Would you guys think this card needs a ban?
6GG
Haste, Trample
35/35
That's significantly more powerful than Hoof, as while it can't scale as high it can kill with literally nothing on the board, and it stays a 35/35 turn after turn.
Of course, its still worse than T&N, but unlike T&N it doesn't actually win the game, just kills a player, so it staying huge forever would turn it into a centralizing creature, as it would be a great theft target, unlike Hoof, and reliably so, unlike some other creatures that can get that big. The fact that its reliably strong, and persistently strong would also encourage getting it out as fast as possible. I wouldn't spend my first couple turns tutoring for and ramping into Hoof, because you do actually need to set up a board for it to be useful, but grabbing your joke of an argument would be a reasonable thing to focus on casting as fast as possible, to the same degree as Prime Time. Turn 1 Sol Ring, Signet, pass, Turn 2 Cultivate, tutor, pass, Turn 3 Nature's lore, maybe a dude, pass, turn 4 Hoof would be, what, like 10 damage maybe and a 5/5 and whatever the other creature was left over? Your proposed comparison, on the other hand, would be a must answer on turn 4.
It is a common strategy for mono green decks like yisan to spend their early turns tutoring and ramping into craterhoof. They are extremely consistent decks, only a bit worse than a handful of the strongest strategies available in edh.
It is a common strategy for mono green decks like yisan to spend their early turns tutoring and ramping into craterhoof. They are extremely consistent decks, only a bit worse than a handful of the strongest strategies available in edh.
I'm a little insulted on behalf of Yisan decks everywhere that you think Craterhoof Behemoth is the reason they are strong.
Craterhoof is a much stronger game decider. Take 5 1/1 tokens. Craterhoof will turn that into 5 6/6 tramplers, plus itself, leading to 41 trampling power. Enough to one-shot a defenseless player but even if it's no kill, still certainly enough to leave a massive dent.
Triumph will also kill a defenseless player, but even one blocker effectively neuters the attack unless you have a lot more poison synergies going on. Furthermore, against 3 3/3's or something, you only push 4 damage through while the Hoof will have pushed 32 through.
Triumph is far from a bad card, but it, Pathbreaker Ibex, Overrun and pretty much all those other effects are much less explosive as Craterhoof is. Now this is in part made kind of fair by the mana cost, except you're in green so lol at that.
Had Craterhoof been a 5-mana-sorcery, I doubt it'd be nearly as much complained about even though it'd be a much, MUCH better Overrun.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
Comparing Hoof to 3 or 4 mana cards is silly. Comparing it to cards that at least cost a similar amount of mana is more reasonable. Vitalizing Wind, Insurrection, Storm Herd, Omniscience, Tooth and Nail, etc. are more reasonable comparisons. By the same logic, Boundless Realms should be banned because it can get way more explosive easier than other basic land searching ramp spells. It isn't really more explosive than the personal mana doubler enchantments, though.
It is a common strategy for mono green decks like yisan to spend their early turns tutoring and ramping into craterhoof. They are extremely consistent decks, only a bit worse than a handful of the strongest strategies available in edh.
I'm a little insulted on behalf of Yisan decks everywhere that you think Craterhoof Behemoth is the reason they are strong.
I mean, trust me when I tell you that Temur Sabertooth is worth ten Craterhoof Behemoths.
If you're trying to solve the "problem" of mono-green creature decks being almost as good as top tier decks, at least look for the right problem.
I never said that it was the reason they are strong, but it is the most common finisher of choice that I know of in yisan. This is addressing the idea that somehow no one wants to ramp and tutor into craterhoof, which is completely incorrect.
And your argument falls apart when I point out Kiki Jiki and Splinter Twin, because they can both win the game, from literally nothing, and actually take out the whole table.
Comparing it to Overrun is a joke, because Overrun is unplayable. Comparing it to boosts that are ACTUALLY similar, like Ibex, or Triumph of the Hoards, or Titanic Ultimatum, now that's reasonable, but oh, then you really are comparing Bolt to Shock instead of Primordial to Slime.
And yes, Exsaguinate takes more mana to kill the board. Guess what else though? Its much more difficult to answer, and doesn't use combat. It doesn't matter what board your opponent's have when you exsanguinate, if they don't counter it, they lose. They can also counter hoof, or they can have a board that lets them survive Hoof, or they can fog, or they can kill a couple of creatures in response, or they can Cyclonic Rift or Cryptic Command.
The burden of proof is on those arguing that it should be banned. So far you've made the best argument and it still falls woefully short. You've successfully proved that it can put a lot of power on the board quickly, and? You haven't proven that it is over centralizing, because over centralizing DOES NOT just mean that a lot of decks run the card, but that in addition games that involve a deck that runs the card often become all about that card. Prime Time was centralizing, because games were about dropping Prime Time as soon as possible, stealing Prime Time, protecting Prime Time, Killing Prime Time, Reanimating Prime Time, etc, same with Prophet. Games with Hoof only become about Hoof when Hoof is going to close the game. If it takes out one player, it doesn't become the focus of the rest of the game, it becomes a vanilla 5/5. You haven't proven that it is uniquely powerful or format warping, you've proven that it is an 8 drop capable of turning the tide of the game or even winning it, which is what 8 drops do in this format. Again, I've listed several cards that are capable of just turning the game around, or even outright winning, with as much setup as Hoof, and that's not even counting easy two card combos, that come online earlier than Hoof, that win the game outright more reliably than Hoof.
Being a strong card isn't banworthy. Being widely played isn't banworthy. It does not interact poorly with the structure of the format. It doesn't create undesirable game states as defined by the RC. The closest it comes is to having "problematic casual omnipresence", but it is in the same boat as myriad other cards, not at the level that Prime Time or Prophet reached. Insurrection requires less setup, absolutely no deck building considerations other than asking "do my opponents play creatures?" and often accomplishes the same effect as Craterhoof, for the same mana, and handily clear the way of blockers, and fits in literally every casual red deck. Do you get what I'm saying? I'm saying that there are so many cards sitting at Hoof's power level that are widely played, and equally "deserving" of a ban as Hoof. You go down that path, you end up with a ridiculous ban list.
Being strong is a reason to be banned. Look at Primeval Titan, Sylvan Primordial, Griselbrand. All of these cards were banned for being "too strong" and or "Over Centralizing".
It is true that there are more efficient ways to combo win. The problem is that Craterhoof Behemoth is a very strong one card synergy card that easily closes out games in ways that many other cards of similar effect are unable to do. Many metas do not allow infinite combos as part of their social agreement but craterhoof behemoth often does not fit directly into any social agreements. My issue with it is how efficient it is combined with how accessible it is and to top it off not everyone views it the same when it comes to social agreements. The consideration of what is "banworthy" differs wildly from person to person. The rules committee however has taken a stance though that over centralizing and or overpowered cards can and occasionally do get banned so the question is more of how to define what is over the top. I will agree that Craterhoof Behemoth is more narrow than most cards that have fallen into this category in the past however it has become the pinnacle of token strategies wincon because it is so far above and beyond the next mass pump effect. In many cases its two to three times more explosive for the mana than the next most effective overrun effect. I dont at all mind power over time like that provided by Beastmaster Ascension but my qualms are with how explosive and accessible Craterhoof Behemoth is to this archetype.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I have officially moved to MTGNexus. I just wanted to let people know as my response time to salvation decks being bumped is very hit or miss.
It can't fit into overcentralizing like any of the cards in that definition. The advantage gained by it is also negated by socially acceptable one mana instants unlike the lands/cards. Infact, I've never seen it cloned, flickered, briberied, or reanimated. Losing the game is also not considered to be an undesirable game state because games have to end. It also isn't necessarily a bigger boost. Infact, you said it yourself, Tears of Rage gives the exact same boost, Ibex/Overwhelming Stampede/Vitalizing Wind/Savage Beating can give comparable boosts to what you describe as a problem. Decimator of Provinces even does all the things you're describing in your single player kill senarios. Now, it is pretty easy to tutor, but combo use isn't even normally considered to be kill one person. Otherwise, we should ban Door to Nothingness since it is a literal one card single player kill with no strings at all other than mana. In order to be a combo as is normally described, it would have to push through 80-160 damage to kill a typical table. That's combine it with Army of the Damned level damage and it comes at a delay since the tokens ETBT and the only other card that makes that kind of tokens reasonably is Storm Herd. Infact to push through that much, I've had to cast Overwhelming Stampede or Triumph of the Horde on top of Hoof on the Army tokens a few times.
The reason you haven't seen things like cloning a craterhoof is because it's a player ender at minimum, and a game ender in the more frequent use case.
Please stop bringing up marginal to bad overrun effects that are substantially weaker and less played than craterhoof. I hope you guys can recognize the difference between them.
Cratehoof leads to very unsatisfying game endings, because it tends to go from unthreatening board state of little nothing creatures -> killing multiple players.
Hell, I'd say the card it is most comparable to is coalition victory.
It can't fit into overcentralizing like any of the cards in that definition. The advantage gained by it is also negated by socially acceptable one mana instants unlike the lands/cards. Infact, I've never seen it cloned, flickered, briberied, or reanimated. Losing the game is also not considered to be an undesirable game state because games have to end. It also isn't necessarily a bigger boost. Infact, you said it yourself, Tears of Rage gives the exact same boost, Ibex/Overwhelming Stampede/Vitalizing Wind/Savage Beating can give comparable boosts to what you describe as a problem. Decimator of Provinces even does all the things you're describing in your single player kill senarios. Now, it is pretty easy to tutor, but combo use isn't even normally considered to be kill one person. Otherwise, we should ban Door to Nothingness since it is a literal one card single player kill with no strings at all other than mana. In order to be a combo as is normally described, it would have to push through 80-160 damage to kill a typical table. That's combine it with Army of the Damned level damage and it comes at a delay since the tokens ETBT and the only other card that makes that kind of tokens reasonably is Storm Herd. Infact to push through that much, I've had to cast Overwhelming Stampede or Triumph of the Horde on top of Hoof on the Army tokens a few times.
Yea I wont pretend that its anywhere near those cards as far as general use / general power go but it was more of a statement that cards do get banned because of power level and or over centralization. In this case its more narrow as its more focused on token strategies but within that archetype this card is very much centralizing.
I remember years ago Kamahl, Fist of Krosa seemed like a decent commander for overrunning people. Times have changed due to Craterhoof Behemoth its better to run token producers as your commander because Craterhoof Behemoth in deck is almost as reliable a buff as Kamahl as a commander used to be. Craterhoof is very accessible and far more potent so why even consider Kamahl, Fist of Krosa as a commander anymore?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I have officially moved to MTGNexus. I just wanted to let people know as my response time to salvation decks being bumped is very hit or miss.
It really depends on the token strategy. If you're talking about copying big tokens, doubling seasons, double strike, and combat phases are probably better. Even if it were good with all tokens, though, overcentralizing refers to the format, not to the fact that a card is an archetype staple. Now, it is the best Overrun for token strategies that focus almost exclusively on spamming small tokens and can pay triple green. Now, as for mentioning cards that might see less play, why would I not mention other cards I use to accomplish the same thing? Yeah, it is a good card for some decks, but ending a game with it is harder than a lot of other strong, complained about high mana cards like Time Stretch, Rite of Replication, Insurrection, Cyclonic Rift, Tooth and Nail, etc. that cost similar amounts of mana.
It is a common strategy for mono green decks like yisan to spend their early turns tutoring and ramping into craterhoof. They are extremely consistent decks, only a bit worse than a handful of the strongest strategies available in edh.
I'm a little insulted on behalf of Yisan decks everywhere that you think Craterhoof Behemoth is the reason they are strong.
I mean, trust me when I tell you that Temur Sabertooth is worth ten Craterhoof Behemoths.
If you're trying to solve the "problem" of mono-green creature decks being almost as good as top tier decks, at least look for the right problem.
I never said that it was the reason they are strong, but it is the most common finisher of choice that I know of in yisan. This is addressing the idea that somehow no one wants to ramp and tutor into craterhoof, which is completely incorrect.
Sorry, I overestimated you and assumed you knew what you are talking about. That Yisan deck? No, it's not just ramping into Hoof. It's laying down creatures first. It has something it needs to do before it can bring Hoof online. It's casting an elf, casting it's commander, searching for an elf, etc, over multiple turns, and if it tries to hoof as soon as it can be cast, some of its board would be tapped because it uses creature based ramp. You actually need to devote resources to building your board, not just focusing on tutoring for it and ramping into it, something any G/X deck could do with your sad attempt of a comparison card.
Pointing to Yisan, a very strong commander, also undermines any argument to ban it. Cards don't get banned for being super strong in one deck, first of all, unless the card is legendary. Second, your idiotic hypothetical card would be an option to ramp into in ANY green deck, while Hoof needs specific conditions in a tier 1 deck to be considered, and STILL isn't the best option there, as the guy who actually runs the deck already explained to you.
Hey, how about this? Would you turn 1 entomb and turn 2 exhume Hoof? You would with your joke of an attempt to "prove" thay Hoof is OP. Would you sneak attack it turn 3? You would with your card. Show and tell turn 2? Hell no for Hoof, hell yes for your card. Do you get the point yet?
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!
It really depends on the token strategy. If you're talking about copying big tokens, doubling seasons, double strike, and combat phases are probably better. Even if it were good with all tokens, though, overcentralizing refers to the format, not to the fact that a card is an archetype staple. Now, it is the best Overrun for token strategies that focus almost exclusively on spamming small tokens and can pay triple green. Now, as for mentioning cards that might see less play, why would I not mention other cards I use to accomplish the same thing? Yeah, it is a good card for some decks, but ending a game with it is harder than a lot of other strong, complained about high mana cards like Time Stretch, Rite of Replication, Insurrection, Cyclonic Rift, Tooth and Nail, etc. that cost similar amounts of mana.
Mostly it comes down to consistencies for me. All of those things can be irritating but green's access to tutors makes Craterhoof far more accessible than most of the cards you just mentioned. In a lot of cases those cards are far more situational as to if they do anything as well.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I have officially moved to MTGNexus. I just wanted to let people know as my response time to salvation decks being bumped is very hit or miss.
Cratehoof leads to very unsatisfying game endings, because it tends to go from unthreatening board state of little nothing creatures -> killing multiple players.
I keep seeing this claim, and it doesn't really line up with any of my experience playing green. Let's take a scenario and math it out. Assume a four-player game. It's a real game, so players aren't going to be at 40 life -- let's say you've got one opponent at 17 life, another at 23, and another at 20. That comes to 60 life across three players, average of 20 each. The Craterhoof player has some board, so let's assume it's been a turn or two since the most recent wipe and everyone has something of a board presence. Player A (17 life) has a Sun Titan, who just reanimated a Soul Warden that had been killed earlier in the game. Player B (23 life) has a Solemn Simulacrum and a tapped Elvish Mystic. Player C has four 2/2 zombie tokens and a tapped Grave Titan. This sounds like a reasonable enough scenario, right? For whatever reason, all the players are hellbent, so you know there won't be any tricks coming from hand.
You have an Ant Queen and have been producing 1/1 insect tokens. You topdeck Craterhoof Behemoth -- they had no reason to expect you would have that card (like using any of the green tutors) and had tapped some of their creatures. You play the card and swing for victory.
But how many insect tokens do you need to have made? Player A will need to take 25 points of damage (17 life + 1 gain for the Hoof + 7 toughness of creatures). Player B will need to take 25 points of damage (23 life + 2 toughness). Player C will need to take 28 points of damage (20 life + 8 toughness). That means you'll need 78 points of damage. Six insect tokens should do it, right? That would give you 8 creatures for (8*8)+5+5+1+1+1+1+1+1 = 80 points of damage. So you play Hoof. Each of your insect becomes a 9/9 trample and your Ant Queen and Hoof become a 13/13 trample each.
Now you have to arrange your kill. You only have two more points of damage than you need, so you can't waste anything. I think the best that can be done is Ant Queen and Hoof at one of the 25 players (killing him), three insects at another (killing him), and three insects at Player C, leaving him alive but at one life. Better hope he doesn't topdeck a Damnation! Alternatively, if you had seven insects (98 points of damage), you could just overrun everyone.
In other words, what I'm trying to prove with this, is that green rarely just "kills the board" out of two mana dorks and a saproling token. It requires quite a bit of setup and is almost always seen coming. That scenario, remember, required a pre-existing 5/5 and 6-7 tokens. The only exception is a big instant speed token generation spell, and there are only a handful of those (none that I know of in mono-green).
The best laugh I got was certainly about the line referring to Hoof as a "one card synergy card." Leaving aside that synergy inherently requires more than one card, Craterhoof Behemoth without any support is a 6/6 trample haste creature for eight that becomes a vanilla 5/5 after its first turn. It's like an Akroma, Angel of Wrath, only without half the keywords, and then it loses even those keywords after a turn.
Your argument that its hard to have a board of tokens is a little flawed as depending on what commander you are playing. For instance, have you ever tried wrath answering a Prossh, Skyraider of Kher, Hazezon Tamar, or Marath, Will of the Wild deck? Most of these decks have a MUCH faster recovery time than what you are quoting in a lot of cases casing their commander is enough to leave a complete army that requires another wrath and all three of them are very much commanders who utilize ramp very well so recasting tends to be very easy.
Wraths do very little to all three of these and often you actually help clear the way for them to craterhoof kill everything by wrathing them. In most cases it takes 1-2 turns of setup assuming they have no board to be ready for craterhoof again after a wrath and these numbers are not talking about killing a player but the whole table in most cases.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I have officially moved to MTGNexus. I just wanted to let people know as my response time to salvation decks being bumped is very hit or miss.
I'm okay with it. It's obviously a big green sledgehammer, but that doesn't mean that it should be banned because it's effective at what it does. It's not brokenly over the top, and its strength is mostly tied to Tooth and Nail which is another green card that is often argued about banning. I'd think T&N is closer to being banworthy than Craterhoof, but that's just my opinion.
Green should have the best big dumb fat. And that's all this card is. The best big dumb fat. It's a bit difficult to deal with because he triggers on ETB, but that doesn't mean it's impossible to deal with. And as for it being a huge siege breaker... well... there has to be something to break a siege eventually because stagnation sucks.
Your argument that its hard to have a board of tokens is a little flawed as depending on what commander you are playing. For instance, have you ever tried wrath answering a Prossh, Skyraider of Kher, Hazezon Tamar, or Marath, Will of the Wild deck? Most of these decks have a MUCH faster recovery time than what you are quoting in a lot of cases casing their commander is enough to leave a complete army that requires another wrath and all three of them are very much commanders who utilize ramp very well so recasting tends to be very easy.
Wraths do very little to all three of these and often you actually help clear the way for them to craterhoof kill everything by wrathing them. In most cases it takes 1-2 turns of setup assuming they have no board to be ready for craterhoof again after a wrath.
And you have missed the point entirely, which seems about par for the course in this thread. I was responding to a specific claim from Carthage that stated Craterhoof Behemoth kills come off of an non-threatening board. The best way to tell this is what I was addressing is the fact that I quoted it at the top of my post and my first line was "I keep seeing this claim, and it doesn't really line up with any of my experience playing green." I then did not mention wraths, except in the fact that the board state meant it had been a while* since the last one and that a black player should be assumed to have a top-deck Damnation as a possible play.
* - note that, in multiplayer games with an advanced turn counter -- and my example must be if people are hardcasting Hoof -- "a while" is one to two complete cycles. If everyone has a lot of mana, and all the decks are constructed to compete in a multiplayer setting, they should be able to climb right back into the thick of things in two turns minimum.
Anyway, to address your tangentially-related point (that certain generals create threatening board positions), I don't really know what to tell you. That's a part of the game. Prepare for them or be willing to accept a loss.
Your argument that its hard to have a board of tokens is a little flawed as depending on what commander you are playing. For instance, have you ever tried wrath answering a Prossh, Skyraider of Kher, Hazezon Tamar, or Marath, Will of the Wild deck? Most of these decks have a MUCH faster recovery time than what you are quoting in a lot of cases casing their commander is enough to leave a complete army that requires another wrath and all three of them are very much commanders who utilize ramp very well so recasting tends to be very easy.
Wraths do very little to all three of these and often you actually help clear the way for them to craterhoof kill everything by wrathing them. In most cases it takes 1-2 turns of setup assuming they have no board to be ready for craterhoof again after a wrath.
And you have missed the point entirely, which seems about par for the course in this thread. I was responding to a specific claim from Carthage that stated Craterhoof Behemoth kills come off of an non-threatening board. The best way to tell this is what I was addressing is the fact that I quoted it at the top of my post and my first line was "I keep seeing this claim, and it doesn't really line up with any of my experience playing green." I then did not mention wraths, except in the fact that the board state meant it had been a while* since the last one and that a black player should be assumed to have a top-deck Damnation as a possible play.
* - note that, in multiplayer games with an advanced turn counter -- and my example must be if people are hardcasting Hoof -- "a while" is one to two complete cycles. If everyone has a lot of mana, and all the decks are constructed to compete in a multiplayer setting, they should be able to climb right back into the thick of things in two turns minimum.
Anyway, to address your tangentially-related point (that certain generals create threatening board positions), I don't really know what to tell you. That's a part of the game. Prepare for them or be willing to accept a loss.
Craterhoof kills DO come from non threatening boards.
Just because you're only killing one or two players with your 8 mana spell and board of nothings doesn't suddenly make it weak and it doesn't suddenly make the player who was killed by it feel any better. It represents an absurd amount of reach.
Your example would have left the craterhoof player in an absolutely dominant position to take the game.
Craterhoof kills DO come from non threatening boards.
Just because you're only killing one or two players with your 8 mana spell and board of nothings doesn't suddenly make it weak and it doesn't suddenly make the player who was killed by it feel any better. It represents an absurd amount of reach.
Your example would have left the craterhoof player in an absolutely dominant position to take the game.
That was the point. If you're looking for Hoof to win the game, what do you need to make it happen? In that scenario, it was a board of seven creatures, a 5/5 and six 1/1s. If you consider that a non-threatening board, I think the problem is with you, not with the spell.
Eight mana spells win games, or at least put the caster in a position to win the game. If they didn't, they would cost less mana or, like Guardian of Vitu-Ghazi, be unplayable trash.
Craterhoof kills DO come from non threatening boards.
Just because you're only killing one or two players with your 8 mana spell and board of nothings doesn't suddenly make it weak and it doesn't suddenly make the player who was killed by it feel any better. It represents an absurd amount of reach.
Your example would have left the craterhoof player in an absolutely dominant position to take the game.
That was the point. If you're looking for Hoof to win the game, what do you need to make it happen? In that scenario, it was a board of seven creatures, a 5/5 and six 1/1s. If you consider that a non-threatening board, I think the problem is with you, not with the spell.
Eight mana spells win games, or at least put the caster in a position to win the game. If they didn't, they would cost less mana or, like Guardian of Vitu-Ghazi, be unplayable trash.
Why should 8 mana spells win games as consistently as craterhoof? This isn't 1v1 20 life magic. Reaching 8 mana is usually pretty trivial. If we let 8 mana spells be as game ending as craterhoof, we cheapen everything that happens up until the big mana point because every spell cast from then on out will have the intent of ending the game on the spot.
Why should 8 mana spells win games as consistently as craterhoof? This isn't 1v1 20 life magic. Reaching 8 mana is usually pretty trivial. If we let 8 mana spells be as game ending as craterhoof, we cheapen everything that happens up until the big mana point because every spell cast from then on out will have the intent of ending the game on the spot.
