Common?
Realy?
Didnt they ban Study from pauper 2 months ago?
Dude, that was Frantic Search they banned. Careful Study is no where near good enough to receive a ban in any format. Even Brainstorm is legal in Pauper...
I'm sorry, did you read a word I said? Flavourwise this is totally red! Red is perfectly willing to throw away cards in hand that are not immediately useful in exchange for something different. That's how red works. It's a different interpretation of the mechanic than its blue counterpart, but it's no less valid.
Red doesn't draw cards out of knowledge, but of instinct. Check out the flavor text of Bonded Fetch:
A well-made homunculus grooms the mind of its master, pruning the thoughts that lead to madness. Few loredelvers survive the study of the infinite without one.
Looting is considered a calculated trade of "inferior" knowledge for more esteemed or useful knowledge and should clearly be in the realm of blue (or green, in the sense of growth of mind, i.e. why Sindbad was timeshifted into green). In no case should red flavorfully be able to control knowledge to that detailed of a degree. I could see it maybe being a blue/red hybrid card, as surges of unconscious intuition do fit the overlap between blue and red, but it should definitely have a random aspect to it to be a fully red card. Red also gets sorceries as it's "preferred" card type for the color, so I could see a looting effect that lets them dig for those as well, but just flat out looting? Doesn't make any sense.
Red doesn't draw cards out of knowledge, but of instinct. Check out the flavor text of Bonded Fetch:
A well-made homunculus grooms the mind of its master, pruning the thoughts that lead to madness. Few loredelvers survive the study of the infinite without one.
Looting is considered a calculated trade of "inferior" knowledge for more esteemed or useful knowledge and should clearly be in the realm of blue (or green, in the sense of growth of mind, i.e. why Sindbad was timeshifted into green). In no case should red flavorfully be able to control knowledge to that detailed of a degree. I could see it maybe being a blue/red hybrid card, as surges of unconscious intuition do fit the overlap between blue and red, but it should definitely have a random aspect to it to be a fully red card. Red also gets sorceries as it's "preferred" card type for the color, so I could see a looting effect that lets them dig for those as well, but just flat out looting? Doesn't make any sense.
Looting makes sense in this regard: You break into a building and see shiny stuff all around, but you've already got stuff with you and you can only carry so much. Now you have to decide what to drop and what to run off with. You didn't know what you'd find when you decided to break in but now you have a choice of what to make off with.
Faithless Looting was spoiled today on the Mothersite. It will be a common card released in Dark Ascension, with different art, though.
I personally like this card a lot. If people can recall back to the ever-so-fun Reanimator decks, and even the ones played today in legacy, a very popular card choice was Careful Study. This card isCareful Study and more, since it's now got a nice little flashback add-on. Even though we don't have any current Reanimator decks in standard, I can see this card becoming a staple for some decks in the near future. After all, Innistrad block is graveyard themed, and we have no idea what kind of things await us in Dark Ascension.
Are you guys seriously arguing over the color pie aspect of this card? It's card filtering, something every color has or will have to some extent because it is just too important from a game play perspective. Planar Chaos made it very clear that any card effect can be rationalized in any color. This card is not one that violates the color pie in any worrisome way. Even if red gets looting, it'll be occasional, and with good reason — red needs it.
If it were a purely red angel, horror, elephant, or elf, that'd be more worrisome. As I see it, looting should be a color-independent ability. It's not a looter per se, that may stay in blue. But a looting spell is fine.
I'm still surprised the discard isn't at random. Maybe their color bleeding looting into Red now.
When red has had discard at random they have not had a -1 card advantage before. Yes the random hurts in the fact that it could hit what ya need, but it normally acted as a replacement effect over -1 to the hand.
Maybe they'll just put commons in these comic books or something to keep the price down. Nonetheless, I don't have a problem with it as long as they don't print mana vault 2.0 in a comic book. I like the art though on this one so will probably try to get 4 of the IDW version since the art is good and the set art is probably going to be worse.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Yawgmoth," Freyalise whispered as she set the bomb, "now you will pay for your treachery."
Are you guys seriously arguing over the color pie aspect of this card? It's card filtering, something every color has or will have to some extent because it is just too important from a game play perspective. Planar Chaos made it very clear that any card effect can be rationalized in any color. This card is not one that violates the color pie in any worrisome way. Even if red gets looting, it'll be occasional, and with good reason — red needs it.
If it were a purely red angel, horror, elephant, or elf, that'd be more worrisome. As I see it, looting should be a color-independent ability. It's not a looter per se, that may stay in blue. But a looting spell is fine.
Not likely. Red is a lot closer to this effect than white ever has been. Red has had a lot of discard + draw effects in the past and while this effect reverses the order of them it is a lot closer to blue or red than any other colors.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I have officially moved to MTGNexus. I just wanted to let people know as my response time to salvation decks being bumped is very hit or miss.
When red has had discard at random they have not had a -1 card advantage before. Yes the random hurts in the fact that it could hit what ya need, but it normally acted as a replacement effect over -1 to the hand.
This card is very strong. I know it's been said already, but I need to say it again. Abusing the discard half of the card is necessary, but it shouldn't be that difficult, and the rewards are very high since you get to see 4 new cards (or dredge 4 times) for 4 mana that you can split over two turns.
I think its a good step towards evening out the color pie, by getting rid of blues monopoly on card draw.
I could see Ponder being color shifted to white.
White is about planning, Red is about coming up with new crazy ideas.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Don't you see that the whole aim of Moderators is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make infractions literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed, will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten.
We really need to see more spells coming from the "lust" part of the red slice of color pie. Come on, for once boobies will not be gratuitious!
Agreed on the lust part of the pie but I think it could be done subtly. I'd love to have seen Traitorous blood done as a card called Vampiric Allure or something of the ilk.
The flavor text could even be
"A vampire doesn't always need magic to control blood."
they say they are shifting looting into red, yet they still are giving us cards like civilized scholar. This confuses me. maybe they are letting blue and red have the looting ability.
they say they are shifting looting into red, yet they still are giving us cards like civilized scholar. This confuses me. maybe they are letting blue and red have the looting ability.
Those were cards that helped the transition, see the backside of Scholar. It's red.
Red doesn't draw cards out of knowledge, but of instinct. Check out the flavor text of Bonded Fetch:
A well-made homunculus grooms the mind of its master, pruning the thoughts that lead to madness. Few loredelvers survive the study of the infinite without one.
Looting is considered a calculated trade of "inferior" knowledge for more esteemed or useful knowledge and should clearly be in the realm of blue (or green, in the sense of growth of mind, i.e. why Sindbad was timeshifted into green). In no case should red flavorfully be able to control knowledge to that detailed of a degree. I could see it maybe being a blue/red hybrid card, as surges of unconscious intuition do fit the overlap between blue and red, but it should definitely have a random aspect to it to be a fully red card. Red also gets sorceries as it's "preferred" card type for the color, so I could see a looting effect that lets them dig for those as well, but just flat out looting? Doesn't make any sense.
As it happens, I've already addressed the "each mechanic has one and only one flavour interpretation" argument here. I also referred to the different ways Red and Blue use the hand (and the different things that represents) in both posts that you quoted. I really wish people would feel the need to read what I have written before responding to it.
As it happens, I've already addressed the "each mechanic has one and only one flavour interpretation" argument here. I also referred to the different ways Red and Blue use the hand (and the different things that represents) in both posts that you quoted. I really wish people would feel the need to read what I have written before responding to it.
That explanation doesn't make any sense, you could abstract red killing enchantments if you boiled it down to "oh all red cares about is the here and now", because surprisingly that's that Magic games are all about. Okryl the Orc doesn't care about the Circle of Protection and smashes right through it. Instead there is an abstraction, Red doesn't have the power to kill enchantments because it's based more in physical magic, although that physical magic does have certain powers, such as to enhance attacks with such elemental destructive force (lava, acid etc) that normal damage prevention doesn't work (i.e. Flaring Pain). However, the enchantments can't be destroyed, no matter how little Okryl cares about them.
By your rationale you could say, since Blue only cares about long term planning, you could have an enchantment like Pernicious Deed in it except it only builds a counter a turn, indicating that the plan takes a long time. That card would never be printed. I don't think you really understand abstraction as well as you think you do.
