At what size do you people see playing this? I'm in the skeptical camp here (unpowered, if that matters). I'd like to support the lands.dec more but I'm just not seeing this.
Chromatic Lantern pretty much does everything this card already wants to do.
Hard disagree. Chromatic lantern doesnt shut down aggression on turn 3, and there is significantly more artifact removal vs enchantment removal in most aggressive decks.
Secondly, chromatic lantern doesnt let you go off with crucible of worlds.
I cut Chromatic Lantern mostly because of arguments made on these forums: perfect fixing on one card isn't that good if that card can be removed easily, so it's kind of a redundant effect, and at 3 mana a ramp card should do more. I see a lot of the same issues here. When it comes to this vs. an aggro deck, sure, there is often more artifact than enchantment removal, but there is also a lot of creature removal. This survives most red removal, but not much else.
Still, it would seem like it needs a lot of buildaround :/
I never liked chromatic lantern much. It has little upside, and doesn't do much for it's cost.
An overly simplistic , Patrick Chapin-esque way to compare the two cards would be to eliminate the ability they both have (prismatic omen) then compare the subtracted cards.
A 2/4 with exploration ability tacked onto it, vs a mana rock that can produce 1 mana.
Exploration is worth a card and 1 mana, a 2/4 is worth a card and 2 mana. A mana rock is worth a card and 2 mana. With the Dryad, you are essentially getting an extra card and mana of worth of value. It's safe to call the 3 vs 2 mana a wash because a mana rock is better than the other cards respectively... but that means the dryad is still an entire extra card better as long as it lives.
For a 3 mana card that's a big difference.
I agree that it's a bit of a build around.. more so, that you can't just shove this into a mono green deck with 16 lands and have it be playable. It's ceiling is way way higher than it's average case performance, and it should miss a decent % of main decks or be a weak playable.
It's ceiling is in a deck with strip mine , crucible effects , oracle of mul daya and/or courser of kruphix.
Once you go off with some of those shenanigans, you'll see why this card is much better than the lantern.
Upside is a very important thing to consider when evaluating a card imo.
My guess is it's a clear miss at 360, worth a test in the 450-540 range, and a slam at 540+.
I agree that it's a bit of a build around.. more so, that you can't just shove this into a mono green deck with 16 lands and have it be playable. It's ceiling is way way higher than it's average case performance, and it should miss a decent % of main decks or be a weak playable.
It's ceiling is in a deck with strip mine , crucible effects , oracle of mul daya and/or courser of kruphix.
Once you go off with some of those shenanigans, you'll see why this card is much better than the lantern.
Upside is a very important thing to consider when evaluating a card imo.
My guess is it's a clear miss at 360, worth a test in the 450-540 range, and a slam at 540+.
I wrote that message a bit late so I realize now that I wasn't very clear about this, but yes, I absolutely agree this card has a much higher ceiling than Chromatic Lantern and this matters. I was just surprised to see people point to the Chromatic Lantern effect as a significant point in favor of this card AND claiming that this is more resistant to removal against aggressive decks than Lantern, since I don't think the latter is really the case, and the former in and of itself seems a bit weak to me.
I checked your cube while I was writing this and saw that you're running double Fastbond, and this makes sense to me in terms of making land shenanigans work: the deck needs consistent ways of getting extra land drops early, so I would probably add Fastbond and/or Exploration before I added Dryad of Ilysian Grove. Even then, I think the deck might be more in need of more cheap ways of playing lands from the GY, cheap ways of getting lands into the GY with some sort of benefit, or cheap was of benefiting even more from your lands going into the GY rather than more cards that give you double land drops without actually helping you get those lands into your hand/GY. We're not going to get functional reprints of Strip Mine or the like, so I think the deck needs a more playable Seismic Assault or Titania rather than an Exploration on a stick... but I might be mistaken.
I wrote that message a bit late so I realize now that I wasn't very clear about this, but yes, I absolutely agree this card has a much higher ceiling than Chromatic Lantern and this matters. I was just surprised to see people point to the Chromatic Lantern effect as a significant point in favor of this card AND claiming that this is more resistant to removal against aggressive decks than Lantern, since I don't think the latter is really the case, and the former in and of itself seems a bit weak to me.
The chromatic lantern effect IS a significant point in favor of the card. Is it enough to make the card by itself? far from it.
But the effect is worth almost an extra mana tacked onto the card, when combined with an effect that allows you to get more mana faster. (they are synergistic)
It is not more resilient to removal than lantern vs agro, that is a false statement for sure.
[quote from="Zetsu_Sensei »" url="/forums/the-game/the-cube-forum/cube-card-and-archetype/cube-new-card-discussion/815810-dryad-of-ilysian-grove?comment=9"]What's your cube environment? I have a 360 powered list and slots are pretty tight, but I still enjoy a couple of build arounds which aren't embarrassing, like wildfire, opposition, sneak attack and co. Does your lands.dec measure up well in terms of power and consistency?
I never liked chromatic lantern much. It has little upside, and doesn't do much for it's cost.
An overly simplistic , Patrick Chapin-esque way to compare the two cards would be to eliminate the ability they both have (prismatic omen) then compare the subtracted cards.
A 2/4 with exploration ability tacked onto it, vs a mana rock that can produce 1 mana.
Exploration is worth a card and 1 mana, a 2/4 is worth a card and 2 mana. A mana rock is worth a card and 2 mana. With the Dryad, you are essentially getting an extra card and mana of worth of value. It's safe to call the 3 vs 2 mana a wash because a mana rock is better than the other cards respectively... but that means the dryad is still an entire extra card better as long as it lives.
For a 3 mana card that's a big difference.
I agree that it's a bit of a build around.. more so, that you can't just shove this into a mono green deck with 16 lands and have it be playable. It's ceiling is way way higher than it's average case performance, and it should miss a decent % of main decks or be a weak playable.
It's ceiling is in a deck with strip mine , crucible effects , oracle of mul daya and/or courser of kruphix.
Once you go off with some of those shenanigans, you'll see why this card is much better than the lantern.
Upside is a very important thing to consider when evaluating a card imo.
My guess is it's a clear miss at 360, worth a test in the 450-540 range, and a slam at 540+.
Last Updated 02/07/24
Streaming Standard/Cube on Twitch https://www.twitch.tv/heisenb3rg96
Strategy Twitter https://www.twitter.com/heisenb3rg
I wrote that message a bit late so I realize now that I wasn't very clear about this, but yes, I absolutely agree this card has a much higher ceiling than Chromatic Lantern and this matters. I was just surprised to see people point to the Chromatic Lantern effect as a significant point in favor of this card AND claiming that this is more resistant to removal against aggressive decks than Lantern, since I don't think the latter is really the case, and the former in and of itself seems a bit weak to me.
I checked your cube while I was writing this and saw that you're running double Fastbond, and this makes sense to me in terms of making land shenanigans work: the deck needs consistent ways of getting extra land drops early, so I would probably add Fastbond and/or Exploration before I added Dryad of Ilysian Grove. Even then, I think the deck might be more in need of more cheap ways of playing lands from the GY, cheap ways of getting lands into the GY with some sort of benefit, or cheap was of benefiting even more from your lands going into the GY rather than more cards that give you double land drops without actually helping you get those lands into your hand/GY. We're not going to get functional reprints of Strip Mine or the like, so I think the deck needs a more playable Seismic Assault or Titania rather than an Exploration on a stick... but I might be mistaken.
The chromatic lantern effect IS a significant point in favor of the card. Is it enough to make the card by itself? far from it.
But the effect is worth almost an extra mana tacked onto the card, when combined with an effect that allows you to get more mana faster. (they are synergistic)
It is not more resilient to removal than lantern vs agro, that is a false statement for sure.
Last Updated 02/07/24
Streaming Standard/Cube on Twitch https://www.twitch.tv/heisenb3rg96
Strategy Twitter https://www.twitter.com/heisenb3rg
I think that if you are running those cards, you probably just want to add this new one to the lot. It's not really a matter of how it replaces them.
The lands.dec is awesome on our environment. It can compete with the rest of regular power stuff and even with agressive decks. It does feature some spicy cards that almost nobody runs though. You can take a lot by yourself on CT : https://www.cubetutor.com/viewcube/12370;jsessionid=E2944633FBB675640FD08E463B26ED02
Zetsu's Cube on CubeTutor.com
Zetsu's Ebay MTG Online Store
Zetsu's Poker Draft Method