As to popping a Nevinryalls disk just prior to scooping, then you're just being a jerk and/or kingmaking, both of which I don't like. Everyone should just win or die trying, and free for all is free for all, not "if i can't win then you can't either".
I'd like to point out that threatening lethal — or even a significant attack — against the person with the untapped Disk is provoking the activation in the first place.
As to popping a Nevinryalls disk just prior to scooping, then you're just being a jerk and/or kingmaking, both of which I don't like. Everyone should just win or die trying, and free for all is free for all, not "if i can't win then you can't either".
I'd like to point out that threatening lethal — or even a significant attack — against the person with the untapped Disk is provoking the activation in the first place.
True, and I wouldn't have a problem with it if it saves him - that's why he runs the card in the first place. What I have problems with is popping a disk when doing that wouldn't save you anyway. Or popping it, only to leave the game afterwards without genuinely losing. I think nobody likes to be on the receiving end of a boardwipe, yet everybody recognizes the need for them. But if feel you need to play one, then you also play with the consequences. Otherwise, you're just being a Nigel Farage.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The secret to enjoyable Commander games is not winning first, but losing last.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
We're basically just talking about the cold war here. Having nukes aimed at the other country (nev's disk) won't save you from their nukes (lethal fireball), but it will make them think twice about using theirs in the first place. And the plausibility of that counterattack is very important to it acting as a deterrent.
As far as playing good, technical magic the correct play is clear. Complaining that your opponent set off nev's disk just to screw you over would be like if the USA whined about the USSR nuking them after the USA launched all their nukes at the USSR. If you didn't think it was worth retaliation then you shouldn't have done it.
I will say that casting, say, quicken + decree of annihilation in response to a lethal fireball where no one was particularly ahead (aka the "farting right before leaving the elevator" maneuver) has a bit less legitimacy imo.
We're basically just talking about the cold war here. Having nukes aimed at the other country (nev's disk) won't save you from their nukes (lethal fireball), but it will make them think twice about using theirs in the first place. And the plausibility of that counterattack is very important to it acting as a deterrent.
As far as playing good, technical magic the correct play is clear. Complaining that your opponent set off nev's disk just to screw you over would be like if the USA whined about the USSR nuking them after the USA launched all their nukes at the USSR. If you didn't think it was worth retaliation then you shouldn't have done it.
I will say that casting, say, quicken + decree of annihilation in response to a lethal fireball where no one was particularly ahead (aka the "farting right before leaving the elevator" maneuver) has a bit less legitimacy imo.
What again is the freaking difference? Blowing up nonlands and blowing up everything if you are about to lose anyway is principally the same.
Objective of the game is to win. If you played something that didn't prevent you from dying to lethal spell or attack, you are just screwing over a person (that was either lucky, played well, or both) and an ass****.
Well, unless there is an agreed-upon social contract in the group stating that this sort of tactic isn't allowed, it's pointless to say charged things like this.
We're basically just talking about the cold war here. Having nukes aimed at the other country (nev's disk) won't save you from their nukes (lethal fireball), but it will make them think twice about using theirs in the first place. And the plausibility of that counterattack is very important to it acting as a deterrent.
As far as playing good, technical magic the correct play is clear. Complaining that your opponent set off nev's disk just to screw you over would be like if the USA whined about the USSR nuking them after the USA launched all their nukes at the USSR. If you didn't think it was worth retaliation then you shouldn't have done it.
I will say that casting, say, quicken + decree of annihilation in response to a lethal fireball where no one was particularly ahead (aka the "farting right before leaving the elevator" maneuver) has a bit less legitimacy imo.
What again is the freaking difference? Blowing up nonlands and blowing up everything if you are about to lose anyway is principally the same.
Objective of the game is to win. If you played something that didn't prevent you from dying to lethal spell or attack, you are just screwing over a person (that was either lucky, played well, or both) and an ass****.
difference being that no one is ahead before caste no decree in that scenario, so casting decree doesn’t technically hurt or help anyone’s chances.
In the disk scenario you’re only activating if it hurts the person killing you. If they’re behind, activating would be stupid. The goal is to hurt whoever is killing you as much as possible, thus deterring them from doing so - not simply to prolong the game for no reason. If the person fireballing you is way behind on board, the deterrent is NOT setting off disk, thus making it more likely that they'll die to the other players. Whereas if they agree to send the fireball somewhere else, maybe you'll set off disk to save them.
This is interesting. I might sound "charged" because everybody I ever played with or seen playing considers something like scooping to deny triggers or trying to influence the game knowing he/she would lose (in multiplayer games) as bad as I do. I just take it for granted that there is already this social contract struck, that people take the game seriously, try to win, and respect other players at the same time. I am honestly quite suprised that so many people here are okay with things like that.
I 100% feel you. But there was a major disussion about "spite scooping" in this very forum not so long ago and there's at the very least a significant portion of the playerbase that feels this is ok. The major pro argument was "if the rules allow it, it can't be bad".
(If you ever wondered what playing Magic with Martin Skhreli is like... )
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The secret to enjoyable Commander games is not winning first, but losing last.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
This is interesting. I might sound "charged" because everybody I ever played with or seen playing considers something like scooping to deny triggers or trying to influence the game knowing he/she would lose (in multiplayer games) as bad as I do. I just take it for granted that there is already this social contract struck, that people take the game seriously, try to win, and respect other players at the same time. I am honestly quite suprised that so many people here are okay with things like that.
I 100% feel you. But there was a major disussion about "spite scooping" in this very forum not so long ago and there's at the very least a significant portion of the playerbase that feels this is ok. The major pro argument was "if the rules allow it, it can't be bad".
(If you ever wondered what playing Magic with Martin Skhreli is like... )
One thing I haven't mentioned: I think it's more "gentlemanly" if you plan to spite scoop to announce that you're going to do so, if killed. That makes it a more legitimate deterrent and less of a mere spite maneuver.
For the record, I do personally think scooping to deny triggers is at least a bit dickish (and I very rarely do that sort of thing). But I might do it if I think the other person has broken the social contract and is playing an excessively high-powered deck, which seems like what is happening here. If you're being a dick, I don't think you can count on your opponents not being dicks right back.
This is interesting. I might sound "charged" because everybody I ever played with or seen playing considers something like scooping to deny triggers or trying to influence the game knowing he/she would lose (in multiplayer games) as bad as I do. I just take it for granted that there is already this social contract struck, that people take the game seriously, try to win, and respect other players at the same time. I am honestly quite suprised that so many people here are okay with things like that.
You're surprised there are many people out there that may actually think differently than the people you've played with or seen playing?
It's a big world and a big Internet, so that should be expected.
(If you ever wondered what playing Magic with Martin Skhreli is like... )
Playing Magic with Shkreli is that he buys up all the cards in your LGS and any you want to buy online, then he sells you them for 10 times the original price while he crafted himself a perfect deck to counter whatever you were thinking about building.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
We're basically just talking about the cold war here. Having nukes aimed at the other country (nev's disk) won't save you from their nukes (lethal fireball), but it will make them think twice about using theirs in the first place. And the plausibility of that counterattack is very important to it acting as a deterrent.
As far as playing good, technical magic the correct play is clear. Complaining that your opponent set off nev's disk just to screw you over would be like if the USA whined about the USSR nuking them after the USA launched all their nukes at the USSR. If you didn't think it was worth retaliation then you shouldn't have done it.
I will say that casting, say, quicken + decree of annihilation in response to a lethal fireball where no one was particularly ahead (aka the "farting right before leaving the elevator" maneuver) has a bit less legitimacy imo.
What again is the freaking difference? Blowing up nonlands and blowing up everything if you are about to lose anyway is principally the same.
Objective of the game is to win. If you played something that didn't prevent you from dying to lethal spell or attack, you are just screwing over a person (that was either lucky, played well, or both) and an ass****.
What if they have a Solemn in play and might draw into a 1/60 chance of not dying after popping the disk? Does that make you feel any different? The outcome is going to be the same nearly all of the time: they die but wipe the board first. Would you prefer they not pop it because it's unlikely to matter? What if they don't remember whether or not they have outs they could draw into by killing their Simulacrum or are borrowing the deck from someone?
As someone who has detonated a disk on the way out, I will say that it absolutely depends on whether the person's been hammering me all game or not, and if I can help the other players take my killer down. If it can, I will every time. If it helps them not to, then I will just die. If someone goes after me and succeeds, I will do everything I can to ensure they don't win with any dying breath left. Don't like that? Tough...
We're basically just talking about the cold war here. Having nukes aimed at the other country (nev's disk) won't save you from their nukes (lethal fireball), but it will make them think twice about using theirs in the first place. And the plausibility of that counterattack is very important to it acting as a deterrent.
As far as playing good, technical magic the correct play is clear. Complaining that your opponent set off nev's disk just to screw you over would be like if the USA whined about the USSR nuking them after the USA launched all their nukes at the USSR. If you didn't think it was worth retaliation then you shouldn't have done it.
I will say that casting, say, quicken + decree of annihilation in response to a lethal fireball where no one was particularly ahead (aka the "farting right before leaving the elevator" maneuver) has a bit less legitimacy imo.
What again is the freaking difference? Blowing up nonlands and blowing up everything if you are about to lose anyway is principally the same.
Objective of the game is to win. If you played something that didn't prevent you from dying to lethal spell or attack, you are just screwing over a person (that was either lucky, played well, or both) and an ass****.
What if they have a Solemn in play and might draw into a 1/60 chance of not dying after popping the disk? Does that make you feel any different? The outcome is going to be the same nearly all of the time: they die but wipe the board first. Would you prefer they not pop it because it's unlikely to matter? What if they don't remember whether or not they have outs they could draw into by killing their Simulacrum or are borrowing the deck from someone?
Yes! The difference is a chance of having an out, no matter how slim it is. Imagine if it happened- prime example of crazy play right there. If it fails... the intent is what matters rather than the outcome. Activating the disk is then justified in my book.
It also implies if I had my list memorized and knew for sure I cannot draw any save, I won't pop.
I actually scooped like that only once, when I had just plain bad day and got super frustrated with another's threat assesment. It was my weak moment, I recognise I made a wrong thing and I would never do it again.
I'm curious what you think in these situations:
1 Setting off disk will guarantee a loss for the person killing you, whereas not setting it off guarantees a win for them.
2 Setting off disk will decrease the chances of winning for the person killing you (but no guarantees).
3 Same as 1, but you tell the person in advance that if they kill you, you're going to set off disk.
4 Same as 2, but you tell the person in advance that if they kill you, you're going to set off disk.
Certainly in case 3 and often in case 4, you have to concede that you're more likely to survive and potentially win. So it is "an out". And then #1 and #2 are essentially the same as 3 and 4 except that the threat is implied. So I'm curious where you'd draw the line. Are you allowed to threaten it, but then you can't actually do it?
If it fails... the intent is what matters rather than the outcome.
So even if there's an out that the disk player could also draw into by doing so, you would still disapprove of them popping it for the express purpose of messing with the fireball player?
If a player is about to lose and his only possible way of preventing that loss involves mass destruction that’s fine. As a matter of fact, it’s the only correct play at that point.
We were talking about situations where that mass destruction does nothing to prevent the loss but is PURELY intended to worsen the position of the one who beat you fair and square vs the other remaining opponents.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The secret to enjoyable Commander games is not winning first, but losing last.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
If a player is about to lose and his only possible way of preventing that loss involves mass destruction that’s fine. As a matter of fact, it’s the only correct play at that point.
We were talking about situations where that mass destruction does nothing to prevent the loss but is PURELY intended to worsen the position of the one who beat you fair and square vs the other remaining opponents.
1 Setting off disk will guarantee a loss for the person killing you, whereas not setting it off guarantees a win for them.
2 Setting off disk will decrease the chances of winning for the person killing you (but no guarantees).
3 Same as 1, but you tell the person in advance that if they kill you, you're going to set off disk.
4 Same as 2, but you tell the person in advance that if they kill you, you're going to set off disk.
Certainly in case 3 and often in case 4, you have to concede that you're more likely to survive and potentially win. So it is "an out". And then #1 and #2 are essentially the same as 3 and 4 except that the threat is implied. So I'm curious where you'd draw the line. Are you allowed to threaten it, but then you can't actually do it?
C'mon I want to talk about deterrence with the hard-liners
Hey be my guest, I just wanted to clarify what I was saying because I felt it didn't come across as clearly.
Threatening to pop a disk as a matter of deterence is fine in my book.
Speed-scooping is another form of deterrence, though, too. I mean anything you can do to screw over your killer can be deterrence.
I will concede that often in these scenarios people don’t use them as deterrence and just do them out of spite though - in particular speed-scooping often is forgotten as a possibility until it’s too late to be a deterrent and is only for spite. It’s not a deterrent if your opponent isn’t aware of the possibility, obviously.
But I think as long as everyone is aware of it, it can be a nice tool to give people in desperate situations one final weapon. I think mostly it’s “bm” when it comes as a surprise.
To OP's question. What does gentlemanlike mean? I don't know how exactly the Edric player built his deck, but in my eyes, there is the gentleman...liness of not building a deck that forces out anything but the most ridiculous or tuned strategies. To me games aren't fun if players build decks that are unpleasant or play unpleasantly. Taking three extra turns at once is fair game at some point in the game, but it does ring some alarm bells for me. If the Edric player built a deck that's unpleasant to whatever social contract that's present in the game, conceding out of spite isn't a particularly nasty thing to do.
old thread
old thread
old thread
R Zada Arcane Storm
RBU Marchesa
GWU Estrid
GWR Samut?
URB Kess
(R/W)(U/B) Akiri & Silas
BWR Alesha
R Neheb Dragons
G Nylea Wurms
W Darien
U Tetsuko
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
As far as playing good, technical magic the correct play is clear. Complaining that your opponent set off nev's disk just to screw you over would be like if the USA whined about the USSR nuking them after the USA launched all their nukes at the USSR. If you didn't think it was worth retaliation then you shouldn't have done it.
I will say that casting, say, quicken + decree of annihilation in response to a lethal fireball where no one was particularly ahead (aka the "farting right before leaving the elevator" maneuver) has a bit less legitimacy imo.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
Well, unless there is an agreed-upon social contract in the group stating that this sort of tactic isn't allowed, it's pointless to say charged things like this.
In the disk scenario you’re only activating if it hurts the person killing you. If they’re behind, activating would be stupid. The goal is to hurt whoever is killing you as much as possible, thus deterring them from doing so - not simply to prolong the game for no reason. If the person fireballing you is way behind on board, the deterrent is NOT setting off disk, thus making it more likely that they'll die to the other players. Whereas if they agree to send the fireball somewhere else, maybe you'll set off disk to save them.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
(If you ever wondered what playing Magic with Martin Skhreli is like... )
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
For the record, I do personally think scooping to deny triggers is at least a bit dickish (and I very rarely do that sort of thing). But I might do it if I think the other person has broken the social contract and is playing an excessively high-powered deck, which seems like what is happening here. If you're being a dick, I don't think you can count on your opponents not being dicks right back.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
You're surprised there are many people out there that may actually think differently than the people you've played with or seen playing?
It's a big world and a big Internet, so that should be expected.
Playing Magic with Shkreli is that he buys up all the cards in your LGS and any you want to buy online, then he sells you them for 10 times the original price while he crafted himself a perfect deck to counter whatever you were thinking about building.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
Older Magic as a Board Game: Panglacial Wurm , Mill
1 Setting off disk will guarantee a loss for the person killing you, whereas not setting it off guarantees a win for them.
2 Setting off disk will decrease the chances of winning for the person killing you (but no guarantees).
3 Same as 1, but you tell the person in advance that if they kill you, you're going to set off disk.
4 Same as 2, but you tell the person in advance that if they kill you, you're going to set off disk.
Certainly in case 3 and often in case 4, you have to concede that you're more likely to survive and potentially win. So it is "an out". And then #1 and #2 are essentially the same as 3 and 4 except that the threat is implied. So I'm curious where you'd draw the line. Are you allowed to threaten it, but then you can't actually do it?
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
Older Magic as a Board Game: Panglacial Wurm , Mill
We were talking about situations where that mass destruction does nothing to prevent the loss but is PURELY intended to worsen the position of the one who beat you fair and square vs the other remaining opponents.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
Threatening to pop a disk as a matter of deterence is fine in my book.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
I will concede that often in these scenarios people don’t use them as deterrence and just do them out of spite though - in particular speed-scooping often is forgotten as a possibility until it’s too late to be a deterrent and is only for spite. It’s not a deterrent if your opponent isn’t aware of the possibility, obviously.
But I think as long as everyone is aware of it, it can be a nice tool to give people in desperate situations one final weapon. I think mostly it’s “bm” when it comes as a surprise.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6