Gathering some Magics

millercross · 2012-01-23 15:10:38

I normally don't like enchantments that force me to lose a creature, but I admit that Seancé has its uses. Mostly with Vanish Into Memory, if I feel like drawing lots of cards

Idler · 2012-01-23 15:12:46

I think spirits have been mostly associated with White for quite a while now.

Seance is a fantastic Johnny card.

millercross · 2012-01-23 15:15:19

When will the set be released again? Next week?

Salix Babylonika · 2012-01-23 15:15:25

What are the three personalities again? I know Spike is the one that likes to win, but I forget what Johnny and Timmy are.

Idler · 2012-01-23 15:18:23

Johnny is the guy who likes to innovate, Timmy is the guy who likes big flashy stuff.

Also, there's Melvin (likes to see how things fit together from a design standpoint) and Vorthos (likes flavour).

Viani · 2012-01-23 15:19:07

MTG card makers.

Links plz

millercross · 2012-01-23 15:25:49

Johnny= Likes deckbuilding and coming up with creative wincons

Timmy= Likes and enjoy playing, regardless of the outcome

Spike= Cares about winning above all.

Vorthos= Likes flavour and his priority is that his deck makes sense in terms of the Magic storyline.

I've pretty much a shade of each of them except Spike. I never really cared about winning.

Viani · 2012-01-23 15:29:22

Im kind of Timmy, although I might end up becoming Spike if I learn too much about this game.

Idler · 2012-01-23 15:30:11

I'm more of a Vorthos than anything, I think.

Salix Babylonika · 2012-01-23 15:36:48

I think I'm a bit of most of those.

Not sure what that says about me.

Bunny · 2012-01-23 16:42:12

Johnny followed by Timmy followed by Spike.

I like winning, but I like playing more, and I like making fun decks even more.

Gelzo · 2012-01-23 16:51:52

It's not that I don't enjoy the other aspects of the game or that I enjoy winning over everything else, I just think the game is more enjoyable when both sides are trying their best to win (while following the rules of course). Part of what bothers me about casual play is that people have varying and sometimes unrealistic standards for what is and is not fair, and you can easily come off as a jerk or a noob if you guess wrong. That is not really so much of a concern in competitive play, since the responsibility of making the decks fair is on the shoulders of WOTC.

So I guess that makes me more of a Spike if you have to give it a label.

millercross · 2012-01-23 17:07:57

Well, i always aim to win a game when i play or build a deck. I just try to win without feeling as if i was cheating (like using splinter twin and exarch twin/intruder alarm)

Viani · 2012-01-23 17:09:23

I understand that view too. While I am not a Spike now, I will be when I get to know the game better. There's nothing wrong with playing to win since losing means you aren't doing well enough, and understanding that when playing against Spikes, there can be good and bad. You can play the best cards, most broken combos in the strongest metagame and desire to win, when things are at stake. After all, if you invest time or money into something, you don't want to lose what you invested into it just because you want to keep this really-pretty-but-shitty card in your deck.

Except when it comes "hey want to play against my metadeck?" "no, this is but a regdeck." "okay, I'll grab my regdeck."

Which is fine.

Salix Babylonika · 2012-01-23 17:09:59

Is playing cards to see people raeg being a Spike?

Because I really like Wrath of God for precisely that reason. >.>

I wouldn't play it on strangers, I don't think. But my friends can take some light trolling.

Viani · 2012-01-23 17:11:55

Winning regardless of method or the well-being of the other player is Spike. Whether it be extremely potent strategies and powerful cards, or gamebreaking bugs or rule-sharking.

millercross · 2012-01-23 17:14:02

There's nothing wrong with foiling someone's plan to see/imagine their face. Oftentimes, the whole reason i build a deck is
"Hey, this totally ruins that deck that X plays"

Yes, x is haven why do you ask

Idler · 2012-01-23 17:14:36

Wrath of God (or nowadays, the slightly less powerful version Day of Judgment) is a staple card in lots of decks. I wouldn't say there's any shame in playing it; it's not like you're playing Scepter-Chant or something.

Salix Babylonika · 2012-01-23 17:15:22

edit; meh

Wrath of God (or nowadays, the slightly less powerful version Day of Judgment) is a staple card in lots of decks. I wouldn't say there's any shame in playing it; it's not like you're playing Scepter-Chant or something.

What about Phyrexian Rebirth, which is Wrath of God with a higher mana cost and also worse?

Viani · 2012-01-23 17:22:54

It's one of those "holy shit" cards. Where firing one to ruin an entire strategy is perfectly fine as long as it doesn't become the only way to win and games don't turn into a "Play X, Win Forever" standard.

Viani · 2012-01-23 17:28:41

THERE ARE ONLY 2 SHARKS IN THE ENTIRETY OF MTG? 2?

millercross · 2012-01-23 17:30:50

Three, actually. And they all suck as they rely on your opponent having an island to attack

That said, you can build around them and making them lethal.

