The card is underwhelming. The +2 is really bad/do nothing on an empty board. The -3 played it way too safe; they could have made it "CMC 4 or less" without making the card too strong.
Ultimate is good, but they're making all of Vraska's ultimates slight variations on one another.
Read the card again, my dude. It doesn't say creatures but permanents. Which means you can sack lands to her as well. Any deck worth a salt will be able to capitalize on this, and it's not like we don't have plenty of cards that can play lands from the graveyard, both in the Standard format and every other format of the game. I agree with your criticism of her -3 to a degree. It's Abrupt Decay at sorcery speed. BUT... Turn 4 is a pivotal turn for most decks regardless of what format you play. It would definitely feel bad if you slam down a 4 mana planeswalker only to have your opponent kill it immediately the next turn with Vraska. Wizards certainly didn't want players to feel bad, and ultimately, it very well may have been too strong
So far non of the mythic screams "you must buy this" to me. Nice-to-have maybe, but nothing urgent.
My wallet approves.
Same... I don't even feel like paying 3 dollars for this card.
Vraska is probably still tired from her perilous voyage in Ixalan...
... her + needs to be heavily built around.. just what would I gladly sacrifice on turn 4?, her - is a sorcery speed abrupt decay which when used will throw away the hard work of giving her the +, the ult is game ending but then we go back to the problem #1 on how to give +
I don't believe she is playable in Standard or Modern. Pretty underwhelming for a 4 drop. Most likely does nothing turn 4 and hopefully turn 5 didn't out pace its mana cost restriction. I'd definitely be happy if my opponent wasted their turn casting this on turn 4.
It looks like they left out the words "you control" on her +2 ability. The phrase "you may sacrifice another permanent" is a little too open-ended if taken literally.
It looks like they left out the words "you control" on her +2 ability. The phrase "you may sacrifice another permanent" is a little too open-ended if taken literally.
Vraska was the card in this set i was most hyped about.
Yeah . . . dissapointed @ first sight.
+1 is definately build around. If not, u @ least go up to 6 Loyality, which is damn nice. Feed her tokenz or specific creatures that cant wait to die ?
-3 simple abrupt decay. I shoulda known. Wizards seem to have reached the point where their creativity ran out. But just copy other cards.
For the ability: nice that it can hit all non-lands, but imo not enough to defend herself. I dont c how itd b 2 strong without the mana-restriction. Not a fan.
-9 screams for tokenz. Potential instant win.
Im incredibbly pissed that once again . . . + draw & - destroy-template was abused. How lazy is dat ?!
Why wont wizards design Planeswalkers differently for once . . . Like Nissa from Amonkhet.
We like it. Just dare !
For example add a non-loyality ability that does stuff when etb, or event X happens.
Let her join with some sac-material when etb & adapt the rest.
I wished soo bad she created tokenz !
Pls never again Ob nixilis-template !
With Relic Seeker they will be doing a +2 to draw a card and gaining 1 life. Now I m not sure if I prefer relic seeker or this. Relic seeker is way more relevant but this is better vs agro and can be a good grind card
Also Wizards is going full zerg with golgary this time, idk if I like it(almost hate)
You heard it first here: nuking a 3 CMC non-land permanents is "doing nothing".
Next to cards like Assassin's Trophy and Vraska's Contempt, she looks reeaalllll bad in comparison. Hell, just pay the 2 extra mana for the significantly better Vraska.
I feel like a lot of the people in this thread are missing that the sacrifice is optional.
Missing the point. If your plan is to play a 4 mana card that doesn't effect the board in any way, you've gone astray. I expect my 4 drops to actually do something.
It looks like they left out the words "you control" on her +2 ability. The phrase "you may sacrifice another permanent" is a little too open-ended if taken literally.
701.16. Sacrifice
701.16a To sacrifice a permanent, its controller moves it from the battlefield directly to its owner’s
graveyard. A player can’t sacrifice something that isn’t a permanent, or something that’s a
permanent they don’t control. Sacrificing a permanent doesn’t destroy it, so regeneration or
other effects that replace destruction can’t affect this action.
It looks like they left out the words "you control" on her +2 ability. The phrase "you may sacrifice another permanent" is a little too open-ended if taken literally.
701.16. Sacrifice
701.16a To sacrifice a permanent, its controller moves it from the battlefield directly to its owner’s
graveyard. A player can’t sacrifice something that isn’t a permanent, or something that’s a
permanent they don’t control. Sacrificing a permanent doesn’t destroy it, so regeneration or
other effects that replace destruction can’t affect this action.
I know that and you know that, but there is always going to be that one ridiculous rules lawyer at the LGS who will try to interpret the card exactly as it is written or pull the wool over someone else's eyes. Example: this guy once tried to convince me that hexproof meant deathtouch didn't kill his creature because the damage targets the creature. *sigh*
PWs in EDH aren't great to begin with but this one is decent. Card draw, sac outlet, and removal in one card is nothing to scoff at even if the application is narrow.
Will it be a staple in GBx lists, no. But lots of decks will want it and it will be great in those decks.
God, this card is a huge letdown. They got the CMC and loyalty right for a Modern-playable GBx planeswalker but the abilities are far too weak.
+2: Doesn't affect the board, is typically only going to be useful in the later stages of the game when you have excess lands. 6 loyalty might be a lot in Standard, but in Modern it's not really that impressive when you consider that this ability doesn't really "do" anything.
-3: Abrupt Decay has been terrible in Modern for years. This very easily could have just copied the original Vraska's minus of "destroy target nonland permanent" and the card would have actually been playable. Big miss here.
-9: She comes in at 4 loyalty, can plus to 6, and then 8, and then 10, and finally after she has been in play for 3 full turn cycles without taking damage and without affecting the board, now she can produce an emblem that relies on you having a better board than your opponent. You don't play planeswalkers for their ultimates, but the fact that she takes so long to reach it while not setting it up and it doesn't even do anything by itself is a real stinker.
All in all, this card is very disappointing and I'd expect it to see no play in Legacy/Modern and very fringe play in Standard (and what play it sees there will likely be in decks built around the graveyard where the sacrifice ability has upside instead of being a real cost). Can we errata this down to 3 CMC or fix the minus please??
Sure, there is a chance of spending $4 on a booster and getting the Mythic Rare $30 super card. There is also a chance of surviving putting your tongue in a light socket.
So, she has repeatable Abrupt Decay and her emblem is a nice throwback to her original ultimate. I'm impressed. You can always run Assassin's Trophy with her, it's asociated with her after all. And you have to judge Vraska by what cards are around her in the format, not just whether or not you think "+2: You MAY sac a permanent to draw a card and gain 1 life" is "bad".
MTGS Wikia Article about "New World Order"
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.
PSA to everyone who keeps forgetting about the Reserved List:
You're on a website dedicated to talking about MtG. You're only a few keystrokes away from finding out what cards are on the Reserved List. You're also only a few keystrokes away from finding out why some cards on the Reserved List got foil printings in FtV, as Judge promos, or whatnot, as well as why that won't happen again. Stop doing this.
You keep living in your world, I'll stay in mine, where "does nothing" does not mean "not as immediately busted as the best card in the set." IIUC, 99% of the cards spoiled so far "do nothing".
What deck is this going in? You really asking that? The same deck everything Golgari might go in...
Dredge
Living End
BG Elves
Otherwise, there are tons of permanents that when they die: value
It's an average walker, only good if you're already ahead. Other than that its an expensive abrupt decay. For what its worth every card looks great next to LotV. But they work well together.
The black tutor card is the best card in this set. And I'm pretty sure it's going to stay that way.
Sure, she does absolutely nothing on her own but I'm always happy to have more sac outlets available. I'm confident she'll find a home in a dedicated shell.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Read the card again, my dude. It doesn't say creatures but permanents. Which means you can sack lands to her as well. Any deck worth a salt will be able to capitalize on this, and it's not like we don't have plenty of cards that can play lands from the graveyard, both in the Standard format and every other format of the game. I agree with your criticism of her -3 to a degree. It's Abrupt Decay at sorcery speed. BUT... Turn 4 is a pivotal turn for most decks regardless of what format you play. It would definitely feel bad if you slam down a 4 mana planeswalker only to have your opponent kill it immediately the next turn with Vraska. Wizards certainly didn't want players to feel bad, and ultimately, it very well may have been too strong
Same... I don't even feel like paying 3 dollars for this card.
Vraska is probably still tired from her perilous voyage in Ixalan...
... her + needs to be heavily built around.. just what would I gladly sacrifice on turn 4?, her - is a sorcery speed abrupt decay which when used will throw away the hard work of giving her the +, the ult is game ending but then we go back to the problem #1 on how to give +
Nexus MTG News // Nexus - Magic Art Gallery // MTG Dual Land Color Ratios Analyzer // MTG Card Drawing Odds Calculator
Want to play a UW control deck in modern, but don't have jace or snaps?
Please come visit us at the Emeria Titan control thread
Seems like a Brawl/CMDR card imo.
GENERATION 12: The first time you see this, copy and paste it into your signature and add 1 to the generation number. It's a social experiment.
This version of Vraska is significantly better than that lackluster version of Liliana we got in the last set. *That* planeswalker was underwhelming.
It does seem potentially open to abuse that way.
Yeah, I drafted Liliana, Untouched by Death, it didn't work too well.
GENERATION 12: The first time you see this, copy and paste it into your signature and add 1 to the generation number. It's a social experiment.
Yeah . . . dissapointed @ first sight.
+1 is definately build around. If not, u @ least go up to 6 Loyality, which is damn nice. Feed her tokenz or specific creatures that cant wait to die ?
-3 simple abrupt decay. I shoulda known. Wizards seem to have reached the point where their creativity ran out. But just copy other cards.
For the ability: nice that it can hit all non-lands, but imo not enough to defend herself. I dont c how itd b 2 strong without the mana-restriction. Not a fan.
-9 screams for tokenz. Potential instant win.
Im incredibbly pissed that once again . . . + draw & - destroy-template was abused. How lazy is dat ?!
Why wont wizards design Planeswalkers differently for once . . . Like Nissa from Amonkhet.
We like it. Just dare !
For example add a non-loyality ability that does stuff when etb, or event X happens.
Let her join with some sac-material when etb & adapt the rest.
I wished soo bad she created tokenz !
Pls never again Ob nixilis-template !
Also Wizards is going full zerg with golgary this time, idk if I like it(almost hate)
Glad to see my second favorite walker finally got a good card.
I need about 9.
701.16. Sacrifice
701.16a To sacrifice a permanent, its controller moves it from the battlefield directly to its owner’s
graveyard. A player can’t sacrifice something that isn’t a permanent, or something that’s a
permanent they don’t control. Sacrificing a permanent doesn’t destroy it, so regeneration or
other effects that replace destruction can’t affect this action.
I know that and you know that, but there is always going to be that one ridiculous rules lawyer at the LGS who will try to interpret the card exactly as it is written or pull the wool over someone else's eyes. Example: this guy once tried to convince me that hexproof meant deathtouch didn't kill his creature because the damage targets the creature. *sigh*
Except that Null Rod is better because it does Nothing not nothing.
PWs in EDH aren't great to begin with but this one is decent. Card draw, sac outlet, and removal in one card is nothing to scoff at even if the application is narrow.
Will it be a staple in GBx lists, no. But lots of decks will want it and it will be great in those decks.
+2: Doesn't affect the board, is typically only going to be useful in the later stages of the game when you have excess lands. 6 loyalty might be a lot in Standard, but in Modern it's not really that impressive when you consider that this ability doesn't really "do" anything.
-3: Abrupt Decay has been terrible in Modern for years. This very easily could have just copied the original Vraska's minus of "destroy target nonland permanent" and the card would have actually been playable. Big miss here.
-9: She comes in at 4 loyalty, can plus to 6, and then 8, and then 10, and finally after she has been in play for 3 full turn cycles without taking damage and without affecting the board, now she can produce an emblem that relies on you having a better board than your opponent. You don't play planeswalkers for their ultimates, but the fact that she takes so long to reach it while not setting it up and it doesn't even do anything by itself is a real stinker.
All in all, this card is very disappointing and I'd expect it to see no play in Legacy/Modern and very fringe play in Standard (and what play it sees there will likely be in decks built around the graveyard where the sacrifice ability has upside instead of being a real cost). Can we errata this down to 3 CMC or fix the minus please??
Since when was ral the guild leader?
Since flavor text on Govern the Storm said he is. Niv is missing.
Ah, my b. Could only find the flavor text in another language.
And for commander, she's a great compliment to Mazirek, Kraul Death Priest (fitting as they are friends) and Meren of Clan Nel Toth.
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.
You keep living in your world, I'll stay in mine, where "does nothing" does not mean "not as immediately busted as the best card in the set." IIUC, 99% of the cards spoiled so far "do nothing".
/A wild hyperbole appears.
Dredge
Living End
BG Elves
Otherwise, there are tons of permanents that when they die: value
It's an average walker, only good if you're already ahead. Other than that its an expensive abrupt decay. For what its worth every card looks great next to LotV. But they work well together.
The black tutor card is the best card in this set. And I'm pretty sure it's going to stay that way.