5/23/2013 Thursday Feature Article

183 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is for discussion Thursday's feature article which goes can be found here.
So what happens if I control Oracle of Mul Daya and play my two lands for the turn, then bounce and recast the oracle? Do I get another land drop or no?
So what happens if I control Oracle of Mul Daya and play my two lands for the turn, then bounce and recast the oracle? Do I get another land drop or no?



In this situation you can not play a second land because you've used up two land plays that turn with 1 oracle in play you still only have access to 2 land plays this turn and you have already used them. So unless you have another effect allowing you the option to play a third land that turn you can't play a third land.


I lost a round at a GP for mis-sideboarding. I deserved to lose it. None of this makes sense. The legend rule stuff is a joke. There was a problem with the rule that the person that drew it first got to have the card, and the other person was screwed. This reverts back to that. I play Visara. You play Visara. Guess what my Visara is going to kill? The problem that was fixed has been re-created. This is a step back for Magic, and quite frankly, you tack crap onto legends that need not be there that legend ruling them keeps games from devolving into unfun messes.
So what happens if I control Oracle of Mul Daya and play my two lands for the turn, then bounce and recast the oracle? Do I get another land drop or no?



Short answer: no. Longer answer: If you control Oracle of Mul Daya, you have two land drops. If you make both then bounce the Oracle, you will have one land drop available with two used while Oracle is in your hand. After you re-cast Oracle, you will have two land drops for the turn with two used. Since the math works out to 0 land drops (or less) with or without Oracle on the board, you don't get to play any more lands until your next turn.
So if I control an Oracle of Mul Daya, play two lands, then cast Explore, my opponent can Lightning Bolt my Oracle and the Explore won't let me play an extra land. That's weird.
So if I control an Oracle of Mul Daya, play two lands, then cast Explore, my opponent can Lightning Bolt my Oracle and the Explore won't let me play an extra land. That's weird.



Yep your correct on this one and I agree it makes the card not work as its intended to work.
There was a problem with the rule that the person that drew it first got to have the card, and the other person was screwed. This reverts back to that. I play Visara. You play Visara. Guess what my Visara is going to kill? The problem that was fixed has been re-created. This is a step back for Magic, and quite frankly, you tack crap onto legends that need not be there that legend ruling them keeps games from devolving into unfun messes.


How very specific of an example to use for unwarranted criticism. How does this apply to legends that DON'T have a kill ability again?
The only thing I dislike about these changes are Geist of Saint Traft and Sigarda, Host of Herons. In the cases of those cards, it feels like they were developed specifically to be kept in check by the clone/legend rule interaction. They kind of look like Braid of Fire now, in the sense that they just don't look like they make any sense without those rules interactions. Except, of course, that Geist was already a powerful tournament card before...

Actually, I'm just disappointed that development used the clone/legend rule interaction to balance out a couple of cards. The fact that it's gone now brings this into sharp focus.

Everything else is great. Phantasmal Image isn't Terror? Great. Same-character planeswalkers in the same deck? Great. The sideboard thing I don't really care about either way. Unblockable and Indestructible always stuck out to me as weird, so it's good to see them brought into line. And the bounce-your-Azusa thing always seemed wrong, so it's good to see that patched.
When you work for a corporation, it's important to show that you are doing things.  Otherwise you get fired and replaced by a person who is doing things. 
I lost a round at a GP for mis-sideboarding. I deserved to lose it. None of this makes sense. The legend rule stuff is a joke. There was a problem with the rule that the person that drew it first got to have the card, and the other person was screwed. This reverts back to that. I play Visara. You play Visara. Guess what my Visara is going to kill? The problem that was fixed has been re-created. This is a step back for Magic, and quite frankly, you tack crap onto legends that need not be there that legend ruling them keeps games from devolving into unfun messes.

Actually the person who just played Visara wins in that case since they can immediately destroy the old Visara. And no, you didn't deserve to lose a round at a GP. Magic is a game of strategy not book keeping.
Actually the person who just played Visara wins in that case since they can immediately destroy the old Visara.


Summoning sickness, btw.
From a flavor standpoint, its really weird to have two of the very same person on the battlefield fighting... Himself. But I guess weirder things have happened in the MTG universe.

from a commander standpoint: hexproof generals just got a lot better, and some strategies are now obsolete. On the other hand, now people can have the same generals and play in the same game without worry.

 From a speculation standpoint: Theros block is probably gonna be legendary intensive with a greco-roman theme similar in scope to Kamigawa. 

Overall, I'm game to see what happens. Should be interesting. 
There was a problem with the rule that the person that drew it first got to have the card, and the other person was screwed. This reverts back to that. I play Visara. You play Visara. Guess what my Visara is going to kill? The problem that was fixed has been re-created..


I ORing your ORing. I AoSerenity your AoSerenity. There's thousands of interactions like this in MtG, it's just a part of the game. What you describe doesn't deviate from how the game works already.
Great. Now I get to remove even more cards from my Muraganda Petroglyphs deck. First Hexproof, now Indestructible. At least make the keyword version "Indestructibility", please. Grammatically speaking "gains indestructibility" makes more sense than "gains indestructible." It still bugs the crap out of me that it's "gains hexproof" and not "is hexproof."

While the "legend rule" change is nice for Commander gameplay, I don't look forward to regular gameplay. And I've always viewed Magic as a type of RPG (which is what attracts me to the game). These rules changes for legendaries and planeswalkers get rid of that aspect of the game. It made sense to me that if both players had the same legendary or the same planeswalker, they both lose that permanent because the character portrayed by that permanent decides "Nope, you both want my help? Forget it, I have better things to do than play mediator for your squabbles." Now, if viewing the game as an RPG still, I'm not actually summoning these legendary things or planeswalkers, I'm summoning...Aetheric representations of them? That somehow have the EXACT same powers as the real things?

The sideboard thing I don't particularly care one way or another about, as I don't play in many competitive venues. Though I agree it should make for some very interesting games.

Rules Advisor from 8-26-09 to 1-31-14, reinstated (reactivated?) on 9-24-14 (been seeing more FNM, prerelease, and release events as of late)
Joined the crowd and got an Avatar from zammm's Avatar Workshop on 5-6-2012

Khans of Tarkir Clan Quiz
After three iterations of taking the quiz, it says each time that I'm Temur, the clan. Which is funny because the dual-color tests still yield the same two results as before.

That "Dual Colors" personality test thing
IMAGE(http://stat.rumandmonkey.com/tests/1/6/5261/20806.jpg)

I am Black/Green

Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!

Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.

I am both selfish and instinctive. I value growth and community, as long as they favour my own objectives; I enjoy nature, and I particularly enjoy watching parts of nature die. At best, I am resilient and tenacious; at worst, I'm uncontrollable and destructive.

Oh, but wait, there were multiple answers that fit my thoughts to some questions. What colors did they say I was?

IMAGE(http://stat.rumandmonkey.com/tests/1/6/5261/20801.jpg)

I am Blue/Green

I am both rational and instinctive. I value self-knowledge and understanding of the world; my ultimate goal is self-improvement and improvement of the world around me. At best, I am focused and methodical; at worst, I am obsessive and amoral.

So every legend from now on will be targetable, destructible, and/or not really annoying right?
honestly, the change i have the biggest issue with out of these is the lands one. it sounds to me that this makes things such as fetch lands, walking atlas, and any number of green fetch spells can no longer be used as desired or intended.  i'm probably just taking the djinn of wishes example to an illogical conclusion, but it's not necessarily an unreasonable one to draw from the article as written.

"Legendary" is a drawback.  Players like Legends.  Wizards hates printing cards with drawbacks.  Therefore the Legend rule needed to be softened.  (Likely not for the last time.)


I like it better for Planeswalkers than for Legends, because there's no summoning sickness. When both cancel, there was a distinct lack of parity.  (My PW cancels with yours, but I already got an activation because I was a turn faster.)  This was super-noticeable back in the Caw-Blade days when sticking Jace first was all that mattered.


However, Legend destruction has been a power constraint at the worst of times.  As bad as Jitte was, at least they destroyed each other rather than facing off to completely dominate games.  And it's not like Pacifism was any kind of overpowered when it was used to blank 2 copies intead of 1.


On the whole, this will have a subtle "play more copies" effect on deckbuilding.  This will diminish variance and I would contend make Magic games less fun.  But only subtly.  And as power creep we can probably expect a positive reaction to the change from most players.

If you're on MTGO check out the Free Events via PDCMagic and Gatherling.

Other games you should try:
DC Universe Online - action-based MMO.  Free to play.  Surprisingly well-designed combat and classes.

Planetside 2 - Free to play MMO-meets-FPS and the first shooter I've liked in ages.
Simunomics - Free-to-play economy simulation game.

honestly, the change i have the biggest issue with out of these is the lands one. it sounds to me that this makes things such as fetch lands, walking atlas, and any number of green fetch spells can no longer be used as desired or intended.  i'm probably just taking the djinn of wishes example to an illogical conclusion, but it's not necessarily an unreasonable one to draw from the article as written.



Putting a land on the battleifeld and playing a land are two different actions. Fetchlands put lands onto the battlefield (as do Farseek and Rampant Growth). Djinn of Wishes specifically tells you to play the revealed card or exile it.

If, however, fetch spells and lands were worded like this:

"Search your library for a {quality} land, play that land, then shuffle your library."

Then we'd have a problem. But they're not worded that way. So there is no problem. Except with "You may play an additional land" effects.

Rules Advisor from 8-26-09 to 1-31-14, reinstated (reactivated?) on 9-24-14 (been seeing more FNM, prerelease, and release events as of late)
Joined the crowd and got an Avatar from zammm's Avatar Workshop on 5-6-2012

Khans of Tarkir Clan Quiz
After three iterations of taking the quiz, it says each time that I'm Temur, the clan. Which is funny because the dual-color tests still yield the same two results as before.

That "Dual Colors" personality test thing
IMAGE(http://stat.rumandmonkey.com/tests/1/6/5261/20806.jpg)

I am Black/Green

Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!

Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.

I am both selfish and instinctive. I value growth and community, as long as they favour my own objectives; I enjoy nature, and I particularly enjoy watching parts of nature die. At best, I am resilient and tenacious; at worst, I'm uncontrollable and destructive.

Oh, but wait, there were multiple answers that fit my thoughts to some questions. What colors did they say I was?

IMAGE(http://stat.rumandmonkey.com/tests/1/6/5261/20801.jpg)

I am Blue/Green

I am both rational and instinctive. I value self-knowledge and understanding of the world; my ultimate goal is self-improvement and improvement of the world around me. At best, I am focused and methodical; at worst, I am obsessive and amoral.

Blargh.  I get that WotC has decided that they can just make some cards that are supposed to be awesome awesome and who cares about strict balance, which is actually true, so therefore they don't need there to be much of a "drawback" to still make above-the-curve legends.  (They can just make above-the-curve legends, and everyone will learn to use 'em.)

That said, I'm really not a fan of how the article describe the Pacifism / Faith's Fetters interaction as "bad", nor the bit on Clones.   It was *good* that Phantasmal Image provided a minimal way to interact with Geist of Saint Traft.  As is, this'll make cards like Geist or Sigarda even harder to meaningfully interact with.  Also, Faith's Fetters blanking both the current Planeswalker, and a Planeswalker in hand?  That's a feature, not a bug, reprint it.  MTG shouldn't be dominated by Planeswalkers; they're still plenty "good" if that's the worry.  It's just a minor incentive to not stick 4 copies in - an incentive that is routinely ignored anyway.

Oh well.  End curmudgeonly "they changed it now it's not the same" grumbling. 
honestly, the change i have the biggest issue with out of these is the lands one. it sounds to me that this makes things such as fetch lands, walking atlas, and any number of green fetch spells can no longer be used as desired or intended.  i'm probably just taking the djinn of wishes example to an illogical conclusion, but it's not necessarily an unreasonable one to draw from the article as written.



