|
If nothing else, he'd have warehouses full of kindling to sell which would keep him afloat for at least a year or so while he finds another market to hyperinflate.
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 01:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 14:18 |
|
|
Hour of Devestation limited is way more poo poo than I remember it
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 01:16
|
|
|
AnEdgelord posted:Hour of Devestation limited is way more poo poo than I remember it I'm having fun jamming it. Just Supreme Willed a Scorpion God, and the next turn let a Scarab God resolve and Final Reward'ed it. Bet dude was salty.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 01:18
|
|
|
Owlbear Camus posted:I'm having fun jamming it. Just Supreme Willed a Scorpion God, and the next turn let a Scarab God resolve and Final Reward'ed it. Bet dude was salty. The jerk had two HOD gods. He deserved it.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 01:19
|
|
|
I had Locust God and resolved it 0 times
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 01:20
|
|
|
Owlbear Camus posted:I'm having fun jamming it. Just Supreme Willed a Scorpion God, and the next turn let a Scarab God resolve and Final Reward'ed it. Bet dude was salty. I think i'm just spoiled by dominaria, I'm finding the format too fast and a lot of the mechanics too dry.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 01:20
|
|
|
First time I drafted I went 7-2 with a lovely U/W deck with 4 black removal spells, with a few fliers that carried me. 2nd draft I went with a much better G/B deck with some -1/-1 synergy and 2 Apocalypse Demon. I went 3-3. Third one I tried drafting fliers and making an actual good deck and went 0-3. Welp that was fun for the weekend. Dumped the rest of my gems and gold into DOM packs.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 01:30
|
|
|
Is Twilight Prophet good in any particular deck? I just noticed it because it's art is *fantastic*. Seems like a bad Bob but it's still a flying card advantage drainer?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 01:32
|
|
|
Matsuri posted:Is Twilight Prophet good in any particular deck? I just noticed it because it's art is *fantastic*. In think pretty much has to be a BW deck leaning heavily on Ascend. Vampire tribal can work but Sanctum Seeker is probably better as a finisher, or Elenda against other go wide decks. Pride of Conquerers is one of the best rewards for Ascend, and you get Skymarcher Aspirant and the Knight of Grace/Malice. BG might work with saproling generators?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 01:48
|
|
|
Hellsau posted:MTG Spellbook: Reserved List? Just the whole reserved list in a nice package for $99.99, printed to demand. The retailers would still buy up all the sets break them down to sell individual cards. Or mark the sets up so high to be outside the realm of Average Joe's reach.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 01:53
|
|
|
Is it just me or does mana screw happen significantly more frequently on arena than it should? Its probably in my head but I feel like i'm losing 50% of my games to mana screw rather than anything else. I'm running 24 lands right now so I don't feel like my land count is off, especially since I'm specifically having trouble drawing a third land.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 01:54
|
|
|
Matsuri posted:Is Twilight Prophet good in any particular deck? I just noticed it because it's art is *fantastic*. i've enjoyed it in edh
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 02:14
|
|
|
AnEdgelord posted:Is it just me or does mana screw happen significantly more frequently on arena than it should? Its probably in my head but I feel like i'm losing 50% of my games to mana screw rather than anything else. I'm running 24 lands right now so I don't feel like my land count is off, especially since I'm specifically having trouble drawing a third land. The correct number is 26 or 22. Anything else is wrong because the hands are all rigged in Arena to make newbies feel like they’re good at deck construction so you always draw 2 hands and get the one with the best mix of land and spells.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 02:19
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:The correct number is 26 or 22. Anything else is wrong because the hands are all rigged in Arena to make newbies feel like they’re good at deck construction so you always draw 2 hands and get the one with the best mix of land and spells. I mean, they're rigged because a single game format would be aggressively unfun without it.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 02:23
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:The correct number is 26 or 22. Anything else is wrong because the hands are all rigged in Arena to make newbies feel like they’re good at deck construction so you always draw 2 hands and get the one with the best mix of land and spells. Not what i'm talking about but ok
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 02:46
|
|
|
Just had MTGA crash on my during the match found screen, then after I reopened it loaded me back directly into the match against the player I was up against. Weird as hell but okay cool
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 02:52
|
|
|
AnEdgelord posted:Is it just me or does mana screw happen significantly more frequently on arena than it should? Its probably in my head but I feel like i'm losing 50% of my games to mana screw rather than anything else. I'm running 24 lands right now so I don't feel like my land count is off, especially since I'm specifically having trouble drawing a third land. It's just you.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 02:58
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:The correct number is 26 or 22. Anything else is wrong because the hands are all rigged in Arena to make newbies feel like they’re good at deck construction so you always draw 2 hands and get the one with the best mix of land and spells. That's not exactly true. That assumes that you want to draw some number of lands on turn 1 and then as few as possible on subsequent turns. You could equally say that 21 or 25 are correct, as they maximize drawing as many lands as possible as the game goes on while having some number of lands in your starting hand. Or maybe, you don't actually want either extreme and instead want something in between.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 03:02
|
|
|
Decided to just say gently caress it and rare drafted ended up with 12 rares in my last draft, still cobbled something together and went 3-3 not even mad
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 03:06
|
|
|
Soul Glo posted:i've enjoyed it in edh It's really good in EDH, I run it in my Queen Marchesa deck and after everyone has exhausted all their spot removal to kill things that aren't mine because I'm almost always second scariest (which is a powerful position in EDH), I drop it down and it gets me like anywhere from 3 to 9 extra life and a bunch of cards.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 03:11
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Cactrot/status/992950269519392769
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 03:13
|
|
|
mossyfisk posted:I mean, they're rigged because a single game format would be aggressively unfun without it. Single game formats or normal Magic are already aggressively unfun.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 03:26
|
|
|
- My opponent casts hostage taker, stealing one of my creatures, immediately casts it, then passes the turn - I take my turn, cast my own hostage taker, target the creature they control that I own and take it hostage but can’t cast it, I pass the turn - My opponent takes their turn, kills my hostage taker. What happens to the permanent I own that was under my hostage taker that my opponent last controlled? My opponent immediately called a judge and the judge at the store (not an actual judge) said it goes back to my opponent since he was the last controller. I appealed and he consulted his phone for a minute or two and then clicked it off saying “just looked it up, ruling stands” offered no justification and walked away. My internet searching resulted in a few people asking the same question and the answer references 610.3b - returning to the owners control.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 03:49
|
|
|
Dehtraen posted:- My opponent casts hostage taker, stealing one of my creatures, immediately casts it, then passes the turn well, you own the card, right so i'd say it was yours
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 03:56
|
|
|
Soul Glo posted:well, you own the card, right Hostage taker is a bad card, ownership is never exclusively referenced. Edit: I'm not disputing you, just saying it is extremely carelessly worded.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 03:59
|
|
|
Gotta admit, getting a little annoyed at people quitting out on XMage after I resolve a Second Sun in my U/W cycling deck, especially if they're quitting out game one. Edit: Between Hostage Taker and the Squee-Ixalan's Binding interaction, I feel like Wizards is getting really sloppy with how they're using the Exile zone. Tibalt fucked around with this message at 04:07 on May 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 04:02
|
|
|
Dehtraen posted:- My opponent casts hostage taker, stealing one of my creatures, immediately casts it, then passes the turn When an object moves zones, it "forgets" basically everything that happened previously (unless the effect says otherwise). The card has no knowledge at all of whoever controlled it before it was exiled, and (as you found) will return under the owner's control since the effect doesn't specify otherwise. My guess is that the judge is an insecure manchild who can't bear to admit when their initial snap judgment was wrong. That would explain the lack of an attempt to justify it after actually looking it up.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 04:05
|
|
|
I don’t think it’s all that confusing. The opponent shouldn’t get a new game object they don’t own under their control unless an effect puts it under their control.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 04:25
|
|
|
I think that people have an intuition that "on the battlefield under my control" and "on the battlefield under their control" are different places, so you put it back where you got it from.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 04:34
|
|
|
Tibalt posted:Gotta admit, getting a little annoyed at people quitting out on XMage after I resolve a Second Sun in my U/W cycling deck, especially if they're quitting out game one. I mean they certainly were sloppy when wording Hostage Taker, given that they printed it as 2UB: Draw the Game if there are no other creatures in play.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 04:41
|
|
|
I just noticed that Reid Duke puts up his CFB draft content as single elimination leagues. That’s a boss level move given you no longer have to do that now they have leagues and you are assuredly looking for some decent length content. (Of course he 3-0’d)
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 05:17
|
|
|
Wrong thread.... Um... JAYA OWNS. Toshimo fucked around with this message at 05:39 on May 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 05:22
|
|
|
At some point someone on camera is going to have the situation occur where they manage to lose a game because they activate Teferi's +1 ability without performing any other actions during their turn only to realize that Teferi's EOT untap ability is mandatory and requires you to untap your opponent's lands if they have tapped lands and you don't.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 05:38
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:At some point someone on camera is going to have the situation occur where they manage to lose a game because they activate Teferi's +1 ability without performing any other actions during their turn only to realize that Teferi's EOT untap ability is mandatory and requires you to untap your opponent's lands if they have tapped lands and you don't. Can't that literally be solved just by tapping your own lands, floating some mana, and then untapping them? You could even plausibly argue that skipping the part where you wiggle your lands is just short cutting in the same way people cast spells while they look for the land they're fetching to do it.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 05:43
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:At some point someone on camera is going to have the situation occur where they manage to lose a game because they activate Teferi's +1 ability without performing any other actions during their turn only to realize that Teferi's EOT untap ability is mandatory and requires you to untap your opponent's lands if they have tapped lands and you don't. Isn't this a MTGO only issue? Pretty sure in paper you can just do it to two of your lands, whereas MTGO is mistakenly forcing you to choose tapped lands only?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 05:48
|
|
|
mehall posted:Isn't this a MTGO only issue? Pretty sure in paper you can just do it to two of your lands, whereas MTGO is mistakenly forcing you to choose tapped lands only? No, that is the rules. It orders you to untap two lands. You can just tap your own lands in response but if you go to resolve it at Comp REL and don’t have any lands to untap you untap your opponents because those are the only legal targets and it’s not a “may” ability. AnEdgelord posted:Can't that literally be solved just by tapping your own lands, floating some mana, and then untapping them? You could even plausibly argue that skipping the part where you wiggle your lands is just short cutting in the same way people cast spells while they look for the land they're fetching to do it. No. At regular REL no one is going to care, but at higher levels of comp you have to know in advance to tap your own lands if you aren't going to use any mana on your own turn. Angry Grimace fucked around with this message at 06:14 on May 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 06:08
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:No, that is the rules. It orders you to untap two lands. You can just tap your own lands in response but if you go to resolve it at Comp REL and don’t have any lands to untap you untap your opponents because those are the only legal targets and it’s not a “may” ability. Tapping lands doesnt use the stack, you dont have to do poo poo in advance because you can generate legal targets at will. Edit: here is how this works irl A: plus teferi and end B: teferi's untap thing isnt a may you have to untap something A: oh sure, ill just tap two lands, float the mana and untap them AnEdgelord fucked around with this message at 06:20 on May 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 06:16
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:At some point someone on camera is going to have the situation occur where they manage to lose a game because they activate Teferi's +1 ability without performing any other actions during their turn only to realize that Teferi's EOT untap ability is mandatory and requires you to untap your opponent's lands if they have tapped lands and you don't. Dude what are you going on about? It doesn't say untap two tapped lands.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 06:29
|
|
|
AnEdgelord posted:Tapping lands doesnt use the stack, you dont have to do poo poo in advance because you can generate legal targets at will. All of this is 100% wrong and you probably shouldn't be needlessly smug about it, considering that.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 06:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 14:18 |
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:Dude what are you going on about? It doesn't say untap two tapped lands. "Untapping" is an action that can only be done to a tapped permanent. The ability instructs you to untap two lands so you have to choose tapped lands to perform it on if possible. The reason "untap target permanent" doesn't require you to choose a tapped permanent is because it doesn't say "target tapped permanent" so there's no targetting restrictions, and the ability does as much as it can, which is nothing if the permanent is untapped already. Cf. drop of honey requiring you to choose a non-indestructible creature if able
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2018 06:37
|
|
