Warping Wail 1C
Instant
Choose one -
- Exile target creature with power or toughness 1 or less.
- Counter target sorcery spell.
- Put a 1/1 colorless Eldrazi Scion creature token onto the battlefield. It has "Sacrifice this creature: Add C to your mana pool."
The colorless Charm! This card looks strong. Exile a creature with power OR toughness 1 is pretty cool.
This one requires some support for the colorless theme though.
Poor Wandering Fumarole. Just can't get around that one, can it?
I think this is a very cool card with constructed applications, but I need more upside here. I don't think I'd ever splash a color for an effect like this, so it doesn't really meet the criteria I'm looking for in a colorless card.
What percentage of creatures in the cube have power or toughness less than 1. Less than 20% I would guess? And if you're exiling something like snapcaster, fire imp, war marshal, meeeeeehhhhhhhhhhh!
Then, it only counters sorceries. Again, a very small percentage of cube cards (albiet with some powerful things to counter, for sure).
Finally, the supposed fail safe mode is absolutely HORRENDOUS. 2 mana for a 1/1 with flash and that can give me <> once? And I already NEED a <> source to cast this card? Lol?
I mean, sure, there might be some matchups this would be great in - but that leaves it in pure sideboard territory, which is not what I want with cube.
I like this card more than Spatial Contortion at the very least. Not sure how much this will pull me into wanting to play <>, but it is really cool to see an off color (all colors, lol) counterspell, even if it is super limited. Still, counter target wrath, demonic tutor, or Wildfire is not too shabby.
It probably has a good chance to make it to some modern decks, but ultimately I think asmallcat is right; it's not good enough for cube whether colorless is supported as a theme or not.
I like this card more than Spatial Contortion at the very least. Not sure how much this will pull me into wanting to play <>, but it is really cool to see an off color (all colors, lol) counterspell, even if it is super limited. Still, counter target wrath, demonic tutor, or Wildfire is not too shabby.
I like the counter sorcery on dimir charm fairly well (I am looking at you plow under, time walk, and upheaval). The other modes are a little meh. But for cube this is >>>>spatial contortion.
And counterspells out of non blue decks are hilarious.
Again not enough to convince me to support colorless, but if I already was I would try it.
The biggest problem is needing the sources of <> so early. For this to kill a 1-drop on defense, you're gonna need to hit your colorless mana on the 2nd turn, which means like 7 sources of colorless lands. All the other ones I'm considering can function off of far fewer sources (and non-land sources!), which is an important factor to consider with these kinds of cards. I think 3<> is about the cheapest spell I'll reliably be able to play before the mana becomes unstable.
The biggest problem is needing the sources of <> so early. For this to kill a 1-drop on defense, you're gonna need to hit your colorless mana on the 2nd turn, which means like 7 sources of colorless lands. All the other ones I'm considering can function off of far fewer sources (and non-land sources!), which is an important factor to consider with these kinds of cards. I think 3<> is about the cheapest spell I'll reliably be able to play before the mana becomes unstable.
I'm not sure if this analysis is correct. If you're running this card in your 40-card deck, there's a 20% chance you'll draw it in your opening 8 cards. If you run 3 colorless sources in your deck, there's a 50% chance you'll draw at least one in your opening 8 cards. My understanding then, in that scenario, there's only a 10% chance of drawing this card and NOT drawing a colorless source in your first 8 cards. Therefore, 3 colorless sources seems like plenty in order to support this card in your deck.
Edit: Obviously this analysis is incomplete, and only focuses on your point about turn 2. With 3 colorless sources in your deck, you're going to draw this card before you draw a way to play it in 25% of games. I don't know how acceptable that is. Perhaps 4 colorless sources is what I would want to play this card. The point is that 7 would be excessive.
IF you have this card in your opening hand, and you want to be able to cast it on T2, you'll need 7 sources. I'm not talking about the odds of drawing both together, but if you want to make sure you have enough sources to cast spells in their correct timing windows, you need more sources. If you want to know more about source probabilities, you can read the article I wrote about it (called Mana Short, and the link is in my sig). 3 sources isn't remotely enough to support cards like this IF you want to cast them in a specific timing window.
And that's also assuming that you're okay with a 50/50 chance of having the <> source be "reliable" which I don't think it is.
IF you have this card in your opening hand, and you want to be able to cast it on T2, you'll need 7 sources. I'm not talking about the odds of drawing both together, but if you want to make sure you have enough sources to cast spells in their correct timing windows, you need more sources. If you want to know more about source probabilities, you can read the article I wrote about it (called Mana Short, and the link is in my sig). 3 sources isn't remotely enough to support cards like this IF you want to cast them in a specific timing window.
And that's also assuming that you're okay with a 50/50 chance of having the <> source be "reliable" which I don't think it is.
I guess I don't understand. I get the idea that if your deck is full of red two drops, so that red mana is something you're going to reliably want on turn two, you're going to want at least 7 sources. But that's not what we're saying here. As in, we don't need to consistently have colorless mana on turn two. We ONLY need to have it if we have this card in our hand. If we have 3 colorless sources in our deck, the likelihood of drawing this card and not drawing a colorless source in our first 8 cards is just 10%. If we go up to 4 colorless sources, then the chances go down to 8%. With 4 sources, the likelihood of drawing this card before we draw a colorless source is just 20%. That seems like acceptable risk to me. 7 colorless sources seems arbitrarily high.
Edit: I see your 50/50 point, and your article on casting windows, and it's well taken. And if your argument is that this card only has utility when cast on turn two, to the point that it has no value at any other point, your suggestion of 7 sources would make more sense. I would disagree, however, that this card has no value after turn 2. Surely it's value diminishes after turn 2, but the ability to counter a time walk, armageddon, profane command, etc. gives it real value beyond turn 2.
If this was an effect like Time Walk that can be cast for full value late in the game and be fine, ~3-4 sources would likely work. But since this is a card you need to cast in the right timing window for value, I want to use the more conservative value for 1X cost cards, which in this case is 7.
The article explains exactly where those numbers come from, and why. I believe this is the kind of card I would want to have immediate access to if it was in my opening hand, as sitting on it severely impacts its value.
If this was an effect like Time Walk that can be cast for full value late in the game and be fine, ~3-4 sources would likely work. But since this is a card you need to cast in the right timing window for value, I want to use the more conservative value for 1X cost cards, which in this case is 7.
The article explains exactly where those numbers come from, and why. I believe this is the kind of card I would want to have immediate access to if it was in my opening hand, as sitting on it severely impacts its value.
The more I think about it, the more I agree. If "colorless" as a color doesn't get alot of support already in your cube, then this is a card that can by definition never be more than a splash. And in general, this is not the kind of card that you want to splash.
Ya, in the cube, we're splashing for <> cards. So I want them to be both powerful enough to be worth splashing, and easy to splash for without sacrificing full on-curve value. This card kinda fails hard at both.
A modal spell that can
- kill a creature
- counter a spell
- create a creature token
is pretty good, so I was initially excited about this card. It is also not a card that you need to play on curve and that is still of value later, so the cheap cost with the C requirement didn't bother me. However, all of these effects are just so weak and/or so restrictive. The power level is so low (even counting the great flexibility) that I just don't think this will make it into a cube deck. Therefore, it's a miss.
I wish it were more powerful for a higher cost, like this:
Warping Wail 2C
Instant
Choose one -
- Exile target creature with power or toughness 2 or less.
- Counter target instant or sorcery spell.
- Put two 1/1 colorless Eldrazi Scion creature tokens onto the battlefield. They have "Sacrifice this creature: Add C to your mana pool."
The biggest problem is needing the sources of <> so early. For this to kill a 1-drop on defense, you're gonna need to hit your colorless mana on the 2nd turn, which means like 7 sources of colorless lands. All the other ones I'm considering can function off of far fewer sources (and non-land sources!), which is an important factor to consider with these kinds of cards. I think 3<> is about the cheapest spell I'll reliably be able to play before the mana becomes unstable.
