There are no comments yet for this card.
If you think this is a bad card because "it gives them a choice", you have little to no deckbuilding imagination.
Browbeat is a decent card. Vexing Devil is a dang decent card. Blazing Salvo is a great card. "It gives them a choice" is a bad argument when either choice is undercosted for its effect and your deck is prepared to punish them quickly for either choice.
But, is this card on their level, efficiency-wise? Not really.
Does this card require more than a bit of thought to be used effectively? Yes.
To respond directly to some of the arguments you present, majinara:
If you plan on beating decks with Royal Assassins in them, and you don't put cards in that can deal with him (burn, black kill spells, whatever), then that's your fault, not this card's.
Scenario:
T1: I drop a Vampire Lacerator and pass the turn
their turn, they drop a Goblin Guide and swing for two. I declare no blockers.
T2: I put a contaminated bond on their Gobl... (see all)
Posted By:
Fictionarious
(11/1/2013 8:53:42 PM)
pacifism this most certainly is not, and not because of the choice, but rather it will generally not do what you need it to do. As stated, on a utility creature, there is no need to attack or block. Where the disparity can be best seen is on a large beater. Lets just pick a titan. So you put this on my Titan. So what? I will continue to attack, get the color-specific benifit from turning said titan sideways, and hit you for 6. Sure I take 3, but I will be winning this race. Comapre to a REAL pacifism, I cannot attack at all. So this card is not bad realted to choice, Fictionarious, but rather because it just generally does not perform well. Just use one of black various kill cards and be done with it.
EDIT: PS; worst case scenario in your example, Fictionarious, is they bolt the vampire, put some kind of equipment on the guide, and continue to destroy you. This isnt a build-around card, this is a find-a-better-option card.
Posted By:
Bbone37
(2/16/2014 1:16:26 PM)