I'm excited! I think...

[xXx]

http://photos-e.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs398.snc3/24179_10150162248750705_687210704_11449693_5711304_n.jpg

Discuss.

[ProphetKing]

what the fuck

seriously?

[xXx]

Yes. It's the first of October's 2010 block. Along with Mirrodin Pure and New Phyrexia.

EDIT: Yes, NEW PHYREXIA.

[xXx]

Not sure what is gonna happen. I'm hoping for busted.

[ProphetKing]

Not enough time has passed for me to get nostalgic and all happy about this block that was all about stupid aggro and getting shit banned.

Then again, considering today's standards, Raffinity probably isn't that unreasonable.

[ProphetKing]

Yes. It's the first of October's 2010 block. Along with Mirrodin Pure and New Phyrexia.

EDIT: Yes, NEW PHYREXIA.New Phyrexia?

Fuck, I am legitimately interested.

[xXx]

Not enough time has passed for me to get nostalgic and all happy about this block that was all about stupid aggro and getting shit banned.

Then again, considering today's standards, Raffinity probably isn't that unreasonable.

It probably won't be Raffinity. It probably won't even be close in terms of power level. Then again, artifacts tend to be busted. In any case, WotC will be careful this time around. They lost a lot last time.

[Tony3]

I'm interested.

[ProphetKing]

It probably won't be Raffinity. It probably won't even be close in terms of power level. Then again, artifacts tend to be busted. In any case, WotC will be careful this time around. They lost a lot last time.Affinity for Enchantments

Affinity for Rares in Play

[Dullahan]

Affinity for Enchantments

Affinity for Rares in Play

Affinity for Affinity for Artifacts.

[ProphetKing]

Unfriendly Rapist 1B

Unaffinity for Lands in Play

8/8

...

It's basically a bad Tarmogoyf.

[Van]

Those books were terrible.

[Naga]

I doubt affinity will appear. I also think that Alara taught Wizards how to do artifacts properly. As in, most of the artifacts in SoM will be colored.

[Van]

I doubt affinity will appear. I also think that Alara taught Wizards how to do artifacts properly. As in, most of the artifacts in SoM will be colored.Affinity will so be coming back you are crazy.

[ProphetKing]

if affinity doesn't come back i will quit magic

[Fonzy]

It probably won't be Raffinity. It probably won't even be close in terms of power level. Then again, artifacts tend to be busted. In any case, WotC will be careful this time around. They lost a lot last time.

I would LOVE to see the sales for Mirrodin block compared to other blocks. Didn't Rosewater even write an article at one point saying basically, "Yeah we know busted blocks sell better, but we don't want to completely fuck up the game"?

[Tony3]

Mirrodins whole thing was affinity. Obviously it's going to be back. Just they are going to being neutering the hell out of anything with it and you might see 2-3 playable affinity cards in the whole set. They know if they give it anything good, it would probably reappear and destroy extended. It would be cool to see something geared for legacy affinity though.

[xXx]

I would LOVE to see the sales for Mirrodin block compared to other blocks. Didn't Rosewater even write an article at one point saying basically, "Yeah we know busted blocks sell better, but we don't want to completely fuck up the game"?

M10 sold like crazy.

I'm sure they made money, but a lot of players stopped playing competitively.

[xXx]

Mirrodins whole thing was affinity. Obviously it's going to be back. Just they are going to being neutering the hell out of anything with it and you might see 2-3 playable affinity cards in the whole set. They know if they give it anything good, it would probably reappear and destroy extended. It would be cool to see something geared for legacy affinity though.

Ext Affinity might catch something. (Will Affinity be in Ext by then?)

[quadibloc]

The mechanic of affinity for artifacts isn't broken by itself. It's only broken if the cards involved are undercosted.

So if a creature or sorcery or artifact ought to cost, normally, say (4)(U), if it costs (U)(U) and has affinity - it's broken, because you can play it for (U) when you've got enough artifacts.

But if it should cost (4)(U), it has affinity, and it's given a cost of (3)(U)(U)(U)(U), then the most affinity can do for you is shave 1 off the converted mana cost the card would have had without affinity: you can play it for (U)(U)(U)(U) instead of (4)(U).

So affinity the mechanic isn't broken, just some of the cards they had the last time were broken. Of course, the example I gave shows affinity made weak and useless - in practice, they would go for something reasonably good, but not broken this time, I think.

[Fonzy]

What you've just demonstrated is that, by itself, affinity is pretty ridiculous and has to be actively neutered by adding absurd colored mana requriements to cards or through other means.

[Van]

No Skullclamp, no Ornithopters (or other such 0-cost combo enablers), no artifact lands, and colored mana requirements slow down affinity enough that you don't need to make it overkill on the cost.

[Dr. Faustroll, pataphysician]

Affinity isn't inherently broken exactly, but if you give it an absurd amount of of artificial accelerators, a way to draw an absurd amount of cards, and synergistic cards that reward you for doing what you're already doing, it gets a little busted.

[Van]

Affinity isn't inherently broken exactly, but if you give it an absurd amount of of artificial accelerators, a way to draw an absurd amount of cards, and synergistic cards that reward you for doing what you're already doing, it gets a little busted.

To be fair, this could be said about any mechanic. Affinity just happened to work really well with itself and got too much of the above.

[Naga]

To be fair, this could be said about any mechanic. Affinity just happened to work really well with itself and got too much of the above.

It could, but it tends to happen more with mechanics that make cards free.

[mrs_bun]

I think the way to make affinity work is to have already pretty reasonably costed cards with affinity for stuff you aren't likely to have more than one or two of anyway. Examples include perhaps cards with affinity for themselves.

Also new combat rules are killeing magic, so I don't really care. But this seems neat.

[xXx]

What do you know about Magic? You're just a girl.

[xXx]

Hehe.


















<3

[LegendShark]

Those books were terrible.

The mirrodin books were the only ones I ever read. I didn't think they were bad. I was also twelve.

[Fonzy]

The mirrodin books were the only ones I ever read. I didn't think they were bad. I was also twelve.

I've read up to Mirrodin and they're all pretty much crap.

[Dr. Faustroll, pataphysician]

Tie-in Fantasy Novels Devoid of Literary Merit, news at 11.

[Fonzy]

Tie-in Fantasy Novels Devoid of Literary Merit, news at 11.

I was just hoping for some entertainment and they weren't even that great by that measure.

[mrs_bun]

Fuck you, Vinny. :stare:

[Tony3]

Even though I don't play magic anymore, I still sometimes get the urge at times to write more primers for WotC when I'm bored.

[Zerg]

I got excited there for a second...

Then I decided that it's probably going to be crap, like everything WotC printed since Ravnica... sure, they're coming back to the old setting, but they won't be coming back to old design philosophy.

Consider everything that happened since original Mirrodin: Giant undercosted creatues, medium-sized undercosted creatures, Tarmogoyf, Cancel, 20 different "special" card frames, Planeswalkers (okay, I like this one), Tarmogoyf, Mythic Rares, trap cards, dual lands constantly being $20, fucking Tarmogoyf, durrhurr welovemulticolor, 8 keywords per set, blah blah.

Ravager without damage-on-the-stack.

[Fonzy]

Ravager without damage-on-the-stack.

Oh sweet fuck, this. :cry: