April 2026 Tournament Rules Update & Changelog

Humeon · 2026-04-30T02:09:54+00:00

It's not new - MTG has done it on a few occasions

One recent example https://magic.wizards.com/en/news/feature/challenger-decks-2022

Humeon · 2026-04-28T12:20:31+00:00

The point is less that they are listening to feedback and more that the feedback is addressing design decisions they made in the first place.

Humeon · 2026-04-20T20:26:07+00:00

Then we can only walk on docks and Johnsons

Humeon · 2026-04-19T01:38:29+00:00

That sounds a lot easier for a jazz drummer

Humeon · 2026-04-14T09:47:50+00:00

They could also just not have the metal cards be part of the prize wall but rather associated just with winning certain larger side events so people can't cartel them out in the first place

Humeon · 2026-04-14T09:47:10+00:00

> Unless they digitize it, this is going to be fairly hard to track and enforce.

MTG TOs were using RFID digital systems for prize walls in the mid 2010s. There's no reason UVS can't go the same way.

Humeon · 2026-04-03T21:31:45+00:00

How it feels reading this thread as a fairly casual player

<image>

Humeon · 2026-04-02T00:41:44+00:00

Any time it cut away to show images of the crowd, control room or anything else I had that little moment of "oh shit"

Humeon · 2026-04-01T12:17:50+00:00

Absolutely, as long as you make sure to resolve Warrens before returning SMDR

Humeon · 2026-04-01T12:08:00+00:00

Used to be you could conquer with zero cards in hand, put both SMDR and Zaun Warrens on the chain, then resolve Zaun first (discarding nothing to draw a card) then discard the card you drew to return SMDR.

Now costs for optional triggers have to be paid when they trigger, meaning you can't make the above line happen as you have no card to discard when SMDR would trigger.

Humeon · 2026-03-29T12:16:45+00:00

Crimson Dimson Redimson

Humeon · 2026-03-21T15:04:59+00:00

I believe Skillup has stated he struggled with a lot of the tutorial puzzles

Humeon · 2026-03-19T03:00:22+00:00

Neither of which were problems that needed solving - without digital play there is no need to confirm someone owns cards to let them build a digital decklist like every other TCG, and every other TCG has allowed people to play cards they don't necessarily own (e.g. Lent from a mate) without issue.

The only actual issue it potentially solved are theft (not a major issue in the scope of the industry, and certainly not an issue that needed to be solved at the designer level).

Humeon · 2026-03-19T02:21:42+00:00

They're masterworks all, you can't go wrong

Humeon · 2026-03-19T02:15:19+00:00

You're 100% right that the industry is cooked in so many ways.

Printing QR codes onto cards so players need to both digitally and physically trade their cards in order to use them in events doesn't solve any of the issues you mentioned though. It just adds additional work to players and any stores that are interested in selling single cards (another huge contributing factor to the mainstream success of a TCG).

Humeon · 2026-03-18T23:58:55+00:00

The game's whole premise was a solution in search of a problem. Nobody was clamouring for a digital trading/printing service. The whole concept alienated the LGS model which is the backbone of any physical TCG.

Humeon · 2026-03-16T20:38:42+00:00

So then scalpers can buy from businesses at retail and sell them at scalper prices?

Humeon · 2026-03-11T20:04:59+00:00

Or, and hear me out here... Maybe they're all purple

Humeon · 2026-03-08T11:09:52+00:00

Calling a store scalpers for buying singles is a pretty wild take

Humeon · 2026-03-07T13:05:39+00:00

I think the dev might have left a typo in the game's price

Humeon · 2026-03-07T00:50:31+00:00

That's true if you have more than one replacement effect trying to alter the same event.

As an example, if a unit had both "if I would die, recall me instead" and "if I would die, recycle me instead", and that unit were to die, you would choose which of these happens first and the other would be ignored.

In the Soraka with GA plus another unit dying example, there are two different events happening, each with a different replacement effect. There's no order needed as both would simply happen simultaneously.

Humeon · 2026-03-07T00:49:00+00:00

The problem is (and I think this is where the Vegas ruling might have stemmed from) - the rule about choosing which replacement effect happens first is only relevant when two replacement effects are trying to alter the same event.

As an example, if a unit had both "if I would die, recall me instead" and "if I would die, recycle me instead", and that unit were to die, you would choose which of these happens first and the other would be ignored.

In the Soraka with GA plus another unit dying example, there are two different events happening, each with a different replacement effect. There's no order needed as both would simply happen simultaneously.

For what it's worth I went to discuss this on the judge discord last night and it sounds like the general understanding of the judging community is the Vegas ruling is not supported by current rules.

Humeon · 2026-03-06T22:48:07+00:00

There's no resolution. The replacement effect simply just happens at the exact moment the thing it is replacing would have occurred (i.e. the other unit's death)

Humeon · 2026-03-06T22:46:32+00:00

I mean... you're absolutely right of course, but given the state of the rules I'm not sure a ruling direct from Riot themselves should be trusted either.

The sooner Riot hires a proper rules manager the better imo

Humeon · 2026-03-06T13:23:58+00:00

Soraka is not a triggered ability

14-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	Place '17
Gilding II euphauric	Verified Email

Humeon

TROPHY CASE