Rinkles posted:

"I was told to make a wall of forest detritus and man-made odds and ends. Later somebody went around my AD and got some poor dude in Production to mutilate it in Photoshop. Thus the illustration you see here and the card don't quite match.

This, too, sometimes happens, dear ones. Just take the money and move on. "

http://www.deviantart.com/art/Wall-of-Mulch-70658352

Count Bleck posted:

You say that, and then watch, we're getting Zendikar fetches.

I want to believe.

Elyv posted:

I feel like it's more conditional than bad; if there are enough cheap, efficient dragons to make this guy consistently a 3/4 for 2 then I think it's fine. Will there be? Still too early to tell.

Angry Grimace posted:

Doug Beyer also confirms that Narset is written to be somewhere on the autism spectrum in her Uncharted Realms story.

Cernunnos posted:

A non-legendary 5/5 for 4 seems OK to me. I mean it's not blowing anything out of the water but it's still decent.

legoman727 posted:

Herald of Dromokoa has Herald of Anafenza's curved horn. I love the little references in this set.

Madmarker posted:

And if they have no creatures in play, the spell is countered, assuming you are casting this off the rebound

Rinkles posted:

Lancelot posted:

I guess the token is misprinted, it should be X/X, right? Cool card though.

Entropic posted:

The next five blocks are about Sarkhan getting his hand stuck in a toaster and constantly going back to change the timeline over and over, resulting in weirder and weirder alternate timelines. Bear-men of Tarkir. Cats of Tarkir. Fish of Tarkir. Treefolk of Tarkir. Khans of Tarkir except it rains Donuts sometimes.

Devor posted:

So you got to live the LSV dream

Rimusutera posted:

Against control decks? (I'd lean to agreeing with you) or in general?

cheetah7071 posted:

Here's the entire archive:

http://mtgcolorpie.com/lotus-cobra-is-evil/

qbert posted:

Any instant speed Artifact hate right? Sacrificing the Sword is part of the Thopter activation cost, so destroying the Foundry in response to a single activation stops the combo, right?

So basically everything you would side in against Affinity is good?

Errant Gin Monks posted:

Monastery mentor dropped like a rock.

GoutPatrol posted:

Does anyone else listen to Mark Rosewater's podcast? In one this week's podcasts, he has a pretty interesting story.

The pwnage mechanic of Ken Nagle's that everyone makes fun of here was originally Richard Garfield's. An idea similar to it was also going to be used in Avacyn Restored as a mechanic called "Forbidden" until Tabak nixed it

Serperoth posted:

No, Ken definitely wanted to put Pwnage in a set.
Unless you mean Richard, but I don't know about that.

scaevola posted:

That's a crazy rule-misunderstanding by Adrian Sullivan...

EDIT: Oh wait, his thinking wasn't as far-fetched as I thought, since he did end up with the Sidisi at the end..

Kyrosiris posted:

Am I the only one that thinks "the sleeves touched when I set it down to put the other three back" means "that was added to your hand" is insanely petty/rules-laywery?

Also holy poo poo the commentary team sounds really against Chapin.

Ramos posted:

Oh man, Jeskai Ascendancy Combo continues to be the coolest deck ever this standard. He dug through what? A third of his deck for that Helix?

MiddleEastBeast posted:

Anyone know when the Chapin match happened? I'm on the youtube page of archived footage from today and none of the feature match titles have Chapins name. Was his match a late look-in from another match that finished early, or does it look like they're not posting his round because reasons.

MiddleEastBeast posted:

It's understandable that he'd be frustrated because of the lack of picking up the cards or shuffling them together. I was a bit surprised that he seemed to be feigning ignorance of the hard-and-fast rule that "it's only gay if the cards touch". That's just about the only tournament rule I know by heart, once the sleeves touch it's in your hand and treated like a drawn card.

qbert posted:

Actually, I will copy/paste the relevant portion of his argument, because it's kind of funny that he's basically continuing right where he left off from the judge appeal on camera onto the internet, and also maybe the judges in this thread can comment on the validity of his arguments.

Wezlar posted:

It is a premium article on a website largely for hardcore magic players. Their target audience is players willing to drop money to read more articles when there are already of hundreds of free magic articles on the Web.
The PT coverage is on Twitch and while obviously the hardcore players and fans watch it, the coverage itself is largely a promotional vehicle for the game aimed at new or casual players.
The type of content that is appropriate for these two groups is completely different, especially when you're trying to attract more players to the games or to play tournament Magic.