Dies to Removal

That's a pretty ignorant argument, but I think even you know that it's a pretty weak one. Straw man points don't last very long in FoS. After all, straw burns quickly.

I fail to see how I'm making such an argument. I'm not trying to say that we should love it because if we hated all new cards, we'd never use any. I'm merely pointing out the fact that people tend to dislike new planeswalkers at first.[
/quote]

A straw man or straw person, also known in the UK as an Aunt Sally,[1][2] is a type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[3] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and to refute it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[3][4] This technique has been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly in arguments about highly charged, emotional issues.

By comparing it to how people felt about Domri Rade, you're inadvertently trying to lump everyone who dislikes this new planeswalker with "Well everyone hates new tech, look at this other card people hated!" It's a very weak stance.

Card evaluation is based on a lot of factors and is very subjective, but
if we're going to debate I'd rather do it properly.

I refuse to debate with a Disney prince.

How's that for a fallacy?

What about this?

[deck]
Creatures (29)
4 Experiment One
4 Young Wolf
4 Strangleroot Geist
4 Flinthoof Boar
3 Borderland Ranger
3 Pyreheart Wolf
3 Hound of Griselbrand
4 Deadbridge Goliath

Spells (7)
4 Searing Spear
3 Mizzium Mortars

Lands (24)
3 Kessig Wolf Run
4 Stomping Ground
4 Rootbound Crag
3 Mountain
10 Forest
[/deck]

What about this?

[deck]
Creatures (29)
4 Experiment One
4 Young Wolf
4 Strangleroot Geist
4 Flinthoof Boar
3 Borderland Ranger
3 Pyreheart Wolf
3 Hound of Griselbrand
4 Deadbridge Goliath

Spells (7)
4 Searing Spear
3 Mizzium Mortars

Lands (24)
3 Kessig Wolf Run
4 Stomping Ground
4 Rootbound Crag
3 Mountain
10 Forest
[/deck]

I like that. I hadn't thought of Deadbridge Goliath when I was thinking up the undying theme. I guess Scavenge is a form of it, but even without he's already a 5/5 for 4, similar to your other inclusion of Flinthoof Boar.[/
quote]

Yeah, I'm not super happy about Flinthoof Boar since we have only 7 Mountains, but Borderland Ranger makes that less egregious. I really want him to enter the battlefield as a 3/3 though to evolve Experiment One following a turn two creature. Granted, undying trigger from Geist will evolve him also, but that's clunky.

On the subject of Ral: Does anyone else think that he's just a less-good version of Ajani Vengeant?

I'm having a hard time evaluating him due to the potency of the lightning bolt effect and the "so what" of the tap/untap effect. Moreover, I'm not sure how I feel about the ultimate--super dicey effects aren't my favorite.

On the subject of Ral: Does anyone else think that he's just a less-good version of Ajani Vengeant?

I'm having a hard time evaluating him due to the potency of the lightning bolt effect and the "so what" of the tap/untap effect. Moreover, I'm not sure how I feel about the ultimate--super dicey effects aren't my favorite.

That's actually the first thing I thought of when I saw him.

That's a pretty ignorant argument, but I think even you know that it's a pretty weak one. Straw man points don't last very long in FoS. After all, straw burns quickly.

I fail to see how I'm making such an argument. I'm not trying
to say that we should love it because if we hated all new cards, we'd never use any. I'm merely pointing out the fact that people tend to dislike new planeswalkers at first.

A straw man or straw person, also known in the UK as an Aunt Sally,[1][2] is a type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[3] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and to refute it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[3][4] This technique has been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly in arguments about highly charged, emotional issues.

By comparing it to how people felt about Domri Rade, you're inadvertently trying to lump everyone who dislikes this new planeswalker with "
Well everyone hates new tech, look at this other card people hated!" It's a very weak stance.

Card evaluation is based on a lot of factors and is very subjective, but if we're going to debate I'd rather do it properly.

I refuse to debate with a Disney prince.

How's that for a fallacy?

Says the artist formerly known as Gweivyth...

I still vote point: Kaze.

You can shorten it to Gway, but only after putting the work in to figuring out how to pronounce it. It's like the word Myrddin: easy to pronounce, but it looks gross.

@The Artist Now Known as Gway: That makes sense.

I keep forgetting I'm the only one here with an English degree. My name, at least to me, seems ridiculously easy after taking four years of Latin.

