I'd certainly lean toward it being in... But I still find it strange to put in in the spoiler with this much being circumstantial. Having said that, I won't be surprised when it is in
What we're doing here is akin to taking the text of Moby Dick, locating specific words therein, rearranging them to create a passage from Fight Club, and concluding from this evidence that Tyler Durden is based on Ahab.
Ha! I'm totally replacing my ego-sig with this.
(Nice touch with the thumbsdown there, urzas, real mature. :rolleyes:)
What we're doing here is akin to taking the text of Moby Dick, locating specific words therein, rearranging them to create a passage from Fight Club, and concluding from this evidence that Tyler Durden is based on Ahab.
Meddling make stinks of rotten tomatoes. If I open one I will trade it for foil mountain so I can shock it better.
I have quite a selection you can choose from then.
I'm apprehensive about the MM being top dollar for the long hual; while in Standard you will soon lose Runed Halo, the MM impacts even less than the Halo since it doesn't stop shenanigans already in play. While a 2/2 body isn't bad at all, the creature curve has stepped up a level since it's first outing.
Is MM a great card? Oh yes. Will I swing for a playset it possible? You betcha! Will the best deck in the format be a deck that produces WU and names the right card every time? Pure speculation which, at this early stage, is dubious at best (Wake Thrasher, Tattermunge Maniac, etc...).
Runed Halo is a sideboard card in many cases, and one that sees less and less play at that. Again, MM is useful and powerful but is it an end-all, be-all card in tournament play? Not as much as everyone seems to believe. Combo will live with and without the MM (especially when Red/Black can kill a creature instead of trying to play around an enchantment they can't remove).
Yes. A thousand times yes. They lured me in with Ivory Tower and Zuran Orb, and I kept telling myself "I can quit whenever I want...just look at that untapped disk". That was ten years ago man.....
There's also the possibility that Wizards is specifically messing with our minds. Putting the proper word and card name just to throw people off is not unthinkable, especially given the stance on spoilers held by some designers.
They've (and that designer specifically) messed with our minds in the past with the use of carefully worded affirmations about cards count related to the time spiral purple cards.
So you're on board with adding Backlash to the spoiler, then? In that case, we're in agreement.
Unless, of course, you think Backlash *shouldn't* be added. In which case I would accuse you of displaying a flagrant double-standard.
Perhaps more importantly, you clearly misread my post. All the "evidence" for Meddling Mage being in Alara Reborn was also present in Shards, excepting the word "Meddling". Meddling Mage was not in Shards, nor was any card with even remotely similar rules text. What we're doing here is akin to taking the text of Moby Dick, locating specific words therein, rearranging them to create a passage from Fight Club, and concluding from this evidence that Tyler Durden is based on Ahab.
It's POSSIBLE, but the evidence is NOT there.
It's not my spoiler, but I'd lean towards including it. There are two cards that have the term "Backlash" in them and Backlash fits the set (gold) and the wording exists. I would have no qualms with them adding it, but I understand their reluctance as well, it's not as uniquely worded as MM is.
And what you stated is WHY they added it this time. Meddling + unique and fitting card text + it fits the set = enough proof for them.
And Tyler Durden was based on Queequay. Everyone knows this.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
^^
MTGO Writer and Epic Time-Waster.
If you have questions about MTGO PM me, I'm all up ons, as it were.
Check out my articles on http://puremtgo.com/ I'm the nerd you see there... wait, not that one. Nope, not that one either... yeah. That one.
I don't think it would, for the following reasons:
1.-Meddling Mage is no Mutavault/Bitterblossom/Cryptic Command.
2.-Its casting cost and concept restrict it to specific decks.
3.-It didn't reach that price the first time around.
4.-Nowadays, rares are "less rare" than they used to be, what with the smaller sets.
Then again, they could reprint it as a mythic, which would be disastrous
My guess is 15 dollars after the first overhype.
Meddling Mage stops Bitterblossom/Cryptic/Cruel Ultimatum/Everything thats good and isn't a land, from being played period. Why wouldn't it rise in price because of that alone? In today's standard if your in either white or blue your probably going to put this in your board and find a way to play it, especially with today's mana pool, hell faeries ran white for esper charm for mirror this is probably going to push them to run this card to stop opposing Cryptics (even though it locks out theirs) from being used or volcanic fallout. 5CC will no doubt put this card in their main or sideboard (depends on what kind of meta your expecting) to stop key cards like Ajani for boatbrew and bitterblossom/Cryptic for fae. Lark should just sky rocket at this point because theres no point in trying to win against a deck that plays two of the most aggravating cards in standard (imo) where they can litterally lock out of your win condition.
Meddling make stinks of rotten tomatoes. If I open one I will trade it for foil mountain so I can shock it better.
Can I have your name and # so I can trade with you please?
Because I would assume that this wouldn't be the only stupid trade you'd give me.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Proud Member of the coolest clan on Salvation : [Dragons]
Decks:
EDH: B Korlash, Heir to Blackblade B G Verdeloth the Ancient G R Ib Halfheart, Goblin Tactition R BUW Sharrum of the Hedgemon BUW GUW Jenara GUW BURGW Reaper King BURGW
Yes I really like EDH
The entire text for Meddling Mage and Backlash is in the orb, actually.
Meddling Mage has much more specific text than Backlash though. Name, played, etc.
You are acting like we are jumping to conclusions when we have known the orb results for a week, and after thinking about it, I put it on the spoiler.
Do you have a better reason for the ENTIRE TEXT of Meddling Mage appearing in the orb?
As ~ comes into play, name a nonland card.
Activated abilities of the named card can't be played.
Clearly they're stapling Pithing Needle to a bear and getting rid of the annoying "mana abilities" caveat.
I kid, I kid. I just thought... maybe there would be some more evidence than "welp the oracle text is in the orb" that you're hiding from us so as to not get DCI banned?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from "Flamebuster" »
Tarmogoyf has no evasion, yet it sees tonnes of play. What makes this any different?
It's not my spoiler, but I'd lean towards including it. There are two cards that have the term "Backlash" in them and Backlash fits the set (gold) and the wording exists. I would have no qualms with them adding it, but I understand their reluctance as well, it's not as uniquely worded as MM is.
I salute you for consistency, then! If we added Backlash to the spoiler, I'd have no leg to stand on in this argument, since we'd be down to arguing what standard of proof is necessary for inclusion in the spoiler, and that's very debatable. I think my standard would be higher, and I don't think I'd include either MM or Backlash on this evidence, but at least if we include both, we aren't applying a double-standard.
And what you stated is WHY they added it this time. Meddling + unique and fitting card text + it fits the set = enough proof for them.
That's fair, though I would argue that MM doesn't really have all that unique card text (again, all the text is in Shards). The words aren't actually uncommon, it's just the sequencing that makes it unique.
And Tyler Durden was based on Queequay. Everyone knows this.
Little birdies are generally a *shrug* as far as evidence is concerned, but that's still better than what we had going over here. With that information and the Orb combined, I'd say the odds are now slightly better than even. Were it my call, I'd still hold off putting it on the spoiler until we could be a bit more certain, but that part's not my call.
Little birdies are generally a *shrug* as far as evidence is concerned, but that's still better than what we had going over here. With that information and the Orb combined, I'd say the odds are now slightly better than even. Were it my call, I'd still hold off putting it on the spoiler until we could be a bit more certain, but that part's not my call.
Little birdies are generally a *shrug* as far as evidence is concerned, but that's still better than what we had going over here. With that information and the Orb combined, I'd say the odds are now slightly better than even. Were it my call, I'd still hold off putting it on the spoiler until we could be a bit more certain, but that part's not my call.
More like Captain Black hasn't been wrong before (read: he is a source, one of the few we have left :/ ), so this information is as solid as we are going to get until we see the card physically.
If you were in charge of the spoiler, you wouldn't have added any Conflux Zesty cards either I guess.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
News and spoiler contributor for GatheringMagic.com
I never use those icons, somehow that clicked when I made the post. It was an accident. When I looked at the post, I was like...what is that...?
Hey, I didn't even notice. I'm an emoticon retard.
More like Captain Black hasn't been wrong before (read: he is a source, one of the few we have left :/ ), so this information is as solid as we are going to get until we see the card physically.
If you were in charge of the spoiler, you wouldn't have added any Conflux Zesty cards either I guess.
My bad, I didn't know how good a rep he had. If he's a solid source, then consider it confirmed. I stand by my assessment of the previously existing evidence, however, and still think adding it on the basis of "The word "Can't" is in the Orb!" is pretty silly, and even more silly in light of Backlash.
As to the card itself, Meddling Mage is sitting in a very strange place right now. Specifically, he's competing with no less than two other two-drop Bears that do very, very similar things - Tidehollow Sculler and Gaddock Teeg. Sculler is the most versatile of the three, and probably the strongest. Despite that, Meddling Mage is at his best when played adjacent to Sculler (since he never names something irrelevant). Both cards give 5cC headaches, so I wouldn't be surprised to see an Esper-based deck akin to Zvi's "The Solution" from way back when. You could run the twin denying bears in Block alongside Punish Ignorance, and even Hindering Light if you're feeling especially frisky, centering on beating up the more controlling decks in the format, and effectively denying them the tools to fight back.
The main difficulty I see with that strategy would be finding an efficient way to handle "My guys are bigger than yours".
I never use those icons, somehow that clicked when I made the post. It was an accident. When I looked at the post, I was like...what is that...?
Fair enough. It would be funny if the system could identify posts that disagree with whatever they're quoting and automatically add something like that.
What we're doing here is akin to taking the text of Moby Dick, locating specific words therein, rearranging them to create a passage from Fight Club, and concluding from this evidence that Tyler Durden is based on Ahab.
Hey, I didn't even notice. I'm an emoticon retard.
My bad, I didn't know how good a rep he had. If he's a solid source, then consider it confirmed. I stand by my assessment of the previously existing evidence, however, and still think adding it on the basis of "The word "Can't" is in the Orb!" is pretty silly, and even more silly in light of Backlash.
As to the card itself, Meddling Mage is sitting in a very strange place right now. Specifically, he's competing with no less than two other two-drop Bears that do very, very similar things - Tidehollow Sculler and Gaddock Teeg. Sculler is the most versatile of the three, and probably the strongest. Despite that, Meddling Mage is at his best when played adjacent to Sculler (since he never names something irrelevant). Both cards give 5cC headaches, so I wouldn't be surprised to see an Esper-based deck akin to Zvi's "The Solution" from way back when. You could run the twin denying bears in Block alongside Punish Ignorance, and even Hindering Light if you're feeling especially frisky, centering on beating up the more controlling decks in the format, and effectively denying them the tools to fight back.
The main difficulty I see with that strategy would be finding an efficient way to handle "My guys are bigger than yours".
I agree with the argument, other than sculler being the strongest (I would argue for teeg in the current standard) but used in dark bant, making it much harder for control decks to stop you, or anti-tokens using sculler or mage to stop the path's the wreck you and teeg to stop the spectral proccessions, planeswalkers, and sideboard sweeps. Using mage over the others probably wont happen, but side by side, along with some other power, it could make for a strong dark bant deck (that would unfortuantly have no possibilty in the mirror).
I agree with the argument, other than sculler being the strongest (I would argue for teeg in the current standard) but used in dark bant, making it much harder for control decks to stop you, or anti-tokens using sculler or mage to stop the path's the wreck you and teeg to stop the spectral proccessions, planeswalkers, and sideboard sweeps. Using mage over the others probably wont happen, but side by side, along with some other power, it could make for a strong dark bant deck (that would unfortuantly have no possibilty in the mirror).
But tweaking Dark Bant to be better at beating 5cC just results in old-fashioned Doran decks. (Trust me, been there, done that.) Discard is often more efficient than Meddling Mages. And the painful fact is, these decks are currently quite resistant to Volcanic Fallout, but once you add Meddling Mages in addition to Scullers, Birds, and Hierarchs, they get a lot MORE vulnerable to it, which means the first thing Meddling Mage has to name is... Volcanic Fallout. So you add a card to stop your opponent from playing specific cards, and by virtue of adding that card, you have to use the first one to stop your opponent from playing a card that was already pretty bad against you. That's kinda sad, dontcha think?
"Crovax Connections" does sound like a friendly corner store run by your local Ascendant Lord
I bet we have a case of Jon Finkel sleeping with the girl, then never calling her again and she going bat #%^% crazy and writing this article case closed.
First PTQ top 8 6/13/09(1st) Second PTQ top 8 10/7/09(5th) Second at national Qualifier 5/15/10
Third PTQ top 8 2/12/11 (2nd)
Second at Alberta 2011's
Fourth PTQ top 8 3/17/12(8th)
GP Vancouver 2012 (18th)
I stopped play live magic about a year and a half ago and recently got into Magic online (You know, same game, but no anyoing kids and smelly people.. and I can watch TV in between draft time) And well, I am VERY much looking forward to pulling a meddling Mage (hopefully) in a draft
So what will you name with this most of the time... PtE? Without combo decks in standard isn't this card mediocre at best?
This is really hard to say right now, but generally you want to stop cards that either a) will kill the mage or b) kill you that you can't normally deal with.
This generally means that you'll name Volcanic Fallout or Banefire and just deal with countering the other removal as it gets aimed at the Mage (like with hindering light, sweet). Or, if I were needing to stick an Elspeth in Block against 5CC I'd play MM turn two naming Countersquall and drop the elspeth with less fear of losing a turn and two life.
Sometimes, you just want to slow their game plan down as well. Say you want to buy a turn or two against Naya Aggro. Drop him naming Wooly Thoctar and they have to burn the Mage out before they can drop the real beater in their hand. Again, it doesn't have to lock them out completely to do its job, just slow them down until you can do what your deck needs to do to take control.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
^^
MTGO Writer and Epic Time-Waster.
If you have questions about MTGO PM me, I'm all up ons, as it were.
Check out my articles on http://puremtgo.com/ I'm the nerd you see there... wait, not that one. Nope, not that one either... yeah. That one.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Banner by spiderboy4 at [High~Light Studios]
Ha! I'm totally replacing my ego-sig with this.
(Nice touch with the thumbsdown there, urzas, real mature. :rolleyes:)
Guildmaster Jarad
I have quite a selection you can choose from then.
I'm apprehensive about the MM being top dollar for the long hual; while in Standard you will soon lose Runed Halo, the MM impacts even less than the Halo since it doesn't stop shenanigans already in play. While a 2/2 body isn't bad at all, the creature curve has stepped up a level since it's first outing.
Is MM a great card? Oh yes. Will I swing for a playset it possible? You betcha! Will the best deck in the format be a deck that produces WU and names the right card every time? Pure speculation which, at this early stage, is dubious at best (Wake Thrasher, Tattermunge Maniac, etc...).
Runed Halo is a sideboard card in many cases, and one that sees less and less play at that. Again, MM is useful and powerful but is it an end-all, be-all card in tournament play? Not as much as everyone seems to believe. Combo will live with and without the MM (especially when Red/Black can kill a creature instead of trying to play around an enchantment they can't remove).
They've (and that designer specifically) messed with our minds in the past with the use of carefully worded affirmations about cards count related to the time spiral purple cards.
So, beware.
Either way this will have a huge impact in the metagame. It might even make Lapse of Certainty useful.
It's not my spoiler, but I'd lean towards including it. There are two cards that have the term "Backlash" in them and Backlash fits the set (gold) and the wording exists. I would have no qualms with them adding it, but I understand their reluctance as well, it's not as uniquely worded as MM is.
And what you stated is WHY they added it this time. Meddling + unique and fitting card text + it fits the set = enough proof for them.
And Tyler Durden was based on Queequay. Everyone knows this.
MTGO Writer and Epic Time-Waster.
If you have questions about MTGO PM me, I'm all up ons, as it were.
Check out my articles on http://puremtgo.com/ I'm the nerd you see there... wait, not that one. Nope, not that one either... yeah. That one.
Meddling Mage stops Bitterblossom/Cryptic/Cruel Ultimatum/Everything thats good and isn't a land, from being played period. Why wouldn't it rise in price because of that alone? In today's standard if your in either white or blue your probably going to put this in your board and find a way to play it, especially with today's mana pool, hell faeries ran white for esper charm for mirror this is probably going to push them to run this card to stop opposing Cryptics (even though it locks out theirs) from being used or volcanic fallout. 5CC will no doubt put this card in their main or sideboard (depends on what kind of meta your expecting) to stop key cards like Ajani for boatbrew and bitterblossom/Cryptic for fae. Lark should just sky rocket at this point because theres no point in trying to win against a deck that plays two of the most aggravating cards in standard (imo) where they can litterally lock out of your win condition.
There was once [The Pack], but no more.
Can I have your name and # so I can trade with you please?
Because I would assume that this wouldn't be the only stupid trade you'd give me.
Decks:
EDH:
B Korlash, Heir to Blackblade B
G Verdeloth the Ancient G
R Ib Halfheart, Goblin Tactition R
BUW Sharrum of the Hedgemon BUW
GUW Jenara GUW
BURGW Reaper King BURGW
Yes I really like EDH
Standard
BURGW FCC BURGW
BR Goblins BR
Activated abilities of the named card can't be played.
Clearly they're stapling Pithing Needle to a bear and getting rid of the annoying "mana abilities" caveat.
I kid, I kid. I just thought... maybe there would be some more evidence than "welp the oracle text is in the orb" that you're hiding from us so as to not get DCI banned?
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=3772718&postcount=63
- 4/22/12, Knowledge from the Helvault (Part 1)
I salute you for consistency, then! If we added Backlash to the spoiler, I'd have no leg to stand on in this argument, since we'd be down to arguing what standard of proof is necessary for inclusion in the spoiler, and that's very debatable. I think my standard would be higher, and I don't think I'd include either MM or Backlash on this evidence, but at least if we include both, we aren't applying a double-standard.
That's fair, though I would argue that MM doesn't really have all that unique card text (again, all the text is in Shards). The words aren't actually uncommon, it's just the sequencing that makes it unique.
*facepalm* Of course, I should have known!
Well, that's confirmation enough for me
Little birdies are generally a *shrug* as far as evidence is concerned, but that's still better than what we had going over here. With that information and the Orb combined, I'd say the odds are now slightly better than even. Were it my call, I'd still hold off putting it on the spoiler until we could be a bit more certain, but that part's not my call.
You should look up the captain's track record
I never use those icons, somehow that clicked when I made the post. It was an accident. When I looked at the post, I was like...what is that...?
There we go.
More like Captain Black hasn't been wrong before (read: he is a source, one of the few we have left :/ ), so this information is as solid as we are going to get until we see the card physically.
If you were in charge of the spoiler, you wouldn't have added any Conflux Zesty cards either I guess.
Twitter
Hey, I didn't even notice. I'm an emoticon retard.
My bad, I didn't know how good a rep he had. If he's a solid source, then consider it confirmed. I stand by my assessment of the previously existing evidence, however, and still think adding it on the basis of "The word "Can't" is in the Orb!" is pretty silly, and even more silly in light of Backlash.
As to the card itself, Meddling Mage is sitting in a very strange place right now. Specifically, he's competing with no less than two other two-drop Bears that do very, very similar things - Tidehollow Sculler and Gaddock Teeg. Sculler is the most versatile of the three, and probably the strongest. Despite that, Meddling Mage is at his best when played adjacent to Sculler (since he never names something irrelevant). Both cards give 5cC headaches, so I wouldn't be surprised to see an Esper-based deck akin to Zvi's "The Solution" from way back when. You could run the twin denying bears in Block alongside Punish Ignorance, and even Hindering Light if you're feeling especially frisky, centering on beating up the more controlling decks in the format, and effectively denying them the tools to fight back.
The main difficulty I see with that strategy would be finding an efficient way to handle "My guys are bigger than yours".
Fair enough. It would be funny if the system could identify posts that disagree with whatever they're quoting and automatically add something like that.
Guildmaster Jarad
I agree with the argument, other than sculler being the strongest (I would argue for teeg in the current standard) but used in dark bant, making it much harder for control decks to stop you, or anti-tokens using sculler or mage to stop the path's the wreck you and teeg to stop the spectral proccessions, planeswalkers, and sideboard sweeps. Using mage over the others probably wont happen, but side by side, along with some other power, it could make for a strong dark bant deck (that would unfortuantly have no possibilty in the mirror).
Nothing much has changed.
Still, a nice addition to any expansion.
Banner and avatar by the one and only Craven at Epic graphics. Check them out.
Offical High Priest of Reign of Blood
But tweaking Dark Bant to be better at beating 5cC just results in old-fashioned Doran decks. (Trust me, been there, done that.) Discard is often more efficient than Meddling Mages. And the painful fact is, these decks are currently quite resistant to Volcanic Fallout, but once you add Meddling Mages in addition to Scullers, Birds, and Hierarchs, they get a lot MORE vulnerable to it, which means the first thing Meddling Mage has to name is... Volcanic Fallout. So you add a card to stop your opponent from playing specific cards, and by virtue of adding that card, you have to use the first one to stop your opponent from playing a card that was already pretty bad against you. That's kinda sad, dontcha think?
First PTQ top 8 6/13/09(1st)
Second PTQ top 8 10/7/09(5th)
Second at national Qualifier 5/15/10
Third PTQ top 8 2/12/11 (2nd)
Second at Alberta 2011's
Fourth PTQ top 8 3/17/12(8th)
GP Vancouver 2012 (18th)
Cyriss
Bant probably, it's not an artifact creature...
This is really hard to say right now, but generally you want to stop cards that either a) will kill the mage or b) kill you that you can't normally deal with.
This generally means that you'll name Volcanic Fallout or Banefire and just deal with countering the other removal as it gets aimed at the Mage (like with hindering light, sweet). Or, if I were needing to stick an Elspeth in Block against 5CC I'd play MM turn two naming Countersquall and drop the elspeth with less fear of losing a turn and two life.
Sometimes, you just want to slow their game plan down as well. Say you want to buy a turn or two against Naya Aggro. Drop him naming Wooly Thoctar and they have to burn the Mage out before they can drop the real beater in their hand. Again, it doesn't have to lock them out completely to do its job, just slow them down until you can do what your deck needs to do to take control.
MTGO Writer and Epic Time-Waster.
If you have questions about MTGO PM me, I'm all up ons, as it were.
Check out my articles on http://puremtgo.com/ I'm the nerd you see there... wait, not that one. Nope, not that one either... yeah. That one.