I think you are right. I've generated enough sealed pools to see every mythic several times but I've never come across her. I think the two uncommon black transform creatures are missing as well.
I would consider both Pack Guardian and Evolving Wilds here as well. Both combo with Gitrog and can help you turn delirium on for your Mindwrack Demons!
Unless we are doing some unnecessary time traveling, I don't think this will be an innistrad sequel, but a prequel instead. If its based on lili searching for one of her demons, and following the origins plot, then this incarnation of innistrad should be before everything that happened in the last innistrad block. At least i hope because it sounds a lot more interesting to me than "Avacyn makes good colors too powerful, and bad colors need to take their revenge".
Jace is on the cover art for SoI and I don't think he has ever actually been there before (based on an UR from a few weeks ago when Liliana and Gideon show up on Ravnica looking for Jace).
How does the stack work in this scenario? Can you manipulate it so the persist trigger resolves first? This just seems way to easy of an enabler. It's basically a 5 mana win condition of its true with any persist creature.
From my understanding, the death trigger that triggers Persist happens at the same time as the sac trigger than triggers the commander's ability. When two abilities are triggered at the same time, their controller(s) decide(s) in what order to place them on the stack (in order of precedence starting with active player and going in turn order). If you place the sac trigger first and persist on top of it, persist resolves, putting the creature back into play, followed by the sac trigger, which removes the -1/-1 counter from the creature that persisted.
That sounds right to me. Thanks for pointing that out!
I could be misreading things, but Mazirek seems like a lot of fun with Puppeteer Clique. Assuming you have a free sac outlet (which I assume would be a given considering Mazirek is your commander) and another player has a creature in their graveyard you could immediately go infinite. Infinite damage with Blasting Station, infinite mana with Ashnod's Altar, infinite +1/+1 counters regardless, and so on. Spawning Bed seems incredible with him as well.
I've been dabbling in a persist, undying deck for awhile now and this will probably be the card to push it over the edge into a real deck. Slot him into Ghave with a small token subtheme and you can either combo out or waves of critters with counters. Gives me a way of powering up or powering down a deck based on the group.
That sounds great! I love it when spoiler season gives you that one card you need to make things work.
I could be misreading things, but Mazirek seems like a lot of fun with Puppeteer Clique. Assuming you have a free sac outlet (which I assume would be a given considering Mazirek is your commander) and another player has a creature in their graveyard you could immediately go infinite. Infinite damage with Blasting Station, infinite mana with Ashnod's Altar, infinite +1/+1 counters regardless, and so on. Spawning Bed seems incredible with him as well.
This looks like a lot of fun. I am running mono-red artifacts with Feldon but considered going Izzet for a while. If I ever get bored with it I may go this route. Nice!
I did, in fact, read the entire article. There is no reason to be pedantic about my use of the word "likely". That is super annoying. You look into the biblical text already assuming that it is fallible in the same way that you are accusing me of the opposite. This will be my last post regarding our current conversation. Thank you.
If you identify as a Christian and reject the infallibility of Scripture then it will be difficult for us to come to any kind of understanding.
I would like to come to an understanding as to how you can look at those two parts of Genesis and say that they say the same thing without contradiction.
Because if they contradict, then Scripture rejects the infallibility of Scripture. It becomes objective fact that Scripture cannot be infallible.
That's the thing, they do say two different things. I never said they didn't. However, that does not make them contradict in what they assert about creation. The writer, who I assume to be Moses, would not have intentionally written contradictory statements without a purpose. You reject the idea that poetry allows for a more open interpretation of events. Its redundant at this point but if you understand Genesis 1 as a poem it doesn't really matter that the account varies slightly from 2. To be honest, I feel like I have justified my assertions. If you already have a problem with the Genesis account and the infallibility of Scripture then it becomes a moot point. From what you are saying, it doesn't matter if I am talking about evolution or not.
[quote from="Tiax »" url="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/outside-magic/debate/religion/577276-the-pope-and-evolution?comment=59"]My reading of the sentence is loosely equivalent to "sexuality is a subset of communion", not "communion is a subset of sexuality". Similarly, one can have intimacy and emotional closeness as a component of sexuality, but that does not mean that all emotional closeness is sexuality.
"It especially concerns....and in a more general way the aptitude for forming bonds of communion with others."
The way the sentence is phrased suggests that "the bonds of communion" are a subset of sexuality. The bonds of communion are in the same list as affectivity, the ability to love, and the ability to procreate. Each is a subset of sexuality.
I think you are right. I've generated enough sealed pools to see every mythic several times but I've never come across her. I think the two uncommon black transform creatures are missing as well.
Jace is on the cover art for SoI and I don't think he has ever actually been there before (based on an UR from a few weeks ago when Liliana and Gideon show up on Ravnica looking for Jace).
Scytheclaw
Edit: Wow, I am really bad at replying to other people's posts. Am I supposed to be hitting quote instead of reply?
EDIT: Well, I meant to quote the guy who mentioned Bestow for the Daxos deck mechanic. Anyways, either would work.
That sounds right to me. Thanks for pointing that out!
That sounds great! I love it when spoiler season gives you that one card you need to make things work.
I did, in fact, read the entire article. There is no reason to be pedantic about my use of the word "likely". That is super annoying. You look into the biblical text already assuming that it is fallible in the same way that you are accusing me of the opposite. This will be my last post regarding our current conversation. Thank you.
That's the thing, they do say two different things. I never said they didn't. However, that does not make them contradict in what they assert about creation. The writer, who I assume to be Moses, would not have intentionally written contradictory statements without a purpose. You reject the idea that poetry allows for a more open interpretation of events. Its redundant at this point but if you understand Genesis 1 as a poem it doesn't really matter that the account varies slightly from 2. To be honest, I feel like I have justified my assertions. If you already have a problem with the Genesis account and the infallibility of Scripture then it becomes a moot point. From what you are saying, it doesn't matter if I am talking about evolution or not.
What is your definition of infallibility?
A guy named Carl Drews lays out a really good foundation for Theistic Evolution on a website I have been reading. I'm going to post the link because he is likely smarter than me:
http://www.theistic-evolution.com/theisticevolution.html#Yom
"It especially concerns....and in a more general way the aptitude for forming bonds of communion with others."
The way the sentence is phrased suggests that "the bonds of communion" are a subset of sexuality. The bonds of communion are in the same list as affectivity, the ability to love, and the ability to procreate. Each is a subset of sexuality.