Unreleased and New Card Discussion

[Venedrex]

@Venedrex I would say it's bad because this isn't 1v1 and trading resources 1:1 before you have the slightest idea what the shape of the game looks like or who the actual threat is, is a bad idea.

For that matter, I think lightning bolt is a solid card, but if it was conditional on having elementals it'd be mid af.

Oh yeah, for sure, I should have clarified that I was talking about 1v1 formats like Standard.

[Mookie]

Mildly disappointed by The Goose Mother, but I'm not surprised. I do feel it would be thematically appropriate to build her, but none of the directions I've thought of so far have piqued my interest.

Hmmm... yeah, no obviously spicy directions I can think of either - most of them are some variant of 'interesting synergistic card.dec' (with Lembas, Academy Manufactor, and Gilded Goose being the most obvious ones). There might be some UG bird / flyer deck, but we all know Edric, Spymaster of Trest is the actual best Simic bird tribal commander.

Otherwise, I think the most interesting thing about The Goose Mother is that she can generate multiple artifacts on ETB. It's a pity that she isn't very flicker-friendly, but creating a pile of artifact tokens can fuel some interesting synergies, and I can't think of many other UG artifact commanders. At the very least, Urza, Lord High Artificer (or another way to turn food into mana) + Temur Sabertooth (or another way to bounce TGM to hand) can do some silly things. Lonis, Cryptozoologist is probably a bit more straightforward though.

...in other news, Agatha's Soul Cauldron is a mix of Unlicensed Hearse and Necrotic Ooze. Meanwhile, Regal Bunnicorn is adorable and I want to snuggle it, even if it costs me a limb or two.

[DirkGently]

Oh yeah, for sure, I should have clarified that I was talking about 1v1 formats like Standard.

How dare you talk about other formats in this thread. (it's okay when I do it for limited though obviously)

[Toshi]

Yo dawg, i heard you like Lazav, the Multifarious, so i stapled Merfolk Looter on dat bish and called it Likeness Looter!
Ofc the sorcery clause does make it a lot worse, but aside from no commander damage it should make for a solid Plan B and a decent evasion enabler.

[Sporegorger_Dragon]

People are going wild about Agatha's Soul Cauldron and DFCs.

Want to transform Nicol Bolas, the Ravager for cheap? Exile Jace, Vryn's Prodigy/Chandra, Fire of Kaladesh and make sure Bolas has a +1/+1 counter, and hey! {T} for Nicol Bolas the Arisen!

Exile something with a cheap transforming activated ability (like Elusive Tormentor/Heir of Falkenrath) and start transforming things like Etali, Primal Conqueror and Thing in the Ice!

[duducrash]

such as Faerie Dreamthief...

That if nothing is a cool Raffine, Scheming Seer card.

New fae don't seem pushed, specially with some lack of flash. I did get my masterminds beforehand afraid of a spike

[PrimevalCommander]

Likeness Looter. Yes, more looter upgrades for my Sefris of the Hidden Ways deck Though I must be careful with my fixing. Having every 2 drop be or may mess with my curve.

[yeti1069]

Manascape Refractor and Blossoming Tortoise - I know I'm going to put them in the same deck and then try to do something flashy in a way which is not actually discounted by the Tortoise's middle ability

Yeah, Tortoise is weird. I've seen it pointed out that this doesn't have the usual 'can't reduce to less than 1' or 'doesn't apply to mana abilities' clauses, which means you can use it for stuff like Skycloud Expanse... or your creatures if you have Ashaya, Soul of the Wild or a similar effect.

WotC, tired of seeing the filter lands they include in very commander deck being cut print a card and say, "Here! Now these lands are good! Stop cutting them!"

[DirkGently]

I still love odyssey filter lands. Helps shore up all my colourless utility lands lol.

[yeti1069]

Likeness Looter. Yes, more looter upgrades for my Sefris of the Hidden Ways deck Though I must be careful with my fixing. Having every 2 drop be or may mess with my curve.

We're in the golden age of looters!

[yeti1069]

I still love odyssey filter lands. Helps shore up all my colourless utility lands lol.

I've found myself too often in situations with Signets and these (and even the Lorwyn filters) where having to commit 2 lands was awkward/problematic. Not to mention that they do nothing t1, and therefore restrict land sequencing. If I have two 1-drops in my hand, one of each color, but one is a creature and the other an instant, I don't like having to choose whether to play them both at the same time, play the creature and give up the option of the instant for the turn cycle, or skip deploying the creature to keep up the instant. This sort of problem comes up too often for my tastes.

[kirkusjones]

Likeness Looter. Yes, more looter upgrades for my Sefris of the Hidden Ways deck Though I must be careful with my fixing. Having every 2 drop be or may mess with my curve.

Very excited to run this in Oskar, Rubbish Reclaimer reanimator.

[Sporegorger_Dragon]

I missed that Likeness Looter is a FAERIE!

[Venedrex]

I missed that Likeness Looter is a FAERIE!

[Dunadain]

No way did they just make a card called "Thoughtseize at Home"

[Mookie]

More stuff!

• Stormkeld Vanguard // "No Solicitors!" is mildly interesting as a cheap Naturalize / Foundation Breaker alternative that is a legit lategame body.
• Virtue of Persistence is a weak early removal spell that doubles as a lategame threat. Quadrant theory is happy.
• Likeness Looter does indeed look like a sweet looter.
• Extraordinary Journey looks nice for blink decks - one-shot mass bounce effect, plus a draw engine.

[DirkGently]

Does anyone know why Extraordinary Journey couldn't be worded "Whenever a creatures enters the battlefield from exile or was cast from exile, draw a card. This ability triggers only once each turn."?

I've seen that clunky "one or more" "once each turn" formatting and I don't get it. Why is it necessary to specify "or more" if it can only trigger only once anyway?

[Mookie]

I've seen that clunky "one or more" "once each turn" formatting and I don't get it. Why is it necessary to specify "or more" if it can only trigger only once anyway?

My best guess is for clarity / redundancy, in case someone misses the 'once per turn' clause (or just to make it read better). Could also be for Arena / MTGO optimization - if you have an action that would trigger it multiple times, you only need to check for it once, instead of once per possible instance. Alternatively, it could be for future-proofing against a hypothetical 'once per turn limits don't apply' ability. That said, it looks like they've been using this formatting pretty much since they first started regularly adding 'once each turn' restrictions.

[DirkGently]

My best guess is for clarity / redundancy, in case someone misses the 'once per turn' clause (or just to make it read better). Could also be for Arena / MTGO optimization - if you have an action that would trigger it multiple times, you only need to check for it once, instead of once per possible instance. Alternatively, it could be for future-proofing against a hypothetical 'once per turn limits don't apply' ability. That said, it looks like they've been using this formatting pretty much since they first started regularly adding 'once each turn' restrictions.

I guess it's subjective, but people can't seriously find that complex mess of words easier to understand than my version, can they? And an "triggers once per turn" as a completely separate sentence seems about as difficult to miss as any text can be. Not to say people don't miss that sort of thing, but you can't stop people from misreading and it seems absurd to contort the text in the vain hopes of preventing it. Besides, it's not like it's truly redundant, if it were "one or more" without the "once per turn", you could trigger multiple times per turn by having separate events.

Arena optimization seems more plausible, but given that it's a "triggers once per turn" and not a "do this once per turn" (like Nykthos Paragon), shouldn't it only create a trigger once regardless, even if multiple creatures enter at once? I can't think of any reason it would act differently in either a physical or online game scenario.

Future proofing is I guess possible but seems unlikely. I'm pretty sure tons of stuff would become broken in that scenario, allowing for drawing multiple cards off mass-returning-from-exile seems like a minor issue. Hell, completely uninteresting cards like Cutthroat Contender become a huge threat under that sort of effect, and I'm sure there are much scarier things besides.

edit: Ondu Spiritdancer casually sets up an infinite loop, and they just printed that.

[Mookie]

I guess it's subjective, but people can't seriously find that complex mess of words easier to understand than my version, can they? And an "triggers once per turn" as a completely separate sentence seems about as difficult to miss as any text can be. Not to say people don't miss that sort of thing, but you can't stop people from misreading and it seems absurd to contort the text in the vain hopes of preventing it.

Relevant Blogatog post

Have y'all considered using "Once per turn, whenever..." as a template for abilities that only trigger once per turn? It would avoid the bad feels by letting us know the restriction up front, and it would save a lot of space on the text box.

