I suppose you know better than the thousands of dollars they put into market research. Oh, wait a second...
Valarin's knowledge of Magic outweighs the knowledge of Wizards and the knowledge of the pro players. Everyone knows this. I hear R&D asks him for advice every so often.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
EDH: URJhoira of the GhituUR(Under con.) BMaralen of the MornsongB UBLazav, Dimir MastermindUB Standard: UMono U DevotionU Casual: GPrimordial Hydra JankinessG
They spend a lot more tan thousands of dollars,which makes the fact they get so many things wrong even more embarrassing.
Wrong by what, your standards? Fortunately for us, you don't design Magic cards, nor are the authority on what makes Magic a successful game.
Shroud is counter-intuitive. Hexproof isn't. I don't remember people making as big of a fuss about all this when Troll Ascetic was first printed, but after 2 years of Geist of Saint Traft, it seems like it's easier to jump to conclusions than actually think about how a card effects the format as a whole.
They spend a lot more tan thousands of dollars,which makes the fact they get so many things wrong even more embarrassing.
They get so many things wrong, according to you, that it should be a miracle the game is absolutely thriving right now. Maybe the problem is that WotC knows what they want and designs for what they want and what they want isn't in line with what you want. Maybe what you see as faults in WotC are actually faults in your own expectations.
Let's all remember that Mark Rosewater designs every card, Valarin designs better than Mark Rosewater, and therefore Valarin will one day save Magic from one of its most successful periods ever.
Turning big, indestructible, hexproof cats with wigs sideways isn't dumb at all!
. . .
In all seriousness though, I agree. This card is just dumb and represents the worst kind of annoying, unfun design. It has Invisible Stalker syndrome, although nowhere near as bad thanks to the additional monstrosity cost. What I mean is that there are so few playable answers to these types of cards that they just feel like they were designed to be used to troll people over and over again. Also, it doesn't really make sense flavor-wise (Greek mythology be damned) why a random lion would ever be harder to kill than, say, Progenitus or Emrakul. Or any of the gods of Theros, for that matter...
This will see constructed play, although (despite all my griping) I imagine the steep monstrosity cost will prevent it from being too obnoxious. Killing this dumb lion in response to the monstrosity activation will be pretty satisfying, at least.
I really don't feel Watchwolf needed to be obsoleted. It's not much better, but come on, Watchwolf was a chase uncommon and very potent. Really didn't require being discredited. They could have tweaked it just slightly so that it wasn't a blatant obsoletion.
But yeah, keep on sucking the value out of the secondary market, don't worry, the players will just keep shelling out the money, no worries guys! :/
Thunder Smash - R
Instant (U)
Thunder Smash deals 3 damage to any target.
Kicker 4RR - If you paid the kicker cost, Thunder Smash also deals 1 damage to any target. Why not?
Turning big, indestructible, hexproof cats with wigs sideways isn't dumb at all!
. . .
In all seriousness though, I agree. This card is just dumb and represents the worst kind of annoying, unfun design. It has Invisible Stalker syndrome, although nowhere near as bad thanks to the additional monstrosity cost. What I mean is that there are so few playable answers to these types of cards that they just feel like they were designed to be used to troll people over and over again. Also, it doesn't really make sense flavor-wise (Greek mythology be damned) why a random lion would ever be harder to kill than, say, Progenitus or Emrakul. Or any of the gods of Theros, for that matter...
This will see constructed play, although (despite all my griping) I imagine the steep monstrosity cost will prevent it from being too obnoxious. Killing this dumb lion in response to the monstrosity activation will be pretty satisfying, at least.
This is an interesting perspective. When hexproof first debuted, I felt this same way, even if I couldn't articulate as well as you. But yeah, this thing possibly being untargetable AND indestructible? Stupid.
Tap 5 at the end of your turn to activate monstrosity
opponent responds
you don't have another 5 mana (guaranteed)
you lose the lion.
.....move on......
EOT? No, silly, that's not how you abuse Hexproof/Indestructible at instant speed.:rolleyes: You gotta make them waste a doom blade first.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
EDH: URJhoira of the GhituUR(Under con.) BMaralen of the MornsongB UBLazav, Dimir MastermindUB Standard: UMono U DevotionU Casual: GPrimordial Hydra JankinessG
While I may be new to the forum, I'm glad veterans have the same reaction to this dude's claims of designing cards better than the actual designers lol.
For everyone who's jumping on the "complain about hexproof" bandwagon, this card proves that R&D listened to you. It's no Geist and you've got three turns (more if I miss land drops) to block this, make me block with it, or kill it with fire before you have to worry about the hexproof clause.
For those who are saying that the Monstrous ability isn't relevant/won't ever be used, please use your head. It's not about always having it go off. It's about the fact that I can threaten you with it until either I get it or you deal with the card. Once I have five mana I can sit there, daring you to deal with it. You can't ever tap out or you'll have a major headache on your hands. I'll hold up mana on your turn, wait for you to tap out and then activate this. If I don't want to then I can make a 5/5 trampling wurm instead. That's good too. Green/White's late game just got really sick.
This is an interesting perspective. When hexproof first debuted, I felt this same way, even if I couldn't articulate as well as you. But yeah, this thing possibly being untargetable AND indestructible? Stupid.
It isn't stupid. It is top down design. It is the Nemean Lion(whose hide was impenetrable) whose mane is that of the Golden Fleece(which had mystical powers that could heal any wound). Is it a bit of a derpy card in terms of interaction? Yes. Is it bad? Definitely not. Is it stupid? Not from a design/flavor standpoint.
I really don't feel Watchwolf needed to be obsoleted. It's not much better, but come on, Watchwolf was a chase uncommon and very potent. Really didn't require being discredited. They could have tweaked it just slightly so that it wasn't a blatant obsoletion.
But yeah, keep on sucking the value out of the secondary market, don't worry, the players will just keep shelling out the money, no worries guys! :/
Thunder Smash - R
Instant (U)
Thunder Smash deals 3 damage to any target.
Kicker 4RR - If you paid the kicker cost, Thunder Smash also deals 1 damage to any target. Why not?
in wotc's defense, obsoleting watchwolf does nothing to warp any format right now, whereas obsoleting lightning bolt would have much more far-reaching effects (and assuming that super-powerful burn is "worse" for most formats than strong creatures, this is something we want to avoid. though I realize that is an assumption being made). Lightning bolt is better than watchwolf and super-efficient burn spells are better than super-efficient creatures. They could print a one-mana counter spell too, but that's nothing like what they're doing with fleecemane lion.
and besides, if wotc printed your card they'd make it rare
It isn't stupid. It is top down design. It is the Nemean Lion(whose hide was impenetrable) whose mane is that of the Golden Fleece(which had mystical powers that could heal any wound). Is it a bit of a derpy card in terms of interaction? Yes. Is it bad? Definitely not. Is it stupid? Not from a design/flavor standpoint.
Top down design was also the way that Invisible Stalker came into existence (the invisible man trope and all that). Does that make Invisible Stalker any less of an annoying, obnoxious troll card? No. When I'm getting beaten down by a 12/12 trample, flying, lifelink, first strike, unblockable, hexproof invisible guy, I don't really care very much about its top down design. Naturally, I fully agree that the way the lion works is "derpy", but I also agree that it is most certainly not a bad card from an objective, competitive evaluation standpoint. It will see standard play, I think that much is certain, and it's uses are indeed much more reasonable and interactive than the abomination that was Stalker. It's a 3/3 for 2 to start, and that alone is fairly respectable. But if you couldn't already tell, I personally think that the card is stupid from both a design and flavor standpoint. It feels like a complete sellout for indestructible and hexproof to appear on the same card together. Both of these abilities are already extremely powerful on their own. It doesn't take a design genius to realize that when you put them together it is obscenely difficult to deal with. This type of design represents another small step towards the now seemingly inevitable "Your opponents are not allowed to interact with this card in any way whatsoever." There's a point where you just need to draw the line.
As far as flavor goes, I too can appreciate the Nemean lion and golden fleece references, but does that really justify the creation of a creature who is more difficult to kill than Progenitus? Does it justify a creature whose degree of protection goes well beyond actual "protection from everything"? It just doesn't make much sense.
