Too bad i never got any meddlers I started playing around ravnica block!!! Kudos to wizards for bringing him back, no kudos for them not reprinted watchwolf and glare of subdual. It wont hurt wizards I promise. Reprint those two and ill be a happy man!!!
Meddling Mage is such an elegant card. Not too powerful that you must play it or or beat it (bitterblossom, skullcap, etc) but a game changing card non-the less. I think we going to now see a lot of aggro decks splash blue. White already has great cards (o-ring and exile). I am already working on a deck
Isn't this the first rare reprint outside a core set?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
hey i have managed to evolve my axolotls by feeding them thyroid glands the thyroxine contained in these gland is enough to change these water dwelling creatures into land based creatures
Posted by: Tay Collins | January 20, 2010 6:45 AM
Tay, that's not evolution. It's metamorphosis. Evolution means descent with heritable modification – individuals cannot evolve, unless they're Pokemon.
Posted by: David Marjanović | January 20, 2010 8:55 AM
This thread is full of idiots... Lightning Bolt is NOT being reprinted.
Many times has a writer in Wizards said so, because of the plain and simple fact that it's too powerful for what it costs. x/3 creatures shouldn't be able to die at instant speed for one mana without a signifigant drawback. (like PTE giving you a land)
I absolutely guarantee that LB will not be printed in M10, and you can quote me on that.
There are too many cheap blink cards for meddling mage >.<;
Only the most unusual decks will be able to beat out meddling mages ability.
Diversification.
Running more that just 'the best' removal will have to be considered. Mage and Thought Hemorrhoids will force players to diversify their decks to avoid being wrecked by either of them.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
^^
MTGO Writer and Epic Time-Waster.
If you have questions about MTGO PM me, I'm all up ons, as it were.
Check out my articles on http://puremtgo.com/ I'm the nerd you see there... wait, not that one. Nope, not that one either... yeah. That one.
Running more that just 'the best' removal will have to be considered. Mage and Thought Hemorrhoids will force players to diversify their decks to avoid being wrecked by either of them.
Which is good. Perhaps we can return to the days of old where 1-ofs made up over a quarter of the nonland cards in any given deck... but they'd probably have to reprint Mystical Teachings first.
Isn't this the first rare reprint outside a core set?
Blinding Light was a rare in the 1999 Starter set, but an uncommon in Mirage and Invasion. Does that count? Birds of Paradise was in Beta (not really a core set) and in Ravnica.
I seriously think people are overrating the card if they think that this will overly hurt the environment. It's darn good and naming volcanic fallout/whatever is pretty strong, but even if you know their hand, it does the same thing as sculler more often than not (get rid of a card in your opponents hand and have a 2/2 left over). drawing multiples of a card happens but I really don't see it warping anything. 5cc isn't much one to run 2/2s for 2 and I think esperlark is the only real tier deck that will benefit from this card
Running more that just 'the best' removal will have to be considered. Mage and Thought Hemorrhoids will force players to diversify their decks to avoid being wrecked by either of them.
Don't you see!? that's just what Wizards wants us to do, buy more cards!!! Anyways, i think this might kill alot control decks, the counters are too slow to kill this, its a static so cryptic will just run over it, and finishers won't be played...
Running more that just 'the best' removal will have to be considered. Mage and Thought Hemorrhoids will force players to diversify their decks to avoid being wrecked by either of them.
Yeah, maybe 5cc will stop playing 4 Broodmates and no other finishers when they realize Thought HemorRAGE removes their ability to win. Mage, not so much since you need one naming Fallout and one naming Broodmate.
Running more that just 'the best' removal will have to be considered. Mage and Thought Hemorrhoids will force players to diversify their decks to avoid being wrecked by either of them.
I love this, personally. Magic isn't as fun when every game is the same and your deck is 4x 4x 4x 4x 4x.
