Dragonless Scorn happens occasionally, but can still be useful early on as a force spike. I still love the card, you may be experiencing some variance.
I agree about the 2 Dissolve, and switched out the Disdainful Stroke in the main for a 3rd Dissolve. I find myself needing counters for removal more than I am for 4 mana spells, in order to push Ojutai through.
As for enchantment hate, I don't know if the deck really supports any at all, as a combination of counters and Thoughtseize might be enough as is. Might just have to stay vigilant for decks looking to sneak some through (Ascendancy and Whip being prime targets).
Won game day with Esper Dragons today (primarily CFB list). Not much aggro at our shop, but expected to face the mirror at some point. Changed sideboard to attack the mirror, and it helped. Added Duress and Risen Executioner.
Might need some type of enchantment hate. Only game loss was to a resolved Jeskai Ascendancy.
I have to agree, there's just not much flavor in these dragons. They hardly seemed tied to their time-altered clans at all, and these new factions/clans are likewise flavorless. This comes as a great disappointment compared with the khans/clans mechanics/flavor, which I felt Fate Reforged added to, and now feel like DTK is stifling.
As far as enemy fetches go, doesn't it seem logical that Zendikar will feature them as the replacement for the rotated enemy pain lands, so that there are viable untapped duals for all 10 color pairings?
You could always ask wizards again, I guess. Point out exactly what's wrong and why.
As it stands now the error seems annoying and pointless, but not espescially significant. On the bright side, you now have a story about winning your first FNM that you won't soon forget, I no longer remember how I did at my first FNM, but I doubt I won.
I agree with you on all counts, and it is a somewhat interesting story that I will not forget, and I get to rib the owner at my leisure. Thank you for your thoughts.
The organizer agreed that there had been an error, no denial, and I'm unsure if more could be done (which is really the purpose of this post). The prizes were insignificant, I'm more vainly concerned with the more or less permanent result displayed by the dci. Having reflected further, I'm just going to let this drop, but I was curious as to whether dci placement results could be modified after the fact. Typical weirdness for me however, seems like every time I do something for the first time, the whole system breaks down.
So, last Friday I attended my first FNM. Very small event, only 3 rounds. I finished the event 3-0, but was told that I had placed 3rd in the event. I said that was ridiculous, as my 3rd round match opponent (who I had defeated) was announced as the winner. The store owner said that the computer showed the standings, but didn't really delve any further into the issue ("just a weird technicality","something to do with bye scoring").
When I returned home, I checked my results on the dci, and it said I lost my 3rd match. So basically, the store owner gave my 3rd round match win to my opponent, causing the ridiculous outcome. I appealed to the owner the next day, and he contacted Wizards, who updated my planeswalker points accordingly, but did not change my placement in the event. Is there any way to correct this?
Putting a card ontop and not shuffling does not equate to cheating though. It is only cheating if you know what that card is (which the videos do not prove).
I still think this is all a major With-Hunt. There is not a single video evidence where you can say 100% Jared knew what the top card of the library was. [/quote]
But why would anyone do this? The implication alone is motive enough to NOT put a bottom card on top and then keep it there, as the bottom card is typically the most visible to the shuffler. And then to only do it for shuffling your opponent's deck? It may not be proof, but it is still damning, and leads us to where we are now. Only Jared can answer why he shuffles this way.
It doesn't matter if Player A actually manipulated the deck. The devil's advocate theory is based on the FEAR that player A would, if given the opportunity, manipulate their deck.
There's a lot of that going around now!
Although, if this scenario is in any way feasible (and I don't believe it is), your opponent just has to put a card he does want on the bottom, making this an implausible 'defense'.
I would like an explanation for why Jared shuffles his opponent's deck the way he does.
The Player A/B explanation is far-fetched, as we do not have evidence that in these cases Player A ever manipulated their own deck before presenting it to Jared (as well as considering the most minute chance that this would ever actually help Player A, it doesn't pass the risk/reward part of the test).
Right now, my favorite card is Golgari Charm due to its versatility. The regenerating, enchantment destroying, weenie sweeper has been very good to me lately!
Anyone know where to find updated tokens database? Thanks!
0
I agree about the 2 Dissolve, and switched out the Disdainful Stroke in the main for a 3rd Dissolve. I find myself needing counters for removal more than I am for 4 mana spells, in order to push Ojutai through.
As for enchantment hate, I don't know if the deck really supports any at all, as a combination of counters and Thoughtseize might be enough as is. Might just have to stay vigilant for decks looking to sneak some through (Ascendancy and Whip being prime targets).
Might need some type of enchantment hate. Only game loss was to a resolved Jeskai Ascendancy.
As far as enemy fetches go, doesn't it seem logical that Zendikar will feature them as the replacement for the rotated enemy pain lands, so that there are viable untapped duals for all 10 color pairings?
I agree with you on all counts, and it is a somewhat interesting story that I will not forget, and I get to rib the owner at my leisure. Thank you for your thoughts.
When I returned home, I checked my results on the dci, and it said I lost my 3rd match. So basically, the store owner gave my 3rd round match win to my opponent, causing the ridiculous outcome. I appealed to the owner the next day, and he contacted Wizards, who updated my planeswalker points accordingly, but did not change my placement in the event. Is there any way to correct this?
The police are everyone else.
Putting a card ontop and not shuffling does not equate to cheating though. It is only cheating if you know what that card is (which the videos do not prove).
I still think this is all a major With-Hunt. There is not a single video evidence where you can say 100% Jared knew what the top card of the library was. [/quote]
But why would anyone do this? The implication alone is motive enough to NOT put a bottom card on top and then keep it there, as the bottom card is typically the most visible to the shuffler. And then to only do it for shuffling your opponent's deck? It may not be proof, but it is still damning, and leads us to where we are now. Only Jared can answer why he shuffles this way.
There's a lot of that going around now!
Although, if this scenario is in any way feasible (and I don't believe it is), your opponent just has to put a card he does want on the bottom, making this an implausible 'defense'.
The Player A/B explanation is far-fetched, as we do not have evidence that in these cases Player A ever manipulated their own deck before presenting it to Jared (as well as considering the most minute chance that this would ever actually help Player A, it doesn't pass the risk/reward part of the test).
An additional cut by both you and then your opponent could curtail some of these problems as well.
I really hope everything is on the up and up. Too much of this in a limited time frame can be very damaging.
Edit: Reddit is apparently where footage gathers that damns a player.