I would like to speculate about stifle in Rise of the Eldrazi (or other future set). Is it possible?
Definitely, yes. Do you remember when we get stifle last time? Yes, when we have morph, old fetches, storm, kicker, etc. Now we have fetches, cascade, kicker and probably morph in Roe. We will get spells that do something when they are cast (Like Eldrazi, with triggered abilities).
And there is a chance that we get new modular/sunburst/contraption ;P etc. mechanic in next block. (mirrodin 2.0)
Eldrazi are old, so maybe they will return with some old spells?
Or do you think that stifle is too good? Overpowered? Maybe we can get some kind of trickbind? Or maybe it's a bad idea? what do you think?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
By John Avon
Decks:
EDH: :symbw::symuw::symub:Merieke Ri Berit:symbw::symuw::symub:
Archenemy EDH: Reaper king
No, it will not happen and I will explain to you why in one word:
Cheap Land Destruction
Wizards won't go near LD with a 10 foot pole these days (though they do it with a 20 foot pole), and stifle is a 1 CMC spell that kills an enemy fetchland. As long as fetches exist, stifle will not.
As far as power level and playability is concerned, it should be reprinted. Alas, it won't be because of whiners. I'm not calling clan_iraq for pointing it out, but there are plenty of people who would rather Cascade into Blightning or play and crack a fetch to swing for 11 on turn 3 and would prefer if their opponent not even interact.
Also, don't forget Landfall as another reason Stifle should be reprinted.
I'm for a varient that no one will like because it's not Stifle, but I'm sick of people only valuing a set as "good" if it has 2-3 functional or direct reprints. I'd rather have a creative but solid set than a boring one with a Wrath, Counterspell, Yag's Will, and Goyf reprints.
As far as the cheap land destruction argument goes remember that Stifle was in the same block as the original fetchlands. Besides, the only place where Stifle is used in that way, and quite often not even there anymore, is Legacy. In extended it was used primarily against the numerous storm decks and little else, not as a fetch impediment.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In my dream, the world had suffered a terrible disaster. A black haze shut out the sun, and the darkness was alive with the moans and screams of wounded people. Suddenly, a small light glowed. A candle flickered into life, symbol of hope for millions. A single tiny candle, shining in the ugly dark. I laughed and blew it out.
Many thanks to HotP Studios. Special thanks to DNC for this great sig.
The main reason it fetches the price it does is b/c of the existence of Stiflenought.dec in Legacy. But yeah, it has other uses there, obv.
I'm not saying now is the time to reprint it, but they ought to reprint it at some point, yes.
Trickbind wouldn't work b/c of Split Second, which was a block-specific mechanic. (God I hope so, anyway..I don't miss Split Second at all...such a nasty mechanic.)
I'd like to see it again..I actually sold mine not too long ago. (I needed the $ :()
As far as power level and playability is concerned, it should be reprinted. Alas, it won't be because of whiners. I'm not calling clan_iraq for pointing it out, but there are plenty of people who would rather Cascade into Blightning or play and crack a fetch to swing for 11 on turn 3 and would prefer if their opponent not even interact.
I don't play the game.
I'm a designer.
Wizards has specifically decided that Land Destruction is effectively offlimits (ie, can be printed but only so atrociously underpowered/inefficient that nobody will use it). They did this because player polling and playtesting found that nothing was less liked by players than land destruction- not being able to play your spells because of lack of land is much, much, much less fun for the victim than the LD player has fun- the weight of the "fun" people lose from LD existing is much more than the minority of people who enjoyed LD decks.
Stifle won't exist because its a 1 Mana Cost spell that effectively destroys a single land- and not only that, its in the wrong part of the color pie for that effect. Stifle could exist with a function that targets only non-land abilities, but don't hold your breath there either
Cheap UNIVERSAL land destruction, with reasonable support is what Wizards sees as a big issue. Ceap HIGHLY LIMITED land destruction with NO support is not a problem, because it doesn't create those unfun game situations. Same for counter magic and discard, there can be cheap counterspells if they're limited and don't have a lot of support. Stifle as a LD spell is not enough to cause people to stop playing because it makes the game non-interactive.
On a different note, I'd be all for a more expensive version with cycling or cantrip. Or what about something like this:
MegaCounter 2UU
Instant
Counter target spell.
Cycling 2U
When you cycle ~, you mat counter target activated or triggered ability.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Death Vish | High on Crackblade | Ooze the Boss | Long Live the King | Fomori Face Fister
Brunal Legend | Hazezon First | Cirrhosis of the Sliver | Animar Planet | The Joy of Pain-ting
No, it will not happen and I will explain to you why in one word:
Cheap Land Destruction
Wizards won't go near LD with a 10 foot pole these days (though they do it with a 20 foot pole), and stifle is a 1 CMC spell that kills an enemy fetchland. As long as fetches exist, stifle will not.
are you sure? There are only 4 fetches in 90% competitive decks. Mono black vampires uses 6, and mono G elves uses 6, but hey, they are MONOCOLORED, they don't need them to work.
Ok, maybe WR Landfall Boros need more, but it's the only one.
Besides, land destruction is only side effect of this card. Not main, like in legacy, where we counter fetch ability.
Tectonic edge is land destruction.
Stifle is not Land destruction. We have Pithing needle, if someone want destroy fetchlands.
I ask this every time it comes up, and I'll ask it again: why should WotC coddle fetchland players?
Go ahead and print Stifle. Print other fetchland hosers. If the hate gets too hot, run basics. Nobody's saying WotC should print "destroy target land" at 1 CMC.
are you sure? There are only 4 fetches in 90% competitive decks. Mono black vampires uses 6, and mono G elves uses 6, but hey, they are MONOCOLORED, they don't need them to work.
Ok, maybe WR Landfall Boros need more, but it's the only one.
Besides, land destruction is only side effect of this card. Not main, like in legacy, where we counter fetch ability.
In the past few sets/blocks/etc, fetchlands have provided a huge chunk of the mana base, and they won't be rotating out any time soon. While current decks in a metagame that will change the second RotE is out might use fewer fetchlands, stifle would both reduce the viable mana base for decks (they'd be more concerned about running fetches) and reduce the design space for wizards (they'd be more concerned about making fetchl-like mechanics).
The reality is, you have to ask yourself how stifle is going to get used. If it would end up being used primarily in decks simply to nuke lands that your opponents are playing, than it is effectively land destruction. If 50%+ of stifle usages are targeting fetchlands, then thats a 1 CMC land destruction instant in blue. In terms of scope; its huge. A graveyard hoser, while it might seem ridiculous, isn't a big problem because the niche it targets is small; wizards can afford to make it above the curve. Land Hosing, that is, LD, is universal to all decks (ok, not manaless dredge or whatever bizarre charbelcher).
Look at the primary uses of Stifle. Its going to be used to
A) Kill fetchlands
B) Combo cheat
C) Counter keywords
(nevermind the set legality, those are just examples of the mechanics)
But how are they weighted? If a typical game goes like this:
1: "Island, go"
2: "Fetchland, pop"
-wait, I stifle
"Oh, well gg." *scoop*
It is a scenario that plays out more predominately than combo tricks or countering those splashy effects. It changes stifle from a 1 mana cost counterspell for half of that bloodbraid elf into a 1 mana cost stone rain for that fetchland. And believe me, there is a HUGE difference; its a more powerful effect, more costly effect, and out of color effect, and more gamebreaking on turn 1 than later, as opposed to counterspelling.
Stifle is not Land destruction. We have Pithing needle, if someone want destroy fetchlands.
Pithing Needle falls into a different school of thought. Frankly, I think that if Wizards went back, they would rewrite it as "Name a Non-Land Card", for the exact same reasons. But even as it exists, it is a lesser problem; it does not 'destroy' fetchlands, it merely paralyzes them, and decks can even answer it right back; you maelstrom pulse it or just naturalize it and your fetchlands are back in business.
I think if you asked them, they'd acknowledge that having a 1 mana artifact that shuts off mana bases is already problem enough. They've made it clear enough their position on LD effects, however
edit: Oh yeah, forgot to mention. The other problem with Stifle as a land destruction spell against fetchlands isn't just the balance concern of players having fun but also the "memory" or "mistake" issue. Players rarely go through the whole motion of stacking up a fetchland before using its ability. You'll have tons and tons of games where someone has already started searching their library when you say "wait but I'm stifling your fetch!" or games where they just do a shortcut and say "k tap my fetchland for an forest and play scute mob", to which you have to reply "nope gotta back up the game but thanks for telling me you have a scute mob!".
Its bad for the game either way.
Now, if we wanted a stifle just for its combo effects, why not print a version that can't target lands?
I doubt the original Stifle will ever see print again, but I could totally see wizards doing some type of variant in either Rise or M11. :1mana::symu: is quite good without being completely overpowered. However I could see wizards waiting until the next block to bring in such a card so that control won't completely f over the rest of us.
But how are they weighted? If a typical game goes like this:
1: "Island, go"
2: "Fetchland, pop"
-wait, I stifle
"Oh, well gg." *scoop*
edit: Oh yeah, forgot to mention. The other problem with Stifle as a land destruction spell against fetchlands isn't just the balance concern of players having fun but also the "memory" or "mistake" issue. Players rarely go through the whole motion of stacking up a fetchland before using its ability. You'll have tons and tons of games where someone has already started searching their library when you say "wait but I'm stifling your fetch!" or games where they just do a shortcut and say "k tap my fetchland for an forest and play scute mob", to which you have to reply "nope gotta back up the game but thanks for telling me you have a scute mob!".
Its bad for the game either way.
If Stifle did that, that is a GOOD thing. In the first instance, it keeps people from keeping piss poor hands that apparently depend on having ONE fetchland in hand. If that's the case, Stifle is not the problem.
