x If you're looking for a specific comment, check the other printings as well.
Player Rating:
Community Rating: 2.792 / 5  (24 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:
12 >
I've seen this as the finisher in a really mean GU turbo-fog deck.
Posted By: Atali (9/8/2012 8:22:17 PM)


The 2nd ruling is crap!

"If the targeted creature or player is an illegal target by the time the ability resolves, the ability is countered. You won't put a charge counter on Sphinx-Bone Wand and it won't deal damage."

The card clearly states that you first put a charge counter upon casting a spell, and then it deals damage. If the target's gone, then fine - it does no damage, but the charge counter should still be added! (IMHO).
Posted By: wheeledgoat (8/12/2013 11:00:38 AM)


coulda used new art, but not really complaining. good card is good. Someone go curbstomp Jake with their Izzet deck plz lol. :P
Posted By: DarthParallax (9/8/2012 11:00:25 AM)


This is actually getting pulled into my r/b/g edh deck, enough mana acceleration to actually play it, and lots of small spells to trigger it.
Posted By: orisiti (9/8/2012 10:59:49 AM)


guttersnipe is much more efficient
Posted By: Osprey_93 (12/15/2012 1:04:20 AM)



Replicated spells do not get cast, they won't trigger Sphinx-Bone Wand.

All in all, terrible card.
Posted By: benevolinsolence (9/30/2012 4:24:54 PM)


I SUPPOSE it could be useful/not stupidly overcosted if it was cheated in VIA Tinker/Master Transmuter, or if you're playing a deck that REALLY slows the game down.

But if that was the case, why would you waste a turn playing this without mana open? Wouldn't you rather have a Mana Leak/Counterspell in your hand with 2+ mana at the ready?

Whatever, I don't really care. I'm taking it out for a second Brainstorm anyway.
Posted By: Ferlord (9/9/2012 8:02:37 PM)


Would have been a decent card if it was three or four mana cheaper.. Only thing I can say in it's defense is that it doesn't care about card resolution. Otherwise, pretty much a junk card.
Posted By: BastianQoU (9/7/2012 10:19:10 AM)


Should have cost 4 and only target creatures, or 5 and only target players. They costed it out of usefulness.
Posted By: blindthrall (9/18/2012 5:13:21 PM)


Bad card is bad.

Why did Wizards add this?
Posted By: Jake1991 (9/6/2012 5:59:39 PM)