LeafHouse posted:

Yep, you’ve got it right. It’s worth noting that In scenario #1 your mongrel will be considered blocked even though you’ve destroyed the creature so it will not deal combat damage (unless you gave it trample somehow).

For #2 your first instinct is correct, instants and sorceries are placed into the graveyard as the last step of resolution. If you were to cast terminal agony and in response your opponent cast their own terminal agony on your mongrel you could respond by discarding and casting revolutionist but revolutionist would come into play before Terminal Agony resolves so it couldn’t return it to your hand.

HootTheOwl posted:

You're mostly correct with what you're trying to do a few notes though:
Declaring attacks is a step, not a phase. Combat is the phase.
Madness will override all timing restrictions on a card but it isn't an instant. So while, yeah, you can discard the revolutionist to the dog to cast the revolutionist at instant speed, it doesn't become an instant. This matters in that it would still be countered by spells like Remove Soul which counter creatures and not spells like Dispel which counter instants.
Whenever an instant or sorcery resolves it goes straight to the graveyard. Your revolutionist will have no problem finding it if it resolved.
Finally even if a blocking creature dies before combat damage they will have still blocked the attacking creature and that's still enough to stop then from dealing damage to the defending player. You'll want to kill potential blockers before they are declared as such.

Fuzzy Mammal posted:

in my day we just drafted the actual block

One thing I learned is flesh and blood intends to keep all sealed product permanently in print. imagine if you could get any amount of sealed boxes of any mainline set at msrp? I'd be drafting eventide every month!

Captain Invictus posted:

lol

mikeraskol posted:

Fight them about what though . . .

You actually have to have a cognizable legal claim despite what backseat lawyers everywhere think. That thing would get dismissed in 5 seconds and wouldn't matter in the slightest, nor would it cost millions for WOTC to defend.

The Japanese tutor is like $350 right? I was looking at it the other day and almost pulled the trigger that card is so insanely sweet.

Strong Sauce posted:

Amazon sometimes reprices their products to whatever price is the lowest out of their resellers. So it could just be one of their resellers needs to liquidate inventory and dropped the price. It was actually like ~$1 cheaper a week ago and I actually want one but I'm waiting for the price to go back down to when I first saw it.

Eldraine boxes were being sold at $108 for a bit because one of the 3rd party sellers had it at that price. they sold out and the price on amazon went back up to $125.. its back now to $108 again because that 3rd party found more boxes to liquidate I guess.

The last two sets MH2, and AiTFR.. all had pretty high initial release prices before they dropped down.. I think AITFR set boxes have been slowly dropping in price. Makes me kinda hesitant about buying any of the new Innistrad products since they all seem to drop in price right after the release.

triple sulk posted:

He's grifted way more than a bit on Patreon. To my knowledge he sold about 3000 bundles for Flesh and Blood's Monarch set (which had two 1st edition boxes) for $1000 each. The boxes now barely move for $250 a piece after being as much as $500-650 on CFB pre-launch which was right around the time he offered them.

Lone Goat posted:

This sorta happened with Future Sight (scroll down to the part that starts with Future Sight was an Especially Good Set for Singles). Ben explains why people didn't just crack boxes for infinite money, the main reason being that it's not feasible for a non-store individual to convert singles to cash, especially in 2008 compared to now.

But the point in stating what is obvious to most, when a new/returning player is asking what is the best way to get cards to make a deck, the answer is not "spend half a month's rent on random poo poo you likely won't be able to use".

Looking at mtggoldfish, for about $600 (is this what a case costs in USD?) you can get both a copy of Yorion Ultimatum and Naya Winota, which is more useful to a player* than the detritus you'd get from cracking 216 boosters.

Like if you're a huge fuckin degenerate gambler or spend your entire life hustling crypto/NFTs/team fortress 2 hats then yeah blow your money on whatever frivolities you like but I'm never going to advise a stranger to do that poo poo.

* yes both those decks rotate out in a month but the point is for that kinda cash you can generally get 1-3 functional standard decks, or even Pioneer if that's your thing. Also this goes out the window if you're getting actual pleasure out of the packs like playing limited or swimming in a vault full of booster wrappers like Scrooge McDuck.

quote:

Tomorrow is our big announcement day. What are all of you hoping we’ll announce?

Lone Goat posted:

They're just standard sets, they don't need to have any cohesion between them. Last year was D&D, Vikings, Wizard School and Zendikar. The year before was Godzilla, Hades, Camelot/Fairy Tales and [core set] lol.

Brother's War is a flashback episode, it's not current.

Lone Goat posted:

Is it because they're actually cool?

Lone Goat posted:

Sorry to be clear, I was just implying that all the other settings were NOT cool, so having a cool setting was a divergence from the normal slop that MTG wallows in.

flatluigi posted:

scryfall does in fact support boolean searches

Allstone posted:

Scryfall does just about anything you could want it to do - what are you trying to search for?

flatluigi posted:

both "f:standard and (o:mill or (o:exile and o:library))" and "f:future and (o:mill or (o:exile and o:library))" seem to be working correctly for me

Leperflesh posted:

There are poker situations, depending on your stack etc., in which this is legitimately a great play. I've seen this done by pros in tournaments more than once, although you're probably referring to Gus Hanson.

By not looking at your cards, you are telling the table that they're going to either have to have good cards, or fold to you - you cannot be bluffing, you cannot be honestly representing a good draw, they must play their own deal purely. You would typically only do this if you were short-stacked and being killed by the blinds & antes - in that situation (in tournaments typically, because you can re-buy in regular cash games) you are forced to shove all-in with marginal hands to try to double-up, and the rest of the table, if they know anything about poker, know it. By taking away the factor of them questioning whether you are playing on their knowledge and shoving with awful cards, they have to instead assume you have an "average" hand instead and play accordingly.

But given that is the typical (albeit rare) case, you could in a game with pros, sorta reference it by doing it even when you're not short-stacked, or even at a cash game, etc. Playing several hands blind is removing a certain factor from the game, which you could choose to do strategically. Perhaps another player is bullying the table (with their bets, of course), or someone else is shoving too frequently, or something like that. It's an option for a defensive move. It would be bad to do this too much, because it's super exploitable, but doing it for a few hands in a row as a conscious choice kind of owns.

Gus Hanson has a really terrific youtube series/channel (https://www.youtube.com/c/CrushlivePoker), he's got a weekly call-in audio show that includes fans calling in with (pre-screened) hands to analyze. He'll pick good examples and show them on youtube with the cards and amounts displayed and use each one as a case study.

Paul Zuvella posted:

Who the gently caress augments their play patterns based on the opponents emote usage? What on earth.

If you don’t play around settle the wreckage it’s tour own drat fault, it doesn’t matter if the opponent GGs you or not

A big flaming stink posted:

Are string bets in poker angle shooting or are they straight up illegal?

mandatory lesbian posted:

Maybe next time you should attack correctly instead of throwing the game away with an incorrect attack

thetoughestbean posted:

Is attacking with a monster that would die to a block, saying “oops”, then buffing it with an instant when it gets blocked an angle shoot or is it just bluffing?

Drewjitsu posted:

No its not. Is all table talk to get a read on your opponent in poker an angle shoot?

quote:

an angleshoot is an action where it isn't necessarily illegal, but looked down upon as seeking an advantage that's not within the rules/boundaries of the game, or is done to specifically take advantage of the game's norms

mandatory lesbian posted:

Youre calling it scummy, im disagreeing by saying the onus is on the attacker to properly attack

Danger Diabolik posted:

quote:

Consuming Blob 3GG

Creature — Ooze (Mythic)

Consuming Blob's power is equal to the number of card types among cards in your graveyard and its toughness is equal to that number plus 1.

At the beginning of your end step, create a green Ooze creature token with “This creature's power is equal to the number of card types among cards in your graveyard and its toughness is equal to that number plus 1”.

*/*+1

AlternateNu posted:

MeinPanzer posted:

Rules question: If my opponent goes to cast a noncreature spell and I sack Ranger-Captain of Eos in response, why does the noncreature spell still get cast? The ability comes into effect on the stack before the spell itself is cast, right? So shouldn't it fail?

I thought his ability worked like Veil of Summer, i.e. your opponent casts a counter spell aand you cast VoS in response, preventing the counter spell from being able to counter the initial spell you cast?