I want to run it because there are lots of permants that he would have to sac meaning he has to loose a lot of life to counter act the potential loss of permanants.
I don't want to run it because the life total we start with is very high.
I want to run it because its hilarious.
I dont want to run it because its a lol card.
I want to run it for 1v1
I dont for muliplayer, i want a sweeper.
Ehh...i cant decide. What are your thoughts?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Given up magic because a)its a waste of money b)it sucks the joy out of life c)im doing more interesting things than tapping pieces of plastic that have no intrinsic value.
I encourage you to do the same. Instead of FNM try Friday Night Something Spontaneous. Instead of thousands of hours and dollars on plastic imagine it with a significant other or friends sharing something meaningful. I randomly typed a new password, so bon voyage itches i encourage you to follow suit! Cheers
Doesn't seem worth it to me, but I have next to no experience with EDH. It just doesn't seem that great...unless I am misreading the card they could just choose like 2, or 1, or 0 for that matter, and it would be null and void. Especially if they know what the effect does.
Doesn't seem worth it to me, but I have next to no experience with EDH. It just doesn't seem that great...unless I am misreading the card they could just choose like 2, or 1, or 0 for that matter, and it would be null and void. Especially if they know what the effect does.
Err.... You don't have to be an EDH player to see what it does. Basically, if your opponent chooses a high number -- say 20 -- you may choose to have your opponents lose 20 life or sacrifice all but 20 permanents. If your opponent chooses a low number -- say 1 -- you may choose to have your opponent lose 1 life or sacrifice all but 1 permanent. From a flavour perspective, you are basically asking your opponent how he/she wishes to damn himself / herself -- lose N life or sacrifice all but N permanents.
In your scenario, if they choose 2, you may choose to have your opponents sacrifice all but two permaments. That got to hurt.
Err.... You don't have to be an EDH player to see what it does. Basically, if your opponent chooses a high number -- say 20 -- you may choose to have your opponents lose 20 life or sacrifice all but 20 permanents. If your opponent chooses a low number -- say 1 -- you may choose to have your opponent lose 1 life or sacrifice all but 1 permanent. From a flavour perspective, you are basically asking your opponent how he/she wishes to damn himself / herself -- lose N life or sacrifice all but N permanents.
In your scenario, if they choose 2, you may choose to have your opponents sacrifice all but two permaments. That got to hurt.
So on balance would you run it? Does it have merit in itself? I can see lots of permants on the table so the health loss should be huge.
Its like $1 lol so im going to get it but im seeing if anyone has considered it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Given up magic because a)its a waste of money b)it sucks the joy out of life c)im doing more interesting things than tapping pieces of plastic that have no intrinsic value.
I encourage you to do the same. Instead of FNM try Friday Night Something Spontaneous. Instead of thousands of hours and dollars on plastic imagine it with a significant other or friends sharing something meaningful. I randomly typed a new password, so bon voyage itches i encourage you to follow suit! Cheers
Err.... You don't have to be an EDH player to see what it does. Basically, if your opponent chooses a high number -- say 20 -- you may choose to have your opponents lose 20 life or sacrifice all but 20 permanents. If your opponent chooses a low number -- say 1 -- you may choose to have your opponent lose 1 life or sacrifice all but 1 permanent. From a flavour perspective, you are basically asking your opponent how he/she wishes to damn himself / herself -- lose N life or sacrifice all but N permanents.
In your scenario, if they choose 2, you may choose to have your opponents sacrifice all but two permaments. That got to hurt.
Yeah I think I misunderstood the card. I guess it seems viable, depending on your deck and such.
Choice of Damnations isn't too amazing in EDH if someone knows what the card exactly does. It's one of those spells with a reduced effectiveness in the format due to 40 life totals. If your opponent has a well-developed position (let's say 9 permanents of some kind) and you target them with CoD, they'll lose 9 life at best. Spending 6 mana to make a single person lose a decent chunk of life is something that most EDH decks wouldn't be too thrilled to play with. In 1v1 play, Choice of Damnations usually is a waste of 6 mana when you could be doing something else, like setting up a prison lock or comboing out to win.
The card is more for finishing off opponents really late in the game when their life totals are quite low and they have a lot of stuff out.
I had this discussion with a friend of mine at college. The problem is Unless your opponent has low life already he's just going to pick the number of permanents he needs to keep to win any way and not worry about how much life you make him loose. For six mana you ought to be playing sorin markov or some gamewinning bomb not a card that will never acomplish exactly what you want... Its like browbeat. you will never draw cards when you need to draw cards and you will never deal damage when you need to deal damage...
However, from a strategic perspective, when you use it, you'd either be winning already (which make it a win-more card) or the opponent would have been in a high enough life total to make the card not nearly as powerful. Still, I can see it fitting in in big multiplayer games (Hint: Get the insane token guy ;))
Are we looking to be super competitive here? If so there are better cards. However, if you are playing EDH just for fun then by all means play it. A friend of mine plays it in his deck and it's hilarious when he drops it late game.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
EDH
GB Nath of the Gilt-Leaf BG GURWB Child of Alara BWRUG
"Target player loses life equal to the number of permanents he/she controls. If that's too much life for that player, they can probably even get away with losing a few less. Additionally, that player may sacrifice 1/3-2/3 of their permanents to prevent this effect."
In fact, this card is pretty much worse compared to "Target player loses life equal to the number of permanents he/she controls." Remember, if you give your opponent a choice, they're going to pick whatever's better for them.
I think it's hilarious; a solid way for a black-based control deck to put a player out of the game towards the end.
The thing you have to keep in mind is that it's not going to get cast early on, when a player can necessarily afford to pay life equal to the number of permanents they control. What about later in the game, when players have ~15 permanents and ~20 life remaining. What do you pick there? You either choose a low number and get your board obliterated, or you choose a high number and get killed by the next player.
It's something that's definitely no good in constructed, but it's good for shutting down a player that's pulling ahead in multiplayer. You either put them in kill range or destroy their board. Either option seems pretty good. You just need to hold the card until either option is bad for the opponent.
RE: the comparison to browbeat:
I think browbeat is fine in multiplayer. You could probably politic your way into getting someone to let you draw three, or you could just point it at the player with the lowest life total, who may have to think about whether or not they want to lose 5 life. I've also cubed with browbeat before, and it's been pretty stellar. To be fair, I drafted a control deck whose win condition was browbeating the opponent repeatedly.
The trick with both of them is that you can't just throw them out there when there's an obvious choice that's better for the opponent. Obviously, when you browbeat/choice someone at a high life total, they'll just eat the damage. At extremely low life totals, they'll let you have cards/eat their boards. What about the middle ground?
If your opponent is at 7 and you browbeat them, what do they do? 2 is a pretty low number, and is well within lightning bolt range. Do you have a burn spell? Will you draw 7 points of burn in the next 3 cards? Can they stabilize next turn in spite of you drawing 3? Most people are prepared to say that they'd be willing to pay somewhere between 1 and 4 life for each card that THEY would like to draw. It's a little harder to evaluate how much life your opponent's cards are worth.
This is a terrible card for EDH for the simple reason that the correct choice is almost always N = the number of permanents you control. (or maybe one or two less)
So you always end up burning them, which is nigh-irrelevant in EDH. The only time this is good is if they're about to lose, in which case this is just a win-more card and Banefire, Corrupt, or Drain Life would be better.
This card is also bad because it only hits one player. Even if you play a lot of 1v1, this card costs too much for that faster format.
Aside from the fact that it's kind of a silly card, I can think of no reason to run it.
There are better cards, it can't be denied. If you're being purely utilitarian, there are better choices for damage and better choices for wrecking board position. And it's better in multiplayer than in 1-on-1. But here's what resonates with me:
It is a hilarious card. As other people have said, played late game, it hurts. Now, sure, it may hurt a little less than some other cards. But if you've got an opponent at 10 life with 12 permanents, sure you could Corrupt them to death, or Plague Wind all their beaters or something. But Choice of Damnations beats both in psychological toil. Your force your opponent to make hard choices about their board position, card by card. Do they need all their mana sources, can they live without such and such creature? When they finally come back with a number, you choose whether they sac or lose life. Anguish!
It's a blast to play late game. This isn't highlander Vintage with 40 life and a general, it's EDH. Run it because it's hilarious.
Back in the old kamigawa days, I played it during a tournament, told my opponent to pick a number, he glossed over it and said 6000. Guess who learnt to read cards a bit more carefully from that point onwards.
I want to run it because there are lots of permants that he would have to sac meaning he has to loose a lot of life to counter act the potential loss of permanants.
I don't want to run it because the life total we start with is very high.
I want to run it because its hilarious.
I dont want to run it because its a lol card.
I want to run it for 1v1
I dont for muliplayer, i want a sweeper.
Ehh...i cant decide. What are your thoughts?
I encourage you to do the same. Instead of FNM try Friday Night Something Spontaneous. Instead of thousands of hours and dollars on plastic imagine it with a significant other or friends sharing something meaningful. I randomly typed a new password, so bon voyage itches i encourage you to follow suit! Cheers
Err.... You don't have to be an EDH player to see what it does. Basically, if your opponent chooses a high number -- say 20 -- you may choose to have your opponents lose 20 life or sacrifice all but 20 permanents. If your opponent chooses a low number -- say 1 -- you may choose to have your opponent lose 1 life or sacrifice all but 1 permanent. From a flavour perspective, you are basically asking your opponent how he/she wishes to damn himself / herself -- lose N life or sacrifice all but N permanents.
In your scenario, if they choose 2, you may choose to have your opponents sacrifice all but two permaments. That got to hurt.
So on balance would you run it? Does it have merit in itself? I can see lots of permants on the table so the health loss should be huge.
Its like $1 lol so im going to get it but im seeing if anyone has considered it.
I encourage you to do the same. Instead of FNM try Friday Night Something Spontaneous. Instead of thousands of hours and dollars on plastic imagine it with a significant other or friends sharing something meaningful. I randomly typed a new password, so bon voyage itches i encourage you to follow suit! Cheers
Yeah I think I misunderstood the card. I guess it seems viable, depending on your deck and such.
The card is more for finishing off opponents really late in the game when their life totals are quite low and they have a lot of stuff out.
Wort/ Jor Kadeen/ Rasputin/BWG Karador/ Rakdos/ Edric/ Dralnu/ BBMikaeus
Mirror of Fate collection counter 98
However, from a strategic perspective, when you use it, you'd either be winning already (which make it a win-more card) or the opponent would have been in a high enough life total to make the card not nearly as powerful. Still, I can see it fitting in in big multiplayer games (Hint: Get the insane token guy ;))
GB Nath of the Gilt-Leaf BG
GURWB Child of Alara BWRUG
Standard
RBBlood BuildBR
"Target player loses life equal to the number of permanents he/she controls. If that's too much life for that player, they can probably even get away with losing a few less. Additionally, that player may sacrifice 1/3-2/3 of their permanents to prevent this effect."
In fact, this card is pretty much worse compared to "Target player loses life equal to the number of permanents he/she controls." Remember, if you give your opponent a choice, they're going to pick whatever's better for them.
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
The thing you have to keep in mind is that it's not going to get cast early on, when a player can necessarily afford to pay life equal to the number of permanents they control. What about later in the game, when players have ~15 permanents and ~20 life remaining. What do you pick there? You either choose a low number and get your board obliterated, or you choose a high number and get killed by the next player.
It's something that's definitely no good in constructed, but it's good for shutting down a player that's pulling ahead in multiplayer. You either put them in kill range or destroy their board. Either option seems pretty good. You just need to hold the card until either option is bad for the opponent.
RE: the comparison to browbeat:
I think browbeat is fine in multiplayer. You could probably politic your way into getting someone to let you draw three, or you could just point it at the player with the lowest life total, who may have to think about whether or not they want to lose 5 life. I've also cubed with browbeat before, and it's been pretty stellar. To be fair, I drafted a control deck whose win condition was browbeating the opponent repeatedly.
The trick with both of them is that you can't just throw them out there when there's an obvious choice that's better for the opponent. Obviously, when you browbeat/choice someone at a high life total, they'll just eat the damage. At extremely low life totals, they'll let you have cards/eat their boards. What about the middle ground?
If your opponent is at 7 and you browbeat them, what do they do? 2 is a pretty low number, and is well within lightning bolt range. Do you have a burn spell? Will you draw 7 points of burn in the next 3 cards? Can they stabilize next turn in spite of you drawing 3? Most people are prepared to say that they'd be willing to pay somewhere between 1 and 4 life for each card that THEY would like to draw. It's a little harder to evaluate how much life your opponent's cards are worth.
So you always end up burning them, which is nigh-irrelevant in EDH. The only time this is good is if they're about to lose, in which case this is just a win-more card and Banefire, Corrupt, or Drain Life would be better.
This card is also bad because it only hits one player. Even if you play a lot of 1v1, this card costs too much for that faster format.
Aside from the fact that it's kind of a silly card, I can think of no reason to run it.
It is a hilarious card. As other people have said, played late game, it hurts. Now, sure, it may hurt a little less than some other cards. But if you've got an opponent at 10 life with 12 permanents, sure you could Corrupt them to death, or Plague Wind all their beaters or something. But Choice of Damnations beats both in psychological toil. Your force your opponent to make hard choices about their board position, card by card. Do they need all their mana sources, can they live without such and such creature? When they finally come back with a number, you choose whether they sac or lose life. Anguish!
It's a blast to play late game. This isn't highlander Vintage with 40 life and a general, it's EDH. Run it because it's hilarious.