if jedit ojanen of efrava blocks 2 creatures

#IF JEDIT OJANEN OF EFRAVA BLOCKS 2 CREATURES UPDATE#

The less gets said about Traxos, the better. Traxos feels like another Ramos situation in that the description makes it sound like they should have appeared in The Brothers' War but clearly didn't. What even is that thing? Clearly not a dragon engine, but whatever the case, it says 'based on Phyrexian designs', which I take to mean it must be one of the machines Mishra built himself rather than one of Phyrexian origin.

Traxos doesn't make a whole lot of sense to begin with. That sort of corruption was the whole point of the Infect and Proliferate mechanics after all.

So I would argue the creatures with the Phyrexian watermark from Scars block could all be justified as having the Phyrexian type by saying they must have been 'infected' by the oil, if not outright compleated. Some of those individuals are more corrupted by the oil than others, with cards like Tel-Jilad Fallen or Fallen Ferromancer having Infect and showing visible signs of corruption without being compleated in the taditional sense. Because everyone and everything that is loyal to the Phyrexian side probably got that way by being exposed to the oil. Another argument in favour of making them Phyrexians would be the way the 'new' Glistening Oil on Mirrodin worked. Theoretically, if it's sufficiently flavor neutral, it probably shouldn't get its type changed for purely pragmatic reprint reasons.Sure, there's a tiny handful of Human cards that have the Phyrexian watermark but no obvious mechanical ties to Phyrexia and that don't look obviously compleated (like Blind Zealot), but I guess those may or may not be compleated and go either way. I think another factor might be in how flexible the name is and potentially how much the mechanic on the card is tired to Phyrexia. While they may be aligned and loyal to Phyrexia, unless they're actually compleated, it's not really their creature type, it's just their loyalty. I don't think everything with a phyrexian watermark really deserves the phyrexian type. If they make an effort to get it right, though, Phyrexian might become one of my favourite tribes going forward. I can't stand illogical creature types, and Phyrexia is one of a small handful of things that at least keep me in the orbit of Magic. I agree with Maro that some cards are in a bit of a grey area, which is why I made a large section for those, and maybe I could get over it if they left the creature tokens alone (although they really shouldn't, they even made two different pieces of artwork for Phyrexian and Mirran Myr and Golems, and all Germ tokens are obviously Phyrexian etc.), but if what they end up doing isn't at least somewhere in the ball park of my compilation, I might just lose interest in New Phyrexia altogether.

#IF JEDIT OJANEN OF EFRAVA BLOCKS 2 CREATURES UPDATE#

The Grand Creature Type Update affected a lot more creatures than my suggestions for Phyrexians would, especially when it comes to Humans. Yeah, realistically only 20 of those things will be phyrexians.Why? Wizards normally tries to make sure that people can somewhat reliably guess a creature's type by looking at the card when they errata something, so why would they arbitrarily errata some Phyrexians to count as 'Phyrexian' but not others? There are already a lot more creatures with 'Phyrexia(n)' in their names than 20, and a LOT more than that with the Phyrexian watermark, and those two things seem like the most obvious markers of Phyrexian-ness that you could give to a creature.

If jedit ojanen of efrava blocks 2 creatures