A Brief Future History Of Magic

Posted on February 26, 2010
Filed Under Articles, Flashbacks, Staff | 7 Comments

Destroy target creature.

Regenerate target creature.

Destroy target creature. It can’t be regenerated.

Target creature is indestructible. (”Destroy” effects and lethal damage don’t destroy it.)

Target creature can’t be indestructible.

Target creature can’t be prevented from being indestructible.

Spells and abilities can’t stop target creature from being prevented from being indestructible.

Players can’t play spells or abilities that would prevent the stopping of the prevention of the indestructibility of target creature.

Cards that would halt the prevention of the stopping of the prevention of the indestructibility of target creature have no text.

A player who plays a spell or ability that would remove the text of cards that would prevent the prevention of the cessation of stopping the indestructibility of target creature loses the game.

Whenever a player plays a spell or ability that would cause a player to lose the game for playing a spell or ability that would remove the text of cards that would prevent the prevention of the cessation of stopping the indestructibility of target creature, players play a MAGIC subgame using their libraries as their decks. Each player who loses the subgame loses the main game.

MAGIC subgames can’t be played.

MAGIC subgames can’t be prevented.

Players are insubgamable. (”Subgame” effects don’t make them play subgames.)

Card text cannot make players insubgamable.

Card text does not exist.

Each card text that would exist exists and cannot be prevented from existing. That card text cannot be prevented from reading what it would read or doing what it would do. All card text always destroys all creatures, and no card text can stop card text that would destroy all creatures from destroying them. Card text that would alter the existence of card text that would destroy all creatures cannot alter the existence of any card text, which is immutable and cannot be changed by any card text or any rule.

Ignore all rules.

- Jan. 25, 2007

Comments

7 Responses to “A Brief Future History Of Magic”

  1. vandwedge on February 22nd, 2009 10:42 am

    I could see that second-to-last one at 1WW.

  2. Sarah Palin on February 22nd, 2009 5:00 pm

    No, 1RR. Don’t you understand the color pie?

  3. vandwedge on February 22nd, 2009 6:41 pm

    It should be white, because it sounds like it’s setting rules, and white likes to set rules.

    It should be red, because red is all about anger and this card is an angry reaction to the previous card in the series.

    It should be green, because this card is all about letting cards happen as they naturally would.

    It should be blue, because it’s guided by intellect and the desire to parsel out knowledge.

    It should be black, because it’s founded on the principle of selfishness.

    …maybe it could be one of those Conflux Woo-Bergs.

  4. Salem on February 25th, 2009 6:16 pm

    That, and black will do anything to win.

  5. Basilisk on February 26th, 2009 10:39 am

    It’s an artifact, because artifacts are all about having lots of text.

  6. Boland on February 26th, 2010 6:56 pm

    it could be a misprinted non-artifact Construct creature because that is the cool thing to print these days

  7. Dread Archon on February 27th, 2010 6:01 pm

    This could also be titled “When Magic Goes to Hell”
    I like a couple rules twists here and there, but they should be used sparingly.

Leave a Reply