1) 3 mana is a huge upside
2) them replacing the cards you strip from their hand isn't a huge downside
Wait what? Them getting to draw cards isn't a huge downside? How is a card that in even the best case is paying 4 mana to get card disadvantage not a downside?
Yes, 3 mana is an upside. Considering a lot of posts have mentioned taking away emrakuls I'd say that 3 or 4 mana isn't that big of a difference though. The problem with that 3 mana upside is that it also gets some downsides to compensate for that. So for one less mana you lose versatility in not getting to name artifacts and you lose even more cards from the times they get to draw from the effect.
Extraction effects have been around for very long, they have never been especially good except as sideboard cards against very narrow strategies with few wincons (such as storm).
That is why I don't see why people are considering this particular extraction-effect as especially good. Sure, it might be a useful sideboard card if a deck with very few wincons emerges, but that saved mana doesn't compensate for the even larger card disadvantage and less versatility.
Lobotomy you can only choose from their hand. If you know what kind of deck their playing but want to name a staple (gout, siege rhino, lightning bolt whatever) you can't unless it's in their hand.
To be honest this whole "omg they get to draw cards!" Crap is kinda dumb. So what? It isn't a lot of cards. Vendilion Clique and Thought-knot seer timed right is a kick in the balls.
Hell there is the best case scenario, they don't have it in their hands and you just nuked their win con. Worse case I guess would be if they have all freaking 4 copies in their hand but I don't mind if it's some serious threat that I don't want to deal with.
Spending an entire turn and a card doing nothing to the boardstate does not seem like an extremely good plan vs. decks with bolts, goyfs or rhinos...
You think pointing out that this card is inherent disadvantage in one of the most important resources in the game is "kinda dumb"? Claiming that something is "kinda dumb" and following it up with a comparison with clique and TKS is imo "kinda dumb".
clique lets them draw a card, yes. But it is also guaranteed to get their best card, at instant speed, and nets you a 3 power flier. 3 power fliers are kinda good. Same with tks, you get their best card and have a 4/4 on the ground. 4/4:s are kinda good aswell.
This extraction effect lets you spend 3 mana with zero impact to the board, netting the opponent card advantage. How is that comparable to getting an instant speed 3 power flier taking away their best card?
I object to calling it better than Infinite Obliteration Even more inherent card disadvantage is a pretty big strike against it.
I think Kambal could find a deck. It's a 3 mana general which helps. And draining opponents for every spell they cast is not only obnoxious, it actually adds up quite a bit. Problem is that they will want to kill him or you asap since the effect is annoying.
Quote me for replies.
Did I write something useful? Leave a like.
Any new cool Daretti cards printed in the latest set? Tell me about it!
Rules Advisor
Kambal looks like it will see play in every constructed format it's legal in. Decent value in standard, and royally messing up spell decks and combo in modern, legacy, and vintage, probably inside a death and taxes build.
ITT ruric thar is a stax piece.
Kambal is a slow commander, and a waste of the zone. However he should be put into wb stax and control decks to help with the grind. Think oloro
1) 3 mana is a huge upside
2) them replacing the cards you strip from their hand isn't a huge downside
Wait what? Them getting to draw cards isn't a huge downside? How is a card that in even the best case is paying 4 mana to get card disadvantage not a downside?
Yes, 3 mana is an upside. Considering a lot of posts have mentioned taking away emrakuls I'd say that 3 or 4 mana isn't that big of a difference though. The problem with that 3 mana upside is that it also gets some downsides to compensate for that. So for one less mana you lose versatility in not getting to name artifacts and you lose even more cards from the times they get to draw from the effect.
Extraction effects have been around for very long, they have never been especially good except as sideboard cards against very narrow strategies with few wincons (such as storm).
That is why I don't see why people are considering this particular extraction-effect as especially good. Sure, it might be a useful sideboard card if a deck with very few wincons emerges, but that saved mana doesn't compensate for the even larger card disadvantage and less versatility.
Lobotomy you can only choose from their hand. If you know what kind of deck their playing but want to name a staple (gout, siege rhino, lightning bolt whatever) you can't unless it's in their hand.
To be honest this whole "omg they get to draw cards!" Crap is kinda dumb. So what? It isn't a lot of cards. Vendilion Clique and Thought-knot seer timed right is a kick in the balls.
Hell there is the best case scenario, they don't have it in their hands and you just nuked their win con. Worse case I guess would be if they have all freaking 4 copies in their hand but I don't mind if it's some serious threat that I don't want to deal with.
Spending an entire turn and a card doing nothing to the boardstate does not seem like an extremely good plan vs. decks with bolts, goyfs or rhinos...
You think pointing out that this card is inherent disadvantage in one of the most important resources in the game is "kinda dumb"? Claiming that something is "kinda dumb" and following it up with a comparison with clique and TKS is imo "kinda dumb".
clique lets them draw a card, yes. But it is also guaranteed to get their best card, at instant speed, and nets you a 3 power flier. 3 power fliers are kinda good. Same with tks, you get their best card and have a 4/4 on the ground. 4/4:s are kinda good aswell.
This extraction effect lets you spend 3 mana with zero impact to the board, netting the opponent card advantage. How is that comparable to getting an instant speed 3 power flier taking away their best card?
I object to calling it better than Infinite Obliteration Even more inherent card disadvantage is a pretty big strike against it.
I think Kambal could find a deck. It's a 3 mana general which helps. And draining opponents for every spell they cast is not only obnoxious, it actually adds up quite a bit. Problem is that they will want to kill him or you asap since the effect is annoying.
