why did they feel the need to add the ignore this effect if empty handed? Were they afraid people would start chopping their hands off to resolve the ability?lol
Back in the early days rules were really, really unclear. Someone would have totally thought that if a player had no cards, Nicol Bolas wouldn't be able to attack that player. Players back then often got the rules wrong, and if a card couldn't perform an action, it was though that it couldn't be used at all. So in effect what that text is really saying is "Nicol Bolas can attack a player even if that player has no cards in hand." A lot of rules interpretations in 1994 were sketchy at best.
Unfortunately every try hard from Sacramento to Shanghai preaches from the top of their 27 lands + Mana Reflection that Tooth and Nail and Time Stretch are fine to play in the same turn but Armageddon is unfair.
Back in the day, I was really into the Elder Dragons and had a deck with all five of them in it. I thought that was the most powerful strategy possible.
I just didn't understand why my friends didn't cower in terror when I played Chromium and Arcades Sabboth.
I love Silklash Spider in EDH - there's a lot of competition for that five-cost green slot, but as long as people insist on using legendary dragons and angels as their commander, I'll keep playing him.
Nightwing Shade isn't the most efficient use for Cabal Coffers, but it's probably not the worst either.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not watching.
There's an old story that Sligh decks of the Invasion era occasionally played Firebrand Ranger even when they didn't have access to green mana, just because it was a 2/1 for two mana. I wasn't playing in tournaments then, so I can't verify it personally, but nothing would surprise me any more!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not watching.
Skyshroud Ranger is one of my favorite cards. Firebrand Ranger is almost as good. It doesn't surprise me if he was in the sligh deck. The 4th edition version had Ironclaw Orcs in it.
The 9/27/16 random card of the day is Balshan Griffin. If you have any comments, combos or a decklist involving this card, feel free to share.
Thank you for this! I love that quote from Zvi about "red doesn't need good cards to win".
I actually think that the Diamonds are not bad cards in general. Their problem is that a lot of mono-colored decks can play Mind Stone and just deal with the colorless mana. On the other hand, black cards often reward you for having as much black mana in one place as possible (cf. Bloodhusk Ritualist.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not watching.
Zvi is so right. Most of the cards in that deck are embarassingly bad, even by the standards of the time, but they work as a cohesive strategy even if they're individually weak.
The problem with the diamonds in general is that if you have light color requirements you'd rather have Mind Stone like you mentioned, and if you have heavy color requirements I think you'd want oneofthesignets, or maybe one ofthe talismans. Maybe you're more likely to play it as 2-cost manarock number 5+, or in a mono black EDH deck.
4c Gifts Deck Stats: https://bit.ly/2XMPrlY
https://pucatrade.com/invite/gift/120495
UB Wight Phantasm
RB Burn
UR Faerie Rites of Initiation
Legacy:
R Burn
CG-Post
Back in the early days rules were really, really unclear. Someone would have totally thought that if a player had no cards, Nicol Bolas wouldn't be able to attack that player. Players back then often got the rules wrong, and if a card couldn't perform an action, it was though that it couldn't be used at all. So in effect what that text is really saying is "Nicol Bolas can attack a player even if that player has no cards in hand." A lot of rules interpretations in 1994 were sketchy at best.
Also this card is still a pretty sick EDH general. Grixis are like my favorite EDH colors.
I just didn't understand why my friends didn't cower in terror when I played Chromium and Arcades Sabboth.
The 9/19/16 random card of the day is Cinder Shade. If you have any comments, combos or a decklist involving this card, feel free to share.
Nightwing Shade isn't the most efficient use for Cabal Coffers, but it's probably not the worst either.
The 9/22/16 random card of the day is Touch of Moonglove. If you have any comments, combos or a decklist involving this card, feel free to share.
The 9/27/16 random card of the day is Balshan Griffin. If you have any comments, combos or a decklist involving this card, feel free to share.
SCG article with the list
Thank you for this! I love that quote from Zvi about "red doesn't need good cards to win".
I actually think that the Diamonds are not bad cards in general. Their problem is that a lot of mono-colored decks can play Mind Stone and just deal with the colorless mana. On the other hand, black cards often reward you for having as much black mana in one place as possible (cf. Bloodhusk Ritualist.
The problem with the diamonds in general is that if you have light color requirements you'd rather have Mind Stone like you mentioned, and if you have heavy color requirements I think you'd want one of the signets, or maybe one of the talismans. Maybe you're more likely to play it as 2-cost manarock number 5+, or in a mono black EDH deck.
Still, since we're already on theme for early 2000s anecdotes, have a look at this beauty with full playsets of Charcoal, Marble and Sky diamonds.