Wow. That's very good. Much cheaper than Distant Melody, and although you only get half the effect, it's not tribally-restricted. The name is the only thing making it not a blue card.

Does white get this kind of card draw based on creatures? Seems more green or, as you say, blue. So, ok, it's a conditional (on being a token deck) http://draw3cards.com/, with cycling. And only costs . The condition is pretty easy to meet in a white soldier deck, so I'd say far too good.

I'm not sure. Green gets card drawing based on power, so it seems to make sense that white would get card drawing based on number of creatures. I agree it (or any card drawing) could be blue. I think it's a question of "should white weenie decks get super card drawing"? And I'm not sure, but they probably deserve it as much as blue weenie decks.

I find it interesting to compare this card to Thoughtcast. Obviously, there are too many variable there to make a proper comparison, but, when I squint, I see similar cards.

It is true that any deck that packs enough creatures should auto-play this. One casting cost cantrips happen, but they often come with a minor effect. Let's put it another way... if this card read:

Burning is Fundamental
R
Instant
Draw a card. Then, if you control seven lands, deal 4 damage to target creature or player.

Would you play that card? Because I would be all over that thing like a pig on truffles. It looks fair, because there's parity and all, but, really you don't have to work for it. If you don't have the land, you can just cycle it for a cost that you're bound to have within any three rounds. If you do have it, kaboom, pure card advantage. Five creatures is alot... but for some decks, it's standard procedure.

Casting cost aside, I don't really have a problem with the color. Others will. As far as I'm concerned, all colors should be allowed to draw cards as long as its tied to their mechanic. Drawing cards is fun, and the color pie is wrong for thinking otherwise. ­