News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The mathematics of Magic: the Gathering (1999). Parent comment

Re:The mathematics of Magic: the Gathering (1999) by YeGoblynQueenne on Thursday June 21, 2018 @10:40AM (#17365563)
>> For most MtG players, the game rules are the sum of the game rules and the set of cards which are legal to play. Including other potential card text is not relevant, or at least at that point you are playing an unofficial variant of the game.

I dont' think there is any other language for which we assume that the only strings that belong to it are the sum of its printed texts (which in the case of M:tG ability text are printed cards). I don't see why we should make this assumption for ability text. That's not how languages work, in general.

Note that all this has nothing to do with "official" status, or the acceptance of specific strings by players of the game, or anyone. Either ability text is some unique construct, the likes of which has never been seen before, or it's a language like any other and it can be analysed in the same way as any other language.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The mathematics of Magic: the Gathering (1999) by rcxdude on Wednesday July 04, 2018 @08:06AM (#17456758)
Because when you play mtg, you don't manipulate the words on the cards, you manipulate the cards (well, some cards can manipulate ability text, but not arbitrarily). They are the fundamental unit of the game, not the ability text language itself. This does not have a great analogue with other languages. Anyway, you can analyse the language used to create ability text itself, but I think this is a far less interesting question.
[ Parent | on HN ]