I'm not debating that aspect of this. You missed the point of my post.
While some people would be complaining, if it was aggressively costed then Standard would be a much more diverse and interesting format. I don't see what would be wrong with that.
Not saying anything is wrong with a diverse format (BTW - Standard is pretty diverse, it just has 2-3 top decks which is typical).
What I'm saying is that people will complain either way. It's what people here at MTGS love to do and frankly it's one of the reasons many top players avoid ever coming here to discuss Magic.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Old enough to know better, much too young to care.
Not saying anything is wrong with a diverse format (BTW - Standard is pretty diverse, it just has 2-3 top decks which is typical).
What I'm saying is that people will complain either way. It's what people here at MTGS love to do and frankly it's one of the reasons many top players avoid ever coming here to discuss Magic.
People have opinions. Different people like different things and someone will always be disappointed by something. Besides, we have our fair share of top players (or at least we do in the Modern forum).
Not saying anything is wrong with a diverse format (BTW - Standard is pretty diverse, it just has 2-3 top decks which is typical).
What I'm saying is that people will complain either way. It's what people here at MTGS love to do and frankly it's one of the reasons many top players avoid ever coming here to discuss Magic.
Okay Stalin. Don't let people voice their opinions on a board dedicated to magic. Everything has to be praise, 100% of the time.
Pros might not come here for several reasons. They are dedicated to other forums. They don't need or want to discuss their brews publicly. They might be busy. They might be contracted by a website to not discuss these things with anyone else. Complaining about things which they might believe might not be good for their connections with companies or sponsors. That might factor in, huh?
@ golden: Then who do you think this card is for. I hope you've a decent amount of limited experience. Because replying for the sake of replying isn't gonna change the fact that this card is unplayable in any limited variant.
lol
I have a ton of limited experience, with multiple PTQ and GPT wins/top 8's.
But that isn't the point. More important is the fact that the people designing the game have INFINITELY more experience that either of us when it comes to this stuff. I don't think I know more than them, which so many people here seem to do. So I trust them not to completely waste a precious card slot or interesting effect like this. Now if we get out and actually start playing with this, and find a few months from now that it is unplayable in limited...then I will readily call it a mistake on their part not to cost it a little bit more aggressively. But I am not arrogant enough to make that assumption (i.e. presume their idiocy) without having actually gotten some experiences with the card under my belt.
lol if a pro is paid to miss out on MTG Salvation.... Erm... Sure, why not?
I imagine its something like this
MTG sales vendor behemoth: Hey, your tournament record is great, how about we sponsor you/you write articles for us?
Aspiring pro: Okay
MTG sales vendor behemoth Okay. You'll give us a "pro" image/insight and we'll give you free cards and some money or something.
Aspiring pro: Okay
MTG sales vendor behemoth: Since we're using you to sell dumb article subscriptions/cards you can't be posting about MTG anywhere else got it?
Aspiring pro: Okay
MTG sales vendor behemoth: Since we're always trying to sell cards you can't bash anything senselessly and try your best to stay positive okay?
Aspiring pro: Okay
I have a ton of limited experience, with multiple PTQ and GPT wins/top 8's.
But that isn't the point. More important is the fact that the people designing the game have INFINITELY more experience that either of us when it comes to this stuff. I don't think I know more than them, which so many people here seem to do. So I trust them not to completely waste a precious card slot or interesting effect like this. Now if we get out and actually start playing with this, and find a few months from now that it is unplayable in limited...then I will readily call it a mistake on their part not to cost it a little bit more aggressively. But I am not arrogant enough to make that assumption (i.e. presume their idiocy) without having actually gotten some experiences with the card under my belt.
Not to disqualify your argument but my view of Wizards' overall design crew got a little shaken at the flaws in their EDH-product of 2013. Marath having built-in infinity-problems and Darksteel Mutation's errata (minor it may be) is simply just sloppy. Mistakes can happen and I don't particularly blame them for the minor ones (like Walking Atlas - missing the artifact type) but at times they make larger ones.
It's also quite frequently that we hear that development didn't anticipate how the meta would run. I'm not sure if it was hot air or if they didn't believe mono-blue devotion would be such a major player in RTR-THS standard. Sometimes it feels like development doesn't grasp what they have created and I think that is what makes players a bit iffy about some judgments.
Note that I don't say that players who post here knows more than the Design and Development teams from WotC but they (WotC) are after all only human and makes mistakes, likewise some players on these/other forums in a few cases might have better insight on certain aspects of card-designs.
However with previous mechanics that resembles that of a newer card makes it very related to compare the two and evaluate how they each function in a vacuum. Then you draw in the meta and at times that isn't hard to do.
Do recall that Wizards' design some cards to be unplayable for constructed because they wish to cater to limited and/or doesn't want that particular mechanic/effect to actually work in the meta.
I'll be arrogant and confident enough to claim that this card wont see stable Standard play at least until M15 is released.
Not to disqualify your argument but my view of Wizards' overall design crew got a little shaken at the flaws in their EDH-product of 2013. Marath having built-in infinity-problems and Darksteel Mutation's errata (minor it may be) is simply just sloppy. Mistakes can happen and I don't particularly blame them for the minor ones (like Walking Atlas - missing the artifact type) but at times they make larger ones.
I think the commander product mistakes are more errors but the rules/proofreader guys than the actual design team.
It's also quite frequently that we hear that development didn't anticipate how the meta would run. I'm not sure if it was hot air or if they didn't believe mono-blue devotion would be such a major player in RTR-THS standard. Sometimes it feels like development doesn't grasp what they have created and I think that is what makes players a bit iffy about some judgments.
They do work hard to try and create a varied meta. It's intentional that not every card will play a major role in constructed. Meta simply can't be accurately predicted however hard they try, but you can't say WotC don't at least safeguard against dominant archetypes better currently than they did a few years ago.
I think the OP picked out a card not designed for constructed but intended for casual/limited and used it to make the same tired points that come up every set (worst set ever/this isn't what I wanted/WotC only want my money and don't love me as a person etc). Cards like this have their place and have their fans. It certainly isn't any way representitive of a set which personally I am quite excited for right now.
Not to disqualify your argument but my view of Wizards' overall design crew got a little shaken at the flaws in their EDH-product of 2013. Marath having built-in infinity-problems and Darksteel Mutation's errata (minor it may be) is simply just sloppy. Mistakes can happen and I don't particularly blame them for the minor ones (like Walking Atlas - missing the artifact type) but at times they make larger ones.
I think the commander product mistakes are more errors but the rules/proofreader guys than the actual design team.
It's also quite frequently that we hear that development didn't anticipate how the meta would run. I'm not sure if it was hot air or if they didn't believe mono-blue devotion would be such a major player in RTR-THS standard. Sometimes it feels like development doesn't grasp what they have created and I think that is what makes players a bit iffy about some judgments.
They do work hard to try and create a varied meta. It's intentional that not every card will play a major role in constructed. Meta simply can't be accurately predicted however hard they try, but you can't say WotC don't at least safeguard against dominant archetypes better currently than they did a few years ago.
I think the OP picked out a card not designed for constructed but intended for casual/limited and used it to make the same tired points that come up every set (worst set ever/this isn't what I wanted/WotC only want my money and don't love me as a person etc). Cards like this have their place and have their fans. It certainly isn't any way representitive of a set which personally I am quite excited for right now.
How many times does this have to be repeated?
Just because a card is really, really bad, doesn't mean casual/limited players want it.
Just because a card is really, really bad, doesn't mean casual/limited players want it.
I think you seem to under the impression that since you don't like/rate this card then no one will. The card is not really, really bad it's just not a competitive card. People will play it. They will play it limited and they will play it casual decks. In fact people will probably even build around it.
I think the OP picked out a card not designed for constructed but intended for casual/limited and used it to make the same tired points that come up every set (worst set ever/this isn't what I wanted/WotC only want my money and don't love me as a person etc). Cards like this have their place and have their fans. It certainly isn't any way representitive of a set which personally I am quite excited for right now.
Casual? Maybe, but as has already been stated, knowledge and power seem to be fairly unplayable in limited. I'm personally of the opinion that it is one of the trap cards they include in every set that newer players tend to overvalue. Its one of their "skill testers." It is designed to be actively terrible.
