Urza, Lord High Artificer

Combos Browse all Suggest

Tokens

Legality

Format Legality
1v1 Commander 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
Legacy Legal
Leviathan Legal
Limited Legal
Modern Legal
Oathbreaker Legal
Penny Dreadful Legal
Vintage Legal

Urza, Lord High Artificer

Legendary Creature — Human Artificer

When Urza, Lord High Artificer enters the battlefield, create a 0/0 colourless Construct artifact creature token with “This creature gets +1/+1 for each artifact you control.”

Tap an untapped artifact you control: Add .

: Shuffle your library, then exile the top card. Until end of turn, you may play that card without paying its mana cost.

Recommendations View more recommendations

Zheraan on Urza, CEO of Machines

2 weeks ago

Thanks for your answer !

I'm not sure why you're saying that making Urza an artifact would make it a good source of commander damage, but yes the gameplan is mostly straightforward beatdown with the construct token, in a very casual fashion.

I know Urza, Lord High Artificer is a very good combo piece, but I rather intend to use it as an extra source of mana and value engine, in a very vanilla way. I know to some it might be sacrilegious, but I'm keeping it casual and I just like the construct theme. I'm not too fond of having boring infinite combos and extra turns in a fun format, at least on the kitchen table with friends. But also I don't really want to go for full aggro with only cheap creatures to get Urza out early and counterspells to keep it, even though that would probably be better.

Now the thing with Tezzeret, Master of the Bridge is that I can't tutor it and it's relatively fragile as a planeswalker, so Mycosynth Golem still isn't a bad addition, in my opinion, especially with Fabricate and Sphinx Summoner.

Then, 35 lands is not nearly enough if I want to consistently have 3-4 lands on turn 3-4, I know commander player are the constant desire to remove lands but 35% chances of lands isn't enough, especially with lots of 3+ drops. Regarding what lands, I am not new to the game and I know that taplands sure aren't as good as ravlands, checklands and others, but they are also much cheaper. I have some left from past competitive decks, but I don't really wanna buy more right now, maybe later.

multimedia on Urza, CEO of Machines

2 weeks ago

Hey, good upgrades to the precon, what you've done so far.

How do you want to win? Determining the main strategy you want to play can help to keep good cards for that strategy and cut unnecessary cards. If you're wanting to keep precon level budget then doing combat damage with Constructs and Commander damage with Urza are directions to consider. Research Thief and Bident of Thassa are excellent budget cards if you want to be attacking with Constructs. Making Urza an artifact makes him a reliable source of Commander damage, but this means including effects to make Urza an artifact.

You have Urza, Lord High Artificer, he's a combo wincon, but to use him as a wincon you'll want to add other cards and more ways to assemble the combo. Drawing cards from Constructs doing combat damage to opponents is a good alternative to playing expensive price tutors to get combo pieces in your hand.

You have Tezzeret, Master of the Bridge, you don't really need Mycosynth Golem especially not for it's price tag. You don't need this Tezzeret either, but if you have it might as well play it. The first cuts to consider are lands since 41 lands is a lot when the strategy here are artifacts. Consider cutting 6 lands? Lands that always ETB tapped and are worse then others that also do this. If you feel you need more mana then add mana sources (rocks, dorks) not lands.

The Bounce lands and Scry lands are worse always ETB tapped lands then Tri lands, Bridges, etc.


Some advice for more cuts is choose the top 20 creatures here, top 10 artifacts and top 10 other nonland cards. By choosing the best cards then you can cut a huge chunk away of lesser cards.

Creatures:

Artifacts:

Others:

For upgrading it's easier to get an established list that's not 99 cards then have a list that's way over 99 cards. Really any 0-3 drop artifact creature who can make some value to take advantage of Urza artifact creature affinity or any 0-2 drop mana rock for more ramp can fill unfilled deck spots.

Good luck with your deck.

ijakobe on Rayne

1 month ago

Blackblade Reforged

Force of Will

Reality Ripple

Change of Plans

Spellseeker

Aether Channeler

Sword of Fire and Ice

Polluted Delta

Flooded Strand

Misty Rainforest

Scalding Tarn

Prismatic Vista

Sensei's Divining Top

Moonsnare Prototype

Urza, Lord High Artificer

- Basilisk Collar Strata Scythe Wonder Gadwick Phyrexian Metamorph Thought Vessel Sapphire Medallion Reliquary Tower Glen Elendra Archmage Sword of Vengeance Venser, Shaper Savant Arcanis the Omnipotent Baral, Chief of Compliance Clever Impersonator

ijakobe on Rayne

1 month ago

quick first ideas

minus Show

multimedia on

2 months ago

Hey, you're welcome.

If you wanted to a couple of lesser lands here could be upgraded within the budget?

Other options are to replace them for some less expensive utility lands?

These land options are lower priced ones, there's many others that are higher price that are better such as Inventors' Fair and City of Brass.

The Talismans in the sideboard could replace some of the Signets?


You're light here with low mana cost ramp and have a pretty high mana curve. More ramp could help gameplay. These are better ramp options specifically with Urza as Commander than the other Signets/mana rocks. The 2 drop artifact creature mana dorks can be helpful to cast Urza quicker since they count towards his artifact creature affinity and can make colored mana.

This is a ramp package to consider? It's 16 sources, most important 14 sources of low mana cost ramp with Urza, Monument and Tezz at high end. Thought Vessel is a good card, but it turns off discarding hand down to 7 cards which can fuel artifact reanimation. Solemn Simulacrum is another good card, but I think it's too much mana here since there's better 4 drops for power and/or help more Urza and Constructs. Sculpting Steel is excellent in multiplayer Commander and it can count towards ramp because it can become an artifact ramp source.

MtgBattleNerd on Stax for salt

3 months ago

My play groupe and I are preparing a salty saturday and I'm trying to build an artifact deck focusing of stax artifact.

Other than the orbs that I already have which other cards should I think about ?

The commander is going to be either Urza, Lord High Artificer or a proxy Urza, Chief Artificer.

I wanna slow them down to the bone and beat them up with golems created by Urza or by using combos.

Any suggestions are welcome.

Massacar on Brother's War Spoilers

3 months ago

Coward_Token the Rules committee hasn't actually made any rulings about the card as of yet, so far as I can tell that screenshot has been passed around from Reddit.

An indicator that it's fake is that they cite Urza, Lord High Artificer in the article as opposed to Urza, Lord Protector.

Rules Committee Site, if anyone else can find the actual article here please let me know, because I haven't been able to corroborate it otherwise.

FolkOccult on What Commander Do You Think …

4 months ago

TheOfficialCreator Sick, I was just wanting to be cautious, in some Discord Servers and a Reddit forum prior I was asked about reducing post lengths. Just wanting to respect a precedent I suppose.

Grubbernaut The opposing view is just as valid, and more insightful than having mostly the same repeated points towards this subject.

Ideally, I'd imagine, in a game about playing cards and constructing decks with those products; to ban a card is never the company's motive. They want to sell every card they have and for us to buy them. When a card is banned, it's usually for the health of the specific format to preserve as many cards as possible while allowing player's to access the game.

I think it's in this accessibility that cards get banned due to a perceived "power level" of the current "meta" that might have taken advantage of the card, or the effect of the product in question was so ill-received. Opposition Agent was one of the few cards I saw, and was rather excited about. Every player under the sun screamed "ban" and wizards didn't. I found this quite the impressive result because I'm skeptical that WotC tends to listen when their player's cry wolf; just look at the ban list.

It's obvious that certain gameplay strategies are favored. Feather, the Redeemed is obviously loved as shown by this forum, and that's super cool, but it's the player's choice to play that deck against an opponent they might not know and I believe accept the risk that their deck's strategy may be flat out exploited and shut down. I also believe that it is that deck's responsibility to have at least a couple of answers specific or otherwise to answer cards you, the deckbuilder expect to see shut you down.

I'm going to use Korvold, Fae-Cursed King as an example. I know plenty of people want him banned, and I can easily see why. Dude is sick, he's one of my prized commanders, but I enjoy how he plays. Of course I'm biased and don't want him banned, and he probably won't as up to this point they have yet to ban a preconstructed deck's face-card. I'm fairly certain that's by choice, otherwise WotC would have. But, is it unfair of me to ask that they ban Yasharn, Implacable Earth because it shuts down my deck's main strategy (I know not entirely, because you can still sac lands, and that's how I built my deck, but I did that because of this interaction. As a form of fail-safe and deck protection. Because my opponents counterplay every deck I bring because I even made Korvold). Is it fair, to counter a commander deck? I don't know. I'm not here to debate the ethics of playstyle entirely, but more the "legality" of rules as written, because otherwise why else would this discussion stand?

Commander should be casual in this sense, you should be allowed to play what you want, because if you don't, how much fun are you really having? I think this is why we have a rule 0. Excluding professional competitive environments (and there's a debate to how professional those really can be depending on the LGS or players) for the moment. To allow each player what they wish from the game, Rule 0 exists to please all parties with compromise if not mutual agreeable terms. "You want to play Feather, the Redeemed, I'd love to see how you built yours! Just letting you know, I have an Ivy, Gleeful Spellthief as my newest deck, are you alright with me playing this?" literally how every interaction before Casual play should begin, as dictating by the website and thousands of videos on the internet.

For the sake of peace at the table and respect for all players present, I'm entirely for this discussion. Like D&D (and I'll only reference this momentarily because it is also a WotC IP) it shows a sense of social courtesy to fellow players, that you do care about their deck, or cards, experience, or playstyle. That you are considering their participation at the table you joined, or the table they've come to play at. It's a game, and the first rule is "talk". This may be a touch rude, and absolute, but I've experienced a plethora of players too concerned over their commander and not being able to play it that I believe them sometimes at fault for gatekeeping their table from players building decks with the newest cards that have come out. I'm on occasion guilty of this (not wanting to have to switch out decks or else I'd get counterplayed, because my opponent didn't want to change commanders) but it's unfair to presume a player using a controversial commander like Jodah, the Unifier who I think is perfectly fine, would have ill intentions towards you the player, personally (in casual play).

Competitively. I feel like the game sports an entirely different flavor, one that is fast, calculated, and just as rich with players and their own method of interacting with this medium. When a player brings something like Urza, Lord High Artificer to a table to play for a prize. You've signed a social contract in a setting that'll require you to play. To counterplay. To out pace, out think, and like chess, determine your best route to seek victory. cEDH is a wonderful and freeing battlefield to be apart of, I think it's unfair to proceed as if both are the same formatted gamemode when they both interact quite differently. The ramp is different, the mana base is different, most of the spells will either be counterplay picks for decks you'd expect to see, and everyone there (or majority I'd expect) has literally signed up for this. Paid their LGS, and is wanting to win.

Now. Does that mean your neckbearded-odorous-shop-dwelling-compking is going to show up and try to sweep everyone with their 3,000. cEDH deck because they are compelled to win here, because they have short comings in life? And does this hobby support and enable this behavior? Kind of. It happens, sure, but no one wanting to have fun should care, and anyone trying to win now has a baseline to work off of. If it does happen, you literally know what they'll play, use, or at least what to expect. That's the magic to competitive play. To be (and this will be a wild example) Goku standing across from Cell at the Cell Games... is sort of how it feels in cEDH 1v1 shop comps. It's, really fun. I don't know, I'm not too experienced on this side of the format, I've literally lost every shop competition I've attended, but I see the value and joy it has and wish to respect it.

I do believe there is an argument to removing Sol Ring, I think it's a crutch of a card. Though I just count it with my lands at this point. It's the first card in a deck 99% of the time without it being said. Printed in every preconstructed product, the card makes the format what it is, and that's kinda dumb. No one (I'd hope) wants to play the same deck, but here we have staples, and Sol Ring is sort of one of them. It's our Ki-Blast, our standard poke-ball, it's the Ash Blossom & Joyous Spring, it's literally engrained into the game with so many printings and secret lairs. I'm baffled to suggest if we got rid of it, would it be just as "necessary" as any of the other cards on the ban list? I don't think so, most of them could probably see play with that Rule 0 in a casual game, but the ban list, is upheld for competitive players and that's kind of baffling.

That Casual players can scream to High Hrothgar and back about something like Hullbreacher or Opposition Agent and be bummed that both didn't see the same fate. But someone who plays cEDH now has to suffer the consequences of players who want to play competitions at their LGS but don't realize that their preconstructed product might not hold up. Sad to say (and I do realize this is an extreme variable based on literally whoever shows up, it's that random whenever you're new to the game until you notice who plays, what they play, and how they tend to play. Then you learn what to expect, and the fun of cEDH or what I enjoyed personally arises to the surface.) but most preconstructed products now, seem to sell a concept with the intention of being improved by the player and encouraging they buy more cards to do so. (I enjoy this aspect of encouraging the player to deck-build instead of relying on what they purchased, they can rely on creativity or the advice of their closest friend or the player across from them)

I've no rational experience in regards to having specific cards banned that I wished to play, unless Korvold sees the hammer, but even then, I'm not taking him apart. I'm just going to continue with Rule 0 and play him casually. I wish the game wasn't so ambiguous that these sorts of topics had clear and defined answers so that all could just agree on a single experience, but that's so restrictive and against the nature of the format. Perhaps Modern and Legacy see this, Standard certainly does (and I believe that's what makes Standard a rather fascinating format due to the fact that none of their rules are as ambiguous as EDH's Rule 0, which is necessary but rather counter productive when compared to cEDH. You can't argue Rule 0, but you can't abuse it either. More ambiguity.) and Draft as well.

I don't believe by having a ban list, you're helping, solving, or relieving a problem. I'm very much a casual, and believe you should be able to play what you want. "I'll suffer the wrath of Braids?" Cool. I want to see what you built that represents you, how you play, how you have fun. It's going to be my job to do likewise and hope it's a fun game for both sides. Now being mana flooded, mana screwed. It feels like more of a personal issue across all players, sometimes you hit a pocket because you over shuffled and all your lands have ended up together, I feel like not enough people take into account some players face this problem and blame a card, a player, a format and take that personally when mathematically they've added too many lands, not enough, over shuffled, didn't have enough protection, removal, boardwipes. The requirements for a "good" deck, in cEDH sounds excessive, but that's that format. Casually I think you should be able to build what you want and move on.

Also, apologies if it sounds hypocritical by the end, but I'm pro-Sol Ring for the simple fact that it enables some exciting combos with Salvaging Station & Ich-Tekik, Salvage Splicer. But that's just extreme biased, anyone could say the same about Flash, Tolarian Academy, or my favorite Panoptic Mirror. I'm certain they all had really cool interactions, I'm certain with the latter; and I'd understand why WotC could ban Sol Ring or be encouraged to, and I wouldn't be mad. I'd just adapt, it's all we do as players. Communicate, adapt, play/build, repeat.

Load more