Home > Card Reviews > Raviel, Lord of Phantasms: Reviews and where to look

Raviel, Lord of Phantasms: Reviews and where to look

2.12.12 Card Review. Please look at the evening announcements and do contests before going anywhere else, because they are fresh and new.

Raviel is definitely the best sacred beast that Kagemaru used, and is an obelisk look-alike. And with such an awesome ability, lets take a look at Raviel, Lord of Phantasms.

Look:

Raviel,LordofPhantasmsLC02-EN-UR-LE.jpg
Because it’s pretty old, and rare, you might not be able to get this cheap, so if you want Raviel, and all the other sacred beats, get the legendary collection 2.

Review:
Raviel is definitely the best of the sacred beasts, and soon you’ll know why. Raviel has 4000 attack & 4000 defense, so it’s strong enough to win any battle, just like obelisk, but its summoning is harder. To summon Raviel, you have to tribute 3 fiend type monsters, which is ridiculously hard. But once on the field, all that’s left is rewards for you. Each time your opponent normal summons a monster, you in return get one phantasm token, a level one fiend type monster with 1000 attack and 1000 defense. Phantasm tokens can’t attack, but have another purpose. You can sacrifice monsters on the field, and Raviel gains their attack for a turn! So that means for every monster your opponent summons, you a get a phantasm token, and then you can sacrifice them, which gives Raviel an extra 1000 attack per each token! Raviel needs a fiend swarming deck, like Marik, so that you can get the required monsters on the field. Also, you probably won’t need to use those phantasm tokens, unless you want to win in one turn flat.

Where to look:
Go to eBay, or buy legendary collection 2.

My Rating (out of 5*’s):
****
Because it’s so tough to summon, it lost a star, but Raviel is still a great addition to any deck.

Advertisements
  1. March 5, 2012 at 10:25 am

    I have hardly ever appeared at it like that, but you’ve got brought to mind some things I’ve never ever regarded inside the past. I know this was not an incredibly significant subject, but I do value what you explained. I’ll be reading your weblog much more often.

  1. March 13, 2012 at 12:52 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: