The Wizards, in their "infinite" wisdom, have a whole heap of cards that basically say "get X circumstance, win game/target player loses".
What's your opinion on these cards?
I think they're the most fun to build around.
In my opinion. As long as there done well, there fun. They add a new element to the game play. What I would call "goal cards". Essentially, they make you want to reach a goal. Can have some interesting gameplay to get there. And keep the game designers from repeating themselves, and widens there design space. Though goal cards absolutely have to be done well. Otherwise, they might screw up the game
I honestly love seeing decks built around them. I love that moment when I lose to a {Door to Nothingness}. Everything is going just fine, and then the game is just over lol. It is pretty cool to see those decks go off.
I'm currently building a zombie {laboratory maniac} deck. And can't wait to test it out. Just need to wait for Potticus's end of our trade to arrive
I like them a lot in 1-on-1 formats. It adds more options to your deck building and lets you create some really unique strategies that go well outside of the norm.
In multiplayer, though, they start to lose a little luster. I still love {door to nothingness} because it only knocks out one target player. But then cards like {Felidar Sovereign} go off and one player goes "whee!" And the others all go "cool, that accomplished nothing, congrats. We're gonna keep playing to see who comes in 2nd now by actually playing magic and having fun."
See, that's how I respond. I don't think those kind of cards are fun at all. The only one card I have like that at all is {Hellkite Tyrant}, but never once have I used it in a way that made me win. There's never enough artifacts.
How would {laboratory maniac} work in multiplayer?
You'd win!
More fairly than Falidar though!
The cards generally aren't a problem and balanced since they usually have high or complex mana costs or they require a bit of work to go off.
The card I'm talking about is that Azorious card that gives you the game in five turns.
Quote from: xStrayKnightx on February 20, 2013, 06:27:14 PM
The card I'm talking about is that Azorious card that gives you the game in five turns.
{Azor's Elocutors}
Quote from: xStrayKnightx on February 20, 2013, 06:27:14 PM
The card I'm talking about is that Azorious card that gives you the game in five turns.
{Azor's Elocutors}. One day ill get around to building a deck based around that card.
Quote from: Silent1236 on February 20, 2013, 06:29:59 PM
Quote from: xStrayKnightx on February 20, 2013, 06:27:14 PM
The card I'm talking about is that Azorious card that gives you the game in five turns.
{Azor's Elocutors}
I don't think that card is too much trouble, really. You have five turns before anything happens. That gives you plenty of time to bounce, exile, kill, or whatever you need to do to it. Also, as long as you can keep damaging them, it's essentially negated. It's a cool card, but its pretty easy to work around, since its so obvious. I could be wrong, however, since I've never played against it.
Quote from: xStrayKnightx on February 20, 2013, 06:27:14 PM
The card I'm talking about is that Azorious card that gives you the game in five turns.
It's a cheap card for a reason. Not easy to pull off with its condition if removing counters from player damage.
I played against it once and drew nothing to try and kill it. After I lost, I drew to see what my next card would be...it was my {Balefire Dragon}. -.-
That awkward moment when your opponent {slaughter games} your {battle of wits}...
A lot of people have called my RWB Angel/Demon/Dragon Deck broken, on the basis that I have cards like Aurelia, Avacyn, Gisela, Iona, Linvala etc in there. It's Commander legal (Kaalia is Commander), and I constantly tell them; it's not broken if its legal in a lot of formats. The amount of times I've hit people with Iona and they've almost instantly conceded is immense.
But those cards aren't win cards. They're boost or dibilitation cards. Like I said before, the only "win game" card I have in my deck is Hellkite Tyrant, and that's cause he's a 6/5 dragon with flying. I'd be happy if he didn't have the win condition; replace it with haste or trample, and I'd be giddy.
I kinda want to build an Elocutor Fog deck, could be fun.
If youre winning with these cards one of two things is happening.
One: you tried very hard, built very well, and played very well to make it happen. If so congrats.
Two: you opponents dont know what their doing, dont play removal or answers of any kind, or dont read cards. If so find better opponents.
