Here's the new restricted list!!!
Mike McAulay
restricted list, I received some e-mail from Sparky!! explaining that
they are having trouble posting from their site. He sent me the new
banned/restricted info, which is:
RESTRICTED: Zuran Orb
BANNED: Channel, Chaos Orb, Falling Star
UNRESTRICTED: Summon Legends (yes!!)
Also, Homelands will not displace FE when it arrives.
This is not a hoax, as subsequent posts from Sparky!! will doubtless
make clear. For the skeptical among you, the full text of both messages
from Sparky!! follows...
X-POP3-Rcpt: mike@headgames
Return-Path: spa...@castle.wizards.com
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 1995 13:20:51 -0800
From: spa...@castle.wizards.com (Sparky!!)
To: mi...@capsinc.com (Mike McAulay)
Subject: Re: SPARKY: Where's the *#@$& restricted list?
References: <44qg2d$s...@sun.sirius.com>
Organization: Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
In article <44qg2d$s...@sun.sirius.com>, mi...@capsinc.com (Mike McAulay)
wrote:
> Subject pretty much says it all. You promised the new list would be
> released on the first of October, which done come and gone.
News things are taking a week to get off our site, and I don't know why.
Check the last date from something I posted.
I did post the changes, and when I get the final edited form I'll post
it.
Sorry, but the delays in propogation aren't in my realm of control.
--
Marc Schmalz, aka Sparky!!
Wizards of the Coast Customer Service Team
spa...@castle.wizards.com
-POP3-Rcpt: mike@headgames
Return-Path: spa...@wizards.com
X-Sender: spa...@castle.wizards.com
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 1995 14:07:00 -0800
To: mmca...@headgames.com (Mike McAulay)
From: spa...@wizards.com (Marc "Sparky" Schmalz)
Subject: Re: SPARKY: Where's the *#@$& restricted list?
I don't know how many other people have said they'll do this for me, but
here you are:
The following is part of a letter from the DC on the changes that are
taking place. Official documents will be posted as I get them from
Editing.
--
I'd like to take this opportunity to highlight several of the
modifications and briefly discuss them, in order to provide you with a
better understanding of the reasons behind the changes.
o After reading the updated rules carefully, you'll note that
Summon
Legend cards are no longer Restricted. Yes, you may now construct a
sanctioned tournament deck with four General Jarkeld cards therein!
However, the rule pertaining to only one individual Summon Legend card
title in play at any one time is still effective (so there can be only
one
General Jarkeld card in play at a time). Originally, these cards
were
restricted not because of their power, but to enhance the atmosphere of
the
game environment when Legends was widely available. That limited
expansion is, as you know, now out of print, and Summon Legend cards
are
not seen as frequently in tournaments, and we agreed that restriction
was
no longer necessary.
o The Type II tournament format has been modified to permit
players
to build decks using cards from all currently available limited edition
expansions and stand-alone expansions. This alteration now allows
players
to construct Type II tournament decks with cards from Fourth Edition,
Chronicles (an extension of the Basic Set), Fallen Empires and Ice
Age.
When Homelands is available, it will not replace Fallen Empires .
Please
pay special attention to the modified "30-Day Rule" below! We think
permitting players to construct decks from a wider selection of cards
definitely supports the true spirit of the game! The purpose of Type II
tournaments is to allow players to construct tournament decks from the
more
readily available and less expensive cards. Although Fallen Empires is
out of print, it is still widely available, and will not be removed from
the Type II tournament format until it becomes widely unavailable. The
Duelists' Convocation will provide a minimum of ninety days written
notice
to members prior to a change in availability in Duelist magazine, The
Duelist Companion and on our Internet venues.
o One card has been added to the Restricted Lists: Zuran Orb.
Three
cards have been added to the Banned Lists: Channel, Chaos Orb and
Falling
Star. Although we received many conflicting suggestions regarding these
(and other) cards, we made a decision that we believed benefits the
tournament environment. Although we are aware that some Duelists'
Convocation members and other players will be disappointed with our
decision, we truly do think that we've made a choice that promotes
general
tournament welfare. We will continue to monitor these and other cards.
In
fact, there is a "Duelists' Convocation Most Watched List:" Can you
guess
which cards appear on it?
o The "thirty day" rule has been modified to allow sanctioned
Sealed
Deck tournaments to include cards from new expansions immediately upon
their retail release! Players may not use cards from new expansions in
all
other tournament types for 30 days after their retail release.
o Beginning with this set of rules, all future modifications will
be
announced on the first day of the month, and become effective on the
first
day of the following month. Standardizing the release dates for rules
changes takes some of the guesswork out of organizing tournaments --
tournament coordinators will now know when to expect any future
modifications.
The Duelists' Convocation hopes you'll agree that these updated
rules improve the Magic: The Gathering tournament structure! We also
hope you will send us your reactions to these modifications. Thank you
for
all your comments and suggestions, but most of all for your patience as
we
work to create a better organization. Just as Magic is ever-evolving,
so
too is the Duelists' Convocation continuously improving, and member
input
is a vital element in our evolutionary process!
Jason A. Carl
Acting Director, Duelists' Convocation
Marc Schmalz, aka Sparky!!
Wizards of the Coast Customer Service Team
spa...@castle.wizards.com
Razorbacker
>
>Having complained about the lack of the promised update to the
>restricted list, I received some e-mail from Sparky!! explaining that
>they are having trouble posting from their site. He sent me the new
>banned/restricted info, which is:
>
>RESTRICTED: Zuran Orb
>
>BANNED: Channel, Chaos Orb, Falling Star
>
>UNRESTRICTED: Summon Legends (yes!!)
>
Why would they ban one of the funniest cards to play (Chaos Orb)?
RAZ
Rodney Lynch
>Three
>cards have been added to the Banned Lists: Channel, Chaos Orb and
>Falling
>Star.
>
>Acting Director, Duelists' Convocation
>
>Marc Schmalz, aka Sparky!!
>Wizards of the Coast Customer Service Team
>spa...@castle.wizards.com
>
>
to be banned (of course, the question here is: Why did they reprint
it in 4e?)
Chaos Orb is a powerful card, but it is arguably the most fun card in
the game! Why on earth did they ban falling star? Let me read
falling star to you, since many of you I'm sure are not aware of it:
Falling Star Cost: 2R
Sorcery
Flip Star onto the playing area from a height of at least one foot.
Star must turn at least 360 degrees or it has no effect. When falling
star lands, Falling Star does 3 damage to each creature that it
touches. Any creatures damaged by Falling Star that are not destroyed
become tapped.
This card is much less powerful than chaos orb! I have never seen
anyone play with this card. Is there anyone out there who can make a
case for this card to be banned? The defense against these cards is
to play with your cards more spread out. This is no secret, unless
there is limited space available.
Restricting Zuran Orb and not Jester's Cap? I won't argue too much
with Zuran Orb (This is perhaps one of those cards that could be
"semi-restricted," say 2 in a deck). How could they overlook Jester's
Cap?
I guess that we can all breathe a sigh of relief that they didn't do
anything stupid like restrict multilands (based on the "type 1.5
tournament" I thought this was coming).
Something to think about: The following cards are now in the same
grouping: Time Vault, Shahrazad, Chaos Orb, Channel, Falling Star.
-Rodney Lynch
Mike Marcelais
| Having complained about the lack of the promised update to the
| restricted list, I received some e-mail from Sparky!! explaining that
| they are having trouble posting from their site. He sent me the new
| banned/restricted info, which is:
| RESTRICTED: Zuran Orb
Doesn't surprise me much.
| BANNED: Channel, Chaos Orb, Falling Star
With these three, all I can say is `about time.' Channel was just too
powerful and I don't think the two `card tossing' cards should ever have
been made. (I was completely surprised that Channel was left _in_ 4th
Edition -- Mind Twist also, but that card doesn't deserve to be banned.)
Just my two bits.
--
+------------------------+----------------------------+
| Mike Marcelais | mrma...@eos.ncsu.edu |
| Moonstone Dragon | Magic: The Gathering Judge |
| -==(UDIC)==- | Author of ChrHack 2.3 |
+-----------------------------------------------------+
zor...@hoover.stanford.edu
>>One card has been added to the Restricted Lists: Zuran Orb.
>>Three
>>cards have been added to the Banned Lists: Channel, Chaos Orb and
>>Falling
>>Star.
>>
>>Acting Director, Duelists' Convocation
>>
>>Marc Schmalz, aka Sparky!!
>>Wizards of the Coast Customer Service Team
>>spa...@castle.wizards.com
>>
>>
>to be banned (of course, the question here is: Why did they reprint
>it in 4e?)
>Chaos Orb is a powerful card, but it is arguably the most fun card in
>the game! Why on earth did they ban falling star? Let me read
>falling star to you, since many of you I'm sure are not aware of it:
>
essentially it is a three casting cost desert twister. Furthermore, falling
star, and the orb if the power of the orb wasn't enough, was banned because
these cards cause more rules exceptions and disputes at tournaments than many
others. Essentially, these cards bring elements of the real world, i.e. not
contained on the cards into the game. These include table space, measuring
the height correctly, opponents blowing on the cards, people ripping the cards
up, etc. Likely, these are hassles that tournament directors just wanted out.
Mike McAulay
in the thing they have in common: the flipping aspect of their
activation. When these cards are being used players need enough room to
spread their cards out. Most tournement take place in cramped
conditions where this just isn't possible.
M.
In article <451r3j$d...@nntp.Stanford.EDU>,
John Palmer
: >One card has been added to the Restricted Lists: Zuran Orb.
: >cards have been added to the Banned Lists: Channel, Chaos Orb and
: >Falling
: >Star.
: Chaos Orb is a powerful card, but it is arguably the most fun card in
: the game!
Chaos orb is fun in casual play, but I think it has no place in a
tournament. All it does is add the "spread your cards" restriction to
strategy.
: grouping: Time Vault, Shahrazad, Chaos Orb, Channel, Falling Star.
Well, Shahrazad is banned as a time waster. . . I think it's a shame
channel is being banned because I really like the *IDEA* of the card, even
if it doesn't work out that well.
Szura Adam L
: Having complained about the lack of the promised update to the
: they are having trouble posting from their site. He sent me the new
: banned/restricted info, which is:
: RESTRICTED: Zuran Orb
I still think that restricting this card doesn't really change anything.
The only change is now you only have to destroy one. Unlike the tower
this is a non-cumulative effect. Having more than one orb out at a time
is useless. I also feel that it is a looser card. It does help vs.
direct damage, making them draw another card to kill you. But vs. any
permanent source of damage (creature/vise/rack) it just prolongs the
unstoppable in most cases.
: BANNED: Channel, Chaos Orb, Falling Star
I see that the orb and star are now banned. I can only imagine the
reason is the complex rules problems that they create. Is this a valid
reason to ban a card? Will we see our dopplegangers/clones/deflections
banned next because they cause some rules frustration? Why ban a the Orb
after it has been in the mix since alpha?
Channel, channel, channel. Banned! Why? You leave the card in the mix
(which I questioned then) and then BAN it. Get with it. Channel can be
stopped by almost ALL the colors. Red can hold a bolt, blue can
counter/deflect it (for now), white can reverse/eye for an eye it, green
is so fast and has so many life cards it is almost NEVER behind far
enough to be channeled and black can simulacrum the damage on a damn
drudge skeleton. These all make channel much less usefull than the card
that I personally hate MIND TWIST (which was also left in the mix, DUH).
What color can stop the twist BLUE (counter it) and red could at least
fork it, but that option is gone from type 2 now. Most people have heard
of the slippery slope theory. I feel that DC has really started to walk
down that path lately. Leave type 1 alone (I don't really like it
anyway) the fact is the people that enjoy it are drawn to the game
breaking atmosphere. Once you start tweakin around with banning cards
you will always find one that is significantly more powerfull than the
rest of the mix. Even if you ban all the moxs, lotus and the time cards
people will complain about mana drain and the abyss. It will never stop
and now you have really started the ball rolling.
*Bitch mode off*
: UNRESTRICTED: Summon Legends (yes!!)
Always made sense to me that they be unrestricted. Only can be one in
play at time anyway. Only ones to really worry about is Marton,
Sol'kanar and dakkon. I do wonder about one thing. Was this a move that
was influenced by the fact that anyone that opens a significant amount of
Chronicles will now have 4 sol'kanars? Sure makes it easier to sell
packs if a bunch of the cards are no longer restricted.
: Also, Homelands will not displace FE when it arrives.
Thank GOD! Another businness move, but one that had to be made.
: This is not a hoax, as subsequent posts from Sparky!! will doubtless
: make clear. For the skeptical among you, the full text of both messages
: from Sparky!! follows...
I am assuming that this is not a hoax. If it is please disregard
everything (well, almost everything) I said.
May your boosters be full of Rares,
Adam
Leslie B. Houk
|> I think that they banned the Chaos Orb and the Falling Star so that
|> Microprose wouldn't have to try to incorporate them into the computer
|> CD-ROM Magic game. Think of it, how could you play those cards on the
|> computer? No, they probably banned them just so people would no longer go
|> to great lengths to spread out their cards. Unfortunately, I will always
|> unconciously play in "Chaos Orb Mode". It's a bad habit, like crack.
|> Z
Um, I'm just a newbie and not all that familiar with these two cards,
but I believe that they both require physically flipping the card, don't
they? If so, could they have been banned because players with physical
handicaps that prevented normal use of their arms couldn't play the
cards? Just a thought...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Leslie B. Houk Lockheed Martin
Internet: ho...@lm6k01.jsc.nasa.gov 555 Forge River Road, Suite 100
Compu$erve: 71051,2656 Webster, Texas 77598-4336
Obligatory Disclaimer: All opinions are mine, not Lockheed Martin's.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"...I turn to my computer, spend my evenings with it like a friend."
Kate Bush, "Deeper Understanding"
Adam P. Lally
|> I personally don't care that they banned channel, it probably needed
|> to be banned (of course, the question here is: Why did they reprint
|> it in 4e?)
|> Chaos Orb is a powerful card, but it is arguably the most fun card in
|> the game! Why on earth did they ban falling star?
I agree they are fun cards - thus they are appropriate for fun play, but not for tournament play.
|> This card is much less powerful than chaos orb! I have never seen
|> anyone play with this card. Is there anyone out there who can make a
|> case for this card to be banned? The defense against these cards is
|> to play with your cards more spread out. This is no secret, unless
|> there is limited space available.
|>
You just said it right there. In most tournaments, players don't have as much space as they would like. There's no room for wasted space, so players shouldn't have to worry that all their forests are going to be taken out with one card just because they stacked them together to save space.
|> Restricting Zuran Orb and not Jester's Cap? I won't argue too much
|> with Zuran Orb (This is perhaps one of those cards that could be
|> "semi-restricted," say 2 in a deck). How could they overlook Jester's
|> Cap?
I agree here too. I think the cap and mask should have been restricted because they slow down the game, and permit the opponent to get their grubby little hands all over your valuable cards, especially if sleeves aren't allowed.
-Adam
Eugene G. McKenna
>>
>
>Why would they ban one of the funniest cards to play (Chaos Orb)?
>
>
>RAZ
>
>
According to Sparky they cause too much controversy in tournaments.
--Eugene
JASON GRUNDY
>In article <44utdf$g...@sun.sirius.com>, mmca...@headgames.com (Mike McAulay) says:
>>
>>restricted list, I received some e-mail from Sparky!! explaining that
>>they are having trouble posting from their site. He sent me the new
>>banned/restricted info, which is:
>>
>>RESTRICTED: Zuran Orb
STUPID. So bloody stupid. How can they restrict Zuran Orb but not touch
Storm Bind? Would you restrict Healing Salve before Lightning Bolt??? Of
course not. Bolts are far more flexible and will often save you far more
life than a healing salve will give you, I.E. bolting a spectre or kird ape.
>>BANNED: Channel, Chaos Orb, Falling Star
Its good that they finally got rid of the two and only two cards that
force you into being concerned about your card positions on the table. I
get pretty sick of putting all my cards in a grid pattern so a chaos orb will
only hit one, and putting my most important ones overhanging the table edge.
Its bad they got rid of the the only colorless way of selectivly destroying
a card in play.
Channel: THANK GOD. The biggest, stupidest "I Win" card is finally dead,
dead, dead. Oh... You're tapped out? You lose. At the very least, this
goes a long way to helping eliminate luck.
>>UNRESTRICTED: Summon Legends (yes!!)
Hmmmm. Interesting. Legends definetly add something to the game.
Unrestricting them adds something else too. Now as often as not you'll
simply want to neutralize a Legend instead of kill it so the opponent can't
cast another one.
>
>
>
--
--------------
Jason Grundy
Michael Bahr
Leslie B. Houk <ho...@lm6k01.jsc.nasa.gov> wrote:
>In article <45224k$5...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, shdwp...@aol.com (ShdwPnthrZ) writes:
>|> I think that they banned the Chaos Orb and the Falling Star so that
>|> Microprose wouldn't have to try to incorporate them into the computer
>|> CD-ROM Magic game. Think of it, how could you play those cards on the
>|> computer? No, they probably banned them just so people would no longer go
>|> to great lengths to spread out their cards. Unfortunately, I will always
>|> unconciously play in "Chaos Orb Mode". It's a bad habit, like crack.
>
>but I believe that they both require physically flipping the card, don't
>they? If so, could they have been banned because players with physical
>handicaps that prevented normal use of their arms couldn't play the
>cards? Just a thought...
