Baneslayer doesn't die to a single burn spell. Titans had an etb.
I still think the upside when he doesn't get removed is too good to pass up, but he has a valid point. Furthermore, and I think this is what seperates Baneslayer, Hydra doesn't even stabilize the board when he enters play. My team of 3 guys can still just attack in ftw.
I think the stabilization argument is good. I wonder how much better this would be with 5 toughness instead of just 4. Note that he is in green which is a better ramp color than white so the 5 cc is kinda deceptive. I am convinced at this point that in order to make him good the challenge is to figure out how to either give him haste, which does a number of important things: It makes sorcery removal far less useful because while you might end up removing the creature you are taking a lot of damage or losing a solid blocker or both before that occurs. The other issue are the charms and doom blade. There are three charms that kill this guy and those are very difficult to overcome without some kind of protection spell like Simic Charm or something similar. Haste also helps because you can wait for your opponent to tap out before smashing them in the face with your 8/8 trampler, but still, those damn charms....
Baneslayer stabilizes the board because... it can block the turn it comes into play? Apparently walls are also now better than the hydra.
Baneslayer excelled in control decks. The hydra might excel in aggressive decks, because it fits the archetype. They're both good for separate reasons, and they both die to removal. It seems to me that "dies to removal" is not a barrier to standard playability, even at 5 CMC.
I think this guy has huge potential, and will probably end up being defined by future printings and the meta-game shifts. If the Thragtusk, Huntmaster, Restoration Angel (massive ETB value) cards phase out with m14 and the Innistrad block and aren't replaced by new pushed ETB cards then this guy could be seriously relevant. If they continue to push out ETB value (which was way toned down in the Rav block with an exception or 2) then this guy probably still has a home in some decks, just not a staple.
I think people tend to forget that in 3+ months there is only really gonna be a few powerful ETB value cards left in standard. The format is not going to be the same. Dies to removal is only going to be a valid argument for a 3 month period of time, then the argument will probably shift to 'he's a ton better than most of the stuff we have left'. Maybe WOTC is easing back a little on how pushed some of the value creatures are. Maybe this guy will be the new thundermaw.
People may play a lot of removal (I'm salivating over getting doomblade back) but what happens when your opponent plays this and you don't have removal in hand ready to go. . .
Baneslayer stabilizes the board because... it can block the turn it comes into play? Apparently walls are also now better than the hydra.
Baneslayer excelled in control decks. The hydra might excel in aggressive decks, because it fits the archetype. They're both good for separate reasons, and they both die to removal. It seems to me that "dies to removal" is not a barrier to standard playability, even at 5 CMC.
Baneslayer had lifelink which means you couldn't suicide your creatures into it and win an attrition war. It also had flying which means you couldn't fly over it.
Any card that has evasion and does lethal damage in 2 attack steps is more than reasonable, and will find a home whenever the meta is right for it.
He's also actually good facing down thragtusk or reckoner on a one-for-one basis, which is not true of very many creatures in the format, and indicates to me that he will find a home in sideboards at the very least.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Slingin' cardboard out of Yokohama, Japan. (if you're local and play EDH or want to test competitive, drop me a line!)
Baneslayer stabilizes the board because... it can block the turn it comes into play? Apparently walls are also now better than the hydra.
Baneslayer excelled in control decks. The hydra might excel in aggressive decks, because it fits the archetype. They're both good for separate reasons, and they both die to removal. It seems to me that "dies to removal" is not a barrier to standard playability, even at 5 CMC.
Baneslayer pretty much profitably blocked everything in the meta except herself. If she stuck when you cast her you'd likely deter your opponent from attacking while also threatening to outrace with 10 point life swings (I remember her outracing a Progenitus in a PT). She definitely stabilized boards. More importantly, however, the standards of standard have evolved since she was first released in type 2. When you say "It seems to me that "dies to removal" is not a barrier to standard playability, even at 5CMC" you're operating under the false assumption that the barrier from Baneslayer's time is the same as our current one. People don't joke around saying "Welcome to ETB:The Gathering" for nothing. It'd probably make a bit more sense to look at our current standard and see what is competitively being played at 5CMC+ that doesn't effect the board and compare those instead.
They keep printing more and more powerful green fat (let's face it, that's what this is.... pure power and toughness). I wonder if they've finally creeped enough to make it playable?
They keep printing more and more powerful green fat (let's face it, that's what this is.... pure power and toughness). I wonder if they've finally creeped enough to make it playable?
I thought Terra Stomper was that card when it was first announced. Then Khalni Hydra came around. I don't think this is the final form for big green creatures.
After some time looking around, i can't find any other five drop which threatens to end games quicker than this. Mostly it's because of trample that this dude is good.
From all my cards, and all of gatherer. Has there ever been a more aggressive creature with no drawback, with such an easy mana cost?
I don't think there has. It's far and away from the old favourites baneslayer and thundermaw. It's in another league. 2 swings? It's bonkers.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: G Tron, Vannifar, Jund, Druid/Vizier combo, Humans, Eldrazi Stompy (Serum Powder), Amulet, Grishoalbrand, Breach Titan, Turns, Eternal Command, As Foretold Living End, Elves, Cheerios, RUG Scapeshift
Baneslayer pretty much profitably blocked everything in the meta except herself. If she stuck when you cast her you'd likely deter your opponent from attacking while also threatening to outrace with 10 point life swings (I remember her outracing a Progenitus in a PT). She definitely stabilized boards. More importantly, however, the standards of standard have evolved since she was first released in type 2. When you say "It seems to me that "dies to removal" is not a barrier to standard playability, even at 5CMC" you're operating under the false assumption that the barrier from Baneslayer's time is the same as our current one. People don't joke around saying "Welcome to ETB:The Gathering" for nothing. It'd probably make a bit more sense to look at our current standard and see what is competitively being played at 5CMC+ that doesn't effect the board and compare those instead.
I don't think anyone's arguing that the hydra is going to replace Thragtusk or Thundermaw Hellkite as the go-to 5+ CMC staple anytime soon... well, sooner than Theros anyways. My point remains, however: Baneslayer proves wrong your argument about how its CMC relative to the removal spell being used against it is the primary measure of its value. You can apply that to both the meta in which it saw play as well as the current meta. Furthermore, it only provided stability if it survived long enough to net you life or defend against attacking creatures, which it couldn't and wouldn't do if it died to cheap removal... which it could and would. Is this sounding familiar? It should, because it's the same argument people are using to knock the hydra. Your "if she stuck" clause is certainly the most important caveat in both scenarios. If Baneslayer stuck, you probably would have stabilized and out raced your opponent, which is every bit as meaningful as saying "if the hydra sticks, your opponent is dead in two turns."
I thought Terra Stomper was that card when it was first announced. Then Khalni Hydra came around. I don't think this is the final form for big green creatures.
New quote that sums up Wizards when it comes to Hydras. "This isn't even my final form!"
I don't think anyone's arguing that the hydra is going to replace Thragtusk or Thundermaw Hellkite as the go-to 5+ CMC staple anytime soon... well, sooner than Theros anyways. My point remains, however: Baneslayer proves wrong your argument about how its CMC relative to the removal spell being used against it is the primary measure of its value. You can apply that to both the meta in which it saw play as well as the current meta. Furthermore, it only provided stability if it survived long enough to net you life or defend against attacking creatures, which it couldn't and wouldn't do if it died to cheap removal... which it could and would. Is this sounding familiar? It should, because it's the same argument people are using to knock the hydra. Your "if she stuck" clause is certainly the most important caveat in both scenarios. If Baneslayer stuck, you probably would have stabilized and out raced your opponent, which is every bit as meaningful as saying "if the hydra sticks, your opponent is dead in two turns."
