x If you're looking for a specific comment, check the other printings as well.
Player Rating:
Community Rating: 3.256 / 5  (43 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:
12 >
This card is great in this deck since you need to build up time to cast your dragons. Giving it 3 toughness allows it to survive the first strike of many knights.
Posted By: EpicBroccoli (4/5/2011 5:39:06 AM)


"@ Brocolli: your point about it's toughness helping it survive is moot if you ... read the text."
@lorendorky: Your point about it's toughness helping it survive being moot is moot if you ... read the text.

In other words, you didn't quite get alucard311's point.
This is a print from Duel Decks: Knights vs. Dragons; he refered to this card's use in the dragon deck against the knight deck. And in the knight deck are many 2/2 first strikers.

He is well aware that the wall won't survive combat due to its ability, but that doesn't mean toughness doesn't matter. if it was just a 3/2 for example, it wouldn't be able to deal any damage because it wouldn't survive the first strike from the knight.
And dealing damage to kill the attacking knight doesn't sound irrelevant at all.

Also, please learn your hómophones. The wall is not toughness, it has toughness: its toughness.
(Although in this case i have to admit - since the main point of this comment... (see all)
Posted By: Mode (7/23/2011 9:16:08 AM)


Might manage to be a removal spell at times, but that's all it'll ever be. Would rather have some sort of fiery burn spell.
Posted By: sir_dwar (4/11/2011 3:05:27 PM)


@ Brocolli: your point about it's toughness helping it survive is moot if you ... read the text.
Posted By: lorendorky (6/2/2011 1:17:00 PM)


Teh suxxorz
Posted By: Anathame (8/29/2011 6:37:28 PM)


It's ok a 3/3 for 1 cmc anit bad.
Posted By: kashonismw (9/18/2011 5:26:42 AM)


@ Mode - actually, "it's" is the correct contraction of "it has."
Posted By: stygimoloch (10/7/2011 6:32:11 PM)


huh, this guy is better than I first thought. He does not sacrifice himself when he attacks, which is fairly relevant with Warmonger's Chariot.
Posted By: alucard311 (6/25/2011 6:52:23 PM)



I hate to add to such a petty exchange, but I find your comment perplexing. You're right in a general sense, but your comment is irrelevant because the OP was a misuse of a possessive "its", not "it is". It's strange that you missed this, since the original sentence was directly quoted in Mode's comment ("your point about it's toughness ...")

As for the card itself, it could be useable in some sort of Eldrazi Monument wall deck. Or just a defender deck with cards like Glyph of Destruction and Fling.
Posted By: nemokara (11/21/2012 8:41:04 AM)


Its real good 'Cause it's toughness has higher and better.

/english lesson

I think the flavor fits as well; the Knights run into a wall of cinders on their way as they hunt the dragons. Dragons don't hunt knights because they have better things to do; like burn villages n stuf.
Posted By: blurrymadness (7/18/2013 2:43:00 PM)