You make a good point, but I just don't see that many people with
serious arm impediments playing.. well.. a card game. I know it may make
me sound closed-minded but I call 'em as I see 'em. Of the thousands of
MTG duels I have played, only once did that come up. I played a college
girl of about my age who had one arm, and thus used a shuffling machine
to shuffle her cards... as it was necessary! And as a final note of
irony, she played a Chaos Orb, and flipped it rather well, killing off
some of my good cards. It was painfully slow to play her, though. She had
to put her hand down to tap/untap things, constantly stop and re-start
her game action... if she hadn't been so attractive, I might have decided
it wasn't worth my while. :)
Mike Bahr, dur...@indirect.com
D.J. Green
JASON GRUNDY <gru...@gaul.csd.uwo.ca> wrote:
>In article <450ql4$j...@news.cei.net>, Razorbacker <razo...@fs.cei.net> wrote:
>>In article <44utdf$g...@sun.sirius.com>, mmca...@headgames.com (Mike McAulay) says:
>>>
>>>restricted list, I received some e-mail from Sparky!! explaining that
>>>they are having trouble posting from their site. He sent me the new
>>>banned/restricted info, which is:
>>>
>>>RESTRICTED: Zuran Orb
>
>Storm Bind?
Because Zuran Orb is restricted for the same reason that Ivory Tower is
restricted--it prolongs games. Stormbind costs mana and isn't
unbalancing--it can even speed up games. The Orb slows down games
drastically ("I'm going to die? Better run another land or two through the
Orb").
>>>BANNED: Channel, Chaos Orb, Falling Star
>
> Its good that they finally got rid of the two and only two cards that
>force you into being concerned about your card positions on the table. I
>get pretty sick of putting all my cards in a grid pattern so a chaos orb will
>only hit one, and putting my most important ones overhanging the table edge.
This is (in my mind) the single best argument against Falling Star and
Chaos Orb--not that they're unbalancing (the Star isn't; the Orb can be, in
the right hands) but that they force a consideration (play area and
configuration) onto the game that shouldn't really be a part of it.
> Its bad they got rid of the the only colorless way of selectivly destroying
>a card in play.
Not really. Each color has its strengths and weaknesses. Black has
trouble dealing with enchantments; so does red. Green is hard-up for
counter abilities. White is often weak offensively and has almost no
direct damage. Blue has trouble dealing with cards once they actually hit
the table. Having a colorless way to get rid of arbitrary cards should
either be blessed expensive, or not exist at all.
> Channel: THANK GOD. The biggest, stupidest "I Win" card is finally dead,
>dead, dead. Oh... You're tapped out? You lose. At the very least, this
>goes a long way to helping eliminate luck.
It would be nice if there were a way to restrict Channel from being used
for 'X-type' spells (Drain Life, Fireball, etc.), but this is about as
ill-defined a concept as exists in the game.
--
Call the Physics Friends Helpline!
Find out about your special density!
SnowDog
][ In article <451ktn$8...@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>, rl...@cornell.edu (Rodney Lynch) writes:
][ >>cards have been added to the Banned Lists: Channel, Chaos Orb and
][ >>Falling
][ >>Star.
][ My guess is that they banned Chaos Orb because it is excessively powerful,
<snip>
][ these cards cause more rules exceptions and disputes at tournaments
Also, don't forget that chaos orb and falling star cannot be used well by
those with disabilities...
Yes, they're fun--but your status in a tournament should not be determined
by how personally agile you are...
You can keep playing them at home :) [just don't let Dennis hear you :) ]
-D
Usagi Yojimbo
>My spies tell me that Mike McAulay (mmca...@headgames.com) wrote:
>| restricted list, I received some e-mail from Sparky!! explaining that
>| they are having trouble posting from their site. He sent me the new
>| banned/restricted info, which is:
>
>| RESTRICTED: Zuran Orb
>
>
>
>powerful and I don't think the two `card tossing' cards should ever have
>been made. (I was completely surprised that Channel was left _in_ 4th
>Edition -- Mind Twist also, but that card doesn't deserve to be banned.)
>
>Just my two bits.
Hmmm... Most people i know always thought they were cool cards. Shoot if
you don't want to make those cards, why make anything? A wide variety of
cards and ideas is part of what makes the game fun.
mBobo
>>
>I personally don't care that they banned channel, it probably needed
>to be banned (of course, the question here is: Why did they reprint
>it in 4e?)
Thank the gods of magic, who ever they may be... I got so damn paradoid
about channel that i started playing permission all the time unless my
opponet promised he had no channels!
>Chaos Orb is a powerful card, but it is arguably the most fun card in
>the game! Why on earth did they ban falling star? Let me read
>falling star to you, since many of you I'm sure are not aware of it:
>
[stuuf cut here]>
>This card is much less powerful than chaos orb! I have never seen
>anyone play with this card. Is there anyone out there who can make a
>case for this card to be banned? The defense against these cards is
>to play with your cards more spread out. This is no secret, unless
>there is limited space available.
>
there are a few reasons I can see for this, one its kinda a crap shoot
based pretty much on luck ( yeah yeah so are a few other coin flipping
cards but this is different) another reason is that I have seen some
people go crazy and tear up chaos orbs into 50 different pices , drop
them all on their opponets side an insist that he remove all his cards
from the table, bottom line the card can be fun if played right but has
potental for abuse!
>Restricting Zuran Orb and not Jester's Cap? I won't argue too much
>with Zuran Orb (This is perhaps one of those cards that could be
>"semi-restricted," say 2 in a deck). How could they overlook Jester's
>Cap?
The reasoning behind zuran orb is its real easy to make recursive decks
based on the orb because you can sacrifice any land to it jesters cap is
neat , but you only use it once so its doesn't have the ability to build
a whole deck around it ( and lets face it , if you've ever been caught by
a recursive deck , you know how frustrating it can be!)
Just My .02$ worth
Ian Knox
Thomas R Wylie
John Collin <jco...@phakt.usc.edu> wrote:
>I'd like to know why they unrestricted Legends. The way I see it, if a card
>is a legend, there should only be one at all. Having four of each Elder
>Dragon is kind of excessive.
