(02-08-2010, 11:33 PM)Sponson link Wrote: [ -> ][quote author=Chronomaster link=topic=4187.msg136142#msg136142 date=1265688401]
[quote author=Luinbariel link=topic=4187.msg136137#msg136137 date=1265686305]
[quote author=Sponson link=topic=4187.msg136132#msg136132 date=1265683881]
[quote author=Luinbariel link=topic=4187.msg136129#msg136129 date=1265683070]
mtg is hard?
Fun fact, unmorphing is ending a continuous effect, and there fore does not use the stack, which allows a voidmage to flip and counter even though a split second card has already been played.
Concepts of the game aren't hard. Hurr durr mana and attack. But the finer rule interactions via the stack can get pretty dumb.
[/quote]
I reiterate.
[/quote]
You'd think this would be common knowledge at the Pro Tour. People slip up on these things all the time.
It's not so much hard, as it is
archaic given the game is 17 years old. So many keywords, effects, and interactions (the Comprehensive Ruleset Document is 171 pages, larger than even the Star Wars CCG CRD, a game famous for being designed for entirely new ways to play the game every
set) that people who aren't completely wise to everything will get tripped up in a judge call every once in a while.
So yeah, it's hard in that sense.
[/quote]
But if learning the intricacies of mtg isn't hard, then what is?
What is a "hard" game? Chess? hardly. Warhammer? No.
[/quote]
That's a pretty good question, actually, and maybe I'm wrong in not describing it as hard (I prefer deep, as it isn't hard to enter into), but this is a bit outside the scope of this thread.
After all, we're supposed to be attracting people to playing
Diplomacy, not nerding all over this thread. Well, not nerding MTG all over this thread.