Agreed, it looks really strong, but I do think it's balanced by two things:
1) Tapping the creature as a sorcery to put a +1/+1 counter on it is a big tempo loss. On a board at parity, there's essentially a hidden cost of "opponent hits you for some damage."
2) The way the keyword-granting abilities are worded, a mid-combat removal spell can be a blowout against Abzan.
So I do think there are ways to profitably interact with it. In a long game, yes Abzan definitely has the advantage. (Which is good because that's their flavor, right? Winning a siege?) If you can't attack them in the mid game or removal their creatures in the late game, you're in trouble, but how exactly were you planning to win a game of Magic with neither tempo nor removal?
About the tempo loss, I don't think it will be as problematic in this set. If you were to tap your creatures in your main phase just to grow them a little in a really fast set, it would be a huge problem, but KTK is looking slow-ish (which I'm very excited for). Plus, it's not like the mechanic requires you to tap ALL your creatures. If you have enough of a board presence that you can afford to remove one of your blockers, that's where Outlast shines.
To me, parity is where you WANT outlast because it will break parity. It's pretty rare to be in a situation where if one of your creatures is removed then your opponent can swing in for damage. It seems more common that the parity results from this game of "If I attack, I can get some damage in but then I'll take a ton on the swing-back." In that situation, outlast is by far the best mechanic of the 5 (obviously, that's just one situation of many that can happen in a game of magic, and the other mechanics are better in other situations).
From what we have of the set so far (and the full set will be spoiled in under 2 hours so maybe this will change), I don't know how to beat a Mer-Ek Nightblade and an Ainok Bond-Kin when the board is at parity. That's just a two card combo of an uncommon and a common, so it will come up. Mer-Ek Nightblade plus Tuskguard Captain is also brutal. There are all these 2-card synergies in Abzan that all need to be broken up when they happen.
Abzan is looking REALLY strong to me. It seems dangerous that there's a lot of synergy, but the cards are also good on their own. That's a recipe for an oppressively superior archetype. Not only does it have a lot of synergy, it looks like it will have a snowballing effect in games where once it gets going it will just dominate. Plus, it has access to the best removal revealed so far. Hopefully it will be a balanced format (and I think overall it probably will) but I think Abzan looks the best so far.
I'm hopeful that the format won't be super fast. I think the speed of M15 is really good. Aggro can exist to punish do-nothing decks but it definitely isn't a fast format. I didn't think JBT was that fast either. I don't remember BNG that much because it was so boring.
Like what you said, the mechanics point to a slower format. Plus, I feel like morph hurts aggro because if a slow deck stumbles a little, it can still probably cast a 2/2 blocker on turn 3
I agree with the OP. I actually like the card's power level, but they really dropped the ball on creative. If WOTC had told us a week ago that there's a card called "wingmate roc" in the set, people would speculate every rarity except mythic. The name is so boring, and doesn't make it feel grand at all.
As for the art, the comparison to Eyes in the Skies is spot on. I hadn't noticed it but if you swapped the artwork I wouldn't have thought twice about it. Interestingly, Eyes in the Skies is a good follow up to Wingmate Roc.
I absolutely love the cycle of morph uncommons revealed today in Limited Information. Sultai is my favorite clan and the U and B ones are my favorite in the cycle. I like that the cards in the cycle are not overpowered or fancy. They're simple but present interesting gameplay decisions for you and your opponent.
I only played with morph once in a Legions/Onslaught sealed event so I don't have much experience with it, but I'm really looking forward to it. I think it will be fun trying to decide how best to use removal after having seen an opponent's Icefeather Aven or Sagu Mauler in a previous game.
Come to think of it, this format already seems to be very Spike-centric.
-Being a 3 color format inherently rewards those who value fixing appropriately.
-Outlast, Delve, and Prowess have a ton of sequencing options to weigh.
-Raid will frequently require you to weigh the value of your worst creature vs the value of the effect you'll be getting.
-The Prowess/Raid/Morph dynamic incentivizes bluffing very heavily.
I think this is a really great point. I hadn't really thought about it in these terms, but there will be a LOT of decisions in KTK games, and ones that normally aren't as important in other formats. Even though the mechanics are pretty simple to understand, I think they'll be very difficult to play optimally. I guess the Temur one is somewhat difficult to mess up, but the others could easily be mis-sequenced. And, as you mentioned, prowess, raid, and morph are all conducive to bluffing (and morph even allows you to bluff with an empty hand, something which normally isn't a thing).
Another thing is that Outlast and Delve are both resource-management mechanics, which I think are very skill-testing. Delve obviously allows you to turn cards in the graveyard into mana, but you might not always want to cast the most expensive card in your hand for the cheapest possible. Outlast allows you to use up mana in the late game at the cost of blockers/attackers. I think the natural tendency is to cast an outlast creature and then want to build it up rather than develop the board, which I can't imagine will be good.
