It is currently Sat Nov 18, 2017 6:46 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 10:10 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 25, 2013
Posts: 2269
http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/ar ... -mechanics

Quote:
Starting with this set, all planeswalkers past, present, and future will have the supertype legendary. They will also be subject to the "legend rule." The "planeswalker uniqueness rule" is going away. What does this mean? In short, everything that's true about legendary creatures will now be true about legendary planeswalkers.

Under the new rules, if a player controls more than one legendary planeswalker with the same name, that player chooses one and puts the other into their owner's graveyard. This means that if you control Jace, Unraveler of Secrets and cast Jace, Cunning Castaway, both Jaces can exist under your control.


Sad-face.

Oh well. Guess they got tired of people going "why can't I have both?". Will this destroy Magic as we know it? Is this the end times? Nah. Just another day at the office.

_________________
Quote:
"If you refuse to use rock, you will never beat scissors." — Galef, Dakka Dakka Forums


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 10:15 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 7108
Ugh planeswalkers were the thing I hated most about standard. Probably won't nug modern TOO badly (but negate is looking like a stronger sideboard card)

_________________
"Everything looks good when your opponent passes 4 turns in a row" -- rstnme
"Something that does not look good when your opponent does nothing is not a thing" -- me


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 12:08 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 12420
Identity: Chaoslight
Preferred Pronoun Set: She
So what does this actually change? That two players can have a jace but only one each? I honestly dont remember how walkers worked.

_________________
altimis wrote:
I never take anytihng Lily says seriously, except for when I take it personally. Then it's personal.
WotC_Ethan wrote:
People, buy more stuff.
#WotCstaff
Spoiler

Image


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 12:32 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 6379
LilyStorm wrote:
So what does this actually change? That two players can have a jace but only one each? I honestly dont remember how walkers worked.
Theoretically, with this change, you, as a player, could have one copy of each Jace card out on your side of the battlefield.

_________________
magicpablo666 wrote:
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is "never get involved in an thread with GM_Champion" - but only slightly less well-known is this: "Never go in against AzureShade when card design is on the line!"


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 12:34 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: May 09, 2014
Posts: 1962
it means planeswalker subtypes don't do anything rules-wise anymore, for the most part.

_________________
I used to view myself as a crow. A large, negative, angry bird who is portrayed as the sign of a bad omen. Feared by others and wanting to dominate, I was my own flock.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 12:34 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: May 09, 2014
Posts: 1962
you can have multiple jaces at once as long as they all have different names

_________________
I used to view myself as a crow. A large, negative, angry bird who is portrayed as the sign of a bad omen. Feared by others and wanting to dominate, I was my own flock.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 1:07 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 2928
It should be noted that, at least for the time being, you still cannot use planeswalkers as Commander generals unless they specifically state they can be used as Commander generals.

Apparently Mirror Gallery just sold out everywhere. Captain Sisay just had a spike in demand. Lay Bare the Heart just got worse.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 1:52 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 04, 2015
Posts: 4649
Location: Alchemist's Refuge
Identity: Male
Preferred Pronoun Set: he/him/his/his/himself
Apparently Mirror Gallery just sold out everywhere. Captain Sisay just had a spike in demand. Lay Bare the Heart just got worse.


But at least Empress Galina got better. :incognito:

_________________
Former Rules Advisor (RA program ended 5-3-16)

Up High, Down Low, Whoops, Too Slow.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 2:21 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Aug 28, 2014
Posts: 1124
Ew. I mean, I knew it was coming, but it's still an ugly typeline. And if it was done for Jace... it wasn't strictly necessary. "... except the copies aren't Jaces" may read weird, but would have worked, I'm 99% sure.

_________________
The Five Worlds block - [5WD] Set archive | [MST] Partial Set archive
Planeswalker Sharing Compendium entry - note to self: improve it.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 4:10 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 07, 2015
Posts: 249
Preferred Pronoun Set: he/him
It's an odd change. I thought it would be more likely that the legendary rule would be scrapped entirely than that its use would be expanded to cover planeswalkers. Aesthetically, I really don't like the change.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 4:56 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 12420
Identity: Chaoslight
Preferred Pronoun Set: She
AzureShade wrote:
LilyStorm wrote:
So what does this actually change? That two players can have a jace but only one each? I honestly dont remember how walkers worked.
Theoretically, with this change, you, as a player, could have one copy of each Jace card out on your side of the battlefield.


oh yeah, doy

_________________
altimis wrote:
I never take anytihng Lily says seriously, except for when I take it personally. Then it's personal.
WotC_Ethan wrote:
People, buy more stuff.
#WotCstaff
Spoiler

Image


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 29, 2017 2:32 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 28, 2016
Posts: 1792
Preferred Pronoun Set: he/him/his/his/himself
:face:

_________________
nice quotes from this forum


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 6:15 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 12, 2015
Posts: 514
I think they probably discussed scrapping both rules, but that a faction of Development argued successfully that the Planeswalker Uniqueness rule carries an important chunk of the work of balancing individual Planeswalker cards. So they decided to fold them together.

