I'm going to start signing up for events this weekend. I would like Mage Wars to be included in the list, but if they aren't posted soon, I might not be able to join in the fun.

PLEASE get them on the schedule ASAP!

Well, the Arsenal is no more... where are Mage Wars addicts in Central Indiana hanging out these days?

I would love to get in more games... I've only had one other person to play when I go to non-tournament settings, and even then that is only irregularly. It seems like no one wants to join us when I'm able to show up.

Boy do I need the practice! (In other words, if you want to win, look me up!)

Dave

Well, the important part of what sIKE is suggesting (in my opinion) is to block Line of Sight cheaply. For this task, a Fog Bank would work fine. Wall of Earth is superior to Fog Bank if you ask me, however, because it also blocks passage. This makes it more difficult to circumvent. Both have the options of going around or destroying the wall, but Fog Bank can also be gone through which the Wall of Earth can't.

In addition, the Wall of Earth is in school for more mages (Warlord and Earth Wizard) than the Fog Bank (Air Wizard). Plus the previewed card Otto Kronig can put armor on the Wall of Earth and reconstruct it. The Goblin Builder is also meant to be able to reconstruct it, although there is concern that it can't as currently worded. Fog Bank lacks this kind of support.

I guess I need to avoid these conversations since I have no idea that these cards even exist.

I agree. If your opponent wastes the mana and actions getting rid of my forge than it's worth the quick action I used to cast it.

While this is true, I also feel it is beside the point. Given the option to spend some mana for a Force Hammer or a couple of Surging Waves to kill the thing on the following turn, or to leave it be and give the opposing mage a dozen or so mana plus a similar number of actions, I'd choose to kill it. You probably lose less mana and certainly prevent your opponent from having many more equipment spells cast in the long run by doing so.

Either for use by any Mage as an alternative to "normal" casting, or perhaps for a new Arcane school mage special ability (though I strongly advise the latter):

Counterspell would be an ability, rather than a spell. The ability would allow the possibility of cancelling a spell currently being cast by the opposing Mage. You would have to have the same spell available to cast (if it were your action), and then cast the spell (during the counterspell step) using your quickcast marker, and pay the same amount of mana that your opponent is using to cast his spell. If this is done, then the original spell fizzles.

So, if the enemy mage spends 12 mana to try to teleport your mage to a zone on the other side of the board where a bunch of creatures are waiting for him, you could reveal a Teleport spell in hand (or use one from a Mage wand), flip your quickcast marker, and spend 12 mana yourself to cancel the action.

If you want a little more flexibility at the expense of complication, you could alternately allow the use of a spell of the same type from the same school with a higher base spellbook cost instead. So, for example, to cancel a Minor Heal, you could use a Heal if you had no Minor Heal in hand... but you only would pay the cost for the Minor Heal.

For spells with more than one school listed, you could use a spell from either school... but the total base spellbook cost would have to be exceeded. For example, you might be able to cancel a Renewing Rain with a Lay Hands, but not with a Heal.

I would think that this could only be used on Attack and Incantation spells for flavor (if not logistical) reasons, and that you would have to be within range (using the range of the spell you are using to counter the original spell) of either the opposing mage, or the original spell's target in order to be able to do this.

I am suggesting that this would be an ability specific to a new mage, rather than for use by all. This seems as if it would particularly empower melee mages with added magical defenses... they could prepare teleports every round knowing that this can help them defend against being teleported away, all the while using melee attacks instead of (or in conjunction with) the teleport counterspell.

It seemed interesting... wondering what you all think about the concept.

If you spend all your mana, you are just telling me: "You can go FFA on me, I can't reveal any Nullify, Block, Reverse Attack, etc.".

If you like to play fast with mana, it's a good idea to toss out a Decoy or two during the course of the game for just this reason... to pay those reveal costs when your opponent thinks you can't.

I'm not saying one per table... whoever is running the tournament or someone else designated who isn't playing. How many ties do you have to break in a round, after all?

How about this... let a tie be a tie... 5-2-0 points for win-tie-lose. Or give no points for ties, and just count numbers of won games.

I hate having to worry about what happens at the end... and it seems that the books I play always have me playing well into the time limits. Maybe it's the player, and I'm just playing... wrong. Maybe I should just stop playing tournaments and just play for fun instead. To be honest, that's why I go to tournaments... experience and fun... I never expect to win anything.

How about offering non-tournament play more often at cons? Have a designated place for people to sign up and play pick-up games.

I used to play in SFB tourneys. In that game, if neither player had lost when time was called, the winner was determined by an experienced, impartial judge. The judge looked at the situation and declared a winner.

In MW, the judge would check out the mage boards, the position of the mages and spells on the board, the spells remaining in each spellbook, and asks each player privately how he plans to finish the game... then the judge just decides.

Why not just do that?