Oh I suppose “target player sacrifices” sort of counts as specifying an exception of source for destroying something? But to get the same impact as destroy the wording ends up quite clunky and inelegant within magics rules system imo.

I can’t actually think of any examples in magic of things other than damage intuitively specifying they aren’t the source? Like there are a few cases of “choose” instead of “target” allowing a spell to get past hexproof, but I don’t think that’s what you’re referring to?

Now as to why Destroy effects don’t also do this. I suspect it’s also the rules baggage about interactions with protection. Damnation can destroy a pro-black creature, but Pyroclasm can’t damage a pro-red one. Imo this is an unintuitive interaction, and it would likely be better if neither worked.

This notably also allows spells to make other things do damage. Like fight spells would be really confusing without a way to specify whether the spell or the creature was dealing the damage. It would be very unclear how protection is supposed to interact with that.

I think it’s something to do with the how they made the rules for Protection and damage prevention work way back? Damage needs to have a source so Protection can know what attributes it has and whether it should be protecting from them, even when not targeting. It can’t do that for destroy.

This is so absurdly similar to a stock Australian Highlander (7ph) Grixis deck. So I’d probably consider Kaito, the 4 mana planeswalker with Ninjitsu for 3 mana. And probably also baleful strix?

Yes, I’m the eldest of 5 and I love all my siblings. My two younger sisters are 2.5 and 4 years younger than me and we all have great relationships and have pretty much the whole time, and my two younger half brothers are 10.5 and 12 years younger than me and I’ve loved guiding them through life.

Dear Gibb, do you prefer apples or oranges?

It’s this character’s birthday today. Apparently that’s a thing they’re doing for Final Fantasy, revealing characters on their birthday whether or not it fits into the schedule otherwise.

Got stuck working out the sequence needed to get that result. Think it needs to be:
1. 6 (6 loyalty (L), 2 uses left (U))
2. 6 (7 L, 3 U)
3. 6 (8 L, 4 U)
4. 4/5 (6 L, 3 U, 8 dmg)
5. 4/5 (4 L, 2 U, 14 dmg)
6. 6 (5 L, 3 U)
7. 1/2 (7 L, 2 U, 2 1/1s)
8. 3 (6 L, 1 U, 1 Regrowth)
9. 4/5 (4 L, 20 dmg)

This is really cool! Would it be possible to implement the same feature for Australian Highlander? Their points list is here: 7ph.com.au

Gosh I’m looking forward to watching this after I’m finished at family dinner!

I think it’s because these designs don’t compromise on readability. So most people who don’t like the art style can more easily disregard it.
If the alt arts were also different to read, people would likely more annoyed by them, because they’d have to decipher them across the table.

Also gotta remember that pyrogoyf can hit any target. Oftentimes it’s dealing 7 damage to your opponent while developing a 7/8

Personally, I prefer Auslander 😊