• Blah

    that might be the only “lands don’t untap” that’ll be worth it.. great sideboard card.

  • Desth

    This is actually… actually good

  • Cody Alex Humble

    as foretold turn 6 this….
    greatness

    • I may actually mess around with As Foretold with this cycle being printed. Might as well pick up a playset.

  • Brandon Washabaugh

    Who wants the red one to be a wheel of fortune?

    1RR
    Sorcery
    Each player discard there hand and draws 7 cards. Lands don’t untap during your next untap step.

    But WOC doesn’t like good ideas.

    • Friedrich

      Wouldn’t that be like realy bad for you?
      Letting other players go +2 or +3 and haveing a free turn?
      I would rather see something like “Deal 3 damage to all creatures and 4 to target player”

      • Brandon Washabaugh

        I’m the a commander wheel player I win by milling you out

      • Brandon Washabaugh

        Also modern dredge would disagree they hardly ever need to tap lands

  • Oleksandr

    Here is a fun idea, cast multiple of this cycle in a single turn still freezes your lands for only one turn. So boardwiping and resetting your life total on turn six doesn’t sound too bad.

  • Gregory Walter

    I feel sad now.

  • Shagoth

    It’s weird that a white, life gain rare, with as much of a downside as the rest of the cycle, including one which says “Destroy all creatures,” all of which costs the same mana cost, maybe the best. might be th

  • Erico Maia

    If have an enchantment “players can’t gain life” my life becomes 20 or not?

    • MaloBeto

      It does. It’s not life gain in the same sense loss of life isn’t necessarily damage

      • Pandancules

        Actually there is a precedent for this “If an effect says to set your life total to a certain number, and that number is higher than your current life total, that effect will normally cause you to gain life equal to the difference. With Everlasting Torment on the battlefield, that part of the effect won’t do anything. (If the number is lower than your current life total, the effect will work as normal.)”

        • MaloBeto

          Interesting. I’m not a judge or anything so I’ll take your word for it. I don’t think I’ve ever encountered one of these effects in a game before, so I defaulted to doing exactly what the card said.

          • ningyouNK

            Setting your life to your starting life total is considered life gain by the game. So no your life total won’t become 20 if you have a “players cant’ gain life” effect in play.

            As a rules reference, here’s an extract from the Release Notes of Magic: Origins on the card Alhammarret’s Archive:

            Alhammarret’s Archive
            {5}
            Legendary Artifact
            If you would gain life, you gain twice that much life instead.
            If you would draw a card except the first one you draw in each of your draw steps, draw two cards instead.

            * If an effect would set your life total to a specific number that’s higher than your current life total, that effect would cause you to gain life equal to the difference. Alhammarret’s Archive will then double the amount of life that effect would cause you to gain. For example, if you have 3 life and an effect says that your life total “becomes 10,” your life total will actually become 17.

      • Maverick

        Anything that changes or sets your life total to a certain number counts as gaining life or loss of life. In games where you start at 20 life, if you’re at 10 it has you to gain 10 life, and if you’re at 30 you lose 10 life, so Skullcrack and Leyline of Punishment will stop it from gaining you any life.

      • Dave

        It counts as lifegain.

    • Raymond Horley

      if your life is more than 20 yes otherwise no.

  • MaloBeto

    Not sure why you guys think this is better than the black one. At best this is a gain 19 life. Most of the time it won’t even be that. This sort of feels worse than other pure life gain cards to me, and those are almost universally seen as bad cards.

    • Pandancules

      New players love life gain. This may be good in limited and fringe playable in standard or casual EDH though.

      • MaloBeto

        I could see it getting some decent play in edh as a stall card or an activator for stuff like Serra Ascendant. In standard I could only see it being a sideboard against a rare burn deck, but even then the drawback feels too big to me to be that helpful.

    • Shagoth

      Pure life gain is, IMO, the most underrated mechanic in the game. It’s needlessly hated. In multiplayer, the person who gains a lot of life is usually impossible to take down. In modern, I basically can’t win with agree decks once someone uses a decent life gain spell. This is devastating against aggro decks who got you to 5 on turn three (which happens in modern) but they have two cards left in hand. This negates a ton of their progress and wastes burn spells if the agree deck in question is burn (Negating four lightning bolt esque effects is basically card advantage because it’s the same as playing a three mana spell to cause an opponent to counter four spells in the past). Lifegain can be bad, I would not pay four mana to gain seven life, but life gain can be good, whether it helps you stay alive efficiently like here or Heroes’ Reunion, or it’s something that people do passively like in Soul Sisters or various lifelink cards.

      • MaloBeto

        Basically it’s sort of useful as a stall mechanic against pure burn decks, but otherwise it’s usually a waste of both card advantage and mana

        • Shagoth

          Well, yeah, you don’t use it outside of sideboards.

      • Random Guy

        1 mana and 1 card to gain 5 life is a weak card. Often you can just use a 1 mana 1/1 to the same effect, and of course a 1 mana 1/1 is a weak card.

        6 mana and 1 card to gain 19 life even in the best-case scenario is a very weak card. See http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=414329

        Could be decent in EDH depending on the metagame. If it’s all commander damage or combo then no.

        • Mr.Mayhem631

          Providence and this card aren’t similar at all, and this could see play where Providence doesn’t.

          • Random Guy

            They areboth high mana lifegain, how are they different in ways that mattter?

          • Mr.Mayhem631

            They aren’t both high mana, though. Providence actually costs seven mana. You must have seven lands out to cast it, which just isn’t going to happen in most formats vs. aggro. With this, it costs three mana and then prevents you from generating three more next turn. That’s the key difference- you can actually cast this vs. aggro in time.

            And when playing it buys you three or four turns or even wins the game, the drawback doesn’t matter.

      • Pandancules

        Cards that only gain you life have always been bad. There are so many cards that can gain you life and give you some other benefit.

        • Shagoth

          There are, but I have lost to cards that are pure life gain because they play it the turn after I play skullcrack.
          Life gain is much better when it has something else to do. When that happens, you get behind while the person with the thragtusk is still playing decent threats.

        • Have they ever fully healed you?

          I make a longer post about this elsewhere in this thread, but in Hearthstone (granted it’s a different game, but the point has relevance) certain heal cards are considered super valuable simply because they heal you for a boatload (sometimes full, or at least to half life), and this can simply help you outlast enemies. It’s entirely possible to basically lose steam against them without running the heals yourself or building your deck to counter them.

          What holds this back from being viable in Magic is, I’d imagine, the strength of the heals. Which this card — whether or not it ends up being good — is at least a step in the right direction toward.

          • Pandancules

            There is an Ajani that can give you 100 life and its not good, because life is your least valuable resource. It seems counter intuitive because you lose if you run out, but its simultaneously true that you can still win with only 1 life (in some cases you can win with 0).

          • Ajani, Mentor of Heroes, right?

            You mean on a Plainswalker, the slowest possible type of power card in the game, as its -8 when it starts with only 4 Loyalty, with no +2? =P

            I simply don’t buy it that “gain 100 life” is a universally bad effect. I might be relatively new to frequent Magic play but I’m not an idiot; I’ve frequently rejected lifegain cards and when I explicitly built a lifegain deck it was a DRAIN deck that did damage too and combo’d other things with lifegain.

            100 life is a massive buffer. if your deck is built in such a way that a buffer is useful, then that’s a good effect. That Ajani Plainswalker looks super mediocre across the board, so I don’t see why that’s a good example of why “gain 100 life” is a bad effect. xP

            A plainswalker that slow is the kind of thing you want a massive life buffer in order to use in the first place, not something that you use to get your massive buffer. What’s counter-intuitive here isn’t the notion of life gain being bad, but rather that card’s OVERALL DESIGN is counter-intuitive; of course it’s bad. Doesn’t make life gain bad. =P

          • Pandancules

            Look at fetchlands and shocklands. In their respective formats people don’t blink an eye at dropping nine life just to fix their mana. Life just isn’t a valuable resource. The card in question asks you to give up mana for two turns and go down in card advantage. There are endless examples of those things being more valuable than life gain.

          • I’m a dominantly black player dude (or a Warlock player in Hearthstone); you don’t need to tell me about the value of sacrificing life (or anything really) for the big effect that’s going to win you the game or at least secure a big advantage.

            I’m not interested in arguing over the viability of this card specifically — unless you can tell me of a card that specifically functions very similarly or identically to this one then neither of us is really qualified to judge it until it’s been playable for a while and professionals have had their hands on it — in the end I don’t really know if this card is good or not. But the impression among the Magic community that raw life gain is, always was, and always will be a bad mechanic is just untenable. You think it isn’t, because you have precedent on your side, but I already pointed out that your criticism of that Ajani card is just you blaming the specific effect (“gain 100 life”) for the failure of what seems pretty clearly to just be an all-around bad card, and I also already pointed out that putting 100-life gain on a slow-as-heck Plainswalker that isn’t even that special otherwise is entirely counterintuitive to the point of lifegain; it’s the exact opposite of why you would want lifegain in the first place.

            The issue is you’re mistaking precedent established by existing cards (which I don’t intend to argue aren’t largely or entirely bad) for a fact that applies to new cards you’ve never seen before. And as I’ve established elsewhere in this thread, there actually IS precedent (MASSIVE precedent; admittedly in other games, but that nonetheless have similar enough mechanics to be relevant) for lifegain being VERY, VERY GOOD in decks where, you know, it synergizes with what else they do… and when it’s massive. You’re mistaking your experience with pre-existing cards in a single game for a fact about mechanics and game design in general.

            YES, obviously mana is the more important resource, and that obviously makes fetch- and shocklands valuable. Just because one resource is more valuable than another doesn’t make both resources valuable; it only makes them unequally so.

          • Pandancules

            You can’t use a precedent from Hearthstone because the games are too different. Creatures are far more vulnerable in HS because they don’t heal at the end of the turn. In Magic they do, so taking out the same amount of life again wouldn’t be hard for most decks, especially since you played a sorcery that tapped you out for two turns. You mentioned how we would have to wait for pros to evaluate it, but any of them will tell you this card is trash.

          • The games are similar enough to identify possibilities in one game where they’ve succeeded in the other. It goes without saying that the exact same tuning doesn’t work in either game, but people say self-healing is just as bad in Hearthstone as you are about Magic (which is one similarity) and the only reason heals ARE still played in most cases is to heal your minions, not yourself. HOWEVER, despite the fact that the differences you yourself identified make healing minions more important than healing yourself, top decks like Renolock involve self-healing, and those cards are viable because they’re so big, and they synergize with the rest of the deck because of mechanics that are the same in both games: In Hearthstone, Warlocks discard health for cards. In Magic, black decks often discard life for… just about anything, but oftentimes cards. The difference you bring up OUGHT to make self-healing LESS important in Hearthstone than it is in Magic, and yet there it is; that should tell you something.

            You cannot just say “the games are too different to compare”; you’re showing a complete disregard for any potential similarities, or the successes of mechanics in a game that should otherwise make that mechanic worse than it is in the other.

            You’re absolutely right that creatures are stickier in Magic, making damaging people down easier in general, and that’s an excellent argument against this card, which in best case scenarios usually only gives you 10, maybe 15 life at most. I already told you I wasn’t trying to argue if this card was good or not; our discussion has passed beyond that. So, yes, mana is the more important resource but you acting like that fact proves any card unviable if it sacrifices mana to help with any other resource is an untenable position; you could stretch that logic to argue any card type that has to use mana is bad, because mana is important. And that’s obviously just not true. MAYBE this card is bad, but certainly not because it uses mana; expending a small amount of one resource to fuel growth in another is a basic part of the game, and if gaining life serves a strategy, or, you know, buys you more turns, then how is that not a good use of a resource provided the card is tuned correctly?

            This one card MIGHT be bad, but that does not prove the notion of this TYPE of card bad. Nor are you being entirely forthcoming about how this card even works, considering it only uses up three mana; it doesn’t tap all of your land, so if it’s the only thing you want to play then it doesn’t lock down all your mana AT ALL; there are going to be situations where you play this card with little to no real penalty if you simply don’t need to use all your mana.

          • Mr.Mayhem631

            The difference is that if people say self heal is bad in Hearthstone, they lack a basic understanding of the game. I’ve never seen any of those people.

          • Pandancules

            and you admitted mana is a more important resource than life, which this card asks for you to keep your lands tapped so even by your own logic this is bad.

        • Mr.Mayhem631

          It’s not a new thing for those cards to see sideboard play, and this could too.

      • Gord

        Life gain is bad if you are only using it to postpone dying. It can be really good if you are using it to stablize against an aggro deck – effectively negating all the resources they used to hurt you in the first place. Having a card like this in the deck means you can be bolder when setting up a late game. But this looks a lot better than the black one when the opponent follows up with a Glorybringer.

        • MaloBeto

          But this still lets the aggro decks keep their board presence, and even keeps you from establishing any yourself next turn. If you get to the late game it usually means the aggro decks have already lost.

          • Gord

            Aggro deck will have a better board presence early but you should be able to contain it – if you can gain 12 life that should get you to the late game – and that means aggro decks have already lost

          • Yeah, aren’t most aggro decks inherently early-game focused anyway?

          • MaloBeto

            You can’t contain their board presence if you have no mana. Even excluding the massive downside on this card gaining 12 life for 3 mana is not good because you’re wasting your turn just gaining back life your opponent will be able to take again next turn. At best it’s an overcosted fog. With the downside it actually would hurt you more often than it would help you against aggro.

          • Gord

            I wouldn’t use this ASAP with nothing to do but take the next hit obviously – this along with a sweeper or a creature, it can get you out of range of suddenly being killed. More along the lines of pulse of fields which was quite powerful

      • I keep bringing it up in these comments but I bought used cards once and it came with a deck someone made (I take no credit for making it) with basically a mono-White lifegain deck. It’s absurd in terms of power. (It uses Squadron Hawks as fuel for its Martyr of Sands to gain life, which then SUPER quickly turn its Serra Ascendants and Chalice of Life into superweapons.)

        I literally can never beat it with any deck I actually make.

        A MUCH more underwhelming deck that I did make is an Orzhov deck that focuses around Extort and other lifedrain while turning all straight heals (mostly via Lifelink) into damage with Vizkopa Guildmage.

        Lifegain is good if you can build around it. Like any mechanic. =P

        • Shagoth

          That deck is called Soul Sisters, it sounds exacyl like it, actually.

          • Ya looking into it you’re right. It doesn’t rely on the titular Soul Warden or Soul’s Attendant or any creature buffs, but instead just uses Martyr of Sands and then a million exile or control cards like Path to Exile, Oblivion Ring, and Ghostly Prison, and then Ranger of Eos and basically infinite 1-cost-creature revive to continually bring back the Martyrs and Ascendants. It’s nuts. Can’t beat it. o_0

            What’s the counter to that deck? xD

    • Friedrich

      it can be gain 39 in commander, in our playgroups doubleheaded giant commander even 79. its decent in formats with high starting live.

      • MaloBeto

        Wasn’t talking about commander. In commander this could be an interesting thing to play around with.

    • I recognize that bringing this up is in some ways only half of an argument because in the end I’m referring to a different game, with different cards, inner workings, and a different meta, but I think it has merit here.

      (Also I apologize for the length but I need to explain a lot about another game to make the point. xP )

      In Hearthstone… the exact same stigma exists. Oh, cards that heal are considered useful, but only because in that game you can (usually) target your minions (that game’s creatures; in Hearthstone they don’t heal after damage) and so it’s considered good to heal your minions, and bad to heal yourself… in most cases. Like in League, good self-heal cards are considered good because they do other things, like Truesilver Champion, a weapon that heals you every time you attack a minion directly.

      That said, there are a few cases where cards with either mainly heal or are certainly taken most often for healing (or saved for healing where they have multiple uses) are in fact SUPREMELY meta cards played constantly in top tier game, to the point where (especially before some of them rotated out of Standard) you basically couldn’t watch high level games without seeing them constantly:

      -Alexstrasza (which sets either your or your opponents life total to 15; half the starting total; I tend to see it used as a heal however)
      -Reno Jackson (which fully heals your hero if your deck has no duplicates)
      -Lord Jaraxxus (which changes you into a special hero with new powers but also sets your health to 15 and is principally saved for the heal)
      -Kazakus (which lets you create a custom spell with many possible effects but which include many healing options)

      One of the absolute top-tier decks prior to Reno Jackson rotating out of Standard, the Renolock, is a Warlock deck that sacrifices life to draw tons of cards, and as many heal cards as possible including Reno Jackson, Kazakus, and Lord Jaraxxus. Often it will even have Alexstrasza.

      So there is plenty of precedence for LONG-TERM heal play to be SUPER viable in CCGs. All Magic would need to make it work is the right kinds of cards, and as it happens, what defines the validity of the cards I mentioned in Hearthstone is HOW MUCH they heal; a card like this is well on the way to making big heal cards viable in Magic. It might not be THE right card, but it’s the right direction for Wizards to take. It’s easy to look at the existing cards and meta in Magic and say it’s not good but it absolutely IS if you have the right cards. And we’re not even talking decks that actually synergize with the heals, using cards like Serra Ascendant, Chalice of Life, or Vizkopa Guildmage.

      • MaloBeto

        One of the big reasons Renolock was good though was because you could pay life for card advantage and then reset back to your starting life total when you got low, furthermore Reno is also a minion and not really purely lifegain. You’re still establishing some board presence when you play him. On top of that it’s a lot more difficult to kill your opponent from full health in 1-2 turns in hearthstone than it is in magic. The other cards you’ve mentioned aren’t primarily used as lifegain cards. Alex is played as a combo piece to bring your opponent’s life down to 15 most of the time, and Jaraxxus is useful mostly for the new hero power you get and the extra 3 attack. Kazakus potions do have lifegain effects but they usually do something else to help you gain board control as well.

        I’m not saying lifegain can’t be viable but it usually has to be with some other goal in mind. Cards that just gain you life without giving you some other advantage over your opponent usually end up being a waste of other, more valuable resources. In edh I can see this card being played since it will activate a number of very powerful cards like Serra Ascendant, and the swing in life totals is usually going to be large enough to make this card worth it. In every other format though the absolute best you can do is gain 19 life, so at it’s very best this card gains you a little over 6 life per mana spent with a massive downside, especially for a card whose entire purpose would be to buy you another turn. But more often than not you won’t be getting 19 life off of this and you’re going to have to be predicting the turn before when your opponent can kill you since this is only a sorcery. Against a burn deck (the matchup where this card would be most viable mind you) you’re going to want to start worrying at 10 or 11 life, so in those games it’ll likely only net you 9-12 life. That’s at best healing 4 per mana spent with a massive downside. In most instances this card is going to be worse than heroes reunion because at least that still gives you a benefit if you play it while you are at 20 life, it’s one mana cheaper, and there’s no downside.

        • Well. yes, you must have some other goal in mind when you lifegain because that’s inherent to the nature of this and every other CCG: It’s a strategy game. No strategy — and no good deck — REALLY centers around nothing but high-value cards. The best decks have combos; everything serves a purpose. That’s such a basic lesson about CCGs that the anime for freaking Yu-Gi-Oh (which at least launched as one of the most primitive CCGs I’ve ever seen) criticizes one of its characters for doing this right in one of the first few episodes. =P

          The only cards you include in a deck that don’t either serve to expand on its strengths or to compensate for its specific weaknesses are answers to specific other decks, usually sideboard options; so yes, you’re right that so much heal works in Renolock because IT’S PART OF THE STRATEGY. But that strategy CAN BE — and is, in some cases with Renolock or pretty much always with Quest Priest decks in Hearthstone — to outlast your opponent. But they have more than just pure heals to facilitate it.

          Just because heal is best with other things does not mean pure-heal cards are bad; it means you combine those pure heals with other things. You say Reno is good because it’s also a minion but if it was a spell instead or like the worst possible minion (let’s say a 0/1 that can’t be buffed) then I’m pretty sure Renolock would still play it. The minion stats are a bonus in this case; Reno is still DOMINANTLY a heal card.

          You are right about about Jaraxxus and Kazakus — although I see them uses purely for heals more often than you might believe (in fact in Renolocks Kazakus spells are fairly often only non-healing when you pull off the Bran combo and get two potions (one to heal, one for other things) — but not as right, I think, with Alexstrasza. At least in the decks and games I’ve been seeing (to be fair, mostly post Un’goro), offensive Alex play is usually punished or almost an immediate throw; by the time you have 9 mana to play Alex you USUALLY have your opponent’s life down to 15 already unless you’re losing (and Renolock was a dominant deck so its loss rate is not high), so more often than offensive Alex uses, you see neutral ones (hit your opponent when they’re already 15 wasting the effect just to get the minion out) or defensive uses. Most of the time offensive uses are used AGAINST Renolocks or other heal decks, playing it after your opponent plays their Reno or maybe now an Amara if it’s a Quest Priest. Even Jaraxxus is RARELY used before you’re 15 or lower.

          It’s also really not much harder to quickly kill an opponent from full in Hearthstone. You might be right in games where no one’s losing real bad, because the life total is lower in Magic and it’s easier to keep creatures alive, so you can easily save up enough power to do 10 at least. But in Hearthstone, if you’re about to die (which you are if you play Reno or do a heal Mr. J or Alex, your opponent can probably kill you just as fast; it’s much easier to get out 7-10 damage minions in Hearthstone than it is in Magic and I have seen many games with roughly 10-damage minions threatening the losing player. Renolocks ARE based around sacrificing life for cards — which makes the heals have combo synergy on them — but they also tend to just flat-out outlast your opponent.

          I’m not even arguing this card is good, just that it’s a step in the right direction to make an outlast strategy viable. Just like with Hearthstone’s big heals, it heals you to full or just for massive amounts; that’s how you make healing outlast decks work. I do not however think this downside is as big as anyone thinks. It does not guarantee all of your lands are tapped; it guarantees three are. If you’re losing, there’s a fair chance you could be top-decking, and if you haven’t played all of your cards then how immediately are you likely to need to cast them? High chance is you play this and don’t even want to play something else right away. There are MANY situations where this will actually be a very small penalty, and possibly entirely negligible, especially as you said in EDH where as I understand the games tend to go longer and to higher land counts.

      • Mr.Mayhem631

        How much Hearthstone do you play? Usually if you’re running self heal it’s not for minions, it’s for you. Heal in HS is much much much better than in Magic.

        • It’s complicated because I don’t actually play it right now; I watch it. =P But I’m always good at putting myself in the mindset of playing a game — which is really easy in a turn-based game anyway — and have actively helped all of my friends play the game and can basically “play” it (in my head) at a much higher level than they can. Which is weird, I know.

          You might be right then but in most cases I see players at high levels of play run heals (other than the obvious big ones like Reno or the defensive Alex/Jaraxxus/Kazakus) they do tend to use them on their minions. There are exceptions though, and obviously cards like Mistress of Mixtures are included for very different reasons (and you can’t heal minions with that anyway). But even priests I see tend to heal minions unless, A. Their minions are topped off, or, B. They’re getting low and know they’re going to need a buffer. Obviously it’s case-by-case though and you’re absolutely right that healing yourself is more important across the board than it is in Magic, which makes sense since there’s a class whose entire Hero Power is just to “heal” themselves (with armor): Warrior. xP

          I guess the main thing is mid-size to huge heals are (mostly) used on yourself while small heals (Voodoo Doctor, Hot Spring Guardian, assuming anyone runs them) are usually used on minions. But yeah, exceptions exist. Another example of the big self-targeting preservation effects is on Secret Mage or just most mages I guess since Ice Block and Ice Barrier see so much play now.

          • Mr.Mayhem631

            But cards that heal you, and can only heal you, are still very good, and few cards are run to heal your minions. Even Hot Spring Guardian would not be nearly as good without the ability to heal you, and most cards that heal and have seen play can’t even target minions.

          • Fair enough. Most of the time I see these minions might actually be from Arena drafts or Discover pulls so that might be why I see them at all. I’ll try to pay more attention to it. Still, I do see Priests — who also have small heals for their Hero Power — mostly target minions unless they can’t or need to heal themselves.

            But you’re absolutely right that most of the popular healing cards are self-heals, and are huge, as opposed to the any-target small heals.

  • Arcus Diabolus

    This makes me sad.

    • Philip Tan

      Me too :'(

      • Ellis

        And all the gods fell ._.

  • Nelson Chandra

    Damn if only these cycled.

  • Happy The Cat

    wish it said target player so it could also double as an anti-life gain spell. the drawback for this is much less severe than bontus since it doesn’t leave you with no board to defend yourself.

    • Dave

      Uh, I’d say it’s even more severe as you don’t deal with your opponent’s threats at all. In the turn immediately after casting this you could take another attack and go back down to ten with no untap. And generally you’re more likely to use a boardwipe while you’re behind on creatures, so I disagree with your assessment.

      • Jay Kilian

        I would play this in control and mid range as an advantage, not as defense. Once stabilized this erases early beats. I also see it in bitterblossom decks and maybe turns decks.

      • MTG fan

        That’s what he said at the end
        Edit: whoops read it wrong.

    • Dave

      I also wish it said “target player” though as I have a pretty fun Tainted Remedy deck that’d love that! :D

  • Random Guy

    The flavor here…

    I came here to heal, not to feel.

  • Jordan

    Looks like the gods die in this set. Starting to look like Bolas really does win after all. Way too excited to read the stories.

  • Robert FakeLastName

    nifty side vs burn in modern or any format for that matter.

    • Jay Kilian

      Yup, this will make them weep. If it were a “target player” effect it would end deaths shadow decks too.

  • Edward

    Looks like this will be part of a cycle since we have Bontu’s Last Reckoning.

    • MTG fan

      It is confirmed that this card is part of a cycle of the 5 gods from Amonkhet.

      • Jacob Kodicovic

        Kefnet’s Last Smartening 1UU
        Sorcery
        Take an extra turn after this one. Lands you control don’t untap during your next untap step.
        To the last, Kefnet only wanted to be the birbiest birb.

        (Yes, I know this is a functional reprint)

        • Shagoth

          I thought the Original was an instant.

  • TheAnonymousNate

    Control decks might have some fun with this card

  • Ja Ja ja

    GG Burn in modern :(

  • Vando

    Well this should be fun in 2 Headed Giant games.

  • MrAptronym

    Wow, a lifegain card I actually like. I enjoy the ‘player Exert’ effect they have going on here.

  • Well that’s one way to make a raw lifegain card playable… make it heal you to full. LOL

  • Oscar

    Man, this card makes me really sad… I liked Oketra, such a kindhearted being :,(

  • Deadly Berry

    The feels… are off the chart on this one: the name, the artwork, the flavor, even the effect. Since this will be a cycle of sadness, I know Hazoret will have her own; my body is not ready.

  • Merlin

    Do you think this is Oketra saving gatewatch or trying to leave something that might save it