It is not a may effect. You have to sacrifice it if the situation arises.
The reason they have the clause you are curious about is incase someone destroys the promise before you have a chance to sacrifice it. In that case, you don't get the tokens.
EDIT: I guess it also makes sure you only get 4 tokens
Guys, i am really sorry this is taking me so long. This happens to be one of the busiest weeks of the year for me, what with AP's and SAT2's, finals, and all kinds of other last-minute projects and review. Anyway, I am about halfway through the thread, and hope to catch up by this weekend. When I do get up to speed, however, i promise I will try to remain active. I'm just giving you guys an update.
Just checking in. I'm about halfway through. I am going to my uncle's memorial service this weekend and might not have internet access. Sorry it is taking me so long to catch up, guys
Oh yeah, you should NOT have called them masons. The definition of a mason means that both players are assured each others alignment.
notice, he didn't. He said they could communicate, not specifically that they were mason buddies. Jobie assumed that, and Holmes went along willfully (duh)
hey guys, I'm going to try and get caught up as soon as I can. But 57 pages is a lot, and this week is fairly stressful for me. I'm going to do my best, and will definately be up to speed by the weekend. Just checking in.
My initial thoughts:
Dammit people, listen to me when I say someone is scum. I picked up on Holmes at the very beginning. And noone listened to me, even though Holmes kept acting scummily. Oh well, I guess it was my fault.
I wish we followed some people's suspicions more. KCW caught on to beaker early on, and we should have tried to pursue that. I caught on to holmes. Only Twomz caught on to Puzzle.
I definitely think the best player in this game was Puzzle. He was able to convince everyone that he was town, and he was beneficial and necessary. As such, I let him target me. I was hesitant, because as he claimed it, I had a possibility of dying, but I thought it would be worth the risk to confirm myself. I hadn't considered the possibility that he could be a mafia. (I am a bit surprised you guys didn't ask for his investigation the next day, though.)
Dammit Jobie, it didn't say you were a mason. It said you could communicate and give holmes powers, but it said nothing about being a mason. This is why assuming something is a bad idea.
For reference, here was my role:
Zaphod Beeblebrox the Nothingth, the Fugitive President of the Galaxy – Town Egotist. You win with the town. You get to know when anyone would target you. You also get to choose whether or not to let that person do so.
Amuzingly enough, I went 2-0 drop. I had to go, sadly, and couldn't keep playing. My deck was amazing, however. It was G/W/B. Ironically, it didn't use one of the dissension guilds, but that's okay. It had 6 pieces of removal, which is ridiculous. And it gained from some of the solid monocolor cards I got in Dissension.
So, um, guys? All this no love for Wits End stuff has GOT to go. People have hands. Even on turn ten. Even on turn twenty. Get over it. Is it a great card? No. Is it playable? Hell yes. Everyone seems to be saying "Dude, like, you could play it on yourself if you want Hellbent, roflcopter!!!!11!!!eleventy-one!!"
When you have a spell with an effect that reads "Win the game" (and make no mistake, "Target player discards their hand" is often just "Win the game"), it bears consideration, REGARDLESS of the mana cost. R&D could have costed Wits End at 7BB, and it wouldn't have been entirely out of order.
I'm not saying "Wits End is teh r0kz0rs!", though I'm sure that's how a large percentage of this board will read this post, but for the love of God, in a set with cards like Tidespout Tyrant, Wits End is *NOT* the worst spell. Not even in the bottom ten.
um... no
simply put, making someone discard their hand on turn 7 rarely will do anything, especially in competitive magic. In casual, occasionally this could be useful but barely even then. you say that this reads "win the game" in many cases. Does that mean that Waking Nightmare says "win the game" because a lot of the time, that's the only effect you will be getting out of wit's end. Obviously, Waking nightmare is not broken and is indeed rarely playable. Getting the same effect for 4 mana more is evern worse.
The thing is, the only deck where this would remove a lot of stuff from someone's hand is a control deck, and many times, they have ways to get prevent the spell from resolving (read: counters a la hinder, mana leak, or anytihng else). At 7 mana, this is a piece of crap, nothing more. at 9 mana, abso-****ing-lutely no one would play this. It is terrible as it is, and raising the cost is not going to help. Unless you are playing with erratic explosion. And in that case, there are better spells that actually are decent in a deck.
It gets my vote.
EDIT:
Quote from Desolation Angel »
Um... When a card says "target creature", It refers to that creature for the rest of the ability. If the card meant "another target creature", it would say so. If it says something different in the FAQ, then I would concede the point.
hey look, more people are wrong. If there are multiple instances of target on a spell, they can be different targets. See Seeds of Strength and perhaps read the FAQ
1) we don't know that. Fayul hasn't confirmed that
2) what is the purpose of this post?
Quote from bluesoul »
As far as I know we're not in a hurry right now. I'm not saying the game will stop for you, but go ahead and catch up on it if you want.
there is no "if you want" about it. Catching up is not an optional thing. It would be nice if you caught up soon, as it would really help the game along, but take your time. However, definately do catch up.
And I am sorry I have become somewhat of a lurker, but I've been really busy this last week. And I also am posting to let you guys know that I am gone over this weekend, and may or may not get to post. I will have access to computer, but I am not sure I will have time to post.
It is not a may effect. You have to sacrifice it if the situation arises.
The reason they have the clause you are curious about is incase someone destroys the promise before you have a chance to sacrifice it. In that case, you don't get the tokens.
EDIT: I guess it also makes sure you only get 4 tokens
notice, he didn't. He said they could communicate, not specifically that they were mason buddies. Jobie assumed that, and Holmes went along willfully (duh)
And I have it in my sig. That's how much I suck. I should have known because it was you.
Dammit people, listen to me when I say someone is scum. I picked up on Holmes at the very beginning. And noone listened to me, even though Holmes kept acting scummily. Oh well, I guess it was my fault.
I wish we followed some people's suspicions more. KCW caught on to beaker early on, and we should have tried to pursue that. I caught on to holmes. Only Twomz caught on to Puzzle.
I definitely think the best player in this game was Puzzle. He was able to convince everyone that he was town, and he was beneficial and necessary. As such, I let him target me. I was hesitant, because as he claimed it, I had a possibility of dying, but I thought it would be worth the risk to confirm myself. I hadn't considered the possibility that he could be a mafia. (I am a bit surprised you guys didn't ask for his investigation the next day, though.)
Dammit Jobie, it didn't say you were a mason. It said you could communicate and give holmes powers, but it said nothing about being a mason. This is why assuming something is a bad idea.
For reference, here was my role:
I'm a dumbass for letting Puzzle target me.
Overall, it was fun though
um... no
simply put, making someone discard their hand on turn 7 rarely will do anything, especially in competitive magic. In casual, occasionally this could be useful but barely even then. you say that this reads "win the game" in many cases. Does that mean that Waking Nightmare says "win the game" because a lot of the time, that's the only effect you will be getting out of wit's end. Obviously, Waking nightmare is not broken and is indeed rarely playable. Getting the same effect for 4 mana more is evern worse.
The thing is, the only deck where this would remove a lot of stuff from someone's hand is a control deck, and many times, they have ways to get prevent the spell from resolving (read: counters a la hinder, mana leak, or anytihng else). At 7 mana, this is a piece of crap, nothing more. at 9 mana, abso-****ing-lutely no one would play this. It is terrible as it is, and raising the cost is not going to help. Unless you are playing with erratic explosion. And in that case, there are better spells that actually are decent in a deck.
It gets my vote.
EDIT:
hey look, more people are wrong. If there are multiple instances of target on a spell, they can be different targets. See Seeds of Strength and perhaps read the FAQ
stupid choices, damnit
oh well, hope we win.
1) we don't know that. Fayul hasn't confirmed that
2) what is the purpose of this post?
there is no "if you want" about it. Catching up is not an optional thing. It would be nice if you caught up soon, as it would really help the game along, but take your time. However, definately do catch up.
And I am sorry I have become somewhat of a lurker, but I've been really busy this last week. And I also am posting to let you guys know that I am gone over this weekend, and may or may not get to post. I will have access to computer, but I am not sure I will have time to post.