In the second scenario, forcing people to play correctly by the rules is what we call um...a GREAT thing? Yeah. A shortcut is just that, a shortcut. It is NOT mandatory that we have them and having Stifle in the format will make people play properly going forward. Is adding in a second few word sentence like "Pop fetch, stifle?" really that problematic? If it is, I am speechless.
It's no different than when Owling Mine was viable (and in the corner case of Runeflare trap now) of people having to say "End of draw step, anything?"
If Stifle did that, that is a GOOD thing. In the first instance, it keeps people from keeping piss poor hands that apparently depend on having ONE fetchland in hand. If that's the case, Stifle is not the problem.
No, it is not. Not in any way shape or form.
Land destruction is land destruction.
Nobody said that hypothetical hand had only one land in it. What if your hand has all 2 CMC spells and two lands? And then you draw nothing but gas for 5 turns when you're stuck with a single island? Good luck with that. As you should know as well as anyone, one mana in your mana pool is a huge difference to any game. And a 1 CMC stone rain effect is wildly detrimental to people having fun playing.
In the second scenario, forcing people to play correctly by the rules is what we call um...a GREAT thing? Yeah. A shortcut is just that, a shortcut. It is NOT mandatory that we have them and having Stifle in the format will make people play properly going forward. Is adding in a second few word sentence like "Pop fetch, stifle?" really that problematic? If it is, I am speechless.
Yes, that is a huge problem.
Imagine wizards prints the card:
Lame Attack: UB
Instant
You may cast Lame Attack even when you do not have priority at any time you damned well desire.
Remove all mana from target player's mana pool. Then name a card. That player reveals his hand. If that card is in that hand, that player discards his hand.
Besides being broken as hell, whats the problem here? Its that every time your opponent tried to cast a spell, you'd throw a word in edgewise, and say "you can't do that!!!!" and then know the name of the spell he has, and name it, and make him discard 100% of the time.
Wizards intentionally designed cards like Orim's Chant and Silence to artfully avoid this problem- players cast these at the beginning of the turn before their opponent has cast anything, and cannot use it to counter a spell that player has already revealed and "played", shortcutting or not- by the way the stack functions and priority, Silence cast after your spell does nothing, and you don't get a chance to interrupt it.
This is, in many ways, why "Mana Effects" are offlimits to players. Tapping your lands for mana does not use the stack, and it could if the game really really wanted it to, but it would make it extraordinarily tedious. The "shortcutting" in this case is already built in.
And when players use fetchlands, they are playing from a part of the game- mana producing lands- that they assume covers this same "protection of the shortcut". When you start introducing spells that addle with these mana-esque abilities, you create a whole new hurdle of hesitation for players.
You need to stop looking at things from whatever ridiculous balance or rules extolling vantage point you are using, and look at it the same way a wizards' game designer looks at it: In terms of game design. It introduces two notable game mechanics, one which players don't find fun (land destruction) and one that interrupts the flow of the game (mana interruption). Game Designers don't use rules as an ends, they use them as a means to an ends. When Wizards is encouraging people to play magic, they are encouraging no one to follow each game exactly to the ruleset elaborating every single stack manipulation and phase of the game. It isn't supposed to take 10 minutes for every turn of magic between two players- and that is what the game is designed around.
These are issues that Wizards is particularly conscious of. Its why you only see effects like Hive Mind, Eye of the Storm, or Warp World at high mana costs and used extremely sparsely- usually once per set at the most. In game design, simplicity rules. Mechanics should by large be very easy for players to understand. Complexity, instead of being a quality of rules, is a product of the rules (emergent gameplay). When you force an overelaborate procedure on the player, you're subtracting from a game, and there had better dang well be a good reason why- cards like Warp World come at about same casting costs as spells that probably win the game right then and there, so its not so big an issue when they present complicated effects; in turn these allow players to build very niche decks with fun mechanics instead of polluting the larger pool of the game.
In each cardspot in a set, they have the opportunity to introduce a huge new variety of mechanics and deep effects. Why introduce a spell like stifle, that will arguably take away more from the game than it adds, when you can add well thought out cards that dosomethingcool?
It isn't supposed to take 10 minutes for every turn of magic between two players- and that is what the game is designed around.
Right, I verbally pass priority in some of my two player games, ask if my triggers resolve, and ask when blocks are final versus non-final. I will also tell my opponent when I am proceeding to combat, what colors I am tapping my lands for even when it is painfully obvious, and other such stuff. It doesn't affect my games at all. All I am doing is following the rules. If someone doesn't want to follow the rules, then they shouldn't be playing in a tournament. Instead, they should be playing at a kitchen table where their opponents have instituted house rules that Stifle is banned because it is too good. There, even if stifle is not banned, they should be fine with reshuffling their deck, because they won't get a warning or anything for it. Then again, those kitchen table players most likely aren't playing with fetches anyway, so what do they care about a card that owns them? I think that fetches should be fine, because good players will adapt their game to the card and bad players shouldn't be playing the card much anyway, so there really won't be much of a problem.
That said, I would really like to see a reprint of stifle in ROE. It seems like the perfect time to bring back an old favorite.
A card like stifle is interesting in the current environment (block at least, I don't play standard).
It has many uses:
1. Fetchlands
2. Journey to Nowhere - Stifle can either prevent your opponents Journey from removing your creature, or can prevent your opponents creature from coming back if your Journey is removed.
3. Khalni Heart Expedition - Stop them from finding their lands, great against Valukut decks.
4. Gatekeeper of Malakir - Keep your creature
5. Equip disruption - With Kor Duelist running around, this could prevent 5 damage on an early turn if you stop a Machete with it.
6. Sphinx of Lost Truths - Stop your opponent from drawing 3 cards when this comes into play.
And that's just off the top of my head.
The argument that it will frustrate players who will just assume that their fetchlands are going to go off and cast their spell before they even find their land is laughable. Learning that your opponent can counter your stuff is part of how you learn to play the game, and there are much more complicated plays out there right now anyways.
Did you know:
If you cast Journey to Nowhere, stack the trigger and then cast Into the Roil on your Journey, your Journey comes back to your hand, and your opponents creature is exiled never to return.
It's a strange nuanced play that the best players will know about, but newbies who don't understand it get angry about when you do it to them.
Understanding your cards is only half the game. You have to understand your opponents cards too if you want to play the game.
You're just wrong. Is FlashfreezeCancel? The word is "conditional". Surging Chaos said it first.
If you play Standard and you run a deck full of fetchlands, you made a metagame decision. If Stifle was in the Standard meta, you might have made a different decision. If you drop a fetchland on turn 1 and it gets Stifled, maybe that's an indication that you should construct your deck differently or up your game a little bit.
I don't know where you're pulling this "game designer" argument from. There are a hundred other design and development factors you are conveniently ignoring in order to trump up some absolutely loopy nonsense about Stifled fetchlands leading to 10-minute turns, like Stifle was the only instant spell in the history of Magic to use the stack.
Again, Stifle is fine. It would make players think twice before including a costly fetchland mana base, a decision-making process that can only be a good thing for the game, IMO.
wow clan_iraq, you sir fail. Not only do you not know what conditional means but as guesswork said, your arguing a design by ignoring other design elements. Stifle would be an awsome tool in standard/extendd and I personnally hope it is reprinted in a similer way/shap/form.
"Crovax Connections" does sound like a friendly corner store run by your local Ascendant Lord
I bet we have a case of Jon Finkel sleeping with the girl, then never calling her again and she going bat #%^% crazy and writing this article case closed.
First PTQ top 8 6/13/09(1st) Second PTQ top 8 10/7/09(5th) Second at national Qualifier 5/15/10
Third PTQ top 8 2/12/11 (2nd)
Second at Alberta 2011's
Fourth PTQ top 8 3/17/12(8th)
GP Vancouver 2012 (18th)
No, it will not happen and I will explain to you why in one word:
Cheap Land Destruction
Quite the single word you have there.
However, I don't think Stifle will be reprinted. It just wouldn't feel right.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DCI Level 2 Judge
Modern: GRB Jund BRG RBU Grixis Delver UBR Legacy: W Death & Taxes W GRB Punishing Jund BRG GUR Canadian Threshold RUG Commander: RUG Maelstrom Wanderer GUR
No, it is not. Not in any way shape or form.
Land destruction is land destruction.
Nobody said that hypothetical hand had only one land in it. What if your hand has all 2 CMC spells and two lands? And then you draw nothing but gas for 5 turns when you're stuck with a single island? Good luck with that. As you should know as well as anyone, one mana in your mana pool is a huge difference to any game. And a 1 CMC stone rain effect is wildly detrimental to people having fun playing.
Yes, that is a huge problem.
Imagine wizards prints the card:
Lame Attack: UB
Instant
You may cast Lame Attack even when you do not have priority at any time you damned well desire.
Remove all mana from target player's mana pool. Then name a card. That player reveals his hand. If that card is in that hand, that player discards his hand.
Besides being broken as hell, whats the problem here? Its that every time your opponent tried to cast a spell, you'd throw a word in edgewise, and say "you can't do that!!!!" and then know the name of the spell he has, and name it, and make him discard 100% of the time.
Wizards intentionally designed cards like Orim's Chant and Silence to artfully avoid this problem- players cast these at the beginning of the turn before their opponent has cast anything, and cannot use it to counter a spell that player has already revealed and "played", shortcutting or not- by the way the stack functions and priority, Silence cast after your spell does nothing, and you don't get a chance to interrupt it.
This is, in many ways, why "Mana Effects" are offlimits to players. Tapping your lands for mana does not use the stack, and it could if the game really really wanted it to, but it would make it extraordinarily tedious. The "shortcutting" in this case is already built in.
And when players use fetchlands, they are playing from a part of the game- mana producing lands- that they assume covers this same "protection of the shortcut". When you start introducing spells that addle with these mana-esque abilities, you create a whole new hurdle of hesitation for players.
You need to stop looking at things from whatever ridiculous balance or rules extolling vantage point you are using, and look at it the same way a wizards' game designer looks at it: In terms of game design. It introduces two notable game mechanics, one which players don't find fun (land destruction) and one that interrupts the flow of the game (mana interruption). Game Designers don't use rules as an ends, they use them as a means to an ends. When Wizards is encouraging people to play magic, they are encouraging no one to follow each game exactly to the ruleset elaborating every single stack manipulation and phase of the game. It isn't supposed to take 10 minutes for every turn of magic between two players- and that is what the game is designed around.
These are issues that Wizards is particularly conscious of. Its why you only see effects like Hive Mind, Eye of the Storm, or Warp World at high mana costs and used extremely sparsely- usually once per set at the most. In game design, simplicity rules. Mechanics should by large be very easy for players to understand. Complexity, instead of being a quality of rules, is a product of the rules (emergent gameplay). When you force an overelaborate procedure on the player, you're subtracting from a game, and there had better dang well be a good reason why- cards like Warp World come at about same casting costs as spells that probably win the game right then and there, so its not so big an issue when they present complicated effects; in turn these allow players to build very niche decks with fun mechanics instead of polluting the larger pool of the game.
In each cardspot in a set, they have the opportunity to introduce a huge new variety of mechanics and deep effects. Why introduce a spell like stifle, that will arguably take away more from the game than it adds, when you can add well thought out cards that dosomethingcool?
I don't like the fact that you are coddling bad play mistakes. you say you are a card designer? if that's the case then maybe you should look at what's healthy for the game and not how sad you are when someone stifles your fetch. stifle coming back would cause meta's to be different in regards to people not wanting to take the chance to be stifled; they would be less reliant on fetch's if it were such a problem, and if it is your land may as well have read, "sac this land, target player discards stifle and taps for U".
making a card up just to prove a point that isn't even relevent only lessens your credibility. If you have a problem with a card from a design perspective, simply state your facts and move on.
I don't know and kind of doubt Stifle would be reprinted because it had interesting effects on the meta previously. the fetchlands argument is something to look at but doesn't shout un-printable.
If you have a problem with a card from a design perspective, simply state your facts and move on.
I'm not the one who decided the reasons behind it (Land Destruction being off limits), I'm merely explaining to people why this aspect of play, and in particular stifle does not come back. I'm not here to make an argument for or against, I'm just explaining something that Wizards already elaborated
If you want exact quotes:
R&D has a strange relationship with land destruction. We want it to exist because it adds interesting elements to gameplay, but experience has shown us that land destruction-themed decks piss off the majority of our players. So, we reached a happy compromise. We'll keep doing land destruction but we rein it in so the deck exists but mostly in a non-tournament viable form. Pillage was a cool card but having a second Stone Rain for three pushed land destruction harder than we liked. Demolish is simply a slightly weaker Pillage.
As an example, R&D quickly found that land destruction was very unfun if it could be used to keep the opponent from ever being able to do anything. This has led to R&D making the choice to print the majority of land destruction at a lower power level to keep those kinds of decks generally out of the tournament environment.
In an environment loaded with fetchlands, a card that would predominately equate to "U: Destroy target nonbasic land" is simply not going to exist. Wizards does not print cheap land destruction that significantly affects the metagame anymore- much less outside of Red's color pie. And thats exactly what Stifle would be.
If R&D decides to move the next few blocks away from Fetchlands, and use different kinds of nonbasics as a backbone of the mana base, then Stifle could easily see a reprint. But Zendikar just introduced the last cycle of Fetches. It will be a while before they rotate out.
Game Designers do not simply pick ideas out of a hat and throw them into release without any thought as to what they do. In terms of MTG, this is why elements like the Color Pie, "Power Level" and player polling exist, to name a few.
Definitely, yes. Do you remember when we get stifle last time? Yes, when we have morph, old fetches, storm, kicker, etc. Now we have fetches, cascade, kicker and probably morph in Roe. We will get spells that do something when they are cast (Like Eldrazi, with triggered abilities).
And there is a chance that we get new modular/sunburst/contraption ;P etc. mechanic in next block. (mirrodin 2.0)
Eldrazi are old, so maybe they will return with some old spells?
Or do you think that stifle is too good? Overpowered? Maybe we can get some kind of trickbind? Or maybe it's a bad idea? what do you think?
Decks:
EDH: :symbw::symuw::symub:Merieke Ri Berit:symbw::symuw::symub:
Archenemy EDH: Reaper king
(")(")
GONZO
Genius, fast, and long eared.
Cheap Land Destruction
Wizards won't go near LD with a 10 foot pole these days (though they do it with a 20 foot pole), and stifle is a 1 CMC spell that kills an enemy fetchland. As long as fetches exist, stifle will not.
Also, don't forget Landfall as another reason Stifle should be reprinted.
