L
Lord Magnus
Guest
I wonder why they got rid of banding?
M
MrXarvox
Guest
because it's almost completely useless.
G
Gizmo
Guest
It was an ability that was rarely used, and also very hard to explain to beginners. And it didn`t actually do very much.
Just got rid of it to make the game simpler.
Just got rid of it to make the game simpler.
D
Deadman
Guest
Way too complicated to explain to begginers.
Plus it sucked, it was rarely worth the hassle.
I rarely played banding critters from dread of having to explain it to newbies.
Banding sucked. So it got ditched.
Plus it sucked, it was rarely worth the hassle.
I rarely played banding critters from dread of having to explain it to newbies.
Banding sucked. So it got ditched.
R
rkoelsch
Guest
Such talk. They did get rid of it because it was very hard to explain. It was also best used in a defensive deck. It is very difficult to win when you are being defensive but it is possible. Classic rules actually made it stronger but it is not a competitive ability. But let skizzik or ball lightning meet a knight of thorns he would teach them proper respect for a little used ability.
D
Deadman
Guest
Nope, sorry, Banding sucked.
That's not the reason it got ditched, but it still sucked.
Yes it had it's uses, but still, overall, it sucked.
That's not the reason it got ditched, but it still sucked.
Yes it had it's uses, but still, overall, it sucked.
C
Chaos Turtle
Guest
Actually, it was a vaulable creature ability in limited formats.
Its replacement, the en-Kor ability, is a little easier to understand, and much more useful.
I hope some en-Kor creatures make the cut to 7th edition.
Its replacement, the en-Kor ability, is a little easier to understand, and much more useful.
I hope some en-Kor creatures make the cut to 7th edition.
L
Landkiller
Guest
To anyone who claims that Banding sucks :
Have you ever played against a deck with much Banding? No. Well let me tell you, it's really annoying. Your beefy creatures keep trading with 1/1's. That's what Banding does. And, often, your midsize or smaller creatures completely are unable to effect combat, and abilities like first strike or flying become useless. A well-balanced Banding army will overcome almost any normal creature horde another deck can produce.
The problem is, in most Constructed environments, an ability that subtle never gets much chance to be used. Setting up and abusing a banding horde was too much overextension, when Wrath of God and it's friends are around. Also, it's a slower strategy than the more successful agressive decks.
Have you ever played against a deck with much Banding? No. Well let me tell you, it's really annoying. Your beefy creatures keep trading with 1/1's. That's what Banding does. And, often, your midsize or smaller creatures completely are unable to effect combat, and abilities like first strike or flying become useless. A well-balanced Banding army will overcome almost any normal creature horde another deck can produce.
The problem is, in most Constructed environments, an ability that subtle never gets much chance to be used. Setting up and abusing a banding horde was too much overextension, when Wrath of God and it's friends are around. Also, it's a slower strategy than the more successful agressive decks.
R
rkoelsch
Guest
Even though I like banding the en kor ability is definitely cleaner. I hope it makes it into 7th
also
also
N
Nyx
Guest
Not competitive? The controller of the banding creature decides how the damage is dealt, not the controller of the creature causing the damage.That means that I block a Thorn elemental with a 1/1 benalish hero and a second critter and you don't cause me a single point of damage unless I want you to. In your own example, I block your ball lightning or skizzik with the same hero and friend again, I take nothing all of it hits the hero OR his friend (I'd be stupid to kill them both) and your skizzik or ball lightning dies with him. YOU CAN'T CONTROL THE DAMAGE WHEN MY CRITTER IS IN A BAND! That's one of the more powerful abilities around. It also works on the attack to allow your creatures to "gang up" on the defenders. That's where people really started playing the ability incorrectly though.Classic rules actually made it stronger but it is not a competitive ability.
The confusing part was that people thought that banding gave attacking critters shared evasion. So if I banded a pegasus with a pearled unicorn and attacked, they thought that unless you could block the pegasus, you couldn't block the unicorn. Meanwhile the rules actually say that if you block the unicorn, you also block the pegasus.
Consider the following: Timber Wolf + Basilisk Banded and attacking. If you block, I choose to stick up to three on the basilisk preventing any critter from dying, yours gets destroyed by the basilisk's power if not by the 3 damage it takes from blocking both. If you deal 4 or more, I just assign it all to the wolf and the basilisk is unharmed and ready to come back next turn.
Pull out some of the nasty white critters from Arabian Nights and other old sets and play a few games in Apprentice. I'll recommend the Noble Elephant and the Moorish Cavalry mixed with Benalish Heroes, Mesa Pegasus, Jihad, and Crusade. When those trampling cavalry keep coming back turn after turn and all you manage to kill is a 1/1 benalish hero, you'll get the idea of how deadly it is on the attack. Serra Angels, IA's Seraph, and the Mesa Pegasus also make for ruthless combinations.
Here's another one: a 2/1 first striker comes for you. You block with two benalish heroes. You assign all the damage from the firststriker to one hero and the second kills it.
Still think the power isn't competitive? It's only drawback is that it requires two or more creatures. Though only one needs to have the ability. You don't need a horde, just two. And that's easy enough to pull off. Especially with things that have protection in white. Mesa PEgasus and all the new angels...
[Edited by Nyx on 11-20-00 at 07:00 PM]
T
theorgg
Guest
Banding is AWESOME! It lets you force creatures to work together and let several things be really cool, like Urza's Engine and Ication Skirmishers.
I Love banding and I'm really sad that the "one bander per block" wasn't held up like it was said to be going to have been... or somthng.
I really miss Banding and Poison. those were some really good abilities--they need to be brought back into the game of Magic. If only as 1/1(ability) for 1.
I Love banding and I'm really sad that the "one bander per block" wasn't held up like it was said to be going to have been... or somthng.
I really miss Banding and Poison. those were some really good abilities--they need to be brought back into the game of Magic. If only as 1/1(ability) for 1.
R
rkoelsch
Guest
I like banding and I have used it on many occasions. What really hurt the ability is that lack of protection. One of the best banding creatures is Knight of thorns 2/2 knight with banding and protection from red. It therefore doesn't need another creature. It can block Ball Lightning and Skizzik and survive with you taking no damage.
N
Nyx
Guest
Knight of Thorns needs a second critter. If he blocks a ball lightning by himself you take all the damage but two, and he survives. The ability of a banding critter that lets you determing the damage assignment is called "damage sharing" and it only works if you have a second critter. In fact, you have to have a second critter to form a band:
So a benalish hero and a knight of dawn is just as effective a band as a knight of thorns and a civilian token at stopping skizzik. But even a benalish hero and a civilian token can stop the skizzik without me taking any damage.
That is the one drawback of banding. But I still think it's incredibly potent. It's right up there with first strike in my book. Anything that can negate my opponent's first strike, his trample, and his "Super Trample" (like the lone wolf, rhox, and thorn elemental) is a monster of a defensive power. And when it negates his defenders' first strike and numerical advantage, it becomes a nasty offensive power as well.
You need "a group of creatures" to activate damage sharing.A.7.12 - When assigning damage in combat (on either attack or defense), if at least one creature with Banding ability is present in a group of creatures which are blocked by or which are blocking the same creature, then the group of creatures is subject to damage sharing. [Fifth Edition, Page 29]
So a benalish hero and a knight of dawn is just as effective a band as a knight of thorns and a civilian token at stopping skizzik. But even a benalish hero and a civilian token can stop the skizzik without me taking any damage.
That is the one drawback of banding. But I still think it's incredibly potent. It's right up there with first strike in my book. Anything that can negate my opponent's first strike, his trample, and his "Super Trample" (like the lone wolf, rhox, and thorn elemental) is a monster of a defensive power. And when it negates his defenders' first strike and numerical advantage, it becomes a nasty offensive power as well.
D
Duel
Guest
Banding confused me less than trample STILL confuses my brother (side note: Rampage was the first ability I really figured out)
they took it out because they wanted to. they said ti was too complicated, but compared to APNAP and "if" trigger effects, banding is a walk in the playground.
they took it out because they wanted to. they said ti was too complicated, but compared to APNAP and "if" trigger effects, banding is a walk in the playground.
Nyx; I think you're misinterpreting "group". It means "one or more". Check out this rule:
C.5.Ruling.3 - If there is just one blocker and it has banding, the
defending player still decides how damage is divided. This can be
important if the attacking creature has Trample (see Rule A.27), or if a
creature like Thorn Elemental is involved. [DeLaney 00/01/13]
R
rkoelsch
Guest
I was trying to get out to D'angelos site but it must have been down yesterday. I thought that banding to defend didn't depend on a group under the new rules. I was starting to question if I understood it properly. Thanks again
I was under the impression that's how banding worked ALL the time.
One thing that DOES bug me is that I thought that if a Timber Wolves and Basilisk were banded together attacking and someone blocks the Wolves, the Basilisk's ability DIDN'T trigger. But that may have been under the old rules 'cause I can't find anything that says it happens that way. All of the blocking rules say to treat all creatures as if blocked (and imply abilities trigger). I may have to dig up those two old Duelists with banding explained in them.
{editing)
Never mind, I found the rule. Apparently this is it:
One thing that DOES bug me is that I thought that if a Timber Wolves and Basilisk were banded together attacking and someone blocks the Wolves, the Basilisk's ability DIDN'T trigger. But that may have been under the old rules 'cause I can't find anything that says it happens that way. All of the blocking rules say to treat all creatures as if blocked (and imply abilities trigger). I may have to dig up those two old Duelists with banding explained in them.
{editing)
Never mind, I found the rule. Apparently this is it:
However, it's from '99, so maybe the way I thought it worked DID work in the past. But I guess it's changed now...C.4.11 - If a blocker legally blocks one creature in a band of attackers, it
is considered to block all members of that band, even if it could not
legally block some or all of the other creatures in the band.
[D'Angelo 99/05/01]
R
rkoelsch
Guest
at least that was the way we use to play it. It was not very clear. But when you blocked a creature you were only blocking that creature and not any that were banded with it for triggered effects.
I
Istanbul
Guest
Even now, we can't come to any kind of easy decision as to how Banding works in assorted situations. This is precisely why Banding was taken out of the basic set; it's just too confusing.