My deck has a few one ofs, two ofs, and three ofs. Only two or three cards are 4x.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
News and spoiler contributor for GatheringMagic.com
This is insane. Our reason for believing Meddling Mage is in the set is the presence of the word "Meddling" twice? Three cards (not counting the Kids) have been printed with the word "Meddling" on them. Obviously, that drains the well of possible card names including the word "Meddling" completely dry, so there's absolutely no way that this is actually a different card.
Seriously, we're all on board with this reasoning? The word "Backlash" appears in the Orb as well, can we add that to the list of confirmed reprints?
Look, I'm not saying Meddling Mage won't be reprinted. I *am* saying that Meddling Mage is about as "confirmed" as Backlash, so either get Meddling Mage OFF the spoiler, or put Backlash ON. Just because you WANT Meddling Mage reprinted does not mean that the evidence for its presence is inherently stronger.
This is insane. Our reason for believing Meddling Mage is in the set is the presence of the word "Meddling" twice? Three cards (not counting the Kids) have been printed with the word "Meddling" on them. Obviously, that drains the well of possible card names including the word "Meddling" completely dry, so there's absolutely no way that this is actually a different card.
Seriously, we're all on board with this reasoning? The word "Backlash" appears in the Orb as well, can we add that to the list of confirmed reprints?
Look, I'm not saying Meddling Mage won't be reprinted. I *am* saying that Meddling Mage is about as "confirmed" as Backlash, so either get Meddling Mage OFF the spoiler, or put Backlash ON. Just because you WANT Meddling Mage reprinted does not mean that the evidence for its presence is inherently stronger.
That's exactly where I'm at, too. But they have their reasons. So let them fuel idiots rushing to eBay. If it turns out not to be true, you and I can have an "I Told You So" party later.
However, I'm all for diversification if this ends up being true.
What we're doing here is akin to taking the text of Moby Dick, locating specific words therein, rearranging them to create a passage from Fight Club, and concluding from this evidence that Tyler Durden is based on Ahab.
This is insane. Our reason for believing Meddling Mage is in the set is the presence of the word "Meddling" twice? Three cards (not counting the Kids) have been printed with the word "Meddling" on them. Obviously, that drains the well of possible card names including the word "Meddling" completely dry, so there's absolutely no way that this is actually a different card.
Seriously, we're all on board with this reasoning? The word "Backlash" appears in the Orb as well, can we add that to the list of confirmed reprints?
Look, I'm not saying Meddling Mage won't be reprinted. I *am* saying that Meddling Mage is about as "confirmed" as Backlash, so either get Meddling Mage OFF the spoiler, or put Backlash ON. Just because you WANT Meddling Mage reprinted does not mean that the evidence for its presence is inherently stronger.
The entire text for Meddling Mage and Backlash is in the orb, actually.
Meddling Mage has much more specific text than Backlash though. Name, played, etc.
You are acting like we are jumping to conclusions when we have known the orb results for a week, and after thinking about it, I put it on the spoiler.
Do you have a better reason for the ENTIRE TEXT of Meddling Mage appearing in the orb?
Backlash is indeed likely, but its card text isn't as unique, so it is harder to be completely sure about. The name is the biggest clue in that case, but I think it is likely in the set.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
News and spoiler contributor for GatheringMagic.com
Who wanna bet that WotC will reprint it as Mythic? You, it kinda has that mythic-feeling ability about it. And Im sure it would boost the sales even higher than having it at rare. After all, if they print just one constructed-playable rare, their "mythics arent just a list of the best cards" argument holds water. /sarcasm
Seriously, diversification is the best thing we could get right now, maybe with a more you-cant-splash-for-whatever-you-like manabase.
Also, Meddling Mage will cost more than it did back when it was standard legal. If not because of anything else, then because of inflation.
The entire text for Meddling Mage and Backlash is in the orb, actually.
Meddling Mage has much more specific text than Backlash though. Name, played, etc.
You are acting like we are jumping to conclusions when we have known the orb results for a week, and after thinking about it, I put it on the spoiler.
Do you have a better reason for the ENTIRE TEXT of Meddling Mage appearing in the orb?
Yes, yes I do. My better reason? Because those words aren't very unusual. "Comes into play", "name", "named", "can't", "card". Every single one of those appears in Shards of Alara. Some appear several times. (The Herald cycle provides five instances of "Named" on its own.) Imagine if Ethersworn Canonist had been named "Meddling Canonist". You'd be doing this exact same thing with Shards?
Backlash is indeed likely, but its card text isn't as unique, so it is harder to be completely sure about. The name is the biggest clue in that case, but I think it is likely in the set.
It's possibly in the set. You've provided enough evidence for us to say conclusively that we can't rule it out. What you need to ask yourself now is, does that constitute a sufficient standard of evidence to put it on the spoiler? You've probably actively affected its price on the secondary market already, if you're wrong, you're actually costing people money right now.
I'd give it 50% odds. But, personally, I feel you should be much closer to 100% before you start sticking things on the spoiler and calling them "Confirmed", especially when you're working with evidence this flimsy. (Again, I say to you - All those words were in Shards, and would have been in the Shards Orb. If a card called "Malfegor's Meddling" had been printed, and had the rules text "Malfegor's Meddling can't be countered by spells or abilities," would you have put Meddling Mage on the Shards spoiler? If so, would you consider that an error?)
Yes, yes I do. My better reason? Because those words aren't very unusual. "Comes into play", "name", "named", "can't", "card". Every single one of those appears in Shards of Alara. Some appear several times. (The Herald cycle provides five instances of "Named" on its own.) Imagine if Ethersworn Canonist had been named "Meddling Canonist". You'd be doing this exact same thing with Shards?
It's possibly in the set. You've provided enough evidence for us to say conclusively that we can't rule it out. What you need to ask yourself now is, does that constitute a sufficient standard of evidence to put it on the spoiler? You've probably actively affected its price on the secondary market already, if you're wrong, you're actually costing people money right now.
I'd give it 50% odds. But, personally, I feel you should be much closer to 100% before you start sticking things on the spoiler and calling them "Confirmed", especially when you're working with evidence this flimsy. (Again, I say to you - All those words were in Shards, and would have been in the Shards Orb. If a card called "Malfegor's Meddling" had been printed, and had the rules text "Malfegor's Meddling can't be countered by spells or abilities," would you have put Meddling Mage on the Shards spoiler? If so, would you consider that an error?)
If.
If.
Meddling Mage fits the orb in a way that makes sense for it to be in there. The likelihood of a card that has "meddling" twice, while also hitting all the words for the card, which also fits a 'solid gold' set is evidently low enough that the mods decided it was going to be in.
I doubt that they add cards to the spoiler lightly, in fact, I imagine it's usually a very conscious decision. Adding cards that they they don't believe will be in the set to the spoiler is beyond foolish. The spoiler is a major part of the ethos of this site and its moderators. The reason that so many people come here each rumor season is because they treat each season seriously and treat the spoiler as a very important document.
Of course there's a possibility that there's the perfect confluence of events that leads to all the pieces being together in the named set and not having Meddling Mage. That's where Occam's Razor comes in. The most likely answer is usually the correct one. The most likely end result of all these peices of information is that MM is going to be reprinted. You have to start creating cases to explain it away, which is a sign that you're wandering away from the easiest answer.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
^^
MTGO Writer and Epic Time-Waster.
If you have questions about MTGO PM me, I'm all up ons, as it were.
Check out my articles on http://puremtgo.com/ I'm the nerd you see there... wait, not that one. Nope, not that one either... yeah. That one.
Meddling Mage fits the orb in a way that makes sense for it to be in there. The likelihood of a card that has "meddling" twice, while also hitting all the words for the card, which also fits a 'solid gold' set is evidently low enough that the mods decided it was going to be in.
I doubt that they add cards to the spoiler lightly, in fact, I imagine it's usually a very conscious decision. Adding cards that they they don't believe will be in the set to the spoiler is beyond foolish. The spoiler is a major part of the ethos of this site and its moderators. The reason that so many people come here each rumor season is because they treat each season seriously and treat the spoiler as a very important document.
Of course there's a possibility that there's the perfect confluence of events that leads to all the pieces being together in the named set and not having Meddling Mage. That's where Occam's Razor comes in. The most likely answer is usually the correct one. The most likely end result of all these peices of information is that MM is going to be reprinted. You have to start creating cases to explain it away, which is a sign that you're wandering away from the easiest answer.
So you're on board with adding Backlash to the spoiler, then? In that case, we're in agreement.
Unless, of course, you think Backlash *shouldn't* be added. In which case I would accuse you of displaying a flagrant double-standard.
Perhaps more importantly, you clearly misread my post. All the "evidence" for Meddling Mage being in Alara Reborn was also present in Shards, excepting the word "Meddling". Meddling Mage was not in Shards, nor was any card with even remotely similar rules text. What we're doing here is akin to taking the text of Moby Dick, locating specific words therein, rearranging them to create a passage from Fight Club, and concluding from this evidence that Tyler Durden is based on Ahab.
Scullers, Teeg and him. Too much disruption for you.
I like this very much.
Thanks to Heroes of the Plane Studios for the amazing sig.
NO RUG: Primer
Tempo Thresh: Primer
Posted by: Tay Collins | January 20, 2010 6:45 AM
Tay, that's not evolution. It's metamorphosis. Evolution means descent with heritable modification – individuals cannot evolve, unless they're Pokemon.
Posted by: David Marjanović | January 20, 2010 8:55 AM
Only the most unusual decks will be able to beat out meddling mages ability.
Reflecting Pool is a recent example.
“Homo homini lupus est.”
Thanks to Heroes of the Plane Studios for the amazing sig.
NO RUG: Primer
Tempo Thresh: Primer
Diversification.
Running more that just 'the best' removal will have to be considered. Mage and Thought Hemorrhoids will force players to diversify their decks to avoid being wrecked by either of them.
MTGO Writer and Epic Time-Waster.
If you have questions about MTGO PM me, I'm all up ons, as it were.
Check out my articles on http://puremtgo.com/ I'm the nerd you see there... wait, not that one. Nope, not that one either... yeah. That one.
Which is good. Perhaps we can return to the days of old where 1-ofs made up over a quarter of the nonland cards in any given deck... but they'd probably have to reprint Mystical Teachings first.
Blinding Light was a rare in the 1999 Starter set, but an uncommon in Mirage and Invasion. Does that count?
Birds of Paradise was in Beta (not really a core set) and in Ravnica.
Argl... majorly Sarnath'd...
Don't you see!? that's just what Wizards wants us to do, buy more cards!!! Anyways, i think this might kill alot control decks, the counters are too slow to kill this, its a static so cryptic will just run over it, and finishers won't be played...
Esper Fae will gladly pay 2 to shut off Volcanic Blowout.
Yeah, maybe 5cc will stop playing 4 Broodmates and no other finishers when they realize Thought HemorRAGE removes their ability to win. Mage, not so much since you need one naming Fallout and one naming Broodmate.
I love this, personally. Magic isn't as fun when every game is the same and your deck is 4x 4x 4x 4x 4x.
My deck has a few one ofs, two ofs, and three ofs. Only two or three cards are 4x.
Twitter
Seriously, we're all on board with this reasoning? The word "Backlash" appears in the Orb as well, can we add that to the list of confirmed reprints?
Look, I'm not saying Meddling Mage won't be reprinted. I *am* saying that Meddling Mage is about as "confirmed" as Backlash, so either get Meddling Mage OFF the spoiler, or put Backlash ON. Just because you WANT Meddling Mage reprinted does not mean that the evidence for its presence is inherently stronger.
LOL, don't remember the Timeshifted cards?
