BigBlue;276398 said:
Oversoul - you can choose not to pay cumulative upkeep, you don't have to pay it until you run out of mana (or whatever other resource it calls for).
I already addressed this, but I'll try one more time. If Malignant Growth had a non-cumulative upkeep cost of 1, you could still let it go at any time. I don't consider being able opt out on an awful card that's helping my opponent to be advantage that significantly improves the card. It's still a bad card with an upkeep. The fact that the upkeep is cumulative makes it even worse and means that even if you did NOT want the card to die, you wouldn't really get a choice in the matter because the upkeep would grow outside of your control.
It is perfectly true that having the upkeep cost means you can let it die, but if you don't want your opponent drawing cards, a better strategy would be to not play something that lets your opponent draw cards. A version of Malignant Growth with no cumulative upkeep, while no long having a self-destruct mechanism, would still be better than the actual card because if you really did find yourself in a situation where your opponent drawing cards and taking damage for it would be what you wanted, you'd also want not to have your available mana taken up by the card that's doing it. I believe the disadvantage of having to pay to keep it out far, far outweighs the advantage of being able to let it go when you don't need it anymore. Especially because a situation where this card is good for a few turns, but bad after several is just plain unrealistic.
If you do want your opponent to be drawing cards and taking damage for doing so (a situation that is normally to your disadvantage), you want your lands free to play other spells (presumably spells that will help you maintain control of the game and negate the card advantage your opponent is getting). If you don't want your opponent to be drawing cards and taking damage for doing so, why would you pay five mana for a card that does just that? That you can let the card die after using it for a couple of turns isn't really a consolation.
The advantage was you could let it go away... unlike the caliph, if he's in play and your opponent turns the tables life-wise... you'll get killed by your own caliph.
This is the same drawback any sort of suicide strategy must face. It's more pronounced by the Caliph because because it's a bad card, but your own Juzam Djinn could do you in too.
I agree that the Hall is more about constructed than limited... but, if a card is the bomb in limited and absolutely sucks in constructed, it's probably not going to win because it has some use. (that's not to say City in a Bottle is the bomb by any stretch...
)
Yeah, I was just pointing it out because while I wouldn't normally use any of the cards nominated in this set (except maybe Warping Wurm in a weird deck that lets it sit around and then capitalizes on how big its gotten, presumably in tandem with other such concepts), in a situation where what I use is more restricted, I might resort to Emberwilde Caliph as a finishing weapon. It would be a "win more" card in such a context because I'd already be beating my opponent down, but it could make the kill faster. I've used the card Flame Rift a lot, and the Caliph is basically an overcosted creature version of it.
