x If you're looking for a specific comment, check the other printings as well.
Player Rating:
Community Rating: 1.375 / 5  (44 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 >
Well, this card isn't exactly great, but it's far from worthless. It gets card advantage and does a little bit of damage. I probably wouldn't even play it in limited, but it doesn't suck as much as some other LD spells.

Budget Commander maybe?
Posted By: marmaris74 (1/22/2013 7:34:40 PM)


Pretty good if your opponent only has one artifact, but the fact that they get to choose which land to toss prevents you from taking away an important land.
Posted By: Purplerooster (1/25/2013 11:16:48 AM)


Flavor text says Gruul, but I think this is better in Izzet. Because Izzet have the Tim Taylor goblin to reduce the cost.
Posted By: A3Kitsune (1/24/2013 3:43:11 AM)


Why print a land destruction card that doesn't even give you the choice of land to destroy. I guess if they've missed a few land drops and only just played their third land followed by a keyrune in the previous turn you could play this just to rub in how far ahead you are.
Posted By: Antny517 (2/1/2013 1:44:17 PM)


This card actually came in handy last night. My opponent played a Door To Nothingness, with the mana available to activate it the following turn. I played this card, forcing them to sac both the door and a land. Bought me some much needed time while they tried to replace what just got sac'ed.

So, yeah, if your opponent just happens to be playing a Door to Nothingnessthemed deck, this card becomes semi-useful. Outside of that? Blah.
Posted By: Jandrem (2/6/2013 5:31:26 AM)


Geez. This could be each opponent at least
Posted By: Kryptnyt (1/24/2013 2:17:36 AM)


STOP *** PRINTING WORTHLESS LAND DESTRUCTION. I love LD but if this is what we get then don't bother OK thanks bye.
Posted By: lorendorky (1/22/2013 5:52:16 PM)


Question, card says sacrifices an artifact and a land. What if you only have a land and no artifacts or vice versa? I hate to be he only nerd here that makes this point, but this game is so rule based, it's seems the target player would have to have both for this to work. Hence the word "and". Wouldnt they have used or if they meant only had to have one? It's confusing!
Posted By: Modernii (4/22/2013 7:21:56 PM)


Rauck-Chauv: Master of the Eastern Border.
Posted By: Enemy_Tricolor (2/17/2013 12:05:23 AM)


I use this card frequently... for cleaning my teeth.

Keep trying, Wizards. Keep trying.
Posted By: Rootkit9208 (4/3/2013 9:24:19 PM)