Was just reading through some cards and noticed Dreams of the Dead exiles creatures if they leave the battlefield. However flicker effects allow the creature to return as a new object.
I though this wasn't the case for the unearth mechanic, which seems similar to this. What am I missing here?
You have nothing to lose by confronting the store owner. It's your money. The worst he can do is say no. If you are going to take your money else wear, you might as well haggle with the store owner. Not speaking up and not standing up for yourself? Not a good habit to get into.
Jin Gitaxius is the only creature you should be scooping to if you don't have an immediate answer. That or Iona if everyone at the table is the same mono colored deck.
I find Trisk and Mike to be kinda crappy do nothing cards on their own.
Since you have survival in there, you can get to Notion Theif pretty easy. Combine this dude with Windfall. Perhaps intuition as your third card? I dunno.
The difficulty is mostly that the balance needed for commander is different than the balance needed for standard and modern. In order to print the kinds of cards necessary to let aggro compete with combo or control in EDH, they would probably blow everything out of the water in modern. Red is going to draw the short straw here because its best cards are based around early damage and trading cards for damage - effects that aren't worthwhile for EDH. The game is principally balanced for standard, modern, and legacy, so the balance will always be out of whack in EDH, even ignoring broken old cards available in the pool.
What percentage of the field in competitive Modern and Legacy has blue in the deck? I'm not so sure there is a balance in other formats aside from standard, and standard can be relative to the times.
Honestly I think it is really ludicrous that MaRo would say this about Commander, certainly when he doesn't play the format. I think the upcoming Commander decks are the most excited I have been for a Magic product in years. I am also a huge fan of Planar Chaos. I personally love it when colors bend the rules on the color pie, but I also feel that the cards still need to justify why they are doing so thematically. The Song of Dryads is a great example of this. Enchanted permanent is a tree - awesome. I also think it's pretty crappy that some colors are greatly restricted by their ability to play the game, and others are not. MaRo may believe that these restrictions are a core part of the game, but when your players are asking for tools and your aren't giving them what they want, you are going to turn people off. Red and black need ways that don't suck and are thematically appropriate to deal with enchantments. Black needs a way that doesn't suck and is thematically appropriate to deal with artifacts. Neither of these changes will be a particularly big deal in legacy, they should probably not be printed in standard, but in Commander they would be momentous changes that would shake the game up in a significant, and I believe positive, way. Ultimately - everything I have seen about the upcoming Commander set has been wildly positive. Maybe MaRo should pay attention and let these guys design more stuff.
Dude, red can take out Circle of Protection: Red with Chaos Warp, Disk, and a few things other things that cost a bunch of mana, or using a few turns of tapping and putting counters on it.
Mara is the guru though, and he's done a magnificent of using his color pie theory to make sure each color in magic is balanced.
Should it be shown that he is the one and only authority behind the current color pie. Any threads like these should probably be closed and the creators of said thread should be referred to a maro sticky.
Or the people posting things like this on said thread could actually read the original post...
Yes, I get what you saying. It appears your thread spawned a color pie debate.
Other than obvious things, like his job, what "source" could you possible be looking for?
This is all very, very subjective. OBVIOUSLY. Trying to pretend like there's a way to define an objective "winner" in this debate is just ridiculous.
Actually, there is a winner, and it's not subjective. From what I gather according to what Jiv has posted, Maro is the ultimate defining entity of the current state of the color pie. There is no reason for me to debate this anymore. Those arguing that Song of the Dryads are within Green are wrong. I am no longer in that camp until a new head designer states otherwise.
Yes, it appears to me there are inconsistencies with Maro's previous rulings. It's okay. People can make mistakes. No big deal. However, it wasn't very obvious to me when I'm told other people employed by wizards are also designing cards, and cards like song of the dryads are allowed to make the cut and see print. This is misleading to me.
But it is very clear now and I will point out to anyone otherwise that they are clearly wrong and do not understand the how the color pie works.
The argument here is (or ought to be) "SHOULD unconditional removal (with drawbacks) of creatures be part of green's pie?" Needless to say, there's no objective answer to this question. I guess there's also a potential subquestion of "if it's out of pie, is it OK considering everything else that's out of pie in eternal formats?"
If people are going to point to Maro as a reference to their claims on what defines the current state of the color pie, than it's the only argument they really have. Otherwise they must concede the color pie is susceptible to change through the history of magic and varying sources of authority. This then becomes a double edge sword. Everything is arbitrarily correct and can be rationalized through whatever means by either side of the debate. Be it green having means to remove creatures, or white having the means to somehow make people discard. Again, this is the problem with fantasy world.
You either have a current source that explicitly states what is valid, or you have a religious debate about something that can be interpreted to be anything through enough creative thinking and strength in numbers. It's really that simple.
If we get a source citing Maro as the end all be all, then whatever I say about the color pie, doesn't matter. I understand mistakes were made, maybe even by Maro himself. I then accept the current color pie as being whatever the current authority figure says it to be.
He is the head designer. It's literally his job to be the final authority on the Color Pie.
If this can be explicitly shown. Then the color pie is whatever he says it is, and no other designer has any weight behind their philosophy of the color pie.
But it also has other implications. Should he no longer be a head designer, and it is explicitly stated that whomever the head designer is, they define the current state of the color pie. No exceptions
Should it be shown that he is the one and only authority behind the current color pie. Any threads like these should probably be closed and the creators of said thread should be referred to a maro sticky.
If it can be explicitly shown that Maro is in fact the one and only source of authority of the color.
The debate is over. It doesn't matter what your opinion of the color pie is. Previous mistakes regarding the color pie must be considered anomalies.
However, if it can be shown that the philosophy behind the color pie is in fact not dictated by maro. Then there is a basis for cards which appear to break the color pie to people in one camp, but be completely fine to people of another camp.
This is no different than people who both claim they are of X religion and differ on the morality of issue Y. In which case, anything can be shown to be anything. People can rationalize spells being countered by green turning them into forests.
Until someone can show that Maro is the one and only source of authority on this issue, then they are no different than the people they claim are plugging their ears and not listening to reason. And by reason I mean an unquestionable authority which can be shown to be inconsistent by closely examining all rulings and said rulings justifications.
This has never come up in all the games I've played. Looks like Resto Angle and DEN have even more synergy than I previously thought.
Dreams of the Dead exiles creatures if they leave the battlefield. However flicker effects allow the creature to return as a new object.
I though this wasn't the case for the unearth mechanic, which seems similar to this. What am I missing here?
I mean, seriously?
Since you have survival in there, you can get to Notion Theif pretty easy. Combine this dude with Windfall. Perhaps intuition as your third card? I dunno.
What percentage of the field in competitive Modern and Legacy has blue in the deck? I'm not so sure there is a balance in other formats aside from standard, and standard can be relative to the times.
Dude, red can take out Circle of Protection: Red with Chaos Warp, Disk, and a few things other things that cost a bunch of mana, or using a few turns of tapping and putting counters on it.
Mara is the guru though, and he's done a magnificent of using his color pie theory to make sure each color in magic is balanced.
Yes, I get what you saying. It appears your thread spawned a color pie debate.
No. I'm arguing the current color pie isn't up for debate if there is a singular authority. These links appear to state exactly that.
Actually, there is a winner, and it's not subjective. From what I gather according to what Jiv has posted, Maro is the ultimate defining entity of the current state of the color pie. There is no reason for me to debate this anymore. Those arguing that Song of the Dryads are within Green are wrong. I am no longer in that camp until a new head designer states otherwise.
Yes, it appears to me there are inconsistencies with Maro's previous rulings. It's okay. People can make mistakes. No big deal. However, it wasn't very obvious to me when I'm told other people employed by wizards are also designing cards, and cards like song of the dryads are allowed to make the cut and see print. This is misleading to me.
But it is very clear now and I will point out to anyone otherwise that they are clearly wrong and do not understand the how the color pie works.
If people are going to point to Maro as a reference to their claims on what defines the current state of the color pie, than it's the only argument they really have. Otherwise they must concede the color pie is susceptible to change through the history of magic and varying sources of authority. This then becomes a double edge sword. Everything is arbitrarily correct and can be rationalized through whatever means by either side of the debate. Be it green having means to remove creatures, or white having the means to somehow make people discard. Again, this is the problem with fantasy world.
You either have a current source that explicitly states what is valid, or you have a religious debate about something that can be interpreted to be anything through enough creative thinking and strength in numbers. It's really that simple.
If we get a source citing Maro as the end all be all, then whatever I say about the color pie, doesn't matter. I understand mistakes were made, maybe even by Maro himself. I then accept the current color pie as being whatever the current authority figure says it to be.
If this can be explicitly shown. Then the color pie is whatever he says it is, and no other designer has any weight behind their philosophy of the color pie.
But it also has other implications. Should he no longer be a head designer, and it is explicitly stated that whomever the head designer is, they define the current state of the color pie. No exceptions
Should it be shown that he is the one and only authority behind the current color pie. Any threads like these should probably be closed and the creators of said thread should be referred to a maro sticky.
The debate is over. It doesn't matter what your opinion of the color pie is. Previous mistakes regarding the color pie must be considered anomalies.
However, if it can be shown that the philosophy behind the color pie is in fact not dictated by maro. Then there is a basis for cards which appear to break the color pie to people in one camp, but be completely fine to people of another camp.
This is no different than people who both claim they are of X religion and differ on the morality of issue Y. In which case, anything can be shown to be anything. People can rationalize spells being countered by green turning them into forests.
Until someone can show that Maro is the one and only source of authority on this issue, then they are no different than the people they claim are plugging their ears and not listening to reason. And by reason I mean an unquestionable authority which can be shown to be inconsistent by closely examining all rulings and said rulings justifications.
This is a common problem in the realm of fantasy.
Can we get some kind of consensus on this, or is this explicitly stated somewhere?
From what I've seen, it appears anything can arbitrary enough to where green can counter spells by turning them into forests.