You trade the surprise that giant growth has for +1/+1... hmm prolly good in limited? but otherwise lets people play around it easier
sethddickess
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.7/5.0)(20 votes)
strictly worse than giant growth
Spideredd
★★★★☆ (4.6/5.0)(7 votes)
Pair this withgiant growth. See what happens for +.
Tommy9898
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(8 votes)
You can't say it is strictly worse, giant growth can't give +4/+4
PolskiSuzeren
★★★★☆ (4.6/5.0)(4 votes)
I really hate people who use the phrase strictly better/worse. That is saying that there are no situations where Card A would be better/worse than Card B. Shame on you. Some cards, you have to find really tight corner cases for. But this? there are tons of situations where I'd rather have this than giant growth.
boneclub
★★★☆☆ (3.0/5.0)(3 votes)
I also like it for you target a creature with Trample. Seeing as though this is green, you gain access to Rancor :)
ClockworkSwordfish
★★★★☆ (4.2/5.0)(10 votes)
Watch me use this right: Strictly better than Monstrous Growth.
GrimjawxRULES
★★★★☆ (4.7/5.0)(3 votes)
Might of Old Krosa is awesome. I've seen so many crazy 2nd and 3rd turn swings made with this, and quite a few games won with this too.
It's hard to compare Giant Growth and Might of Old Krosa. They do pretty similar things, but fulfill two different roles. Might of Old Krosa is incredible when you're playing a very aggressive deck, but Giant Growth is better if your deck is a bit slower, and you want to be able to protect your creatures from bolts and kill creatures with combat tricks. Having both available, though, is no bad idea at all.
DacenOctavio
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(5 votes)
I like the reference to the Alpha art for Giant Growth :)
Fanaticmogg
★★★★☆ (4.0/5.0)(2 votes)
@bijart_dauth: You don't need another card in your hand to cast this during your main phase. What are you talking about? This can be cast as a 1-mana +4/+4 sorcery or a 1-mana +4/+4 instant. Monstrous Growth can be used as a 2-mana +4/+4 sorcery, meaning it's both less efficient and less versatile. In other words, yes this is strictly better.
bijart_dauth
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.7/5.0)(3 votes)
@ ClockworkSwordfish, not really. i agree that it is better, but stricktly better it is not. if you have no other cards in your hand (and thus cannot activate its ability) than this card is worse than the growth. So while not strictly better, i would agree that it is in fact better.
oh wait, never mind. I misread it. I thought it said 'another spell' not this spell.
Mode
★☆☆☆☆ (1.5/5.0)(3 votes)
@ClockworkSwordfish: Even that isn't quite right, since this is an Instant and Monstrous Growth is a Sorcery.
To be strictly better, the card normally has to be really identical, except for the fact that it costs more, has less P/T, some more conditional abilities that the other one has unconditional, or the like. Of course overall Might of old Krosa is effectively better than Monstrous Growth, since you'd have to build an entire deck around this card to make it more advantageous than this one, e.g. with (commonly red) cards that profit from casting sorceries or having them in your graveyard. Or just imagine getting a Déjà Vu of this amazingly awesome, totally playable Monstrous Growth! Isn't that worth it? Err, bad example maybe...
Wynzerman
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(3 votes)
This isn't strictly better or worse than any of the other growths, it' s just it's own flavor :) Fun card with a simple condition.
Progle
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.5/5.0)(2 votes)
I love it.I just think it should cost more mana.
bandswithgoats
★★☆☆☆ (2.8/5.0)(2 votes)
@Mode,
Monstrous Growth being a sorcery means it's only going to be cast at the same time you would use this for 4. So Monstrous Growth is played at the same time, costs more, and lacks flexibility.
You can come up with weird scenarios where a sorcery matters (like you have mana to copy sorceries with Izzet Guildmage but not instants,) but obscure corner cases don't factor into most peoples' assessment of whether something is strictly better or worse.
heavyterror
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
I have been searching and searching for a fill card in monogreen infect. this is it.
Thanatophagous
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Its strictly great, that's what it is. +4/+4 for just with that little drawback? And it ain't even a big deal, just use trample and all is hunky dory.
DarthParallax
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Titanic Growth is not too shabby, but I like this because it has a giant mouse :)
Kirbster
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
I think it's great in a U/G infect deck. Invigorate and Mutagenic Growth are still the MVPs, but you might as well spend some mana. Who cares if you're playing it at sorcery speed if you're just going to dump it on a Blighted Agent anyway? Or pair it up with Distortion Strike - the Might here is less about messing with combat math and more about raw power for cheap.
Dragasm
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Strictly FREAKY when you play it with another cheap growth spell!
blurrymadness
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Each card in Time Spiral was an homage to an earlier card. This one references Anaba Bodyguard.
Missile_Penguin
★★★☆☆ (3.5/5.0)(3 votes)
Every card in Time Spiral was a throwback to at least one previously printed card.
Comments (22)
It's hard to compare Giant Growth and Might of Old Krosa. They do pretty similar things, but fulfill two different roles. Might of Old Krosa is incredible when you're playing a very aggressive deck, but Giant Growth is better if your deck is a bit slower, and you want to be able to protect your creatures from bolts and kill creatures with combat tricks. Having both available, though, is no bad idea at all.
oh wait, never mind. I misread it. I thought it said 'another spell' not this spell.
To be strictly better, the card normally has to be really identical, except for the fact that it costs more, has less P/T, some more conditional abilities that the other one has unconditional, or the like.
Of course overall Might of old Krosa is effectively better than Monstrous Growth, since you'd have to build an entire deck around this card to make it more advantageous than this one, e.g. with (commonly red) cards that profit from casting sorceries or having them in your graveyard. Or just imagine getting a Déjà Vu of this amazingly awesome, totally playable Monstrous Growth! Isn't that worth it? Err, bad example maybe...
Monstrous Growth being a sorcery means it's only going to be cast at the same time you would use this for 4. So Monstrous Growth is played at the same time, costs
You can come up with weird scenarios where a sorcery matters (like you have mana to copy sorceries with Izzet Guildmage but not instants,) but obscure corner cases don't factor into most peoples' assessment of whether something is strictly better or worse.
This card references green's multitude of Monstrous Growth and Giant Growth effects, and is part of a cycle of instants with more powerful effects if played like sorceries (Haunting Hymn, Careful Consideration, Might of Old Krosa, Return to Dust, Sulfurous Blast)
Krosa is a forest on the island of Otaria, the setting for the Odyssey and Onslaught blocks.