Mashup: the Gathering Workbench: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity

CardName: Time-Faced Fink Cost: 4U Type: Creature - Noggle Rogue Pow/Tgh: 3/2 Rules Text: {1}{U} Discard Time-Faced Fink: remove all counters on target permanent or exiled card, or double them. When Time-Faced Fink enters the battlefield, remove all counters on target permanent or exiled card, or double them. Flavour Text: Set/Rarity: Mashup: the Gathering Workbench Uncommon

Time-Faced Fink
{4}{u}
 
 U 
Creature – Noggle Rogue
{1}{u} Discard Time-Faced Fink: remove all counters on target permanent or exiled card, or double them.
When Time-Faced Fink enters the battlefield, remove all counters on target permanent or exiled card, or double them.
3/2
Updated on 24 Sep 2011 by jmgariepy

History: [-]

2011-09-24 21:16:29: jmgariepy created the card Time-Faced Fink

Random Generator gave me Shriekmaw and Clockspinning. I admit, this guy is an Noggle, because I like the name "Time-Faced Fink". Also, I was trying to remember the creature type for Noggle, so I searched for the word "Breaker" in Gatherer. There are 17 creatures that contain the word "Breaker"... looks like someone likes to use that suffix a bit too much. Perhaps there's a theme deck one could base around this...

2011-09-24 21:18:00: jmgariepy edited Time-Faced Fink

Interesting rephrasal of Evoke. Different interactions, obviously, but very interesting. Looks like a fine mashup. (Also, awesome both with and against planeswalkers!)

Wow. You are certainly right about the Walkers. How I missed that is beyond me. I suppose paying {1}{u} for instant speed, uncounterable removal for Gideon is probably a bit too cheap.

"paying {1}{u} for instant speed, uncounterable removal for Gideon is probably a bit too cheap"

Or maybe just about right :) Actually, I'm not sure. I hear there should probably be better answers to planeswalkers than there are in standard; I don't know if this is better than Vampire Hexmage or Oblivion Ring or Bramblecrash or not. (It's obviously better in a deck that wants the doubling ability, but maybe not if not).

Come to think of it, maybe wizards should be printing more spells that do 2 or 3 damage to a planesalker and fewer that destroy them: even if they say "planeswalker" on, I think "Do 2 damage to target planeswalker" is more flavourful than "destroy target non-creature permanent." (Not that that makes any difference to this card, I was just thinking about planeswalker answers in general.)

It's a strange problem. From a flavor perspective, cards that say "Kill target Planewalker" raise the question of "Why didn't you just cast this on your opponent?". The flip side of this argument is that they can print a card that says "Deal 2 damage to target creature or Planeswalker", but that card would be worse than Shock. Why not just make the card say "creature or player"?

But, yeah, I agree. It appears that, since 2009, when they first appeared, the best color to play against Planeswalkers was Red. After all, red doesn't have to mess around with cards like Rootgrapple to take down a Planeswalker. It was already playing Lightning Bolt. Black, on the other hand, can either discard the Planeswalker, or (barring Vampire Hexmage) look at it longingly. So, let's count the permanents that black can't destroy nowadays? Artifacts, Enchantments, Planeswalkers, and few tournament worth Land Destruction spells. If black wasn't so damn awesome in the first place, I'd say it was getting the shaft.

Add your comments:


(formatting help)
Enter mana symbols like this: {2}{U}{U/R}{PR}, {T} becomes {2}{u}{u/r}{pr}, {t}
You can use Markdown such as _italic_, **bold**, ## headings ##
Link to [[[Official Magic card]]] or (((Card in Multiverse)))
Include [[image of official card]] or ((image or mockup of card in Multiverse))
Make hyperlinks like this: [text to show](destination url)
What is this card's power? Runeclaw Bear
(Signed-in users don't get captchas and can edit their comments)