I think it is a bit silly to claim that MP-usefulness should be based on the card in a vacuum on one hand, and to mention Darksteel Colossus as a better finisher on the other. I doubt there are decklists that include DSC without a way to speed up his arrival.
The "problem" with a large vanilla creature is that it can be chumped while everyone is frantically trying to off you, or the creature if that is easier. The nice part of DSC is that an 11/11 indestructible trampler is quite likely to deal with anyone in short order, giving your opponents little time to come get you. In that sense, a finisher like DSC has the advantage of being 1 package, whereas LoE will need help to be as lethal as quickly as DSC, which is inherently weaker.
But, I think LoE more than compensates for this by costing a mere 5 mana and having no anti-reanimation clauses. Just a pity that you can't Wrath the board through him to clear the way. With Dauntless Escort, you can tho ^^.
Lastly, there is a difference between optimising a deck for any given card (Mind's Desire, for example) and making the deck work well with it. Having a way of giving LoE trample is making it work well, but running tinker/sol ring for DSC is optimising a strategy. Akroma sucks without support as well, without reanimation (combo!) she arrives at turn 8 or later and if you have no plan (read: support cards) to get there, you won't. Therefore, I think it is rather useless to claim that a finisher cannot be supported for it to be good.
I think it is a bit silly to claim that MP-usefulness should be based on the card in a vacuum on one hand, and to mention Darksteel Colossus as a better finisher on the other. I doubt there are decklists that include DSC without a way to speed up his arrival.
The "problem" with a large vanilla creature is that it can be chumped while everyone is frantically trying to off you, or the creature if that is easier. The nice part of DSC is that an 11/11 indestructible trampler is quite likely to deal with anyone in short order, giving your opponents little time to come get you. In that sense, a finisher like DSC has the advantage of being 1 package, whereas LoE will need help to be as lethal as quickly as DSC, which is inherently weaker.
But, I think LoE more than compensates for this by costing a mere 5 mana and having no anti-reanimation clauses. Just a pity that you can't Wrath the board through him to clear the way. With Dauntless Escort, you can tho ^^.
Lastly, there is a difference between optimising a deck for any given card (Mind's Desire, for example) and making the deck work well with it. Having a way of giving LoE trample is making it work well, but running tinker/sol ring for DSC is optimising a strategy. Akroma sucks without support as well, without reanimation (combo!) she arrives at turn 8 or later and if you have no plan (read: support cards) to get there, you won't. Therefore, I think it is rather useless to claim that a finisher cannot be supported for it to be good.
I kind of regret using the words "stand-alone" earlier because it seems that it has become somewhat of a lynch pin for counter arguments. Let me clarify: I am in no way saying that cards should be evaluated in a vacuum. I am simply trying to point out that in MP play, the "single package-ness" of the card determines the amount of CA generated or lost.
Is LoE's size-to-cost ratio enough to compensate for the CA lost in playing both him and the cards required to make him a finisher? I am not making an argument of support or deck building, I am making an argument of CA.
Is LoE's size-to-cost ratio enough to compensate for the CA lost in playing both him and the cards required to make him a finisher? I am not making an argument of support or deck building, I am making an argument of CA.
Yes, emphatically YES! Lord of extinction's size is more than enough compensation for his lack of built-in card advantage (which you are drastically overrating), especially when one considers that the cards that best feed his growth (damnation, deed, syphon mind, etc.) generate card advantage themselves. I cannot fathom where you see any CA lost in that.
Not every good card will have built-in card advantage, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. In fact some really powerful cards like tinker , black lotus , and natural order generate card disadvantage, and they are still well worth the sacrifice because of their raw power and the tempo boost they provide. LoE is just such a tempo boost (it is larger than anything else at any casting cost), without any inherent card disadvantage. Would you play a five mana 20/20? What about a five mana 40/40? How big does it have to be before you'd consider it worth running?
I really can't explain myself any more clearly than I already have, and if you continue to disagree, so-be-it. At this point there's really nothing else I can say that will convince you otherwise. My part in this particular debate is concluded.
Anyone else want to chime in, or suggest a card from Alara Reboon that might have been overlooked up until this point?
Lord of Extinction is a fine card, but... I would rather have, for example, a Spiritmonger . It's smaller for the same cost, but way more versatile, and harder to stop or kill. For sheer size, pay one more mana, and get Multani, Maro Sorcerer . He's bigger early (when a vanilla creature is most likely to get through), and Shroud protects him from spot removal.
Lord of Extinction is a fine card, but... I would rather have, for example, a Spiritmonger . It's smaller for the same cost, but way more versatile, and harder to stop or kill. For sheer size, pay one more mana, and get Multani, Maro Sorcerer . He's bigger early (when a vanilla creature is most likely to get through), and Shroud protects him from spot removal.
Plus Multani can even be given evasion through other means along with being protected from shroud. Brawn in the graveyard, Overrun effects, the Dragon enchantment cycle returned for free from the grave Dragon Fangs Dragon Wings Dragon Shadow
Plus Multani can even be given evasion through other means along with being protected from shroud. Brawn in the graveyard, Overrun effects, the Dragon enchantment cycle returned for free from the grave Dragon Fangs Dragon Wings Dragon Shadow
That Multani can be made better with other cards? But LoE can't? Nastynate has said everything I would say about this card, but I'll stress the raw power once more. 5 mana for probably the biggest creature printed outside of an Unset is huge and the fact that people are arguing that it is a good card astounds me.
That Multani can be made better with other cards? But LoE can't? Nastynate has said everything I would say about this card, but I'll stress the raw power once more. 5 mana for probably the biggest creature printed outside of an Unset is huge and the fact that people are arguing that it is a good card astounds me.
Again, Multani is bigger when it matters. I've gotten Llanowar Elf , Werebear , Gaea's Cradle -> turn 3 Multani. Then on turn 4 you start killing the people without chump blockers. That would never work with Lord of Extinction ; he'd be like a 2/2 unless someone was playing Traumatize .
I'm not saying that I don't think he's good. He fills a fine role as a big dumb threat, and needs less support than, say, War Elemental or Phytohydra , both cards I've had good results with. Give him a Lightning Greaves or Whispersilk Cloak , and he's terrifying. Still, so are lots of guys, and they're often more interesting/fun, too. And they don't die to Time Spiral .
Yes, emphatically YES! Lord of extinction's size is more than enough compensation for his lack of built-in card advantage (which you are drastically overrating), especially when one considers that the cards that best feed his growth (damnation, deed, syphon mind, etc.) generate card advantage themselves. I cannot fathom where you see any CA lost in that.
Not every good card will have built-in card advantage, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. In fact some really powerful cards like tinker , black lotus , and natural order generate card disadvantage, and they are still well worth the sacrifice because of their raw power and the tempo boost they provide. LoE is just such a tempo boost (it is larger than anything else at any casting cost), without any inherent card disadvantage. Would you play a five mana 20/20? What about a five mana 40/40? How big does it have to be before you'd consider it worth running?
I really can't explain myself any more clearly than I already have, and if you continue to disagree, so-be-it. At this point there's really nothing else I can say that will convince you otherwise. My part in this particular debate is concluded.
Aw, too bad. I was really beginning to enjoy our joust. I suppose I shall conclude myself by saying that your arguments have failed to take into account the hands and competence of your opponents. Assuming that you have competent opponents, the probability of LoE's survival is significantly lower than the probability of your opponents not only drawing, but holding answers for LoE. How many times are can you honestly expect to steam-roll your opponents and get away with it? In the end, MTG is a game of numbers and chances; those numbers and chances, like in the case of any other finisher in MP, are stacked against LoE. The only difference is that LoE does not have any abilities that increases its chances of survival or any abilities that increases the chances of bringing you a win.
Yes, I know..."But it's big!" right? That is the central argument supporting LoE. "It's big, it's BIG!". My response would be: "So what?" Between myself and every single other competent player, the chances of having or drawing an answer for LoE are so great that I would not feel threatened in any way. I myself can't wait to shut down someone's $8+ card with my $0.10 pacifism . Politically, LoE is a good card...it creates alliances united under a common goal aimed to shoot it down.
Yes, "not every card has built in CA, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that"...in duels in which the wins come quickly. Some of the really powerful cards (like tinker , black lotus , and natural order ) you mentioned often trade CA for speed and power and can get away with it because the game in likely to end soon after. But the "craziness" of their impact is significantly reduced in MP. Whereas sac'ing black lotus into a tinker into a DSC is almost a guaranteed to be a quick win in duels, this guarantee is reduced in MP play. In spite of all the speed and power, the win will not come as quick in MP (if at all).
In regards to both our general arguments, saying "But it's big. But it's BIG!" over and over again just isn't convincing enough for me to justify it being better than some of the other cards on this list that provide more CA (thereby increasing your chances to win). In the end, some playgroups will let you get away with consistently winning with LoE, some playgroups won't. The competence of my opponents places me in the latter.
Alas, I will retire my argument as well and leave the community to continue, if they so desire, the debate. It has been a pleasure :D .
Alas, I will retire my argument as well and leave the community to continue, if they so desire, the debate. It has been a pleasure.
I has been nice to have a civilized conversation (and disagreement) on a forum without it degenerating into nonsense (as it so often does). You've been most sportsmanlike.
Because it's a very subtle and hard-to-remove rattlesnake card. If you've got a choice of throwing some beef at somebody's head, you're probably going to look at the guy rocking the Wall of Denial and think "hmm... ain't no way I'm getting through that. I think I'll swing at Dave instead". Of course, we can probably argue the same for Lord of Extinction as well, in a roundabout way!
Thanks for the response!
But still, I don't see the value in WoD. I can imagine seeing a guy rocking the Wall and thinking "Cool: I can swing at this guy with a few creatures and not fear losing any." A rattlesnake card is something like No Mercy , which punishes those who attack you. Wall of Denial doesn't create any consequences for an attacking player unless they are attacking with a single creature.
Kicker Aggro (Invasion Block)
