For many, when it comes to magic, Sally is their "Google". And while you may find that EMA is a supplemental product, you wouldn't necessarily find something that explicitly says that EMA is taking the same release spot that an hypothetical MM16 would be taking. You might, but you might not.
And to be honest, many people don't have good "search-fu" which is why they come here.
I don't think any of you interpreted the OP's question. First and foremost, there is no Modern Masters 2016. Eternal Masters is the supplemental product instead of, for example, a hypothetical Modern Masters 2016. I think that was the original poster's question. Then we had two people say it was exactly like MM16, which doesn't exist, and a third just agreeing with one of the responders.
I joined the site a number of years ago, before the Curse takeover, but it seems the logistics of getting a membership and posting immediately for the spam bots is fairly easy now, as the recent post section, especially at night in the USA is inundated with spam posts. Will it ever get better? Because each time I see it, and then see those spam posts sometimes remain for quite some time, it just seems "shoddy". I don't know if this is the correct forum for this post, but it's the best I could see.
Not sure, and I'll see if I can find the original sleeves.
I had, some time ago, been using sleeves. They had flaming skulls in which three or four dragons were shaped within the flames of the skull. I loved the artwork, but the sleeves were used relentlessly and I had to retire them. But I have never found them again. I don't know the manufacturer, I had saw them randomly on eBay one time, and it's when I first started sleeving my decks.
I don't know where the beat ones are, but I'll try to dig one up and scan it in the next day or two, unless someone knows the sleeves off the top of their head.
Deals should be ironclad. That being said, with this other player being new, you made him a bad offer. You were both in unhappy board states, so you wanted to catch up a little bit. You needed his help, And you offer a new player a deal that be can't use one of his possible win conditions against you ever is pure and total cheese, and if you did those kinds of offers multiple times in my group, you'd be looking for a new group,
Regarding your original post, you aren't clear. You say he killed one player, and the other lost about half his life, but then he used the hornets to "murder you and win the game". So did he win the game then? That is just for clarification, as like I said, if an experienced player was making deals to take advantage of new players like this, he'd either have to stop, or, like I said, find a new group.
DFCs where you can cast either side would certainly be shocking, but would cause serious issues. Players would have to play with sleeves which cause serious memory issues. Or you use checklist cards, and the print on the Innistrad checklist card already had fairly small print as it is.
Split cards with non-permanent and permanent halves would be interesting, but both sides would have to be fairly bland in what they are if you want any legibility, think of the flip cards.
We do have some cards that have an effect on the board state while in the graveyard, Wonder for example. So expansion in that is a possibility.
I didn't play during Threshold, and I know there are some issues with it, but we could try fixing it in some fashion as it seems to have some room.
Contraptions.
A "kicker" cost of exiling cards from your graveyard, instead of mana, or delve. This would have the potential of making small spells bigger in the later game without increasing the spell's actual cost. There are multiple avenues to go this way.
Uncommon legends wouldn't feel legendary or unique, not even mentioning the limited environment issues this could create.
I just want to make sure, but use of a Boogie Board LCD writing tablet would be prohibited, whether or not it included the save page option. Thanks in advance.
Curse of the Pierced Heart is a good example of why this card is not bad, but not good either. Yours is slightly better in life-losing aspect of it, but the opponent has control over the bleeding. Furthermore, timing restrictions on discarding asre weird: you can discard your hand anytime, or only when the third counter is placed?
I've played quite a lot of Limited and I'm pretty sure the card is pickable, but far from a bomb. Again, I might be wrong, but that's the reason there are multiple judges.
There has to be at least 3 relief counters on the card in order to have the option of discarding their hand to sacrifice the enchantment.
I did not really enjoy this ccl. There were many different interpretations of each challenge, and this led to much confusion and a very unfun experience. This seems far too clique-ish for me.
Whenever enchanted player casts a spell, that player loses 1 life.
At the beginning of each end step, if the enchanted player cast 2 or more spells that turn, put a relief counter on Scintillating Scotoma.
If there are 3 or more relief counters on Scintillating Scomota, the enchanted player may discard their hand. If they do, sacrifice Scintillating Scomota.
One must empty their mind to make the pain go away.
I think you are misreading card. The enchanted player loses 1 life every time they cast a spell. If they don't deal with it, if this is dropped turn 2 it will cause a minimum of 6 life lost, before they can make it go away, assuming they meet the criteria. It's only if they cast 2 spells in a turn (2 life lost on that turn) that they can get a relief counter on it, and they need 3 relief counters on it before they can sac it (and yes, I realize they may have an empty hand before doing so). Maybe you are reading it correctly, but I'd take a2 drop that deals 6 or more damage (life lost) quite often.
First of all, I'm not really sure that it is a good card even in limited, as your library contains 23 spells, and you are probably casting 1.5 spells each turn on average. So, that's a red curse from Innistrad buffed slightly - there is one problem, though: that card was used mainly for reach, taking off that last few points of life, an this thing falls off in the lategame once you enter top-deck mode.
How have people found the challenges this month? Always happy for feedback so I can make better ones next time.
In the first one, I just didn't understand if we were supposed to make cards specifically against the two Vampires or just generic cards that happen to be usable against them. Specifically, I didn't consider just being able to block them as a valid interaction because blocking is just going to work against any creature, not specifically the two Vampires. If you've read the discussion between me and Asrama, it mostly gets down to this.
Same here, it seems as if some believe the common had to completely shut down the 2 black commons, as opposed to just being able to help overcome a fast start.
And to be honest, many people don't have good "search-fu" which is why they come here.
I had, some time ago, been using sleeves. They had flaming skulls in which three or four dragons were shaped within the flames of the skull. I loved the artwork, but the sleeves were used relentlessly and I had to retire them. But I have never found them again. I don't know the manufacturer, I had saw them randomly on eBay one time, and it's when I first started sleeving my decks.
I don't know where the beat ones are, but I'll try to dig one up and scan it in the next day or two, unless someone knows the sleeves off the top of their head.
Thanks in advance.
Regarding your original post, you aren't clear. You say he killed one player, and the other lost about half his life, but then he used the hornets to "murder you and win the game". So did he win the game then? That is just for clarification, as like I said, if an experienced player was making deals to take advantage of new players like this, he'd either have to stop, or, like I said, find a new group.
Split cards with non-permanent and permanent halves would be interesting, but both sides would have to be fairly bland in what they are if you want any legibility, think of the flip cards.
We do have some cards that have an effect on the board state while in the graveyard, Wonder for example. So expansion in that is a possibility.
I didn't play during Threshold, and I know there are some issues with it, but we could try fixing it in some fashion as it seems to have some room.
Contraptions.
A "kicker" cost of exiling cards from your graveyard, instead of mana, or delve. This would have the potential of making small spells bigger in the later game without increasing the spell's actual cost. There are multiple avenues to go this way.
Uncommon legends wouldn't feel legendary or unique, not even mentioning the limited environment issues this could create.
There has to be at least 3 relief counters on the card in order to have the option of discarding their hand to sacrifice the enchantment.
I did not really enjoy this ccl. There were many different interpretations of each challenge, and this led to much confusion and a very unfun experience. This seems far too clique-ish for me.
I think you are misreading card. The enchanted player loses 1 life every time they cast a spell. If they don't deal with it, if this is dropped turn 2 it will cause a minimum of 6 life lost, before they can make it go away, assuming they meet the criteria. It's only if they cast 2 spells in a turn (2 life lost on that turn) that they can get a relief counter on it, and they need 3 relief counters on it before they can sac it (and yes, I realize they may have an empty hand before doing so). Maybe you are reading it correctly, but I'd take a2 drop that deals 6 or more damage (life lost) quite often.
First of all, I'm not really sure that it is a good card even in limited, as your library contains 23 spells, and you are probably casting 1.5 spells each turn on average. So, that's a red curse from Innistrad buffed slightly - there is one problem, though: that card was used mainly for reach, taking off that last few points of life, an this thing falls off in the lategame once you enter top-deck mode.
1> netn10
2> Bravelion83
3> glurman
Sorry, just don't have time this week to write more detailed responses.
Same here, it seems as if some believe the common had to completely shut down the 2 black commons, as opposed to just being able to help overcome a fast start.