horseshoe_hermit, I see what you are saying, and I generally despise all of the needlessly-three-colored cards (or cards that just plain get the color pie wrong), but I don't see this as an example of that really.
True, this could have been just r/w. But the addition of green isn't so egregious. Green/x fliers are fine - I see no problem with assault zeppelid, the green is the trample and blue is flying. The only problem might be that I don't think a blue/x gold card should be a very efficient creature, and I think that's what you're getting at here with something green/x being vengeance-themed.
But green has a long history of getting bigger from being dealt damage, with Fungusaur. I think this fits that bill, but red/white gives it a twist, which is now it is its owner being damaged and not the creature itself. And green is a good color for +1/+1 counters. So look at it that way: green is a color of growth, red/white give it a vengeance-based growth, and flying.
Cascade is a way of casting a spell - a sort of embellishment. You throw in a kind of energy, or spell signature, or whatever (it's magic!), and the energy suddenly takes on a life of its own. Just as you invoke your own wizardry, the 'ribbon' you attach, that flaps just slightly out of place at first, flourishes and swirls about in the Æther, forming an arcane matrix wholly independent of its source. This self-sustaining, self-governing engine already scarcely hints that it was ever distinct from its own genesis; and in the end, it yields a spell. EDIT: A spell that you did not specifically arrange. A spell that you brought about, and yet not.
Or, you know, something like that.
I like this explanation for cascade. I suppose that could fit into an "ardent plea" because you are praying so passionately that you just cause a cascade (as you described it).
I really like this card. I was hoping there would be some low-cost cascade cards. Also, as roussos noted, this thing is great in multiples. I'd like to see this at the top of the curve in a weenie deck!
White is allowed this mechanic, and we can totally see this as Bant's spell.
Anyway, I'm kind of embarrassed I was the first one to mention attacking with not one guy in the additional combat phase. At least someone else noticed this ability is cumulative.
I think it's the whole Relentless Assault ability that is messing with the color pie, not exalted, lol.
Frozen_fire mentioned it on the third page, so you don't have to be embarrassed.
2GG, 0/1 Vigilant, gets +2/+2 for each aura attached to it.
2RGW, 5/5 Enemy Shroud, gets +2/+2 for each aura attached to it. Legendary.
Still not sure what the point was,
Oh really, this has different stats than rabid wombat? I hadn't noticed!
I'll repeat what I said: Didn't everyone come up with this the first time they tried to make a Rabid Wombatvariant? (emphasis added)
Of course you want to put some built-in protection on a rabid wombat-esque card, to help protect it against the otherwise inevitable card disadvantage when you slap multiple enchantments on it. THAT was my point - that opponent-shroud is a very obvious ability on this type of creature. Dozens of cards in the card/set ideas forum must have been made with this combination of abilities. I'm just surprised this particular card is such a shock to everyone (unless everyone is shocked by a red card with super-shroud that loves auras, in which case, yes that is shocking until you take into account the fact that the color pie hasn't really mattered for years).
Eh? Everyone probably noticed how vulnerable the deck was to someone just nuking the wombat. Or how slow the deck was to get the giant wombat going.
Um...yeah. That's the whole "EVERYONE" part. This card should have been designed many years ago, except without extraneous and inappropriate colors thrown on. You know, back when the color pie mattered.
Rabid Wombat didn't have 5 power and didn't start with troll shroud.
It didn't cost freakin 2RGW either.
but this guy is a monster
I mean...I guess. A 5/5 with super-shroud is cool for 2RGW. I guess it's convenient that it likes auras, because it is never going to connect with an opponent without help from trample or evasion. And I'm interested (but not really) in seeing what kind of deck would possibly have room for this, auras, and other naya-themed cards like spellbreaker behemoth and wooly thoctar and the other generally good (and less situational) naya/green/whatever fat. Some sort of aura.dec would be nice but it probably didn't want to play red. oh well.
Why is everyone freaking out so much about this card. Didn't everyone come up with this the first time they tried to make a Rabid Wombat variant? I mean, except not costing mana of three different colors, of course. Sorry if my distaste for wotc randomly slapping tri-colors on every rare in this set is starting to show.
That said, I hope aura.dec can exist in some format. Not sure if red would have otherwise been present in that deck (again: damn you wotc for making this needlessly three-colors!), but I assume it would be now, with this guy.
This seems both overcosted, and like it should have had red in the cost. C'mon, let's at least pretend the color pie still exists, especially since we're doing enemy-color golds in this set.
Also, every card that show's off a shard's marquee mechanic doesn't have to be tri-color, particularly when one of the colors is so clearly out of place. I'm looking at you, blue.
About Stifle, you can use it with Isochron Scepter, and cut the trigger ability whenever you like, now its correct, sorry for my mistake:)
But then it just becomes a 7/7 haste trampler for 3RGU with a cost of 2 every upkeep. That isn't really good. It's much, much worse when it requires you to have stifle and isochron scepter in the first place. There are literally hundreds of cooler things you can do with an isochron scepter. I mean really, why are we going through all these wacky permutations just to make a 7/7 haste trampler? If you are spending/doing enough that you could just hard-cast a 7/7 haste trampler, or something better, then you're doing too much and it's time to recognize the "combo" just isn't worth it.
For those that keep insisting on trying to compare these to lands, then to that I want to point out the obvious flaw (they are artifacts, not lands).
This is important for one very large reason, and that is that you can only play one land per turn, while you can play multiple of these in a turn depending upon the mana/lands you have available to you to pay their costs.
And compared to other artifact mana, I would put these up on the same level as most others. True, they do not come into play untapped, but the alternate cost helps to make up for that.
So, once again, I just wanted to point out to all those that insist on comparing them to lands, that you can of course do that, but that in the end they do have advantages over lands because of the one-land-per-turn rule.
They also have a big disadvantage over lands: these cost mana. Also, (most) lands don't return other lands to your hand when they come into play.
I can't imagine a realistic scenario where you would play multiple of these in a turn....second turn, you tap both your basic lands, cast two borderposts, and bounce all your lands? You're playing a multicolor deck (or else you wouldn't even need borderposts) that is drawing/playing two basic lands (of the same type, or else you wouldn't need the borderposts) on turn 2? And then, what, your opponent plays pulse of the maelstrom on his turn to effectively armageddon you?
Being able to play multiple of these a turn would only be an advantage if these could accelerate your mana, and these don't (at least not on their alternate cost). It could also be an advantage if you needed "accelerated fixing," but I can't foresee that being a realistic scenario, as I detailed above. Unless you're worried about being able to generate BB on the second turn in your r/b deck, and you have only a mountain, a swamp, and two borderposts in your opening hand....but then you wouldn't play both your borderposts on turn two. You'd play one on turn one, and then just play the swamp on turn 2.
Anyone notice that Mike Flores's comparisons of spoiled cards to older cards have been getting more and more ridiculous. Last time he compared Maelstrom Archangel to dark ritual + hypnotic specter (no seriously, he did it in the article he wrote for PtE), and now he's comparing Maelstrom Pulse to....pulse of the fields? Really? REALLY?? Can't we just, you know, talk about how it's a good card instead of trying to shoehorn it into an old "pulse" card?
re: pain bond - I didn't think it had been done, but it does feel familiar enough to be totally possible. maybe I should have done a gatherer search first to make sure I wasn't being repetitive?
Ragnarok Behemoth :2mana::symr::symr:
Creature - Avatar
0/5
First strike
Ragnarok Behemoth must attack each turn if able.
At the beginning of your upkeep, put a charge counter on Ragnarok Behemoth. Ragnarok Behemoth gets +5/+0 for each charge counter on it.
Sacrifice a nontoken permanent: remove a charge counter from Ragnarok Behemoth. Any player may play this ability.
Whipscale Broodmother :1mana::symg::symg:
Creature - Snake
2/2
At the beginning of you upkeep, you may pay :symg:. If you do, put a 1/1 green Snake creature token into play. If you don't, sacrifice a snake.
Pain Bond :1mana::symb:
Instant
Until end of turn, whenever target creature is dealt damage, you gain that much life.
Draw a card.
Just wish he didn't cost so much...6 for a 5/5 would have been fine with me.
Yeah, actually something like a 3/3 for 1UBR would have been very cool for this. Because as I see it, his problem is that he is a fatty that doesn't quite have either of the two things good fat should have.
Strong playable fat probably needs two things: some way to reliably hit players (evasion, trample, thorn elemental), and some way to protect itself from removal. The second isn't required, but is generally really important. This guy doesn't have it. Being black no longer means removal-proof, not in this environment. He is big, at least, but (until some creatures have been sacrificed) not necessarily big enough to survive collisions with other fatties.
He also doesn't have evasion, although haste can be a sort of pseudo-evasion for a turn. He does have a unique mechanic for getting rid of chump blockers faster, however. Now they need to have a creature open to block him, and a creature available to sac. This is nice. Still, I think I'd rather just have trample - you are going to get through and deal damage faster. And that is sort of like saying I would rather have a 6/6 haste trample for 4UBR....which means thrax isn't that great.
I like his ability though. I just wish it wasn't on such a large, expensive, easily-outclassed fatty.
Sharding Sphinx + this + a couple of artifact creatures + a few disposable artifacts and you can easily take 3-4 extra turns, which is enough to kill an undefended opponent.
I'm not really following block this season, but if a Sharding Sphinx Esper deck exists, this goes in it as a 1-2 of, if only to grab a surprise double/triple attack.
Yeah, I'm not super concerned with figuring out how to "break" it for tons of extra turns. I just think this is a really, really cool card for esper/artifact decks. Sharding sphinx is a great idea; anything that can generate a couple "throwaway" artifacts will do the trick. Even if you are sacrificing some of your real, semi-important artifacts, and extra turn is still pretty nice. This card might not be breakable, it might not even be playable, but I really like it.
What I don't get is why people are always focusing on the wrong things. The drawback isn't really the point. People play with Ball Lightning, even when they're not running any reanimation. It's drawback isn't any worse than that, probably even better since you can possibly topdeck it again later.
I was focusing on it because it is the only thing remotely interesting about the card. Otherwise it is just a fattie with a disadvantage that we've seen before. Also, in order to argue why the card is good, it is necessary to discuss the drawback and how it can be worked around or how it compares to other cards. So it's only natural to focus on why the drawback is still a drawback if one is to argue that the card isn't good.
The more important difference is the mana cost, not the drawback, imo. If it's too expensive to play the Ball Lightning role, that's why it's not competitive. It's ability or inability to be reanimated isn't that important, it's the mana cost that's the most important factor (well, it's fair to talk about unearth, since that's built into other creatures). If it was 3 mana, everyone would talk about how much better it is than Ball Lightning. At 5 mana, it's much less exciting. 4 mana might have made it competitive. It's good in limited tho.
Yup, I agree. It is basically a 7/7 ball lightning for 3RG, and that isn't good. And then when we get into this discussion of how to make the card work for you - like with fancy ways of getting it back to the top of your deck, or returning it to your hand before its drawback triggers - the price becomes an issue, because really the BEST you can do with this card is a 7/7 trampler for 5 - that's great, but totally not worth jumping through so many hoops to get. It's not like you're getting a 12/12 trampler for 1 mana.
And then we have people saying so what, at least it is fun in casual. But that's the part I don't get. What's fun about this? It goes away after a turn! That isn't fun at all! There are literally hundreds of more "fun" things to do in red and green for 5 mana. This isn't a makes-you-want-to-build-around-it drawback, because ultimately whatever you get from it (a 7/7 trampler) isn't worth the hassle, and the drawback is actually far harder to get around than it may seem at first.
True, this could have been just r/w. But the addition of green isn't so egregious. Green/x fliers are fine - I see no problem with assault zeppelid, the green is the trample and blue is flying. The only problem might be that I don't think a blue/x gold card should be a very efficient creature, and I think that's what you're getting at here with something green/x being vengeance-themed.
But green has a long history of getting bigger from being dealt damage, with Fungusaur. I think this fits that bill, but red/white gives it a twist, which is now it is its owner being damaged and not the creature itself. And green is a good color for +1/+1 counters. So look at it that way: green is a color of growth, red/white give it a vengeance-based growth, and flying.
I like this explanation for cascade. I suppose that could fit into an "ardent plea" because you are praying so passionately that you just cause a cascade (as you described it).
I really like this card. I was hoping there would be some low-cost cascade cards. Also, as roussos noted, this thing is great in multiples. I'd like to see this at the top of the curve in a weenie deck!
I think it's the whole Relentless Assault ability that is messing with the color pie, not exalted, lol.
Frozen_fire mentioned it on the third page, so you don't have to be embarrassed.
Oh really, this has different stats than rabid wombat? I hadn't noticed!
I'll repeat what I said: Didn't everyone come up with this the first time they tried to make a Rabid Wombat variant? (emphasis added)
Of course you want to put some built-in protection on a rabid wombat-esque card, to help protect it against the otherwise inevitable card disadvantage when you slap multiple enchantments on it. THAT was my point - that opponent-shroud is a very obvious ability on this type of creature. Dozens of cards in the card/set ideas forum must have been made with this combination of abilities. I'm just surprised this particular card is such a shock to everyone (unless everyone is shocked by a red card with super-shroud that loves auras, in which case, yes that is shocking until you take into account the fact that the color pie hasn't really mattered for years).
Um...yeah. That's the whole "EVERYONE" part. This card should have been designed many years ago, except without extraneous and inappropriate colors thrown on. You know, back when the color pie mattered.
It didn't cost freakin 2RGW either.
I mean...I guess. A 5/5 with super-shroud is cool for 2RGW. I guess it's convenient that it likes auras, because it is never going to connect with an opponent without help from trample or evasion. And I'm interested (but not really) in seeing what kind of deck would possibly have room for this, auras, and other naya-themed cards like spellbreaker behemoth and wooly thoctar and the other generally good (and less situational) naya/green/whatever fat. Some sort of aura.dec would be nice but it probably didn't want to play red. oh well.
That said, I hope aura.dec can exist in some format. Not sure if red would have otherwise been present in that deck (again: damn you wotc for making this needlessly three-colors!), but I assume it would be now, with this guy.
Also, every card that show's off a shard's marquee mechanic doesn't have to be tri-color, particularly when one of the colors is so clearly out of place. I'm looking at you, blue.
But hey, cool art and card name!
I agree 100%...the partial spoiler lists this as just a regular rare, but that's a mistake, right?
This card is very cool, and exactly what I think a mythic should be. Now Uril on the other hand, that doesn't feel quite so mythic to me.
But then it just becomes a 7/7 haste trampler for 3RGU with a cost of 2 every upkeep. That isn't really good. It's much, much worse when it requires you to have stifle and isochron scepter in the first place. There are literally hundreds of cooler things you can do with an isochron scepter. I mean really, why are we going through all these wacky permutations just to make a 7/7 haste trampler? If you are spending/doing enough that you could just hard-cast a 7/7 haste trampler, or something better, then you're doing too much and it's time to recognize the "combo" just isn't worth it.
They also have a big disadvantage over lands: these cost mana. Also, (most) lands don't return other lands to your hand when they come into play.
I can't imagine a realistic scenario where you would play multiple of these in a turn....second turn, you tap both your basic lands, cast two borderposts, and bounce all your lands? You're playing a multicolor deck (or else you wouldn't even need borderposts) that is drawing/playing two basic lands (of the same type, or else you wouldn't need the borderposts) on turn 2? And then, what, your opponent plays pulse of the maelstrom on his turn to effectively armageddon you?
