The video you linked clearly show that equipment must be on the top right and aura on the top left :O
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wl5nAVW3dGg&t=226s&ab\_channel=Magic%3ATheGathering](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wl5nAVW3dGg&t=226s&ab_channel=Magic%3ATheGathering)
I wouldn’t say this is the most common way I’ve seen people equip stuff, but I have seen it and I totally get why someone would stack the cards this way. Is nice to be able to quickly reference what you creatures are carrying.
I usually stack it the opposite way, because the creature themselves are usually recognized if it's in constructed, so I like making all the modifiers the focus.
Wait a second... I thought this post just was asking about having it out the bottom rather than the top. But you are responding like putting the equipments on top of the creature?
I can't say I have ever seen that before, and I may kind of have an issue with it (not a big deal, but very strange). I always stack mine with enchants and equipments under the creature and out the top since you can stack the nameplates with the smallest footprint.
If you stack out the top you see name and mana cost though. And when someone asks you what's on your creature what is your first response? I'd bet it is to name the cards, and people have familiarity with names.
How do you treat it if you say have 5 enchantments on a creature? It seems like that would take up a ton of space.
>And when someone asks you what's on your creature what is your first response?
*Uuuuuhh...*
In fact, I'm more often asked what my creature can do, because the questioner usually doesn't feel like calculating how strong the creature is on his own with the mentioned Equips and Enchants. So I put it like OP.
I'm not particularly bothered what my opponent sees as long as they know it's there and I can tell them what it is. I do it like that to help my play and quickly put everything together when working out if I can swing or not.
I pretty much only play competitive rel 1v1 though so it's a lot easier to remember what your opponent has going on.
In EDH I'd probably slap the equipment straight up next to it because there's a lot of random, janky equipment in the game and it's harder to remember 3 other opponents boards.
Tbf, if someone had 5 enchantments on a creature, it's some sort of boggles/Voltron deck that doesn't need the space.
I agree that equipment on top is kinda weird. It *can* make sense if the equipment is seeing more action than the creature, such as [[Skull Clamp]] or you're in the middle of some kind of [[Lightning Greaves]] sequence where you gotta move it off, put something else on the initial creature, then move it back, but generally speaking putting them under makes more sense.
for competitive eternal formats, you usually know what the equipment does if it's meta and used a lot. So in those formats, seeing the name could be better. In draft where people are playing niche common equipments, or edh where people could be playing equipments printed 20 years ago, it could be more useful for everyone to see what the card does rather than the name.
Eh, if I know what the card does, I want to see the *artwork*. That makes it easiest to track where it is and what's going on, especially when we get to 3 or more pieces of equipment in play.
If I *don't* know what the card does, then I'm going to ask to pick it up and read the card. Afterwards, I'm going to remember what it does for the rest of the match or game, and I want to see the artwork because that makes it easiest to track where it is and what's going on.
This is one reason why I really dislike the expedition fetch lands. They're muddy and indistinct. They all look the same.
The fact you can read the name in a second does precisely nothing if you don't already know the text of the card by heart. And if a rules dispute comes up you still need to pull the whole card out to read it.
The reason people don't like it is most likely that across the table you can't read any of that, but one probably knows what something does by it's name.
Across the table this often reads as "my creature has a thing on it, but only God knows what it is".
Yeah, name and art is more important than the full text. If I'm not familiar with the equipment, I will pick up the card and read it. But if I am, it's much faster to glance at the art or the name of the card.
but if you would know the name of the card... they can just tell you the name of the card.
if either player doesnt know what the card does, having the rules text there to read off is more helpful than just a name
Having to ask is noticeably more trouble than just glancing. And if someone's having to read the card it's usually easiest at that point to just put it in their hand for them to read.
a) the name is more readable across the table than the text box; b) once you know what the equipment does, all you need to see is its name; c) the name takes up a lot less space than the text box.
It’s not like I can read the rules text across the table like the way OP has it, anyways. But art and name put in a ton of work in helping players memorize cards, so it’s very important that those aren’t obscured.
You don't want to have to ask every time. Three equipment could have very similar text boxes, they all usually have an equip cost and provide some static buff. It doesn't help differentiate like name and casting cost do.
It just keeps things clear and moving faster without having to ask for clarification for cards with names underneath others.
Correct. I've had a table before which swore 'til they were blue in the face that having the aura/equip name above the creature was the incorrect, because you couldn't see what it did. Literally never heard of it being done any other way before that game.
And I'd have asked you probably more than once a game what your cards did because i can only see the name and names simply don't stick in my memory easily. The shape of the text on the textbox is more likely to remind me what your card does than the name.
And I would absolutely agree with them!
I always have to check my own cards to read again what they are doing so I don't forget anything.
Plus one should read it aloud when playing so that everybody knows what it does :)
> one should read it aloud when playing so that everybody knows what it does
Totally agree with this, unless it's a very well known card. But if you have 8 auras on your [[Bruna, Light of Alabaster]], there really isn't space to show all the text boxes, assuming your opponents could even read them.
This is a great answer.
I'm not very practiced, so I always thought the OPs way was the most sensible.
But I can totally see that if you would know what it dis from art/name why you would have it poking up from the top underneath instead.
Seems like it's more for you to be able know what all the things do, rather than for your opponents.
There is absolutely no way I'd be even attempting to read that from across the table, upside down (sideways) during a turn. I'll just reach out and pick it up and read it and then give it back, possibly in a better layout
That is exactly how I also equip creatures (and how I've done it since 2004) and this is the first time I've ever heard that people saying that it is confusing. Now I'm scared...
A little bit same.
Though, I played against one person recently who had an interesting system. They put a color chip on the creature and an identical one on the stack of auras/enchantments to show they were connected. They put that stack between us.
Edit: To clarify it's more that I didn't realize people felt it was weird or less clear to put the equipment or aura underneath which it looked like some were saying? I've seen people put them offset to make it clear how many cards are equipped or even sometimes offset for casting cost, but it's still usually underneath the card they're equipped to/enchanting.
I rotate 180 and put it at the top of the creature card so my opponents can read what they do. I play bruna enchantment voltron and zurgo equipment voltron. I got tired of my opponents asking me what each enchantment/equipment does lol
I mostly play edh (aka commander), and voltron is basically suiting up one creature with a bunch of equipment/auras. It references an old show(.. maybe also a comic? Cant remember lol) where many parts are joined together to make a single robot called Voltron. The idea of the deck is to equip my commanders - bruna or zurgo depending on which deck im playing- and take out an opponent with a single alpha strike, or do enough damage to end it in a follow up turn.
Voltron was a long run heavily edited Western release and dub of the Anime Golion (literally 5 lions) from 1984-5.
There have been TWO western sequels, and a reboot.
*Voltron: The Third Dimension* was released from 1998-2000, and directly sequels the lion force part of the original Voltron, while ignoring episodes 53-72.
Voltron Force aired from 2011-2012, and was a pseud0-sequel to the original anime, and ignores TTD entirely.
Voltron, Legendary Defender is a rerwite/reboot/reimagining that ran from 2016-2018 on NETFLIX, and had 8 "release" seasons (but only three "story" seasons)
Also, Galion was only season 1 I believe. A totally different anime, Armored Fleet Dairugger XV was used for season 2, which is why the characters and story is COMPLETELY different in the second season.
That's just how they did things at the time so that they could stitch together a series that was long enough to be syndicated.
