Turns out, timeshifting has been happening for a while now!
Nickkom
★★★★☆ (4.1/5.0)(11 votes)
This is a great example of a card that enriched one of magic's colors-- in this case green.
Some might see this and laugh, and say, "They sure were silly back then. Green doesn't do direct damage!"
But that's precisely why this is a good card. I'm not saying the colors shouldn't be mostly devoted to specific types of abilites (black is discard and graveyard recursion, blue is card draw and counterspells, etc), but having a few totally oddball cards in a color really makes it interesting.
fackme
★★★☆☆ (3.0/5.0)(5 votes)
back 15 years ago this card kicked ass and when i pull this deck out now day.s and hit someone with my trusty stormseeker my oponents dont know what to do cc smithh
achilleselbow
★★★★☆ (4.0/5.0)(7 votes)
It makes a little sense when you think about it from a color enmity perspective: it was made solely to punish Blue. Though I guess that still would have made more sense as a red card. But you could basically rationalize anything as being green if you put words like "Nature" somewhere in the title.
Selez
★☆☆☆☆ (1.0/5.0)(3 votes)
WTFrick? Not only does this effect make absolutely no sense for its card's color, but there is essentially no flavor. I just don't get it.
Guest513736147
★☆☆☆☆ (1.7/5.0)(3 votes)
Why is it a sword?
NARFNra
★☆☆☆☆ (1.5/5.0)(2 votes)
They should of made a card in Time Spiral called Storm Searcher or something, that would have been an artifact with {3}{T}: Deal damage to target player equal to the number of cards in their hand. Or maybe it would have been a Spellshaper, Wielder of Storm Seeker... Would of fit the art more.
ROBRAM89
★★★★☆ (4.5/5.0)(20 votes)
Why is it a sword in a field? Why is it seeking storms? Is the storm what does the damage, or the sword? What does it have to do with the size of your hand? WHY IS IT GREEN!?
DacenOctavio
★★★★☆ (4.2/5.0)(5 votes)
Don't criticize it for not being originally red. It's just plain unexpected, and that's why it's awesome.
kiseki
★★★★☆ (4.8/5.0)(3 votes)
I bought a collection the other day that included a playset of these and I realized that I had completely forgotten about it. I don't feel bad about using it because it is the only direct damage spell in my red-green spiteful visions deck. This working at instant speed is a great deal of fun. I love cards that make you ask "how many cards are in your hand?" and watching opponent's try to figure out what you have in hand.
TheWrathofShane
★★★☆☆ (3.5/5.0)(2 votes)
I love the flavor. No that is not sarcasm, the flavor is obvious. Whatever your imagination can come up with....
I believe the idea of the card being called Storm Seeker and the art being a sword in the field seems obvious to me. The sword is acting as a lightning rod during a coming storm. Why a sword? Well this is MTG where swords, daggers, staffs and the like are common place. As for why the sword is in the middle of a field? Well if the field is mostly flat then the sword would then be the most elevated and metal thing out there. Drawing in the damage from the lightning.
Perfect Sense. ;)
Arachnos
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.5/5.0)(1 vote)
This is green.
*headsplodes*
SirWhetcastleKibbs
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.5/5.0)(1 vote)
Storm Seeker's nothing but Trouble.
OrgasmandTea
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
I like the idea that the storm is the natural world's reaction to a supremely powerful mage, but then some supposedly less intelligent green mage just chucks a sword nearby, and all of that lightning is channelled directly into the sword which then bounces back into the mage's face and kills him.
Ok, it's a bit daft. But a part of me really thinks green without direct damage or flyers doesn't quite make sense. Insects are green... and lots of insects fly. And nature is one of the most destructive forces imaginable - who could stand against an earthquake, a tsunami, a thunderstorm? If you could channel the forces of nature, surely you'd be able to wipe out any opposition, and yet green mages can't so much as throw a rock to deal one damage to target opponent.
I dunno. I love the colour wheel and everything, but I just feel green has the worst and least sensible restrictions out of all the colours.
Hunter06
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
This is pretty good, considering its color
3/5 Stars
Mirrordin_Pure
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
NO ONE EXPECTS THE STORMISH INQUISITION
GrimjawxRULES
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
It's green because green hates blue, and blue draws a lot of cards. That's why.
Comments (22)
Some might see this and laugh, and say, "They sure were silly back then. Green doesn't do direct damage!"
But that's precisely why this is a good card. I'm not saying the colors shouldn't be mostly devoted to specific types of abilites (black is discard and graveyard recursion, blue is card draw and counterspells, etc), but having a few totally oddball cards in a color really makes it interesting.
I love cards that make you ask "how many cards are in your hand?" and watching opponent's try to figure out what you have in hand.
Perfect Sense. ;)
*headsplodes*
Ok, it's a bit daft. But a part of me really thinks green without direct damage or flyers doesn't quite make sense. Insects are green... and lots of insects fly. And nature is one of the most destructive forces imaginable - who could stand against an earthquake, a tsunami, a thunderstorm? If you could channel the forces of nature, surely you'd be able to wipe out any opposition, and yet green mages can't so much as throw a rock to deal one damage to target opponent.
I dunno. I love the colour wheel and everything, but I just feel green has the worst and least sensible restrictions out of all the colours.
3/5 Stars