You sir are a gentleman and a scholar. I can't wait till I can play my bicycle land out, thus making me heckbent, while I have Nessie on the field. You know, so I can attack with my Pervert.
Under the new R&D rules and through their "market research" of player satisfaction, I suspect the era of counter spells that counter absolutely is coming to an end. Counterspells like Cancel and Disallow will become infrequent occurrences or become chase cards for blue players when they are introduced in Standard. In their place is a whole slew of "leak" counterspells or spells that hit only some card types. I think any absolute counterspells will be at rare for some foreseeable time.
Aren't you just trading your turn for theirs when you cast the Rubble half?
Exactly that's what I thought as well. I think people should halve the great expectations of this card. Maybe it'll work in a thermo-alchemist deck.
I also feel people should treat Reduce as a full card first, then Rubble as an afterthought. If they can feel this way and feel comfortable adding it in their 60-card deck, then yea, it's worth it.
It's semi-decent in limited. But its expiry date goes really fast with more lands on the other side.
Aren't you just trading your turn for theirs when you cast the Rubble half?
Exactly that's what I thought as well. I think people should halve the great expectations of this card. Maybe it'll work in a thermo-alchemist deck.
I also feel people should treat Reduce as a full card first, then Rubble as an afterthought. If they can feel this way and feel comfortable adding it in their 60-card deck, then yea, it's worth it.
It's semi-decent in limited. But its expiry date goes really fast with more lands on the other side.
Yeah, check your math again. Your lands untap, but theirs don't. Pretty big tempo swing early game.
Aren't you just trading your turn for theirs when you cast the Rubble half?
Exactly that's what I thought as well. I think people should halve the great expectations of this card. Maybe it'll work in a thermo-alchemist deck.
I also feel people should treat Reduce as a full card first, then Rubble as an afterthought. If they can feel this way and feel comfortable adding it in their 60-card deck, then yea, it's worth it.
It's semi-decent in limited. But its expiry date goes really fast with more lands on the other side.
Yeah, check your math again. Your lands untap, but theirs don't. Pretty big tempo swing early game.
Yeah, but I'm spending three mana on my turn 4 to make you lose three mana on your turn 4. That's equal.
You sir are a gentleman and a scholar. I can't wait till I can play my bicycle land out, thus making me heckbent, while I have Nessie on the field. You know, so I can attack with my Pervert.
I would have rather had the Rubble side as a card instead. It's annoying that you have to play a mediocre counterspell just to get value out of rubble or hope you discard it.
Conditional counter spells with converted mana with a coverted mana cost of 3 or higher are never played outside of limited.
I get the feeling that Wizards is wanting to redefine blue control decks in a manner that's a semblance of its former self but one that new players feel is more "fun"; however that term may be applied. I say that because it feels like the different blue stuff we've been seeing is coming out in a hunt-and-peck style that is searching for an answer that is unknown.
"Maybe this will work? ... Nope"
"How about this? ... Not quite. Tweak it a bit."
"Tweaked. ... Ah, that made it worse."
I have no concrete reason for saying that. It's just how I feel about control these days: They don't like how it used to be, and they are working on building a new variant of it.
This seems accurate. They really want 2 mana to be "situational", forcing Blue to have the right solution to the right threat, while 3 mana is a hard "nope". They're having trouble finding the balance, however - Silumgar's Scorn proved pretty good because it could be hard counter, while Revolutionary Rebuff is nigh-unplayable. At 3, Dissolve and Void Shatter aren't enough of a boost over Cancel to be playable, but Disallow seems like it is in the right place. Lots of experimentation.
I think it's also that "modern" counterspells have a wide variety in power, like other spells. There's a heck of a lot of discard and burn that's unplayable, some that's grudgingly playable, and every now and then a great one. Not every standard is going to have a Lightning Strike and not every standard is going to have a Disallow
They could literally just lower the cost and price by 1 on the blue half (1U cost, pay 2) and you'd have a spell genuinely competing with Mana Leak in eternal formats. As it stands, it's hard to see why anyone would play this over Disallow if you're convinced to play a 3cmc counter.
