Feather, the Redeemed
Start Commander Deck
Set Price Alerts

Combos Browse all Suggest

Legality

Format Legality
1v1 Commander Legal
Arena Legal
Block Constructed Legal
Canadian Highlander Legal
Casual Legal
Commander / EDH Legal
Commander: Rule 0 Legal
Custom Legal
Duel Commander Legal
Gladiator Legal
Highlander Legal
Historic Legal
Legacy Legal
Leviathan Legal
Limited Legal
Modern Legal
Oathbreaker Legal
Pioneer Legal
Tiny Leaders Legal
Vintage Legal

Feather, the Redeemed

Legendary Creature — Angel

Flying

Whenever you cast an instant or sorcery spell that targets a creature you control, exile that card instead of putting it into your graveyard as it resolves. If you do, return it to your hand at the beginning of the next end step.

Recommendations View more recommendations

Bandage
Defiant Strike
Vanguard of Brimaz
Akroan Crusader
Guided Strike
Niveous Wisps

TheSnuggleLord on What Commander Do You Think …

3 days ago

TheOfficialCreator Sick, I was just wanting to be cautious, in some Discord Servers and a Reddit forum prior I was asked about reducing post lengths. Just wanting to respect a precedent I suppose.

Grubbernaut The opposing view is just as valid, and more insightful than having mostly the same repeated points towards this subject.

Ideally, I'd imagine, in a game about playing cards and constructing decks with those products; to ban a card is never the company's motive. They want to sell every card they have and for us to buy them. When a card is banned, it's usually for the health of the specific format to preserve as many cards as possible while allowing player's to access the game.

I think it's in this accessibility that cards get banned due to a perceived "power level" of the current "meta" that might have taken advantage of the card, or the effect of the product in question was so ill-received. Opposition Agent was one of the few cards I saw, and was rather excited about. Every player under the sun screamed "ban" and wizards didn't. I found this quite the impressive result because I'm skeptical that WotC tends to listen when their player's cry wolf; just look at the ban list.

It's obvious that certain gameplay strategies are favored. Feather, the Redeemed is obviously loved as shown by this forum, and that's super cool, but it's the player's choice to play that deck against an opponent they might not know and I believe accept the risk that their deck's strategy may be flat out exploited and shut down. I also believe that it is that deck's responsibility to have at least a couple of answers specific or otherwise to answer cards you, the deckbuilder expect to see shut you down.

I'm going to use Korvold, Fae-Cursed King as an example. I know plenty of people want him banned, and I can easily see why. Dude is sick, he's one of my prized commanders, but I enjoy how he plays. Of course I'm biased and don't want him banned, and he probably won't as up to this point they have yet to ban a preconstructed deck's face-card. I'm fairly certain that's by choice, otherwise WotC would have. But, is it unfair of me to ask that they ban Yasharn, Implacable Earth because it shuts down my deck's main strategy (I know not entirely, because you can still sac lands, and that's how I built my deck, but I did that because of this interaction. As a form of fail-safe and deck protection. Because my opponents counterplay every deck I bring because I even made Korvold). Is it fair, to counter a commander deck? I don't know. I'm not here to debate the ethics of playstyle entirely, but more the "legality" of rules as written, because otherwise why else would this discussion stand?

Commander should be casual in this sense, you should be allowed to play what you want, because if you don't, how much fun are you really having? I think this is why we have a rule 0. Excluding professional competitive environments (and there's a debate to how professional those really can be depending on the LGS or players) for the moment. To allow each player what they wish from the game, Rule 0 exists to please all parties with compromise if not mutual agreeable terms. "You want to play Feather, the Redeemed, I'd love to see how you built yours! Just letting you know, I have an Ivy, Gleeful Spellthief as my newest deck, are you alright with me playing this?" literally how every interaction before Casual play should begin, as dictating by the website and thousands of videos on the internet.

For the sake of peace at the table and respect for all players present, I'm entirely for this discussion. Like D&D (and I'll only reference this momentarily because it is also a WotC IP) it shows a sense of social courtesy to fellow players, that you do care about their deck, or cards, experience, or playstyle. That you are considering their participation at the table you joined, or the table they've come to play at. It's a game, and the first rule is "talk". This may be a touch rude, and absolute, but I've experienced a plethora of players too concerned over their commander and not being able to play it that I believe them sometimes at fault for gatekeeping their table from players building decks with the newest cards that have come out. I'm on occasion guilty of this (not wanting to have to switch out decks or else I'd get counterplayed, because my opponent didn't want to change commanders) but it's unfair to presume a player using a controversial commander like Jodah, the Unifier who I think is perfectly fine, would have ill intentions towards you the player, personally (in casual play).

Competitively. I feel like the game sports an entirely different flavor, one that is fast, calculated, and just as rich with players and their own method of interacting with this medium. When a player brings something like Urza, Lord High Artificer to a table to play for a prize. You've signed a social contract in a setting that'll require you to play. To counterplay. To out pace, out think, and like chess, determine your best route to seek victory. cEDH is a wonderful and freeing battlefield to be apart of, I think it's unfair to proceed as if both are the same formatted gamemode when they both interact quite differently. The ramp is different, the mana base is different, most of the spells will either be counterplay picks for decks you'd expect to see, and everyone there (or majority I'd expect) has literally signed up for this. Paid their LGS, and is wanting to win.

Now. Does that mean your neckbearded-odorous-shop-dwelling-compking is going to show up and try to sweep everyone with their 3,000. cEDH deck because they are compelled to win here, because they have short comings in life? And does this hobby support and enable this behavior? Kind of. It happens, sure, but no one wanting to have fun should care, and anyone trying to win now has a baseline to work off of. If it does happen, you literally know what they'll play, use, or at least what to expect. That's the magic to competitive play. To be (and this will be a wild example) Goku standing across from Cell at the Cell Games... is sort of how it feels in cEDH 1v1 shop comps. It's, really fun. I don't know, I'm not too experienced on this side of the format, I've literally lost every shop competition I've attended, but I see the value and joy it has and wish to respect it.

I do believe there is an argument to removing Sol Ring, I think it's a crutch of a card. Though I just count it with my lands at this point. It's the first card in a deck 99% of the time without it being said. Printed in every preconstructed product, the card makes the format what it is, and that's kinda dumb. No one (I'd hope) wants to play the same deck, but here we have staples, and Sol Ring is sort of one of them. It's our Ki-Blast, our standard poke-ball, it's the Ash Blossom & Joyous Spring, it's literally engrained into the game with so many printings and secret lairs. I'm baffled to suggest if we got rid of it, would it be just as "necessary" as any of the other cards on the ban list? I don't think so, most of them could probably see play with that Rule 0 in a casual game, but the ban list, is upheld for competitive players and that's kind of baffling.

That Casual players can scream to High Hrothgar and back about something like Hullbreacher or Opposition Agent and be bummed that both didn't see the same fate. But someone who plays cEDH now has to suffer the consequences of players who want to play competitions at their LGS but don't realize that their preconstructed product might not hold up. Sad to say (and I do realize this is an extreme variable based on literally whoever shows up, it's that random whenever you're new to the game until you notice who plays, what they play, and how they tend to play. Then you learn what to expect, and the fun of cEDH or what I enjoyed personally arises to the surface.) but most preconstructed products now, seem to sell a concept with the intention of being improved by the player and encouraging they buy more cards to do so. (I enjoy this aspect of encouraging the player to deck-build instead of relying on what they purchased, they can rely on creativity or the advice of their closest friend or the player across from them)

I've no rational experience in regards to having specific cards banned that I wished to play, unless Korvold sees the hammer, but even then, I'm not taking him apart. I'm just going to continue with Rule 0 and play him casually. I wish the game wasn't so ambiguous that these sorts of topics had clear and defined answers so that all could just agree on a single experience, but that's so restrictive and against the nature of the format. Perhaps Modern and Legacy see this, Standard certainly does (and I believe that's what makes Standard a rather fascinating format due to the fact that none of their rules are as ambiguous as EDH's Rule 0, which is necessary but rather counter productive when compared to cEDH. You can't argue Rule 0, but you can't abuse it either. More ambiguity.) and Draft as well.

I don't believe by having a ban list, you're helping, solving, or relieving a problem. I'm very much a casual, and believe you should be able to play what you want. "I'll suffer the wrath of Braids?" Cool. I want to see what you built that represents you, how you play, how you have fun. It's going to be my job to do likewise and hope it's a fun game for both sides. Now being mana flooded, mana screwed. It feels like more of a personal issue across all players, sometimes you hit a pocket because you over shuffled and all your lands have ended up together, I feel like not enough people take into account some players face this problem and blame a card, a player, a format and take that personally when mathematically they've added too many lands, not enough, over shuffled, didn't have enough protection, removal, boardwipes. The requirements for a "good" deck, in cEDH sounds excessive, but that's that format. Casually I think you should be able to build what you want and move on.

Also, apologies if it sounds hypocritical by the end, but I'm pro-Sol Ring for the simple fact that it enables some exciting combos with Salvaging Station & Ich-Tekik, Salvage Splicer. But that's just extreme biased, anyone could say the same about Flash, Tolarian Academy, or my favorite Panoptic Mirror. I'm certain they all had really cool interactions, I'm certain with the latter; and I'd understand why WotC could ban Sol Ring or be encouraged to, and I wouldn't be mad. I'd just adapt, it's all we do as players. Communicate, adapt, play/build, repeat.

Niko9 on What Commander Do You Think …

1 week ago

To be fair, I haven't played with or against Ivy, Gleeful Spellthief but I have played Feather, the Redeemed for years and what jumps out to me about Ivy is a few things.

She's two mana, so if everything is on curve, she will hit the board two turns before feather can attack and a deck running Ivy as the commander will be very incentivized to play spells it's own spells that can target creatures. Feather might run into a place where Ivy is gaining all Feather's spells plus whatever the Ivy player is playing, and Ivy also has flying, and you have green so your deck should always be casting and recasting Ivy, so how does a Feather deck ever attack into an Ivy deck? Not to mention that most spells in Feather are meant to draw, and Ivy just gets those, no matter who the Feather player is attacking. And on top of it, Ivy gets to choose and copy any other effects from any other players.

Feather is just the example, but it's just a matter of, any deck trying to play combat tricks will always have a big disincentive to attacking Ivy because Ivy will get every resource that goes into the attack plus anything that a deck who is made to have spells that target creatures, whatever that deck might have in hand.

Even protection is helping the Ivy player. If feather plays Shelter not only does the Ivy player get draw, but you get to pick a new color and Ivy can free block any 2nd attacking creature. That's probably the best tool that feather has available in this match up and it still limits attacks to a strategy that's main focus is attacking, for 2 mana, in the command zone.

Niko9 on What Commander Do You Think …

1 week ago

I don't think it will get banned, but I'd honestly like to see Ivy, Gleeful Spellthief get a ban before too many people build the deck. It just completely dismantles decks like Feather, the Redeemed that are already struggling to have a place in the format, and it does it incidentally. Ivy can run all it's own spells and auras and gain value, but at the same time your 2 mana commander will just shut down some percentage of decks. Things like enchantress, combat tricks, prowess storm like Veyran, Voice of Duality, you basically just can't make a deck on those strategies that can sit across from Ivy.

I think it's just the fact that Ivy doesn't have to do anything other than it's normal gameplan to crush certain types of decks that makes it kind of gross. If it wasn't a "may" ability then I'd love the card. Having to copy and eat removal, but still being two mana that can be replayed, that would be a great game space for a commander.

Gidgetimer on Feather, “a” = target?

4 weeks ago

In case it wasn't clear from legendofa's response, spells and abilities only target in MtG if they specifically use the word "target". Otherwise it is an untargeted effect.

There are a limited number of targeted sacrifice effects. Most are abilities of creatures (Arcum Dagsson, Ashling, the Extinguisher, etc.) but there is Barrin's Spite as well, so it is possible at some point that there will be something that synergizes with Feather, the Redeemed.

legendofa on Feather, “a” = target?

4 weeks ago

No, unfortunately. Victimize only targets creature cards in your graveyard. They don't count as creature permanents for Feather, the Redeemed, and the sacrifice is not a targeted effect.

If Victimize said "... Sacrifice target creature (you control)...", it would work, but I don't think there are any targeted sacrifice effects in the game.

MLS91 on Feather, “a” = target?

4 weeks ago

Would Feather, the Redeemed return Victimize to hand?