Being able to play multiple of these a turn would only be an advantage if these could accelerate your mana, and these don't (at least not on their alternate cost). It could also be an advantage if you needed "accelerated fixing," but I can't foresee that being a realistic scenario, as I detailed above. Unless you're worried about being able to generate BB on the second turn in your r/b deck, and you have only a mountain, a swamp, and two borderposts in your opening hand....but then you wouldn't play both your borderposts on turn two. You'd play one on turn one, and then just play the swamp on turn 2.
re: pain bond - I didn't think it had been done, but it does feel familiar enough to be totally possible. maybe I should have done a gatherer search first to make sure I wasn't being repetitive?
Instant
Creatures with Fear get +1/+0 until end of turn. Creatures without Fear get -1/-0 until end of turn.
Ethereal Skyhawk :symw::symw::symu:
Enchantment Creature - Bird Spirit
2/4
Flying
Ragnarok Behemoth :2mana::symr::symr:
Creature - Avatar
0/5
First strike
Ragnarok Behemoth must attack each turn if able.
At the beginning of your upkeep, put a charge counter on Ragnarok Behemoth. Ragnarok Behemoth gets +5/+0 for each charge counter on it.
Sacrifice a nontoken permanent: remove a charge counter from Ragnarok Behemoth. Any player may play this ability.
Whipscale Broodmother :1mana::symg::symg:
Creature - Snake
2/2
At the beginning of you upkeep, you may pay :symg:. If you do, put a 1/1 green Snake creature token into play. If you don't, sacrifice a snake.
Pain Bond :1mana::symb:
Instant
Until end of turn, whenever target creature is dealt damage, you gain that much life.
Draw a card.
Yeah, actually something like a 3/3 for 1UBR would have been very cool for this. Because as I see it, his problem is that he is a fatty that doesn't quite have either of the two things good fat should have.
Strong playable fat probably needs two things: some way to reliably hit players (evasion, trample, thorn elemental), and some way to protect itself from removal. The second isn't required, but is generally really important. This guy doesn't have it. Being black no longer means removal-proof, not in this environment. He is big, at least, but (until some creatures have been sacrificed) not necessarily big enough to survive collisions with other fatties.
He also doesn't have evasion, although haste can be a sort of pseudo-evasion for a turn. He does have a unique mechanic for getting rid of chump blockers faster, however. Now they need to have a creature open to block him, and a creature available to sac. This is nice. Still, I think I'd rather just have trample - you are going to get through and deal damage faster. And that is sort of like saying I would rather have a 6/6 haste trample for 4UBR....which means thrax isn't that great.
I like his ability though. I just wish it wasn't on such a large, expensive, easily-outclassed fatty.
Yeah, I'm not super concerned with figuring out how to "break" it for tons of extra turns. I just think this is a really, really cool card for esper/artifact decks. Sharding sphinx is a great idea; anything that can generate a couple "throwaway" artifacts will do the trick. Even if you are sacrificing some of your real, semi-important artifacts, and extra turn is still pretty nice. This card might not be breakable, it might not even be playable, but I really like it.
I was focusing on it because it is the only thing remotely interesting about the card. Otherwise it is just a fattie with a disadvantage that we've seen before. Also, in order to argue why the card is good, it is necessary to discuss the drawback and how it can be worked around or how it compares to other cards. So it's only natural to focus on why the drawback is still a drawback if one is to argue that the card isn't good.
Yup, I agree. It is basically a 7/7 ball lightning for 3RG, and that isn't good. And then when we get into this discussion of how to make the card work for you - like with fancy ways of getting it back to the top of your deck, or returning it to your hand before its drawback triggers - the price becomes an issue, because really the BEST you can do with this card is a 7/7 trampler for 5 - that's great, but totally not worth jumping through so many hoops to get. It's not like you're getting a 12/12 trampler for 1 mana.
And then we have people saying so what, at least it is fun in casual. But that's the part I don't get. What's fun about this? It goes away after a turn! That isn't fun at all! There are literally hundreds of more "fun" things to do in red and green for 5 mana. This isn't a makes-you-want-to-build-around-it drawback, because ultimately whatever you get from it (a 7/7 trampler) isn't worth the hassle, and the drawback is actually far harder to get around than it may seem at first.