Again, you have latched on to one interpretation and refuse to see any other perspective. However in this case, strangely, it is not as far as I can tell an interpretation that WotC has ever used themselves. You've just decided that cards in hand should represent short-term options which, while justified, is not really reflected in any mechanics at all (perhaps you have your own interpretations of mechanics like you do looting, but again this is not an interpretation I've ever been aware of). In fact if you think about it, your justification doesn't really stack up to the way hellbent (and fast red strategies in general) actually plays. You seem to be arguing that hellbent is the opposite of how black/red should be thinking, on the grounds that the hand represents short-term options which black/red favours, but what hellbent (and, indeed, looting) does is it forces the hand to actually be short-term options rather than some stockpile of answers waiting for the opportune moment. To go at this from another direction, blue and red are the colours that care most about instants and sorceries, but the way in which they use them is quite different. Red likes to use its instants and sorceries the way you describe, in the short term, throw them all out. This tends to leave the hand empty, which is where hellbent comes in (I think you might also be a little hung up on hellbent's association with black, but since this thread is about red mechanics I don't really want to go into that too much. Assume I'm talking exclusively about red, because I am). Blue, on the other hand, sees its instants and sorceries as more of a long-term contigency. Yes, they're one-shots, but they're one-shots to be used at some point in the future. Red doesn't want to plan that far ahead, it wants to use all its resources now. It took me a while to understand how you thought that was contradictory to hellbent because as I hope I've explained, I see it as the exact opposite.
I give an interpretation that works
You say it's justified
Then you say there's a problem with it
Suffice it to say I got confused about hellbent. That was just me being haunted about my virus-bunked essay. I unfortunately believed I was being coherent.
Are you guys seriously arguing over the color pie aspect of this card? It's card filtering, something every color has or will have to some extent because it is just too important from a game play perspective. Planar Chaos made it very clear that any card effect can be rationalized in any color. This card is not one that violates the color pie in any worrisome way. Even if red gets looting, it'll be occasional, and with good reason — red needs it.
If it were a purely red angel, horror, elephant, or elf, that'd be more worrisome. As I see it, looting should be a color-independent ability. It's not a looter per se, that may stay in blue. But a looting spell is fine.
I'm quoting the whole of your post to indicate it has good stuff in it.
That's not what Planar Chaos proved. The core-mantle-crust spiel is quite deep. It's just something that... it's one of Rosewater's more inelegant articles. And the set itself certainly didn't justify that picture on its own.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Epic banner by Erasmus of æтђєг.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
That explanation doesn't make any sense, you could abstract red killing enchantments if you boiled it down to "oh all red cares about is the here and now", because surprisingly that's that Magic games are all about. Okryl the Orc doesn't care about the Circle of Protection and smashes right through it. Instead there is an abstraction, Red doesn't have the power to kill enchantments because it's based more in physical magic, although that physical magic does have certain powers, such as to enhance attacks with such elemental destructive force (lava, acid etc) that normal damage prevention doesn't work (i.e. Flaring Pain). However, the enchantments can't be destroyed, no matter how little Okryl cares about them.
By your rationale you could say, since Blue only cares about long term planning, you could have an enchantment like Pernicious Deed in it except it only builds a counter a turn, indicating that the plan takes a long time. That card would never be printed. I don't think you really understand abstraction as well as you think you do.
Seriously, there is a flavor for red destroying enchantments. It would be a creature that is too passionate to be affected by mind altering. Really, should Raging Goblin ever be Pacified? He's raging! A more intelligent creature could easily say "Ha! That silly illusion of power you grant yourself! DASHED!"
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
She wants a ride on the pony, dude.
Mafia Stats
Kill shot: BB
Issue with my shooting? Please visit my helpdesk and help me learn to aim!
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Realy?
Didnt they ban Study from pauper 2 months ago?
Dude, that was Frantic Search they banned. Careful Study is no where near good enough to receive a ban in any format. Even Brainstorm is legal in Pauper...
Red doesn't draw cards out of knowledge, but of instinct. Check out the flavor text of Bonded Fetch:
A well-made homunculus grooms the mind of its master, pruning the thoughts that lead to madness. Few loredelvers survive the study of the infinite without one.
Looting is considered a calculated trade of "inferior" knowledge for more esteemed or useful knowledge and should clearly be in the realm of blue (or green, in the sense of growth of mind, i.e. why Sindbad was timeshifted into green). In no case should red flavorfully be able to control knowledge to that detailed of a degree. I could see it maybe being a blue/red hybrid card, as surges of unconscious intuition do fit the overlap between blue and red, but it should definitely have a random aspect to it to be a fully red card. Red also gets sorceries as it's "preferred" card type for the color, so I could see a looting effect that lets them dig for those as well, but just flat out looting? Doesn't make any sense.
Looting makes sense in this regard: You break into a building and see shiny stuff all around, but you've already got stuff with you and you can only carry so much. Now you have to decide what to drop and what to run off with. You didn't know what you'd find when you decided to break in but now you have a choice of what to make off with.
Red flavor: recklessness
I personally like this card a lot. If people can recall back to the ever-so-fun Reanimator decks, and even the ones played today in legacy, a very popular card choice was Careful Study. This card is Careful Study and more, since it's now got a nice little flashback add-on. Even though we don't have any current Reanimator decks in standard, I can see this card becoming a staple for some decks in the near future. After all, Innistrad block is graveyard themed, and we have no idea what kind of things await us in Dark Ascension.
Dunes of Zairo
SHANDALAR
Innistrad - The Darkest Night
~THE RAVNICAN CONSORTIUM~
A Community Set
Commander: Allies & Adversaries
If it were a purely red angel, horror, elephant, or elf, that'd be more worrisome. As I see it, looting should be a color-independent ability. It's not a looter per se, that may stay in blue. But a looting spell is fine.
When red has had discard at random they have not had a -1 card advantage before. Yes the random hurts in the fact that it could hit what ya need, but it normally acted as a replacement effect over -1 to the hand.
Currently Playing:
Retired
So you could see this card in white?
Not likely. Red is a lot closer to this effect than white ever has been. Red has had a lot of discard + draw effects in the past and while this effect reverses the order of them it is a lot closer to blue or red than any other colors.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
Gamble is a tutor not a draw effect. When did we start talking about faithless looting being a tutor?
Burning Inquiry
Touche, although was thinking strictly on a targeted draw, but you are indeed correct. That leaves a disadvantage for the draw.
~~~~~~~~~
Too many to list efficiently. Find me online with the same SN if you want to play, or message me here to set up a time to play.
Modern
~~~~~~~~~
Whatever pile of 75 I throw together the night before without testing. Usually: :symb::symu::symg:
I could see Ponder being color shifted to white.
White is about planning, Red is about coming up with new crazy ideas.
Visions?
Practice for Khans of Tarkir Limited:
Draft: (#1) (#2) (#3) (#4) (#5)
Agreed on the lust part of the pie but I think it could be done subtly. I'd love to have seen Traitorous blood done as a card called Vampiric Allure or something of the ilk.
The flavor text could even be
"A vampire doesn't always need magic to control blood."
You can check out my artwork here and here
Those were cards that helped the transition, see the backside of Scholar. It's red.
As it happens, I've already addressed the "each mechanic has one and only one flavour interpretation" argument here. I also referred to the different ways Red and Blue use the hand (and the different things that represents) in both posts that you quoted. I really wish people would feel the need to read what I have written before responding to it.
That explanation doesn't make any sense, you could abstract red killing enchantments if you boiled it down to "oh all red cares about is the here and now", because surprisingly that's that Magic games are all about. Okryl the Orc doesn't care about the Circle of Protection and smashes right through it. Instead there is an abstraction, Red doesn't have the power to kill enchantments because it's based more in physical magic, although that physical magic does have certain powers, such as to enhance attacks with such elemental destructive force (lava, acid etc) that normal damage prevention doesn't work (i.e. Flaring Pain). However, the enchantments can't be destroyed, no matter how little Okryl cares about them.
By your rationale you could say, since Blue only cares about long term planning, you could have an enchantment like Pernicious Deed in it except it only builds a counter a turn, indicating that the plan takes a long time. That card would never be printed. I don't think you really understand abstraction as well as you think you do.
Credit goes to Brofoux for the Sig pic.
Current Modern Deck
Black Licorice
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=11006564#post11006564
I give an interpretation that works
You say it's justified
Then you say there's a problem with it
Suffice it to say I got confused about hellbent. That was just me being haunted about my virus-bunked essay. I unfortunately believed I was being coherent.
I'm quoting the whole of your post to indicate it has good stuff in it.
That's not what Planar Chaos proved. The core-mantle-crust spiel is quite deep. It's just something that... it's one of Rosewater's more inelegant articles. And the set itself certainly didn't justify that picture on its own.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
Capricious Efreet? Jaya Ballard, Task Mage? Active Volcano, Pyroblast or Red Elemental Blast which Jaya's based on? Two of those are in Modern, and the other three are the first ability of one of the Modern. In fact, Wild Swing is about the only random destruction that specifically calls out nonenchantment. And all this doesn't count the way red can destroy Lucent Liminid.
Seriously, there is a flavor for red destroying enchantments. It would be a creature that is too passionate to be affected by mind altering. Really, should Raging Goblin ever be Pacified? He's raging! A more intelligent creature could easily say "Ha! That silly illusion of power you grant yourself! DASHED!"
Mafia Stats
Kill shot: BB
Issue with my shooting? Please visit my helpdesk and help me learn to aim!