top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 86 points 2 years ago

And he brought it in wearing an actual fedora to boot

  • source
  • [–] 62 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I heard it's not the size of your deck but how you use it .

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 58 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I remember when Magic the Gathering had no rules on deck size. It suggested between 30 and 60. But it also said it could be anything.

    That didn't last very long lol

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    It's still unlimited (with a minimum) for constructed as far as I'm aware, except EDH at exactly 100. You just have to be able to shuffle the entire deck unassisted without resorting to piles and stuff. It would also be a terrible strategy to dilute your best cards since there can only be four copies. I'm sure there's some crazy gimmick deck that works with 250 cards that only Shaq can play.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    So I use a shuffler after a bad accident and some nerve damage. Am I permanently banned from MtG tournaments or do I gotta take asscrack photos first?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    By anything, did they mean in terms of card limit or literally anything? Cause if it was the latter, then I can imagine the chaos

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    I started off when the game was still brand spanking new; they had no limits on either deck size or what could be in it. Half the cards I own are now banned in tournaments because I haven't bought new cards since high school (I graduated in 2003 for reference) and I had thought the deck size was limited, too, now but another poster points out that is still unlimited for the most part.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 47 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Does it though? Nobody trying to actually compete is going to bring a super large deck. It's only going to hurt your odds of drawing what you need.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Why would the odds change if the ratio of cards are the same? You don’t just build a large deck with filler.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 49 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    According to a quick google, you can only have up to three of the same cards in a Yu-Gi-Oh deck. So you can't keep the ratios the same.

    I don't play Yu-Gi-Oh, but I play Magic, and it's similar there, but you can have up to four of any card.

    I imagine most trading card games are like this, otherwise you could just make a deck of only the most OP card or something. Not exactly fun to build, or play, or play against.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago* (12 children)

    When did magic introduce that rule it’s been ages since I’ve played, I also imagine that doesn’t apply to land, so you land to monster ratio wouldn’t change.

    And I believe those rules wree introduced to yugioh after this debacle, I could be wrong. But it’s not about the individual cards, you need monsters/traps/energy ratios. Those odds wouldn’t change.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I started playing during revised, specifically with the Fallen Empires expansion, and thought that the 4 card limit had always been a part of the game. I looked at my Pocket Players Guide from around that time and could not find that rule. After a little bit of research I ran into this comment on reddit, https://www.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/2jxr9z/comment/clh3ip7 which seems to have an answer although their source linked no longer works. In 1996 the mirage rule book has the 4 card limit listed under "house rules" and in 1999 the Sixth Edition Comprehensive Rules Document has the 4 card limit listed as rule 100.2

    Again unfortunately the link to that document is broken so we can't be 100% sure, but it seems the answer is sometime between Mirage in 1996 and Sixth Edition in 1999

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    The 1998 tournament guide I found doesn’t mention anything about card limits except for single cards and banned cards.

    Mentions the 40 card minimum for drafting.

    But that doesn’t line up with people saying ice age, since ice age is 1995(?). So it seems to be officially in 1999 and was a house rule somehow before that. Weird it being a house rule before official though…

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Four card limits were implemented in the 1990's; I remember it when Ice Age was released.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    What year was that? I found a 1998 tournament pamphlet and nothing about 4 card limits and still had 40 card minimum.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    That might be a limited (sealed/draft) tournament, where you have to build your deck out of cards you get from packs at the start of the tournament. To this day, those tournaments have 40 card deck minimums and no 4 card limits.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago*

    Pamphlet included all the types of tourneys, talked about single limit cards and banned cards as well.

    I can’t find anything concrete online with a specific date or even pack release that coincides with it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    It doesn't apply to just basic lands, yeah. But any special lands you can only have 4. It's been a rule for as long as I've played (since 2017), but I do know it wasn't a rule at the start of the game. I think they added it pretty early on though, as a response to people making decks out of just channel and fireball for instant wins.

    And, sure, you could keep the ratio of card types the same, but while I don't play Yu-Gi-Oh, I have to imagine there are some cards better than other cards. So to make a deck that big, you'd have to include cards that just aren't as good. Playable, sure, but I can't imagine it finding its best cards consistently enough to be competitive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    The point of a large deck (different school of thoughts for large decks) is to drag a game out and wear the opponent or their deck down. A lot of the cards would be considered filler to someone who wants certain monsters. The point of a large deck isn’t certain cards. It’s the ratio between types.

    So yeah you don’t get your pretty little dragon card, but it doesn’t matter, that’s not the strategy.

    This yugioh one in particular was about shuffling the deck, it had to be done properly or would be disqualified for not shuffling properly. So all he needed was one card that caused shuffle and it would take 30 minutes to properly shuffle. Lots of cards trigger shuffle, just need the ratio of types to stay alive till than.

    If people didn’t surrender, they would probably win, but at what time cost.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    I guess I don't really understand Yu-Gi-Oh all that well. I know in Magic there's a bit of a meme deck based around the card Battle of Wits, which basically says if you have over 200 cards in your library at the start of your turn you win the game. But it was never truly competitive because other decks would run it over before they could find and play one of those 4 cards in their 300 card deck or whatever. The synergies in other decks were just too strong for it to survive long enough. People occasionally got lucky enough to place well in a tourney here and there, but it was never a meta deck in competitive play.

    Kinda figured that same problem would exist in Yu-Gi-Oh but yeah, I don't really know enough to say.

    I see what you're saying about the shuffling, that would be annoying as hell. Do Yu-Gi-Oh rounds not have time limits?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    A Battle of Wits deck is different than what the Yu-Gi-Oh deck was trying to do.

    Battle of Wits, while goofy, is a legitimate win condition and the player is trying to win the game by playing a card.

    In contrast, the gigantic Yu-Gi-Oh deck isn't trying to win, but force a draw by taking up the round's time by constantly shuffling the deck. It would be like a Magic deck built around playing Shahrazad until an opponent quit or time was called. You aren't playing to win, but draw.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Reminds me a bit of my favorite modern deck called zombie hunt.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Oh zombie hunt. That was the first deck I ever built on mtgo. And then in my first game trying it some guy ragequit because I wasn't playing a meta deck but was still winning. Sorry you can't beat a meme bro, I have no regrets.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (7 replies)
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Because there are lots of other rules governing the makeup of a deck.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago

    The point of a large deck wouldn’t be for specific cards. It would be for actions. You just need proper ratios of cards to be able to play while waiting for one of many cards to trigger the action. This one was shuffle. Plenty of cards can trigger a shuffle.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    I played Magic back in the day and the goal was to play the smallest deck possible.

    Although I do have to say this guy would have easily beaten my millstone/control deck. I would have just resigned as soon as he sat down.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 37 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 36 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Dude on the right looking like Data in The Long Goodbye.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Ya gotta get to the several hearts of the cards, Yug’!

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›