The best part is that the person you target with this doesn't have to be the person you attacked with the creature you ciphered this onto
Goatllama
★★★★☆ (4.8/5.0)(4 votes)
Rinse, lather, and recast. Twice as soon as you play - two targeted pseudo-smallpoxes - and then more if the creature doesn't get removed. Much potential, here.
lorendorky
★★★★☆ (4.1/5.0)(4 votes)
The art looks like he's saying "urglglg don't eat the shrimp."
ThePinkBaron
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(3 votes)
Looks a lot meaner when you realize it has a good chance of hitting twice on the turn you play it. It's like every other cipher card in that it's sort of contingent on you owning a creature with evasion, which won't always be the case. But if this DOES manage to get through a couple of times, you're pretty much guaranteed the game.
Ferlord
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(3 votes)
This is a costly spell, but Cipher seems to be more costly than the other mechanics.
I think Cipher will be a problem in limited, especially when people have one of these. Casting this each turn (attached to an unblockable creature) will be just the opposite of the Bee's Knee's.
handoflazav_414
★★★☆☆ (3.0/5.0)(3 votes)
That elf got a full Dimir welcome... ...IN THE FACE!!!
Purplerooster
★★★★☆ (4.2/5.0)(2 votes)
The sac a permanent component is going to be most effective in the long run and can possibly make your opponents sacrifice lands.
pedrodyl
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(4 votes)
Infect one of your creatures with Smallpox, then infect your opponent with it!
DacenOctavio
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
6 mana seems fine for a potential 4-for-1 with life-loss attached to it and the threat of more on the way. I'm not sure it's Standard viable, but this will cause some headaches in limited :)
Fyriaan
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Nice card when you cipher it on a unblockable! My opponent had sac all of his land!! =D I have 2 of them in my deck so imagen when I use both of them at the same time. >=D
majinara
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
I don't think this is really worth it. The one life part is mostly irrelevant, sacrificing a permanent that late in the game might be just a land, a tiny token or something the opponent actually wants to die. Same with discard. The opponent might have no cards on hand, so that this effect does nothing. Or he might have so many cards on hand, that the effect might be irrelevant. Or he might have cards on hand that he wants in his graveyard. Sure, if you'd get this to trigger each turn, it would be annoying for the opponent. But at that stage of the game... A small creature the opponent will just kill. Or bounce, pacify, whatever. And a large creature? If you can connect with that several times, you won anyway.
I think it's overcosted. Maybe four mana would be good. I guess they had it in an earlier design stage set to "sacrifices a creature". But if you put that on a creature with evasion, your opponent might be unable to keep anything in play, so they weakened it down to "permanent".
2/5
DoragonShinzui
★★★★☆ (4.2/5.0)(4 votes)
Single target, repeatable Smallpox. ... People are complaining about this? People are complaining about this!?
azure_drake222222
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.7/5.0)(3 votes)
@pedrodyl: Where does it say "infect" or "poison counter"?
Torquebacklash
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
If you are going to run cipher cards this is one you should. In a best case scenario (that many like me will do) you will cast this card and cipher it to a ready creature like invisible stalker. the spell will go off and then you will swing with the stalker for the effect. With this one act you will have forced your opponent to sacrifice 2 perm, discard 2 cards, and lose 3 life. not bad for a 6 cost.
Fun things to point out: -Cipher doesn't target -Triggers every time the combat damage is dealt (so anything with double-strike is extra effective) -Counts as casting, which may be helpful to your deck (in color and on curve for Consuming Aberration for example.)
Allso, this is 2-for-1 (most of the time) on the first casting, and quite possibly 4-for-1 on the first casting + attack.
SAUS3
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
@majinara At 4 mana this would be stupid. It would be WAY too powerful. 5 mana might be okay for it, but undercosting this would result in bad times due to the potential for 2 casts on the same turn.
j_mindfingerpainter
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Not nearly the power of Smallpox. Any opponent worth the price of their cards will remove the creature on which this is ciphered, or just counter the fricken thing. On turn 2, people don't expect a powerful spell like Smallpox and not everyone has the counters to deal with it. Also, sacrifice a land and a creature is a lot better than sacrifice a permanent in most any game. Probably will stay at about 3/5
auriscope
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
This thing can be surprisingly brutal in limited, especially if you can get it to connect twice the turn you cast it. Definitely can't go below 5 mana.
TheWrathofShane
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Without creatures Discard 1 card, sacrifice 1 permenant, lose 1 life. With evasion. Discard 2 cards, sacrifice 2 permanents, lose 2 life, retain a board threat. With doublestrike. Discard 3 cards, sacrifice 3 permenants, lose 3 life, retain a board threat.
I think this card can do some serious work in casual if you can hit them with an evasion or doublestrike same turn. Worst case is you cast this, then they blow up your creature before you deal damage. If they discard a land and sacrifice a land, this card could have little impact on the board. Best case is on doublestrike, they have to discard the rest of their hand and sacrifice 3 lands, while you retain this and threaten to seal the deal next turn.
Mode
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
"Single target, repeatable Smallpox. ... People are complaining about this? People are complaining about this!?" --DoragonShinzui
People are complaining about this. However- That's because it isn't what you make it out to be:
First of all it cost three times as much, so the first impact it can have on the game is much later, where likely none of these effects hits your opponent that hard.
Additionally, the effect also does not make your opponent sacrifice a land.
And last but not least, the repeatability of it is quite conditional. True, it can be somewhat reliable in the right deck - but that asks for dedicating it to the Cypher mechanic, otherwise your opponent will just block or destroy your cypher target, and you wasted your sixth turn for something that could have had a far greater impact or even won you the game.
Cyberium
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
@pedrodyl
Bonus points if you infect a Doll, like Stuffy Doll. You know, how Europeans killed Native Americans.
Comments (21)
I think Cipher will be a problem in limited, especially when people have one of these. Casting this each turn (attached to an unblockable creature) will be just the opposite of the Bee's Knee's.
...IN THE FACE!!!
I have 2 of them in my deck so imagen when I use both of them at the same time. >=D
Sure, if you'd get this to trigger each turn, it would be annoying for the opponent. But at that stage of the game... A small creature the opponent will just kill. Or bounce, pacify, whatever. And a large creature? If you can connect with that several times, you won anyway.
I think it's overcosted. Maybe four mana would be good. I guess they had it in an earlier design stage set to "sacrifices a creature". But if you put that on a creature with evasion, your opponent might be unable to keep anything in play, so they weakened it down to "permanent".
2/5
...
People are complaining about this? People are complaining about this!?
T2: Peat Bog, Lightning Greaves
T3: Swamp, Dark Ritual, this
Game. (probably..)
Fun things to point out:
-Cipher doesn't target
-Triggers every time the combat damage is dealt (so anything with double-strike is extra effective)
-Counts as casting, which may be helpful to your deck (in color and on curve for Consuming Aberration for example.)
Allso, this is 2-for-1 (most of the time) on the first casting, and quite possibly 4-for-1 on the first casting + attack.
At 4 mana this would be stupid. It would be WAY too powerful. 5 mana might be okay for it, but undercosting this would result in bad times due to the potential for 2 casts on the same turn.
Discard 1 card, sacrifice 1 permenant, lose 1 life.
With evasion.
Discard 2 cards, sacrifice 2 permanents, lose 2 life, retain a board threat.
With doublestrike.
Discard 3 cards, sacrifice 3 permenants, lose 3 life, retain a board threat.
I think this card can do some serious work in casual if you can hit them with an evasion or doublestrike same turn. Worst case is you cast this, then they blow up your creature before you deal damage. If they discard a land and sacrifice a land, this card could have little impact on the board. Best case is on doublestrike, they have to discard the rest of their hand and sacrifice 3 lands, while you retain this and threaten to seal the deal next turn.
...
People are complaining about this? People are complaining about this!?" --DoragonShinzui
People are complaining about this. However-
That's because it isn't what you make it out to be:
Calling this a single target, repeatable Smallpox is like calling, say,
Steelshaper Apprentice a harder to kill, repeatable Stoneforge Mystic.
First of all it cost three times as much, so the first impact it can have on the game is much later,
where likely none of these effects hits your opponent that hard.
Additionally, the effect also does not make your opponent sacrifice a land.
And last but not least, the repeatability of it is quite conditional.
True, it can be somewhat reliable in the right deck - but that asks for dedicating it to the Cypher mechanic,
otherwise your opponent will just block or destroy your cypher target,
and you wasted your sixth turn for something that could have had a far greater impact or even won you the game.
Bonus points if you infect a Doll, like Stuffy Doll. You know, how Europeans killed Native Americans.