Eldritch Moon Spoiler Thread
Spoilers, Rumors, and Speculation forum
Posted on June 20, 2016, 11:36 a.m. by DarkLaw
I don't think there is one yet, at least not one posted recently. If there is, feel free to correct me.
I have to agree with CChaos. If you're wanting that kind of card to hit players, you're trying to break the game.
And typically people who break games are the ones who ruin it for everybody else.
July 6, 2016 11:22 a.m.
That seems really silly to have a spoiler box for a discussion in this thread I recommend just making a lore thread to talk about it
July 6, 2016 11:23 a.m.
Hi_diddly_ho_neighbor says... #5
Wowza, Dark Salvation is a 1 drop removal for most creatures in zombie tribal. That is starting to look like a pretty powerful deck.
July 6, 2016 11:26 a.m.
TheAlexGnan - I imagine it would function similarly to Windbrisk Heights, ignoring sorcery speed limitations.
July 6, 2016 11:42 a.m.
PistonGolem says... #7
Phaetion the only thing that would suck more in the story is if...
Read Story First, speculation Show
July 6, 2016 11:44 a.m.
@PistonGolem, I would be very surprised if that happened. There's already enough strife on Kaladesh with Chandra's back story that adding that in would be a pretty big let down.
Kaladesh will probably be very closely tied to the events in Chandra's new origin story. Especially the fact that Pia Nalaar (her mom), was never seen dead. Chandra saw her father die and the village burn so she assumed that her mom was dead as well. That's the direction I see Kaladesh going, but who knows. Maybe they'll just ignore that part and Chandra just wants to play anarchist lol
July 6, 2016 11:56 a.m.
'Fortune's Favor' looks so good and yet so bad.
It's card advantage. - Check
It's instant speed. - Check
It's your choice of which pile you get. - Check
It's 4CMC - The usual cost for this type of effect
It does not disclose all the information you need.
It discloses the information to your opponent, and give them opportunity.
I think it can see play... but wow... it will be awkward to use.
July 6, 2016 12:28 p.m.
new tamiyo, eldrich evolution, warf infiltraitor, and now spell queller. I'm going to have to make some room in my Derevi, Empyrial Tactician EDH deck. This is a great block for Bant all of the sudden.
July 6, 2016 12:33 p.m.
Picture some of the possible scenarios with the card. Either:
- Either both piles have two cards
- Or one has three
I'm assuming your opponent won't let you have all four of course. If it's 2/2 then judge the visible 2 against your current hand and board state for whether the risk of trading down offsets possible unnecessary redundancy (e.g. excess land, no removal when you need, etc.).
If it's 3/1 the three are almost always your best option unless the one is facing up and a game winner on its own. You can invent situations where this isn't true - Emrakul vs. 3 lands for example - but a visible Emmy would count as game winning, and 3 visible lands are likely worth passing up if you're good on mana.
July 6, 2016 12:42 p.m.
Reading the flavor for Dark Salvation I've come to realize that only on Innistrad can an army of undead be a good thing.
July 6, 2016 12:55 p.m.
shinobigarth says... #14
"if we can't save the world, you can make damn sure we'll avenge it" Sorin and the vampires have become the Avengers, or the Vampvengers if you will.
so we have the Vampvengers and the Jacetice League.
July 6, 2016 12:59 p.m.
averagenovice74 says... #15
CanadianShinobi yeah it just another version of Rolling Thunder that's cost better but without the burn to the player. If they did this at instant speed the card would be so much better, maybe even busted. sigh they could just reprint Lightning Strike.... still not the worst mythic in my opinion on the list.
EDIT: It's really more closer to Bonfire of the Damned but with discard.
July 6, 2016 1:17 p.m. Edited.
the only spoilers I am waiting for is Ludevic,and a Hal and Alena card. Like cool we got a legendary spider and all, but like I feel like these three are so much more important to the story!
the only thing I appreciate about the spider is it has a nostalgic call back of spider spawning
July 6, 2016 1:20 p.m.
'Spell Queller' + Eldrazi Displacer = opponent can't cast and spells CMC 4 or less.
AND you can repeatedly cast any 4CMC or less spell... which is great for things with "When you cast..."
Vile Redeemer if 5+ creatures dies this turn for unlimited tokens.
Bearer of Silence for repeated forced sac.
Eldrazi Obligator to repeatedly take control of creatures.
July 6, 2016 1:20 p.m.
@Patrique: I'm a bit confused as to how Hal and Alena are important to the story. They got one section of story space. I agree with Ludevic, but it would just be weird if Hal and Alena got a card, they have such a small, and frankly unessential part of the overarching plot.
July 6, 2016 1:24 p.m.
Fortunes Favor seems pretty good in standard. I wish it were five cards, but still... Usually, you judge the redundancy of the cards in the visible pile. If there isn't a realistic chance that you need them then I would go for pile 2. There are many other factors, though. Maybe you already looked at all of those cards?
I hate Spell Quashed because Wizards didn't have the balls to print a counterspell creature, just a spell supressing creature. Incidentally, if you exile something like Read the Bones, put them down to 2 and kill it, then your opponent won't have to cast it because it's a may effect. I've already seen someone misunderstand that.
Another thing: Wizards had not the balls to in some way edit Nahiri's Wrath so it could hit players, perhaps for around 1/3 or 1/4 of the damage and costing 
more.
Regarding the creature which I nickname "Devil Trigger", I actually think that it's most likely to see play as a top-end spell in some burn variants. Problem is that it costs, like, 
too much.
July 6, 2016 1:39 p.m.
GoldGhost012 says... #20
Wabbbit: So did The Gitrog Monster, and it got a card. Hal and Alena have actually had more story space than TGM, since they had (I think) the very first SOI story and a not-small part in Emrakul Rises.
July 6, 2016 1:39 p.m.
Wabbit, they aren't a big part of the story but they represent the people of Innistrad more than any other person imo. They are two humans , with no magic fighting for their lives. They don't have any control, they can't save the plane. It's all they can do to hold on to each other and that tells a way better story than the other parts. They're the most down to Earth, and all they're trying to do is survive. I hope they get a card because really without them, Innistrad is just horrors. Horror is good but you need the people or its just monsters scaring monsters which is meh. They give the story depth.
July 6, 2016 1:47 p.m.
@GoldGhost012: True, you've got me there. I only recall the one (in my opinion) small part in Emrakul Rises. But if they were in more then just that scene then it makes more sense.
July 6, 2016 1:51 p.m.
@Phaetion: Hm I haven't noticed that. Could you point me to those cards? I'd be interested to see them.
July 6, 2016 1:53 p.m. Edited.
July 6, 2016 2:05 p.m.
July 6, 2016 2:06 p.m. Edited.
Actually... I think it's not that ideal now Rayenous.
Activate Eldrazi Displacer's ability to flicker [Spell Queller].
He leaves and ETBs in the same resolution.
His leave ability and his ETB ability are both now awaiting to be ordered onto the stack.
No matter which way you order them, you can't cast and re-exile the spell because his leave ability will be a check of "Do you want to cast this spell?" If you say yes then it will be immediately put on top of the stack, regardless of where the ETB trigger for Queller is.
So you can't manipulate the stack quite that easily.
Unfortunately. real close.
July 6, 2016 2:18 p.m. Edited.
Hi_diddly_ho_neighbor says... #31
I may be missing something, but how does the Spell Queller + Eldrazi Displacer combo stop your opponent from casting 4cmc or less spells for the rest of the game? Can't they just cast the originally exiled spell when you flicker Spell Queller again since its a 'leave the battlefield' trigger? And repeatedly flickering it would just cause whatever else was exiled by it to be cast-able again.
July 6, 2016 2:24 p.m.
In a proper control setup you could stall out spells you don't like until you have counterspells.
Once you have a counterspell (say Horribly Awry) you could flicker Queller and hit a different spell you don't like. Then use your counterspells to deal with the spell that is now on the stack that you didn't like originally. It's basically letting you counter two things at once at that point. Very tempo/control-ish.
Could be useful when abused properly.
It's vaguely similar to when I would use Jace, the Living Guildpact to simply bounce away creatures I didn't like that I didn't have removal for but did have counterspells for, such as Siege Rhino.
July 6, 2016 2:28 p.m.
No, it goes like this (6 mana required.. should have stated that in first post):
- You have Queller and Eldrazi Displacer on the battlefield.
- Opponent casts Languish
- You Flicker Queller
- Both ETB(1) and LTB(0) are added on the stack in the order you wish.
- You choose to have the LTB(0) resolve before the ETB(1) (ETB(1) targets Languish).
- LTB(0) does nothing because nothing has been exiled yet.
- You Flicker Queller, again, before ETB(1) resolves
- Both ETB(2) and LTB(1) are added on the stack in the order you wish.
- You choose to have the LTB(1) resolve before the ETB(2) (ETB(2) targets nothing)
- LTB(1) does nothing because nothing has been exiled yet
- ETB(2) resolves exiling nothing.
- ETB(1) resolves exiling Languish permanently...
Since LTB(1) has already resolved, it will never resolve again. - If Queller leaves play again, a new LTB(2) will try to return the 'nothing' that was exiled by ETB(2).
July 6, 2016 2:43 p.m.
PistonGolem says... #34
Spoiled a Noose Snake thing. Anyone find it funny that once Wizards makes history by printing the first Red Bear, they print a better Green Bear right after. Really shows what standard is all about... Cough GREEN N' WHITE Cough.
July 6, 2016 2:46 p.m.
Well, Wizards literally just tied the Noose around Falkenrath Reaver.
July 6, 2016 2:50 p.m.
Opponent casts Languish. You cast Queller in response, exiling Languish for now. Two turns later you've got a Displacer in play and opponent just cast Grasp of Darkness targeting the Queller. Here's what happens:
Grasp on stack. You activate Displacer, targeting Queller. Displacer ability resolves.
Grasp on bottom of the stack, then Queller LTB, and finally Queller ETB. Queller ETB could target Grasp but since Grasp is already going to be countered (target is gone), this would be self-defeating. So you let the ETB go. Opponent can then use LTB trigger to cast Languish. Finally, Grasp counters itself because target is missing due to the Displacer's blink.
In short, this is a nonbo, and not a combo. Only viable if the spell put on the stack that you respond to with Displacer is "worse" than what Queller is already hiding.
The remaining question I have is how long your opponent can wait before choosing to cast the spell "revealed" by Queller LTB. Does "may" mean when the LTB resolves else it's sent to graveyard? I believe so.
July 6, 2016 2:51 p.m.
Ravenous, what makes you think you can order LTB(0) and ETB(1) in either order you wish? They don't happen at the same time. Check Displacer's wording again.
July 6, 2016 2:54 p.m.
BOMB!
Noose Constrictor (1)(G)
Creature-Snake 2/2
Reach
Discard a card: +1/+1 until end of turn
Best limited pick, nice standard aggro. Turn 3 discard your hand, win the game.
July 6, 2016 2:55 p.m.
Rules essay incoming.
When it enters the battlefield, exile your opponent's spell. Then, if they cast another, flicker it and put the ETB trigger on the stack below the LTB trigger. Let the LTB trigger resolve, then flicker it again before the ETB trigger resolves. Put the ETB 2 below the LTB 2. Exile the spell you exiled the first time with the ETB trigger you get the second time you flicker it and you can exile the other spell permanently (because the leave the battlefield trigger has already resolved).
The problem is, it requires 
, and is fairly specific with what you can do and when.
If anyone's wondering, it needs to be this drawn-out. The first spell they cast can't be exiled permanently because the trigger to exile the spell will always be above others whose LTB triggers already resolved, meaning that it will still let them cast the spell if it dies. You need two spells to target and a flicker effect if you want to exile one permanently.
Or, at least, that's how I think it works. If I'm wrong, please tell me. Someone's probably already ninja'd me anyway.
July 6, 2016 2:56 p.m.
Omeros - The ETB and LTB both wait to be put on the stack until after the Displacer's ability has finished resolving. - At that point there are 2 things to be put on the stack, both controlled by you, so you get to choose the order to put them on the stack...
Besides, it wouldn't matter which order they go on the stack. The LTB(0) can resolve whenever... it's from an earlier ETB(0) that had nothing exiled to it.
The only LTB that could possibly allow your opponent to recast Languish is the LTB(1), as it is the LTB from the same object as the ETB(1). So long as the LTB(1) resolves before the ETB(1), the spell exiled from ETB(1) will never be re-castable.
July 6, 2016 3:01 p.m.
Oh... I was missing something...
Since Quellers ETB is not a 'may' ability flickering with Eldrazi Displacer, forces you to exile the spell with the ETB(2)... thus negating the ETB(1), and the spell will be able to be re-cast later when/(if) LTB(2) eventually triggers.
The only way around this is to have another spell to add to the stack... which then gets exiled by ETB(2).
K. Little harder to keep the spell exiled than I thought.
July 6, 2016 3:07 p.m.
Ah, I was forgetting that even though the triggers are temporarily ordered you control both and no one can respond until both are on the stack. In these situations the rules do allow you to order LTB and ETB however you want, so you're right.
July 6, 2016 3:15 p.m.
I suppose it's relevant for the thread, even if there's another whole thread devoted to it. But I'll spoiler tag it for people who don't want to read it.
My rant about the latest story Show
Also, I myself was surprised when I red that Spell Quasher was not a may. They tend to like that now, and I agree with the sentiment. I suppose it makes it much less abusable.
July 6, 2016 3:25 p.m.
Hi_diddly_ho_neighbor says... #44
Hmmm seems like an interesting but convoluted combo...on a side note Wild Mongrel reprint wooooo!
July 6, 2016 3:26 p.m.
So I'm a little confused, because I initially interpreted Spell Queller a different way.
It enters exiles card 1 (c1). You blink it, either c1 gets cast or you exile c2, you pick the order I'm following it up to there. Here's where I get hung up, say it blinks and I exile c2, does c1 fizzle now because it just doesn't exist anymore or does c2 and c1 get exiled? If Quellers keeps track of every cad it exiles then suddenly you're casting c1 and c2...
So Option 1-2:
ETB - Hit C1Blink - Hit with ETB C2, LTB C1 fizzles because it doesn't remember it or it got replaced or whatever the verbage is.
C2 then is cast anyways? effectively doing nothing but exiling C1
C2 just sit there and waits for the next blink?
Option 3:
ETB - Hit C1Blink - ETB Hit C2, LTB C1 and C2 are both cast because both were exiled by it.
Thats a very important distinction that I am having trouble making as it changes how you would use the card drastically.
July 6, 2016 3:47 p.m.
Rayenous - Yeah I was about to call you out for the no may on ETB till I got to the bottom.
That's still a lot of work. I didn't consider reflickering Queller mid process.
You could certainly just make a scrub feel bad with your knowledge from your Honors Stack Mechanics class and have them concede out of pure confusion. (just kidding. don't be a scumbag)
Dat stack tho
July 6, 2016 4:30 p.m. Edited.
Zaueski - If I'm following your question right:
The first card you exiled would remain in exile until the trigger to choose to cast it from exile is resolved. It wouldn't cease to exist. Only tokens cease to exist. A card can't go anywhere past the exile zone. That's as far out as you get. So when Queller exiles a card its going to stay there until it's tricked into staying in exile (Like Rayenous is trying to do) or Queller's LTB trigger resolves and the controller decides whether or not to cast it from exile without paying it's mana cost. If they do it is moved from Exile to the Stack.
So essentially your third option (I think - I'm still kind of shooting in the dark at understanding you).
July 6, 2016 4:37 p.m.
So then the controllers of Spells 1 & 2 get to cast them for blinking costs over and over?
Also side note: AWOL is a card lol
July 6, 2016 4:51 p.m.
Zaueski Having trouble understanding your block of abbreviations, so I'll break it down more simply where you follow up to. I'm going to order it in first-to-resolve to last-to-resolve.
As you said, opp. casts their second spell (S2). You blink in response, and order the stack like this:
LTB, bringing back S1
ETB, targeting S2 (the only legal target)
S2
You let the LTB resolve. Now it looks like this.
S1
ETB, targeting S2
S2
Now, you flicker it again. The stack looks like this.
LTB, which SHOULD be returning S2
ETB, targeting S1 so as not to fizzle the next LTB trigger.
S1
ETB, targeting S2
S2
Now, you can let the LTB resolve. As the trigger trying to exile S2 is later in the stack, the spell won't have been exiled when LTB resolves, so it isn't cast. The stack will look like this:
ETB, targeting S1 (LTB unfulfilled)
S1
ETB, targeting S2 (LTB fulfilled)
S2
You let the first ETB resolve, temporarily exiling S1.
ETB, targeting S2 (LTB fulfilled)
S2
The LTB for this has already resolved, so S2 is exiled permanently.
Something important for everyone which I realised: The opponent chooses which spell gets exiled permanently. Consider this:
S2
Blinked, the stack becomes:
LTB
ETB, targeting S2
S2
They "may" cast it without paying the mana cost. They choose not to.
ETB, targeting S2 (unfulfilled LTB)
S2
It resolves. Note that the spell temporarily resolved in this case is S2 rather than S1.
Sorry for the hand-holding or boring message or whatever. But if you find it useful, that's good, I suppose.
CChaos says... #1
DemonDragonJ
If Nahiri's Wrath could target a players life it would not be decent, it would be broken. Then it would be banned for being a turn 3 or less one shot to a player's life by discarding Emrakul and any 7 mana card or more. Thats 20 damage right there for up to 2 targets as 2 cards would be discarded.
This would be a extremely powerful card in all formats if it could hit life points. As it is now it is decent.
July 6, 2016 11:20 a.m.