...i think it's a stupid hat
Posted By:
DlCK
(1/12/2010 12:37:04 AM)
Everything with banding on the card gets 0.5 for banding being such a horrible, horrible rule.
Posted By:
Baconradar
(9/14/2010 12:58:18 PM)
"Hurr durr, banding iz too complicated for my feeble brain!!"
-- Brats who spend their daddy's money on Baneslayer Angels
Helm of Chatzuk. Mono Artifact.
If target opponent still cannot figure out what banding does after all these years, (s)he has an IQ less than 70 and may no longer play Magic: The Gathering, but must play World of Warcrack or Grand Theft Lotto instead.
Posted By:
DrJack
(9/20/2013 8:52:51 AM)
What the hell that helm has to do with banding?????
Posted By:
Fallout90
(3/12/2012 4:31:27 AM)
I don't see why everyone hates on banding, it it would be nice to see it make a comeback. Just think of it as a purely defensive ability, your Goldenglow Moth can be gaining you 4 and practically never die since banding allows you to assign damage. Hell, band it with a Guard Gomozoa and it's party time. Sure there are better combos but banding still gets a bad rap.
Also I'm honestly surprised there isn't a white enchantment that gives banding to all your creatures.
Posted By:
s8n8ataco
(6/21/2012 11:08:29 AM)
Just because banding is complicated doesn't mean that the card is bad, guys. The great thing about Helm of Chatzuk is that it can give banding to creatures that don't suck.
@DrJack
How about you find some smart friends of yours who don't know how banding works, teach them the basics of Magic if they do not already, then show them the reminder text for banding on the gatherer. After that, ask them what would happen in the specific situations which are unintuitive (such as if you attack with a flying creature and banding creature and you band them together, can a creature without flying block the band). See how often they are correct.
My point is that Banding has problems, and it doesn't have to do with Wizards being condescending (at least not in the case of banding)
Posted By:
OlvynChuru
(4/20/2014 1:35:14 PM)