Magic: The Gathering,GO TEAM MS!

[chamber]

Whooooops.

Played Soul Ransom illegally at an official tournament at least a dozen times. Even one of the judges seemed to acknowledge the effect as-played though. If nothing else it proves that true conviction can do ANYTHING.

The card is worded extremely poorly. Level 1 judges don't know anything (store owners tend to know even less).

[NabakovNabakov]

I don't think I've ever disagreed with magic analysis quite as much as I disagree with what Nabnab just said. Strategies such as the one he is describing only have utility at a very base level. If I am taking such a deck to a tournament, and my decks power relies on my opponents not understanding the interactions well enough to play correctly, then I will beat bad opponents some large percentage of the time and I will lose to good opponents some large percentage of the time. However, if I am playing tight, with a deck with a reasonable power level without any absolutely horrendously bad matchups and a solid side board plan for those matchups which are unfavorable, I will also beat the bad players some large percentage of the time, without having to resort to smoke and mirrors, and, I will by the same token have vastly improved my matchups against the good players.

Since I am, I think, pretty good at magic, I would much rather the barrier for beating me be "Play magic better than I do" instead of "see through my gimmicks."

Your way of playing Magic sounds like less fun. After all, the only level of utility that counts is the base level.

Also, we now have a ton of evidence that Soul Ransom causes legitimate confusion not just in a "This is new, and I don't know how to optimally respond to it" type of way, but in a "I got a pronoun mixed up when reading this card and actually thought it did something completely different" type of way. Ultimately, my comment wasn't about how awesome it was to catch people off-guard with Soul Ransom, it was about how stupid the wording was that Nuwen was able to go through an entire tournament playing the card wrong.

[Fate]

SHEA DOESNT PLAY MAGIC FOR FUN YOU FOOL

HE.

PLAYS.

TO.

WIN.

[Sudo_Nym]

Winning is fun.

[hasdgfas]

Winning is fun.

Yep. But not winning isn't inherently not fun.

[AGar]

It's not about winning or losing, it's about having fun.

There's just no fun in losing.

[bv310]

I play EDH for fun (and to play with my goddamned Fable of Wolf and Owl). Standard and Modern are for being vaguely competitive. That's my style, anyway. Everyone's play will be different.

[NabakovNabakov]

Abyssal Persecutor + Platinum Angel say that simultaneously not winning AND not losing is the

most

fun.

[Thestatusquo]

If that's why you're playing magic, why don't you just play tick tack toe instead. It's much quicker.

[Thestatusquo]

Also, I would agree with the commentary that "fun" and "winning" are not somehow exclusive, but are completely linked. Do you really have fun when you get outplayed at magic? I don't. It's an abysmal feeling to lose, and anyone who says it doesn't impact their fun negatively? Well, that's outside of my frame of reference I guess.

I play lots of things that I am not great at, but the urge to win is still the basic driving force behind any game play, right? Like, if we're not playing to win then why bother playing a competitive game at all? Why don't we play dominion to see if we can get one player to get all the provinces? Why don't we just all try to get one player the longest road we possibly can in Settlers? It's because those practices inherently do not provide the basic tension that makes game play interesting. I like interesting interactions and complex decks better than most people, and in fact if I had my druthers I'd run storm combo every single tournament I am in. (the decision trees! oh, the decision trees!) But losing with an interesting and outlandish deck just is not more fun than winning with a boring normal one. It's just not.

[AGar]

I didn't peg you as someone with any

Timmy

Johnny tendencies Shea.

E: Helps if I remember which is which.

[hasdgfas]

Also, I would agree with the commentary that "fun" and "winning" are not somehow exclusive, but are completely linked. Do you really have fun when you get outplayed at magic? I don't. It's an abysmal feeling to lose, and anyone who says it doesn't impact their fun negatively? Well, that's outside of my frame of reference I guess.

I play lots of things that I am not great at, but the urge to win is still the basic driving force behind any game play, right? Like, if we're not playing to win then why bother playing a competitive game at all? Why don't we play dominion to see if we can get one player to get all the provinces? Why don't we just all try to get one player the longest road we possibly can in Settlers? It's because those practices inherently do not provide the basic tension that makes game play interesting. I like interesting interactions and complex decks better than most people, and in fact if I had my druthers I'd run storm combo every single tournament I am in. (the decision trees! oh, the decision trees!) But losing with an interesting and outlandish deck just is not more fun than winning with a boring normal one. It's just not.

