Tribute to the Wild

[ISBPathfinder]

So, its true that your opponents get to choose what to sacrifice but given you generally get to remove 2-3 things for two mana at instant speed.... well even if you are hitting two mana stones that only tap for one mana I feel like the value of this card is fairly good. It can potentially catch gods and really, I can't think of anything that you can catch with it that I am disapointed to catch. If it was just one player it wouldn't be very impressive but hitting one per opponent makes it kind of spicy.

Does anyone have much experience with Tribute to the Wild? I have always liked it but I don't play a ton of green to be honest.

[RxPhantom]

Yes, you get to take out 2-3 things, but they'll be the worst things.

[Dunharrow]

I guess it depends on your meta. If your opponents play a lot of mana rocks this is jut not worth playing over a Nature's Claim. I would rather kill one specific threat than kill 3 signets.

If you had certain synergies, like a Mazirek, Kraul Death Priest deck, then play this for sure.

[Hawk]

Having played and tried it a lot, it has been cut from everywhere. Like you, I was initially enticed by it being a possible 3-for-1, but always eating the worst card makes it pretty meh. If there were a critical mass of these (the way a Bx Aristocrat deck can run Innocent Blood AND Vona's Hunger AND Plaguecrafter AND Fleshbag Marauder AND Soul Shatter AND Liliana's Triumph AND...) it might be worth it, but in practice it gives too much flexibility to the opponent and that simply doesn't make up for its relative speed and efficiency. I have been let down way too many times as this eats a Sol Ring or Marble Diamond when what I really needed was to get rid of some key equipment or engine piece. I would never play it again, not over staples like Nature's Claim or Return to Nature or Krosan Grip (my three go-tos for this effect). If I want a 2-for-1 possibility out of my green noncreature removal, I'll keep looking to Acidic Slime and Force of Vigor. It seems like it has game against Therosian Gods, but those Gods almost always have some enchantment or rock or enchantment creature to turn themselves on so it never works - if you're worried about dying to Heliod or Purphoros, you should be running Deglamer or Unravel the Aether or something. The recent proliferation of random treasure and gold tokens from Smothering Tithe, Curse of Opulence, and Hullbreacher makes this even worse.

If you were specifically building some sort of super hateful deck (like Shattergang Brothers STAX?) where eating rocks early was Plan A, this might be good. I'd also at least consider it in a Sacrifice-heavy deck like Mazirek, Kraul Death Priest or Korvold, Fae-Cursed King as well. But honestly I think all of those decks profit a lot more from using bodies that do this while triggering those commanders like Caustic Caterpillar, Reclamation Sage, Viridian Zealot, Acidic Slime, Ingot Chewer, etc.

[TheAmericanSpirit]

Typically, I want removal that specifically kills that which afflicts me much more than I want removal that merely kills random things at an efficient rate. I'd play Naturalize over this any day, and naturalize isn't exactly quality removal. That should say a lot.

[Mookie]

Tribute to the Wild is a card I keep meaning to try out, but never get around to. 3-for-1s are good, and artifact / enchantment tokens are rarer than creature tokens, which makes it more likely to hit something than than a Fleshbag Marauder effect. However... as others have pointed out, mana rocks are extremely common, and I wouldn't play a card to just blow up Mind Stones.

The other issue with Tribute is the sheer number of Naturalize options available to green. Reclamation Sage, Beast Within, Bane of Progress.... if you're in green, there are already a ton of premium options for killing artifacts and enchantments, which makes those slots extremely competitive. As a result, the vast majority of this effect that I play has some sort of synergy with my deck, usually in the form of 'being a creature for Glimpse of Nature effects'. Tribute is interesting if your deck has synergies with casting instants, but that isn't the case for most decks.

Plus, again, edict effects are less likely to hit what you want than targeted removal. I don't mind a bit of variance in my cards, but my removal suite is something I usually want to be more consistent. Seems like a reasonable choice if you're in a meta that doesn't have a lot of mana rocks / small disposable artifacts, I suppose, but that seems unlikely.

[toctheyounger]

On paper it looks fine, but you're always going to be scraping from the bottom of the barrel with it. It could do reasonable work, but I have my doubts.

Nonetheless I think it's probably more effective than its black counterpart Mire in Misery purely for targeting things that people generally will have less of with artifacts and enchantments, whereas with Mire you're probably taking out some tokens or a chump blocker tops. Chances are this is taking out signets or such over what you really want to get rid of, though.

