Creature — Kavu
When Horned Kavu enters the battlefield, return a red or green creature you control to its owner's hand.
Printings View all
Combos Browse all
|Commander / EDH||Legal|
Horned Kavu Discussion
2 weeks ago
No - echo costs have to be paid in the upkeep - well before the main phase in which you can cast Horned Kavu. The drake will likely not be on the battlefield by the time you cast the Kavu.
6 months ago
I think maybe these cards could be good, but i thing Horned Kavu is good with etb effects and this deck doenst have this kind of synergy and Kird Ape can enter in the place of Akrasan Squire but without akrasan squire and Qasali Pridemage i will not have excuse to play Fencing Ace hahahaha but these two cards can enter in another build with Burning-Tree Emissary or somethin like that maybe
6 months ago
6 months ago
theages I think Horned Kavu would be a great addition in this deck. In pauper, having a creature with 4 toughness is amazing. There aren't many creatures with 4 power, and having 4 toughness can survive a much more common card than Snap : Lightning Bolt . All the cards that you mentioned for exemple Burning-Tree Emissary or even a +1/+1 Young Wolf would make this card shine. The goal of this card is to do more stuff with fewer cards so you don't lose card advantage.
Horned Kavu isn't a target ability, so it works with shroud.
7 months ago
Okay so first of all: one drops of two different colors in pauper is really awkward. It should work out fine most of the time but I feel like it might turn some hands that would be auto wins if you can play your 1 drop into pretty bad hands. In fact, you can see how awkward it makes things by your mana base: if you had another red 1 drop instead of Young Wolf , you could probably get away with swapping 2 forests for 2 mountains.
I'm not a fan of Horned Kavu : it's a big pile of stats, sure, but it puts you behind on tempo and it leaves you very vulnerable to Snap which is a blue staple. I would much rather see a fourth Burning-Tree Emissary and another two drop like Nest Invader or Mogg War Marshal which would help you trigger Morbid. (As a side note, Blastoderm + Horned Kavu doesn't actually work because Blastoderm has shroud)
Speaking of Blastoderm , I'm not a big fan of it because it can't come down before turn 4, which is the turn you're either going to be overtaken by other aggro decks or the turn a control deck will start stabilizing so you need to have an explosive turn 4, which is the complete opposite of Blastoderm as it's just a big pile of stats with no real impact on the field.
Manamorphose isn't great either: it does basically say -1 card in your deck but the filtering doesn't seem very relevant when you could have more action in your deck. If you had a Thermo-Alchemist or a similar card in there, it would be alright but right now, I'd be more happy to see more Rancor .
Overall, I feel like this deck is a bit too slow. Here are some cards to consider to accelerate it: Vines of Vastwood , more Rancor , Nettle Sentinel if the deck veers green, Goblin Cohort and/or Mogg Conscripts , Goblin Bushwhacker if the deck goes wider, Hunger of the Howlpack , Porcelain Legionnaire , Vault Skirge if you have lots of pumps, Skarrgan Pit-Skulk , Savage Swipe if you mostly have 2-power creatures and maybe some more burn in the main like Chain Lightning and Reckless Abandon .
7 months ago
8 months ago
I agree that having a critical mass of high cost creatures can be a fundamental flaw in the Naya design. However I also stated that the line didn't necessarily have to be at power 5. It could be power 4.
Additionally Caretaker also takes CMC into account, so it functions with any creature spell that is CMC 5 or higher. That grants a lot of open space to utilize the mechanic outside the strict nature of Naya's theme.
Recent post: "“Wanted [the soulbond] to be a restrictive pairing” is not what I want at all. I was suggesting that creatures who pair with specific types of creatures is ground worth exploring. I think, in fact, that most of them will just be plain ‘ol Soulbond."
Earlier post: "Soulbond's biggest strike against is it's a complex mechanic. Many players like it, though. and if you can follow what's going on, it has good gameplay. I really don't know if this mechanic will ever return, but its popularity makes me think there's a chance.
So you see where I’m going with this? If X is paired with a creature with power Y or less, ...
Maybe some will be normal Soulbond, some will care about power/toughness, maybe one or two will care about beasts."
You contradict your previous statement. I can understand if you changed your mind but you make an adamant statement that you did not want restrictive pairing for Soulbond at all... whereas you previously stated that you want Soulbond that cares about who they pair with and only some would be normal, now you want the majority to be normal Soulbond.
