Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Oct-22 4:38 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 214 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 15  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Wish you were here: A mechanic defunct
AgePosted: 2019-Jun-27 7:05 am 

Joined: 2019-Mar-15 1:06 pm
Age: Wyvern
It's clear that the Wish cards were originally intended to be able to grab cards that were removed from the game, since Mark Rosewater himself discussed that functionality in 2002, a month prior to the release of the Judgement set.

Quote:
Wishes are a cycle of five cards, one in each color, based on an artifact from Arabian Nights called Ring of Ma'ruf. Like the Ring, the Wishes allow you put a card from out of the game into your hand. In casual play, this card can come from anywhere (and I do mean anywhere) including cards that started in your deck but were removed from the game.


https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/a ... 2002-04-29

That said, I'm not a fan of the mechanic and I think that they made the right decision when they made exile into a zone within the game. I don't think that this warrants errata to make the cards function differently than the way that they are written, since there are specific ways to interact with exiled cards and those generally have more restrictions. I also think that the relative permanence of something being exiled is good for the game because it lets you get around things that can't be destroyed.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wish you were here: A mechanic defunct
AgePosted: 2019-Jun-28 1:08 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
That just states how they worked at the time -- of which I don't think anybody here is arguing that at all :)

Plus, Rosewater has said on his blog that with the M10 rules change, the wishes weren't going to be able to get cards from there regardless of what the name of the (now named 'Exile') zone was called. And if they changed 'Exile' back to "Removed from the game" in name, then the wishes wouldn't change in functionality from how they work now:

https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/169333939373/exile-changing-name-didnt-functionally-change
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/169329901393/masterminds-acquisition-makes-me-extra-sad
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/98588939943/whats-your-opinion-on-the-wishes

Please note that last link (very clearly) shows Rosewater's opinion on how the wishes should work -- which should not be confused with what the original intent of them should be (unless someone can find somethings somewhere that shows MaRo was the one who designed the wishes.)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wish you were here: A mechanic defunct
AgePosted: 2019-Jun-29 1:13 am 

Joined: 2019-Mar-15 1:06 pm
Age: Wyvern
Yes, a rule change from 8 years later changed the way that these cards work because exile became a zone within the game. It seems implausible that it would take them 8 years to fix the way a popular card cycle worked when they were clearly aware of its scope prior to the cards even being released.

Mark Rosewater saying in 2014 that he doesn't like the way they worked in 2002 looks like hindsight as opposed to intent. I don't think that anyone can prove that the developers intended anything other than what we originally got.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wish you were here: A mechanic defunct
AgePosted: 2019-Jun-29 2:39 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Panphage wrote:
Mark Rosewater saying in 2014 that he doesn't like the way they worked in 2002 looks like hindsight as opposed to intent. I don't think that anyone can prove that the developers intended anything other than what we originally got.

Probably not, so best we have is the current WotC intent -- which is pretty obvious which way they go as they have never let them get cards from Exile.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wish you were here: A mechanic defunct
AgePosted: 2019-Jun-29 2:43 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Dec-03 3:16 am
Age: Elder Dragon
It is highly unlikely that one person designed all 5 of the original wishes. More likely one person designed one or two and then as a group they designed the remaining cards.

vilestrom asked: Hey Mark, I've got a question So I was watching the new command zone episode and they offhandedly mention the topic of some card designers being maybe better at making commanders than others. They also bring up how it would be interested in seeing who made what commanders. Better in this case is subjective of course. How so you feel about some people maybe being better at making commanders, and has wizards ever thought about releasing the who made what cards?

A lot of designs have many hands involved. I’ll mention designers of cards if there’s a major contributor and I know who they are. Making the information public for the purpose of the audience rating the designers seems like a bad idea.

June 15, 2019 53 notes

_________________
Shabbaman wrote:
The usual answer is "the social contract", but I guess that is not what you are looking for. Try house rules.


With perfect mana, reasonable removal, disruption, and card advantage, we're back to pitchforks and torches. And it's about to get worse for those who do not enjoy the game as Richard Garfield intended, playing as few win conditions as possible and prompting concession after all hopes (and spells) are lost. - Shaheen Soorani


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wish you were here: A mechanic defunct
AgePosted: 2019-Jun-30 6:48 pm 

Joined: 2019-Mar-15 1:06 pm
Age: Wyvern
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/3 ... ey-were-in

Mark Rosewater says that he campaigned against letting Wishes get cards that were removed from the game when they were in development, which seems to indicate that they were contentious even back before they officially made it into the game.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wish you were here: A mechanic defunct
AgePosted: 2019-Oct-07 11:16 pm 

Joined: 2019-Mar-18 10:17 am
Age: Hatchling
I'd like to dust off this thread slightly with a few things I gathered from before i made this thread.

