All users will need to merge their MTGSalvation account with a new or existing Twitch account starting Sept 25th. You can merge your accounts by clicking here. Have questions? Learn more here.
Magic Market Index for April 20th, 2018
Pauper Review: Dominaria
The Limited Archetypes of Dominaria
  • posted a message on Two rules questions: (1) Captivating Crew and Leyline of Anticipation and (2) Sylvan Awakening and Helm of the Host
    1. No. Leyline of Anticipation only applies to the casting of spells, not card abilities because it only mentions spells. The "any time you could cast a sorcery," is merely shorthand for "activate this ability only during your main phase when the stack is empty," and nothing else.

    2. You get a regular, token copy of Field of Ruin. The only modifications that copy effects carry over from the original are other copy effects. Nothing else makes it over.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Heart-Piercer Manticore
    Quote from Iosef14 »
    Ok, so if my opponent wants to activate the Manticore ability he has to sacrifice another creature but he controls it, like a 4/4 and in the same way he will do those 4 damage to a target creature or player?

    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Potentially More Unique Buy-A-Box Promos
    This is a bad road to go down. A card that sees play in no competitive formats, is only somewhat desirable in commander and is from the newest set shouldn't be near $20. Muldrotha, THE hypest commander in the set and a MYTHIC RARE for Karona's sake is $8.

    I mean, Karn, Scion of Urza is worth twice as much as Firesong and Sunspeaker as of the posting of this comment, and there's no way that he'll maintain that. There are plenty of problems with buy-a-box only cards, but let's leave price on prerelease weekend out of that discussion.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Heart-Piercer Manticore
    Players can only sacrifice permanents under their control.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Are Costs Effects?
    So Library of Leng's ruling is just overzealous / underspecified reminder that things before colons and additional costs to cast spells don't fall under its replacement.
    An effect can be imposing a cost, but it is not a cost.

    I'd like Leng's ruling to be touched up, but what are you going to do.

    Thanks fellas.

    I think it would be more accurate to say that the costs and effects are separate and entirely different, but not mutually exclusive. The text shown in this thread are both categories simultaneously, and Library of Leng's oracle text is inclusive in that it just cares whether or not the discard is attached to an effect. Anything that happens in resolution is an effect, even if that involves paying a cost. Maybe a more clear equivalent would be how black is not green, but a card that cares about black cards will affect black-green ones just fine.

    I definitely see how the gatherer ruling can be interpreted like that, though.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Obstinate Baloth And Big Game Hunter both trigger off Liliana Discard
    Yes, you can. Obstinate Baloth and Big Game Hunter both have replacement effects, so the baloth will end up on the battlefield at the same time that the hunter will be in exile. Then, madness will trigger, you cast the spell, and the creature enters the battlefield. By that point, the baloth will be a legal target for the ETB trigger.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Stack related Question
    Abilities are independent of their sources. Removing the source in response to activation does not prevent the activation of Crystal Shard, nor does it make the ability do anything other than try to resolve as much as possible.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Mechanic: Focus
    Quote from Crunk-Aid »

    I agree with pretty much all of what you said although there's a few things I'd like you to consider. Yes they're slow, but I figured with the right cards you could speed them up. For example:

    Attune with Focus G
    Search your library for a basic land card, reveal it, then put it into your hand. Shuffle your library afterwards. Add a focus counter to up to two permanents you control.

    Suddenly, they become much better.

    I figured as much, though it's hard to tell with such a small "sample platter."

    As to your other points, I intentionally left off "ETB add focus" on purpose on most cards so you'd have your focus makers and focus users on seperate cards. It makes it different than energy.

    Keep in mind that Wizards did energy in Kaladesh in that way specifically to avoid the pitfalls of AB mechanics. In hindsight, energy was a flawed mechanic, but I don't think going full AB is the answer here. That aspect made populate a particularly troubling mechanic to use back in RTR even though the token half was at least usable without populate cards. I don't think making both halves useless without the other is a step in the right direction here.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Dominaria Slivers (Cycle)
    Slivers in dominaria are a catch-22. Either they don't include them and their fans complain about that, or they get included in small numbers and their fans complain because there isn't enough. Your choice to tack token generation onto all of them proves this point, and even that copy-paste attempt at a solution wouldn't make everybody happy. Not including them would be the easier of the two choices because slivers have pretty limited design space as-is, since every sliver that isn't 5-colored or colorless has to be some sort of lord. The necessarily creature-heavy nature of sliver decks constricts even the design space for sliver-based noncreatures. The only alternative would be another thing that many slivers fans hate, which is slivers that break the mold. Even updating slivers from their antiquated symmetrical lord abilities to more modern asymmetrical styles created a backlash even though it made the slivers better for it.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Mechanic: Focus
    This mechanic has a few problems. First of all, it's really slow. Not only do you have to spend time distributing counters to make it work, but not all of these cards can even do anything the turn they get counters. The land, in particular, is terrible. Either it's a land that doesn't tap for mana, a 5 color land that ruins your deck's synergy, or a bad Mirrodin's Core. Except, it's the only way here to benefit from multiple counters on the same creature, which brings me to my next issue. Beyond "merely" being a parasitic AB mechanic, you pretty much need a focus counter-creature ratio of 1:1 to be worthwhile. Too many counters is useless because there's no point in doubling up, and too few weakens your cards that rely on them. The tiny amount of wiggle room afforded simply can't support a mechanic in which you intend to include creatures that need counters yet can't make them.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on The Digsite: An extra deck themed around unlocking the lost powers of Wastes.
    Would the constructed rules for this mechanic be the same as contraptions? That is, 15 card minimum with 1 copy maximum, to prevent abuse? Also, for limited purposes, would wastes be outside of packs and in land stations (or equivalents) for such a draft format? Actual wastes were scant enough in Oath limited that players usually had to bank hard on getting other colorless sources to pay :symc:. Making it even more restrictive makes me doubt that regular pack distribution would be enough.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on The Antiquites War
    Quote from thatmarkguy »
    They just printed Haphazard Bombardment with exactly that sort of exclusion (nonenchantment permanents) so don’t pretend it’s something that they never do or is against their new world order or templating rules. If they think an exclusion is necessary to keep a card in its color pie they’ll do it - they didn’t want red to get enchantment removal so they excluded it. If they wanted to exclude artifact digging for Ancient Stirrings because they think it out of pie for green they could have. They didn’t, but they could have. Ergo it’s not really considered out of pie.

    Haphazard Bombardment doesn't exactly have a kind of wording you see very often to begin with, and it has nothing to do with the non-artifact exclusion, which used to be ubiquitous and lost that status with M10 and Zendikar block.

    Anyhow, I'm not part of the crowd saying that positive artifact interaction is totally out of pie for green, but I am trying to qualify it. The Antiquities War does not fit into green's color pie because green does not typically single out artifacts for these kinds of effects outside of extremely artifact-heavy blocks like Mirrodin and Kaladesh. What green does get is broad-scale interaction that names a wide variety of types or affects everything, under which artifacts frequently fall.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on The Antiquites War
    Quote from thatmarkguy »
    They could easily have added the word 'nonartifact' if they didn't want people to use it to dig for artifacts with a green spell, if the thinking was that green was not allowed to artifact-sift.

    It doesn't get artifacts as an accidental side effect. It gets them among their set of findables by design. They could have excluded them but opted not to.

    The main reason why "non-artifact" didn't end up on Ancient Stirrings is the same reason why it got taken off Terror. It's clunky and unnecessary. Not wanting to go through the trouble of adding a random exclusion was definitely much stronger than them specifically wanting green to dig for artifacts given the game's design direction at Rise of the Eldrazi's release. It would have been remarkably strange to see that clause so soon after the introduction of Doom Blade and in the midst of their attempts to find a replacement for fear.

    There was also no way that they could have foreseen the card's usage in modern tron and lantern control decks, particularly the latter.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Why not all full art ?
    It's tempting, but text-over-art can be terribly hard to read depending on what's being depicted. Just look at the way that Serra Avenger promo art is situated. Her leg placement and dark lower half with white text work well, but trying to pull that off every single time would require an awful lot of extra effort. A miscue can cause serious legibility problems.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Idea: give the "draw" player an additional benefit
    Quote from Aazadan »
    Better than having a land enter untapped (which a lot of players aren't going to understand as casual players play basics), what about a gold/treasure/whatever token. Basically a consumable permanent that could sit in the command zone that could be sacrificed for one mana of any color.

    A free, guaranteed Lotus Petal would break legacy and maybe even modern, too. Magic simply can't handle a Hearthstone-style solution. Free mana is way too valuable for that.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.