Combos Browse all Suggest
Legality
| Format | Legality |
| 1v1 Commander | Legal |
| Archenemy | Legal |
| Arena | Legal |
| Block Constructed | Legal |
| Canadian Highlander | Legal |
| Casual | Legal |
| Commander / EDH | Legal |
| Commander: Rule 0 | Legal |
| Custom | Legal |
| Duel Commander | Legal |
| Freeform | Legal |
| Gladiator | Legal |
| Highlander | Legal |
| Historic | Legal |
| Historic Brawl | Legal |
| Legacy | Legal |
| Leviathan | Legal |
| Limited | Legal |
| Modern | Legal |
| Modern Beyond Horizons | Legal |
| Oathbreaker | Legal |
| Pioneer | Legal |
| Planar Constructed | Legal |
| Planechase | Legal |
| Quest Magic | Legal |
| Tiny Leaders | Legal |
| Vanguard | Legal |
| Vintage | Legal |
Aurelia's Fury
Instant
Aurelia's Fury deals X damage divided as you choose among any number of target creatures, players and/or planeswalkers. Tap each creature dealt damage this way. Players dealt damage this way can't cast noncreature spells this turn.
plakjekaas on How Can Mono-Colored Cards be …
6 months ago
I'll admit I misinterpreted the first mention of Aurelia's Fury. However, Sliverguy420 you have just been correcting and fighting people in this thread. You called me out on my mistake, now let me return the favor:
"i never said magwaaf said anything."
"magwaaf wrong about what exactly? are you saying wotc deliberately did the opposite here, and that monocolored cards are more often stronger than their multicolored counterparts?"
Yes, you "technically" didn't say he said it, but you were asking. I answered you. Then:
"Thought Collapse and Psychic Strike do NOT in fact have the same effect. thats the "whole effing point". one mills 2, the other mills 3. not the same effect."
While the actual question was:
"What does everyone else say, about this? Why are some mono-colored cards more powerful than are multi-colored cards that are very similar?"
You suddenly denied the entire premise of the post just to spite me. That's not contributing, that's derailing. My argument about Aurelia's Fury was that they're not very similar. You start arguing that "very similar" is not exactly the same. That's not gathering or sharing any insight in the discussion at hand. You lose yourself in semantics to feel better about yourself correcting someone online on the Internet. And you dig your heels in the sand when someone else calls you out on it. I thought about making the point of your posts not contributing to the original question in my previous post, but someone beat me to it.
The exact same card with a different name you tried to pass on as the only true meaning of same, which only works for cards, not effects, has its own name. A functional reprint. That's the term to use when discussing cards that are the same, except for the name. They have no place in a discussion about similar cards with different measurements of power, because by definition they're the same in every way, and there is no difference in power.
Effects in Magic are things that happen as the result of a spell or ability. Countering a spell is an effect. Making a player mill cards is an effect. Dealing damage is an effect. Shock and Lightning Bolt both have the same effect, where one of the cards is more powerful than the other. Because they're both monocolored, I've not used the example in this topic. They make my powercreep argument a bit weaker as well. But the thing is: when somebody would claim they're the same card, they would obviously be wrong. But stating: these are not the same card, 2 damage is not 3 damage, you can't compare them, while no lies in the words, is also obviously wrong. Lightning Bolt is said to be "strictly better" than Shock. The same mana cost, card types, same effect, but one with higher numbers.
If Psychic Strike would also cost , we could just say Thought Collapse is strictly better. The discussion would end there, comparison easily handled. Because the mana cost is actually different, you could question if the mana cost causes the difference. That's what OP did, thinking that was the only difference between the cards. Limited environments, rarity and powercreep are all contributing to how strong a card could be, and could explain the mentioned deviation from the expected trend.
Saying similar cards are not exactly the same, does not explain anything about that. Asking if fellow forum user is saying [topic of discussion] is actually the case, does not explain. Denying to derail the discussion after not trying to contribute to the topic and being called out on it, does not help OP's insight to the case. Deflecting that the one you're fighting about it is now also derailing the topic, does not help.
