| "Valence": Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Valence Skeleton |
|
CardName: Cemetery Rouser Cost: 2bg Type: Creature - Human Druid Pow/Tgh: 2/3 Rules Text: Whenever a creature you control dies, you may pay {x}, where X is equal to the card's converted mana cost. If you do, put that card into your hand. Flavour Text: Set/Rarity: "Valence" Uncommon |
Code: UZ04 History: [-] Add your comments: |
, where X is equal to the card's converted mana cost. If you do, put that card into your hand.
Goes infinite with Blood Pet, and kills if you add Zulaport Cutthroat. I don't think that's necessarily a problem, but something to keep in mind.
Interesting card.
It wouldn't actually go infinite with Blood Pet because it puts the card back in your hand, so you would have to pay
.
True. Make that Ornithopter plus any sacrifice outlet plus Blood Artist.
I should point out that while this particular combo isn't really dangerous in itself, there's a potential for abuse with this card in modern, because of the sheer amount of repetition you can get with a number of card slots. A potential Cemetery Rouser combo decklist could run:
4x Ornithopter
4x Memnite
3x Walking Ballista
3x Hangarback Walker
4x Arcbound Ravager
2X Grafted Wargear
4x Spawning Pit
4x Blood Artist
4x Zulaport Cutthroat
3x Disciple of the Vault
4x Cemetery Rouser
Mix the numbers around, add some disruption and some tutoring (Tolaria West is beautiful in this deck.) and go to town. It might still not be broken, but it should at least be a tier two archetype. The fact that this deck could hybridize itself into affinity might be problematic.
Oh boy, you really put a lot of thought into that, but I'm not really going to change it. These cards are never actually going to be printed, so I'm not too worried about the dangers of its "overpoweredness" apart from within the set.
Eh, it's no worse than the blasting station combo. I mean, yes, it's a combo. Three card 'win the game' combos are allowed nowadays.
@Simonnoble: It's cool. It was more a thought experiment than anything.
@Vitenka: Three card combos are fine. But when you have two potential alternaives for each piece of the puzzle, the combo's rate of assembly is just too high.
A classic example of this problem is the deck called 'Life'. Part A was put a creature on the table that increased toughness when targeted. Part B was target for free. Part C was sacrfice to gain life equal to toughness. Now deck the opponent after shuffling your library a couple times.
Life was particularly sticky because there were a lot of good tutors that could fetch the pieces. But it wasn't that uncommon for the deck to just go infinite 'on accident' by turn 3 or 4.
See also: http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/legacy/10867_Going_Infinite_Grand_Prix_Philadelphia_15th_Place.html
@Simonnoble: It's cool. It was more a thought experiment than anything.
@Vitenka: Three card combos are fine. But when you have two potential alternaives for each piece of the puzzle, the combo's rate of assembly is just too high.
A classic example of this problem is the deck called 'Life'. Part A was put a creature on the table that increased toughness when targeted. Part B was target for free. Part C was sacrfice to gain life equal to toughness. Now deck the opponent after shuffling your library a couple times.
Life was particularly sticky because there were a lot of good tutors that could fetch the pieces. But it wasn't that uncommon for the deck to just go infinite 'on accident' by turn 3 or 4.
See also: http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/legacy/10867_Going_Infinite_Grand_Prix_Philadelphia_15th_Place.html