I'd consider this much more playable than Plow through Reito, it's a bomb in limited. Though perhaps too slow for WW it might find a home in a W/G deck with mana excel and creatures with trample. Too bad there's no W/G archetype in Standard at the moment ...but that may change with the coming of the multicolored goodness that is Ravnica. :biggrin3:
Stir the Pride might seem better at first glance, but don't underestimate the Arcane part of this card. Also, with the "hand size matters" theme, the extra lands returned to hand might not be a disadvantage at all, but exactly the opposite in the right build.
Agreed, we've yet to see the full turn out of cards that provide interesting effects based on cards in hand from Saviors, and While on the surface, this card makes you think 'Why????'.
The answer may lie with something we haven't seen yet. Remember we have only 20 odd cards of 165, there's alot hidden out there, maybe something killer to do with the number of lands in your hand.
Yeah. I predict Sweep being 2-1-1-0-0. Remember, we already also know about Sink into Takenuma, which is black. The last one is probably red or green (more likely green). I doubt they'd give blue a mechanic that's already aligned to it on other cards.
About this card, though, could it have value as a 1/2-spot in Tallowisp WW? That deck gets a nice amount of creatures quickly, and a 4W +5/+5 to all of your weenies is severely good for that deck.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from The Missing Link »
ever looked on http://www.wizards.com it gives u lots of info on magic amd cards so if u havnt looked hav a look and it will tell u allmost anything about magic the gathering
In the criminal justice system, the people are represented by two separate yet equally important groups: the police who investigate the crimes; and the district attorneys who prosecute the offenders. These are their stories.
I like this card, but something's been bothering me...
Why is sweep a keyword?? Charge for instance would work just fine as 'return any number of Plains you control to their owners hand. Creatures you control get +1/+1 until end of turn.' It would even be less wordy. Can someone explain this to me?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Goblinboy »
just think of it as Ankh (you know... an Ankh) More Pork, Ian. That's how I remember it :tongue2: (without the e, anyway)
That's how to remember my name. Or, you could just read the Discworld Novels by Terry Pratchett. I recommend the second method.:)
Quote from NeoNataku »
And dear god, it's on the INTERNET! It has to be true!
...riight.
plow through rieto + Steriods = this.
nice finisher. if you want to kill your opponet without style, just kill him normaly, if you want some style, use this on an army of 1/1s, but if you want to kill your opponet with a lot of style, and then use that fact to taunt him/her mercisly(sp?) then use this on an army of pest tokens
any card that can turn a single pest token into a dangerous creature gets a smile from me this card can turn an army of pests into a death squad, so i am happy.
So much better than plow through reito, this thing is going to be a bomb/finisher in any white heavy limited deck. It might even see play as a finisher in block.
It is a bit strange that sweep is keyworded. However, in its current form it has an advantage over 'As an additional cost...' It doesn't mean you bounced all that land to get the spell countered, so you don't waste all that bouncing.
Oh, I know. However, it doesn't have to be templated as an additional cost a la Worthy Cause, like I said earlier: 'Return any number of Plains you control to their owners hand. Creatures you control get +1/+1 for each Plains returned this way.' or something like that. As a side note, this one also returns on resolution.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Goblinboy »
just think of it as Ankh (you know... an Ankh) More Pork, Ian. That's how I remember it :tongue2: (without the e, anyway)
That's how to remember my name. Or, you could just read the Discworld Novels by Terry Pratchett. I recommend the second method.:)
Quote from NeoNataku »
And dear god, it's on the INTERNET! It has to be true!
...riight.
Sweep is keyworded, because from now on everything will be keyworded. They would have keyworded Spiritcraft if the set was released a few months later.
The Sweep keyword doesn't have his own rules (and no reminder text), but is just put in front of normal rules text. Also, on a black card that rulestext will be different, because 'plains' will be 'swamps'
* Ankh-Morporkian sighs
Seriously, why are all these keywords necessary? All they do is clutter up the card, the Comprehensive Rulebook(because it absolutely is not already way too cluttered), and is, um, inelegant. So now, we have a 4(!)-card cycle, with rules text that can easily fit on the card, and it is keyworded!?:upset: For what it's worth, I think keywords should either be on large mechanics(morph, kicker) or extremely complicated mechanics(madness, phasing). Rampant keywording makes me cry.:crying:
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Goblinboy »
just think of it as Ankh (you know... an Ankh) More Pork, Ian. That's how I remember it :tongue2: (without the e, anyway)
That's how to remember my name. Or, you could just read the Discworld Novels by Terry Pratchett. I recommend the second method.:)
Quote from NeoNataku »
And dear god, it's on the INTERNET! It has to be true!
...riight.
I feel that keywords both bring the game together in a more cohesive way and provide a functional tie between cards.
Keywording a mechanic like Sweep is perfectly fine, as it is versitile (can be used in future blocks), and presents the ability to have the rule explicitly understood by players who have read and comprehend the rules to the game.
Having mechanics where you have to explore each individual card to understand the mechanic is tiresome and is not conducive to a viable framework. The game is undergoing a lot of change in the last few years (card face, color pie, theme drive, rules overhaul) and the move to keyword and explain the mechanics of the game explicitly is simply one further alteration in an attempt to streamline the game, and make it more easily accessable to newcomers and outsiders.
Keywords are necessary, for all of the reasons outlined above, and are, in my humble opinion not an evil at al, but merely a way to make the game more enclosed and comprehensive. Isn't that what "comprehensive rules" means?
I feel that keywords both bring the game together in a more cohesive way and provide a functional tie between cards.
Keywording a mechanic like Sweep is perfectly fine, as it is versitile (can be used in future blocks), and presents the ability to have the rule explicitly understood by players who have read and comprehend the rules to the game.
