06/05/2012 ReConstructed: "A Tallowisp Tale"

22 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is for discussion of this week's ReConstructed, which goes live Tuesday morning on magicthegathering.com.

"Infinite Reflection is a card that really intrigues me, since with Drogskol Captain it's completely insane. All of your creatures are hexproof and huge? Sign me up! The issue, however, is that if you have enough creatures on the battlefield to make it strong then you probably don't need the Reflection to win. If this deck was playing Lingering Souls—which is certainly a route you could go—I would be far more inclined to keep this card."

 Thankfully, Infinite Reflection doesn't work on tokens, so there's no need to be tempted by it at all.
Nice deck. I was looking to do something casual w/ Blue/White spirits, splashing some green for Decendant's Path, and Moorland Haunt for instant-speed spirit-making. This is a lot less clunky, and I like it.
Just curious how any sane person is expected to read Tallowisp and Threads of Disloyalty and come to the conclusion that the former can't be used to search up the latter.
Just curious how any sane person is expected to read Tallowisp and Threads of Disloyalty and come to the conclusion that the former can't be used to search up the latter.


Actually, you can (or should b able to.  I don't fully know.)  Actually, someone has already done a deck similar to this one.  See it here www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/Article.a...
Zach's Silverblade Ninjas deck is not modern legal. It contains 3 Umezawa's Jitte
I love that All-In Windbrisk deck, but I'm not sure Primal Surge is a good idea given the high risk of putting two or more Emrakul into play at once. Surely there are better options given that any card in the format can get cast that way? Jin-Gitaxias? Iona?
I love that All-In Windbrisk deck, but I'm not sure Primal Surge is a good idea given the high risk of putting two or more Emrakul into play at once. Surely there are better options given that any card in the format can get cast that way? Jin-Gitaxias? Iona?



It's not a big risk, as each revealed permanent enters the battlefield one at a time and you decide if you want each of them to enter, one at a time. But I do think the deck could use some Ionas =)
Just curious how any sane person is expected to read Tallowisp and Threads of Disloyalty and come to the conclusion that the former can't be used to search up the latter.



Well, gatherer has it worded slightly differently:

Enchant creature with converted mana cost 2 or less




You control enchanted creature.




So, it says that instead of straight up "enchant creature."  Anyway, if this is correct, then they need to re-errata it again.  Should be something like:

"Enchant creature

[cardname] can only enchant creatures with cmc 2 or less

You control enchanted creature." 

Otherwise, seems like BS.
It's not a big risk, as each revealed permanent enters the battlefield one at a time and you decide if you want each of them to enter

Ah, good point, I should probably read the card more carefully! :-)

(I've only ever used Surge in decks which insta-win if it resolves, so it's never been relevant.)

Oh man, I remember when I had an old Extended deck not unlike that Blue Land Denial one.
Nothing like bouncing their first land back to hand for seven turns in a row, then feeling like such a **** after.
Deck blog: http://alurenrecycle.blogspot.com/ http://gureiseion.tumblr.com/
Love this deck. Steel of the Godhead was one of my favorite cards back in the day, and to throw Tallowisp and then Remand (my favorite counterspell of all time)? Thank you!
Tallowisp really should work with Threads of Disloyalty. Considering the wording and the fact that they're both from the same expansion, I'm 100% positive that they did work together at one point.
Tallowisp, as far as I can tell, functions very well with Daybreak Coronet and Threads of Disloyalty.

If it didn't, then the whole deck is moot to begin with as every aura is errataed to to be "Enchantment -- Aura". As someone pointed out, somebody already made a competitive version of Geist Dad (as I'm sure this list is based off of), and I am pretty sure it wouldn't have done as well as it did if Tallowisp wasn't able to tutor anything.

And beyond that, you're saying it can tutor Steel of the Godhead but not Daybreak Coronet when they both have the same type. That is a pretty big oversight when we're talking about how an entire deck functions.
Puresteel players unite! [Archetype] PURESTEEL
Tallowisp, as far as I can tell, functions very well with Daybreak Coronet and Threads of Disloyalty.

If it didn't, then the whole deck is moot to begin with as every aura is errataed to to be "Enchantment -- Aura". As someone pointed out, somebody already made a competitive version of Geist Dad (as I'm sure this list is based off of), and I am pretty sure it wouldn't have done as well as it did if Tallowisp wasn't able to tutor anything.

And beyond that, you're saying it can tutor Steel of the Godhead but not Daybreak Coronet when they both have the same type. That is a pretty big oversight when we're talking about how an entire deck functions.



If you look at the Oracle text, Threads is an aura but no where in its text box does it say 'Enchant Creature'. Wispy's Oracle says an Aura with Enchant Creature. Gavin is right, but it seems very likely this is an errata issue, as it has essentially been power-level errata'ed which WotC doesn't like. All previous enchant creature cards should have Enchant Creature I would think.

Myths of Theros: Part 1, Part 2, Born of the Gods Myths

Beta Client, "Shiny", V4.0 tutorial

Momir Basic Primer

I must be. Because the only way this makes sense is that if a card like Tinker could only find Artifact cards without any other text -- no equipment, no artifact creatures, etc.

Both their errata do explicity say, in the first two words, "Enchant Creature" now. There is a restrictive clause following, but both are classified to enchant creatures, yes?

Beyond that, in the Threads of Disloyalty and Tallowisp day, there weren't aura subtypes. The Tallowisp very explicity was looking for the Enchant Creature card type, which was the predecessor to Enchantment - Aura. So my second concern would be why would these cards be printed in the same set and have 0 interaction?
Puresteel players unite! [Archetype] PURESTEEL
Both their errata do explicity say, in the first two words, "Enchant Creature" now. There is a restrictive clause following, but both are classified to enchant creatures, yes?



I think the sticky point is the cards do not have, on their own line, Enchant Creature.

Myths of Theros: Part 1, Part 2, Born of the Gods Myths

Beta Client, "Shiny", V4.0 tutorial

Momir Basic Primer

If they're willing to un-errata things like Flash, which would have used the updated wording if the technology had existed at the time, then they should change Threads of Disloyalty to
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant Creature
Threads of Disloyalty can enchant only a creature with converted mana cost two or less.


It's the same thing. Threads of Disloyalty WOULD have used the current wording if the tech had existed at the time (Just as Flash wouldn't have put the creature onto the battlefield until the cost was paid), but since the tech didn't exist, it wasn't worded that way. Since they care more about the exact wording on the card, rather than making it function as it was intended to function, they should change Threads of Disloyalty.
IMAGE(http://images.community.wizards.com/community.wizards.com/user/blitzschnell/c6f9e416e5e0e1f0a1e5c42b0c7b3e88.jpg?v=90000)
Here is a deck Idea (for discussion, I know i'm supposed to e-mail him) that I call "Hero's Surging Crusade"

Lands:
4 Clifftop Retreat
11 Mountains
11 Plains

Creatures:
2 Archwing Dragon
4 Hero of Bladehold
4 Gold Myr
4 Iron Myr

Other:
3 Sword of Body and Mind
4 Cathar's Crusade
4 Warstorm Surge
4 Galvanic Blast
3 Whipflare
2 Slagstorm

A note on my choice of sword: In this deck, it actually helps us play faster because we are actually getting a 3/3 and a lightning bolt. Plan is to use a Myr to jump to four and cast a hero or dragon. Then Crusade works well with the hero (a 5/6 and two 4/3s? Ridiculous.) and the Warstorm Surde follow up creates an aggressive start not even wolf-run ramp could possibly beat. Still thinking about a sideboard, or any edits before I send it in. Thoughts?
Tallowisp now reads, "you may search your library for an Aura card with enchant creature" - while Threads of Disloyalty reads, "Enchant creature with converted mana cost 2 or less". Seems to me that it has "Enchant creature", even if it's a more specific version of it. Even Coral Net seems like it should count as an "Enchant creature" despite the intervening text.
Unfortunately "Enchant Creature" and Enchant creature with converted mana cost 2 or less" are two different abilities.  There's no such thing as an ability that is, rules-wise, just a type of a broader ability.  It's too bad, though, because I have a very similar deck to this and it runs a copy of Daybreak Coronet, which I'll have to remove now that this has been pointed out.
Unfortunately "Enchant Creature" and Enchant creature with converted mana cost 2 or less" are two different abilities.  There's no such thing as an ability that is, rules-wise, just a type of a broader ability.



Giant Slug begs to differ.

Considering all the questionable rules changes made in the name of making things work as the card reads, it boggles my mind that Tallowisp can't be used to find Threads of Disloyalty.