Prismatic Omen

Enchantment

Lands you control are every basic land type in addition to their other types.

Combos

• Cabal Stronghold + Prismatic Omen

Legality

Format	Legality
1v1 Commander	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
Planar Constructed	Legal
Planechase	Legal
Quest Magic	Legal
Tiny Leaders	Legal
Vanguard	Legal
Vintage	Legal

Discussion (44)

Barguppis on Archelos, Landfall / Emergent Ultimatum

6 days ago

What if I replaced Chromatic Lantern with Prismatic Omen? The original reason I put Chromatic lantern was I thought it made my lands every basic land type but it doesn't. I need my Maze of Ith and Glacial Chasm to tap for mana sometimes.

I can see the value of tapping Archelos with lands to stax opponents but I find that making opponents hate my combo piece Archelos, Lagoon Mystic isn't always the best. I think this deck does better when it's not attracting hate from the rest of the board.

legendofa on The New Commander Brackets Beta

2 weeks 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 OracleGC 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 StudyGC or Smothering TitheGC. This group often also includes oppression, since a lot of them tax the opponent. Another group is cheap (1-2 mana) tutors, like Vampiric TutorGC, Enlightened TutorGC, or Survival of the FittestGC, that increase a deck's reliability for very little opportunity cost. Most game changers can be sorted into one of these four categories. Ancient TombGC and Gaea's CradleGC are speed and resource generation, Drannith MagistrateGC and Force of WillGC 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 IVGC, 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 TitheGC or Trouble in PairsGC, 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:

• Bracket 2: But if you smash one helm...

• Bracket 3: Above such mortal concerns

• Bracket 4: Arrogant. Ruthless. Oppressive. Victorious.

Femme_Fatale on mn6334

3 months ago

Cards that cause other cards to generate mana get the mana generation tags themselves because they function the same way within a deck like mana dorks do. Consider land enchantments like Wild Growth. Or cards like Prismatic Omen which function like a lot of filter cards do.

kamarupa on Squirrels, Squirrels, Squirrels! (Squirrel Prison)

3 months ago

Fun stuff! I have some thoughts. I hope you find something useful, but no worries if you don't!

White is really where it's at with enchantments and the graveyard, namely Hall of Heliod's Generosity. I'd imagine if that were the only thing you needed white mana for, you could probably pretty often get by with a Birds of Paradise and maybe something like a Fertile Ground or Prismatic Omen. However, there are some other nice white spells that might prove just as helpful to you - Sacred Ground and Terra Eternal.

I don't play competitive MTG, but it's my understanding that in fast formats like Modern, you don't really need or even want repeatable/permanent solutions to threats your opponents might have. What we want are fast, efficient, and broadly applicable answers that buy us just enough time to gain enough advantage to win. So my advice - and do take this as a humble suggestion and not any sort criticism - is to forget the artifact defenses (and enchantments I mention above) and focus on having the mana available to cast your counterspells and/or add some low MV protection spells like Tamiyo's Safekeeping or Heroic Intervention and also a Fog/Holy Day or two.

I'd also say that while Drift of Phantasms is decent, I've come to prefer card advantage over tutors. It always seems like it too much to spend 3MV on a cantrip tutor that also reveals your threat. If you wait until you have enough mana to tutor a card, cast it, and have the mana to protect it for two turns, you're already looking at something like T10 without a synergized ramp in place. And that's probably just too slow for [competitive] modern. So, personally, and again, I'm not interested in competitive play, so feel free to ignore me, but I prefer spells like Harmonize for the card advantage and broader range of impact in getting me what I need, even if it is more of a gamble than a tutor. If you keep the artifact defense, you might consider Thoughtcast.

As much as I like what you're trying to do, I'd want an extra land or two, even with the Birds of Paradise. As little as I like it, I've come to believe 22+ lands is usually worth it, especially in a deck that's counting on casting multiple 3MV spells for their win-con.

I like a lot of things about Verdant Command, but I haven't found it useful enough in my little playgroup to warrant a full set in a mainboard.

My final piece of advice is to use the 'Copy Deck' feature here to make forks of this to try out things I suggested (and other ideas you might have). I find it so useful to have multiple builds of the same deck to playtest and compare what's really helping, what isn't, what's fun, what's slow, etc.

hybridv21 on Scion

4 months ago

ok, so what we want here is a fast consistent scion, with haste, and mana spare to trigger that ability. this deck will really shine with a few good dragons for every occasion, and the rest of the deck fixing mana, ramping and getting out a fast and well protected scion.

Prismatic Omen from your other decks should go in here, plus Lightning Greaves and other ways to protect scion and from being countered, its KIND OF like a voltron commander, you want the commander protected, and you want a back up plan incase, a general dragon tribal deck is a fine back up plan incase he can't get out, so spare some deck space for that too and you'll do great.

nuperokaso on elemental lorwyn block constructed

11 months ago

1. Play 4 Reflecting Pool. Works great with Vivids and Primal Beyond. No need to play Prismatic Omen.
2. Supreme Exemplar is not very good. It works only with Incandescent Soulstoke.
3. Horde of Notions is the best card you have. You should be playing more of them, most likely 4. If one is answered, you drop a second one. If not answered, he'll overtake over the game.
4. Play more lands. Your deck is mana hungry, and even with Smokebraider you always have expensive things to cast or activate Horde of Notions.
5. I would replace one Island with Mystic Gate. You have white and blue spells with double mana and this filter will help you casting them.

Gidgetimer on Blood Moon versus Prismatic Omen

11 months ago

Prismatic Omen is an enchantment and can't be played as a response unless there is something allowing a player to play it at instant speed. Since nothing allowing it to be cast at instant speed was mentioned I will assume that you meant "later plays" instead of "responds with".

"Priority" has a meaning within the rules. Nothing here is dealing with priority. I will assume that you are using the normal English meaning of the word as a synonym for precedence instead of the rules meaning.

Neither enchantment "overrides" the other nor makes a player "safe" from anything.

When continuous effects are interacting they are applied in a system of layers and then in timestamp order within a layer. Since both Blood Moon and Prismatic Omen are type changing effects, they are applied in the same layer. In your example the Blood Moon was played first and will have an earlier timestamp, so it is applied first making all non-basic lands into mountains. Then the Prismatic Omen will apply granting all of its controller's lands all basic land types. The player(s) who don't control the Prismatic Omen will have all of their non-basics still only be mountains.

If the enchantments had entered in the opposite order Prismatic Omen will give all of its controller's lands all basic land types. Then Blood Moon would make all non-basics into mountains, and the non basics controlled by Prismatic Omen's controller would lose all other land types.

DarkKiridon on Blood Moon versus Prismatic Omen

11 months ago

Blood Moon effects all players, obviously. The player who casts (after resolving) and controls Prismatic Omen is now safe from said Blood Moon therefore it overrides it.