Runner's Bane vs Hands of Binding. Which is better?

Standard forum

Posted on July 9, 2013, 5:26 p.m. by mirosith25

In limited which one is generally better? Runner's Bane or Hands of Binding. Both have their own limitations. I just want you people's opinions.

Epochalyptik says... #2

The Q&A is more for rule questions. Move to Standard.

July 9, 2013 5:30 p.m.

Runner's Bane is better for an alpha strike because you're likely to disable more than just one thing.

Hands of Binding isn't as explosive, but can completely shut down a threat, which can make it invaluable.

I'd say Hands of Binding is a better card in limited, unless you're going full aggro, in which case the explosive damage from Runner's Bane is probably more relevant most of the time.

July 9, 2013 5:48 p.m.

beakedbard says... #4

My main problem with Runner's Bane is the limitation although it is a lot better for dealing with fast decks (as the name would suggest XD) i still prefer Hands of Binding . I have three reasons for that one have an unblockable creature and you can pretty much constantly keep bigger creature taps out two you can switch targets with it and three i run Guttersnipe atm.

July 10, 2013 7:16 a.m.

lepandaking says... #5

Hands of Binding all the way, the cant naturalize a cipherd card because its exiled, although Runner's Bane does smash frontline medic and boros reckoner, i still would go for hands

July 10, 2013 1:07 p.m.

This discussion has been closed