Pointed Discussion

Gives anther creature pseudo-persist. I like.

So verstile. Kills little dudes, taps down and weakens big dudes, or saves your own dudes.

Probably the most innovative design in the set.

Love it.

It's hard to argue 'bout greatness of design, but power level could be bit higher, considering its rarity and stuff.

Great Design!

A really odd yet versatile card. More cards should need actual thoughts about it's usage than just be auto includes that you can play without thinking.

Interesting card, but my favorite feature is between the name and the rules text. I love how that thing looks. I'd put a model of one on my desk.

Gore Vidal lol

Good job, you cited rules that most players know and understand. No one on this page suggested that you could use this to tap down an opponent's creature or anything.

On a different note, I find it interesting how Wizards added the (as far as I can tell) unnecessary "toughness greater than 1" bit, to make it easier to get for players who don't quite understand the 0-toughness state-based effect thing yet. I think I agree with their decision. Nine more words in the box, a lot less confusion by the player. Which is a good thing.

@Great_North - Actually, Lunarblade DID suggest that it taps down creatures.

I agree about them writing in the "toughness 1 or greater" clause. That'll save a LOT of confusion as otherwise there'd be tons of people thinking that you could regenerate it regardless.

another great card for Sun Titan

That thing's a Hound!? And it might rescue a creature?

My God! The Phyrexians got Lassie!

I'm feeling underwhelmed by this uncommon. Would have been more interesting if they had made this a tap effect.

This doesn't really do much. Regenerating a creature only taps a creature if it has to actually regenerate. All this does is weaken a creature and give it a potential regeneration shield, which is practically useless in any format that has wither or infect running around. I'd rather take Priests of Norn.

Here's some supporting evidence, folks.

701.11a If the effect of a resolving spell or ability regenerates a permanent, it creates a replacement
effect that protects the permanent the next time it would be destroyed this turn. In this case,
“Regenerate ” means “The next time would be destroyed this turn,
instead remove all damage marked on it and tap it. If it’s an attacking or blocking creature,
remove it from combat.”

The regeneration shield is a potential replacement effect that triggers off of any destruction event where regeneration is permitted. And a toughness value of 0 or lower doesn't permit regeneration as it is not destruction, it's just placing the creature into a graveyard as a state-based action.

That aside, I wouldn't even pick up this junk in limited. I really am not interested in paying {2W} for a Necropede that regenerates things.

Underwhelmed is close. More like -- this card isn't good.

I do realize i must be reading it wrong or something but i read it that you sacrifice it and as long as the target has higher then 1 toughness then gore vassal comes back tapped....i only came on here to wonder if they had changed it to say u need to tap it do do this....but clearly i have read it WAY WRONG

I understand they're trying to make it so Phyrexia can be in every color, but I just don't get the flavor of a lot of these Phyrexian white cards. Especially infect, it all seems so black.

So I read through the rest of the posts, all eluding to the idea that this creature is merely over priced, underpowered, cannon fodder. I still stand by my argument that it is the Gore Vassal which is the creature who regenerates in response. If it were the targeted creature receiving the -1/-1 counter why would they mention the regenerate function. Not to mention, although wizards has been known to be somewhat vague in the past, they have certainly stepped their 'game' up so-to-speak.

If what most people are saying were to be true, the wordage on the card would state, "Sacrifice Gore Vassal: Then, if that creature's toughness is 1 or greater regenerate that creature."

The answer lies in the punctuation of the ability. The comma in this case represents/indicates a second clause independent of the first in the sentence. The it, in the 'then regenerate it', is referring to the only creature prompted to go to the graveyard (the Gore Vassal). What I have been able to surmise from the irrelevant citations of rules having nothing to do with this card is; Gore Vassal is placing a -1/-1 counter onto an attacking creature, forcing it to regenerate when it has no threat of going to the graveyard, tapping your opponents creature (I can't imagine a scenario where one would use this ability on one's own creature) and removing it from combat. But how many other cards are there like that which ignore combat damage and none of which illicit the regenerate mechanic? Any of the Phantom cards from Judgement (Phantom Nantuko, Phantom Nishoba, Etc.) but none force the creature to regenerate resolving any combat damage resulting in it being tapped and safe. Same goes with the Gustcloak creatures from Onslaught (Gustcloak Savior, Gustcloak Harrier, Gustcloak Runner) they are simply removed from combat and untapped.

Maybe that is because those cards I mentioned are simply a different mechanic, but I see no reason to regenerate a creature who hasn't received lethal combat damage. It is along the same lines of why Wizards introduced Day of Judgement instead of reprinting Wrath of God. It seems that there is to be more emphasis on the Regenrate mechanic on creatures like Thrun, the Last Troll. I have been playing for some years now over many blocks in the past, and the Scars of Mirrodin block enticed me to revisit some of the flavor I haven't tasted in quite a while. So I will admit I am new to the Infect, Whither, Flash, Battlecry, mechanics; but all of these seem to be pretty self explanitory.

And to comment on .Blaze.'s post, I will admit this is a plausible function of Gore Vassal. Gore vassal could act as a Persist mechanic with legs (a feeble one because a 2/1 for 3cc is quite underwhelming as some have put it), but the card should read as such, "Sacrifice Gore Vassal: Regenerate target creature. At the end of combat target creature returns to play (or to the battlefield, as the cards have changed from remove from game->exile/play->Battlefield) tapped with a -1/-1 counter on it."

But in all likelihood I still strongly stand by my interpretation of Gore Vassal's ability, because that is how the ability should be read, given the wording on the card. Whether or not this was the intent of Gore Vassal's activated ability by Wizards, remains to be certain (as there haven't been, at least to my knowledge, any corrections or further rulings on the card). Even the flavor text at the bottom indicates there is more to it than what appears to be at first glance.

