So Innistrad has 2 moons. One real and tangible(and made of Moon Silver) and one magical/ethereal? I need to catch up on my reading could you link this for me?
"Recent measurements of moon phase durations have shown asymmetric alterations. The implication is that the moon's orbit itself is being pulled in some direction by a very large, very nearby object still invisible to humanoid eyes."
The Eldritch Moon is made entirely of Moon Silver it would be another "other half". It is a prison for the other "other half", Emrakul an entity/Titan that may or may not have been an angel at one time.
No the eldritch moon is the invisible moon above drownyard temple. The moon of innistrad is not (from what we know) the eldritch moon.
As you can see I tended towards green red and feel like I scraped the barrel outside of some 5 drops. What would you build. I just didn't see depth anywhere except black and that's for mediocre removal or removal that's better on curve where splashing kills. Anywho. I need to get better at sealed and am not sure what to focus.
As you all have a ton of experience I was wondering if you think a alteration of the deck could work.
I was thinking bring to light allows for so much potential and could be insane resilience against the different hate out there.
So the deck I was thinking would cut all blue out of the main but bring to light
The engine of the deck would look something like
1 scapeshift
4 BTL
1 Kiki
1 Through the Breach
1 Emrakul
4 Nahiri
1 primetime
4 restoration angels
2-3 wall of omens
rest of ramp and removal package but no counter spells could play path to exile as well.
This would be kind of a smash up of the different strategies in the format right now. You can bring out TTB if you have an emrakul or prime time in hand (prime time for the haste, if you fetch 2 valakut then swing fetching 2 mountains you do 12 valakut damage and 6 trample, could up valakut count by 1 to make it more likely you would deal 18 valakut damage) if you have an angel on the field or kiki on the field you can find the other piece for kiki win (kiki and angel are decent in the deck to draw cards off wall and retrigger primetime, angel is just a beast anyways)and if you have 7 lands in play you can deal 18 damage straight to the face. As alsways you can fetch the wrath of god to clear the board if coco is being a *****. Nahiri is 2 answers in 1 card loots and can fetch out 1 of the amazing wincons.
So I was wondering what people here would think as I have not played regular shift regularly and am curious if a more field interactive explosive version could work with out as many ways to protect its combos.
I really liked the Novajoe idea for card advantage. This is a more toolbox variation. I cut lands since traverse can just be cycled for a land. I want to test this out and do some tuning, I think shattered perception could be insanely powerful in this deck but is too expensive to play more than 2. Since Urborg turns every land into a swamp for veilborn ghoul I figured traversing for it or westvale or gitrog or azusa would be able to just close out games.
Is that sufficient, or do you have a different dictionary you'd like to argue with.
No, but unless one regrets the decision one doesn't agree it was a mistake. One just thinks that one made a mistake in getting caught. Wrong is often a subjective term so I am unwilling to classify something as such unless the mistake maker also agrees it was wrong. In the same sense I am not going to say "Hasbro made a mistake in banning Jesse" I disagree and think it was a move that helps regress our society however, since Hasbro does not agree it is not universally objectively a mistake. Unless the perpetrator agrees that it was a mistake, I do not agree to attribution of the term.
Sure this is all tangential but there is are reasons people get offended and most of the time it boils down to misunderstanding so, I would like to remedy in this particular instance and maybe it will relate to other disagreements. Maybe even in this thread.
This is a little too into the semantic weeds. It WAS a mistake. Mistake means an action that was wrong, that's it.
"and regret" is the most basic definition.
Most people would addendum "didn't mean to"
and a lot more would further it with "typically not life changing"
What? Seriously, let's not get dragged into semantics here.
Well if you don't want to get into semantics you shouldn't try to define something. Defining something to a specific meaning invites arguments of semantics. Am I saying it wasn't a mistake? no I am not. However I do disagree with your exclusive definition of 'mistake.'
I thought he wasn't a Convicted Rapist, "just" a Sex Offender.
Those things are not alike, and would make a huge difference in what should happen.
There's the legal use of the term and the general use of the term. Going by the legal standard he isn't a rapist but in casual conversation people are pretty comfortable calling what he did rape. Two people being drunk, one gets passed out, the other has sex. The victim never consented (and legally couldn't even consent) that counts as rape in most peoples minds though to a legal standard it's usually prosecuted as less than rape, but still a sexual offense. That's a much different situation from a person breaking into your home with a gun, holding it to your head, and raping you which goes up there as assault, violent crime, rape, and a few other things.
thing is he says that isn't what happened but that she consented, however in a court of law it was too scary to face. So we either follow the US justice system and let him off since they think he is fine, OR we ignore the US justice system and him being a rapist isn't in the slightest proven.
Well until this is reversed I cannot participate in anything that profits Hasbro.
Unless you are advocating that we sentence people to death or slavery when they commit sexual assault you are being very inconsistent. If you are advocating that, I think you are cruel and heartless person who does not understand what it means to be human.
I don't think anyone here is actually advocating death or slavery for sexual assault, even the pro-WOTC side of this issue. The primary issue is whether the ban should stay or not. The secondary issue seems to be more to the question of: "Is it right to hold someone's crimes against them, after the justice system goes through with them?
My point is that it is inconsistent to want to punish someone continuously for certain crimes and not realize that is equivalent to a form of slavery. It is hard for us to look at slavery objectively since the most recent incarnation was particularly heinous, however other historical forms of slavery were much more humane but accomplished the same goals.
I used this same type of example to explain to someone why they couldn't refuse service to a homosexual regardless of their religion.
Assume that anytime I say "don't feel safe" that more often than not that person actually just wants more punishment and "justice" and have no actual fear there.
Let us take someone that agrees with Wizards enforcement. So we ban ZJ from MTG. Now let us go to other areas of their life. They go to the pool, they don't feel safe at the pool if ZJ goes to the pool, and remember kids are at the pool. So now ZJ is banned from the pool. Then let us go to the next place. It's a playground, ZJ took his kid to the playground but the mothers there don't feel safe, so ZJ is banned from the playground. Now how about work, ZJ is no longer allowed to get a job because everywhere thinks that he is dangerous. What this person wants is to significantly limit this persons freedoms, for the rest of their life. Why? Because they deserve it. Not because this person poses any threat to society or is even a drain, they are not looking at the bigger picture, they are doing it out of hate and malicious intent.
Now call me crazy, but I have never seen this sort of vitriol against a female rapist and I do not imagine that half the people would come out of the woodwork if ZJ was a female. That is conjecture and you can dismiss this point due to that, but if you also see that as a likelihood then you know that shows just how fair that is.
Well until this is reversed I cannot participate in anything that profits Hasbro.
Any entity that is completely OK with a) Bullying (how this ordeal happened, no matter what your viewpoint is on this, this is bullying) and b)Retributive justice is not an entity that I can support. Retributive justice is barbaric, inhumane, and it harms both parties. It subjects the persecutors to cruelty and it reduces the persecuted to sub-human.
Unless you are advocating that we sentence people to death or slavery when they commit sexual assault you are being very inconsistent. If you are advocating that, I think you are cruel and heartless person who does not understand what it means to be human.
If you play control, you should understand why instant speed is better than sorcery speed.
But is it better than giving them a land?
Plus That deck you referred to plays burn and snapcasters, and is actually a highend Tempo deck that runs burn so the 3 life matters more. It doens't even run finishers. That deck just eeks advantage until it can't be overcome, it doesn't say NO then drop a Win in a single card.
Also path to exile is pretty much a pointless card against DRS and any other dork where oust is absolutley insane if they have no shuffle effects, and very good even if they do.
I understand that instant is very good and a huge upside that is not in debate, however, ramping/fixing your opponent is a much much much bigger downside than 3 life/them getting it in 3 turns. The question is if instant makes up for the downside. In this meta where control has very few cheap answers, being behind on land is a very big deal, not to mention control doesn't normally like to 2-for-1 itself.
I would say 15 times that path is a better card in aggro/midrange/tempo decks but I do not believe it is in a control deck.
TL;DR Yes path is better in UWR tempo(resto angels and snaps are definatley tempo cards not straight control cards) or any non control deck mostly, but is instant speed enough to make up for it in a CONTROL deck.
"Recent measurements of moon phase durations have shown asymmetric alterations. The implication is that the moon's orbit itself is being pulled in some direction by a very large, very nearby object still invisible to humanoid eyes."
http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/magic-story/drownyard-temple-2016-04-06
No the eldritch moon is the invisible moon above drownyard temple. The moon of innistrad is not (from what we know) the eldritch moon.
duskwatch really seems like he can be a house. 1 mana mystics, dwywen's, and 2 mana lords are pretty great.
Looks sick.
I havent played any list yet but have been spending a lot of time learning elves in the past couple days.
I really feel that the deck is geared to be tier 1.
That's the pool.
As you can see I tended towards green red and feel like I scraped the barrel outside of some 5 drops. What would you build. I just didn't see depth anywhere except black and that's for mediocre removal or removal that's better on curve where splashing kills. Anywho. I need to get better at sealed and am not sure what to focus.
I was thinking bring to light allows for so much potential and could be insane resilience against the different hate out there.
So the deck I was thinking would cut all blue out of the main but bring to light
The engine of the deck would look something like
1 scapeshift
4 BTL
1 Kiki
1 Through the Breach
1 Emrakul
4 Nahiri
1 primetime
4 restoration angels
2-3 wall of omens
rest of ramp and removal package but no counter spells could play path to exile as well.
This would be kind of a smash up of the different strategies in the format right now. You can bring out TTB if you have an emrakul or prime time in hand (prime time for the haste, if you fetch 2 valakut then swing fetching 2 mountains you do 12 valakut damage and 6 trample, could up valakut count by 1 to make it more likely you would deal 18 valakut damage) if you have an angel on the field or kiki on the field you can find the other piece for kiki win (kiki and angel are decent in the deck to draw cards off wall and retrigger primetime, angel is just a beast anyways)and if you have 7 lands in play you can deal 18 damage straight to the face. As alsways you can fetch the wrath of god to clear the board if coco is being a *****. Nahiri is 2 answers in 1 card loots and can fetch out 1 of the amazing wincons.
So I was wondering what people here would think as I have not played regular shift regularly and am curious if a more field interactive explosive version could work with out as many ways to protect its combos.
4 veilborn ghoul
1 The Gitrog Monster
1 Azusa, Lost but Seeking
1 Shattered Perception
4 life from the loam
4 faithless looting
4 zombie infestation
2 seismic assault
2 Inqisition of Kozilek
2 Thoughtseize
3 abrupt decay
2 molten vortex
4 Traverse the Ulvenwald
2 commune with the gods
2 ghost quarter
1 westvale abbey
4 verdant catacomb
2 bloodstained mire
1 Tectonic Edge
1 wooded foothills
2 blood crypt
1 overgrown tomb
2 stomping ground
1 mountain
1 swamp
1 forest
1 urborg, tomb of yawgmoth
I really liked the Novajoe idea for card advantage. This is a more toolbox variation. I cut lands since traverse can just be cycled for a land. I want to test this out and do some tuning, I think shattered perception could be insanely powerful in this deck but is too expensive to play more than 2. Since Urborg turns every land into a swamp for veilborn ghoul I figured traversing for it or westvale or gitrog or azusa would be able to just close out games.
No, but unless one regrets the decision one doesn't agree it was a mistake. One just thinks that one made a mistake in getting caught. Wrong is often a subjective term so I am unwilling to classify something as such unless the mistake maker also agrees it was wrong. In the same sense I am not going to say "Hasbro made a mistake in banning Jesse" I disagree and think it was a move that helps regress our society however, since Hasbro does not agree it is not universally objectively a mistake. Unless the perpetrator agrees that it was a mistake, I do not agree to attribution of the term.
Sure this is all tangential but there is are reasons people get offended and most of the time it boils down to misunderstanding so, I would like to remedy in this particular instance and maybe it will relate to other disagreements. Maybe even in this thread.
Well if you don't want to get into semantics you shouldn't try to define something. Defining something to a specific meaning invites arguments of semantics. Am I saying it wasn't a mistake? no I am not. However I do disagree with your exclusive definition of 'mistake.'
thing is he says that isn't what happened but that she consented, however in a court of law it was too scary to face. So we either follow the US justice system and let him off since they think he is fine, OR we ignore the US justice system and him being a rapist isn't in the slightest proven.
"and regret" is the most basic definition.
Most people would addendum "didn't mean to"
and a lot more would further it with "typically not life changing"
My point is that it is inconsistent to want to punish someone continuously for certain crimes and not realize that is equivalent to a form of slavery. It is hard for us to look at slavery objectively since the most recent incarnation was particularly heinous, however other historical forms of slavery were much more humane but accomplished the same goals.
I used this same type of example to explain to someone why they couldn't refuse service to a homosexual regardless of their religion.
Assume that anytime I say "don't feel safe" that more often than not that person actually just wants more punishment and "justice" and have no actual fear there.
Let us take someone that agrees with Wizards enforcement. So we ban ZJ from MTG. Now let us go to other areas of their life. They go to the pool, they don't feel safe at the pool if ZJ goes to the pool, and remember kids are at the pool. So now ZJ is banned from the pool. Then let us go to the next place. It's a playground, ZJ took his kid to the playground but the mothers there don't feel safe, so ZJ is banned from the playground. Now how about work, ZJ is no longer allowed to get a job because everywhere thinks that he is dangerous. What this person wants is to significantly limit this persons freedoms, for the rest of their life. Why? Because they deserve it. Not because this person poses any threat to society or is even a drain, they are not looking at the bigger picture, they are doing it out of hate and malicious intent.
Now call me crazy, but I have never seen this sort of vitriol against a female rapist and I do not imagine that half the people would come out of the woodwork if ZJ was a female. That is conjecture and you can dismiss this point due to that, but if you also see that as a likelihood then you know that shows just how fair that is.
Any entity that is completely OK with a) Bullying (how this ordeal happened, no matter what your viewpoint is on this, this is bullying) and b)Retributive justice is not an entity that I can support. Retributive justice is barbaric, inhumane, and it harms both parties. It subjects the persecutors to cruelty and it reduces the persecuted to sub-human.
Unless you are advocating that we sentence people to death or slavery when they commit sexual assault you are being very inconsistent. If you are advocating that, I think you are cruel and heartless person who does not understand what it means to be human.
does exactly what command witness does without letting the return part be counterable and is super cheap and without vial can get online for 5 mana.
But is it better than giving them a land?
Plus That deck you referred to plays burn and snapcasters, and is actually a highend Tempo deck that runs burn so the 3 life matters more. It doens't even run finishers. That deck just eeks advantage until it can't be overcome, it doesn't say NO then drop a Win in a single card.
Also path to exile is pretty much a pointless card against DRS and any other dork where oust is absolutley insane if they have no shuffle effects, and very good even if they do.
I understand that instant is very good and a huge upside that is not in debate, however, ramping/fixing your opponent is a much much much bigger downside than 3 life/them getting it in 3 turns. The question is if instant makes up for the downside. In this meta where control has very few cheap answers, being behind on land is a very big deal, not to mention control doesn't normally like to 2-for-1 itself.
I would say 15 times that path is a better card in aggro/midrange/tempo decks but I do not believe it is in a control deck.
TL;DR Yes path is better in UWR tempo(resto angels and snaps are definatley tempo cards not straight control cards) or any non control deck mostly, but is instant speed enough to make up for it in a CONTROL deck.