So...I've sorta been having this internal debate. It actually started a couple sets back, but it feels more and more relevant each set. Do you guys feel that, in the modern game of Magic, a 2/2 creature with a +1/+1 counter is just functionally better than a. 3/3? If so, is the difference so relevant that it should be reflected in mana cost? Is it already affecting cost?
So...I've sorta been having this internal debate. It actually started a couple sets back, but it feels more and more relevant each set. Do you guys feel that, in the modern game of Magic, a 2/2 creature with a +1/+1 counter is just functionally better than a. 3/3? If so, is the difference so relevant that it should be reflected in mana cost? Is it already affecting cost?
I think the answer to your question is Vantress Paladin is not a very good card.
So...I've sorta been having this internal debate. It actually started a couple sets back, but it feels more and more relevant each set. Do you guys feel that, in the modern game of Magic, a 2/2 creature with a +1/+1 counter is just functionally better than a. 3/3? If so, is the difference so relevant that it should be reflected in mana cost? Is it already affecting cost?
In a vacuum, they are functionally equivalent so it comes down to what else is going on around the two cards. Right now we have proliferate in standard so yes a +1/+1 counter is better in standard (marginally) but there have been times when it's been 0 net impact or a negative impact. In either case, in eternal formats there are much bigger cost-reward considerations to think about so this is primarily a standard/limited sort of question and I think the answer is probably "it depends".
So...I've sorta been having this internal debate. It actually started a couple sets back, but it feels more and more relevant each set. Do you guys feel that, in the modern game of Magic, a 2/2 creature with a +1/+1 counter is just functionally better than a. 3/3? If so, is the difference so relevant that it should be reflected in mana cost? Is it already affecting cost?
We have Phantom Monster at common. Which, crazily enough, if the only 3/3 French vanilla - flying - creature at common with this casting cost. All other 3/3 creatures with flying for 4cmc (regardless of color) are either not common, have two or more pips in their casting cost, or have flying only situationally. Which makes Phantom Monster appear quite pushed for a common creature, which makes you realize that Vantress Paladin is in the competitive running for efficiency in this category, the difference is that this essentially costs 1UUU. Now within a casual constructed deck, there are many cards like Abzan Battle Priest that can make the Paladin a better card.
The visions is a worse version of Precognitive Perception esssetnially
In a vacuum, they are functionally equivalent so it comes down to what else is going on around the two cards. Right now we have proliferate in standard so yes a +1/+1 counter is better in standard (marginally) but there have been times when it's been 0 net impact or a negative impact. In either case, in eternal formats there are much bigger cost-reward considerations to think about so this is primarily a standard/limited sort of question and I think the answer is probably "it depends".
We have Phantom Monster at common. Which, crazily enough, if the only 3/3 French vanilla - flying - creature at common with this casting cost. All other 3/3 creatures with flying for 4cmc (regardless of color) are either not common, have two or more pips in their casting cost, or have flying only situationally. Which makes Phantom Monster appear quite pushed for a common creature, which makes you realize that Vantress Paladin is in the competitive running for efficiency in this category, the difference is that this essentially costs 1UUU. Now within a casual constructed deck, there are many cards like Abzan Battle Priest that can make the Paladin a better card.
GWUBRDraft my Old Border Nostalgia Cube! and/or The Little Pauper Cube That Could!RBUWG
Modern:WDeath & TaxesW | RUGRUG DelverRUG