I'm not sure if this analysis is correct. If you're running this card in your 40-card deck, there's a 20% chance you'll draw it in your opening 8 cards. If you run 3 colorless sources in your deck, there's a 50% chance you'll draw at least one in your opening 8 cards. My understanding then, in that scenario, there's only a 10% chance of drawing this card and NOT drawing a colorless source in your first 8 cards. Therefore, 3 colorless sources seems like plenty in order to support this card in your deck.
Edit: Obviously this analysis is incomplete, and only focuses on your point about turn 2. With 3 colorless sources in your deck, you're going to draw this card before you draw a way to play it in 25% of games. I don't know how acceptable that is. Perhaps 4 colorless sources is what I would want to play this card. The point is that 7 would be excessive.
I'm not sure it's as simple as the conditional probability, but I'm also not confident in my ability to work out the math, so I ran a very simple simulation instead. Based on that very rough estimate, with 3 colorless sources in a 40-card deck, assuming no mulligans or anything fancy, about 45% of the times you have this card in your hand, you won't have a colorless source by the time you've seen 10 cards (around turn 3) and you still won't have a colorless source about 28% of the time after you seen 14 cards (around turn 7). By bumping that up to 4 colorless sources, you improve to ~33% and ~18% fail rates, respectively. Once you hit 7 sources, you have a ~13% fail rate after seeing 10 cards and a ~5% fail rate after seeing 14.
This card suffers a great deal from being uncastable because all of its modes are only effective within very narrow windows: the exile mode typically targets utility creatures that accrue value the longer they're on the table, the counter mode only works when your opponent is actively casting one of a limited number of sorceries, and the ramp/token mode gets worse with every turn. I wouldn't be inclined to play such a reactive card when there's even a 30% chance it'll be a stone blank during the critical window, let alone 45%. This is only good in heavy colorless-mana decks, which are probably not possible except in the most dedicated cubes.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I am so stupid that I cannot understand philosophy; the antithesis of this is that philosophy is so clever that it cannot comprehend my stupidity. These antitheses are mediated in a higher unity; in our common stupidity."
~ Søren Aabye Kierkegaard
I used to be very good at this stuff but it has been awhile.
I calculate about .46 probability that, given you have this card (or any other really) you get at least 1 <> source by turn two with three of them in deck.
I can see this card being pretty good if you support C, but it doesn't draw you into colorless. Lots of sorceries have a huge impact, so lategame it isnt dead, while early game it either ramps you at instant speed, or deals with a small threat, i think its versatility is actually pretty good.
Warping Wail 1C
Instant
Choose one -
- Exile target creature with power or toughness 1 or less.
- Counter target sorcery spell.
- Put a 1/1 colorless Eldrazi Scion creature token onto the battlefield. It has "Sacrifice this creature: Add C to your mana pool."
The colorless Charm! This card looks strong. Exile a creature with power OR toughness 1 is pretty cool.
This one requires some support for the colorless theme though.
I think this is a very cool card with constructed applications, but I need more upside here. I don't think I'd ever splash a color for an effect like this, so it doesn't really meet the criteria I'm looking for in a colorless card.
Cubetutor Link
What percentage of creatures in the cube have power or toughness less than 1. Less than 20% I would guess? And if you're exiling something like snapcaster, fire imp, war marshal, meeeeeehhhhhhhhhhh!
Then, it only counters sorceries. Again, a very small percentage of cube cards (albiet with some powerful things to counter, for sure).
Finally, the supposed fail safe mode is absolutely HORRENDOUS. 2 mana for a 1/1 with flash and that can give me <> once? And I already NEED a <> source to cast this card? Lol?
I mean, sure, there might be some matchups this would be great in - but that leaves it in pure sideboard territory, which is not what I want with cube.
Pass, pass, pass for any normal cube of any size.
375 unpowered cube - https://cubecobra.com/cube/list/601ac624832cdf1039947588
I like the counter sorcery on dimir charm fairly well (I am looking at you plow under, time walk, and upheaval). The other modes are a little meh. But for cube this is >>>>spatial contortion.
And counterspells out of non blue decks are hilarious.
Again not enough to convince me to support colorless, but if I already was I would try it.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
I'm not sure if this analysis is correct. If you're running this card in your 40-card deck, there's a 20% chance you'll draw it in your opening 8 cards. If you run 3 colorless sources in your deck, there's a 50% chance you'll draw at least one in your opening 8 cards. My understanding then, in that scenario, there's only a 10% chance of drawing this card and NOT drawing a colorless source in your first 8 cards. Therefore, 3 colorless sources seems like plenty in order to support this card in your deck.
Edit: Obviously this analysis is incomplete, and only focuses on your point about turn 2. With 3 colorless sources in your deck, you're going to draw this card before you draw a way to play it in 25% of games. I don't know how acceptable that is. Perhaps 4 colorless sources is what I would want to play this card. The point is that 7 would be excessive.
And that's also assuming that you're okay with a 50/50 chance of having the <> source be "reliable" which I don't think it is.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
I guess I don't understand. I get the idea that if your deck is full of red two drops, so that red mana is something you're going to reliably want on turn two, you're going to want at least 7 sources. But that's not what we're saying here. As in, we don't need to consistently have colorless mana on turn two. We ONLY need to have it if we have this card in our hand. If we have 3 colorless sources in our deck, the likelihood of drawing this card and not drawing a colorless source in our first 8 cards is just 10%. If we go up to 4 colorless sources, then the chances go down to 8%. With 4 sources, the likelihood of drawing this card before we draw a colorless source is just 20%. That seems like acceptable risk to me. 7 colorless sources seems arbitrarily high.
Edit: I see your 50/50 point, and your article on casting windows, and it's well taken. And if your argument is that this card only has utility when cast on turn two, to the point that it has no value at any other point, your suggestion of 7 sources would make more sense. I would disagree, however, that this card has no value after turn 2. Surely it's value diminishes after turn 2, but the ability to counter a time walk, armageddon, profane command, etc. gives it real value beyond turn 2.
The article explains exactly where those numbers come from, and why. I believe this is the kind of card I would want to have immediate access to if it was in my opening hand, as sitting on it severely impacts its value.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
The more I think about it, the more I agree. If "colorless" as a color doesn't get alot of support already in your cube, then this is a card that can by definition never be more than a splash. And in general, this is not the kind of card that you want to splash.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
My cube
My cube on Cube tutor
I'm OP_Forever. I'll be putting this in my signature for a while so everyone know I change my nickname.
- kill a creature
- counter a spell
- create a creature token
is pretty good, so I was initially excited about this card. It is also not a card that you need to play on curve and that is still of value later, so the cheap cost with the C requirement didn't bother me. However, all of these effects are just so weak and/or so restrictive. The power level is so low (even counting the great flexibility) that I just don't think this will make it into a cube deck. Therefore, it's a miss.
I wish it were more powerful for a higher cost, like this:
Warping Wail 2C
Instant
Choose one -
- Exile target creature with power or toughness 2 or less.
- Counter target instant or sorcery spell.
- Put two 1/1 colorless Eldrazi Scion creature tokens onto the battlefield. They have "Sacrifice this creature: Add C to your mana pool."
Uril, the Miststalker RGW -- Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre C -- Vhati il-Dal BG -- Jor Kadeen, the Prevailer RW -- Animar, Soul of Elements URG
Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker R -- Maga, Traitor to Mortals B -- Ghave, Guru of Spores BGW -- Sliver Hivelord WUBRG
This card suffers a great deal from being uncastable because all of its modes are only effective within very narrow windows: the exile mode typically targets utility creatures that accrue value the longer they're on the table, the counter mode only works when your opponent is actively casting one of a limited number of sorceries, and the ramp/token mode gets worse with every turn. I wouldn't be inclined to play such a reactive card when there's even a 30% chance it'll be a stone blank during the critical window, let alone 45%. This is only good in heavy colorless-mana decks, which are probably not possible except in the most dedicated cubes.
~ Søren Aabye Kierkegaard
I calculate about .46 probability that, given you have this card (or any other really) you get at least 1 <> source by turn two with three of them in deck.
thats my cube