Redox would have made a nice split card. But what to reduce...
Posted By:
WilloftheLisp
(6/14/2011 2:53:03 PM)
red has been known to hate artifacts since, well, the beginning of magic. and yet shatter costs twice as much as this and does not include the non-regeneration clause. this would have been better costed at GG or G1 and made a sorcery instead.
Posted By:
Eternal_Blue
(9/26/2010 10:24:32 PM)
Come on Wizards, just print a red version of this already...
Posted By:
Feralsymphony
(2/5/2011 7:20:14 PM)
isnt that platinum angel in the card art?
Posted By:
FugimSky
(7/31/2009 8:39:35 PM)
Personally I'd put the cost for artifact destruction at a little dearer than enchantment destruction and a little cheaper than creature destruction. I kinda think that one mana artifact destruction is a bit cheap... and that the "can't be regenerated" clause is a bit unnecessary.
Posted By:
Waza
(1/25/2010 10:08:28 PM)
@ FugimSky: I believe so. A pretty cute way for WotC to clue people in that Platinum Angel was very vulnerable. Oxidize is comfortably among the top level of targeted artifact removal ever printed.
Posted By:
stygimoloch
(2/11/2010 5:15:21 PM)
@Waza, green has (and had at the time) Naturalize. Oxidize is more limited, in that it can only destroy artifacts while Naturalize can destroy artifacts and enchantments. Therefore Oxidize has to cost less then Naturalize, ie: less then 2 mana. And less then 2 mana would be 1 mana.
Also, in Mirrodin block the "can't be regenerated" clause is necessary, in order to put a control on "regenerate target artifact" effects.
Posted By:
A3Kitsune
(2/15/2010 5:44:46 AM)
@Izzet_Guild_mage Not anymore. Smelt is now on the field.
Posted By:
atemu1234
(7/16/2012 2:47:33 PM)
"Hope it works before it... something something dust?" I got nothing.
Posted By:
Totema
(10/1/2012 12:38:35 AM)
Before Oxidize, there was Crumble.
Posted By:
Bouchart
(7/5/2013 7:27:56 PM)