[SoK] Blue card drawer? CONFIRMED - Ideas Unbound

[Jentsu]

Originally Posted by Azerbaijan

Where is this extra card coming from? Your draw? You're going to draw that card whether you play this @EOT or not. The only (relevant) difference between your scenarios is the mana.

Presumably, if you are using this spell, you're doing so because you A) have a threshold fetish, or B) are playing a deck with lots of cheap, non-reactive spells. If you include it in a deck where you expect to draw a lot of cards with high mana costs, I readily acknowledge it's just a glorified Impulse effect and not a problem.

Isn't the notion of playing one of these @EOT, drawing into another, playing it too (or a Twincast) and having 4 extra cards to use a little hard to believe, especially in the absence of a name? I would love to see it; I just doubt they're going to push blue that much - having both this & Twincast in the same set.

If you are playing this on your turn and then have an empty hand, where do you think it's coming from? Your draw.

Also, if you play the spell, maybe you just like seeing more cards with the chance to use at least some of them.

[Azerbaijan]

Originally Posted by Jentsu

If you are playing this on your turn and then have an empty hand, where do you think it's coming from? Your draw.

SCENARIO A:
1) You have two cards.
2) @OEOT, play this. You have four cards.
3) Your turn - draw. You have five cards.

SCENARIO B:
1) You have two cards.
2) During your upkeep, play this. You have four cards.
3) Draw - You have five cards.

SCENARIO C:
1) You have two cards.
2) Your turn - draw your card. You have three cards.
3) Play this. You have five cards.

I do not see the extra card.

Also, if you play the spell, maybe you just like seeing more cards with the chance to use at least some of them.

Yes. That would be about like Impulse (except, of course, fewer cards, extras go to the 'yard, etc.) In a deck where this would be used for "filtering," it would not be overpowered - no dispute here. It's other deck types which I think R&D would be concerned about: those which are able to play the extra three cards.

[Jentsu]

Originally Posted by Azerbaijan

SCENARIO A:
1) You have two cards.
2) @OEOT, play this. You have four cards.
3) Your turn - draw. You have five cards.

SCENARIO B:
1) You have two cards.
2) During your upkeep, play this. You have four cards.
3) Draw - You have five cards.

SCENARIO C:
1) You have two cards.
2) Your turn - draw your card. You have three cards.
3) Play this. You have five cards.

I do not see the extra card.

Yes. That would be about like Impulse (except, of course, fewer cards, extras go to the 'yard, etc.) In a deck where this would be used for "filtering," it would not be overpowered - no dispute here. It's other deck types which I think R&D would be concerned about: those which are able to play the extra three cards.

...First, who the heck would play this at their own turn before their upkeep?

Second, that's not the situation. The situation assumes that after you play it, you have only the three cards (in other words, no cards other than that one, which you play). Here, I'll even just add in the "X" cards, x being the cards you had just before playing it.

A: Your turn, after draw.
Play the card (-1 card, +3 cards)
Results:

Spoiler:

X+2 cards, X mana. Oh, wow. How very not exciting.

B: @oeot
Play this card (-1 card, +3 cards)
Your turn, untap (+2 mana), then draw (+1 card)
Results:

Spoiler:

X+3 cards, X+2 mana.

C: (The ******** Option™)
Play this card (-1 card, +3 cards)
Draw step (+1 card)
Results:

Spoiler:

YOU HAVE BEEN SURPRISED AND KILLED BY A MANTICORE! IT QUICKLY SHREDS YOUR FLESH AND DEVOURS YOU!

You have X+3 cards, X mana

[Azerbaijan]

Originally Posted by Jentsu

...First, who the heck would play this at their own turn before their upkeep?

Probably no one. Just want to make sure there's no confusion about when these supposed "extra" cards are showing up.

Second, that's not the situation. The situation assumes that after you play it, you have only the three cards (in other words, no cards other than that one, which you play).

That's...that's a very limited situation.

At any rate, your argument as I see it essentially boils down to, "I'd rather have two less mana, see one less card and 'have to get rid of' one fewer card." This assumes that it would be difficult for you to play the "extra" card, in which case this card is simply not a good fit for your deck. It doesn't say anything about the merits of the card in a deck designed to use it well.

[Craigacp]

If only my Affinity could actually consistantly cast a UU. I'll take 3 cards i can easily play for 2 mana.

[Jentsu]

Originally Posted by Azerbaijan

Probably no one. Just want to make sure there's no confusion about when these supposed "extra" cards are showing up.

That's...that's a very limited situation.

At any rate, your argument as I see it essentially boils down to, "I'd rather have two less mana, see one less card and 'have to get rid of' one fewer card." This assumes that it would be difficult for you to play the "extra" card, in which case this card is simply not a good fit for your deck. It doesn't say anything about the merits of the card in a deck designed to use it well.

Where did I ever say I wanted less mana and see fewer cards? All along I've said that I'd prefer to play it @oeot, but that doesn't make it any easier to ditch all of the cards.

Also, not all good cards can be played for two or less, and especially in a control deck. Hinder costs 1uu, Meloku costs 4u, Vedalken Shackles costs 3. I didn't say it would be eight times more difficult. I just said it would be more difficult. You don't build a deck around an instant that draws three cards. You just don't. As such, unless you just so happen to be play a blue deck in which everything costs two or less (do those even exist?), there's not a garuntee of being able to play it.

Now, for my Final Words on this topic unless I am so trolled back:

I. Never. Said. I. Would. Rather. Not. Play. This. Card. At. The. End. Of. An. Opponent's. Turn.

I. Would. Much. Rather. Play. It. Then. Than. Any. Other. Time. Given. The. Vast. Majority. Of. Cases.

I. Was. Simply. Stating. The. Point. Of. Why. It. Was. Considered. Balanced. Enough. To. Not. Need. A. Clause. Restricting. The. Times. At. Which. This. Spell. Could. Be. Played.

I. Gave. Several. Examples. Based. On. What. You. And. I. Were. Saying. In. The. Previous. Sentences.

Every. Time. I. Changed. An. Example. I. Stated. It. At. Least. Twice.

I'm. Getting. Tired. Of. Writing. Like. This. So. I'll. Just. Stop. And. Assume. That. You. Have. Figured. Out. What. I. Have. Been. Saying. This. Whole. Time.

*sigh*

EDIT: Here's special emphasis to the situation that changed, as I don't think you're going to see it: The 0 cards in hand. That was the one I changed. Note it. See? I changed it up when you first didn't see it, and tried using the variable X instead to show you the broader range. The ones I stated after it assumed you had X cards before casting it. I just chose 0 before then to show you where the 1 extra card was coming from. Then I tried showing you with X. Even still, the math you did took the two situations that were the same. Most people whom are forced to play cards during their own turns don't play them before their draw. You would want to see what card you are getting already before plunging down in the event of having a better move for free vs. never getting to play that better move.

EDIT²: I'll stop posting here before the thread degenerates into Thread Deathdom. (Not the same as letting it die; not staying to explain.)

[Azerbaijan]

It certainly sounded like you'd rather play it on your turn...

Well, w/e. I really enjoyed our conversation

EDIT: So as not to completely kill the thread: My opinion was that Wizards would not print this and Twincast in the same set, all EOT considerations aside.

[rancored_elf]

I was thinking that this card is kind of like:

Name - UU
Instant
Draw 3.
(insert some drawback that in some decks can be worked around, depending on format)

If you build your deck to support this card, and play it properly, this card is Ancestral for UU. In T2, that's going to be really tough, and almost never happen. In older formats, it's much more likely to work out that way - and for that reason might be restricted if it gets crazy.

This Card in T2 - UU
Instant
Draw 3.
Discard your hand at end of turn.

This Card in T1.X - UU
Instant
Draw 3.
Discard 3 at end of turn.

This Card in T1.5 - UU
Instant
Draw 3.
Small drawback.

This Card in T1 - UU
Instant
Draw 3.

That's a dramatization of course, but my point is that it's only as broken as the format you play it in... possibly making it printable.

[MykeXero2]

Originally Posted by rancored_elf

I was thinking that this card is kind of like:
This Card in T1.X - UU
Instant
Draw 3.
Discard 3 at end of turn.

This Card in T1.5 - UU
Instant
Draw 3.
Small Drawback

This Card in T1 - UU
Instant
Draw 3.

I`d think of it more like this:

This Card in T1.X - UU
Instant
Draw 3 then If you are playing a Madness deck, Do things that make Affinty decks look slow.

This Card in T1.5 - UU
Instant
Dont Draw 3 cuse this card is banned.

This Card in T1 - UU
Instant
Win the game, cuse odds are, you are gonna draw what you need.

[Craigacp]

Originally Posted by rancored_elf

I was thinking that this card is kind of like:

Name - UU
Instant
Draw 3.
(insert some drawback that in some decks can be worked around, depending on format)

If you build your deck to support this card, and play it properly, this card is Ancestral for UU. In T2, that's going to be really tough, and almost never happen. In older formats, it's much more likely to work out that way - and for that reason might be restricted if it gets crazy.

This Card in T2 - UU
Instant
Draw 3.
Discard your hand at end of turn.

This Card in T1.X - UU
Instant
Draw 3.
Discard 3 at end of turn.

This Card in T1.5 - UU
Instant
Draw 3.
Small drawback.

This Card in T1 - UU
Instant
Draw 3.

That's a dramatization of course, but my point is that it's only as broken as the format you play it in... possibly making it printable.

Though in 1.X it may as well read U/G Madness sprays creatures everywhere, or those wurms and rootwallas suddenly take off. And in Affinity it reads UU play the next 3 artifacts from the top of your deck.

[Machius]

In every format you can build a deck to abuse this card, the no. of decks and how strong they are just increases with each format you go back. However only in the 2 older formats(T1/T1.5) can it be used as a more expensive version of ancestral recall, because only in those formats are there enough cheap powerful spells to go off with on the same turn you cast it.

Using it for it own merits is as good or better than an ancestral in certain decks, namely UG Madness where the discard element is as good as the draw element and the delayed discard just means that you can if you had an empty hand play any permanents which would otherwise be discarded(unlike careful study).

[Cyan]

This thread is just screaming 'Lock Me'. The same conversation has been going on for like 200 posts now.

[herohammer]

:dance2::cthulhu::evil3:Can someone confirm this or deny it please? Otherwise I think its lock time until someone gets some more real info.

[rancored_elf]

I can confirm this spell, and the name is Ideas Unbound, and the text is:

Draw three cards. Discard three cards at end of turn.

It's a Sorcery, though. But it's Arcane.

[kobold_army]

aaw, it was looking really good as an instant. not worth buying now.