I personally don't see why everyone is so up in arms over this set. There are plenty of valuable reprints and the set looks like a truly unique, fun set to draft. Obviously it's not perfect, but I'm looking forward to drafting it.
Didn't the vorthoses point out that the stained glass is reminiscent of Benalia? Also Serra angels were never human. From a flavour perspective i have serious doubts it's real
This is obviously not an Angel but a human that spawns one when it dies. And humans are definitely part of Serra's army (see Serra Ascendant, Serra Inquisitors, Serra Paladin and Serra Zealot). This is perfectly reasonable and fits with the names of mentioned cards.
The flavor text implies that the human creature becomes an angel when it dies in combat.
Looks like we've got two full weeks of practicing for Masters 25 before it comes out in person!
I just updated Draftsim for draft here and sealed here, let me know what you think.
Not sure if you've been made aware of this or not, but the simulator seems to think Brainstorm is uncommon.
I wanted to design a creature or planeswalker card which, when played, behaved as though it was an entirely new player that had just joined the game. Planeswalkers are arguably like this but, flavorfully, you still control planeswalkers to the extent that you've recruited them and they follow your orders. I wanted this card to behave completely actively (rather than passively) and autonomously, to the point where it would impact the board but have the same effect on the game regardless of which player had it under their control. This is what I came up with:
Barzal, the Impetuous (1)(B)(R)(R)
Legendary Creature - Demon {M}
Flying, haste
Barzal, the Impetuous can’t block and can't be sacrificed.
At the beginning of your declare attackers phase, if Barzal is untapped, flip a coin. If you win the flip, Barzal attacks an opponent chosen at random, if able. Otherwise, Barzal can’t attack this combat.
At the beginning of each opponent’s upkeep, flip a coin. If you lose the flip, that player gains control of Barzal, the Impetuous and untaps it. "You summoned me, yes, but I heed no call."
4/6
I also wanted to include "Barzal, the Impetuous has shroud as long as it's tapped" in order to prevent players from getting around the chance factor of the card, but felt that it a) made the card too wordy and b) actually didn't really fit the flavor I was going for since players are perfectly capable of reacting to what their opponents are doing under normal conditions (so why shouldn't a player be able to kill Barzal in response to his "decision" to attack them?).
Anyway, as you can tell, I made the card heavily red to fit with the autonomous flavor of the card, but only after finishing it did I realize that it would actually be possible to design cards of any color that behave this way (e.g., a white creature that blocks/prevents damage to its controller or its controller's weakest creature, but changes controllers based on life totals, who controls how many creatures, or whether any of its controller's creatures died last turn, etc.).
But before I get ahead of myself, how does this card look? Is it formatted properly? Does it work the way I intend it to? Does it break the game somehow? (The legendary rule doesn't cause you to sacrifice permanents, right?) How is its power level? (To the statistically/probabilistically uninitiated, this card is actually more likely to help you than hurt you in the long run in a 1v1 game. Assuming you played it during your pre-combat main phase, by the time your next main pre-combat main phase rolls around, if Barzal hasn't died or been targeted by any spells or abilities and there were no extra combat phases, the odds that it's a) attacked your opponent are 50%, b) attacked you are only 25%, and c) under your control are 75%).
Is "impetuous" the word I was searching for?
[Edit]: Would "Barzal, the Impetuous can’t block and spells or abilities any player controls can't cause Barzal to be sacrificed" be better, if wordier?
Obviously the least amount of any given card that can be drafted from the same box by every player is zero, but I'm curious how many of the same common, uncommon, rare, or mythic rare card a player could theoretically have in the same draft deck (not counting foils, and assuming no errors in the print run). I'm asking because I'm considering making my own, custom limited set of all reprints (like MM, EM, and IM) but would like to know how many copies of each card I would need to own in order to most realistically simulate an actual MTG draft.
Suppose I have both a Drana, Liberator of Malakir and an Ainok Bond-Kin with no +1/+1 counters on it in play. I attack with both. Drana connects with my opponent, triggering her ability, which resolves, putting a +1/+1 counter on both herself and the Bond-Kin. So, now the Bond-Kin has first strike. Since first strike damage has already been dealt, the game would progress to the next damage phase. Would the Bond-Kin then deal no damage, because the first strike phase had already passed?
This card definitely gets the award for most over-hyped card spoiled so far. At the end of the day, this card is just a dumb beater. Even if it does come down as a 6/6, it doesn't do much. Obviously, it could see play in non-abzan decks, but the way it's being talked about you'd think it's one of the premier cards of the set. I tend to be cautious when evaluating cards, but I'll risk eating my words on this one: If I ever play this card card in constructed, I won't be excited that I'm doing it.
Maybe I'm just too tired to figure it out, but what does this deck even do? Are you just trying to run control while occasionally dinging your opponent with Ojutai? This does not seem efficient at all to me, let alone efficient enough to hand in the next Standard.
The deck gets to play all of the best removal and card-draw in the format. It controls the game, and then wins with Gideon or Ojutai. How is that any less efficient than Esper Dragons is now? It is actually better at closing out the game since you get to play effectively 9 win-cons (4 Bring to Light, 2 Dragonlord Ojutai, 3 Gideon). It also gets far better answers than any Control deck in Standard gets right now simply because it is able to play all of the answers.
What kind of control deck is going to get away with having only 10 lands that can be tapped for mana in a control mirror? Drawing land past 10 in that matchup will be card disadvantage. And how reliably can you get two basics of a needed color on the first couple turns? I realize you can fetch a tango turn 1 or 2, but that slows you down on each subsequent turn until you have two basics, which you may need to forestall even further depending on the board state. How frequently do you find yourself stuck on mana despite having fetchlands in hand because there's nothing left to fetch with them? Goldfishing a mana base has the same flaws as goldfishing anything else: You're not simulating real game situations because you don't have an opponent to interact with. You also have no way of protecting your win cons, and appear to flat out lose to a lumbering falls on an empty board.
It is cool that this is possible in standard, but I'm very skeptical that 5-color decks are going to be the norm.
This kind of effect isn't exactly uncommon in any given set/standard (barring awaken), and it's never been particularly impressive, to my knowledge. Additionally, as others have said, some of the biggest and most popular threats in the current standard and the standard to come will do more than just shrug this off - they'll laugh it off. I will say, however, that in a format with manlands, the awaken mechanic, and up-to-10cmc creatures that may require the sacrifice of Eldrazi tokens to cast (though you don't really want your opponents recasting the likes of Desolation Twin), Roil Spout may find more constructed success than other cards with this effect traditionally have.
Depending on what else we get for allies, this could be incredibly good. Ensuring that every card you draw for the rest of the game is gas is a big game - especially when your entire side of the board is getting multiple buffs and triggering multiple abilities every time you cast something.
I may not understand the whole NWO thing, but this guy, without being built around, is worse than a common bear from a long time ago. It isn't overly complex or strong. It is a 3-drop that wants you to wait for turn 4 and dies horribly to common red removal even then.
It doesn't matter how much damage is dealt to Undergrowth Champion, you will only remove one +1/+1 counter, regardless. For example, if you're on the play and play this on turn three and your opponent follows up with an Anger of the Gods (or Radiant Flames) on their turn three, then you would remove one +1/+1 counter from this guy, and he would survive. Alternatively, if your opponent attacks with a Desolation Twin, you can block it with this and, rather than having it take ten damage, you will instead remove a single +1/+1 counter from it.
Edit: For some reason I thought this was a 0/0 creature that ETB with two +1/+1 counters. So, nevermind, BigGrizzy. You already knew all this, didn't you?
The original English translation provided was very poorly worded and unclear. Still, I would have hoped it was obvious that you couldn't go infinite here.
The flavor text implies that the human creature becomes an angel when it dies in combat.
Not sure if you've been made aware of this or not, but the simulator seems to think Brainstorm is uncommon.
Magic players: So dumb that this set is basically going to be Jace lottery for mythics.
Also Magic players: Printing Chalice and Bridge at mythic was such a missed opportunity.
Legendary Creature - Demon {M}
Flying, haste
Barzal, the Impetuous can’t block and can't be sacrificed.
At the beginning of your declare attackers phase, if Barzal is untapped, flip a coin. If you win the flip, Barzal attacks an opponent chosen at random, if able. Otherwise, Barzal can’t attack this combat.
At the beginning of each opponent’s upkeep, flip a coin. If you lose the flip, that player gains control of Barzal, the Impetuous and untaps it.
"You summoned me, yes, but I heed no call."
4/6
Anyway, as you can tell, I made the card heavily red to fit with the autonomous flavor of the card, but only after finishing it did I realize that it would actually be possible to design cards of any color that behave this way (e.g., a white creature that blocks/prevents damage to its controller or its controller's weakest creature, but changes controllers based on life totals, who controls how many creatures, or whether any of its controller's creatures died last turn, etc.).
But before I get ahead of myself, how does this card look? Is it formatted properly? Does it work the way I intend it to? Does it break the game somehow? (The legendary rule doesn't cause you to sacrifice permanents, right?) How is its power level? (To the statistically/probabilistically uninitiated, this card is actually more likely to help you than hurt you in the long run in a 1v1 game. Assuming you played it during your pre-combat main phase, by the time your next main pre-combat main phase rolls around, if Barzal hasn't died or been targeted by any spells or abilities and there were no extra combat phases, the odds that it's a) attacked your opponent are 50%, b) attacked you are only 25%, and c) under your control are 75%).
Is "impetuous" the word I was searching for?
[Edit]: Would "Barzal, the Impetuous can’t block and spells or abilities any player controls can't cause Barzal to be sacrificed" be better, if wordier?
What kind of control deck is going to get away with having only 10 lands that can be tapped for mana in a control mirror? Drawing land past 10 in that matchup will be card disadvantage. And how reliably can you get two basics of a needed color on the first couple turns? I realize you can fetch a tango turn 1 or 2, but that slows you down on each subsequent turn until you have two basics, which you may need to forestall even further depending on the board state. How frequently do you find yourself stuck on mana despite having fetchlands in hand because there's nothing left to fetch with them? Goldfishing a mana base has the same flaws as goldfishing anything else: You're not simulating real game situations because you don't have an opponent to interact with. You also have no way of protecting your win cons, and appear to flat out lose to a lumbering falls on an empty board.
It is cool that this is possible in standard, but I'm very skeptical that 5-color decks are going to be the norm.
It is necessary to prevent cheating.
It doesn't matter how much damage is dealt to Undergrowth Champion, you will only remove one +1/+1 counter, regardless. For example, if you're on the play and play this on turn three and your opponent follows up with an Anger of the Gods (or Radiant Flames) on their turn three, then you would remove one +1/+1 counter from this guy, and he would survive. Alternatively, if your opponent attacks with a Desolation Twin, you can block it with this and, rather than having it take ten damage, you will instead remove a single +1/+1 counter from it.
Edit: For some reason I thought this was a 0/0 creature that ETB with two +1/+1 counters. So, nevermind, BigGrizzy. You already knew all this, didn't you?