Multiverse Feedback: Recent Activity
| Multiverse Feedback: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Upcoming releases | Skeleton |
Recent updates to Multiverse Feedback: (Generated at 2025-10-28 06:57:44)
I've been bearing Jeska, Mending Medium in mind throughout this discussion, but, well, there's a reason SadisticMystic commented on her "A lot of players would have problems handling innate creature planeswalkers no matter how you phrase them, so I wouldn't worry about seeing a card like this pop up in a booster pack near you". And SM is both the card's creator and the person who knows the rules best out of anyone I've interacted with.
Gideon Jura-style planeswalkers are fairly frequent, but inherently creature-plus-planeswalker cards? Ideally they'd want a custom frame to show both the P/T box and the loyalty, but, well, let's say writing a custom frame for a niche case like that isn't my highest priority. I'm fairly sure the toughness box does accept "/" (and I think even " ", space) so she'd be able to work as well as she currently does even under this new proposal.
(amuseum's comments continue to puzzle me. Are you saying you think that of the two creature stats, power is more like loyalty than toughness is?)
Seems a good compromise to me. Toughness/Loyalty accepts things like 'X' and '*', so presumably the solution for Jeska would be to also permit '/'.
Note: Also important to be consistent in handling this field in other forms of output - card export, plain view etc.
Jeska, Mending Medium is a thing.
well, if a user would type in a number before changing frames, they would usually first type it in the power box, not the toughness. so the whole situation is unintuitive. 1) sharing loyalty box with toughness or power. 2) worse, choosing toughness over power to be shared.
In general users don't start with creatures and turn them into planeswalkers, certainly. But in general planeswalkers created on here come out with just one figure in the loyalty box. The bug you and wlframe experience seems to be pretty unusual.
But yes, the user can't fix it while staying in the planeswalker frame, which is why I created this discussion topic for the proposed enhancement to hide power on planeswalkers. I'm planning to make this fix unless anyone can suggest reasons why it's a bad idea.
it's not user error. if a user is making a pw, theres no reason to assume he started with a creature. even so, after it becomes a pw, the user cannot fix it by staying in the pw frame and has no idea why it still shows p/t.
As Jack said, it's Chrome on Android. I would clear my cache but I don't know how. :-(
I'll Google it.
FWIW, I definitely had the same problem for a while (Chrome on Android), but recently it's seemed OK.
Hm. It's certainly working for most of us. I don't know what would be causing this. Can you clear your phone browser's cache?
fixed
fixed!
There's a related bug with planeswalkers like Nu, Force of Oblivion or a planeswalker version of Loyal Cathar - it's not possible to add a loyalty shield on the night side even if you want one.
I think I need to make the card editing form show the loyalty shield / P/T box on the night side in all cases, and then when displaying the card show the shield / PTbox only if it's got any contents.
Another related thing to represent would be "This isn't the cards intended name, just something I made up to hang on it for now"
But it really should be a separate column, (rendering as a star after the name on printed cards if desired). That provides both "able to see at a glance which cards are reprints" and "doesn't have two cards with the same name with different 'name' fields". I mean, I agree that feature is not worth the effort of implementing, but I think it's the correct idea?
V: Ah. I think the cardset designers really do wanna see those stars, though (as an easy-to-spot visual indicator of how many reprints a set has), so you have fairly opposed aims there. Unless I make it a per-user preference, I guess... (Which would need me to start by implementing per-user preferences...)
Can I suggest a Tampermonkey script?
mmm yes; whatever the behaviour is should really be a checkbox; with ...* as a short-cut way of triggerring it :)
But I really wanna not see those stars :)
A visual way of recognising a card as a reprint would be useful, whether it keys off "...*" or a separate field. (Although probably not a high priority.)
Maybe expanding it in the display. Something like?
CardName* -> (((CardName*))) (Reprint of CardName)
Hiding the star would rather defeat the point of including it. I could add a link to the original card easily enough. I actually tried to auto-detect existing card names, but it hit some problem - the regexp was too big, or some such.
That would probably be sufficient in most cases.
Hmm. Yes, I could do that. Or I could add a comments thread to the mechanics page as a whole, which might be just as good.
Ah ok cool good to know.
That sounds useful, but potentially complicated.