That's basically the reason they were originally restricted (i.e., for
thematic reasons), but at this point it doesn't seem as interesting to
restrict them, especially given the months and months of people requesting
that they be unrestricted ;)
Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for
aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
Mike McAulay
aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) wrote:
>
>John Collin <jco...@phakt.usc.edu> wrote:
>>I'd like to know why they unrestricted Legends. The way I see it, if
a card
>>is a legend, there should only be one at all. Having four of each
Elder
>>Dragon is kind of excessive.
>
>That's basically the reason they were originally restricted (i.e., for
>thematic reasons),
I've never understood that. When it's in your hand or your library the
card represents a *spell* which can summon the legendary being from its
home universe. When it's in play it represents the being itself. So
think of it this way: when the being is killed it returns to its home,
whence it may be summoned again via another spell.
There's no violation of the uniqueness of the individual legend implicit
in the ability of a player to have more than one spell which summons it.
M.
John Palmer
: |> I personally don't care that they banned channel, it probably needed
: |> to be banned (of course, the question here is: Why did they reprint
: |> it in 4e?)
: Good question. Now everyone's stuck with 10 channels they can't use.
ROTFLMAO! Yea, it always kind of bothered me that there are so many
"just" uncommon restricted cards, like Demonic Tutor, Regrowth, and
Channel.
But here's something for discussion: in type II, where there are
fewer restricted cards and fewer broken cards, why is Feldon's cane still
restricted? Feldon's Cane, Regrowth and Demonic Tutor always struck me as
being "restricted by the presence of other restricted cards". That is, if
there were no broken cards, no channels or lotii or Ivory Towers or
whatever, they wouldn't need to be restricted.
David DeLaney
I'm moving it.
rl...@cornell.edu (Rodney Lynch) writes:
>Chaos Orb is a powerful card, but it is arguably the most fun card in
>the game! Why on earth did they ban falling star?
Because it is exactly the same as Chaos Orb, except it deals damage instead
of destroying and is a Red spell instead of an artifact effect.
>Restricting Zuran Orb and not Jester's Cap? I won't argue too much
>with Zuran Orb (This is perhaps one of those cards that could be
>"semi-restricted," say 2 in a deck). How could they overlook Jester's
>Cap?
Zuran Orb can cause a tournament game to last longer. Jester's Cap cannot.
These are *tournament* restrictions/bannings, not "game-balance" restrictions/
bannings; if a card starts utterly dominating tournaments it'll get Restricted
or Banned even if it's the best-balanced card in the game.
Dave
--
\/David DeLaney d...@panacea.phys.utk.edu "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. Disclaimer: IMHO; VRbeableURLAP
http://enigma.phys.utk.edu/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
JASON GRUNDY
D.J. Green <nebu...@shellx.best.com> wrote:
>In article <453qgo$i...@falcon.ccs.uwo.ca>,
>JASON GRUNDY <gru...@gaul.csd.uwo.ca> wrote:
>>In article <450ql4$j...@news.cei.net>, Razorbacker <razo...@fs.cei.net> wrote:
>>>In article <44utdf$g...@sun.sirius.com>, mmca...@headgames.com (Mike McAulay) says:
>>>>
>>>>restricted list, I received some e-mail from Sparky!! explaining that
>>>>they are having trouble posting from their site. He sent me the new
>>>>banned/restricted info, which is:
>>>>
>>>>RESTRICTED: Zuran Orb
>>
>>Storm Bind?
>
>Because Zuran Orb is restricted for the same reason that Ivory Tower is
>restricted--it prolongs games. Stormbind costs mana and isn't
>unbalancing--it can even speed up games. The Orb slows down games
>drastically ("I'm going to die? Better run another land or two through the
>Orb").
There are a couple big differences. Ivory Tower can gain you a lot of
life at the start, two Ivory Towers can easily enough gain you 6+ pts/turn,
more if you're using draw card effects like Library, Tomes, Ancestral Recall.
3 just gets stupid. With just one tower in my deck, I've had entire
tournaments where I've never had a game where I've not broken 50 life [often
thanks in part to copy artifact.] Often going over 80 life. The Orb is
small change compared to that. Its easier to use, but it isn't cumlative.
I'd WANT someone to be stupid enough to put 4 in their deck. Unless the
deck is based around it, it won't help them much. It definetly isn't much
use at the start of the game, one of the big reasons a lot of cards are
restricted [I.E. Moxes, Lotus, Copy Artifact,] Unless you're playing
against land destruction that is.
If it prolongs games, so be it. The only game its likely to serious
effect the play time on is against decks with non-permanent sources of damage.
To me, this is a good thing, as decks made only of bolts and fireballs and
sinkholes SHOULDN'T win.
>>>>BANNED: Channel, Chaos Orb, Falling Star
>> Its bad they got rid of the the only colorless way of selectivly destroying
>>a card in play.
>
>Not really. Each color has its strengths and weaknesses. Black has
>trouble dealing with enchantments; so does red. Green is hard-up for
>counter abilities. White is often weak offensively and has almost no
>direct damage. Blue has trouble dealing with cards once they actually hit
>the table. Having a colorless way to get rid of arbitrary cards should
>either be blessed expensive, or not exist at all.
Or be restricted... Having one Chaos Orb in a deck didn't really hurt
anything from a balance point of view. It IS nice to know that somewhere
in your deck, you have a card that can get rid of just the Karma, or just
the Spectrally Cloaked/Shielded/Red/Blue Warded Ali From Cairo, or just the
Blood Moon, or just the Ritual of Subdual, without having to destroy the whole
table with a disc [and take an extra turn and more mana to boot.]
>> Channel: THANK GOD. The biggest, stupidest "I Win" card is finally dead,
>>dead, dead. Oh... You're tapped out? You lose. At the very least, this
>>goes a long way to helping eliminate luck.
>
>It would be nice if there were a way to restrict Channel from being used
>for 'X-type' spells (Drain Life, Fireball, etc.), but this is about as
>ill-defined a concept as exists in the game.
Do the Metamorphosis thing and have the mana only usable for casting
artifacts and creatures [can't do enchantments because of Ice Berg...]
Maybe allow paying 2 life for 1 green mana in addition to 1 for 1 colorless.
--
--------------
Jason Grundy
Thomas R Wylie
John Palmer <jpa...@infinet.com> wrote:
> But here's something for discussion: in type II, where there are
>fewer restricted cards and fewer broken cards, why is Feldon's cane still
>restricted? Feldon's Cane, Regrowth and Demonic Tutor always struck me as
>being "restricted by the presence of other restricted cards". That is, if
>there were no broken cards, no channels or lotii or Ivory Towers or
>whatever, they wouldn't need to be restricted.
There are basically two reasons for this, from what I understand. First,
it's simpler to just leave it restricted :) But the better reason is that
it's not clear yet whether it's a good idea to have cards restricted
on one list but not on others. This will probably have to be revisited
in the upcoming months (restricting Recall in Type II might not be necessary,
and if Jester's Cap is restricted at all, it might be only in Type I), but
in the interest of getting the new rules out, we passed on the discussion
for the moment.
Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for
aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
sj...@lehigh.edu
>
>Zuran Orb can cause a tournament game to last longer. Jester's Cap cannot.
So what? Since when did game length become a huge problem? I've played
against many a Zuran Orb and I can assure you that it doesn't prolong games
all that much. (at least against a decent deck)
>
>These are *tournament* restrictions/bannings, not "game-balance" restrictions/
>bannings; if a card starts utterly dominating tournaments it'll get Restricted
>or Banned even if it's the best-balanced card in the game.
That is not good reasoning. Most people play using DC rules, whether they are
in a tournament or not. So a strategy work well? So what. Come up with a
counter strategy that beats it. (there ALWAYS is a way) Restricting cards
that work well is NOT the answer. If a card is restricted simply because of
its success in tournaments, then it is time to produce differing rules for
tournaments and for play elsewhere. I realize that in theory there is nothing
preventing you from playing with whatever kind of deck you want, but in
reality, who's going to play you when you have an even slightly degenerate
deck? Nobody. Card balance is how cards should be restricted, not how
succesful they are on the tournament circuit.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although it does not | Stacy John Behrens
mindfully keep guard, | *===)-------------
In the small mountain fields | sj...@lehigh.edu
the scarecrow | http://www.lehigh.edu/~sjb3/sjb3.html
does not stand in vain. (Bukkoku) | ft...@cleveland.freenet.edu
Cpaths
even do it so that skill in the flip would be involved. YOu would use
probabilities to simulate where cards wre, and probabilities to decide
where the card landed. You could also do a neat animation of the card
flipping onscreen.
If WoTC really wanted to help Microporse, they would stop creating new
kinds of cards and modifying the rules...
- toby robison Critical Paths, Inc. p01...@psilink.com
>DATE: 5 Oct 1995 21:52:20 -0400
>FROM: ShdwPnthrZ <shdwp...@aol.com>
>
> I think that they banned the Chaos Orb and the Falling Star so that
>Microprose wouldn't have to try to incorporate them into the computer
>CD-ROM Magic game. Think of it, how could you play those cards on the
>computer? No, they probably banned them just so people would no longer go
>to great lengths to spread out their cards. Unfortunately, I will always
>unconciously play in "Chaos Orb Mode". It's a bad habit, like crack.
> Z
Matt Braunstein
why the hell is this card restricted??! 2 of them out does you no
good, and getting one early in the game doesnt really help you either.
Sounds kinda silly to me.
If anything, restrict enduring renewal.
My $.02
Mike Marcelais
| In article <450ql4$j...@news.cei.net>, Razorbacker <razo...@fs.cei.net> wrote:
| >In article <44utdf$g...@sun.sirius.com>, mmca...@headgames.com (Mike McAulay) says:
| >>
| >>RESTRICTED: Zuran Orb
| STUPID. So bloody stupid. How can they restrict Zuran Orb but not touch
| Storm Bind? Would you restrict Healing Salve before Lightning Bolt??? Of
| course not. Bolts are far more flexible and will often save you far more
| life than a healing salve will give you, I.E. bolting a spectre or kird ape.
Yes, but Stormbind is a two color card; Zuron Orb costs (0). Stormbind
costs (2) to use (+ 1 card) while the Orb costs only the land. Hence, Zuran
Orb is much more _generally_ useful -- Stormbind can't just be thrown into
any deck as a `no brainer'
William Hurley
rl...@cornell.edu (Rodney Lynch) wrote:
> I personally don't care that they banned channel, it probably needed
> to be banned (of course, the question here is: Why did they reprint
> it in 4e?)
> Chaos Orb is a powerful card, but it is arguably the most fun card in
> the game! Why on earth did they ban falling star? Let me read
> falling star to you, since many of you I'm sure are not aware of it:
[stuff about Falling Star deleted]
> This card is much less powerful than chaos orb! I have never seen
> anyone play with this card. Is there anyone out there who can make a
> case for this card to be banned? The defense against these cards is
> to play with your cards more spread out. This is no secret, unless
> there is limited space available.
My guess is that they were banned because they do not fit the style
of Magic. Does flipping cards around generally happen in most card
games?
> Restricting Zuran Orb and not Jester's Cap? I won't argue too much
> with Zuran Orb (This is perhaps one of those cards that could be
> "semi-restricted," say 2 in a deck). How could they overlook Jester's
> Cap?
Because in and of itself it does very little. You can remove 3 cards
that, statistically, will never see the light of day anyway. And all
of this for just 6 mana. What a deal.
> I guess that we can all breathe a sigh of relief that they didn't do
> anything stupid like restrict multilands (based on the "type 1.5
> tournament" I thought this was coming).
> Something to think about: The following cards are now in the same
> grouping: Time Vault, Shahrazad, Chaos Orb, Channel, Falling Star.
You missed Divine Intervention. Anyway, we have one (perhaps two) that
are too powerful, even to be restricted; two that drag the game out too
long; and two that don't fit the enviroment of M:tG. Your point?
> -Rodney Lynch
>
---
Maybe all I need,
Besides my pills
And the surgery,
Is a new metaphor for reality.
-- Queensryche, Dis Con Nec Ted
Mr. Mike
>powerful and I don't think the two `card tossing' cards should ever have
>been made. (I was completely surprised that Channel was left _in_ 4th
>Edition -- Mind Twist also, but that card doesn't deserve to be banned.)
>>Just my two bits.
ever made....as is the Black Vise. The filp cards are no more wierd than the
flip a coin cards....and envolves more skill. It seems that WoC is out to
sandbag the older cards alltogether. Chaos Orb is a favorite card of
mine...It adds a LOT of excitement to the game. As for a confusing card, why
did they ever reprint the Icy??? Woc has a severe case of crainal Rectal
Inversion when it comes to "fixing broken cards". I for one am sick and tired
of finding some unique way to interplay cards, only to have WoC ban or
ristrict the cards. What are they after, making us all play down to the level
of 8 yearolds?????
Mike
Mark Green
> It's easy to simulate the action of chaos orb on a computer. You could
> even do it so that skill in the flip would be involved. YOu would use
> probabilities to simulate where cards wre, and probabilities to decide
> where the card landed. You could also do a neat animation of the card
> flipping onscreen.
>
> If WoTC really wanted to help Microporse, they would stop creating new
> kinds of cards and modifying the rules...
>
> - toby robison Critical Paths, Inc. p01...@psilink.com
>
I was under the impression that the CD would include *ALL* cards before
(and not including) FE. If so, it *MUST* contain Falling Star, and is
likely to contain Chaos Orb (unless they decide to be mean and not include
UL.. c'mon guys, let us try the spoilers in Archmage mode at least, if not
Shandalar)
I think the game's probably dead on its feet, though. The "demo" felt
like an alpha, it crashed so often, and it did that without having any
of the playable part of the game present. And now the entire team
have been fired...
Mg
--
mark balabon
: In article <450ql4$j...@news.cei.net>, Razorbacker <razo...@fs.cei.net> wrote:
: >In article <44utdf$g...@sun.sirius.com>, mmca...@headgames.com (Mike McAulay) says:
: >>Having complained about the lack of the promised update to the
: >>they are having trouble posting from their site. He sent me the new
: >>banned/restricted info, which is:
: >>RESTRICTED: Zuran Orb
: STUPID. So bloody stupid. How can they restrict Zuran Orb but not touch
: Storm Bind? Would you restrict Healing Salve before Lightning Bolt??? Of
: course not. Bolts are far more flexible and will often save you far more
: life than a healing salve will give you, I.E. bolting a spectre or kird ape.
: >>BANNED: Channel, Chaos Orb, Falling Star
: Its good that they finally got rid of the two and only two cards that
: force you into being concerned about your card positions on the table. I
: get pretty sick of putting all my cards in a grid pattern so a chaos orb will
: only hit one, and putting my most important ones overhanging the table edge.
: Its bad they got rid of the the only colorless way of selectivly destroying
: a card in play.
: Channel: THANK GOD. The biggest, stupidest "I Win" card is finally dead,
: dead, dead. Oh... You're tapped out? You lose. At the very least, this
: goes a long way to helping eliminate luck.
: >>UNRESTRICTED: Summon Legends (yes!!)
Frederick Scott
> But here's something for discussion: in type II, where there are
>fewer restricted cards and fewer broken cards, why is Feldon's cane still
>restricted? Feldon's Cane, Regrowth and Demonic Tutor always struck me as
>being "restricted by the presence of other restricted cards". That is, if
>there were no broken cards, no channels or lotii or Ivory Towers or
>whatever, they wouldn't need to be restricted.
You may have a point about Feldon's Cane. Demonic Tutor and Regrowth
definitely not. Grabbing the card you want most at any given moment out of
your library or graveyard is too much milage to get out of a sorcery that
costs B1 or G1.
Fred
Alexander P Rutkowski
Here's the new restrict.. by Razor...@fs.cei.net
> >restricted list, I received some e-mail from Sparky!! explaining that
> >they are having trouble posting from their site. He sent me the new
> >banned/restricted info, which is:
> >
> >RESTRICTED: Zuran Orb
> >
> >
> >
>
> Why would they ban one of the funniest cards to play (Chaos Orb)?
>
>
> RAZ
>
>
what hasnt. plus the whole 360 flip. another reason is when there are
orbs in play you need a HUGE table to play and usually the tournament
managers cant supply them.
It is a shame that the single most exciting card in magic got banned
just because of laziness and a lack of rescources.
Anyone who says that the chaos orb does not belong in the game is out of
their mind. Sure it makes any deck better but that still does not make
it easy to master.
One possible solution to the orb is that the caster must call his shot
If he hits that card fine it is removed and play on. If it hits anything
else it fizzles. a simple solution in my mind. it limits the power of
the card and makes it easier on the space required to play Type I
tournaments.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
_/_/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/ Alex Rutkowski
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ 1538 Alabama Ave.
_/_/_/_/ _/ _/_/ _/_/ Pittsburgh Pa. 15216
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ (412)-681-3130
_/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/ ar...@andrew.cmu.edu
mkl...@freenet.vcu.edu
that there was a change that would allow more than one Legend
card of the same type to be in play. If someone has this rules
posting could they please email it to me.
Thanks.
The people I play with will not believe it unless I have
something official.>
> RE: HERE'S THE NEW RESTRICTED LIST!!!
>
> Newsgroups:
> rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules,rec.games.trading-cards.mag
> ic.misc
> Post a followup article to newsgroup(s)
> From: aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie)
> Send e-mail reply to: Thomas R Wylie
> Date: 6 Oct 1995 05:58:33 GMT
> Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
>
>
>John Collin <jco...@phakt.usc.edu> wrote:
>>I'd like to know why they unrestricted Legends. The way I see it, if a card
>>is a legend, there should only be one at all. Having four of each Elder
>>Dragon is kind of excessive.
