Now Playing Tracks

mtg-talk:

socialmtg:

If you see this photo circulating (except you know without FAKE written across it), just be aware that it is a FAKE. The photoshopping is pretty clear if you look for it, and the set symbol is wrong as per rambling-raven

I actually think Dack may be real. If you go to the source on Reddit, we only see the left half of the card. The only photoshopping on it is just filling in the rest, including the set symbol. The right half of the card is still very speculative, but I honestly think the left half is legit.

image

Idk, I don’t think bad photoshop is enough to damn this one as fake. I could be wrong though, it could just be some grand Conspiracy! 

Yes it is enough, it’s just a speculation image. People think it’s real because they forget what a magic card looks like.

commandertheory:

So I was trying to figure out what the remaining text on this dude might be, and I think I may have hit upon something. For the first ability, I thought it might be “Target player draws two cards, then discards two cards”, but there’s no way that “aws two cards, then discards” would fit in the remaining space. But what would work is “Target player draws a card, then discards two cards.” It also helps explain why it allows you to target your opponent; I wouldn’t let an opponent loot for two, but I would snipe an opponent who had one card in hand.

I’m guessing the -2 is “Gain control of target artifact”, since his backstory is that he’s a thief.

My guess for the last ability is more speculative, since we don’t have as much of the text to go off of, but I think it might be “You get an emblem with “whenever you cast a spell that targets [something], copy that spell. You may choose new targets for the copy.”

Anyway, those are my guesses for the rest of the card. What do you guys think?

That first ability doesn’t seem like it would be on a Planeswalker they said is going to be pushed.

ivenoideawhattodonow asked:

I know you've spoken about Group Hug before (it's something you don't like to play against, because it gives your collective opponent three times the advantage it gives you), but, as an archetype, do you think that it's actively harmful or beneficial (like, as opposed to neutral, not "GOOD OR BAD") to the Commander format as a whole? Not, like, Group-Hug-with-Mind-Over-Matter-Sucker-Punch'd, *true* Group Hug.

commandertheory:

mysticwhitereaper:

justmagicthings:

commandertheory:

I’d say that toothless Group Hug is probably a good thing for the format. It’s an archetype that’s unique to Commander and most people find it really fun. It’s probably convinced a few people to get into the format on the basis of how fun it is.

The only reason I complain about it so much is because this blog is about optimization, and Group Hug is not a great archetype to play with or against if you’re interested in winning. If you’re playing with it, either you have no win conditions, or you’re running combo. If you’re running combo, your gimmick is going to work exactly once before opponents start to use all the free stuff you’re giving them to kill you faster. 

Playing against Group Hug is annoying to Spikes because it can disrupt some decks’ game plans almost as much as Chaos. It’s pretty frustrating if you’re playing aggro and you’ve got Opponent A nearly dead when Opponent B drops Arbiter of Knollridge. You can end up feeling like your win/loss was meaningless, because it didn’t come down to your play skill or the quality of your deck (fixable problems), or even variance (part of the game), but you won/lost because your deck could/couldn’t utilize the Group Hug resources better than anyone else.

But yeah, people love Group Hug and it’s probably good for the format. It’s only a problem for Spiky Commander players.

I’m glad it’s a problem for Spike-y players, they kind of deserve getting their decks disrupted once in a while.

Commander is literally suppose to be about big games and lots of fun with the shenanigans of magic. It was very much designed as a Timmy format. If you’re a spike and you still want to play commander then play French commander. That’s the competitive version of commander. You wont see group hug decks there.

Me: “I don’t like this thing but it’s probably good and I don’t blame you if you like it.”

You: “I like this thing and if you don’t like it you can leave this format forever.”

While I don’t like playing against spikes much, I don’t mind it in a multiplayer setting. I’m just saying sometimes Spikes need to lose to someone who isn’t a Spike.

ivenoideawhattodonow asked:

I know you've spoken about Group Hug before (it's something you don't like to play against, because it gives your collective opponent three times the advantage it gives you), but, as an archetype, do you think that it's actively harmful or beneficial (like, as opposed to neutral, not "GOOD OR BAD") to the Commander format as a whole? Not, like, Group-Hug-with-Mind-Over-Matter-Sucker-Punch'd, *true* Group Hug.

commandertheory:

I’d say that toothless Group Hug is probably a good thing for the format. It’s an archetype that’s unique to Commander and most people find it really fun. It’s probably convinced a few people to get into the format on the basis of how fun it is.

The only reason I complain about it so much is because this blog is about optimization, and Group Hug is not a great archetype to play with or against if you’re interested in winning. If you’re playing with it, either you have no win conditions, or you’re running combo. If you’re running combo, your gimmick is going to work exactly once before opponents start to use all the free stuff you’re giving them to kill you faster. 

Playing against Group Hug is annoying to Spikes because it can disrupt some decks’ game plans almost as much as Chaos. It’s pretty frustrating if you’re playing aggro and you’ve got Opponent A nearly dead when Opponent B drops Arbiter of Knollridge. You can end up feeling like your win/loss was meaningless, because it didn’t come down to your play skill or the quality of your deck (fixable problems), or even variance (part of the game), but you won/lost because your deck could/couldn’t utilize the Group Hug resources better than anyone else.

But yeah, people love Group Hug and it’s probably good for the format. It’s only a problem for Spiky Commander players.

I’m glad it’s a problem for Spike-y players, they kind of deserve getting their decks disrupted once in a while.

mtg-talk:

Wizards seems to be having lots of fun slowly leaking info about conspiracy. The newest piece of spoiler, for instance is HALF of Dack Fayden. Luckily for Dack, they didn’t actually cut him in half…

We know he’s Blue/Red. His +1 probably reads “Target player draws two cards then discards two cards”. Idk what his -2 is taking or for how long. Hopefully a non-land permanent, forever. And his -6 gives you an emblem. That’s all we know so far, folks!

Source: http://www.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/2381zh/this_was_flashed_at_the_end_of_the_conspiracy/

His -2 will steal an artifact forever, it’s obvious if you know about Dack’s character.

To Tumblr, Love Pixel Union