Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2018-Sep-25 4:03 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 226 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 16  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Mastermind's Acquisition - Can we haz sideboardz now?
AgePosted: 2018-Mar-07 8:26 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Yeah... from recollection (I'm not going back over the posts) I've not seen anything wrong with UK's arguments.

He's simply stating his point, or (IMO generally successfully) defending his previous points.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mastermind's Acquisition - Can we haz sideboardz now?
AgePosted: 2018-Mar-07 7:00 pm 

Joined: 2015-Dec-22 4:41 am
Age: Drake
Uktabi_Kong wrote:
MMLgamer wrote:
Uktabi_Kong wrote:
If you accept the premise that the current set of rules regarding wishes are the best for the spirit of format, then spirit becomes a sufficient argument to maintain that "best" state.

But of course! If you accept X as a premise, then X becomes a great argument. In other words, it's true because it's true?
This is a flat out misrepresentation of what I said. An argument has two parts to it: being logically valid and being factually sound. I was commenting on the validity of the argument, aka whether it makes logical sense. Simplifying what I said into its simplest logical form:
Quote:
If X is best for Y, then Y is a strong reason for X.

That argument is logically valid. In order to be a bad argument, it would have to be shown that X is in fact not best for Y. Specifically in this case, you would have to argue that the current rules are not the best incarnation of the spirit of the format.

So what you're essentially saying is that you were only giving half an argument. My question was "Why is spirit alone a sufficient argument?" Judging from your last reply, it clearly isn't. There has to be some bigger reason for a rule to change from its previous iteration or for rejecting a suggested change.

Also, for what it's worth, I am not anti-status quo. I'm anti-hypocrisy. If I present reason X to promote possible change Y, and a past change that is equal to or greater than Y was made for a reason that is equal to or less than X, then using status quo alone as an argument is invalid and hypocritical. The proper argument against change Y in this case is to argue against the suggested values of X and/or Y.

_________________
.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mastermind's Acquisition - Can we haz sideboardz now?
AgePosted: 2018-Mar-08 3:52 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Feb-07 4:15 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Quote:
So what you're essentially saying is that you were only giving half an argument. My question was "Why is spirit alone a sufficient argument?" Judging from your last reply, it clearly isn't. There has to be some bigger reason for a rule to change from its previous iteration or for rejecting a suggested change.
When judging whether an argument is good or not, you have to give the tacit assumption that the facts of the argument are or at least could be true. Otherwise there's no point in actually talking about the argument itself because it's impossible to come to a reasonable conclusion from faulty premises.

I'm also not sure that the phrase of "spirit alone" is particularly helpful, since spirit itself is a combination of many other factors, all of which can be weighted differently depending on who you're talking to at the moment.

Quote:
If I present reason X to promote possible change Y, and a past change that is equal to or greater than Y was made for a reason that is equal to or less than X, then using status quo alone as an argument is invalid and hypocritical.
This is true, but I don't think this is what anyone is actually doing. As I think I mentioned before, the status quo doesn't appear out of the sky because some genie wished it or anything. There are reasons why the status quo is the way it is, and when it does change there are reasons behind those changes. And there is a reason that when the past change was made it only went as far as it did instead of going further.

And I'm also missing where the hypocrisy is, particularly because I don't think "they've made bigger changes before" is relevant. Forget what's happened in the past, the current rules are what they are. Any changes to the current rule will either make the future rule better or worse, and whatever changes happened in the past have little to do with it. The only way the past changes could be relevant is if there's a clear and obvious pattern, but even that's sketchy because there's almost certainly going to be a sweet spot where any further change in the same direction causes a problem.

