Some sort of mount mechanic is probably inevitable.
Posted By:
themlsna
(6/9/2010 1:26:10 PM)
This is asking to be mounted by a creature like Nova Chaser
Posted By:
Daikoru
(8/26/2010 10:08:40 PM)
Its...
...
...a seahorse...
Posted By:
Kryptnyt
(8/29/2011 11:10:18 PM)
Kinda like a licid in the way it's ability works (although it's only until end of turn).
Posted By:
A3Kitsune
(2/8/2010 5:06:31 AM)
I like the art and like the mount idea, perhaps it should be introduced in a new way like equipments did
Posted By:
SPhoenix
(8/17/2010 3:51:10 PM)
This card is an interesting collision of flavor-based mechanics that get in the way of what the card really wants to do. First, it wants to carry a rider by giving it +1/+1 and flying. This sort of "mount/guard duty" mechanic is used on earlier cards like Wyluli Wolf and contemporaries like Kjeldoran Guard. Unfortunately, it can only carry a rider so large -- much like the Dwarven Warriors can only convey a creature of a certain size through their tunnels -- so power must be 2 or less. And, like some other guards, it uses basically the same mechanic that the proto-equipment -- such as Sandals of Abdallah, Flying Carpet, Tawnos's Weaponry and Runesword -- in that it is lost on the field/goes down with its user.
Rich with flavor. Choking on flavor. And that's eventually what lead them to favor simplicity over flavor. Chasm Drake/au... (see all)
Posted By:
longwinded
(4/16/2012 1:00:15 AM)
A card given restrictionsn with a wording made more complicate for flavor reasons.
I'm glad we'll likely never see such a thing these days again.
I like the idea of mounts (e.g. creatures which can be attached to others like equipment/auras), though...
Posted By:
Mode
(10/29/2009 6:28:58 PM)
I can't read it...!
Posted By:
Gabriel422
(9/22/2011 2:44:52 AM)
And yet...no banding. Go figure.
Posted By:
TheHandyman
(10/26/2011 5:42:52 PM)
too long to read, not important enough.
?/5.
Posted By:
O0oze
(12/6/2013 9:47:50 AM)