|
This is just some idea I was mulling in my brain, and I'm wondering if this mechanic is okay or far too powerful? I was think about Surrak Dragonclaw and how he's not that great. If you aren't against control, anti-counter power doesn't help. I was think of a power that could be very powerful buy not invincible, and I thought of this: This creature has protection from removal (Cannot be affected by spells or creature abilities that can destroy, exile, or sacrifice). While that seems pretty powerful, the creature itself is still open to being killed by burn spells (lighting strike, searing blood, etc.), debuffing spells like bile blight, and being blocked by creatures. Does something like this feel too powerful to use in-game?
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 06:40 |
|
|
As written, your hypothetical creature still does to Wrath of God and Cruel Edict. "Protection" means something very specific, and doesn't do anything about destroy/exile/sacrifice effects. Honestly, just making something hexproof is effectively "protection from spot removal", and I'm not sure how much you're gaining by reinventing it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:01
|
|
|
reinvent it by bringing back shroud instead
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:05
|
|
|
Jabor posted:As written, your hypothetical creature still does to Wrath of God and Cruel Edict. "Protection" means something very specific, and doesn't do anything about destroy/exile/sacrifice effects. True, but I mean that creature wouldn't be affected by wrath spells like Wrath of God. I can see where hexproof would be an easier answer, but I'm just wondering if something like what I am suggesting is too powerful.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:09
|
|
|
Have it be something like "This creature can only be destroyed by combat damage."
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
This comes up every once in a while, and I don't think we've ever found a way to template it that isn't really awkward. Functionally, I think Aetherling is as close as it's gonna get.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:11
|
|
|
homerlaw posted:Have it be something like "This creature can only be destroyed by combat damage." "This creature cannot leave the battlefield unless it has received lethal damage."
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:12
|
|
|
Do we do trades and such for MTGO in the trade thread in SA Mart? I don't know that I've seen that. I haven't seen anywhere to add friends on MTGO, either. At least some of you guys still play it, right?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:14
|
|
|
homerlaw posted:Have it be something like "This creature can only be destroyed by combat damage." You can still make them sacrifice it, it can still be exiled, and it would still die from having a toughness of 0. I think this discussion occurred in the last thread- it's actually very difficult to make something genuinely immune to mass removal.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:15
|
|
|
LGD posted:You can still make them sacrifice it, it can still be exiled, and it would still die from having a toughness of 0. I think this discussion occurred in the last thread- it's actually very difficult to make something genuinely immune to mass removal. I don't think there's anything in the game that is immune to Perilous Vault. Stapling Sigarda, Progenitus and Indestructible would come close to invincible, but I don't think there's anything that actually makes something immune to exile. I guess if you had an ability that said "if a spell or effect would cause CARDNAME to leave the battlefield, counter that spell or ability." Even then, you could technically Stifle that trigger.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:18
|
|
|
Carrasco posted:This comes up every once in a while, and I don't think we've ever found a way to template it that isn't really awkward. Functionally, I think Aetherling is as close as it's gonna get. Noncombat damage can't be marked on ~. ~ can't be destroyed except by lethal damage.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:21
|
|
|
I'm thinking about putting dictate of erebos in a butcher of the horde + goblin rabblemaster + brimaz shell, with tempo and hand disruption. The basic idea is turn 5-7 you pump the butcher, which also would wipe your opponent's board with indirect removal that gets around hexproof and indestructible. For removal, it would be lightning strike, stoke the flames, murderous cut, hero's downfall, thoughtsieze, despise, mardu charm, crackling doom, deicide/banishing light/chained to the rocks, etc. No shortage of answers to things like Sarkhan in main deck. So, would throwing athreos/purphoros in the mix make it super punishing, or would that be a little too christmas land, even in sideboard?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:22
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:Noncombat damage can't be marked on ~. Prevent all non-combat damage that would be dealt to ~ 
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:23
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:Noncombat damage can't be marked on ~. ~ can't be destroyed except by lethal damage. That's just a weaker and needlessly complicated version of indestructible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:25
|
|
|
You could also solve the sacrifice/exile problem by not printing any sacrifice/exile removal in the same format, if we're talking about this as an actual card design rather than a "can you make an unkillable creature" thought experiment. Then you can just do "~ can't be destroyed except by lethal damage", which fits the original stipulation of being immune to traditional mass and spot removal but still dies to burn, -X/-X, and combat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:25
|
|
|
Carrasco posted:That's just a weaker and needlessly complicated version of indestructible. Isn't that what we're going for? I didn't actually read most of the last page  End of Life Guy posted:Prevent all non-combat damage that would be dealt to ~ That doesn't get around 'this damage can't be prevented' effects..
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
"If ~ would leave the battlefield, instead remove all noncombat damage from it. If ~ has lethal combat damage marked on it, destroy it." That works and I think it matches the correct rule lawyer phrasing, but it's screwy with effects like Karn Liberated and Lich's Mirror.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:30
|
|
|
Maybe some variation on "If this creature would be put into the graveyard for any reason other than being destroyed as a result of lethal combat damage, or if this creature would be exiled by any other effect, and no creature named ~CARD NAME~ has left the battlefield this turn, exile this creature and return it to the battlefield." but yeah there really isn't any way to do this that doesn't have holes in it (the above example can be bounced and is still subject to Pacifism style effects), isn't super awkward to read, and isn't super-abusable
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:34
|
|
|
RME posted:only if you use different colored beads of the same type for counters too That's the plan! The problem is that I hate carrying assortments of dice and crap. I only bring 4-5 large dice for goyf and Planeswalker tracking and that's it. This will force me to bring my old pokemon glass bead bag which was awful.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:38
|
|
|
Not necessarily what we are looking for, but I would be interested in seeing something like the following: Planar Bound (This card cannot be exiled from the battlefield.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
Mondrian posted:Calvary Seleeneeya Or-jov Dimmer Joond
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
AlternateNu posted:Not necessarily what we are looking for, but I would be interested in seeing something like the following: The problem with that is if Rest in Peace is on the battlefield, when a "Planar Bound" creature receives lethal damage or has toughness < 1, the game just hangs up repeatedly trying to execute a state-based effect that can't happen.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:52
|
|
|
Carrasco posted:The problem with that is if Rest in Peace is on the battlefield, when a "Planar Bound" creature receives lethal damage or has toughness < 1, the game just hangs up repeatedly trying to execute a state-based effect that can't happen. Yeah, but that can just be "common sense" (I do hate that phrase) embedded into the keyword effect like Bestowed lets the card stay on the field as a creature if the target is destroyed before the Bestow effect resolves.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:58
|
|
|
Exiling is rare enough that this hypothetical keyword seems extremely narrow, annoying to execute rules-wise, and fairly pointless.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 02:00
|
|
|
Traded Treasure Cruise for 3 boosters, got Sarkhan. Card works a fuckin treat. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 02:00
|
|
|
Jitte Keranos Any other foreign words that sound awful when pronounced as American English but it's mostly those two that will endure due to eternal usage.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 02:04
|
|
|
AATREK CURES KIDS posted:More fun is watching someone's terrified reaction when you play Flip and Rip. I thought it was stupid, then I actually played it. Everyone should try it at least once, especially with a new player.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
A fun thing to do in your playgroup is correct someone's pronunciation of "Necropotence," no matter which they choose. If they say "neck-row-potence," say it's "ne-craw-po-tense," and vice-versa. Then next week, when they've "corrected" their pronunciation, do it again. See how long it takes before they figure it out/stop playing EDH with you.
Johnny Landmine fucked around with this message at 02:25 on Oct 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
Carrasco posted:That's just a weaker and needlessly complicated version of indestructible. "needlessly complicated" doesn't exist in Goon lexicon.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
Pala-KRON-os? Pa-LUKE-ren-os? Paw-luke-RAN-os?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
Palooka. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 02:30
|
|
|
Kokusho... coke-a-show
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 02:30
|
|
|
Dungeon Ecology posted:Pala-KRON-os? Pa-LUKE-ren-os? Paw-luke-RAN-os? Big P.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 02:31
|
|
|
I know a guy that says "mootavault" who evidently either doesn't really get or care about the fact that it's a really basic combination of the words mutant/mutating and vault.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 02:32
|
|
|
Gumdrop Larry posted:I know a guy that says "mootavault" who evidently either doesn't really get or care about the fact that it's a really basic combination of the words mutant/mutating and vault.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 02:35
|
|
|
Dungeon Ecology posted:Pala-KRON-os? Pa-LUKE-ren-os? Paw-luke-RAN-os? Polly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 02:35
|
|
|
Jonked posted:How the hell do you pronounce mutant without a moo sound? When you say it correctly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 02:35
|
|
|
Jonked posted:How the hell do you pronounce mutant without a moo sound? Some people intentionally mispronounce words because they find it funny, even when the rest of the world doesn't. Also his name is totally Big Palooka, the World Eater guys.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 02:38
|
|
|
Jonked posted:How the hell do you pronounce mutant without a moo sound? By being fluent in the English language.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 02:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 06:40 |
|
|
Cernunnos posted:Some people intentionally mispronounce words because they find it funny, even when the rest of the world doesn't. Pauly Prissy Pants.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 02:43
|
|
