Hanabi means fireworks, or more literally, Fire flower. So this art could have been a bit flashier.
NoobOfLore
★★★★☆ (4.8/5.0)(4 votes)
This would be great, except for the "at random" part. Otherwise, you could build a madness deck around it. As it is, you are as likely to discard it as any other card, and then you somehow managed to play a 3-cost shock, which is honestly kind of offensive to burn everywhere.
Ameisenmeister
★★★★☆ (4.8/5.0)(2 votes)
Should deal 3 damage. Interesting effect though.
DarthParallax
★★★★☆ (4.1/5.0)(6 votes)
massively inefficienty mechanism for thoroughly mediocre effect? check!
ability that is normally a downside, could be an upside with the right condition, but as
worded is not as effective for the upside as it could be? check!
7 stars out of 0. because I can.
this card is pure gobby nutsness. real goblins, though violent, are not 'built' to organize themselves into the beautiful 3-turn kill decks that players force them into. I consider them to be playing goblins 'so right, they're wrong' because they use the kind of military tactics that win smart, which I believe come from white and blue mana. the opposites of red.
seriously, it makes no sense that a madness deck would want to be as well oiled a machine as an artifact combo deck. i say its BETTER for madness because of the 'random' clause.
discarding cards at random is the best effect to represent deciding to randomly go insane in a fight. you can't pick what kind of insanity you get like its a draft. that would be too logical.
la-la-C'thulhu! icki icki icki pthang! la-la!
luca_barelli
★★★★☆ (4.0/5.0)(1 vote)
Let this be a lesson to everyone: don't Comment Under The Influence.
ScissorsLizard
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
The problem with this in a madness deck is not that it discards a card at random (though that is bad), it's that it costs 3 mana, so you need 3 mana on top of whatever madness cost you need to pay. Reckless Wurm for 6 mana? No thanks. Give me Wild Mongrel any day.
Goatllama
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Speaking of commenting under the influence, I would swear that I've rated under the influence. I come to this card in 2012 and yet I have already rated it in 2010. I have no memory of ever seeing this card before. I like it though. As someone said, it should definitely be 3 damage, that would stifle a lot of the complaints I think. However, this. Is. KAMIGAWAAAAAAA!
Comments (12)
Otherwise, you could build a madness deck around it.
As it is, you are as likely to discard it as any other card, and then you somehow managed to play a 3-cost shock, which is honestly kind of offensive to burn everywhere.
ability that is normally a downside, could be an upside with the right condition, but as
worded is not as effective for the upside as it could be? check!
7 stars out of 0. because I can.
this card is pure gobby nutsness. real goblins, though violent, are not 'built' to organize themselves into the beautiful 3-turn kill decks that players force them into. I consider them to be playing goblins 'so right, they're wrong' because they use the kind of military tactics that win smart, which I believe come from white and blue mana. the opposites of red.
seriously, it makes no sense that a madness deck would want to be as well oiled a machine as an artifact combo deck. i say its BETTER for madness because of the 'random' clause.
discarding cards at random is the best effect to represent deciding to randomly go insane in a fight. you can't pick what kind of insanity you get like its a draft. that would be too logical.
la-la-C'thulhu! icki icki icki pthang! la-la!