Costs and effects: Zur the Enchanter

52 posts / 0 new
Last post
Zur the Enchanter:

Whenever Zur the Enchanter attacks, you may search your library for an enchantment card with converted mana cost 3 or less and put it onto the battlefield. If you do, shuffle your library.

My question concerns terminology: the difference between costs and effects. What exactly defines whether a specific part of an effect is a cost, and when is it not a cost.

In the template

'You may ... . If you do, [effect]

Is ... always a cost, or not ? If not, what determines whether it is or isn't ?

Wooden Sphere's wording:

'You may pay {1}. If you do, [effect]

Obviously a cost. Let's change it.

'You may discard a card. If you do, [effect]

Still pretty obviously a cost. Let's change it.

'You may draw three cards. If you do, [effect]

Less obvious, but I think it's still a cost. Let's change it.

'You may search your library for a card, and put it into your hand. If you do, [effect]

Very fuzzy.

So where is the line drawn ? Is the search clause of Zur the Enchanter a cost to shuffle the library? If not, How is this determined?
Searching your library as a result of Zur's ability is in fact a cost.

From the comp rules...

Costs

117.12. Some spells, activated abilities, and triggered abilities read, “[Do something]. If [a player]
[does or doesn’t], [effect].” or “[A player] may [do something]. If [that player] [does or doesn’t],
[effect].” The action [do something] is a cost, paid when the spell or ability resolves. The “If [a
player] [does or doesn’t]” clause checks whether the player chose to pay an optional cost or started
to pay a mandatory cost, regardless of what events actually occurred.


Effects

609.1. An effect is something that happens in the game as a result of a spell or ability. When a spell,
activated ability, or triggered ability resolves, it may create one or more one-shot or continuous
effects. Static abilities may create one or more continuous effects. Text itself is never an effect.


Something can be both a cost and an effect.
Rules Advisor
That was my conclusion as well. It just seems ... odd.
Clearly, the main effect of Zur's ability is supposed to be the search. The shuffling is just an afterthought, so seeing the search as a cost to shuffle is kind of counterintuitive to a typical player.

There is a way to word Zur without making it a cost, which I think is probably preferable:

Whenever Zur the Enchanter attacks, you may search your library for an enchantment card with converted mana cost 3 or less, put it onto the battlefield, and then shuffle your library.

The reason why 'if you do' is used in Zur is not to make the search a cost, but to make shuffling the library dependent on the search, so that the player doesn't have to shuffle each time Zur attacks. The suggested wording makes the shuffle part of the same sentence, and as such part of the 'may', making 'if you do' redundant.
They sometimes say "then" and sometimes say "if you do". For the sake of consistency, I'd prefer if they stuck to just one of them, but that's a separate issue.

I don't understand what the problem with the "if you do" wording is, though. That does make it a cost, but I'm not aware of a situation where the fact that it's a cost matters. What would be the benefit of making it not be a cost?
I'd rather define it as an optional instruction, and define costs as a type of an optional instruction.

Also, because the search might not happen they use "if you do, shuffle", so I find it consistent.

I still wonder why Zur the Enchanter's ability is optional in the first place. Maybe it's meant to allow Zur to attack without messing "Indexed" cards or triggering Psychgenic Probe, unlike Isperia the Inscrutable. Other search effects on triggered abilities are meant to happen only once in the object's lifetime (enters/dies), or are tied to another optional action (Blood Speaker- "you may sacrifice").
Quite a few searches are optional. Finding something is optional anyways (if it's more specific than "a card"), but making the search itself optional also makes sense, especially if there's the possibility the player doesn't want to (or can't) find an appropriate card. If Zur's ability were mandatory, you'd be stuck with the busy work of shuffling your library each time he attacks even after you've already gotten all the Aura cards from your library.
Quite a few searches are optional. Finding something is optional anyways (if it's more specific than "a card"), but making the search itself optional also makes sense, especially if there's the possibility the player doesn't want to (or can't) find an appropriate card.

Good point. it looks as if there's some inconsistency on whether a quality-specific search effect in a triggered ability is optional or not. It seems that most of the cards with such an effect are optional, and if I'm not mistaken, newly printed cards are made mostly optional.

But then there is Mwonvuli Beast Tracker as an exception, I wonder if it was a calculated decision to make it mandatory or just a mistake.

If Zur's ability were mandatory, you'd be stuck with the busy work of shuffling your library each time he attacks even after you've already gotten all the Aura cards from your library.

It could be the reason, but becasue shuffling a fully random deck can be shortened to not physically shuffling at all, so it might not be a reason enough. That's why I specified "indexing" and Psychogenic Probe as the reason.

There is the hypothetical 'If you would search your library, sacrifice a creature instead.'

This would be a functional difference when combined with Angel of Jubilation, depending on whether it is a cost or not.

I've only used Zur as an example.

I'm pretty sure there are other 'if you do' costs out there which are a bit odd and which would make more sense as non-costs.
Angel of Jubilation doesn't say anything about costs in general. It specifically says "to cast spells or activate abilities". It doesn't stop sacrifices or life payments to pay for other costs.

Indeed, I don't think there's any card that cares about costs in general. The fact that Zur's library searching is technically a cost might be interesting rules trivia, but it's not more than that. Most players don't need to know that it's a cost or even what the technical definition of a cost is.

And yes, there are some rather absurd costs. Delif's Cone is a prime example. The actual benefit is the cost, while the effect is something you really don't want. It really doesn't make sense to conceptually view gaining life there as a cost, but I still don't see what benefit there would be to making it a non-cost.

Is there any actual, non-hypothetical, situation where it matters that something is a cost? Is there a functional difference between the abilities of Ondu Giant and Farhaven Elf?
I should have read FezzHead's sblocks, okay, it's pretty well defined as a cost. No question about it.

Is there a functional difference between the abilities of Ondu Giant and Farhaven Elf?


It depends. How does Ondu Giant interact with Mindblock Orb? The rulings only specify optional searching with "if you do ... shuffle" or mandatory searching with ",then search" . But no mention for "may search, do something. Then,shuffle". Sounds to me like Ondu Giant needs to be streamlined to use "if you do" for clarity.
We do have an [O] ruling that Maralen of the Mornsong negates the entire effect of Knollspine Dragon. Because it's impossible to draw, you can't choose to "discard and draw".

I think the same would go for Ondu Giant and Mindlock Orb.
The rule for indestructible is as follows.

"700.4. If a permanent is indestructible, rules and effects can't destroy it."

It doesn't say that costs can't destroy it, and Floral Spuzzem's Oracle wording uses destruction as a cost (although it may also be an effect in this case).
Rules Advisor
As you'd already pointed out, costs and effects aren't mutually exclusive. The destruction there is both.

If the targeted artifact is indestructible, it's not legal to choose to destroy it, so the Spuzzem will still deal its combat damage.
Agreed, but there is at least one case (indestructible) where the distinction between something being a cost or an effect matters.
Rules Advisor
We do have an [O] ruling that Maralen of the Mornsong negates the entire effect of Knollspine Dragon. Because it's impossible to draw, you can't choose to "discard and draw".

I think the same would go for Ondu Giant and Mindlock Orb.

Very interesting. Thanks for the info!

So if you have a string of actions under a "may" and can't be perform one, then you can't perform any. Sounds reasonable. This would also mean that Ondu Giant is hosed by Worms of the Earth as well. (Still no different than Farhaven though, since the "may search and put" is also a set of actions, and the shuffling depends on searching).

The rule for indestructible is as follows.

"700.4. If a permanent is indestructible, rules and effects can't destroy it."

It doesn't say that costs can't destroy it, and Floral Spuzzem's Oracle wording uses destruction as a cost (although it may also be an effect in this case).

Doesn't matter. An action can be both a cost and an effect.

Edit:



  • 117.1. A cost is an action or payment necessary to take another action or to stop another action from taking place. To pay a cost, a player carries out the instructions specified by the spell, ability, or effect that contains that cost.

Agreed, but there is at least one case (indestructible) where the distinction between something being a cost or an effect matters.

But then you're talking about non-effects and costs for "if you do" exist only inside effects, so this wouldn't help for this case.
Also, a somewhat similar distinction is exists with "sacrifice". You can still sacrifice permanents to pay for playing spells and abilities even with Tajuru Preserver on the battlefield.
As you'd already pointed out, costs and effects aren't mutually exclusive. The destruction there is both.

If the targeted artifact is indestructible, it's not legal to choose to destroy it, so the Spuzzem will still deal its combat damage.



Floral Spuzzem no longer uses the word "choose" in its oracle text; it only targets. So you can legally target an indestructible artifact. Even the original text actually targets.
Agreed, but there is at least one case (indestructible) where the distinction between something being a cost or an effect matters.



This doesn't make sense. Even though you know that the two aren't mutually exclusive, you're still talking about it as through they're a dichotomy. You're trying to use the fact that things care whether something is an effect to imply that there are also things that care whether something is a cost, but this doesn't follow.

As you'd already pointed out, costs and effects aren't mutually exclusive. The destruction there is both.

If the targeted artifact is indestructible, it's not legal to choose to destroy it, so the Spuzzem will still deal its combat damage.



Floral Spuzzem no longer uses the word "choose" in its oracle text; it only targets. So you can legally target an indestructible artifact. Even the original text actually targets.



It says "you may". You can legally choose an indestructible artifact as target, but when the ability resolves, you can't choose to go for the "you may destroy [that artifact]".

Agreed, but there is at least one case (indestructible) where the distinction between something being a cost or an effect matters.



This doesn't make sense. Even though you know that the two aren't mutually exclusive, you're still talking about it as through they're a dichotomy. You're trying to use the fact that things care whether something is an effect to imply that there are also things that care whether something is a cost, but this doesn't follow.



We agree that costs and effects are not mutually exclusive. My previous post was poorly phrased. Something can be a cost, or an effect, or both. There are places in the rules and on cards where costs or effects are explicitly mentioned. My point was that any rule or card that references what effects can do does not necessarily apply to costs, since costs are not (always) effects. I do not know of any situations where this distinction matters, but there are enough strange interactions in Magic that one probably exists.
Rules Advisor

As you'd already pointed out, costs and effects aren't mutually exclusive. The destruction there is both.

If the targeted artifact is indestructible, it's not legal to choose to destroy it, so the Spuzzem will still deal its combat damage.



Floral Spuzzem no longer uses the word "choose" in its oracle text; it only targets. So you can legally target an indestructible artifact. Even the original text actually targets.



It says "you may". You can legally choose an indestructible artifact as target, but when the ability resolves, you can't choose to go for the "you may destroy [that artifact]".




Indeed it does! My mistake.
So where is the line drawn? Is the search clause of Zur the Enchanter a cost to shuffle the library? If not, How is this determined?

I do not understand what problem you are trying to solve. It never matters whether or not it is a cost.
I think his point is that it could be troublesome, if the Magic team won't be careful with their design.

However, considering cards that already exist, they probably already follow some guideline, only printing cards that restrict costs that are easy to identify (Angel of Jubilation) or cards that restrict actions (Mindlock Orb). Also, even with cards that restrict actions, with a text like "you may X. If you do, Y" it's easy to see that if X doesn't happen then Y doesn't happen either, even without identifying X as a cost.

The closest we have to referring to any kind of cost is Rosheen the Meanderer, but I don't think there are any cards/interactions where paying  is not a cost. (Do the rules define all the payments as costs? Or is it too enforced by the template design? I think it's the latter)
I think English forever links payments with costs. It would be nonsensical to have a payment of something that wasn't satisfying the demands of a cost.

3DH4LIF3

If there's some consequence to paying or not paying, it's a cost. And there really isn't any meaningful design space for consequence-free life/mana payments, so the issue of whether those would still count as costs won't come up.
I don't know if they still apply, but Gatherer actually lists rulings for Mindlock Orb contradictory to the conclusions earlier in the thread:
[10/1/2008] If an effect says "You may search your library . . . If you do, shuffle your library," you can't choose to search, so you won't shuffle.
[10/1/2008] If an effect says "Search your library . . . Then shuffle your library," the search effect fails, but you will have to shuffle.



Eidt: Of course this doesn't actually apply to Ondu Giant now that I think about it since it's a "you may". However, there are several cases of "search...then shuffle" which are not optional, and those always cause a shuffle, while a hypothetical non-optional "search...if you do, shuffle" wouldn't.
blah blah metal lyrics
As you noted, the "you may" makes a difference. You can't make an impossible choice, but if you're told to the impossible, you do as much as possible.
It is possible to construct a scenario where it matters whether an action is a cost or not. It requires a replacement effect that changes the action required to pay a cost into another action altogether. Consider Blind Zealot.

If I attack you with the Zealot and it deals combat damage to you, the Zealot's ability fires.

Suppose you control a Leylind of the Void. If I choose to sacrifice the Zealot, it will not be sacrificed, as sacrifice is defined as the permanent's controller moving it from the battlefield to their graveyard, and the Leyline changes the destination to exile, so the Zealot wasn't sacrificed.

Because the sacrifice is a cost, however, 117.7 is invoked.
117.7. What a player actually needs to do to pay a cost may be changed or reduced by effects. If the mana component of a cost is reduced to nothing by cost reduction effects, it’s considered to be {0}. Paying a cost changed or reduced by an effect counts as paying the original cost.

So, even though the Zealot was exiled and not sacrificed, the targeted creature is still destroyed - because the Zealot's sacrifice is a cost.
Still blessed by Julia of Hillsdown. M:tG Rules Adviser You are Red/Blue!
You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
That's not right. Sacrifice is a wrapper around "move something from the battlefield to the graveyard". Leyline of the Void changes the contents, but not the wrapper. It's still a sacrifice, and Furnace Celebration will still trigger.

Also, I think it's a stretch to apply that part of 117.7. That's for things that actually change costs. For example, Thick-Skinned Goblin doesn't stop something from being an echo cost, so it won't stop Shah of Naar Isle's ability from triggering. And something like Semblance Anvil won't interfere with evoke, replicate, overload, etc. The reduced cost still counts as the appropriate kind of cost.

What you're talking about is instead something that changes the result of paying the cost. The more relevant rule is the one this thread is about:

117.12. Some spells, activated abilities, and triggered abilities read, "[Do something]. If [a player] [does or doesn't], [effect]." or "[A player] may [do something]. If [that player] [does or doesn't], [effect]." The action [do something] is a cost, paid when the spell or ability resolves. The "If [a player] [does or doesn't]" clause checks whether the player chose to pay an optional cost or started to pay a mandatory cost, regardless of what events actually occurred.

There are even weirder costs.
There are costs with durations
(I assume the cost is considered paid once that duration starts, regardless of how long it lasts in reality, because it can't predict the future):

Dominus of Fealthy
Johan
Junkyo Bell
Orcish Squatters
Stromgald Spy
I would imagine that the cost is really "create so-and-so continuous effect" in those circumstances.
blah blah metal lyrics
It is possible to construct a scenario where it matters whether an action is a cost or not. It requires a replacement effect that changes the action required to pay a cost into another action altogether. Consider Blind Zealot.

If I attack you with the Zealot and it deals combat damage to you, the Zealot's ability fires.

Suppose you control a Leylind of the Void. If I choose to sacrifice the Zealot, it will not be sacrificed, as sacrifice is defined as the permanent's controller moving it from the battlefield to their graveyard, and the Leyline changes the destination to exile, so the Zealot wasn't sacrificed.

Because the sacrifice is a cost, however, 117.7 is invoked.
117.7. What a player actually needs to do to pay a cost may be changed or reduced by effects. If the mana component of a cost is reduced to nothing by cost reduction effects, it’s considered to be {0}. Paying a cost changed or reduced by an effect counts as paying the original cost.

So, even though the Zealot was exiled and not sacrificed, the targeted creature is still destroyed - because the Zealot's sacrifice is a cost.


A cost is defined as an action which is required to have another effect happen or to prevent another effect from occurring.  Therefore in situations where it matters if something uses the rules for a cost it will always be a cost.
Anything that has to do with understanding the rules doesn't matter much, because we're talking about someone who's already reading them and can find out that [do something] before "if you do" is a cost. What is required here is an actual card that addresses costs in a way that includes [do something] but that the general player won't notice or will be confused about.


By the way, since costs are allowed to be weird, how about bringing Chronatog and Avizoa back to their printed functionality?
Let's imagine for a second that Dominus of Fealthy's ability said 'permanent' instead of creature.
This shouldn't change much rules-wise, right ?

Now let's bring a shrouded Guardian Beast into the mix and an artifact under that player's control.

If Dominus targets that artifact, is the cost considered paid?
Control will not be changed, even though I believe the continuous effect does get generated.
So does that artifact untap, or not ?

(The same would apply to other continuous effects which have no effect for some reason (can't > can), even though Guardian Beast's ability is the only one I can come up with for the moment)

Before you answer, also consider Herald of Leshrac + Guardian Beast + artifact lands
If generating the continuous effect is enough, you could repeatedly choose an artifact land to keep the herald on the field forever.
Let's imagine for a second that Dominus of Fealthy's ability said 'permanent' instead of creature.
This shouldn't change much rules-wise, right ?

it does say permanent
Now let's bring a shrouded Guardian Beast into the mix and an artifact under that player's control.

If Dominus targets that artifact, is the cost considered paid?

no
Control will not be changed, even though I believe the continuous effect does get generated.
So does that artifact untap, or not ?

the cost is not the targeting
the cost is choosing to gain control of the targeted permanent (and possibly the control change actually occuring)
ie. applying the control change continuous effect
(The same would apply to other continuous effects which have no effect for some reason (can't > can), even though Guardian Beast's ability is the only one I can come up with for the moment)

Before you answer, also consider Herald of Leshrac + Guardian Beast + artifact lands
If generating the continuous effect is enough, you could repeatedly choose an artifact land to keep the herald on the field forever.

it may be that for the cost to be paid not only does the continuous effect have to be applied, but also an actual change of control must occur
you could likewise apply this reasoning to Dominus of Fealty

DCI Certified Judge & Goth/Industrial/EBM/Indie/Alternative/80's-Wave DJ
DJ Vortex

DCI Certified Judge since July 13, 2013  - If you have any concerns with my conduct as a judge, feel free to submit feedback here.
DCI #5209514320


My Wife's Makeup Artist Page <-- cool stuff - check it out

I don't know why I thought Dominus only worked on creatures. Great, this reinforces my point :P

Yes, it 'may be'. The rules are not clear.

So the question is:

Is applying the continuous effect enough ?

Yes --> the artifact does untap with Dominus, but the same artifact land can be chosen for Herald repeatedly.
No --> the artifact does not untap, and the artifact land cannot be chosen at all for the Herald.

In case of no, however, we have now established that just applying the continuous effect is not enough.
This complicates things if we have effects which do something at a later time, which means we are unsure whether the cost is paid.
(replacement/prevention effects come to mind)

Imagine a cost of 'Prevent the next X damage that would be dealt to it this turn.'

If no damage is prevented, is the cost paid?
It's impossible to tell. (For example, that damage could be prevented by another effect.)

Are replacement/prevention effects an exception to this? It's possible, but the rules are silent.

In my opinion, the answer to the above question must be 'yes'.
Applying the effect is enough to satisfy the cost. The alternative just complicates things too badly.

I'm going to dig a bit further to find such an effect.



If you don't gain control of the permanent with Dominus of Fealty, it does not untap.
If you don't gain control of a land with Herald of Leshrac, you didn't pay the cost and it's sacrificed.
Guardian Beast does not change anything to the matter at hand except making the payment impossible.

Time Vault has no cost. It has an optionnal replacement effect. Very different.

I don't understand why this is a "non-option". It's the most logical conclusion.

Rules Advisor

Quotes
76783093 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
58331438 wrote:
56945988 wrote:
Rancor dies to in-response removal.
Yeah... Until next game, where it'll be right back. Seriously, there's no way to deal with Rancor in any format. It should be banned, except Gleemax is a lobbyist for the Rancor party, so that'll never happen.
You can't ban rancor, it just returns to your deck.
58331438 wrote:
57461258 wrote:
You might want to actually talk to the Flavor & Storyline Board people... since, you know, our whole reason for playing Magic is the flavor. I'm willing to bet you'll get a lot more interest there than in General.
Indeed, both posters down there would be thrilled.
57817638 wrote:
I think I wasn't direct enough in my last post. I'll try to fix it now. Ahem... NO ONE CARES there you have it.
57471038 wrote:
When talks about banning Jace first started, I was thinking that I would see him banned come June 20th. But as I think more about it, I don't really think that Jace is the problem anymore. Sure his power level leaves very little to the imagination (opening Jace is like opening a refrigerator box with a naked girl on the inside), and sure his price does have a strong impact on what players choose to play (playing Jace is like being intimate with a woman and she doesn't charge you in the morning), but it is not the source of all the problems in Standard.
76973988 wrote:
How do people think saving room to print more abilities on cards is dumbing down the game?

Do you really think, say, Akroma would ever be printed if she said, "Akroma can block by creatures with this ability and cannot be blocked by creatures without this ability.  If a creature without this ability would deal combat damage by Akroma would be destroyed, prevent all combat damage that creature would deal to Akroma this combat.  Attacking does not cause Akroma to tap.  If Akroma is blocked and deals lethal damage, it deals the remainder of its damage to the defending player.  Akroma may attack and use abilities that require tapping in the casting cost the turn it enters the battlefield.  Akroma cannot be damaged, enchanted, equipped, blocked or targeted by black or red sources" rather than her "dumbed down" wording she has?  No freaking way.  Keywording and shorthand allows them to make complicated cards easy to play with, allowing them to be printed in the first place.
57817638 wrote:
The creation of praetors was worth it just because now amoeboid changeling is a praetor.
57140668 wrote:
1. cast frankie peanuts2. ask opponent "will you concede the game this turn"? if they say yes, you win; if they say no, play a staying power
3. subsequently ask "will you attack this turn"? and "will you cast a spell this turn"? (using a Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir for the second question if necessary) to ensure they can't disrupt the combo
4. donate them a platinum angel
5. play a mox lotus and braingeyser them for every card in their library. play an opalescence and donate them a glorious anthem and a blacker lotus, then play enchanted evening. play and activate a mindslaver and then donate them a fastbond and the mox lotus (returning one of the donates to your hand with eternal witness or whatever)
6. during their turn, play every permanent in their hand (playing lands with fastbond) then (as yourself) cast mirrorweave on the blacker lotus, so every permanent becomes a copy of it. proceed to tear up every card they control, and hopefully do it before they notice that they aren't bound by staying power's ability anymore and can concede
82423538 wrote:
57471038 wrote:
82423538 wrote:
One part of the statement being true=/=the whole statement true.
Whatever. I'm still here about ten minutes away. Whenever you want to get destroyed in Magic, I'm available.
I would like to get destroyed in Magic, actually. Do you know anybody good enough?
57617478 wrote:
Please format your statements in a way that doesn't look like a baboon hit its face on your keyboard.
57140668 wrote:
why did Garruk Relentless lose a loyalty counter
Show
to get to the other side
89522235 wrote:
You're such an obvious troll that you have hexproof and : Regenerate.
56957928 wrote:
56776038 wrote:
Dark Ritual being overpowered is determined more by what is done with it than the card itself.
True, but the fact that it enables so many ridiculous things is pretty telling. It's like, sure I can use a shotgun as a bludgeoning instrument, but that doesn't make it not a shotgun.
79035425 wrote:
Shortly before Serra died, she transferred her spark into an angel whose full name was Asha Avacyn Bolas. Her dragon father groomed her for her positions in Alara and Innistrad, and she's also been getting help from her uncle Ugin in the form of Urza, who was resurrected as Marit Lage to be the avatar as which she projects herself into material realms. Grieslbrand is a split personality who sometimes wanders the planes disguised as a human woman named Liliana Vess.
97610188 wrote:
Yeah that (Content Removed) really annoys me. Moderated by MY_self right about naahowwww!
93446159 wrote:
Dilleux_Lepaire just won the thread.
57461258 wrote:
And, as usual, Dilleux wins the entire thread. Nice work, sir, nice work.
99113151 wrote:
They need to make 9 layers of zones where cards go when they "die". Much like Hell.
56778328 wrote:
Wow, holy doggy poop, kids, obvious statement is obvious.
56776038 wrote:
122053101 wrote:
i don't think your geting it WotC is trying to kill the comption to make it so that there shity app is the only one left.
I haven't tried the app. How is its use of English grammar? Cheers!
57471038 wrote:
Everyone's life would be easier if players would, instead of coming to the 'net for help with a deck, just netdeck and be done with it. And I'm not talking about some Top 8 lists, for the Casualists, too, can benefit from netdecking. I've netdecked plenty of decks from the Casual Play forums from users such as Mown, Raedien, Floopfoot, and a few others. I snatched straight the heck out of my web browser. Yes, people, your original idea fell victim to a savage netdecker. You have been assimiliated. Suppose I wanted a Zombie deck. Why on earth would I spend time searching Gatherer for a decent list of Zombie cards when Raedien already did it for me? Taking time to be creative or waiting on people on the forums to tell you why your deck sucks or 'go to Casual forums' is a disasterous waste of time (to me).
56957928 wrote:
82423538 wrote:
If WotC started putting $100 bills in packs, the players would complain that they folded them wrong.
No, they just spam them with ban requests. That being said, Magic was ruined back in Alpha when they added all that rules and cards [Debutantes avert your eyes]. My friends and I still like playing it the "pure" way (Basically we go into the woods and hit eachother with wiffle bats while shouting made up obscenities. You know, the way Garfield wanted it to be played).
56957928 wrote:
Don't worry about it. I've come up with a list of changes to fix EDH. -First off, there's no commander. -The minimum deck size is 60 cards, and each deck can have up to four of each card, save basic lands and relentless rats. Also decks have no color identity. -Starting life total is 20. And voila, now things are balanced.
89522235 wrote:
Here's a clever play you can try yourself: -Convince friend to run relentless rats.dec in legacy tournament -Get a deck with lots of mill, yixlid jailer, and humility -Drop humility and jailer, wait for him to dump his hand, mill him out -All his rats now have no abilities. Call a judge because he's playing an illegal deck with more than 4 of a single card. -Get him/her banned from competitive magic play
142055101 wrote:
But how to mark them without making the individual sleeve different! You could buy a skunk and slam it's butt on you deck (pardon the french) Then after the game just sniff at your opponent's pile of cards and you will know if any of your cards are there!!!
141434757 wrote:
In Soviet Russia, Sorin opens You
71235715 wrote:
L, is for the leather gloves you weaaaar. O, is for the organs that guy could spaaaare. V, is very very, extraordinay. E, is for every vagrant i butchered in a wine cellar befooooore.
57052258 wrote:
The outer layer of the Magic: the Gathering box, the carton, or crust, is fairly thin and light, and contains largely aluminosilcates. Within that lies the middle layer, consisting of the familiar booster pack. Although solid, the booster packs' high temperatures allow them to acutally move around within the booster box. This flow, sometimes called convection, is cited by frustrated box mappers as one of WOTC's most genious uses of thermodynamics since the Ravnica block. No one knows what lies at the core of the booster box, but scientists theorize that it must be especially dense in order to make up for the large amount of fluff distributed amongst the booster packs.
58232598 wrote:
88993869 wrote:
Torpor Orb is absolutely godawful against Vexing Devil.
whoever is playing vexing devil is probably losing anyways
56957928 wrote:
I imagine [Ajani 3's] second ability involves him hurling the creature at your opponent Brion Stoutarm style, then the guy is just like "Okay, that may have worked, but don't- GOD DAMN IT!" as he does it again because cats don't give a **** :33.
56957928 wrote:
"Do or do not, there is no try." - Albus Dumbledore, The Lord of the Rings.
89522235 wrote:
68978039 wrote:
Its like that one time Elves broke out in a field of Jund. Elves became a resurgent hit, then died off again once Jund adapted to the rest of the field of G/W that it required mass removal that inherently pooped on Elves too. Submit to the menace. Delver can, and will blot out the sun.
Then we shall play in the shade.
89522235 wrote:
I'm sorry, this forum isn't for getting bad advice on mediocre decks, that's standard deck help. This forum is for starting ****storms.
97820278 wrote:
139359831 wrote:
Your advice would only lead me to make generic, boring, and unworthy content. It's of no use to me.
I just got this image of you as an architect, having finished a building suspended by only a small pole in its southwest corner, saying it's original. Then the building collapses.
56957928 wrote:
I for one love the flavor of legendary lands. "I remember my days as a youth at Tolarian Academy." "Wow, small multiverse, I actually went there too." "WAIT, DON'T- Well ****, there's $200,000 in student loans well spent."
56957928 wrote:
And flavor goes out the window when you cast a second copy of a planeswalker right after the first one dies, so... "Hey Nissa, I need a favor." "You just asked me for a 'favor' like thirty seconds ago, and it turned out to be having Sarkhan Transmogrify my only follower into a dragon like 5 times -which dickery aside also violates some laws of causality - and then you let me get beaten over the head by that hedron crab." "...I'll give you " "...Well all right then."
57150868 wrote:
GM, I don't think Dill is better than you. I KNOW it. Even if he wakes up every morning, clubs a baby seal, steals all the TV remotes from within a block's radius of his house and then robs hungry orphans of their food he'd be better than you, for the simple reason that he learns from his mistakes.
143211137 wrote:
57033358 wrote:
Tamiyo vs. Gideon
What would they have to fight about? Like, all I can think of now is Gideon going "Hey, long-ears! I'm gathering a group of 'Walkers together to fight some tentacle monsters.....you want in?" and Tamiyo going "Ew! Hentai no bakka Gideon-desu desu!" and flying away.
76783093 wrote:
I open 4 packs just to be on the safe side. Not only do I get more cards than everyone else, but I also get to spend the rest of the night off. Win Win.
191752181 wrote:
MaRo has a thing for people opening boosters with bad cards. But since he can only get so many bad cards printed in each set, he has found a devious way of getting more bad cards into circulation: He makes entire print sheets with just bad rares, then puts them onto the assembly line. He proceeds to wring his hands and twirl his evil mustache that he grew for twirling purposes as a lightning bolt strikes in the background. Afterwards, he goes to make sure that the good cards are only opened by everyone's friends, and that we all only get to open bad cards. He does this by memorising each booster, than switching them around accordingly. Whenever someone complains about a card, he immediately jumps out from behind a chair to yell "WELL, IT'S NOT FOR YOU!" before merging back into the shadows in order to devise new ways in which he can screw over players, then claim that he has valid reasons for doing so.
97820278 wrote:
192729031 wrote:
You open a booster pack, and staring back at you from the rare slot is a Lotleth Troll? At least I can stick him in my EDH deck and still have four for my standard constructed.
Because lol troll
56874518 wrote:
It helped that I more or less skipped most of GM_Champion's longer diatribes. I only have so many brain cells I'm willing to sacrifice each day.
192931349 wrote:
Mark Rosewater is sitting in a seemingly innocuous cable TV van, outside of Bankaimastery's house. Sitting nearby are two hardened criminal hackers, fresh out of prison, and filled with resentment at their lack of physical fitness. "Have you managed to hack his brainwaves yet? The set deadline's coming up fast." "We're almost through. It should be coming up on the screen any second." The hacker presses a button, and Kevin's thoughts flash onto the screen. Mark and the hackers stare in amazement at the sheer beauty, the elegance, and the raw truth of what they see. It's like the ending to 2001: A Space Odyssey. Brilliant light shines across the screen, the truth of existence is made clear to them, and they despair at their own foolishness, their own ignorance, their own inadequacy. And then they steal his ideas. As they return back to R&D, Mark sneers at a haggard old man chained to a cast-iron sphere. The man looks up from his laborious task of breaking rocks in the dungeon of Wizards of the Coast headquarters, and asks a question: "Kevin, my greatest student. He - he's all right, isn't he? You didn't hurt him?" Mark deals him a weighty blow with his boot. "Know your place, Richard. Get back to work."
57023768 wrote:
Now show me on the Garruk doll where Zac Hill ruined your enjoyment of Magic...
63711769 wrote:
I'm only opposed to it because it bears so little relation to how people actually play the game. The example of Miracles is actually a much better one then the Clone example I was trying to use. From the game's perspective, the card can move instantly from face down in the library to revealed in the hand and that's fine for the rules. But in real life, we can't actually do that, so the card spends a good bit of time in locations that are neither where that player's library is nor where that player's hand is. And that's fine for real life. What I don't want is the disconnect to be explicitly codified. Along the lines of
183664.697 A game of Magic as laid out by these rules exists only as a pure Platonic ideal, utterly unrealizable by fallible mortals limited by the confines of physicality and the ravages of evil and sin. 183664.698 The cake is a lie, too.
I know it's true, but I don't want the rules to actually straight-up tell me that.
147137503 wrote:
77120821 wrote:
Pfft this cant be serious can it? If it is please delete your account OP. Its not even close to ban worthy, considering what JTMS and stoneforge had to accomplish to get banned i see the WotC selling magic to aquire Pokemon before that ever happens.
I'm trying to imagine sorin markov as a gym leader in one of those pokemon games which you have to beat him to get his badge... somehow I imagine that he would stab you in the chest with his sword before giving you the badge, even if you beat his pokemon....
196239043 wrote:
Personally, I'd be fine with tea time but then I'm not gonna waste the mana summoning Emrakul, the Aeons Torn. He always takes all the sugar, drinks the whole pot of Earl Grey and doesn't even say thank you. SO. RUDE.

 

JustTerrorIt wrote:

 

JuliusPringle wrote:

All I want to do is sit down and play magic, but when I walked in yesterday, (since I didn't talk to anyone) nobody talked to me and I silently bought what I wanted and walked out.


If you don't talk to anyone, that increases the odds that no one will talk to you.

 

JuliusPringle wrote:

So how do I just... introduce myself? "Hi, my name is Adam, wanna play magic with me?" Do I go to the counter and talk to the cashier?


Yeah. Talk to the cashier. Tell him/her that you want a Black Lotus, and if they don't have one tell them that the store isn't on par with what you expected.

 

Reach into your back left pocket. Pull out a deck list that you copied directly from some ChannelFireball top 8 Standard discussion, and ask for all the cards, as is, on that list. Then, ask for some random, probably terrible cards from whatever set is Standard legal. Say it's tech for the upcoming changes in the metagame.

 

Pull out a deck, and tell some random dude you wanna test (you have to use the term "test" for this to work) for Standard. Make sure that deck contains Kitchen Finks and Alluring Siren. Maybe throw in Nyxathid for good measure.

 

Finally, before you leave, spill (make it look like an accident) one hundred singleton, random cards onto the floor. Pick them up, put them in a pile, and say "EEE-DEE-AYCH".

 

I know this sounds dumb at first, but it will work. With the method outlined above, you will draw the attention of players that play older formats by asking for cards that no one on Earth can reasonably afford. You will get the attention of the wanna-be pro, Stomp-n00bz players by pulling out a well known decklist and declare that you have "tech" to make it better. You will get the attention of all the kind, helpful players by seemingly not knowing the most common format by having non-Standard legal cards in a deck that you claim is Standard legal. Finally, you catch all the rest of the Magic players by saying "EEE-DEE-AYCH" (EDH (or Commander)).

And there you have it. You will be talking to more people than you would have wanted to talk to in no time.

 

Smoke_Stack wrote:

EDH is the best format anyway


See, it's starting already.

 

Break the Card
What is Break the Card?
Break the Card is a regular thread in the Cards and Combo Forum. Quite simply, the participants are given a Johnnystatic card (e.g. Xenograft) and are asked to build a deck around it. The winner and honorable mentions are sigged below. Get brewing!
Week 1 : Xenograft
This week's Break the Card was based around Xenograft. Thread : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27681049/Break_the_card_:_Xenograft?pg=1 Winner : Axterix with his Vampdrazi deck. Finalist : Vektor480 with his Ally/Golem/Plant deck. Honorable mentions : Zammm for the Turntimber Ranger combo and TinGorilla for suggesting Sarkhan the Mad.
Week 2 : Mindlock Orb
Here's the link to the Mindlock Orb contest : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27697565/Break_the_Card_:_Mindlock_Orb?sdb=1&pg=last#497536269 Winner : Axterix with his Maralen of the Mornsong deck. Honorable mentions : Void_Elemental.
Week 3 : Bludgeon Brawl
Here's the link to Break the Card : Bludgeon Brawl : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27715169/Break_the_Card_:_Bludgeon_Brawl?sdb=1&pg=last#498208797 Winner : Vektor and his Grab the World deck. Finalist : Crandor with his Awesome Aliteration deck. Honorable mentions : RP Jesus with his Wat deck and Zix200 with his Signet Renewal deck.
Week 4 : Followed Footsteps
This week was Followed Footsteps : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27748677/Break_the_Card_:_Followed_Footsteps?pg=1 Winner : Tevish_Szat with his Exponential Growth deck. Honorable mentions : Zix with his Carbon Copies deck and Escef with his Fungus of Speed and Time deck.
Week 5 : Delaying Shield
This week's card was Delaying Shield : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27790101/Break_the_Card_:_Delaying_Shield Winner : Tevish_Szat. Finalist : Vampire_Bat. Honorable Mention : Zix200.
Week 6 : Painter's Servant
This week's card was Painter's Servant : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27940861/Break_the_Card_:_Painters_Servant?pg=1 Winner : Tevish_Szat with his Paint it Black deck. Finalist : Wprundv with his Tiger, Tiger Painted Bright deck.
Week 7 : Venser, the Sojourner
This week's card was Venser, the Sojourner : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27977489/Break_the_Card_:_Venser,_the_Sojourner Winner : Izzett with her "Venser, Trickster Trader" deck. Finalist : Wprundv with his "Tactical Sojourner Action" deck.
Week 8 : Personal Sanctuary
This week's card was Personal Sanctuary : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/28005461/Break_the_card_:_Personal_Sanctuary Winner : MrQuizzles. Honorable mention : Vampire_Bat and UbberSheep
Week 9 : Sundial of the Infinite
This week's card was Sundial of the Infinite : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/28038277/Break_the_card_:_Sundial_of_the_Infinite Finalist : Izzett with her "Afterlife Trespassers" deck. Winner : Xeromus with his "Fortune 500" deck.
Week 10 : Jace's Archivist
This week's card was Jace's Archivist : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/28063377/Break_the_Card_:_Jaces_Archivist. Finalists : Jentaru with his "Consecration of the Draw" deck and HereticSmitty with his "ADHD: The deck" deck. Winner : JaxsonBateman with his "The Archives Are Endless!" deck.
Week 11 : Search the City
This week's card was Search the City : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29518555/Break_the_Card_:_Search_the_City Finalist : Mown with "A Thousand Footsteps". Winner : Desolation_masticore with "Burn the City".
Week 12 : Fiend Hunter
This week's card was Fiend Hunter : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29530975/Break_the_Card_:_Fiend_Hunter Winner : Yuyu63 with "Carnival Hunting". Honorable mention : Dknowle's "Champion the Fiend".
Week 13 : Clock of Omens
This week's card was Clock of Omens : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29541549/Break_the_Card_:_Clock_of_Omens?pg=1 Winner : Dknowle's "The Myrs Go Marching".
Week 14 : Light of Sanction
This week's card was Light of Sanction : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29607219/Break_the_Card_:_Light_of_Sanction?pg=1 Winner : Zauzich's "Divine Plague".
Week 15 : Assemble the Legion
This week's card was Assemble the Legion : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29662307/Break_the_Card_:_Assemble_the_Legion Winner : JBTM's "Some Assembly Required".
Week 16 : High Tide
This week's cards were High Tide and/or Bubbling Muck : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29760427/Break_the_Card_:_High_Tide Winner : Mown's "Puppet Strings".
Week 17 : Illusionist's Bracers
This week's card was Illusionist's Bracers : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29776943/Break_the_Card_:_Illusionistss_Bracers Winner : Enigma256's "Tezzeret's Bracers"
Week 18 : Savor the Moment
This week's card was Savor the Moment : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29787235/Break_the_Card_:_Savor_the_Moment Winner : POSValkir's "A Savory Filibuster!"
Week 19 : Grinning Ignus
This week's card was Grinning Ignus : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29795547/Break_the_Card_:_Grinning_Ignus Winner : dknowle's "Luren' and Laughin'".
Week 20 : Transcendence
This week's card was Transcendence : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29806481/Break_the_Card_:_Transcendence Winners : Mown's "Transcending Timing Restrictions" and Dknowle's "Blinded by Greed", tied for the win.
Week 21 : Mortus Strider
This week's card was Mortus Strider : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29818471/Break_the_Card_:_Mortus_Strider Winner : SimonGlume's "Mortus Head".
Week 22 : High Priest of Penance
This week's card was High Priest of Penance : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29917231/Break_the_Card_High_Priest_of_Penance Winners : JBTM's "Two Clerics and a Goblin walk into a (Bom)bar(dment)..." and POSValkir1's "Choke Their Rivers with Our Dead!".
Week 23 : False Cure
This week's card was False Cure :http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29964239/Break_the_Card_:_False_Cure Winner : Dknowle's "When Hippos Fly".

Week 24 : Akroan Horse

This week's card was Akroan Horse : http://community.wizards.com/forum/cards-and-combos/threads/4024821.

Winner : Dknowle's "Indian Giver".

Week 25 : Leylines

This week saw multiple cards being in the contest : all of the Leylines! http://community.wizards.com/forum/cards-and-combos/threads/4067621

Winner : POSValkir1's "Laying the Battle Lines".

If you don't gain control of the permanent with Dominus of Fealty, it does not untap.
If you don't gain control of a land with Herald of Leshrac, you didn't pay the cost and it's sacrificed.
Guardian Beast does not change anything to the matter at hand except making the payment impossible.

Time Vault has no cost. It has an optionnal replacement effect. Very different.

I don't understand why this is a "non-option". It's the most logical conclusion.

Time vault has a cost.

If you would begin your turn while Time Vault is tapped, you may skip that turn instead. If you do, untap Time Vault.

It follows the template used for costs, and is therefor a cost. Whether it's all part of a replacement effect/triggered ability/activated ability is completely irrelevant. If you disagree, I challenge you to find a rule that supports you.

(I edited my post above while you were answering, using prevention effects in place of time vault, because prevention effects don't necessarily apply, while time vault always applies, but the principle is the same, my apology for any confusion this may cause)
Time Vault is arguable. Even if it was a cost, however, the payment is immediate. Since it's a replacement effect, you skip the turn and it goes to the next player. There no problem there.

As for your other example, you can't imagine a card that does X and show how that would be a problem, because as we saw numerous times, the rules are changed whenever there's a problematic card. This thread is about if there is a problem right now, not if there's a possibility of designing a card that would cause a problem, which is obviously true. You can't prove that the rules must be interpreted in a given way with cards that don't exist. ;)

Anyway, a cost that would do something in the future isn't a problem. The cost wouldn't be to actually do it, but to set the delayed replacement effect. If such a card would be printed, a minor hack to the rules or a carefully written text would be all that is needed to make it work.

Rules Advisor

Quotes
76783093 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
58331438 wrote:
56945988 wrote:
Rancor dies to in-response removal.
Yeah... Until next game, where it'll be right back. Seriously, there's no way to deal with Rancor in any format. It should be banned, except Gleemax is a lobbyist for the Rancor party, so that'll never happen.
You can't ban rancor, it just returns to your deck.
58331438 wrote:
57461258 wrote:
You might want to actually talk to the Flavor & Storyline Board people... since, you know, our whole reason for playing Magic is the flavor. I'm willing to bet you'll get a lot more interest there than in General.
Indeed, both posters down there would be thrilled.
57817638 wrote:
I think I wasn't direct enough in my last post. I'll try to fix it now. Ahem... NO ONE CARES there you have it.
57471038 wrote:
When talks about banning Jace first started, I was thinking that I would see him banned come June 20th. But as I think more about it, I don't really think that Jace is the problem anymore. Sure his power level leaves very little to the imagination (opening Jace is like opening a refrigerator box with a naked girl on the inside), and sure his price does have a strong impact on what players choose to play (playing Jace is like being intimate with a woman and she doesn't charge you in the morning), but it is not the source of all the problems in Standard.
76973988 wrote:
How do people think saving room to print more abilities on cards is dumbing down the game?

Do you really think, say, Akroma would ever be printed if she said, "Akroma can block by creatures with this ability and cannot be blocked by creatures without this ability.  If a creature without this ability would deal combat damage by Akroma would be destroyed, prevent all combat damage that creature would deal to Akroma this combat.  Attacking does not cause Akroma to tap.  If Akroma is blocked and deals lethal damage, it deals the remainder of its damage to the defending player.  Akroma may attack and use abilities that require tapping in the casting cost the turn it enters the battlefield.  Akroma cannot be damaged, enchanted, equipped, blocked or targeted by black or red sources" rather than her "dumbed down" wording she has?  No freaking way.  Keywording and shorthand allows them to make complicated cards easy to play with, allowing them to be printed in the first place.
57817638 wrote:
The creation of praetors was worth it just because now amoeboid changeling is a praetor.
57140668 wrote:
1. cast frankie peanuts2. ask opponent "will you concede the game this turn"? if they say yes, you win; if they say no, play a staying power
3. subsequently ask "will you attack this turn"? and "will you cast a spell this turn"? (using a Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir for the second question if necessary) to ensure they can't disrupt the combo
4. donate them a platinum angel
5. play a mox lotus and braingeyser them for every card in their library. play an opalescence and donate them a glorious anthem and a blacker lotus, then play enchanted evening. play and activate a mindslaver and then donate them a fastbond and the mox lotus (returning one of the donates to your hand with eternal witness or whatever)
6. during their turn, play every permanent in their hand (playing lands with fastbond) then (as yourself) cast mirrorweave on the blacker lotus, so every permanent becomes a copy of it. proceed to tear up every card they control, and hopefully do it before they notice that they aren't bound by staying power's ability anymore and can concede
82423538 wrote:
57471038 wrote:
82423538 wrote:
One part of the statement being true=/=the whole statement true.
Whatever. I'm still here about ten minutes away. Whenever you want to get destroyed in Magic, I'm available.
I would like to get destroyed in Magic, actually. Do you know anybody good enough?
57617478 wrote:
Please format your statements in a way that doesn't look like a baboon hit its face on your keyboard.
57140668 wrote:
why did Garruk Relentless lose a loyalty counter
Show
to get to the other side
89522235 wrote:
You're such an obvious troll that you have hexproof and : Regenerate.
56957928 wrote:
56776038 wrote:
Dark Ritual being overpowered is determined more by what is done with it than the card itself.
True, but the fact that it enables so many ridiculous things is pretty telling. It's like, sure I can use a shotgun as a bludgeoning instrument, but that doesn't make it not a shotgun.
79035425 wrote:
Shortly before Serra died, she transferred her spark into an angel whose full name was Asha Avacyn Bolas. Her dragon father groomed her for her positions in Alara and Innistrad, and she's also been getting help from her uncle Ugin in the form of Urza, who was resurrected as Marit Lage to be the avatar as which she projects herself into material realms. Grieslbrand is a split personality who sometimes wanders the planes disguised as a human woman named Liliana Vess.
97610188 wrote:
Yeah that (Content Removed) really annoys me. Moderated by MY_self right about naahowwww!
93446159 wrote:
Dilleux_Lepaire just won the thread.
57461258 wrote:
And, as usual, Dilleux wins the entire thread. Nice work, sir, nice work.
99113151 wrote:
They need to make 9 layers of zones where cards go when they "die". Much like Hell.
56778328 wrote:
Wow, holy doggy poop, kids, obvious statement is obvious.
56776038 wrote:
122053101 wrote:
i don't think your geting it WotC is trying to kill the comption to make it so that there shity app is the only one left.
I haven't tried the app. How is its use of English grammar? Cheers!
57471038 wrote:
Everyone's life would be easier if players would, instead of coming to the 'net for help with a deck, just netdeck and be done with it. And I'm not talking about some Top 8 lists, for the Casualists, too, can benefit from netdecking. I've netdecked plenty of decks from the Casual Play forums from users such as Mown, Raedien, Floopfoot, and a few others. I snatched straight the heck out of my web browser. Yes, people, your original idea fell victim to a savage netdecker. You have been assimiliated. Suppose I wanted a Zombie deck. Why on earth would I spend time searching Gatherer for a decent list of Zombie cards when Raedien already did it for me? Taking time to be creative or waiting on people on the forums to tell you why your deck sucks or 'go to Casual forums' is a disasterous waste of time (to me).
56957928 wrote:
82423538 wrote:
If WotC started putting $100 bills in packs, the players would complain that they folded them wrong.
No, they just spam them with ban requests. That being said, Magic was ruined back in Alpha when they added all that rules and cards [Debutantes avert your eyes]. My friends and I still like playing it the "pure" way (Basically we go into the woods and hit eachother with wiffle bats while shouting made up obscenities. You know, the way Garfield wanted it to be played).
56957928 wrote:
Don't worry about it. I've come up with a list of changes to fix EDH. -First off, there's no commander. -The minimum deck size is 60 cards, and each deck can have up to four of each card, save basic lands and relentless rats. Also decks have no color identity. -Starting life total is 20. And voila, now things are balanced.
89522235 wrote:
Here's a clever play you can try yourself: -Convince friend to run relentless rats.dec in legacy tournament -Get a deck with lots of mill, yixlid jailer, and humility -Drop humility and jailer, wait for him to dump his hand, mill him out -All his rats now have no abilities. Call a judge because he's playing an illegal deck with more than 4 of a single card. -Get him/her banned from competitive magic play
142055101 wrote:
But how to mark them without making the individual sleeve different! You could buy a skunk and slam it's butt on you deck (pardon the french) Then after the game just sniff at your opponent's pile of cards and you will know if any of your cards are there!!!
141434757 wrote:
In Soviet Russia, Sorin opens You
71235715 wrote:
L, is for the leather gloves you weaaaar. O, is for the organs that guy could spaaaare. V, is very very, extraordinay. E, is for every vagrant i butchered in a wine cellar befooooore.
57052258 wrote:
The outer layer of the Magic: the Gathering box, the carton, or crust, is fairly thin and light, and contains largely aluminosilcates. Within that lies the middle layer, consisting of the familiar booster pack. Although solid, the booster packs' high temperatures allow them to acutally move around within the booster box. This flow, sometimes called convection, is cited by frustrated box mappers as one of WOTC's most genious uses of thermodynamics since the Ravnica block. No one knows what lies at the core of the booster box, but scientists theorize that it must be especially dense in order to make up for the large amount of fluff distributed amongst the booster packs.
58232598 wrote:
88993869 wrote:
Torpor Orb is absolutely godawful against Vexing Devil.
whoever is playing vexing devil is probably losing anyways
56957928 wrote:
I imagine [Ajani 3's] second ability involves him hurling the creature at your opponent Brion Stoutarm style, then the guy is just like "Okay, that may have worked, but don't- GOD DAMN IT!" as he does it again because cats don't give a **** :33.
56957928 wrote:
"Do or do not, there is no try." - Albus Dumbledore, The Lord of the Rings.
89522235 wrote:
68978039 wrote:
Its like that one time Elves broke out in a field of Jund. Elves became a resurgent hit, then died off again once Jund adapted to the rest of the field of G/W that it required mass removal that inherently pooped on Elves too. Submit to the menace. Delver can, and will blot out the sun.
Then we shall play in the shade.
89522235 wrote:
I'm sorry, this forum isn't for getting bad advice on mediocre decks, that's standard deck help. This forum is for starting ****storms.
97820278 wrote:
139359831 wrote:
Your advice would only lead me to make generic, boring, and unworthy content. It's of no use to me.
I just got this image of you as an architect, having finished a building suspended by only a small pole in its southwest corner, saying it's original. Then the building collapses.
56957928 wrote:
I for one love the flavor of legendary lands. "I remember my days as a youth at Tolarian Academy." "Wow, small multiverse, I actually went there too." "WAIT, DON'T- Well ****, there's $200,000 in student loans well spent."
56957928 wrote:
And flavor goes out the window when you cast a second copy of a planeswalker right after the first one dies, so... "Hey Nissa, I need a favor." "You just asked me for a 'favor' like thirty seconds ago, and it turned out to be having Sarkhan Transmogrify my only follower into a dragon like 5 times -which dickery aside also violates some laws of causality - and then you let me get beaten over the head by that hedron crab." "...I'll give you " "...Well all right then."
57150868 wrote:
GM, I don't think Dill is better than you. I KNOW it. Even if he wakes up every morning, clubs a baby seal, steals all the TV remotes from within a block's radius of his house and then robs hungry orphans of their food he'd be better than you, for the simple reason that he learns from his mistakes.
143211137 wrote:
57033358 wrote:
Tamiyo vs. Gideon
What would they have to fight about? Like, all I can think of now is Gideon going "Hey, long-ears! I'm gathering a group of 'Walkers together to fight some tentacle monsters.....you want in?" and Tamiyo going "Ew! Hentai no bakka Gideon-desu desu!" and flying away.
76783093 wrote:
I open 4 packs just to be on the safe side. Not only do I get more cards than everyone else, but I also get to spend the rest of the night off. Win Win.
191752181 wrote:
MaRo has a thing for people opening boosters with bad cards. But since he can only get so many bad cards printed in each set, he has found a devious way of getting more bad cards into circulation: He makes entire print sheets with just bad rares, then puts them onto the assembly line. He proceeds to wring his hands and twirl his evil mustache that he grew for twirling purposes as a lightning bolt strikes in the background. Afterwards, he goes to make sure that the good cards are only opened by everyone's friends, and that we all only get to open bad cards. He does this by memorising each booster, than switching them around accordingly. Whenever someone complains about a card, he immediately jumps out from behind a chair to yell "WELL, IT'S NOT FOR YOU!" before merging back into the shadows in order to devise new ways in which he can screw over players, then claim that he has valid reasons for doing so.
97820278 wrote:
192729031 wrote:
You open a booster pack, and staring back at you from the rare slot is a Lotleth Troll? At least I can stick him in my EDH deck and still have four for my standard constructed.
Because lol troll
56874518 wrote:
It helped that I more or less skipped most of GM_Champion's longer diatribes. I only have so many brain cells I'm willing to sacrifice each day.
192931349 wrote:
Mark Rosewater is sitting in a seemingly innocuous cable TV van, outside of Bankaimastery's house. Sitting nearby are two hardened criminal hackers, fresh out of prison, and filled with resentment at their lack of physical fitness. "Have you managed to hack his brainwaves yet? The set deadline's coming up fast." "We're almost through. It should be coming up on the screen any second." The hacker presses a button, and Kevin's thoughts flash onto the screen. Mark and the hackers stare in amazement at the sheer beauty, the elegance, and the raw truth of what they see. It's like the ending to 2001: A Space Odyssey. Brilliant light shines across the screen, the truth of existence is made clear to them, and they despair at their own foolishness, their own ignorance, their own inadequacy. And then they steal his ideas. As they return back to R&D, Mark sneers at a haggard old man chained to a cast-iron sphere. The man looks up from his laborious task of breaking rocks in the dungeon of Wizards of the Coast headquarters, and asks a question: "Kevin, my greatest student. He - he's all right, isn't he? You didn't hurt him?" Mark deals him a weighty blow with his boot. "Know your place, Richard. Get back to work."
57023768 wrote:
Now show me on the Garruk doll where Zac Hill ruined your enjoyment of Magic...
63711769 wrote:
I'm only opposed to it because it bears so little relation to how people actually play the game. The example of Miracles is actually a much better one then the Clone example I was trying to use. From the game's perspective, the card can move instantly from face down in the library to revealed in the hand and that's fine for the rules. But in real life, we can't actually do that, so the card spends a good bit of time in locations that are neither where that player's library is nor where that player's hand is. And that's fine for real life. What I don't want is the disconnect to be explicitly codified. Along the lines of
183664.697 A game of Magic as laid out by these rules exists only as a pure Platonic ideal, utterly unrealizable by fallible mortals limited by the confines of physicality and the ravages of evil and sin. 183664.698 The cake is a lie, too.
I know it's true, but I don't want the rules to actually straight-up tell me that.
147137503 wrote:
77120821 wrote:
Pfft this cant be serious can it? If it is please delete your account OP. Its not even close to ban worthy, considering what JTMS and stoneforge had to accomplish to get banned i see the WotC selling magic to aquire Pokemon before that ever happens.
I'm trying to imagine sorin markov as a gym leader in one of those pokemon games which you have to beat him to get his badge... somehow I imagine that he would stab you in the chest with his sword before giving you the badge, even if you beat his pokemon....
196239043 wrote:
Personally, I'd be fine with tea time but then I'm not gonna waste the mana summoning Emrakul, the Aeons Torn. He always takes all the sugar, drinks the whole pot of Earl Grey and doesn't even say thank you. SO. RUDE.

 

JustTerrorIt wrote:

 

JuliusPringle wrote:

All I want to do is sit down and play magic, but when I walked in yesterday, (since I didn't talk to anyone) nobody talked to me and I silently bought what I wanted and walked out.


If you don't talk to anyone, that increases the odds that no one will talk to you.

 

JuliusPringle wrote:

So how do I just... introduce myself? "Hi, my name is Adam, wanna play magic with me?" Do I go to the counter and talk to the cashier?


Yeah. Talk to the cashier. Tell him/her that you want a Black Lotus, and if they don't have one tell them that the store isn't on par with what you expected.

 

Reach into your back left pocket. Pull out a deck list that you copied directly from some ChannelFireball top 8 Standard discussion, and ask for all the cards, as is, on that list. Then, ask for some random, probably terrible cards from whatever set is Standard legal. Say it's tech for the upcoming changes in the metagame.

 

Pull out a deck, and tell some random dude you wanna test (you have to use the term "test" for this to work) for Standard. Make sure that deck contains Kitchen Finks and Alluring Siren. Maybe throw in Nyxathid for good measure.

 

Finally, before you leave, spill (make it look like an accident) one hundred singleton, random cards onto the floor. Pick them up, put them in a pile, and say "EEE-DEE-AYCH".

 

I know this sounds dumb at first, but it will work. With the method outlined above, you will draw the attention of players that play older formats by asking for cards that no one on Earth can reasonably afford. You will get the attention of the wanna-be pro, Stomp-n00bz players by pulling out a well known decklist and declare that you have "tech" to make it better. You will get the attention of all the kind, helpful players by seemingly not knowing the most common format by having non-Standard legal cards in a deck that you claim is Standard legal. Finally, you catch all the rest of the Magic players by saying "EEE-DEE-AYCH" (EDH (or Commander)).

And there you have it. You will be talking to more people than you would have wanted to talk to in no time.

 

Smoke_Stack wrote:

EDH is the best format anyway


See, it's starting already.

 

Break the Card
What is Break the Card?
Break the Card is a regular thread in the Cards and Combo Forum. Quite simply, the participants are given a Johnnystatic card (e.g. Xenograft) and are asked to build a deck around it. The winner and honorable mentions are sigged below. Get brewing!
Week 1 : Xenograft
This week's Break the Card was based around Xenograft. Thread : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27681049/Break_the_card_:_Xenograft?pg=1 Winner : Axterix with his Vampdrazi deck. Finalist : Vektor480 with his Ally/Golem/Plant deck. Honorable mentions : Zammm for the Turntimber Ranger combo and TinGorilla for suggesting Sarkhan the Mad.
Week 2 : Mindlock Orb
Here's the link to the Mindlock Orb contest : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27697565/Break_the_Card_:_Mindlock_Orb?sdb=1&pg=last#497536269 Winner : Axterix with his Maralen of the Mornsong deck. Honorable mentions : Void_Elemental.
Week 3 : Bludgeon Brawl
Here's the link to Break the Card : Bludgeon Brawl : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27715169/Break_the_Card_:_Bludgeon_Brawl?sdb=1&pg=last#498208797 Winner : Vektor and his Grab the World deck. Finalist : Crandor with his Awesome Aliteration deck. Honorable mentions : RP Jesus with his Wat deck and Zix200 with his Signet Renewal deck.
Week 4 : Followed Footsteps
This week was Followed Footsteps : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27748677/Break_the_Card_:_Followed_Footsteps?pg=1 Winner : Tevish_Szat with his Exponential Growth deck. Honorable mentions : Zix with his Carbon Copies deck and Escef with his Fungus of Speed and Time deck.
Week 5 : Delaying Shield
This week's card was Delaying Shield : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27790101/Break_the_Card_:_Delaying_Shield Winner : Tevish_Szat. Finalist : Vampire_Bat. Honorable Mention : Zix200.
Week 6 : Painter's Servant
This week's card was Painter's Servant : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27940861/Break_the_Card_:_Painters_Servant?pg=1 Winner : Tevish_Szat with his Paint it Black deck. Finalist : Wprundv with his Tiger, Tiger Painted Bright deck.
Week 7 : Venser, the Sojourner
This week's card was Venser, the Sojourner : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27977489/Break_the_Card_:_Venser,_the_Sojourner Winner : Izzett with her "Venser, Trickster Trader" deck. Finalist : Wprundv with his "Tactical Sojourner Action" deck.
Week 8 : Personal Sanctuary
This week's card was Personal Sanctuary : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/28005461/Break_the_card_:_Personal_Sanctuary Winner : MrQuizzles. Honorable mention : Vampire_Bat and UbberSheep
Week 9 : Sundial of the Infinite
This week's card was Sundial of the Infinite : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/28038277/Break_the_card_:_Sundial_of_the_Infinite Finalist : Izzett with her "Afterlife Trespassers" deck. Winner : Xeromus with his "Fortune 500" deck.
Week 10 : Jace's Archivist
This week's card was Jace's Archivist : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/28063377/Break_the_Card_:_Jaces_Archivist. Finalists : Jentaru with his "Consecration of the Draw" deck and HereticSmitty with his "ADHD: The deck" deck. Winner : JaxsonBateman with his "The Archives Are Endless!" deck.
Week 11 : Search the City
This week's card was Search the City : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29518555/Break_the_Card_:_Search_the_City Finalist : Mown with "A Thousand Footsteps". Winner : Desolation_masticore with "Burn the City".
Week 12 : Fiend Hunter
This week's card was Fiend Hunter : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29530975/Break_the_Card_:_Fiend_Hunter Winner : Yuyu63 with "Carnival Hunting". Honorable mention : Dknowle's "Champion the Fiend".
Week 13 : Clock of Omens
This week's card was Clock of Omens : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29541549/Break_the_Card_:_Clock_of_Omens?pg=1 Winner : Dknowle's "The Myrs Go Marching".
Week 14 : Light of Sanction
This week's card was Light of Sanction : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29607219/Break_the_Card_:_Light_of_Sanction?pg=1 Winner : Zauzich's "Divine Plague".
Week 15 : Assemble the Legion
This week's card was Assemble the Legion : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29662307/Break_the_Card_:_Assemble_the_Legion Winner : JBTM's "Some Assembly Required".
Week 16 : High Tide
This week's cards were High Tide and/or Bubbling Muck : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29760427/Break_the_Card_:_High_Tide Winner : Mown's "Puppet Strings".
Week 17 : Illusionist's Bracers
This week's card was Illusionist's Bracers : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29776943/Break_the_Card_:_Illusionistss_Bracers Winner : Enigma256's "Tezzeret's Bracers"
Week 18 : Savor the Moment
This week's card was Savor the Moment : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29787235/Break_the_Card_:_Savor_the_Moment Winner : POSValkir's "A Savory Filibuster!"
Week 19 : Grinning Ignus
This week's card was Grinning Ignus : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29795547/Break_the_Card_:_Grinning_Ignus Winner : dknowle's "Luren' and Laughin'".
Week 20 : Transcendence
This week's card was Transcendence : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29806481/Break_the_Card_:_Transcendence Winners : Mown's "Transcending Timing Restrictions" and Dknowle's "Blinded by Greed", tied for the win.
Week 21 : Mortus Strider
This week's card was Mortus Strider : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29818471/Break_the_Card_:_Mortus_Strider Winner : SimonGlume's "Mortus Head".
Week 22 : High Priest of Penance
This week's card was High Priest of Penance : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29917231/Break_the_Card_High_Priest_of_Penance Winners : JBTM's "Two Clerics and a Goblin walk into a (Bom)bar(dment)..." and POSValkir1's "Choke Their Rivers with Our Dead!".
Week 23 : False Cure
This week's card was False Cure :http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29964239/Break_the_Card_:_False_Cure Winner : Dknowle's "When Hippos Fly".

Week 24 : Akroan Horse

This week's card was Akroan Horse : http://community.wizards.com/forum/cards-and-combos/threads/4024821.

Winner : Dknowle's "Indian Giver".

Week 25 : Leylines

This week saw multiple cards being in the contest : all of the Leylines! http://community.wizards.com/forum/cards-and-combos/threads/4067621

Winner : POSValkir1's "Laying the Battle Lines".

There are already costs that do something in the future.

Example:

Cloak of Confusion - You may have it assign no combat damage this turn. If you do, ...

What if there is no combat damage for some other reason? (removal from combat, for example)
Cloak of Confusion was not the cause of no combat damage this turn then, so the cost is not paid.

This is analogous to how one cannot sacrifice a creature to an effect and also consider that as payment of a cost. It must be the cost causing it or it is not considered paid. In case og Cloak of Confusion, however, there is no way to know this in advance.
Let's imagine for a second that Dominus of Fealthy's ability said 'permanent' instead of creature. This shouldn't change much rules-wise, right ? Now let's bring a shrouded Guardian Beast into the mix and an artifact under that player's control. If Dominus targets that artifact, is the cost considered paid?

The way you ask your question for this case sounds out of the ordinary. You're forcing the fact that it's a cost into the question even though it's unnecessary in this case.
Is applying the continuous effect enough ?

You're implying that even if you don't gain control of the creature, the duration that's tugged to that control effect somehow still exists. But you can't split the action like that. the duration has no meaning by itself, you don't get "apply nothing until end of turn".

Not to mention, Guardian Beast doesn't replace "control changes" it disallows it from happening in the first place. You'd need an actual case where an action with a duration can be replaced to do nothing. And I don't think there's even a case where a duration-based action* can be replaced at all.

*(gain control; gain ability; P/T effects; becomes unblockable/indestructible or have some other rule-changing effect applied)
You're implying that even if you don't gain control of the creature, the duration that's tugged to that control effect somehow still exists. But you can't split the action like that. the duration has no meaning by itself, you don't get "apply nothing until end of turn".

---

I admit the rules don't point in either direction.

There are very few things which can stop a continuous effect from doing anything, so this is understandable.
(Only Guardian Beast comes to mind)

If it is indeed the case that a continuous effect, which is negated/suppressed, completely ceases to exist, this would solve this issue. (meaning the guardian beast + herald issue. The issue with the Cloak of Confusion stands. (Assuming you still answer 'no' to the question whether applying the continuous effect is enough), I think answering yes would have no bad sides now.)

I would have argued that adding another effect to that same duration would still make the duration relevant, but
"You control target creature and it gets +1/+1 until end of turn."
could be interpreted as a short notation for
"You control target creature until end of turn. It gets +1/+1 until end of turn.", making it a duration per effect,
which doesn't help my case.
Sign In to post comments