Pauper Cube
I cube, I play EDH, and I can't afford Legacy. The other formats can suck it.
They already did this with Trickbind.
As far as the cheap land destruction argument goes remember that Stifle was in the same block as the original fetchlands. Besides, the only place where Stifle is used in that way, and quite often not even there anymore, is Legacy. In extended it was used primarily against the numerous storm decks and little else, not as a fetch impediment.
Many thanks to HotP Studios. Special thanks to DNC for this great sig.
The main reason it fetches the price it does is b/c of the existence of Stiflenought.dec in Legacy. But yeah, it has other uses there, obv.
I'm not saying now is the time to reprint it, but they ought to reprint it at some point, yes.
Trickbind wouldn't work b/c of Split Second, which was a block-specific mechanic. (God I hope so, anyway..I don't miss Split Second at all...such a nasty mechanic.)
I'd like to see it again..I actually sold mine not too long ago. (I needed the $ :()
Fully-powered 600-Card "Dream Cube" https://cubecobra.com/cube/list/dreamcube
450-Card "Artificer's Cube" https://cubecobra.com/cube/list/artificer
Cubing in Indianapolis...send me a PM!!
I don't play the game.
I'm a designer.
Wizards has specifically decided that Land Destruction is effectively offlimits (ie, can be printed but only so atrociously underpowered/inefficient that nobody will use it). They did this because player polling and playtesting found that nothing was less liked by players than land destruction- not being able to play your spells because of lack of land is much, much, much less fun for the victim than the LD player has fun- the weight of the "fun" people lose from LD existing is much more than the minority of people who enjoyed LD decks.
Stifle won't exist because its a 1 Mana Cost spell that effectively destroys a single land- and not only that, its in the wrong part of the color pie for that effect. Stifle could exist with a function that targets only non-land abilities, but don't hold your breath there either
On a different note, I'd be all for a more expensive version with cycling or cantrip. Or what about something like this:
MegaCounter 2UU
Instant
Counter target spell.
Cycling 2U
When you cycle ~, you mat counter target activated or triggered ability.
are you sure? There are only 4 fetches in 90% competitive decks. Mono black vampires uses 6, and mono G elves uses 6, but hey, they are MONOCOLORED, they don't need them to work.
Ok, maybe WR Landfall Boros need more, but it's the only one.
Besides, land destruction is only side effect of this card. Not main, like in legacy, where we counter fetch ability.
Tectonic edge is land destruction.
Stifle is not Land destruction. We have Pithing needle, if someone want destroy fetchlands.
Decks:
EDH: :symbw::symuw::symub:Merieke Ri Berit:symbw::symuw::symub:
Archenemy EDH: Reaper king
(")(")
GONZO
Genius, fast, and long eared.
QFT.
I ask this every time it comes up, and I'll ask it again: why should WotC coddle fetchland players?
Go ahead and print Stifle. Print other fetchland hosers. If the hate gets too hot, run basics. Nobody's saying WotC should print "destroy target land" at 1 CMC.
In the past few sets/blocks/etc, fetchlands have provided a huge chunk of the mana base, and they won't be rotating out any time soon. While current decks in a metagame that will change the second RotE is out might use fewer fetchlands, stifle would both reduce the viable mana base for decks (they'd be more concerned about running fetches) and reduce the design space for wizards (they'd be more concerned about making fetchl-like mechanics).
The reality is, you have to ask yourself how stifle is going to get used. If it would end up being used primarily in decks simply to nuke lands that your opponents are playing, than it is effectively land destruction. If 50%+ of stifle usages are targeting fetchlands, then thats a 1 CMC land destruction instant in blue. In terms of scope; its huge. A graveyard hoser, while it might seem ridiculous, isn't a big problem because the niche it targets is small; wizards can afford to make it above the curve. Land Hosing, that is, LD, is universal to all decks (ok, not manaless dredge or whatever bizarre charbelcher).
Look at the primary uses of Stifle. Its going to be used to
A) Kill fetchlands
B) Combo cheat
C) Counter keywords
(nevermind the set legality, those are just examples of the mechanics)
But how are they weighted? If a typical game goes like this:
1: "Island, go"
2: "Fetchland, pop"
-wait, I stifle
"Oh, well gg." *scoop*
It is a scenario that plays out more predominately than combo tricks or countering those splashy effects. It changes stifle from a 1 mana cost counterspell for half of that bloodbraid elf into a 1 mana cost stone rain for that fetchland. And believe me, there is a HUGE difference; its a more powerful effect, more costly effect, and out of color effect, and more gamebreaking on turn 1 than later, as opposed to counterspelling.
Pithing Needle falls into a different school of thought. Frankly, I think that if Wizards went back, they would rewrite it as "Name a Non-Land Card", for the exact same reasons. But even as it exists, it is a lesser problem; it does not 'destroy' fetchlands, it merely paralyzes them, and decks can even answer it right back; you maelstrom pulse it or just naturalize it and your fetchlands are back in business.
I think if you asked them, they'd acknowledge that having a 1 mana artifact that shuts off mana bases is already problem enough. They've made it clear enough their position on LD effects, however
edit: Oh yeah, forgot to mention. The other problem with Stifle as a land destruction spell against fetchlands isn't just the balance concern of players having fun but also the "memory" or "mistake" issue. Players rarely go through the whole motion of stacking up a fetchland before using its ability. You'll have tons and tons of games where someone has already started searching their library when you say "wait but I'm stifling your fetch!" or games where they just do a shortcut and say "k tap my fetchland for an forest and play scute mob", to which you have to reply "nope gotta back up the game but thanks for telling me you have a scute mob!".
Its bad for the game either way.
Now, if we wanted a stifle just for its combo effects, why not print a version that can't target lands?
If Stifle did that, that is a GOOD thing. In the first instance, it keeps people from keeping piss poor hands that apparently depend on having ONE fetchland in hand. If that's the case, Stifle is not the problem.
In the second scenario, forcing people to play correctly by the rules is what we call um...a GREAT thing? Yeah. A shortcut is just that, a shortcut. It is NOT mandatory that we have them and having Stifle in the format will make people play properly going forward. Is adding in a second few word sentence like "Pop fetch, stifle?" really that problematic? If it is, I am speechless.
It's no different than when Owling Mine was viable (and in the corner case of Runeflare trap now) of people having to say "End of draw step, anything?"
And Squall knows where it's at :).
No, it is not. Not in any way shape or form.
Land destruction is land destruction.
Nobody said that hypothetical hand had only one land in it. What if your hand has all 2 CMC spells and two lands? And then you draw nothing but gas for 5 turns when you're stuck with a single island? Good luck with that. As you should know as well as anyone, one mana in your mana pool is a huge difference to any game. And a 1 CMC stone rain effect is wildly detrimental to people having fun playing.
Yes, that is a huge problem.
Imagine wizards prints the card:
Lame Attack: UB
Instant
You may cast Lame Attack even when you do not have priority at any time you damned well desire.
Remove all mana from target player's mana pool. Then name a card. That player reveals his hand. If that card is in that hand, that player discards his hand.
Besides being broken as hell, whats the problem here? Its that every time your opponent tried to cast a spell, you'd throw a word in edgewise, and say "you can't do that!!!!" and then know the name of the spell he has, and name it, and make him discard 100% of the time.
Wizards intentionally designed cards like Orim's Chant and Silence to artfully avoid this problem- players cast these at the beginning of the turn before their opponent has cast anything, and cannot use it to counter a spell that player has already revealed and "played", shortcutting or not- by the way the stack functions and priority, Silence cast after your spell does nothing, and you don't get a chance to interrupt it.
This is, in many ways, why "Mana Effects" are offlimits to players. Tapping your lands for mana does not use the stack, and it could if the game really really wanted it to, but it would make it extraordinarily tedious. The "shortcutting" in this case is already built in.
And when players use fetchlands, they are playing from a part of the game- mana producing lands- that they assume covers this same "protection of the shortcut". When you start introducing spells that addle with these mana-esque abilities, you create a whole new hurdle of hesitation for players.
You need to stop looking at things from whatever ridiculous balance or rules extolling vantage point you are using, and look at it the same way a wizards' game designer looks at it: In terms of game design. It introduces two notable game mechanics, one which players don't find fun (land destruction) and one that interrupts the flow of the game (mana interruption). Game Designers don't use rules as an ends, they use them as a means to an ends. When Wizards is encouraging people to play magic, they are encouraging no one to follow each game exactly to the ruleset elaborating every single stack manipulation and phase of the game. It isn't supposed to take 10 minutes for every turn of magic between two players- and that is what the game is designed around.
These are issues that Wizards is particularly conscious of. Its why you only see effects like Hive Mind, Eye of the Storm, or Warp World at high mana costs and used extremely sparsely- usually once per set at the most. In game design, simplicity rules. Mechanics should by large be very easy for players to understand. Complexity, instead of being a quality of rules, is a product of the rules (emergent gameplay). When you force an overelaborate procedure on the player, you're subtracting from a game, and there had better dang well be a good reason why- cards like Warp World come at about same casting costs as spells that probably win the game right then and there, so its not so big an issue when they present complicated effects; in turn these allow players to build very niche decks with fun mechanics instead of polluting the larger pool of the game.
In each cardspot in a set, they have the opportunity to introduce a huge new variety of mechanics and deep effects. Why introduce a spell like stifle, that will arguably take away more from the game than it adds, when you can add well thought out cards that do something cool?
