On one hand, I just want to kick this card. On the other, I really don't want to kick this card.
Gear61
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(4 votes)
A 4 mana kicker for a single +1/+1 counter...
Really?
GradiustheFox
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.5/5.0)(1 vote)
How worthless. Subpar stats, an un-ability, and very possibly, if not easily, the worst Kick I've ever seen. The Kavu as a whole seem rather hit or miss, and this is a definite miss.
achilleselbow
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
I have a feeling that this, like Mindless Null, was a misprint that Wizards decided to keep because they thought it was funny. A kicker of 1 would have made sense On the other hand, if you ignore the kicker, this is a 3/2 for 3 with an irrelevant drawback, so it's only slightly below the curve, and not terrible in a Kavu deck if you have nothing else for the 3CC slot.
aznxknightz
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
Maybe wizards left out something like: "... comes into play with a +1/+1 counter it and can't be blocked.
metalevolence
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(4 votes)
1) This is a limited card. It's a common. It's a 3/2 red 3 drop. It attacks just fine. Red likes. It won't get kicked often but the fact that you could can't hurt.
2) It's from a time when cards in general were not as strong. In short, power has crept.
It's not a strong card, but it's no failure. It is adequate for its specific purpose.
Superllama12
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
So {6}{R} for...a Dreg Reaver that can't block? And that card was pretty bad in the first place!
djflo
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(3 votes)
I feel like this would have a better rating without the kicker, it is pretty much a slap in the face to someone trying to use this.
ICEFANG13
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
You know that kicker is a good thing right? No matter what creature, nearly any creature, adding kicker 4 for a +1/+1 counter is a good thing right?
A 3/2 for 3 in red, that can't block, red is the color that doesn't know what blocking is!
Its similar to a 3/2 vanilla for 3, which is good but boring, the kicker is just a good thing, and the can't block is important for making it balanced, its a 2/5, because no one likes playing vanilla cards.
Power has crept indeed but this is bad. But, its a common so its forgiven. There wouldn't be any good cards without bad cards you know.
EpicBroccoli
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Man, this card isn't terrible but the kicker just makes it feel terrible to everyone
wstonefi
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Much like Urborg Skeleton, this card isn't actually that bad. It's a solid beater in limited. But because of the exorbitant kicker cost, everyone underrates it.
Sago
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Kicker should have been 1 or 2, not 4.
Lifegainwithbite
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
When I looked at the card for a sec, I thought 'Oh that's okay' then I read the kicker cost... kind of puts me off using it.
Lord_Ascapelion
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
I think the crappy kicker makes this card seem worse than it is. It's not particularly good, but not horrific, either. It's good for limited, that's it.
Kirbster
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Okay, look. A 3/2 for 3 mana is decent in red, especially considering you shouldn't have been bothering to block anyway. That's the only requirement: 3 power for 3 mana. Not great, but usable. You're set.
Now, if you had seven lands out and draw this and have nothing else to do... what, are you going to not pay the kicker? Yes, it's overcosted, but it doesn't make the card worse. Having a kicker cost, any kind of kicker cost, is not an additional drawback. Something about having the option to pay too much seems to really just rub people the wrong way. It's an interesting psychological case....
tcollins
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Think of it as a split card that is a 3/2 creature that can't block for {2}{R} or a 4/3 for {6}{R} that can't block....
Comments (19)
Really?
On the other hand, if you ignore the kicker, this is a 3/2 for 3 with an irrelevant drawback, so it's only slightly below the curve, and not terrible in a Kavu deck if you have nothing else for the 3CC slot.
2) It's from a time when cards in general were not as strong. In short, power has crept.
It's not a strong card, but it's no failure. It is adequate for its specific purpose.
A 3/2 for 3 in red, that can't block, red is the color that doesn't know what blocking is!
Its similar to a 3/2 vanilla for 3, which is good but boring, the kicker is just a good thing, and the can't block is important for making it balanced, its a 2/5, because no one likes playing vanilla cards.
Zendikar: not failing at kicker since 2009.
Now, if you had seven lands out and draw this and have nothing else to do... what, are you going to not pay the kicker? Yes, it's overcosted, but it doesn't make the card worse. Having a kicker cost, any kind of kicker cost, is not an additional drawback. Something about having the option to pay too much seems to really just rub people the wrong way. It's an interesting psychological case....
A terrible, terrible split card.