2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • 1

    posted a message on Can't get Tibalt's Trickery to resolve on Magic Online (MTGO)
    You need to click on the card that was revealed and then click "Cast without paying its mana cost".
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 1

    posted a message on Nightmare Shepherd and mutated tokens
    So, there are two pieces here that are relevant. The first is the one you pointed out: it is not a token even though a token is a component in the pile. So, Shepherd should have triggered and potentially allowed you to exile the cards in the graveyard.

    However, the more important piece is the "if you do" clause on Shepherd. This requires that every component of the pile be exiled in order for you to get a new token. While the trigger should have happened, it is impossible for you to exile every component since the token component ceased to exist.

    It certainly sounds like a bug if the trigger didn't occur, but you can't get the new token anyway so the end result ends up being correct. Since you can't just perform part of the process, you also can't exile the card components just because you want to. It is all or nothing and since you can't choose "all" you end up exiling "nothing".
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • 1

    posted a message on Help locating a card (name)
    While you don't give a lot of information, "needing 2 of each color mana to cast" narrows things down immensely. That is, there is only one thing in the entire game that fits this criteria: Progenitus. And it was first printed in Conflux in 2009 which is 12 years ago now. Without more information, this appears to be exactly the card you are looking for.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 1

    posted a message on New Secret Lair Cards
    The only thing I am disappointed about is that I just picked up some borderless Cultivates from M21 (or whatever set they were in). Otherwise, this Secret Lair is looking pretty good. Ponder is still the most exciting card, but I am optimistic for what the last two cards will be.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 1

    posted a message on Griselbrand - Lifelink - Sling-Gang Lieutenant
    Yes, they should have been able to sac their creature before damage. But I doubt it is a bug. It sounds to me like they didn't have a stop set in the Declare Blockers step so that is why they never got priority after blockers were declared.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • 1

    posted a message on Companion question
    It is whatever you want; you are sideboarding after all. So, you can put it into your deck if you want. If you do that, it is no longer a Companion (or, more specifically, can't be declared as one). If you want to use it as your companion, you need to leave it in the sideboard and still ensure your main deck matches the condition after you are done sideboarding.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • 1

    posted a message on Legendary MDFCs, Rules Text, and Color Identity
    It is already covered in the rules because of things like Archangel Avacyb:

    903.4d. The back face of a double-faced card (see rule 711) is included when determining a card's color identity. This is an exception to rule 711.4a.

    So, no, the symbols on the front face don't change anything. Or, if they do, they don't matter because the rule says to just look at the back face and the back face has those symbols too.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • 1

    posted a message on Need help
    There is a Rulings Forum for questions like that and, as hoffmkr points out, using card tags is mandatory.

    As to your question, each of those cards add one trigger. So, with both, you get 3 triggers instead of 1 for each Landfall trigger whenever a land enters since you get 2 extra triggers (one from Yarok and one from Greenwarden). So, Elemental gets +6/+6 total. Moraug would get you 3 extra combat phases. And so on for anything else with Landfall.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 2

    posted a message on How does your play group feel about/use proxies?
    I sort of have the opposite situation. I refuse to play with proxies when I can manage it (sometimes I will use them when the cards are in the mail or when I am testing cards) but for the most part, I don't play with proxies.

    My decks still end up having similar cards to one another, though I make a conscious decision to try to keep the overall "feel" of the decks distinct. So, all my blue decks play Cyclonic Rift and Mana Drain for example. And, again, none of these are proxies so it isn't like allowing for proxies is pushing things in my decks to be degenerate; I have the cards to build whatever I want and I want those two cards because they are good (Rift especially being a sort of "get out of jail" type card).

    So, with that being said about what I do with proxies, I have done my best to really encourage proxies in my group. There is one player who proxies his entire deck which I am fine with. And others play generally lower powered stuff because they don't want to use proxies, which is also fine. But I keep trying to push for the "proxies are ok" mentality because it shouldn't lead anyone to any particular playstyle.

    Maybe things are a little homogenous as players start out, and maybe they don't evolve from there but that is a playgroup issue and seems like it is a weird thing to accept and/or advocate. That is, it seems like your point is that players would dive more into homogeny and optimization except they are simply priced out of doing so. Which....I guess I don't see the point. Plenty of cheap cards offer homogeny; plenty of powerful cards are cheap due to reprints. To suggest that you don't want to see too many Scroll Racks simply because it is expensive while you are fine with Kinnan combo simply because it is cheap (enough pieces are anyway) seems sort of backwards.

    I have a feeling that if you really cracked down on proxies, at least from the "too powerful" or "optimized" category, and then someone like me showed up to your group and played every blue deck I had which includes all the stuff your group has said was not ok to proxy, I imagine it would feel sort of unfair. I mean, what is really the difference between proxying a Rift for every blue deck and simply buying it from a play perspective? You force someone to spend money, sure, but your games are the exact same as they would be with proxies.

    If there is an issue with power or whatever then talk to your group. Encourage diversity but don't do it through some sort of gatekeeping based entirely on personal budget or finances.

    In short, I think there is plenty of degeneracy that can occur without proxies; that is a player issue, not a budget issue.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • 1

    posted a message on Two Phasing questions
    Quote from chaikov »
    Woah, guess I missed some functionnal updates here! Must have been coviblinded...
    I know this is no rule question but, are there many other cards that were updated from Exile to Phase Out, like Oubliette?

    No. They only changed it because the oracle text wouldn't fit on a printed card. Or, that is most of the reason.

    Someone did ask Tabak about Tawnos's Coffin though and he seemed open to it. Though, it sounds like he might not have been completely on board with Oubliette so who knows.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.