5. UndeadZombie - Nuts and More Nuts (yes, you guys can name your decks. And this isn't actually part of the deck name, this is just a reminder from the moderator)
All mana costs on each card (including in their rules text) becomes phyrexian mana. For instance, you can pay 4 life to cast an Azorius Guildmage and 6 life to activate each of its abilities.
So is this going under the rule that if you draw, the person with the higher life total is the winner?
Well, I'm just sitting at home bored, and there weren't very many matchups to do, so I'll do both. The one on the left is calculated under the assumption that if, when the game draws, the player with the higher life total is the winner. The one on the right is calculated based on the assumption that when the game draws it ends in a draw (2 points for each player)
X 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | X 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 X 4 0 2 1 4 4 | 1 X 4 2 2 2 4 4
2 0 X 4 0 4 4 2 | 2 0 X 4 0 4 4 2
3 4 0 X 1 2 0 4 | 3 2 0 X 1 2 0 2
4 2 4 3 X 3 4 4 | 4 2 4 3 X 2 4 4
5 3 0 2 1 X 0 3 | 5 2 0 2 2 X 0 2
6 0 0 4 0 4 X 0 | 6 0 0 4 0 4 X 0
7 0 2 0 0 1 4 X | 7 0 2 2 0 2 4 X
I don't understand. How does frankie peanuts auto win you the game?
And Shogun:
Against deck #2, when you are on the draw it goes: t1: collonade. t1: soaring seacliff. t2: calciform pools, ratchet bomb, tap ratchet bomb up to 1 counter t2: play amulet and have it get countered by chancellor of the annex, then play simic growth chamber t3: tap ratchet bomb to put a 2nd counter t3: devoted druid, soaring seacliff t4: pop ratchet bomb on 2, killing druid.
Your only other option is to not play anything, but deck #2 just charges up until it can cast a creature and win. On the play, your deck wins before he can untap and use ratchet bomb.
Against deck #4, when you are on the play, it goes t1: soaring seacliffs t1: mountain, mon's goblin waiters t2: same as before with the chancellor, so you just play your bounceland t2: gods' eye, cast boom, destroying simic growth chamber and gods' eye, gate to the reikai. After that, win with spirit token from gods' eye and mon's goblin waiters. And when you are on the draw, the same thing happens but you are one turn slower.
I came up with a slightly different row for myself than the one knobbodi came up with:
X 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
7 0 4 0 4 1 4 x
Why's that?
My understanding is that you ask a question like "Will you do at least one of A) Answer 'yes' to this question, cast no spell and make no attacks this turn, or B) answer "No" to this question and then go on to cast spells and/or make attacks?" If they answer 'Yes' then they do task A (since they obviously didn't do B) and cannot cast spells or make attacks. If they answer 'No' then they MUSTN'T do B), which means since they answered 'No' they must therefore go on to not cast spells or make attacks or else they would be doing B and therefore lying.
But he only binds the player into acting on that answer until the end of the player who controls him's turn.
Here's the question that XScorpion told me he could ask:
"Will you either answer 'no' to this question, or concede immediately?"
I'm not sure if it would work myself, now that I think about it. It's a really weird situation when you're up against Frankie. That's why you never want to cross paths with him.
But it seems (to me at least) that since frankie says they have to obey that until end of turn, that frankie can't cause someone to do anything on their turn, just on the turn of the person playing frankie
Here's the question that XScorpion told me he could ask:
"Will you either answer 'no' to this question, or concede immediately?"
I'm not sure if it would work myself, now that I think about it. It's a really weird situation when you're up against Frankie. That's why you never want to cross paths with him.
This doesn't work for two reasons--cards can't force players to concede (see Mindslaver) and, I would argue that since you CAN'T answer 'no' to the question, it doesn't qualify as a 'yes or no' questions--'yes or yes' questions are cheating.
And yes, I stand corrected, you can't stop him from casting spells or attacking. You CAN stop him from responding to your attacks and spells--or to, say, put an infinite number of -1/-1 counters
The player is required to answer truthfully. They are NOT required to answer with "Yes" or "No". So if you ask one of those stupid questions, they can answer "I am not going to answer this question with a no, I am simply going to tell you that I will not concede this turn". The question has been answered truthfully.
I'm lol'ing because people are trying to put a ruling to an Unhinged card.
Good luck guys 8D
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
An ability exists on the stack independently of its source. Removal of the source after that time won't affect the ability. Some abilities cause a source to do something rather than the ability. Any activated or triggered ability that references information about the source checks that information when the ability is put onto the stack. Otherwise, it will check that information when it resolves. If the source is no longer in the zone it's expected to be in, its last known information is used.
if you didn't have to answer yes/no and only have to answer truthfully they you can answer a question like "will you block if I attack" with "I haven't decided"
that basically means his ability does nothing
I would argue that answering a yes/no question with anything other then yes/no would not be a proper answer
if you didn't have to answer yes/no and only have to answer truthfully they you can answer a question like "will you block if I attack" with "I haven't decided"
that basically means his ability does nothing
I would argue that answering a yes/no question with anything other then yes/no would not be a proper answer
"I haven't decided" doesn't answer the question "will you block?". It volunteers information, but doesn't answer the question (you don't know if they will block, which means the question is unanswered).
On the other hand, you can comprehensively answer the stupid concession question truthfully; "I will not concede" certainly answers the question "will you concede?" (you know know that they will not concede).
And frankly, I didn't start with the attempts to rules-lawyer Mr Peanuts... and by the way? It seems pretty clear the INTENT of the card is to gather information.
So. RAW and RAI? He doesn't win you the game in your next upkeep.
Entrees
Magical Hacker / Devoted Druid / Breeding Pool / Breeding Pool / Simian Spirit Guide
2. X Scorpion
Frankie Peanuts / Calciform Pools / Celestial Colonnade / Chancellor of the Annex / Ratchet Bomb
3. WhammWhamme
Form of the Squirrel / Pendelhaven / Privileged Position / Fungal Reaches / Emrakul, the Aeons Torn
4. Knobbodi
Gods' Eye, Gate to the Reiki / Mountain / Mon's Goblin Waiters / Boom//Bust / Chancellor of the Annex
5. UndeadZombie - Nuts and More Nuts (yes, you guys can name your decks. And this isn't actually part of the deck name, this is just a reminder from the moderator)
Darksteel Plate / Forest / Forest / Llanowar Elves / Form of the Squirrel
6. Yodavader
Ass Whuppin' / Plains / Orzhov Basilica / Engineered Explosives / Bitterblossom
7. Shogun17
Magical Hacker / Devoted Druid / Simic Growth Chamber / Soaring Seacliff / Amulet of Vigor
Homepage: http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=326399
Next Week: Phyrexian Magic
All mana costs on each card (including in their rules text) becomes phyrexian mana. For instance, you can pay 4 life to cast an Azorius Guildmage and 6 life to activate each of its abilities.
Well, I'm just sitting at home bored, and there weren't very many matchups to do, so I'll do both. The one on the left is calculated under the assumption that if, when the game draws, the player with the higher life total is the winner. The one on the right is calculated based on the assumption that when the game draws it ends in a draw (2 points for each player)
X 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | X 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 X 4 0 2 1 4 4 | 1 X 4 2 2 2 4 4
2 0 X 4 0 4 4 2 | 2 0 X 4 0 4 4 2
3 4 0 X 1 2 0 4 | 3 2 0 X 1 2 0 2
4 2 4 3 X 3 4 4 | 4 2 4 3 X 2 4 4
5 3 0 2 1 X 0 3 | 5 2 0 2 2 X 0 2
6 0 0 4 0 4 X 0 | 6 0 0 4 0 4 X 0
7 0 2 0 0 1 4 X | 7 0 2 2 0 2 4 X
X 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
7 0 4 0 4 1 4 x
Why's that?
And Shogun:
Against deck #2, when you are on the draw it goes: t1: collonade. t1: soaring seacliff. t2: calciform pools, ratchet bomb, tap ratchet bomb up to 1 counter t2: play amulet and have it get countered by chancellor of the annex, then play simic growth chamber t3: tap ratchet bomb to put a 2nd counter t3: devoted druid, soaring seacliff t4: pop ratchet bomb on 2, killing druid.
Your only other option is to not play anything, but deck #2 just charges up until it can cast a creature and win. On the play, your deck wins before he can untap and use ratchet bomb.
Against deck #4, when you are on the play, it goes t1: soaring seacliffs t1: mountain, mon's goblin waiters t2: same as before with the chancellor, so you just play your bounceland t2: gods' eye, cast boom, destroying simic growth chamber and gods' eye, gate to the reikai. After that, win with spirit token from gods' eye and mon's goblin waiters. And when you are on the draw, the same thing happens but you are one turn slower.
My understanding is that you ask a question like "Will you do at least one of A) Answer 'yes' to this question, cast no spell and make no attacks this turn, or B) answer "No" to this question and then go on to cast spells and/or make attacks?" If they answer 'Yes' then they do task A (since they obviously didn't do B) and cannot cast spells or make attacks. If they answer 'No' then they MUSTN'T do B), which means since they answered 'No' they must therefore go on to not cast spells or make attacks or else they would be doing B and therefore lying.
Here's the question that XScorpion told me he could ask:
"Will you either answer 'no' to this question, or concede immediately?"
I'm not sure if it would work myself, now that I think about it. It's a really weird situation when you're up against Frankie. That's why you never want to cross paths with him.
This doesn't work for two reasons--cards can't force players to concede (see Mindslaver) and, I would argue that since you CAN'T answer 'no' to the question, it doesn't qualify as a 'yes or no' questions--'yes or yes' questions are cheating.
And yes, I stand corrected, you can't stop him from casting spells or attacking. You CAN stop him from responding to your attacks and spells--or to, say, put an infinite number of -1/-1 counters
Basically no "OR" within it. Otherwise, you're giving a question that says "Choose A or B" rather than "Yes or No".
Even if you list "Say 'Yes'" and "Say 'No'" you're not actually asking a yes-or-no question.
Honestly, Frankie is a paradox: "Will you answer 'no' to this question?"
No longer staff here.
Good luck guys 8D
that basically means his ability does nothing
I would argue that answering a yes/no question with anything other then yes/no would not be a proper answer
"I haven't decided" doesn't answer the question "will you block?". It volunteers information, but doesn't answer the question (you don't know if they will block, which means the question is unanswered).
On the other hand, you can comprehensively answer the stupid concession question truthfully; "I will not concede" certainly answers the question "will you concede?" (you know know that they will not concede).
And frankly, I didn't start with the attempts to rules-lawyer Mr Peanuts... and by the way? It seems pretty clear the INTENT of the card is to gather information.
So. RAW and RAI? He doesn't win you the game in your next upkeep.
I'll post next week's format.
No, I actually do not have a rule banning turn 1 kills.