>Tap 6, +1, discard lightning bolt, deal 4 damage to

Nice watermark.

>>155530325
Wizards of the Coast is an SJW company. I rip up the cards and shit on the table

File: counterspell.jpg (28KB, 265x370px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 265x370px

wtf is this shit?

>>155530325
>ever discarding bolt
>that card disadvantage
>aiming it at the face instead of a creature

>Not discarding Fiery Temper into madness
Sasuga Megumeme

File: Image.ashx.jpg (30KB, 223x310px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 223x310px

>>155530325
I play Maze's End, and because I control 10 gate cards with different names, I win the game.
gg better luck next time.

You may have changed your op but I still remember last time when you said you discard shock. You can never escape from your shame.

File: 1491429977990.png (204KB, 248x346px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 248x346px

I wish to win the game and tap my land to make it come true

I play a Swamp...
and exile Simian Spirit Guide gaining 1 red mana. Then I use the floating red mana to cast Faithless Looting, draw two, and I discard Griselbrand + a land. Now I tap my Swamp for 1 black mana and exile another Simian Spirit Guide gaining 1 red mana. I use that red plus the floating black to cast Goryo's Vengeance, targeting Griselbrand in the yard. I pay 7 life, draw 7 cards. and attack with Griselbrand (since he has haste), which evens out the lost life. Now I exile two red cards to cast Fury of the Horde for free, which allows me to untap Griselbrand. I pay another 7 life to draw 7 more cards and I swing again. I exile two more red cards, cast another Fury of the Horde, and just like last time that untaps Griselbrand and I swing in for lethal."

>>155532521
I've never really been into magic but isn't that card garbage?
All it does is force your opponent to do 4 damage to that creature before he can win the game and paying 7 mana for that effect on a 4/4 flying body seems pretty expensive.

>>155533036
It forces a removal card unless the opponent happens to have reach/flying blockers. It's 4dmg per turn that the opponent can't ignore because no matter what they do, removing it is a necessity.

>>155533036
Usually you can protect it in some way and 4 flying damage is a decent clock. Otherwise yes, it's not really great.

>>155533174
Forgot to mention that it's colourless, which as a "colour" has amazing ramp potential. Colourless decks are usually Eldrazi, of which the win condition is dropping a ridiculously powerful card that costs about 15 mana and winning the game with it as soon as possible, so Platinum Angel would be a nice early-mid game card that prevents aggro decks trying to burn your lifepoints down to 0 as fast as they can from winning before you can take your gigantic eldritch shit on the board and claim the win for yourself.
Not really a fantastic card, but certainly has its solid niche.

>>155533036
Some decks have no way to deal with it but generally yes.

>>155533036
It's great, if someone tries to remove it you can just say no
You can't get disqualified since you can't lose

>>155533292
I know a bit and know about Eldrazi decks and Emrakul, I just didn't expect platinum angel to work that well against burn decks. I thought they can just direct 4 of their burn damage to the angel instead of the player and then carry on. Sure, that's 4 damage you have prevented, but isn't paying 7 to prevent 4 quite expensive in that case?

>spend 6 mana instead of 1 for 4 burn damage instead of 3

>>155531171
>waiting that long for your win condition
Or you could get Door to Nothingness and Chromatic Lantern and use conventional mana ramp.

>>155534103
Maze's end is a meme, 99% sure he was being sarcastic.

>>155530325
I'd tap that

>>155530325
Steal pantsu

>>155530414
One of the cards that defined the game. Opponent plays something: you negate that for two islands. It not only has potentyal in-game: you can play mind tricks to your opponet by leaving two islands purposefully untapped, making him/her think that you have one in hand.