But if the player knows what he/she is doing they would just go off, or continue on after you cast either of the two spells and kill you before it resolves. You would need to cast it prior to them having the ability to go off, and then they would most likely just wait a turn.
Leyline of Sanctity will work (preventing MR from targeting the player), Murderous Redcap's ability targets.
So you need play the Ethereal haze as soon as redcap comes into play before they sac.
Here's how I feel playing magic today. It's like driving a Toyota Prius today but longing for your old muscle car from the 70s. Every card is just a weaker version of another card printed in the past. I want to see wizards make magic great again. Print the power.
Too late. I ordered the MM17 from SCG yesterday. The reason I chose the MM17 instead of MM15 is because the 2017 version looks brighter. Just personal preference.
Comparison
2015
2017
Well, could get the 2015 one when goyf money becomes available again.
Also going to order the "tarmodie" that they're selling there. Maybe next month.
I didn't realize there was that much difference in print quality. I like the brighter 2017 version.
My two cents: First of all we need to define what "luck" is. For a quick and sloppy analysis we'll just associated it to randomness. Then good luck is having the randomness inexplicably tilt in your favor, bad luck is inexplicably against your interest. The randomness of a magic deck is significantly less than that of a deck of playing cards. So, even when putting two competing decks head to head, the amount randomness, purely in card draw would still be less than a deck of playing cards. Now there is another level of "luck" that is relevant and it comes in the form of meta gaming. Decks have good and bad matchups where a deck can be favored purely on design principle. Aggro is favored vs control but is not against tron type decks for example. Going into an unknown meta is a crap shoot. You can mitigate your chances by playing a tiered deck but ultimately until you familiarize yourself with the environment, it is significantly random.
Overall, I think people attribute way too much of the game to skill and ignore the luck aspect far too often because "being lucky" does very little to the ego...lol. Don't get me wrong: there is a significant amount of skill in the form of game intellect and moxie that the best players possess but ultimately a couple no land opening hands will end their day just as quickly as a novice.
I agree, I see it like this. You go to a 100 man tournament playing a control deck because aggro has been non existent in the meta, right call. Only 3 people show up playing aggro in that 100 man tournament, again verification you made the right call. Some how your first three Matchups are the Aggro players. I see this as unlucky not just a variance of chance. I guess a lot of this debate comes down to if you believe luck is something that can be measured or it is something more supernatural.
Great idea, Wizards, cut the packs and stick in a bunch of junk that nobody cares about.
It's a miracle they haven't cut the amount of packs in Fat Packs by now and started shoving in things like pen and pencil sets and Jace-shaped erasers and tat like that.
Ugh.
True, I remember when you used to get a Book with the fat packs.
and what decks are doing best in the eldrai tron and deaths shadow meta. i.e. what benefited from them becoming tier 1?
If you don't have any other enchantment hate in your sideboard and it's a blind meta, you really need Wear // Tear. Shattering Spree seems strictly good for Chalice, which is a solid thing to board for. But you really need at least three pieces of enchantment hate in your 75, and really I'd go for all four.
I don't like these with only 3 packs, no box and no dividers. They should included a flash from the past pack. I would love to have packs with totally random cards from the Past and present. That would get me in the holiday spirit.
Each copy is CMC 1. It gets around Chalice because Chalice has a triggered ability that triggers on cast. The copies from Shattering Spree aren't cast, so it only affects the first one and not the Replicated ones.
Thanks, That makes sense. sadly I traded my play set to a Skred player the other day. I'm going to pick up a couple more, this is a good answer for Chalice.
Just asking another goyf related question... if given a choice.. what would be the better one to invest money on? The original printing or the Modern Masters 2017 version? Going to buy one tomorrow. Thanks.
None are doing well, but oldest printings do best. That one without the foil stamp on the bottom is second best.
I like the foil stamp ones they are harder to fake. No card 0ver $10 dollars is a good investment anymore do to wizards reprinting model. Wizards is eventually going to print cards to the point of no value.
Referring to the part of the post that I put in bold... thanks a lot. That brought me back to my senses. Remembered the faking incidents that happened just awhile ago in our local mtg community.
Ordered the MM17 version - my question has been answered.
I know 76 dollars isn't a big deal for some people.. but a bit in shock right now.. this is my biggest mtg single card purchase, even more expensive than the time I bought a Taiga.. those were only about 50 dollars apiece. I hope this one goyf helps even a little. I plan to buy another one when money is available again.
A lot of LGS's have fakes, you really have to know your stuff. What players try to do is trade in fakes for real cards,( make fake money into real money) most LGS owners are smart enough to spot the fakes but not all of them. Foils are safe, far as I know they haven't been able to make passible fake foils yet. The only cards over 20 dollars I buy at LGS is foils or cards I personally witnessed opened from packs.
I had a different response typed up but I'm just going to leave this here so we can actually talk about numbers and people can stop theorizing and citing personal and biased examples.
I've said this numerous times but I'll say it again: everyone here agrees that luck plays a role in MTG and all MTG formats. We just disagree about the extent to which that is true. The data is just waiting for people to look at, but no one really wants to. They want to just speculate about their theories and cite personal examples.
Here are some actual numbers because no one else wants to do this work.
I compared the 50 players with the highest format win percentages in Legacy and Modern, seeing where they ranked on a list of 150 players with the highest MTG-wide win percentages. Of those top 150 winningest players, 16 appeared in the Legacy top 50. For Modern, 18 of that top 150 appeared in the Modern top 50. This means that if we look at the winningest 150 players in the game, there is no statistical difference between how many appear in the bracket of top 50 winningest Modern players vs. the bracket of top 50 winningest Legacy players.
Taking it a step further, I checked the overall win percentage across MTG for all of those top 50 players in both Modern and Legacy, averaging the final results. In the end, the average MTG-wide win rate of a top 50 Legacy player is 63%. The average MTG-wide win percentage of a top 50 Modern player is 61%. This is a statistically significant difference, so it is possible that there is something about Legacy that allows better players to win 2% more in Legacy than in Modern.
I took this yet another step further and only looked at top 50 Modern/Legacy players who were also top 150 overall players. In essence, we’re narrowing down the Modern and Legacy lists only to big name top pros. This removes many players who just don’t have a lot of events in their portfolio, and those who aren’t in that elite top 150 overall subset. Looking at those top players (16 in Legacy, 18 in Modern), we find their average MTG-wide win % is identical: 63.8%. This, despite there being only two elite top 150 players overlapping in the Modern and Legacy subsets (BBD and Royce Walter). But their win rates within those formats are not identical. In Legacy, those players averaged a 71.8% win rate. In Modern, they averaged a 68% win rate. This magnifies the number above, suggesting that for top players, there’s something about Modern which is translating to a 3.8% lower win rate.
When we look at those players who aren’t top 150, there is a bigger difference between the Modern and Legacy win-rates. In Legacy, it’s 70.4%. In Modern, it’s 67.3%. So for the non-pro players, Modern is also affecting win rates.
If we assume the sample is big enough, and if we assume that skill should generally average out to decide matchups over many datapoints, we can conclude that there’s something about Modern which accounts for between a 2% and 4% drop in your win rate that would otherwise be expected in Legacy. I believe this is the variance that people cite as being present in Modern and not in Legacy, but I don’t actually know if variance causes it. I don't know what causes it. I just know it’s a real difference. And, again, it doesn’t actually affect how many top players appear at the top in Modern events.
The Byes are artificially raising the win rates for Pro players. They are getting 2-3 free wins a tournament with byes not to mention they are missing out on all the early rogue decks.
4 Eidolon of the Great Revel
4 Goblin Guide
4 Monastery Swiftspear
1 Grim lavamancer
Spells
4 Lava Spike
4 Rift Bolt
4 Boros Charm
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Lightning Helix
4 Searing Blaze
4 Skullcrack
3 Arid Mesa
3 Inspiring Vantage
3 Mountain
2 Sacred Foundry
4 Bloodstained Mire
4 Wooded Foothills
2 Deflecting Palm
2 Relic of Progenitus
3 Path to Exile
4 Wear // Tear
2 Shattering Spree
2 Ensnaring Bridge