nyxborn eidolon
Spoilers, Rumors, and Speculation forum
Posted on Jan. 26, 2014, 1:06 a.m. by NixTheThird
Nyxborn Eidolon is leaving me confused. The reasoning laid out in the Daily MTG article (http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/li/283) about the bestow costs on different creatures is weak in it's reasoning. To illustrate what I mean lets stay within the same color as this bestow in order to waylay disagreements about what plays to color strengths and current meta (otherwise I would just link Nyxborn Shieldmate or something and cry out Q.E.D.)
Take a look at the new Spiteful Returned . OK, 1B for a 1/1 is bad. Eidolon beats it there, but a +1 power difference with equal toughness means your more powerful creature is still getting killed off to the exact same things. Then add to that when you declare your attack Spiteful will still do more damage to your opponent no matter the situation.
So then it comes down to if you believe that having the option of killing off a creature with one more toughness is worth it. Keep in mind that 9 times out of ten this that situation will be a trade because of both creatures are equal in toughness.Yeah, sometimes that's a good move. But wow is that sometimes a bad keyword...
TL:TD: I don't get Nyxborn Eidolon bestow cost. It seems things like Spiteful Returned and Nyxborn Triton are much better. Discuss.
They made it that way because it passes the 'is it good enough to mainboard in my limited deck as a creature by itself' test at Wizards.
January 26, 2014 2:33 a.m.
ChrisHansonBiomancin says... #4
The entire Nyxborn cycle is overcosted and bad. Unfortunately, not every common can offer the same bang-for-the-buck as Chimney Imp .
January 26, 2014 3:54 a.m.
NixTheThird says... #6
See, I was really hoping there was something I was missing. Somehow I am against the old fashion "bad just to fill space" theory, even though it makes perfect business model sense. The fact they tried to defend it (even if it was poorly) gave me a bit of hope there was something else to it.
January 26, 2014 5:45 p.m.
Schwonga here are three links to articles explaining why R&D makes bad cards. It's rather interesting, and they do more than just fill space.
Hope this helps!
January 26, 2014 5:50 p.m.
NixTheThird says... #8
raithe000, you are a scholar and a gentleman. Those articles were indeed good reads. While I would still debate a couple of the points (mostly because that's what I do...), those articles ring far more true than the "passes the vanilla test" excuse of the one I posted.
EvenDryke says... #2
It's a shitty common, every set has them. They're bad on purpose.
January 26, 2014 1:13 a.m.