|
mcmagic posted:It's a really bad card too. I'm going to love when nerds try to draft fancy because there's some cool nerd decks and I win the 75$ draft with a glorified lava axe due to them not having 'creatures'
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 07:22 |
|
|
mcmagic posted:It's a really bad card too. Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:Especially since it doesn't resemble old Rorix that much. Yea he was one of my favorite dragons back in the day.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:21
|
|
|
Skyl3lazer posted:I'm going to love when nerds try to draft fancy because there's some cool nerd decks and I win the 75$ draft with a glorified lava axe due to them not having 'creatures' I guess if you can cheat it into play in a GY deck it might be OK but you're not gonna be casting this guy for 6 and feeling good about it in this format.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:27
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:I guess if you can cheat it into play in a GY deck it might be OK but you're not gonna be casting this guy for 6 and feeling good about it in this format. How do you know so much about this format? E: fwiw I can't imagine rorix being a bad card in normal limited(as opposed to a high powered cube). It's a 6 mana 6/5 hasty flier. Elyv fucked around with this message at 15:32 on May 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:I guess if you can cheat it into play in a GY deck it might be OK but you're not gonna be casting this guy for 6 and feeling good about it in this format. Spending 6 on a 6 mana 6/5 haste flier is good in most formats??????
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:31
|
|
|
A Fancy Bloke posted:Not really so much as asking just what happens if it's not an easily identifiable fake. Sure it might be time consuming, just a thought that in general I'd trust a reputable vendor that probably has received counterfeit cards and has some motivation to be able to detect them vs. a judge trying to resolve a dispute and the judges primary motivation is A. do the right thing B. not DQ people unless he is super positive that it is justified. Judges in general probably err on the side of caution in regard to big penalties, of which using counterfeit cards would be. It is at best going to ruin someones decklist by forcing them to replace the cards with basics (p.sure thats the remedy?) middle ground is remove them from the event, severe end is DQ them for cheating if the judge smells intent and possibly getting a DCI ban for some period of time.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:32
|
|
|
Elyv posted:How do you know so much about this format? This format looks much more like cube to me so far.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:33
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:This format looks much more like cube to me so far. We've seen like 5 commons and 3 uncommons.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:35
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:It's a really bad card too. Do you mean in limited or constructed? 6cmc 6/5 flying haste is a loving bomb in limited.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:35
|
|
|
Elyv posted:
Arcanis is still awesome
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:36
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:38
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:I guess if you can cheat it into play in a GY deck it might be OK but you're not gonna be casting this guy for 6 and feeling good about it in this format. And this is why you will lose to my 6/5 hasty flying dragon as you cast a cabal therapy and name counterspell
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
After the high-angle shot of his original art, we get a low angle and a Dude For Scale. So he is in fact huge.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:41
|
|
|
jassi007 posted:Do you mean in limited or constructed? 6cmc 6/5 flying haste is a loving bomb in limited. Really bad in constructed and I bet it's just OK in this limited format.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:41
|
|
|
Two cascade cards makes me hopeful for a shardless reprint. ~~REPOST THIS IS YOU'RE A YOUNG BLACK TIM WHO DONT NEED NO HAT~~ 
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:41
|
|
|
Elyv posted:
Can I change my post from a few pages ago? This is the rare I hope I open when I buy a 20 dollar pack! New Maelstrom Wanderer is pretty neat but I'm not too keen on the art. Skyl3lazer posted:Two cascade cards makes me hopeful for a shardless reprint. Okay I have no idea what this set is attempting to accomplish anymore.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Really bad in constructed and I bet it's just OK in this limited format. I will make a bet with you on this if we can come up with a way to define goodness in the limited format and also define words like "okay".
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:45
|
|
|
Definitely starting to shy further and further away from this set.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:45
|
|
|
Skyl3lazer posted:Two cascade cards makes me hopeful for a shardless reprint. At least make it look somewhat like the old art. This is so bad
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:45
|
|
|
This set is getting sweeter by the spoiler I can't loving wait to draft it tbqh (serious post)
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
Elyv posted:I will make a bet with you on this if we can come up with a way to define goodness in the limited format and also define words like "okay". It's not gonna be a first pick in draft.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
I can't wait to do online practice drafts of this site and never draft it for real because I don't feel like paying $60 to play the jace lottery with crappy prize support.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
Gonna draft giant tortoises and tims for days.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:54
|
|
|
Hymn 2 Tupac @ uncommon
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:57
|
|
|
non lovely hymn foils woop woop!
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
The cards in this set are good and the art in this set is bad.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 16:00
|
|
|
Oop, called it! (not that it's a surprise) Shardless @ Rare
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 16:01
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:It's not gonna be a first pick in draft. According to who and at what point in the format and how do you define "first pick"? For instance, I suspect it will be better than the vast majority of uncommons but I could believe that a few are better than it.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 16:01
|
|
|
I think the only way mcmagic is right about Rorix is with regard to the casting cost being too restrictive (ie: if EMA is a draft format where decks that can fairly cast a 3RRR top end bomb can't actually make it to 6 mana without being way behind/dead because red-heavy decks suck), not because the power level isn't there.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 16:03
|
|
|
A Fancy Bloke posted:Not really so much as asking just what happens if it's not an easily identifiable fake. Do you go to a vendor every time fakes are accused and you can't tell? Do you ask them to check the whole deck? Do you tell the player that's why you're looking because you probably need to unsleeve at least a couple cards to start with anyways? I just can't imagine this being worth it basically any time where it wasn't incredibly obvious, and if I owned a legacy/vintage deck I would be incredibly upset to find out it was unsleeved without my knowledge because someone said the cards might be fake.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
I'm not a Limited pro by any means, but I feel like if any card in this set needed to be rare to make Limited less awful it's Hymn. Unless Reanimator and Threshold are going to be really good Limited strats. Also no wolf shirt art 
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
Skyl3lazer posted:Hymn 2 Tupac @ uncommon The art in this set is such garbage. I know there's possibly royalty issues with super old art and all that, but the VMA / FTV20 art for Hymn is so bad compared to any of the originals. Even the wolf shirt one.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 16:05
|
|
|
Hymn at uncommon is bad. Oi. That card is miserable to play against.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 16:10
|
|
|
Hymn at uncommon. Sure. Why loving not.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
Strictly worse anguished unmaking @ rare ^^^^ Wow you're not letting me finish my gimmick of posting card w/ joker names if you post them first!!
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 16:18
|
|
|
Count Bleck posted:Hymn at uncommon. Sure. Why loving not. I only have 20 hymns, might as well get more. Also gently caress yeah vindicate.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
Skyl3lazer posted:Strictly worse anguished unmaking @ rare ^^^^ I see you've never screwed someone out of a color before. We have such sights to show you.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:I see you've never screwed someone out of a color before. Finally played legacy again yesterday for the first time in a year. Junded my way to 4-1 and was happy wastelanding the gently caress out of people again. gently caress modern. I lost to Omnitell. gently caress Omnitell still.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 07:22 |
|
|
Skyl3lazer posted:Strictly worse anguished unmaking @ rare ^^^^ Troll better please.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 16:23
|
|