I don't know man, your argument has some pretty big flaws. You mentioned legacy lost being less versatile. less versatile than what? it targets everything than isn't a land or artifact; did you mean it's one of the most versatile extraction cards? you also responded to them about vendilion clique and TKS getting their BEST card and a relevant body. you are right about the body, completely wrong about the best card part. you get the best card 'in their hand' whereas legacy lost literally get's their best card save for an artifact. yes they MAY get card advantage off of this, MAY. again I will stress this, MAY. only if they have at least one of the named card in hand. Legacy lost is far more flexible and frankly more powerful than infinite obliteration. lets just bring up the temurge deck for example, as you mentioned 'if a deck with very few wincons emerges', so lets say you are on the play. use this turn three and get their kozilek's return, well their goes their entire defense against go wide strategies before they can even cast it once, or instead hit their elder deep-fiend, well now you just hit their biggest wincon. infinite obliteration only could have dealt with one of those. And exactly what are you afraid of them drawing if you just took the best card out of their deck? how about tokens, that will still be a deck, so you got their nissas or their gideons or their avacyns. anyone of those almost completely shuts down the deck, or at least slows it down enough to take away all the advantage the deck was built on. to tell you the truth, the card draw thing, is probably the only thing not making this one of the most powerful cards in the set. but it does have it, which of course lets you use it on yourself as others have mentioned to get dead cards out of hand or if you choose eternal scourge it reads pay 3, draw a minimum of 4 cards. I get the feeling you just don't like extraction effects, or just completely overvalue the POTENTIAL for an opponent to have card advantage.
I don't know man, your argument has some pretty big flaws. You mentioned legacy lost being less versatile. less versatile than what? it targets everything than isn't a land or artifact; did you mean it's one of the most versatile extraction cards? you also responded to them about vendilion clique and TKS getting their BEST card and a relevant body. you are right about the body, completely wrong about the best card part. you get the best card 'in their hand' whereas legacy lost literally get's their best card save for an artifact. yes they MAY get card advantage off of this, MAY. again I will stress this, MAY. only if they have at least one of the named card in hand. Legacy lost is far more flexible and frankly more powerful than infinite obliteration. lets just bring up the temurge deck for example, as you mentioned 'if a deck with very few wincons emerges', so lets say you are on the play. use this turn three and get their kozilek's return, well their goes their entire defense against go wide strategies before they can even cast it once, or instead hit their elder deep-fiend, well now you just hit their biggest wincon. infinite obliteration only could have dealt with one of those. And exactly what are you afraid of them drawing if you just took the best card out of their deck? how about tokens, that will still be a deck, so you got their nissas or their gideons or their avacyns. anyone of those almost completely shuts down the deck, or at least slows it down enough to take away all the advantage the deck was built on. to tell you the truth, the card draw thing, is probably the only thing not making this one of the most powerful cards in the set. but it does have it, which of course lets you use it on yourself as others have mentioned to get dead cards out of hand or if you choose eternal scourge it reads pay 3, draw a minimum of 4 cards. I get the feeling you just don't like extraction effects, or just completely overvalue the POTENTIAL for an opponent to have card advantage.
Paragraphs, they work.
Less versatile than a lot of other extraction effects, a lot of which I've already linked.
With clique or tks you get a body and the best card in their hand. I actually prefer getting the best card in their hand as opposed to not getting any cards in their hand.
And there is no may about them getting card advantage of you casting this. They will ALWAYS get card advantage. You just spent a card and 3 mana, you losing cards is jsut as much card advantage for the opponent as him/her drawing cards.
It is more flexible, yes. More powerful due to the flexibility sure. But that extra power carries a big drawback. With infinite obliteration you can atleast stay neutral on the cards, with this you will give the oponent card advantage no matter what.
Yeah, if you extract their kozileks return their defense against go wide strategies is gone. But you on the other hand has spent a turn and 3 mana on not going wide so that defense is less important. Not only that, if this extract becomes a huge sideboard card then they only need to do is diversify their wipes with a few similar cards instead of several copies of the most powerful.
Same with elder-deep fiend. Sure, you have extracted their dep fiend. But at the same time you have done nothing agianst the creatures already on board who was geting ready to emerge (or the deep fiend opp just flashed in in response to you extracting) and are getting beat down by those. And as in the previous example they can diversify their threats and wincons if this extract effect gains popularity in side-boards somwhat weakening the deck to counter this card.
What I am afraid of them drawing? Again, considering you just spent a whole turn and a card without any impact to the boardstate even their small utilitydudes are dangerous.
Any one of those almost completely shuts down their deck? Take away gideon and they still have nissa for pumps. Take away avacyn and they won't need it to protect their tokens since you took away their avacyns rather than dealing with the tokens on board. All while getting beat down by said tokens.
And sure, you may slow them down. But at the same time you slow yourself down keeping the status quo, apart from you giving away card advantage.
Sure, you can use it on yourself. But then you basically pay three mana for a worse, more durdly Faithless Looting with even more severe card disadvantage than looting since you cannot flashback it. Sure, you can "draw" cards by naming eternal scourge. That nets you a bunch of 3/3s for 3 mana while the opponent plays those Nissas instead.
It has nothing to do with me not liking extraction effects, although I don't. It is about me liking good cards and disliking cards that time and time again have proven to be bad in general except as side-board cards against very specific narrow strategies and wizards suddenly printing one with even more card disadvantage tacked on does not make it better than previous iterations of the effect.
And again to make it clear. We are not talking about having a POTENTIAL to give the opponent card advantage. We are talking about a card that GUARANTEES your opponent will gain card advantage.
