Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Jul-17 12:33 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Increasing Number of Card-Specific Rules
AgePosted: 2007-Jul-11 7:24 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2007-Mar-28 10:17 am
Age: Drake
Location: Oberlin, OH, USA
The newly announced Riftsweeper rule about it not affecting generals that are current RFG is the second in a series of odd card-specific rules. The first such rule is the one that keeps Karakas from bouncing generals. These rules represent effective power-level errata to the cards in question.

The Eternal formats have shown us that power-level errata is not the way to go. It represents a continually-increasing clutter in the rules of the game. R&D has been systematically stripping power-level errata from those formats then dropping the ban/restrict hammer on cards like Flash as required.

Why not just drop our ban hammer on Riftsweeper and Karakas and keep the rules tidy?

Otherwise, the format starts looking too much like Calvinball.

[For those who didn't read the comic strip Calvin and Hobbes, Calvinball was the game the child and his stuffed animal/imaginary friend played. The rules changed whenever someone was losing, i.e. continuously.]

_________________
Scholars possess such lofty knowledge that it shouldn't be surprising when they fall.
-- Hapless Researcher


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Increasing Number of Card-Specific Rules
AgePosted: 2007-Jul-11 8:08 pm 

Joined: 2007-Jul-03 12:38 am
Age: Egg
so, we should
- remove the power level errata.
- ban those card just like WotC did

I don't mind.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
AgePosted: 2007-Jul-11 9:56 pm 

Joined: 2007-Jun-04 6:34 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Gainsville, FL
Because Karakas and Riftsweeper are ok in how they interact with non-Generals? Mangara? RFG'd or suspended creatures?

My personal preference is to keep a larger cardpool open first and foremost to keep deckbuilding options as varied as possible. I think if cards can be fixed via errata without removing them from the environment altogether, it is best to minimize collateral damage.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Increasing Number of Card-Specific Rules
AgePosted: 2007-Jul-12 4:57 am 

Joined: 2006-Jun-07 2:06 pm
Age: Hatchling
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
cynip wrote:
so, we should
- remove the power level errata.
- ban those card just like WotC did

I don't mind.


why is power errata so bad?
if errata is removed then those cards would be to good/broken for edh (=unfun) and if they were banned, card pool would loose some good cards.

those cards weren't printed with edh in mind so errata seems good to me.

(my 2 cents :) )

_________________
Q: If a Tim tims a Tim, can the timmed Tim tim the timming Tim before the Tim tims the timmed Tim?
-- Timmy, Power Gamer

A: Tim can tim the timmed tim in response to the other Tim timming it. Both Tims are destroyed.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
AgePosted: 2007-Jul-12 8:14 pm 

Joined: 2006-Aug-01 8:14 pm
Age: Wyvern
I feel that rift sweeper should have been dealt with through a rewording of the General zone change rule. Karakas should probably be banned, I can't think of a useful third option (ban & errata are the first 2 options)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 29 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: