what you guys should have noticed that it's a red card that says destroy a creature i don't believe we've had that for quite sometime if I'm not mistaken
This is what I was going to point out. Red generally doesn't get to destroy creatures outright, it usually has to deal damage.
I agree with most of what you said, but since when is Avenging Arrow "very playable?" Avenging Arrow is that 23 card you begrudgingly put into your deck because you have nothing better. It's a bad removal because it punishes you for being behind and sometimes puts you to be 2-for-one'd. The Swing is slightly better because its two mana(albeit colored) but the -5/-5 remains to be seen as a positive or a negative. And against Boros or Gruul, you definitely want to kill things before they deal damage.
A nitpicky post, I admit, I just don't see this card as good or "very playable"
I completely agree with your evaluation of Arrow and Swing. Neither one is very good simply because it's conditional removal that you don't want to fulfill the condition on. Plenty of Avenging Arrows have languished in my sideboards and I'm perfectly happy about that.
I don't know about you,
but after drawing my entire deck, I'd probably want to spend the extra G for Eureka,
so I can put most of my library into play, rather than the one best card
He's talking about playing S&T to put Omniscience into play, then playing EtI for free, along with the rest of your deck.
No, Aurelia says "attacks for the first time each turn", so only 1 time per turn
Yes, but if you attack with her, get her trigger, then Cloudshift her, she can attack again and will trigger again. She has haste and Cloudshifting her makes her a new object, so as far as the game is concerned, the second attack is the first time that Aurelia attacked this turn.
"A natural number (i.e. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, etc.) is called a prime or a prime numberif it is greater than 1 and has exactly two divisors, 1 and the number itself."
Wouldn't that make 2 the number that you're looking for since, per the definition of a prime number, you can't fulfill the requirements?
It's a legal play, because you choose the targets for a spell before you pay its costs. You can target the creature and then sacrifice it for Launch Party's cost. It fizzles when it goes to resolve since its target is gone, but it doesn't matter here.
Note that it does matter in this case that the spell is countered upon resolution because Launch Party causes the creature's controller to lose 2 life. Since the spell is countered, that doesn't happen.
I'm reading people's comments about not wanting to lock in on 2 colors in pick 1 and think to myself that they don't seem to realize that they'll be playing 3 colors most of the time in this format.
Dumb question, but this happened at the first incarnation of this effect: Jin-Gitaxias, Core Augur still must occur? Or can you now selectively "forget" to have it trigger?
"Forgetting" a trigger intentionally is cheating - fraud.
Hey, I'm wondering if creatures create a priority situation even if there are no ETB triggers?
For example, I have a birthing pod in play and my opponent has 1B open.
I cast elvish visionary. Does my opponent have an opportunity to cast doom blade before I sacrifice the elf to the pod? In a previously played situation, my opponent argued that there is a creature ETB state.
In this case he will because Elvish Visionary has an ETB ability. Since Pod can only be activated when you can play a sorcery, he could Doom Blade your elf while its ETB ability is on the stack.
Were it a creature without an ETB ability like Arbor Elf, then no he would not be able to kill your dood before you activate your pod.
Cultural Exchange doesn't target creatures, it targets players. You choose the creatures that get exchanged when Cultural Exchange resolves. When the first one resolves, you can exchange your 1 for one of your opponent's creatures. Then when the second one resolves, you can swap the one you just took for either his other creature or the one you just gave him.
TL;DR:
You can only take one of his creatures if you only control a single guy
Thanks for clarifying. If I use the second example without Mycoloth, will the doubled tokens still get haste?
Rhys' ability would have to be activated while FKZ's ETB trigger is on the stack. If you let FKZ's trigger resolve, it will be too late for the copied tokens to get +1/+1 and haste. If you respond to that trigger though, yes, they will benefit from the FKZ's trigger.
I devour all 27 tokens with Mycoloth and make 54 saproling tokens. Mycoloth is 58/58.
Stop right there. The first two can be stacked in the order that you listed and you would get all 27 tokens. The Devouring of the tokens, however, would not happen. It wouldn't even being able to happen to ANY of your creatures. Devour is a static ability that creates a replacement effect for how the creature enters the battlefield. Since all of the creatures enter the battlefield at the same time, there are no creatures around to devour in the first place, let alone the tokens created by triggered abilities.
This is what I was going to point out. Red generally doesn't get to destroy creatures outright, it usually has to deal damage.
I completely agree with your evaluation of Arrow and Swing. Neither one is very good simply because it's conditional removal that you don't want to fulfill the condition on. Plenty of Avenging Arrows have languished in my sideboards and I'm perfectly happy about that.
Executioner's Swing doesn't impress me. It's just a reworked Avenging Arrow and that card isn't very good.
Smite and Arrows of Justice on the other hand, those cards make me happy.
He's talking about playing S&T to put Omniscience into play, then playing EtI for free, along with the rest of your deck.
Yes, but if you attack with her, get her trigger, then Cloudshift her, she can attack again and will trigger again. She has haste and Cloudshifting her makes her a new object, so as far as the game is concerned, the second attack is the first time that Aurelia attacked this turn.
Wouldn't that make 2 the number that you're looking for since, per the definition of a prime number, you can't fulfill the requirements?
Note that it does matter in this case that the spell is countered upon resolution because Launch Party causes the creature's controller to lose 2 life. Since the spell is countered, that doesn't happen.
For the record: Charm
You would be wrong. The ability goes on the stack and both players have a chance to respond to it.
"Forgetting" a trigger intentionally is cheating - fraud.
In this case he will because Elvish Visionary has an ETB ability. Since Pod can only be activated when you can play a sorcery, he could Doom Blade your elf while its ETB ability is on the stack.
Were it a creature without an ETB ability like Arbor Elf, then no he would not be able to kill your dood before you activate your pod.
TL;DR:
You can only take one of his creatures if you only control a single guy
Rhys' ability would have to be activated while FKZ's ETB trigger is on the stack. If you let FKZ's trigger resolve, it will be too late for the copied tokens to get +1/+1 and haste. If you respond to that trigger though, yes, they will benefit from the FKZ's trigger.
Stop right there. The first two can be stacked in the order that you listed and you would get all 27 tokens. The Devouring of the tokens, however, would not happen. It wouldn't even being able to happen to ANY of your creatures. Devour is a static ability that creates a replacement effect for how the creature enters the battlefield. Since all of the creatures enter the battlefield at the same time, there are no creatures around to devour in the first place, let alone the tokens created by triggered abilities.