Help me save the tombstone icon!

T

theorgg

Guest
If you have taken a look at some of the Onslaught cards now avaible, you'll notice somthing missing from the ones with abilities that are used in the graveyard.

Ben Bleweiss wrote his first column on the icon, and stated that it was here to stay.

Recently, in Ask Wizards, Randy Behuler said they decided to discontinue the icon.

Why? No real reason was given.

I personally feel this is a very bad choice for Magic, and should be in the least brought up as a column of Behuler's, as well as a poll after aformentioned column.

If you believe the tombstone icon was a good idea, please inform Mr. Behuler at latestdevelopments@wizards.com

Thanks, ya'll!
 
F

FoundationOfRancor

Guest
I didnt like the tombstone. It didnt help me at all, and (to me) it ruined the entire flavor of the card.

Granted, I dont really care all that much, and wouldnt really mind if they brought it back.
 
T

Thallid Ice Cream Man

Guest
I honestly don't care. I've only bought 5 boosters since Apocalypse anyway.

But I will say that it might cost them money to use it again, because it might make a templating issue. I'm not sure, I don't know much about this business, but it might.
And if it has been at least temporarily discontinued it won't see print until at least the third set this block anyway. (They have to be done typesetting the followup to Onslaught by now.)

It might just be a matter of Wizards wanting to keep it synonymous with Odyssey block.

EDIT: I figured out a very significant reason why not: It totally eliminates a card from being reprinted if it has something like that on it. Granted they weren't going to reprint something with flashback anyway, but the symbol could still be applied to non-mechanic cards anyway, right? If so, such cards couldn't be reprinted.
 
H

Hetemti

Guest
Tombstone ticked me off. It ruined the text formatting, and was distracting.
 
C

Chaos Turtle

Guest
I kind of liked the icon. But if R&D made this decision, it was doubtless based on responses to some consumer survey or another, so your chances of saving it are pretty slim, especially since it looks like most people don't really care either way.
 
M

Mr_Pestilence

Guest
Sorry, I don't care either way. If I was using graveyard recursion, I should know which cards have graveyards effects, flashback, or whatever. If my opponent is playing recursion, it's my responsibility to know the relevant cards. Besides, I can examine any graveyard whenever I want.


As far as e-mailing Randy Butthole, don't bother. I know he receives a huge amount of e-mail, but I've never gotten a response, despite several e-mails.


Look, WotC/Hasbeen only care about one thing - $$$$. If they think they might lose 1/10 of a cent, they won't ban cards - even when they acknowledge problems (to paraphrase a recent article, "We know Blue is too strong, but we're not going to do anything about it".)

Since Hasbeen took over, has WotC/DCI banned a single card in Standard? Not that I can remember. Why? Banned cards result in cards having to be replaced (see "Urza's Saga Disaster"). So even when broken cards are printed *Cough* Upheaval/Wild Mongrel/Fact or Fiction *Cough*, nothing will be done to resolve the problem. Nothing at all.
 
S

Spiderman

Administrator
Staff member
I don't care about the icon in either way also. I kind of liked it, but it wasn't necessary and I can understand the reasons put forth above not to use it again.

But going a but off-topic to Mr. P above, unless I'm misunderstanding your post and you mean Upheaval/Wild Mongrel/Fact or Fiction in a single deck and combo, I think there's a different and (in my view) badly misconception of what "broken" means. In Standard, I believe it's supposed to mean cards that enable a "first turn win" where it comes down to who goes first. Academy did that. To my knowledge, the above cards do not (and if I'm wrong, please correct me). And that's why they're not banned.
 
T

theorgg

Guest
Upheval and Fact or fiction arn't very balanced... to say the least.

'heve is quite difficult to win against if it resolves, due to being eaten by an Atog the next turn... unless you're playing Hunting Grounds, have threshold, and have a Worldgorger Dragon in hand...

And Willd Mongrel should have been GG so it didn't turn into a "GU" card... I think that's the only problem there...
 
T

train

Guest
'heve is quite difficult to win against if it resolves, due to being eaten by an Atog the next turn... unless you're playing Hunting Grounds, have threshold, and have a Worldgorger Dragon in hand...
Click to expand...
Hell yeah baby...

Ahhhhh... The power of White/Green...

:D
 
M

Mr_Pestilence

Guest
Well, I have a different notion of broken.

I was not speaking of using these cards together in some combo, but looking at the cards, it would be conceivable to use them together in the same deck.

As far as "broken" goes, when I see the same cards in deck after deck after deck, that is bad for the game, and therefore is a "gamebreaker".

Apart from making the game very dull and redundant, seeing the same cards over and over should indicate that those cards are just a little too good. Considering the cards individually:

Fact or Fiction - during its run, virtually every top deck featured 3 or 4 of these to generate massive card advantage, also filling the graveyard for Psychatog or reaching threshhold quickly. Its a shame that decks without FoF were considered bad by definition.

Upheaval - If this resolves, I would bet the caster wins about 90% of the time. Roughly equivalent in effect to Obliterate, it costs 2 less to cast, and even allows for Counterspell or Circular Logic backup if necessary, since it comes in the color of control.

Wild Mongrel - this card is in every Madness deck, either G/U or G/R. Apart from that, it's in all good beatdown decks. It comes out fast, is virtually immune to direct damage, and just dominates the early game. Along with it's partner in crime, Basking Rootwalla, this formed the most potent, least surprising 1-2 punch in Standard Magic.

So, all in all, these cards to me are simply too good, as they have the effect of skewing the environment. In other words, they force Standard players to construct their decks with these cards in mind, or to plan on going home early. To me, that is the definition of broken.
 
S

Spiderman

Administrator
Staff member
I agree, if it dominates so much that you're either playing with it or against it (much like Necro back in the day), it needs to be looked at.

Personal impressions aside (since what one may see in his local area may not be indicative of the whole tourney scene), were there no other decks viable during the run of these cards? I don't know enough about the history of them.

I might say this wrong, so please don't be offended :)

I understand that you may be putting your "personal spin" on the word "broken", but it doesn't seem that it can usually apply when trying to make an argument on a subject that isn't "personal". It's like taking data that's only applies to the West Coast and making a decision for the entire US. Obviously you're entitled to your own opinion and you probably disagree with this opinion of mine :); I'm just trying to think of the "general" and more factors that go into what determines how a card is "broken".
 
T

train

Guest
If anything is broken for a single card(during a situation) - it's the Basking Rootwalla.

0 - for a 1/1 pumpable... Not even the kobolds were 1/1's...

But, The only reason he's broken is because of the madness cost... he has to be utilized this way in order for him to be so effective. That's the bonus: up the mongrel or switch the moeba, and get a creature... 2 bonuses for.... not a dam_ thing!!!!!
 
N

Nightstalkers

Guest
The tombstone was cute but we think it should be replaced with something else.
 
T

train

Guest
It should be replaced with a pokemon symbol to remind everyone how close they are realted to pokemon players...:eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top