The reason why so many don't care that this card exists is because not everyone worships MaRo's version of the colour pie. He is a human, and no human could develop a perfect colour pie. Its not like it came down from the heavens as a gift from a divine power.
Some people do worship him though, as seen by the very heated comments posted earlier. You know wizards has done a good job of turning people into addicts when flame wars break out over a feature in a fictional universe of a commercial product.
Because I am fairly new to the game, I was reading some older threads from a couple of years ago and I found some discussion on colour pie balance. Many thought that blue had the lion's share of mechanics in the colour pie. I still do. As stated in many other places, certain mechanics are more important than others. Even if you were to distribute mechanics on an equal basis quantitatively, it still wouldn't be balanced. A colour denied creature removal is a lot worse of than a colour denied trample.
In addition, certain mechanics are a lot more binary. Green's drawback in that it cannot outright remove (non-flying) creatures without board presence is quite binary. Either a card removes a creature or it doesn't. However, in previous threads I was reading there was some discussion about how delver was an efficient creature and shouldn't have been given to blue, but there were others that disagreed and said that it wasn't efficient. Whether or not a creature is efficient is not binary. It is a scale. So having a weakness that is not binary is better than a binary one, like Green's, since it is easier to argue both ways on it.
That doesn't mean that I don't like the idea of a colour pie - I just like the idea of a completely balanced one. Getting rid of weaknesses is one way to balance a weak colour's slice of the pie - but an even better way would be to simple focus on strengths and really push them. If I was R&D, the mechanics I would push on Green would be more creature resilience. Not hexproof, since its uninteractive, but more cards like Greater Good - which basically say "if you kill my creature, I will get compensation for it". In m15 they had life's legacy but this isn't really the same because at sorcery speed, you cannot use it to protect your creatures from removal.
I read earlier that Aaron Forsythe, the current directory of Magic R&D, was the one responsible for the Green commander deck. If that's true I think he has done a good job of it when you consider what the true goals of Wizards are. Wizards is a commercial business, and at the end of the day their goal is to sell product. The majority of comments of these commander decks have been positive and many have said it is the best out of the commander sets. In that sense, they have fulfilled their goal. Controversy is also a good way to generate interest. I'm sure that if they were to round up the people who MaRo disagrees with most in R&D and get them to make the next commander set, it would sell like hotcakes.
Black Chaos Warp 2B
Instant
Target permanent's controller sacrifices it. You lose life equal to its converted mana cost.
Yeah, you just printed black Stone Rain, only in most cases strictly better. Don't think that's going to happen. I don't disagree with your theme, though. Every color should have some level of access to just about every ability, but the efficiency of said abilities should be directly related to their importance to that color's share of the pie. Examples: I think white should get Mana Tithe and other taxing counterspells. I think black should get artifact removal that requires substantial sacrifices, a la Gate to Phyrexia. I think blue should get LIMITED boosts to its creatures, mostly in terms of protection (it used to have shroud all over the place, but it feels like it doesn't get hexproof except for occasional rares and Invisible Stalker). I think red should have more access to hand alteration (stuff like Chandra, Pyromaster's +0 ability, plus some limited access to discard a la Delirium Skeins). I think green should get a greater share of enchantments that give it access to versatile effects, like this one.
There are certain lines that should never be crossed (I still think Harmonize was an enormous mistake), but by and large, it doesn't hurt to throw colors a previously unseen bone, provided it doesn't become a habit. Otherwise everyone might as well just play blue forever.
Black Chaos Warp 2B
Instant
Target permanent's controller sacrifices it. You lose life equal to its converted mana cost.
Yeah, you just printed black Stone Rain, only in most cases strictly better.
Is it that big of a deal to haveanotherblackstonerain? These sets aren't modern legal anyway. It may be a little powerful as written though, a black kill anything spell in legacy could be insane. Just look at the flexibility of Dismember... This thing should probably have a higher life loss than just the CMC of the target.
Black Chaos Warp 2B
Instant
Target permanent's controller sacrifices it. You lose life equal to its converted mana cost.
Yeah, you just printed black Stone Rain, only in most cases strictly better.
Is it that big of a deal to haveanotherblackstonerain? These sets aren't modern legal anyway. It may be a little powerful as written though, a black kill anything spell in legacy could be insane. Just look at the flexibility of Dismember... This thing should probably have a higher life loss than just the CMC of the target.
Making it sorcery speed would help balance it more... maybe a high CMC too.
Black Chaos Warp 2B
Instant
Target permanent's controller sacrifices it. You lose life equal to its converted mana cost.
Yeah, you just printed black Stone Rain, only in most cases strictly better. Don't think that's going to happen. I don't disagree with your theme, though. Every color should have some level of access to just about every ability, but the efficiency of said abilities should be directly related to their importance to that color's share of the pie. Examples: I think white should get Mana Tithe and other taxing counterspells. I think black should get artifact removal that requires substantial sacrifices, a la Gate to Phyrexia. I think blue should get LIMITED boosts to its creatures, mostly in terms of protection (it used to have shroud all over the place, but it feels like it doesn't get hexproof except for occasional rares and Invisible Stalker). I think red should have more access to hand alteration (stuff like Chandra, Pyromaster's +0 ability, plus some limited access to discard a la Delirium Skeins). I think green should get a greater share of enchantments that give it access to versatile effects, like this one.
There are certain lines that should never be crossed (I still think Harmonize was an enormous mistake), but by and large, it doesn't hurt to throw colors a previously unseen bone, provided it doesn't become a habit. Otherwise everyone might as well just play blue forever.
If black does gain a way to deal with artifacts/enchantments, I'd like to see it in this form:
Target player/Each player sacrifices an artifact/enchantment/creature/ect...lose life equal to CMC.
Basically, I believe that IF black ever gets something to deal with other permanents, it should be in the form of non-targeted sacrifice, and with a hefty cost.
I am now playing Heliod's Pilgrim in Karador because of this card. I have also been salivating in anticipation of sacrificing Academy Rector to turn a shroud/hexproof commander into a forest at instant, uncounterable, speed.
Magic isn't a game where every color can do everything. I don't know about you guys, but I'd rather play magic. If you don't like it maybe another game would be more appropriate. I hear you can play whatever cards you want in yugioh.
Personally, I'm perfectly fine with all colors being able to do anything, but at different costs and efficiency. In practice, almost all abilities are available through artifacts anyway, and it makes no more sense that artifacts can do it if the colors themselves can't do it.
Sorry but that isn't how magic works. This is one of those cases where you are objectively wrong about the game.
You're are objectively wrong about the game, since Song of the Dryads is a card created, approved and printed by the people who DECIDES what the game IS.
Tip: those people =/= MaRo. His one of then. ONE of then.
Red killing things with lightning bolt doesn't mean it can reanimate them. Feldon is an exception.
Green turning lands into creatures does not mean it can turn creatures into lands. Oath is an exception.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I've got a "powered" peasant cube. You can draft it here.
Brief description:
---Primary------Secondary W Midrange----Control U Control------Tempo B Aggro--------Necromancy R Aggro--------Reach G Midrange-----Ramp
Black Chaos Warp would have a high cmc for real magic. Anything over 3 is pretty much unplayable in the removal category unless it's mass removal. I'm really not sure it would see all that much legacy/vintage play.
how is turning a creature into a plant not green? i dont get it.
who ever said, that there is not way that green can remove creatures? is this wrote down somewhere in the 10 commandments of magic?
fact is: the card is very flavourful. turning a creature into a plant is 100% green.
i dont see any reason, why green cant have creature removal if it fits into its flavour.
Please see my signature.
Quite literally anything can be justified on the grounds of flavor alone. White casting divination, blue destroying artifacts, black exiling enchantments. Anything. That does not mean the game can or should do it.
You're are objectively wrong about the game, since Song of the Dryads is a card created, approved and printed by the people who DECIDES what the game IS.
I'm wrong? Not so much.
Ethan Fleischer said "I am embarrassed about Song of the Dryads. It wasn't a deliberate color pie violation, and it wasn't noticed until it was too late to change it."
Even the person in charge of the product says it was a mistake.
how is turning a creature into a plant not green? i dont get it.
who ever said, that there is not way that green can remove creatures? is this wrote down somewhere in the 10 commandments of magic?
fact is: the card is very flavourful. turning a creature into a plant is 100% green.
i dont see any reason, why green cant have creature removal if it fits into its flavour.
Please see my signature.
Quite literally anything can be justified on the grounds of flavor alone. White casting divination, blue destroying artifacts, black exiling enchantments. Anything. That does not mean the game can or should do it.
You're are objectively wrong about the game, since Song of the Dryads is a card created, approved and printed by the people who DECIDES what the game IS.
I'm wrong? Not so much.
Ethan Fleischer said "I am embarrassed about Song of the Dryads. It wasn't a deliberate color pie violation, and it wasn't noticed until it was too late to change it."
Even the person in charge of the product says it was a mistake.
I will humbly concede to that.
I still feel that it's extremely weird tat, because of overly strict design, the color of plant magic should never in decades gets access to a fantasy plant magic trope (entangling). It just feels very wrong green mages in mtg being unable to do that.
You might consider that's a childish vision. Well, believing MTG is a strictly mechanical game such as poker is a delusion. Without fantasy concepts, card names, flavor texts and arts the game wouldn't last half a week. And if they don't feed that side of the game it will simply die.
They can but shouldn't justify any effect with flavor, I agree. But it's not the point here. The point is, sometimes mechanics have to meet flavor and not the opposite, simply because mtg players are flavor consumers as well. If they can think of a mechanical way of to cover that flavor without violating the pie - great. But if they don't, you cant expect certain things will simply not appear in the card game. Such as green summoning plants to entangle their opponents.
I'm not arguing against the card feeling Green flavorfully. I'm saying that it doesn't matter because the color pie say it isn't green. Flavor be damned (in most cases).
Everyone needs to understand theres a huge difference between bending the color pie and breaking the color pie. While green does not get creature removal, this makes way more sense than having the card simply read "Destroy target permanent." I think we should appreciate that Wizards wants to make sure cards don't seem out of place and keep them flavorful and fitting, but at the same time giving them powerful cards without breaking the color pie. I think this card is fine; I mean its not like green is taking a new direction, it's just one card.
Everyone needs to understand theres a huge difference between bending the color pie and breaking the color pie. While green does not get creature removal, this makes way more sense than having the card simply read "Destroy target permanent." I think we should appreciate that Wizards wants to make sure cards don't seem out of place and keep them flavorful and fitting, but at the same time giving them powerful cards without breaking the color pie. I think this card is fine; I mean its not like green is taking a new direction, it's just one card.
One card makes people think it's ok to print more cards. The best defense of color pie is not to break it. And yes, this card breaks pie unlike a card like Harmonize which stretches it.
It's a little silly that people are defending it after I gave a quote from the head designer of the set that says it was a mistake.
Wants and desires blind people from what should (or in this case should not) exist.
a little silly that people are defending it after I gave a quote from the head designer of the set that says it was a mistake.
Maybe because they have been known to say things like "Chaos Warp and Beast Within were mistakes,"
while continuing to reprint said cards?
If they genuinely feel it's a mistake, they should treat it like one (Sylvan Primordial).
Momir Vig, Simic Visionary
Melek, Izzet Paragon
Oona, Queen of the Fae
Bruna, Light of Alabaster
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight
Rhys the Redeemed
Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord
Sen Triplets
The Mimeoplasm WUBRGSliver OverlordGRBUW WUBRGSliver Hivelord(Superfriends)GRBUW
Wants and desires blind people from what should (or in this case should not) exist.
So the wants and desires of yourself and a number of Magic designers are more valid and worthy that the wants and desires of a vocal number of players and a another number of Magic designers? Get off your dead horse. The logic you are utilizing is way too black and white. Grey DOES exist, you know, even if you feel it shouldn't. I'm not asking you to change your stance on the subject. I'm asking you to pull your head out of your ass and realize that this subject is SUBJECTIVE and that you aren't right or wrong. It's your opinion, but you speak as though it is law. Get over yourself.
EDIT - Can someone who knows how to set up one of those polls start a thread or add it to this one. Something like:
Do you believe that...
1) the color pie is perfect as is and should never be altered
2) the color pie is perfect as is, but a bit of bleeding is fine for the right cards
3) the color pie is pretty balanced, but could use better distribution of some abilities
4) the color pie needs work as some colors have larger slices at present
My guess is option one wouldn't get the most votes against the other three options.
a little silly that people are defending it after I gave a quote from the head designer of the set that says it was a mistake.
Maybe because they have been known to say things like "Chaos Warp and Beast Within were mistakes,"
while continuing to reprint said cards?
If they genuinely feel it's a mistake, they should treat it like one (Sylvan Primordial).
Yea, and I don't buy that whole "It was a mistake but we didn't catch it in time" line. The community saw how it strattled the color lines the minute it was spoiled, but Wizards missed it through the entire design and development processes? My butt...
Yea, and I don't buy that whole "It was a mistake but we didn't catch it in time" line. The community saw how it strattled the color lines the minute it was spoiled, but Wizards missed it through the entire design and development processes? My butt...
This is on the verge of suggesting that the people who are trying to have open discussion with us are lying. I'm not heading down that hole because it is really insulting to the designers.
Mistake cards happen and they will continue to happen. The key is to understand that they are mistakes and not use them as justification for further ones. I'm sorry if that isn't good enough for you.
a little silly that people are defending it after I gave a quote from the head designer of the set that says it was a mistake.
Maybe because they have been known to say things like "Chaos Warp and Beast Within were mistakes,"
while continuing to reprint said cards?
If they genuinely feel it's a mistake, they should treat it like one (Sylvan Primordial).
Yea, and I don't buy that whole "It was a mistake but we didn't catch it in time" line. The community saw how it strattled the color lines the minute it was spoiled, but Wizards missed it through the entire design and development processes? My butt...
Having played with the pre-con decks for a bit, it seems the typical play from the green deck when testing them against each other was to use Song of the Dryads to enchant the opponent's planeswalker commander, which feels very in color pie, since green gets Bramblecrush and such. If this had been printed as "enchant non-creature permanent" it wouldn't be breaking the color pie at all, and if that's the way it was typically played, with the option to enchant opponent's creatures only rarely utilized, then it's pretty easy to see how they could miss it. In fact, it's entirely possible that one iteration of it was worded that way, and was changed to 'enchant permanent' because of odd corner cases where you animate the forest it has become being strange and kinda silly (Think about what happens when Life and Limb and the enchant non-creature version of this is out). Another important thing to remember is how much larger the community is than the design and development team. For the entire design and development, there were, what, at most ten guys seriously working with the cards? Maybe a few more who gave it a quick look-over, but weren't engaged with it on a day to day basis. The fact that a community of thousands caught it in a minute only proves that we have a huge community, not that wizards was somehow negligent.
a little silly that people are defending it after I gave a quote from the head designer of the set that says it was a mistake.
Maybe because they have been known to say things like "Chaos Warp and Beast Within were mistakes,"
while continuing to reprint said cards?
If they genuinely feel it's a mistake, they should treat it like one (Sylvan Primordial).
Yea, and I don't buy that whole "It was a mistake but we didn't catch it in time" line. The community saw how it strattled the color lines the minute it was spoiled, but Wizards missed it through the entire design and development processes? My butt...
Having played with the pre-con decks for a bit, it seems the typical play from the green deck when testing them against each other was to use Song of the Dryads to enchant the opponent's planeswalker commander, which feels very in color pie, since green gets Bramblecrush and such. If this had been printed as "enchant non-creature permanent" it wouldn't be breaking the color pie at all, and if that's the way it was typically played, with the option to enchant opponent's creatures only rarely utilized, then it's pretty easy to see how they could miss it. In fact, it's entirely possible that one iteration of it was worded that way, and was changed to 'enchant permanent' because of odd corner cases where you animate the forest it has become being strange and kinda silly (Think about what happens when Life and Limb and the enchant non-creature version of this is out). Another important thing to remember is how much larger the community is than the design and development team. For the entire design and development, there were, what, at most ten guys seriously working with the cards? Maybe a few more who gave it a quick look-over, but weren't engaged with it on a day to day basis. The fact that a community of thousands caught it in a minute only proves that we have a huge community, not that wizards was somehow negligent.
Okay, I'll buy that. A number of good points. I especially like how you pointed out how close this card is to green's slice of the pie and I would have been fine with the watered-down version that could only target non-creatures.
Is there a link where Ethan and/or Aaron say that Song of the Dryads is a mistake?
All I will say is that it's flavorful, but it breaks the color pie. If MaRo was in charge of CMDR, this wouldn't have seen print. It was probably created by Aaron Forsythe, who's in charge of the green deck. He's MaRo's boss. No one talks back at their bosses, right.
I provide my opponents with a Forest to use as an overlay when I enchant their commander. Don't want them to be confused about the land type.
Also, this card is completely ridiculous. So strong! People will need to keep enchantment removal in hand in the future when playing me. No wasting it on a pair of boots.
Some people do worship him though, as seen by the very heated comments posted earlier. You know wizards has done a good job of turning people into addicts when flame wars break out over a feature in a fictional universe of a commercial product.
Because I am fairly new to the game, I was reading some older threads from a couple of years ago and I found some discussion on colour pie balance. Many thought that blue had the lion's share of mechanics in the colour pie. I still do. As stated in many other places, certain mechanics are more important than others. Even if you were to distribute mechanics on an equal basis quantitatively, it still wouldn't be balanced. A colour denied creature removal is a lot worse of than a colour denied trample.
