Mother of Runes has Protection from Black.
Spells in play: (Champion of the Parish, Crusade) (Elemental) (Mother of Runes)
Spoiler: List of all Spells in play
Champion of the Parish
Creature
CREATURE SPELLS MAY BE CAST DURING ANY PHASE.
THIS SPELL COSTS one White mana to cast.
Creature spells have public effects and stay in effect until removed from the game.
This creature gains votes equal to the number of creatures you control.
This creature's total casting cost is equal to the number of creatures you control.
I stand for every cobbler, tamer, and fool in this town--and they stand for me.
Crusade
Enchantment
ENCHANTMENT SPELLS MAY BE CAST DURING ANY PHASE.
This spell costs two white mana to cast.
Enchantment spells have public effects and stay in effect until removed from the game.
Any time a White Creature votes for a player, an extra vote is added.
Finally, I understand. Home isn't where you rest.
It's what you fight for.
Elemental
Creature
Creature spells have public effects and stay in effect until removed from the game.
This Creature may vote.
Mother of Runes
Creature
Creature SPELLS MAY BE CAST DURING ANY PHASE.
This spell costs one White mana to cast.
Creature spells have public effects and stay in effect until removed from the game.
When you cast this Spell, choose a color and target a Creature.
Until the end of the next Night Phase, that Creature is immune to Spells and effects of that color.
You may repeat this ability at the start of each Day phase that Mother of Runes is in play.
Last edited by Varsoon on Tue Mar 20, 2018 2:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Unless they had reason to believe ownership could be revealed somehow. The first creature came into play before Micc/Nancys ability to gift a creature was known, so if scum, they made a mistake imo, or suspected creatures could be tied to owners easily enough to justify using their creatures and spells sure optimally.
Since someone brought this up publicly(much easier to get potential scum to admit a connection to something if they think it gets people to town read them), I have to ask:
Alisae, why did you give Chara that creature? Chara in particular. The real reason.
In post 2800, Varsoon wrote:Apparently, the Squirrel creature type only became such a big staple of Magic because the head of the art department didn't know how to play Magic.
Unless they had reason to believe ownership could be revealed somehow. The first creature came into play before Micc/Nancys ability to gift a creature was known, so if scum, they made a mistake imo, or suspected creatures could be tied to owners easily enough to justify using their creatures and spells sure optimally.
Since someone brought this up publicly(much easier to get potential scum to admit a connection to something if they think it gets people to town read them), I have to ask:
Alisae, why did you give Chara that creature? Chara in particular. The real reason.
-Cerb
Interesting. Elaborate on the mistake further please.
In post 2683, Reasonably Rational wrote:Oh, and I guess they could also still end up the lynch for today even as scum if they're being bussed, but that player wouldn't be getting bussed D1, and if they were, they'd want to get a lot more credit out of it than anyone can currently claim.
-Cerb
If the double voting creature is town, then it's way easier to get a lynch on scum without bussers.
~Kiana
I'm saying I find it very doubtful that none of the scum slots in the game have the ability to remove a creature from play.
That means even though there are currently 5(as of last VC) votes on SD, you can only count on 3 of those votes remaining in play when SD hits L-1, if they're scum(or scum want us to THINK they're scum). The highest they ever got was L-2, I believe, so if all those vote come back, they'd only be at 5 votes, ignoring the creature, because it doesn't count if we're voting scum.
That means we're far from a consensus.
-Cerb
I'm not sure I understand where you are coming from on the bolded part. Roles were created before alignment. How can you be so sure scum has the ability to remove a creature from play? Is removal of a creature a pretty common ability in MtG?
(I'm about 10 pages behind so I apologize if this has already been answered.)
In post 2800, Varsoon wrote:Apparently, the Squirrel creature type only became such a big staple of Magic because the head of the art department didn't know how to play Magic.
This is an amazing piece of trivia.
Also, I <3 Squirrels.
-Cerb
Indeed, I wish squirrels weren't so feisty so I could have one as a pet
We're falling through space, you and me, clinging to the skin of this tiny little world, and if we let go...That's who I am.
From how I see it, it means if Alisae is scum it isn’t with Micc/Nancy. It also to me means the Creature owner if scum, is not aligned with Micc/Nancy.
Furthermore Alisae supposedly copied a role and stole mana. How would that apply to cards?
In post 2800, Varsoon wrote:Apparently, the Squirrel creature type only became such a big staple of Magic because the head of the art department didn't know how to play Magic.
This is an amazing piece of trivia.
Also, I <3 Squirrels.
-Cerb
I love the art department. Squirrel decks are okay but the art is where it’s at.
The ability to remove a creature might actually be a spell card, I think I remember seeing that somewhere that there are cards that let you send a creature back to its owner, maybe not for mtg but I feel like even if so it would be similar across trading card games
PEdit: OTM confirms my suspicions
We're falling through space, you and me, clinging to the skin of this tiny little world, and if we let go...That's who I am.
Unless they had reason to believe ownership could be revealed somehow. The first creature came into play before Micc/Nancys ability to gift a creature was known, so if scum, they made a mistake imo, or suspected creatures could be tied to owners easily enough to justify using their creatures and spells sure optimally.
Since someone brought this up publicly(much easier to get potential scum to admit a connection to something if they think it gets people to town read them), I have to ask:
Alisae, why did you give Chara that creature? Chara in particular. The real reason.
-Cerb
Interesting. Elaborate on the mistake further please.
Oh, just not preserving the ability to spring multivoting on someone they really wanted lynched. That's all.
-Cerb
pedit:@Skybird: Two reasons.
1) I know scum have factionals.
2) Every color in magic can remove creatures somehow, some more easily than others. It seems implausible that an entire scum team, with 9-12 cards between them, would not have at least one piece of creature removal that they've managed to generate the mana to use.
ppedit:@OTM:I don't believe your conclusions necessarily follow. Duplicating a teammate, who you know has an ability that allows you to steal mana, so you can prevent town slots from using their cards, seems good. I don't see any reason why the creature owner couldn't be scum with Micc/Nancy, unless you find the strength of the combination of their abilities(which were created before alignments were assigned) unlikely.
In post 2807, OnTheMark wrote:From how I see it, it means if Alisae is scum it isn’t with Micc/Nancy. It also to me means the Creature owner if scum, is not aligned with Micc/Nancy.
Furthermore Alisae supposedly copied a role and stole mana. How would that apply to cards?
In post 2807, OnTheMark wrote:From how I see it, it means if Alisae is scum it isn’t with Micc/Nancy. It also to me means the Creature owner if scum, is not aligned with Micc/Nancy.
Furthermore Alisae supposedly copied a role and stole mana. How would that apply to cards?
It doesn't.
Exactly my point.
The creatures are creature cards.
So the voting can’t be duplicated from what I see.
tbh I kinda just gave it to Chara on a whim.
I heard they were town and didn't really think much about it besides
"Bee is really obvious town and likely going to get shot and I don't want to put all of my eggs in one basket"
In post 2807, OnTheMark wrote:From how I see it, it means if Alisae is scum it isn’t with Micc/Nancy. It also to me means the Creature owner if scum, is not aligned with Micc/Nancy.
Furthermore Alisae supposedly copied a role and stole mana. How would that apply to cards?
It doesn't.
Exactly my point.
The creatures are creature cards.
So the voting can’t be duplicated from what I see.
So no “mistake” exists.
...
Alisae did not play a creature card from Micc's hand.
She used an ability of Micc's that can give someone else a green elemental, and generates a mana for herself.
Like, I've seen that exact same stunt before from town.
I agree its not a town motivated move
But at the same time I don't think wolves in general claim miller then retract.
In post 2821, Purple Heart wrote:Like, I've seen that exact same stunt before from town.
I agree its not a town motivated move
But at the same time I don't think wolves in general claim miller then retract.
I am giving you a bit of a side eye for that.
You know of at least one occurrence where that has happened and scum won.
