The land you search up I don't care about so much - the point is, this is currently almost strictly better than a.. swamp. Named woodland. Well whatever; you get the idea :) (Not strictly, because it's not basic)
So it needs a downside; and since this is really rather nice colour fixing; if it itself ETB tapped; that would fix it. Other downsides (like maybe put the life cost on ETB rather than the ability) might work too.
Still; it's not impossible to deal with. The first version wasn't too much overpowered. And having to sacc lands (or pay 9) is a pretty big cost.
Dunno, at this level of power it's hard to evaluate. You'll practically never want to flat cast this - but you could. And at 9 mana, it really should be stupidly powerful. But here if you do that, it's at its weakest.
So you're more likely to cast it for 3-5, at which level it is... well, pretty damn good; but you just threw lands away.
So this is going to be very swingy. If the opponent has an o-ring, you just got yourself screwed up for no good reason. And if they don't; well, it (with indestructible) is really very potent.
And I guess splashy is what wizards like in a mythic. Go for it! :)
Ok; so now doing that it's... 6/6. A turn 3 6/6 is nice but not vastly scary. But it scales up nicely (12/12 if you could flat-cast).
The loss of invulnerability is a biggie though; one Shatter gets rid of it, or any kill spell, or just plain old blocking it a lot.
In other words, I think by reducing it to +1/+1 per land, you've gone too far the other way. Unless the set's gonna have a lot of other stuff about dumping land into the graveyard.
OUCH! And no, those lands are in your graveyward; so it's a free +10; making it 14/14.
Probably better to have 3 lands; tap and sacc the lands giving you + to cast it with; and making it 10/10 and Alex? I think you just meant to say 3, not 5, didn't you?
Ok; turn 3; no lands, is a serious setback. And one o-ring will make you regret it. But this is scary powerful.
Pay 2 life for the cycle? So It acts as a shock land of sorts?
It only searches for basics and the land etb tapped. Should the land its self ETB tapped too? If it did it would be worse than guildgates and such.
Um; it isn't you know.
The land you search up I don't care about so much - the point is, this is currently almost strictly better than a.. swamp. Named woodland. Well whatever; you get the idea :) (Not strictly, because it's not basic)
So it needs a downside; and since this is really rather nice colour fixing; if it itself ETB tapped; that would fix it. Other downsides (like maybe put the life cost on ETB rather than the ability) might work too.
White doesn't really get that kind of unprovoked destruction any more - but I guess it's sorta balance-like so maybe it's ok.
Very powerful finisher card though; you might want to consider making it cost a bit more.
Mayybe? That's super-potent; even on a 6/6.
Still; it's not impossible to deal with. The first version wasn't too much overpowered. And having to sacc lands (or pay 9) is a pretty big cost.
Dunno, at this level of power it's hard to evaluate. You'll practically never want to flat cast this - but you could. And at 9 mana, it really should be stupidly powerful. But here if you do that, it's at its weakest.
So you're more likely to cast it for 3-5, at which level it is... well, pretty damn good; but you just threw lands away.
So this is going to be very swingy. If the opponent has an o-ring, you just got yourself screwed up for no good reason. And if they don't; well, it (with indestructible) is really very potent.
And I guess splashy is what wizards like in a mythic. Go for it! :)
Thanks I did not know that ~ trick thanks and ETB tapped is apart of they cycle now.
So since I dropped the power buff it receives I can give the indestructibility back ?
Same comment as your other land; this should have a drawback (likely ETB tapped)
You might also like to use '~' instead of typing out the (wrong) name :)
Ok; so now doing that it's... 6/6. A turn 3 6/6 is nice but not vastly scary. But it scales up nicely (12/12 if you could flat-cast).
The loss of invulnerability is a biggie though; one Shatter gets rid of it, or any kill spell, or just plain old blocking it a lot.
In other words, I think by reducing it to +1/+1 per land, you've gone too far the other way. Unless the set's gonna have a lot of other stuff about dumping land into the graveyard.
Thanks for the feedback guys. I made some changes, I want to make sure it is a fair cost for sacrificing lands to cast it.
I like this one. A lot. I especially like that it lets you blow up a token swarm, even if they've been pumped nine ways to Sunday.
I kiiiinda dislike the idea that you can use this after you've sacced most of your land, though. Which seems to be a set theme. Dunno.
OUCH! And no, those lands are in your graveyward; so it's a free +10; making it 14/14.
Probably better to have 3 lands; tap and sacc the lands giving you
+
to cast it with; and making it 10/10 and Alex? I think you just meant to say 3, not 5, didn't you?
Ok; turn 3; no lands, is a serious setback. And one o-ring will make you regret it. But this is scary powerful.