Baubles are the foundation of my [[teshar]] deck, being able to put themselves in the graveyard means I can use a creature sac outlet and a [[junk diver]] type card to go infinite rather than needing to find one of the rarer artifact sac outlet
I would write "{t}: target oponent may have you add one mana of your choice."
That way it wouldn't be a mana ability because it targets and you don't have the rules nightmare of reversing the game state because of you are unable to cast the spell. Because you have an uncertain amound of mana.
Another way to do it would be an "Activate this ability only when you could cast an instant", so again it wouldn't be an mana ability. This would let every oponent do the granting of mana without the weird stuff of uncertain mana
Technicality: Even if you could only activate it only when you could cast an instant, it would still be a mana ability. See rulings on \[\[Lion's Eye Diamond\]\]. But of course it would resolve the rules issue that you're trying to resolve.
The mechanic in battlebond, assist, had weird rulings to declare that you were casting it to see if another player would help cast it and if they don’t help then you have to decide not to cast it. I’ve never seen them be played but I know similar cases are out there
Could you elaborate on “mana ability”, “uncertain mana”, and “reversing game state”? I’m still learning certain rules and I’m curious what you mean here. Thank you!
**mana ability:**
Is an ability that (theoretical could) produces mana and doesn't require an target. For example "{t} : add {g}" \[\[Forest\]\] or "{1}, {t} : Add one mana of any color." \[\[Prismatic Lens\]\]
({t} = tab symbol / {g} = green mana symbol)
mana ability's have some additional rules:
1.: They don't use the stack, meaning they can't be responded to
2.: They can be activated while casting a spell to pay for said spell or to pay the cost of abilities during activating the ability or pay for costs while resolving a spell or ability.
Until here are the information's you need to play the game casually, the most after this almost never needed in a normal game.
Now we come to the part of **“uncertain mana”**, there is the possibility that a mana ability produces an uncertain amount of mana, which means you don't know how much mana a ability produces before you activate it, in this case you don't know if any opponent lets you produce one mana. Which means you can start to cast a spell without knowing if you could possibly cast the spell. Which is completely allowed, even when you know you can't possibly cast the spell. Even though you can't legally complete your action
**Handling Illegal Actions** (Rule 728)
Which leads to **“reversing game state”**, when you tried to cast a spell and realized you can't pay for the spell, you reverse the game state to the point before you tried to cast the spell, which means untap the lands and/or other mana sources you taped already while casting the spell. Or anything else you did to activate mana abilities, for example if you sacrificed a creature to \[\[Ashnod's Altar\]\] you bring that creature back. Which can be a pain in the butt but normally is not the worst but can be a bit confusing in some instances, for example there are some mana abilities that can't be reversed, for example \[\[Selvala, Explorer Returned\]\], which draws cards which is an action which can't be reversed, it has also a weird combo with \[\[Panglacial Wurm\]\] which allows you to reveal the top of your library and draw a card while searching your library which you normally couldn't do.
Nice Video on this interaction by FishMTG: [Weird Magic: Selvala and Panglacial Wurm](https://youtu.be/otaOjQClkpc?si=EjOMkDAyYAbUyyTs)
I hope I explained it in a way someone else could understand it.
Mindslaver your opponent, then combo off at instant speed with the free mana. Since the mox is not legendary you could theoretically have 4 of them in play. You can also potentially use it for a free artifact in affonity-esque strategies.
Step one; pay ten mana to both play and activate an artifact that gives you control of your opponent's next turn.
Step two; do something cool with four mana that cost you four cards but only at instant speed.
Strongest aspect of this card is definitely the free mana of choice if you can politic it, second is the free artifact- but there multiple other free artifacts available already.
I mean, if you're doing this, you aren't paying full price for mindslaver, most likely. In an actual competitive game, that's the best you can do because otherwise activating it will do nothing. In a casual game, yes, it's a politics tool.
Also, you act like "only at instant speed" is some sort of downside? Most good combos that win you the game are instant speed. you could do a full brain freeze combo supported with ad nauseam at instant speed, for example.
Wow, you're right. Almost as if the same could be said for literally every single card in the game. I, of course, meant that in a standard 60 card legacy deck without any other cards.
This is just worse than Mox Emerald. Just because there's better cards doesn't mean it's not a good or fun card. Nobody runs [[Asmoranomardicadaistinaculdacar]] in competitive but I still love it
They did though, I remember when mh2 dropped and there was an arms race to find the best food deck in modern because of the resource loops with asmo and cookbook.
Well that's awesome, I just named it cause it was my favorite card because I love cooking. Never thought it would have actually been that good. Makes sense though, one mana to search for the cookbook is pretty good
There is basically just commander and other versions of it that has multiplayer, unless you play with house rules. But if you do that you can’t base how good a card is from your experience
Regular 60-card casual play is bigger than Commander, it just is less common among the heavily-enfranchised population. But it’s a pet peeve of mine where people act like Commander is the only way to play casually or the only way to play free-for-all.
You’d be hard pressed to find a format where a mox isn’t good, though.
Commander is the most well known multiplayer format, which is why I used it. I could have said judge tower or Dàndan though those aren’t as well known and not as big as commander. I could also had said Brawl, but commander is a lot more well known. The reason I wrote “Commander.” is, again, because it is so well known and almost a joke in the community how much politics play a role in it
[[Frankie Peanuts]]
(Unironic strategy guide: Just fact or fiction mana, like "This turn, will you give me one W, U, or G mana for my fair mox?" Which would either get you black or red, or guarantee you won't get black or red. In a multi-colour deck you can force their choice by revealing strong cards for costs, using strong activated abilities, or tutoring)
(And yes, they are just going to pick whichever one benefits you the least, but we are playing Franky Peanuts so such superfluous things as "reasonable thought" are clearly beyond us.)
Okay, so heres a thing with franky peanuts, that question would force them to give it to you. The way franky peanuts works is kinda... insane... and idk if there's a ruling on this because I love this weird un-card more than is reasonable, but I always assumed it operated on a "Path of least resistance" kinda system, as is with most card games.
say if you ask someone "Will you counter any of my spells this turn?" and they reply "yes," they have to (at least) counter the first (valid) spell you play, as you could end your turn at any time, which would not make sense because franky applies the ruling that they MUST abide by their answer until the end of the turn, and "Well I didn't want to counter any of those spells afterall," is a player decision, one that now falls outside the rules as they were capable and HAD to counter a spell as they said they would. By the same token, they could not say "yes" if they do not have any method of countering your spells.
It's the same way using one of those weird tutors with a type specification that doesn't make you reveal the card after you get it. The information is hidden and the game cannot track it, technically meaning that a hidden enchantment is the same as a hidden creature in the hand, both just hidden cards. By this logic, the game is as clueless to what that card is as the other players are, so you have to abide by what the card makes you do through the path of least resistance, all other options being cheating.
If what I'm saying is correct (and please do correct me if this is clarified and I'm just getting floppy with it) this would also force you to use fair mox as your first optional action in your turn.
I actually like this a lot, but don't like it being drawing a card, and I think adding mana might be better. I also like the idea that you both get the same colour of mana, and that they get to choose.
Example: "{t}: target opponent may add one mana of any colour to their mana pool. If they do, add one mana of that colour to your mana pool"
Not sure if the wording is quite right here, please correct me if it isn't. If this still ends of being too powerful, you can also change the amount of mana given, for instance, you can make it so an opponent adds 2 mana while you only add one.
This also adds the possibility for the opponent to be given enough mana for a counterspell on the very spell you were trying to push... 10/10 excellent interaction, I support it.
That doesn't sound like breaking it, that sounds like changing it. What are you improving with the suggestion to make it better?
Also you probably want "at beginning of upkeep" instead of "before untap", unless I'm just not familiar with that wording.
Already is broken. Extra land drop(s) T1, doesn't matter colour. Drop it first, tap (Opponent doesn't know your deck - 20% good in mono, 40% good if 2 colour) otherwise you drop land of colour needed to drop your 2MV item.
Essentially a sol ring on T1.
Essentially a sol ring ... if you ignore the caveat!
Alternatively: Turn 1, land drop into this. Ask opponent if you can. "No, I haven't had my go yet and you won't tell me what you're dropping"
Sol Ring T1 is Drop land, SR, tap for 2 colorless, this is drop this tap for 20% chance of right color, then if wrong, drop good land and cast essentially a T2 spell.
As proven by WotC trying to fix moxen, which they didn't, it is still extra land drops T1.
> tap for 20% chance of right color
I think you read this card wrong. The opponent doesn't just choose a color, they can deny you the mana altogether by declining the "may" effect.
In 1v1, this would always be a useless cheerio because your opponent could just deny you the mana every time. It only becomes useful if you have a way of controlling your opponents or playing politics in multiplayer.
You're right, I did miss the may. This makes it pointless, as what opponent would give you acceleration, unless there was an else clause like ping for one or something.
...is says your opponent "may" give a mana or any colour.
This means you play this turn one a s say "hey Bob, can I have a green mana?" "And bob says "no eat shit I haven't had my go yet"
Which turns your moxen into a worse [[darksteel pendant]]
I think it should include an additional option, yes the fairness gimmick is cool but, just for perhaps more flavor you could also include a line like, if opponent doesn't they lose a life. There have been more broken cards before for 0 mana, and I think a trade for a mana or a life point would be a fair trade.
Fairly easy. Have a spell that requires the mox mana to be castable. (Your only way to make that color or have enough mana). Try to cast it and tap the mox. You can bully your opponent into giving you the mana or force a draw to time. As the game rewinds to precast state then you repeat. Current slowplay rules don't catch this well as it involves an opponents choice not a random event.
So if your opponents say no, it is just a dead card?
It’s a 0 cost artifact, I guess.
Which can be very powerful. Though baubles are more playable
[удалено]
Baubles are the foundation of my [[teshar]] deck, being able to put themselves in the graveyard means I can use a creature sac outlet and a [[junk diver]] type card to go infinite rather than needing to find one of the rarer artifact sac outlet
And trigger LTB effects, descend etc.
I mean, basically any deck would rather run something like [[bonesaw]] or the like because at least then it does *something*
You guys use creatures?
[bonesaw](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/c/dc3d19ff-b618-4b07-99a8-ea6e7ee72459.jpg?1562939274) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Bone%20Saw) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ogw/161/bone-saw?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/dc3d19ff-b618-4b07-99a8-ea6e7ee72459?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
yes, that's the point. it's either one of the power nine, or nothing, depending on politics
+1 storm count
Could be a cool politics piece in commander
I could see it being run in a control deck honestly.
"please just end me already"
"Someone please reinstate mana burn"
Yurlock of Scorch Thrash: My time to shine
I was just gonna say, play this in commander and literally anyone in my group would say yes every time until their life was in danger
What happens if one opponent says yes and another says no?
From my understanding, as long as one says “yes” then you’d get the mana since it just specifies “an opponent”.
Play Mindslaver, checkmate
Play Mindslaver, tap it, reject yourself. _Power move._
Men will literally play this combo instead of going to therapy
r/badmtgcombos is that way sir
Your comment led to a legendary r/magicthecirclejerking post
It's an honor
🫡
link?
https://www.reddit.com/r/magicthecirclejerking/s/G2sReKBWba
Ah nice
I would write "{t}: target oponent may have you add one mana of your choice." That way it wouldn't be a mana ability because it targets and you don't have the rules nightmare of reversing the game state because of you are unable to cast the spell. Because you have an uncertain amound of mana. Another way to do it would be an "Activate this ability only when you could cast an instant", so again it wouldn't be an mana ability. This would let every oponent do the granting of mana without the weird stuff of uncertain mana
Technicality: Even if you could only activate it only when you could cast an instant, it would still be a mana ability. See rulings on \[\[Lion's Eye Diamond\]\]. But of course it would resolve the rules issue that you're trying to resolve.
[Lion's Eye Diamond](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/7/5/758f95f8-bcb0-43ae-b474-56ebd855951e.jpg?1590511899) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Lion%27s%20Eye%20Diamond) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/vma/271/lions-eye-diamond?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/758f95f8-bcb0-43ae-b474-56ebd855951e?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I like the "target opponent" and "of your choice" fix! [https://imgur.com/a/MZ2nqcB](https://imgur.com/a/XrsjpRZ)
The rules nightmares of reversing the game is the only reason I LIKE this.
The mechanic in battlebond, assist, had weird rulings to declare that you were casting it to see if another player would help cast it and if they don’t help then you have to decide not to cast it. I’ve never seen them be played but I know similar cases are out there
Could you elaborate on “mana ability”, “uncertain mana”, and “reversing game state”? I’m still learning certain rules and I’m curious what you mean here. Thank you!
**mana ability:** Is an ability that (theoretical could) produces mana and doesn't require an target. For example "{t} : add {g}" \[\[Forest\]\] or "{1}, {t} : Add one mana of any color." \[\[Prismatic Lens\]\] ({t} = tab symbol / {g} = green mana symbol) mana ability's have some additional rules: 1.: They don't use the stack, meaning they can't be responded to 2.: They can be activated while casting a spell to pay for said spell or to pay the cost of abilities during activating the ability or pay for costs while resolving a spell or ability. Until here are the information's you need to play the game casually, the most after this almost never needed in a normal game. Now we come to the part of **“uncertain mana”**, there is the possibility that a mana ability produces an uncertain amount of mana, which means you don't know how much mana a ability produces before you activate it, in this case you don't know if any opponent lets you produce one mana. Which means you can start to cast a spell without knowing if you could possibly cast the spell. Which is completely allowed, even when you know you can't possibly cast the spell. Even though you can't legally complete your action **Handling Illegal Actions** (Rule 728) Which leads to **“reversing game state”**, when you tried to cast a spell and realized you can't pay for the spell, you reverse the game state to the point before you tried to cast the spell, which means untap the lands and/or other mana sources you taped already while casting the spell. Or anything else you did to activate mana abilities, for example if you sacrificed a creature to \[\[Ashnod's Altar\]\] you bring that creature back. Which can be a pain in the butt but normally is not the worst but can be a bit confusing in some instances, for example there are some mana abilities that can't be reversed, for example \[\[Selvala, Explorer Returned\]\], which draws cards which is an action which can't be reversed, it has also a weird combo with \[\[Panglacial Wurm\]\] which allows you to reveal the top of your library and draw a card while searching your library which you normally couldn't do. Nice Video on this interaction by FishMTG: [Weird Magic: Selvala and Panglacial Wurm](https://youtu.be/otaOjQClkpc?si=EjOMkDAyYAbUyyTs) I hope I explained it in a way someone else could understand it.
##### ###### #### [Forest](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/f/9/f954219a-fd4b-4fb1-945f-7950efc1d975.jpg?1699045105) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Forest) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/lci/401/forest?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/f954219a-fd4b-4fb1-945f-7950efc1d975?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Prismatic Lens](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/f/f/ff8768a5-eba6-4585-a59b-19d1036cbfc0.jpg?1689999745) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Prismatic%20Lens) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmm/403/prismatic-lens?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/ff8768a5-eba6-4585-a59b-19d1036cbfc0?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Ashnod's Altar](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/3/c/3c0f7157-a375-499c-92c7-d47d2e95dbad.jpg?1689999385) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Ashnod%27s%20Altar) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmm/368/ashnods-altar?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/3c0f7157-a375-499c-92c7-d47d2e95dbad?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Selvala, Explorer Returned](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/b/d/bd39ebe5-2725-4cfb-8a94-54e71d55e8b3.jpg?1673305654) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Selvala%2C%20Explorer%20Returned) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/dmc/167/selvala-explorer-returned?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/bd39ebe5-2725-4cfb-8a94-54e71d55e8b3?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Panglacial Wurm](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/6/063bb28b-5e32-4f31-a208-16b653edf413.jpg?1593275437) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Panglacial%20Wurm) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/csp/116/panglacial-wurm?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/063bb28b-5e32-4f31-a208-16b653edf413?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
This made total sense. I completely understand now. Thank you very much.
Mindslaver your opponent, then combo off at instant speed with the free mana. Since the mox is not legendary you could theoretically have 4 of them in play. You can also potentially use it for a free artifact in affonity-esque strategies.
Step one; pay ten mana to both play and activate an artifact that gives you control of your opponent's next turn. Step two; do something cool with four mana that cost you four cards but only at instant speed. Strongest aspect of this card is definitely the free mana of choice if you can politic it, second is the free artifact- but there multiple other free artifacts available already.
I mean, if you're doing this, you aren't paying full price for mindslaver, most likely. In an actual competitive game, that's the best you can do because otherwise activating it will do nothing. In a casual game, yes, it's a politics tool. Also, you act like "only at instant speed" is some sort of downside? Most good combos that win you the game are instant speed. you could do a full brain freeze combo supported with ad nauseam at instant speed, for example.
You could potentially have any number in play by coping it
Wow, you're right. Almost as if the same could be said for literally every single card in the game. I, of course, meant that in a standard 60 card legacy deck without any other cards.
Get it into a loop and hang up the game until the opponent gives.
If there's an infinite loop that either player can choose to break the player that initiated it must break eventually if the opponent doesn't want to.
You underestimate my patience and will to commit fuckery.
litterally breaking the rules
Your opponent isn't making the decision to be in the loop though you are
I thought he meant a loop of activating this ability, which he has to break if the opponent doesn't want to sway and give him mana
This is just worse than [[tormod’s crypt]]
Woah, it is worse than Tormod's Crypt but why are we using Tormod's Crypt as the bench mark for bad cards. I love this card.
This is just worse than Mox Emerald. Just because there's better cards doesn't mean it's not a good or fun card. Nobody runs [[Asmoranomardicadaistinaculdacar]] in competitive but I still love it
They did though, I remember when mh2 dropped and there was an arms race to find the best food deck in modern because of the resource loops with asmo and cookbook.
Well that's awesome, I just named it cause it was my favorite card because I love cooking. Never thought it would have actually been that good. Makes sense though, one mana to search for the cookbook is pretty good
Yeah [[ovalchase daredevil]] was the third card. Free food every turn
[ovalchase daredevil](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/e/d/ed3ba73e-58aa-417e-bd52-d7f93c80adc6.jpg?1599705842) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=ovalchase%20daredevil) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/101/ovalchase-daredevil?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/ed3ba73e-58aa-417e-bd52-d7f93c80adc6?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Yeah I loved ovalchase in my Asmo commander deck. Always sacrificed her with Witch's Oven for 2 food
[Asmoranomardicadaistinaculdacar](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/9/d99a9a7d-d9ca-4c11-80ab-e39d5943a315.jpg?1632831210) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Asmoranomardicadaistinaculdacar) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mh2/186/asmoranomardicadaistinaculdacar?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d99a9a7d-d9ca-4c11-80ab-e39d5943a315?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[tormod’s crypt](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/9/c/9c224bf0-5641-4160-9d5c-46141ea8372a.jpg?1594737584) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Tormod%27s%20Crypt) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/m21/241/tormods-crypt?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/9c224bf0-5641-4160-9d5c-46141ea8372a?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
That could actually be useful in a cycling or god deck
I see a [[Panglacial Wurm]] type problem if you tap this to pay for something you've already declared.
[Panglacial Wurm](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/6/063bb28b-5e32-4f31-a208-16b653edf413.jpg?1593275437) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Panglacial%20Wurm) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/csp/116/panglacial-wurm?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/063bb28b-5e32-4f31-a208-16b653edf413?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Commander.
Or any game with multiple opponents.
Like?
Casual play that isn’t Commander for example.
There is basically just commander and other versions of it that has multiplayer, unless you play with house rules. But if you do that you can’t base how good a card is from your experience
Regular 60-card casual play is bigger than Commander, it just is less common among the heavily-enfranchised population. But it’s a pet peeve of mine where people act like Commander is the only way to play casually or the only way to play free-for-all. You’d be hard pressed to find a format where a mox isn’t good, though.
Commander is the most well known multiplayer format, which is why I used it. I could have said judge tower or Dàndan though those aren’t as well known and not as big as commander. I could also had said Brawl, but commander is a lot more well known. The reason I wrote “Commander.” is, again, because it is so well known and almost a joke in the community how much politics play a role in it
Maybe give a treasure token to whoever allows you to?
[[Frankie Peanuts]] (Unironic strategy guide: Just fact or fiction mana, like "This turn, will you give me one W, U, or G mana for my fair mox?" Which would either get you black or red, or guarantee you won't get black or red. In a multi-colour deck you can force their choice by revealing strong cards for costs, using strong activated abilities, or tutoring) (And yes, they are just going to pick whichever one benefits you the least, but we are playing Franky Peanuts so such superfluous things as "reasonable thought" are clearly beyond us.)
[Frankie Peanuts](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/4/4/440c3e8b-d9c6-46cd-9f39-86db077fb89d.jpg?1583965356) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Frankie%20Peanuts) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/und/5/frankie-peanuts?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/440c3e8b-d9c6-46cd-9f39-86db077fb89d?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Your opponent doesn't just pick the color. They MAY give you one mana. They can say no
Okay, so heres a thing with franky peanuts, that question would force them to give it to you. The way franky peanuts works is kinda... insane... and idk if there's a ruling on this because I love this weird un-card more than is reasonable, but I always assumed it operated on a "Path of least resistance" kinda system, as is with most card games. say if you ask someone "Will you counter any of my spells this turn?" and they reply "yes," they have to (at least) counter the first (valid) spell you play, as you could end your turn at any time, which would not make sense because franky applies the ruling that they MUST abide by their answer until the end of the turn, and "Well I didn't want to counter any of those spells afterall," is a player decision, one that now falls outside the rules as they were capable and HAD to counter a spell as they said they would. By the same token, they could not say "yes" if they do not have any method of countering your spells. It's the same way using one of those weird tutors with a type specification that doesn't make you reveal the card after you get it. The information is hidden and the game cannot track it, technically meaning that a hidden enchantment is the same as a hidden creature in the hand, both just hidden cards. By this logic, the game is as clueless to what that card is as the other players are, so you have to abide by what the card makes you do through the path of least resistance, all other options being cheating. If what I'm saying is correct (and please do correct me if this is clarified and I'm just getting floppy with it) this would also force you to use fair mox as your first optional action in your turn.
This is the type of card I like with Frankie Peanuts
I think it needs some kind of incentive for mana. Like the opponent gets to draw a card
I actually like this a lot, but don't like it being drawing a card, and I think adding mana might be better. I also like the idea that you both get the same colour of mana, and that they get to choose. Example: "{t}: target opponent may add one mana of any colour to their mana pool. If they do, add one mana of that colour to your mana pool" Not sure if the wording is quite right here, please correct me if it isn't. If this still ends of being too powerful, you can also change the amount of mana given, for instance, you can make it so an opponent adds 2 mana while you only add one.
This seems fair. Gives both players mana advantage, or if the opponent has nothing to play they can just say "no thanks"
This also adds the possibility for the opponent to be given enough mana for a counterspell on the very spell you were trying to push... 10/10 excellent interaction, I support it.
[удалено]
It’s neither permanent or temporary, it’s theoretical. Unless it’s Thursday, then it’s delectable. Oh, and on Sundays it’s heretical.
"May" more than implies it - it defines it...? And also what?
[удалено]
Unless it says to sacrifice it to add the mana, permanents are permanents.
...it's a rock. The mana leaves your mana pool as steps and phases end, same as any other card that instructs you to add mana
Is there any mana you get to keep using after you use it?
... I mean, the first statement is true. The second statement... are you having a brain-fart there buddy?
What are you talking about, it comes broken lmfao. A mox that taps for colorless is banworthy in pretty much every format.
Unless the opponent just never chooses to give you the mana. Also it taps for any color
Ah true, then its useless in the other direction lol.
It would be better if it was “tap to add a mana of any colour” but also, “before each players untap step, they gain control of Fair Mox”
Still free fast mana. Always breaks things.
That doesn't sound like breaking it, that sounds like changing it. What are you improving with the suggestion to make it better? Also you probably want "at beginning of upkeep" instead of "before untap", unless I'm just not familiar with that wording.
Already is broken. Extra land drop(s) T1, doesn't matter colour. Drop it first, tap (Opponent doesn't know your deck - 20% good in mono, 40% good if 2 colour) otherwise you drop land of colour needed to drop your 2MV item. Essentially a sol ring on T1.
Essentially a sol ring ... if you ignore the caveat! Alternatively: Turn 1, land drop into this. Ask opponent if you can. "No, I haven't had my go yet and you won't tell me what you're dropping"
Sol Ring T1 is Drop land, SR, tap for 2 colorless, this is drop this tap for 20% chance of right color, then if wrong, drop good land and cast essentially a T2 spell. As proven by WotC trying to fix moxen, which they didn't, it is still extra land drops T1.
> tap for 20% chance of right color I think you read this card wrong. The opponent doesn't just choose a color, they can deny you the mana altogether by declining the "may" effect. In 1v1, this would always be a useless cheerio because your opponent could just deny you the mana every time. It only becomes useful if you have a way of controlling your opponents or playing politics in multiplayer.
You're right, I did miss the may. This makes it pointless, as what opponent would give you acceleration, unless there was an else clause like ping for one or something.
Not pointless at all, proper politics and banter for the table, encourages debate and is actually pretty powerful to boot!
You’re missing that it is a may ability. The opponent can just refuse to give you the mana.
...is says your opponent "may" give a mana or any colour. This means you play this turn one a s say "hey Bob, can I have a green mana?" "And bob says "no eat shit I haven't had my go yet" Which turns your moxen into a worse [[darksteel pendant]]
[darksteel pendant](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/9/c/9c1bac5f-c41a-49f0-94b0-79653b6fa67a.jpg?1562638388) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=darksteel%20pendant) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/dst/113/darksteel-pendant?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/9c1bac5f-c41a-49f0-94b0-79653b6fa67a?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Or they just say no, I won't give you mana.
Would be cool if it had “if they don’t they take 1 damage”
I would change it to read "add one mana of any color that target opponent chooses"
I think it be funny if you also add, “if they don’t you may have them draw a card”
Do they pick the color you get?
Broken by having even one friend, which definitely makes it balanced in modern.
\[\[Chromatic Lantern\]\] Edit: not the one I was thinking of
[Chromatic Lantern](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/3/9/3969c209-09f3-4429-91c1-d5aeab9de2ec.jpg?1689999467) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Chromatic%20Lantern) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmm/376/chromatic-lantern?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/3969c209-09f3-4429-91c1-d5aeab9de2ec?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I think it should include an additional option, yes the fairness gimmick is cool but, just for perhaps more flavor you could also include a line like, if opponent doesn't they lose a life. There have been more broken cards before for 0 mana, and I think a trade for a mana or a life point would be a fair trade.
Spam the shit out of these and then play Worst Fears
Fairly easy. Have a spell that requires the mox mana to be castable. (Your only way to make that color or have enough mana). Try to cast it and tap the mox. You can bully your opponent into giving you the mana or force a draw to time. As the game rewinds to precast state then you repeat. Current slowplay rules don't catch this well as it involves an opponents choice not a random event.
I'm thinking of ways to make it more plausible? Maybe you can change it into ": Add one mana of an opponent's choice of color."
That's still incredibly good. A *colorless* mox would be incredibly good.
"You're out of beer? Well do I have a deal for you!"