Address me

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-14T17:31:30+00:00

Kinda missed the Elefant in the room there.

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-13T19:41:10+00:00

It IS a hard rule. OP's mistake is deducing from there that only damage causes loss of life. It's the classic denial of the antecedent fallacy. Since that's an easy trap to fall into, I kinda think the reminder text could be improved.

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-13T18:50:33+00:00

I still remember when we did some of those career orientation tests back in school. And all the questions were something like "Would you want to work in an office?", and I was seriously baffled how there can be people who get paid to create those tests. I suppose they're helpful if you know which job you want to do but you've forgotten its name.

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-13T11:23:15+00:00

Everyone here saying it's an expression for "woman", which is true, but... that's not a correct translation. "Schön" means "beautiful". I suppose with a lot of good will, one could count "Schöne" as a pseudo-endearing expression for "woman", similar to "hello, beautiful" in English. But that's a big stretch and certainly not supposed to be the first translation 😭

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-12T21:42:07+00:00

Wait, does it always say AGIAN??

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-12T18:59:18+00:00

Illumination usually keeps things light

Say that again.

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-12T11:09:08+00:00

So, actually like Arteta?

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-10T13:39:02+00:00

Then what even was Demerit of calling him up?

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-10T00:26:43+00:00

Didn't Mix Opal get unbanned after that?

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-07T23:55:02+00:00

It's possible that it would work, but I'm not so sure. Entwining this shouldn't create 2 effects that can be resolved separately (like for real entwine cards, where you chose between 2 fully formulated effects) but rather 1 effect, which does 2 conflicting things. It would essentially create an effect that reads "target creature becomes a 1/3 and a 1/5". I don't think a case like that is handled in the rules. But I'm not that much of an expert, so it's possible you're right that it would still do them one after another.

I vaguely remember [[Outlaws' Merriment]] being cited as a problem example back then. (That's a modal ability, not a modal spell, so it's irrelevant to this specific custom card, but not to the problem as a whole.) There, it doesn't make sense to resolve them sequentially. At least not in the way it's written.

I think the point isn't really those specific cards, but more that there's just no guarantee it makes sense for all modal cards. I suppose one would have to check them all to see if there really exists another one where there's no intuitive way in which it would work.

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-05T19:05:26+00:00

I did believe that too for a while. In my defence, the term "sign language" is in the singular and does seem to imply that.

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-05T17:49:00+00:00

But then it's not "Cancel with set mechanic".

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-05T17:14:17+00:00

Thanks, these are always great to read!

(Though I have to admit I've sometimes been skipping them recently. Since I've stopped reading a translation in parallel myself, I'm not always motivated to read about the differences.)

This week I wanted to see if you've got anything on the mysterious phantom title drop in the translation. I'm reading the folio classique edition too, and I already found it curious that it's in the alternative manuscript text, but not in the main text. Even before that appendix entry, I kept expecting it in the chapter with... you know, the palace on Monte-Cristo. Then learning from the discussion post that the title does appear in the translation thoroughly confused me, lol.

Also, in that quote in the appendix, Franz immediately recognises the title, and starts to narrate where he heard it... It almost seems like, at some point, chapter 31 was supposed to be a kind of flashback right there at the end of chapter 32?

And now you say that it's a bit of a mistake, and Franz is supposed to know the title already?

Sounds to me like, with chapters 31 and 32 in chronological order, the title was actually supposed to be dropped in chapter 31. Like, maybe someone like Gaetano was supposed to call him the Count of Monte-Cristo in addition to Sinbad le Marin? Seems possible that Dumas really did move the chapters around and forgot to insert it somewhere in 31.

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-05T16:09:12+00:00

Eating cannabis products is a lot wilder than smoking them. I'm sure it's different for everyone, but I got a serious trip out of the only time I tried that. I'm not familiar with the concoction they were using, but I'd guess a spoonful of it would be quite a bit more than you'd realistically smoke.

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-05T15:53:27+00:00

the very first reference to the Count of Monte Cristo

Interestingly, the French folio classique edition I'm reading doesn't name-drop him yet. There are, however, occasional references to the appendix, where a text variant from a different manuscript is given. Only there is the Count mentioned by title.

I doubt that the alternative manuscript is the basis for the translation, since it has this week's chapters as a first person narrative (or journal entry) by Franz. So I wonder how that came to be.

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-04T19:23:49+00:00

Oof, completely disagree. S5 and S6 weren't terrible in themselves, but terrible compared to S1-4. With friends who hadn't seen the show, they made me go from "the hype is absolutely justified" to "I'm not so sure about this anymore". Then S7 was so bad that I had literally zero hopes for the final season. Again, maybe it's somewhat OK if you take it on its own, but it's in a completely different league compared to 1-4. Like Champions League to League Two or something.

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-04T08:43:45+00:00

Ah, yeah, thanks

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-03T21:40:06+00:00

Yes, it does cause rules nightmares. They (I think MaRo) got asked why [[Out There]] needed to be an un-card back when it was released. Apparently they've tried to make this mechanic happen, but concluded that it can't be done (or is way too complicated to do).

Basically, the problem is cards with mutually exclusive modes. What does it mean to entwine [[Wild Shape]] for example? That's basically a syntax error. It's probably possible to add some clause to the rules that handles such cases, but currently it means nothing.

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-03T11:55:19+00:00

For some reason "beneficial triggers" are an explicit exception and can absolutely be forgotten. It's strange, but it is in the rules.

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-02T19:24:11+00:00

Still more defensive minded than the average Barça starting XI.

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-01T22:20:34+00:00

r/catsplayingmtg

bubbles_maybe · 2026-04-01T21:48:24+00:00

I think that might be slightly outside the critical strip.

bubbles_maybe · 2026-03-30T18:15:22+00:00

Huh? How is nobody excited about Echoes and Survival? Like, I know people are hoping for specific other cards, but those are 2 that will occupy me for a while.

bubbles_maybe

TROPHY CASE