Conversation: Recent Activity
| Conversation: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics |
Recent updates to Conversation: (Generated at 2026-04-29 11:06:12)
| Conversation: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics |
Recent updates to Conversation: (Generated at 2026-04-29 11:06:12)
what about this website?
https://www.toothycat.net/wiki/bnf.pl?page=AlexChurchill/MagicCardGenerator
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/613489/magic-the-gathering-is-officially-the-worlds-most-complex-game/
@Alex, are you the Alex mentioned in this article?
^
Where's that "re-space a cardname" challenge...
raises hand
Mrs. Teacherwoman, secretboi420 just gave dudeboi420 3rd degree burns! Requesting medical attention! Thx mum.
Does the word Elf show up in the name Boreal Shelf?
It's very easy to find out: http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?name=+[Human]
Inhumaniac also shows up in that search. Does that count?
Human Frailty and whatever the legendary Human was called that was part of the Kamigawa cycle of special members of their tribes that turn into enchantments.
woah! do you know which two?
Only two cards have the word Human in their names.
The third round of Ravnica split cards are very competitively costed (as they should be.) My Esper Skies deck will have 4 copies each of these three split cards: Depose // Deploy, Warrant // Warden, Discovery // Dispersal,
The good news is that magicmultiverse actually encouraged me to make a backup of at least my custom card designs which otherwise would be entirely lost, so that's a special "Thank you" for making this site!
:(:(
Today I learnt: MtGSalvation failed to notify me of an owner change and related issues and deleted my account and all the links back to card discussion on that site is now no longer worth anything.
Today I learnt: Wasteland Scorpion has flavor text that ironically foreshadows Hour of Glory.
precisely the location i was visualizing yes
i just feel like the idea of fighting is so huge, that to me, it should be appear in all colors... I know that red and green get it, because they just love that stuff, but fighting in white and black would also make sense to me, especially per card's flavor...
as for survive and kill those would also need to be worded, but they would definitely open even more space: survive would be very white black and green, kill would be quite red and black i'd say.
so i just think it;s really neat, if a bit of a out-there idea
"Fights and does not die but the other guy does" is pretty bnasty wording, yet a very natural concept.
Still, I guess not very many cards would use it. Maybe some gladitorial-focussed set woudl want to keyword it?
The thing is your "definition" contains another word that is not defined in the rules either "kill" in addition to "survive" which at least is a reminder text concept but not to my knowledge well-defined either.
The main reason I don't care much about "winning" a fight is that the difference between having something happen as a result of winning a fight or just after the fight can be minimal. And it's terminology that only goes onto a subset of a subset of cards.
That's not saying it can't be done, but it changes so little.
ugh old design makes my head hurt (especially because i traumatized myself by obsessing over a 169 kb document where i wrote down each card in an illiterate language from alpha to ravnica.)
that document single-handedly messed up how i thought design worked for the first few months i was on this site.
you can probably see most my thoughts back then were quite contrary to modern practice. i had only ever had experience with cards from theros (my first intro decks i was gifted) and a headache that i forced on myself :P
tldr im stoopit and i feel with secret
anyone else think wizards should add a definition for winning fights? It would be a very cool design concept with new space. i'd like to see it in abzan (though right now only green gets actual fighting, champions are quite w/g/b and black just loves to win), but i could see it rarely in red, probably not in blue. I've been using it as this: Kills the other creature and survives.
i dont have a problem wit the change, it may be a bit unasthetique, but to me its so simple i cant see it not being gorgeous. probs my minimalism
Yep, that's the same complaint we all raised when they announced the change
I realized why I don't like "add
."
What are you adding it to? The verb is generally "Add ___ to {place.} Without "to" it feels unnatural.
"Produce" does not have this problem.
Today I learnt: Soul Burn was a common in Invasion. That's old world order for you.
Oh, I've heard "lit" before. Okay.
I'd say "litty af" either means disparagingly "like idots talk, thank you Aaron Forsythe-bama" or "very much lit" with "lit" being usually positive. Your choice.
Not liking "add" is just personal preference, I suppose. It didn't please me aesthetically. Produce just sounds better to me personally.
Is "litty af" a good thing or a bad thing? Young people slang is my third language.
this is awesome! thanks a ton!
A lot of really cool symbols are missing, I'd love to see more if that's a possibility! Love to all :D