Proposed MP Official Rules
- Thread starter Spiderman
- Start date
R
Reverend Love
Guest
Two thumbs up. Glad to see WoTC supporting all it's consumers as opposed to it's loudest (pros) consumers.
M
mythosx
Guest
they loves that spell range. Whats up with that? Let's just have free for action. Perhaps this is a sign that they intend to open up multiplayer competitions on the highest levels and they need to set up a way to control the randomness of an 8 way brawl in order to draw in some of the top pros. Dang it they are still catering to the tourney players.
N
Nightstalkers
Guest
-mumbles to himself-
And what about us guys wantin' a T1 tourney?
...
Multiplayer T1!!!!
M
mythosx
Guest
You are right. But I think the years have taken a toll on us. We were once proud knights. Now we just sit around the CPA like an old folks home and slap each other on the back about how vicious Channel/fireball used to be.
M
mythosx
Guest
"I'm an old man, I don't need inches." Funniest thing heard by tech support. True story. Some guy called in to complain about spam.
N
Notepad
Guest
A lot of these things I'm hearing about sound like stuff they already have on MTGO. Spell range is a HUGE thing on MTGO, which breaks cards like Howling Mine and Coat of Arms, especially in Emperor Games. Cards like Weird Harvest and New Frontiers actually have value on MTGO thanks to spell range.
So, like the 8E cards, when people complain, they'll just say:
"Well, people've been playing under this system already. You's don't know whatcha talkin' 'bout, biznatch?! We know better then j00!!!" and then plug their ears like they always do.
So, like the 8E cards, when people complain, they'll just say:
"Well, people've been playing under this system already. You's don't know whatcha talkin' 'bout, biznatch?! We know better then j00!!!" and then plug their ears like they always do.
T
train
Guest
Spell Range is blanketly stated to be in "some" multiplayer games... So it wouldn't be all...
But if they sanction it - all the better...
But if they sanction it - all the better...
T
TheCasualOblivion
Guest
I can't think of Wizards defining multiplayer rules as anything less than a sign of the apocalypse. Multiplayer is where people go to run away from Wizards and the DCI, and now they're going to invade it? It might be nice to have some of the bigger messes with it defined, but I'm not really sure its worth the price.
Well, I think that it's about time. For the first few editions of Magic they didn't even acknowledge the fact that more than two players were playing the game.
Tournament level Multiplayer? It almost sounds good, but let me use an example of what happens when a "serious" player comes into a format such as Multiplayer:
Back in the days of Fourth Ed/Ice Age, I had my first play group. We had lots of fun playing FFA games. One night they invited a friend to play. He was a minion of a local Cardboard Crack Dealer. A nice guy, but kinda' evil. He started off the game more-or-less ignoring us as he layed down cards like Fastbond and tons of land. Then he put out a CoP:Green and a Zuron Orb. The rest of us kept ignoring him as we attacked each other w/ creatures etc.
Then he cast Channel, sacked all of his lands to his Zuron Orb, cast Hurricane, Forked it, and tried to use his CoP:Green for both spells. After the damage was done he says "I won!" I reminded him of the text of Fork that states the copy is Red, not Green and advised him that the game was a draw. A very boring draw.
Aside from the Fork mistake, I can imagine a lot of play similar to this if sanctionned multiplayer becomes possible. In this case, I would happily welcome spell ranges.
-Ferret
"How would Shaharazad work w/ spell range?"
Tournament level Multiplayer? It almost sounds good, but let me use an example of what happens when a "serious" player comes into a format such as Multiplayer:
Back in the days of Fourth Ed/Ice Age, I had my first play group. We had lots of fun playing FFA games. One night they invited a friend to play. He was a minion of a local Cardboard Crack Dealer. A nice guy, but kinda' evil. He started off the game more-or-less ignoring us as he layed down cards like Fastbond and tons of land. Then he put out a CoP:Green and a Zuron Orb. The rest of us kept ignoring him as we attacked each other w/ creatures etc.
Then he cast Channel, sacked all of his lands to his Zuron Orb, cast Hurricane, Forked it, and tried to use his CoP:Green for both spells. After the damage was done he says "I won!" I reminded him of the text of Fork that states the copy is Red, not Green and advised him that the game was a draw. A very boring draw.
Aside from the Fork mistake, I can imagine a lot of play similar to this if sanctionned multiplayer becomes possible. In this case, I would happily welcome spell ranges.
-Ferret
"How would Shaharazad work w/ spell range?"