Having one rule is much better than having two. I'm agnostic as to whether they kept the better rule.

_________________


"Ability words are flavor text for Melvins."

"Remember, dear friends: when we announce something and you imagine it, the odds that we made exactly that thing are zero."---Kelly Digges


Last edited by astarael7 on Sat Sep 09, 2017 8:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2017 1:17 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 6379
But wait, there's more!

Image

_________________
magicpablo666 wrote:
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is "never get involved in an thread with GM_Champion" - but only slightly less well-known is this: "Never go in against AzureShade when card design is on the line!"


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2017 1:26 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 07, 2015
Posts: 249
Preferred Pronoun Set: he/him
Wow. Now that's a big deal. Saying it's "a chunk" of errata is putting it very mildly.

The redirection rule has always been a kludge, but it was deemed the least bad solution due to just how massive the errata would be (and messy, with cards like Blightning; would it be unable to hit planeswalkers, would it just fail to cause the discard on a planeswalker, or would it say "Blightning deals 3 damage to target player or planeswalker. That player or that planeswalker's controller discards two cards."?). The more cards they printed, the more errata would be needed, so I'm surprised that they've changed their mind on this.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2017 2:20 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Aug 28, 2014
Posts: 1124
Yeah, there was a reason they essentially said "lol no" to errataing back when planeswalkers were first released. Also, it means that any burn they print that hits players going forward also needs to hit planeswalkers. Otherwise we have tons of spells that look the same, but aren't.

(How would something like Acidic Soil look? "~ deals damage to each player or one planeswalker that player controls equal to the number of lands he or she controls."?)

_________________
The Five Worlds block - [5WD] Set archive | [MST] Partial Set archive
Planeswalker Sharing Compendium entry - note to self: improve it.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2017 3:02 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 07, 2015
Posts: 249
Preferred Pronoun Set: he/him
One thing to note is that the card in the image says "target opponent or planeswalker", so it can now hit a planeswalker you or a teammate controls. So they aren't directly replicating the current redirection rule. This makes sense. It also means they might change interactions in other ways.

If "target opponent" becomes "target opponent or planeswalker", maybe "each player" becomes "each player and each planeswalker"? Variable damage cards like Acidic Soil would still need a "that player or that planeswalker's controller". And it would change the power level of all those cards.

I think it's more likely that they'd just leave off planeswalkers from those and have the errata affect only targeted damage. Having the choice to redirect or not be made on resolution is a big part of the weirdness of the current rule, so I don't think they'd want to keep that if they can avoid it.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2017 3:07 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 09, 2013
Posts: 5315
Location: Mountain View
Preferred Pronoun Set: he/him
My best guess would be that stuff like Sizzle will no longer be able to hit planeswalkers.

On one hand, I think this will clean up the gameplay of hitting planeswalkers with burn (no more "I bolt you, does it resolve? Okay, redirect"), and if you're only using new cards, it makes things easier to understand. This is great for online gameplay and eventually for standard, but the way this will affect old cards feels really messy and weird. Even in the simplest case, it'll be easy for someone to compare 2018 Lightning Strike with 2015 Lightning Bolt and conclude "one of these can target planeswalkers and the other one can't."

_________________
0x10


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2017 3:40 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 07, 2015
Posts: 249
Preferred Pronoun Set: he/him
Indeed. And that level of errata is pretty unprecedented. The rules change that sparked this thread has the potential for the same confusion ("these old planeswalkers must not be legendary"), but that's unlikely to actually cause confusion: planeswalkers are all mythic and all represent specific characters, and they were always legendary-adjacent, so it's unlikely that people will think you can have multiple of the same old planeswalker on the battlefield.

The one rules change they made with big errata implications was the introduction of the tribal card type, but that also didn't cause that problem, since it worked in the opposite way. That is, while the removal of the planeswalker redirection rule will mean that old Lightning Strike looks like it can do less than it actually can, the introduction of tribal just meant that some old tribe-affecting cards look like could do more than they actually could, and only in nigh-irrelevant ways. At worst, you'll think you can sacrifice Boggart Shenanigans to Airdrop Condor for 0 damage.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2017 4:08 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Nov 08, 2013
Posts: 610
Location: Zaragoza, Spain
Please Wizards do it and do it as soon as possible.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 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
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group