Magic the Gathering Thread XXIV: *Slaps Roof* This Thread Can Hold So Many Chandras!

[Ninjaman]

"Dies to removal" is a terrible argument, though.

On a two drop, yes. On a seven drop, no.
If you spend seven mana to cast this and your opponent uses one card and 2-4 mana to deal with it then you have a massive tempo disadvantage.

Like, if nothing else it's a better Mana Reflection

Being better than a card that isn't good doesn't make a card too good.

with a beefy body stapled onto it that you can cheat out with Ilharg,

I feel like there are things you can cheat out with Ilharg that gets you closer to winning the game than just having a lot of mana afterwards. Swinging for 11 and then playing something for 15 mana just feels like win-more.

so now you have three times as much mana to play Fireball or whatever.

So that's a three card combo that requires you to play fireball. That's not very good.

Or you cheat out six copies using Arcane Artisan + a kicked Rites of Replication, so they HAVE to wipe your board (killing the Artisan would only get rid of one token here).

That's a three card combo, that doesn't even win you the game. That's such a weak argument for a card being too good.
They don't even need a sweeper. Any person on the table just needs to have:
Mass bounce
Mass enchantment destruction
Mass land destruction (not casually played I know)

If you manage to assemble your three card combo without any other player having that, that's fine. Your combo worked. You deserve that win.
Siona creates infinite 1/1s with Shielded by Faith, so that requires a sweeper, costs only 6 mana, requires only 2 cards, one of which can be your commander, and yet I that's not what you complain about.

It's much easier to clone, cheat out, or recur creatures, as compared to enchantments.

It's also much easier to answer since it's a creature while also still being an enchantment.

Hey so, quick question for mechanical smart people. What does Altar of the Pantheon do? It says you gain devotion for each colour and colour pair and... what does that mean exactly? Since there are five colour pairs that contain white, and also white by itself, does the Altar give you devotion to white 6? Because that's what it reads like to me.

People seem to agree it only adds one devotion, whether that is to white, or to blue/white, it always only adds 1. I think it's because increasing devotion to white by 1 doesn't effect devotion to white and blue, and the other way around.

[Tvtyrant]

Dies to spot removal is legit in 1v1, not in multiplayer. Spot removal doesn't progress your own game plan, and puts you behind players 3+ in tempo.

This costs enough that it costs more then mass removal, so it is more legitimate. Being in green means playing it then untapping lands isn't that hard, so I think it is decent but costs too much to be great.

[LaZodiac]

As per the rules of devotion: Your devotion to two colors is equal to the number of mana symbols that are the first color, the second color, or both colors among the mana costs of permanents you control. Specifically, a hybrid mana symbol counts only once toward your devotion to its two colors. For example, if the only nonland permanents you control are Pharika, God of Affliction and Golgari Guildmage (whose mana cost is {B/G}{B/G}), your devotion to black and green is four.

and: Hybrid mana symbols, monocolored hybrid mana symbols, and Phyrexian mana symbols do count toward your devotion to their color(s).

So the Altar... theoretically gives either Two, One, or Six devotion, since it is still not clear.

[Douglas]

As per the rules of devotion: Your devotion to two colors is equal to the number of mana symbols that are the first color, the second color, or both colors among the mana costs of permanents you control. Specifically, a hybrid mana symbol counts only once toward your devotion to its two colors. For example, if the only nonland permanents you control are Pharika, God of Affliction and Golgari Guildmage (whose mana cost is {B/G}{B/G}), your devotion to black and green is four.

and: Hybrid mana symbols, monocolored hybrid mana symbols, and Phyrexian mana symbols do count toward your devotion to their color(s).

So the Altar... theoretically gives either Two, One, or Six devotion, since it is still not clear.

It seems perfectly clear to me: devotion is derived from mana symbols, not from other colors of devotion, and mana symbols are not derived from devotion. If something increases devotion, that does not change the number of mana symbols you have, and increasing one type of devotion does not cause any other types of devotion to increase - even if one of them is for a subset of the other's colors.

For any color or combination of colors, the Altar gives 1 devotion. Full stop. The various different devotion increases from this effect do not interact with each other in any way.

If you have Saheeli, Sublime Artificer (1{U/R}{U/R}) and Altar of the Pantheon, your devotion numbers are:
U: 3
R: 3
U and R: 3
U and anything: 3
R and anything: 3
Anything else: 1

[LaZodiac]

It seems perfectly clear to me: devotion is derived from mana symbols, not from other colors of devotion, and mana symbols are not derived from devotion. If something increases devotion, that does not change the number of mana symbols you have, and increasing one type of devotion does not cause any other types of devotion to increase - even if one of them is for a subset of the other's colors.

For any color or combination of colors, the Altar gives 1 devotion. Full stop. The various different devotion increases from this effect do not interact with each other in any way.

If you have Saheeli, Sublime Artificer (1{U/R}{U/R}) and Altar of the Pantheon, your devotion numbers are:
U: 3
R: 3
U and R: 3
U and anything: 3
R and anything: 3
Anything else: 1

Okay, let me get this right? So if I have a BG and a B/G, I have devotion to Black 1, devotion to Green 1, AND Devotion to "Green and Black" 1. So if I had say, Klothys, who needs "Green and Red", I would only get one green from my board state for her devotion (not counting her). Correct?

Because that seems surprisingly counter intuitive and not at all how like it feels like it actually plays. And if this is not correct, and it goes the way I'd think, it raises a question of Altar of the Pantheon and how it "gives 1 devotion for each colour and colour pair". Because if it's the former, it makes sense, but if it's the later, it sounds like Altar would give 6 Devotion for each colour. Or need ad hotfix clarification of its rule text.

[Tvtyrant]

Okay, let me get this right? So if I have a BG and a B/G, I have devotion to Black 1, devotion to Green 1, AND Devotion to "Green and Black" 1. So if I had say, Klothys, who needs "Green and Red", I would only get one green from my board state for her devotion (not counting her). Correct?

Because that seems surprisingly counter intuitive and not at all how like it feels like it actually plays.

BG: Devotion to G 1, Devotion to B 1, Devotion to B&G 2.
B/G: Devotion to G1, Devotion to B1, Devotion to B&G1.

The altar is basically B/G/R/W/U.

[LaZodiac]

BG: Devotion to G 1, Devotion to B 1, Devotion to B&G 2.
B/G: Devotion to G1, Devotion to B1, Devotion to B&G1.

The altar is basically B/G/R/W/U.

That feels weird to be, but alright.

I suspect a lot of garbage is going to go down at LGS's because of this card. And it's a god damned common too, goodness.

[Tvtyrant]

That feels weird to be, but alright.

I suspect a lot of garbage is going to go down at LGS's because of this card. And it's a god damned common too, goodness.

Yeah the question is if they could have worded it any worse. It should have been "this counts once and only once towards the devotion of any card." Then you don't have to parse out bad rules to understand it.

[LaZodiac]

Yeah the question is if they could have worded it any worse. It should have been "this counts once and only once towards the devotion of any card." Then you don't have to parse out bad rules to understand it.

0: ~ is White, Black, Red, Blue, or Green until end of turn. Use this ability only once per turn.

That's it. That's all they had to do. It even becomes more clearly an Altar since you're going to it to pray for one of the five main gods! Now yes, this would have remove some flavor, but it also makes the card ****ing readable.

[Androgeus]

0: ~ is White, Black, Red, Blue, or Green until end of turn. Use this ability only once per turn.

That wouldn’t work. Devotion doesn’t care about the colour of the permanent, just the pips in the mana cost. It also doesn’t do what they want it to do, which is increase all devotion at the same time.

[Douglas]

Okay, let me get this right? So if I have a BG and a B/G, I have devotion to Black 1, devotion to Green 1, AND Devotion to "Green and Black" 1. So if I had say, Klothys, who needs "Green and Red", I would only get one green from my board state for her devotion (not counting her). Correct?

Because that seems surprisingly counter intuitive and not at all how like it feels like it actually plays. And if this is not correct, and it goes the way I'd think, it raises a question of Altar of the Pantheon and how it "gives 1 devotion for each colour and colour pair". Because if it's the former, it makes sense, but if it's the later, it sounds like Altar would give 6 Devotion for each colour. Or need ad hotfix clarification of its rule text.

The B/G mana symbol counts for each of black, green, "green and X", and "black and X".

You have a Swarm Guildmage (BG) and a Deathrite Shaman (B/G) in play. Your devotion numbers are:
B: 2
G: 2
B and G: 3
B and anything not G: 2
G and anything not B: 2
Anything else: 0

If you add Altar of the Pantheon, your devotion numbers then increase to:
B: 3
G: 3
B and G: 4
B and anything not G: 3
G and anything not B: 3
Anything else: 1

To calculate your devotion, look at casting costs and count the number of mana symbols that include at least one of the specified colors. All Altar of the Pantheon does is take the already existing way to calculate devotion and tack on "and then add 1" to the end of it, so just count mana symbols and add 1.

[Ninjaman]

Altar of the Pantheon always increases your devotion you are counting by 1. Yes it's not always obvious from looking at the card that that's what it does, but you only have to be told once.
At prerelease it's just a matter of mentioning it when the judge explains the set mechanics.

Dies to spot removal is legit in 1v1, not in multiplayer. Spot removal doesn't progress your own game plan, and puts you behind players 3+ in tempo.

1. I mentioned removal before commander was mentioned.
2. You should still play spot removal in commander. You shouldn't play as much, but you should still play it. Card advantage doesn't matter if you can't stop what your opponent is doing.
3. There's spot removal in commander that doesn't have this problem. Luminate Primordial, Silence the Believers, Malicious Affliction, Reclamation Sage, Annihilate, Slice in Twain, Ray of Revelation and so on.

This costs enough that it costs more then mass removal, so it is more legitimate. Being in green means playing it then untapping lands isn't that hard, so I think it is decent but costs too much to be great.

Seems like we agree then.

[Emmerlaus]

I would like to ask about Rune-Tail EDH meta...

Their is a few ways to use this commander. Most people use it as pillowfort-lifegain deck.

But the way I wanted to build it is throught flier and lifelink/lifegain. Because trample beat this strategy, I was thinking of making it a bit more aggressive since my creatures would not be destroyed in combat. In the way I builded the deck, Sephara, Sky's Blade is a hidden ace in the deck.

I put a lot of Equipement ramp based cards in it because of it, including Dowsing Dagger, Sword of the Animist, Skullclamp but also put Quietus Spike, Lightning Greases so I put Steelshaper Gift in there.

But with the incoming new Heliod card and the Heliod/Ballista combo, I considered (because its considered one of the best new MTG white card and a infinite combo) to put it in the deck.

But if I do so, some people say I should put more cards to get the combo... If I do so, I think the deck would lack a bit of focus.

So now, I dont know what I should focus on... Dont get me wrong, the combo is neat but I think its too cheesy? Heliod is good but I dont thinjk he bring a lot as a commander except for the combo. I did added some cards in there that could help get the combo (Enlightened Tutor, Citanul Flute, Sanctum Gargoyle etc) but I feel like the combo itself lack cards to get it to make it overpowered if you focus on that to be your win condition. Especially since you need so much cards to be able to help mono-white curse of mana-ramp/card draw problem.

So in short, here's my questions:

1) What would be the best strategy for a Rune-Tail deck?

2) Do you think Heliod would be better as a commander instead for the same kind of strategy (focus on lifelink creatures cards). Personnaly, I think focusing on that isnt good enough as other colors are better in doing lo its of damage early. But I could be wrong.

3) Would Odric, Lunarch Marshal would be better as a COmmander for a Lifelink, attacking strategy then Heliod?

[enderlord99]

I just had an amazing match in the temporary/event "Planeswalker Momir" category in Arena. I ended up getting a Fleet Swallower as a 7-drop from the Momir emblem while I also had Tezzeret, Artifice Master out. This gave me a clear gameplan: protect Tezz until I could pull off his ult, then get Angrath the Flame-chained with Tezz's emblem, then protect and build loyalty on Angrath this time while also using Tezz's emblem to pull Ajani, the Greathearted and Chandra, Acolyte of Flame to accelerate that accumulation of loyalty, then, because the preconstructed deck in this format (and thus my opponent's graveyard) is huge, I ult Angrath and win.

