Red is not allowed to do large amounts of direct damage because that's off-color.
How does that make you feel?
>>47663911
i don't really play mtg so it doesn't really make me feel much at all
>>47663911
i get where he's coming from
obviously what he said only applies to burn that can hit creatures, but you wouldnt want a spell that can burn a player for a huge amount either, because that would just be broken unless it was really expensive anyway
>>47663911
>It's a OP outs himself as a fag that can't read episode
>>47663911
On the other hand, you're a complete retard who can't read and doesn't understand the game.
On the other hand, so is MaRo.
>>47663911
There is a time and place for some things anon. Red gets huge damage spells when it's appropriate. It's obvious from context they are just trying to avoid making something like a red doom blade.
>>47664462
...but why?
Why does the color of direct damage get the worst, most easily defeated removal?
they won't print lightning bolt in standard again, and that only does three damage
>>47664605
That's because the closest second they have is fiery impulse on spell mastery, and that only does it to creatures.
>>47664521
>Why does the color of direct damage get the worst, most easily defeated removal?
Holy crap are redfags the worst. Not only are they moronic but they always obnoxiously spew their crap about "muh color fakshuns". If you don't like that red isn't one of the most powerful colors in the game then go splash another color.
Red already has Chain Lightning and Lightning bolt.
>>47664605
Only 3 damage for one mana? Perish the thought!
>>47663911
>We'd like to avoid Red's theme being "Destroy Target Creature" by avoiding large amounts of damage outside of X spells.
RED ISN'T DO DAMAGE OHMAGAWD THIS IS JUST LIKE THAT TIME THEY TOOK AWAY ALL BLUE'S CREATURES BECAUSE BLUE'S THEME IS SPELLS
>>47664521
its not the worst removal, it is the most easily defeated but thats why it comes cheaper and more plentifully then other removal
this is why red is the only color that gets 2 and 3 mana board wipes for the most part, although black has a few as well
red gets cheap removal that can be played around with toughness but has no downside
white gets either expensive removal or cheap removal that gives the opponent resources, or symmetrical board wipes
>>47664378
You've got two other hands, but where's the one hand?
>>47663911
You are a fag.
But so is Maro, because holy shit, this is what happens when you take away shit like Prevent Damage and Regenration.
They started kicking over conenvtions in the name of Fun and Accessibility and now they have to keep cutting and tossing because every time they "fix" a problem, another one pops up.
And the result is that the game becomes blander and blander.
>>47664813
What 2-3 mana board wipes are you talking about nigger?
>>47664855
Both hands are other from eachother. He considers each hand to be equal.
>>47663911
I think that guy needs to stop sipping his own kool aid.
In the meantime i'll keep using this.
>>47665474
And this
>>47665474
Outnumber
>>47665353
pyroclasm, anger of the gods, radiant flames, etc
aka the best and most played board wipes
>>47664167
>it's a dumb meme guy who doesn't realize how gay he sounds
>>47663911
I think this just means they're not going to be doing stuff like Fire Slash that's a lot of anti-creature damage for really cheap.
Instead they're going to have Burn be versatile and scale more directly with mana cost.
While I think big, expensive, burn spells have their place, with how much they're toning down everything lately I'm not too surprised.
>>47666167
Those aren't boardwipes...
>>47669151
What are they then?
>>47669790
Boardscrubbers.
Sounds about right. Same reason green doesn't get 1/1 reach deathtouch flash. The color pie exists to limit what colors can do, not make them have their own spin on things.
>>47669790
pryoclasm, anger of the gods and radiant flames are out of color because mutual, fair destruction is white's slice of the color pie, fucking Maro.
>>47670792
There are plenty of creatures with reach, deathtouch, and flash.
In fact, I think of the colors, green has the most versatility.
>>47670792
Two out of three ain't bad.
>>47670792
>green doesn't get 1/1 reach deathtouch flash
Close enough
>>47663911
I think MaRo needs to retire or be retired ASAP.
>>47670979
indiscriminate destruction and damage is totally in Reds part of the color pie. Look at all the MLD and wipes reds always had. Red is all about blowing everything up.
>>47664855
You really don't want to know where the one hand is.
>>47666002
>creature or player
>>47663938
I have untreated clinical depression, so nothing makes me feel much at all.
>>47664462
>Something like a red Doom Blade.
I couldn't be assed to install Magic Set Editor for a shitty pun.
ITT: Reminders that /tg/ is bad at magic.
>>47665474
>>47665489
>>47666002
Are you people clinically brain dead or something? Like, are you unable to form or hold complex thoughts that allow you to understand how words function?
>>47673602
Put it on a creature and that'd be ridiculous because of the fact that the game values creatures a lot more.
>>47663911
Maro's right about this, though. The weakness of red removal is that it has to scale. That differentiates it from black removal, which just kills outright. And on paper that sounds like it makes red weak, but depending on what burn spells are around in a given format, can still leave red with plenty of powerful options. Especially when so many of those spells allow you to take potshots at the opponent to close out the game faster.
>>47681644
/tg/ complains about Magic's design while not realizing how bad Magic would be if they designed it.
>>47673602
not really. That only hits fliers, which is a restriction, and basically the most green of descriptions. And it doesn't require the flier to be attacking.
deathtouch/flash/reach, could hit ground or flying creatures.
Having said this, that wouldn't be too outthere of a green spell, and isn't unconditional removal as they have to attack. It would have to be more expensive than the ambush viper, probably at least 4 converted mana cost, but then you could also justify it being a little stronger than 1/1.
Where it would get silly and out of green character is if you through first strike on top of that. But green doesn't get first strike normally.
>>47663911
>what is burn?
Fuck you, maro.
>>47682634
If you don't understand the problem with "Red deals damage, so Red shouldn't have limits on how much damage it can deal" see >>47678687
>>47670792
?
>>47683541
Winged Coatl is a cozy card senpai.
>>47663911
As long as there are multiple bolts hes right, just the problem is there are not. roast was a step in the right direction, devour in flames also gets a little credit because its limited meta included spell lands, but fuck maro for saying red shouldnt get good removal.
>>47684024
>fuck maro for saying red shouldnt get good removal.
M/tg/ threads are bad for my blood pressure. Are you incapable of reading? "We don't want cards that might as well read 'Destroy target creature' in Red" is not the same as saying "Red removal must suck"
>>47684024
>>47684120
Fiery temper just got reprinted. Needs discard, but that 3 damage for 1 mana, and up a card
>>47664521
>Why does the color of direct damage get the worst, most easily defeated removal?
This has to be bait. Nobody's this stupid.
