• Ultramegalord

    Could be a bat that gets +x from either managed or delirium, or flying and hexproff and the ability to flip back

    • eltratzo

      we already have bat trnsformations. mist transformation is new ^^ also bats are not generally prone to hexproofiness.

  • Dr. Burn Crow

    A tad clunky, but this is a solid vector for Cipher cards, no?

    • Hedronal

      Only with something that allows it to actually deal damage to the player, but yes.

      • Mr.Mayhem631

        Not too hard. Bone Saw is all it takes.

        • Dr. Burn Crow

          Or just transform it from fog to vampire.

          • Mr.Mayhem631

            But then it isn’t protected.

          • Dr. Burn Crow

            Well not with that attitude.

  • Alexander Malinin (Cfyz)

    Why “and isn’t blocked” clause if it is unblockable?

    • Denis Stich

      Choking Vines; XG
      Instant
      X target attacking creatures become blocked. Choking Vines deals 1 damage to each of those creatures. (This spell works on creatures that can’t be blocked.)

      Wouldn’t rush out to buy a playset mind you.

      • Martijn Koningsberger

        But it has hexproof.

        • harbor jitters hihr

          in this situation we’re assuming someone went out of their way to use both arcane lighthouse and choking vines to block insidious mist i guess

      • Alexander Malinin (Cfyz)

        Even if it didn’t have hexproof, it couldn’t become blocked anyway. From magic comprehensive rules:
        101.2. When a rule or effect allows or directs something to happen, and another effect states that it can’t happen, the “can’t” effect takes precedence.

        It does not have “unblockable” keyword [edit: there is no such keyword, I used that one wrong; I meant evasion abilities], which can be overriden. It “can’t be blocked”, which is final. So I really wonder what was the reason for that clause, card text is usually worded very carefully.

        • Trevor Terry

          Except the gatherer page for choking vines specifically states in the oracle text “This spell works on creatures that can’t be blocked”

          There are also cards like Flash Foliage, which puts a 1/1 saproling in play blocking target creature, which has a ruling that says it can effect creatures that could not legally be blocked.

          And hexproof can be removed, using effects like glaring spotlight, or bonds of mortality.

          • Alexander Malinin (Cfyz)

            Well, this may require a proper judge to figure out, but I really think there is a fine distinction between something that is not easily blockable (flying, menace, intimidate, etc.) and something that clearly stated cannot be blocked.

            Evasion abilities of creatures have specific wording “can only be blocked by…” (e. g. other creatures with flying or reach, two or more creatures, etc.). These abilities may prevent you from blocking at some point, but they may be overridden by another ability allowing you to block. That is because both abilities (one that is preventing and one that is allowing) are kind of equal status. Choking Vines and Flash Foliage will work since them and evasion abilities allow something new, not deny.

            On the other hand, Insidious Mist “can’t be blocked”, period. 101.2 says that “can’t do” wins over “can do”. This is the reason uncounterable spells work because otherwise any “counter target spell” would be able to override the “can’t be countered” ability. Notice how it is not much different from “can’t be blocked” vs “can be blocked” case we are discussing now.

            About card rulings at gatherer. Rulings for Flash Foliage do not say anything about unblockable creatures, only mentions creatures with evasion. As for the Choking Vines, its first ruling entry practically says the same thing as me: it’s just lifting the additional blocking restrictions. The “works on creatures that can’t be blocked” piece is probably a careless reminder wording, as it is not present in the rulings.

          • Trevor Terry

            Your entire argument is predicated based on the fact that the “Can’t be blocked” wording means more than “Unblockable” when it doesn’t, Unblockable was a keyword ability that represented “Can’t be blocked” this was made obsolete in M14, and cards that used this term have received errata in the Oracle card reference.

            Additionally, the wording on the keyword abilities such as flying, menace, intimdate are “A creature with flying can’t be blocked except by creatures with flying and/or reach”, “A creature with menace can’t be blocked except by two or more creatures”, and “A creature with intimidate can’t be blocked except by artifact creatures and/or creatures that share a color with it”, respectively. All of these keywords share the “can’t” nomenclature that you refer to above.

            This works the same way that putting a creature on the battlefield “Tapped and attacking” ignores “cannot attack” restrictions, such as ensnaring bridge, or effects which require costs to be paid to attack, the block is never officially declared, therefore it ignores all effects that would prevent the regular blocking of the creature.

          • Alexander Malinin (Cfyz)

            Yes, evasion ability wording was fairly embarassing mistake on my part. They actually use ‘can’t’ in comprehensive rules.

            Okay, moving from explaining my position to trying to understand how this works. Let’s take my example from above: we have a card saying ‘can’t be blocked’ and another card saying ‘target creature becomes blocked’; what is the difference from ‘can’t be countered’ and ‘counter target spell’?

          • Trevor Terry

            “Can’t be blocked” only prevents blockers from being assigned to that creature during the declare blockers phase. Casting a spell that says “target creature becomes blocked, or “Put a 1/1 saproling into play blocking target creature” ignores the restrictions, since the action of assigning a blocker is not actually occuring, something is being placed into play blocking the creature, or an effect is forcing the creature to be “Blocked”.

            Counterspells work differently, if a spell cannot be countered, it’s a short way of saying “Cannot be targeted by spells that use the keyword “Counter””

          • Hedronal

            It sounds to me more like counterspells can target things they can’t counter, the counter part just does nothing.

          • Mr.Mayhem631

            Yup. Can’t be countered means exactly what it says. It isn’t shorthand for anything.

        • Hedronal

          There is no “unblockable” keyword. That has been changed retroactively to “can’t be blocked”.

          • Alexander Malinin (Cfyz)

            Yes, I amended that a few seconds before your comment. The problem is, I may be wrong about evasion as well.

          • Hedronal

            The simple version is that while “can’t be blocked” overrides the ability to block, effects that say “x blocks y” or “y counts as being blocked” without “if able” override “can’t be blocked”.

    • Chaospyke

      If you attack while its Elusive Tormentor, then it gets blocked, and then you transform it.
      That seems like a bad play but its a possible one.

      • Mr.Mayhem631

        Once blocked, it stays blocked, even if you transform it.

        • eltratzo

          which was the point he wanted to make, it seems ^^

    • Christopher

      It is probably like that to make it as easy to understand as possible for any player. A newer player would read it and conclude that this ability is activated after blockers are declared.

    • AlaAlba

      Because it’s possible for it to become blocked. There are instants and triggered abilities that put creatures into play blocking any attacking creatures. Those will cause this to become blocked. That rules confusion is a large part of the reason they stopped using “unblockable” on cards.

  • Melissa Juice

    The flavor is just too good.

    Hard not to see this scene straight out of a classic vampire movie.

    • Vectis

      So true.

    • Blank88

      Amazing flavour

  • Ryū

    Very, very neat.

  • Happy The Cat

    SMOKE BOMB GO!!!

  • Squirrel Lover

    spokky mist

  • Zombie

    This is another amazingly cool and flavorful card that kinda contradicts itself when it actually comes to playing Magic.

    The slow midrange/control style decks that would absolutely love a large threat like this that’s insanely hard to get rid of are the decks that just really don’t want to be discarding cards every turn.

    Sure, pitching an extra land to it here and there will be fine, and I’m certain it’s going to be Standard playable to some degree, but it’s going to be one of those ultra-late-game finishers that feeds off of your dead cards. And that’s probably fine.

    It’s not Aetherling, not even close, but it’s going to fill similar roles.

    • Alexander Malinin (Cfyz)

      I believe the “discard a card” cost is more of a Madness mechanic enabler than a real cost. Decks playing this card will want to discard.

      • Zombie

        Playing a card like this and focusing on the smallest aspect of its card and singling out its Madness synergy is probably the worst possible way to evaluate the card.

        Every other thing about it is far better than using it as a Madness engine.

        • Alexander Malinin (Cfyz)

          You are placing it in the wrong deck. It is very likely madness will be a thing in this block. In a deck built around it discarding a card is not a “smallest aspect” by the definition.

          • Zombie

            Agressive Madness decks are going to want discard effects that are free, as well as aggressively costed Madness costs.

            This could be a top end creature for that type of deck but I’d never run more than 2 or 3. It’s just too slow.

  • MrAptronym

    Nice, turning to mist is one of my favorite vampire tropes. I don’t mind a 4/4 for 4 that can become practically unkillable either. This does seem like a color pie break though. You get the very blue side for just black mana.

    • Kahai

      UBR VAMPIRES! MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

  • Blahblahblahbla

    This is absolutely miserable. If it didn’t have a body, i would say it’s Sorrow’s Path bad.

  • The Mist

    This thing really should have shroud, hexproof and indestructible are quite the combination, why not through in unblockable as well.

    • The mist 2.0

      throw*

  • Joaquim Mp

    OH MY GOSH DA FLAVORRRRR

    • Joaquim Mp

      Giving me an orgasm right now

  • Blahblahblahbla

    So, to make this an evasive creature, i’ve got to commit 8 mana and discard a card to swing through for 4 damage. Then. If i wan’t to dodge removal i have to discard more cards and sink more mana into it. Seems really bad. This must be one of the main cards that they use in the set decks that are never playable in any format. I’m always unsure why they don’t quit with the unplayable bs.

    • Mr.Mayhem631

      The point is not to be unblocked, though you could do that.
      The point is it dodges all removal at a cheap cost and then can be brought back good as new whenever you want.

    • juan

      you are forgetting about madness

  • ashenmoor

    no, you clearly misunderstood his post.
    If this had shroud you would not be able to target it yourself. Hexproof on the other hand allows you to pump this as much as you want

    • The Mist 3.0

      This guy gets it.

  • Jody Williams

    Yeah, he’s talking about for flavor reasons. Shroud makes more sense with something being incorporeal.

  • Mr.Mayhem631

    This is better protected than Progenitus, right?
    It doesn’t die to Wrath like Progenitus does.
    The low toughness makes it die to a whole bunch of other stuff, though.

    Also, I want Voltron Mist to be a thing.

    • Vizzerdrix

      It enables madness so anything that pumps like a madness giant growth could make it viable, if you giant growth a flip card transform it,b it still applies to both sides also auras wouldn’t fall off if you go that rout, only problem I could see is having mana open

      • Mr.Mayhem631

        It only costs one to transform.

        • Vizzerdrix

          Then another 3 to flip back so 4 mana total prob 3 your turn and 1 on your opponent’s. Give a sword of feast and famine though…

          • Mr.Mayhem631

            You don’t need to flip back. Just voltron is up.

    • Kotadis

      This dies to Golgari Charm though, Progenitus doesn’t.

  • Kahai

    This is… Beautiful. <3

  • Rubz

    this.. is…. HILARIOUS

  • Vizzerdrix

    I. Love. This. Card. And. This. Set.
    This set is looking so f-ing fun I can’t wait

  • MTG fan

    Can kill opponents fast! #Underrated

  • Bostorket

    NINJA VAMPIRES.

    • ryan mcbride

      I loved Ninjitsu, Ink-Eyes is such a fun card. This guy can go into Blue/Black Ninja commander deck. To bad there is not a Ninjitsu commander to support both colors.

      • AlaAlba

        Vela? The Dimir Legendary specifically designed to play well with Ninjitsu? From the Ninjitsu Planechase deck. I mean, having Ninjitsu on your Commander wouldn’t be that great anyway, considering it’s a “from hand” thing, and it kinda be telegraphed anyway.

  • ArcaneMelee

    This card is great mechanic wise (lots of people have explained why so I wont go into it), but I love this mostly because of the flavor. Ever since Bram Stoker vampires have often had the ability to transform into mist. Complete flavor win, which is why I loved the first Innistrad set in the first place.

  • Nate Dougherty

    I want to get one of these to put in my BW Exalted deck, it’d be pretty fun if they kill off my tormented soul.

  • Mike Baumgart

    throw neglected heirloom on it, you can equip either side to good effect, and transforms into ether a 3/4 unblockable or 7/7 with first strike. optimal would be equip NH on mist then transform mist when attacking to hit for 7 or if they have counters just pump up mist.

    • kmk888

      Now that’s a real reason to play this. Good comment man. That deck would also love Heir of Falkenrath.

  • kmk888

    I love the classical look at Vampire lore.

    Standard playability: I think the biggest barrier is actually the cost of flipping it back up since I assume you’re playing Madness cards to make use of the “downside” on the front. But if you’re okay with paying 4 mana for 4 damage maybe this works for you. I don’t think this lines up well against generically good 4 drops such as Thought-knot Seer and Mindwrack Demon though.

    However if you do the thing the guy below me said with Neglected Heirloom this card is great.

  • Mike1020

    would you be able to use this card in a game of commander? say for example my commander has black green and white but not blue, would i still be able to transform him?

    • Sophie Hughes

      Nope! Afraid not. Commander deck construction rules follow color identity rules (as opposed to just color). The color identity of this card is Blue and Black; unless you commander’s color identity also includes blue and black, you cannot play this card in your commander deck.

  • Zombie

    Black doesn’t need an “Aetherling” creature, though.

    Also, if you’re building around this type of card, the optimal deck is a control or midrange deck that needs to stick a late game threat that’s hard to deal with.

    And as a result, the closest comparison to its function is Aetherling.

    And then because of the comparison it results as a “worse Aetherling”.

    Building solely around Elusive Tormentor’s Discard effect is wasting the best parts of the card.

  • Together Alone

    Ok, But what about an Aura style deck, like we had with invisible stalker. This costs more, but its all upside when its not flipped. Anyway just a thought.

  • Zombie

    That deck would be quite slow if Elusive Tormentor was your Voltron target. It would be pretty safe, sure, but it’s very likely you’d just get outpaced by a number of decks.