Abundant Growth
Set Price Alerts

Combos Browse all Suggest

Legality

Format Legality
1v1 Commander Legal
Alchemy Legal
Archenemy Legal
Arena Legal
Block Constructed Legal
Canadian Highlander Legal
Casual Legal
Commander / EDH Legal
Commander: Rule 0 Legal
Custom Legal
Duel Commander Legal
Gladiator Legal
Highlander Legal
Historic Legal
Historic Brawl Legal
Legacy Legal
Leviathan Legal
Limited Legal
Modern Legal
Modern Beyond Horizons Legal
Oathbreaker Legal
Pauper Legal
Pauper Duel Commander Legal
Pauper EDH Legal
Planar Constructed Legal
Planechase Legal
Quest Magic Legal
Tiny Leaders Legal
Vanguard Legal
Vintage Legal

Abundant Growth

Enchantment — Aura

Enchant land (Target a land as you cast this. This card enters attached to that land.)

When this enters, draw a card.

Enchanted land has ": Add one mana of any colour.

leovolt884_ on Domain Zoo 2025 2nd try

2 weeks ago

Personally I like Lush Growth over Abundant Growth to enable your creatures and this deck is just naya anyways so it's a lot better than it is in 4 or 5 color domain. I would maybe consider some tapped duals that have basic land types so you can have a swamps or islands for domain without banking on drawing Nylea's Presence. 6 copies of Terramorphic Expanse/Evolving Wilds are pretty slow already so swapping them for tap lands doesn't seem like too much of a loss. Running the swamp type on a few lands + 4 Nylea's Presence in the deck would make running some copies of Snuff Out pretty consistent. Having premium removal that costs 0 mana seems great for a creature heavy aggro deck. I don't see too much of a point in Kor Skyfisher as you really have no good targets to bounce. It's a niche combo with rancor since bouncing the enchanted creature puts it in the graveyard, then back into your hand, but it seems like too much of a tempo loss to have to bounce your own beaters. I guess you can also bounce a land and replay it if you miss a land drop but if that's what you're going for I would suggest going down to 18 lands and cutting 1-2 Matca Rioters to run more aggressive 1 drop creatures. Spark Elemental, Jungle Lion, Jackal Familiar, Goblin Cohort, Clockwork Percussionist, Fanatical Firebrand, or Gingerbrute are all aggressive 1 drops that come to mind. Clockwork Percussionist in particular provides card advantage which is very good and can help you hit land drops if you choose to run a lower land count.

Deck looks cool and keep in mind these are just suggestions, have a nice day <3

legendofa on The New Commander Brackets Beta

1 month ago

I've been struggling with this for a couple of my decklists recently, and I'm trying to summarize my thoughts here without starting a new thread. So this is semi-stream-of-thought, and I apologize if it gets a little rambly.

There are several criteria being tracked by the current bracket system, including resource generation, speed, reliability, and oppression, and possibly others.

Game changers: A combo like Demonic Consultation/Tainted Pact + Thassa's Oracle gets a key card on the game changers list, because it's fast and reliable, ending a match on turn 3-4. These are speed game changers. Other game changers generate resources just by playing the game, like Rhystic Study or Smothering Tithe. This group often also includes oppression, since a lot of them tax the opponent. Another group is cheap (1-2 mana) tutors, like Vampiric Tutor, Enlightened Tutor, or Survival of the Fittest, that increase a deck's reliability for very little opportunity cost. Most game changers can be sorted into one of these four categories. Ancient Tomb and Gaea's Cradle are speed and resource generation, Drannith Magistrate and Force of Will are oppression, and so on.

Bracket Guidelines: From Gavin Verhey's announcement article, here's what each of the brackets mean and expect. Important to note that the system is still in beta testing, so this is probably going to be different in the future.

  • Bracket 1: Decks with more focus on a gimmick than on winning. "Winning is not the primary goal here, as it's more about showing off something unusual you've made. Villains yelling in the art? Everything has the number four? Oops, all Horses? Those are all fair game!" This bracket doesn't allow extra turns, two-card infinite combos, mass land denial, or game changers, and restricts tutors.

  • Bracket 2: Decks that can win, but are not tightly focused, or slow to develop. "While Bracket 2 decks may not have every perfect card, they have the potential for big, splashy turns, strong engines, and are built in a way that works toward winning the game. While the game is unlikely to end out of nowhere and generally goes nine or more turns, you can expect big swings." This bracket doesn't allow any game changers, mass land denial, two-card infinite combos, or multiple extra turns in a row, and restricts tutors.

  • Bracket 3: Decks that are focused on winning efficiently, but are not optimized. "They are full of carefully selected cards, with work having gone into figuring out the best card for each slot. The games tend to be a little faster as well, ending a turn or two sooner than your Core (Bracket 2) decks." This bracket does not allow mass land denial or multiple extra turns in a row, and restricts game changers and two-card infinite combos, and allows tutors freely.

  • Bracket 4: Decks that are optimized for their strategy. "Bring out your strongest decks and cards... This is high-powered Commander, and games have the potential to end quickly. The focus here is on bringing the best version of the deck you want to play, but not one built around a tournament metagame." This bracket has no restrictions.

  • Bracket 5: Decks that expect to win at the most competitive levels. "There is care paid into following and paying attention to a metagame and tournament structure, and no sacrifices are made in deck building as you try to be the one to win the pod." This brackets has no restrictions.

Deck Analysis 1: The deck I've been struggling most with is Clear Waters. As I listed in another thread, it has an infinite turns combo (Wanderwine Prophets + Deeproot Pilgrimage + Merfolk Sovereign) and mass land denial (Opposition + Seedborn Muse, Quicksilver Fountain), and a selection of tutors to pull these together (Forerunner of the Heralds, Idyllic Tutor, Merrow Harbinger, Seahunter, and Sterling Grove). This should put it squarely into Bracket 4.

My concern is that it's neither high powered nor optimized. On the axes of speed, resource generation, reliability, and oppression, I would score it high on oppression, pretty good on reliability, and low on speed and resources generation. Looking at examples of other Bracket 4 decks around the internet, all four of those criteria need to be high in this bracket. The infinite turns combo is slow and easily removed, and the land denial is optional (Opposition can have other targets) or temporary (Quicksilver Fountain can remove its own effect).

It would be easy to simply add a big pile of game changers to improve all of these facets. Right now, it has one game changer in Grand Arbiter Augustin IV, and that one's not essential to the deck. That's not the direction I want to go with the deck, though--I want to keep it reasonably budget, and even adding the three least expensive of the game changers I'm considering would basically double the deck's cost.

I know that people in brackets under 4 want to be able to play their deck, and the infinite turns and land denial shut that down. These are clearly stated in the announcement article -"A single extra-turn spell can be fun and splashy. However, extra-turn spells take a ton of time away from other players and their ability to play the game and tend to be unfun when repeated."- that's why they're forced into brackets 4 and 5. But if a deck isn't able to compete against high power, optimized Bracket 4 decks, can it be considered Bracket 4?

Deck Analysis 2: Another deck that I've been struggling with is an enchantment deck, Do Not Mistake Peace For Passivity. The point of concern for this deck is land denial. Blood Moon is classic mass land denial, and the deck is designed to play around it with Abundant Growth, Fertile Ground, Prismatic Omen, and similar cards. It also has a combo that doesn't directly deny lands, but punishes their play and use: Manabarbs + Citadel of Pain. Otherwise, the deck fits all the criteria of a Bracket 2 deck--no game changers, no infinite combos, few tutors, and no extra turns.

This deck can be converted into a pure Bracket 2 deck without much effort by replacing Blood Moon and Manabarbs. But as it stands, a single card pushes the deck up two brackets, according to the guidelines. Again, I don't feel the deck is high powered or optimized, and would not be able to compete in a Bracket 4 match. It could probably survive in Bracket 3, since it's highly synergistic, but nothing any higher.

In this case, adding a bunch of game changers and power cards would somewhat dilute how the deck functions. A few, like Smothering Tithe or Trouble in Pairs, could slot in, but most others would be more gratuitous.

Conclusion: To quote the article again, "There's some wiggle room, and while playing against decks that are all inside your bracket is ideal, you can usually wiggle within one bracket away from you safely." "You should play where you think you belong based on the descriptions." All of this can be discussed in a Rule 0 talk. I strongly believe the brackets are intended to help this conversation, not replace it. As an example, for the Clear Waters deck, I would say that the deck is not optimized to Bracket 4, and I think it fits best into Bracket 3, but it's controlling and has a potential three-card infinite turns combo. I'm willing to announce when the combo is assembled and ready to start, to give everyone a turn cycle to react, and reduce the use of Opposition to creatures and artifacts.

I feel like the current setup is a little too restrictive of the kind of combo-control decks I like. I can have fun smashing big creatures into each other and outmaneuvering everyone else, but I will enjoy locking down the board and establishing my inevitability, and I'm having a harder time trying to find ways to do that in lower brackets. Some people have already offered me excellent feedback and suggestions that I'm taking into consideration, but I'd also like to see how people are responding to the bracket system so far.

For comparison, here's a few more of my decklists:

Darsul on Cultivating Enchantments

1 year ago

if you want to avoid Control Magic, Willbreaker is always fun with aura builds. I see you have Light-Paws, Emperor's Voice were is Ivy, Gleeful Spellthief? They always fun to have out together. Heliod's Pilgrim is always a good way to fine the aura you need. Infiltrator's Magemark just funny i love it (it's an aura with a global effect). Abundant Growth, Nylea's Presence both can trip but, don't ramp. Fertile Ground,Utopia Sprawl and Wild Growth ramp.

Metropolis39 on Esper-Reanimator

2 years ago

id probably play Abundant Growth over the Oaths. to help with blood moons and overall smooth put the mana

wallisface on

2 years ago

Some thoughts:

  • Always aim to get your deck down to 60 cards. 66 might not seem like much over, but it's going to mess with your consistency and leave you with an overall weaker deck.

  • Abundant Growth doesn't really help you as it still only lets the land tap for 1 mana as it did before, and as you're only a 2-colour deck, you don't need the colour fixing.

  • Mirari's Wake and Canopy Tactician also feel too slow for ramp cards, and it's probably worth trying to find better options to fill these slots.

  • As your deck has a large percentage of lands, cards like Arboreal Grazer and Explore could do very well for you here.

  • Taplands are painfully slow, and i'm not sure its worth running either of Thornglint Bridge or Tranquil Expanse when you could just be running basics instead.

Tsesarevich on All Are One

2 years ago

Incoming cards:

Add these to your deck with the correct printing and foiling. I would advise for these switches, but they are purely recommendations.

mjbiffi on feeling cute , might sunburst later

2 years ago

Engineered Explosives, Utopia Sprawl and Abundant Growth might be good in here

Niko9 on How come we don't have …

2 years ago

I think that they are really hesitant to print things into enchant because almost every format has some enchantresses and the only reason they aren't totally broken is because enchantments in general are weak.

Enchantment lands+ Abundant Growth+ enchantresses+ Sanctum Weaver+ Rune of Speed+ Ancestral Mask+ Inkmoth Nexus would be an extremely dependable infect package, and I'm sure there are better effects than that, it's just the one I can think of right now : )

I mean, if there was a 2 mana creature that said "when an artifact enters the battlefield draw a card" everyone would be drawing their whole deck and we'd basically be playing YGO. If enchantments get a decent push, they would be too good, ironically.

Load more
Have (1) C4rnif3X
Want (1) beesaurs