|
3 months ago ::
Mar 02, 2013 - 2:20AM
#51
|
Date Joined:
Jan 13, 2012
|
On the topic of Punisher cards, I would like to know what others think of Soul Ransom  . I play one copy in one of my decks and so far it has never "punished" me. Control Magic  is obviously very very good, and I assume Mindculling  for 4 (and the discard two part never bricks) is also good. I think the worst case scenario with this card is this: It is turn 4 and they are killing you with a creature, and you use this. They throw away two spells and kill you next turn. You never get a chance to use the 2 extra card. Any other situation, the card is very good. And there's potential for sick blowouts where you kill or sacrifice the creature in response to them activating Soul Ransom s ability. Vexing Devil  is a bad card because there are way too many times when it is a literal blank, that doesn't seem to be the case for Soul Ransom. Am I wrong? I might add that one thing people tend to understimate is the chance of your opponent making bad decisions. We always tend to assume that our opponent will always make the best decision when evaluating cards that offer a choice. The fact that they don't have perfect knowledge about the contents of your hand (or even the contents of your deck) can be used to your advantage in tricking them into a poor choice... the amount of times people gave me wrong piles when I had the chance to play around with Jace, Architect of Thought  was really surprising.
Quotes
Show
Okay, here is the clincher. I've been waiting to say this.
The "cam girl" this was inspired by was just a girl from a social networking website, Stickam. Her name was TinyTerror and she was just a regular girl who was on her webcam, totally unrelated to any type of adult content.
I hope you all feel really smart now. 
This is like someone coming into class with a bloody nose and everyone's like "Jeez what happened to you" and they're like "I ran into a wall" and everyone laughs at them for being an idiot but then at the end of the class they say "HAHA JUST KIDDING I PUNCHED MYSELF IN THE FACE!!!!!! TALK ABOUT OWNED HAHAHAHAHA"
I really enjoy imagining this from Kevin's perspective. Because in Kevin's world, Rosewater actually reads everything he types. Mark is sitting there right now, reading this, and thinking "The greatest trick the devil ever pulled. . ." Or some such. He chuckles low, then clicks on "The Best Of KEVINSET" and says "Yes, this'll do just fine. A busty lady with banding who deals direct damage to Zones!? Why this will be the star of my next set, and no one will ever believe you Kevin." Then he closes his Macbook, so his servant may move it out of the way, while another servant puts a Fetal Richard Garfield Clone lathered in Steak Sauce in front of him. Then Mark Feasts.
Sorin walked into the chamber where his newly wed bride, Vampy, awaited. A beam of moonlight illuminated his brilliant silver hair as he strode with confidence towards the bed. His shirtless body showcased his powerful abdominal muscles and he was wearing jeans with holes in the knees.
I wish more girls play magic cards...
Have you considered assassinating Kevin?
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 02, 2013 - 7:02AM
#52
|
Date Joined:
Jun 30, 2012
|
Wizards says that Modern Masters is supposed to lower the cost of entry for modern players.
I still get a chuckle out of this. I've no idea how they figure this will happen when it's a super limited run only given to card shops that can and will mark up the product to the sky.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 02, 2013 - 11:48AM
#53
|
|
|
They might be thinking in terms of the expansion of the singles supply, especially with it meant for drafts. As to fetchlands...I still find it strange that Commander decks will include slightly off-color fetchlands (e.g. Arid Mesa  and Polluted Delta  in a GWU deck). I know that color identity rules don't interdict them, but it still feels like a stretch. Of course, this is coming from someone who thinks some case-by-case color identity exceptions should be made (e.g. Quenchable Fire  should not require a UR general, Mtenda Lion  should not require a GU general, Balthor the Defiled  should be regarded as having a BR color identity. Not sure what to deem for Reality Twist  and Naked Singularity  , though.). The costs probably aren't helped by WotC's tendency, then and now, to allocate rarity based in part on Limited concerns (less-than-rare multi-lands in a non-multicolor environment might lead to too many dead drafts, apparently). That said, I would not mind seeing M14 or whatever the next block is reprinting the Flood Plain  cycle and adding associated opposed colors. Hopefully still in uncommon. We might want to look for a way to generally slow down the pace of tournaments across the board, though. Make it so players DON'T feel impelled to play cards at a breakneck rush.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 02, 2013 - 12:24PM
#54
|
|
|
On the topic of Punisher cards, I would like to know what others think of Soul Ransom . I play one copy in one of my decks and so far it has never "punished" me. Control Magic is obviously very very good, and I assume Mindculling for 4 (and the discard two part never bricks) is also good. I think the worst case scenario with this card is this: It is turn 4 and they are killing you with a creature, and you use this. They throw away two spells and kill you next turn. You never get a chance to use the 2 extra card.
