Welcome to MTG Chicago - Your Gateway to the Multiverse of Magic: The Gathering! 🌟 Immerse yourself in the enchanting world of MTG as we, the Planeswalkers of MTG Chicago, bring you thrilling paper gameplay recordings and delve into the intricate strategies of this iconic card game. 🃏 Gameplay Galore: Watch as we, the MTG Chicago crew, showcase epic battles 🤝 Community Connection: Become a valued member of the MTG Chicago community! Share your thoughts, strategies, and engage with fellow Planeswalkers in the comments section. 🌐 Connect with MTG Chicago: Follow us on social media for the latest updates, polls, and behind-the-scenes content. Your feedback and suggestions shape the future of MTG Chicago. 🔗 Subscribe & Hit the Bell: Don't miss a moment of the magic! Subscribe to MTG Chicago, hit the notification bell, and embark on a journey through the planes with us. Let the spellbinding adventures begin! ✨🔥💧🌪️ #MTGChicago #magicthegathering #paperplay #cardgame
If this is how Ruby storm players are playing, then no wonder it isn't doing well. So many mistakes all round and game 1 should have been a win way faster. And, 100% cheating fetching the Island with Arid Mesa. You can see he realized it and still put it down hoping opponent misses it.
Am I wrong or is it somewhat a game violation for somebody to be keeping track of the storm players storm count for them? It feels like it should be something that's their responsibility to keep track of. Edit: I posted this before the Living End player gave it the go ahead.
The lets be done was completely accurate for playing against nadu. It plays like eggs, twin, and kci had an unholy bird child. Now, not saying dimir dude was cheating, but the way he shuffled he could see the bottom card, and did it every time. Just something you may want to mention to him so he can correct it to avoid any accusations.
Game 3 the storm player had a past in flames he had exiled from Ren resolve and accidentally put it in his bin at the end step should of stayed exile till next turn would of costed 2 and he could of stormed off
@@perrinleadbeater6603 Hi, it's me the breakfast player. The origin of the term "breakfast" in mtg is in the 0 cost of cards or activated abilities. These 0 costs were nicknamed Cheerios and because the deck was filled with "Cheerios" it was called breakfast
Am I missing something? Why didn't the Ruby Storm player use past In flames and just recast Grapechat to kill the other player in the first game? I am pretty sure he had the mana especially since the past in flames were free to cast due to Ral.
@@dylanbanks8883 dylan why not cast both pif then grape ? in this way u are 1 off lethal but if he plays endurance in response to the 1st pif then u have lethal with grape ! also i would have sided glimpse the impossible out vs nadu, its horrible vs fast match ups
If there's anything in life that we can all agree on, it's how much we can all feel the pure exhaustion he was feeling while saying those words. Bro hating his life watching Nadu doing it's thing.
@@nathanbally he would not have, alchemist gambit states damage can't be prevented in the extra turn. So it gets around the one ring. I'm the storm player lol
