Really, a serpent that doesn't have major drawbacks? Yes! Finally a good serpent card . . . oh wait, its a 3/4 that costs five and its only ability is cycling. Uhg, nevermind.
Radagast
★★★☆☆ (3.8/5.0)(5 votes)
Not as horrible as some serpents, but still keeping up the theme that serpents and serious decks don't mix.
Anubisisking
★★★★☆ (4.1/5.0)(4 votes)
Eh, this guy isn't actually that terrible... I like the flexibility you get with cycling...
Kirbster
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(2 votes)
Hey, leave him alone. Fluctuator, much like love, is blind.
DoragonShinzui
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(2 votes)
Could've used a bit more...juice. Still, it's not overly terrible.
DacenOctavio
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.5/5.0)(1 vote)
A card that reduces the mana costs of cards with cycling by their cycling costs would go a long way toward making many cycling cards playable. For example, this guy would cost {2U}. By the same token, that would also break the crap out of cards like Resounding Thunder.
Lash_of_Dragonbreath
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
@DacenOctavio: Resounding Thunder for R would be... Lightning Bolt. I get your point, though. Maybe something that gave all your spells madness would benefit cyclers more (in case anyone's wondering, check Ichor Slick to see how madness and cycling interact.
About this... It's a vanilla 3/4 with cycling. Relatively crappy even if you're in the Living Death bandwagon.
Comments (8)
About this... It's a vanilla 3/4 with cycling. Relatively crappy even if you're in the Living Death bandwagon.