Search results

Because I was hoping that someone other than Spiderman would see all this and make pretty much the exact post you just did. Mission accomplished!

Well, I said something like that a long time ago and you might still remember it, but I was in error. There are battle axes in Warhammer Quest that preclude the use of a shield (and have an additional Strength bonus), but regular axes do not. So you're good to go!

Double post again. Haha! They keep coming. Nope, I don't say that, without a doubt, no one said that a given change would kill the game. I can't go around and ask every single person. But I'm also not going to assume that someone, somewhere, sometime did say it. You being sure isn't enough...

Firstly, you're pretty close to nitpicking things that aren't even there. I didn't say, "And they called them power 9 back then." I know the term wasn't around from the beginning. I was just using it because it exists now. I've heard stories, but nothing that had solid documentation, so I'm...

Well, at least temporarily I'm back on my desktop. I didn't really want to update your characters on my laptop and have to transfer everything back again, as I am lazy. I'll distribute the treasure like this tentatively, and if anyone wants to change it, let me know... Throg: Lifestone of...

Horrible idea #1: Have Mooseman play a deck that looks extremely threatening. When the other players take the bait and gang up on him, he should protest and try to convince them that having everyone attack the most apparent threat isn't actually a good idea. They kill Mooseman (or perhaps nearly...

Grillz - K.I.Z. (2008)

I will not double post. But I will triple post! http://www.classicdojo.org/b985/bif.981203mmc.txt

Since all this Waylay stuff has come up again, I remember that for the article I wrote earlier this year I was looking at the redaction of power-level errata, something I'm a big fan of. I'd thought WotC got rid of just about all of the old power-level errata (with a few problematic exceptions)...

Again, apologies to everyone for saying way too much about this. I am going to go write "I will not double post" on a blackboard one-hundred times... Perhaps. Only if I'm seeing something that isn't there. I want to be clear that I'm not attributing sinister motives to Mark Rosewater. I think...

Haha, I can already tell I'm going to double post again. This thread is just too much. Everyone else at the CPA hates me by now. Here we go... Yeah, I get that. I don't know the full extent of this because it's not very well-documented and I wasn't around to see it, but I've heard stories...

I saw that it was a control deck. Just got me thinking about the "peasant" format and all that. Combo would work here too. Control should be pretty strong in an all-commons format, although 5-color control seems pretty ambitious... Is this the only all-common deck so far, or have you done others?

Untap, upkeep, liberate the poor dwarf, draw, Mountain, tap the Mountain for red mana and use the red mana to hire the dwarf on as an indentured servant, done. Common Pool Forest Waste Away 4B, Instant (As an additional cost to cast ~, discard a card.; Target creature gets -5/-5 ueot) Swamp...

Sorry, that was pretty long, but there were several different little bits and I didn't want to miss anything important. This one'll probably be long too... Uh, what? I don't think so. I said not a bullet point list. Then you said bullet point. Then I said not a bullet point list. Maybe you...

I'll get to the part about reading the article momentarily. To clarify the things related to 6th Edition... It might help if you'd stop strawmanning me then. I've said multiple times, but I'll repeat it again: I'm not making a quantitative comparison, nor do I think it's even possible. Well...

I'll be emancipating that dwarf from the common pool, by the way.

Heart of the Sunrise - Yes (1971)

Your additional stipulation of a 75-card deck would also make it harder to devise a powerful combo deck capable of going off quickly, but I think I could pull it off. My first bet would be High Tide...

Is that what you meant about "substantial" rules changes? In aggregate, there would have been a lot of rules changes between 1993 and 1999. I thought you were saying those rules changes didn't matter, but now I think you're getting at something else... I was saying that the early changes are...

If you search using Google, or better yet the wayback machine, you'll find that discussion on Waylay's erratum crops up beginning July of 1999. There's also this thread: http://www.casualplayers.org/forums/threads/our-first-issue.405/