Archester Revival: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity
Mechanics | Skeleton

CardName: Refresher Cost: 1g Type: Creature - Elf Shaman Pow/Tgh: 2/2 Rules Text: Whenever Refresher attacks, you may untap target permanent you control. Flavour Text: Set/Rarity: Archester Revival Common

Refresher
{1}{g}
 
 C 
Creature – Elf Shaman
Whenever Refresher attacks, you may untap target permanent you control.
2/2
Updated on 10 Jun 2016 by MOON-E

Code: CG04

Active?: true

History: [-]

2015-09-30 06:37:20: MOON-E created the card Refresher

Perhaps fhis should say "untap another target permanent so as to prevent giving green a 2/2 vigilance for {1}{g}...

I'm not sure giving semi-vigilance to green is too much. You want to risk your untapper just to untap it? Go ahead. A la Inspire, you are risking your creature just to reap it's benifits. But if you do, no ramp for you and potentially a dead creature for not much.

Even Copperhorn Scout doesn't untap itself.

Yes but CS untaps all your other creatures... CS > Refresher being able to untap itself.

I think vigilance bears are totally okay for green. The closest thing is Steward of Valeron.

I mean, it's not like green doesn't have access to vigilance. There are 20 mono-colored green cards with the mechanic in its text.

(Sorry about not making a proper link. Mulitiverse doesn't like links that include brackets and parenthesis.)

And while dude is right that Green doesn't technically have 'Vigilance Bears', I would say that Brushstrider is close enough.

(Edit by Alex: I fixed the link. To link to sites with brackets you need to use the [description][1] format with another line reading [1]:URL. Or just <a href>.)

I forgot that Vigilance is Secondary {g}, I retract my objections. It's fine as it is. :)

I think vigilance mode is cool on this card.

Starting to fill out the skeleton. Proposing this as the CG04 slot in the skeleton

on 01 Feb 2016 by Legend:

The last and only time green had "untap target permanent" was Emerald Charm
its untap target creature effects aren't like this

The last and only time white had "untap target permanent" was Burst of Energy. It also has Beacon Hawk.

the rest are blue. this is a blue ability imo

on 01 Feb 2016 by Legend:

Okay, I completely mistyped that. Ignore the bold type and stuff...

You can edit your comments, y'know?

Personally I might allow "creature/land or artifact" if the set really needed it, but I'd be surprised if it did.

I think you wanted spaces instead of the asterisks :) Legend can't edit their comments though because they're not signed in. When someone makes a comment without being signed in, I'm the only one who can edit it. I've fixed it for you.

on 01 Feb 2016 by Legend:

Note that I don't think this is too strong, just that it isn't green. imo Archester will have enough bleeds due to two-brid mana costs. it doesn't need monocolor bleeds as well.

Legend, I would argue that you cannot generalize "Archester does not need monocular bleeds". Each individual bleed must be considered individually to see if the benefits outweigh the risks and damages to the color pie.

If the wording is such a problem, we can simply change it to "untap target creature or land you control", and then it definitely becomes a green ability. Green has about 100 cards that untap either a creature or a land, and the functionality is just about the same as "untap target permanent". Sure it can no longer untap non-creature artifacts, but for the needs this card tries to fill, in the themes of Windup, Ramp and Aggro, that loss is irrelevant.

on 01 Feb 2016 by Legend:

Of the about 100 cards that untap either a creature or a land, there's 8 that untap target creature and 4 that untap all creatures you control, and 11 of those 12 are old designs.
I'm not saying this card breaks the game by any stretch, but that we should at least maintain the illusion of the color pie where possible (and it's possible here), especially in a set that is already bleeding into colorless.
I also think this card poses unfun tension and would be a better all around, feel good card if it just Vitalized when it etb.

Legend, I am not sure how you did your search, but I found quite a bit more than just 12, and more than a few are recent. I feel this is pretty deeply rooted in Green's color pie.

The “Untap target creature” cards :
Recent :
­Vines of the Recluse,Spidery Grasp,Seedcradle Witch,Savage Surge,Ruthless Instincts,Kiora, Master of the Depths,Dragonscale Boon,Derevi, Empyrial Tactician,Colossal Heroics,Burst of Strength,Bounding Krasis

Old :
­Wirewood Symbiote,Seeker of Skybreak,Scryb Ranger,Quirion Ranger,Gerrard's Command,Fyndhorn Brownie,Foxfire

The “Untap all creatures” cards :
Recent :
­Quest for Renewal,Prophet of Kruphix,Patron of the Orochi,Murkfiend Liege,Seedborn Muse,,Great Oak Guardian

Old :
­Vitalize,Mobilize,Awakening

I'm not going to say that it's particularly overpowered but I'd like to point out two things.

First, all of those cards you used as examples are either one-time-use cards or uncommons+.

Second, Legend has a point about this being out of color pie, as it is right now. For example, this card has pseudo-vigilance since it can currently target itself.

I suspect that wasn't intentional but it's just one potential abuse of the card. If we do decide to go with this, I'd suggest changing it to simply target lands. I can see the possibility of having it target another creature as well, but I think we'd be better served by having it do one or the other.

If we go with land, it'll be sought after as a mana dork in the {c}-centered decks; if we go with Creatures, it'll get snapped up in the {g/w} windup deck. If we have it work in both it'll get snapped up very quickly in limited since everyone in {g} will want it.

I think green is second in vigilance, there's not many non-white vigilance cards, but they seem to mostly be green, eg. Tajuru Pathwarden. And untapping for re-use but not as a surprise feels slightly more green to me.

But it's probably doing too much for common. It would be fine at uncommon, or a common could have "untap target land" or "untap target other creature".

Raptor, we already talked about how this granting vigilance to itself was fine since {g} is secondary in vigilance. It is wholly intentional. I do not see how this having vigilance would be out of the color pie, nor how this is a potential abuse of the card.

I also think this being a value card in multiple limited archetypes to be a great thing to have, not something we should be afraid of. However, if I need to pick only one between untapping a land and untapping a creature, I would choose "untap target creature". Besides, this would be a high pick in draft simply because it is a two drop with upsides. Every green deck will already want it to fill out their curve, and those that are not interested in a two drop bear probably will not be interested in a mana dork that risks its skin by attacking each time it produces another mana.

Lastly, if we keep the untapping land part of the ability, we must be aware that it cannot accelerate a turn 3 4-drop. It cannot mana-fix you by giving you more of a color than you already have to pay for a single {u}{u} or {c}{c}{c} spell. The fact that untapping the land happens during combat means that the player needs to spend some mana before combat on a spell or ability, attack, then plan to pay for another spell or ability after combat. As it goes, the land "ramp" is fairly weak, which is why I think we could keep both on the card.

The only time this will "ramp" you is when you either plan on playing multiple spells in a turn, play a tapped land(say with anything similar to Evolving Wilds) or intend to play an Instant during your battle phase.

As for the "overpower at common", this is in a sense a worst Copperhorn Scout. At best I think we need to drop it to a 1/2

I only realized we had had this conversation before after I'd posted my comment yesterday. We can keep it as it is.

2016-02-19 19:40:16: MOON-E edited Refresher:

Added

With the Bouncelands in the set, I think this is simply perfect to reward greedy land strategies. Green and Black already have LD at common anyway to counterbalance. (If that is still not enough, we might have to think about giving red an uncommon/rare land destruction spell. Although I doubt we will.)

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)
How much damage does this card deal? Lava Axe
(Signed-in users don't get captchas and can edit their comments)