Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Magic: the Gathering: Cardboard Crack

13132343637100

Posts

  • TaramoorTaramoor Registered User regular
    Chen wrote: »
    The question is: Who plays Fireballs in standard? Havengul Lich? It really only fits in ramp type decks and for them damage to player isn't too relevant. Might as well play Slagstorm which is cheaper and more reliable and use Wolf Run to finish the job.

    Except Slagstorm hits your creatures too, which can be a problem if you're running a token deck without some kind of booster.

    Combining Bonfire or Thunderous Wrath with Reclaim in a G/R deck can do tremendous things. I'm not saying run four of them, but having one or two can be a lifesaver. The other thing I like about it over the other miracle cards is that if you really want to get rid of it you can do so much cheaper. Which makes it more amenable to Reclaim than Thunderous Wrath or Temporal Mastery.

  • TurksonTurkson Near the mountains of ColoradoRegistered User regular
    Looking at Bonfire of the Damned my immediate thought was, "This looks like a slightly different Comet Storm."

    Comet Storm didn't see play.

    "You. Poet. Be sure to write this down."
  • ChenChen Registered User regular
    I thought about Noxious Revival, but when you think about it, it doesn't seem worth it to pitch two cards for the Miracle effects spoiled so far. Three cards if you play Bonfire for 0 to be able to Reclaim it. Vampiric Tutor effects make it easier to set up, but probably the best Miracle enablers are Brainstorm and Jace, which means Eternal formats.

    l8kt.png
  • VyolynceVyolynce Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    Not many people run fireballs, but sweepers are still sweepers. This is a sweeper that happens to have a fireball tacked on to it more than it is a fireball. Yes, Slagstorm is better in most cases, but if you would rather your X/2s and X/1s live (Huntmaster and token, Simulacrum; Birds) while their x/1s die, casting this for 3 gets the job done much better than Slagstorm for the same cost. Of course, if you have one of those four drops in play then you probably have access to at least 5 mana for a one-sided Pryoclasm+. Ramping to 7 isn't hard in that deck either, and anything beyond that is Miracle territory anyway.

    Vyolynce on
  • PinfeldorfPinfeldorf Registered User regular
    Comet Storm saw a lot of play in Block RUG. I mean, it was only a 2-of, but RUG was the only deck in block, so...

    1133965-1.png?1297145727
  • TaramoorTaramoor Registered User regular
    New Miracle card spoiled below
    Spoiler:

    Callbacks to the really old Fire Elemental art and Wheel of Fortune. Pretty awesome.

  • PikaPuffPikaPuff Registered User regular
    turn 4 geist, turn 5 enchantment, attack

  • LucedesLucedes Registered User regular
    reforge the soul seems pretty broken if you're _not_ a card advantage deck.

    like, RDW / Burn drawing a new hand is much, much more powerful than esper control drawing a new hand.

  • PikaPuffPikaPuff Registered User regular
    i'd run 1 in my soon to be u/r deck. t1 delver, counter counter counter counter new hand counter counter counter counter

  • LucedesLucedes Registered User regular
    lol, u/r delver might be a real deck soon.

    i played it when innistrad came out, it was a real bad deck. might be better with ponder->miracles, faithless looting.
    u/r delver is exactly the kind of deck that wants ridiculous time walks and a graveyard full of cards to snapcast.

  • TaramoorTaramoor Registered User regular
    Lucedes wrote: »
    lol, u/r delver might be a real deck soon.

    i played it when innistrad came out, it was a real bad deck. might be better with ponder->miracles, faithless looting.
    u/r delver is exactly the kind of deck that wants ridiculous time walks and a graveyard full of cards to snapcast.

    Honestly, a turn three time walk with two flipped Delvers on the board could RUIN people.

  • silence1186silence1186 Character shields down! As a wingmanRegistered User regular
    Taramoor wrote: »
    Lucedes wrote: »
    lol, u/r delver might be a real deck soon.

    i played it when innistrad came out, it was a real bad deck. might be better with ponder->miracles, faithless looting.
    u/r delver is exactly the kind of deck that wants ridiculous time walks and a graveyard full of cards to snapcast.

    Honestly, a turn three time walk with two flipped Delvers on the board could RUIN people.

    T1 Delver
    T2 Delver, Ponder
    T3 Reveal Time walk, flip delvers, Cast Time walk.

