Ban Basic Lands!
BIGFRICK
Hell, these things make it too easy to get the mana you need. Think about it,
you are playing a one color green deck with all forests in it for land, you
always have the mana you need to cast the spells. These basic lands are
broken, and DCI should ban them.
Thanks
Cam Berry
BIGFRICK <bigf...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19980127174...@ladder02.news.aol.com>...
Jeff Vogel
In article <19980127174...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
bigf...@aol.com (BIGFRICK) wrote:
> Hell, these things make it too easy to get the mana you need.
You don't ban a card because it's good (unless, of course, it's TOO good).
You ban a card because it's so prevalent that it becomes a standard
feature in the majority of the decks in the environment (every card that
appears in EVERY deck makes magic a less interesting game), or because
it's so powerful that the need to deal with it keeps players away from too
many deck types that would be viable otherwise. An example of this is,
say, just to pull an example out of my hat, Cursed Scroll in Tempest
constructed.
Now, there are no basic lands that are like that. Plenty of people make
viable Tempest constructed decks without plains in them. Or swamps. Or
mountains. Nobody is doomed if they make a deck that can't handle the
opponent having islands. The "Well, ban basic lands." argument is amusing,
but reflects a serious lack of knowledge of why cards should be banned.
- Jeff Vogel, Keeper of Exile, Spiderweb Software, Inc.
Check out Exile: Escape From the Pit, Exile II: Crystal Souls,
Exile III: Ruined World, and Blades of Exile, the hit shareware rpg's
for Macintosh and Windows 3.1/95. Find them at http://www.spidweb.com
Richard Clayton
> Hell, these things make it too easy to get the mana you need. Think about it,
> you are playing a one color green deck with all forests in it for land, you
> always have the mana you need to cast the spells. These basic lands are
> broken, and DCI should ban them.
>
#1. They can't be counterspelled, power-sinked, or stopped in any
way. This is unfair to your opponent, since he has no way to stop you
from using it once you've drawn it.
#2. Basic lands are so incredibly useful, nearly every player uses
them. This reduces the variety and "creativity factor" involved in deck
building. It's true- go to a Pro Tour Qualifier, you'll see that NEARLY
EVERY PLAYER uses basic lands. This is clearly evidence that basic lands
are overpowered.
Sound stupid? Yeah, I think so too. But those were the arguments for
restricting Strip Mine... :(
Richard "I HATED having to remove two Strip Mines from my slow-control
deck to keep it Classic legal" Clayton
FrkShowBob
Now what really need to be banned are creatures. Too many people use
creatures. They are dominating the environment. It has been way too long for
us having to deal with those darn things. Life would be so much easier without
creatures to worry about.
Mike
frksh...@aol.com
Ilya
BIGFRICK <bigf...@aol.com> wrote:
: Hell, these things make it too easy to get the mana you need. Think about it,
: you are playing a one color green deck with all forests in it for land, you
: always have the mana you need to cast the spells. These basic lands are
: broken, and DCI should ban them.
: Thanks
Very funny. Haha.
Ilya
Tolun
frksh...@aol.com (FrkShowBob) wrote:
Nah. They should ban cards. I mean, they complain because "every" deck
has four Cursed Scrolls? Well, every deck I've ever seen in a
tournament has at least SIXTY cards! Talk about dominating the
environment!
(: :)
Tolun
Uno
While we're at it DCI should ban multi color lands - too versatile and
allow too many combos... maybe if we banned multi-lands...
They should also (after banning multiple color lands, birds of paradise,
quirion elves, skyshroud elves, and all of their evil ilk) ban
mono-color or even bi-color decks. Make every deck 5 color and no rares
allowed either... that should balance the environment....
Hey - isn't Cursed Scroll an artifact? So are moxen and the lotus?
Black Vise is an artifact
BAN ALL ARTIFACTS....
This whole thread is ridiculous and purposely so.... it's time that the
design team starts making cards that won't get banned for popularity.
Heck... disencant is overpowered---- BAN IT! destroys an artifact or an
enchantment for 1W where as poor red has to pay 1R to destroy an
artifact. Sounds like it's undercosted and overpowered to me....
bachrach
Jeff Vogel <spi...@spidweb.com> wrote in article
<spidweb-2701...@sea-ts8-p45.wolfenet.com>...
> In article <19980127174...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
> bigf...@aol.com (BIGFRICK) wrote:
>
> > Hell, these things make it too easy to get the mana you need.
>
> You don't ban a card because it's good (unless, of course, it's TOO
good).
> You ban a card because it's so prevalent that it becomes a standard
> feature in the majority of the decks in the environment (every card that
> appears in EVERY deck makes magic a less interesting game), or because
> it's so powerful that the need to deal with it keeps players away from
too
> many deck types that would be viable otherwise. An example of this is,
> say, just to pull an example out of my hat, Cursed Scroll in Tempest
> constructed.
>
> Now, there are no basic lands that are like that. Plenty of people make
> viable Tempest constructed decks without plains in them. Or swamps. Or
> mountains. Nobody is doomed if they make a deck that can't handle the
> opponent having islands. The "Well, ban basic lands." argument is
amusing,
> but reflects a serious lack of knowledge of why cards should be banned.
