Correct me if I am wrong, you seem to be neglecting Condescend, which I believe sees a fair amount of T2 play these days.

You could add Yet Another AEther Vortex for additional hilarity over Future Sight.

I thought conceding doesn't use the stack and that whoever says it first concedes first.

Dishonor?

http://www.misetings.com/item/835



Very reasonable card, though.

--Sam L-L

Right, of course it isn't needed for rules purposes.

I think it's nice for the sake of clarity, so that it's immediately obvious how it works (and so you wouldn't get questions on it in the Rules forum.)

--Sam L-L

Without "up to X", it is a little confusing what happens when you, say, pay 6 for X and there are less than 6 cards in your graveyard of any one type (or, giving an even larger possibility for confusion, if there are >6, say, lands, but <6 of each other type). This makes the correct answer immediately obvious.

--Sam L-L

You probably want "up to X" in the card text.

Matt's right.

Rune Horvik says:



--Sam L-L

The Oracle text says "Each player who doesn't win the subgame loses half his or her life, rounded up." (Emphasis mine.)

--Sam L-L

Shahrazad takes your new decks from your parent game libraries, not your parent game hands. Unless something put cards from someone's hand back into their library, both players will have empty decks in the subgame.

--Sam L-L

Here is my reasoning: see if it makes sense to you.

"Players play a MAGIC subgame, using their libraries as their decks. Each player who doesn't win the subgame loses half his or her life, rounded up. After the subgame, players shuffle all subgame cards they own into their libraries. Players don't ante a card for the subgame, and libraries with less than the required number of cards are legal."

Nothing in there about losing if you have less cards than the number you have to draw in your opening hand. In the Comprehensive Rules:

"101.3. Once the starting player has been determined, each player sets his or her life total to 20 and draws a hand of seven cards."

"102.2. When a player is required to draw more cards than are left in his or her library, he or she draws the remaining cards, and then loses the game the next time a player would receive priority. (This is a state-based effect. See rule 420.)"

These are the two rules that would make someone lose in a normal (parent) game. 3CB overrides 102.2, so that we each start by trying to draw 7 and only getting 3, but don't lose.

In a subgame, though:

"506.3a A player's deck in the subgame may have less than the minimum number of cards. If a player's deck contains less than seven cards, the player will lose the game as soon as it starts, even if he or she mulligans. (See rule 420, "State-Based Effects.")"

Read strictly, each player loses the subgame as soon as it starts. But it seems like the reason for this is that each player will be drawing more cards in their library, and that therefore 3CB should override it as well.

On the second issue, if we override this rule, but then both players have no chance of winning the subgame, you get in an infinite loop:

"102.6. If the game somehow enters a "loop," repeating a sequence of events with no way to stop, the game is a draw. Loops that contain an optional action don't result in a draw."

You'd be in a loop where the only thing each player could do would be pass the turn, and therefore the subgame would be a draw. Both players would lose half their life in the parent game.

--Sam L-L

No worries -- but since this is the first 'official' 5D tournament, I'll have to play 5D even if it makes my deck awful  

--Sam L-L

With the upkeep ability on the stack, Disenchant it?

--Sam L-L

Presumably it was legal in #35? Someone ran Auriok Salvagers...

--Sam L-L

It's clear from this that you aren't supposed to tell the players when you see an obvious rules problem that the two players are missing.

Should you raise your hand immediately and call for a judge, or simply let it slide?

--Sam L-L

You could see if you can fast-talk the guy in charge of the tournament into letting you play 40 Relentless Rats.

--Sam L-L

If this is supposed to be:

Skip your next turn: At the end of your opponents next turn, double your life total.

...then you can play the ability an arbitrarily large number of times and each will double your life total on your opponent's next end step. It's like a one-card infinite combo, with a built in win via decking.

It is very much not well defined what happens when two players are playing under different rulesets -- what if one player is playing under pre-Sixth Edition rules and has no stack?

--Sam L-L

We should probably call it "Beeble Sligh."

--Sam L-L

Which naturally mandates 2x Bouncing Beebles.

--Sam L-L

PoP and Blood Moon don't really interact. A Tolarian Academy under Blood Moon is a nonbasic Mountain and would still be good for 2 PoP damage.

--Sam L-L

Probably I am missing something, but why 4 Explorations and no Fastbond? It seems like Fastbond would be especially good in conjunction with your Sunder.

--Sam L-L

Not to be rude, but are we ever going to see the results from this?

--Sam L-L

...thus avoiding the thorny issue of whether gay marriage is legal in Magic: the Gathering.

--Sam L-L

You probably want to play Willbenders so that you can win instead of draw.

--Sam L-L

You've basically created the following card:


Mirrored Landscape
0
Enchantment
2: Draw a card. If you've played this ability four times, instead sacrifice Mirrored Landscape and draw two cards.
Flavor text: You could play this card as a land, but nobody will, so we left it off.

[card]Cephalid Shrine[/card]

--Sam L-L

I'm not sure it's a great thing to be able to keep your opponent stuck on 3 or 4 lands forever with one card.

--Sam L-L

Pffft. That would have made it easier, yes Something like the first three decks I could come up with were banned (Balance, Strip Mine, and the Bridge).



Ah, I actually meant the Woodlot -- I meant that the Channel/Snake Basket deck wished it was in the format. I overlooked the FE replacement!

--Sam L-L

OK, maybe swamp, ritual, hypnotic specter isn't very original, but it is classic

I think that Channel/Snake Basket really wants the Hickory Woodlot to be a contender.

I was strangely tempted to go for the ~100 turn win deck (Dwarven Hold, Ensnaring Bridge, Searing Touch) but somehow resisted it.

--Sam L-L