Coat of Arms
Each creature gets +1/+1 for each other creature on the battlefield that shares at least one creature type with it. (For example, if two Goblin Warriors and a Goblin Shaman are on the battlefield, each gets +2/+2.)
|Have (3)||Forkbeard , metalmagic , jecder|
|Want (3)||IconPrince , DJGam-G , stevenlockheed|
Combos Browse all
- Coat of Arms + Myr Incubator
- Changeling Hero + Coat of Arms
- Coat of Arms + Elvish Promenade
- Coat of Arms + Devoted Druid
|Commander / EDH||Legal|
Coat of Arms occurrence in decks from the last year
Latest Decks as Commander
Coat of Arms Discussion
1 day ago
You might like these:
Ivy Lane Denizen (causes Lathril and your # of elves to grow exponentially each time Lathril hits an opp)
Fallen Ideal (similar to denizen. sac your tokens right before lathril hits to deal a ton more damage and make twice as many tokens as you had before)
Coat of Arms
Song of Freyalise
Return of the Wildspeaker
Patron of the Orochi
4 days ago
I've been trying to find the right balance in my Lathril build as well.
Cards I think are cuttable here: Just Beaters - You are looking to flood the board with elves and pump up Lathril to make more elves. Traditional beater type creatures don't do much for you here so you can probably lose cards like Heedless One, Abomination of Llanowar and Elvish Vanguard. These cards don't do anything for you other than get big and swing which is counter productive to you strat.
Big Mana Producers - You want to flood the board early and elves in general don't have high CMC so you can probably lose some of the higher cmc mana dorks like Wirewood Channeler, Selvala, Heart of the Wilds, Joraga Treespeaker and Incubation Druid.
Other - Unless you plan on a lifegain subtheme you can cut Nissa Revane. I can't run Coat of Arms in my group because there are a lot of other tribal decks that also benefit from it. Higher mana elves like Eyeblight Cullers and Exquisite Huntmaster and Nath of the Gilt-Leaf are all cards I would consider cutting to bring down the average CMC.
Obviously just my opinions, I don't know if you have pet cards or what your plaugroup looks like just thought I could share my line of thinking!
4 days ago
Creature types serve two main purposes. The first is mechanical, certain effects will apply only to certain types so the power of such cards is proportional to the number of cards with that type Elvish Clancaller. Notably there are also cards that don’t care about specific types so any creature type that is sufficiently large can get use out of them Coat of Arms. Because of this sparingly used creature types are generally not very good. Having a card like Uncle Istvan (pre-errata) would suffer due to not being part of a larger type. To be fair plenty of cards get by without any tribal support at all which is perfectly fine but by grouping some of these together you are opening up options for future tribal decks to be created. An example of this can be seen with cats and dogs. Cats are a unified creature type in magic. The leorin are cats, they aren’t catfolk, or Leonin creature type, they are cats. So cards like Regal Caracal work on all of them and you have plenty of cards to put together. Dogs on the other hand have jackals, as well as dogs. Dogs was a replacement for hound and all previous hounds were made into dogs so that wasn’t really a new creature type. Jackals will likely not fit into any dog deck and for that reason have less of a chance at being played. There is also the issue of creating cards that support a tribe in a creature type that have a lot of creatures such as elves or humans. Wizards could probably print a 1 mana 0/1 with the effect “other kraken’s you control get +2/+2 and flying” and this would be fine but replace that with elves and you have a card that would get banned harder than Oko. But if you want to create a card that benefits a creature type but it seems too powerful for the existing type it may be reasonable to create a new type to allow for this card and others in the future to thrive. Dinosaurs could have been kept as lizard if they really wanted to but the second goal of creature types is flavor. You want to get across a certain idea about a creature and it’s identity through its typing. And while dinosaurs are big lizards I think most people consider them drastically different enough to justify a new creature type. Warlock’s creation also fits into this second category by allowing the separation of people who get power from dark powers out of cleric which still could probably hold them but has a strong connotation of religion and demons (for dark clerics).
On the topic of creating the phyrexian creature type we can measure it against the criteria above. Does it serve a mechanical purpose? And is the difference in flavor large enough to justify it? Horrors, minions and constructs (a large part of old phyrexian cards) are not an overly supported tribes. Mechanically the main issue is that you wouldn’t be able to give cards across the spectrum buffs because of their variety especially when you consider that there are smaller pockets of other creature types that still could be phyrexian. Flavor wise are the phyrexians different enough as a group to justify a typing? almost all creatures have their type based on species and occupation (wizard, fighter, noble). From the species perspective, horrors and constructs still seem to fit the general theme of these cards quite well. Personally I don’t see their alterations to self as a new species separate from these categories or from other types that exist but this is where a lot of the discussion of the validity of this type will happen. Yes they are all United in purpose but the purpose is too specific for the general occupation creature types.
