Reminder that these two symbols are indistinguishable from one another to the average MtG player

My girlfriend picked it up at a glance, but I guess she's smarter than the average MTG player because she also got shroud, and that was apparently too complex.

Unfortunately, it IS too complex for the average player.
You should've seen the thread the other day where multiple people were surprised that shroud works as it does, and that protection doesn't stop wraths.
It's unfortunate, but the mechanical changes they've made honestly are necessary (the other changes not so much)

I'm glad I missed that thread.

Attached: 7a62b8002ef51bd128292e7c65b609c6804e7aca8df5e7fe9014621b97b2aefc.jpg (1000x1000, 137K)

That's actually a big problem with MTG, the rules are mostly very simple but are not intuitive at all. Most of these assumptions are very reasonable but the game doesn't work in ways that make sense because how old the game is that they can't fix mechanics.

It's very natural to assume Protection from white means you can't die to Wrath of god because that's the image the keyword creates. Other mechanics like tokens only existing in the battlefield(you can't bounce them? If you flicker them, they die?), lands being colorless (why is a swamp not a black permanent) or regeneration not working after the permanent is destroyed(don't you need to get hurt in order to have something regenerate?) are also common complaints I see players having, not because the rules themselves are hard, as they'll understand once it's explained, but because they were designed in non intuitive ways that you can easily learn the game wrongly in casual play and have a hard time unlearning it.

To be fair to new players, Wizards does change shit all the time. A new player might look at an old eldrazi temple and insist that two of them can't be used to cast Though-Knot because you need anus mana too. Or given the retarded new 'any target' wording, new players might figure Lightning Bolt can't hit planeswalkers. Hell, the tap symbol used to be a rotated 'T', so if a new player saw this card in the wild without any indications of what it was, maybe it's just another variation on the tap symbol.

Not an excuse to not use it, as reminder text is a thing, but either way, the design space feels limited enough that I'm not especially sad it's not coming back.

>different colors
>different directions
If a player doesn't at least ask what one means from the other, they're stupid. At least newbies will ask what the difference is.

A lot of people here do not get the distinction between complexity and intuitiveness so I'm glad someone does.

Keeping the old "T" symbol for "tap" and this stylised "U" symbol for "untap" makes too much sense for Wizards to use it, doesn't it?

MtG players are dumb enough to buy Masters 25 and Dominaria, so that makes sense.

I've had to explain to almost everyone I know who was new to Magic that regenerate, in fact, does not mean "return from the graveyard to the battlefield".

>I've been playing for about a year and I had to explain what shroud was to someone who's been playing for over five
why are my friends retarded, what the fuck did they do before I started playing with them

Reminber that the letters "p" and "q" are inbistinguishadle from one another to the average reaber.

>Reminber that the letters "p" and "q" are inbistinguishadle from one another to the average reaber.
Nice

Attached: 1477880800505.png (859x720, 786K)

You're not wrong

Protection IS complex. No one understands what it does intuitively. It's only after getting the DEBT rules lesson that you get. And from that point, sure, it's easy. But a lot of young kitchen table players are not gonna get that lesson.

I had a judge-level understanding of the rules when I stopped playing, but my dumbass childhood self didn't even know what the fuck trample was when I was playing against my younger brother with the pile of random 7th ed/planeshift cards I got for my birthday.

Protection should just be reworded to be
Shrouded from (red), or Hexproof from (red).
Wizards keeps changing shit with magic but it's never useful changes. Anus mana was too little too late, and was barely used in the set it was introduced in, planeswalkers were introduced with a whole set of rules that are now being completely rewritten, "Mana pool" is no longer being written on cards? What about shit like Omnath?
Oh but it's okay they've changed him/her to their. Not for any practical reasons like ink or card space, no it's to make non-binary potatoes happy.

But protection is better because combat

>hexproof from (red)
You mean like they're already doing in Dominaria? You are bitching about them not doing something they've literally already done, unless the spoilers are wrong.

