Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: [SCD] Invisible Stalker.

  1. #1

    [SCD] Invisible Stalker.



    1U
    Creature-Human Rogue
    1/1

    Hexproof (This creature can't be the target of spells or abilities your opponents control.)
    Invisible Stalker is unblockable.
    - This looks like a really nice card for Stoneblade decks that want someone to be able to carry equipment. He will only dies to sweepers, pitches to forces, and nothing can block it. Does anyone think it will see play in equipment decks?

  2. #2
    Site Contributor

    Join Date

    Mar 2010
    Location

    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts

    1,064

    Re: [SCD] Invisible Stalker.

    No.

    'Carries equipment well' is a given, because EVERY creature is good with equipment. Other options at that casting cost are simply better: Spellstutter Sprite has evasion, a useful ability, and synergizes with Riptide Laboratory. Squadron Hawk, while not exactly as amazing in Legacy, at least replaces itself. These creatures also aren't as terrible topdecks when you don't have equipment to throw on them.

  3. #3
    Pray for Rain
    Tammit67's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2010
    Location

    Philadelphia, PA, USA
    Posts

    1,534

    Re: [SCD] Invisible Stalker.

    Standard decks like him probably, but he is miserable against aggro of all forms, even there. I'm not sold
    Matt Bevenour in real life

  4. #4

    Re: [SCD] Invisible Stalker.

    This guy is far, far worse that even Bitterblossom, a card that is on the cusp of playability in Legacy. The problem is, without equipment he is awful, and with equipment he's merely okay. What the best you can do? Jitte? Okay, so you're hitting with a 1/1 that might be a 5/5 at some point, or gain you some life, or kill some dudes. That's fine. Sword of Fire and Ice? You hit for three, throw a Shock around, and draw a card. That's good. Sword of Feast and Famine? Eh, you get a 3/3 and a discard and all your lands untap, whatever. And it goes downhill from there.

    Not to mention, equipment is a black hole where tempo goes to die. There really needs to be nothing going on before equipping your 1/1 is the best play. At least Mystic can make a 4/4 Batterskull that blocks well.

  5. #5
    Member

    Join Date

    Oct 2009
    Location

    Michigan
    Posts

    189

    Re: [SCD] Invisible Stalker.

    The main reason why equipment is 'a black whole where tempo goes to die' (I like the phrasing) is because if they kill the creature, you spent a ton of mana doing nothing. The stalker sides this problem because it is very difficult to kill him with less mana then it takes to play and equip him.

    That said, a 1/1 for 2 probably is a little slow for legacy, regardless of his other abilities.

  6. #6
    Member
    Malchar's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2007
    Location

    Roseville, MN
    Posts

    946

    Re: [SCD] Invisible Stalker.

    If this were good then people would be using silhana ledgewalker with equipment.

  7. #7
    Force of Will is my bitch
    Finn's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2004
    Location

    South Florida
    Posts

    2,977

    Re: [SCD] Invisible Stalker.

    They are. Silhana is deadly with a Jitte. But the deck is necessarily green, which does not disrupt on its own. The trick is to routinely get her online before your opponent gets their own game on, and that means disruption or acceleration. There is good reason why large amounts of acceleration is not effective outside of combo, so you are into another color. Now...why aren't you going Tarmo, Natural Order, etc?

    The fact that Invisible Stalker is blue is a big deal.
    "Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job."
    "Politicians are like diapers. They should be changed often and for the same reason."
    "Governing is too important to be left to people as silly as politicians."
    "Politicians were mostly people who'd had too little morals and ethics to stay lawyers."

  8. #8

    Re: [SCD] Invisible Stalker.

    The card is still terrible, though. In many decks with equipment, you have guys that are fine on their own but get better when you dress them up. This guy is a glorified pinger on his own. He doesn't even block well. That's terrible. There's no reason to run a card whose sole purpose is to enable some other card that is mana-intensive to get running and then doesn't win on the spot. Even if this guy makes your equipment work for sure, there are plenty of other cards that can nearly guarantee equipment working and which do more on their own but are nevertheless unplayable (or barely playable). See: Squadron Hawk, Bitterblossom, Troll Ascetic.

  9. #9

    Re: [SCD] Invisible Stalker.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aggro_zombies View Post
    The card is still terrible, though. In many decks with equipment, you have guys that are fine on their own but get better when you dress them up. This guy is a glorified pinger on his own. He doesn't even block well. That's terrible. There's no reason to run a card whose sole purpose is to enable some other card that is mana-intensive to get running and then doesn't win on the spot. Even if this guy makes your equipment work for sure, there are plenty of other cards that can nearly guarantee equipment working and which do more on their own but are nevertheless unplayable (or barely playable). See: Squadron Hawk, Bitterblossom, Troll Ascetic.
    Troll can get chump blocked.

    Bitterblossom can't pitch to Force of Will.

    Squadron hawk can be chumped or die to Grim Lavamancer or removal.

    Stalker can be pitched to force, can't be blocked, and can't die to targetted removal.

  10. #10

    Re: [SCD] Invisible Stalker.

    Quote Originally Posted by DragoFireheart View Post
    Troll can get chump blocked.

    Bitterblossom can't pitch to Force of Will.

    Squadron hawk can be chumped or die to Grim Lavamancer or removal.

    Stalker can be pitched to force, can't be blocked, and can't die to targetted removal.
    So?

    "Pitch to Force" can mean anything from, "This card is very good and happens to be blue should an emergency situation arise," to, "This card doesn't belong in my deck but is blue so I will pitch it to Force a considerable amount of the time." Reach through Mists pitches to Force. That's no reason to run it. Pitching to Force is not even much of an "icing on the cake" argument.

    Unblockable is eh. The card is a 1/1 on its own. Unblockability is only relevant when the card has a Sword of X and Y on it, which incidentally is the only way the card isn't completely embarrassing. If it had more power, it would be a better creature on its own.

    Not dying to targeted removal is whatever. I guess it keeps you from getting blown out when equipping, but that doesn't reduce the cost of equipping, or make it instant-speed. You're still giving up tempo to make your 1/1 not worthless.

    What you missed is that all the other cards I mentioned are actually kind of threats on their own and just get better with equipment. This card is worse than all of the cards I mentioned on its own, which says something because the cards I mentioned are unplayable because they don't do enough. So yeah...while people may be dreaming of all the sick beatings they get when this guy is armed, I'm dreaming of you blowing your second turn on a 1/1 so I can swing in with Nacatl and land a Goyf, then watch you blow your third turn on an equipment you probably can't equip yet so I get another free attack, and by the time this guy is online you are in burn range and I am thoroughly enjoying the "sick beats" you brought. Or maybe you chumped with him. Or maybe you equipped him but I had Pridemage. Or maybe it's game two and I have Grip/Ancient Grudge in addition to Pridemage and you have to blow all your counters protecting your equipment to enable your 1/1.

  11. #11
    Mega Shark VS. Giant Octopus!
    bowvamp's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jan 2009
    Posts

    344

    Re: [SCD] Invisible Stalker.

    IMHO Looter il-Kor carries equipment better (lol).

    No seriously, you may have just listed its legacy relevant properties, but you forgot to mention that if this were only U not 1U, it would be good. Otherwise, meh. I don't think bitterblossom is better simply because of the bb life loss. Think about all the other blue creatures you could be playing for 2 mana. Spellstutter Sprite comes to mind.
    feefox: each card in hand!!!!
    ridicolous
    only fortune

  12. #12
    Force of Will is my bitch
    Finn's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2004
    Location

    South Florida
    Posts

    2,977

    Re: [SCD] Invisible Stalker.

    Considering its application, this guy's status as a threat is entirely dependent on the other 56 cards in the deck - and not at all the number before the slash. Does the deck consistently get this guy equipped and attacking? If no, this guys sucks even if he is a 2/3 for 2. If yes, what do we care if it is a 1/1 or a 2/2 or whatever? It is a body that can not be f&cked with at all. I mean honestly, a blue-white aggro-control deck that can mostly only be stopped if you outcounter it or are packing artifact hate has a pretty significant starting position. You have to face that deck like a tough combo matchup. Looter Il-Kor is not even close. Silhana is not blue.
    "Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job."
    "Politicians are like diapers. They should be changed often and for the same reason."
    "Governing is too important to be left to people as silly as politicians."
    "Politicians were mostly people who'd had too little morals and ethics to stay lawyers."

  13. #13
    Member
    Malchar's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2007
    Location

    Roseville, MN
    Posts

    946

    Re: [SCD] Invisible Stalker.

    You say "pitches to fow", I say, "can't block goblin piledriver".

  14. #14

    Re: [SCD] Invisible Stalker.

    Quote Originally Posted by Finn View Post
    Considering its application, this guy's status as a threat is entirely dependent on the other 56 cards in the deck - and not at all the number before the slash. Does the deck consistently get this guy equipped and attacking? If no, this guys sucks even if he is a 2/3 for 2. If yes, what do we care if it is a 1/1 or a 2/2 or whatever? It is a body that can not be f&cked with at all. I mean honestly, a blue-white aggro-control deck that can mostly only be stopped if you outcounter it or are packing artifact hate has a pretty significant starting position. You have to face that deck like a tough combo matchup. Looter Il-Kor is not even close. Silhana is not blue.
    - SFM / Batterskull decks will like him for sure.


    Quote Originally Posted by DragoFireheart View Post
    I can say that goblin dies to sword of fire and ice on the stalker. sup?
    -I can say that goblin dies to sword of fire and ice on the stalker. sup?

  15. #15
    itsJulian.com - Legacy Videos
    Julian23's Avatar
    Join Date

    Apr 2007
    Location

    Munich / Germany
    Posts

    3,141

    Re: [SCD] Invisible Stalker.

    Quote Originally Posted by DragoFireheart View Post
    I can say that goblin dies to sword of fire and ice on the stalker. sup?
    What Malchar actually wanted to say (and I agree with him on this) is that "pitches to FoW" is an argument that can be made for each and every blue card thus rendering it quite useless. Just like "can't block Piledriver" is a generic argument against any blue creature, which also doesn't accomplish a lot..
    The seven cardinal sins of Legacy:
    1. Discuss the unbanning of Land Tax Earthcraft.
    2. Argue that banning Force of Will would make the format healthier.
    3. Play Brainstorm without Fetchlands.
    4. Stifle Standstill.
    5. Think that Gaea's Blessing will make you Solidarity-proof.
    6. Pass priority after playing Infernal Tutor.
    7. Fail to playtest against Nourishing Lich (coZ iT wIlL gEt U!).

  16. #16
    Don't ping the hydra
    DrJones's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2007
    Location

    Spain
    Posts

    107,480

    Re: [SCD] Invisible Stalker.

    This creature is good, but it's not legacy playable, because "having the best evasion" is not a relevant trait while building a deck.
    Please stop talking about whether Force of Will is broken or not. It obviously is, and rather than "the glue that holds vintage together" it would be better to call it "the rug under which you hide the filth until there's so much that you can no longer conceal it".

  17. #17
    I like Tacos.
    dahcmai's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jan 2006
    Location

    Traverse City, MI
    Posts

    2,202

    Re: [SCD] Invisible Stalker.

    It's the old argument of how good is it without it's combo piece. Unfortunately, the card doesn't do too much on it's own. It's very close to Sihana and is pretty much in her position. She was just too small of a creature to be relevant most of the time. Without something to boost up that power and make her a really big threat, she's meh. I would consider the card if you had a deck jammed packed with equipment and enchantments. It's probably not really all that far off from being viable, but not yet.

  18. #18
    Member
    AngryTroll's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jul 2004
    Location

    College Station, TX
    Posts

    2,629

    Re: [SCD] Invisible Stalker.

    Quote Originally Posted by DragoFireheart View Post
    -I can say that goblin dies to sword of fire and ice on the stalker. sup?
    Invisible Stalker + casting and Equiping Sword of Fire and Ice = 1U + 3 + 2 , or 6U. With Stoneforge Mystic, it's only 1U + 1W + 1W + 2, or, umm, 5UWW. Now, sure, this is a better investment than tapping out three turns in a row and watching your dude eat a Swords, Bolt, Go for the Throat, or Goblin Incinerator, but that's not really saying much.

    Goblin Piledriver costs 1R, often costs R and has haste, and for 7 mana, you can bet that he brought friends to the party.

    Invisible Stalker is very cool, and the art is great, but he's not going to be making waves in Legacy.
    InfoNinjas

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)