A 4 mana kicker for a single +1/+1 counter...
Really?
Posted By:
Gear61
(3/7/2010 11:00:04 PM)
1) This is a limited card. It's a common. It's a 3/2 red 3 drop. It attacks just fine. Red likes. It won't get kicked often but the fact that you could can't hurt.
2) It's from a time when cards in general were not as strong. In short, power has crept.
It's not a strong card, but it's no failure. It is adequate for its specific purpose.
Posted By:
metalevolence
(1/18/2011 7:06:09 PM)
I feel like this would have a better rating without the kicker, it is pretty much a slap in the face to someone trying to use this.
Posted By:
djflo
(7/21/2011 8:03:48 AM)
I have a feeling that this, like Mindless Null, was a misprint that Wizards decided to keep because they thought it was funny. A kicker of 1 would have made sense
On the other hand, if you ignore the kicker, this is a 3/2 for 3 with an irrelevant drawback, so it's only slightly below the curve, and not terrible in a Kavu deck if you have nothing else for the 3CC slot.
Posted By:
achilleselbow
(7/4/2010 4:21:25 PM)
Maybe wizards left out something like: "... comes into play with a +1/+1 counter it and can't be blocked.
Posted By:
aznxknightz
(11/7/2010 1:46:23 PM)
Probably one of the worst kicked cards.
Posted By:
jhimbob
(10/10/2009 3:41:52 AM)
On one hand, I just want to kick this card. On the other, I really don't want to kick this card.
Posted By:
garbagegatherer
(2/21/2010 3:05:47 AM)
How worthless. Subpar stats, an un-ability, and very possibly, if not easily, the worst Kick I've ever seen. The Kavu as a whole seem rather hit or miss, and this is a definite miss.
Posted By:
GradiustheFox
(3/18/2010 10:32:02 PM)
I'll pay a {4} kicker on only one card, and that's Burst Lightning. I'll only pay a {5} kicker on Rite of Replication.
Zendikar: not failing at kicker since 2009.
Posted By:
DacenOctavio
(10/20/2011 12:00:12 AM)
So {6}{R} for...a Dreg Reaver that can't block? And that card was pretty bad in the first place!
Posted By:
Superllama12
(6/10/2011 1:26:05 PM)