Search results

Inspired by "Baby's First Combo" talk in Low Power Spotlight: A place to post your cards and ideas aren't the best cards or ideas. To expand on my post in the other thread: 0/X maker (I didn't include auras that make it 0/X because that's a Pacifism, anyways.) warkite marauder serendib sorcerer...

True. Let it be Entomb++ I wasn't exactly aiming for correct wording lol.

Random thought. RB or 1B or 1R Sorcery Search for a card w/ Madness, add to hand, discard it.

These combos feel like how EDH was meant to be played.

I don't jest. I used to run those two combos in a deck lol. I'd love a list of jank ass combos like this.

serendib sorcerer merfolk thaumaturgist reality acid dream stalker

The ransom one isn't a choice at all. Opponent scry is kind of a nice downside that's easy to grok. The third one is a true dual in a lot of formats, so that depends. You need to use the "land" color for the title and type lines.

I knew about that site and have used it for many scrapped projects. I guess I was looking for more like... Part of the rebellion against Phyrexians. It's fine, though. I think that idea isn't exactly what I want to pursue. That said, I'd like to do some kind of "A vs B" design.

How can I tell if a card is Mirran? Obviously, I thought to search the watermarks, but that seems hugely insufficient. For example, there are more cards with "t: phyrexian -watermark: phyrexian" than there are with "watermark: phyrexian". Another example, the Mirran watermark is missing from For...

It's mostly the draft format that makes it problematic to me. Each DFC is going to be potentially unsleeved to read the back 15 times in the draft (worst case scenario) and another 3-10 times during play. This takes some time, confuses some people, and probably makes that sleeve look distinctly...

Definitely feeling some frustration with "Battle" as a card type. First of all, I don't want a bunch of DFC nonsense. Second of all, they're making a bunch of cards that refer to Battles now. Keep in mind, within English speaking, "battle" means the same thing as "fight" or "combat." This...

T: Add W. T: Add one mana of any color a basic land you control could produce. Flexible in 2-3c, doesn't enable too much 5c nonsense. That said, it isn't "on" until you have your other colors.

Doesn't matter at all.

Strong urges to change my avatar.

Kinda. I was thinking like a pack of 5-7 commanders, choose one, then given 2-3 signature spells of each non-commander color and choose one. Then given a sealed pool of 100 cards to accommodate the colors. Make a 58(+2) card deck. I'm also considering simply changing the Background commanders...

I was thinking something like this. I'm currently strongly considering a commander plus a signature spell. The signature spell, in a change from Oathbreaker, would be off-color. This way, a monocolored commander gets to run two colors. Maybe no three colored commanders, in that case. I haven't...

This is would be correct if the market were based entirely on logic. However, there's a certain amount of excitement in being able to potentially open a card that will sell for well over $100,000. That excitement adds to the price. The gambling aspect of the set will increase the price by more...

Looking at Kenku, I think it's because both cards are defining the card as something else (Angel, Homunculus) so they add the flying to that. I was sort of under the impression that ability counters were evergreen now, but maybe I notice them disproportionately because I'm not a fan of them.

Am I the only one who thinks it's weird that we have a permanent flying effect not marked by a flying counter? I get that it's kind of ugly to add two kinds of counters off one effect, but it feels like this is why they made flying counters.

I don't like how Backgrounds work. Significantly less flexible than Partner. I hate having extra stuff with me. I'm kind of liking the two commanders idea. Sounds really crazy.