WotC just made a new card that cares about cards outside the game - Fae of Wishes, and they don't seem intent on stopping. It's a trend that will likely continue since mtg Arena's best of one mode of playing encourages taking out responses from your sideboard during a game to use them. This is the game working exactly as designed by its creators right now. Commander should be the same, unless we want a constant stream of interesting wish cards from future sets made useless by an unintuitive rule 13, and repeating questions from future players about this specific difference from regular magic and it's role.

In brawl there's no specific rules like rule 13, so you can play Fae of Wishes and get cards from your collection in a casual game, just like the wording in gatherer says. I realize that it is a different format, but it's the closest format to commander I'm aware of.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wish you were here: A mechanic defunct
AgePosted: 2019-Oct-07 11:44 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2016-Nov-27 2:39 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
manioo8 wrote:
I'd like to dust off this thread slightly with a few things I gathered from before i made this thread.

WotC just made a new card that cares about cards outside the game - Fae of Wishes, and they don't seem intent on stopping. It's a trend that will likely continue since mtg Arena's best of one mode of playing encourages taking out responses from your sideboard during a game to use them. This is the game working exactly as designed by its creators right now. Commander should be the same, unless we want a constant stream of interesting wish cards from future sets made useless by an unintuitive rule 13, and repeating questions from future players about this specific difference from regular magic and it's role.

In brawl there's no specific rules like rule 13, so you can play Fae of Wishes and get cards from your collection in a casual game, just like the wording in gatherer says. I realize that it is a different format, but it's the closest format to commander I'm aware of.

We already get a steady stream of cards that are useless in commander, so that's nothing unique to wishes. That we're getting new wish cards that are useless wouldn't be a case for allowing them—wishes being useless is the whole point of the rule, so them being useless is a conscious feature, not a bug.

Instead the case to make is “wishes in general make the format better” or at least “Fae of Wishes does more good for the format than harm”. (It would naturally have to consider why people and the RC do not consider those to be the case.)

_________________
Decks: Chaos colored dragons, Mathas, the Instigator (politics and mayhem).
Beloved precons: Atraxa, Praetors' Voice; Saskia the Unyielding; Freyalise, Llanowar's Fury.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wish you were here: A mechanic defunct
AgePosted: 2019-Oct-08 12:10 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
spacemonaut wrote:
(It would naturally have to consider why people and the RC do not consider those to be the case.)

Yeah - we've got a big long thread here on pros & cons ... if you think there's an issue with the cons for it, then you need to address those issues and not just say "WotC keeps making cards like this" as that's not an argument as to why it should be allowed, nor how to handle the potential problems allowing this "mechanic" will create.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wish you were here: A mechanic defunct
AgePosted: 2019-Oct-08 8:24 am 

Joined: 2014-Jul-26 11:35 am
Age: Elder Dragon
It is also worth remembering that Brawl uses the standard card pool. Wishing for cards in standard is very different to wishes for cards in vintage.

_________________
Favourite Deck:
Ghost Council of Orzhova

Playing Online:
Noyan Darr & Sedris Zombie Guy


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wish you were here: A mechanic defunct
AgePosted: 2019-Oct-08 2:49 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2008-Feb-29 5:57 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Duvall, WA
Panphage wrote:
It's clear that the Wish cards were originally intended to be able to grab cards that were removed from the game, since Mark Rosewater himself discussed that functionality in 2002, a month prior to the release of the Judgement set.

Quote:
Wishes are a cycle of five cards, one in each color, based on an artifact from Arabian Nights called Ring of Ma'ruf. Like the Ring, the Wishes allow you put a card from out of the game into your hand. In casual play, this card can come from anywhere (and I do mean anywhere) including cards that started in your deck but were removed from the game.


https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/a ... 2002-04-29


here are my thoughts on wishes. its not something i thought much about prior to reading this thread, but i think i'm pro wishes for multiple reasons.

1. in the above quote, it's mentioned that "in casual games, they can get any card". EDH is billed as the format for casual players, and 5his would be the only "official" format where they function as intended.

2. We talk all the time about how having more rules and a longer banned list is bad because people dont want to have to check a bunch of info to see if they can use thier cards. We got rid of the "you can only create mana of your commander's colors" rule for thus reason, and I would be pro- removing another un needed rule. I DO think wishboards are a terrible idea. they create MORE, not less, rules and are more likely to be used as a utility package than a fun casual card that only "works" in commander.

