|
On February 19 2013 02:34 Louuster wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2013 02:22 cLAN.Anax wrote:Question:I think someone disproved my Bazaar Trader-Avarice Totem trick. Here's the way I thought of it before: Tap the Trader and target the Totem to yourself. Then, in response to this, swap the Totem with a permanent of your choice, preferably one of your opponent's of course. That swap resolves first, and you nab their permanent. Then this resolves after that, and your Totem magically returns to your control. But someone responded on Gatherer saying this: This ability would be countered due to having an illegal target as it says "target you control", thus you'd pay five mana, steal their thing, and this guy wouldn't do anything. Have I been living a lie? :-C Well it says "you control" right there on the card lol, when the ability goes to resolve it checks that the target is still legal which it isnt because you dont control it. Since you seem into totem tricks, I assume you already know that you can stack two totem activations to achieve a similar goal
It's a complicated, rule-bending maneuver. It's tough for me to take into account every tiny detail, gimme a break. T_T
I'm aware of that trick, but it's not nearly as efficient and effective as what I was doing with the Trader. 10 mana + trade vs. 5, tap, and steal? I know which one I preferred. Guess I'm left with Venser for this, and it's not at instant speed. :-\
|
On February 19 2013 03:48 cLAN.Anax wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2013 02:34 Louuster wrote:On February 19 2013 02:22 cLAN.Anax wrote:Question:I think someone disproved my Bazaar Trader-Avarice Totem trick. Here's the way I thought of it before: Tap the Trader and target the Totem to yourself. Then, in response to this, swap the Totem with a permanent of your choice, preferably one of your opponent's of course. That swap resolves first, and you nab their permanent. Then this resolves after that, and your Totem magically returns to your control. But someone responded on Gatherer saying this: This ability would be countered due to having an illegal target as it says "target you control", thus you'd pay five mana, steal their thing, and this guy wouldn't do anything. Have I been living a lie? :-C Well it says "you control" right there on the card lol, when the ability goes to resolve it checks that the target is still legal which it isnt because you dont control it. Since you seem into totem tricks, I assume you already know that you can stack two totem activations to achieve a similar goal It's a complicated, rule-bending maneuver. It's tough for me to take into account every tiny detail, gimme a break. T_T I'm aware of that trick, but it's not nearly as efficient and effective as what I was doing with the Trader. 10 mana + trade vs. 5, tap, and steal? I know which one I preferred. Guess I'm left with Venser for this, and it's not at instant speed. :-\
From what I understand, this is literally the entire purpose of the stack resolution, though. Otherwise, a lot of certain things wouldn't work, like you couldn't tap a swamp to regenerate Lotleth Troll when someone throws a burn at him. Because the burn would resolve on a Lotleth Troll who didn't have regeneration yet.
Responding allows you to alter board state reactively, and those changes have to take effect to be a reaction.
|
On February 19 2013 03:51 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2013 03:48 cLAN.Anax wrote:On February 19 2013 02:34 Louuster wrote:On February 19 2013 02:22 cLAN.Anax wrote:Question:I think someone disproved my Bazaar Trader-Avarice Totem trick. Here's the way I thought of it before: Tap the Trader and target the Totem to yourself. Then, in response to this, swap the Totem with a permanent of your choice, preferably one of your opponent's of course. That swap resolves first, and you nab their permanent. Then this resolves after that, and your Totem magically returns to your control. But someone responded on Gatherer saying this: This ability would be countered due to having an illegal target as it says "target you control", thus you'd pay five mana, steal their thing, and this guy wouldn't do anything. Have I been living a lie? :-C Well it says "you control" right there on the card lol, when the ability goes to resolve it checks that the target is still legal which it isnt because you dont control it. Since you seem into totem tricks, I assume you already know that you can stack two totem activations to achieve a similar goal It's a complicated, rule-bending maneuver. It's tough for me to take into account every tiny detail, gimme a break. T_T I'm aware of that trick, but it's not nearly as efficient and effective as what I was doing with the Trader. 10 mana + trade vs. 5, tap, and steal? I know which one I preferred. Guess I'm left with Venser for this, and it's not at instant speed. :-\ From what I understand, this is literally the entire purpose of the stack resolution, though. Otherwise, a lot of certain things wouldn't work, like you couldn't tap a swamp to regenerate Lotleth Troll when someone throws a burn at him. Because the burn would resolve on a Lotleth Troll who didn't have regeneration yet. Responding allows you to alter board state reactively, and those changes have to take effect to be a reaction.
It's not the stack that I had trouble understanding, it was the "that you control" part that I misplaced. I know how the stack works; I just didn't put together the fact that I wouldn't be in control of the Totem anymore, thus rendering his returning my Totem useless.
|
http://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=4363&d=225457 Seems like a fun and reasonably good deck to play, with most cards not killing your wallet aside from Domri, Stomping and some of the sideboard.
I was thinking of making a friend that has mediocre budget build one of these or similar to get an efficient deck for FNM, I think he has few of the more expensive cards and could playtest it using gruul gates as proxies for stomping grounds etc. to see if he likes it enough to trade/buy the rest of stuff (though I doubt Thundermaws will ever enter the final plan and Garruk is borderline when it comes to budget, unless he mainboards him).
|
Straight outta Johto18973 Posts
On February 19 2013 00:02 Judicator wrote:Show nested quote +On February 18 2013 15:04 lightrise wrote:On February 17 2013 07:34 MoonBear wrote:On February 17 2013 07:16 iGrok wrote:On February 17 2013 06:26 MoonBear wrote:On February 17 2013 06:21 Judicator wrote: Wafo Tapo has to be playing the most expensive Esper deck. Ever. I swear he can't actually own all those cards. He's got to have borrowed some of them from friends or a dealer. Otherwise that deck would cost more than some Legacy decks do @.@ Where can I find his decklist? It's an Esper Control deck. The actual card choice aren't anything special. It's just that... the entire deck is foil. How do you not think its his deck? When i was playing a lot back a few years ago, I had all beta land with my all foil deck. Its easily possible to have an all foil deck. Wafo was banned and only recently came back. I mean I would totally hoard all Esper foils for a deck that may or may not exist 2 years ahead of time. Just to add to what Judi said - Wafo-Tapa also typically plays completely foiled decks at the events he participates in.
|
Just learned yesterday that 2 soulbond creatures cant give each other their buffs. Funny that nobody called me on it friday when i literally had 3 separate instances of silverblade + nearheath with both effects on.
|
On February 19 2013 05:56 Audemed wrote: Just learned yesterday that 2 soulbond creatures cant give each other their buffs. Funny that nobody called me on it friday when i literally had 3 separate instances of silverblade + nearheath with both effects on.
If you soulbond 2 creatures with soulbond, they both get both soulbond effects, but you can't soulbond a creature that is ALREADY bonded with another soulbond creature.
Example:
Silverblade Paladin in play, I play Wolfir Silverheart, I now have a 6/6 double strike and a 8/8 double strike. If I play another Silverheart (or any soulbond creature) I cannot soulbond it with either of those creatures.
The key is that Soulbond says that it applies when the creature is bonded, when you soulbond with another soulbond creature, both are bonded.
|
That's what I thought also, but the way it actually works (apparently) is that it's just an ETB trigger, and any creature can only have one souldbond effect per. So you have a silverblade out and put down wolfir silverheart. Both effects trigger, and you choose what order they go on the stack. If you choose to bond on the first effect (say, double strike), then when the second trigger resolves it checks and sees that the eligible target for the soulbond is already bonded to something, and it does nothing. Learned this the hard way on MTGO :/
|
On February 19 2013 06:07 Audemed wrote: That's what I thought also, but the way it actually works (apparently) is that it's just an ETB trigger, and any creature can only have one souldbond effect per. So you have a silverblade out and put down wolfir silverheart. Both effects trigger, and you choose what order they go on the stack. If you choose to bond on the first effect (say, double strike), then when the second trigger resolves it checks and sees that the eligible target for the soulbond is already bonded to something, and it does nothing. Learned this the hard way on MTGO :/ This is wrong, sounds like an mtgo bug
|
There's no issue there from what you're saying - sure, the second bond trigger fizzles, but the first one already resolved, so the creatures should be paired.
|
Soulbond says "as long as they are paired" it doesn't say "as long as this creature initiates the pair".
|
From reading the text, it's wrong for the right reasons. You can only trigger one pairing, but, the text is...
As long as Wolfir Silverheart is paired with another creature, each of those creatures gets +4/+4.
That's the one that actually matters. The creature is paired with another. Even though you can only bind them based off of one of the triggers, the effect that binds them, and the effect when bound, are two different things.
At least, the way I understand it, they'd both get both pairing bonuses. Because either Soulbond trigger pairs each with each, triggering each soulbond effect.
|
Hmm, interesting...so at least with the text, it should indeed work that both creatures are receiving each others' bonuses.
