استریم

برچسب: MTG

  • In MTG, why aren’t mono-color decks optimal?


    If you were to take a naive approach to theory-crafting and deck-building in MTG, mono-colored decks would always be the optimal way to play. Adding more colors (again, thinking naively) only introduces problems:

    • Not drawing the right mana-source type or enough of them (especially in the first turn).
    • Needing to balance the ratio of cards-per-color rather than not having to worry about it if they’re all one color.
    • Hypothetically having less access to the cards you want to draw (not necessarily always the case but in mono-decks it’s easier to stack more of the same cards or types of cards).
    • Being stuck with cards you can’t play in your hand (more often than in mono-decks).
    • Higher constraint on total mana cost, especially when a card costs multiple colored mana.
    • Et cetera.

    In practice, it’s obvious that mono-decks are not optimal as multi-color decks are extremely popular. People will debate how good they are, ranging from "can’t be competitive" to "red burn is the best deck in the game", even in the past year or so.

    So my question is: what are the abstract; theory-crafting advantages to multi-colored decks that off-set the many and obvious advantages monos have? If possible, I’d appreciate not relying heavily on MTG examples as I feel this question has value for game-design and theory-crafting beyond MTG, as other games and genres also have mix-and-match mechanics. (Of course all answers are well-come, just explaining where I’m personally coming from)!

    I focused on colors and didn’t mention artifacts as they can have great utility either way.
    Let’s also assume ample access to cards to the extent building a strong deck isn’t an issue.



    Source link

  • magic the gathering – Can a player force a game of MTG to end in a draw with an infinite amalia/indestructable wildgrowth walker loop?

    magic the gathering – Can a player force a game of MTG to end in a draw with an infinite amalia/indestructable wildgrowth walker loop?


    The combination of Amalia and an indestructible Wildgrowth Walker always draws the game with an infinite loop once a creature explores, no matter what card is on top of the library.

    For reference, Amalia has the text

    Whenever you gain life, Amalia Benavides Aguirre explores. Then destroy all other creatures if its power is exactly 20.

    and Wildgrowth Walker has the text

    Whenever a creature you control explores, put a +1/+1 counter on this creature and you gain 3 life.

    The keyword action “explore” and the event “explores” are defined in rules 701.40a-b:

    701.40a. Certain abilities instruct a permanent to explore. To do so, that permanent’s controller reveals the top card of their library. If a land card is revealed this way, that player puts that card into their hand. Otherwise, that player puts a +1/+1 counter on the exploring permanent and may put the revealed card into their graveyard.

    701.40b. A permanent “explores” after the process described in rule 701.40a is complete, even if some or all of those actions were impossible.

    So, if a player controls Amalia and a Wildgrowth Walker, and a creature explores, then Wildgrowth Walker’s ability triggers, which causes the player to gain life, so Amalia’s ability triggers, and she explores, which triggers Wildgrowth Walker’s ability again, in a loop. The only choice any player makes during that process is what to do with the card on top of the library, if it is not a land.

    However, because of the last part of rule 701.40b, the exploration happens no matter what card is on top of the library, and even if there is no card on top of the library at all. This means that the loop always continues, no matter what choice the player makes while exploring. Therefore, the loop is mandatory, so the game is a draw.



    Source link