Thanks for the response. I was hoping someone else might have a suggestion as well since I have been looking into the same thing. I have been sleeving my cards in the black Ultra Pro sleeves and, while they work fine, I don't like that they load on the side (opening on the long side) because it makes shuffling awkward. If I would have known the Ultimate Guard ones load on the top (short side) I would have picked those up.
How do they seem for size? I have my MTG Vanguard cards sleeved up and they are a tight fit in the Ultra Pros since they are just slightly larger than the "normal" planechase/archenemy cards. Do they planechase cards seem like a tight fit or is there a little extra room in the sleeves?
Yes, they can do that. In your example, there is a trigger allowing you to draw a card followed by another trigger allowing you to draw a card. They can respond in the middle of the triggers.
In the case of something that has you draw multiple cards at once, it is true that they effectively mean "draw a card, draw a card, draw a card" for anything that cares about a card being drawn (such as Dredge). However, there is no passing of priority in that case as it is still one effect so the entire spell has to resolve before your opponent gets to respond.
They will still see what you draw of course, but they won't be able to do much about it.
First, I would reword it to say "If an effect would cause you to sacrifice a creature...". This way you don't have to worry about trying to replace a cost (such as that of Ashnod's Altar).
Second, imbedding a target into the replacement effect seems to go against most templating. The problem is that it doesn't really fit within the idea of Replacement effects since they are never put onto the stack, so there is never a good time to declare the target.
Maybe choose a player as Raughn enters the battlefield. So, it would read like this:
Raughn, Harbinger of Darkness 4BBB
Legendary Creature
Flying
As ~ enters the battlefield, choose an opponent.
If an effect would cause you to sacrifice a creature, you may have the chosen player sacrifice a creature instead.
6/6
To be clear, it has a cost of 1 "Red" (not Mountain; Mountains produce Red mana, but so do other things) mana and 3 generic. And, to Horseshoe_Hermit's point, the generic mana comes before the colored mana requirement, but that is mostly just being pedantic.
In any case, the answers above provide the answer to your question (hopefully).
The controller of Viscera Seer can sacifice in response and will not take 3 damage. The other Searing Blood cannot be cast to target Viscera Seer either.
When a spell is on the stack other players can respond to that spell. If those responses cause all that spell's targets to be illegal, the spell will "fizzle" or be countered on resolution. Since Searing Blood only has one target, removing that target (sacrificing it) will cause it to no longer have a legal target and it will be countered. None of its effects will happen.
Another Searing Blood cannot be cast in this case as the cost of activating the ability of the Seer's ability cannot be responded to. Since part of that cost is sacrificing it, the Seer is gone by the time any player receives priority.
It refers to the turn you activated the ability. If your creatures dealt damage to your opponent this turn, your opponent can activate Spear's ability to then destroy those creatures.
There is only 1 ability: "tap target nonland permanent....doesn't untap". I bolded the important part here. The ability has a specific target (a nonland permanent). The ability doesn't care whether it is tapped or not at the time it is targeted. When the ability resolves, it will tap the permanent (which won't do anything since it is already tapped) and then prevent it from untapping next turn.
So, yes, you can target a tapped creature and the rest of the ability will still take affect.
This should probably be in the Rulings forum and I think you mean Grenzo, Havoc Raiser.
You have two effects trying to be placed onto this creature. When this happens like this, the playing controlling the Goaded creature must adhere to as many requirements as possible with also violating the least amount of restrictions.
The current requirement is that the creature must attack. This can be satisfied, so this is not a problem. Another requirement is that is attacks Grenzo's controller due to Dulcet Sirens. And, finally, the last requirement is that it attacks someone other than player 3 (since they are attacking) and the controller of Grenzo.
So, there are two competing Requirements. As such, the controller of the Goaded creature can decide which requirement they want to satisfy. This means, they can attack Player 1 or Player 2.
Wizards has no effect on either format now and will not in the future. Multiplayer Commander was a community driven format that caught on and became immensely popular. Duel Commander spawned from that to provide a more competitive environment.
No offense, but Wizards have a whole team working on making the Commander annal sets. To say they don't have a say on the Commander format is a not true.
I disagree with most of your point, so I don't want to rehash anything I said initially. However, I do want to address this quote.
I'll grant that Wizards obviously partakes in evolution of the format by introducing new cards. Your complaints are predicated on ban list decisions and overall philosophy of the format. While there are certainly things that can be improved (though I believe the format is in a very good place overall), my initial statement holds true within this context. Wizards does not dictate bans or philosophical changes to the format. You want them to and that is fine, but my point holds that it is extremely unlikely that Wizards will ever play a bigger role than just designing new cards for the format.
This seems like a lot of misunderstanding or, worse, intentionally misrepresenting the actual scenario to fit your preference.
Wizards has no effect on either format now and will not in the future. Multiplayer Commander was a community driven format that caught on and became immensely popular. Duel Commander spawned from that to provide a more competitive environment.
I get that it would be nice for Duel Commander players to have the option to play online, but Wizards taking over one group or the other has no bearing on this. They already don't interfere with Multiplayer Commander and yet coded it into MTGO. The quest should be to add Duel Commander, not supplant Multiplayer Commander on MTGO.
I am also confused on the assertion that the current RC has no experience doing what they are doing. Sheldon is a judge who has been working long enough around Magic to know at least something about it. And, at least 1 committee member is already a Wizards employee. I don't know enough about the rest of the RC, but I know they have all been involved in Magic at a professional level in some capacity. If I recall, this started out as a judge format since the creators were all judges.
I am not suggesting that they are omnipotent and can do no wrong, but that is a far cry from being inept at handling the format.
They meet often enough and their decisions are made at the same time Wizards makes their own Banned lists announcements. This allows ample time for those same changes to made in MTGO 3 weeks later (when the ban list changes go into effect online).
I disagree that Duel is in any way nearly as popular as Multiplayer Commander. It may be different in your area, but I doubt that is true across the wide spectrum of LGS's and players.
So, while there can certainly be changes made to add Duel Commander to MTGO (which seems to be what most of this post is about), Wizards taking over either format will help no one in the long run.
1) Yes. You would get 3 life. 1 Life for the first spell cast and then another 2 life for the second spell cast.
2) Here is the summary:
Bone Saw is cast. Each Reservoir triggers and resolves and you gain 2 life (1 from each). Bone Saw resolves.
Cathar's Shield is cast. Each Reservoir triggers and resolves and you gain 4 life (2 from each). Shield resolves.
Lightning Bolt is cast. Each Reservoir triggers. In response to those triggers, another Bolt is cast creating 2 more triggers.
The last 2 trigger resolve independently and you gain 8 life (4 for each since you cast 4 spells)
Bolt resolves.
The first 2 triggers resolve independently and you gain another 8 life (4 from each trigger).
The first Bolt resolves.
This gives you a total life gain of 1+1+2+2+4+4+4+4 or 22 life.
Generic costs in spells can be paid with any color or type of mana. Colorless mana can pay for Smuggler's Copter or the generic mana cost of Tireless Tracker just like the 5 colors can.
Yes, you can "filter" the colorless mana generated by Cultivator Drone through Unknown Shores since Unknown Shores is a colorless permanent and the ability is an activated ability.
Just the one. Once an object moves to a different zone, it becomes a new object with no relation or memory to its previous existence. So, even if you bring the same Bomat Courier back, it has already lost track of the cards in exile when it died so you will not get those back. They will remain face down for the remainder of the game most likely.
Also, Bomat Courier does not draw cards. It puts cards in your hand. This is a relevant distinction as things that prevent you from drawing cards (such as Spirit of the Labyrinth) will not stop you fom getting the exiled cards into your hand.
If a player is no longer part of the game, their cards aren't either. That means that you will lose any bonus you got from the creature cards that were in their graveyard.
This is because the buff is constantly being reevaluated so if creature cards enter or leave graveyards after Nighthowler is on the battlefield, the buff will update as appropriate.
How do they seem for size? I have my MTG Vanguard cards sleeved up and they are a tight fit in the Ultra Pros since they are just slightly larger than the "normal" planechase/archenemy cards. Do they planechase cards seem like a tight fit or is there a little extra room in the sleeves?
In the case of something that has you draw multiple cards at once, it is true that they effectively mean "draw a card, draw a card, draw a card" for anything that cares about a card being drawn (such as Dredge). However, there is no passing of priority in that case as it is still one effect so the entire spell has to resolve before your opponent gets to respond.
They will still see what you draw of course, but they won't be able to do much about it.
Second, imbedding a target into the replacement effect seems to go against most templating. The problem is that it doesn't really fit within the idea of Replacement effects since they are never put onto the stack, so there is never a good time to declare the target.
Maybe choose a player as Raughn enters the battlefield. So, it would read like this:
Legendary Creature
Flying
As ~ enters the battlefield, choose an opponent.
If an effect would cause you to sacrifice a creature, you may have the chosen player sacrifice a creature instead.
6/6
In any case, the answers above provide the answer to your question (hopefully).
When a spell is on the stack other players can respond to that spell. If those responses cause all that spell's targets to be illegal, the spell will "fizzle" or be countered on resolution. Since Searing Blood only has one target, removing that target (sacrificing it) will cause it to no longer have a legal target and it will be countered. None of its effects will happen.
Another Searing Blood cannot be cast in this case as the cost of activating the ability of the Seer's ability cannot be responded to. Since part of that cost is sacrificing it, the Seer is gone by the time any player receives priority.
So, yes, you can target a tapped creature and the rest of the ability will still take affect.
You have two effects trying to be placed onto this creature. When this happens like this, the playing controlling the Goaded creature must adhere to as many requirements as possible with also violating the least amount of restrictions.
The current requirement is that the creature must attack. This can be satisfied, so this is not a problem. Another requirement is that is attacks Grenzo's controller due to Dulcet Sirens. And, finally, the last requirement is that it attacks someone other than player 3 (since they are attacking) and the controller of Grenzo.
So, there are two competing Requirements. As such, the controller of the Goaded creature can decide which requirement they want to satisfy. This means, they can attack Player 1 or Player 2.
I'll grant that Wizards obviously partakes in evolution of the format by introducing new cards. Your complaints are predicated on ban list decisions and overall philosophy of the format. While there are certainly things that can be improved (though I believe the format is in a very good place overall), my initial statement holds true within this context. Wizards does not dictate bans or philosophical changes to the format. You want them to and that is fine, but my point holds that it is extremely unlikely that Wizards will ever play a bigger role than just designing new cards for the format.
Wizards has no effect on either format now and will not in the future. Multiplayer Commander was a community driven format that caught on and became immensely popular. Duel Commander spawned from that to provide a more competitive environment.
I get that it would be nice for Duel Commander players to have the option to play online, but Wizards taking over one group or the other has no bearing on this. They already don't interfere with Multiplayer Commander and yet coded it into MTGO. The quest should be to add Duel Commander, not supplant Multiplayer Commander on MTGO.
I am also confused on the assertion that the current RC has no experience doing what they are doing. Sheldon is a judge who has been working long enough around Magic to know at least something about it. And, at least 1 committee member is already a Wizards employee. I don't know enough about the rest of the RC, but I know they have all been involved in Magic at a professional level in some capacity. If I recall, this started out as a judge format since the creators were all judges.
I am not suggesting that they are omnipotent and can do no wrong, but that is a far cry from being inept at handling the format.
They meet often enough and their decisions are made at the same time Wizards makes their own Banned lists announcements. This allows ample time for those same changes to made in MTGO 3 weeks later (when the ban list changes go into effect online).
I disagree that Duel is in any way nearly as popular as Multiplayer Commander. It may be different in your area, but I doubt that is true across the wide spectrum of LGS's and players.
So, while there can certainly be changes made to add Duel Commander to MTGO (which seems to be what most of this post is about), Wizards taking over either format will help no one in the long run.
2) Here is the summary:
Cathar's Shield is cast. Each Reservoir triggers and resolves and you gain 4 life (2 from each). Shield resolves.
Lightning Bolt is cast. Each Reservoir triggers. In response to those triggers, another Bolt is cast creating 2 more triggers.
The last 2 trigger resolve independently and you gain 8 life (4 for each since you cast 4 spells)
Bolt resolves.
The first 2 triggers resolve independently and you gain another 8 life (4 from each trigger).
The first Bolt resolves.
This gives you a total life gain of 1+1+2+2+4+4+4+4 or 22 life.
Generic costs in spells can be paid with any color or type of mana. Colorless mana can pay for Smuggler's Copter or the generic mana cost of Tireless Tracker just like the 5 colors can.
Yes, you can "filter" the colorless mana generated by Cultivator Drone through Unknown Shores since Unknown Shores is a colorless permanent and the ability is an activated ability.
Cards printed in Supplemental sets, such as Commander sets, do not count towards the legality of cards in Modern or Standard.
Also, Bomat Courier does not draw cards. It puts cards in your hand. This is a relevant distinction as things that prevent you from drawing cards (such as Spirit of the Labyrinth) will not stop you fom getting the exiled cards into your hand.
Nighthowler
If a player is no longer part of the game, their cards aren't either. That means that you will lose any bonus you got from the creature cards that were in their graveyard.
This is because the buff is constantly being reevaluated so if creature cards enter or leave graveyards after Nighthowler is on the battlefield, the buff will update as appropriate.