I would be fine with this honestly, if it was an enters the battlefield trigger. As is splicing this onto a creature is really bizarre. I understand how splice works in the comp rules, but you could amend the rules for this case. As is it just makes no sense.
oh I forgot that the echoes would be legendary. that wasn't the intention.
and the hydra.... needed something extra, yes.
Arbitrary Armor
Artifact — Equipment {R}
Equipped creature can't do anything right. 2, Suck a huge dick: Return Arbitrary Armor from your graveyard to the battlefield, then attach it to target creature.
Equip—Stab yourself.
IIW: You are bad and should feel bad.
7/24/2013: A dick is consider huge if either its length exceeds or equals the throat or its width exceeds or equals the lips.
7/24/2013: If you do not survive your stabbing injuries before the conclusion of a game, you are considered to have conceded.
I would like to note that Stephen Fry is intensely purposeful with his language. In that rant there was nothing bordering on sloppy in anything he said. My only point, my original point, was that I noticed sloppiness and in the nicest way I could I suggested that it be tidied for the sake of being tidy. There's nothing wrong with being sloppy when the situation suits it, but when the entirety of a paragraph appears neatly laid out and grammatically formal but for the sloppy misuse of the preposition "of" in place of the similar-sounding contraction ending " 've," then it's out of place and uncohesive to the thought as a whole. Additionally, as I earlier mentioned and as Stephen rightly conveys, language creativity and invention and repurposing and reamalgamating should be embraced when it serves a thoughtful purpose, when it is the medium for describing a new and intriguing concept. I challenge anyone to explain to me the new and intriguing grammatical concept of "of" in the context of "should of," "could of," etc. If it's grokable, I have no qualms accepting it and using it in my own conversations as I deem it fit to convey the unique perspective that every word or phrase claims real estate to. But when sloppiness persists simply for the sake of sloppiness, I cannot and refuse to attempt to understand or accept it under any circumstances. Again, as Stephen said, language and the enjoyment of language is something to relish, not to slog though because it is a necessary evil.
I haven't had the chance to read that back over as it's dinnertime but hopefully that says what I mean for it to and helps clarify anyone who was confused about my actions.
I know... I never bothered to fix it... even though I could of when I changed my IIWs. If someone's going to point it out though...
"could have"
sorry, i'm all for latitude in language, for creativity and growth, and if someone could explain to me what the "of" means in could of, should of, would of, other than just being a homonym for the "'ve" sound, then i'd be all for it. but no one has, so i point it out in as nice of a way as i can, not calling you out, but more asking, "is this what you mean to be saying?"
Brushwagg Wizard1G Creature - Brushwagg Wizard [r]
Vigilance T: Target blocked or blocking creature gets -X/+X, where X is its toughness. The safest place from a brushwagg is uphill.
2/3
There's this thread. It's called the modern banned list thread. It's in the modern section. I encourage you to check it out. People will actually agree with you there. However, you're here in the general section. Here, people are less clouded by greed and envy and are able to see that some cards are just not right for some formats. The cards you mentioned aren't right for modern. Maybe a few could come off - I could see Golgari Grave-Troll easily getting unbanned. But the ones you mentioned are gone. If it confuses you, go find a coloring book and scribble away until you don't feel confused anymore.
Of course not. Omniscience doesn't care about alternate costs. It doesn't give you free kicker. It doesn't take out the trash on Tuesdays. It, in essence, makes every spell you want to cast have a 0 in its upper right corner instead of what it had before. No more, no less.
For 2 and 3, it should be noted that a land can not be countered, and therefor can not be Delay ed. But there may be other cards that could give the it Suspend.
Zoetic Cavern can absolutely be countered if you cast it as a morph. If you counter it with delay, it will be exiled with three time counters on it - not as a morph - as a Zoetic Cavern. So it will indeed be your land drop the turn it unsuspends.
1
It works just fine on Nameless Inversion and Crib Swap. Why should it work any differently on Chameleon Colossus and Mistform Ultimus?
5
7/24/2013: A dick is consider huge if either its length exceeds or equals the throat or its width exceeds or equals the lips.
7/24/2013: If you do not survive your stabbing injuries before the conclusion of a game, you are considered to have conceded.
1
Puresteel Paladin is very similar to Glimpse of Nature. Essentially, you draw a card for each spell you cast.
Riddlesmith is very similar to Coral Merfolk. Essentially, you draw no cards for each spell you cast.
1
I would like to note that Stephen Fry is intensely purposeful with his language. In that rant there was nothing bordering on sloppy in anything he said. My only point, my original point, was that I noticed sloppiness and in the nicest way I could I suggested that it be tidied for the sake of being tidy. There's nothing wrong with being sloppy when the situation suits it, but when the entirety of a paragraph appears neatly laid out and grammatically formal but for the sloppy misuse of the preposition "of" in place of the similar-sounding contraction ending " 've," then it's out of place and uncohesive to the thought as a whole. Additionally, as I earlier mentioned and as Stephen rightly conveys, language creativity and invention and repurposing and reamalgamating should be embraced when it serves a thoughtful purpose, when it is the medium for describing a new and intriguing concept. I challenge anyone to explain to me the new and intriguing grammatical concept of "of" in the context of "should of," "could of," etc. If it's grokable, I have no qualms accepting it and using it in my own conversations as I deem it fit to convey the unique perspective that every word or phrase claims real estate to. But when sloppiness persists simply for the sake of sloppiness, I cannot and refuse to attempt to understand or accept it under any circumstances. Again, as Stephen said, language and the enjoyment of language is something to relish, not to slog though because it is a necessary evil.
I haven't had the chance to read that back over as it's dinnertime but hopefully that says what I mean for it to and helps clarify anyone who was confused about my actions.
1
"could have"
sorry, i'm all for latitude in language, for creativity and growth, and if someone could explain to me what the "of" means in could of, should of, would of, other than just being a homonym for the "'ve" sound, then i'd be all for it. but no one has, so i point it out in as nice of a way as i can, not calling you out, but more asking, "is this what you mean to be saying?"
Am I spamming enough, Megiddo?
1
your sig misspells "not."
2
Creature - Brushwagg Wizard [r]
Vigilance
T: Target blocked or blocking creature gets -X/+X, where X is its toughness.
The safest place from a brushwagg is uphill.
2/3
iiw: it keeps you runnin'
1
Warning issued for trolling. -Xen
1
1
Zoetic Cavern can absolutely be countered if you cast it as a morph. If you counter it with delay, it will be exiled with three time counters on it - not as a morph - as a Zoetic Cavern. So it will indeed be your land drop the turn it unsuspends.