How do you figure that Caretaker is played into a very different gameplay space than Exploit? Both requires a cost of a permanent on your board. Exploit is flexible in what cost it is, while Caretaker is locked and you have to play it before the benefit happens. Caretaker is definitely the weaker version of an Exploit cost due to those restrictions and setup, but I think it fits given that this kind of cost is not something that is normally within Green, so it does it worse. However because Caretaker is worse I think you can get away with granting higher payoffs.
As for breaking the color pie... No break is happening here to the color pie. Red, Green and White definitely have multiple sources of bouncing own permanents or creatures, so it is not a break of the color pie. You may argue about a break of what is traditionally Naya, but we are trying to make a new mechanic for Naya and after the conflux, Blue and Black mana have entered Naya. I wouldn't say it's a large stretch to have such a mechanic within .
Roaring Primadox , Stampeding Serow and its brother Stampeding Wildebeests , Temur Sabertooth , Ambush Krotiq , Invasive Species are some of them. Not bouncing a creature but bouncing none the less; Quirion Ranger Scryb Ranger I based these on mono green cards, but there's obviously a lot of others with other colors within the Nayan color pairing. Stuff like Fleetfoot Panther or Horned Kavu , Shivan Wurm . Red green had a lot of this stuff in the past. As far as I recall it was not a particularly liked mechanic in my LGS mostly because your opponent could interact with the "cost" and kill your only bounce target, so you had to bounce the creature itself. This was also back when creatures wasn't as pushed as they are now. Also having Caretaker as an optional cost that can't be interacted with and granting a benefit could make Caretaker work where the Red Green bounce for an undercosted big fattie failed.
Again; this is not a color pie break.
While I agree that Soulbond as a gameplay mechanic is more flexible in its core form, as it just requires a Soulbond creature and any other creature, I think Soulbond as a design mechanic is a lot more restrictive than you realize.
As for what decks are fun or not, I'm not going to go into that discussion. I would say most decks that are competitive are pretty linear in my eyes, because that is what makes them consistent and good.
Naya is exactly about the circle of life and normal predation to survive, not for sport like it may seem on Jund. I wouldn't say there's a bond between the gargantuans and their worshippers, as the gargantuans are the prime dangers to the humanoid inhabitants on Naya. The beasts prey on the populace and rampage through the jungle, destroying settlements.
I think for the gargantuans, it's more a tolerance thing. Like when a crocodile rests and opens its mouth to let birds eat out the scraps and clean for them. The crocodile doesn't care for the birds, but there's a symbiotic relationship that benefits both. I wont call it a bond. And certainly not one of the soul. That's why I called it a flavor break.
Thank you for the sauce on the popularity. I recognize that Naya is the least popular of the shards according to WotC's data. However it doesn't say that the mechanic is disliked. Shards of Alara fell into the top of the 25-50 percentile, which WotC classifies as a "liked" position, with the 0-25 percentile to be "disliked". They said some shards (like Esper) broke through the 50 percentile into the "popular" category.
So unless Naya is a vast outlier on the bad end, I don't think it's correct to say that Naya was disliked. Since they positively mentioned Esper to break the category but nothing else, I think it's safer to assume that Naya fell within the 25-50 percentile and is considered "liked, but not popular". You only know that Naya was the least popular of the shards. The rest is speculation.
And this speculation and personal bias is exactly why I kept going with this argument - which I reckoned was lost from the start. From your first post it is pretty clear that you don't consider the ideas applicable, so at first I wanted to know what thought went behind that, also to know what I might not have considered. From thereon it became clearer that some personal bias was present more than thought through criticism. I want people to argue with facts, and not use personal bias and present it as facts.
I don't mind you not liking my suggested mechanic and what it builds on. And if you have some factual or anecdotal evidence that supports a broader consensus which you claim to present, then I'll have to reconsider my position and revalue my viewpoints.
I thank you for our little discussion, but I think it is past time to end this.
1 year ago
Hey there 5finga, thanks for your suggestions.
I considered Horned Kavu, but the deck only has 12 other creatures, and Harvest Wurm and Hooting Mandrills can both be difficult to cast. After I playtest the deck and determine how often I can afford to recast Harvest Wurm, I may try out Horned Kavu.