2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • posted a message on 2/14 Secret Lairs: Theros Stargazing
    That is what I thought (and what the other Secret Lairs did) but this one, in my order confirmation email, just says: "If your purchase includes digital products, the link to redeem these will be provided in a separate email when your order is ready to ship. "

    So, I thought maybe they were doing it differently this time around. Maybe I won't get it until the mid march time frame for some reason (even though my order is shipped now)?

    I see you obviously got yours so I just reached out to Scalefast to see why I didn't get the same link my email that you got. Maybe it is something with the bundle over the individual boxes?
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on 2/14 Secret Lairs: Theros Stargazing
    My email actually said:

    Your order estimated shipping date is March 2020 to April 2020


    And, I got an email yesterday saying it was shipped and the tracking says it is supposed to be here tomorrow. So, it does seem that the shipping estimates may have been slightly inflated just in case.

    On another topic, did anyone get an email that provided their digital download codes for Arena? I haven't seen mine come through, even in the Shipping Confirmation email, and I am wondering if those are delayed? Since the Scalefast website doesn't seem to have an "Account" option I don't see a way to look at my order or download codes.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on oubliette Confirmed for a reprint in a upcoming set so where will it be reprinted?
    I seem to have missed something in our exchange here. You made some inane comment about the reprint probably doing nothing to quell the price (at least, not to a low enough price to matter). I was simply pointing out that was wrong. The announcement has already dropped prices and my assertion was that the actual reprint would drop them further. I am not telling you to buy anything. TCGPlayer works fine for a lot of people and it is a reasonable indicator of market price since stores are generally slow to lower prices but individuals are not. Your distrust doesn't change the fact that the prices have halved.

    Since TCGPlayer isn't good enough (I chose them since they were the cheapest I could find), CardKingdom has them for $20 (near mint) and $17 (excellent/lightly played). Whether either of these places are good enough for *you* is, frankly, immaterial as this shows that the prices are already dropping.

    Again, I am not suggesting that you buy into them if you don't need them. In fact, what I am suggesting would the exact opposite of that. The price will continue to fall as people sell out of them until they reach a plateau (perhaps half the original price is that plateau for now) and then the actual reprint will cause them to go lower. There is no way a reprint causes prices to go back *up* from here (not in the short term anyway).
    Posted in: Speculation
  • posted a message on oubliette Confirmed for a reprint in a upcoming set so where will it be reprinted?
    https://shop.tcgplayer.com/magic/arabian-nights/oubliette-version-2?xid=ie1fd57e8f22c4a488b11d8410305aaed

    There are 3 for under $16 (taxes not included obviously).

    EDIT: That is Lightly played. If you are fine with Heavy Played, you can get down to almost $13
    Posted in: Speculation
  • posted a message on oubliette Confirmed for a reprint in a upcoming set so where will it be reprinted?
    My guess printed as a rare in some ancillary product. Won't be enough copies to bring the price down any significant amount. Will remain in the 20-30 dollar range. Pauper players will still have problems finding paper copies. Frown
    I can pick one up right now for $16. The price has crashed based entirely on the "announcement" that it is getting printed without knowing anything about when. There is no way that any actual supply doesn't lower the price of the card to below $10 and probably even lower than that.
    Posted in: Speculation
  • posted a message on Multiple Stacks of Cascades
    No. It just needs to be on the field when the spell is cast. The spell will have Cascade as it is cast and will trigger immediately after being cast. Getting rid of the Sliver does get rid of Cascade, but Cascade has already triggered by the time they get priority and losing Cascade won't affect the trigger already on the stack. It will still resolve as normal to get your free spell.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Multiple Stacks of Cascades
    In your first scenario, the first creature spell you cast will Cascade twice: once from First Sliver and once from Nexus. Any subsequent creature (if you hit a creature off either Cascade) will Cascade once. Conspiracy allows you to hit non-slivers to continue the Cascade as Slivers would work the same either way and Nexus only gives you one extra Cascade per turn.

    For the second, no. The First Sliver will give Slivers Cascade but Yidris only gives them another instance of Cascade if they arfe cast from your hand so anything you Cascade into only Cascades once. Anything from hand will Cascade twice.

    For the third, (assuming Conspiracy and The First Sliver) you will have 3 instances: one from The First Sliver and two from the Wanderer's own abilities.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Secret Lair - Year of the Rat
    I got mine today and I got Arlinn. So far, it seems we have

    Ral
    Arlinn
    Teyo and
    Sarkhan

    (Ral was in the unboxing video on Twitter if I remember correctly). I don't mind Arlinn (I like her better than Teyo) but I was kind of hoping for Ral.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Athreos and the stack
    There are a couple of things to clarify here.

    First, Altered Ego doesn't target. The choice of what to copy is made as it resolves and you cannot respond to this choice. You won't know what they try to copy until the spell starts to resolving.

    If, for some reason, they decide to say what they are copying before it resolves, they are locked into that choice unless you do something. If you do something, like sac a bunch of things, they are no longer bound by that choice.

    If you are absolutely sure that Athreos is what they will copy, and all of your stuff you want to sac has Coin counters on them, they will return prior to Altered Ego resolving. Athreos's trigger(s) would go onto the stack on top of whatever is there and would resolve before anything else already there waiting to resolve. So, you sac a creature and it will return with Altered Ego still on the stack, waiting for its turn to resolve.

