8:50 - the interaction being mentioned is not a bug. When you cast Mentor's Guidance, it creates a triggered ability that, when said ability resolves, creates a copy of the Guidance if you control a creature of one of the relevant creature types. The trigger is always created regardless of whether or not you control any creatures, but the game doesn't check until the triggered ability's resolution to determine whether to put a copy of the Guidance on the stack, so you can respond and remove their creatures to stop the copy. But love some Ninjas and have been playing them to great success, though I would also be looking at a 1-of Hope of Ghirapur as an additional Thopter in place of one of the Faerie Seers. The sacrifice ability is relevant and it's another Thopter for the Foundry.
I (and LVD) thought that this card qualified for an "intervening if clause" because it's very similar to that group of triggers. For reference it's 603.4: 603.4 A triggered ability may read “When/Whenever/At [trigger event], if [condition], [effect].” When the trigger event occurs, the ability checks whether the stated condition is true. The ability triggers only if it is; otherwise it does nothing. If the ability triggers, it checks the stated condition again as it resolves. If the condition isn’t true at that time, the ability is removed from the stack and does nothing. Note that this mirrors the check for legal targets. This rule is referred to as the “intervening ‘if’ clause” rule. (The word “if” has only its normal English meaning anywhere else in the text of a card; this rule only applies to an “if” that immediately follows a trigger condition.) blogs.magicjudges.org/rules/cr603/ But this card is templated as "When [trigger event], [effect] if [condition]" not "When [trigger event], if [condition], [effect]". So maybe it doesn't qualify. Strange.
It's not an intervening if-clause, so it should only check on casting. Compare the wording with Dwynen's Elite, where it is an intervening if-clause, so it checks twice. I haven't actually seen the interaction in-game to know if it's bugged though.
@@Yesnomu Intervening-if clauses check at both times, but this only checks on resolution. However, for the trigger to only check on trigger (and not again at resolution), it would use a wording like Dragon's Fire or Foul-Tongue Invocation where it specifies that the additional effect happens based on the trigger condition being met 'as you cast' the card in question. In both cases, you needn't still control the Dragon as the spell resolves to get the boosted effect.
I love how Retrofitter Foundry is a 'Ninjas' card. If you showed it to someone unfamiliar with Magic and told them "This card is strongly associated with Ninjutsu," they almost certainly wouldn't be able to guess why.
This deck in best of 3 lets you burn through your dailies sooooo quickly; whether it’s from beating your opponent to death in three turns or them auto-scooping the second they see foundry into thopter. Easily my favorite deck lol
An even better line at 28:35 would have been to push the giver, forcing the opponent to activate it on one of the two attackers, and then block the attacker that was not protected.
The first game really demonstrates how significant of a downside the losing 2 life from Thoughtseize really is. The opponent gets another turn if they didn't lose that extra life, perhaps enough time to cast something like Path of Peril, possible for someone to include in a black deck (though admittedly unlikely).
I feel like the final opponent misplayed with Cloudsteel Kirin because they read but misunderstood the text, in a frankly understandable way. The exact text is "equipped creature has "you can't lose and your opponents can't win", which could be easily misinterpreted as "if this creature is equipped with something etc etc" to english-second-language speakers.
10:14 - Don't understand why you don't target Balmor and use the 3/3 to block the Arcanist. In that scenario, you still take three, but they lose both creatures...
I believe he’s playing for the counter swing. By losing his creature to save himself 3 life he might not win through the advantage pressure he ended up winning with. Ultimately I don’t think the balmor was of highest consequence personally, as the games are so short, but yeah I can see why it’d seem unoptimal to leave it alive.
Sure, I get you lose out on 3 points and it takes your clock down a turn. But also, that deck can hit you out of nowhere and part of that is the pump off of Balmor. It didn't end up mattering since had removal in hand, but how different does it look with your opponent at 8 life and no creatures? Probably more of a judgment call/play style since there was no chance of dying the next turn (and I'm more control). Went back and watched, I think it's suboptimal if there isn't any thought put into which one ("I can kill one of my opponent's creatures" - wasn't any dialogue about why decision). But he did also say "take advantage of tempo swing", so may have been internal thought that wasn't said in commentary. Given how much I enjoy his videos and how he explains decisions that can have impact, not hearing an internal debate had me perceive that there wasn't one.
I believe you had lethal at 32:30. If you attacked all out, opponent was forced to chump one of the 4/4's and block one of the 1/1's. Then you could ninjustu the fur master on the unblocked 1/1 for 6 total damage.
@@lagna1506 Of course, but they were trying to keep one creature alive to reconfigure the Kirin onto. It is unlikely that they would have double chumped, and if they did it would solve the kirin problem without having to worry about keeping up Otawara
Is thare something that prevents thousand faced shadow from copying another attacking thousand faced shadows creating an infinite number of attacking thousand faced shadows?
I definitely do NOT think dropping Ingenious Infiltrator for Lurrus is worth it. But maybe all the Bowmasters/Sheoldreds running around makes him a liability instead?
Feels like he's always facing opponents which don't do anything the whole game. For example in Match 3, what was the opponents gameplan? Had plenty of time against a mulligan to 5 and was doing absolutely nothing....
That’s because we answered all their key cards. Hangarback alongside Zabaz can get very scary. They also drew a few removal spells which happened to work out better for us than if they had drawn more creatures.
@LegenVD ah word, I've been trying to make dredge work in alchemy, Olgor has been cool but I want to see what you could do with that card before it rotates. Cheers!
![Kodak Black - Sharp Vibes [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/oEV0OoLJeIs/mqdefault.jpg)
Swinging for 16 on turn 3 provides exact levels of value
Happy to see ninjas having their time in historic now. Ninjutsu is a cool ability, but they never really stood a chance in standard
8:50 - the interaction being mentioned is not a bug. When you cast Mentor's Guidance, it creates a triggered ability that, when said ability resolves, creates a copy of the Guidance if you control a creature of one of the relevant creature types. The trigger is always created regardless of whether or not you control any creatures, but the game doesn't check until the triggered ability's resolution to determine whether to put a copy of the Guidance on the stack, so you can respond and remove their creatures to stop the copy.
But love some Ninjas and have been playing them to great success, though I would also be looking at a 1-of Hope of Ghirapur as an additional Thopter in place of one of the Faerie Seers. The sacrifice ability is relevant and it's another Thopter for the Foundry.
I (and LVD) thought that this card qualified for an "intervening if clause" because it's very similar to that group of triggers. For reference it's 603.4:
603.4 A triggered ability may read “When/Whenever/At [trigger event], if [condition], [effect].” When the trigger event occurs, the ability checks whether the stated condition is true. The ability triggers only if it is; otherwise it does nothing. If the ability triggers, it checks the stated condition again as it resolves. If the condition isn’t true at that time, the ability is removed from the stack and does nothing. Note that this mirrors the check for legal targets. This rule is referred to as the “intervening ‘if’ clause” rule. (The word “if” has only its normal English meaning anywhere else in the text of a card; this rule only applies to an “if” that immediately follows a trigger condition.)
blogs.magicjudges.org/rules/cr603/
But this card is templated as "When [trigger event], [effect] if [condition]" not "When [trigger event], if [condition], [effect]". So maybe it doesn't qualify.
Strange.
Gotcha, verified it once again in the judge chat.
Was told the incorrect ruling a while back.
It's not an intervening if-clause, so it should only check on casting. Compare the wording with Dwynen's Elite, where it is an intervening if-clause, so it checks twice. I haven't actually seen the interaction in-game to know if it's bugged though.
@@Yesnomu Intervening-if clauses check at both times, but this only checks on resolution. However, for the trigger to only check on trigger (and not again at resolution), it would use a wording like Dragon's Fire or Foul-Tongue Invocation where it specifies that the additional effect happens based on the trigger condition being met 'as you cast' the card in question. In both cases, you needn't still control the Dragon as the spell resolves to get the boosted effect.
@@RiaCorvidiva You're right! I got confused, thanks. :)
Just in time for the new TMNT movie!! Haha awesome deck Luca, you're the best!!
Love seeing Ninjas. And I really need to make a Satoru brawl deck after these buffs.
this is the only deck that makes me consider playing historic
Cool deck, quite explosive. Thanks.
Ninjaaaaaaaas. This deck is so cool, thanks for the video!
I love how Retrofitter Foundry is a 'Ninjas' card. If you showed it to someone unfamiliar with Magic and told them "This card is strongly associated with Ninjutsu," they almost certainly wouldn't be able to guess why.
Match 6 was bizarre to say the least
Hitting 16 face turn 3, not a big deal 😅😂😂😂
So all three of the ninjas got buffed, that’s pretty cool
Really great patience on the wizards matchup seems like you’ve had a lot of experience against it
This deck in best of 3 lets you burn through your dailies sooooo quickly; whether it’s from beating your opponent to death in three turns or them auto-scooping the second they see foundry into thopter. Easily my favorite deck lol
Bring Ninjutsu back into meta!
I like it when Alchemy is used to boost underperforming archetypes, rather than creating busted chase cards
Nice one, orcish bowmaster often seems like an autoinclude
Why wouldnt you run it in any deck that includes black, its way too much value for 2 mana xD
just like fable of the mirrorbreaker :D
Good stuff
faerie dreamthief is a good sub for faerie seer. You lose 1 on the scry/surveil, but it gets pumped by silver-fur, so that's a pretty good trade imo.
An even better line at 28:35 would have been to push the giver, forcing the opponent to activate it on one of the two attackers, and then block the attacker that was not protected.
I really wanted to take out the Arms Scavenger though.
Aight :)
The first game really demonstrates how significant of a downside the losing 2 life from Thoughtseize really is. The opponent gets another turn if they didn't lose that extra life, perhaps enough time to cast something like Path of Peril, possible for someone to include in a black deck (though admittedly unlikely).
I feel like the final opponent misplayed with Cloudsteel Kirin because they read but misunderstood the text, in a frankly understandable way. The exact text is "equipped creature has "you can't lose and your opponents can't win", which could be easily misinterpreted as "if this creature is equipped with something etc etc" to english-second-language speakers.
Btw Nin means Ninja or stealth and Jutsu means skill or ability.
Orcish Bowmaster is so broken that it has to be put in every Historic deck.
10:14 - Don't understand why you don't target Balmor and use the 3/3 to block the Arcanist. In that scenario, you still take three, but they lose both creatures...
I believe he’s playing for the counter swing. By losing his creature to save himself 3 life he might not win through the advantage pressure he ended up winning with.
Ultimately I don’t think the balmor was of highest consequence personally, as the games are so short, but yeah I can see why it’d seem unoptimal to leave it alive.
Sure, I get you lose out on 3 points and it takes your clock down a turn. But also, that deck can hit you out of nowhere and part of that is the pump off of Balmor. It didn't end up mattering since had removal in hand, but how different does it look with your opponent at 8 life and no creatures? Probably more of a judgment call/play style since there was no chance of dying the next turn (and I'm more control). Went back and watched, I think it's suboptimal if there isn't any thought put into which one ("I can kill one of my opponent's creatures" - wasn't any dialogue about why decision). But he did also say "take advantage of tempo swing", so may have been internal thought that wasn't said in commentary. Given how much I enjoy his videos and how he explains decisions that can have impact, not hearing an internal debate had me perceive that there wasn't one.
I believe you had lethal at 32:30.
If you attacked all out, opponent was forced to chump one of the 4/4's and block one of the 1/1's. Then you could ninjustu the fur master on the unblocked 1/1 for 6 total damage.
opponent can just block the two 4/4s and not die?
@@lagna1506 Of course, but they were trying to keep one creature alive to reconfigure the Kirin onto. It is unlikely that they would have double chumped, and if they did it would solve the kirin problem without having to worry about keeping up Otawara
😊
Lutzer had no idea you were a ninjitsu deck
Is thare something that prevents thousand faced shadow from copying another attacking thousand faced shadows creating an infinite number of attacking thousand faced shadows?
it only copies if it enters from your hand, so a token copy of it won't trigger
You can loop two copies of them as long as you have the mana to keep using Ninjutsu, it's quite fun!
VALUE
I definitely do NOT think dropping Ingenious Infiltrator for Lurrus is worth it. But maybe all the Bowmasters/Sheoldreds running around makes him a liability instead?
Alchemised ninjas are absolutely busted
31:50 Wouldn't you just have lethal if you used Soaring City to bounce Giver?
Never mind, opponent could block with the token and blow up the unblocked construct.
thousand faced ninjutsu is not 2UU?
It's an alchemy rebalance
since Orcs got nerfed, this deck is not the same
Yeah, would require some adjusting.
Ninja player here.
Honestly, Lurrus is not that good and cutting Ingenious Infiltrator is really bad for this deck.
Feels like he's always facing opponents which don't do anything the whole game. For example in Match 3, what was the opponents gameplan? Had plenty of time against a mulligan to 5 and was doing absolutely nothing....
That’s because we answered all their key cards. Hangarback alongside Zabaz can get very scary. They also drew a few removal spells which happened to work out better for us than if they had drawn more creatures.
@@LegenVD Was not meant to diminish your performance :) Maybe it just seems like so because of your great plays, keep on going!! :)
Brother you should try alchemy
I did a while back!
@LegenVD ah word, I've been trying to make dredge work in alchemy, Olgor has been cool but I want to see what you could do with that card before it rotates.
Cheers!