The oracle text is actually weirder then the original - "the next time target land would be destroyed this turn, remove all damage from it instead." Do lands take damage normally?
aarotech
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(4 votes)
Oh wait I get it. The damage is removed instead of it being destroyed. huh
Guest57443454
★★★★☆ (4.5/5.0)(2 votes)
Great flavor, but this card is far too narrow for its cost...The original wording is wonky, hence the wonky current wording...I know it once was read as a regen ability...
Lateralis0ne
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
yaaay Armageddon.
kitsunewarlock
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
Its not just "regenerate" since that would cause it to tap and remove it from combat. This can regenerate a creature without removing it from combat...if the creature is a man-land.
A3Kitsune
★★☆☆☆ (2.8/5.0)(2 votes)
The original wording isn't wonky, by the standard of of the day. The current Oracle wording isn't so much weird as it has a large part missing. It's most likely WotC took the reminder text wording for the Regenerate ability and used that for this card, removing the bits about tapping and removal from combat, and accidently removing a bit more.
ratchet1215
★★★★☆ (4.1/5.0)(5 votes)
So this card is Oracle-reengineered to help out with a manland? That's really neat, actually.
Tiggurix
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.5/5.0)(1 vote)
Retarded Oracle text, as already mentioned. Just make this regenerate the damn land, dammit! At least it would then help out a little against Stone Rain.
exterion
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(6 votes)
The reason it says "remove all damage from it" is because it would do jack shit about state-based actions trying to destroy it (due to, say, lethal damage after being animated) as the SBA's would try to destroy it again immediately after you prevented it the first time.
Kryptnyt
★★★★☆ (4.6/5.0)(8 votes)
If bad cards are taunts, then this is a big hairy ass in your face.
Misago
★☆☆☆☆ (1.0/5.0)(1 vote)
With the introduction of the EDH format into the casual multiplayer environment, old rare cards such as this could have been used effectively to enhance the game status if not for the inaccurate oracle text. For example, it could have been used to aggresively save some of your lands while casting Armageddon, or gain an ally by saving another player's land from a Stone Rain. The new oracle text is not close to what the card was originally meant to do, making this card rather useless and undesirable. Changing the oracle text to something along the lines of blowing up an aura AND making a land indestructible until end of turn would have been much more in sync with what the card was originally designed to do. Wizards of the Coast, please change the oracle text to save this classic card.
Kirbster
★★★★☆ (4.8/5.0)(5 votes)
Over 9000 hours with pencil crayons.
metalevolence
★★★☆☆ (3.0/5.0)(1 vote)
What are those two pyramids up to back there?
ChaosFire
★★★★☆ (4.9/5.0)(7 votes)
Alright, look.
I'm not usually one to attack other people or get aggressive, but you guy's aren't even reading the oracle text anymore.
To everyone complaining that this removes damage but isn't useful against stone rain, you are outright WRONG.
Let's look at the Oracle wording you're complaining so much about: "Destroy target Aura attached to a land; or the next time target land would be destroyed this turn, remove all damage from it instead."
That little word at the end - INSTEAD - means its still works.
INSTEAD of the land being destroyed by stone rain, it does something different, like removing damage from the land.
THE LAND STILL ISN'T DESTROYED.
ultratog1028
★★★★☆ (4.3/5.0)(3 votes)
@chaosfire: You are right. Though they could add Reminder text to the oracle.
Pontiac
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(3 votes)
I can't remember EVER seeing this thing in a deck and I'm talkin' since it came out in 94 lol.
scumbling1
★★★★☆ (4.4/5.0)(9 votes)
"For example, it could have been used to aggresively save some of your lands while casting Armageddon, or gain an ally by saving another player's land from a Stone Rain."
Why can't you do this with the present Oracle text? Two mana sets up a delayed ability to protect a land against the next Stone Rain or Armageddon, no matter who controls the land or the spell; it's not destroyed, but rather all damage is removed from it instead (even if it's zero damage).
"Changing the oracle text to something along the lines of blowing up an aura AND making a land indestructible until end of turn would have been much more in sync with what the card was originally designed to do."
