Please login to comment
Daveslab2022 You never have?
I have introduced quite a few 60-card format players to commander, and "oh, shuffling this many cards will take some getting used to" is usually the first thing said after handing them a deck.
The other way too, commander players trying a 60 card format, or even better, a prerelease 40 card deck, usually easy something about how much easier a deck that small can be held while shuffling.
Wizards has kinda promised to never bring the actual fetchlands to Standard again, and they're banned in Pioneer too, just because Modern tournaments are not that fun to watch, since most decks actually have to shuffle every turn. In 50 minute matches, that's an easy way to pad your playtime to a draw or 1-0 victory if you're playing a slow and grindy deck, and every time you shuffle, the game has to pause until you're done.
You might not be bothered by it, but people do complain about shuffling their deck. It's time spent not actually playing, after all.
November 29, 2022 2:42 a.m.
Half... the... posts... no.
Just no. There's 2 posts out of 47 that are actually ad hominem (discarding the topic in favor of mocking the OP).
There was one by me, referencing Doubling Cube.
Every other post not written by you was either a question on "How would this even work?" or a simile showing situations where either your system breaks down, or the problem you're trying to solve is already accounted for in the current rules.
The fact that you don't acknowledge those, is why a moderator stepped in to show you how bad your forum etiquette looks.
So... the problem you're trying to solve? I read everything again and I still don't really understand what in the current way of playing upsets you this much. From what I gather:
You hate that, after you get an unplayable opening hand, you need to shuffle up again if you don't want to play it. You already admitted to playing MTGO, so I'm not sure why shuffling is an issue, but that seems to be the thing you're upset about. That, and people who haven't played for a long time might get confused about the current state of affairs, which can be cleared up in less time than it takes to shuffle a deck.
To fix this, you'd like to introduce a betting system so you can "play" or "fold" your hands in favor of striking it big with another, better hand later? You can already do this without having to bet anything btw; rule 104.3a: "A player can concede the game at any time. A player who concedes leaves the game immediately. He or she loses the game." You could just do it. It works exactly like poker already. Except the price of folding a hand, which is a lot more expensive in MtG.
You advocate for this system because of its use in Backgammon, which is a game I don't know. A quick wikipedia search shows me that the only real comparisons to competitive MtG are that you play 1v1 and there's chance involved. All seemingly non-sequitur arguments like the opening line of #29 stem from here; you're literally comparing a boardgame rolling dice with a cardgame. Everyone else comparing random other games are on-topic arguments. Not great ones, mind you, but that is done on purpose, to show you how your reasoning might be flawed as well.
Yet you put your heels in the sand and state that everyone who doesn't agree or has no experience with the system cannot possibly understand what they are taking about. But we were warned about this, in post #29. That is why it might be hard to take you serious, and easy to mock you back.
I think your suggestion will lead to seeing more hands, but also playing less actual games of Magic. Since the cards are designed to play games and I actually enjoy playing games, it's what I design my deck to do, I think your system will lead to a less enjoyable experience overall. The current rules enable playing the most enjoyable games pretty well, which is why I won't be trying your suggestion.
November 28, 2022 11:37 a.m.
We have sideboards to adjust for "raising" your deck to beat the odds.
There is probably no sideboards in backgammon, definitely not in poker, I feel like if you like bluffing bad hands, poker might just be a better game for you to play. If you want a doubling cube, you should go play backgammon. And if you play magic and lose to just variance, play game 2 and 3 with sideboard options and a new chance of variance working out your way.
Because of the way cards interact in this game, there's opening hands possible that don't allow you to play the game. 7-2 is bad in poker, but you can still hit a flop and win with it. In Magic, you need to be a very special deck to do that by missing your land drop turn 1. Because you are in control of how much of your information becomes known information, and your cards can interact with your opponents' cards. Which you should account for in deck building. Which are all factors that make magic a very different game from poker. With very different problems and very different proposed solutions for them.
In poker you also get like 50 hands to build your plan for the table, in Magic you only get up to three games. Folding one will have a way bigger impact on your chances of winning matches. Non-games in Magic lead to bad experiences, meaning players get less invested in keeping the game going. Mulligans are designed to reduce the amount of those, to even the scales for both players, so more magic will be played, games and matches will be more enjoyable. Paris to Vancouver to London mulligan rules is a progression in balancing the costs and benefits of retrying your hand, adding both a way out in emergencies and a tactical aspect to the choice of how low you will go for glory.
It's all been in development since 1994, and to suggest it's completely useless and better replaced with some system from some unrelated game, just so it plays like a completely different unrelated game, is disrespectful to the history of Magic: the Gathering in my book.
November 26, 2022 5:27 p.m.
I thought this would be about Doubling Cube
November 26, 2022 8:18 a.m.
The distinction you wish there to be, is not a mechanical one. It's a flavor one, as FormOverFunction touched upon.
Black is the color of dark magic, vampires, extracting the force of life out of your victims and sacrifices. That's why many vampires have lifelink.
Green is the color of nature, the food chain, photosynthesis, natural growth and prospering.
They can still mechanically be represented with the same kinds of cards, but the reason each color gains life is not bound by the mechanics but by the philosophy of the color pie. At least that's how I see it.
November 21, 2022 3:35 a.m.
Green is literally the color of life in MtG, I'm not sure why lifegain would need to be tied to a card type for the color. Every type has lifegain in green:
November 20, 2022 6:29 a.m.
"I disapprove of the way you interact with the world" I say, in a post that serves no other purpose than to shame someone anonymously online /rolleyes
The LGSs with well-visited events I've been at, have a people-background noise level loud enough to not be able to play music at any sound level that would not be rude to the other customers. In my LGS, the owner plays radio or a playlist of his own choosing, although I barely notice because people playing Magic en masse are pretty loud. Music also distracts me from interacting with my opponent. Which is why I've never even thought about bringing a portable speaker, also because my taste in music is peculiar and alternative enough to chase people away.
The only acceptable instances of playing music inside LGSs that I've seen, was D&D dungeon masters accompanying their adventures with specific story-appropriate sound clips, and even that is usually distracting other tables. Although there's more goodwill for it, because the purpose of enhancing the entertainment is undeniable.
November 13, 2022 6:44 a.m.
Commander / EDH
SCORE: 1 | 17 VIEWS
|Playing since||Battle for Zendikar|
|Avg. deck rating||2.40|
|Favorite formats||Standard, Commander / EDH|
|Suppressed formats||Legacy, Modern|
|Cards suggested / good suggestions||14 / 9|
|Last activity||6 hours|