The set symbol does seem to be roughly in the right spot, though it's hard to tell exactly because the picture is tilted.
What really made me suspicious at first was how the set symbol actually horizontally overlaps the final letter of the type line. But there seems to be some precedent for that even -- maybe? It's a little hard to tell. The examples I have in mind are Thalia, Guardian of Thraben, Jolrael, Empress of Beasts (Time Spiral printing), and maybeReaper King?
I don't know, what do other people make of these? In any case, it does seem to be rather more pronounced in this case than in those cases, but I guess that doesn't rule it out...
I know how regeneration and replacements effects work. What seemed strange to me is that they used "destroy" instead "die".
The reason is that you can't use regeneration for things like it having 0 toughness or being put into the graveyard from the Legend rule. Those are destruction events which is what regeneration prevents.
Overall, countermagic is bad right now. Removal is better. But indeed, rapid hybridization is an answer to him in blue, and Annihilating Fire plus other damage source would exile him in Red.
And since every other color has an answer, green has a chance too.
Annihilating Fire plus other damage source would exile him in Red.
Annihilating Fire doesn't work, for the same reason that Pillar of Flame doesn't work. The exile only happens if that creature would die this turn, and a creature that regenerates doesn't die. Remember, "dies" is shorthand for "is put into a graveyard from the battlefield. Also, from Annihilating Fire's Gathering rulings:
10/1/2012: The creature can still regenerate.
Anyway, back on topic: yes, there are some obvious red flags -- April 1st, Troll creature, etc.
But, to be honest, I'd be quite happy if that ends up being the actual card's text. It's not overpowered, but is still quite strong.
Nothing obviously wrong with this. Correct templating as far as I can tell, watermark/frame look legit, set symbol is in the right place (compare its position to the p/t box; also, see Niv-Mizzet, Dracogenius for a card with a very similar type line and a slightly narrower expansion symbol than the DGM symbol).
Abilities seem reasonable, no obvious design issues, powerful but not absurd. Deathtouch on a creature that is at least 5/5 when you have the option to use it is a little weird, but they sometimes do that when a creature needs another ability for flashiness or cycle completion but can't have anything very good for power reasons (see Grave Titan).
Obviously all the components someone would need in order to fake this are already out there, but I can't see anything that says it couldn't be real. Fakers have historically messed something up in almost all cases, so there's that.
No, you've got the wrong idea on how Pillar of Flame works. What happens, is the creature is destroyed due to sufficient damage marked on it, then it would go to the graveyard. Varolz' effect sees that it "would be destroyed due to sufficient damage marked on it", and steps in and says "but first, regenerate it and put a +1/+1 counter on him". It never goes to the graveyard, so Pillar of Flame never gets a chance to step in and exile him.
The second two examples do work for killing him, however.
Rules question I do have, however... If you deal exactly four damage to him from a source that does not allow him to regenerate, would he die? The reason I ask is because both the +1/+1 counter and the regeneration effect would have to happen before he's properly destroyed, at which point he would no longer have lethal damage marked on him.
His name is weird, the 'p' in Varolz, the Scar-Striped does not match typical name-font (I'm referencing Precinct Captain and Sunspire Griffin).
This. The "p" and the mana symbols are too far down than normal printing (you should see some color between the bottom of the letter and the art border. Unless this was a printing error (you don't see one aspect out of whack), then I might have to call fake. The Set Symbol is too far over if you look at it with the card type line, not the P/T box. And if the person took the picture, why didn't we get an artist name or collector's number. Seems too convenient.
The ability is good, and makes sense with the guild.
It's the little things that don't completely add up. Would I be shocked if this was real? No. But because today's the 1st...
People don't want to write it off immediately, in part because it would be pretty powerful, and isn't entirely implausible.
And, as has been pointed out, it would be ridiculously hilarious if WotC "leaked" a card to 4Chan on 4/1 knowing full well how the public would react to its legitimacy.
Rules question I do have, however... If you deal exactly four damage to him from a source that does not allow him to regenerate, would he die? The reason I ask is because both the +1/+1 counter and the regeneration effect would have to happen before he's properly destroyed, at which point he would no longer have lethal damage marked on him.
That's a tricky question... hmmm. It appears the put a +1/+1 on him is linked to the regenerate if he would be destroyed. The "if" makes it a replacement effect I think, replacing him being destroyed with "regenerate, put a +1/+1 counter on him". So I think it still occurs and doesn't have to use the stack since it's a replacement effect and not a triggered or activated ability.
Why is the artwork's frame completely black on the top half? If it were real, the frame would be split Black/Green right in the middle.
There's no arguing here, the photo itself shows the correct depiction on the bottom of the artwork's frame (B/G) while the top entirely black. Yeah, pretty much fake or a mock-up.
If this card is real, which it very well could be, do you think all the champions will have the "Warrior" Sub-Type?
Not that it is terribly relevant as a creature type right now, but it would make for an interesting comparison in what the guilds consider their "warriors".
If this card is real, which it very well could be, do you think all the champions will have the "Warrior" Sub-Type?
Not that it is terribly relevant as a creature type right now, but it would make for an interesting comparison in what the guilds consider their "warriors".
Probably not. Champions don't have to be Warriors. (They could be Cowards, but don't hold your breath.)
To those of you who are doubting it, this card is actually pretty damn good. It'll be good in constructed (assuming a good enough deck sprouting G/B exists, I don't know if he's worth splashing Green or Black for), it'll be good in EDH, he's got a lot of build around me potential..etc. He's a good card really.
Could still be fake, but he's a well designed one.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
What really made me suspicious at first was how the set symbol actually horizontally overlaps the final letter of the type line. But there seems to be some precedent for that even -- maybe? It's a little hard to tell. The examples I have in mind are Thalia, Guardian of Thraben, Jolrael, Empress of Beasts (Time Spiral printing), and maybe Reaper King?
I don't know, what do other people make of these? In any case, it does seem to be rather more pronounced in this case than in those cases, but I guess that doesn't rule it out...
The reason is that you can't use regeneration for things like it having 0 toughness or being put into the graveyard from the Legend rule. Those are destruction events which is what regeneration prevents.
DCI MTG Level 2 Judge
Simple math kids:
Redhead + Tsundere = Win
Shimapan + Thigh Highs = Win
Overall, countermagic is bad right now. Removal is better. But indeed, rapid hybridization is an answer to him in blue, and Annihilating Fire plus other damage source would exile him in Red.
And since every other color has an answer, green has a chance too.
His name is weird, the 'p' in Varolz, the Scar-Striped does not match typical name-font (I'm referencing Precinct Captain and Sunspire Griffin).
Annihilating Fire doesn't work, for the same reason that Pillar of Flame doesn't work. The exile only happens if that creature would die this turn, and a creature that regenerates doesn't die. Remember, "dies" is shorthand for "is put into a graveyard from the battlefield. Also, from Annihilating Fire's Gathering rulings:
Anyway, back on topic: yes, there are some obvious red flags -- April 1st, Troll creature, etc.
But, to be honest, I'd be quite happy if that ends up being the actual card's text. It's not overpowered, but is still quite strong.
Commander/EDH Decks:
BRG The Blood of Jund - Kresh the Bloodbraided BRG
WR The Blades of Goldnight - Gisela, Blade of Goldnight WR
Abilities seem reasonable, no obvious design issues, powerful but not absurd. Deathtouch on a creature that is at least 5/5 when you have the option to use it is a little weird, but they sometimes do that when a creature needs another ability for flashiness or cycle completion but can't have anything very good for power reasons (see Grave Titan).
Obviously all the components someone would need in order to fake this are already out there, but I can't see anything that says it couldn't be real. Fakers have historically messed something up in almost all cases, so there's that.
:symr::symb: I hate your deck(Kaervek the Merciless)
Wait, how do I even hide it as a name title?
Kemba, Kostume
Ka...Oh god that's not a good alliteration.Wait, how do I even hide it as a name title?
No, you've got the wrong idea on how Pillar of Flame works. What happens, is the creature is destroyed due to sufficient damage marked on it, then it would go to the graveyard. Varolz' effect sees that it "would be destroyed due to sufficient damage marked on it", and steps in and says "but first, regenerate it and put a +1/+1 counter on him". It never goes to the graveyard, so Pillar of Flame never gets a chance to step in and exile him.
The second two examples do work for killing him, however.
Rules question I do have, however... If you deal exactly four damage to him from a source that does not allow him to regenerate, would he die? The reason I ask is because both the +1/+1 counter and the regeneration effect would have to happen before he's properly destroyed, at which point he would no longer have lethal damage marked on him.
- Main Cube
- No Brains, All Feelings Cube
Creature type - Troll
Source: 4CHAN
Are you guys actually taking this seriously?
Niv-Mizzet Ramp 'n' Wheel
Godo: Strap him up and turn him sideways!
I definitely like the design, it's a great card that suits the theme very well.
This. The "p" and the mana symbols are too far down than normal printing (you should see some color between the bottom of the letter and the art border. Unless this was a printing error (you don't see one aspect out of whack), then I might have to call fake. The Set Symbol is too far over if you look at it with the card type line, not the P/T box. And if the person took the picture, why didn't we get an artist name or collector's number. Seems too convenient.
The ability is good, and makes sense with the guild.
It's the little things that don't completely add up. Would I be shocked if this was real? No. But because today's the 1st...
GatheringMagic.com Commander Writer
Twitter: @mtgcolorpie
One of the GDS2 Final 101
Recently Written Posts:
1-31 MTGCP The Complete Commander - Designing Commander
12-18 MTGCP The Day Kibler Shut Down the World
And, as has been pointed out, it would be ridiculously hilarious if WotC "leaked" a card to 4Chan on 4/1 knowing full well how the public would react to its legitimacy.
Commander/EDH Decks:
BRG The Blood of Jund - Kresh the Bloodbraided BRG
WR The Blades of Goldnight - Gisela, Blade of Goldnight WR
So...torn...
~M
That's a tricky question... hmmm. It appears the put a +1/+1 on him is linked to the regenerate if he would be destroyed. The "if" makes it a replacement effect I think, replacing him being destroyed with "regenerate, put a +1/+1 counter on him". So I think it still occurs and doesn't have to use the stack since it's a replacement effect and not a triggered or activated ability.
JUDGE!?!
There's no arguing here, the photo itself shows the correct depiction on the bottom of the artwork's frame (B/G) while the top entirely black. Yeah, pretty much fake or a mock-up.
Not that it is terribly relevant as a creature type right now, but it would make for an interesting comparison in what the guilds consider their "warriors".
Probably not. Champions don't have to be Warriors. (They could be Cowards, but don't hold your breath.)
You can find me on MTGO. My username is gereffi.
Could still be fake, but he's a well designed one.