No, no, no, you aren't getting it. It isn't blue because it's blue - it's blue because it's good.
Its blue because, as Rosewater said in Monday's article, the entire block is made up of cards that coould arguably be black, so as a rule any card that could fit into a color besides black went into the other color, period.
This was a guiding principle of Innistrad design so that they could spread horror tropes out to other colors.
This guy makes more sense as black, but he also makes sense in blue - blue is the best color at flying.
So he is blue, in this block, becuase otherwise 90% of the cards would be black.
To just get to France (let alone to where the GP is) I'd be paying in excess of about £150 (about $250).
This doesn't take into account how long it would take to get there (six hours would be a fun alternative) nor does it account for Hotel or the train to Lille / the GP.
You are inconvenienced.
I simply cannot get there without losing my job.
I'm pretty sure you guys don't get how big the United States is. I luckily live about 60 minutes from Lincoln, NE.
The next nearest to me of these Grand Prix would require me to drive for 13 hours. (Indianapolis). Seattle is 2,600 kilometers from me. Indianapolis is a mere 1,000 km. Salt Lake City is 1,500 km. Austin is 1350km, and Nashville about 1270. And to top it off, Orlando is 2,300 km away.
And you know the most amazing thing about this?
Omaha, NE is located almost exactly in the middle of the country.
The only people who have more than one Grand Prix within a day's travel are the ones who live in southern Indiana or Kentucky, who'll be a day from both Indianapolis and Nashville.
Seattle and Orlando are 5,000 kilometers apart.
For perspective, the distance between Paris and Moscow is only 2,400 km.
That's about how far away from me 2 of these Grand Prix are.
I think saying that the implementation is horrible kind of misses the point. It seems to me that the whole mechanic was designed around the implementation, not the other way round. Someone just said "Right, we're making double-sided cards", and then they had to figure out how to do so without ruining everything.
I think everyone is missing the point.
If they had done it with a token system, there would have to be a token transformed card for every transformer, and they'd either have to include several per pack, not use transform at common/uncommon, or make it prohibitively hard to get the other halves.
By doing 2sided cards with the single checklist, they essentially have a universal token card that works for every transformer (when in your hand/deck) instead of needing 20 token cards for when the transform condition is satisfied.
Its both more economical and will make it a lot easier to use transform at lower rarities because the number of transform cards isn't going to be limited by availability of the token.
The big advantage of transfigure is that it lets you tutor for creature answers that aren't even in your color or are too deep in a color for you to access.
Phyrexian Obliterator would be a likely target for a reprinted Fleshwrither, letting people bypass his overly difficult CMC. In fact, it'd be an even better target for transfigure in other colors (Since color-sharing isn't required). However, there are actually not that many lower-cost creatures that would be this powerful accessed to extra cost out of color. After all, you would be paying 7 mana to transfigure into obliterator. That's a big premium, compared to just birthing podding into him, which is a lot easier.
I don't actually think that kind of interaction could end up so broken that it wouldn't be printable. Transmute is more dangerous because it comes in blue and so can be used to tutor for 2-3 cmc counter, bounce and draw spells.
So what you are saying is you want a format like Legacy. I keep hearing this argument about Modern and It hasnt been played yet. Why does everyone want Modern to be like Legacy? I know many that are HAPPY Modern isnt anything like Legacy. As for it being creature based, I say thats because of the lazyness of those playing. The general magic player has become very lazy about deck building and expect others to build top tier decks FOR THEM.
I dont think anyone can make an agrument for or against Modern until we get some tournament play under our collective belts. Until then I think everyone just needs to get to building and testing to actually see what is possible out of the cards we have to use. If in the future we get more bannings or some come off the list, we will adjust.
I dont know exactly how Modern will play. I dont care if it is exactly like Legacy or not (though Legacy is a successful, popular format that has an impending death in the next decade so a replacement that was as fun and popular would probably be a great idea).
However, I can read what the philosophy is behind how they want Modern to play, and what elements they want present in it, and some of those are extremely specific.
If you create a combo deck that kills on turn 3 reliably, you're going to get a card banned. Etc. You also have the fundamental design decision to start the format late enough that many things that bother them a lot (like, basically, any possibility for a legitimately strong creatureless or near-creatureless deck) is impossible.
But, again, part of what makes Legacy great (and that will be lost when Legacy is lost) is the ability to enjoy Magic by a completely different set of standards. Extended and Standard are different formats, but you can transition from knowing Standard alright into Extended and do a solid job picking out what cards will be strong and effective, even if you dont know that cardpool. You can probably do the same from Extended into Modern, because many of the power thresholds are not moving that much.
You can't make a transition like that to Legacy or Vintage play - what is and isn't strong in the formats is so radically different that you really have to experience the cards in a different way.
As another example, think about it in this way
In Standard, titans tend to win games when they get to attack once and are a popular finisher. (and primeval is his own deck) They can be cast reliably by many decks and games can frequently last long enough to see em.
In Extended, titans are still a popular finisher, but a bit less absolute when they manage to get cast and stick. (and primeval has his own deck) Some games will end fast enough they cant get out, but they're still possible to play a good part of the time
In Modern, titans will be a strong finisher option among many other strong finisher options (and primeval would have had his own deck but for the valakut ban). Part of their problem might be that they are too slow, but rampy or controllish decks will find places.
In Legacy, titans are jank unplayable trash, even Primeval, and only show up in narrow niches if at all, and probaby would have to cost 2CC to be played regularly.
What is good in legacy and vintage isnt simply a power scaling issue the way it largely is from standard > extended > probaby to modern. It is a completely different environment, set of standards and play experience.
But unfortunately a few too many R&D personalities, and honestly I think Lapille and Forsythe in particular are strong in this regard, really dislike that significant difference and a lot of the 'degenerate' and 'unfun' play produced by them and have therefore created a format that, while it's strong on the merits, very unfortunately is unlikely to continue to produce a sanctioned, eternal environment that is a fundamentally different play experience to the rotating formats.
A big part of Legacys popularity is, IMO, due to these differences as well as to the balance and diversity of the format. Legacy feels a lot more different from standard to play, in the same way that commander feels different from either.
Extended struggles because it fails to get that kind of separation from standard (and rather feels like similar decks with slightly improved power and a lot of familiarity). I fear Modern will not depart enough from standard/extended with its banlist philosophies and its starting time, and that when Legacy inevitably dies to its own growth, there will no longer be a competitive, fun, supported format that plays as a different experience besides commander, which is of course not a sanctioned competitive environment.
Sacntioend magic shouldnt be synnonymous with hardcore creature combat, lack of combo decks and weaker control play. I fear Modern sets the stage for, eventually, that basically being true.
You know I tend towards pretty major wizards homerism and support - i generally believe they do an excellent job creating their product and allowing it to appeal to the widest possible demographic.
But I admit I think modern is just a terrible, terrible decision in many ways - most mentioned in this thread, I'm sure - that makes me extremely pessimistic about it.
I get that they don't think that cards they don't like and stopped printing aren't "fun" (dark ritual, combo play in general, etc), but the degree to which they've forced it from this format and have basically created another format that will revolve around the attack step is incredibly disheartening.
its too bad they don't recognize that a major reason for legacy's popularity isnt just the cardpool or the balance - its that it tends to play by fundamentally different competitive standards than the formats newer than it because of changes they have made to card design philosophy (Ie heavier on strong creatures, weaker on combo, on land dest, on hardcore fcontrol, etc).
While I appreciate that for the core set, standard and even extended environments - all of which are designed on some level to be accessible and easier to get into and easier to pick up - it is incredibly disappointing that Wizards has committed to an eternal format that will also feature this gameplay.
Its one thing to say 'this is our philosophy and we beleive it is more fun in the long term for more players, so we will design cards that way'
Its another to say 'we believe our philosophy is so much stronger and more fun than the results of the older philosophys that we are unwilling to commit to providing you a permanent avenue to enjoy these play characteristics. All serious sanctioned play will be with our new philosophies.
Part of what makes Legacy (and Vintage) neat is that they are fundamentally different to play - not just what cards matter, but what strategies work, what thing are good ideas in general, and etc.
While they intend to still support Legacy, it's inevitably doomed to growth because it will eventually feature an unsustainably small cardpool. This very reason lead them to create the Modern format in the first place.
it may be 5 years or more until that happens, but eventually we will not be able to support grand prix or PT trials with the legacy format, and when that happens there will be no widescale sanctioned method to enjoy Magic that is different from their fundamental idea.
Rosewater has said that they regard Split Second as a poor mechanic because it doesn't actually have as much design space or fun as it appears at first glance (there's not that many things you can do at instant speed, unstoppably, and still be fair). A lot of those cards were already mined out by Future Sight (Krosan Grip and friends). I doubt we'll ever see this return, and if we do it'll on only a very few cards.
Someone on page 10 finally mentioned devour. Devour's a great addition to the list of flavorful, comprehensible and good mechanics. The two Kamigawa mechanics are almost sure to return someday with renames (though I could see them not renaming ninjutsu because the concept has a lot more popular appeal than bushido .. you dont think "oh my rogue dude is a NINJA!" is a reaction they're ok with kids having? yeah).
I'll also add that someone recently asked Rosewater on tumblr about Bushido and he was pretty firm that it would come back again renamed someday. When he's that decisive about a statement, its usually because it's already being used somewhere in the next 3-4 years of development tree (since he's starting design on a 2014 set, he's got at least an idea of what mechanics are being considered, were considered or are in the next 10 or so blocks (!!)).
He's also said that we will see Provoke again someday.
I'd suggest that the present list of good options for the core set mechanic are something like, and not in a priority order:
I don't think even M13 would be too early for Alara mechanics: at that point, those mechanics will be in their last year of Extended, and anything after that and they will be pretty old. Unearth in particular seems like a nobrainer to return someday, as it makes tons of sense, is simple, works well in limited, has never been overpowered, and helps teach people a little about interacting with their graveyard without getting overly complicated or creating excessive board states (since every unearth is basically just a ball lightning, they just unclog a game by either getting through or getting blocked and killing something).
I think both devour and unearth are better core set mechanics than exalted, as they're both extremely fantasy tropish and intuitive. Exalted does not encourage players to do something they want to encourage new players to do (new players tend to be timid about attacking, and one of the reasons bloodthirst is good is that it encourages people to attack more often and with more creatures to get more damage through). Exalted's natural tendancy to encourage people to attack with one creature at a time is not behavior they want to teach new people in creature combat.
Both devour and unearth, however, have useful upsides in being able to help nudge people towards doing things they should be willing to do - attack and trade more aggressively (unearth) and trade cards for gain (devour). New players don't typically like killing their own cards, but devour has always seemed to work a bit better in that they're typically gladder to cast that 1 drop they drew in turn 12 in order to eat it immediately and power up the bigger guy in their hand by casting him right after.
Since no one has actually told the OP, Kuldotha Red is a weenie, small-creature red deck that gets its name from Kuldotha Rebirth, not Kuldotha Phoenix.
The deck wants to play a memnite or ornithopter on turn one, then sacrifice it to rebirth and swarm the opponent with wimpy, fast red creatures.
Koth of the Hammer would probably be the largest-cc card in such a deck. It might be playing enough artifacts (to blow up with rebirth) to be able to enable metalcraft for the pheonix as a late-game card, though .. or it could if you wanted it to, since your playgroup isn't exactly cutthroat competitive.
This is the kind of deck that hopes to play Koth and use his + ability to add a 4/4 mountain to combat on turn 4 and hopefully swing for the win on turn 4-5. If it doesn't, the turns spent using Koth's loyalty gainer enable the ultimate to gain the emblem and finish the remaining few life points.
Since sovereigns of lost alara ability doesn't say target in it can a creature with shroud attacking alone benefit from the sovereigns ability by having an aura attached to it
Yes, if you are attaching an aura through some means other than casting, it can be attached to something with shroud. Since sovereign's ability doesn't target, shroud doesn't prevent it.
This should not be a letdown or anything of the sort. It should be a realization. By realization i mean that if a card as unexciting as Squadron Hawk is the "super tech" in your deck, you should realize just how bad said deck most likely is.
I can imagine that having been a reaction in oh say early december-ish.
I was playing mono-green hyper-aggro infect before Mirrodin Besieged was released, just for the fun of it. That all-in playstyle of either getting a super-quick kill by unloading a hand full of pump spells onto a single attacker or fizzling out quick can be fun to play for a while, though I got bored of it and moved on. Maybe I'll try an updated version after this set hits.
A sincere question for you:
What would you rather do with a deck like that, play the 1/1 infector for G, or play some kind of mana card to be able to play a much stronger 3CMC infector on turn 2?
I imagine in practice you would have both capabilities because 4 1 drops isn't enough in an aggressive deck, but I'm curious what you would regard as the superior play.
If the answer is the mana acceleration, I'd say that that doesn't bode all that well for that infector for G.
Hint: Dark Ritual is a signature example of black's piece of the color pie.
Actually its an example of neither. Dark Ritual used to be an example of black's portion of the pie, but that trait now belongs to red (ie Seething Song) and black no longer does one-shot mana generation unless its tied to creature sacrifice.
That might be a relevant example here: every so often a set comes along that is intended to push pie boundries. Often times those sets will experiment with several borderline effects they are considering moving to a different color or spreading to another color. Often times one or two of those experiments will work and become regular afterwords, and most won't be revisited.
I'm sure some of the phyrexian pie bleeding will become mainstream, but only a small portion, and probably in areas that help colors with particularly narrow ranges of particular kinds of effects. If there was a creature keyword being bled to blue, that would be an excellent example of something that might become a lasting change to pie distribution.
Let me to summarize the things:
The colour pie is completely ruined. All five colours force your opponent to lose life, blue spell now discards (Mindculling, white deals damage, Chancellor of the Annex counters spells ( I read his ability as: spells you don't cast cost 1 more to play), white weakens your opponent's creatures, Phyrexian Unlife reminds me of Lich, but lich is black. By the way black now Enslave creatures, and destoys them Life's Finale, which I have not seen since Planar Chaos when Damnation was released. Red weakens creatures (Tormentor Exarch), and tap creatures. Green destroys permanents. I don't know how to play with colour pie broken.
I like every card from this set. Splicers - my favorite cycle ever. I will run Cathedral membrane in Esper deck. Chancellor of the Annex is just big fatty. Exlusion ritual is my favorite from all white cards, it works welll against Titans and Jace 2.0. White Phyrexia is unsurprisingly non-infect. Corrupted resolve is new Counterspell for me, must be in every U-infect deck. Tezzetet's Gambit makes me wonder if he has become new Father of Machines. Viral drake have a combo with Training grounds. Xenograph will work in Splcers deck, making my artificiers Golems. Reaper of Sheoldred reminds me of Belltower sphynx. Geosurge and Melira are great. I have not seen Spinebiter's ability since 8 Edition. good to know Wizards ruturned it. Myr Superion works well with Grand Architect.
The most expencive cards by now are Batterscull , Karn, Phyrexian Oblitirator, Sword of War and Peace.
Why do people keep saying that Beast Within isn't green? Meet Desert Twister. Every single card that's ever had 'destroy target permanent' has been at least multicolored with green in it (most recently Maelstrom Pulse), except Vindicate. Vindicate being white/black is actually the exception rather than the rule (presumably, having been arrived at via combining white enchantment/artifact destruction with black land/creature destruction). This effect's always been green.
1) Major rules breakage, pretty much. Massive or repeated cheating, for example (such as by adding cards to Sealed pools, since you mentioned prereleases). Assault or harassment are other quick ways to end up suspended. Collusion can also get you suspended (prize splits for example, even if no one at FNM actually cares). Organizer fraud can get a TO suspended, which means they can't run tournaments for the duration of their suspension.
2) In theory, sure, but that's fraudulent and could get everyone involved in even more trouble.
Prize splits are not collusion, and the methodology to them is explicitly supported in the rules.
Collusion is 'scoop to me and I'll give you all my prize packs', and anything else where you explicitly offer any benefit in exchange for a concession, or a benefit outside an even share for a draw. "Lets prize split and you can have my packs" is collusion, "lets prize split" isnt. The offer of extra profit is necessary.
Prize splits are not collusion. Its irresponsible to claim that they are. That's what leads to posters like the OP who think they can get in trouble with the DCI for being at the same FNM as someone who was suspended.
Its blue because, as Rosewater said in Monday's article, the entire block is made up of cards that coould arguably be black, so as a rule any card that could fit into a color besides black went into the other color, period.
This was a guiding principle of Innistrad design so that they could spread horror tropes out to other colors.
This guy makes more sense as black, but he also makes sense in blue - blue is the best color at flying.
So he is blue, in this block, becuase otherwise 90% of the cards would be black.
I'm pretty sure you guys don't get how big the United States is. I luckily live about 60 minutes from Lincoln, NE.
The next nearest to me of these Grand Prix would require me to drive for 13 hours. (Indianapolis). Seattle is 2,600 kilometers from me. Indianapolis is a mere 1,000 km. Salt Lake City is 1,500 km. Austin is 1350km, and Nashville about 1270. And to top it off, Orlando is 2,300 km away.
And you know the most amazing thing about this?
Omaha, NE is located almost exactly in the middle of the country.
The only people who have more than one Grand Prix within a day's travel are the ones who live in southern Indiana or Kentucky, who'll be a day from both Indianapolis and Nashville.
Seattle and Orlando are 5,000 kilometers apart.
For perspective, the distance between Paris and Moscow is only 2,400 km.
That's about how far away from me 2 of these Grand Prix are.
I think everyone is missing the point.
If they had done it with a token system, there would have to be a token transformed card for every transformer, and they'd either have to include several per pack, not use transform at common/uncommon, or make it prohibitively hard to get the other halves.
By doing 2sided cards with the single checklist, they essentially have a universal token card that works for every transformer (when in your hand/deck) instead of needing 20 token cards for when the transform condition is satisfied.
Its both more economical and will make it a lot easier to use transform at lower rarities because the number of transform cards isn't going to be limited by availability of the token.
Phyrexian Obliterator would be a likely target for a reprinted Fleshwrither, letting people bypass his overly difficult CMC. In fact, it'd be an even better target for transfigure in other colors (Since color-sharing isn't required). However, there are actually not that many lower-cost creatures that would be this powerful accessed to extra cost out of color. After all, you would be paying 7 mana to transfigure into obliterator. That's a big premium, compared to just birthing podding into him, which is a lot easier.
I don't actually think that kind of interaction could end up so broken that it wouldn't be printable. Transmute is more dangerous because it comes in blue and so can be used to tutor for 2-3 cmc counter, bounce and draw spells.
I dont know exactly how Modern will play. I dont care if it is exactly like Legacy or not (though Legacy is a successful, popular format that has an impending death in the next decade so a replacement that was as fun and popular would probably be a great idea).
However, I can read what the philosophy is behind how they want Modern to play, and what elements they want present in it, and some of those are extremely specific.
If you create a combo deck that kills on turn 3 reliably, you're going to get a card banned. Etc. You also have the fundamental design decision to start the format late enough that many things that bother them a lot (like, basically, any possibility for a legitimately strong creatureless or near-creatureless deck) is impossible.
But, again, part of what makes Legacy great (and that will be lost when Legacy is lost) is the ability to enjoy Magic by a completely different set of standards. Extended and Standard are different formats, but you can transition from knowing Standard alright into Extended and do a solid job picking out what cards will be strong and effective, even if you dont know that cardpool. You can probably do the same from Extended into Modern, because many of the power thresholds are not moving that much.
You can't make a transition like that to Legacy or Vintage play - what is and isn't strong in the formats is so radically different that you really have to experience the cards in a different way.
As another example, think about it in this way
In Standard, titans tend to win games when they get to attack once and are a popular finisher. (and primeval is his own deck) They can be cast reliably by many decks and games can frequently last long enough to see em.
In Extended, titans are still a popular finisher, but a bit less absolute when they manage to get cast and stick. (and primeval has his own deck) Some games will end fast enough they cant get out, but they're still possible to play a good part of the time
In Modern, titans will be a strong finisher option among many other strong finisher options (and primeval would have had his own deck but for the valakut ban). Part of their problem might be that they are too slow, but rampy or controllish decks will find places.
In Legacy, titans are jank unplayable trash, even Primeval, and only show up in narrow niches if at all, and probaby would have to cost 2CC to be played regularly.
What is good in legacy and vintage isnt simply a power scaling issue the way it largely is from standard > extended > probaby to modern. It is a completely different environment, set of standards and play experience.
But unfortunately a few too many R&D personalities, and honestly I think Lapille and Forsythe in particular are strong in this regard, really dislike that significant difference and a lot of the 'degenerate' and 'unfun' play produced by them and have therefore created a format that, while it's strong on the merits, very unfortunately is unlikely to continue to produce a sanctioned, eternal environment that is a fundamentally different play experience to the rotating formats.
A big part of Legacys popularity is, IMO, due to these differences as well as to the balance and diversity of the format. Legacy feels a lot more different from standard to play, in the same way that commander feels different from either.
Extended struggles because it fails to get that kind of separation from standard (and rather feels like similar decks with slightly improved power and a lot of familiarity). I fear Modern will not depart enough from standard/extended with its banlist philosophies and its starting time, and that when Legacy inevitably dies to its own growth, there will no longer be a competitive, fun, supported format that plays as a different experience besides commander, which is of course not a sanctioned competitive environment.
Sacntioend magic shouldnt be synnonymous with hardcore creature combat, lack of combo decks and weaker control play. I fear Modern sets the stage for, eventually, that basically being true.
But I admit I think modern is just a terrible, terrible decision in many ways - most mentioned in this thread, I'm sure - that makes me extremely pessimistic about it.
I get that they don't think that cards they don't like and stopped printing aren't "fun" (dark ritual, combo play in general, etc), but the degree to which they've forced it from this format and have basically created another format that will revolve around the attack step is incredibly disheartening.
its too bad they don't recognize that a major reason for legacy's popularity isnt just the cardpool or the balance - its that it tends to play by fundamentally different competitive standards than the formats newer than it because of changes they have made to card design philosophy (Ie heavier on strong creatures, weaker on combo, on land dest, on hardcore fcontrol, etc).
While I appreciate that for the core set, standard and even extended environments - all of which are designed on some level to be accessible and easier to get into and easier to pick up - it is incredibly disappointing that Wizards has committed to an eternal format that will also feature this gameplay.
Its one thing to say 'this is our philosophy and we beleive it is more fun in the long term for more players, so we will design cards that way'
Its another to say 'we believe our philosophy is so much stronger and more fun than the results of the older philosophys that we are unwilling to commit to providing you a permanent avenue to enjoy these play characteristics. All serious sanctioned play will be with our new philosophies.
Part of what makes Legacy (and Vintage) neat is that they are fundamentally different to play - not just what cards matter, but what strategies work, what thing are good ideas in general, and etc.
While they intend to still support Legacy, it's inevitably doomed to growth because it will eventually feature an unsustainably small cardpool. This very reason lead them to create the Modern format in the first place.
it may be 5 years or more until that happens, but eventually we will not be able to support grand prix or PT trials with the legacy format, and when that happens there will be no widescale sanctioned method to enjoy Magic that is different from their fundamental idea.
It is so terribly limiting.
Rosewater has said that they regard Split Second as a poor mechanic because it doesn't actually have as much design space or fun as it appears at first glance (there's not that many things you can do at instant speed, unstoppably, and still be fair). A lot of those cards were already mined out by Future Sight (Krosan Grip and friends). I doubt we'll ever see this return, and if we do it'll on only a very few cards.
Someone on page 10 finally mentioned devour. Devour's a great addition to the list of flavorful, comprehensible and good mechanics. The two Kamigawa mechanics are almost sure to return someday with renames (though I could see them not renaming ninjutsu because the concept has a lot more popular appeal than bushido .. you dont think "oh my rogue dude is a NINJA!" is a reaction they're ok with kids having? yeah).
I'll also add that someone recently asked Rosewater on tumblr about Bushido and he was pretty firm that it would come back again renamed someday. When he's that decisive about a statement, its usually because it's already being used somewhere in the next 3-4 years of development tree (since he's starting design on a 2014 set, he's got at least an idea of what mechanics are being considered, were considered or are in the next 10 or so blocks (!!)).
He's also said that we will see Provoke again someday.
I'd suggest that the present list of good options for the core set mechanic are something like, and not in a priority order:
Devour
Provoke
Exalted
Bushido-renamed
Ninjutso
Unearth
I don't think even M13 would be too early for Alara mechanics: at that point, those mechanics will be in their last year of Extended, and anything after that and they will be pretty old. Unearth in particular seems like a nobrainer to return someday, as it makes tons of sense, is simple, works well in limited, has never been overpowered, and helps teach people a little about interacting with their graveyard without getting overly complicated or creating excessive board states (since every unearth is basically just a ball lightning, they just unclog a game by either getting through or getting blocked and killing something).
I think both devour and unearth are better core set mechanics than exalted, as they're both extremely fantasy tropish and intuitive. Exalted does not encourage players to do something they want to encourage new players to do (new players tend to be timid about attacking, and one of the reasons bloodthirst is good is that it encourages people to attack more often and with more creatures to get more damage through). Exalted's natural tendancy to encourage people to attack with one creature at a time is not behavior they want to teach new people in creature combat.
Both devour and unearth, however, have useful upsides in being able to help nudge people towards doing things they should be willing to do - attack and trade more aggressively (unearth) and trade cards for gain (devour). New players don't typically like killing their own cards, but devour has always seemed to work a bit better in that they're typically gladder to cast that 1 drop they drew in turn 12 in order to eat it immediately and power up the bigger guy in their hand by casting him right after.
Can it be both?
I think it's both.
Its horrific of course, but it is also absolutely hilarious at the same time.
The deck wants to play a memnite or ornithopter on turn one, then sacrifice it to rebirth and swarm the opponent with wimpy, fast red creatures.
Koth of the Hammer would probably be the largest-cc card in such a deck. It might be playing enough artifacts (to blow up with rebirth) to be able to enable metalcraft for the pheonix as a late-game card, though .. or it could if you wanted it to, since your playgroup isn't exactly cutthroat competitive.
This is the kind of deck that hopes to play Koth and use his + ability to add a 4/4 mountain to combat on turn 4 and hopefully swing for the win on turn 4-5. If it doesn't, the turns spent using Koth's loyalty gainer enable the ultimate to gain the emblem and finish the remaining few life points.
Yes, if you are attaching an aura through some means other than casting, it can be attached to something with shroud. Since sovereign's ability doesn't target, shroud doesn't prevent it.
I can imagine that having been a reaction in oh say early december-ish.
A sincere question for you:
What would you rather do with a deck like that, play the 1/1 infector for G, or play some kind of mana card to be able to play a much stronger 3CMC infector on turn 2?
I imagine in practice you would have both capabilities because 4 1 drops isn't enough in an aggressive deck, but I'm curious what you would regard as the superior play.
If the answer is the mana acceleration, I'd say that that doesn't bode all that well for that infector for G.
Actually its an example of neither. Dark Ritual used to be an example of black's portion of the pie, but that trait now belongs to red (ie Seething Song) and black no longer does one-shot mana generation unless its tied to creature sacrifice.
That might be a relevant example here: every so often a set comes along that is intended to push pie boundries. Often times those sets will experiment with several borderline effects they are considering moving to a different color or spreading to another color. Often times one or two of those experiments will work and become regular afterwords, and most won't be revisited.
I'm sure some of the phyrexian pie bleeding will become mainstream, but only a small portion, and probably in areas that help colors with particularly narrow ranges of particular kinds of effects. If there was a creature keyword being bled to blue, that would be an excellent example of something that might become a lasting change to pie distribution.
Most of this is temporary and will not return.
Why do people keep saying that Beast Within isn't green? Meet Desert Twister. Every single card that's ever had 'destroy target permanent' has been at least multicolored with green in it (most recently Maelstrom Pulse), except Vindicate. Vindicate being white/black is actually the exception rather than the rule (presumably, having been arrived at via combining white enchantment/artifact destruction with black land/creature destruction). This effect's always been green.
Prize splits are not collusion, and the methodology to them is explicitly supported in the rules.
Collusion is 'scoop to me and I'll give you all my prize packs', and anything else where you explicitly offer any benefit in exchange for a concession, or a benefit outside an even share for a draw. "Lets prize split and you can have my packs" is collusion, "lets prize split" isnt. The offer of extra profit is necessary.
Prize splits are not collusion. Its irresponsible to claim that they are. That's what leads to posters like the OP who think they can get in trouble with the DCI for being at the same FNM as someone who was suspended.