Coral Reef

Homelands sucked. Homelands really sucked. So, for two mana, you get: a card with four counters on it that has an incredibly expensive ability to remove a counter to give a tiny (albeit permanent) toughness buff. Here are example s of better cards that require creatures to tap: Arachnus Spider (despite requiring it to be a spider and only grabbing a specific card), Bramblesnap (despite only giving a +1/+1 bonus to itself), Nullmage Shepard (despite needing four creatures), and Unerring Sling (despite only allowing one creature to fight an attacking or blocking creature with flying for 3 mana once per turn). Oh wait, you can put counters back on it for the low, low price of sacrificing an Island? Yeah, how about no. In all fairness, the +0/+1 is permanent and it is rechargeable, but it's just been so outclassed almost immediately in subsequent sets.  What was with old blue Magic cards needing to sacrifice Islands?

Pros: Gives a toughness boost

Cons: Limited number of uses, requires mana and untapped blue creatures to activate, requires land sack to recharge

Rating: 0.5/5

Replacements: Grand Architect, Hall of Triumph, Power Matrix

Leviathan

Rawr! I's a monster! A really bad, expensive, destructive monster. Stat-wise, this thing is pretty underpowered. Often, if something has a power than is greater than its CMC, it can be balanced out by increasing the colour cost. A good example of this is Leatherback Baloth: it costs 3 CMC for a 4/5, but it's three green mana, which is a balancing factor. This card doesn't warrant 4 blue mana symbols. Very few cards actually have 4 mana symbols because it's kind of hard to justify such an expensive colour commitment. A 10/10 trampler for 5UUUU is already bad enough, but the fact that you have to sack a ton of Islands in order to do anything with it makes it all that much worse. I can see a lot of this happening if you try and run it:

"I sack 2 Islands to untap it and 2 more to swing in to deal you..."
"Agonizing Demise. Kicked."
"What?!"

"I believe you lose now."

*rage-quit*

If this had Shroud or Hexproof, it'd be a lot better but still not worth it. I can't actually see a situation where I'd want this over, say, a Thing from the Deep. Okay, maybe if I had a Homarid Spawning Bed...

Pros: Big 'n' beefy

Cons: Quad blue, tons of land sack required

Rating: 0/5

Diregraf Ghoul

It's a bear! Kind of. Well, not really. I actually think this card is pretty cool. Yeah, it comes in tapped, but if you drop it turn 1, it doesn't really matter. It could block, but most things dropped on turn 1 won't be that threatening as to require an immediate block. All that really be said about it is that it's a 2/2 for 1 with a minor drawback. Can't really be happier with a one-drop, can you?

Pros: 2/2 for 1

Cons: Enters tapped

Rating: 4/5

Schismotivate

Whenever I look at this card, I get confused feelings about it. On the one hand, it's a card that combines red's tendency to have Instant-speed buffs with blue's penchant for Instant-speed debuffs. On the other hand, it also costs 3 (two of it being mixed colours) and it only affects power. However, in deconstructing this card, we can see its true value.. If we are to look at the buff side, we get Fists of the Anvil. On the debuff side, we get Downsize (despite not having actually existing when this card was first printed). In essence, this is two cards in one for the same price. You can't really complain about that honestly. It's a pair of average cards taped together to make a better-than-average combat trick. Very Izzet if you think about it...

Pros: Fists of the Anvil and Downsize in one

Cons: Double colour commitment, average effects

Rating: 3/5

Phyrexian Plaguelord

This is what I was talking about in my Phyrexian Debaser review all that single hour ago. Instant-speed sack outlets are always awesome because they can be easily abused. Add "creature removal" on top of that and it becomes amazing. For five mana, this card rocks and is usually going to register fairly high on the "things that need to be dealt with" list when it hits the table. It does suck that it has to tap in order to sack itself for the -4/-4, but if you really need to get rid of it that badly, just sack it to its second ability. This is an all-star in the world of black Magic creatures and it is a well-deserved recognition.

Pros: Instant-speed sack outlet, -4/-4 until end of turn

Cons: Requires tap for -4/-4, requires sack for all abilities

Rating: 4.5/5

NOTE: If you're wondering why I didn't do all four Carriers in one article, it's because it's a vertical set, not a horizontal set. Call it personal neurosis, but I don't really like vertical sets as much as horizontal ones, so I tend not to lump them together. Don't really know why. Maybe it's because I have huge 3-inch binder full of horizontal sets...

Phyrexian Defiler

This is a creature that borders on average. As I've said before, 3 is the magic number when it comes to direct damage removal and there's a reason behind that: a lot of creatures have 3 or less toughness (shocking, right?). Why does that matter? Well, to start winning, you usually have to remove obstacles such as your opponents creatures, and the quicker you can get those chump blockers out of the way, the better, and since most chump blockers are tiny, you only need to deal 3 or less damage. Now, why does this matter here? Well, -X/-X kind of starts to turn around at about the X = 3 mark. Why? Because it can allow your chump blockers to take down your opponent's big things. If you're able to bring your opponent's big guys down to the size of your own little guys, then you don't really have to worry about direct damage in order to deal with them.

"But Jay," I hear masses cry out, "Direct damage works in the same fashion as -X/-X for the purposes of how you described!". Yeah, dealing a Timber Protector 3 damage with a Barbed Lightning will allow a Crypt Angel to kill it just as easily as if you hit it with a Last Gasp, but look at it this way: which of those scenarios results in you having a creature on the board? Hit the Protector with 3 damage and it still deals 4 damage, but give it -3/-3 and suddenly it only deals 2 which allows your Crypt Angel to live. Even if you can't kill it outright, I'd still prefer shrinking something down to block it instead of putting damage on it. And on the note of "not killing it outright", -X/-X gets around that pesky Indestructible thing, so that's a point in it's favour.

Back to this card. Yeah, it still has to tap and die to give the -3/-3, but at least it does more that Phyrexian Debaser at the same CMC. And besides, as I've stated, -3/-3 is a pretty good debuff to hand out, even if it's only once.

Pros: -3/-3 until end of turn

Cons: Has to tap, has to sack

Rating: 2/5

Phyrexian Debaser

A slight improvement to Phyrexian Denouncer in that this can flying and kills larger things. Still, not really a great cost for such a marginal effect. But, to its credit, it only has one card that it can be called inferior to in the same "costs exactly the same, isn't a permanent, and has a similar (or better) effect" category that I judged the Denouncer on: Gild. I guess it's good for 4-drop black removal then? Eh... No. It's still bad. Better than Denouncer, but still bad.

Pros: Flies, Crippling Fatigue on a stick, not Phyrexian Denouncer

Cons: Requires tap, requires sack, 2/2 for 4

Rating: 0.5/5

Phyrexian Denouncer

Talk about no bang for your buck. Having a Night on a stick can be quite useful even if it requires a sacrifice (look at Phyrexian Plaguelord for a good example of that), but this is just really sad. First, it has to tap in order to sack, so it has to stay around for a turn and not attack, which kind of lessens any combat trickability you might try and wring out of this. Second, it dies to give something -1/-1 until end of turn which isn't that great, especially for two mana. Here are better things you could spend your two mana on and get the same end result (or better): Chainer's Edict, Cruel Edict, Diabolic Edict, Dry Spell, Last Gasp, Nausea, Scent of Nightshade, Shrivel, and Steal Strength. I'm not saying that's every two-drop that's better than this; it's just every two-drop that costs 1B that isn't a creature that has no targeting restrictions or sack requirement. All in all, skip this card if you can.

Pros: Night on a stick

Cons: Requires sack, requires tap

Rating: 0/5

Ramos

I really wish Ramos had an actual card. I think he would cost WWUUBBRRGG like Progenitus because that's what these produce (kind of like how the Attendants can be sacked for their respective dragons). As for these cards, they aren't bad at all. They are much more restrictive Manaliths, but they have the option to become a better Implements of Sacrifice if need be. They're pretty solid as far as mana rocks go, although they aren't as good as Sol Ring. Then again, not much is as good as Sol Ring.

Pros: Able to produce two mana if need be

Cons: Single colour, requires sack for 2nd mana

Rating: 3/5

As a closing point, I'd like to say that I like every piece of art for this set, except for the Heart. Apparently the greatest dragon engine in all of Mercadia was, in fact, a Care Bear.

Opal "Statues"

I really like this set of cards. They are basically cheap creatures that aren't exactly creatures until your opponent makes one (in fact, that's exactly what they are (save for one)). All of these would be amazing creatures if they were creatures 100% of the time (a 2/2 for 1, a flying bear, a 3/3 first striker for 3...) but their amazingness is balanced out by the fact that an opponent needs to play a creature spell (or you need to be dying).

Okay, I'm going to take a quick minute here to talk about Opal Avenger since it doesn't have the same trigger as the rest of these cards. It's still pretty good. It's a nice blocker against aggro and it doesn't die to most burn removal. Now that we're done with that, back to the rest of the set.

I can see these working nicely in a control deck since your opponent only has to cast the creature spell, not have the creature enter the battlefield. Are these going to win an Legacy or Vintage tournaments? I doubt it. Are they fun cards for casual? Most definitely. 

Pros: Amazing creatures for their cost

Cons: An opponent has to cast a creature or you have to be dying

Rating: 3/5

Note: Props to Opal Acrolith for being able to dodge most creature removal.