Autant pour moi , je mettais pas sur le mme plan le droit au profit des actionnaires et les droits des enfants ne pas tre maris de force . Je suis con des fois . <| sep |> Not only is it 4 mana , it doesn ' t hit face anymore . That is really big . I think I could stomach 3 mana blade flurry , since with prep it costs 0 , but the fact that Blade flurry prep costs a mana is ridiculous . <| sep |> At that point self checkout supervisors should be given a wiffle bat for the express purpose of smacking those people in the head . <| sep |> I don ' t know where you pull that against Twin thing from . I stated that cmc 3 sorcery speed cards are unplayable if not absurdly powerful . Its not about against Twin , its about in the modern format . And Yes , i do imply that there are cards that are not absurdly powerful , because there are a lot in magic in fact the majority of the card pool is not absurdly powerful , otherwise the thing we call staples wouldn ' t exist . However , i did state that Twin might higher the bar for a cmc 3 spell to be viable they need to be more powerful than without twin , which i then disprove with the latest meta development of cutting down on cmc 3 drops in modern successful decks even though twin is absent . The general available card pool makes cmc 3 cards that are not absurdly powerful unplayable , not twin . The rule of cmc 3 sorcery speed cards are unplayable except they are very powerful is actually a perfect rule . The definition of powerful however is a different thing it changes with the available card pool and the currently played decks . But when a card is determined to be powerful , it is an exception to the rule since the rule does not apply to it any longer . This is not about misreading the rule , it is about misjudging the object you want to apply the rule to , because it seems to fit the criteria of the rule at first sight hence why closer examination shows that the rule does not apply to it . When it is shown that the rule does not apply , the rule does not apply since it doesn ' t apply , it can ' t show that it is incomplete or inaccurate . Therefore the rule has not been disproved and following the mathematical proof by contradiction it has been proven to be correct .