Conversation: Recent Activity
Conversation: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
Mechanics |
Recent updates to Conversation: (Generated at 2024-04-28 11:45:12)
Conversation: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
Mechanics |
Recent updates to Conversation: (Generated at 2024-04-28 11:45:12)
Yeah. It seems like they took any critical response as a personal attack. A forum build around critiquing things is the absolute wrong place for them to be
@Froggy
I think feeling like you only get negative comments is a result of human nature. People are most likely to comment if 1) a design has glaring mistakes that they know how to "correct," or 2) a design is interesting, but has a slight issue they have advice about, or 3) a design is very cool and eye-catching. Cards that are fine, but not interesting, don't tend to draw comments.
Then there's the fact that we tend to remember negative things more prominently than positive, so all of the negative comments we receive tend to stand out more in our minds, in addition to being easier for commentators to make.
I say "negative comments," but I don't think most comments on this site are negative. In fact, such comments are very rare, though there's a few posters that come across that way for me. I think most people think of their criticism as positive, constructive, and informative. When I say something, at least, that's the intent.
Did I ever interact with this person? Who the heck are they?
Sounds like the site is better off without them.
Nah fuck that. I'm just gonna give up. Easier than trying to drill an original thought into these peoples heads. Goodbye.
I don't think you're stupid. I understand that feeling though, when I started making cards what felt like all of them either got no comments, or someone saying I made a mistake.
I took the advice and kept going, because I wanted to learn more about design and to make high quality cards. If you feel that way too, then it's important that you recognize criticism on this site is very rarely ever against a card's creator, it's almost always about the card design.
If your goal isn't to learn more about Magic design, and you just want to make cards you enjoy (which is okay, too), then you could consider making your cardsets private (it's in the cardsets option page). Of course, only administrators would be able to see them, but it does give you a place to make cards 'in peace'.
Now, perhaps your comment was more about how you feel in real life, in which case, I can't offer any advice to you. I'm a 17 year old mess who knows nothing about anything (except Magic the Gathering and a few other games), but from what I've heard, talking to people is a good start.
Best wishes :)
Yeah sorry I just get tired of hearing everything I say is wrong all the time I guess I'm just too stupid
''Well that was very dismissive''
I didn't read Vitenka's comment like that. I mean no offense, but I think you should consider reading comments on this site as if they were written with good intentions. I think you might not have liked my comment on (((Frank, Max & Ian, Gourmet Chefs ♂️))) for this reason, which is why you said I 'made a fool out of myself'. Though, you've deleted that card and it's comments now.
You've mentioned getting headaches from making cards quite a few times, though that might have been metaphorical. If it's not, maybe you should consider taking things easier on yourself and others, we're all here to have fun, not get hostile.
Well that was very dismissive. Magic may have explicitly forbid this but Magic also changes it's mind about a lot of shit and I've predicted the future before. What if we only did it with proper nouns like "Llanowar"?? Yu-Gi-Oh has Monster types like warrior, fiend or dragon but it also has a thing called Archetypes. The cards Archetype is always first in the name of the card like "Elemental HERO", "Red Eyes" or "Ancient Gear"
Magic explicitly forbids this. You can refer to the whole name of a card only; because when translated they may not be the same ordering, or eve the same number of words. So it's been an explicit decision to not support this.
The equivalent of referring to parts of a card name is referring to a subtype. "Goblins you control gain +1/+1"
Un-sets, of course, get to break this rule.
So if you were to do this, the 'right' way would probably be to add a lot of subtypes to everything. But as MaRo has often bemoaned the fact that Fireball isn't a "Fire Sorcery" makes it very hard for them to do this retroactively.
There's also a good question of what this would actually gain you, which tribal and colour don't already give you. Is another dimension to consider spells through useful enough for the added complexity?
(The closest equivalent of what yugioh calls subtype is probably colour)
Taking this idea from Gwent. Spy (This creature enters the battlefield under target opponents control.)
These cards would have to have strong negative effects on their controller or even stronger positive effects on their owner.
I'm not sure how it is. Might also be . Blue & Red do both have a lot of control changing cards.
Yu-Gi-Oh has a lot of this But I dont think any Magic cards have it unless they refer to a very specific card (legendary creatures or planeswalkers.) I want to see cards that reference the single words that appear in the names of multiple other cards.
''No, if they went with "discard from library," that causes a lot of functionally changes to cards that interact with discarding''
For sure. I was saying it was definitely a bad idea, but thought it would be funny to bring up :).
I dunno why there is a difference in the templates, they might have overlooked it, or maybe they really want to cut (1) word, for some reason.
@Circeus Oh good point(s), i hadn't though of those :)
"Really (and not just from design wonks like us, but from the entire player base) the question was never "What word instead of mill?" and always "Why not mill?""
I agree for sure. I'm super excited to see what kind of stuff they come up with in the future, now that it's a keyword!
"Oh for goodness sakes; blue desperately needs a keyword. Have a keyword. Expect to see creatures that mill if they hit you."
lol :) If only it were that easy!
Edit: Formatting
Blue didn't need a keyword. UR (and to a lesser extent UB) need a creature keyword ability, for which mill doesn't count because a) it goes on spells, and b) it's a keyword action, not a keyword ability
I suspect it was also "Oh for goodness sakes; blue desperately needs a keyword. Have a keyword. Expect to see creatures that mill if they hit you."
"Honestly, the only reason I would ever suggest making mill a keyword action is to potentially save space on cards, giving them some more design space, by giving them more room to place an additional ability, perhaps."
I can think of multiple other design-related reasons.
-You can now interact with mill a lot more easily and actively than before because the rules text is so much shorter and (more importantly) easier to parse.
-You can refer to milling in a reminder text (reach was keyworded because of that).
-A shorter templates means you can afford to use it more aggressively at common, especially as a secondary effect. Currently mills tends to be the primary effects on commons (Especially blue ones) that feature it because of its "weight". A one-word form means it has the potential to see usage levels closer to scry.
-If you can use it a lot more/in reminder text, you can potentially (although unlikely) use it to create a new or formal U/B keyword. (I'm still in favor of shrinking being used instead of milling for that last point, but it's worth keeping in mind)
A simple effect like "Whenever a player mills a card or cards, CARD_NAME can't be blocked this turn." Would have been far wordy in the past. This trigger has been used only once I can find at a glance (Devourer of Memory; type-specific variants have also been used, but very rarely); the equivalent of "if a player milled this turn" has never been used as far as I can tell.
Really (and not just from design wonks like us, but from the entire player base) the question was never "What word instead of mill?" and always "Why not mill?"
No, if they went with "discard from library," that causes a lot of functionally changes to cards that interact with discarding
I think the only two templating options are "[Players] mills X" (for any targeted or opponent mill effect) and "Mill X" (for things that only mill you). I think the latter should be "you mill X," but they still have the option to word it that way if they need to for clarity. It's like how life gain is usually "Gain X life," but occasionally is "You gain X life" if they need clarity
ETA: Wait, every life gain card uses the latter template. Why doesn't self-mill always say "You mill X"??
"and there may be complaining, but no other words could've possible do that at this point."
I agree that people would almost certainly not have switched what they call the mechanic, but that doesn't mean the actual mechanic couldn't have a different name. I mean, slang is slang, they're not bound by it.
However, I think the fact that they went with mill, anyway, was a good choice. Some people would probably have been upset by having two different names for the same thing, even though only one is official.
Honestly, the only reason I would ever suggest making mill a keyword action is to potentially save space on cards, giving them some more design space, by giving them more room to place an additional ability, perhaps.
Hmmm... would it have made any sense for them to just allow you to 'discard from the top of your library'? Similar to how old cards said 'discard from play' instead of 'destroy'?
It's probably a bad idea, but I'm sure it was an option they considered (though probably didn't think about it for long)
I'm still waiting to see how they phrase it in the future on cards with different rules text than the ones we've seen, thus far. I mean, there's definitely quite a few variations of reminder text for milling, just grammatically speaking (same action being performed by different people, for example).
I guess there might just be two, actually... the difference between "your" and "their"...
"I don't believe they couldn't have picked "erode" or something and converted mill the same way."
They introduced "Commander" as a formal rules term ten years ago, and there are still significant amount of people calling it "EDH". There is NO WAY IN HELL NO WAY NO HOW they would've gone with a term they weren't absolutely 200% certain people would have immediately switched to, and there may be complaining, but no other words could've possible do that at this point.
This has me thinking [like a silly goose], but what if instead of "draw a card" we used "card up." Just imagine Overflowing Insight reading "Target player cards up seven times."
This came from discard being intuitive.
I also wondered about a term for "put into the graveyard" from any zone. "Erode target hand" "erode target library" etc. But I guess milling here is saving words by not specifying library. So we have a pair "discard" and "mill" meaning almost the same thing.
Or, I remember teaching new players they'd be confused that discard WASN'T from play. I'm not sure if that can be improved.
"Forget" sounds like discard. "Grind" and "erode" don't make sense for removing things from either a library or from your long-term memory, and are only proposed because they're loose synonyms for mill (in the English sense)
bump
It's about time. In my opinion, no word would have been flavorful and catch, at least words that were free.
What about "and then shuffle?"
I think it's cool that a player term "ascended," but it's not as flavorful add "grind" or "erode" or "forget."
"Grind" would be better, as a verb. But even so, not particularly memorable. So yeah, I'm surprised they gave in.
And yet are still holding out about "and then shuffle".
Mill has no flavor, but every other option is confusing with discard
Huh. Keyword makes sense, but I thought they'd hold out for a flavour that was transparent to new player. Erode sounds good. I guess "mill" grinding cards away is a reasonable flavour?
I'll probably eventually pick it up, but I'm more than happy with bury. I don't believe they couldn't have picked "erode" or something and converted mill the same way.
That said just having the keyword action is good.