I get the feeling that Wizards is wanting to redefine blue control decks in a manner that's a semblance of its former self but one that new players feel is more "fun"; however that term may be applied. I say that because it feels like the different blue stuff we've been seeing is coming out in a hunt-and-peck style that is searching for an answer that is unknown.
"Maybe this will work? ... Nope"
"How about this? ... Not quite. Tweak it a bit."
"Tweaked. ... Ah, that made it worse."
I have no concrete reason for saying that. It's just how I feel about control these days: They don't like how it used to be, and they are working on building a new variant of it.
This seems accurate. They really want 2 mana to be "situational", forcing Blue to have the right solution to the right threat, while 3 mana is a hard "nope". They're having trouble finding the balance, however - Silumgar's Scorn proved pretty good because it could be hard counter, while Revolutionary Rebuff is nigh-unplayable. At 3, Dissolve and Void Shatter aren't enough of a boost over Cancel to be playable, but Disallow seems like it is in the right place. Lots of experimentation.
I actually liked Dissolve a lot more then Disallow. Scry 1 was actually really nice, and outside of randomly tagging an ultimate, Disallow is cancel 99 times out of a 100.
I guess the dream is T2 Baral, Chief of Compliance, T3 Reduce, T4 Chandra, Torch of Defiance +1 for RR to cast Rubble. You have a 5 loyalty Chandra on a presumably pretty clear board and they probably can't deal with her with 3 lands frozen. Reduce to Rubble seems Standard playable to me.
What about Flashing back Rubble with Goblin Dark-Dwellers? You've got a 4/4 Menace, and they only have 2-3 lands to work with.
How does Torrential Gearhulk work with these Aftermath cards? If one side is an instant, can you cast the sorcery side instead?
Edit: Tabak answered the question in his Twitter. If either side is an instant, you can cast either side.
So, we can hold Gearhulk in-hand, and if they don't play something worth countering, or if they have the 3 to spare, you can flashback Rubble instead. But I guess that actually wouldn't be worth it, because they would get to Untap, right?
Edit #2: I should have read the card again, it DOES work! Hmmm... This is actually pretty cool. So, you can flash in Gearhulk, and either counter a spell or lock down 3 mana for your turn AND their next turn!
I notice everyone is mentioning Baral as if the thing is a staple. Its a good card but its too expensive to be great.
Problem is unlike modern decks that have access to 8 copies of this effect only having 4 will make it less likely you actually have him plus it's just going to die to removal spells before you can take advantage of him.
I don't think it would be possible to build an engine around just him.
Aren't you just trading your turn for theirs when you cast the Rubble half?
Yes. You are making a 'fair' trade, but on your terms. I have 2 creatures out already, you have a vehicle whose pilot I just countered; I don't need to cast anything else this turn, so I'm going to make sure you can't cast anything on your turn either.
Aren't you just trading your turn for theirs when you cast the Rubble half?
Yes. You are making a 'fair' trade, but on your terms. I have 2 creatures out already, you have a vehicle whose pilot I just countered; I don't need to cast anything else this turn, so I'm going to make sure you can't cast anything on your turn either.
Or just being a control deck in general. Every turn you're not under pressure the game tilts farther in your favor. If you're slinging Gearhulks while the other guy is playing 2 and 3 drops on turn 6 you're winning that fight.
Good enough. Rubble is kind of gross early-game. Good support makes it even worse.
Wouldn't the printing of a "good" modern counterspell force it to be in a standard-legal set, thus warping the format badly around it for two years unless they banhammered it, by the way?
They could literally just lower the cost and price by 1 on the blue half (1U cost, pay 2) and you'd have a spell genuinely competing with Mana Leak in eternal formats. As it stands, it's hard to see why anyone would play this over Disallow if you're convinced to play a 3cmc counter.
So what you're saying is that if they were to give Mana Leak more functionality with no drawback, it would be awesome? You don't say!
Anyway, the card is a serious tempo swing, especially in multiples. I dig it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Can you name all of the creature types with at least 20 cards? Try my Sporcle Quiz! Last Updated: 6/29/20 (Core Set 2021).
They could literally just lower the cost and price by 1 on the blue half (1U cost, pay 2) and you'd have a spell genuinely competing with Mana Leak in eternal formats. As it stands, it's hard to see why anyone would play this over Disallow if you're convinced to play a 3cmc counter.
So what you're saying is that if they were to give Mana Leak more functionality with no drawback, it would be awesome? You don't say!
Anyway, the card is a serious tempo swing, especially in multiples. I dig it.
Mana Leak is pay 3, this hypothetical would be pay 2. Would be slightly worse on the front side for the benefit on the back side. At 3 mana CMC, it's mostly unplayable in Modern.
They could literally just lower the cost and price by 1 on the blue half (1U cost, pay 2) and you'd have a spell genuinely competing with Mana Leak in eternal formats. As it stands, it's hard to see why anyone would play this over Disallow if you're convinced to play a 3cmc counter.
So what you're saying is that if they were to give Mana Leak more functionality with no drawback, it would be awesome? You don't say!
Anyway, the card is a serious tempo swing, especially in multiples. I dig it.
(S)He didn't say that. (S)He didn't say "1U: counter target spell unless opp pays 3. // extra stuff". (S)He said "1U: counter target spell unless opp pays 2. // extra stuff". It's a big difference and I think (s)he's got a point.
Good enough. Rubble is kind of gross early-game. Good support makes it even worse.
Wouldn't the printing of a "good" modern counterspell force it to be in a standard-legal set, thus warping the format badly around it for two years unless they banhammered it, by the way?
If only the splits in cards weren't always stand-ins for words! But that would be hilarious.
I don't think so. There are plenty of creatures with good ETB effects in standard. Trying to fight creatures with spells is a loosing proposition, since all the "1-1 removal" actually trades at a worse rate than 1-to-1. This is why you need to fight creatures with permanents, and then std converges to a "midrange-only" format. To give standard variety in game styles you need to be able to fight creatures with spells, and (if wotc insists on giving their creatures etb effects) they will have to start printing good countermagic. Alternatively, they'll have to print cheap removal w/upside.
Ya I don't even care about the counter part, I want the rubble part. I'm thinking something like
T1: soul-scar mage
T2: furyblade vampire
T3: discard reduce to furyblades ability, swing, cast rubble second main phase.
no one wants to be timewalked by an aggro deck, especially early game. This card could be devastating for red!!
This slots into my Fevered Visions deck like a boss!
Nothing like Exhausting people to help get those triggers. And the counterspell is also decent enough to be useful.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In case I didn't tell you, I don't care about your opinion I just want your facts. And not the facts that make you seem smart. I want the ones that are actual facts.
If there was ever a time to print a strong(er) counterspell, it would be during a Standard when there is a whole mechanic devoted to bringing things back from the grave. It's a tailor-made scenario for them to reintroduce blue control without having to worry that it would be oppressive.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Under the new R&D rules and through their "market research" of player satisfaction, I suspect the era of counter spells that counter absolutely is coming to an end. Counterspells like Cancel and Disallow will become infrequent occurrences or become chase cards for blue players when they are introduced in Standard. In their place is a whole slew of "leak" counterspells or spells that hit only some card types. I think any absolute counterspells will be at rare for some foreseeable time.
Exactly that's what I thought as well. I think people should halve the great expectations of this card. Maybe it'll work in a thermo-alchemist deck.
I also feel people should treat Reduce as a full card first, then Rubble as an afterthought. If they can feel this way and feel comfortable adding it in their 60-card deck, then yea, it's worth it.
It's semi-decent in limited. But its expiry date goes really fast with more lands on the other side.
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
Yeah, check your math again. Your lands untap, but theirs don't. Pretty big tempo swing early game.
