Saviors of Kamigawa Preview

TomB

Administrator
Staff member
If I might chime in here, in the old days it was less reliable getting 2 color specific spells to work in a multi-colored deck due to limited dual-colored mana available. Now there are more sources, so it's easier now. Perhaps that's why it seems hard to believe for Spidey ... I dunno.

I own a Fork, though I haven't used it in a deck for a long time. It used to be in my T1 12 Bolts deck, but since all it usually did was duplicate a Lightning Bolt I replaced it with Bosium Strip, so I could dupe them more often.

Hmmm...Bosium Strip...;)
 

Spiderman

Administrator
Staff member
Oversoul said:
Still nothing about an afterthought. Including Hymn in two-color (with black as one of those colors, of course) decks is an exception. I don't know how "rare" it is. It's certainly much less common than using Hymn in monoblack decks. Nothing in my sentence indicated that Hymn was an afterthought. And you have not explained how my diction gave you such an impression.
Less common, afterthought, it all comes down to not considering Hymn as a viable choice for a dual color deck.

When I make a discard deck with two colors, I always pull out the Hymn and put them in my "cards to use" pile when getting the cards together, period.

Oversoul said:
I haven't used Fork in any decks other than monored ones (I have owned four copies for I forget how long). I don't know why you are trying to bring deck-tuning into this. I'm talking about the limitations of the card. If it can't be used very readily in multicolored decks, then it is made less versatile by that. It's not an issue of how well-tuned anyone's deck is. You seem to consider Fork a midgame or late game card moreso than an early one. That seems to be the case from my experience with the card. But not being able to play it without two red mana doesn't just go away. If I'm Mind Twisted early on and want to Fork it, Fork will need to be available second or third turn, and not fifth. If I'm playing against land destruction, my ability to cough up two red mana may be jeapordized until long after the fifth turn.
The only reason why I'm bringing deck tuning into this is because you seem to think it's difficult getting dual mana out for when you want to use the card, in general I'm simply saying it's not hard enough to warrant excluding a dual colored mana spell in a dual deck.

Those examples I agree with. In which case Fork may not play much of a part or my sideboard can deal with that deck strategy next game. Dem's the breaks. But that's still no reason not to include Fork just because I might be going up against those deck types.

Oversoul said:
Requiring two of the same color of mana is simply more of a burden on any deck (except for one-color decks, and only some of those) than only needing one of the mana to be a specific color. This is not complicated. It is a drawback of Fork (and numerous other cards). Just how much of a drawback it is varies.
And all I'm saying is that the drawback is negligible.

Oversoul said:
No. Why do you ask?
Because it seems to me you should be seeing that it's no problem playing Fork by then.

TomB: I don't think it's the land limitations back then (although I think having the dual lands or pain lands would have still helped than hurt) My perception may be more shaped by Fork was restricted for most of these years and the chance of getting it anyway was pretty slim overall, so when I did get it I could cast it.
 

Oversoul

The Tentacled One
Spiderman said:
Less common, afterthought, it all comes down to not considering Hymn as a viable choice for a dual color deck.

When I make a discard deck with two colors, I always pull out the Hymn and put them in my "cards to use" pile when getting the cards together, period.
Any "discard deck" I've seen has had black as the more common color. This is simply because Hymn, Duress, Mind Twist, Hypnotic Specter, and almost all the other decent discard spells are black. Control decks that are not entirely discard-based and use Hymn tend to be monoblack (like Necro and other MBC designs). Hymn doesn't fit very well into multicolored decks. I don't know whether that means it should be considered a viable choice or not. But, like Fork, it tends to stay within its own color (and is sometimes used in two-color decks, but I'd say there's a noticeable difference).

The only reason why I'm bringing deck tuning into this is because you seem to think it's difficult getting dual mana out for when you want to use the card, in general I'm simply saying it's not hard enough to warrant excluding a dual colored mana spell in a dual deck.
Difficult is a relative term. It is more difficult than only one of the mana needing to be of a specific color. It isn't an insurmountable obstacle, but no one is saying it is.

