It is currently Sun Dec 01, 2024 4:33 am

Board index » Magic: The Gathering » Magic General » Spoiler Room

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]



Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 13 of 45
  [ 888 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 ... 45  Next
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic | Search this topic 
Author Message
Shockwave07
PostPosted: Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:44 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 2912
Location: Arizona, USA
You know if Wizards gets it through their minds they can use the Relentless Rats clause on Barry's Land...

_________________
RPG Personality
D&D Characters


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
razorborne
PostPosted: Wed Aug 12, 2015 2:35 am 
Offline
YMtC Champ '14
YMTC Pro Tour Champion
User avatar

Joined: Jun 04, 2014
Posts: 15599
Location: Freedom
Preferred Pronoun Set: they
why would they do that?

:duel:

_________________
GrifterMage wrote:
I tend to agree with Razor.

Mown wrote:
I'll never again complain about raz's criteria.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Zenbitz
PostPosted: Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:45 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 7260
So that you can make a reasonable colorless commander deck.

_________________
"Everything looks good when your opponent passes 4 turns in a row" -- rstnme
"Something that does not look good when your opponent does nothing is not a thing" -- me


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
squinty_eyes
PostPosted: Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:24 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 11309
Location: Asleep at the wheel
Preferred Pronoun Set: SE / squinty / squints
Zenbitz wrote:
So that you can make a reasonable colorless commander deck.

So, you want a deck with Emrakul, the Aeons Torn, Karn, Silver Golem, Kozilek, Butcher of Truth, or Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre as your commander? What about using:

Spoiler


~SE++

_________________
[D&D 5E] Princes of the Apocalypse | Set-up | In Character | Out of Character | Map: Lance Rock

[Johnny's Quest] October 12 - 18: Cloudstone Curio


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
razorborne
PostPosted: Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:46 pm 
Offline
YMtC Champ '14
YMTC Pro Tour Champion
User avatar

Joined: Jun 04, 2014
Posts: 15599
Location: Freedom
Preferred Pronoun Set: they
Zenbitz wrote:
So that you can make a reasonable colorless commander deck.

Barry's Land is a proposed new basic land type. you'd need no such clause to allow players to run as many of it as they wanted in any deck.

also commander sucks

:duel:

_________________
GrifterMage wrote:
I tend to agree with Razor.

Mown wrote:
I'll never again complain about raz's criteria.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
CommanderJim
PostPosted: Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:09 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 09, 2013
Posts: 7454
Location: Mountain View
Preferred Pronoun Set: he/him
To clear things up, there's a misuse of terminology here. The original goal of "Barry's land" was to let domain effects go to six. For that reason, the primary definition of "Barry's land" is "a colorless basic land that introduces a sixth basic land type."

Anything that doesn't introduce a sixth basic land type isn't really Barry's land, since it has no connection to "Barry's mechanic" (domain), and MaRo has explained multiple times why Barry's land will never happen.

I've always felt like people who just want a colorless basic (or pseudo-basic) land without all the subtype nonsense should refer to it as "Karn's land".

_________________
ParadOxymoron wrote:
if someone said this about me i'd make it my signature


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Zenbitz
PostPosted: Fri Aug 14, 2015 12:51 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 7260
My assumption that a "barry's land" with relentless rats clause, would in fact, not be basic (and as CommanderJim points out, not a real barry's land) but rather just a colorless land that you can have as many as you want. And yes, you can make a colorless commander deck now if you have enough of the lands listed.

Also, commander does suck.

_________________
"Everything looks good when your opponent passes 4 turns in a row" -- rstnme
"Something that does not look good when your opponent does nothing is not a thing" -- me


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
AzureShade
PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 10:40 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 7801
This image was featured in today's Uncharted Realms.
Image
It references part of the story where Nissa gets her connection to Zendikar severed by a passing swarm of Eldrazi that are digesting the mana from the land.

I know it's not, but wouldn't it be funny if this is art for the reveal that they are putting Wasteland in Modern?

_________________
magicpablo666 wrote:
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is "never get involved in an thread with GM_Champion" - but only slightly less well-known is this: "Never go in against AzureShade when card design is on the line!"


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
CommanderJim
PostPosted: Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:19 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 09, 2013
Posts: 7454
Location: Mountain View
Preferred Pronoun Set: he/him
The Announcing Oath of the Gatewatch article lists the official draft format as Oath of the Gatewatch/Oath of the Gatewatch/Battle for Zendikar, so that's interesting.

_________________
ParadOxymoron wrote:
if someone said this about me i'd make it my signature


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Zenbitz
PostPosted: Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:36 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 7260
Small Small Large? Ballsy. But they have really nailed draft formats the last year or so, so I'm in. Although frankly it just smells of a way to sell Oath packs.

_________________
"Everything looks good when your opponent passes 4 turns in a row" -- rstnme
"Something that does not look good when your opponent does nothing is not a thing" -- me


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
razorborne
PostPosted: Tue Sep 01, 2015 11:33 am 
Offline
YMtC Champ '14
YMTC Pro Tour Champion
User avatar

Joined: Jun 04, 2014
Posts: 15599
Location: Freedom
Preferred Pronoun Set: they
...Oath of the Gatewatch?

:duel:

_________________
GrifterMage wrote:
I tend to agree with Razor.

Mown wrote:
I'll never again complain about raz's criteria.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
AzureShade
PostPosted: Tue Sep 01, 2015 11:52 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 7801
razorborne wrote:
...Oath of the Gatewatch?

:duel:
Yes.

Spoiler

_________________
magicpablo666 wrote:
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is "never get involved in an thread with GM_Champion" - but only slightly less well-known is this: "Never go in against AzureShade when card design is on the line!"


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
CommanderJim
PostPosted: Tue Sep 01, 2015 11:53 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 09, 2013
Posts: 7454
Location: Mountain View
Preferred Pronoun Set: he/him
razorborne wrote:
...Oath of the Gatewatch?

:duel:

Because the biggest flaw in Ugin's original plan was not having a secret club name for the three of them.

_________________
ParadOxymoron wrote:
if someone said this about me i'd make it my signature


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Knight Otu
PostPosted: Tue Sep 01, 2015 3:46 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Aug 28, 2014
Posts: 1957
CommanderJim wrote:
The Announcing Oath of the Gatewatch article lists the official draft format as Oath of the Gatewatch/Oath of the Gatewatch/Battle for Zendikar, so that's interesting.

Weird set size (to go with the weird name I guess). That's 19 more than usual for a small set, and 1 less than FRF, which had ten additional commons and ten basic lands. Shouldn't be the Expeditions of Gatewatch - that's twenty cards, and they aren't supposed to count for set size. I'm not going to speculate further, though - my Origins speculations went spectacularly wrong, after all.

_________________
The Five Worlds block - [5WD] Set archive | [MST] Partial Set archive
Planeswalker Sharing Compendium entry - note to self: improve it.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
felbatista
PostPosted: Tue Sep 01, 2015 7:22 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 30, 2013
Posts: 8960
Location: Brazil
So, the BFZ packaging arcana today mentions Kiora and Ob, heavily hinting that they are the remaining 2 PW in the Set. Will OGW also have 3 (Jace, Chandra and Nissa), or one of the pact won't get a card?

_________________
Yes, I'm from Brazil and no, I'm not an annoying ****.

RPG characters


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Flopfoot
PostPosted: Wed Sep 02, 2015 4:48 am 
Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 24, 2013
Posts: 8786
Small small large is the default draft structure for a whole block draft from now on


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Zenbitz
PostPosted: Wed Sep 02, 2015 10:54 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 7260
I can't imagine them jamming 3 'walkers in a small set. It's usually 1.

I think they are -- for story purposes -- considering at least some of the "block" walkers as there. I mean, they aren't printing another Ugin, right?
So I doubt they will make another Jace/Chandra/Nissa. It's weird enough that they went back-to-back on Gideons. There were 3 in Theros though.

So, Gideon/Kiora/Ob makes sense for BTK. OGW I would expect to have another 1... Sorin perhaps?

_________________
"Everything looks good when your opponent passes 4 turns in a row" -- rstnme
"Something that does not look good when your opponent does nothing is not a thing" -- me


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
felbatista
PostPosted: Wed Sep 02, 2015 4:30 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 30, 2013
Posts: 8960
Location: Brazil
OGW will have at least 2. They changed to have only 2 Sets per Block, but their norm remains 5 'walkers per block. Also, back-to-back Gideons is no strange at all, since he's a central character in the story arc they're telling. They WILL print a new Nissa in OGW, and it makes no sense to tell a story where Chandra shows up in the last second to save the day and not give her a card. If anyone if left cardless, it's going to be Jace, but it's going to be strange if all but one member of the oath gets a card.

BTW, the original Zendikar block had 6 'walkers.

_________________
Yes, I'm from Brazil and no, I'm not an annoying ****.

RPG characters


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Knight Otu
PostPosted: Wed Sep 02, 2015 4:48 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Aug 28, 2014
Posts: 1957
I'd expect that Wizards will do a 4/2 split if there are six planeswalker cards, as it looks right now. It's more in line with the mythic ratio than 3/3. And back to back planeswalkers are hardly that rare, are they? So Gideon, Kiora, Ob, and one of Jace or Nissa in Battle, then the other plus Chandra in Gatewatch.

_________________
The Five Worlds block - [5WD] Set archive | [MST] Partial Set archive
Planeswalker Sharing Compendium entry - note to self: improve it.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
felbatista
PostPosted: Wed Sep 02, 2015 5:22 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 30, 2013
Posts: 8960
Location: Brazil
Knight Otu wrote:
I'd expect that Wizards will do a 4/2 split if there are six planeswalker cards, as it looks right now. It's more in line with the mythic ratio than 3/3. And back to back planeswalkers are hardly that rare, are they? So Gideon, Kiora, Ob, and one of Jace or Nissa in Battle, then the other plus Chandra in Gatewatch.


Sounds reasonable.

_________________
Yes, I'm from Brazil and no, I'm not an annoying ****.

RPG characters


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 13 of 45
  [ 888 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 ... 45  Next

Board index » Magic: The Gathering » Magic General » Spoiler Room

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group