2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • posted a message on Various takes on existing lands
    I would evaluate your shock and fetch variants very differently. The thing about colorless mana is that it's a fake color, so you can't evaluate it as equal. Colorless mana is going to be inferior to colored mana in every scenario except when colorless casting cost mana symbols are involved, which is a narrow and set-based mechanic. As such, I would not rate Siltstream on the same level as a shockland because it isn't a true dual. It might be worth decreasing the life payment to one, in light of this being weaker than shocks.

    Fetchlands are another issue. They are strong enough to be played in otherwise multicolored decks due to the strength of thinning, and, as such, the power loss to the preexisting ten is minimal. Whether repeated shuffling is good for the game is not is another matter, related to shocks but unrelated to this.

    Your third design is harder to evaluate. At first blush, five (effectively six) mana is a prohibitive cost, but the kinds of decks that would play this can reach that mana easily, and usually need to go higher. Putting +2 ramp on a land is also very strong.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Apex Altisaur + Strionic Resonator vs. Butcher of Malakir
    Yes. That ability would still be on the stack, and therefore be a legal target for resonator. Any new object on the stack is going to resolve first, so your opponent can have Altisaur fight something else before the sacrifice trigger resolves.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Fleshgorger (simple black design)
    Even in commander, this is probably too aggressively costed. Even repeatable, symmetrical edicts tend not to go for less than 5 mana.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on A commander for playing Marit Lage as your commander
    Personally, I'm not much of a fan of the "slang-as-rules-text" approach. Technically, there is no such thing in the rulebook as "commander damage," even if it's easy to understand due to being, well, slang. The actual rule is that a player who takes 21 or more damage from a single commander in a game loses as a state-based action. Wouldn't it be more straightforward and flavorful to just straight-up make the Marit Lage token your commander?
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Izzet Reverberation
    yeah, having too many mana rocks was something i ran into while playtesting. much less of them now. The copy spells that you are suggesting though, just don't fit my combo. Their perfectly good cards, but this deck wants to hit you for 20 in the face, not 6 or 9. Repeated gives he enough copies to one-shot my opponent. The spells you suggest have to have multiple copies in order to take effect.

    Frankly, I don't even know what running two Chromatic Lantern even does for you. You're in two colors and neither splashing nor running anything particularly color-heavy (although Niv-Mizzet, Parun would be a nice backup win condition here), and you aren't in a particular rush to hit 5 mana. If you were serious about ramping into a huge Explosion, then you might want to go Temur for Wilderness Reclamation and green ramp. Otherwise, you're just spending 3 mana on something that isn't Narset.

    Dig Through Time belongs in the mainboard. It's a massively powerful draw spell, and you fill your graveyard fairly easily without using it.
    Posted in: Pioneer
  • posted a message on Izzet Reverberation
    I'm not sure how crazy I am about the mana rocks here. Technically they enable the all-in combo plan to go off a bit earlier, but they're very passive plays. I'm not sure you can get away with tapping out on turn 2 or 3 on your own turn, since it clashes with all of the interaction you run. What you really want is to leave mana up for a counter or removal or card draw. Those slots would be better served being, well, more of those three things. I'm also surprised that you're running Repeated Reverberation over more efficient copy effects like Doublecast or Narset's Reversal. The latter is particularly flexible.
    Posted in: Pioneer
  • posted a message on Chalice of the void - intentionally miss trigger
    No. Chalice of the Void's ability is not an optional trigger, a necessary characteristic because the card affects all players symmetrically.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on 'Mystery Booster' product
    Quote from Cactuscorpus »
    The prices for cards in this set have tanked really bad. I figured the foils would drop, but Sen Triplets is 16 bucks! A friend was really excited he pulled two Expropriates, and it was a decent pull for sure, but not at all what he expected. On the flipside, this is a really fun draft environment and I look forward to doing it as much as possible!

    Isn't that one of the goals with reprint sets? To depress prices by making cards more accessible.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Aether Assailant: Anti-Walker Hate
    Quote from Creedmoor »
    I actually think I'm with Rosy on this one. While the flash on this isn't as big of a flash on Containment Priest, playing this guy the turn after your opponent plays a planeswalker and then upticks it feels really bad. Without flash I'm not sure I would ever play this card unless it was against a very specific deck that only cared about playing walkers. Even with the flash, I feel that way. But I think the flash is the most important part because it doesn't let your opponent uptick correctly.

    I mean, yeah, of course the card would be stronger with flash. Nobody's saying that flash would be useless. The question here is whether this needs flash, which is important because this card is red. Red's color pie is dead last in how often the color gets flash, so it can't just be thrown on like you would first strike or haste. Instead, red's flash comes on a strictly as-needed basis, so the real question is whether flash is necessary for this card to function. The answer to this is a resounding no, since this creature has a lower CMC than most planeswalkers. Decks that rely on planeswalkers are going to take damage if this guy comes down on curve, regardless of whether he is vanilla or has flash, first strike, haste, or anything else that makes him better than a bear.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on A question of cost
    Quote from Boyachi »

    It would most likely fall into an uncommon slot.

    No way, this is too weird and specific to be an uncommon. Niche Johnny cards like this are good candidates to be weak, but necessary rares.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Legendary God Construct Cycle Part 1
    You'll definitely want to use the champion route here. Under the other two options, you'll lose the creature if your god eats countermagic.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on [C20] Commander deck names
    With the possible exception of Timeless Wisdom, these names scream enemy color pairs.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Adventure Mechanic Question
    No. A player can not use Murder, etc. on a creature card in exile. This can be a little tricky for newer, and even moderately experienced, players, but, essentially, objects in Magic can fall into one of three broad categories: permanents, spells, and cards. An object is a permanents while it is on the battlefield, a spell while on the stack (excluding abilities), and card while in any zone other than the stack or battlefield. The tricky part is that, while anything that affects cards and spells will name cards and spells in their text, permanent status is usually implied.

    For example, take a look at the text of Essence Scatter:

    "Counter target creature spell."

    It says "creature spell," so it only affects creatures on the stack.
    Now look at Raise Dead:

    "Return target creature card from your graveyard to your hand."

    It says "creature card," while naming the graveyard, so it only affects creatures in your graveyard. Anything that affects cards will name the zone.
    Lastly, take a look at the text of Murder:

    "Destroy target creature."

    It says neither spell nor card, so it actually defaults to "creature permanent," even though affecting permanents is only ever spelled out on cards that can affect more than one card type, like Assassin's Trophy. Thus, since Murder does not affect spells nor cards in a given zone, it can only target creature permanents on the battlefield.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Is the value of X defined by Last known info on a flickered creature?
    The Stonecoil Serpent will, after being flickered, enter the battlefield with 0 counters. Neither rule 107.3k nor Last Known Information (LKI) are relevant in this scenario.

    If you cast a Stonecoil Serpent for X=3, it will enter the battlefield with 3 +1/+1 counters. That is what rule 107.3k does; it bridges the gap between X spells, for which X is the chosen value and permanents with X in their casting costs, for which X is 0. To restate that rule, it essentially says that "Yes, Stonecoil Serpent does indeed enter the battlefield with 3 +1/+1 counters even though X is 0 while it is on the battlefield."

    If that same Serpent then becomes the target of Flicker of Fate, Last Known Information will indeed say that it had 3 +1/+1 counters on it when I left the battlefield, which would be important if it had, say, a Leaves the Battlefield trigger that cared about its counters. That's what LKI does, it lets dies and Leaves triggers function, in addition to other effects that care about what used to be in a given zone, but has just moved. The Serpent that re-enters the battlefield will then enter with 0 counters on it, and presumably die. Why? Because the creature that re-entered the battlefield is not the same one as the creature that left it. Once a card changes zones, it becomes a new object. The new Serpent was not cast (that was the one that left), and, as such, X was not set to a particular value, which then defaults to 0.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on oubliette is. Coming soon in a set
    Quote from Lord Void »
    Still utterly fails to explain why it wasn't in Modern Horizons like tons of people were asking for but ok.

    A better question would be to ask why anybody though Modern Horizons would be such a natural fit for it in the first place. The damn thing is near unprintable. For one, it's a relic. Not only does it predate the modern color pie, getting an effect normally reserved for white, it does so with a massive wall of text. The 2-part Oblivion Ring template has been dead for years, so there's no way something with it was going to end up in a product that was supposed to represent the future. All of that text exists to serve a weird aura/counter preservation mechanic that, respectively, results in a wall of text or has been written much more elegantly the few times it has appeared since Oubliette's printing. All told, the sheer number of reasons to not reprint it is damning. It would probably just be forgotten if it wasn't printed at common.

    Folks should be happy that Wizards is thinking at all about how to reprint the unreprintable, not get mad about not jamming cards where they obviously don't belong.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.