Horrible hand, mull. Too much land and too poor bash.
I would likely do berserker t2 though. T3 shrine + burn is better imo.
Hold on, that hand isn't that bad. You have a great turn 1 and 2 play plus backup if your original plan fails. You have all of the land you will ever need to get through the game, which looks kind of lame in your starting hand admittedly, but that's no reason to throw it away. Every deck needs enough mana to cast its spells and RDW is no exception. Not to mention that RDW doesn't really have any good ways to generate card advantage, so you need all of the cards you can get. There aren't many combinations of six cards that will be perform noticeably better than these seven. You don't want to mull into a 2-land hand with Shrine of Burning Rage only to draw your third land the turn after your Shrine is Oblivion Ringed or destroyed.
Anyway, as far as the best turn 2 play, I would almost always play Stormblood Berserker in this case. Against UB Control and maybe Wolf Run depending on what they played first turn, I would play the Shrine but generally the Berserker is the best play. It is almost a guaranteed three damage for the next two or three turns. It will more than make up for the counters you don't get on the Shrine. It is really important to have pressure on the early turns and Berserker provides a lot more pressure than Shrine.
Thanks for the feedback. Looking back, I definitely should have taken the Auramancer since most of white's removal seems to be auras, not to mention Arachnus Web. Overall, I was very happy with the deck although I think I got a little lucky that no one else was deep in white or green. As for Warhorse, I'm really not a fan of its casting cost. I absolutely hate the card.
Ok, I've done a few drafts on MODO so far, figured I should start getting some criticism on them. This draft felt pretty good but the first pack gave me trouble with which colors to go with. White felt really open right away along with blue and green, but green seemed more open in the end, especially in pack 2. It is really difficult to pick up on green signals in M12 since many of its creatures are on a very similar power level for the mana cost.
Didn't really want to run Gladecover Scouts since I didn't pick up a lot of auras but I think I should have because they seem like a beating against any bloodthirst deck.
instead of asking proof of anything lets prove your statements yourself...
show us a zoo list without goyf nacatl and knight that can beat the original list consistently.
U said old list were made with other creatures...but there is a reason if its an OLD list and there is a new stroger one..
And unfortunately we have to deal with new strong decks.....not surpassed lists.
not to talk about how zoo legacy players "adapted" their skills in the MM era....
Maybe I don't read as well as I think I do, but i-never-smile didn't mention anything regarding Zoo. Not once in that entire post. Please, try to make some sense with your arguments and form them logically instead of making completely unfounded accusations. Fabricating stories does neither side any good in this debate.
I think you guys are really undervaluing Snapcaster Mage here. Now, I'm going to declare it as the end-all, be-all, but Snapcaster is actual card advantage. In fact, I think he is the most beneficial against aggro, something a lot of Teachings decks have a problem with.
If you have to turn 1 Path to Exile something or turn 2 Doom Blade, Snapcaster is exactly the card I want to see. Not only do you get to reuse that removal spell, you get a 2/1 body that can block. Is this a gamebreaking play? No, of course not. Is it actual card advantage? Yes, you've played 3 spells but are down only 2 cards. Against Zoo, that 2/1 can either block or eat some burn, saving part of your life total either way. My favorite thing about Snapcaster, though, is that he slows aggro after a Damnation or another board wipe, like to a snail's pace. If you've played any removal spell before clearing the board, you can not only get rid of any creature your opponent plays post-board wipe, but you again get that body. That is a huge road block. If that isn't good enough to help your aggro match up, what is?
I think that most players do want Modern to be new and different. But then again, many of those same players have these hidden, Legacy-informed biases about what makes a card too powerful, a deck too dominant, an archetype unplayable, and a format healthy or unhealthy. Modern is a new format with its own rules and ideas. While there is going to be some format overlap (Lightning Bolt is a good burn spell, Path to Exile is aggro's removal of choice, Fetchland/Shockland synergy is awesome, etc.), there is also going to be a lot of dissonance.
-ktkenshinx-
No, that's exactly what I was getting at. You did a great job on elaborating what I may not have stated clearly enough. I think that we're both on the same page in that Modern needs to be different from Legacy. The word "eternal" brings up all sorts of ideas from Legacy, which has arguably been the only relevant eternal format since its creation. Once these preconceptions from Legacy are removed from everyone's mindset, I think that a lot more people will accept Modern for what it is instead of accidentally or even purposefully comparing it to Legacy.
I think a lot of people that are upset over the bannings would be less angry about them if they took the time to look at it from a different perspective. Right now, most people see Wizards as the parent who doesn't let the kid figure out anything for himself. Wizards is constricting the kid's creativity and not giving him any room to breathe. People say that Wizards needs to let the meta settle so players can adjust.
Now, look at it from this angle: there is no meta. So many people here hear eternal format and they instantly think of Legacy where there is an established meta and players are able to adjust to this meta and answer problem decks with a few tweaks of their own. This is the main problem. Modern, while an eternal format, does NOT have an established meta. It doesn't even have an uncharted meta. There is literally no meta to speak of. Modern is practically still in the womb. It is unreasonable to expect Modern to come into the world with a tangible meta that players can react to. Once Wizards has done what they want with the format then and only then can a meta even begin to form.
Wizards created this format with a specific vision (which is not the players' vision, more on this in a bit) and they really want Modern to have its own identity. In order to do this, Wizards needs to sculpt the format to a point where it looks different from what already exists. This process will take time. After this a meta can begin to develop. Players who say that they don't want to invest in this format because Wizards is banning everything good don't seem to understand that Wizards is not banning the best decks. Wizards is banning decks that create uncanny resemblances to other formats. Although, they are right to decide against investing in Modern at this moment. You absolutely should not invest heavily in a brand new format since you'll only get burned as the format is molded. It is wise to wait until the format is developed. This is not to say that you shouldn't support Modern, though. Supporting Modern is a great idea if you want an eternal format that is different than Legacy and has a cheaper cost of entry.
Wizards' created this format because players wanted a more accessible eternal format. As of right now, they are on the right track to achieving this goal. However, Wizards did not create Modern to be "Legacy-lite" or just a cheaper Legacy. Just as Legacy is different from Vintage, Modern will be different from Legacy, in that it won't have quite as many broken interactions and swingy plays. This is not to say that Modern will be boring but if you're looking for Legacy-type plays, you need to go to Legacy. Unfortunately, Wizards cannot make a format that will please everyone.
I think money is a major thing there but curious why you didn't touch on the fact that the team pretty much doesn't have to pay for their cards, therefore it's difficult for them to care about that absurd prices on the secondary market.
He didn't say anything about it because Wizards usually doesn't, and probably rightfully so, care about the secondary market. Their job is to design cards. When they design good cards that a lot of people want to use in their competitive and casual decks, the secondary market will unfortunately put a high price on that card. What can Wizards do about that? Design cards that no one wants? The one influence Wizards has on the secondary market is with reprints. Sure, they can throw a few spendy reprints into a set. It might not be a bad idea for them since that set will probably sell really well because of it. But those reprints greatly restrict what new cards can be designed. Sets are designed with a lot of formats in mind, and including all of the pricey cards currently on the market just to attempt to reduce their price is going to negatively affect each of those formats.
Landfall did not have me or my opponent going between a second sideboard to reference cards.
Equipment did not dictate how I have to sleeve my deck or what constitutes a marked card.
Neither required official proxy cards to be issues.
None forced players to write on their cards with a sharpie.
None led to a card that could conceivable be ambiguous as to what it is.
None forced people to now have to hide their draft piles or give otu free information.
None forced me to flip cards in my hand during a draft.
None made me have to take cards out of sleeves mid game, not even morph.
If you're playing at a competitive level and you need to reference what double-sided cards do, you won't do well anyway. If you're playing casually, it's not a big deal.
Again, competitively, decks are already sleeved. People not trying to cheat will usually have cleary marked cards. Purposefully marking your card ambiguously is considered cheating. It is very easy to make sure your cards are marked clearly. This is a non-issue. Casually, it also doesn't matter. If you're playing with cheaters, maybe you should look for a new playgroup.
You got me with the proxy one, but that won't meaningfully affect how you play the game. You still play the card normally with it's casting cost or by putting it into with another card like Aether Vial or Zombify. The only difference is that while in an unsleeved deck or one with clear sleeves, you should use the proxy. Not a big inconvenience.
Again you got me with marking cards with a Sharpie, but the checklist cards were created for exactly that purpose and Wizards has stated that they will be readily available. Still not an issue.
Landfall and equipment don't lead to Ambiguousness, but morph, flip, and certainly others have led to it. Morph and flip may not have been the most popular, but they got the job done.
You're right, draft will be a little different, but not to the point where it is going to be completely warped or any one player will be able to gather a signicant advantage.
Transform is not making you orient any cards in your hand in a draft any differently, either. Normal drafting will normally be enough to hide the double-sided card.
Transform also does not force you to take any cards out of a sleeve midgame.
Please, everybody, quit making up problems and wait until you actually play with these cards before coming to conclusions. Jumping to conclusions before gathing data is almost never a good idea.
I was really really hoping day night was some global effect that some creatures or cards get bonuses from like being cheaper or tougher or something. Maybe a few would transfprm but a few woupd work differently. Players might struggle for control over the time of day. You know, control the night.
Pretty disappointed
That's the thing, this mechanic isn't a day/night mechanic. It's called transform. Competely different thing than day/night. As of right now, day/night does not exist in Magic. The only thing that is day/night about it is the sun and moon symbols used to easily tell if the card is transformed or not.
One consolation, transform conveniently works as a global day/night mechanic for werewolves. In fact, with them, people will do exactly what you suggest, struggling for control over the time of day.
In response to UNBAN SHAHRAZAD,
You are correct, I am making too many assumptions about you and everyone is entitled to voice their opinion. But, I am getting a little angry over the fact that so many players on this forum are making baseless assumptions about something they know very little about. Nobody except Wizards has played with transform cards yet. All we know is that these cards are double-sided and that Wizards has created efficient solutions to a lot of the foreseeable problems. Of course Wizards is going to try to push the envelope. If they didn't, we'd be playing with the same mechanics over and over again. Pushing the envelope keeps the game new and exciting for people like us who have been playing for years. Now, pushing the envelope is not the same as going for "shock value," as many people think is happening with transform. Yes, they wanted to stir the pot a little bit, but Wizards went with double-sided cards because they think there is real design space to be used. They're not going to throw out a new mechanic to just shock people. That kind of mechanic can't be used again, unlike transform, which opens up a huge realm of possibilities. You can now have two cards on one! That's huge for design! This can be used, sparingly mind you, for years down the road. Wizards took a risk with double-sided cards because they wanted the choice of not having to dumb down and create completely different cards than what they wanted. Why create a brand new card that doesn't do what you want when you can create a new mechanic that let's you create the cards you want and maybe have design space for years to come?
As far as Wizards "thinking of everything," I think that they have covered all of the logistical problems. Those are much easier to find and fix than interactions between hundreds of cards. Using checklists, taking cards out of sleeves, or finding them in a deckbox is much less of a hassle than you're making it out to be. Do you use the actual token cards provided in booster packs when you use those token producers in a deck? If so, then you should understand that this isn't a problem. If not, I would suggest playing a couple of games using them and digging them out. You'll quickly learn that it isn't a big deal. This change isn't as big of a deal as you make it out to be. Less than 8 percent of the cards in the set are double-sided. Magic still has its identifiable features, including the card backs. Sure, they're mandating the use of official proxies and/or sleeves, but sleeves are pretty much mandated for any high level play like a PTQ anyway. Even most FMNers, at my store anyway, use sleeves already. This will only really affect the kitchen table crowd, and marginally at that. They're still provided with proxies, they can use different ones if they want since it's casual, or they can even use the double-sided card. That's the beauty of casual.
If the designers were smart they could have done it all on one card face. I know plenty of graphic designers who would have found a way to make the card without making it double faced. So what if the cards have ice cauldron sized text, at least they play like the game has always played.
Last time I checked, you still have to cast transform cards just like any other card. They change the way the game is played about as much as landfall or equipment. Having text in a size .1 font isn't a good solution to fitting more text onto a card, by the way. There's plenty of people that can hardly read the cards as it is.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not totally against Transform. It just seems clunky and unnecessary. I still think they could have fit the transform cards into the existing flip cards or split cards. It may have required dumbing them down a little, but is having a one or two extra lines of text really worth changing things so much? As for trusting Wizards, well, I think that ship sailed a long time ago. One has to earn trust and after printing obviously broken cards, failing to do enough playtesting on others, and all around trying to mess with the foundation of the game, I'm not really ready to trust Wizards at the moment.
You understand that Wizards cannot possibly test every single possible interaction between every single card before the set is sent to the printers, right? Even if R&D was 10 times as big and they spent 10 times as long designing sets, things can and will slip through. That's the amazing thing about Magic is that even after a format is put under the microscope with all of the big name tournaments and Magic Online that we have today, we can still discover new interactions until and after a new set is introduced.
Taking a line or two off of Mayor of Avabruck is not dumbing it down, it is taking away at least one completely relevant ability. If you take away the lord bonus, the human side of the werewolf cards are much less threatening. Take away the token ability of the transformed side, he's just a werewolf lord. Exciting, sure, but not as exciting as a lord makes guys that then get pumped by the same lord. Not to mention how it would interact with the rest of the set. It would be a completely different card without one of its abilities.
Also, how do you figure that they are messing with the foundation of the game? The two largest changes to the game were the rules changes of 4th Ed. and M10 (it's possible that I missed the correct timeline of the actual rules changes, but I think you will understand what I'm getting at). No single set in recent history, probably the history of the game, has impacted the game as much as those rules changes. Sure, they added a card type in Lorwyn and Mythic rarity in M10. This hardly touches the foundation of the game. Granted, Planeswalkers have added a new dymanic, but the general goal of the game is still to reduce your opponent's life to 0 or deck them. How is using the back of the card going to change the foundation of the game? Oh, it requires you to use proxies. So in reality, this change will impact how people play the game as much as Mythic rarity.
If you have had little to no faith in Wizards and R&D to make a good game for a while now, why even support them at all? It sounds like you wait for set after set, expecting Wizards to ruin it somehow, and then you find the one flaw and it ruins the whole experience for you. But apparently there's something appealing about the game, otherwise you wouldn't be playing it 10 years later. Maybe Wizards is actually creating a good game. Maybe they actually know what they're doing. If you think they're doing such a horrible job, why are you even playing?
And if there's too much text to fit in one text box, the card is too complex to be printed. As Maro has said, the biggest long-term threat to MTG is complexity creep and restrictions breed creativity.
That is definitely not the case. More text does not always equal more complex. Are the Ravnica Guildmages any more complex than creatures with only one activated ability? Or an activated ability that requires tapping the creature as a cost? No.
Also, using the back of the card to allow a whole other card to exist is pretty creative, you have to admit. Especially since that card can still kind of have a normal back (taking the checklist cards into account).
It's not that it's so much more complex than some of the other abilities, it's just that there are ways to have done this (split cards, flip cards) without having to go to such an extreme. I realize they were trying to create excitement, but speaking as a 10 year veteran of the game, this just goes too far imo, especially when there were templates that already exist that do basically the same thing. The back of the card just seems like a cornerstone to the game to me; one you don't touch even if you're trying to push the envelope.
Flip and/or split cards would not work nearly as well. For one, some cards like Mayor of Avabruck have too much text for those to be feasible. Don't forget about the new Garruk, who is also a transform card. A planeswalker using the transform mechanic would not have anywhere near enough space on a single card for all of the text and loyalty increments.
The one point that people make that I understand is that you shouldn't mess with the back of the card in a TCG, but Wizards has taken care of this problem very well. They are taking great measures to make sure that the checklist cards will be readily available to everybody. One way of looking at this situation that might make you feel a little better is thinking of the checklist card as the actual card that, when you cast it, creates a token of the marked card. Now obviously the transform card is the real card while the checklist is just a proxy, but it solves the issues of using the back of the card for more space very well. I've only been playing the game for 8 years, but I want to see it keep succeeding as much as you do. I'm sure that Wizards and R&D feel the same way and wouldn't take a risk like this if they weren't sure that it would pay off. I understand that Wizard does indeed make mistakes, but that doesn't mean you should throw all of your faith in them to the wind.
There are two transform conditions, yes. The others can just use the word flip, the werewolf transforms are specific.
So yeah, I think that's more reasonable than printing Official Proxies, changing the rules regarding information in a draft, pulling cards out of sleeves, etc.
We've seen three transform conditions so far, actually. The bat/vampire has one, the test subject has another, and the werewolf has a third. Considering that we don't know if there are more ways to transform cards (which there certainly could be), keywords for each one will get very, very cumbersome.
Hold on, that hand isn't that bad. You have a great turn 1 and 2 play plus backup if your original plan fails. You have all of the land you will ever need to get through the game, which looks kind of lame in your starting hand admittedly, but that's no reason to throw it away. Every deck needs enough mana to cast its spells and RDW is no exception. Not to mention that RDW doesn't really have any good ways to generate card advantage, so you need all of the cards you can get. There aren't many combinations of six cards that will be perform noticeably better than these seven. You don't want to mull into a 2-land hand with Shrine of Burning Rage only to draw your third land the turn after your Shrine is Oblivion Ringed or destroyed.
Anyway, as far as the best turn 2 play, I would almost always play Stormblood Berserker in this case. Against UB Control and maybe Wolf Run depending on what they played first turn, I would play the Shrine but generally the Berserker is the best play. It is almost a guaranteed three damage for the next two or three turns. It will more than make up for the counters you don't get on the Shrine. It is really important to have pressure on the early turns and Berserker provides a lot more pressure than Shrine.
Shock
Stampeding Rhino
Disentomb
Forest
Coral Merfolk
Slaughter Cry
--> Day of Judgment
Demystify
Æther Adept
Brindle Boar
Onyx Mage
Timely Reinforcements
Drifting Shade
Azure Mage (FOIL)
Dragon's Claw
Pack 1 pick 2:
--> Stormfront Pegasus
Goblin Chieftain
Vastwood Gorger
Bloodrage Vampire
Chasm Drake
Duskhunter Bat
Griffin Rider
Greatsword
Titanic Growth
Armored Warhorse
Goblin Fireslinger
Flight
Plains
Flashfreeze
Pack 1 pick 3:
Demystify
Æther Adept
Roc Egg
--> Assault Griffin
Merfolk Mesmerist
Blood Ogre
Duskhunter Bat
Azure Mage
Stave Off
Hideous Visage
Taste of Blood
Swamp
Demon's Horn
Pack 1 pick 4:
Diabolic Tutor
Rites of Flourishing
--> Divination
Angel's Mercy
Lifelink
Coral Merfolk
Siege Mastodon
Goblin Arsonist
Lightning Elemental
Garruk's Companion
Goblin Grenade
Forest
Pack 1 pick 5:
Negate
Lightning Elemental
Manic Vandal
Stonehorn Dignitary
Buried Ruin
Guardians' Pledge
Distress
--> Peregrine Griffin
Plains
Naturalize
Flashfreeze
Pack 1 pick 6:
Turn to Frog
--> Stormfront Pegasus
Goblin Arsonist
Greater Basilisk
Stonehorn Dignitary
Duskhunter Bat
Arachnus Web
Skywinder Drake
Distress
Island
Pack 1 pick 7:
Lava Axe
Angel's Mercy
Deathmark
Brink of Disaster
Garruk's Companion
--> Phantasmal Dragon
Merfolk Mesmerist
Stave Off
Mountain
Pack 1 pick 8:
Lava Axe
Swamp
Stampeding Rhino
Rootbound Crag
Lurking Crocodile
Divine Favor
--> Swiftfoot Boots
Fog
Pack 1 pick 9:
Stampeding Rhino
Disentomb
Forest
Slaughter Cry
--> Demystify
Brindle Boar
Dragon's Claw
Pack 1 pick 10:
Vastwood Gorger
--> Titanic Growth
Armored Warhorse
Flight
Plains
Flashfreeze
Pack 1 pick 11:
--> Demystify
Hideous Visage
Taste of Blood
Swamp
Demon's Horn
Pack 1 pick 12:
Rites of Flourishing
Angel's Mercy
--> Lifelink
Forest
Pack 1 pick 13:
Buried Ruin
Plains
--> Naturalize
Pack 1 pick 14:
--> Greater Basilisk
Island
Pack 1 pick 15:
--> Mountain
------ M12 ------
Pack 2 pick 1:
Gravedigger
Goblin Piker (FOIL)
--> Oblivion Ring
Griffin Sentinel
Lifelink
Plains
Lightning Elemental
Garruk's Companion
Plummet
Overrun
Stormblood Berserker
Bonebreaker Giant
Sorin's Thirst
Sorin's Vengeance
Naturalize
Pack 2 pick 2:
Rampant Growth
Mind Rot
Swamp
Cancel
Fiery Hellhound
Ponder
Redirect
Mighty Leap
Tormented Soul
Spirit Mantle
Carnage Wurm
Griffin Rider
--> Arachnus Web
Titanic Growth
Pack 2 pick 3:
Goblin Piker
Turn to Frog
Zombie Goliath
Forest
Slaughter Cry
Harbor Serpent
Elixir of Immortality
Auramancer
--> Gladecover Scout
Merfolk Mesmerist
Doubling Chant
Phantasmal Bear
Pride Guardian
Pack 2 pick 4:
Firebreathing
Fling
Giant Spider
Thran Golem
--> Sacred Wolf
Drifting Shade
Circle of Flame
Armored Warhorse
Rusted Sentinel
Flight
Wring Flesh
Swamp
Pack 2 pick 5:
Goblin Piker
Reclaim
Ice Cage
Angel's Mercy
Jace's Erasure
Mana Leak
--> Garruk's Companion
Master Thief
Forest
Kraken's Eye
Wurm's Tooth
Pack 2 pick 6:
--> Runeclaw Bear
Fiery Hellhound
Siege Mastodon
Combust
Trollhide
Distress
Flight
Mountain
Lure
Llanowar Elves
Pack 2 pick 7:
Lava Axe
--> Stampeding Rhino
Forest
Demystify
Drifting Shade
Divine Favor
Frost Breath
Scrambleverse
Fog
Pack 2 pick 8:
Swamp
Celestial Purge
Dragonskull Summit
--> Sacred Wolf
Lurking Crocodile
Carnage Wurm
Guardians' Pledge
Llanowar Elves
Pack 2 pick 9:
Goblin Piker (FOIL)
Lifelink
Plains
Lightning Elemental
--> Garruk's Companion
Bonebreaker Giant
Naturalize
Pack 2 pick 10:
--> Rampant Growth
Mind Rot
Swamp
Cancel
Mighty Leap
Titanic Growth
Pack 2 pick 11:
Forest
Harbor Serpent
Merfolk Mesmerist
Doubling Chant
--> Pride Guardian
Pack 2 pick 12:
Firebreathing
Circle of Flame
--> Flight
Swamp
Pack 2 pick 13:
--> Angel's Mercy
Forest
Wurm's Tooth
Pack 2 pick 14:
--> Flight
Mountain
Pack 2 pick 15:
--> Forest
------ M12 ------
Pack 3 pick 1:
Firebreathing
Fling
Negate
Bountiful Harvest
Mana Leak
Swamp
Lurking Crocodile
Scepter of Empires
--> Arachnus Spinner (FOIL)
Goblin Fireslinger
Sengir Vampire
Devouring Swarm
Sorin's Thirst
Smallpox
Call to the Grave
Pack 3 pick 2:
--> Pacifism
Incinerate
Fling
Mind Rot
Negate
Bountiful Harvest
Goblin Chieftain
Stingerfling Spider
Lurking Crocodile
Griffin Rider
Sengir Vampire
Devouring Swarm
Mountain
Child of Night
Pack 3 pick 3:
Firebreathing
--> Giant Spider
Ice Cage
Angel's Mercy
Deathmark
Goblin Tunneler
Harbor Serpent
Mana Leak
Arbalest Elite
Gladecover Scout
Drifting Shade
Throne of Empires
Mountain
Pack 3 pick 4:
Warpath Ghoul
--> Pacifism
Cudgel Troll
Greater Basilisk
Manic Vandal
Manalith
Scepter of Empires
Alabaster Mage
Guardians' Pledge
Skywinder Drake
Swamp
Llanowar Elves
Pack 3 pick 5:
Island
Cancel
--> Cudgel Troll
Drowned Catacomb
Lifelink
Slaughter Cry
Assault Griffin
Auramancer
Goblin Bangchuckers
Bonebreaker Giant
Naturalize
Pack 3 pick 6:
Firebreathing
Elite Vanguard
Giant Spider
--> Stormfront Pegasus
Act of Treason
Mana Leak
Mighty Leap
Swamp
Stonehorn Dignitary
Distress
Pack 3 pick 7:
Cancel
--> Stampeding Rhino
Divination
Vastwood Gorger
Phantasmal Bear
Tectonic Rift
Quicksilver Amulet
Plains
Wurm's Tooth
Pack 3 pick 8:
Mind Rot
Negate
Runeclaw Bear
Coral Merfolk
Autumn's Veil
--> Trollhide
Swamp
Demon's Horn
Pack 3 pick 9:
Firebreathing
Fling
Bountiful Harvest
Swamp
--> Lurking Crocodile
Scepter of Empires
Smallpox
Pack 3 pick 10:
Fling
Mind Rot
Negate
Bountiful Harvest
--> Lurking Crocodile
Mountain
Pack 3 pick 11:
Firebreathing
Angel's Mercy
Harbor Serpent
--> Gladecover Scout
Mountain
Pack 3 pick 12:
--> Greater Basilisk
Manic Vandal
Guardians' Pledge
Swamp
Pack 3 pick 13:
Island
Lifelink
--> Naturalize
Pack 3 pick 14:
--> Firebreathing
Swamp
Pack 3 pick 15:
--> Plains
Here's the deck:
2 Garruk's Companion
1 Runeclaw Bear
2 Sacred Wolf
1 Assualt Griffin
1 Giant Spider
1 Crudgel Troll
2 Greater Basilisk
1 Peregrine Griffin
1 Arachnus Spinner
2 Pacifism
1 Titanic Growth
1 Rampant Growth
1 Oblivion Ring
1 Arachnus Web
1 Trollhide
1 Day of Judgment
9 Forest
8 Plains
Didn't really want to run Gladecover Scouts since I didn't pick up a lot of auras but I think I should have because they seem like a beating against any bloodthirst deck.
Maybe I don't read as well as I think I do, but i-never-smile didn't mention anything regarding Zoo. Not once in that entire post. Please, try to make some sense with your arguments and form them logically instead of making completely unfounded accusations. Fabricating stories does neither side any good in this debate.
If you have to turn 1 Path to Exile something or turn 2 Doom Blade, Snapcaster is exactly the card I want to see. Not only do you get to reuse that removal spell, you get a 2/1 body that can block. Is this a gamebreaking play? No, of course not. Is it actual card advantage? Yes, you've played 3 spells but are down only 2 cards. Against Zoo, that 2/1 can either block or eat some burn, saving part of your life total either way. My favorite thing about Snapcaster, though, is that he slows aggro after a Damnation or another board wipe, like to a snail's pace. If you've played any removal spell before clearing the board, you can not only get rid of any creature your opponent plays post-board wipe, but you again get that body. That is a huge road block. If that isn't good enough to help your aggro match up, what is?
No, that's exactly what I was getting at. You did a great job on elaborating what I may not have stated clearly enough. I think that we're both on the same page in that Modern needs to be different from Legacy. The word "eternal" brings up all sorts of ideas from Legacy, which has arguably been the only relevant eternal format since its creation. Once these preconceptions from Legacy are removed from everyone's mindset, I think that a lot more people will accept Modern for what it is instead of accidentally or even purposefully comparing it to Legacy.
Now, look at it from this angle: there is no meta. So many people here hear eternal format and they instantly think of Legacy where there is an established meta and players are able to adjust to this meta and answer problem decks with a few tweaks of their own. This is the main problem. Modern, while an eternal format, does NOT have an established meta. It doesn't even have an uncharted meta. There is literally no meta to speak of. Modern is practically still in the womb. It is unreasonable to expect Modern to come into the world with a tangible meta that players can react to. Once Wizards has done what they want with the format then and only then can a meta even begin to form.
Wizards created this format with a specific vision (which is not the players' vision, more on this in a bit) and they really want Modern to have its own identity. In order to do this, Wizards needs to sculpt the format to a point where it looks different from what already exists. This process will take time. After this a meta can begin to develop. Players who say that they don't want to invest in this format because Wizards is banning everything good don't seem to understand that Wizards is not banning the best decks. Wizards is banning decks that create uncanny resemblances to other formats. Although, they are right to decide against investing in Modern at this moment. You absolutely should not invest heavily in a brand new format since you'll only get burned as the format is molded. It is wise to wait until the format is developed. This is not to say that you shouldn't support Modern, though. Supporting Modern is a great idea if you want an eternal format that is different than Legacy and has a cheaper cost of entry.
Wizards' created this format because players wanted a more accessible eternal format. As of right now, they are on the right track to achieving this goal. However, Wizards did not create Modern to be "Legacy-lite" or just a cheaper Legacy. Just as Legacy is different from Vintage, Modern will be different from Legacy, in that it won't have quite as many broken interactions and swingy plays. This is not to say that Modern will be boring but if you're looking for Legacy-type plays, you need to go to Legacy. Unfortunately, Wizards cannot make a format that will please everyone.
He didn't say anything about it because Wizards usually doesn't, and probably rightfully so, care about the secondary market. Their job is to design cards. When they design good cards that a lot of people want to use in their competitive and casual decks, the secondary market will unfortunately put a high price on that card. What can Wizards do about that? Design cards that no one wants? The one influence Wizards has on the secondary market is with reprints. Sure, they can throw a few spendy reprints into a set. It might not be a bad idea for them since that set will probably sell really well because of it. But those reprints greatly restrict what new cards can be designed. Sets are designed with a lot of formats in mind, and including all of the pricey cards currently on the market just to attempt to reduce their price is going to negatively affect each of those formats.
If you're playing at a competitive level and you need to reference what double-sided cards do, you won't do well anyway. If you're playing casually, it's not a big deal.
Again, competitively, decks are already sleeved. People not trying to cheat will usually have cleary marked cards. Purposefully marking your card ambiguously is considered cheating. It is very easy to make sure your cards are marked clearly. This is a non-issue. Casually, it also doesn't matter. If you're playing with cheaters, maybe you should look for a new playgroup.
You got me with the proxy one, but that won't meaningfully affect how you play the game. You still play the card normally with it's casting cost or by putting it into with another card like Aether Vial or Zombify. The only difference is that while in an unsleeved deck or one with clear sleeves, you should use the proxy. Not a big inconvenience.
Again you got me with marking cards with a Sharpie, but the checklist cards were created for exactly that purpose and Wizards has stated that they will be readily available. Still not an issue.
Landfall and equipment don't lead to Ambiguousness, but morph, flip, and certainly others have led to it. Morph and flip may not have been the most popular, but they got the job done.
You're right, draft will be a little different, but not to the point where it is going to be completely warped or any one player will be able to gather a signicant advantage.
Transform is not making you orient any cards in your hand in a draft any differently, either. Normal drafting will normally be enough to hide the double-sided card.
Transform also does not force you to take any cards out of a sleeve midgame.
Please, everybody, quit making up problems and wait until you actually play with these cards before coming to conclusions. Jumping to conclusions before gathing data is almost never a good idea.
That's the thing, this mechanic isn't a day/night mechanic. It's called transform. Competely different thing than day/night. As of right now, day/night does not exist in Magic. The only thing that is day/night about it is the sun and moon symbols used to easily tell if the card is transformed or not.
One consolation, transform conveniently works as a global day/night mechanic for werewolves. In fact, with them, people will do exactly what you suggest, struggling for control over the time of day.
In response to UNBAN SHAHRAZAD,
You are correct, I am making too many assumptions about you and everyone is entitled to voice their opinion. But, I am getting a little angry over the fact that so many players on this forum are making baseless assumptions about something they know very little about. Nobody except Wizards has played with transform cards yet. All we know is that these cards are double-sided and that Wizards has created efficient solutions to a lot of the foreseeable problems. Of course Wizards is going to try to push the envelope. If they didn't, we'd be playing with the same mechanics over and over again. Pushing the envelope keeps the game new and exciting for people like us who have been playing for years. Now, pushing the envelope is not the same as going for "shock value," as many people think is happening with transform. Yes, they wanted to stir the pot a little bit, but Wizards went with double-sided cards because they think there is real design space to be used. They're not going to throw out a new mechanic to just shock people. That kind of mechanic can't be used again, unlike transform, which opens up a huge realm of possibilities. You can now have two cards on one! That's huge for design! This can be used, sparingly mind you, for years down the road. Wizards took a risk with double-sided cards because they wanted the choice of not having to dumb down and create completely different cards than what they wanted. Why create a brand new card that doesn't do what you want when you can create a new mechanic that let's you create the cards you want and maybe have design space for years to come?
As far as Wizards "thinking of everything," I think that they have covered all of the logistical problems. Those are much easier to find and fix than interactions between hundreds of cards. Using checklists, taking cards out of sleeves, or finding them in a deckbox is much less of a hassle than you're making it out to be. Do you use the actual token cards provided in booster packs when you use those token producers in a deck? If so, then you should understand that this isn't a problem. If not, I would suggest playing a couple of games using them and digging them out. You'll quickly learn that it isn't a big deal. This change isn't as big of a deal as you make it out to be. Less than 8 percent of the cards in the set are double-sided. Magic still has its identifiable features, including the card backs. Sure, they're mandating the use of official proxies and/or sleeves, but sleeves are pretty much mandated for any high level play like a PTQ anyway. Even most FMNers, at my store anyway, use sleeves already. This will only really affect the kitchen table crowd, and marginally at that. They're still provided with proxies, they can use different ones if they want since it's casual, or they can even use the double-sided card. That's the beauty of casual.
Last time I checked, you still have to cast transform cards just like any other card. They change the way the game is played about as much as landfall or equipment. Having text in a size .1 font isn't a good solution to fitting more text onto a card, by the way. There's plenty of people that can hardly read the cards as it is.
You understand that Wizards cannot possibly test every single possible interaction between every single card before the set is sent to the printers, right? Even if R&D was 10 times as big and they spent 10 times as long designing sets, things can and will slip through. That's the amazing thing about Magic is that even after a format is put under the microscope with all of the big name tournaments and Magic Online that we have today, we can still discover new interactions until and after a new set is introduced.
Taking a line or two off of Mayor of Avabruck is not dumbing it down, it is taking away at least one completely relevant ability. If you take away the lord bonus, the human side of the werewolf cards are much less threatening. Take away the token ability of the transformed side, he's just a werewolf lord. Exciting, sure, but not as exciting as a lord makes guys that then get pumped by the same lord. Not to mention how it would interact with the rest of the set. It would be a completely different card without one of its abilities.
Also, how do you figure that they are messing with the foundation of the game? The two largest changes to the game were the rules changes of 4th Ed. and M10 (it's possible that I missed the correct timeline of the actual rules changes, but I think you will understand what I'm getting at). No single set in recent history, probably the history of the game, has impacted the game as much as those rules changes. Sure, they added a card type in Lorwyn and Mythic rarity in M10. This hardly touches the foundation of the game. Granted, Planeswalkers have added a new dymanic, but the general goal of the game is still to reduce your opponent's life to 0 or deck them. How is using the back of the card going to change the foundation of the game? Oh, it requires you to use proxies. So in reality, this change will impact how people play the game as much as Mythic rarity.
If you have had little to no faith in Wizards and R&D to make a good game for a while now, why even support them at all? It sounds like you wait for set after set, expecting Wizards to ruin it somehow, and then you find the one flaw and it ruins the whole experience for you. But apparently there's something appealing about the game, otherwise you wouldn't be playing it 10 years later. Maybe Wizards is actually creating a good game. Maybe they actually know what they're doing. If you think they're doing such a horrible job, why are you even playing?
That is definitely not the case. More text does not always equal more complex. Are the Ravnica Guildmages any more complex than creatures with only one activated ability? Or an activated ability that requires tapping the creature as a cost? No.
Also, using the back of the card to allow a whole other card to exist is pretty creative, you have to admit. Especially since that card can still kind of have a normal back (taking the checklist cards into account).
Flip and/or split cards would not work nearly as well. For one, some cards like Mayor of Avabruck have too much text for those to be feasible. Don't forget about the new Garruk, who is also a transform card. A planeswalker using the transform mechanic would not have anywhere near enough space on a single card for all of the text and loyalty increments.
The one point that people make that I understand is that you shouldn't mess with the back of the card in a TCG, but Wizards has taken care of this problem very well. They are taking great measures to make sure that the checklist cards will be readily available to everybody. One way of looking at this situation that might make you feel a little better is thinking of the checklist card as the actual card that, when you cast it, creates a token of the marked card. Now obviously the transform card is the real card while the checklist is just a proxy, but it solves the issues of using the back of the card for more space very well. I've only been playing the game for 8 years, but I want to see it keep succeeding as much as you do. I'm sure that Wizards and R&D feel the same way and wouldn't take a risk like this if they weren't sure that it would pay off. I understand that Wizard does indeed make mistakes, but that doesn't mean you should throw all of your faith in them to the wind.
We've seen three transform conditions so far, actually. The bat/vampire has one, the test subject has another, and the werewolf has a third. Considering that we don't know if there are more ways to transform cards (which there certainly could be), keywords for each one will get very, very cumbersome.