It doesn't seem like a good card, but when you think about it, the angel works fairly well with enchantments. The key is to beef it up with aura's, lots of aura's, while keeping an Island untapped. Then when the threat of removal targets the angel the activated ability can prevent it. That seems pretty good to me.
AlphaNumerical
★★☆☆☆ (2.9/5.0)(4 votes)
... Except that people play with board sweepers.
mrredhatter
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.8/5.0)(7 votes)
This card should be banned for unusability.
SleetFox
★★☆☆☆ (2.4/5.0)(5 votes)
This card would be great if it were a 4/4. The optional shroud works great when you want to target it, but 4 mana for a 2/2 flier isn't worth enchanting or pumping in the first place.
Moleland
★★★★☆ (4.3/5.0)(3 votes)
Hmm... I'd be tempted to use it. It isn't terrible.
Hoonster
★★★★☆ (4.1/5.0)(5 votes)
What idiotic players expect wizards to print for commons: 4cmc for 4/4 flying with shroud, indestructible, cannot be exiled, protection from blue, green, and pink. What wizards thinks about them: WTF?
land_comment
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(3 votes)
I like this card.
pedrodyl
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
This card isn't bad at all. You guys have to keep in mind that it's a common, and that just because its mana cost isn't the same or less than its p/t, doesn't make it automatically terrible. Not every color can be green, you know.
It looks male. Don't tell the posters in the Malach of the Dawn discussion thread.
Tiggurix
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
@ianindustrial: It's rather hard to tell, but there's just a hint of breasts on this angel, so I'd say no. Malach of the Dawn is at least unambiguously male.
Comments (11)
What wizards thinks about them: WTF?