I like the card, but the rarity is the problem. It's a payoff card for drafting a graveyard deck, but the problem is that it's so hard to get enough payoff cards that the enablers just generally don't do anything.
If this had been a common, I think it would have been a pretty exciting card in the right deck, but at uncommon, you just can't get enough cards that matter for the right deck to exist.
This is one of those cards that really makes me wonder if WotC is run by monkeys. This card is so fundamentally bad that I don't see how it could have made it through any reasonable development process. It's the kind of card that sounds like someone came up with it in a brainstorming session, and everyone went "ooh, nice" and then they just never actually tested it or thought about it again. This is the closest they've come to printing a vanilla 1/1 for 1 that they've done in years, and they put it at rare, as a spiritual successor to one of the most successful cards of all time. That cannot possibly be what they intended.
Well, I have a friend who pretty consistently sticks one of these in his control decks and I find it to add a pretty significant edge to his decks when I'm playing him, far more than when I see it as a random 23rd card in an aggro deck, that could have been almost any 2-drop and made their deck more consistent and efficient. So obviously take any kind of argument from authority with a grain of salt, but I do have some experience when I say it.
I think you need to be in a fairly controlling deck to want this. If the goal of your deck is to curve out, then this interferes with that more than anything, but if you have a lot of removal and bounce and blockers, then the drawback on this matters less and the extra card and evasion matter more.
This is one of those I keep looking to draft because I want to try it out, and never having a good excuse to do so. Something about the print runs I guess just makes it so there's nearly always a really good card to take over this. I think it has a lot of promise, but green is probably my least drafted color and it's likely to stay that way.
Been a long time since I had a story-worthy game, but this one was pretty fun.
Had double Sigiled Starfish and scryed through my entire deck trying to stave off the killing blow. Eventually I was stable at three life with two Jhessian Thief and a surviving Starfish holding off a 1/3 Valeron Wardens and Herald of the Pantheon, and my opponent was at 1 life. I had Negate in hand, but I knew the remaining eight cards in my library were all land. Basically, I was about to lose to decking myself and there was nothing I can do about it.
So I attack with both guys, my opponent blocks them, and cracks back. I block the Wardens to go to 1, and he plays Mighty Leap on his Herald, and I counter it. He proceeds to have only one blocker to play and I win the game and match.
I realize there's a fairly long list of things my opponent did there to let me win that match, but it was pretty satisfying regardless.
Joraga Invocation is a card you need to learn how to play with, like when to trade and when not to trade, etc., but it is a high quality card. If you have 3 random creatures on the board when you cast Overrun but you're behind, there's a good possibility it makes no difference, but that situation is far less likely to come up with Invocation because of the forced blocking. It's a decent catch up card if you plan around it.
That said, it's still a 6-drop and this format does punish you for playing a lot of those. That's not a reason not to play Invocation, nor to avoid picking it early, but it does mean you actually have to build your deck and play with it in mind.
Tl;dr It's not indifferent because they're both town, it's indifferent because the scum player would (or at least should) die in either scenario.
That is goo reasoning. By the same token, though, shouln't you be hunting the *other* scum at this point? You alreay know that I'm scum, so it's inifferent whether you lynch me today or tomorrow. On the other han, if you lynch the other scum toay then you won't even have to worry about who to lynch tomorrow. An if you on't manage to lynch them, then the game will be mercifully shorter.
This is a misrepresentation of the case we had on Flamingo, given that we were scumreading Flamingo at the time for the very strange behavior they were exhibiting, including the inability to stick to a single vote.
I was directly reference something you said, thusly:
@Mod: Please force somebody that actually intends to play Mafia to pilot the Flamingo Hydra. Thank you.
If we're talking mindset, then what we're looking at here is someone who's voting a person for the same behavior that they seem to believe can get them modkilled. What exactly was that, if not voting them for not playing real mafia?
In this post, we can see Puddlejumper very clearly trying to chain mislynches, and on an illogical basis. Lynching us at the time wouldn't have confirmed anybody, and this is reading strongly of an attempt to push someone for a reason other than scumreading them...which Limited has accused us of doing in this game, and saying we are scum as a result.
Chaining mislynches must mean something different to you than it does to the rest of the world. Clearing people on the basis of a successful lynch is not the same thing as lynching people on the basis of an unsuccessful one.
As I pointed out before, this argument does not mesh with Limited's own pushes at the time, which included the Crafters. If we were strictly trying to lynch low-hanging fruit, then Limited was also guilty of trying to lynch low-hanging fruit. You can't have your cake and eat it.
Note that Limited never actually stated a reason to be scumreading The Crafters, and their biggest point of argument against them was "well they feel like Family's buddy". In that case, shouldn't Limited have advocated for our lynch over that of The Crafters? (Hint: The answer is yes.)
Unsurprising, then, how I was voting you at the time.
Not only is the description of "what scum do" a total misrepresentation of anything we've actually done this game, the fact that Limited didn't vote us by this point pretty clearly shows that he was focused on making us look bad, rather than actually caring about what our alignment is.
Uhh, you realize that was my first (admittedly multi-)post of the day, right? Either you're not really reading carefully or else you're just trying to spew misdirection and see what sticks.
Also, the fact that Limited IMMEDIATELY decided that The Family allegedly targeting Brigade automatically constituted us as scum is incredibly suspect, given that we expressed a strong town read on Brigade on Day 1. If anything, Limited could have been potentially outing the Doctor or Bodyguard - which shows that Limited's motive was, again, fishing; not scumhunting.
How would I have been outing you, exactly? I never even mentioned you in the context of my ability until you literally forced it out of me.
Given that most CCMs these days are around Basic complexity, I'm not sure what exactly Limited is thinking by suggesting that there might be some kind of weird role that involves another player pretending to be 3 people at once.
Is my ignorance of the average complexity of CCMs actually part of your case, or are you just putting in whatever you think will make a decent distraction into your post? I've never participated in a CCM before.
See, I just don't see this post coming from a town mindset. "Brigade takes care of themselves." I mean, fonti's pretty much the only one that was even remotely reading Brigade, and this just looks like another hardcore fish attempt on Brigade from Limited.
Yes, attempting to keep attention away from Brigade is fishing. Good. I'll have to remember this in the future.
If this had been a common, I think it would have been a pretty exciting card in the right deck, but at uncommon, you just can't get enough cards that matter for the right deck to exist.
Unplayable trash.
And here I thought I was doing such a good job.
-Puddlejumper
Just being helpful.
-Puddlejumper
Had double Sigiled Starfish and scryed through my entire deck trying to stave off the killing blow. Eventually I was stable at three life with two Jhessian Thief and a surviving Starfish holding off a 1/3 Valeron Wardens and Herald of the Pantheon, and my opponent was at 1 life. I had Negate in hand, but I knew the remaining eight cards in my library were all land. Basically, I was about to lose to decking myself and there was nothing I can do about it.
So I attack with both guys, my opponent blocks them, and cracks back. I block the Wardens to go to 1, and he plays Mighty Leap on his Herald, and I counter it. He proceeds to have only one blocker to play and I win the game and match.
I realize there's a fairly long list of things my opponent did there to let me win that match, but it was pretty satisfying regardless.
EDIT: Oops. This is Puddlejumper.
That said, it's still a 6-drop and this format does punish you for playing a lot of those. That's not a reason not to play Invocation, nor to avoid picking it early, but it does mean you actually have to build your deck and play with it in mind.
-Puddlejumper
-Puddlejumper
That is goo reasoning. By the same token, though, shouln't you be hunting the *other* scum at this point? You alreay know that I'm scum, so it's inifferent whether you lynch me today or tomorrow. On the other han, if you lynch the other scum toay then you won't even have to worry about who to lynch tomorrow. An if you on't manage to lynch them, then the game will be mercifully shorter.
-Pulejumper
I was directly reference something you said, thusly:
If we're talking mindset, then what we're looking at here is someone who's voting a person for the same behavior that they seem to believe can get them modkilled. What exactly was that, if not voting them for not playing real mafia?
Chaining mislynches must mean something different to you than it does to the rest of the world. Clearing people on the basis of a successful lynch is not the same thing as lynching people on the basis of an unsuccessful one.
Unsurprising, then, how I was voting you at the time.
Uhh, you realize that was my first (admittedly multi-)post of the day, right? Either you're not really reading carefully or else you're just trying to spew misdirection and see what sticks.
How would I have been outing you, exactly? I never even mentioned you in the context of my ability until you literally forced it out of me.
Is my ignorance of the average complexity of CCMs actually part of your case, or are you just putting in whatever you think will make a decent distraction into your post? I've never participated in a CCM before.
Yes, attempting to keep attention away from Brigade is fishing. Good. I'll have to remember this in the future.
-Puddlejumper