Strictly better: Difference between revisions

From MTG Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
>@DeletedUser40376198
m (Reverted edits by 98.24.231.181 (talk) to last revision by Bobobberts)
No edit summary
Line 30: Line 30:
*<c>Jungle Shrine</c> is strictly better than <c>Shivan Oasis</c>, because it can provide an additional color of mana.
*<c>Jungle Shrine</c> is strictly better than <c>Shivan Oasis</c>, because it can provide an additional color of mana.
*<c>Negate</c> is strictly better than <c>Flash Counter</c>, because it can counter additional types of spells.
*<c>Negate</c> is strictly better than <c>Flash Counter</c>, because it can counter additional types of spells.
*<c>Mother of Runes</c> is strictly better than <c>Benevolent Bodyguard</c> because her ability can be used more than once.
*<c>Mother of Runes</c> is strictly better than <c>Benevolent Bodyguard</c> because her ability can be used more than once. (Not quite, Benevolent Bodyguard can sacrifice the turn it is played, Mother of runes has summoning sickness)


==Same effect but cost less==
==Same effect but cost less==

Revision as of 11:03, 2 December 2014

Strictly better is a term used to compare cards that are identical in most regards, and in each way they are different the same one is more favorable. [1] Strictly better does not care about creature type. [2] For example, Lightning Bolt is strictly better than Shock. Both are instants that cost {R} and deal damage to a creature or player, but Lightning Bolt deals 3 damage where shock deals 2 damage. The opposite of strictly better is called strictly worse, as in "Shock is strictly worse than Lightning Bolt."

The convention is well understood among experienced Magic players. However, those new to the terminology may complain that a strictly better card is not better in all situations than a strictly worse card. [3] [4] For example, Shock is a better card to draw than Lightning Bolt if both players are at two life and the opponent controls a Booby Trap naming Lightning Bolt. Such examples are not a failure of the terminology; it compares only the attributes of the cards regardless of obscure situations that may arise in play.

Cards are constantly being obsoleted by strictly better versions (sometimes even in the same set, such as Glory Seeker and Knight of Cliffhaven). This may lead to power creep. Examples of strict comparisons include:

More powerful at same cost

The following cards have the same cost but one has an added ability or greater size.

More flexibility at same cost

The following cards have the same effect, but one is more restricted in its use.

Same effect but cost less

The following cards have the same effect but one has a greater cost.

Instant instead of sorcery

The following are cards that have the same effect and cost but are instants instead of sorceries.

Multiple upgrades

Some cards can be compared strictly in more than one way. If one card is better than another in every way that they're different, then the comparison is strict.

References

  1. Mark Rosewater (March 31, 2003). "This Land is My Land". magicthegathering.com. Wizards of the Coast.
  2. Error on call to {{WebRef}}: Parameters url and title must be specifiedMark Rosewater (July 20, 2014). "". Tumblr.
  3. Mike Flores (March 03, 2014). "Strictly Superior". magicthegathering.com. Wizards of the Coast.
  4. Mike Flores (March 10, 2014). "Redundancy". magicthegathering.com. Wizards of the Coast.