If you really wanted to warp a cube to support Heroic (a difficult task), this would probably be one of the easiest includes. Outside of that or Peasant/Pauper, I can't see a good reason to run this.
I thought I made a nice list of reasons to run this card, but I guess they weren't any good. What is a good reason to run a card?
I've run this card since it was printed and will probably never take it out (barring a complete change in my cube's philosophy). It has both play and counterplay, can generate tempo or card advantage (sometimes both!), slots into many decks for many purposes, cycles away when its dead and is perfectly costed for the effect. It is everything I want in a cube card and probably my favorite card in the format. Unless your cube is designed in such a way where this effect is unwanted, I would run this card. It has my highest recommendation.
No. Only that if you're unwilling to play games that have an element of luck to them, Chess is your best option.
Caylus is better, but that's besides the point.
The point is not one about the presence or absence of luck, but the complete absence of engaging gameplay that this particular type of luck often creates. There are plenty of games with random elements where said random elements don't stop you from participating in the game.
So, the resolution of wanting to play a fantasy card game with heavy levels of customization that has less frustration causing randomness is to . . . play chess?
The problem being lamented is not that the game has randomness in determining who wins, but that the randomness makes playing the game out to find who wins unenjoyable.
The game as designed has 20 years of inertia behind it. Its flaws have become tropes in themselves and charming in their own way. The game is not going to undergo a fundamental change to its resource system. I think we all accept that. That doesn't mean we can't muse over missed design opportunities that the creator of the game himself recognizes.
This is probably one area where the game could have been improved fundamentally from the start. ALL cards probably should have cycled. It should have been a sorcery speed action you can always take on your turn (something like, pay one mana, discard a card and draw a card). And not tied to a card ability, but something like a phase (before your main phase, you may cycle).
It would have helped with mana flood/screw and given you more opportunities to get to cards you needed. It would have made more narrow cards maindeckable too. There's tons of benefit.
It's not a rule you could implement now because not all cards were designed with cycling in mind (cycling fatties for reanimator - it's all too easy if every card cycles).
The game would have evolved much differently with that rule in place, but I actually think it would be a better game had it had this mechanic from the beginning.
Richard Garfield implemented this very idea in his second CCG and considered it an improvement, so you're in good company here.
(Before people rag on it, yes I know V:TES wasn't as successful as Magic. But consider that it had an inaccessible theme, require 5 players for a good game, contained player elimination, a playtime north of two hours and didn't have limited print run early editions to fuel collectors AND in spite of that stayed in print for 16 years with over 20 expansions. If it had been made first, designed for 15 minute duels and fantasy themed we would all be playing it right now)
Cubes, regardless of their card selection, focus, maxim or environment they're trying to create can contain a Grim Monolith. A cube that has a heavy aggro presence can still contain a Grim Monolith. A cube that focusses on midrange archetypes can still contain a Grim Monolith. A dragon cube focussing on ramping into haymaker creatures and spells can still contain a Grim Monolith. A combo cube that's entirely nontraditional can still contain a Grim Monolith. A cube focussed on interactions and synergy can still contain a Grim Monolith. A cube running multiples can still contain a Grim Monolith. And so on and so forth.
Cube size gives me a basic idea of the card selection tiers, and how often build-around-me cards will show up with regularity. The powered/unpowered tag gives me at least 9x as much information as using a single card name tag gives me, and also lets me know that the designer is less likely to exclude cards based on power-level (cubes that play Moxen and Time Walk aren't likely to have a deep ban list, if they ban any cards at all).
So the "Grim Monolith" tag either gives me no real information at all, or it's incorrectly applying some sort of connotation that may or may not apply to the list. Powered/unpowered and cube size aren't perfect descriptors. No descriptor will perfectly label a cube, since each environment is different from another and lumping cube lists together by any tag is going to be vague at best. But those two tags provide infinitely more information than any single card tag can provide, because there's a lot of information to be gained from them.
If the connotation applies to the list, then the moniker that suggests that implication is correctly applied. The moniker is a statement of that implication, not a yes/no check as to whether or not the cube contains one or more copies of grim monolith .
(Any more then a dragon cube refers to any cube that runs a creature with the subtype "dragon")
The moniker Grim Monolith Cube is a great phrase and extremely descriptive. While I suppose it could be slightly deceptive (a combo cube could contain Grim Monolith or a Grim Monolith Cube might not contain its namesake), I think Grim Monolith is the perfect selection for a card that represents something that makes some cubes extremely different from others. It certainly gives me much more knowledge then [size] or [powered] ever could and people are still writing that in front of their lists.
I think the comparison to divination and merfolk looter is a little unfair. When you control a red and a green permanent, this card is Phyrexian Arena, Ajani's Mantra and Merfolk Looter AT THE SAME TIME. When this card is active, it is much better then any of its mono-colored equivalents. It may well be that it is too hard to keep active, but saying that the mono-colored cards provide better effects is pretty clearly false.
Ponder, Preordian, Opt, Judge's Familiar, Gitaxian Probe, Sleight of Hand, Enclave Cryptologist, CLoudfin Raptor, Delver of Secrets, Ancestral Visions, Ancestral Recall, Serum Visions, Hapless Researcher, Drifter Il'Dal and Phantasmal Bear are all cards I would use one blue mana on turn 1 in a vacuum. I may have missed some others. With a concentration of shuffle effects or (lol) tribal support the sage could definitely be better then many of these cards, but as a random include it has little value, to the point that I would rather make a custom card or double up on something rather then include it just for the sake of having a one drop.
Way before this! My Cube was started in 2002 and I had been Cubing for a year already with a friend's Cube. I'd say Cube is from 1999 / 2000.
The earliest cube I know of was created in December 1997, but I wouldn't doubt that one may have been made earlier. Ice Age was released in June 1995 and put the idea of a "self contained set" into the discourse and being the first set to be drafted with any sort of popularity I doubt it could have been any earlier then that. I will wildly guess the first cube was created October 1995.
I've been playing magic for a long time and I cannot, for the life of me, pin point when this became the dominant philosophy ? During the ice age/urza times, "uninteractiveness" if you will, was never an issue. Fast forward to today and everything has to be fair and interactive... Is this part of the entitlement generation we live in today ?
I'm not entitled to interactive gameplay. However, MtG isn't entitled to my business. If MtG doesn't give me interactive gameplay, I will spend my time and money playing a different game.
I thought I made a nice list of reasons to run this card, but I guess they weren't any good. What is a good reason to run a card?
Caylus is better, but that's besides the point.
The point is not one about the presence or absence of luck, but the complete absence of engaging gameplay that this particular type of luck often creates. There are plenty of games with random elements where said random elements don't stop you from participating in the game.
The problem being lamented is not that the game has randomness in determining who wins, but that the randomness makes playing the game out to find who wins unenjoyable.
The game as designed has 20 years of inertia behind it. Its flaws have become tropes in themselves and charming in their own way. The game is not going to undergo a fundamental change to its resource system. I think we all accept that. That doesn't mean we can't muse over missed design opportunities that the creator of the game himself recognizes.
Richard Garfield implemented this very idea in his second CCG and considered it an improvement, so you're in good company here.
(Before people rag on it, yes I know V:TES wasn't as successful as Magic. But consider that it had an inaccessible theme, require 5 players for a good game, contained player elimination, a playtime north of two hours and didn't have limited print run early editions to fuel collectors AND in spite of that stayed in print for 16 years with over 20 expansions. If it had been made first, designed for 15 minute duels and fantasy themed we would all be playing it right now)
If the connotation applies to the list, then the moniker that suggests that implication is correctly applied. The moniker is a statement of that implication, not a yes/no check as to whether or not the cube contains one or more copies of grim monolith .
(Any more then a dragon cube refers to any cube that runs a creature with the subtype "dragon")
Looking for quota filling aggro creatures? Theros has them AND they obsolete old favorites. Its a double win!
Looking for build around cards? Devotion's got you covered
Want to expand XXX matters? Multiple card type cards and they're actually good!
Like voltroning up creatures? This set has you covered. Bestow, Ordeals, Heroic, gods, tools its all there.
Quality removal? Hero's Downfall and chained to the rocks are tops.
A very similiar yet completely different version of one of the most beloved card draw spells ever? Sure why not Steam Augury.
Playable Planeswalkers? How about 3?!
There are literally 45+ cubable cards in this set. Its amazing.
I assure you that you are not the only one who feels this way.
The earliest cube I know of was created in December 1997, but I wouldn't doubt that one may have been made earlier. Ice Age was released in June 1995 and put the idea of a "self contained set" into the discourse and being the first set to be drafted with any sort of popularity I doubt it could have been any earlier then that. I will wildly guess the first cube was created October 1995.
I'm not entitled to interactive gameplay. However, MtG isn't entitled to my business. If MtG doesn't give me interactive gameplay, I will spend my time and money playing a different game.