Maybe the ring cycle, or the allied colour creature cycle (Arctic Aven)? Keep in mind he could be talking about cards in M12 or M11.
Are there any other core set cards that break the colour pie?
Liliana's Shade (land tutoring is more G/W?) - Agree Void Stalker (blue creature removal?) - Disagree. This "feels" Blue. It's more of a "trick" than straight removal.
Eh, blue gets most of the lesser used mechanics just because it's blue. I can get behind this i suppose as blue has had it before but doesn't really deserve it.
Maybe the ring cycle, or the allied colour creature cycle (Arctic Aven)? Keep in mind he could be talking about cards in M12 or M11.
I've no problem with cards that work best with multiple colors. If your creature is dependent on plains, then you can reap the benefits of white mana. This guy gets +1/+1 which is a white mechanic. You aren't going to get it in mono blue unless you wanna run plains just for the hell of it.
Are there any other core set cards that break the colour pie?
Rosewater is a hypocrite. He says he doesn't want to break the pie but then he gives green creature removal with all the new fight stuff. I'm perfectly fine with fight and with other colors doing things they might not normally do so long as the change is gradual, makes sense, and relies on a mechanic that fits that color.
Rosewater hates Beast Within but he loves Pit Fight. To me that is blatant hypocrisy. The former doesn't even really remove a creature, the latter actually removes a creature. Yet he takes up arms against the former and praises how smart R&D had to be to create the latter.
Rosewater hates Beast Within but he loves Pit Fight. To me that is blatant hypocrisy. The former doesn't even really remove a creature, the latter actually removes a creature. Yet he takes up arms against the former and praises how smart R&D had to be to create the latter.
You don't seem to realize that Beast Within can be cast to destroy target PERMANENT from your hand as long as you have the mana whereas Pit Fight requires you to, not only have a creature (and the other guy too since it's only used against creatures), but have a stronger creature than the opponent (unless you cast it during combat which is a very cool thing)
You don't seem to be able to grasp the nuances between the two: they kill stuff so they're the same!
You don't seem to realize that Beast Within can be cast to destroy target PERMANENT from your hand as long as you have the mana whereas Pit Fight requires you to, not only have a creature (and the other guy too since it's only used against creatures), but have a stronger creature than the opponent (unless you cast it during combat which is a very cool thing)
You don't seem to realize that OBVIOUSLY THEY ARE NOT IDENTICAL CARDS.
Yes, you are not surprising anybody with that revelation. This may be shocking to you but despite them not being carbon copies of each other, the two cards serve similar purposes.
First of all, while Beast Within does technically destroy a permanent, it also gives you a 3/3 green beast token. When used on a creature this is fundamentally no different than transforming the attributes of a creature. This is something that is not only flavorfully green, but something we have seen before:
Pit Fight actually gets rid of the creature. Secondly, creature removal was always supposed to be green's weakness, so if he is going to pretend that this is any different than what Chaos Warp enables red to do with enchantments he is a hypocrite and you are too if you support that train of thought.
You don't seem to be able to grasp the nuances between the two: they kill stuff so they're the same!
You don't seem to understand that it doesn't matter if they aren't identical cards! Obviously they're not going to be identical! That is the ENTIRE POINT! One card can actually remove creatures on its own, the other will NEVER remove creatures on its own. The irony here is that rosewater believes the latter card is a larger bastardization of the color pie than the former. That position is laughably and demonstrably hypocritical.
Pit Fight is a perfectly Ok card if you ask me. Fighting was R/G before it was even fighting. Look at cards like Tahngarth, Talruum Hero, Contested Cliffs, Magus of the Arena, Rivals' Duel and fighting slowly spread to mono green cards as well. A great way for Green to has it's own creature removal. And even a flavorful one on top.
Firstly, all the cards you linked are RED cards or one is a land. Despite this, in every single scenario you listed, red mana was needed in order to use that ability. It has not been green until recently.
I agree, fight is a fine mechanic in green. I think it fits flavorfully and it allows green to do something that it normally doesn't get to do so long as it abides by stricter rules that fit with its portion of the pie. That is fine and dandy.
What i hate though is when beast within, which a very similar card, is derided as somehow being one of the ultimate unpie cards when the entire fight mechanic is even more explicitly against the fundamentals of green's pie.
Beast Within on the other side was a strange card. Green always destroyed non creature cards even in the time of Chain of Acid. Granted there were also some cards like Desert Twister or Tornado. But those were way longer ago. And where so overcosted that they couldn't see any competitive play.
Yes, but desert twister does not give somebody a 3/3 green beast token.
I don't get it, the fight mechanic has been green for a while now. (a couple of older cards I can't remmeber the name of have it, utawald tracker has it, prey upon has it, etc.)
Fight makes perfect sense as a green mechanic, because green is the color of creatures, and what do creatures do? They fight. Think about it: flavorfully, you are basically taking your bear (or whatever) and saying "sic 'em!" so, what's the big difference between fight and regular combat that is so color-pie breaking?
Also, pit fight is red. Hybrid, but still counts as red...
Fight makes perfect sense as a green mechanic, because green is the color of creatures, and what do creatures do? They fight. Think about it: flavorfully, you are basically taking your bear (or whatever) and saying "sic 'em!" so, what's the big difference between fight and regular combat that is so color-pie breaking?
Also, pit fight is red. Hybrid, but still counts as red...
Green's removal (and card draw) is supposed to be based around having your creatures do the work. Beast Within doesn't require you to have any creatures at all. Also, Polymorphing is supposed to be blue, not green. Green is on the nature side of nature vs. nurture; flavor-wise it doesn't make sense for green to have polymorphing.
Also, fight is essentially a fixed version of provoke, which has always been green and red. Provoke, the card, sets a pretty strong precedent for the effect to be in green.
Green's removal (and card draw) is supposed to be based around having your creatures do the work. Beast Within doesn't require you to have any creatures at all. Also, Polymorphing is supposed to be blue, not green. Green is on the nature side of nature vs. nurture; flavor-wise it doesn't make sense for green to have polymorphing.
Also, fight is essentially a fixed version of provoke, which has always been green and red. Provoke, the card, sets a pretty strong precedent for the effect to be in green.
Green isn't supposed to be able to remove creatures. It's the same as red's inability to remove enchantments.
I don't see any problem with doing it as long as it's flavorful and fits the feel of the color, but if fight isn't color breaking in somebody's eyes, then neither is beast within or other abilities that were listed in the OP.
The difference between them though is that pit fight is not straight up removal, it is conditional on you having a bigger dude play. Relying on big dudes is very green. As a green mage you get your big animal to attack something else, this fits green in the colour pie. Whereas Beast Within is just point and kill. Green is generally allowed removal, card draw etc. that's based around having creatures but shouldn't be allowed flat out kill spells.
you're right but at the same time beast within doesn't actually remove a creature. i mean yes, it destroys a creature, but replacing it with a 3/3 green beast is no different than a card that turns creatures into 3/3 green beasts. i think most people would find that mechanic to be green.
Hurricane is part of Green's color pie because it hates on flying creatures, while Desert Twister is an older card, which shouldn't be taken into account while examining the color pie. (blue should have direct damage spells, if we think about Psionic blast and Psychic purge)
I don't know man, I take A LOT of my definition of the color pie from those older cards... There have been new mechanics introduced, but overall the colors still work the same.
I wanna see a reprint of Traumatize for all these mill decks that have been popping up. I still have a couple of them, but the cards are getting a little old lol
Back on topic, the worst one is probably Hornet sting. In my opinion, pretty much all of the phyrexian mana spells broke the color pie, because even blue mages could cast Gut Shot or red mages Gitaxian Probe.
Phyrexian mana was intended to break the colour pie. It was used as an indicator of the Phyrexians' influence; this is why we are discussing the core sets.
Green isn't supposed to be able to remove creatures. It's the same as red's inability to remove enchantments.
I don't see any problem with doing it as long as it's flavorful and fits the feel of the color, but if fight isn't color breaking in somebody's eyes, then neither is beast within or other abilities that were listed in the OP.
As a matter of fact, the first and second creature with fight are green, namely Tracker from The Dark and Gargantuan Gorilla from Alliance. Green had the ability to remove flyers directly, and other creatures indirectly though combat, and fight is the epitome of green removal.
I don't get the hate for Beast Within since first, it is in a set that bends colour pie, and second it is essentially green Polymorph which incidentally is a spell that specifically states 'destroy target creature' on a blue spell, and yet is perfectly blue.
Back on topic, none of the cards stated in the OP breaks the colour pie. Liliana of the Dark Realm and Liliana's Shade both fit perfectly with black's love swamp theme, and they do not put the land into play (which would be breaking the colour pie). As previous posters have said, the most egregious colour pie break from the core set is Hornet Sting, since only red (and Black to a smaller extent) is suppose to have burn spells that can hit both creatures and players.
