Magic Market Index for March 15th, 2019
 
Magic Market Index for Feb 8th, 2018
 
Magic Market Index for Feb 1st, 2019
  • posted a message on Every booster will have a planeswalker in WAR
    Looks like each color, two-color combination, and colorless have at least two walkers each. The rest are Bolas and maybe some tricolor walkers? Maybe a five-color one? Here's a hypothetical list, based on existing cards, the stained glass art, and a lot of speculating:

    W: Gideon
    U: Jace
    B: Liliana, Ob
    R: Chandra, Jaya
    G: Nissa, Vivien, Jiangg Yanggu
    WU: Teferi, Dovin, Narset
    UB: Ashiok, Davriel
    BR: Tibalt, Angrath
    RG: Samut, Domri, Arlinn
    GW: Ajani, Huatli (maybe)
    WB: Sorin
    UR: Ral, Saheeli
    BG: Vraska
    RW: Nahiri, Huatli (maybe)
    GU: Kiora
    Colorless: Karn, Ugin

    Everyone else: Bolas (Grixis), Tamiyo (Bant), Teyo Verada (???), unknown shepherd lady (???), unknown hat lady (???), Sarkhan (???, needs to have red)


    Don't forget that Sarkhan's most recent multicolored card was actually Temur (GUR), but he was mono-red in M19.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Every booster will have a planeswalker in WAR
    Okay... uncommon planeswalker. But honestly how will they do the balance on those or will planeswalker gain a new type of uniqueness rule?


    All planeswalkers are legendary and are subject to the "legend rule". Wizards has done fine with balancing other legendary permanents recently so I imagine they'll figure it out here. It's probably safe to assume that any planeswalkers shifted into lower rarities will have their power level bumped down accordingly.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Every booster will have a planeswalker in WAR
    #21 is definitely Jiang Yanggu. Mowu is behind him being a good boy.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Modern Horizons (Updated)
    HOLY CRAP IT'S SERRA! FINALLY!
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Grand Warlord radha
    Quote from WizardMN »
    Quote from Slacker4Life1 »
    How does the ability relate to combat phase ending if the activated ability resolves and the mana is in the mana pool.Does the mana stay till end of turn. Even after he dies?
    Please use card tags:

    Grand Warlord Radha

    The trigger will resolve in the Declare Attackers Step. Once it has done so, the effect that added the mana that says it doesn't empty still applies. It won't matter if Radha is gone. Even if she dies is combat, you will still have that mana until the end of the turn. And, even if she dies with the trigger on the stack, she will still give you mana when the trigger resolves (though she will no longer count herself in that case).

    Also, it is not an activated ability; it is a triggered ability.


    Actually, if Grand Warlord Radha leaves the battlefield before the triggered ability resolves, the ability will still count herself when determining how much mana you add when it resolves:

    4/27/2018 The amount of mana you’ll add is the number of creatures you attack with. Creatures that are put onto the battlefield attacking before Radha’s triggered ability resolves don’t count, and creatures that attacked but left combat before the triggered ability resolves do count.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Oubliette to be reprinted in a "future set"
    Quote from Ava »
    If you switch Oubliette to Phasing, then it will gain an additional ability - 502.15i When a permanent phases out, any local enchantments or Equipment attached to that permanent phase out at the same time. This alternate way of phasing out is known as phasing out "indirectly." An enchantment or Equipment that phased out indirectly won't phase in by itself, but instead phases in along with the card it's attached to.

    Equipment will Phase Out with the Creature, in addition to Enchantments.


    And that's exactly why Oubliette and Tawnos's Coffin can't make the targeted creature phase out, because Wizards would be giving those cards functionality they're not meant to have.
    Coffin and Oubliette used to use phasing because it was actually simpler and more elegant.

    The reasoning why it was changed back to the clunky wordfest? According to Mark L. Gottlieb, the writer of the article:

    Oubliette and Tawnos's Coffin
    Originally, these cards didn't phase creatures out. They were printed years before phasing was invented. Then, somewhere along the way, someone realized that using phasing was a concise, convenient way to mimic the (long, clunkily worded) functionality of these cards. The tricky part of Oubliette and Tawnos's Coffin isn't that they remove creatures from the game and return them to play later. The tricky part is that those creatures retain any enchantments and any counters on them. This is really hard to express, since it's the opposite of how any other zone-change effect works . . . except phasing. So hooray for shortcuts.

    The problem is that phasing doesn't exactly mimic the functionality. What's different?
    • When a creature phases out, it won't trigger leaves-play effects. Based on these cards' wordings, it should.
    • When a creature phases in, it won't trigger comes-into-play effects. Based on these cards' wordings, it should.
    • When a creature phases in, it's treated as though it has haste. This rarely matters with Oubliette and Tawnos's Coffin since the creatures return to play tapped, but in case the creature becomes untapped, it shouldn't be able to attack or use abilities that turn.
    • When a creature phases out, any Equipment attached to it phases out too. Based on these cards' wordings, it shouldn't.
    • If Oubliette or Tawnos's Coffin leaves play and the phase-in effect is Stifled, the removed creature will phase in the following turn. Based on these cards' wordings, it should remain removed from the game forever.
    Of course, Oubliette and Tawnos's Coffin predate comes-into-play effects, leaves-play effects, Equipment, and Stifle. But those things all exist now, and they need to work intuitively with the card that you're holding in your hand. Therefore, phasing is leaving these cards in favor of a wording that goes back to their original (long, clunky) wordings. They'll work as printed (or as close to it as modernly possible).
    Source: https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/feature/masters-edition-update-bulletin-2007-08-29

    So SyntheticDreamer, do you agree with WotC's logic for reverting the cards to back the way they were?

    EDIT: Also here are the links from yawgatog to show effectively the before-and-after on oracle wording for oubliette and coffin:
    https://yawgatog.com/resources/oracle-changes/10e-med/?id=27
    https://yawgatog.com/resources/oracle-changes/10e-med/?id=33


    I actually linked that article earlier, but yes, I agree with that reasoning. Also, the "remove from the game" wording was present pre-6th Edition and I'm fairly sure the reasoning they used was that "out of play" means "not in play" (i.e., not in what they called the "in-play zone" at the time).
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Oubliette to be reprinted in a "future set"
    If you switch Oubliette to Phasing, then it will gain an additional ability - 502.15i When a permanent phases out, any local enchantments or Equipment attached to that permanent phase out at the same time. This alternate way of phasing out is known as phasing out "indirectly." An enchantment or Equipment that phased out indirectly won't phase in by itself, but instead phases in along with the card it's attached to.

    Equipment will Phase Out with the Creature, in addition to Enchantments.


    And that's exactly why Oubliette and Tawnos's Coffin can't make the targeted creature phase out, because Wizards would be giving those cards functionality they're not meant to have.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Oubliette to be reprinted in a "future set"
    Quote from Jiyor »
    Since it was already printed as a common, there is no reason to believe WotC would not upshift the rarity to Uncommon or even Rare in a set. It would still be legal in Pauper and would make more sense in a higher rarity slot in a newer set.

    Also, the oracle text is very easy to follow, compared to the original text. "When Oubliette enters the battlefield, exile target creature and all Auras attached to it. Note the number and kind of counters that were on that creature.

    When Oubliette leaves the battlefield, return that exiled card to the battlefield under its owner's control tapped with the noted number and kind of counters on it. If you do, return the other exiled cards to the battlefield under their owner's control attached to that permanent."


    I honestly think they should finally update it using phasing. Just have the creature and all auras on it remain phased as long as Oubliette remains on the battlefiel and have it phase back in tapped. That would keep the text/reminder text on it shorter all the while keeping the card fuctioning as its suppose to.


    Oubliette and the very similar Tawnos's Coffin actually had wording that used phasing at one time, but it was changed to exile because although phasing seems to make sense, it changed the functionality of the cards. They specified that the targeted creature was "considered out of play" - i.e., not "in play" or "on the battlefield". This means that it leaves the "in-play zone"/battlefield, which means it should cause zone-change triggered abilities to trigger. Phasing doesn't do that.

    It also introduced problems if Oubliette's leaves-the-battlefield ability was Stifled as if Oubliette used phasing, the creature would just phase in during its controller's next untap step, which is counterintuitive (if it's "out of play" and the ability returning it to play is countered, it should remain "out of play" forever).

    Phasing also causes attached Equipment to phase out along with the creature, and that's not supposed to happen with Oubliette. Even though those things didn't exist when Oubliette was printed, they do now, and Wizards reverted to an exile wording in order to get it as close as possible to the original functionality.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on How does the new Teysa Karlov work?
    What about adarkar valkyrie, I’m curious about this. If two creatures die, let’s say via a sac outlet. Teysa Karlov is in play, and I tap the Adrkar Valkyrie at the same time they die... I understand this is an activated ability from the Valkyrie, but the wording does use the word “Whenever”. I’m wondering it retuns both creatures from the graveyard?


    Adarkar Valkyrie's activated ability does create a delayed triggered ability that waits to trigger until another creature dies. However, it doesn't interact particularly well with Teysa's ability because it specifies that you return "that card" to the battlefield. When the creature dies, the delayed triggered ability would trigger twice due to Teysa's ability, but you can only return "that card" to the battlefield once. Even if you could somehow sacrifice the creature again in between the two instances of the triggered ability, the creature would become a new object in the graveyard and it would no longer be "that card" (i.e. the creature card that was originally the creature targeted by the Valkyrie's ability).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Forbidding Spirit
    A Ghost-ly Prison. Cute, Wizards, really cute.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Weekly MTG previews
    Quote from void_nothing »
    Gateway Sneak is a really, really nice Gate payoff for Limited.
    So is Gatebreaker Ram. Woof.


    Yeah, the Gate deck is actually looking like a very solid and possibly competitive draft archetype this time around.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Weekly MTG previews
    Gateway Sneak is a really, really nice Gate payoff for Limited.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Cavalcade of Calamity - The Loregoyfs preview
    Turns your tokens into mini-Hellriders. This is really strong.

    Quote from Crispen_Smith »
    Any chance this becomes a 1 of in Affinty? Seems like there are times when all you've got is durdle dudes without a Plating or an Overseer


    Interesting idea. Makes Vault Skirges and Ornithopters into serious threats without a Plating on the board. If I still had my Affinity deck I'd experiment with it but it might be useful as a 1- or 2-of.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Possible name of the upcoming set
    Quote from SilverWolf_27 »
    I mean Chandra comic implies it went poorly but I am not convinced WOTC is going to kill lots of Walkers.

    Chandra and Ajani are safe thanks to comics. Lili is safe due to story arcs, same as Karn and Teferi.

    I suppose anyone else could theoretically die.

    Jace is safe because "market research".


    Well, that plus Vryn is a highly-demanded plane for an expansion and Jace would need to be alive if we visited Vryn in a future set unless it was a flashback set (speaking of flashback sets, I really want a Thran era Dominaria flashback set, dang it!).
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Possible name of the upcoming set
    Here's a link to confirm that this is indeed on the Coming Soon page. The timing would suggest this is the name of the as-yet-unnamed third Ravnica set, and the background art resembles Ravnica...in ruins.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.