Quote me for replies.
Did I write something useful? Leave a like.
Any new cool Daretti cards printed in the latest set? Tell me about it!
Rules Advisor
After looking at Kambal a bit more, I'm seeing how he could be good in EDH—
he's not a big enough threat to draw targeted removal, so he'll likely stick around a bit until he eats a wrath
(or your opponents attack you in an attempt to make you block with him).
He basically reads 1WB: gain life until people are bothered enough to waste a card on it.
As a commander, he's sort of like Oloro without U-
he comes down early enough to really tilt life totals in your favor over time.
I still prefer Ayli, Eternal Pilgrim and Karlov of the Ghost Council,
but Kambal should be good support for either one.
Momir Vig, Simic Visionary
Melek, Izzet Paragon
Oona, Queen of the Fae
Bruna, Light of Alabaster
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight
Rhys the Redeemed
Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord
Sen Triplets
The Mimeoplasm WUBRGSliver OverlordGRBUW WUBRGSliver Hivelord(Superfriends)GRBUW
After looking at Kambal a bit more, I'm seeing how he could be good in EDH—
he's not a big enough threat to draw targeted removal, so he'll likely stick around a bit until he eats a wrath
(or your opponents attack you in an attempt to make you block with him).
He basically reads 1WB: gain life until people are bothered enough to waste a card on it.
As a commander, he's sort of like Oloro without U-
he comes down early enough to really tilt life totals in your favor over time.
I still prefer Ayli, Eternal Pilgrim and Karlov of the Ghost Council,
but Kambal should be good support for either one.
The problem with him is imo that people will attack you jsut to get rid of that annoying lifeloss. He draws hate anytime any opponent does anything pretty much. Cards that punishes opponents are much more likely to get targeted than cards that defend yourself.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote me for replies.
Did I write something useful? Leave a like.
Any new cool Daretti cards printed in the latest set? Tell me about it!
Rules Advisor
Not really, I think the dude is mehtastic at best. My favourite general in WB is still the first teysa and seeing the design of recent orzhov legends makes it very likely that won't change anytime soon.
I'm SO SICK of the "too strong for Standard" argument. It's the new "Dies to removal". We can have a two mana 4/4 with a zillion abilities, but we can't just have Accumulated Knowledge. Makes sense.
Kambal looks like it will see play in every constructed format it's legal in. Decent value in standard, and royally messing up spell decks and combo in modern, legacy, and vintage, probably inside a death and taxes build.
D&T is a natural fit, but I think he will see play in Kiki-Evo Decks, Maverick, Deadguy Ale, Abzan.
I actually kind of see him playing nice in an esper shell too. Kambal + Remand is gross on many levels.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Current Decks
Modern
No idea because my favorite decks keep getting banned or having the rules changed against them
And another Orzhov legend for lifegain.dec. Karlov, Ayli, Oloro...They're all happy with this one.
Also, Stax actually got its name, not from Smokestack, but from a very specific deck called "the $4000 solution" or $T4KS in l33t 4kr0nym. Here's an early (2003) Stax deck from David Wee.
Card advantage is not the same thing as card draw. Something for 2B cannot be strictly worse than something for BBB or 3BB. If you're taking out Swords to Plowshares for Plummet, you're a fool. Stop doing these things!
In fact, your life total is one of the two most important resources in the game (the other being cards); as once you run out, you lose.
Back on topic- Kambal is very interesting (from an edh perspective), though I see him being more of a cog in the 99 than at the helm. While it's true he might slip under the radar as opposed to most of his competition; it's also a really annoying effect that people will get irritated with quickly and want him off the table, at which point it's not quite swingy enough of an effect to warrant recasting him several times (outside of the random night you're vs three spell-slinging decks).
Other than that, I certainly see him having other constructed applications.
The one thing Lost Legacy has going for it is the fact it can be ritual'd out on turn 1 in eternal formats vs ANT and the like. Otherwise, it's a rather meh rehash of the same old cranial re-skin they print every couple sets or so.
I don't know man, your argument has some pretty big flaws. You mentioned legacy lost being less versatile. less versatile than what? it targets everything than isn't a land or artifact; did you mean it's one of the most versatile extraction cards? you also responded to them about vendilion clique and TKS getting their BEST card and a relevant body. you are right about the body, completely wrong about the best card part. you get the best card 'in their hand' whereas legacy lost literally get's their best card save for an artifact. yes they MAY get card advantage off of this, MAY. again I will stress this, MAY. only if they have at least one of the named card in hand. Legacy lost is far more flexible and frankly more powerful than infinite obliteration. lets just bring up the temurge deck for example, as you mentioned 'if a deck with very few wincons emerges', so lets say you are on the play. use this turn three and get their kozilek's return, well their goes their entire defense against go wide strategies before they can even cast it once, or instead hit their elder deep-fiend, well now you just hit their biggest wincon. infinite obliteration only could have dealt with one of those. And exactly what are you afraid of them drawing if you just took the best card out of their deck? how about tokens, that will still be a deck, so you got their nissas or their gideons or their avacyns. anyone of those almost completely shuts down the deck, or at least slows it down enough to take away all the advantage the deck was built on. to tell you the truth, the card draw thing, is probably the only thing not making this one of the most powerful cards in the set. but it does have it, which of course lets you use it on yourself as others have mentioned to get dead cards out of hand or if you choose eternal scourge it reads pay 3, draw a minimum of 4 cards. I get the feeling you just don't like extraction effects, or just completely overvalue the POTENTIAL for an opponent to have card advantage.
Paragraphs, they work.
