Celestial FlareWW
Instant
Target player sacrifices an attacking or blocking creature.
I think it looks pretty good. I like how the opponent is likely to have fewer options than with regular forced sacrifice. Should also have great synergy with first strike, since you can play it during the regular damage step, after one of the opponent's creatures dies, narrowing the options.
It's okay when you don't have any untapped creatures on the field when an opponent attacks. Otherwise I'd just play Smite.
At least you can also let him sacrifice a blocker and get around unblockables. So that's a plus I guess.
Smite is easily can be better for control (except for hexproof/indestructible), but I think Flare might be better for aggro, where you want to attack and create "damned if you do, damned if you don't"-type situations:
You block? Sure, I'll force-sac your blocker and attack again next time. You don't block? I got my damage through, and I've still got my Flare for when you attack me back.
It's okay when you don't have any untapped creatures on the field when an opponent attacks. Otherwise I'd just play Smite.
At least you can also let him sacrifice a blocker and get around unblockables. So that's a plus I guess.
It's an awful card outside of limited, and really not a great card in limited.
It's restricted in when it can be used AND gives the opponent the choice of the creature.
Neither of those things are too serious, and they combine together to be even less of a problem. Edict effects are good, and this can be further refined to hit creatures that are actually involved in combat.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Moderator Helpdesk
Currently Playing:
Legacy: Something U/W Controlish EDH Cube
Hypercube! A New EDH Deck Every Week(ish)!
Reasons to run this card in standard:
1.) It's a white edict.
Reasons not to run this card in standard:
1.) WW restrictive casting cost
2.) Restrictive window to cast
3.) Better removal available with splash (Detention Sphere, Azorius Charm, burn spells, strong black removal, etc.)
...not only is the total number of players expanding very quickly, but at the same time a greater and greater number of those players are being pushed to only desire a small subset of the available cards. These combined forces drastically increase demand for those cards and cause the values of just those specific cards to often balloon out of proportion.
I like this a lot. Cheap, common removal that can work through hexproof and protections has a lot of value. I like that even if your opponent isn't attacking or blocking alone and sacs the creature you dont want, freeing up another blocker could still make it a 2-for-1. High pick in limited, should see sideboard play in standard and pauper at the very least.
I might be derailing my own thread here, but I really like it when cards are so colour restrictive that they won't get shoved in any deck, like Victim of Night, Geralf's Messenger, Ash Zealot and Elite Inquisitor. That way we won't keep seeing the same few cards over and over again no matter which deck we're up against, like we often do with Mana Leak, Lightning Bolt, Doom Blade and Thragtusk. My point is: In a deck that's mono white or mainly white, Celestial Flare just as powerful as it would have been if it cost 1W. But is it powerful enough to justify the restrictiveness? Not sure.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
When I hit my 3000 post mark, I'm gone for good.
Stay reasonable, be mindful of your expectations and don't feed the trolls.
Two mana is good for removal. Not great and double-white obviously gives restriction, but if you're a control deck just looking to survive the first creature wave, or an aggro deck that has a hard time killing the lone blocker across from you, I can think of worse.
Like, it could be 4 mana or something. And we could not have shocklands in the format.
This is good, even on par with Geth's Verdict variant. The choice is narrow with attacking & blocking clause, and narrowing target is a good thing for edict effect. "Attacking" also mean it will hit their main aggresor. Which is good, and also, the effect won't weaken if opponent drop dorks.
You played JESUS?!?! I heard none of his guys stay in the graveyard, and once you think you have him beat he ALWAYS comes back to win within three turns. I like...WORSHIP him.
I'm skeptical whether this will see play in Standard. It's too easy for your opponent to attack with a mana elf or something to minimize its effect. And it won't do anything about creatures with problematic abilities.
Renounce the Guilds is technically better and it's a sideboard card at best.
This statement isn't true. The cards are comparable, but useful in completely different situations.
This card even kills Geist of Saint Traft, as you can cast it with the angel trigger on the stack, before they have a second attacker (you still get hit by the angel once, but w/e). Renounce would also most likely kill Geist, but wouldn't if your opponent had another multicolored permanent.
Renounce the Guilds is technically better and it's a sideboard card at best.
Apples and oranges, my friend. RtG only gets multicoloured (for better or worse), and you have to sacrifice one yourself if you've got any (which, admittedly, you probably don't if you're using RtG).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
When I hit my 3000 post mark, I'm gone for good.
Stay reasonable, be mindful of your expectations and don't feed the trolls.
I'm skeptical whether this will see play in Standard. It's too easy for your opponent to attack with a mana elf or something to minimize its effect. And it won't do anything about creatures with problematic abilities.
That assumes that your opponent knows you have this in hand, which unless they have seen your hand, they don't. Also, removing mana dorks isn't a bad thing, as getting rid of them slows decks down
Failed Opression Stories:
Legend of Korra
Return to Ravnica
(Not that the stories or character are inhernetly bad, but that they failed to further delve into the topic. Like Gateless/Non-Benders feeling opressed by the Guilds/Benders that sought a revolution but it became less of importance according to the story.)
I really don't understand the name of the card. I was thinking it was a red card based on the name. The WW requirement is pretty bad.
The white comes from celestial a la celestial crusader and such. In fact, type in just celestial to magiccards.info and all the cards that come up are white related and none of them involve red actually.
The only drawback to this card is the WW cost. At 1W it would be extremely powerful. At WW it's playable just not insane. I think we'll be seeing a lot of "geist trigger on the stack, celestial flare"
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Yawgmoth," Freyalise whispered as she set the bomb, "now you will pay for your treachery."
what happens when someone attacks with a gaist of saint traft and i play this? can he sac the angel token, or is no token in play when he has to sac something? when he had to sac the geist this would be fine vs bant hexproof, because now they run this regeneration enchantment sometimes and this card would just destroy their plan.
You can respond to the geist trigger to kill the geist before the token is created.
I think it looks pretty good. I like how the opponent is likely to have fewer options than with regular forced sacrifice. Should also have great synergy with first strike, since you can play it during the regular damage step, after one of the opponent's creatures dies, narrowing the options.
Thoughts?
Stay reasonable, be mindful of your expectations and don't feed the trolls.
Doomsdayin'
Smite
is easilycan be better for control (except for hexproof/indestructible), but I think Flare might be better for aggro, where you want to attack and create "damned if you do, damned if you don't"-type situations:You block? Sure, I'll force-sac your blocker and attack again next time. You don't block? I got my damage through, and I've still got my Flare for when you attack me back.
I know that's how I'm going to use it.
Stay reasonable, be mindful of your expectations and don't feed the trolls.
Doomsdayin'
I'd say it's a lot better than Smite.
Hits blocking creatures, not just attacking ones
Doesn't require you to have an untapped blocker
Gets around Hexproof
Currently Playing:
Legacy: Something U/W Controlish
EDH Cube
Hypercube! A New EDH Deck Every Week(ish)!
It's restricted in when it can be used AND gives the opponent the choice of the creature.
Neither of those things are too serious, and they combine together to be even less of a problem. Edict effects are good, and this can be further refined to hit creatures that are actually involved in combat.
Currently Playing:
Legacy: Something U/W Controlish
EDH Cube
Hypercube! A New EDH Deck Every Week(ish)!
You do realize that the first drawback you mention alleviates the second?
Stay reasonable, be mindful of your expectations and don't feed the trolls.
Doomsdayin'
1.) It's a white edict.
Reasons not to run this card in standard:
1.) WW restrictive casting cost
2.) Restrictive window to cast
3.) Better removal available with splash (Detention Sphere, Azorius Charm, burn spells, strong black removal, etc.)
Loam Pox
Standard:
Boros Burn
Cubetutor Link
I might be derailing my own thread here, but I really like it when cards are so colour restrictive that they won't get shoved in any deck, like Victim of Night, Geralf's Messenger, Ash Zealot and Elite Inquisitor. That way we won't keep seeing the same few cards over and over again no matter which deck we're up against, like we often do with Mana Leak, Lightning Bolt, Doom Blade and Thragtusk. My point is: In a deck that's mono white or mainly white, Celestial Flare just as powerful as it would have been if it cost 1W. But is it powerful enough to justify the restrictiveness? Not sure.
Stay reasonable, be mindful of your expectations and don't feed the trolls.
Doomsdayin'
Like, it could be 4 mana or something. And we could not have shocklands in the format.
My 180 Modern Bordered Only Cube
A comic about the world's most addictive game, Magic: The Gathering.
Renounce the Guilds is technically better and it's a sideboard card at best.
This statement isn't true. The cards are comparable, but useful in completely different situations.
This card even kills Geist of Saint Traft, as you can cast it with the angel trigger on the stack, before they have a second attacker (you still get hit by the angel once, but w/e). Renounce would also most likely kill Geist, but wouldn't if your opponent had another multicolored permanent.
Apples and oranges, my friend. RtG only gets multicoloured (for better or worse), and you have to sacrifice one yourself if you've got any (which, admittedly, you probably don't if you're using RtG).
Stay reasonable, be mindful of your expectations and don't feed the trolls.
Doomsdayin'
That assumes that your opponent knows you have this in hand, which unless they have seen your hand, they don't. Also, removing mana dorks isn't a bad thing, as getting rid of them slows decks down
emphasis on *technically* due to the multicolor requirement
this is a "nice" removal spell for white... but until 2 color decks come back, like U/W control I dont see why people would run it over other removal
TBD...
Legend of Korra
Return to Ravnica
(Not that the stories or character are inhernetly bad, but that they failed to further delve into the topic. Like Gateless/Non-Benders feeling opressed by the Guilds/Benders that sought a revolution but it became less of importance according to the story.)
The white comes from celestial a la celestial crusader and such. In fact, type in just celestial to magiccards.info and all the cards that come up are white related and none of them involve red actually.
The only drawback to this card is the WW cost. At 1W it would be extremely powerful. At WW it's playable just not insane. I think we'll be seeing a lot of "geist trigger on the stack, celestial flare"
Currently Playing:
Retired
You can respond to the geist trigger to kill the geist before the token is created.