I think you bring up a good point. I agree that "expensive creature that dies to doomblade" isn't the only counter to the argument.
However, looking beyond just that, the Baneslayer is much better on defense on the critical turn that it comes into play. You can make some general assumptions that whenever these expensive creatures land the opposition has reach close to critical mass. Throwing aside the removal (since with that argument they are both equally vulnearble), the Baneslayer is much better on defense, which a lumbering deck playing 5 drops desperately needs. In that scenario the Hydra is not menacing at all. It's just a 4/4 creature and I can just attack in to you, and even if I don't fly I just lose 1 creature maybe. With Baneslayer I suddenly just can't attack anymore. If I attack into Baneslayer, even with a flyer, you gain 5 life and short of 6 toughness I don't even trade creatures.
So the argument should be expanded. Baneslayer is vulnerable but in the event removal is not immediately available it stops attacks instantly. Hydra, even without removal does not. Of course there are other variables, like the "who is playing offense and defense" question. The Baneslayer player is often on defense, the Hydra player may not be, which is why I think it must go into aggressive decks, preferably where everything is hasted for it to make an impact fast enough for the 8 damage it's bringing to matter.
So the argument should be expanded. Baneslayer is vulnerable but in the event removal is not immediately available it stops attacks instantly. Hydra, even without removal does not. Of course there are other variables, like the "who is playing offense and defense" question. The Baneslayer player is often on defense, the Hydra player may not be, which is why I think it must go into aggressive decks, preferably where everything is hasted for it to make an impact fast enough for the 8 damage it's bringing to matter.
Exactly. Baneslayer excelled, despite vulnerability to removal, because it was played in slower, control oriented decks that relied on the stability it could provide. A card like the hydra certainly wouldn't be competitive if played in the same kind of deck, but nobody here's advocating that. The hydra can and probably will excel in the upcoming meta (post-rotation), also despite vulnerability to removal, because it plays well in an aggressive deck.
So, just like "Baneslayer is vulnerable but in the event removal is not immediately available it stops attacks instantly," the hydra is vulnerable, but in the event removal is not immediately available it wins the game quick.
Exactly. Baneslayer excelled, despite vulnerability to removal, because it was played in slower, control oriented decks that relied on the stability it could provide. A card like the hydra certainly wouldn't be competitive if played in the same kind of deck, but nobody here's advocating that. The hydra can and probably will excel in the upcoming meta (post-rotation), also despite vulnerability to removal, because it plays well in an aggressive deck.
So, just like "Baneslayer is vulnerable but in the event removal is not immediately available it stops attacks instantly," the hydra is vulnerable, but in the event removal is not immediately available it wins the game quick.
It has to be the MOST aggressive deck however. If it's slightly less aggressive than some other deck (like mono-red or something) then it's going to have a serious problem. Unlike Baneslayer which can be defense/offense oriented. This thing is one-dimensional. It's not a valuable blocker. If the deck that runs it is in a situation where it's not the aggressor it's in serious trouble.
I don't think anyone's arguing that the hydra is going to replace Thragtusk or Thundermaw Hellkite as the go-to 5+ CMC staple anytime soon.
I'm pretty sure that's exactly what people are arguing and the only reason I've been playing devil's advocate this entire time. I've constantly pointed out that I believe this card to be good. It's only when people start comparing it to BSA/Thundermaw (beyond the obvious fact that it's a 5CMC core set mythic) that I've felt the need to speak up and explain why that's not the case.
I also still can't stress enough just how good Baneslayer was in her setting and I feel like your totally discounting this fact. There's something to be said for a card that essentially deterred the entire meta from attacking into her when she hit the board but could also go on the offensive just as easily. For instance, she shut down Jund's aerial game which was rather dominate at the time. Point is, when she hit the board you got everything you were going to get for your five mana investment. She didn't take time to get online and give you a ROI.