Less versatile than a lot of other extraction effects, a lot of which I've already linked.
With clique or tks you get a body and the best card in their hand. I actually prefer getting the best card in their hand as opposed to not getting any cards in their hand.
And there is no may about them getting card advantage of you casting this. They will ALWAYS get card advantage. You just spent a card and 3 mana, you losing cards is jsut as much card advantage for the opponent as him/her drawing cards.
It is more flexible, yes. More powerful due to the flexibility sure. But that extra power carries a big drawback. With infinite obliteration you can atleast stay neutral on the cards, with this you will give the oponent card advantage no matter what.
Yeah, if you extract their kozileks return their defense against go wide strategies is gone. But you on the other hand has spent a turn and 3 mana on not going wide so that defense is less important. Not only that, if this extract becomes a huge sideboard card then they only need to do is diversify their wipes with a few similar cards instead of several copies of the most powerful.
Same with elder-deep fiend. Sure, you have extracted their dep fiend. But at the same time you have done nothing agianst the creatures already on board who was geting ready to emerge (or the deep fiend opp just flashed in in response to you extracting) and are getting beat down by those. And as in the previous example they can diversify their threats and wincons if this extract effect gains popularity in side-boards somwhat weakening the deck to counter this card.
What I am afraid of them drawing? Again, considering you just spent a whole turn and a card without any impact to the boardstate even their small utilitydudes are dangerous.
Any one of those almost completely shuts down their deck? Take away gideon and they still have nissa for pumps. Take away avacyn and they won't need it to protect their tokens since you took away their avacyns rather than dealing with the tokens on board. All while getting beat down by said tokens.
And sure, you may slow them down. But at the same time you slow yourself down keeping the status quo, apart from you giving away card advantage.
Sure, you can use it on yourself. But then you basically pay three mana for a worse, more durdly Faithless Looting with even more severe card disadvantage than looting since you cannot flashback it. Sure, you can "draw" cards by naming eternal scourge. That nets you a bunch of 3/3s for 3 mana while the opponent plays those Nissas instead.
It has nothing to do with me not liking extraction effects, although I don't. It is about me liking good cards and disliking cards that time and time again have proven to be bad in general except as side-board cards against very specific narrow strategies and wizards suddenly printing one with even more card disadvantage tacked on does not make it better than previous iterations of the effect.
And again to make it clear. We are not talking about having a POTENTIAL to give the opponent card advantage. We are talking about a card that GUARANTEES your opponent will gain card advantage.
so basically your entire argument is that if a spell of any sort is cast that does not immediately effect the board, then you somehow 'guarantee' card advantage to your opponent? That's the most limited thinking I have seen in any argument before. I'll take a bet that you've never played a game of chess have you. dictating the resources that your opponent has to use over THE ENTIRE GAME gives you the advantage, by definition. using a card like this on turn three, literally only hurts you against an agro deck build. And of course no one would use a card like this against aggro in the first place. There is a reason this type of card always shows up in the sideboard, and that's because it's incredibly useful, just not against one type of build.
As to your other arguments, you act as if a person playing this spell does absolutely nothing on the turns before it and leave an empty board to be run over with. Not every deck is a tempo build; sure there have been many successful ones recently, but a card like this would actually work wonders in a go wide strategy deck. specifically because they are going wide, so they have smaller, cheaper creatures, and can easily sacrifice one turn of board presence to steal the opponents wincon. that's actually a good play; not a wasted turn as you seem to believe. I wont say this card is for every deck, or that you should like it or want to play it; but should at least be realistic about it.
so basically your entire argument is that if a spell of any sort is cast that does not immediately effect the board, then you somehow 'guarantee' card advantage to your opponent? That's the most limited thinking I have seen in any argument before. I'll take a bet that you've never played a game of chess have you. dictating the resources that your opponent has to use over THE ENTIRE GAME gives you the advantage, by definition. using a card like this on turn three, literally only hurts you against an agro deck build. And of course no one would use a card like this against aggro in the first place. There is a reason this type of card always shows up in the sideboard, and that's because it's incredibly useful, just not against one type of build.
As to your other arguments, you act as if a person playing this spell does absolutely nothing on the turns before it and leave an empty board to be run over with. Not every deck is a tempo build; sure there have been many successful ones recently, but a card like this would actually work wonders in a go wide strategy deck. specifically because they are going wide, so they have smaller, cheaper creatures, and can easily sacrifice one turn of board presence to steal the opponents wincon. that's actually a good play; not a wasted turn as you seem to believe. I wont say this card is for every deck, or that you should like it or want to play it; but should at least be realistic about it.
If you feel like condensing my argument into one sentence it would help if you do it correctly. a spell that doesn't immediately affect the board has nothing to do with card advantage or disadvantage. You spending 3 mana and a card however guarantees card disadvantage. How can a card that loses you a card not result in card disadvantage? Are you also agumenting that Enlightened Tutor doesn't net you card disadvantage?
I'll take you up on that bet, was a cuple of years since I played for real and never got higher than low-ish 2000's. But hey, low 2000's aint too shabby. I am not really sure how you make the connection between magic and chess though. Because it seems to me that the connection is, boiled down, "you dictate resources over an entire game netting you advantage". But I fail to see an actual argument following that, also keep in mind that I can just as easily state that chess just as magic is about incremental advantages.
Can you show me the definition you speak of? Where in magic, or chess, is it defined that dictating the resources to use over a game gives you the adantage? Because from my experience of both games a lot more energy is put towards making favourable trades whether it be regarding board positions or pieces. So please, show me that definition.