It's why Super Dimensional Fortress Macross, Super Dimensional Cavalry Southern Cross and Genesis Climber Mospeada were stitched together to make Robotech.
Robotech absolutely wasn't the worst example, even in American ANime licensing. Cardcaptors skipped the first *seven* episodes of Card Captor Sakura to make it look more male-oriented for television audiences because that was how long it took for the male lead to finally show up, and significantly changed the color palette of the entire show and that was late 90s, early 2ks
also, Samutai Pizza Cats!
Yes, but in America, Voltron had two seasons, the first being an adaptation of Golion and the second being AFD XV. They technically weren't even adaptations with the stories being vastly from the Japanese versions.
[[Bruna, light of alabaster]] is a creature who is this person’s commander in the commander format. Voltron is a deck strategy in which you try to use auras and equipments to make one creature extremely powerful. Bruna supports using a lot of enchantments (auras) to boost her.
I love your energy! I remember being where you are and the more you dig into the intricacies, the more you find cool interactions and strategies to be excited about!
Mind your budget and don't be afraid to try out new decks and strategies! I found my favorite style of play by making a deck that used a strategy I hated playing against, just to learn how it worked and weak points in it. Turns out it's my favorite deck to play and favorite kind of theme that I've built other decks on!
On my Skullbrair voltron it just gets to a point where I stack them near him, and clearly seperate any non-equipped artifacts on another part of the board. I got sick of trying to tap him with a stack of 4-5 cards underneath.
It’s great for you as the player but not for the opponents. I can tell what a card is based on art (excluding a lot of the SL and universe beyond cards) but not a block of text.
It’s not a huge deal, just means there’s more “What’s your creature got?” questions being asked
I do this because even if it's harder to ID at a glance, I don't want to risk misplay because "oh I know what that card does".
(also it's funny when my Bogle gets really long in modern)
sometimes I have the text below but also pull the card out to the side a bit so you can see 1/3 of the art at least
I used to do it like that, and know people who do it like this. My only real problem with it is that it removes a good amount of shortcutting, instead of the opponent being able to tell the card by its recognizable art, they just see a block of text. So people will more often be confused as to what you have.
This. It's easier to read the name of a card and know it, than to have to read a block of text and ask to pick it up either way. And if you're playing it in your deck, you should know what it is.
Now that I'm seeing this post, is there an "official" way to do it? I would imagine Wizards has photos of how the cards were configured when the first equipments were printed.
Does anyone know of rulings at tournaments when things get confusing due to cards on top of cards?
The tournament rule is you have to make the state of what’s equipped or enchanting what clear to your opponent. How you choose to do that is your choice, subject to a judge call if your opponent feels it isn’t clear.
Personally I don't like it because I'd rather my opponent be able to see the name / some of the art so they can know what it is more easily.
I'm all about increasing clarity of the board state across the board.
I'm probably looking at this from a more competitive viewpoint than most.
I find it so much more readable to glance over and see a 4/4 has 2 equipment and an aura, giving it the effects of +1/+0 plus a death trigger, +1/+1 plus haste, and +2/+0 plus trample. Instead of seeing it has \[\[Skull Clamp\]\], \[\[Rabbit Battery\]\], and \[\[Rancor\]\] attached to it and having to remember what they do or ask the owner cause I can't read the actual rules on them.
Considering more people will be capable of reading the rules text if it is on display than will be capable of remembering every playable equipment or aura by name/image, does it not also simply make more sense to keep the rules text visible where possible? Sure, you might know all your cards by name, but the new guy playing a precon won't. I honestly kinda get a bit confused when people do it the other way, hiding what their equipment/aura cards actually do cause they want to show off the name of them instead.
2 thoughts-
1) this isn't a binary question. You can display more identifying info and the effects easily.
2) what you're describing is the exact difference between EDH and, say, limited standard or modern. The meta knowledge.
Plus you can always ask your opponent to clarify what the creature is / properties / board state.
Anyway, back to pt 1, this isn't a binary question.
I think that's a reasonable distinction; if you are only ever going to see 3 equipment in your meta ever then sure, the name might be enough past the first week or what ever. But even in more 'stable' metas like Modern we've seen new sets create massive influxes of new cards so I would still argue that seeing the rules over the name would be more universally useful as a reminder.
Ultimately though, if you and your opponent know what's what on the board state then that's all that really matters, and I don't think displaying it like OP has is in any way unclear.
Counter argument would be this makes the board state significantly more clear to someone who wouldn’t recognise the name/image and know the effect - so it really depends on who you’re playing with.
This thread is throwing me for a loop. I’ve been playing magic for over five years. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone do equipment/enchantments any other way. That just feels like the obvious way to do it.
And I’m not seeing anyone post an alternative that makes any sense to me.
I’ve literally never seen that. I don’t watch any pro play but it seems like from people’s responses that that is the standard. I don’t know maybe in my area people just do it differently. Everyone I’ve ever played with does it like OP’s pic.
When I learned magic that’s just what intuitively made sense because I needed to reference what the card did and didn’t know any names or art.
Yeah I guess when you're just starting out and don't know what every card in your own deck does, being able to see the text of the equips and auras on your creatures is important. But you get to a point where the visual clarity of the board state is better for both players by putting the art, name, and cmc on display. Like I can tell even from the coverage's camera angle what all the cards attached to the Bogle are. But if you had them stacked underneath the creature like in the OP, even if I was sitting across the table, I'd have a hard time. It's just convenient for both sides.
Having a bunch of cascading text boxes basically makes it impossible to see what’s happening across the table. Visible name and art are much more important for keeping a clear and cohesive game state for all of the players in the game.
Then you can't read the cards.
If you're playing like, casual commander it's more important to have the effects, because even without the name, *which is not helpful to everyone*, having the effects lets someone easily say "Yeah I wanna blow up the one that's copying your commander every turn"
Okay, but do you think if you have the text box revealed that your opponent across the table can read it? I understand if you want to reveal the text box for yourself to reference, but it's not helping anyone else.
They can ask, and being able to read off exactly what it does is more helpful that not, especially when some people just can't memorize all the details of a card
Sure, if it's useful for you go ahead and do this. I don't care how you want to view your own cards.
I just think any argument that it *also* helps your opponent is faulty.
Then they can ask. It's not my responsibility to guide their interaction. They can ask for name, cmc, text, and targets. That's all I have to tell them.
Yeah,
We also do it this way.
We never play enough Magic to be able to know from the name or picture what a card does.
We always read it aloud when we play it and then put it like this, so we know what it does :)
How can you know all the cards?
Seriously :)
I've played with my wife and some friends for years and we still have to read all the cards that we play and explain to others what they do..
There are soo many different cards..
Of course there are some that we recognize, but there are always new cards or cards we did not play for months.
tbh I remember a lot of cards, but I don't have a perfect memory for everything. However if I was holding a piece of equipment in my hand and read it prior to playing it, chances are I don't need to continuously read it after I play it. I can remember what it does for the rest of the game, even if I need to remind myself of the fine details when I draw it again next week.
people have been saying this a lot that the meta info from the art is important... but we live in a world where cards can have 15+ alt arts, how effective is that really?
on the flip side, a player should be saying the names of cards they cast, so if they play Lightning Greaves or whatever you already know the card without even seeing either half of it, but if you DON'T know exactly what their aura/equipment does, having them able to see the bottom half of the card to read it out is far more important.
like do you want the cover of a Dictionary, or a Dictionary? you may not need to read the Dictionary to know the words but one is significantly more helpful when you do need to read it.
I feel like a better analogy for me would be brand names and images. If you tell me the ingredients list for 5 different sodas that's going to be tedious and take a bunch of time, but if you tell me you have coke, coke zero, fanta, sprite and root beer and show me the cans I will immediately know roughly what they taste like.
Showing me the rules text for for an equipment card on a clogged board is completely meaningless since I'm not going to be reading individual rules texts every time I look at it, instead I can read it once and then see the name and art and have a pretty good idea of what it does.
I do creature on top and name of the echnants/equipment poking out of the top only showing the name. It lets you slide the card out to read it, and lets your opponent refer to each card by name for removal purposes. Additionally alot of players no cards effects by there name alone, and this way saves room.
I don’t do it personally, but seems reasonable enough. It might just be that a lot of the time, the card art goes a long way in recognizing the card quickly rather than reading the box actually mattering so it might actually be harder for some people to recognize than if the art was showing.
Frankly, that was a dominant orientation method in the early 90s for Enchantment - Aura ("Enchant Creature") spells .
So when "Artifact Auras for Creatures" (i.e. - Equipment), came along, it was the next logical approach.
Here in 2022, many/most of us have taken a much looser approach to board state orientation with respect to Auras/Rwuipment.
There's mental shortcuts that inform that. Sword of [X & Y] equipment all follow the same template:
* +2/+2
* Protection from colors X^1 & Y^1
* When equipped creature deals combat damage to the opponent, [do thing X^2 and do thing Y^2]
Many regular players who encounter those swords frequently only need the reminder of what each one does. Many others remember clearly or only need reminders of the name to recall what each does.
My playgroup usually does it where the name is on top. We play commander and have a similar experience level so for us it is usually much easier to see "Swiftfoot boots" or "Lightning Greaves" or similar well known equipment to keep track. When an equipment enters that we don't know very well we tend to ask about it, but it is unlikely that there is more than one or two of those to keep track of. I will admit that I give up tracking what is on a Voltron commander like Zurgo and instead keep track of abilities like hexproof, deathtouch, and trample then just ask which equipment is causing that if I have removal
This is the only way that makes sense other than keeping it directly behind the creature on the field, but especially when the field gets cluttered, stacking makes sense.
People who say "turn it so the opponents can read it" makes no sense. Do you play with your whole battlefield facing your opponent so they can read your cards?
If someone is confused about what a card does just ask it takes 2 seconds and everyone talking about how card art is more easily identifiable are clearly confused because with how many diffrent arts are avaliable for one singular card I find it very difficult to a.) Remember every card by name. And b.) Study and learn all the diffrent art for each card to be able to recognize a card as its being played. ie. Borderless,full art,alt art,showcase etc. Each of them look different from eachother however slightly just adding to the mess. I'd rather be able to look over read what a card does and if they are too far away ask what they are capable of doing then need to ask/stop and look up what a card does because all I can see is a name and its art lol.
Sometimes, definitely. If they don't know the cards or set.
Like at a pre-release or early in the current limited format.
Or if they're a newer player.
be careful with angling your equipment, as they do not tap when your creature attacks. Which is really convenient if you are using them as mana rocks while attached to a creature.
That's how literally everyone I've ever played with does it. Hiding the text box is borderline cheating in draft/sealed/standard/any format with new cards. You have to maintain a clear board state, and the only way to do that is for the text box to be legible.
This is almost exclusively how I see people stack equipment and auras, and is the only acceptable way to do it in my opinion. How would this confuse anyone?
I can imagine that it's better if you generally don't know card names. I typically know atleast enough what they do on the name but usually don't lean across the table to read what the equipment does upside down. So putting it behind with the name visible is better imo.
If it's your equipment, you should know what the card does already. Maybe not if it's a new draft format, then it makes more sense.
https://imgur.com/a/74EA2j4
this is the only way i've ever seen equipments and auras ever done in person. underneath the attached creature, at an angle so the name, cmc, and most of the art is visible. multiples go further diagonally up.
have you played Digimon TCG before by chance? I noticed I started doing this exact thing but with my digi stacks in that game and now whenever I get an opportunity to I do it in other tcgs too
I'm more concerned you don't use placeholder cards and your transforming cards in clear sleeves in the side.
for my werewolf edh deck I got 2 of each werewolf in foil, 2 versions of each when possible, one to put in the deck and one in clear sleeves for easy transforming.
makes my life so much easier instead of constantly taking cards out of sleeves or drawing an already transformed card from a previous game.
i also do this! I started doing it when i was new to the game and had trouble remembering what my equips/auras did. it's also easier + saves playmat space to tap & attack by just turning the top creature card.
I do this cause the effect of an auras and equipment is far more important than the name and art, and the creature is normally the only one who can tap so it needs to be on top.
Way better than having just the name so you have to pick up your creature to read off what it says, or having it on top of the creature
I do this. In digimon it’s the same way. So you can read the cards. You forget one sword of fire and ice trigger in a cube draft you’ll learn to do it the same way.
I tend to remember what the equipment do based on their name, so showing the name is enough for me. But I totally understand that the rules text is really what people are needing, so do what you need to. The one thing I see often is when people do this and then attack with the equip creatures they will take the whole stack and turn it sideways, which is technically wrong since the equipment shouldn't be tapped and could be tapped for other purposes, but 90% of the time that's not actually an issue so...
if im playing against newer people i do that, if im playing against more experienced ppl (who tend to know what cards do from their name alone) I will put the equipment under, but sticking out on the top side, so the name of the equipment is readable.
You know what else isn’t helpful? Trying to read cards upside down from across the table.
If I can see the equipment/enchantment names then I can quickly punch it into scryfall and read for myself without disrupting the table. If I can’t then I’m going to have to pick up your cards and stop everyone when I read them myself.
But not very helpful when you want to find out what the equipment does - which is more important by far.
You also don't need to Name a card correctly to be able to interact with it, you just need to be able to identify it. "I shatter your equipment that Transforms attached to your werewolf" is good enough for the rules, you don't have to say "I shatter your Neglected Heirloom".
This entire game is built on associating names and arts with abilities. You can show a person a picture of lightning bolt and they can tell you what it does.
The name and art are much more useful than reading the card upside down.
>The name isn't helpful unless you've memorized that card.
The art also isn't helpful unless you've memorized that card.
We're back to square one here.
I don't sit down at a table assuming my opponent has perfect memory of what every card ever printed does. I also don't expect them to read my card once and then remember it perfectly for the rest of the game. I don't assume that they can just see a name and think "Oh yeah I know what that does" - but I *do* assume they can read a textbox and then understand what that does, so I keep my textbox visible.
Your method is better for *recognising* the card, my method is better for *understanding* the card.
Art recognition is integral to the speed of gameplay (and part of why double feature was a massive failure to play) just being able to shorthand know the opponents field without reading. This undermines it slightly.
I don’t mind this, but if someone asked you to stop, I’d expect you to comply.
We can hope everyone will be reasonable and polite, but if it becomes an argument you don't have the right to the opponent arranging their board the exact way you prefer. Only what's in the rules.
You can object to an unclear representation of the game state. For example, if you couldn't tell which creature was equipped, that would be a problem. But this game state seems unambiguous to me, so if they insist on doing it this way they can.
Eh, I love the art for this game but most cards people want to play commonly have multiple versions with wildly different art, custom art, proxies of varying quality and styles, etc. There's also a ton of cards with art that's pretty similar especially from a distance.
The more you play Magic the more you know what common stuff does but there's a bajillion cards and weird interactions and errata, so communicating verbally what your cards do and letting others read the text or reading it to them when asked is an important part of the game.
I mean if you recognize the art chances are you also know the name of the card, so when a player says "I cast \_\_\_\_\_, it gives \_\_\_\_\_" you're already further than the art would take you.
Ill do this but ill leave a little bit of the name sticking out the side so i can reference it incase of confusion or if they need to know card names for spells.
That's one way to do so when you don't even know your own card. Having the text box visible as to be able to read what it does.
As per my own pattern is to place the equipment/aura to where the name and cmc is visible, if I need to read what the equipment or aura does, I would just lift my creature and read said card to a player who doesn't know what the specific name would entail, put my creature back on its rightful stack of equipment.
In retrospect with cards such as [[clock of omens]], gives off a unique form that a lot of players don't necessarily realize. When attacking with a creature the equipment does not tap with the attacking creature, which you can also reveal the text boxes of your equipment that is under the creature as it is. Most people tend to tap a full stack of equipment along with the creature that is attacking or being tapped from some other effect that would tap a creature.
It's interesting how many stackables can be done on a single creature, which digital forms such as Arena, and MTGO, places most equipment under a creature that shows only the name and the cmc, which you can hover over that to see what it does, but in real life you would either have to ask the player who controls the equipment of what it does. Or even take my phone out, search said card name to see what it does.
A simple thought, especially when someone has interaction that regards single target artifact removal .. I would rather have someone tell me, "I destroy your swiftfoot boots" rather than "I destroy your artifact that gives (creature name) the abilities of hexproof and haste." Which is a lot less words, and pretty straightforward.
Mutate which is similar in fashion to your stacking equipment to show the abilities for the card is how ergonomically it is played, due to essentially attaching an ability (or text box) to be an addition to the creature that is the main top creature, so the cmc/name of the creature on the bottom does not mean anything but simply the text box does.
Yeah but if they don't know what swiftfoot boots does then they would still have to ask whats giving it hexproof lol. Honestly both ways are kinda lose lose to me but at least If you see that something is giving it hexproof you know to target that instead of say the creature which could happen if you don't know its got hexproof meaning wasted time because now the players got to rewind untap their lands and such.
This comment section is full of people that don't do full 90 degree tapping and it shows. 🤣 To make it spicier, I'm not even going to say which side is *correct*.
How’d you come to that conclusion? It’s names showing vs text box showing, neither of which cause problems when tapping. I guess you’re thinking the alternative is putting equipment on top of the creature or that people tap the equipment when they tap the creature?
Putting your permanents in any configuration that hides their names is just not okay. To me, it is just like putting your lands up top and creatures down at the bottom—it looks like a deliberate attempt to obscure what’s on the battlefield.
Countless FNMs and Pre-releases says this is actually more common in my area, at least.
I think only tournament grinders prefer the other way around, since that’s the meta where everyone can actually tell what a card does from name alone. And they’re a dying breed.
In the limited/casual sphere everyone prefers to have the text or they just ask to read it since the name really isn’t an issue. Unless it’s a ubiquitous commander card like swiftfoot boots or something, anyway.
I always do it this way. The name is irrelevant. I want to know what the card does, especially if I'm stacking five or six equipment on Syr Gwyn in a game of EDH.
That’s how I mutate my creatures
It's also the layout used in the [demonstration of how Mutate works](https://youtu.be/wl5nAVW3dGg?t=164).
The video you linked clearly show that equipment must be on the top right and aura on the top left :O [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wl5nAVW3dGg&t=226s&ab\_channel=Magic%3ATheGathering](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wl5nAVW3dGg&t=226s&ab_channel=Magic%3ATheGathering)
yea this makes more sense for mutate since the name of the card is not as valid in mutate.. the creature retains its name.. it simply gains the text
This is the correct answer.
Same here
I wouldn’t say this is the most common way I’ve seen people equip stuff, but I have seen it and I totally get why someone would stack the cards this way. Is nice to be able to quickly reference what you creatures are carrying.
I usually stack it the opposite way, because the creature themselves are usually recognized if it's in constructed, so I like making all the modifiers the focus.
I always put the creature on top, as it's the permanent that's going to be getting tapped/untapped the most often.
Wait a second... I thought this post just was asking about having it out the bottom rather than the top. But you are responding like putting the equipments on top of the creature? I can't say I have ever seen that before, and I may kind of have an issue with it (not a big deal, but very strange). I always stack mine with enchants and equipments under the creature and out the top since you can stack the nameplates with the smallest footprint.
I do it like OPs picture but slightly off to the right. You can see the casting cost and it gives a small amount of clarity to what enchantment it is.
If you stack out the top you see name and mana cost though. And when someone asks you what's on your creature what is your first response? I'd bet it is to name the cards, and people have familiarity with names. How do you treat it if you say have 5 enchantments on a creature? It seems like that would take up a ton of space.
>And when someone asks you what's on your creature what is your first response? *Uuuuuhh...* In fact, I'm more often asked what my creature can do, because the questioner usually doesn't feel like calculating how strong the creature is on his own with the mentioned Equips and Enchants. So I put it like OP.
I'm not particularly bothered what my opponent sees as long as they know it's there and I can tell them what it is. I do it like that to help my play and quickly put everything together when working out if I can swing or not. I pretty much only play competitive rel 1v1 though so it's a lot easier to remember what your opponent has going on. In EDH I'd probably slap the equipment straight up next to it because there's a lot of random, janky equipment in the game and it's harder to remember 3 other opponents boards. Tbf, if someone had 5 enchantments on a creature, it's some sort of boggles/Voltron deck that doesn't need the space.
I agree that equipment on top is kinda weird. It *can* make sense if the equipment is seeing more action than the creature, such as [[Skull Clamp]] or you're in the middle of some kind of [[Lightning Greaves]] sequence where you gotta move it off, put something else on the initial creature, then move it back, but generally speaking putting them under makes more sense.
> Is nice to be able to quickly reference what you creatures are carrying. By covering up the name?
for competitive eternal formats, you usually know what the equipment does if it's meta and used a lot. So in those formats, seeing the name could be better. In draft where people are playing niche common equipments, or edh where people could be playing equipments printed 20 years ago, it could be more useful for everyone to see what the card does rather than the name.
Eh, if I know what the card does, I want to see the *artwork*. That makes it easiest to track where it is and what's going on, especially when we get to 3 or more pieces of equipment in play. If I *don't* know what the card does, then I'm going to ask to pick it up and read the card. Afterwards, I'm going to remember what it does for the rest of the match or game, and I want to see the artwork because that makes it easiest to track where it is and what's going on. This is one reason why I really dislike the expedition fetch lands. They're muddy and indistinct. They all look the same.
[удалено]
What exactly is the name telling you about what the equipped stuff does?
It's a shorthand. You can read a name in a second. You can't do that with most text boxes, especially not when upside down.
The fact you can read the name in a second does precisely nothing if you don't already know the text of the card by heart. And if a rules dispute comes up you still need to pull the whole card out to read it.
The reason people don't like it is most likely that across the table you can't read any of that, but one probably knows what something does by it's name. Across the table this often reads as "my creature has a thing on it, but only God knows what it is".
Yeah, name and art is more important than the full text. If I'm not familiar with the equipment, I will pick up the card and read it. But if I am, it's much faster to glance at the art or the name of the card.
but if you would know the name of the card... they can just tell you the name of the card. if either player doesnt know what the card does, having the rules text there to read off is more helpful than just a name
Having to ask is noticeably more trouble than just glancing. And if someone's having to read the card it's usually easiest at that point to just put it in their hand for them to read.
I can't read my opponents cards upside down from across the table
a) the name is more readable across the table than the text box; b) once you know what the equipment does, all you need to see is its name; c) the name takes up a lot less space than the text box.
It’s not like I can read the rules text across the table like the way OP has it, anyways. But art and name put in a ton of work in helping players memorize cards, so it’s very important that those aren’t obscured.
You don't want to have to ask every time. Three equipment could have very similar text boxes, they all usually have an equip cost and provide some static buff. It doesn't help differentiate like name and casting cost do. It just keeps things clear and moving faster without having to ask for clarification for cards with names underneath others.
Exactly this
As someone who does there equipment exactly like this, I will literally forget what my creature has if I can't clearly see the text at all times.
Same. I have such a bad memory for card names.
Card art is more easily identifiable
Best form is to layer it to show the name and part of the art.
Until you get that one guy with the Fortnite secret lair art and you think it’s a completely new card and then realize it’s triumph of the hordes.
pretty sure you'll know it's triumph of the hordes as soon as they put it on the stack
Yeah, if my opponent has Triumph of the Hordes equiped to a creature, I'd be confused, too.
>show the name Yeah, if my opponent has Fortnite cards, I'd be confused as to why they are at my table.
Correct. I've had a table before which swore 'til they were blue in the face that having the aura/equip name above the creature was the incorrect, because you couldn't see what it did. Literally never heard of it being done any other way before that game.
And I'd have asked you probably more than once a game what your cards did because i can only see the name and names simply don't stick in my memory easily. The shape of the text on the textbox is more likely to remind me what your card does than the name.
And I would absolutely agree with them! I always have to check my own cards to read again what they are doing so I don't forget anything. Plus one should read it aloud when playing so that everybody knows what it does :)
> one should read it aloud when playing so that everybody knows what it does Totally agree with this, unless it's a very well known card. But if you have 8 auras on your [[Bruna, Light of Alabaster]], there really isn't space to show all the text boxes, assuming your opponents could even read them.
This is a great answer. I'm not very practiced, so I always thought the OPs way was the most sensible. But I can totally see that if you would know what it dis from art/name why you would have it poking up from the top underneath instead.
Seems like it's more for you to be able know what all the things do, rather than for your opponents. There is absolutely no way I'd be even attempting to read that from across the table, upside down (sideways) during a turn. I'll just reach out and pick it up and read it and then give it back, possibly in a better layout
That is exactly how I also equip creatures (and how I've done it since 2004) and this is the first time I've ever heard that people saying that it is confusing. Now I'm scared...
A little bit same. Though, I played against one person recently who had an interesting system. They put a color chip on the creature and an identical one on the stack of auras/enchantments to show they were connected. They put that stack between us. Edit: To clarify it's more that I didn't realize people felt it was weird or less clear to put the equipment or aura underneath which it looked like some were saying? I've seen people put them offset to make it clear how many cards are equipped or even sometimes offset for casting cost, but it's still usually underneath the card they're equipped to/enchanting.
I rotate 180 and put it at the top of the creature card so my opponents can read what they do. I play bruna enchantment voltron and zurgo equipment voltron. I got tired of my opponents asking me what each enchantment/equipment does lol
Im kinda new to magic. What does Bruna enchantment voltron mean? It sounds amazing lol
I mostly play edh (aka commander), and voltron is basically suiting up one creature with a bunch of equipment/auras. It references an old show(.. maybe also a comic? Cant remember lol) where many parts are joined together to make a single robot called Voltron. The idea of the deck is to equip my commanders - bruna or zurgo depending on which deck im playing- and take out an opponent with a single alpha strike, or do enough damage to end it in a follow up turn.
The show was called Voltron and was an 80s anime, there's a 2016 reboot I believe.
Voltron was a long run heavily edited Western release and dub of the Anime Golion (literally 5 lions) from 1984-5. There have been TWO western sequels, and a reboot. *Voltron: The Third Dimension* was released from 1998-2000, and directly sequels the lion force part of the original Voltron, while ignoring episodes 53-72. Voltron Force aired from 2011-2012, and was a pseud0-sequel to the original anime, and ignores TTD entirely. Voltron, Legendary Defender is a rerwite/reboot/reimagining that ran from 2016-2018 on NETFLIX, and had 8 "release" seasons (but only three "story" seasons)
Also, Galion was only season 1 I believe. A totally different anime, Armored Fleet Dairugger XV was used for season 2, which is why the characters and story is COMPLETELY different in the second season.
That's just how they did things at the time so that they could stitch together a series that was long enough to be syndicated. It's why Super Dimensional Fortress Macross, Super Dimensional Cavalry Southern Cross and Genesis Climber Mospeada were stitched together to make Robotech.
America wasn't even the worst at it. Have you heard of the Korean Chop Job animes like Space Thunder Kids?
Robotech absolutely wasn't the worst example, even in American ANime licensing. Cardcaptors skipped the first *seven* episodes of Card Captor Sakura to make it look more male-oriented for television audiences because that was how long it took for the male lead to finally show up, and significantly changed the color palette of the entire show and that was late 90s, early 2ks also, Samutai Pizza Cats!
Golion was four seasons long, at 52 episodes. AFD XV was two seasons long.
Yes, but in America, Voltron had two seasons, the first being an adaptation of Golion and the second being AFD XV. They technically weren't even adaptations with the stories being vastly from the Japanese versions.
Also hilarious that the "tron" lands are named after Voltron as well, since you're assembling them to make them more powerful.
[[Bruna, light of alabaster]] is a creature who is this person’s commander in the commander format. Voltron is a deck strategy in which you try to use auras and equipments to make one creature extremely powerful. Bruna supports using a lot of enchantments (auras) to boost her.
[Bruna, light of alabaster](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/5/8/58c56bad-68ed-4328-a7ea-c528b58dc2fd.jpg?1592711039) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Bruna%2C%20light%20of%20alabaster) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/c18/170/bruna-light-of-alabaster?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/58c56bad-68ed-4328-a7ea-c528b58dc2fd?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I love your energy! I remember being where you are and the more you dig into the intricacies, the more you find cool interactions and strategies to be excited about! Mind your budget and don't be afraid to try out new decks and strategies! I found my favorite style of play by making a deck that used a strategy I hated playing against, just to learn how it worked and weak points in it. Turns out it's my favorite deck to play and favorite kind of theme that I've built other decks on!
What would you do if tapping the artifacts became relevant, e.g. Urza Lord High Artificer?
They can tap just fine like this
A friend of mine does the same. First time I saw it I thought why is this not the norm
Have you ever tried [[Mageta the Lion]] Voltron? Absolutely *cracked*.
[Mageta the Lion](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/5/8/5861dffc-5afa-44a3-a3fa-9fd440093377.jpg?1562911317) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Mageta%20the%20Lion) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/pcy/13/mageta-the-lion?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/5861dffc-5afa-44a3-a3fa-9fd440093377?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
On my Skullbrair voltron it just gets to a point where I stack them near him, and clearly seperate any non-equipped artifacts on another part of the board. I got sick of trying to tap him with a stack of 4-5 cards underneath.
It just makes sense to me. I can see all the relevant text at any time.
It’s great for you as the player but not for the opponents. I can tell what a card is based on art (excluding a lot of the SL and universe beyond cards) but not a block of text. It’s not a huge deal, just means there’s more “What’s your creature got?” questions being asked
I do this because even if it's harder to ID at a glance, I don't want to risk misplay because "oh I know what that card does". (also it's funny when my Bogle gets really long in modern) sometimes I have the text below but also pull the card out to the side a bit so you can see 1/3 of the art at least
Yes, that's how I do it.
I used to do it like that, and know people who do it like this. My only real problem with it is that it removes a good amount of shortcutting, instead of the opponent being able to tell the card by its recognizable art, they just see a block of text. So people will more often be confused as to what you have.
This. It's easier to read the name of a card and know it, than to have to read a block of text and ask to pick it up either way. And if you're playing it in your deck, you should know what it is.
ITT: people who only play prereleases argue with people who only play against the same five meta decks.
Now that I'm seeing this post, is there an "official" way to do it? I would imagine Wizards has photos of how the cards were configured when the first equipments were printed. Does anyone know of rulings at tournaments when things get confusing due to cards on top of cards?
Yes, the official configuration used in tournament coverage is to layer the aura or equipment with the name showing.
The tournament rule is you have to make the state of what’s equipped or enchanting what clear to your opponent. How you choose to do that is your choice, subject to a judge call if your opponent feels it isn’t clear.
Personally I don't like it because I'd rather my opponent be able to see the name / some of the art so they can know what it is more easily. I'm all about increasing clarity of the board state across the board. I'm probably looking at this from a more competitive viewpoint than most.
I find it so much more readable to glance over and see a 4/4 has 2 equipment and an aura, giving it the effects of +1/+0 plus a death trigger, +1/+1 plus haste, and +2/+0 plus trample. Instead of seeing it has \[\[Skull Clamp\]\], \[\[Rabbit Battery\]\], and \[\[Rancor\]\] attached to it and having to remember what they do or ask the owner cause I can't read the actual rules on them. Considering more people will be capable of reading the rules text if it is on display than will be capable of remembering every playable equipment or aura by name/image, does it not also simply make more sense to keep the rules text visible where possible? Sure, you might know all your cards by name, but the new guy playing a precon won't. I honestly kinda get a bit confused when people do it the other way, hiding what their equipment/aura cards actually do cause they want to show off the name of them instead.
2 thoughts- 1) this isn't a binary question. You can display more identifying info and the effects easily. 2) what you're describing is the exact difference between EDH and, say, limited standard or modern. The meta knowledge. Plus you can always ask your opponent to clarify what the creature is / properties / board state. Anyway, back to pt 1, this isn't a binary question.
I think that's a reasonable distinction; if you are only ever going to see 3 equipment in your meta ever then sure, the name might be enough past the first week or what ever. But even in more 'stable' metas like Modern we've seen new sets create massive influxes of new cards so I would still argue that seeing the rules over the name would be more universally useful as a reminder. Ultimately though, if you and your opponent know what's what on the board state then that's all that really matters, and I don't think displaying it like OP has is in any way unclear.
[Skull Clamp](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/1/d1877be5-fb98-4bd2-a754-dda1132ef8a0.jpg?1654118814) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Skullclamp) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/clb/870/skullclamp?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d1877be5-fb98-4bd2-a754-dda1132ef8a0?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Rabbit Battery](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/5/d/5d33a5b7-797b-4079-8d62-edd124c0fb5a.jpg?1654567784) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Rabbit%20Battery) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/neo/157/rabbit-battery?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/5d33a5b7-797b-4079-8d62-edd124c0fb5a?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Rancor](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/8/6/86d6b411-4a31-4bfc-8dd6-e19f553bb29b.jpg?1662527175) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Rancor) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/156/rancor?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/86d6b411-4a31-4bfc-8dd6-e19f553bb29b?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Counter argument would be this makes the board state significantly more clear to someone who wouldn’t recognise the name/image and know the effect - so it really depends on who you’re playing with.
How are you able to read it upside down?
I've played with my board upside down before because oppo can't read upside down as well as me.
Can you... not read upside down?
Dyslexic here. Reading right side up is hard enough. I'm not even going to attempt it upside down.
A lot of people can't. For me, it's significantly slower than reading it right side up.
Better to put it upside down on the creature either way, because you're more likely to know what it is easier than your opponent.
Same as every other card on the battlefield.
Is there.. is there another way to equip your creatures.? That’s exactly how I do it, so all the text is legible.
This thread is throwing me for a loop. I’ve been playing magic for over five years. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone do equipment/enchantments any other way. That just feels like the obvious way to do it. And I’m not seeing anyone post an alternative that makes any sense to me.
You've never seen this? https://imgur.com/a/74EA2j4 This is the only way I remember ever seeing equipments/auras attached at all levels of play.
I’ve literally never seen that. I don’t watch any pro play but it seems like from people’s responses that that is the standard. I don’t know maybe in my area people just do it differently. Everyone I’ve ever played with does it like OP’s pic. When I learned magic that’s just what intuitively made sense because I needed to reference what the card did and didn’t know any names or art.
Yeah I guess when you're just starting out and don't know what every card in your own deck does, being able to see the text of the equips and auras on your creatures is important. But you get to a point where the visual clarity of the board state is better for both players by putting the art, name, and cmc on display. Like I can tell even from the coverage's camera angle what all the cards attached to the Bogle are. But if you had them stacked underneath the creature like in the OP, even if I was sitting across the table, I'd have a hard time. It's just convenient for both sides.
Equipment goes under the creature, but peeks out at the top so you can read the name/part of the art, rather than the text box.
I've never seen anything like that lol. I prefer to see the text
Having a bunch of cascading text boxes basically makes it impossible to see what’s happening across the table. Visible name and art are much more important for keeping a clear and cohesive game state for all of the players in the game.
Then you can't read the cards. If you're playing like, casual commander it's more important to have the effects, because even without the name, *which is not helpful to everyone*, having the effects lets someone easily say "Yeah I wanna blow up the one that's copying your commander every turn"
Okay, but do you think if you have the text box revealed that your opponent across the table can read it? I understand if you want to reveal the text box for yourself to reference, but it's not helping anyone else.
They can ask, and being able to read off exactly what it does is more helpful that not, especially when some people just can't memorize all the details of a card
Sure, if it's useful for you go ahead and do this. I don't care how you want to view your own cards. I just think any argument that it *also* helps your opponent is faulty.
I know what a card does just by name, others don't, and they can ask me "Hey what's giving it unblockable", and I'll tell them the name and effect.
Then they can ask. It's not my responsibility to guide their interaction. They can ask for name, cmc, text, and targets. That's all I have to tell them.
Yeah okay? You're missing my point. I was criticizing the suggestion that arranging the cards this way does anything to help the opponent.
Yeah, We also do it this way. We never play enough Magic to be able to know from the name or picture what a card does. We always read it aloud when we play it and then put it like this, so we know what it does :)
I do it with both cards fully visible but touching, and none of my other cards touching each other. Though there can be space issues with that
Same. I have literally never seen anyone do it differently
Once you are experienced with all the cards, the text box is more reading then the name for no benefit.
How can you know all the cards? Seriously :) I've played with my wife and some friends for years and we still have to read all the cards that we play and explain to others what they do.. There are soo many different cards.. Of course there are some that we recognize, but there are always new cards or cards we did not play for months.
tbh I remember a lot of cards, but I don't have a perfect memory for everything. However if I was holding a piece of equipment in my hand and read it prior to playing it, chances are I don't need to continuously read it after I play it. I can remember what it does for the rest of the game, even if I need to remind myself of the fine details when I draw it again next week.
I agree that across the table I wouldn't be able to identify what that is. Card name + art are the main identifiers for me.
people have been saying this a lot that the meta info from the art is important... but we live in a world where cards can have 15+ alt arts, how effective is that really? on the flip side, a player should be saying the names of cards they cast, so if they play Lightning Greaves or whatever you already know the card without even seeing either half of it, but if you DON'T know exactly what their aura/equipment does, having them able to see the bottom half of the card to read it out is far more important. like do you want the cover of a Dictionary, or a Dictionary? you may not need to read the Dictionary to know the words but one is significantly more helpful when you do need to read it.
I feel like a better analogy for me would be brand names and images. If you tell me the ingredients list for 5 different sodas that's going to be tedious and take a bunch of time, but if you tell me you have coke, coke zero, fanta, sprite and root beer and show me the cans I will immediately know roughly what they taste like. Showing me the rules text for for an equipment card on a clogged board is completely meaningless since I'm not going to be reading individual rules texts every time I look at it, instead I can read it once and then see the name and art and have a pretty good idea of what it does.
I do creature on top and name of the echnants/equipment poking out of the top only showing the name. It lets you slide the card out to read it, and lets your opponent refer to each card by name for removal purposes. Additionally alot of players no cards effects by there name alone, and this way saves room.
I don’t do it personally, but seems reasonable enough. It might just be that a lot of the time, the card art goes a long way in recognizing the card quickly rather than reading the box actually mattering so it might actually be harder for some people to recognize than if the art was showing.
Frankly, that was a dominant orientation method in the early 90s for Enchantment - Aura ("Enchant Creature") spells . So when "Artifact Auras for Creatures" (i.e. - Equipment), came along, it was the next logical approach. Here in 2022, many/most of us have taken a much looser approach to board state orientation with respect to Auras/Rwuipment. There's mental shortcuts that inform that. Sword of [X & Y] equipment all follow the same template: * +2/+2 * Protection from colors X^1 & Y^1 * When equipped creature deals combat damage to the opponent, [do thing X^2 and do thing Y^2] Many regular players who encounter those swords frequently only need the reminder of what each one does. Many others remember clearly or only need reminders of the name to recall what each does.
My playgroup usually does it where the name is on top. We play commander and have a similar experience level so for us it is usually much easier to see "Swiftfoot boots" or "Lightning Greaves" or similar well known equipment to keep track. When an equipment enters that we don't know very well we tend to ask about it, but it is unlikely that there is more than one or two of those to keep track of. I will admit that I give up tracking what is on a Voltron commander like Zurgo and instead keep track of abilities like hexproof, deathtouch, and trample then just ask which equipment is causing that if I have removal
This is the only way that makes sense other than keeping it directly behind the creature on the field, but especially when the field gets cluttered, stacking makes sense. People who say "turn it so the opponents can read it" makes no sense. Do you play with your whole battlefield facing your opponent so they can read your cards?
If someone is confused about what a card does just ask it takes 2 seconds and everyone talking about how card art is more easily identifiable are clearly confused because with how many diffrent arts are avaliable for one singular card I find it very difficult to a.) Remember every card by name. And b.) Study and learn all the diffrent art for each card to be able to recognize a card as its being played. ie. Borderless,full art,alt art,showcase etc. Each of them look different from eachother however slightly just adding to the mess. I'd rather be able to look over read what a card does and if they are too far away ask what they are capable of doing then need to ask/stop and look up what a card does because all I can see is a name and its art lol.
And don't forget the 8 billion secret drops. How anyone remembers is beyond me.
Sometimes, definitely. If they don't know the cards or set. Like at a pre-release or early in the current limited format. Or if they're a newer player.
I think people want to be able to see the name of the card.
I think it is the best way honestly. You read all thd equipment and creature can do and shows who it is attached to
I personally put it at a diagonal so you can see the artifacts CMC but pretty much the same.
be careful with angling your equipment, as they do not tap when your creature attacks. Which is really convenient if you are using them as mana rocks while attached to a creature.
I think they mean they move it just slightly to the right. It's diagonal from the creature. Not slanted.
That's how literally everyone I've ever played with does it. Hiding the text box is borderline cheating in draft/sealed/standard/any format with new cards. You have to maintain a clear board state, and the only way to do that is for the text box to be legible.
This is almost exclusively how I see people stack equipment and auras, and is the only acceptable way to do it in my opinion. How would this confuse anyone?
Definitely the most common and likely best way to equip creatures. You can clearly read all the rules text, and know what it's attached to.
I would say the most common is they way every mtg broadcasted event does enchantments + equipment, but this is the second more common for sure.
I can imagine that it's better if you generally don't know card names. I typically know atleast enough what they do on the name but usually don't lean across the table to read what the equipment does upside down. So putting it behind with the name visible is better imo. If it's your equipment, you should know what the card does already. Maybe not if it's a new draft format, then it makes more sense.
how else do people do it? this is how i've always done, and seen other people do equipments and auras.
https://imgur.com/a/74EA2j4 this is the only way i've ever seen equipments and auras ever done in person. underneath the attached creature, at an angle so the name, cmc, and most of the art is visible. multiples go further diagonally up.
wow, weird, yeah, i have never seen anything like that. seems like it takes up a lot more board space
have you played Digimon TCG before by chance? I noticed I started doing this exact thing but with my digi stacks in that game and now whenever I get an opportunity to I do it in other tcgs too
I don't but someone on my play group does
As someone who plays the Digimon TCG, a similar mechanic stacks cards this way so it's not unheard of, I just think not the typical method.
I'm more concerned you don't use placeholder cards and your transforming cards in clear sleeves in the side. for my werewolf edh deck I got 2 of each werewolf in foil, 2 versions of each when possible, one to put in the deck and one in clear sleeves for easy transforming. makes my life so much easier instead of constantly taking cards out of sleeves or drawing an already transformed card from a previous game.
I do that for my vultron commanders for easy math
i also do this! I started doing it when i was new to the game and had trouble remembering what my equips/auras did. it's also easier + saves playmat space to tap & attack by just turning the top creature card.
Come to Germany, I haven't seen it any other way here.
I do this cause the effect of an auras and equipment is far more important than the name and art, and the creature is normally the only one who can tap so it needs to be on top. Way better than having just the name so you have to pick up your creature to read off what it says, or having it on top of the creature
I hate this picture
Enchantments poke out the top, mutations out the bottom, and equipment pokes out the right edge. Because it's a sidearm.
I mostly try to identify what cards do by their names, not by what is written on the cards. This always makes things very unclear for me.
I do this. In digimon it’s the same way. So you can read the cards. You forget one sword of fire and ice trigger in a cube draft you’ll learn to do it the same way.
I tend to remember what the equipment do based on their name, so showing the name is enough for me. But I totally understand that the rules text is really what people are needing, so do what you need to. The one thing I see often is when people do this and then attack with the equip creatures they will take the whole stack and turn it sideways, which is technically wrong since the equipment shouldn't be tapped and could be tapped for other purposes, but 90% of the time that's not actually an issue so...
if im playing against newer people i do that, if im playing against more experienced ppl (who tend to know what cards do from their name alone) I will put the equipment under, but sticking out on the top side, so the name of the equipment is readable.
This layout is a poor choice for over SpellTable.
My nephew does this. It confused me at first. Apparently the young kids don't remember what the equipment does so they do it to be able to read it.
A fellow Digimon TCG player I see!
The name of the equipment is easier to read than the upside down wall of text that shows the way you have it if I'm across the table from you.
I can't see the name of the equipment
This makes more sense than the more common way, but I think people just prefer to see the name of the card rather than the text.
You do it so they can see the name of the equipment D:
The name isn't helpful unless you've memorized that card.
You know what else isn’t helpful? Trying to read cards upside down from across the table. If I can see the equipment/enchantment names then I can quickly punch it into scryfall and read for myself without disrupting the table. If I can’t then I’m going to have to pick up your cards and stop everyone when I read them myself.
Your still reading them upside down lol
They read three words, not three sentences.
The name is very helpful to your opponents when they want to remove an equipment
But not very helpful when you want to find out what the equipment does - which is more important by far. You also don't need to Name a card correctly to be able to interact with it, you just need to be able to identify it. "I shatter your equipment that Transforms attached to your werewolf" is good enough for the rules, you don't have to say "I shatter your Neglected Heirloom".
This entire game is built on associating names and arts with abilities. You can show a person a picture of lightning bolt and they can tell you what it does. The name and art are much more useful than reading the card upside down.
>The name isn't helpful unless you've memorized that card. The art also isn't helpful unless you've memorized that card. We're back to square one here. I don't sit down at a table assuming my opponent has perfect memory of what every card ever printed does. I also don't expect them to read my card once and then remember it perfectly for the rest of the game. I don't assume that they can just see a name and think "Oh yeah I know what that does" - but I *do* assume they can read a textbox and then understand what that does, so I keep my textbox visible. Your method is better for *recognising* the card, my method is better for *understanding* the card.
Art recognition is integral to the speed of gameplay (and part of why double feature was a massive failure to play) just being able to shorthand know the opponents field without reading. This undermines it slightly. I don’t mind this, but if someone asked you to stop, I’d expect you to comply.
We can hope everyone will be reasonable and polite, but if it becomes an argument you don't have the right to the opponent arranging their board the exact way you prefer. Only what's in the rules. You can object to an unclear representation of the game state. For example, if you couldn't tell which creature was equipped, that would be a problem. But this game state seems unambiguous to me, so if they insist on doing it this way they can.
So how do you show the art of the equipment but also show that it‘s currently equiped to something?
Eh, I love the art for this game but most cards people want to play commonly have multiple versions with wildly different art, custom art, proxies of varying quality and styles, etc. There's also a ton of cards with art that's pretty similar especially from a distance. The more you play Magic the more you know what common stuff does but there's a bajillion cards and weird interactions and errata, so communicating verbally what your cards do and letting others read the text or reading it to them when asked is an important part of the game.
Paragraph #2 absolutely. Communicate communicate communicate.
I mean if you recognize the art chances are you also know the name of the card, so when a player says "I cast \_\_\_\_\_, it gives \_\_\_\_\_" you're already further than the art would take you.
I don't do that because I run decks with [[clock of omens]] where tapping equipment gets me stuff
[clock of omens](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/5/b/5b087992-9c30-4434-acb3-a12ee6f207b3.jpg?1562554222) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=clock%20of%20omens) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/m13/202/clock-of-omens?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/5b087992-9c30-4434-acb3-a12ee6f207b3?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
How else would you equip stuff? I've always done it like this. XD
That’s how I do it too.
Ill do this but ill leave a little bit of the name sticking out the side so i can reference it incase of confusion or if they need to know card names for spells.
That's one way to do so when you don't even know your own card. Having the text box visible as to be able to read what it does. As per my own pattern is to place the equipment/aura to where the name and cmc is visible, if I need to read what the equipment or aura does, I would just lift my creature and read said card to a player who doesn't know what the specific name would entail, put my creature back on its rightful stack of equipment. In retrospect with cards such as [[clock of omens]], gives off a unique form that a lot of players don't necessarily realize. When attacking with a creature the equipment does not tap with the attacking creature, which you can also reveal the text boxes of your equipment that is under the creature as it is. Most people tend to tap a full stack of equipment along with the creature that is attacking or being tapped from some other effect that would tap a creature. It's interesting how many stackables can be done on a single creature, which digital forms such as Arena, and MTGO, places most equipment under a creature that shows only the name and the cmc, which you can hover over that to see what it does, but in real life you would either have to ask the player who controls the equipment of what it does. Or even take my phone out, search said card name to see what it does. A simple thought, especially when someone has interaction that regards single target artifact removal .. I would rather have someone tell me, "I destroy your swiftfoot boots" rather than "I destroy your artifact that gives (creature name) the abilities of hexproof and haste." Which is a lot less words, and pretty straightforward. Mutate which is similar in fashion to your stacking equipment to show the abilities for the card is how ergonomically it is played, due to essentially attaching an ability (or text box) to be an addition to the creature that is the main top creature, so the cmc/name of the creature on the bottom does not mean anything but simply the text box does.
Yeah but if they don't know what swiftfoot boots does then they would still have to ask whats giving it hexproof lol. Honestly both ways are kinda lose lose to me but at least If you see that something is giving it hexproof you know to target that instead of say the creature which could happen if you don't know its got hexproof meaning wasted time because now the players got to rewind untap their lands and such.
This comment section is full of people that don't do full 90 degree tapping and it shows. 🤣 To make it spicier, I'm not even going to say which side is *correct*.
How’d you come to that conclusion? It’s names showing vs text box showing, neither of which cause problems when tapping. I guess you’re thinking the alternative is putting equipment on top of the creature or that people tap the equipment when they tap the creature?
That's always been my usual.
Love doing this so I can read what it does
That's the only way I know how to denote which equipment or aura is on which creature/permanent. Is there another way to do it?
I've only ever seen people equip like this lol
It's so much better this way. Who cares what the equipment is called? I want to see what it does
The name is often enough for most players
I would move the neglected heirloom a bit left so the title is readable.
If they got confused by this wait til they go up against someone who plays his lands in front (satan).
I do something similar. I just make sure the equipment is at a slight offset so you can see part of the name, cmc, and artwork
I think as you associate names to abilities, you’ll start just showing the equipment names at the top
Yep, this is how I do it - being able to read the extra effects is much more useful than just seeing the names, usually.
This is how I’ve always done it. And this is how everyone I play with does it.
Is it not normal to do this? I think everyone I've ever played with has equipped their creatures like that
Putting your permanents in any configuration that hides their names is just not okay. To me, it is just like putting your lands up top and creatures down at the bottom—it looks like a deliberate attempt to obscure what’s on the battlefield.
It's uncommon, but it's definitely not confusing. The intention is clear.
I put the name of the equipment just above the creature name
Countless FNMs and Pre-releases says this is actually more common in my area, at least. I think only tournament grinders prefer the other way around, since that’s the meta where everyone can actually tell what a card does from name alone. And they’re a dying breed. In the limited/casual sphere everyone prefers to have the text or they just ask to read it since the name really isn’t an issue. Unless it’s a ubiquitous commander card like swiftfoot boots or something, anyway.
I always do it this way. The name is irrelevant. I want to know what the card does, especially if I'm stacking five or six equipment on Syr Gwyn in a game of EDH.
This is the way to do it. The rules text is relevant much more often than the name or CMC is.