I'm pretty sure that's exactly what people are arguing and the only reason I've been playing devil's advocate this entire time. I've constantly pointed out that I believe this card to be good. It's only when people start comparing it to BSA/Thundermaw (beyond the obvious fact that it's a 5CMC core set mythic) that I've felt the need to speak up and explain why that's not the case.
I also still can't stress enough just how good Baneslayer was in her setting and I feel like your totally discounting this fact. There's something to be said for a card that essentially deterred the entire meta from attacking into her when she hit the board but could also go on the offensive just as easily. For instance, she shut down Jund's aerial game which was rather dominate at the time. Point is, when she hit the board you got everything you were going to get for your five mana investment. She didn't take time to get online and give you a ROI.
I also still can't stress enough just how good Baneslayer was in her setting and I feel like your totally discounting this fact. There's something to be said for a card that essentially deterred the entire meta from attacking into her when she hit the board but could also go on the offensive just as easily. For instance, she shut down Jund's aerial game which was rather dominate at the time. Point is, when she hit the board you got everything you were going to get for your five mana investment. She didn't take time to get online and give you a ROI.[/QUOTE]
This man knows his stuff, I couldn't put it better myself but let me try Baneslayer Angel put your opponent into a spot that if they didn't have removal they were screwed it didn't need haste it didn't need anything to BE the board when it was played not be on the board it was the board anything you did up to that point was negated simply by her presence, this isn't close to that this is an ok attacker that may win the game IF you give it haste as unlike some of the other examples like thundermaw or hellrider it doesn't have haste naturally and unlike thragtusk it doesn't do anything when it enters or leaves the battlefield.
In other words like DTG has been saying this thing is good but not good ENOUGH, look no ones telling anyone not to play this card but don't be surprised if it loses you a game/games because of being generally terrible against any kind of removal, oh and baneslayer was only good for her time then they printed the titans.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Decks:
Standard: Pure Jank:p
Modern: UB Control:cool2:
Legacy: Death & Taxes
Vintage: UWR Geist Fish
EDH: Thassa,Obzedat
I'm pretty sure that's exactly what people are arguing and the only reason I've been playing devil's advocate this entire time. I've constantly pointed out that I believe this card to be good. It's only when people start comparing it to BSA/Thundermaw (beyond the obvious fact that it's a 5CMC core set mythic) that I've felt the need to speak up and explain why that's not the case.
I also still can't stress enough just how good Baneslayer was in her setting and I feel like your totally discounting this fact. There's something to be said for a card that essentially deterred the entire meta from attacking into her when she hit the board but could also go on the offensive just as easily. For instance, she shut down Jund's aerial game which was rather dominate at the time. Point is, when she hit the board you got everything you were going to get for your five mana investment. She didn't take time to get online and give you a ROI.
I know how good she was, but that still does not validate the "dies to removal" argument. She may have provided more value under the right circumstances, but that value was still conditional. I guess we'll just have to wait and see how the hydra impacts the board this fall.
People seem to be forgetting that she wasn't just an amazing clock, she was also an amazing way to not die and she was really good all on her own too. Those two features (Does't require other creatures, and Keeps you alive) are not offered by the Hydra.
It's still a goood card, assuming you are in the market for a two turn clock.
This man knows his stuff, I couldn't put it better myself but let me try Baneslayer Angel put your opponent into a spot that if they didn't have removal they were screwed it didn't need haste it didn't need anything to BE the board when it was played not be on the board it was the board anything you did up to that point was negated simply by her presence, this isn't close to that this is an ok attacker that may win the game IF you give it haste as unlike some of the other examples like thundermaw or hellrider it doesn't have haste naturally and unlike thragtusk it doesn't do anything when it enters or leaves the battlefield.
In other words like DTG has been saying this thing is good but not good ENOUGH, look no ones telling anyone not to play this card but don't be surprised if it loses you a game/games because of being generally terrible against any kind of removal, oh and baneslayer was only good for her time then they printed the titans.
