x If you're looking for a specific comment, check the other printings as well.
Player Rating:
Community Rating: 4.276 / 5  (85 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:
123 >
I personally find merfolk to be ridiculously underpowered compared to kithkin or faeries, between scion of oona, figure of destiny, and what not. If you want to play merfolk though, certainly have to love this one, especially tied in with their champion that lets you take extra turns when it hits the opponent.

As to how did merfolk move about on land without legs? See card, buoyancy.
Posted By: Donovan_Fabian (12/16/2009 3:45:36 AM)


i'm diggin the new "merfolk-with-legs" thing flavor-wise. Finally an answer to that age old question of just what happens next when you're making out with a mermaid.
Posted By: madformedusa (9/26/2009 10:34:35 PM)


The only issue I have with her is the aggressive casting cost, so it only goes down by 1 from Banneret.

Posted By: boneclub (5/10/2010 10:19:17 PM)


That's Shiva, Merfolk are Hindu. you know it's true.
Posted By: BlackAlbino (5/25/2010 4:13:03 PM)


Muitu foda vai pro deck.
Posted By: magusland (7/15/2009 12:46:37 PM)


There isn't anything wrong with it having humanoid legs; in fact I imagine that it can change between fish and human legs at will, probably to decieve other creatures. It also makes sense because how can legless merfolk fight on land if thier confined to water? It would never make sense if my Runeclaw Bear got killed from blocking a merfolk if the merfolk coudn't walk on land. So its perfectly fine that it has normal legs and the rest of you whiny morons who think otherwise can shut the hell up.
Posted By: SavageBrain89 (7/14/2009 3:10:04 PM)


the last 10 boosters I've opened I've pulled 3 of these... don't know if I'm blessed or cursed.
Posted By: Sironos (6/21/2010 2:43:18 PM)


It not having aquatic features, like the traditional fish tail of the merfolk, annoys me. I mean, if 2010 is getting back to the basics of traditional fantasy genres, why is the art for this card deviant from the traditional image of a merfolk?
Posted By: Oleander (7/11/2009 4:14:37 AM)


Worse out of the new lords. Tap make a merfolk unblockable? WTF?! There is no merfolk that is worth hitting your opponet aside from doing damage. If this base set had a couple kick ass mers that had 'when this creature deals combat damage to player X happens' then I see it being worthwhile. Also with a set that has whispersilk cloak in it this ability really becomes moot. Equipped creature is unblockable and has shroud. Now if this also gave merfolk shroud then we would be on the way to a new and improved merfolk world safe from Lighting Bots and other targeted removal spells. However after the Scion of Oona and Faerie deck dominated these past couple of years I guess its time from blue to go back into the closet. This is just another way of showing that blue has to pay for the years of having counterspell and ensaring bridge and other cool control decks. 3/5
Posted By: ZioKai (8/12/2009 4:58:37 PM)


Oleander Is Gay This Art Is Beutiful And Asides From Inkfathom Merfolk Look Like Dorks
Posted By: MasterOfEtherium (7/14/2009 12:05:51 AM)