-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Magic: the Gathering |OT10| Aether Revolt - That shit that make your Soul Burn slow
- Thread starter SigmasonicX
- Start date
- Status
this is depressing
Simply Sarah
Member
As people have mentioned, Kaladesh didn't really do a great job of taking the chance to showcase the creative side of red, which feels like it has been largely ignored recently. Red's non-destructive emotions (friendship, love, just enjoying life) haven't been well represented either and even when they are in card flavour/mechanically they generally aren't the other (see Cathartic Reunion) and/or are gold.
T
Transhuman
Unconfirmed Member
So who is right in this scenario:
I cast Fortune's Favor. My opponent puts 2 cards in one face-up pile and 2 card in another face up pile. I ask my opponent if they are done with their choices and say yes. I pick up all the cards.
I cast Fortune's Favor. My opponent puts 2 cards in one face-up pile and 2 card in another face up pile. I ask my opponent if they are done with their choices and say yes. I pick up all the cards.
divisionbyzorro
Member
Call a judge. You can't take both piles because your opponent didn't follow the rules on the card correctly (there should be one face-up pile and one face-down pile). You've both committed a rules violation (you took two piles, he didn't create the piles correctly). He has to remake the piles correctly, but you get the advantage of now knowing exactly what's in each pile.
Call a judge. At Professional REL, you are probably getting all 4 cards, at Competitive or lower, your opponent is going to get a chance to do the piles again
divisionbyzorro
Member
Nah. If the cards were in two distinct piles, the judge should make the opponent turn one pile over and give the opponent a GRV. You get the advantage of knowing exactly what's in each pile, but you aren't getting all of the cards.
T
Transhuman
Unconfirmed Member
I mean, since the comp rel definition of pile is "A temporary grouping of cards" a pile doesn't necessarily need to be touching, and since there's only one valid state for one of the piles (being face down) all face-up cards must belong to the other pile.
It's not actually improper though, because it's legal to have a pile with 0 cards in it.
That said, the correct answer is to always call a judge as soon as you notice something wrong. I think, in this case, I'd be likely to rule that you get all four cards, though I could see the argument that allowing the opponent to re-make the piles is a potential fix (even though I disagree). In any case, at Comp REL or higher, the opponent would get a GRV warning.
divisionbyzorro
Member
It certainly would be a judgement call, no pun intended. If you called a judge and nobody touched the cards while you waited, the judge probably could sort it out pretty quickly. If I saw two cards face up in one stack, then two more cards face up in another stack clearly separated from the first, it would be a stretch to interpret that as a pile of four and a pile of zero.
It would be inconsistent to give the opponent a GRV if you gave Transhuman all four cards. In that case, you're ruling that the four cards constitute a single face-up stack, and the face-down stack had zero cards in it. That's a totally legitimate way to resolve the card, and it would be just bad form to punish the opponent twice. Either give him a GRV and let Transhuman pick one pile, or say "Yep, that's a legal way to resolve the card, and Transhuman can pick the pile of four or the pile of zero."
EDIT: I would do the following:
1) Pull Opponent aside. Ask him if he meant to put all four face-up cards in one pile or two.
1a) Opponent says "one pile." Go back to the table and tell Transhuman that the card was resolved correctly, and there is a face-up pile of four cards and a face-down pile of zero cards.
1b) Opponent says "two piles." Give Opponent a GRV and tell him that one pile must be face-down. Allow Opponent to turn one pile face-down, but do not allow him to remake the piles. Transhuman then picks a pile.
It would be inconsistent to give the opponent a GRV if you gave Transhuman all four cards. In that case, you're ruling that the four cards constitute a single face-up stack, and the face-down stack had zero cards in it. That's a totally legitimate way to resolve the card, and it would be just bad form to punish the opponent twice. Either give him a GRV and let Transhuman pick one pile, or say "Yep, that's a legal way to resolve the card, and Transhuman can pick the pile of four or the pile of zero."
EDIT: I would do the following:
1) Pull Opponent aside. Ask him if he meant to put all four face-up cards in one pile or two.
1a) Opponent says "one pile." Go back to the table and tell Transhuman that the card was resolved correctly, and there is a face-up pile of four cards and a face-down pile of zero cards.
1b) Opponent says "two piles." Give Opponent a GRV and tell him that one pile must be face-down. Allow Opponent to turn one pile face-down, but do not allow him to remake the piles. Transhuman then picks a pile.
If 4 faceup cards, in two different piles, is an acceptable resolution of the card, why are they getting a GRV for presenting that? I think the possible rulings here are: "that is one faceup pile of cards, everything resolved okay, you pick one pile to put in your hand, no penalties" or "that is two face up piles, which isn't what the card says to do, so GRV, and potentially rewind".
And if that's a situation where you'd give a GRV, and the player casting Fortune's Favor picked up all four cards without calling a judge, they obviously knew that the opponent wasn't resolving the card properly, allowed it to happen and in a manner that benefited them.
You just gotta go wide really fast. And get him outside Magma Jet range before dropping him. Honestly, I hold onto the card until either I already got a huge board presence going, or I know I can make a huge board the following turn I drop him. Again, Fist of Ironwood synergizes amazingly with Wayfare. It didnt hurt to pick up an Intangible Virtue and Gaeas Anthem either lol.
Cards like Druid Deliverance actually over performed for me. T2 Call of the Conclave, and then having Deliverance up as an instant populate the next turn is a pretty nice combat trick.
divisionbyzorro
Member
Man I miss RTR Limited.
You're right on the first point and I agree completely. I thought had typed up a paragraph about possible fixes other than allowing for taking all for cards, but I didn't. A side affect of internetting before eating breakfast. In the cases of allowing the opponent to remake the piles (which I disagree with, but not strongly) or re-randomizing the deck and backing up to a point where the opponent looks at the top four cards and makes the piles (which I strongly disagree with), there would be a GRV warning. In the case where the player takes all four face up cards, there's no warning.
In the case where the main player doesn't call a judge and just takes all four cards, I think it comes down to an investigation. Depending on the words that were exchanged between the players, it could certainly fall under cheating, but I'd argue the onus is on the opponent to show that they clearly indicated that there were two separate face-up piles.
GoutPatrol
Forgotten in his cell
So, for a Modern tournament with an unknown meta, what would you guys suggest playing: Merfolk, Affinity, Dredge (missing Darkblast, which hurts), or Infect. Could probably get Jund together minus the Fulminator Mages.
All are pretty standard decklists. Was leaning towards Affinity, since it is my favorite, but I like playing them all.
The same shop is holding another tournament next weekend, so was planning on just seeing the meta this week and playing the best option next week.
All are pretty standard decklists. Was leaning towards Affinity, since it is my favorite, but I like playing them all.
The same shop is holding another tournament next weekend, so was planning on just seeing the meta this week and playing the best option next week.
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
Affinity or Infect. Personally merfolk.
Infinite Stars
Member
Infect is Dead right now though. Like, I haven't seen anyone playing it because Push+Probe banning kicked the deck right in the nuts.
Affinity also dies hard to DSJ if they don't get the god-tier hands, so.. yeah, I'd go with Merfolk. It has a positive Burn Matchup, doesn't auto-fold to Blood Moon, doesn't hurt as bad vs DS, etc.
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
Out of those options, probably Merfolk.
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
It's not a powerhouse anymore but against an unprepared field or a bunch of tron, the not brown kind, it should be able to do quite well.
Infinite Stars
Member
I mean, of those Decks, Merfolk is the only one that's top 8'd a GP, so.
Also, I'd figure 8 Seas Merfolk beats Eldrazi Tron, but I haven't seen the Matchup myself.
Thanks. Will get the Merfolk sideboard ready.
Infect I haven't really touched since the probe banning, not really sure what I want to put in there instead. Was thinking of a couple more Vapor Snags and maybe going for disruption, but yeah, Probe was really nice to have there.
Affinity is fun but haven't really played Modern in like a year and heard it has not been doing the best.
I'm not as big a fan of Modern Dredge as Legacy, but still like the deck. Playing it though without Darkblast sort of sucks, nice Bing able to take out 1/1s.
Infect I haven't really touched since the probe banning, not really sure what I want to put in there instead. Was thinking of a couple more Vapor Snags and maybe going for disruption, but yeah, Probe was really nice to have there.
Affinity is fun but haven't really played Modern in like a year and heard it has not been doing the best.
I'm not as big a fan of Modern Dredge as Legacy, but still like the deck. Playing it though without Darkblast sort of sucks, nice Bing able to take out 1/1s.
Merfolk has a good matchup against the deck with like 1/3 removal spells? Dafuq
Boxes are down to $200 shipped on eBay and WotC just gave stores the option to refill up to 20 boxes.
Not having to allocate all the product to the GPs (which means you have to overestimate massively in case of giant turnout) was huge.
Infinite Stars
Member
Kira Great Glass Spinner+ Sideboard cards like Unified Will= One hell of a fight
charlequin
Banned
So like with the volume of product available for this set and the card selection that went into it, do we feel like WotC has finally hit the point of seriously addressing Modern accessibility?
It's weird to have an influx of product, and yet the prices have already stabilized.
Infinite Stars
Member
90% there. There remains the issue of a few certain cards that they haven't reprinted in any meaningful way that need one good MM3 size reprint to get knocked down to reasonable. I'm not talking staples of the color(Liliana, Goyf, Snapcaster, Bolt, Path, etc) but the fringe cards that are used in 1-4 decks that are stupid high because of low printings.
I'm talking Aether Vial, Horizon Canopy, Grove of the Burnwillows, Gaddock Teeg, Scapeshift etc. cards that really need to be knocked down in price.
Basically, I wish we had some "Early Modern Masters" cards reprinted, because most of these are just up in price because of their rarity. Like, before MM3, I think... 50+ of Merfolk's cost was in Cavern and Vial. 40%+ of the price of Death and Taxes was tied to Vial.
charlequin
Banned
Announcement day moved from next Friday all the way out to June:
I guess this certainly dispels any idea that there won't be a huge thing for the 25th anniversary. It does make me wonder about the fall block though -- if this is the full 25th anniversary announcement I'm not sure how that fits with what we think we know about it.
I agree, but I think that with the swathe of stuff addressed in MM3 we're getting to the point where it starts to be viable to tackle some of these other individual cards in other products and not having MM be the one single possible source for good reprints.
They're never going to say things are completely awful at a moment when they're not doing anything, but it's also not going to stop them from doing something in particular.
I guess this certainly dispels any idea that there won't be a huge thing for the 25th anniversary. It does make me wonder about the fall block though -- if this is the full 25th anniversary announcement I'm not sure how that fits with what we think we know about it.
I agree, but I think that with the swathe of stuff addressed in MM3 we're getting to the point where it starts to be viable to tackle some of these other individual cards in other products and not having MM be the one single possible source for good reprints.
They're never going to say things are completely awful at a moment when they're not doing anything, but it's also not going to stop them from doing something in particular.
SigmasonicX
Member
The question was about things other than haste and direct damage.
Latest Developments - An Update on Standard - This really gives the impression that they don't know what to do about Standard. He says that core sets helped them get cards that help and hose archetypes without having to stick to a theme, and the hard mechanical themes of recent blocks make this hard now. It seems like with four blocks in Standard, they may not make each block so different anymore. He concedes they should at least have had Naturalize. Though it's understandable, his statement that it would be pointless to share FFL decks from Amonkhet block really shines a light on how untested the upcoming Standard will be.
They should go back to the pre-M10 Core Set model, where a Core set of only reprints is printed every other year, and is legal until the next set comes out. Go back to 3 expansions a year, and have both a Consipiracy and a Masters set in the years that have no core set.
It's boring, but would probably lead to Standard being better
SigmasonicX
Member
I think the solution they'll go for is to have two blocks in a row have similar themes. For example, we could have had Shadows over Innistrad then Amonkhet. This simulates the three-set block model while still creating change. If they start themes with the spring block, then that would allow there to still be variety in Standard.
Infinite Stars
Member
Or, here's an idea:
Starting in 2018/2019, we get the following set schedule(Starting in Fall 2018)
Block ALarge-October
Basic Magic-Late November, is basically a core set
Block ASmall- January
Block BLarge-April
Reprint Set(Masters, Conspiracy, what have you) -Late May/Early June
Block BSmall-July
FreedomFrisbee
Member
I legit thought you were joking about the announcement day change.
At $200? Don't blame her.
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
5 to 7 seas is usually enough and you might want some tec edges too. There's still contention between Kira and Clique going on and the latest top 8 player had an unusual sideboard.
Issue with 8 seas is the missing lands to side out aether vials.
Infinite Stars
Member
I mean, isn't the obvious choice meta wise Kira in the main/Clique in the board? I know Tec Edge is great though against Eldrazi Tron, but I didn't think of how good it is.
The latest top8 player is one of the bigger Merfolk guys though, what was so unusual about his Sideboard? I'm actually tempted to try and buy/trade into Merfolk because of the reprints recently.
Temp mana is done through creatures head days. See burning tree
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
Kira and Clique have been an either or for most merfolk players.
I'm confusing the players right now I could swear there was another merfolk player posting results recently with an unusual sideboard but I can't find it on mtgtop8. Nikachu of course is a well known fish player.
His sideboard was still a bit unusual with 3 dispels.
Uhhhh. Great revel, vexing devil and sulfuric vortex are good cards and they are punisher cards....
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked