When increasing vengeance resolves it puts copies of the targeted spell directly on to the top of the stack. As these weren't cast but just appeared out of thin air they don't trigger the extractor only the original one does.Mahorfeus said:
Shuffling is Not a Formality
- Thread starter Encaen
- Start date
No, because you never actually "cast" the copy.Mahorfeus said:
706.9. To copy a spell or activated ability means to put a copy of it onto the stack; a copy of a spell isn't
cast and a copy of an activated ability isn't activated.
Interesting article about a very interesting subject.
Though I think it is really lacking a short explanation for many of the shuffling techniques mentioned. An overview over the different shuffling techniques would have made the article much more informative and probably more enjoyable to read.
Though I think it is really lacking a short explanation for many of the shuffling techniques mentioned. An overview over the different shuffling techniques would have made the article much more informative and probably more enjoyable to read.
Mash shuffling is splitting the deck and cramming them back together. Pile shuffling is taking the top card and placing that down into any number of smaller piles, so ending up with say 6 piles of 10 cards. Riffle shuffling is splitting the deck and flexing the two smaller stacks so that they fall back together one on top of the other.Kwil said:
... I nearly fell asleep reading that. You really needed to provide explanations as to what the different shuffles are.
Anyway I will stick to just the traditional way of shuffling cards.
http://www.pokerology.com/poker-articles/how-to-shuffle-cards/
Anyway I will stick to just the traditional way of shuffling cards.
http://www.pokerology.com/poker-articles/how-to-shuffle-cards/
There used to be a jerk at my local gaming club who would always mana weave his lands and then shuffle once...just once. He refused to shuffle further saying that his cards were valuable and refused to put any more wear on them than possible.
It wasn't an officially sanctioned tourney so I couldn't have the official ref make him shuffle more...and he was a big buyer from the game store owner so the owner never gave him any crap about it.
It wasn't an officially sanctioned tourney so I couldn't have the official ref make him shuffle more...and he was a big buyer from the game store owner so the owner never gave him any crap about it.
But that's just it, there's no such thing as "perfectly random". True randomness would mean that with each draw you have an equal chance to draw any card in your deck you haven't already drawn. Anything like mana weaving, re-ording by clumps or any other technique actually reduces disorder and would result in a less random distribution of cards.Kross said:
Probably the only way to truly randomize a deck would be to go into a pitch dark room, throw all the cards up in the air, collect them all, somehow making sure all are face down, into a pile and then allowing your opponent to cut and/or shuffle.
Personally I think a good eight to twelve shuffles of at least two kinds, usually mash + overhand, is good enough to have a reasonably "random" order of cards, wherein you will get enough mana to play your spells, but not so much that it floods your hand. Of course, with truly random ordered cards this is always a possibility and should be expected.
Personally I've never heard of this "mana-shuffling" business, but if I saw someone doing that I'd immediately call them a cheater. Being "mana-screwed" or "mana-drowned" with your opening hand is part of the game...which is why they have mulligans in the first place. Not enough land? Too much land? Too many big cards? Too many lesser cards? Shuffle up and try again.
I use a variety of shuffle methods. The classic "cut the deck in half and shuffle" technique, the technique of dealing out every card in the deck into 6 piles in a random order then stacking those six piles back up in a random order. And if the playing area is big enough, I'll even do the messy (and annoying
) technique of just spreading your deck out across the table, mixing the cards around, then bringing them all back together into a reformed deck. I'll do each a couple of times before I consider my deck properly shuffled. Except for in-game shuffle effects (i.e. Elixir of Immortality), in which case I'll just do a couple classic shuffles and move on for the sake of time.
As for the question...
<spoiler=I know these articles are supposed to be for newcomers to the game as well as experienced players...but I feel sad for anyone who plays magic and doesn't know this.> The last chance you get is during your Declare Blockers phase, which comes directly after your opponent's Declare Attackers phase.
I use a variety of shuffle methods. The classic "cut the deck in half and shuffle" technique, the technique of dealing out every card in the deck into 6 piles in a random order then stacking those six piles back up in a random order. And if the playing area is big enough, I'll even do the messy (and annoying
) technique of just spreading your deck out across the table, mixing the cards around, then bringing them all back together into a reformed deck. I'll do each a couple of times before I consider my deck properly shuffled. Except for in-game shuffle effects (i.e. Elixir of Immortality), in which case I'll just do a couple classic shuffles and move on for the sake of time.As for the question...
<spoiler=I know these articles are supposed to be for newcomers to the game as well as experienced players...but I feel sad for anyone who plays magic and doesn't know this.
> The last chance you get is during your Declare Blockers phase, which comes directly after your opponent's Declare Attackers phase.
Great article, one that sadly needs to be posted at the local hobby shop that I play at.
I think the most often reason cited for mana shuffling comes from players refusing to bother shuffling between games. If you play a long game, at the end, and if you manage your cards at all, you are going to have a clump of mana, creatures and spells. Too often I see players scoop up their cards at the end of a match and then give them a couple of overhand shuffles and then complain about getting pockets of mana, creatures, spells, etc.
The only time I think mana shuffling is ever condoned is when I am introducing a new player to the game because its an easy way to ensure that a person has a decent supply of mana without having a mana pocket throw them off. Also because when I help a new player build a deck, its full of low cost cards, so it means they get to play a variety cards early on.
I think the most often reason cited for mana shuffling comes from players refusing to bother shuffling between games. If you play a long game, at the end, and if you manage your cards at all, you are going to have a clump of mana, creatures and spells. Too often I see players scoop up their cards at the end of a match and then give them a couple of overhand shuffles and then complain about getting pockets of mana, creatures, spells, etc.