Viani · 2012-01-23 17:35:24

So you give your opponent an island and then beat them down with Memory of Akroma and Code of Arms or whatever that sliver buff is?

Salix Babylonika · 2012-01-23 17:36:16

There's only three sharks?

Shit man, there should be a race of Sharkmen.

Gelzo · 2012-01-23 18:38:23

Playing a card to make someone rage means either doing something unacceptable in your group, anticipating playing against a poor sport, or playing something that's tedious to watch unfold.

None of those strike me as fun times, except maybe the second, and then only once or twice.

Salix Babylonika · 2012-01-23 19:00:04

I don't mean like, genuine anger, I mean like Reddit ragecomic anger.

Haven · 2012-01-23 19:22:50

Part of what bothers me about casual play is that people have varying and sometimes unrealistic standards for what is and is not fair, and you can easily come off as a jerk or a noob if you guess wrong. That is not really so much of a concern in competitive play, since the responsibility of making the decks fair is on the shoulders of WOTC.

That feel. I know it.

"Hey, this totally ruins that deck that X plays"

Yes, x is haven why do you ask

And then there's "hey, this totally ruins someone else's total ruining of that deck that I play." Good times.

Salix Babylonika · 2012-01-23 19:45:25

I have cobbled together a Cephalid deck for the sole reason that I like octopi.

This is clearly the best reason to do this. And not retarded at all.

Obā-san · 2012-01-23 19:49:02

Decks for no reason are the best decks. This is why Giant Flying Mattress is the best YGO deck. And yes, I have run that deck.

Bunny · 2012-01-23 19:50:48

...Giant Flying Mattress?

Obā-san · 2012-01-23 19:52:43

Salix Babylonika · 2012-01-23 19:57:39

Sometimes he gets mad and that is dreadful.

Indeed it is.

Obā-san · 2012-01-23 20:10:15

Eeyup.

Bunny · 2012-01-23 20:12:53

I'm guessing it involves this?

Obā-san · 2012-01-23 20:14:37

Eeyup. Crappyest deck setup ever. But IT'S A GIANT FLYING MATTRESS.

millercross · 2012-01-23 20:38:24

And then there's "hey, this totally ruins someone else's total ruining of that deck that I play." Good times.

[Alternative Flavour Text for Leyline of Sanctity :P]

Justice4243 · 2012-01-23 23:15:08

"Wrath of God (or nowadays, the slightly less powerful version Day of Judgment)"

Uh, actually Day of Judgement is the less powerful version of Wrath of God.

With Wrath, you can't regenerate creatures. Not the same for DoJ, and they cost the same.

I suppose you could argue that with DoJ, you can plan ahead and have some regenerating creatures, but very rarely will you have the mana to do a heck of a lot after using four of it. People mostly just want to kill everything their opponent has and they want them to stay dead.

Also, yes I'm directing this at a quote made from some doche who probably will never read this. Don't care.

millercross · 2012-01-23 23:22:02

Uh, actually Day of Judgement is the less powerful version of Wrath of God.

That's what he said, actually

Justice4243 · 2012-01-24 00:21:22

...You sure about that?

Ah, N/M, my brain inserted an "of" into the sentence where it did not exist.

Viani · 2012-01-24 01:57:28

So, Cancel vs. Counterspell

Is the reason Cancel exists the way it is now was because Counterspell was too strong or something?

Haven · 2012-01-24 01:58:45

Yeah.

Gelzo · 2012-01-24 02:03:01

It's not too strong for the game, it's just that people didn't have as much fun when it was used against them. Sort of like land destruction.

Viani · 2012-01-24 02:17:58

Isn't land destruction still around?

Gelzo · 2012-01-24 02:19:19

Yep. So are counterspells.

It just didn't work out to leave them that cheap without restrictions, or at least that's what they've concluded.

Viani · 2012-01-24 02:22:33

I can see that too. Being cockblocked for almost nothing and having your land blown to pieces, slowing you game to a hault can cause problems.

millercross · 2012-01-24 06:47:41

Land destruction can be utterly crippling. OTOH, Maze of Ith.

Gelzo · 2012-01-24 07:01:34

Which is why non-basic land hate is cheaper.

Idler · 2012-01-24 07:28:38

I'm increasingly realising how terrible my new idea is. Boo.

Gelzo · 2012-01-24 07:29:28

Ha ha, I see what you did there.

Idler · 2012-01-24 07:33:13

Wow, that was totally unintentional.

Basically the idea was to burn the opponent to death by using Vengeance to multiply something like a Metalcrafted Galvanic Blast by three, supplemented with Curse of Bloodletting and Shrine of Burning Rage.

Gathering some Magics

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories