Page 20 of 30 FirstFirst ... 10161718192021222324 ... LastLast
Results 381 to 400 of 583

Thread: [M10] General Discussion on Rules Changes

  1. #381
    Serious Rider
    Pinder's Avatar
    Join Date

    Oct 2005
    Posts

    4,962

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    Quote Originally Posted by TsumiBand View Post
    Can't we just wait for players to accept that (a) playing by the rules isn't cheating (b) yeah, you can do stuff with damage on the stack (c) learning how to do it makes you a better player? Why does knowing the rules have to be cheating dejure?
    Because they people who actually buy booster packs whine about it too much. Having to actually learn the rules to the game they're playing is waaaaaaaaaaaaay too much effort.

    And I agree with Nihil. Simply having creatures not deal damage if they leave play seems like what they should have done in the first place.
    Team Info-Ninjas: Ambition is a poor excuse for not having enough sense to be lazy.
    My Videos: Chiron Beta Prime, Flickr, Re: Your Brains
    Quote Originally Posted by Slay
    Man Kills Seven at popular gaming tournament, buries in backyard. "I was only trying to get thresh," he says.
    -Slay

  2. #382
    Order of the Ebon Hand gets there...pro Swords...take 2...
    Jason's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jun 2008
    Location

    Iowa
    Posts

    249

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinder View Post
    Exactly.

    Also, keep in mind that under these new rules, pumping and damage prevention work differently during combat.

    If he swings with a 3/3 and you block with 3 1/1s and use Healing Salve on the first one, he still only has to assign 1 damage to the first blocker and can still kill the second and third blocker, even though the first blocker stays alive.

    Which is super intuitive.
    Ha! I just started actually typing a reply saying that wasn't correct and went back to the article and read the following line in reference to the 2/2 Suntail Hawk protected by Bandage: "I need to assign just 2 damage, but I might as well assign 3 so it'll be destroyed"

    ...wow. That is super intuitive [/sarcasm]
    End of turn...Morphling

    Quote Originally Posted by AriLax View Post
    Brainstorm is only useful in certain situations? Brainstorm is useful when you hand is not the stone cold nutter butter blade Ranchington Q. Farnsworth Esquire best. When Brainstorm is "dead", the game is already over.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ectoplasm View Post
    I heard Bryant Cook once set fire to his opponent's face for playing a Rule of Law.
    Quote Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin View Post
    It's impressive the amount of effort you put into telling a story that actually makes you look much worse than the idiot.
    Team OMRIAIGTWYFEWARTCAE

  3. #383
    Win or lose, it begins with...
    Arsenal's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2007
    Location

    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts

    2,184

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinder View Post
    Exactly.

    Also, keep in mind that under these new rules, pumping and damage prevention work differently during combat.

    If he swings with a 3/3 and you block with 3 1/1s and use Healing Salve on the first one, he still only has to assign 1 damage to the first blocker and can still kill the second and third blocker, even though the first blocker stays alive.

    Which is super intuitive.
    Wow. Didn't know that's how it worked. I need to re-read the article a dozen more times. So... when the article refers to lethal damage, they really mean toughness printed on the physical card, right?

  4. #384

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    Quote Originally Posted by Finn View Post
    You are calling me stupid? You disagree. That's fine. But if you want to call me stupid perhaps you could come up with something - anything at all to support your claim.

    EDIT: BTW, lemme 'splain the new rules. "controller=owner"
    Done.
    How is that going to require a lengthy explanation?
    Because it's not always true (i.e. Donate, Sleeper Agent) and not even true for tokens (i.e. Grab the Reins etc).


    Quote Originally Posted by TsumiBand
    You know what's really counterintuitive?

    Banging your head against a pile of bricks until a leaf comes out, and that leaf turns you into a yiff that can fly and kill people with its tail.
    Thank you for killing Mario for me forever.

  5. #385

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    Quote Originally Posted by Arsenal View Post
    Wow. Didn't know that's how it worked. I need to re-read the article a dozen more times. So... when the article refers to lethal damage, they really mean toughness printed on the physical card, right?
    Not quite. Lethal will have to cover current power/toughness, but NOT prevention effects.

  6. #386
    Serious Rider
    Pinder's Avatar
    Join Date

    Oct 2005
    Posts

    4,962

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    Quote Originally Posted by Arsenal View Post
    Wow. Didn't know that's how it worked. I need to re-read the article a dozen more times. So... when the article refers to lethal damage, they really mean toughness printed on the physical card, right?
    Yes. Even under the new rules, "the amount of damage it actually takes to kill the creature" is not necessarily the same thing as the technical definition for "lethal damage" (which is toughness - any damage already on the creature).

