Speculators dumb as hell. This is never getting unbanned in Modern or Legacy, and "Frontier" starting with Khans is dead as well (it will start with IX as that's the oldest Arena set)
Speculators dumb as hell. This is never getting unbanned in Modern or Legacy, and "Frontier" starting with Khans is dead as well (it will start with IX as that's the oldest Arena set)
$5, first ever reprint. New art by Terese Nielsen, unfortunately.
So that art everyone thought was for Dig Through Time is just packaging art.
Chat just pointed out this has consistently been the case for every recent set, and has happened sporadically as far back as Innistrad 1 (with the Liliana art they really should have used for LotV instead of what we got).
Arena has Shadows block, Kaladesh block, and Amonkhet block programmed in.Speculators dumb as hell. This is never getting unbanned in Modern or Legacy, and "Frontier" starting with Khans is dead as well (it will start with IX as that's the oldest Arena set)
ouch, I hope this art was commisioned before that :vShe got caught liking a ton of pro-Trump/alt-right garbage on Twitter: https://tumblhurgoyf.tumblr.com/post/164483701965/about-the-terese-nielsen-and-trump-thing
Must be really hard to have to be confronted with the values of other people on topics that have a direct impact on a lot of others once in a while. My condolences.Yeah, done with this thread if you guys want to talk politics in it.
Later
they can stop to commisioning her artworks thought.I can understand the opposite perspective, but I don't think it's particularly inclusive to blacklist people for liking bad tweets. I don't think "we've chased other members of the community out" is a great precedent, either. IMO, as long as she likes bad politics on her own time and isn't practicing intolerance or saying intolerant things, then she meets my standard of community acceptance.
It was a lot more than generic republican stuff.I can understand the opposite perspective, but I don't think it's particularly inclusive to blacklist people for liking bad tweets. I don't think "we've chased other members of the community out" is a great precedent, either. IMO, as long as she likes bad politics on her own time and isn't practicing intolerance or saying intolerant things, then she meets my standard of community acceptance.
"Why do tolerant people don't tolerate intolerance" is a terrible attitude.Yeah, it's a fine line for me. Wizards are certainly within their rights to stop commissioning, and I wouldn't protest, but I'd prefer them to keep doing it under the principle of "I think a tolerant community should also tolerate some level of bad politics if they aren't acted on."
Fair enough, if it's that bad then defenses probably don't apply.
Cry me a river. Bye.I'd had enough of politics in every other thread that exists on this forum.
FFS guys
The problem is that it inevitably goes exactly where it did: an ethical debate about blacklisting someone. Why does everything have to turn into an ethical debate?
Pizzagate is far beyond the pale of acceptable discourse. Fox News won't touch that shit.The problem is that it inevitably goes exactly where it did: an ethical debate about blacklisting someone. Why does everything have to turn into an ethical debate?
There has literally never been a productive ethical debate on ERA, or GAF for that matter.
The thing is, there's a spectrum between "Magic Financier" and "I don't care about the value of my cards at all" and most people fall toward the middle leaning toward the financier side. Nobody wants to spend a bunch of money on a deck only to have it lose 80% of it's value in a month. We've seen this effect in standard when they were doing masterpieces. Standard prices were super low, but it ended up actually discouraging people from jumping in because, even though it was cheap to build a deck, it was basically impossible to sell those cards down the road and impossible to trade/sell cards that you acquired but didn't want since basically everything was bulk.The funny thing about Masters sets is Yugioh basically does sets a few times a year with much needed reprints (eg. Battle of Legends) and they don't cost nearly as much and are the price of a standard YGO box set. Reprints are always done in sets and structure decks and i honestly think it's a joke we have to wait like over 20 years for a card like Mana Drain or over 10 years for Shadowmoor reprints. I would honestly have a cheap game to play than worry about people in the MTG Finance community getting shitty about losing money on their cards.
They shouldn't be. Having them on the List quite literally violates the rules of the List. They were reprinted in Revised. Reserve List cards are supposed to have been never been reprinted.
modern deck prices were way up this year despite 2 masters sets.The large problem with the financier side of Magic is the Reserve List, at the end of the day. Ever since Modern Masters 2, Wizards has (despite some issues here and there) done a good job utilizing Standard sets, Masters sets, and supplemental products to keep the prices of Modern decks down. If the eventual goal of the company is to essentially kill off Legacy and have Modern as the de facto Eternal format, they're doing a great job. I just don't see Modern as a truly viable investment anymore as a result.
That's largely because of the disaster that was Masters 25. That's what I was referring to when I mentioned "some issues". Following up Iconic Masters (which itself had some issues) with an outright molten disaster was highly problematic.modern deck prices were way up this year despite 2 masters sets.
modern deck prices were way up this year despite 2 masters sets.
The problem is that it inevitably goes exactly where it did: an ethical debate about blacklisting someone. Why does everything have to turn into an ethical debate?
There has literally never been a productive ethical debate on ERA, or GAF for that matter.
This is because Iconic Masters and Masters 25 did nothing to help the situationmodern deck prices were way up this year despite 2 masters sets.
Iconic Masters tried. It did. It had some much needed reprints within. The problem with it was simply that the Mythic slot was not packed with enough value.This is because Iconic Masters and Masters 25 did nothing to help the situation
"they still buyed an underwhelming iconic master, we can literally put crap in those sets and they will still buy" most likely.Iconic Masters tried. It did. It had some much needed reprints within. The problem with it was simply that the Mythic slot was not packed with enough value.
Masters 25, however, is an oddity. I'm not sure how Wizards bungled a Masters set so badly. The Limited was trash, there was barely any real value, and it was too close to a previous Masters set.
This is unlikely, given development times. At some point nine months to a year prior, they looked at Masters 25 and said "This is fine"."they still buyed an underwhelming iconic master, we can literally put crap in those sets and they will still buy" most likely.