@shaman-ben thanks for the reply. I'll try it out. May just bite the bullet and get the shops.

@scrum said in Two Card Monte:

I am missing 3 copies of Mishras Worshop. Is there a possible substitute for these lands?

Workshop is very hit or miss in the deck. I have only been playing 3 recently as I test out other things. You could test out a Mox-heavy build instead, with something like 1 Workshop, 1 City of Traitors, 2 Urborg Tomb of Yawgmoth, and 1-4 Mox Opal in those slots. I would probably not play more than 1 City of Traitors if you go that route, because the fact that it is legendary, doesn't allow you to continue to make land drops, and doesn't provide any colors, makes it tough to use and build with.

@studderingdave

Maybe I misread something, but I'm curious. If you had Helm out and your opponent cast Yawgmoth's Will, why didn't you helm for the win there? Unless you were tapped out.

@jaco said in Two Card Monte:

Workshop is very hit or miss in the deck. I have only been playing 3 recently as I test out other things. You could test out a Mox-heavy build instead, with something like 1 Workshop, 1 City of Traitors, 2 Urborg Tomb of Yawgmoth, and 1-4 Mox Opal in those slots. I would probably not play more than 1 City of Traitors if you go that route, because the fact that it is legendary, doesn't allow you to continue to make land drops, and doesn't provide any colors, makes it tough to use and build with.

While this is very good advice, City of Traitors is not legendary. It just takes a very odd game to end up with two in play at the same time, usually involving Blood Moon.

City of Traitors isn't a land. It's a colorless dark ritual that costs a land drop and sometimes sticks around.

last edited by cutlex

@hierarchnoble said in Two Card Monte:

@jaco said in Two Card Monte:

Workshop is very hit or miss in the deck. I have only been playing 3 recently as I test out other things. You could test out a Mox-heavy build instead, with something like 1 Workshop, 1 City of Traitors, 2 Urborg Tomb of Yawgmoth, and 1-4 Mox Opal in those slots. I would probably not play more than 1 City of Traitors if you go that route, because the fact that it is legendary, doesn't allow you to continue to make land drops, and doesn't provide any colors, makes it tough to use and build with.

While this is very good advice, City of Traitors is not legendary. It just takes a very odd game to end up with two in play at the same time, usually involving Blood Moon.

My assumption is he meant that it acts like a legendary in the way that you have to sacrifice after another land enters the battlefield, unless as you stated unusual circumstances.

@mdkubiak said in Two Card Monte:

My assumption is he meant that it acts like a legendary in the way that you have to sacrifice after another land enters the battlefield, unless as you stated unusual circumstances.

While it does "act legendary" in response to a second City of Traitors, it also "acts legendary" to any other new land and doesn't "act legendary" when a Blood Moon-style effect in on board. I'll stick with the explicit phrasing of the post over the implicit, especially since his second point was "doesn't allow you to continue to make land drops", which embodies the "acts legendary" aspect of the card you're talking about.

EDIT: Strategically valuable to some, you can Thespian's Stage a City of Traitors to make it a copy of one, since it's a play trigger and not a state-based effect. Again, the card doesn't "act legendary".

last edited by Guest

@hierarchnoble Yes, everything you said is right in regards to situations on City of Traitors. However, I would argue that 95 percent of the time, you have to sack it when you play another land, which is acting like a legendary clause while not being legendary. It doesn't do a perfect impersonation, but that's what I mean by saying "acting like" over being the same thing.

Again, I'm not disagreeing with anything you said with how City of Traitors works and yes, technically it is not legendary and you can have more than one with Blood Moon affects.

@mdkubiak said in Two Card Monte:

@hierarchnoble Yes, everything you said is right in regards to situations on City of Traitors. However, I would argue that 95 percent of the time, you have to sack it when you play another land, which is acting like a legendary clause while not being legendary. It doesn't do a perfect impersonation, but that's what I mean by saying "acting like" over being the same thing.

Again, I'm not disagreeing with anything you said with how City of Traitors works and yes, technically it is not legendary and you can have more than one with Blood Moon affects.

Obfuscating the rules by using erroneous terminology is not good for the game. You lose a lot of credibility assuming the intent of a possible typo and using it to promote incorrect game terminology. City of Traitors isn't legendary, and playing a land and saying "I legendary my City of Traitors" as a trigger announcement deserves a judge call.

@hierarchnoble said in Two Card Monte:

erroneous

You said it did not act like legendary and I argue that it does (act not is- two completely different things). That's the only basis I had in my discussion, nothing beyond that at all.

That does not mean at all I would use the terminology in a game, as it is incorrect, and doesn't make sense. I never once implied that I would use that terminology outside of this discussion. All I was doing was trying to explain why I felt @JACO may have used the term. If it's a typo, fine, no big deal. We move on.

@mdkubiak said in Two Card Monte:

@hierarchnoble said in Two Card Monte:

erroneous

You said it did not act like legendary and I argue that it does (act not is- two completely different things). That's the only basis I had in my discussion, nothing beyond that at all.

That does not mean at all I would use the terminology in a game, as it is incorrect, and doesn't make sense. I never once implied that I would use that terminology outside of this discussion. All I was doing was trying to explain why I felt @JACO may have used the term. If it's a typo, fine, no big deal. We move on.

Yeah, but you felt the need to defend his wording. I told him it was a great post with a caveat that City of Traitors isn't legendary, with a small example. If you didn't want to die on this hill you shouldn't have made an assumption and moved on well before you made your first post. You're doing him a disservice by speaking for him so poorly.

@hierarchnoble I never said I spoke for him, only was saying what possibly why he said that just for conversation sake. In no way do I speak for @Jaco or anybody else for that matter. Only for myself. Yet you started to attack my credibility, because we disagreed on the terminology of "act like". That is the only issue I have with any of your posts.

*Edit: I was never trying to imply you were wrong for making the original comment that you did. Nor was I ever trying to attack you. I just figured, hey, Mike was commenting on Jaco's post about a "legendary" City of Traitors, I'd figured I'd comment back. Then it spiraled out of control as @cutlex so correctly put.

last edited by mdkubiak

@cutlex said in Two Card Monte:

alt text

I honestly cannot keep my eyes away from this .gif.

@mdkubiak said in Two Card Monte:

@hierarchnoble I never said I spoke for him, only was saying what possibly why he said that just for conversation sake. In no way do I speak for @Jaco or anybody else for that matter. Only for myself. Yet you started to attack my credibility, because we disagreed on the terminology of "act like".

It may be best to not make conversation for conversation's sake then. With @JACO having a monetary stake in the Eldrazi with his book, combined with your profile reiterating multiple times how much you love Eldrazi, I found your post to be defending him for who he was more than what he was saying. It didn't read well and I choose to speak on behalf of literal interpretation of the rules and his post. I don't deal in maybes, I work with the objective information that I have available. I'm sorry if this came off wrong.

last edited by Guest

@hierarchnoble It had zero to do with my feelings on Eldrazi or Jaco. I don't know Jaco at all, honestly. I would have done the same others in the same situation if I cared enough for the subject.

@mdkubiak Since I knew zero about you up until this point I couldn't have known that. I hope we can still trade high fives at EW or something along those lines.

@mdkubiak prolly just missed it honestly. i knew about the interaction too from the Tusk Talk podcast but I was most likely just caught up in the game. I would have had mana too because in that specific game i had roughly 10 mana at my disposal.

@hierarchnoble No worries, it wouldn’t be fair to expect you to know me. Or let this minor interaction sour my opinion of you before I get to know you. Hopefully one day, I won’t be able to attend EW this year unfortunately.

Maybe a better phrase earlier would have been City of Traitors has a sacrifice component like Legendary does. But let’s drop that.

@studderingdave Heh, no problem was just curious. I just figured it was good to point out for the interactiot in case you may have not known. Hell it didn't dawn on me immediately.

  • 112
    Posts
  • 64863
    Views