|
2 years ago ::
May 02, 2011 - 9:00PM
#11
|
Date Joined:
Aug 30, 2010
|
Why do the Intro Packs have Scars rares in them? I thought Intro Packs only had rares from the set they were showcasing?
Aside from the dragon, all bad rares too. Pretty harsh for new players... poor n00bs. But how else can they get basic land these days?
Got to disagree with you there. Blade Splicer is pretty good. a 4/4 for 3 is very cost efficent.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 02, 2011 - 11:35PM
#12
|
|
|
Why do the Intro Packs have Scars rares in them? I thought Intro Packs only had rares from the set they were showcasing?
Aside from the dragon, all bad rares too. Pretty harsh for new players... poor n00bs. But how else can they get basic land these days?
Um same way Im assuming most people get them..from the card shop? For free?
I like fun, but competitive decks. So I might not play what is optimal but they have normally been tested to have a 2/3 winrate.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 03, 2011 - 5:26AM
#13
|
Date Joined:
Sep 19, 2007
|
Why do the Intro Packs have Scars rares in them? I thought Intro Packs only had rares from the set they were showcasing?
Aside from the dragon, all bad rares too. Pretty harsh for new players... poor n00bs. But how else can they get basic land these days?
Um same way Im assuming most people get them..from the card shop? For free?
Oh, I don't live in America. There are no 'card shop's here. Lands are a precious commodity 
Yeah blade splicer is good. I suppose you get a booster pack too. I wonder if they make sure the rare is on-colour?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 03, 2011 - 5:58AM
#14
|
Date Joined:
Nov 14, 2009
|
Aside from the dragon, all bad rares too. Pretty harsh for new players... poor n00bs. But how else can they get basic land these days?
Don't know about anyone else, but I find ebay useful for that. I invested in a thousand for a fiver :-) Should keep me going for life!
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 03, 2011 - 2:05PM
#15
|
Date Joined:
Jun 24, 2003
|
Put the name of the deck on the front of the box please!
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 03, 2011 - 9:15PM
#16
|
Date Joined:
Dec 10, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 03, 2011 - 9:28PM
#17
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2009
|
Am I missing something or is Act of Aggresion  really not supposed to clarify it "can target any creature, even one that's untapped or that you already control" when it clearly says "Gain control of target creature an opponent controls."?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 03, 2011 - 9:53PM
#18
|
|
|
No, my mistake on Act of Aggression. It clearly can't target a creature you control. Maybe it did during development? Maybe I just assumed incorrectly? Oops!
Magic: The Gathering Rules Manager
Wizards of the Coast
Follow me @TabakRules
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 04, 2011 - 1:30AM
#19
|
Date Joined:
May 15, 2010
|
Another typo/error in today's FAQ: Unless I'm quite mistaken, Xenograft  doesn't have an enters-the-battlefield ability to resolve. The choice should be made when Xenograft itself is resolving (or when it is entering the battlefield another way).
Rules Nut Advisor
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 04, 2011 - 9:50AM
#20
|
Date Joined:
Nov 10, 2010
|
Another typo/error in today's FAQ: Unless I'm quite mistaken, Xenograft doesn't have an enters-the-battlefield ability to resolve. The choice should be made when Xenograft itself is resolving (or when it is entering the battlefield another way).
Really? Thats strange - is it because of the difference between "AS <> enters the battlefield" and "WHEN <> enters the battlefield"?
|
|
|
