A New and Exciting Beginning
The End of an Era
Exclusive: Sword of Truth and Justice
  • posted a message on The Magic Mirror- Brad Nelson Spoiler
    So it's basically a Mind Unbound that costs 50% more but COULD cost up to 50% less.

    Even with artifact and legend interactions, I'm more impressed by the midnight clock than this for EDH.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on [ELD] Commanderin prodcast preview - dance of the manse
    So... 4 mana to return sword and foundry?

    Seriously though, I see this as more of a commander card.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on [ELD] Oathsworn Knight
    Quote from CatParty »
    Oh nice, we get Phantoms back in Magic! Don't forget that if you slap a toughness boosting aura/equipment on this guy, he's sorta indestructible - even with 0 counters on him he still gets the buff from the aura.

    This guy specifically takes away that loophole, requiring a counter for the damage prevention
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on [ELD] Andrew Cuneo - Deafening silence
    To be fair, this is the first piece of storm hate that has been cheap and generalized enough to actually look effective.

    Instead of making storming more difficult (dampening sphere) or targeting the kill spells (amulet of safekeeping), this card targets the mechanism of storm at a mana cost that matters (unlike rule of law/eidolon of rhetoric).

    ...plus this card hurts affinity, ad nauseum (no more grace + nauseum), and infect (no explosive wins from nowhere).
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on [ELD] Fervent champion
    I am down for this with Sunforger in Modern

    The ability to grab Paths and Bolts from your deck repeatedly for RW is kind of mouth-watering in my opinion. Would play out like a midrange deck but wiping out a few creatures before swinging with a 5/1 First Striker sounds pretty fun.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on [ELD] Fervent champion
    Well, this is my new favorite raging goblin
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on [ELD] Feasting Troll King— Piotr 'kanister' Głogowski preview
    So... sacking this guy to a witch's oven in response to a kill spell gets you two of the three food you need while protecting this guy from exile effects.

    So... yeah. If you cast this from your hand with an oven out, your opponent would have to kill this thing four times (without you getting any additional food) to make it stick.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on {ELD] Robber of the Rich (@JEDepraz spoiler)
    Quote from Melkor »
    .....is this possibly the completion of the Goyf/Snap/Bob/SFM cycle? the rest of the set feels weak, but this is SUPER good

    Personally, I can't really tell if this card is even good.

    I can see a sort of bomat courier appeal and admit that this card might be able to attack twice if played on curve (maybe 3 if you have some burn or kill to back him up). A 2-drop that draws two cards from an opponent's deck isn't a slouch and playing a second robber of the rich later on (or an incidental rogue) allows you to claim what the first one stole earlier, which is nice. Between the small body, reliance on combat, and the requirement for fewer cards in hand, however, the floor for this card seems to be pretty low.

    I don't know... maybe the comparison is apt. It dies to more things than goyf, puts itself at more risk than bob, and the quality of the card advantage it generates isn't as good/reliable as Snap/SFM. Then again, it produces "reusable" card advantage starting on the turn you play it, which none of those other cards really do.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on [ELD] Witch's Vengeance- Masters of Modern Podcast preview
    So... that's pretty dang good.

    Most tribes with decks (humans, spirits, goblins, elves, etc) tend to have small butts.

    I will be seeing this card in the future, I think.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on I think it's about time someone says it
    Okay... finally posting here. I was tempted to post on this thread several times but didn't think that there was anything I could add that others haven't. After seeing how long this thread has been going, however, I feel the need to speak up.

    The title of your thread presents this idea as if it’s one of the big design complaints that everyone silently has with the game but are scared to bring up. Your opening post reinforces this idea by asserting that you have seen other people bringing up this idea in the past before getting shut down (without linking to sources… even though googling “mtg creatures attacking creatures” gets only seems to get two real results in the first five pages… both written by newbies).

    In the course of the past 5 pages, 28 different users (myself included) have unanimously agreed that applying this system to mtg at large would be a bad idea and no other posters have supported this idea or have been visibly swayed by your arguments (at least from what I see). I’m more than certain that you and your group enjoy the changes that you’ve made and I admit that a sample size of n = 28 isn’t particularly robust. With that said, the results so far seem to suggest that either a) you introduced this idea in an environment that is entirely unreceptive to it; or b) the incredibly high value you place upon intuitive gameplay makes you an outlier rather than a voice of the people who Wizards should listen to.

    To reiterate what has been said in this thread so far, the stated value of this “fix” to magic are:
    1. It would make things a bit more intuitive, especially for new players.
    2. It would add more choices and add to available design space (which isn’t automatically a good thing but has potential to be really good).
    3. It would reduce reliance on kill spells.

    While the recognized downsides are:
    1. Evasion needs to be revamped.
    2. Defensive abilities need to be revamped
    3. Which may mean that spells and abilities granting evasion/defensive abilities may be problems
    3. Cost-efficient creatures with low cost are more dangerous
    4. Risks creating a snow-balling effect.
    5. Not exactly clear how this would work with lots of older defensive cards.
    6. Older kill spells would be much less useful (though some would call this good, as mentioned above).
    7. While you use the existence of Planeswalkers to justify attacking creatures, there are a number of differences between walkers and summons that would change how they feel in play (Walkers give you value the turn they come out by giving you a loyalty ability while a vanilla summon would not. Attacking a walker practically never results in card disadvantage for the attacker when compared to attacking the opponent. The continuous nature of loyalty for walkers allows for more "feel-good" moments for both players where the attacker deals some damage and the defender keeps their permanent. This sort of moment is harder with a binary nature of toughness. Creating complicated game states where a single permanent is blocking one permanent and is being blocked by another or where two permanents are blocking for each other.)
    8. The sheer madness involved in making a new card type. I am going to stay here for a moment because I am unsure if you are aware of exactly how big this change is. The introduction of legendary as a creature type with Champions of Kamigawa impacted just over 200 cards. The change to damage spells to specifically call out planeswalkers or “any target” with Dominaria’s release affected about 1,000 cards. The “Grand Creature Type Update” that accompanied Lorwyn affected about 1,200 cards.

    Adding a new card type that functions as a creature for most purposes would impact 10,946 cards (AKA over 50% of all cards currently in creation). I am 100% serious right now. Whereas the existence of planeswalkers subtly changed the function of a similar number of cards, creating summons would literally change the text (or reminder text) on over half of all cards (assuming you wanted summons to act as creatures for most purposes). Every incidence of the word “creature” (on auras, burn, combat tricks, revival, bounce, flicker, counterspells, tap effects, untap effects, doesn’t untap effects, when creatures etb triggers, when creatures die triggers, beast of burden effects, sacrifice effects, fight effects, threaten effects, the reminder text for abilities like equip/intimidate/battlecry, etc. would be changed to “creature or summon”. Every instance of “noncreature” would need to be replaced with “noncreature, nonsummon”.

    This one change would alter the text of more cards than any other shift in the history of magic by nearly an order of magnitude and not making these changes (making all of those old cards useless in the “new world order” of summons) would frankly be suicide for this game.

    With all of that said, which of these sides is more important is a matter of subjective opinion. I feel that I am correct when I say that adapting MtG for this purpose is highly impractical (especially when you could convert other card games that already play with similar rules to those you are after, allowing for much smaller and more manageable changes). You can feel that you are correct when you say that it makes no sense to control an army that can’t attack the opposing army. Ultimately, though, neither of these points are objectively more important than the other and we are bound to keep talking past each other if we simply have different value systems.

    One Final Subject: Regarding the “intuitiveness” of this rule.
    As others have said, this game features a number of interactions that are not intuitive. This is a game where a Squirrel wielding twelve swords can hop into an aetherpunk helicopter to crew it along with ten giant eldrazi, weaponizing a bowl of hot soup on the dashboard of the helicopter to avoid enemy vessels before the flying copter falls into a mid-air Fissure.

    If you try to handwave this absurdity with magic (it’s a magic squirrel, its magic soup, etc.), I could just as easily handwave the apparent unintuitive nature of this game (The rules of magical duels prevents creatures from fighting each other directly except in defense of their summoner. Summoned creatures can only be meaningfully harmed in combat while engaged in combat, etc.). While there’s nothing in the rules or lore of the game that specifically suggests this background, neither is there any specific indication that the squirrels summoned by acorn harvest have the ability to grow twelve extra limbs.

    In short: When you try to handwave with magic, everything is infinitely reductive. If you don’t try to handwave with magic, the game allows for all varieties of situations that simply wouldn’t make sense.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on [ELD] 3 Adventure cards (with rules) and Uncommon Legendary (Syr Konrad)
    Sir Kondrad is pretty damn awesome, hurting opponents whenever you so much as sneeze.

    (Self)mill, discard, kill, sacrifice, and reanimation can all dome those opponents... which might make this the most quintessentially black legend ever.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Your Wish is My Command
    Was just working on a Modern Horizons-esque set and came up with something goofy that I wanted to share.

    Your Wish is My Command 5 mana blue mana blue mana blue mana
    Choose two-
    • Create a 5/6 blue djinn creature token with flying.
    • Shuffle your hand and library into your hand and draw 4 cards.
    • Add a card you own from outside of the game to your hand.
    • Return target artifact card from your graveyard to the battlefield.
    Miracle blue mana blue mana blue mana
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on [C19] THE END. - madness deck list and all the other 3 decks
    Nope. Just looked through all of the decklists and all of the new cards are currently spoiled.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on [C19] THE END. - madness deck list and all the other 3 decks
    Hmmm... Geth, Squee, Solemn Simulacrum, Chaos Warp... Not as bad as I thought it would be.

    Also, we have 19 madness cards without a giant vampire theme, which was kind of unexpected.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on [C19] Mothership spoilers 8/8 - New version of Chainer, curse of fools wisdom and big game hunter reprint
    So I'm noticing that chainer acts as a discard outlet and gives haste to anything you reanimate, which is a pretty good deal for a straightforward reanimator deck.

    No easy infinite loops with this guy (maybe leaden Myr + ashnod's altar + Necromancy + Altar of the brood?) but a very strong FAIR reanimator commander.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.