3. We often talk about how commander is the format that lets you play old wierd cards. The wishes are a casualty of a rule we don't need and would let people play more, not-powerful-but-fun random cards. Dont forget here, we are talking about Spawnsire of ulamog and research // development just as much as the original wishes. there are a ton if "outside the game" cards, not just the wish cycle.

4. in other similar cases, we tell people to "ask thier playgroup" and this can still be done with wishes, but as commander's target audience is not tournaments or FLGS leagues, i would say the best change is to remove the rule entirely and let playgroups figure out how they want wishes to work.

In the end, it's more abour rules streamlining than wishes being legal. If we want to keep the rules clean and brief and the banned list short, why have the extra rule?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wish you were here: A mechanic defunct
AgePosted: 2019-Oct-09 4:30 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2011-Jan-16 5:36 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Toronto, ON
I'm in support of including wishes for a few reasons, and mostly, I'm using ban-list criteria, because Wishes are in some sense de facto banned.

First, 'does it add to the game': I think there are some cards that do look for cards outside the game, and are (arguably) interesting. I think Spawnsire of Ulamog is the primary example; if you put together 30 (!!!) mana, you can play a bunch of eldrazi from outside the game. I think that'd be pretty neat, and has nothing to do with someone using Cunning Wish for a Dispel.

More to the point, I think that since it isn't an option available to us, no one is exploring interesting possibilities with it. Fae of Wishes lets you get a noncreature card. It might be a wincon or answer, but it might also be something that's not one of those. The conversation here about wishes adding nothing to the game seems to be because it becomes 'silver bullet gallery'. I think to just refer to things as uninteresting because they're an answer or wincon is reductionist; if you categorize every card into answer, wincon, combo piece, ramp, or card draw, are all cards uninteresting? Isn't the game uninteresting at that point?

Second point; I don't think it is a type of card that the RC would discourage people from using, unlike Erayo, Soratami Ascendant or Paradox Engine. I don't believe it prevents people from playing Magic, or makes games long and drawn out (unless the player is hauling around longboxes of cards they could Wish for, but I think even if that did happen, it would be far less common than someone durdling a table into boredom with Paradox Engine).

Third, I don't think they interact poorly with the structure of EDH. The talk about making choices for the 100 cards and no more is incredibly arbitrary. People talk about the sanctity of the 100 card limit, but it's like they're ignoring the idea that you can generate more than 100 tokens in a game. Or even loop stack effects to the point where there are more than 100 spells in the game (i.e. Infinite mana and Nivix Guildmage). Or that you can alter text in the game with cards like Mind Bend or New Blood, to make functionally new cards. There are plenty of ways of practically breaking the 100 card limit in some sense.

If you're considering the sanctity of choosing 100 cards from a collection, it's equally as arbitrary and equally circumvented within the rules/banlist of the game. Here's a real argument in terms of making deck construction choices and how 100-card limits are not especially sacrosanct:
1. Let's say that a players has a 6,000 card collection evenly distributed among the five colours plus 1000 colourless cards,. Let's say they're also playing a bicolour deck, so they have 100 choices to make from a pool of 3000 cards.

2. Let's say they play Praetor's Grasp during a game, targeting a player with 80 cards left in their library.

3. They now have a functional one-hundred and first deckbuilding choice to make, from a pool of 80 cards.

4. If playing Praetor's Grasp makes a functional one-hundred and first deckbuilding choice, and the 100-card limit is about forcing us to make deckbuilding choices and is sacrosanct, we should ban cards like Praetor Grasp, Gonti, Lord of Luxury, et al.

4a. If you want to suggest that having to choose to play Praetor's Grasp is a deckbuilding choice, I would contend that having to choose to play Wishes is a deckbuilding choice. In practical terms, I don't think a player using a Wish will have the number of options available to them that Praetor's Grasp would allow.


Finally, I don't think there's a balance issue. In the last five pages, people have talked a lot about the practical usage of it, and a single person chimed in about how it's legal in their competitive group, but no one uses actually it because it's ineffective compared to existing options. More to the point, as others have stated, people who want to break the format will be able to with everything that's already available to them.

As much as I appreciate Shoe's argument above, I don't believe it results in parsimony in the rules. If you do away with rule 13, there are questions about what you can wish for. Unless you want to wish for anything within the bounds of the comprehensive rules (i.e. a card not in any game zone that is a traditional magic card), a a rule will be needed that ends up replacing rule 13.

