You dont have to protect a Phenax to win the game with it though. If anything, the creatures you have out need to be protected before you can resolve your 5 mana do nothing.
You should try being a bit more intelligent before mocking somebody.
Apparently you didn't get my point. He said running Jace out onto a horrible board state was bad magic, I countered by saying the same is true of Phenax. Granted these two cards don't fill the same purpose because they won't be in the same decks. Maybe YOU should realize that the person you called unintelligent actually knows of what he speaks. I've been milling around with him since he was spoiled, and I have a deck list that I'm tweaking that I'm dubbing Harry Potter and the Order of the Phenax.
Apparently you didn't get my point. He said running Jace out onto a horrible board state was bad magic, I countered by saying the same is true of Phenax. Granted these two cards don't fill the same purpose because they won't be in the same decks. Maybe YOU should realize that the person you called unintelligent actually knows of what he speaks.
Your point makes no sense, thats why I "didnt get it". If you play Phenax into a bad board state, theres no penalty to that, unlike Jace that would just die. Also Jace can try to fog your opponent and draw a card, while Phenax doesnt have any other option other than doing nothing by itself. Phenax is a terrible stand alone card, which is why its not any good for any competitive control deck since good competitive decks need good stand alone cards or cards combined with a few other cards can win the game on the spot.
You were repeating exactly what the other guy said and evaluating both cards the same way in the same situation, which is why your post looked pretty stupid.
Correct me if I'm wrong, I don't play standard so I don't know how the decks are built, but aren't decks running Jace running far less creatures than a deck based around Phenax would? So if you have an empty boardstate with Phenax that's kind of the least of your worries. What were you doing the first 5 turns?
Correct me if I'm wrong, I don't play standard so I don't know how the decks are built, but aren't decks running Jace running far less creatures than a deck based around Phenax would? So if you have an empty boardstate with Phenax that's kind of the least of your worries. What were you doing the first 5 turns?
I have always said that Phenex may have a deck that it can be played in, but it requires a specific deck and a lot of effort to make it work. Apparently some people have the ridiculois opinion that mill cards that require no extra work to win the game are worse. That is where the argument started.
I have always said that Phenex may have a deck that it can be played in, but it requires a specific deck and a lot of effort to make it work. Apparently some people have the ridiculois opinion that mill cards that require no extra work to win the game are worse. That is where the argument started.
Posted from MTGsalvation.com App for Android
Again, noob, so I probably have a wrong opinion but doesn't Phenax indestructibility make up for Jace's other uses/utility as a lone card? Jace is much easier to get rid of (probably wrong here) than Phenax. Heroes downfall which is highly played will get rid of Jace but Phenax is vulnerable to niche cards that don't seem to be run very often (Fade into Antiquity). If it had shroud or hexproof this card would be even better. Again, unless I'm wrong, that jace is the "mill" jace but do people really use that ability?
Edit: Also, does Jace's ultimate cause them to lose the game if they have <20 card left in the library?
I have always said that Phenex may have a deck that it can be played in, but it requires a specific deck and a lot of effort to make it work. Apparently some people have the ridiculois opinion that mill cards that require no extra work to win the game are worse. That is where the argument started.
Posted from MTGsalvation.com App for Android
Again, noob, so I probably have a wrong opinion but doesn't Phenax indestructibility make up for Jace's other uses/utility as a lone card? Jace is much easier to get rid of (probably wrong here) than Phenax. Heroes downfall which is highly played will get rid of Jace but Phenax is vulnerable to niche cards that don't seem to be run very often (Fade into Antiquity). If it had shroud or hexproof this card would be even better. Again, unless I'm wrong, that jace is the "mill" jace but do people really use that ability?
Edit: Also, does Jace's ultimate cause them to lose the game if they have <20 card left in the library?
The main difference is the utility provided. Phenax is more difficult to remove, but the cards required to make Phenax useful are easy to remove. If Phenax is alone, he does nothing. Phenax also really only does one thing, mill. I mean, you can use him to beat face, but the decks that will want him probably won't care about that.
Jace is great on an empty board, and if the opponent has creatures he still at least draws a card and gains life if you have nothing else to do. Jace just does stuff more frequently, making him the objectively more powerful card.
Apparently you didn't get my point. He said running Jace out onto a horrible board state was bad magic, I countered by saying the same is true of Phenax. Granted these two cards don't fill the same purpose because they won't be in the same decks. Maybe YOU should realize that the person you called unintelligent actually knows of what he speaks. I've been milling around with him since he was spoiled, and I have a deck list that I'm tweaking that I'm dubbing Harry Potter and the Order of the Phenax.
Maybe he realized that the person he called unintelligent is easily excited by janky cards.
The problem with these threads is that most people who turn out to be wrong won't ever admit it.
