x If you're looking for a specific comment, check the other printings as well.
Player Rating:
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0
Community Rating: 3.949 / 5  (39 votes)
The player rating is the overall rating for the card taking into account all player rating votes.

 
Popular Comments
Hide Comments
Only show me comments rated:
 stars.
12 >
Wow. I'm really impressed by the artwork here. Glad they reprinted it for FTV.
Posted By: BongRipper420 (10/19/2012 5:41:33 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


I really preferred the original art, but it was a decent choice to reprint.
Posted By: Doaj (9/2/2012 1:05:33 AM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


Other than the original dual lands, one of the best duals of all time.
Plus, it makes you popular!
Posted By: Sabisent (8/30/2012 5:08:00 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


I would've preferred River of Tears

@syrazemyla: I realize that, but their choices do not always include cards that were well represented in tournament play, and many famous, competitive cards do not make the cut.
Also, the fact that Grove of the Burnwillows is in decks that I do not play has no effect on my preference of River of Tears among the Future Sight lands.
Posted By: Atali (9/2/2012 2:50:12 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


Against most RG decks, the lifegain is negligible. Excellent dual land.
Posted By: General_Naga (9/5/2012 5:34:52 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


@Atali: River of Tears wasn't in a number of tournament-winning Extended decks.
Posted By: syrazemyla (8/30/2012 11:56:29 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


@ DarthParallax: Maybe because if you're plaing mono-red, you have to wait 7 turns just for Valakut to DO SOMETHING. And if you're not playing mono-red, good luck getting 5 mountains without shocklands or broken dual lands.

@ syrazemlya: Don't forget that River of Tears also wasn't in tournament-winning Modern decks.

Posted By: j_mindfingerpainter (8/31/2012 12:42:22 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


What was wrong with the old art!? The new art is good too, which is a surprise seeing as most of the new art is canned photoshop trash, but I don't see why this needed new art more than Vesuva or Windbrisk Heights.
Posted By: Ideatog (9/10/2012 11:35:58 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


Still not sure if I really think this card is any more or less 'Mythic' than Valakut-- I don't deny it's playability, but this one of the cards I'd definitely say is 'arguable' about whether it belongs actually in the set- but certainly it did belong in the Nomination Round, and I guess Wizards voted for this more than for Valakut...

@j_mindfingerpainter: Everything you say is true. I don't disagree with your premise- I disagree with your conclusion that that is what makes something Mythic or not. The difference between a Rare and a Mythic is not one that Spike can see (if the cards are being made properly). It's one you need to ask a Vorthos on. From the Vault is the only other Thing about MTG that *guarantees* you the Mythic Expansion symbol except for Planeswalker card type or Duel Decks Posterboy/girl. That means that cards need to be chosen not just on "What plays good/What wins games" but also on "What can we give kick ass art to/What is just awesome/What would play whether it w... (see all)
Posted By: DarthParallax (9/6/2012 5:46:26 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


So this card's origin that Future Sight peered into was a From the Vault set? Interesting.
Posted By: Continue (11/18/2012 7:52:00 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0