Timeline for Are there times it's actually advantageous to wait to pay mana abilities until casting a spell?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 30, 2016 at 6:35 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackBoardGames/status/759276161398611968 | ||
| Jul 29, 2016 at 15:38 | comment | added | GendoIkari | A lot of relevant comments here: boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/13062/…. | |
| Jul 29, 2016 at 13:19 | comment | added | doppelgreener | I'm editing this question slightly to just ask about the general idea ("are there situations?"); we appear to be accidentally spawning answers of exactly the scenario Rainbolt is describing. A good answer here probably ought to cover a broad swathe or general principles, rather than list yet another one-off. | |
| Jul 29, 2016 at 13:18 | history | edited | doppelgreener | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
refocusing so this winds up less of a list of times
|
| Jul 29, 2016 at 13:18 | vote | accept | tsuma534 | ||
| Jul 29, 2016 at 13:18 | comment | added | doppelgreener | @tsuma534 Sure, it's worth keeping. MTG's a big game with lots of interesting interactions even long-term players haven't considered yet, and this one's highlighted some. | |
| Jul 29, 2016 at 13:17 | comment | added | Rainbolt | @tsuma534 Keep it. I am not looking forward to the flood of "Oh! I have an example that matters!" answers, but the question is totally fine. | |
| Jul 29, 2016 at 13:17 | answer | added | SocioMatt | timeline score: 10 | |
| Jul 29, 2016 at 13:15 | comment | added | tsuma534 | Is this question worth keeping or should I delete it? It's a shame I can't downvote my own question. | |
| Jul 29, 2016 at 13:13 | answer | added | JonTheMon | timeline score: 9 | |
| Jul 29, 2016 at 13:10 | comment | added | doppelgreener | Ok, I've given your title an edit accordingly. | |
| Jul 29, 2016 at 13:10 | history | edited | doppelgreener | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited title
|
| Jul 29, 2016 at 13:08 | comment | added | tsuma534 | Yes, SocioMatt, that was exactly what I was looking for. Thank you. @doppelgreener I guess this mostly adresses your doubts as well. | |
| Jul 29, 2016 at 13:05 | comment | added | SocioMatt | I'm not sure if this is the kind of thing you're looking for, so I'm not posting it as an answer: You cast Mycosynth Golem with an affinity count of five, so its cost is six mana. You only have two mana from lands available, but you have a Krark-Clan Ironworks in play, so you sacrifice two artifacts in order to generate the four mana you need. Since you cast the Golem before paying its cost, you get the locked in cost of six. If you had added the mana first, you would have needed to sacrifice four artifacts to generate the appropriate mana to cast the golem. | |
| Jul 29, 2016 at 13:03 | answer | added | Hackworth | timeline score: 3 | |
| Jul 29, 2016 at 12:01 | comment | added | doppelgreener | You ask what the point of the rule is in your title, but ask under what circumstances it's more mechanically advantageous in your body. What if the point of it isn't mechanical advantage at all? (There are many things MTG's designers do just because it's more intuitive and easier for players to deal with.) Which are you interested in? The actual reason for the rule, or the situations where it's mechanically advantageous to use it? I think if you're after the former, presuming it's got anything to do with mechanical advantage might be doing the question a disservice. | |
| Jul 29, 2016 at 10:20 | history | asked | tsuma534 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |