Thanks for posting this. I've had this, uh, 'discussion' with a number of shops that had proposed to launch Pauper nights and I try to ask them "MTGO rules or actual-paper printed rarity", they go "Whatever, if it was ever a common it's good unless it's on the banlist, if it was bad it'd be on the banned list", I explain "Hymn and Sinkhole aren't on the MTGO banned list because they're not MTGO commons..." "Whatever, man. We'll see how it plays out." Yeah, I already know how this plays out.
I don't want to bring a deck with Hymns and get in arguments with the faction that thinks they're illegal in paper pauper (not on the MTGO pauper valids list). I don't want to bring a deck with Chainer's Edicts and get in arguments with the faction that thinks they're illegal in paper pauper (never printed as paper commons). I don't want to bring a deck that resists using either flavor of corner case and then face decks all evening that didn't hold themselves to the same deckbuilding restrictions. I want a show-runner who gives a damn enough to make it clear to all players what the cardpool is; ideally, I want the organization that handles all the other formats (including the online version of Pauper) to actually give a damn enough to codify a ruleset for paper pauper. But for some reason they never do.
-
- thatmarkguy
- Registered User
-
Member for 10 years, 2 months, and 14 days
Last active Tue, Jan, 19 2021 20:09:45
- 0 Followers
- 2,294 Total Posts
- 1043 Thanks
No, double faced cards are just their default, sunny, front face in all non-battlefield places. This is an artifact at all times, except when it has flipped into a land on the battlefield.
711.1a and 711.1b will clearly be amended to include the description of how to define the front face of Ixalan double faced cards (right now they just describe the specific symbols used in ndouble faced cards to date). Though it's pretty clear logically which is which.
711.4a While a double-faced card is outside the game, in a zone other than the battlefield, or on the battlefield with its front face up, it has only the characteristics of its front face.
1 evasive power. It's a 1/2.
On the other hand, being a fixed cost rather than X-cost makes it opportune when playing a deck that cheat-casts sorceries. Stuff like Jeleva, Nephalia's Scourge, Living Lore, and Aetherworks Marvel would rather a 7-cost spell than an X-cost spell that would get freecast with X=0.
Pirate's Cutlass 3
Common
Artifact-Equipment
When Pirate's Cutlass enters the battlefield, attach it to target Pirate you control.
Equipped creature gets +2/+1
Equip 2
Kitesail Freebooter 1B
Uncommon
Creature - Human Pirate
Flying
When Kitesail Freeboter enters the battlefield, target opponent reveals his or her hand. You choose a noncreature, nonland card from it. Exile that card until Kitesail Freebooter leaves the battlefield.
1/2
It would have been neat to have seen it templated in a way that would make it Fatal Push immune. Like make it cost 4B but with text "You may pay 3 less to cast ~. If you do, it enters the battlefield with a bounty counter on it. When ~ dies, if it had a bounty counter on it, target opponent creates two treasures..."
Varolz, the Scar-Striped does like creatures with printed power 2x its mana cost. I mean, not as much as he likes ones with power 12x or 13x but still, 4 power for 2 cost is in consideration for depth slots. Varolz is known to run Sheltering Ancient - another high power to CMC ratio 2-drop that you probably don't want to actually cast.
We still need room for 3 more uncommon multis. 229, 231, and you should probably claw back 233 into the multis.
I want Jace holding an iPhone.
"No, Siri, I said navigate to Dominaria!"
But wouldn't it look great in foil? Awwww.
(Why bother printing that as a newly-named and unique card in a sealed product and still have it be so bad? I get limited removal being priced for limited power and as such Claustrophobia might be considered too strong for limited, but printing a card in a deck like this is a chance to print a card in the in-between land of still not good enough for constructed but better than limited-chaff).
Same reason Heir of the Wilds is a bad idea. Sure, it'll usually attack as a 3/3. But it enters the battlefield as a 2/2 for 2. Which just isn't good enough. If you think you need the deathtouch on defense, go Narnam Renegade. It is half the cost, evolves E1 just as well as a worst case, and is a 2/3 that helps a following Avatar of the Resolute as a best case.
Skarrgan Pit-Skulk is also a lousy nonbo with E1. A typical line of play is to drop an E1 on T1, then drop a thing or things on T2 to evolve your E1 before it attacks. But if you play SPS pre-combat it's a 1/1. If you play it postcombat you've missed your chance to evolve E1 to make it hit harder this turn.