|
Angry Grimace posted:I don't think ROE had one, did it? ROE only had Eldrazi Temple as its rare land.
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 11:23 |
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:I don't think ROE had one, did it? RoE, AVR, and Alara didn't. If you go further back very, very few blocks had rare land cycles (All of Mirrodin/Kami didn't have them, TSP didn't until the last set).
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:14
|
|
|
Surge of Righteousness is going to be a 2 or 3 of in my Esper Control SB post DTK.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:14
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Nah. Disdainful Stroke is just much better. This probably sees play as a psuedo-Syncopate against opponents who tap out, and if they've drawn Ojutai/Silumgar then it's a nice hard counter later.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:15
|
|
|
The UU Force Spike mode is so bad I can't imagine anyone outside limited runs it.Jabor posted:It's a Guard Duty that costs twice as much mana and that your opponent can choose to ignore and attack through anyway if it becomes profitable for them. I guess it's a rare for complexity reasons, because power-level wise it's an uncommon at best in a Limited environment. Put it on your opponent's Dragonlord Silumgar, gain control of a different creature they control and then block their dude with their own dude. ...yeah, I don't know either.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:16
|
|
|
That counterspell is completely unplayable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:17
|
|
|
ShadeofBlue posted:That counterspell is completely unplayable. People just get excited about alternate costs and modes on counterspells.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:18
|
|
|
bhsman posted:This probably sees play as a psuedo-Syncopate against opponents who tap out, and if they've drawn Ojutai/Silumgar then it's a nice hard counter later. A two-mana force spike is not playable. Hell, a 1-mana force spike probably wouldn't be playable in this Standard. Syncopate was decent because it remained effective in the midgame - you can cast Syncopate for 3 on your opponent's 4-drop, even if they have a couple of lands left open - this doesn't even come close.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:19
|
|
|
That's like saying Syncopate is unplayable, and this is almost as good. It'll see play.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:19
|
|
|
if you ignore the conditionality of it it says "UU counter target spell" which is exciting, but it is probably a force spike more of the time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:20
|
|
|
bhsman posted:That's like saying Syncopate is unplayable, and this is almost as good. It'll see play. This is worlds different than Syncopate. And Syncopate isn't that great in the first place, so "almost as good" doesn't say much about it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:21
|
|
|
it should really be dragondaze, reveal a dragon instead of paying UU to counter unless they pay 1 :3
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:21
|
|
|
I know it's intended to be put on an opponents creature, but any value that will be derived out of this card will be from casting it on your own ETB effect or some other combo piece. Otherwise it just says "enchanted creature has defender until its controller can get rid of this" which even in limited is barely useful semi-removal. Definitely a wacky "try to build around me" bulk rare.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:21
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:People just get excited about alternate costs and modes on counterspells. This isn't even an alternate cost. It's an additional cost. The card isn't playable in any format.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:22
|
|
|
Ultima66 posted:RoE, AVR, and Alara didn't. If you go further back very, very few blocks had rare land cycles (All of Mirrodin/Kami didn't have them, TSP didn't until the last set). AVR finished the cycle of Utility Lands from the rest of the block I guess.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:22
|
|
|
The point of this card is to counter a small child's dragon and then let him silently know that you, the grown adult, are in fact the dragonmaster. Except you don't have to make roaring noises or flap your hands like pretend wings. The card does all the work.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:22
|
|
|
bhsman posted:That's like saying Syncopate is unplayable, and this is almost as good. It'll see play. The gulf between Force Spike and Syncopate is pretty enormous, dude. And as the King noted, Syncopate isn't that good in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:23
|
|
|
There might be a Dragon deck that uses some of these conditional spells, but there isn't enough space for all of them and this counter would be awkward in such a deck.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:23
|
|
|
Amoeboid Changeling's time to shine?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:23
|
|
|
A better comparison than Syncopate is Stubborn Denial, and Stubborn Denial is a way better card.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
The Nastier Nate posted:I know it's intended to be put on an opponents creature, but any value that will be derived out of this card will be from casting it on your own ETB effect or some other combo piece. Otherwise it just says "enchanted creature has defender until its controller can get rid of this" which even in limited is barely useful semi-removal. Stick it on Master of Waves. Gary would be good too except black devotion makes it fiddly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:25
|
|
|
Elyv posted:
Hello Green answer to UB early Ashiok.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:27
|
|
|
BizarroAzrael posted:Stick it on Master of Waves. Gary would be good too except black devotion makes it fiddly. Put it on a Doomwake Giant. In limited its just a generic "opposing creature has defender" card. In constructed, you're probably looking to abuse ETBs on your own guys.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:30
|
|
|
BizarroAzrael posted:Stick it on Master of Waves. Gary would be good too except black devotion makes it fiddly. You still have to be able to get your master of waves to survive an attack or else you lose all your elementals at EoT anyway. At least Gary is big enough on the back end to survive untill he runs head first into a seige rhino.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:30
|
|
|
I really like those color cycle hosers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:31
|
|
|
Mirror Mockery is either a subtle or unintended reference to Flicker, and I love the card for it.  Angry Grimace posted:The gulf between Force Spike and Syncopate is pretty enormous, dude. And as the King noted, Syncopate isn't that good in the first place. And yet Syncopate still saw play. It's good enough to be a 1-of in a Control deck that runs any dragon as a finisher.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:33
|
|
|
GoutPatrol posted:Hello Green answer to UB early Ashiok. And Sorin. And Narset. And NewSarkhan.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:33
|
|
|
Gyshall posted:I really like those color cycle hosers. The black one probably just kills UW Heroic entirely now (it was already hanging on by a thread).
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:33
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:The black one probably just kills UW Heroic entirely now (it was already hanging on by a thread). Yeah. Between Roast, Ultimate Price coming back, and now enemy hate-sacking, W/u heroic is probably dead.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:37
|
|
|
Elyv posted:
What happened to all the Rakshasas anyway. There's been like, two cards with them?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:38
|
|
|
bhsman posted:Mirror Mockery is either a subtle or unintended reference to Flicker, and I love the card for it. How many dragons do you think a control deck plays? Because it is not enough to make that added cost ever be a factor.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:38
|
|
|
forbidden lesbian posted:How many dragons do you think a control deck plays? Because it is not enough to make that added cost ever be a factor. Izzet dragon counter/burn feat. Mind Swipe and Silumgar's Scorn. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:40
|
|
|
forbidden lesbian posted:How many dragons do you think a control deck plays? Because it is not enough to make that added cost ever be a factor. Also I think we're underrating this card but I really have no loving clue. Playing against force spike that sometimes turns into counterspell with information you don't have is going to randomly be a nightmare, but it might just be too unreliable in the midgame.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:41
|
|
|
^^^Or a Hexproof Dragonlord Ojutai, but as you said it might be too unreliable at times, which is why I'm not saying people should run more than 2. forbidden lesbian posted:How many dragons do you think a control deck plays? Because it is not enough to make that added cost ever be a factor. About 2-3 per deck? I'm not banking on it being up reliably, but denying it outright is just dumb.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
Spiderdrake posted:Not that it's a super huge big deal or whatever but I hope everyone parses correctly that the spell has either an added cost or an upgrade if your hexproof silumgar is in play. Control is biased towards taplands in the early game and in the late game its just Force Spike that costs twice as much as Force Spike. If your hexproof Silumgar is in play, you already won the game. bhsman posted:About 2-3 per deck? I'm not banking on it being up reliably, but denying it outright is just dumb. Usually 1 or 2.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:43
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:Control is biased towards taplands in the early game and in the late game its just Force Spike that costs twice as much as Force Spike. I think stuff like taplands are exactly why a Control deck would want this, though. It's not like people never tap out in Standard. Even Silumgar being in play is not a guarantee of victory, and even the hexproof version needs protection at times. quote:Usually 1 or 2. So what's the problem?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:46
|
|
|
netcat posted:What happened to all the Rakshasas anyway. There's been like, two cards with them? There were only 4 cards in FRF and KTK combined that had Rakshasa in their name, so I guess there weren't that many in the first place
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:46
|
|
|
If all of the "dragons matter" spells were tribal, that dragon counter might be good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:47
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:If your hexproof Silumgar is in play, you already won the game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 11:23 |
|
|
bhsman posted:I think stuff like taplands are exactly why a Control deck would want this, though. It's not like people never tap out in Standard. Even Silumgar being in play is not a guarantee of victory, and even the hexproof version needs protection at times. People tap out sure, but control decks are heavily biased towards consistency and this card is the poster-child for inconsistency. 1 or 2 Dragons is not enough to reliably turn on the part of this card that makes it any good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:49
|
|