Sylvan Offering

Sorcery

Choose an opponent. You and that player each create an X/X green Treefolk creature.

Choose an opponent. You and that player each create X 1/1 green Elf Warrior creature tokens.

Tokens

• Elf Warrior 1/1 G
• Treefolk X/X G

Legality

Format	Legality
1v1 Commander	Legal
Canadian Highlander	Legal
Casual	Legal
Commander / EDH	Legal
Commander: Rule 0	Legal
Custom	Legal
Duel Commander	Legal
Highlander	Legal
Legacy	Legal
Leviathan	Legal
Limited	Legal
Oathbreaker	Legal
Tiny Leaders	Legal
Vintage	Legal

Discussion (51)

carpecanum on 1/1 Elves (EDH)

21 hours ago

Scepter of Celebration, Sylvan Offering, Broodhatch Nantuko, Wyrm's Crossing Patrol, Pollenbright Wings, Veteran Soldier

Mercy Killing would be great after you attack, allowing you to sac a 1/1 but with the added power of your boss ability, doubling the number of counters on your boss and giving you a bunch of untapped 1/1's for blocking or attacking next round.

carpecanum on Golgari Elves (Commander/EDH)

1 month ago

Sylvan Offering and anything to make you unblockable

aholder7 on New Social Contract Breach Discussion

4 months ago

I would say in most any situation I'm not a fan of a single player conceding, with the main exception being concessions that end the game. If everyone is conceding or it's down to 2 then it's not really an issue as everyone involved has had their say and no one is impacted.

Is there a difference between leaving in response to lethal combat with lifelink and leaving at sorcery speed when you feel out of the game? yes, obviously. The first one is far more malicious, but that doesn't mean that the second one is completely justified. There was an argument made that scooping is an issue when you might provide an (dis)advantage to someone with your absence. I agree, but this will always be the case. If only for the reason that you don't know what everyone else is capable of. You might only be useful for another player because someone will still need to take a turn out of their master plan to kill you. but that buys everyone else at the table a turn.

When you are playing in a multiplayer game, people make decisions based off of your existence. No matter how little you feel you would contribute to the game, or how little chance you feel you have at winning, your existence matters. You change everything from the math on cards like Exsanguinate, to the options of cards like Sylvan Offering. Your presence might be poor now but things have the ability to change, especially since you being in a poor spot means that many people might leave you be since you're not a threat.

To be transparent, I used to often be in the situation where friends of mine would concede and this would lead to me subsequently losing the game. So I do have some experience with the issue and have a reason that i'm arguing this side of things. But i think lots of people underestimate the ability to make a comeback in a game as swingy as edh. what does your empty board state even mean when someone could just play Farewell next turn and level it out? In one game where I was spectating, my friend, who did this frequently, decided they were going to concede because they felt their board state was untenable. They had nothing but lands in play and they were even behind in that. I asked if they wouldn't mind if i just took over instead if they were just going to leave. everyone was fine with it since i had no knowledge of anyone's hands or anything. I then went on to win that game because edh is like that sometimes. They have since stopped conceding as much. but you know what, i could have still lost that and i think the point would stand. even if i never came back from it. because i could have, and other people still had to devote their in game resources to me and my existence.

trying to respond to some of the above comments questions

legendofa: would it matter if they said it politely instead of "threw a tantrum"? yes, but while the second scenario is more polite i still don't think they should do it. and to your supplemental questions.

1) No it's not fair play to concede when being attacked. this is by far the most cut and dry of these as there are very clear consequences for the attack resolving or not. I think most people would agree this is spiteful. does it matter more if they have 4 life? yes but its still a spiteful play even if the attacker has 300. Regardless of the fact that the difference between 300 and 350 life might not matter to most, it's still was only done to spite the other player. this is very rude and very poor sportsmanship.

2) Still no. Sure they sacramented all 15 of your removal spells, but theres other players at the table who could kill it. And if Sen Triplets still is choosing you every turn its because they feel that any card you draw would be amazing to have otherwise they should be picking someone else. You should try and use this situation to your advantage. Invite the other players to attack and kill you. Sen now has to either defend you or start allowing you to defend yourself. Either way your likely to have more leverage in the argument than you'd think.

3) Also no in again what feels very cut and dry to me. you are literally going to make someone else lose/start losing because of your decision to leave. This is just a small step removed from scenario 1 in my mind.

There was also a mention by plakjekaas (hopefully i don't have another episode of spelling your name wrong like 3 times), where others are expected to explain the reasons for the detriment. But that now means that you likely have to give up secret information such as cards in hand or your strategies that opponents might not be aware of. we agreed on most of the scenarios except for the Sen trips one but i wanted to point out that you are right that when a player takes all of your things that it can be a detriment to fun and lead to a terrible game experience. But i think that if you see that as an unfun experience (which it is very reasonable and acceptable to feel that way) then you should bring that up before you start playing with a sen trips deck at the table. because once the game begins the sen trips player has to start doing that to people as thats what their deck is designed to do.

I understand a lot of arguments about leaving when you are not having fun, but this also then leads to other players having less fun because of said leaving. Yes you can and should talk to people about things before hand such as this, but i think the baseline assumption should be that if you are there to play the game you should stick around to play the game through the ups and downs.

superwill123 on Lathril elf token swarm commander

5 months ago

Rhys the Redeemed, Sundering Growth, and Growing Ranks are al white cards, making them illegal in your deck. for replacements, I can recommend Abomination of Llanowar, Reclamation Sage, and Sylvan Offering.

carpecanum on Lathril elf token swarm commander

5 months ago

Rhys the Redeemed counts as a white creature and is illegal with this commander.

Beastmaster Ascension or Vigor could help make your guys stronger. Sylvan Offering gives you enough elves to pop off your commander's ability. Vitalize and Curse of Bounty allow you to use your commander ability twice.

AwesomeDude2471 on Hogaak: My Favorite (Infinite) Combo Deck

6 months ago

Hey man, been a while, pretty much have the list to a T built in paper now and regularly use it.

How are we feeling about The Meathook Massacre ? I'm strongly considering replacing maybe Greater Good, Sylvan Offering or even Toxic Deluge (gasp, I know!)

The static affect can add up VERY quickly.

TheoryCrafter on Mirror Entity (Esix, Fractal Bloom) (Disasembled)

6 months ago

Have you considered any combination of Emrakul's Evangel, Hornet Nest, Stolen by the Fae and Sylvan Offering? All of these cards can create multiple instances of creature tokens at once. Happy Hunting!

WanderingSpirit on Poor Elves

7 months ago

Heedless one would make an interesting commander. She scales with the number of elves, so she rewards you no matter who has them. Maybe throw in a Sylvan Offering for fun.