Putting a land on the battleifeld and playing a land are two different actions. Fetchlands put lands onto the battlefield (as do Farseek and Rampant Growth). Djinn of Wishes specifically tells you to play the revealed card or exile it.

If, however, fetch spells and lands were worded like this:

"Search your library for a {quality} land, play that land, then shuffle your library."

Then we'd have a problem. But they're not worded that way. So there is no problem. Except with "You may play an additional land" effects.

i had a feeling that was the case, it was just a case of being tired while reading through the article and a bit of first hand rules rust from not having been able to actually play a game of Magic is almost 5 months
I got confused between Visara and Vraska.

OK but it's the same kind of thing as if both players were playing Avatar of Woe, the first one wins. Or if one player had a Visara and the other had a Kalitas. 
I got confused between Visara and Vraska.

OK but it's the same kind of thing as if both players were playing Avatar of Woe, the first one wins. Or if one player had a Visara and the other had a Kalitas. 



The problem here is the disconnect from flavor. Massive disconnect. As if the Creative team were locked up in a room to satisfy the new-player, rich-parent-splurge that MtG is catering to with this change. These rules weren't there to harm players, they were to balance and provide flavor. Now, arguably, the annihilation rule itself is pretty bad, and the classic pre-Kamigawa rule is more in-flavor than any since with the minor difference that it should be "newest wins:" You are summoning the legend or planeswalker, and that means if he's on your opponent's side, then he's gone, and now on yours. They lose the card, which merely represents the spell you use to "call" said blokes.

But the change now means two Jace, the Mind Sculptor can face down over the field. You cna't have two different Jaces, but they can both be on the board at the same time.

The major problem arises with the EDH format: Clones are the primary method for dealing with indestructible or hexproof generals, as you cannot otherwise bounce them. Blue is far more prevalent a color in EDH decks than Black, which can force a sacrifice, but Clones are more utile, and many Blue decks thrown in Phantasmal Image, Phyrexian Metamorph and Vesuvan Shapeshifter primarily to take out opposing generals their removal cannot otherwise touch. In short, it is one of Blue's primary forms of general removal, and a staple aspect of the format. Doesn't this KILL that?
"Possibilities abound, too numerous to count." "Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969) "Ever since man first left his cave and met a stranger with a different language and a new way of looking at things, the human race has had a dream: to kill him, so we don't have to learn his language or his new way of looking at things." --- Zapp Brannigan (Beast With a Billion Backs)
The major problem arises with the EDH format: Clones are the primary method for dealing with indestructible or hexproof generals, as you cannot otherwise bounce them. Blue is far more prevalent a color in EDH decks than Black, which can force a sacrifice, but Clones are more utile, and many Blue decks thrown in Phantasmal Image, Phyrexian Metamorph and Vesuvan Shapeshifter primarily to take out opposing generals their removal cannot otherwise touch. In short, it is one of Blue's primary forms of general removal, and a staple aspect of the format. Doesn't this KILL that?



Maybe it's good that blue's getting weakened?
So why have a legendary rule at all now? Just let people have all the legendaries they want in play. The flavour is ruined anyways.
So why have a legendary rule at all now? Just let people have all the legendaries they want in play. The flavour is ruined anyways.



Just wait, that change is coming in Theros. This is just testing the waters. Undecided
Speaking as a judge, I'll be quite happy to not have to worry about handing out game losses to players who forgot to remove a card from their deck when sideboarding; the 0 or 15 rule, with no room in between, never really made too much sense to me. I'm kind of looking forward to the first time I check a deck registered at 75/0, or some other nonstandard division.

The change to additional land drops is a vast improvement.

The changes to legends and planeswalkers may cause some outcry (and I'll give a quick moment of silence for my brave Vesuvan Shapeshifter, who has saved me from annoying legends oh so many times), but really, the change is likely for the better.

Come join me at No Goblins Allowed


Because frankly, being here depresses me these days.

I am sorry, but the Legend and Planeswalker rule is just plain stupid. Much of the game's strategy so far, especially in Legacy revolved around when to play what card...

As well, as mentioned EDH - how are we going to fight obnoxious generals without the means to clone them? Play more counterspells? That's sure gonna make the format far more enjoyable.

I dunno, I am just seriously baffled as to why this change was needed at all and, without any feet stomping, I am affraid this change might push me out of the game because it completely changes the way the game I love plays. 
The flavor of the Legends goes right out of the window with the new changes. How can you have a Thrun, the Last Troll fighting another Thrun, the Last Troll? The justification that the battlefields were actually separate zones is equally horrible. This is not a Drone War: The Gathering, this is Magic: The Gathering, where creatures fight with swords and stuff.
I'm solidly in favor of the legendary update. It makes them work much better and in a way I find much more intuitive (and fun!). Sure, I've had lots of good times clone-ing a legend to death (even did it earlier tonight to my brother's Ezuri), but this is just a huge improvement for the game. Much like the removal of mana burn, in my opinion.

I strongly resented the shift to 'battlefield' (though I later understood its usefulness in differentiating played/casted vs. in play/on the battlefield). I was somewhat impartial to the removal of damage on the stack (didn't really even understand that until after it was gone). I was super opposed to 'dies' because I thought it took clarity away from the game (turns out it really didn't). I think I really just need to start trusting WotC on some of their rules updates, and this is one I'm definitely gonna get behind.

Next up: max hand size? I dunno, guess we'll see. 

Side note: Sideboard update? A+. Should have been done 6 years ago. 
So legends are not that legendary anymore??

When I play my Jace to kill my opponents Jace thats about to ultimate it feels pretty good and my interactive match of magic can continue.

When I play my Geist of Saint Traft to kill my opponents Geist of Saint Traft that has Spectral Flight and Unflinching Courage attached it feels pretty good and my interactive match of magic can continue.

When I purposly fought to keep my planeswalker alive to prevent/destroy my opponents copy

When I actually had to go through the trouble of correctly subtracting loyalty from my planeswalker to intentially kill it to grow my goyf while getting full value

When its not the players fault they have to RESORT to using the cheapest clone ever printed to deal with an extremely difficult to deal with permanent aka Geist of Saint Traft due to a lack of ways to interact with it... better get your copies now boys this guy just became unstoppable!

It was already hard enough accepting not having to worry about mana burn or not being able to distribute damage as I stragically wanted to instead of being forced to deal lethal to creatures before moving on the next blocker.

I dont know how much more dumbing down of the game I can take... I think I am out after GP Miami

Hey WOTC listin its called strategy... the thing you keep taking away from the game every year when a core set comes out... I wonder how many more of these great rule changes are needed before people start to quit in mass
Legend rule: I'm fine with this change, although it is a bit anti-flavor. Same for the planeswalker update.
Sideboard changes: Fine with this.
Indestructible: About time!
Unblockable: I think they overthought this one too much, and this lead them to extending the wording. We wanted this keyworded to allow for more space to do other stuff on the card, not because it was confusing players. Honestly though, you're not keywording this due to their being other variations of it? Since when has that ever stopped wizards from keywording something? Even in YMTC 4 you had an entry with a flashback variant that didn't use flashback as the keyword. 
Lands: Ehh, whatever.
New Exile language: Wasn't covered here. Thanks for the clarification.
The major problem arises with the EDH format: Clones are the primary method for dealing with indestructible or hexproof generals, as you cannot otherwise bounce them. Blue is far more prevalent a color in EDH decks than Black, which can force a sacrifice, but Clones are more utile, and many Blue decks thrown in Phantasmal Image, Phyrexian Metamorph and Vesuvan Shapeshifter primarily to take out opposing generals their removal cannot otherwise touch. In short, it is one of Blue's primary forms of general removal, and a staple aspect of the format. Doesn't this KILL that?



Maybe it's good that blue's getting weakened?



Huh?

Consider. I have a Bruna, Light of Alabaster EDH deck. I can, at instant speed, throw several auras onto her to make her untargetable. Once this happens, there are only several solutions to Bruna, being a baordwipe, mass bounce, or forced sacrifice. If I have one of the totem armors or False Demise on her, then the boardwipe option won't do much, nor will the force sacrifice; if it's a sacrifice option, I merely need one other creature in play. This leaves the only effective solution a bounce spell, now that clones have been taken off the table. Trust me, I will get to attack without being blocked if I can, and no copy of Bruna on the other side will be able to grab the auras off of her (unblockable runs mad in the deck). Clones offer a no-way-out removal spell for Bruna. Indeed, it is the primary method by which Blue fights other generals, not bounce, as this helps install the general tax and allows countermagic to be useful (especially Spell Crumple).

There is no part of this rule that is appealing to EDH players on the whole (no Scott Evil jokes!). This helps allow new players get annoyed who do not understand the overwhelming power of some legendary creatures, or the fact that all recent legendary creatures and all planeswalkers IN ALL ASPECTS were designed with the Legend rule in mind and a balancing factor. Indeed, the ability to nuke your opponent's planeswalker was provided as a solution to the reason why so little removal has been printed that deals with them. And this is despite Dreadbore, which is restrictive in its colors. Now, this option has been taken off the table for the benefit of little Freddy 'cause he spent all that mana dropping that card he barely knows how to play and some 17yo with tourney experience nukes it by dropping a copy. This is because new players simply do not get trained on complex rules interactions while being allowed to play with cards they require them.

This should be a reason to keep these cards out of these players hands, not make them more available while sacrificing the game's health to deal with them. This, of course, is all out the window if -- and only IF -- MtG prints more regularly cards that can better DEAL with Planeswalkers and legends:

UU
Instant
Counter target legendary or planeswalker spell.

BB
Sorcery
Choose a legendary creature on the battlefield. Its controller sacrifices it.

and

1BB
Sorcery
Remove all counters from target permanent. That permanent's controller loses life equal to the amount of counters removed this way

1RR
Sorcery
CARDNAME deals damage to target creature or planeswalker equal to its toughness or loyalty.

GG
Creature - Beast
2/2
CARDNAME gets +4/+4 and gains trample as long as it's attacking a planeswalker.
"Possibilities abound, too numerous to count." "Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969) "Ever since man first left his cave and met a stranger with a different language and a new way of looking at things, the human race has had a dream: to kill him, so we don't have to learn his language or his new way of looking at things." --- Zapp Brannigan (Beast With a Billion Backs)
Who was clamoring for this Legend Rule change? I get the clone thing but it makes no sense if both my opponent and I hard cast the same legend. I don't approve of ya'll stripping away drawbacks at the cost of flavor. I hope this turns out to be some sort of rules change trial that reverts back to the intuitive and flavorful Legend Rule.
I'll have you know that bananas do not suck thank you very much! They are in fact completely incapable of doing so.
I found pieces of the first draft of this article:

We know how much players like flavor, so we figured it would be a good idea to allow multiples of the same planeswalker or legendary creature to be on the battlefield at the same time. It makes sense that only one thing that exists in the universe is able to fight another version of itself, as we all run into that problem. Imagine though, four Liliana's and Marit Lage's in a multiplayer game.

If you still don't believe we're not giving up on flavor, we are packing M14 full of slivers. We often hear player's complain that the intro decks with every set is not enough, and Wizards should give more decks and cards that don't require thought, intelligence or any deckbuilding skill. Well, we heard the demands of the public. Hell, we may just start doing nothing but intro decks in the future in appreciation of our fans. And did I mention our YMTC 5 contest? It's coming soon, and players will get the opporunity to vote between sliver or merfolk for the next card. Then, all players in the state of Oklahoma may submit the rules text they themselves designed that must be the same thing as a previous WoTC design. 

But it doesn't stop there. We made Indestructible a keyword, because our supergeek staff couldn't think of a single variation of Indestructible that would keep a permanent from being destroyed. But as far as unblockable, our supernerds thought it wouldn't make sense to keyword this as there are still cards that have certain stipulations tied to whether or not they can be blocked. It would have been absolutely ridiculous to keyword that. No player would understand how it works, and as soon as an unblockable creature is cast, almost every game would end in a stalemate while waiting for the judges to determine what the hell unblockable is or is not. Instead, we struck unblockable altogether then added about 5 lines of text to clearly define what unblockable means for that creature. Furthermore, every creature designed this way will come with a 300 page document outlining how it works, just so nobody is confused. Anytime this creature that can't be blocked is played, all players will take turns reading through the rule book before continuing the game. That should prevent any confusion as to how it works.
Great. Now I get to remove even more cards from my Muraganda Petroglyphs deck. First Hexproof, now Indestructible.



You have no idea how the card works, do you? Read the rulings. Very first one:

Muraganda Petroglyphs gives a bonus only to creatures that have no rules text at all. This includes true vanilla creatures (such as Grizzly Bears), face-down creatures, many tokens, and creatures that have lost their abilities (due to Ovinize, for example). Any ability of any kind, whether or not the ability functions in the on the battlefield zone, including things like "Cycling {2}" means the creature doesn't get the bonus.



It's only for vanilla creatures. Nothing else. That's the whole point of the card.
The changes to the legendary rule and PW uniqueness are stupid. How can i call Gideon to bash your face in only to have you also call gideon, how is he at both are sides? How can he attack himself?

This seems like epic fail all in the name of making duplicate commanders allowable. They simply could have made a rule stating that commanders are immune to the legendary or that they are immune to it in regards to other commanders but not non-commander versions of the card, or my personal preference that your commander destroys all other non commander versions but stays in play, afterall hes your commander and should ahow some loyalty.
Great. Now I get to remove even more cards from my Muraganda Petroglyphs deck. First Hexproof, now Indestructible.



You have no idea how the card works, do you? Read the rulings. Very first one:

Muraganda Petroglyphs gives a bonus only to creatures that have no rules text at all. This includes true vanilla creatures (such as Grizzly Bears), face-down creatures, many tokens, and creatures that have lost their abilities (due to Ovinize, for example). Any ability of any kind, whether or not the ability functions in the on the battlefield zone, including things like "Cycling {2}" means the creature doesn't get the bonus.



It's only for vanilla creatures. Nothing else. That's the whole point of the card.



You misunderstand. An emblem from Elspeth + Muraganda Petroglyphs would make Kami of Old Stone a 3/9 indestructible. Now, it makes it a 1/7 indestructible. There are other vanilla creatures, but because these cards grant an ability instead of just making them indestructible, it gives them "text", as it were. They now function like Akroma's Memorial, instead.
"Possibilities abound, too numerous to count." "Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969) "Ever since man first left his cave and met a stranger with a different language and a new way of looking at things, the human race has had a dream: to kill him, so we don't have to learn his language or his new way of looking at things." --- Zapp Brannigan (Beast With a Billion Backs)
Great. Now I get to remove even more cards from my Muraganda Petroglyphs deck. First Hexproof, now Indestructible.



You have no idea how the card works, do you? Read the rulings. Very first one:

Muraganda Petroglyphs gives a bonus only to creatures that have no rules text at all. This includes true vanilla creatures (such as Grizzly Bears), face-down creatures, many tokens, and creatures that have lost their abilities (due to Ovinize, for example). Any ability of any kind, whether or not the ability functions in the on the battlefield zone, including things like "Cycling {2}" means the creature doesn't get the bonus.



It's only for vanilla creatures. Nothing else. That's the whole point of the card.



If you have a card that says "Creatures you control are indestrutible." then Muraganda Petroglyphs still buffs your vanilla creatures, as the ability is on the other card. Now it says "Creatures you control have indestrutible.", so they have an ability and therefor don't get the buff.
The changes to the legendary rule and PW uniqueness are stupid. How can i call Gideon to bash your face in only to have you also call gideon, how is he at both are sides? How can he attack himself?

"Stop hitting yourself! Stop hitting yourself! Stop hitting yourself!"

Come join me at No Goblins Allowed


Because frankly, being here depresses me these days.