Soradyne Laboratories: Recent Activity
| Soradyne Laboratories: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Skeleton | Soradyne Laboratories — Home |
Recent updates to Soradyne Laboratories: (Generated at 2025-07-07 09:20:59)
It does allow multiple "feints" at once though. Is that a problem?
Houlding's solution is not the worst thing I've seen. Not at all. Let's put that up as one for serious consideration.
Even if Feint technically works within the rules, I think that it would create a lot of disagreement and judge-calling due to its reliance on presumptions.
One solution would be to broaden the prevention to all unblocked creatures, and then tie the cost-reduction scaling to the number of unblocked creatures you control. This would weaken the ability under a number of circumstances, but it does clarify the rules.
Feint (Prevent all combat damage unblocked creatures you control would deal this turn: Cast this spell as if it had flash, and for
less for each unblocked creature you control.)
The Giant Growth example is easy to answer: the Giant Growth is irrelevant. Once the feint spell is announced, that's where the cost is locked in. Now the creature will deal 0 combat damage, regardless of what happens later.
Still, I agree that the ability as a whole is built on some deceptively shaky ground, and wish there were a simpler way to make it work. Dan (Bombshell) and I have pondered this for a hell of a long time, and jeep coming back to the same thing: it's a solid end effect and it's a good fit for this set, but there's got to be a better way to make it work.
One friend of mine has suggested that it should actually restore damage already dealt in exchange for costing less, but it feels awkwarnerone that way. "You thought you got hurt, but I was actually setting up something totally different, so here, have a bonus."
I've looked at simply tying the cost reduction to a creature's power, but as Dan quickly recognized, it has the potential to just be salt in a wound. "Yeah, I just hit you for 4 to the face. Now watch me cast a damn-near-free huge creature/gamebreaker".
I could also simplify it to "tap a creature, spell costs (power) less", but it just doesn't feel the same to me. Might be the simplest way though.
As for how soon you could play this, you can manage it on turn 1 with "exile simian spirit guide x4, mountain, boggart ram gang, ruinous riot", but there's definitely much more useful things you could do on turn 1 with 5 mana (although I'd love to see my opponent's face).
Turn 2, you can manage it just with "Turn 1. Mountain, Akki Avalanchers. Turn 2. Mountain, attack, float RR, sac mountain, feint for 3" but that's very niche and still burning resources.
I think turn 3 is the soonest you can manage it sanely, and even then, you're trading quite a bit for it. I originally thought maybe 3RR was too much for land destruction, but given the possibilities for reduction, it seems right.
Hm. I think the concept of feint is fine, unambiguous and fairly intuitive (at least in situations I can think of), but I don't think the rules work for it yet.
You must have to declare feint spells in the declare blockers step after blockers are declared (the last opportunity before combat damage). However, I don't think the cost reduction makes sense until the damage is actually prevented, so the spell shouldn't actually go on the stack until after combat damage.
And I don't think there's any time before the damage is actually dealt when it's inevitable what it's going to be. If you did cast feint spells in declare blockers step, would the cost reduction apply to what the damage would be? What if someone plays giant growth in response or after it resolves?
(The combat damage step does put triggered abilities on the stack and give players priority, after damage, including after first strike damage, cf. http://www.wizards.com/magic/comprules/MagicCompRules_20110715.pdf 510.3 510.4)
I'm not sure what's best. Perhaps make feint a special action that happens as you assign combat damage (either paying the rest of the costs then, or just remembering the reduction so you can play it in the combat damage step after combat damage). Or have it be something you declare in advance in decalre blockers, and then cast based on the actual reduction. Or (changing it a bit) make it trigger from an unblocked creature's power, instead of the damage actually prevented.
And the answer as to when you can pull off a
play of Ruinous Riot is "Pretty f*ing fast", but it takes an incredible draw and serious casualties to your own resources.
Like anything else, costs are locked in at the time of the spell's announcement, and can't be responded to. Preventing the damage is part of the ability's cost, so simply announcing it once blockers are declared and choosing your "feinting" creature will set the cost of the spell.
Doublestrike seemed sticky to me for a while, but I believe that (could be wrong) under M10 rules, there's no window for effects (save triggered ones) or responses once the damage-dealing starts happening, so a doublestriker's eventual damage sum can be assessed before they take their first strike swing. As long as a Feint effect is declared in the "declare blockers" step, Feint should work as intended.
That said, I've been looking for a better way to structure the ability. It's one hell of a mouthful.
So, I was staring at this card trying to figure out how easily you could cast this for
, when I realized I have no idea how the timing of feint really works.
After blockers are declared, you announce a feint spell and choose an unblocked creature whose damage you wish to prevent. That much is clear. But my issue is that things get fuzzy when figuring out how much damage will be prevented, as you need to apply the cost reduction before the damage step. So how does it interact with cards like Goblin Glaivemaster? Pump spells? If I declare a Feint spell, and then my opponent kills the chosen creature in response, did I prevent any combat damage from happening?
Seems... fishy.
UUU might be the fix. Note; I certainly wouldn't argue against the Mechanic's being in the set, either, nor against strong cards; just that getting pantsed by this iteration of the card may feel unfun.
Total overhaul. Set needed a common blue "stay tapped" aura.
Okay, I can see recursion wreaking havoc here. Would a
activation make it more fair? I could also see a 1/3 or 2/3 bounce split.
I still feel like the fact that your opponent chooses which permanents to return is notable, but yeah, i now see that running this guy on a combo loop would be crazy. Which isn't to say he shouldn't exist in the set, just that he really is damn strong.
If having a counter on the lands presents a problem I suppose they could be given the Tendo Ice Bridge solution. Still, I don't think it'll be that confusing most of the time.
Took me a couple reads of this but once it clicked, I like it. It may not be the kind of thing that turns the tide for a player down but it can certainly break stalemates.