(N.B.: if you keep paying the cost, this has 2 age counters after the first upkeep, 6 after the second, then 14, 30, 62 etc, since each time it goes n -> (n+1)*2)
Uh. That's indeed a problem.
I think this trick (quite ugly, admittedly) may work? This way, it enters as a 0/1, the soulbond "when this enters" trigger can be allowed to resolve, then this becomes a -7/-7 when it is already (possibly) paired
I think there's a mechanical problem here. Soulbond's nested rulings begin with "When this creature enters, ..." - notably not "As this creature enters, ...", meaning that this would as is this die to state-based actions before it could ever get that +10/+10 from the soulbond ability.
(N.B.: if you keep paying the cost, this has 2 age counters after the first upkeep, 6 after the second, then 14, 30, 62 etc, since each time it goes n -> (n+1)*2)
typo
cost w->1w
Uh. That's indeed a problem. I think this trick (quite ugly, admittedly) may work? This way, it enters as a 0/1, the soulbond "when this enters" trigger can be allowed to resolve, then this becomes a -7/-7 when it is already (possibly) paired
Used to be -7/-7; reworked in such a way that it can survive until the soulbond trigger resolves.
I think there's a mechanical problem here. Soulbond's nested rulings begin with "When this creature enters, ..." - notably not "As this creature enters, ...", meaning that this would as is this die to state-based actions before it could ever get that +10/+10 from the soulbond ability.
changed name
spelling