Magic Market Index for Nov 2nd, 2018
 
Magic Market Index for October 26th, 2018
 
Magic Market Index for October 12th, 2018
  • posted a message on Upcoming Norse-Inspired Set
    Quote from BB84Prez »
    Either way, it just seems too close for WotC to risk a lawsuit.


    fwiw there's no lawsuit.

    nothing would come of similar cards being printed, unless the value of duals radically dropped. It's all tied to money. Nobody is going to bring a suit against WoTC for crossing some imaginary line where a card happens to be slightly too similar to a card on the RL.

    Norse, eh?

    hmm... yep. I can get behind that. sign me up. Snowy landscapes and tall tales.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on [POLL] What cards do you want banned or unbanned in the November 26, 2018 announcement?
    Quote from ktkenshinx »
    Unban: SFM
    Ban: Stirrings

    SFM is a joke ban, nothing more to say about it. Stirrings represents an inconsistency with Preordain. I could easily switch that vote to a Preordain unban, but as I think Wizards has a ideological problem with blue cantrips, I think the Stirrings ban vote is more realistic.


    I'm disappointed that you became a proponent of the non-argument whereby the fact that preordain remains banned means that stirrings needs to be banned.

    There's no real link between the two cards which can be drawn to this effect. It's a false correlation.
    Preordain, as you well know was banned at a time when the critical mass of blue cantrips was an issue and blue combo was high profile. The fact that any of those cantrips remain on the banlist is more to do with how static the banlist is, than anything else. Cards rarely come off, and the presumption is that unbanning a card brings associated risks. Just because another card currently legal is (in your eyes) equal or better, (in another colour no less) doesn't affect those potential risks associated with unbanning something. One cannot say: "preordain is still banned, so this other card X should be banned along with it". It does not follow logically to make that statement.

    Conversely, stirrings itself is an engine for an entirely different kind of deck. The kind of deck that needs those sorts of consistency tools and doesn't have a reasonable alternative. We are not in a world of critical mass-driven problems relating to decks using stirrings, and stirrings itself, while good, isn't causing the downfall or destruction of modern. It isn't a problem; it's just another viable, potent card in a format of viable potent cards.

    I agree we could likely see preordain return and I doubt it would cause too much issue. That's for WotC to decide.
    Claiming that the decision on preordain has any bearing whatsoever on cards like stirrings though? That's false equivalency. It's pseudo-logic. It's a very commonly-used argument but regardless of how many people use it, it doesn't make sense.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Please stop shuffling opponent's deck if you don't know how
    Quote from Emblem »
    I personally just can't stand when an opponent shuffles my deck, especially in a small-time tourney. Cutting seems like a gentlemanly formality to me, but shuffling seems to just blatantly say "I don't trust you". Sure, strangers aren't expected to trust other strangers, but you don't see them coming out and saying it. I don't count my bank withdrawal in front of the teller who just counted it out in front of me. If someone is clearly having trouble shuffling I'll sometimes shuffle and let them know why, but you still want to shuffle my deck after you just saw me pile shuffle twice with several riffles and hand-over-hands in between? C'mon.


    I think it's polite to shuffle. Shows that you're interested in playing on a level playing field and respect your opponent.

    I'd suggest you're thinking along skewed lines if your response to someone shuffling your deck is defensively thinking that they are somehow implying you're a cheater. Thinking that way is kind of... Bogus?

    I always shuffle. Even if only once or twice. And I ask my opponents to as well. It's a courtesy more than anything but at comp REL it's required so it's a good habit to get into.

    (oh and for the record, even though shuffling isn't an inference of an opponent's dishonesty, some people are dishonest. For every ten nice people who want to have a fun game, there's one douche who cheats. And it's not always obvious which one is which so keeping up the courteous shuffle in all instances is a win-win for everyone. We should all do it, as a prevention measure against any dishonesty out there)
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Casting an instant onto a newly empty stack
    I realise the stack doesn't technically 'go away' but it was the best way I could think of, to express my thought process.

    Thanks for the replies. Makes sense now =)
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Casting an instant onto a newly empty stack
    Quote from MadMageQc »
    Quote from purklefluff »
    Let's say we have a stack of spells or abilities. For the sake of argument, three. It's doesn't really matter what they are.

    I'm the opponent (not active player)

    Can I do the priority shuffle and let each of the three spells resolve individually, then after the last one resolves, add something to the empty stack again?

    Thanks

    Yes you can, though it will be after the active player has passed priority to you (as the active player, they get priority first on an emtpy stack). The game won't proceed to the next step or phase until all players have passed priority in succession on a an emtpy stack.


    You've answered a different question that I wasn't asking. See my more clarified post immediately above (comment 6 in the thread). Apologies for the double post. On mobile can't seem to merge quotes.

    Thanks in advance.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Casting an instant onto a newly empty stack
    Quote from user_938036 »
    Quote from purklefluff »
    To clarify, I mean before an opponent gets a chance to play a land or cast a sorcery.

    Can I let spells resolve down to an empty stack, and then sneak something into an empty stack before any sorcery speed stuff starts getting played again. Is there a point at which we both receive priority before my opponent goes back to casting creatures.
    Assuming this is the opponents main phase, otherwise they couldn't do sorcery stuff anyway, then no. The active player is the first to gain priority, so your opponent will get priority first on their turn.


    So, just to make absolutely clear, there isn't a passing of priority (apnap) after the last spell in a stack. Meaning once that final spell or ability resolves, I have no more opportunity to add anything to the now-empty stack before the stack disappears and we go back to 'sorcery speed' and my opponent can cast creatures etc.


    To put this in a specific example:

    Player 1 (their main phase) casts oath of nissa & it resolves. Trigger goes on the stack. Can I let the trigger resolve down to an empty stack, see what my opponent gets as part of the resolution of the ability (for sake of argument a creature), then cast an instant back onto that empty stack, before they get to cast their creature. For this to work I'm assuming that after the last spell resolving there's a round of passing priority before the stack disappears.

    The rules seem fuzzy because I've read that after each spell or ability resolving there's a round of priority. So I assumed that one could let spells resolve down to an empty stack and then (still at instant speed, before the stack goes away) still add spells back to the stack.

    In fact, I'm fairly sure there's a deck that existed, that relies on this very interaction (maybe?). I have definite memory of more than one player using this stack interaction over the years, so what's the deal? I've had mixed responses and nobody seems to quite be able to specifically pinpoint this one within the comp rules. The main quote is the one referring to moving to the next step or phase which isn't what I'm talking about.

    Help please!
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on [Primer] Gx Tron
    Quote from Vegita1998 »
    Anyone have any tips vs Abzan? T2 Stony Silence into t3 Liliana of the Veil is unbeatable as far as I can tell unless you have natural tron into t4 ulamog, the ceaseless hunger or world breaker.


    well.. you're not 0% to see some dig through your deck, although Stony does shut off chromatics making G a harder sell.



    these are decent in the scenario you described (and if you're not bringing in nature's claim, you're doing it wrong). I assume you're running 5 basics? that seems to be the way we're headed these days and personally i've not found any reason to drop down from the 5 i'm running right now (ask me again in six months but for now 5 is the way to go). with that number of basics you're relatively likely to see one over your first couple of draws or maybe in your opener.

    stony is a pain, that's for sure. I've never felt that it's lights out though - and we topdeck better than midrange decks so having an empty hand isn't necessarily lights out either.
    Dat Lily ultimate tho. lol. if you struggle to find a way to deal with her, that'll be a pain for sure.

    i've played a few games which followed the scenario you've described. I threw out an o-stone on my third turn (which i couldn't activate) and then on my fourth or fifth turns, used a nature's claim to enable a couple of chromatics, draw a couple of cards, drop a tron-piece and activate the stone. It worked out fairly well at the time although I recognise you'd have to draw the claim in order to have access to this sort of corner-turning moment.
    oh and of course, this was before the printing of assassin's trophy.... but then if they are using trophy on your o-stone, i guess you're up on the exchange? you definitely should have boarded in thragtusks and attempted to lower your curve post-board so them giving you an extra land in exchange for stone would be actually brilliant.

    Posted in: Big Mana
  • posted a message on Casting an instant onto a newly empty stack
    To clarify, I mean before an opponent gets a chance to play a land or cast a sorcery.

    Can I let spells resolve down to an empty stack, and then sneak something into an empty stack before any sorcery speed stuff starts getting played again. Is there a point at which we both receive priority before my opponent goes back to casting creatures.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Casting an instant onto a newly empty stack
    Let's say we have a stack of spells or abilities. For the sake of argument, three. It's doesn't really matter what they are.

    I'm the opponent (not active player)

    Can I do the priority shuffle and let each of the three spells resolve individually, then after the last one resolves, add something to the empty stack again?

    Thanks

    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Back playing magic after a 7 years stop
    If you've still got your old cards, you may be in a good place to start in modern.

    To clarify, there's a handful of decks which rely heavily on the cards and mechanics from mirrodin block (and surrounding sets). If you've got any of these cards, they'll not only be worth a fair amount of cash but also be a great way to start building a competitive deck in modern. I'm referring to your comment on playing affinity/ninjas before.

    Cards to look out for: krark-clan ironworks, arcbound ravager, blinkmoth nexus, darksteel citadel to name a few.

    Look up these decks:
    Affinity
    Hardened scales
    KCI

    Moreover, its a bit rarer, but there are some pretty valuable cards from kamigawa block as well.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on New to magic, is my deck any good?
    It sounds a little like the person running this activity wants you to experiment and work together to find a decent deck by yourselves, not go out and purchase the best cards straight away?

    Is purchasing cards outside of the ones you've been given allowed in the context of your tournament? I ask this because given your starting point, it wouldn't be too hard to just dominate everything by purchasing playsets of the best cards in your colours. But doing this wouldn't teach you anything, improve your skill or even necessarily be enjoyable. Other players may even resent you for breaking the fairness of the situation.

    If everyone is on more or less a level playing field, you'll probably learn more and have a better experience overall. With that in mind, you'll want to look for a few things:

    - in a casual 'box of random stuff' kind of format, you'll benefit greatly from trying to identify cards which net you more than a card's worth of value. Examples of this could include creatures (especially in the 3-4 mana cost range) which have a useful tacked-on effect such as killing an opponent's creature. ravenous chupacabra is a perfect example.
    - you'll probably find most games drag out for a while as you trade resources, until one of you can establish a decent threat on the board and ride it to victory. In these longer games, drawing additional cards is really useful in order to keep hitting your land drops and draw into more threats than your opponent. Simple cards like divination are good examples of this.
    - removal. Many beginners see their path to victory as being a race to dump as many creatures on the board as possible, and don't allocate space in their deck for removal or interaction. Removal is cards which kill opposing threats, and the best removal spells are ones which efficiently deal with a problematic threat, at the cheapest possible mana cost.
    - repeatable sources of advantage or value: activated abilities (even expensive ones) on cheap creatures are a good way to have relevant plays in the early game and then have something useful to do with your mana in the late game. Planeswalkers and some enchantments also offer these repeatable sources of advantage. Abilities which draw cards are often the most powerful, but you'll have to balance it according to your deck's strategy.
    - have a strategy: if your deck mixes high-cost huge stompy creatures with tiny low-cost aggro creatures, your deck won't work. You'll often draw the 'wrong half' of your deck and have uncastable cards in the early game and topdeck tiny useless things in the late game. If aggro is your strategy, go all-in on the aggro. If big threats are your game-plan, include ways to put additional lands onto the battlefield, as well as removal for your opponent's threats. This way you'll have ways to accelerate your large spells out quicker, and have ways to survive your first few turns when you won't be putting much on the board. It's all about finding your strategy and planting a flag. Trying to do too much won't work.
    - evasion vs large creatures: if your creatures are hard to block (i.e. Flying) you'll be able to pressure your opponent even if they flood the board with large creatures. That by itself won't win you a game, so including some removal will get rid of their biggest nastiest threats while allowing you to chip away and keep applying pressure. However:
    - two headed giant: 2HG games are generally slower and aggro decks are a bit weaker due to higher life totals. Balancing your deck with your partner's will be challenging and I think you'll benefit a lot from just playing and seeing what works and what doesn't.

    I could go on, but that's a lot. Hope that helped?
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Anyone want to see Tournament Packs make a comeback?
    This product doesn't make sense. It doesn't fill a need. It doesn't have a real market it serves.


    Your point is taken, and I hope you have voted your feelings on it. Currently over two thirds of voters are in favor of them. To that majority is does make sense and would serve that niche of the market. Niche products are needed by manufacturers, not everyone wants Coke or Pepsi. Smile


    my opinion has changed.

    I personally loved these 'larger boosters' and if there was some significant benefit to the inclusion of lands (i.e. full-arts or something) then I could see some value being attributed for these. Otherwise it's just a 'big booster' and i'm not sure that's enough.

    still... who knows, eh?
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Anyone want to see Tournament Packs make a comeback?
    I can remember the first sealed product I ever convinced my mum to purchase while walking around a large shop, as a young 'un. It was a 4th edition tournament pack (here: they look like this. She agreed to buy one pack, so naturally I opted for the larger pack instead of a single booster.

    I still remember opening that pack, and the cards in it. alabaster potion was the first card, and armageddon was second. It was such a formative experience for me, despite having owned cards (mostly gifts from my uncle) from Alpha onwards, this was the first time I had fresh, sealed product of my own. Who would have predicted the lifelong joy that would follow.

    That said, I'm not sure they make sense anymore. It's all about the value of the included lands. Are they worth it? probably not. I'd stratify MTG products into tiers as follows::

    0.5- a beginner's set, like Portal (remember that?). Needs to be able to exist without hitting income targets for a regular standard set. Should tie into Arena very strongly! promo codes, booster unlock cards for online, etc. Should be cheaper and aimed at involving people in the ecosystem/community rather than getting people to draft.
    1- Standard boosters. most basic tier of product
    2- preconstructed theme decks for standard blocks, similar to the old theme decks. Those products were fantastic at bringing together flavour and collection-building, and a fun way to play with friends. I'd wager that the majority of my time as a player has been informed and sculpted by those theme decks, even though they were discontinued some years ago. They formed the backbone of my playgroup's collections for a long time, and helped to sculpt everyone's own personal 'colour' identities within our social circle as well. What was brilliant about them was the no-nonsense, basic packaging. No big blister-packs, no huge boxes. Simple easy-to-grasp themes and several choices for each new set which showcased mechanics and new cards. For a time, I preferred to purchase these products instead of boosters or singles.
    3- highly focused format specific products: commander decks, Modern reprint packs (NOT designed for draft, but packs of format staples aimed at increasing accessibility), FNM-pitched tournament/challenger decks for Standard or Modern, with generous inclusions of the important cards.
    4- the rare, (perhaps annual) occasional experimental product (see: Planechase/Archenemy which were both great). Notably these should also include needed reprints for formats like Modern.

    and that's probably where I'd leave it.
    less is more, right?
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Help with Muldrotha the Gravetide deck
    Quote from purklefluff »

    Also I've got this bugging sensation in my brain that viscera seer alongside Mystic snake is some sort of mono-combo when muldrotha is in play haha.

    Muldrotha, the Gravetide only lets you play from graveyard during your own turns.


    Ah yes, the old read the card switcheroo.

    I thought it said "each turn". My bad I'll leave my old post unedited for posterity.
    Posted in: Deck Creation (Modern)
  • posted a message on Help with Muldrotha the Gravetide deck
    ^see above post. Basically says most of what I was going to say.

    Except for one part:

    eldritch evolution is probably the only feasible way you can afford to run a six-cost creature in modern without jumping through a load of hoops (like the utopia sprawl/arbor elf engine).

    Running evolution also means you can cut all the way down to a single copy of muldrotha and use it as a silver bullet to beat grindy matchups. Actually not a bad plan, all things considered. That opens up the rest of your deck to powerful 'value' creatures and modern staples. I'm liking the sound of it so far.

    Also I've got this bugging sensation in my brain that viscera seer alongside Mystic snake is some sort of mono-combo when muldrotha is in play haha.
    Realistically you want to run a handful of powerful creatures that interact with the board (one of each, as evolution targets), like sower of temptation and ravenous chupacabra. The rest of the deck should be a mix of stuff like scavenging ooze, good removal, tireless tracker, maybe some light discard

    Your issue is that the sorts of decks muldrotha wants to be in are decks that want to play white. You'll probably end up abzan-splash-blue in most of the better builds which is.. Fine? A bit tricky. You'll probably lose occasional games to mana screw.
    Posted in: Deck Creation (Modern)
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.