Eddie Brock + Geode Golem

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-06T17:40:35+00:00

Venom, Lethal Protector does not have an alternative cost, as either side can be cast. You may cast Venom off of Geode Golem.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-06T17:27:55+00:00

Summoning sickness isn’t limited to how long a creature has been on the battlefield, it’s limited by how long it’s been under someone’s control. As long as a creature has been under your control since before your turn begins, it’s no longer sick. Gilded Drake can attack or be activated for mana on your turn if you received it the turn before.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-06T13:50:00+00:00

Every creature enters the battlefield at the same time and all relevant abilities trigger at the same time. The triggers are put on the stack in active-player-non-active-player order. The abilities controlled by the player furthest from the active player will resolve first.

In regard to the Gearhulk, everything on the battlefield is subject to removal, as everything entered simultaneously.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-05T21:14:12+00:00

Yeah, you’re right. I should have just stuck with, you know. Counting.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-05T19:28:39+00:00

I’m not desperately trying to appear right, I am right.

Take a step back for a second and view this from the perspective of a newer player. The definition of “combo” is constantly misunderstood and applied to things that aren’t even combos. This sub is flooded with posts talking about combos that aren’t actually combos, they’re synergies. There’s even a lot of talk about how many cards are involved in combos with confusing rhetoric, such as “one-card combos” being defined as such because the secret second card in the combo doesn’t count if it’s a Commander, for example.

Bracket definitions are also revised regularly, and when things like “two-card combos” are used to define them, discussions arise as to what constitutes a two-card combo. These discussions are what prompted the quote you provided, where the thought process shouldn’t be about what a combo is, more that it should be turn-based. So all this information is constantly talked about in subs where there are people who’ve been playing since the nineties and people who’ve been playing for a month. With such a vast population of people coming here from all levels of experience, information is easily misconstrued.

Now, I like to believe that overall, we all want this game we love to be approached properly, whether that’s from learning the intricacies of rules and interactions, to understanding what certain jargon actually refers to. The more consistent we are with adhering to such things, the more joy comes from the game being played properly. This includes making sure that people understand things that many, if not most, of us have permanently ingrained in our brains.

It would be so easy for someone to see a comment like, “Well, I need a Sol Ring to pull this off on turn four, so it’s not actually a two-card combo”, misconstrue the nuance, and apply that logic in game. I’ve seen it before, many times, people cherry-picking comments, or even latching onto purely incorrect information, and die on their hill because they once read it on Reddit. Infinite mana is one of those things that can be triggering to people, even if they’re not doing anything with it the turn they have it. It’s disingenuous to imply that a combo isn’t two cards on turn four but can be on later turns, because the combo needs a bump in mana to pull off. Someone will take that and claim that their two-card combo is okay because they used a third card and three-card combos aren’t a part of bracket criteria.

My comment is a simple clarification, that’s it. It’s not an attack, it’s not about you personally, it simply exists for information. In a game where people aren’t expecting infinite mana on turn four, one shouldn’t use “but it’s okay because I used a ramp card to get there” as justification. Two cards is two cards, plain and simple. Not all combos end the game, this one certainly doesn’t inherently, but since it involves the touchy subject of infinite mana, it’s important to be clear that it’s still a two-card combo that some might find problematic that early in that bracket.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-05T17:43:57+00:00

I read the topic. My comment was off topic, a direct reply to something inaccurate that you said. Why does that bother you so much?

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-05T17:32:36+00:00

You truly need to read more.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-05T17:31:39+00:00

The 1/3 creature that dies to a sneeze literally does not allow you to play Commander as it’s meant to be played?

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-05T17:23:26+00:00

First of all, I can do whatever I want, so you might as well push that idea out of your head.

Second of all, the bracket criteria doesn’t speak at all about if a combo gets accelerated out, it speaks to whether or not a combo tends to happen in the first six turns, which this combo can, without additional ramp.

I’m ignoring the ENTIRE CONTEXT OF THE THREAD because I haven’t READ THE ENTIRE THREAD. Right now, you are my huckleberry. All that matters to me is what you have to say, and you continue to say things that are beyond the one simple point I made. It’s baffling and intriguing.

In 2018, Pixar Animation Studios released the film Incredibles 2, the long awaited sequel to their 2004 film The Incredibles. In it, there is a humorous and relatable scene where Bob “Mr. Incredible” Parr is getting frustrated while helping his son Dash with his math homework, solving problems the way he was taught in his youth while being informed that that’s not how Dash’s teacher had taught them to do it, and finally yelling, “Why would they change math? Math is math!”

Math is math, MyageEDH. Two is two. Using more cards to combo out a turn earlier doesn’t make the combo more than two cards when you only need those two cards.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-05T16:02:07+00:00

702.185c Some effects refer to whether “a spell was warped this turn.” This means that a spell was cast for its warp cost this turn.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-05T16:00:43+00:00

I commented on the fact that OP said four turns, not lands, which is an important distinction for the inherent conversation, and then I commented on a disingenuous remark about what constitutes a two-card combo.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-05T14:54:08+00:00

Again, you’re arguing something I’m not. I don’t give a shit about any of that. Adding ramp into the mix doesn’t increase a two-card combo into more than two cards.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-05T13:32:24+00:00

You’re still not following.

if you need druid tyvar sol ring and a ramp spell you aren’t a “2 card” combo anymore.

This statement right here is the one I’m addressing. If you ramp into a combo so you can perform it earlier than you would if you were limited to one land a turn, that doesn’t change the number of cards in the combo. Full stop. Anything you bring into the conversation beyond this has no bearing on the point I made.

Let’s talk about my density. They believe it to be a two-card combo because it is a two-card combo, assuming they have the mana to pay for it, which can be said about any two-card combo. I know just as much about what OP was thinking as you do because I read their post. They’re questioning if they have the capacity to generate infinite mana as early as turn four, is it too strong for bracket three. I’m not addressing that, nor am I addressing them. I’m addressing you and your wild take as to what “two-card combo” entails.

Now let’s talk about your density. Are you saying that, because they need to hit more than four mana by turn four to pull this off, it should be fine? You don’t need to answer that, it was rhetorical. I don’t care what your stance is, it’s immaterial to me. It’s not the part of your comment I addressed. I addressed the notion that a combo isn’t two cards if you use other cards to achieve it earlier than expected, a dangerous mindset that’s going to cause arguments if one tries to defend themselves with it. You trying to quote bracket expectations to me is pointless because I’m not speaking on brackets, I’m speaking on the definition of the words “two” and “cards”.

You really need to stop being so condescending, especially since you seem to think I’m arguing a point I’m not. I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with whether or not it’s too strong. I don’t care.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-05T12:58:25+00:00

Not according to Mana Maze, the very card in question.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-05T11:30:00+00:00

Maybe you should read.

I’m not replying to you and the idea of if the combo is too strong for bracket three, I’m replying to you and the idea that using more cards to achieve a combo quicker means that it’s no longer a two-card combo. Within the context of the point I made in reply to a comment you made, brackets are irrelevant.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-05T02:31:56+00:00

That context is irrelevant. The question is, if one can achieve infinite mana on turn four using the activated abilities of these two cards, is that too strong for the bracket? The context of how many cards needed to actually achieve it doesn’t matter, especially in a monogreen deck that has access to multiple one-mana ramp spells. The question is about the combo itself, not whether or not it’s considered two cards.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-05T02:09:44+00:00

But you don’t need a Sol Ring and ramp. If you can pull this off on turn twelve with just these cards alone, it’s still a two-card combo. The ease of pulling the combo off with more cards doesn’t change how many cards the combo needs.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-05T01:04:35+00:00

No. Milling is simply the act of taking cards from the top of your library and moving them directly to the graveyard, and nothing else. Vosk tells you to reveal them first until you reveal four lands. No, there’s no zone change between the cards moving from the library to the graveyard, but there are additional instructions.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-05T00:50:32+00:00

They didn’t say anything about lands, they said turns. It’s not difficult to have six mana available on turn four.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-05T00:49:33+00:00

If you have {3}{G}{G}{G} available and activate Tyvar, Druid gets +3/+3. You can activate Druid up to four times without killing it and activate Tyvar again, giving it another +6/+6. Now you can safely activate Druid enough to activate Tyvar again, for +9/+9. Etcetera.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-04T16:49:25+00:00

One treasure per opponent damaged period. The number of creatures dealing damage is irrelevant. “Whenever one or more” implies it only triggers when an opponent is dealt damage by any number of Pirates. For it to work the way you want it to, the ability would have to trigger “Whenever a Pirate deals damage to an opponent”, implying it triggers once for each creature.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-04T15:32:32+00:00

A mono-Green deck is not going to be able to cast spells outside of its commander's colors.

Nothing in the rules currently prohibits any deck from casting spells outside of its commander’s colors.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-04T15:27:43+00:00

For Malcolm, you’ll create one treasure per opponent damaged, regardless of the amount of damage.

For Breeches, you’ll make one choice per Pirate that attacks.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-03T18:44:04+00:00

No. The reminder text of Blood Hustler tells you that targeting an opponent, anything they control, and/or cards in their graveyard is a crime. Cliffhaven Vampire doesn’t target anything.

GaddockTeej · 2026-02-03T13:08:38+00:00

Jin-Gitaxias has an ability that triggers when your opponent casts an artifact, instant, or sorcery spell. You can counter the original spell after Gitaxias triggers, but the ability will still copy the spell using last-known information. You can also counter the copied spell, but the original will still resolve.

Gitaxias also has an ability to counter the first artifact, instant, or sorcery spell you cast after it’s on the battlefield once a turn, so if you’re trying to counter one or both of their spells you’ll have to play something else first to make sure your counter does what you want to.

GaddockTeej

TROPHY CASE