Last Online
Recent Posts
posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

I spent an unreasonable amount of time checking if the “Seattle” anagram was present in “Unsettled”.

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

The opportunity cost of playing a card like this “normally” (ie not with the upside previously stated in Dredge or Oath) is playing fewer Shattering Sprees. Unacceptable imo.

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

@vaughnbros I’m confused, can you clarify if I’ve missed something? Since you need to convoke at least twice, the fodder for that needs to be at least two of Ichorid/Amalgam/Bloodghast/Bridge tokens if you want to do it without mana, which seems like it will slow you down significantly on the path towards Vengevine (assuming creature spell #1 is Hollow One from hand) - and most of this is vulnerable to Containment Priest.

posted in Vintage Strategy read more

I don’t wanna work this hard for this payoff. All the obvious enablers do more broken stuff.

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

@chronatog LED has an obvious payoff. This does not.

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

What’s the payoff here?

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

@blindtherapy the naming is a bit FORCED omg please tell me that was intentional 😁

The thing I’m confused about here is that I can’t see a real practical incentive to cast this on your own turn. I guess for Vintage it’s relevant that topdecking this delays unlocking you from Spheres / Revokers / Rods for a turn. That seems marginal though? (and thus not a compelling reason to attach this text other than to conform to the rest of the cycle). And I don’t see the applications in Modern, I may be missing something obvious tho

Feels like they just wanted to get this free effect into the card pool.

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

Good card to have in the Vintage card pool. But a super confusing design. What does the oppo-turn clause actually do here. It makes sense for the other two spoiled Forces but this one makes next to no sense.

Also not into the flavor and naming of many of these but I suppose that’s secondary

posted in Vintage Community read more

Ok. So let’s please just remember that games need to be fun. And I know that is subjective, so I’m sure my opinion that Mind’s Desire adds zero dimension of game play to Vintage isn’t shared by everyone.

But who are those people who wish to play Solitaire with an opponent? I imagine the goldfishing is interesting but is it twice as interesting as a regular game of Magic? Because I would imagine playing against 4x Desire would be painful, so I’m guessing the net fun had by players wouldn’t go up.

Change my mind.