MTGNexus

Got to say, as someone that thought energy was a pretty poor mechanic the first time around, I've been loving the modern jeskai control lists Galvanic Discharge, Wrath of the Skies, and, to a lesser extent, Rush of Inspiration // Crackling Falls have enabled.

Still haven't seen anything cool with it in Commander, but I'm glad to see it's doing cool things elsewhere.

duducrash wrote: ↑

5 days ago

• A new mechanic which is a tweak on a mechanic from 2013

A few people have guessed heroic and agree, like being able to work with equipment to work with the mice subtheme.

• A ten-card cycle that acts as typal glue
• Creature – Rabbit Mouse

I'm gonna guess these are gonna be team up cards like in MoM. Good way to have cross typal cards without needing to have changelings.

• "for each other Squirrel and/or Food you control."

Oooo fun and likely stuff i can run in my BG deck since Squirrels are BG.

• Creature – Hamster Citizen
• Creature – Skunk Assassin
• Legendary Creature – Weasel Mercenary

Three fun new folks in Bloomburrow

• Hop to It

Hmmm wonder if this is frog or rabbit flavored/themed.

• Polliwallop

Frog themed (if not typal) fight spell.

I like Bloomburrow's flavor, but damn if it isn't going to give the furries too much fuel by turning characters into animals.


And pour one out for Tomik and Ral's marriage. It survived them being in different guilds, the War for the Spark, bad writing, and a Phyrexian Invasion, but I don't know if it can last Ral not shutting the %$#% up about his otter 'sona.

onering wrote: ↑

4 days ago

I like Bloomburrow's flavor, but damn if it isn't going to give the furries too much fuel by turning characters into animals.

Ajani and other animalfolk already give furry fuel.

And pour one out for Tomik and Ral's marriage. It survived them being in different guilds, the War for the Spark, bad writing, and a Phyrexian Invasion, but I don't know if it can last Ral not shutting the %$#% up about his otter 'sona.

Ral was already an otter tho...

I I can't roll my eyes hard enough at Crumb and Get It. Unless the art ties it together well, it seems lame to me. I'm hyped for Bloomburrow though, despite the fact that heavy tribal sets don't do much for me. I'm here for the vibes.

onering wrote: ↑

4 days ago

And pour one out for Tomik and Ral's marriage. It survived them being in different guilds, the War for the Spark, bad writing, and a Phyrexian Invasion, but I don't know if it can last Ral not shutting the %$#% up about his otter 'sona.

Hey, Tomik can go to Bloomburrow and get a fursona too (it'll probably be a bat).

5colorsrainbow wrote: ↑

4 days ago

Ral was already an otter tho...

If anything, it might strengthen their relationship.

I am probably a little late to talking about the assassin's creed set but I am..... a little concerned with how pushed Alexios, Deimos of Kosmos is. It seems odd to complain about a mono red aggro legend but if you just cast him and he survives the turn rotation he will have attacked for 18 damage and came back to you as an 8/8 with trample. I feel like maybe its a touch strong considering he needs like.... almost zero assistance to be terrifying.

ISBPathfinder wrote: ↑

4 days ago

I am probably a little late to talking about the assassin's creed set but I am..... a little concerned with how pushed Alexios, Deimos of Kosmos is. It seems odd to complain about a mono red aggro legend but if you just cast him and he survives the turn rotation he will have attacked for 18 damage and came back to you as an 8/8 with trample. I feel like maybe its a touch strong considering he needs like.... almost zero assistance to be terrifying.

Worse than Slicer, Hired Muscle // Slicer, High-Speed Antagonist?

Arebennian wrote: ↑

3 days ago

ISBPathfinder wrote: ↑

4 days ago

I am probably a little late to talking about the assassin's creed set but I am..... a little concerned with how pushed Alexios, Deimos of Kosmos is. It seems odd to complain about a mono red aggro legend but if you just cast him and he survives the turn rotation he will have attacked for 18 damage and came back to you as an 8/8 with trample. I feel like maybe its a touch strong considering he needs like.... almost zero assistance to be terrifying.

Worse than Slicer, Hired Muscle // Slicer, High-Speed Antagonist?

Beat me to it. Definitely a strong commander, but costs more and doesn't hit as hard for the first turn cycle, plus slicer is significantly more insane with equipment, especially swords.

Both commanders are pretty insane when they aren't stopped, but they have a very obvious single point of failure in their plan. So y'know, run removal.

Also Deimos can be suicide-attacked into a fat blocker once something bigger is on the table. Slicer does have the advantage of being able to decline getting passed around if necessary (though obviously it slows him down a lot, but he can at least get played and then have a turn to suit up protective equipment before trying to get into combat).

In my mind it is scarier than Slicer. Having trample and self pumping might not add up as fast as a god hand of slicer but you can chump the hell out of slicer and he usually does take a few equipment to really get in where as I don't think Alexios really needs anything. Its the difference between playing a fire and forget commander vs playing a voltron though I guess. Slicer can do more but when you play Alexios you get to essentially play a control deck instead of a voltron deck.

The weird thing is that technically when it comes to trample you technically can assign more than lethal damage to creatures. I am not sure how many opponents are going to realize this. I don't plan on bringing it up if I were to ever build an Alexios deck. This also assumes you are the boogy man and opponents don't want to kill each other.

I think Alexios looks scarier than Slicer.
Slicer gets chumped fairly easily, whereas Alexios is trampling over chump blockers.
When Slicer first comes down, it usually has 2 toughness, which means it can die to a few more things. Alexios starts at 4, and grows each turn, making it more difficult to kill with damage.
In converted mode, any 4/4 or bigger can block Slicer to death, while Alexios needs a 5 power creature on the first attack, and more after that.
Slicer wants equipment that grant trample, various protective keywords, and pumps, while Alexios really only needs the protective keywords.
Slicer is 2 cards types, which opens it up to more types of removal.
Alexios can never attack its controller.
Slicer doesn't care about death touchers with less than 3 toughness, while Alexios dies to those.

Turn cycles of damage without buffs:
1 Slicer 6, 6, 6, 6 = 24 | Alexios 5, 6, 7 = 18
2 Slicer 6, 6, 6, 6 = 48 | Alexios 8, 9, 10, 11 = 56
3 Slicer 6, 6, 6, 6 = 72 | Alexios 12, 13, 14, 15 = 110

Against Slicer, players can keep tossing out creatures to block, even if those creatures are valuable, while they're stalling for an answer. Alexios laughs at most blockers in the first cycle.

Well he does come down a full turn later, and trample is a lot more replaceable than double strike.

The self buff is strong, but Slicer hits like a truck before making a full turn rotation.

Not even close imo, but I didn't think Slicer would be all that until I actually played against him so what do I know.

yeti1069 wrote: ↑

3 days ago

I think Alexios looks scarier than Slicer.
Slicer gets chumped fairly easily, whereas Alexios is trampling over chump blockers.
When Slicer first comes down, it usually has 2 toughness, which means it can die to a few more things. Alexios starts at 4, and grows each turn, making it more difficult to kill with damage.
In converted mode, any 4/4 or bigger can block Slicer to death, while Alexios needs a 5 power creature on the first attack, and more after that.
Slicer wants equipment that grant trample, various protective keywords, and pumps, while Alexios really only needs the protective keywords.
Slicer is 2 cards types, which opens it up to more types of removal.
Alexios can never attack its controller.
Slicer doesn't care about death touchers with less than 3 toughness, while Alexios dies to those.

Turn cycles of damage without buffs:
1 Slicer 6, 6, 6, 6 = 24 | Alexios 5, 6, 7 = 18
2 Slicer 6, 6, 6, 6 = 48 | Alexios 8, 9, 10, 11 = 56
3 Slicer 6, 6, 6, 6 = 72 | Alexios 12, 13, 14, 15 = 110

Against Slicer, players can keep tossing out creatures to block, even if those creatures are valuable, while they're stalling for an answer. Alexios laughs at most blockers in the first cycle.

I've played against Slicer in cEDH setting quite a bit and its the real deal.
The idea is that the 99 is designed to cast on Turn 1. And that's exactly what it does, so you mull until you can cast on Turn 1 and it really doesn't matter what happens after that.

Turn 1 - 3 + 6 + 6 + 6 = 21 .. usually the most perceived powerful Commander/deck is hit for 18 Commander damage Turn 1.
Turn 2 - 6 x 4 = 24
Turn 3 - 6 x 3 = 18
By Turn 3 you have 63 Commander damage which when divided by 21 is 3 players. So you have lethal for your 3 opponents.
From experience, when you can muster up a chump blocker(s) in those first few turns, you are losing badly. There is a reason you have those resources in your deck, they are to establish your own game plan (mana, draw, stax, whatever) and you are just skipping turns basically. Trust me, you lose anyway.

Alexios comes down a full turn later, let's say Turn 2.
Turn 2 - 5 + 6 + 7 = 18
Turn 3 - 8 + 9 + 10 + 11 = 38
56 Commander damage can be distributed by Turn 3, but that is 7 dmg short of 3 opponents. So no matter what (unless you create buffs) you are going to need to go into the 4th turn. Slicer can do it on Turn 3.
Also having that 4 mana on Turn 2 is more significant than needing 3 mana on Turn 1. It may sound like all you need is an extra land in hand as opposed to the same keep for Slicer, but these aggressive mulligans often come down to keeping one land hands. So the additional resource you need for the Turn 2 Alexios is a big deal.

The 2 toughness for the first time isn't a factor. Lightning Bolt is the only Turn 1 play I can think of in cEDH where it would be a factor.
4/4 blockers don't happen in those first 3 turns. They don't.
The biggest factor by far is the fact that Slicer is also an artifact. This of all the points is the distinguishing factor that can separate them.

I think it's safe to say that they are both scary. If you haven't played against Slicer yet, it's faaaaaar more deadly than you'd first give it credit. But when you die to it consistently on Turn 2 or Turn 3 many games in a row, you'll see it as one of the most feared Commanders to play against.
Alexios is pretty much the same, but can be a turn slower and the 4 mana will make it slightly less consistent on the mulligans. Better against metas that have more artifact removal.

Hugs boy here gives a massive impulse draw base on the mana dump in to him and another Exploration on a creature,

Even without that a 5/5 trampler

Wow that's a slam dunk in xenagos. :D for me anyway

Card advantage + ramp + 5 power for 4 mana + trample = probably good? Seems like a nice upgrade over Mina and Denn, Wildborn, at the very least. I suppose you miss out on the ability to bounce lands for landfall triggers, but seems generally better if you just want to ramp.

Pretty chill for a mythic these days. or maybe MH3 just broke me.

A few decent elements at once but none of them are amazing. Compares badly to Exploration or any dedicated X-draw spell, but since he's both and comes with a decent body he's at least okay. Not that kind of pushed that worries me though.

Seeing reasonable mythics that are playable but not must have brokneness is fine and probably where we need to be for a bit.

Mookie wrote: ↑

3 days ago

Card advantage + ramp + 5 power for 4 mana + trample = probably good? Seems like a nice upgrade over Mina and Denn, Wildborn, at the very least. I suppose you miss out on the ability to bounce lands for landfall triggers, but seems generally better if you just want to ramp.

What if instead of bouncing lands for landfall triggers, I'm bouncing lands to replay after I Obliterate? Hugs, you say? Too kind for my taste.

Paying a bit of french vanilla tax compared to Commune with Lava, but it comes with an Exploration stapled on to help you make better use of the cards and the body is well above curve.

Definitely playable. Will try it out in my 13/Yaz deck.

Rumpy5897 wrote: ↑

6 days ago

I realised I'm disillusioned with MTG from a flavour perspective a few years ago, and wrote it up in late 2020. I'm of the opinion that the current push for more modernised settings is a conscious attempt to get UB stuff to not stick out like a sore thumb. If you've got a Arc Spitter and a Chainsaw then whatever the Fallout stuff is up to won't feel out of place. I still wish UB never happened, but the cat's out of the bag now and it seems that it meshes very well with their growth-minded philosophy. It will be interesting to see if this translates to retention.

I mean, Urza's incubator, Fodder Cannon, and Extruder came out in 1999. Then the story was based on Star Trek. I think futuristic cards was inevitable.

Yeah, the idea that Magic hasn't always mixed Scifi and Fantasy is nonsense. Antiquities was one of the first expansions for the game and detailed archaeological research into a whole magic tech civilization, and the war against the corrupting Magic Cyborgs was basically the first real plot arc in the game's overarching story. During that plot arc we explored things such as airships, time travel, energy weapons, artificial satellites, and nano machines.

Now, we can argue that the modern aesthetic wasn't a thing for most of the game's history, and that is somewhat true, certainly more so than the idea that technology hasn't been just as much a part of the game as fantasy. This is actually why I didn't have a problem with Doctor Who like some people did. Doctor Who is a franchise that has always been about taking people ostentably from our reality and thrusting them into fantastical situations, and so while some of the card art might not seem like it fits, the IP as a whole is only about as far away from Magic as 40K was. I think they could have done a better job of that with better art direction (looking at you Graham O'Brien), but Doctor Who has always had technology so advanced it might as well be magic, and fantastical creatures with physically impossible abilities, as things inherent to the to the franchise.

There is always just been random people on cards, and as long as the surroundings (both ideas and art) are fantastical enough that's fine with me. Rebbec, Architect of Ascension is an incredibly important character from those early sci-fi-ish portions of Magic's history, but if you put her next to some of those Doctor Who characters (with a normalized border), you aren't exactly going to be able to tell the difference for a lot of them.

So honestly, I don't really have any issues with them including modern things as long as those things are at least somewhat stylized and fantastical. A card like Chainsaw is blurring the line somewhat, being a modern tool. In the service of the horror trope being utilized here it's not awful, but it definitely is in an awkward position. Compare that to Field-Tested Frying Pan, which fits into the fantasy side fairly easily despite technically being a modern tool as well.

In that regard this is technically unbroken ground for Magic as a whole. Duskmourne seems to be the closest set yet to our modern reality, albeit a substantially modified version of such. This means that it crosses a line that even most of the Doctor Who set did not, and for people who dislike that kind of change this causes a reaction, for good and bad.

They removed subtlety and allusion. Trepanation Blade was the in-universe version of a chainsaw.

I do feel like a lot of people are projecting their assumptions on Duskmourne when it comes to this whole debate. For example, Chainsaw gets cited as "being a modern tool" without being stylized or fantastical, but if you actually look at the normal art for more than 2 seconds, it becomes pretty clear that it still is fantastical, since I don't recall flames running on a chainsaw the last time I reved one up. There's also no indication of a gas tank or pull cord, yet I saw those explictly cited as reasons this Chainsaw is above and beyond the pale. Similarly, someone sent an ask to Mark citing "VCR Tapes" as one of the things that makes Duskmourne too modern, despite there not actually being any in evidence (While Cursed Recording references the Ring, there is no actual VCR or VCR player in the art).

Serenade wrote: ↑

2 days ago

They removed subtlety and allusion. Trepanation Blade was the in-universe version of a chainsaw.

And the feedback for it was no one got it what it was a reference to and they should have just done a chainsaw (same thing for silver crossbolts). This was brought up during Ixalan when they decided to add guns into mtg* and the lesson they got was if the genre wants tech/guns/ect and just make them magically powered.

*if you wanna say the guns in magic aren't real guns well then the tvs, chainsaws, trains and cars aren't real tvs, chainsaws, trains and cars either.