!!NEW BANNED CARDS!!
mk0...@acad.drake.edu
resticted/banned list. What happened. I tried WotC's home page and Web Across
Dominia (an excellent page) and neither had anything about it. I've heard they
are debating BANNING Zuran Orb and restricting Caps, Masks, and Enduring
Renewal. Any substance to these rumors? Anyone else hear the same?
I think its kind of lame to Ban Zuran Orb. I realize the power of the
card, but I don't think its all powerful. Surely its not as great as a Lotus,
and other than Ante card, only one other card was banned, and that was because
it could give you infinite turns. Banning Zuran Orb would be crazy. I could
however see it being resticted. I don't know that it would hurt that bad
though. Unless you were playing with a elf/amrageddon deck I couldn't see
wanting more than one or possibly two Orbs.
Enduring renewal however I think should definitely be resticted. Its a
cheese card, simple as that. I guess I would repect a player a lot less that
played with an enduring renewal deck rather than one with spirit links,
underworld dreams, or somehting else that takes some brainpower to effectively
work into a deck. Ice Age has only been out since June, and Enduring Renewal
Atog is already getting really lame. Is Atog in 4th edition? I guess it comes
down to the fact that Enduring renewal/atog roughly equals channel fireball in
terms of the brainpower required to put them into decks. Thats why channel was
restricted, and that's why renewal should be.
Hey, maybe I'm smoking something. Reply with any comments/flames/questions. I'd
love to start a thread on the subject of banned cards.
Mana Man
--
"Do or do not. There is no try."
Matthew Koch
mk0...@acad.drake.edu
"Mana Man"
Jose
h? isn't that cheesy enough "OK, I'll use the cap, reconstruct it 4 times, etc.
, regrowth it, huh huh...game over..."Please, this card is too powerful.
Ng, Kai Koon
>Hey, I thought yesterday (Sunday) was supposed to be the big day for the new
>resticted/banned list. What happened. I tried WotC's home page and Web Across
>Dominia (an excellent page) and neither had anything about it. I've heard they
>are debating BANNING Zuran Orb and restricting Caps, Masks, and Enduring
>Renewal. Any substance to these rumors? Anyone else hear the same?
Dunno, but another card that should be restricted is Zur's Wierding. The
number of times, and ways I have managed to achieve locks using that card is
just ridiculous. Here's a few examples.
Scenario 1:
Through Moxes/Lotus/Channel/Dark Ritual/... a 1st or second turn Mind Twist
gets rid of your opponent's hand. Next turn, Zur's Wierding. Just makes sure
that every land (or Mox or Lotus) he draws is discarded. If you have a
creature in you hand, it's a shoo in. A Llanowar Elf can kill him given
enough time.
Scenario 2:
Summon a big Djinn/Orgg/whatever early in the game. Drop Zur's Wierding.
Then make him discard mana sources, so he cannot summon his own big creature,
and anti-creature spells, like Control Magic. Sooner, rather than later, he
is dead.
> I think its kind of lame to Ban Zuran Orb. I realize the power of the
>card, but I don't think its all powerful. Surely its not as great as a Lotus,
>and other than Ante card, only one other card was banned, and that was because
>it could give you infinite turns. Banning Zuran Orb would be crazy. I could
There are 2 other non-ante banned cards, Sharazad, and Divine Intervention.
Both were banned because they had the potential of making tourneys last way,
way too long.
> Enduring renewal however I think should definitely be resticted. Its a
>cheese card, simple as that. I guess I would repect a player a lot less that
>played with an enduring renewal deck rather than one with spirit links,
>underworld dreams, or somehting else that takes some brainpower to effectively
>work into a deck. Ice Age has only been out since June, and Enduring Renewal
>Atog is already getting really lame. Is Atog in 4th edition? I guess it comes
>down to the fact that Enduring renewal/atog roughly equals channel fireball in
>terms of the brainpower required to put them into decks. Thats why channel was
>restricted, and that's why renewal should be.
I still don't see why Enduring Renewal should be restricted. All you need is
someone to Mind Twist/Hymn to Tourach/etc. you with those creature cards in
your hand, to be seriously defenseless when his creatures come a-knockin'.
Keijo Turpeinen
: Jester's Cap, Enduring Renewal, and Zur's Weirding will need to be restricted.
I hope Channel is banned. If we compare it with the other restricted cards
(like Lotus, Moxes, Time Walk, Tutor, etc.), this is what I find out.
You will in most cases win with Channel. Simply use Channel+Fireball.
That is the reason for most of the Green-Red decks. Lotus etc. will
help your deck and play but usually they are not the game-winners. I mean
that they are not last 2 cards or monsters that kills your opponent.
Channel is usually the last card. Have you ever seen it being used
anything else than Fireball or something other x-blast?
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
KEIJO TURPEINEN Raahe Institute of Computer Engineering
-> Live everyday like it was your last, because someday it is <-
E-Mail: ktur...@ratol.fi Suomi, Finland
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Stripp
>Should Channel be banned?
Don't care, I usually burn anyone who plays with it, so the few
times that it kills me is immaterial. If it is not played by
the second turn your opponent should hold something to counter
the inevitable.
>Should the following IA cards be banned or restricted?
>Jester's Cap
>Jester's Mask
Nope, if they want to drop 5 mana and then pay activation that's
fine by me. If I can't kill them by that time or have something
suitably dangerous then I deserve anything that happens.
>Enduring Renewal
Another who really cares. Yes the Atog thing is anoying, but how
many tourney decks are based on this? I'd say not all that many.
If it starts to dominate tournament play then restrict it.
>Zuran Orb
Nope again. Fine burn your land to stay alive. Makes it easier
for me to toast you in the long run. It's a big trade off to
stay in the game and not overpowering.
>Zur's Weirding
Come on. Yes you can do nasty things to people's draw, but I've
made weirding decks and they don't do that great. Try playing a
weenie deck against one and you'll see how good it is.
>All of my read/green decks have a channel, and I hope it is not banned. I
think >Jester's Cap, Enduring Renewal, and Zur's Weirding will need to be
restricted.
I really think magic players have gotten pathetic. None of these cards
are bannable material. Nor should many of them be restricted. They are
easily circumvented and don't dominate tourney play so why bother.
sj...@lehigh.edu
>Hey, I thought yesterday (Sunday) was supposed to be the big day for the new
>resticted/banned list. What happened. I tried WotC's home page and Web Across
>Dominia (an excellent page) and neither had anything about it. I've heard they
>are debating BANNING Zuran Orb and restricting Caps, Masks, and Enduring
>Renewal. Any substance to these rumors? Anyone else hear the same?
Why restrict the Cap and Mask? They're good cards, but hardly unbalancing
enough to be restricted. For them to be anything more than an annoyance you
have to use a lot of them (and they haven't proven to be all that easy to get)
and lots of Reconstructions and such. Any decent speed deck will beat the
hell out this strategy assuming they can get them into play in the first place.
Enduring Renewal probably should be restricted and
maybe, just maybe Zuran Orb. Ban Zuran Orb? If they do this I want to know
what they are smoking.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
ct0...@acad.drake.edu
> I just received The Duelist #14. They ask the following
>
> Should Channel be banned?
>
>
> Should the following IA cards be banned or restricted?
> Jester's Cap
> Jester's Mask
> Zuran Orb
> Zur's Weirding
>
> More Questions follow ....
>
> I think it is a real big hint of things to come.
>
> All of my read/green decks have a channel, and I hope it is not banned. I think
> Jester's Cap, Enduring Renewal, and Zur's Weirding will need to be restricted.>
> Dan & Danielle Becker beck...@ix.netcom.com
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Banning cards that have been restriced for a while is indeed silly. Channel
isn't as powerful as somepeople would like to believe. It is a cheesy win, but
I have to admit, I have one in my tourny deck and if winnning the grand prize
comes down to me Channel Fireballing, I'm not gonna think twice about what
choice I should make. However, there are many things to do agains that combo.
I love it when someone plays that against me, didn't notic or didn't care that
I wasn't tapped out, and then I reverse the damage from that fireball.....how
happy, they just gave me all their life. Plus if someone is gonna play that,
the next round I'm gonna be damn sure to sideboard in my COP:Red's to stop that
from happening.
The Orb and Falling star are quite silly as well. I don't know the Falling
Star that much, so I won't comment on it (it's an orb for creatures), but they
are not that powerfull. Some of the people I play with have it take out their
own cards on accident and I just laugh. You can also Disenchant the thing, and
if you're playing against someone who has it, don't play your cards too close
together.
Now for the real topic, the Ice Age Cards.
Banning these is going way too far. I have had my butt whipped around the
playing field by what these little puppies did, but that's life. You need to
make things that can overcome that weekness. The Enduring Renewal crap is just
pathetic. If anyone plays that, next round I'm gonna Demonic Tutor for my damn
Disenchant and say goodbye to the silly thing.
The Cap and Mask are powerful, but again Banning is too far. Make them
construct a deck around it using only one of each and see how well it does in
the tournies. Yeah-Yeah I know, Reconstruct it, Regrowth it and all that
stuff. It's gonna take a good deck o do that to me before I can get out some
tough 5/5 creatures and the sort.
The one card that I will be completely upset at if it is banned is the Zuran
Orb. Restricted, yes, Banned, NO. It's a very good card and if WOTC made it,
tough luck. If it seems a litttle unfair, Restrict it, but thats all. If
they're gonna restrict every card they make that adds some interesting elements
to the game for the Newbies out thier (or just the people that don't have a ton
of money to spend) they might lose a lot of players from that. I mean, what
are they gonna do, say "Ok any card that anyone out thier can find a good use
for will be banned?"---god I hope not.
When they realsized the power of the Mox, Lotus, and other big cards, they
Restricted them, and that was it. Going as far as to ban them is taking away
from the ever changing world of Magic. If there are never gonna be any new
elements to the game due to banning, why play at all.
Cameron Hodge
CT0...@acad.drake.edu
Adrian H. Newman
>
>In article <1995Oct...@acad.drake.edu>, mk0...@acad.drake.edu writes:
>>Hey, I thought yesterday (Sunday) was supposed to be the big day for the new
>>resticted/banned list. What happened. I tried WotC's home page and Web Across
>>Dominia (an excellent page) and neither had anything about it. I've heard they
>>are debating BANNING Zuran Orb and restricting Caps, Masks, and Enduring
>>Renewal. Any substance to these rumors? Anyone else hear the same?
>
>
>Why restrict the Cap and Mask? They're good cards, but hardly
unbalancing
>enough to be restricted. For them to be anything more than an
annoyance you
>have to use a lot of them (and they haven't proven to be all that easy
to get)
>and lots of Reconstructions and such. Any decent speed deck will beat
the
>hell out this strategy assuming they can get them into play in the
first place.
>
they'll slow down play a lot as your opponent digs through your entire
library looking for and deciding on what cards to remove/put in hand.
Secondly, do you really want some guy at a tournie getting his greasy
fingers all over your thousand dollar deck, especially if he's one of
the "Hey, take those sleeves off" people. What happens when a Mox
accidently gets damaged as he's rummaging through your library? The DC
doesn't want headaches like that. Are Cap and Mask too powerful? Not
hardly. Are they too much trouble? You bet.
-Adrian
mk0...@acad.drake.edu
deed, and 2? to reconstruct it. That's 6 mana for every ->3<- cards you want to
remove from the players deck. Banning and restircting are really only important
in Type I and II rules. In these tourneys (especially in Type I) if you haven't
killed your opponent in 6 rounds you had better be playing a stasis deck or
something that is designed to last. I was once told tourney decks kill can deal
20 damage in 4 rounds. Barring one heck of a draw (i.e. 5 moxes, lotus, cap,
then 4 reconstuction and a land in the next 5 turns) the cap isn't going to do
much. Besides, a shatter/counterspell/disenchant and their respective casting
costs are far more likely to come about than a cap x5. Restrict it yes. Ban it,
no way.
mk0...@acad.drake.edu
> : All of my read/green decks have a channel, and I hope it is not banned. I think
>
> (like Lotus, Moxes, Time Walk, Tutor, etc.), this is what I find out.
>
> You will in most cases win with Channel. Simply use Channel+Fireball.
> That is the reason for most of the Green-Red decks. Lotus etc. will
> help your deck and play but usually they are not the game-winners. I mean
> that they are not last 2 cards or monsters that kills your opponent.
>
> Channel is usually the last card. Have you ever seen it being used
> anything else than Fireball or something other x-blast?
>
least 40)
B.)If you are one that believes channel is the end all solution, you
naturally wouldn't think of another way to use channel.
C.)Counterspell
D.)Reverse Damage
E.) To use a channel fireball you need to be above their life. If you
depend on channel fireballs to win, or regard them that highly, you will rarely
be above your opponents life (unless your both waiting for that channel).
By the way, I have a red green burn deck WITHOUT channel!
mk0...@acad.drake.edu
I really think magic players have gotten pathetic. None of these cards
are bannable material. Nor should many of them be restricted. They are
easily circumvented and don't dominate tourney play so why bother.--
I would just like to say "bill" is the magic god now isn't he. I say all of us
"pathetic" players now direct all of our questions about the game to
BST...@INTERACCESS.COM. He knows all and will tell all
becker2d
Should Channel be banned?
Should Chaos Orb and Falling Star be banned?
Should the following IA cards be banned or restricted?
Jester's Cap
Jester's Mask
Enduring Renewal
Zuran Orb
Zur's Weirding
More Questions follow ....
I think it is a real big hint of things to come.
All of my read/green decks have a channel, and I hope it is not banned. I think
Jester's Cap, Enduring Renewal, and Zur's Weirding will need to be restricted.
Dan
Bill Stripp
>>are bannable material. Nor should many of them be restricted. They are
>>easily circumvented and don't dominate tourney play so why bother.--
>I would just like to say "bill" is the magic god now isn't he. I say all
>of us "pathetic" players now direct all of our questions about the game to
>BST...@INTERACCESS.COM. He knows all and will tell all
Well Matt, if you feel the need to E-mail me with questions feel free to.
I never claimed to be an expert, I'm just observing that all of the
banning talk is reminiscent of the 'ban the perl unicorn' thread awhile
back. The cards we're arguing about are not nearly as ridiculous as many
in play (time walk, moxes, etc.) I really didn't see one card in the list
besides channel that is a real hoser, or has ever dominated tourney play.
