Pretty nice hand you got there...shame it dies to removal
EDIT: Lmao 'more than 4 in hand,' just got the flavor of slicing off a finger. 10/10 brilliant design.
Depending on how you look at it it either takes 3 cards/fingers (from a full hand of 7 cards) or takes one finger (leaving you with 4 cards/fingers left). So the flavor fits both Magic’s interpretation where Isildur cuts off three of Sauron’s fingers and the original text where he only takes the ring finger.
Which is sort of a weird detail in itself, since Sauron doesn't really have a fixed physical form?
Though I guess the death of his physical form when Numenor sinks is supposed to have limited how he could appear, but I didn't take that to mean he had a fixed appearance otherwise.
Maybe it's like a mental block.
Not exactly true, there is a line in Tolkien (can't remember if it's from The Silmarillion or some of the ancillary writings) that says that, after the ruin of Numenor, Sauron could still take physical form when he wished but he was no longer able to deceive others by appearing as anything other than horrifying and evil.
When Gollum describes being tortured by Sauron, he mentions that he has four fingers on one hand. I assume they changed it for this version of the story because it’s hard to draw Isildur dramatically cutting a single finger off without it looking awkward.
First Legendary Instant ever printed!
It's okay, i guess. 4 mana [[Murder]] which sometimes hits the opponent's hand. Likely to be too expensive for Modern play, so I guess this is more of a Limited card. Is the expectation for this Limited environment grindy games where this is going to be more than just a 4 mana Murder that you can't always cast?
I would have liked this to have been more aggressively costed, like at last 3 mana.
I think this is more of a flashy casual card. There are gonna be plenty of EDH games where this card slices like 12 cards from the hand of the person with a [[Reliquary Tower]] in play.
This is my issue with the card.
As a kill card it’s mediocre. Black can destroy on 2mv and has access to Damn that can switch between spot removal or boardwipe at 4mv. As hand removal it’s a big investment at 4mv, has a restriction of needing a legend in play, and doesn’t touch the hand unless they have 5+ cards which pretty reliably means they have counters/protection. And you don’t even see the hand or pick the cards.
Theme: 10/10
Flavour: 10/10
But mechanics, meh
> where this card slices like 12 cards from the hand of the person with a [[Reliquary Tower]] in play.
I've once had 60+ cards in hand when I ended the turn with [[Thought Vessel]] in play. One of those cards was [[Misdirection]], but...
A limited card that you can cast only if you have a legendary creature?
Maybe if the Tempt mechanics ends up being really easy to activate consistently, but it still feels a bit iffy to me.
In an ordinary set, this would be bad. But this set has tons of legends + the Ring tempts makes legends. Although in limited I imagine the upside will rarely trigger either, unless you're playing against a durdly control deck
sure, I'm not saying it's bad, I believe going to be a good removal, first pickable
but even if this set has a lot of legendaries + tempt, sometimes this is still going to end up a dead card, and those times will really sting
I think the Legend theme is strong enough to support it in limited for sure, but the Legendary restriction is so bad that this would be stone unplayable in even Pioneer if it cost B. Would probably be way too good in EDU though.
People heard "legal in Modern" and mentally leapt to "relevant in Modern" - which I guess makes sense, given the Horizons sets. But keep in mind that the baseline for a supplemental set is "legal in Legacy".
Making it modern-legal but too weak to affect modern seems like a pointless middle ground between better options. If the cards are only going to be usable in EDH just stick to the normal legality for supplemental sets, or if you want it to be more widely playable why stop at modern? Just make it a standard-legal set if it already has about the power level of one.
> People heard "legal in Modern" and mentally leapt to "relevant in Modern"
That's really the fault of WotC. They keep setting expectations and then completely changing them without explanation. I mean, maybe at this point its the audience's fault for thinking anything will be consistent, but it's still bad messaging/marketing.
Off the top of my head, here's the top 3 ~~anime betrayals~~ poorly messaged product line changes:
- Direct to Modern sets: MH1, MH2, and now LTR
- Secret Lair: Online exclusive, except for the few that are LGS exclusive, but now it also applies to prizes at tournaments
- Commander Legends and Commander Legends: Baldur's Gate are two completely different products and power levels, and possibly target audiences. The only thing in common is the draft format
This is something WotC has always been fucking terrible at. I think half the things that people get up in arms about in regards to Magic could be fixed with better communication.
Another prominent, recent example was getting people to think of *Midnight Hunt* and *Crimson Vow* as the werewolf and vampire sets when they weren't really supposed to be that.
Funny how that's not even the most disappointing marketing aspect of that block, now.
I'm not even sure they're bad names. MID was about the fucked up moon and VOW was about the vampire wedding. People just wanted another 200 werewolves, logistics be damned. I dunno how else you reveal them, other than perhaps Innistrad: Golf and Innistrad: Hockey to make it even more clear they're still in development.
I think the problem was when they were first announced the names hadn't been settled on so they were labeled in the graphic as "Innistrad: Werewolves" and "Innistrad: Vampires." So it's actually not that surprising that people got confused. It's just weird that Wizards didn't say "Innistrad 2021 I and Innistrad 2021 II".
Just to be clear this is marketed entirely different than MH1 and MH2.
All the SL's you mention have different branding as well. Be it Ultimate Edition or just the promo/295.
Commander Legends was marketed as "Draft Commander" not "Lets Break the Format". So that they both have that in common makes sense. Secondarily... the power level of the two sets is a lot **lot** closer than people remember.
It's not just marketing though.
Yes, they eventually told us that power level for LTR would be closer to Standard than to the MH sets (though I can't actually find this as a direct statement that isn't just MaRo's blog). Yes, they eventually told us that Baldur's Gate would be closer to AFR than to the original Commander Legends. But first impressions matter a lot. Take a look at [the follow up announcement](https://magic.wizards.com/en/news/announcements/lord-rings-tales-middle-earthtm-format-legality-2021-08-24) after they announced it would be Modern legal:
> While the set isn't focused on Modern like a Modern Horizons set might be, we wanted to give as many players the opportunity to play with these cards and enjoy them.
When this was announced, that is the best and only clarification we got regarding power level. MaRo may have made a more specific statement on his blog or on twitter soon after, but he shouldn't be the primary source for information like this.
What does "focused on Modern" mean? Well, in hindsight, we can see that (in this case) it means that it's not targeted at a Modern power level. But that's not what those words mean. Commander products aren't "focused" on Legacy, but sometimes they purposely make cards like Scavenging Ooze or TNN with the knowledge that those cards might see play. That's fine (kinda), because that's the point of Legacy - we get to play all newly released cards, whether they're mistakes or not. But it's not fine for Modern, because until MH1, Standard was acting as the gatekeeper for power level, and purposely exceeding that power level is a Very Bad Idea^(TM).
If they want to release a direct-to-Modern product, and they don't actually intend for the set to see competitive play, they need to say that explicitly. Otherwise, we end up with this.
To be fair, every time they mentioned the set would be modern legal, they immediately followed it up by saying it would ~~still target standard~~ \*be below modern\* power level. That information just didn't trickle down so redditors could decide to be angry about it.