Any other situation, the card is very good. And there's potential for sick blowouts where you kill or sacrifice the creature in response to them activating Soul Ransom s ability.
I have been making a deck in my head for this card since the Gatecrash pre release as I pulled a playset of them from two guild boxes and five prize packs (essentially 15 boosters as two of the packs were the guild boosters and I did not choose Dimir for either). So far it includes undying creatures like Young Wolf  , Strangleroot Geist  and Geralf's Messenger  , sac outlets like Bone Splinters  , Altar's Reap  , Barter in Blood  and possibly Korozda Guildmage  , Zameck Guildmage  to keep undying going and obviously Soul Ransom . Snapcaster Mage  might work it's way in too, and a Psychic Spiral  incase the game goes long and I draw too many cards. Of course, constructed is not my forte, so it might be rubbish, but I'd like to it give it a try some time.
I have dreams about sacrificing my opponent's Soul Ransom ed creature to Altar's Reap in response to them activating the ability to get it back and getting a six card advantage.
There's always the chance they sac, bounce or flicker their creature in response to you casting Soul Ransom , but that should be a one for one at worst any way.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 02, 2013 - 1:44PM
#55
|
|
|
I have dreams about sacrificing my opponent's Soul Ransom ed creature to Altar's Reap in response to them activating the ability to get it back and getting a six card advantage.
I'm pretty sure that doesn't quite work. I mean, it's a successful play, but you won't draw the two cards from them activating the ability. If you sacrifice the creature in response to the ability being activated, you draw two cards, and they've discarded two cards for the activation cost. The effect of the ability will then be countered by state-based effects since the controller of Soul Ransom (you) can no longer sacrifice it (because it's already in your graveyard). I mean, they discarded two cards, you drew two cards, and they lost their creature, so that's pretty sweet. But you won't draw four, if that's what you had in mind.
Favorite set: Arabian Nights Favorite planeswalker: Taysir, the One Made of Five Favorite book cycle: Ice Age Favorite creature type(s): Elephant (W), Minotaur (R), Shade (B), Spider (G), Cephalid (U) Myr (Artifact) Standard: Gruul Control Modern: American Human Tempo; Zombie Tribal EDH: Aboshan, Cephalid EmperorCube: The Moons of Mirrodin
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 02, 2013 - 1:51PM
#56
|
Date Joined:
Mar 27, 2003
|
I have dreams about sacrificing my opponent's Soul Ransom ed creature to Altar's Reap in response to them activating the ability to get it back and getting a six card advantage.
I'm pretty sure that doesn't quite work. I mean, it's a successful play, but you won't draw the two cards from them activating the ability. If you sacrifice the creature in response to the ability being activated, you draw two cards, and they've discarded two cards for the activation cost. The effect of the ability will then be countered by state-based effects since the controller of Soul Ransom (you) can no longer sacrifice it (because it's already in your graveyard). I mean, they discarded two cards, you drew two cards, and they lost their creature, so that's pretty sweet. But you won't draw four, if that's what you had in mind.
No, he'll draw 4.
Spells/abilities are only countered if they need a target and don't have one when they resolve.
Once they put the "Sacrifice Soul Ransom, draw 2 cards" ability on the stack, and discard 2 cards as a cost, then it's there. Doesn't matter what happens to the creature or the enchantment after that; the ability doesn't target, so it can't fizzle.
