Not strictly worse in the strictest sense, as this costs only 1 white mana and Serra Angel costs 2 white mana.
Posted By:
Nagoragama
(7/31/2011 9:13:49 PM)
Although it's outclassed by better cards like Serra Angel and Shepherd of the Lost, it's still costed pretty fairly. I mean a 3/3 with two relevant abilities for 5 with low colour weight is fine.
I prefer this over Angel of Mercy anyway.
Posted By:
Baconradar
(12/21/2011 4:07:56 AM)
Let's do some consideration...
A bad 5 mana angel -> Starlit Angel.
A good 5 mana angel -> Melesse Spirit, Angel of Light.
A very good 5 mana angel -> Serra Angel, Shepherd of the Lost, Angel of Flight Alabaster.
A too good 5 mana angel -> Baneslayer Angel, Angelic Overseer.
Posted By:
Paolino
(1/11/2012 5:29:50 AM)
Nice flavor and artwork, unfortunately strictly worse than Serra Angel (which isn't strictly worse than Baneslayer Angel, per se, due to vigilance).
Posted By:
AlphaNumerical
(8/10/2009 12:10:22 AM)
This is the type of angel I envision. Very solid.
Posted By:
Weretarrasque
(7/25/2009 8:06:02 AM)
Strictly worse then both Serra Angel and Shepherd of the Lost. Especially considering they are all uncommons. 1/5
Posted By:
Eved
(12/17/2009 6:23:00 AM)
Five mana? I'll take a Baneslayer Angel instead.
Posted By:
mrredhatter
(10/3/2009 7:18:39 PM)
Someone please explain to me how on earth this is a $10 card. Scarcity is one thing, but being good is another thing as well.
Posted By:
BlackFlameAshura
(1/8/2012 9:49:17 AM)
Great art, very splashable and relevant ability. People have to compare it to other 5 cc angels and its not fair since the other 5 cc are different rarities. The closest one would be to Angel of Mercy who is also a 3/3 but gains you 3 life. You are essentially trading 3 life for vigilance. Whereas unfair to compare this to Serra Angel and Baneslayer Angel. Remember this card is meant to be in a Starter set, for new players to learn and undertand Magic.
Posted By:
vantha
(2/1/2013 7:13:58 AM)