x If you're looking for a specific comment, check the other printings as well.
Player Rating:
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0
Community Rating: 1.506 / 5  (77 votes)
The player rating is the overall rating for the card taking into account all player rating votes.

 
Popular Comments
Hide Comments
Only show me comments rated:
 stars.
12 >
Every land should have a mana ability, Wizards realized this after many bad lands...even with a mana ability these lands would still suck...
Posted By: Guest57443454 (11/25/2009 11:37:24 AM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


It's so sad that this cycle of cards is the worst ever printed(respectibly)Good names, good retro art, but fail...just fail.
Posted By: GrimGorgonBC (1/14/2010 6:33:57 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


@kimbote: There are three ways this could go: the original way, the way a lot of us seem to have been lead to believe they changed it, and the way it actually works now. (For the sake of readability, and in deference to the card, let's say we were looking at "bands with legends".)
1) The original way this functioned was creatures with "bands with other legends" could form a band with legends who also had the "bands with other legends" ability. Very restrictive.
2) I was lead to believe that they recently changed it so that it could band with other legendss whether they have the ability or not. That is, a creature with "bands with legends" can only join a band if another legend has already been declared part of the band (either because he has banding and was added to the band first, because he was the 1 non-banding creature that was added to the band, or because the band is entirely made of legends with "bands with other legends").
3) However, the current reminder text DOES accurately ... (see all)
Posted By: longwinded (3/11/2011 1:43:42 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


It gets a point for the picture, I suppose....
Posted By: Kirbster (7/1/2010 8:20:14 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


@ nammertime: are you sure? It appears they word it a bit different now: White legendary creatures you control have "bands with other legendary creatures." (Any legendary creatures can attack in a band as long as at least one has "bands with other legendary creatures."...

It reads as if only one would need this ability. It's as if it is a different kind of "banding". Correct me if I'm reading it wrong though.
Posted By: Kimbote (1/28/2010 7:39:22 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


I think the manna argument is right. Although, its not nearly as offensive to me as it seems to everyone else. If it only produced one colorless manna, than it might be nice.

Though, for some reason, this card reminds me of the kamigawa block, they talked a lot about legends.

Perhaps... If you treated this like a zero cost enchantment it looks better, and don't think of it as a land when structuring the deck, then it could be good.

That, and have your deck full of white legendary creatures... It's playable... Later in a game, I might rather have this in my hand than another, typical, land, especially in a deck made for it.

Although, I will admit, having two on the field doesn't really do you all that much good...

So, base rating: ***

No manna production: -** */2
Center deck structure: +*
Zero manna cost: +*

Final: ** */2
Posted By: Zoah (2/22/2010 10:55:08 AM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


From what I can tell, this cycle was SUPPOSED to be the justification for such otherwise (and potentially still, despite the initial scheme) low-wattage legends as The Lady of the Mountain and Tobias Andrion. Andrion's advantage over Serra Angel and Air Elemental was that once you got the Cathedral of Serra and/or Seafarers' Quay out, he'd have banding, every turn (not every other turn like with Helm of Chatzuk, not to mention the banding would be for more than just one creature). Very selective banding, yes, but it WAS within the adventurers' party (q.v. D&D personal campaign inspirations); the Cathedral & Co. were where the adventurers met and formed that party. In fact, extrapolating from the whole situation with Andrion, I think the original intent was that you were EXPECTED to use these lands to create the adventuring party, and thus bring the legends to their intended potentia... (see all)
Posted By: SkyknightXi (5/13/2011 8:00:37 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


Plenty of white creatures have the tools they need to abuse banding, and enough of them are legendary. This is the best of the cycle. Could be a fun card to use in non-competitive formats such as Commander.
Posted By: Kryptnyt (6/14/2011 4:50:33 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


This should be legendary and be able to produce white mana.
Posted By: Rainyday2012 (8/11/2009 3:07:28 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


Banding doesn't necessarily suck. It's worthless lands that grant banding which suck. If they were mana sources as well, they'd be useful. Well, if they didn't get rid of the banding ability, that is.

@Rainyday2012: It doesn't need to be legendary, but it definitely needs to produce mana.
Posted By: Dr_Draco (8/22/2009 11:10:19 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0