jump to navigation

More Rules Updates that We Need June 14, 2009

Posted by James in : all, random, game rules, theory, complecated rules, design , trackback

There are more rules updates starting with M10 (Magic 2010) that haven’t been mentioned yet, and I will mention some of the rules that I wanted changed. Here is what Mark L. Gottlieb had to say concerning the M10 rule updates:

The changes listed in this article aren’t the only rules changes that are taking place, but they’re the most relevant ones to modern Magic play. The rest include things like an update to banding to bring it into compliance with the new combat damage rules, a radical streamlining of the phasing rules that I’ve been working on, and various maintenance fixes deep behind the scenes. More information will be made available about all these changes as we near the rulebook’s release date.

I have already mentioned many rules that I disagree with when playing Magic. I am merely going to mention them again here. I might also mention another rule I want changed in a couple of days.

Attach

The most important rule that needs to be updated is the rule for attach. It does not currently make it clear that permanents can’t be attached to multiple permanents at once. Rule 501.2a:

To attach an Aura, Equipment, or Fortification to an object means to take it from where it currently is and put it onto that object. If something is attached to a permanent in play, it’s customary to place it so that it’s physically touching the permanent. An Aura, Equipment, or Fortification can’t be attached to an object it couldn’t enchant, equip, or fortify, respectively.

This should be changed to the following:

To attach a permanent to an object means to permanently consider that permanent to be attached to the object. Each permanent can only be attached to one object at a time. Permanents cannot be attached to themselves. If a permanent is attached to another permanent in play, it’s customary to place it so that it’s physically touching the permanent. An Aura, Equipment, or Fortification can’t be attached to an object it couldn’t enchant, equip, or fortify, respectively.

Go here for more information about why attach rules need to be changed.

Death Baron and more

death baronDeath Baron reads to me like a Zombie Skeleton can get +2/+2. The wording needs to be changed or it needs to give Zombie Skeleton creatures +2/+2. Reminder text could also help.  Gottlieb mentioned that he wants cards to be “intuitive” meaning “do what you would expect.” Ok, then change Death Baron and other cards like it!

Go here to find out why Death Baron and cards like it need to be changed.

First Strike Combat Tricks

So far no first strike combat tricks are allowed. They are forbidden by the rules. These are the rules I am referring to:

502.2c Adding or removing first strike any time after combat damage has been put on the stack in the first combat damage step won’t prevent a creature from dealing combat damage or allow it to deal combat damage twice.

This is NOT intuitive. You have to be a rules lawyer to know about it. Again, you want the game to do what you expect? Change these rules!

Update 6-21-2009: Now that I think about it this rule will be changed slightly because combat damage doesn’t go on the stack anymore. Instead the rule will probably say, “Adding or removing first strike any time after combat damage has been dealt in the first combat damage step won’t prevent a creature from dealing combat damage or allow it to deal combat damage twice.

There should be time after first strike has been dealt and before regular damage is dealt for combat tricks.
Go here to find out about the first strike combat tricks I want to do.

Subtypes need to be clear

dryad arborRight now it’s not always obvious what supertype a subtype is for. Forest is always a subtype for a land. Dryad is always a subtype for a creature. This might be intuitive to some extent, but it’s not as clear as it should be.

Dryad Arbor is merely one example. Tribal is another problem. Some tribal instants are goblins, but we are expected to know that instants can’t be goblins. The card type “tribal” is the goblin.

Sound confusing? Go here for more information about subtype and supertype weirdness.

Tribal isn’t a supertype

Tribal is a card type, but I don’t want it to be. It should be a supertype instead. Why? Because card types are types of cards you can cast (or play). You can play a land or cast a creature, but you can’t cast a tribal. That wouldn’t make sense. Therefore, it doesn’t belong. That’s like listing fruits and mentioning “Bananas, watermelons, and lightsabors.” A lightsabor is not a fruit no matter how much Mark Rosewater wants it to be.

Go here to find out more about why tribal shouldn’t be a card type.

Comments»

1. Recoculous.com: Magic the Gathering Articles » My Top 10 Articles of 2009 - December 30, 2009

[…] 3. More Rules Updates We Need […]