Remarkably efficient even by today's standards.
Posted By:
DeadeyeDave
(8/2/2011 9:29:35 AM)
Reach on this card makes very little sense because it means that my dragon that's 500 feet up in the air has to swoop down and snack on this dork on top of a 30-foot tower. Reach ought to stick with creatures that can actually climb up there and get the flyer, not just shoot at it.
Thanks for the story, Aaron. I don't agree with your friend's behavior but it shoulds like he was a little guilty about it, which is good enough for me. I would have gone the extra mile and said "Are you sure? This isn't actually an Archer" instead of just "Are you sure?", but his conduct was within acceptible limits and I don't expect everyone to be as honorable as me.
EDIT - And as I reread this comment seven months after its original posting (June 5th, 2011), I find myself feeling differently and agreeing with the "skumbag" perception. Sure the guy ought to have stopped and wondered why his opponent was asking "Are you sure", but he shouldn't be punished for a lapse in judgment, and Mike should be ... (see all)
Posted By:
willpell
(1/28/2012 12:14:11 AM)
White creature with reach, dosn't happen often.
Posted By:
A3Kitsune
(2/7/2010 2:28:34 AM)
I'd must say that almost all older cards are oracled now and if you want to play with them in DCI sanctioned event I strongly suggest that you print out the oracled texts so that you remember how those cards work today.
Posted By:
tavaritz
(8/29/2011 11:55:27 PM)
That was pretty wrong of Mike to do. But this is a great card. A 2/2 with first strike for two is always nice. Reach just makes it better.
Posted By:
NeoKoda
(9/18/2011 10:58:50 AM)
From back before Wizards mandated that reach was a strictly green effect.
Posted By:
Treima
(5/16/2010 5:07:59 PM)
Aaron’s Random Card Comment of the Day #69, 3/31/11
There are more mono-white creatures with reach (5) than I would have initially guessed, but Longbow Archer is the quintessential one. Archers do fit in well with white’s flavor, although we tend to design them as creatures with “rangestrike” like Crossbow Infantry or Ballista Squad, letting the green Archers and Spiders have reach. White and green have a tendency to want similar types of small ground creatures, so in general we want to keep reach in green so as not to further blur the lines.
Note that the Sixth Edition version was printed as type “Soldier”—a change from the original Visions printing of “Archer.” I’m not sure why that was done exactly, but I have a personal tale about the two cards.
Mike Turian and I were both playing a W/g Rebels deck at Pro Tour—Chicago 2000, one of the rare Standard Pro Tours of that era. Many decks had access to the card autoc... (see all)
Posted By:
Aaron_Forsythe
(3/31/2011 12:19:53 AM)
@ KramlmarK:
It's a cpmletely different thing to compare your Emerge Unscathed with some Oracle changes and clear stats printed on a card. You don't have to correct the gameplay of your opponent, but you SHOULD be responsible for any changes that happens to the cards you play, just because you used an older version of this card.
This kind of thinking reminds me on an ebay trick, where an article was sold using the word "Originalverpackung" in the de***ion, meaning original packing. However, this meant that you buy the packing, not the content. All that was missing was the word "in".
@ Aaron:
I would really appreciate to see more green archers with the "real" archery ability instead. First of all, green is a friend of red and it would be cool, if it could do similar things. Dealing damage to creatures would be wonderful and the restriction on attacking/blocking creatures would fit really well into the green combat-focus. In addition, this works li... (see all)
Posted By:
Cheza
(8/1/2011 2:17:24 PM)
@Aaron
That is extremely low class and poor sportsmanship.
Posted By:
TheWrathofShane
(6/23/2013 2:40:18 AM)
what a pathetic looking dragon in the background
Posted By:
pedrodyl
(8/17/2011 7:44:58 PM)