|
4 months ago ::
Jan 18, 2013 - 10:09AM
#11
|
Date Joined:
Oct 18, 2009
|
"You can negate creature spells; you just can't Negate  creature spells."
I think that ambiguity would be more confusing than the "counter"/"counter" situation.
It's not as though they can't just stop reprinting Negate (and create a functionally-identical version if they want to keep the effect around, as they already did with its  counterpart  ).
Note that I don't think this word has to be changed, but I do think that "negate" is probably the word to use in the unlikely situation it does happen. (It's the word Yu-Gi-Oh uses, incidentally.)
I think " cancel  " would be just as good new word, if not better.
[<o>]
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 18, 2013 - 10:11AM
#12
|
Date Joined:
Jan 19, 2003
|
I think " cancel " would be just as good new word, if not better.
Even the rulebook uses "cancel":
701.5a To counter a spell or ability means to cancel it, removing it from the stack. It doesn't resolve and none of its effects occur. A countered spell is put into its owner's graveyard.
(however, i am not in favor of changing the term)
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 18, 2013 - 12:42PM
#13
|
|
|
Unweave... oooohhh, flavor.
I like cancel. But don't care if it changes. The plain English meaning in both cases is very different. This was not true for play.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 19, 2013 - 7:21PM
#14
|
Date Joined:
Nov 10, 2012
|
If even Ambiguity  can be understood relatively easily, I don't think we need to worry about it too much. Frankly, I'm more concerned with the ambiguity of spell (any nonland card) and spell (instants and sorceries).
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 19, 2013 - 8:19PM
#15
|
|
|
Frankly, I'm more concerned with the ambiguity of spell (any nonland card) and spell (instants and sorceries).
This is why when I first started I thought storm was a bad mechanic.
As long as it's random, I really can't see where's the problem. Anyway, there's already a few standard ways for doing this. We listed them in this thread. If someone does the bogey-bogey, eats the cards, waits until they come out, look out the approximate order, place replacements in the same order, calls the president to ask him to give him a string of numbers, puts the card in the given order, then pick the cards in the order given by taking the date of birth of his opponent, reversed, and taking only every other number, then a judge can clearly declare that he's random enough.
The beauty of sarcasm is that when the person using it is totally incorrect, you can just remove the sarcasm and end up with a post that is actually correct.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 20, 2013 - 7:51AM
#16
|
Date Joined:
Oct 11, 2007
|
There's no ambiguity there. Spell always means a card on the stack, or more broadly a card that could be on the stack (i.e. is not a land). It's just an unfortunate naming choice because people want "spell" to exclude creatures (and maybe artifacts too).
It made more sense when creatures were "summons" until they actually came into play, but of course that made other things much more confusing.
blah blah metal lyrics
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 20, 2013 - 10:57AM
#17
|
- Celestial Teapots are broken!
Date Joined:
Feb 24, 2007
|
The "spell = instant or sorcery" thing is mainly in colloquial language and deck lists. In terms of the actual rules, the only thing even hinting at that is the term "spell types".
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 20, 2013 - 5:30PM
#18
|
Date Joined:
Nov 10, 2012
|
The "spell = instant or sorcery" thing is mainly in colloquial language and deck lists. In terms of the actual rules, the only thing even hinting at that is the term "spell types".
Cipher (Then you may exile this spell card encoded on a creature you control.)
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 20, 2013 - 5:33PM
#19
|
Date Joined:
Sep 17, 2005
|
The "spell = instant or sorcery" thing is mainly in colloquial language and deck lists. In terms of the actual rules, the only thing even hinting at that is the term "spell types".
Cipher (Then you may exile this spell card encoded on a creature you control.)
As worded, that would work on any non-land card. We'll have to wait for the rules update to see if its limited to a certain spell type.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 21, 2013 - 1:19AM
#20
|
- Celestial Teapots are broken!
Date Joined:
Feb 24, 2007
|
"Spell card" means "spell which is also a card". It's worded like that because you don't exile the spell if it's just a copy.
It happens that cipher wouldn't make sense on non-instant, non-sorcery cards, but that doesn't mean that "spell card" means "instant or sorcery card".
|
|
|
