We have updated our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Dismiss
 
D&D Beyond
 
Treasure Cruisin' with Azorius Titan
 
Commander 2017 Digest
  • 0

    posted a message on Iconic Masters November 2017
    Bad for investors and speculators. Ideal for collectors. Reprints make it more feasible to collect cards that would be pricier if not the reprints. Collectors that actually collect (not 'collectors' who appropriate the title of 'collector' because they don't like 'speculator' or 'hoarder') love reprints.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 0

    posted a message on Iconic Masters November 2017
    The problem is, the Iconic creatures of Magic are the likes of Serra Angel, Sengir Vampire, and Shivan Dragon.

    Unfortunately, people who buy $10 premium packs exclusively available through hobby channels won't spend that on packs where those cards are the featured and prominent elements.

    They have to stray from 'Iconic creatures' somewhat because Iconic creatures can't drive sales on a premium set.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 3

    posted a message on Iconic Masters November 2017
    Between this and Masters 25, this is their chance to Make Paper Pauper Pauper Again, and flood the market with commons that people will actually be able to buy at common-level pricing, and return Pauper to its ideal of being buildable on a shoestring budget. Simian Spirit Guide! Manamorphose! Street Wraith! Lotus Petal! Sleight of Hand! Chain Lightning!

    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 0

    posted a message on RG Super Vengevine
    Quote from Froop91 »
    Myr superion with only Emissarys for the mana is tough.


    There's Claim // Fame to cheat it in as well. With 14 cards that can usher it into the grave from either library or hand, I don't think his deck is left with a stranded Superion often. If one is in hand without a BTE partner, it just becomes the next-best-thing to pitch after Vengevines.

    amic: a sideboard suggestion: Kari Zev's Expertise. Not a card you want against combo or go-wide aggro, but against midrange decks or decks that win with big fat, it can be huge to steal their fattest blocker T3 and be able to freecast a Superion or Flayer on the side.
    Posted in: Deck Creation (Modern)
  • 0

    posted a message on Ixalan Name and Number Crunch
    We have seen 53 rares and 15 mythics.

    A typical large set has 53 rares, 15 mythics, and a total of 269 cards.

    This set has a total of 279 cards.

    So there are, at most, 10 'extra' cards. Of which some may be a rarity less than rare.

    But you've completely ignored me both previous times I've tried to point this out to you so why would you begin to read now?
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 0

    posted a message on Stompy
    Even in a revolt-all-the-time build, I just don't think Herbalists is good enough. It's just a 2/2. Even if it's a 'free' 2/2, this deck isn't really getting benefit from going wide. I think it has a place in decks that benefit from multiple-spells-cast turns (cards with Surge; Vengevine; Talara's Battalion) or a use for creature-generated mana (Myr Superion)... or decks that have an Overrun-like effect where bears can win if there are enough of them. But here? It's a less-devotion Burning-Tree Emissary that sometimes misfires but provides uniformly green mana. And to me, that's not good enough if you're not exploiting it other ways.

    And I think enough has already been said about Kessig Prowler.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • 0

    posted a message on Portal Mage and Master of Cruelties
    It is curious, why didn't they print MoC with the 'defending player' template like is on Guiltfeeder, Swamp Mosquito, etc? What is gained with the 'that player' switch, if not a behaviour change in the face of effects that remember who was originally attacked?

    Edit: Oh, yeah, Planeswalkers. Always screwing everything up.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • 0

    posted a message on Portal Mage and Master of Cruelties
    But Master of Cruelties never refers to a defending player. It just refers to "that player", referencing the player who was attacked. "that creature is still considered to have attacked the player or planeswalker as declared" seems to imply that the game is meant to remember which player was the one attacked (even though it is now distinct from the concept of "defending player"). (This is why that specific text confused me - it would make sense to me that C should be whacked, but that text seemed to me to contradict).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • 0

    posted a message on Portal Mage and Master of Cruelties
    C17 release notes went up, and part of the release note section for Portal Mage makes me want a doublecheck that it really does what it seems to say it does when it redirects a Master of Cruelties.

    "Whenever Master of Cruelties attacks a player and isn't blocked, that player's life total becomes 1."
    "If you reselect which player or planeswalker an attacking creature is attacking, that creature is still considered to have attacked the player or planeswalker as declared, but it is now attacking the new player or planeswalker."

    So I attack player B, Portal Mage lands and makes me switch my attack to C... if C chooses not to block, "it is stil considered to have attacked the player or planeswalker as declared..." so, B's life total gets set to 1? Is that an accurate interpretation?



    MoC's text:

    First strike, deathtouch
    Master of Cruelties can only attack alone.
    Whenever Master of Cruelties attacks a player and isn't blocked, that player's life total becomes 1. Master of Cruelties assigns no combat damage this combat.

    Portal Mage release notes:
    When Portal Mage enters the battlefield during the declare attackers step, you may reselect which player or planeswalker target attacking creature is attacking. (It can't attack its controller or its controller's planeswalkers.)

    You may cast Portal Mage outside of a declare attackers step. If Portal Mage enters the battlefield outside of a declare attackers step, its ability simply doesn't trigger.
    Reselecting which player or planeswalker a creature is attacking ignores all requirements, restrictions, and costs associated with attacking.
    Reselecting which player or planeswalker a creature is attacking doesn't cause "when this creature attacks" abilities to trigger. Notably, the Curses in this set (such as Curse of Vitality) won't trigger while Portal Mage's ability is resolving.
    If you reselect which player or planeswalker an attacking creature is attacking, that creature is still considered to have attacked the player or planeswalker as declared, but it is now attacking the new player or planeswalker.

    If an ability targets something controlled by the "defending player" of an attacking creature and the defending player for that creature changes before that ability resolves, the ability will be countered because its target has become illegal.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • 1

    posted a message on RG Super Vengevine
    Any thought to Greenbelt Rampager? All on its own it can trigger a Vengevine revival - something very few other cards you might topdeck after emptying your hand could do.
    Posted in: Deck Creation (Modern)
  • 2

    posted a message on Stompy
    You know what's not so hot against Wurmcoil? Beast Within. Oh, you thought I'd give you two 3/3 creatures? Joke's on you! I'll give you three!
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • 0

    posted a message on Ixalan Name and Number Crunch
    If something along the lines of Trial of Ambition or Perilous Predicament is MaRo's favorite card in the set, that's a far more damning statement about the set than the whole rare sheet ever was.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 0

    posted a message on Stompy
    Quote from RingabelBast »

    Use Sundering Growth > Naturalize , is better option Smile


    In a version of the deck that doesn't make tokens, why would Sundering Growth be a better option?

    I could see that making sense if you ran a build with, say, Rhonas's Last Stand and Call of the Conclave (I've even dabbled in a build involving Kin-Tree Invocation)... but in most of the decks listed here, they don't tend to benefit from Populate.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • 0

    posted a message on RG Super Vengevine
    I had a good look at it, and it's still on my maybelist, but instant combat tricks and Lupine Prototype don't play together very well. I need to cast my TBR before declaring attack or Lupine can't be declared, but then I lose the option of casting the TBR with the benefit of knowing blocking.

    I was also giving some thought to Fling in a similar capacity, but it has a similar problem.


    An earlier version of the deck that was running the Myr Superions instead of Lupine Prototypes was running Kari Zev's Expertise as a secondary way of getting the Superion into play. There was also a short dabble in black-splash for Claim // Fame.
    Posted in: Deck Creation (Modern)
  • 0

    posted a message on Stompy
    Sorry to see your 0-3. Last two times I took this deck to Modern night, I went 2-1 both times and got some packs. I think the deck is a meta call. It may just be the wrong call for that shop. I wouldn't read too much into one night though.

    I tested Creeping Corrosion, and I think it's too expensive. It's not too popular, but I prefer Naturalize, basically a green Disenchant. It hits artifacts and enchantments, only costs 2, and can remove a Chalice of the Void set to 1, which really hurts us bad.


    Deglamer / Unravel the Aether is generally preferable - same cost, same targets, but gets past indestructible and regeneration and graveyard recursion and 'dies' triggers...
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.