If you can tell me different, fine. I'd be happy to discuss it with you.
However, the day an Atog/ER deck wins a tourney is the day I'll take up
a sign with "ban xxxxxx" and picket WOTC. However, I just don't see it
hapening. In fact I rarely see any of the cards we're talking about in
any good tourney deck. In your other posts you do agree with me to
some degree by pointing out that jester's cards are not all that great.
As to the knows all and tells all... this is Usenet. If you don't have
an opinion you might as well post your 'me too' and shut up. This forum
is for opinions and I don't mind posting mine. I also think that too
many people whine about cards because they don't use them. But, try and
ban one that they do and they get up in arms. Bah. Pathetic, like I
said.
As a final note, I am happy to entertain all of your questions, comments
and criticisms. I place my address in my sig so if you feel the need to
holler at me, fine, mail away. If you're too obnoxious that's what kill
fines are for. I advise you to do the same if you find me similarly
offensive.
Bill Stripp
bst...@interaccess.com
IZZ...@mvs.oac.ucla.edu
>I just received The Duelist #14. They ask the following
>Should Channel be banned?
>Should Chaos Orb and Falling Star be banned?
>Should the following IA cards be banned or restricted?
>Jester's Cap
>Jester's Mask
>Enduring Renewal
>Zuran Orb
>Zur's Weirding
>
Yup. You can pretty much say "c'ya!" to the Chaos Orb, Falling Star,
and Channel. Good riddance on the latter as well.
HCS...@uacsc2.albany.edu
Jose <JJM...@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>
>How about banning that Jester's cap? the one that takes 4 card out of a deck hu
>h? isn't that cheesy enough "OK, I'll use the cap, reconstruct it 4 times, etc.
>, regrowth it, huh huh...game over..."Please, this card is too powerful.
artifact and skull of orm.
Aaron Sommer
> Hey, I thought yesterday (Sunday) was supposed to be the big day for the new
> resticted/banned list. What happened. I tried WotC's home page and Web Across
> Dominia (an excellent page) and neither had anything about it. I've heard they
> are debating BANNING Zuran Orb and restricting Caps, Masks, and Enduring
> Renewal. Any substance to these rumors? Anyone else hear the same?
> I think its kind of lame to Ban Zuran Orb. I realize the power of the
> card, but I don't think its all powerful. Surely its not as great as a Lotus,
> and other than Ante card, only one other card was banned, and that was because
> it could give you infinite turns. Banning Zuran Orb would be crazy. I could
> however see it being resticted. I don't know that it would hurt that bad
> though. Unless you were playing with a elf/amrageddon deck I couldn't see
> wanting more than one or possibly two Orbs.
> Enduring renewal however I think should definitely be resticted. Its a
> cheese card, simple as that. I guess I would repect a player a lot less that
> played with an enduring renewal deck rather than one with spirit links,
> underworld dreams, or somehting else that takes some brainpower to effectively
> work into a deck. Ice Age has only been out since June, and Enduring Renewal
> Atog is already getting really lame. Is Atog in 4th edition? I guess it comes
> down to the fact that Enduring renewal/atog roughly equals channel fireball in
> terms of the brainpower required to put them into decks. Thats why channel was
> restricted, and that's why renewal should be.
> Hey, maybe I'm smoking something. Reply with any
comments/flames/questions. I'd
> love to start a thread on the subject of banned cards.
>
> Mana Man
> --
> "Do or do not. There is no try."
>
> Matthew Koch
> mk0...@acad.drake.edu
> "Mana Man"
I'd like to see the Orb, Cap and Mask restricted, and ER banned.
Seriously, the orb only hoses LD decks- and even then, they're still
losing land. other than that, I don't consider 1-land-for-2-life to be a
very good deal....
The Cap and Mask are simple- I don't like having my opponent go through my
library and pick out cards. Once, sure. 4 times, no.
Enduring renewal- just burn the damn thing. Very poorly thought out card,
wonder how it got past the playtesters.
Aaron Sommer
> I just received The Duelist #14. They ask the following
>
> Should Channel be banned?
Yes. It's a good concept, but has too much cheese potential.* Perhaps if
it was 2-life-for-1-mana we wouldn't see all this "Channelball" crap...
> Should Chaos Orb and Falling Star be banned?
No. Such cards tend to wear out quickly, and tend to destroy themselves.
Also, Artifact-killers are all over the place.
> Should the following IA cards be banned or restricted?
> Jester's Cap
Restricted. Looking through the opponent's library is just too powerful,
let alone removing the cards from the game.
> Jester's Mask
Restrict. library digging, again.
> Enduring Renewal
Ban. As with channel, good concept, poor execution.
> Zuran Orb
Maybe restrict- Land Destruction has needed a serious counter for a long
time. Let's let this one be for a while.
> Zur's Weirding
haven't played against a Wierding deck, can't really say. Could someone
post the text and situations that cause problems?
> More Questions follow ....
>
> I think it is a real big hint of things to come.
>
> All of my read/green decks have a channel, and I hope it is not banned.
I think
> Jester's Cap, Enduring Renewal, and Zur's Weirding will need to be restricted.
>
> Dan
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dan & Danielle Becker beck...@ix.netcom.com
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As always, just my opinion.
aaron_...@herringn.com
Paul van Gool
>: All of my read/green decks have a channel, and I hope it is not banned. I think
>: Jester's Cap, Enduring Renewal, and Zur's Weirding will need to be restricted.
.> I hope Channel is banned. If we compare it with the other
restricted cards
.> (like Lotus, Moxes, Time Walk, Tutor, etc.), this is what I find
out.
.>
.> You will in most cases win with Channel. Simply use
Channel+Fireball.
.> That is the reason for most of the Green-Red decks. Lotus etc.
will
.> help your deck and play but usually they are not the game-winners.
I mean
.> that they are not last 2 cards or monsters that kills your
opponent.
> Channel is usually the last card. Have you ever seen it being used
> anything else than Fireball or something other x-blast?
I know of another solution.
It isn't Channel that should be banned. On it's own it is just crap.
No, we should ban Fireball and Desintegrate.
This would solve the problem, wouldn't it. :-)
I realy don't think channel is worth als the discussions on banning
it. It just isn't such a great card. Restricting it is enough.
Stephen Lil IV
: I just received The Duelist #14. They ask the following
Well, since everybody's biting...
: Should Channel be banned?
Yes. This card represents too much of a random swing. I mean, you can be ahead
in life and your opponent draws Channel and bang, you're dead. What are you
going to do? Play counter in every deck and save UU every turn just because
there's a card called Channel in the game? Any card that creates a "whoever
draws it first wins" situation ought to be banned.
: Should Chaos Orb and Falling Star be banned?
Yes and yes. Just on general principle. It shouldn't matter jack how I laid
my cards out on the table. I mean, it just freaking isn't fair to lose a
duel due to lack of space in tournaments. And even when you do have space
it is plain ridiculous to have to lay your cards WAY out just because of
the existence of these two cards.
: Should the following IA cards be banned or restricted?
: Jester's Cap
: Jester's Mask
Banned and banned, unless you put a time limit on how long a player has to use
the cards of two minutes or less per use. If there's a time limit on them,
then restrict Jester's Cap and leave Jester's Mask alone. Frankly, Jester's
Mask does jack-squat and I can't care less if people want to use four of 'em
in a deck. On the other hand, Jester's Cap encourages deck designs which
fester brain-atrophy and really represents a significant random swing (who-
ever draws Jester's Cap first can strip the opponent of their sideboard cards
and Jester's Cap).
: Enduring Renewal
Left alone. Who gives a rat's buttocks about this card? I mean, you have to play
with Ornithopters and Kobolds?
: Zuran Orb
It's really Land Tax and Land Equilibrium that you ought to be restricting, but
heck, restricting Zuran Orb is probably a good idea if you leave Land Tax and
Land Equilibrium alone. The bad thing is that if you don't restrict LT and LE,
you will have to restrict anything significant which sacrifices land in the
future.
: Zur's Weirding
Restricted. This card is just pure luck for a lock.
: More Questions follow ....
:
: I think it is a real big hint of things to come.
:
: All of my read/green decks have a channel, and I hope it is not banned. I think
: Jester's Cap, Enduring Renewal, and Zur's Weirding will need to be restricted.
:
: Dan
:
: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
: Dan & Danielle Becker beck...@ix.netcom.com
: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
--Steve Internet: sl7...@u.cc.utah.edu
'The duel was going badly for me, and BHack thought I was finished. He boasted
that he would eat my soul, but all he ate were his words.' --Steve, 'ObLock'
- Under Construction -
: Jose <JJM...@psuvm.psu.edu> wrote:
: >How about banning that Jester's cap? the one that takes 4 card out of a deck hu
: >h? isn't that cheesy enough "OK, I'll use the cap, reconstruct it 4 times, etc.
: >, regrowth it, huh huh...game over..."Please, this card is too powerful.
: Ummm.. you might need to rethink your deck strategies. While the
: person is playing with their caps and reconstructions, Ive got an
: erhnam djinn on the table killing them. So they might take out a few
: cards, but still will die.
: You also forget, I can cap their caps, which would destroy that entire
: cap deck. There are SO many ways around it, and the caps definately
: ARENT too powerful. Try using a cap deck against a weenie deck
: sometime, or a LD deck, or something similar. Youll find that your use
: of caps here won't be adequate.
Well, cap will be still effective on weenies. For example. If
you have a moat out against a weenie deck, you can always cap their
disenchents, or tranquilities. Against LD decks, I can always cap their
damage cards, like fireballs. They can go ahead and destroy my lands all
they want, but they can't kill me. Over all, I think caps are pretty
powerful cards, and I think they should be restricted.
--
>+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+<
| o o |
| N a t a S (nay'tuhs) n.masc. I (shan) n. |
| o I 1. Mountain. o |
| Kuo Shan Chou , I , 2. ____________. |
| o na...@ucssun1.sdsu.edu ------i 3. NataS' first o |
| kc...@ucssun1.sdsu.edu name. |
| o o |
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Keijo Turpeinen
: > anything else than Fireball or something other x-blast?
: I know of another solution.
: It isn't Channel that should be banned. On it's own it is just crap.
: No, we should ban Fireball and Desintegrate.
: This would solve the problem, wouldn't it. :-)
Or more better: We should ban Channel+fireball (disintegrate, etc)
combo :)
: I realy don't think channel is worth als the discussions on banning
: it. It just isn't such a great card. Restricting it is enough.
If it comes around the first three rounds, you probably win. After that,
well.. You have a good change of winning. But, StP, Zuran, Counterspell
etc. will make it useless.
Mr. Rogers
>> I just received The Duelist #14. They ask the following
>>
>> Should Channel be banned?
>Yes. It's a good concept, but has too much cheese potential.* Perhaps if
>it was 2-life-for-1-mana we wouldn't see all this "Channelball" crap...
Cards should be restricted for cheese not banned. The only color that doesn't
really have a way around a sudden Channelball is green. (Maybe there
is one, I just can't think of it off the top of my head.
>> Should Chaos Orb and Falling Star be banned?
>No. Such cards tend to wear out quickly, and tend to destroy themselves.
>Also, Artifact-killers are all over the place.
>> Should the following IA cards be banned or restricted?
>> Jester's Cap
>Restricted. Looking through the opponent's library is just too powerful,
>let alone removing the cards from the game.
>> Jester's Mask
>Restrict. library digging, again.
>> Enduring Renewal
>Ban. As with channel, good concept, poor execution.
No card is really powerful enough that it should be banned. Sure, it is
possible to get infinite life/mana combos with this card, but hey, if its
restricted, what are the odds they are going to come up with all the cards
they need for the combos anyways? Especially in Type 2!
>> Zuran Orb
>Maybe restrict- Land Destruction has needed a serious counter for a long
>time. Let's let this one be for a while.
>> Zur's Weirding
Enchantment 3U
All players play with their hands face up on the table. Whenever any player
draws a card, any other player may pay 2 life to force the drawing player to
discard that card. Effects that prevent or redirect this damage may not be
used to counter this loss of life.
I was surprised to see a good enchantment in Ice Ages without CU. It's good,
but maybe not good enough for restriction. If only you could use it against
them, that's something else.
Anyways, powerful cards should be restricted, not banned. The only reason to
ban cards should be a) ante is mentioned on the card; or b] the card
interferes with the play of the tournament, like Divine Intervention. Time
Vault was a big mistake on Wizard's part. I'd sidebar a Warp Artifact in every
Black deck just for that card. "Oh, you want to take infinite turns, well then
you can take infinite damage along with it."
Banning cards just makes the game less interesting. Fewer cards, fewer
choices, fewer deck types. I look forward to fighting my first Enduring
Renewal Deck.
-))) Mr. Rogers
sj...@lehigh.edu
>In article <44qbba$a...@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>, becker2d <beck...@ix.netcom.co
>> I just received The Duelist #14. They ask the following
>>
>> Should Channel be banned?
No.
>>
>> Should Chaos Orb and Falling Star be banned?
No.
>>
>> Should the following IA cards be banned or restricted?
>> Jester's Cap
Absolutely not.
>> Jester's Mask
No.
>> Enduring Renewal
Restricted Yes, banned No.
>> Zuran Orb
Possibly restricted though I don't think it really needs to be.
>> Zur's Weirding
I don't know why they would even consider this one.
They also should unrestrict Fork IMO. I know about the problems with Goblin
Grenade Combos but that is a problem with Goblin Grenade, not Fork. Fork is
just not a game unbalancing card IMNSHO.
M. Turian
that they are self-cleaning if you put one out you remove mine(and
vise-versa). THerefore it is not a good idea to build a deck around 1 if
they were to be restricted, because for all you know your oppenent could
pull there's first and remove your cap from the game
Jose (JJM...@psuvm.psu.edu) wrote:
> How about banning that Jester's cap? the one that takes 4 card out of a deck hu
> h? isn't that cheesy enough "OK, I'll use the cap, reconstruct it 4 times, etc.
> , regrowth it, huh huh...game over..."Please, this card is too powerful.
--
-----------------------------------------------
"To the University of Akron football team: Crush Ohio and lose by less
than 50 to the rest."
------------------------------------------------------------------
Aaron Sommer
rich_...@ccmail.uoregon.edu (Mr. Rogers) wrote:
Hm. Looks like a Revelations with some kick... Strange that it would be
blue- I don't like for the opposition to know what I have in hand.
