Wow. I've never seen so much poster flaming in a single card discussion before. It's almost like the forums!
Well, I'll just add my 2 cents to this. I hope somebody, someday will read through all this hate and have my post contribute.
As for mulligans, the game should be about deck building skill and strategy and not luck. If a deck is more powerful, or it has a better player, it will win more times than not. Therefore, I allow my opponents to take as many mulligans as they please, unless its obvious that they are mulliganning over and over to try and get a perfect combo hand or something. Nobody should ever mulligan more than 5 times. This is assuming that they allow me the same courtesy. Nothing sucks more than drawing no or 1 land and taking that first free mulligan and its the same. Then you have to draw less and are at a disadvantage all because of bad luck. And besides, nothing will predict what they will draw in the next few turns, so they MUST rely on the consistency o... (see all)
Posted By:
CorkBulb
(7/15/2012 4:16:40 AM)
I find it interesting that the original text has the disclaimer "effects that prevent or redirect damage cannot be used to prevent this loss of life" when nothing on this card causes a player to lose life.
Posted By:
SyntheticDreamer
(11/12/2012 3:09:27 PM)
This card is nearly useless even if you are playing for ante.
Suppose you are in a position where you are clearly winning, and you use this card. Your opponent knows he will probably lose so he chooses to flip the coin and get a 50% chance of winning. Definitely not a good situation to use the card.
Suppose you are in a position where you are clearly losing, and you use this card. Your opponent says "okay" and antes an additional card, and in all likelihood you have wasted an entire turn playing a 6 CC artifact that did nothing. Maybe you get super lucky and pull off a win, but it's not likely, and the wasted turn may have only sealed your loss. I can't see this being a good situation to use the card.
Suppose you are in a position where you are basically even. Your opponent doesn't want to risk losing a card, so he flips a coin. Since you were even anyway, the 50% chance of winning here doesn't really make a difference. Another case where the outcome of the game isn't provably diffe... (see all)
Posted By:
Technetium
(4/30/2013 7:48:59 AM)
...Well! Who would have ever thought such a silly, inconsequential card as Amulet of Quoz would have generated such a firestorm of controversey? I doubt anyone has ever even played with this thing.
Having ante being mandatory would have been a terrible idea, and would have likely killed this game early on, for the reasons that have already been adequately discussed by the high rated comments here. Even in the days of Revised Edition and Legends (when I started) most of us were reticent to play for ante, particularly with total strangers. I wrote a mini-dissertation on this subject on the comments section for the Revised Edition Contract from Below, if anyone is interested in the perspective of another oldtimer besides SlackWareWolf.
However, optional ante could still have a place in Magic. For casual games with people you know, a "Temporary Ante" could be fun. Basically, when ownership of a card changes because of ante or as an effect of a card like Tempest Efreet or Bronze Tablet, t... (see all)
Posted By:
DrJack
(12/5/2013 4:28:17 PM)
Big fan of the MTG Shandalar game. Every match was for ante, deck size was 40, and allowed you to use up to 4 of ANY card. The game is great for letting you see what it's like to have a deck of Power 9 cards, and how ante cards are supposed to work.
I don't remember this card. At ALL. Let's assume it's in the game somewhere. Where would it be useful, and how could we use it? Here's the best possibility:
Opening hand with 6 mana (2 Black Lotus, or 1 Black Lotus&Swamp&Dark Ritual, etc.) and Amulet of Quoz. You can only activate the amulet turn 2, and...I'm honestly not sure. You certainly wouldn't know if you're winning the game yet or not, but I don't know how the computer is designed to gauge whether it should ante an extra card or flip a coin. If it antes, then you're behind since you just wasted a 6 mana turn one hand on the amulet. If it doesn't, then there's your 50% shot at w... (see all)
Posted By:
DraftOnly
(3/8/2014 7:33:58 AM)
The amulet looks like the "trollface" (google image search it if you don't know what I mean). Which actually kind of fits the card...
Posted By:
Lord_Seth_02
(12/1/2012 8:41:35 PM)
I understand most comments here are directed at SlackerWareWoof. Mine is too, should he read it or not.
But really, must you comment this same crap on every ante card? No one is required to play for ante, and I've played with 'no mana mulligans' since I held my first card in my hand. And my brothers, who taught me to play around iceage, they also never played for ante, and they've played much longer than I.
To be honest, I actually tend to "be a man" and LET people mulligan as much as they please, because I enjoy a challenge. I'll tell them, draw all 7, as long as you reveal your hand JUST ENOUGH to prove you're short on mana. That's called honor, bro, and clearly "men" like you lack it, you just like to show off your power-9 so people don't notice how small your deck is.
In short, chill out, bro. Play with bad cards like this, and I'll play with respect for the ever-changing game instead of trying to sound awesome because I refuse to move on from, what, pre-Urza's block?
Posted By:
Dr.Pingas
(8/27/2011 8:59:25 AM)
Its a shame that ante cards cant be played outside ante. This one would be kinda cool:
"I activate this"
"Ok"
"We flip a coin"
"Ok"
"You know this game's winner is determined by this coinflip?"
So, in the end, two (at least) mighty mages and planeswalkers battle in coin flipping.
Posted By:
Qazior
(3/26/2010 8:37:42 AM)
Don't know why nobody has mentioned this, but... Krark's Thumb is the way to go.
If someone challenges you to an ante match, this could be your ticket to win.
Posted By:
Kryptnyt
(8/13/2010 3:51:56 PM)
Great to use with Platinum Angel.
Posted By:
Bouchart
(8/15/2009 9:51:04 PM)