Jump to content

[disc] secret village of the spellcasters

skragtheprophet09

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 76
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Pharaoh_Atem Newbie

Pharaoh_Atem

Posted
Posted

Bad because they are no spellcasters worth running at the moment apart from Breaker

 

Fix'd

 

No' date=' not fix'd. Reading what I said in a previous post might help you out.

[/quote']

 

I think he was trying to show what he MEANT to say.

 

Aye, but that's not relevant here.

 

"Fix'd" requires that something be fixed - and for something to be fixed in the way applicable here, it must necessarily be free of flaws.

 

If the above is what he meant to say, it's not fix'd, simply because there's a flaw in it, that flaw being the same logical error that got his earlier statements shredded in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
「tea.leaf」 Newbie

「tea.leaf」

Posted
Posted

BAd because they are no good spellcasters now apart from Breaker

BAWWW

 

You could do much better to dismantle his case than to say something as baseless as "shut it with your meta-attitude". You make it seem as if it's a bad thing to be in tune with what the current metagame requires.

 

Baseless judgments that tell people to shut up... tend to sound like crying' date=' hence why I condensed your argument into its shorter form, as you will see in the above quote.

 

While he's wrong to consider the card bad for the reason he has given, and while the reason he gave is in and of itself a flawed judgment, the core of that reason is itself in good shape. That core is merely a mix of the premises "It is unwise to do something unwise" and "It is unwise to run a deck wherein you sabotage all of your own chances before you even begin."

 

That mix of premises does NOT equate to Breaker being "the only good Spellcaster at the moment". Being a good card does not require a card to be worth running at the present time; it simply requires that the card be designed well.

 

And no, a card being worth running at the present time does not prove that a card is designed well.

 

This faulty logic of his is why he's wrong, not his meta-attitude. His meta-attitude is actually harmed by his faulty logic, and would become stronger if he'd fix the logic.

 

Since he's not wrong because of his meta-attitude, the only reason for you to tell him to "shut it with [his'] meta-attitude" is to pursue a goal of silencing a viewpoint just for being in tune w/ said "meta-attitude".

 

Hence why you're guilty of BAWWWing --- you want him to shut up simply because he has a view you don't care for. This BAWWWing completely invalidates your opinion, as valid opinions resort to logos, pathos, and/or ethos, but most certainly not the inane sort of rant that only BAWWWing can deliver.

 

So, yeah, you're both wrong, but at least he has an excuse - he's wrong because of a logical error, whereas you're wrong because you come off as an insecure little whiner.

 

Pharaoh, hey, Pharaoh!

 

So what's your opinion on this card?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phantom Roxas Enthusiast

Phantom Roxas

Posted
Posted

Bad because they are no spellcasters worth running at the moment apart from Breaker

 

Fix'd

 

No' date=' not fix'd. Reading what I said in a previous post might help you out.

[/quote']

 

I think he was trying to show what he MEANT to say.

 

Aye, but that's not relevant here.

 

"Fix'd" requires that something be fixed - and for something to be fixed in the way applicable here, it must necessarily be free of flaws.

 

If the above is what he meant to say, it's not fix'd, simply because there's a flaw in it, that flaw being the same logical error that got his earlier statements shredded in the first place.

 

Okay then, what other Spellcasters are playable? *Goes to look up Spellcaster Synchro Monsters*

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pharaoh_Atem Newbie

Pharaoh_Atem

Posted
Posted

Bad because they are no spellcasters worth running at the moment apart from Breaker

 

Fix'd

 

No' date=' not fix'd. Reading what I said in a previous post might help you out.

[/quote']

 

I think he was trying to show what he MEANT to say.

 

Aye, but that's not relevant here.

 

"Fix'd" requires that something be fixed - and for something to be fixed in the way applicable here, it must necessarily be free of flaws.

 

If the above is what he meant to say, it's not fix'd, simply because there's a flaw in it, that flaw being the same logical error that got his earlier statements shredded in the first place.

Okay then, what other Spellcasters are playable?

 

Irrelevant.

 

You seem to be making the same error.

 

So what's your opinion on this card?

 

I don't have an opinion. Logic just dictates that it's a good card.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phantom Roxas Enthusiast

Phantom Roxas

Posted
Posted

Bad because they are no spellcasters worth running at the moment apart from Breaker

 

Fix'd

 

No' date=' not fix'd. Reading what I said in a previous post might help you out.

[/quote']

 

I think he was trying to show what he MEANT to say.

 

Aye, but that's not relevant here.

 

"Fix'd" requires that something be fixed - and for something to be fixed in the way applicable here, it must necessarily be free of flaws.

 

If the above is what he meant to say, it's not fix'd, simply because there's a flaw in it, that flaw being the same logical error that got his earlier statements shredded in the first place.

Okay then, what other Spellcasters are playable?

 

Irrelevant.

 

You seem to be making the same error.

 

How am I making an error? You can't prove JoC wrong without showing other Spellcasters that have play, unless there are no Spellcasters really playable. Besides, DMoC is banned, so what good are Spellcasters now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CrabHelmet Newbie

CrabHelmet

Posted
Posted

Bad because they are no spellcasters worth running at the moment apart from Breaker

 

Fix'd

 

No' date=' not fix'd. Reading what I said in a previous post might help you out.

[/quote']

 

I think he was trying to show what he MEANT to say.

 

Aye, but that's not relevant here.

 

"Fix'd" requires that something be fixed - and for something to be fixed in the way applicable here, it must necessarily be free of flaws.

 

If the above is what he meant to say, it's not fix'd, simply because there's a flaw in it, that flaw being the same logical error that got his earlier statements shredded in the first place.

Okay then, what other Spellcasters are playable?

 

Irrelevant.

 

You seem to be making the same error.

 

How am I making an error? You can't prove JoC wrong without showing other Spellcasters that have play, unless there are no Spellcasters really playable. Besides, DMoC is banned, so what good are Spellcasters now?

 

It doesn't matter which Spellcaster-Type monsters are worth using under the current format. A card's playability under the current format does not equate to how "good" a card is, and while JoC's logic can be used to show that the card is not worth using under the current format, it in no way proves how "good" said card is.

 

Konami could ban every single Spellcaster-Type monster in the card pool without even slightly altering how "good" a card this is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
werewolfjedi Newbie

werewolfjedi

Posted
Posted

ive got a spellcaster deck that could use this, they would see it and say (out loud) "s##t" while thinking {you little piece of crap.}

 

why do you say the only good spellcaster out there is breaker? can i see your reasoning behind this? i have a bunch of spellcasters that i feel are worth playing. of course you might be thinking outside of a spellcaster deck, which is a stupid thing to do for this card.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...