How easy will it be to fulfill the Delirium requirement? In standard it will not that easy, I believe. Especially since the fetchlands leaves. To reliably have 4 different card types in the graveyard will likely require a significant amount of looting and/or self-mill effects. Could Oath of Jace become a role player?
I initally hated the DFC design when it was spoiled (looked like flip cards in a new wrapping), but actually came to like it. The main point is that I think the werewolves played really well; the transform trigger made for interesting plays and deck decitions. It was a major reason Innistrad limited was awesome, imo.
I have played MtG for a loooong time, and I cannot think of any format in which a dedicated land destruction deck has been oppressive. Has land destruction ever even been Tier 1? I don't think so. The closest thing is probably Owling Mine (which was more like tempo+land denial), Wildfire goyf or white weenie with Armageddon.
Thus, the hate against land destruction is not a power level debate; it is a play-style debate. Johnnies want to be able to play their 9-cost fatty.
No reason at all that this couldn't hit lands too. I mean, there are 0 other cards that can do that in standard for 3 mana, so it's not like you can build a dedicated land desctruction deck. It would just give the card more versatility, especially in older formats. And no, this is not in any way better than vindicate for commander. You absolutely need answers to lands in that format or you get overrun by cabal coffers, geia's cradle, etc.
Instant speed Vindicate would obviously be over-powered.
I agree that some land destruction at mana cost 3 would be acceptable in standard, though not on this card.
How much it will be played remains to be seen. However, it cannot be jammed into any deck, unlike Tarmogoyf. It is a rare in an in-print set. Those points alone mean that it cannot retain its current price tag, imo.
That said, it is obviously vastly superior to Skaab Ruinator.
In theory it is still possible that IoK is in the set, right? I mean, it is not likely, but neither impossible. Is there a reliable source saying that all eldrazi cards now are colorless?
Mark Rosewater said that Eldrazi spells are either true colorless or devoid. They won't break this rule just to reprint an expensive uncommon. Especially since we got a similar card in BFZ already: Transgress the Mind. Speaking of which, there is a second reason why Inquisition of Kozilek won't be in OGW: It discards the chosen card, while all other Eldrazi "discard" effects in the current block exile the chosen cards, since exiling is a major theme for them now.
All good points which make a reprint unlikely, but not impossible
She is not an Eldrazi card. She is a Kor.
(I suppose you were making a joke, but I want to make it clear that it is completely impossible that Inquisition is in this set, since it lacks devoid.)
In theory it is still possible that IoK is in the set, right? I mean, it is not likely, but neither impossible. Is there a reliable source saying that all eldrazi cards now are colorless?
Also, when someone Terminates your Seer, it's not card advantage for them, it's simply parity. You exiled a card, they get a new one. Body for removal, exile for draw.
I do think Thought-Knot Seer is pretty reasonable, but not stellar. Maybe good in the aggro lists, and possibly Sideboard material for combo matchups too.
@Stubbe, I don't think you can go all in on creatures and skip out on the ramp and Scrabbling Claws. These decks can be inconsistent; the ramp and cantrip spell are pretty necessary it seems. You might get by with only a couple Scrabbling Claws and a handful of mindstones/maps, but I think you need a nonzero number of them. Not playing discard also seems very risky in this format. I think the aggro versions will be successful to some extent, but they will still need to share a similar core.
I would even say you're up in parity, as you choose a card to exile(probably one that you can't deal with or a combo piece) and they draw a random card in place.
Also, with removal as sparse in modern as it is now, the only removals commonly played that can rid them of this card are path, dismember, roast, go for the throat, terminate.
Seems alright by me
You may get nothing relevant (or no card at all) with the exile clause, though. At which point you're down a card if your opponent manages to kill the seer.
jokey665 asked: Why was the colorless mana symbol added in OGW and not BFZ?
That was a subject of huge debate. I was on the BFZ side but my side did not win out. The winning argument said that introducing before it was mechanically relevant would confuse even more players than having them mix in limited. It also made the splash when it was supposed to be the focus.
Well, that's an explanation, but not one I necessarily agree with.
Okay, Wizards, here's a little advice from me, and probably from a lot of other players and people who enjoy this game. Manlands are very loved and treasured part of the game. From Mishra's Factory to Raging Ravine, from Stalking Stones to Mutavault, people really enjoy the concept and have done so for years. When we heard that we were going back to Zendikar, enemy-colored Manlands were something a lot of people expected, and looking at the original cycle, the reason was pretty obvious. However, this time around, we get nothing but boring french vanilla cards with a single ability, low-power level and very little creativity involved. And I think that Hissing Quagmire is the worst offender, despite the UR one not being revealed yet. Why? Because deathtouch is one of the worst abilities you can put on a Manland. You don't want these cards to be blocked or to block nine of out ten times. So, if you play it smartly, nine out of ten times, this card has no ability. I really don't imagine you winning a lot of games where you have to defensively use this card to block.
All of these cards could have been more - more powerful, more interesting, more creative and more inspired. But instead we get more of "play-it-safe" nonsense that seems to be the recurring theme of this block.
This. Keeping up 2BG every turn to prevent a fatty from attacking is a recipe for disaster. Manlands aren't made for playing defensive (unless you're Celestial Colonnade in a deck loaded with instant speed spells and mana sinks).
It is a sixth "color", since some cards require a sixth type of mana (not WUBRG, but <>). The ingenious thing is that the way it is implemented it is backwards compatible (there already exist hundreds of cards producing colorless mana). The strange thing to me is that WotC chose to introduce it mid-block..?
I don't know what to say... Is it broken..?
Thus, the hate against land destruction is not a power level debate; it is a play-style debate. Johnnies want to be able to play their 9-cost fatty.
Instant speed Vindicate would obviously be over-powered.
I agree that some land destruction at mana cost 3 would be acceptable in standard, though not on this card.
That said, it is obviously vastly superior to Skaab Ruinator.
This. Keeping up 2BG every turn to prevent a fatty from attacking is a recipe for disaster. Manlands aren't made for playing defensive (unless you're Celestial Colonnade in a deck loaded with instant speed spells and mana sinks).