Having mechanics where you have to explore each individual card to understand the mechanic is tiresome and is not conducive to a viable framework. The game is undergoing a lot of change in the last few years (card face, color pie, theme drive, rules overhaul) and the move to keyword and explain the mechanics of the game explicitly is simply one further alteration in an attempt to streamline the game, and make it more easily accessable to newcomers and outsiders.
Keywords are necessary, for all of the reasons outlined above, and are, in my humble opinion not an evil at al, but merely a way to make the game more enclosed and comprehensive. Isn't that what "comprehensive rules" means?
Furthermore, saying everything is quite a mouthful
"Cannot be blocked except by black or artifact creatures" (cant remember the exact wordings.)
or just..
"Fear"
It's not about the card, it's about the people playing them. It's definitely much easier giving the players a keyword to call lengthy abilities. By tagging a name onto those abilities, it makes it easier to recall which set it's from and overall makes the ability more easier to remember.
I think they trying to make sure that when you look back at SoK, you'll think of the "Sweep" mechanic instead of the "return lands thingie" mechanic.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from DoucheWaffle »
am i the only one refreshing magic websites while looking at porn and eating fruit loops at 2 in the morning?...i feel so alone...
......WTF????....... I don't even know what kind of warning you deserve for this....
Will someone clue me in when a 5 mana finisher became "too expensive"? This spell is a killer and if it were any cheaper, it'd be inherently broken. Especially if you're using the sweep mechanic to it's full potential...
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Will likely only see play in Limited and Casual.
The answer may lie with something we haven't seen yet. Remember we have only 20 odd cards of 165, there's alot hidden out there, maybe something killer to do with the number of lands in your hand.
This guy worries me a bit but I am sure they are real. Good in limited maybe SB in WW.
About this card, though, could it have value as a 1/2-spot in Tallowisp WW? That deck gets a nice amount of creatures quickly, and a 4W +5/+5 to all of your weenies is severely good for that deck.
In the criminal justice system, the people are represented by two separate yet equally important groups: the police who investigate the crimes; and the district attorneys who prosecute the offenders. These are their stories.
Orbs says 2 white, 1 black, 1 red.
Sooner or later we'll get flooded by vast- keywords.
♪~~~♫~~~~
(\ /)
(♥.♥)
(> <)
Music, Love, Magic and Bunny.
Life is so beautiful...
Why is sweep a keyword?? Charge for instance would work just fine as 'return any number of Plains you control to their owners hand. Creatures you control get +1/+1 until end of turn.' It would even be less wordy. Can someone explain this to me?
That's how to remember my name. Or, you could just read the Discworld Novels by Terry Pratchett. I recommend the second method.:)
And dear god, it's on the INTERNET! It has to be true!
...riight.
nice finisher. if you want to kill your opponet without style, just kill him normaly, if you want some style, use this on an army of 1/1s, but if you want to kill your opponet with a lot of style, and then use that fact to taunt him/her mercisly(sp?) then use this on an army of pest tokens
any card that can turn a single pest token into a dangerous creature gets a smile from me this card can turn an army of pests into a death squad, so i am happy.
Machius proudly supports R_E's right to Rumour!
Oh, I know. However, it doesn't have to be templated as an additional cost a la Worthy Cause, like I said earlier: 'Return any number of Plains you control to their owners hand. Creatures you control get +1/+1 for each Plains returned this way.' or something like that. As a side note, this one also returns on resolution.
That's how to remember my name. Or, you could just read the Discworld Novels by Terry Pratchett. I recommend the second method.:)
And dear god, it's on the INTERNET! It has to be true!
...riight.
* Ankh-Morporkian sighs
Seriously, why are all these keywords necessary? All they do is clutter up the card, the Comprehensive Rulebook(because it absolutely is not already way too cluttered), and is, um, inelegant. So now, we have a 4(!)-card cycle, with rules text that can easily fit on the card, and it is keyworded!?:upset: For what it's worth, I think keywords should either be on large mechanics(morph, kicker) or extremely complicated mechanics(madness, phasing). Rampant keywording makes me cry.:crying:
That's how to remember my name. Or, you could just read the Discworld Novels by Terry Pratchett. I recommend the second method.:)
And dear god, it's on the INTERNET! It has to be true!
...riight.
Keywording a mechanic like Sweep is perfectly fine, as it is versitile (can be used in future blocks), and presents the ability to have the rule explicitly understood by players who have read and comprehend the rules to the game.
Having mechanics where you have to explore each individual card to understand the mechanic is tiresome and is not conducive to a viable framework. The game is undergoing a lot of change in the last few years (card face, color pie, theme drive, rules overhaul) and the move to keyword and explain the mechanics of the game explicitly is simply one further alteration in an attempt to streamline the game, and make it more easily accessable to newcomers and outsiders.
Keywords are necessary, for all of the reasons outlined above, and are, in my humble opinion not an evil at al, but merely a way to make the game more enclosed and comprehensive. Isn't that what "comprehensive rules" means?
Furthermore, saying everything is quite a mouthful
"Cannot be blocked except by black or artifact creatures" (cant remember the exact wordings.)
or just..
"Fear"
It's not about the card, it's about the people playing them. It's definitely much easier giving the players a keyword to call lengthy abilities. By tagging a name onto those abilities, it makes it easier to recall which set it's from and overall makes the ability more easier to remember.
I think they trying to make sure that when you look back at SoK, you'll think of the "Sweep" mechanic instead of the "return lands thingie" mechanic.
<Qzilla> losing to girls at magic is such a high
Love that mechanic.
(O.o)
(> <)
This is bunny. Copy him into your signature to help him take over the world.