You are also making the claim that using this card on turn three literally only hurts against an aggro deck build and now I am somewhat confused. To make the comparison to chess that is a bit like claiming that skipping your third move in chess literally only hurts against opponents going for agressive openings or a scholars mate. And if you have any knowledge of chess you know just how silly that claim would be considering even playing white and getting to go first is a very serious advantage.
No, these types of cards does not always show up in sideboards. They show up in sideboards of specific decks playing in a meta where there are specific decks to combat with extraction effects.
No, I am not acting as if the person playing this spell does nothing previous turns. I am acting as if the player playing this spell is taking a turn off to play this while the other player develops their board or hand. No, not every deck is a tempo build, but when goyfs, bolts and rhinos are mentioned those are cards often seen in midrangey tempobuilds.
You, yet again, talk about "stealing an opponents wincon". What exactly do you propose this card does if they have several? Steal one of them and hope they don't draw the others?
How do you mean I am unrealistic about it? Extraction effects are nothing new and they have never seen any play outside of specific sideboards to combat very specific decks. The one extract-effect that pops up in a lot of sideboards is surgical extraction. And that one is instant, can be cast for zero mana and is useful against snapcaster.
I would rather say that the one acting unrealistic is the one claiming that this card does not guarantee card disadvantage for the one casting the spell.
Sure, there's Eternal Scourge. But for that to be even a feasible suggestion the scourge neds to be playable to begin with. Or well, I guess your opponent could always Arcane Denial your extraction. That would net you card advantage.
Quote me for replies.
Did I write something useful? Leave a like.
Any new cool Daretti cards printed in the latest set? Tell me about it!
Rules Advisor
And another Orzhov legend for lifegain.dec. Karlov, Ayli, Oloro...They're all happy with this one.
Also, Stax actually got its name, not from Smokestack, but from a very specific deck called "the $4000 solution" or $T4KS in l33t 4kr0nym. Here's an early (2003) Stax deck from David Wee.
Kambal is the kind of commander that my friends would really gun for - I see him as an Oloro or Ruric Thar, the Unbowed and those decks typically get ganged up on in my group. He's smaller and seems a bit safer but I think people would quickly grow to hate him, so probably better with him in the 99 rather than lead a deck.
The cranial extraction variant is just that - a cranial extraction variant. People need to stop freaking out about it.
so basically your entire argument is that if a spell of any sort is cast that does not immediately effect the board, then you somehow 'guarantee' card advantage to your opponent? That's the most limited thinking I have seen in any argument before. I'll take a bet that you've never played a game of chess have you. dictating the resources that your opponent has to use over THE ENTIRE GAME gives you the advantage, by definition. using a card like this on turn three, literally only hurts you against an agro deck build. And of course no one would use a card like this against aggro in the first place. There is a reason this type of card always shows up in the sideboard, and that's because it's incredibly useful, just not against one type of build.
As to your other arguments, you act as if a person playing this spell does absolutely nothing on the turns before it and leave an empty board to be run over with. Not every deck is a tempo build; sure there have been many successful ones recently, but a card like this would actually work wonders in a go wide strategy deck. specifically because they are going wide, so they have smaller, cheaper creatures, and can easily sacrifice one turn of board presence to steal the opponents wincon. that's actually a good play; not a wasted turn as you seem to believe. I wont say this card is for every deck, or that you should like it or want to play it; but should at least be realistic about it.
If you feel like condensing my argument into one sentence it would help if you do it correctly. a spell that doesn't immediately affect the board has nothing to do with card advantage or disadvantage. You spending 3 mana and a card however guarantees card disadvantage. How can a card that loses you a card not result in card disadvantage? Are you also agumenting that Enlightened Tutor doesn't net you card disadvantage?
I'll take you up on that bet, was a cuple of years since I played for real and never got higher than low-ish 2000's. But hey, low 2000's aint too shabby. I am not really sure how you make the connection between magic and chess though. Because it seems to me that the connection is, boiled down, "you dictate resources over an entire game netting you advantage". But I fail to see an actual argument following that, also keep in mind that I can just as easily state that chess just as magic is about incremental advantages.
Can you show me the definition you speak of? Where in magic, or chess, is it defined that dictating the resources to use over a game gives you the adantage? Because from my experience of both games a lot more energy is put towards making favourable trades whether it be regarding board positions or pieces. So please, show me that definition.
You are also making the claim that using this card on turn three literally only hurts against an aggro deck build and now I am somewhat confused. To make the comparison to chess that is a bit like claiming that skipping your third move in chess literally only hurts against opponents going for agressive openings or a scholars mate. And if you have any knowledge of chess you know just how silly that claim would be considering even playing white and getting to go first is a very serious advantage.
No, these types of cards does not always show up in sideboards. They show up in sideboards of specific decks playing in a meta where there are specific decks to combat with extraction effects.
No, I am not acting as if the person playing this spell does nothing previous turns. I am acting as if the player playing this spell is taking a turn off to play this while the other player develops their board or hand. No, not every deck is a tempo build, but when goyfs, bolts and rhinos are mentioned those are cards often seen in midrangey tempobuilds.
You, yet again, talk about "stealing an opponents wincon". What exactly do you propose this card does if they have several? Steal one of them and hope they don't draw the others?
How do you mean I am unrealistic about it? Extraction effects are nothing new and they have never seen any play outside of specific sideboards to combat very specific decks. The one extract-effect that pops up in a lot of sideboards is surgical extraction. And that one is instant, can be cast for zero mana and is useful against snapcaster.
I would rather say that the one acting unrealistic is the one claiming that this card does not guarantee card disadvantage for the one casting the spell.
Sure, there's Eternal Scourge. But for that to be even a feasible suggestion the scourge neds to be playable to begin with. Or well, I guess your opponent could always Arcane Denial your extraction. That would net you card advantage.
okay, so I can agree that casting a card that is not a tutor or a cantrip does not result in card advantage. So by that definition every single card that is not a tutor or cantrip also is card disadvantage....which pretty much makes your point moot; as it clearly was the basis of your entire argument. You gave yourself away in the post before this one that you really are just here to argue though, when you claimed that your opponent could just cast the elder deep fiend in response to someone casting this, which in standard at least, is impossible to do turn whether you go first or not. See you and I have a different idea it seems as what is considered doing 'nothing' on a turn. In chess there are dozens of different 'trap' type moves that don't net you anything at the exact moment you make it, yet your opponents later responses can net you one of their more valuable pieces. this is what this card does. I'm not sure why that's so hard for you to understand. exiling up to four cards for your opponents gameplan isn't 'nothing'. maybe you see logic as being condescending, and I'm sorry if you feel that way, but it doesn't change anything. you still give yourself the advantage by playing this card. But no, you don't on exactly turn three. is that what you need to hear? Or that talking an early game risk for late game advantage is 'nothing'? because that's utter nonsense. Either way I will listen to whatever else you want to say, but I'm done responding, because now you are arguing to argue
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Wait what? Them getting to draw cards isn't a huge downside? How is a card that in even the best case is paying 4 mana to get card disadvantage not a downside?
Yes, 3 mana is an upside. Considering a lot of posts have mentioned taking away emrakuls I'd say that 3 or 4 mana isn't that big of a difference though. The problem with that 3 mana upside is that it also gets some downsides to compensate for that. So for one less mana you lose versatility in not getting to name artifacts and you lose even more cards from the times they get to draw from the effect.
Extraction effects have been around for very long, they have never been especially good except as sideboard cards against very narrow strategies with few wincons (such as storm).
That is why I don't see why people are considering this particular extraction-effect as especially good. Sure, it might be a useful sideboard card if a deck with very few wincons emerges, but that saved mana doesn't compensate for the even larger card disadvantage and less versatility.
Spending an entire turn and a card doing nothing to the boardstate does not seem like an extremely good plan vs. decks with bolts, goyfs or rhinos...
You think pointing out that this card is inherent disadvantage in one of the most important resources in the game is "kinda dumb"? Claiming that something is "kinda dumb" and following it up with a comparison with clique and TKS is imo "kinda dumb".
clique lets them draw a card, yes. But it is also guaranteed to get their best card, at instant speed, and nets you a 3 power flier. 3 power fliers are kinda good. Same with tks, you get their best card and have a 4/4 on the ground. 4/4:s are kinda good aswell.
This extraction effect lets you spend 3 mana with zero impact to the board, netting the opponent card advantage. How is that comparable to getting an instant speed 3 power flier taking away their best card?
I object to calling it better than Infinite Obliteration Even more inherent card disadvantage is a pretty big strike against it.
I think Kambal could find a deck. It's a 3 mana general which helps. And draining opponents for every spell they cast is not only obnoxious, it actually adds up quite a bit. Problem is that they will want to kill him or you asap since the effect is annoying.
Did I write something useful? Leave a like.
Any new cool Daretti cards printed in the latest set? Tell me about it!
Rules Advisor
Kambal is a slow commander, and a waste of the zone. However he should be put into wb stax and control decks to help with the grind. Think oloro
I don't know man, your argument has some pretty big flaws. You mentioned legacy lost being less versatile. less versatile than what? it targets everything than isn't a land or artifact; did you mean it's one of the most versatile extraction cards? you also responded to them about vendilion clique and TKS getting their BEST card and a relevant body. you are right about the body, completely wrong about the best card part. you get the best card 'in their hand' whereas legacy lost literally get's their best card save for an artifact. yes they MAY get card advantage off of this, MAY. again I will stress this, MAY. only if they have at least one of the named card in hand. Legacy lost is far more flexible and frankly more powerful than infinite obliteration. lets just bring up the temurge deck for example, as you mentioned 'if a deck with very few wincons emerges', so lets say you are on the play. use this turn three and get their kozilek's return, well their goes their entire defense against go wide strategies before they can even cast it once, or instead hit their elder deep-fiend, well now you just hit their biggest wincon. infinite obliteration only could have dealt with one of those. And exactly what are you afraid of them drawing if you just took the best card out of their deck? how about tokens, that will still be a deck, so you got their nissas or their gideons or their avacyns. anyone of those almost completely shuts down the deck, or at least slows it down enough to take away all the advantage the deck was built on. to tell you the truth, the card draw thing, is probably the only thing not making this one of the most powerful cards in the set. but it does have it, which of course lets you use it on yourself as others have mentioned to get dead cards out of hand or if you choose eternal scourge it reads pay 3, draw a minimum of 4 cards. I get the feeling you just don't like extraction effects, or just completely overvalue the POTENTIAL for an opponent to have card advantage.
Well, what if he only told opponents that??? I mean, how crazy would that be? Oh, not that crazy, because... Read the card. SMH.
.-.
he could mean playing against it. . .
don't hit your head again
jerksweetieParagraphs, they work.
Less versatile than a lot of other extraction effects, a lot of which I've already linked.
With clique or tks you get a body and the best card in their hand. I actually prefer getting the best card in their hand as opposed to not getting any cards in their hand.
