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: 1.113 / 5  (151 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.
1234 >
Come on people! This card is bad, but it actually isn't even the worst in its own block. That dubious title belongs to Bog Hoodlums. I think this card should get at least 1/5.

That said, I find it quite hilarious how disproportionely bad this card is in comparison to the rest of its cycle.

Ballynock Cohort: The best of its cycle, this card is actually a solid creature in mono-white. 4/5

Briarberry Cohort: The second best of its cycle, this card is slightly better than Mudbrawler Cohort simply because it has flying. 3.5/4

Mudbrawler Cohort: The third best of its cycle, it works well with another kind of cohort, namely Goblin Cohort. 3/5

Crabapple Cohort: The second worst of its cycle, this card is still far better than the last member of the cycle. 2.5/5

Ashenmoor Cohort: The worst member of the cycle by far... (see all)
Posted By: Tiggurix (6/25/2010 5:03:20 AM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


There is no way this card is as bad as others that are around. Come on... would you rather have this or Wood Elemental? This is at least not going to hurt you in game, or destroy all your swamps, lol.

That having been said, terrible for its cost, obviously. 1/5
Posted By: Gaussgoat (7/16/2010 11:43:28 AM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


Funny. If this cost 2 less it would actually be decent.
Posted By: Blackworm_Bloodworm (7/17/2010 7:25:23 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


It's a horrible card no doubt, thought not the worst by any means. This has a horrible mana/power ratio without a doubt, but being as sucky as it is, it still is just overcosted. We used it in my playing group the first week we played, when we didn't know what the standard for cards were, just as we used zombie goliath. We didn't know any better, and everybody had that kind of sucky cards, so it kinda evened out.
Even back then, we wouldn't have used something like wood elemental, which is much much worse than this. This card is horribly bad, no doubt about it, but giving it the lowest rating is unfair. I guess it's lowest rating is due to the fact that bad without being funny like wood elemental or chimney imp.
Posted By: Sironos (9/8/2010 2:49:54 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


complete garbage
Posted By: maxzakh (5/30/2009 11:34:53 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


This card shouldn't have such a low rating. I'm serious. Compare this with wood elemental, outcast of numai, face of fear. Those are /terrible/ creatures. This is better than them. Given that it's a black fatty, it has to be a bit more expensive. It has semi relevant creature types, unlike a lot of fatties. It's at common. It has decent art.

It's a 1.5 or 1/5, not a 0.5

I mean this is a card that you would be fine with topdecking sometimes.
Posted By: Baconradar (8/18/2010 11:35:29 AM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


I may love elementals but when I look at this card I die a little inside. As far as I'm concerned this card doesn't even exist!!!!
Posted By: lXDarkSunXl (5/27/2010 3:55:24 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


What the heck is this ass?
Posted By: Duskdale_Wurm (6/6/2010 7:02:26 PM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


It has really cool flavour text...
Posted By: SpoonIsMe (1/24/2011 3:13:07 AM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 


not terrible but I can think of sooooo many cards for six mana that do way more dirt than this.
Posted By: Smoke_Stack (2/7/2013 11:46:42 AM)
Rating: 
0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

 




Gatherer works better in the Companion app!

Continue