I keep forgetting I'm the only one here with an English degree. My name, at least to me, seems ridiculously easy after taking four years of Latin.

There's more PMs where he pretends like he knew "because of my IP," but as stated previous, I connected via proxy, so he's full of it. I don't have the heart to tell him, though, so I'm just letting him think he's got me.

I'm sure he'll read about it here.

Regarding Ral Zarek, if his +1 kept whatever tapped for a turn I think I'd love him, as is - I'm not really sure.

Actually busy at work on a Monday, this is some bs

It may be hard to pronounce, but when you google it, you get me, my account here, my account on MGTS, my League of Legends stuffs. Et cetera. I like having a name nobody else uses.

And now I feel like an idiot for writing out an incorrect pronunciation of Kaze's name, because I apparently have never actually read it.

Meh. To each, their own, I suppose. It seems like any time a new walker is spoiled the general consensus is "Trash mythic, no play." Then someone cracks in at a pre-release and steamrolls everyone else with it. All of a sudden it's 20 dollars.

Meh. To each, their own, I suppose. It seems like any time a new walker is spoiled the general consensus is "Trash mythic, no play." Then someone cracks in at a pre-release and steamrolls everyone else with it. All of a sudden it's 20 dollars.

That was the prediction at my LGS about Gideon when I was mourning him after being spoiled...I so BADLY want(ed) to break him. Everyone else was going on about how awesome he was. One father/son combo that I know pretty well (actually, it's a dad, and his two sons, and one daughter that all play there) both cracked one, and
then proceeded to get facerolled, because they were too focused on making him their wincon.

Now there's a guy who's building an entire deck around him, and again...he just gets facerolled. He's a good player too, but he just can't see that the meta is wrong for him right now. And people are astounded that he's plummeting in price...

I think what it is is that walkers are cool...people like them and want to play them. I can feel that. I LOVE playing walkers. But now I've been back for nearly a full block, and gotten the hang of them. When I came back, they were a new card type, and it was neat and exciting, and I wanted to make them work in EVERY deck. Doesn't work that way.

My walker evaluation focuses mostly on the first two abilities...as has been drilled into me, and I've really liked the test of "First turn, does it protect itself, or draw you cards/provide virtual card advantage?" If it passes that test...then I look at it's ultimate. Ral KINDA passes the first test. His
abilities aren't stellar, if you ask me...but they aren't bad either. His ultimate is goofy as hell though. I'm the kind of player that wants to MINIMIZE variance. I think the coin flip = extra turns thing is fun...but not something I'd ever want to rely on.

I'm thinking he'll be a casual play walker for me, unless I find a deck that he's absolutely brilliant in.

I'm more of an anonymous forum goer myself. this is my 5th forum name in 5 forums!

Dane: I feel that Ral looks too powerful to not find a home. As said before, a Staggershock-ish Bolt effect plus that tap effect looks too good to not be playable. I just want to hit the jackpot on the ultimate though!!! 5 turns? Yes please!

But, the same thing was said about [card]Aurelia's Fury[/card], and that never found a home.

I'm more of an anonymous forum goer myself. this is my 5th forum name in 5 forums!

Dane: I feel that Ral looks too powerful to not find a home. As said before, a Staggershock-ish Bolt effect plus that tap effect looks too good to not be playable. I just want to hit the jackpot on the ultimate though!!! 5 turns? Yes please!

But, the same thing was said about [card]Aurelia's Fury[/card], and that never found a home.

Aurelia's Fury was a trap card from the start. Aggro can't hold back mana to cast a spell, and aggro is where that card wants to be.

Always hated it.

I'm more of an anonymous forum goer myself. this is my 5th forum name in 5 forums!

Dane: I feel that Ral looks too powerful to not find a home. As said before, a Staggershock-ish Bolt effect plus that tap effect looks too good to not be playable. I just want to hit the jackpot on the ultimate though!!! 5 turns?
Yes please!

But, the same thing was said about [card]Aurelia's Fury[/card], and that never found a home.

Aurelia's Fury was a trap card from the start. Aggro can't hold back mana to cast a spell, and aggro is where that card wants to be.

Always hated it.

It's a win condition in midrange. I played it in Modern flash and it was about as good as you expect it to be when you're playing cards like Vendillion Clique, Restoration Angel, and Snapcaster Mage. Which is to say it just killed my opponent out of nowhere when they thought they had the board pretty stable.