Mediocre. There are better options out there for that much mana. A decent cycling card is all you're getting if you buy into this. Even in limited, it's pretty weak.
Studoku
★★★★☆ (4.2/5.0)(2 votes)
Cycling for 1 is nice, but I can't see this card actually being played.
SavageBrain89
★★☆☆☆ (2.3/5.0)(5 votes)
Here is a list of adjectives that describe this card: obtuse, pathetic, superseded, maladroit, and insipid.
Rafiqofthemany
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.5/5.0)(4 votes)
this is THE WORST CARD i have ever seen. i have like 34 of them too. i hate them and their families.
metalevolence
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(4 votes)
why so much hate for this guy? the cycling is the point.
KrosanGardener
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Bring back Astral Slide!
hieyster
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(3 votes)
Thanks to Crypt of Agadeem it's now a 3-4-of in any Crypt Combo deck making it Worlds worthy :D
Creyn
★★☆☆☆ (2.8/5.0)(2 votes)
It's like Ashenmoor Gouger but more expensive. I'd rather have the gouger.
xd4
★★☆☆☆ (2.5/5.0)(1 vote)
well if this card was a 5/5 then it would at least be a piece of crap
Blackworm_Bloodworm
★★★☆☆ (3.5/5.0)(1 vote)
Really only good for cycling in a deck that involves Crypt of Agadeem or such.
Test-Subject_217601
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
Oh, oh I know this one! The punchline is "pudding" right?
Mnemonic_Jabberssac
★★☆☆☆ (2.0/5.0)(1 vote)
(barf) 0/5
SleetFox
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
Most of the time you cycle this card; the price is very reasonable. But if you draw it late enough that you can pay for it and need the creature, you can play it. Flexibility. That is why you play this card.
Now, it's still not fantastic, but people are looking at it way wrong. I give it a 3/5.
Anyone else think it's weird that a creature like this isn't green?
NoobOfLore
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
Cycle it most of the time. IF you happen to be able to play it, and you need a creature to do a bit of a push, hardcast it. Not that difficult, guys. It's easy to use, and effective in more than one situation.
Arachibutyrophobia
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
carabid is the fancy term for ground beetles
MindAblaze
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
This is kind of decent, I don't know how so many people can trash it. Decent late drop in limited and it's a one mana draw a card. doesn't have much for good p/t ratios, the only bad thing is its forced to run into a bigger creature...probably a dragon or beast...3/5
B/R cycling creatures are also nice for the reanimation factor and the card draw factor in red, who traditionally has limited options for that.
DarthParallax
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
"Most of the time you cycle this card; the price is very reasonable. But if you draw it late enough that you can pay for it and need the creature, you can play it. Flexibility. That is why you play this card. Now, it's still not fantastic, but people are looking at it way wrong. I give it a 3/5."
I challenge this. It's NOT that the statement is OBVIOUSLY wrong. In fact, it's the ''conventional wisdom'' to explain/defend most good cycling creatures. I challenge that it's correct to apply ''the conventional wisdom'' to EVERY card with a 'conventional' excuse though. Cycling is a FANTASTIC mechanic, PERIOD. But there ARE cards with cycling we shouldn't play. Which ones are they, and why? Well, they all have mana costs, and they all have cycling costs- how could the statement NOT be true about all of them?
A quick Gatherer Search shows 54 total "Creatures with Cycling" in MAGIC. Let's see if there's a way to break them down more easily.
There are 18 Non-Landcycling Creatures with Cycling that are Modern Legal. Landcycling is good enough to always be excused. plain Cycling is not. plainscycling is. Errr...
Of them, they are mostly from Alara and Time Spiral blocks. Here is something I notice:
Some of the cyclers have effects when they cycle. Some of the cyclers cycle for only one color and have other effects. Some of the cyclers have ETB which is of course great, almost-but-not as good as Landcycling? And...some of them either don't do anything, do very little, or have a drawback:
Jungle Weaver- a large spider? for {5}{G}{G} it's not worth it. fact is Deadly Recluse is the perfect Reach card and is relatively Overpowered compared to the rest of the Spider Tribe. A Spider deck is makeable but if you just want a Cycler, Green's got better. Ridge Rannet- a 6/4 Beast with no abilities for {5}{R}{R}? The CYCLING is good, and Red might have needed way more stuff like cycling before, but Red's new card draw and fake looting undermines the need for Cycling, and this is not much better than a giant Spider. At Least Jungle Weaver can block flying bombs. Yoked Plowbeast- a 5/5 for the SAME CMC. {5}{W}{W}? It's a little bit ridiculous, no!?
7 just -isn't- acceptable for a vanilla creature with medium fat. Not when Green is now getting Fusion Elemental-rates for Power/Toughness/Mana in mono-colored. Vorstclaw.
Why IS Monstrous Carabid more playable than the rest? Because it's Creature Cast setting is mere FIVE MANA! It's a 4/4 for five! and even with the drawback on that mode (must attack). This waayy beats out the CMC 7 of the other 'vanilla' Cyclers, and tells us that 5 mana is what we should want the top-right corner to say if we're SERIOUSLY considering an actually Vanilla Cycling Creature. Six needs at LEAST a single good keyword.
7-cost cyclers are pretty much all Limited Fodder. I am speaking about Constructed because unless you specify which, people will assume you mean Constructed, and people talk about Cycling way too generally.
Comments (23)
Now, it's still not fantastic, but people are looking at it way wrong. I give it a 3/5.
GIANT JUND ANTS JUST PUNCHED OUT YOUR NULLTREAD GARGANTUAN BUDDY
Not that difficult, guys. It's easy to use, and effective in more than one situation.
I challenge this. It's NOT that the statement is OBVIOUSLY wrong. In fact, it's the ''conventional wisdom'' to explain/defend most good cycling creatures. I challenge that it's correct to apply ''the conventional wisdom'' to EVERY card with a 'conventional' excuse though. Cycling is a FANTASTIC mechanic, PERIOD. But there ARE cards with cycling we shouldn't play. Which ones are they, and why?
Well, they all have mana costs, and they all have cycling costs- how could the statement NOT be true about all of them?
A quick Gatherer Search shows 54 total "Creatures with Cycling" in MAGIC.
Let's see if there's a way to break them down more easily.
There are 18 Non-Landcycling Creatures with Cycling that are Modern Legal. Landcycling is good enough to always be excused. plain Cycling is not. plainscycling is. Errr...
Of them, they are mostly from Alara and Time Spiral blocks. Here is something I notice:
Some of the cyclers have effects when they cycle.
Some of the cyclers cycle for only one color and have other effects.
Some of the cyclers have ETB which is of course great, almost-but-not as good as Landcycling?
And...some of them either don't do anything, do very little, or have a drawback:
Jungle Weaver- a large spider? for {5}{G}{G} it's not worth it. fact is Deadly Recluse is the perfect Reach card and is relatively Overpowered compared to the rest of the Spider Tribe. A Spider deck is makeable but if you just want a Cycler, Green's got better.
Ridge Rannet- a 6/4 Beast with no abilities for {5}{R}{R}? The CYCLING is good, and Red might have needed way more stuff like cycling before, but Red's new card draw and fake looting undermines the need for Cycling, and this is not much better than a giant Spider. At Least Jungle Weaver can block flying bombs.
Yoked Plowbeast- a 5/5 for the SAME CMC. {5}{W}{W}? It's a little bit ridiculous, no!?
7 just -isn't- acceptable for a vanilla creature with medium fat. Not when Green is now getting Fusion Elemental-rates for Power/Toughness/Mana in mono-colored. Vorstclaw.
Why IS Monstrous Carabid more playable than the rest? Because it's Creature Cast setting is mere FIVE MANA! It's a 4/4 for five! and even with the drawback on that mode (must attack). This waayy beats out the CMC 7 of the other 'vanilla' Cyclers, and tells us that 5 mana is what we should want the top-right corner to say if we're SERIOUSLY considering an actually Vanilla Cycling Creature. Six needs at LEAST a single good keyword.
7-cost cyclers are pretty much all Limited Fodder. I am speaking about Constructed because unless you specify which, people will assume you mean Constructed, and people talk about Cycling way too generally.