Talk:Wilds of Eldraine/Card comparisons: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
>Carrianator (Created page with "Not Dead After All is not quite strictly better than Feign Death but most of the time it is, does that mean it should go under “Vanillas and French vanillas”?") |
>Neoheart No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Not Dead After All is not quite strictly better than Feign Death but most of the time it is, does that mean it should go under “Vanillas and French vanillas”? | Not Dead After All is not quite strictly better than Feign Death but most of the time it is, does that mean it should go under “Vanillas and French vanillas”? | ||
:That's not what that category is for; V and FV is for creatures, as vanilla creatures makes up a large chunk of reprints and could group things better there. In this case, "most of the time" is generally not good enough for "strictly better", though really it's starting to get quite difficult to separate. The standard I put forth in the Strictly Better article was that no specific card or mechanic could be cited for the case of why a card is not worse or better, such as Devotion for denser costs, but is "destroy enchantment" or "bounce nonland" generic enough to cite? Nobody's accepted or challenged this definition so it's unclear how this new mechanic measures up, apart from being really good at messing with standards. Here, +1/+1 counters have synergies, and while auras do also, they're in different spaces so they shouldn't compare.[[Special:Contributions/114.76.200.191|114.76.200.191]] 20:47, 5 September 2023 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 22:35, 5 September 2023
Not Dead After All is not quite strictly better than Feign Death but most of the time it is, does that mean it should go under “Vanillas and French vanillas”?
- That's not what that category is for; V and FV is for creatures, as vanilla creatures makes up a large chunk of reprints and could group things better there. In this case, "most of the time" is generally not good enough for "strictly better", though really it's starting to get quite difficult to separate. The standard I put forth in the Strictly Better article was that no specific card or mechanic could be cited for the case of why a card is not worse or better, such as Devotion for denser costs, but is "destroy enchantment" or "bounce nonland" generic enough to cite? Nobody's accepted or challenged this definition so it's unclear how this new mechanic measures up, apart from being really good at messing with standards. Here, +1/+1 counters have synergies, and while auras do also, they're in different spaces so they shouldn't compare.114.76.200.191 20:47, 5 September 2023 (UTC)