Are you allowed to cut the deck after an opponent shuffles it?
Nope, but you can call a judge if you suspect something might be wrong with the way your opponent shuffled your deck. There isn't a judge in the world who wouldn't at least re-shuffle your deck for you after you've voiced such a concern.
When did they change this? I stopped playing around Zendikar in competitive magic, but up until then, if your opponent shuffled your deck (not cut), you were allowed one final cut of your own deck.
It changed with Magic 2010, like many other rules.
I played Stoke the Flames this past weekend in a 150 person PTQ, where I went 4-3 drop. It was fine but I never got any spectacular use out of it. I killed a 4/4 Ajani's Pridemate and a Liliana of the Veil with it in two different matches, and domed a guy in the face before bricking on my next draw step and losing. I think I'd rather run another Electrolyze instead.
Has anyone tried out Stoke The Flames? I know Flame Slash is often a card in UR Delver lists and while the CMC of Stoke is high, you should only have to pay full price rarely in this deck, plus the fact that it's an Instant and can go to the face are both huge pluses. I'm currently running a list with two Grim Lavamancers and am thinking about cutting one for a singleton Stoke. Anyone else test it?
DrWorm & cylon man, your 'ideal' profit numbers are correct. But, with the age of Amazon, things have changed.
Savage Dream lord has it correct. Distributors sell to the LGS based upon past history, # of boxes, & how well they like the LGS. Boxes range from $70 (for high volume, good customer) to $85 (new LGS, low volume). Large places like SCG, set themselves as distributors, getting even lower prices.
Honestly curious, what evidence do you have that SCG is a distributor? That's the first I've heard of that claim.
Lightning Bolt is not too powerful to be in Standard every year. However, it makes designing other, similar spells more difficult and makes it unlikely they will be played. Not having Lightning Bolt makes Magic more interesting, even if it isn't technically too powerful to be printed.
Depends on what island or islands you'll be visiting. Oahu is super touristy and barely worth it, but if you're going to the big island and the volcano park in particular, it's awesome.
Here's the RBW deck I've been running for about 2 months, ever since Conley Woods top 16'd PT GTC. I took his mostly mono-black deck and really tweaked the manabase to fully support 3 colors while toning down the "mono-blackness" overall. It's performed really well for me, although game 1 against Control is very tough and I sideboard in lots of cards against them in game 2-3.
Some of the ideas of the deck are similar to Conley's, trading 1-for-1 or more until you can stabilize with Crypt Ghast into Griselbrand or a large Rakdos's Return, but I've "midranged" the deck up a bit more to be more flexible. Some explanation of card choices:
Vampire Nighthawk/Lingering Souls are here mainly to stall. However, when combined with Sorin, Lord of Innistrad your spirit tokens can quickly become win conditions with a few emblems. Note that these are poor blockers against Wolf Run decks, hence the Pithing Needle in the sideboard (good versus Drownyard/big Jace too)
Barter in Blood/Mutilate split is here for mass removal. Why not 4x Mutilate? Because you don't always have 4+ Swamps, mainly. Barter is also nice when you have 3+ spirits to their 2 huge dudes, you actually come out on top in that scenario, rather than even.
Sign in Blood is your main card draw "engine". You generally need all your lands every turn and all your colors, so Underworld Connections is not a good fit.
Obzedat, Ghost Council/Griselbrand are your finishers, along with Rakdos's Return. Griselbrand is really awesome but playing with more just left me feeling like all I'd do is draw multiples and die without casting him. However, if you do get him into play and with 8+ life, he wins the game almost every time.
Sideboard changes almost every week, but what I posted is what I'd be happy to play this weekend, for example.
There might not be a huge demand for him, but there isn't a large supply either. People are holding onto their Jaces in the hope he will go higher, and apparently there's still slightly more demand than there is supply, keeping his price high for now.
Pros get their advantage through deck advantage, not playskill for the most part. Yes they do have a playskill advantage, but it's not a huge one over most solid players.
Give the random guy who qualified through the PTQ the Sam Black deck for the pro tour, and he's going to do really well. Give a pro the terrible deck that the PTQ winner who had to test by himself plays, and he's not going to do well.
Same goes for limited. Let Ben Stark draft for me at the PT, and I'll crush people at the PT. Let some random guy draft for Ben, and he's not going to do very well.
Yeah, this is patently untrue and misguided. In fact, Aristocrats (the deck Sam Black made for PT GTC) was probably the worst deck in the top 8 overall. Over and over, pros that tested with it and Sam and Tom said the match-up versus Melissa DeTora (and against Efro's deck) were severely lopsided against The Aristocrats. Therefore, playskill must obviously account for Martell's success.
Also, "solid" players are by definition above-average.
It changed with Magic 2010, like many other rules.
Cool deck though, good job. Have you played against RBW midrange/control yet? How does it match up?
Honestly curious, what evidence do you have that SCG is a distributor? That's the first I've heard of that claim.
I can't think of a single other game, even outside of TCGs, where you are punished for amassing too much of a resource.
http://ark42.com/mtg/pricehistory.php?s=Rise+of+the+Eldrazi&c=Inquisition+of+Kozilek&d=365
3 Vampire Nighthawk
4 Crypt Ghast
3 Obzedat, Ghost Council
1 Griselbrand
5 Planeswalkers
2 Liliana of the Veil
3 Sorin, Lord of Innistrad
22 Spells
2 Tragic Slip
2 Victim of Night
2 Dreadbore
4 Sign in Blood
4 Lingering Souls
2 Barter in Blood
2 Mutilate
1 Rakdos's Return
1 Staff of Nin
1 Plains
6 Swamp
4 Godless Shrine
4 Blood Crypt
4 Isolated Chapel
2 Dragonskull Summit
2 Clifftop Retreat
1 Vault of the Archangel
1 Pithing Needle
3 Duress
1 Rakdos's Return
2 Purify the Grave
2 Slaughter Games
2 Olivia Voldaren
1 Assemble the Legion
1 Rakdos Charm
1 Devour Flesh
Some of the ideas of the deck are similar to Conley's, trading 1-for-1 or more until you can stabilize with Crypt Ghast into Griselbrand or a large Rakdos's Return, but I've "midranged" the deck up a bit more to be more flexible. Some explanation of card choices:
Vampire Nighthawk/Lingering Souls are here mainly to stall. However, when combined with Sorin, Lord of Innistrad your spirit tokens can quickly become win conditions with a few emblems. Note that these are poor blockers against Wolf Run decks, hence the Pithing Needle in the sideboard (good versus Drownyard/big Jace too)
Barter in Blood/Mutilate split is here for mass removal. Why not 4x Mutilate? Because you don't always have 4+ Swamps, mainly. Barter is also nice when you have 3+ spirits to their 2 huge dudes, you actually come out on top in that scenario, rather than even.
Sign in Blood is your main card draw "engine". You generally need all your lands every turn and all your colors, so Underworld Connections is not a good fit.
Obzedat, Ghost Council/Griselbrand are your finishers, along with Rakdos's Return. Griselbrand is really awesome but playing with more just left me feeling like all I'd do is draw multiples and die without casting him. However, if you do get him into play and with 8+ life, he wins the game almost every time.
Sideboard changes almost every week, but what I posted is what I'd be happy to play this weekend, for example.
Yeah, this is patently untrue and misguided. In fact, Aristocrats (the deck Sam Black made for PT GTC) was probably the worst deck in the top 8 overall. Over and over, pros that tested with it and Sam and Tom said the match-up versus Melissa DeTora (and against Efro's deck) were severely lopsided against The Aristocrats. Therefore, playskill must obviously account for Martell's success.
Also, "solid" players are by definition above-average.