-----

I guess, my support of it is zero sum, except for the following: It seems harmless, and someone might be able to do something interesting with it. If someone does something uninteresting or mean with it, it would be no different than that person doing something uninteresting or mean with the bountiful options that are already available.

_________________
Check out my old column, Generally Speaking, at CommanderCast.com
http://www.commandercast.com/category/a ... y-speaking

Follow me on Twitter: @generalspeak


Top
 Online Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wish you were here: A mechanic defunct
AgePosted: 2019-Oct-09 6:08 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2008-Feb-29 5:57 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Duvall, WA
Sinis wrote:

As much as I appreciate Shoe's argument above, I don't believe it results in parsimony in the rules. If you do away with rule 13, there are questions about what you can wish for. Unless you want to wish for anything within the bounds of the comprehensive rules (i.e. a card not in any game zone that is a traditional magic card), a a rule will be needed that ends up replacing rule 13


I agree with your sentiment entirely except for the need for a replacement for rule 13. I think the comp rule is fine here, we are playing casual magic and if your friend takes 20 minutes trying to dig through 5 or 6 long boxes, rule 1 is the thing they are violating. So rule 13 just seems like unneeded bulk to me. Let us wish for any damn card we want. Does a wish allow you to make your deck illegal in casual games per the comp rules? I'd have to read it more closely.

EDIT: Based on rule 719.2 it looks like wishes making your deck illegal is fine. It's a wierd rule to hit on this but, when you restart the game like with Karn liberated cards you wish for are now part of your deck. If we go even by tournament rules, starting a game with 61 cards when your registered deck was 60 is a different list. Granted floor rules dont apply in casual games, but I think this rule makes it clear that wishes can make your deck illegal. Now, I would say probably cant wish for cards that would make you have more than 1 copy of a card in your deck total, but this is where wotc needs to clarify the comp rules imho. OR, just let us wish for anything we want. Wish for hybrids so you can play them if one color is off hybrid for all i care. Being able to jump through silly hoops to do interesting stuff is what commander and casual magic is all about imho. Definately a moment to remember in my opinion which is good.

EDIT#2: Magic is a game about letting the cards break the rules. If relentless rats works in commander who cares if the deck becomes non 100-card highlander during play from a spawnsire or a wish. Seems fun to me


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wish you were here: A mechanic defunct
AgePosted: 2019-Oct-09 6:41 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2011-Jan-16 5:36 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Toronto, ON
Shoe wrote:
Does a wish allow you to make your deck illegal in casual games per the comp rules? I'd have to read it more closely.

As far as I know, yes.

If you check the comprehensive rule document for "outside the game", there are 22 instances of the phrase, and none of them say you may not (except in the case of a non-traditional Magic card (which Planes, Schemes, Vanguards explicitly are, but probably includes Agendas from Conspiracy)

But, this is muddy; taking a second copy of a card that is not a basic land would make deck construction illegal, but, taking a banned card would also make deck construction illegal (arguably in the same way). I think Wishing for a banned card would definitely against the spirit of the format, but, Wishing for a duplicate wouldn't be.

As written, without additional rules, I believe you could wish for a banned card, which I think might be problematic.

_________________
Check out my old column, Generally Speaking, at CommanderCast.com
http://www.commandercast.com/category/a ... y-speaking

Follow me on Twitter: @generalspeak


Top
 Online Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wish you were here: A mechanic defunct
AgePosted: 2019-Oct-09 6:44 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2008-Feb-29 5:57 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Duvall, WA
Sinis wrote:
Shoe wrote:
Does a wish allow you to make your deck illegal in casual games per the comp rules? I'd have to read it more closely.

As far as I know, yes.

If you check the comprehensive rule document for "outside the game", there are 22 instances of the phrase, and none of them say you may not (except in the case of a non-traditional Magic card (which Planes, Schemes, Vanguards explicitly are, but probably includes Agendas from Conspiracy)

But, this is muddy; taking a second copy of a card that is not a basic land would make deck construction illegal, but, taking a banned card would also make deck construction illegal (arguably in the same way). I think Wishing for a banned card would definitely against the spirit of the format, but, Wishing for a duplicate wouldn't be.

As written, without additional rules, I believe you could wish for a banned card, which I think might be problematic.


Possibly, maybe rather than a new rule 13, change the wording of the banned list to prevent the addition to deck and prevent the use during games.

At least wishes all give people the chance to prepare to react to a card. There is warning. Cards outside the game aren't secret right? I am pretty sure I recall reading that in the comp rules. I skimmed each of the instances of "outside the game" in the comp rules


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 214 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 15  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 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: