Magic Market Index for April 19, 2019
 
Magic Market Index for April 12, 2019
 
Magic Market Index for April 5, 2019
  • 1

    posted a message on Random Card of the Day: Victim on Night
    I think there's merit to a light touch. The more you talk (pointedly), the more you look like a puppet master who must die. Also lying is going to work once before no one trusts you. And You're assuming you're a better actor than the guy you're framing...I think unless he's snidely whiplash he'll be able to at least make people skeptical of your claim and uncertain of the truth. And that's assuming he doesn't just reveal his hand to prove you a liar.

    Idk it all sounds like cute theorycrafting that'll never work how you want in practice. Telepathy just...works.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • 1

    posted a message on [[Official]] Unreleased and New Card Discussion
    Without a dedicated legendary creature, amass has no sense in commander
    Amass totally has a commander...the army we always had but never knew...
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • 1

    posted a message on Why is it so hard to get feedback on decklists?
    Quote from illakunsaa »
    If a list resembles something that was copied from edhrec then I think most people know how the deck operates If they know how it operates then what is the point to comment?
    What? That's the opposite of what makes sense. If you know how a deck operates, then wouldn't you be in the best position to give constructive feedback about how to improve it?

    Also I don't 100% know what you mean by "copied from EDHrec". If you mean copied from one of the decklists listed for that commander, then while that's a lame way to build a deck, it would presumably be as creative as whoever built it first. And if you mean built by copying the most-played cards for the commander, then in many cases it wouldn't have a clear strategy because it would be using cards from multiple builds haphazardly, like combo pieces from FCT and random value allies in the same deck, so it wouldn't be clear at all "how it operates".
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • 2

    posted a message on IGN Spoilers - Nicol Bolas, Dragon God, Deliver Unto Evil, The Elderspell
    Quote from Faruel »
    I am not talking about constructed. I think the card is perfectly fine there but in limited? You will get 7 planeswalker in the Prerelease package and most player will end up with playing at least 2. This card is totally bonkers and unfair. You can't compare this with wrath of God. This is a one sited, 2 cc planeswalker wrath with upside. Even if your opponent doesn't play any planeswalker you can destroy your own to reach a ultimate. Not even a death card if your opponent doesn't play any planeswalker. I can't see why the spot removal wasn't enough for limited. There are solid removal spell even at common.
    Well, for one thing, this is a rare. I don't think this is getting anywhere CLOSE to the best rare in limited. Did you play during fate reforged? I played during fate reforged.

    For a second thing, you just said yourself - running around 2 walkers? I mean, is plummet a hideously broken limited card? Also costs 2 and kills something most decks will have a couple of, and probably at a decent mana advantage. Sure, this can get you 2 loyalty, but that won't be a major deal unless you have a rare+ walker close to ulting, which is a lot less likely than an uncommon one where you just get decent value. And compared to flyers, they'll probably get immediate value out of their pw first, which most flyers will not.

    Anytime your "broken rare" can be reasonably compared to plummet...you might be overreacting just a smidge.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 2

    posted a message on Sarkhan the Masterless
    Sarkhan the Incel.

    Seriously though, the abilities are super cool. He doesn't give haste though? Kind of a bummer. Guess you'll almost always -3 him to start.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 1

    posted a message on IGN Spoilers - Nicol Bolas, Dragon God, Deliver Unto Evil, The Elderspell
    Quote from Morphling »
    Your reaction tells me they made this card absolutely perfect. If you're going to stuff a set full of PW's, you NEED some easy, cheap ways to answer them. Spot removal won't get you there. You need some MASS removal options too. I mean...you might even put in some ways that really do punish a foolish player who just floods the board with PW's every single game. Incidentally, its the same reason 'busted/unfair' Wrath of God exists: There's a price to be paid for being too aggressive...so don't do it.
    I agree up until the end. You don't just "not do it". You weigh the risks and the rewards. Some games you have to just hope your opponent doesn't have WoG (or the elderspell) because you can't realistically beat them if they do, and you want the best chance if they don't. Or you can be aware of the risks during deckbuilding and give yourself answers in the form of counterspells, indestructibles, or what have you. It's all a balance of risk and reward, not a simple "Don't do that thing because there's a good counter to it".
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 1

    posted a message on IGN Spoilers - Nicol Bolas, Dragon God, Deliver Unto Evil, The Elderspell
    Wtf? Destroy all creatures you don't control costs 9 mana, but destroy all planeswalkers you don't control only costs 2? Except The Elder Spell is even better than that because it also puts extra loyalty counters on any planeswalker you happen to have.

    Yeah, this card is literally and deliberately broken.
    Well...except that (1) destroy all enemy creatures for 9 is ludicrously overcosted outside of basically only commander (2) decks usually play a lot more creatures than planeswalkers.

    This card is a lot closer to something like rest in peace. A very efficient hoser for a specific deck (in this case, superfriends). Outside of that, it's just a more restrictive dreadbore that might not even have a target against some decks (in particular, WW and RDW usually run no pws to my knowledge, and are some of the best decks in the meta, so mainboard this at your peril if you play standard).
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 1

    posted a message on Planar Celebration
    Quote from Manite »
    I don't want to waste my time on a story with a downer ending where the good guys I've been rooting for end up losing. And I flat out reject stories that confuse "realism" with "pessimism", where the downer ending is supposed to represent some fatalistic philosophy about life. It's bad enough that real life has been disappointing and depressing, I will NOT waste my time on disappointing and depressing fiction.
    And if the good guys always win, then where is the tension?

    Personally I think the more interesting direction is not letting the bad guy win sometimes, but rather doing away with clear delineations between good and evil. Give me some (early) Song of Ice and Fire over Lord of the Rings any day. When no one is going to be the obvious winner, there's tension. There's room to experience more emotions than increasingly-numb satisfaction at another victory to vindicate my personal perspective. In the real world, heroes aren't flawless, villains aren't pure evil, and no one has all the answers. Fiction, in its best forms, channels that complexity to make us care.

    On the other hand, it's a card game. If the plot sucks but we get some Feather-caliber cards out of the deal, then I can deal with some trite storytelling.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 2

    posted a message on Why is it so hard to get feedback on decklists?
    Quote from Kelzam »
    Well the nectdeck comment is just asinine. You don't have to netdeck to know good cards in the format, or look at EDHREC. It's always funny to me when people bring up the word "netdeck" because it's usually used in such a poor argument or way of thinking. Netdecking ultimately means finding optimal or good cards and that you're using them, because that's what "netdecks" are: Optimized decks that were came to as a consensus of common knowledge of what a good assembly of cards are for a deck. Every time someone "netdecks" it's a list of cards that were tested and proven. You don't even need the internet to do that if you have a decent amount of exposure or experience in a format to know what you're doing. So really people? Just drop the "netdeck" thing. It's ignorant. Especially in Commander.
    when people complain about netdecking, it's usually because someone copied a decklist whole cloth without understanding it or putting any work into it. It can make more competitive formats like standard somewhat unappealing to brewers when anything they're tinkering with has to stand up to top-tier decks at every round, even from people who spent next to zero time on their list. But thats the unavoidable nature of those formats.

    That's why I prefer limited and commander - in limited deckbuulding skill is part of the competition, and in commander even people "netdecking" are usually just copying stuff off edhrec, which tends to follow 75% rather than cEDH building, so brews don't have to compete with top-tier decks constantly. And even the odd cEDH player can be beaten if the table allies against them.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • 4

    posted a message on Decks that start out focused and end up with split goals...
    I have a game to help think about this - I call it "Seven Degrees of Kevin Bacon Synergy". Lets use as an example my first Toshiro Umezawa deck, which I didn't like how it turned out.

    The primary synergy with Toshi is instants - without those, Toshiro does nothing, and he needs nothing else to have synergy.

    Then you have stuff that supports that synergy but doesn't have synergy on its own, such as self-mill to get instants into your grave without casting them, or non-instant removal, which can trigger toshiro. So that's the second degree of synergy.

    Once I had the self-mill, suddenly self-recurring creatures like reassembling skeleton were better. Now we're up to three degrees of synergy.

    And once I had a bunch of self-recurring creatures, I needed something to do with them to get decent value besides just chump blocking. So then I threw in grave pact and dictate of erebos and the like. Holy crap, we're up to four degrees.

    And finally, now that I've got a grave pact engine going, I need sac outlets to reliably trigger them instead of relying on blocks. Five degrees of synergy at this point. Yikes.

    You can see where this went off the rails. By the end, there were a lot of cards that had no direct synergy with my commander, and I was spreading myself way too thin across many different functionalities of cards. The odds of drawing cards that didn't work well together was way too high, and a lot of my cards were very low-impact without synergies.

    So I think it's worth analyzing card choices in this way. Think to yourself - "why is this card in my deck, what makes it good here?" And if you find that it takes quite a few degrees of synergy - by which I usually mean more than about 3 at absolute maximum - then you should probably reevaluate and try to refocus your deck.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.