|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:Deflecting Palm is a source of damage and an ABAB pattern would work out that way. My understanding is that the controller of the source dealing damage would choose which of the replacement effects to apply. I have no idea what the modo ui for this looks like.
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 03:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 16:20 |
|
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:Deflecting Palm is a source of damage and an ABAB pattern would work out that way. This is what I thought and I'm pretty sure what happened. I targeted the latest both times. Alaan posted:Should be the last one your opponent played but good loving luck on MTGO. It did work out that way. I was mostly posting because I was so surprised to see someone else on MTGO actually playing a fun deck. I think 4 DP in one turn is ridiculous even in casual, but to play against someone playing stupid decks for fun on MTGO is a hard find. So my original post was half rules question and part "Can you believe". The Human Crouton fucked around with this message at 03:48 on Sep 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 03:45
|
|
|
The source changes with each deflecting palm though. It isn't actually a redirect. Edit: I think you could technically target your own creature to create a second replacement effect you choose the order of, but it would be dumb because you are still the controller of the source. Alaan fucked around with this message at 03:50 on Sep 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 03:45
|
|
|
The stack is extremely clear on magic online. If you targeted something that was lower on the stack I don't know what to tell you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 03:53
|
|
|
ShaneB posted:The stack is extremely clear on magic online. If you targeted something that was lower on the stack I don't know what to tell you. Deflecting Palm doesn't target.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 03:54
|
|
|
Jabor posted:Deflecting Palm doesn't target. You select the source of the damage. It's essentially like picking a target without the rules of "target" being in place. But I'm no Deflecting Palm judge so I'm all ears when it comes to understanding this better. But anyway his opponent played the last one so I'm not sure how he would have come out of the exchange a winner.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 03:55
|
|
|
A real-life example I found online, because I'm curious:quote:Let's call you A and your opponents B. Oh wait this example isn't a great one. ShaneB fucked around with this message at 04:03 on Sep 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 04:00
|
|
|
ShaneB posted:The stack is extremely clear on magic online. If you targeted something that was lower on the stack I don't know what to tell you. I didn't. I always targeted the latest. Turns out I did it right, according to the other replies. It was just funny that there were 4 Delecting Palms in one play. Also, I was wondering if I could have played the stack better, but again the thread tells me that I did all I could have done.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 04:00
|
|
|
I did miss it didn't target which makes it a bit wonkier at least!
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 04:05
|
|
|
ShaneB posted:A real-life example I found online, because I'm curious: The better question is why a Deflecting Palm on an unblocked Siege Rhino is only doing 3 damage.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 04:05
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:I just wanted everyone to know that I just lost a game because someone Deflecting Palmed my Deflecting Palm, which I played in response to his other Deflecting Palm, which he played in response to my first Deflecting Palm. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhUkGIsKvn0
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
ShaneB posted:The stack is extremely clear on magic online. If you targeted something that was lower on the stack I don't know what to tell you. it's extremely clear until someone flusterstorms a tendrils of agony
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 04:46
|
|
|
 "Night Owl" (Something lost in translation?) 2BB Enchantment "Night Owl" enters the battlefield with 7 time counters. At the beginning of your draw step, you draw additional one card, remove two time counters from "Night Owl." Your maximum hand size is equal to the number of time counters on "Night Owl." Whenever you discard a card, you lose 1 life. --  2W Instant Exile target creature you control, then return it to the batttlefiled under it's owner's control. Draw a card.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 05:36
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:
I hope something is missing from that translation, otherwise this is simply something bad to combo with Harmless Offering?
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 05:45
|
|
|
PJOmega posted:I hope something is missing from that translation, otherwise this is simply something bad to combo with Harmless Offering? It draws you an additional card, so it's a much worse Phyrexian Arena. It would probably be worth it at 3 mana, but at 4 it doesn't seem worth the turn.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 05:49
|
|
|
PJOmega posted:I hope something is missing from that translation, otherwise this is simply something bad to combo with Harmless Offering? it's a phyrexian arena that doesn't necessarily cost you a life every turn. Seems fine. EDIT: By fine I don't mean "constructed playable", I just mean a totally acceptable average rare that's not obvious trash.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 05:49
|
|
|
PJOmega posted:I hope something is missing from that translation, otherwise this is simply something bad to combo with Harmless Offering? "Draw an extra card every turn" is pretty reasonable on its own. It's like Avaricious Dragon without a body, except the downside takes a while to actually kick in.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 05:51
|
|
|
If your playing a deck that can empty it's hand efficiently every turn by turn 5, it's pretty solid. It seems okay in some Rakdos Burn lists I've seen. And most of that list will survive rotation except for Exquisite Firecraft. (and thats not even played always or even necessarily often) And in Rakdos Burn lists you can even Harmless Offer it...
anglachel fucked around with this message at 06:31 on Sep 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 06:28
|
|
|
anglachel posted:If your playing a deck that can empty it's hand efficiently every turn by turn 5, it's pretty solid. It seems okay in some Rakdos Burn lists I've seen. And most of that list will survive rotation except for Exquisite Firecraft. (and thats not even played always or even necessarily often) And in Rakdos Burn lists you can even Harmless Offer it... Doesn't Rakdos Burn discard a bunch of cards?
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 06:39
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:Doesn't Rakdos Burn discard a bunch of cards? Yep. But by turn 5 (or whatever turn your hellbent), it's most likely empty handed, and 5 mana will be enough to pretty much immediately cast anything you draw. The only time you would want to/need to discard at that point is to power Collective Brutality, which has a handy "gain 2 life" part to it to offset the life loss. Like yeah you want to cast Fiery Temper for 1, but turn 5 when your basically hellbent anyways, paying 3 for it and say dropping a land. And the card doesn't force discard until turn 8. If your playing Burn and going to turn 8, your having bigger problems. The biggest mark against it is that top decking is likely to not get you a whole lot sense you have to wait a whole turn first. But sense it would likely go into a deck with Chandra, flipping this off her, and just letting it exile and your opponent take 2 won't be terrible either. And if you need to discard it to Collectice Brutality or Reveler, not real loss if you feel it's not gonna get you there. anglachel fucked around with this message at 07:01 on Sep 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 06:58
|
|
|
the Orb of Zot posted:It draws you an additional card, so it's a much worse Phyrexian Arena. It would probably be worth it at 3 mana, but at 4 it doesn't seem worth the turn. Tottally putting this in my doubling season/proliferate deck 14 card handsize here I come
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 07:03
|
|
|
Weird card
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 10:55
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:Weird card and then they ban collected company and I cum
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 11:05
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:Weird card So you LOOK at 10 cards... But you only pick two... Then your opponent gets first pick between the two, and you get the other one? Dubious.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 11:19
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:So you LOOK at 10 cards... But you only pick two... Then your opponent gets first pick between the two, and you get the other one? It's a may, so the opponent might decide not to pick anything, giving you two creatures. Now that's upside.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 11:29
|
|
|
You can also choose to choose only one... giving it to the opponent if they want it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 11:31
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:You can also choose to choose only one... giving it to the opponent if they want it. Play this first, the opponent grabs the only creature, slam Oath of Druids as you mutter "All according to cakeaku".
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 11:34
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:Weird card It honestly should have said three instead of two. That way, you get two creatures to their one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 11:46
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:Weird card I have no idea what you do with this but it's cool.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 12:22
|
|
|
Seems like a commander card. "Hmm, top 8, Joe over there can have the best one out of these two, and I'll get the other one."
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 12:38
|
|
|
Sestze posted:Seems like a commander card. "Hmm, top 8, Joe over there can have the best one out of these two, and I'll get the other one." As much as you would like to believe it, being dogshit terrible doesn't equate to commander card.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 12:43
|
|
|
A combo deck could use this in theory. Pull out two copies of the same creature that makes your combo fire, what the opponent does makes no difference.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 12:47
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:
When this only has one counter left on it and it tells you to remove two, do you remove none (because you can't remove 2) or remove one?
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 12:54
|
|
|
dragon enthusiast posted:When this only has one counter left on it and it tells you to remove two, do you remove none (because you can't remove 2) or remove one? You do as much as you can, so you'll end up with a maximum hand size of zero.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 13:16
|
|
|
Yeah I guess it's meant to be a 'teamwork' card in multiplayer? Still kinda bad.MrL_JaKiri posted:A combo deck could use this in theory. Pull out two copies of the same creature that makes your combo fire, what the opponent does makes no difference.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 13:32
|
|
|
Sower and Emrakul? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 14:06
|
|
|
It sort of works OK with mechrakaal
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 14:10
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:Weird card Nevermind I misread
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 14:15
|
|
|
That Dubious Challenge card seems very good when you have a homeward path on the battlefield.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 14:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 16:20 |
|
|
That card is just very bad, in the sense that it's not even exciting for a casual player. I may be wrong, but even a casual player would think wtf, why would my opponent get to choose first?
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2016 14:33
|
|