It's still not colorless, and has no color. That's a paradox. So either you're a Zen master or an idiot, I'll assume the Zen master for sake of argument. This card will have no paradoxes because it has a clear paradox. Deep stuff man.
I think that your view in the color pie is too rigid and also outdated. Excommunicate effects have been white since many years ago, as haste in black. As for exalted, it makes alot more sense in black that in blue if you ask me. And you can count it as Grixis if you want but Gem of Becoming is an artifact and color pie constraints are a lot looser for them. I agree with Fog Bank being out of color althought.
These are all fine. None of these are outside of the normal color pie. Some may be on the fringes (ie Black doesn't often get Haste, but it is allowed) but none are outright breaks.
Vampire Nighthawk is a bit broken, but I think it is a great black card and it works great with other vampires.
Fog Bank does feel a little out of place in a blue scheme, yet does fit into the "illusion" mold. I don't know why they would make it a wall AND give it defender...
It might all be a matter of opinion... I wont complain unless I start seeing mono-red creatures with life-link and green start giving out -1/-1 counters. THEN I will lose my **** lmao
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
-Jaralthazar-
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So which cards do you think he is talking about?
Courtly Provocateur (forcing attacks and blocks is more R/G)
Crippling Blight (preventing blocking is more R/W)
Jace's Phantasm (more of a B/G thing?)
Liliana's Shade (land tutoring is more G/W?)
Void Stalker (blue creature removal?)
Maybe the ring cycle, or the allied colour creature cycle (Arctic Aven)? Keep in mind he could be talking about cards in M12 or M11.
Are there any other core set cards that break the colour pie?
I don't always post about Rafiq of the Many, but when I do, I cardlink to the original artwork, and not the supplementary product version.
"I trust myself to do my duty, even unto death. It's what comes after that I'm afraid of."
"Just fight without fear. Your soul is protected by the hand of Avacyn and will never submit to evil."
Liliana's Shade (land tutoring is more G/W?) - Agree
Void Stalker (blue creature removal?) - Disagree. This "feels" Blue. It's more of a "trick" than straight removal.
Eh, blue gets most of the lesser used mechanics just because it's blue. I can get behind this i suppose as blue has had it before but doesn't really deserve it.
This is fine in black: flavorful and it makes sense. Even if it were a color pie breach it would be a very minor one.
It is dependent entirely on the cards in your opponent's graveyard. That is not only a rare mechanic, but it also fits in with the mechanics of UB.
Tutoring a swamp is black.
It's not really removal.
I've no problem with cards that work best with multiple colors. If your creature is dependent on plains, then you can reap the benefits of white mana. This guy gets +1/+1 which is a white mechanic. You aren't going to get it in mono blue unless you wanna run plains just for the hell of it.
Rosewater is a hypocrite. He says he doesn't want to break the pie but then he gives green creature removal with all the new fight stuff. I'm perfectly fine with fight and with other colors doing things they might not normally do so long as the change is gradual, makes sense, and relies on a mechanic that fits that color.
Rosewater hates Beast Within but he loves Pit Fight. To me that is blatant hypocrisy. The former doesn't even really remove a creature, the latter actually removes a creature. Yet he takes up arms against the former and praises how smart R&D had to be to create the latter.
You don't seem to realize that Beast Within can be cast to destroy target PERMANENT from your hand as long as you have the mana whereas Pit Fight requires you to, not only have a creature (and the other guy too since it's only used against creatures), but have a stronger creature than the opponent (unless you cast it during combat which is a very cool thing)
You don't seem to be able to grasp the nuances between the two: they kill stuff so they're the same!
You don't seem to realize that OBVIOUSLY THEY ARE NOT IDENTICAL CARDS.
Yes, you are not surprising anybody with that revelation. This may be shocking to you but despite them not being carbon copies of each other, the two cards serve similar purposes.
First of all, while Beast Within does technically destroy a permanent, it also gives you a 3/3 green beast token. When used on a creature this is fundamentally no different than transforming the attributes of a creature. This is something that is not only flavorfully green, but something we have seen before:
Snakeform
Lignify
Arachnus Web
Pit Fight actually gets rid of the creature. Secondly, creature removal was always supposed to be green's weakness, so if he is going to pretend that this is any different than what Chaos Warp enables red to do with enchantments he is a hypocrite and you are too if you support that train of thought.
You don't seem to understand that it doesn't matter if they aren't identical cards! Obviously they're not going to be identical! That is the ENTIRE POINT! One card can actually remove creatures on its own, the other will NEVER remove creatures on its own. The irony here is that rosewater believes the latter card is a larger bastardization of the color pie than the former. That position is laughably and demonstrably hypocritical.
Firstly, all the cards you linked are RED cards or one is a land. Despite this, in every single scenario you listed, red mana was needed in order to use that ability. It has not been green until recently.
I agree, fight is a fine mechanic in green. I think it fits flavorfully and it allows green to do something that it normally doesn't get to do so long as it abides by stricter rules that fit with its portion of the pie. That is fine and dandy.
What i hate though is when beast within, which a very similar card, is derided as somehow being one of the ultimate unpie cards when the entire fight mechanic is even more explicitly against the fundamentals of green's pie.
Yes, but desert twister does not give somebody a 3/3 green beast token.
There. Fight in green on an older card.
From a discussion about skipping town and fleeing from the law:
While trying to ambush a creature who favored grabbing and strangling PCs:
What is your point here? TSP isn't that old anyways. And as i've said multiple times, I have no problem with fight being green.
Also, pit fight is red. Hybrid, but still counts as red...
Nobody said fight was pie breaking.
Also, fight is essentially a fixed version of provoke, which has always been green and red. Provoke, the card, sets a pretty strong precedent for the effect to be in green.
As to the original topic, Mindclaw Shaman and Courtly Provocateur come to mind.
Green isn't supposed to be able to remove creatures. It's the same as red's inability to remove enchantments.
I don't see any problem with doing it as long as it's flavorful and fits the feel of the color, but if fight isn't color breaking in somebody's eyes, then neither is beast within or other abilities that were listed in the OP.
you're right but at the same time beast within doesn't actually remove a creature. i mean yes, it destroys a creature, but replacing it with a 3/3 green beast is no different than a card that turns creatures into 3/3 green beasts. i think most people would find that mechanic to be green.
I don't know man, I take A LOT of my definition of the color pie from those older cards... There have been new mechanics introduced, but overall the colors still work the same.
I wanna see a reprint of Traumatize for all these mill decks that have been popping up. I still have a couple of them, but the cards are getting a little old lol
As a matter of fact, the first and second creature with fight are green, namely Tracker from The Dark and Gargantuan Gorilla from Alliance. Green had the ability to remove flyers directly, and other creatures indirectly though combat, and fight is the epitome of green removal.
I don't get the hate for Beast Within since first, it is in a set that bends colour pie, and second it is essentially green Polymorph which incidentally is a spell that specifically states 'destroy target creature' on a blue spell, and yet is perfectly blue.
Back on topic, none of the cards stated in the OP breaks the colour pie. Liliana of the Dark Realm and Liliana's Shade both fit perfectly with black's love swamp theme, and they do not put the land into play (which would be breaking the colour pie). As previous posters have said, the most egregious colour pie break from the core set is Hornet Sting, since only red (and Black to a smaller extent) is suppose to have burn spells that can hit both creatures and players.
The only colour with a 99/99
Signature by Spongy Pengwin
UBR: Sedris
Angelic Arbiter has a very blue effect.
Archon of Justice can remove lands, something white usually has trouble with.
Benalish Veteran has a suspiciously green ability, as does Crusader of Odric.
Duskmantle Prowler is an abomination of random off-color nonsense.
Elderscale Wurm does something I'd expect a white card to do.
Entangling Vines.
Excommunicate.
Fog bank.
Gem of Becoming. I'm counting this as a Grixis one.
Someone take over from //gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?page=10&action=advanced&set=|[%22Magic%202010%22">|[%22Magic%202011%22]|[%22Magic%202012%22]|[%22Magic%202013%22]"]here.
I think that your view in the color pie is too rigid and also outdated. Excommunicate effects have been white since many years ago, as haste in black. As for exalted, it makes alot more sense in black that in blue if you ask me. And you can count it as Grixis if you want but Gem of Becoming is an artifact and color pie constraints are a lot looser for them. I agree with Fog Bank being out of color althought.
These are all fine. None of these are outside of the normal color pie. Some may be on the fringes (ie Black doesn't often get Haste, but it is allowed) but none are outright breaks.
Fog Bank does feel a little out of place in a blue scheme, yet does fit into the "illusion" mold. I don't know why they would make it a wall AND give it defender...
It might all be a matter of opinion... I wont complain unless I start seeing mono-red creatures with life-link and green start giving out -1/-1 counters. THEN I will lose my **** lmao