Feb 20 Preview: F.U.M.A.S.T.

[jedibcg]

http://spoils.tcgplayer.com/db/article.asp?ID=1505

Check out Lucien's article.

[infidel07]

wow


this is very interesting

prob never used in limited but i cant say never in constructed. its nice that tenacious puts out a tournament themed ccg but at the same time has cards that would be awesome in a constructed format.

good show

[jedibcg]

Did you noticed that it is limited artwork as well?

[infidel07]

the art is always great with spoils

[CodyD1024]

These are just the types of cards I wanted to see. This makes mono banker just that much better. Actually, it makes banker not just a splash anymore, although I do agree, it dosn't have much of a place in sealed.

I can definitley see decks being built around this card in the future.

[JayDubbs]

When it says to a minimum of 1 is it implying new factions or a way to have more than one copy of the same unique on your side of the board?

[jedibcg]

While there are other things that can reduce the cost as well. As the article mentions. But I think you are correct in assuming that it is making way for new factions.

[Osion]

When it says to a minimum of 1 is it implying new factions or a way to have more than one copy of the same unique on your side of the board?

Perhaps just in case a faction comes out with

Cost - Pay 1
Effect - Gain 1 Influence

or any other number of 1-cost effects. If abilities cost 0 they'd be too powerful, unless they have drawbacks attached.

[BertGreenMan]

LOVE IT!!!!!!!!

looks like banker is shaking up to being a threat.

[JayDubbs]

The minimum does prevent potentially broken future faction combos, but it is always nice to think about them.:D

[aldrinanymous]

perfectly balanced as it is also unique. I wonder if we'll see this a lot in splash decks other than mono banker...

[Kallen000]

I love the card dont even know how much constructed it will see but I can guarentee you I already have a deck it will go in so maybe that speaks for itself. Its not mono banker :)

[painted_klown]

Wow, nice card. I totally agree with Luke's review of it as well. I'll be looking to build a mono Baker deck come 1Ep2.:) Another thing I liked is the relatively high structure cost. It may be tough to remove from the field for a bit if your opponent isn't also playing banker and slapping down some Repo men. The fact that it's Unique keeps it balanced as well so you cannot "stack" them, making every Faction ability only 1 cost. Another nice job :chomp: . :D

[Knightmare13]

Give me a L! Give me an A! Give me a M! Give me an E!

Whats that spell?

LAME!!!

LOL

Sorry im in no way happy about this card. The threshold almost garuntess that the game will be LONG over before its useful. If your opponent has time to play this card you deserve to lose the game. The only way advantage cards are good is if they generate EARLY game advantage to help you put your opponent into a hole nice and early forcing them to claw for anything they can get to use against you.

Its neat and all, and in casual constructed im sure it will see some play, but the only thing I would use this card for is to pass it to the guy next to me over and over until he is forced to draft it and lose a precious spot in his card pool.

(dont take my opening statement to hard, im just playing around)

This thing would be like if MTGs moxes cost 5 to play. It would take them from being some of the best cards ever and turn them into garbage.

[Phlyinice]

Give me a L! Give me an A! Give me a M! Give me an E!

This thing would be like if MTGs moxes cost 5 to play. It would take them from being some of the best cards ever and turn them into garbage.

if I'm not mistaken, the newer versions of the black lotus also had some drastic drawbacks that were on this order, and even they saw plenty of constructed play. Lotus Vale is used in dragonstorm decks, and the lotus card that cost 5 to play also saw plenty of play (in mirrodin block?).

Point is: don't write it off yet.

[turning_of_the_tide]

Plain and simple seems like a timmy card to me....even if it does see play it makes repo man that much better....thresh is far to much and effect wont usually hit til at least the turn after. On the tournement faction this card is pretty bad...maybe good in the future with new fations but my grade for now: D-

-Ryan:spade:

[Hopes]

Well, we haven't seen much from Part 2 yet, so we can't say much about what archetype will be viable once this card hits the store. But I think a good mono-banker control deck will do something with it, using early defense to set up a good board and keeping control of it through stuff like necromorph bureaucrat and limited liability or even gold summit and the banker's good draw, and using characters along the lines of concealed goon to win. But as Tide said, it would be hard to do with the tournament faction, and it would need more support of control cards that it would hopefully get in part 2.

[Kallen000]

short answer is that you can build a deck to get it out but the card dosnt say "you win" so it may be to costly of a venture.

[DoughboyDominatrix]

I've been waiting for something like this. I just didn't expect it to be banker nor did I expect 6 threshold.

[JayDubbs]

I think that a mono banker deck with F.U.M.A.S.T. and Samuel Gristwalter can make for strong control. Lock out the opponents attack and then out draw them to victory.

[Kallen000]

the problem is outdrawing dosnt mean you win and thats the point. Mono Banker is short on grand answers of winning. This card may give you an advantage but at what cost.

[JayDubbs]

Banker does have some good beaters like Erotic Assassin, Mau Tough and the new embezzeller. Lock the board, then downsize and play some fat. It is not great but not terrible. It would also be kind of suspenseful trying to see if you can wipe the board and then draw lots cards and win before the opponent can re-up.

[The_Sin]

I think I have mixed decisions on this card. I feel that if I really wanted to reduce the cost of numerical abilities I would probably not be using the Banker aspect (Gear smith is where it is at); however, I do understand what The Spoils is trying to do hear. Giving options so new decks can be made. I really am okay with the location costing that many resources. At first glance it seems a little outrages, but given the fact that your start out with two resources in play and the fact that the life on this location is really high, I think it will see a lot of constructed play. However, only the future will unfold the events to come. :chomp:

[Brad Meine]

It will see zero constructed play if mono-banker is not a viable deck. This card doesn't win you any games, which I guess only adds to the fact that mono-banker doesn't win any games either. I can guarantee without item destruction that mono-banker will be even less workable in the future. The Whatever Device adds greatly to an already unbelievable strong deck.

[Lioge]

I know some people who are just drooling to have this card hit constructed play. Those people are the OPPONENTS who play Pluck.

Hmm, I can see that Card Counter/Pillaging Pirate have hit gold in the FUMAST, now I can not only out play my opponent by picking the best thing in their discard, but I can also out draw them.

Grand Theft All and Pluck make this card unplayable. There is something to be said about the parity between your Tournament Faction and your opponents Tournament Faction. This card has more potential to used "against" your deck than effectively for your deck.

Think about this:

By the time you have 6 Greed thresh out and 6 open resources available, the board position can probably deal 8 damage to a location before you can glean positive card advantage with FUMAST.

Lets talk numbers:
FUMAST (card: 3 resources + cost: 6 resources = 9)
Generating parity with this location will cost you a total of 15 resources. The opportunity cost of playing FUMAST is drawing 2 cards plus the card itself. Once FUMAST is in play you'll need to spend 6 resources to draw three cards to reach parity.

If a player has 15 resources available to spend to reach EVEN, the opponent isn't playing to win.

Just my two cents.