Well this seems utterly crap for the game as a whole. But at least unlike the crossovers, I can just ignore these and pretend they don't exist. It's not like I'll ever see one.
I have the exact opposite feeling. I love some of the cards spoiled (Like Davriel), it's perfectly doable in paper and I hate that I'm forced each time to print a proxy version of it as the only way to have it and ask playgroup if they are fine with it (and probably won't), instead of having it as default accepted and legal in EDH.
isn't it obvious that they are trying to more and more divorce paper and digital mtg? it's not necesarily a bad thing, for example having "eternal" format that uses all cards available on digital platform is very good since it gives players something to do with their digital objects when they rotate out of standard. but i would say that gimmickiness of those mechanics seem to serve only the purpose of not being able to do them effectively in paper although i would need to see all the cards first before final judgement.
I would like to have something to do with my real standard cardboard after they rotate out. If they cant comply with that then I want them to get rid entirely of standard, and make that thing full digital, so the standard sets are avaible only in digital format. And if some of these cards are really worth of a GATHERING with old wizards, meaning that they are good enough to compete with somenthing like the gorgeous force of will, then only then, they would be reprinted in some expensive modern eternal horizon or eternal masters or modern masters. So at this point the should print only legacy reprints, and leave the fun new morally correct stuff for the kiddies for them to play in theirs new gizmos.
making standard digital only is not really possible without abandoning nonrotating paper formats (or drasticaly redefining how stnadard works) which are the driving force of expensive reprints sets. without new cards entering those formats cardpools their metagame will stagnate and people will lose interest. they don't want to lose this market.
Well this seems utterly crap for the game as a whole. But at least unlike the crossovers, I can just ignore these and pretend they don't exist. It's not like I'll ever see one.
I have the exact opposite feeling. I love some of the cards spoiled (Like Davriel), it's perfectly doable in paper and I hate that I'm forced each time to print a proxy version of it as the only way to have it and ask playgroup if they are fine with it (and probably won't), instead of having it as default accepted and legal in EDH.
isn't it obvious that they are trying to more and more divorce paper and digital mtg? it's not necesarily a bad thing, for example having "eternal" format that uses all cards available on digital platform is very good since it gives players something to do with their digital objects when they rotate out of standard. but i would say that gimmickiness of those mechanics seem to serve only the purpose of not being able to do them effectively in paper although i would need to see all the cards first before final judgement.
I imagine two of the main reasons they only made three dungeons are because it's harder to balance the more dungeons you add both in terms of the power level of venture cards and the dungeons themselves relative to each other, and secondly because the more dungeons you add the more complex all the venture cards become with different possible choices and outcomes.
The first mistake was not limiting the number of dungeons "in your deck". They should at least have made the dungeons take up a sideboard card slot.
Honestly, these should've just worked similar to sagas: Cards with a mana cost that you cast and go into your deck. If it was me I would've made them double-faced to represent the reward or loot on the backside, similar to the Ixalan DFCs.
This mechanic feels very undeveloped front, back and center. And I cannot wrap my head around why they thought it was a good idea and exciting for the players to only print three dungeons. It boggles my mind.
Maybe they are afraid of making them too good after companion debacle? Designing more of them and making them legal only in limited, prerelease or something would fix that issue. There is also missed opportunity to allow players to make dungeons themselves from pre-designed pieces in similar fashion as there were equipment stickers in theros. As was mentioned dungeons look like excellent material for supplemental product like planechase. Just do not make them legal in any tournament setting.
As game pieces they are terrible. Very clunky. There is a lot of text on them and the marker for currently occupied room needs to be tiny. In paper this will be annoying to use and I can imagine accidental displacement of marker will be a thing. Making oversized variants would fix the problem (they could put oversized variants in prerelease packs). I can imagine this will have "cool" animations on arena, alongside with list of bugs and performance issues for mtga and modo longer than dungeon mechanics entry in comprules.
For now this looks like the party mechanic that had no impact in any format whatsoever. And btw why not reprint party mechanic in DnD tie-in set instead of inventing new one? It seems like perfect fit for a DnD set and was already proven to be safe for the game.
The Rampant Growth seems absolutely terrible. They had to push this more surely, given there's so many 4 mana double ramp spells with, some upside already, why on earth would you ever want this?
because this is a double ramp spell with upside for 4 mana.
it triggers "on cast" stuff twice, the lands come untapped.... so you'll have one spare mana more than most of those effects on the turn you cast it.
it's just as good as all the other 4 mana spells that tutor up 2 basic lands... better in some decks, worse in others.
it's a fine card.
It's just another permutation of available options but I feel they are running out of designspace for ramp spells using two lands. I would say that it's a bit worse than previous iterations as it gives opponent whole turn to interact with whatever generates additional value from land drops that you have on board before second land hits the board.
There can't possibly be enough valuable cards in a single box to be worth the pricing.
Check what Ryperior listed. Fetchlands are in rare slot and cost 20-40E. Recent history of similar products show high chances of experiencing shortages in supply again. This is all unfortunate and no MSRP makes it even easier to bump the prices. Maybe they actually overprint mh2 and we will get actual drop in card prices.
I don't see why pact is not bannable. It should not be introduced to the format in the first place. Not only does it not work correctly but also it was obvious what will happen when it will be introduced into historic.
He refers to "mistakes" that are actually sound business decisions.
Would you care to name those? Unless by "sound business decisions" you mean ones that will result in increased income no mater the cost then yeah, those are sound business decisions all right.
Anyway what is "WPN Email" and "Wizards Fan Email"?
Try to get this back on topic
reprints will probably be made with new art in D&D form
I have lost contact with DnD after 3.5. Back then there was a lot of overlap in the list of artists for DnD books and MtG cards. Is this still true now?
How I miss the old style land art, where you see serenity instead of drama.
Agreed. They really need to bring that back. Also genuine painting, not waxy digital renders
digital renders are fine... if you have a variety of styles available. the issue is uniformity. art guidelines are currently so strict that you can barely recognize that images were made by different artists. ug land? it will sure use mostly blues and greens and you will be able to tell what colors it will produce without seeing textbox. while it has its pros it also makes everything look same-ish.
the fact that you might not use this card does not invalidate the fact that using it would make the deck better.
But that's barely. I wouldn't want to take anything out of any deck and making it less synergistic just for the chance of one out of twenty games I get to show off and then get reamed by the table.
Honestly, this card throws out subtlety in the hopes that no one can stop you. It's still a good card, but not the Commander destroyer, #1 card of all time some are making it out to be.
i disagree. if your deck leans on the commander in any way then using this will always be improvement. of course the degree of improvement depends on the deck and power level of the meta but even if you use in decks from casual end of the spectrum it will still be very good since decks at that power level tend to not have that much low cmc interaction to punish you. and on the competitive end of the spectrum... well people play gemstone cavern for a reason, casting 4cmc commander t1 is something people will want to do.
what i don't like is the play patterns it incentivizes - as you pointed out it strengthens all-in strategies and makes games more draw dependent. which is an unnecessary development for any format. but yes, the sky is not falling.
Go ahead and quibble about how it’s a dead card when you’re commander is out and protected (so you’re already in a strong position if not winning).
It puts out your commander early or pays for tax. There are extremely few decks where this isn’t an auto-include.
I think I'll find a way to not include it in any of my decks from Goreclaw to Daretti, Tariel to Phenax, Atraxa to Torbran, Mazirek to Melek, Scarab God to Ravos+Kraum, R/G Omnath to Tiana. In any of those Daretti and Goreclaw are the only two that really wants to get out turn one or far faster than they normally would, but then I have no protection and I put a target on my back so large I might as well scoop then and there.
I'll find a way to survive without it. Sol Ring is far more auto include than this shiny flower.
the fact that you might not use this card does not invalidate the fact that using it would make the deck better. and this is the issue people are having with it. obviously you can easily just not put that card in your deck and the deck will still funcion... in the same way that you can take out sol ring from decks you are running it in and be still fine.
i don't think this wil be a problem in casual decks but it might be an issue when played in optimized builds or cedh decks.
in the end this is a card that the format do not need and noone asked for.
This card is very, very good. Even in the most casual games this will generate some form of card advantage and lasting lock effect (so more card advantage since opponent needs to use removal on it). It's really sad that again the best type of this kind of effect is being printed outside of white. Compared to Aven Mindcensor that dumb bird looks pretty bleak both effect-wise and stats-wise.
The Scapeshift player just won't sac any land, and you'll get nothing. It's just a fancy counterspell in this case.
They were thinking too small, imagine resolving this in response to Doomsday.
I think this will be very interesting card to play with but maybe not necessarily fun to play against. It will generate interesting decision patterns e.g. do I cast this now in response to fetchland or do I wait to snipe Tinker for Bolas's Citadel?
As game pieces they are terrible. Very clunky. There is a lot of text on them and the marker for currently occupied room needs to be tiny. In paper this will be annoying to use and I can imagine accidental displacement of marker will be a thing. Making oversized variants would fix the problem (they could put oversized variants in prerelease packs). I can imagine this will have "cool" animations on arena, alongside with list of bugs and performance issues for mtga and modo longer than dungeon mechanics entry in comprules.
For now this looks like the party mechanic that had no impact in any format whatsoever. And btw why not reprint party mechanic in DnD tie-in set instead of inventing new one? It seems like perfect fit for a DnD set and was already proven to be safe for the game.
This is a nice callback to the original art.
It would be slightly too good if it made each opponent discard. You still have other ways to make all opponents discard cards like Liliana's Triumph, Arterial Flow, Bottomless Pit, Necrogen Mists, Oppression, hell, even Pox, Dark Deal, Memory Jar and Chains of Mephistopheles. The actual bummer is that you have nothing to do with those counters afterwards other than mash face. Still may be an interesting choice to helm monocolored pox/stax and certainly easier to acquire than Tinybones, Trinket Thief.
For modern? Unplayable for 2 and too hard to cast and too slow for 4. Moreover will not fit into the same deck that uses Grief/blink.
Anyway what is "WPN Email" and "Wizards Fan Email"?
I have lost contact with DnD after 3.5. Back then there was a lot of overlap in the list of artists for DnD books and MtG cards. Is this still true now?
what i don't like is the play patterns it incentivizes - as you pointed out it strengthens all-in strategies and makes games more draw dependent. which is an unnecessary development for any format. but yes, the sky is not falling.
one might say that after few turns negative effects start showing up during upkeep.
are there any null profusion variants that would work with obeka?
i don't think this wil be a problem in casual decks but it might be an issue when played in optimized builds or cedh decks.
in the end this is a card that the format do not need and noone asked for.
They were thinking too small, imagine resolving this in response to Doomsday.
I think this will be very interesting card to play with but maybe not necessarily fun to play against. It will generate interesting decision patterns e.g. do I cast this now in response to fetchland or do I wait to snipe Tinker for Bolas's Citadel?