But I don't have fun winning because my opponent doesn't play a spell. I have fun when Magic feels like a battle of wits and the decisions actually matter. I drafted on Tuesday at work, and had way more fun losing g1 of round 2 because there were always decisions to make as opposed to g1 round 1 where I rolled because my opponent had nothing. Winning is more fun than losing, but losing doesn't mean you didn't have fun.

[Thestatusquo]

You're making a false comparison. I too prefer good magic to bad magic. But when you're comparing losing a game with complex interactions to winning a game that wasn't really a game of magic, you're comparing apples to oranges. A much more illustrative question is do you prefer to win a game where one player doesn't actually get to play magic, or lose such a game?

[hasdgfas]

You're making a false comparison. I too prefer good magic to bad magic. But when you're comparing losing a game with complex interactions to winning a game that wasn't really a game of magic, you're comparing apples to oranges. A much more illustrative question is do you prefer to win a game where one player doesn't actually get to play magic, or lose such a game?

I prefer winning. Like I said, I always prefer winning to losing, but losing doesn't mean you didn't have fun.

[NabakovNabakov]

If I had the disposable income, I

would

run that Persecutor/Angel combo just to get it on the field and (attempt to) protect it to the bitter end. It's not a draw, and so long as you're not playing in a time-limited format, you end up with an eternal game. Even after everyone draws their last card, walks away, and (eventually) dies, the game is still going. Forever. And that is

awesome

.

I'd also like to run an 'architecture' deck composed entirely of gates, walls, and the Door to Nothingness. Can it win? Yes, technically. Will it win? Probably not. But I'll still get to play my dumb little deck and laugh my ass off, and my opponent gets to win. So in a sense, win-win. But I don't even need fancy cards or decks to enjoy myself while losing. I'll discard a 7-card hand to a Barbarian Bully, just to see the look on my roommate's face. I'll play Manabarbs whenever, wherever, because that card is

hilarious

. If I played enough Catan, I'm sure I'd end up being that guy who only wants to make his roads into smiley face or gathers sheep to the exclusion of all other resources (because seriously? Sheep?).

In short, as much as Magic is a game, it can also just be a toy.

[Thestatusquo]

You sir, are a strange person.

[kdowns]

I was going through Star City Dallas the one I went to back in Janurary, and then I saw this http://starcitygames.com/scglive/files/ ... 00000.html


How many people can say they were in first place at one point in a major tournament.

[AGar]

You sir, are a strange person.

He's just an extreme Johnny.

[AGar]

Bad Standard combo I REEEEEALLLY wanna try:

Breeding Pool
Galvanic Alchemist + Arbor Elf with Illusionist's Bracers equipped.
Mind Grind.

Create 30ish mana.

Mind Grind your opponent.

Win the game.

[InflatablePie]

AGar: Infinity on a Budget

Not sure if that's where you got the idea or not. Either way, as someone who piloted a Primal Surge/Lab Maniac deck, I wanna try this. I don't have the mana-base (the harbors anyway) but I don't suppose it's THAT necessary.

Also I feel like Alchemist's Refuge would be okay as a two-of here for SURPRISE FLASH DOUBLE LAB MANIAC HUE

[AGar]

AGar: Infinity on a Budget

Not sure if that's where you got the idea or not. Either way, as someone who piloted a Primal Surge/Lab Maniac deck, I wanna try this. I don't have the mana-base (the harbors anyway) but I don't suppose it's THAT necessary.

Also I feel like Alchemist's Refuge would be okay as a two-of here for SURPRISE FLASH DOUBLE LAB MANIAC HUE

Yeah Infinity on a Budget is where I got the idea for the Breeding Pool/Galvanic Alchemist/Arbor Elf/Bracers half of it.

But I like mill (I'm potentially running a cobbled together mill deck tonight at FNM depending on what time I get done with work) and grind is a cool effect and I saw Mind Grind in an article and was like "Oooh, I could have fun with that," and I was trying to work out a BUG ramp list to make it work.

[Thestatusquo]

Anyone who won their first round at a big tournament? You were tied with 268 other people.

[chamber]

Anyone who won their first round at a big tournament? You were tied with 268 other people.

He was technically in first. At that point the tiebreaker being used is order you signed up in I believe.

[InflatablePie]

After looking at a ton of different budget decks (since the ones I have were kinda meh, and are worse after GTC), I want to try and play Standard Elves.

This is what I'm thinking. Obviously I need two more Breeding Pools (and maybe the Harbors, but I don't want to invest $40+ in something that's rotating out and may not be reprinted that doesn't see much play in older formats).

[InflatablePie]

Also: what's the P1P1 here?

Spoiler: p1p1

I wanna say Kingpin's Pet is a solid choice, but idk...