Previos versions of this card had better art.
Posted By:
A3Kitsune
(2/2/2010 4:47:02 PM)
Art isn't bad... but I'm so glad that this thing has finally been killed off for M10...
Posted By:
Volcre
(10/1/2009 10:45:33 AM)
Fortunately, hill giants have large blind spots in which a human can easily hide. Unfortunately, these blind spots are beneath the bottoms of their feet.
Posted By:
MasterOfEtherium
(8/6/2009 9:14:58 PM)
@ Chamale,
Hill Giant isn't strictly worse than those cards, other than the complex interactions between different cards, no card with an ability is better than the same card without an ability because of
Muraganda Petroglyphs which for some reason I can't auto card
Even if one of those cards was a 5/5 it doesn't guarantee that its better, then its power five, it could be returned to hand with a Cowardice and a Mosstodon
With all the cards in Magic, there is no card that's strictly better. Perhaps you can in standard, or like a standard set (like Ravinca Block)
If anyone else has one card that's strictly better in comparison to the other card, if you link them here I will post how its not strictly better on that card
@ leomistico, I already said why Grizzly Bears isn't strictly better than Wild Mongrel
Muraganda Petroglyphs
Strictly better, is better at all times in the game, no matter what. Car... (see all)
Posted By:
ICEFANG13
(6/18/2011 6:33:09 AM)
Can you say lightning rod?
Posted By:
Ligerman30
(5/14/2012 7:00:08 PM)
I hear a lot of talking tough, but I have yet to see a Magic player who could take on a Hill Giant in a fight.
Scathing jealousy detected.
Posted By:
Kirbster
(6/19/2012 8:41:21 AM)
This card still has nice art, and nice flavor text. You can try to win with x4 hill giants in your deck just for the fun and the flavor, and hes always played in drafts.
Posted By:
TheWrathofShane
(10/24/2012 9:50:12 AM)
I think what bugs me most about this card is the bad rep he gives giants.
Seriously. As well as the TItans, there's also Jareth, Leonine Titan and the immense amount of Lorwyn Tribal support available, and yet when people think of giants... they think of this guy.
Sigh.
Posted By:
psychichobo
(11/1/2012 3:43:37 PM)
It's crap, but it's classic crap. One of Magic's iconic creatures, simply because it's become a byword for bad vanilla creatures.
Posted By:
Continue
(11/14/2012 8:02:04 AM)
Don't feed the Troll. ICEFANG is a pessimistic, or a cynic, or a nihilist, or a just-bad-at-math-ist, or whatever he is.
He will be sad forever until he realizes that "Strictly Better" is a thing. He will even if he is happy, be failing to gain the happiness that comes from believing in Strictly Betterness, and thus he will not be Strictly Happy no matter how much he protests that he can be happy and that he is not a cynic. He will only prove his Happiness is stunted because it caps out in such a way that he can be just as equally unsatisfied or satisfied with a Hill Giant as with an Ogre Arsonist. Say what you want about the {1} mana difference, I wouldn't play Hill Giant in any deck I can imagine that wouldn't rather play the Ogre. EVEN B.S. Dredge Decks need lands. Eggs is an entirely different sort of B.S. that also does not change that Hill Giant is worse because you aren't going to have a Metagame be allowed that revolves around Eggs be... (see all)
Posted By:
DarthParallax
(2/20/2013 11:02:16 PM)