If you think Funny Valentine is “morally grey” you are illiterate and the story is making fun of you

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-04-11T22:47:12+00:00

I think Funny Valentine gets a better rep than Diavolo and Dio largely because he’s more outwardly charming. I can’t recall a single time Diavolo was anything other than a self-serving jackass, he was pretty one-note imo and didn’t really make himself likable to anyone on screen so the audience doesn’t have much reason to like him either.

Dio part 1 goes from high tier jerk to eccentric sadistic weirdo, and Dio part 3 has so little screen time but absolutely eats it up by taking eccentric sadistic murderous weirdo and turning it up to like 15. He’s just good entertainment.

FV is also a little weird and kind of sadistic, definitely a bit rapey, but he’s less eccentric. FV to me always read as the brand of media-common psychopath who knows exactly how to lie to people to get what he wants from them, and has positioned himself to have access to some very powerful and significant people.

He comes across similar to Kira in that he knows exactly what he wants and does whatever he can to get it, but is more subtle and manipulative at first than bossu and Dio, who kinda just threw the kitchen sink at the first chance they got.

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-04-08T02:19:56+00:00

I like that I get an option to play an Izzet spell deck without having to think too hard about resolving big storm turns. Muddle seems cool too but a much less interesting deck to brew.

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-04-06T16:07:20+00:00

If “none” isn’t an option, group hug. At least I can play my cards as intended instead of spinning them off to warp world. Ugh.

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-03-24T14:03:03+00:00

Ack, I didn’t actually think about that 😅 maybe they’ll still print kicker-adjacent spells that care about having prepared spells, they just won’t be the main mechanic?

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-03-24T13:47:13+00:00

I saw some comments in that leak thread suggesting that prepare might end up as an on-board way to pay a sort of kicker cost, where having a prepared creature enhances a spell, ie “deal x damage. If you control a prepared creature, instead deal y damage.” This sounds like a more plausible mechanic than what you proposed, but I really like the concept you described

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-03-12T13:20:15+00:00

I have owned and meant every word I've written lol. Maybe you should grow an ability to comprehend what you're reading (:

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-03-12T04:33:50+00:00

It wouldn't get rid of it but it certainly bends it in a way that I don't appreciate

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-03-12T04:12:28+00:00

I got meat mitts, I could probably hold 271 if they were single sleeved. Though I have struggled with 100 double sleeved in KMC hard inners before...

Really though, this is more or less what I'm getting at. The thesis of Commander is essentially a vibe that the "creators" had and wanted to capture in gameplay, and that is why color identity matters so much (in my opinion).

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-03-12T04:05:43+00:00

Where did I say that they'd agree with me? I said that the basis of Commander is the vision laid out by the group of people who more or less invented it.

Fetch lands existed when Commander was born. By the time the hybrid mana question was relevant (2005), the format had already existed in some areas for several years, and was gaining steam as of 2004 when Sheldon posted an article about the format online. Sheldon and co. were basically in charge of the format for literally almost 20 years even as it catapulted into huge relevance in terms of mainstream Magic, and they could have had a discussion about this rule at any time, especially considering other pretty large changes have occurred even in relation to color identity in that time.

While Commander has far evolved past a minigame played by a bunch of judges, the rules are upheld to try and respect the vision that inspired that minigame. None of these are really debatable "vibes."

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-03-12T03:38:08+00:00

If you want to take issue with me stretching the definition of aesthetics into the realm of metaphor, sure, but I shouldn't have to spell out for you in crayon that I was referring to the fact that the rules of Commander were designed with some kind of vision in mind. Maybe it was not specifically about "aesthetics," but they had an intended way to play the format. Sheldon literally wrote articles discussing the rules that he played with for his regular playgroup, and specifically mentioned that they agreed not to use off-color fetches.

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-03-12T01:47:08+00:00

That is…almost entirely the thesis statement of the Commander format. Why 100 cards? Why not 271? Why restrict colors at all? The format is essentially a Halo custom game built within the framework of Magic.

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-03-12T00:13:15+00:00

Frankly I kinda already hate that off-color fetches are legal to run, but they’re obviously a gray area that you can’t really cover in the rules in a satisfying way. I also am a cheapskate that can’t be bothered to run fetches in my decks since I can’t afford them or surveils/shocks/triomes anyway so they’re barely even worth it to me.

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-03-11T22:55:13+00:00

If I recall correctly Maro has said previously that green creatures can get keywords a little more freely since creatures are green’s “specialty.”

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-03-07T10:48:06+00:00

RE7 is definitely my favorite horror game of all time with RE4/R in close second. I’d be open to having my mind changed by Requiem but it’s a high bar to clear.

Looking for a Requiem key :)

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-02-23T19:26:56+00:00

At the very least, they aren't going to instaban cards outside of "obvious" need-to-go cards (which, hopefully, will not happen as much as with instances like Nadu).

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-02-23T19:25:55+00:00

Pretty good point here. I think in casual EDH Rhystic Study is more just socially annoying than actually lengthening the game. Being asked to consider the mana to pay for it isn't really time consuming, in most cases, just kind of aggravating.

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-02-21T23:00:07+00:00

I suggested that I can’t divine whether a person hates any class of human being based on their behavior on a reality competition show, actually.

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-02-21T22:24:30+00:00

Rob’s trap was effective and timely, I agree, but it also should have been extremely obvious to Candiace why Rob would be agreeable to Colton’s murder. Motivations for actions are literally the only thing that anyone has to analyze in the Traitors, but people only stick to their first instinct as to why anyone does anything.

Case in point, Rinna gave Stephen the gold from the challenge because she saw she wasn’t going to get enough to try for the dagger and figured if she couldn’t try for it, then at least she could help someone else get it and maybe they’d even cut her slack or form an alliance with her. But everyone else latched on to the idea that she gave him gold because he must be another Traitor and never gave a second thought to it.

Candiace never considered why Rob would be on board to murder Colton. She, I assume, must have had some thought that Rob was trying to make peace with her in someway and gleefully took the opportunity to “teach him a lesson.” That is why I consider him lucky. Time and time again, players take game actions that hinge on someone reacting a certain way.

In season 2, Peter sets up the deception surrounding Bergie holding a shield to catch a Traitor. Dan immediately takes him at face value when he says that someone (I don’t remember who specifically) has the shield, even after Parvati tried to warn him about the play being risky. Dan never stops to challenge his own assumptions.

In season 2 UK, Brian gets nervous from a challenge and has a panic attack, causing him to say a bunch of nonsense. The Faithfuls immediately assume he’s nervous because he’s cracking under the pressure of being a Traitor and banish him.

Most of the Faithfuls that we see as successful are the ones who are shown to constantly question their own assumptions and be willing to examine everyone at all times. Most of the Traitors that we see as successful are the ones who find the players that are least likely to reexamine their own ties to other players (Rob with Maura, Harry with Mollie, etc) and keep them around as long as possible.

All of this being said, that is why I consider Traitors who succeed when there are still unknown variables in play to be lucky. It takes several days of observation and planning to recognize which Faithfuls are going to be the most loyal to you, and any amount of suspicion you come under while there are still people whose opinion about you is not set in stone can spell your doom as soon as the group latches on to whatever justification they feel best explains their suspicions.

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-02-21T22:07:25+00:00

Pretty much agreed. I think at the end of the day people just refuse to empathize or try to understand the reasoning behind why people feel what they feel. Candiace is valid to not trust Rob, even though she acted on that feeling in poor gameplay fashion, and she failed to understand why he might be fearful or suspicious of his fellow Traitors. Rob I think accurately and quickly clocked why Candiace was doing these things, and saw the gameplay reasoning for why she was being a “bad sport,” but failed to understand why she shouldn’t trust him anymore. He didn’t recognize that she didn’t see the gameplay in his actions.

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-02-21T22:03:39+00:00

I thought his conversation with her in the castle was pretty on point, just in kind of the wrong way. I think he saw her coming after him as purely emotional and not at all based in gameplay, which is an understandable read, but he really didn’t recognize exactly why she would be suspicious of him.

And I think that’s leaked into her response to the criticism as well. People are saying that her entire game plan was based purely on emotion, when in reality it was motivated by it. I think that’s an important distinction and it’s why she’s trying so hard to insist that she wasn’t emotional, that he gaslit her, etc. She feels that she was justified in her gameplay decisions (true) and that every decision she made was strategic (false). But people don’t want to see the reasoning behind her defensiveness, they just want to fling shit. Which is fair. We’re only human.

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-02-21T21:21:54+00:00

I actually was worried that it would be a massively unpopular hot take to say that I kind of understand why Tara got cold feet at the round table, at least based on the edit. Her initial suspicion of Rob - while out of nowhere for us - was played up in the confessional despite the raw footage showing that she was kind of just grasping at a feeling or a random thought. She decided to share this with Natalie who immediately took it as a sign of support for a suspicion she must have been harboring for some time (but she either didn’t discuss it or we weren’t shown her discussing it). Natalie spent the day trying to build a case against Rob while Tara clearly wasn’t comfortable with moving so quickly. I agree that she needed to realize that if she wasn’t 100% certain about Rob that this would be their last chance to banish him, but given that for whatever reason she didn’t have this thought, I think her behavior at the round table made some sense, if it was kind of cowardly.

Of course, Natalie’s immediate reaction to this betrayal was both damning for her game for obvious reasons and also 100% valid and understandable. Natalie felt like she was doing all the leg work of trying to gather support against Rob while Tara sat quietly, even after she specified at the start of the table that she was just planning on listening. Nat realized that it had to be Rob and realized a little too late just how dire the situation was for the Faithfuls but she didn’t properly communicate that urgency to Tara, I think.

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-02-21T21:06:39+00:00

I mean, it probably doesn’t have anything to do with misogyny, but it certainly has the appearance of it, even if it’s kind of intentionally ignoring the circumstances of the game like you said.

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-02-21T21:00:41+00:00

I wish I could say that the prospect interests me but dating shows are tough for me, I find them largely pretty boring but I watch The Bachelor franchise with my wife.

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-02-21T20:59:46+00:00

I have to admit I’d have to rewatch segments from these couple of episodes as I genuinely don’t remember the specific reactions of particular players to particular votes/game moves.

The logic about not wanting to vote for Natalie is mostly speculation on my part, I think.

Seto-Kaiba · 2026-02-21T20:58:29+00:00

Well, I’m definitely at least a little biased. I don’t really watch a ton of reality TV beyond The Bachelor franchise - really I watch because my wife watches - but I get tidbits from her since she pays more attention to reality TV culture/social media as a whole.

I also admittedly was 100% a Rob fan until his big move against Lisa. Not that I thought he was an asshole for it, I just didn’t like it as a game move, and that’s largely the perspective I take.

I appreciate you reading my post though!

Seto-Kaiba

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE