A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
 
Exclusive: Sword of Truth and Justice
  • posted a message on Grafdigger's Cage Reprint (Impulso Geek Preview)
    There's most likely some good graveyard stuff coming up for them to want to print this, but I think it's mainly a way to satisfy reprint demands from modern and eternal formats, in the same way Scapeshift and Crucible of Worlds were reprinted last time, yet haven't seen much play in standard since (correct me if I'm wrong).
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Colossus Hammer
    Quote from kirasu »
    How does he walk through tavern doors with that?? Amazing card for my Zurgo deck

    He 'redesigns' the doorway on his way in.

    This card is hilarious and I love it.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Cavalier of Thorns (Giga.de spoiler)
    Quote from the n00b king »
    I'm not sure why the death trigger is so weak. I mean how much more powerful would putting the card in your hand be? This feels like a huge miss here Frown

    Too powerful, I'd say.
    Compare this to Elvish Rejuvenator.
    Better stats for cost + reach + death trigger + put the land untapped + puts the cards into your graveyard.
    Drawback is the ramp is slightly less useful on a more expensive creature and the high colored mana cost.
    This seems pretty solid to me.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Enemy Temples are back
    Quote from xaltair »
    Quote from illakunsaa »
    Honestly these should have been uncommon instead of rare.


    My thoughts exactly, they etb tapped, why are they rare?

    Who ever said etb tapped meant uncommon or common?
    They aren't the best dual lands, but that doesn't mean they aren't suitable for rare.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Enemy Temples are back
    Quote from kysg »
    Are these even playable in standard or modern?

    Yes
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Enemy Temples are back

    It's funny, because that quote only talks about 'giving access to all ten pairs' with dual lands. Which we have. It doesn't specify all ten pairs getting cards of the same cycle in the same set.

    Quote from LuckyJoe1988 »

    Now, I know this doesn't mean anything now, with it being 2019, but he had changed his statements soon afterwards before the release of Dragons of Tarkir, saying that all 10 color pairs would be simply supported, rather than completing said cycles.

    So your argument is to quote a source and then discredit its relevance? How does this help your case?

    Quote from LuckyJoe1988 »

    This upset a great many deal of players and collectors whom wanted the cycles completed for their decks and collections at the time. Many, including myself are still annoyed that WOTC continues to not listen to their player base and support all 10 colored pairs with complete cycles, and for whatever their reasons or excuses, continue to half-ass and leave out many other cycles that still need completion and/or representation.

    How does this support the idea of doing 10 dual lands in one set? Your argument is, what, 'many players want this'? Many players want a lot of different things, it doesn't mean they're good for the game. That's not a good response to the developmental problems of having too many rare quality dual lands in standard.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Enemy Temples are back
    Quote from LuckyJoe1988 »
    Quote from DJK3654 »
    Quote from Cainsson »
    Stop printing incomplete cycles ffs.

    What?
    They printed all five enemy colors. Are you expecting them to do all 10? Because there's not much precedent for that.


    Are you saying there is a precedent for a half-ass job?

    People want complete cycles. That has been the case since WOTC printed the original fetchlands back in the Khan's block. They originally said they'd support 10-dual colored cycles, and then went back on it that same year. Not only are these lands un-exciting, but the least they can do is print the whole cycle at the same time. It's just annoying for players and collectors at this point.

    https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/173641035963/differentiated-support-for-ally-vs-enemy-color
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Enemy Temples are back
    Quote from WizardMN »
    Quote from Jiyor »


    They could....I don’t know....maybe....******* complete cycles they haven’t finished yet like the show lands or the rest of the allied canopy cycle.
    This right here. I dislike that we are basically always going to be behind with enemy duals because they do allies first (usually) and then, they get an opportunity to complete a cycle and then go with a completely different cycle.

    Always going to be behind on enemy duals? Like with the Canopy lands where they... printed the enemy colors... first?
    Okay, there are a couple cycles that have allied and not enemy. My god.
    Of course, it's obviously that they will continue to usually do allies first (except that's not a deliberate design decision) and whenever they get an opportunity to complete a cycle they won't (except when they do).

    Quote from WizardMN »

    I want the enemy tango lands specifically and maybe those would be more powerful than they want (though, without fetches, I am not sure). The show lands seem like a good enough cycle they could have completed as they don't seem *too* overpowered since we are losing the check lands soon. Though, with the shocks, maybe they thought they were too good? I am not sure.

    The tango lands without fetchlands might just be worse than these temples in standard. I don't know what you're complaining about. We'll see the enemy tango lands eventually.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Enemy Temples are back
    Quote from Cainsson »
    Stop printing incomplete cycles ffs.

    What?
    They printed all five enemy colors. Are you expecting them to do all 10? Because there's not much precedent for that.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Cavalier of dawn
    The big question I think is, what artifacts or enchantments do you run that you get back with this, since you probably got to have a few to warrant the include?
    Looking through some of the options for enchantments, maybe Search for Azcanta, Legion's Landing, Ixalan's Binding, Curious Obsession, History of Benalia (which has the handy benefit of putting itself in the graveyard and Knight synergy), the other sagas, Seal Away, Prison Realm, Dreadhorde Invasion, Oath of Kaya, Smothering Tithe, Conclave Tribunal, Dead Weight, Ajani's Welcome the upcoming Leylines, Rule of Law and Season of Growth?
    For artifacts, could be Fountain of Renewal, Treasure Map, The Immortal Sun, Helm of the Host, Mox Amber, Chromatic Lantern, Gate Colossus, God-Pharaoh's Statue, Bolas's Citadel, Viven's Arkbow?

    Also, the value of being able hit something of your own that's cheap and/or with a good death trigger and get a 3/3 is not at all unimportant.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Knight of the Ebon Legion (Goha.ru preview)
    Seems pretty damm good for any black aggro deck. Compares to Pelt Collector.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Goyf in m20
    All this talk is making me want to see Goyf in standard, regardless of whether this is fake. They reprinted Scapeshift (and are now printing Field of the Dead alongside it) and Crucible of Worlds in the last core set, maybe it's not as crazy as it sounds after all?
    Posted in: Speculation
  • posted a message on Goyf in m20
    Quote from RedGauntlet »
    i doubt it, but i don't see how it would be an issue in standard? Leyline of the Void also got reprinted and standard doesn't have fetch lands and cards like Faithless Looting to abuse Tarmogoyf.

    It could be balanced, but it's a risk given the known high power ceiling, and it's not exactly the hardest card to enable.
    It's definitely possible though, it's no Ancestral Recall.
    Posted in: Speculation
  • posted a message on Goyf in m20
    Quote from leslak »
    i don't think goyf would be as good in standard as it is in modern(even with all the superfriends decks now).

    But then, that's true for a lot of cards.
    Goyf just has a very strong rate. And it's also kind of iconic for modern, so WotC might not want to upset collectors and certain die-hard modern fans by putting it in standard.
    Posted in: Speculation
  • posted a message on Goyf in m20
    Quote from volrathy_82 »
    surely not I hate green print lightning bolt then plx

    I could see Lightning Bolt and maybe even Counterspell before Tarmogoyf.

    EDIT: On second thought, Tarmogoyf is probably more likely Counterspell given the former's deckbuilding aspect and the latter's promotion of permission control gameplay.
    Posted in: Speculation
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.