Constructed Angers me

42 posts / 0 new
Last post
Every set they come out with these cool abilities like metalcraft, infect, detain, unleash, scavenge, populate, etc. and far too often they have little to no impact on any constructed formats anywhere (shut up EDH is not a real format). 

This is stupid and dumb and no fun. If I don't get at least two Cipher cards that are constructed viable I'm going to be pissed.

Why must design make all these sweet abilities and yet leave us playing constructed without them? 

3,000th post: September 5, 2010 4,000th post: March 24, 2012 Winner of the YMTC Ravnica War of the Guilds contest as guild Dimir.

Snapcaster Mage is the best card of all time. How do you deal?

Would you prefer they intentionally print powerful cards to showcase new mechanics?

Would you prefer they intentionally print powerful cards to showcase new mechanics?




Better then them intentionally printing powerful cards to do nothing.

*cough* thragtusk *cough* 

3,000th post: September 5, 2010 4,000th post: March 24, 2012 Winner of the YMTC Ravnica War of the Guilds contest as guild Dimir.

Snapcaster Mage is the best card of all time. How do you deal?

Infect hasn't an impact on constructed formats? 

Most of these abilities are mana intensive and require you to jump through hoops to accomplish them. Cards that are good on their own have high constructed value compared to cards in which you need to combine them with others to be good. This is just obvious. This is why Cipher might fail. You need creatures to make it do something and that could be its downfall.  
... far too often they have little to no impact on any constructed formats anywhere (shut up EDH is not a real format).



Must be nice when you get the privilege to write off a format as "not real" because it does not conform to your argument. Where do you apply for that?

Scope my YouTube channel!

Here's a shout out for Scholars' Books & Games in Bridgewater, MA, and for Paladin's Place in Darmstadt, Hessen, Germany where I was stationed for two years. Support your FLGS!

Attacking the darkness since 1987, turning creatures sideways since 1994.

He's obviously talking about competitive formats, also most keywords don't have that many cards that are good in EDH either.

The reason most cards with these mechanics suck in Constructed is that most cards suck in Constructed. Really as simple as that.
blah blah metal lyrics
Most cards suck in constructed? I'm not sure about this one, but vintage constructed got pretty solid cards
Most cards suck in standard?
I love trolls Dont hate me because I'm blunt and you cannot handle it
Most cards suck in constructed? I'm not sure about this one, but vintage constructed got pretty solid cards
Most cards suck in standard?


Most cards are not constructed worthy, even in EDH. That's just the way it is. Not every card is going to be in the top 60 of its color. You don't get a medal just for participating (unless you're in the Army, than you get two).

Scope my YouTube channel!

Here's a shout out for Scholars' Books & Games in Bridgewater, MA, and for Paladin's Place in Darmstadt, Hessen, Germany where I was stationed for two years. Support your FLGS!

Attacking the darkness since 1987, turning creatures sideways since 1994.

Nyktos is correct.  The vast majority of cards are unplayable in any constructed format.  Standard has teh highest percent of playables in terms of the actual card pool, yet count how many cards are actually played.

Still, saying that the keywords don't get played is flat out wrong.  Undying (Geralf's Messenger, Strangleroot Geist), flashback (Think Twice, Forbidden Alchemy, Snapcaster Mage), "transform" (Delver of Secrets, Huntmaster of the Fells, unleash (Rakdos Cackler), metalcraft (Tempered Steel was a deck after all), soulbond (Silverblade Paladin, Wolfir Silverheart and miracle (Bonfire of the Damned, Terminus) are/were pretty common in Standard.  Infect would have been bigger if it weren't for Delver being absolutely everywhere (Vapor Snag and Gut Shot make pump spells cry).  Even then, Inkmoth Nexus got played a ton.
Nyktos is correct.  The vast majority of cards are unplayable in any constructed format.  Standard has teh highest percent of playables in terms of the actual card pool, yet count how many cards are actually played.

Still, saying that the keywords don't get played is flat out wrong.  Undying (Geralf's Messenger, Strangleroot Geist), flashback (Think Twice, Forbidden Alchemy, Snapcaster Mage), "transform" (Delver of Secrets, Huntmaster of the Fells, unleash (Rakdos Cackler), metalcraft (Tempered Steel was a deck after all), soulbond (Silverblade Paladin, Wolfir Silverheart and miracle (Bonfire of the Damned, Terminus) are/were pretty common in Standard.  Infect would have been bigger if it weren't for Delver being absolutely everywhere (Vapor Snag and Gut Shot make pump spells cry).  Even then, Inkmoth Nexus got played a ton.



Don't forget unburial.


Hell, new mechanics have some eternal viability.

Any time we see a very modest bleed into eternal, a significant effect on standard and a f***fest, er I mean funfest of a limited environment (I suppose I should mention block too. Does anyone actually play block? I mean, I've been known to play my share of a limited expansion league or three but that's a much better, I mean different kettle of fish) then it's a success and an awesome adventure in finding out if the great MarNagGo axis are showing any signs of running low on design space.
76783093 wrote:
Luckily, we have stop-having-fun guys to remind us that having anything more than 60 cards in your deck is tantamount to being a rapist and anyone considering it should be strung up by their ****.
Infect hasn't an impact on constructed formats?



I'd say infect had an impact to the point that I was playing Suicide Rakdos, a deck specifically developed as anti-infect, and coming in in the top X (where X is correlated to the number of people there) quite regularly after MBS came out.

Then people realized Sword of Feast and Famine went well with Squadron Hawk and Stoneforge Mystic.

I still use Ritual into Phyrexian Vatmother in Legacy. It's a good way to take advantage of how nobody plays with poison.
139359831 wrote:
Clever deduction Watson! Maybe you can explain why Supergirl is trying to kill me.
---- Autocard is your friend. Lightning Bolt = Lightning Bolt
Most cards suck in constructed? I'm not sure about this one, but vintage constructed got pretty solid cards


www.thefreedictionary.com/most
Thanks to Long_Con for the avatar.
River Guide
56756068 wrote:
58147568 wrote:
121816979 wrote:
56819178 wrote:
147112461 wrote:
Hi everyone,I have two questions. 1. If my opponent already controlled a planewalker , then he cast avacyn,angle of hope ,and resolved on battlefield.Now his planewalker in indestructible right?
[c]Avacyn, Angel of Hope[/c] -> Avacyn, Angel of Hope
No need to be so obtuse, maybe he's just trying to complement her. That's not too radical of a concept, I mean she is pretty acute, right?.
This right here should be a bannable offense :p
No, not an outright banning, that's too easy. He should be punished ... ... by degrees.
Then there are ones that suck in both limited and constructed.
139359831 wrote:
Clever deduction Watson! Maybe you can explain why Supergirl is trying to kill me.
---- Autocard is your friend. Lightning Bolt = Lightning Bolt
Most cards suck in constructed? I'm not sure about this one, but vintage constructed got pretty solid cards


www.thefreedictionary.com/most



Nice link, now tell me how the constructed standard list is different from the limited standard list? You know, to make sure you did have a point and a reason to try to be a smartass. If I take card X in constructed and it's awful, it will still be awful in limited... just slightly less awful.... still it's the same card pool.
I love trolls Dont hate me because I'm blunt and you cannot handle it
Nice link, now tell me how the constructed standard list is different from the limited standard list? You know, to make sure you did have a point and a reason to try to be a smartass. If I take card X in constructed and it's awful, it will still be awful in limited... just slightly less awful.... still it's the same card pool.

Have you ever actually played Limited?
blah blah metal lyrics
Nice link, now tell me how the constructed standard list is different from the limited standard list? You know, to make sure you did have a point and a reason to try to be a smartass. If I take card X in constructed and it's awful, it will still be awful in limited... just slightly less awful.... still it's the same card pool.

Have you ever actually played Limited?



Yes

I put a JTMS at turn 4 in constructed and I put it at turn 4 in limited, both time it's an awesome card, right?
I love trolls Dont hate me because I'm blunt and you cannot handle it
Must be nice when you get the privilege to write off a format as "not real" because it does not conform to your argument. Where do you apply for that?

EDH is a real format, since people do play it.

However, it is a very specialized format, since there is the Commander, and the other cards have to share its colors; it thus doesn't share the same basic Magic play experience as the Constructed formats - Standard, Extended, Modern, Legacy, and Vintage - that only differ in their card pool.

Terming EDH "not real", therefore, while certainly not accurate, and indeed somewhat dismissive to the people who play it, is still legitimate enough as a quick shorthand dismissal of it from the argument as not being a format he is concerned with - that is, if certain new keywords are only effective in EDH, that isn't enough to make the keywords worthwhile, at least for him.

He is complaining that these new keywords aren't getting enough powerful cards to make them useful in plain ordinary Constructed formats; the special nature of EDH as a format designed to facilitate more casual play may make the keywords work - but it also may make it less interesting to people who enjoy normal Constructed play. There's nothing hard to understand about that.

Coming up with weird ideas to make everyone happy since 2008!

 

I have now started a blog as an appropriate place to put my crazy ideas.

@MoiMoi, obvious insanely good card is obviously insanely good in either format.  However, what about something like Collective Blessing?  The card is INSANE in Limited, completely unplayable in Constructed.  The point is that your card evaluations change greatly when you have to make do with what you get (Limited) and when you can build with few restrictions (Constructed).

There are very few true unplayables in Limited (hell, in 3x INN, there probably wasn't a single card that was strictly unplayable).  Once you move to Block (and that's played online only), I'd guess that 60% of cards become unplayable (if not more).  Once you move into Standard, that probably goes up to 75%.  Once you get to Modern, it's likely 85-90%.  Once you hit Legacy, 95+% of the cards are unplayable (there's usually 2-4 playable cards in each set).
Nice link, now tell me how the constructed standard list is different from the limited standard list? You know, to make sure you did have a point and a reason to try to be a smartass. If I take card X in constructed and it's awful, it will still be awful in limited... just slightly less awful.... still it's the same card pool.



Some exceptions:

*A number of combo pieces are inherently bad in limited because they're not good without the other card. During Dark Ascension Sealed, I got three mythics in one pool. I eschewed Essence of the Wild and Helvault but used Drogskol Reaver.
*Removal spells. No matter how overcosted a removal spell is, it's inherently playable in limited, so long as it isn't too narrow.
*Rise of the Eldrazi. The whole thing is more or less black/green ramp, when you consider colorless bombs at all rarities.
139359831 wrote:
Clever deduction Watson! Maybe you can explain why Supergirl is trying to kill me.
---- Autocard is your friend. Lightning Bolt = Lightning Bolt
Nice link, now tell me how the constructed standard list is different from the limited standard list? You know, to make sure you did have a point and a reason to try to be a smartass. If I take card X in constructed and it's awful, it will still be awful in limited... just slightly less awful.... still it's the same card pool.

Have you ever actually played Limited?



Yes

I put a JTMS at turn 4 in constructed and I put it at turn 4 in limited, both time it's an awesome card, right?



Stab Wound is insane in Limited.  In constructed standard, it's pretty much bleh.  Golgari Long-Leg is also very playable in limited.  It is awful in standard constructed.  Launch Party can be good removal in limited.  Guess where it lands in constructed?  That's just RtR. 

Just because one card is good in both settings does not prove that everything good in one setting is good in another.  Some are obviously good, such as Thragtusk.  Other are combo pieces.  So your point about Jace is moot.
I put a JTMS at turn 4 in constructed and I put it at turn 4 in limited, both time it's an awesome card, right?

So do you expect Pack Rat to be crush the next Standard PT then?

Because a lot of very good players consider it among the most broken Limited cards of all time.
blah blah metal lyrics
Every set they come out with these cool abilities like metalcraft, infect, detain, unleash, scavenge, populate, etc. and far too often they have little to no impact on any constructed formats anywhere (shut up EDH is not a real format). 

This is stupid and dumb and no fun. If I don't get at least two Cipher cards that are constructed viable I'm going to be pissed.

Why must design make all these sweet abilities and yet leave us playing constructed without them? 



I think it's mostly due to them trying to squeeze 5 mechanics into a set. I think we're seeing the same thing in Gatecrash where the set mechanics are slightly underpowered thanks to the fact that they're trying to balance 5 set mechanics against each other.

Infect and metalcraft on the other hand each have modern viable decklists with cards that utilize those mechanics not to mention the fact that each was played in standard.
Don't be too smart to have fun
Launch Party can be good removal in limited.

I really don't understand anything about that card. I don't understand why it costs more mana than Murder. I don't understand what the name has to do with the card. I especially don't understand the flavor text in the context of the card. Who decided it would be acceptable to print that card?
I really don't understand anything about that card. I don't understand why it costs more mana than Murder. I don't understand what the name has to do with the card. I especially don't understand the flavor text in the context of the card. Who decided it would be acceptable to print that card?

It costs more mana than Murder because R&D didn't want it to be so insanely good in Limited that the decks that could best take advantage of the sacrifice wouldn't get to play it in drafts. The name is because the Rakdos are having a party around launching some guy out of a cannon. (Or the Ravnica equivalent thereof.) The flavor text is making a humorous counterpoint to the card's effect--the guy's life is short because he's doing the thing he loves. (Which apparently is getting shot out of a cannon at someone else.) Every member of Return to Ravnica's development team decided printing it was acceptable.

Hope that helps. ;)

Come join me at No Goblins Allowed


Because frankly, being here depresses me these days.

OP:
Because Zac Hill had no idea what the hell he was doing. I'm not even joking either (I wish I was.) Zac approached the FFL with an ideal metagame in mind which consisted of Aggro, Disruptive Aggro and Midrange because he believed that Control and Combo decks alienate new players by being counterintuitive and difficult. In this sense the FFL was been pigeonholed into designing a great metagame within the context of the kind of constructed games they wanted you to play. But it's pretty obvious they deliberately avoided stress testing specific types of cards and decks, and the constructed metagames are suffering because of it.

Rather, when designing the last few Standard seasons, R&D didn't notice the obviously bonkers self-building Tempo decks that had too many tools for the limited supply of those in the format- and when we asked why these types of decks exist, the answers we got were mostly excuses in the vain of "well, it's the same thing as a control deck- Except that it doesn't have to wait to put it's threats online, or milk drawspells for contingency, because it will beat you before the game starts to drag." And the "failsafes" like Cavern of Souls were so poorly timed and placed that they actually undermined the idea of hosing a degenerate deck.

In the world of hee-haw creature threats, dubiously bad non-creature threats, unpunishable greedy manabases, and removal that is becoming more finnicky with each set there is no place for "gimmic" mechanics outside of limited, because we're just going to piggyback 3 or 4  haymaker creatures, cheap draw and temporary removal or easy counters to keep our opponent from getting back into the game. Because for the time being, Magic is way too easy.

EDIT: Lyev Skyknight, Martial Law and Azorius Justiciar are fine detainment spells. I've seen use out of Inaction Injunction as a spare cantrip in creature matchups.  And I've seen both Azorius Arrester and New Prahv Guildmage tinkered with. The castable spells are there but we can't break through  2/3rds of the time because, the disparity between these cards and the "good cards" is pretty heavy.
IMAGE(http://i998.photobucket.com/albums/af108/acatan/sigwynzermancopy.png) Signature by IMAGE(http://www.poke-amph.com/heartgoldsoulsilver/sprites/258.png)

Maybe it's just me but detain seems like a really lame ability. Martial Law looks like it would be effective but most of the others seem like they'd generally be way better if they bounced the creature or did something other than just sit the creature out for a single turn. If it were me I'd actually try making detain untargetted so it could hit hexproof things - at least then it would have a powerful effect that you might rather have over typical bounce or exile abilities.


Imagine Lyev Skyknight reading "When ~ comes into play, detain a non-land permanent an opponent controls. (*Existing reminder text* This is not a targetted ability.)"


"Detain a X an opponent controls" even sounds more eloquent than "Detain target x an opponent controls." I know the bit in the reminder text that I wrote about it not being a targetted ability is mostly redundant because the rules text doesn't use the word target, but that's the nature of reminder text I suppose.

Maybe it's just me but detain seems like a really lame ability. Martial Law looks like it would be effective but most of the others seem like they'd generally be way better if they bounced the creature or did something other than just sit the creature out for a single turn. If it were me I'd actually try making detain untargetted so it could hit hexproof things - at least then it would have a powerful effect that you might rather have over typical bounce or exile abilities.


You're underestimating the skyknight and way overestimating Martial Law. Law suffers from needing to survive a turn before it does anything, which makes it effectively a dead draw. It's insane in limited (But, once again, doens't mean a ton) but not so much in constructured because of that dead turn.

Skyknight on the other hand does a lot of work in the right deck. It's a solid beater and can help shut the opponent down for a turn. Even better, it can do two things a tempo deck needs to do in the same turn with one card: Slow down the opponent and gain a board presence. It'll stop a Planeswalker for a turn and is a valid Resto target. Seriously. It may not quite make top tier levels of playability, but the Skyknight is by far the best Detain card.

It's not a permanent lock, but the fact that it can handle whatever you would Detention Sphere for a turn means you can play it now and DetSphere later. 
Immature College Student (Also a Rules Advisor)
Maybe it's just me but detain seems like a really lame ability. Martial Law looks like it would be effective but most of the others seem like they'd generally be way better if they bounced the creature or did something other than just sit the creature out for a single turn. If it were me I'd actually try making detain untargetted so it could hit hexproof things - at least then it would have a powerful effect that you might rather have over typical bounce or exile abilities.


You're underestimating the skyknight and way overestimating Martial Law. Law suffers from needing to survive a turn before it does anything, which makes it effectively a dead draw. It's insane in limited (But, once again, doens't mean a ton) but not so much in constructured because of that dead turn.

Skyknight on the other hand does a lotof work in the right deck. It's a solid beater and can help shut the opponent down for a turn. Even better, it can do two things a tempo deck needs to do in the same turn with one card: Slow down the opponent and gain a board presence. It'll stop a Planeswalker for a turn and is a valid Resto target. Seriously. It may not quite make top tier levels of playability, but the Skyknight is by far the best Detain card.

I disagree completely on Martial Law being a dead draw. That's like saying Standstill or Bloodgift Demon are dead draws because they don't do anything/attack the turn you play them. I didn't even say I thought it was GOOD, just that it uses the ability in a seemingly effective way.

I also didn't say the Skyknight wasn't good, just that the ability itself isn't that good. Would you agree that 90% of the time you'd prefer it to just bounce the creature? There are exceptions to that but it's generally the case and it really holds the ability back in my opinion. Wouldn't you agree that making it untargetted improves every card with the ability both functionally and flavorfully? I mean, it's a guild ability, it SHOULD be good and flavorful.

I mean, you're actually wrong. Standstill does do something the turn you play it. It makes it so nobody casts spells anymore. Bloodgift Demon is also a creature so it can be part of combat if your opoonent attacks. Martial Law literally does nothing the turn you play it. It doesn't advance your board position the turn it comes into play. It's actually just bad. 
 I disagree completely on Martial Law being a dead draw. That's like saying Standstill or Bloodgift Demon are dead draws because they don't do anything/attack the turn you play them. I didn't even say I thought it was GOOD, just that it uses the ability in a seemingly effective way.

I also didn't say the Skyknight wasn't good, just that the ability itself isn't that good. Would you agree that 90% of the time you'd prefer it to just bounce the creature? There are exceptions to that but it's generally the case and it really holds the ability back in my opinion. Wouldn't you agree that making it untargetted improves every card with the ability both functionally and flavorfully? I mean, it's a guild ability, it SHOULD be good and flavorful.



As others have said: Standstill has the immediate effect of bringing the board to a halt. Bloodgift Demon is a creature. Neither of those is as important as the fact that Martial Law not only does nothing when it hits play, it also can be directly compared to other cards that do. Ultimately the flexibility of changing targets doesn't make up for the 'only creatures' thing and the four mana cost and the turn wait.

As for whether it would be better as bounce on Skyknight: I'm not certain actually. Bounce doesn't stop 'Walkers from Walking, it is an active negative against Swagtusk, Messenger, Thundermaw, and Resto, and does nothing against hasties like Ash Zealot. So no, I can't say that I would rather have Bounce actually. Maybe in a different format, but not this one.

As for untargeted? Of course that would be better. But it wouldn't make much sense from a design perspective and it would be counterintuitive. I don't think being able to hit untargetables makes sense flavorfully either.

I think you're expecting the wrong things from the ability. The ability isn't supposed to be an amazing shutdown tool. It's supposed to be a way to allow you to cast your beater without forcing you to choose between damage and disrupting the opponent's tempo. It fills that role incredibly well and it does so in a very balanced way.
Immature College Student (Also a Rules Advisor)
...and yet you never come to the limited forums.

Why does everyone think I'm phantom lancer? QFT:

Show
139359831 wrote:
I hope all this helps you to see things in a greater light—and understand that Magic: the Gathering was really created by extraterrestials using Richard Garfield as a medium. The game itself reflects the socio-psycho realtivity between living beings, and the science that takes precedence over them—to define reality for them all (like telekinesis, weather, scientific reaction, phenomenon, ingenuity, how the brain works, etc.). I'd also bet there is an entity floating thousands of miles above us, looking down on the current state of game, shaking its fist like... "Wtf are you doing?! You're getting it all screwed up!". Awkward—to be evolved, and yet still subject to the ladder that is the concepts of the game. In this case, misconception, corruption, and deception. With the realities of each color becoming distorted (through oblivious designers), leading the game to reflect a false state of reality that warps the understanding that other people have about those things. For example, people thinking that white could be anything except pure good. This shouldn't be too far off though, I mean...Magic is designed based on reality after all, so that entity (those entities) should be subject to those things. Anyways, I guess when you're busy doing space stuff you can't always be around to ensure quality control. It's no wonder they choose Garfield, they're so much alike; that's exactly what happened to him and Magic.
166199665 wrote:
omg snortng so much febbdelicious /intocixated in rl
 I disagree completely on Martial Law being a dead draw. That's like saying Standstill or Bloodgift Demon are dead draws because they don't do anything/attack the turn you play them. I didn't even say I thought it was GOOD, just that it uses the ability in a seemingly effective way.

I also didn't say the Skyknight wasn't good, just that the ability itself isn't that good. Would you agree that 90% of the time you'd prefer it to just bounce the creature? There are exceptions to that but it's generally the case and it really holds the ability back in my opinion. Wouldn't you agree that making it untargetted improves every card with the ability both functionally and flavorfully? I mean, it's a guild ability, it SHOULD be good and flavorful.



As others have said: Standstill has the immediate effect of bringing the board to a halt. Bloodgift Demon is a creature. Neither of those is as important as the fact that Martial Law not only does nothing when it hits play, it also can be directly compared to other cards that do. Ultimately the flexibility of changing targets doesn't make up for the 'only creatures' thing and the four mana cost and the turn wait.

As for whether it would be better as bounce on Skyknight: I'm not certain actually. Bounce doesn't stop 'Walkers from Walking, it is an active negative against Swagtusk, Messenger, Thundermaw, and Resto, and does nothing against hasties like Ash Zealot. So no, I can't say that I would rather have Bounce actually. Maybe in a different format, but not this one.

As for untargeted? Of course that would be better. But it wouldn't make much sense from a design perspective and it would be counterintuitive. I don't think being able to hit untargetables makes sense flavorfully either.

I think you're expecting the wrong things from the ability. The ability isn't supposed to be an amazing shutdown tool. It's supposed to be a way to allow you to cast your beater without forcing you to choose between damage and disrupting the opponent's tempo. It fills that role incredibly well and it does so in a very balanced way.

Standstill really has little immediate effect. The majority of the time your opponent isn't able to do anything on your turn anyway. Besides, if your argument is that its presence will affect your opponent is able to play you could still make that argument for Martial Law - it'll affect what creatures they can/should play. It's admittedly less powerful but it's certainly false that cards are dead draws if they have no immediate effect when you play them. Even if that effect is a response of targetted removal before it goes off that's still an effect, and potentially still as good as having the thing in play doing what it's intended to do. As far as the Demon being a creature... Does it REALLY do anything that first turn other than soak up removal? It's not even as if competitive magic players do a lot of blocking. That's how it is in most formats I've played, anyway, last I checked. Blocking isn't totally irrelevant, of course, and I already said soaking up removal can be a good thing, so this still just supports my point that cards aren't dead just because they don't do anything. Every card can do SOMETHING. It's the SITUATION that makes the something relevant enough to consider the card not dead.


Still, the arguements are neither here nor there because I was talking about the ability rather than the cards. Again, I didn't even claim that any of those cards are good or bad. I've placed in a tournament or two in my day, I understand tempo and know a thing or two about evaluating cards. In the grand scheme of things the ability just doesn't stand out. It's a named keyword ability associated with a guild, so it SHOULD stand out, but every card that implements it as far as I have seen is little better than one turn Arrest. This is useful, certainly, but as I said the MAJORITY of the time bounce is just better. You set the opponent back one turn guaranteed, potentially longer if they don't have the resources to play the card again or there is no opportunity to play it again because there are more pertinent plays to be made or if they suspect you have a counter or something. They also lose any enchantments or other cards attached to them or committed to them being in play as well as any counters on them. They have to actually take the time and resources to correct what you did. The cards you named are the exceptions - which I already acknowledged exist - where it may not be a good idea to bounce the targets, but they are definitely not the rule.


Of course making it untargetted makes sense. Physically detaining a creature or object has nothing to do with magic, so it makes logical sense that being "hexproof" or "shrouded" in a protective aura would have little effect. What difference would it make if you are bulletproof or resistant to enchantment if I physically grab you up and lock you in a jail cell? It's a flavorful and practical way to make the ability, which is mediocre in the grand scheme of things, really unique and stand out. I'm not just talking about one format like standard, I'm talking about THE GAME. Even the untargetted thing wouldn't matter the majority of the time but it's at least something cool and interesting and useful.

Still, the arguements are neither here nor there because I was talking about the ability rather than the cards. Again, I didn't even claim that any of those cards are good or bad. I've placed in a tournament or two in my day, I understand tempo and know a thing or two about evaluating cards. In the grand scheme of things the ability just doesn't stand out. It's a named keyword ability associated with a guild, so it SHOULD stand out, but every card that implements it as far as I have seen is little better than one turn Arrest. This is useful, certainly, but as I said the MAJORITY of the time bounce is just better. You set the opponent back one turn guaranteed, potentially longer if they don't have the resources to play the card again or there is no opportunity to play it again because there are more pertinent plays to be made or if they suspect you have a counter or something. They also lose any enchantments or other cards attached to them or committed to them being in play as well as any counters on them. They have to actually take the time and resources to correct what you did. The cards you named are the exceptions - which I already acknowledged exist - where it may not be a good idea to bounce the targets, but they are definitely not the rule.

Of course making it untargetted makes sense. Physically detaining a creature or object has nothing to do with magic, so it makes logical sense that being "hexproof" or "shrouded" in a protective aura would have little effect. What difference would it make if you are bulletproof or resistant to enchantment if I physically grab you up and lock you in a jail cell? It's a flavorful and practical way to make the ability, which is mediocre in the grand scheme of things, really unique and stand out. I'm not just talking about one format like standard, I'm talking about THE GAME. Even the untargetted thing wouldn't matter the majority of the time but it's at least something cool and interesting and useful.



Ignoring argument over immediate effect or not as per your request that it be considered irrelevant.

So as to two remaining points:
The Bounce VS Detain argument is silly as it implies that you would be getting it at the same rate. Bounce is in most cases (In environments besides current standard at least) more effective than detain, but it also costs more. Lyev Mistknight would not have been a 3/1. Likewise, Azorius Adept would not have been a 2/1. If detain was bounce it wouldn't have been costed so aggressively.

As for Hexproof making flavor sense: I think that's more an issue with Hexproof not being flavorful a lot of the time. There's no obvious reason why the Geist of Saint Traft can dodge a Shock but a Latch Seeker can't. Why is Dungrove Elder immune to being Incinerated? Flavorfully it varies from creature to creature, but mechanically it very much would be counterintuitive for it not to target since it's a negative effect which affects only a specific creature/permanent. I can't think of another example of such a thing that isn't targetted that was printed recently except something like Tribute to Hunger, and that targets players at least.
Immature College Student (Also a Rules Advisor)
Stop reading after you were completely wrong about standstill. Obviously never played with it or against it. 
Stop reading after you were completely wrong about standstill. Obviously never played with it or against it. 

Hergaderpaderg, yeah, obviously there's no way I play a competitive legacy deck with 4 copies of the card, all because you disagree with a post that I made on the internet.

I don't see how you even disagree - Standstill generally doesn't DO anything the turn you play it. Standstill doesn't generally DO anything at all until something triggers it (and that's not on the turn that you play it probably better than 90% of the time.) This is a demonstrable fact. The point was that a card isn't dead just because it doesn't immediately DO something and a card that doesn't immediately DO something can still affect the game. Sometimes Standstill is a dead card, sometimes it isn't, but when (or if) it will be triggered is irrelevant to all of that. The same goes for any card mentioned in the context we were discussing and every card in Magic.


And you STILL entirely miss the point of my post which started this conversation, which was about a particular ability rather than the cards the ability is printed on.

Yeah, being forced to play around standstill means it hasn't actually done anything. Very interesting line of thought here. 

Top decks that don't do anything actually don't do anything. 
ITT: Shadow gets frustrated and eggs somebody on with the "you're either inexperienced or a moron" argument again. That person doesn't know when to just roll their eyes and let it go.

Ironman- Martial Law isn't Standstill, and it isn't particularly insane because it does have a delayed startup. It does however, keep your opponent's board suppressed quite well and at 4 can be played on a reasonable turn, or with removal backup. It's worth trying, but I get most of my work with it as a post-SB card to ensure that it's never truly a dead card.
IMAGE(http://i998.photobucket.com/albums/af108/acatan/sigwynzermancopy.png) Signature by IMAGE(http://www.poke-amph.com/heartgoldsoulsilver/sprites/258.png)
lol you got it. full tilt over here

Then argues my point. No biggie.  
Yeah, being forced to play around standstill means it hasn't actually done anything. Very interesting line of thought here. 

Top decks that don't do anything actually don't do anything. 

Youhave to play around martial law, too. You have to play around just about everything your opponent plays. Soo..... Are you going to just realize that we are in agreement yet?

If you would die during your opponents turn, Standstill can potentially prevent that from occuring.  If you play Martial Law, it has no effect at all until your next turn.  There is no potential for it to have any effect that might stop your opponent from killing you before your next turn.

I dont understand why this argument is still going on, its rather silly.

Current decks
Comments or suggestions are always welcome

Modern
nothing at the moment

You have to play around martial law, too. You have to play around just about everything your opponent plays. Soo..... Are you going to just realize that we are in agreement yet?



There's a difference between playing around and simply playing with the knowledge of. Standstill being in play actively alters your opponent's choices and incentivizes them to take actions they otherwise might not have or avoid doing things they otherwise would have. That's an immediate effect. It tells your opponent 'Casting your next spell will gain me a lot of card advantage'

Martial law on the other hand tells your opponent 'Do whatever, but know that I will lock down one of your creatures next turn.' That may be a menacing fact, but it doesn't really change how your opponent has to play. All it does is give them information and a turn to prepare for your negative effect. That's really my point: You treat it as though you're forcing them to play around it, but what you're doing is actually giving them free information. Sure, they may alter their choices based upon it, but they will be better choices because they now know what you're planning. And you can't defend that by saying 'Well, they still suffer' because other cards like the Skyknight or Detention Sphere also cause similar suffering without giving your opponent a full turn of warning.

In limited where you don't have many other options, if any, that's not a big deal but in Standard? You're lowering your counter shield for a turn to not remove the threat that was causing you problems in the first place. Or if there isn't a threat right now you're removing your ability to prevent one from showing up.

There are definitely games where it will be an all star but usually you're better off with either a detain card like the Skyknight with an immediate effect or a permanent piece of removal like Oblivion Ring that solves the problem right away.
Immature College Student (Also a Rules Advisor)