This site works best with JavaScript enabled. Please enable JavaScript to get the best experience from this site.
Quote from Lithl »Curse of Opulence is by far the best curse, although part of that is related to CMC (Overwhelming Splendor, Curse of Verbosity, and Cruel Reality definitely have stronger effects, but cost more to play). If all the curses are free then I'd have to stack rank it lower than normal.
Quote from Reach229 »Sounds real good. only query would be 3x Curse of Death's Hold??? I don't know what kind of decks your playgroup is running but i like my weenie creatures, one of these would be harsh, to see more than that would be brutal! I would be tempted to errata the 'you do x' curses, since there arent many, and since randomising it could mean the attacker gets double the effect, which isn't meant to happen... Also imagine attacking into Curse of Bounty only to find it untaps all the opponents blockers
Quote from AUTUMNTWILIGHT »Remind me with Chandra Torch of Defiance was there a concerted effort by MARO and Friends to make sure Red didn't get good cards in the next sets?
Quote from cfusionpm »[quote from="WarMachinePrime »" url="/forums/magic-fundamentals/the-rumor-mill/801595-full-gallery-is-up?comment=269"] Just so we're clear, your stance is that you want cards to be cheaper. Cards are cheaper as a result of this set. In fact, every card included in the set has dropped considerably. But you are nevertheless upset, because the cards aren't cheaper enough. Then you call me crazy and that you can't debate? Well at least one of those things is true.
Quote from cfusionpm »If you aren't buying packs, but you get to benefit from price drops anyway, why are you upset?
Quote from Narlix the Blue »[quote from="Dontrike »" url="/forums/magic-fundamentals/the-rumor-mill/800876-ultimate-masters-box-topper-promos-psa-regarding?comment=673"][quote from="Narlix the Blue »" url="/forums/magic-fundamentals/the-rumor-mill/800876-ultimate-masters-box-topper-promos-psa-regarding?comment=672"] Look there is no such thing as a player or collector/investor/hoarder( as you put it) everyone in this game is BOTH with very few exception( you can collect without playing you can't play with out collecting ) .
Quote from greywyn »No. Anything goes. Echoing a post above: if you don’t like a particular card or strategy, punish it. Destroy it. Disallow it (with cards, not house rules). I’ve yet to run into any real problems with this approach.
Quote from WarMachinePrime »Quote from jshrwd »Quote from WarMachinePrime »Methinks a lot of Wizard employees have the day off and are posting up in this thread judging by join dates and post numbers. These types of comments serve zero purpose and only undermine any reasonable nature of a conversation They're the "YOU'RE FAKE NEWS" of MTGS and hurt us all when they are posted So you seek to delegitamize my comments by calling it fake news. Let the forum-ship decide for themselves. Free thought and all. It hurts NO ONE!!!
Quote from jshrwd »Quote from WarMachinePrime »Methinks a lot of Wizard employees have the day off and are posting up in this thread judging by join dates and post numbers. These types of comments serve zero purpose and only undermine any reasonable nature of a conversation They're the "YOU'RE FAKE NEWS" of MTGS and hurt us all when they are posted
Quote from WarMachinePrime »Methinks a lot of Wizard employees have the day off and are posting up in this thread judging by join dates and post numbers.
Quote from WarMachinePrime » One sided arguments are pointless. I let mine stand on their own merit. I'll reiterate, Ulitmate Masters is no where near ultimate. An improvement for sure, but when the bar is set so low with Iconic Trashters and MassTurds 25, anything looks better.
Quote from DirkGently »Hmm, I do understand that goal, but I'd think that having a deck that's extremely fragile to removal would be a pretty un-fun way to avoid blowing out your opposition. The skill level between myself and the rest of the playgroup is quite large, so I feel building a crappy deck is a better option at this stage. I'll reevaluate if it doesn't go as planned, however. [quote from="Onering »" url="/forums/the-game/commander-edh/801237-who-should-lead-a-sans-r-walls-deck?comment=9"]I agree with Dirk. Even if you are pulling punches while deck building, stick with Arcades. Just build him as goofy wall aggro and leave out the combos. You aren't going to run the table trying to beat face with walls, even with all that draw, but you'll at least have a consistent deck that actually does something even when you don't win, rather than just getting rolled because your key card got killed or building in so much contingency that your deck has no identity and you're just running Bant control, but with walls. If you're going to build a deck that does dumb *****, build it so that it does that dumb ***** reliably, every game. That's how you make it fun. You want to be able to throw walls at people, then make sure you can throw walls at people starting turn 4, every game.
Quote from Gashnaw »[quote from="Monkey222 »" url="/forums/the-game/commander-edh/801237-who-should-lead-a-sans-r-walls-deck?comment=6"] I have done that as well, However I have 3 Izzet decks with two more in production. So while i goal was 32 decks, i will probably have closer to 40 by the end. Arcades was my bant deck but after a few plays i realized i hated it. Too commander dependent so i took it apart pretty much the day i built it. I think I may go with Estrid as well. Not sure.
Quote from DirkGently » I mean, if you want to build a bad deck for fun, build a bad deck for fun. But if you want to make a wall deck work, just build arcades. Doran doesn't even add anything to the deck, he's just redundant.