Phyrexian Obliterator (New Phyrexia) - Community - Gatherer

There are no comments yet for this card.

Dies to removal. 1/5.

...yeah, I'm joking. It's incredibly powerful, and I like any step mono black takes away from the cheesy vampire mechanics. I don't think it's quite as overpowered as Baneslayer Angel or Wurmcoil Engine because of its restrictive mana cost, but yeah, definitely incredible value for CMC. If it was {B}{B}{B}{B}{B}, I'd still play it.

Report Abuse

Posted By: Havrekjex (12/9/2011 1:31:38 AM)

Rating:

The card never really sees play. It's awesome, but it forces you to play monoblack and it just hasn't been a viable archetype since it was printed. Not to mention it was printed alongside Dismember which owns this card and was played in EVERY SINGLE DECK.

Funny how everyone thought this was too insanely OPed. Turns out the cost was enough of a drawback. But this is still a kitchen table all star and a favorite of mine.

Report Abuse

Posted By: RedAtrocitus (2/7/2013 9:59:08 AM)

Rating:

You might as well make this thing indestructible

Report Abuse

Posted By: Gcrudaplaneswalker (9/5/2011 4:38:00 PM)

Rating:

It's not like green's not going to play Beast Within, heh? Who's complaining that BW is more versatile and, therefore, more likely to be played in large numbers? No one. What makes JTMS great? Versatility. Obliterator is just a "unblockable" beatstick. It fills a very narrow role, in a very limited number of decks. It's not going to pop all over the place and warp the metagame.

I think Wizards realized that as long as they provided a healthy amount of removal for all colors, it was okay to make powerful and flashy creatures. And we're benefiting from it. The whole game thrives on cool creatures with nifty abilities. It's like DnD at higher levels: you can do great things and you feel awesome doing them, but your enemies can do a lot too, so the balance (usually) remains. Everybody's happy. Or should be.

Report Abuse

Posted By: LiXinjian (5/15/2011 4:56:41 PM)

Rating:

I did a double take when I first read this card and I seriously doubt that I was the only one. This card is so unbelievably powerful I'm surprised it doesn't appear to be seeing quite as much tournament play as it deserves.

Report Abuse

Posted By: BlackFlameAshura (8/4/2011 8:54:24 AM)

Rating:

It's upsetting, in my opinion, when a card this cool and this powerful is hardly given a second glance because of the metagame it's in.
I'm glad everyone comes to the consensus that he's a very good, well-rounded creature,
But many ALSO agree that he's extremely manageable.
He's in an environment where

can kill him without activating his ability. (Dismember), and

can do the same without life loss, but needs the Black

(Go for the Throat).
I like him, and many people like him, and his flavour is just so awesome.
However, him being printed in an environment that is difficult to survive means that he won't see as much play as I would personally like to see him in.

Report Abuse

Posted By: infernox10 (9/12/2011 12:04:47 AM)

Rating:

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/af2

Hmm . . . . So back in Urza block when Phyrexian Negator was being playtested, somebody somewhere at some point thought, "hey, maybe the controller of this 5/5 trampler for 3 shouldn't HAVE to sac permanents when it takes damage, maybe it should be, like, optional."
But (thankfully, we may have all presumed) nobody listened.

Then, years later, somebody else in a playtest session testing an early version of this must've said, "You know what? Why should I have to sac permanents for my 5/5 trampler for 3? You know who should be saccing permanents? YOU!" So they made it mono black, raised it's cmc by one, and made it mythic.

Am I the only one that looks at this and thinks maybe they just should've listened to the guy from back in Urza's block and made the permanent saccing optional?

Dammit Wizards, you're making Urza Block look bad for crying out loud!

Report Abuse

Posted By: Fictionarious (8/8/2012 1:51:42 AM)

Rating: