Very nice wall. There are great wall deck possibilities coming from this set.
BrutalJim
★★★☆☆ (3.3/5.0)(3 votes)
This is pretty bad, Wall of Swords was ok, but nothing spectacular. This is 1 more CMC just for +1 power. Normally for another mana I expect more than that.
Gaussgoat
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(3 votes)
A solid, if unspectacular, wall. A bit high on cost, a 2WW would have been a nice upgrade over Wall of Swords.
3/5
blindthrall
★★★★☆ (4.7/5.0)(7 votes)
Weren't these guys in Return of the King?
achilleselbow
★★★☆☆ (3.8/5.0)(5 votes)
I never thought they'd print something almost as bad as Dark Maze again, but apparently I was wrong. And as an uncommon too. At least Dark Maze can attack once. You guys do realize that a simple 4/5 flying for 5 would have been perfectly reasonable by today's standards, right? And that's just compared to normal creatures, I'm not even gonna mention that other white flyer that costs 5 mana...
ratrase
★★★☆☆ (3.5/5.0)(3 votes)
Why on earth did wizards print such a horrible wall, being uncommon and all. This should be 3 cmc (see wolly thoctar or leatherback baloth).
I really wanted a effective wall that could acctually kill stuff. Red have some decent defenders, but splashing red complicates things.
Belz_
★★☆☆☆ (2.8/5.0)(2 votes)
I'm with achilleselbow on this. Wall of Air is 1/5 flying for 3. Hell, Baneslayer Angel is a 5/5 with every ability in the game, for 5... so... huh ?
Gear61
★★★★☆ (4.0/5.0)(2 votes)
Why is this an uncommon?
sarroth
★★☆☆☆ (2.8/5.0)(2 votes)
I don't see the point in comparing an uncommon to a mythic rare. There are different rarities for a reason, and one of those reasons is to purposefully give higher ratings greater power.
Aside from that, yes, this card does suck. It should have been {2}{W}{W} and that would have easily made up for the increased power of Wall of Swords. Obviously this card was given defender to fit with the subtheme of Rise of the Eldrazi, so there was no way this would have been a balanced card with the same cost and 4/5 without defender, but at least it could have been 4CMC.
Richard_Hawk
★★☆☆☆ (2.8/5.0)(2 votes)
this is terrible, don't know why its even above a 2 star rating as of this post and an uncommon at that.
Tevish_Szat
★★★☆☆ (3.5/5.0)(3 votes)
Great with Rolling Stones, of course. Yes, I will admit that this card is under the lofty power bar set by Baneslayer Angel, but frankly Baneslayer angel is just a little over the curve. Compare this wall to Serra angel... and that defender still hurts, while the extra point of toughness isn't one of the big, relevant ones like "out of bolt range" or "out of shock range". Still, an average wall at worst.
NoobOfLore
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(2 votes)
Nothing fancy. I would take this over Baneslayer Angel in my Defender deck. Because sometimes having defender is actually not a downside, especially if you have a couple warmonger's chariots and some Stalwart Shield-Bearers. I would basically run it as a less mana-focused Plumeveil, which makes a remarkably good beater.
http404error
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
Having defender can certainly be a very good thing, especially considering the set it was printed in.
reapersaurus
★★☆☆☆ (2.0/5.0)(1 vote)
There is no point for this card to exist, other than to hire an artist, produce a card and pump out an underpowered defender. It really is embarrassing when Wizards puts out crap like this. I've been waiting for defender to become remotely competitive for 17+ years, but Wizards apparently thinks "Defender" or "wall" means the card has to suck, for some reason.
I dare Wizards to come up with a Defender card that is anywhere near as powerful as Baneslayer Angel (or any number of over-the-curve creatures THAT CAN ATTACK). Seriously, there would be no problem with that, since it can only DEFEND on its own. "Hello!"
SeiberTross
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
He's uncommon because if he was not, every single player in draft would chase after a Warmonger's Chariot to slap on him to get a 6/7 flyer the turn after Soulbound Guardians came out.
SunshineTheBlond
★★☆☆☆ (2.8/5.0)(2 votes)
@ Belz_
You can't compare this card to Baneslayer Angel. Look at their rarities. Does Llanowar Elves suck because Birds of Paradise exist? Does Cancel not exist because of Mindbreak Trap? No, the difference in rarities means there's going to be a difference in power. It's how the game was made.
As for the creature, it's not great, but it's not awful. It's a nice solid blocker, and using the still-in-set Warmonger's Chariot makes it a pretty heavy flier. I used one in standard after a bad run-in with a Makindi Griffin, and it saved my life twice.
destroytargetplayer
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
Is anyone else thinking about Avacyn Restored keyword mechanics now?
BongRipper420
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Would it have killed to make this cost one less?
TheWrathofShane
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Dies to doom blade /fooking campers.
GrimjawxRULES
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
The nerve of some people. This card was printed in Rise of the Eldrazi, a set heavily focused on defenders and the late-game in limited. As others have mentioned, Warmonger's Chariot made this card a 6/7 flyer. That's larger than Deathless Angel, a disgustingly powerful card in the format, and that's using uncommons. Another way to use this would be to pair it up with Rage Nimbus to kill your opponents' utility creatures or Eldrazi Spawn tokens. Removal was hard to come by and made extremely valuable by the existence of the Eldrazi at all rarities.
Comments (20)
3/5
You guys do realize that a simple 4/5 flying for 5 would have been perfectly reasonable by today's standards, right? And that's just compared to normal creatures, I'm not even gonna mention that other white flyer that costs 5 mana...
I really wanted a effective wall that could acctually kill stuff. Red have some decent defenders, but splashing red complicates things.
Aside from that, yes, this card does suck. It should have been {2}{W}{W} and that would have easily made up for the increased power of Wall of Swords. Obviously this card was given defender to fit with the subtheme of Rise of the Eldrazi, so there was no way this would have been a balanced card with the same cost and 4/5 without defender, but at least it could have been 4CMC.
I would take this over Baneslayer Angel in my Defender deck.
Because sometimes having defender is actually not a downside, especially if you have a couple warmonger's chariots and some Stalwart Shield-Bearers.
I would basically run it as a less mana-focused Plumeveil, which makes a remarkably good beater.
It really is embarrassing when Wizards puts out crap like this.
I've been waiting for defender to become remotely competitive for 17+ years, but Wizards apparently thinks "Defender" or "wall" means the card has to suck, for some reason.
I dare Wizards to come up with a Defender card that is anywhere near as powerful as Baneslayer Angel (or any number of over-the-curve creatures THAT CAN ATTACK).
Seriously, there would be no problem with that, since it can only DEFEND on its own. "Hello!"
You can't compare this card to Baneslayer Angel. Look at their rarities. Does Llanowar Elves suck because Birds of Paradise exist? Does Cancel not exist because of Mindbreak Trap? No, the difference in rarities means there's going to be a difference in power. It's how the game was made.
As for the creature, it's not great, but it's not awful. It's a nice solid blocker, and using the still-in-set Warmonger's Chariot makes it a pretty heavy flier. I used one in standard after a bad run-in with a Makindi Griffin, and it saved my life twice.