Quote from TormodModern could never replace Legacy.
The formats are completely different. Its like saying unicycles will replace airplanes.
Quote from limmepieIsn't this the first rare reprint outside a core set?
Quote from AzureShadowThis thread is full of idiots... Lightning Bolt is NOT being reprinted.
Many times has a writer in Wizards said so, because of the plain and simple fact that it's too powerful for what it costs. x/3 creatures shouldn't be able to die at instant speed for one mana without a signifigant drawback. (like PTE giving you a land)
I absolutely guarantee that LB will not be printed in M10, and you can quote me on that.
Quote from WalkingPlanesThere are too many cheap blink cards for meddling mage >.<;
Only the most unusual decks will be able to beat out meddling mages ability.
Quote from hamtasticDiversification.
Running more that just 'the best' removal will have to be considered. Mage and Thought Hemorrhoids will force players to diversify their decks to avoid being wrecked by either of them.
Quote from blasppspsurprised no one mentioned this. Its basically "2 mana to name volcanic fallout" Still strong, just not that fun until you hit your second one
Quote from Zadok001This is insane. Our reason for believing Meddling Mage is in the set is the presence of the word "Meddling" twice? Three cards (not counting the Kids) have been printed with the word "Meddling" on them. Obviously, that drains the well of possible card names including the word "Meddling" completely dry, so there's absolutely no way that this is actually a different card.
Seriously, we're all on board with this reasoning? The word "Backlash" appears in the Orb as well, can we add that to the list of confirmed reprints?
Look, I'm not saying Meddling Mage won't be reprinted. I *am* saying that Meddling Mage is about as "confirmed" as Backlash, so either get Meddling Mage OFF the spoiler, or put Backlash ON. Just because you WANT Meddling Mage reprinted does not mean that the evidence for its presence is inherently stronger.
Quote from Zadok001What we're doing here is akin to taking the text of Moby Dick, locating specific words therein, rearranging them to create a passage from Fight Club, and concluding from this evidence that Tyler Durden is based on Ahab.
Quote from urzassedativesThe entire text for Meddling Mage and Backlash is in the orb, actually.
Meddling Mage has much more specific text than Backlash though. Name, played, etc.
You are acting like we are jumping to conclusions when we have known the orb results for a week, and after thinking about it, I put it on the spoiler.
Do you have a better reason for the ENTIRE TEXT of Meddling Mage appearing in the orb?
Backlash is indeed likely, but its card text isn't as unique, so it is harder to be completely sure about. The name is the biggest clue in that case, but I think it is likely in the set.
Quote from Zadok001Yes, yes I do. My better reason? Because those words aren't very unusual. "Comes into play", "name", "named", "can't", "card". Every single one of those appears in Shards of Alara. Some appear several times. (The Herald cycle provides five instances of "Named" on its own.) Imagine if Ethersworn Canonist had been named "Meddling Canonist". You'd be doing this exact same thing with Shards?
It's possibly in the set. You've provided enough evidence for us to say conclusively that we can't rule it out. What you need to ask yourself now is, does that constitute a sufficient standard of evidence to put it on the spoiler? You've probably actively affected its price on the secondary market already, if you're wrong, you're actually costing people money right now.
I'd give it 50% odds. But, personally, I feel you should be much closer to 100% before you start sticking things on the spoiler and calling them "Confirmed", especially when you're working with evidence this flimsy. (Again, I say to you - All those words were in Shards, and would have been in the Shards Orb. If a card called "Malfegor's Meddling" had been printed, and had the rules text "Malfegor's Meddling can't be countered by spells or abilities," would you have put Meddling Mage on the Shards spoiler? If so, would you consider that an error?)
Quote from hamtasticIf.
Meddling Mage fits the orb in a way that makes sense for it to be in there. The likelihood of a card that has "meddling" twice, while also hitting all the words for the card, which also fits a 'solid gold' set is evidently low enough that the mods decided it was going to be in.
I doubt that they add cards to the spoiler lightly, in fact, I imagine it's usually a very conscious decision. Adding cards that they they don't believe will be in the set to the spoiler is beyond foolish. The spoiler is a major part of the ethos of this site and its moderators. The reason that so many people come here each rumor season is because they treat each season seriously and treat the spoiler as a very important document.
Of course there's a possibility that there's the perfect confluence of events that leads to all the pieces being together in the named set and not having Meddling Mage. That's where Occam's Razor comes in. The most likely answer is usually the correct one. The most likely end result of all these peices of information is that MM is going to be reprinted. You have to start creating cases to explain it away, which is a sign that you're wandering away from the easiest answer.