[Official] Reverse Time | Rewind

[Cheesy111]

This card, while not clearly op, is extremely annoying to play against and counters a lot of decks it honestly shouldn't...

You provided evidence that you get annoyed playing against it.
You have not yet supplied evidence that it counters decks it shouldn't.

It counters all slow, non-rush decks: by sending your creature back to your deck it controls your creatures, card drawing, AND quanta (gotta spend it to get that creature back on the field) all with one cheap, spammable card. It's too much.

It does not counter all non-rush decks.

It does not counter, for example, any kind of stall.  It does not counter immaterial creatures.  It does not efficiently counter Mummy or Skeleton.  It does not counter any sort of bolt deck.  It does not counter any sort of SoV deck. 

Compared to Lightning and Basilisk Blood, Reverse Time is reasonable.  Lightning offers permanent CC at the cost of requiring a creature to have 5 or less HP.  Basilisk blood does not care about HP, but only delays the creature instead of killing it.  Reverse Time removes the creature from the battlefield, but -probably- improves your next draw significantly and does not permanently take care of the creature.

[eaglgenes101]

How much would each of these hypothetical cards cost in quanta?

1. Cancel the opponent's next draw if they have a targetable creature.
2. Reset target creature to its original state.
3. Disable target creature until the opponent has its cost in his/her quanta pool.
4. Generate a dummy card with the same cost as the target creature's cost in the opponent's hand.

Just getting it out there as disassembling the parts of this card might help show where exactly its balance lies.

[Cheesy111]

How much would each of these hypothetical cards cost in quanta?

1. Cancel the opponent's next draw if they have a targetable creature. Worth less than the card slot it would take up - conditional draw denial is not worth a card.
2. Reset target creature to its original state. Worth very very little.  Perhaps .5 at most.
3. Disable target creature until the opponent has its cost in his/her quanta pool. Although an important part is left out here (the quanta cost has to be paid and not just exist in the quanta pool) this is where I feel the majority of Reverse Time's value comes into play. 
4. Generate a dummy card with the same cost as the target creature's cost in the opponent's hand. A negative effect.  Not sure how to classify this in terms of quanta.

Just getting it out there as disassembling the parts of this card might help show where exactly its balance lies.

[mesaprotector]

I would like to point out that card #1 is pretty much the former effect of Nightmare (even though it was quite UP, the effect is worth at least half a card).

[OldTrees]

How much would each of these hypothetical cards cost in quanta?

1. Cancel the opponent's next draw if they have a targetable creature.
2. Reset target creature to its original state.
3. Disable target creature until the opponent has its cost in his/her quanta pool.
4. Generate a dummy card with the same cost as the target creature's cost in the opponent's hand.

Just getting it out there as disassembling the parts of this card might help show where exactly its balance lies.

You are counting some things twice. Either it makes the next draw less valuable or it makes the next draw more valuable. The more valuable the disable effect, the more valuable the free card quality we give the opponent.

[eaglgenes101]

How much would each of these hypothetical cards cost in quanta?

1. Cancel the opponent's next draw if they have a targetable creature.
2. Reset target creature to its original state.
3. Disable target creature until the opponent has its cost in his/her quanta pool.
4. Generate a dummy card with the same cost as the target creature's cost in the opponent's hand.

Just getting it out there as disassembling the parts of this card might help show where exactly its balance lies.

You are counting some things twice. Either it makes the next draw less valuable or it makes the next draw more valuable. The more valuable the disable effect, the more valuable the free card quality we give the opponent.

Chances are you're RTing whatever creature there is in play. You're usually not waiting for a better-to-RT creature to come in. It's you trying to pick the best time and creature to RT vs your opponent trying to determine if and how to play RT-resistantly. I think these factors cancel out and therefore you can assume that you're not changing how good or bad the next draw is.

[OldTrees]

How much would each of these hypothetical cards cost in quanta?

1. Cancel the opponent's next draw if they have a targetable creature.
2. Reset target creature to its original state.
3. Disable target creature until the opponent has its cost in his/her quanta pool.
4. Generate a dummy card with the same cost as the target creature's cost in the opponent's hand.

Just getting it out there as disassembling the parts of this card might help show where exactly its balance lies.

You are counting some things twice. Either it makes the next draw less valuable or it makes the next draw more valuable. The more valuable the disable effect, the more valuable the free card quality we give the opponent.

Chances are you're RTing whatever creature there is in play. You're usually not waiting for a better-to-RT creature to come in. It's you trying to pick the best time and creature to RT vs your opponent trying to determine if and how to play RT-resistantly. I think these factors cancel out and therefore you can assume that you're not changing how good or bad the next draw is.

I agree that they work against each other and thus 1 value should be calculated for their total. I do not know if it cancels out to 0.

[Jyiber]

A suggested counter is a small change to Sanctuary's effect. If you have an RT'd creature it goes back to hand instead of deck.

[Cheesy111]

A suggested counter is a small change to Sanctuary's effect. If you have an RT'd creature it goes back to hand instead of deck.

How does this work thematically?

Sanctuary protects your hand and quanta from disruption, and should not be used as a catch-all for "protection" effects.

[Jyiber]

Well it protects your hand, and by extension could protect your next draw.
You don't even really need an elaborate explanation. Small suggestion anyway.

[Zso_Zso]

Going with the 3rd option in the poll: RT returning the creature to hand instead of deck -- that would make sanctuary automatically countering it.
It would also remove the infinite-stall feature of RT and it would no longer block the drawing of the opponent. It would continue to act as soft CC, but without the draw-power denial and super-stall effects.

[omegareaper7]

Going with the 3rd option in the poll: RT returning the creature to hand instead of deck -- that would make sanctuary automatically countering it.
It would also remove the infinite-stall feature of RT and it would no longer block the drawing of the opponent. It would continue to act as soft CC, but without the draw-power denial and super-stall effects.

Compare to basilisk blood and lightning. That would make reverse time a ton weaker then either of those most likely.