DISCLAIMER: I'm mainly speaking about the theoretical problems that arise from indestructible and hexproof being on the same card. I do not think that this card in particular will be much of a problem because it does not have these abilities immediately and can easily be interacted with beforehand, which makes it at least somewhat reasonable.
Are people still using The argument "But someone can kill creature x with something!!1!!1"?
Dude , it's okay. You won't have to worry about Fabiocat after I kill you with it. It'll be all over then.
You say "Kill it with fire!" in response I say Brave the Elements or Ranger's Guile yo. Go ahead and waste your kill before I smack you with Fabiocat. Why would you try and activate his monstrosity before you can protect it.
I don't remember people making as big of a fuss about all this when Troll Ascetic was first printed, but after 2 years of Geist of Saint Traft, it seems like it's easier to jump to conclusions than actually think about how a card effects the format as a whole.
To be fair, when Troll Ascetic was printed, it was a very distant third on the "issues with Standard" list behind "Affinity > Everything" and Tooth and Nail. Probably fourth, if you consider Onslaught/Mirrodin standard also still had Goblin Bidding, which could rival Affinity for speed and lethality, at least until Arcbound Ravager came along. Also, Troll is just a dumb beater. Sure, it can regenerate, and it held a Sword of Fire and Ice better than anything else at the time, but that was it. It could be blocked with relative ease until someone found a Sword to put on it. It didn't have any evasion of its own. It didn't have any other board-affecting abilities, and it didn't generate any additional creatures by itself. The bigger issue with hexproof now is that it's getting put on things that have built-in evasion (Sigarda, Invisible Stalker), have far-reaching effects on the rest of the board state (Sigarda again, Asceticism), and/or are just flat-out enormous threats BEFORE attaching Auras/Equipment (Geist, Sigarda again again, Thrun to an extent). At least with shroud things could be pushed a little because there was no way to make the creature any better. The harder something is to answer, the less you can push the other abilities, or it approaches broken (note: I don't consider any of these broken, though this, Geist and Sigarda are pushing it). The issue is that they keep pushing the creature with P/T and abilities that would be fair to efficient for their cost AND tacking hexproof on at the end.
On top of all that, there's the fact that mass removal has been nerfed quite a bit as well. Onslaught-Mirrodin Standard had Wrath of God, Akroma's Vengeance, Pyroclasm, Infest, Oblivion Stone, Starstorm, and Flamebreak that could kill Troll before a Sword, and that's just the stuff that got played! I didn't include other things like Inferno and Plague Wind that were too expensive and didn't fit a deck at the time. Now think about what can kill this lion once it's monstrous: Merciless Eviction. That's it. Part of that is due to the indestructibility, but most of it is due to it being too big to kill with mass shrink and it being unable to be exiled or bounced with a single-target spell because of hexproof. Throw an Unflinching Courage on it and now you've got a 6/6 indestructible trampling lifelinker that can't be stopped with removal but can still get bigger with more Auras.
I think this would have been powerful and beyond fair with shroud. Hell, it probably could have been buffed to Monstrous 2 and still been fair. I think it's powerful and verging on unfair with hexproof. If design is claiming to value interaction because they want a more "fair" game, then making the interaction completely one-sided is achieving one at the expense of the other.
Top down design was also the way that Invisible Stalker came into existence (the invisible man trope and all that). Does that make Invisible Stalker any less of an annoying, obnoxious troll card? No. When I'm getting beaten down by a 12/12 trample, flying, lifelink, first strike, unblockable, hexproof invisible guy, I don't really care very much about its top down design. Naturally, I fully agree that the way the lion works is "derpy", but I also agree that it is most certainly not a bad card from an objective, competitive evaluation standpoint. It will see standard play, I think that much is certain, and it's uses are indeed much more reasonable and interactive than the abomination that was Stalker. It's a 3/3 for 2 to start, and that alone is fairly respectable. But if you couldn't already tell, I personally think that the card is stupid from both a design and flavor standpoint. It feels like a complete sellout for indestructible and hexproof to appear on the same card together. Both of these abilities are already extremely powerful on their own. It doesn't take a design genius to realize that when you put them together it is obscenely difficult to deal with. This type of design represents another small step towards the now seemingly inevitable "Your opponents are not allowed to interact with this card in any way whatsoever." There's a point where you just need to draw the line.
As far as flavor goes, I too can appreciate the Nemean lion and golden fleece references, but does that really justify the creation of a creature who is more difficult to kill than Progenitus? Does it justify a creature whose degree of protection goes well beyond actual "protection from everything"? It just doesn't make much sense.
DISCLAIMER: I'm mainly speaking about the theoretical problems that arise from indestructible and hexproof being on the same card. I do not think that this card in particular will be much of a problem because it does not have these abilities immediately and can easily be interacted with beforehand, which makes it at least somewhat reasonable.
Given your disclaimer, I'll state the following opinion: I think that your theoretical argument is right, and that this card is a reasonably elegant way of arriving at the desired effect while sidestepping some of the problems you pointed out. Being able to become a hideously obnoxious creature is definitely less of a sin than that of Invisible Stalker, which comes into play as a hideously obnoxious creature. I doubt we'll see these two words on the same creature often, or even rarely. The trope here is a decent excuse for it.
Unfortunately Wizards has retired Shroud in favor of Hexproof because new players and casual players, (who always have and will make up the largest base of their business,) do not like, enjoy, and often don't understand the power in "symmetric" effects like Shroud.
The same goes for self-harming things, reasons we will never see cards like Phyrexian Arena in a core set again, or the pain land cycle, that flavor of ability doesn't sit well with the casual and newb crowd.
To be fair, when Troll Ascetic was printed, it was a very distant third on the "issues with Standard" list behind "Affinity > Everything" and Tooth and Nail. Probably fourth, if you consider Onslaught/Mirrodin standard also still had Goblin Bidding, which could rival Affinity for speed and lethality, at least until Arcbound Ravager came along. Also, Troll is just a dumb beater. Sure, it can regenerate, and it held a Sword of Fire and Ice better than anything else at the time, but that was it. It could be blocked with relative ease until someone found a Sword to put on it. It didn't have any evasion of its own. It didn't have any other board-affecting abilities, and it didn't generate any additional creatures by itself. The bigger issue with hexproof now is that it's getting put on things that have built-in evasion (Sigarda, Invisible Stalker), have far-reaching effects on the rest of the board state (Sigarda again, Asceticism), and/or are just flat-out enormous threats BEFORE attaching Auras/Equipment (Geist, Sigarda again again, Thrun to an extent). At least with shroud things could be pushed a little because there was no way to make the creature any better. The harder something is to answer, the less you can push the other abilities, or it approaches broken (note: I don't consider any of these broken, though this, Geist and Sigarda are pushing it). The issue is that they keep pushing the creature with P/T and abilities that would be fair to efficient for their cost AND tacking hexproof on at the end.
On top of all that, there's the fact that mass removal has been nerfed quite a bit as well. Onslaught-Mirrodin Standard had Wrath of God, Akroma's Vengeance, Pyroclasm, Infest, Oblivion Stone, Starstorm, and Flamebreak that could kill Troll before a Sword, and that's just the stuff that got played! I didn't include other things like Inferno and Plague Wind that were too expensive and didn't fit a deck at the time. Now think about what can kill this lion once it's monstrous: Merciless Eviction. That's it. Part of that is due to the indestructibility, but most of it is due to it being too big to kill with mass shrink and it being unable to be exiled or bounced with a single-target spell because of hexproof. Throw an Unflinching Courage on it and now you've got a 6/6 indestructible trampling lifelinker that can't be stopped with removal but can still get bigger with more Auras.
I think this would have been powerful and beyond fair with shroud. Hell, it probably could have been buffed to Monstrous 2 and still been fair. I think it's powerful and verging on unfair with hexproof. If design is claiming to value interaction because they want a more "fair" game, then making the interaction completely one-sided is achieving one at the expense of the other.
/rant
I understand your frustration at the prospect of facing down another Stalker-like annoyance that is almost impossible to interact with. But as a player who's played a lot of Bant Hexproof this last year, let me try to reassure you. This is a very good creature, a powerful early drop with a decent upside. But this is not a creature that really enables a "hexproof/auras" deck unless Standard is going to change a LOT in the upcoming months.
The big drawback to this card is the tempo loss you face if the Lion is killed in response to it's monstrous activation. So you're not going to want to activate it unless 1) you have additional protection available, or 2) your opponent has tapped out. Best case scenario, your opponent taps out on turn 4/5 for something and you can activate. But looking at the other Theros spoilers, if your opponent is tapping out on turn 4/5, there is a strong possibility that they're playing something that can actually block an indestructible 4/4 (a God, the new Gorgon, Hundred-Handed One, Ember Swallower, Polukranos, etc.)
With Cavern of Souls rotating out (and Savage Summoning not looking like a viable replacement), countermagic will be a viable tool for control decks which can often handle this card. Edict effects also can deal with it pretty reasonably. This card will be a beating in Limited (as many rares are) and will probably see Constructed play, but I don't think it'll be format defining in any real way.
To be fair, when Troll Ascetic was printed, it was a very distant third on the "issues with Standard" list behind "Affinity > Everything" and Tooth and Nail. Probably fourth, if you consider Onslaught/Mirrodin standard also still had Goblin Bidding, which could rival Affinity for speed and lethality, at least until Arcbound Ravager came along. Also, Troll is just a dumb beater. Sure, it can regenerate, and it held a Sword of Fire and Ice better than anything else at the time, but that was it. It could be blocked with relative ease until someone found a Sword to put on it. It didn't have any evasion of its own. It didn't have any other board-affecting abilities, and it didn't generate any additional creatures by itself. The bigger issue with hexproof now is that it's getting put on things that have built-in evasion (Sigarda, Invisible Stalker), have far-reaching effects on the rest of the board state (Sigarda again, Asceticism), and/or are just flat-out enormous threats BEFORE attaching Auras/Equipment (Geist, Sigarda again again, Thrun to an extent). At least with shroud things could be pushed a little because there was no way to make the creature any better. The harder something is to answer, the less you can push the other abilities, or it approaches broken (note: I don't consider any of these broken, though this, Geist and Sigarda are pushing it). The issue is that they keep pushing the creature with P/T and abilities that would be fair to efficient for their cost AND tacking hexproof on at the end.
On top of all that, there's the fact that mass removal has been nerfed quite a bit as well. Onslaught-Mirrodin Standard had Wrath of God, Akroma's Vengeance, Pyroclasm, Infest, Oblivion Stone, Starstorm, and Flamebreak that could kill Troll before a Sword, and that's just the stuff that got played! I didn't include other things like Inferno and Plague Wind that were too expensive and didn't fit a deck at the time. Now think about what can kill this lion once it's monstrous: Merciless Eviction. That's it. Part of that is due to the indestructibility, but most of it is due to it being too big to kill with mass shrink and it being unable to be exiled or bounced with a single-target spell because of hexproof. Throw an Unflinching Courage on it and now you've got a 6/6 indestructible trampling lifelinker that can't be stopped with removal but can still get bigger with more Auras.
I think this would have been powerful and beyond fair with shroud. Hell, it probably could have been buffed to Monstrous 2 and still been fair. I think it's powerful and verging on unfair with hexproof. If design is claiming to value interaction because they want a more "fair" game, then making the interaction completely one-sided is achieving one at the expense of the other.
/rant
They can still force you to sacrifice it, Barter in Blood and similar effects still get rid of it.
Like others in the thread, I would agree that Hexproof is only really obnoxious on creatures that are already very pushed (such as the aforementioned Geist and Invisible Stalker). The lion is, undoubtedly, pushed, but I think that the fact that it does not begin with Hexproof or Indestructible makes it fair. It is already a Watchwolf, which is plenty powerful for what it is, and it has the power to really take off at 5 mana. It is your job to make sure that it dies before the opponent reaches 5 mana; if you can't then it becomes almost unkillable. The card gives you time to react and stop the threat, so I think that it's fair. It's a very good, very pushed creature that I expect will see play, but it isn't unfair. Every color has some way to deal with it before it becomes a monstrous threat, so I think that its abilities are justified. If there was a 'correct' way to do Hexproof, this is probably it: kill it quickly, or soon you won't be able to.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
They spend a lot more tan thousands of dollars,which makes the fact they get so many things wrong even more embarrassing.
