[ECL] Cinder Strike (Card Gallery)
img
  • 126 points Yasherets

    Sick art too

    parent
    12 points Mr-Syndrome

    agreed. The art goes insanely hard

    parent root
  • 48 points JasonKain

    Ah, the next Lorwyn Cinder card whose art goes hundreds of times harder than the card itself.

    Hope it's good in limited.

    parent
  • 69 points cardboard_numbers

    Sorcery speed is rough here, but 4 damage for 1 mana with a relatively small additional cost (that can be a benefit in some limited decks!) is certainly punching above its MV in a real way. Solid C/C+ removal here that kills nearly 80% of the format for a single mana.

    parent
    36 points Oleandervine

    Because of the potential to do 4 damage for a relatively minor drawback is exactly why it's Sorcery speed. This card would be hella busted if it was Instant, and nowhere near Common.

    parent root
    13 points cardboard_numbers

    I agree?

    parent root
    10 points AwakenedSol

    I’m Ron Burgandy?

    parent root
    1 points why-names-hard

    I love lamp!

    parent root
    7 points vaguestory

    it only targets creatures... and requires you to also have a creature to pay its extra cost. i really don't think instant would have been "hella busted" but, i guess i have been wrong before.

    in any case it's a strictly worse [[flame slash]]

    parent root
    2 points ThatBiGuy25

    the main circumstance I think this would be potentially strong as an instant would be using it as a combat trick. if it was an instant you could use any 1/1 chump blocker as blight fodder to throw 4 damage at a problem creature.

    but, like, there's a ton of ways to do that anyway so idk if that's game-breaking or anything

    parent root
    1 points MTGCardFetcher

    flame slash - (G) (SF) (txt)


    FAQ

    parent root
    1 points ThatBiGuy25

    [[Unholy Heat]] does more damage, is at instant speed, can target planeswalkers, and procs off of playing your deck normally. it is also a common, and doesn't require you to give up any of your board state

    parent root
    1 points MTGCardFetcher

    Unholy Heat - (G) (SF) (txt)


    FAQ

    parent root
  • 25 points Show-Me-Your-Moves

    [[Flame Slash]] at home

    parent
    2 points MTGCardFetcher

    Flame Slash - (G) (SF) (txt)


    FAQ

    parent root
    2 points BrantheMan1985

    Thought the same thing. Is Flame Slash too strong for standard?

    parent root
    21 points AwakenedSol

    Too strong for limited.

    parent root
    -15 points Mestewart3

    Haven't you heard, all interaction is too strong now.  God forbid removal spells be strong and cheap enough to actually prevent games from ending on turn 3-4.

    parent root
    7 points Rooftop_Reve

    You can actually have removal that’s too strong for limited.

    But I agree, interaction has been fairly wack recently in 60 card formats

    parent root
    2 points mysticrudnin

    you guys make it sound like flame slash is the norm

    that's not how it is, that's not what it's like for anything like this

    they print a strong card one time, it's played in draft for a couple months and it sticks around in standard for a couple years, and then it's gone. it doesn't mean "this is the new benchmark" it means "this was a heavily pushed card and that's how the game was for a little bit"

    it is not normal to have 4 damage for 1 mana. it was in a set where we were trying to cast 8 mana spells or activate 8 mana abilities.

    that people play formats like commander, where they can play the best spells ever from all of magic's history, does not make that the average power level

    in any case, in THIS set, it's very possible that this card is better than flame slash. that's awesome.

    parent root
  • 14 points Aesthetic-Dialectic

    Lore implications?!?!?!?!?! CINDER???? Are they still a thing despite the Rimekin?

    parent
    19 points PancakeBurglar99

    Yes, not all became rimekin.

    parent root
    4 points Dosettte

    there's a few still hanging around. [[Kulrath Zealot]], [[Burning Curiosity]], and [[Flame-Chain Mauler]] for example

    parent root
    2 points MTGCardFetcher

    All cards
    Kulrath Zealot - (G) (SF) (txt)
    Burning Curiosity - (G) (SF) (txt)
    Flame-Chain Mauler - (G) (SF) (txt)


    FAQ

    parent root
    3 points CaptainMarcia

    [[Flaring Cinder]] is also in the set, but looks a lot less like past cinders.

    parent root
    7 points Earlio52

    looks like it’s in the process of becoming a rimekin 

    parent root
    2 points MTGCardFetcher

    Flaring Cinder - (G) (SF) (txt)


    FAQ

    parent root
  • 3 points yokaishinigami

    Going to try this out in my gruul landfall deck. The ability to do 4 damage and kill off a tapped earthbent land for a landfall trigger could be interesting in the right situation. Will definitely be testing a couple of these in my sideboard.

    parent
  • 3 points CrimsonBTT

    Rules question: if something grants this spell a different additional cost, which you pay, like [[Defiler of Instinct]], does this spell deal 4 damage instead?

    parent
    11 points CaptainMarcia

    No.

    607.2i If an object has an ability printed on it that allows an additional cost to be paid and an ability printed on it that refers to whether that cost was paid, those abilities are linked. The second refers only to whether the intent to pay the additional cost listed in the first was declared as the object was cast as a spell. If an ability lists multiple such costs, it may have multiple abilities linked to it. Each of those abilities will specify which cost it refers to. Example: Stormscape Battlemage has “Kicker {W} and/or {2}{B}” and two abilities that may trigger when it enters the battlefield. The first triggers if it was kicked with its {W} kicker, and the second triggers if it was kicked with its {2}{B} kicker. Each of those triggered abilities is linked to its kicker ability.

    https://magic.wizards.com/en/rules

    parent root
    2 points CrimsonBTT

    Sweet, thanks for the clarification.

    parent root
    2 points MTGCardFetcher

    Defiler of Instinct - (G) (SF) (txt)


    FAQ

    parent root
  • 2 points Multievolution

    I get we need pack filler, and also draft stuff, so I won’t say I dislike it, but I won’t lie; a lot of cards I’ve seen in this set had me thinking “this would be amazing as an instant”

    parent
  • 3 points Apart-Kangaroo-7648

    Is instant speed too much to ask for?

    parent
    1 points Mestewart3

    Yes it is. God forbid interaction be any combination of flexible/strong/fast, people might not be able to just vomit their hands out into winning board states?! Can you imagine all the hurt feelings!!

    parent root
  • 1 points mcswaggerduff

    I may grab as many of these as I can just for art alone!

    parent
  • 0 points Birbbato

    Why are the coolest looking cards always commons

    parent
  • 1 points Fire_Pea

    Flame slash is pretty good but blight 1 does hurt. It'll be great in limited though

    parent
    1 points mysticrudnin

    it's an upside in some decks

    parent root
  • 1 points LaoChan4P

    This would look amazing in the old foil

    parent
  • 1 points Shnook817

    Huh, I'd never heard it as "gutter out" before. Sputter out, sure, but never gutter. And they're even slightly different meanings! Thanks for the vocab lesson, flavor text!

    parent
  • 1 points Tophattogo

    That flavor text goes hard

    parent
  • Hacker News
    • Top
    • Best
    • New
    • Ask
    • Show
    • Jobs
  • beta Hugging Face
    • Posts
  • Reddit
    • r/programming
    • r/technology
    • r/science
    • r/news
    • r/gaming