Excellent points mondu - even if a deck is complaint with the house rules here, it's advantage may be that it beats decks which are not complaint, and therefore is not competitive. It's a variant format at best, casual is probably the appropriate place for it. FFA Multiplayer threads seem to land here anyway, so that makes sense.
I'll try to edit the original post to clean this thread up so we have some deck discussion.
I don't think you understand though. What you are proposing is not Vintage. It's a variant or casual format. Just because you choose to use the P9 or Libraries, etc, does not make a format "Vintage."
You are placing House Rules on an existing format with a strict set of rules already.
Unfortunately, I have to move this to Casual.
I would post another thread on Vintage asking for multiplayer deck ideas (forgetting the house rules), but it seems anything related to FFA multiplayer is by nature Casual, so it probably fits here better, thanks.
The problem lies in the amount of restrictions placed. What you want is no longer a vintage deck, but rather a deck for an variant format. For example,tinker and oath of Druids solely exist to bypass casting costs and put an otherwise uncastable creature (llike progenitus) into play... but because of rule #4, oath and tinker might as well be banned. So, in essence, thiese rules ban certain cards in addition to the already established B&R cards, which means it isn't vintage anymore.
Admittedly some cards are less useful. But for the sake of getting some ideas, assume Progenitus is the only creature with this restriction, so Tinkering out a Darksteel Colossus or Inkwell Leviathan are still perfectly acceptable.
Given that limitation, there should be plenty of decks out there that don't rely on infinite combos (2) or contain Progenitus (4). Even rule 3 is very lightly enforced because it's usually easy to argue that you have a win condition.
Hopefully you aren't saying the rules above displace 100% of the vintage multiplayer decks out there, and folks who do have similar decks here can post for discussion.
For consideration, here is a sample of one that's worked okay for me:
You'll notice the lack of some vintage cards as I haven't worked them in yet, and the larger size - almost 80. Some of the longer games can go 15+ turns, and chewing through 4-5 cards per turn uses up a lot of the library.
I guess the question is why? If you are playing with all of the power cards and duals etc, why would you choose to not play a good deck?
Why are those the house rules? I didn't create them, so I can't say for sure. But within those rules we do try to play the best decks possible - everyone is aggressively playing to win, or to eliminate the biggest board threat.
I didn't see a lot of threads on this, but if there is already one active please lead the way.
Basically, I often join a group of folks that are casual vintage players. They own some of the best cards in the game, but are not the typical Turn 2-3 kill deck builders. In fact house rules prevent some of the mechanics that are typically associated with vintage multiplayer.
I often look around for deck ideas, but a lot of deck ideas out there are:
Vintage for single player, not scalable
Standard / Extended for multi player (not competitve enough)
Vintage for multi player but combo based (infinite amount of something)
In case I'm not the only one out there participating in this kind of group, I wanted to see if other folks out there have similar groups and deck ideas they'd like to share. For reference, here are some of the house rules/patterns that are usually folowed
Must follow DCI restricted / legal Vintage lists
Combo mechanics that generate arbitrary numbers of something are only allowed to generate 2 of whatever base increment is per round. Infinite tokens, mana, life, damage, turns, etc all generate twice whatever their base amount would be.
Decks must have a reasonable win condition. This is debateable, but if a deck appears to simply be play-to-annoy, it will get negative attention.
Some spells must be hardcast (player must spend the appropriate mana to play them). I'm not going to add the whole list, but cards like Progenitus are top candidates.
Everything else is fair game. I'd appreciate some deck ideas if anyone has any. I'll soon add a couple that have moderate success for reference, but P9, orig dual lands, library, etc are all commonly played (often with proxies)
Cool deck idea. I play in a couple casual vintage multiplayer groups, and have a deck that runs sanguine bond as a life gain / steal deck.
Here's a few of the cards that I find work really well with this card, and at the same time have merit on their own in case someone packs Krosan Grip to deal with the bond.
This thread has been very enjoyable to read. A lot of good ideas, counter-points and a couple humorous suggestions to keep it interesting.
The fact that P9 prices even exist is a mark of success in this game. From 2 cents to 2 thousand dollars, it has a range that is attractive to many geographical and socio-economic targets, with foreign languages to back it up. This also means it ranges well with age – few games last and scale from childhood to retirement but Magic has that capability. The tiered formats further make this attractive because standard players don’t have to own P9; they can play hard and earn 40K in a single tournament with cards that are a year old.
I don’t think anyone would disagree that the price of all cards (P9 included) would drop if Hasbro or WotC suddenly went out of business and no one picked the franchise up. We should consider ourselves lucky if these prices maintain or inflate in value for the next 20 years, because that means the game is still a success. Our exit from the hobby can provide money to our pockets or a valuable hand-off to the next generation. Anyone that invested in Magic over the last 17 years would argue that collectibles can not only be a good investment, but you can have fun while you’re collecting. Let’s see a stamp collector match that.
For clarification, this thread seems to focus around the reprinting of cards, and the inclusion in formats they previously weren’t in. Those are two separate topics. We should dismiss the second topic in this thread as WotC can and has (Ex Lightning Bolt in M10) brought cards back as they see fit in the new storyline. Even older cards without reprinting have gone in and out of Vintage/Legacy and Legal/Restricted status. The exception here is formats which necessitate a reprint. So we get to the real discussion - the most expensive and powerful cards among the 572 unique listed on the Reserved List.
Some brought up rarity as a danger to this list as the cards will eventually get destroyed or lost. However, the increasing values in these cards beget an increasing chance they will be well protected for many years to come by those who own them. There are plenty of equally rare cards in Beta that can be had for 1/100th the price of a Lotus, more likely to be re-sleeved and abused, but we aren’t as worried about them (sorry Lich!)
The Reserved List was created from a commitment - made to individual owners and significant dealers / retailers that acquire and hold larger inventories of cards. We as purchasers may be upset with WotC for reprinting a card we invested in, but think about a shop with 50-100K worth of P9. So WotC did what they could in 2002 to produce a firm stance on some of the most expensive cards – and they’ve honored it for 8 years now. That’s a good thing.
Many have argued about WotC getting sued, lack of care for this “gentlemen’s agreement”, etc, but based on market value clearly we have a trust that this will be honored. Both that the cards on this list will not be reprinted, and cards that are equally or more powerful will not be created. WotC goes as far as to say the same cost, abilities, text, types, sub-types, and power/toughness will not be reprinted. But there is an implicit, unstated trust in that they won’t for instance create a Platinum-Lotus that taps for 4. We trust them to do the right thing with the game, and in many ways extends way off this list. We trust Baneslayer Angel or her better won’t show up as a common in M11. If she did, million-a playset owner today would drop their commitment to chasing valuable cards. They’ve carefully introduced powerful mechanics that beat Reserved-list cards (example Amulet of Vigor + Tri-Tap-Lands), but still respect the bar set in ‘93.
The argument of collectors and vintage players adding no value due to secondary markets is significantly flawed. First, I’ve seen many sales of older cards funding newer booster packs or rares. Some folks just don’t need that old playset of Bazaar’s – they’ve grown tired of the mechanic and move onto Tarmogoyf or something else fun. Goyf doesn’t have a reprint limitation yet has increased in value tremendously despite a high print number and exit from standard. Second, casual vintage players like myself enjoy the newest releases as much as anyone else, and buy boosters, special editions, and singles from shops. Most of these directly benefit WotC, but the secondary single market should also be noted. Many shops open booster boxes or buy complete sets just to sell cards individually. A purchase of these cards, or older cards from another trade-in, in cyclical fashion has driven demand for new sets. As an owner of a few dual lands, I was thrilled to see M10’s Drowned Catacomb which plays nice with basics, duals, and the Ravnica shock set. These types of interactions are what make the whole space exciting to keep up with. WotC showed some involvement here in random Zendikar booster vintage cards, further acknowledging the existence and demand for this format.
If folks have an issue about other cards like FoW being too expensive, this isn’t the thread for that – WotC could choose to reprint them if they fit a storyline, or they just wanted to do a special “FTV: Counters” deck. Go ahead and throw in Mana Drain – as a Legend’s uncommon it’s not on the Reserved List either. But WotC has shown they respect value in these sets, through limited production and higher retail price (ex. FTV: Exiled).
A proposal I could agree with is periodic FTV:Vintage Proxies (different backs) done in smaller productions between sets, or as random inserts in boosters. As proxies, they wouldn’t be sanctioned for play any more than our own sharpie’d lands were, but we’d get to see great new artwork from our favorite artists. They would generate interest in the format, perhaps more un-sanctioned 10 or 15 proxy tournaments, and slowly give our casual nights that 8th edition art for the whole deck. That’s something new and vintage collectors would probably enjoy, and is allowed under the Special-Purpose section of the Reprint Policy.
For some it may be a bit too sacred an area to mess with, but for WotC, I think it’s just good business right now not to do it – they want to encourage competitive standard play with real cards. Like some Foil Jace the Mind Sculptor[/QUOTE]’s.
Not, as the ability is moving the nether traitor from the graveyard to the battlefield. The Traitor has to be in the graveyard when a creature leaves the battlefield otherwise the game won't see that there are any triggers that need to be accounted for.
That's what I'm getting at - it's a zone leaving trigger and not a zone entering trigger, like "when... enters the battlefield."
The zone leaving trigger is because of the words "put into... from play". If this same sentence read a hypothetical "enters the graveyard", it would no longer be a leaves the battlefield trigger, it would be an enters-the graveyard-zone trigger, thus allowing both creatures to be in the graveyard. I say hypothetical because I haven't seen any such zone-entering trigger for graveyards.
Neither "put into" nor "enters" has anything to do with this. Nether Traitor's ability is a leaves-the-battlefield ability (because it specifically triggers on a permanent leaving moving from the battlefield to another zone), and the ability triggers based on the game state before any the event. Since Nether Traitor is on the battlefield itself just before creatures are destroyed, it is in the wrong zone for its ability to function.
If the ability read "Enters" the graveyard, I could see that the wording would matter, because that would change the "leaves-the-battlefield" ability to a "enters-the-graveyard-zone" ability, meaning it was after the creatures were destroyed and are in the graveyard which Nether Traitor is now in as well. Perhaps you are saying the semantics don't matter because there is no such ability on cards today?
Q: A Wrath of God destroys two of my creatures, one of which is a Nether Traitor. Does the Nether Traitor trigger?
A: Nope! Abilities only work while in play unless they say otherwise. Nether Traitor references where it triggers from, so it'll only trigger from the graveyard zone.
I can understand this, but it seems counter-intuitive based on similar battlefield triggers. For instance, consider this hypothetical card's triggered ability:
Whenever another creature enters the battlefield, you may return Bouncer from the battlefield to your hand.
If a spell or effect allowed you to put both Bouncer and another creature onto the battlefield at the same time, it seems the triggered ability would be able to return Bouncer, because at the time the triggers resolve, Bouncer is already on the battlefield.
But the ruling seems to say that when Nether Traitor's triggered ability is resolving, it's not in the graveyard. Is this more because of the words "put into" instead of "enters" on Traitor's ability?
It's interesting you bring those two cards up, because although Balance is restricted, I recently have been playing decks that pack Second Sunrise specifically to combat Balance as it is commonly played in vintage, especially in multi-player groups I play with. With so many tutors we see, in certain game situations it doesn't matter if it's restricted - every player will search the library for it if possible.
For me, the decks that seek complete board dominance (with cards like Obliterate, Ghostway, Eslpeth's ultimate, etc have a weakness - even if successful, they are two mana away from a balance. Enchantments and artifacts may be safe but I've lost games due to this despite having board dominance for a turn or two, until I started including 3x Sunrise. Since then, many more games have gone my way, sometimes without a key combo since I can deal with Wrath, Armageddon, etc as they come up.
Obviously counterspells are one way to deal with this, but some of the decks just don't have U. It's also amusing to add the Sunrise mana to the pool before Balance resolves, watch everyone ditch their counters to keep lands, and I hold onto the Sunrise. Counters stay buried and we get our permanents back. Priceless!
Q: I have a Cunning Sparkmage I stole with a Vapor Snare, equipped with a Chanel limited edition Basilisk Collar. I ping my opponent's Goliath Sphinx to make it dead. My opponent responds with Relic Crush to commit property damage against my Sparkmage's designer ensemble, but I use Veteran's Reflexes to untap the Sparkmage and have him poke himself in the eye. When all's said and done, the Sparkmage and the Collar are both gone – will the Sphinx die, too?
A: It will! To determine whether or not damage was dealt by a source with deathtouch, the source's last known information is used. That's what it looked like immediately before it left the battlefield, and in this case, the Sparkmage had deathtouch. It doesn't matter that it shot itself in the face or that the artifact giving it deathtouch is gone – it had deathtouch right before it left.
I understand the ruling here, but wouldn't be surprised if a rule change affected this outcome. In general we've seen a migration towards more realistic damage calculations, where blockers can't be removed from combat and still swing for damage, damage doesn't use the stack, etc.
Krosan Grip is one possible answer to this, but still dodges the obvious game state at the time the deathly ping occurs.
In this case the self-pinging suicide mission, uncounterable if done through an ability like Diamond Valley's, has one obvious outcome - the weapon is left lying on the battlefield. To say a trigger from the grave is able to use it is non-obvious based on the board state at the time of resolution. Additions admittedly would need to be complex to deal with it properly, but wouldn't be surprised to see this case handled at some point for equipment - and possibly some fringe Aura cases.
Per this question, I don't think the answer fully addressed the question, but it did state the trigger flexibility:
Q: I have Anowon, the Ruin Sage on the battlefield, as well as Archdemon of Unx. Both require me to sacrifice either a non-Vampire creature or a non-Zombie creature at the beginning of my upkeep. Do they both get sacrificed to each other simultaneously or do I get to choose which one lives and which one gets sacrificed?
A: When numerous triggered abilities would go on the stack at the same time, the player who controls them chooses what order they go on the stack, and then they resolve one at a time. Once a creature is sacrificed to one triggered ability, it can't be sacrificed to another
Because the two cards affect different types of creatures, I believe there is some control by the player to see which creature lives based on triggered ability order. If the active player puts the Anonowon's trigger on first, followed by Archdemon's, Archdemon's trigger will force the player to either sacrifice Archdemon or Anonowon (both are non-Zombie).
Anonowon's trigger will then resolve with the Zombie token entering the battlefield, and force the player to discard either the Zombie token, or Archdemon if he is still left (both are non-Vampire).
Therefore the player can actually ensure that either Archdemon or Anonowon will survive the triggers, if they are willing to lose the token.
Unfortunately if the player chooses the opposite trigger order, they will lose both creatures, as the Zombie token isn't created until after both creatures are gone. The only time this reverse order would be better, is if the player cast Shields of Velis Vel, targeting the owner, while both triggered abilities are on the stack. This will leave the player with all 3 creatures - the original two having all creature types until EOT. The original order would have killed the Zombie token, as it entered after Velis resolved, therefore being just a plain ole non-Vampire Zombie.
I'll try to edit the original post to clean this thread up so we have some deck discussion.
I would post another thread on Vintage asking for multiplayer deck ideas (forgetting the house rules), but it seems anything related to FFA multiplayer is by nature Casual, so it probably fits here better, thanks.
- Shunt / Red Elemental Blast / Guttural Response (some control)
- Diamond Valleys and a few cheap dragons you can sack when the time is right
- Creatures with Phasing
Admittedly some cards are less useful. But for the sake of getting some ideas, assume Progenitus is the only creature with this restriction, so Tinkering out a Darksteel Colossus or Inkwell Leviathan are still perfectly acceptable.
Given that limitation, there should be plenty of decks out there that don't rely on infinite combos (2) or contain Progenitus (4). Even rule 3 is very lightly enforced because it's usually easy to argue that you have a win condition.
Hopefully you aren't saying the rules above displace 100% of the vintage multiplayer decks out there, and folks who do have similar decks here can post for discussion.
For consideration, here is a sample of one that's worked okay for me:
1 Enlightened Tutor
1 Beacon of Immortality
1 Vindicate
1 Punish Ignorance
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Serene Offering
1 Offering to Asha
1 Mana Drain
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Reverse Damage
1 Sorin Markov
2 Absorb
2 Silence
Artifacts/Enhancements
1 Indestructibility
1 Well of Lost Dreams
1 Angelic Chorus
1 Proper Burial
1 Mox Pearl
1 Sol Ring
2 Sensei's Divining Top
1 Mind's Eye
3 Sunbeam Spellbomb
3 Sanguine Bond
1 Divinity of Pride
2 Blind Hunter
3 Kitchen Finks
3 Auriok Champion
3 Kokusho, the Evening Star
3 Baneslayer Angel
4 Wall of Reverence
Lands
1 Dromar's Cavern
1 Swamp
1 Island
1 Plains
1 Library of Alexandria
1 Vesuva
2 Maze of Ith
2 Arcane Sanctum
3 Sejiri Refuge
3 Diamond Valley
4 Scrubland
4 Tundra
4 Fetid Heath
You'll notice the lack of some vintage cards as I haven't worked them in yet, and the larger size - almost 80. Some of the longer games can go 15+ turns, and chewing through 4-5 cards per turn uses up a lot of the library.
Regards,
Why are those the house rules? I didn't create them, so I can't say for sure. But within those rules we do try to play the best decks possible - everyone is aggressively playing to win, or to eliminate the biggest board threat.
Basically, I often join a group of folks that are casual vintage players. They own some of the best cards in the game, but are not the typical Turn 2-3 kill deck builders. In fact house rules prevent some of the mechanics that are typically associated with vintage multiplayer.
I often look around for deck ideas, but a lot of deck ideas out there are:
In case I'm not the only one out there participating in this kind of group, I wanted to see if other folks out there have similar groups and deck ideas they'd like to share. For reference, here are some of the house rules/patterns that are usually folowed
- Must follow DCI restricted / legal Vintage lists
- Combo mechanics that generate arbitrary numbers of something are only allowed to generate 2 of whatever base increment is per round. Infinite tokens, mana, life, damage, turns, etc all generate twice whatever their base amount would be.
- Decks must have a reasonable win condition. This is debateable, but if a deck appears to simply be play-to-annoy, it will get negative attention.
- Some spells must be hardcast (player must spend the appropriate mana to play them). I'm not going to add the whole list, but cards like Progenitus are top candidates.
Everything else is fair game. I'd appreciate some deck ideas if anyone has any. I'll soon add a couple that have moderate success for reference, but P9, orig dual lands, library, etc are all commonly played (often with proxies)Regards
Here's a few of the cards that I find work really well with this card, and at the same time have merit on their own in case someone packs Krosan Grip to deal with the bond.
- Kokusho, the Evening Star & Diamond Valley (ridiculously good in multiplayer)
- Beacon of Immortality
- Sunbeam Spellbomb
- Kitchen Finks (also goes well with Diamond Valley)
- Baneslayer Angel (anything with lifelink, but a first strike flyer for free is just awesome)
- Wall of Reverence
- Sorin Markov
- Cruel Ultimatum
- Absorb or Punish Ignorance
The fact that P9 prices even exist is a mark of success in this game. From 2 cents to 2 thousand dollars, it has a range that is attractive to many geographical and socio-economic targets, with foreign languages to back it up. This also means it ranges well with age – few games last and scale from childhood to retirement but Magic has that capability. The tiered formats further make this attractive because standard players don’t have to own P9; they can play hard and earn 40K in a single tournament with cards that are a year old.
I don’t think anyone would disagree that the price of all cards (P9 included) would drop if Hasbro or WotC suddenly went out of business and no one picked the franchise up. We should consider ourselves lucky if these prices maintain or inflate in value for the next 20 years, because that means the game is still a success. Our exit from the hobby can provide money to our pockets or a valuable hand-off to the next generation. Anyone that invested in Magic over the last 17 years would argue that collectibles can not only be a good investment, but you can have fun while you’re collecting. Let’s see a stamp collector match that.
For clarification, this thread seems to focus around the reprinting of cards, and the inclusion in formats they previously weren’t in. Those are two separate topics. We should dismiss the second topic in this thread as WotC can and has (Ex Lightning Bolt in M10) brought cards back as they see fit in the new storyline. Even older cards without reprinting have gone in and out of Vintage/Legacy and Legal/Restricted status. The exception here is formats which necessitate a reprint. So we get to the real discussion - the most expensive and powerful cards among the 572 unique listed on the Reserved List.
Some brought up rarity as a danger to this list as the cards will eventually get destroyed or lost. However, the increasing values in these cards beget an increasing chance they will be well protected for many years to come by those who own them. There are plenty of equally rare cards in Beta that can be had for 1/100th the price of a Lotus, more likely to be re-sleeved and abused, but we aren’t as worried about them (sorry Lich!)
The Reserved List was created from a commitment - made to individual owners and significant dealers / retailers that acquire and hold larger inventories of cards. We as purchasers may be upset with WotC for reprinting a card we invested in, but think about a shop with 50-100K worth of P9. So WotC did what they could in 2002 to produce a firm stance on some of the most expensive cards – and they’ve honored it for 8 years now. That’s a good thing.
Many have argued about WotC getting sued, lack of care for this “gentlemen’s agreement”, etc, but based on market value clearly we have a trust that this will be honored. Both that the cards on this list will not be reprinted, and cards that are equally or more powerful will not be created. WotC goes as far as to say the same cost, abilities, text, types, sub-types, and power/toughness will not be reprinted. But there is an implicit, unstated trust in that they won’t for instance create a Platinum-Lotus that taps for 4. We trust them to do the right thing with the game, and in many ways extends way off this list. We trust Baneslayer Angel or her better won’t show up as a common in M11. If she did, million-a playset owner today would drop their commitment to chasing valuable cards. They’ve carefully introduced powerful mechanics that beat Reserved-list cards (example Amulet of Vigor + Tri-Tap-Lands), but still respect the bar set in ‘93.
The argument of collectors and vintage players adding no value due to secondary markets is significantly flawed. First, I’ve seen many sales of older cards funding newer booster packs or rares. Some folks just don’t need that old playset of Bazaar’s – they’ve grown tired of the mechanic and move onto Tarmogoyf or something else fun. Goyf doesn’t have a reprint limitation yet has increased in value tremendously despite a high print number and exit from standard. Second, casual vintage players like myself enjoy the newest releases as much as anyone else, and buy boosters, special editions, and singles from shops. Most of these directly benefit WotC, but the secondary single market should also be noted. Many shops open booster boxes or buy complete sets just to sell cards individually. A purchase of these cards, or older cards from another trade-in, in cyclical fashion has driven demand for new sets. As an owner of a few dual lands, I was thrilled to see M10’s Drowned Catacomb which plays nice with basics, duals, and the Ravnica shock set. These types of interactions are what make the whole space exciting to keep up with. WotC showed some involvement here in random Zendikar booster vintage cards, further acknowledging the existence and demand for this format.
If folks have an issue about other cards like FoW being too expensive, this isn’t the thread for that – WotC could choose to reprint them if they fit a storyline, or they just wanted to do a special “FTV: Counters” deck. Go ahead and throw in Mana Drain – as a Legend’s uncommon it’s not on the Reserved List either. But WotC has shown they respect value in these sets, through limited production and higher retail price (ex. FTV: Exiled).
A proposal I could agree with is periodic FTV:Vintage Proxies (different backs) done in smaller productions between sets, or as random inserts in boosters. As proxies, they wouldn’t be sanctioned for play any more than our own sharpie’d lands were, but we’d get to see great new artwork from our favorite artists. They would generate interest in the format, perhaps more un-sanctioned 10 or 15 proxy tournaments, and slowly give our casual nights that 8th edition art for the whole deck. That’s something new and vintage collectors would probably enjoy, and is allowed under the Special-Purpose section of the Reprint Policy.
For some it may be a bit too sacred an area to mess with, but for WotC, I think it’s just good business right now not to do it – they want to encourage competitive standard play with real cards. Like some Foil Jace the Mind Sculptor[/QUOTE]’s.
Regards
Yup - that's the one that clarifies it for me. Thanks.
That's what I'm getting at - it's a zone leaving trigger and not a zone entering trigger, like "when... enters the battlefield."
The zone leaving trigger is because of the words "put into... from play". If this same sentence read a hypothetical "enters the graveyard", it would no longer be a leaves the battlefield trigger, it would be an enters-the graveyard-zone trigger, thus allowing both creatures to be in the graveyard. I say hypothetical because I haven't seen any such zone-entering trigger for graveyards.
-Thanks for the responses
If the ability read "Enters" the graveyard, I could see that the wording would matter, because that would change the "leaves-the-battlefield" ability to a "enters-the-graveyard-zone" ability, meaning it was after the creatures were destroyed and are in the graveyard which Nether Traitor is now in as well. Perhaps you are saying the semantics don't matter because there is no such ability on cards today?
I can understand this, but it seems counter-intuitive based on similar battlefield triggers. For instance, consider this hypothetical card's triggered ability:
If a spell or effect allowed you to put both Bouncer and another creature onto the battlefield at the same time, it seems the triggered ability would be able to return Bouncer, because at the time the triggers resolve, Bouncer is already on the battlefield.
But the ruling seems to say that when Nether Traitor's triggered ability is resolving, it's not in the graveyard. Is this more because of the words "put into" instead of "enters" on Traitor's ability?
For me, the decks that seek complete board dominance (with cards like Obliterate, Ghostway, Eslpeth's ultimate, etc have a weakness - even if successful, they are two mana away from a balance. Enchantments and artifacts may be safe but I've lost games due to this despite having board dominance for a turn or two, until I started including 3x Sunrise. Since then, many more games have gone my way, sometimes without a key combo since I can deal with Wrath, Armageddon, etc as they come up.
Obviously counterspells are one way to deal with this, but some of the decks just don't have U. It's also amusing to add the Sunrise mana to the pool before Balance resolves, watch everyone ditch their counters to keep lands, and I hold onto the Sunrise. Counters stay buried and we get our permanents back. Priceless!
I understand the ruling here, but wouldn't be surprised if a rule change affected this outcome. In general we've seen a migration towards more realistic damage calculations, where blockers can't be removed from combat and still swing for damage, damage doesn't use the stack, etc.
Krosan Grip is one possible answer to this, but still dodges the obvious game state at the time the deathly ping occurs.
In this case the self-pinging suicide mission, uncounterable if done through an ability like Diamond Valley's, has one obvious outcome - the weapon is left lying on the battlefield. To say a trigger from the grave is able to use it is non-obvious based on the board state at the time of resolution. Additions admittedly would need to be complex to deal with it properly, but wouldn't be surprised to see this case handled at some point for equipment - and possibly some fringe Aura cases.
Because the two cards affect different types of creatures, I believe there is some control by the player to see which creature lives based on triggered ability order. If the active player puts the Anonowon's trigger on first, followed by Archdemon's, Archdemon's trigger will force the player to either sacrifice Archdemon or Anonowon (both are non-Zombie).
Anonowon's trigger will then resolve with the Zombie token entering the battlefield, and force the player to discard either the Zombie token, or Archdemon if he is still left (both are non-Vampire).
Therefore the player can actually ensure that either Archdemon or Anonowon will survive the triggers, if they are willing to lose the token.
Unfortunately if the player chooses the opposite trigger order, they will lose both creatures, as the Zombie token isn't created until after both creatures are gone. The only time this reverse order would be better, is if the player cast Shields of Velis Vel, targeting the owner, while both triggered abilities are on the stack. This will leave the player with all 3 creatures - the original two having all creature types until EOT. The original order would have killed the Zombie token, as it entered after Velis resolved, therefore being just a plain ole non-Vampire Zombie.
Hope that makes sense.
Regards,
Sean