There's your traditional fantasy item found in most settings in this genre. Here's hoping we get a Magic Rope-type spell in the near future to go along with it
I love it, I really hope that this is a precursor to much more “crossing the streams”. Between the D&D supplements of MtG worlds, Ravinca book and the poll question that Mark had a couple of months ago regarding D&D in MtG it looks like it’s gonna happen.
Ok silly daft question, but what does "crossing the streams" mean?
'buster
It’s a reference to Ghostbusters. Crossing the streams of the proton packs potentially causing disaster. So within WotC the idea is to keep the MtG IP and the D&D IPs separate and distinctive so as to not cause disaster to either IP with a poorly received crossover
I am fairly certain you can't, as the new bag of holding is seen as a different entity than the one you had on the field previously, so it would not consider the exiled cards to be exiled by itself. Someone will probably drop by with all the proper rule references though.
This is probably one of the more frustrating rules of magic, because it seems counter intuitive and frustrating when you want to make cards like this work.
In some ways, yes, but in other ways no. Let’s say you have two Bag of Holdings out, each with a few cards exiled, and both get bounced to your hand then your opponent makes you discard one at random. Which one was discarded? When you play the one in your hand, which set of exiled cards do you get? Because card can go into hidden zones, the rules have separate out instances of a card such that any time one enters the battlefield, it is considered its own new thing.
I am fairly certain you can't, as the new bag of holding is seen as a different entity than the one you had on the field previously, so it would not consider the exiled cards to be exiled by itself. Someone will probably drop by with all the proper rule references though.
This is probably one of the more frustrating rules of magic, because it seems counter intuitive and frustrating when you want to make cards like this work.
In some ways, yes, but in other ways no. Let’s say you have two Bag of Holdings out, each with a few cards exiled, and both get bounced to your hand then your opponent makes you discard one at random. Which one was discarded? When you play the one in your hand, which set of exiled cards do you get? Because card can go into hidden zones, the rules have separate out instances of a card such that any time one enters the battlefield, it is considered its own new thing.
Not to mention that allowing the bag to retrieve exiled cards from a different instance of the bag violates the idea that exiled cards are supposed to be hard to get back and willingly putting them there is supposed to be risky. WotC is already dancing into dangerous territory with cards like Karn, Scion of Urza where exiling any card harbors little risk or with cards like Squee, The Immortal or God-Eternal Kefnet pushes Magic into Yu-Gi-Oh-like style of play.
In short, WotC has to be careful not to arrive to a situation where Exile 2.0 becomes necessary.
I am fairly certain you can't, as the new bag of holding is seen as a different entity than the one you had on the field previously, so it would not consider the exiled cards to be exiled by itself. Someone will probably drop by with all the proper rule references though.
This is probably one of the more frustrating rules of magic, because it seems counter intuitive and frustrating when you want to make cards like this work.
In some ways, yes, but in other ways no. Let’s say you have two Bag of Holdings out, each with a few cards exiled, and both get bounced to your hand then your opponent makes you discard one at random. Which one was discarded? When you play the one in your hand, which set of exiled cards do you get? Because card can go into hidden zones, the rules have separate out instances of a card such that any time one enters the battlefield, it is considered its own new thing.
Not to mention that allowing the bag to retrieve exiled cards from a different instance of the bag violates the idea that exiled cards are supposed to be hard to get back and willingly putting them there is supposed to be risky. WotC is already dancing into dangerous territory with cards like Karn, Scion of Urza where exiling any card harbors little risk or with cards like Squee, The Immortal or God-Eternal Kefnet pushes Magic into Yu-Gi-Oh-like style of play.
In short, WotC has to be careful not to arrive to a situation where Exile 2.0 becomes necessary.
Mark has stated that they don’t like messing around with the exile zone it’s self, but for flavor they will occasionally make exceptions like Squee and the Eternalized Gods.
Karn is different as the cards don’t go to the exile zone but under the silver token. Those kinda effects happen the only difference is any Karn, Scion of Urza can interact with the token.
Karn is different as the cards don’t go to the exile zone but under the silver token. Those kinda effects happen the only difference is any Karn, Scion of Urza can interact with the token.
With all due respect, you might want to re-read what Karn, Scion of Urza actually does. Karn literally says the cards go to exile. Whether they’re marked with a silver counter or not doesn’t change what zone the card is in. This matters for cards that actually interact with cards in exile, like Scion, Squee, and Karn, the Great Creator.
I am fairly certain you can't, as the new bag of holding is seen as a different entity than the one you had on the field previously, so it would not consider the exiled cards to be exiled by itself. Someone will probably drop by with all the proper rule references though.
This is probably one of the more frustrating rules of magic, because it seems counter intuitive and frustrating when you want to make cards like this work.
In some ways, yes, but in other ways no. Let’s say you have two Bag of Holdings out, each with a few cards exiled, and both get bounced to your hand then your opponent makes you discard one at random. Which one was discarded? When you play the one in your hand, which set of exiled cards do you get? Because card can go into hidden zones, the rules have separate out instances of a card such that any time one enters the battlefield, it is considered its own new thing.