When I first saw the mechanics I wasn't too thrilled (other than for delve) but the more I think about it, I think this will be a very difficult format to crack/master, which means it should have depth to it. Obviously, still early and we only have 60 cards, but I'm excited!
Whatever you do, don't go into the chat and cry about the shuffler. You make yourself look like an idiot. It works, it's not broken, you got unlucky. This is particularly true if you're bad at mulliganing. If you keep a 7 with only 1 land, no one has sympathy for you if you miss land drops. Cricket's number 2 is pretty good, too. Unless you get screwed twice in the same match, you still have yourself to blame for your loss, too. Don't try to deflect your failures onto a fully-functional, "fair" RNG. It'd be like a football team blaming the kicker for missing a 50/50 FG to win the game when they should be blaming themselves for needing a last minute FG to potentially win in the first place.
I will say, though, that if your opponent is clearly getting unlucky, you need to not pretend like you earned your win. I've seen people comment on their own bad luck, without saying anything negative to the opponent, and be met with things like "lol you're just bad. Learn to build a deck" so many times in games or in the chat room. There's no reason to kick a guy when he's down, especially if you're the one getting free wins you may not deserve because of it.
I had an opponent IRL keep a 1 land 7 card hand in M14 sealed who lost (obviously) and then whined for 10 minutes about how he hates magic because he always gets mana screwed. And he was a father there with his son.
Everybody has won due to luck and lost due to luck, and there's really no reason to get angry when there's nothing that could have been done to change the outcome. I get MUCH angrier when I make play mistakes that cost me the game than when I lose to drawing 8 lands in a row.
OTOH, while early to say if it's a real thing or just a hiccup, from what we know so far, it seems that Wizards bizarrely decided to make bestow worse and worse with every set. We first got bestow with good abilities, then vanilla bestow. Now we get bestow… with a drawback? That black bestow granting +2/+1 and "can't block" is really bad.
I don't know, I think that's a good progression. It fits with the story in that at first the gods are bestowing powerful gifts on heroes and as the gods and humans become more adversarial the gifts become worse and worse and eventually can come with negatives. Not that I'm a story person. Plus, bestow is a really powerful mechanic in limited, and I think bestowers with drawbacks will add a lot to the gameplay.
Alright, spoiler week is here! Time to dust off the Limited forum, shake out the cobwebs, and start trying to extrapolate useful information about the upcoming format from a frustratingly tiny sample of cards.
To kick things off: Monstrosity is back! And Tribute isn't! Hooray! I really tried to give tribute a chance, but it just never did anything for me. Most of the creatures weren't that good, and playing cards that give your opponent an interesting choice instead of you always just feels bad. But Monstrosity, IMO, proved itself to be a great Limited mechanic, and I'm thrilled to see it back.
not to get off topic so soon, but I actually liked tribute. I liked that it added cool decisions (except that I've hit the wrong button by mistake far too many times on MTGO). Although, I REALLY liked monstrosity and I'm glad it's back.
As for the spoilers, as you said, we have frustratingly small group of cards to assess, but i like the commons/uncommons spoiled tonight. Ajani's Presence seems really good in any white based heroic deck. It's kind of like Dauntless Onslaught.
I know already I'm going to lose a bunch to turn 1 Satyr Hoplite into turn 2 Ordeal. In the RW heroic deck, it's like a Favored Hoplite. Obviously not as good, but it's COMMON. I think it will be a very annoying card.
Sigiled Starfish is awesome. I mean, it's a little starfish. I want to hug it. As far as gameplay though, I can see it being about as good as Omenspeaker, but it's tough to say. Omenspeaker lets you plan your next couple draws, but Sigiled Starfish (if it survives) allows you to gain increasing value.
You really just need to embrace the rage. I keep a small colony of hamsters next to my computer and every time I lose a match to mana screw I throw one against the wall.
This. I think most players do this.
Actually though, I just remind myself how many times I've won due to my opponent being mana screwed, which makes me feel I deserve the mana screw myself. Also, once it happens a bunch you learn to let go. It's not productive to get upset about it. This is a game that has variance and eve the best player in the world isn't going to win 100% of the time, so losing isn't a big deal.
Wow, P1P6 Fate Unraveler is about as clear a signal as you can get that black is criminally underdrafted. I'd take that regardless of what I had picked up before and just move in.
Yes! I've gone into black after getting passed a 4th pick Fate Unraveler. I don't understand why people don't like that card! I recognize that some people take the super-aggro approach to this format, which can be really good, but control decks can definitely be viable in BTT. I especially like Fate Unraveler because it has a decent body to stabilize the board on turn 4, and generates value the longer the game goes. Maybe I overvalue that card, but I've been really impressed by it when I've played it.