Quote from: Mikefrompluto on February 20, 2013, 06:31:27 PM
Quote from: xStrayKnightx on February 20, 2013, 06:27:14 PM
The card I'm talking about is that Azorious card that gives you the game in five turns.
{Azor's Elocutors}. One day ill get around to building a deck based around that card.
I had one but I took it apart. I thought it was awesome that it was only ten bucks for the whole deck (guildgates) and now I know how bad that is against people with waaay more money.
Quote from: izik99 on February 20, 2013, 09:20:18 PM
Quote from: Mikefrompluto on February 20, 2013, 06:31:27 PM
Quote from: xStrayKnightx on February 20, 2013, 06:27:14 PM
The card I'm talking about is that Azorious card that gives you the game in five turns.
{Azor's Elocutors}. One day ill get around to building a deck based around that card.
I had one but I took it apart. I thought it was awesome that it was only ten bucks for the whole deck (guildgates) and now I know how bad that is against people with waaay more money.
so. I made a good choice trading mine away? Maybe it's not so much a build around card as a support/divert attention card
To the person saying iona isnt cheap.. Iona is cheap, <uncalled for> It is one of MAYBE 5 cards i do not agree with, i dont just hate on good cards. Decks should not be forced into multicolor..
Keep it civil please. -G
The only card that enrages me on this topic is {Platinum Angel}. Sure it can be removed but it alters the game to drastically and yet remains non-definitive provided you have answer. It takes the fun away from that particular match and I play strictly for the fun.
No, decks shouldn't be forced into multicolour. However, you can't deny that you get more flexibility in a multicoloured deck.
I did not deny that strayknight, that is 100% off topic however. My point is that you should not HAVE to if you choose not to. If you want kono black, your loss. However i believe it extraordinarily unnecessary to have a card that absolutely requires you to have more than one color. Iona is the epitomy of game ruining. Sure, id love to have one but i would never in my life play it for any purpose but to aggrivate one of my close friends.
If you play EDH casually, Iona can be a jerk move. If you play with people who tend to be on the competitive side, I honestly dont care.
Quote from: KangaRod on February 21, 2013, 12:37:11 AM
That's what I mean, I don't feel like with WOTC current marketing model, cards like {Iona, Shield of Emeria} are what they like to see people playing
If they didnt like it they would ban it. Playing casually people should go in with an understanding of whats a jerk move and whats not. WOTC doesnt ban it because people do play competitively and they obviously find it ok in that regard.
I like Iona. Playing against her you just need to be watchful of anything that brings in creatures early ({elvish piper}, {quicksilver amulet}, etc) or have a counterspell ready. Coming prepared for whatever might be in an opponent's deck is part of the fun of the game. Don't get me wrong, I scooped last time she came out but that was because my silly mono white casual deck had no prayer against her. 😔Now I know to be on the lookout.
So I bought a two player booster thing and pulled a {Battle of Wits}
Have any of you ever played this silly card? I always thought a 100 card deck was already excessive, but 200??? And did Wizards just decide to troll a newbie pack by giving a rare like that??
I know Coffee Vampire made a {battle of wits} deck that was pretty sweet. I played against it in the Cockatrice league the forum tried to do months back.
Main problem with battle of wits is finding it in 250+ card deck. You have to run 4x tutors as well as card draw, and if you like seeing a card more than once a round I absolutely has to be a 4-of
{Felidar Sovereign} is the only card I hate for EDH in that it takes no real thought/setup to pull off.
I don't mind Iona too much. I feel that the decks that are made to cheat her out(Kaalia), you should see coming and deal with them early. And if in multiplayer they draw extra hate anyway so I don't mind.
If you run mono then you should be faster than your opponents anyway. I mean you don't have to plan and workout a mana base and as long as you are hitting your mana drops you have nothing to complain about. A multi colored deck has much more reduced chances to hit the colors they need to cast some of their multi colored spells. So if someone is able to drop a bomb on your single color deck, than you can't complain.
Basically I think if the win condition takes some prep and thought, then I'm all for it!
{Felidar Sovereign} is a stupid card. {Kaalia of the Vast} is great, and I DO have {Iona, Shield of Emeria} in my primary deck. But I swap her out with something else if I'm up against a mono deck.
Quote from: Stoneco1d869 on February 22, 2013, 05:03:21 AM
{Felidar Sovereign} is the only card I hate for EDH in that it takes no real thought/setup to pull off.
Do you consider the rules on that card exactly?
I've heard folks who prefer to agree that the life gain needed for a win would be double, so instead you need to get to 80 life rather than 40(since it is default)
Quote from: Muggywuggy on February 22, 2013, 07:15:06 AM
Quote from: Stoneco1d869 on February 22, 2013, 05:03:21 AM
{Felidar Sovereign} is the only card I hate for EDH in that it takes no real thought/setup to pull off.
Do you consider the rules on that card exactly?
I've heard folks who prefer to agree that the life gain needed for a win would be double, so instead you need to get to 80 life rather than 40(since it is default)
That's not a bad idea. I just wish they would adjust EDH rules accordingly. My playgroup just goes by the rules:/
We do adjust infect though unless it's coming from a commander.
Quote from: Stoneco1d869 on February 22, 2013, 07:36:00 AM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on February 22, 2013, 07:15:06 AM
Quote from: Stoneco1d869 on February 22, 2013, 05:03:21 AM
{Felidar Sovereign} is the only card I hate for EDH in that it takes no real thought/setup to pull off.
Do you consider the rules on that card exactly?
I've heard folks who prefer to agree that the life gain needed for a win would be double, so instead you need to get to 80 life rather than 40(since it is default)
That's not a bad idea. I just wish they would adjust EDH rules accordingly. My playgroup just goes by the rules:/
We do adjust infect though unless it's coming from a commander.
So lightning bolt does 6 damage?
Same rule would need to be applied to every card making no difference. The lightning bolt was everyone in my group arguement to {Serra Ascendant}.
Quote from: Muggywuggy on February 21, 2013, 07:10:04 PM
So I bought a two player booster thing and pulled a {Battle of Wits}
Have any of you ever played this silly card? I always thought a 100 card deck was already excessive, but 200??? And did Wizards just decide to troll a newbie pack by giving a rare like that??
get {research/development} and do an infinite mana combo with {izzet guildmage} in a casual game
Do you consider the rules on that card exactly?
I've heard folks who prefer to agree that the life gain needed for a win would be double, so instead you need to get to 80 life rather than 40(since it is default)
[/quote]
That's not a bad idea. I just wish they would adjust EDH rules accordingly. My playgroup just goes by the rules:/
We do adjust infect though unless it's coming from a commander.
[/quote]
So lightning bolt does 6 damage?
Same rule would need to be applied to every card making no difference. The lightning bolt was everyone in my group arguement to {Serra Ascendant}.
[/quote]
{Serra Ascendant} doesn't bother me too much because you don't win the next turn. It also does not prevent you from playing cards either. But I respect your point about lightning bolt.
I mean, I think if you're the guy with {Felidar Sovereign} and you state that you have one in your deck and you'd like his life win count to be 80 instead of 40; I don't think your opponents would mind.
You warn them that you can auto win, but you're not going to be cheap with a win card due to the life starting double. Instead since your original goal was 40 life when you only had 20, you double the win condition factor.
Doubling the effect of every spell would be pointless yes, but I just dont feel like giving everyone an honest chance is bad thing. It's a backup win plan with a legal card in your deck, but changing it to a goal rather than making it an instawin is better IMO for the whole group. Yes you could argue that you don't have to put that in your deck, but people want to win and have alt strategies for winning.
Now if you just CoP'd yourself and {Iona, Shield of Emeria} is on the floor and you're just gaining life slowly; I'm sure people will just push you out of your LGS and rip your cards
Doubling to 80 doesn't make sense, life start + 20 = 60 does.
In an EDH game, 60 life is too easy to reach with the right cards. 80 life doubles what you start with, so it evens out. I personally would push it to 100, but that's also cause it can still be real easy to get to 80 life.
Woah, Woah, Woah! I tune in on page 4 and we're already at 100 life?! Pages 1-3 should be wicked! lol
I honestly don't think that {Felidar Sovereign} is as ridiculous as people make it out to be in EDH. Is its effect a bit abides by the life difference? Sure. But downright unfair? I don't really think so. By this logic, which was already touched on a bit, we'd need to double the life requirement for {Serra Ascendant} for sure, which is in a similar category. It doesn't win you the game, but a 6/6 for 1 is a more than unfair price for the other player. Some people think tutors are way too powerful in EDH, should we double their mana cost for fairness? I think not. If people want to play with "unfair" cards, it's their choice, and their playgroup doesn't have to duel them if its that bad. I used to have {Bond of Agony} in my deck. Nothing made a turn 1 {Akoum Refuge} more frowned upon. I took it out though, since it was a bit obnoxious. The Sovereign can't be played until turn 6, if they draw it that soon, out of their 99 card deck, and doesn't have any sort of resilience. It can be killed, exiled, bounced, or whatever you need to get rid of it. It gives you at least one turn to deal with it, and if by then nobody has dealt any damage to its controlling player, they win. It's pretty easily avoided. In a life gain deck, I can understand it being unfair, but it isn't that hard to put a few extra removal/counter/whatever spells in your deck to be prepared. EDH is all about the playgroup, after all. If you want to get rid of unfair cards, I'd vote for {Zur the Enchanter} over the Sovereign any day 😏
/rant
No way,{Necropotence} and {helm of obedience} are at the top of my hit list. I bitterly despise them both and vote ban and my vote counts for 2. Cause you agree with me.
Quote from: Double-O-Scotch on February 23, 2013, 02:23:23 AM
No way,{Necropotence} and {helm of obedience} are at the top of my hit list. I bitterly despise them both and vote ban and my vote counts for 2. Cause you agree with me.
Lol, I take it you've had some less than pleasant experiences with them?
I've had a hate-on for {Necropotence} since it was printed and a guy pulled the ol' {helm of obedience} / {rest in peace} combo turn 4 on me at random (pod of 5) in a tourney. No amount of milkshake takes the sting out of that...
Quote from: xStrayKnightx on February 23, 2013, 02:03:24 AM
In an EDH game, 60 life is too easy to reach with the right cards.
Right cards? Tell us more, please :P
Quote from: Piotr on February 23, 2013, 02:54:52 AM
Quote from: xStrayKnightx on February 23, 2013, 02:03:24 AM
In an EDH game, 60 life is too easy to reach with the right cards.
Right cards? Tell us more, please :P
It's not hard to figure out. Provided you have the mana, {Felidar Sovereign} + {War Report}/ {Congregate} means an instant win with enough cards. I realise that's all very circumstantial, but still...instant wins suck. That's why I love EDH; no duplicates of {Biovisionary} to deal with.
I'm not convinced. Also, my definition of 'instant' does not include 'on your next turn' ;)
Quote from: Piotr on February 23, 2013, 03:18:29 PM
I'm not convinced. Also, my definition of 'instant' does not include 'on your next turn' ;)
It's more of a "thoughtless" win.
You don't really have to do much in the situation where you drop a card for an auto win. The card does not need help, it just needs to exist for one turn or less. It also was likely not printed with any format other than that where you begin with 20 life. That's all I am saying.
The concept of "Fairness" bugs me a bit. If a win condition keeps getting me, I admit, I get frustrated too. But fairness is what I do with it. I build a tasty home brew deck and keep refining it until I can consistently topple that annoying win condition. That's one great thing about Magic: there's always an answer. Sure, someone will always have better cards (ie more money), better skills, better luck, or all three but give anyone enough time and they'll concoct an answer to those tough decks.
I run a pretty mean {Felidar Sovereign} deck that my friend has owned with his poison ramp and black discard decks. Sovereign isn't worth much when he's sitting on 10 poison counters or on the bottom oft graveyard...😒
If you guys could create your own win conditions, what would they be?
Quote from: Birdbrain on February 23, 2013, 09:17:29 PM
If you guys could create your own win conditions, what would they be?
If you control a white crow creature or green angel creature you win 😉
... And you know with {blind seer}...
Hahaha..
Quote from: Langku on February 23, 2013, 09:49:16 PM
Quote from: Birdbrain on February 23, 2013, 09:17:29 PM
If you guys could create your own win conditions, what would they be?
If you control a white crow creature or green angel creature you win 😉
... And you know with {blind seer}...
haha. I'm probably going to be hearing about that for a while. But seriously. What win conditions would you make up
I want a win condition that cares about how many spells I cast in one turn.
Quote from: Maximo on February 23, 2013, 10:17:34 PM
I want a win condition that cares about how many spells I cast in one turn.
something like
"If you cast 4 or more spells in a turn, put a counter on this card.
If this card has ten or more counters, you win the game."
Something like that?
I love mobs. Enchantment: 3{U}{U} "at the beginning of your next upkeep if you control 20 or more merfolk creatures you win the game." Or substitute merfolk for kithkin, soldiers, elves, goblins, take your pick.
Angel's Deliverance, 3 Converted {W}{W}{W}
Enchantment.
If you control three or more Angel's, you gain 3 life per Angel at the beginning of your upkeep.
If you control seven or more Angels, destroy any target Demon or Dragon you don't control. Otherwise, tap target creature.
If you control twenty Angels at the end of your turn, you win the game.
That enchantment sounds cool. The one birdbrain mentioned.
I still want a win condition based on cards in exile.
Varis, Protector of the Banished {4}{W}{U}
Legendary Creature - Human Cleric
Varis gets +0/+1 and can block an additional creature for each creature card in exile.
If 30 or more cards are in exile, you win the game.
3/4
Quote from: KangaRod on February 25, 2013, 04:47:33 AM
Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of exile?
Moreso than {Misthallow Griffon}? Being able to utilize a card that's been exiled is far more purpose-defeating than a unique strategy-creating win condition that encourages players to exile and do irreparable damage to both himself and his opponent as much as possible.
But that's just my opinion. Perhaps I just see the purpose of exile differently.
Quote from: Gorzo on February 25, 2013, 05:08:10 AM
Quote from: KangaRod on February 25, 2013, 04:47:33 AM
Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of exile?
Being able to utilize a card that's been exiled is far more purpose-defeating than a unique strategy-creating win condition that encourages players to exile and do irreparable damage to both himself and his opponent as much as possible.
But that's just my opinion. Perhaps I just see the purpose of exile differently.
I like it. I'd never implement it, but it's quirky and different.
Quote from: Gorzo on February 24, 2013, 01:02:41 AM
I still want a win condition based on cards in exile.
Varis, Protector of the Banished {4}{W}{U}
Legendary Creature - Human Cleric
Varis gets +0/+1 and can block an additional creature for each creature card in exile.
If 30 or more cards are in exile, you win the game.
3/4
{Mana Severance} if your deck has enough land XD
Quote from: Bozo_Law on February 25, 2013, 03:02:16 PM
Quote from: Gorzo on February 24, 2013, 01:02:41 AM
I still want a win condition based on cards in exile.
Varis, Protector of the Banished {4}{W}{U}
Legendary Creature - Human Cleric
Varis gets +0/+1 and can block an additional creature for each creature card in exile.
If 30 or more cards are in exile, you win the game.
3/4
{Mana Severance} if your deck has enough land XD
Also {Selective Memory}.
Quote from: smokin terry on February 25, 2013, 03:43:13 PM
Quote from: Bozo_Law on February 25, 2013, 03:02:16 PM
Quote from: Gorzo on February 24, 2013, 01:02:41 AM
I still want a win condition based on cards in exile.
Varis, Protector of the Banished {4}{W}{U}
Legendary Creature - Human Cleric
Varis gets +0/+1 and can block an additional creature for each creature card in exile.
If 30 or more cards are in exile, you win the game.
3/4
{Mana Severance} if your deck has enough land XD
Also {Selective Memory}.
{rest in peace} then mill
Was just a rough idea, of course. Would need balancing - perhaps a higher card total needed, or he needs 20-30 -creature- cards exiled to win.