x If you're looking for a specific comment, check the other printings as well.
Player Rating:
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0
Community Rating: 1.870 / 5  (46 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:
 stars.
 >
Come on, it's worse than Redwood Treefolk. How could this card even reach a rating above 1.5?
Well, at least since the Grand Creature Type Update, this guy got a rather useful type. Although it's still not an advisable choice for a tribal deck, of course.
Posted By: Mode (8/25/2009 8:48:30 AM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


It's a MONSTER!!
Posted By: Selez (3/6/2010 10:47:02 AM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


Awful card and an example of why people hate 8th and 9th edition moreso than any other core sets (except, maybe, fifth for its large size and rarity upgrades to some cards as bad as this). They take a useless older card and reprint it just to say they have. Then they get rid of its only classic appeal--its art--and give it this. This art is seriously bad. It gives me no feeling of unsettling creepiness like the last one and at the same time doesn't set any sort of scene. The creature typing on this stinks too. Mossdog is a Plant--yet somehow Moss Monster is an elemental. Not that plants are any kind of tribe--but it'd definately be a fun one if it was. More fun than this guy, I'd imagine.
Posted By: kitsunewarlock (10/25/2011 11:37:42 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


But the losers remains were dusted with green...I'm usually a fan of high toughness to power ratio defensively, but this is a horrible five drop.
Posted By: MindAblaze (10/26/2011 7:44:00 AM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 




Gatherer works better in the Companion app!

Continue