Hover over cards for details, click for permalink
6rm 6rm 6rm 6rm 6rm 6rm 6rt 6rt 6rt 6rt 6rt 6rt 710 710 710 710 710 710 710 710 715 715 71c 71c 71c 71c 71k 71k 72i 72i 72i 72i 7k1 7k1 7k1 7k1 7k1 7n2 7n2 7n2 7n2 7n2 8pqOne of the few disadvantages of SoSac is that the opponent can (at least theoretically) hold back their damage output. By using Aflatoxin, that choice is taken out of the opponent's hands; the opponent will be doing at least 23 damage per turn without a shield. With a shield, their damage output will be blocked almost entirely, especially if Death Nymph hits the field and Aflatoxins the few creatures that could be played before Malignant Cells could lock the field.
The PC-using opponent must choose between two undesirable choices. Do they let the shield live, and therefore deal miniscule amounts of damage with the few creatures that get played before Cells lock their field? Or do they destroy the shield, and run the risk of having their progress erased if the FG has a few SoSac in their hand? Thematically, the FG removes the doubt that comes of holding back damage to get past SoSac, but increases doubt by introducing such a dilemma. The FG itself does show signs of doubt; it must hold back its SoSac carefully until the opponent has sufficient damage, it has to hold back SoD if it has already played SoSac, it has to hold back excess Morning Glories and Animate Weapons, and its comparatively large deck introduces further uncertainty with its hand.
I am aware that FGs should not have shards, but this FG was made just for fun; I'm not actually expecting it to be put in the game.
I was playing around with the idea of using Arsenics instead and making it use a Mark of Death, but it gets countered too easily if I try that.
