I dont know what i think about this card yet. 4U is the "correct" cost for an instant that draws 3 cards or a sorcery that draws 4 but has a small drawback. The main ability isnt bad, its fair, but if your opponent dosnt like those 3 he can give you 5 instead, which is spectacular. this card is always +2 cards in hand and can be up to +4 CIH. seems playable to me. The problem being if the top 3 are crap, you paid 1 extra mana than you should to draw 3...but thats seems to be a reasonable risk.
Hydrogoose
★★★☆☆ (3.6/5.0)(10 votes)
there's no doubt about it, this card is just awful. if the top three cards are irrelevant you A) paid 2 more than counsel of the soratami AND your opponent knows three of the cards in your hand. if the top three cards are stuff you actually need at that point in the game, you get 5 cards that are likely to be just far less relevant and game breaking.
True_Mumin
★★★☆☆ (3.5/5.0)(10 votes)
...And why exactly is this piece of junk rare?! I demand an explanation! This is strictly worse than Tidings. Give me back my good blue drawing spells, Wizards!!! 1/5.
snyden
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.5/5.0)(1 vote)
One type of deck where this card can shine is one where you can and/or actively seek to play cards from your graveyard as well as your hand, or to a lesser extent where you have ways of returning cards from the graveyard to your hand. There are many types of blue/black or blue/green decks that have this very goal, far too numerous to list here. This adds an extra synergy that makes Covenant of Minds very playable in my opinion. Having said that I doubt I would have it in any other type of deck, with the possible exclusion of a draft of course.
ScissorsLizard
★★★☆☆ (3.3/5.0)(10 votes)
Awful. As True_Mumin said, this is strictly worse than tidings. ShoeZ, even if you are playing something with graveyard effects, you're still giving your opponent the option to put those cards into the graveyard, which they won't do: they'll let you draw them, and thank you for letting them see what's in your hand.
metalevolence
★★★☆☆ (3.0/5.0)(1 vote)
i get that the idea is for grixis, but for the same CMC you can instead have the awesome hilarity of drastic revelation.
TokenMaster
★★☆☆☆ (2.5/5.0)(2 votes)
So, like, did Wizards forget that Petals of Insight existed?
vadaaaa
★★☆☆☆ (2.3/5.0)(5 votes)
every body are rebeling nobody write a better card in standard 5 mana draw 3 card ıf blue is your minor color so what only 1 blue mana ı think this card is okey
catowner
★★★☆☆ (3.5/5.0)(5 votes)
jace's ingenuity is the same cost, doesn't let your opponent have you draw other cards instead, and is instant speed.
You guys aren't getting it. This card enables convoluted combos from other colors. Mindgamez, son.
Belz_
★☆☆☆☆ (1.0/5.0)(9 votes)
@True_Mumin: How exactly can one card that doesn't do the same thing as another be "strictly worse" ? This can net you three cards or five cards; tidings four. You can easily say you don't like this card, but this "strictly worse" nonsense is just that.
blugrn1989
★☆☆☆☆ (1.4/5.0)(4 votes)
I play this in a casual deck, and I really enjoy using it - you're up at least 3 cards, and you'd be surprised how many people will throw away 3 cards and let you have 5 that they don't see. Plus, it opens up some nice mind games: yes, all you gave me 2 lands and an unsummon for 5 mana, now watch as I open up your defense and play another, more expensive card next turn.
This is not strictly worse than tidings. You guys are dumb, really, really dumb.
Who cares if they see the top three cards? If you run the right stuff, they will WANT that stuff in your graveyard, and when they let you draw, you're getting five cards for five mana. If that's not good I don't know what is.
marmaris74
★★★★☆ (4.2/5.0)(9 votes)
While this card isn't strictly worse than tidings, it's very close. Just pretend your opponent says, "Ok, I don't care what the first 3 cards are, I'll let you draw them." Then this is 4U for three cards (that your opponent can see), while tidings is basically the same cost (3UU) for 4 cards that other players don't get to look at. Plus, if the 3 cards happen to be amazing, this gives you opponent the option to get rid of them. Therefore, other than the slightly more restrictive cost, this card is strictly worse than tidings.
Arachibutyrophobia
★★★☆☆ (3.9/5.0)(4 votes)
jank
LordRandomness
★★★☆☆ (3.9/5.0)(4 votes)
The only way to use this is library manipulation and a good poker face. But why bother? Just throw down Concentrate...
YawgmothsWish
★★★☆☆ (3.7/5.0)(7 votes)
To simplify: Giving your opponent 0 choice > Giving your opponent 1 or more choices. 1/5
BonniePrinceCharlie
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
I actually prefer this as one of my draw spells in my Living Death EDH deck, because it's just one more way to get a bomb creature or two into my graveyard. Yes, this costs 5 mana, but it potentially digs 8 cards deep. In a graveyard based deck, I'm finding it much more useful than a straight Draw 3 spell.
DacenOctavio
★☆☆☆☆ (1.8/5.0)(2 votes)
I actually don't mind this card. My decks tend to have great cards in them that scare my opponents shitless. And there's also like 4 hug decks in my EDH meta.
Johny_Bones_Jones
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Read this card. Then read tidings. This card sucks.
Hunter06
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Its like a freeking awful Fact or Fiction this could be decent if it cost {2}{U} but at 5 this is unplayable drank...
2/5 Stars Edit: Just noticed this is at sorcery speed, at instant this is unplayable, but at sorcery... no comment...
strider24seven
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
@Necrokeryx Most experienced players would just let you keep the three cards. I for one would not give my opponents eight cards for five mana when I can let them have only 3.
They should just change the text of the card to read: "Reveal the top 3 cards of your library and put them to your hand."
There are very rare situations where an opponent might have you pitch the 3 cards. Like if you revealed Tendrils of Agony, Ad Nauseam, and Yawgmoth's Will. But then, if you were playing a legacy storm deck.... why would you hamstring yourself by running jank like this in the first place?
Sasooli
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
No-one's mentioned the possibility of running this in EDH (or any other free-for-all multiplayer) with the aim of making a deal with one opponent to let you draw the five in return for helping them out, or not using those five cards against them, or whatever. If opponent A is clearly about to win, opponent B will probably be glad to give you five (or eight if you're using your graveyard) to search for a way to stop them.
Still that's a pretty niche application. Not a good card, I agree - though if I owned one I'd probably throw it in an EDH deck purely for the interest of trying to make deals out of it.
Comments (24)
However, Fact or Fiction is still the best.
Who cares if they see the top three cards? If you run the right stuff, they will WANT that stuff in your graveyard, and when they let you draw, you're getting five cards for five mana. If that's not good I don't know what is.
Therefore, other than the slightly more restrictive cost, this card is strictly worse than tidings.
1/5
2/5 Stars
Edit: Just noticed this is at sorcery speed, at instant this is unplayable, but at sorcery... no comment...
Most experienced players would just let you keep the three cards. I for one would not give my opponents eight cards for five mana when I can let them have only 3.
They should just change the text of the card to read: "Reveal the top 3 cards of your library and put them to your hand."
There are very rare situations where an opponent might have you pitch the 3 cards. Like if you revealed Tendrils of Agony, Ad Nauseam, and Yawgmoth's Will. But then, if you were playing a legacy storm deck.... why would you hamstring yourself by running jank like this in the first place?
Still that's a pretty niche application. Not a good card, I agree - though if I owned one I'd probably throw it in an EDH deck purely for the interest of trying to make deals out of it.