How bout Lantern Spirit?
Posted By:
Schlapatzjenc
(12/20/2011 11:54:56 AM)
This was a powerhouse back in the day. You newbies and your static combat damage. Back when combat damage used the stack, you could bounce this in response to combat damage to save it while still dealing two damage to whatever it was fighting. Pair that with Counterspell and the other powerful cards of the day, blue didn't really need anything else:
Your opponent has Serra Angel? Fine, block with two of these, bounce them in response to combat damage and the Angel dies while these survive. That is, if you didn't counter the Angel in the first place.
Posted By:
GrimjawxRULES
(6/8/2012 4:09:36 AM)
@John: 2/1 or 2/2 is pretty irrelevant on this guy. It's rare because it is (or was) a win condition for blue decks. A cheap creature with evasion that is about impossible to kill, and that can block larger creatures all day long without dying.
Posted By:
majinara
(5/8/2010 12:49:36 PM)
"can it stop cratures even with trample?"
-alexkano
No, if you're using the ability in response to blockers, the blocked trample creature will still do its full power in damage to defending player.
This is just a mediocre card now, It at least used to be combat tricks prior to the rules change.
Posted By:
KarmasPayment
(8/16/2010 10:40:34 PM)
can it stop cratures even with trample?
Posted By:
alexkano
(6/9/2010 11:20:12 PM)
I gave this card a 2 because it doesn't really need to be rare. If it had 2/2 then I'd say rare. but 2/1 for a 2B is just, Uncommon.
Posted By:
John-Bender
(6/27/2009 4:31:50 AM)
WOTC must sh1t blue cause this is nothing but a turd
Posted By:
@go
(10/18/2009 7:58:00 PM)
not strong enough for a rare imo
Posted By:
Imperialstonedragon
(3/25/2011 4:14:10 AM)
It's Storm Crow with Transmutation and an expensive self-Unsummon ability built in. And in the same core set as Storm Crow. But this was rare.
WotC does move in mysterious ways.
Posted By:
jfre81
(7/24/2011 2:40:23 PM)
This used to be much better when combat damage stacked.
Posted By:
1maketoilets
(2/11/2012 2:09:29 PM)