I'm surprised by the widespread negative reaction to these frames. I've never played D&D, but I find these card frames pretty charming.
I guess after taking over 5 years to get over the betrayal of them changing from the classic frame in 8th ed, it takes a lot for me to get upset over a new style.
Since it doesn't have the "if you do", or "when you do" clause, I also like the idea of hitting it with multiple spells like, on their end turn target it with shock and in response to the trigger target it and one of their creatures with the Dizzying Swoop side of Ardenvale Tactician so you get double tokens.
"• A white creature that can make an opponent lose the game simply by attacking them no matter how much life they have"
Could this be something as simple as, "whenever this creature attacks, you and defending player draw a card." so technically if they have no cards in their library they lose no matter how much life they have?
I was wondering generally how Zirda, the Dawnwaker's cost reduction ability interacts with additional cost reduction that doesn't have the same restriction of not reducing it below one.
If you go to activate the cycling ability of the Triome, are you able to apply Zirda's ablitiy first, reducing it to 1, then apply Fluctuator's reducing it to 0, or do cost reductions work such that you simply can't involve Zirda's ability if the cost would be 0 in the end?
I haven't played this deck, but with the new set I was thinking about it and had an idea I wanted to toss out.
Would it be reasonable to toss a Zirda, the Dawnwaker in the sideboard as a companion, just to have a speedbump to toss out if a game is going poorly, or is effectively running a 14 card sideboard too much of a cost?
Several lists I've seen already have it's companion condition met preboard and would just have to not declare it as a companion on games where they side in Evoke creatures or Leylines.
Parcelbeast is just the kind of mutate I have been wanting to see. The cheap Mutate cost and lack of mutate trigger makes me want to use it with a creature that I can sac in response for some other useful effect. I would like it with creatures like Krosan Wayfarer or Tinder Wall so you could get it out on turn two.
I'm glad they clarified that ruling. The phrase, "...that part of the ability..." is a little ambiguous, and I would have felt fairly confident after reading 706.7a that it would have worked the other way.
So keeping with the Arthurian theme, I'm wondering how deep they will go with the mythology and stories. It would be great to have a Green Knight equivalent in the game. I bet we will see an extension of Knight tribal as a as a return of Faeries!
I have some disappointing news for you. First Maro has said that the dive into Arthurian is fairly shallow because the populace doesn't actually know that much. He specifically calls out the Green Knight as something probably not done because no one would recognize it.
That's disappointing. If Adventure Time has enough respect for their audience to throw out a Green Knight reference, I feel that Magic should be able to.
Since the unicorn would force you to be in GW which would make it difficult to be in a dedicated mill deck, would that make it not worth trying to make the combo work in limited if you did manage to pull an altar, or if you had a deck with the unicorn and masticore already would it be worth throwing in the otherwise dead alter just for combo potential?
At first glance I wasn't big on it, but when I think about it as usually just a better Ball Lightning, since it can't be blanked by a single lightning bolt, I guess it's okay.
Two bodies can very easily be worse when they're only 3 power and it's harder to fully trample over.
Losing two cards for surprise blockers may be sweet in limited but in constructed who cares? Three mana for a conditional six damage is eh especially considering the comparison to the new ball blightning thing.
The white force may not be gangbusters but this card is baaaaaaaad
I can understand not liking the card and thinking that it still won't be good enough for modern, but the 2 bodies definitely make it easier to trample over.
Any 2 creatures that could stop them from trampling over could double block a ball lightning and still prevent any damage from trampling through, it just has better chances of killing at least one blocker, for instance, if they had two 3/4 goyf's sitting back not attacking. I see the times that ball lightning would be better as being fewer and less impactful then the times that Force would be better.
At first glance I wasn't big on it, but when I think about it as usually just a better Ball Lightning, since it can't be blanked by a single lightning bolt, I guess it's okay.
That‘s how I understand it as well, otherwise the ‚and/or‘ clause would be irrelevant.
To me, it seems like you can get either one single creature out of your library or your yard or both, but never two out of the yard or out of your library
It reads to me like you only get one creature in total. I'm pretty sure the main point of the 'and/or' clause is so you don't have to shuffle your library if you know you are just grabbing something from the yard. Lets you save time and/or not disturb known cards on the top or bottom that you'd rather leave there.
I guess after taking over 5 years to get over the betrayal of them changing from the classic frame in 8th ed, it takes a lot for me to get upset over a new style.
Since it doesn't have the "if you do", or "when you do" clause, I also like the idea of hitting it with multiple spells like, on their end turn target it with shock and in response to the trigger target it and one of their creatures with the Dizzying Swoop side of Ardenvale Tactician so you get double tokens.
Could this be something as simple as, "whenever this creature attacks, you and defending player draw a card." so technically if they have no cards in their library they lose no matter how much life they have?
The specific example I have in mind involves having a Fluctuator and a Zirda, the Dawnwaker on the battlefield and a Savai Triome in hand.
If you go to activate the cycling ability of the Triome, are you able to apply Zirda's ablitiy first, reducing it to 1, then apply Fluctuator's reducing it to 0, or do cost reductions work such that you simply can't involve Zirda's ability if the cost would be 0 in the end?
Would it be reasonable to toss a Zirda, the Dawnwaker in the sideboard as a companion, just to have a speedbump to toss out if a game is going poorly, or is effectively running a 14 card sideboard too much of a cost?
Several lists I've seen already have it's companion condition met preboard and would just have to not declare it as a companion on games where they side in Evoke creatures or Leylines.
"When the twelfth hour counter is put on midnight clock exile Midnight Clock, if you do ..."
As it is worded, at least if you have an artifact sac outlet you can sac it in response to the ability to shuffle it in with everything else.
That's disappointing. If Adventure Time has enough respect for their audience to throw out a Green Knight reference, I feel that Magic should be able to.
Since the unicorn would force you to be in GW which would make it difficult to be in a dedicated mill deck, would that make it not worth trying to make the combo work in limited if you did manage to pull an altar, or if you had a deck with the unicorn and masticore already would it be worth throwing in the otherwise dead alter just for combo potential?
Any 2 creatures that could stop them from trampling over could double block a ball lightning and still prevent any damage from trampling through, it just has better chances of killing at least one blocker, for instance, if they had two 3/4 goyf's sitting back not attacking. I see the times that ball lightning would be better as being fewer and less impactful then the times that Force would be better.
It reads to me like you only get one creature in total. I'm pretty sure the main point of the 'and/or' clause is so you don't have to shuffle your library if you know you are just grabbing something from the yard. Lets you save time and/or not disturb known cards on the top or bottom that you'd rather leave there.