TypicalTimmy on Commander Legends: Battle for Baldur's …

4 months ago

Some fun Background pairings: (All hyperlinks, not hover images. You'll need to click to open.)

There's obviously more options, but it's 3am and I need to get to bed. But these were my first initial thoughts.

I'll probably build a really dumb and janky Wilson deck later, although I already did build a Yorvo, Lord of Garenbrig back when Eldraine first released, and Wilson here would essentially be a clone of it so I'd probably get too bored, too easily.

Lae'Chef would be super fun. I haven't built Selensya in a very long time. So she might be the first one I'll tackle.

Evil Volo just looks like a blast, although Dimir isn't known for being super creature focused, in most cases.

I think Livaan-Fist has some real keen potential as a Boros deck. Almost like Feather, the Redeemed on steroids.

Guerric on [Primer] Helming the Host of Heaven: A Giada Guide

4 months ago
I got in a three player game today against a fast Anowon, the Ruin Thief deck and my own Feather, the Redeemed deck which another person was playing, which is optimized. The MVP of the game was the almighty duo of Sanctuary Warden (just recently added to the deck) and Sword of Hearth and Home, which it turns out is a devastatingly powerful engine. While Anowon deck exploded out of the gate and was soon milling me four cards per turn, the Feather deck was slowed for the first few turns because he kept a hand with no red mana, which definitely helped. I drew Sword of the Animist in the first couple of turns and soon had Giada herself swinging with both, which meant I had absolutely no mana problems at all throughout the game, and felt like I was in a green deck. Sanctuary Warden was the first angel I got on the battlefield besides Giada, and she was an absolute powerhouse. Not only did Sword of Hearth and Home put a fresh, untapped plains onto the battlefield each turn, but it blinked Sanctuary Warden, allowing me later to put more counters on it after more angels were out, and drew a free card pretty much every turn. The milling actually helped out a couple of times because it milled me through some land clumps that would have been dead draws, and combined with two swords my deck was thinned to the goodstuff near the end. I ended up oblating the Anowon player's best mill piece and hitting him exclusively with my ever-growing angelic armada, which had been reinforced by Archangel of Thune and Angel of Jubilation. In the mean time, the Feather player had stabilized, hitting one of his tokens with Path to Exile to rapidly catch up in ramp, and began doing what feather does best. At that point I hit him for the first time with some large angel tokens generated by Archangel of Thune and The Book of Exalted Deeds, and also finished off the Anowon player, who I knew had a counterspell in hand, and then tutored up Sephara, Sky's Blade with Search for Glory and promptly played it! I knew he still had Path in hand, but was pretty confident he didn't have enough mana to both path Sephara and wipe my board the same turn. And that was where I made a huge mistake! I should have seen it coming, especially because it was my own darned deck and he had exactly four mana open. Instead of just swinging with just a little bit more power than I needed to kill him and holding Sephara in reserve, I just alpha swung with everything, thinking the game was over. And then I got my Comeuppance! It was absolutely brutal watching my whole board go to the graveyard and none of my damage or life-gain triggers working. Thankfully, Giada was saved by Sword of Hearth and Home and Sanctuary Warden was saved by her shield counters. Clearly they were still the MVPs! Since all of my mana was still untapped and I had cards in hand I played in quick succession, piling them with counters again. He wasn't able to come back even after his epic play, and on my subsequent term I finished with a win. It was certainly an enlightening game, aside from showcasing the power of two specatacular cards. I made quite a few misplays, and was fairly sloppy. Aside from the Comeuppance debacle I missed all of the on attack draw triggers for Sanctuary Warden and also forgot to scry and draw each turn with Herald's Horn, which was on the battlefield for a good part of the game. The deck was nonetheless strong enough to overcome these misplays. I've heard some people warning potential players on Reddit and elsewhere that Sanctuary Warden is a trap and not good enough, though others have defended its inclusion. After my experience today, there is definitely a lot of evidence in its favor. I'm also amazed that I was able to pick up Sword of Hearth and Home so cheaply still. Smuggler's Share costs three times enough and while good, is a narrower card that won't be anywhere near as expensive as the second best sword of will be in several years. Definitely invest in it now! As expected, The Book of Exalted Deeds and Archangel of Thune also played a role, and the deck still seems to have a great curve and lots of synergies.
Load more