I guess it could be fine somewhere you don't need it to target specific things, like you just need artifacts to go or whatever, but still seems fairly corner case and suboptimal.

[ISBPathfinder]

I honestly...... don't understand that people wouldn't kill three mind stones for 1G. I get not doing it for one but if you take out three one mana rocks isn't that the same as ramping forward one? Its actually more punishing than that though because you are in green so you can both ramp and deny with this stuff. If Stone Rain said for each opponent don't you think that would be a playable card?

[Wallycaine]

I honestly...... don't understand that people wouldn't kill three mind stones for 1G. I get not doing it for one but if you take out three one mana rocks isn't that the same as ramping forward one? Its actually more punishing than that though because you are in green so you can both ramp and deny with this stuff. If Stone Rain said for each opponent don't you think that would be a playable card?

Not really? That Stone Rain just feels like a card that's going to draw hate. And the trick is that killing 3 Mind Stone's is like... peak performance for this card typically. Most decks just aren't relying on artifact ramp enough for it to matter. Sure, maybe you'll take out one dude's signet, but maybe player number 2's got a treasure token to sac, and player number 3 is using Rampant growth instead, so he's got nothing to sac. Sure, there's the occasional time you'll catch someone with a valuable artifact or enchantment alone on the field, but that's going to be outweighed by the times you have to fire this off when only 1 or 2 people have actual cards to sacrifice. In general, I think putting everyone back a step with mana is worse than moving yourself forward one, especially when it's indiscriminate like this, or worse, targetted towards those whose ramp you should be worrying less about. As mentioned, in a heavy stax type deck, this could work as one of several effects in this realm, but even then I'm skeptical.

[Mookie]

I'll also point out that while Rampant Growth is great on turn 2, it's significantly less exciting on turn 12 - similarly, Tribute to the Wild to kill three Mind Stones on turn 2 is much more exciting than doing so later in the game.... and of course, that's contingent on all three opponents playing a mana rock and not land ramp.

On the other hand, targeted Naturalize effects get way better in the lategame. Early on, you may just be killing a mana rock... but in the lategame, being able to kill something like Omniscience, Mana Reflection, or Overwhelming Splendor could be the difference between winning and losing.

...in other words, edict effects get worse as the game goes on and boardstates get more complicated, while targeted removal gets better.

[DirkGently]

It's not really a 3-for-1 though. You're down a card. They're down a card each (unless they don't have one, or have something not worth a card to sac, like a treasure). It's parity at BEST. If it's t2 and everyone plays a signet, you could blow them all up or you could just play a signet of your own. Same difference, basically. You're all still same number of cards and mana relative to each other either way.

I agree with American Spirit - hitting priority targets > rate. If you want an efficient rate to blow up artifacts and enchantments indiscriminately there are options like bane of progress that are far more powerful.

[NZB2323]

Best case scenario you play this card on turn 2 and take out a Sol Ring, Sylvan Library andNecropotence. Worse case is you play it late game and take out 1 of Solemn Simulacrum, Treacherous Blessing, Rancor, or a treasure token.

I certainly wouldn't run it over Beast Within, force of vigor, Nature's Claim, or Return to Nature. If you're in a really artifact heavy meta cards like Collector Ouphe I would play above it and if you're in an enchantment heavy meta I'd prefer Back to Nature or Spring Cleaning. If your meta is heavy with both cards like Bane of Progress are better.

If you're in a Golgari deck, I'd probably prefer Liliana's Triumph.

As others have said, this might make sense in Mazirek, Kraul Death Priest...it could also be good in Kalamax, the Stormsire.

[JWK]

I used to run this but cut it out of all my decks long ago. When I ran it, I found it to have the problems everyone has already noted - it never gets what you most want to get rid of. I much prefer targeted removal, of any sort, with the exception of Fleshbag Marauder sorts of effects being good if you can replay them over and over to just keep creatures mostly off the board... and even then, I always play targeted removal in addition to Fleshbag sorts of things.

In the right deck (some examples noted above) it is probably good, but for general play, green has so many better options.

[Hawk]

I honestly...... don't understand that people wouldn't kill three mind stones for 1G. I get not doing it for one but if you take out three one mana rocks isn't that the same as ramping forward one? Its actually more punishing than that though because you are in green so you can both ramp and deny with this stuff. If Stone Rain said for each opponent don't you think that would be a playable card?

I dunno, man - how often is anyone playing Null Rod? Or Tremble? I'd say pretty rarely. Null Rod is an expensive power card, but is only in 2747 and that's because in addition to randomly being a "kill everyones signets" it also locks out lots of powerful artifacts in a STAX deck. It looks like a great rate to break people's backs, and for sure some amount of games (maybe even 20-30% of games) where you slam this turn 2 will be non-games because you smash everyone's rocks and knock them back to the stone age. I do see your point, and for sure in all the decks I've tested this in monogreen Multani, Maro-Sorcerer was the best home since once it did exactly that. But for that one game, this sat in my hand basically uncastable for every other, contributing only +1/+1 to Multani.

I'd wager a hypothetical card that was 2R to destroy "up to one target land controlled by any number of target players" would see a little play but not a ton, and a hypothetical "Tremble but only for your opponents" would see play approximately nowhere, because for every game where you highroll into slamming it turn 2 or 3 to effectively "win", there'd be too many games where you drew it turn 10 and it did nothing (to say nothing of the political and salt ramifications when it does actually work).

And those cards would be guaranteed to never miss - everyone's got lands, right? This can definitely miss. It's only "kill three mind stones" if everyone's opener was land, land, rock. But if only one person opened on a rock, this is no different than turn 2ing a Naturalize for that signet or ring. And if they really need rocks midgame, they might sacrifice something else instead (including the very real possibility that this just nabs a random treasure/thopter/myr/servo token and nothing of any value at all).

It's also for reasons we've often bandied about on these forums kind of a sucker's bet to attack resources anyways, right? We've spent a lot of virtual ink on why it's rarely right to counter a Cultivate - maybe it wins but earns a ton of salt, but more likely it does nothing...and also draws a lot of salt and rage. I'm not running Nature's Claim to blow up rocks. That's not why its in my deck. Sure, every once in a while I may blow up a Sol Ring or Signet if it's a really weird situation and it seems the right move, but 99% of the time that card's purpose is to make sure someone doesn't scale into infinity with Mirari's Wake or Rhystic Study or Smothering Tithe, and doesn't lock out the game with a Grave Pact or Sphere of Safety or whatever. Most of what needs to be answered in EDH are creatures, instants, and sorceries, but we include naturalize effects because it #feelsbadman to lose to the above. So when I dedicate a slot to a card like this (over a more universal answer, like Beast Within or Song of the Dryads or Meteor Golem and thats all just in monogreen), I need it to 100% answer the cards I'm actually worried about. The one exception would be some sort of G/x STAX-type deck, in which case yeah this seems okay, but in general it just isn't worth.

[NZB2323]

It seems like this card would shine in Sarulf, Realm Eater.

[BOVINE]

As others suggest, Tribute is best early but "best early" actually means when the board is near empty — which happens way more often than just the opening turns of a game. Additionally, taking out three signets isn't the only thing that's going to happen but I'll take that anytime an opponent or two are building up/back up.. You're going to hold Tribute until you know that you get at least one permanent you want and in that sense it's much better than naturalize. It's not like people don't run decimate. Granted Decimate targets but it you have to wait under the conditions are met. By the time you cast Decimate there probably be only one permanent you wish you could have gotten a few turns ago with Tribute to the Wild. And at end of turn. Tribute is legit.

[Sinis]

I don't believe Tribute is a good card. It seems like a fine turn 2 play against a pile of rocks, but, it'd be a godawful topdeck later unless it's post-sweeper. At which point, you could just play a sweeper, or something modal that deals with multiple targets. I think your opponent being able to choose later game pretty much scuttles this card.

This is different from creature edicts because you can have some critical mass of creature edicts. Not so with artifacts/enchantments.

[3drinks]

This really isn't a very strong card, and I'm very keen on popping artifacts and enchantments. There's no real synergy with it, and you often get more from the humble Caustic Caterpillar. Making people sac instead of targeting to destroy is a great way to proc opposing wellsprings over hitting Coalition Relics.

Compare it to the more rigid answers a la Peace and Quiet and Rack and Ruin, or the more flexible Force of Vigors and Tribute to the Wild just really struggles to keep up. This isn't 2009 anymore, cards have come a very far way.

[plushpenguin]

This isn't always even that good early. I run Pir's Whim, and that card I can generally t3 and I rarely hit too many things that are incredibly relevant to the current situation. However Whim is a land tutor + ramp first and removal second and so the removal is a bonus feature.

[hyalopterouslemur]

If it were repeatable à la Grave Pact or Shattergang Brothers I'd play it, even for the extra mana cost. But, in general, the ability to target > getting around shroud and friends + hitting all players because most of the time, I want to take out a combo piece.