Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Nov-20 1:35 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 75 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: A Case Against Extort in Mono decks.
AgePosted: 2016-Jul-26 2:36 am 

Joined: 2013-Aug-20 4:37 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Boston
specter404 wrote:
Bloodrush, cipher and evolve aren't especially green, black and blue mechanics respectively, but we don't worry about them because there is no mana symbol involved.

Pump is pretty green, saboteur abilities are definitely a thing black does, and counters representing change is something that blue does sometimes. They aren't strong representatives of those mono colors, but they aren't pie breakers.

Quote:
If the argument is purely, "this shouldnt be done in mono white" then I refer you back to the point that lots of cards bend and break the colour pie, that doesnt mean we should force them into the colours we think they should be.

My argument is more that an exemplar ability shouldn't be the thing that's breaking the color pie. If Extort had just been a triggered ability on some white card, it would just be a one-off example of a bad hybrid card like Augury Adept or color pie bleed like Pious Evangel/Wayward Disciple where it is acknowledged through CI, at least.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A Case Against Extort in Mono decks.
AgePosted: 2016-Jul-26 8:16 am 

Joined: 2014-Jul-26 11:35 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Exemplar ability? It's been used in exactly two sets for a total of 14 cards, that's hardly representative of white.

_________________
Favourite Deck:
Ghost Council of Orzhova

Playing Online:
Noyan Darr & Sedris Zombie Guy


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A Case Against Extort in Mono decks.
AgePosted: 2016-Jul-26 8:57 am 

Joined: 2013-Aug-20 4:37 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Boston
specter404 wrote:
Exemplar ability? It's been used in exactly two sets for a total of 14 cards, that's hardly representative of white.

It's an exemplar ability of Orzhov, not white as a whole. The fact that it is such a bad example of white is why I think it is a bad ability to serve as a guild mechanic. Haunt was too complex, but at least it made sense on either black or white cards and tied in to the whole "serve the guild even after you're dead" thing that Orzhov does.

I mean, the concept of extortion as a thing that Orzhov does makes sense; the whitest white member of Orzhov is going to put the screws to somebody given the chance. What doesn't make sense for them to be performing extortion in such a black way.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A Case Against Extort in Mono decks.
AgePosted: 2016-Jul-26 2:52 pm 

Joined: 2014-Jul-26 11:35 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Sure extort is an exemplar of Orzhov, but commander is not bound to Ravnica. This discussion has become very bogged down in whether or not extort makes sense in the colour pie.

The topic question, and the question I am asking is, why is this bad for commander? Why do we need to write a fairly convoluted rule which effectively bans mono coloured decks from running extort cards? Especially since any such rule would remove them from both black decks and white decks, which punishes black decks for something they clearly should be able to do.

The cards it is on are not against the flavor of the cards, so if blue is allowed to have prodigal sorcerer, and red is allowed to have chaos warp, why cant white have extort?

_________________
Favourite Deck:
Ghost Council of Orzhova

Playing Online:
Noyan Darr & Sedris Zombie Guy


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A Case Against Extort in Mono decks.
AgePosted: 2016-Jul-26 10:27 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2009-Jun-12 7:46 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
specter404 wrote:
Why do we need to write a fairly convoluted rule which effectively bans mono coloured decks from running extort cards?

It is not a "fairly convoluted" rule, it is a fairly simple rule to write. The problem comes in comprehending the rule for disengaged players. Trying to inform them of the subtle difference between the rules of a mechanic, which can be shown as reminder text, and actual flavour text that is not a stand-in for actual rules.

specter404 wrote:
The cards it is on are not against the flavor of the cards, so if blue is allowed to have prodigal sorcerer, and red is allowed to have chaos warp, why cant white have extort?

I don't think colour pie flavour is going to get us very far in this type of discussion. When looking at the entire history of the game, there have been so many pie-breaking cards that have a mono-colour CI. To begin with, Colour Identity doesn't really reflect the colour pie anyway.

_________________
Cheethorne


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A Case Against Extort in Mono decks.
AgePosted: 2016-Jul-26 10:55 pm 

Joined: 2013-Aug-20 4:37 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Boston
specter404 wrote:
Sure extort is an exemplar of Orzhov, but commander is not bound to Ravnica. This discussion has become very bogged down in whether or not extort makes sense in the colour pie.

Point taken. I've grumped more than enough about it, so consider it yelled at and told to get off the lawn.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A Case Against Extort in Mono decks.
AgePosted: 2016-Jul-27 8:11 am 

Joined: 2014-Jul-26 11:35 am
Age: Elder Dragon
cheethorne wrote:
specter404 wrote:
Why do we need to write a fairly convoluted rule which effectively bans mono coloured decks from running extort cards?

It is not a "fairly convoluted" rule, it is a fairly simple rule to write. The problem comes in comprehending the rule for disengaged players. Trying to inform them of the subtle difference between the rules of a mechanic, which can be shown as reminder text, and actual flavour text that is not a stand-in for actual rules.


Perhaps I am misinformed, but I was of the understanding that the additional text on trinishpere was reminder text as far as the rules are concerned.

It is written into the oracle card text so it cant be considered flavor text. Could you give me the simple rule that makes extort go away but not trinishpere.

_________________
Favourite Deck:
Ghost Council of Orzhova

Playing Online:
Noyan Darr & Sedris Zombie Guy


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A Case Against Extort in Mono decks.
AgePosted: 2016-Jul-28 12:09 am 

Joined: 2013-Aug-20 4:37 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Boston
specter404 wrote:
It is written into the oracle card text so it cant be considered flavor text. Could you give me the simple rule that makes extort go away but not trinishpere.

"Cards are considered to have the entire text of their keyword abilities printed on them for purposes of CI."

That might still not be simple enough, people get confused by CI as it is.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A Case Against Extort in Mono decks.
AgePosted: 2016-Jul-28 5:11 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2016-May-16 12:03 pm
Age: Dragon
Location: The Blind Eternities
Yeah I am calling shenanigans on this, We should be able to have extort in both black and white decks because the ability is both simultaneously and seperately black and white

_________________
Image

RaiRai's Decks of Otherworldlyness:

Unknown Horizons
Bane of the Vast 1.0
Call from Eternity
Twisted Nightmares


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A Case Against Extort in Mono decks.
AgePosted: 2016-Jul-28 5:18 am 

Joined: 2016-Feb-13 2:14 pm
Age: Dragon
Location: Orlando, Florida
RaiRai wrote:
Yeah I am calling shenanigans on this, We should be able to have extort in both black and white decks because the ability is both simultaneously and seperately black and white

You already can do that. Read the thread.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A Case Against Extort in Mono decks.
AgePosted: 2016-Jul-31 3:58 am 

Joined: 2015-Sep-02 2:49 am
Age: Drake
Location: Connecticut
Extort was clearly worded with the intention of throwing a rock at a hornet's nest, and probably should've been responded to in kind. I like the proposed idea of treating keywords where mana symbols are hidden in the rules to be given the same treatment as basic lands, where a similar assumption is made. Fix the rules and say, "Your move, Rosewater. Your move."


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A Case Against Extort in Mono decks.
AgePosted: 2016-Aug-01 2:04 am 
EDH Rules Committee

Joined: 2006-May-18 5:21 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Baron Cappuccino wrote:
Extort was clearly worded with the intention of throwing a rock at a hornet's nest, and probably should've been responded to in kind.


Yuck. That's a very internet way of thinking.

Nobody is looking to score points between the RC and Wizards. In fact, I can't even figure out what kind of points you think they scored here. Or were trying to score. You think someone in R&D said "Extort will finally show how silly it is to treat reminder text as not there"?

If anything, they probably looked at the rules and said "how can we make Crypt Ghast playable in mono-black decks?" and figured out how to make that happen. That's assuming that they were thinking about it at all.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A Case Against Extort in Mono decks.
AgePosted: 2016-Aug-01 2:32 am 

Joined: 2013-Aug-20 4:37 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Boston
papa_funk wrote:
You think someone in R&D said "Extort will finally show how silly it is to treat reminder text as not there"?

I think BC was saying that somebody in R&D is known for his opinion that hybrid is intended as an either/or and doesn't like how CI interacts with that. More in line with your Crypt Ghast comment: how do we make an ability with a W/B symbol that avoids running into CI problems.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A Case Against Extort in Mono decks.
AgePosted: 2016-Aug-01 7:20 am 
EDH Rules Committee

Joined: 2006-May-18 5:21 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
JJackson wrote:
papa_funk wrote:
You think someone in R&D said "Extort will finally show how silly it is to treat reminder text as not there"?

I think BC was saying that somebody in R&D is known for his opinion that hybrid is intended as an either/or and doesn't like how CI interacts with that. More in line with your Crypt Ghast comment: how do we make an ability with a W/B symbol that avoids running into CI problems.


So the conspiracy theory is that Mark cares enough about hybrid to use mechanics to take shots at the RC, but does so in a way that makes the cards totally compatible with the current stance, necessitating no change to make things work in the (probably) optimal way. Devilish!

(Note that Mark's stance isn't actually incompatible. The cards are either/or in gameplay, and the elimination of the mana production rule makes that even clearer. But the deckbuilding restriction isn't about what you can cast. There's lots of cards that you can cast that you can't include in a deck.)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: A Case Against Extort in Mono decks.
AgePosted: 2016-Aug-01 8:20 am 

Joined: 2013-Aug-20 4:37 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Boston
papa_funk wrote:
So the conspiracy theory is that Mark cares enough about hybrid to use mechanics to take shots at the RC, but does so in a way that makes the cards totally compatible with the current stance, necessitating no change to make things work in the (probably) optimal way. Devilish!

The conspiracy version is that it is intended as a shot at the RC. The likely real version is that it is intended as a way to dodge the CI issues of "Extort {W/B}" actually being on the card. It trades the potential of future Extort cards with non-{W/B} costs in exchange for having them playable in more color combos.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 75 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 20 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: