Magic: The Gathering XIII: What A Horrible Night To Have An Enchantment- Curse

[Lord Ruby34]

Okay, I think I've got it then.

Spoiler

Show

Creatures:
Stromkirk Noble 4x
Fume Spitter 4x
Bloodcrazed Neonate 3x
Vampire Interloper 2x
Rakish Heir 4x
Stromkirk Captain 4x
Markov Blademaster 3x
Bloodline Keeper 4x

Spells:
Arc Trail 4x
Doom Blade 2x
Go for the Throat 2x
Incinerate 2x

Land:
Dragonskull Summit 4x
Blackcleave Cliffs 4x
Mountain 8x
Swamp 6x

Sideboard

Doom Blade 2x
Go for the Throat 2x
Infiltration Lens 4x
Shock 2x
Incinerate 2x
Undying Evil 3x

The sideboard is just a rough estimate, but I could see myself swapping these in on occasion.

[Bucky]

Okay, I think I've got it then.

Spoiler

Show

Creatures:
Stromkirk Noble 4x
Fume Spitter 4x
Bloodcrazed Neonate 3x
Vampire Interloper 2x
Rakish Heir 4x
Stromkirk Captain 4x
Markov Blademaster 3x
Bloodline Keeper 4x

Spells:
Arc Trail 4x
Doom Blade 2x
Go for the Throat 2x
Incinerate 2x

Land:
Dragonskull Summit 4x
Blackcleave Cliffs 4x
Mountain 8x
Swamp 6x

Sideboard

Doom Blade 2x
Go for the Throat 2x
Infiltration Lens 4x
Shock 2x
Incinerate 2x
Undying Evil 3x

The sideboard is just a rough estimate, but I could see myself swapping these in on occasion.

8x Go for the Throat / Doom Blade total seems excessive... you have plenty of targetted creature kill. At the very least, sub a couple of kill spells in the board for Geth's Verdict (to deal with Hexproof). Also, Manabarbs is an old sideboard favorite for tempo decks, and may deserve a slot or two. Finally, with both Fume Spitter and Arc Trail in the deck, Shock seems less important. Finally, Stensia Bloodhall is still a way to push through the last 2-6 points of damage, and probably deserves to displace one of your nonland cards.

I think in general, your sideboard should be stuff that changes your gameplan rather than more of the same. When are you bringing in both extra Doom Blades instead of (or in addition to) 2 Incinerates?

[9mm]

Agreed, but Image also dies if it's targeted by anything which I find a major flaw. Sure, the idea would be to target the Captain in this deck so it can't be targeted, but if I were to copy something else...well then there's a problem.

EDIT: I should state that this might just be a product of my gaming environment. I've never seen an Image survive past a single turn if it could be targeted, especially if it's copied something dangerous.

while in general you'll always be targeting your captain; and getting at most one use, if any from copying your opponents stuff, that one use is often pretty damn baller.

Fun fact, if you copied say ravager of the fells, and two spells were cast, it wouldn't transform into the huntmaster, but you've still dealt 2 damage to your opponent and a creature of his. Also copying opponents legendaries is always hilarious.

It...what? I'm..not even talking about a zombie deck. I'm talking about a potential spirit/angel deck.

Sorry this was my fault; as both you and ninjaman are doing two tribal decks that use lords to create argo pressure. I got the two captains backwards, and quoted the zombie deck while giving advice to yours. Phantasmal image fits both.

[Lord Ruby34]

Hmm, The Doomblade/Go for the Throat was for dealing with Black or Artifact decks, but I guess that I could deal with Two Go for the Throats to make things easier. I guess I'll sub those out for Geth's Verdict. That might save me money too. I'm not sure I can afford Manabarbs and Stensia Bloodhall, so I'll try to trade for those later. I'll need to trade for Infiltration lens too. The sideboard is my last concern, so I'll deal with it after I assemble my deck. Thanks for the help, I really needed guidance on the proper spells.

[tgva8889]

Fun fact, if you copied say ravager of the fells, and two spells were cast, it wouldn't transform into the huntmaster, but you've still dealt 2 damage to your opponent and a creature of his.

This actually isn't true. A Phantasmal Image of Ravager of the Fells can't transform at all, so when that ability resolves, absolutely nothing happens. A Phantasmal Image of Ravager of the Fells will never trigger the ability to deal 2 damage to an opponent and/or a creature, because it can't have ever transformed into Ravager of the Fells.

[9mm]

This actually isn't true. A Phantasmal Image of Ravager of the Fells can't transform at all, so when that ability resolves, absolutely nothing happens. A Phantasmal Image of Ravager of the Fells will never trigger the ability to deal 2 damage to an opponent and/or a creature, because it can't have ever transformed into Ravager of the Fells.

Tell that to the magic pro tour, where that exact play happened.

[AgentPaper]

This actually isn't true. A Phantasmal Image of Ravager of the Fells can't transform at all, so when that ability resolves, absolutely nothing happens. A Phantasmal Image of Ravager of the Fells will never trigger the ability to deal 2 damage to an opponent and/or a creature, because it can't have ever transformed into Ravager of the Fells.

I think the rules explanation would be that the image can transform, it's just that being transformed doesn't do anything do it, since it doesn't have a second side. It still technically transforms, though, so it's ability triggers.

[tgva8889]

Oh, really? Well never mind then, I guess I'm wrong.

[Bucky]

Hmm, The Doomblade/Go for the Throat was for dealing with Black or Artifact decks, but I guess that I could deal with Two Go for the Throats to make things easier.

Most creatures in most black/artifact decks die to Incinerate. The main exceptions are Phyrexian Obliterator, Grave Titan and Tempered Steel-boosted creatures.

I'm not sure I can afford Manabarbs and Stensia Bloodhall, so I'll try to trade for those later.

Stensia Bloodhall is 25 cents on channelfireball, which means you should be able to get them relatively cheap off a 'value trader'.

[The Extinguisher]

Oh, really? Well never mind then, I guess I'm wrong.

Actually, you're right. If a card with only one face (or a token) is instructed to transform, then nothing happens. It won't trigger the ability, because no transformation happened.

Just because it happened at a pro tour, doesn't mean it's the correct play. They make mistakes there too.

[Fable Wright]

Hmm, The Doomblade/Go for the Throat was for dealing with Black or Artifact decks, but I guess that I could deal with Two Go for the Throats to make things easier. I guess I'll sub those out for Geth's Verdict. That might save me money too. I'm not sure I can afford Manabarbs and Stensia Bloodhall, so I'll try to trade for those later. I'll need to trade for Infiltration lens too. The sideboard is my last concern, so I'll deal with it after I assemble my deck. Thanks for the help, I really needed guidance on the proper spells.

As previously stated, all of those cards are fairly cheap. The only cards on your list worth a few bucks are the lands, Bloodline Keepers, and the Stromkirk Noble.

Also, consider grabbing a few Sever the Bloodlines. Control decks will be running Wurmcoil Engine. And you need a better out to that than just Doom Blade.

[Mystic Muse]

Also, consider grabbing a few Sever the Bloodlines. Control decks will be running Wurmcoil Engine. And you need a better out to that than just Doom Blade.

Speaking of control decks, I was hoping to make a Mono-black one. Anybody have any advice? I probably won't be able to afford Surgical extractions, sadly. I've got four Obliterators on Hand, and was wanting to make a deck based around them. Standard legal, even though I'll probably never use it at FNM.

[Lord Seth]

Actually, you're right. If a card with only one face (or a token) is instructed to transform, then nothing happens. It won't trigger the ability, because no transformation happened.

Just because it happened at a pro tour, doesn't mean it's the correct play. They make mistakes there too.

Does anyone have a link to some kind of official ruling on this, whether that be from a high-level judge or Wizards of the Coast themselves?

[9mm]

Just because it happened at a pro tour, doesn't mean it's the correct play. They make mistakes there too.

yes but Pro tour also has a judge sitting right next to them.

[Sohala]

Link to rules

If any card or token other than a double-faced card is instructed to transform, nothing happens. It won't be turned face down.

[Narkis]

There's also a ruling that addresses this specific issue on Werewolf Ransacker, which has the same kind of trigger as Ravager.

It's not impossible that the judge made a mistake, or just didn't notice it. We are far from infallible.

[tgva8889]

That only addresses the "becoming a copy" moment. So, for example, when I play a Phantasmal Image and choose to copy Ravager of the Fells, I don't trigger its ability because it didn't transform into it, it became a copy of it (which is a different game action).

Pro Tour judges are not infallible. They've made mistakes before. It is highly likely that the ruling was correct, but considering the amount of confusion I'm not sure what the right answer is. My guess is that based on the quoted rules text, the Phantasmal Image would still technically transform, but it wouldn't do anything because it's not a Double-Faced Card. Because it did technically transform, it will trigger abilities that trigger on transforming, such as Ravager of the Fell's ability.

Reading the Comprehensive Rules, it implies that things that are not Double-Faced Cards can't transform at all:

711.1. A double-faced card has a Magic card face on each side rather than a Magic card face on one side and a Magic card back on the other. Each face may have abilities that allow the permanent to "transform," or turn over to its other face. Tokens and cards with a Magic card back can't transform. (See rule 701.25, "Transform.")

The real question is whether Ravager of the Fells can actually transform into itself or not (via being not a double-faced card). If this is the case, then I can imagine some amusement involving Mirrorweave, Huntmaster of the Fells, and Moonmist.

[Callos_DeTerran]

So, gotta mention (since my deck ideas mostly went ignored) something I saw the other day...Has anyone else seen the Avacyn Restored trailer?

Fluff Stuff

Spoiler

Show

So it Liliana who engineers the breaking of the Helvault, but she needs pawns to do it...and finds it in Thalia by threatening the lives of her men. My question is...how did she threaten them? Use her connection to Geralf to maneuver the stitcher against the remains of Thraben's army?

In either case, from the look of things, the mere arrival of Avacyn seems to turn the entire plane around. Angels everywhere, holy magic working again, cathars (and arch-mages apparently?) on the war-path and even mention of fearsome beasts turned into passive guardians. Did Avacyn tame werewolves? Cause that'd explain her symbol and the flavor text on Ancient Grudge.

The bad news...Griselbrand is also released, along with whatever else was in there with him, but with both Sorin and Avacyn on the loose, I honestly don't think that's a big problem. Especially considering that Liliana's plan seems to be to let Avacyn deal with her demonic loan-shark. So look at that...a Magic cycle that didn't end with an apocalypse, but instead features it's successful trouble-shooting. More proof that Sorin should be the one to lead the other planeswalkers against Nicol Bolas!

[AgentPaper]

There's also a ruling that addresses this specific issue on Werewolf Ransacker, which has the same kind of trigger as Ravager.

It's not impossible that the judge made a mistake, or just didn't notice it. We are far from infallible.

For that specific ruling at least, I think it's in reference to the fact that something becoming a copy of Werewolf Ransacker doesn't cause the effect to trigger, since it's not transforming into it, it's simply entering the battlefield as a copy of it. If that copy were to later trigger it's transform ability, then the ability would trigger since it's actually transforming, even if it doesn't actually cause the card to flip.

[Androgeus]

Reading the Comprehensive Rules, it implies that things that are not Double-Faced Cards can't transform at all:

It actually states that things that aren't double-faced cards can't transform.

701.25a Only permanents represented by double-faced cards can transform. (See rule 711, “Double-Faced Cards.”) If a spell or ability instructs a player to transform any permanent that isn’t represented by a double-faced card, nothing happens.

[killem2]

Why are you spending so many cards on this?

Swamp, Dark Ritual, Entomb, Goyro's Vengeance. 4 cards, at any moment, to make your opponent sacrifice 6 permanents and take 15. Out of nowhere.

Though I think my favorite would be to combine those 4 with Sacrifice and Drain Life for the Turn 1 Kill, using at least 3 cards that no one plays anymore.

Well, that is one way to do it, but I feel emrakual is a worthless creature in the first place to pull out :P

I'd rather stick to the tried and true stuff, use Simic Sky swallower. When you have to bend the rest of the deck around the reanimator targets, it weakens its consistency over all.

I was just giving suggestions for what is available.

[Lord Seth]

To respond to something older (probably for the final time):

Spoiler

Show

Akroma was popular for 4 years after her printing, so much so that she was printed on the Time-Shifted Sheet and constantly referenced in Time Spiral Block.

Previous popularity is irrelevant to what you said. You stated she still stood out today. I pointed out that did not seem to be true due to the obvious lack of usage.

Phage received no such reference beyond her block.

