Slot is too stacked to test but I dig the card and the art!
Too often I doubt you'll have a creature powerful enough to sac , that you'll be happy sacrificing for value... the fail case of a 4/3 for 2RR is pretty ehhhhh.
Embalm is sweet but expensive.
Seems cool with sneak attack. Sneak in a big fatty, attack with it, sneak in this guy, fling the fatty..
Now you have the embalm in the graveyard.
Goes well with Control Magic / certain threaten effects like Sarkhan / Frenzied Fugue. Not being great outside of midrange kind of kills this card though, especially when compared to FTK / PK Nalaar.
From the embalm token, I would have guessed this to cost 3R. Anyway, I think the red 4-drop slot is just too full for this. Card advantage through recursion is nice, but the creature itself is just not good enough for cube. Having to sacrifice another creature and not even doing a satisfying amount of damage if it is only a cheap small one (or a typical token)? Meh. As wtwlf said, not being able to sacrifice itself is a major downside that puts the final nail in the (cubic) coffin.
Does anybody know why the etb effect has a second "when" rather than the typical "if"? This is highly unusual and I find it rather weird. Especially since the second when stands at the start of the line, making it look like a second, unrelated trigger.
Does anybody know why the etb effect has a second "when" rather than the typical "if"? This is highly unusual and I find it rather weird. Especially since the second when stands at the start of the line, making it look like a second, unrelated trigger.
I believe it's to clarify that both the sacrifice and dealing damage happen when the ETB trigger is resolving.
But it is not clarifying! It is reducing clarity! Starting the second part of the triggered ability with "if" has worked for over a decade. Why change it? I see absolutely no reason. Especially on this card, where this new wording makes it easier to misunderstand what is going on.
To my understanding (disclaimer: not a judge) it's not a change of wording, but a difference in ability.
Saying "if" would mean that you get the effect of dealing damage if you sacrificed a creature. Instead, saying "when" means that you get another triggered ability on the stack if you sacrificed a creature, and the damage is dealt if that second triggered ability resolves. Also means you don't have to declare targets for the damage until you've sacrificed a creature.
Great card, great art but not going to cut it. Red 4 is just too deep. Not sure they could tweak it without breaking it. Too bad, I's ;ove a fling for kiln fiend
I like to see Manticores. Nice classic creature type. This one isn't quite there though. It's a shame the really discounted Embalm 6/6 Wurm guy was in green - red would make better use of that style of card. I wouldn't be surprised to see an Embalm Dragon in the next set though, so here's hoping.
To my understanding (disclaimer: not a judge) it's not a change of wording, but a difference in ability.
Saying "if" would mean that you get the effect of dealing damage if you sacrificed a creature. Instead, saying "when" means that you get another triggered ability on the stack if you sacrificed a creature, and the damage is dealt if that second triggered ability resolves. Also means you don't have to declare targets for the damage until you've sacrificed a creature.
I can't be sure, but my guess would be that it is a second trigger, that goes on the stack after you made the choice to sacrifice a creature (and which creature to sacrifice). This is a significantly different from (and worse than) the "if" version, because you cannot decide not to sacrifice if your opponent pumps or sacrifices the target in response.
It could be a change in the way R&D templates this kind of triggers going forward (it is confusing and feels vaguely shady, like the oblivion ring trick), or it could be just for this one, because the amount of damage is variable. Or I could be wrong: look up the release notes when they are published. ]
You two are explaining how this new wording works, but I am still scratching my head why it was chosen. As you two said, the damage dealing part being a second trigger means that the opponent can respond to it. Which wouldn't be the case with the usual "if" wording that just makes the whole ability a single trigger with "an intervening if-clause" (to use rules terminology). This certainly makes the card weaker, since your opponent can react to the second, damage dealing trigger after you've already sacrificed a creature.
