|
2R Sorcery Play a hand of blackjack with a L3 or higher judge as the dealer. If you win the hand, search your library for a rare or mythic rare red enchantment or sorcery card with converted mana cost 6 or higher.
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 21:06 |
|
|
Attorney at Funk posted:
this will go great in my Ur-Dragon edh deck
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
Imr. mephistopheles posted:Narset probably isn't playable in modern currently but comparing her power level to any Jace is silly and giving any spell rebound is a really difficult ability to evaluate without playtesting. Is the first Narset better than the first Jace? No, absolutely not, not even close. Is she better than the fourth Jace in a deck full of the best card selection ever printed? Maaaaaaaaybe.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
MiddleEastBeast posted:He was obviously referring to the case where you hit a noncreature/nonland card, since that's the actual situation where it's good and possibly comparable to the Jaces that are guaranteed to draw you a card. Saying "well you don't have to reveal the card [in the situation where Narset is way worse than the planeswalkers people are saying is better]" is missing the point of what other people are arguing against you about. This is a stupid loving argument, but "No, I mean sometimes you just don't get anything, and you have to show your opponent what it is." initially read to me as if you always have to show. I get what he was trying to say now, but that's not how I originally read it. Someone quoting mcmagic explaining what he thought the quote meant as if that was his own interpretation of the card and then correcting him was pretty funny though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
AlternateNu posted:I can see Twin decks shifting to more of a Tarmo-Twin form and just side out the entire combo against decks with this card. Should be interesting to see how the meta reacts. I can see them moving to Tarmo-Twin to diffuse the impact of that card and to cast mutagenic growth from the board more easily, but you can still combo through this card on T4 with mutagenic growth. Going to Tarmotwin also means that the decks that side into this have to hold bad cards to stop the combo which lets you just beat them with Goofy easier.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
Entropic posted:2R I know this wasn't the intention but it's very fitting that you don't actually do anything after searching for the card 
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
Death Bot posted:I know this wasn't the intention but it's very fitting that you don't actually do anything after searching for the card Your opponent's wandered off already anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
Or they just Clique you and you move your overly specific hate card to the bottom and then combo off.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:Or they just Clique you and you move your overly specific hate card to the bottom and then combo off. Or you probably just kill the Clique and now both of you are down a card, but they paid 3 mana for it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
AlternateNu posted:Or you probably just kill the Clique and now both of you are down a card, but they paid 3 mana for it. Sure, but that accomplishes the same thing - they don't have Overly Specific Twin Hate card in hand.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:28
|
|
|
DAD LOST MY IPOD posted:Is the first Narset better than the first Jace? No, absolutely not, not even close. Is she better than the fourth Jace in a deck full of the best card selection ever printed? Maaaaaaaaybe. Okay well I guess I just straight up disagree then. Jace 1 is more versatile but when built around I think Narset is way more powerful.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
Everyone is focusing on Twin but this card also owns Resto Angel and Colonnade and those are both pretty relevant.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:Okay well I guess I just straight up disagree then. Jace 1 is more versatile but when built around I think Narset is way more powerful. sorry no I meant the first copy of JTMS in a Legacy Miracles deck. I think we're talking about different use cases entirely.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
DAD LOST MY IPOD posted:Everyone is focusing on Twin but this card also owns Resto Angel and Colonnade and those are both pretty relevant. Can't kill Siege Rhino!
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:32
|
|
|
DAD LOST MY IPOD posted:sorry no I meant the first copy of JTMS in a Legacy Miracles deck. I think we're talking about different use cases entirely. Oh haha, I wasn't talking Legacy at all, yeah she's nowhere near JTMS.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
DAD LOST MY IPOD posted:Everyone is focusing on Twin but this card also owns Resto Angel and Colonnade and those are both pretty relevant. Those aren't aren't played in T1 decks right now and there was already a hoser for them in Combust.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:36
|
|
|
I don't think Narset plays particularly well with Miracles. I don't think she fits into Modern UWR and I don't think she is good enough for an entirely new archetype. In Modern tapping out for her on t4 is a pretty bad idea compared to what every other deck is doing. I mean even if you built a deck around her she doesn't seem as powerful as Agent of Bolas and nobody plays him in Modern. Vintage is obviously another story.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:38
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Those aren't aren't played in T1 decks right now and there was already a hoser for them in Combust. yeah you're right why would anyone play the 1cmc version when there's a 2cmc option available already
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:I don't think Narset plays particularly well with Miracles. I don't think she fits into Modern UWR and I don't think she is good enough for an entirely new archetype. In Modern tapping out for her on t4 is a pretty bad idea compared to what every other deck is doing. She's not good enough for Vintage either, actually. Doing something potentially broken on your next turn isn't as exciting as it sounds. Its a format that revolves almost entirely around taking one really enormously broken turn.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
There are Tezzeret decks in Vintage. I didn't say Narset was playable there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:There are Tezzeret decks in Vintage. I didn't say Narset was playable there. Ah, I thought you meant you didn't know whether she was playable there. My bad. I think part of the confusion was that I've seen Tezzeret 1 in Vintage but never Agent of Bolas so I didn't make the connection.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:I don't think Narset plays particularly well with Miracles. I don't think she fits into Modern UWR and I don't think she is good enough for an entirely new archetype. In Modern tapping out for her on t4 is a pretty bad idea compared to what every other deck is doing. This is true for current poo poo garbage Modern but maybe in the future. Also there is a Tezz deck that does okay in MODO dailies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
Yeah Tezz is a pretty cool t2 card. Decent cheap artifacts are very rarely printed now so I am guessing it always stays that way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:45
|
|
|
Yeah if you're blue in Modern right now and you're not comboing off you're kind of hosed and it would take a lot to change that
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:46
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:Yeah if you're blue in Modern right now and you're not comboing off you're kind of hosed and it would take a lot to change that Tell Gerrard Fabiano that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
Entropic posted:I think they've confirmed that there's no dragons at common (boo), 3 two-color cycles of dragons at uncommon, rare, and mythic and two mono-color cycles at uncommon and rare, which makes 25 dragons all told, with probably a few more thrown in at rare. None of them cost less than 6 mana at uncommon, and the only rare that's less than 5 is the one red one. Then in an 8-player pod drafting DTK-DTK-FRF, for any given 2-color allied pair there will be an expected 2.72 dragons (3*2*3*8/80=1.8 uncommons, 3*2*(7/8)*8/53=0.79 rares, and 1*2*8/8/15=.13 mythics). Plus another 1 from the FRF packs, you're getting at best maybe 4 dragons, and that's if you're drafting every dragon your color pair allows and you're wide open in all your colors. It doesn't seem like you can ever get enough dragons to make the uncommon "give all your dragons a +1/+1 counter" cycle worthwhile. Even under ideal conditions they seem more useful as another way to turn on your "if you revealed or control a dragon" effects than for their own rules text.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
Not to mention that if you have multiple 4/4 flyers online in limited, you should be winning the game already anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:Then in an 8-player pod drafting DTK-DTK-FRF, for any given 2-color allied pair there will be an expected 2.72 dragons (3*2*3*8/80=1.8 uncommons, 3*2*(7/8)*8/53=0.79 rares, and 1*2*8/8/15=.13 mythics). Plus another 1 from the FRF packs, you're getting at best maybe 4 dragons, and that's if you're drafting every dragon your color pair allows and you're wide open in all your colors. The bear mode makes it a playable card, but a Morph that costs 7 to unmorph as a 4/4 Flier and who's unmorph ability is likely to be irrelevant is not terribly exciting, even as an uncommon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
The KTK morphs are so much better than the DTK ones...
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Tell Gerrard Fabiano that. Gerrard Fabiano could top 8 with standard Murdergoats
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 22:16
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:The bear mode makes it a playable card, but a Morph that costs 7 to unmorph as a 4/4 Flier and who's unmorph ability is likely to be irrelevant is not terribly exciting, even as an uncommon. I mean, it's playable in the sense that any off-color morph is playable as a Gray Ogre, but I'm not going to get excited about Gray Ogres or try to build a deck around them, least of all in a block where Gray Ogres are everywhere anyhow. My point is that the "we made them deliberately bad so that dedicated dragon-drafters could get more" explanation for why they're so bad doesn't seem to hold up very well. There just aren't enough dragons for that. It's really weird that M14 gets a dragon at common but Dragons the Dragoning doesn't.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 22:17
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:Gerrard Fabiano could top 8 with standard Murdergoats Yet he chooses to play blue cards without a combo... So does Hoogland.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
They kind of screwed themselves in the lore by having fully grown dragons emerging from tempests so they couldn't then have young or baby dragons with cheap casting costs. Gonna be honest, from what i've seen so far I'm a little bit disappointed with this set.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
Wurzag posted:They kind of screwed themselves in the lore by having fully grown dragons emerging from tempests so they couldn't then have young or baby dragons with cheap casting costs. Instead of reprinting Dragon Fodder, if they had printed a similar card except the two tokens were Dragons, I think people would be way more excited/thinking about these "if you control a dragon" interactions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 22:23
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:I mean, it's playable in the sense that any off-color morph is playable as a Gray Ogre, but I'm not going to get excited about Gray Ogres or try to build a deck around them, least of all in a block where Gray Ogres are everywhere anyhow. Horrible flavor justification that there are no whelps on Tarkir. I mean, is not a great card but it would help if you're trying to legitimately enable a a Dragon tribal strategy. Instead everything was 6CMC. Wurzag posted:They kind of screwed themselves in the lore by having fully grown dragons emerging from tempests so they couldn't then have young or baby dragons with cheap casting costs. I don't want to say I think the set looks bad, but....yeah the set looks bad from what I've seen. I mean, we all should have known that Dragons: the Dragoning was code for Overcosted Fatties: the Set, but you would have liked to think they would have tried harder to avoid it. Angry Grimace fucked around with this message at 22:31 on Mar 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 22:24
|
|
|
Wurzag posted:They kind of screwed themselves in the lore by having fully grown dragons emerging from tempests so they couldn't then have young or baby dragons with cheap casting costs. What are you talking about this set is amazing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
Wurzag posted:They kind of screwed themselves in the lore by having fully grown dragons emerging from tempests so they couldn't then have young or baby dragons with cheap casting costs. Yeah I'm probably not going to grab anything from this set besides a couple of sarkhans to maybe get that drat temur deck going. I bought Khans because I loved the flavor and I never got to mess with a tri color set before, I bought frf because there were tons of cool cards and fun mechanics. This set has boring mechanics and lame bombs and I couldn't ever be more tired of dragons. Nothing short of enemy fetches will get me to buy this block.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 22:29
|
|
|
So the dragons are born fully formed and without Ugin to explain to them the normal draconic life-cycle they just never produce offspring? Because that's loving weird. Is Ugin cloning a massive army of sterile dragons from colorless mana to fight the Eldrazi or something? I get the feeling you might have backed the wrong horse again, Sarkhan.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:What are you talking about this set is amazing. Serious question: why do you think this set is amazing?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 21:06 |
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:Serious question: why do you think this set is amazing? Maybe he isn't a jaded fun-hating curmudgeon 
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 22:34
|
|