I stated that I could remember what Phage did more precisely. Which makes some sense; Phage's "kill a player in one hit" ability is one-of-a-kind, whereas Akroma is just a bunch of already-existing abilities thrown onto one card (not to mention "kills creatures in one hit, kills players in one hit, and kills you if you don't hardcast her" is easier to remember than seven different abilities).

Clearly, Akroma did something worth remembering, otherwise they wouldn't have made nearly so many cards to reference her. I mean, as late as M11 they were making Sword of Vengeance.

Hard to see that as a reference. It isn't named after her, she isn't in the flavor text, and unlike, say, Akroma's Memorial, it doesn't give all her abilities.

I'm not sure 8 is still too much to actually cast. Some decks cast Elesh Norn and Drogskol Reaver for full mana cost these days. In Standard. Sure, there's a world of difference between 7 and 8, but it wasn't that long ago that 10 was an acceptable mana cost for cards that you could cast.

When was this? Granted, I suppose there were cards like the Eldrazi (Emrakul in particular), but they were colorless so they could be used more efficiently and had cards like Eye of Ugin to help out.

The card is unlikely to see play for a combination of reasons, not purely because it costs 8.

I do not believe I ever stated that her casting cost alone was the reason she was unlikely to see play.

Comparing Avacyn the creature to Elspeth the planeswalker is a leap for me.

The point I was making was that both had the ability to make your stuff indestructible. That's all.

A build-up of excitement doesn't necessitate "awesome tournament staple."

I should think it kind of should. Maybe not necessarily a major staple, but still something to impact various formats fairly well. And that's again my issue, I don't think any card has been built up as much as Avacyn, so it's disappointing that it seems like a card that just seems so...meh in terms of actual deck construction. I was hoping for something like Thalia or maybe even Delver, but it could've looked like it'd have less of an impact than Thalia and still satisfied me (say, like the non-Emrakul legendary Eldrazi). I have to agree with what others have said--if they had maybe dropped the power/toughness a bit so the casting cost could be lower, this card might have been more interesting.

I can understand your disappointment that Avacyn is not a tournament-playable card from immediate glance. But I'm not sure why you thought she would be.

Because, yet again, if you're going to put a particular card in the name of the set, I feel it should really be something that will be played a lot more than this card is likely to be.

But let's even ignore the issue of tournament playability. Even ignoring that, the card still seems just...boring. Yet another fatty with a sweeping ability and a high casting cost. Yawn. Already saw it with Iona, Elesh Norn, and others, which I feel did it better. I wish there was a bit more zip to it, like with Emrakul or Progenitus or heck, even Akroma (who back in the day, admittedly, was fairly impressive). It's odd that despite having an ability as rare as "everything you have is indestructible" it still manages to feel so generic.

I admit I might be wrong. Maybe someone will come up with some nifty way to use this creature that I'm missing. Maybe there will be a card in the set that interface with it to give it better strategies. In a few months we'll have a better idea about the card. But at the moment, I'm very unimpressed with a creature that probably has had more buildup than any other card.

[AgentPaper]

Spoiler

Show

Lord Seth: The card isn't designed for you. It's a Timmy card, not a Spike or Johnny card. Comparing it to Elesh Norn isn't really fair, they each do very different things. Elesh Norn is better in some circumstances, and Avacyn is better in other circumstances. Is Elesh Norn better? Maybe, but Elesh Norn is an absurdly good card, so if Avacyn is even comparable to her, then that's a pretty good sign.

"Won't see play in tournaments," does not mean, "Won't see play." She will absolutely see a ton of play in various formats on thousands of kitchen tables around the world.

It's good for there to be a few tournament-grade mythic rare cards in each set, but every mythic rare was a tournament-grade card, then they would be even more expensive, and playing in tournaments would cost even more than it does today. It would also make mythic rare cards much less fun for all the Timmies and Johnnies out there that prefer a different kind of card.

Could she have been tweaked to appeal more to spikes and johnnies? Sure. For example, imagine the following two cards:

Avacyn, Angel of Hope 2WW
Legendary Creature - Angel M
Flying
Avacyn, Angel of Hope and other creatures you control are indestructible.
3/3

Avacyn, Angel of Hope 6WWW
Legendary Creature - Angel M
Flying
Human permanents you control are indestructible.
At the beginning of your upkeep, put a 4/4 white Angel creature token with flying onto the battlefield.
When Avacyn is put into a graveyard from anywhere, its owner shuffles his or her graveyard into his or her library.
5/5

The first one appeals to Spikes, with it's fairly aggressive cost and great resilience. The second appeals more to Johnnies, with it's powerful and interesting abilities that interact in cool ways. Of course, neither of these appeals to everyone. The first is too small to be interesting to a Timmy, and the second has too many words and not enough raw power. The first is too simple and straightforwards for a Johnny, and the second is certainly not playable to a Spike.

Okay, so let's try and make something good for everyone:

Avacyn, Angel of Hope 3WW
Legendary Creature - Angel M
Flying, Vigilance
Other permanents you control are indestructible.
5/5

There. It's kinda big, so Timmy likes it. It's not too expensive, so Spike might play it. It's interesting to Johnny, since if you protect her then all of your stuff is invincible. So this must be the perfect card, right?

No. It's big, but it's not big or splashy enough to really impress a Timmy. It's playable, but not enough that a Spike will really be excited about including it in any of his decks. It's got a bit of interesting interactions, but beyond sticking a pair of lightning greaves or a suit of darksteel plate on it, Johnny doesn't have much to work with here.

Which comes back to the issue of "If you try to please everyone, you end up pleasing nobody." With Avacyn, they decided to please Timmies, and I would say that they succeeded from what we've seen so far. She's big, she's splashy, and she's got and she does something pretty unique. You can't ask for much more from a Timmy card.

[Fable Wright]

Avacyn, Angel of Hope 3WW
Legendary Creature - Angel M
Flying, Vigilance
Other permanents you control are indestructible.
5/5

There. It's kinda big, so Timmy likes it. It's not too expensive, so Spike might play it. It's interesting to Johnny, since if you protect her then all of your stuff is invincible. So this must be the perfect card, right?

No. It's big, but it's not big or splashy enough to really impress a Timmy. It's playable, but not enough that a Spike will really be excited about including it in any of his decks. It's got a bit of interesting interactions, but beyond sticking a pair of lightning greaves or a suit of darksteel plate on it, Johnny doesn't have much to work with here.

Which comes back to the issue of "If you try to please everyone, you end up pleasing nobody." With Avacyn, they decided to please Timmies, and I would say that they succeeded from what we've seen so far. She's big, she's splashy, and she's got and she does something pretty unique. You can't ask for much more from a Timmy card.

...No, that card would definitely be played by Spikes. All your permanents being indestructible is kinda ridiculously powerful. Even if Avacyn isn't, she's easy to protect with Faith's Shield and Apostle's Blessing, and having everything else indestructible for that cost would be ridiculous. Hero of Bladehold: You no longer have to worry about it dying. And the tokens it makes proceed to be indestructible. Lingering Souls provides even more of an advantage, as they can't kill the spirits, and Elspeth Tirel becomes a ridiculous powerhouse. That card would not be something that sees print, ever.

[Androgeus]

You two should probably be talking in spoilers btw.

Spoiler

Show

That second card is a real hodgepodge AgentPaper, the abilities have no synergy.

[Foeofthelance]

Reading the Comprehensive Rules, it implies that things that are not Double-Faced Cards can't transform at all:



The real question is whether Ravager of the Fells can actually transform into itself or not (via being not a double-faced card). If this is the case, then I can imagine some amusement involving Mirrorweave, Huntmaster of the Fells, and Moonmist.

I think that's the problem. The way 711.1 is written implies that the Transform trigger resolves, but nothing happens. So the twin shocks on Ravagers checks to see if there was a Transform trigger (there was) and whether the face of the card now reads Ravager of the Fells (which it does) and decides that yes, someone is going to get burned. This is backed up by 701.25, which says nothing happens when a single faced card Transforms, and 701.25c, which states that the Transform trigger and actually flipping the card are separate actions. Instead of reading, "Single faced cards can't Transform", 711.1 should read "Single faced cards don't Transform."

[tgva8889]

I think that's the problem. The way 711.1 is written implies that the Transform trigger resolves, but nothing happens. So the twin shocks on Ravagers checks to see if there was a Transform trigger (there was) and whether the face of the card now reads Ravager of the Fells (which it does) and decides that yes, someone is going to get burned. This is backed up by 701.25, which says nothing happens when a single faced card Transforms, and 701.25c, which states that the Transform trigger and actually flipping the card are separate actions. Instead of reading, "Single faced cards can't Transform", 711.1 should read "Single faced cards don't Transform."

I asked Matt Tabak, the Magic rules manager, on Twitter, and he replied:

@tgva8889 Nope. Has to actually transform into the appropriate side.

So since when Phantasmal Image of Ravager of the Fells tries to transform, nothing happens, it can't trigger the ability because it didn't actually perform the full action of transforming, which requires flipping the card over. So I think I was right the first time.

Please spoil specific discussion of Avacyn the card or anything that references the majority of her card text (like the designs above).

In response to the lack of popularity of Akroma:

I think Sword of Vengeance is clearly a reference to Akroma. The fact that they printed the card and immediately several people said "Oh man, it's Akroma's Sword!" whether or not it specifically references her in text is an example of the fact that people still recognize that Akroma is a thing. The reference wasn't as obvious as Akroma's Memorial, sure, but Sword of Vengeance is still quite clearly an Akroma reference for those who have seen Akroma. I mean, by your justification how much of a "reference" is Akroma, Angel of Fury?

The fact that I've seen many comparisons between Avacyn and Akroma on an "awesomeness" level indicates that Akroma is still known even today. Akroma is still well-known almost 7 years after her original printing. They wouldn't have printed Sword of Vengeance if that wasn't true.

Literal quote from Wizards of the Coast card of the day:

Card of the Day - Monday, July 26, 2010
Sword of Vengeance – Magic 2011 rare. The abilities granted by Sword of Vengeance echo the abilities of Akroma, Angel of Wrath. As the flavor text notes, we can't say for sure that it's the real deal. Still, this card does subtly imply that without her sword, Akroma would be a 4/6 with flying and protection from black and from red.

In reference to the card actually under discussion:

Spoiler

Show

Drogskol Reavers and Elesh Norns are being cast in decks in tournaments right now. Cast, with mana. There are decks doing this in Standard. Avacyn is a card that could see play. Of course the Eldrazi had help, but the Eldrazi being played were still 11 and 15 mana. Even with the help of Eldrazi Temples and Eye of Ugin, they were generally cast with 8 or 9 mana-producing permanents on the battlefield.

How do you know Avacyn won't see any tournament play? How do you know the card isn't going to be influential on any tournament formats?

[Suedars]

Spoiler

Show

There's a few big differences though. Both cost 7 rather than 8, which is a lot less. Just resolving Elesh Norn does a huge amount to stabilize you, since she's a Plague Wind that stays on the field against a big chunk of the format. Drogskol Reaver isn't quite as good there since they actually get a chance to kill him, but if they can't he does what Baneslayer used to in old UW control. He neutralizes their first attack, then as soon as he starts swinging puts the game well out of reach. Plus Reaver is just seeing niche play AFAIK and isn't a format staple the way Elesh Norn is. Has it put up any results aside from a single top 32 in SLC?

All Avacyn gives you is a blocker, and there's going to be a lot of spots where you'll cast her then die on the crackback.

I don't think that's it's impossible that she sees play, but I think it's quite unlikely. Her most likely role is as a control finisher, and I don't see how her abilities give her a niche there.

[Foeofthelance]

I asked Matt Tabak, the Magic rules manager, on Twitter, and he replied:



So since when Phantasmal Image of Ravager of the Fells tries to transform, nothing happens, it can't trigger the ability because it didn't actually perform the full action of transforming, which requires flipping the card over. So I think I was right the first time.

That's what I figured they intended, and why I think they should have replaced "Can't" with "Don't". Can't is ambiguous as to whether or not the event happens at all or whether the card just doesn't flip, while Don't would have specifically denied the event and its consequences. Either that or have the ability specifically refer to the other side of the card, such as, "If a player casts two more spells this turn, transform Ravager of the Fells into Huntsmaster of the Fells at the next upkeep." Its wordy and ridiculously redundant, but probably would have been been clearer on his type of ability.

[AgentPaper]

Spoiler

Show

The cards were just meant to be an example, I didn't spend that much time on them. My point stands regardless.