In addition, certain mechanics are a lot more binary. Green's drawback in that it cannot outright remove (non-flying) creatures without board presence is quite binary. Either a card removes a creature or it doesn't. However, in previous threads I was reading there was some discussion about how delver was an efficient creature and shouldn't have been given to blue, but there were others that disagreed and said that it wasn't efficient. Whether or not a creature is efficient is not binary. It is a scale. So having a weakness that is not binary is better than a binary one, like Green's, since it is easier to argue both ways on it.
That doesn't mean that I don't like the idea of a colour pie - I just like the idea of a completely balanced one. Getting rid of weaknesses is one way to balance a weak colour's slice of the pie - but an even better way would be to simple focus on strengths and really push them. If I was R&D, the mechanics I would push on Green would be more creature resilience. Not hexproof, since its uninteractive, but more cards like Greater Good - which basically say "if you kill my creature, I will get compensation for it". In m15 they had life's legacy but this isn't really the same because at sorcery speed, you cannot use it to protect your creatures from removal.
I read earlier that Aaron Forsythe, the current directory of Magic R&D, was the one responsible for the Green commander deck. If that's true I think he has done a good job of it when you consider what the true goals of Wizards are. Wizards is a commercial business, and at the end of the day their goal is to sell product. The majority of comments of these commander decks have been positive and many have said it is the best out of the commander sets. In that sense, they have fulfilled their goal. Controversy is also a good way to generate interest. I'm sure that if they were to round up the people who MaRo disagrees with most in R&D and get them to make the next commander set, it would sell like hotcakes.
Yeah, you just printed black Stone Rain, only in most cases strictly better. Don't think that's going to happen. I don't disagree with your theme, though. Every color should have some level of access to just about every ability, but the efficiency of said abilities should be directly related to their importance to that color's share of the pie. Examples: I think white should get Mana Tithe and other taxing counterspells. I think black should get artifact removal that requires substantial sacrifices, a la Gate to Phyrexia. I think blue should get LIMITED boosts to its creatures, mostly in terms of protection (it used to have shroud all over the place, but it feels like it doesn't get hexproof except for occasional rares and Invisible Stalker). I think red should have more access to hand alteration (stuff like Chandra, Pyromaster's +0 ability, plus some limited access to discard a la Delirium Skeins). I think green should get a greater share of enchantments that give it access to versatile effects, like this one.
There are certain lines that should never be crossed (I still think Harmonize was an enormous mistake), but by and large, it doesn't hurt to throw colors a previously unseen bone, provided it doesn't become a habit. Otherwise everyone might as well just play blue forever.
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
Is it that big of a deal to have another black stone rain? These sets aren't modern legal anyway. It may be a little powerful as written though, a black kill anything spell in legacy could be insane. Just look at the flexibility of Dismember... This thing should probably have a higher life loss than just the CMC of the target.
If black does gain a way to deal with artifacts/enchantments, I'd like to see it in this form:
Target player/Each player sacrifices an artifact/enchantment/creature/ect...lose life equal to CMC.
Basically, I believe that IF black ever gets something to deal with other permanents, it should be in the form of non-targeted sacrifice, and with a hefty cost.
PucaTrade Invite. Sign up and enjoy the first 500 points ($5) free!
8.RG Green Devotion Ramp/Combo 9.UR Draw Triggers 10.WUR Group stalling 11.WUR Voltron Spellslinger 12.WB Sacrificial Shenanigans
13.BR Creatureless Panharmonicon 14.BR Pingers and Eldrazi 15.URG Untapped Cascading
16.Reyhan, last of the Abzan's WUBG +1/+1 Counter Craziness 17.WUBRG Dragons aka Why did I make this?
Building: The Gitrog Monster lands, Glissa the Traitor stax, Muldrotha, the Gravetide Planeswalker Combo, Kydele, Chosen of Kruphix + Sidar Kondo of Jamuraa Clues, and Tribal Scarecrow Planeswalkers
You're are objectively wrong about the game, since Song of the Dryads is a card created, approved and printed by the people who DECIDES what the game IS.
Tip: those people =/= MaRo. His one of then. ONE of then.
BGU Control
R Aggro
Standard - For Fun
BG Auras
Green turning lands into creatures does not mean it can turn creatures into lands. Oath is an exception.
Brief description:
W Midrange----Control
U Control------Tempo
B Aggro--------Necromancy
R Aggro--------Reach
G Midrange-----Ramp
who ever said, that there is not way that green can remove creatures? is this wrote down somewhere in the 10 commandments of magic?
fact is: the card is very flavourful. turning a creature into a plant is 100% green.
i dont see any reason, why green cant have creature removal if it fits into its flavour.
Please see my signature.
Quite literally anything can be justified on the grounds of flavor alone. White casting divination, blue destroying artifacts, black exiling enchantments. Anything. That does not mean the game can or should do it.
I'm wrong? Not so much.
Ethan Fleischer said "I am embarrassed about Song of the Dryads. It wasn't a deliberate color pie violation, and it wasn't noticed until it was too late to change it."
Even the person in charge of the product says it was a mistake.
I will humbly concede to that.
I still feel that it's extremely weird tat, because of overly strict design, the color of plant magic should never in decades gets access to a fantasy plant magic trope (entangling). It just feels very wrong green mages in mtg being unable to do that.
You might consider that's a childish vision. Well, believing MTG is a strictly mechanical game such as poker is a delusion. Without fantasy concepts, card names, flavor texts and arts the game wouldn't last half a week. And if they don't feed that side of the game it will simply die.
They can but shouldn't justify any effect with flavor, I agree. But it's not the point here. The point is, sometimes mechanics have to meet flavor and not the opposite, simply because mtg players are flavor consumers as well. If they can think of a mechanical way of to cover that flavor without violating the pie - great. But if they don't, you cant expect certain things will simply not appear in the card game. Such as green summoning plants to entangle their opponents.
BGU Control
R Aggro
Standard - For Fun
BG Auras
Dunes of Zairo
SHANDALAR
Innistrad - The Darkest Night
~THE RAVNICAN CONSORTIUM~
A Community Set
Commander: Allies & Adversaries
One card makes people think it's ok to print more cards. The best defense of color pie is not to break it. And yes, this card breaks pie unlike a card like Harmonize which stretches it.
It's a little silly that people are defending it after I gave a quote from the head designer of the set that says it was a mistake.
Wants and desires blind people from what should (or in this case should not) exist.
That isn't Green. Entangling Vines, on the other hand...
Maybe because they have been known to say things like "Chaos Warp and Beast Within were mistakes,"
while continuing to reprint said cards?
If they genuinely feel it's a mistake, they should treat it like one (Sylvan Primordial).
Reprint Stasis!
Control needs more love.
EDH:
Momir Vig, Simic Visionary
Melek, Izzet Paragon
Oona, Queen of the Fae
Bruna, Light of Alabaster
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight
Rhys the Redeemed
Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord
Sen Triplets
The Mimeoplasm
WUBRGSliver OverlordGRBUW
WUBRGSliver Hivelord(Superfriends)GRBUW
EDIT - Can someone who knows how to set up one of those polls start a thread or add it to this one. Something like:
Do you believe that...
1) the color pie is perfect as is and should never be altered
2) the color pie is perfect as is, but a bit of bleeding is fine for the right cards
3) the color pie is pretty balanced, but could use better distribution of some abilities
4) the color pie needs work as some colors have larger slices at present
My guess is option one wouldn't get the most votes against the other three options.
This is on the verge of suggesting that the people who are trying to have open discussion with us are lying. I'm not heading down that hole because it is really insulting to the designers.
Mistake cards happen and they will continue to happen. The key is to understand that they are mistakes and not use them as justification for further ones. I'm sorry if that isn't good enough for you.
All I will say is that it's flavorful, but it breaks the color pie. If MaRo was in charge of CMDR, this wouldn't have seen print. It was probably created by Aaron Forsythe, who's in charge of the green deck. He's MaRo's boss. No one talks back at their bosses, right.
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
Also, this card is completely ridiculous. So strong! People will need to keep enchantment removal in hand in the future when playing me. No wasting it on a pair of boots.
8.RG Green Devotion Ramp/Combo 9.UR Draw Triggers 10.WUR Group stalling 11.WUR Voltron Spellslinger 12.WB Sacrificial Shenanigans
13.BR Creatureless Panharmonicon 14.BR Pingers and Eldrazi 15.URG Untapped Cascading
16.Reyhan, last of the Abzan's WUBG +1/+1 Counter Craziness 17.WUBRG Dragons aka Why did I make this?
Building: The Gitrog Monster lands, Glissa the Traitor stax, Muldrotha, the Gravetide Planeswalker Combo, Kydele, Chosen of Kruphix + Sidar Kondo of Jamuraa Clues, and Tribal Scarecrow Planeswalkers