Take that, Tarmogoyf!
Posted By:
Gabriel422
(12/23/2010 4:48:12 AM)
No, it's not the worst card ever printed. Its just a 2/1 for two with a silly, unimportant draw back. Plenty of decks used it way back when just to have a two drop, calm down people.
Posted By:
Tommy9898
(12/4/2010 1:27:20 AM)
2 for a 2/1 isn't that bad, even with a slight drawback. Not that I'm saying this a good card by any means, but when you also have utter turds like the "bands with other" lands and many incredibly overcosted artifacts, it's far from the worst.
Posted By:
Tanaka348
(11/26/2009 1:06:24 PM)
"One of the worst cards ever printed"
It's not good, but it's not that bad. It's certainly better than Squire, and even the recently-printed Mindless Null.
Any creature that can attack and / or block doesn't really qualify for the "worst card ever". You can still kill an opponent with a Squire. That title belongs for cards that have such inane and narrow abilities that they effectively do nothing at all -- Great Wall, Melting, Break Open, ect.
Posted By:
scumbling1
(1/26/2012 4:46:10 PM)
oh its not THAT bad is it? lol
Posted By:
GrimGorgonBC
(10/29/2009 9:26:05 PM)
One of the worst cards ever printed, the players even said so when they voted this card out after 4th Edition. If only this was a 2/2...
Posted By:
Guest57443454
(11/25/2009 1:13:01 PM)
Actually, by the standards of the time, this wasn't that bad. Erg Raiders was better, though it had a drawback that would show up now and then (people actually played Paralyze to deal with early beaters with drawbacks), and its own drawback is nearly meaningless, which means you've got a 2/1 for 1B. Not great, but not terrible. Compare it to Scathe Zombies, which is terrible, or even Spineless Thug, which gains a point of toughness - big deal - but also a huge drawback of not being able to block.
Posted By:
Radagast
(1/13/2013 3:11:20 PM)