|
3 years ago ::
Jun 21, 2010 - 4:44PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jun 24, 2008
|
This thread is for discussion of this week's Limited Information, which goes live Tuesday morning on magicthegathering.com.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jun 21, 2010 - 11:02PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Oct 13, 2009
|
Pretty good article, and makes some good points, but I feel obliged to point out that the very fact that the opponent didn't make any early plays makes the odds that he has Narcolepsy go way up. A hand with no early plays and no removal is a reasonable-to-likely mulligan; a hand with no early plays, but with a Narcolepsy and an Ondu Giant, is a much safer hand to keep, since Ondu Giant stops the small beaters and Narcolepsy the big one.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jun 21, 2010 - 11:05PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jun 30, 2008
|
I believe the strongest point in the whole article is that you actually want your opponent to play a narcolepsy on your Wildheart. That means when you get to 8 mana you win the game. Best thing he could do from there is putting another removal spell on your guy.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jun 22, 2010 - 1:10AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Feb 27, 2007
|
I was thinking the same thing as The Great Galendo while I was reading the article.
I got three Nacrolepsy in a draft the other night. They were very nice in helping me win. How many have yall got in one draft? Were they game breakers?
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jun 22, 2010 - 1:11AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Feb 27, 2007
|
I agree with Drecon84 also.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jun 22, 2010 - 1:23AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Oct 13, 2003
|
I don't know if that's been proposed before, but we should start to check if there is any article where Steve Sadin doesn't use the expression "a world of hurt" (or even "being in for a world of hurt")  Seriously, we should count them. I guess there is not an article in the last months without "a world of hurt". Or, if there is some, there are other ones making up for that, with twice that same expression!  I am going to start some statistics with his archive... I'll let you know, LOL.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jun 22, 2010 - 1:39AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Jan 10, 2010
|
As usual, Steve had a good article.
Contest Winners
Show
Random Words
Show
Round 1: Maraxas-of-Keld, Cryos_Icy_Manipulator
Round 2: Dr_Demento, UltraMaximum
Round 3: Dr_Demento, Keino
Round 4: KunouNoHana
Round 5: Maraxas-of-Keld, Stigma_Lasher
Round 6: royinator
Round 7: forty2j
Round 8: Qazior
Round 9: Qazior
Round 10: Could be you link Split Cards
Show
Winner: dberry02 Pac-Man
Show
Round 1: Fallingman WorldprismQuotes
Show
I just love how focused the YMtC community is.
That's what I love about posting on these forums. Everyone's an expert(except for me).
really no need to be so bitchy.
@Edacade: Awright kid you go on ahead and do your thing and don't let anyone tell you different y'hear
City of Asymmetrical Beings
Land
 , sacrifice a creature: Destroy target creature with the same converted mana cost as the sacrificed creature.
Might I just interject that making this a meme is the worst idea in magic in my opinion. It is too overpowered. It encourages cheating it in play. Essentially 99/100 times it is cheated in play instead of hardcast. Not only that, but you essentially win when it comes into play.
Make five-color hybrid tribal instant with buyback, kicker, cycling, card draw, token production, a steal effect, alternate casting cost and landfall that embodies the love that your mom and I share.
I think you just killed all chances of my card being elegant.
Ardency :1mana::symwu::symbr:
Tribal Instant - Soldier
You may have target opponent gain control of 3 permanents you control rather than pay ~'s mana cost.
As an additional cost to cast ~, choose two creatures you control, and sacrifice the rest. If you control a soldier, you can't sacrifice permanents this turn.
Landfall - If you had a land enter the battlefield under your control this turn, instead choose 4 creatures.
Kicker  
You get an emblem with "As long as you control both chosen creatures, they have protection from everything."
If ~ was kicked, creatures you control get +1/+1 for each creature card in your graveyard until end of turn.
Cycling :2mana:
When you cycle ~, put two 2/2 Soldier creatures onto the battlefield.
Would this EVER fit on a card?~
Aside from a few wording mishaps (should say "each chosen creature" because it's not necessarily two) this is nice. Very simple and elegant. I like the alternate cost a lot, and the kicker goes nicely with the sacrifice. However, the cycling seems a bit powerful (4 power and a card for 3? Cycling is supposed be ba  d  . 8/10
EDIT: Just looked up "ardency". Lol.
I'm immortalized too as long as no one deletes this post!
But in the shadow of the great one lurked many who sought to partake of his eternal glory.
Since when am I "many"?
You're a whole damn city.
Ahem.
Vivisect  
Sorcery
As an additional cost to cast Vivisect, sacrifice a creature.
Draw three cards.
"For the sake of humanity," the surgeon whispered. The knife had never felt heavier in his hand.
I don't think a world that sacrifices so much would want to stop the making of children  .
Vivisect =/= vasectomy
Now I just feel silly.
I read over two hundred webcomics on a regular basis. "Terrible" doesn't even begin to describe me.
I think that this is the first wizards-community thread that actually made me laugh out loud. Maraxas, I love you.
batman is a jerk in all of my dreams
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jun 22, 2010 - 6:33AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Mar 16, 2009
|
I believe the strongest point in the whole article is that you actually want your opponent to play a narcolepsy on your Wildheart. That means when you get to 8 mana you win the game. Best thing he could do from there is putting another removal spell on your guy.
That's pretty much it right there. In the situation described, I would LOVE to have my opponent Narcolepsy my Wildheart Invoker, as that means that any actual answer to its 8-mana ability is now card disadvantage for the opponent.
Of course, I understand that that wasn't quite the point of the article, it's just worth pointing out.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jun 22, 2010 - 6:51AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Jul 10, 2003
|
"But often times, even if you are trying to win in the late game, you will need to put enough pressure on your opponent so that he or she will use his or her cards to less than optimal effect."
^This!
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jun 22, 2010 - 7:27AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Oct 23, 2003
|
I believe the strongest point in the whole article is that you actually want your opponent to play a narcolepsy on your Wildheart. That means when you get to 8 mana you win the game. Best thing he could do from there is putting another removal spell on your guy.
That's pretty much it right there. In the situation described, I would LOVE to have my opponent Narcolepsy my Wildheart Invoker, as that means that any actual answer to its 8-mana ability is now card disadvantage for the opponent.
Yeah, I've had that happen. My Wildheart Invoker  ate both a Narcolepsy  and a Flame Slash  . If only I'd had a Boar Umbra  on him...
|
|
|
Kicker Aggro (Invasion Block)