I don't see it as a problem- it affects all players equally, and the
sacrifice is significant. Then again, I've never played against it.
Jeff Goldsmith
> A.) Getting a channel fireball combo in a deck requires luck (1 in at
>least 40)
I bet this is off by at least a factor of 10. Let's construct a
deck that'll do this best; I'm sure others will be able to do
better than I.
Red/Green/Black
1 Channel
4 Fireballs
4 Lava Bursts
4 Disintegrates
4 Urza's Baubles
1 Demonic Tutor
Fill the rest of the deck with lands, moxes, a lotus, etc.,
including multis, the sol ring, implements, ...
Let's assume that you will always win as long as you
channel/fireball by turn 2. To first order, this is
a 56-card deck; one will see 9 cards in time. There's
about a 30% chance you'll see one of the Tutor or the
Channel by then. There are 12 fireball-equivalents;
it's nearly a sure thing you'll see one. There's some
chance you won't get the right mana, but with this much
in it, that's pretty minimal. Call it 25%. Of course,
if you don't get it right away, your chances don't go
up much, so this is a silly deck to construct, but 1/40
is way off, even for a reasonably constructed deck.
Just in case my algebra has gone south, the general
computation is: in a 60-card deck, the chance of
finding one of N cards in your first 8 is:
(60-N)! 52!
1 - -----------
(52-N)! 60!
This is probably not all that helpful, but the
chance of finding one of four cards in your first
eight is therefore about 44.5%.
--Jeff
--
His tale is told and done. Jerry Garcia
Opera Man
But hear me out.
A lot of the cards that are to be restricted/banned may not be for obvious reasons, so don't flame away w/out thinking it through. This group has at times been filled with petty flame wars over simple misunderstandings. (and a few moronic know-it-alls ;)
Anyway, back to ZW.
I have decks that can beat it, but game play is not my rationale.
When I've played in tournaments, there are inevitably those games where peope are watching. (even big time sanctioned ones, like the ones here in NYC)
I do NOT like the idea of people learning my deck strategy, and seeing all the cards within it. I know they can get it by watching me play, but this card simply makes the 'spy' job a lot easier. And don't think for a second that it doesn't happen, because it does.
I know people who come with 4-5 friends who will scope out the competition for them, so they know how to sideboard, etc. for each player they may face.
Besides, I know that there are many times that I've played, and the theme of my deck hasn't really started rolling, or that one of my 'ace in the hole' cards never left my hand, because it wasn't needed.
I don't like the thought that my next opponent could be standing 10 feet away, and see my whole plan of attack.
Enduring Renewal has this problem as well, but you usually build a deck around this so it's at least your choice. ER should be restricted, but not banned.
There are many combos that can be done w/this, but all in all, they're pretty easy to spot.
well, that's just my 0.02
Thanks,
Jason
--
jr...@netcom.com - the original Opera Man... (before SNL!)
___________________________________________________________________________
| Capt Jeremiah Rose / Jhiaxus Rose 3034 / Magic: The Gathering |
| CO Black Thorns / / I like to trade! |
| Btech 3056 MUSE / Fineous on Valhalla / Star Trek, too! |
|__________________________________________________________________________|
| "A life without risk, is a life without reward..." |
|__________________________________________________________________________|
[Perceptor/Fafnertron, TF MUSH I]
J. Andrew Lipscomb
(Bill Stripp) wrote:
> >I just received The Duelist #14. They ask the following
>
> >Should Channel be banned?
> Don't care, I usually burn anyone who plays with it, so the few
> times that it kills me is immaterial. If it is not played by
> the second turn your opponent should hold something to counter
> the inevitable.
>
> >Should the following IA cards be banned or restricted?
> >Jester's Cap
> >Jester's Mask
> Nope, if they want to drop 5 mana and then pay activation that's
> fine by me. If I can't kill them by that time or have something
> suitably dangerous then I deserve anything that happens.
By turn two? A swamp, one more land (as long as it gives mana), and two
DRs, and it's off on the second turn Type 2 legally! Ban no, but restrict
yes.
J. Andrew Lipscomb <ew...@chattanooga.net, them...@delphi.com>
PGP keys by request
Don't blame me, I voted Libertarian.
J. Andrew Lipscomb
HCS...@uacsc2.albany.edu wrote:
> In article <95275.232...@psuvm.psu.edu>
> Jose <JJM...@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>
> >
> >How about banning that Jester's cap? the one that takes 4 card out of a
deck hu
> >h? isn't that cheesy enough "OK, I'll use the cap, reconstruct it 4
times, etc.
> >, regrowth it, huh huh...game over..."Please, this card is too powerful.
>
> first of all, it takes 3 cards oit of library, and secondly its worse
with copy
> artifact and skull of orm.
Skull of Orm doesn't do artifacts, it does enchantments. Argivian
Archaeologist and Reconstruction are the ones that do it for artifacts.
do...@netcom.com
: I just received The Duelist #14. They ask the following
: Should Channel be banned?
No. It's cheesy as hell, but it's random. If you rely on it, someone
with a control deck will eliminate you from contention.
: Should Chaos Orb and Falling Star be banned?
No. More cheese, but I think we should just stick with the optional
'gentleman's target' rules where you pick one card and destroy it, or
make 'em flip the card.
: Should the following IA cards be banned or restricted?
: Jester's Cap
I haven't faced a deck with four of these suckers yet, but I would
venture to say Restrict this one. It is very powerful to look at your
opponent's deck and remove three key cards. Of course, if you rely on
three key cards, you deserve to lose.
: Jester's Mask
Haven't faced four yet either. I'll say Restrict since looking through a
library is a powerful thing.
: Enduring Renewal
I voted Restrict already on the mail in, but I'll change it here to no
restrictions. Until this card dominates play, we don't need to mess with
it. Of course, I haven't been on the Type II circuit in a while, but I
hear more Black Vise horror stories there.
: Zuran Orb
I voted Restrict here but I think I'll change it back to no restrict
(geez, maybe I ought to revote). This card is not primarily used as a
defense against Land Destruction (at least in Type I). It's used as a
source of life for a permission deck when facing a fast weenie creature
deck (which loses it's speed around turn 4 or 5). If people want to pack
defensive cards, let them.
: Zur's Weirding
Restrict. This card is hell of fun to play with, but it does create a
nasty lock if it comes out. Again, I'd still like to see it dominate
Type I or Type II play before restricting, but I think it will come to pass.
Again, the KEY ISSUE here shouldn't be whether you feel the card is too
powerful or not, it should be whether the card dominates play. If a card
is something that EVERYONE feels obligated to put in their decks because
it is so powerful, then that merits restriction. Really of the Ice Age
ones, only the Jester's Cap is one which probably deserves Restriction in
this sense. It's useful for everyone, though it's most powerful in long
games, especially when facing an opponent who loves recursion.
The DC took a dangerous route here. I hope they go with their own
judgement rather than deferring completely to a mass vote (which their
request for resposes looked rather like).
ct0...@acad.drake.edu
> In article <44qbba$a...@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>,
> becker2d <beck...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>
>>Should Channel be banned?
>>Jester's Cap
>>Enduring Renewal
>>Zuran Orb
>>Zur's Weirding
>
> Yup. You can pretty much say "c'ya!" to the Chaos Orb, Falling Star,
> and Channel. Good riddance on the latter as well.
How can you say that the Chaos Orb and the Falling Star will be banned? The
Chaos Orb has been around since the start of MTG and it's only been restricted.
I'm not sure what is up with the Falling Star (is it restricted) but they are
not a problem to me. It's been around since Legends (I believe) and I've never
even run into it in a tournement. The few times that I have bumped into the
Chaos Orb, I either Disenchanted it, it took out one card, or the poor fool
killed two of his Juzam Djinns with the silly thing. The next match I just
remembered to play with cards ferther apart. It's not that difficult to work
around and is hardly worth the effort to ban those two cards.
Cameron Hodge
Adam Maysonet
>Excerpts from netnews.rec.games.trading-cards.magic.strategy: 4-Oct-95
>Re: !!NEW BANNED CARDS!! by Aaron Som...@herringn.co
>> > Zur's Weirding
>> haven't played against a Wierding deck, can't really say. Could someone
>> post the text and situations that cause problems?
>>
>My favorite use of zur's weirding is 4 living artifacts and ZW.
Actually this won't work. Zur's Weirding causes a loss of life, which
doesn't count as damage, which means the living artifacts won't get
any counters when you use the Zur's. This would also be true for
Necropotence, Greed, Book of Ras, Channel, and Psychic Purge (when
getting hit for 5 from the discard) to name a few.
Adam Maysonet
Aladeptus
SE Regional Champion
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _/_/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/ Alex Rutkowski
> _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ 1538 Alabama Ave.
> _/_/_/_/ _/ _/_/ _/_/ Pittsburgh Pa. 15216
> _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ (412)-681-3130
>_/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/ ar...@andrew.cmu.edu
Keijo Turpeinen
: > anything else than Fireball or something other x-blast?
: least 40)
True. In our local tournament, RG players who had the combo still
got it fairly often.
: B.)If you are one that believes channel is the end all solution, you
: naturally wouldn't think of another way to use channel.
I don't use Channel, because I don't really play with Red and Green
: C.)Counterspell
: D.)Reverse Damage
Power Sink, Lighning Bolt.. Etc. If the channel comes in first three
rounds, there is a problem. Later, they should be none.
: By the way, I have a red green burn deck WITHOUT channel!
I admire you..
Banning channel is however strong point, considering the cards which
are banned. Still it is powerful cards in the first rounds.
Kung -Fu Master
Dennis F. Hefferman
|Anyways, powerful cards should be restricted, not banned. The only reason to
|ban cards should be a) ante is mentioned on the card; or b] the card
|interferes with the play of the tournament, like Divine Intervention. Time
|Vault was a big mistake on Wizard's part. I'd sidebar a Warp Artifact in every
|Black deck just for that card. "Oh, you want to take infinite turns, well then
|you can take infinite damage along with it."
|Banning cards just makes the game less interesting. Fewer cards, fewer
|choices, fewer deck types. I look forward to fighting my first Enduring
|Renewal Deck.
Quite the contrary. Cards so powerful that to allow a decent chance of
drawing them would be to unbalance the game should be banned. Restricting them
only increases the amount of luck in the game, as games are decided by who
draws their Restricted unbalancing card(s) first.
This has been quite adequately demonstrated by both Type I and Type II
play. What has also been demonstrated is that allowing these cards does not
result in more choices and more deck types, it allows fewer. Unbalancing cards
quickly become mandatory or near-mandatory, such that in Type I you can pretty
much expect half or more of the Restricted list in every deck. My group does
not allow these cards at all, and as a result you can play _more_ different
types of decks, because strategies that are marginalized by unbalancing cards
are now viable.
--
Dennis Francis Heffernan IRC: Macavity heff...@pegasus.montclair.edu
Montclair State University #include <disclaim.h> Computer Science/Philosophy
"You bitch about the present and blame it on the past/I'd like to find your
inner child and kick its little ass!" -- Don Henley/Glenn Fry, "Get Over It"
Alexander P Rutkowski
>Re: !!NEW BANNED CARDS!! by Aaron Som...@herringn.co
>> > Zur's Weirding
>> haven't played against a Wierding deck, can't really say. Could someone
>> post the text and situations that cause problems?
>>
>My favorite use of zur's weirding is 4 living artifacts and ZW.
Actually this won't work. Zur's Weirding causes a loss of life, which
doesn't count as damage, which means the living artifacts won't get
any counters when you use the Zur's. This would also be true for
Necropotence, Greed, Book of Ras, Channel, and Psychic Purge (when
getting hit for 5 from the discard) to name a few.
Adam Maysonet
Aladeptus
SE Regional Champion
You're right, it says "pay 2 Life" but the other ways I mentioned to get
up on life all work and anyway any other sources of damage will put
counters on the living artifacts anyway(assuming that you let him get
any:) )
Charles E. Kostick
to see the look on my opponent's face. but seriously, now that demonic
consultation is out and about, channels come up just about every game
for me.
do...@netcom.com
: >> > Zur's Weirding
: >My favorite use of zur's weirding is 4 living artifacts and ZW.
: Actually this won't work. Zur's Weirding causes a loss of life, which
: doesn't count as damage, which means the living artifacts won't get
: any counters when you use the Zur's. This would also be true for
: Necropotence, Greed, Book of Ras, Channel, and Psychic Purge (when
: getting hit for 5 from the discard) to name a few.
Of course, you can always mana burn yourself for one damage each turn.
Then once you have two Living Artifacts in play, you're set. Btw, I
thought the ruling was that ZW is indeed a DISCARD, so you can use the
card you just drew as a fast effect, if it is an instant or interrupt
only. Hrm. Maybe I'll have to make a new green/blue enchant deck...;)
dolor
Charles E. Kostick
withnew types of tournaments. let the type 1 people have fun w/ their
decks and let type 2 people enjoy their decks. if there are still
problems come up w/ new types of tournaments like this new point system
idea. it adds veriety to the game. besides at the rate that wotc
brings out new expansions and people ask for cards to be restricted,
pretty soon you won't be able to make a deck w/ only restricted cards
that rests at only 60 cards in the deck.
Robert Chodos
: In article <44qbba$a...@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>,
: becker2d <beck...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
:
: >I just received The Duelist #14. They ask the following
: >Should Channel be banned?
: >Should Chaos Orb and Falling Star be banned?
: >Should the following IA cards be banned or restricted?
: >Jester's Cap
: >Jester's Mask
: >Enduring Renewal
: >Zuran Orb
: >Zur's Weirding
: >
:
: Yup. You can pretty much say "c'ya!" to the Chaos Orb, Falling Star,
: and Channel. Good riddance on the latter as well.
Wait a minute. What is so great about Zuran Orb? I've played
with it in my permission deck, and it never seems worth it
to sac a land just for two life. How can this possibly be
put in the same category as Jester's Mask and Cap, not to
mention Chaos Orb!?
David Chodos
leis...@hookup.net
:
:
:
Ryan John Cousineau
>were restricted. Jesters, while fun to use, aren't even tournament
>quality. They don't imbalance the game- they aren't even worth playing
>with. Zuran Orb is powerful, but does it imbalance the game? If you draw
>it, do you have a definite advantage over your opponent? This is why
>Zur's Wierding will never be restricted. It affects both players
>equally.