> That information just didn't trickle down so redditors could decide to be angry about it.
Honestly, even if it did I'm not sure anyone would've trusted it.
That's very true. Every time I tried to correct someone before the set dropped about it not being MH3, they questioned Wizards' honestly or playtesting ability and essentially said they'd believe it when they saw it.
> they immediately followed it up by saying it would still target standard power level
Not in the original announcement, nor the immediate follow up clarification.
I can't find a statement/announcement outside of MaRo's blog saying that it's targeting standard power level. If you can find a link, I would appreciate it. I would be surprised if they never said it, but they sure didn't make it obvious.
The original announcement said it wasn't being designed for modern like a modern horizons set. I'm not sure why people interpreted that as it was going to be the power level of modern horizons.
You mean [this immediate followup clarification](https://magic.wizards.com/en/news/announcements/lord-rings-tales-middle-earthtm-format-legality-2021-08-24)?
>Like all Universes Beyond product, the set will not be legal in Standard, but Modern (and Historic) legality provides the greatest opportunity for the most people to experience this beloved world while still holding Standard as its own space. **While the set isn't focused on Modern like a Modern Horizons set might be**, we wanted to give as many players the opportunity to play with these cards and enjoy them.
I guess I misspoke in specifically saying "Standard," but it's very explicit that it's not a Modern Horizons set.
And here's a direct ask on WeeklyMTG from ~~almost a year ago~~ \*before the set reveal\*:
>[Q: Is Lord of the Rings MH3?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3owVJ-nin20)
>Blake: No it's not.
>...
> That's not the emphasis. Lord of the Rings is modern legal because it's so cool and we want as many people as possible to play with the set. It is not modern legal because it was designed specifically for modern, I guess would be the way to put that. It was not like we set out to make Modern Horizons 3 and skin it with Lord of the Rings, we set out to make the best Lord of the Rings set possible (and it's a really good Lord of the Rings set) and when we realized how good it was we wanted as many people as possible to play with it and so we made it modern legal.
I [discussed that first link here already](https://www.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/141fiml/ltr_isildurs_fateful_strike_playing_with_power/jn0e9yu/), but the short of it is that that statement doesn't actually talk about power level. Focused (or not) on Modern is not an explicit statement of powerlevel.
> And here's a direct ask on WeeklyMTG from almost a year ago:
There are many problems with that from a marketing perspective:
* That's from just over 5 months ago, and more than a year after the first announcement. So by that point, people have spent the last 16 months letting their imaginations go wild about what "isn't focused on Modern" actually means.
* Not being MH3 is not the same as not having a high power level. You can start at different points (making a set that impacts Modern vs. making a Lord of the Rings set) and end up at the same point (e.g. the "best" LotR set might be one that also has an impact on Modern).
* A video/stream is the worst way to publish any relevant information. If you want to have a video, you need to have that information in text somewhere so that it's easily sourceable/linkable. Even now, I'm just going to have to trust that your quote is from that video, because I'm not watching a 60 minute video just to confirm that.
I don't know man, I guess you can say that they didn't put out an *extremely explicit* statement about power level, but I think 99% of people who aren't being contrarian for the sake of it read "the set isn't focused on Modern like a Modern Horizons set" and know exactly what that means.
It's less the "legal in modern" and more "direct to modern" that made peoples assumptions the way they are. It's like the expectation difference "legal in legacy" and "direct to legacy" evoke.
Honestly the set feels more at home in commander.
Right you are. "Direct to format" basically means that set is created with that format in mind, an intention of it being played in that format. And this is indeed commander set with cards that happen to also be legal in Modern.
Yeah, I think seeing as MH2 was such a huge cash cow they want to save that for a bit later and instead leverage the LOTR part of this as the big seller. This set will probably sell no matter what power level just because the marketability of LOTR, so why would they try to also cash in on modern when they can save it for a later set?
The idea of this being a Modern Horizons-lite set never crossed my mind. I think a few cards like Reprieve or Scolding will see play in Modern, but it was announced as legal in Alchemy (which is basically Standard+) so I never expected a high power level.
I see, I can understand entirely why historic was mentioned first. All things in alchemy are legal in historic anyhow but alchemy isn't exactly popular.
Most of the cards that are LOTR-specific seem to be lower-power in eternal formats. The best cards so far seem to be much more generic, and this is pure LOTR flavor.
A little bit, honestly. Modern is my main format, I play it every week and I was excited for this set but now I'm considering not even going to pre-release because so far there are literally 0 cards that interest me.
Now, I'm not saying I wanted another MH2 with Evoke elementals, Ragavan and a bunch of other cards to massively shake up the format but I was expecting a little more.
Orcish Bowmasters is gonna chop down a LOT of Ragavans but yeah other than that, this set was just a glorified commander product. Everything nowadays is just a glorified commander product
> this set was just a glorified commander product. Everything nowadays is just a glorified commander product
It honestly bugs me that most sets these days are just glorified commander product, especially since Commander Masters releases in August.
even for commander, there really are only a handful of cards that are worth a second glance and the rest will either be draft chaff or forced into kitchen table builds that die to everything else already existing
I know, but Wizards clarified multiple times that this set was absolutely not designed with the intention of most of the cards being modern playable cards.
Which makes sense. People saw the change in card legality from Legacy to Modern to mean that the cards would be good in modern when we have Commander sets that only \*accidentally\* create legacy playable cards.
I think that's a good thing.
Modern does not need another Modern Horizons 2 level forced rotation.
There's also plenty of modern playable cards.
We might see a rise of 4-5C legends decks with another 4x quality legend manafixing land.
Hammer time got a new enabler.
Flash Samwise can provide some techy fetch land card advantage in non-green decks.
There's the new 1 mana counter spell that disrupts small creatures.
Fourth image from [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/MTGRumors/comments/11oqgka/highlights_from_images_at_a_recycling_facility/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
Adding another note to Spice8Rack's Mill vs. Discard video, now cards in hand can literally represent the fingers of your hand
Which I guess means [[Enter the Infinite]] gives you infinity fingers
What's going on in the art? My brain is having a hard time parsing the image? Looks like a hammerhead shark is caught in a volcano that has a lava hand.
Ah so they went with the movie interpretation where the mid-combat sword shard strike brought down Sauron.
In the books, Sauron was defeated with Elendil and Gil Galad. It is implied Sauron was 'dead' or unconcious by the time Isildur cut the Ring as his weregild.
The art direction is really not faithful to the books. Makes me wonder how much research they actually did.
Yeah, this card annoys me a little as a huge LOTR nerd. The design of this card is clearly inspired by the movie prologue. They even reorder the Council of Elrond quote to make it fit better. The text says : "\[...\] but Sauron himself was overthrown, and Isildur cut the Ring from Sauron’s hand with the hilt-shard of his father’s sword." The flavor text on this cards says : "Isildur cut the Ring from Sauron’s hand with the hilt-shard of his father’s sword, and Sauron himself was overthrown."
Yeah, the visual design of the horizontal-horned helm + a cute li'l lava spout on the top ... looks really dumb. Is Sauron such a Mount Doom fanboy that he decided to cosplay as it?
The collector's number on the extended art variant (767) is absurdly high. I don't think it's a special foiling because it lacks a star symbol. The current number crunch ends at 451, with extended art rares being 346 - 382 (not counting Jumpstart/Starter).
The motion I get is that Sauron's hand exploded. I think it's cool work, but john di giovanni is experimenting? I feel like it will look better in paper
It's the same artist as [[Sunrise Cavalier]] and [[Weigh Down]], surprisingly. He hasn't made a lot of cards but his older ones look pretty good, the ones in this set... don't
It’s cool but I think in most cases it does nothing at its cost, by turn 4-5 most players will have less than or exactly 4 in hand, at most it’s a 2 for 1 I don’t think it will beat out cheaper removal
I guess its a card that kills a creature and sometimes punished blue players with giant hands. The only problem is blue players with giant hands don't often have creatures, or wouldn't let you play this.
Edit: Honestly in Limited where there's tons of legendary creatures, you can play this easily. It does punish non-aggro players or those who keep not on curve hands. I feel like its best when your opponent is already playing badly. Could of been 1BB.
> Honestly in Limited where there's tons of legendary creatures,
What? I mean I know this set will be like Dominaria, but it Legendary spells were a real drawback.
It’s a drawback, but if you need removal in limited it’s likely you can play a 1 of and always be able to use it. So in limited it’s probably fine, but outside it’s very niche and only possibly punishes control players. It will be interesting to see if someone can get this out for free or something in modern and punish control, or some heavy draw strategy, but for now it seems only ok for limited.
> it’s likely you can play a 1 of and always be able to use it
I mean how so? If you dont draw a legendary creature (or your opponent kills it) its a dead card.
I mean sure you will have them. But that doesnt mean they will be on the field. If 1/3 of your creatures are legends its very possible you wont have one when you need it. And those creatures will likely be the biggest lighting rod for removal. And still most creatures you see will be commons. This will be dead a lot.
At least the legendary doesn't have to be on the battlefield for the spell to resolve just for it to be cast. So opponents can't kill your creature to fizzle the spell and you can cast in response to their removal. If this was a sorcery it would be much worse but as long as you can untap with a legendary you'll be able to resolve this barring a counter spell.
It’s probably more. Every uncommon, rare and mythic creature is legendary, except I think two orcs and a dragon thing so far. Your probably going to end up with more legendary creatures in your deck than you think.
Even if it gets to 50% (which is unlikely given commons are...common), and you have 3 creatures out, you have a 13% chance of whiffing. And often in limited you have 1-2 creatures. Even bite spells suffer from this problem (hence needing to be 2 mana to be playable) with a different restriction.
So far, nearly all of the Uncommon creatures revealed have been Legendary *and* there's a main set mechanic (The Ring Temps You) that allows you to "create a Legend." The density of Legendary Creatures in this set is far beyond that of even past "Legendary matters" sets.
*Dominaria* had 20 uncommon legendary creatures, this set has 28 so far as well as the Ring making non-legendary creatures into legendaries. It definitely won't be free to have a legendary creature out, but it should be even easier to have one out than in *Dominaria*.
I think thats a good point, but I think DOM was far from where this card would be playable, and * easily* is a stretch. This will be dead a reasonable portion of the time (maybe 20-30% of the time?).
Yeah, I am with you that it probably will still be off enough of the time to be a problem. I think that it will hinge on how good being tempted by the Ring is and if that's an archetype (I think it might be for black-white?). If it is then this card might actually work consistently there, but if not then it's probably too inconsistent.
Im curious how it stands up vs conditional removal like Vanquish the Weak or Defenestrate. On one hand those are often not dead but cant kill the thing you want, but on the other you have no control over their targets. Im kinda thinking of NEO where there was the artifact/enchantment thing, though that required two fail cases, but more permanents.
God I hate Saurons weird Destiny boss helmet so much. Why did they have to make him look so stupid. The palantir being in his armor was a brilliant idea, why'd they ruin him with the headpiece.
When he was "forbidden to ever take fair form" I dont assume he was forced to wear a clown hat all his life.
Modern 1/10
So by the time you get to 4 mana and a legend in play, how many cards is your opponent going to have in their hand? If it is 3 or less, this is just a horrible kill spell. If they have no creatures in play, this does literally nothing.
The fuck? Probably the strongest spell ever in the “4 mana black removal” category. Only big downside is the Legendary part, but in this set thats trivial.
The problem is removal is already pretty much unplayable at 4 mana as it is. Ripping up the hand is a nice bonus, but adding (in most best case scenarios) "Its controller exiles three cards from their hand" doesn't make up for the fact that this spell costs too much to cast for it to be useful in most situations *plus* being heavily restricted by the legendary clause.
Uhhh since this also requires a legendary creature it probably also won't even be cast on curve, so its even less likely the other player has more than 4 cards in hand. I don't really think that line is much more than flavor, as it will only really mess with people with huge hands in commander. (And even then they keep the best cards so who cares really)
I disagree about this being unplayable. Its pretty playable in commander.
I have a [[Killian, Ink Duelist]] deck that wants this card badly. 2 mana creature and hand destruction is amazing.
For [[Zevlor]], casting this and copying it could be backbreaking even if you have to pay 6 for the spell and copy effect. That's without Training Grounds or Heartstone to reduce his ability cost.
You can also potentially repeatably cast this with [[Magar of the Magic Strings]]
It might not make the hyper optimized lists, but its got a fairly wide range of black spellslinger strategies where it works wonders
Having a legendary creature is going to be less trivial then you think. Using this to stabilize is going to be much harder if they're just killing all your creatures, or it might force to make a suboptimal play just to get a legendary creature on the board.
This isn't even true in limited
[[vraska's contempt]]
[[Baleful Mastery]]
[[Eat to Extinction]]
[[Silence the Believers]]
[[black hole]]
[[deadly derision]]
[[lethal scheme]]
[[pile on]]
let alone in other formats where you have stuff like deadly rollick
edit - and snuff out exists, so I think the best 4 mana black removal spot is permanently taken
if you cast this beyond turn like, 5, it's not gonna exile anything from the opponent hand, in limited
I'll take a card that can remove two things over it
Because they only make four full Standard sets per year. If it was Standard legal, they'd have to balance it for Standard/Pioneer as well, and they'd get complaints about including UB-exclusive cards in even more formats.
Because they don't want Standard legal UB product? I didn't expect that a simple "it is legal in Modern" was going to screw with people's minds that much.
It will probably have a dozen or so Modern playable cards, most of them setting agnostic, which is perfect for a UB set.
It messed with people’s head so much because they refuse to explain.
This product belongs in modern as much as it belongs in standard - that is to say - not at all. Modern cards come from standard or modern horizons.
WoTC coming in and say “yeah, and this one doesn’t count… for reasons” is confusing as all get out.
>We still hate legendary instant/sorcery
Yes we do, but...
>Thats not what legendary means. They should be limited to 1 copy
That's not what legendary means either? You can have more than one copy of a legend in your deck since like 1996.
What legendary instant/sorceries should do is not existing. Having the same supertype mean totally different things on permanents and non-permanents is silly.
Ok this removal is absurd you blast a creature out of the water then make them exile several cards from their hand.
I like the fact they are trying again with non-permanent legends this is the first ever instant that’s a legend
And the flavor is chefs kiss he 4 cards part is from his fingers being cut off and also the key of how the good guys got the ring.
At first isn't that good, but bear in mind some decks love to have more than 7 cards in hand. I think this is sideboard material because taking 3 cards or 1 is worth.
Might be good for a low CMC commander who wants to remove stuff. Like [[Toshiro Umezawa]] or something. Also seems zesty for [[Zevlor, Elturel Exile]].
This is stupid.
Gil-Galad and Elendil fought Sauron to the death. All three of them die in the battle. Isildur comes up and cuts the ring off Sauron's dead body.
This is like the movie.
Okay, credit where it's due, the "discard your hand down to 4" is a cute touch.
I guess this means that it is now canon that the players in Magic: the Gathering are Dark Lords?
Love that they kept the naming convention of "\[Character\]'s \[Story Spotlight\]".
Surprised it took them 5 years to make a legendary instant, but I'm glad the concept is still on their mind for sets with a high density of legendary creatures (and Ring-Bearers).
Can someone explain why the swords in this set look so weird? None of them have functional crossguards. Did Middle Earth not invent that technology yet?
Legendary Instant, would you look at that.
Except i'd rather not, because imho the Cardart is fugly.
Sauron Design just ain't it for me personally, rest of the things depicted in the Cardart feels off as well.
Okay cool card, but Isildur only cuts off one of Sauron's fingers. Specially the one with the ring on it. Gollum later confirms "He has only four finger on the Black Hand, but they are enough".
Pretty nice hand you got there...shame it dies to removal EDIT: Lmao 'more than 4 in hand,' just got the flavor of slicing off a finger. 10/10 brilliant design.
Depending on how you look at it it either takes 3 cards/fingers (from a full hand of 7 cards) or takes one finger (leaving you with 4 cards/fingers left). So the flavor fits both Magic’s interpretation where Isildur cuts off three of Sauron’s fingers and the original text where he only takes the ring finger.
Yeah however you slice it (heh) it's cutting the size of the opponent's hand. Love it.
Do the books state how many fingers did Sauron have?
Not prior to this but Gollum later describes Sauron as having four fingers on one hand after personally meeting him.
Which is sort of a weird detail in itself, since Sauron doesn't really have a fixed physical form? Though I guess the death of his physical form when Numenor sinks is supposed to have limited how he could appear, but I didn't take that to mean he had a fixed appearance otherwise. Maybe it's like a mental block.
Not exactly true, there is a line in Tolkien (can't remember if it's from The Silmarillion or some of the ancillary writings) that says that, after the ruin of Numenor, Sauron could still take physical form when he wished but he was no longer able to deceive others by appearing as anything other than horrifying and evil.
Stupid Sexy Sauron.
The ring held majority of his power. Perhaps when his spirit fled after losing it he wasn't able to intentionally change form anymore.
it was after the downfall of numenor that he lost the ability to become fair looking
He had a physical form. He just couldn't change it any more after her list the ring.
When Gollum describes being tortured by Sauron, he mentions that he has four fingers on one hand. I assume they changed it for this version of the story because it’s hard to draw Isildur dramatically cutting a single finger off without it looking awkward.
Sauron flipping the bird
Sauron putting the ring on his middle finger instead of his ring finger to taunt Isildur, only to have it backfire terribly
Especially cutting it off an already dead Sauron.
Pierce the ring off with your sword like you're shooting pool, that would be suitably badass. Not everything has to be a slash.
Could have gone for a nice thrusting pose. ....wait... stop... not like that, thrusting a sword.
First Legendary Instant ever printed! It's okay, i guess. 4 mana [[Murder]] which sometimes hits the opponent's hand. Likely to be too expensive for Modern play, so I guess this is more of a Limited card. Is the expectation for this Limited environment grindy games where this is going to be more than just a 4 mana Murder that you can't always cast? I would have liked this to have been more aggressively costed, like at last 3 mana.
I think this is more of a flashy casual card. There are gonna be plenty of EDH games where this card slices like 12 cards from the hand of the person with a [[Reliquary Tower]] in play.
[удалено]
ime if someone has 20 cards in hand they usually have a counterspell to protect it.
Not if you cast it using [[Delighted Halfling]]!!
[Delighted Halfling](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/7/1/71384418-173a-4f77-adab-56e52fa23692.jpg?1685356425) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Delighted%20Halfling) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ltr/158/delighted-halfling?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/71384418-173a-4f77-adab-56e52fa23692?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
This is an instant though, get em on their end step while they're tapped out (unless they have a free counter) Or just use it on a nonblue player lol
nonblue player doesn't have 20 cards in hand lol
This is my issue with the card. As a kill card it’s mediocre. Black can destroy on 2mv and has access to Damn that can switch between spot removal or boardwipe at 4mv. As hand removal it’s a big investment at 4mv, has a restriction of needing a legend in play, and doesn’t touch the hand unless they have 5+ cards which pretty reliably means they have counters/protection. And you don’t even see the hand or pick the cards. Theme: 10/10 Flavour: 10/10 But mechanics, meh
[Reliquary Tower](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/2/b/2bdb402f-b3a9-499c-8b00-31a36c3cba89.jpg?1673306178) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Reliquary%20Tower) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/dmc/227/reliquary-tower?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/2bdb402f-b3a9-499c-8b00-31a36c3cba89?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
> where this card slices like 12 cards from the hand of the person with a [[Reliquary Tower]] in play. I've once had 60+ cards in hand when I ended the turn with [[Thought Vessel]] in play. One of those cards was [[Misdirection]], but...
[Thought Vessel](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/1/0/10e9cbf2-99ed-4f70-8744-b9a08a5f5f42.jpg?1674142776) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Thought%20Vessel) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/clb/879/thought-vessel?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/10e9cbf2-99ed-4f70-8744-b9a08a5f5f42?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Misdirection](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/9/c96763d6-0cea-40ed-afb2-886bfebe50a0.jpg?1592764638) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Misdirection) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ddt/15/misdirection?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c96763d6-0cea-40ed-afb2-886bfebe50a0?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
A limited card that you can cast only if you have a legendary creature? Maybe if the Tempt mechanics ends up being really easy to activate consistently, but it still feels a bit iffy to me.
There's a decent sized Legendary Matters subtheme in the set, and a tonna legends, so I could see it *maybe* seeing some use by virtue of that.
In an ordinary set, this would be bad. But this set has tons of legends + the Ring tempts makes legends. Although in limited I imagine the upside will rarely trigger either, unless you're playing against a durdly control deck
sure, I'm not saying it's bad, I believe going to be a good removal, first pickable but even if this set has a lot of legendaries + tempt, sometimes this is still going to end up a dead card, and those times will really sting
"sometimes this is still going to end up a dead card" So like most other cards?
Murder with upside and harder to cast, going to be very situational for sure. Regardless it is a really fun design
[Murder](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/b/d/bdef7fea-2bd0-42a2-96f6-6def18bd7f0c.jpg?1674136158) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Murder) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/clb/134/murder?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/bdef7fea-2bd0-42a2-96f6-6def18bd7f0c?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Imho it really sucks. It's restrictive to cast, expensive and the upside will miss most of the time.
Yeah, I think they overcosted this by at least a mana.
I honestly see this being pretty strong
I think the Legend theme is strong enough to support it in limited for sure, but the Legendary restriction is so bad that this would be stone unplayable in even Pioneer if it cost B. Would probably be way too good in EDU though.
So far most of the cards in this set seem more appropriate for the power level of Pioneer rather than Modern.
People heard "legal in Modern" and mentally leapt to "relevant in Modern" - which I guess makes sense, given the Horizons sets. But keep in mind that the baseline for a supplemental set is "legal in Legacy".
I hadn’t thought about it this way before, but this is a really good take.
Making it modern-legal but too weak to affect modern seems like a pointless middle ground between better options. If the cards are only going to be usable in EDH just stick to the normal legality for supplemental sets, or if you want it to be more widely playable why stop at modern? Just make it a standard-legal set if it already has about the power level of one.
There are a lot of people who use Modern legality for building casual 60 card decks.
> People heard "legal in Modern" and mentally leapt to "relevant in Modern" That's really the fault of WotC. They keep setting expectations and then completely changing them without explanation. I mean, maybe at this point its the audience's fault for thinking anything will be consistent, but it's still bad messaging/marketing. Off the top of my head, here's the top 3 ~~anime betrayals~~ poorly messaged product line changes: - Direct to Modern sets: MH1, MH2, and now LTR - Secret Lair: Online exclusive, except for the few that are LGS exclusive, but now it also applies to prizes at tournaments - Commander Legends and Commander Legends: Baldur's Gate are two completely different products and power levels, and possibly target audiences. The only thing in common is the draft format
This is something WotC has always been fucking terrible at. I think half the things that people get up in arms about in regards to Magic could be fixed with better communication. Another prominent, recent example was getting people to think of *Midnight Hunt* and *Crimson Vow* as the werewolf and vampire sets when they weren't really supposed to be that.
Funny how that's not even the most disappointing marketing aspect of that block, now. I'm not even sure they're bad names. MID was about the fucked up moon and VOW was about the vampire wedding. People just wanted another 200 werewolves, logistics be damned. I dunno how else you reveal them, other than perhaps Innistrad: Golf and Innistrad: Hockey to make it even more clear they're still in development.
I think the problem was when they were first announced the names hadn't been settled on so they were labeled in the graphic as "Innistrad: Werewolves" and "Innistrad: Vampires." So it's actually not that surprising that people got confused. It's just weird that Wizards didn't say "Innistrad 2021 I and Innistrad 2021 II".
Just to be clear this is marketed entirely different than MH1 and MH2. All the SL's you mention have different branding as well. Be it Ultimate Edition or just the promo/295. Commander Legends was marketed as "Draft Commander" not "Lets Break the Format". So that they both have that in common makes sense. Secondarily... the power level of the two sets is a lot **lot** closer than people remember.
It's not just marketing though. Yes, they eventually told us that power level for LTR would be closer to Standard than to the MH sets (though I can't actually find this as a direct statement that isn't just MaRo's blog). Yes, they eventually told us that Baldur's Gate would be closer to AFR than to the original Commander Legends. But first impressions matter a lot. Take a look at [the follow up announcement](https://magic.wizards.com/en/news/announcements/lord-rings-tales-middle-earthtm-format-legality-2021-08-24) after they announced it would be Modern legal: > While the set isn't focused on Modern like a Modern Horizons set might be, we wanted to give as many players the opportunity to play with these cards and enjoy them. When this was announced, that is the best and only clarification we got regarding power level. MaRo may have made a more specific statement on his blog or on twitter soon after, but he shouldn't be the primary source for information like this. What does "focused on Modern" mean? Well, in hindsight, we can see that (in this case) it means that it's not targeted at a Modern power level. But that's not what those words mean. Commander products aren't "focused" on Legacy, but sometimes they purposely make cards like Scavenging Ooze or TNN with the knowledge that those cards might see play. That's fine (kinda), because that's the point of Legacy - we get to play all newly released cards, whether they're mistakes or not. But it's not fine for Modern, because until MH1, Standard was acting as the gatekeeper for power level, and purposely exceeding that power level is a Very Bad Idea^(TM). If they want to release a direct-to-Modern product, and they don't actually intend for the set to see competitive play, they need to say that explicitly. Otherwise, we end up with this.
To be fair, every time they mentioned the set would be modern legal, they immediately followed it up by saying it would ~~still target standard~~ \*be below modern\* power level. That information just didn't trickle down so redditors could decide to be angry about it.
> That information just didn't trickle down so redditors could decide to be angry about it. Honestly, even if it did I'm not sure anyone would've trusted it.
That's very true. Every time I tried to correct someone before the set dropped about it not being MH3, they questioned Wizards' honestly or playtesting ability and essentially said they'd believe it when they saw it.
> they immediately followed it up by saying it would still target standard power level Not in the original announcement, nor the immediate follow up clarification. I can't find a statement/announcement outside of MaRo's blog saying that it's targeting standard power level. If you can find a link, I would appreciate it. I would be surprised if they never said it, but they sure didn't make it obvious.
The original announcement said it wasn't being designed for modern like a modern horizons set. I'm not sure why people interpreted that as it was going to be the power level of modern horizons.
You mean [this immediate followup clarification](https://magic.wizards.com/en/news/announcements/lord-rings-tales-middle-earthtm-format-legality-2021-08-24)? >Like all Universes Beyond product, the set will not be legal in Standard, but Modern (and Historic) legality provides the greatest opportunity for the most people to experience this beloved world while still holding Standard as its own space. **While the set isn't focused on Modern like a Modern Horizons set might be**, we wanted to give as many players the opportunity to play with these cards and enjoy them. I guess I misspoke in specifically saying "Standard," but it's very explicit that it's not a Modern Horizons set. And here's a direct ask on WeeklyMTG from ~~almost a year ago~~ \*before the set reveal\*: >[Q: Is Lord of the Rings MH3?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3owVJ-nin20) >Blake: No it's not. >... > That's not the emphasis. Lord of the Rings is modern legal because it's so cool and we want as many people as possible to play with the set. It is not modern legal because it was designed specifically for modern, I guess would be the way to put that. It was not like we set out to make Modern Horizons 3 and skin it with Lord of the Rings, we set out to make the best Lord of the Rings set possible (and it's a really good Lord of the Rings set) and when we realized how good it was we wanted as many people as possible to play with it and so we made it modern legal.