>
>That's basically the reason they were originally restricted (i.e., for
>thematic reasons), but at this point it doesn't seem as interesting to
>restrict them, especially given the months and months of people requesting
>that they be unrestricted ;)
>
>
John Palmer
: jpa...@infinet.com (John Palmer) writes:
Well. . . since they're both sorceries, you can't pull the card
anytime you want. And, again, if there are few enough cards on the
restricted list, then there really isn't too much difference between
drawing the card and regrowing/tutoring for it.
I dunno. Maybe they should be more expensive, or maybe they should
end your main phase if cast.
John Palmer
: > wELL HERE'S MY 2 BITS. MINDTWIST IS one of the most abusive cards
: ever made....as is the Black Vise.
You're welcome to your opinion. . . Mind twist probably should be
restricted (gee, it IS) but Black Vise is hardly that horrible unless
you're specifically playing a slow deck or unless you're mana screwed. . .
both of which can kill you quite nicely without a vice existing.
The filp cards are no more wierd than the
: flip a coin cards....and envolves more skill. It seems that WoC is out to
: sandbag the older cards alltogether.
Bad guess. If that were the case, the Lotus would have been banned.
The flip cards have one problem that the coin flip cards don't have: they
add a completely meaningless additional requirement to gameplay:
specifically, they require more card spreading.
: As for a confusing card, why
: did they ever reprint the Icy???
The Icy Manipulator is NOT confusing.
Peter Kelly
: rl...@cornell.edu (Rodney Lynch) wrote:
:
: > I personally don't care that they banned channel, it probably needed
: > to be banned (of course, the question here is: Why did they reprint
: > it in 4e?)
I ohnestly can't see why they banned channel, sure you could use it win,
but you ran the risk of loesing a lot of life without a guarentee of a
win. Its my belief that channel (and I must point out, I dont use them)
is by no means a instant death card. All it does is get you quick manna
at a big cost in the life stakes. So what if you can use to Disintegrate
for 17 points, its still a two card combo. Perhaps they should ban
haveing more mana than the opponent has life :)
--
====================================================
==== ==== AYLANDER: Never send jackals
= = to hunt a Lion.
= == =
= = = =
== == bat...@DIALix.com.au
====================================================
Frederick Scott
I agree that their being a sorceries rather than instants makes them less
good but not that much. I also agree banning spoilers further reduces the
importance of what you can do with them but I still disagree that it weakens
them sufficiently to not consider them spoilers. DT and Regrowth are extremely
flexible cards since they allow you to choose from any of a large number of
cards at a fairly insignificant cost. Regrowth is probably somewhat less
valuable than DT since at any given time one's graveyard will likely be much
smaller than one's library but even Regrowth is problematic. Compare it to
a card like Brainstorm which allows you to choose from only the next three
cards in your library with the only compensating advantages being that it's
an instant and it costs U instead of G1. Once your graveyard is larger than
three, I would argue that Regrowth inevitably becomes more and more powerful.
> I dunno. Maybe they should be more expensive, or maybe they should
>end your main phase if cast.
The "end your main phase" likely wouldn't be much of a compensating
disadvantage. If you're digging for a non-instant, non-interrupt card then
you have to wait a turn to cast it, otherwise it's only a question of whether
you wanted to cast the instant/interrupt prior to doing some other main phase
action (usually it wouldn't matter).
As for more expensive, yes - that would probably play balance it. For a card
like Regrowth, I'd like to see something like GGG (more in the "living/growing
things" motif, you have to be pretty heavy green to make it usable). For
Demonic Tutor, I'd like to see something like BB3 - enough mana to keep it
from being useful soon (and vulnerable to land destruction, etc.) and also
enough to make it a sacrifice to use (it would make a big difference whether
you luckily just drew the card you wanted vs. had to DT for it).
Fred
Michael Smith
: John Collin <jco...@phakt.usc.edu> wrote:
: >I'd like to know why they unrestricted Legends. The way I see it, if a card
: >is a legend, there should only be one at all. Having four of each Elder
: >Dragon is kind of excessive.
: That's basically the reason they were originally restricted (i.e., for
: thematic reasons), but at this point it doesn't seem as interesting to
: restrict them, especially given the months and months of people requesting
: that they be unrestricted ;)
Not to mention how big of an asshole you'll feel like when you have a
hand full of summon legend cards in your hand that you can only discard
since there is already one in play! :)
Damian O'Dea
>Mr. Mike (mrm...@deltanet.com) wrote:
>: The filp cards are no more wierd than the
>: is out to sandbag the older cards alltogether.
>
>Bad guess. If that were the case, the Lotus would have been banned.
>The flip cards have one problem that the coin flip cards don't have:
>they add a completely meaningless additional requirement to gameplay:
>specifically, they require more card spreading.
I think the main reason behind banning such a card is the wide variety
of playing areas used in different tournaments. Some people who run
tournaments have all the space in the world, and consequently you don't
need to crowd you cards together. Others have only smaller shops and
hence present the difficulty of card "stacking" simply to be able to fit
them onto the table. Most playing areas I use seem to require that my
land be "stacked" two deep. These environments are a Choas Orb users
heaven; they can rip through and devastate an entire game. Yet why
should people in these areas be disadvantaged by having to face such a
thing, simply because the play environment doesn't allow them to spread
their cards out to safety.
The variety of different areas means its impossible to deal with
"fairly" unless you start doing really _stupid_ stuff like regulating
the minimum (or maximum) distance between cards. Do you really want to
add another accoutrement to the already growing number of magic
accesssories - a ruler?! Are we TCG players or wargamers? Flip card
regulation is a nightmare that the DC has graciously spared the already
overworked tournament organisers and judges from having to deal with.
ODie...
Jeffrey Sue
thanks
jeff
John Palmer
: (Hint: most every time I'v seen a guy play with an Orb in a tournament, he
: was only concentrating on hitting one card anyway. This really wouldn't
: make much difference.)
So far, every time I've played against a Chaos Orb, I was playing on
a small table. I've never had a person trying to hit "just one" card; they
were aiming at clusters.