It's also worth noting that the bag of holding is only an Artifact while on the battlefield. This is true of all cards. In any other zone it is an artifact card, or the idea of an artifact. It is therefore not at all the same bag of holding even in flavor. I find it much easier to remember those rules interactions when I keep that flavor in mind.
I am fairly certain you can't, as the new bag of holding is seen as a different entity than the one you had on the field previously, so it would not consider the exiled cards to be exiled by itself. Someone will probably drop by with all the proper rule references though.
This is probably one of the more frustrating rules of magic, because it seems counter intuitive and frustrating when you want to make cards like this work.
In some ways, yes, but in other ways no. Let’s say you have two Bag of Holdings out, each with a few cards exiled, and both get bounced to your hand then your opponent makes you discard one at random. Which one was discarded? When you play the one in your hand, which set of exiled cards do you get? Because card can go into hidden zones, the rules have separate out instances of a card such that any time one enters the battlefield, it is considered its own new thing.
It's also worth noting that the bag of holding is only an Artifact while on the battlefield. This is true of all cards. In any other zone it is an artifact card, or the idea of an artifact. It is therefore not at all the same bag of holding even in flavor. I find it much easier to remember those rules interactions when I keep that flavor in mind.
Never really quite thought of it quite that way. I always thought of them as pages in a book. That’s a good one to remember for those don’t like a pages analogy.
This card would have been soooo much better if it read "Whenever you discard a card, you may exile that card from your graveyard." As it is, its presence percludes the use of graveyard strategies with looting mechanics. Its a shame...
Also, first comment on the platform. Hello everybody!
This card would have been soooo much better if it read "Whenever you discard a card, you may exile that card from your graveyard." As it is, its presence percludes the use of graveyard strategies with looting mechanics. Its a shame...
Also, first comment on the platform. Hello everybody!
What a pity that you registered in that moment were everybody are about to leave this site...
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It'll be a nice addition to my Play-From-Exile deck that uses Cadaverous Bloom along with Eternal Scourge, Torrent Elemental and Misthollow Griffin to generate large amounts of mana to draw into Well of Knowledge to locate key cards and replay them from exile.
'buster
HR Analyst. Gamer. Activist | Fearless, and forthright | Aggro-control is a mindset.
Elspeth and Jhoira rock my world.
'buster
HR Analyst. Gamer. Activist | Fearless, and forthright | Aggro-control is a mindset.
Elspeth and Jhoira rock my world.
It’s a reference to Ghostbusters. Crossing the streams of the proton packs potentially causing disaster. So within WotC the idea is to keep the MtG IP and the D&D IPs separate and distinctive so as to not cause disaster to either IP with a poorly received crossover
'buster
HR Analyst. Gamer. Activist | Fearless, and forthright | Aggro-control is a mindset.
Elspeth and Jhoira rock my world.
In some ways, yes, but in other ways no. Let’s say you have two Bag of Holdings out, each with a few cards exiled, and both get bounced to your hand then your opponent makes you discard one at random. Which one was discarded? When you play the one in your hand, which set of exiled cards do you get? Because card can go into hidden zones, the rules have separate out instances of a card such that any time one enters the battlefield, it is considered its own new thing.
Not to mention that allowing the bag to retrieve exiled cards from a different instance of the bag violates the idea that exiled cards are supposed to be hard to get back and willingly putting them there is supposed to be risky. WotC is already dancing into dangerous territory with cards like Karn, Scion of Urza where exiling any card harbors little risk or with cards like Squee, The Immortal or God-Eternal Kefnet pushes Magic into Yu-Gi-Oh-like style of play.
In short, WotC has to be careful not to arrive to a situation where Exile 2.0 becomes necessary.
Mark has stated that they don’t like messing around with the exile zone it’s self, but for flavor they will occasionally make exceptions like Squee and the Eternalized Gods.
Karn is different as the cards don’t go to the exile zone but under the silver token. Those kinda effects happen the only difference is any Karn, Scion of Urza can interact with the token.
With all due respect, you might want to re-read what Karn, Scion of Urza actually does. Karn literally says the cards go to exile. Whether they’re marked with a silver counter or not doesn’t change what zone the card is in. This matters for cards that actually interact with cards in exile, like Scion, Squee, and Karn, the Great Creator.
It's also worth noting that the bag of holding is only an Artifact while on the battlefield. This is true of all cards. In any other zone it is an artifact card, or the idea of an artifact. It is therefore not at all the same bag of holding even in flavor. I find it much easier to remember those rules interactions when I keep that flavor in mind.
Never really quite thought of it quite that way. I always thought of them as pages in a book. That’s a good one to remember for those don’t like a pages analogy.
Also, first comment on the platform. Hello everybody!
What a pity that you registered in that moment were everybody are about to leave this site...