I guess it costs so much because it's reusable, you can have it bounce itself and play it each turn. If it would cost less you could have your opponent sac several lands each turn. Granted, you'd have to sac too, but that's why you'd use other manasources or crucible or something.
So I understad why that effect must be costy, the p/t is still bad though. Should be like 4/4 with fear, or 4/4 haste, or 5/5 or something.
Posted By:
majinara
(2/17/2010 12:52:36 PM)
The sad thing is I have a playset of these....they're MINT too.
Posted By:
Tetsu_tora
(4/29/2011 4:38:31 PM)
Overcosted. "Mode" summed the problems with this card up nicely. If you want to abuse it, you'll need a lot of R/B Mana artifacts and spell cost reducing effects. Even if you do, you will not be winning the game solely on the power of this puny pest. Look elsewhere.
Posted By:
markarmor
(2/1/2011 4:05:36 PM)
Snidds these days.
Posted By:
Feathermind
(2/2/2010 9:03:13 PM)
Tremble with buyback for 6 mana?
Posted By:
NeverendingDream
(6/5/2010 2:21:35 PM)
Six mana for a 3/3 body with a cip/etb effect that causes each player sacrifices a land despite the fact that you have return a creature from you on top of that? Good one, Wizards.
Possibly this was a cheaper drop for four mana or something during development, they abused the cip/etb effect in a land destruction deck during playtesting and noticed this card was even powerful. Unfortunately though, for six mana you now have far better choices than this one.
Posted By:
Mode
(8/13/2009 12:01:59 PM)
I think the art looks cool.
Posted By:
SandMouse
(1/14/2010 7:23:45 AM)
Why do you hate land destruction so much, Wizards? (Yes, I know the answer. I'm just sulking)
Posted By:
Selez
(11/5/2009 9:49:27 PM)
Way too expensive for what it does, but worse, 3/3? seriously? This makes some of the laughably overbalanced cards from early sets like The Dark look good.
Posted By:
jonb86
(4/21/2011 6:49:42 AM)
Probably the worst land destruction ever. Good work wizards....
Posted By:
True_Smog
(12/15/2009 5:04:40 AM)