I may be wrong though. I guess it might be "possible" that KnowledgeAndPower.deck may be draftable and moderately competitive in limited.....
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
- Manite
It's far too early to write off this card as unplayable in limited and anyone who tries to say that is just desperate to prove their point without worrying about whether their actually right.
I second Tzefick's post. If you see a new card and found similarities with an older one, I think it's ok to make a snap judgement because you've played/experienced it before.
Take for example Doom Blade vs Feast of Dreams. This one should be relatively easy.
The difference between K&P and said "engines" is that it requires additional costs compared to the examples I've stated. To make it even more unappealing, they played it safe and made it overcosted.
It's quite important to know the speed of a limited format too. I'll say THS block is fast, but not Zendikar fast. This is due to the voltron mechanics in the set. Therefore people like me have judged it to be unplayable.
Honestly, who wants feel-bad cards? If one truly cares about magic and its people, who wants to see a kid play this and get burn/punished because of playing this overcosted-do-nothing card? There're better teaching tools out there but this card can be quite demoralizing. And to top it off, the name isn't apt. It's pretty insulting and not worthy of its name.
I'm pretty sure this card, like all build around mes are templated cards for each block. A staple, and IMO a very lazy staple. If some of you think wizards work hard at this sort of things, or channel their energies towards standard, I don't totally buy that.
As tzefick pointed out, there're glaring mistakes, and wizards themselves admitted they don't really build decks for standard; they just have to feel right. If feeling was ever a good barometer, we wouldn't have banned cards (scars era) or have miserable (delver, snappy era) or dull (current standard) seasons.
Should we magic fans and players be asking more of a product? I think we ought to. Most of us pay to get an experience. Is it right to tell Wizards what they're doing wrong? Of course it is. Magic's future products are correlated to our feedback; if one is gonna shut up and be happy with what they give us, I'm sure Wizards will happily stay in their comfort zone. The truth is, some of them are not doing enough. But that's another discussion for another day.
To keep it to point. K&P is probably the barometer of how good THS block is. Many cards in this block take too much requirement to work.
So you want every single person who wants to play it to come to this forum and get pooped upon? Alright, let flow the dookie good sirs. I want to play it. I want to make a deck with Thassa and Keranos and that starfish and a bunch of other scryers. That sounds fun to me. And this + the starfish in limited actually seems pretty good (though admittedly I'm a terrible drafter lol).
Just because you cannot possibly imagine someone wanting to play this card doesn't mean the card is pointless. It means your imagination and sense of empathy suck.
I have a ton of limited experience, with multiple PTQ and GPT wins/top 8's.
But that isn't the point. More important is the fact that the people designing the game have INFINITELY more experience that either of us when it comes to this stuff. I don't think I know more than them, which so many people here seem to do. So I trust them not to completely waste a precious card slot or interesting effect like this. Now if we get out and actually start playing with this, and find a few months from now that it is unplayable in limited...then I will readily call it a mistake on their part not to cost it a little bit more aggressively. But I am not arrogant enough to make that assumption (i.e. presume their idiocy) without having actually gotten some experiences with the card under my belt.
Not to disqualify your argument but my view of Wizards' overall design crew got a little shaken at the flaws in their EDH-product of 2013. Marath having built-in infinity-problems and Darksteel Mutation's errata (minor it may be) is simply just sloppy. Mistakes can happen and I don't particularly blame them for the minor ones (like Walking Atlas - missing the artifact type) but at times they make larger ones.
It's also quite frequently that we hear that development didn't anticipate how the meta would run. I'm not sure if it was hot air or if they didn't believe mono-blue devotion would be such a major player in RTR-THS standard. Sometimes it feels like development doesn't grasp what they have created and I think that is what makes players a bit iffy about some judgments.
Note that I don't say that players who post here knows more than the Design and Development teams from WotC but they (WotC) are after all only human and makes mistakes, likewise some players on these/other forums in a few cases might have better insight on certain aspects of card-designs.
However with previous mechanics that resembles that of a newer card makes it very related to compare the two and evaluate how they each function in a vacuum. Then you draw in the meta and at times that isn't hard to do.
