So they purposely made it wrong, as a joke, right?

>>54484657
They were worried about a 2 mana planeswalker being OP, which isn't an unwarranted concern.

All it really needed was the discard to not be random.

>>54484753

if the discard wasnt random it would be a little too strong dont you think?

>>54485143
Well, test it.

>>54485143
Discard then draw then?

>>54485143
i play this guy in my 360 unpowered cube with the"at random" part crossed out, he's strong but he's never felt oppressive in any way.

my drafter where obsessed with this guy when he came out but he was just not even close to good enough so we decided to buff him and its been all fun ever since.

>>54485579
He probably would've been fine as 'You may discard a card. If you do, draw a card', yes.
+s in general can be used regardless of board state, and letting him just draw outright if you have no cards in hand WOULD probably be too good

>>54484657
It's red, they purposedly made it wrong out of petty hatred.

>>54487182
This is actually a really good idea. Do you think they'd ever errata that? Seems pretty uncharacteristic of wizards, but honestly they've got a lot of shit that's just bad only because if funky stuff like that.

>>54492268
They don't make functional errata unless it's absolutely necessary for the card to function as intended - otherwise they could've fixed cards instead of banned them, for example.
Since they can't change what physical cards actually say, and they want them to do what they say they do (as best as possible) because not everyone would know 'hey THIS card specifically has been changed', they keep things as they are.

>>54492504
Have they changed printed text for any reason other than a reprint getting the new template text?

I suppose they can always "Jacefy" Tibalt and print something slightly different.

>>54492504
This is why online cgs are nice. You can miss some janky shit in testing, then fix it in a patch.

I like Tibalt (mostly because I'm a contrarian). I hope he gets a new version that's OP as fuck so he can have the best and worst planeswalker card.

It'll never happen. He'll probably be in the unstable set making rigger tokens or some shit.

File: Marath, Will of the Wild_C13.jpg (253KB, 672x936px) Image search: [Google]

253KB, 672x936px

>>54492528
This guy got errata'd. X can't be zero.

File: EGrq3PXmrF_EN[1].jpg (240KB, 265x370px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 265x370px

>>54492528
They can always make a new Tibalt, but as-is the current one is bleh and nothing will be changed because it all works fine. They have said that Tibalt the character is far more liked than Tibalt the card (and that he's RB rather than monored), so we may eventually get a snappy-dressed devil/human that doesn't suck balls.
>>54492621
Them forgetting to put that text on (which gives infinite ETB/death triggers otherwise) was just one of two erratas in C13 - both of which came out before the set was actually released.
The other added 'card types and creature types' after abilities to this because they forgot turning things into artifact creatures doesn't work the same way as turning things into...literally anything else (due to how many artifacts turn into artifact creatures)

>>54484753
>>54485579
Madness

>>54484657
stream that film, if you're so great

>>54487182
Wouldnt you be able to then get stacks by ignoring the "may?" Thats back to OP.

>>54493593
You'd just get a counter and do nothing. That's why there's an 'if you do' on the draw a card - you have to discard to draw. If you didn't, well, nothing happens (beyond paying the cost of the loyalty ability, which is 'put a loyalty counter on this card' in that case)
And that's how walkers in general work - even if you can't actually USE their + abilities - because, say, they target creatures and someone used a boardwipe - they're worded so you can activate them for the sole purpose of getting loyalty counters for no effect.

>>54484753
The problem they found with a 2-mana planeswalker was that it either turned out to be too powerful or too weak. So they erred on the weaker side when making Tibalt rather than make an overpowered planeswalker knowingly so soon after Jace TMS.

This was also back in the day when WotC still thought it was good practice to design cards in ways no previous cards had been designed simply because it had never been done before.

>>54494058
>This was also back in the day when WotC still thought it was good practice to design cards in ways no previous cards had been designed simply because it had never been done before.

Ah the good old days when we actually got interesting cards.

>>54493522
What film?

>>54494058
>This was also back in the day when WotC still thought it was good practice to design cards in ways no previous cards had been designed simply because it had never been done before.
Literally the good old days because even if the cards were dogshit at least they were the kind of dogshit that made you ask "but why".

I'm still a scrub at MtG, can someone explain to me why Tibalt is such shit? Just looking at him, he seems decent, if not outright good.

>>54499096
Random self discard that comes after a draw so you can't even use it to go from 0 to 1 cards in hand

Gotcha, but even then it doesn't seem to be as meme tier as everyone makes it seem.

>>54499190
his -4 is complete garbage and you cant even use his - from the get go as you can with most other planeswalkers. The ult will never happen. which makes his + his only real function, and the discarding at random really is top tier garbage. dont try to defend this card, I play him and each time I am suffering. Thats the only thing that is right about the card, the fact that tibalt is a sadist.

>>54499190
What most people don't realize is that he takes the role of a gearhulk in a lot of other decks. Do you play a gearhulk against a full board? Probably not because you're playing control with red so why the fuck would the board be full if you have so many sweepers.

Gearhulk has the problem that everybody is running abrade and is weak to creature-hate. Bolas can't just chill and block a creature to death every turn but is better in control matchups.

He's trash against aggro but luckily you have a sideboard.

Is there no way to make Tibalt viable?

>>54502638
remove the random part
make the -4 target creatures too.

but he will hopefully never get a new card

>>54502733
>but he will hopefully never get a new card
But I need him for my edgelord deck.

>>54494058
dont you mean Jace TSM (the second mortgage)

>>54494058
you say this literally right after a set where we got a new resource system.

So what's a good 2-mana walker design for Tibalt?

I could see:
+1; Deal 1 damage to up to 2 creatures and/or players
-1; Deal 1 damage to all creatures
-5; All lands become 1/1 elemental creatures. They're still lands

1 loyalty

>>54502122
Friend has tibalt -4'd me after I cast enter the infinite more times than I am proud of.

>>54507841
You're designing a low mana walker wrong. I don't know how so many people fall into this pit of thinking "Well if I make the ult that no one ever uses and the normal minus suck, then the walker is balanced" No. It's the plus ability that has to be shit (Double edged sword or chance to whiff) and the other abilities are normally powerful. It's been like this for almost every damn planeswalker below CMC 4 and people still can't wrap their heads around it

File: 1500197328052.jpg (55KB, 645x968px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 645x968px

>Discard a card at random

How do you do this when you know what the cards in your hand are?

>>54508705
Fan your hand out, and have an opponent pick from their backs

>>54508705
let your opponent pick

File: webms aren't streaming.webm (3MB, 294x125px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 294x125px

>>54493522

>>54484753
They don't worry about other planeswalkers being OP, what's the problem?

>>54507841
Tibalt, Player hater
+1 discard your hand, draw a card
-4 Tibalt, player hater deals two damage to target creature or player and four damage to you
-8 flip a coin. If heads take an extra turn after this, at that end of that turn, you lose the game. If tails, you lose the game.

>>54507841
This >>54508666

The Tibalt you just made could easily just spam the +1 all day in order to clear out smaller threats to himself or otherwise help get rid of chump blockers. Then, assuming you haven't won from the advantage of two free pings each turn, you'll eventually be able to have everyone's lands become tiny creatures, which sets you up for an easy way to kill your opponent's manabase and give you an easy lead.

Or this could all backfire since they just need a shock to kill it once it hits the board.

It's incredibly swingy, since it demands an answer right away, but also protects itself and generates good value right away. The current version of Tibalt is better balanced in that regard, since it won't be as easy to focus instantly, but also won't be generating huge value. Even if it didn't have the 'random' wording, it's still just filtering your hand.

A 2 drop walker can't have a ton of value with their +1, since that quickly snowballs. Their +1 should be something minor that helps the player, or hampers the opponent, but it can't excel at defending itself, since it's already easy to defend a 2 drop walker because there's nothing major on the board already.

>>54508866
repeatable ANYTHING at 2 mana with other upsides

>>54508948
Shit, I forgot starting loyalty...
2

>>54508866
Most games tend to wrap up by turn 4 or 5. Something that enters on the second turn will sway the direction of the game a lot more compared to something on turn 4, which is more likely to be when you want to start moving in for the win.

A 4 mana walker that will quickly win you the game if not answered is fine. A 2 mana walker that will quickly win you the game isn't.

>>54508866
Two mana is the real problem here, especially in mono-red. If they made him too good, burn decks will actually use and play him. Wizards does not want this, because burn decks are not what they want in the game.

>>54509019
>Wizards does not want this, because red decks are not what they want in the game
Fixed that for you

>>54508948
Might actually be useful in a Rakdos/Hellbent style deck. Gives you an extra spell and a way to ensure your hand is empty, and the -4 might be good if you need just a little extra reach and have the life to spare.

>>54508959
>>54509006
I think you are reading too far into the intent of what I had in mind.

Planeswalkers bad card type.

>>54509038
This senpai.

>>54509049
Planeswalkers are essentially Enchantments that can be attacked.

>>54509038
This really activates my almonds as a red player. Every time, Wizards has pretty much gutted red when they had the chance. Compare Electrify and Mizzium Mortars. Compare Shock to Magma Spray. Every single cycle, red get the shit end of the stick. I fucking hate it.

>>54509086
That affect the board immediately and subsequently for a far less costed value, and are usually able to freely defend themselves, belonging only to one rarity.

>>54509086
>Planeswalkers are essentially Enchantments that can be attacked.

Except this card doesn't exist for planeswalkers.

Enchantments of any kind have sideboard options that completely shit on them from a great height. Cards that kill planeswalkers outright are comparatively very weak and rare.

File: aura.jpg (54KB, 312x445px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 312x445px

>>54509447

Fantastic. Forgot picture.

>>54509447
Well, you can always get a destroy target permanent for them.

>>54510166
Most colors don't have access to just a destroy permanent. The only ones I can think of right now are Vindicate, Anguished Unmaking and Utter End.

File: dreadbore.png (130KB, 223x311px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 223x311px

>>54509447
>>54509467
>2 mana removal for planeswalkers doesn't exist

Except it does. It's just in the colors that don't get the Enchantment removal that you're bragging is so common and accessible.

A Red deck will have a far easier time killing a Planeswalker than it will an oppressive Enchantment.

File: Image.png (136KB, 223x311px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 223x311px

>>54510215
>>54510166
>>54509447

>>54512926
To powerful for standard, kills Gideon.

>>54485143
It would be a good playable card, on the same levels than cards like Looter il-kor, baby Jace or Enclave cryptologist. Coincidentally, all of them are blue cards.
Wizards were playing too safe.

>>54506946
That wasn't done simply because it had never been done before. Energy was designed for the first Mirrodin block and removed due to lack of space. It took until Kaladesh for them to actually use because it didn't thematically fit into any other world that they created in between.

Doing something that has never been done before is not the same as doing it simply because it has never been done before.

>>54512926
It's a color break. Green isn't supposed to get removal for non-flying creatures that doesn't rely on it having a bigger creature in play.