702.2b Any nonzero amount of combat damage assigned to a creature by a source with deathtouch is considered to be lethal damage, regardless of that creature’s toughness. See rules 510.1c–d.
This rule doesn't say that the damage is only considered lethal until the next time state-based actions occur. By a literal reading of the rules, if Ulamog is dealt 1 damage by a source with deathtouch, and then loses all abilities later the same turn, he still has lethal damage marked on him, but will not be killed by it.
There is no reason that they can't reprint Tarmogofy in a normal set. It will not even be that good. Back during that standard it was just okay. There was no such thing as every single deck needing to play it to win. Printing gofy would have zero negative effects for anyone except hoarders and price speculators. It would be such a massive boon to the community to dethrone the king of price gouging. Wizards however wants to keep it's price high in order to sell very crappy Modern Masters sets.
It was played in Standard, Extended, and Legacy. It was $50. It was better than "just okay".
My opponent has a sultai flayer and a Rotting Mastodon on the battlefield. They have 2 health left (Player's Health). If I attack with a creature that is doing 10 trampling damage and they block with their Rotting Mastodon, does that player die?
Yes. The Mastodon will die, which will trigger the Sultai Flayer ability. However, when that ability is put onto the stack, the player is at -2 life and will lose the game due to being at 0 or less life. This will happen before the triggered ability from the Flayer can resolve.
You are correct that the person does die, but the ability is of Sultai Flayer is never actually put on the stack. It will trigger but before it can be put on the stack, the State Based Abilities are checked. One of them says that if you are at zero or less life, you lose the game. Remember State Based Abilities are checked right before the next time a player would gain priority.
The ability will be put onto the stack. Players don't gain priority until after the ability is placed on the stack, so it will be there by the time the player loses.
There is no sense in which this was the right move by SCG. Firstly, since when do free and intelligent human beings respond to an opinion by attempting to memory-hole it and erase it from existence, even when it's wrong?
Given that they posted an apology and freaking pointed out the fact that they removed it from their site, they're doing a terrible job of trying to "erase it from existence".
Nope. It says "...if Kytheon, Hero of Akros and at least two other creatures attacked this combat..." Nothing about being declared as an attacker, simply that they did attack. Since the cat does attack, it triggers Kytheon.
"...if Kytheon, Hero of Akros and at least two other creatures attacked this combat..."
"attack" = be declared as an attacker.
"attacked" = was declared as an attacker.
Perhaps now we can have an intelligent discussion on reprinting pure-jank cards in products developed exclusively for new players and how that's silly.
The alternatives would be printing all-new jank cards for new players, which would be silly and might create a supply problem if they turned out to be good, or reprinting good cards for the sample dekcs and then having old players snatch them all up before the new players can get them.
Even earlier, in fact: Ascendant Evincar in Nemesis. That's a large part of why they can't fix it, because without knowing the story, you have no way of knowing that that's the same guy who's represented by Crovax the Cursed.
Right, I forgot about those. I read an article that talked about the problem a while back but referred to Kamahl, I guess that's why I thought of him first.
The legend problem has been known for ages (like since Onslaught), and it's too late to fix it. That's why the Planeswalker rule goes by subtype instead of name.
Basically, Wizards has known about this since Planeswalkers were introduced, there's nothing new to discuss here really.
I remember discussing the Runestones before, and I'm still not completely convinced that having it as a triggered ability is better than using a tap ability with some other restriction.
Shield of Entanglement is really narrow, and pretty expensive for such a narrow card. Maybe give it a toughness boost as well, or something?
Mark of Insanity is too narrow to see play. I count 11 currently-printed cards that it works with, and not all of them get the full discount. You'd need a lot of madness cards in your set for it to be worth playing. I'd suggest something "Discard a card: Add 1 to your mana pool" instead, or something like that, so it actually helps enable madness.
Sanctum of Veknus looks fine.
Temple of Cahdaria could be made legendary to remove the once-per-turn restriction. Less words is good.
No, that's definitely not the meaning of the ability. The ability is meant mainly for multi colored cards. The more colors on the card, the better the ability will be.
That's not really a "mechanic", that's just how multicolored cards work. You're essentially making an ability word that says "This card is stronger because it's multicolored", which is just how multicolored cards are designed.
I mean, when you cast Consume Intellect, it's always going to be a U/B card. It's affected by Mycosynth Lattice and stuff, but that's still a very small number of cards that will interact with it (and will generally make it weaker).
This rule doesn't say that the damage is only considered lethal until the next time state-based actions occur. By a literal reading of the rules, if Ulamog is dealt 1 damage by a source with deathtouch, and then loses all abilities later the same turn, he still has lethal damage marked on him, but will not be killed by it.
It was played in Standard, Extended, and Legacy. It was $50. It was better than "just okay".
So it's not as if we have zero data on how good the 'Goyf is in Standard. We do have data, and it says that 'Goyf is powerful.
The ability will be put onto the stack. Players don't gain priority until after the ability is placed on the stack, so it will be there by the time the player loses.
Given that they posted an apology and freaking pointed out the fact that they removed it from their site, they're doing a terrible job of trying to "erase it from existence".
"attack" = be declared as an attacker.
"attacked" = was declared as an attacker.
Yes, and it's better for you if they're reprints of old jank because then nobody except for collectors is actually trying to get them.
I guess you want them to only use cards that are in boosters?
You could get a copy from one of the previous printings, because, y'know, they're reprints.
The alternatives would be printing all-new jank cards for new players, which would be silly and might create a supply problem if they turned out to be good, or reprinting good cards for the sample dekcs and then having old players snatch them all up before the new players can get them.
It looks like all the cards are reprinted commons, so their value as singles will be nil.
Basically, Wizards has known about this since Planeswalkers were introduced, there's nothing new to discuss here really.
If your sideboard cards are in the same sleeves as your deck, there's potential for confusion, so that might be a bad idea.
Shield of Entanglement is really narrow, and pretty expensive for such a narrow card. Maybe give it a toughness boost as well, or something?
Mark of Insanity is too narrow to see play. I count 11 currently-printed cards that it works with, and not all of them get the full discount. You'd need a lot of madness cards in your set for it to be worth playing. I'd suggest something "Discard a card: Add 1 to your mana pool" instead, or something like that, so it actually helps enable madness.
Sanctum of Veknus looks fine.
Temple of Cahdaria could be made legendary to remove the once-per-turn restriction. Less words is good.
I mean, when you cast Consume Intellect, it's always going to be a U/B card. It's affected by Mycosynth Lattice and stuff, but that's still a very small number of cards that will interact with it (and will generally make it weaker).