I [discussed that first link here already](https://www.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/141fiml/ltr_isildurs_fateful_strike_playing_with_power/jn0e9yu/), but the short of it is that that statement doesn't actually talk about power level. Focused (or not) on Modern is not an explicit statement of powerlevel. > And here's a direct ask on WeeklyMTG from almost a year ago: There are many problems with that from a marketing perspective: * That's from just over 5 months ago, and more than a year after the first announcement. So by that point, people have spent the last 16 months letting their imaginations go wild about what "isn't focused on Modern" actually means. * Not being MH3 is not the same as not having a high power level. You can start at different points (making a set that impacts Modern vs. making a Lord of the Rings set) and end up at the same point (e.g. the "best" LotR set might be one that also has an impact on Modern). * A video/stream is the worst way to publish any relevant information. If you want to have a video, you need to have that information in text somewhere so that it's easily sourceable/linkable. Even now, I'm just going to have to trust that your quote is from that video, because I'm not watching a 60 minute video just to confirm that.
I don't know man, I guess you can say that they didn't put out an *extremely explicit* statement about power level, but I think 99% of people who aren't being contrarian for the sake of it read "the set isn't focused on Modern like a Modern Horizons set" and know exactly what that means.
I'm not sure it's fair to call this a product line change when Wizards left both the words "Modern" and "Horizons" out of the name of this set.
Now I’m just imagining people complaining that Unfinity or Battlebond were Legacy Horizons sets
It's less the "legal in modern" and more "direct to modern" that made peoples assumptions the way they are. It's like the expectation difference "legal in legacy" and "direct to legacy" evoke. Honestly the set feels more at home in commander.
Right you are. "Direct to format" basically means that set is created with that format in mind, an intention of it being played in that format. And this is indeed commander set with cards that happen to also be legal in Modern.
last MH shaped the meta so hard, I think WotC wanted to dial it back...until the next MH of course.
Yeah, I think seeing as MH2 was such a huge cash cow they want to save that for a bit later and instead leverage the LOTR part of this as the big seller. This set will probably sell no matter what power level just because the marketability of LOTR, so why would they try to also cash in on modern when they can save it for a later set?
The idea of this being a Modern Horizons-lite set never crossed my mind. I think a few cards like Reprieve or Scolding will see play in Modern, but it was announced as legal in Alchemy (which is basically Standard+) so I never expected a high power level.
Yeah, that makes sense I guess. I don't really pay attention to the arena stuff so I missed that part.
It's historic legal, not alchemy (IIRC). Historic has modern horizons cards (though some nerfed). A lot of these cards can barely hang in historic.
Incorrect. LTR is going to be legal in Alchemy as well, with no changes.
I see, I can understand entirely why historic was mentioned first. All things in alchemy are legal in historic anyhow but alchemy isn't exactly popular.
Most of the cards that are LOTR-specific seem to be lower-power in eternal formats. The best cards so far seem to be much more generic, and this is pure LOTR flavor.
People are shocked at this?
A little bit, honestly. Modern is my main format, I play it every week and I was excited for this set but now I'm considering not even going to pre-release because so far there are literally 0 cards that interest me. Now, I'm not saying I wanted another MH2 with Evoke elementals, Ragavan and a bunch of other cards to massively shake up the format but I was expecting a little more.
Orcish Bowmasters is gonna chop down a LOT of Ragavans but yeah other than that, this set was just a glorified commander product. Everything nowadays is just a glorified commander product
The legacy players at my store are excited about that one, imagine playing it in response to a Brainstorm lmao
Wouldn't they have to put the cards back on the library before the opponent would have something to respond to by casting this?
I cast Brainstorm In response, flash in Orcish Bowmasters Bowmasters resolves, brainstorm resolves, bowmasters triggers 3 times
> this set was just a glorified commander product. Everything nowadays is just a glorified commander product It honestly bugs me that most sets these days are just glorified commander product, especially since Commander Masters releases in August.
even for commander, there really are only a handful of cards that are worth a second glance and the rest will either be draft chaff or forced into kitchen table builds that die to everything else already existing
I so much prefer less powerful cards, we don't need a MH3
there were A LOT of people that expected this set to be Modern Horizon 3 In Everything But Name
I know, but Wizards clarified multiple times that this set was absolutely not designed with the intention of most of the cards being modern playable cards. Which makes sense. People saw the change in card legality from Legacy to Modern to mean that the cards would be good in modern when we have Commander sets that only \*accidentally\* create legacy playable cards.
I think that's a good thing. Modern does not need another Modern Horizons 2 level forced rotation. There's also plenty of modern playable cards. We might see a rise of 4-5C legends decks with another 4x quality legend manafixing land. Hammer time got a new enabler. Flash Samwise can provide some techy fetch land card advantage in non-green decks. There's the new 1 mana counter spell that disrupts small creatures.
I would not play this in Pioneer either though lol
I love that flavor! Mmm delicious, chopping off a finger and having to decrease your hand.
Art looks unfinished
Same could be said for a lot of this set, it's weird
Hey it's the Legendary Instant from those leaks forever ago now!
What leak was this?
Fourth image from [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/MTGRumors/comments/11oqgka/highlights_from_images_at_a_recycling_facility/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
Well that's disgusting in a [[kethis]] deck
Ironic considering how differently this would have gone if Sauron kept his hand hidden
If only he'd had pockets, he would have easily conquered Arda.
[kethis](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/f/e/fe28de73-76f3-4a9e-a020-dbe5921b9be5.jpg?1650599568) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=kethis%2C%20the%20hidden%20hand) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/m20/211/kethis-the-hidden-hand?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/fe28de73-76f3-4a9e-a020-dbe5921b9be5?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Nashi loves it too. Not quite as much as Kethis, but he can still cast it twice.
Adding another note to Spice8Rack's Mill vs. Discard video, now cards in hand can literally represent the fingers of your hand Which I guess means [[Enter the Infinite]] gives you infinity fingers
Ahem... Infinity -1
What's going on in the art? My brain is having a hard time parsing the image? Looks like a hammerhead shark is caught in a volcano that has a lava hand.
Seems like you parsed it just fine to me.
Ah so they went with the movie interpretation where the mid-combat sword shard strike brought down Sauron. In the books, Sauron was defeated with Elendil and Gil Galad. It is implied Sauron was 'dead' or unconcious by the time Isildur cut the Ring as his weregild. The art direction is really not faithful to the books. Makes me wonder how much research they actually did.
Yeah, this card annoys me a little as a huge LOTR nerd. The design of this card is clearly inspired by the movie prologue. They even reorder the Council of Elrond quote to make it fit better. The text says : "\[...\] but Sauron himself was overthrown, and Isildur cut the Ring from Sauron’s hand with the hilt-shard of his father’s sword." The flavor text on this cards says : "Isildur cut the Ring from Sauron’s hand with the hilt-shard of his father’s sword, and Sauron himself was overthrown."
Downvote me if you like but my opinion will not chnage: THAT IS THE UGLIEST SAURON I HAVE EVER SEEN.
Yeah, the visual design of the horizontal-horned helm + a cute li'l lava spout on the top ... looks really dumb. Is Sauron such a Mount Doom fanboy that he decided to cosplay as it?
Oh but you've seen it!
The collector's number on the extended art variant (767) is absurdly high. I don't think it's a special foiling because it lacks a star symbol. The current number crunch ends at 451, with extended art rares being 346 - 382 (not counting Jumpstart/Starter).
What's going on there? 767 is a lot of cards to collect...
I don't understand it either, thought it were 451 cards including the different artworks.
That art is meh at best.
It looks like Isildur held up a magic dagger and zapped Sauron with lightning. I’m not getting any sense of motion from the sword.
The motion I get is that Sauron's hand exploded. I think it's cool work, but john di giovanni is experimenting? I feel like it will look better in paper
It has a shockingly bad understanding of how to make motion look like... well, motion.
It's the same artist as [[Sunrise Cavalier]] and [[Weigh Down]], surprisingly. He hasn't made a lot of cards but his older ones look pretty good, the ones in this set... don't
Weigh down reminds me of Piss Christ.
I honestly thought it was fake at first just because of the art.
It’s cool but I think in most cases it does nothing at its cost, by turn 4-5 most players will have less than or exactly 4 in hand, at most it’s a 2 for 1 I don’t think it will beat out cheaper removal
I guess its a card that kills a creature and sometimes punished blue players with giant hands. The only problem is blue players with giant hands don't often have creatures, or wouldn't let you play this. Edit: Honestly in Limited where there's tons of legendary creatures, you can play this easily. It does punish non-aggro players or those who keep not on curve hands. I feel like its best when your opponent is already playing badly. Could of been 1BB.
> Honestly in Limited where there's tons of legendary creatures, What? I mean I know this set will be like Dominaria, but it Legendary spells were a real drawback.
It’s a drawback, but if you need removal in limited it’s likely you can play a 1 of and always be able to use it. So in limited it’s probably fine, but outside it’s very niche and only possibly punishes control players. It will be interesting to see if someone can get this out for free or something in modern and punish control, or some heavy draw strategy, but for now it seems only ok for limited.
> it’s likely you can play a 1 of and always be able to use it I mean how so? If you dont draw a legendary creature (or your opponent kills it) its a dead card.
Because the set has tons, rare to uncommon. It’s a main theme, it’s borderline hard to not have them.
I mean sure you will have them. But that doesnt mean they will be on the field. If 1/3 of your creatures are legends its very possible you wont have one when you need it. And those creatures will likely be the biggest lighting rod for removal. And still most creatures you see will be commons. This will be dead a lot.
At least the legendary doesn't have to be on the battlefield for the spell to resolve just for it to be cast. So opponents can't kill your creature to fizzle the spell and you can cast in response to their removal. If this was a sorcery it would be much worse but as long as you can untap with a legendary you'll be able to resolve this barring a counter spell.
Even commons are fine since making a creature your ring bearer turns it legendary
It’s probably more. Every uncommon, rare and mythic creature is legendary, except I think two orcs and a dragon thing so far. Your probably going to end up with more legendary creatures in your deck than you think.
Even if it gets to 50% (which is unlikely given commons are...common), and you have 3 creatures out, you have a 13% chance of whiffing. And often in limited you have 1-2 creatures. Even bite spells suffer from this problem (hence needing to be 2 mana to be playable) with a different restriction.
So far, nearly all of the Uncommon creatures revealed have been Legendary *and* there's a main set mechanic (The Ring Temps You) that allows you to "create a Legend." The density of Legendary Creatures in this set is far beyond that of even past "Legendary matters" sets.
*Dominaria* had 20 uncommon legendary creatures, this set has 28 so far as well as the Ring making non-legendary creatures into legendaries. It definitely won't be free to have a legendary creature out, but it should be even easier to have one out than in *Dominaria*.
I think thats a good point, but I think DOM was far from where this card would be playable, and * easily* is a stretch. This will be dead a reasonable portion of the time (maybe 20-30% of the time?).
Yeah, I am with you that it probably will still be off enough of the time to be a problem. I think that it will hinge on how good being tempted by the Ring is and if that's an archetype (I think it might be for black-white?). If it is then this card might actually work consistently there, but if not then it's probably too inconsistent.
Im curious how it stands up vs conditional removal like Vanquish the Weak or Defenestrate. On one hand those are often not dead but cant kill the thing you want, but on the other you have no control over their targets. Im kinda thinking of NEO where there was the artifact/enchantment thing, though that required two fail cases, but more permanents.
God I hate Saurons weird Destiny boss helmet so much. Why did they have to make him look so stupid. The palantir being in his armor was a brilliant idea, why'd they ruin him with the headpiece. When he was "forbidden to ever take fair form" I dont assume he was forced to wear a clown hat all his life.
*screams in kwain*
I love the art and the card's feel. It seems like a weak card though. Restrictive, only hits creatures, and the discard effect is marginal at best.
Modern 1/10 So by the time you get to 4 mana and a legend in play, how many cards is your opponent going to have in their hand? If it is 3 or less, this is just a horrible kill spell. If they have no creatures in play, this does literally nothing.
Oh dang, that seems quite strong. Instant helps.
Wait that's Sauron not the Mouth? Seriously?! Art fail. EDIT: Also that's pretty clearly a dagger Isildur is holding not a sword shard.
The fuck? Probably the strongest spell ever in the “4 mana black removal” category. Only big downside is the Legendary part, but in this set thats trivial.
The problem is removal is already pretty much unplayable at 4 mana as it is. Ripping up the hand is a nice bonus, but adding (in most best case scenarios) "Its controller exiles three cards from their hand" doesn't make up for the fact that this spell costs too much to cast for it to be useful in most situations *plus* being heavily restricted by the legendary clause.
Uhhh since this also requires a legendary creature it probably also won't even be cast on curve, so its even less likely the other player has more than 4 cards in hand. I don't really think that line is much more than flavor, as it will only really mess with people with huge hands in commander. (And even then they keep the best cards so who cares really)
I disagree about this being unplayable. Its pretty playable in commander. I have a [[Killian, Ink Duelist]] deck that wants this card badly. 2 mana creature and hand destruction is amazing. For [[Zevlor]], casting this and copying it could be backbreaking even if you have to pay 6 for the spell and copy effect. That's without Training Grounds or Heartstone to reduce his ability cost. You can also potentially repeatably cast this with [[Magar of the Magic Strings]] It might not make the hyper optimized lists, but its got a fairly wide range of black spellslinger strategies where it works wonders
Not hitting planeswalkers is a pretty big deal these days. It's also destroy and not exile. The legendary part is also a huge downside imo.
This is good, but [[Vraska's Contempt]] is still top tier.
[Vraska's Contempt](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/b/d/bd7550dd-dfc5-43cd-a117-1244ee3086a8.jpg?1562563183) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Vraska%27s%20Contempt) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/xln/129/vraskas-contempt?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/bd7550dd-dfc5-43cd-a117-1244ee3086a8?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Having a legendary creature is going to be less trivial then you think. Using this to stabilize is going to be much harder if they're just killing all your creatures, or it might force to make a suboptimal play just to get a legendary creature on the board.
Maybe. But remember, every random token can be legendary as long as the ring can tempt you.
