4 mana for 6/6 across 2 bodies...is it good enough?
If it was as simple as that it would be. But 5 of that attacking power is so vulnerable. I mean Beauty can be easily destroyed (she's a 1/1), which shackles the Beast... but Beast can even be neutered by someone putting a +1/+1 counter on her!
Somebody correct me if I’m wrong but Rosewater said there were only three planeswalkers in the set. I guess maybe he wasn’t counting the BaB promo or something?
As some have said: Garruk can be a Brawl commander or Will can be a Brawl commander. And again Rosewater said that will and Rowan are in the set, confirming Rowan is one of the walkers of the set, but never said Will would appear as a walker (could be the big bad wolf as people had speculated).
Ha, I'd be interested in seeing the theory where he is the big bad wolf!
Somebody correct me if I’m wrong but Rosewater said there were only three planeswalkers in the set. I guess maybe he wasn’t counting the BaB promo or something?
He's definitely the kind of guy who thinks picayune crap like that is the height of clever.
Classic Manic Vandal type of a creature! Seems great!
Do we know if this would count as a creature if you cast it in Adventure mode? Fairly significant vs things like Thorn of Amethyst or Vryn Wingmare in Cube
You can cast the card's adventure mode from your hand, and it goes to exile when you do. Creatures with "adventure" can be cast from exile.
So if you cast the adventure spell first, you can get both the adventure effect and the creature. And all creatures with an adventure spell attached to them are essentially immune to being exiled, since you can simply re-cast them from that zone.
Aaron Forsythe clarified this - creatures with adventure gain the ability to be cast from exile as the adventure resolves. If the creature ends up in exile for any other reason, it'll be stranded like any other creature would be.
Probably not a major issue but an annoying quirk to potentially keep track of.
You can cast the card's adventure mode from your hand, and it goes to exile when you do. Creatures with "adventure" can be cast from exile.
So if you cast the adventure spell first, you can get both the adventure effect and the creature. And all creatures with an adventure spell attached to them are essentially immune to being exiled, since you can simply re-cast them from that zone.
We don't know the bolded part to be true. For instance, if a Rebound spell is exiled in some other way you can't cast it from exile.
Granted, the two abilities work differently, but it is loose speculation to simply add a static "You may cast this from exile" to every Adventure card. Worse than that, to only add it to the creature side of the card.
Does that mean you can put the ultimate on the stack exchanging control of your Food for your opponent's card, sacrifice the Food, and still get their card?
Exchange is a keyword action, with specific rules preventing that.
701.10a: A spell or ability may instruct players to exchange something (for example, life totals or control of two permanents) as part of its resolution. When such a spell or ability resolves, if the entire exchange can't be completed, no part of the exchange occurs.
Example: If a spell attempts to exchange control of two target creatures but one of those creatures is destroyed before the spell resolves, the spell does nothing to the other creature.
Ah, thanks. I think I do remember when "exchange" was added to the lexicon actually. Was it in m13 with Switcheroo?
Why doesn't Syr Konrad, the Grim's first ability just read:
Whenever a creature card is put into your graveyard from anywhere or leaves your graveyard, do ~x~.
Why do they list both parts of dying or putting in the graveyard from anywhere else. Seems like a step back in templating.
Is it really just so it doesn't count himself when he dies? Also, counter to Ashiok, Dream Render and Kaya, Orzhov Usurper!
Knowing Wizards it's another case of missing the forest for the tress (ie lets not stress about important things and worry about going over minutiae with a fine-tooth comb).
Which means it's probably because "Whenever another creature card..." is technically incorrect since permanents are creatures while in play/exile but creature cards in every other zone. Think dumb, really dumb.
(Since the distinction CAUSES far more confusion to people than glossing over it ever would, you might think they just introduce a fudge rule that "creature" = creature except in cases where another zone is referenced and then it equals "creature cards")
How do Adventure creatures work when they end up in exile normally (e.g. Path to Exile, graveyard exile effects)? You can't cast them from exile in this case...or can you?
Interesting question as to what happens if the card is otherwise exiled as it is going to take some extra baggage to clarify this point either way.
However, it appears that under no circumstances will the Adventure side be castable from exile leading me to suppose that part of the ability is "Adventures can only be cast from your hand" although there would be different ways to stipulate this.
What concerns me is that if they try to bury this question in the official rules (mostly opaque to players) without issuing a clarification it's going to be a major point of confusion. And it looks for all the world like they are going to do exactly that.
On most cards if a spell or ability has multiple targets and then one of them is removed before resolution, you continue with as much of the effect of the spell as possible.
Does that mean you can put the ultimate on the stack exchanging control of your Food for your opponent's card, sacrifice the Food, and still get their card?
Its "you can't actvate this ability if you DON'T control.." if you opt for that phrasing.
Funny. Beast can't love a fatty.
Ha, I'd be interested in seeing the theory where he is the big bad wolf!
He's definitely the kind of guy who thinks picayune crap like that is the height of clever.
Do we know if this would count as a creature if you cast it in Adventure mode? Fairly significant vs things like Thorn of Amethyst or Vryn Wingmare in Cube
Probably not a major issue but an annoying quirk to potentially keep track of.
This one has flying and costs less than the Stalker fwiw.
We don't know the bolded part to be true. For instance, if a Rebound spell is exiled in some other way you can't cast it from exile.
Granted, the two abilities work differently, but it is loose speculation to simply add a static "You may cast this from exile" to every Adventure card. Worse than that, to only add it to the creature side of the card.
Ah, thanks. I think I do remember when "exchange" was added to the lexicon actually. Was it in m13 with Switcheroo?
Ironically, if they were to print a card named Noble Faerie in this set it likely wouldn't be a Noble
Knowing Wizards it's another case of missing the forest for the tress (ie lets not stress about important things and worry about going over minutiae with a fine-tooth comb).
Which means it's probably because "Whenever another creature card..." is technically incorrect since permanents are creatures while in play/exile but creature cards in every other zone. Think dumb, really dumb.
(Since the distinction CAUSES far more confusion to people than glossing over it ever would, you might think they just introduce a fudge rule that "creature" = creature except in cases where another zone is referenced and then it equals "creature cards")
Interesting question as to what happens if the card is otherwise exiled as it is going to take some extra baggage to clarify this point either way.
However, it appears that under no circumstances will the Adventure side be castable from exile leading me to suppose that part of the ability is "Adventures can only be cast from your hand" although there would be different ways to stipulate this.
What concerns me is that if they try to bury this question in the official rules (mostly opaque to players) without issuing a clarification it's going to be a major point of confusion. And it looks for all the world like they are going to do exactly that.
Does that mean you can put the ultimate on the stack exchanging control of your Food for your opponent's card, sacrifice the Food, and still get their card?