Reverse Errata (err...maybe later)

[Scapegoat]

I just found my old isidran warrior and was wondering if it would be okay to change the AEG errata on him back? Or maybe on other cards too? As long as these changes arent realy needed for ancients!?! It would also reduce the list of erraters by a lot and avoid mistaks by not knowing theses erraters

Well maybe its not a great idear but it would be nice to see some old cards back :)

[Nihilistiskism]

Heh. I put Isadran Warrior in a deck just the other day. :-D

This is not the first time such a change has been suggested. I think the last time was in re: to Amoudasi's Wrath.

I'm trying to think of how to say this, but I don't have a lot of sleep so it might not be very...ummm...you might not understand it so well...

It is not the job of the Ancients Format council to "fix" underpowered cards. "Balancing" the environment, sadly, does not work both ways. We have the authority to "tone down" cards that are over-the-top (but always within a guideline of why they are being toned down, because, remember, I don't believe in NPE's). I don't think it's our job, or our right, to "re-empower" old cards that were previously errata'd or toned down by someone else.

That's not to say I don't agree that some of those old errata's should go away. I'd be for it.

That is, however, another topic for another day, and really, IMO, something that would have to be independent of the Ancients format/council duties.

I'll gladly talk to Arne. I can imagine shortening the errata list would please him to some extent.

-nihil

[Porter]

Let's actually *do* that, then. Perhaps a separate Council of players (apart from Ancients perhaps?) can discuss some options. Let those already printed cards be seriously reviewed and reconsidered and then let Ancients officially place the cards in the pool. Also, I think there are likely quite good candidates to reintroduce that would benefit multiple parties on multiple fronts.

[Cyanide]

I agree with both Porter and Nihil. There were many cards that were erratad specifically for the format in which that card was in, and when placed in an open or ancients environment may not be up to par with surrounding cards. As nihil said, that would not fall onto the ancients council, but a separate determining factor. After which, then the ancients group would decide at that point which cards would be "over the top", as nihil puts it, for the ancients format.

I feel that the cards that should be most looked at would be Warlords that received an errata. Certain Warlords (i.e. Serolia Calix, Inquisitor Chyre, Faiza Nyota) were literally dumbed down for the, at the time, current environment and have less, little or no play value in the open and ancients environments. I am not saying that every errata should be lifted or recanted, but each one should be looked separately, with only the open format taken into consideration at first look.

[Nihilistiskism]

Personally, I think that all 3 of those Warlords are just fine in Ancients. :-P

-nihil

[Captain Paratos Al Sim]

Agreed. Chyre's FIXES at the very least among those three hardly made him bat an eye. Oh, I don't get to sleaze my way out of being attacked unless I'm ready and spend for my react. Guess I'm too much of a coward to blitz the hell out of my opponent now. Right.

[Scapegoat]

well i would realy like to see chyre a little bit like these days...at least make the spendreact a react...
maybe faiza too..

[Cyanide]

I am looking to see Serolia's order to be not once per turn, but definitely not infinite. Twice per turn would be balanced and useful.

[senekthepoisoner]

Why use her she isnt good at anything, shes an ELF

[barin_wrath]

I like this idea, but cards that have an MRP to go with the errata shouldn't be considered. You would be issuing a new errata for the MRP, in essence.