|
10 months ago ::
Aug 06, 2012 - 6:15PM
#31
|
Date Joined:
May 16, 2002
|
Have you noticed that Ice Cauldron's first printed wording is actually longer than its current Oracle text? 
Del Laugel
Senior editor, Magic TCG
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 06, 2012 - 6:22PM
#32
|
Date Joined:
Sep 17, 2005
|
Why should I/we have to?? The card works as it should; I have never seen or heard anyone who didn't get it.
Just to play devil's advocate, I'm sure people would understand Ice Cauldron  much better if it said: " : Pay for a spell now and cast it later by tapping Ice Cauldron again." but we can't do that.
You could do that if that's exactly what Ice Cauldron did, but since it does more than that, the wording is different.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 06, 2012 - 6:43PM
#33
|
Date Joined:
Oct 11, 2007
|
Why should I/we have to?? The card works as it should; I have never seen or heard anyone who didn't get it.
Just to play devil's advocate, I'm sure people would understand Ice Cauldron much better if it said: ": Pay for a spell now and cast it later by tapping Ice Cauldron again." but we can't do that.
You could do that if that's exactly what Ice Cauldron did, but since it does more than that, the wording is different.
Even it that was what it did I am entirely certain that the CR couldn't support that wording.
And yeah, I'd forgotten you could pay part of the mana now and part later. Not a huge difference.
blah blah metal lyrics
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 08, 2012 - 1:34PM
#34
|
Date Joined:
Feb 27, 2007
|
And yeah, I'd forgotten you could pay part of the mana now and part later. Not a huge difference.
Paying for a spell may include many other things than paying mana.
|
|
|