Maximizing players reactions the first time they read the card is lower down on our priorities than things like making sure the text is as helpful as possible when playing with them. The thing players care most about when playing is the trigger condition, so we want to be careful not to bury it.

(also this post, potentially)

My understanding is that this is the templating they've decided on that has the highest clarity, even if it is a bit wordy. The ability will only be triggering once even if multiple creatures ETB at the same time, so they want to communicate that as early in the text as possible.

(also, given how often people misread cards or miss text, I'd prefer they only get one trigger out of the misread instead of multiple)

[DirkGently]

@Mookie I don't think either of those posts are relevant at all. I don't have any issue with the "once per turn" clause and I don't care whether it's put at the front or the end. The part I find clumsy and unnecessary is the "one or more", which neither posts mentions at all. Could someone read "triggers once per turn" and honestly believe that putting multiple creatures into play simultaneously would generate more than one trigger? It says ONCE. EACH. TURN. How is that not clear?

Whenever a nontoken creature enters the battlefield, if it entered from exile or was cast from exile, you draw a card. This ability triggers only once each turn.

Whenever one or more nontoken creatures enter the battlefield, if one or more of them entered from exile or was cast from exile, you draw a card. This ability triggers only once each turn.

Do you actually think the second one is clearer? Because I definitely do not. I don't think it clarifies anything and is just much clumsier to read. And I can't think of any situation where they would function differently either.

I will admit that some of the clumsiness is necessary for the card to work as designed - I want to change it to "when it enters from exile or is cast from exile" but then creatures cast from exile but countered would trigger it when they wouldn't with the card as written. Personally I don't think that matters enough to justify the complexity though. I guess the nontoken clause is to prevent it triggering from copies of creatures being cast from exile but I'm not sure if anything actually doing that. Pretty sure Nashi, Moon's Legacy doesn't cast from exile? Maybe it's to avoid confusion with those sorts of effects, though they seem so few and far between idk why it was worth the effort.

[TheAmericanSpirit]

Mildly disappointed by The Goose Mother, but I'm not surprised. I do feel it would be thematically appropriate to build her, but none of the directions I've thought of so far have piqued my interest.

I for one plan to build it in your honor. I hope you approve of my eventual design.

[Mookie]

@Mookie I don't think either of those posts are relevant at all. I don't have any issue with the "once per turn" clause and I don't care whether it's put at the front or the end. The part I find clumsy and unnecessary is the "one or more", which neither posts mentions at all. Could someone read "triggers once per turn" and honestly believe that putting multiple creatures into play simultaneously would generate more than one trigger? It says ONCE. EACH. TURN. How is that not clear?

People misread and misremember cards all the time. Do you read every card your opponents play? What if they're in a foreign language, or Phyrexian? (hey, that actually happened recently in a Pro Tour!) Or alternatively, it could just be a new player with a card they're not familiar with. I would not at all be surprised if someone out there is going to miss the 'once per turn' clause occasionally. Now, suppose that person has multiple creatures enter the battlefield the same time and trigger Extraordinary Journey, or some other card.

• If they think it triggers once per creature, then they put multiple triggers on the stack. Their opponent calls a judge over, and they get an infraction or are disqualified from the Pro Tour, or whatever.
• If they think it triggers once, total, then they only resolve one trigger. No misplay has occurred. There may be an issue if it triggers again later that turn, but they're fine for now.

So yeah, I do think the additional clarity is meaningful.

Another thing I'll note is that from a templating perspective, redundant triggers are usually combined with a 'one or more' clause - see stuff like Forth Eorlingas! and Malcolm, Keen-Eyed Navigator. Could they be written to trigger multiple times? Sure... but combining redundant triggers is generally preferred for Arena and MTGO, because manually stacking triggers is a pain. In this case, every additional hypothetical trigger is redundant, because the ability triggers only once or turn... so it seems pretty natural to be consistent with the 'one or more' wording used for redundant / combined triggers elsewhere.

[folding_music]

"if it was bargained" is an even worse syntactical sticking point to me. lol. sometimes i kinda wish we never left the Legends / Revised improvised phraseology era

[Toshi]

My fellow Zada, Hedron Grinder players will go nuts for Flick a Coin!
So far no spell has combined both the card advantage as well as the mana aspect of this card. Getting it at common will make PDH Zada, Hedron Grinder even better.