I might be wrong, but this card seems to lack any text for what would happen if you are unable to sacrifice two lands ('if you do not, sacrifice this permanent'), nor is it worded as an additional cost or some such. Does that mean that if you play this as your first land, you wouldn't loose any lands at all?
Nope, you would have to sacrifice It. It enters, asks for the sacrifice, does it to self being the only land available.
this is another debate, but i, for one, find banning anything extremely short-sighted, ugly and unecessary. there's not a SINGLE card in the modern banlist that couldn't be restricted (which, as i said before many times, is much more elegant). chrome mox wouldn't break anything as a one of, nor would any other of these cards. meanwhile, they would surely improve strategies and add an interesting deckbuilding option to the cardpool.
banning should only come for inevitable stuff, but hardly anything becomes inevitable as a one of without ridiculously efficient tutors and done under modern's overall design constraints.
Here we have a hogaak or whatever the new guy is called player. Nice one mate. Enjoy your 75% winrate while it lasts.
not to burst ur bubble, but no, i don't play it or wish to as i'm not particularly fond of the playstyle/play patterns (lantern lover here, u can deduce what i tend to like from that). but hogaark itself is one of the cards i liked the most on MH.
as for the banned vs. restricted cards, anyone wishing to debate the subject can shoot me a pm, as to not derail the thread.
my collection is entirely proxied, with art and border suited to my liking (when so desired).
no one i play with gives a ****. this game, for most people, is not about the biggest wallet. it's about strategy, fast decision making and fun times.
great games in modern with top decks or personal brews (really, it's a lot of proxies; i'm working my way towards all i need for legacy/vintage, but i already have a lot of things from there too 'cause commander)
i have awesome matches, being able to test anything i wish with all the cards i want, with aesthetically pleasing tables to boot. i just don't play sanctioned events (which is more than fair - and eh, being a pro is a job, i dont want Magic to be my job)
guess the one thing i can't have is foils, heh. but i'm slowly working on that.
1
It shouldn't
3
1
Nope, you would have to sacrifice It. It enters, asks for the sacrifice, does it to self being the only land available.
1
2
I assume it climbs trees bear style
Must really hate birds
1
if you'd be so kind
i won't
1
not to burst ur bubble, but no, i don't play it or wish to as i'm not particularly fond of the playstyle/play patterns (lantern lover here, u can deduce what i tend to like from that). but hogaark itself is one of the cards i liked the most on MH.
as for the banned vs. restricted cards, anyone wishing to debate the subject can shoot me a pm, as to not derail the thread.
2
i'm really happy that there's folks like u in this thread
i just wish those that love to hold onto that big throbbing banhammer would make the effort to follow this advice
2
cause it's a marketing dpt concern
even though they could make piles more of money if it was attached to decent worldbuilding and art direction.
but no,
surveys is ALL u need
1
no one i play with gives a ****. this game, for most people, is not about the biggest wallet. it's about strategy, fast decision making and fun times.
great games in modern with top decks or personal brews (really, it's a lot of proxies; i'm working my way towards all i need for legacy/vintage, but i already have a lot of things from there too 'cause commander)
i have awesome matches, being able to test anything i wish with all the cards i want, with aesthetically pleasing tables to boot. i just don't play sanctioned events (which is more than fair - and eh, being a pro is a job, i dont want Magic to be my job)
guess the one thing i can't have is foils, heh. but i'm slowly working on that.