There are no comments yet for this card.
Certainly good for what it's designed to do. This feels to me more like a sideboard than a main-deck card...though on the other hand, if you're playing Legacy or casual, you can probably count on your opponent's deck fielding nonbasics anyhow.
Posted By:
Magnor_Criol
(11/29/2010 9:39:13 AM)
This card is definitely not a side-board card. A lot of decks play a lot of non-basic lands, and this card is soo good because the key is to not use any yourself, or very few, so you don't have any out when you cast this. I just cast this card on my brother last night for 6 damage!! 
that's all it costs! If this card was able to target a creature or player I think it would be on the brink of being too good. 5/5
Posted By:
EvilCleavage
(12/17/2010 10:52:21 AM)
Sidedeck at best, too risky to put in main deck in most situations.
Posted By:
Richard_Hawk
(12/7/2010 11:50:04 PM)
This makes me want the Fire and Lightning deck so bad, I run an artifact deck with only 2 or 3 basic lands the rest are artifact and my friend runs a quick summon eldrazi deck when he loses alot still wouldn't do crap to that cuz Urza's Mine, Tower, and Powerplant are all considered basic lands. But the Fire and Lightning deck looks like just my playstyle go in and leave a burn,
Posted By:
Tootsie213
(7/3/2012 7:09:52 AM)
So, tell me about how you spent 120$ on a playset of taiga. . .
Posted By:
TwentyFifthBaam
(10/18/2012 11:36:48 PM)
For the people complaining that this is broken, you have never actually played with or against it.
Most legacy decks are constructed to play around wasteland already, and at that point it would be playing around this card too. While it's nearly impossible to take no damage at all, taking 2-4 damage instead is a big difference than taking 8-10. It's the checks and balances system of the game. PoP gives burn a great matchup against affinity, but burn in general is very weak to combo decks, it's just how the decks work.
Posted By:
mdakw576
(8/18/2013 6:26:18 AM)
4-8 damage for 2
5/5
Posted By:
blurrymadness
(9/18/2013 12:07:11 PM)
LOL @ you guys, especially TheWrathofShane.
Dual land haters apparently believe that not only do people deserve to be punished in a spectacularly brutal manner for playing with Alpha dual lands, they actually seem to believe that those particular dual lands are the only non-basic lands in existence. I'll get to that in a moment. Firstly, if the dual land haters believe people deserve to lose games in an extremely unfair and arbitrary manner, well I guess we'll just have to *agree to disagree*. It's especially ironic to see TheWrathofShane prancing about with giddy delight over Price of Progress, up on his hind legs begging like a dog to have it reprinted, seeing as how he complains bitterly about almost every card out there for being "unbalanced". Time to pause and reflect about your values, my friend.
Now... very important... a fact that seems to go over *EVERYBODY'S HEADS*...
The Alpha edition dual-lands are NOT THE ONLY NON-BASIC LANDS in existence. Non-basic lands are universally... (see all)
Posted By:
DrJack
(12/8/2013 11:59:52 AM)
Amazing situational burn. It should be a worthwhile card even if the opponent only has two non-basics on the ground. Personally though, I think it's too risky to maindeck unless you feel reasonably confident with the metagame.
Oh yeah, and I think the fact that it doesn't target is a pretty big point in its favor for a burn card.
Posted By:
Gelzo
(12/20/2010 12:41:26 AM)