I thought I could have answered the question of “What does this set have” in the above section. But I guess I got delayed just like this set did. So here we are.
(I use the word kindred here to refer to creature types, because the alternative, being “typal”, is a very lame word, and I still think the word “race” means cars get to the finish line. It’s much of the same way I use “magecraft” to mean “instant or sorcery” really)
This return of Lorwyn had two options when it comes to bringing back the creature types (let’s ignore the Morningtide classes): Allied pairs, which is missing Gruul but you can fill in with Elementals, but still you’ll be missing the Elves. Or RTR formation (allied pairs but swap Red and Black’s places) where you can put Elemental in Izzet and just leave Faeries to Eldraine probably. Either way, it’s clear that Giants and Treefolks got the short end of the stick, it’s unfortunate.
This is how Edge of Eternities got the GTC shock lands, I think. Over here, we still have treats for them. Dimir can do flash things, so Faeries would still feel right at home. The other four archetypes will get new set mechanics that we’ll see very soon.
Here’s a table of how many cards per rarity per color (listed in color order, as the P column would explain) you can expect of each kindred, including the ones being unfortunately left out.
Kindred the card type will be counted, but cards just putting the word in the text box will not (if there’s any).
Multicolored cards (whether literally or through color identity) will be excluded because they tend (not always) to come in cycles.
Precons’ new designs will be excluded too, because color balance is not here.
| Kindred | P | M | R | U | C | T |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Merfolk | WU | 1+2 | 3+3 | 3+3 | 15 | |
| Goblin | BR | 2+2 | 4+3 | 3+3 | 17 | |
| Kithkin | GW | 1+2 | 2+3 | 3+4 | 15 | |
| Elemental | UR | 1+2 | 3+5 | 3+4 | 18 | |
| Elf | BG | 0+1 | 3+3 | 2+5 | 3+3 | 20 |
| Faerie | UB | 0+1 | 2+0 | 3+1 | 1+1 | 9 |
| Giant | RGW | 011 | 101 | 111 | 110 | 9 |
| Treefolk | WBG | 110 | 111 | 5 |
Splashed cards will be listed down here, but maybe their intentions are just as fuzzy:
This is basically a version of Domain that checks for colors among allied permanents (lands don’t have colors). One you might have already seen on a Lorwyn card that will get reprinted here. Which means that you can’t just put two Triomes down and call it complete, but thing is a Leyline of the Guildpact would still fully count. So that’s the trick, hybrid cards will let reach all the colors, outside of Commander obviously.
| Set | W | U | B | R | G | M | T |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ECL-M | 2 | 2 | |||||
| ECL-R | 1 | 1 | |||||
| ECL-U | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 10 |
| ECL-C | 1 | 1 | |||||
| ECC-R | 1 | 1 | |||||
| Total | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 7 | 2 | 15 |
Ultimately, given the fact that this set don’t have a draft land cycle, this mechanic isn’t really intended to be the core. So just two archetypes are really interested in it: Izzet and Simic, and it’s surely weird that most of the cards with this keyword is concentrated on uncommon.
The mythic is probably the most notable card of all these, being a reprint and also seems to be the inspiration point. The other mythic is a giant wall of text, which is just as true for the Izzet rare. Common has one card that discounts in a way too familiar to Domain’s card collection, I feel.
Uncommon has a cycle of big creatures with an arrival ability using this keyword. Actually, one is really small at 2 mana and by that logic, Green has two. Two prowesses also use this keyword, but only from cast to arrival. If you so desire that ongoing tracking, go for a red creature or a Simic hybrid one, both about stats.
You know the silly cost of removing +1/+1 counters on allied creatures right? This one’s premise is probably the same, but well the counter involved is different so the dynamic is very different.
In all fairness, the more accurate comparison would be to sacrifice a creature: Killing it for a value that’s hopefully than having your opponent do that act. Blight is actually a smaller cost, considering that -1/-1 counters don’t fully kill bigger creatures, but again it obviously does kill the small 1/1 tokens we always label sacrifice fodders.
Blight also comes with a number, that doesn’t actually restrict what creatures can get the blight, it just restricts what survives. So you can blight 10 by sacrificing a 1/1 just fine, because the alternative is complexity hell and we know how that went (this is apparently also why vivid do let hybrid cards count twice).
The color distribution here definitely adds up with the fact that this is a weaker version of sacrifice. Looking at the cards, you may notice somethings: A lot of these cards use blight as a kicker cost. But as with waterbending, it’s decided that both of those things can’t live on the same line of text. So just spell it out. It doesn’t hurt, there are just 6 cards doing this thing.
| Set | W | U | B | R | M | T |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ECL-M | 1 | 1 | ||||
| ECL-R | 3* | 1 | 2 | 6 | ||
| ECL-U | 2 | 4 | 3 | 9 | ||
| ECL-C | 1 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 9 |
| ECC-? | R | M | 2 | |||
| Total | 3 | 1 | 11 | 8 | 4 | 27 |