Well crap. Now I'm not going to have anywhere to ask rules questions or scope out cool deck lists for various formats.
In my opinion this has been the best resource for the game. Now I'm just wander around the internet trying to find a substitute. Bullocks I tell you!
- Perodequeso
- Registered User
-
Member for 7 years and 9 months
Last active Wed, Mar, 3 2021 17:05:03
- 0 Followers
- 425 Total Posts
- 135 Thanks
-
Nov 30, 2017Perodequeso posted a message on If You Can't Take Criticism of Jeremy Hambly, You're Part of the ProblemI agree with the vast majority of this opinion piece, however: in one paragraph it states that policing peoples thoughts is abhorrent, and in another paragragh it states one should be OK with shooting people for their thoughts.Posted in: Articles
Nazis in Normandy were an occupying force waging a war of aggresson and comitting human rights violations. Modern American nazis are just a**holes with their heads lodged, we should shoot them? If and when they become violent prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law sure, but to espouse idealogical violence is dangerous, extreme thinking. - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
These:https://scryfall.com/search?as=grid&order=name&q=usd>2500
are the top 15 most valuable cards in the game, according to you final criteria.
These are the most valuable cards actually available in the market.
I'm thinking that my Knights of Thorn part of the band can block his Knights and only my Knights can deal damage to his, but I can still divide his damage among both my creatures if I so choose.
Or, because one of my creatures is red, my band cannot block his Knights due to the protection from red.
I'm not sold that latter scenario is correct but just want to be sure.
That's the same mirror we're all looking into. Anyone who doesn't believe it is in denial. LOL!!!
I know many casual players will disagree with this take on proxies, and I'm personally fine with responsible use of them, but using proxies will almost certainly degenerate into what you're currently experiencing. I would advise that you suggest to your group to roll back on or forego using them altogether, at least for a while. They've become a crutch for your groups deck building, time to walk without the crutch me thinks.
We added a new player to our group earlier this year. He was brand new to the game. At one point he purchased a bunch of powerful proxies just so he could keep up with the rest of us. He no longer uses those proxies, he feels like he's cheating even though the rest of us are cool with it.
Proxying cards you already own on the other hand feels different, not cheating, just efficiency of deck construction. So it'll be harder to convince them they should give up the practice. Maybe try to get them to see the beauty in having decks with varying power levels, a jank fest can be fun.
Ah, that was the caveat I was missing, thanks.
It seems to me that the only way to phase out an Aura ball would to phase out either one or both directly, with something akin to Teferi’s Protection.
The effects that cause permanents to phase out go after creatures, artifacts, lands, or non-Aura enchantments. So short of turning the Auras into creatures(in which case they would become unattached) or artifacts, how could they become phased out indirectly exactly? As an Aura ball, they wouldn’t be attached to any other permanents to indirectly phase out. If they become artifacts any effect that would phase them out would do so directly.
In short, I cannot think of a way that an Aura ball could phase out indirectly, and if this is the case, a phased out Aura ball would only be phased out directly. Am I missing something?
Wouldn't this be covered by the last sentence in 702.25g? "An Aura, Equipment, or Fortification that phased out indirectly won't phase in by itself, but instead phases in along with the permanents it's attached to(emphasis mine).
I was under the impression that attached permanents stayed attached when phasing in and out as long as all targets are legal. Is this not correct?
Of the nine cards with Chroma, four are just straight up Devotion.
Three are Devotion “in another zone".
Fiery Bombardment and Light from Within feel like a wholly separate ability, that frankly shouldn’t have been key-worded Chroma.
Chroma feels messy and all over rhe place. Like they had an idea but weren’t quite sure about how to execute it. Devotion on the other hand is cleaner, it always does the same thing. It’s easier to mentally absorb, and with the complexity in the game that’s really important.
It's just that "mill" can be a verb, like what you do to gain to turn it into flour.
I believe yes but would just like confirmation.
Edit:
Never mind, just read the Sundial's ruling's more carefully and got my answer.
This is totally Oogway!
1) Increase prize support for tournaments with desirable, needed cards.
2) Create products specifically for WPN locations.
3) Sell product directly to stores, bypassing distributors.
4) Support more formats at events.
All things that WOTC had done in the past.
These are only a few things, I'm sure there are others.
My question is, will that creature be destroyed by Siren's Call's trigger because Disharmony removed it from combat, or since it was declared as an attacker will it survive?
I'm leaning towards the former but not totally sure.