Bloodletting, also known as bloodshedding or phlebotomy, refers to the practice of deliberately withdrawing blood from a person's body as a medical treatment. This ancient technique has been used for centuries in various cultures as a means to restore balance and rid the body of harmful substances. However, while bloodletting was once considered a legitimate therapeutic intervention, it is now widely regarded as a medical fallacy and one of the most egregious examples of historical medical malpractice. The origins of bloodletting can be traced back to ancient civilizations such as the Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans who believed that the human body contained four humors - blood, yellow bile, black bile, and phlegm. According to this theory, good health relied on balancing these bodily fluids, and bloodletting was thought to be an effective method of achieving this balance. This concept was further propagated by notable physicians such as Hippocrates and Galen, whose teachings greatly influenced medical practices throughout history.
Incite Fury (2 psi; conc., 1 min.). As a bonus action, choose up to three allies you can see within 60 feet of you (you can choose yourself in place of one of the allies). Until your concentration ends, each target can roll a d4 when rolling damage for a melee weapon attack and add the number rolled to the damage roll.
Yes, Curse of Bloodletting is quite useful to make someone either fall in line with the status quo, or a means of having them check out of the game altogether. Such cards often leads to players turning their attention to the enchantment at best, or you at worst, which serves to have the opposite effect as what you re attempting to use them for.
This concept was further propagated by notable physicians such as Hippocrates and Galen, whose teachings greatly influenced medical practices throughout history. During the medieval period, bloodletting reached its peak in terms of popularity and acceptance. The practice was believed to be a cure-all for various ailments, ranging from fevers and infections to mental illnesses and even spiritual disturbances.
Curse of vlloodletting
Of all the variation that multiplayer Magic has compared to regular two-player face-offs, the most notable feature is the length of time it takes to play. It’s no secret that Magic duels can be over in mere minutes, especially on the highly competitive level. Among the most hardcore players some matches are so one-sided or so fierce that they could start and finish between TV commercial breaks. The average session is a bit longer, but unless you build a deck to purposely slow the game down, two-player bouts don’t usually take more than about 20-25 minutes.
By contrast, most games of Commander don’t even start percolating with anything noteworthy until that point. With more players and a format markedly slower by design, most playthroughs take a couple hours to reach a viable conclusion. Yet the cause of this is more than just having extra chairs at the table and decks not based around heavily aggressive strategies. Indeed, part of the reason it takes so darn long is because of how much time goes into finding an attack of opportunity.
Table politics in multiplayer games are huge. It’s what causes fierce rivals to form alliances to stop someone from running away with the game and why so many board wipes exist as a form of hitting the reset button on the game state. More people at the table ensures that attacking or spending resources on only one player can easily make you more vulnerable to the capricious whims of another in response. It’s why so often you see many people sit and try to build up their board rather than dive wildly into the fray, as an unprovoked and half-formed strategy more often than not will hurt your position at the table rather than raise it. It’s for this reason why so many people bide their time until they feel they can (or must) make a real power move.
Every Commander game is like a PG-version of Game of Thrones, where the status quo may keep you at the table, but you’ll eventually need to get your hands dirty to get ahead. Sometimes this will be casting a huge threat that everyone else has to deal with or using a wide-sweeping combo to take out more than one person at a time. Until that moment, though, most multiplayer games are about waiting for the right window to strike and doing whatever you can in the meantime to avoid getting into a cage match fight with one other person while everyone else watches like hungry sharks.
There are times, however, when that other person totally deserves your wrath. Everyone’s had those moments where you just want to throw strategy to the wind due to the actions of an opponent. In those cases, where you’re going to break the stalemate and just make them suffer, it helps to have the right tools. Tools like this week’s Aura.
Today we have: Curse of Bloodletting
Name: Curse of Bloodletting
Edition: Dark Ascension
Rarity: Rare
Focus: Damage Dealing
Highlights: Curse of Bloodletting is not a complicated card. Its effect is quite transparent, enchanting a single player and stating that any damage they would take will be doubled – regardless of where the damage is coming from. This is a one-sided Furnace of Rath for about the same cost, but it’s no less potent. There are many times in games when someone will do something to irritate you or are generating way too much threat to be left alone. In those cases, it’s highly useful to pull out card like this to make them think twice about their actions.
Never let it be said that revenge isn’t a powerful motivator.
While the card ensures that you’re bound to make a guaranteed enemy by casting it on another player, it’ll still be advantageous to use if timed right. Whether it’s in retaliation to a slight or a preemptive strike against someone becoming difficult for the table to handle, Curse of Bloodletting generates both a mechanical and psychological effect on players when it hits the table. For the targeted player, their life total was just effectively halved. For everyone else, said player just became open season for damage dealing.
Because of this (with the exception of the affected player) Curse of Bloodletting is often more useful on the battlefield compared to cards like the aforementioned Furnace, Dictate of the Twin Gods, or Gratuitous Violence. Blanket damage doubling has a tendency to make people collectively nervous, especially if the person casting it has explosive spells or a powerful army behind them. Such cards often leads to players turning their attention to the enchantment at best, or you at worst, which serves to have the opposite effect as what you’re attempting to use them for. Curse of Bloodletting on the other hand, while only singularly focused, doesn’t share that fate. Your marked opponent may hate it, but the rest of the table will either leave it alone – or will take full advantage of the effect.
Yes, Curse of Bloodletting is quite useful to make someone either fall in line with the status quo, or a means of having them check out of the game altogether. If used as a vendetta tool, it’ll make your job of destroying them that much easier. If it’s used to take out the game’s current Big Bad, it’s a low-risk means of getting the table to break the status quo long enough to wade into the fight.
If nothing else, it’ll certainly shake up the table – which Commander games need to do now and then anyhow. So it’s win-win, really.
Except for the cursed player. But they probably deserved it.
Keep an eye out for us to be regularly featuring other more accessible-but-worth-it Commander cards going forward. In the meantime, we’ll keep the light on for you.
You can discuss this article over on our social media!
Do you have a particular Commander card to suggest for us to shine a future Spotlight on? You can send suggestions to [email protected]
By contrast, most games of Commander don’t even start percolating with anything noteworthy until that point. With more players and a format markedly slower by design, most playthroughs take a couple hours to reach a viable conclusion. Yet the cause of this is more than just having extra chairs at the table and decks not based around heavily aggressive strategies. Indeed, part of the reason it takes so darn long is because of how much time goes into finding an attack of opportunity.
Barbers, who also served as barber-surgeons, became the primary practitioners of bloodletting due to their experience in using sharp instruments, such as razors and lancets. Unfortunately, bloodletting was often carried out indiscriminately and without a thorough understanding of human anatomy and physiology. Patients would undergo bloodletting procedures that involved opening veins or arteries in different parts of the body, resulting in excessive bleeding and, sometimes, death. The notion that "bleeding a little" could relieve symptoms or restore vitality became deeply ingrained in medical thought, leading to the widespread overuse of bloodletting. It was not until the 19th century that bloodletting began to be gradually discredited as scientific advancements and a better understanding of the human body debunked the underlying theory. The advent of modern medicine, improvements in hygiene, and the development of more effective treatments led to the abandonment of bloodletting as a standard medical procedure. Today, bloodletting is viewed as a dangerous and ineffective treatment, relegated to the annals of medical history. Its legacy serves as a reminder of the fallibility of medical knowledge, the dangers of blindly adhering to traditional practices, and the importance of evidence-based medicine. In conclusion, the curse of bloodletting highlights the perils of relying on outdated medical practices without scientific evidence. Although once considered a remedy for countless ailments, bloodletting ultimately caused more harm than good. Its decline and eventual abandonment demonstrate the importance of critical thinking, research, and continuous scientific advancements in the field of medicine..
Reviews for "The Cursed Bloodline: Tracing the Origins of Vlloodletting"
1. Mary - 2/5 stars - "I was really looking forward to reading 'Curse of Bloodletting', but I was left disappointed. The story lacked depth and the characters felt one-dimensional. It was hard for me to connect with any of them, and I found myself quickly losing interest. The writing style also felt choppy and disjointed, making it difficult to follow the plot. Overall, I found this book to be underwhelming."
2. John - 1/5 stars - "I found 'Curse of Bloodletting' to be a complete waste of time. The story was confusing and poorly executed, leaving me feeling frustrated and confused. The pacing was off, with some parts dragging on while others felt rushed and incomplete. The dialogue was also unnatural and forced, making it hard to believe in the characters or their interactions. I would not recommend this book to anyone."
3. Sarah - 2/5 stars - "While the concept of 'Curse of Bloodletting' intrigued me, the execution fell flat. The plot was predictable and lacked originality, making it hard for me to become fully engrossed in the story. The characters were also uninteresting and lacked depth, leading to a lack of emotional investment in their fates. Additionally, the writing style felt amateurish and in need of further editing. Overall, this book did not live up to my expectations."
4. Robert - 2/5 stars - "I had high hopes for 'Curse of Bloodletting', but unfortunately, it did not deliver. The story started off promising, but soon became convoluted and hard to follow. The plot twists felt forced and lacking in cohesion, making it hard to stay engaged. The dialogue was also unrealistic and stiff, making it difficult for me to connect with the characters. I was left feeling disappointed and unsatisfied with this book."