Re: Undying Evil and Strangleroot Geist, if you haven't seen it, check out Frank Lepore's most recent BUG aggro videos - he is running a deck that I think could translate pretty well into MP. But the short version is Undying + Zamack Guildmage = valuetown.
Arcane Denial/Dream Fracture are pretty much the only counters I play in multiplayer. If you're running uncounterable spells, Denial can turn into a draw 3 for 2, which isn't half bad. Kind of a marginal play, but hey.
Also, sorry I haven't been good about commenting on your blog posts - I have been reading them, just haven't had much extra time to comment/post lately
Yes. (if you click the card link, the Gatherer page has a pretty thorough breakdown of how Commandeer works)
But for those who don't like clicking links:
7/15/2006: After Commandeer resolves, you control the targeted spell. Any instance of "you" in that spell's text now refers to you, "an opponent" refers to one of your opponents, and so on. The change of control happens before new targets are chosen, so any targeting restrictions such as "target opponent" or "target creature you control" are now made in reference to you, not the spell's original controller. You may either change those targets to be legal in reference to you, or, if those are the spell's only targets, the spell will be countered on resolution for having illegal targets. When the spell resolves, any illegal targets are unaffected by it and you make all decisions the spell's effect calls for.
7/15/2006: You may change any of the targeted spell's targets. If you change a target, you must choose a legal target for the spell. If you can't, you must leave the target the same (even if that target is now illegal).
7/15/2006: If the targeted spell has a triggered ability that copies it (for example, replicate or storm), the copies will be controlled by the player who cast that spell.
7/15/2006: You may pay the alternative cost rather than the card's mana cost. Any additional costs are paid as normal.
7/15/2006: If you don't have two cards of the right color in your hand, you can't choose to cast the spell using the alternative cost.
7/15/2006: You can't exile a card from your hand to pay for itself. At the time you would pay costs, that card is on the stack, not in your hand.
2/1/2007: If you Commandeer a spell for which Buyback has been paid, the card returns to its owner’s hand.
Shroud only stops targeting - Encoding does not target, so you are 100% good to go^^
[/CARD].
Varal:
I'm not quite sure where to start, since you're conflating so many unrelated things together somehow, but there's enough misinformation in this post that I'm going to try.
First, let's try and sort out some of the things that you seem to be misunderstanding:
1. I am not in any way saying that using house rules is in any way shape or form is "wrong" or "bad". As long as your playgroup all agrees to it beforehand, that's fine and dandy. However:
2. There are official rules, and they are explicit in their coverage, and anything that is not explicitly stated in the written rules (outside of specific tournament rules) is a house rule. There are no implied rules in Magic, everything is explicit. Again, playing with a house rule doesn't make it wrong in any way, but I personally feel that it is important to know the difference between house rules and the official rules. It's one thing to decide that you want to change a rule to make things more fun, it's quite another to play the "wrong" way out of ignorance. I will continue to make a note of those issues when I see them - not as an attempt to slag anyone off, but purely for educational purposes.
So, we come to your post - yes, I am 100% aware of 507.1's existence - I mentioned it in the post that Revaillac quoted, and in fact, your continued tone of "look at 507[.1] though, it proves that you are wrong" is one of the things that makes me think that you didn't read my post.
But let's break this down very carefully, and if you have questions or concerns after this post, please let me know which number your question falls under:
1. Only things that are explicitly stated in the rules exist as part of the official rules, anything else is a house rule.
2. Currently, there are 3 official multiplayer variants for declaring attackers: 1. Attack Multiple Players, 2. Attack Left and 3. Attack Right
3. Attack Multiple Players doesn't use 507.1
4. Attack Left and Attack Right were irrelevant to the situation I was addressing in my original post.
5. Any other method of attacking is a house rule (and again, that doesn't make it wrong, it just means it's outside of the official rules, which was the only point I was trying to make)
The only reason I got a little irritated with you at all, is your original assertion that "there are no official rules for multiplayer". Since we've moved on to quoting from the CR, I hope we can at least lay that to rest.
But I think here is where there's a disconnect - I do not interpret the rules more strictly than written - I "interpret" them exactly as written, with no omissions or additions. The rules only cover the situations as written, not anything else.
Really? Do you honestly think that section has any bearing on what we're discussing? Spoiler Alert: It Does Not. It an acknowledgement that there are additional rules in tournaments. An almost identically worded caveat for single player can be found under 100.6. It is certainly not a blank check to say "anything that you want can be called an official rule if you feel like it".
I have to be honest, I found that pretty offensive.
In any case, maybe things are cleared up now?
Again, this isn't really the place for an in-depth rules discussion. But:
I realize that my explanation in that quote makes it sound quite complicated, but I was trying to make it 100% clear to varal why his objection was irrelevant - since he didn't bother to read my response, it was wasted effort anyway, though
There's a huge difference between "T2 Griselbrand every game" and "sometimes he hits the nuts and gets T2 Griselbrand" - there's more to Lunatic's question than "what cards make that work?" There are very few Vintage-legal decks that could be that consistent about it, so there's several questions being asked. I mean, if next we hear that this meta has unlimited mulligans or something like that, it's pretty important to know.
edit: also, exactly what Cz says in reply 40.
Divine Reckoning tends to be my go-to for that purpose, or previously Cataclysm.
As much as I love getting into detailed descriptions of how the Magic rules work, this isn't the place for it, so I'll leave a link to the Comprehensive Rules for anyone actually interested and be done.
If you're fighting through infinite loop type effects along with giant fatties, that's going to color the advice given a bit^^
I would probably just run an enchantress deck based on Rest in Peace + Energy Field in that situation honestly. Or something along those lines. I'll chew on the idea a bit and see if I can find a decklist.
I know
(/steps off soapbox)
Back to the topic at hand though, you could always go the Clone route - Duplicant in particular is hilariously great. And if Reanimator is a consistent player in your meta, Dimir Doppleganger is one of my favorite cards, for several reasons^^
Saying there are no "official" rules for multiplayer is pretty disingenuous - sure, casual is casual and playgroups can make up whatever rules they want; that doesn't mean that section 800 of the CR doesn't exist. To be more exact in my explanation though, there's no existing multiplayer variant where that space between announcing the defending player and Declaring Attackers is relevant. Currently, the only 3 attack variations are: 1. Attacking Multiple Players Option (covered under 802) 2. Attack Left, and 3. Attack Right (both covered under 803). The first option, the one by far most commonly used in multiplayer, doesn't use the separate declaration mentioned in 507.1, the other two technically do, but since there is only one available target to attack, the knowledge is irrelevant to this discussion.
Just to point out that if you're playing by the rules, that's not possible. Deciding who is being attacked is part of the Declare Attackers Step, and once you've moved into that step no one gets priority to respond until the creatures are already attacking (and by that time, tapping them doesn't do anything relevant).
And then probably a token strategy to go with it, with Vault of the Archangel helping you to trade a Lingering Souls token for Emrakul
Anyway, something along that line would be my advice.
It's more when you're running things like Genesis or Mikaeus, the Unhallowed^^
Disciple of Bolas
So far my experiences have been very positive with this card - normally I prefer my card advantage to be in a more long term form, like Phyrexian Arena or it's ilk, but Disciple makes for such an explosive burst of advantage that I think it's worth running one or two in the appropriate decks.
So far, the colors that he really seems to shine in are GB and GBW - any color where you can get Phyrexian Reclamation/Genesis effects, or have creatures that you can sac for added value like Angel of Serenity, Thragtusk or Reveillark. (not to mention saccing Abyssal Persecutor to it just feels dirty^^)
Anyway, just thought I would see if other people had opinions on him one way or the other.
2 Pride of the Clouds
4 Soulcatcher
4 Squadron Hawk
4 Thrummingbird
4 Welkin Hawk
1 Windbrisk Raptor
4 Rhystic Study
4 Soulcatcher's Aerie
4 Divine Reckoning
4 Glacial Fortress
2 Seaside Haven
3 Mistveil Plains
5 Plains
5 Island
4 Hallowed Fountain
or something along those lines. I would probably do it a little differently now, but the core of Squadron Hawk/Welkin Hawk to fuel the engine worked very well. And as Carom mentioned, equipment also works very well here - particularly something like Basilisk Collar. Since you have a never ending stream of threats, you just need to make sure that each of them can trade profitably until you reach that critical mass.