Pointed Discussion

When Derelor was first printed, it was not regarded as crap. Many players were willing to accept the drawback of more expensive future black spells just to get out a cheap 4/4 body. Nowadays, we expect our 4/4's for 4 to have HELPFUL abilities, but this was not the case in Fallen Empires.

Donate.

i agree with Eppek_the_Goblin

This actually works better with Endrehk, as he makes more thrulls based off of casting values. Almost looks like they were made for eachother.

this won't change the CMC of the card, it will just add 1 black to the CC, the same way if you kicked a spell
Endrek Sahr, Master Breeder wouldn't put out extra thrulls from the kicker cost.

But Eppek is right, this wasn't a bad card in Fallen Empires because 4/4 creatures were a rarity, so just playing one made you a force to be reckoned with. Same mindset as Vizzerdrix.

Not sure what you guys are going on about.. Only comparable card to this is Ashling, The Extinguisher which is Legendary and not a Thrull. This is the same tribe with Blood Pet and is way faster than you are all giving it credit for. Black creatures tend to be over cost because of Dark Ritual. Any creature that is not over cost like Phyrexian Negator will have a horrible drawback. Juzám Djinn is only 1 power and 1 toughness greater and is worth $200 in addition to dealing you damage every turn. In a race, Derelor is about as good as a Juzam. The tradeoff of not dealing it's controller damage, and being a thrull instead of a.. nothing really.. has it's advantages for sure. Since black decks empty their hand very quickly even if you are playing Dark Confidant Derelor really has no drawback. It is much more easily worked around than you're all assuming. Also, Ashenmoor Gouger cannot block nor does it splash with Wasteland . Derelor is in fact compared to other black creatures one of the better choices you could decide to throw in a deck.

Not horrible back in the day, but certainly not great either. The fact that it was a Thrull helped, as you could sacrifice it and take advantage of some Thrull shenanigans when you needed to get rid of it.

2/5 for retro flavor.

For 3B, this still makes some sense to me. You need to go into 2BB before I start expecting a (minor, not major; no power creep, please!) boon.

"Black creatures tend to be over cost because of Dark Ritual."

You're going to have to provide some sort of evidence supporting this idea, otherwise I just don't buy it. Green and white get the most efficient creatures; it's in their share of the color pie. Because black has continued to get inefficient creatures long after Dark Ritual has left even extended, I think it's safe to say it's just a consequence of the color pie. If Dark Ritual was really the motivation for nerfing black, wouldn't they also have cut the efficiency of black non-creature cards, too?

Decent back then. A 4/4 black creature for 3B was pretty solid. Sure, it wasn't a Juzam, but still, it could beat face. Obsolete by today's standards.

I played when this was printed and this was unusable garbage even then. One of the worst to ever hit the printing press..0.5/5

The art is awesome on this. 5/5 for art. Otherwise the card is garbage.

Back in the day this card was amazing, playing a multi-color deck, it's 1 B in the CC was nothing, but a 4/4 creature was huge as it wouldn't die from a single lightning bolt, and would require an opponent to use either dedicate a large amount of mana into fireball/disintegrate or use more than one card to kill it, since it couldn't be terrored. Only Swords to Plowshares would kill it, and at the time people didn't want to give opponent life

In the day, I mean back in the day, you could rock the house with a Derelor in the 5 color green deck.

@hovercraft, even without dark ritual, black has always been efficient. erg raiders, juzam, stone throwing devils, hypnotic specter, order of the ebon hand, knights of stromgald, black knight, ihsan's shade, and nightmare were all being played during black's heyday - from the early years up til the banning of necropotence. i don't see how you can say that black creatures are overcosted in general unless you're talking about baron sengir.

I remember running a deck where I would Slight of Mind this card into another color, then Donate it to my opponent; if they didn't play black, one of their colors was completely shut down.

Eventually I just moved on to donating Illusions of Grandeur instead.

Thrulls should get a tribal creature in a new Sarpadia set that is similar to Bosk Banneret.

Not bad, I'm also a sucker for old flavour.

To all those currently naysaying: please note that this card was in the original Sligh decklist. You know, the deck that was the genesis of RDW.

Those giving one- and two-star ratings aren't aware of the card in historical context. They're used to a world where Deadbridge Goliath (2GG 5/5) is Standard-useless even before Polukranos existed. As I have cast more Derelors in Standard ("Type II") tournaments than anyone on the planet, I shall defend it.

in the first days of Standard (1995-96), the consensus best creature was Chronicles' reprinted Erhnam Djinn, a 4/5 for 3G that gives an opposing creature forestwalk each turn. Even then, Derelor was lightly regarded by the masses. The flavor text, essentially broadcasting "this is a bad card", didn't help. But it was a 4-power 4-drop with a back end out of Bolt and Incinerate range whose biggest downside was that it loses a fight with Erhnam itself.

Derelor was best in precisely the same scenarios as Erhnam: as a splash, possibly as the only black cards in your deck. An Erhnam cast off a Karplusan Forest or Barbed Sextant has no downside (and possibly even upside, as you can give forestwalk to a small creature and then block - 'oops, no forests'); a Derelor has no downside if you've got no other black cards to cast. You wouldn't put it in monoblack Necropotence, opting for Sengir Vampire or Ihsan's Shade instead. You put it in, say, GW Erhnam-Geddon and cast it off Birds and Cities of Brass (while possibly fulfilling most of your Fallen Empires quota; the first PTQs mandated 5+ cards from all legal card sets).

What's more, in tournaments, creatures have a short life. They get countered, removed (Swords was legal when Derelor was), or die in combat. If your Derelor (or Erhnam) dies, drawback gone; you didn't have to sacrifice something, pay life, etc. to cast it. Your next Derelor costs 3B, not 3BB, and your other black spells revert to their retail price.

My successful 1996 Standard deck was a mostly red midrange deck with 4 Derelor and 4 Erhnam Djinn (plus a Balance) splashed off pain lands, a few Cities, and 4 Barbed Sextant. Derelor and Erhnam had no downside other than the 1 damage you often take summoning them. My 1997 Standard was also mostly-red midrange with a threat base of 4 Derelor, 4 Wildfire Emissary, and 4 Hammer of Bogardan. Stupors were the only other black cards. They cost 3 and got played the turn before Derelor if I drew both. Ergo, no drawback.

In September 1997, Tempest was released, showing the world once and for all that 2/1s for 1 and unblockable 2/Xs for 2 are infinitely more powerful than Erhnams and Juzams (pure-size, no-ability 4-drops), and Derelor and friends were consigned to the dustbin of history. Erhnam and Sengir were reprinted in Odyssey block in 2002 and never got a whiff of Standard play. But in its day, Derelor, 'the black Erhnam', was a great card which saw a fair amount of play and deserved more.