No, a 1/3 is pretty darn awful, especially at 3 mana. This format is generally not about grinding out card advantage, and when it is, it's far more about drawing extra cards than forcing non-random discard. You're usually better off with something that can attack or at least kill an X/2, like Blood-Toll Harpy, or something much better at playing defense, like the lowly Guardians of Meletis. Adept just doesn't do anything in this format. Sure, sometimes you just need to play it as a 3-drop that blocks when you have no good alternatives, but those circumstances are few and far between, and they often are the result of poor drafting.
I disagree with this, although I agree that Ashiok's Adept wouldn't be good in your deck. I've played Ashiok's Adept in WB, where you're probably winning grindy matches with Scholar of Athreos. WB I think is the best shell for Adept because it has the most bestow creatures, and has a lot of other ways to trigger heroic. When you can cause your opponent to discard 3 or 4 cards over the game, that's REALLY good. For me, it was so good that it became a must-kill for my opponents after they saw it in game 1. Even though it's non-random discard, it's repeatable and most importantly it's instant speed. That's really powerful. Of course, this is just my personal experience in a small number of matches, but it's definitely not a garbage card and in the right deck I would pick it highly.
This is how I deal with losing due to poor luck: I shut up. I have to seriously be on tilt to say anything on MTGO.
IMHO the biggest jerk move is when someone says "GG" after they win a game where their opponent barely even played Magic. If I mull to 4 and stick on 1 land for 5 turns, the last thing I want to hear is how it was actually a "game," much less a "good" one. So if you're someone who says GG after every game, regardless of who win or lost--stop doing that. It's actually rude to say GG sometimes; use your brain before you say anything.
THAT'S what you think is the biggest jerk move? I guess you haven't faced many jerks on MTGO then. I've had people message me after a game to call me a jerk because I didn't respond to their ranting during the game. I had an opponent the other day who, while dead on board, refused to pass priority until they timed out so I had to sit there for 10 minutes to get my win. there are a lot of VERY salty people on MTGO, and my opponent saying "gg" after a game where I stall on 2 lands for 8 turns doesn't even register. Plus, I think most people say "good game" as just a polite exit not necessarily as a "that was a good game of magic." It's kind of like how you might say "good morning" to somebody who wakes up with a hangover. It's not ACTUALLY a good morning for that person, but it's just a greeting.
With all that said, I don't say "gg" first unless I lost so that sensitive people don't think I'm rubbing it in.
This is a REALLY tough question. My sentimental/emotional response would be either Jester's Mask (the first rare I opened) or Polar Kraken (the first card I traded for), but honestly I think my actual favorite card is Aether Vial. It's the one I have the most fun playing with.
About the tempo loss, I don't think it will be as problematic in this set. If you were to tap your creatures in your main phase just to grow them a little in a really fast set, it would be a huge problem, but KTK is looking slow-ish (which I'm very excited for). Plus, it's not like the mechanic requires you to tap ALL your creatures. If you have enough of a board presence that you can afford to remove one of your blockers, that's where Outlast shines.
To me, parity is where you WANT outlast because it will break parity. It's pretty rare to be in a situation where if one of your creatures is removed then your opponent can swing in for damage. It seems more common that the parity results from this game of "If I attack, I can get some damage in but then I'll take a ton on the swing-back." In that situation, outlast is by far the best mechanic of the 5 (obviously, that's just one situation of many that can happen in a game of magic, and the other mechanics are better in other situations).
From what we have of the set so far (and the full set will be spoiled in under 2 hours so maybe this will change), I don't know how to beat a Mer-Ek Nightblade and an Ainok Bond-Kin when the board is at parity. That's just a two card combo of an uncommon and a common, so it will come up. Mer-Ek Nightblade plus Tuskguard Captain is also brutal. There are all these 2-card synergies in Abzan that all need to be broken up when they happen.
Like what you said, the mechanics point to a slower format. Plus, I feel like morph hurts aggro because if a slow deck stumbles a little, it can still probably cast a 2/2 blocker on turn 3
As for the art, the comparison to Eyes in the Skies is spot on. I hadn't noticed it but if you swapped the artwork I wouldn't have thought twice about it. Interestingly, Eyes in the Skies is a good follow up to Wingmate Roc.
I only played with morph once in a Legions/Onslaught sealed event so I don't have much experience with it, but I'm really looking forward to it. I think it will be fun trying to decide how best to use removal after having seen an opponent's Icefeather Aven or Sagu Mauler in a previous game.
I think this is a really great point. I hadn't really thought about it in these terms, but there will be a LOT of decisions in KTK games, and ones that normally aren't as important in other formats. Even though the mechanics are pretty simple to understand, I think they'll be very difficult to play optimally. I guess the Temur one is somewhat difficult to mess up, but the others could easily be mis-sequenced. And, as you mentioned, prowess, raid, and morph are all conducive to bluffing (and morph even allows you to bluff with an empty hand, something which normally isn't a thing).
Another thing is that Outlast and Delve are both resource-management mechanics, which I think are very skill-testing. Delve obviously allows you to turn cards in the graveyard into mana, but you might not always want to cast the most expensive card in your hand for the cheapest possible. Outlast allows you to use up mana in the late game at the cost of blockers/attackers. I think the natural tendency is to cast an outlast creature and then want to build it up rather than develop the board, which I can't imagine will be good.
When I first saw the mechanics I wasn't too thrilled (other than for delve) but the more I think about it, I think this will be a very difficult format to crack/master, which means it should have depth to it. Obviously, still early and we only have 60 cards, but I'm excited!
I had an opponent IRL keep a 1 land 7 card hand in M14 sealed who lost (obviously) and then whined for 10 minutes about how he hates magic because he always gets mana screwed. And he was a father there with his son.
Everybody has won due to luck and lost due to luck, and there's really no reason to get angry when there's nothing that could have been done to change the outcome. I get MUCH angrier when I make play mistakes that cost me the game than when I lose to drawing 8 lands in a row.
I know equipping targets. I was saying that the exiling ability doesn't seem to target, which means it can exile hexproof or pro-white creatures.
That's what I was wondering. It doesn't seem to target.
I don't know, I think that's a good progression. It fits with the story in that at first the gods are bestowing powerful gifts on heroes and as the gods and humans become more adversarial the gifts become worse and worse and eventually can come with negatives. Not that I'm a story person. Plus, bestow is a really powerful mechanic in limited, and I think bestowers with drawbacks will add a lot to the gameplay.
not to get off topic so soon, but I actually liked tribute. I liked that it added cool decisions (except that I've hit the wrong button by mistake far too many times on MTGO). Although, I REALLY liked monstrosity and I'm glad it's back.
As for the spoilers, as you said, we have frustratingly small group of cards to assess, but i like the commons/uncommons spoiled tonight. Ajani's Presence seems really good in any white based heroic deck. It's kind of like Dauntless Onslaught.
I know already I'm going to lose a bunch to turn 1 Satyr Hoplite into turn 2 Ordeal. In the RW heroic deck, it's like a Favored Hoplite. Obviously not as good, but it's COMMON. I think it will be a very annoying card.
Sigiled Starfish is awesome. I mean, it's a little starfish. I want to hug it. As far as gameplay though, I can see it being about as good as Omenspeaker, but it's tough to say. Omenspeaker lets you plan your next couple draws, but Sigiled Starfish (if it survives) allows you to gain increasing value.
This. I think most players do this.
Actually though, I just remind myself how many times I've won due to my opponent being mana screwed, which makes me feel I deserve the mana screw myself. Also, once it happens a bunch you learn to let go. It's not productive to get upset about it. This is a game that has variance and eve the best player in the world isn't going to win 100% of the time, so losing isn't a big deal.
Yes! I've gone into black after getting passed a 4th pick Fate Unraveler. I don't understand why people don't like that card! I recognize that some people take the super-aggro approach to this format, which can be really good, but control decks can definitely be viable in BTT. I especially like Fate Unraveler because it has a decent body to stabilize the board on turn 4, and generates value the longer the game goes. Maybe I overvalue that card, but I've been really impressed by it when I've played it.
I disagree with this, although I agree that Ashiok's Adept wouldn't be good in your deck. I've played Ashiok's Adept in WB, where you're probably winning grindy matches with Scholar of Athreos. WB I think is the best shell for Adept because it has the most bestow creatures, and has a lot of other ways to trigger heroic. When you can cause your opponent to discard 3 or 4 cards over the game, that's REALLY good. For me, it was so good that it became a must-kill for my opponents after they saw it in game 1. Even though it's non-random discard, it's repeatable and most importantly it's instant speed. That's really powerful. Of course, this is just my personal experience in a small number of matches, but it's definitely not a garbage card and in the right deck I would pick it highly.
THAT'S what you think is the biggest jerk move? I guess you haven't faced many jerks on MTGO then. I've had people message me after a game to call me a jerk because I didn't respond to their ranting during the game. I had an opponent the other day who, while dead on board, refused to pass priority until they timed out so I had to sit there for 10 minutes to get my win. there are a lot of VERY salty people on MTGO, and my opponent saying "gg" after a game where I stall on 2 lands for 8 turns doesn't even register. Plus, I think most people say "good game" as just a polite exit not necessarily as a "that was a good game of magic." It's kind of like how you might say "good morning" to somebody who wakes up with a hangover. It's not ACTUALLY a good morning for that person, but it's just a greeting.
With all that said, I don't say "gg" first unless I lost so that sensitive people don't think I'm rubbing it in.