"(...) just because MM is a promotional set, it doesn't mean every rare should be more valueable than the booster itself."
@Nikeyeia
True, but a promotional set doesn't need artifical junk rares nonetheless.
Artificial junk rare.
Hah.
That's actually quite accurate when you consider what it does.
Nonetheless, this should have stayed an Uncommon that's handling artificial junk.
It's an okay card with some combo potential, but nothing i could think of that has potential in Modern.
By itself, it's just an expensive creature.
(Since i rate cards by use in any format, which means the best potential i could think of,
I'll give it what i gave it back then in Mirrodin - 3/5.)
Posted By:
Mode
(6/5/2013 8:49:14 AM)
This guy isnt bad, still have 4 of them in a BW deck that can really abuse some cards, however I think its power level might not be good for modern, I dont play modern but I think he should cost 2 less to make it as a rare here, they should have put some other really rare card in white instead.
Posted By:
Half-dead
(6/5/2013 2:14:58 PM)
After I opened a $.50 one of these in a pack I paid $11 for, I wanted to slap someone. And THEN I found out they increased the rarity? WTF. Will this be stupidly broken in draft at uncommon? What are the chances someone will draft this and Lotus Bloom? Not too likely.
Posted By:
Gcrudaplaneswalker
(6/8/2013 10:45:09 AM)
Drafted him in my artifact affinity deck with three Æther Spellbombs ...made them last 20 minutes longer on average
Posted By:
djh119
(6/9/2013 5:48:32 PM)
Eh, it lets you reuse Lotus Bloom in draft. It's okay, but not great.
Posted By:
SyntheticDreamer
(6/10/2013 7:25:50 AM)
This is the problem with modern masters.
Your rare could be $100, or it could be $0.50.
I like the idea of the set and it definitely brought great accessibility to some really good old cards, but you can get screwed really badly. It's all or nothing. Not enough middle ground (at least for the rare slot).
Anyways, this card is still cool, and it would definitely break drafts if it was still uncommon.
3.5/5
Posted By:
SAUS3
(6/11/2013 11:15:38 AM)
Proof that I can somehow love a card at uncommon and hate it at rare... even though it's just a cosmetic difference.
Posted By:
Kryptnyt
(6/13/2013 2:39:50 AM)