General [M19] Magic 2019
- Thread starter Onderzeeboot
- Start date
Heck yeah, it's a sweet card. I'm definitely gonna try it out.
Chris Taylor
Contributor
The sexual implications are a bit more clear in cards like pride sovereign and broodmate dragon than something like this, as gaining life is more often tied to eclectic things like hospitalizaion, Vampirism, or even just living
But "Creature + this creature = additional creature" is a bit more clear in my mind.[/Shitposting]
So on the real front, holy shit this is a 3/3 flying for 3, mythic lets you get away with a lot doesn't it, the post hoc kicker on it is powerful on it as well even if it is temporary.
5 or more life is enough in that you'll need A LOT of individual triggers or shit cards like Heroes' Reunion that nobody in their right mind should be drafting.
I'm into it
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Not for my cube, but this is a clean and powerful uncommon that clearly signals a theme. I like it!
Neat
A multicolor uncommon about enchantments? And in a core set? These slots are used to signal draft archetypes, right? Does this mean enchantments as a theme and therefore enchantment strategies support? Now I'm interested.
Also, artifacts aggro as azorius theme? Weird and cool! I think some people around here already had something like this.
Chris Taylor
Contributor
Not for my cube, but this is a clean and powerful uncommon that clearly signals a theme. I like it!
To steal from someone on twitter: I'll never be able to look at a blue white card again and not think "This should have been black green"
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
What. That doesn't even make sense, at least not in the context of this card.
Chris Taylor
Contributor
Nah it's a reference to the equally stupid question from the GDS3: "What colors would serra angel be if it was multicolored and not white"
Here is the question for those of you who are curious:
Q28. We try to avoid making two-color cards where the card could be done as a monocolor card in one of the two colors. Given that, suppose you have a two-color 4/4 creature with flying and vigilance (and no other abilities). Which of the following color combinations would be the best choice for this card?
- White-black
- Black-green
- White-blue
- Green-white
The biggest issue I have with the question is using "best choice" as a qualifier. The "best choice" is not a black/green creature based on what we've seen throughout Magic's history, a flying/vigilance creature would normally be UW. Sure, you could probably make something that fits flavorwise like some Lich Beetle thing from RTR, but that wouldn't be the first thing that comes to mind when I think of a card with flying and vigilance as a 4/4. Hell, you could justify any amount of color pie bleeding to fit from a flavor perspective for any given card. It really doesn't matter nowadays.
I don't like gotcha questions like this. It's not testing for actual design chops, just whether the reader can parse through and recognize that White/Blue should be eliminated as a possible answer, which is dumb. They have a land that turns into the creature specified in this prompt. Are prospective designers just supposed to ignore that completely? We know that the most historically relevant color combination is a UW creature based off cards that have been printed and what we've been exposed to through the color pie with many fliers situated in W and U featuring those keywords over the years.
It doesn't matter how unique or interesting that BG card might be because that would not be the "best choice". Ask for uniqueness instead or whether it is possible to do so, anything that would actually clarify the question beyond something so ambiguous and open to interpretation.
I don't like gotcha questions like this. It's not testing for actual design chops, just whether the reader can parse through and recognize that White/Blue should be eliminated as a possible answer, which is dumb. They have a land that turns into the creature specified in this prompt. Are prospective designers just supposed to ignore that completely? We know that the most historically relevant color combination is a UW creature based off cards that have been printed and what we've been exposed to through the color pie with many fliers situated in W and U featuring those keywords over the years.
It doesn't matter how unique or interesting that BG card might be because that would not be the "best choice". Ask for uniqueness instead or whether it is possible to do so, anything that would actually clarify the question beyond something so ambiguous and open to interpretation.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
I actually thought the question was rather clever in theory. Of course this card could be 
, but the question is pretty clear. "Given that you want to avoid making a two-color card where the card could be done as a mono-colored card in one of those colors" immediately rules out any two-color combination containing white. Thus, I wasn't so much disappointed in the question, but rather in the answer options. Because three of them did contain white, the correct answer was pretty obvious, provided you interpreted the question correctly, meaning they turned it into a "gotcha" question after all. It would have been more interesting to see some different options. would have been an interesting option, because you could totally make a dragon with those stats. Honestly the options are a bit limited though, because flying is so common in all colors except green. Maybe it's just the wrong keyword to test for. Vigilance on the other hand is nice to test, because it used to be secondary or tertiary in blue, but isn't anymore, so this would be a good way to test contestants if they're up to speed with the current color wheel. Lastly, they could have shuffled the wording around a bit to put more emphasis on the "given that". Like, what if they had asked the question this way.
Q28. We try to avoid making two-color cards where the card could be done as a monocolor card in one of the two colors. Given that, which of the following color combinations would be the best choice for a two-color 4/4 creature with first strike and vigilance (and no other abilities)?
, but the question is pretty clear. "Given that you want to avoid making a two-color card where the card could be done as a mono-colored card in one of those colors" immediately rules out any two-color combination containing white. Thus, I wasn't so much disappointed in the question, but rather in the answer options. Because three of them did contain white, the correct answer was pretty obvious, provided you interpreted the question correctly, meaning they turned it into a "gotcha" question after all. It would have been more interesting to see some different options. would have been an interesting option, because you could totally make a dragon with those stats. Honestly the options are a bit limited though, because flying is so common in all colors except green. Maybe it's just the wrong keyword to test for. Vigilance on the other hand is nice to test, because it used to be secondary or tertiary in blue, but isn't anymore, so this would be a good way to test contestants if they're up to speed with the current color wheel. Lastly, they could have shuffled the wording around a bit to put more emphasis on the "given that". Like, what if they had asked the question this way.Q28. We try to avoid making two-color cards where the card could be done as a monocolor card in one of the two colors. Given that, which of the following color combinations would be the best choice for a two-color 4/4 creature with first strike and vigilance (and no other abilities)?
- White-black
- Blue-red
- Black-green
- Green-blue
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Flying
Sacrifice Remorseful Reverend: Exile all cards from target player's graveyard.
Nice hate pegasus!
Chris Taylor
Contributor
Ooooooo
Legendary bear!
Legendary bear!
The Nova looks absolutely sick. It really feels worth the extra mana compared to WoG.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Oh wow, the Nova is just perfect! I love five mana wrath effects!
This is great. Definite add for me.
I forgot how much I missed core sets. There's so many neat one off designs in here that are super flavorful.
Here's a cute little 3 for 1. Not sure it's worth a multicolor slot, but I like it:
The Mare cycle is deeply weird, but I kinda like it.
Time to revisit lifegain triggers matter?
I like this. This is what I want black to be doing.
What's up, Abusive Sergeant?
Here's a cute little 3 for 1. Not sure it's worth a multicolor slot, but I like it:
The Mare cycle is deeply weird, but I kinda like it.
Time to revisit lifegain triggers matter?
I like this. This is what I want black to be doing.
What's up, Abusive Sergeant?
Time to ask the same question again but with a new card
Would Open the Graves be useful in Aristocrats?
Would Open the Graves be useful in Aristocrats?
Time to ask the same question again but with a new card
Would Open the Graves be useful in Aristocrats?
I mean, a lot of aristocrat decks I've seen and played usually try to grind out a bunch of value out of death-triggers and sacrifice effects and this potentially doubles the amount of such you can get out from your current board state. Imagine having some creatures like doomed traveler and xathrid necromancer and a blood artist out with a sac outlet? Super sweet, and it has immediate board impact too!