5,835 reputation
1341
bio website
location
age
visits member for 3 years, 1 month
seen yesterday

May
9
revised What is the converted mana cost of a spell with {X} when cast with the Miracle mechanic?
added 420 characters in body
May
9
comment What is the converted mana cost of a spell with {X} when cast with the Miracle mechanic?
@thesunneversets I agree that the alternative cost route is vastly more elegant, but that wasn't the question. The (rephrased) question was, "is it possible to design the Miracle mechanic in such a way that the CMC reflect your choice of X, without adding fancy new rules", and the answer is yes, since it has been done before: see Convoke, Affinity etc. Nothing logically stops them from reducing a XX cost by X, except that it would probably be confusing and inelegant. But that's a different aspect.
May
9
comment What is the converted mana cost of a spell with {X} when cast with the Miracle mechanic?
@thesunneversets They could have easily connected the regular and miracle costs, by implementing Miracle as a cost reduction effect. They could have said, "you may cast this card when you draw it if it's the first card you drew this turn. If you do, its cost is reduced by (some cost reduction).", something along those lines. Then you would have to pay its actual mana cost, except reduced, and things like Spell Burst would take into account whatever you chose for X.
May
9
revised What is the converted mana cost of a spell with {X} when cast with the Miracle mechanic?
added 106 characters in body
May
9
comment What is the converted mana cost of a spell with {X} when cast with the Miracle mechanic?
@Circeus He doesn't define the CMC as 9. The XX in the mana costs and the X in the alternative costs are completely unrelated.
May
9
answered What is the converted mana cost of a spell with {X} when cast with the Miracle mechanic?
May
7
comment How does trample interact with damage prevention effects and indestructible blockers?
@thesunneversets Then again, this site is supposed to give qualified answers. Always going the extra length to cite rules references is what sets us apart from a regular forum and should be encouraged. Nothing keeps you from summarizing an answer and additionally providing a solid reference.
May
2
comment Why play Land Grant?
@JSBᾶngs Notice the difference between a "Forest" and a "Basic Forest".
Apr
30
comment Relative amounts of luck in MTG limited formats?
That is hard to say. Rigorously comparing 6-pack sealed vs 4-pack sealed is possible, because you can easily compare probabilities. Comparing Sealed vs Draft involves a lot more hand-waving because everything changes. You don't have perfect information about the pool from the beginning, you get to draw from a much smaller overall pool, and your choices affect everyone, as everyone affects your possible choices. So it's hard if not impossible to put meaningful numbers into that comparison. Qualitatively, I fully agree with your conclusion that Draft has the largest relative skill component.
Apr
30
revised Relative amounts of luck in MTG limited formats?
added 109 characters in body
Apr
30
comment In Carcassonne, what is the point of a Bridge in the expansion set?
@Ian That's a bug or a wrongly implemented rule though. I have that expansion at home, and the rules explicitly state that bridges do not split farms.
Apr
30
answered Relative amounts of luck in MTG limited formats?
Apr
29
answered In Carcassonne, what is the point of a Bridge in the expansion set?
Apr
19
awarded  Scholar
Apr
19
accepted Is it possible to get old Vanguard cards?
Apr
19
revised Is it possible to get old Vanguard cards?
deleted 1 characters in body
Apr
19
asked Is it possible to get old Vanguard cards?
Apr
16
comment Which tournament format best emphasizes winning (as opposed to avoiding last place)?
@AlexP Exactly what I wanted to write about splitting prizes as well. Also correct with the "increasingly arbitrary" tie breakers - you can only make up so many justifiable tie breakers. Adding more will be exactly like flipping a coin anyway, so why not cut it short right then.
Apr
16
comment Which tournament format best emphasizes winning (as opposed to avoiding last place)?
@JoeGolton It depends on the details of course, but the general problem I see with single- as well as double-elimination for Settlers and any game with more than 2 rivals per match is simply "who to kick" after a match. Eliminating 3 of 4 players per match makes for a very short and probably boring tournament and IMHO does not do the element of randomness in Settlers justice. However, eliminating fewer than the 3 losers once again creates ties, which have to be broken by a yet another scoring system. So for certain kinds of games, an elimination system is just inherently bad.
Apr
16
comment Which tournament format best emphasizes winning (as opposed to avoiding last place)?
@CaulynDarr Chance is a valid method of deciding the winner after all reasonable methods have been exhausted. After all, if 2 or more players are tied after numerous tie breakers, then by all rights you could say they have played an equally strong tournament, and the more, increasingly arbitrary tie-breakers you make up, the more the process devolves into randomness anyway. Example: several important, national football leagues, even the World Cup have essentially a coin flip as the final tie breaker: theoffside.com/world-football/…