A Year or so later,...

[Killer Joe]

...what do you think about 6th edition rules now? I remember, but not at these forums, that many people posted "See Ya Later"'s because they forecasted the demise of Magic due to 6E rule changes.
IMHO, the "Stack" was the best thing that ever happened to Magic, I never really understood the "batches" of spells thing, that's probably why I really couldn't grasp the whole "Abeyance" debate a while back.
And Interrupts, could you respond to an Interrupt or did you have to deal with it without being able to respond? I remember the first time I tried countering a counterspell, my opponent said, "What? How can you counter an Interrupt?" I always got confused (that was before I had tournament experience). I am, however, glad to see Interrupts gone, along with 'Banding' (a whole other topic).

 

[Whimsical]

The idea of having "interrupts" in the Magic game was good ... but it made the entire system too top-heavy as it expanded/evolved. Getting rid of it made things a LOT easier for the below-average player like moi.

The damage stacking in 6th Ed. rules ... is interesting. For one thing, it makes the Mishra's Factory a real threat to weenies. Back then, when your opponent had a grizzly (or any other 2 power creature) and you had a factory, you had to waste a mana and the factory every turn just to keep the bear off your back. Under 6th Ed., you have a dead weenie and a killer factory. Same thing for Mogg Fanatics ... now the little buggers can take down a 2 toughness creature. Let me stop before I start making some sense here and say something simple instead.

I like the new rules.

 

[Melkor]

Oh man, I remember back in the day, the Banding ability caused me fits because we didn't know how it really worked, so basically it ended up being way to good. So good in fact that I traded for a Helm of Chatzuk, shortly after obtaining this card we discovered the real rules, leaving me screwed as normal.

I remember the doomsayers all running around predicting the end of Magic, and all the, "I'll never play by those rules" going around at the time. I think it was relatively natural for it to happen, but even at the time I felt that these new rules were generally better and that they weren't actually that big of a change from the old style. Time has confirmed that idea, the style of the game is by and large exactly the same as with the old rules with only some of the mechanics operating in a different way.

 

[Gizmo]

6th Edition is great - it was always going to be great and it didn`t disappoint. Anybody with a rules question simply isn`t thinking hard enough, beause there are no hard rules questions under 6th Edition.

 

[Mundungu]

I just wish they would clear up the "end of turn" mess (although maybe it is just me who dont understand it).

I also still do not understand why the trample damage is fully assigned when a creature is blocked by a creature with protection from the color.

But the stack is great and quite clear in general if you put your mind to it.

 

[EricBess]

Mundungu,

Either I don't understand or you don't. Perhaps I just don't understand what you are confused about.

Okay, for the "end of turn" thing, the most important thing to realize is that there is a difference between "until end of turn" and "at end of turn".

"Until end of turn" wears off during the cleanup step and there is nothing that you can do to get around this (within reason).

"At end of turn" triggers at the beginning of an "end of turn" step and only has one chance during the turn to be added to the stack. If the effect is created too late in the turn to be added to the stack (during the end to turn or even cleanup step in some situations), it will wait around until the next end of turn step, usually during your opponent's turn.

Okay, I can understand why that might be confusing, but you have lost me on the trample thing.

Trample damage is always completely assigned. If a trampling black creature (4/4) is blocked by a 2/2 pro:black creature, you have to assign 4 pts of damage. At least 2 of this must be assigned to the creature because that is "lethal damage". The fact that it is pro:black doesn't come into play until the damage resolves, at which time the damage to the creature is reduced to 0.

What you say seems to indicate a belief that all 4 damage would be assigned to the player, and this is not the case. You assign to all creatures the same way, regardless of protection.

Note: there used to be creatures that couldn't even receive combat damage. I don't think there are anymore. I think they all have errata now. You may be getting confused because of this.

Hope this helps.

 

[Ura]

6th edition while not the end of magic by anymeans wasn't sorta a toos up for me, some things were better some things I thought stunk.

Good things:
The damage stack, easier to teach newbies how combat works.
The spell and reactions stack, also makes it easier to teach newbies.
Cleaning up the phase sequence of turns so there are less timing arguments.

Bad things:
The loss of interrupts, I hate this change and think it stinks. The entire point of being an interrupt was to do just that, interrupt something from happening.
The loss of creature abilities in the basic set, primarily banding and trample. I have never seen what people find so confusing about banding and probably never will.
The change to trample rules so that you only have to assign "leathal damage" or rather assign damage equal to a blocking creatures toughness and the rest can automatically blow through to the player. Makes creatures with protection alot weaker on defense then they were before 6th edition.
Things like a blinking spirit can put combat damage on the stack and then bounce before taking damage doesn't make much sense as far as "realistic combat" goes, but hey its only a card game.

Changes I didn't care about one way of the other:
Tapped blockers still deal combat damage. It rendered Master of Arms ability completely useless, but oh well.

otherwise I just felt the whole thing was kinda mediocre and didn't really change things for me one way or the other other then minor gripes and annoyances. The game is still the same for the most part.

 

[Apollo]

I mostly agree with Ura. I think that 6th Edition rules are better than the original rules. However, I still think it was a mistake to change the rules, because so many people were used to the old ones. I sitll make the occasional mistake because I'm thinking of the original rules.

In short, I thought that 6th were better, but not enough better that it was worth changing. They shoulda picked one at the beginning and stuck with it.

 

[TomB]

And I won't bore you all by bringing up the same old debates again. It blew when they changed the rules on us back then, and it still blows, and as far as I'm concerned I no longer care.

H.A.N.D.!

 

[Zadok001]

Ah, those were the days...

The Dojo went up in FLAMES over this, as I remember it. More little 'Screw Magic!' threads than at any other time in the history of the game, AFAIK. The Waylay ruling shortly thereafter sent up a new wave of fireballs along the Dojo, as people screamed about 6th 'obviously' annihilating all the good rules and putting bad ones in their place.

Throughtout all this, I did my best to stay neutral. I commented every now and then, but I wasn't a regular poster. I didn't really understand all the ranging implications of 6th for about a month after it came out, at which point the stack began to make an impact on the games I played. IMHO, the changes were far less severe than many players thought them to be.

It's been almost 2 years now. 6th edition rules are reflex to me, and I play unregistered Rules Guru at my local card shop, online, and in my play group. (Which isn't to say I understand anywhere close to everything. What on earth DOES happen with that Humility/Opalescence thing, anyway?) The fact is, the rules are great fun to play with, and there are a lot more options now. And I can now teach the game to newbies in one less step (no need to explain those interrupt things).

To anyone who still hates 6th: Yes, it killed Interrupts. Look what else it killed. Damage 'batches?' What's THAT? Tapped attackers deal damage, but tapped blockers don't? Huh? Yeah, 6th killed some good stuff. But it killed a lot MORE bad stuff in the process, and was a worthwhile change.

 

[Spiderman]

Everyone who remembers the Dojo boards knows my position as a firm advocate of 6th rules...

I still believe they're a lot better than the old rules.

Good things:

Cleaned up triggered abilities
The batch

Bad things:

Hmm... honestly, nothing really bad

Indifferent Things:

How the attack phase is handled now (now when you say you're attacking and your opponent has responses, you're still committed to attacking (and thus using the attack phase whereas before, you didn't have to)

Trample
damage at End of Combat

As a note: Banding is great and it's loss has nothing to do with 6th rules (as far as I know, it operates the same now as it did in the past). Rather, because banding in general seemed to be confusing, WOTC has decided to take it out which is why you don't see it around.

Also, to EricBess, I think Mundungu was more confused about the specific way Waylay used to, and Thawing Flaciers continues to interact with the EOT step rather than the general idea of EOT. At least, that's the way I read it...

 

[Baskil]

By a LONG shot. At first it was confusing, but once they cleared up the issues with older cards and how they interacted, as well as clean up their templating, it's been the best thing ever. I can't imagine what it would be like if MBC was played under 5th edition or even Revised rules.

 

[Duel]

good things:
TIMING WORKS NOW! It even makes sense!
Bad things:
Block, deal damage, AND tap, AND sac? Screw that.