>
I caan't believe that anyone actually fell for that one.
------------------------------------------------------
Spam for the spammers okay?
QQat...@aol.com gwanote...@ameritech.net gw...@juno.com
gwa...@aol.com maga...@iname.com w...@webtdcenter.com he...@gsd.com.au
ho...@gsd.com.au admini...@gsd.com.au din...@worldnet.att.net
jtsr...@sprintmail.com em...@sinotrade.com millen...@earthlink.net
Ilw...@hotmail.com th...@2umail.com eur...@eureka.abc-web.com
what do you say we end spam by getting the current heads of the FCC annoyed
at spam. Here are their addresses:
Chairman Reed Hundt: rhu...@fcc.gov
Commissioner James Quello: jqu...@fcc.gov
Commissioner Susan Ness: sn...@fcc.gov
Commissioner Rachelle Chong: rch...@fcc.gov
please go ahead and send me more spam, I need more names for this list.
Christian Goijaarts
* Wednesday January 28 1998, frksh...@aol.com (FrkShowBob) wrote:
F> Now what really need to be banned are creatures. Too many people use
F> creatures. They are dominating the environment. It has been way too long
F> for us having to deal with those darn things. Life would be so much easier
F> without creatures to worry about.
So what should I do with my Stompy deck? Just basic lands and Overruns would
not give me a victory, would they? ;)
Regards,
Chrus 'R Us
... Garfield: What'sa matter? Can't take a joke?
GBKilla187
that is the biggest douschiest gayest thing i ever heard of
Jeffrey G. Montgomery
In article <6alf6f$b...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>,
Cam Berry <ar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>BIGFRICK <bigf...@aol.com> wrote in article
><19980127174...@ladder02.news.aol.com>...
>about it,
>> you are playing a one color green deck with all forests in it for land,
>you
>> always have the mana you need to cast the spells. These basic lands are
>> broken, and DCI should ban them.
>>
>>
>You. Are. Insane. That's all there is to it.
No; he just doesn't like green .... :)
Jeff
Gerrud Rasmussen
GBKilla187 wrote:
> that is the biggest douschiest gayest thing i ever heard of
Does AOL have a REQUIREMENT that anybody who posts to a ng from there
must be functionally illiterate? That aside, I quote Richard Clayton's
previous post on this thread:
> Another two reasons basic lands are broken:
>
> #1. They can't be counterspelled, power-sinked, or stopped in any
>way. This is unfair to your opponent, since he has no way to stop you
>from using it once you've drawn it.
> #2. Basic lands are so incredibly useful, nearly every player uses
>them. This reduces the variety and "creativity factor" involved in deck
>building. It's true- go to a Pro Tour Qualifier, you'll see that NEARLY
>EVERY PLAYER uses basic lands. This is clearly evidence that basic
lands
>are overpowered.
>
> Sound stupid? Yeah, I think so too. But those were the arguments
for
>restricting Strip Mine... :(
Of course banning basic land is ludicrous. This thread is attempting to
point out the faulty reasoning behind the banning/restriction criteria
used at the DCI these days.
Channel-cornerstone of mindless first turn kills <BANNED>
Mind Twist-as bad as Channel, it just takes you 5 or 6 turns to realize
what kicked your ass. <BANNED>
now the strange ones:
Black Vise-if played on first turn by the player who plays first (that's
IF), guarantees 3 WHOLE POINTS OF DAMAGE!!! So does a Lightning Bolt.
In an environment like Classic, if you can't: 1)drop 2-3 cards on your
first turn or 2)blow the damned vise up, you were screwed the moment you
decided to play in the tourney <RESTRICTED>
Strip Mine-destroys a land by sacrificing itself. The player who uses
the Strip Mine gains no advantage over the person whose land he
detroyed. He can still only play one land per turn. 1 land for 1 land =
no card advantage. This one is slightly remedied by Wasteland, as
non-basic lands run rampant in Classic. <RESTRICTED>
Copy Artifact-recently unrestricted in Classic. (?!?) Great. Now
without mass-artifact removal at our IMMEDIATE disposal (Shatterstorm,
Disk, Haups), we can stare across the table at 5 Mirror Universes, until
their next upkeep, that is. I, myself use the Mirror, but the ability
to have 5 in play or 8 Candelabras of Tawnos (another good example), is
just way too heinous. <UNRESTRICTED>
I wonder......is the DCI TRYING to destroy Type I play? It has been
widely surmised that that is indeed the case, what with WotC not making
any money off of Type I. That's another thing.......WotC says they are
all in it for "the love of the game"......right. A friend of mine
operates the best game store in the area, and he wonders why they must
charge more and more to share in their "love of the game" I believe the
answer to 99.9% of the problems plaguing M:tG can be attributed to one
common factor: the love of money.
WotC started off in a basement with a game called Talislanta. This game
was a source of concern for a few companies, notably TSR and Palladium,
because of the conversion notes in the Talislanta rules that allowed you
to convert to any other games system. TSR and Palladium did the usual
"big company sues little company and wins" thing.
Forward several years......
Now that the shoe is on the other foot, these people who "just love
games" feel the need to secure their "intellectual property" and gain a
copyright for their crown jewel, Magic, thereby cornering the market.
For a company that professes to be in it for the love of the game, you
sure are making it hard for the rest of us...
flame on!
ka...@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca
And the ranks of the sarcastically challenged swell even further...
--
Randomness is not hypocrisy, if done with honesty.
In chaos, all is possible.
M. Keane
In article <34D38B73...@sk.sympatico.ca>,
Gerrud Rasmussen <r...@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>Black Vise-if played on first turn by the player who plays first (that's
>IF), guarantees 3 WHOLE POINTS OF DAMAGE!!! So does a Lightning Bolt.
>In an environment like Classic, if you can't: 1)drop 2-3 cards on your
>first turn or 2)blow the damned vise up, you were screwed the moment you
>decided to play in the tourney <RESTRICTED>
The reason BV is restricted is because there is *no* reason not to play
four of them in your deck. Everyone plays four so...
>Strip Mine-destroys a land by sacrificing itself. The player who uses
>the Strip Mine gains no advantage over the person whose land he
>detroyed. He can still only play one land per turn. 1 land for 1 land =
>no card advantage. This one is slightly remedied by Wasteland, as
>non-basic lands run rampant in Classic. <RESTRICTED>
Once again, no reason not to play four strip mines...
--
Micheal (Chris) Keane, Political Science, University of Washington
Associate Professor of Psychogravitational Analysis, University of Ediacara
Join the Church of Last Thursday and worship Queen Maeve!
http://weber.u.washington.edu/~aexia/thursday.htm
T C Barrett
In article <6b3psl$7g8$1...@nntp5.u.washington.edu>, ae...@u.washington.edu
(M. Keane) wrote:
> In article <34D38B73...@sk.sympatico.ca>,
> Gerrud Rasmussen <r...@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> >Black Vise-if played on first turn by the player who plays first (that's
> >IF), guarantees 3 WHOLE POINTS OF DAMAGE!!! So does a Lightning Bolt.
> >In an environment like Classic, if you can't: 1)drop 2-3 cards on your
> >first turn or 2)blow the damned vise up, you were screwed the moment you
> >decided to play in the tourney <RESTRICTED>
>
> The reason BV is restricted is because there is *no* reason not to play
> four of them in your deck. Everyone plays four so...
>
> >Strip Mine-destroys a land by sacrificing itself. The player who uses
> >the Strip Mine gains no advantage over the person whose land he
> >detroyed. He can still only play one land per turn. 1 land for 1 land =
> >no card advantage. This one is slightly remedied by Wasteland, as
> >non-basic lands run rampant in Classic. <RESTRICTED>
>
> Once again, no reason not to play four strip mines...
How does Cursed Scroll fit into this kind of world.
Is there a reason not to play 4 of them?
--
T C Barrett
M. Keane
In article <tbarrett-020...@172.18.72.130>,
T C Barrett <tbar...@futurenet.com> wrote:
>> The reason BV is restricted is because there is *no* reason not to play
>> four of them in your deck. Everyone plays four so...
>>
>
>How does Cursed Scroll fit into this kind of world.
>Is there a reason not to play 4 of them?
Not in tempest constructed. In T2, there are more valuable cards that
could be in that slot. But in TC, Cursed Scroll is easily one of the most
powerful cards because of the lack of countermeasures against it. It's
worth tossing in because it'll be a sure-fire way of drawing out your
opponent's disenchants/shatters/etc, which then makes your other cards
good.
M. Keane
In article <768_980...@dahlia.xs4all.nl>,
Christian Goijaarts <ch...@dahlia.xs4all.nl> wrote:
>So what should I do with my Stompy deck? Just basic lands and Overruns would
>not give me a victory, would they? ;)
They would if you were playing nature's revolt... =-)
fil
T C Barrett wrote:
>
> In article <6b3psl$7g8$1...@nntp5.u.washington.edu>, ae...@u.washington.edu
> (M. Keane) wrote:
>
> > In article <34D38B73...@sk.sympatico.ca>,
> > Gerrud Rasmussen <r...@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> > >Black Vise-if played on first turn by the player who plays first (that's
> > >IF), guarantees 3 WHOLE POINTS OF DAMAGE!!! So does a Lightning Bolt.
> > >In an environment like Classic, if you can't: 1)drop 2-3 cards on your
> > >first turn or 2)blow the damned vise up, you were screwed the moment you
> > >decided to play in the tourney <RESTRICTED>
> >
> > four of them in your deck. Everyone plays four so...
> >
> > >the Strip Mine gains no advantage over the person whose land he
> > >detroyed. He can still only play one land per turn. 1 land for 1 land =
> > >no card advantage. This one is slightly remedied by Wasteland, as
> > >non-basic lands run rampant in Classic. <RESTRICTED>
> >
>
> How does Cursed Scroll fit into this kind of world.
> Is there a reason not to play 4 of them?
>
> T C BarrettI haven't got any, now theres a damn good reason!
fil