@ saith17:
Yes, you could reveal your entire deck and then rig it so you win. After you deal 60 damage to target creature or player. Just one question - why haven't you won after dealing 60 damage to your opponent?
-Squab
i can think of three instances were you haven't won after dealing 60 damage to someone:
1) they have more than 60 life
2) they can't lose the game due to loss of life (both platinums, liches tomb, ect.)
3) you play multiplayer
Posted By:
KnexWiz
(8/8/2012 4:48:03 AM)
It's been a dream of mine to Mind Funeral someone playing a Charbelcher deck...
Posted By:
pedrodyl
(12/23/2012 11:13:14 AM)
This card plus Mana Severance = win.
Posted By:
caesar1994
(8/2/2009 12:56:13 PM)
So, 0-land deck, 3T: deals 40+ damage to target player, then sort your entire deck? Not too bad, I guess.
I doubt that the decks that manage to be 0-land or close would ever use this, though. Empty the Warrens is the finisher in the decks I've seen. It also doesn't seem worth combo-ing. Some mono-red aggro might find a place for this.
Posted By:
rubber
(10/16/2009 8:31:08 PM)
If you don't find any lands while searching your deck, it does damage equal to the number of cards in your deck. So, there is no reason to leave any lands in your deck before you use this.
Posted By:
mtmills
(9/1/2009 10:44:25 AM)
Goblin Recruiter.
Pity this card isn't actually a Goblin tribal. It's still a fun win condition in a Goblin deck.
Posted By:
Aquillion
(4/26/2013 11:08:53 PM)
@ Halidir_Orveck
The judge's decision was well-supported by the rules.
413.2b The controller of the spell or ability follows its instructions
in the order written...
416.3. If an effect attempts to do something impossible, it does only as
much as possible.
Example: If a player is holding only one card, an effect that reads
"Discard two cards" causes him or her to discard only that card. If an
effect moves cards out of the library (as opposed to drawing), it moves
as many as possible.
103.3. If an instruction requires taking an impossible action, it's
ignored. (In many cases the card will specify consequences for this; if
it doesn't, there's no effect.)
Nowhere on the card is it indicated that you must have a land in your deck to use this ability. So we know the ability can be activated without land in the deck. Once activated, it requires you to reveal cards until you hit a land. 413.2b requires you to take actions in the order they are printed on the card. Thus, you ... (see all)
Posted By:
Antsache
(5/1/2013 9:20:18 PM)
For those of us that speak English as our native language the card quite clearly states in its first sentence that this card's effect is dependent on drawing a land card.
" 3, T: Reveal cards from the top of your library until you reveal a land card."
If a player never satisfies the first conditional statement of the card, how can you possibly apply anything subsequent? This is a broken ruling, and for those of you that like playing a broken format your shuffle and turn 1 will be all the magic you ever experience.
Posted By:
Etom11
(6/12/2013 8:10:52 PM)
In a red, 60 card deck with 25 lands, after having used 20 of those cards (8 of which are lands, theoretically) (so now there are 28 non-lands and 12 lands) you have a 50% to deal 4 damage, a 25% chance to do 8 damage, and a 10% chance to deal 14 damage. About a 2% chance to deal 20 damage.
Those numbers are probably off by about ±5%. Regardless, it's pretty solid damage that is reusable. If you can get it into a deck that is stripped of lands, by some means (I recall some card that takes all plains out of the deck, just put one back in there via another card), then you can easily nuke someone to death or at least put on extremely heavy pressure.
Interesting concept, reasonably strong. Nothing gamebreaking, but it's solid.
Posted By:
Elysiume
(5/21/2009 6:04:17 PM)
This card infuriates me, If you fail to complete an ability "Until you reveal a land" the ability should not go off, I do not care what any judge says in my heart it is wrong.
Posted By:
Halidir_Orveck
(4/27/2012 4:04:40 AM)