This card is bad. Winds of Change is not played, this is worse.
HOWEVER - the idea of lands that are not lands is huge business for Charbelcher and Rogue Hermit (Oops all Spells). Both decks can now run much more reliable and normal manabases. Heck, the blue spell/lands pitch to Force of Will as well!
Since Rogue Hermit essentially pays 2B for Undercity Informer and threatens to win on the spot, is that deck about to get better? Does Zendikar do for that deck what Thassa did for Doomsday?
I honestly don't know if they've changed the layering rules in the past few years, but I think Humility'd creatures retain their bonus from +1/+1 counters. That means a Humility will actually make every creature in a Workshop deck except Foundry Inspector bigger. With Shop-Aggro representing such a big portion of the aggro decks in the format, it really dampens how flexible the card would be in Vintage specifically.
You are absolutely correct. Rules text below. Basically, power and toughness-setting abilities are applied in Layer 1 and then things that modify power and toughness are applied later. You can make a funny deck using Humility and creatures that have +1/+1 counters. You will have the biggest dorks on the board!
**613. Interaction of Continuous Effects613.1.
The values of an object’s characteristics are determined by starting with the actual object. For a card, that means the values of the characteristics printed on that card. For a token or a copy of a spell or card, that means the values of the characteristics defined by the effect that created it. Then all applicable continuous effects are applied in a series of layers in the following order:
613.1a Layer 1: Rules and effects that modify copiable values are applied.
613.1b Layer 2:Control-changing effects are applied.
613.1c Layer 3:Text-changing effects are applied. See rule 612, “Text-Changing Effects.”
613.1d Layer 4:Type-changing effects are applied. These include effects that change an object’s card type, subtype, and/or supertype.613.1e
Layer 5:Color-changing effects are applied.
613.1f Layer 6:Ability-adding effects, keyword counters, ability-removing effects, and effects that say an object can’t have an abilityare applied.
613.1g Layer 7:Power-and/or toughness-changing effects are applied
613.2. Within layer 1, apply effects in a series of sublayers in the order described below. Within each sublayer, apply effects in timestamp order (see rule 613.7). Note that dependency may alter the order in which effects are applied within a sublayer. (See rule 613.8.)
613.2a Layer 1a: Copiable effects are applied. This includes copy effects (see rule 706, “Copying Objects”) and changes to an object’s base characteristics determined by merging an object with a permanent (see rule 721, “Merging with Permanents”).“As . . . enters the battlefield”and “as . . . is turned face up”abilities generatecopiable effectsif theyset power and toughness, even if they also define other characteristics.
706.2. When copying an object, the copy acquires the copiable values of the original object’s characteristics and, for an object on the stack, choices made when casting or activating it (mode, targets, the value of X, whether it was kicked, how it will affect multiple targets, and so on). The copiable values are the values derived from the text printed on the object (that text being name, mana cost, color indicator, card type, subtype, supertype, rules text, power, toughness, and/or loyalty), as modified by other copy effects, by its face-down status, and by “as . . . enters the battlefield”and “as . . . is turned face up”abilities that set power and toughness (and may also set additional characteristics).**
@brianpk80 I think the normal use case for this card will be on your own creatures. Getting a 4/4 flier for 2 mana is really good, probably at least as good as a 5/5 non-flier for the same. But, having an artifact is easier than having a creature in Vintage, hence the prerequisite is harder.
It's got other modes too, of course. It's a counterspell of sorts too, so you have that extra mode. But if you use that mode you're not beating face. In a pinch, it's removal, but it's removal that probably puts you on a three turn clock, so not great. I like the card in general.
@smmenen Waaaait a minute here, Steven.
You've been all over people (like me!) who mis-use the term "Power Level Errata" in the past. Now you're mis-using it? Shame on you, brah.
Power-level errata, as the School of Menedian taught me, means issuing errata to change card text for the express purpose of reducing its power level. Now, usually it's misapplied by people who apply it to a change that is justified by original intent or original function but has the practical effect of reducing power level.
It seems like you're doing the same thing, but abusing a different part of the definition. Wizards is not issuing errata for card text like they did in the Power Level Errata era. Instead, they're changing rules. This is something that happens all the time. Hell, remember the Mulligan rule changes? Remember that cluster? Damage on the stack? Lotus-freaking-Vale? Rules changes are not the same thing as card errata and you know this.
I think the calm version of what I'm trying to say is that it's alarming to me to see someone who has always been so calm and clinical about the application of errata policy essentially break out the pitchforks over this one.
@desolutionist You let me play Whispers of the Muse out of my sideboard in exchange for one of my sideboard slots and you better believe I'd do it.
@protoaddict That's a good analysis and I think it correctly reflects how the less a Companion requires you to actually pay a cost in terms of deck building, the less the Companion Tax matters.
I also suspect this means we're getting more Companions... and quickly. Probably lots of them. We're entering a new era, everyone:
1994- 2007 - The Golden Age
2007 - 2020 - The Planesewalker Era
2020 - ???? - Every Format is EDH
A reverse wish that is always available and doesn't take a card in your hand. That's a very different animal from the usual wishes.
EDIT: @moorebrother1 Do you really think one sideboard slot is worth more than a 5/5 for 8 (spread over two turns) or Lurrs at 6 on tap could be? Assuming your deck otherwise has no changes needed to run the card? Seems like a stretch.
I don't think this actually addresses the problem with Companions, really. To be clear, it does make them all less generically powerful. But, it doesn't actually address the advantage they offer.
Consider this. Let's say your deck otherwise can run Jegantha. You didn't build your deck around it, you just happen to meet its conditions. Now, do you run Jegantha? Is it worth a sideboard slot to have a 5/5 for 5+3 sitting there for the late game?
I would argue it's still worth it. You're still getting access to an extra resource your opponent is not, and it's probably worth a sideboard slot.