I don't think I even understand the argument here. That no magic cards are worth playing because you won't always draw them?
If the argument is about combo pieces in particular, well, it's not the responsibility of the combo piece to make itself easier to find. You build the rest of your deck around making that happen.
As evidence, I used to play Splinter Twin in Modern. That deck consistently won on turn 4 despite having to find both a copy of Twin (out of 4) and a target for it (out of 7ish). It did this by relying on other cards like cantrips to find its pieces. Despite the fact that it relied heavily on the combo and had very little in the way of backup plans, the deck was so dominant that the combo had to be banned to allow other decks their time in the spotlight.
So... overwhelming splendor is a white aura. A card that cheats a card into play for 2 mana is as powerful as the strongest thing it can cheat out and splendor is... strong.
Fighting and attacking are not the same thing. Tapped creatures cannot attack (even if they have vigilance) but they can still fight. Similarly, note that if the creature was untapped, fighting does not cause it to tap (unless the fight spell or ability says so).
Think of it this way: In most phases and sub-phases, the game will ask each player "Do you want to do something?". It will always start with the active player (the player whose turn it is). If they answer no, the game asks the next player. However, if the active player does take an action, the process starts over. So, the game will start with the active player again. If both players answer no (pass), the game moves to the next phase/sub-phase.
I think the confusion is from Split Second. Normally, you could activate an ability "in response" to the active player's action and it would resolve before they were able to perform another (sorcery speed) action. But you were prevented from doing this by Split Second, had to wait until the spell resolved, by which time it is indeed the active player's action again.
Cabal Patriarch the Descended5BB
Legendary Creature - Human Noble
Indestructible, Vigilance, Bushido 5
3/3 "Cabal Patriarch is like, the raddest guy ever. I could see it all along." ~Kuberr
There. Perfect.
Seems perfectly balanced to me. A set with this power level would surely be well-received and not among the weakest and most hated sets ever. Surely.
For the amount of power and evasion stapled to this undercosted dude, I think it would be flavorful to have some sort of drawback associated with this that lets your opponent actually cast spells from their graveyards once a turn or something. Maybe Kess, Dissident Mage's ability but for opponents instead of you.
Ooh, interesting idea! A drawback this massive may even justify making him cheaper.
The First, Patriarch Reborn2BB Legendary Creature - Zombie Wizard
Menace
When ~ becomes the target of a spell, if that spell wasn't cast from a graveyard, counter it.
During each opponent's turn, that player may cast one instant or sorcery from their graveyard. If a spell cast this way would be put into a graveyard, exile it instead.
5/5
Flavor: He has been pulled through a portal from the underworld, but the gate remains open, allowing others to draw on its power.
Utility: An undercosted beater with some built-in protection. Menace allows him to get around go-tall decks or trade 2-for-1 (or more) with go-wide decks. He gives opponents the means to circumvent his unusual spell protection, but this is also a political tool. Especially in multiplayer games, maybe they don't want to kill him, but keep him around for their own benefit.
So I basically can't remove this guy unless I have Snapcaster Mage + Path to Exile? I thought you liked interaction?
I would probably word the first ability, "Whenever ~ becomes the target of a spell, counter that spell unless it was cast from a graveyard".
The second ability is a tracking nightmare. For the rest of the game, I have to make notes about which zone a creature was cast from?
So what is the force majeure here? He is weak to zombies? Isn't that the antithesis of the character, creating a quandry that is anti-synergistic to the intended paradigm?
Eh, since this thread has now been necroed, we can all revel in how much the people above suck at evaluating cards
Take a look at some of the Eldraine preview threads. People thought Cauldron Familiar was draft chaff and Embercleave was too expensive to ever see play.
The fact that OP says "respond to the lifelink mechanic" makes me think the opponent was trying to do the old-school "put damage on the stack, then sac". If so, that no longer works.
Birgi, God of Boasting. According to that linked tweet, they asked about the other side and Wizards said there wasn't one. Might have been more along the lines of "we have other plans for the god side".
I'm not sure I understand the question. If I understand correctly, you're not actually asking about mutate, but whether Goreclaw, Terror of Sal Sisma reduces commander tax?
If that is the case, the answer is yes. 601.2f tells us to determine a spell's mana cost by adding any increases (tax) then subtracting any decreases (Goreclaw). In this case, the two simply cancel each other out, at least for the first bit of commander tax.
If the argument is about combo pieces in particular, well, it's not the responsibility of the combo piece to make itself easier to find. You build the rest of your deck around making that happen.
As evidence, I used to play Splinter Twin in Modern. That deck consistently won on turn 4 despite having to find both a copy of Twin (out of 4) and a target for it (out of 7ish). It did this by relying on other cards like cantrips to find its pieces. Despite the fact that it relied heavily on the combo and had very little in the way of backup plans, the deck was so dominant that the combo had to be banned to allow other decks their time in the spotlight.
Holy crap, why is no one talking about this part?
I think the confusion is from Split Second. Normally, you could activate an ability "in response" to the active player's action and it would resolve before they were able to perform another (sorcery speed) action. But you were prevented from doing this by Split Second, had to wait until the spell resolved, by which time it is indeed the active player's action again.
Seems perfectly balanced to me. A set with this power level would surely be well-received and not among the weakest and most hated sets ever. Surely.
Ooh, interesting idea! A drawback this massive may even justify making him cheaper.
The First, Patriarch Reborn 2BB
Legendary Creature - Zombie Wizard
Menace
When ~ becomes the target of a spell, if that spell wasn't cast from a graveyard, counter it.
During each opponent's turn, that player may cast one instant or sorcery from their graveyard. If a spell cast this way would be put into a graveyard, exile it instead.
5/5
Flavor: He has been pulled through a portal from the underworld, but the gate remains open, allowing others to draw on its power.
Utility: An undercosted beater with some built-in protection. Menace allows him to get around go-tall decks or trade 2-for-1 (or more) with go-wide decks. He gives opponents the means to circumvent his unusual spell protection, but this is also a political tool. Especially in multiplayer games, maybe they don't want to kill him, but keep him around for their own benefit.
I would probably word the first ability, "Whenever ~ becomes the target of a spell, counter that spell unless it was cast from a graveyard".
The second ability is a tracking nightmare. For the rest of the game, I have to make notes about which zone a creature was cast from?
So what is the force majeure here? He is weak to zombies? Isn't that the antithesis of the character, creating a quandry that is anti-synergistic to the intended paradigm?
Take a look at some of the Eldraine preview threads. People thought Cauldron Familiar was draft chaff and Embercleave was too expensive to ever see play.
Makes his look like the wizards from Scourge.
Birgi, God of Boasting. According to that linked tweet, they asked about the other side and Wizards said there wasn't one. Might have been more along the lines of "we have other plans for the god side".
If that is the case, the answer is yes. 601.2f tells us to determine a spell's mana cost by adding any increases (tax) then subtracting any decreases (Goreclaw). In this case, the two simply cancel each other out, at least for the first bit of commander tax.