Note that those two products listed are exactly the same product. All of them have the exact same cards inside, with the only difference being which of those cards are shiny (which is not really relevant for any of those 4 cards).
I can’t really explain why wizards did something like that. The best guess that I’ve heard is that Amazon either required or incentivized the creation of an “Amazon-exclusive” product and wizards went about it in one of the laziest ways possible.
After giving this card some thought, I am not the biggest fan of this card as it is a R/U ability that works with relatively few red cards.
While this card obviously works well with looting, red gets very little of that outside of of faithless looting/salvaging and this card quickly shuts down most red card draw that uses discard as a cost (Like cathartic Reunion or thrill of possibility). It works well enough with avaricious dragon and smaller “wheels” like dangerous wager or Anje’s Ravager but I’m not sure how much of that stuff there really is in red (especially as wheels that draw cards equal to what you discard are also quickly shut down by this ability)
while this may seem like a silly distinction, I worry that people are seeing the artifact type and 3 mana cost and go on “manalith-autopilot”, overlooking the fact that this is even more vulnerable than usual and has summoning sickness.
So... I think that I kickstarted some of the recent discussion regarding the "triggers once per turn" discussion that was recently going on over on blogatog. As far as I can tell, there are three different wordings that have three different implications.
1. "Whenever you *insert text* the first time each turn" (look at bloodhaze wolverine and the like for the general template).
2. "At the beginning of combat on your/each turn" OR "At the beginning of your/each end step" OR "At the beginning of your postcombat main phase". (look at Luminarch Aspirant, Neheb, the Eternal, or Ludevic, Necro-Alchemist)
3. "This ability triggers only once each turn."
For version 1, if you met the condition before you cast the spell, it is too late for it to trigger that turn. While I don't think that it has been outright stated, I am guessing that this quirk of such abilities causes it to be misplayed by some newer players.
For version 2, you trigger regardless of whether you met the condition before or after you played the card, though you must have met the condition AND played the card before the noted trigger time. The trigger time can also make some effects awkward (it's hard to have a trigger that can produce a surprise blocker in mid-combat, for example, if the ability only checks whether or not you get a token at the start of combat).
For version 3, meeting the condition before casting the spell doesn't give you the trigger but doesn't stop you from meeting the trigger later on that turn (a mistake some people would likely make for #1). It is also more flexible in utilization than option #2 as it does not have to be gated to triggering at a specific time in the turn. Linguistically, however, this is the only version where the limitation has to be listed at the very end of the ability, which can make it feel much worse than abilities that introduce functionally similar limitations up-front.
If there was a way to template the wording so you could get the mechanics of Version #3 while organically putting the limitation at the start of the ability, I think that would be the best option. Unfortunately, that does not seem to be an option.
I wonder if "Once per turn, whenever (condition) you may (effect)" would work?
I think that wizards is trying to maintain consistency between the formatting of activated and triggered ability.
If an ability read:
: Once per turn, as a sorcery, *this creature* gets +2/+2.
That would look odd to me as it makes the restriction look like a part of the ability rather than being a restriction (IMO). For activated abilities, I think that putting the restrictions at the end makes good sense. When you try to keep that consistent with triggered abilities, though...
For those who missed it, the kraken has thirteen claws (not counting the possible two fins just coming out of the water and the four tiny things on its head).
So... I think that I kickstarted some of the recent discussion regarding the "triggers once per turn" discussion that was recently going on over on blogatog. As far as I can tell, there are three different wordings that have three different implications.
1. "Whenever you *insert text* the first time each turn" (look at bloodhaze wolverine and the like for the general template).
2. "At the beginning of combat on your/each turn" OR "At the beginning of your/each end step" OR "At the beginning of your postcombat main phase". (look at Luminarch Aspirant, Neheb, the Eternal, or Ludevic, Necro-Alchemist)
3. "This ability triggers only once each turn."
For version 1, if you met the condition before you cast the spell, it is too late for it to trigger that turn. While I don't think that it has been outright stated, I am guessing that this quirk of such abilities causes it to be misplayed by some newer players.
For version 2, you trigger regardless of whether you met the condition before or after you played the card, though you must have met the condition AND played the card before the noted trigger time. The trigger time can also make some effects awkward (it's hard to have a trigger that can produce a surprise blocker in mid-combat, for example, if the ability only checks whether or not you get a token at the start of combat).
For version 3, meeting the condition before casting the spell doesn't give you the trigger but doesn't stop you from meeting the trigger later on that turn (a mistake some people would likely make for #1). It is also more flexible in utilization than option #2 as it does not have to be gated to triggering at a specific time in the turn. Linguistically, however, this is the only version where the limitation has to be listed at the very end of the ability, which can make it feel much worse than abilities that introduce functionally similar limitations up-front.
If there was a way to template the wording so you could get the mechanics of Version #3 while organically putting the limitation at the start of the ability, I think that would be the best option. Unfortunately, that does not seem to be an option.
Weird. In Shadow of Innistrad standard not a single decent graveyard mass removal was available because it would ruin all the grave-based mechanics of the set. This time they are giving us already one of the best mass-exile grave effects in magic history. I wonder why they dont give a c**p to ruin all the grave-based archetypes in constructed this time.
The limited themes in Crimson Vow:
Azorius: Spirits with Disturb
Orzov: Life Gain
Boros: Attacking (with two creatures)
Selesnya: Humans with Training
Dimir: Zombies with Exploit
Izzet: Spellslinger/noncreature spells.
Simic: Self-mill
Rakdos: Vampire blood token aggro
Golgari: Big butt tribal
Gruul: Werewolves, part 2
Of those ten archetypes, only Azorius and Simic really seem to be bothered by the loss of graveyards. Compare that with all colors having delirium the last time we went to Innistrad (or all colors having flashback in the last set).
The fact that the blue one only lets you futuresight one card each turn is a limiting factor, though you may well be right be right. A painless phyrexian arena tacked to a 2/3 flier who hates graveyards is pretty decent.
Does the Toughness-matters archetype strike anyone else as the glass-iest of cannons in limited. It seems like a deck where saving your kill spells for a few select synergy pieces effectively disarms the rest of the deck. Am I missing something?
If the translation is right and 1) it does not need to be combat damage and 2) damage need not be done to players, this is very interesting.
Every time it attacks, you are likely to get 6 blood. All of the synergies that work with blood (from madness to Marionette Master to Goblin Welder) get a lot of mileage and giving you card selection to dig for one of those pieces if you don’t have one. It is also a decent mana sink for infinite mana engines, which red doesn’t have a ton of. Finally, It’s a nice vampire top-end alongside patron of the vein if you are playing anything other than low-cmc Edgar.
The only problem with it is that it’s a a 6-mana creature without haste or an ETB effect… which can be a huge problem. As far as elder gargaroth type cards go, however, this is my favorite in red so far (especially as red is the color of haste enablers).
This is the best of the cemetery cycle by FAR. It’s a good body that incidentally hoses the graveyard in a way that bypasses ground seal and the like (like the whole cycle) but that uses the effect for a very relevant group slug effect.
If a good reanimation deck somehow appears in standard within the next year, I could see this card being put in the sideboard as a 1-2 of for a mirror matchup as it’s a not-horrible reanimation target that robs the graveyard and hopefully kills a target… twice.
I can’t really explain why wizards did something like that. The best guess that I’ve heard is that Amazon either required or incentivized the creation of an “Amazon-exclusive” product and wizards went about it in one of the laziest ways possible.
While this card obviously works well with looting, red gets very little of that outside of of faithless looting/salvaging and this card quickly shuts down most red card draw that uses discard as a cost (Like cathartic Reunion or thrill of possibility). It works well enough with avaricious dragon and smaller “wheels” like dangerous wager or Anje’s Ravager but I’m not sure how much of that stuff there really is in red (especially as wheels that draw cards equal to what you discard are also quickly shut down by this ability)
while this may seem like a silly distinction, I worry that people are seeing the artifact type and 3 mana cost and go on “manalith-autopilot”, overlooking the fact that this is even more vulnerable than usual and has summoning sickness.
Turn 2 Kaya and tick up
Turn 3 -2 and cast lingering souls
Turn 4 -2 and flashback lingering souls
Not realistic to happen in any formats I can name but a nice idea.
Note that the front half is a 1/2 creature.
I think that wizards is trying to maintain consistency between the formatting of activated and triggered ability.
If an ability read:
That would look odd to me as it makes the restriction look like a part of the ability rather than being a restriction (IMO). For activated abilities, I think that putting the restrictions at the end makes good sense. When you try to keep that consistent with triggered abilities, though...
1. "Whenever you *insert text* the first time each turn" (look at bloodhaze wolverine and the like for the general template).
2. "At the beginning of combat on your/each turn" OR "At the beginning of your/each end step" OR "At the beginning of your postcombat main phase". (look at Luminarch Aspirant, Neheb, the Eternal, or Ludevic, Necro-Alchemist)
3. "This ability triggers only once each turn."
For version 1, if you met the condition before you cast the spell, it is too late for it to trigger that turn. While I don't think that it has been outright stated, I am guessing that this quirk of such abilities causes it to be misplayed by some newer players.
For version 2, you trigger regardless of whether you met the condition before or after you played the card, though you must have met the condition AND played the card before the noted trigger time. The trigger time can also make some effects awkward (it's hard to have a trigger that can produce a surprise blocker in mid-combat, for example, if the ability only checks whether or not you get a token at the start of combat).
For version 3, meeting the condition before casting the spell doesn't give you the trigger but doesn't stop you from meeting the trigger later on that turn (a mistake some people would likely make for #1). It is also more flexible in utilization than option #2 as it does not have to be gated to triggering at a specific time in the turn. Linguistically, however, this is the only version where the limitation has to be listed at the very end of the ability, which can make it feel much worse than abilities that introduce functionally similar limitations up-front.
If there was a way to template the wording so you could get the mechanics of Version #3 while organically putting the limitation at the start of the ability, I think that would be the best option. Unfortunately, that does not seem to be an option.
The limited themes in Crimson Vow:
Azorius: Spirits with Disturb
Orzov: Life Gain
Boros: Attacking (with two creatures)
Selesnya: Humans with Training
Dimir: Zombies with Exploit
Izzet: Spellslinger/noncreature spells.
Simic: Self-mill
Rakdos: Vampire blood token aggro
Golgari: Big butt tribal
Gruul: Werewolves, part 2
Of those ten archetypes, only Azorius and Simic really seem to be bothered by the loss of graveyards. Compare that with all colors having delirium the last time we went to Innistrad (or all colors having flashback in the last set).
If the translation is right and 1) it does not need to be combat damage and 2) damage need not be done to players, this is very interesting.
Every time it attacks, you are likely to get 6 blood. All of the synergies that work with blood (from madness to Marionette Master to Goblin Welder) get a lot of mileage and giving you card selection to dig for one of those pieces if you don’t have one. It is also a decent mana sink for infinite mana engines, which red doesn’t have a ton of. Finally, It’s a nice vampire top-end alongside patron of the vein if you are playing anything other than low-cmc Edgar.
The only problem with it is that it’s a a 6-mana creature without haste or an ETB effect… which can be a huge problem. As far as elder gargaroth type cards go, however, this is my favorite in red so far (especially as red is the color of haste enablers).
Outside of that, it seems okay for casual tables.