Something I don't understand about the rulings..... they state:
"However, if it's not able to be dealt damage because it's neither a creature nor a planeswalker..."
A planeswalker isn't a creature so couldn't be targeted right? You also can't target a player for the damage to be redirected. So why the reference???
Either i'm missing something or i've just found a new use for this card :-)
Posted By:
dregoth00
(3/13/2010 1:56:28 AM)
@dregoth00 I @ssume they're referring to the planeswalker that turns into a creature, so that it's targeted while it's a creature.
Posted By:
OpeeFomenom
(9/14/2010 1:02:21 PM)
In a creatureless deck, it's actually pretty good. Earthquake and reflect the damage onto a creature a second time, for example.
Posted By:
ShakaUVM
(6/28/2011 5:22:12 PM)
It's a good political card in multiplayer.
Posted By:
musicmiles
(9/9/2009 10:47:14 PM)
Kinda like it in a creatureless deck.
Posted By:
Gilgamesh3000
(9/1/2009 8:57:54 PM)
There's better option for redirecting damage, but this isn't that bad...
Posted By:
Guest57443454
(11/29/2009 9:18:28 PM)
@drego & opee
Indeed, if it's a creature when this targets but not on resolution (I.E. it reverts to a planeswalker) it can still have the damage dealt/redirect to it. If this thing can't actually redirect the damage is the only case where it's countered.
Posted By:
blurrymadness
(4/15/2013 3:43:15 PM)
If you only have stuffy dolls it poses quite a conundrum
Posted By:
SarcasmElemental
(9/25/2013 9:12:29 PM)