That's exactly where I'm at, too. But they have their reasons. So let them fuel idiots rushing to eBay. If it turns out not to be true, you and I can have an "I Told You So" party later.
However, I'm all for diversification if this ends up being true.
Guildmaster Jarad
The entire text for Meddling Mage and Backlash is in the orb, actually.
Meddling Mage has much more specific text than Backlash though. Name, played, etc.
You are acting like we are jumping to conclusions when we have known the orb results for a week, and after thinking about it, I put it on the spoiler.
Do you have a better reason for the ENTIRE TEXT of Meddling Mage appearing in the orb?
Backlash is indeed likely, but its card text isn't as unique, so it is harder to be completely sure about. The name is the biggest clue in that case, but I think it is likely in the set.
Twitter
Seriously, diversification is the best thing we could get right now, maybe with a more you-cant-splash-for-whatever-you-like manabase.
Also, Meddling Mage will cost more than it did back when it was standard legal. If not because of anything else, then because of inflation.
Yes, yes I do. My better reason? Because those words aren't very unusual. "Comes into play", "name", "named", "can't", "card". Every single one of those appears in Shards of Alara. Some appear several times. (The Herald cycle provides five instances of "Named" on its own.) Imagine if Ethersworn Canonist had been named "Meddling Canonist". You'd be doing this exact same thing with Shards?
It's possibly in the set. You've provided enough evidence for us to say conclusively that we can't rule it out. What you need to ask yourself now is, does that constitute a sufficient standard of evidence to put it on the spoiler? You've probably actively affected its price on the secondary market already, if you're wrong, you're actually costing people money right now.
I'd give it 50% odds. But, personally, I feel you should be much closer to 100% before you start sticking things on the spoiler and calling them "Confirmed", especially when you're working with evidence this flimsy. (Again, I say to you - All those words were in Shards, and would have been in the Shards Orb. If a card called "Malfegor's Meddling" had been printed, and had the rules text "Malfegor's Meddling can't be countered by spells or abilities," would you have put Meddling Mage on the Shards spoiler? If so, would you consider that an error?)
If.
If.
Meddling Mage fits the orb in a way that makes sense for it to be in there. The likelihood of a card that has "meddling" twice, while also hitting all the words for the card, which also fits a 'solid gold' set is evidently low enough that the mods decided it was going to be in.
I doubt that they add cards to the spoiler lightly, in fact, I imagine it's usually a very conscious decision. Adding cards that they they don't believe will be in the set to the spoiler is beyond foolish. The spoiler is a major part of the ethos of this site and its moderators. The reason that so many people come here each rumor season is because they treat each season seriously and treat the spoiler as a very important document.
Of course there's a possibility that there's the perfect confluence of events that leads to all the pieces being together in the named set and not having Meddling Mage. That's where Occam's Razor comes in. The most likely answer is usually the correct one. The most likely end result of all these peices of information is that MM is going to be reprinted. You have to start creating cases to explain it away, which is a sign that you're wandering away from the easiest answer.
MTGO Writer and Epic Time-Waster.
If you have questions about MTGO PM me, I'm all up ons, as it were.
Check out my articles on http://puremtgo.com/ I'm the nerd you see there... wait, not that one. Nope, not that one either... yeah. That one.
So you're on board with adding Backlash to the spoiler, then? In that case, we're in agreement.
Unless, of course, you think Backlash *shouldn't* be added. In which case I would accuse you of displaying a flagrant double-standard.
Perhaps more importantly, you clearly misread my post. All the "evidence" for Meddling Mage being in Alara Reborn was also present in Shards, excepting the word "Meddling". Meddling Mage was not in Shards, nor was any card with even remotely similar rules text. What we're doing here is akin to taking the text of Moby Dick, locating specific words therein, rearranging them to create a passage from Fight Club, and concluding from this evidence that Tyler Durden is based on Ahab.
It's POSSIBLE, but the evidence is NOT there.