>Now let's talk about banned cards. Look at the restricted list. Other
>than the ante cards, there are only 2. Time Vault is an obvious choice.
>Infinite turns tend to provide one with a definite advantage. The other
>is Shaharazad. Now, I wasn't around when Arabian Nights came out, and I
>never played with this card, so I don't why it was banned. Cards are
>banned when they are too degenerate to play with at all. Why would you
>ban Channel? There are plenty of ways to take care of that. Chaos Orb,
>it can be a little powerful, but it is hardly ever the sole reason why a
>player would win the game. Banning falling star is rediculous. Dwarven
>Catapult is better. I'm not even going to dicuss banning Jesters.
>-Matt
Shaharazad was banned because it takes too long to play. For those of you
that don't know, what Shaharazad roughly does is tell you to start a new
game with only your remaining libraries. Loser of that subgame loses half
of their life in the main game.
The Jesters' could be major potential problems if you have several of
them. I think they may have been banned in the end because whatever their
casting cost, they fit a little too well into too many strategies. If
you're playing LD, it makes sense to take out three lands, or give your
opponent seven land cards. Also nice in a Vise deck. And hey, cripple
that theme! Wipe out a bunch of counter cards! Etc.
Also, the Jesters are slow in actual play. Your opponent looks through
your whole deck, and picks out three cards. Or seven. Tutoring is slow
enough!
I think the problem with the Zuran Orb comes down to its ability to slow
games down, and to work into some fairly sick strategies, not the least
of which is Jokulhaups responded to by sacking all your land into mister
Orb. Annoying.
I don't know if all this adds up to reasons to restrict these cards, but
it seems reasonable. Of course, it still means that Fallen Empires still
has the dubious distinction of contributing no cards to the restricted
list, possibly a distinction shared by no other expansion set. Well,
we'll always have Orgg...
--
Ryan Cousineau, rcou...@sfu.ca // This message sponsored by
'89 Yamaha FZR400 Special: Jenny // \\ //ired <<<ola
'82 Yamaha Vision 550: Black Pig // \X/
// Wired Cola: It's CyberMorphic!
Sunny Huo
deck and I'm thinking of building a new Red/Black deck.
Anyone have any suggestions? I want to avoid the
following deck concepts (already played them):
Discard/Rack
Land Destruction/Vice
Weenie Horde!
Thanks!
- SSH
Stephen Lil IV
: OK! After reading all of these, I'd have to say that anyone who thinks
: that Jesters should be restricted needs to play a little more. Cards are
: restricted when they start dominating the playing field.
Cards are restricted for many reasons, dominating the playing field being the
most common (do you think that Copy Artifact dominates the playing field?).
: Why was Lotus restricted? Because whoever draws their Lotus first usually
: has a much better chance of winning the game.
I wouldn't say a "much" better chance. At least not nearly as "much" better
as whoever draws Channel first.
: That's why cards like Channel and LoA were restricted. Jesters, while fun
: to use, aren't even tournament quality. They don't imbalance the game-
: they aren't even worth playing with.
The 'Mask I wouldn't use in a tournament. The 'Cap, on the other hand, I'd
put in my sideboard. But that's not the point. Have you ever played
against idiots who load up with the Jester's happy fun tools? Do you know
how *&%$#@ long it takes some people to look through your deck and that
some of them actually have notepads and pencil handy? Let's have official
time limits for these things already, huh?
: Zuran Orb is powerful, but does it imbalance the game? If you draw
: it, do you have a definite advantage over your opponent?
Land Tax? Land Equilibrium? Those plus Armageddon and little weenies?
: This is why Zur's Wierding will never be restricted. It affects both players
: equally.
It may not be restricted this time...
: Now let's talk about banned cards. Look at the restricted list. Other
: than the ante cards, there are only 2. Time Vault is an obvious choice.
: Infinite turns tend to provide one with a definite advantage. The other
: is Shaharazad. Now, I wasn't around when Arabian Nights came out, and I
: never played with this card, so I don't why it was banned. Cards are
: banned when they are too degenerate to play with at all. Why would you
: ban Channel?
You draw, you cast, you win. What more needs to be said?
: There are plenty of ways to take care of that.
Provided that your opponent doesn't have any idea when to cast it. It's not
like he needs to cast it right away. You, on the other hand, have to be
ready for it turn after turn after turn after turn...get the picture?
: Chaos Orb, it can be a little powerful, but it is hardly ever the sole
: reason why a player would win the game. Banning falling star is rediculous.
: Dwarven Catapult is better. I'm not even going to dicuss banning Jesters.
:
: -Matt
Like I said, how somebody lays out their cards while playing ought not to be
a factor in determining a duel. To simply have Falling Star and Chaos Orb
in the tournament environment means that player must ALWAYS lay their cards
out in a ridiculous manner to maximize their chance of winning. Banning
Falling Star is ridiculous? Nah. Always laying your creatures out at the
corners of your teritory? Now that's ridiculous.
Hey, for those who answer every "How are you going to defend against that?"
question with "Chaos Orb," my condolances. Evolve or die.
--
--Steve Internet: sl7...@u.cc.utah.edu
sj...@lehigh.edu
.sandybay.utas.edu.au (Ng, Kai Koon) writes:
>In article <1995Oct...@acad.drake.edu> mk0...@acad.drake.edu writes:
>
>>Hey, I thought yesterday (Sunday) was supposed to be the big day for the new
>>resticted/banned list. What happened. I tried WotC's home page and Web Across
>>Dominia (an excellent page) and neither had anything about it. I've heard they
>>are debating BANNING Zuran Orb and restricting Caps, Masks, and Enduring
>>Renewal. Any substance to these rumors? Anyone else hear the same?
>
>Dunno, but another card that should be restricted is Zur's Wierding. The
>number of times, and ways I have managed to achieve locks using that card is
>just ridiculous. Here's a few examples.
Getting your opponent locked down should not be out of the question. The
examples you give require other ostensibly broken cards to work. In type 2
play it would be quite difficult to get a lock with this card earlier than
turn 2 or 3 and even then it would take a great draw. Part of the game is
chance and the odds of getting the lock without moxen or lotii is pretty
small early in the game.
I suppose you could possibly restrict it in type 1 but I see no reason to do
so in type 2.
As for banning Orbs, Caps and Mask, there is no reason to do so. There isn't
even a good reason to restrict the Caps and Mask. Yes they are powerful, but
they don't break the game. (Hell I don't care if someone looks in my library,
most folks I play know what I use anyway so I plan accordingly)
William R. Brickles III
In a previous article, ar...@andrew.cmu.edu (Alexander P Rutkowski) says:
>Excerpts from netnews.rec.games.trading-cards.magic.strategy: 4-Oct-95
>Re: !!NEW BANNED CARDS!! by Aaron Som...@herringn.co
>> > Zur's Weirding
>> haven't played against a Wierding deck, can't really say. Could someone
>> post the text and situations that cause problems?
>>
>
>
>My favorite use of zur's weirding is 4 living artifacts and ZW.
>
>pay the 2 life each turn and the opponent never gets anything and as
>long as you get two LA's out. they cant even disenchant the ZW because
>they will never get the opportunity to draw one and if they had one to
>begin with they would have used it on a LA. plus there are so many ways
>to get life all you need for a virtual lock on a game is 2 fountains of
>youth 4 mana and zurs weirding. They will probably restrict it for these
>reasons.
>
>Other life givers:
>Ivory tower
>Powerleech
>Farmstead
>healing salve
>lucky charms
>spirit links
>Divine offering
>onulet (+ER)
>reverse damage
>stream of life/alabaster potion
>
>so you see there is way too many ways to make your opponent just Quit
>because they will never draw anything but maybe a basic land the rest of
>the game and they will usually slowly die by trying to keep your key
>cards off the board All in All it makes for extremely boring games.
The reasons you give for banning Zur's Weirding is totally wrong. First
of all, it takes 2 life, not 1, to force opponent to discard a card. To
regenerate that loss of life, you need two of something or instants. Of
hand, I can't think of anything that says OOO: Gain one life.
Everything taps or can only give you one life per turn. That means you
would need two of Living Artifact or Fountain of Youth to keep life at
the same level. Also, your opponent can use the same ability and thus
force you to discard your living artifacts or fountains when they come
out. I don't think the card should be banned or restricted. I don't
see it as being overly powerful at all. Maybe slows the game down too
much, so a restriction may be necessary. This was the sad fate of
Balance (Unrestrict it!) as it slowed games down terribly.
If you wanted to ban cards for every combo, then everyone would be
playing with a bunch of Pearled Unicorns and Hill Giants. Wanna talk
restricting cuz of combos, how about this (note, it takes 10 mana to
cast though) In play you have a Serra Angel (or any other power
creature) and a way to get 10 mana (when I did it, I had Sol Ring,
Iceberg with 3 counters, two islands, three plains). Play a Safe Haven
and tap the sol ring to remove your serra from the game. Tap two plains
and two islands for a Wrath of God. Then sacrifice your Safe Haven to
bring Serra Back into play. Tap Plain and remove the three counters
from Iceberg to cast Armegeddon. If you can pull the combo off, it is
almost instant win in a couple turns.
So now what? Do we restrict Serra, Wrath, Armegeddon, and Iceberg cuz
this is too powerful? Gimme a break. Channel is fine unrestricted cuz
there are so many ways it can backfire (counter the fireball for
example). Jester's headgear should be restricted though. Also,
Enduring Renewal should be aloud to stay because of it's backfire
capabilities.
mk0...@acad.drake.edu
land you draw on the 20th round, the one where you were looking for a Stp to
kill his only creature, the one you thought was useless, well now, instead of
dying by kird ape, your alive for one more round to find that StP. When you
need the orb, you usually have an excess of land. If you have ten lands out,
thats 20 free life!!!! It gets annoying when you are trying to kill someone
that has a Zorb out.--
"Do or do not. There is no try."
Matthew Koch
mk0...@acad.drake.edu
"Mana Man"
Eric Taylor
: You draw, you cast, you win. What more needs to be said?
red/green with kird apes lightning bolts, fireballs and channel was one
of the very few winning decks that didn't take high priced cards that
beginners could play at tournaments. Blue mages with mana drains,
moxes and lotus must be happier than hell at the blow cheap decks have
taken. Who profits from the channel being taken out? Slow decks. Now
you don't have to worry about being taken out in the first three turns
from an orcish lumberjack/channel/fireball. Blue gets a major boost
from this. Rich players with their mana drains and abyss decks and
millstones get a boost. red/green players with their $20 decks get
burned. It's simply not fair for god's sake that the beginning player
with their cheap ass decks get their $1 power card *BANNED*, while Mr.
suitcase blue mage still has his $1,000 deck of mana drain, time walk,
time twister, lotus, mox, mox, mox, mox, mox, library of alexandria and
ancenstral recall. How can a person try to get by inexpensively hope
to compete any more?
--- edt
sj...@lehigh.edu
> Well, cap will be still effective on weenies. For example. If
>you have a moat out against a weenie deck, you can always cap their
>disenchents, or tranquilities. Against LD decks, I can always cap their
>damage cards, like fireballs. They can go ahead and destroy my lands all
>they want, but they can't kill me. Over all, I think caps are pretty
>powerful cards, and I think they should be restricted.
>
Being powerful is not adequate justification for restriction. There are
plenty of powerful cards that are not restricted and shouldn't be. The Cap is
among them. The Cap frankly is something of a sucker card. It appears to be
the most powerful card in Ice Age at first, but when you really start playing
with them, you find out that they weren't quite as effective as you once
thought. Heck, make a deck that uses them (proxy them if you have to) and try
it. I'm quite sure you'll find they aren't as effective as you thought. If
we ever see Caps dominating the tournament circuit, and you can't win without
them, then we might have adequate cause for restriction, but as it is they
aren't and that doesn't appear to be changing any time soon. Leave the Cap
(and the Mask) alone and unrestricted.
Nathan Sullivan
> Now let's talk about banned cards. Look at the restricted list. Other
> than the ante cards, there are only 2. Time Vault is an obvious choice.
> Infinite turns tend to provide one with a definite advantage. The other
> is Shaharazad. Now, I wasn't around when Arabian Nights came out, and I
> never played with this card, so I don't why it was banned.
Actually, there are three non-ante cards that are banned, and of the
three, Time Vault is the only one that is banned for power reasons.
Shaharazad and Divine Intervention were banned because they disrupt
tournament play. Shaharazad makes the games take too long, and Divine
Intervention causes draws, which screw up the ladder.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spam is the symbol of my faith and | High Priest Alfonso 117 the Spammy
object of my worship. | Nathan Sullivan
-- Me | alf...@rhf.bradley.edu
Nicholas Ragovis
>: > Channel is usually the last card. Have you ever seen it being used
>: > anything else than Fireball or something other x-blast?
>: I know of another solution.
>: It isn't Channel that should be banned. On it's own it is just crap.
>: No, we should ban Fireball and Desintegrate.
>: This would solve the problem, wouldn't it. :-)
> Or more better: We should ban Channel+fireball (disintegrate, etc)
> combo :)
>: I realy don't think channel is worth als the discussions on banning
>: it. It just isn't such a great card. Restricting it is enough.
> If it comes around the first three rounds, you probably win. After that,
> well.. You have a good change of winning. But, StP, Zuran, Counterspell
> etc. will make it useless.
Y'know I thknk I've been Channel Fireballed exactly once. I have had the
displeasure of a far more annoying Channel combination many times
however. Channel, initiates of the Ebon Hand and Drain Life. Your
opponent doesn't even lose life, so he can go as low in life as he wants
on the Channel, even if it doesn't end the game that turn. Really annoying.
Frank Kusumoto
Anyone have ideas for an Ante Deck... something truly degenerate
that sticks to Type I deck construction rules? i.e., contract
from below, darkpact, demonic attorney... etc.
Monica Severa
->Stephen Lil IV (sl7...@u.cc.utah.edu) wrote:
->: You draw, you cast, you win. What more needs to be said?
->
->of the very few winning decks that didn't take high priced cards that
->beginners could play at tournaments. Blue mages with mana drains,
->moxes and lotus must be happier than hell at the blow cheap decks have
->taken. Who profits from the channel being taken out? Slow decks.
-Now
->you don't have to worry about being taken out in the first three turns
->from this. Rich players with their mana drains and abyss decks and
->millstones get a boost. red/green players with their $20 decks get
->burned. It's simply not fair for god's sake that the beginning player
->with their cheap ass decks get their $1 power card *BANNED*, while Mr.
->suitcase blue mage still has his $1,000 deck of mana drain, time walk,
->time twister, lotus, mox, mox, mox, mox, mox, library of alexandria
-and
->ancenstral recall. How can a person try to get by inexpensively hope
->to compete any more?
->
->--- edt
R/G is still great. Why would you ever play in a tournament if you need
a 3 card combo, to win, and one of them is restricted? Not to mention
the fact that R/G can't tutor. Overall, it makes little or no
difference.
If you are so damn sick of Mr. Suitcase and his $2000 deck, then play
type 2.
-Matt
Monica Severa
>Hey folks. I've gotten sick of my Red/Black discard
>deck and I'm thinking of building a new Red/Black deck.
->following deck concepts (already played them):
->
->Discard/Rack
->Land Destruction/Vice
->Weenie Horde!
->
->Thanks!
->
->- SSH
Well, you could try reanimator decks using Ball Lightning and Ruhk Eggs,
or you could just (GASP!) try playing other colors, like Blue.
-Matt
the Muse
If you want to stick to Black/Red try a swampwalking deck...
Monica Severa
->
->: Why was Lotus restricted? Because whoever draws their Lotus first
-usually
->: has a much better chance of winning the game.
->
->
->I wouldn't say a "much" better chance. At least not nearly as "much"
-better
-> as whoever draws Channel first.
Look at it this way- Channel can easily be countered. You can even make
it even with direct damage. Channel works only with an X-spell, where
Lotus works well with just about anything. If you counter a Channelball,
not only has your opponent been reduced to almost no life, but they have
also used 2 cards and are tapped out. If you countered a Lotus, you have
gained nothing.
->: Zuran Orb is powerful, but does it imbalance the game? If you draw
->: it, do you have a definite advantage over your opponent?
->
->
->Land Tax? Land Equilibrium? Those plus Armageddon and little weenies?
Look, there are plenty of powerful cards in Magic, but does that mean
that we have to go and restrict them? Zuran Orb is powerful, but it's
not that great.
->: This is why Zur's Wierding will never be restricted. It affects both
-players
->: equally.
->
->
->It may not be restricted this time...
->
->
->: Now let's talk about banned cards. Look at the restricted list.
-Other
->: than the ante cards, there are only 2. Time Vault is an obvious
-choice.
->: Infinite turns tend to provide one with a definite advantage. The
-other
->: is Shaharazad. Now, I wasn't around when Arabian Nights came out,
-and I
->: never played with this card, so I don't why it was banned. Cards are
->: banned when they are too degenerate to play with at all. Why would
-you
->: ban Channel?
->
->
->You draw, you cast, you win. What more needs to be said?
Actually, it goes like this: You draw early and with a fireball, you
cast, you hope your opponent can't counter it- if they do, your screwed,
then you hope your opponent doesn't have a lightning bolt if they do,
you're both screwed. Only after that do you win.
->: Chaos Orb, it can be a little powerful, but it is hardly ever the
-sole
->: reason why a player would win the game. Banning falling star is
-rediculous.
->: Dwarven Catapult is better. I'm not even going to dicuss banning
-Jesters.
->:
->: -Matt
->
->
->Like I said, how somebody lays out their cards while playing ought not
-to be
-> a factor in determining a duel. To simply have Falling Star and
-Chaos Orb
-> in the tournament environment means that player must ALWAYS lay
-their cards
-> out in a ridiculous manner to maximize their chance of winning.
-Banning
-> Falling Star is ridiculous? Nah. Always laying your creatures out
-at the
-> corners of your teritory? Now that's ridiculous.
->
Who said you have to lay your creatures at the far end of your
terrritory? Just lay them a few inches apart, and you will never have a
problem. Even if you stack your cards, Chaos Orb isn't that powerful.
-Matt
Albert Ko
As many deviously twisted and wonderful people have posted before:
Tempest Efreet + Dance of Many the Efreet, give him the token and take a
card + then Skull of Orm to get your Dance of Many again and repeat until
you have all the cards you want/the opponent concedes the game or
ante/punches start flying. If it wasn't for the Skull, it would be Type II.
Of course there are Bronze Tablets, Rebirths, and Divine Interventions.
Experiment/test it out on a good friend (definitely not for real ante!)
until your deck is completely nasty!
|=+Albert+=|
"Beware the Stasis field!"
sj...@lehigh.edu
>Apparently Fork is now banned, and Balance has been restricted.
>
Why? There is absolutely no reason to even restrict Fork much less ban it.
It isn't a game unbalancing card. (I'd use them all the time if it were)
Besides Balance being restricted is old news.
Stephen Lil IV
: sl7...@u.cc.utah.edu (Stephen Lil IV) wrote:
[My stuff deleted]
: Look at it this way- Channel can easily be countered. You can even make
: it even with direct damage. Channel works only with an X-spell, where
: Lotus works well with just about anything. If you counter a Channelball,
: not only has your opponent been reduced to almost no life, but they have
: also used 2 cards and are tapped out. If you countered a Lotus, you have
: gained nothing.
If you successfully use Channel, you win. If you successfully use Black
Lotus, you (possibly) gain an advantage. The difference is significant.
[My stuff deleted]
: Look, there are plenty of powerful cards in Magic, but does that mean
: that we have to go and restrict them? Zuran Orb is powerful, but it's
: not that great.
[Rhetorical question and statement of opinion ignored]
[My stuff about Channel deleted]
: Actually, it goes like this: You draw early and with a fireball, you
: cast, you hope your opponent can't counter it- if they do, your screwed,
: then you hope your opponent doesn't have a lightning bolt if they do,
: you're both screwed. Only after that do you win.
This paragraph is full of false assumptions. First of all, most decks don't
use counters. Secondly, any semi-competent player can easily sneak Channel
pass a counter, without even using a REB/Pyroblast. You don't have to cast
Channel as soon as you draw it, just wait until the opponent taps out (it's
easy). As for Lightning Bolt, it's not like you have to Channel down to 3
life very often (there is mana beyond Channel), and even if you do, it is
just a draw.
Now the bottom line is, how often do people actually win when they Channel?
75% win, 10% draw? Probably higher. I'll take those odds any day.
[My stuff deleted]
: Who said you have to lay your creatures at the far end of your
: terrritory? Just lay them a few inches apart, and you will never have a
: problem. Even if you stack your cards, Chaos Orb isn't that powerful.
The point is that having to worry about how your deck is laid out on the table
is ridiculous and unnecessary. Now if Chaos Orb is the "One Card" on which
all your decks' anti-lock defenses are based and you can't live without it,
then you have my condolances. Evolve or die.
: -Matt
--
--Steve Internet: sl7...@u.cc.utah.edu
HCS...@uacsc2.albany.edu
serra, the stream of life back up to 15 next turn? not a pretty sight.
do...@netcom.com
: Stephen Lil IV (sl7...@u.cc.utah.edu) wrote:
: : You draw, you cast, you win. What more needs to be said?
: red/green with kird apes lightning bolts, fireballs and channel was one
: of the very few winning decks that didn't take high priced cards that
: beginners could play at tournaments. Blue mages with mana drains,
: moxes and lotus must be happier than hell at the blow cheap decks have
: taken. Who profits from the channel being taken out? Slow decks.
Hear, hear! Unfortunately this is the case. I was quite enjoying the
comeback weenie speed decks were making until THIS! Even most of those
didn't use Channel, though I have seen it quite a bit in the Type II
arena (Who's fault is this?).
: Now
: you don't have to worry about being taken out in the first three turns
: from an orcish lumberjack/channel/fireball. Blue gets a major boost
: from this. Rich players with their mana drains and abyss decks and
: millstones get a boost. red/green players with their $20 decks get
: burned.
Yup. It's sad that the DC had to decide banning was the way to go. If
they felt Channel was dominating Type II, BAN it for Type II. They
should have done this in the first place by removing it from Fourth
Edition. It almost SEEMS that they left the restricted cards (Mind
Twist, Channel, Ivory Tower, Balance) in 4E so the new players could have
a fighting chance. Now they've ripped part of the rug out from under them.
: It's simply not fair for god's sake that the beginning player
: with their cheap ass decks get their $1 power card *BANNED*, while Mr.
: suitcase blue mage still has his $1,000 deck of mana drain, time walk,
: time twister, lotus, mox, mox, mox, mox, mox, library of alexandria and
: ancenstral recall. How can a person try to get by inexpensively hope
: to compete any more?
I think the key word here is inexpensively. Good or bad for WotC?
Ok, Ok. So that's a bit cynical. But I really feel that the prominence
of Channel must be a local thing. Around here Channel-ball decks are
scoffed at. Channel was one of the few remaining ways for new players to
add speed to their decks now that Fastbond was removed. C'est la Vie.
Hopefully we'll see a reversal, but this will have to be hard fought.
dolor
do...@netcom.com
: : sl7...@u.cc.utah.edu (Stephen Lil IV) wrote:
: [My stuff deleted]
: : Look at it this way- Channel can easily be countered. You can even make
: : it even with direct damage. Channel works only with an X-spell, where
: : Lotus works well with just about anything. If you counter a Channelball,
: : not only has your opponent been reduced to almost no life, but they have
: : also used 2 cards and are tapped out. If you countered a Lotus, you have
: : gained nothing.
: If you successfully use Channel, you win. If you successfully use Black
: Lotus, you (possibly) gain an advantage. The difference is significant.
Of course, if your opponent doesn't have a way to deal with certain deck
strategies, they deserve to be beaten by a deck that relies on that
strategy. This is why countermagic decks are so prevalent. Their power
lies in their flexibility. But that's another topic...
: [My stuff deleted]
: : Look, there are plenty of powerful cards in Magic, but does that mean
: : that we have to go and restrict them? Zuran Orb is powerful, but it's
: : not that great.
: [Rhetorical question and statement of opinion ignored]
: [My stuff about Channel deleted]
: : Actually, it goes like this: You draw early and with a fireball, you
: : cast, you hope your opponent can't counter it- if they do, your screwed,
: : then you hope your opponent doesn't have a lightning bolt if they do,
: : you're both screwed. Only after that do you win.
: This paragraph is full of false assumptions. First of all, most decks don't
: use counters. Secondly, any semi-competent player can easily sneak Channel
: pass a counter, without even using a REB/Pyroblast. You don't have to cast
: Channel as soon as you draw it, just wait until the opponent taps out (it's
: easy). As for Lightning Bolt, it's not like you have to Channel down to 3
: life very often (there is mana beyond Channel), and even if you do, it is
: just a draw.
: Now the bottom line is, how often do people actually win when they Channel?
: 75% win, 10% draw? Probably higher. I'll take those odds any day.
Again, is your opponent prepared? No? They'll lose. Yes? The
Channeller loses. This is the risk all Channel-players take. Usually in
tournament play, they'll be taken out by a well-prepared opponent. I
thought we just had a WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP?? How many people in the upper
echelon used Channel?
: [My stuff deleted]
: : Who said you have to lay your creatures at the far end of your
: : terrritory? Just lay them a few inches apart, and you will never have a
: : problem. Even if you stack your cards, Chaos Orb isn't that powerful.
: The point is that having to worry about how your deck is laid out on the table
: is ridiculous and unnecessary. Now if Chaos Orb is the "One Card" on which
: all your decks' anti-lock defenses are based and you can't live without it,
: then you have my condolances. Evolve or die.
Chaos Orb was a very powerful card with a mess of rules to deal with how
you're supposed to use it. The 'Gentleman's Rule' or 'Limited Space
Rule' solved this problem adequately. All it would take was the word
from WotC or the DC to make this rule (target one and only one card,
destroy that card with no flip) the way the card is played and we'd have
no more problem.
dolor
: : -Matt
: --Steve Internet: sl7...@u.cc.utah.edu
JRA...@utcvm.utc.edu
sun...@ix.netcom.com (Sunny Huo ) writes:
>Hey folks. I've gotten sick of my Red/Black discard
>deck and I'm thinking of building a new Red/Black deck.
>
>Land Destruction/Vice
>Weenie Horde!
good deck for Necropotence, also.]
A red/black Millstone deck can also be quite potent (with Vexing Arcanices,
Orcish Spies, and Spoils of War and Evil...if you don't mind a little
blue, Elemental Auguries work well here.)
Black is also a good backup color for a Red Cowards (Orcish Mutant, Orgg)
deck, with a vast arsenal of anti-creature cards, including Word of Binding.
Finally, there's the Orcish Barrage deck (Artilery and Canonneers, plus
Banshees, Combajj witches. Use a Glacial Chasm with an Orcish farmer, then
unload during each of your opponents' turns...)
Monica Severa
>If you successfully use Channel, you win. If you successfully use Black
> Lotus, you (possibly) gain an advantage. The difference is significant.
>
>
But how often can you use Channel succesfully?
>This paragraph is full of false assumptions. First of all, most decks don't
> use counters. Secondly, any semi-competent player can easily sneak Channel
> pass a counter, without even using a REB/Pyroblast. You don't have to cast
> Channel as soon as you draw it, just wait until the opponent taps out (it's
> easy). As for Lightning Bolt, it's not like you have to Channel down to 3
> life very often (there is mana beyond Channel), and even if you do, it is
> just a draw.
Most decks don't use counters. Oh, my condolences. Evolve or Die. And you think that it is possible to cast Channel later in a game?=
Well, then, what are you bitching about? If your opponent can't lower your life total at all by then, then either they got a horrib=
le draw and they are going to lose anyway, or they had their chance, and they deserve to die.
>The point is that having to worry about how your deck is laid out on the table
> is ridiculous and unnecessary. Now if Chaos Orb is the "One Card" on which
> all your decks' anti-lock defenses are based and you can't live without it,
> then you have my condolances. Evolve or die.
Belive me, I have plenty of ways to take care of anything. I'm not that sorry to see Chaos Orb go, because it's no that great of a c=
ard unless you are very lucky. Even if you stack your cards, it does not make a significant diference. I've never spread out my card=
s- unless I was making fun of those freaks who think that they need to- and I've had plaenty of Chaos Orb flipped on me.
