Comprehensive Rules and creature types

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

There seem to be three creature types missing from the glossary entry in
the rules. I tried to bring this to John Carter's attention in
February, but that seems to have had no effect.

Should Expansion-Symbol, Mime, and Penguin be in the list? And if so,
how do I inform someone in a position to do something about this.
--
Daniel W. Johnson
panoptes@iquest.net
http://members.iquest.net/~panoptes/
039 53 36 N / 086 11 55 W

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Daniel W. Johnson <panoptes@iquest.net> wrote:
>There seem to be three creature types missing from the glossary entry in
>the rules. I tried to bring this to John Carter's attention in
>February, but that seems to have had no effect.
>
>Should Expansion-Symbol, Mime, and Penguin be in the list? And if so,
>how do I inform someone in a position to do something about this.

Recognizing those types from a previous attempt of my own to bring their
missingness to WotC's attention, I can say that yes they ought to be there.
I'll poke them again about it.

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from dbd@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.

 

[gil-galad]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Those creatures type seems to me to be part of either Unglued or
Unhinged, which are not official expansion set. A creature type that is
only in in these sets, should not be available in official play. If a
creature type, that is only in Unglued or Unhinged, is in the creature
o-list, then I think you should informed them of that.

GG

Daniel W. Johnson wrote:
> There seem to be three creature types missing from the glossary entry in
> the rules. I tried to bring this to John Carter's attention in
> February, but that seems to have had no effect.
>
> Should Expansion-Symbol, Mime, and Penguin be in the list? And if so,
> how do I inform someone in a position to do something about this.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Gil-Galad <palomides@videotron.ca> wrote:

> Those creatures type seems to me to be part of either Unglued or
> Unhinged, which are not official expansion set. A creature type that is
> only in in these sets, should not be available in official play. If a
> creature type, that is only in Unglued or Unhinged, is in the creature
> o-list, then I think you should informed them of that.

You mean like Paratrooper, Teddy, or
The-Biggest-Baddest-Nastiest-Scariest-Creature-You'll-Ever-See?
--
Daniel W. Johnson
panoptes@iquest.net
http://members.iquest.net/~panoptes/
039 53 36 N / 086 11 55 W

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 23:50:41 -0400, Gil-Galad <palomides@videotron.ca> wrote:
>Those creatures type seems to me to be part of either Unglued or
>Unhinged, which are not official expansion set. A creature type that is
>only in in these sets, should not be available in official play. If a
>creature type, that is only in Unglued or Unhinged, is in the creature
>o-list, then I think you should informed them of that.

You may want to actually LOOK at the creature-type list. Every other
creature type that's only in Unglued/Unhinged is in there, including
Clamfolk, Cow, Designer, Donkey, Gamer, Lady-of-Proper-Etiquette, and
The-Biggest-Baddest-Nastiest-Scariest-Creature-You'll-Ever-See. These three
are inexplicably not there.

Dave

 

[RisseR]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

I actually had a question about that.

According to the Oracle, Timmy, Power Gamer is still Summon Legend,
which I think gives him the creature type Legend. But that's not in
the list.

I mean, I know all the Legend creatures were changed to Legendary
Creatures, but the Oracle (via Gatherer) doesn't show that.

In fact, the Oracle still lists Miss Demeaner as a 'Lady Of Proper
Etiquette', whereas the type in the rules is
'Lady-Of-Proper-Etiquette'. This would lead me to beleive that Proper
and Etiquette are valid creature types as well.

A small detail, but one that is easily fixed. It seems they could
update the Oracle wording for creature types in Unglued and Unhinged
pretty easily.

Peter

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Dunno about the others, but I think they were just Too Embarrassed to
put Penguin in there.


James, who has been wanting a Penguin card since becoming a judge....

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

On 26 Aug 2005 06:20:21 -0700, Risser <knucklehead000@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I actually had a question about that.
>
>According to the Oracle, Timmy, Power Gamer is still Summon Legend,
>which I think gives him the creature type Legend. But that's not in
>the list.

Unfortunately, when they went through and updated files for 6th Edition,
they left the file for Unglued alone. Meaning that its card wordings are all
still using pre-6th Edition templates (Clam Session has an ability starting
"During your upkeep, ...", for another example, and Jack-in-the-Mox says
"Treat this ability as a mana source"). Resources do exist that show how they
should be worded for 6E-and-later templates, but they haven't made it into
Oracle/Gatherer yet, and I keep poking them about it.

>I mean, I know all the Legend creatures were changed to Legendary
>Creatures, but the Oracle (via Gatherer) doesn't show that.

I know. I want them to update Unglued too. I'll poke them again.

>A small detail, but one that is easily fixed.

Not quite -so- easily - _all_ the Unglued cards have to be gone over and
brought up-to-date. But fairly easily considering it's been unofficially
done for some time now, yes.

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from dbd@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 23:50:41 -0400, Gil-Galad <palomides@videotron.ca>
wrote:

>Those creatures type seems to me to be part of either Unglued or
>Unhinged, which are not official expansion set. A creature type that is
>only in in these sets, should not be available in official play.

Yes but most of the creature types are not valid when your playing a
format other than vintage/legacy.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Gareth Pye <gareth@gpsatsys.com.au> wrote:

> Yes but most of the creature types are not valid when your playing a
> format other than vintage/legacy.

I see no reference to tournament format in the following rule:

212.1e If an instruction requires choosing a subtype, you must choose
one, and only one, existing subtype, and the subtype you choose must be
for the appropriate type. For example, you can't choose a land type if
an instruction requires choosing a creature type. (Use the Oracle card
reference to determine whether a creature type exists; see rule 200.2.
You can also find complete lists of subtypes in the glossary at the end
of this document under "Creature Types," "Land Types," etc.)
Example: When choosing a creature type, "Merfolk" or "Wizard" is
acceptable, but "Merfolk Wizard" is not. Words like "artifact,"
"opponent," "Swamp," or "truck" can't be chosen because they aren't
creature types.

Sure, in a standard tournament, types like Stangg-Twin are not likely to
show up outside of something like Ashes of the Fallen, but any actual
restriction along those lines would require a separate list of creature
types for each tournament format.
--
Daniel W. Johnson
panoptes@iquest.net
http://members.iquest.net/~panoptes/
039 53 36 N / 086 11 55 W

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Hrm I must have come to that conclusion by means of a over active
imagination.

It just seams weird to be able to name cheetah (only a creature type
in portal 3 kingdoms) when its not the type of a creature that is
legal for play in any tornament when I can't name dingo.

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 21:27:40 -0500, panoptes@iquest.net (Daniel W.
Johnson) wrote:

>Gareth Pye <gareth@gpsatsys.com.au> wrote:
>
>> Yes but most of the creature types are not valid when your playing a
>> format other than vintage/legacy.
>
>I see no reference to tournament format in the following rule:
>
>212.1e If an instruction requires choosing a subtype, you must choose
>one, and only one, existing subtype, and the subtype you choose must be
>for the appropriate type. For example, you can't choose a land type if
>an instruction requires choosing a creature type. (Use the Oracle card
>reference to determine whether a creature type exists; see rule 200.2.
>You can also find complete lists of subtypes in the glossary at the end
>of this document under "Creature Types," "Land Types," etc.)
>Example: When choosing a creature type, "Merfolk" or "Wizard" is
>acceptable, but "Merfolk Wizard" is not. Words like "artifact,"
>"opponent," "Swamp," or "truck" can't be chosen because they aren't
>creature types.
>
>Sure, in a standard tournament, types like Stangg-Twin are not likely to
>show up outside of something like Ashes of the Fallen, but any actual
>restriction along those lines would require a separate list of creature
>types for each tournament format.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Gareth Pye <gareth@gpsatsys.com.au> wrote:

> Hrm I must have come to that conclusion by means of a over active
> imagination.
>
> It just seams weird to be able to name cheetah (only a creature type
> in portal 3 kingdoms) when its not the type of a creature that is
> legal for play in any tornament when I can't name dingo.

And maintaining two lists which are mostly the same (one for tournament
and one for casual) would not be strange?

I think MTGO was also an issue when that change was made. The "list of
valid creature types" is easy to implement. The alternative would have
been a list of invalid creature types and code to watch for typos (e.g.,
Doppleganger).

Oh, and you do realize that Cheetah cards will become legal in a couple
tournament types next month?
--
Daniel W. Johnson
panoptes@iquest.net
http://members.iquest.net/~panoptes/
039 53 36 N / 086 11 55 W