Pointed Discussion

Being in Venser, the Sojourner's deck makes Neurok Invisimancer more valuable than he normally would be.
4.5/5

Great 2 for 1 with a ton of flavor through it's mechanics. Vorthos fodder.

Not worth it in it own but good in combination with firebreathing and other creature with firebreathing
P.S i love the art and flavour

Don't know why this card is rated so lowly, since it's extremely effective in basically any Ninja deck. Its enter-the-battlefield trigger will help your existing Ninjas get through to the opponent, while the next turn you can use it to swap in some of your bigger Ninjas. Then rinse, and repeat.

Very good. It's a phantom warrior by itself that makes other, potentially devastating creatures, unblockable as well. "Enters the battlefield" is always exploitable as well.

I really don't understand how this is rated lower than phantom warrior
he's the same cost with the same effect, only he's got 1 toughness as opposed to 2. And when he enters, your huge beefy creature can becomes unblockable for a turn. And on top of that, this guy's a common.
The second effect really just makes this guy better than phantom, though he's still not strictly better.

This thing is kind of a beast in my Ninjutsu deck!

For my part, I'm rating this card lower than Phantom Warrior because it has an extremely stupid name. Some linguistics so you people understand what I'm talking about: On TV Tropes they have a page called "Whatevermancy" (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Whatevermancy), where they clarify that the term "___mancy/mancer" is usually a misnomer: "Similarly, -mancer and -mancy seem to have been derived from the well-known "necromancy", even though in the original Greek they come from the word manteia, meaning "divination". The "-mancy" template originally referred to the practice of divining the future using whatever the prefix was as a medium. So a classical necromancer would ask important questions of a dead person's spirit, a pyromancer would look for important symbols in flames, and so on. The proper suffix for someone magically manipulating a substance, force, or entity would be "-urgy" and "-urge" which derives from érgon or "work"."

But that's not the only part of the name that's stupid. "Invisiblilty" comes from the Latin word "invisibilis", which is composed of "in" (non), and "visibilis" (visible), so to be "invisible" is simply to be non-visible. But the word is inflected completely inappropriately in this chimera of a title. In the Wiktionary article on the Latin word "visibilis", they have a list on the inflection of "visibilis". With basis on that list, I would guess that the "proper" way this title would be, would be "invisibiliturgist".

TL;DR: I think the name is stupid because *reasons*.