Full Dack Fayden?
Spoilers, Rumors, and Speculation forum
Posted on April 17, 2014, 7:13 p.m. by crystalizeq
http://i.imgur.com/yLrPSoK.jpg
Can't tell if he is real or not. MTG Vault had this on their facebook page. It seems to fit in with his personality, and I saw someone make a similar prediction when they spoiled half of him.
His low mana cost seems awesome, and I would love to use him in EDH, however, because he is in Conspiracy, he wouldn't be legal in Modern or Standard. I also do not think he is good enough to be run in legacy, but then again, I don't play legacy and I don't know much about legacy.
He can't be 54. There can't be that many multicolored cards, can there?
April 17, 2014 7:23 p.m.
I agree that it is fake, though the abilities themselves seem likely to be correct based on the information we currently have.
April 17, 2014 7:27 p.m.
BorosPlayer says... #6
Fake, the set symbol for mythic should have white around the red, not black.
Also as zandl said, no copyright info.
April 17, 2014 7:45 p.m.
Also notice the ult has 3 lines of text, whereas in the spoiler only two lines are shown on the ult.
April 17, 2014 7:45 p.m.
It's difinitely fake. For all the reasons already given and if you look and the "1" in the mana cost it's off. It's the wrong shape.
April 17, 2014 7:55 p.m.
Also, his ult says: '...targets a creature, untap and gain control of that creature'. Should be 'untap IT and gain control of it.
April 17, 2014 8:02 p.m.
@Shane if you look closer you'll also see on the Half-Card spoiler that you can't see anything just below the bottom edge of the -6 which conveniently cuts off where the 3rd line of text would be. I agree it's most likely a fake. I just don't think the 3rd line of text is the evidence that proves it. Whenever I've seen a card spoiled, it always includes the copyright information at the bottom (look at every card on mythic spoiler). I think it would be very odd and out of place for them to randomly not include it on this one card.
April 17, 2014 8:08 p.m.
crystalizeq says... #11
Oh yeah, I just noticed that the set number is 54/210, and there cannot be that many multicolored spells in the set. The actual abilities might be correct though.
Sorry for the false alarm though.
April 17, 2014 8:12 p.m.
Where is everyone seeing 54/210? Not that it's important or anything but on my screen the picture in post #2 says 51/210 and if copy and paste the link in the OP its the same image that says 51/210. Like I said its not really an important issue, but I'm sitting here like what am I missing??
April 17, 2014 8:28 p.m.
Could just be an unfortunate double typo. It's definitely 51.
April 17, 2014 10:22 p.m.
@zandl That's what i figured when Matsi883 posted the picture in #2 and directly below where it says 51/210 wrote 54. Then crystalizeq was like "oh I just noticed noticed it said 54" so I assumed he saw it too and wasn't just repeating what Matsi883 had said. That's why I was sitting here thinking, "how am I not seeing 54 anywhere on here" lol.
April 17, 2014 10:43 p.m.
crystalizeq says... #15
@abenz419 Sorry for the late response, but I guess I misread it, I quickly glanced at the number and the small print made it look like 54. But it is definitely 51. Sorry for the confusion
April 21, 2014 12:18 a.m.
41 is prolly where it will be around, magister is like 48, the set has a lottttt of artifact and lands since cogwork librarain is like 58
April 21, 2014 12:36 a.m.
oh plus this was confirmed fake, well it was admitted by someone they made it, no copyright, its in the m15 frame, etc
April 21, 2014 12:37 a.m.
Didgeridooda says... #18
Card is a mock up or what ever, but do you think the abilities are correct?
zandl says... #2
Doesn't have copyright info at bottom - Why would someone use Card Maker to make the real thing if they already knew what the real one was?
Fake.
April 17, 2014 7:22 p.m.