Good thoughts, EvilCleavage. I think that the if you do clause is added in case some effect prevents you from sacrificing him, although I can't think of one at the moment
Posted By:
brunsbr103
(3/17/2010 6:32:03 AM)
I think what the wording means is, you don't have to sacrifice him until the ability resolves. If your opponent decides to kill it in response to the ability via doom blade, path to exile, etc., then you wont be able to sacrifice it and nothing happens.
Posted By:
IshubarashI
(9/3/2010 11:25:46 AM)
I like the flavour text. I like how Boros army employs elementals for (mainly suicidal) duties :D
Posted By:
1maketoilets
(6/1/2011 11:37:05 AM)
A strange inversion of Flametongue Kavu. I don't like it. If your opponent isn't a dumb one, he will just play a small creature.
Posted By:
holgir
(8/14/2009 8:09:09 AM)
It really seems like a misprint to me. I'm sure it isn't but it says: "When another creature comes into play, sacrifice Flame-Kin War Scout. If you do, , Flame-Kin War Scout deals 4 damage to that creature". . . Now doesn't it seem strange that it says, "If you do"? The first sentence makes it sound mandatory, and the second makes it sound optional. Just my thoughts.
Posted By:
EvilCleavage
(3/5/2010 8:23:01 PM)
WHAT ?! suicidal Flametongue Kavu ?!
Oh come on wizards! just reprint Flametounge Kavu instead of this garbage.
Posted By:
True_Smog
(12/15/2009 4:47:50 AM)
Seems like a worse reprint of Mogg Bombers.
Posted By:
achilleselbow
(5/17/2010 10:03:29 PM)
If the rules text was "...sacrifice Flame-kin Warscout. Flame-kin Warscout deals 4 damage to that creature", then you could use another ability to sacrifice him for your own ends, and still deal 4 damage. With this wording, you don't get 4 damage unless you sacrifice him to this effect.
Posted By:
KikiJikiTiki
(5/7/2011 12:26:53 AM)
"If you do..." clauses are to do a few things:
-Keep the effect from stacking due to instant speed manuevers. In this case, if I Scatter the Seeds you'll kill one of them, not all three. So it disallows multiple triggers.
-They also allow the opponent to respond so that if you put the trigger on the stack and they destroy your creature in response, they're safe. It's a tactic that reduces the ability to lockdown the opponent and cause "unfun" play.
-Also prevents instant speed shinanigans in the other direction. No letting it go on the stack and then blinking it out of play before it sacs. You can do that, but it won't kill the opponent's creature.
It makes the card essentially one dimensional making the skill level required to play the card "correctly" or "to it's fullest" at a very minimum; good if you want a younger/dumber audience.
Posted By:
blurrymadness
(10/29/2011 10:52:15 PM)
@EvilCleavage
The reason for it is that, once it triggers, you could then kill it another way. Then, it would trigger to sacrifice it, but since you can't, it won't do the damage. Additionally, multiple creatures might enter the battlefield at the same time. It would trigger more than once, but you could only sacrifice it once and it would only do the damage once.
Posted By:
marmaris74
(4/8/2012 8:25:08 PM)