Please login to comment

I'll partially agree with DeinoStinkus that this keyword doesn't seem necessary as a keyword. I mean down the line it's a net gain to refer to combat-specific triggers as a keyword, but unless it gets evergreen or evergreen-like, I don't see the point. It needs to be on the level of Landfall to make much sense.

I had a section about the dangers of a mechanic that shares a generic trigger but is bound to a certain function - like Duelist seems to be for the benefit of the Duelist creature or its controller, but there are creatures like Hamlet Captain and Savvy Hunter which doesn't seem to flavorfully fit the duelist function despite sharing its trigger.

Omnath, Locus of the Roil doesn't have landfall printed on it, but most will call it landfall when explaining it.


Another thing is; I absolutely have to disagree about the name. A duel emphasizes the combat between two individuals. Actually it goes as far as being an arranged fight between two individuals with matched weapons. If you include more people it is a skirmish or on a larger scale a battle. Additionally you want to reward attacks that doesn't necessarily have to be blocked, which doesn't result in a duel (or skirmish). This doesn't seem like a duelist perspective, unless you're figuring the attacking creature duels the player/planeswalker it attacks, who are helpless to actually defend themselves.

If it was me, I would focus on the act of taking action, because that is what this mechanic checks for. If your creature is engaged in combat, they are either attacking or blocking. If not, they are passive. From that place of logic, you could call it Initiative or Take Action. You could derive the name from a mindset or characteristic that thrives in combat/conflict, like Battlelust, Combatant, Fighter, Aggression (aggression seems more like an attacker but a defender can just as well be aggressive and seek out a fight).

September 18, 2020 10:15 a.m.

I stand corrected. I haven't read up on Teysa enough it seems. Thought it was specific enough to only allow die-triggers to function.

September 17, 2020 1:59 p.m.

Said on Shard Spells...

#3

I think it would be a better proposition to make the spells cost 1 of the main color (e.g. black for Grixis) and then a hybrid of the ally colors. Then focus the spell's effects on the main color's interaction with the allies to design them.

Also I believe MaRo has said that tribal non-creatures will not happen again. It caused a lot of interaction ruckus.

I have to disagree Boza about what is within the color pie for each shard. The grixis one is mainly black, but red does sacrifice and can use that to remove creatures, with say Goblin Grenade or Fling. Blue however... is a long stretch to have do either of these, so perhaps the idea of a hybrid shard spell is not particularly interesting as the color pie sets too many restrictions, unless you straight up copy what the Shards have been doing in the Alara block - e.g. Grixis doing reanimation for a turn.

Unless the OP changed the cards since your posting, I think it's unfair to compare the Naya one to Finale of Devastation. For X = 2, you get to find a 4 CMC or less creature and put into your hand. Then for the rest of the turn your creature cards costs less.

What I find iffy is the combination of X spells with something that benefits casting other spells - like the Jund one granting your other creature spells Devour 2... The scaling of the card works directly against its other benefits. That just seems like bad design, even if it is intended as a conscious choice between scaling the effect and taking advantage of the sub-effect.

The Jund one is certainly still within green's color pie. Mycoloth is mono green with Devour. Green can create a lot of tokens. Usually it depends on something else like Avenger of Zendikar, but they do get a few odd X spells Gelatinous Genesis or Sylvan Offering.

I agree about both the Esper and Bant ones having little hold within Blue's slice of the color pie. Blue can create tokens, but usually not in bulk without depending on a 3rd party.

September 16, 2020 8:41 a.m.

Eloniel It wont work. Boreas Charger is a "Leaves the battlefield"-trigger and not a die-trigger - so Teysa sees nothing and does nothing.

September 16, 2020 8:17 a.m.

Genocide as a term describes the intentional act to destroy a people. That kinda seems strange when included on a spell dealing with thoughts/memory?

Also I agree with smackjack that this seems like a effect.

Azorious is usually more about denying something. Through counterspells, taxing, detain or straight up deny.

Perhaps it could just deny the casting of spells with CMC X or less until your next turn? That would be pretty powerful. It is borderline to compare with an extra turn spell, so perhaps it should just be ?

September 15, 2020 10:45 a.m.

This seems really interesting, but also pretty narrow. You'd need a critical mass of matching CMC between auras and creatures you can get into the graveyard.

May I suggest a revised version that is more flexible?

revised Show

September 15, 2020 10:28 a.m.

Said on Champions of Might...

#7

I agree that the +1 should not have Fight attached OR it should be a minus ability.

The -4 is incredibly weak. Compare it to Garruk, Caller of Beasts who reveals top 5 and puts ALL creatures revealed into your hand. And that's a +1 ability... He is also 6 CMC but this one is 3 colors against Garruk's green.

What if you turned the two abilities around?

Different take Show

September 15, 2020 9:16 a.m.

Said on Wither to Dust...

#8

Black doesn't get exile this cheap, even with downside. If you would give it to them, the color would take over some of White's main strengths. The downside is mostly negligible based on the format.

In Commander you have 40 life to take from, so if the opponent gets to achieve a high power creature where this is your only removal choice, you're in trouble. But in 99% of cases, it just costs you a small amount of life, which black happily does in so many other aspects of the color.

In Standard you'll only target stuff that doesn't cost you too much - but the alternative is often to take the combat damage to the face. If the meta is dominated by big power creatures, you run destroy removal, and possibly this as SB if WotC decides to make a stronger Bronzehide Lion.

In Eternal formats you SB it against creatures where the cost is negligible or where it disrupts your opponent's combo.

Also... Tragic Slip exists and that is how Black usually does removal that bypass indestructible, but it is conditional when it's this cheap.

Black is usually tied at 4 CMC for unconditional exile removal, as seen in Eat to Extinction, Gild, Deadly Rollick. The last one having a conditional situation where it's free, specifically for Commander.

Black does get lower CMC exile, but they are conditional on the target: Epic Downfall Legion's End or Grotesque Demise. Or Infernal Reckoning.

White is and should be the king of cheap flexible exile, or it loses one of its few strengths.

September 14, 2020 9:46 a.m.

Decks

Zacama, Primal Calamity

Commander / EDH Tzefick

65 VIEWS

Finished Decks 19
Prototype Decks 17
Drafts 0
Avg. deck rating None
T/O Rank 453
Helper Rank 866
Last activity 1 week
Joined 3 years