_________________
Current Generals:
III Omnath, Locus of Mana III Thada Adel, Acquisitor III Geth, Lord of the Vault III Eight-and-a-Half-Tails III Zo-Zu the Punisher III BruseIkra III Kynaios and Tiro of Meletis III Kess, Dissident Mage, III AkriSilas III Grenzo, Havoc Raiser III Ghalta, Primal Hunger III Ambassador Laquatus III Anax and Cymede III Sidisi, Brood Tyrant III Shu Yun, the Silent Tempest III Ghave, Guru of Spores III Zurgo Helmsmasher III Yidris, Maelstrom Wielder III


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mastermind's Acquisition - Can we haz sideboardz now?
AgePosted: 2018-Mar-08 11:42 pm 

Joined: 2015-Dec-22 4:41 am
Age: Drake
Uktabi_Kong wrote:
When judging whether an argument is good or not, you have to give the tacit assumption that the facts of the argument are or at least could be true. Otherwise there's no point in actually talking about the argument itself because it's impossible to come to a reasonable conclusion from faulty premises.
I can definitely agree that the half-argument you gave is a good point provided that the other half you didn't give is true.

Quote:
I'm also not sure that the phrase of "spirit alone" is particularly helpful, since spirit itself is a combination of many other factors, all of which can be weighted differently depending on who you're talking to at the moment.
Then the person citing format spirit should expound upon those "many other factors." If they don't, their argument is as helpful as appealing to the will of Bob.

Quote:
This is true, but I don't think this is what anyone is actually doing. As I think I mentioned before, the status quo doesn't appear out of the sky because some genie wished it or anything. There are reasons why the status quo is the way it is, and when it does change there are reasons behind those changes. And there is a reason that when the past change was made it only went as far as it did instead of going further.
All of the factors you mentioned would of course contribute to the value of reason X in relation to change Y. I would only suggest to anyone participating in debate that they explain those factors instead of simply saying "There are reasons!" without actually stating the reasons.
Quote:
And I'm also missing where the hypocrisy is, particularly because I don't think "they've made bigger changes before" is relevant. Forget what's happened in the past, the current rules are what they are. Any changes to the current rule will either make the future rule better or worse, and whatever changes happened in the past have little to do with it. The only way the past changes could be relevant is if there's a clear and obvious pattern, but even that's sketchy because there's almost certainly going to be a sweet spot where any further change in the same direction causes a problem.
No I will not forget what happened in the past. It's oh so easy to proclaim that the past is irrelevant if you agree with all the changes that were made. If you think further change will cause a problem, you should explain what that problem is in your argument against that change.

_________________
.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mastermind's Acquisition - Can we haz sideboardz now?
AgePosted: 2018-Mar-09 4:22 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Feb-07 4:15 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Alright, I'm starting to think we're talking past each other, and I'm pretty sure it's on me for not being clear in my initial post.

Your original post, at least to me, didn't seem to be a criticism/questioning of any specific argument but the underlying logic that many posters had been used. I then responded by describing the circumstances where the argument could be valid or useful. While I of course have my own personal opinions on the subject, I had no intentions to present them.

Nothing in your last post is even a point of disagreement between us; you're just pointing out the fact that I didn't do certain things that I had no intention of doing. Obviously if someone is actually presenting that argument they should be specific as to their data and/or reasoning. I was not attempting to be that someone, especially since I personally don't find the "spirit" argument all that compelling in either direction.

To make an analogy, your original post was questioning if a new brand of microwave is useful for cooking food. I described how and why this particular microwave works, and you then responded by pointing out that I didn't mention what kind of food would be used in the microwave.

_________________
Current Generals:
III Omnath, Locus of Mana III Thada Adel, Acquisitor III Geth, Lord of the Vault III Eight-and-a-Half-Tails III Zo-Zu the Punisher III BruseIkra III Kynaios and Tiro of Meletis III Kess, Dissident Mage, III AkriSilas III Grenzo, Havoc Raiser III Ghalta, Primal Hunger III Ambassador Laquatus III Anax and Cymede III Sidisi, Brood Tyrant III Shu Yun, the Silent Tempest III Ghave, Guru of Spores III Zurgo Helmsmasher III Yidris, Maelstrom Wielder III


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mastermind's Acquisition - Can we haz sideboardz now?
AgePosted: 2018-Mar-10 11:35 pm 

Joined: 2015-Dec-22 4:41 am
Age: Drake
Uktabi_Kong wrote:
[...] I personally don't find the "spirit" argument all that compelling in either direction.

You should have began your original post with this. I asked a question, and your first response was a half-answer that portrayed the "spirit" argument in a positive fashion without backing it up with facts or making any attempt to clarify the impartiality of your half-answer.

A more accurate analogy would be: I ask you why the function of a microwave alone is good enough to justify its purchase. You claim that if I accept the premise that the microwave cooks food well, then that should support the value of the microwave's function. I point out that your answer does not help me decide whether or or not to purchase the microwave. Then, you claim that you never intended to help me in that regard (even though the nature of the question clearly called for an opinion).

_________________
.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mastermind's Acquisition - Can we haz sideboardz now?
AgePosted: 2018-Mar-12 1:47 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2017-Mar-11 6:43 am
Age: Dragon
:roll:

Image

This all really seems like pointless hair-splitting- and while I do love some good internet bloodsports; there is a point where I feel compelled to ask...

Have you guys seen The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly? What role do you think you're occupying in the contextual sense of this mostly pointless argument? Do you feel like this one-upsmanship is something beyond entertainment?

Uktabi simply believes that wishboards lead to cancerous strategies, and I'm inclined to agree with him with regards to context. Wishboards have a nasty habit of being used for hate/hose spells and combo pieces- effectively making them surpass tutors in power- since they artificially increase the number of options by expanding the deck size. He even acknowledged that Wishboards CAN be functional and fun- but any sortof "official" meddling in the matter has real consequences.

MML disagrees. His arguments against that position are noted- and respected where they diverge.

The rest is banter, over-analyzing specific language to seek some sort of superfluous victory in a no-win situation- without expanding or articulating points further. Technicality games yield nothing to be gleaned by either participant- because it relies on over-correction to assert one's sense of authority or power contextually to the argument at hand. Neither of you seem daft, so I don't see purpose in either party further brandishing "weaponized autism" when simply agreeing to disagree opens up several entirely more productive avenues of conversation. Neither of you need to be correct, because we're all just opinionatin' and sharing diverging models.

Image

_________________
niheloim wrote:
Wall of Chat. 2U
Creature- Wall

Defender
Wall of chat exceeds at using a lot of words to mischaracterize opposing view points.

Warp Riders (Ephara Solar Flare)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mastermind's Acquisition - Can we haz sideboardz now?
AgePosted: 2018-Mar-14 10:23 pm 

Joined: 2015-Dec-22 4:41 am
Age: Drake
Mr Degradation wrote:
The rest is banter, over-analyzing specific language to seek some sort of superfluous victory in a no-win situation- without expanding or articulating points further.


And what exactly is your post doing?

I'm grateful that my points are noted; I'd be even more grateful if they were addressed, since nothing in my last wish-related post in which I outlined my argument really conflicted that much (or even disagreed, really) with the points you are reiterating against wishes.

_________________
.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mastermind's Acquisition - Can we haz sideboardz now?
AgePosted: 2018-Mar-15 5:42 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2017-Mar-11 6:43 am
Age: Dragon
MMLgamer wrote:
Mr Degradation wrote:
The rest is banter, over-analyzing specific language to seek some sort of superfluous victory in a no-win situation- without expanding or articulating points further.


And what exactly is your post doing?


I'm taking the piss out of you silly-billies. Having a strong opinion on forums such as these, tends to require understanding that dissent is the expectation- and these discussions require a level of humor to be shared. Since the topic is complicated, approaching it in a combative way only serves to undermine your ability to persuade your fellow posters- stepping over a humor dollar for a righteous dime. I feel as though Uktabi didn't see the bait, and has been very earnest.

Image

The appeal to hypocrisy is cute, so I'll articulate my own opinion on wishboards. You can rationalize your own views to refute it, but you would be wasting your time if your idea of refutation involves pedantics, or the expectation that we'll all suddenly see the light.