Ok, just found this on the MTG rulings on soulbond:
"If a creature with soulbond is paired with another creature with soulbond, each of them will receive both bonuses."
Well, guess I was right in the first place, and should report the bug to Wizards.
|
On February 19 2013 00:43 Judicator wrote: Most manabases are expensive to put together. My friend borrowed my deck for SCG Cincy because I had the mana base assembled as the primary reason. He ended up top 4-ing, so congrats to him and I'll demand a cut, :D
Some thoughts after the tournament and chats with my buddy...Tamiyo is bad in most match-ups (like actually worse than Resto Angel or another 5 drop) except in 2 match ups, I figured as much since I was boarding Tamiyo out like 90% of the time. I was boarding out Jace but realized that Tamiyo was just worse. Tamiyo does make the 2 match ups infinitely easier. What are those 2 match ups? Bant (any variant) and Naya.
The Bant matchup was traditionally thought of as an easy win for Esper. That was true until they added Wolf-run and just erased any semblance of easy. Thragtusk is still a card economy nightmare for Esper and many times Tamiyo tapping down the Wolf-run makes the Thragtusk interactions easier since it doesn't turn every creature into a Fireball. You can also make them use their Restoration Angels post-board to untap their Thragtusk and make your Verdict/Terminus much better. They have PWs that arguably trumps yours and they have access to the same X spells that makes the match up much more tricky than it seems since they can challenge Esper's lines very effectively. Farseek on 2, Thragtusk on 5 are all decision points for the Esper player. Just because you have handled their initial threat, a 5-Garruk is a back-breaking resolution on 6 most of the time. So you have to pay attention here to how to resolve spells.
The other match up Tamiyo breaks parity in is the Naya match up, it acts as a major speed bump where often times you can put them in a top decking situation but can't actually win because Aurelia's Fury gives them reach. The red splash here means you need to mind your life points. This is where I felt the changes my friend made to the deck's removal package hurts him and one of the main reasons why I hated Azorius Charm in the deck. AC just doesn't do enough. Verdict is a risky proposition because the threats they play can kill you in short order without dedicating much, they never have to play into a 2 for 1 if they don't choose to or if you don't make them. Tamiyo helps that to some extent, but more important stymies the damage and set up for the best interaction you can possibly hope for, Slip/Snap/Slip. You need to remove the threats, not just tempo them.
Lastly, I like what my friend did to the deck, felt more controlling, didn't run any herpderp Blind Obedience main. Still don't like the 3x Azorius Charms though, feels like 1 too many.
Also, the number of times the commentators had no clue of what my singleton Forbidden Alchemy looked like was hilarious. Every time the FMN promo was cast, they were like what did Jack just play? Another friend's foil Russian Dispel looked like Red Elemental Blast on camera, and acted like it too.
I don't get your reasoning for disliking azorious charm.. it's amazing against aggro, allowing you to survive to later turns to take control of the game, and it cycles if you have no use for it. With instant speed removal being so limited (let's face it, UP does not hit a number of key creatures in the meta) azorious charm is the next best thing and it hits everything. Orzhov charm seems OK too, I can see the life loss being problematic though. Also not a huge fan of 2x Liliana.. I could see maybe 1 being ok.. devour flesh just seems better.. or just more wraths or even detention sphere to deal with planeswalkers..
|
Friend didnt play Lily and I advised him to stay away from it. As for Azorious Charm, my reasoning is simple. My MU against aggro is good enough with a slightly changed removal package. I tested against various red aggro lists and it was in my favor preboard, 6-4 to 7-3 good. The problem with charm is against the thragtusk decks and the decks that play X spells that get mana quicker than you, aka Jund/Bant/Naya. Therefore, I rather make the aggro matchup a little worse and improve the midrange matchups.
As for PWs, just play tighter. If you let a PW resolve you arent winning the game most of the time, Detention Sphere or not. We have 1 in the board for certain matchups that are much slower.
|
On February 19 2013 03:26 iGrok wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2013 03:21 JingleHell wrote:On February 19 2013 03:14 iGrok wrote:On February 19 2013 03:12 JingleHell wrote:On February 19 2013 03:03 iGrok wrote:On February 19 2013 02:32 JingleHell wrote:On February 19 2013 02:29 iGrok wrote:On February 19 2013 01:30 spinesheath wrote:On February 19 2013 00:57 JingleHell wrote:On February 19 2013 00:48 iGrok wrote: [quote] Basically wincon is swing with 6-7 buffed up weenies, probably after boardwipe->Servitude.
It doesn't matter how many times my creatures die, they always come back.
For your deck, I'd also try to pick up 2 kessig wolf runs. Wouldn't your weenies become unbuffed at the board wipe? And wouldn't putting them back into the battlefield resolve simultaneously, preventing new 1/1 counters? If I'm totally wrong, I'd love to know it, since I still don't understand all the interactions. That wolf run is kinda cute. I'm guessing they're a bitch to trade into though. All creatures entering at the same time trigger all the ETB effects of all creatures on the board, including those that are just entering the battlefield. That's the sole reason why human reanimator with Angel of Glory's rise works, after all. That deck seems to want to do two different things; cast lots of small creatures as well as ramp up for (four!) Sphinx's Revelations. Seems weird. Wouldn't it be more streamlined if you had more creatures in there, as well card draw that sets up servitude, like mulch or tracker's instinct's? Thats a good thought. It just feels like with Mass Appeal, I should be running it in bant humans because its just broken once you have 4+ humans. Charms and verdicts are pretty much a necessity... in fact here's whats necessary: 4x Charm 2x Verdict 3x Servitude 4x Snapcaster 3x Mass Appeal 16x 1drop human +32 cards +22 lands = 54 So now i've got 6 slots to fit: 2 Drop Humans (synergy with Snap) - thalia, Fencing Ace? Farseek Shphinx (less necessary with more mass appeals) Touch of the Eternal is an amusing 1-of that usually means I win ( 12-15 permanents upon play) What about that one flipping werewolf who buffs humans on the one side? If he flips he doesn't buff humans anymore :/ Your entire deck is one and two drops, how hard is it to cast two spells a turn? haha, I suppose you are right. But is he better than Thalia? Probably better than fencing ace Just use him alongside Thalia and Fencing Ace, didn't you have slots to fill? That's assuming that splashing for him doesn't screw your manabase, of course. I mean, with 1/2 drops abounding, a free 1/1 to everything seems massive. I've got 5 slots to fill, and thats without including Revelations or Farseeks. I think you should play with the Mayor. It's not usually going to flip on your turn. If it flips on your opponent's turn that usually isn't too bad for you either. Especially because that means that you immediately get a 2/2 wolf token to compensate. A cheap +1/+1 that also is a human is very good.
Thinking about Immortal Servitude for 2 in your deck... if you have 2 Thalias in the graveyard and reanimate them, they will obviously remove each other. But what happens when you have 3 of them enter the battlefield at once?
|
Straight outta Johto18973 Posts
On February 19 2013 07:44 spinesheath wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2013 03:26 iGrok wrote:On February 19 2013 03:21 JingleHell wrote:On February 19 2013 03:14 iGrok wrote:On February 19 2013 03:12 JingleHell wrote:On February 19 2013 03:03 iGrok wrote:On February 19 2013 02:32 JingleHell wrote:On February 19 2013 02:29 iGrok wrote:On February 19 2013 01:30 spinesheath wrote:On February 19 2013 00:57 JingleHell wrote: [quote]
Wouldn't your weenies become unbuffed at the board wipe? And wouldn't putting them back into the battlefield resolve simultaneously, preventing new 1/1 counters? If I'm totally wrong, I'd love to know it, since I still don't understand all the interactions.
That wolf run is kinda cute. I'm guessing they're a bitch to trade into though. All creatures entering at the same time trigger all the ETB effects of all creatures on the board, including those that are just entering the battlefield. That's the sole reason why human reanimator with Angel of Glory's rise works, after all. That deck seems to want to do two different things; cast lots of small creatures as well as ramp up for (four!) Sphinx's Revelations. Seems weird. Wouldn't it be more streamlined if you had more creatures in there, as well card draw that sets up servitude, like mulch or tracker's instinct's? Thats a good thought. It just feels like with Mass Appeal, I should be running it in bant humans because its just broken once you have 4+ humans. Charms and verdicts are pretty much a necessity... in fact here's whats necessary: 4x Charm 2x Verdict 3x Servitude 4x Snapcaster 3x Mass Appeal 16x 1drop human +32 cards +22 lands = 54 So now i've got 6 slots to fit: 2 Drop Humans (synergy with Snap) - thalia, Fencing Ace? Farseek Shphinx (less necessary with more mass appeals) Touch of the Eternal is an amusing 1-of that usually means I win ( 12-15 permanents upon play) What about that one flipping werewolf who buffs humans on the one side? If he flips he doesn't buff humans anymore :/ Your entire deck is one and two drops, how hard is it to cast two spells a turn? haha, I suppose you are right. But is he better than Thalia? Probably better than fencing ace Just use him alongside Thalia and Fencing Ace, didn't you have slots to fill? That's assuming that splashing for him doesn't screw your manabase, of course. I mean, with 1/2 drops abounding, a free 1/1 to everything seems massive. I've got 5 slots to fill, and thats without including Revelations or Farseeks. I think you should play with the Mayor. It's not usually going to flip on your turn. If it flips on your opponent's turn that usually isn't too bad for you either. Especially because that means that you immediately get a 2/2 wolf token to compensate. A cheap +1/+1 that also is a human is very good. Thinking about Immortal Servitude for 2 in your deck... if you have 2 Thalias in the graveyard and reanimate them, they will obviously remove each other. But what happens when you have 3 of them enter the battlefield at once? They all come into play at the same time. State-based effects are checked. All three Thalia's "see" each other and are all Legendary-ruled into the graveyard. No dice I'm afraid.
|
On February 19 2013 07:44 spinesheath wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2013 03:26 iGrok wrote:On February 19 2013 03:21 JingleHell wrote:On February 19 2013 03:14 iGrok wrote:On February 19 2013 03:12 JingleHell wrote:On February 19 2013 03:03 iGrok wrote:On February 19 2013 02:32 JingleHell wrote:On February 19 2013 02:29 iGrok wrote:On February 19 2013 01:30 spinesheath wrote:On February 19 2013 00:57 JingleHell wrote: [quote]
Wouldn't your weenies become unbuffed at the board wipe? And wouldn't putting them back into the battlefield resolve simultaneously, preventing new 1/1 counters? If I'm totally wrong, I'd love to know it, since I still don't understand all the interactions.
That wolf run is kinda cute. I'm guessing they're a bitch to trade into though. All creatures entering at the same time trigger all the ETB effects of all creatures on the board, including those that are just entering the battlefield. That's the sole reason why human reanimator with Angel of Glory's rise works, after all. That deck seems to want to do two different things; cast lots of small creatures as well as ramp up for (four!) Sphinx's Revelations. Seems weird. Wouldn't it be more streamlined if you had more creatures in there, as well card draw that sets up servitude, like mulch or tracker's instinct's? Thats a good thought. It just feels like with Mass Appeal, I should be running it in bant humans because its just broken once you have 4+ humans. Charms and verdicts are pretty much a necessity... in fact here's whats necessary: 4x Charm 2x Verdict 3x Servitude 4x Snapcaster 3x Mass Appeal 16x 1drop human +32 cards +22 lands = 54 So now i've got 6 slots to fit: 2 Drop Humans (synergy with Snap) - thalia, Fencing Ace? Farseek Shphinx (less necessary with more mass appeals) Touch of the Eternal is an amusing 1-of that usually means I win ( 12-15 permanents upon play) What about that one flipping werewolf who buffs humans on the one side? If he flips he doesn't buff humans anymore :/ Your entire deck is one and two drops, how hard is it to cast two spells a turn? haha, I suppose you are right. But is he better than Thalia? Probably better than fencing ace Just use him alongside Thalia and Fencing Ace, didn't you have slots to fill? That's assuming that splashing for him doesn't screw your manabase, of course. I mean, with 1/2 drops abounding, a free 1/1 to everything seems massive. I've got 5 slots to fill, and thats without including Revelations or Farseeks. I think you should play with the Mayor. It's not usually going to flip on your turn. If it flips on your opponent's turn that usually isn't too bad for you either. Especially because that means that you immediately get a 2/2 wolf token to compensate. A cheap +1/+1 that also is a human is very good. Thinking about Immortal Servitude for 2 in your deck... if you have 2 Thalias in the graveyard and reanimate them, they will obviously remove each other. But what happens when you have 3 of them enter the battlefield at once?
Still all die. The better way to think of it is the highlander motto, there can be only one.
|
That's more Lin-Sivvi than Thalia. I can't imagine playing under the old legend ruling.
|
Could run 3 mayor 2 thalia. sure, if I draw the second one its a dead card, but i've got enough draw taht that -shouldn't- matter
|
|
|
|
|
|