Pointed Discussion

nubiop 2009-02-15

☆☆☆☆☆ (0.5/5.0) (4 votes)

why can't magic stop trying to print modified, worse, versions of the moxes and the lotuses.

Designer_Genes 2009-09-17

☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)

It isn't a "modified, worse" version. It plays like a mix of the two, and I actually think it is a very nice card. It creates interesting decisions.

Demage 2009-11-21

☆☆☆☆☆ (0.6/5.0) (4 votes)

At least it's better than "Diamonds", which come for the same cost, but tapped, and can't be sacrifised for additional mana.

nibelheim_valesti 2010-06-23

★★★★★ (5.0/5.0) (2 votes)

@nubiop: Because printed unchanged, equivalent versions would break the game?

It is true that they have failed to settle on a standard set of mana-fixing artifacts. They probably just want to keep things changing so people don't stop and realise how boring/uninspired that whole element of the game really is.

Magnor_Criol 2010-11-29

☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)

Yes, because effective and cheap utility cards that enable people to reliably play multicolored decks are sooooo boring.

-Starchaser- 2011-06-09

☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)

it comes untapped so it can be considered with cost 2, so it is like a gold myr, it isn't a creature so it doesn't die to bolts etc, and if you are in need, you can sacrifice it and have 2 white mana instead of 1, I think it's a good card

NoobOfLore 2011-10-01

☆☆☆☆☆ (0.5/5.0) (1 vote)

A old mana producer that isn't one of the power 9, and isn't strictly worse than a more recent mana producer?
INCREDIBLE.

In fact, it's not even technically "strictly" worse than any of the elements of the power 9.
I'm looking at you, Black Lotus.

This is actually pretty decent, if you ask me.

TheWrathofShane 2013-05-29

☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)

Not a bad cycle, can actually give you a nice boost to hit an early Final Judgment on turn 4 if you need it.