Hungry for More
Guardian Instant - Aura
Suspense
When this leaves the arena, gain 3{h}.
Average Card Type Distribution
Average Attack Value:
2.752.746566756
Average Defense Value:
2.772.773749731
Hero
Lyath Goldmane, Vile Savant
55% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Lyath Goldmane, Vile Savant that play both.
Pleiades, Superstar
20% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Pleiades, Superstar that play both.
Jarl Vetreiði
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Jarl Vetreiði that play both.
Bravo, Showstopper
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Bravo, Showstopper that play both.
Victor Goldmane, High and Mighty
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Victor Goldmane, High and Mighty that play both.
Betsy, Skin in the Game
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Betsy, Skin in the Game that play both.
Equipment
Gauntlets of the Boreal Domain
800% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Gauntlets of the Boreal Domain that play both.
Tectonic Crust
300% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Tectonic Crust that play both.
Root-Bound Trunks
300% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Root-Bound Trunks that play both.
Ollin Ice Cap
100% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Ollin Ice Cap that play both.
Rampart of the Ram's Head
76% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Rampart of the Ram's Head that play both.
Nullrune Boots
69% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Nullrune Boots that play both.
Fyendal's Spring Tunic
69% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Fyendal's Spring Tunic that play both.
Nullrune Gloves
65% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Nullrune Gloves that play both.
Arcanite Skullcap
53% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Arcanite Skullcap that play both.
Arcane Lantern
53% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Arcane Lantern that play both.
Attention Grabbers
51% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Attention Grabbers that play both.
Quickdodge Flexors
25% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Quickdodge Flexors that play both.
Gauntlets of Iron Will
23% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Gauntlets of Iron Will that play both.
Nullrune Hood
22% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Nullrune Hood that play both.
Snapdragon Scalers
18% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Snapdragon Scalers that play both.
Nullrune Robe
17% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Nullrune Robe that play both.
Balance of Justice
13% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Balance of Justice that play both.
Crown of Providence
12% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Crown of Providence that play both.
Craterhoof
12% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Craterhoof that play both.
Quelling Slippers
11% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Quelling Slippers that play both.
Boots to the Boards
11% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Boots to the Boards that play both.
Tectonic Plating
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Tectonic Plating that play both.
Ironhide Legs
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Ironhide Legs that play both.
Crown of Dominion
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Crown of Dominion that play both.
Ironfist Revelation
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Ironfist Revelation that play both.
Horns of the Despised
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Horns of the Despised that play both.
Arcanite Fortress
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Arcanite Fortress that play both.
Steelbraid Buckler
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Steelbraid Buckler that play both.
Aurum Aegis
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Aurum Aegis that play both.
Coronet Peak
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Coronet Peak that play both.
Good Time Chapeau
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Good Time Chapeau that play both.
Blade Beckoner Boots
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Blade Beckoner Boots that play both.
Civic Steps
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Civic Steps that play both.
Helm of the Adored
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Helm of the Adored that play both.
Virtuoso Bodice
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Virtuoso Bodice that play both.
Weapon
Summit, the Unforgiving
100% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Summit, the Unforgiving that play both.
Titan's Fist
85% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Titan's Fist that play both.
Sledge of Anvilheim
17% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Sledge of Anvilheim that play both.
Anothos
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Anothos that play both.
Action
Crumble to Eternity
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
1100% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Crumble to Eternity that play both.
Frozen to Death
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
1000% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Frozen to Death that play both.
Channel Mount Isen
Avg. played:
2.112.111111111
500% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Channel Mount Isen that play both.
Tear Asunder
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
73% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Tear Asunder that play both.
Imposing Visage
Avg. played:
2.852.847457627
42% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Imposing Visage that play both.
Booze!
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
31% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Booze! that play both.
Cruel Ambition
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
28% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Cruel Ambition that play both.
Two Steps Ahead
Avg. played:
2.702.704545455
26% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Two Steps Ahead that play both.
