I think the questions surrounding explaining hand size and milling and the fact that there is a "player" who is also a planeswalker is not how a movie should be approached. When we read the Official Fan Fiction, the story is not told as if each Planeswalker were a magical player who needs cards to make spells happen. The cards give us a representation of what it would be like if we were in that world. How much mana is accessible to use to cast a spell? Our lands plus other things that generate mana. For a Planeswalker like Jace, this is how much he can draw from the land around him, plus other resources. This is not hard to CGI for a movie. He would need to have some physical reaction to indicate he is "drawing" mana from the land around him. How much effort it requires (physically) and the resultant spell explains without words how much mana was available. Furthermore, if the result seems minimal for his capacity, he can even provide (while panting from exhaustion) that there just isn't enough mana he can use in the land around him. This can also then be contrasted by another Planeswalker (say Chandra) who can draw lots of mana from the land to cast a spell, because the land is mountainous and therefore in her "color." If a Pyromancer is surrounded by water, it's not hard to imagine why she can't conjure up a ball of flame. They can even pull an artifact out of their pocket to draw more mana from, with swirly magical lines leaving the artifact and combining with the swirly magical lines from the land that surround their body until it coalesces into whatever spell. Other than Planeswalkers and mana, what else is there really to explain? How do you explain that a creature without flying or reach cannot block a creature with flying? Have the creature with flying actually fly over the creature that cannot block it. Hexproof: have a spell fizzle at the caster (not deflect off the creature, because that makes it appear that you can target it). I would think that each keyword ability can be represented in some physical fashion with relative ease.
The look and feel of a Magic the Gathering movie will not be anything like the game if we want it to be a success. As I said earlier, I don't want to see Jace pull a card out that says "Divination" and then two more cards magically appear in his hand. That's not how the Fan Fiction is presented and that's not how a movie should be presented. The movie should have several central Planeswalkers that are the good guys, and possibly even several Planeswalkers that are the bad guys. This generates a conflict that is on a single dimension of complexity, because it only requires that one Planeswalker explain how his/her spark ignited and you can understand the premise behind Planeswalkers. Conflict resolution by the end of the movie, then tease the next conflict, which can be a step up in complexity. The challenge behind a Magic the Gathering movie, IMO, is that there is so much content, what do you limit it to? You cannot explain all the worlds in one movie. You develop one world, maybe two at the most, in a single movie. So do subsequent movies go back to that world or new worlds? Is each movie development of new worlds/Planeswalkers or do you always keep it limited to a few? Can the plot be boiled down to a few worlds instead of the vast majority as represented in the Fan Fiction? Maybe you pick the favorites and make movies around those, but since each world's plot line relative to Planeswalker development in the Fan Fiction is different from how it would be in the movie, you necessarily have to separate the Fan Fiction from the movies.
-
- DRay563
- Registered User
-
Member for 9 years, 5 months, and 13 days
Last active Wed, Aug, 5 2020 07:25:31
- 0 Followers
- 694 Total Posts
- 116 Thanks
I agree that the opponent gained that information, but in casual games with an unskilled opponent (like one who takes 2 minutes to determine that Gods Willing should be played in response to Banishing Light's trigger), taking the game back to a point where your opponent can cast the spell is acceptable, IMO. It's about courtesy and respect. Now, if he/she is a skilled opponent who missed the trigger, no dice. Skillful players don't get the same leniency because they should know better. There have been games I've played where I missed a trigger and asked my opponent if I could execute. They ponder, and then give me an answer. Many times, it's yes. Other times, no, as the game has progressed to a point (in their mind) that it's beyond rewinding, and I accept their answer and move on. Again, courtesy and respect.
Based on the OP and the responses since the OP, it sounds like the opponent is not skilled nor respectful (did not ask but instead took action), and the judge should not have ruled that the game be rewound to accommodate the player's mistake of missing his opportunity to respond.
Daniel
There are two important things regarding the t component of his activated ability. First, as noted by Mysticake, Embodiment of Spring is affected by summoning sickness. This means the turn you play him, unless you have something out giving him haste (like Temur Ascendancy or Hammer of Purphoros), you have to wait until he has been through your upkeep before you can tap him to pay part of the cost of activated ability. Therefore, under normal conditions, you play him in your Main Phase, then have to wait until your next turn before you can sac him to find the land.
The second important thing is that if he is tapped for some reason (like you use him for Convoke or an ability taps him), then you cannot sac him because you have to tap him as part of the cost of the ability and he is already tapped.
Daniel
No. Sacrificing Willbender to Phyrexian Altar is a cost of the activated ability and will take place before the resolution of the ability itself. Therefore, Willbender will be in the graveyard prior to the mana being in your mana pool
.
Daniel
To clarify, if you are playing a pick-up game, that's different from playing a game at a sanctioned FNM. While a sanctioned FNM is still casual play, the rules still need to be followed. The difference is that players are not penalized as stiffly, and the judge is supposed to be there to enforce the rules as a learning experience.
If your opponent gave you control of the card, that is his tacit way of stating that he allows the triggered ability of Banishing Light to resolve and exile his Battlewise Hoplite. What happens next is important though. If you ask "proceed to combat?" but he hasn't agreed to it yet, then he can arguably ask you if he can play something in response to your Banishing Light trigger. This is fair because nothing has happened other than you've made the declaration that you have nothing else to do in your Main Phase and wish to proceed to combat. However, since he has already let the ability resolve, you can choose to not let him do that. It's a douche thing to do, but it's technically your prerogative. If he's already agreed to proceed to combat and you've declared attackers, there's no going back. Period.
I disagree with the Judge's ruling about nothing happening as being a valid reason to let him take it back. The "nothing happening" rule is about missing a trigger. If you miss a trigger, like for example, gaining a life in your upkeep from Nyx-Fleece Ram, and realize in your main phase that you missed it, it's ok to add that life to your life total. However, if you miss the trigger from Thassa, God of the Sea allowing you to scry in your upkeep, and you draw your top card... probably not ok to say "missed my trigger, I'm gonna scry this one away and draw the next card," especially if cards have been played in the Main Phase. He didn't miss a trigger, he agreed that you could banish his creature, then regretted it and changed his mind. Part of learning the game is learning when to accept your mistakes. I'll give you an example.
At FNM a few weeks ago, I cast Stoke the Flames, targeting my opponent and then choosing to redirect to his Ajani Steadfast. He could ultimate Ajani the next turn, so it was crucial I get the damage in. He played a Deflecting Palm. I called a judge to determine if that was legitimate (since I wanted to target his Planeswalker and not him), Judge ruled it was legit. In frustration, I put my card in the graveyard, indicating that both resolved and subtracted 4 from my life total. I then looked at my board and realized I had left open 2 mana for my OWN Deflecting Palm! I could have easily said at this time "missed this, was gonna play this in response" and add four back to my life total, at which point my opponent would take four loyalty counters from Ajani. However, since I agreed to the resolution of each spell, I considered it too late for me to play Palm in response. And it cost me the game. Talk about a learning experience!
Daniel
Daniel
Bearer of the Heavens
Meandering Towershell
Life's Legacy
While I understand you're trying to build a deck around Towershell (based on the title of your post), what's the synergy with the card? You also have lots of other high casting cost cards. How do you anticipate to survive long enough to play them? You will need lots of mana ramp, so 4 of each Sylvan Caryatid and Rattleclaw Mystic become a must. The other synergy you are trying to create is using Life's Legacy as a card draw engine, which I've always imagined as being a fun way to draw cards, especially with recurring creatures like Phytotitan. But again, you have to survive long enough to get there. I'd try restructuring your deck by reducing the number of huge CMC creatures and putting in some lesser casting cost giants like Polukranos, World Eater that can help you survive long enough to try the Phytotitan/Life's Legacy combo.
Daniel
Why aren't you running Chord of Calling? With all your mana ramp and creature populating, you could easily go find Phenax or Nylea as the board dictates.
Daniel
1) No. Shroud means "This permanent or player can’t be the target of spells or abilities." [per 702.18]. Per 702.6a, "Equip is an activated ability of Equipment cards. 'Equip [cost]' means '[Cost]: Attach this permanent to target creature you control. Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery.'" Your creature can't be the target of any abilities, including equip.
2) Yes. 702.16d, "A permanent with protection can’t be equipped by Equipment that have the stated quality or fortified by Fortifications that have the stated quality. Such Equipment or Fortifications become unattached from that permanent as a state-based action, but remain on the battlefield."
3) Yes. 702.16c, "A permanent or player with protection can’t be enchanted by Auras that have the stated quality. Such Auras attached to the permanent or player with protection will be put into their owners’ graveyards as a state-based action."
Daniel
Since Song of the Dryads leaves him the subtype of Legendary, in a Legacy game, if my opponent had a Maelstrom Wanderer that I enchanted with Song of the Dryads, so he plays another Maelstrom Wanderer whom I also enchant with a Song of the Dryads, would the legendary rule apply and one be forced to go to the graveyard?
Daniel
Daniel
2) The one land restriction is that you may not "play" more than one land per turn. Xenagos's ultimate states that you may "put" any number of land and/or creature cards onto the battlefield. This distinction means his ultimate does not violate the one land per turn rule.
3) Putting creatures on the battlefield means you are not casting them, which means you cannot use any alternative casting methods (like morph or bestow). Additionally, X will be zero automatically, as this is a cost determined when casting. Therefore, Hooded Hydra would come onto the battlefield as a 0/0, and as soon as state-based actions are checked, would move to the graveyard. If you have graveyard interaction potential in your deck, I would recommend doing this vs. leaving him in exile. If you have no graveyard interaction, then best to leave him in exile so you opponent can't use it somehow.
Daniel