[mtgnexus] Random Card of the Day - Monstrous Onslaught

[ISBPathfinder]

Fatal Push is a card that suffers from the 100 card singleton nature of commander. If you look at most of its use in 60 card its paired with fetchlands as the means to enable revolt. I think if I could reliably have as much access to revolt in this format as you can in 60 card I would be more willing to run it here. There are a ton of commanders that this can kill that just happen to be 3 mana but I can't really justify the card all that much without revolt.

I mostly pass on the card due to this. Its possible if you were running fetches and a sac based tactic that somehow cares about or runs a lot of spells it could also work, I just think it is naturally something I tend away from rather than feel it works for this format.

[onering]

This is actually pretty good in aristocrats because you can much more easily have revolt happen whenever you need it to than in most decks.

Unfortunately, aristocrats enables revolt in a way that also enables morbid, which means if this is online it's very likely Tragic Slip is as well, and Tragic Slip hits a lot more by giving -13/-13. It's also not a destroy effect but a toughness lowering based kill, so it clears indestructible.

Both kind of suck if you don't have them powered up, but Tragic Slip is just so much better when it's powered up that it's not even close.

[DirkGently]

I'm never sleeving this up in Shut Up and Play. Imagine @DirkGently drops Samut, the Driving Force and you're sitting on this instead of whatever Go for the Throat variant you favor. That's just a straight game losing choice.

Half the reason this card is even playable is fetches. I'd basically never play this anywhere below bracket 4.

I think it's alright. Ofc it suffers from the nature of the format biasing removal towards killing game-winning bombs over tempo plays. It's the sort of removal spell I'd move up in my ranking when building a very curve-dependent aggro deck that would much rather leave up 1 mana than 2, and doesn't want the game to go long enough that many 6-drops are hitting the table. Fetches definitely help too, ofc, though those could exist in any bracket.

For a typical deck I'm almost always picking harder 2 mv removal over it, but I don't think it's unplayable even in lower brackets, and in higher brackets the efficiency probably makes it one of the better options.

So...it's aight. 6/10?

[3drinks]

Thursday, September 17th 2026; Monstrous Onslaught

[onering]

Push: the thing with these (tragic slip included) as well is that they compete with other 1 mana removal if you have access to white or blue. In low curve aggro, rapid hybridization and pongify probably aren't great because they leave 3/3s behind, but in any other deck they are amazing. Obviously Swords and Path are amazing, as is the new path variant that destroys instead of exiles (though giving someone a basic is a genuine drawback). Hell, even red has enough that competes with this at 1 mana, good ol' Bolt will take out most of what this takes out without revolt and a large chunk of what it does with revolt but can also hit walkers or go to the face (which can actually be relevant in aggro).

This definitely has its place, I just think it's restricted to bracket 4 metas that push the edge of the bracket or cEDH. I play plenty of bracket 4 games where this just misses way too much and where 2 mana broader removal is more effective than this by a mile, but that's online where the meta is broad. B4 playgroups can look more like cEDH in terms of curve and the importance of cheap creatures is much higher so this would be good there.


Monstrous Onslaught: this was a limited bomb but doesn't do a whole lot in most commander games. It really needs you to be running a high density of enormous creatures to get the amount of damage high enough to be worth 5 mana, even being able to split it. If you're slinging Eldrazi it's probably doing decent work, but I don't even run it in Goreclaw because if I'm spending 5 mana there I'd rather be spending it on a 7 drop creature that threatens to take over the game (or one of the many 5 drops of Goreclaw isn't out, or a 5 drop and a 4 drop if he is.).

[DirkGently]

Very niche. I don't even think I'd want to run it in eldrazi-type decks, I'd only really consider it for something like Zimone, Paradox Sculptor where you could plausibly have an 80/80 sitting around that turns this into a 5 mana plague wind.

It is less risky than it initially looks though, since unlike most fight/bite spells this still works if your creature is removed. Which is pretty imperative to this being playable, since it's pretty hard to have a creature that big in play and not have opponents at minimum holding up removal in case you give it evasion.

[Lifeless]

There are pros and cons here for sure. Perfectly reasonable if I was still running Thromok the Insatiable or some such indiscriminately large critter since, like Dirk mentioned, it can't be blanked by removal. However, I'm personally looking for effects like this to work with deathtouch and therefore willing to accept the risk of getting blown out most of the time.

[MAGUSZANIN]

I struggle to think of a single creature that would make me want to cast Monstrous Onslaught. Even something like Ghalta, Primal Hunger just isn't going to clear most Commander boards at 12.

Maybe if I am doing some kind of monogreen enchantress Voltron? Something like Ancestral Mask can easily push a creature to 30 power or more, which makes it a lot more appealing. Even then, that is very niche and most of those decks are playing at least one more color to give them a bit more options.

[ISBPathfinder]

I have a Grothama, All-Devouring deck where I considered it a bit. Its a bit expensive for removal but if you have some chonky boys I think its fine. I could also see it fitting in some other commanders like Ghalta, Primal Hunger. I haven't really seen much of it. I don't think its horrible its a bit spendy and takes some setup but I think its effect is fairly decent. I honestly wouldn't be that surprised to see it played I think it seems reasonable if a bit intensive mana / setup to execute.

Sure, its not a wrath but let me kill your commander, and yours, and that utility creature for 5 mana in green. I am not sure why people are hating on this. Sure, its not a complete wrath but I think a 3-5 for 1 in green creature removal is useful in some decks.

[3drinks]

I think it's like fire covenant in that you don't need to kill everything and that's what people are focusing on. You only have to hit the problems being presented to you running your offense. Don't be greedy.

Strikes me as a big nickel defender rather than the primere defensive scheme you want to install.

[Moxnix]

Just seems bad to me better ways to leverage high power to auto win than use its half one sided wipe if 15 power kills half the board then even a hunters prowess leverage the same power to draw 18 card enough gas to auto kill the table its like large numbers have cards that leverage them if I'm going to why would i play wipes some guys maybe instead of draws enough to cards to win always of which green has like 20 ways to do. Not the same mana but compare this effect to last march of the ents that when it sees a fat card just reads like "win the game" . I dont really wrath in green period why just cast some kind of overrun and kill them green sitting back to play control feels odd i mean if your being quirky suer but in general i dont need to remove creatures in green as much a i do other colors outside hatebears IE lumra hates dauthi. I dont know when green is my best wipe color I'm likely mono green and in mono green my plans normally run you over not control the board. So can i see a world where its good in ghatla sure but I bet I can put any of greens draw for power cards in the same slot and make the deck stronger.

[3drinks]

Just seems bad to me better ways to leverage high power to auto win than use its half one sided wipe if 15 power kills half the board then even a hunters prowess leverage the same power to draw 18 card enough gas to auto kill the table its like large numbers have cards that leverage them if I'm going to why would i play wipes some guys maybe instead of draws enough to cards to win always of which green has like 20 ways to do. Not the same mana but compare this effect to last march of the ents that when it sees a fat card just reads like "win the game" . I dont really wrath in green period why just cast some kind of overrun and kill them green sitting back to play control feels odd i mean if your being quirky suer but in general i dont need to remove creatures in green as much a i do other colors outside hatebears IE lumra hates dauthi. I dont know when green is my best wipe color I'm likely mono green and in mono green my plans normally run you over not control the board. So can i see a world where its good in ghatla sure but I bet I can put any of greens draw for power cards in the same slot and make the deck stronger.

It's the curse of midrange slop. People are too focused on how to not lose when they could just win. Which coincidentally also accomplished the not lose objective.

[onering]

I have a Grothama, All-Devouring deck where I considered it a bit. Its a bit expensive for removal but if you have some chonky boys I think its fine. I could also see it fitting in some other commanders like Ghalta, Primal Hunger. I haven't really seen much of it. I don't think its horrible its a bit spendy and takes some setup but I think its effect is fairly decent. I honestly wouldn't be that surprised to see it played I think it seems reasonable if a bit intensive mana / setup to execute.

Sure, its not a wrath but let me kill your commander, and yours, and that utility creature for 5 mana in green. I am not sure why people are hating on this. Sure, its not a complete wrath but I think a 3-5 for 1 in green creature removal is useful in some decks.

Its more like a 2-3 for 1 unless you're only hitting utility creatures, or you have like a 20/20 on the board. Ghalta is a natural place for it and I wouldn't bank on it being anything more than a 3 for 1 in any given game, and actually expect it to be a 2 for 1 at least as often.

It's 5 mana, sorcery speed, and reliant on you having a large enough creature to actually matter, and even then it may not actually do what you need it to do when you need it to. I mean, damn, you can spend 5 mana at sorcery speed and have it just be a 2 for 1 by relying on having Ghalta out. That is not good. It's a very niche card that needs you to have something unreasonably large out to actually be reliably good rather than just serviceable. Sure, it can be pretty good when it's a 3-5 for 1, but that needs to be weighed against the times you just can't use it because your big creature died, or your stuff just all got bounced. It sucks hard when you're behind and it's role is similar to an overrun, to help you turn a strong board state into a win or at least a strong attack, and frankly a card like that needs to reliably pull its weight. It you have something absurdly huge in play often, it will, so it's a niche card for that sort of deck. Ghalta seems like the absolute minimum to me, where it's going to be just reliable enough and do just enough damage to be worth it.

3Drinks compared it to Fire Covenant, but Fire Covenant is much, much better. It's 3 mana instead of 5, and it's instant speed. You can use it reactively, and you can use it when you're board is weak. It's active more reliably, and it's more flexible, since it can serve both as a way to clear out the board for an attack or remove utility creatures when you have a strong board AND as a way to hurt someone else's board when you are trying to stabilize your own. While the life payment is a significant cost it's not enough to keep it from being far better than this card. I'd say they really serve different roles, but it's more true that Fire Covenant serves this card's role about equally well while also serving additional roles with equivalent competence, which just makes it a far better card.

Genuinely, I would put this card as a 4/10, suited for niche use where it can shine, while Fire Covenant is a 7/10, a strong card useable in a broad spectrum of decks that suffers from a drawback.

[ISBPathfinder]

Its more like a 2-3 for 1 unless you're only hitting utility creatures, or you have like a 20/20 on the board. Ghalta is a natural place for it and I wouldn't bank on it being anything more than a 3 for 1 in any given game, and actually expect it to be a 2 for 1 at least as often.

It's 5 mana, sorcery speed, and reliant on you having a large enough creature to actually matter, and even then it may not actually do what you need it to do when you need it to. I mean, damn, you can spend 5 mana at sorcery speed and have it just be a 2 for 1 by relying on having Ghalta out. That is not good. It's a very niche card that needs you to have something unreasonably large out to actually be reliably good rather than just serviceable. Sure, it can be pretty good when it's a 3-5 for 1, but that needs to be weighed against the times you just can't use it because your big creature died, or your stuff just all got bounced. It sucks hard when you're behind and it's role is similar to an overrun, to help you turn a strong board state into a win or at least a strong attack, and frankly a card like that needs to reliably pull its weight. It you have something absurdly huge in play often, it will, so it's a niche card for that sort of deck. Ghalta seems like the absolute minimum to me, where it's going to be just reliable enough and do just enough damage to be worth it.

3Drinks compared it to Fire Covenant, but Fire Covenant is much, much better. It's 3 mana instead of 5, and it's instant speed. You can use it reactively, and you can use it when you're board is weak. It's active more reliably, and it's more flexible, since it can serve both as a way to clear out the board for an attack or remove utility creatures when you have a strong board AND as a way to hurt someone else's board when you are trying to stabilize your own. While the life payment is a significant cost it's not enough to keep it from being far better than this card. I'd say they really serve different roles, but it's more true that Fire Covenant serves this card's role about equally well while also serving additional roles with equivalent competence, which just makes it a far better card.

Genuinely, I would put this card as a 4/10, suited for niche use where it can shine, while Fire Covenant is a 7/10, a strong card useable in a broad spectrum of decks that suffers from a drawback.

I agree that I think comparing it to Fire Covenant is a big stretch. I was just arguing that its not completely unplayable. Its going to be a niche roleplayer at best but I do think anything where you plan to have + power reliably its at least an ok consideration. I am not saying slam run or OP or anything I just think its fine and it could be an ok card.

I do like that it remembers the power on cast rather than on resolution as that removes the issue of fight where being removed in response screws you over.

[onering]

I think that's a reasonable assessment

[3drinks]

3Drinks compared it to Fire Covenant, but Fire Covenant is much, much better. It's 3 mana instead of 5, and it's instant speed. You can use it reactively, and you can use it when you're board is weak. It's active more reliably, and it's more flexible, since it can serve both as a way to clear out the board for an attack or remove utility creatures when you have a strong board AND as a way to hurt someone else's board when you are trying to stabilize your own. While the life payment is a significant cost it's not enough to keep it from being far better than this card. I'd say they really serve different roles, but it's more true that Fire Covenant serves this card's role about equally well while also serving additional roles with equivalent competence, which just makes it a far better card.

Obviously it's not literal fire covenant. That's absurd. The role this is (trying to) provide is similar to fire covenant. A selectable sweeper. Using a large creature during your main phase and a single colour. Versus using two colours, your life points, and instant speed.

[Moxnix]

Its not that its unplayable in something lower power i just have a hard time imgaingining my 5 cc pile in green and playing this over even overwhelming stampede which likely just kills whoever owned the creatures i wanted to kill right now you know. Its more of a green can play cards that threaten to end the game with the setup this card requires to ping a few guys out.

[ISBPathfinder]

Its not that its unplayable in something lower power i just have a hard time imgaingining my 5 cc pile in green and playing this over even overwhelming stampede which likely just kills whoever owned the creatures i wanted to kill right now you know. Its more of a green can play cards that threaten to end the game with the setup this card requires to ping a few guys out.

What if you already have Overwhelming Stampede in your deck? Just saying, its not like there are even 2 cards with this effect that exist. I am not saying your argument isn't valid but there aren't that many cards of this equivalence. I guess there is an enchantment that does something similar minus trample. I was just pointing out that you might already have that in a list.

[MAGUSZANIN]

What if you already have Overwhelming Stampede in your deck? Just saying, its not like there are even 2 cards with this effect that exist. I am not saying your argument isn't valid but there aren't that many cards of this equivalence. I guess there is an enchantment that does something similar minus trample. I was just pointing out that you might already have that in a list.

Ehhhhh, Spinning Wheel Kick is pretty close. Yeah, if you are trying to kill a whole board of 1/1s it might not be as good, but besides that scenario, paying 5ish for both cards? You are basically certain to kill roughly the same things, but you might have trouble getting enough damage for a third one with Onslaught. And you have the options to cast Wheel Kick for cheap and kill less targets, or cast it for a lot and kill a ton of targets. Plus Wheel Kick is still plenty castable with a five power creature in play, whereas Onslaught is significantly degraded in that scenario.

Wheel Kick is also really nice in that the creature is dealing with damage, so it benefits from Deathtouch, Lifelink, auras, etc.

[3drinks]

I like Apex Altisaur + Withstand Death. Peak g nonsense.

[MooseHatGuy]

This didn't last long in my Xenagos, God of Revels because Chandra's Ignition and even Showstopping Surprise made it look stupid.