@bob I won't quote all of that because of how long it was and I don't disagree on a lot of what you are saying but does the fact that its overly centralizing as the strongest of the effects combined with being the absolute most tutorable option being a green creature change this? It does overly centralize any sort of swarm style of green deck who might consider any mass pump effect in that its 2-3x stronger than essentially every other mass pump effect out there. Most of the really annoying over centralizing game enders are far less accessible and or need to be run in greater numbers to reliably find.
Most of the options for interaction are extremely reactive as well rather than proactive strategies too which I find extremely unfortunate.
That's not what overly centralizing means, so no. Overly centralizing does not mean that a card is the best option for what it does and thus decks that want the effect will make it their first choice. Overly centralizing means that the card has a centralizing effect on the format, that decks that have access to it will most likely run it and all decks will include cards specifically to hose it or take advantage of it. Prophet it a great example, because if you were UG you were probably running it, and people where running Bribery, Praetors grasp, and others specifically to grab it out of a UG opponents library, and control magic effects to steal it, and reanimation spells to grab it out of opponents graveyards. It was a card that people would fight over. Craterhoof is most assuredly not centralizing. If it hits and doesn't kill the table, it isn't fought over. People don't run bribery et al to grab it. It isnt the automatic target for reanimation. Sure, people will grab it with bribery or reanimation if they are already running these cards AND their board supports it, but unlike prophet or prime time or sylvan primordial there are plenty of times where a hoof will be sitting there in a yard and you'll have a reanimation spell in hand and not even consider wasting it on the hoof.
Being the best at what it does is not a reason to ban it. It doesn't create undesirable game states. It is not ubiquitous enough. Its debatable whether it's even problematic in the games it shows up in (sometimes it can be, but merely ending a game isnt necessarily problematic, and I'd be surprised if most, or even a majority of games ended by hoof were ended in a way I'd consider problematic). There are numerous commonly run answers to this card, including the oft complained about cyclonic rift, which blows it out and IS actually ubiquitous (though I'll consistently argue it's the opposite of problematic and actually helps hold all sorts of things in check).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Meaning of Life: "M-hmm. Well, it's nothing very special. Uh, try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations"
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Whether its blue players countering your spells, red players burning you out, or combo, if you have a problem with an aspect of Magic's gameplay, you can fix it!
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
Overly centralizing does not mean that a card is the best option for what it does and thus decks that want the effect will make it their first choice. Overly centralizing means that the card has a centralizing effect on the format, that decks that have access to it will most likely run it and all decks will include cards specifically to hose it or take advantage of it. Prophet it a great example, because if you were UG you were probably running it, and people where running Bribery, Praetors grasp, and others specifically to grab it out of a UG opponents library, and control magic effects to steal it, and reanimation spells to grab it out of opponents graveyards. It was a card that people would fight over.
This. Primeval Titan was probably the worst offender on this front; as powerful as Prophet is, it's much less impressive when you have no creatures/instants in hand and no mana sinks in play, and so stealing it isn't always profitable for you (although denying it to your opponent can be worth it). But everyone likes getting two extra lands per turn.
I don't even remember the last time I saw a whole table die to Craterhoof. If the opponent has enough creatures to kill everyone, you're doing something wrong, or life totals are low enough that the game was about to end anyway.
We did have a game about half a year ago where the Rhys the Redeemed player had thousands of creatures (thanks to Doubling Season, Parallel Lives, and Seedborn Muse) and tried to end it with a Craterhoof (overkill), yet a simple fog stopped it. Then a Fumigate made for a hilarious board wipe (I gained 3,600+ life).
I originally voted ban on this thread but I'm kinda converting - maybe it's because so many people switched over to ridiculous Paradox Engine nonsense that used to end in hoofdad and an army of mana dorks; so much of that stuff became Selvala or Yisan decks that don't even need hoof to win.
Way back when most creature decks seemed to win with hoof but I honestly have not even seen the card in the last probably 50 games if I had to guess.
edit: Point not being that you should ban PE (which you should) but that with how ridiculously powerful non-combat wins have gotten I think it's fine for combat wins to be strong. They're still a lot weaker overall.
I originally voted ban on this thread but I'm kinda converting - maybe it's because so many people switched over to ridiculous Paradox Engine nonsense that used to end in hoofdad and an army of mana dorks; so much of that stuff became Selvala or Yisan decks that don't even need hoof to win.
Way back when most creature decks seemed to win with hoof but I honestly have not even seen the card in the last probably 50 games if I had to guess.
edit: Point not being that you should ban PE (which you should) but that with how ridiculously powerful non-combat wins have gotten I think it's fine for combat wins to be strong. They're still a lot weaker overall.
This. Hoof gets ran because it's a way for creature decks to win as decisively as non combat decks. The worst I see from Hoof is the Hoof/Avenger combo off of T&N, which is more of an issue with T&N than Hoof.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Meaning of Life: "M-hmm. Well, it's nothing very special. Uh, try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations"
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Whether its blue players countering your spells, red players burning you out, or combo, if you have a problem with an aspect of Magic's gameplay, you can fix it!
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
On the argument that because newer cards cap the P/T increase to your board that it shows how insane Craterhoof is: If we banned every card that is undeniably superior in power to an evolving modern design paradigm, we'd be left with Brawl. And Brawl is dead.
Pathbreaker Ibex is a somewhat recent design though. Who knows, maybe Craterhoof was in the file and was cut by Play Design for being too powerful for Standard.
I think the Ibex is fine, personally. Similar effect but not as over the top as Hoof. Winning with Ibex, or being beat by Ibex, doesn't feel nearly as anticlimactic as winning with ot losing to Hoof, probably because Ibex requires a lot more set-up and can't literally win out of nowhere. If you are playing an opponent who is playing green and you aren't keeping haste enablers off the table, you really have nothing to complain about when you get overrun by Ibex or Thunderfoot Baloth or something like that.
Pathbreaker Ibex is a somewhat recent design though. Who knows, maybe Craterhoof was in the file and was cut by Play Design for being too powerful for Standard.
It is a lot easier to make hoof lethal in standard, a 1v1 20 life format. Its is also harder to cast it, however. The first time around it wasn't an issue, but that was a standard dominated first by caw blade, and later by UW st Traft, two particularly strong tempo decks (that the latter is oft forgotten is a testament to how absurdly dominant the former was). Todays standard, which is much more balanced, might not be able to handle a finisher that strong.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Meaning of Life: "M-hmm. Well, it's nothing very special. Uh, try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations"
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Whether its blue players countering your spells, red players burning you out, or combo, if you have a problem with an aspect of Magic's gameplay, you can fix it!
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
That's not what overly centralizing means, so no. Overly centralizing does not mean that a card is the best option for what it does and thus decks that want the effect will make it their first choice. Overly centralizing means that the card has a centralizing effect on the format, that decks that have access to it will most likely run it and all decks will include cards specifically to hose it or take advantage of it. Prophet it a great example, because if you were UG you were probably running it, and people where running Bribery, Praetors grasp, and others specifically to grab it out of a UG opponents library, and control magic effects to steal it, and reanimation spells to grab it out of opponents graveyards. It was a card that people would fight over. Craterhoof is most assuredly not centralizing. If it hits and doesn't kill the table, it isn't fought over. People don't run bribery et al to grab it. It isnt the automatic target for reanimation. Sure, people will grab it with bribery or reanimation if they are already running these cards AND their board supports it, but unlike prophet or prime time or sylvan primordial there are plenty of times where a hoof will be sitting there in a yard and you'll have a reanimation spell in hand and not even consider wasting it on the hoof.
Being the best at what it does is not a reason to ban it. It doesn't create undesirable game states. It is not ubiquitous enough. Its debatable whether it's even problematic in the games it shows up in (sometimes it can be, but merely ending a game isnt necessarily problematic, and I'd be surprised if most, or even a majority of games ended by hoof were ended in a way I'd consider problematic). There are numerous commonly run answers to this card, including the oft complained about cyclonic rift, which blows it out and IS actually ubiquitous (though I'll consistently argue it's the opposite of problematic and actually helps hold all sorts of things in check).
Its centralizing for the deck playing it, not necessarily everyone else. Because craterhoof is an option to play in that deck it might mean that they include a much heavier tutor focus rather than redundancy in effects because of the discrepancy in power level between craterhoof and the next best overrun effect. In that sense, it is a centralizing effect for these types of decks even though its not centralizing in the way primeval titan was in that it doesn't help everyone in the game the same way.
I originally voted ban on this thread but I'm kinda converting - maybe it's because so many people switched over to ridiculous Paradox Engine nonsense that used to end in hoofdad and an army of mana dorks; so much of that stuff became Selvala or Yisan decks that don't even need hoof to win.
Way back when most creature decks seemed to win with hoof but I honestly have not even seen the card in the last probably 50 games if I had to guess.
edit: Point not being that you should ban PE (which you should) but that with how ridiculously powerful non-combat wins have gotten I think it's fine for combat wins to be strong. They're still a lot weaker overall.
Paradox Engine doesn't pretend to be a fair card though. Its full out as deep as you can go into combo centric which starts to ask if things are getting towards cEDH because there are almost no applications for that card that are not combo. Craterhoof is a card that a lot of people playing 75% commander and or even casual commander might and likely at some point consider and run.
It's not centralizing for the deck playing it though. It's not the best tutor target regardless of boardstate. Sure, if you have a large number of creatures, it can be the best target. But it's still a situational card. (And again, Tooth and Nail combos with it are issues with T&N, not the Hoof)
It's a strong card. But there is nothing wrong with expensive strong cards that end the game. It doesn't ignore everything that has come before, as it requires a boardstate to matter. Games don't warp and become all about Hoof. Deckbuilding decisions for the format are not really impacted by the legality of the card (If it was banned, it would be replaced, and no one is running Hoof specific answers that they wouldn't be packing if it weren't legal).
It's also not a card you can cheat out. So I went turn 1 Sol Ring/Signet into turn 2 Skyshroud Claim into turn 3 Craterhoof. Hurray i did 5 damage! Compare that with cheating out some other 8+ mana cards that people complain about.
Craterhoof requires other cards and time to set it up in order to be effective.
That's not what overly centralizing means, so no. Overly centralizing does not mean that a card is the best option for what it does and thus decks that want the effect will make it their first choice. Overly centralizing means that the card has a centralizing effect on the format, that decks that have access to it will most likely run it and all decks will include cards specifically to hose it or take advantage of it. Prophet it a great example, because if you were UG you were probably running it, and people where running Bribery, Praetors grasp, and others specifically to grab it out of a UG opponents library, and control magic effects to steal it, and reanimation spells to grab it out of opponents graveyards. It was a card that people would fight over. Craterhoof is most assuredly not centralizing. If it hits and doesn't kill the table, it isn't fought over. People don't run bribery et al to grab it. It isnt the automatic target for reanimation. Sure, people will grab it with bribery or reanimation if they are already running these cards AND their board supports it, but unlike prophet or prime time or sylvan primordial there are plenty of times where a hoof will be sitting there in a yard and you'll have a reanimation spell in hand and not even consider wasting it on the hoof.
Being the best at what it does is not a reason to ban it. It doesn't create undesirable game states. It is not ubiquitous enough. Its debatable whether it's even problematic in the games it shows up in (sometimes it can be, but merely ending a game isnt necessarily problematic, and I'd be surprised if most, or even a majority of games ended by hoof were ended in a way I'd consider problematic). There are numerous commonly run answers to this card, including the oft complained about cyclonic rift, which blows it out and IS actually ubiquitous (though I'll consistently argue it's the opposite of problematic and actually helps hold all sorts of things in check).
Its centralizing for the deck playing it, not necessarily everyone else. Because craterhoof is an option to play in that deck it might mean that they include a much heavier tutor focus rather than redundancy in effects because of the discrepancy in power level between craterhoof and the next best overrun effect. In that sense, it is a centralizing effect for these types of decks even though its not centralizing in the way primeval titan was in that it doesn't help everyone in the game in the same way
There's multiple problems with this argument.
First, as has been said repeatedly, being the best at what it does has no bearing on whether a card is bannable. It is entirely irrelevant to the conversation. If what the card does is a problem, then it is a problem whether that card is the best at it or 3rd from the best. Sway of the Stars is banned and it's the third best card what it does, but what it does is so anathema to what the RC wants for the format that those sort of effects are just generally banned. On the other hand, there are no banned counter spells, because even ridiculously OP ones like mana drain don't merit banning. If Hoof is banworthy, it would be banworthy whether it's the best at what it does or if there was a version that cost 3 less and another that added lifeline and death touch floating around.
Second, including hoof does not alter deckbuilding considerations in a way that differs in any meaningful way from any other strong card. Hoof wants you to run more creatures so it can actually do something worthwhile consistently, but I don't see G/x decks that aren't creature focused adding in dudes just so they can run hoof. What you have is hoof getting added to decks that run a lot of creatures already as their gameplan. As you said, hoof may incentivize those decks to add some tutors to get hoof, but that's most likely something they should be doing anyway as the tutors themselves are better additions to the deck than hoof. Yeah, hoof is a win con, but Worldly Tutor can get a win con, or a reclamation sage to answer a must kill artifact or enchantment, or some other answer, or eternal witness, or a value engine, etc. Tutors do so much work at every stage of the game to help you win, and are such powerful additions to any deck, that you really don't need a specific reason to run them. An established player purposefully eschewing tutors will not add them just to fetch Hoof, so if Hoof is inspiring someone to add tutors its probably acting as a signpost teaching less established players the value of tutors, and their next step will be learning that they often should use those tutors to grab things other than hoof. That's not centralizing.
Lastly, the entire concept of centralizing within a certain deck or even archetype is really quite a stretch. Centralizing is a meta issue, so the term is just misapplied here. Pursuing a narrow gameplan or strategy is just a fundamental feature of many decks, and the game as a whole. Not having a gameplan or strategy, at least a broad or flexible one, is on the other hand a common mistake that noobs make. Many popular strategies run through a handful of cards, like Coffers in mono black.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Meaning of Life: "M-hmm. Well, it's nothing very special. Uh, try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations"
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Whether its blue players countering your spells, red players burning you out, or combo, if you have a problem with an aspect of Magic's gameplay, you can fix it!
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
Paradox Engine doesn't pretend to be a fair card though. Its full out as deep as you can go into combo centric which starts to ask if things are getting towards cEDH because there are almost no applications for that card that are not combo.
Yeah, it's pretty uncommon not to see a resolved Paradox Engine lead to ending the game that turn. (Or else mana open for control spells and winning in a turn or two.) Occasionally it can serve as a powerful ritual, such as one time when I cast it and all I accomplished was to land Oblivion Stone with 5 open mana (ready to disrupt up the Mike/Trike that an opponent was absolutely going to land on their next turn).
That's not what overly centralizing means, so no. Overly centralizing does not mean that a card is the best option for what it does and thus decks that want the effect will make it their first choice. Overly centralizing means that the card has a centralizing effect on the format, that decks that have access to it will most likely run it and all decks will include cards specifically to hose it or take advantage of it. Prophet it a great example, because if you were UG you were probably running it, and people where running Bribery, Praetors grasp, and others specifically to grab it out of a UG opponents library, and control magic effects to steal it, and reanimation spells to grab it out of opponents graveyards. It was a card that people would fight over. Craterhoof is most assuredly not centralizing. If it hits and doesn't kill the table, it isn't fought over. People don't run bribery et al to grab it. It isnt the automatic target for reanimation. Sure, people will grab it with bribery or reanimation if they are already running these cards AND their board supports it, but unlike prophet or prime time or sylvan primordial there are plenty of times where a hoof will be sitting there in a yard and you'll have a reanimation spell in hand and not even consider wasting it on the hoof.
Being the best at what it does is not a reason to ban it. It doesn't create undesirable game states. It is not ubiquitous enough. Its debatable whether it's even problematic in the games it shows up in (sometimes it can be, but merely ending a game isnt necessarily problematic, and I'd be surprised if most, or even a majority of games ended by hoof were ended in a way I'd consider problematic). There are numerous commonly run answers to this card, including the oft complained about cyclonic rift, which blows it out and IS actually ubiquitous (though I'll consistently argue it's the opposite of problematic and actually helps hold all sorts of things in check).
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
We did have a game about half a year ago where the Rhys the Redeemed player had thousands of creatures (thanks to Doubling Season, Parallel Lives, and Seedborn Muse) and tried to end it with a Craterhoof (overkill), yet a simple fog stopped it. Then a Fumigate made for a hilarious board wipe (I gained 3,600+ life).
2023 Average Peasant Cube|and Discussion
Because I have more decks than fit in a signature
Useful Resources:
MTGSalvation tags
EDHREC
ManabaseCrafter
Way back when most creature decks seemed to win with hoof but I honestly have not even seen the card in the last probably 50 games if I had to guess.
edit: Point not being that you should ban PE (which you should) but that with how ridiculously powerful non-combat wins have gotten I think it's fine for combat wins to be strong. They're still a lot weaker overall.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
This. Hoof gets ran because it's a way for creature decks to win as decisively as non combat decks. The worst I see from Hoof is the Hoof/Avenger combo off of T&N, which is more of an issue with T&N than Hoof.
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
(Also known as Xenphire)
8.RG Green Devotion Ramp/Combo 9.UR Draw Triggers 10.WUR Group stalling 11.WUR Voltron Spellslinger 12.WB Sacrificial Shenanigans
13.BR Creatureless Panharmonicon 14.BR Pingers and Eldrazi 15.URG Untapped Cascading
16.Reyhan, last of the Abzan's WUBG +1/+1 Counter Craziness 17.WUBRG Dragons aka Why did I make this?
Building: The Gitrog Monster lands, Glissa the Traitor stax, Muldrotha, the Gravetide Planeswalker Combo, Kydele, Chosen of Kruphix + Sidar Kondo of Jamuraa Clues, and Tribal Scarecrow Planeswalkers
It is a lot easier to make hoof lethal in standard, a 1v1 20 life format. Its is also harder to cast it, however. The first time around it wasn't an issue, but that was a standard dominated first by caw blade, and later by UW st Traft, two particularly strong tempo decks (that the latter is oft forgotten is a testament to how absurdly dominant the former was). Todays standard, which is much more balanced, might not be able to handle a finisher that strong.
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
Its centralizing for the deck playing it, not necessarily everyone else. Because craterhoof is an option to play in that deck it might mean that they include a much heavier tutor focus rather than redundancy in effects because of the discrepancy in power level between craterhoof and the next best overrun effect. In that sense, it is a centralizing effect for these types of decks even though its not centralizing in the way primeval titan was in that it doesn't help everyone in the game the same way.
Paradox Engine doesn't pretend to be a fair card though. Its full out as deep as you can go into combo centric which starts to ask if things are getting towards cEDH because there are almost no applications for that card that are not combo. Craterhoof is a card that a lot of people playing 75% commander and or even casual commander might and likely at some point consider and run.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
It's a strong card. But there is nothing wrong with expensive strong cards that end the game. It doesn't ignore everything that has come before, as it requires a boardstate to matter. Games don't warp and become all about Hoof. Deckbuilding decisions for the format are not really impacted by the legality of the card (If it was banned, it would be replaced, and no one is running Hoof specific answers that they wouldn't be packing if it weren't legal).
Craterhoof requires other cards and time to set it up in order to be effective.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
There's multiple problems with this argument.
First, as has been said repeatedly, being the best at what it does has no bearing on whether a card is bannable. It is entirely irrelevant to the conversation. If what the card does is a problem, then it is a problem whether that card is the best at it or 3rd from the best. Sway of the Stars is banned and it's the third best card what it does, but what it does is so anathema to what the RC wants for the format that those sort of effects are just generally banned. On the other hand, there are no banned counter spells, because even ridiculously OP ones like mana drain don't merit banning. If Hoof is banworthy, it would be banworthy whether it's the best at what it does or if there was a version that cost 3 less and another that added lifeline and death touch floating around.
Second, including hoof does not alter deckbuilding considerations in a way that differs in any meaningful way from any other strong card. Hoof wants you to run more creatures so it can actually do something worthwhile consistently, but I don't see G/x decks that aren't creature focused adding in dudes just so they can run hoof. What you have is hoof getting added to decks that run a lot of creatures already as their gameplan. As you said, hoof may incentivize those decks to add some tutors to get hoof, but that's most likely something they should be doing anyway as the tutors themselves are better additions to the deck than hoof. Yeah, hoof is a win con, but Worldly Tutor can get a win con, or a reclamation sage to answer a must kill artifact or enchantment, or some other answer, or eternal witness, or a value engine, etc. Tutors do so much work at every stage of the game to help you win, and are such powerful additions to any deck, that you really don't need a specific reason to run them. An established player purposefully eschewing tutors will not add them just to fetch Hoof, so if Hoof is inspiring someone to add tutors its probably acting as a signpost teaching less established players the value of tutors, and their next step will be learning that they often should use those tutors to grab things other than hoof. That's not centralizing.
Lastly, the entire concept of centralizing within a certain deck or even archetype is really quite a stretch. Centralizing is a meta issue, so the term is just misapplied here. Pursuing a narrow gameplan or strategy is just a fundamental feature of many decks, and the game as a whole. Not having a gameplan or strategy, at least a broad or flexible one, is on the other hand a common mistake that noobs make. Many popular strategies run through a handful of cards, like Coffers in mono black.
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)