Valarin's knowledge of Magic outweighs the knowledge of Wizards and the knowledge of the pro players. Everyone knows this. I hear R&D asks him for advice every so often.
URJhoira of the GhituUR(Under con.)
BMaralen of the MornsongB
UBLazav, Dimir MastermindUB
Standard:
UMono U DevotionU
Casual:
GPrimordial Hydra JankinessG
Wrong by what, your standards? Fortunately for us, you don't design Magic cards, nor are the authority on what makes Magic a successful game.
Shroud is counter-intuitive. Hexproof isn't. I don't remember people making as big of a fuss about all this when Troll Ascetic was first printed, but after 2 years of Geist of Saint Traft, it seems like it's easier to jump to conclusions than actually think about how a card effects the format as a whole.
They get so many things wrong, according to you, that it should be a miracle the game is absolutely thriving right now. Maybe the problem is that WotC knows what they want and designs for what they want and what they want isn't in line with what you want. Maybe what you see as faults in WotC are actually faults in your own expectations.
Turning big, indestructible, hexproof cats with wigs sideways isn't dumb at all!
. . .
In all seriousness though, I agree. This card is just dumb and represents the worst kind of annoying, unfun design. It has Invisible Stalker syndrome, although nowhere near as bad thanks to the additional monstrosity cost. What I mean is that there are so few playable answers to these types of cards that they just feel like they were designed to be used to troll people over and over again. Also, it doesn't really make sense flavor-wise (Greek mythology be damned) why a random lion would ever be harder to kill than, say, Progenitus or Emrakul. Or any of the gods of Theros, for that matter...
This will see constructed play, although (despite all my griping) I imagine the steep monstrosity cost will prevent it from being too obnoxious. Killing this dumb lion in response to the monstrosity activation will be pretty satisfying, at least.
But yeah, keep on sucking the value out of the secondary market, don't worry, the players will just keep shelling out the money, no worries guys! :/
Thunder Smash - R
Instant (U)
Thunder Smash deals 3 damage to any target.
Kicker 4RR - If you paid the kicker cost, Thunder Smash also deals 1 damage to any target.
Why not?
.
This is an interesting perspective. When hexproof first debuted, I felt this same way, even if I couldn't articulate as well as you. But yeah, this thing possibly being untargetable AND indestructible? Stupid.
Tap 5 at the end of your turn to activate monstrosity
opponent responds
you don't have another 5 mana (guaranteed)
you lose the lion.
.....move on......
My Sales Post!
EOT? No, silly, that's not how you abuse Hexproof/Indestructible at instant speed.:rolleyes: You gotta make them waste a doom blade first.
URJhoira of the GhituUR(Under con.)
BMaralen of the MornsongB
UBLazav, Dimir MastermindUB
Standard:
UMono U DevotionU
Casual:
GPrimordial Hydra JankinessG
UW Control (:symu: :symw:)
For everyone who's jumping on the "complain about hexproof" bandwagon, this card proves that R&D listened to you. It's no Geist and you've got three turns (more if I miss land drops) to block this, make me block with it, or kill it with fire before you have to worry about the hexproof clause.
For those who are saying that the Monstrous ability isn't relevant/won't ever be used, please use your head. It's not about always having it go off. It's about the fact that I can threaten you with it until either I get it or you deal with the card. Once I have five mana I can sit there, daring you to deal with it. You can't ever tap out or you'll have a major headache on your hands. I'll hold up mana on your turn, wait for you to tap out and then activate this. If I don't want to then I can make a 5/5 trampling wurm instead. That's good too. Green/White's late game just got really sick.
It isn't stupid. It is top down design. It is the Nemean Lion(whose hide was impenetrable) whose mane is that of the Golden Fleece(which had mystical powers that could heal any wound). Is it a bit of a derpy card in terms of interaction? Yes. Is it bad? Definitely not. Is it stupid? Not from a design/flavor standpoint.
Many thanks to DNC at Heroes of the Plane Studios
in wotc's defense, obsoleting watchwolf does nothing to warp any format right now, whereas obsoleting lightning bolt would have much more far-reaching effects (and assuming that super-powerful burn is "worse" for most formats than strong creatures, this is something we want to avoid. though I realize that is an assumption being made). Lightning bolt is better than watchwolf and super-efficient burn spells are better than super-efficient creatures. They could print a one-mana counter spell too, but that's nothing like what they're doing with fleecemane lion.
and besides, if wotc printed your card they'd make it rare
Top down design was also the way that Invisible Stalker came into existence (the invisible man trope and all that). Does that make Invisible Stalker any less of an annoying, obnoxious troll card? No. When I'm getting beaten down by a 12/12 trample, flying, lifelink, first strike, unblockable, hexproof invisible guy, I don't really care very much about its top down design. Naturally, I fully agree that the way the lion works is "derpy", but I also agree that it is most certainly not a bad card from an objective, competitive evaluation standpoint. It will see standard play, I think that much is certain, and it's uses are indeed much more reasonable and interactive than the abomination that was Stalker. It's a 3/3 for 2 to start, and that alone is fairly respectable. But if you couldn't already tell, I personally think that the card is stupid from both a design and flavor standpoint. It feels like a complete sellout for indestructible and hexproof to appear on the same card together. Both of these abilities are already extremely powerful on their own. It doesn't take a design genius to realize that when you put them together it is obscenely difficult to deal with. This type of design represents another small step towards the now seemingly inevitable "Your opponents are not allowed to interact with this card in any way whatsoever." There's a point where you just need to draw the line.
As far as flavor goes, I too can appreciate the Nemean lion and golden fleece references, but does that really justify the creation of a creature who is more difficult to kill than Progenitus? Does it justify a creature whose degree of protection goes well beyond actual "protection from everything"? It just doesn't make much sense.
DISCLAIMER: I'm mainly speaking about the theoretical problems that arise from indestructible and hexproof being on the same card. I do not think that this card in particular will be much of a problem because it does not have these abilities immediately and can easily be interacted with beforehand, which makes it at least somewhat reasonable.
Dude , it's okay. You won't have to worry about Fabiocat after I kill you with it. It'll be all over then.
You say "Kill it with fire!" in response I say Brave the Elements or Ranger's Guile yo. Go ahead and waste your kill before I smack you with Fabiocat. Why would you try and activate his monstrosity before you can protect it.
To be fair, when Troll Ascetic was printed, it was a very distant third on the "issues with Standard" list behind "Affinity > Everything" and Tooth and Nail. Probably fourth, if you consider Onslaught/Mirrodin standard also still had Goblin Bidding, which could rival Affinity for speed and lethality, at least until Arcbound Ravager came along. Also, Troll is just a dumb beater. Sure, it can regenerate, and it held a Sword of Fire and Ice better than anything else at the time, but that was it. It could be blocked with relative ease until someone found a Sword to put on it. It didn't have any evasion of its own. It didn't have any other board-affecting abilities, and it didn't generate any additional creatures by itself. The bigger issue with hexproof now is that it's getting put on things that have built-in evasion (Sigarda, Invisible Stalker), have far-reaching effects on the rest of the board state (Sigarda again, Asceticism), and/or are just flat-out enormous threats BEFORE attaching Auras/Equipment (Geist, Sigarda again again, Thrun to an extent). At least with shroud things could be pushed a little because there was no way to make the creature any better. The harder something is to answer, the less you can push the other abilities, or it approaches broken (note: I don't consider any of these broken, though this, Geist and Sigarda are pushing it). The issue is that they keep pushing the creature with P/T and abilities that would be fair to efficient for their cost AND tacking hexproof on at the end.
On top of all that, there's the fact that mass removal has been nerfed quite a bit as well. Onslaught-Mirrodin Standard had Wrath of God, Akroma's Vengeance, Pyroclasm, Infest, Oblivion Stone, Starstorm, and Flamebreak that could kill Troll before a Sword, and that's just the stuff that got played! I didn't include other things like Inferno and Plague Wind that were too expensive and didn't fit a deck at the time. Now think about what can kill this lion once it's monstrous: Merciless Eviction. That's it. Part of that is due to the indestructibility, but most of it is due to it being too big to kill with mass shrink and it being unable to be exiled or bounced with a single-target spell because of hexproof. Throw an Unflinching Courage on it and now you've got a 6/6 indestructible trampling lifelinker that can't be stopped with removal but can still get bigger with more Auras.
I think this would have been powerful and beyond fair with shroud. Hell, it probably could have been buffed to Monstrous 2 and still been fair. I think it's powerful and verging on unfair with hexproof. If design is claiming to value interaction because they want a more "fair" game, then making the interaction completely one-sided is achieving one at the expense of the other.
/rant
UBDragonlord Silumgar WGKarametra, God of Harvests
BRUNekusar, the Mindrazer BGMazirek, Kraul Death Priest
URMelek, Izzet Paragon UGPrime Speaker Zegana
WUHanna, Ship's Navigator BWUSydri, Galvanic Genius
WUBRGSliver Queen RBBladewing the Risen
WBKarlov of the Ghost Council RGXenagos, God of Revels
GFreyalise, Llanowar's Fury RWAurelia, the Warleader
RIb Halfheart, Goblin Tactician BDrana, Liberator of Malakir
UAzami, Lady of Scrolls WNahiri, the Lithomancer
WBGDoran, the Siege Tower CEmrakul, the Promised End
Given your disclaimer, I'll state the following opinion: I think that your theoretical argument is right, and that this card is a reasonably elegant way of arriving at the desired effect while sidestepping some of the problems you pointed out. Being able to become a hideously obnoxious creature is definitely less of a sin than that of Invisible Stalker, which comes into play as a hideously obnoxious creature. I doubt we'll see these two words on the same creature often, or even rarely. The trope here is a decent excuse for it.
Unfortunately Wizards has retired Shroud in favor of Hexproof because new players and casual players, (who always have and will make up the largest base of their business,) do not like, enjoy, and often don't understand the power in "symmetric" effects like Shroud.
The same goes for self-harming things, reasons we will never see cards like Phyrexian Arena in a core set again, or the pain land cycle, that flavor of ability doesn't sit well with the casual and newb crowd.
Sad, but true.
I understand your frustration at the prospect of facing down another Stalker-like annoyance that is almost impossible to interact with. But as a player who's played a lot of Bant Hexproof this last year, let me try to reassure you. This is a very good creature, a powerful early drop with a decent upside. But this is not a creature that really enables a "hexproof/auras" deck unless Standard is going to change a LOT in the upcoming months.
The big drawback to this card is the tempo loss you face if the Lion is killed in response to it's monstrous activation. So you're not going to want to activate it unless 1) you have additional protection available, or 2) your opponent has tapped out. Best case scenario, your opponent taps out on turn 4/5 for something and you can activate. But looking at the other Theros spoilers, if your opponent is tapping out on turn 4/5, there is a strong possibility that they're playing something that can actually block an indestructible 4/4 (a God, the new Gorgon, Hundred-Handed One, Ember Swallower, Polukranos, etc.)
With Cavern of Souls rotating out (and Savage Summoning not looking like a viable replacement), countermagic will be a viable tool for control decks which can often handle this card. Edict effects also can deal with it pretty reasonably. This card will be a beating in Limited (as many rares are) and will probably see Constructed play, but I don't think it'll be format defining in any real way.
They can still force you to sacrifice it, Barter in Blood and similar effects still get rid of it.
Now to start getting my VoR....
Glad I sold them for 25 each (TO SCG), now I can get them for...
30 each....
Still not bad.
UBRBLACK ROSE COMMANDERUBR
WURGBTrades - Looking for ABU Duals, Fetches, Ect. Have Liliana otV, Snapcaster Mages, Chrod of Calling, Alters!WURGB
Commander
Omnath, Locus of Mana
GWBUR Genju of The Realms RUBWG