This card IS good enough, does a different job and fits into different decks than Wallet Slayer AND you are wrong on the last account. BSA STILL saw play when titans were in standard.
Baneslayer stabilizes the board because... it can block the turn it comes into play? Apparently walls are also now better than the hydra.
Baneslayer excelled in control decks. The hydra might excel in aggressive decks, because it fits the archetype. They're both good for separate reasons, and they both die to removal. It seems to me that "dies to removal" is not a barrier to standard playability, even at 5 CMC.
C'mon man. Baneslayer stabilizes the board because it gains you 5 life when the beatdown attacks into it.
You keep trying to refute the arguments seperately, but they need to be taken together. It does nothing the turn it enters play, its 5 mana, it dies to removal, and it doesn't stabilize against faster decks. There are a lot of cards like that. None of them have been playable.
For me, it needs haste. I hope there's a deck there. I suspect there isn't. What do you do against an aggro deck that doesn't play 5 drops? You need guys at 2-3 CC that can attack and block well. Are there any of those in gruul colors?
Exava into this with domri down seems pretty rough for an opponent without removal in hand,and if they do have the removal, they have no choice but to play it...
Yep. Hello Domri Jund.
Delicious.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently Playing:
:symrg:Domri's Savagery:symrg:
:symw:Humans:symw:
:symw::symu::symg:Trostani Bant:symw::symu::symg:
:sympu:Architect:sympu:
I think the stabilization argument is good. I wonder how much better this would be with 5 toughness instead of just 4. Note that he is in green which is a better ramp color than white so the 5 cc is kinda deceptive. I am convinced at this point that in order to make him good the challenge is to figure out how to either give him haste, which does a number of important things: It makes sorcery removal far less useful because while you might end up removing the creature you are taking a lot of damage or losing a solid blocker or both before that occurs. The other issue are the charms and doom blade. There are three charms that kill this guy and those are very difficult to overcome without some kind of protection spell like Simic Charm or something similar. Haste also helps because you can wait for your opponent to tap out before smashing them in the face with your 8/8 trampler, but still, those damn charms....
Rafiq of the Many UWG
Sedris, the Traitor King URB
Kaalia of the Vast RWB
Savra, Queen of Golgari GB
Trostani, Selesnya's Voice GW
Eight-and-a-Half-Tails EquipmentW
Baneslayer excelled in control decks. The hydra might excel in aggressive decks, because it fits the archetype. They're both good for separate reasons, and they both die to removal. It seems to me that "dies to removal" is not a barrier to standard playability, even at 5 CMC.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
I think people tend to forget that in 3+ months there is only really gonna be a few powerful ETB value cards left in standard. The format is not going to be the same. Dies to removal is only going to be a valid argument for a 3 month period of time, then the argument will probably shift to 'he's a ton better than most of the stuff we have left'. Maybe WOTC is easing back a little on how pushed some of the value creatures are. Maybe this guy will be the new thundermaw.
People may play a lot of removal (I'm salivating over getting doomblade back) but what happens when your opponent plays this and you don't have removal in hand ready to go. . .
Baneslayer had lifelink which means you couldn't suicide your creatures into it and win an attrition war. It also had flying which means you couldn't fly over it.
Rafiq of the Many UWG
Sedris, the Traitor King URB
Kaalia of the Vast RWB
Savra, Queen of Golgari GB
Trostani, Selesnya's Voice GW
Eight-and-a-Half-Tails EquipmentW
He's also actually good facing down thragtusk or reckoner on a one-for-one basis, which is not true of very many creatures in the format, and indicates to me that he will find a home in sideboards at the very least.
Baneslayer pretty much profitably blocked everything in the meta except herself. If she stuck when you cast her you'd likely deter your opponent from attacking while also threatening to outrace with 10 point life swings (I remember her outracing a Progenitus in a PT). She definitely stabilized boards. More importantly, however, the standards of standard have evolved since she was first released in type 2. When you say "It seems to me that "dies to removal" is not a barrier to standard playability, even at 5CMC" you're operating under the false assumption that the barrier from Baneslayer's time is the same as our current one. People don't joke around saying "Welcome to ETB:The Gathering" for nothing. It'd probably make a bit more sense to look at our current standard and see what is competitively being played at 5CMC+ that doesn't effect the board and compare those instead.
.
I thought Terra Stomper was that card when it was first announced. Then Khalni Hydra came around. I don't think this is the final form for big green creatures.
From all my cards, and all of gatherer. Has there ever been a more aggressive creature with no drawback, with such an easy mana cost?
I don't think there has. It's far and away from the old favourites baneslayer and thundermaw. It's in another league. 2 swings? It's bonkers.
I don't think anyone's arguing that the hydra is going to replace Thragtusk or Thundermaw Hellkite as the go-to 5+ CMC staple anytime soon... well, sooner than Theros anyways. My point remains, however: Baneslayer proves wrong your argument about how its CMC relative to the removal spell being used against it is the primary measure of its value. You can apply that to both the meta in which it saw play as well as the current meta. Furthermore, it only provided stability if it survived long enough to net you life or defend against attacking creatures, which it couldn't and wouldn't do if it died to cheap removal... which it could and would. Is this sounding familiar? It should, because it's the same argument people are using to knock the hydra. Your "if she stuck" clause is certainly the most important caveat in both scenarios. If Baneslayer stuck, you probably would have stabilized and out raced your opponent, which is every bit as meaningful as saying "if the hydra sticks, your opponent is dead in two turns."
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
New quote that sums up Wizards when it comes to Hydras. "This isn't even my final form!"
Many thanks to DNC at Heroes of the Plane Studios
I think you bring up a good point. I agree that "expensive creature that dies to doomblade" isn't the only counter to the argument.
However, looking beyond just that, the Baneslayer is much better on defense on the critical turn that it comes into play. You can make some general assumptions that whenever these expensive creatures land the opposition has reach close to critical mass. Throwing aside the removal (since with that argument they are both equally vulnearble), the Baneslayer is much better on defense, which a lumbering deck playing 5 drops desperately needs. In that scenario the Hydra is not menacing at all. It's just a 4/4 creature and I can just attack in to you, and even if I don't fly I just lose 1 creature maybe. With Baneslayer I suddenly just can't attack anymore. If I attack into Baneslayer, even with a flyer, you gain 5 life and short of 6 toughness I don't even trade creatures.
So the argument should be expanded. Baneslayer is vulnerable but in the event removal is not immediately available it stops attacks instantly. Hydra, even without removal does not. Of course there are other variables, like the "who is playing offense and defense" question. The Baneslayer player is often on defense, the Hydra player may not be, which is why I think it must go into aggressive decks, preferably where everything is hasted for it to make an impact fast enough for the 8 damage it's bringing to matter.
Rafiq of the Many UWG
Sedris, the Traitor King URB
Kaalia of the Vast RWB
Savra, Queen of Golgari GB
Trostani, Selesnya's Voice GW
Eight-and-a-Half-Tails EquipmentW
Exactly. Baneslayer excelled, despite vulnerability to removal, because it was played in slower, control oriented decks that relied on the stability it could provide. A card like the hydra certainly wouldn't be competitive if played in the same kind of deck, but nobody here's advocating that. The hydra can and probably will excel in the upcoming meta (post-rotation), also despite vulnerability to removal, because it plays well in an aggressive deck.
So, just like "Baneslayer is vulnerable but in the event removal is not immediately available it stops attacks instantly," the hydra is vulnerable, but in the event removal is not immediately available it wins the game quick.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
I can see the attraction, but this reminds me a lot of Armada Wurm.
It was $15 two days ago. Still a better investment than the new planeswalkers.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
It has to be the MOST aggressive deck however. If it's slightly less aggressive than some other deck (like mono-red or something) then it's going to have a serious problem. Unlike Baneslayer which can be defense/offense oriented. This thing is one-dimensional. It's not a valuable blocker. If the deck that runs it is in a situation where it's not the aggressor it's in serious trouble.
