Pointed Discussion

Surprisingly, it's better than it looks as it's versatile and can kill problem creatures at an aggresive cost. However, it's too slow to be played in the formats in which it's currently legal.

if you play red and black then might as well play with Wrecking Ball. only problem is that u lose out on the artifact destruction. but theres probably something out there to make up for it. besides more often than not artifact destruction is sideboard material.

This is a great and versatile removal card in EDH.

The versatility doesn't make up for the recoil or mana cost.

Amazingly versatile.

The look on an opponents face the first time a mono-red deck gets 'destroy target creature' is well worth the drawback.

I have it in most mono-red commander/EDH decks. It's just too versatile, and the three life normally hurt less than what the permanent you kill would do to you (not to mention that you start with 40 life in that format). 3.5 from me

2 stars? You've got to be kidding me. This an extremely useful spell. 3 life is not too much; it's only the last point that counts.

If you're playing red, you're doing more damage to them than they are to you. 3 isn't really going to hurt much. The fact that you can shoot down their angel, sphinx, or other powerful finisher with just one card is quite the boon for red. As an LD spell, it's pretty mediocre, but at least it always kills manlands!

Non-damage based creature removal is not common in red, so this is good card as is Fissure.

It's always made me wonder why a little life loss in black is nothing but in other colours it always means that most players think the card unplayable.

It's like the red version of Creeping Mold except this destroys Creatures instead of Enchantments. Definately better in that sense, but I wish red had more enchantment hate.

So versatile that the casting cost and drawback pale in comparison. This guy does everything.

Dear Players:

Just to rub it in---no, we are not giving Red enchantment removal.

They get 'destroy target creature' even sometimes, when we're feeling really nice.

But no enchantment removal.

Signed,
Wizards.

One of the best EDH kill cards out there; you'll always have something to target with it.

Also, WotC's hatred for enchantment removal in Red is hilarious when they had no problem printing Pongify in Blue. "Oh, but that was in Time Spiral." Yeah, and did you see any efficient Red enchantment removal in Time Spiral?

Why is everyone whining about red not getting enchantment removal? Red has NEVER been able to remove enchantments- and never will! It's one of the weaknesses of the color, plain and simple. Green can't kill creatures, black can't get rid of artifacts or enchantments, blue can't destroy permanents at all and white's removal either must be mass (getting rid of its stuff, too) or has some condition attached to it (Oblivion Ring can be removed, returning the target, Path to Exile gives your opponent a land, etc.) And hence, red's weakness is that it can't get rid of enchantments.

I like this card, though. Red isn't known for its versatility, so this is useful.

Fantastic card. Sadly, not really in Red's color pie (but according to Mark Rosewater, neither is Chaos Warp, so there's always a chance more spells like this will slip through the cracks and see print) - just consider Avatar of Discord, which hits the same permanents but at the cost that it's random.

@Lord_Ascapalion: Green can destroy creatures through Instant deathtouch cards, provoke, and fight; Blue can get permanents through tapping them down, bouncing them, and stealing them (plus oddities like Reweave); the conditional effects on White removal are hardly that conditional (Oblivion Ring, for instance, is difficult for a Red mage to take care of). Red has a few answers to enchantments with random effects like Avatar of Discord and temporary stealing effects like Zealous Con***s, but aside from comparing it to Black, its weakness in enchantments is much worse than the weaknesses you and R&D state for the other colors, and Black gets better creature removal, draw, and recursion, so it makes up for its weaknesses - especially in multiplayer - much more than Red can.

That said, as much as I like this card, I'm actually glad Aftershock effects are not really in Red's colorpie, as it steps on the toes of Black. While its enchantment removal is lacking, its creature removal - even the nondamage based kind - is not.

This is a fantastic card, but newer players might see it and think "it Lightning Bolts ME?!" and dismiss it. Red does not have many ways of dealing with creatures with 5 or more toughness for 4 mana, and at the time of its printing, this was an easy supplement to fearsome land destruction decks boasting Wasteland, Stone Rain, Flowstone Flood, Rain of Tears, pitching in as either threat removal or more land destruction. Do not sleep on this kind of versatility.

Destroy target creature?!

Whoa. 3.5/5+ easy; as red doesn't get anything like this. Additionally, this can go in a Land Destruction deck; while being able to hit the fat that could land between your disruption. Seems good.

I'm having a problem. My friend casted Aftershock to destroy one of my creatures. I countered it using the card Meddle (redirect a single target spell if it's targeting a creature to a creature of your choice) to redirect it to one of his creatures.

He insists that he shouldn't take the 3 damage that goes along with casting the spell and I insist that he still does since he casted the spell.

My question is...though the spell was countered (redirected), does he still take the 3 damage? Or, for some reason, because I redirected it using Meddle, I somehow absorb the side effect of the card?