I would say this new wording is more complicated than the old one, but maybe too many players thought that they could react between the two parts of such abilities? I've certainly encountered such sitations where my opponents thought that they could react after I chose to satisfy the condition of similar effects.
While I already find it odd to have a trigger that creates a second trigger (which isn't a delayed trigger - those things existed before and made sense), it is especially weird on this Masticore, since the second "When" stands at the start of that line of text, making it look like a second independent trigger.
...
Regarding the art: That entrance on the right side of the picture, in which the staircase leads... I know it is meant to be stylized Bolas horns... but it also looks like something else.
Regarding the art: That entrance on the right side of the picture, in which the staircase leads... I know it is meant to be stylized Bolas horns... but it also looks like something else.
To my understanding (disclaimer: not a judge) it's not a change of wording, but a difference in ability.
Saying "if" would mean that you get the effect of dealing damage if you sacrificed a creature. Instead, saying "when" means that you get another triggered ability on the stack if you sacrificed a creature, and the damage is dealt if that second triggered ability resolves. Also means you don't have to declare targets for the damage until you've sacrificed a creature.
I can't be sure, but my guess would be that it is a second trigger, that goes on the stack after you made the choice to sacrifice a creature (and which creature to sacrifice). This is a significantly different from (and worse than) the "if" version, because you cannot decide not to sacrifice if your opponent pumps or sacrifices the target in response.
It could be a change in the way R&D templates this kind of triggers going forward (it is confusing and feels vaguely shady, like the oblivion ring trick), or it could be just for this one, because the amount of damage is variable. Or I could be wrong: look up the release notes when they are published. ]
You two are explaining how this new wording works, but I am still scratching my head why it was chosen. As you two said, the damage dealing part being a second trigger means that the opponent can respond to it. Which wouldn't be the case with the usual "if" wording that just makes the whole ability a single trigger with "an intervening if-clause" (to use rules terminology). This certainly makes the card weaker, since your opponent can react to the second, damage dealing trigger after you've already sacrificed a creature.
I would say this new wording is more complicated than the old one, but maybe too many players thought that they could react between the two parts of such abilities? I've certainly encountered such sitations where my opponents thought that they could react after I chose to satisfy the condition of similar effects.
While I already find it odd to have a trigger that creates a second trigger (which isn't a delayed trigger - those things existed before and made sense), it is especially weird on this Masticore, since the second "When" stands at the start of that line of text, making it look like a second independent trigger.
...
Regarding the art: That entrance on the right side of the picture, in which the staircase leads... I know it is meant to be stylized Bolas horns... but it also looks like something else.
The wording is very similar to Exploit cards, but I don't believe they're functionally the same since exploit involves two separate triggers.
Heart-Piercer Manticore features a new style of triggered ability. When it enters the battlefield, its triggered ability goes on the stack without a target. While that ability is resolving, you may sacrifice a creature. If you do, a second ability triggers and you pick a target creature or player that will be dealt damage. This is different from other abilities that say "If you do . . ." in that players may cast spells and activate abilities before a creature is sacrificed and then again after the creature is sacrificed but before damage is dealt.
Build your own FTK with embalm seems interesting. Thoughts?
My High Octane Unpowered Cube on CubeCobra
Would've provided SO MUCH additional value if it could sacrifice itself.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 49th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from MKM!
Stacked slot is stacked though. It's an interesting card for midrange / big red, but is kinda meh on its own.
My High Octane Unpowered Cube on CubeCobra
Too often I doubt you'll have a creature powerful enough to sac , that you'll be happy sacrificing for value... the fail case of a 4/3 for 2RR is pretty ehhhhh.
Embalm is sweet but expensive.
Seems cool with sneak attack. Sneak in a big fatty, attack with it, sneak in this guy, fling the fatty..
Now you have the embalm in the graveyard.
Still likely too situational
Last Updated 02/07/24
Streaming Standard/Cube on Twitch https://www.twitch.tv/heisenb3rg96
Strategy Twitter https://www.twitter.com/heisenb3rg
My High Octane Unpowered Cube on CubeCobra
Does anybody know why the etb effect has a second "when" rather than the typical "if"? This is highly unusual and I find it rather weird. Especially since the second when stands at the start of the line, making it look like a second, unrelated trigger.
Uril, the Miststalker RGW -- Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre C -- Vhati il-Dal BG -- Jor Kadeen, the Prevailer RW -- Animar, Soul of Elements URG
Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker R -- Maga, Traitor to Mortals B -- Ghave, Guru of Spores BGW -- Sliver Hivelord WUBRG
Social Media: Twitter, Twitch
MTG Articles: 200+ Articles on StarCityGames.com, MTG Draft AI Article
MTG AI Code: Limited Draft Bot, CubeCobra Recommender System
I believe it's to clarify that both the sacrifice and dealing damage happen when the ETB trigger is resolving.
Modern:
Dredge | Restore Balance | Titanshift
My [360][Unpowered][Modern-Frame] Cube
Uril, the Miststalker RGW -- Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre C -- Vhati il-Dal BG -- Jor Kadeen, the Prevailer RW -- Animar, Soul of Elements URG
Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker R -- Maga, Traitor to Mortals B -- Ghave, Guru of Spores BGW -- Sliver Hivelord WUBRG
Saying "if" would mean that you get the effect of dealing damage if you sacrificed a creature. Instead, saying "when" means that you get another triggered ability on the stack if you sacrificed a creature, and the damage is dealt if that second triggered ability resolves. Also means you don't have to declare targets for the damage until you've sacrificed a creature.
Modern:
Dredge | Restore Balance | Titanshift
My [360][Unpowered][Modern-Frame] Cube
On spoiled card wishlisting and 'should-have-had'-isms:
It helps that the art is awesome...
My Eternal Cube on CubeTutor| |My Reject Rare Cube on CubeTutor| |My Peasant Cube on CubeTutor
I used to write for MTGS, including Cranial Insertion and cube articles. Good on you if you can find those after the upgrade.
Last Updated 02/07/24
Streaming Standard/Cube on Twitch https://www.twitch.tv/heisenb3rg96
Strategy Twitter https://www.twitter.com/heisenb3rg
You two are explaining how this new wording works, but I am still scratching my head why it was chosen. As you two said, the damage dealing part being a second trigger means that the opponent can respond to it. Which wouldn't be the case with the usual "if" wording that just makes the whole ability a single trigger with "an intervening if-clause" (to use rules terminology). This certainly makes the card weaker, since your opponent can react to the second, damage dealing trigger after you've already sacrificed a creature.
I would say this new wording is more complicated than the old one, but maybe too many players thought that they could react between the two parts of such abilities? I've certainly encountered such sitations where my opponents thought that they could react after I chose to satisfy the condition of similar effects.
While I already find it odd to have a trigger that creates a second trigger (which isn't a delayed trigger - those things existed before and made sense), it is especially weird on this Masticore, since the second "When" stands at the start of that line of text, making it look like a second independent trigger.
...
Regarding the art: That entrance on the right side of the picture, in which the staircase leads... I know it is meant to be stylized Bolas horns... but it also looks like something else.
Uril, the Miststalker RGW -- Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre C -- Vhati il-Dal BG -- Jor Kadeen, the Prevailer RW -- Animar, Soul of Elements URG
Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker R -- Maga, Traitor to Mortals B -- Ghave, Guru of Spores BGW -- Sliver Hivelord WUBRG
Haha, cannot unsee now.
On spoiled card wishlisting and 'should-have-had'-isms:
Also, follow us on twitter! @TurnOneMagic
The wording is very similar to Exploit cards, but I don't believe they're functionally the same since exploit involves two separate triggers.
My High Octane Unpowered Cube on CubeCobra
Modern:
Dredge | Restore Balance | Titanshift
My [360][Unpowered][Modern-Frame] Cube