That's what I think it's wrong about your presence in this topic, the ad hominem nature of every post you make, and whenever you're pointed to that, trying to cover it up with more of the same, unwilling to change your own perspective, but expecting us all to join yours. Seems I'm not the only one.
wallisface on How Can Mono-Colored Cards be …
6 months ago
Sliverguy420 you also understand that synonym-words aren’t always identical, right? The very definition for synonym states the words can be “nearly the same”…, so using this metric to prove a point doesn’t seem practical.
In any case, we’re clearly both just beating our heads against brick-walls here, so there’s no need for us to keep rattling on with these semantics.
On the Aurelia's Fury vs Rolling Thunder, it’s an extreme case of comparison - AF has two additional effects which aren’t even mentioned on RT, as well as being Instant instead of Sorcery, and Mythic rarity instead of Uncommon (the rarity alone could easily explain the vast difference in card complexity/power). I would say however that its a fine comparison, but fails in that it deviates entirely from the OPs initial question, which was asking why some mono-coloured cards have stronger effects than their multicoloured counterparts. Providing an example to the opposite does nothing towards answering the OPs initial question
Sliverguy420 on How Can Mono-Colored Cards be …
6 months ago
wallisface you can also google synonyms of "same" and see that "identical" is the first one. what you found however, is from "google ai" which is quite often wrong. i did not derail anything, because semantics matter here. same means identical. same means equal. this is of primary importance in this thread. the whole point of the original question is about differences in card effects, therefore not same. i was debunking someones factually incorrect point, not "derailing" anything. point being, to say that Aurelia's Fury vs Rolling Thunder is "not a valid comparison", is just blatantly incorrect. the cards are in fact a valid comparison.
plakjekaas on How Can Mono-Colored Cards be …
6 months ago
It's also mythic vs. uncommon, that alone would explain the increase in power. The added effects are very white, which is enough reason to explain why it's multicoloured. Aurelia's Fury as a mono red card would make no sense at all, bringing it up in a discussion about cards that, according to the title of the topic, are weaker in multicolored than in monocolored with the same effect for the same cost, is a) literally disproving the theory and b) not applicable because the effects are not the same in this case, and can only be explained by the mono-/multicoloured nature of the card.
That's why I didn't think it fits in the discussion, but it made a good point in my argument for powercreep as explanation of the suggested trend nonetheless.
Sliverguy420 on How Can Mono-Colored Cards be …
6 months ago
plakjekaas: Aurelia's Fury vs Rolling Thunder seems like a good comparison, specifically for the reasons you mentioned. it requires more colors, thus does more things to make it more powerful.
plakjekaas on How Can Mono-Colored Cards be …
6 months ago
The problem with printing cards that are rewards for monocolor decks, is that they're either just not good enough, like Slaying Fire or instant expensive staples, like Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx. Because if the effect is good enough, the two-color decks will consider playing it too, think Cabal Coffers+Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth. Monocolor decks make the sacrifice of devoting to that color, and accepting its weaknesses. The best way to combat those weaknesses, is to add a color. The payoff is the manabase consistency, and leveraging the strength of the color you picked. There's a few Caged Sun or Throne of Eldraine-type cards that possibly could slot in every monocolor deck. But the fun of building a monocolor deck (I'm talking commander here) is to deepen out your limited cardpool to get the job done in a way most multicolor decks won't expect because it uses cards you normally wouldn't see in multicolor decks.
To get back on topic, in the OPs examples, if the monocolored option for similar effect is actually better, it's probably printed more recently and therefor more powerful. That's the case with Psychic Strike vs Thought Collapse and for as similar as they are (differences were already pointed out) for Merciless Eviction and Farewell. Final Judgment in its turn is older than that, and therefor more limited in application than Merciless Eviction, which is the newer card out of the two.
Aurelia's Fury vs Rolling Thunder is a bad comparison. The silence- and tap effects make the card a lot more versatile. With Aurelia's Fury you could ping a player to stop them from comboing, tap down three blockers to swing in for lethal, where Rolling Thunder only offers straight up removal or burn to the face, which Fury can do as well. Still, Rolling Thunder was printed in 1997 where Aurelia's Fury was printed in 2015.
What OP's describing is powercreep, and it's not restricted by colors.
DemonDragonJ on How Can Mono-Colored Cards be …
6 months ago
Employees of WotC have said that multi-colored cards can be more powerful and/or more efficiently costed than are mono-colored cards with the same cost or similar effects (such as comparing Aurelia's Fury to Rolling Thunder or Merciless Eviction to Final Judgment), but I have noticed that there are certain mono-colored cards that are strictly better than are certain multi-colored cards (for example, compare Thought Collapse to Psychic Strike or Farewell to Merciless Eviction), so I wonder how WotC can justify that, as that seems to contradict their previously-stated opinion on the matter.
What does everyone else say, about this? Why are some mono-colored cards more powerful than are multi-colored cards that are very similar? I certainly am very interested to hear your thoughts on this subject.
Apoptosis on
Gear Up!
9 months ago
Specific changes. All of these changes optimize card draw, tutoring, protection to board state, create synergies and infinite combos, and optimization to allow instant speed responses.
OUT: Ardenn, Intrepid Archaeologist (thought this would be awesome, disappointed in performance) Assemble the Players (sub-optimal card draw) Aurelia's Fury Bitterthorn, Nissa's Animus (land drops have not been a problem and by the time I draw it, I needed something else) Brimaz, King of Oreskos (love this guy, but had to cut) Chained to the Rocks Elbrus, the Binding Blade Flip (obtained better equipment) Fellwar Stone Hixus, Prison Warden (never happy when I had this in hand because you need to let the damage land, plus you fail to build board state when waiting to draw a punch) Illusionist's Bracers (I realized there was little in this deck that this could help) Kemba, Kha Enduring (I want the option of where the equipment goes) Kjeldoran Outpost (did help create a chump blocker and spend unused mana, but I didn't like losing the land) Lapse of Certainty (replaced with better options, but I love this card) Lightning Helix Path of Mettle Flip (never had good results) Prophetic Flamespeaker (under-performed) Puresteel Paladin (tough cut) Purphoros, God of the Forge (under-performed) Rogue's Passage Sea Gate Wreckage Silverblade Paladin (love this guy, tough cut) Sram, Senior Edificer (very tough and recent cut for Leonin Shikari and Merry, who are just better but I may put back in) Sword of the Animist (land drops have not been a problem and by the time I draw it, I needed something else) Wingmate Roc (love it but under-performed)
In: Esper Sentinel (card draw) Leonin Shikari (instant speed equiping is amazing) Merry, Esquire of Rohan (card draw) Enlightened Tutor (great for combos/synergies) Sigarda's Aid (so great) Pyrohemia (this card is a beast with Iroas! Even without Iroas must people don't have easy ways to deal with enchantments and this is a wraith on a stick. I've added it to all of my red decks and it's cousin (Pestilence) to my black decks in a slot I would normally hold for a wraith) Teferi's Protection (protect the board state) Excalibur, Sword of Eden Fighter Class (tutor!) Angelic Skirmisher (lifelink to stretch game and facilitates infinite combos) Splendor Mare (put it on Reckoner or Spitemare, give them indestructable, and gain infinite life, or move it to pyrohemia with nesting grounds to get massive amounts of life as you flamethrower the whole table!!) Mask of Avacyn (better option then shroud from boots, you need to be able to dynamically react/voltron) Mob Rule (this just finishes games) Smothering Tithe (ramp) Sunforger (some say you must build around this, I say you use this as a key tutor for when you need an instant) Nesting Grounds Spitemare The One Ring (card draw, duh) Minas Tirith (card draw) Sunhome, Fortress of the Legion (value engine, mana dump) Phyrexian Vindicator (beefy flier, helps get Iroas online, and difficult to remove) War of the Last Alliance (tutor) Hall of Heliod's Generosity (bring back pyrohemia and flamethrower the world all over again!!) Mask of Memory (card draw) Boromir, Warden of the Tower (protect board state)
| Have (1) | metalmagic |
| Want (1) | beesaurs |