Mirrodin: Isochron Scepter

[LoA]

Damn.  I've been too busy to play much this summer, but the cards I've seen from this set look destined to make Type 1 what we've all been claiming it isn't for years: combo v. combo (it's almost there already it seems).

[Browser]

Null Rod stops the use of Equipment costs right??

If so, Null Rods should be in EVERY (other) deck now.  This is friggin nuts.  

And the Imprint ability is a CITP effect, which means it can be welded into play if need be, and still rock the house.

[Moxlotus]

I think the best way to use the card would be in something like U/r phid or mono blue. Just throw any counter to it. Permanent Mana drain would be sweet.

[Carlos El Salvador]

...I really think wizards needs to stop printing broken cards...  But that could just be me.   M'ybee deed beats would make a good t1 deck after Mirroden fucks up the metagame, as it obviously is going to.

[Gabethebabe]

Quote (Jacob Orlove @ Sep. 09 2003,01:38)

Quote (Nocturnal @ Sep. 08 2003,21:25)Hehe ... I see there is no need for me to reiterate abusing this card as an improved Jayemdae Tome for 2 and 2T.

Well, if you use Fire/Ice, it's also an Icy and a Scroll.  

Nope.

Fire/Ice has a CMC of 4

(Comprehensive Rules 505.5)

[Magimaster]

Think this could replace Cursed Scroll in Sligh?

Imprint a bolt or incinerate, and now you have a scroll for 2 that deals 3 damage, without the semi-annoying randomness of scroll.

[TracerBullet]

Portal suffered from a much larger problem than single card loss- high casting cost.  Portal was something that HAD to be used to shore up control because it's casting cost (and more importantly, activation cost) was something that only came down AND had an impact once you already had enough mana to use it (not to mention you had to have survived to that point).

Scepter is different in that in comes down for two colorless mana, gets activated for two colorless mana, which can take effect long before the game is decided.  Scepter for AK on turn two is savage- you now get to draw at least one card per turn for 2.  First turn scepters are quite possible, seeing as it's 2, and it will allow you to gain control infinately more easily than Planar Portal ever would.


Simply ask yourself this- how will it fit in to hulk as is?  I personally think it will be obscene, simply looking at the number of useable 2cc instants ALREADY IN THE DECK.  Add that with the opportunity to go "Wish, Scepter", and you've got something that needs to be looked at for restriction.

[jntemp777]

This card is just silly.  The low casting cost just doesn't match up with it's high power level.  





Just my rant about this card.

[rozetta]

Ah, but think of it on the bright side -  it's a colourless way of getting rid of Blood Moon.

\n\n

[MoreFling]

Quote (rozetta @ Sep. 09 2003,09:52)Ah, but think of it on the bright side -  it's a colourless way of getting rid of Blood Moon.

And how are you today, Rakso?      

[Kaervek]

Quote But this doesn't mean the artifact isn't dangerous! Quite the other way... Imagine the following deck:

3-4 Scepter
4 Mana Drain
4 Mana Leak
4 Brainstorm
1 Ancestral
3 Impulse

Consider me not impressed with this attempt. You seem so keen on imprinting it with a counterspell effect. You'll just end up with an (albeit colerless) Ertai. I agree this card is quite flexible however.

Onto card economics.

What does this card actually cost? Enter Resource Point theory once again.

It costs the card itself = 4 rp.
It costs the imprinted card = 4 rp.
It costs 2 mana to play = 2 rp.
---------------------------------
total = 10 rp.

What do you gain from it?

Every time you use it, it costs you 2 mana (=2 rp.), but 'saves' you the actual card.

Ofcourse the actual benefit comes from the card you imprinted. If the card is 'neutral' by nature (ie. doesn't provide card advantage), the Scepter simply 'makes' that card advantageous it it's 6th use.

If the card is Ancestral (arguably it's best use), the benefits on first use of the Scepter are:
- cost: 2 mana (activation) = 2 rp.
- benefit: 3 cards = 12 rp.
----------------------------------
Total = 10 rp.

The cost of playing the Scepter was 10 rp. as well. Which means that after using it to 'ancestral' once, it provides no card advantage per se, while if you would have just 'regular Ancestralled', you would have gained (12-(4+1)=) 7 resource points.

The strenght of this card becomes apparent when using it twice. That's a clean +10 rp. right there (please note: if you would have played Ancestral in the regular fashion twice, it would have netted you (7+7) = 14 rp, while this little action 'merely' nets you (0+10) = 10 rp. Obviously, though, you CAN'T play a regular Ancestral twice).