New creature types also always carry the baggage of should old types he errata’d into this new type? Hounds -> dogs was easy, all of things of 1 type are now other type. Phyrexian would involve a lot of changes that many people would not be able to guess by looking at the cards like they could probably do with dinosaurs. So I think the concern for retyping old cards is very valid.
Personally as much as I like Phyrexians I don’t see the need for the new type unless they are planning on adding specific support for it. And if they are adding support for it I don’t see it as worth the issues it causes as they probably would have to retype a lot of the old cards to make it make sense.
2 weeks ago
Hey! I love this, I started my main commander deck as a samurai tribal with Queen Marchesa As the commander, too! As far as Creatures go, adding Masako the Humorless Or Michiko Konda, Truth Seeker can help with some defense control. If you want to keep your creatures dense with samurai, I would suggest Opal-Eye, Konda's Yojimbo. If you want a Shapeshifter, I would replace your Taurean Mauler with a Mirror Entity. For enchantments and artifacts, I would suggest Ghostly Prison for defense purposes, and Coat of Arms for tribal synergy. When playing commander, I always try to run some neat lands in order to make sure I use up my card space efficiently. I would suggest taking out some basic lands and adding Eiganjo Castle , Shinka, the Bloodsoaked Keep , And Shizo, Death's Storehouse. These lands tap for colored mana, don't come in tapped, and give you an extra little something. Those lands have helped me win a few stressful games, and are a few of my favorite cards. Feel free to check out my samurai standard deck, or my Queen Marchesa commander deck for more ideas!! Good luck!!
3 weeks ago
I recently posted my deck Kykar Swiss Army Knife (Budget). I am mostly going the enchantment route, but using anthems to pump my spirits into an army. Go to my deck list to see the build. I have an extensive maybeboard for these types of enchantments.
Think about it - when you cast Favorable Winds, you get a 1/1 spirit that becomes 2/2. Then, you cast Shared Triumph and you get another 1/1 spirit. Now both spirits are 3/3. Next you cast Glorious Anthem and you're at 3 spirits, 4/4 each.
There's not a lot of great mana ramp in these three colours, so my build uses lots of little spells.
Cards that make tokens better (23)
1x Bident of Thassa 1x Call for Unity 1x Cathars' Crusade 1x Clash of Realities 1x Commander's Insignia 1x Crescendo of War 1x Day of the Dragons 1x Dictate of Heliod 1x Diversionary Tactics 1x Divine Sacrament 1x Divine Visitation 1x Eldrazi Monument 1x Force of Virtue 1x Glorious Anthem 1x Glory of Warfare 1x Goblin Bombardment 1x Goblinslide 1x Hall of Triumph 1x Heraldic Banner 1x Honor of the Pure 1x Shared Triumph 1x The Immortal Sun 1x Throne of the God-Pharaoh
4 weeks ago
I love a good tribal deck!!
Since you're running red, maybe consider replacing Coat of Arms with Shared Animosity? It costs less mana and doesn't give a bonus to the opponents' tribal strategies, which I think makes up the lack of a toughness boost.
That is, assuming you still have/are still working on this deck - just realized it was last updated 2 years ago, haha. Which's also before all that new bear tribal support came out in Modern Horizons.
1 month ago
Little tribal goblin deck I built just for some fun against my brothers and friends, not meant to be a tournament or prize deck, just a fun little beater to help teach friends how to play. The Coat of Arms could be traded for an Obelisk of Urd in my opinion, but the Coat of Arms makes everything more stronger. It could also use a little bit more spells, maybe some Flame Slash or Lightning Bolt, but my main focus in this deck is to just create a goblin army. Whenever I play it out mana doesn't seem to be too big of an issue either.
1 month ago
my man, that is one beautiful and simplistic list :D I have a deck that's very similar to this, and I find that Collective Unconscious does wonders in late game. and if you squint a bit, the greenish people in the art look a bit snakey ;) also, Obelisk of Urd or Coat of Arms wouldn't hurt, if you don't feel like thy clash too much with th aesthetic ;)