It's weird how they've revealed three/four mechanics and a bunch of flavor stuff and I still haven't the first idea what this set is about.
Hopefully that's a sign that they're just concealing their hand particularly well this time.
Has it really been that much flavor stuff? We know some vague details about how it's Gatewatch-versus-Bolas and how there are five animal-headed Gods. Have I missed a lot?
And we really just saw the first few cards yesterday/today... it's only natural that we don't know what the themes are.
On topic, the oracle card is a really neat design, will be fun in EDH and might see play somewhere else. Hard to evaluate the dragon until we know what exert does. I'm guessing we will be seeing a lot of it since it seems like an attacking option and they didn't feel the need to reminder it on the rare. I suspect the -1/-1 counter theory is correct as it will support other themes in the set.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Sig by Dark Night Cavalier at Heroes of the Plane Studios!
Queeg: As one example, assume 'to exert' means '~ cannot untap until after your next untap step'.
a) would prevent card effects like 'when a creature you control attacks, untap it' from working.
Under b), you could select the order in which the effects occur (technically, the order they go on the stack), and thus you could untap it before the exert effect applies and prevents it from untapping.
That's a far-fetched interaction, but a fine example nonetheless. Now assume exert says: "To exert, tap this permanent. It doesn't untap until your next untap step." It removes vigilance loophole while removing the need for the change as specified by your example.
It just hit me that the gods of this block could work like Deity of Scars in the sense that they come into play as artifacts / enchantments with a certain number of -1/-1 counters and they animate when they don't have any -1/-1 counters left on them.
What are the ramifications of "attack and exert" instead of "attack into exert"?
Both still remain attack triggers. Only difference I can see is, that by the time it goes on the stack a) creature is already exerted b) creature is going to get exerted.
Why would this matter to warrant a change?
And I'm going to answer myself, got it!
a) You can't kill the creature to negate the trigger, if it was declared as an attacker. It already is on the stack targeting your guy for 4 damage.
b) You could kill the dragon with an instant kill spell before the trigger to exert and deal 4 goes off. Case solved. Move on people. Namely me.
This would only be true if 'to exert' requires the creature to be alive. Which is very possible, and I think you do have the primary reason. Just pointing out that it's more Clues to how 'exert' works.
Varyag: Mana Leak is a card that, while not explicitly considered too strong for Standard, certainly shapes the meta to a degree. Theoretically, Miscalculation would do the same if it's better than Mana Leak.
Personally, I think Miscalculation would be a great reprint, especially considering that the Gatewatch's entire idea of going after Nicol Bolas can be IMO accurately described with the term.
It seems odd that exert would exist as an action with no reminder text, unless it was something that was going to be made more common, possibly evergreen.
I think it's just the fact that it's a full art promo. Those tend not to get reminder text, IIRC.
I do think Exert will involve putting -1/-1 counter on the creature. It makes more sense than "cannot untap", and it's easier to remember.
You do realize it would make your 5-mana dragon a "kill 4 opponent's guys across 4 turns" killing machine. Not OP at all.
Only if your opponent has no flying creatures or direct damage. With the "-1/-1 counter to exert" idea, it's more along the lines of:
Turn 5: Play 3/3 hasty flier and attack, burn a cretaure for 4.
Turn 6: Attack with a 2/2 and hope it doesn't die, burn for 4
Turn 7: Attack with 1/1 and hope it doesnt die, burn for 4.
Turn 8: Attack for 1 damage or burn for 4.
If youre killing 4 guys across 4 turns, youre attacking with an increasingly vulnerable creature that might not even MAKE IT to the 4th turn through combat. If you're using his ability to clear out flying blockers, youre doing 6 damage over 3-4 turns, depending on how many flying blockers you have to shoot down. If you're NOT shooting down blockers, youre running a risk of it dying in combat.
I think its strong but fair, personally. Let's also not forget it will exist in an environment where Aethersphere Harvester and Heart of Kiran are commonly played and where Walking Ballista can take it down quickly.
The creatures say "exert as it attacks", meaning that exerting is not the same as attacking.
You could exert when tapping, sacrificing, whatever they want to put on the card.
It's red, so "going all in" makes sense.
My first impression would be "return to its owners hand", so it would do the effect without dealing combat damage.
My second guess would be "sacrifice at end of turn", but I'd stick with self-bouncing.
Since the new Liliana works with -1/-1 counters, it's possible that Gideon works with one of the other mechanics. White has historically been a color that cares about cycling, but it's equally likely that he's designed to show off one of the newer mechanics.
If he is designed to work with Exert, it might be possible that his plus 1 is there to counteract its downside, which could very well be "This creature doesn't untap during its controller's next untap step."
1U
0/1
You may exert ~ as it taps. If you do, draw a card.
T: Draw a card, then discard a card
?
It's awkward to use while tapping, as I am fairly sure that it would need to be a separate clause and not part of the tap effect.
Also, I don't think it's self-bounce. Glorybringer becomes '3RR: Deal 4 damage to target creature. Use this ability only once per turn.' Also, Exert would be a foil to -1/-1 counters if so, and I don't see a mechanic with the name of 'exert' getting rid of -1/-1 counters.
You are right in that exert could be used on other things than attacks. Unfortunately, the two leading ideas (-1/-1 counter application and slowtapping) both work with tapping and attacking both.
Since the new Liliana works with -1/-1 counters, it's possible that Gideon works with one of the other mechanics. White has historically been a color that cares about cycling, but it's equally likely that he's designed to show off one of the newer mechanics.
If he is designed to work with Exert, it might be possible that his plus 1 is there to counteract its downside, which could very well be "This creature doesn't untap during its controller's next untap step."
I'm going to take a wild guess that Exert will be along the lines of Regenerate (not the ability itself, but the mechanics).
In which you choose to remove the creature from combat when the trigger is put on the stack, already tapped (or you tap it if untapped), and you then get the Exert trigger instead.
So in the case of Glorybringer, you can attack with a 4/4 flyer or instead deal 4 damage to a creature (whenever it can attack).
why is the demon wording "whenever you cycle or discard" ??? wouldnt whenever you discard include cycle too, which means the wording is redundant ?
To alleviate complexity. It only adds like two words and serves as a reminder that cycling is discarding a card. Most people tend to focus on the draw a card part, more than the discard a card part.
I'm going to take a wild guess that Exert will be along the lines of Regenerate (not the ability itself, but the mechanics).
In which you choose to remove the creature from combat when the trigger is put on the stack, already tapped (or you tap it if untapped), and you then get the Exert trigger instead.
So in the case of Glorybringer, you can attack with a 4/4 flyer or instead deal 4 damage to a creature (whenever it can attack).
We actually just got confirmation that Exert is 'when this creature attacks, you may exert it for an ability. If you do, it doesn't untap during your next untap step.' Obviously paraphrased, but that's the gist.
Guys, please tell me what is the difference between:
a) You may exert ~ as it attacks. When you do,...
b) When ~ attacks, you may exert it. If you do,...
Because b) is the current template for such triggers. What's the reason to change it?
The first (a) is more likely if exert means something with tapping (e. g. "tap and it doesn't untap during its controller's next untap step"). The first is a static ability that modifies what you do as you attack (not exactly the same as a replacement effect but in practice you don't need to know the difference - it does not use the stack).
The important thing to note is that (b) would not work if exert means "tap and it doesn't untap during your untap step" since by the time the triggered ability would be on the stack the creature would already have to have been tapped as attackers are declared (unless it has vigilance - which the Dragon does not). Now since the creature would be tapped already you could not perform the optional action "tap this and it doesn't untap during its controller's untap step" since the "tap this" part would require the Dragon to be untapped.
For the most popular alternative suggested explanation for exert ("put a -1/-1 cdounter on this") this would be an atypical wording that functionally would be different due to not using the stack, but not really required to make the ability work.
(Note that the second part of the ability after the wen would use the stack with the (a) wording - only the decision to exert would have altered timing)
Exert allows creatures to give a little more effort to produce unusually good results.
You make the decision whether to exert a creature as you declare it as an attacker. If you choose to have it exert, an ability will trigger and grant you some bonus. As a trade-off, the creature won't untap during your next turn. It's tired. Needs a nap. Attack more later.
You don't have to exert the creature as it attacks. If you don't, no ability will trigger, and it will untap normal during your next turn. Note that as you declare attackers is the only time you can have it exert. You can't wait until later in the turn and then exert it. When your next untap step rolls around, if the creature you exerted is untapped, nothing happens and the exertion cost you nothing. Maybe you found a different way to untap it, or maybe you gave it vigilance. You are clever!
Exert allows creatures to give a little more effort to produce unusually good results.
You make the decision whether to exert a creature as you declare it as an attacker. If you choose to have it exert, an ability will trigger and grant you some bonus. As a trade-off, the creature won't untap during your next turn. It's tired. Needs a nap. Attack more later.
You don't have to exert the creature as it attacks. If you don't, no ability will trigger, and it will untap normal during your next turn. Note that as you declare attackers is the only time you can have it exert. You can't wait until later in the turn and then exert it. When your next untap step rolls around, if the creature you exerted is untapped, nothing happens and the exertion cost you nothing. Maybe you found a different way to untap it, or maybe you gave it vigilance. You are clever!
Hopefully that's a sign that they're just concealing their hand particularly well this time.
I do think Exert will involve putting -1/-1 counter on the creature. It makes more sense than "cannot untap", and it's easier to remember.
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
Has it really been that much flavor stuff? We know some vague details about how it's Gatewatch-versus-Bolas and how there are five animal-headed Gods. Have I missed a lot?
And we really just saw the first few cards yesterday/today... it's only natural that we don't know what the themes are.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
man, it's crazy bananas in a BG Greater Good casual deck I have... lol
On topic, the oracle card is a really neat design, will be fun in EDH and might see play somewhere else. Hard to evaluate the dragon until we know what exert does. I'm guessing we will be seeing a lot of it since it seems like an attacking option and they didn't feel the need to reminder it on the rare. I suspect the -1/-1 counter theory is correct as it will support other themes in the set.
