MTG Salvation

It's not quite the same thing. I have something similar in green in the same set... But I don't want a "you can't counter this", I want a "you have to guess whether you want to counter this". Kinda silly, I guess. Well, back to the drawing board. Thanks anyways.

Illusory Mask
Instant
As an additional cost to play Illusory Mask, exile a card from your hand face-down.
Reveal the exiled card. If it is an Instant or Sorcery, You may pay X, where X is that card’s converted mana cost. If you do, Illusory Mask gains all effects of that card. If necessary, you may choose new targets for Illusory Mask.
If Illusory Mask is put into your graveyard from play, you may shuffle it into your Library and draw a card.


This... probably does not work as written.

The point of this spell is to "mask" your next move. That is, you throw down the Mask, and the opponent has to take a wild guess whether what you play is actually worth losing a counterspell over. What's more, if they do counter it, you don't get 2-for-1'd; you merely lose the card you would have lost anyways.

Firstly there's the issue of the recursion effect. I don't want this to make for two-for-ones. It's not that amazing of an effect, you're paying extra for it, and it shouldn't also cost you an additional card. What I don't want is this becoming the next big incredibly stupid thing for Dredge (or making LED even more broken). I'm not sure if it works as worded, though, and I'm not sure how you could get that effect without directly mentioning the stack (which is apparently a big no-no?). What I'm more worried about is the "gains all effects of that card". Would that still work? Can you get the effects of that spell to resolve? How could I get around this? I want the opponent to have to decide to counter or not before they can know what I'm actually casting, and I don't know how I could make that work. Any thoughts?

Anyone here been to Amsterdam?

Anyways. Christ, been a while hasn't it? God. MTG. It's a thing. Being totally bi. It's also a thing. Half a bottle of rum. Definitely a thing. Just got back into magic. Sup?

Quote from Gaka

Doran is one of (if not the) best aggro generals available.

Yeah, i'd say he's viable.

Where should I ask about playstyles and such? Like, right now I'm running a deck which is very heavy in cards like Grizzled Leotao and Jaddi Lifestrider, which become huge with Doran, and Eland Umbra and Hero's Resolve, which make other dudes huge with Doran. Is this a bad idea?

I'm not sure where else to ask, so I'll just follow the new guy and ask, "Is Doran, The Siege Tower a viable general to use?" He seems pretty good to me, but then again, I'm running a fairly casual aggro/control build, so...

All right. Thanks again, both of you. That makes things a lot more clear.

@1: Ah, excellent. Follow-up question, just to make sure: this applies equally to the raised mana costs on repeat calls, correct? If I play Heartless Summoning and then Doran dies, the cost reduction applies equally to the increased casting cost?

@2: Shame. Was hoping that would be more useful for me. Ah well, still a ludicrously amazing synergy between the two. I need to run more treefolk... Thanks!

1. Does play your commander from the RFG commander zone act like a normal creature spell? Can it be countered? Can you pay for it with Ancient Ziggurat? Is it made cheaper by cards like Heartless Summoning?

2. My commander is Doran, the Siege Tower. I play him, then remove him from the game with Unstoppable Ash. Can I:

a) Replay him from the RFG zone?
b) return him to play by casting him (with the additional cost)?
c) return him to play if my unstoppable ash dies?
d) play him by casting him, then return him to play when Unstoppable Ash dies if he dies in the meanwhile again?

In general, how does the "Champion" mechanic interact with commanders?

I hit my opponent with plague wind, killing 10 creatures, and have a tapped Goblin Sharpshooter in play. Can he shoot ten times (each time a trigger resolves, he untaps, then can tap to put his effect on the stack) or once?

My friend's objection to the "he can shoot 10 times" thing is that once the stack starts resolving, you can't throw anything else on there once everyone has passed priority to the first resolving spell/effect. Is he correct?

My opponent is blocking my 7/7 with a muscle sliver and two sliver tokens. All three of the above are 3/3s (he has another muscle sliver on the board). Can I assign 3 damage to the muscle sliver and 2 damage to each of othe others and kill all three that way? When does the buff from the muscle sliver (and the damage) disappear?

Fair enough. Let's hope those provisions are added.

I don't think this has been mentioned here, so...

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/south-dakota-hb-1171-legalize-killing-abortion-providers?page=1

Same row of bills.

Now, it's true, the morality of abortions is questionable (I find it a non-issue because I do not feel that human rights themselves are justified, but that's an issue for another thread). However, the morality of the murder of living, breathing, THINKING people-people who are unquestionably alive... This is disgusting. This is patently disgusting. And I have no doubt that within a few months of this bill being passed, we're going to see cases of legal murder against abortion doctors.

This has to stop. I honestly think that George Carlin got it right. "Fetus? You're golden. Alive? You're on your own."


...I suppose this is only slightly related, but ☺☺☺☺. I really hope this stuff doesn't pass, but I'm fairly sure that unless there's rioting in the streets or the supreme court steps in, that bill is going to pass in Iowa.

Quote from D00msday

Although most will disagree with what they did, the school board has every right to do this and there are almost definitely clauses regarding this type of thing in the teacher's contract. I know there are clauses that would apply to this type of behavior in teacher contracts in my area.

Let's see how far we can get before someone mistakenly references "freedom of speech" in relation to this story. Over/Under is 5 posts.

I'll bite. Why is freedom of speech not an issue?

In case it wasn't mentioned. Gnosticism on either side is fairly ridiculous at this point. Atheism does not ensure surety; neither does theism. It merely indicates that you believe something; if you aren't sure then it doesn't mean you can't still believe anyways.

Err... So hang on, the official explanation of this is for public safety? They could've pushed so many better laws that only infringe on rights of expression without having to infringe on religious beliefs.

I'm behind Highroller on this one; it's just a liiiittle bit ridiculous to claim that this is not religion-based.