Yeah, but I'm spending three mana on my turn 4 to make you lose three mana on your turn 4. That's equal.
Conditional counter spells with converted mana with a coverted mana cost of 3 or higher are never played outside of limited.
UBRKess, Dissident MageUBR - Controlling Dissidents
GRhonas the IndomitableG - Indomitable Four Drops
WUBOloro, Ageless AsceticWUB - Loot & Renanimate
On th eplay, I guess you curve turn 3 this, turn 4 tap lands, turn 5 liliana, make a zombie? Looks opressive enough, especially if you chain them.
I think it's also that "modern" counterspells have a wide variety in power, like other spells. There's a heck of a lot of discard and burn that's unplayable, some that's grudgingly playable, and every now and then a great one. Not every standard is going to have a Lightning Strike and not every standard is going to have a Disallow
They could literally just lower the cost and price by 1 on the blue half (1U cost, pay 2) and you'd have a spell genuinely competing with Mana Leak in eternal formats. As it stands, it's hard to see why anyone would play this over Disallow if you're convinced to play a 3cmc counter.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
I actually liked Dissolve a lot more then Disallow. Scry 1 was actually really nice, and outside of randomly tagging an ultimate, Disallow is cancel 99 times out of a 100.
How does Torrential Gearhulk work with these Aftermath cards? If one side is an instant, can you cast the sorcery side instead?
Edit: Tabak answered the question in his Twitter. If either side is an instant, you can cast either side.
So, we can hold Gearhulk in-hand, and if they don't play something worth countering, or if they have the 3 to spare, you can flashback Rubble instead. But I guess that actually wouldn't be worth it, because they would get to Untap, right?
Edit #2: I should have read the card again, it DOES work! Hmmm... This is actually pretty cool. So, you can flash in Gearhulk, and either counter a spell or lock down 3 mana for your turn AND their next turn!
About Mindslaver rulings:
Problem is unlike modern decks that have access to 8 copies of this effect only having 4 will make it less likely you actually have him plus it's just going to die to removal spells before you can take advantage of him.
I don't think it would be possible to build an engine around just him.
Yes. You are making a 'fair' trade, but on your terms. I have 2 creatures out already, you have a vehicle whose pilot I just countered; I don't need to cast anything else this turn, so I'm going to make sure you can't cast anything on your turn either.
Wouldn't the printing of a "good" modern counterspell force it to be in a standard-legal set, thus warping the format badly around it for two years unless they banhammered it, by the way?
If only the splits in cards weren't always stand-ins for words! But that would be hilarious.
So what you're saying is that if they were to give Mana Leak more functionality with no drawback, it would be awesome? You don't say!
Anyway, the card is a serious tempo swing, especially in multiples. I dig it.
My 720 Peasant Cube
Mana Leak is pay 3, this hypothetical would be pay 2. Would be slightly worse on the front side for the benefit on the back side. At 3 mana CMC, it's mostly unplayable in Modern.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
(S)He didn't say that. (S)He didn't say "1U: counter target spell unless opp pays 3. // extra stuff". (S)He said "1U: counter target spell unless opp pays 2. // extra stuff". It's a big difference and I think (s)he's got a point.
I don't think so. There are plenty of creatures with good ETB effects in standard. Trying to fight creatures with spells is a loosing proposition, since all the "1-1 removal" actually trades at a worse rate than 1-to-1. This is why you need to fight creatures with permanents, and then std converges to a "midrange-only" format. To give standard variety in game styles you need to be able to fight creatures with spells, and (if wotc insists on giving their creatures etb effects) they will have to start printing good countermagic. Alternatively, they'll have to print cheap removal w/upside.
T1: soul-scar mage
T2: furyblade vampire
T3: discard reduce to furyblades ability, swing, cast rubble second main phase.
no one wants to be timewalked by an aggro deck, especially early game. This card could be devastating for red!!
Nothing like Exhausting people to help get those triggers. And the counterspell is also decent enough to be useful.
Cockatrice username: Blackcat77