I think the questions surrounding explaining hand size and milling and the fact that there is a "player" who is also a planeswalker is not how a movie should be approached. When we read the Official Fan Fiction, the story is not told as if each Planeswalker were a magical player who needs cards to make spells happen. The cards give us a representation of what it would be like if we were in that world. How much mana is accessible to use to cast a spell? Our lands plus other things that generate mana. For a Planeswalker like Jace, this is how much he can draw from the land around him, plus other resources. This is not hard to CGI for a movie. He would need to have some physical reaction to indicate he is "drawing" mana from the land around him. How much effort it requires (physically) and the resultant spell explains without words how much mana was available. Furthermore, if the result seems minimal for his capacity, he can even provide (while panting from exhaustion) that there just isn't enough mana he can use in the land around him. This can also then be contrasted by another Planeswalker (say Chandra) who can draw lots of mana from the land to cast a spell, because the land is mountainous and therefore in her "color." If a Pyromancer is surrounded by water, it's not hard to imagine why she can't conjure up a ball of flame. They can even pull an artifact out of their pocket to draw more mana from, with swirly magical lines leaving the artifact and combining with the swirly magical lines from the land that surround their body until it coalesces into whatever spell. Other than Planeswalkers and mana, what else is there really to explain? How do you explain that a creature without flying or reach cannot block a creature with flying? Have the creature with flying actually fly over the creature that cannot block it. Hexproof: have a spell fizzle at the caster (not deflect off the creature, because that makes it appear that you can target it). I would think that each keyword ability can be represented in some physical fashion with relative ease.
The look and feel of a Magic the Gathering movie will not be anything like the game if we want it to be a success. As I said earlier, I don't want to see Jace pull a card out that says "Divination" and then two more cards magically appear in his hand. That's not how the Fan Fiction is presented and that's not how a movie should be presented. The movie should have several central Planeswalkers that are the good guys, and possibly even several Planeswalkers that are the bad guys. This generates a conflict that is on a single dimension of complexity, because it only requires that one Planeswalker explain how his/her spark ignited and you can understand the premise behind Planeswalkers. Conflict resolution by the end of the movie, then tease the next conflict, which can be a step up in complexity. The challenge behind a Magic the Gathering movie, IMO, is that there is so much content, what do you limit it to? You cannot explain all the worlds in one movie. You develop one world, maybe two at the most, in a single movie. So do subsequent movies go back to that world or new worlds? Is each movie development of new worlds/Planeswalkers or do you always keep it limited to a few? Can the plot be boiled down to a few worlds instead of the vast majority as represented in the Fan Fiction? Maybe you pick the favorites and make movies around those, but since each world's plot line relative to Planeswalker development in the Fan Fiction is different from how it would be in the movie, you necessarily have to separate the Fan Fiction from the movies.
-
- DRay563
- Registered User
-
Member for 9 years, 5 months, and 10 days
Last active Wed, Aug, 5 2020 07:25:31
- 0 Followers
- 694 Total Posts
- 116 Thanks
There are certain cards in Magic that directly "destroy" or deal damage to a creature. Examples of this include Murder (for destroy) and Lightning Bolt (for direct damage). A creature dies (is moved to your graveyard) when various things happen. Two of those things include being destroyed (e.g. I cast Murder targeting your creature and it resolves) or your creature has been dealt lethal damage (e.g. I cast Lightning Bolt targeting your creature and your creature has a toughness equal to 3 or less). There are other ways your creature could be dealt lethal damage, like combat damage (I block your attacking creature and my blocker has power greater than or equal to your creature's toughness) or deathtouch damage (I block your attacking creature and my blocker has deathtouch and my blocker has power 1 or greater). There are even spells like Rabid Bite, where my creature can deal damage to your creature directly, and if my creature's power is bigger or equal to your creature's toughness, or has deathtouch, your creature will die.
Here are some examples:
- You have Grizzly Bears. I target it with Murder. Murder resolves. Grizzly Bears is destroyed and goes to the graveyard.
- You have Grizzly Bears. I target it with Lightning Bolt. Lightning Bolt resolves. Grizzly Bears has 3 damage marked on it and only 2 toughness, so it is destroyed and goes to the graveyard.
- You attack me with Grizzly Bears. I block it with Giant Spider. After combat damage, both Grizzly Bears and Giant Spider have 2 damage marked on them. Since Grizzly Bears has only 2 toughness, it is destroyed and goes to the graveyard. Giant Spider does not since it has 4 toughness.
- You attack me with Grizzly Bears. I block it with Sedge Scorpion. After combat damage, Grizzly Bears has 1 damage marked on it and Sedge Scorpion has 2 damage marked on it. Since Grizzly Bears was damaged by a creature with deathtouch, it is destroyed and goes to the graveyard. Since Sedge Scorpion has only 1 toughness, it is destroyed and goes to the graveyard.
