IDK, it seems "obvious" the other half of the cycle will be printed in MH2. I guess by doing it this way we get 6/10 now instead of just 5/10 and it serves as a warning shot to those owning horizon canopy that it will not hold it's current price long term as a reprint will be coming in a very few years.
Pretty sure the "obvious" choice for MH2 is going to be a Grove of the Burnwillows cycle, and not a rehash of the same thing MH1 is doing. And even that would be ignoring a dozen other possibilities that all might have credence (imagine an Urborg cycle? )
I just had a terrible thought... What if spectacle works the complete opposite. What if the spectacle is a sacrifice; "Discard this card: gain (in this case R)". There would need to be some other condition or cost (like must have taken damage or also sacrifice a creature) to keep the engine from being way too powerful, but pitching for powerful effects is pretty spectacular.
"You may cast this card for its spectacle cost as you draw it. If you do, you can't cast spells this turn."
This would also be a spectacle of some sort...
That would be completely useless with this card though, as it "draws" you two cards you can only play this turn...
"Until the end of your next turn, you can play these cards."
Why is everyone in the entire thread misreading the card istg
Why would Wizards make a card that everyone keeps misreading? Telling people they can cast spells at the same time as you take the ability to cast spells away from them is not a good design, even if there is an "until end of next turn" clause in there.
I am a fan of spectacle being an alternate cost; if it weren't rakdos I would think something like "you may cast this spell for its spectacle cost if it's the first spell you cast this turn"
To be more rakdosian, what about "if you played a card for its spectacle cost this turn, tap all <lands, permanents, creatures, some bundle> you control at end of turn".
It better be worth it casting the spell then
That's why I phrased it "at end of turn". You dump your hand in a grand spectacle full of cheap thrills, then everything gets tapped after you're done with your circus show. With rakdos haste and in unleashed style, the drawback is in flavor for the guild while fueling fast and furious offense at the expense of defense gameplay.
I am a fan of spectacle being an alternate cost; if it weren't rakdos I would think something like "you may cast this spell for its spectacle cost if it's the first spell you cast this turn"
To be more rakdosian, what about "if you played a card for its spectacle cost this turn, tap all <lands, permanents, creatures, some bundle> you control at end of turn".
So, vandertroll, not to put a pin in your username or anything, but you give a quote about how investors want to own and grow their assets and then turn around and say Magic cards aren't an investment. Does this mean you believe nobody who plays magic wants to own and grow their collections? Players want to feel proud of their collections and want their collection to grow in value over time (either by buying more cards, or from the cards themselves gaining value over time). They want to keep this collection though, so they are not spectating by your definitions (although speculators do exist). Of course, as with any collectible, to keep and grow a collection sometimes individual cards or smaller collections may be sold in order to make new purchases, or investments. The intention to sell is not necessary to the act of investing.
I 100% assume there will be cards with either "mentor, Whenever you put a +1/+1 counter on another creature it gains X" or "whenever you mentor a creature do X" as well as cards with "whenever X gains one or more +1/+1 counters, do Y" type cards (I'm looking at you Selesnya).
16/16 without trample is kinda, eh, I always question the value of big creatures with no evasion and no pseudo-evasion like trample or menace. A card like Lure or Mage Slayer fixes that, though, but at some point, you've got to wonder if just swinging with all your d00dz is better.
The paradox is, without non-trample fatties why should any card grant trample? Sure the card granting trample could also boost power (like most Overwhelm effects), but having to treat trample as purely rider text on power boosts is kind of disappointing. In this new era of dinosaurs, it would not be surprising if we start seeing some cheap enchantment that grants trample to creatures above power X or other fling type effects that make high power creatures intrinsically valuable, with or without trample.
So the best batch of sets in like 3 years isn't "good enough to sell a box on their own merit"? The fact that anything, no matter how good, can be made better by putting bacon on it doesn't mean putting bacon on your bacon covered bacon wrapped bacon-fried chicken sandwich isn't going to make it better (in this case, the 'better' is more sales for WOTC because they get to eat the sandwich we pay for ... I'm bad at metaphor). Also, remember that the feedback from the first BAB promo hadn't been received before Nexus of Fate, and will have been [probably but maybe not] received for Guilds of Ravnica (and even if they chose to stop BAB promos like this now, expect them for at least the rest of the Boss-Fight-Vs-Bolas-Arc-that-totally-isn't-a-Ravnica-block-because-set-3-is-"on Ravnica"-not-"about Ravnica" (whatever that means)).
To support Wizards: They didn't playtest the BAB promos on the premise that they were intentionally non-standard cards (read: they targetted Commander players and forgot some effects are good in constructed formats).
To hate Wizards: There was no reason whatsoforkingever not to test these in ALL environments they would be legal. Just because it wasn't designed in the same pool as the Set doesn't mean it wasn't released alongside the set, so they totally should (and stated they are moving forward, even before this fiasco) be testing these cards as if they were in the set.
To support W: The BAB promo, even before it caused waves in a tournament, has been successful (taking their word on this).
To hate W: There are like 500 other reasons LGS are dieing... don't put a bandage on a gangrenous wound and assume that the condition will get better. The healthy LGS that weren't going to die, will not die even more successfully. The others are going to do anything they can to survive, even buy their own BAB promo boxes so they can resell these promos for an actual profit (even if the risk is stupid and why do people believe this will ever happen, other than to fill a base supply since they can't have 0 of a card for singles sales?).
Overall, this conversation is moot. The forces will push Wizards to continue this practice. They will learn from this perception and will, I would put money on this bet if I had any idea the timeframe that was reasonable to start testing it, they 100% WILL put in measures or expectations for reprints so we never feel so scared as we do today. MaRo may be the hardest person in the world to convince of a fact he doesn't believe in (forget his echo chamber, he knows better about the fact the feedback he gets is stupidly biased: MaRo will not change his mind about anything he has made a decision about, even if all of Wizards tells him that Poison is a bad mechanic and shouldn't ever return), but, he does know that even if he 'knows' that Nexus of Fate is plentiful enough for the market to adjust, he also knows that our perception is important. We are upset. That is what matters. If we are rational or not, is not the point for -him- (Wizards may or may not care about us as long as profits go up, that's separate). MaRo will push for an avenue to rescue us. Especially if enough people let him know that it is our -perception- that needs fixing (and feel free to be self-righteous about your perception being backed up by data). That is, unless he has already made a decision about what to do ... there is no word better than Stubborn to describe the energetic gnome of Magic.
Please tell me I'm not the only person that noticed how ridiculously similar it is to a very recent planeswalker deck printing; Huatli, Dinosaur Knight
I feel so stupid for not seeing this earlier... It was recently pointed out to me and I had to come back and make sure this critical insight wasn't ignored.
So the jank dream is to Apex of Power into Omniscience. Almost makes having multiples of those two otherwise insanely expensive spells manageable, since once omniscience is out apex gets much better (and chainable). Now will red have the rituals needed to race to 10 or not?
Edit: dam it omni is free from hand only... never mind. Still janky.
Thinking on this, I'd probably would have wanted this costing 2 and being able to destroy colorless non-land permanents. If wizards wants to make colorless walkers that work in any color, there needs to be an answer to stop them that isn't insanely narrow.
Except black doesn't destroy artifacts or enchantments. Colorless creature or planeswalker, maybe, but they wanted this to be pushed for Modern and it's starting to sound like Wizards really wants black to have a means of dethroning swords to plowshares and path of exile as the preeminent removal spells. White is meant to be bad at removal, not king of it.
Now, this isn't swords or path so it's not quite there, but at 1 mana if the goal is to exile colorless creatures at the very least the temptation to splash white just to get removal is removed for that case.
Why is white supposed to be bad at removal?
MaRo has said so in his Color Pie segments a number of times. White can destroy things, but it should either have conditions (target attacking or blocking creature, or the like) or it should be temporary (Oblivion Ring or other prison effects). The color pie is also why red should never destroy enchantments outside of warp world level "random" effects or why green shouldn't get creatures with first strike. The color pie can be bent or even broken at times, but it is meant to be regarded highly as the standard for what colors can and/or cant do, and how well they can do them (green can have haste, but only rarely).
By clearly defining strengths and weaknesses for each color the game becomes much less likely to have any single color be the dominant color for all formats for all time. (Also probably a reason to add things like this card for colorless hate, since colorless is getting close to needing it's own slice of the color pie)
Written from my phone: will update with better examples/links when I get home.
Thinking on this, I'd probably would have wanted this costing 2 and being able to destroy colorless non-land permanents. If wizards wants to make colorless walkers that work in any color, there needs to be an answer to stop them that isn't insanely narrow.
Except black doesn't destroy artifacts or enchantments. Colorless creature or planeswalker, maybe, but they wanted this to be pushed for Modern and it's starting to sound like Wizards really wants black to have a means of dethroning swords to plowshares and path of exile as the preeminent removal spells. White is meant to be bad at removal, not king of it.
Now, this isn't swords or path so it's not quite there, but at 1 mana if the goal is to exile colorless creatures at the very least the temptation to splash white just to get removal is removed for that case.
To be fair, Havrekjex did say /s indicating (if you know the slang) that they were done being sarcastic, so I doubt that was a serious remark about ritualling this out .... ever.
What is odd to me is that it is "any one color". I would have assumed the one color was to reduce the bend in color pie giving red mana fixing (even if it is at 10 mana), but letting it be any one color is still some fixing. I guess the bend was the compromise since they clearly must have known this was a garbage pile outside of Mizzix decks. It would have been more interesting (if very hard to track state) if it refunded to your mana pool the exact types/colors of mana you used to cast it (and even it might have fixed the card completely if the refund was an on-cast trigger so you could use a little of the mana in the counter-war to protect your ungodly awful 10 mana gamble).
Pretty sure the "obvious" choice for MH2 is going to be a Grove of the Burnwillows cycle, and not a rehash of the same thing MH1 is doing. And even that would be ignoring a dozen other possibilities that all might have credence (imagine an Urborg cycle? )
Why would Wizards make a card that everyone keeps misreading? Telling people they can cast spells at the same time as you take the ability to cast spells away from them is not a good design, even if there is an "until end of next turn" clause in there.
That's why I phrased it "at end of turn". You dump your hand in a grand spectacle full of cheap thrills, then everything gets tapped after you're done with your circus show. With rakdos haste and in unleashed style, the drawback is in flavor for the guild while fueling fast and furious offense at the expense of defense gameplay.
To be more rakdosian, what about "if you played a card for its spectacle cost this turn, tap all <lands, permanents, creatures, some bundle> you control at end of turn".
To support Wizards: They didn't playtest the BAB promos on the premise that they were intentionally non-standard cards (read: they targetted Commander players and forgot some effects are good in constructed formats).
To hate Wizards: There was no reason whatsoforkingever not to test these in ALL environments they would be legal. Just because it wasn't designed in the same pool as the Set doesn't mean it wasn't released alongside the set, so they totally should (and stated they are moving forward, even before this fiasco) be testing these cards as if they were in the set.
To support W: The BAB promo, even before it caused waves in a tournament, has been successful (taking their word on this).
To hate W: There are like 500 other reasons LGS are dieing... don't put a bandage on a gangrenous wound and assume that the condition will get better. The healthy LGS that weren't going to die, will not die even more successfully. The others are going to do anything they can to survive, even buy their own BAB promo boxes so they can resell these promos for an actual profit (even if the risk is stupid and why do people believe this will ever happen, other than to fill a base supply since they can't have 0 of a card for singles sales?).
Overall, this conversation is moot. The forces will push Wizards to continue this practice. They will learn from this perception and will, I would put money on this bet if I had any idea the timeframe that was reasonable to start testing it, they 100% WILL put in measures or expectations for reprints so we never feel so scared as we do today. MaRo may be the hardest person in the world to convince of a fact he doesn't believe in (forget his echo chamber, he knows better about the fact the feedback he gets is stupidly biased: MaRo will not change his mind about anything he has made a decision about, even if all of Wizards tells him that Poison is a bad mechanic and shouldn't ever return), but, he does know that even if he 'knows' that Nexus of Fate is plentiful enough for the market to adjust, he also knows that our perception is important. We are upset. That is what matters. If we are rational or not, is not the point for -him- (Wizards may or may not care about us as long as profits go up, that's separate). MaRo will push for an avenue to rescue us. Especially if enough people let him know that it is our -perception- that needs fixing (and feel free to be self-righteous about your perception being backed up by data). That is, unless he has already made a decision about what to do ... there is no word better than Stubborn to describe the energetic gnome of Magic.
I feel so stupid for not seeing this earlier... It was recently pointed out to me and I had to come back and make sure this critical insight wasn't ignored.
Edit: dam it omni is free from hand only... never mind. Still janky.
MaRo has said so in his Color Pie segments a number of times. White can destroy things, but it should either have conditions (target attacking or blocking creature, or the like) or it should be temporary (Oblivion Ring or other prison effects). The color pie is also why red should never destroy enchantments outside of warp world level "random" effects or why green shouldn't get creatures with first strike. The color pie can be bent or even broken at times, but it is meant to be regarded highly as the standard for what colors can and/or cant do, and how well they can do them (green can have haste, but only rarely).
By clearly defining strengths and weaknesses for each color the game becomes much less likely to have any single color be the dominant color for all formats for all time. (Also probably a reason to add things like this card for colorless hate, since colorless is getting close to needing it's own slice of the color pie)
Written from my phone: will update with better examples/links when I get home.
Except black doesn't destroy artifacts or enchantments. Colorless creature or planeswalker, maybe, but they wanted this to be pushed for Modern and it's starting to sound like Wizards really wants black to have a means of dethroning swords to plowshares and path of exile as the preeminent removal spells. White is meant to be bad at removal, not king of it.
Now, this isn't swords or path so it's not quite there, but at 1 mana if the goal is to exile colorless creatures at the very least the temptation to splash white just to get removal is removed for that case.