![]() ( ) is similar to Legends' mana costs, an ensample being ?) are backwards from what we see today, yet are all constant. Hazezon Tamar) have the same colour ordering.Īll of the two-colour combinations (except for Oddly enough, all of the four Naya legends ( , oddly adheres to what we see today of the ordering, being. More important is the second for the sake of this comment. The set of Legends introduced both Legendary creatures and multi-coloured cards into the game. S acted exactly in that capacity, as hard removal for commanders. I don't know exactly when EDH was conceived, or the precise moment it was posted online, but I know it's at least as old as 2007, so for at least 5 years EDH predates M14, the set that changed the rule from the "all are lost" to the current system. "could you imagine a clone deck keeping everyone's commanders boxed?" Nor is it destroyed, which is sometimes confused as well. What you are thinking of us that a creature that dies to the legend rule is not “sacrificedâ€. Were honestly always bad, even for their time. ![]() It's easy to look back at old cards and think "well times were different" but like nah, cards like I'll never understand what possessed them at the time to make cards with an inherent downside even worse. This rule was fine because at the time legendary cards kinda sucked they were difficult to cast and had high upkeep demandsįor the most part yeah. In a more competitive setting, I guess leave it to the judges to explain pre-tournament and adjucate as needed? That's outside of my expertise. It can be difficult to determine whether conceding is done tactically, spitefully, or simply to cut losses, and having a pre-match conversation can settle these issues, so that's a point I strongly agree with. But assuming a modicum of decency, I think conceding should be available at any time, within the agreement of the group. Obviously, conceding shouldn't be done yelling and tableflipping. I don't claim to have objectively correct answers to these questions, but I think they add some needed nuance to the central question of when someone can concede to another person's detriment. Is Barktooth free to gracefully and respectfully concede, forcing Jedit to attack the remaining available player? During Jedit's first main phase, before Jedit attacks, Barktooth Warbeard gets a critical removal spell countered and decides this game is unwinnable. Is it fair play to concede a game if it forces another player into a line of action? Marisi, Breaker of the Coil Combat Control goads Jedit Ojanen into attacking. Is it fair play to concede if a player can reasonably expect to be unable to proceed, if an opponent is relying on their presence? If Sen Triplets Stax has stripped all artifact removal from The Lady of the Mountain's deck through Sadistic Sacrament and has taken control of nearly all of The Lady's permanents, can The Lady concede on the grounds that she reasonably believes she can't win, even though it would cost Triplets some key blockers? barely hanging on at 4 life and built up a Fervored board this turn? Is it fair play to concede in response to being attacked? If Gahiji, Honored One Beatdown attacks Tobias Andrion with a Titanic Ultimatum and enough creatures to defeat Tobias, can Tobias concede immediately to avoid the lifelink damage? Does the answer change whether Gahiji is dominating the match at 300 life + board vs. The issue is "when is quitting the game right to do?" Instead of directly answering, I'd like to add some supplemental questions, based on this thread and my own thoughts. That player loses the game."īut the legality of concession isn't really the issue here. A player who concedes leaves the game immediately. And 104.3a very much says a player can dip out of it all: "A player can concede the game at any time. Refusing to vote on Expropriate, then continuing to play, is disrespectful and illegal. Conceding with a tantrum is disrespectful, but legal. However, I see the following: conceding gracefully is respectful and legal. Good game, and well played," would that still be an issue? I understand that the game flow can be radically changed by who's present and available. If, hypothetically, the other player said "I'm afraid I have no chance at winning, I concede. But I take special exception to the tantrum. "he only other valid player threw a tantrum & left the game" is not good play. Gleeock I haven't gotten in a multiplayer game with randoms for years now, I've never played cEDH, and I don't actually have a regular group at the moment (frustration and sadness), so I'm probably out of touch with actual multiplayer reality.Īll the same, though, I have a couple of responses. New Social Contract Breach Discussion 3 months ago
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |