My Secret Santa gift arrived today! In the package, together with a lovely handwritten note, there were some very cool things: (The picture quality is not great, due to a bad cellphone camera / bad lighting combo, but everything was truly appreciated!)
So, here's Carnophage/Sarcomancy/Vampire Lacerator for the modern times. The drawback will probably be very live, but it's still another 2/1 for B. Is it still an include? Does it replace any existing Black 1-Drop? What are your thoughts?
Interesting take on a Gatekeeper of Malakir. The WCS is Vampire Interloper, which is sort of close on playability (although it falls a bit short), but there is a ton of value to be had if you can get an edict out of it. Seems like we may have to figure out how to accommodate C costs after all?
So, a 4/4 for 4 with an ability reminiscent of Tidehollow Sculler and Vendilion Clique. After getting a cubable option in Reality Smasher, I think we may have gotten another potential testable Colorless card. What do you think?
Super-efficient creature, with evasion and a pseudo-protective ability. Honestly, looks efficient and powerful enough to include, regardless of the C cost. Thoughts?
I usually try to use a Magic token for every token creature, but I have been using some Magic cards as tokens as well. I previously used foil Rumbling Baloths as the Beast tokens for Rampaging Baloths, and I am currently using foil Walking Corpses as Zombie tokens and a foil Pharika's Chosen as the token for Ophiomancer. I wouldn't use creatures with "wrong" creature types and/or with extraneous abilities, but there are LOTS of Magic cards that can double as tokens - that's a cool way to customize your tokens! Just be careful not to use them in tournament Magic, though.
@ivorcosta,@MisterJaPa, congratulations on your results at the GP! I have a question for both of you: what is your strategy for the mirror match? You played it at the GP, and I am very curious to hear your perspectives about that particular game and the matchup in general. Thanks!
I went and checked - I believe you're right. Please disregard my previous post, I was just trying to offer some insight in this question - turns out I wasn't correct.
edit: Giving a longer answer. I'm *very* interested in the deck (I went ahead and bought the deck on paper) and want to know its ins and outs - and part of that is knowing the correct rulings. I checked Gatherer's rulings and, to the best of my rules knowledge, they seemed to indicate that the answer I gave above was correct, but after thinking a bit longer and checking with other judges I now realize that the ruling does not contradict at all the answer that Zac gave above. My bad. Please get back to the deck development, I'll go back to lurking
If the top card of your library changes while you're casting a spell or activating an ability, the new top card won't be revealed until you finish casting that spell or activating that ability.
This means that you don't get to see the card underneath the card just drawn with Serum Visions until after it has fully resolved (i.e. after the Scry).
I'm going to keep going slightly off-topic on this, but if this is too much, dear Mods, please move this discussion to a relevant thread.
The great thing about Math (and Science in general!) is that you don't need to believe in it for it to be true. Sure, what we have available to explain gravity (for instance) is just a model, i.e. an approximation at best. But being an approximation does not mean we get to dismiss it - you can choose not to believe in gravity all you want, but you're still subject to its effect just like everyone else.
So, what does this tell us? Well, if in a 2-color deck all our 2-drops cost 1C instead of CC, then with a single dual land we're 90% to get there. If we have 3 dual lands, then that gives us a 13-7 mana base, which puts us very close to the 14 sources needed to be above 90% to cast all our CC 2-drops in our main color by turn 2, and definitely above 90% for turn 3!
Again, every time we're dealing with probabilities we're dealing with the uncertain, but all we can do in the face of randomness is to maximize our odds of getting a desired effect, and Math helps us get there. Of course there's a certain feel attached to deck-building, cube-building, etc etc, but we, as Cube designers, are doing our drafters a disservice by not using the tools available to us, and this is one of the best resources we have. And this means that this is absolutely a question of educating ourselves and our drafters in the implications of having too many CC (a to a lesser extent 1CC) cards both in the Cube and in any given Cube deck.
