It takes a second to realize that the rage counter is simply a memory device. Given that it counts your opponents' lands, I can see trample being so worth the sacrifice. On the other hand, Timmy is more likely to stick with sheer size.

That's pretty much precisely what I was going for :) Sometimes you'll want to use the rage, sometimes you won't.

Nifty little one here, yeah i agree that Timmy will probably always want an 16/16 on the battlefield, i know i would. Having the extra option to give it -5/-5 to give it trample is nice though, although most players would try to build around him and give him evasion some other way. Cool card

I don't know if I like the tension in this one particularly. Big creatures are okay if they don't have trample (okay, some still complain), but here it looks like you are making the one playing the card make a Sadistic Choice.

It plays well probably, and the decision is obviously interesting (though I'm wondering how many times you will be choosing not to sacrifice), but it just reads/feels wrong. Or maybe it's just me?

So you're saying it'd be a more pleasing card design without the second ability? I do appreciate that some abilities can feel bad even if they're technically all-upside; I guess it's possible this is one of those.

Flip it around? Hooves has trample and sacs lands on ETB, but has an ability to sacrifice the trample and go find you some lands?

That could work if there was a way to word it that was both sane and short, but I don't think there is.

There is, and you can make it all up side. When the creature enters the battlefield, search through your library for 4 lands and put them into play tapped. You may instead exile those lands. If you do, ~ gains trample.

That's a significant power jump -rather than deciding "Ok, do I want a semi-unstoppable trampler, but 3 mana - or do I want an even harder to kill one that doens't trample and keep 8 mana" you're instead deciding between 8 and 12 mana. Which is an easier decision, I'd think.