Wizards most recent Rule Change (107.1b)
General forum
Posted on July 15, 2017, 4:07 a.m. by ------
as far as I understand, creatures can NOT anymore have -12/1 anymore but will instead be 0/1 when getting hit by Chant of the Skifsang or alike, meaning Rabble-Rouser cannot give opponents attacking creatures -12/-0 anymore, killing even more combo potential with stupid unwanted rulechanges that were so not necessary.
Oh great. WotC making perfectly logical things completely illogical because they rarely happen.
July 15, 2017 9:07 a.m.
I mean... does this actually ruin anything? I hadn't even heard of the cards you mentioned until now so anything this adversely affects would be few and far between.
July 15, 2017 10:39 a.m.
I am curious how this would affect players though. If this also applies to players, this would mean you could no longer provide yourself with a negative life total, which would matter for cards like Death's Shadow when used in combo style decks.
July 15, 2017 10:41 a.m.
MindAblaze says... #6
Damn. I really wanted to give your Wild Beastmaster -13/-0 in response to its attack trigger...
July 15, 2017 10:58 a.m.
Scratch my earlier comment on life totals. I had just woken up.
July 15, 2017 11:39 a.m.
To be fair I don't see how this is such a bad change. It doesn't make the game any harder and very few things are actually affected by this.
You just sound a but salty cuz you probably like that combo and it's one of the only things that actually gives a shit in this case.
With all due respect, of course.
July 15, 2017 2:53 p.m.
DarkMagician says... #9
Wizards will simply continue to dumb the game down until it's Yu-Gi-Oh.
July 15, 2017 3:04 p.m.
Grantley91 says... #11
I had never even realized this was a thing, but I'm glad it's fixed now.
Also laughing at the Yu-Gi-Oh comment by a guy with a username DarkMagician.
July 15, 2017 3:29 p.m.
Yugioh is actually a pretty cool game, it's really stable and... I'm sorry, I couldn't finish that statement with a straight face. I mean, I do play it from time to time and it isn't actually that bad, but pretty much every deck is a legacy storm deck or cheatyface deck.
Don't do power creep, kids.
July 15, 2017 3:42 p.m.
Grantley91 says... #13
I started a new job recently and a couple of the guys there are into it. I'm trying to convert them to Magic and it appears to be working. Thank God...
But anyway. This rules change seems superfluous, but is likely warranted by... someone? So yeah, works for me.
July 15, 2017 3:56 p.m.
Oloro_Magic says... #14
Wizards has talked about making the game more accessible to newer players maybe they thought the interaction would be confusing to new players with the release of HOU judging from their statement.
July 15, 2017 4:42 p.m.
Still, the original rules made mathematical sense. Going into a negative life total with Phyrexian Unlife meant your Death's Shadow got bigger than its base P/T. Now it doesn't make mathematical sense anymore. There's no way to guess that this ruling exists, if it ever came up, without looking it up first - however, you could make a logical guess before this that would turn out to be correct.
A rule that was supposed to make the game more simple just made it more complex.
July 15, 2017 7:18 p.m.
PhotogenicParasympathetic says... #16
This is not a rule that makes it easier for new players. This is a rule that is going to make me feel like a scumbag when I explain it to a new player as they try to take advantage of the logical way this interaction used to work.
July 15, 2017 8:45 p.m.
My only complaint is that it just seems like another way Wizards seems hellbent on ruining any nifty combo decks out there. Because the only major infraction I see here is the dampening of the Death's Shadow combo deck. You know, the decks that played Death's Shadow even when it wasn't cool.
Why do they seem so intent to ruin all the cool things about this game? That's half the reason I started playing.
I'm not convinced they're trying tear this game to the ground or dumb it down like the OP, but I do have a serious issue with their continued negative stance against combo decks that actually do useful things.
July 15, 2017 9:48 p.m.
Servo_Token says... #18
Back to the actual rules, does this apply only to +/- X effects? Or can creatures just not have negative power anymore?
If I have infinite Mana and an AEtherling, can I give it infinite power by first giving it infinite toughness while it's power remains 0? As an example.
July 16, 2017 12:54 p.m.
PhotogenicParasympathetic says... #19
I don't think so, DevoidMage. The creatures can still have negative power. The ruling ONLY applies to effects that are attempting to give +X or -X while X is a negative number. So AEtherling still gets a negative power, and can't become infinitely large on the backswing.
July 16, 2017 1:31 p.m.
Servo_Token says... #20
The way that the OP was worded led me to believe otherwise, but after reading the post on the wotc site I believe that you are correct.
July 16, 2017 5:16 p.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #21
The previous version of the rule did produce confusing situations. Try explaining to a new player why your morbid Tragic Slip on their attacking Wild Beastmaster just wiped their board. The interaction only comes up very rarely anyway and always feels really weird when it does so I don't mind it being patched out.
July 17, 2017 12:34 p.m.
Rhadamanthus The only confusing thing about that situation is that Wild Beastmaster seems to retain its negative power in the graveyard? Not really all that complicated.
July 17, 2017 2:30 p.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #23
DarkLaw I understand the math/logic, and obviously you do too, but flipping signs while adding and subtracting negative numbers may not be such a simple and straightforward concept for the average person. The game causes its own bit of confusion by establishing that creatures with less than 0 power will assign 0 damage in combat (rather than giving back life). Note that the updated rule brings other negative-power calculations more in line with the combat damage result.
July 17, 2017 3:33 p.m. Edited.
Rhadamanthus That a power (or toughness) could even reach a negative value is interesting.
Bestowing a negative "gift" upon something seems more plausible than your attacks actually healing a regular person - that's the only justification I can think of, and it isn't a particularly strong one. The same would be true with a positive "curse", etc.
Tbf there are rules which are more stupid, but it's a little sad that WotC wants to rein in gameplay. The most exciting games are the bizarre ones.
July 17, 2017 4:06 p.m.
The game is hurting for new players and they're trying to do everything in their power to make the environment inviting for those new players.
Take it from somebody who reads WPN articles on a weekly basis. They gotta dumb it down for the new people. The community on a wide scale is so saturated with sobered up, veteran, (and frequently complaining) players. That's a big turn off for new players. It's a tough uphill climb to turn that around.
Boza says... #2
Well the combo (which I did not know was one until you mentioned it) is shot, but creatures having negative power is not.
Chant on any creature will still give that creature negative power, for example a Rabble-Rouser enchanted with Chant will be -12/1, but if you activate its ability it will give 0/0 to attacking creatures.
July 15, 2017 8:24 a.m.