You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
I cannot imagine Offering or a mechanic similar to it in DTK. Standard already has 2 cost modifying mechanics. If anything I predict a Kicker like mechanic with creature saccing as an optional additional cost.
Not 100% sure but I thought I had read they have pretty much retired Poison for Infect, since Infect is somewhat less parasitic.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“There are no weak Jews. I am descended from those who wrestle angels and kill giants. We were chosen by God. You were chosen by a pathetic little man who can't seem to grow a full mustache"
"You can tell how dumb someone is by how they use Mary Sue"
A devour mechanic makes most sence in the theme of "dragons" all over, especially as that works with many of the "sacrifice me" creatures in Fate Reforged , so many cards have a an effect on death and we have enough tokens aswell.
I love reading people pulling ideas out of the hat that have nothing in common with the first post.
Dragon Sac effect? Where did you get a hint for that one? O_o
It's still a better guess than infect returning in DTK...
I never said infect, just poison. You know that mechanic that was in future sight? The one MaRo said had a possibility of turning up without -1/-1 counters. Imagine playing the prowler with a poison esq equipment. Be pretty damn good.
The meta is actually enjoyable at the moment, I hope wizards NEVER brings back anything like infect.
I second the sac matters in dtk. It also explains Haruspex's spot as an Ugins fate card. Looking at the background pictures from that video I also noticed something interesting, when they were refering to a specific card/cycle, that card would appear but when they were talking about the future in general sometimes there would be a seemingly unrelated piece of art. These arts were, fascination, honor's reward, sage's reverie, lotus-eye mystics, sandsteppe mastodon, renowned weaponsmith and jungle hollow. The bolster cards hint at the future in that Abzan will get bolster and weaponsmith because he fetches future equipment. That leaves fascination, lotus eye mystics and sage's reverie. Fascination hints at a mill subtheme for new sultai (please don't let dimir be a wad of bad mill cards again), and mystics and reverie hint at an enchantment's matter theme for jeskai.
A mechanic that cares about things being cast from the graveyard/exile. Blue casts from exile occasionally. Black likes playing things from the graveyard. Green sometimes brings stuff back from the graveyard. Makes sense with Delve, too.
A mechanic that cares about casting from exile sounds quite nonintuitive. I mean, both cascade and madness cast cards from exile, not from the library or the graveyard, but nobody thinks about them like that.
I love reading people pulling ideas out of the hat that have nothing in common with the first post.
Dragon Sac effect? Where did you get a hint for that one? O_o
It's still a better guess than infect returning in DTK...
I never said infect, just poison. You know that mechanic that was in future sight? The one MaRo said had a possibility of turning up without -1/-1 counters. Imagine playing the prowler with a poison esq equipment. Be pretty damn good.
The meta is actually enjoyable at the moment, I hope wizards NEVER brings back anything like infect.
I would be very surprised if infect doesn't return. That's one of MaRo's pet mechanics, and it's now tied to the Phyrexians.
I love reading people pulling ideas out of the hat that have nothing in common with the first post.
Dragon Sac effect? Where did you get a hint for that one? O_o
It's still a better guess than infect returning in DTK...
I never said infect, just poison. You know that mechanic that was in future sight? The one MaRo said had a possibility of turning up without -1/-1 counters. Imagine playing the prowler with a poison esq equipment. Be pretty damn good.
The meta is actually enjoyable at the moment, I hope wizards NEVER brings back anything like infect.
I would be very surprised if infect doesn't return. That's one of MaRo's pet mechanics, and it's now tied to the Phyrexians.
No I know, but that doesn't mean I wanna see it :/ lord knows it's obnoxious enough in modern.
I love reading people pulling ideas out of the hat that have nothing in common with the first post.
Dragon Sac effect? Where did you get a hint for that one? O_o
It's still a better guess than infect returning in DTK...
I never said infect, just poison. You know that mechanic that was in future sight? The one MaRo said had a possibility of turning up without -1/-1 counters. Imagine playing the prowler with a poison esq equipment. Be pretty damn good.
The meta is actually enjoyable at the moment, I hope wizards NEVER brings back anything like infect.
I never understood the intense hatred for infect some people have, especially considering (in my experience) many of those same people tend to like other alt win conditions. Anyhoo, infect will return some day, but it won't be in DTK and you can take that to the bank. MaRo specifically stated in a recent "Making Magic" article that the two mechanics for a specific clan (five from KTK, five from DTK... five of those ten which appeared in FRF) are meant to play well together (aka, have synergy). How in God's name does infect fit into that? It would need to play well with either Delve, Prowess or Ferocious. So aside from infect being stronger on creatures with a high power, in what way would infect make ANY sense? Not to mention Wizards avoids having +1/+1 counters and -1/-1 counters in the same set and Bolster uses the former. So yeah, as much as I am a fan of infect, it's NOT in DTK. I'd stake my entire Magic collection on it.
I would really enjoy something like Dredge, maybe something that's a refined version, perhaps. Anything that allows for graveyard shenanigans without exiling would be preferred.
Sac matters for Sultai does make sense with Delve, especially if there are other cards like Prowler in DTK that can come back. That way cards like Prowler serve double duty, either fueling Delve or allowing for card advantage through the sac effects and recursion. Self-mill would make sense with Delve too, but we've been there and done that (self-mill) with BUG in Innistrad, so it would feel a bit tired. It would give more options for my casual self-mill deck though...
I never understood the intense hatred for infect some people have, especially considering (in my experience) many of those same people tend to like other alt win conditions.
I hate infect for a whole host of reasons. It's fugly. It's two mechanics (and two counter types) crammed into one keyword. One of those mechanics was quiteexcellent on its own, but infect's existence practically guarantees that wither will never return. Poison counters are intentionally non-interactive, and contrary to what MaRo says about that being cool and different, I think it actually goes against good game design principles. I have no issue whatsoever with the alt-wincon-ness of infect. It's one of the only things about the mechanic that I do like. The longer it takes for infect to come back, the better.
In any case, it certainly won't be back in DTK.
Put another chalk mark in the column of people predicting a "sacrifice matters" theme. It would be both very flavorful, and a good fit for a surprise use of Marang River Prowler.
but infect's existence practically guarantees that wither will never return.
What, where do you get THAT from? Infect is not an upgraded wither. If a block has no poison theme, but uses -1/-1 counters, wither would be chosen over infect.
What, where do you get THAT from? Infect is not an upgraded wither. If a block has no poison theme, but uses -1/-1 counters, wither would be chosen over infect.
It's like saying equip is an upgraded enchant.
So, no, dealing damage as poison is not strictly better than dealing regular damage. You have to support poison with more poison. But, poison works on an accelerated scale and you can't undo it (barring, of course, Leeches). So, infect damage is still perceived as an upgrade over regular damage. I mean, obviously it is. Why run infect, otherwise?
So, wither is in the sorry state of being perceived as a gimped infect (because it does less), even though that's not what it was when it was released. Even though you and I can probably both dream up plenty of cool cards with wither. Whatever the context, wither loses out on something important that infect does. And WotC still has a Jones for infect. If WotC perceived infect as a failure, I would put the chance of wither's return pretty high. Since they're eager to bring back infect? Pretty much zero chance. As long as infect is the golden child, wither will be to infect as horsemanship is to flying: a bit of historical trivia that gets trotted out in minor formats, primarily just for novelty's sake.
Which is too bad, because wither is the better mechanic by far.
What, where do you get THAT from? Infect is not an upgraded wither. If a block has no poison theme, but uses -1/-1 counters, wither would be chosen over infect.
It's like saying equip is an upgraded enchant.
So, no, dealing damage as poison is not strictly better than dealing regular damage. You have to support poison with more poison. But, poison works on an accelerated scale and you can't undo it (barring, of course, Leeches). So, infect damage is still perceived as an upgrade over regular damage. I mean, obviously it is. Why run infect, otherwise?
So, wither is in the sorry state of being perceived as a gimped infect (because it does less), even though that's not what it was when it was released. Even though you and I can probably both dream up plenty of cool cards with wither. Whatever the context, wither loses out on something important that infect does. And WotC still has a Jones for infect. If WotC perceived infect as a failure, I would put the chance of wither's return pretty high. Since they're eager to bring back infect? Pretty much zero chance. As long as infect is the golden child, wither will be to infect as horsemanship is to flying: a bit of historical trivia that gets trotted out in minor formats, primarily just for novelty's sake.
Which is too bad, because wither is the better mechanic by far.
Infect isn't always strictly better. You could be playing with affinity against an opponent who is at 2 life and 0 poison counters, but the only creatures you have are Inkmoth Nexuses. Sometimes when you have both Inkmoth and Blinkmoth Nexus on the field with a bunch of artifacts and Cranial Plating, you put the plating on inkmoth because you might win faster with normal damage.
What, where do you get THAT from? Infect is not an upgraded wither. If a block has no poison theme, but uses -1/-1 counters, wither would be chosen over infect.
It's like saying equip is an upgraded enchant.
So, no, dealing damage as poison is not strictly better than dealing regular damage. You have to support poison with more poison. But, poison works on an accelerated scale and you can't undo it (barring, of course, Leeches). So, infect damage is still perceived as an upgrade over regular damage. I mean, obviously it is. Why run infect, otherwise?
So, wither is in the sorry state of being perceived as a gimped infect (because it does less), even though that's not what it was when it was released. Even though you and I can probably both dream up plenty of cool cards with wither. Whatever the context, wither loses out on something important that infect does. And WotC still has a Jones for infect. If WotC perceived infect as a failure, I would put the chance of wither's return pretty high. Since they're eager to bring back infect? Pretty much zero chance. As long as infect is the golden child, wither will be to infect as horsemanship is to flying: a bit of historical trivia that gets trotted out in minor formats, primarily just for novelty's sake.
Which is too bad, because wither is the better mechanic by far.
Infect is not only not strictly better than wither, it also isn't "better" than wither. It is just different.
Infect is a parasitic mechanic that gets better if it has more of itself. A single infect creature in an aggro deck isn't going to do much, you need a certain threshold to make most use of the mechanic. Wither is different. You can put as many wither creatures as you want in a deck, even if it's just one and it will still work perfectly fine.
WotC ,knows this. They are aware that infect is not an upgrade over wither and Maro even once said that the existence of infect does NOT mean that wither is never to return. (Can't find the article, but it was pretty much at the beginning of scars block.)
You're comparing apples to oranges and claim that oranges are an uprade over apples. They're not and both mechanics will be used depending on what the set needs. If anything I'd say wither has a higher chance of returning, because it is less demanding. (Infect needs both -1/-1 counters and poison to work, wither only -1/-1 counters.)
What, where do you get THAT from? Infect is not an upgraded wither. If a block has no poison theme, but uses -1/-1 counters, wither would be chosen over infect.
It's like saying equip is an upgraded enchant.
So, no, dealing damage as poison is not strictly better than dealing regular damage. You have to support poison with more poison. But, poison works on an accelerated scale and you can't undo it (barring, of course, Leeches). So, infect damage is still perceived as an upgrade over regular damage. I mean, obviously it is. Why run infect, otherwise?
So, wither is in the sorry state of being perceived as a gimped infect (because it does less), even though that's not what it was when it was released. Even though you and I can probably both dream up plenty of cool cards with wither. Whatever the context, wither loses out on something important that infect does. And WotC still has a Jones for infect. If WotC perceived infect as a failure, I would put the chance of wither's return pretty high. Since they're eager to bring back infect? Pretty much zero chance. As long as infect is the golden child, wither will be to infect as horsemanship is to flying: a bit of historical trivia that gets trotted out in minor formats, primarily just for novelty's sake.
Which is too bad, because wither is the better mechanic by far.
Infect is not only not strictly better than wither, it also isn't "better" than wither. It is just different.
Infect is a parasitic mechanic that gets better if it has more of itself. A single infect creature in an aggro deck isn't going to do much, you need a certain threshold to make most use of the mechanic. Wither is different. You can put as many wither creatures as you want in a deck, even if it's just one and it will still work perfectly fine.
WotC ,knows this. They are aware that infect is not an upgrade over wither and Maro even once said that the existence of infect does NOT mean that wither is never to return. (Can't find the article, but it was pretty much at the beginning of scars block.)
You're comparing apples to oranges and claim that oranges are an uprade over apples. They're not and both mechanics will be used depending on what the set needs. If anything I'd say wither has a higher chance of returning, because it is less demanding. (Infect needs both -1/-1 counters and poison to work, wither only -1/-1 counters.)
I think it's a question of when, rather than if, infect will return. The next Phyrexian block will almost certainly have it.
I see I didn't get any "doesn't fit the culture" response I was looking for. Anyway, if it really were something like Ninjutsu it could be where you sacrifice the unblocked creature instead of bringing it back to your hand. River Prowler would be great for this and the creatures with death triggers would work out well also.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
"OH GOD MY BRAIN IS EXPLOADING AT HOW BAD THE ART IS ON MY OWN CARD"
-A friend's first impression of Ancestral Recall
10/10, I tapped.
"You can tell how dumb someone is by how they use Mary Sue"
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
Time to dig out those copies of Nighthowler people.
The meta is actually enjoyable at the moment, I hope wizards NEVER brings back anything like infect.
I would be very surprised if infect doesn't return. That's one of MaRo's pet mechanics, and it's now tied to the Phyrexians.
UR Blue-Red Control
Modern:
UBR Grixis Control
UWR Jeskai Control
Infect was last labled as a 2 on the storm scale, which Maro rates as "I would be shocked if we never see it again".
No I know, but that doesn't mean I wanna see it :/ lord knows it's obnoxious enough in modern.
A sacrifice ability would also be neat.
Dunes of Zairo
SHANDALAR
Innistrad - The Darkest Night
~THE RAVNICAN CONSORTIUM~
A Community Set
Commander: Allies & Adversaries
In any case, it certainly won't be back in DTK.
Put another chalk mark in the column of people predicting a "sacrifice matters" theme. It would be both very flavorful, and a good fit for a surprise use of Marang River Prowler.
What, where do you get THAT from? Infect is not an upgraded wither. If a block has no poison theme, but uses -1/-1 counters, wither would be chosen over infect.
It's like saying equip is an upgraded enchant.
So, wither is in the sorry state of being perceived as a gimped infect (because it does less), even though that's not what it was when it was released. Even though you and I can probably both dream up plenty of cool cards with wither. Whatever the context, wither loses out on something important that infect does. And WotC still has a Jones for infect. If WotC perceived infect as a failure, I would put the chance of wither's return pretty high. Since they're eager to bring back infect? Pretty much zero chance. As long as infect is the golden child, wither will be to infect as horsemanship is to flying: a bit of historical trivia that gets trotted out in minor formats, primarily just for novelty's sake.
Which is too bad, because wither is the better mechanic by far.
Infect isn't always strictly better. You could be playing with affinity against an opponent who is at 2 life and 0 poison counters, but the only creatures you have are Inkmoth Nexuses. Sometimes when you have both Inkmoth and Blinkmoth Nexus on the field with a bunch of artifacts and Cranial Plating, you put the plating on inkmoth because you might win faster with normal damage.
Infect is not only not strictly better than wither, it also isn't "better" than wither. It is just different.
Infect is a parasitic mechanic that gets better if it has more of itself. A single infect creature in an aggro deck isn't going to do much, you need a certain threshold to make most use of the mechanic. Wither is different. You can put as many wither creatures as you want in a deck, even if it's just one and it will still work perfectly fine.
WotC ,knows this. They are aware that infect is not an upgrade over wither and Maro even once said that the existence of infect does NOT mean that wither is never to return. (Can't find the article, but it was pretty much at the beginning of scars block.)
You're comparing apples to oranges and claim that oranges are an uprade over apples. They're not and both mechanics will be used depending on what the set needs. If anything I'd say wither has a higher chance of returning, because it is less demanding. (Infect needs both -1/-1 counters and poison to work, wither only -1/-1 counters.)
I think it's a question of when, rather than if, infect will return. The next Phyrexian block will almost certainly have it.
That doesn't rule out wither, of course.
UR Blue-Red Control
Modern:
UBR Grixis Control
UWR Jeskai Control