Rafiq of the Many UWG
Sedris, the Traitor King URB
Kaalia of the Vast RWB
Savra, Queen of Golgari GB
Trostani, Selesnya's Voice GW
Eight-and-a-Half-Tails EquipmentW
Hype is a beautiful thing.
I'm pretty sure that's exactly what people are arguing and the only reason I've been playing devil's advocate this entire time. I've constantly pointed out that I believe this card to be good. It's only when people start comparing it to BSA/Thundermaw (beyond the obvious fact that it's a 5CMC core set mythic) that I've felt the need to speak up and explain why that's not the case.
I also still can't stress enough just how good Baneslayer was in her setting and I feel like your totally discounting this fact. There's something to be said for a card that essentially deterred the entire meta from attacking into her when she hit the board but could also go on the offensive just as easily. For instance, she shut down Jund's aerial game which was rather dominate at the time. Point is, when she hit the board you got everything you were going to get for your five mana investment. She didn't take time to get online and give you a ROI.
I also still can't stress enough just how good Baneslayer was in her setting and I feel like your totally discounting this fact. There's something to be said for a card that essentially deterred the entire meta from attacking into her when she hit the board but could also go on the offensive just as easily. For instance, she shut down Jund's aerial game which was rather dominate at the time. Point is, when she hit the board you got everything you were going to get for your five mana investment. She didn't take time to get online and give you a ROI.[/QUOTE]
This man knows his stuff, I couldn't put it better myself but let me try Baneslayer Angel put your opponent into a spot that if they didn't have removal they were screwed it didn't need haste it didn't need anything to BE the board when it was played not be on the board it was the board anything you did up to that point was negated simply by her presence, this isn't close to that this is an ok attacker that may win the game IF you give it haste as unlike some of the other examples like thundermaw or hellrider it doesn't have haste naturally and unlike thragtusk it doesn't do anything when it enters or leaves the battlefield.
In other words like DTG has been saying this thing is good but not good ENOUGH, look no ones telling anyone not to play this card but don't be surprised if it loses you a game/games because of being generally terrible against any kind of removal, oh and baneslayer was only good for her time then they printed the titans.
Standard: Pure Jank:p
Modern: UB Control:cool2:
Legacy: Death & Taxes
Vintage: UWR Geist Fish
EDH: Thassa,Obzedat
I know how good she was, but that still does not validate the "dies to removal" argument. She may have provided more value under the right circumstances, but that value was still conditional. I guess we'll just have to wait and see how the hydra impacts the board this fall.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
People seem to be forgetting that she wasn't just an amazing clock, she was also an amazing way to not die and she was really good all on her own too. Those two features (Does't require other creatures, and Keeps you alive) are not offered by the Hydra.
It's still a goood card, assuming you are in the market for a two turn clock.
Many thanks to DNC at Heroes of the Plane Studios
C'mon man. Baneslayer stabilizes the board because it gains you 5 life when the beatdown attacks into it.
You keep trying to refute the arguments seperately, but they need to be taken together. It does nothing the turn it enters play, its 5 mana, it dies to removal, and it doesn't stabilize against faster decks. There are a lot of cards like that. None of them have been playable.
For me, it needs haste. I hope there's a deck there. I suspect there isn't. What do you do against an aggro deck that doesn't play 5 drops? You need guys at 2-3 CC that can attack and block well. Are there any of those in gruul colors?
Edit: Shock helps a lot, actually.
Yep. Hello Domri Jund.
Delicious.
:symrg:Domri's Savagery:symrg:
:symw:Humans:symw:
:symw::symu::symg:Trostani Bant:symw::symu::symg:
:sympu:Architect:sympu:
The question is what would be the better card to support them between Lightning Greaves and Steely Resolve?