well, if that is true that is extremely counter-intuitive because with the wording "this turn" WotC always meant for stuff relevant only in the turn you cast the spell, this wording has literally no precedent in no card in Magic (unless you can prove me otherwise, clearly). To me, the Emrakul ability sounded just a fancy Drownyard Behemoth variant protection and I would had worded what you are saying to me as "whenever a player cast a spell and/or that spell resolve as a permanent, Emrakul got protection from that spell or permament." or something like that, would been much less ambigous.
EDIT: or even better: In each turn/in each player turn, Emmy got protection from spells and permanents casted this turn.
So you think that Ethersworn Canonist's ability only applies the turn that it comes into play?
"whenever a player cast a spell and/or that spell resolve as a permanent, Emrakul got protection from that spell or permament." Oh yeah because that's WAY less ambiguous lol
First of all:
1) Why are you replying on a issue already solved? They explained to me why I was in error and I admitted my error because I recognized where was the error. Period. Insisting like you do on this point after weeks that is solved, is trollish behavior.
2) What's wrong with my wording? How my wording can be interpreted in multiple ways? I even make a even more better and elegant EDIT that you obviously ignored (another trollish behavior).
3) Yes, I realize that there are cards like Canonist or Vampire Sengir, but Emrakul got an extremely unique and weird protection and, as I said, I'm not native speaker and in the syntax of my native language sounds something completely different from what you understand. And once again, you ignoring my arguments and picking only what is convenient to you is trollish behavior.
Ok my bad, probably I didn't understood because I'm not native speaker and the ability sounded completely different to me. I'm convined now you are right, thank you for the clarification.
No, Emrakul is protected from spells and from permanents that were cast in the current turn, not the turn Emrakul was cast.
well, if that is true that is extremely counter-intuitive because with the wording "this turn" WotC always meant for stuff relevant only in the turn you cast the spell, this wording has literally no precedent in no card in Magic (unless you can prove me otherwise, clearly). To me, the Emrakul ability sounded just a fancy Drownyard Behemoth variant protection and I would had worded what you are saying to me as "whenever a player cast a spell and/or that spell resolve as a permanent, Emrakul got protection from that spell or permament." or something like that, would been much less ambigous.
EDIT: or even better: In each turn/in each player turn, Emmy got protection from spells and permanents casted this turn.
-You can cast a universal solvent on one turn and use it to exile her on a later turn, but not that turn, regardless when Emrakul was cast.
So, if this is true, a Visara the Dreadful cannot kill Emrakul in the turn you cast her with her ability, but in any other later turn yes?
what the hell mean "protection from spells and permanents that were cast this turn"? is this a weird way to say the Emrakul can't be countered and got hexproof until the end of turn?
It's two separate protections.
Protection from spells stops it from being targeted by instants, sorceries, auras and creatures with mutate or dealt damage by instants and sorceries as they resolve. It can still be targeted by everything else and can be countered.
I understand that with that wording Emrakul is basically protected only by instants or permanents with flash and only in the turn you cast Emrakul...and that's it. Pretty sucky protection if thats the corrected interpretation.
How is Emrakul protected from "sorceries, auras, creatures with mutate, oblivion ring or spiteful banditry", unless you give flash of them with a Leyline of Anticipation or whatever? Or without giving flash to Emrakul, since you normally cast him only at sorcery speed in your turn?
plus they actually threw in a monsterous drawback even the protection makes it really hard to get rid her. is that she wraths your own board when she leaves (heck its in sacrifice so not even indestructible survive) so all you need is a mistmeadow witch and flick it after the turn is over it came in.
Touch the Spirit Realm can blink it no problem too, but also, Soul Shatter and other hexproof-dodging removal spells work fine.
....or just wait the the Emmy player simply pass the turn and then you have all the time you want to Terror him? I mean it doesn't even give haste to the creatures it steals, you really have not to worry no matter in what turn they cast Emmy if you have any kind of removal ready.....
what the hell mean "protection from spells and permanents that were cast this turn"? is this a weird way to say the Emrakul can't be countered and got hexproof until the end of turn?
Ooh - I thought the swords were complete, but this opens up a few more slots. I like Sword of Wealth and Power, and doubles strike and/or extra combats can get you multiple copies of a spell. But this also means we can get one with protection from artifacts and enchantments and maybe another with protection from planeswalkers and lands.
why planeswalker and lands? looks complete disconnected, and protection from lands is also too narrow to be really useful. Is much more natural that would be planeswalker and creatures (living things) exactly how enchantment and artifacts are artificial things and instant and sorceries ethereal things.
But I still wished they made a sword that gives protection to colorless and multicolor
so if you are in a 4 player table the necrosaga at chapter 2 makes you alone minimum 12 zombies not counting additional rad counters at only six mana? Wow, thats wild, I love it.
Universes Beyond sets have a greater lead time because we need to run everything by our partner. This means Fallout was designed before March of the Machine was released, so we didn’t yet know how Battles would be received. In addition, for production reasons, it’s difficult to put DFCs in Commander decks, and a single card in a supplemental product is probably not how we wanted to premiere single-faced Battles. https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/743032468634058752/i-know-nothing-about-fallout-but-just-from-a
That activated ability being a sorcery won't matter. Getting five treasures is pretty easy and it steals any creature.
If opponent got removal it is pretty relevant, he can easily play it around even with sorcery speed removals and force you to sacrifice 5 treasures for nothing since without Kellog you lose automatically also the creature. At least without the "sorcery speed" restriction, opponent was forced to answer with instant speed removal in order to waste your treasures.
maro better explain this they brought back fortification well it’s a 8 on the storm scale and that’s requires stars to align
and The stars align due to the fact it was impossible to resist making a shelter on land since fortifying is a thing in survival video games.
Hasn't he been pretty clear about the storm scale only applying to premier sets? Hence storm itself appearing in a whole bunch of products that aren't premier sets, including this one.
And even inside Premere Sets the Storm Scale at 10 only means "highly unlikely", never impossible.
Except play testing kept showing many players playing it as if it were Hexproof.
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/61095684755/shroud-is-supported-but-not-currently-being-used/amp "Shroud is supported but not currently being used on new cards. We do not want to use shroud and hexproof at the same time." Can you elaborate on the logic the design group would use for arguing that a block needs shroud over hexproof?
Each keyword you make new players learn is a barrier. We do not want to make them learn two completely different keywords that mean almost the same thing so we only use one, hexproof, in new products.
Do they finally made the enemy filter lands. Wonder why it took so long for this? Simple design.
I think it was probably a question of where to put them. They haven't put new dual lands in a commander product before, but I don't see these designs being good for a standard set.
They could easily putted in ANY supplemental set with enemy colored archetypes in them. They were simply lazy or just didn't think about it.
First of all:
1) Why are you replying on a issue already solved? They explained to me why I was in error and I admitted my error because I recognized where was the error. Period. Insisting like you do on this point after weeks that is solved, is trollish behavior.
2) What's wrong with my wording? How my wording can be interpreted in multiple ways? I even make a even more better and elegant EDIT that you obviously ignored (another trollish behavior).
3) Yes, I realize that there are cards like Canonist or Vampire Sengir, but Emrakul got an extremely unique and weird protection and, as I said, I'm not native speaker and in the syntax of my native language sounds something completely different from what you understand. And once again, you ignoring my arguments and picking only what is convenient to you is trollish behavior.
Luckily Oblivion Stone works always even if Emrakul have protection of it, protection never gives indestructible in his effects.
well, if that is true that is extremely counter-intuitive because with the wording "this turn" WotC always meant for stuff relevant only in the turn you cast the spell, this wording has literally no precedent in no card in Magic (unless you can prove me otherwise, clearly). To me, the Emrakul ability sounded just a fancy Drownyard Behemoth variant protection and I would had worded what you are saying to me as "whenever a player cast a spell and/or that spell resolve as a permanent, Emrakul got protection from that spell or permament." or something like that, would been much less ambigous.
EDIT: or even better: In each turn/in each player turn, Emmy got protection from spells and permanents casted this turn.
So, if this is true, a Visara the Dreadful cannot kill Emrakul in the turn you cast her with her ability, but in any other later turn yes?
I understand that with that wording Emrakul is basically protected only by instants or permanents with flash and only in the turn you cast Emrakul...and that's it. Pretty sucky protection if thats the corrected interpretation.
How is Emrakul protected from "sorceries, auras, creatures with mutate, oblivion ring or spiteful banditry", unless you give flash of them with a Leyline of Anticipation or whatever? Or without giving flash to Emrakul, since you normally cast him only at sorcery speed in your turn?
....or just wait the the Emmy player simply pass the turn and then you have all the time you want to Terror him? I mean it doesn't even give haste to the creatures it steals, you really have not to worry no matter in what turn they cast Emmy if you have any kind of removal ready.....
why planeswalker and lands? looks complete disconnected, and protection from lands is also too narrow to be really useful. Is much more natural that would be planeswalker and creatures (living things) exactly how enchantment and artifacts are artificial things and instant and sorceries ethereal things.
But I still wished they made a sword that gives protection to colorless and multicolor
Universes Beyond sets have a greater lead time because we need to run everything by our partner. This means Fallout was designed before March of the Machine was released, so we didn’t yet know how Battles would be received. In addition, for production reasons, it’s difficult to put DFCs in Commander decks, and a single card in a supplemental product is probably not how we wanted to premiere single-faced Battles.
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/743032468634058752/i-know-nothing-about-fallout-but-just-from-a
If opponent got removal it is pretty relevant, he can easily play it around even with sorcery speed removals and force you to sacrifice 5 treasures for nothing since without Kellog you lose automatically also the creature. At least without the "sorcery speed" restriction, opponent was forced to answer with instant speed removal in order to waste your treasures.
And even inside Premere Sets the Storm Scale at 10 only means "highly unlikely", never impossible.
Things that are 10 can appear in Standard-legal sets. Die-rolling is the example.
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/742945540757684224/should-it-still-be-called-the-storm-scale-when-new#notes
Looks like just a contemplatory mood to me. it's actually in the promo version where the guy is clearly sad for some reason.
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/121128269933/shroud-is-a-great-hex-proof-variant
Shroud is a great hex-proof variant.
Except play testing kept showing many players playing it as if it were Hexproof.
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/61095684755/shroud-is-supported-but-not-currently-being-used/amp
"Shroud is supported but not currently being used on new cards. We do not want to use shroud and hexproof at the same time." Can you elaborate on the logic the design group would use for arguing that a block needs shroud over hexproof?
Each keyword you make new players learn is a barrier. We do not want to make them learn two completely different keywords that mean almost the same thing so we only use one, hexproof, in new products.
Well, this definitely aged like milk, lol
They could easily putted in ANY supplemental set with enemy colored archetypes in them. They were simply lazy or just didn't think about it.