And all I'm saying is that the drawback is negligible.
It isn't negligible. If Hymn costed 1B, it would be easily splashable in three-color decks. If Counterspell costed 1U, it would be Mana Leak without the drawback. People use Mana Leak, and I've seen it used over Counterspell on occasion (of course, they're usually used together). If the mana difference were truly negligible, Mana Leak would be considered chaff compared to Counterspell. If Morphling costed 4U instead of 3UU, then it would be available to various multicolored decks (fortunately, three of its abilities also require blue mana, holding it back some more). The mana cost of a spell does matter.

TomB: I don't think it's the land limitations back then (although I think having the dual lands or pain lands would have still helped than hurt) My perception may be more shaped by Fork was restricted for most of these years and the chance of getting it anyway was pretty slim overall, so when I did get it I could cast it.
I don't think it's land limitations either. The biggest advancement there has probably been the Onslaught fetchlands, which can grab the right dual lands at the right times.

Fork wasn't seeing much use while restricted, and that doesn't seem to have changed with unrestriction. I also haven't seen it in any Legacy decks. But if the effect is still desirable, we'll probably be seeing Twincast used more than Fork (since it's blue).
 

Spiderman

Administrator
Staff member
Oversoul said:
Any "discard deck" I've seen has had black as the more common color. This is simply because Hymn, Duress, Mind Twist, Hypnotic Specter, and almost all the other decent discard spells are black. Control decks that are not entirely discard-based and use Hymn tend to be monoblack (like Necro and other MBC designs). Hymn doesn't fit very well into multicolored decks. I don't know whether that means it should be considered a viable choice or not. But, like Fork, it tends to stay within its own color (and is sometimes used in two-color decks, but I'd say there's a noticeable difference).
Well, apparently you haven't seen the decks I've seen, because I've seen it used in the decks you've described.

Oversoul said:
Difficult is a relative term. It is more difficult than only one of the mana needing to be of a specific color. It isn't an insurmountable obstacle, but no one is saying it is.
You got that right.

Oversoul said:
It isn't negligible. If Hymn costed 1B, it would be easily splashable in three-color decks. If Counterspell costed 1U, it would be Mana Leak without the drawback. People use Mana Leak, and I've seen it used over Counterspell on occasion (of course, they're usually used together). If the mana difference were truly negligible, Mana Leak would be considered chaff compared to Counterspell. If Morphling costed 4U instead of 3UU, then it would be available to various multicolored decks (fortunately, three of its abilities also require blue mana, holding it back some more). The mana cost of a spell does matter.
<sigh> It IS negligible and you seem to be veering off the beaten track. I already established we were talking about dual colored decks, not three-or-more colored decks. Once you go there, it's comparing apples and oranges.

And for the record, I have ALSO used Counterspell and seen it used in dual color decks both with and without Mana Leaks.

Oversoul said:
Fork wasn't seeing much use while restricted, and that doesn't seem to have changed with unrestriction. I also haven't seen it in any Legacy decks. But if the effect is still desirable, we'll probably be seeing Twincast used more than Fork (since it's blue).
I don't think it saw much use either, but I think it was more because it was restricted and a fairly hard card to get, not because it was "hard to use" in a deck.

At this point I think we're going to have to agree to disagree. Our experiences seem to vastly differ from each others in the use of this card and it's pretty apparent neither is going to convince the other of changing his mind.
 

Oversoul

The Tentacled One
Spiderman said:
Well, apparently you haven't seen the decks I've seen, because I've seen it used in the decks you've described.
You've seen Hymn used in decks in which black was secondary to another color (or there was an even mix)? I guess someone might try it, but such a deck doesn't sound like it would be much good.

<sigh> It IS negligible and you seem to be veering off the beaten track. I already established we were talking about dual colored decks, not three-or-more colored decks. Once you go there, it's comparing apples and oranges.
I'm not veering at all. My original contention was that Fork has been limited by its double-red mana cost. I'm not going to ignore multicolored decks. You established that YOU are talking about two-color decks, but that doesn't really have anything to do with my contention.

And for the record, I have ALSO used Counterspell and seen it used in dual color decks both with and without Mana Leaks.
Now that you remind me, I know I have actually seen that as well. But Mana Leak would have been preferable to Counterspell in those decks.

I don't think it saw much use either, but I think it was more because it was restricted and a fairly hard card to get, not because it was "hard to use" in a deck.
It's not restricted anymore. If it's so great, it should be seeing some use right now...
 

Spiderman

Administrator
Staff member
Oversoul said:
You've seen Hymn used in decks in which black was secondary to another color (or there was an even mix)? I guess someone might try it, but such a deck doesn't sound like it would be much good.
More of an even mix, as black and the other color were about 50/50 in the deck. I'm sorry you think it sounds like it wouldn't be very good, as it worked fairly well.

Oversoul said:
I'm not veering at all. My original contention was that Fork has been limited by its double-red mana cost. I'm not going to ignore multicolored decks. You established that YOU are talking about two-color decks, but that doesn't really have anything to do with my contention.
True, but I agree with you about it being more limited in three-or-more color decks. Dual-color decks was what I was thinking about when I first differed with you and primarily what I was concerned with. So we have nothing really to argue about at that point.
 

Oversoul

The Tentacled One
Well, I rather liked that article, but not this paragraph...

The next camp seems upset with the new keyword strategy because it plays into a common theme – stop dumbing down the game. My response to this is simple. The game is so complex, it needs all the simplification it can get. Everyone, for example, seemed to decry sixth edition rules when they were introduced because many players felt it was taking away so many of the idiosyncrasies that made Magic the game it was. As time has shown, the sixth edition rules helped make the game tighter, cleaner, clearer. Dare I say, better. As my keyword column explains, there are numerous benefits from being more liberal with keyword usage. One of the most important though is that it makes the game easier to understand. That group of cards? They all work the same. You don't have to scrutinize each one. I feel strongly that players have to see simplification for what it is. Not some evil force changing the game away from what they love, but rather an attempt to hone the game into something that can stand the test of time. Complexity solely for the sake of complexity is not good game design.
This might be only because I've seen him do this before in another article. The 6th edition rules changes completely altered the game. It was bound to have complaints even moreso than it was bound to have some proponents. Perhaps there were more complaints than the changes warranted. Perhaps some of the complaints were unfounded in reality. Perhaps some of them were dead on. It's not as though anyone was going to stop the changes from happening back then, and it's certainly not as though anyone can go back and erase the changes now. Using it as an example only sends the message that Magic players complain a lot (or that people in general will complain about a change in something they are comfortable with). Is anyone denying that?

I find the comparison to be unfair. I can understand using it like that, if he's receiving a lot of complaints about the new keywords (a sort of defense mechanism). However, I think he made an oversimplification himself by comparing new keywords to rules changes only on the basis that both were, at some point, considered "dumbing down" the game. One of them was arguably the biggest change in the game's history (including the cardface change in eighth edition). The other is the addition of a possibly useless word here and there on some cards. People complaining about oversimplification in both instances does not really draw a parallel between the two...
 

Spiderman

Administrator
Staff member
I don't think 6th completely altered the game. The most significant changes was getting rid of Interrupts (which I think was said at the time that a good number didn't use Interrupts "cleanly" anyways) and the combat step, with tapped blockers dealing damage and slightly the damage dealing step (which again, was said that a good majority pretty much used the pre-6th and post-6th the same way for all intents and purposes).

Interaction and uses of cards might have changed (for instance, the infamous Waylay, Thawing Glaciers maybe), but I more view that as general, sweeping errata for those cards.

But that's where Rosewater might have been coming from.
 
Top