|
If she's a professional massage therapist I'm sure she's already used to massaging all kinds of gross people.
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 20:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 01:21 |
|
|
So if you're not watching LSV's stream right now, you're missing this:
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 21:08
|
|
|
GonSmithe posted:So if you're not watching LSV's stream right now, you're missing this: It's glorious 
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 21:10
|
|
|
Count Bleck posted:Best Chun Li and if you disagree I don't even wanna talk to you. He's the #1 Chun Li player online, at least, and also the #1 or 2 Poison.  Dude owns and has a great attitude about his life.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 21:15
|
|
|
GonSmithe posted:Just played the most tilting round of Magic I have ever played. Arrow Storm is... well, not an unfair card by any means, but dang does it have some feelbad potential. It essentially gives the reach of Lava Axe in an aggressive limited deck, except it's so much more of a no-brainer than Lava Axe because it can target creatures. At least if you were drafting an aggressive deck around the 'dome the last 5-10 points with Lava Axe' plan, you were going in on that plan with a card that was pretty bad when it didn't actually kill your opponent.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 21:21
|
|
|
GonSmithe posted:So if you're not watching LSV's stream right now, you're missing this: EDIT: Oh, duh. Thanks, sarmhan. Boco_T fucked around with this message at 21:27 on Oct 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 21:22
|
|
|
Switch from 'High' to 'Source'
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
sarmhan posted:Switch from 'High' to 'Source' I am also bad at clicking buttons ty. Also I figured out my problem with nummies stream music. It's all pop singles. No B sides, no weird tracks, just radio singles. And yes I am a horrible music snot so it's prob 50/50 PleasantDirge fucked around with this message at 21:39 on Oct 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 21:37
|
|
|
GonSmithe posted:So if you're not watching LSV's stream right now, you're missing this:  holy poo poo that deck is amazingedit: andrew cuneo's banner deck is amazing DAD LOST MY IPOD fucked around with this message at 21:42 on Oct 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 21:38
|
|
|
Sultai Control on SCG stream right now. We might see a Villainous Wealth vs. R/G Monsters!
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 22:05
|
|
|
DAD LOST MY IPOD posted:edit: andrew cuneo's banner deck is amazing Where's this?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
EAT THE EGGS RICOLA posted:Where's this? LSV played cuneo in a vintage 2-man with him playing workshops, moxes, cluestones and banners. That's it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
Devor posted:Sultai Control on SCG stream right now. We might see a Villainous Wealth vs. R/G Monsters! Not very impressive performance overall, but did manage to do one for X=4 and hit Polukranos and Fanatic of Xenagos E: Second one for X=4 hit Caryatid, Mystic, Lightning strike
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
GonSmithe posted:So if you're not watching LSV's stream right now, you're missing this: Tune in, hear like 5 minutes after tuning in: "I can get back cranial archive with Warden of the Eye" LSV
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
RIP LSV defeated by a stream sniper.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 22:38
|
|
|
Everything about LSV is amazing, he's such a great ambassador for the game. He's a pretty big part of why my return to the game stuck, his content is fantastic and he's got such a great sense of humor. In one of his recent video series on CFB you can see him doing his deck teck and the top five decks in his deck list are "Anti Cheon."
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 22:40
|
|
|
PleasantDirge posted:Also I figured out my problem with nummies stream music. It's all pop singles. No B sides, no weird tracks, just radio singles. And yes I am a horrible music snot so it's prob 50/50 Agreed. Why bother streaming music if literally anyone could just turn to the top 40 station and hear the exact same stuff?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
Count Bleck posted:Best Chun Li and if you disagree I don't even wanna talk to you. My highlight this week was while playing Subsligh mono red against a friend playing robots. I had lethal on the board and him only Chandra while we had no cards in either of our hands, then he +0's Chandra and flips over the top card to cast. loving Anger of the Gods. Then he plinked me to death with her +1 while I drew no hasters and only 1/1s or pump spells. It was a nailbiting set overall though so we had a good time, he even bought me a pint afterwards because of how bad he felt.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:Everything about LSV is amazing, he's such a great ambassador for the game. He's a pretty big part of why my return to the game stuck, his content is fantastic and he's got such a great sense of humor. In one of his recent video series on CFB you can see him doing his deck teck and the top five decks in his deck list are "Anti Cheon." Pretty big agreement here, LSV is a lot of fun to watch and I bet he's fun in person too. He's a very nice, laid back guy who clearly enjoys playing Magic a lot, and despite being incredibly skilled he's very even tempered (depressing how often the default assumption is that these two don't go together).
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 23:09
|
|
|
Lol, legacy owns. This is the board state and I have 4 bolts in my hand. I decide to shortcut it and just put all 4 on the stack because 4 bolts lol. I managed to win later on by drawing chain lightnings and snapcasters, but try and guess how the guy took no damage this turn.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 23:12
|
|
|
Bonus posted:Lol, legacy owns. This is the board state and I have 4 bolts in my hand. I decide to shortcut it and just put all 4 on the stack because 4 bolts lol. I managed to win later on by drawing chain lightnings and snapcasters, but try and guess how the guy took no damage this turn. Flusterstorm?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
Crop rotation into glacial chasm.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 23:43
|
|
|
Wadjamaloo posted:Crop rotation into glacial chasm.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
Bonus posted:Haha bingo! Loam decks don't usually run Flusterstorm. So yeah, don't just put stuff on the stack all at once for no reason is what I learned from this. In paper, if you just say "play 4 lightning bolts," without specifying that you're holding priority, isn't the default assumption that you're waiting for each to resolve before playing the next, in case the opponent has a response?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 23:55
|
|
|
No way. That sounds like holding priority to me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 23:58
|
|
|
On the Eternal stream, the UR burn guy fireblasts his opponent that is at 15 to get three more cards in the bin for Treasure Cruise. Fair magic card
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2014 23:59
|
|
|
Not sure. In paper, I'd usually go bolt? then wait for my opponent to say OK before proceeding with another bolt. Paper magic has some weird interactions like that, like for instance when you ask your opponent exactly how many copies of Deceiver Exarch they're making and then all of a sudden they decide they're playing around all sorts of stuff when previously they were just like "combo, do i win?"
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 00:00
|
|
|
I think what it would be legal to do in paper is just fan the four bolts at your opponent, without claiming to cast them, and see if they scoop. If they shrug and wait for you to start playing them out, then you know they probably have shenanigans. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK flashing your opponent the win from your hand is acceptable as a "shortcut" in tournaments.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
I couldn't find anything in the comp rules, but the tournament policy has this to say: Whenever a player adds an object to the stack, he or she is assumed to be passing priority unless he or she explicitly announces that he or she intends to retain it. If he or she adds a group of objects to the stack without explicitly retaining priority and a player wishes to take an action at a point in the middle, the actions should be reversed up to that point. This blog post clarifies the reasoning behind it. I still wouldn't try it at a random FNM in case they have a bad judge, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 00:11
|
|
|
Wait, so you could lie about your play to bait something out then do something completely different after the first spell? That seems good to know.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 00:18
|
|
|
Babylon Astronaut posted:Wait, so you could lie about your play to bait something out then do something completely different after the first spell? That seems good to know. Well, it's not lying about your play insofar as you're representing 'I want to play four Lightning Bolts, one after the other' and if your opponent doesn't do anything in response, you can't suddenly call takebacksies on yourself. But you're not obligated to still cast the last two Lightning Bolts if they back it up and do something after the second one that suddenly makes the last two a bad idea. That's what I get out of it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 00:23
|
|
|
You are allowed to reveal cards from your hand without casting them in paper.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
It is something that is just sloppy play and poor form though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
So let me get this straight, revealing the cards aside, because that seems like fair to mindgames someone with, you could say you were playing four bolts, if they counter the first one play something more important in response and keep the rest of the bolts? Could you just say you were casting something that you didn't even have if you aren't obligated to actually play it? Ok, here's an example: my opponent has dispel in hand. Can I say I'm playing 4 instants, order them from most important to least, see what they counter and drop a creature with flash, say a snapcaster instead of everything after their counter? Babylon Astronaut fucked around with this message at 00:49 on Oct 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
If you tap mana and put a card on the table you're going to have a hard time telling a judge you didn't actually cast it yet. When you cast a spell, you still have priority, you can add another spell to the stack without your opponent getting a chance to respond. So if you tap RRRR and throw four lightning bolts on the table, the assumption is going to be that you cast them all in a row without passing priority, and then are passing priority with all four on the stack. You can show your opponent the four bolts in your hand and see if they snap-concede, but don't try to pretend like you're casting them and then backtrack, that'll get you a warning .
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:01
|
|
|
Babylon Astronaut posted:So let me get this straight, revealing the cards aside, because that seems like fair to mindgames someone with, you could say you were playing four bolts, if they counter the first one play something more important in response and keep the rest of the bolts? Could you just say you were casting something that you didn't even have if you aren't obligated to actually play it? You say you're casting them, it's implicit that what you're saying is "...Unless you do something in response." If you didn't want to implicitly say that, you can hold priority. But you can't go back on it if they say go ahead.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:08
|
|
|
Entropic posted:If you tap mana and put a card on the table you're going to have a hard time telling a judge you didn't actually cast it yet. Unless I'm missing a subtlety, Ableist Kinkshamer literally just quoted the tournament policy that shows that the official "assumption" is something else.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:09
|
|
|
Babylon Astronaut posted:So let me get this straight, revealing the cards aside, because that seems like fair to mindgames someone with, you could say you were playing four bolts, if they counter the first one play something more important in response and keep the rest of the bolts? Could you just say you were casting something that you didn't even have if you aren't obligated to actually play it? What would/should actually happen: You cast 4 lightning bolts all at once. You opponent clarifys, "are these all on the stack or should we back up?" You either put them all on the stack and pay, or you back up to resolving them one by one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:19
|
|
|
Does anybody have the current Subsligh decklist? I need to get in the standard daily on mtgo RIGHT NOW!
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 01:21 |
|
|
Wadjamaloo posted:What you think would happen: You cast 4 lightning bolts all at once, they counter one, you go wait no I'm not casting these 3 and cast snap instead. The bottom line is don't be dink and try to rules lawyer, just cast your poo poo normally.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:22
|
|