Combos Browse all Suggest
Legality
| Format | Legality |
| 1v1 Commander | Legal |
| Archenemy | Legal |
| Block Constructed | Legal |
| Canadian Highlander | Legal |
| Casual | Legal |
| Commander / EDH | Legal |
| Commander: Rule 0 | Legal |
| Custom | Legal |
| Duel Commander | Legal |
| Highlander | Legal |
| Legacy | Legal |
| Leviathan | Legal |
| Limited | Legal |
| Modern | Legal |
| Oathbreaker | Legal |
| Planechase | Legal |
| Premodern | Legal |
| Quest Magic | Legal |
| Vanguard | Legal |
| Vintage | Legal |
Confiscate
Enchantment — Aura
Enchant permanent (Target a permanent as you play this. This card enters the battlefield attached to that permanent.)
You control enchanted permanent.
Ashdust on
Nihiloor's Mind Cleanse
2 years ago
I like Confiscate in decks like these, but it may be overpriced. Anything to steal opponents' creatures really, and attack for loads of damage. You probably have reasons for not focusing on this, I just like that idea. I may have to make a Nihiloor deck later...
feathermain on
Orvar, the All-Form
2 years ago
if you want to go a little mean, you can add things like Winter's Rest and Confiscate. orvar can copy the enchantment and when the copy enters, it can attach to any legal permanent, even creatures with hexproof or shroud. you can permanently tap down their entire board or steal all of their creatures, one by one. Eldrazi Conscription and Blighted Agent are a favorite of mine.
Madcookie on Does Radiant Performer work with …
2 years ago
I wonder if Radiant Performer works with auras's enchant ability such as
1 - Captured by the Consulate to neuter all opponent's creatures and protect my own
2 - Confiscate to gain control of every permanent
3 - Paradox Haze to enchant everyone and give them extra upkeeps
TheMadRocketeer on
Jalira
3 years ago
Good Sweepers To Maybe Bring In:
- AEtherspouts
- Curse of the Swine
- Evacuation
- Nevinyrral's Disk
- Polymorphist's Jest - Only temporary, though
- Selective Snare - Limited against non-tribal decks, though
Good Control To Maybe Bring In:
- Cancel
- Devious Cover-Up
- Didn't Say Please
- Dispersal Shield - Conditional, though
- Memory Lapse - Goes to library rather than graveyard, though
- Sinister Sabotage
- Spell Rupture - Conditional, though
Good Creature Steal To Maybe Bring In:
Thoughts?
DemonDragonJ on Commander Legends Spoilers
3 years ago
It is very nice to see that Vampiric Tutor is being reprinted, again; I know that most players, including myself, were hoping for a reprint of Imperial Seal, but at least the tutor will decrease in price, since it is still worth more than $100.00, at this time.
At this point, it is likely safe to presume that uncommon legendary creatures will now be a regular feature of this game, which severely disappoints me, since I was hoping that they appear only on rare occasions.
Mnemonic Deluge is quite awesome, but I am not certain if I would be willing to spend such a large amount of mana to cast it.
Confiscate has not been reprinted in some time, so it is nice to see another reprint of that card.
It is nice to see that WotC finally made a card of Krark, and he obviously has synergy with his own thumb, which I hope is reprinted in this set, as well.
Szat's Will is very diabolical, much like Szat, himself, although, as with Szat, himself, I feel that it should have had more black mana symbols in its cost, since both card are very powerful and very black in effect.
Sphinx of the Second Sun is a very interesting new effect that has never been done, before, so I like it.
I like Siani, but the fact that his or her (the name sounds feminine, to me) ability is limited to creatures with flying limits their usefulness.
If I ever build a fairy EDH deck, I shall definitely include Nymris in that deck.
The ghost of Ramirez de Pietro is quite an awesome callback to an obscure older card, although I wish that the ghost was black/blue, since the original card was black/blue.
Seraphic Greatsword is very awesome, although the high equip cost will require a carefully-constructed deck to be able to pay it reliably.
I am so happy to finally see Liesa, the black/white angel from Innistrad, and her ability is definitely very awesome; I certainly would like to see other legendary creatures with that form of alternative payment, but I also would like to see it remain unique to her; if I ever make a black/white EDH deck, there will be so many options from which to choose. However, why is he only a normal rare, when the other angels from her cycle were mythic rares? I noticed that her alternate cost is mandatory, not optional, which could be a problem if she is summoned too many times, but any deck that has her as the general will likely have plenty of methods for gaining life.
Bladegriff prototype is very awesome, but I am not certain if it is worth the additional 2 mana over Trygon Predator.
Colonel_Kink on None
3 years ago
also, just wanted to let anyone know, the Confiscate card and Disruptive Student card i picked as a reach.
cuz i see some of the banned cards as a reach.
plus people said that it is about teferi, well... what if some group didnt know that and got offended?
BOOM. they will claim that teferi is a racist depiction and will claim that anyone justifying it is racist.
thats my problem. if anyone can claim offense to something, and it gets banned, where does it stop?
Deadpoo111 on None
3 years ago
DISCLAIMER: THE FOLLOWING IS MY PERSONAL OPINION
Okay, so I've been doing a lot of reading on this topic and I think I've reformed my argument.
-
I think the legitimate erasure of these cards from MTG's history is a bad move. Banning, while somewhat lazy, prevents the cards from seeing the light of day. What WotC has done is make sure no one sees those cards again. It's a dangerous precedent, and while I'm personally still glad these cards are gone, I don't think straight up erasing them from everywhere is a great sign. IMAGINE IF THEY DID THAT TO A SPECTER!
-
I made an argument earlier about how Confiscate and Disruptive Student aren't in the same vein as these cards because they depict characters within the story that have backgrounds and traits that lend themselves directly to what is happening on the card. Some tried to use this argument to defend the other cards. This argument doesn't hold up. Who's the first hooded man in Invoke Prejudice? What's his name? Why does he want to invoke prejudice? Legends had a story based directly around the legendary creatures of the set (the comics in Legends case, god do I love me some Jeddit Ojanen) and this card has nothing to do with that story. The same goes for every card, although I suppose Jihad could be supported? I haven't read Arabian Nights so if there is mention of Jihad there, I suppose it could stand under "This is an actual part of the set and character's story"
-
My (and again this is my opinion not fact) problem with Jihad, invoke predjudice, and crusade is that they step dangerously, almost fully into the real world. The crusades were real, they happened and there were years of bloodshed because of them. The OG crusade literally has European knights, so I don't think the "the card is innocent works" because the card was specifically made to represent the actual crusades. Jihad is harder for me to evaluate because of my limited knowledge of middle eastern culture, but again, it references something involving many deaths and bloodshed from our real world. I think Invoke Prejudice is guilty on each side of the art argument. If you think it depicts the Klan, then it should be excluded because the Klan is a real world symbol of racism and hate. If you think it represents the Spanish inquisition, it should be excluded because it depicts a real world event involving bloodshed and death.
-
Cleanse is honestly a little on the fence for me personally>/i>. I don't agree with the argument that the color black in magic is representative of any race or ethnicity. The card is a little dicey with the name? The flavor text can be read either way since black (in magic) is a color filled with zombies, demons, nightmares, etc...
-
There's been a lot of argument over what a slur is in relation to the G***y card. I don't feel like I have a say, but if there actually is a split of those who think the word is a slur and those who don't, wouldn't it be safer to just get rid of it? That's my only opinion on it. I avoid using the word anyway, simply out of respect, but I understand that others feel it is their heritage.
-
The devils felt like a big stretch until I read some fascinating stuff about those pillars. I think (this is my opinion) the card itself once again references the real world too closely. Not really on the fence with this one, but if someone asked me to remove a card I thought was problematic to the game, I certainly wouldn't have thought of this one.
-
The art on Imprison is just a little too close to the nail for me. I believe this card was fine to remove and that's it, basically the artwork.
-
The final point I sort of want to leave on is that I feel getting rid of these cards was a good idea. However, I don't believe made the right choice in how to get rid of them. While I don't ,ind a little reference to Monty Python and Sharknado here and there, I do mind references to the inquisition or klan.
dingusdingo on None
3 years ago
The thread that keeps on giving
Why does it matter if they're banned if you can use them for kitchen table?
Sanctioned events exist where these cards might see play, especially Invoke Prejudice. Mono blue commander decks love the card as a powerful hoser that gives lots of devotion. This ranged from local EDH night at your shop to Commandfest. The list of officially sanctioned cards is pretty important in a card game.
Your post is a logical fallacy based on anecdotal evidence. Well I never saw any racism after MLK died why are we protesting? It doesn't matter if you have personally seen the cards. If I have seen the cards, does that change the legitimacy of my argument for or against their banning? No, not at all. You should debate based on the merit of the cards themselves.
The bannings DO impact the game, and even though Crusade has a functional reprint, decks can now only run 1 copy of the effect instead of 2. I have covered this already, but if you need something more thorough I'm happy to write you a blog post.
Your defense of Confiscate and Disruptive Student could easily be appropriated to defend the banned cards. Invoke Prejudice just shows a scene from Magic's in game history :^) Pradesh Gypsies are not the ethnic group but the other definition "person who wanders". :^) While we can sit here and volley these justifications back and forth all day, the larger point is that these cards and the art are what people construe them to be.
I am an educator and knowledgeable on the public schooling system, especially in America. History has been whitewashed to promote American imperialism, and and Common Core in America leaves quite a bit off the treatment of people of color in North and South America. Even if the history of race relations was properly documented in public school, supplementing with a variety of media shouldn't be frowned upon. Please don't use "We learned about race in school, so why is it in magic cards/tv/video games/etc." because it stifles learning and conversation
Lastly, saying that someone is "whining their $400 card got banned" is trivializing the issue. The players are paying for the mistake of Wizards from their own wallet. Please justify to me why players should be eating the monetary mistake of Wizards.
Thank you for the information about how Invoke Prejudice was made. This certainly helps us with evaluating the context of the card at the time, and now.
I agree, people aren't focusing on the issue of preservation and history and the long term impacts of trying to memory-hole the mistakes. There is more at stake than 7 cards which see fringe play, and people are equating the need for equity with the need to remove the records of what happened in the past.
I also agree that as soon as an inch is given, a mile will be taken. This is one of the reasons I am staunchly against these bannings. If the cards truly present a problem, there are solutions that involve Wizards spending time and money to correct them.
This is twice you've been called out for assuming ignorance with someone you're talking to. I'd still like to see even an acknowledgement of the racist things you've said in this thread, if not an apology and a pledge to do better on top. You've commented since then, so clearly you've read it. Do you see the hypocrisy when you're arguing for systemic changes for racial sensitivity when you choose not to acknowledge your own mistakes? Seriously, check yourself. I know you're a moderator on TappedOut, so maybe I should go to the person above you for intervention on your behalf since you can't act appropriately.
Also I agree with Toolmaster again, the coincidences around Invoke Prejudice do not show racist intent. You're a lawyer, right? How do you not understand that 4 pieces of circumstantial evidence isn't enough to hang the guilty? Especially when those 4 pieces of circumstantial evidence involve different people making the choices, with years inbetween (the card being made against gathered ID being assigned), and the artist on record speaking explicitly about the art and art direction.
Silencing voices on discussion is never a win. I understand what you're getting at, but the issue at hand is "Are the cards racist enough to warrant a ban?", so talking about what is and isn't racist is quite on topic. You don't have to be personally impacted by police brutality to speak on the issue.
| Have (2) | JordanSanFran , reikitavi |
| Want (0) |