The game has to end at some point. And saying that Craterhoof Behemoth invalidates everything that has happened earlier strikes me as an especially asinine argument. As I have proven to you (several times now!), without "things happening before", Hoof is a strictly worse Akroma, Angel of Wrath.
Why should 8 mana spells win games as consistently as craterhoof? This isn't 1v1 20 life magic. Reaching 8 mana is usually pretty trivial. If we let 8 mana spells be as game ending as craterhoof, we cheapen everything that happens up until the big mana point because every spell cast from then on out will have the intent of ending the game on the spot.
The game has to end at some point. And saying that Craterhoof Behemoth invalidates everything that has happened earlier strikes me as an especially asinine argument. As I have proven to you (several times now!), without "things happening before", Hoof is a strictly worse Akroma, Angel of Wrath.
Shock is "Strictly Worse" than Lightning Bolt. I cant take you very seriously with this statement. This is a place for debate but this statement is nowhere near accurate. I am not looking for you to agree with me but at least have rebuttal that makes sense please.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I have officially moved to MTGNexus. I just wanted to let people know as my response time to salvation decks being bumped is very hit or miss.
Hoofs owner gets to choose when to play it. They aren't going to slam it down into a Torpor Orb or when they have a lone 1/1 goat token and their oppoents have 56 life each. Hoof is never going to be played without the threat of it dealing massive damamge.
It really depends on the token strategy. If you're talking about copying big tokens, doubling seasons, double strike, and combat phases are probably better. Even if it were good with all tokens, though, overcentralizing refers to the format, not to the fact that a card is an archetype staple. Now, it is the best Overrun for token strategies that focus almost exclusively on spamming small tokens and can pay triple green. Now, as for mentioning cards that might see less play, why would I not mention other cards I use to accomplish the same thing? Yeah, it is a good card for some decks, but ending a game with it is harder than a lot of other strong, complained about high mana cards like Time Stretch, Rite of Replication, Insurrection, Cyclonic Rift, Tooth and Nail, etc. that cost similar amounts of mana.
Mostly it comes down to consistencies for me. All of those things can be irritating but green's access to tutors makes Craterhoof far more accessible than most of the cards you just mentioned. In a lot of cases those cards are far more situational as to if they do anything as well.
Well, black can get anything and blue has personal tutor/mystical tutor that can get them. Now, as for situational, Time Stretch is always great. Rite requires one creature on the board somewhere that you can target and is worth copying. Insurrection just requires one or more opponents to play dangerous creatures. Cyclonic Rift works against pretty much anything. Tooth and Nail requires no setup at all. They're not exactly tough conditions. Now, Hoof is powerful but super high mana spells have to be pretty strong to actually be legitimately playable.
Hoofs owner gets to choose when to play it. They aren't going to slam it down into a Torpor Orb or when they have a lone 1/1 goat token and their oppoents have 56 life each. Hoof is never going to be played without the threat of it dealing massive damamge.
Well, yeah, which proves that it actually does require some setup and isn't just a dumbfire broken card like Carthage's 8 mana 35/35 haste trampler. Its basically like saying you aren't going to fire off T&N when Aven Mindcensor is out.
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!
It is a common strategy for mono green decks like yisan to spend their early turns tutoring and ramping into craterhoof. They are extremely consistent decks, only a bit worse than a handful of the strongest strategies available in edh.
I'm a little insulted on behalf of Yisan decks everywhere that you think Craterhoof Behemoth is the reason they are strong.
Because I'll just tell you now that no Yisan player is staying up at night worrying about Hoof getting banned. Seedborn Muse is orders of magnitude more powerful, along with Genesis Wave, Gaea's Cradle, Staff of Domination, Shaman of Forgotten Ways, and Sylvan Library.
I mean, trust me when I tell you that Temur Sabertooth is worth ten Craterhoof Behemoths.
If you're trying to solve the "problem" of mono-green creature decks being almost as good as top tier decks, at least look for the right problem.
Craterhoof is a much stronger game decider. Take 5 1/1 tokens. Craterhoof will turn that into 5 6/6 tramplers, plus itself, leading to 41 trampling power. Enough to one-shot a defenseless player but even if it's no kill, still certainly enough to leave a massive dent.
Triumph will also kill a defenseless player, but even one blocker effectively neuters the attack unless you have a lot more poison synergies going on. Furthermore, against 3 3/3's or something, you only push 4 damage through while the Hoof will have pushed 32 through.
Triumph is far from a bad card, but it, Pathbreaker Ibex, Overrun and pretty much all those other effects are much less explosive as Craterhoof is. Now this is in part made kind of fair by the mana cost, except you're in green so lol at that.
Had Craterhoof been a 5-mana-sorcery, I doubt it'd be nearly as much complained about even though it'd be a much, MUCH better Overrun.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
I never said that it was the reason they are strong, but it is the most common finisher of choice that I know of in yisan. This is addressing the idea that somehow no one wants to ramp and tutor into craterhoof, which is completely incorrect.
Being strong is a reason to be banned. Look at Primeval Titan, Sylvan Primordial, Griselbrand. All of these cards were banned for being "too strong" and or "Over Centralizing".
It is true that there are more efficient ways to combo win. The problem is that Craterhoof Behemoth is a very strong one card synergy card that easily closes out games in ways that many other cards of similar effect are unable to do. Many metas do not allow infinite combos as part of their social agreement but craterhoof behemoth often does not fit directly into any social agreements. My issue with it is how efficient it is combined with how accessible it is and to top it off not everyone views it the same when it comes to social agreements. The consideration of what is "banworthy" differs wildly from person to person. The rules committee however has taken a stance though that over centralizing and or overpowered cards can and occasionally do get banned so the question is more of how to define what is over the top. I will agree that Craterhoof Behemoth is more narrow than most cards that have fallen into this category in the past however it has become the pinnacle of token strategies wincon because it is so far above and beyond the next mass pump effect. In many cases its two to three times more explosive for the mana than the next most effective overrun effect. I dont at all mind power over time like that provided by Beastmaster Ascension but my qualms are with how explosive and accessible Craterhoof Behemoth is to this archetype.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
Please stop bringing up marginal to bad overrun effects that are substantially weaker and less played than craterhoof. I hope you guys can recognize the difference between them.
Cratehoof leads to very unsatisfying game endings, because it tends to go from unthreatening board state of little nothing creatures -> killing multiple players.
Hell, I'd say the card it is most comparable to is coalition victory.
Yea I wont pretend that its anywhere near those cards as far as general use / general power go but it was more of a statement that cards do get banned because of power level and or over centralization. In this case its more narrow as its more focused on token strategies but within that archetype this card is very much centralizing.
I remember years ago Kamahl, Fist of Krosa seemed like a decent commander for overrunning people. Times have changed due to Craterhoof Behemoth its better to run token producers as your commander because Craterhoof Behemoth in deck is almost as reliable a buff as Kamahl as a commander used to be. Craterhoof is very accessible and far more potent so why even consider Kamahl, Fist of Krosa as a commander anymore?
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
Sorry, I overestimated you and assumed you knew what you are talking about. That Yisan deck? No, it's not just ramping into Hoof. It's laying down creatures first. It has something it needs to do before it can bring Hoof online. It's casting an elf, casting it's commander, searching for an elf, etc, over multiple turns, and if it tries to hoof as soon as it can be cast, some of its board would be tapped because it uses creature based ramp. You actually need to devote resources to building your board, not just focusing on tutoring for it and ramping into it, something any G/X deck could do with your sad attempt of a comparison card.
Pointing to Yisan, a very strong commander, also undermines any argument to ban it. Cards don't get banned for being super strong in one deck, first of all, unless the card is legendary. Second, your idiotic hypothetical card would be an option to ramp into in ANY green deck, while Hoof needs specific conditions in a tier 1 deck to be considered, and STILL isn't the best option there, as the guy who actually runs the deck already explained to you.
Hey, how about this? Would you turn 1 entomb and turn 2 exhume Hoof? You would with your joke of an attempt to "prove" thay Hoof is OP. Would you sneak attack it turn 3? You would with your card. Show and tell turn 2? Hell no for Hoof, hell yes for your card. Do you get the point yet?
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!
Mostly it comes down to consistencies for me. All of those things can be irritating but green's access to tutors makes Craterhoof far more accessible than most of the cards you just mentioned. In a lot of cases those cards are far more situational as to if they do anything as well.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
I keep seeing this claim, and it doesn't really line up with any of my experience playing green. Let's take a scenario and math it out. Assume a four-player game. It's a real game, so players aren't going to be at 40 life -- let's say you've got one opponent at 17 life, another at 23, and another at 20. That comes to 60 life across three players, average of 20 each. The Craterhoof player has some board, so let's assume it's been a turn or two since the most recent wipe and everyone has something of a board presence. Player A (17 life) has a Sun Titan, who just reanimated a Soul Warden that had been killed earlier in the game. Player B (23 life) has a Solemn Simulacrum and a tapped Elvish Mystic. Player C has four 2/2 zombie tokens and a tapped Grave Titan. This sounds like a reasonable enough scenario, right? For whatever reason, all the players are hellbent, so you know there won't be any tricks coming from hand.
You have an Ant Queen and have been producing 1/1 insect tokens. You topdeck Craterhoof Behemoth -- they had no reason to expect you would have that card (like using any of the green tutors) and had tapped some of their creatures. You play the card and swing for victory.
But how many insect tokens do you need to have made? Player A will need to take 25 points of damage (17 life + 1 gain for the Hoof + 7 toughness of creatures). Player B will need to take 25 points of damage (23 life + 2 toughness). Player C will need to take 28 points of damage (20 life + 8 toughness). That means you'll need 78 points of damage. Six insect tokens should do it, right? That would give you 8 creatures for (8*8)+5+5+1+1+1+1+1+1 = 80 points of damage. So you play Hoof. Each of your insect becomes a 9/9 trample and your Ant Queen and Hoof become a 13/13 trample each.
Now you have to arrange your kill. You only have two more points of damage than you need, so you can't waste anything. I think the best that can be done is Ant Queen and Hoof at one of the 25 players (killing him), three insects at another (killing him), and three insects at Player C, leaving him alive but at one life. Better hope he doesn't topdeck a Damnation! Alternatively, if you had seven insects (98 points of damage), you could just overrun everyone.
In other words, what I'm trying to prove with this, is that green rarely just "kills the board" out of two mana dorks and a saproling token. It requires quite a bit of setup and is almost always seen coming. That scenario, remember, required a pre-existing 5/5 and 6-7 tokens. The only exception is a big instant speed token generation spell, and there are only a handful of those (none that I know of in mono-green).
The best laugh I got was certainly about the line referring to Hoof as a "one card synergy card." Leaving aside that synergy inherently requires more than one card, Craterhoof Behemoth without any support is a 6/6 trample haste creature for eight that becomes a vanilla 5/5 after its first turn. It's like an Akroma, Angel of Wrath, only without half the keywords, and then it loses even those keywords after a turn.
Wraths do very little to all three of these and often you actually help clear the way for them to craterhoof kill everything by wrathing them. In most cases it takes 1-2 turns of setup assuming they have no board to be ready for craterhoof again after a wrath and these numbers are not talking about killing a player but the whole table in most cases.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
Green should have the best big dumb fat. And that's all this card is. The best big dumb fat. It's a bit difficult to deal with because he triggers on ETB, but that doesn't mean it's impossible to deal with. And as for it being a huge siege breaker... well... there has to be something to break a siege eventually because stagnation sucks.
And you have missed the point entirely, which seems about par for the course in this thread. I was responding to a specific claim from Carthage that stated Craterhoof Behemoth kills come off of an non-threatening board. The best way to tell this is what I was addressing is the fact that I quoted it at the top of my post and my first line was "I keep seeing this claim, and it doesn't really line up with any of my experience playing green." I then did not mention wraths, except in the fact that the board state meant it had been a while* since the last one and that a black player should be assumed to have a top-deck Damnation as a possible play.
* - note that, in multiplayer games with an advanced turn counter -- and my example must be if people are hardcasting Hoof -- "a while" is one to two complete cycles. If everyone has a lot of mana, and all the decks are constructed to compete in a multiplayer setting, they should be able to climb right back into the thick of things in two turns minimum.
Anyway, to address your tangentially-related point (that certain generals create threatening board positions), I don't really know what to tell you. That's a part of the game. Prepare for them or be willing to accept a loss.
Craterhoof kills DO come from non threatening boards.
Just because you're only killing one or two players with your 8 mana spell and board of nothings doesn't suddenly make it weak and it doesn't suddenly make the player who was killed by it feel any better. It represents an absurd amount of reach.
Your example would have left the craterhoof player in an absolutely dominant position to take the game.
That was the point. If you're looking for Hoof to win the game, what do you need to make it happen? In that scenario, it was a board of seven creatures, a 5/5 and six 1/1s. If you consider that a non-threatening board, I think the problem is with you, not with the spell.
Eight mana spells win games, or at least put the caster in a position to win the game. If they didn't, they would cost less mana or, like Guardian of Vitu-Ghazi, be unplayable trash.
Why should 8 mana spells win games as consistently as craterhoof? This isn't 1v1 20 life magic. Reaching 8 mana is usually pretty trivial. If we let 8 mana spells be as game ending as craterhoof, we cheapen everything that happens up until the big mana point because every spell cast from then on out will have the intent of ending the game on the spot.
The game has to end at some point. And saying that Craterhoof Behemoth invalidates everything that has happened earlier strikes me as an especially asinine argument. As I have proven to you (several times now!), without "things happening before", Hoof is a strictly worse Akroma, Angel of Wrath.
Very well put.
Shock is "Strictly Worse" than Lightning Bolt. I cant take you very seriously with this statement. This is a place for debate but this statement is nowhere near accurate. I am not looking for you to agree with me but at least have rebuttal that makes sense please.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
Well, yeah, which proves that it actually does require some setup and isn't just a dumbfire broken card like Carthage's 8 mana 35/35 haste trampler. Its basically like saying you aren't going to fire off T&N when Aven Mindcensor is out.
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!