We should, if we are going to argue so much about a card's future competitive value, make a thread for bragging rights were everyone weighs their opinion about each card, then we come back and however turns out to be incorrect has to eat some crow.
The problem with these threads is that most people who turn out to be wrong won't ever admit it.
We should, if we are going to argue so much about a card's future competitive value, make a thread for bragging rights were everyone weighs their opinion about each card, then we come back and however turns out to be incorrect has to eat some crow.
Good idea in theory, but since no one is civil on the internet I can't think of something that would be more poorly executed.
The last standard FNM I went to I lost to a ridiculous Consuming Aberration deck (that went undefeated), then Phenax is spoiled and that deck just got pumped like a mofo. In a good control setup that's just sickening.
I've hated mill since the Black Vise decks of '94, but I can't deny that's an awesome finisher for the deck type.
As for unoriginality.. what did you expect UB to get? Mill is what it does. This seems like whining about red getting yet another direct damage spell.
Apparently you didn't get my point. He said running Jace out onto a horrible board state was bad magic, I countered by saying the same is true of Phenax. Granted these two cards don't fill the same purpose because they won't be in the same decks. Maybe YOU should realize that the person you called unintelligent actually knows of what he speaks. I've been milling around with him since he was spoiled, and I have a deck list that I'm tweaking that I'm dubbing Harry Potter and the Order of the Phenax.
Many thanks to DNC at Heroes of the Plane Studios
Your point makes no sense, thats why I "didnt get it". If you play Phenax into a bad board state, theres no penalty to that, unlike Jace that would just die. Also Jace can try to fog your opponent and draw a card, while Phenax doesnt have any other option other than doing nothing by itself. Phenax is a terrible stand alone card, which is why its not any good for any competitive control deck since good competitive decks need good stand alone cards or cards combined with a few other cards can win the game on the spot.
You were repeating exactly what the other guy said and evaluating both cards the same way in the same situation, which is why your post looked pretty stupid.
I have always said that Phenex may have a deck that it can be played in, but it requires a specific deck and a lot of effort to make it work. Apparently some people have the ridiculois opinion that mill cards that require no extra work to win the game are worse. That is where the argument started.
Posted from MTGsalvation.com App for Android
Check out http://www.mtgbrodeals.com/author/john-murphy/ for my EDH articles!
Again, noob, so I probably have a wrong opinion but doesn't Phenax indestructibility make up for Jace's other uses/utility as a lone card? Jace is much easier to get rid of (probably wrong here) than Phenax. Heroes downfall which is highly played will get rid of Jace but Phenax is vulnerable to niche cards that don't seem to be run very often (Fade into Antiquity). If it had shroud or hexproof this card would be even better. Again, unless I'm wrong, that jace is the "mill" jace but do people really use that ability?
Edit: Also, does Jace's ultimate cause them to lose the game if they have <20 card left in the library?
The main difference is the utility provided. Phenax is more difficult to remove, but the cards required to make Phenax useful are easy to remove. If Phenax is alone, he does nothing. Phenax also really only does one thing, mill. I mean, you can use him to beat face, but the decks that will want him probably won't care about that.
Jace is great on an empty board, and if the opponent has creatures he still at least draws a card and gains life if you have nothing else to do. Jace just does stuff more frequently, making him the objectively more powerful card.
Edit: Yes
Posted from MTGsalvation.com App for Android
Check out http://www.mtgbrodeals.com/author/john-murphy/ for my EDH articles!
Maybe he realized that the person he called unintelligent is easily excited by janky cards.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
We should, if we are going to argue so much about a card's future competitive value, make a thread for bragging rights were everyone weighs their opinion about each card, then we come back and however turns out to be incorrect has to eat some crow.
Good idea in theory, but since no one is civil on the internet I can't think of something that would be more poorly executed.
I've hated mill since the Black Vise decks of '94, but I can't deny that's an awesome finisher for the deck type.
As for unoriginality.. what did you expect UB to get? Mill is what it does. This seems like whining about red getting yet another direct damage spell.
How To Keep Your FOIL Cards From Curling: http://youtu.be/QTmubrS8VnI
The Best Deck Boxes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEwgLph_Pjk
The Best Binders: http://youtu.be/H5IauASYWjk
...and I'm over here with The Mimeoplasm and Consuming Aberration and, I dunno, Tree of Redemption? just waitin' to cackle.
UB-variety fans are (understandably) saying "gah not more mill" and a swathe of mill fans are saying "THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING ABOUT EVERYTHING I DO."
Hedron Crab is one small, small step closer to being OP, and B.F.M. can one-shot a player who's sitting pretty behind Blazing Archon and Empyrial Angel. Today is a good day.
A. A soil that holds no moisture, hosts no play.
--Yahoo Answers
Whelming Wave is great. Hero could find some love. Phenax is just bad (as we all knew he would be).
But, is there any hope for u/b currently?