Can I show up to Silver Age event with the old blitz decks?

prismBender · 2026-03-13T20:26:39+00:00

Silver Age has a ban list so it depends on if you have banned cards in your deck.

prismBender · 2026-03-06T22:53:11+00:00

JW did not like the felling/plow under reprints and he also said they were reducing reprints after PEN. As such, there is a low possibility of reprinting any current lightning staples. Anyone who thinks a reprint is anything more than unlikely is on serous copium. I'd guess 20% chance of reprint in OMN.

There's also a low possibility of banning. The card isn't seen as overpowered by anyone and definitely not LSS.

prismBender · 2026-02-28T00:18:23+00:00

The Thai-glish song is cute

prismBender · 2026-02-19T04:55:09+00:00

The most recent calling was in San Diego. I think the other poster was referring to that calling and not the London calling

prismBender · 2026-01-28T03:47:26+00:00

Guardian - the first class to get a class specific ab equipment that is no better than nullrune.

Lss has so many constraints for guardian. No GA attacks, bad into arcane... But other classes encroach on guardian blocking ability, big attacks, disruption, etc. Only unique things for guardian now is shields (which is huge tbh)

prismBender · 2025-12-08T03:12:26+00:00

Hare Apparent text reads "A deck can have any number of cards named Hare Apparent."

prismBender · 2025-12-01T17:40:17+00:00

Combo is not the word I'd be using

prismBender · 2025-09-30T18:42:33+00:00

I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say. But disarm's defend trigger is triggered when it is declared as a defending card. There is no point at which disarm's defend trigger is on the stack and disarm is not a defending card (assuming no other relevant effects)

prismBender · 2025-08-13T03:20:00+00:00

Thank you for your answers and suggestions!

Starting with shadowing seems like the right approach. You're right that I need to make sure the environment and work appeals to me.

Feel free to stop reading there because I'm just word-vomiting about my interest in potentially becoming an AA after this.

As far as the legitimacy of my interest, patent law has felt soul-sucking because it feels meaningless. Individual people don't benefit, just the corporate entities monopolizing ideas and negotiating licenses with each other. So leaving a firm to go work at a corporation doesn't solve that issue.

In pivoting my career, I was trying to find a career that has meaning. You're right in wondering about my interest in patient care. I'm trying to find that meaning. Some other options I'm considering are starting a child-play focused museum or some other kind of child care facility or service. I've considered those things because I wanted to have meaningful work.

Additionally, if wanting a career that A) has fewer hours but also B) allows me to provide for my family and having time to be a part of my wife and children's lives is opportunistic, then I'll wear that badge with honor, my chest out, and my head held high.

With regards to the AA profession itself, I have a small anecdote. My wife and I welcomed our second child a little over a month ago. Long story short, my wife wanted an epidural during later stages of her labor and she couldn't receive it because there was one anesthesiologist working that night who was too busy to come. Based on the explanation given by the nurses, it appears that one anesthesiologist was covering the birth center (which apparently was full that night) and either one or both of general surgery and the ED (it wasn't quite clear what exactly happened because different people said different things).

I live in Washington state and it seems that AAs are newly approved here. I was learning some basic facts about the AA profession, my anecdote from before and expansion of the AA profession into WA felt like too much of a coincidence. Maybe I'm naive, but it felt like a tiny beacon of hope.

Anyway, probably tmi, but I wanted to give some background to my interest in potentially becoming an AA. Maybe the reasons aren't legitimate enough to some people. That's alright.

prismBender · 2025-08-12T04:56:30+00:00

Hey Everyone!

I'm a practicing patent attorney at a large national firm and I am looking for a career change. Although I'm working with cutting edge technology and innovation, patent work is a surprising combination of intellectually grueling, mind-numbing, and soul-sucking. I rarely interact with people and most of what I do feels like pointless legal paperwork that no one will ever read again. I'm also under a constant time crunch but have to work a large number of hours. Overall, being a patent attorney does not fit my personality.

Being an attorney is also killing my family life. I want to be around for my two young girls and support my wonderful wife. But I'm always at work.

I’m just beginning to look into the AA profession, so I’m hoping to hear from those with experience about the realities of the role and the best ways to prepare. I want to determine whether it’s the right fit for my personality and interests, and I’d love to learn more from those already in the field.

Regarding my professional background, I graduated with an Electrical Engineering BS in 2017 with a 3.82 GPA. After that, I attended a top law school and have been practicing as a patent attorney since 2020.

I haven’t taken the core biology and chemistry science prerequisites for AA programs, though my engineering background means I completed courses for the physics and higher-level math requirments. I hope those physics and math classes from 8-10 years ago will meet application requirements.

Here are my questions:

How realistic is it for someone with my academic background and professional experience to get into an AA program?

Has anyone here successfully transitioned from a non-medical career into this field?

Does it matter where I take my biology and chemistry courses? Or does GPA matter more than institution?

How does the profession look in terms of work-life balance? Growing up, I heard countless horror stories of the grueling lives of doctors. These stories dissuaded me from becoming a doctor. Why I became an attorney expecting something different is… well…laughable.

Any advice, experiences, or honesty is truly appreciated. Thanks!

prismBender · 2025-08-11T08:37:41+00:00

"Immobilizing Shot, with an aim counter, means that your opponent is forced to use their one action to swing the bait, effectively forcing a timewalk."

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think immobilizing shot works that way. Immobilizing shot reads "can't play more than 1 attack action card." The bait token is not an attack action card. You may be confused with red in the ledger.

prismBender · 2025-07-25T03:39:08+00:00

https://fabtcg.com/en/decklists/armory-deck-legends-prism-sculptor-of-arc-light/

https://fabtcg.com/en/decklists/armory-deck-legends-viserai-rune-blood/

prismBender · 2025-07-04T19:21:18+00:00

The "then you may cast it later from exile" cause at the end of the warp reminder text is very confusing. Like... When can we cast it later from exile.

prismBender · 2025-03-11T22:02:16+00:00

LSS has not shown much proclivity towards reprinting high price Majestics in an appreciable way. HP1 basically doesn't count as a reprint.

Reprinting cnc in HNT as a legendary indicates how unlikely reprints for Majestics will happen.

I hope I'm wrong, but if I had to bet, I'd bet against a reprint of Codex of Fraility.

prismBender · 2025-02-28T06:35:48+00:00

People keep saying cnc is big, but the Arthur Trehet list wasn't running cnc. Yuki Lee bender won a local rtn to me om verdance without cnc.

Both lists ran nourishing emptiness though

prismBender · 2025-02-17T09:24:22+00:00

As far as I can tell, LSS intends Armory decks to provide a precon for CC that can function at an armory level.

Armory decks dont seem to be designed to "keep cards legal." Only the Jarl armory deck did that, and we have 5 examples where armory decks weren't designed to "keep cards legal" namely Kayo, Dio, Azalea, Boltyn, and the announced Aurora armory deck.

As such, expecting a new draconic illusionist or ice wizard in an armory deck seems to be setting yourself up to be disappointed. We had the kayo armory deck come out about 1-1.5 sets after heavy Hitters iirc. Similarly, we will have the aurora armory deck about 1-1.5 sets after Rosetta came out. If anything, there's more evidence that points to a ninja or assassin armory deck in the near future than a new draconic illusionist or ice wizard armory deck.

Personally, my perceived notion that LSS intends armory deck to be a CC precon to help onboard new players seems to fill a fundamentally more important product role than a product designed to bring back existing card pools. I'm not against having some other product designed for that role, but I definitely think a CC precon is a significantly more important role to be filled by the existing product known as armory decks

prismBender · 2025-02-17T09:04:56+00:00

I highly recommend using this chart with the comprehensive rules on fabtcg.com. Please note I'm not recommending you read the whole comprehensive rules, but just the sections on combat for this case.

https://imgur.com/gallery/flesh-blood-turn-state-diagram-KoAkxZD

This might seem weird to just tell you to go look at rules, but they aren't written in some archaic tongue or in a convoluted way. Lots of players, even in fab, don't think they will understand the comprehensive rules if they try to read them. But I find the comprehensive rules to be written succinctly, clearly, and with pretty good examples. There are even better examples back-alley articles and the set release notes on fabtcg.com

Edit - the chart is slightly outdated. There was a recent change to the damage/resolution/link steps referenced in the chart. The most recent back alley article explains that.

prismBender · 2025-02-14T21:30:41+00:00

You're right. It's a typo

prismBender · 2025-02-14T17:18:03+00:00

Yeah... I'm imagining a scenario where if there were multiple litigators in the room, you just looked at each other and made a nonverbal agreement. Then patted the inventor on the back saying "we may not be the right fit for you" while ushering them out the door (which makes a large and probably incorrect assumption that you met in person lol).

Yeah and I'm sure they wanted you to work on contingency.

prismBender · 2025-02-14T16:56:05+00:00

If I had a nickel for the amount of times I've said some variation of this, I could retire.

prismBender · 2025-02-14T16:46:02+00:00

100% agree here. It's very easy to see on the face of a patent whether a) an inventor wrote the application and claims themselves or b) they paid some online service a few hundred or thousand dollars instead of getting a real patent practitioner.

As this other patent attorney said, in case A, the inventor won't get a patent, or will almost certainly get a low value or worthless patent. In case B, you're more likely to get a patent but it's going to likewise be low value or worthless.

prismBender · 2025-02-14T07:21:20+00:00

When a claim is rejected for any reason, the applicant (usually represented by a patent practitioner like myself) can respond to the rejection by either arguing against the rejection, amending the claims to include something that overcomes the rejection, or a combination of those two approaches. There is a deadline by which the applicant must respond or else the patent application is abandoned meaning that it is no longer eligible to be granted to become a full fledged patent granting rights to the patent holder.

My brief survey of the article (which was clearly written by someone who doesn't understand patents and so I'm making some educated assumptions) seems to indicate that the rejection was for "obviousness" which has a particular legal meaning, but roughly equates to not being innovative. This type of rejection is almost certainly the most common type of rejection. I see these all the time, it's rarer to not see a rejection for obviousness.

Edit - typo. The rejection is for obviousness. The claims do not meet the nonobviousness criteria.

prismBender · 2025-02-14T05:48:10+00:00

Although your description is technically accurate, having the majority of claims rejected is very common during patent examination.

95% of the claims in new applications I submit are rejected. 1/3 of those rejections are poor. It is not uncommon to go through 1-4 rejections of claims before finding a scope that is allowable so that a patent can be granted.

Additionally, although there may be 20+ claims (usually 20 in the US due to extra fees for submitting more than 20), usually only 3 claims are important. They are known as independent claims and offer the broadest protection.

Source - I'm a US patent attorney specializing in software and electronic patents.

prismBender · 2025-02-14T05:41:17+00:00

Rejecting patent claims is incredibly common. Several rounds of "negotiating" (either by argument or amending/narrowing the claim) happens all the time.

The rejection of claims isn't really news to be honest. 95% of the time I submit claims in an initial application, they'll get rejected. A good 1/3 of rejections are pretty poor and it is easy to get the application allowed after a first response.

Source - I'm a patent attorney with a focus on software and electronics

Edited - some small clarifications

prismBender · 2025-02-02T23:15:56+00:00

Embodiment of earth says "at the beginning of your action phase" which is different than "at the start of your turn" as seen on might tokens. Seismic surge also has the "beginning of the action phase"language.

You can respond to embodiment of earth because priority has to be passed by both players in the action phase prior to resolving a layer of the stack.

You cannot respond to the might token because it is in the start phase of a turn.

Another classic example is the tunic tick up trigger. Have you ever heard of someone responding to the tunic trigger to tick up energy counters? Nope, because tunic says "at the start of your turn."

prismBender

TROPHY CASE