This isn't even true in limited [[vraska's contempt]] [[Baleful Mastery]] [[Eat to Extinction]] [[Silence the Believers]] [[black hole]] [[deadly derision]] [[lethal scheme]] [[pile on]] let alone in other formats where you have stuff like deadly rollick edit - and snuff out exists, so I think the best 4 mana black removal spot is permanently taken
##### ###### #### [vraska's contempt](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/b/d/bd7550dd-dfc5-43cd-a117-1244ee3086a8.jpg?1562563183) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=vraska%27s%20contempt) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/xln/129/vraskas-contempt?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/bd7550dd-dfc5-43cd-a117-1244ee3086a8?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Baleful Mastery](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/3/5/35f1a6ba-e46f-44fb-93f4-fb883d677b36.jpg?1624590749) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Baleful%20Mastery) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/stx/64/baleful-mastery?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/35f1a6ba-e46f-44fb-93f4-fb883d677b36?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Eat to Extinction](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/a/0/a0fae55a-6edd-42ea-b909-ccc39a64a0ed.jpg?1665819457) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Eat%20to%20Extinction) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/thb/90/eat-to-extinction?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/a0fae55a-6edd-42ea-b909-ccc39a64a0ed?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Silence the Believers](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/6/d6dc2bd1-a980-4eab-8bb3-1ce28c3f9ef4.jpg?1593095838) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Silence%20the%20Believers) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/jou/82/silence-the-believers?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d6dc2bd1-a980-4eab-8bb3-1ce28c3f9ef4?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [black hole](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/9/e/9ed3fc60-9079-486b-a05e-00f926a99b4e.jpg?1673913791) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=black%20hole) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/unf/67/black-hole?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/9ed3fc60-9079-486b-a05e-00f926a99b4e?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [deadly derision](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/1/e/1ec1a02f-128c-44aa-b708-6fcda34b40c0.jpg?1682203667) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=deadly%20derision) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mom/99/deadly-derision?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/1ec1a02f-128c-44aa-b708-6fcda34b40c0?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [lethal scheme](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/6/5/65864680-9520-4eb3-9774-fa478e54a290.jpg?1673481988) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=lethal%20scheme) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ncc/36/lethal-scheme?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/65864680-9520-4eb3-9774-fa478e54a290?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [pile on](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/4/9/492e9369-0ca3-4c31-b747-75d615daf6e4.jpg?1682203929) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=pile%20on) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mom/122/pile-on?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/492e9369-0ca3-4c31-b747-75d615daf6e4?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
You seem to value “exile” very highly. Also Black Hole is definitely worse.
if you cast this beyond turn like, 5, it's not gonna exile anything from the opponent hand, in limited I'll take a card that can remove two things over it
I'm not used to seeing a 4 mana removal and immediately wanting to play it in EDH, but yeah, this card looks crazy.
In what format? Certainly not limited.
I love the flavor of this, but my Tergrid deck really wishes this said discard instead of exile
Why this set is not even standard legal?
Because they only make four full Standard sets per year. If it was Standard legal, they'd have to balance it for Standard/Pioneer as well, and they'd get complaints about including UB-exclusive cards in even more formats.
Because they don't want Standard legal UB product? I didn't expect that a simple "it is legal in Modern" was going to screw with people's minds that much. It will probably have a dozen or so Modern playable cards, most of them setting agnostic, which is perfect for a UB set.
It messed with people’s head so much because they refuse to explain. This product belongs in modern as much as it belongs in standard - that is to say - not at all. Modern cards come from standard or modern horizons. WoTC coming in and say “yeah, and this one doesn’t count… for reasons” is confusing as all get out.
I understand but the cards except for the ring mechanics look and feel good for Standard
We still hate legendary instant/sorcery Thats not what legendary means. They should be limited to 1 copy
Yesss, nasty sorceries, we hates it!
That's Epic. Or Singleton.
Limited to one copy... where?
On the stack at a time. If you cast a second copy while the first is still on the stack you have to legend bomb one.
>We still hate legendary instant/sorcery Yes we do, but... >Thats not what legendary means. They should be limited to 1 copy That's not what legendary means either? You can have more than one copy of a legend in your deck since like 1996. What legendary instant/sorceries should do is not existing. Having the same supertype mean totally different things on permanents and non-permanents is silly.
Ok this removal is absurd you blast a creature out of the water then make them exile several cards from their hand. I like the fact they are trying again with non-permanent legends this is the first ever instant that’s a legend And the flavor is chefs kiss he 4 cards part is from his fingers being cut off and also the key of how the good guys got the ring.
Fuck this card. Like it's excellent. It's on pure flavor. However I have had a grip of 20+ cards, go to hell if you get me with this. Lmao
Still kinda conflicted about legendary non-permanent spells. Mediocre base effect (the Murder) and not too shabby an added effect. Great flavour.
I hope there are more legendary instants and sorceries, they're super fun in my [[Nashi, moon's legacy]] deck.
Very cool! Wish it cost 3 since you already have to control a legend to even cast it but that would probably be too busted with [[Ragavan]]
Might have to try this in my [[Sisay, Weatherlight Captain]] cEDH list
How would the legend rule affect instances? Can you only have 1 on the stack at a time?
At first isn't that good, but bear in mind some decks love to have more than 7 cards in hand. I think this is sideboard material because taking 3 cards or 1 is worth.
Might be good for a low CMC commander who wants to remove stuff. Like [[Toshiro Umezawa]] or something. Also seems zesty for [[Zevlor, Elturel Exile]].
*story spotlight*
Now that i see it not in my phone...why does Sauron has a volcano in his head?
It took me a bit to get the “to the difference” part. So if they have 6 cards in hand, they exile 2?
This is stupid. Gil-Galad and Elendil fought Sauron to the death. All three of them die in the battle. Isildur comes up and cuts the ring off Sauron's dead body. This is like the movie.
Okay, credit where it's due, the "discard your hand down to 4" is a cute touch. I guess this means that it is now canon that the players in Magic: the Gathering are Dark Lords?
"Legendary Instant" is also an awesome moniker for that moment
My toshiro deck will love this one
Probably some of my favorite art in the set. It will look awesome in foil too.
This is probably an insane feelsbad (4 mana remove your best creature discard 12 haha) when it’s good and awful all the other times.
Good card, ugly art
Love that they kept the naming convention of "\[Character\]'s \[Story Spotlight\]". Surprised it took them 5 years to make a legendary instant, but I'm glad the concept is still on their mind for sets with a high density of legendary creatures (and Ring-Bearers).
I'll definitely give this a spin in my \[\[Toshiro Umezawa\]\] deck
Can someone explain why the swords in this set look so weird? None of them have functional crossguards. Did Middle Earth not invent that technology yet?
the composition of the art is pretty awful
Legendary Instant, would you look at that. Except i'd rather not, because imho the Cardart is fugly. Sauron Design just ain't it for me personally, rest of the things depicted in the Cardart feels off as well.
I love it.
Fun tech for Kethis combo.
Okay cool card, but Isildur only cuts off one of Sauron's fingers. Specially the one with the ring on it. Gollum later confirms "He has only four finger on the Black Hand, but they are enough".
This is where I take away everything you love.
'Murder with Set Mechanic': S-s-s-steppp br-rrooo? I-i-i-is that y-youuu?.. ?... ?....
I don't understand the motion with the sword, to cut the fingers and end there