2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • posted a message on Best sites for definitive "most valuable cards" list
    @Ulquiorra9000, the sites you mentioned are really what people use. It's best to take a mean value across them all. You'll find very little variance between them at top tiers.
    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.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Protection and Banding
    Say I have out Knights of Thorn and a Fire Drake. My opponent also has a Knights of Thorn and he attacks. If I band my Knights and Drake can the band block my opponents Knights?

    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.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Magic 93/94
    It appears that Eternal Central has unrestricted Maze of Ith.
    Posted in: Homebrew and Variant Formats
  • posted a message on How does your play group feel about/use proxies?
    Quote from brainface »
    Quote from Perodequeso »
    There's this notion that "casual" players just don't care about these things, aren't as financially invested as tournament grinders, and just have an anything goes attitude. In my personal experience all of those are categorically false. Almost every casual player I know are sticklers for the rules, particularly construction rules, are extremely proud of their collections, and spend way more money on the game than they ought to.

    In particular, I think I'm the first sentence but actually I'm the second sentence. Perodequeso has held a mirror up to my soul and I can't look away.


    That's the same mirror we're all looking into. Anyone who doesn't believe it is in denial. LOL!!!
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on How does your play group feel about/use proxies?
    I've played in plenty of casual groups and every single one was against proxies. And even when a particular group is OK with them, the individual players feel awkward using them. There's this notion that "casual" players just don't care about these things, aren't as financially invested as tournament grinders, and just have an anything goes attitude. In my personal experience all of those are categorically false. Almost every casual player I know are sticklers for the rules, particularly construction rules, are extremely proud of their collections, and spend way more money on the game than they ought to. With all that in mind, proxies are looked upon as cheating. Their attitudes are play what you own, and if that means moving cards around from deck to deck then so be it. Magic cards are like a little micro economy, and proxies are viewed as counterfeits (with the exception of proxying up cards for a test run). The basic attitude is if you need it, buy it, but don't bring that fake garbage around here. And these are people who are cool with silver-bordered cards in decks.

    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.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Two Phasing questions
    Quote from Perodequeso »
    Is there even a way for an Aura ball to indirectly phase out en toto?
    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.
    Teferi's Protection is exactly how it could get phased out.

    Using my example, ER1 phases out, therefore ER2 phases out indirectly at the same time. ER2 phases out, therefore ER1 phases out indirectly at the same time.
    702.25g When a permanent phases out, any Auras, Equipment, or Fortifications attached to that
    permanent phase out at the same time. This alternate way of phasing out is known as phasing
    out “indirectly.” An Aura, Equipment, or Fortification that phased out indirectly won’t phase in
    by itself, but instead phases in along with the permanent it’s attached to.
    702.25h If an object would simultaneously phase out directly and indirectly, it just phases out
    indirectly
    .

    So, they both phase out indirectly and are unlikely to ever phase back in.


    Ah, that was the caveat I was missing, thanks.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Two Phasing questions
    Is there even a way for an Aura ball to indirectly phase out en toto?
    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?
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Two Phasing questions
    Quote from peteroupc »
    Quote from kp256 »
    Quote from peteroupc »
    The comprehensive rules, however, unfortunately don't clarify the case of what happens when a permanent that phased out indirectly, phases in when the permanent was attached only to permanents that likewise phased out indirectly along with the permanent.

    So with no rule to tell them to phase in, it would seem like they stay phased out.
    No, they phase in as the appropriate untap step begins, just like any other phased-out permanent (C.R. 502.1). What is unclear is whether they remain attached or not once they phase in.


    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?
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Chroma vs Devotion
    Chroma is definitely a “better” mechanic than Devotion because it’s three different mechanics rolled up into one key word.
    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.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on "Mill" was such a gross feel-bad game term choice
    Quote from FreezingPoint »
    Shred, Tear, Grind or synonyms. There are cards with the Shred or Grind in their names, but none had the impact of Millstone.

    Personally I prefer the verbs Shred or Grind.


    It's just that "mill" can be a verb, like what you do to gain to turn it into flour.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Psychic Vortex with Sundial Q
    Does activating Sundial of the Infinite get around Psychic Vortex's EOT trigger?
    I believe yes but would just like confirmation.


    Edit:
    Never mind, just read the Sundial's ruling's more carefully and got my answer.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on [CMR] Mothership 10/30— Archelos, Lagoon Mystic... and lore for everyone previewed so far
    Quote from Caranthir »
    Immediately thought about Oogway as well.

    Loving Ramirez's description, and also "Tor Wauki the Elder"...a nice way of acknowledging that the character is mentioned in both Legends I and Legends II cycles (playing a major role in II).


    This is totally Oogway!
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Expand the Reserve List to Save the Local Game Store (LGS)?
    The best way for WOTC to help "save" the LGS would consist of multiple things:
    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.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Siren's Call and Disharmony
    Cool, thanks!
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Siren's Call and Disharmony
    My opponent, on my turn, casts Siren's Call. So now all my non-sick creatures must attack. Say I control a small utility creature that I'd rather not die in combat so I cast Disharmony on it to remove it from combat, after declaring it as an attacker.
    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.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.