-Matt
Mike Stern
: >deck and I'm thinking of building a new Red/Black deck.
: ->following deck concepts (already played them):
: ->Discard/Rack
: ->Land Destruction/Vice
: ->Weenie Horde!
: Well, you could try reanimator decks using Ball Lightning and Ruhk Eggs,
: or you could just (GASP!) try playing other colors, like Blue.
Or, you could try for a flare deck, with lots of mana, you can get big
critters out quickly and stomp your opponent. ...or a food deck (goblin
Warrens to create critters to feed fallen angel/LotP).
--
Mike Stern
ster...@netcom.com
"A waste is such a terrible thing to mind"
Anonymous Garbage Dump Supervisor
mk0...@acad.drake.edu
> In article <450ks1$9...@ipgate.le.ac.uk>, mt...@le.ac.uk (Kung -Fu Master) writes:
>>Apparently Fork is now banned, and Balance has been restricted.
>>
>
> Why? There is absolutely no reason to even restrict Fork much less ban it.
> It isn't a game unbalancing card. (I'd use them all the time if it were)
>
> Besides Balance being restricted is old news.
>
>
>
Psst, update here, RESTRICTING FORK IS OLD NEWS. Happened in May buh-dy, get
over it. If you have four forks in a deck, yes they are overpowering.
Todd W Powell
J. Andrew Lipscomb <ew...@chattanooga.net> wrote:
>In article <1742C10BD3...@uacsc2.albany.edu>,
>HCS...@uacsc2.albany.edu wrote:
>
>> In article <95275.232...@psuvm.psu.edu>
>> Jose <JJM...@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>>
>> >
>> >How about banning that Jester's cap? the one that takes 4 card out of a
>deck hu
>> >h? isn't that cheesy enough "OK, I'll use the cap, reconstruct it 4
>times, etc.
>> >, regrowth it, huh huh...game over..."Please, this card is too powerful.
>>
>> first of all, it takes 3 cards oit of library, and secondly its worse
>with copy
>> artifact and skull of orm.
>
>
>Skull of Orm doesn't do artifacts, it does enchantments. Argivian
>Archaeologist and Reconstruction are the ones that do it for artifacts.
>
>J. Andrew Lipscomb <ew...@chattanooga.net, them...@delphi.com>
>PGP keys by request
>Don't blame me, I voted Libertarian.
Yes, but isn't Copy Artifact and enchantment? If so, then the Skull would
work.
Todd
Stephen Lil IV
:
: : If you successfully use Channel, you win. If you successfully use Black
: : Lotus, you (possibly) gain an advantage. The difference is significant.
: Of course, if your opponent doesn't have a way to deal with certain deck
: strategy.
Channel is a deck strategy? That's a new one on me. I think permission,
card-denial, mana-denial, and weenie hordes are deck strategies, but
Channel is just a card.
: This is why countermagic decks are so prevalent. Their power
: lies in their flexibility. But that's another topic...
:
: : This paragraph is full of false assumptions. First of all, most decks don't
: : use counters. Secondly, any semi-competent player can easily sneak Channel
: : pass a counter, without even using a REB/Pyroblast. You don't have to cast
: : Channel as soon as you draw it, just wait until the opponent taps out (it's
: : easy). As for Lightning Bolt, it's not like you have to Channel down to 3
: : life very often (there is mana beyond Channel), and even if you do, it is
: : just a draw.
:
: : Now the bottom line is, how often do people actually win when they Channel?
: : 75% win, 10% draw? Probably higher. I'll take those odds any day.
:
: Again, is your opponent prepared? No? They'll lose. Yes?
What do you consider "prepared?" Let's say you "prepare" yourself for your
opponent's Channel by playing a deck with eight counters. How do you
propose to have counter ability available throughout the game "just for
Channel?" Are you going to keep UU available throughout the game and not
counter anything as long as your opponent has GGR available? Or course not.
You can't worry about Channel that much or you will simply lose to all the
other cards.
: The Channeller loses. This is the risk all Channel-players take. Usually
: in tournament play, they'll be taken out by a well-prepared opponent.
The deck which included Channel may be weak, but Channel isn't. If your foe
draws Channel in time and plays intelligently, you will probably die. You
just can't have counter ability all the time, especially when your opponent
is playing cards other than Channel which need to be countered. In the
second and third duel, Pyroblasts and REBs will make your mana management
even more difficult. You can take all this from a blue/white player.
: I thought we just had a WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP?? How many people in the upper
: echelon used Channel?
I don't know. But wasn't that a Type II? I would have been too busy 'Hymning
and 'Taxing if I were there.
: : The point is that having to worry about how your deck is laid out on the table
: : is ridiculous and unnecessary. Now if Chaos Orb is the "One Card" on which
: : all your decks' anti-lock defenses are based and you can't live without it,
: : then you have my condolances. Evolve or die.
:
: Chaos Orb was a very powerful card with a mess of rules to deal with how
: you're supposed to use it. The 'Gentleman's Rule' or 'Limited Space
: Rule' solved this problem adequately. All it would take was the word
: from WotC or the DC to make this rule (target one and only one card,
: destroy that card with no flip) the way the card is played and we'd have
: no more problem.
:
: dolor
A targeted destroy-any-card for (3) is just going to encourage brain atrophy.
Just look at all the damage Chaos Orb has already done: All these players
moaning to get the card back as a "targeted effect." Bury your Chaos Orb.
--
--Steve Internet: sl7...@u.cc.utah.edu
zor...@hoover.stanford.edu
>: you don't have to worry about being taken out in the first three turns
>: from an orcish lumberjack/channel/fireball. Blue gets a major boost
>: from this. Rich players with their mana drains and abyss decks and
>: millstones get a boost. red/green players with their $20 decks get
>: burned.
>
>Yup. It's sad that the DC had to decide banning was the way to go. If
>they felt Channel was dominating Type II, BAN it for Type II. They
>should have done this in the first place by removing it from Fourth
>Edition. It almost SEEMS that they left the restricted cards (Mind
>Twist, Channel, Ivory Tower, Balance) in 4E so the new players could have
>a fighting chance. Now they've ripped part of the rug out from under them.
>
>: It's simply not fair for god's sake that the beginning player
>: with their cheap ass decks get their $1 power card *BANNED*, while Mr.
>: suitcase blue mage still has his $1,000 deck of mana drain, time walk,
>: time twister, lotus, mox, mox, mox, mox, mox, library of alexandria and
>: ancenstral recall. How can a person try to get by inexpensively hope
>: to compete any more?
>
Tom Wylie commented on another thread that WotC is considering two seperate
restricted list one the type I one for II. In any case you think having a
channel makes a red/green type I deck competitive with a deck full of big $$$
spoilers? Give me a break. There is no way to inexpensively make a
competitive type I deck. This move is all about type II.
>I think the key word here is inexpensively. Good or bad for WotC?
Wizards makes no money off of resales which is what all the spoilers are now.
>Ok, Ok. So that's a bit cynical. But I really feel that the prominence
>of Channel must be a local thing. Around here Channel-ball decks are
>scoffed at. Channel was one of the few remaining ways for new players to
>add speed to their decks now that Fastbond was removed. C'est la Vie.
>Hopefully we'll see a reversal, but this will have to be hard fought.
Why do you want a reversal so you can channel ball people to death? Green has
more than enough fast mana to get creatures out. Why don't you check out the
decks that played and won at the world/national champs, there are two cards,
out of the 100's available that all of them used channel and mind twist.
>dolor
>
zor...@hoover.stanford.edu
>echelon used Channel?
In type II all of them.
Stephen Lil IV
: sl7...@u.cc.utah.edu (Stephen Lil IV) wrote:
:
: >If you successfully use Channel, you win. If you successfully use Black
: > Lotus, you (possibly) gain an advantage. The difference is significant.
: >
: >
Very often if you know what you are even remotely competent.
: >This paragraph is full of false assumptions. First of all, most decks don't
: > use counters. Secondly, any semi-competent player can easily sneak Channel
: > pass a counter, without even using a REB/Pyroblast. You don't have to cast
: > Channel as soon as you draw it, just wait until the opponent taps out (it's
: > easy). As for Lightning Bolt, it's not like you have to Channel down to 3
: > life very often (there is mana beyond Channel), and even if you do, it is
: > just a draw.
:
: Most decks don't use counters. Oh, my condolences. Evolve or Die.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I see my previous comments about Chaos Orb hit a nerve. Sorry about that.
People can win against decks with Channel, but that doesn't mean that they
can consistently beat Channel. It's a draw-and-win-75% card. We are not
discusing if you can win 2 out of 3 against decks with Channel; we are
discusing whether it's good for the tournament environment for people to
lose a game, even only one game, just because the other guy draws Channel
in time.
: And you think that it is possible to cast Channel later in a game?
Yes (That'll teach 'em to ask rhetorical questions). I have UU free and a
Mana Drain in hand, my green/red buddy casts Elkin Bottle, what are you
going to do? Not counter it because he still has GGR left over? Get real.
: Well, then, what are you bitching about?
First of all, I didn't bitch. Secondly, since you didn't get your expected
answer from your rhetorical question...
: If your opponent can't lower your life total at all by then, then either
: they got a horrible draw and they are going to lose anyway, or they had
: their chance, and they deserve to die.
Just because your opponent doesn't have five more life than you do doesn't
mean that they are necessarily going to lose if you don't draw Channel.
If that were the case, people will just 'Bolt each other early and point
out that his opponent "deserves to lose" justbecause they are behind in
life at some point in the game.
: >The point is that having to worry about how your deck is laid out on the table
: > is ridiculous and unnecessary. Now if Chaos Orb is the "One Card" on which
: > all your decks' anti-lock defenses are based and you can't live without it,
: > then you have my condolances. Evolve or die.
:
: Belive me, I have plenty of ways to take care of anything. I'm not that sorry
: to see Chaos Orb go, because it's no that great of a card unless you are
: very lucky.
Destroy any permanent(s) for three colorless mana isn't that great? Boy, I
sure like to load my deck up with cards which "aren't that great."
: Even if you stack your cards, it does not make a significant diference. I've
: never spread out my cards- unless I was making fun of those freaks who think
: that they need to- and I've had plaenty of Chaos Orb flipped on me.
So people who spread out their cards are freaks now. I guess any trace of
intelligence makes you a freak in this day and age.
sj...@lehigh.edu
Newman ) writes:
>In <44rcpg$31...@ns1-1.CC.Lehigh.EDU> sj...@Lehigh.EDU writes:
>>
>>In article <1995Oct...@acad.drake.edu>, mk0...@acad.drake.edu writes:
>Cap and Mask I can see being banned for two reasons. For one thing,
>they'll slow down play a lot as your opponent digs through your entire
>library looking for and deciding on what cards to remove/put in hand.
So what? Since when does a game have to end in 2 minutes flat?
>Secondly, do you really want some guy at a tournie getting his greasy
>fingers all over your thousand dollar deck, especially if he's one of
>the "Hey, take those sleeves off" people. What happens when a Mox
>accidently gets damaged as he's rummaging through your library?
First off, I don't have a $1000 deck. Not too many people do. And if you
really value your deck that much, then why are you playing it in a tournament?
Plus if someone damages your cards you either a) beat the hell out of them or
b)take them to court. Your choice, though I recommend the latter. :-)
Besides most folks I've seen who are rich enough to afford a mox can usually
get another pretty easily.
>The DC
>doesn't want headaches like that. Are Cap and Mask too powerful? Not
>hardly. Are they too much trouble? You bet.
But that's just the point. They aren't too much trouble, plus I see no reason
why the DC should give a tinker's damn about people with overpriced decks
whining that games are taking an extra 10 minutes. I have little sympathy for
such sentiments. If they really bug you that much, play with more
counterspells and disenchants.
sj...@lehigh.edu
>> In article <450ks1$9...@ipgate.le.ac.uk>, mt...@le.ac.uk (Kung -Fu Master) writ
es:
>>>Apparently Fork is now banned, and Balance has been restricted.
>>>
>>
>> Why? There is absolutely no reason to even restrict Fork much less ban it.
>> It isn't a game unbalancing card. (I'd use them all the time if it were)
>>
>> Besides Balance being restricted is old news.
>>
>>
>>
>
>Psst, update here, RESTRICTING FORK IS OLD NEWS. Happened in May buh-dy, get
>over it. If you have four forks in a deck, yes they are overpowering.
NO SHIT restricting fork is old news. He mentioned BANNING fork. Try reading
the post sometime, works wonders for not sticking your foot in your mouth.
And no they aren't overpowering IMO. I have built several degenerate decks
recently for testing the idea that fork is overpowering and frankly it isn't,
especially once your opponent is aware of the fact that you have several of
them. Yes it can be very effective, but there are plenty of ways around it as
well. Anyway I can deal with it being restricted, but banning it would just
be stupid.
Kelemvor
Bill Stripp <bst...@interaccess.com> wrote:
>>>I really think magic players have gotten pathetic. None of these cards
>>>are bannable material. Nor should many of them be restricted. They are
>>>easily circumvented and don't dominate tourney play so why bother.--
>
>>I would just like to say "bill" is the magic god now isn't he. I say all
>>of us "pathetic" players now direct all of our questions about the game to
>>BST...@INTERACCESS.COM. He knows all and will tell all
>
>Well Matt, if you feel the need to E-mail me with questions feel free to.
>I never claimed to be an expert, I'm just observing that all of the
>banning talk is reminiscent of the 'ban the perl unicorn' thread awhile
>back. The cards we're arguing about are not nearly as ridiculous as many
>in play (time walk, moxes, etc.) I really didn't see one card in the list
>besides channel that is a real hoser, or has ever dominated tourney play.
>
>If you can tell me different, fine. I'd be happy to discuss it with you.
>However, the day an Atog/ER deck wins a tourney is the day I'll take up
>a sign with "ban xxxxxx" and picket WOTC. However, I just don't see it
>hapening. In fact I rarely see any of the cards we're talking about in
>any good tourney deck. In your other posts you do agree with me to
>some degree by pointing out that jester's cards are not all that great.
>
>As to the knows all and tells all... this is Usenet. If you don't have
>an opinion you might as well post your 'me too' and shut up. This forum
>is for opinions and I don't mind posting mine. I also think that too
>many people whine about cards because they don't use them. But, try and
>ban one that they do and they get up in arms. Bah. Pathetic, like I
>said.
>
>As a final note, I am happy to entertain all of your questions, comments
>and criticisms. I place my address in my sig so if you feel the need to
>holler at me, fine, mail away. If you're too obnoxious that's what kill
>fines are for. I advise you to do the same if you find me similarly
>offensive.
>
>Bill Stripp
>bst...@interaccess.com
>
>
>
Geez. of all the cardz that are included in ice age, you people have found
some of the worst examples, for things to be banned/restricted. Jester's
clutter is a joke. And, by the way, Enduring Renewal has won quite a few
tourneys, in minneapolis. The concordant crossroads/E.R./icatian
javelineer/farrelite priest/ashnod's altar/alabaster potion combo dominates.
Thoug I think of all of the cards, they should ban Enduring Renewal. It is
just too good. All those who deny it, can jump in a lake, for all I care.
just my $0.02. Can we abandon this topic? please?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| kron...@gold.tc.umn.edu | have an Atog, give an Atog. Need an Atog take |
| "mihn ya zavoot lenin" | an Atog! |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
do...@netcom.com
: In article <dolorDG...@netcom.com>, do...@netcom.com writes:
: >: It's simply not fair for god's sake that the beginning player
: >: with their cheap ass decks get their $1 power card *BANNED*, while Mr.
: >: suitcase blue mage still has his $1,000 deck of mana drain, time walk,
: >: time twister, lotus, mox, mox, mox, mox, mox, library of alexandria and
: >: ancenstral recall. How can a person try to get by inexpensively hope
: >: to compete any more?
: Tom Wylie commented on another thread that WotC is considering two seperate
: restricted list one the type I one for II. In any case you think having a
: channel makes a red/green type I deck competitive with a deck full of big $$$
: spoilers? Give me a break. There is no way to inexpensively make a
: competitive type I deck. This move is all about type II.
I've seen new players get past the first two rounds with their red/green
channel-ball decks. That's about it. For a new player testing the
waters of Type I, this is a decent place to start. Most move on to
bigger and better things. Some (few) just trade their butts off for a
Berserk and Mirror Universe and call it a day.
: >I think the key word here is inexpensively. Good or bad for WotC?
: Wizards makes no money off of resales which is what all the spoilers are now.
What I meant here was that in order for new players to compete, they'll
have to fork out some major cash to SOMEONE. For most this will mean
buying lots of the latest expansions to keep evolving with the rest of
us. If they want to go onto Type I, they'll have to invest in other
ways. Personally, I don't see a problem with banning Channel in Type
II. It's mainly Type I I'm concerned about.
: >Ok, Ok. So that's a bit cynical. But I really feel that the prominence
: >of Channel must be a local thing. Around here Channel-ball decks are
: >scoffed at. Channel was one of the few remaining ways for new players to
: >add speed to their decks now that Fastbond was removed. C'est la Vie.
: >Hopefully we'll see a reversal, but this will have to be hard fought.
: Why do you want a reversal so you can channel ball people to death? Green has
: more than enough fast mana to get creatures out. Why don't you check out the
: decks that played and won at the world/national champs, there are two cards,
: out of the 100's available that all of them used channel and mind twist.
Well, first, I can't remember the last time I played Channel in a deck.
I don't even recall EVER winning a game, even in friendly play, by
channel-balling someone. Of the decks I saw posted on the 'Net, I only
remembered seeing Mind Twist prominently. I can't recall if the Vise Age
deck had a Channel, but then, I must admit I usually don't notice if a
Channel was posted in the card-list. It's not something I look to see if
people are playing.
dolor
rupr...@usa1.com
>
>
>Anyone have ideas for an Ante Deck... something truly degenerate
>that sticks to Type I deck construction rules? i.e., contract
>from below, darkpact, demonic attorney... etc.
>
>-fkus...@ix.netcom.com
There's always tempest efreet/dance of many/skull of orm... or try all common/uncommon black
weenie with wheels (doesn't steal cards, but it's ridiculously fast and who cares if you lose
once in a while?)
Stephen Lil IV
: do...@netcom.com wrote:
:
: >: It's simply not fair for god's sake that the beginning player
: >: with their cheap ass decks get their $1 power card *BANNED*, while Mr.
: >: suitcase blue mage still has his $1,000 deck of mana drain, time walk,
: >: time twister, lotus, mox, mox, mox, mox, mox, library of alexandria and
: >: ancenstral recall. How can a person try to get by inexpensively hope
: >: to compete any more?
:
: Just ban the mox/lotus/timewalk/ancestrall recall/...
: ... there are 1300+ cards. Banning the most broken twenty
: of them should not be a big thing.
:
: Then type I is quite fair for everyone...
They have. It's called type 1.5.
: Petri
--
--Steve Internet: sl7...@u.cc.utah.edu
Christopher Hebhardt
>In article <453g35$e...@ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>
>sun...@ix.netcom.com (Sunny Huo ) writes:
>
>>Hey folks. I've gotten sick of my Red/Black discard
>>deck and I'm thinking of building a new Red/Black deck.
>>Anyone have any suggestions? I want to avoid the
>>following deck concepts (already played them):
>>
>>Discard/Rack
>>Land Destruction/Vice
>>Weenie Horde!
>
How about a power surge deck? Put in four power surges and several
ways to waste your excess mana. Both red and Black have good ways of using
extra mana. (carrion ants, granet gargole etc.)
Instead of a swamp walk deck, you could andd in a little blue and do
a walk deck. Giant slugs, phantasmal terrains, etc.
Or how about an unblockable deck. But in a few fears some goblin
wardrumms or a few mana flares, carrion ants and dwarven warriors.
Jeff Jackson
>: All of my read/green decks have a channel, and I hope it is not banned. I think
>: Jester's Cap, Enduring Renewal, and Zur's Weirding will need to be restricted.
>
> I hope Channel is banned. If we compare it with the other restricted cards
> (like Lotus, Moxes, Time Walk, Tutor, etc.), this is what I find out.
>
> You will in most cases win with Channel. Simply use Channel+Fireball.
> That is the reason for most of the Green-Red decks. Lotus etc. will
> help your deck and play but usually they are not the game-winners. I mean
> that they are not last 2 cards or monsters that kills your opponent.
>
> Channel is usually the last card. Have you ever seen it being used
> anything else than Fireball or something other x-blast?
>
Well, in case you haven't heard, Channel, Chaos Orb, and Falling Star
have joined the ranks of the banned.
I think you can blame Ice Age for the Channel banning. After all, the
following TWO TURN KILL is possible with a Type II deck:
Turn 1: Mountain, Orcish Lumberjack
Turn 2: Forest, cut it down for 3 green, Channel,
followed by 20 point (pick one)
Fireball, Disintegrate, Lava Burst
You can also do it this way:
Turn 1: Forest, Tinder Wall
Turn 2: Forest, sac Wall for two red, Channel, 20 point blaster
What I wonder is: they knew Ice Age was coming - why didn't they just
keep Channel OUT of 4th Edition???? Let the Type I players keep their
Channels. Who cares? Lotus and Moxes, Time Walk, etc. are still legal.
Keep Wheel of Fortune instead. Why that wasn't reprinted is anyone's guess.
Boy, has WoTC made some STRANGE card decisions this year.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Jackson "Oooh, you wascally wabid (wombat) !!"
Merit Network, Inc.
je...@merit.edu
Carl-Niclas Larsson
: Anyone have ideas for an Ante Deck... something truly degenerate
: that sticks to Type I deck construction rules? i.e., contract
: from below, darkpact, demonic attorney... etc.
: -fkus...@ix.netcom.com
A lovely combo that I think has been published in Scrye by now is Tempest
Efreet and Dance of Many. I get your card and you get my Token. Evil!
It ought to be quite well known by now though.
Cheers!
--
Carl-Niclas Larsson "Witty quote"
"y90...@student.tdb.uu.se -Me
Gary Sturgess
>> first of all, it takes 3 cards oit of library, and secondly its worse
>with copy
>> artifact and skull of orm.
>Skull of Orm doesn't do artifacts, it does enchantments. Argivian
>Archaeologist and Reconstruction are the ones that do it for artifacts.
That's true, but Copy Artifact _is_ an enchantment...
GAZZA
David Fox
>i routinely do a second turn channel juggernaught. it's quite fun just
>to see the look on my opponent's face. but seriously, now that demonic
>consultation is out and about, channels come up just about every game
>for me.
Using the DC how many times did you end up removing the Channel
within the first six cards as the DC dictates? You will die
on your next turn. Use a Diabolic Vision or something before you DC.
My 2Yen
-Dave
sj...@lehigh.edu
>> In article <1995Oct...@acad.drake.edu>, mk0...@acad.drake.edu writes:
>>>In article <456ltn$12...@ns5-1.CC.Lehigh.EDU>, sj...@Lehigh.EDU writes:
>>>> In article <450ks1$9...@ipgate.le.ac.uk>, mt...@le.ac.uk (Kung -Fu Master) wr
it
>> es:
>I was ripping on the person that said "Apparently fork is now banned, and
>balance is resticted. I really don't know where this person is getting their
>information. No one at DC has ever mentioned banning fork. It would be silly.
>It hardly compares to Shaharazad and Time Vault and Divine Intervention as far
>as being unbalancing. (by the way, he did mention restricting fork, I wasn't
>sure if he thought it was just now being restricted.) All of this talk of
>banning is silly. I can't think of a single card that should be banned, but
>isn't.
>
Then I apologize. I certainly do no not intend to rude unnecessarily.
moulds clinton
rulings for tournament play? I looked at the WotC site but
it hasn't been updated for a long time.
Or post the changes here if you have them.
Kung -Fu Master
I mean they've had moxes, lotuses, beserk, time walk, etc, I mean real
killers, for years now, so what do WoTC do they ban channel, thanks
a lot, the only cheap card that gives you some kind of chance against
a Mr. Suitcase.
Those people are unaffected really,they can fall back on other stupidly
tough (and stupidly expensive) cards for their combinations.
WoTC defy belief sometimes, they're determined to make the game exciting
by making it boring...........
Kung -Fu.
Michael Jason Lewis
}True the Chaos Orb and Falling
}Star are rules monsters. Do they dominate play? No. Are they necessary
}for every deck? No. Then why ban them?
Um...huh? 3 colorless to destroy at least one permanent of your choice?
I think we can assume safely that most people using Orbs are going to hit
what they aim at...Jeez, compare it to Desert Twister. Chaos Orb is
undoubtedly necessary for any Type I deck.
- Mike
zor...@hoover.stanford.edu
>
>On a simmilar note, I played against many orbs & stars and have had most of the
>people take out their own things instead of mine. Quite a sight to
>see.....buh-bye Juzam! And yes, I do know what it's like to have my Erhamns
>taken out of the game due to it, but life does go on. The next round you play
>your cards farther part. Anyway----I don't think it's nessecary for everyone to
>whine about playing their cards apart when they know they're facing the orb.
>If you care about winning a game, it shouldn't matter. And it's not like
>you're totally defensless against the orb either.....just disenchant the silly
>thing!
The point is people in tournaments want to win. If one of the factors that
influences the game is how far apart you spread out your cards, people will
spread out their cards. This causes headaches for tourney organizers.
Combine this with the rulings required to make the orb/star playable and you
just have a problem that is best avoided. It doesn't matter what your
experience is or mine is. The fact is people want to win tourneys and to do
that the will use every advantage, spreading out their cards, being very
technical about phases with their opponent, etc. I know the orb is fun but it
just causes headaches. Maybe someday they will come out with a new orb
reworded to be more like game of chaos or something. That would be fun...
Entropy Sphere
(2)
1 and sacrafice.
Flip a coin opponent calls heads or tails. If opponent is correct opponent
chooses a target permaneant to bury. If opponent is incorrect you choose
target permaneant. Winner of each flip may either end the effect or choose to have
another coin flip with the same effect.
>
>Cameron Hodge
>
Stephen Lil IV
: Frederick Scott (fre...@anthrax.cisco.com) wrote:
: : Monica Severa <mse...@madison.k12.wi.us> writes:
:
: : >Decks are suppose to be able to take care of minor annoyances like Channel
: : >and Chaos Orb. Obviously, your deck is to weak to handle them, or you would
: : >stop whining.
:
: : Ah, come now. If Channels and Chaos Orbs are such minor annoyances, your
: : deck will hardly miss them. A _real_ deck wouldn't....
: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: : Fred
:
: Obviously a case of someone who didn't get the point. I expect most
: people here don't rely on either card. They just have decks that can
: handle opponent's who use them. Most irate people, like myself, don't
: rely on either of those two cards. They just are pissed at the DCs
: arbitrary decision to ban these cards.
:
: There really is _NO_ reason to ban either one in terms of play value.
There are many reasons, just not very good ones.
: True the Chaos Orb and Falling Star are rules monsters.
How about:
Irrelevant Disruptor (2) Artifact
(1),tap: Run a 100-meter lap, subtract the number of seconds it takes you
to run the lap from 12 and round down. Destroy that number of target
permanents.
Standing Threat (2U) Intant
If your opponent is not standing when Standing Threat is cast, destroy
target permanent. Your opponent may not move from the declaration of
this spell to the resolution of this spell.
: Do they dominate play? No. Are they necessary for every deck? No.
Assuming that you have a Chaos Orb and can flip it with accuracy, there is
no good reason to leave it out of any deck. Every deck benefits from a
destroy-any-permanent-for-(3) spell. I mean, you can give better reasons
to leave out Ancestral Recall, Time Walk, Mox stones, and Black Lotus, but
that's not the point...and that brings us to the next question...
: Then why ban them?
I believe this has been explained to death: Chaos Orb and Falling Star are
banned because they introduce an unwanted element, the "layout of cards
and flipping skill," to the game.
: Channel never should have made the 4E cut and this is a VERY BAD WAY for
: WotC and the DC to make amends by banning it for both Type I and Type II.
: Ban it for Type II only, but leave it in Type I. It's a perfectly valid
: card and it doesn't make tournaments last any LONGER. It seems as if they
: caved to the real whiners who didn't want to deal with Channel any more.
:
: dolor
I think that Channel is banned because of the extreme element of chance it
introduces to the game. Draw it and you are almost guaranteed a victory
if you are even remotely competent. For no other spell can you honestly
say the same. There is no strategy in that and that's not how DC wants
the players to play the game.