And there is no may about them getting card advantage of you casting this. They will ALWAYS get card advantage. You just spent a card and 3 mana, you losing cards is jsut as much card advantage for the opponent as him/her drawing cards.
It is more flexible, yes. More powerful due to the flexibility sure. But that extra power carries a big drawback. With infinite obliteration you can atleast stay neutral on the cards, with this you will give the oponent card advantage no matter what.
Yeah, if you extract their kozileks return their defense against go wide strategies is gone. But you on the other hand has spent a turn and 3 mana on not going wide so that defense is less important. Not only that, if this extract becomes a huge sideboard card then they only need to do is diversify their wipes with a few similar cards instead of several copies of the most powerful.
Same with elder-deep fiend. Sure, you have extracted their dep fiend. But at the same time you have done nothing agianst the creatures already on board who was geting ready to emerge (or the deep fiend opp just flashed in in response to you extracting) and are getting beat down by those. And as in the previous example they can diversify their threats and wincons if this extract effect gains popularity in side-boards somwhat weakening the deck to counter this card.
What I am afraid of them drawing? Again, considering you just spent a whole turn and a card without any impact to the boardstate even their small utilitydudes are dangerous.
Any one of those almost completely shuts down their deck? Take away gideon and they still have nissa for pumps. Take away avacyn and they won't need it to protect their tokens since you took away their avacyns rather than dealing with the tokens on board. All while getting beat down by said tokens.
And sure, you may slow them down. But at the same time you slow yourself down keeping the status quo, apart from you giving away card advantage.
Sure, you can use it on yourself. But then you basically pay three mana for a worse, more durdly Faithless Looting with even more severe card disadvantage than looting since you cannot flashback it. Sure, you can "draw" cards by naming eternal scourge. That nets you a bunch of 3/3s for 3 mana while the opponent plays those Nissas instead.
It has nothing to do with me not liking extraction effects, although I don't. It is about me liking good cards and disliking cards that time and time again have proven to be bad in general except as side-board cards against very specific narrow strategies and wizards suddenly printing one with even more card disadvantage tacked on does not make it better than previous iterations of the effect.
And again to make it clear. We are not talking about having a POTENTIAL to give the opponent card advantage. We are talking about a card that GUARANTEES your opponent will gain card advantage.
Did I write something useful? Leave a like.
Any new cool Daretti cards printed in the latest set? Tell me about it!
Rules Advisor
he's not a big enough threat to draw targeted removal, so he'll likely stick around a bit until he eats a wrath
(or your opponents attack you in an attempt to make you block with him).
He basically reads 1WB: gain life until people are bothered enough to waste a card on it.
As a commander, he's sort of like Oloro without U-
he comes down early enough to really tilt life totals in your favor over time.
I still prefer Ayli, Eternal Pilgrim and Karlov of the Ghost Council,
but Kambal should be good support for either one.
Reprint Stasis!
Control needs more love.
EDH:
Momir Vig, Simic Visionary
Melek, Izzet Paragon
Oona, Queen of the Fae
Bruna, Light of Alabaster
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight
Rhys the Redeemed
Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord
Sen Triplets
The Mimeoplasm
WUBRGSliver OverlordGRBUW
WUBRGSliver Hivelord(Superfriends)GRBUW
1) Yes I meant playing against it. I don't like playing white.
2) Don't be an ass just because someone else is an ass.
The problem with him is imo that people will attack you jsut to get rid of that annoying lifeloss. He draws hate anytime any opponent does anything pretty much. Cards that punishes opponents are much more likely to get targeted than cards that defend yourself.
Did I write something useful? Leave a like.
Any new cool Daretti cards printed in the latest set? Tell me about it!
Rules Advisor
Not really, I think the dude is mehtastic at best. My favourite general in WB is still the first teysa and seeing the design of recent orzhov legends makes it very likely that won't change anytime soon.
D&T is a natural fit, but I think he will see play in Kiki-Evo Decks, Maverick, Deadguy Ale, Abzan.
I actually kind of see him playing nice in an esper shell too. Kambal + Remand is gross on many levels.
Also, Stax actually got its name, not from Smokestack, but from a very specific deck called "the $4000 solution" or $T4KS in l33t 4kr0nym. Here's an early (2003) Stax deck from David Wee.
2 Island
3 Shivan Reef
4 Volcanic Island
4 Mishra's Workshop
1 Mana Crypt
1 Lotus Petal
1 Black Lotus
1 Sol Ring
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Diamond
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Emerald
1 Candelabra of Tawnos
1 Mana Vault
1 Trade Secrets
1 Tinker
1 Memory Jar
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Careful Study
1 Frantic Search
1 Windfall
1 Wheel of Fortune
1 Timetwister
1 Metalworker
1 Oath of Scholars
1 Tsabo's Web
1 Brainstorm
1 Black Vise
1 Gorilla Shaman
1 Time Vault
2 Urza's Bauble
2 Sphere of Resistance
3 Goblin Welder
4 Meditate
4 Tangle Wire
4 Smokestack
On phasing:
(case in point: phyrexian mana, Ad Nauseam, Plunge into Darkness, Greed, Channel, fetches/shocks, et al.)
In fact, your life total is one of the two most important resources in the game (the other being cards); as once you run out, you lose.
Back on topic- Kambal is very interesting (from an edh perspective), though I see him being more of a cog in the 99 than at the helm. While it's true he might slip under the radar as opposed to most of his competition; it's also a really annoying effect that people will get irritated with quickly and want him off the table, at which point it's not quite swingy enough of an effect to warrant recasting him several times (outside of the random night you're vs three spell-slinging decks).
Other than that, I certainly see him having other constructed applications.
The one thing Lost Legacy has going for it is the fact it can be ritual'd out on turn 1 in eternal formats vs ANT and the like. Otherwise, it's a rather meh rehash of the same old cranial re-skin they print every couple sets or so.
so basically your entire argument is that if a spell of any sort is cast that does not immediately effect the board, then you somehow 'guarantee' card advantage to your opponent? That's the most limited thinking I have seen in any argument before. I'll take a bet that you've never played a game of chess have you. dictating the resources that your opponent has to use over THE ENTIRE GAME gives you the advantage, by definition. using a card like this on turn three, literally only hurts you against an agro deck build. And of course no one would use a card like this against aggro in the first place. There is a reason this type of card always shows up in the sideboard, and that's because it's incredibly useful, just not against one type of build.
As to your other arguments, you act as if a person playing this spell does absolutely nothing on the turns before it and leave an empty board to be run over with. Not every deck is a tempo build; sure there have been many successful ones recently, but a card like this would actually work wonders in a go wide strategy deck. specifically because they are going wide, so they have smaller, cheaper creatures, and can easily sacrifice one turn of board presence to steal the opponents wincon. that's actually a good play; not a wasted turn as you seem to believe. I wont say this card is for every deck, or that you should like it or want to play it; but should at least be realistic about it.
Kambal is ridiculous. Kind of glad he's a legend.
My phone tried to change "Kambal" to jambalaya. I see through your games, racist phone.
If you feel like condensing my argument into one sentence it would help if you do it correctly. a spell that doesn't immediately affect the board has nothing to do with card advantage or disadvantage. You spending 3 mana and a card however guarantees card disadvantage. How can a card that loses you a card not result in card disadvantage? Are you also agumenting that Enlightened Tutor doesn't net you card disadvantage?
I'll take you up on that bet, was a cuple of years since I played for real and never got higher than low-ish 2000's. But hey, low 2000's aint too shabby. I am not really sure how you make the connection between magic and chess though. Because it seems to me that the connection is, boiled down, "you dictate resources over an entire game netting you advantage". But I fail to see an actual argument following that, also keep in mind that I can just as easily state that chess just as magic is about incremental advantages.
Can you show me the definition you speak of? Where in magic, or chess, is it defined that dictating the resources to use over a game gives you the adantage? Because from my experience of both games a lot more energy is put towards making favourable trades whether it be regarding board positions or pieces. So please, show me that definition.
You are also making the claim that using this card on turn three literally only hurts against an aggro deck build and now I am somewhat confused. To make the comparison to chess that is a bit like claiming that skipping your third move in chess literally only hurts against opponents going for agressive openings or a scholars mate. And if you have any knowledge of chess you know just how silly that claim would be considering even playing white and getting to go first is a very serious advantage.
No, these types of cards does not always show up in sideboards. They show up in sideboards of specific decks playing in a meta where there are specific decks to combat with extraction effects.
No, I am not acting as if the person playing this spell does nothing previous turns. I am acting as if the player playing this spell is taking a turn off to play this while the other player develops their board or hand. No, not every deck is a tempo build, but when goyfs, bolts and rhinos are mentioned those are cards often seen in midrangey tempobuilds.
You, yet again, talk about "stealing an opponents wincon". What exactly do you propose this card does if they have several? Steal one of them and hope they don't draw the others?
How do you mean I am unrealistic about it? Extraction effects are nothing new and they have never seen any play outside of specific sideboards to combat very specific decks. The one extract-effect that pops up in a lot of sideboards is surgical extraction. And that one is instant, can be cast for zero mana and is useful against snapcaster.
I would rather say that the one acting unrealistic is the one claiming that this card does not guarantee card disadvantage for the one casting the spell.
Sure, there's Eternal Scourge. But for that to be even a feasible suggestion the scourge neds to be playable to begin with. Or well, I guess your opponent could always Arcane Denial your extraction. That would net you card advantage.
Did I write something useful? Leave a like.
Any new cool Daretti cards printed in the latest set? Tell me about it!
Rules Advisor
ANYWAY MOVING ON...
Kambal is the kind of commander that my friends would really gun for - I see him as an Oloro or Ruric Thar, the Unbowed and those decks typically get ganged up on in my group. He's smaller and seems a bit safer but I think people would quickly grow to hate him, so probably better with him in the 99 rather than lead a deck.
The cranial extraction variant is just that - a cranial extraction variant. People need to stop freaking out about it.
okay, so I can agree that casting a card that is not a tutor or a cantrip does not result in card advantage. So by that definition every single card that is not a tutor or cantrip also is card disadvantage....which pretty much makes your point moot; as it clearly was the basis of your entire argument. You gave yourself away in the post before this one that you really are just here to argue though, when you claimed that your opponent could just cast the elder deep fiend in response to someone casting this, which in standard at least, is impossible to do turn whether you go first or not. See you and I have a different idea it seems as what is considered doing 'nothing' on a turn. In chess there are dozens of different 'trap' type moves that don't net you anything at the exact moment you make it, yet your opponents later responses can net you one of their more valuable pieces. this is what this card does. I'm not sure why that's so hard for you to understand. exiling up to four cards for your opponents gameplan isn't 'nothing'. maybe you see logic as being condescending, and I'm sorry if you feel that way, but it doesn't change anything. you still give yourself the advantage by playing this card. But no, you don't on exactly turn three. is that what you need to hear? Or that talking an early game risk for late game advantage is 'nothing'? because that's utter nonsense. Either way I will listen to whatever else you want to say, but I'm done responding, because now you are arguing to argue