TheManaDrain.com
April 24, 2018, 01:55:24 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Old School Magic in New York! New Website & Format!  (Read 2555 times)
Changster
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 155



View Profile
« on: March 18, 2016, 02:00:26 pm »

Attention all Old School MTG players on the East Coast!

We have launched the New York Old School MTG site!  In the coming months leading up to NYSE Open IV, there will be a few Old School events held at The Geekery HQ, The Comic Book Depot, Inc., & A Store of Fire and Dice using this format.  In a attempt to recapture the nostalgic olden days of the game, it features the standard Old School rules of mana burn, stacking damage, an older B&R list, and an Overtime Armageddon Clock.  Thanks to everyone who helped make this possible with their great feedback and suggestions.

Time to jam some organized Old School!!!  Very Happy

Check out our site:  http://newyorkoldschool.tumblr.com/
Logged

2006 Legacy Champion
2005 Vintage Champion

@RolandMTG on Twitter
Smmenen
2007 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 6392


Smmenen
View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: March 18, 2016, 09:08:12 pm »

Nice!

You guys could also link to the NorCal Old School rules: http://www.eudogames.com/magic/160228-old-school-magic



Logged

Katzby
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 90

katznjamr0
View Profile
« Reply #2 on: March 19, 2016, 10:09:38 pm »

I really, really hate that both of these formats allow CE.  I'm not thrilled about allowing FBB cards, either.

93/94 was evidently orginally intended as a "hardcore" throwback format and to restore an old school sense of making a serious investment to be able to play (a non-budget deck) that absolutely was a part of Magic's early culture.  I feel like the various US-based versions of the format are downright bastardized versions of this good idea; the people that think of the NorCal or Eternal Central Old School formats as "hardcore" are just lying to themselves, IMO.  In actuality, these are budget formats that have a barrier to entry marginally higher than that of Legacy.

Anyway, what's with the weird errata on Howling Mine?

Quote
Howling Mine (2)
Artifact
At the beginning of each playerís draw step, if Howling Mine is untapped, that player draws an additional card.

This actually matches the current Oracle text on the card.  What's the point?
« Last Edit: March 19, 2016, 10:44:15 pm by Katzby » Logged
fsecco
Basic User
**
Posts: 560



View Profile Email
« Reply #3 on: March 20, 2016, 10:24:49 am »

That's really elitist of you Katzby. I don't like allowing Chronicles, because those cards are ugly as hell. Other than that, I see no problem at all. FBB and CE are very expensive anyway, and hard to find. Also, as far as a throwback to good old days, they do exactly that visually, so I see no problem at all. Specially since the format is growing and stuff are getting so expensive that "barrier to entry marginally higher than that of Legacy" couldn't be less accurate.
Logged
diophan
Basic User
**
Posts: 185


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: March 20, 2016, 12:16:14 pm »

In actuality, these are budget formats that have a barrier to entry marginally higher than that of Legacy.

In what world is a set of power to play a blue deck a marginal cost?
Logged
fsecco
Basic User
**
Posts: 560



View Profile Email
« Reply #5 on: March 20, 2016, 06:12:45 pm »

In actuality, these are budget formats that have a barrier to entry marginally higher than that of Legacy.

In what world is a set of power to play a blue deck a marginal cost?
I think he meant if people allow CE and IE.
Logged
Smmenen
2007 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 6392


Smmenen
View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: March 20, 2016, 08:59:21 pm »

I really, really hate that both of these formats allow CE.  I'm not thrilled about allowing FBB cards, either.

93/94 was evidently orginally intended as a "hardcore" throwback format and to restore an old school sense of making a serious investment to be able to play (a non-budget deck) that absolutely was a part of Magic's early culture.

No.  Old School Magic formats, including 93/94, were intended to give people a space to experience old school formats, whose metagames, strategies, and dynamics greatly different from that of constructed formats today.  The Swedish group indeed tried to maximize "pimpness," etc and keep the barrier to entry higher, but what you are saying is patently false.

Moreover, the Swedish groups have long encouraged various budget decks, like WW.

Quote

 I feel like the various US-based versions of the format are downright bastardized versions of this good idea;

Well, that's your mistake - the US versions didn't arise as bad variants of Swedish versions.  The first US "Throwback" tournaments were held years ago, and without knowledge of the Swedish groups.  Nor is there only one "good idea." 

I'd argue, and I think more would agree with me than you on this point, that the point of the formats is to give players a feel for the metagames and power levels of Old School magic - formats that no longer exist - not to try to recreate the dynamics of money and investment that existed then and today. 

Quote

 the people that think of the NorCal or Eternal Central Old School formats as "hardcore" are just lying to themselves, IMO.  In actuality, these are budget formats that have a barrier to entry marginally higher than that of Legacy.


What's "hardcore" about the format isn't the barrier to entry - but the attempt to preserve the vision and feel of what the Type I metagame felt like in 1994 or 1995 or even 1996 (for those version that permit cards from those years).   It has to do with what it felt like with T1 Juzam or Hypnotic Scepter was a devastating play.  Or what it's like to be Sceptre locked.   It has nothing to do with budgets.  You miss the point entirely. 


Logged

Katzby
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 90

katznjamr0
View Profile
« Reply #7 on: March 20, 2016, 10:12:41 pm »

Quote
What's "hardcore" about the format isn't the barrier to entry - but the attempt to preserve the vision and feel of what the Type I metagame felt like in 1994 or 1995 or even 1996 (for those version that permit cards from those years).   It has to do with what it felt like with T1 Juzam or Hypnotic Scepter was a devastating play.  Or what it's like to be Sceptre locked.   It has nothing to do with budgets.  You miss the point entirely.  

No, I don't think you are right.  Is there something you think I'm misunderstand here?

http://oldschool-mtg.blogspot.com/p/historik.html?m=0

Quote
93/94, Old School Mtg, started 2007 in the casual Magic scene in Gothenburg, Sweden, and have since grown with players across the world. A total of seven sets are allowed in the format; Alpha, Beta, Unlimited, Arabian Nights, Antiquities, Legends and The Dark. Non-English versions and reprints after Unlimited are considered proxies, and 93/94 is not played with proxies. The hard, time consuming and expensive road to build most decks is considered an important feature of the format. You play with what you own, and try to find what you need.

Furthermore, if you don't think artificially high barrier to entry is an intended feature of the format, I'd love for you to explain why it is that the Swedish rules disallow stuff like Revised.  If you think it's all about "pimpness" as you've said above, then why not allow, say, FBB?  That was certainly considered pretty fancy back in the olden days that I can remember.

I agree that the format is intended to recapture the feel of the original early 90s MTG scene, as you say, but I fail to see why you seem to think this isn't supposed to include the dynamic of card scarcity and high required personal investment that was every bit a part of the format as getting Scepter-locked.  Granted, the $$$ isn't viewed as a good thing by many players (and I might point out that getting Scepter locked isn't very positive experience, either), but it seems to be pretty explicitly made clear in the part I quoted.

The US takes on organized old school Magic- formats that are only slightly more exclusive than Legacy- simply appear to have different goals from the Swedish one- a format far more exclusive than even Vintage.  The difference in exclusivity, primarily due to the difference in attitudes toward CE, make the US versions a lot less interesting to me, though. It might not surprise you that I've also never been a fan of Vintage proxy events, either.
Logged
fsecco
Basic User
**
Posts: 560



View Profile Email
« Reply #8 on: March 20, 2016, 10:18:27 pm »

Yeah, so you should just stop posting in this topic, since we're here to discuss the wonders of Old School Magic, "hardcore" or not. Enforcing only original editions also helps the price boom we're witnessing, and makes the format even smaller. If you want exclusivity go to a VIP club or something.

About the Armageddon Clock rule, is it meant to be balanced or just fun? Smile
I wonder if there isn't a way to cheat that. Mirror Universe would become pretty good on extra time.
Logged
Katzby
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 90

katznjamr0
View Profile
« Reply #9 on: March 20, 2016, 10:22:39 pm »

I thought we were discussing the differences between the formats and which we preferred?  That's why I started posting in the thread.

Just because you don't agree with me- and I'm well aware that my opinion about this puts me in the extreme minority- isn't a good reason to tell me to stop posting.  Doing that doesn't change my opinion.
Logged
Smmenen
2007 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 6392


Smmenen
View Profile WWW
« Reply #10 on: March 20, 2016, 11:44:39 pm »

Quote
What's "hardcore" about the format isn't the barrier to entry - but the attempt to preserve the vision and feel of what the Type I metagame felt like in 1994 or 1995 or even 1996 (for those version that permit cards from those years).   It has to do with what it felt like with T1 Juzam or Hypnotic Scepter was a devastating play.  Or what it's like to be Sceptre locked.   It has nothing to do with budgets.  You miss the point entirely.  

No, I don't think you are right.  Is there something you think I'm misunderstand here?

http://oldschool-mtg.blogspot.com/p/historik.html?m=0

Quote
93/94, Old School Mtg, started 2007 in the casual Magic scene in Gothenburg, Sweden, and have since grown with players across the world. A total of seven sets are allowed in the format; Alpha, Beta, Unlimited, Arabian Nights, Antiquities, Legends and The Dark. Non-English versions and reprints after Unlimited are considered proxies, and 93/94 is not played with proxies. The hard, time consuming and expensive road to build most decks is considered an important feature of the format. You play with what you own, and try to find what you need.


Yes, there is something you are misunderstanding.

You are reading a one sentence blurb on a website from a European Group, and then ascribing that specific elements to the broader universe of communities with similar interests.  Why are you citing that website to support what *you* like about Old School Magic?

There are many reasons that people play Old School.  But, for the communities of interest that I am aware of and interact with, the element you deem to be "most important" probably does not even make the top 3.  

See: http://www.vintagemagic.com/blog/back-to-the-future-an-introduction-to-old-school-magic/

As I said:

Quote
Old school Magic is the perfect setting for not only learning about the history of the game, but experiencing it firsthand. Itís a place where you may not only explore the past, but relive it. In Old School Magic, history is no longer a dry lesson, but a playground. Itís a place where cards like Juzam Djinn, Mirror Universe, Serra Angel, and the great beasts and artifacts of yore, long superseded by more powerful creations, still reign supreme.

Old School Magic is a venue where you can act out your favorite strategies and historical moments.ďThe DeckĒ is not simply an artifact of history, but a fierce weapon to be used against your friends and enemies. It is a place where Necropotence is not a just a catchphrase or a symbol but a real strategy, and where one of the most feared and exciting combination in the game is Channel-Fireball.

There are many reasons that people play Old School.  I would rank (in no particular order): 1) flavor, 2) nostalgia, 3) different metagame dynamics than exist in modern Magic, 4) an interest in history, etc., 5) original art aesthetics as all more important than the "struggle" to acquire cards.  

Quote

Furthermore, if you don't think artificially high barrier to entry is an intended feature of the format, I'd love for you to explain why it is that the Swedish rules disallow stuff like Revised.  

By "The Format" you are referring to Swedish 93/94, but that is not the same thing as "Old School Magic."  

I define Old School Magic as follows:

Quote
Old School Magic refers to a broad class of historical formats or derivations thereof. It is any format that features sets of the past and excludes recently printed sets. In that sense, itís the opposite of Standard (or, perhaps more accurately, the anti-Standard), which only permits recent sets, while accommodating nearly infinite variety. Virtually any Vintage format of the past or its predecessors (such as Type I, or simply the original Constructed Magic format) count as Old School Magic. Specific examples include the constructed Magic format played at the first Magic World Championship, and the Type I format as of January 1, 1995. However, it may also refer to non-historical formats, formats such as the Type II format from the 1995 World Championship with a different Banned and Restricted List, or a Commander variant permitting only sets legal through Alliances.

The most well-known expression of Old School Magic is: 93/94.

As I said in my article, that is merely one of an infinite number of expressions of Old School magic.  They disallow Revised for flavor reasons as much as exclusivity/elitism.  Revised detracts, in their view, from the full richness experienced when playing the format because it is not as aesthetically attractive.  They are in the minority view on that point.

Quote
If you think it's all about "pimpness" as you've said above, then why not allow, say, FBB?  That was certainly considered pretty fancy back in the olden days that I can remember.

I agree that the format is intended to recapture the feel of the original early 90s MTG scene, as you say, but I fail to see why you seem to think this isn't supposed to include the dynamic of card scarcity and high required personal investment that was every bit a part of the format as getting Scepter-locked.  

Because that wasn't true for everyone.  I played in a community of players from 1993-95 where everyone in my group - about a dozen high school friends of mine - had every card we wanted. I never really faced resource constraints of the kind you described.  I had a fully Beta variant of The Deck I played (and designed myself) in 1994 and 1995 in many tournaments in the midwest when I was just 14 and 15. I can remember playing in many local and regional tournaments, like Orb Con, prepubescent, with a fully powered and Beta-fied UW control deck.  

Moreover, it's not about what is "supposed" to or "not supposed to."  Your incredibly rigid and narrow view of what's happening here is I think part of the problem.  There are many different goals and many different ways of achieving those goals.  Some communities emphasize scarcity; some don't.  Scarcity is by definition part of the format, but Revised was released in 1994, even before the Dark.   For those communities that wish to emphasize the other goals first and foremost, then permitting Revised is a perfectly reasonable trade off, and not a "bastardization."   That's just ridiculous.    

Quote

Granted, the $$$ isn't viewed as a good thing by many players (and I might point out that getting Scepter locked isn't very positive experience, either), but it seems to be pretty explicitly made clear in the part I quoted.

Yes it is.  But your error is assuming that every Old School community seeks the same goals.  There are many reasons to play Old School.

Quote

The US takes on organized old school Magic- formats that are only slightly more exclusive than Legacy- simply appear to have different goals from the Swedish one- a format far more exclusive than even Vintage.  The difference in exclusivity, primarily due to the difference in attitudes toward CE, make the US versions a lot less interesting to me, though. It might not surprise you that I've also never been a fan of Vintage proxy events, either.

You are entitled to your subjective opinion on that point - but you are not entitled to conclude that any other format is just a "bastardization" of what Old School is or should be.  That's just your opinion, and not an objective assessment.  

Personally, I think CE/IE are really nice.  The cards tend to be of higher quality condition, and have the rich flavor that brings Alpha and Beta into the format.  I would much rather look at a CE Black Lotus than an Unlimited one.  Don't others agree?  

« Last Edit: March 21, 2016, 11:11:19 pm by Smmenen » Logged

Katzby
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 90

katznjamr0
View Profile
« Reply #11 on: March 21, 2016, 03:55:21 am »

(I'm not gonna quote everything you've said as you've done for me, 'cause I don't have a lot more to say.  I'm mindful of the problems with quoting out of context, but I'm trying to be fair, anyway.)

Quote
You are reading a one sentence blurb on a website from a European Group, and then ascribing that specific elements to the broader universe of communities with similar interests.  Why are you citing that website to support what *you* like about Old School Magic?

In my first post, I was talking about what the Swedish 93-94 group originally intended, which was my basis for calling one format a pale imitation of another.  I was talking specifically about 93-94, which is what the Swedish group calls the format, after all.  In your response, I thought you were telling me that that wasn't what the Swedish group intended.  You specifically mentioned 93-94 by name.  That's the only reason that I quoted that other site.  I wasn't trying to say that also applied to the US formats.  Rereading this thread, I can see that there has been some miscommunication.

Quote
Yes it is.  But your error is assuming that every Old School community seeks the same goals.  There are many reasons to play Old School.

When did I ever say that?  In a previous post, I even said that the different formats have different goals, didn't I?

Quote
You are entitled to your subjective opinion on that point - but you are not entitled to conclude that any other format is just a "bastardization" of what Old School is or should be.  That's just your opinion, and not an objective assessment.  

But that's just silly.  Come now, of course I am entitled to conclude that one format is just a ""bastardization"" of another.  Surely you aren't saying that I'm not entitled to my own opinion, here, right? Also, whenever anybody says anything in the Internet, isn't it already pretty obvious that that it's just a subjective opinion?  You should mentally add "I think that..." to the start of every sentence you read (including this one).  I would think you already know this and so it's very awkward for me to even point it out.  So, what exactly is the point of calling attention to the subjectivity of what I've said?  When do you think I ever represented myself as objectively right?

I agree that I have an opinion that not many people in the US share and one that's probably pretty hard to identify with by readers of this site.  You're not telling me anything I didn't already know.  But TMD isn't a hive mind- I don't see why anything I'm saying here is so incindiary.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2016, 04:50:19 am by Katzby » Logged
Changster
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 155



View Profile
« Reply #12 on: March 21, 2016, 09:18:49 am »

@Katzby - Sorry that you feel like that about the new fun variation of the format we've created here in the US.  I totally get why you consider it a bastardization of the European format, but what's the point of a format (or even a game, for that matter) to exist if no one can access cards to play? 

While I completely respect and appreciate what the Swedes have done for the promotion of Old School formats, US formats reveal an evolution of Old School.  Locally at tournaments between rounds, we promote the fun and intrigue it brings to those actively playing it and even bystanders curious to see these older relics being cast and played.  The Swedes may have their hardcore format, but years down the line, I guarantee you that they will grow tired of the same card pool and stagnant player base.  Even US Old School is at risk of this, considering most players want to play, but the supply of the older cards (even through FBB, FE & Chronicles) is continually shrinking.  The whole point of New York Old School Magic is to help generate future and further appreciation of the older sets. 

Lastly, just because you hate this format, it does not suddenly empower you tear it down.  For example, while I may not like Modern, I do not go out of my way to knock it.

@Smmenen - I've added that link to NorCal Old School in the Links sidebar of the site.  Thank you for letting me know the correct link to use.

@fsecco - The Armageddon Clock Overtime rule was put in place so we could potentially have a more finite resolution to ongoing long matches.  You make a pretty solid point about Mirror Universe and its power to make things tricky toward the end.  If that particular situation arises in overtime, I would consider that a success.
Logged

2006 Legacy Champion
2005 Vintage Champion

@RolandMTG on Twitter
Smmenen
2007 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 6392


Smmenen
View Profile WWW
« Reply #13 on: March 21, 2016, 01:38:16 pm »

(I'm not gonna quote everything you've said as you've done for me, 'cause I don't have a lot more to say.  I'm mindful of the problems with quoting out of context, but I'm trying to be fair, anyway.)


I also am mindful of any problems with quoting, but use quotes in order to help readers know exactly what I am responding to.

Quote

Quote
You are reading a one sentence blurb on a website from a European Group, and then ascribing that specific elements to the broader universe of communities with similar interests.  Why are you citing that website to support what *you* like about Old School Magic?

In my first post, I was talking about what the Swedish 93-94 group originally intended,

This is my point: why?  What this New York format, or any other format, have to do with that exactly, other than being another expression of Old School?  You came out of the gates saying:
Quote
I really, really hate that both of these formats allow CE.  I'm not thrilled about allowing FBB cards, either.

So, you hate formats that permit CE, etc.   In doing so, it reads as an attack on this New York variant that is the subject of this thread, as well as the Norcal and EC communites you also mentioned in your post.  Yet, my point, which I think you finally understand, is that you were ascribing the interests and goals of the Swedish group to all of these other communities, and then, in rather inflammatory language, condemning these other groups.  

Taking you at your word, that you were simply judging these other formats on what "The swedish group intended," you must have been assuming that all of these communities shared the Swedish group's goals.  But there is absolutely no reason to assume that.  That's simply unwarranted.  

Nor, I should add, is there any reason to assume that the quotes you've taken from Magnus' blog should be taken as the consensus views of the entire Swedish group.  They may not have been parsing their views that finely.  

Quote
which was my basis for calling one format a pale imitation of another.  I was talking specifically about 93-94, which is what the Swedish group calls the format, after all.  In your response, I thought you were telling me that that wasn't what the Swedish group intended.  You specifically mentioned 93-94 by name.  That's the only reason that I quoted that other site.  I wasn't trying to say that also applied to the US formats.  Rereading this thread, I can see that there has been some miscommunication.

Indeed.  In your opening post you began by saying "these formats." These formats include the 93/94 Swedish Group, but also include those that are not created by and for that group.  Therefore, by your own words, you were drawing conclusions and making judgements on behalf of a much broader class of formats.

You were condemning any Old School format that permits CE/IE.  And on fairly absurd terms, as well.

Consider: the fact that you place so much importance on the "struggle" compared to the many other magnificent benefits/goals that I listed in my previous post that flow from Old school Magic is, imo, strange, to say the least.  It's like enjoying Opera primarily for the choreography or scenery rather than the music or performances. It's not impossible to comprehend; it just misses the point.  

Quote

Quote
You are entitled to your subjective opinion on that point - but you are not entitled to conclude that any other format is just a "bastardization" of what Old School is or should be.  That's just your opinion, and not an objective assessment.  

But that's just silly.  Come now, of course I am entitled to conclude that one format is just a ""bastardization"" of another.  Surely you aren't saying that I'm not entitled to my own opinion, here, right? Also, whenever anybody says anything in the Internet, isn't it already pretty obvious that that it's just a subjective opinion?  You should mentally add "I think that..." to the start of every sentence you read (including this one).  I would think you already know this and so it's very awkward for me to even point it out.  So, what exactly is the point of calling attention to the subjectivity of what I've said?  When do you think I ever represented myself as objectively right?

I think you are confused on the difference between an opinion and an argument/assertion.  This is Logic 101 (literally - as in, it would be taught in any introductory logic course.)  

An argument or assertion is a claim.  Claims, under the rules of logic, are subject to dispute and require support.  Support can be offered in the form of either empirical evidence or reasoning (such as mathmatical or deductive reasoning).  Opinions ("I like Ice Cream") do not require support for validity. Claims/arguments do.  

(I should add that adding "I think" or "I feel" to a statement does not render a claim a mere opinion.  Whether a statement is a claim or an opinion is determined by it's substance, not it's framing).

You said:

Quote
the various US-based versions of the format are downright bastardized versions of this good idea

This is a claim.  In order for the claim to be true, then the premises must also be true, and the conclusion must flow from the premises.  My main point in this thread, in responding to you, has been to demonstrate a flaw in the premise, that the formats share the same goal.  They don't.  Therefore, I am contesting your claim.  

Quote
I agree that I have an opinion that not many people in the US share and one that's probably pretty hard to identify with by readers of this site.  You're not telling me anything I didn't already know.  But TMD isn't a hive mind- I don't see why anything I'm saying here is so incindiary.

It's because your argument was both based upon a mistaken (erroneous) premise, as well as the inflammatory tone of your post (the use of words like "bastardization," "lying to themselves," etc.).
« Last Edit: March 21, 2016, 01:57:47 pm by Smmenen » Logged

eliotd
Basic User
**
Posts: 33


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: March 21, 2016, 06:39:23 pm »

I don't really want to wade into most of this back and forth but I will just say...

Personally, I think CE/IE are really nice.  The cards tend to be of higher quality condition, and have the rich flavor that brings Alpha and Beta into the format.  I would much rather look at a CE Black Lotus than an Unlimited one.  Don't others agree?  

...no. I'd prefer to see CE over Revised, for example for things like Jayemdae Tome, where getting a Beta or even Unlimited playset would be very obnoxiously expensive at this point. But I'd personally rather see Unlimited over CE as it feels more "real" to me. But certainly just a personal opinion that I know is not necessarily shared by all! Smile

Also on the general point I'll just add, kudos for starting the NY group and hope you guys have as much fun and success as we are having in Northern CA.

And since I can't help myself, to weigh in on the point of contention here, I'm glad to support CE/Revised/Chronicles in order to broaden the player base. It's hard enough even allowing those sets to get more than a handful of players together at any given time/place, so I think restricting to just the "hardcore" Swedish allowed sets would be shooting all of us, including those who have Beta everything, in the foot. I'd much rather be able to play more matches against a greater variety of decks than be beholden to the most "pure" form of throwback elitism. I take the "pimpness" factor as a personal challenge to incrementally improve the aesthetic appeal and collecting accomplishment of my own decks, but I certainly don't begrudge opponents who want to participate but have less insane spending priorities.
Logged
fsecco
Basic User
**
Posts: 560



View Profile Email
« Reply #15 on: March 22, 2016, 03:00:34 pm »

And since I can't help myself, to weigh in on the point of contention here, I'm glad to support CE/Revised/Chronicles in order to broaden the player base. It's hard enough even allowing those sets to get more than a handful of players together at any given time/place, so I think restricting to just the "hardcore" Swedish allowed sets would be shooting all of us, including those who have Beta everything, in the foot. I'd much rather be able to play more matches against a greater variety of decks than be beholden to the most "pure" form of throwback elitism. I take the "pimpness" factor as a personal challenge to incrementally improve the aesthetic appeal and collecting accomplishment of my own decks, but I certainly don't begrudge opponents who want to participate but have less insane spending priorities.
Exactly. Even Sol'kanar is hard to find these days.
Logged
TheMonadNomad
Basic User
**
Posts: 82


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: March 22, 2016, 04:43:28 pm »

Do tapped blockers still deal damage in this version of old school?  It's an oft forgotten rule that was in place in the beginning of the game (tapped blocking creatures don't deal combat damage) that could be important if running something like Icatian Javelineers or Icy Manipulator...
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.073 seconds with 20 queries.