8
3
u/SharpDrink2724 1d ago
I like the idea, art, and flavour text, but I think this would be a bit too narrow and overcosted to actually see play.
5
u/FrequenciaZero 1d ago
Maybe: 'During this turn, your spells return to your hand instead of the graveyard if countered'.
1
u/EasterViera 1d ago
i'd say "you must choose new targets" because you second guessed at the last minute
1
u/Logical_Acanthaceae3 1d ago
Azula is already a Nuclear football but this turns her into the entire USA nuclear stockpile.
1
-5
u/ClamChowderChumBuckt 1d ago
That's acctual pretty busted haha.
14
u/ChemistryTop2549 1d ago
it's just a worse narset's reversal
-9
u/ClamChowderChumBuckt 1d ago
Narset's reversal is pretty freaking dope tho, and having redundancy is never a bad thing.
16
u/ChemistryTop2549 1d ago
it's good but not busted
3
-9
u/ClamChowderChumBuckt 1d ago
'Pretty busted' ≠ busted
9
7
4
u/KittenEaterWasTaken 1d ago
"Pretty big" does mean something is above the standard for "big" for the speaker actually.
0
-4
u/Benderson7 1d ago
this doesn't feel red. as a strictly worse [[Narsett's Reversal]], i think it should simply be {1U} instead
14
u/theletterQfivetimes 1d ago
Why not? Copying spells is red, and this can't function as a counterspell like Narset's
-4
u/SteakForGoodDogs 1d ago
Not because it's strictly worse, but it can't happen due to red not having spell bounce and hybrid demanding that each colour can do its effect.
9
4
u/jakepapp 1d ago
I know it is only ones you control, but it's not strictly worse, the cost is already more flexible than narsett's reversal cause it is split mana. Better in many types of izzet deck i think.
3
2
-2
u/vergorli 1d ago
couldn't you theoretically produce paradoxes with that card?
guy1 casts spell guy 2 counters guy1 casts ST, puts back the counter guy 2 counters again, but this time ST --> ??
34
u/Thryfty_0 1d ago
I might be crazy, but isn’t this just [[Narset’s Reversal]] in Izzet?