    Of course, many people (especially newer players) will assume, just like you did, that "the damage it takes to kill a creature" and "lethal damage" are the same thing. Which is reasonable, but not true, so we still have a nonintuitive interaction and no matter how we slice it we're going to have to explain the rules to new players.

    Just because we have a different set of non-intuitive interactions to explain to new players doesn't mean somehow that they're a better set of nonintuitive interactions.
    Team Info-Ninjas: Ambition is a poor excuse for not having enough sense to be lazy.
    My Videos: Chiron Beta Prime, Flickr, Re: Your Brains
    Quote Originally Posted by Slay
    Man Kills Seven at popular gaming tournament, buries in backyard. "I was only trying to get thresh," he says.
    -Slay

  7. #387

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    If anything, the new blocking rules are more complex.

    Now that's counter-intuitive to the entire segment on blocking.

  8. #388
    Epic Library
    Brushwagg's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2004
    Location

    Syracuse New York
    Posts

    2,160

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    I've been playing this game since Revised and this is the stupidest thing I've seen come out of them ever(I'm including Homelands and Fallen Empires in there). The Sixth edition rules revamp was needed. There was alot of holes that it fixed, while it did leave some, it was an improvement.

    This pile of garbage is just making the game into Poke-GO: The Gathering. I'll give them to the next expansion, but I so much as see a card that looks like a trap or a trainer, I'm out.
    Quote Scrumdogg @ Amrod's:
    "Didn't you know that Mike Glow invented this format?? We are all just renting it."

    The EPIC Syndicate - Grindermen
    Team Disquailified Poster Duey Cheatem & Howe.

    The stories of my demise have been grossly exaggerated

  9. #389
    Order of the Ebon Hand gets there...pro Swords...take 2...
    Jason's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jun 2008
    Location

    Iowa
    Posts

    249

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    Quote Originally Posted by Brushwagg View Post
    This pile of garbage is just making the game into Poke-GO: The Gathering. I'll give them to the next expansion, but I so much as see a card that looks like a trap or a trainer, I'm out.
    What about assembling contraptions?

    http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Ca...verseid=136151
    End of turn...Morphling

    Quote Originally Posted by AriLax View Post
    Brainstorm is only useful in certain situations? Brainstorm is useful when you hand is not the stone cold nutter butter blade Ranchington Q. Farnsworth Esquire best. When Brainstorm is "dead", the game is already over.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ectoplasm View Post
    I heard Bryant Cook once set fire to his opponent's face for playing a Rule of Law.
    Quote Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin View Post
    It's impressive the amount of effort you put into telling a story that actually makes you look much worse than the idiot.
    Team OMRIAIGTWYFEWARTCAE

  10. #390
    V V SEXY! V V
    quicksilver's Avatar
    Join Date

    Feb 2004
    Location

    NOVA!
    Posts

    3,363

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    Hey you know what's intuitive? Casting giant growth on one of your blockers and having it prevent damage to your other blocker.

  11. #391
    Member

    Join Date

    Dec 2008
    Location

    Waterloo, NY
    Posts

    115

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    Quote Originally Posted by Jason View Post
    What about assembling contraptions?

    http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Ca...verseid=136151
    Thats both terrifying and awesome at the same time.

    And Nihil, and I think Quicksilver from a few pages back, are right - it would have been a LOT more intuitive to just have creatures that arent there for assigning damage not assign damage. Actually, they kinda showed that in the article too, didnt he blow up the wall before dealing damage?

    The confusion between lethal damage and damage = toughness is probably going to be the single biggest hurdle to overcome mentally for me. I know I had to read the suntail hawk explanation a few times before it clicked. It didnt help that they killed it because he "might as well" without explaining it.

  12. #392

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    I don't know if anyone has seen this yet but it's definitely a different perspective:

    http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/m...The_World.html
    "We are goblinkind, heirs to the mountain empires of chieftains past. Rest is death to us, and arson is our call to war."

  13. #393
    Hamburglar Hlelpler
    TsumiBand's Avatar
    Join Date

    Aug 2005
    Location

    Nebraska
    Posts

    2,774

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    Quote Originally Posted by quicksilver View Post
    Hey you know what's intuitive? Casting giant growth on one of your blockers and having it prevent damage to your other blocker.
    I know, right?

    At least they figured out a way to make toughness at least as relevant as power. Sort of.

    You still have to be tricky about it, you can't just control an Honor Guard and save the day by pumping it to a 1/5, the attacker is the decider in terms of picking blocking order and they can decide to put Honor Guard last in line if it's prudent.

  14. #394
    Serious Rider
    Pinder's Avatar
    Join Date

    Oct 2005
    Posts

    4,962

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    Quote Originally Posted by quicksilver View Post
    Hey you know what's intuitive? Casting giant growth on one of your blockers and having it prevent damage to your other blocker.
    I'm not sure if you were going for sarcasm there, but in any case what you described is perfectly intuitive. Having your one big blocker tie up their attacker and protect your other blockers makes sense from a flavor standpoint, at least.

    What doesn't make sense is why that same blocker, when impervious to the same damage but not actually any bigger, can't protect your other blockers.

    edit - Although it makes less sense when several small creatures block one big creature without pump, and for some reason he has to plow through them in order like they lined up for it or something.

    "Alright, now it's your turn....*SMACK*...."
    Team Info-Ninjas: Ambition is a poor excuse for not having enough sense to be lazy.
    My Videos: Chiron Beta Prime, Flickr, Re: Your Brains
    Quote Originally Posted by Slay
    Man Kills Seven at popular gaming tournament, buries in backyard. "I was only trying to get thresh," he says.
    -Slay

  15. #395
    V V SEXY! V V
    quicksilver's Avatar
    Join Date

    Feb 2004
    Location

    NOVA!
    Posts

    3,363

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    Quote Originally Posted by Amon Amarth View Post
    I don't know if anyone has seen this yet but it's definitely a different perspective:

    http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/m...The_World.html
    My main disagreement with the article is he is assuming that the changes make the game more intuitive and streamlined. I think they are less intuitive and clunky.

    His argument "I lose a point of cleverness to the rules, but it is a point I am willing to spend for the game to overall be streamlined and good. " hinges on the fact that the new rules are infact more streamlined and good, which I disagree with. They are more confusing especially to new players.

  16. #396

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    Quote Originally Posted by Nihil Credo View Post
    I'm starting to think that the best compromise between sensibleness and functionality would have been achieved by simply ruling that creatures don't deal their combat damage if they're not in play. [I]
    Yes. (Or in play and attacking/blocking, if you must.)

  17. #397
    Hamburglar Hlelpler
    TsumiBand's Avatar
    Join Date

    Aug 2005
    Location

    Nebraska
    Posts

    2,774

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    Why should it be able to protect the other blockers? Fuck man, you threw a bunch of Squirrels in front of a Krosan Tusker, the fuck did you reckon would happen?

    If I were a Krosan Tusker, and I'm not, but if I were, and I got blocked by a shit ton of Squirrels, why the fuck would I waste my time beating up the one wearing Slagwurm Armor while the rest climb all up on my shit? Fuck that, I'd stomp six of those fuckers back into the asshole of the earth until the rest finally tear me down.

  18. #398

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinder View Post
    I'm not sure if you were going for sarcasm there, but in any case what you described is perfectly intuitive. Having your one big blocker tie up their attacker and protect your other blockers makes sense from a flavor standpoint, at least.

    What doesn't make sense is why that same blocker, when impervious to the same damage but not actually any bigger, can't protect your other blockers.

    edit - Although it makes less sense when several small creatures block one big creature without pump, and for some reason he has to plow through them in order like they lined up for it or something.

    "Alright, now it's your turn....*SMACK*...."

    Because I want MY Tarmogoyf to smash YOUR smaller creature and kill it should it get in the way of it's vicious rampage to deal you 3-7 damage.

  19. #399

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    Quote Originally Posted by TsumiBand View Post
    Why should it be able to protect the other blockers? Fuck man, you threw a bunch of Squirrels in front of a Krosan Tusker, the fuck did you reckon would happen?

    If I were a Krosan Tusker, and I'm not, but if I were, and I got blocked by a shit ton of Squirrels, why the fuck would I waste my time beating up the one wearing Slagwurm Armor while the rest climb all up on my shit? Fuck that, I'd stomp six of those fuckers back into the asshole of the earth until the rest finally tear me down.
    http://sales.starcitygames.com//card...?product=55546

    Think about how large a Squirrel normally is (in our world).

    Look at the Tusker. It's power/toughness means it's DRAGON size.

    So, just how BIG are those Squirrels anyways?

  20. #400

    Re: Magic 2010 Rules Changes

    This is probably messy under the old rules as well...

    Attacker has:
    Skyshroud Behemoth 10/10
    Force of Nature 8/8 Trample

    Defender has:
    Two-Headed Giant of Foriys 4/4
    Two-Headed Dragon 4/4 Flyer
    Benalish Hero 1/1 Banding

    Attacker swings with both creatures.
    Defender blocks Force of Nature with all 3 creatures (attacker orders Hero,Giant,Dragon)
    Defender blocks Behemoth with Giant & Dragon (attacker orders Giant, Dragon)

    How much trample damage can the attacker get through?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)