Herald of Slaanesh

Combos Browse all Suggest


Format Legality
1v1 Commander Legal
Archenemy Legal
Canadian Highlander Legal
Casual Legal
Commander / EDH Legal
Commander: Rule 0 Legal
Custom Legal
Duel Commander Legal
Highlander Legal
Legacy Legal
Leviathan Legal
Limited Legal
Oathbreaker Legal
Planechase Legal
Quest Magic Legal
Tiny Leaders Legal
Vanguard Legal
Vintage Legal

Herald of Slaanesh

Creature — Demon

Locus of Slaanesh — Demon spells you cast cost less to cast.

Other Demons you control have haste.

Kingtao on Rakdos, The Defiler Deck

4 months ago

If I may suggest some budget friendly demon, Herald of Slaanesh, Orcus, Prince of Undeath Desecration Demon and Indulgent Tormentor

soul_knightmare on Fiendish Tendencies

9 months ago

Heya, I see that your deck is mostly lacking in card draw/ card acceleration. You have about 3 while most decks need 10+. Remove Costly Plunder for Night's Whisper so you don't have to sacrifice your demons. Remove Feaster of Fools, Spirit of the Night, Bladebrand, Grasp of Darkness, and You Are Already Dead (I know the meme), and add Dream Devourer, Bloodgift Demon, Herald of Slaanesh, Phyrexian Arena, Blasphemous Act, and Rakdos Charm.

I hope this helps your deck building. Other upgrades would mean removing Ecologist's Terrarium, Lightning Bolt, Grasp of Darkness, Warp Artifact, Insult / Injury, Price of Betrayal, Skulltap, Witch's Vengeance, Blight, and Inevitable End which are okay, but could be improved. Pick more cards that draw cards without condition or ramp on two mana, Wish you the best!

SteelSentry on Will there Ever Be Female …

1 year ago

Epicurus Besides Herald of Slaanesh literally depicting a daemon that gains its strength through mortals indulging their lust and hedonic pleasure, I understand the point of view. I think there are many planes (especially ones not influenced by mainstream Western mythology) that do a pretty good job of depicting a range of body types for demons.

Angels could use some work in the department of perceived gender expression, although the recency bias surrounding planes like Dominaria (created in Serra's image), Innistrad (based on Western European folklore), and Kaldheim (analogues of the Valkyrie) does have an effect. Examples are scarce, but the manmade angels of Ahmonkhet and Mirrodin are a step in the right direction toward androgynous angels.

Selfishly, I would like a "pretty boy" angel, for personal aesthetic reasons. I like hearing the lens people approach this topic with, though!

Epicurus on Will there Ever Be Female …

1 year ago

I think that it's important to reiterate that Angels and Demons are genderless. So the real discussion is about masculinity vs femininity, not male vs female. That distinction is something I've wrestled with for most of my life.

To draw from my personal experience, I've long identified myself as a very feminine male. In today's sociopolitical environment, I might say that I identify as a woman. But I personally believe that doing so would be counterproductive. To say that I identify as a woman would suggest that men can't be feminine and women can't be masculine. It reinforces traditional gender roles. To relate this to the current discussion, I posit that anyone who looks at the artwork for demons in MtG and says that these genderless figures are all men, must accept their own bias which insists that only men can be masculine.

Even if that's the intention of the artists and/or designers, the interpretation of the observer is important. For example, if you look at Master of Cruelties and see a male figure, you're exposing your own biases about "what a woman looks like." Should it be skinny, long-haired, big-boobed and scantily clad? Would that look more like a woman to you? Can a woman not be big, strong, imposing and fully armored?

If that bias is based in truth (which, I believe is incorrect, but will allow the idea for the sake of argument), then what about:

Couldn't you make the argument that the artwork for these cards "look like women?"

And no, none of them are legendary creatures, ultimately they're as genderless as other cards that are much more easy to accept as such (e.g. Hezrou), and, like I am trying to posit, it doesn't say anything about actual gender either way, because however you see these cards is shaped by your social education about what a man or a woman are supposed to look like.

Now, as for angels, the breasts are a dead giveaway. Which is not to say that men never have large breasts, but the visual characterization of angels in MtG tend to follow the general characterization of women in the rest of the fantasy genre (i.e. long hair blowing in the wind, unrealistically large breasts, armor that makes them look sexy at the expense of being actually effective as armor, etc.). This, in my opinion, is what really is the type of thing that should be changed. There're certainly many ways to depict strong woman without giving them big tits and hardly any clothing. Especially in the case of angels, which like demons, are meant to be genderless. However, because the lore defines them as being manifested in the likeness of Serra - who was a human woman - it would be at least more acceptable to be able to depict them as masculine even while depicting them as female. To suggest that you couldn't is the definition of gender norm bias.

That's why I think that the reason Rosewater gives for not depicting "female" demons - if what's been suggested here is true - is utter bullshit. To suggest that the only way to depict a female demon is as a succubus, suggests that women are one-dimensional. I might argue that you could make Demonlord Belzenlok "look female" simply by putting a shirt on it. And why not? Too muscular? Too imposing? Hair too short? Breasts too small? Not showing enough leg? Ask yourself: why do you think it's impossible for a woman to look like that?

Have (1) JordanSanFran
Want (0)