Search results

You did absolutely nothing wrong! <3 I enjoy engaging in discussion, and for some reason this has me end up in an escalating argument with Velrun every now and then. While I can be persistent, I try my best to discuss in a polite and civil manner, and I honestly don't know what it is in my way...

I think this is pretty much where I would put it; Gravecrawler > Bloodsoaked Champion >= Murderous Scarecrow. There's not much between Champion and Scarecrow. Having played with the Champion a lot, I think it just edges out the Scarecrow because it's relatively easy to recur in aggro decks, just...

Thanks for pointing this out, because I really needed to be put in my place here. After all, I took the time to explain my reasoning for why I think it isn't broken, and you refused to do so unless someone continued the discussion in this thread. Which I did. To which you replied: "Broken :p"...

That argument is not going to convince me any more in this thread than it did in the other.

Okay, here you go. PS. It's totally on brand for Riptide to go off topic though, just go with the flow ;)

I'll bite, because I'm curious why @Velrun thinks this is broken.

This perfectly illustrates the difference between Gravecrawler and the custom card. Whether you sacrifice the land or the Murderous Scarecrow, then retrace it, you're down a land card. Obviously losing a land in hand isn't the same as losing a land in play, though at turn 4, you will often have...

I mean, we can agree to disagree, but I don't find your argument of "trust me, it's broken" very compelling for all the reasons I laid out. You haven't provided any examples of how the 2/1 is broken, nor have you provided any example of other recursive 2/1's historically being broken in (almost)...

A recurring 3/2 is a lot stronger than a recurring 2/1. I would just keep it at 2/1. The reason it's good has nothing to do with the stats itself. Gravecrawler is easier to recur repeatedly and isn't breaking any formats. This is decidedly not broken in any format, because discarding a land is...

Hostile Hostel Westvale Abbey DFC lands that transform into a creature are already a thing, so you can just go ahead and use the daybound/nightbound (or the original werewolf) wording on them without any problems if you so wish.

That's mainly because Skullclamp is gross. Hardly. Cards like Cult Conscript and Dread Wanderer are pretty much textbook examples of this type of design, and they haven't wrecked any format. This is only slightly pushed compared to those, and since lands in hand are a finite resource, this...

Yeah, fair. Gravecrawler is an interesting creature, so a retrace version should be fine :)

The problem with really good value retrace effects is that they get repetitive. I don't know how cool a G-retrace-zzly bear is going to be in practice :D

He might be referring to the fact that Cure Wounds is a healing spell no one takes in D&D 5e because Healing Word exists.

Yeah, Hearthstone's mana system leads to a much different costing of top end cards than MtG, plus there are mechanics like attacking with your hero that just don't translate to MtG. That said, Wildheart Guff would be insane (5 mana to gain 5, Rampant Growth and cantrip, and your hero power...

Enlistment is on the verge of underwhelming and undercosted :oops: Like, I feel like it should cost {2}{w} or even {1}{w} to be able to compete in typical cubes, but at that point you also run the risk it becomes overbearing. You know, I think I should try it out in my "everything costs {1}...

I believe this isn't card art but key art for Zendikar rising. Source.

Putin definitely missed the memo :(

Can't you see? The moon is in the Seventh House, and Jupiter aligns with Mars!

If you truly are supporting Merfolk, Emperor Mikhail II would certainly not be a nosedive in power, and I personally like it better than the other two options you presented. Being able to play (and admittedly small subsection of your deck) from the top of your deck is pretty sweet :) Personally...