x If you're looking for a specific comment, check the other printings as well.
Player Rating:
Community Rating: 2.560 / 5  (50 votes)
The player rating is the overall rating for the card taking into account all player rating votes.

Popular Comments
Hide Comments
Only show me comments rated:
12 >
3/3 trample for 2GG seems GOOD to me at common.
Posted By: lorendorky (9/25/2012 11:53:42 PM)


"We're experiencing a shortage of sweet sexy ass in our set!"
"Quick, put a scantily clad girl in front of that lizard!"
Posted By: Kryptnyt (11/17/2012 7:14:22 AM)


The creature itself is cost efficient but the scavenge is overpriced but at least (1), but maybe scavenge got really overpowered during testing. Still, that'll keep cards like this from seeing anything but bits of draft/sealed play when you compare scavenge costs of guys like dreg mangler and the 5/5 Insect for (G)(G)(2), and scavenge at (G)(G)(4). But those are UC and rare, respectively so.... Do whatever you want wizards, lol.

Posted By: Vakyoom (9/26/2012 3:35:10 AM)


It's meant to Scavenge ONTO, rather than the other way around. Not bad, but not great. I'd have liked it more if the lizard was in the forefront rather than the elf, and not blending into the back of the picture.
Posted By: RAV0004 (9/30/2012 3:03:32 PM)


It would be a fair card at common without scavenge. That said, it's not really technically possible for the scavenge to be overcosted. The value of the card doesn't hinge on you being able to use scavenge in the first place.
Posted By: NoobOfLore (10/13/2012 9:15:37 PM)


Mad points for being a giant mossy Komodo dragon. Scavenge is overpriced (as it usually is).

What if Scavenge granted the recipient whatever keyword abilities the scavenged creature had? Now that would be interesting.
Posted By: Trygon_Predator (9/26/2012 1:47:00 PM)


Why the low rating? This lizard is a house in limited. Fairly costed with a moderate Scavenge at Common.
Posted By: GruesomeGoo (10/1/2012 11:48:51 AM)


Okay, the scavenge ability costs a fair deal, but that's like saying the flashback cost of Chainer's Edict is expensive at 7 when the card costs 2 to play. So play this as a 3/3 trample at four mana and let it do its thing. If and when it dies, permanently put its power and toughness onto another creature. Fantastic.
Posted By: igniteice (3/15/2013 8:22:33 AM)


I always get so excited when a new set comes around so that I can make all sorts of comments on Gatherer. But eventually I come to the dregs, such as this card, and I languish in wordlessness. It's not that cards like these are bad per se, they're just, well, boring, bland. They aren't good, but they aren't bad either. They aren't even funny or memorable. Merely they just fill a Limited need (or that's what WotC tells us). So there's nothing really to add save to say that 'Hey look, it's another card you'll get too much of in your boosters.'
Posted By: Eternal_Blue (9/27/2012 10:41:35 PM)


Scavenge must be a super powerful ability if it is this expensive in commons. Pros like me will be patient and use the scavenge ability in the late game.
Posted By: Lotsofpoopy (9/27/2012 1:34:38 AM)