This is also a matter of realizing that this a Limited format and not a Constructed one. Like the name indicates, in Constructed games you get to construct your deck to your heart's desire, and carefully tailor your mana base to have as many sources of a certain color as you so desire - everyone is picking from the same pool and everyone has access to the same cards. But last I checked, Cube is a Limited format - the point is precisely to build a deck from a limited pool of cards, and you are competing with the other players for those cards. Yes, of course my UB deck will have worse fixing if I have to fight for it with the 2 other UB drafters at the table, but I have the choice to move into other colors, prioritize fixing accordingly, or try my best to stay away from cards with multiple mana symbols on them. That's the whole point of playing limited, actually. This whole process and experience goes out the window if I just give free fixing to everyone, either by straight-up giving free dual lands to everyone, include too many mana-fixing lands in the draft pool, or have some sort of weird Rotisserie draft going in parallel with the main draft in which everyone can get "free" fixing. At that point, we're talking about some very weird simulation of a Constructed format - sure, that has its place, but at the basis of every single discussion we have in this forum is the implicit understanding that we're talking about a Limited format. OK, we can argue that typically Cubes have a much larger percentage of fixing than retail Limited formats, and that's OK (if we're talking about revisiting Magic's history and granting people access to all those sweet sweet cards they want to play with, we may as well give them powerful fixing to work with) - but the point is still to play a Limited format, with all the (hard) choices the come with it, both in drafting and deck-building, since they have an influence in actual game play.
You may desire to have more fixing in your Cube, or less fixing. You may be so terrified of mana screw that you need to have a myriad of safety nets to avoid it, or you embrace it for what it is, and minimize it by being a responsible Cube designer and (maybe most importantly!) a responsible drafter. What you don't get to do is to decide that the rules of Magic *and* Math don't apply to you. After all, the only way to be 100% sure guaranteed to have UU available in turn 2, in a 40-card deck, is to run 34 lands that produce blue mana and come into play untapped - think about that.
(Oh, yeah, and what about those new lands in BFZ with those sweet basic land types? Personally, I prefer my lands to enter the battlefield untapped, but I also like that people run 2 colors with a splash or even 3 colors in draft, so I have a slightly higher percentage of fixing lands in my Cube. The great thing about these lands is that they make off-color fetches count a source of those colors for all the relevant purposes, but unlike ABUs and shocklands these lands will most likely enter the battlefield tapped, which favors control-ish decks and color combinations. If could see myself being interested in the blue ones, and maybe the green ones, but outside of legitimate budget concerns I would definitely pass on the Mardu-colored ones. If anything, these lands just illustrate of how great fetchlands are, and make them a slightly higher pick than the already high picks they are...)
Necro time! With the much awaited printing of the enemy manlands (Lumbering Falls et al.), how much better does Powder Keg become? For instance, right now I'm not running it at 600 (but I'm running Engineered Explosives and Ratchet Bomb) because I never felt the need for it, but I'm a fan on powerful answers, and this looks like a great safety valve for the increased number of manlands we will all likely be running...
Thanks, Santa! \o/
So, here's Carnophage/Sarcomancy/Vampire Lacerator for the modern times. The drawback will probably be very live, but it's still another 2/1 for B. Is it still an include? Does it replace any existing Black 1-Drop? What are your thoughts?
Interesting take on a Gatekeeper of Malakir. The WCS is Vampire Interloper, which is sort of close on playability (although it falls a bit short), but there is a ton of value to be had if you can get an edict out of it. Seems like we may have to figure out how to accommodate C costs after all?
So, a 4/4 for 4 with an ability reminiscent of Tidehollow Sculler and Vendilion Clique. After getting a cubable option in Reality Smasher, I think we may have gotten another potential testable Colorless card. What do you think?
Super-efficient creature, with evasion and a pseudo-protective ability. Honestly, looks efficient and powerful enough to include, regardless of the C cost. Thoughts?
Zac was playing Hulk Footsteps this weekend, although he got to do a deck tech.
edit: Giving a longer answer. I'm *very* interested in the deck (I went ahead and bought the deck on paper) and want to know its ins and outs - and part of that is knowing the correct rulings. I checked Gatherer's rulings and, to the best of my rules knowledge, they seemed to indicate that the answer I gave above was correct, but after thinking a bit longer and checking with other judges I now realize that the ruling does not contradict at all the answer that Zac gave above. My bad. Please get back to the deck development, I'll go back to lurking
This means that you don't get to see the card underneath the card just drawn with Serum Visions until after it has fully resolved (i.e. after the Scry).
The great thing about Math (and Science in general!) is that you don't need to believe in it for it to be true. Sure, what we have available to explain gravity (for instance) is just a model, i.e. an approximation at best. But being an approximation does not mean we get to dismiss it - you can choose not to believe in gravity all you want, but you're still subject to its effect just like everyone else.
This brings us to the math behind mana bases. wtwlf123's article is actually pretty solid, but if for some reason someone is still adamant in dismissing it, I'd like to refer you to Frank Karsten, Magic Hall-of-Famer, numbers guy and holder of a PhD in this area: http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/frank-analysis-how-many-colored-mana-sources-do-you-need-to-consistently-cast-your-spells/. Go ahead, I'll give you some time to read it.
So, what does this tell us? Well, if in a 2-color deck all our 2-drops cost 1C instead of CC, then with a single dual land we're 90% to get there. If we have 3 dual lands, then that gives us a 13-7 mana base, which puts us very close to the 14 sources needed to be above 90% to cast all our CC 2-drops in our main color by turn 2, and definitely above 90% for turn 3!
Again, every time we're dealing with probabilities we're dealing with the uncertain, but all we can do in the face of randomness is to maximize our odds of getting a desired effect, and Math helps us get there. Of course there's a certain feel attached to deck-building, cube-building, etc etc, but we, as Cube designers, are doing our drafters a disservice by not using the tools available to us, and this is one of the best resources we have. And this means that this is absolutely a question of educating ourselves and our drafters in the implications of having too many CC (a to a lesser extent 1CC) cards both in the Cube and in any given Cube deck.
This is also a matter of realizing that this a Limited format and not a Constructed one. Like the name indicates, in Constructed games you get to construct your deck to your heart's desire, and carefully tailor your mana base to have as many sources of a certain color as you so desire - everyone is picking from the same pool and everyone has access to the same cards. But last I checked, Cube is a Limited format - the point is precisely to build a deck from a limited pool of cards, and you are competing with the other players for those cards. Yes, of course my UB deck will have worse fixing if I have to fight for it with the 2 other UB drafters at the table, but I have the choice to move into other colors, prioritize fixing accordingly, or try my best to stay away from cards with multiple mana symbols on them. That's the whole point of playing limited, actually. This whole process and experience goes out the window if I just give free fixing to everyone, either by straight-up giving free dual lands to everyone, include too many mana-fixing lands in the draft pool, or have some sort of weird Rotisserie draft going in parallel with the main draft in which everyone can get "free" fixing. At that point, we're talking about some very weird simulation of a Constructed format - sure, that has its place, but at the basis of every single discussion we have in this forum is the implicit understanding that we're talking about a Limited format. OK, we can argue that typically Cubes have a much larger percentage of fixing than retail Limited formats, and that's OK (if we're talking about revisiting Magic's history and granting people access to all those sweet sweet cards they want to play with, we may as well give them powerful fixing to work with) - but the point is still to play a Limited format, with all the (hard) choices the come with it, both in drafting and deck-building, since they have an influence in actual game play.
You may desire to have more fixing in your Cube, or less fixing. You may be so terrified of mana screw that you need to have a myriad of safety nets to avoid it, or you embrace it for what it is, and minimize it by being a responsible Cube designer and (maybe most importantly!) a responsible drafter. What you don't get to do is to decide that the rules of Magic *and* Math don't apply to you. After all, the only way to be 100% sure guaranteed to have UU available in turn 2, in a 40-card deck, is to run 34 lands that produce blue mana and come into play untapped - think about that.
(Oh, yeah, and what about those new lands in BFZ with those sweet basic land types? Personally, I prefer my lands to enter the battlefield untapped, but I also like that people run 2 colors with a splash or even 3 colors in draft, so I have a slightly higher percentage of fixing lands in my Cube. The great thing about these lands is that they make off-color fetches count a source of those colors for all the relevant purposes, but unlike ABUs and shocklands these lands will most likely enter the battlefield tapped, which favors control-ish decks and color combinations. If could see myself being interested in the blue ones, and maybe the green ones, but outside of legitimate budget concerns I would definitely pass on the Mardu-colored ones. If anything, these lands just illustrate of how great fetchlands are, and make them a slightly higher pick than the already high picks they are...)