x If you're looking for a specific comment, check the other printings as well.
Player Rating:
Community Rating: 3.517 / 5  (58 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 >
Needs trample. Until that happens, this will never be MY beast of burden.
Posted By: ClockworkSwordfish (10/29/2010 5:47:26 PM)



My best idea is this:

The more he carries, the more stuff he has to block attacks. This also gives him more stuff to swing around. As such, he gets more every time someone enters the battlefield.
Posted By: NARFNra (11/30/2010 3:21:04 PM)


Will most often provide a great body in a multiplayer game, yet lacks trample.
I also prefer a Stag Beetle for green decks.
Aside from that, there are many more reliable fatties out there.
Posted By: Mode (8/10/2009 7:38:55 AM)


Great in token generating decks.
Posted By: Silverware (8/22/2009 9:04:30 PM)


I love the little girl in front of the big smashy thing.
Posted By: thaviel (8/2/2009 5:22:30 PM)


The art looks odd for several reasons. One is that the little girl/woman could be farther in the background than the golem, in the foreground, or on the same plane. It can't be deremined because there is no overlap/distort effects. So that's kind of uncomfortable to the eye. Secondly, they're just standing around in some cloudly limbo. There's no motion, no dynamic camera angles. We're just looking at two figures in a boring, side-on view, standing nowhere in particular. Finally, assuming the ground is at the point where the woman/girl's feet should be (probably around the bottom of the creature type bar, if the art were extended), and they are, in fact, on the same visual ground (that is, she isn't farther away/closer to the camera than the golem), then the golem's legs are very short, and his arms are very long. That wouldn't make him very good at carrying things. Balance, and all.

There's my irrelevant rant about flawed art, now my actual point:

How, exactly, does... (see all)
Posted By: DoctorKenneth (4/6/2010 3:36:59 PM)


@lickthemoose: Here, let me make that understandable for you.

Haha. Bob has a much higher rating than I expected. If there ever was a noob card, bob is it. Every noob I've seen, that has seen it for the first time, is like "wow that rules!" as I just shake my head.

Punctuation is your friend.
Posted By: Tommy9898 (3/3/2010 1:32:32 PM)


haha bob has a much higher rating then i expected if there ever was a noob card bob is it every noob ive seen thats seen it for the first time is like wow that rules as i just shake my head
Posted By: lickthemoose (9/14/2009 10:07:09 PM)


reeeeeely good in my token deck. although the art is kind of weird.
Posted By: powerdude (11/24/2009 6:55:48 PM)


@DoctorKenneth: definitely agree; this isn't chippy's best artwork. i understand that the original beast of burden was from the first thematic block ever, but the least he could've done was draw elements pertaining to the relevance of its own timeline! the girl is oddly misplaced despite the intentions of dramatic contrast. the whole composition is as plain and static as most alpha artworks... today's cards are much more interesting artistically
Posted By: ph4ntom.lance (5/13/2011 12:11:18 AM)


We have updated our privacy policy. Click the link to learn more.

Gatherer works better in the Companion app!