[AER] Fatal Push



  • alt text

    I hear fetchlands are playable. Comparables include Dismember, Snuff Out, Disfigure ... probably useless because Mental Misstep exists. The decline of black creatures you'd hit like DRS and Bob make it a little less differentiated.



  • Dredge playable probably. Counter-bility isn't a good metric to rate a card by.



  • Feels like more of a modern staple than Vintage, because I feel like Dismember is still better in most metrics since the life loss is not as relevant in vintage play. Would have been buying foil copies of this a few years ago, now I see it as a player and not much else if even.


  • TMD Supporter

    Finally a good spoiler thread! This card is OK.


  • TMD Supporter

    Is swords and fragmentize unplayable because of misstep?

    This is a great removal spell. .



  • This seems like a very good role-player in all formats. Could perhaps be an option for Grixis Delver, given that Gush triggers Revolt too.

    It hits pretty much everything in the format barring Reality Stomper, Trike then tinker bots/Oath targets. Anything else I'm missing? If not...certainly add to the 'playable' pile.



  • @nedleeds said in [Too Aether Too Revolt] Fatal Push:

    I hear fetchlands are playable. Comparables include Dismember, Snuff Out, Disfigure ... probably useless because Mental Misstep exists.

    Also Wastelands, Stip Mine, and Ghost Quarter. I could definitely see this being played in the Eldrazi decks that are playing pain lands a-la Caves of Koilos or Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth.

    If you know or think your opponent has this card in hand, it could make combat much trickier. I'm less likely to attack into a chump blocker with my big dude when their chump block activates this card.

    @Islandswamp said in [Too Aether Too Revolt] Fatal Push:

    Is ... fragmentize unplayable because of misstep?

    I don't think that's a good comparison. The primary use case for any anti-artifact card is Workshops, which tend not to play Mental Misstep.



  • This has TKS written all over it... no? This card as just about perfect against eldrazi.



  • @Topical_Island said in [Too Aether Too Revolt] Fatal Push:

    This has TKS written all over it... no? This card as just about perfect against eldrazi.

    That's exactly what I was thinking of in my little blurb about combat. Chump block a Thought-Knot Seer, pay B to kill it and draw a card? Yes please.



  • @thecravenone Yeah, and it can kill other creatures like Thalia and Revoker and Priest with no Revolt... and you can hold it up against TKS with a fetchland ready to crack and do it all in response to the TKS enter play trigger.

    It can kill Pyromancer at any time, and kill a Mentor of any size on the fetchland crack. Instant speed lets it deal with vehicles. It kills Mishra's factory even though factory is land. Kills painter's servant at any time. Really not too bad. Depending on your meta this is easily a SB card and perhaps could see main board play.


  • TMD Supporter

    Someone pointed out that it says "leaves the battlefield" , so gush turns it on too. That's a card people play. Paradoxical outcome as well...



  • @Islandswamp said in [Too Aether Too Revolt] Fatal Push:

    Someone pointed out that it says "leaves the battlefield" , so gush turns it on too. That's a card people play. Paradoxical outcome as well...

    That's pretty nutty. Make a blocker with Pyromancer, kill one threat, chump the other!



  • The first thing I notice is how wizards has changed the templating on wording.

    This is very narrow, but the way they worded this card, will the revolt clause trigger if you ever controlled the permanent.

    If you opponent gained control of your 1/1 and then you kill that with a lightning bolt, will that allow you to destroy a 4 cc creature of your choosing even though when the creature died this turn it wasn't controlled by you. This is a two pronged questions:

    1. If control switched this turn
    2. if control switched on a previous turn

    Because I could argue it was technically "controlled" at some point in the game. Especially since the card refers to the past tense of the word and specifically uses "controlled"

    Magic doesn't have a lot of "past-tense" interactions.

    Also can this card target any creature? And only destroys it if it has converted mana cost 2 or lower (or 4 or lower)?

    Personally, i think they wanted to make the templating cleaner and instead they made a big mess.



  • @gkraigher You're right, this can target any creature regardless of casting cost. Great to make elemental, monks and storm count <3



  • I've been waiting for a card like this for a while. If only to stress my theory that one mana is still worth 4 life in the Eldrazi matchup.


  • TMD Supporter

    @fsecco said in [Too Aether Too Revolt] Fatal Push:

    @gkraigher You're right, this can target any creature regardless of casting cost. Great to make elemental, monks and storm count <3

    I'm thinking it's a great way to steal a Marit Lage with a Dack Fayden Emblem.



  • @gkraigher said in [Too Aether Too Revolt] Fatal Push:

    The first thing I notice is how wizards has changed the templating on wording.

    This is very narrow, but the way they worded this card, will the revolt clause trigger if you ever controlled the permanent.

    If you opponent gained control of your 1/1 and then you kill that with a lightning bolt, will that allow you to destroy a 4 cc creature of your choosing even though when the creature died this turn it wasn't controlled by you. This is a two pronged questions:

    1. If control switched this turn
    2. if control switched on a previous turn

    Because I could argue it was technically "controlled" at some point in the game. Especially since the card refers to the past tense of the word and specifically uses "controlled"

    Magic doesn't have a lot of "past-tense" interactions.

    Also can this card target any creature? And only destroys it if it has converted mana cost 2 or lower (or 4 or lower)?

    Personally, i think they wanted to make the templating cleaner and instead they made a big mess.

    I dont see how there is any confusion over this. While I haven't found the exact phrasing yet, in 2 different articles from Wizards they describe revolt has happening any time a permanent you control has left the battlefield prior in the turn. Its pretty straight forward. If you controlled it at the beginning of the turn and an opponent steals it and then it leaves play, a permanent you control did not leave play. If you steal a permanent from an opponent and sacrifice it, then a permanent you control left play. The reference to 'at any point in the turn' refers to the permanent leaving play while its under your control. It doesn't refer to you controlling it at any point.

    If you have a link to the exact wording in the rules, that would be great. Its not there yet and none of the articles about new mechanics spell out the rule either.



  • @Islandswamp said in [Too Aether Too Revolt] Fatal Push:

    Is swords and fragmentize unplayable because of misstep?

    This is a great removal spell. .

    No but the decks the internet bring Fragmentize in against dont play Missteps. Or the Misstep your Misstep circlejerk ensues vs something like Oath.



  • "destroy target creature if it has converted mana cost 2 or less"

    So you're saying that this can work late game with dack emblem to steal an opposing Mentor? This card just keeps getting better



  • @Khahan

    "If you controlled it at the beginning of the turn and an opponent steals it and then it leaves play, a permanent you control did not leave play"

    You're not staying consistent. You start off by saying I "controlled" the card at some point, then lost control, and when it died I no longer had control. The problem is the card checks to see if I "controlled" it (which means if I ever controlled it, not if I control it when it is dying).

    It does not read like morbid. If you are correct, similar cards have read like this in the past: "revolt-... ,if a card you control left the battlefield this turn, then"

    Instead they changed the word templating and made it confusing as hell because by the English language I have "controlled" it. Past tense, just like if I had "controlled" it when it died.

    They eliminated 2 comas and gave the card ambiguity. It's also a run on sentence with two if statements, and no comma. Where are the commas?

    Look you are probably right about th intention of the card, all I'm saying is they had a great template for this and F'ed it up.

    Independent of the (terrible) wording, a 1 mana instant speed black removal spell that kills 95% of the creatures in the format is vintage playable.


Log in to reply
 

WAF/WHF

Looks like your connection to The Mana Drain was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.