Replenish

Perception of Urza Block Ostracization

In a recent poll in Twitter listing top 4 sets in MTG history, Urza’s Saga and block as a whole received a spot in a lot of them, almost on pair with Invasion, Innistrad or Ravnica. Nonetheless, it seems WOTC still ostracizes the block. So, so many memorable cards that helped define so many decks: Carpet of Flowers, Sneak Attack, Show and Tell, Gaea’s Cradle, Serra’s Sanctum, Gilded Drake, Yawgmoth’s Will, Grim Monolith, Crop Rotation, Frantic Search, Replenish, Academy Rector, Opalescence, Yawgmoth’s Bargain, Powder Keg, Rofellos… and I could go on and on. I love that beautiful, relaxed, cartoony artwork too. Any love for Urzas Block here?

How exactly do we “ostracize” Urza’s block?

Academy Rector Art Bargain Carpet of Flowers Crop Rotation Drake Frantic Search Gaea's Cradle Gilded Drake Grim Monolith Innistrad Invasion Opalescence Ostracize Powder Keg Replenish Rofellos Sagas Search Serra's Sanctum Show and Tell Sneak Attack Urza's Saga Urza's Saga Wizards of the Coast Yawgmoth's Bargain Yawgmoth's Will

White vs Blue Enchantments

White gets Replenish effects. Can it not copy/clone enchantments? I guess the effect is a bit different.

White can reanimate enchantments. Blue can copy them. Different colors get to do different things.

Blue Clone Colors Enchantments Replenish White

Design Philosophy Over Time

Is it correct to say that in a block like Urza Block the design philosophy was centered on creating build-around cards? Many cards in that block created a deck that could be built around a single, unique card. Example: Bargain. Wildfire. Tinker, Enchantress. Replenish, Opposition etc. It seems to me that nowadays you rather focus on "pre-assembled" groups of cards, rather than single cards. (I don't like it).

No, it is not correct to say that. You are comparing apples and oranges. Urza’s Saga was released in 1998, just five years into the game’s life. There was much less need to differentiate itself from the other sets, because it was in the low two digits. Strixhaven, in contrast, is twenty-eight years in and has triple digits of sets to be compared against. It has to have a stronger, cohesive mechanical identity to be memorable.Both sets had plenty of Standard build-around cards. Where they start to deviate is in larger formats. That’s the result of two big factors. One, it’s easier to make a dent in a format of five years of cards than twenty-eight. Two, Urza’s Saga’s power level is through the roof. It’s the most powerful expansion set ever printed. It’s a lot easier to get cards played when the power level is through the roof.So, yes there are differences, but none of it comes from a design intent to make less build around cards.

Bargain Power Level Replenish Sagas Standard Tinker Urza Urza's Saga Urza's Saga Wildfire

Reanimating Planeswalkers

Excluding Sorin, Lord of Innistrad and Sun Titan there are no cards that reanimate planeswalkers(as far as I know). Every other permanent type can be reanimated with effects ranging from Argivian Restoration and Replenish to Crucible of Worlds(and obviously Reanimate itself). I am wondering if a card that says "return target planeswalker card in your graveyard to the battlefield" could ever be printed. I mean ultimately is it really that much more broken than turn three Karn Liberated in Modern?

Why don’t planeswalkers have cards that let us avoid mana costs like every other permanent? Um, because we’ve gotten smarter.

Argivian Restoration Crucible of Worlds Innistrad Karn Liberated Mana Modern Planeswalkers Replenish Sorin, Lord of Innistrad Sun Titan The Graveyard

Portions of Marodigest are unofficial Fan Content permitted under the Wizards of the Coast Fan Content Policy. The literal and graphical information presented on this site about Magic: The Gathering, including card images and mana symbols, is copyright Wizards of the Coast, LLC. Marodigest is not produced by or endorsed by Wizards of the Coast. All other content © 2024 Webscape Internet Engineers. All rights reserved.