- During my turn, I cast Rabid Bite targeting my Giant Spider and your Grizzly Bears. Rabid Bite resolves and Giant Spider deals 2 damage to Grizzly Bears. Since Grizzly Bears has only 2 toughness, it is destroyed and goes to the graveyard.
- During my turn, I cast Rabid Bite targeting my Sedge Scorpion and your Grizzly Bears. Rabid Bite resolves and Sedge Scorpion deals 1 damage to Grizzly Bears. Since Grizzly Bears was damaged by a creature with deathtouch, it is destroyed and goes to the graveyard.
Athreos, God of Passage is not affected by any of the above affects. Lethal damage, deathtouch damage, or direct destroy effects do nothing to Athreos. He will still have the damage marked on him from damage source (so for example, two Lightning Bolts will still deal him 6 damage), but he will not go to the graveyard because the lethal damage does not destroy him.Please note, though, there are other ways to get rid of him, as indestructible does not mean irremovable. A spell like Grasp of Darkness will lower his toughness to 0, and that will move him to the graveyard. Cards like Vraska's Contempt will still exile him.
Others have answered, so I will belabor this point. Suffice it to say, you look at all your permanents on the battlefield and count any W & B symbols you see in the upper right hand corner. If they equal 7 or more, Athreos is now a creature.
Why? Because Wizards chose to design the card that way. It was their way of showing that a God is only active when there are sufficient believers (in this case, sufficient devotion). When the devotion is there, Athreos is an enchantment creature (that is, both an enchantment and a creature). Otherwise, he is just an enchantment (and very specifically not a creature). This text overrides the Type Line where is says "Legendary Enchantment Creature - God." When your devotion is insufficient the "Creature" part of this Type Line does not apply, and it effectively only says "Legendary Enchantment - God."
If a creature is already tapped, and you cast Pressure Point targeting said creature, it is still a valid spell with a valid target, so it will resolve and do as much as it can do (i.e. you will draw a card). The same applies here. You have a valid target (Masterful Ninja is a creature on the battlefield), so Unsummon is a valid spell when targeting Masterful Ninja on the battlefield. If he is also in your hand due to its ability, then Unsummon will merely do as much as it can (which is to say nothing), but it will still resolve.
Fetches don't get reprinted as mythics (for obvious reasons, 5 mythic slots to lands... that would be a travesty!). Thoughtseize was a rare in Theros, and the Lorwyn version was $65 at the time. Cryptic Command reprint has been rare each time, and Lorwyn version commanded $57 at its peak around MM15. I'm sure there are many other examples as well. While I'm sure the secondary market plays a factor in how they classify card rarity, it's not going to the primary factor (and probably not even a secondary factor). The primary factor is the Limited environment and ensuring it is fun. If it's not fun (e.g. printing this card at common, as a hyperbolic example), then the set bombs and they lose money.
Except, in Battlebond, you have protection from only one of your two opponents. And you attack them jointly and they can block you individually. So the opponent you didn’t choose can block you, making this card less than broken in Battlebond. I’m not seeing why it’s a mythic honestly. I guess they didn’t want too many floating around in the Limited environment.
Etienne Busson pilots GB version to top 8 (7th decklist down)
Alan Simon pilots GB version to 19th place (11th decklist down)
Sean Lynch and Mark McGovern pilot GB versions with 8-0 records (2nd and 3rd decklists down)
Looking at all the lists, every one of them runs Llanowar Elves and Adventurous Impulse. I've evaluated my own decklist (I've been on Sultai for quite some time) and feel like moving to GB makes a lot of sense if placing Llanowar Elves. Woodland Cemetery punishes tri-color builds, as the number of comes-into-play-tapped lands is high. If I was playing Cemetery in the lands, as well as accommodating the requisite blue mana sources, I only had 3-4 basics, insufficient to make Cemetery a reliable untapped land. This slows down the deck, which runs counter to the premise of running Llanowar Elves. I found myself cutting back to The Scarab God being the only blue card (not enough blue mana to reliably hit Hadana's Climb reliably on T3), and it didn't feel like she was worth playing if it warped the mana that much. This led me to fall into the GB build as well. Playing Elves and having more streamlined mana should make the deck most consistent. I was also finding that my decklist had very little counters interaction, which made Snek lackluster. So I ended up putting Rishkar and Gearhulk back into the deck to make the deck more of a classic Snek deck and actually have a counters-matters theme again, as opposed to a value-centric midrange with a minor counters theme. All in all, I came up with a similar build to these lists.
Thoughts on the builds and the deck moving forward?
Have you considered that he could be acting a certain way with the express purpose of putting you on tilt? I'm not saying he is, but if you let your opponent affect you like this just by being themselves (whether its an act or truly who they are), then you've automatically set yourself at a disadvantage. You have to detach yourself from these kinds of distractions to maintain a level head. If he's not acting, then you're trumping yourself by not maintaining your self-control. If he is acting, then you're letting him trump you! If you have a counterspell in hand and let your opponent resolve a bomb card that you can't deal with, that's a misplay. Well, your counterspell in this situation is merely to maintain control of yourself. Don't misplay and let your opponent's bomb (his personality, feigned or otherwise) go uncountered.