Just like the flavor text on Twitch from Tempest, "Battles are won in nuance." Take heed of the little things, because they are usually the most important.

Lost hound. Wanted Dead or Alive. Reward: New Guts.

Oh heavens I am a masochist. Oh well, here goes:

@Witteee:

You sound like a very intelligent person with a solid head on your shoulders and a good sense of logic so I will take this opportunity to explain in detail how gore vassal works within the rules and mechanics of MtG. There are a few things you appear to have misunderstood about the way MtG works mechanically.

Before I get to those though, I need to make sure you understand the concept of "the stack" as it is vital to what I am going to describe. All spells and abilities have two parts to them: a cost, and an effect. In order to cast a spell or activate an ability you must first pay its cost (be it paying mana, tapping a creature, sacrificing a creature, etc.). Paying the cost happens instantaneously and no one can respond to it to prevent it. Once the cost of a spell or ability has been paid the effect that has been paid for goes on to "the stack". "The stack" is limbo space where effects go that have been paid for but have not yet resolved. Once an effect is on "the stack" this is the point in time in which people may cast instant speed spells (like mana leak or lighting bolt) or activate other instant speed abilities (like gore vassal or ant queen) "in response" to the first ability. The very first effect put on to "the stack" is on the "bottom". Any spells or abilities cast or activated in response to the first ability are paid for and then put onto the stack "on top" of the first effect. Once all players are done casting spells or activating abilities, the stack then begins to resolve STARTING FROM THE TOP and going down.

For example if I cast a giant growth on my already existing llanowar elves and then you, in response, cast lightning bolt it will resolve in the following manner: I pay my {G} to cast the gg, the effect of gg goes on the stack and then you get the chance to respond (which you do). You pay your {R} to cast the bolt, the effect of the bolt goes on the stack and then I get the chance to respond (which I don't). Since bolt was the last thing cast it is on the "top" of "the stack" and it resolves first, hitting my elves for 3 damage and killing it very very dead. Then my gg attempts to resolve, sees that its intended target is no longer there, fizzles, and goes to the graveyard without doing anything. On the other hand if you were proactive in casting the bolt as the starting spell, it would go on the stack first and then I could take the opportunity to respond with my gg. In that case, since my gg was the last spell cast it would be on top of the stack and resolve first, making my elves a 4/4. Then the bolt would resolve, and deal 3 damage to the elves, but the elves would survive.

Now onto specifics: how regenerate works from a gameplay mechanic standpoint. In Magic the ability to regenerate does NOT return a creature from the graveyard to play, it only prevents it from going to the graveyard in the first place (and even then it only prevents the death if it's due to lethal damage and/or destroy effects). You cannot regenerate Gore Vassal with its own effect because the COST to activate its EFFECT has already put it in the graveyard. Even if, for some reason you did properly target a gore vassal to regenerate (say with another gore vassal), regeneration does not stop sacrifice effects from putting creatures into the graveyard.

Also, when an effect says to regenerate a creature it does not apply immediately (strange right? but that's how it is). Instead it sets up a "regeneration shield" that acts as a one-time save replacement effect for the NEXT time a creature WOULD be destroyed (from lethal damage or a destroy effect) this turn. A creature is only considered to have been "regenerated" once it has been forced to use up its "regeneration shield". You seem to already know this but for completeness's sake, as an additional effect, if a creature is forced to use up its regeneration shield, the creature is removed from combat (if it is currently in combat) and becomes tapped (if it's not already tapped).

As a general rule, when a card is referring explicitly to itself with its own ability, it will name itself by its own name, like with Darkthicket Wolf's self pump ability. In an effect, when the term "it" is used to denote a creature or a permanent, "it" is referring to the creature/permanent that is the target or selection of the ability.

What does this mean for gore vassal? it means he has the potential to serve 3 different roles:
1)Kill a weenie
2)Weaken an opposing bomb. Sure the bomb will be able regenerate that turn (if it takes lethal damage), but next turn it will be easier to deal with.
3)Save your own bomb or the bomb of an ally. Sure it weakens your bomb (your ally's bomb), but at least it's still around for another turn.

Yeah, the quality of the poetry in Tome of Machines really drops off around verse 1688.

(This card does EWWWW well, which must have been the point of it. Weird to see white do EWWWW well.)

Undying combat trick, maybe this will see play... Tag team with zombie Mikaus? I'll give it a 2 due to limited removal possibilities.

Why yes, I would like to get another cycle out of my Undying creatures.

So cool. I love cards that are versatile like this, and there are a lot of 1-toughness things in the limited format where this often kills something. It's not a bad play to kill a mana myr.

And in a sad twist of fate, lassie fell down the well... full of Glistening Oil!
@ Nagoragama true, except they refer to the same creature. This one cannot be regenerated by its own ability because it dies before its ability goes on the stack. Then, the target creature gets a -1/-1 counter, then, if it isn't already dead, it gets all other damage removed from it that isn't in the form of a -1/-1 counter. For example, let's say you have a 3/3 on the field. Someone Gut Shots it, so it get's dealt one damage. Then, you sacrifice this creature, giving your 3/3, already dealt one damage, so it takes two more damage to kill it, and then it is regenerated. The -1/-1 counter still remains, so your 3/3 is now a 2/2 with no damage on it, and, if I remember correctly from regeneration reminder texts, it is tapped. And, to clear up confusion, a 2/2 given the -1/-1 counter from the ability will not die before it regenerates if it was dealt damage earlier. They resolve simultaneously.

@atemu1234: Actually, you put the counter and just set up the regeneration shield. Only if the creature then is going to be destoryed (maybe because its toughness was lowered), it taps and you remove its damage.

The first in the charge to take out Manbearpig.