The only time I think mana shuffling is ever condoned is when I am introducing a new player to the game because its an easy way to ensure that a person has a decent supply of mana without having a mana pocket throw them off. Also because when I help a new player build a deck, its full of low cost cards, so it means they get to play a variety cards early on.
I do appreciate this article for new players - in my playgroup, we mana shuffled all of the time before we started getting involved with Friday Night Magic and the like. We just didn't know any better.
I do wish that there were more articles for higher level players though. Or ones involving Magic flavor, because those can appeal to both newbies and oldies.
I do wish that there were more articles for higher level players though. Or ones involving Magic flavor, because those can appeal to both newbies and oldies.
The "mash" shuffle you detail is called a Faro shuffle.Encaen said:
For the interested. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faro_shuffle]
As for the Inkmoth question:
I'm going to guess this one instead of just reading the Comprehensive rules, but I believe it's at the end of the declare attackers step. Since the next time you would get priority would be after you declare blockers, and once that's happened you can't re-declare.
Anyway, as always, great article!
Actually, for the inkmoth question, the answer is
No latter than the declaration of the last blocker
in real terms (especially at lower rules enforcement levels).
The letter of the law is as described previously. However, it's considered a minor out of order sequencing offence - the intention of the player is pretty clear (I'll block with these dudes) so as long as it is essentially all one motion - block, block, block with inky (paying 1) it's probably going to be fine.
That said: Do it at the right time, before blockers are declared. It's a better habit.
On mana weaving: It's cheating. Seriously, how could it not be?
Everyone agrees stacking your deck is cheating. Mana weaving is essentially stacking your deck.
A parallel example: Mike Long is, for those of you who are unfamiliar with some of the history of the game, one of magics early pros. He is also a massive, massive cheat*
During US nationals in 2000, mike was playing a card called howling wolf. It's a 4 mana 2/2 that when it comes into play you can search for three more copies. I know, it sounds terrible - suffice to say that masks limited was awful and move on.
Long's deck had 4 of these. It only really functioned if he drew one. So he carefully seperated them by ten cards each, shuffled in a half-hearted fashion (if at all; some claim he made a series of motions designed to return the deck to its initial state) and then when his opponent cut, he was always close to a howling wolf.
This is obviously cheating. Mana weaving is only marginally better.
*and no, not all pros are cheats. Not even most or many. Most are fantastic players and good (nearly all) blokes.
No latter than the declaration of the last blocker
in real terms (especially at lower rules enforcement levels).
The letter of the law is as described previously. However, it's considered a minor out of order sequencing offence - the intention of the player is pretty clear (I'll block with these dudes) so as long as it is essentially all one motion - block, block, block with inky (paying 1) it's probably going to be fine.
That said: Do it at the right time, before blockers are declared. It's a better habit.
On mana weaving: It's cheating. Seriously, how could it not be?
Everyone agrees stacking your deck is cheating. Mana weaving is essentially stacking your deck.
A parallel example: Mike Long is, for those of you who are unfamiliar with some of the history of the game, one of magics early pros. He is also a massive, massive cheat*
During US nationals in 2000, mike was playing a card called howling wolf. It's a 4 mana 2/2 that when it comes into play you can search for three more copies. I know, it sounds terrible - suffice to say that masks limited was awful and move on.
Long's deck had 4 of these. It only really functioned if he drew one. So he carefully seperated them by ten cards each, shuffled in a half-hearted fashion (if at all; some claim he made a series of motions designed to return the deck to its initial state) and then when his opponent cut, he was always close to a howling wolf.
This is obviously cheating. Mana weaving is only marginally better.
*and no, not all pros are cheats. Not even most or many. Most are fantastic players and good (nearly all) blokes.
That right there tells me you've never played the game. Occasionally you have a few curt players here and there, but there's really few outright assholes.Zom-B said:
As someone who watches Kibler's stream regularly, I can say he's one of the most level headed and entertaining guys to play with, he pretty much never rages and always keeps a cool head.
In fact, the only time I can think of when I played an asshole was at an FNM where I forgot to de-sideboard from a previous matchup, caught it before we started playing, then was told by my opponent that he was a judge (not the judge of the tournament, but a judge) and he would disqualify me from the tournament and suspend me if I didn't take a game loss. He doesn't have the power to do that and FNM is casual ruleset which prevents that sort of thing, but he was a friend of the TO so I just said "fine, fuck it".
On the whole, though, RL magic is quite civil and damn near everyone I've met has been extremely nice if a bit introverted.
Never played the game? If you mean that I've never played FNM or entered a tournament, you'd be correct. But I play the game on a weekly basis.deth2munkies said:
Regardless, I've played enough competitive sports to know that when you put passionate, driven, skilled people together in the same place, add in stakes of some sort (prizes, prestige, rankings) it brings out the worst in some of those people. Sure, maybe most MtG players are nice guys who don't annoyingly flap their cards around, but the rude and annoying players are out there and I have absolutely no desire to meet them, let alone play Magic with them. I'll stick to my fun and friendly games with my family and good buddies thanks.
I would never say that no one else should play in FNM or tournaments, it's just not the environment that I like to play in. Your little anecdote quite succinctly explains why I avoid these events. I've never had to even once say "fine, fuck it" when playing with friends, or endure some condescending bullshit from some doofus who claims to be a judge (I could make that claim too, if I were so inclined), ruining my fun.
I don't think Magic was developed by Atari in 1997 for windows, but I may be wrong.
And you are incorrect, you should probably look up turn based actions and figure it out from there.RJ 17 said:As for the question...
<spoiler=I know these articles are supposed to be for newcomers to the game as well as experienced players...but I feel sad for anyone who plays magic and doesn't know this.