Am I the only one who thinks Wizards has been making planeswalkers with ults TOO DAMN STRONG...

Am I the only one who thinks Wizards has been making planeswalkers with ults TOO DAMN STRONG. A lot of them just end the game, and it wouldn't be nearly so bad if I could interact with emblems at all.

Other urls found in this thread:

mtg.gamepedia.com/Cost
gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=391965
gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=376284
blogs.magicjudges.org/rulestips/2015/02/yasova-dragonclaw-pays-for-the-trigger-only-on-resolution/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

I'm sure the argument is that if your deck can't handle a planeswalker either by attacking it or some kind of removal before the ult goes off, you were in a losing position anyway.

All versions of Garruk besides the GB one crushed an unreal amount of puss.

So no, you're not the only one who thinks that but that's only because you people didn't play with the originals when they were able to fight with and against Lightning Bolt unlike the godawful lack of interaction you have with today's Planeswalkers.

Planeswalker cards were a mistake. The players are supposed to be the only planeswalkers, so making cards of NPC 'Walkers is stupid and cheapens everything. I mean they had to invent the whole Neowalker thing to even tone them down enough to print them because old school planeswalkers were damn near deific.

If you let an enemy planeswalker's ult go off, you deserved to lose anyway.

If a planeswalker ults you would have lost anyways

I agree, Planeswalker cards were a mistake and a cash grab for WotC. Never used them in my decks and never will.

>The players are supposed to be the only planeswalkers
Considering the existence and prominence of Urza and friends, I don't really understand what you mean by this.

>wouldn't be nearly so bad if I could interact with emblems at all.
What ult are even running into?

And what format are you talking about?

>Garruk
>Can play him on T3 ezpz because green ramp
>Ults on T4
>Ult is kind of underwhelming

>Sorin
>BW in a set with almost 0 ramp
>comes down T6
>at best can ult T9 if your opponent doesn't damage him once
>ult is countered by any sweeper

I mean, I think PW cards are retarded, but you gotta be reaching pretty hard there, user.

Let opponent ult Sorin with a Rakdos Charm in hand

What about the lifelink bit?

you realize its the lifelinking creatures that deal the damage, not the rakdos charm, right?

You are correct that planeswalkers were a mistake, but it is more of an issue that it breaks basic rules about the game. Adding a new card type basically breaks everything. There will never be as much removal for it as there are for other card types, since it has not been in as many sets.

Even beyond that, there is a tendency to give them a random amount of power. You get Tibalt the unplayable, and also the wallet sculptor.

Well, for starters, could you picture them printing a card for Urza? Probably not, he's supposed to be nearly omnipotent.

I think the idea is that the player is supposed to be on the same level as the classic planeswalkers: extremely powerful, able to summon all manner of powerful creatures and relics from across the plains and cast apocalyptic spells and such

Well, they did print a card representing Urza wearing a goofy disguise.

ITT: butthurt

ur mom interacts with MY emblem

hehehehe

Just a heads up, Freyalise, Teferi and Jaya Ballard all received cards depicting them.

So while there's not a card representing Urza at full power, though there is Blind Seer, the oldwalkers I listed were still meant to be much more powerful than the neowalkers. Despite that they're all shit and weak cards, really shows that they're more focused on the mechanics of the cards, rather than the lore on how strong they are.

Are they too strong? Probably.
Is my artifact deck complaining? Fuck no.

Planeswalkers as a supertype were a mistake on pretty much every level. They're bad fluff, they're bad design, they're awful to play with or against and they lead to bad top-level development choices.

>A lot of them just end the game
If I invest five or six mana and several turns into a card it'd better win me the game.

>they did print a card representing Urza wearing a fabulous hat.

Fixed that for you.

Ugin's planeswalker card depicts him as an oldwalker. The change from oldwalkers to neowalkers wasn't necessary to make the cards, it was necessary to be able to make a Hollywood action movie out of the game, and WotC has had a hard on for making a MtG movie for 20 years or something now.

That's sorta the point of them. A card got put down that is VERY easy to interact with (Since you can put any damage you deal to the player onto them and there are now kill spells that include planeswalkers.) and you had multiple turns to do stuff with them, with even the slightest effect adding a delay of a turn or more to the ult going off.

>Planeswalkers as a supertype
That's not a thing.

Can't Life-link if you're dead

Lifelink is a static ability. There's trigger that goes on the stack, and thus no delay between when the creatures deal damage and when you gain life, and thus no window in which you can die from a Rakdos Charm.

Shit like this is why Wizards thinks Trample is too complicated for players.

Since there's no EDH thread I'll ask here.

So imagine I have Yasova as my commander, and her ability triggers and I target my opponent's Prossh, so in response he sacrifices a few creatures to make the power greater than Yasova's, do I still get the creature or is the ability countered??

And another question, if I gain control of my opponent's Atraxa until end of turn, do I get to proliferate before giving it back?

Power is checked as the ability resolves as well as when it's put on the stack, so you wouldn't gain control of Proshh.

If the card specifically says control until end of turn then you get the proliferate trigger.

No.

Yes.

Not him, but let me ask about Wrangle (hits power 4 or less)

From the ruling on gatherer

2/9/2017 If the target creature’s power becomes 5 or greater as you gain control of it (perhaps because an enchantment gives creatures you control +1/+1), Wrangle will continue to resolve as normal. The creature will still be untapped and gain haste until end of turn, and you’ll still control it until end of turn.

The wording on the card is the same as Yasova.

That's a different sitaution. The ruling on Wrangle is talking about what happens if an effect you control increases its power beyond 4 once you already have control over it. The question asked here was if you still gain control over it if it's power is pumped after the ability is placed on the stack but before it resolves.

>So imagine I have Yasova as my commander, and her ability triggers and I target my opponent's Prossh, so in response he sacrifices a few creatures to make the power greater than Yasova's, do I still get the creature or is the ability countered??

You do not get the creature if the power is greater than Yasova's before Yasova's ability resolves. HOWEVER and this is an important part but you DO NOT HAVE TO PAY THE COST IF THE TARGET IS NO LONGER VALID because this is a MAY ability but the target is still fixed, you get to choose whether you pay the cost or not on "may" abilities. What happens is this:

1) Yasova's ability goes on the stack, you target a Zombie(2/2) of opponent.
2) Opponent is allowed to respond and chooses to play something(card or ability) to raise it to a 5/5 and goes on top of your Yasova trigger and for example purposes you let this ability resolve.
3) Now your Yasova trigger resolves and you MAY now pay 1(U/R)(U/R) if you wish while the original target was still the Zombie(now a 5/5). If you do you will gain control of the creature if the power of the creature is less than Yasova's(currently 4). While the ability is resolving your opponent has ZERO chances to resolve. Once your opponent has allowed you to pay the cost that means they have chosen to let you resolve the ability and can't interfere or respond now because it's too late.

>You may pay 1(U/R)(U/R). IF YOU DO...

Are you a retard or just lack reading comprehension?

>While the ability is resolving your opponent has ZERO chances to resolve. Once your opponent has allowed you to pay the cost that means they have chosen to let you resolve the ability and can't interfere or respond now because it's too late.

Umm, what? For the ability to ever have been on the stack, costs must have been paid. The opponent buffs his dude in response to you targeting his shit, his dude is too big and the ability fizzles.

Isn't a creature type that's coming out soon going to be "God"? The player is well above anything.

Tezzerator is such a sweet deck.
5/5 indestructible strixes are nothing to fuck with.

>Arguing reading comprehension when you two don't read nor know game rules.

Yasova's ability is on the stack. He chooses a target, then when the ability resolves the controller of Yasova chooses to pay the costs or not during the resolution of the ability because it's a MAY ability. If he does pay the cost then he will control the creature if the requirements are still valid but if the requirements aren't valid he can simply choose not to pay. The order for spells and abilities in MTG rules in a nutshell is "targets chosen then costs paid."

Here are some examples:

A player with Angelic Purge can target his own Demonic Pact and then sacrifice same said Demonic Pact to pay the additional cost.

Now here's a fun fact for you with Omnath Locus of Mana with 9 green mana in the mana pool and Life's Legacy. All costs for a card including additional costs may be paid in any order. Life's Legacy has "as an additional cost sacrifice a creature" clause.

When you announce the casting of Life's Legacy you can sacrifice Omnath first and then pay the mana with what is in the pool and you will draw 10 cards. Had you chosen to pay the mana first then sacrificed Omnath you will only draw 8 cards.

>Umm, what? For the ability to ever have been on the stack, costs must have been paid. The opponent buffs his dude in response to you targeting his shit, his dude is too big and the ability fizzles.

The ability triggers at the beginning of combat phase. Yasova's triggered ability actually has zero targetting restrictions, you may for all intents and purposes target a 20/20 dude if you liked and bear in mind Yasova's ability is actually not an activated ability however a target must still be chosen since the ability mentions a target. Now the key thing here is that Yasova's ability is a MAY triggered ability which means costs do not have to be paid quite yet until the ability is resolving. They can buff the dude in response to you targetting their guy but the controller of Yasova does not have to pay the 1(U/R(U/R) cost until during the resolution of the ability and when they see that they can't gain control of your guy they can choose not to pay the cost. They are not forced to pay that 1(U/R(U/R) because it's a MAY triggered ability.

If the planeswalkers design method is last ability (usually) wins you the game then Garruk is better. A green deck will typically be happy to slam an uncounterable overrun. It is more direct than fiddle about with tokens.

But that's not the power. When I finally go to use stuff to rich for my poorfag wallet in mtgo cube it became clear. Jace's ult does read the closest to "you win" but that's not why he is good. His ability are back breaking and read "value", "value", and "more value"

Tl;dr: there isn't ult power creep planeswalkers are all power from the start.

They actually printed a bunch of Gods already my newfriend

Doesn't take good stall into account; planeswalker becomes the win-con instead of you needing a deck that otherwise makes progress towards victory.

You should read the comprehensive rules.

>Red PW is shit
>Blue PW is busted
that's WotC for ya

I mean the problem isn't so much the walker wining the game, as it is that the walker is a card advantage machine that doesn't require mana.
It's part of the reason why they are so good in cube.
Most of the times I've lost to a resolved walker comes more from their + or - abilities, not their ultimate. I don't think I've actually seen LoTV or JTMS ult ever.
I don't know about standard though, its been years since I last played.

You still have to pay costs to put may abilities on the stack. And the ability does have a targeting restriction.

To specify, Yasovas ability will trigger when she attacks. At this point it does not target. Then it resolves, and you choose whether you want to pay for it or not. If you pay, you get to put a new trigger on the stack to take control of target creature with power less than Yasova. If you don't pay, no target is selected.

You should try not being bad at MTG. 117.12

mtg.gamepedia.com/Cost

>You still have to pay costs to put may abilities on the stack.

No you do not. "May" abilities with a cost on them are up to you on whether you choose to pay or not upon the resolution.

>And the ability does have a targeting restriction.

The ability only has a restriction to creatures. It does NOT restrict what creature you can target regardless of power or toughness. Yasova's ability does not read exact words of "target a creature less than Yasova Dragonclaw's power." The power check comes later during the resolution of the ability and if it is less power than Yasova and you chose to pay then you will gain control if the power is less than Yasova's.

>To specify, Yasovas ability will trigger when she attacks.

Read the card. This is not an a "when X attacks" ability. The ability simply triggers at the beginning of the combat phase prior to the declare attackers step.

>Then it resolves, and you choose whether you want to pay for it or not.

This is correct.

>If you pay, you get to put a new trigger on the stack to take control of target creature with power less than Yasova.

This is incorrect, there is no new trigger. The payment cost is part of resolving the trigger when it comes to "may" clauses.

>If you don't pay, no target is selected.

That is incorrect. Anything a card specifically mentions a target you must choose a legal target first. Yasova's ability never states that you must choose a target with power less than Yasova's. If you don't pay you simply just don't gain control of the targetted creature. If you did pay then as long as the power is less than Yasova's then you will gain control of the creature.

Alright just so the people who are still confused about Yasova i'll break it down.

Yasova's ability goes on the stack. Choose a legal target creature that can be chosen as at arget.
Opponent may respond. Opponent does not and lets the ability resolve.
Yasova's ability resolves, during resolution it checks "Is targetted creature less than Yasova' Dragonclaw's power?" If YES go to 1A, If NO go to 2A.

1A) Do you wish to pay 1(U/R(U/R)? If yes go to 1B, if not proceed to 2B if stack is empty.

1B) You now control target creature, it now untaps and gains haste. Proceed to 2B if stack is empty.

2A) Invalid target, no costs are required to be paid. Proceed to 2B if stack is empty.

2B)Declare attackers step.

gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=391965

It is checked when it is put on the stack, just check the ruling.

Don't you need to pay the mana cost to even target a creature in the first place? Or does it work differently because it's not specifically an activated mana ability?

No, that user is correct. There's a ruling for a similar case here: gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=376284

Normally to activate an activated ability you need to pay the costs to do so. Yasova's is actually a triggered ability where you MAY pay a cost if you wish to do so.

I may have been ruling this slightly wrong then if the power is checked upon being put onto the stack because the card text led me to believe that any creature could be chosen as a target and it only cared about the power upon the resolution. Oh well, a lesson is learned. I've only been an L1 for a short time. Thank you for that clarification.

blogs.magicjudges.org/rulestips/2015/02/yasova-dragonclaw-pays-for-the-trigger-only-on-resolution/

Turns out it is a bit of a slightly tricky card indeed.

