Excellent card! I run this in my Enchantment/Pegasus deck. And to top it all off, it totally screws up Trample decks.
Sphagetti
★★★★☆ (4.5/5.0)(2 votes)
I like to use it with High Ground and En-Kor creatures, preferably with Daru Spiritualist on the table.
Pigglebee
★☆☆☆☆ (1.3/5.0)(3 votes)
I take it you can say 'Nope, your creature aint dealing combat damage to my planeswalker but to me'?
KarmasPayment
★★★☆☆ (3.5/5.0)(5 votes)
"I take it you can say 'Nope, your creature aint dealing combat damage to my planeswalker but to me'?" ~Pigglebee
No, because when creatures attack, you must declare what they are attacking. (The defending player, or one of his planeswalkers) It's not like non-combat damage that can be chosen to be redirected to a planeswalker.
But, you can mess with trample and I do beleive deathtouch shenanigans too, allowing you to throw a 1/1 in front of a 10/10 trampler and choose to have the trampler assign all of its damage to that 1/1. I beleive deathtouch would work the same way, instead of assigning one damage (which is lethal with deathtouch) to each blocker you can assign ALL of that damage to one creature, allowing for multi-blocking to be somewhat more effective.
Dabir
★★☆☆☆ (2.6/5.0)(6 votes)
I believe there's a mechanic this bears significant similarities to; it's called "Banding".
But when WotC realised that Banding was an unnecessarily wordy mechanic with unnecessarily complex interactions with other mechanics and timing issues that nobody understood least of all anyone on the Rules Team and didn't contribute anything to flavour that couldn't be done with a myriad of other things, I guess they decided it was a waste of everyone's time constantly reprinting it. So they made a technically inferior, simplified version of banding that only works while blocking and doesn't give people headaches.
2/5 for card usefulness 5/5 for clearing stuff up
tavaritz
★★★☆☆ (3.7/5.0)(7 votes)
I must side with Dr. Jack. Banding was very easy ability to understand, if you read the rules, but like I see here all the time people don't read the rules and then complain or try to do clever stunts that don't work.
For example in this cards discussion KarmasPayment is clearly obviously ignorant about the rule that excess damage of trampling attacker is carried over to damage the defending player or planeswalker. So this card doesn't work so that 10/10 trample damage vanishes by assigning it to 1/1 creature.
sincleanser
★★★★☆ (4.0/5.0)(3 votes)
This card is utterly amazing. It takes a game that combat is tilted in the favor of the defender, and then this card makes combat completely controlled by the defending player, and it's a one sided effect! I would seriously have to consider this getting a 4, especially as it only costs a single W.
StagemasterK
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(2 votes)
I think it's funny how the oracle text allows you to use the pre-m10 combat damage rules. Because this card wouldn't be half as good if you have to use the post rules.
(those who don't know, when you multi block now the attacking player decided the order he's creature will "fight" you're blockers. He then deals combat damage in order, doing at least leathale dmg to each creature before being able to move to the next one. Making things like post combat Pyroclasim mush less effective. How ever with pre-m10 combat rules you could divided the damage in any way that you saw fit between the blocking creatures.)
RuscoJames
★★★☆☆ (3.7/5.0)(3 votes)
@ Tavaritz as of 12/4/2011 510.1c A blocked creature assigns its combat damage to the creatures blocking it. If no creatures are currently blocking it (if, for example, they were destroyed or removed from combat), it assigns no combat damage. If exactly one creature is blocking it, it assigns all its combat damage to that creature. If two or more creatures are blocking it, it assigns its combat damage to those creatures according to the damage assignment order announced for it. This may allow the blocked creature to divide its combat damage. However, it can’t assign combat damage to a creature that’s blocking it unless, when combat damage assignments are complete, each creature that precedes that blocking creature in its order is assigned lethal damage. When checking for assigned lethal damage, take into account damage already marked on the creature and damage from other creatures that’s being assigned during the same combat damage step, but not any abilities or effects that might change the amount of damage that’s actually dealt. An amount of damage that’s greater than a creature’s lethal damage may be assigned to it.
Example: The damage assignment order of an attacking Vastwood Gorger (a 5/6 creature) is Pride Guardian (a 0/3 creature) then Llanowar Elves (a 1/1 creature). Vastwood Gorger can assign 3 damage to the Guardian and 2 damage to the Elves, 4 damage to the Guardian and 1 damage to the Elves, or 5 damage to the Guardian.
This example out of the comprehensive rulebook makes it seem pretty clear to me that you can assign as much damage to a single blocking creature as you want.
In Regards to trample 702.18b The controller of an attacking creature with trample first assigns damage to the creature(s) blocking it. Once all those blocking creatures are assigned lethal damage, any remaining damage is assigned as its controller chooses among those blocking creatures and the player or planeswalker the creature is attacking.
Again, the rules are clear that you are free to choose how you deal your combat damage with the restriction of damage assignment order. Only thing is, this card lets you ignore damage assignment order, giving you almost complete freedom in how you deal your damage. (Still can't have trample ignore the creatures though)
MacBizzle
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(4 votes)
This card has caused me to take a second look at how amazing Banding was and how awesome a card is that says: "Enchantment, (W) Creatures you control get half-banding. The good half."
DrJack
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.5/5.0)(1 vote)
Er, I think there's a word for this. It's called "Banding".
But when WotC shifted their target market from experienced adult gamers to Pokemon kids, I guess they were scared of their clientelle not understanding how banding works. So they made an inferior, simplified version of banding that only works in defense.
2 out of 5 stars for functionality,
0 out of 5 stars for defiling the spirit of the game.
TheWrathofShane
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
If a creature has trample, you may assign any extra damage beyond lethal damage to the player. You can however assign all trample damage to the blocker, so this card can hose trample.
Salient
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
"You choose how creatures attacking you deal combat damage."
With dustmops!
DarthParallax
★★☆☆☆ (2.8/5.0)(2 votes)
I think it's unfair to say that Wizards switched their target audience from 'Experienced Adult Gamers' to 'Pokemon Kids'.
They switched their game from 'Needing to actually know all the rules of Calvinball (which defeats the purpose of Calvinball)' to 'Playable DnD, which is a hybrid of 4th and 3.5 edition rules, also known as Pathfinder.' :)
Or at least, they *try* to, and it often comes out looking like 4th Edition DnD. :P 4th E is better than people give it credit for though!
By the way, is 'Banding' taken as a card name? That would be really nice to reprint this named 'Banding' and make 'the simplification of Banding' Official :)
OlvynChuru
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
@DrJack
It's kind of ironic that, while calling people who have a hard time understanding banding idiots, you also use stereotypes ("Pokemon kids? Really?). It is idiocy to use stereotypes.
Comments (16)
~Pigglebee
No, because when creatures attack, you must declare what they are attacking. (The defending player, or one of his planeswalkers) It's not like non-combat damage that can be chosen to be redirected to a planeswalker.
But, you can mess with trample and I do beleive deathtouch shenanigans too, allowing you to throw a 1/1 in front of a 10/10 trampler and choose to have the trampler assign all of its damage to that 1/1. I beleive deathtouch would work the same way, instead of assigning one damage (which is lethal with deathtouch) to each blocker you can assign ALL of that damage to one creature, allowing for multi-blocking to be somewhat more effective.
But when WotC realised that Banding was an unnecessarily wordy mechanic with unnecessarily complex interactions with other mechanics and timing issues that nobody understood least of all anyone on the Rules Team and didn't contribute anything to flavour that couldn't be done with a myriad of other things, I guess they decided it was a waste of everyone's time constantly reprinting it. So they made a technically inferior, simplified version of banding that only works while blocking and doesn't give people headaches.
2/5 for card usefulness
5/5 for clearing stuff up
For example in this cards discussion KarmasPayment is clearly obviously ignorant about the rule that excess damage of trampling attacker is carried over to damage the defending player or planeswalker. So this card doesn't work so that 10/10 trample damage vanishes by assigning it to 1/1 creature.
(those who don't know, when you multi block now the attacking player decided the order he's creature will "fight" you're blockers. He then deals combat damage in order, doing at least leathale dmg to each creature before being able to move to the next one. Making things like post combat Pyroclasim mush less effective.
How ever with pre-m10 combat rules you could divided the damage in any way that you saw fit between the blocking creatures.)
as of 12/4/2011
510.1c A blocked creature assigns its combat damage to the creatures blocking it. If no creatures are currently blocking it (if, for example, they were destroyed or removed from combat), it assigns no combat damage. If exactly one creature is blocking it, it assigns all its combat damage to that creature. If two or more creatures are blocking it, it assigns its combat damage to those creatures according to the damage assignment order announced for it. This may allow the blocked creature to divide its combat damage. However, it can’t assign combat damage to a creature that’s blocking it unless, when combat damage assignments are complete, each creature that precedes that blocking creature in its order is assigned lethal damage. When checking for assigned lethal damage, take into account damage already marked on the creature and damage from other creatures that’s being assigned during the same combat damage step, but not any abilities or effects that might change the amount of damage that’s actually dealt. An amount of damage that’s greater than a creature’s lethal damage may be assigned to it.
Example: The damage assignment order of an attacking Vastwood Gorger (a 5/6 creature) is Pride Guardian (a 0/3 creature) then Llanowar Elves (a 1/1 creature). Vastwood Gorger can assign 3 damage to the Guardian and 2 damage to the Elves, 4 damage to the Guardian and 1 damage to the Elves, or 5 damage to the Guardian.
This example out of the comprehensive rulebook makes it seem pretty clear to me that you can assign as much damage to a single blocking creature as you want.
In Regards to trample
702.18b The controller of an attacking creature with trample first assigns damage to the creature(s) blocking it. Once all those blocking creatures are assigned lethal damage, any remaining damage is assigned as its controller chooses among those blocking creatures and the player or planeswalker the creature is attacking.
Again, the rules are clear that you are free to choose how you deal your combat damage with the restriction of damage assignment order. Only thing is, this card lets you ignore damage assignment order, giving you almost complete freedom in how you deal your damage. (Still can't have trample ignore the creatures though)
"Enchantment, (W)
Creatures you control get half-banding. The good half."
But when WotC shifted their target market from experienced adult gamers to Pokemon kids, I guess they were scared of their clientelle not understanding how banding works. So they made an inferior, simplified version of banding that only works in defense.
2 out of 5 stars for functionality,
0 out of 5 stars for defiling the spirit of the game.
With dustmops!
They switched their game from 'Needing to actually know all the rules of Calvinball (which defeats the purpose of Calvinball)' to 'Playable DnD, which is a hybrid of 4th and 3.5 edition rules, also known as Pathfinder.' :)
Or at least, they *try* to, and it often comes out looking like 4th Edition DnD. :P 4th E is better than people give it credit for though!
By the way, is 'Banding' taken as a card name? That would be really nice to reprint this named 'Banding' and make 'the simplification of Banding' Official :)
It's kind of ironic that, while calling people who have a hard time understanding banding idiots, you also use stereotypes ("Pokemon kids? Really?). It is idiocy to use stereotypes.