I almost pulled it off, but I accidentally used Ajani's "gain three life" ability instead of his "give your other 'walkers loyalty" ability, so I had to settle for a more conventional win (by which I mean: beating face).

[Ninjaman]

Went 5-0-1 at prerelease with an Abzan deck that should have possibly been Orzhov instead.

[zlefin]

Trying Magic a bit after a hiatus of a decade or so, using the new-fangled MTG Arena. Seems there's certainly been some design changes since I last played; it seems like green has been given more options for creature kill for instance. It feels like in general there's a few more color pie shifts/capability changes that I haven't fully felt yet.

Some of the higher rarity creatures seem quite silly good; while I guess that's always been the case of course, it "feels" more extreme now. Like there's some mythic 4/4's for 4, with several good abilities as well, including some comes into play stuff or other high synergies, so they're good even if killed immediately. Maybe there's a slight change in the power/toughness standards or something.

[mythmonster2]

Creatures have generally become more powerful, yes. Even then, there are a few cards, like Questing Beast, that push that even further and just have a whole potpourri of abilities, though those are usually at higher rarities. In terms of major color pie changes, Red has gotten a new ability of "impulse draw", where they can exile the top card of their library and cast it, but only for one turn. Green has gotten more access to fighting and has a lot more card draw than it used to. Land destruction, especially mass land destruction, has been heavily reduced, and wraths are less common and more expensive as well, though we did just get a 4 mana wrath for the first time in a long while. And you'll definitely want to get used to planeswalkers in general; they're everywhere and we had a planeswalker-centric set about half a year ago.

[boomwolf]

I also came back to arena a few months ago after years of the game, abs the power creep is very felt.
Especially the rarity creep. High rarity is almost always higher powered, often to extreme rates.

And yes, a lot of the color identity has bled over. Haste on monogreen and trample on moored didn't used to be a thing for example. The first ravniva block had a R/G hybrid card with haste and trample, and it was considered mind blowing at the time that either color could use it to grab abilities or just didn't have-now you got them both just standard, and not even in hybrids.

Don't get me started on planeswalkers

[Ninjaman]

Especially the rarity creep. High rarity is almost always higher powered, often to extreme rates.

I'm curious what makes you say that the power level difference between rares and non-rares is larger now than it was in the past.

Haste on monogreen and trample on moored didn't used to be a thing for example.

Green got haste on cards like Centaur Chieftain and Yawimayah Ants. Red got trample on Ball Lightning style creatures. It's used a lot more now than back then, and is a lot more accepted part of those color's pie, but it's untrue to say it didn't use to be a thing.

The first ravniva block had a R/G hybrid card with haste and trample, and it was considered mind blowing at the time that either color could use it to grab abilities or just didn't have

The real color bleed on Giant Solifuge was shroud in red. That's still color bleed.

[Androgeus]

The real color bleed on Giant Solifuge was shroud in red. That's still color bleed.

Yhea, might even be a break as it's the only card that can be cast with only red mana with shroud or hexproof.

[Ninjaman]

Yhea, might even be a break as it's the only card that can be cast with only red mana with shroud or hexproof.

It's definitely an outright break.

[LansXero]

I also came back to arena a few months ago after years of the game, abs the power creep is very felt.
Especially the rarity creep. High rarity is almost always higher powered, often to extreme rates.

And yes, a lot of the color identity has bled over. Haste on monogreen and trample on moored didn't used to be a thing for example. The first ravniva block had a R/G hybrid card with haste and trample, and it was considered mind blowing at the time that either color could use it to grab abilities or just didn't have-now you got them both just standard, and not even in hybrids.

Don't get me started on planeswalkers

Unless you were very, very casual, then you must've seen the slew of powerful, now-relevant-in-modern creatures and planeswalkers from a few years ago. And if you are so ancient to come back from before modern legal sets, then its even worse. Say, what exactly did you play 'way back when'?

[Eurus]

I think most people can agree that there has been some sort of power creep specifically regarding creatures, but I'm not totally sure when it started! It's been going on for quite a while, I think.

Also, I really hate ETB fight effects on monogreen creatures. Just... ew. Monogreen doesn't need that kind of efficient targeted removal, dangit.

[Douglas]

I think most people can agree that there has been some sort of power creep specifically regarding creatures, but I'm not totally sure when it started! It's been going on for quite a while, I think.

I think it's been going on pretty much since the game started, with WotC gradually realizing that the number and efficiency of removal, wrath, and other control cards was so good that most creatures just weren't worth playing.

[Ninjaman]

Yeah creatures have been getting better throughout the entire history of the game.

[Emmerlaus]

Its true that green is way ahead of the curve in term of power.

Im trying to make a mono-white EDH deck and I see why its hard to get ahead of the curve with such deck.

However, I do believe I did a good job in term of card draws and not missing mana drops for my Runetail lifegain deck. I really wish for some feedback but Im still polishing up. Its like 90-95% done lol!

However, I dont see the appeal in winning with the new Heliod/walking balista combo. It doesnt make a game interesting in the least and focusing on that makes your stategy dull and boring. Its a shame MTG only powered up mono-white by giving it a combo instead of better mecanics for putting more lands into play lol

However, Im pretty satisfied of the deck I made. Just waiting for the last few cards to arrive and test it!

[Gauntlet]

If anything, I'd say the power level of creatures has been a lot more flat recently than it was before - if anything, it peaked around Scars of Mirrodin block. The best creatures to cheat onto the battlefield (in the formats where that happens) are still OG Emrakul, Griselbrand, and Blightsteel Colossus depending on your cheat-in method.

The things that have been getting better in recent years have been incremental value engines and utility cards, really. Some are creatures, some are planeswalkers or enchantments or artifacts, but in general, stuff that gets you ahead turn after turn has become more and more available.

[Ninjaman]

If anything, I'd say the power level of creatures has been a lot more flat recently than it was before - if anything, it peaked around Scars of Mirrodin block. The best creatures to cheat onto the battlefield (in the formats where that happens) are still OG Emrakul, Griselbrand, and Blightsteel Colossus depending on your cheat-in method.

I'm not sure why you're using "best creatures to cheat into play" as your basis for the power level of creatures.
It's probably true though that the power level of creatures hasn't increased that noticeably since about that time. Yeah Questing Beast is a silly card, but it's not really better than Bloodbraid Elf. Around that time you're referring to we also got Snapcaster, Delver of Secrets, Deathrite Shaman, Death's Shadow (though that took a while to see play), Stoneforge Mystic and so on.
One of the best creatures is Gurmag Angler, which is later than the time period you're referring to, but earlier than now.

The things that have been getting better in recent years have been incremental value engines and utility cards, really. Some are creatures, some are planeswalkers or enchantments or artifacts, but in general, stuff that gets you ahead turn after turn has become more and more available.

That's probably true.
The problem seems to be that they're making stronger grindy cards, often without good answers to keep them in check.

[Techwarrior]

The problem is that creatures, by nature, have an effect on the board even if they get removed. Imagine these scenarios where a creature doesn't get countered on the stack or prevented from doing actual anything via other means.

• A creature that swings for 5 damage makes you 5 closer to dead even if it gets removed. It also forces you to interact with your opponent's board.
• A creature that has an enter the battlefield effect gets value even if you kill it.
• A creature that prevents good attacks for 3 turns buys you that much life/time/Planeswalker loyalty.

I'm not saying that creatures are bad for the game. I feel quite the opposite in fact. The problem is, creatures are one of the easiest ways to get value out of your cards. Any other strategy is measured 100% of the time against what the best creature strategy in a format is. This is because, without interaction, a Savannah Lions will end the game. Any strategy that isn't 1) play creature, 2) swing has to be able to defeat the deck playing Savannah Lions to be good.

Basically from an overarching strategy perspective, creatures are the cards that dictatev the standard for how many turns the game is allowed to continue. Any other card has to win the game or deal with creatures to pull it's weight.

[Ninjaman]

-snip-

This whole thing is just a huge and pretty useless simplification.
Vintage or Commander for instance aren't at all dictated by how quickly beatdown decks can goldfish.