Make a copy of it using MTG: Dance of Many. Make a copy of that using MTG: Parallel Evolution. Flashback the Parallel Evolution to make 2 more tokens. For each of these four creature tokens, use a pillow to represent them on the board.
When they lose summoning sickness, activate their abilities (inherited from the original MTG: Chaos Orb). Throw multiple pillows at the board (from a height of at least one foot). Destroy most of the board. Laugh maniacally.
Throwing an Armada of Paper Aeroplanes
Similar to the above, this version uses cards from Unglued (note that the Pillow Throwing deck doesn't)...
Animate it and make a token copy of it as above. Use a telephone directory or broadsheet newspaper as the token.
Activate the ability of the token copy. When instructed to "tear ~this~ into pieces", tear each page out and fold it into a simple paper aeroplane before throwing it at the board from five feet horizontal distance. The larger your aeroplanes are, the more of the board you can destroy.
Many thanks to Senji for suggesting this amendment to the original MTG: Chaos Confetti deck idea, which put the telephone directory through a portable shredder. More entertaining, perhaps, but rather less effective at destroying lots of permanents.
The token creature will be removed from the game as a state-based effect... once MTG: Oblation is finished resolving. So, in other words, once you've (with difficulty) shuffled the plastic dinosaur into your library, you then have to remove it from the game - and you don't get to reshuffle your library after removing it. Of course, you have to remove it without looking at the cards before or after it in your library.
And of course also, if your opponent feels you haven't sufficiently randomised the order of your library-plus-plastic-dinosaur, they're entitled to shuffle or cut it.
To back this up from the Comprehensive Rulebook:
216.3. A token in a zone other than the in-play zone ceases to exist. This is a state-based effect. (Note that a token changing zones will set off triggered abilities before the token ceases to exist.) Once a token has left play, it can't be returned to play by any means.
420. State-Based Effects
420.3. Whenever a player would get priority to play a spell or ability (see rule 408, "Timing of Spells and Abilities"), the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based effects. All applicable effects resolve as a single event, then the check is repeated. Once no more state-based effects have been generated, triggered abilities go on the stack, then the appropriate player gets priority.
Comment from AC: Players don't receive priority to play a spell or ability while another one is resolving, and so state-based effects aren't checked then.
420.4. Unlike triggered abilities, state-based effects pay no attention to what happens during the resolution of a spell or ability.
K.25.6 - Token creatures cease to exist entirely if they ever leave play (to the hand, graveyard, removed from game, phased out, or wherever).
K.25.Ruling.1 - Before ceasing to exist (as per Rule K.25.6), token creatures do briefly go where they are sent, which can trigger effects.
For even more fun, build a deck with all cards you don't mind losing. Do the above, except use something on fire as the token. Make sure that your deck lights on fire when you shuffle the "token" in.
DR asks if you could use MTG: Mindslaver to force an opponent to shuffle a strange token into their own deck.
Probably not, actually. Mindslaver allows the controller to make all game decisions for the slaved player; I suspect that "choice of object to use as a token" is not a game decision. Obviously, if they already have an odd token in play, it's another matter... (Incidentally, this came up on the Rules list this week; a slaving player who forces the slaved player to play MTG: Cunning Wish is unable to get a card from the slaved player's sideboard - he can't see it in-game, so is unable to determine which cards are instants.) --CH
Hide and Hide and Hide and Hide and Seek
You may like to consider the possibilities inherent in using MTG: Vedalken Orrery to cast MTG: Goblin Game on an opponent's turn which you happen to be controlling due to a MTG: Mindslaver. It may be an advantage to have a box of 750 dice with you. I'm not sure if the rules allow you to say you're making her hide them all individually, and send her off looking for some good hiding places... --AlexChurchill
You may like to muse about the /MostPossibleTypes it's possible to get on a single permanent. I was initially thinking of supertypes (Legendary, Basic and Word) and types (Artifact, Creature, Enchantment, Instant, Land and Sorcery only); but fun can be had by adding in subtypes (land subtypes such as Plains, creature subtypes such as Rebel, artifact subtypes such as Equipment, and enchantment subtypes such as Shrine) also. I managed one permanent with two supertypes, all permanent types, all creature types and two land types. --AlexChurchill
Someone just HAD to resurrect this game, didn't they? Well, here's one. (Misquoted from memory, compare to your favorite lockdown combo)
The wall of Thistles defence.
Wait until your opponent plays the wall. Move as if to play a card, hesitate, and mutter 'no no, not yet'. Hopefully they will grow concerned and start trying to workout what you are up to.
When they tap the wall to activate the effect, repeat - but add something about how you always have to remember to get this in the right order.
Wait for them to shuffle through their deck - they should be scared enough at this point to go looking for something to tap out all your land. Wait for them to play it.
Smile sweetly. Grin. Lean over the table. Half-pull a card from your hand and say: "And in response I"
Then headbutt them. Call the ref over and ask for an adjudication because your opponent is time-wasting by being unconcious.
AlexChurchill is known for his total detestment of this horrendously overpowered card.
StuartFraser kinda shares Alex's view, but doesn't see why he shouldn't include her in a Conspiracy or two, so he can play a semi-viable 5cW deck....can anyone figure out a way to make all of my Rebels Elves as well, so that I can keep Lin Sivvi with her boyfriend ?(that's Eladamri, for those of you who aren't storyline fanatics)
PeterTaylor wonders what's wrong with making your Elves Rebels - easily achieved using whatever that black enchantment is.
That enchantment would be the MTG: Conspiracy Stuart refers to. And it overwrites creatures' types - so since both Lin Sivvi and MTG: Eladamri, Lord of Leaves have creature types printed in their text box, one or other of them would fail to function. MTG: Artificial Evolution on one or other of them would be the most straightforward (!) way to get both of their effects. It's difficult to use effects like MTG: Mistform Sliver because Lin Sivvi's abilities want the cards to have a certain creature type in the graveyard or the library. Artificial Evolution is the only idea I can think of so far, but I'll get back to you if that changes... --AlexChurchill
However, it did occur to him cycling around today that it's one of the very few cards which let you shuffle your library for no mana cost. (Pay X=0...) This combos nicely with MTG: Future Sight - when the top card of your library gets to something which you can't play (like the second land of the turn), just tap Lin Sivvi for X=0 and get another try! You could even keep untapping her with MTG: Seeker of Skybreak or MTG: Pemmin's Aura until you get something on top of your library which you can play.
I just like the idea of using one of the most recent Banned card with no other Rebels in your deck, just as a 0-cost library shuffler - a more efficient MTG: Soldier of Fortune if you will ;);)
(PeterTaylor) Ran into this one on the MTG fora, and I found it so funny I wanted to share it.
Alice casts [Simic Guildmage]. Bob [Confiscate]s it. Charlie Confiscates the Confiscate. At this point Charlie controls two Confiscates and a Guildmage. Suppose he uses the Guildmage's ability to attach the Confiscate Bob owns to the Confiscate Charlie owns. Who now controls the Confiscates?
What if it were a second Guildmage, controlled by Eve, which moved the Confiscate?
(I think the answer is that in both cases Charlie controls both Confiscates, but I'm not sure I could explain precisely why).
It's a layers question! Control-changes get applied in layer 2, before pretty everything else. If two or more effects apply in the same layer, in general you apply characteristic-setting ones, then the remainder in timestamp order unless there's a dependency. There isn't actually any dependency here - both effects will apply.
Therefore - clearly the Guildmage is back with Alice (nothing's enchanting it any more). We then apply Charlie's Confiscate as being earlier-stamped (timestamp is renewed when an aura becomes attached), so he controls Bob's confiscate. Bob's Confiscate then applies, but since Charlie controls that too you're right and both are under Charlie's control.
I'm pretty sure that's it, but it's not an [O]fficial answer; if you like, I can take it to the Rules list (I'd search the archives - I think it's been asked before - but I can't get the web search to work). --ChrisHowlett, Rules Advisor, Enfield UK.
(PeterTaylor) I looked at the rules before posting. It's not a layers question, because all of the relevant effects apply in layer 2. I disagree about the dependency: each of the Confiscate abilities effects "what [the other] does to any of the things it applies to". However, it doesn't matter because either way we apply effects in timestamp order. In this case I think it's pretty clear-cut that Charlie controls the Confiscate he owns, but I wonder whether there are more complicated scenarios in which that isn't so straightforward.
In a related issue, the circle of dependencies between MTG: Conspiracy and MTG: Life and Limb is really delightfully strange. Those playing along at home may like to consider what happens in each of the following cases: (answers are hidden, use "Edit this page" to view) - Conspiracy making all creatures Goblins. Life and Limb and a Saproling are in play.
- Conspiracy making all creatures Saprolings. Life and Limb and a Soldier are in play.
- Conspiracy making all creatures Goblins. Life and Limb and a Forest are in play.
- Conspiracy making all creatures Goblins. Life and Limb, a Forest and a Saproling are in play.
At GamesEvening last night (8th Jan 2008), it came up that it's possible to win using MTG: Coalition Victory and just four other permanents: two dual lands, a basic land, and a five-colour creature. Discussion was prompted of how to make one land have all five basic land types. The natural answer was three or four MTG: Blanket of Night (or equivalently MTG: Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth, modulo the need for a MTG: Mirror Gallery), using MTG: Magical Hack to make them all add a different basic land type. So using these enchantments, just one land and one creature could satisfy CV's condition. Then Edwin pointed out "It would be more satisfying if the land for Coalition Victory's condition was also the creature". Undeniably true. StuartFraser had the fair comment that using lots of artifacts and enchantments removed a certain amount of the point in winning with just one land, and so the challenge was formulated: Win, using MTG: Coalition Victory, controlling just one permanent. You may never have controlled any other permanent. Your opponent may not help.
It's only recently become possible. Pleasingly, it can be done in a single turn, although it needs several more cards than if you split it across several turns. Hint (ROT13): Gel frnepuvat tngurere sbe gur cuenfr va nqqvgvba gb.
AlexChurchill's first successful attempt uses 26 cards (with 14 different names) on a single turn, assuming playing first (with a starting hand of 7 cards) against a goldfish opponent. Obviously almost all of them are sorceries or instants, apart from the 1 land, but not quite all. I've heard rumours that there's a card coming in Morningtide that might reduce the number of cards required by 1 or 2, perhaps enough that I could lose one of the card-drawing spells.
ChrisHowlett can manage it with 20 cards (with 12 different names) under Alex's conditions. Assuming he's not made a mistake.
Following refinements, I have this down to 18 cards (with 11 different names). --CH
In discussion, we found out Chris' solution didn't work. But combining his ideas with mine, I got a 19-card (11 unique) solution. --AC