Alright, look.
I'm not usually one to attack other people or get aggressive, but you guy's aren't even reading the oracle text anymore.
To everyone complaining that this removes damage but isn't useful against stone rain, you are outright WRONG.
Let's look at the Oracle wording you're complaining so much about: "Destroy target Aura attached to a land; or the next time target land would be destroyed this turn, remove all damage from it instead."
That little word at the end - INSTEAD - means its still works.
INSTEAD of the land being destroyed by stone rain, it does something different, like removing damage from the land.
THE LAND STILL ISN'T DESTROYED.
Posted By:
ChaosFire
(1/12/2011 4:32:49 PM)
Over 9000 hours with pencil crayons.
Posted By:
Kirbster
(11/28/2010 6:06:54 PM)
The oracle text is actually weirder then the original - "the next time target land would be destroyed this turn, remove all damage from it instead." Do lands take damage normally?
Posted By:
mattlohkamp
(4/28/2009 12:38:45 AM)
If bad cards are taunts, then this is a big hairy ass in your face.
Posted By:
Kryptnyt
(10/25/2010 2:22:58 AM)
Great flavor, but this card is far too narrow for its cost...The original wording is wonky, hence the wonky current wording...I know it once was read as a regen ability...
Posted By:
Guest57443454
(7/2/2009 8:31:26 AM)
"For example, it could have been used to aggresively save some of your lands while casting Armageddon, or gain an ally by saving another player's land from a Stone Rain."
Why can't you do this with the present Oracle text? Two mana sets up a delayed ability to protect a land against the next Stone Rain or Armageddon, no matter who controls the land or the spell; it's not destroyed, but rather all damage is removed from it instead (even if it's zero damage).
"Changing the oracle text to something along the lines of blowing up an aura AND making a land indestructible until end of turn would have been much more in sync with what the card was originally designed to do."
The card's printed text says "Prevents a land from being destroyed, or removes an enchantment from any land." "Or", not "and". It's clear that even the original card did not allow you both effects for the same two mana.
"Or the wording was done befor indestructible came into being. Now th... (see all)
Posted By:
scumbling1
(5/10/2011 6:39:09 PM)
@chaosfire: You are right. Though they could add Reminder text to the oracle.
Posted By:
ultratog1028
(2/13/2011 6:15:37 PM)
So this card is Oracle-reengineered to help out with a manland? That's really neat, actually.
Posted By:
ratchet1215
(4/29/2010 4:21:16 AM)
What are those two pyramids up to back there?
Posted By:
metalevolence
(12/15/2010 10:04:23 AM)
The original wording isn't wonky, by the standard of of the day. The current Oracle wording isn't so much weird as it has a large part missing. It's most likely WotC took the reminder text wording for the Regenerate ability and used that for this card, removing the bits about tapping and removal from combat, and accidently removing a bit more.
Posted By:
A3Kitsune
(3/22/2010 9:23:35 PM)