The spoilers were declared officially, there's no chance of them being wrong.

>All the "d" are "b"
I didn't even notice until I read the green text from

Attached: 1521134723160.jpg (600x500, 83K)

>Shrouded from (red), or Hexproof from (red).
But protection also prevents damage.

Well that settles that then. Also, having thought about it for a few more seconds, there's also a card with an omnath style effect in that set as well! And it works perfectly well without "mana pool" - frankly, a way to word it isn't even particularly hard to think of. And the walker complaint is completely retarded, since the rules for them have barely changed at all this set, unless I missed something. I keep tripping into new ways that post is stupid.

The planeswalker damage redirection rule is being removed, and now most things that deal damage to "target creature or player" will just say "to target" and unspecified target is being classified as "creature, player, or planeswalker".
The ultimate meaning of this change is previously, if you had Hexproof (such as through Witchbane Orb), an opponent could not just Lightning Bolt your Jace, they must Lightning Bolt your face and redirect the damage to Jace. Now, they can do so, but if Jace has hexproof (such as from Privileged Position), they cannot. This would not have protected a planeswalker before.
It was an extremely minor rule that only mattered in specific circumstances.

It's honestly a pretty good and logical rule change, but comes off as very clumsy because of the unchangeable nature of cardboard.

It's like cards that say 'bury' instead of destroy.

Bury is technically different from destroy. Bury means that it is destroyed and cannot be regenerated.

Had no idea.

Huh. Yeah, missed that. I suppose it's less of a hack than the original damage redirection rules and allows slightly finer control over burn spell effects, but I bet the oracle wording for earthquake and crew will be messy.

I know what you mean. I don't know how many times i've failed to explain THAC0 was a bad mechanic due to unintuitivenes because anons kept responding with "but it's not complicated"

One rule that is super unintuitive that I have to explain to people is: Once a creature is blocked, unless it has trample, it's still counted as blocked.

You can bolt my chump blocker if you want, but the damage still won't go through to me.

The creature with trample is still blocked, right? It deals its full damage to the defending player if the blocker disappears because of trample but it's still blocked for the purpose of any effect or targeting requirement that cares.

Right. Damage would go through if it has trample, but it's still considered blocked.

If it doesn't have trample it doesn't deal damage.

That's not super unintuitive. It's like when the blocker is declared, the creatures are ready to trade some blows, but if the blocker gets path'd or something, the attacker just whiffs his hit unless he had trample, where the hit will carry over regardless unless the blocker would have been able to soak it all up.
Deathtouch and trample is a spicy one but not unintuitive either.

That seems like a really dumb rule to be honest.

It should be something like since the blocker is returned, you may choose another blocker or let the damage go through.

That's a good way to conceptualize it after you know about it but that doesn't mean it's intuitive. The intuitive line of reasoning is no more blocker -> no longer blocked -> I hit the player.

You never choose blockers to deal damage to in magic (short of shit like provoke). It wouldn't make sense to do so here.

I meant that the defender can pick another blocker, not the attacking player.

That's no good because it means you can't save creatures with removal, which would suck.

It would mean players would have to choose between taking damage or losing a different creature instead of getting a get out of jail free card.

How many rules arguments has this asshole caused?

Attached: mma-182-progenitus.jpg (672x936, 257K)

Not a lot. "Everything" is pretty clear.
It's pretty much shroud + prevent all damage + unblockable.

Removal being strong is a good thing. The rule is good, just unintuitive.

Probably caused more shitposting than actual arguments. Unlike the embarrassing amount of fa/tg/uys who didn't get how Hoard Smelter works.

I would have argued otherwise but seeing the amount of posts where people don't know basic things, I believe you.

What do you mean wrath of god kills him? He has protection from EVERYTHING.