When used three times with Ancestral, it becomes insane. That's actually on par with playing 3 Ancestrals, and at 4 uses, it becomes superior to the original.

The question remains:
- how often do you expect to be able to use it before somewone shuts it down?
- how often will  you actually be able to imprint it with Ancestral?
- has anyone considered the MASSIVE card disadvantage if this gets coutered?

All in all, this s a REALLY good card, and I believe   was referring to this (among others) when he said Mirrodin would bring gooding to the T1 scene, especially since this will be balanced (if not useless) in Standard.

However, I don't think it's broken in Classic per se. Good, perhaps a little too good, but it may prove to be balanced yet. It'll be an interesting few months, that's for sure.

Anyway, it's all just an evil ploy to make T1 players play with the new card faces  \n\n

[Bastian]

Forgive my ignorance... but "rp"?

[Kaervek]

Resource Points.

It's a theory developed to quickly evaluate card economy. It basically holds that:
1 card = 4 mana = 4 life = 4 RP (= Resource Points).

The theory is flawed (as it ignores tempo, the increasing value of life over a game, and the decreasing value of mana over the same period), but if you apply it to 'card drawers', the result is remarkably intuitive and usually succeeds in predicting which card drawers are 'good'.

I just like to look at new cards through the eyes of this little theory.\n\n

[MoreFling]

Imprint sets in when it comes into play, so a counter wouldn't make it card-disadvantage right?

[Gabethebabe]

No, and a Stifle means you have an Artifact doing nothing, just sitting around.

[Bastian]

Kaervek: you like to evaluate cards through a theory that you consider flawed? Talking about redundance...
Either way thanks for the explanation.

Perhaps the card is being hyped more than it should and it will be some overlooked card that will end up finding its way into type 1. EVERY set always has a card that does so.

But either way I stand on my position and wait to see the impact this may have on type 1...\n\n

[Kaervek]

Quote Imprint sets in when it comes into play, so a counter wouldn't make it card-disadvantage right?

Possibly. Haven't seen the confirmed wording yet. If you don't lose the imprinted card when the Scepter is countered, this makes it much better, yes.

Quote Kaervek: you like to evaluate cards through a theory that you consider flawed? Talking about redundance...

Irrelevant remark. We know that Newtonian physics is a flawed theory. I still like to evaluate accelleration and speed and such with it, since the alternative is...messy. Satifactory explanation for ya?  \n\n

[Bastian]

hmm... nope!

But it's not like if I have a choice, is it? Besides, it's up to you how you rate cards:)

[Kaervek]

Hmm...

Okay, for the dense among you, I'll elaborate (some).

1. Where do the numbers come from?

The theory gets its 'numbers' from cards like Sylvan Library and Jayemdaye Tome; cards which are considered balanced. You may think 'hey...those cards are crap', but you'd be wrong. The reason that they're not (heavily) played in our curious format, is BECAUSE of the fact they're balanced (ie. not broken). The cards are not unplayable either, and the numbers that result from them, can be seen throughout the game.

2. Why is the theory flawed?

As I have previously said, it's because it disregards tempo, and the increasing and decreasing value of life and mana (respectively) over time. More or less succesful attempts have been made to incorporate those (and various board position situations) into the theory, but they have not yielded a readily available answer to all questions.

3. Then why use it?

Because is provodes solid answers to questions regarding card advantage. Because it's simple, elegant, and easy-to-use. Simply said becasue, to the end described above, it's good enough.

Theories on magic (much like theories on, say, physics) are never exhaustive and therefore always flawed. They are models, and models always simplify reality. Magic is a much too situational game to be able to create a perfect model. Onto the analogy with physics again: nature is far too complex to be described by the simple Newtonian laws. Still, in daily life, for situations that apply to non-microscopic ('quantum') or non-macroscopic ('cosmic') scale, it's sufficient to state that, for example, F = m*a. The fact that nature doesn't adhere to this law is overshadowed by the fact that this simple equation gives answers that don't measurably diverge from 'the truth'.

Likewise, for the purpose of analysing card advantage spells etc., the Resource Point Theory does a good job. There's no need to make it more complex since, if we would, the resultwould become too complex to derive any conclusions from. Simplify, simplify!

As a sidenote: I don't like your tone. You make it seem like this is my personal, nonsensical little theory that I use to evaluate cards, while in fact it is a powerful tool that is accepted as such and used by most 'magic theorists'.

And to get back on topic, the theory says that in this case, the card advantage is dependant on the card advantage of the imprinted card, and actually relates it quantitavely to it, showing that it is really good, but likely not broken.\n\n

[VideoGameBoy]

Quote (Kaervek @ Sep. 09 2003,02:02)Stuff about rp's...

You might want to adjust your calculation for the fact that the Scepter goes into play, thus the rp's of a card that goes into play versus the graveyard could be considered 0 for all intents and purposes.\n\n

[Rakso]

Random comment. I don't think Vampiric Tutor is as hot with this new Tome variant. You will lose 2 life every turn, since the life is not a cost.

[erik]

And yes, the Imprint wording is confirmed to be CIP, so having it countered is not a 2 for 1. Personally I think the card has a lot of potential, but probably not enough to survive the massive amounts of artifact hate that will surely come...

[Jebus]

Quote (Gabethebabe @ Sep. 08 2003,23:15)

Quote (Jacob Orlove @ Sep. 09 2003,01:38)

Quote (Nocturnal @ Sep. 08 2003,21:25)Hehe ... I see there is no need for me to reiterate abusing this card as an improved Jayemdae Tome for 2 and 2T.

Well, if you use Fire/Ice, it's also an Icy and a Scroll.  

Nope.

Fire/Ice has a CMC of 4

(Comprehensive Rules 505.5)

In this case, you CAN Imprint Fire/Ice.

505.5 does not apply here.  We need to use 505.6.

[Kaervek]

Quote You might want to adjust your calculation for the fact that the Scepter goes into play, thus the rp's of a card that goes into play versus the graveyard could be considered 0 for all intents and purposes.

In a standard RP calculation, when playing a card, you count the card itself as having a 'cost' of 4 (for 'a' card) plus the converted mana cost (in this case 2). Playing the card costs 6, but it's actually 10 since you lose *another* card. Wether the card goes into play (permanent), into the RFG pile or into the 'yard isn't important for the '4' value. It should be seen as a 'replacement cost'.

Rakso: true. But you WILL end up drawing the exact card you need for about 10 turns

[Ric_Flair]

Could Scepter revitalize Keeper?  The deck is based on instants that are cheap.  Plus there is a ton of search and a with Cunning Wish you could easily set up soft locks against just about any deck in the format.  

Also what happens when you Imprint a Skeletal Scrying?  Can you Scry for X or 0 or 1?

[Toast]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say this will not be anywhere near as good as you guys are claiming it will be. The type of card that needs to be imprinted is specific enough that this will have to sit in your hand while you are fumbling around trying to get it and the majority of cards you want to be using it on are restricted...things that should also be factored into the Resource cost is the amount of turns and the mana that is required to set yourself up to play the card. my guess is it will take you too long to set up for this card to really start giving you an advantage.

I agree with klown about the scroll replacement though

[Jebus]

Quote (Ric_Flair @ Sep. 09 2003,06:53)Could Scepter revitalize Keeper?  The deck is based on instants that are cheap.  Plus there is a ton of search and a with Cunning Wish you could easily set up soft locks against just about any deck in the format.  

Also what happens when you Imprint a Skeletal Scrying?  Can you Scry for X or 0 or 1?

Since you are playing the spell without paying it's mana cost, X will be 0.

[Gothmog]

No question playing this card early is risky, especially in a control strategy, but consider having 4 mana on the board when you play it.  I tap two colorless, play it.  I probably have two blue to counter with at this stage, you can choose to fight for it or not.  If it doesn't resolve, no great loss, if it does and you didn't have to fight for it, you still have 2 colorless by definition to use right away on that counter you just imprinted, and the artifact protects itself right away from disenchants.  The card seems strong to me in a variety of situations, and I think its going to see play.

[rozetta]

But honestly, laying one of these down turn 1 with, say, a brainstorm, impulse or some other redundant cheap instant imprinted on it is hardly bad. You can improve your card quality, perhaps gain some card advantage and then imprint your ancestral onto another one later on.

It's not necessary that you'll immediately go digging for the ancestral just to get it imprinted.

[Jacob Orlove]

Here's an idea. How about proxying up some copies of the Scepter and playtesting them. You can even do this on apprentice! Then, instead of everyone arguing on purely theoretical grounds, we can have actual discussions about the cards. Since those discussions should be deck-specific, this thread is unnecessary, so I'm closing it.

If you still want to debate the scepter on theoretical grounds, the thread in the basic user forum is still open.