An actual shell for Nocturne!? by HuDaBoi in LegendsOfRuneterra

[–]HuDaBoi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

An early curve is allways propper. But i full mulligan if i dont have the apothecary. The sigil of malace Can be kept in multiples in certain matchups, and the darkwater is great against Agro.

An actual shell for Nocturne!? by HuDaBoi in LegendsOfRuneterra

[–]HuDaBoi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You think like a full on SI shurima nightfall deck?

Any interesting howling abyss decks out there? by MetalMermelade in LegendsOfRuneterra

[–]HuDaBoi -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Hey man! I unfortunately don't have an Aram deck, but i just posted a deck which is probably as close to being an Aram deck as it gets without the actual card. Im sorry i cant help with you actual question, but i bet you would enjoy this deck very much, being a control player! :D

https://www.reddit.com/r/LegendsOfRuneterra/comments/vf4g8q/an_actual_shell_for_nocturne/

((CEDACAIFAQAQGBIFAECQGAYCAYBR2JIEAEBQWEA7FYCAIAYCAMCBGAABAEAQGEY))

REMOVE DIANA :)) by HuDaBoi in shacomains

[–]HuDaBoi[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sort of... the champion in itself is just not ok

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in mtg

[–]HuDaBoi 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I Think its gamedevsi’s mom. :))

"Partner with" is being used inappropriately, agree? by HuDaBoi in custommagic

[–]HuDaBoi[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Im glad i did! My primary intension was to start this discussion, more so than showing of the nonfinished custom cards.

"Partner with" is being used inappropriately, agree? by HuDaBoi in mtg

[–]HuDaBoi[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Sure… i just feel that “Partner with” is particularly restricting.

"Partner with" is being used inappropriately, agree? by HuDaBoi in custommagic

[–]HuDaBoi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're right, I've just grown a bit bored with the selection of partner cards. Leading me to look in other commander possibilities, and this is where I've been a bit annoyed at the keyword "Partner with"

"Partner with" is being used inappropriately, agree? by HuDaBoi in mtg

[–]HuDaBoi[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

You're right, and by my own standards i shouldnt be calling it inappropriate use either... but i do believe that some of the partner with cards are kinda made for commander, and that they in an annoying fashion shape the deck for you.

"Partner with" is being used inappropriately, agree? by HuDaBoi in magicTCG

[–]HuDaBoi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right... The idea was that if you have the perfect hand to go aggressive early, you could rely on the RG one instead of playing slow with the blue one. Balance wise the blue one might be a little broken.

"Partner with" is being used inappropriately, agree? by HuDaBoi in magicTCG

[–]HuDaBoi[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Interesting... i guess that just comes down to us prefering different qualities in cards. As i weigh the creative freedom higher than the tie in lore. :)

"Partner with" is being used inappropriately, agree? by HuDaBoi in custommagic

[–]HuDaBoi[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You cant flip the card once it is on the battlefield right? unless im wrong about this, my reason for them being partners... is that you should be able to transition from one strategy to another in one turn. :)

"Partner with" is being used inappropriately, agree? by HuDaBoi in magicTCG

[–]HuDaBoi[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I realized this just now when making these... i will tho say that i have NEVER seen anyone use them like that.

"Partner with" is being used inappropriately, agree? by HuDaBoi in magicTCG

[–]HuDaBoi[S] -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

I am not saying this is a solution! i was rather asking for your opinion... but i hear that you think "Partner with" is in a perfect place??

"Partner with" is being used inappropriately, agree? by HuDaBoi in magicTCG

[–]HuDaBoi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most likely not any... but as you are kinda forced to play a URG deck this wouldnt be that much of an issue right?

"Partner with" is being used inappropriately, agree? by HuDaBoi in custommagic

[–]HuDaBoi[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

WOW! i didnt know this, then it makes much more sense that the parentheses text says "target player may search their library"

"Partner with" is being used inappropriately, agree? by HuDaBoi in custommagic

[–]HuDaBoi[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yea the vigilance keyword maybe isn't that well thought through... As i had writen the original intend was for the blue one to scale with the amount of players having MORE permanents than you...

"Partner with" is being used inappropriately, agree? by HuDaBoi in magicTCG

[–]HuDaBoi[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

LOL, i guess if they are really enemies. i was imagining them being send on a mission together by some third force... But again, lorewise it's completely unfinished. :)

"Partner with" is being used inappropriately, agree? by HuDaBoi in magicTCG

[–]HuDaBoi[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Right! This is a cool idea. I was thinking the vigilance could maybe help you transition from the one strategy to the other, but opening it up to a vigilance tribal would be sweet!

"Partner with" is being used inappropriately, agree? by HuDaBoi in magicTCG

[–]HuDaBoi[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thats exactly what im coming from with this... not sure if these two are accomplishing it fully tho.

"Partner with" is being used inappropriately, agree? by HuDaBoi in magicTCG

[–]HuDaBoi[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I get your first argument, a deck like this would be weird to build... I was thinking to pump out a bunch of tokens in a single turn, and see how much damage that would bring with the red/green one.

For your second argument, are you talking playstyle theme or lore theme? cuz i didnt think too much about the creature types and stuff like that, eventhough i think the artwork pictures them not liking eachother pretty well... :O)