At a fundamental level (this is where Uktabi and I might not see eye-to-eye)- I like Wishboards; but a rather large element of them being fun in the firstplace is the social contract present in a game of EDH. If official rules are set, there will be incentive to push that social contract to it's limits; which is a consequence of official rules that the RC has repeatedly curbed throughout EDH's history. In my own experience, I've seen some super fun 7-card Wishboards, and in that context- the Wishes become less like Demonic Tutor- and more like Cryptic Command- often giving the player using them a linchpin, or a "get out of jail free" card. Done tastefully, this builds up the tension of a game significantly, especially in strategies that might just function right below the surface on the relative power-level of the decks played.

Image

My favorite wishboards are usually a modest number (about 7-) focusing on high power utilities or disruption over combo material. They reward the player for clever positioning or playing it like a regular tutor in a fair deck. Hard rules cannot ensure that wishboards are played in good faith, however- and so it's between the members of a playgroup to determine what is too much, or too little (relegating wishboards to the social contract- therefore is, in my own view- the superior method of regulating them.)

Hypothetically, if there were rules (we'll make some up for the sake of argument-) dictating a 10 card wishboard that could only contain copies of cards already present in the EDH deck (a stringent ruleset;) what would one expect the outcome to be? Though it sounds more attractive than loose rules (15 cards, no copies of deck present cards); even the "wish downside" would be weaponized as a form of playgroup arms race- which tends to lead to other violations of the social contract.

Image

Consider also, the EDH banlist- and how often players try to amass as many similar-but-not-the-banned-cards to clarify that; even though the banlist is prefaced by a note advising against doing so. Is that not why the complexity of the banlist has been reduced over the years? EDH is guided by the social contract, and often, the social contract has to hold power greater than the rules prescribed by the RC.

Image

Much in the same way that in a game of DnD, where the DM has to understand just how much punishment a playgroup can take- as well as how soft becomes uninteresting. I like to play a Halfling Ranger when given the opportunity, but the temptation to min/max it has to be offset by the need to uphold the social contract- otherwise, instead of the campaign vamping up obstacles, the DM could only properly entertain us by having every encounter be against something as complex or powerful as a Lich; absolutely shorting the group's ability to create arcs. EDH's very practice has that foundation.

What Uktabi means, (I think), when he describes the "spirit of the format"- is that the rules must only constrain the least common denominator in the format, to make becoming accustomed to "social play" an easier process. The degree of cutt-throat each group plays at varies considerably, and in order to become a desirable member of any playgroup- one must make concessions in regards to their desire to have an edge. Having hard rules tells the least common denominator what they have to bend to get an even larger advantage, because the least common denominator among MtG enthusiasts is still super clever. Therefore, the playgroup's power must always exceed those of the RC at each table EDH is played.

Image

Wishes as a card type have both the power to enhance decks, and ruin games. The playgroup has to split the difference, because a ruleset by the RC would just create an easy avenue for min/maxing Wish cards contextually- escalating EDH's ongoing issue with decks containing crazy numbers of tutors.

_________________
niheloim wrote:
Wall of Chat. 2U
Creature- Wall

Defender
Wall of chat exceeds at using a lot of words to mischaracterize opposing view points.

Warp Riders (Ephara Solar Flare)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mastermind's Acquisition - Can we haz sideboardz now?
AgePosted: 2018-Mar-15 7:36 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-Jul-18 9:59 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
(OT, for which I'm sorry)

Can we keep the memeing to a minimum, please?

_________________
"Degenerate, unfun decks generally come from degenerate, unfun players in my experience." - Cthulus Thrall

"- if this spell is played ten times in a given game then I suggest you warm up the tar and pluck some chickens" - tarnar

"I'm happy to serve as a quote machine" - Sheldon


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mastermind's Acquisition - Can we haz sideboardz now?
AgePosted: 2018-Mar-18 12:53 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2009-Aug-20 7:49 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: New Hampshire
Re: Status Quo;

First off, the "Supporting the status quo means you're a coward who's afraid of change" and/or "supporting the status quo means you're a mindless zombie under the control of puppet master Sheldon" style arguments are worthless, and amount to ad hominem attacks - nothing about those statements actually proves that the status quo is bad, or that the person supporting them is wrong. If someone is not swayed by your arguments, it MAY be that they're closed-minded, but perhaps those arguments weren't as persuasive as they were thought to be?

Secondly, change for the sake of change is not a good thing.

Thirdly, giving players a way around the deckbuilding restrictions that define the format is unacceptable to me. If I'm playing EDH, I expect my opponents to be playing EDH as well, not "EDH, except I have more than 100 cards, and don't actually obey the color ID rules, and have 2 copies of this card because reasons".

_________________
"The President's job - and if someone sufficiently vain and stupid is picked he won't realize this - is not to wield power, but to draw attention away from it." -- Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide tot he Galaxy Radio Transcripts predicting the future.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mastermind's Acquisition - Can we haz sideboardz now?
AgePosted: 2018-Mar-18 3:45 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2017-Mar-11 6:43 am
Age: Dragon
Sid the Chicken wrote:
Thirdly, giving players a way around the deckbuilding restrictions that define the format is unacceptable to me. If I'm playing EDH, I expect my opponents to be playing EDH as well, not "EDH, except I have more than 100 cards, and don't actually obey the color ID rules, and have 2 copies of this card because reasons".


This is why Wishboards are a context-issue that has to be handled by individuals and playgroups. I'm not going to blink at a Feldon of the Third Path Burning Wish package, or a Trostani deck that uses Glittering Wish, Golden Wish and Living Wish for token/mana doublers (but if they're playing Living Wish for Vorinclex, Voice of Hunger I might refuse a second game.) The problem is more in Roon of the Hidden Realm and Atraxa, Preators' Voice decks that use them as super tutors- which if I spot, I'll simply choose not to play with- because it's anti-social play.

_________________
niheloim wrote:
Wall of Chat. 2U
Creature- Wall

Defender
Wall of chat exceeds at using a lot of words to mischaracterize opposing view points.

Warp Riders (Ephara Solar Flare)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mastermind's Acquisition - Can we haz sideboardz now?
AgePosted: 2018-Mar-19 3:32 am 

Joined: 2008-Jan-25 8:26 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Calgary
Sid the Chicken wrote:
"2 copies of this card because reasons".

Unless those reasons are "My Radha deck does it to get a second Brothers Yamazaki"

Anyone at a table who asks about that, I'll be all Picard about it
(imagine a "make it so" gif here)

_________________
"(P)art of the joy of Commander (is) being forced to work with what we (have), even if it (isn't) optimal. Optimal usually isn't that interesting." - papa funk


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mastermind's Acquisition - Can we haz sideboardz now?
AgePosted: 2018-Mar-20 4:08 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2009-Aug-20 7:49 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: New Hampshire
tarnar wrote:
Sid the Chicken wrote:
"2 copies of this card because reasons".

Unless those reasons are "My Radha deck does it to get a second Brothers Yamazaki"

Anyone at a table who asks about that, I'll be all Picard about it
(imagine a "make it so" gif here)


I would much rather your deck just had 2 brothers and you checked if that was cool beforehand than include a wish for it (which also requires checking beforehand). I would stipulate that they have to be the two different arts though. No using 2 left-hand brothers.

_________________
"The President's job - and if someone sufficiently vain and stupid is picked he won't realize this - is not to wield power, but to draw attention away from it." -- Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide tot he Galaxy Radio Transcripts predicting the future.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mastermind's Acquisition - Can we haz sideboardz now?
AgePosted: 2018-Mar-20 5:14 am 

Joined: 2008-Jan-25 8:26 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Calgary
Sid the Chicken wrote:
I would stipulate that they have to be the two different arts though. No using 2 left-hand brothers.

Putting aside your anti-southpaw biases ( :wink: ), of course they'd have to be different art.

More seriously, it's six or one half dozen. I see the Wish for exactly one target as both more flavorful, closer to the deck building rules and more challenging to play out.

But that's just my opinion, man.

Also, it'd have to be a pretty low-power-level meta to want to do it in the first place. Two Brothers (even if you supplement the cool-factor with few token generating effects or whatever) just isn't that splashy.

_________________
"(P)art of the joy of Commander (is) being forced to work with what we (have), even if it (isn't) optimal. Optimal usually isn't that interesting." - papa funk


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 226 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 16  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: