Legacy Breakfast

Latest Episodes:

Episode 58 – Storm Archetypes May 01, 2015

Show notes

Well hello there! Me and Stu get together again and discuss storm. We look at popularly represented archetypes (not to mention some, er…. less well represented ones) and see the history of them, as well as their philosophy, construction, how to play them, what they are susceptible to, and some general hints and tips on how to pilot. WUB WUB.

https://legacybreakfast.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/podcast-58.mp3

Your Hosts:
Stuart Pullin
Stuart Taylor

Silent Requiem’s storm articles on mtgUK:
http://www.manaleak.com/mtguk?s=silent+requiem

The Source:
http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?4-Legacy-Development

Follow us on Twitter @LegacyBreakfast
Email us: legacybreakfast at gmail dot com
RSS feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/LegacyBreakfast
Find us on iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/legacy-breakfast/id720253198
Like us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/legacybreakfast

Link to podcast file: https://legacybreakfast.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/podcast-58.mp3

Episode 57 – GP Kyoto Meta Apr 24, 2015

Show notes

After finally being reunited, our intrepid pair of Stus have a look at the meta from the first Japanese legacy Grand Prix. We have a run down of the decks represented on day 2 (SPOILER – it was quite, quite blue…) and look at the specifics of the Top8 deck lists. And we don’t butcher any Japanese names at all. Nosiree!

https://legacybreakfast.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/podcast-57.mp3

Your Hosts:
Stuart Pullin
Stuart Taylor

Top8 Decklists: http://tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=16756
Undefeated Day 1 Decklists: http://tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=16755
Winning GP Trial Lists: http://tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=16749

Carsten Kotter’s Analysis: http://www.starcitygames.com/article/30690_Legacy-Kyoto-Spotlight.html

Link to podcast file: https://legacybreakfast.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/podcast-57.mp3

Episode 56 – SCG Invitational Top8 Catchup Apr 10, 2015

Show notes

*SpecialBonusFun Episode!*
Despite posts saying that we were on a break… Stu P. takes some time out of his globe-trotting millionaire playboy lifestyle, and joins us from Thailand to discuss our recent tournaments and also to talk about the recent Invitational
results.

https://legacybreakfast.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/podcast-56.mp3

Top8 “Legacy” Decklists*

*We didn’t mention it on the show, but the Top8 we talk about is just the legacy decks played by the Top8 competitors. The Invitational format is both standard and legacy, so you needed the best combined record to make Top8, which was then played out using their standard decks.

Decks that went 7-1 or better

MtgUK Eternal National Championships Weekend:
https://www.facebook.com/events/863488513701882/

Your Hosts:
Stuart Pullin
Stuart Taylor

Link to podcast file: https://legacybreakfast.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/podcast-56.mp3

Easter Break Apr 03, 2015

Show notes

Hello! We don’t have an episode this week- or for the next couple of weeks sadly…

StuP is off on his holidays so the show is taking a little break…

We’ll be back soon! Have fun watching #PTDTK!

Episode 55 – A Chat With Dr Rob Wagner! Mar 31, 2015

Show notes

After Stu T. bravely fights off the gremlins* in his audio system, we are back! And this week, we go all UK-centric on you all and talk to the Pro-Touring, Blue Envelope podcasting, Tundra slinging wizard that is Rob Wagner. We chat about a more competitive approach to legacy, and what its like coming to it from other formats. We also discuss what its like changing metas, and have a special monster of the week 20 questions special!

https://legacybreakfast.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/podcast-55.mp3

*Due to gremlin** assault, Rob sounds really quiet for the first small section and then underwater for most of the rest of it. Apologies!

**No gremlins were harmed during the making of this podcast. Sadly.

Find Rob on The Blue Envelope Podcast:
http://tbepodcast.com

Follow him on Twitter:
@DrRobWagner

Follow The Blue Envelope Podcast:
@tbepodcast

Your hosts:
Stuart Pullin
Stuart Taylor

Link to podcast file:
https://legacybreakfast.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/podcast-55.mp3

Episode 54 – Dragons of Tarkir Set Review and Tournament Report Mar 20, 2015

Show notes

We trawl through Dragons of Tarkir in order to find some new legacy playable cards. And then (SPOILER ALERT), because there aren’t any, you get a bonus mandatory fun tourney report from both our experiences at the Fanboy3 legacy tournament. We discuss how we are thinking about developing our decks, Sneak&Show and Infect.

https://legacybreakfast.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/podcast-54.mp3

Email: legacybreakfast@gmail.com
Twitter: @LegacyBreakfast
http://www.facebook.com/LegacyBreakfast

Link to podcast file: https://legacybreakfast.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/podcast-54.mp3

Episode 53 – Tournament Preparation Mar 14, 2015

Show notes

This week, we take a look at the steps you should take in order to have an enjoyable and productive tournament experience. From testing and deck choice through meta considerations to tournament logistics. How to try and avoid tilt, when to call a judge, how to watch for slow play and cheating. We also consider some psychology and enjoy some rambling stories. Everything you need from your regular Legacy Breakfast fix!

https://legacybreakfast.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/podcast-53.mp3

Email: legacybreakfast@gmail.com
Twitter: @LegacyBreakfast
http://www.facebook.com/LegacyBreakfast

Link to podcast file: https://legacybreakfast.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/podcast-53.mp3

Episode 52 – Breaking into Vintage Mar 10, 2015

Show notes

We have a quick tournament report from the weekend, and see how Stu T. is honing his infect deck. Then we turn our minds to vintage for an episode. We have a look at the differences between legacy and vintage, the vintage meta, and how to think about adapting (unpowered) legacy decks to compete in vintage tournaments. Also – check the new volume before listening. Its been cranked up a notch!

https://legacybreakfast.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/podcast-52.mp3

Your Hosts
Stuart Pullin
Stuart Taylor

Email: legacybreakfast@gmail.com
Twitter: @LegacyBreakfast
http://www.facebook.com/LegacyBreakfast

Link to podcast file:
https://legacybreakfast.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/podcast-52.mp3

An Opinion on the Reserved List Mar 09, 2015

Show notes

In Episode 51 we briefly discussed the reserved list, and mentioned that we weren’t really qualified to make a comment on the legality of it or otherwise.
Corentin Dolivet, one of our lovely listeners, is training to be a solicitor, and emailed in his own view of the reserved list. He’s requested that it should be taken ‘with a pinch of salt’, but it certainly offers a view that we weren’t able to give on the cast.
Thanks very much to Corentin, for taking the time to send us this:

In common law, misstatements and misrepresentation represent an important part of contracts and torts.
Before we examine the condition of misstatements and misrepresentations, let’s just focus on the potential parties in this problem.
Wizards has produced a statement whereby they undertake not to reprint cards from the reserved list. It was a public statement likely to come to the attention of: past consumers already owners of the listed cards, present consumers investing into eternal formats, resellers dealing with second hand market.

As an introductory point I would like to stress that this statement is not a contract on its own since no one could have given consideration to make it binding, and that the doctrine of estoppel only apply for a variation of contract and will not be applicable in this case.

TORT:

An action in tort has to be considered from the point of view of all the “parties” without contractual relationship with Wizards, i.e. past consumers that previously purchased cards now on the reserved list, and maybe pure second hand dealer shop or in regards that part of their business.
An action for negligent misstatement in tort arises where Party A has (1)carelessly made a (2) statement to Party B, where the (3) relationship between the parties is such that Party A owes Party B a duty of care.
To put it another way, responsibility for negligent misstatements is imposed only if they were made in circumstances that made it reasonable to rely on them.
I will not consider pure deceit, as it would imply malice from Wizards, which seems unreasonable and very hard to prove.
2 and 1 : We do have a statement, and one could argue that because Wizards have been adamant they would not go back on their promise, doing so now would imply the first statement has been made carelessly, given its financial consequences.
Problem is, statement must be a statement of fact to potentially be considered a misrepresentation. The essence of this tort is to protect persons reasonably acting upon an expert’s advise, not to bind companies or to create contract where there is no consideration, or never to be able to depart from their shared intention. So I highly doubt this could be actionable. A statement of intention will be important when we will considerer the misrepresentation and the contract.

3 : As for the special relationship two of the most important things to consider when determining whether a special relationship exists are:
Has Wizards “voluntarily assumed responsibility” for the recipient acting on this statement?
Is it fair, just and reasonable for the person to whom a statement has been made to rely on that statement?
It could be argue that such a relationship does exist indeed considering the fact that this statement was precisely made to protect long time players;
So it is not absolutely crazy to consider suing Wizards in tort, although case law does not recognize misstatement of intention for the moment. I did not discuss the extent of the damages to consider, as I will discuss it in the next part.

CONTRACT

A misrepresentation is a (2) false statement of fact or law which (3) induces the representee to enter a (1) contract. Where a statement made during the course of negotiations is classed as a representation rather than a term an action for misrepresentation may be availablewhere the statement turns out to be untrue. There are three types of misrepresentation: innocent misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation and fraudulent misrepresentation. We will not consider the latest for the same reason we did not focus on deceit.
The affect of a finding of misrepresentation is the contract isvoidable ie the contract exists but may be set aside by the representee. The remedy available depends on the type of misrepresentation, but generally consists of rescission and or damages.

1 : So first, we need contracts. We can consider, limitations aside, all the contracts made between consumers and retailers (the definition is any contract, not a contract made with the representor) for magic cards on that basis i.e. assuming some cards never to be reprinted and taking the eternal format into account on that basis, but most importantly contracts made between players themselves, on the basis that a cards on the restricted list would never be printed again and setting the price accordingly, or finally contracts between second hand dealers and players.
2 : Then we need false statement of fact or law. Case law tells us that a statement of opinion may amount to an actionable misrep where the representor was in a position to know the facts. But, and more precisely, a statement as to future intent can not amount to a misrep unless the representor had no intention of carrying out the stated intent.

That’s a tough one, as Wizards did stick to their statement for many years. If we look at the case from which this rule was discovered, we can tell that the false intention must have been known from the very start i.e. they never wanted to stop printing the reserved cards.
Should Wizards decide to change their policy, o one could argue that they did by malice, or recklessly.
As for (3) and damages, I think we can accept the fact that the price of those staples is in part caused by this policy, and that the potential loss for big second hand dealers like Starcity would be within the scope of the foreseeable loss a representee can claim for.

CONCLUSION:
As I understand common law (in UK at least) and the current case law, there would be no real problem for Wizards should they change their policy; although I can understand that cases of companies suing for financial losses would not be absolutely meritless.

Episode 51 – Finance Feb 28, 2015

Show notes

With the cost of legacy staples being what they are, we take a look into good times to buy for your legacy collection, factors that might influence card price and the trends that cards undergo in terms of their price and availability. We also see what would happen if Stu T. were to MC the show….

https://legacybreakfast.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/podcast-51.mp3

Your hosts:

Stuart Pullin

Stuart Taylor

Email: legacybreakfast@gmail.com

Twitter: @LegacyBreakfast

http://www.facebook.com/LegacyBreakfast

Link to podcast file:

https://legacybreakfast.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/podcast-51.mp3