Wouldnt it have been easier to have the cost be "XX, T: Change the target of target spell that targets you. The new target must be a player."
Bouchart
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(2 votes)
No, because that wording doesn't specify what X would be.
pwdrrider
★★★☆☆ (3.0/5.0)(1 vote)
Why is the reflection a skull and the hand is normal (ie not skeletal)?? Not the best art but I can't help feeling nostalgic for the old cards :)
joemercer
★☆☆☆☆ (1.5/5.0)(1 vote)
I miss the old days when you could target anything (as per the wording) I've always wanted to bolt someone's land.
Dragon_Nut
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
The wording I see still requires a spell that was target you to now target a different player. I see nothing that would let you redirect a lightning bolt to a land.
jsttu
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Although it doesn't fit the descri ption, since this was printed in the right set it must be Jodah's mirror given to him by his early master. Was eventually used by freyalise to end the world spell and to ignite Jaya Ballards planeswalker spark.
scumbling1
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
You have the Mirror and two lands untapped? I guess I'll just Lightning Bolt your creatures instead.
It's a fun idea, but needs Morph or Flash to really work right. Oh, and a serious reduction in total expense of casting cost and ability wouldn't hurt.
ax_morph
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
XX, T: Change the target of target spell that targets you to another target player. X is the converted mana cost of that spell.
Radagast
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
Not that bad since it is reusable redirection.
kazenpaus
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
If only it could change the targets of abilities, then you could make Door to Nothingness backfire spectacularly on someone. Then again, you'd have to have 4 mana of every colour open and your opponent would be able to see it coming. Still the thought of it makes me happy.
EDIT: Come to think of it, what's with the name? Reflecting mirror, as opposed to all those mirrors that don't reflect?
Kirbster
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
If you look closely, the word "DEATH" is spelled out on the fingernails.
masterwan
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
If somebody was targeting you and only you with a fireball for 5 damage, how much would you have to pay to reflect to another player. When it is cast it's converted mana cost is 6, (X=5 and one Red), but after casting and on the stack would it go back down to being a converted mana cost of 1, (just the Red mana)?
Aquillion
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
It's a basically useless card -- it costs far too much to use, your opponent can see it coming, and spells that target players tend to not be quite common enough to require this expensive dedicated artifact in the first place.
But it's still a cool card; it's interesting that its rating is (relatively) high despite its uselessness. I think people like it simply because it's fairly unique.
Comments (13)
It's a fun idea, but needs Morph or Flash to really work right. Oh, and a serious reduction in total expense of casting cost and ability wouldn't hurt.
EDIT: Come to think of it, what's with the name? Reflecting mirror, as opposed to all those mirrors that don't reflect?
But it's still a cool card; it's interesting that its rating is (relatively) high despite its uselessness. I think people like it simply because it's fairly unique.