Friend over at Messenger that according to himself works at wizards (have my own doubts) kept telling me this evening of a planeswalker on innistrad, he couldn't show it to me via webcam but he sent me this pic, it looks a little suspicious to me, especially since we just learned of his existence today.
So, does it look legit to any of you ??
I have some pretty serious doubts about it.
I think the templating on Replicate it off. Replicate is written as "Replicate [cost]" so a spell doesn't do anything if it just has "replicate." See Djinn Illuminatus for the correct way to say it.
Him giving you replicate is suspicious. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that Wizards would print a planeswalker with a block mechanic not does not reappear in a the block as another twist to planeswalkers.
Plus it also emphasizes the foreigness of some planeswalkers to certain planes.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MTGS: You guys do not speak for the wider Magic community despite what you guys think.
708th at Grand Prix: Toronto 2013
Modern: U/R Delver, RUG Scapeshift, Pod
Standard: Jeskai Tempo
Legacy: Dredge, Burn
Pauper: Mono-U Delver
EDH: Ghave, Token Master
Fake. There's no such thing as replicate without a cost AFAIK.
Correct.
702.53. Replicate
702.53a Replicate is a keyword that represents two abilities. The first is a static ability that functions while the spell with replicate is on the stack. The second is a triggered ability that functions while the spell with replicate is on the stack. “Replicate [cost]” means “As an additional cost to cast this spell, you may pay [cost] any number of times” and “When you cast this spell, if a replicate cost was paid for it, copy it for each time its replicate cost was paid. If the spell has any targets, you may choose new targets for any of the copies.” Paying a spell’s replicate cost follows the rules for paying additional costs in rules 601.2b and 601.2e–g.
702.53b If a spell has multiple instances of replicate, each is paid separately and triggers based on the payments made for it, not any other instance of replicate.
The only way that planeswalker could work as written is if they changed the comp rules to add a clause which states that an unspecified replicate cost (think of unspecified Echo costs as precedent) is equal to a spell's normal mana cost. Which they very well could do, seeing as its sorta been done before.
I think the templating on Replicate it off. Replicate is written as "Replicate [cost]" so a spell doesn't do anything if it just has "replicate." See Djinn Illuminatus for the correct way to say it.
Seems like everyone's aware, yeah.
Definitely fake.
I'm all for pointing out what I perceive as a bad decision, but I think most of the negative stigma comes from that knee-jerk, limbic reaction which in most ears sounds like "GRWHAHHAHHWHAHAAA, DAMN YOU HASBRO WIZARDS MARK ROSEWATER TARMOGOYF PRICES!"
I build rogue decks and sometimes they're good. Current:
I know I'm stretching it here a bit, I could swear that the copyright date says 201(0) on it. I dunno, it looks realish, but the date kinda caught be the wrong way.
That looks like a really good photoshop! Damn, if worded correctly, it may well have passed for real.
And thank goodness it got messed up. Could you imagine if it was like "Each spell or sorcery you cast has replicate 1" or whatever? We'd be SURE this was the card for so long.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
U
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So, does it look legit to any of you ??
I have some pretty serious doubts about it.
Edit: you guys have a point, scratch that
looks like it was glued onto another card and had the borders sharpied
Currently playing
Nath of The Gilt-Leaf
Teysa, Orzhov Scion
Modern: U Merfolk (in progress)
Legacy: RBurn
...I mean I am sure there are tons of other reasons, but the simple fact that its emblem ability cannot work in game state means it's fake.
and replicate
pretty much confirms the return to ravnica.
edit - this
sig by Sioux
EDIT: Unless the rules for Replicate are changed in time for Innistrad. In Which case this card is still doubtful.
Plus it also emphasizes the foreigness of some planeswalkers to certain planes.
708th at Grand Prix: Toronto 2013
Modern: U/R Delver, RUG Scapeshift, Pod
Standard: Jeskai Tempo
Legacy: Dredge, Burn
Pauper: Mono-U Delver
EDH: Ghave, Token Master
Just watched it over and over and i could guess there was something odd, but i didn't noticed that, well, Please close this thread mod.
Yeah, looks like someone just thought "he looks Izzet, so I'll just take Ravnica cards, rip their abilities and put them on this card"
+1 Leap of Flame
-2 Char
-6 Djinn Illuminatus
Fake
Trades
Pucatrade with me!
(Signature courtesy of Argetlam of Hakai Studios
The only way that planeswalker could work as written is if they changed the comp rules to add a clause which states that an unspecified replicate cost (think of unspecified Echo costs as precedent) is equal to a spell's normal mana cost. Which they very well could do, seeing as its sorta been done before.
Also, "Tonitrumancer?" What?
Seems like everyone's aware, yeah.
Definitely fake.
I build rogue decks and sometimes they're good.
Current:
Trostani, Selesnya's Voice [EDH/Commander]
Tools of the Trade (Orzhov Synergy stuff) [Standard]
:symr::symb: I hate your deck(Kaervek the Merciless)
Wait, how do I even hide it as a name title?
Kemba, Kostume
Ka...Oh god that's not a good alliteration.Wait, how do I even hide it as a name title?
And thank goodness it got messed up. Could you imagine if it was like "Each spell or sorcery you cast has replicate 1" or whatever? We'd be SURE this was the card for so long.