    If the stuff you sac doesn't come back and causes Athreos to no longer be a creature, they can simply choose something else to copy but they can't choose Athreos. If the stuff you sac does come back and is enough to make Athreos a creature still, they are free to still choose Athreos as their creature to copy.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Thassa, Deep Dwelling and Toothy Interaction question
    Because Thassa exiles and returns the card as part of the same ability, Toothy will return before its LTB the trigger even has a chance to go onto the stack. So, when it does go on the stack, he is already on the field which means he will have been on the field for a long time by the time the trigger resolves. You will end up just putting the same number of counters back onto him that he had when he left.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on [Offtopic] Community Thread
    Quote from Arcesious »
    I'm not sure where else to ask this but I've noticed this forum has really slowed down, threads go for a long time without posts, new threads are pretty rare, I figure EDH isn't by any means losing popularity as a format - where's all the discussion gone? Is there some new forum everyone's flocking to? If so, I'd appreciate if someone could point me in that direction. Would like to see what sorts of new things people are making, get ideas. There's very little of anything new on here lately.
    After the proposed shutdown of MTGSalvation, a lot of the EDH players moved over to MTGNexus. Most of the Modern players did as well. I know I have done very little on this site beyond answering Rules questions.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on How to Factor Haktos' Random Protection Values in Your Favor

    You're telling me as a Rules Guru, even though this isn't explicitly defined, you would apply your own homebrew rules interpretation to hotfix the game. That's unlawful. You would be oppressing the player from their fair right to decide or proceed by means that aren't explicitly prohibited.
    I am not going to bother responding to the rest of your comment since my previous comment already answered them. But I will comment on this.

    I gave explicit rules quotations that back up my answer about used the English definition of "Random". You obviously don't agree but I can see that you aren't going to agree which means further effort on this is futile.

    I don't appreciate being attacked because my answer differs from yours. I have given a number of credible sources from the CR that backs up mine (and others) assertion that what you are proposing is cheating. But, to claim that any of us have come to the conclusion we have is based entirely on our own feeling on the matter is ridiculous. We have English definitions on our side (which, as I have pointed out, are the definitions to use) and we have a similar rule defining randomness in coin flips that common sense allows us to extrapolate to this. And, again, even ignoring that rule, we still fall squarely on "English definition is what to use" rules I mentioned above.

    There is no judge that would see this and not recognize it as cheating. You can argue all you want here about it, but in a tournament, you will have a bad time. And your argument of "random isn't defined in the CR" won't fly.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on How to Factor Haktos' Random Protection Values in Your Favor
    So, if I am understanding you correctly, you are using the age-old argument of "the rules don't say I *can't* do this, so it must be legal". Is that the gist of your last post?

    And you haven't addressed this bit:

    701.1. Most actions described in a card's rules text use the standard English definitions of the verbs within, but some specialized verbs are used whose meanings may not be clear. These "keywords" are game terms; sometimes reminder text summarizes their meanings.

    Or, this:

    608.2c. The controller of the spell or ability follows its instructions in the order written. However, replacement effects may modify these actions. In some cases, later text on the card may modify the meaning of earlier text (for example, "Destroy target creature. It can't be regenerated" or "Counter target spell. If that spell is countered this way, put it on top of its owner's library instead of into its owner's graveyard.") Don't just apply effects step by step without thinking in these cases--read the whole text and apply the rules of English to the text.

    These two rules cover the idea of "if the word is not defined in the CR, use the English definition". Since "Random" is not defined, we use the definition. Which I quoted above. How does your proposed method *not* run afoul of that definition?
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on A mana question
    Once mana is paid for a spell it can't be undone. The cost has been paid and the spell has resolved. There is no point that allowed a backup to tap mana differently.

    Two points to this: in a casual, non-tournament game, other players may allow the mana to be tapped differently if they want to allow it. And in some cases, as long as the spell has not resolved, the player is fine to retap their mana differently.

    In both of those instances, since they drew a card in this situation, they would be stuck with that choice. Allowing the player to use new information to influence a previous action is not going to fly in a tournament and I wouldn't think most playgroups would allow it either.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on How to Factor Haktos' Random Protection Values in Your Favor
    705.3. A coin used in a flip must be a two-sided object with easily distinguished sides and equal likelihood that either side lands face up. If the coin that’s being flipped doesn’t have an obvious “heads”or “tails,”designate one side to be “heads,”and the other side to be “tails.”Other methods of randomization may be substituted for flipping a coin as long as there are two possible outcomes of equal likelihood and all players agree to the substitution. For example, the player may roll an even-sided die and call “odds”or “evens,”or roll an even-sided die and designate that “odds”means “heads”and “evens”means “tails.”


    The entire point of something "random" is to make it not favored.

    If you could just willy-nilly make something random heavy in favor of one or the other would make it not random at all (as you can simply choose make it astronomically unlikely, which is basically 0).



    Nope, that wouldn't suffice. It's simply saying that a coin has to be two-sided. So long as coin is two-sided, using it in this manner would still be acceptable.

    The important bit is:

    Other methods of randomization may be substituted for flipping a coin as long as there are two possible outcomes of equal likelihood and all players agree to the substitution

    And one of the definitions in the dictionary for random is:

    being or relating to a set or to an element of a set each of whose elements has equal probability of occurrence

    Since this is a game produced primarily in English, the English definition of words is what is used in a lot of cases when the CR doesn't define them as something different. Since the CR doesn't define "random" we use the English definition.

    There are some serious mental gymnastics needed to propose a "solution" to being tasked with coming up with a random number, where that solution is the exact opposite of being random, and then suggesting it is not cheating. The point of randomness is for each outcome to be equal. It can't be "random" if you weigh the odds in a particular direction.

    The rule above in the CR covers flipping a coin because that is generally what Magic cards care about. Haktos allows for any random method to be used as long as it is random and the rule above clarifying what random means for a coin flip extends to any random selection method.

    In general though, there isn't a need to codify what random means in the CR when things just say "random", or any further clarification, because most people understand the English definition and realize that all outcomes must be equal.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.