Pointed Discussion

This thing's scavenge is just a way to use mana you have no other use for this turn

And for that reason this card will never see standard play. And probably not in draft for that matter. If you've got 6 mana to spare on 2x +1/+1 counters, you just need to get something else to play as an active. This is like that creature that regenerates for (6)(G)... Just, why?

I like the shift for Golgari in flavor and how insects play a much bigger roll in their plans.

Pros like me like this card because it is a bear that scavenges. It scavenges at a high price, but that's ok because it was a bear once.

Scavenge is either efficient on an inefficient creature, or...

This. Damn, this is just kinda sad. I mean, strictly better than bears of course, but still. Any particular reason, guys?

Strictly better than a bear, and major cool points for being a mold-encrusted Golgari beetle, but...

This is a pretty good example of my problems with Scavenge, and I'll voice them here. It looks like Wizards was worried that Dredge-style strategies would ever return, so they nerfed the hell out of them in this block. It's not just the blatant Rest in Peace, but Scavenge itself also lacks a lot of punch. Most of the time you either get fairly-costed creatures with huge Scavenge costs (like the Drudge Beetle here), or extortionately-costed creatures with reasonable Scavenge costs (like the Zanikev Locust) or high costs for both (e.g. Terrus Wurm). The fact that Scavenge works as a sorcery further hurts your mana usage, and if you want to put 2 +1/+1 counters from a Drudge Beetle, you're paying mana that could have gone into playing a fattie.

There are efficient creatures with Scavenge (Deadbridge Goliath, Slitherhead...), but by and large it seems costly for a risky outcome (you can pile counters on a single creature only to see it killed). Corpsejack Menace helps though. Hopefully the mechanic will see more efficient use in the third set, but Unleash does the job more efficiently, even if it's more boring.

All that said, though, I'm still playing Golgari at the prerelease though. Because they're that cool.

tl, dr: Scavenge could have been a whole lot better, Wizards hates graveyards.

I know people are generally going to say that this is a 2/2 for 1G, your standard 'bear', that happens to have an added bonus, and therefore is already above par. However, power creep being a reality, no one would play a vanilla 2/2 for 1G anymore anyhow. Therefore, with bears being all but extinct in Standard/Constructed decks, your 2/2 for 1G is going to want something more than an on-death +2/+2 counter for 5G mana. Which isn't to say this isn't good for Limited--but that's all it's good in. Trygon_Predator pretty much summed up my feelings on the matter.

In draft, probably a good pick for the horde. Anywhere else, not so much. Mind you, I can never bring myself to give a bear less than 2.5, and this is just a fruity bear.

Incredible art.

@Trygon_Predator: I disagree. I'm not saying scavenge is going to take Standard by storm, but it kicked ass for me at the prerelease. Plain and simple, it's card advantage that gives you an edge for the long game, and it's an outlet for all your extra mana when you don't have a more important spell to play (or you're just topdecking). Scavenge costs might be high, but you still got the full value of a creature first.

Sluiceway Scorpion won me an impressive amount of games; nobody wanted to attack me because I'd kill their creature and then make my surviving creatures more powerful the next turn. Add in a Corpsejack Menace (which was in every Golgari prerelease deck) and those counters suddenly start becoming a much better value for the mana. At that point, your guys are starting to get 6-8 counters on them, and given that Golgari has access to swampwalk, trample and lifelink, all at common, things start looking up for you real quick.

How is this card rated so poorly? The real value of this card is the fact that it's a bear with a bonus. An overcosted bonus, but a bonus nontheless.

The only reason I can think of for why Golgari got shafted so badly with their mechanic is because they got Vraska, and even that's a pretty big stretch.

Nothing else seems to explain why they'd make a seemingly awesome ability into a useless one by making you spend the cost of a great fatty to give a creature a minor P/T boost.

Awww, look at that cute little pet!....I WANT one!

In all seriousness, I actually happen to like this guy. Yes, six mana is huge for 2 +1/+1 counters, and I felt like reducing that cost by 1 or even 2 wouldn't have busted his rarity. BUT he is still a solid two-drop and if you need two more power to win the game...he's there for you.

I don't think WotC are through with Scavenge yet. Later sets just might bring out some relief on the mostly heavy mana cost of the ability. I thought about an example:

***************************************
Preservation
2 B/G
Enchantment

You don't have to pay the colorless mana of Scavenge abilities.

"You've been preserved."
****************************************

Though green has ways to ramp mana fast, paying six mana for two +1/+1 seems a bit steep, even considering the rarity system of cards. Scavenge fits with Dredge and that's the way I'm going to use it when I start building my next Golgari deck, but left on it's own it feels a bit... hard sometimes.

Or then they could just release more stuff like Corpsejack Menace.

Deadbridge Goliath's smaller cousin in nearly every aspect.

The Scavenge is the same cost, the cost is exactly half, and they're both insects. I mean, there aren't many insects in magic. Deadbridge is just slightly better with an extra +1/+1 than double.

2/5. A 2/2 for 2 is average. Its scavenge cost puts this card below average.

Scavenge is one of those mechanics that could have been so cool, but flopped. I don't know wth wizards of the coast was thinking. I mean I know you're scarred by dredge but come on, scavenge isn't annnything like that. I would have played this easily with a scavenge cost of 3 or 4. Is that too much to ask?

Also isn't scavenge supposed to be recycling? Like, as in, efficient? Golgari could have made 3 bugs for the cost it takes to reuse the carcass of one. That's retarded flavorwise. *slaps WoTC*

Well, it's a bear with a rather overpriced option. That being said, it's still a bear which is rather unimpressive (save for stuff like Mystic snake, which is probably one of the best bears you are going to get). There is very little reason to run this over Sluiceway Scorpion, Deadbridge Goliath etc. Honestly they could have made this scavenge for and it would still be mediocre.

Strictly not Dredge Beelte. Still, 3/5.

As an activated ability could be glod with Werewolves or Ruric Thar, the unbowed they played it safe due to Simic I think. For casual this is another option late-game when you are top-decking. Insect tribal!

Not to be confused with the best card ever...

To make beetle fully empactful you would need two creatures on the field

1.)valroz the scar striped-
Scavenge to all creatures= to its mama cost

2.)copesjack meance-double adding counters on creatures

So for 1g you get +4/+4 from beetle which is great, this is his fullest affect! :)

Also you can turn two loleth troll 3 valroz 4 menace then discard 1-4( let's say 2) creatures that have scavenge for trolls ability (+4/+4 2/1= 6/5)add its double counters then scavenge those discarded creatures on troll then add double counters on troll!
Let's say beetle scavenged same turn since we have many since we only discarded ...1g +4/+4 to 6/5 troll = troll 10/9 trample with (single swamp regeneration) on turn 5 with 5 mana to spare assuming we have 5 let's say we have the free 0 scavenge too +2/+2 = 12/11 trample regen troll with 4 mana b mana to regen
Another 1g scavenge +4/+4 + 12/11 = 16/15 trample on turn 5 able to regen