Do recall that Wizards' design some cards to be unplayable for constructed because they wish to cater to limited and/or doesn't want that particular mechanic/effect to actually work in the meta.
I'll be arrogant and confident enough to claim that this card wont see stable Standard play at least until M15 is released.
That's not an arrogant claim at all, the card looks to be far too slow for any version of Standard we have had in recent memory (or maybe ever). But theory-crafting how limited playable it is at this point is a much stickier business.
The difference between K&P and said "engines" is that it requires additional costs compared to the examples I've stated. To make it even more unappealing, they played it safe and made it overcosted.
Another difference between K&P and those other enchantments is that K&P doesn't always have to play more and more cards to activate its trigger whereas the other engines do. In limited, if K&P triggered for free after scrying, then something like K&P with Sigiled Starfish or Thassa backed up with removal/bounce could lock certain decks out fairly easily. I think the extra cost on the trigger is fine, though I do agree that the enchantment is overcosted.
The main problem here is that its dropping too late for a 60 card format. EDH may find a place for it, but in anything more traditional if you're not running some kind of ramp its a turn 6 activation that will probably wipe you out. It has some synergy with Sigiled Starfish as a potential damage pusher later on, but honestly, thats one card that can make this advantageous. With Stormcaller of Keranos you're paying 4 to scry + 2 damage. It should have cost 3-4 and had a free trigger (possibly for 1 damage) to get some kind of use out of it alongside Flamespeaker Adept in a scry-based deck. In limited it could see some play, however if you're playing a single card on turn 5 that is not winning the game or at least setting you up to win in the next few turns the board had better be stalled or you had better already be winning, because the alternative is that you've most likely already lost.
It's far too early to write off this card as unplayable in limited and anyone who tries to say that is just desperate to prove their point without worrying about whether their actually right.
It costs 5 mana just to cast...2 mana to activate each time, and you need cards to scry with to actually make it worth it. That's not taking into account the amount of increased enchantment hate in this block proportional to other blocks. Even being just 5 mana for a do-nothing enchantment that requires more mana each time you want to use it means you're pretty dead.
It's far too early to write off this card as unplayable in limited and anyone who tries to say that is just desperate to prove their point without worrying about whether their actually right.
It costs 5 mana just to cast...2 mana to activate each time, and you need cards to scry with to actually make it worth it. That's not taking into account the amount of increased enchantment hate in this block proportional to other blocks. Even being just 5 mana for a do-nothing enchantment that requires more mana each time you want to use it means you're pretty dead.
It offers extra value to your scry cards. Did you know that there is a common creature in this block that scrys whenever it attacks. Or a creature that can scry just by tapping. You simply can't be sure whether a card will work out until you play the format, see where the curve will be (i.e. whether five mana is a lot) and the potential value of free shocks is not to underestimated.
I think the problem here is people have no sense of fun or discovery anymore. They want another snapcaster mage or something obviously pushed so they can "oh there's a powerful card, I can just build the same deck as everyone else and we can all have fun trying to reach the pro tour". If you want to force yourself to believe people won't play this card then fine. You can jsut be wrong.
It's far too early to write off this card as unplayable in limited and anyone who tries to say that is just desperate to prove their point without worrying about whether their actually right.
It costs 5 mana just to cast...2 mana to activate each time, and you need cards to scry with to actually make it worth it. That's not taking into account the amount of increased enchantment hate in this block proportional to other blocks. Even being just 5 mana for a do-nothing enchantment that requires more mana each time you want to use it means you're pretty dead.
It offers extra value to your scry cards. Did you know that there is a common creature in this block that scrys whenever it attacks. Or a creature that can scry just by tapping. You simply can't be sure whether a card will work out until you play the format, see where the curve will be (i.e. whether five mana is a lot) and the potential value of free shocks is not to underestimated.
I think the problem here is people have no sense of fun or discovery anymore. They want another snapcaster mage or something obviously pushed so they can "oh there's a powerful card, I can just build the same deck as everyone else and we can all have fun trying to reach the pro tour". If you want to force yourself to believe people won't play this card then fine. You can jsut be wrong.
People want playable cards, not cards to throw immediately in the trash because they're not even playable in limited. "Sense of discovery" does not equal "do-nothing enchantment that requires other junk to be mediocre". People have already compared this to stuff like Burning Vengeance and its just about worse in every single way. I don't even see how you can make a claim like sense of discovery when this is just the crappiest version of a fringe card type that's been around for a long time.
lightning rift already exists.
But should the card be so overcosted that it is unplayable outside of the jankiest of casual decks?
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
While some people would be complaining, if it was aggressively costed then Standard would be a much more diverse and interesting format. I don't see what would be wrong with that.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
What I'm saying is that people will complain either way. It's what people here at MTGS love to do and frankly it's one of the reasons many top players avoid ever coming here to discuss Magic.
People have opinions. Different people like different things and someone will always be disappointed by something. Besides, we have our fair share of top players (or at least we do in the Modern forum).
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Okay Stalin. Don't let people voice their opinions on a board dedicated to magic. Everything has to be praise, 100% of the time.
Pros might not come here for several reasons. They are dedicated to other forums. They don't need or want to discuss their brews publicly. They might be busy. They might be contracted by a website to not discuss these things with anyone else. Complaining about things which they might believe might not be good for their connections with companies or sponsors. That might factor in, huh?
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
I have a ton of limited experience, with multiple PTQ and GPT wins/top 8's.
But that isn't the point. More important is the fact that the people designing the game have INFINITELY more experience that either of us when it comes to this stuff. I don't think I know more than them, which so many people here seem to do. So I trust them not to completely waste a precious card slot or interesting effect like this. Now if we get out and actually start playing with this, and find a few months from now that it is unplayable in limited...then I will readily call it a mistake on their part not to cost it a little bit more aggressively. But I am not arrogant enough to make that assumption (i.e. presume their idiocy) without having actually gotten some experiences with the card under my belt.
I imagine its something like this
MTG sales vendor behemoth: Hey, your tournament record is great, how about we sponsor you/you write articles for us?
Aspiring pro: Okay
MTG sales vendor behemoth Okay. You'll give us a "pro" image/insight and we'll give you free cards and some money or something.
Aspiring pro: Okay
MTG sales vendor behemoth: Since we're using you to sell dumb article subscriptions/cards you can't be posting about MTG anywhere else got it?
Aspiring pro: Okay
MTG sales vendor behemoth: Since we're always trying to sell cards you can't bash anything senselessly and try your best to stay positive okay?
Aspiring pro: Okay
It's also quite frequently that we hear that development didn't anticipate how the meta would run. I'm not sure if it was hot air or if they didn't believe mono-blue devotion would be such a major player in RTR-THS standard. Sometimes it feels like development doesn't grasp what they have created and I think that is what makes players a bit iffy about some judgments.
Note that I don't say that players who post here knows more than the Design and Development teams from WotC but they (WotC) are after all only human and makes mistakes, likewise some players on these/other forums in a few cases might have better insight on certain aspects of card-designs.
However with previous mechanics that resembles that of a newer card makes it very related to compare the two and evaluate how they each function in a vacuum. Then you draw in the meta and at times that isn't hard to do.
Do recall that Wizards' design some cards to be unplayable for constructed because they wish to cater to limited and/or doesn't want that particular mechanic/effect to actually work in the meta.
I'll be arrogant and confident enough to claim that this card wont see stable Standard play at least until M15 is released.
I think the commander product mistakes are more errors but the rules/proofreader guys than the actual design team.
They do work hard to try and create a varied meta. It's intentional that not every card will play a major role in constructed. Meta simply can't be accurately predicted however hard they try, but you can't say WotC don't at least safeguard against dominant archetypes better currently than they did a few years ago.
I think the OP picked out a card not designed for constructed but intended for casual/limited and used it to make the same tired points that come up every set (worst set ever/this isn't what I wanted/WotC only want my money and don't love me as a person etc). Cards like this have their place and have their fans. It certainly isn't any way representitive of a set which personally I am quite excited for right now.
How many times does this have to be repeated?
Just because a card is really, really bad, doesn't mean casual/limited players want it.
I think you seem to under the impression that since you don't like/rate this card then no one will. The card is not really, really bad it's just not a competitive card. People will play it. They will play it limited and they will play it casual decks. In fact people will probably even build around it.
Casual? Maybe, but as has already been stated, knowledge and power seem to be fairly unplayable in limited. I'm personally of the opinion that it is one of the trap cards they include in every set that newer players tend to overvalue. Its one of their "skill testers." It is designed to be actively terrible.
I may be wrong though. I guess it might be "possible" that KnowledgeAndPower.deck may be draftable and moderately competitive in limited.....
- Manite
I'm Playing
New Challenge Everyday
Kank'sPremiumBlend
Take for example Doom Blade vs Feast of Dreams. This one should be relatively easy.
Then let's get to this build around me card. We have in the past Pyroconvergence, Burning Vengeance, Rumbling Aftershocks and Rage Extractor, just to name a few.
The difference between K&P and said "engines" is that it requires additional costs compared to the examples I've stated. To make it even more unappealing, they played it safe and made it overcosted.
It's quite important to know the speed of a limited format too. I'll say THS block is fast, but not Zendikar fast. This is due to the voltron mechanics in the set. Therefore people like me have judged it to be unplayable.
Honestly, who wants feel-bad cards? If one truly cares about magic and its people, who wants to see a kid play this and get burn/punished because of playing this overcosted-do-nothing card? There're better teaching tools out there but this card can be quite demoralizing. And to top it off, the name isn't apt. It's pretty insulting and not worthy of its name.
I'm pretty sure this card, like all build around mes are templated cards for each block. A staple, and IMO a very lazy staple. If some of you think wizards work hard at this sort of things, or channel their energies towards standard, I don't totally buy that.
As tzefick pointed out, there're glaring mistakes, and wizards themselves admitted they don't really build decks for standard; they just have to feel right. If feeling was ever a good barometer, we wouldn't have banned cards (scars era) or have miserable (delver, snappy era) or dull (current standard) seasons.
Should we magic fans and players be asking more of a product? I think we ought to. Most of us pay to get an experience. Is it right to tell Wizards what they're doing wrong? Of course it is. Magic's future products are correlated to our feedback; if one is gonna shut up and be happy with what they give us, I'm sure Wizards will happily stay in their comfort zone. The truth is, some of them are not doing enough. But that's another discussion for another day.
To keep it to point. K&P is probably the barometer of how good THS block is. Many cards in this block take too much requirement to work.
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
Just because you cannot possibly imagine someone wanting to play this card doesn't mean the card is pointless. It means your imagination and sense of empathy suck.
That's not an arrogant claim at all, the card looks to be far too slow for any version of Standard we have had in recent memory (or maybe ever). But theory-crafting how limited playable it is at this point is a much stickier business.
It costs 5 mana just to cast...2 mana to activate each time, and you need cards to scry with to actually make it worth it. That's not taking into account the amount of increased enchantment hate in this block proportional to other blocks. Even being just 5 mana for a do-nothing enchantment that requires more mana each time you want to use it means you're pretty dead.
It offers extra value to your scry cards. Did you know that there is a common creature in this block that scrys whenever it attacks. Or a creature that can scry just by tapping. You simply can't be sure whether a card will work out until you play the format, see where the curve will be (i.e. whether five mana is a lot) and the potential value of free shocks is not to underestimated.
I think the problem here is people have no sense of fun or discovery anymore. They want another snapcaster mage or something obviously pushed so they can "oh there's a powerful card, I can just build the same deck as everyone else and we can all have fun trying to reach the pro tour". If you want to force yourself to believe people won't play this card then fine. You can jsut be wrong.
I'm Playing
New Challenge Everyday
Kank'sPremiumBlend
People want playable cards, not cards to throw immediately in the trash because they're not even playable in limited. "Sense of discovery" does not equal "do-nothing enchantment that requires other junk to be mediocre". People have already compared this to stuff like Burning Vengeance and its just about worse in every single way. I don't even see how you can make a claim like sense of discovery when this is just the crappiest version of a fringe card type that's been around for a long time.