I feel like the deck will have much stronger mana, for sure, being able to leverage the fast lands and check lands for both BG and UG. If we go to 4-of Adventurous Impulse, we can likely drop back to 21 lands like the deck was before. If we run Impulse, I'm not sure the deck wants Llanowar Elves. Beyond that, though, I'm not sure the deck has much more innovation with this new set. I feel like it has stagnated a little, which is not good with an evolving meta.
My experience is that ramp does not help against Control. They still just counter what they need to counter and kill what they need to kill, and a 1/1 does not pose a significant clock. The only thing Elves does help with is allowing us to curve out 2-drop on T2 without fear of Censor.
There's also another one using Jadelight Ranger in 8th place. I notice both are energy builds with Hadana's Climb, which I've been contemplating switching to. Seems pretty solid.
You typically drop a 2-drop on T2 expecting it to die, yes, which gives you some choice on what to put down. You will most often either a) put down a value card like Merfolk Branchwalker that you can get value from even if it dies or b) drop a creature like Snek and, if you untap with it, try to run away with the game. We have such a critical mass of creatures because we are expecting our creatures to die.
Brontodon is still going to die. Sure, it survives Abrade and Lightning Strike, which gives it a higher rate of survivability, but it will die all the same (Glorybringer, Fatal Push, Cut // Ribbons, Vraska's Contempt). Play the card that you think gives the most value. Brontodon makes the cut if your meta has a) an abnormally high amount of GPG, b) a reasonable amount of aggro where the 3/4 stat makes a difference, or c) other artifact/enchantment-centric decks where its ability can be impactful. Otherwise, I'd choose Ranger. If it dies, you still got value out of it (which can't be said for Brontodon).
I wouldn't do Shapers' Sanctuary. It's not worth it. I mean, sure, it's something to on T1, and it can make your opponent play slightly differently, but it likely won't make a difference. And it will be the deadest of dead draws later in the game when you're hoping to topdeck action.
I've always liked Claim // Fame, but it doesn't diversify your deck. You could go top end, like adding in Vehicles or Planeswalkers, to help make your deck more resilient. I like running Liliana in the sideboard for this very reason, and she provides recursion also.
The comparison to Divination is a recognition that the card is similar to modal cards (except we don't choose the mode, but rather, the top of our library does) with the drawback that we reveal each card:
- In the event the top of the library is two lands, Jadelight Ranger draws us two cards. That is the definition of Divination (3-mana spell that draws two cards). Furthermore, we are left with a 2/1 body. Hence the comparison of this mode to "Divination on a stick."
- In the event the top of the library is a land followed by a non-land card, Jadelight Ranger draws us a card and is a 3/2 body. This is comparable to Rogue Refiner, except without the energy. It also allows us to bin the second card, so in essence, it's like Rogue Refiner + pseudo-scry 1 (again, less the energy).
- In the event the top of the library is a non-land card, we have three potential outcomes partially affected by our decision. We can leave the card, which makes Jadelight Ranger a 4/3 pseudo-scry 1 followed by a second pseudo-scry 1 (with the choice if binning the card on the second reveal). Our second option is to bin the first card, and if the second card is a non-land card, we can have the choice to bin again, leaving us with the same scenario as before (4/3 with double pseudo-scry 1) but we got to dig 2 deep instead of 1. Alternatively for the second option, we can bin the first card, and if the second card is a land, we are back to the 2nd scenario of Rogue Refiner with pseudo-scry 1 stapled onto it. It's actually closer to "Opt on a stick," as we "scried" away the non-land card to then draw the land card.
These are all legitimate comparisons, because they all accurately reflect the different ways Jadelight Ranger can behave in a game, depending on the top of our library. No, it's not Divination, because it doesn't always draw us 2 cards. But when it does, I'm happy because I either needed the two lands or I didn't and I skipped the next two draw steps without having to curse my deck for giving me two lands in a row I didn't need.Yes, the game has a lot of early game a removal. But a 4/3 is significantly easier to remove over a 6/5 in the early game. The only early game removal that commonly sees play that can remove a 6/5 Jadelight Ranger is a revolted Fatal Push. Granted, our opponent can also respond to the double Explore trigger, but once it starts resolving (when Ranger is still a 2/1), they can't respond inbetween the two Explores. Therefore, if our opponent wants to use an Abrade on our 2/1 before it has been determined to become a 6/5, the end result is that they may have used it on an eventual 2/1 if we draw 2 lands. Either way, it eats a removal spell and provides us with value. Or it sticks as a 6/5 and is difficult for our opponent to deal with. Or they remove the snek and we have a 4/3, often requiring another removal spell on their part. No matter how I play it, I feel like I win, which is why I value Jadelight Ranger as a card.