It's really not even about giving niche cards to black.
It should be about giving black cards to Niche.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 02, 2013 - 3:03PM
#57
|
|
|
I have dreams about sacrificing my opponent's Soul Ransom ed creature to Altar's Reap in response to them activating the ability to get it back and getting a six card advantage.
I'm pretty sure that doesn't quite work. I mean, it's a successful play, but you won't draw the two cards from them activating the ability. If you sacrifice the creature in response to the ability being activated, you draw two cards, and they've discarded two cards for the activation cost. The effect of the ability will then be countered by state-based effects since the controller of Soul Ransom (you) can no longer sacrifice it (because it's already in your graveyard). I mean, they discarded two cards, you drew two cards, and they lost their creature, so that's pretty sweet. But you won't draw four, if that's what you had in mind.
No, he'll draw 4.
Spells/abilities are only countered if they need a target and don't have one when they resolve.
Once they put the "Sacrifice Soul Ransom, draw 2 cards" ability on the stack, and discard 2 cards as a cost, then it's there. Doesn't matter what happens to the creature or the enchantment after that; the ability doesn't target, so it can't fizzle.
Oh. Well awesome.
Favorite set: Arabian Nights Favorite planeswalker: Taysir, the One Made of Five Favorite book cycle: Ice Age Favorite creature type(s): Elephant (W), Minotaur (R), Shade (B), Spider (G), Cephalid (U) Myr (Artifact) Standard: Gruul Control Modern: American Human Tempo; Zombie Tribal EDH: Aboshan, Cephalid EmperorCube: The Moons of Mirrodin
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 02, 2013 - 9:57PM
#58
|
|
|
Yup, if it was to work the way you thought, it would be something like 'Soul Ransom's controller sacrifices it. If they do . . . ' Spells and abilities are only countered by the game rules if they require targets and all of their chosen targets are illegal on resolution. Otherwise, they will do as much as possible.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 03, 2013 - 5:26AM
#59
|
Date Joined:
Aug 18, 2007
|
With Soul Ransom , the last ability is a simple cost:effect activation. They discard two cards, announce that trigger on the stack. Then, if it is sacced to Altar's Reap , the controller will draw two from the Reap but not from the Ransom because the enchantment will be gone and the ability won't resolve; it will be countered. Ransom states "Discard two cards: Soul Ransom's controller sacrifices it, then draws two cards. Only any opponent may activate this ability." This means that if the enchantment is not there to sac, the controller won't draw the cards. Once it is sacced to Reap, Ransom will hit the yard, then it's ability on the stack will be countered when it gets to that point because the enchantment needs to be there for it to resolve. The saccing and drawing are the same action, so if part is countered, the other half is too. If it said, "Ransom's controller sac's it. Then that player draws two cards," then it would work for getting 4 cards out of it. That would be pretty awesome though.
If I'm right, I'm right. If I'm wrong, I still believe I'm right. Think of it as religion. dubito ergo sum.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 03, 2013 - 5:50AM
#60
|
Date Joined:
Dec 28, 2012
|
With Soul Ransom , the last ability is a simple cost:effect activation. They discard two cards, announce that trigger on the stack. Then, if it is sacced to Altar's Reap , the controller will draw two from the Reap but not from the Ransom because the enchantment will be gone and the ability won't resolve; it will be countered. Ransom states "Discard two cards: Soul Ransom's controller sacrifices it, then draws two cards. Only any opponent may activate this ability." This means that if the enchantment is not there to sac, the controller won't draw the cards. Once it is sacced to Reap, Ransom will hit the yard, then it's ability on the stack will be countered when it gets to that point because the enchantment needs to be there for it to resolve. The saccing and drawing are the same action, so if part is countered, the other half is too. If it said, "Ransom's controller sac's it. Then that player draws two cards," then it would work for getting 4 cards out of it.
That would be pretty awesome though.
You are wrong and the reasons have already been spelled out in this thread.
|
|
|
