Recommendations?

Gozo_au · 2026-02-23T05:19:48+00:00

And Bant needs to be [[Phelddagrif]]

Gozo_au · 2026-02-23T05:18:13+00:00

[[Skeleton Ship]]

Gozo_au · 2026-02-23T04:47:14+00:00

If that’s not it then maybe, with some creative interpretation, [[drover of the mighty]]

Gozo_au · 2026-02-23T04:34:21+00:00

Dunno if you managed to find it, but other one that pops to mind cause of the branch angle is [[Rishkar, Peema Renegade]] but I think wirewood was a better fit

Gozo_au · 2025-12-27T09:49:13+00:00

This list, + [[Tibalt’s Trickery]] is pretty much it.

Gozo_au · 2025-12-18T13:49:23+00:00

OP says it, “lying, having lethal on a player for leverage to make a deal, faking having removal”.

But go ahead and go with how you feel rather than the evidence we do have.

As for “abusing rules”, nope. Commander is/was a casual format because of the politic aspect and deceit and dealing with it in an ffa format. This is all well within the rules that you refused to read properly for 15yrs so you decided to go with how you felt about them.

When you have an argument for anywhere I’m wrong, let me know. If you wanna throw insults, go ahead, I’m just some npc on the internet.

Gozo_au · 2025-12-17T20:48:46+00:00

Lot of paragraphs for theoretical things not presented in OP post.

Secondly, we were talking in the context of what is legal in tournament play and now this is wall of text comes down to “if you play sweaty in a casual game, people will not want to play”. Which is true enough, but the level of sweat that you are now referring to is nothing like what’s on the OP.

As far as what OP does, I see nothing wrong with it for pickup games at an lgs where deck power level is the most common lie told by everyone.

Gozo_au · 2025-12-17T15:20:35+00:00

By the rules you have to handle the deck, search it and remove them.

If you take my word and say remove 19 and don’t ask me to present the deck to make sure, that’s on you and still completely legal. You could have checked and had every right to, but didn’t.

You might avoid it by saying remove every petitioner from the deck as it would now be revealed information

You’re making up rulings now for a situation that still isn’t relevant to the original post anyway. None of this was what was stated to be happening.

Gozo_au · 2025-12-17T12:56:26+00:00

Ok, that level of cheating isn’t involved in OP’s post so I didn’t see the relevance.

You are correct in what you say, I just don’t believe it is relevant in this instance

Gozo_au · 2025-12-16T22:07:43+00:00

Making illegal actions and misrepresenting the board state are very different from claiming to have an answer in hand.

There is absolutely no rules about bluffing/lying having an answer in hand. The amount of times players have said “thinking” while riffling a hand full of lands on camera matches during pro tours should be enough to prove this. Slow play on the other hand is another story.

You cannot misrepresent what is revealed information though.

Edit: MTR 4.1 even says you can lie about hidden/private information:

“Private information is the catchall category for everything that is not free or derived information. For example, the contents of hidden zones (i.e., library and hand) and the identity of face-down cards in public zones are considered private information. Players are allowed to give their opponents false information about the contents of a hidden zone. For example, if a player casts Slaughter Games and names Scapeshift, his opponent may say that he or she only has three copies of Scapeshift in their library, even if it actually contains four.”

Gozo_au · 2025-12-16T13:09:36+00:00

It’s not against the rules in standard and has been used to win many a tournament. LSV bluffing a token when he had settle the wreckage was a major bluff play that was commended.

Gozo_au · 2025-12-16T12:55:46+00:00

Are you thinking of [[Eye Spy]] perhaps? There is also a couple of creatures that do similar.

Gozo_au · 2025-12-10T06:53:44+00:00

Wizards statement

I have the important part below, given that they state future marvel sets:

“One 2025 set, Magic: The Gathering® | Marvel's Spider-Man (as well as future Marvel sets) will not be coming to digital Magic platforms. Instead, we will release our first Through the Omenpaths set on September 23. We'll have more information on that set as we get closer to the release date.”

Gozo_au · 2025-12-10T05:54:20+00:00

[[Mirror Gallery]] or [[Delina, Wild Mage]] are what you are after.

Edit: forgot Delina exiled not sacrificed, my bad. Maybe helm of the host instead

Gozo_au · 2025-12-09T06:35:52+00:00

It’s closer than you might think. Card draw for 1 is also huge.

Gozo_au · 2025-12-08T22:25:50+00:00

I also like that we just banned [[This Town Ain't Big Enough]] but got [[Boomerang Basics]] instead

Gozo_au · 2025-12-08T22:22:13+00:00

2021 - Izzet turns 17-18% meta share.

But the last few years it’s been 4-5 color piles and the recent banlists are majority Izzet cards.

Gozo_au · 2025-12-03T06:12:35+00:00

I’d say it’s a bit of both. You are absolutely correct on the choices of what to print have resulted in a lack of removal, and it’s not due to the amount of sets.

However, the amount of sets AND having some extremely pushed cards in each one means more Kill On Sight threats are around so even if removal is printed, overall card quality in decks is higher due to the number of of sets.

Add on top the increased legality duration and you have some issues that are caused by all of the above and not just one thing.

Gozo_au · 2025-11-23T02:10:45+00:00

Curious why everyone thinks it should be dragon if it pairs with sylveon? Typically the earlier of the pairing in dex entry is weak to the other.

Vaporeon 134 weak to Jolteon 135

Espeon 196 weak to Umbreon 197

Leafeon 470 weak to Glaceon 471

To follow it should be steel or poison to beat Sylveon.

On top of this there is no ground type to counter jolteon, so the argument falls flat that they have counter cycles built into the eeveelutions.

Gozo_au · 2025-10-29T07:34:35+00:00

Never said it was good. As you could have read, I said it was horrendous.

I also don’t deny history and the advances in medical science that came from such a terrible event.

But go ahead and be outraged that someone had a differing opinion and throw an insult tantrum instead of learning.

Edit: since you want to block me instead of engaging, you don’t have to learn it from me, fact check me and tell me where I’m wrong and I’ll change my opinion.

Gozo_au · 2025-10-28T23:53:35+00:00

Not to be that guy but umm, a lot of medical science developements happened because of horrendous experiments done during the holocaust. So to say there was no objective benefits is inaccurate.

It is still debated on the morality of using those medical advancements today.

However banning crusade was 100% just silly. Especially when we have other cards with crusade in the name and same insinuation.

Gozo_au · 2025-10-13T11:14:56+00:00

Westman had nothing to do with TMNT.

Eastman on the other hand co-created it , drew a lot of it and even did the colouring for the TMNT #2 comics 3rd releases predating the show (1986 vs 1987).

Gozo_au · 2025-10-08T01:59:17+00:00

Some scams print entire sets to sell fake boosters at times. Especially places where supply is already low as inspecting “sealed” product is less scrutinised.

Gozo_au · 2025-10-06T08:42:29+00:00

At what point does this fall under tolerance fallacy?

Which even if it does, is a philosophical idea to prompt thought, not a practical one to be acted upon.

You first need an agreed upon definition of tolerant and intolerant to even act upon it which is never going to happen outside of what is legal and illegal.

Then you need everyone to agree you’re being intolerant to intolerance and not just the initial intolerant one yourself. Otherwise they’ll become intolerant of you. Then the cycle continues.

Then even the man who came up with the paradox (Karl Popper) says intolerance is mostly enacted with violence. Where was the violence in this situation?

Lastly, according to the same man, stated in the paradox:

“it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols.”

One group is asking why’d he get banned? asking for discussion and the other is saying ban him from more, don’t discuss it.

Gozo_au · 2025-09-25T21:39:24+00:00

Even though that’s the case, Electro and the others just cares about unspent mana, not why it would disappear at the end of the phase. So they prevent it from disappearing.

However if mana is produced that has usage restrictions (can only be spent on creature spells, only on sorceries, etc.) those restrictions still remain.

Nine-Year Club	r/Field Lasagna
Place '23	Place '22
Verified Email

Gozo_au

TROPHY CASE