A simple search so far reveals the following. Note I only really go through the letter E. And the bolded cards have explicit 'on attack' triggers.
Alarum, Aphetto Alchemist, Bazaar Krovod, Beacon Hawk, Blessed Alliance, Bounding Krasis, Breaching Hippocamp, Cerulean Wisps, Colossal Heroics, Coral Trickster, Crypsis, Curse of Inertia, Derevi, Empyrial Tactician, Disciple of the Ring, Elder Druid, ...
I meant the existence of both mechanics at the same time, in case the Gods are based on devotion, I though it was obvious.
Yeah, nobody is talking about the Vault but it looks really fun. Particularly if you have proliferate or similar effects to speed up the process.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
This would only be true if 'to exert' requires the creature to be alive. Which is very possible, and I think you do have the primary reason. Just pointing out that it's more Clues to how 'exert' works.
Personally, I think Miscalculation would be a great reprint, especially considering that the Gatewatch's entire idea of going after Nicol Bolas can be IMO accurately described with the term.
Only if your opponent has no flying creatures or direct damage. With the "-1/-1 counter to exert" idea, it's more along the lines of:
Turn 5: Play 3/3 hasty flier and attack, burn a cretaure for 4.
Turn 6: Attack with a 2/2 and hope it doesn't die, burn for 4
Turn 7: Attack with 1/1 and hope it doesnt die, burn for 4.
Turn 8: Attack for 1 damage or burn for 4.
If youre killing 4 guys across 4 turns, youre attacking with an increasingly vulnerable creature that might not even MAKE IT to the 4th turn through combat. If you're using his ability to clear out flying blockers, youre doing 6 damage over 3-4 turns, depending on how many flying blockers you have to shoot down. If you're NOT shooting down blockers, youre running a risk of it dying in combat.
I think its strong but fair, personally. Let's also not forget it will exist in an environment where Aethersphere Harvester and Heart of Kiran are commonly played and where Walking Ballista can take it down quickly.
You could exert when tapping, sacrificing, whatever they want to put on the card.
It's red, so "going all in" makes sense.
My first impression would be "return to its owners hand", so it would do the effect without dealing combat damage.
My second guess would be "sacrifice at end of turn", but I'd stick with self-bouncing.
( 0.0 )
=O ((U/R)) O=
(")(")
I'm an AI making Magic cards.
http://www.staalmedia.nl/nexus/#generate
If he is designed to work with Exert, it might be possible that his plus 1 is there to counteract its downside, which could very well be "This creature doesn't untap during its controller's next untap step."
1U
0/1
You may exert ~ as it taps. If you do, draw a card.
T: Draw a card, then discard a card
?
It's awkward to use while tapping, as I am fairly sure that it would need to be a separate clause and not part of the tap effect.
Also, I don't think it's self-bounce. Glorybringer becomes '3RR: Deal 4 damage to target creature. Use this ability only once per turn.' Also, Exert would be a foil to -1/-1 counters if so, and I don't see a mechanic with the name of 'exert' getting rid of -1/-1 counters.
You are right in that exert could be used on other things than attacks. Unfortunately, the two leading ideas (-1/-1 counter application and slowtapping) both work with tapping and attacking both.
I guess we will know soon enough.
Very good point if you ask me!
In which you choose to remove the creature from combat when the trigger is put on the stack, already tapped (or you tap it if untapped), and you then get the Exert trigger instead.
So in the case of Glorybringer, you can attack with a 4/4 flyer or instead deal 4 damage to a creature (whenever it can attack).
http://www.cubetutor.com/visualspoiler/20765
To alleviate complexity. It only adds like two words and serves as a reminder that cycling is discarding a card. Most people tend to focus on the draw a card part, more than the discard a card part.
We actually just got confirmation that Exert is 'when this creature attacks, you may exert it for an ability. If you do, it doesn't untap during your next untap step.' Obviously paraphrased, but that's the gist.
The first (a) is more likely if exert means something with tapping (e. g. "tap and it doesn't untap during its controller's next untap step"). The first is a static ability that modifies what you do as you attack (not exactly the same as a replacement effect but in practice you don't need to know the difference - it does not use the stack).
The important thing to note is that (b) would not work if exert means "tap and it doesn't untap during your untap step" since by the time the triggered ability would be on the stack the creature would already have to have been tapped as attackers are declared (unless it has vigilance - which the Dragon does not). Now since the creature would be tapped already you could not perform the optional action "tap this and it doesn't untap during its controller's untap step" since the "tap this" part would require the Dragon to be untapped.
For the most popular alternative suggested explanation for exert ("put a -1/-1 cdounter on this") this would be an atypical wording that functionally would be different due to not using the stack, but not really required to make the ability work.
(Note that the second part of the ability after the wen would use the stack with the (a) wording - only the decision to exert would have altered timing)
Finally a good white villain quote: "So, do I ever re-evaluate my life choices? Never, because I know what I'm doing is a righteous cause."
Factions: Sleeping
Remnants: Valheim
Legendary Journey: Heroes & Planeswalkers
Saga: Shards of Rabiah
Legends: The Elder Dragons
Read up on Red Flags & NWO