I swear if you stare at the rules text long enough you reach internal enlightenment.
psyklone
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(7 votes)
I love how this perfectly legal and serious card is more confusing than Ambiguity 5 stars
DoctorKenneth
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(5 votes)
Here, let me help you out with that.
*Tap*
Okay, see how you just blocked my 8/8 with your 1/1? That 1/1 is now blocking THIS 2/2 guy instead. Now, are there any more guys blocking my 8/8? No? Then I guess it's not blocked.
Or, if you wanted, you could switch one of your own blockers to another creature. For some reason. Maybe if your opponent is being a jerk and saying "No, no, you took your hand off the card, that block is final."
A tricky way of red getting something through. Not always a useful trick, especially if you've only got a single useful attacker. But it's not too bad.
DJFalcon
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(13 votes)
"Oh man, I hope the Rulings section on Gatherer will help me with this one!"
-DJFalcon, Last words
thaviel
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
waaaaait...can i make things block like shadow creatures and unblockables with this. O_O *brainDies*
Wormfang
★★★★☆ (4.0/5.0)(2 votes)
this is awesome against green
Opp: I swing with 2 grizzly bears
Me: I block one
Opp: ok, *taps 2 green* 2x giant growth on the other
Me: "taps warlord" reallocates chump to other grizzly
I take 2 dam he wastes 2 giant growths, WIN
NARFNra
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
@thaviel
Um... I think that'd be an illegal block and thus impossible... Rules guru, someone help.
EpicBroccoli
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(2 votes)
All I can say is...
What?
scumbling1
★☆☆☆☆ (1.8/5.0)(4 votes)
If you don't want to bother deciphering the card text, just use this rule of thumb: if it's from Coldsnap, it's, more likely than not, not worth your attention.
Alsebra
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(3 votes)
I'm almost certain that this can't bypass the normal blocking rules (Shadow, Flying, Unblockable, etc).
Either way, the card isn't as confusing as people make it out to be...tap the Warlord, target blocking creature is now not blocking (and its foe is unblocked); you can then reallocate the blocker to another attacker (or the same one, if you want it to).
Signus
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Yo dawg, I herd you like blocking...
longwinded
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
"Wait a minute. Somethings wrong here. You see this text?" "Yeah, I see it.... We don't use the word 'blocked' much anymore. We better change those two instances to 'was blocking'." "Good call. That could have just been confusing."
But seriously, the goal is that you can veto one of the defending player's blocking assignments. That creature still blocks something else (your call) and if whatever it was originally blocking is the only valid choice, you have to let it go right back to blocking that guy. But 90% of the time, you get to say, "No, I think your 1/1 would be better off not blocking my 8/8. Here, he can block my 2/2 instead. Oh look, you're both dead."
edit: I also love how I managed to type out almost exactly the same example before I read DoctorKenneth's comment.
Kryptnyt
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(5 votes)
He's a barbarian. He made his ability confusing and narrow so you would attack with him instead.
Destroy2777
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Put it like this: Say an opponent blocks a creature you attack with. You can tap this to make that blocker block another attacking creature. Unless the first blocked creature was blocked by multiple creatures, there is now no blocker on that creature and its attack goes through.
TheWrathofShane
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.5/5.0)(1 vote)
This cards so simple to understand! I got it the first readthrough :D
Hermeezey
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Yo dawg, I heard you like blocking...
Leitmotiv
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Great multiplayer card for political games. You want to turn a skirmish between two of your opponents in your favor? This is your guy.
RocketLobster
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
This card is probably an intentional reference to the super-confusing cards of yesteryear. Probably.
@Wormfang: "I wait until the combat damage step, then cast two giant growths on this guy."
Lifegainwithbite
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Alright card translation: Target blocking creature instead blocks an attacking creature of your choice. This ability can only be used during the blocking step. Was that really so hard, Wizards? Really?
casual_melvin
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Sooooo many tricks with this card.
The obvious is to get your giant creature past a chump blocker, and if the opponent double chumps they're down an extra creature.
There are also cards that trigger on blocking or being blocked, or cards like smite that have targeting conditions.
Looking at the rulings shows another trick. Two of these can block three creatures. Have both block the same creature, then switch each to a different creature and the original remains blocked.
I also quite enjoy the wall of text. Seven lines of text, on an uncommon, really makes this card fit right in with the ice age cards cold snap was emulating.
and 4 mana for a 3/2 isn't entirely unplayable either. 3.5/5
MCcreator
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
I do not understand how this could possibly be confusing. Serious face, here. I once got one in a card lot and read it and instantly understood. I don't see why anyone is bitching about the rules text because you just have to understand what the words mean.
It's the "rules correct" way of switching over a blocker. A lot of the clauses are so that you can't have a creature double chump block two different creatures as the first would still be blocked if there weren't the clauses. Tut tut.
Comments (25)
5 stars
*Tap*
Okay, see how you just blocked my 8/8 with your 1/1? That 1/1 is now blocking THIS 2/2 guy instead. Now, are there any more guys blocking my 8/8? No? Then I guess it's not blocked.
Or, if you wanted, you could switch one of your own blockers to another creature. For some reason. Maybe if your opponent is being a jerk and saying "No, no, you took your hand off the card, that block is final."
A tricky way of red getting something through. Not always a useful trick, especially if you've only got a single useful attacker. But it's not too bad.
-DJFalcon, Last words
Opp: I swing with 2 grizzly bears
Me: I block one
Opp: ok, *taps 2 green* 2x giant growth on the other
Me: "taps warlord" reallocates chump to other grizzly
I take 2 dam he wastes 2 giant growths, WIN
Um... I think that'd be an illegal block and thus impossible... Rules guru, someone help.
What?
Either way, the card isn't as confusing as people make it out to be...tap the Warlord, target blocking creature is now not blocking (and its foe is unblocked); you can then reallocate the blocker to another attacker (or the same one, if you want it to).
"Yeah, I see it.... We don't use the word 'blocked' much anymore. We better change those two instances to 'was blocking'."
"Good call. That could have just been confusing."
But seriously, the goal is that you can veto one of the defending player's blocking assignments. That creature still blocks something else (your call) and if whatever it was originally blocking is the only valid choice, you have to let it go right back to blocking that guy. But 90% of the time, you get to say, "No, I think your 1/1 would be better off not blocking my 8/8. Here, he can block my 2/2 instead. Oh look, you're both dead."
edit: I also love how I managed to type out almost exactly the same example before I read DoctorKenneth's comment.
@Wormfang: "I wait until the combat damage step, then cast two giant growths on this guy."
Was that really so hard, Wizards? Really?
The obvious is to get your giant creature past a chump blocker, and if the opponent double chumps they're down an extra creature.
There are also cards that trigger on blocking or being blocked, or cards like smite that have targeting conditions.
Looking at the rulings shows another trick. Two of these can block three creatures. Have both block the same creature, then switch each to a different creature and the original remains blocked.
I also quite enjoy the wall of text. Seven lines of text, on an uncommon, really makes this card fit right in with the ice age cards cold snap was emulating.
and 4 mana for a 3/2 isn't entirely unplayable either. 3.5/5
It's the "rules correct" way of switching over a blocker. A lot of the clauses are so that you can't have a creature double chump block two different creatures as the first would still be blocked if there weren't the clauses. Tut tut.
5/5