Clash always seemed like a terrible mechanic for a weenie deck, and not even all that great of a mechanic in any other deck either. The only thing potentially making this worthwhile is that double strike is a really, really good ability. But since it's usually a matter of luck as to whether you'll get it, you can't plan your attack around it, so really, what's the point?
Posted By:
Weary_PSI
(10/21/2010 10:42:53 PM)
I haven't experimented much with clash, but I wouldn't dismiss it entirely. You can get more from every clash with entangling trap, rebellion of the flamekin, or sylvan echoes. An entangling trap with this guy lets you tap a creature every turn, with a chance at keeping it tapped longer and granting something doublestrike.
Also, even if you lose the clash, it's still a public scry 1 for both players. Depends on the matchup whether that's a good thing.
Posted By:
Prizrak
(2/10/2011 5:48:03 AM)
Clash is also like Scry 1, and that makes it very valuable. Granted it is for both players.
Posted By:
desolation_masticore
(5/25/2011 4:36:39 AM)
@DarthParallax
This guy can give your fatty double strike. Mirran Crusader can't even dream of doing that.
Posted By:
Kryptnyt
(12/27/2011 4:51:27 AM)
Giving other creatures double strike is good and all but I really would say there's better Clash mechanics out there.
Posted By:
wholelottalove
(2/11/2013 5:47:17 AM)
Doesn't make goats. 0/5
Posted By:
thexmanlight
(3/4/2012 8:20:09 PM)
I've always disliked the Clash mechanic for being clunky, and the fact that he's probably getting played in a white weenie deck means that you're essentially paying 3 for a vanilla 2/1 half the time.
Posted By:
Jannissary
(2/7/2012 2:26:35 AM)
Double Strike is soooo good, it almost makes clash worth playing. Then they did Mirran Crusader, who is so unbelievably strictly better than this that 'Mirran Crusader over Springjack Knight' should be the iconic example of 'strictly better' forever. :P
Posted By:
DarthParallax
(8/7/2011 8:06:55 PM)