    3DS Friend Code: 1891-2359-4305
    3DS Friend Name: BiggsWedge
    Pokemon Y In-game name: Biggs, Shiny ID: 475
  • ChenChen Registered User regular
    go go goldfishing

    I've had my fair share of time with delver and I can honestly say there are a lot of games where you won't start with one, which makes your hand infinitely worse. It's really what makes the deck tick. The times I started with double delver, in all formats, I can count on one hand. It doesn't help that delver is not a very easy deck to play. So many games thrown away after going through so many options. When you have the nuts, then yeah, but just barely inching the win is not an uncommon occurence. Maybe I'm just bad at magic. I'm not ruling it out!

    l8kt.png
  • PikaPuffPikaPuff Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    you can't base it all around delver. delver can win with the four cards alone. use the other 56 cards to shape a backup plan that also works with lots of instants/sorceries

    PikaPuff on
  • ChenChen Registered User regular
    What? My point is your win percentage on average is lower when you don't have t1 delver, which happens a considerable amount of time. It's exactly like Goblin Guide in RDW or Steppe Lynx in Boros or Wild Nacatl in Zoo.

    l8kt.png
  • silence1186silence1186 Character shields down! As a wingmanRegistered User regular
    Or Champion of the Parish in Humans!

    3DS Friend Code: 1891-2359-4305
    3DS Friend Name: BiggsWedge
    Pokemon Y In-game name: Biggs, Shiny ID: 475
  • E.CoyoteE.Coyote Registered User regular
    Looks like wizards closed down magicdraftsim. O.o

  • PeccaviPeccavi oh... oh my!Registered User regular
    Brilliant business strategy. Shut down a website that makes drafting more accessible and generates interest.

    Seriously though, that's going to fuck me over for drafting.

    kvhn.png
  • TaramoorTaramoor Registered User regular
    Peccavi wrote: »
    Brilliant business strategy. Shut down a website that makes drafting more accessible and generates interest.

    Seriously though, that's going to fuck me over for drafting.

    Maybe they thought it was interfering with that weird Build-a-deck thing they do on the website?

    Still seems an odd decision. Why not work with the guy to drive traffic? It saves you development time and an assload of money if he's willing to do it for free and keep it up to date.

  • WinkyWinky Registered User regular
    Peccavi wrote: »
    Brilliant business strategy. Shut down a website that makes drafting more accessible and generates interest.

    Seriously though, that's going to fuck me over for drafting.

    Maybe they intend to release their own version?

    Still shitty.

    mjoa2p.jpg
  • ForarForar #432 Already prepping for Toronto Fan Expo!Registered User regular
    If they do, hopefully they have a team working on it other than those who participated in the D&D digital/online tools.

    Those things have been mostly poop from a butt for years now.

    sigtwo.png
  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    I would play a 5 mana Wheel of Fortune even if it didn't have Miracle.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch, man" fallacy.
  • PeccaviPeccavi oh... oh my!Registered User regular
    Winky wrote: »
    Peccavi wrote: »
    Brilliant business strategy. Shut down a website that makes drafting more accessible and generates interest.

    Seriously though, that's going to fuck me over for drafting.

    Maybe they intend to release their own version?

    Still shitty.

    Their own version that requires a subscription and is considerably worse than tools that used to be available.

    kvhn.png
  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User regular
    Feral wrote: »
    I would play a 5 mana Wheel of Fortune even if it didn't have Miracle.

    It's much better than the blue one, in terms of miracle / hard cast cost.

    Seriously J not only are you a monumentally umpleasant person when you start uttering the nonsense that passes for philosophy in your mind (shame on whatever institution you graduated in, and shame on your tutors for creating such a monster), but your sense of humor, such as it is, is awful.
  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    Interesting.

    http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=130087&d=1334549284

    Appetite for Brains
    B
    Sorcery Uncommon
    Target opponent reveals his or her hand. You choose a card from it with converted mana cost 4 or greater and exile that card.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch, man" fallacy.
  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User regular
    Feral wrote: »
    Interesting.

    http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=130087&d=1334549284

    Appetite for Brains
    B
    Sorcery Uncommon
    Target opponent reveals his or her hand. You choose a card from it with converted mana cost 4 or greater and exile that card.

    That seems...really good.

    Seriously J not only are you a monumentally umpleasant person when you start uttering the nonsense that passes for philosophy in your mind (shame on whatever institution you graduated in, and shame on your tutors for creating such a monster), but your sense of humor, such as it is, is awful.
  • DMBrendonDMBrendon Registered User
    I friend of mine bought a starter pack last week and I played my first game. I really enjoyed it, I've watched others play it a lot over the years and it was good to get in on it myself. It felt like it could be really addictive, and before I go further I was wondering about how much money you need to spend to give it a good go. It seems like there is and endless supply of cards with different rarities, that would be easy to spend all my cash on. If I don't want to spend lots on it, how likely is it that can I still be competitive, or at least find enough players around that won't just trounce me, with my more limited selection of cards?

    3D Virtual Tabletop - see the dungeon the way your character sees it. Move your miniature forward to discover what lies in the darkness beyond your torchlight. You can try a live demo online right now.
  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User regular
    DMBrendon wrote: »
    I friend of mine bought a starter pack last week and I played my first game. I really enjoyed it, I've watched others play it a lot over the years and it was good to get in on it myself. It felt like it could be really addictive, and before I go further I was wondering about how much money you need to spend to give it a good go. It seems like there is and endless supply of cards with different rarities, that would be easy to spend all my cash on. If I don't want to spend lots on it, how likely is it that can I still be competitive, or at least find enough players around that won't just trounce me, with my more limited selection of cards?

    If you don't want to spend all of your money on it, I would suggest not starting.

    But to your question, it depends on what you consider to be "competitive". If you just play large multiplayer games with friends? You can get by with a few decks you scrap together. If you want to get into the counstructed-deck tournament scene, you'll probably drop a few hundred dollars amassing the cards required to win.

    One thing you might seek out is booster drafts. In these games, everyone starts with fresh packs of cards. The packs are drafted, and everyone makes decks out of the newly acquired cards.

    This is a good way to learn strategies, acquire cards, and be on a somewhat equal footing with everyone else who plays.

    The danger, though, is that you'll get hooked, and start having deck ideas, and then you're dropping money acquiring the cards required to build your deck.

    Seriously J not only are you a monumentally umpleasant person when you start uttering the nonsense that passes for philosophy in your mind (shame on whatever institution you graduated in, and shame on your tutors for creating such a monster), but your sense of humor, such as it is, is awful.
  • peacekeeperpeacekeeper Brisbane, AustraliaRegistered User regular
    avrdescentintomadness.jpg

    this certainly does a lot

    also love that flavour text

  • TaramoorTaramoor Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    xtxvtaj1lv_en.jpg klo9wi3jnw_en.jpg

    Taramoor on
  • PikaPuffPikaPuff Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c120/peacekeepers/avrdescentintomadness.jpg

    this certainly does a lot

    also love that flavour text
    wow that is a crazy card. first I thought it would last forever but sometime the owner would have to exile the enchantment itself

    PikaPuff on
  • Mr_RoseMr_Rose Registered User regular
    Huh. What do we know about this soulbond mechanic?
    Because it seems to me that you can "chain" bonds by binding an already bound creature to a newly summoned soulbonder or binding an incoming creature to another creature with soulbond….

    ...because dragons are AWESOME! That's why.
    Nintendo Network ID: AzraelRose
    DropBox invite link - get 500MB extra free.
  • VyolynceVyolynce Registered User regular
    Mr_Rose wrote: »
    Huh. What do we know about this soulbond mechanic?
    Because it seems to me that you can "chain" bonds by binding an already bound creature to a newly summoned soulbonder or binding an incoming creature to another creature with soulbond….

    We know that one a creature is considered "paired" it can't be "paired" with another one -- or else it would no longer be a "pair". Semantics FTW. (Also, explicitly stated in the mechanics article.)

  • Gandalf_the_CrazedGandalf_the_Crazed Vigilo ConfidoRegistered User regular
    Vyolynce wrote: »
    Mr_Rose wrote: »
    Huh. What do we know about this soulbond mechanic?
    Because it seems to me that you can "chain" bonds by binding an already bound creature to a newly summoned soulbonder or binding an incoming creature to another creature with soulbond….

    We know that one a creature is considered "paired" it can't be "paired" with another one -- or else it would no longer be a "pair". Semantics FTW. (Also, explicitly stated in the mechanics article.)

    Well then they're using extremely terrible grammar in the reminder text. It sounds, from the card, like I could have a Soulbond creature in play, and then every time an "unpaired" creature entered the battlefield, I could pair it to the one Soulbond creature I had. I figured that wasn't the case, mostly because it would absurdly powerful, but still. Whoever proofread that reminder text should be defenestrated.

    Also, does that mean Wolfir Silverheart is an 8/8 for 5 CC? Crazy.

    PEUsig_zps56da03ec.jpg
  • VyolynceVyolynce Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    Reminder text is not rules text.

    And I agree that the reminder text is a mess.

    EDIT: Another CFB preview...

    Champion of Lambholdt - 1GG
    Human Warrior - Rare
    Creatures with power less than this card's power can't block creatures you control.
    Whenever another creature ETB under your control, put a +1/+1 counter on this.
    1/1

    Vyolynce on
  • TaramoorTaramoor Registered User regular
    Vyolynce wrote: »
    Mr_Rose wrote: »
    Huh. What do we know about this soulbond mechanic?
    Because it seems to me that you can "chain" bonds by binding an already bound creature to a newly summoned soulbonder or binding an incoming creature to another creature with soulbond….

    We know that one a creature is considered "paired" it can't be "paired" with another one -- or else it would no longer be a "pair". Semantics FTW. (Also, explicitly stated in the mechanics article.)

    Well then they're using extremely terrible grammar in the reminder text. It sounds, from the card, like I could have a Soulbond creature in play, and then every time an "unpaired" creature entered the battlefield, I could pair it to the one Soulbond creature I had. I figured that wasn't the case, mostly because it would absurdly powerful, but still. Whoever proofread that reminder text should be defenestrated.

    Also, does that mean Wolfir Silverheart is an 8/8 for 5 CC? Crazy.

    I think the "Another" part of "another unpaired creature" implies that both must be unpaired upon pairing.

  • ChenChen Registered User regular
    So I can't assemble them and form Voltron? Lame.

    l8kt.png
  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    Vyolynce wrote: »
    Mr_Rose wrote: »
    Huh. What do we know about this soulbond mechanic?
    Because it seems to me that you can "chain" bonds by binding an already bound creature to a newly summoned soulbonder or binding an incoming creature to another creature with soulbond….

    We know that one a creature is considered "paired" it can't be "paired" with another one -- or else it would no longer be a "pair". Semantics FTW. (Also, explicitly stated in the mechanics article.)

    It's not clear to me what happens if multiple creatures with soulbound enter the battlefield simultaneously. I'm sure that they'll add a rule in the comprehensive that says that you can only choose one pairing per creature (treating it similar to an ability cost) but in the absence of such a rule it's possible that if multiple creatures ETB the simultaneously they could all pair with a single creature.

    BTW, I find it interesting that soulbound does not target. That might be useful.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch, man" fallacy.
  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    Also, I find it interesting that they're putting reusable flicker effects in the same block as Seance. :)

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch, man" fallacy.
  • TaramoorTaramoor Registered User regular
    Feral wrote: »
    Vyolynce wrote: »
    Mr_Rose wrote: »
    Huh. What do we know about this soulbond mechanic?
    Because it seems to me that you can "chain" bonds by binding an already bound creature to a newly summoned soulbonder or binding an incoming creature to another creature with soulbond….

    We know that one a creature is considered "paired" it can't be "paired" with another one -- or else it would no longer be a "pair". Semantics FTW. (Also, explicitly stated in the mechanics article.)

    It's not clear to me what happens if multiple creatures with soulbound enter the battlefield simultaneously. I'm sure that they'll add a rule in the comprehensive that says that you can only choose one pairing per creature (treating it similar to an ability cost) but in the absence of such a rule it's possible that if multiple creatures ETB the simultaneously they could all pair with a single creature.

    BTW, I find it interesting that soulbound does not target. That might be useful.

    Well, I think each of their "Enter the Battlefield" triggered abilities would have to go on the stack in an order their controller specifies, so as you resolved the various abilities creatures that became paired would stop being legal options.

    Though I am picturing using the Helvault to basically store up a crapload of Soulbond critters and then bringing them all back to play just because.

Sign In or Register to comment.