Talk:Battle for Zendikar: Difference between revisions
(→Colorless is not strictly better than colored cards: new section) |
|||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
As far as I know a card can't be strictly better than another card of different colors. And same goes for colorless vs. colored. | As far as I know a card can't be strictly better than another card of different colors. And same goes for colorless vs. colored. | ||
There are effects that care about color, some positive some negative. Being colorless isn't _always_ an advantage. | There are effects that care about color, some positive some negative. Being colorless isn't _always_ an advantage. | ||
*Yes, it is. You can pay colorless mana costs with any color of mana, which makes them strictly superior, and you don't consider interactions with other cards for this purpose. So, for instance, Scaleguard Sentinels is a strictly superior card compared to Elvish Warrior, since the former has the same mana cost and Power/Toughness while having additional positive abilities, even though the latter is an Elf and has synergy with Elf-matters tribal cards. I've re-added the Eldrazi to the page as a result. --[[Special:Contributions/58.7.241.238|58.7.241.238]] 16:27, 17 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 16:27, 17 September 2015
"Sweat" has been named
Since the page is currently locked as preview weeks are coming for this set, I felt the need to point out something that needs fixing here, rather than just straight-up fixing it myself. Under "Expeditions", the following text is present: "There are 25 Expedtion cards appearing with Battle for Zendikar (the 5 new dual lands, 10 shock lands and 10 fetch lands) and 20 more cards coming in "Sweat"." However, "Sweat" has now been named "Oath of the Gatewatch", so we should probably use that name instead. If anyone with the ability to edit the page could fix this, it would be appreciated. Thanks. (And yes, I know that this comment that I am making is going to look really silly years down the line when BFZ is old and OGW is very well-known, plus the page will have been unlocked forever.) --64.69.158.250 23:42, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
- Hardly silly, this is the entire point of talk pages! Also, while the change you suggested was already made, note that this page (and many others that are protected) is lightly protected, and only requires that you register an account. Feel free to sign up! --Corveroth (talk) 04:42, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
Colorless is not strictly better than colored cards
As far as I know a card can't be strictly better than another card of different colors. And same goes for colorless vs. colored. There are effects that care about color, some positive some negative. Being colorless isn't _always_ an advantage.
- Yes, it is. You can pay colorless mana costs with any color of mana, which makes them strictly superior, and you don't consider interactions with other cards for this purpose. So, for instance, Scaleguard Sentinels is a strictly superior card compared to Elvish Warrior, since the former has the same mana cost and Power/Toughness while having additional positive abilities, even though the latter is an Elf and has synergy with Elf-matters tribal cards. I've re-added the Eldrazi to the page as a result. --58.7.241.238 16:27, 17 September 2015 (UTC)