Community

You make a fair point about Invisible Stalker .  I can see where you're coming from.

But, I still don't think it warrants a response as gimmicky as 'target opponent sacrifices a creature of your choice.'

Dec 20, 2012 -- 4:52AM, idrinkyourmilkshake wrote:

You make a fair point about Invisible Stalker .  I can see where you're coming from.

But, I still don't think it warrants a response as gimmicky as 'target opponent sacrifices a creature of your choice.'

Oh yeah, that's not a good card either.

I was just saying that Stalker was probably put in the wrong block. And in that block specifically the fact that it did have hexproof was a big problem.

What sort of interaction are we talking about, all this interaction is removal right, the interaction that results in less interaction later in the game. Invisible Stalker is a 1/1 for 2, although it is blue. Why not play more creatures and have them interact with the stalker during combat, use an ability of another creature to tap it etc...

Good point.

Having thought more about it, shroud might have been a better choice. It's not as bad as the Hexproof on Dun Grove Elder, that makes no sense.

A few posts ago I provided some better costed and slightly reworded versions of these removals. Maybe they would be more reasonable. I agree that the original posters are too cheap.

Card 1 I like -- I have no problem with it because it's application doesn't predicate itself on whether or not a hexproof creature is in play.  It's like Nevermore meets Wrath of God .  A creature doesn't have to be hexproof for it to work, but it does work around hexproof anyways.

The second card however -- is specifically hating on hexproof to the point where it is utterly useless unless your opponent controls a hexproof creature.  Cards like that have such limited usefulness that they will not see play outside of the most particular metagames.  (all Hexproof FTW?)

A hallmark of a good design is that it doesn't work to undo a previous design.  Why would Wizards even start with Hexproof if they were just going to print hexproof hate in the next block?

Designs like these create unbalanced mechanics that seek to one-up each other, so that each iteration nullifies the last, until every creature is a 10/10 indestructible haste hexproof first strike, and every spell is "~ cannot be countered.  Exile all permanents."


And even if you are hell-bent on hating hexproof, why not just have card 2 say "Creatures target opponent controls lose hexproof until end of turn."?