I'm gonna try, I'm not ashamed for trying to get gold borders unbanned.. Been railing for it for a while on here
Oh, I'm not talking about your idea in general. It falls into the same category as people who want more reprints or want to take down the reserve list. Everyone has their own idea of how to make this game more affordable that our profit-hungry mothership couldn't care less about. Still doesn't make it relevant to a discussion about Masterpieces.
From what we've seen, these don't have black or white borders and are currently illegal for tournament play (MTR 3.3). Like LimDul79 said above, there's certainly going to be some kind of update to allow these for tournament play.
Considering the uniqueness of these cards having no borders at all, I wonder if the rules currently making them illegal for tournament play are also the same rules making gold bordered cards illegal.
In updatung the rules to make their new cards legal, I would like for WoTC to also amend the rules to unban gold bordered cards from tournament play.
Since the gold leaf on the top of the invocations wraps around the edge of the card, the only means of making them "unidentifialble" or "unmarked" for play is by using a card sleeve.
Well if all it takes for invocations to be tourney legal is a card sleeve, then I ask why not apply this same logic and get rid of the requirement for black frames and just make the rules more specific about which sets exactly are not allowed for tournament play.
I don't see the point in having language about black frames being the reason for banning cards when you could just put a sleeve on the card and ir doesn't matter. I think some wording could use updating, specifically referring to the gold borders.
The status of the actual Gold-bordered champion decks and that of Invocations are entirely unrelated. One was a product designed to get tournament-winning decks into the hands of players without the risk of flooding the secondary market, while each Masterpiece Series border is designed to be a unique trophy that sells packs to players hoping to pull them. While this is the first time Wizards has altered the borders so radically (and maybe the last, based on the backlash), attempting to roll Gold-bordered cards into this discussion is a shallow attempt to marry this with the reprint discussion. I would bet that, had the color scheme been silver instead, you wouldn't have campaigned to make un-cards tournament legal.
The only legal target Divert needs is the spell on the stack. (Reanimate)
Then you must choose a legal target at that time for the original spell. (Sylvan Primordial)
When you respond by removing the Primordial, Divert doesn't care. Primordial is exiled, Divert changes Reanimate to the Primordial, and then Reanimate fizzles due to the target no longer being valid.
You are required to have a valid target to Divert to, but after that point whether or not Divert resolves has nothing to do with the success or failure of the original spell.
Why would you be required to select the primordial as a new target before Divert even resolves? You're right about Divert needing a spell on the stack, but you can't change a spell's targets to an illegal target. If there are no legal targets to change Reanimate to upon the resolution of Divert, then the spell's target cannot and will not change.
Divert targets the spell, in this case Reanimate. It doesn't care what the original spell was targeting or is now targeting.
The end result of this is Reanimate now targets [null] and fizzles.
Reanimate would only fizzle in this scenario if Divert resolves and changes the target to Sylvan Primordial before it gets exiled, but OP's explanation makes it seem like Deathrite Shaman is being used with Divert still on the stack. Since Divert changes the target as part of its resolution, it will still try to resolve if Primordial gets exiled while Divert is on the stack. If Sun Titan is Reanimate's only legal target, Divert's controller will be unable to change it and the Titan will return to the battlefield.
One of the more straightforward ways to implement it would be turn it into an action word.
Shrink RayU
Instant
Shrink target creature. (It becomes base 1/1 until the end of the turn)
Draw a card.
Ant Sneak1B
Creature-Insect Rogue
Whenever Ant Sneak attacks, you may shrink it.(It becomes base 1/1 until the end of the turn.) If you, it can't be blocked this turn.
2/2
One thing to keep in mind is that these mechanics don't have a very large design space because they have to be big enough to survive with -1/-1 counters and have a body/abilities that make both the shrunken and normal size versions viable.
That being said, I like minimize the most. Micromorph is connected to the unpopular megamorph, and inflict is both more complex and more restrictive. Alternate cost keywords always add an additional dimension, while also keeping options limited enough not to overwhelm. One of my problems with inflict is that it can't go on inexpensive (CMC 2 or less) cards at all unless you want a free colorless creature that dies instantly.
Inventions are tournament legal, so it would be extremely strange, not to mention financially disastrous for the company, for Invocations to be different. I doubt that Invocations not having the traditional black/white border is going to automatically make them worthless. They are a lottery designed to move a great deal of product, after all.
And the copy is a white instead of its other colors and a zombie in addition to its other types. It also isn't technically a token copy, since it doesn't have a mana cost. Essentially every Embalm creature in Amonkhet with have its own white token with the same abilities minus embalm, P/T, types plus zombie, and name.
It's basically a re-balanced white version of unearth, with less potential for abuse. At least token-synergy cards will get something more interesting than the largely vanilla and French vanilla tokens that commonly appear.
On the cards themselves:
Trial of Ambition doesn't seem particularly interesting for a mythic. It'll be a strictly better Succumb to Temptation most of the time, and you'll occasionally reduce an opponent's life total to 0 with it. I don't see many opportunities to cast this on yourself. EDH decks certainly have better black options at 7 CMC. The idea of cards that cycle into your library is pretty neat, especially in light of the new demon's puzzling "cycle or discard" wording. At least, it's a more elegant justification than slapping a cycling onto a sacrifice mechanic.
Magnificent Monoliths seem like an obligatory alt-win card that we'll probably see at one point or another in this set. I think 20 is too much, especially with the tapping limitation. Dark Depths is hard enough to turn on manually.
Alhur is Sedris, the Traitor King on a 4/4 deathtouch body. I think giving him entomb himself might be a little much, especially in EDH, but it fits thematically.
Riversoul Guide's cycle or dies dichotomy is jarring, especially in light of Amonkhet's black discard theme.
Fluent in Mind need to exile itself on resolution to prevent abuse. Such a clause is even more necessary on a 1 sided variation of this effect.
Hour of Devestation (sic) feels like an obligatory name-drop card for Hour of Devastation, minus the typo.
That's all true but the more immediate problem is its not modern legal.
Absolutely! That's why I am asking in the Legacy forum.
There really isn't any incentive in Legacy to make it more playable than what it would be if DM were in Modern. If anything, stiffer competition and stronger answers make it less worthwhile.
There are simply a lot of better 2-card combos. In fact, this isn't even a proper 2 card combo because it needs additional board presence, while Twin and CopyCat can win on the spot on an empty board. It's also much more mana intensive, as the other two combos could play pieces on separate turns, while this demands playing two 3-drops on the same turn. Twin's reign in modern was defined by how risky it was to tap out on turn 3 against certain decks, but this doesn't have that pressure. The biggest strike against this combo is that, despite dropping some of the advantages of the other two combos, it still shares many of their weaknesses. A better question would be to ask why this particular combo is worthwhile compared to the others, other than being different for the sake of being different.
I can see Oracle's Vault getting a deck built around it. I might have to try Fling out in my 8-Whack Goblin deck, can see where Flining a Piledriver for 10 could be good or fling Zada Hedron and other gobbies for a big finish when there are blockers.
I mean, Fling is a reprint, so it was an option for a long time now, but I wouldn't see why you'd play it in 8-Wack over Goblin Grenade. It doesn't work as well with Zada, Hedron Grinder as you think, since the sacrifice is part of the cost and doesn't target. You can fling a creature at all of your other creatures, but that doesn't help you.
Oracle's Vault is too expensive and too slow to see Modern play.
I take it that this card would be a common, then? Sudden Impact is a situational and weak burn spell (not to mention outclassed by Runeflare Trap), and this is a straight-up downgrade in most situations. For an uncommon version, you could have each player draw 2 cards first, which would at least make it more Nekusar-friendly.
Did people whine this much when Undying was revealed? That mechanic is generally more powerful than Embalm in most circumstances.
It's also a fair bit weaker than persist as well, especially without the combo potential. Unlike undying and persist, Embalm can't be used more than once per game without Pull from Eternity or an opposing Processor. The other two mechanics were also resilient to bounce, unlike embalm.
A spell is any nonland card that has been cast and is on the stack. Revolutionary Rebuff can target any creature, enchantment, instant, sorcery, or planeswalker on the stack and counter it unless its controller pays 2. If a card can counter abilities, it would be worded like Disallow.
If red gets a powerful 2 drop that sees an amount of play on part with the others, it needs to be distinct both from preexisting cards in its own color and other colors. I mean, nobody would mistake these 5 cards for a cycle, considering it consists of efficient instant and sorcery recursion, the most efficient beater in the game, a tutor that also cheats in equipment, one of the most efficient card advantage engines, and a means to shift power around to any attacking artifact creature. Mystic, Ravager, and Goyf, in particular, depend on the environment around them.
I'm saying this because the derivative options, like "cheaper Magus of the Moon," "Bolt on a stick," or some of the "red Snapcaster" variants that I've seen on this forum, simply wouldn't cut it. I also object to the usage of the term "broken" to describe those 5 because it justifies design ideas that are, well, grossly overpowered. The others owe most of their use to the fact that they did what they did efficiently. Ravager is the only one that consistently takes over games by itself, but it also has the most narrow usage. I'm not sure it even belongs on this list because it fits into so few archetypes, as opposed to the others' broad usability.
Mairsil's reappearance in card form absolutely can be a coincidence because Commander products are a dumping ground for neglected legendary figures, the vast majority of whom are irrelevant to contemporary sets.
While its value probably won't spike, I disagree with your assessment of Bygone Bishop. It has applications outside of clue-based decks; for example, it makes every creature that Collected Company decks hardcast replace themselves. If any sort of white weenie crops up (human or spirit tribal?), Bishop would give the deck crucial staying power in the mid and late games.
Oh, I'm not talking about your idea in general. It falls into the same category as people who want more reprints or want to take down the reserve list. Everyone has their own idea of how to make this game more affordable that our profit-hungry mothership couldn't care less about. Still doesn't make it relevant to a discussion about Masterpieces.
The status of the actual Gold-bordered champion decks and that of Invocations are entirely unrelated. One was a product designed to get tournament-winning decks into the hands of players without the risk of flooding the secondary market, while each Masterpiece Series border is designed to be a unique trophy that sells packs to players hoping to pull them. While this is the first time Wizards has altered the borders so radically (and maybe the last, based on the backlash), attempting to roll Gold-bordered cards into this discussion is a shallow attempt to marry this with the reprint discussion. I would bet that, had the color scheme been silver instead, you wouldn't have campaigned to make un-cards tournament legal.
Why would you be required to select the primordial as a new target before Divert even resolves? You're right about Divert needing a spell on the stack, but you can't change a spell's targets to an illegal target. If there are no legal targets to change Reanimate to upon the resolution of Divert, then the spell's target cannot and will not change.
Reanimate would only fizzle in this scenario if Divert resolves and changes the target to Sylvan Primordial before it gets exiled, but OP's explanation makes it seem like Deathrite Shaman is being used with Divert still on the stack. Since Divert changes the target as part of its resolution, it will still try to resolve if Primordial gets exiled while Divert is on the stack. If Sun Titan is Reanimate's only legal target, Divert's controller will be unable to change it and the Titan will return to the battlefield.
Shrink Ray U
Instant
Shrink target creature. (It becomes base 1/1 until the end of the turn)
Draw a card.
Ant Sneak 1B
Creature-Insect Rogue
Whenever Ant Sneak attacks, you may shrink it.(It becomes base 1/1 until the end of the turn.) If you, it can't be blocked this turn.
2/2
That being said, I like minimize the most. Micromorph is connected to the unpopular megamorph, and inflict is both more complex and more restrictive. Alternate cost keywords always add an additional dimension, while also keeping options limited enough not to overwhelm. One of my problems with inflict is that it can't go on inexpensive (CMC 2 or less) cards at all unless you want a free colorless creature that dies instantly.
EDIT: Whoops, Freudian slip with "standard" legal
It's basically a re-balanced white version of unearth, with less potential for abuse. At least token-synergy cards will get something more interesting than the largely vanilla and French vanilla tokens that commonly appear.
On the cards themselves:
Trial of Ambition doesn't seem particularly interesting for a mythic. It'll be a strictly better Succumb to Temptation most of the time, and you'll occasionally reduce an opponent's life total to 0 with it. I don't see many opportunities to cast this on yourself. EDH decks certainly have better black options at 7 CMC. The idea of cards that cycle into your library is pretty neat, especially in light of the new demon's puzzling "cycle or discard" wording. At least, it's a more elegant justification than slapping a cycling onto a sacrifice mechanic.
Magnificent Monoliths seem like an obligatory alt-win card that we'll probably see at one point or another in this set. I think 20 is too much, especially with the tapping limitation. Dark Depths is hard enough to turn on manually.
Alhur is Sedris, the Traitor King on a 4/4 deathtouch body. I think giving him entomb himself might be a little much, especially in EDH, but it fits thematically.
Riversoul Guide's cycle or dies dichotomy is jarring, especially in light of Amonkhet's black discard theme.
Fluent in Mind need to exile itself on resolution to prevent abuse. Such a clause is even more necessary on a 1 sided variation of this effect.
Hour of Devestation (sic) feels like an obligatory name-drop card for Hour of Devastation, minus the typo.
There really isn't any incentive in Legacy to make it more playable than what it would be if DM were in Modern. If anything, stiffer competition and stronger answers make it less worthwhile.
I mean, Fling is a reprint, so it was an option for a long time now, but I wouldn't see why you'd play it in 8-Wack over Goblin Grenade. It doesn't work as well with Zada, Hedron Grinder as you think, since the sacrifice is part of the cost and doesn't target. You can fling a creature at all of your other creatures, but that doesn't help you.
Oracle's Vault is too expensive and too slow to see Modern play.
It's also a fair bit weaker than persist as well, especially without the combo potential. Unlike undying and persist, Embalm can't be used more than once per game without Pull from Eternity or an opposing Processor. The other two mechanics were also resilient to bounce, unlike embalm.
I'm saying this because the derivative options, like "cheaper Magus of the Moon," "Bolt on a stick," or some of the "red Snapcaster" variants that I've seen on this forum, simply wouldn't cut it. I also object to the usage of the term "broken" to describe those 5 because it justifies design ideas that are, well, grossly overpowered. The others owe most of their use to the fact that they did what they did efficiently. Ravager is the only one that consistently takes over games by itself, but it also has the most narrow usage. I'm not sure it even belongs on this list because it fits into so few archetypes, as opposed to the others' broad usability.