Right, I verbally pass priority in some of my two player games, ask if my triggers resolve, and ask when blocks are final versus non-final. I will also tell my opponent when I am proceeding to combat, what colors I am tapping my lands for even when it is painfully obvious, and other such stuff. It doesn't affect my games at all. All I am doing is following the rules. If someone doesn't want to follow the rules, then they shouldn't be playing in a tournament. Instead, they should be playing at a kitchen table where their opponents have instituted house rules that Stifle is banned because it is too good. There, even if stifle is not banned, they should be fine with reshuffling their deck, because they won't get a warning or anything for it. Then again, those kitchen table players most likely aren't playing with fetches anyway, so what do they care about a card that owns them? I think that fetches should be fine, because good players will adapt their game to the card and bad players shouldn't be playing the card much anyway, so there really won't be much of a problem.
That said, I would really like to see a reprint of stifle in ROE. It seems like the perfect time to bring back an old favorite.
It has many uses:
1. Fetchlands
2. Journey to Nowhere - Stifle can either prevent your opponents Journey from removing your creature, or can prevent your opponents creature from coming back if your Journey is removed.
3. Khalni Heart Expedition - Stop them from finding their lands, great against Valukut decks.
4. Gatekeeper of Malakir - Keep your creature
5. Equip disruption - With Kor Duelist running around, this could prevent 5 damage on an early turn if you stop a Machete with it.
6. Sphinx of Lost Truths - Stop your opponent from drawing 3 cards when this comes into play.
And that's just off the top of my head.
The argument that it will frustrate players who will just assume that their fetchlands are going to go off and cast their spell before they even find their land is laughable. Learning that your opponent can counter your stuff is part of how you learn to play the game, and there are much more complicated plays out there right now anyways.
Did you know:
If you cast Journey to Nowhere, stack the trigger and then cast Into the Roil on your Journey, your Journey comes back to your hand, and your opponents creature is exiled never to return.
It's a strange nuanced play that the best players will know about, but newbies who don't understand it get angry about when you do it to them.
Understanding your cards is only half the game. You have to understand your opponents cards too if you want to play the game.
[[b]B]DCI Level 2 Judge[/B][/b]You're just wrong. Is Flashfreeze Cancel? The word is "conditional". Surging Chaos said it first.
If you play Standard and you run a deck full of fetchlands, you made a metagame decision. If Stifle was in the Standard meta, you might have made a different decision. If you drop a fetchland on turn 1 and it gets Stifled, maybe that's an indication that you should construct your deck differently or up your game a little bit.
I don't know where you're pulling this "game designer" argument from. There are a hundred other design and development factors you are conveniently ignoring in order to trump up some absolutely loopy nonsense about Stifled fetchlands leading to 10-minute turns, like Stifle was the only instant spell in the history of Magic to use the stack.
Again, Stifle is fine. It would make players think twice before including a costly fetchland mana base, a decision-making process that can only be a good thing for the game, IMO.
First PTQ top 8 6/13/09(1st)
Second PTQ top 8 10/7/09(5th)
Second at national Qualifier 5/15/10
Third PTQ top 8 2/12/11 (2nd)
Second at Alberta 2011's
Fourth PTQ top 8 3/17/12(8th)
GP Vancouver 2012 (18th)
Stifle itself might be a little too good, but making one that is a bit worse that shows off the blocks keywords seems like a better idea.
Gen. George S Patton, Jr
Quite the single word you have there.
However, I don't think Stifle will be reprinted. It just wouldn't feel right.
Modern:
GRB Jund BRG
RBU Grixis Delver UBR
Legacy:
W Death & Taxes W
GRB Punishing Jund BRG
GUR Canadian Threshold RUG
Commander:
RUG Maelstrom Wanderer GUR
I don't like the fact that you are coddling bad play mistakes. you say you are a card designer? if that's the case then maybe you should look at what's healthy for the game and not how sad you are when someone stifles your fetch. stifle coming back would cause meta's to be different in regards to people not wanting to take the chance to be stifled; they would be less reliant on fetch's if it were such a problem, and if it is your land may as well have read, "sac this land, target player discards stifle and taps for U".
making a card up just to prove a point that isn't even relevent only lessens your credibility. If you have a problem with a card from a design perspective, simply state your facts and move on.
I don't know and kind of doubt Stifle would be reprinted because it had interesting effects on the meta previously. the fetchlands argument is something to look at but doesn't shout un-printable.
I'm not the one who decided the reasons behind it (Land Destruction being off limits), I'm merely explaining to people why this aspect of play, and in particular stifle does not come back. I'm not here to make an argument for or against, I'm just explaining something that Wizards already elaborated
If you want exact quotes:
In an environment loaded with fetchlands, a card that would predominately equate to "U: Destroy target nonbasic land" is simply not going to exist. Wizards does not print cheap land destruction that significantly affects the metagame anymore- much less outside of Red's color pie. And thats exactly what Stifle would be.
If R&D decides to move the next few blocks away from Fetchlands, and use different kinds of nonbasics as a backbone of the mana base, then Stifle could easily see a reprint. But Zendikar just introduced the last cycle of Fetches. It will be a while before they rotate out.
Game Designers do not simply pick ideas out of a hat and throw them into release without any thought as to what they do. In terms of MTG, this is why elements like the Color Pie, "Power Level" and player polling exist, to name a few.
Durr, you caught me