The card's printed text says "Prevents a land from being destroyed, or removes an enchantment from any land." "Or", not "and". It's clear that even the original card did not allow you both effects for the same two mana.
"Or the wording was done befor indestructible came into being. Now that we have indestrutible, it could be reworded so it would be more clear."
If the land were to become Indestructable for the remainder of the turn, that would prevent additional attempts to destroy the land that turn for free. The original card only saves a land once per two mana.
"Retarded Oracle text, as already mentioned. Just make this regenerate the damn land, dammit! At least it would then help out a little against Stone Rain."
If it regenerated a land, that land would become tapped and --if it were a man land-- remove it from combat. Tapping and removing from combat were never mentioned in the printed wording, so it would be incorrect to use regeneration to preserve the intended functionality.
Having some wierd oracle text is more than justified in the case of Pyramids: it's absolutely necessary to reproduce the original design intention perfectly (which has been done).
supershawn
★★☆☆☆ (2.8/5.0)(2 votes)
wow I thought this was a land at first since I couldn't see it's mana cost. no no thanks I don't want to pay 6 for this card.
blah blah blah oracle text.
shit I understood that instantly why is everyone so damn slow ITS YOUR FAULT THEY TOOK AWAY BANDING YOU IDIOTS!!!
Crag-Hack
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(3 votes)
Hot tech in man-land decks... wait why are you tapping out your man lands for a 6 drop that does nothing when it hits the board?
WilloftheLisp
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
Used to cost , but Weber did a reverse-Onulet.
Yard Imps was a decent re-invention.
yyukichigai
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
Wonderful land protection, provided you have the mana for it (and the money in your wallet to buy one). A bit overcosted to get it out though.
One important thing to note is that this card gets around "it can't be regenerated" effects: the card doesn't regenerate lands, it replaces the destruction effect. If you have a manland and your opponent decides to Pongify it, you can save the land AND keep the 3/3 Ape token anyway.
A good Johnny card I suppose, but not good for much else.
Tanaka348
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
Killed by the casting cost, like a lot of old artifacts. If you got to 6, you aren't worrying about land destruction anymore. If your opponent is running Armageddon, they'd probably use it before 6.
Purple_Shrimp
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
if you get to 6 mana against a land destruction deck they're losing anyway
Radagast
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Clunky and strange... has anyone used this?
JL2736
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Least effort ever put into a piece of MTG artwork?
Trygon_Predator
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Hey, we need this to hose the rampant land destruction and Genju decks in Vintage!
HuntingDrake
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Would anyone use this if its mana cost was ? is a bit much to leave open for every Stone Rain. And manland decks are probably happier with Terra Eternal anyway. Maybe , , and Flash...
SarcasmElemental
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
It's a Poly Artifact guys, show some respect
ToAsTy42o
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
...remove all damage marked on it...? oracle, wut? when was the last time anyone did damage to a land, as in "I lightning bolt your land"? don't they mean "prevents a land from being destroyed?" oh wait, they DID. AS PRINTED. damnit oracle, sometimes updating the wording is just wrong. oracle SHOULD be "target land is indestructible this turn"
Totema
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
I have an annoying player in my group who loves to animate everyone's lands (usually with Natural Affinity) and then nuke them all with Pyroclasm. He doesn't seem to run any artifact hate though... This is perfect.
patronofthesound
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
I find "damage marked" unusual wording in the oracle. Since when is that in the official lexicon?
Also, terribad card. If you have problems with ld, run terra eternal or darksteel citadel. Possibly also wind zendikon. If you have $$ you're probably already running crucible of worlds. Also, some white land replaces itself when it dies, I think.
Cujucuyo
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Great card if you're running an Urzatron or Cloudpost deck, you can easily have this artifact out by turn 3.
jfre81
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
Oracle still has to reconcile somewhat the poor wording of the rules text and how it should be actually played. If this came out new today, what it would probably say is ": Target land is indestructible until end of turn." Simple. If that land becomes a creature, it's still indestructible.
Being able to save your lands from a board wipe is never bad, not for two mana each. If you're up just two or three lands on everyone else, you're in good shape.
tavaritz
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
The new wording replaces destruction with damage prevention.
If the land is not creature then damage prevention doesn't apply, but the land is not destroyed because the destruction was replaced by damage prevention.
If the land is a creature then the damage prevention handles if the land would be destroyed because of damage greater or equal to the lands toughness and straight destruction is prevented because destruction was replaced by damage prevention.
The reason for this instead of gaining inestructability is because there is no neat way to template temporal indestructability otherways. If one uses Stone Rain to destroy a land one can pay and prevent the lands destuction, but if the player follows that with an other LD-spell one has to pay again. To still have this same effect the card is worded in Oracle the way that it is.
Comments (35)
I'm not usually one to attack other people or get aggressive, but you guy's aren't even reading the oracle text anymore.
To everyone complaining that this removes damage but isn't useful against stone rain, you are outright WRONG.
Let's look at the Oracle wording you're complaining so much about: "Destroy target Aura attached to a land; or the next time target land would be destroyed this turn, remove all damage from it instead."
That little word at the end - INSTEAD - means its still works.
INSTEAD of the land being destroyed by stone rain, it does something different, like removing damage from the land.
THE LAND STILL ISN'T DESTROYED.
Why can't you do this with the present Oracle text? Two mana sets up a delayed ability to protect a land against the next Stone Rain or Armageddon, no matter who controls the land or the spell; it's not destroyed, but rather all damage is removed from it instead (even if it's zero damage).
"Changing the oracle text to something along the lines of blowing up an aura AND making a land indestructible until end of turn would have been much more in sync with what the card was originally designed to do."
The card's printed text says "Prevents a land from being destroyed, or removes an enchantment from any land." "Or", not "and". It's clear that even the original card did not allow you both effects for the same two mana.
"Or the wording was done befor indestructible came into being. Now that we have indestrutible, it could be reworded so it would be more clear."
If the land were to become Indestructable for the remainder of the turn, that would prevent additional attempts to destroy the land that turn for free. The original card only saves a land once per two mana.
"Retarded Oracle text, as already mentioned. Just make this regenerate the damn land, dammit! At least it would then help out a little against Stone Rain."
If it regenerated a land, that land would become tapped and --if it were a man land-- remove it from combat. Tapping and removing from combat were never mentioned in the printed wording, so it would be incorrect to use regeneration to preserve the intended functionality.
Having some wierd oracle text is more than justified in the case of Pyramids: it's absolutely necessary to reproduce the original design intention perfectly (which has been done).
no no thanks I don't want to pay 6 for this card.
blah blah blah oracle text.
shit I understood that instantly why is everyone so damn slow
ITS YOUR FAULT THEY TOOK AWAY BANDING YOU IDIOTS!!!
Yard Imps was a decent re-invention.
One important thing to note is that this card gets around "it can't be regenerated" effects: the card doesn't regenerate lands, it replaces the destruction effect. If you have a manland and your opponent decides to Pongify it, you can save the land AND keep the 3/3 Ape token anyway.
A good Johnny card I suppose, but not good for much else.
And manland decks are probably happier with Terra Eternal anyway.
Maybe
Also, terribad card. If you have problems with ld, run terra eternal or darksteel citadel. Possibly also wind zendikon. If you have $$ you're probably already running crucible of worlds. Also, some white land replaces itself when it dies, I think.
Being able to save your lands from a board wipe is never bad, not for two mana each. If you're up just two or three lands on everyone else, you're in good shape.
If the land is not creature then damage prevention doesn't apply, but the land is not destroyed because the destruction was replaced by damage prevention.
If the land is a creature then the damage prevention handles if the land would be destroyed because of damage greater or equal to the lands toughness and straight destruction is prevented because destruction was replaced by damage prevention.
The reason for this instead of gaining inestructability is because there is no neat way to template temporal indestructability otherways. If one uses Stone Rain to destroy a land one can pay