|
It's half Chandra so it costs another 2 on principle. Girl's got expensive taste.
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 06:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:15 |
|
|
LRR's spoiler card. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 06:52
|
|
|
Frozen_flame posted:LRR's spoiler card. Pretty good given it can turn Ulamog into not a problem.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 06:53
|
|
|
Entropic posted:I like this card mainly because the name is fun to say. Do you want to counter this? Thought not. Also Turn to Elephant is silly, I like it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 06:54
|
|
|
Isn't Jace a mind reader? He's smiling in that picture. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 06:57
|
|
|
Count Bleck posted:Pretty good given it can turn Ulamog into not a problem. you uh you are aware this isn't actually pongify and is awful instead, right?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 06:57
|
|
|
It took me an embarrassingly long time to realize what the jace and sorin art is from.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 06:58
|
|
|
Elyv posted:you uh Well Pognify wouldn't work on Ulamog anyway, so checkmate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 06:59
|
|
|
I like it because the 3/3 is enough of a body that it might be worth using early as an offensive combat trick in addition to being an Ulamog killer. That's a pretty decent amount of utility for one mana. That flying sac dude is actually pretty busted since in addition to being a baseline 2/1 flyer for 2, it's also an uncounterable edict. I'm noticing a lot of the Eldrazi coming from the next set have been building towards a pretty good Aristocrats deck, but with a focus on on-cast abilities and a lot of CMC 4 dudes that wouldn't play well with Collected Company. It will be interesting to see where the deck goes in the future.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:05
|
|
|
Seems like a bad sideboard card for limited with good Kev Walker art.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:06
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:08
|
|
|
It's a hedron lantern. How cute.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:09
|
|
|
Seems very decent for common colorless ramp.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:09
|
|
|
Frozen_flame posted:LRR's spoiler card. It's like Pognify or rapid hybridization minus the part that made those remotely playable (i.e. they permanently dealt with the problem). It'll still be a fine combat trick in limited, but there's no constructed usability here at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:14
|
|
|
Frozen_flame posted:LRR's spoiler card. but why elephant? that feels so green to me its like blue just robbed greens color pie for an until EOT beast within. I mean I know its not that but elephant?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:14
|
|
|
Dungeon Ecology posted:but why elephant? that feels so green to me its like blue just robbed greens color pie for an until EOT beast within. I mean I know its not that but elephant?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:15
|
|
|
Dungeon Ecology posted:but why elephant? that feels so green to me its like blue just robbed greens color pie for an until EOT beast within. I mean I know its not that but elephant? When it's temporary it could frankly be anything really.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:18
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:When it's temporary it could frankly be anything really. So it would be red?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:18
|
|
|
Ramos posted:So it would be red? Because?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:26
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:"So, uh, Jace, I heard you're heading to Innistrad." So are we Kickstarting this playmat or what?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:30
|
|
|
This is a weird set, but there are so many cards that look like they'll have some eternal playability that I think I can safely say I like it
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 08:09
|
|
|
Zoness posted:This 4/4 non-flash non-self targetting split clique seems really nice: I like the look of the eldrazi much more in this set.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 08:23
|
|
|
Zoness posted:This 4/4 non-flash non-self targetting split clique seems really nice: Isn't this closer to the coolest Tidehollow Sculler ever?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 08:32
|
|
|
They said I could become anything so I became an anime character The problem I'm imagining with a new Nahiri card is that her mechanical identity is still almost assuredly "Equipment Matters Planeswalker."
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 08:44
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:They said I could become anything so I became an anime character Are you saying you don't think it's cool that Stoneforge Mystic was so powerful they decided to make the progenitor of that school of mysticism an important plot character? Because it's pretty cool.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 08:58
|
|
|
Wizards can't catch a break.cheetah7071 posted:Because it's pretty cool. it is
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 09:00
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:They said I could become anything so I became an anime character I would take this art than 99% of what they have done this year.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 09:13
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:Are you saying you don't think it's cool that Stoneforge Mystic was so powerful they decided to make the progenitor of that school of mysticism an important plot character? "The Lithomancer" is mentioned in the flavor articles(not uncharted realms, which didn't exist) that set up ROE as the one who made the hedrons, so it predated Stoneforge being great.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 09:17
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:Because? Maro went on for a while there about how red could do anything as long as it was temporary. He quickly dropped that when things like temporary red enchantment removal came up. GoutPatrol posted:I would take this art than 99% of what they have done this year. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 09:27
|
|
|
I wonder if getting his very own spoiler article was part of the deal where they demanded that SaffronOlive remove all of the metagame data he legally compiled from MTGO.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 09:36
|
|
|
Elyv posted:"The Lithomancer" is mentioned in the flavor articles(not uncharted realms, which didn't exist) that set up ROE as the one who made the hedrons, so it predated Stoneforge being great. The art on the (commander) planeswalker card was practically a straight up trace of the original creature. (blah blah traditional attire blah it's the same person)
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 09:56
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:I wonder if getting his very own spoiler article was part of the deal where they demanded that SaffronOlive remove all of the metagame data he legally compiled from MTGO. I don't understand at all why wizards hated on public access to that information. Even if you accept the "solve the format too fast" argument, (I don't but w/e), that can't / shouldn't matter for eternal formats that aren't going to be so trivially solvable. Makes me want to  up a conspiracy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 10:09
|
|
|
Elyv posted:"The Lithomancer" is mentioned in the flavor articles(not uncharted realms, which didn't exist) that set up ROE as the one who made the hedrons, so it predated Stoneforge being great. They didn't say anything about the Lithomancer other than that they existed and helped seal the Eldrazi. The Lithomancer being Stoneforge Mystic was likely decided later.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 10:22
|
|
|
Booklegger posted:I don't understand at all why wizards hated on public access to that information. Even if you accept the "solve the format too fast" argument, (I don't but w/e), that can't / shouldn't matter for eternal formats that aren't going to be so trivially solvable. Can't someone else do it or have they plugged the data leak? Given how knee-jerk Magic fans are I'm surprised no-one got angry and made their own version.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 11:07
|
|
|
Ramos posted:Maro went on for a while there about how red could do anything as long as it was temporary. He quickly dropped that when things like temporary red enchantment removal came up. Zealous Conscripts, checkmate
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 11:32
|
|
|
Barry Shitpeas posted:Zealous Conscripts, checkmate That doesn't remove an enchantment, for, say, something like moat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 11:40
|
|
|
Chaos Warp. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 11:44
|
|
|
Zoness posted:That doesn't remove an enchantment, for, say, something like moat. That's true but it works for every Moat variant printed in the last 20 years or so
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 11:48
|
|
|
Lancelot posted:Can't someone else do it or have they plugged the data leak? Given how knee-jerk Magic fans are I'm surprised no-one got angry and made their own version. I didn't follow it back then, but reading the statements it seems entirely voluntarily on SaffronOlive's side, and I guess that WotC can at least detect massive data gathering on this scale (to sanction anyone trying the same). Otherwise all this would be pointless.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 12:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:15 |
|
|
The Real Foogla posted:I didn't follow it back then, but reading the statements it seems entirely voluntarily on SaffronOlive's side, and I guess that WotC can at least detect massive data gathering on this scale (to sanction anyone trying the same). Otherwise all this would be pointless. Ah, yeah, tracked down a reddit thread where mtggoldfish said: Goldfish posted:The matchup statistics were gathered via Magic Online replays. Wizards can easily block access to this data by either blocking bot access to replays, or removing replays altogether. I would rather remove the data (which we did) rather than having the Magic Online team divert resources to block access to the data (instead of developing and improving Magic Online), or worse yet, everyone losing the ability to watch replays altogether. Either way, Wizards can block this data since Magic Online is the source.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 13:06
|
|