>Don't you need to pay the mana cost to even target a creature in the first place?

Nope! Targets chosen first THEN costs paid. Here's a neat fun little interaction that came up during Magic Origins draft that I played. You have the following cards:

Willbreaker "Whenever a creature an opponent controls becomes the target of a spell or ability you control, gain control of that creature for as long as you control Willbreaker."

Throwing Knife attached to a 1/1 creature token. Throwing Knife reads "Whenever equipped creature attacks, you may sacrifice Throwing Knife. If you do, Throwing Knife deals 2 damage to target creature or player."

So lets say your opponent has a vanilla 4/4 dude. You attack with your 1/1 soldier. This puts the Throwing Knife trigger on the stack and you have to choose a target so you target the 4/4. But wait you just chose a target for one of your abilities so this puts Willbreaker's gain control ability on the stack. Now lets say it resolves and now you gain your opponent's 4/4. Now you still have your Throwing Knife ability waiting to resolve. When it resolves at this point it asks "Do you wish to sacrifice Throwing Knife and deal 2 damage to target?" You can say no at this point and you have still gained control of your opponent's 4/4 creature and can repeat gaining more creatures as long as Willbreaker is around and you can target things!

I could. He wasn't THAT powerful - there were quite a few planeswalkers more powerful than he was, and he was notoriously unconcerned with anything other than his own stuff.
Considering a planewalker card represents them showing up, casting a few spells on your behalf, and if they run out of loyalty (either from getting hit too much for their comfort or from telling them what to do too much instead of what they WANT to do, the difference betwen the - and the +) they fuck off to somewhere else and you've used up your favor, an Urza card would be a low-loyalty planeswalker card mostly in blue whose plus is 'durdle with artifacts', minus is probably straight up Tinker, and ultimate is your standard variation on win the game (likely searching for and casting some specific number of things to replicate building your own fuck-off doomsday device)

>soldiers fakes throwing a knife SO GOOD it scares the big dude into joining his side

Planeswalkers aren't a supertype, they're a type. A supertype is something like "legendary" or "basic".

This is pretty dumb. I don't care if it's correct, it is stupid.

Common sense would tell you that, like paying for spells, you have to pay whatever it takes as part of the process of using it.

Except all talk of a MTG movie immediately dissipated upon Warcraft's lukewarm reception. The fantasy genre is not in a good place right now.

>There will never be as much removal for it as there are for other card types, since it has not been in as many sets.
They've been in for nearly half of the game's lifespan, and a nonzero amount of pre-planeswalker removal still hits them.

I 100% agree with you on this being stupid.

What happened is that WOTC just wrote the wording on Throwing Knife badly when interacting with the rules and the order of modes on abilities. But this is an example to show that for all intents and purposes targets are chosen first before any costs are paid on an ability that is optional aka "may" abilities.

Only damage-based or general permanent removal. It is still its own category that escapes a lot of previous removal.

They are quite fun to play with though, lots of neat little decisions they give you

Some are definitely OP tho

>awful to play with or against

Most people disagree with you, as evidenced by the fact that they are very popular among casuals and cube players, yet the majority of them being unplayable in constructed formats like legacy and modern

Do they really?

I'm scared

It's not that Trample is too complicated in and of itself. While it's a bit complex mechanically, the idea is simple enough that most everyone gets it.
However, because fucking everyone is an idiot and doesn't know anything except what their gut tells them (like Mr Lifelink up there), we can't have things like Tramplers with Double Strike or Tramplers with Deathtouch or anything else other than evasion abilities, because it breaks playtesters/dumbshits brains as to how they interact. You can MAKE those combinations, of course, but they aren't printing things with them.
It's also why there's exceedingly few things with both first strike and deathtouch

>It's also why there's exceedingly few things with both first strike and deathtouch

that combo is much less potentially confusing than trample, the reason you dont see that is it would be OP as fuck on most creatures

Let me check if I understand magic as good as I always thought I did, a creature blocking one with deathtouch and trample would still absorb damage equal to it's toughness, correct?

WRONG!

YOU FAIL!

If I recall that was correct at one point, but then the ruling regarding it was changed.

It changed when the rules for death touch changed, death touch used to be a triggered ability before M10

The trampling creature only needs to assign lethal damage before the rest can be assigned to the defending player.

Mostly correct!
It needs to deal lethal damage to each creature blocking it - an important distinction to make.
Deathtouch means that one point of damage is lethal damage, so you need to deal one to each and the rest tramples over.

Now, what happens when the blocker is Indestructible?

Hmm, indestructible doesn't change anything right? 1 damage from death touch is still "lethal", but when the game goes to destroy the indestructible blocker, nothing happens instead

Exactly! No change whatsoever.

Question from a total noob: how would the game change if they change the rules of constructed where you HAVE to have a planeswalker card as your commander like in EDH but you're not allowed to play them in the 60 or sideboard. So basically you have a guaranteed walker always castable but it's a one-of and if it gets destroyed or countered it gets more expensive.
Would that change the game for bad? For good? Would it be too big of a step from the M:tG everyone knows and plays today?

you're free to start your own format with a planeswalker in the command zone

I don't think people would appreciate their favorite formats suddenly having sub a big change for like no reason

It woukd certainly make control decks way way more powerful, having a planeswalker always available to be cast

>this entire thread
God damn Veeky Forums is awful at magic.

>chandra wants to light enemy planeswalkers on fire
>chandra doesn't want to light enemy creatures on fire
>chandra REALLY doesn't want to light everything on fire

I dunno man I don't know a lot about mtg but this seems a little weird

>too strong

This is what makes me strongly dislike magic and magic players. It's bittersweet because I love the game, but every time one of you limited or standard people complain that a card is too strong, WotC makes more shitty watered down cards. What happened to the days of the original Avacyn? The praetors? The Eldrazi titans? Snapcasterling Mage? It's like people just eat up the garbage they print. It's like if they print a card that's a copy of lightning bolt, but it costs 3 mana, everyone would be like "THAT'S GREAT I'LL TAKE FOUR."

UGH...

>Chandra wants to set the person she wants to set on fire
>Chandra hates being told what to do, so being told to set the little shits on fire annoys her
>Chandra being told to go for the Big Boom makes her go 'okay, contract's over, I'm out' unless you let her have extra Fun first and think of you as being a Cool Person to hang out with
Chandra is a fickle beast

Original avacyn and the praetors are basically only playable in cube and edh, not even powerful really, let alone too strong

"Too strong" is always relative to the format, what people don't like is imbalance, lightning bolt was too strong at one point, because creatures were very weak and rarely had efficient etb abilities. Now creatures are awesome and our nerfed lightning bolt cards are too weak

What people also don't like is pay to win standard, or crack mythic to win limited

I get you though, if the general power level of cards was higher, then there would be less of an overpowering advantage to the cards they push

triple dubs checked, pack it up nerds

inb4 someone mistakes Lina for Chandra again

ain't no shitposts like lina shitposts cause lina shitposts don't stop no matter what board you're in

I'm going to guess she's a fairly similar character regardless, unless she's not actually a pyromancer. I have no idea who that is, other than not Chandra or Jaya, looks like a pyromancer so probably has Default Pyromancer Personality, and obviously isn't the only mage named Lina that I DO know about
People don't tend to allow much variation on pyromancers.

True. She's based on the anime Lina, but shes a hot hellfire bitch with a (n)ice sister. They are from Dota.

Has there ever been a calm pyromancer in...anything, ever?

Kael'thas from Warcraft was pretty calm and collected until MY DEMISE ACCOMPLISHES NOTHING, MY MASTER WILL HAVE YOU! YOU WILL DROWN IN YOUR OWN BLOOD! YOUR WORLD WILL BURN! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHH

Even when half his race was basically sentenced to death for being elves the dude was still just like "yeah, that sucks. what now?"

I remember watching an episode of this anime one time where one of the characters was this dudebrochill type guy, never saw him get mad or even excited during the episode, who had the super power of being able to eat fire by sucking it in and then he would be able to move really fast and breathe fire

Also if you've ever heard of the stormlight archive by Brandon Sanderson, there's a character called Jasnah Kholin who can do all kinds of weird magic but I definitely remember her being able to burn people alive with magic, and she's a scholar, like a philosophy professor at university, so she's very calm

>lukewarm

>Budget: 160 million USD
>Box office: 433.7 million USD

lel

The one thing that fucked me over with Trample was with Double Strike when I attempted to chump block. In my defence I had not played MTG in a long time and was not entire 100% familiar with everything on Double Strike. Typically a creature with Double Strike that has been blocked tries to do damage to the creature that blocked it on both the first and second combat damage steps. However with the addition of trample any unassigned damage carries over and hits me. I had forgotten this factor.

I took 16 damage that day. It was an important lesson. I will never forget that lesson.

>Every penny taken at the box office goes to Blizzard
Heh.

>Film grosses more than twice what it cost to make
>T-this is unsuccessful g-guys!

Damn, really makes you think

So why haven't they announced a sequel?