|
Is Signal the Rats even legal in Modern now?
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 06:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 07:21 |
|
|
Rinkles posted:Got any more thoughts to add to that? If six mana 6/6 Plague Wind is a card that is playable, it is not worth playing that format, because it will devolve into whoever gets their six mana Plague Wind off first. Even people playing creatureless decks to try to get around it still have to face a 6/6, it's not like it's just a dead card.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 06:26
|
|
|
Hellsau posted:If six mana 6/6 Plague Wind is a card that is playable, it is not worth playing that format, because it will devolve into whoever gets their six mana Plague Wind off first. Even people playing creatureless decks to try to get around it still have to face a 6/6, it's not like it's just a dead card. It's a little more expensive than that, but I can't say I know how it'll play out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 06:32
|
|
|
suicidesteve posted:FWIW I really can't think of any other decks with the win conditon of making your opponent fall asleep. Old Miracles is the closest I can think of but that was like, plan D and was reliant on already having the best card in your deck in play and putting 3 copies of a garbage enchantment in your deck. Every other prison deck has a way to win the game in a reasonable amount of time before they draw out of it. Floch's Elixir/Rev which everyone here loves. Its just the perception of being locked out by lovely commons compared to being locked out by infinite counters
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 06:36
|
|
|
Firebatgyro posted:Floch's Elixir/Rev which everyone here loves. Its just the perception of being locked out by lovely commons compared to being locked out by infinite counters Ah, right, the 4th most miserable deck in history to lose to. Let's be honest though, you got locked out by EOT draw 5, gain 5 followed by destroy everything in play.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 06:41
|
|
|
It’s because it’s not fun to sit down and then not play. It’s not a hard concept. Playing a deck like that just takes a certain type of mentality. Lantern sees less play because people don’t have the stomach to be the Fun Police in every game you play.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 06:44
|
|
|
Top 4’d a pptq today.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 06:45
|
|
|
Firebatgyro posted:Floch's Elixir/Rev which everyone here loves. Its just the perception of being locked out by lovely commons compared to being locked out by infinite counters I always assumed the lack of wincon was because he took advantage of the fact people don’t play it out when it got to the state at which one player is totally locked out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 06:46
|
|
|
Yeah the issue with Lantern is really just the game play it generates is quite bad Recall that Second Sunrise was banned for much the same reason
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 06:53
|
|
|
sit on my Facebook posted:Yeah the issue with Lantern is really just the game play it generates is quite bad Second sunrise was banned because it generated 20 minute turns, its not remotely the same thing
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 06:56
|
|
|
Firebatgyro posted:Second sunrise was banned because it generated 20 minute turns, its not remotely the same thing It's preeeeetty close tho, the fundamental similarity being that when the card/strategy in question is involved, a 2-player game of Magic generally does not transpire
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 06:56
|
|
|
suicidesteve posted:FWIW I really can't think of any other decks with the win conditon of making your opponent fall asleep. Old Miracles is the closest I can think of but that was like, plan D and was reliant on already having the best card in your deck in play and putting 3 copies of a garbage enchantment in your deck. Every other prison deck has a way to win the game in a reasonable amount of time before they draw out of it. Jeskai Ascendancy. Seriously, I played against a dude in Modern playing that. He wouldn't talk to me, he just had headphones on the whole time as he comboed off for like 35 minutes in one turn, and I had to let him do it because of the chance of him loving up or fizzling. That's boring. That's a literal waste of my time. gently caress people who play decks like that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 06:59
|
|
|
1 Player games is the point of like 50% of eternal decks. 2ndSunrise was banned because it caused rounds to run over time
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:02
|
|
|
If you want to play a 1 player game, stay at home and goldfish your dumb deck. If you're not interacting with your opponent, you're not even playing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:03
|
|
|
Matsuri posted:If you want to play a 1 player game, stay at home and goldfish your dumb deck. If you're not interacting with your opponent, you're not even playing. Isn't Lantern the deck that interacts with 100% of opposing cards literally by design?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:08
|
|
|
ZeroCount posted:What about playing a deck that can win through an Ensnaring Bridge? I love playing against lantern, especially when I'm playing 8 rack. "Oh you don't want cards? Awesome!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:14
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:Isn't Lantern the deck that interacts with 100% of opposing cards literally by design? You're interacting with your opponent's cards, not your opponent. Because your opponent can't loving do anything but sigh and pass.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:14
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:Isn't Lantern the deck that interacts with 100% of opposing cards literally by design? Lantern is also a deck that completely shits on the notion of "fairness", because it's completely fair. It's 100% cards working as intended without fast mana or explosive starts, it's just not fun to try to fight through the cards' intended use.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:18
|
|
|
Matsuri posted:You're interacting with your opponent's cards, not your opponent. I'd love for you to define the difference between interacting with an opponent and his card in this a literal card game
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:19
|
|
|
*actually* burn is highly interactive because you cast spells and target your opponent *actually* valakut is highly interactive because you play lands and target your opponent *ACTUALLY* storm is highly interactive because you cast spells and target your opponent
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:23
|
|
|
Firebatgyro posted:I'd love for you to define the difference between interacting with an opponent and his card in this a literal card game I don't understand how it's hard to understand. Your opponent is the person across from you who wants to play a game with you. Their cards are the means in which they play with you. If they aren't able to even do anything with their cards, they're not getting to play, and you're not interacting with them, because you've made it impossible for them to interact with you beyond telling you that they pass their turn while contemplating how hard they want to punch you in the throat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:24
|
|
|
Matsuri posted:I don't understand how it's hard to understand. Your opponent is the person across from you who wants to play a game with you. Their cards are the means in which they play with you. If they aren't able to even do anything with their cards, they're not getting to play, and you're not interacting with them, because you've made it impossible for them to interact with you beyond telling you that they pass their turn while contemplating how hard they want to punch you in the throat. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:26
|
|
|
Matsuri posted:I don't understand how it's hard to understand. Your opponent is the person across from you who wants to play a game with you. Their cards are the means in which they play with you. If they aren't able to even do anything with their cards, they're not getting to play, and you're not interacting with them, because you've made it impossible for them to interact with you beyond telling you that they pass their turn while contemplating how hard they want to punch you in the throat. That's not true, you can usually play the lands that are on top of your deck. Also if you are playing white or green and lantern is pissing you off play wheel of sun and moon and Mulligan until you have it in hand.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:29
|
|
|
suicidesteve posted:*actually* burn is highly interactive because you cast spells and target your opponent you have one for stax?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:31
|
|
|
Errant Gin Monks posted:That's not true, you can usually play the lands that are on top of your deck. go get 'im mountain you can do it 
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:32
|
|
|
Again: by the time it gets to that point the game is already over for most practical purposes. It's your choice to keep stabbing yourself in the dick for that fraction-of-a-percent chance of drawing out of it instead of just conceding and crushing your opponent in the next game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:32
|
|
|
Matsuri posted:I don't understand how it's hard to understand. Your opponent is the person across from you who wants to play a game with you. Their cards are the means in which they play with you. If they aren't able to even do anything with their cards, they're not getting to play, and you're not interacting with them, because you've made it impossible for them to interact with you beyond telling you that they pass their turn while contemplating how hard they want to punch you in the throat. In your world of fair and just magic what are your thoughts on the card counterspell?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:37
|
|
|
Firebatgyro posted:In your world of fair and just magic what are your thoughts on the card counterspell? A player casts the card, and it gets countered. Simple and fair interaction because both players actually got to do something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:39
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:you have one for stax? I have one for Workshops, anyway *actually* Shops is highly interactive because it keeps the really degenerate, uninteractive decks like Storm down so people can play fair decks like BUG Fish and lose to assorted miracle gro style decks Also the mirrors at least used to be legitimately good matches with really interesting and intricate gameplay. Then they slowly nerfed every non-Ravager build and printed Ballista and now all that matters is making a big Ravager or Ballista. Or even better *ACTUALY* Dredge is highly interactive because it forces your opponents to interact with you
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:42
|
|
|
Matsuri posted:A player casts the card, and it gets countered. Simple and fair interaction because both players actually got to do something. That's why miracles was so good. My opponent would cast a spell. I would durdle with my top Their spell would be countered. I would durdle with my top again Then I would draw and pass the turn Rinse repeat. Magic baby. God i miss miracles.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:44
|
|
|
Errant Gin Monks posted:That's why miracles was so good. Having played exactly one game with it, same. They banned the wrong card.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:48
|
|
|
Niton posted:Lantern is also a deck that completely shits on the notion of "fairness", because it's completely fair. It's 100% cards working as intended without fast mana or explosive starts, it's just not fun to try to fight through the cards' intended use. I don't really mind Lantern but this argument makes no sense. The purpose of Codex Shredder wasn't to combo with Lantern of Insight to lock the opponent out of their draw step, it was to be...actually, I don't know, but I am sure it wasn't that. Also the deck runs Mox Opal and would be bad if the card was banned so it does have fast mana.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:49
|
|
|
suicidesteve posted:*actually* burn is highly interactive because you cast spells and target your opponent I'm sorry that you hate fun, have you considered playing a game you actually enjoy?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:50
|
|
|
Having not looked at vintage in ages, weird to see an oath deck that plays inferno titan up there
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:51
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:Having not looked at vintage in ages, weird to see an oath deck that plays inferno titan up there It's a Brian Kelly pile; it's ridiculous. But the man has a plan and that plan is "don't lose to Shops." He builds his decks to beat Shops without sacrificing too much percentage against other decks, which is a skill a lot of other players neglect.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 07:59
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 08:01
|
|
|
Niton posted:Lantern is also a deck that completely shits on the notion of "fairness", because it's completely fair. It's 100% cards working as intended without fast mana or explosive starts, it's just not fun to try to fight through the cards' intended use. The deck would be vastly less powerful if Mox Opal were banned. That's one of the payoffs for the deck, it gets to play Gleemox. That little bit of fast mana is what allows them to land Bridge and empty their hand fast enough, while also casting Whir of Invention and Abrupt Decay.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 08:03
|
|
|
Elyv posted:I don't really mind Lantern but this argument makes no sense. The purpose of Codex Shredder wasn't to combo with Lantern of Insight to lock the opponent out of their draw step, it was to be...actually, I don't know, but I am sure it wasn't that. Lantern and Codex Shredder are both doing exactly what you'd expect them to do, though - Lantern is being used to reveal (and shuffle if you don't like what you see), and Codex Shredder is being used to mill advantageously. They're just a whole lot less fun when combined. I'll concede the point about Mox Opal, though - i was thinking more about things like Desperate Ritual or SSG, but Mox Opal is definitely "fast mana" by any reasonable definition.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 08:27
|
|
|
If you ask ten Magic players, you'll get fourteen different incompatible definitions of what "interactive" means.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 08:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 07:21 |
|
|
suicidesteve posted:FWIW I really can't think of any other decks with the win conditon of making your opponent fall asleep. Old Miracles is the closest I can think of but that was like, plan D and was reliant on already having the best card in your deck in play and putting 3 copies of a garbage enchantment in your deck. Every other prison deck has a way to win the game in a reasonable amount of time before they draw out of it. What's the difference between slow rolling and slow playing?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 10:34
|
|
