>>83316132I'll admit that's interesting, I haven't seen that design yet. How is it different from seeing your opponent with cards in hand other than a guarantee that it's a spell and they're not bluffing with a creature instead or something. Also if there's no cost to set that feels worse if the opponent goes to destroy your set spell and you can just activate it in response to 2 for 1 them while they also committed mana to try to destroy it.