What do you mean Phantasmal Image kills him? (Or used to) He has protection from EVERYTHING

>What do you mean wrath of god kills him? He has protection from EVERYTHING.
Which is easily resolved by saying "that basically means shroud + prevent all damage + unblockable, which doesn't stop indiscriminate effects".
>What do you mean Phantasmal Image kills him? (Or used to)
What? With the old legend rule or something? That'd require explaining legends in the first place, protection doesn't enter into it.

If you remember those ask a judge threads we used to have, I'm pretty sure GA started them in response to that incident.

I'm astonished by how many longtime Magic players actually have a very weak grasp on the rules. I've been playing for a whopping total of 8 months, and a few weeks ago I had to explain to someone who's played for TWELVE YEARS that bolting a creature with < 3 toughness in response to a pump spell actually would still kill it.

How the fuck do you play for 12 years and still not understand how the stack works??? I simply do not get it.

Attached: 1399221671711.jpg (416x620, 61K)

Did he get vanned or something? Haven't seen him in a while.

>What? With the old legend rule or something? That'd require explaining legends in the first place, protection doesn't enter into it.
It's more explaining that Phantasmal Image doesn't target, so his protection doesn't do shit.

Because unless you go out of your way to get educated it's very possible to just never run in to the way the rules actually work.

One thing that is very frustrating about learning to play Magic is that you basically can't correctly learn it from what cards say.

Ie: Teferi's Protection can run some retard infinite combo using an Auratogg to sacrifice an aura under its effects, which is absolute nonsense if you actually read the card. Without having read it to actually be a legitimate strategy it would have been seemed like nonsense. Same goes for wraths and protection, hexproof, shroud, etc

While all things do need a weakness the phrasing on the cards leaves little ambiguity. If a card says "This can't be blocked, targeted, dealt damage, or enchanted by anything Red" and then someone blasts that monster with a wrath because 'no, its not targeting it. no its not doing damage to it, its just destroying it.' it seems super retarded to new players.

I don't blame them either, it makes me feel like a prick explaining to someone "yeah thats what the card says but fuck you". Especially if you and your entire playgroup are new you will learn all kinds of "bad" habits just learning to play.

I've never had anyone get confused by copies not targeting.

Man, I guess. Granted, this dude has always only played casually, whereas the second I first learned the game I wanted to become a competitive player. It's amazing how much you can learn in 8 months when you use the wonderful tool of Google to look concrete rules up every single time an in-game situation arises that you don't understand.

>Ie: Teferi's Protection can run some retard infinite combo using an Auratogg to sacrifice an aura under its effects, which is absolute nonsense if you actually read the card. Without having read it to actually be a legitimate strategy it would have been seemed like nonsense.
What the hell are you talking about here, I can't parse this at all

No clue. I assume he just left - can't say I'd blame him.

this is a really really good post

The Dryad Arbor argument infuriates me because it only becomes a problem if the player with Dryad Arbor is intentionally trying to deceive. It's also easily fixable with a floor rule that requires players to keep lands that are also creatures separate from lands that are not creatures as long as they are creatures.

Yeah. I posted up thread that I didn't know shit about the rules when I started playing, and that lasted through til Mirrodin when I started paying attention to competitive play. No room for fucking up there.

Not him but: I assume he means you can't figure out some cards work just by the text on the cardboard. You need additional context.

This combo.

To me it seems pretty fucking clear by the phrasing on Teferi's "treated as though they don't exist" that you can't interact with those cards at all and neither can anyone else.

If someone tried to play that I would tell them that is nonsense and stop playing with them if they made any serious argument because that looks like "no i beat you at blackjack. i got 25, its a bigger number than yours" rule comprehension. That one is fresh in my mind because I learned about it last week but there are plenty of other similar situations.

Attached: faggot shit.png (936x445, 767K)

To be honest if I remember it correctly around 4th or 6th edition it worked like that, all istants resolved together, you needed an interrupt to actually kill it before it buffed. So it could just be someone that learned to play one way and never discovered the rule has changed.

That statement is technically true of any card with a keyword ability but no reminder text.

You activate Lethal Vapors before (or as an answer) to Teferi's Protection, meaning that Lethal Vapors has yet to phase out.
Where is the issue?

It's possible. I can't claim to know anything about the rules as they existed before this summer when I started playing lmfao

But it still pisses me off when these old dudes get incredibly haughty and act like I don't know what I'm talking about because I'm new/young/a girl even when they are actually, objectively wrong about how something works

Read Abolisher.

I have absolutely no idea of how this combo works.

Because the combo hinges on Lethal Vapors simultaneously being indestructible from the effect of Teferi's but also able to be interacted with when it is described as "treated as though they don't exist".

Looking at those cards in the order they are presented you are saying you would think that combo works?

Yeah I guess abolisher stop the opponent from playing the ability of vapours in your turn, but then what?

Yes and?

You skip all of your turns while teferi's protection makes it impossible for you to lose.

I'm gonna need a step by step explanation of that one.

I'm not sure how Abolisher fits in but the other two let you skip an arbitrarily large number of your own turns (by stacking Lethal Vapors activations) and essentially making it impossible for your opponent to do anything to you on their turn.

Your opponent can still win, or at least not lose, if they either have a game-winning combo that doesn't target you or they have some way to keep themselves from decking out.

See what I mean?

The second I posted that faggot shit combo the discussion of the thread immediately turned to it because it looks like literal nonsense.

>Because the combo hinges on Lethal Vapors simultaneously being indestructible
No, no, no. You don't understand.
You activate Vapors a million times during your turn before doing anything, which lead to vapors going to the graveyard and you skipping the next million turns. AFTER that you cast Teferi's Protection, which make you immortal. Then you pass your turn.

Yeah good luck with that. I'm as stereotypically neckbeard as they come and I still have trouble convincing dipshit McGee that blockers haven't left combat when tapped since Beta (actually had to have this conversation at FNM)

Step 1: Activate Lethal Vapors a bunch of times to skip 1000 turns.
Step 2: Cast Teferi's Protection so your life total won't change for the next 1000 turns(because it doesn't end until you get a turn).
Step 3: Wait until the opponent draws to death.

Wait I understood it. Grand abolisher is because otherwise the opponent could skip the same number of turns of you ( or like 10 less to give himself 10 extra turns)

That combo seems completely functional. Provided the enemy doesn't have Platinum Angel, Laboratory Maniac, or any "I win the game" effects, though.

"Ok, you win. You can go sit in the corner while the rest of us play for 2nd"

To be honest the problem isn't Teferi's protection, is how you can use the vapours to skip an arbitrary number of turns on its own. Teferi just stop the opponent from killing you in the infinite turns you gave him, which is what the card is written for.

It's also stopped by Elixir of Immortality.

Wow, someone is too much a faggot for combo in his commander?

Yeah but technically you'd have to play out all those turns. Plan "play for second" is better.

Why so upset? You won.

>people don't play legendary eldrazi or other anti-mill tech in EDH

Have you considered playing cards that actually win you the game?

>Yeah but technically you'd have to play out all those turns.
I'd bet I'm more patient than the combo player is.

Late in a game it's pretty easy to just bunch all of your lands together. But yeah it's easily fixed by saying that ALL creatures should be in front.

>Don't be a complete retard
ironic

Attached: sneakyscoprion.png (654x521, 584K)

I'm not the one so assblasted by combo that barged in a discussion talking about banning people from playgroups if they play them. You know that magic is more than moving creatures sideways right? I bet you exclude even people that play thing like craterhoof.

holy shit thread won

One, I'm not that guy. Two, that's literally how the combo works. You intentionally remove yourself from the game. Playing for second is what should happen. Unless you think you're so important that everyone should concede?

>"p" and "q"
does this say "p" and "q" or "q and p" ?

Attached: confus.jpg (570x494, 61K)