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: 3.562 / 5  (40 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.
 >
If not used in a specific combo, this mechanic is garbage. It would die to destroy effects, or single burn spells, to larger creatures, get stolen, sacrificed, a pacifism slapped on, exiled or whatever.

It is playable though in a deck with.. uhm... pyrohemia for example. The pyro won't kill it, and the ogre keeps the pyro in play.
Posted By: majinara (11/5/2010 4:40:56 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


not a bad card ,confusing text,but can be played well.
Posted By: intothevoid (2/4/2011 11:26:34 AM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


@ bhunji:
I agree, the oracle text of this is very confusing, and I myself find the original wording easier to understand.
For people who doesn't understand what this card does, basically, it can't be destroyed by lethal damage if more than one source assigns damage to it. Example: Ogre Enforcer won't die if I burn it with 2 Lightning Bolts, but it will die if I burn it with a Flame Javelin. Likewise, casting 2 copies of Pyroclasm won't kill it, and if Ogre Enforcer is blocked by a 3/2 and a 2/1 creature, it will survive through combat.

Overall, this card seems pretty decent, though nowhere near tournament level, I can imagine some odd plays made with this.
Posted By: GrimjawxRULES (2/7/2011 8:52:55 AM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


Why do they reword stuff when it isn't needed, what does "marked on it" mean? I prefer the printed text over Oracle's lost in translation.

Also Divine Presence would work well with this.
Posted By: bhunji42 (10/25/2009 4:39:05 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


@bhunji42:

I don't think the card makes sense as printed. No creature can be destroyed unless a single source deals enough damage to destroy it. If I have a regular 4/4 creature, and you Lightning Bolt it twice, the second Lightning Bolt surely does enough damage to destroy it, right? However, as per the Oracle wording, this guy would have 3 damage from LB1 and 3 damage form LB2 marked on him, neither of which is lethal, so he's not destroyed.
Posted By: deggdegg (3/20/2012 6:11:10 AM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


4/4 for 5 is about as Red gets in some instances, and the bizarre ability is...handy. I suppose?
Posted By: DoragonShinzui (10/24/2012 5:00:25 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


For those wondering, the reason they change the Oracle text is because while the text as written reads better, from a purely mathematical perspective, it doesn't work in the rules. Specifically when it interacts with damage prevention or damage removal, without a clear in-rules way of dealing with it, you can't specify what would happen without room for argument. Which in the unlikely event of this deciding if you top 8 or not, could mean thousands of pounds to you.
Posted By: deworde2510 (11/6/2013 2:29:51 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


@majinara

Enforcer works no better with Pyrohemia than any other 4-toughness creature. The source of the damage is the enchantment, not the effect on the stack. Splitting a source's damage into separate effects would likewise result in the ogre being destroyed as all the resulting damage marked on the ogre would have come from a single source (activating Pyrohemia 4 times still marks 4 damage on the ogre, all damage dealt by Pyrohemia). Two Pyrohemias or more are a different kettle of bananas though. You could really have some fun there :)

I love this card's effect, and I want to marry it. State-based actions be damned!
Posted By: Wraique (3/24/2014 11:26:05 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 




Gatherer works better in the Companion app!

Continue