Midas Touch
Avg. played:
2.762.764705882
22% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Midas Touch that play both.
Buckle
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
21% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Buckle that play both.
Amulet of Echoes
Avg. played:
1.001.000000000
13% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Amulet of Echoes that play both.
Villainous Pose (Red)
Avg. played:
2.712.714285714
13% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Villainous Pose (Red) that play both.
Stamp Authority
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
12% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Stamp Authority that play both.
Blessing of Patience (Red)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
12% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Blessing of Patience (Red) that play both.
Sadistic Scowl
Avg. played:
2.702.700000000
12% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Sadistic Scowl that play both.
Revolting Gesture
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
12% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Revolting Gesture that play both.
Truce
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Truce that play both.
Nimblism (Red)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Nimblism (Red) that play both.
Never Yield
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Never Yield that play both.
Imperial Warhorn
Avg. played:
1.001.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Imperial Warhorn that play both.
Minnowism (Red)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Minnowism (Red) that play both.
Channel Lake Frigid
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Channel Lake Frigid that play both.
Visit Goldmane Estate
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Visit Goldmane Estate that play both.
Show Time!
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Show Time! that play both.
Roiling Fissure
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Roiling Fissure that play both.
Gravekeeping (Blue)
Avg. played:
1.001.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Gravekeeping (Blue) that play both.
Attack Action
Macho Grande (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
34% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Macho Grande (Blue) that play both.
Power Play (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Power Play (Blue) that play both.
Short Shrift
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
32% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Short Shrift that play both.
Mocking Blow (Red)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
30% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Mocking Blow (Red) that play both.
Escalate Violence
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
29% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Escalate Violence that play both.
Cranial Crush
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
28% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Cranial Crush that play both.
Thunder Quake (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
23% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Thunder Quake (Blue) that play both.
Battered, Beaten, and Broken
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
21% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Battered, Beaten, and Broken that play both.
Disable (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
19% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Disable (Blue) that play both.
Cut a Long Story Short
Avg. played:
2.792.785714286
18% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Cut a Long Story Short that play both.
Bully Tactics
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
18% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Bully Tactics that play both.
Chokeslam (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
16% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Chokeslam (Blue) that play both.
Last Ditch Effort
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
15% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Last Ditch Effort that play both.
Goon Beatdown
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
15% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Goon Beatdown that play both.
Overcrowded
Avg. played:
2.712.714285714
13% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Overcrowded that play both.
Mocking Blow (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
13% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Mocking Blow (Blue) that play both.
Wee Wrecking Ball
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
13% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Wee Wrecking Ball that play both.
Little Big Foot (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
11% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Little Big Foot (Blue) that play both.
Headbutt
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Headbutt that play both.
Spew Obscenities
Avg. played:
2.632.631578947
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Spew Obscenities that play both.
Ripple Away
Avg. played:
2.612.611111111
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Ripple Away that play both.
Overturn the Results
Avg. played:
2.222.222222222
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Overturn the Results that play both.
Debilitate (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Debilitate (Blue) that play both.
Oaken Old
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Oaken Old that play both.
Enlightened Strike
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Enlightened Strike that play both.
Fix the Match
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Fix the Match that play both.
Mocking Blow (Yellow)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Mocking Blow (Yellow) that play both.
Cries of Encore
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Cries of Encore that play both.
Command and Conquer
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Command and Conquer that play both.
Thump (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Thump (Blue) that play both.
Crippling Crush
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Crippling Crush that play both.
Buckling Blow (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Buckling Blow (Blue) that play both.
Spinal Crush
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Spinal Crush that play both.
Felling of the Crown
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Felling of the Crown that play both.
Glacial Footsteps (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Glacial Footsteps (Blue) that play both.
Boulder Drop
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Boulder Drop that play both.
Righteous Cleansing
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Righteous Cleansing that play both.
Sirens of Safe Harbor (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Sirens of Safe Harbor (Blue) that play both.
Autumn's Touch (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Autumn's Touch (Blue) that play both.
Fruits of the Forest (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Fruits of the Forest (Blue) that play both.
Thunk (Blue)
Avg. played:
1.001.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Thunk (Blue) that play both.
No Tall Tales
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and No Tall Tales that play both.
Star Struck
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Star Struck that play both.
Cut Off at the Knees
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Cut Off at the Knees that play both.
Story Beats (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Story Beats (Blue) that play both.
Attack Reaction
Razor Reflex (Red)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Razor Reflex (Red) that play both.
Pummel (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Pummel (Blue) that play both.
Defense Reaction
Sink Below (Red)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
28% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Sink Below (Red) that play both.
Fate Foreseen
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
20% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Fate Foreseen that play both.
Shelter from the Storm
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
18% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Shelter from the Storm that play both.
Staunch Response (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
15% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Staunch Response (Blue) that play both.
Staunch Response (Red)
Avg. played:
2.672.666666667
15% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Staunch Response (Red) that play both.
Pulse of Isenloft
Avg. played:
1.001.000000000
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Pulse of Isenloft that play both.
Staunch Response (Yellow)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Staunch Response (Yellow) that play both.
Block
Unforgetting Unforgiving
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
200% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Unforgetting Unforgiving that play both.
Fiddler's Green (Red)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
62% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Fiddler's Green (Red) that play both.
Truth or Trickery
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
21% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Truth or Trickery that play both.
Turning Point
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Turning Point that play both.
Instant
Sigil of Solace (Red)
Avg. played:
2.902.902173913
69% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Sigil of Solace (Red) that play both.
Oasis Respite (Red)
Avg. played:
2.682.681318681
57% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Oasis Respite (Red) that play both.
Leave Them Hanging
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
46% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Leave Them Hanging that play both.
Edge of Their Seats (Red)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
25% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Edge of Their Seats (Red) that play both.
Steadfast (Red)
Avg. played:
2.812.806451613
21% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Steadfast (Red) that play both.
Edge of Their Seats (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
19% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Edge of Their Seats (Blue) that play both.
Tension in the Air (Red)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
19% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Tension in the Air (Red) that play both.
Blessing of Serenity (Red)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
18% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Blessing of Serenity (Red) that play both.
In the Palm of Your Hand
Avg. played:
2.752.750000000
18% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and In the Palm of Your Hand that play both.
Act of Glory (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
17% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Act of Glory (Blue) that play both.
What Happens Next?
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
15% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and What Happens Next? that play both.
Remembrance
Avg. played:
1.891.886363636
14% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Remembrance that play both.
To Be Continued...
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
14% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and To Be Continued... that play both.
Peace of Mind (Red)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
13% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Peace of Mind (Red) that play both.
Liar's Charm
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
12% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Liar's Charm that play both.
Withstand (Red)
Avg. played:
2.652.650000000
11% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Withstand (Red) that play both.
Battered Not Broken
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Battered Not Broken that play both.
The Suspense is Killing Me
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and The Suspense is Killing Me that play both.
Act of Glory (Red)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Act of Glory (Red) that play both.
Concealed Object
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Concealed Object that play both.
Up on a Pedestal
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Up on a Pedestal that play both.
Tension in the Air (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Tension in the Air (Blue) that play both.
Calming Breeze
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Calming Breeze that play both.
Arcane Compliance
Avg. played:
1.001.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Arcane Compliance that play both.
Poison the Well
Avg. played:
1.001.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Poison the Well that play both.
Arcane Polarity (Red)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Arcane Polarity (Red) that play both.
Withstand (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Withstand (Blue) that play both.
Steadfast (Blue)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Steadfast (Blue) that play both.
Dramatic Pause (Red)
Avg. played:
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Dramatic Pause (Red) that play both.
Resource
Heart of Fyendal
Avg. played:
1.001.000000000
12% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Heart of Fyendal that play both.
Riches of Trōpal-Dhani
Avg. played:
1.001.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Hungry for More and Riches of Trōpal-Dhani that play both.