--
--Steve Internet: sl7...@u.cc.utah.edu
"If you counter your own Standing Threat, does that mean that your opponent
may not move for the duration of the game?" --Dole Foolsdotter
Frederick Scott
>Decks are suppose to be able to take care of minor annoyances like Channel
>and Chaos Orb. Obviously, your deck is to weak to handle them, or you would
>stop whining.
Ah, come now. If Channels and Chaos Orbs are such minor annoyances, your
deck will hardly miss them. A _real_ deck wouldn't....
Fred
James Pettifer
: >I just received The Duelist #14. They ask the following
: >Should Channel be banned?
: Don't care, I usually burn anyone who plays with it, so the few
: times that it kills me is immaterial. If it is not played by
: the second turn your opponent should hold something to counter
: the inevitable.
YES channel should be and now is banned :)
: >Should the following IA cards be banned or restricted?
: >Jester's Cap
: >Jester's Mask
: Nope, if they want to drop 5 mana and then pay activation that's
: fine by me. If I can't kill them by that time or have something
: suitably dangerous then I deserve anything that happens.
hmmm . . . the cap could be very nasty in a land destruction deck
: >Enduring Renewal
: Another who really cares. Yes the Atog thing is anoying, but how
: many tourney decks are based on this? I'd say not all that many.
: If it starts to dominate tournament play then restrict it.
Say - throw ER in a white weenie deck with a few creatures out and stp in
your hand and have some fun :)
: >Zuran Orb
: Nope again. Fine burn your land to stay alive. Makes it easier
: for me to toast you in the long run. It's a big trade off to
: stay in the game and not overpowering.
Nah, not _that_ powerful. I don't really think that it is powerful enough
to restrict even
: >Zur's Weirding
: Come on. Yes you can do nasty things to people's draw, but I've
: made weirding decks and they don't do that great. Try playing a
: weenie deck against one and you'll see how good it is.
hmmm . . . yeah i have done that and _trashed_ them. The idea is just to
add it to another deck type. It is good in card denial (when opponent has
no cards and you have a rack out - very good chance of kill and _they_
cannot do anything and you can) and in Land destruction (opponent with no
land and zur's weirding is really a bit stuffed) Should be restricted
: >All of my read/green decks have a channel, and I hope it is not banned. I
: think >Jester's Cap, Enduring Renewal, and Zur's Weirding will need to be
: restricted.
Channel - Banned
Cap, ER, ZW - restricted
: I really think magic players have gotten pathetic. None of these cards
: are bannable material. Nor should many of them be restricted. They are
: easily circumvented and don't dominate tourney play so why bother.
Well none of them will totally dominate play as they will only work in
certain deck types and although they are reasonable powerful in those
deck types they are no more powerful than many in the current rest list
Monica Severa
->Monica Severa <mse...@madison.k12.wi.us> writes:
->>Decks are suppose to be able to take care of minor annoyances like
-Channel
->>and Chaos Orb. Obviously, your deck is to weak to handle them, or
-you would
->>stop whining.
->
->Ah, come now. If Channels and Chaos Orbs are such minor annoyances,
-your
->deck will hardly miss them. A _real_ deck wouldn't....
->
->Fred
Well, Freddy, if you can remember, I beleive I said that I didn't miss
them. The reason I'm still in this disccusion is because I can't beleive
the number of freaks like yourself that are afraid of Chaos Orb and
Channel. A _real_ player wouldn't be...
-Matt
Michael Jason Lewis
}
}Um..huh? I will wholeheartedly agree that if you own a Chaos Orb, you
}will most likely play it, but that alone does NOT make it a candidate for
}banning. There are many people without Chaos Orbs who are quite
}competitive in the Type I environment. Disenchants, Swords to Plowshares
}and Strip Mines can get rid of just about anything, and they're all
}cheaper to use than a Chaos Orb. Desert Twister? Come now...
1) Disenchant, StP, and Strip Mine are all narrower than Chaos Orb (at least
Disenchant has two types of uses...). Disenchant and StP force you to use
white, also. I know that with multis and such adding a color isn't a huge
problem, but it is an imposition that the Orb doesn't require.
2) I think we just have a different idea of what makes a card a candidate for
banning. I think that a card that falls into the category of "if you have one,
use it; it doesn't matter what else is in the deck" is pretty abusive. Then
again, I'm not much for the Restricted List as a concept. I tend to agree
with the other people decrying Type I as a race to find your restricted cards
first...
Hm. Maybe you're right. In the Type I environment, its power isn't out of
line with the other cards available. The space considerations do merit it
being banned, I think. Heck, maybe you'll destroy somebody's Library of
Alexandria with it.
- Mike
matt...@atcgate1.faa.ibm.com
|> ct0...@acad.drake.edu wrote:
|> :On a simmilar note, I played against many orbs & stars and have had most of
|> : see.....buh-bye Juzam! And yes, I do know what it's like to have my Erhamns
|> : taken out of the game due to it, but life does go on. The next round you
|> : play your cards farther part. Anyway----I don't think it's nessecary for
|> : everyone to whine about playing their cards apart when they know they're
|> : facing the orb. If you care about winning a game, it shouldn't matter.
|> : And it's not like you're totally defensless against the orb either.....just
|> : disenchant the silly thing!
|>
|> Can't disenchant it since it gets used as an effect in response. While I
Yup, you can. Special ruling just for Orbs and Stars on account of their
special nature. You *do* have to declare the disenchant as a response to the
Orb/Star's use in order to get this to work. Use of Orb/Star is declared.
Opponent declares he is casting a disenchant (shatter, crumble,
whatever...) on the Orb/Star in response to the use. No
more effects declared, resolve LIFO. Disenchant resolves, Orb/Star
goes to the graveyard. Orb/Star attempts to resolve. With a normal card,
no problem; killing the card doesn't prevent an already-declared effect.
But with the Orb/Star, you need the card
to *do* the effect, and you don't have the card anymore--it's in the
graveyard. Effect fizzles. That's the official WotC/DC ruling. Note that
if you disenchant before the owner declares he's using the Orb/Star, it
doesn't work; LIFO resolution means he can respond by delcaring he's using
the Orb/Star and then get to use it before the Disenchant can take it away.
|> really don't care about the Orb since I play Type II anyway, it does seem
|> like banning it was a good move. Even when played with 'gentlemans' rules,
|> it was basically 3 colorless for a desert twister. I've watched many
|> Orbs thrown and I have only seen one miss...so that's about a 99% hit
|> percentage. If they raised the throwing distance to something like 4',
|> maybe it would return to what it was intended to be in the first place...
|> a fun but not very practical card. (Like Chaos Lord and Game of Chaos)
|>
|>
|>
|>
|>
Chris Mattern
C.MA...@genie.com
Frederick Scott
>Obviously a case of someone who didn't get the point. I expect most
>people here don't rely on either card. They just have decks that can
>handle opponent's who use them. Most irate people, like myself, don't
>rely on either of those two cards. They just are pissed at the DCs
>arbitrary decision to ban these cards. There really is _NO_ reason to
>ban either one in terms of play value. True the Chaos Orb and Falling
>Star are rules monsters. Do they dominate play? No.
I don't know what you consider "dominating play" but a Desert Twister which
works as an artifact fast effect for three mana would dominate play, yes,
were it not for its rarity and the number of people like me who refused to
throw them in their decks out pure antagonism for the concept of the card.
Prior to their restriction I ran accross a number of tournament decks that
contained 4 of them that didn't particularly fit in with any theme the deck
might have had. Chaos Orb is a spoiler. Period. Falling Star is not but,
hey, that's the decision.
>Are they necessary for every deck? No. Then why ban them?
They are effective in just about every deck, yes.
>Channel never should have made the 4E cut and this is a VERY BAD WAY for
>WotC and the DC to make amends by banning it for both Type I and Type II.
>Ban it for Type II only, but leave it in Type I. It's a perfectly valid
>card and it doesn't make tournaments last any LONGER. It seems as if they
>caved to the real whiners who didn't want to deal with Channel any more.
I'm not going to defend the banning of Channel. There are reasons to ban it
but it falls into a class of cards (IMHO) that do extreme things which are
potentially easy to abuse but tend to depend on card combos to make them
work. I would like the game better without Channel but it's a matter of
personal taste.
As for being irate, there's over 1000 cards in this game. They banned three.
Maybe they're three that you happen to like to so you're annoyed but it's
not very important. Use other cards.
Fred
do...@netcom.com
: }True the Chaos Orb and Falling
: }Star are rules monsters. Do they dominate play? No. Are they necessary
: Um...huh? 3 colorless to destroy at least one permanent of your choice?
: I think we can assume safely that most people using Orbs are going to hit
: what they aim at...Jeez, compare it to Desert Twister. Chaos Orb is
: undoubtedly necessary for any Type I deck.
Um..huh? I will wholeheartedly agree that if you own a Chaos Orb, you
will most likely play it, but that alone does NOT make it a candidate for
banning. There are many people without Chaos Orbs who are quite
competitive in the Type I environment. Disenchants, Swords to Plowshares
and Strip Mines can get rid of just about anything, and they're all
cheaper to use than a Chaos Orb. Desert Twister? Come now...
dolor
Ryan John Cousineau
>mk0...@acad.drake.edu wrote:
>[Munched]
>Three non-ante cards have been banned.
>And
><Fanfare>
>Time Vault: Tap to gain an extra turn. To untap, skip a turn. Comes
>into play tapped. Too unbalanced; twiddle could be used to untap it.
>Even more unbalanced with I.A.'s Elder Druid and Infuse (probably a
>couple of others, too.).
I think the traditional thing to do with Time Vault was to Animate
Artifact it, then put Instill Energy on the poor thing and play with
yourself. Forever. Pretty good combo, really.
--
Ryan Cousineau, rcou...@sfu.ca // This message sponsored by
'89 Yamaha FZR400 Special: Jenny // \\ //ired <<<ola
'82 Yamaha Vision 550: Black Pig // \X/
// Wired Cola: It's CyberMorphic!
--
Ryan Cousineau, rcou...@sfu.ca // This message sponsored by
'89 Yamaha FZR400 Special: Jenny // \\ //ired <<<ola
'82 Yamaha Vision 550: Black Pig // \X/
// Wired Cola: It's CyberMorphic!
Jeff Dobberpuhl
<tho...@stud.unit.no> writes:
>
>The problem with the Efreet combination is that the player will most
likely
>sacrifice ten life to counter the effect. After all Skull of
Orm+Tempest
>Efreet+Dance of Many will take all his cards ....
>
So thats a problem?
Michael Jason Lewis
} I don't have the room n most of my decks for a Chaos Orb. Its too
}arbitrary. I've seen many of my opponents cards cards destroyed by his own orb.
Then your opponents aren't very good at using the Orb. Fact is, around here
people _do_ _not_ _miss_. Yes, that means they've practiced. Honestly, you
put in a few hours of doing it and it really is destroy a permanent for 3.
}They way I see it is that I would much rather draw a card that goes to the
}theme of my deck, than one that doesn't, nuff said.
How many of your decks never ever need to destroy one of your opponent's
permanents? I mean, jeez, how many decks have a theme of "take an extra
turn"? That's not a theme concept, it's just a Good Thing To Do.
- Mike
Pyromancer
HCS...@uacsc2.albany.edu wrote:
> In article <451qpo$10...@hearst.cac.psu.edu>
> cek...@psu.edu (Charles E. Kostick) writes:
>
> >
> >i routinely do a second turn channel juggernaught. it's quite fun just
> >to see the look on my opponent's face. but seriously, now that demonic
> >consultation is out and about, channels come up just about every game
> >for me.
>
>
> ever see someone channel 16 life to cast and use an alladins ring to kill your
> serra, the stream of life back up to 15 next turn? not a pretty sight.
>
>
>
>
The best use for channel is 1 - 4 black vise, channel brain geyser
opponent.
Pyromancer
William R. Brickles III
In a previous article, mk0...@acad.drake.edu () says:
>In article <45h32e$f...@elaine17.Stanford.EDU>, tr...@leland.Stanford.EDU (Michael Jason Lewis) writes:
>> In article <dolorDG...@netcom.com>, <do...@netcom.com> wrote:
>> }True the Chaos Orb and Falling
>> }Star are rules monsters. Do they dominate play? No. Are they necessary
>> }for every deck? No. Then why ban them?
>>
>> Um...huh? 3 colorless to destroy at least one permanent of your choice?
>> I think we can assume safely that most people using Orbs are going to hit
>> what they aim at...Jeez, compare it to Desert Twister. Chaos Orb is
>> undoubtedly necessary for any Type I deck.
>>
>>
> I don't have the room n most of my decks for a Chaos Orb. Its too
>arbitrary. I've seen many of my opponents cards cards destroyed by his own orb.
>They way I see it is that I would much rather draw a card that goes to the
>theme of my deck, than one that doesn't, nuff said.
>
>
OK, I don't know what either of these cards exactly do, but I get a
feeling that the Chaos Orb is the card I heard a story about. If it's
the one where you drop it and it destroys whatever cards it touches,
then it is.
Here's the story and I tend not to believe it, but it just may work for
the desperate. This boy was in the final round of a tournament playing
for like a bunch of good cards. In a tight game, he got out the Chaos
Orb. But what he did with it was the strangest part. He casts it and
when he went to play it instead of just dropping it, he ripped it to
pieces and then dropped it piece by piece, thus eliminating his
opponents entire table just about. He went on to win very quickly.
Now, lemme remind you that I didn't witness this but I simply heard it.
It sounds kinda fishy, but, is it legal?
Stephen Lil IV
: In article <45go5q$o...@cronkite.cisco.com>, fre...@anthrax.cisco.com (Frederick Scott) writes:
: > Monica Severa <mse...@madison.k12.wi.us> writes:
: >
: >>Decks are suppose to be able to take care of minor annoyances like Channel
: >>and Chaos Orb. Obviously, your deck is to weak to handle them, or you would
: >>stop whining.
: >
: > Ah, come now. If Channels and Chaos Orbs are such minor annoyances, your
: > deck will hardly miss them. A _real_ deck wouldn't....
: >
: >
:
: My real deck would hardly miss the channel. Sure it kills every once in a
: while, but not that often.
As in damn near every time you draw it.
--
--Steve Internet: sl7...@u.cc.utah.edu