Question: Do token creatures technically have names?
Posted By:
Authw8
(7/26/2009 10:09:20 PM)
against tokens,but that`s it
Posted By:
Iiory
(7/27/2009 2:33:15 AM)
غضب عارم
Posted By:
TheWrathofShane
(2/24/2012 7:40:06 PM)
Due to the frowned upon nature of land destruct and the potential to hit multiple targets, I deem this card as or better than vindicate.
Posted By:
patronofthesound
(2/28/2013 7:35:51 AM)
Desert Twister was playable at 6 mana in Type II way back. This is better (except for land) for 3 mana.
With it there is little need to main deck Naturalize and that is already a great spell.
Only limiting factor is that it requires both black and green.
Posted By:
Nighthawk42
(9/22/2009 1:45:12 PM)
this, and a way to make one of your opponents basic lands a non-land card
Posted By:
darkfury
(10/8/2009 8:25:30 PM)
I hope you all realize that this card is 22 dollars EACH.
Posted By:
EnV
(10/17/2009 4:52:02 PM)
If your opponent has a beast made by garruk and a beast made by rampaging baloths, does this kill both of them? They're both called "Beast Tokens" evidently despite different power/toughness
Posted By:
s0phocles
(10/29/2009 11:56:53 AM)
Wow. I can imagine playing this on a hellkite. That would be a game-winner right there.
Posted By:
U-caster
(11/2/2009 1:52:09 PM)
Question was asked - "If your opponent has a beast made by garruk and a beast made by rampaging baloths, does this kill both of them?" Answer, yes it does. They are named "beast" and it doesn't care where they came from or how big they started, or any counters added to them later. They all go. One of the reasons this is a powerful card.
In Worldwake, they came out with a new green sorcery that makes one 1/1 snake, one 2/2 wolf, and one 3/3 elephant, that neatly avoids the usual problem tokens of all kinds have with this card.
Posted By:
JasonC2
(2/3/2010 9:00:49 PM)