Garza Zol or Razia in Oath?

[AmbivalentDuck]

Garza Zol, Plague Queen, 4UBR
Legendary Creature - Vampire   
Flying, haste
Whenever a creature dealt damage by Garza Zol, Plague Queen this turn is put into a graveyard, put a +1/+1 counter on Garza Zol.
Whenever Garza Zol deals combat damage to a player, you may draw a card.
5/5

This just broke on MTGsalvation.com.  Since it's fat, has evasion, and has haste, it's a candidate for Oath of Druids-based decks.  The question is whether a point of power and vigilance is better than card drawing.  My priliminary analysis, feel free to comment/correct/applaud:

Razia:
Kills up to one turn quicker (18 damage is very different than 15 damage)
Can stop an encroaching Fish hoard *very* effectively
Cannot easily be killed by this format's direct damage
Is NOT blue and therefore cannot be killed by Red Elemental Blast or Pyroblast

Garza Zol:
Draws cards.  Losing with an active Oath is not acceptable.  Cards can make tempo.  Especially if it lets you tutor into Time Walk.
The other ability is basically irrelevant.
Pitches to Force of Will (EDIT)

So, fundamentally the question is whether it's more important in a given metagame to beat Fish/kill quicker (good against generalized aggro and Stax).  Or kill slower, but with a greater ability to interact with/disrupt the opponent's game plan.  For that reason, I'd suspect that Garza would be a superior option against combo and Mana Drain based control as it would allow you to counter bounce spells and disrupt their ability to win before you hit for 20. Whereas, Razia is better in a Fish or Stax heavy meta where it's important to simply kill faster and take out random critters (Welder, Confidant, Waterfront Bouncer). 

In a generalized meta, I would personally favor Garza as she lets you interact with your opponent more instead of relying on a quick kill.

[The Atog Lord]

In addition, if needed, Garza is pitchable to Force. And much easier to hardcast with most Oath manabases.

[ashiXIII]

I think not dying to REB and more importantly, killing an entire turn quicker is better than drawing 1-2 cards off a more vulnerable creature. My nod definitely goes to Razia.

[The Atog Lord]

Sometimes she kills quicker, sometimes not. Oath, as it is, does 18 damage in the two turns.

[ashiXIII]

Sometimes she kills quicker, sometimes not. Oath, as it is, does 18 damage in the two turns.

This does 16-17 in two turns, depending on who you flip first. You can usually count on most decks in type 1 to break a fetch and Force something, or fetch twice. The one extra damage is actually huge, and the 2 extra damage is very unfeasible. I really don't think the 1 card you're going to draw is worth waiting an extra turn to kill. I know sometimes you're going to have to wait that turn anyway, but more often than not, you don't. If you're Oathing, you're winning anyway.

[AmbivalentDuck]

Oathing, you're winning anyway.

That's not true.  One Oath does *not* always seal the game.  You can easily lose post-Oath to combo kills and Stax locks.

[ashiXIII]

Oathing, you're winning anyway.

That's not true.  One Oath does *not* always seal the game.  You can easily lose post-Oath to combo kills and Stax locks.

Maybe I should've been more clear. I didn't mean that you've already won the game, just that you're ahead. I used "winning" as a synonymn for "ahead."

[Machinus]

Isn't this just a win-more card?

[ashiXIII]

Isn't this just a win-more card?

That was my point. -.-

[AmbivalentDuck]

Isn't this just a win-more card?

Not when it saves a game you otherwise wouldn't win.  Extra cards give you the flexibility to win when you otherwise wouldn't.  In a fish/aggro heavy environment it may be a win-more card.  I seriously doubt that's true in a combo-heavy environment, though.

[netherspirit]

Personally I'd choose Garza because of her card drawing ability. But as has been said Razia kills faster. I think it depends on the rest of your deck. I'd expect most people to choose Razia though purely because of her speed.

[AngryPheldagrif]

The whole point of Razia is that it beats for 6, is virtually unkillable, and most importantly has Vigilance. The 1 damage difference as well as the lack of Vigilance and any sort of protection is enormous.

The question really boils down to: why change something that is working fine? Oathing usually does mean you are going to win, so the extra damage is enormously relevant. It comes down to 'draws cards after successful Oath and attack' versus the huge stack of Razia advantages. There's really no reason to run this Vampire, but I'm quite happy to see that my mirror match just became a lot easier against a lot of people.

[Moxlotus]

The biggest reason not to run this is because it's blue and is therefore hit by REB, a card a lot of people bring in against Oath.  I'd rather allow them only 1 or 2 outs (the bounce most control decks have maindeck) rather than 3-6.

[The_spooky_kid]

its also important to note that if you did run this you would be at a substancial decline in the mirror match as well because akroma and razia both can kill it without getting scratched.

[unknown.root]

I always go with the approach that when a new card comes out i compare it to other cards of the same factor.

                                                      EXAMPLE
(new draw spell) < thrist for knowledge < fact or fiction < brainstorm < ancestral recall

                    THIS INSTANCE
(new vampire) < DSC < razia < akroma

so there we have it.

[policehq]

I don't think many people are thinking about what they're saying here....

THIS INSTANCE
(new vampire) < DSC < razia < akroma

Where is Spirit of the Night? It was already established better than DSC. And you don't even express a theory as to why DSC is better than Garza.

its also important to note that if you did run this you would be at a substancial decline in the mirror match as well because akroma and razia both can kill it without getting scratched.

I don't think this card would ever see play if your opponent had Akroma and Razia in play and you're both playing Oath of Druids, anyway.

The question really boils down to: why change something that is working fine?

2 DSC worked fine. Spirit of the Night worked much better. Razia, the new creature "that does nothing about Pentavite tokens" is far superior to Spirit of the Night, and I don't really think that hanging your hat there regardless of what is printed is very smart.

Drawing a card is far superior to one extra damage, since you've just assembled a combo that takes three turns to win. Drawing Null Rod, Chalice of the Void, bounce, or a counter could be game-winning and just as important against Stax or Fish. I think Vigilance, in the end, is better though.

-hq

[wraith985]

Garza Zol does not have haste, does not have vigilance, only beats for 5, dies to Akroma, dies to Razia, dies to Spirit, dies to Simic Sky Swallower, has no protection of any sort, and dies to Red Blast. But hey, you get to draw a card!

The way I see it, the choice is that you either get to draw an extra card or deny your opponent an extra draw step, and in Oath it's far more important to do the latter when your opponent is scrambling for an answer to resolved Oath. Oath's kill is slow enough as it is and hard enough to defend, and giving your opponent one more turn to draw out is the last thing an Oath player needs. If you're Oathing, you want to be winning ASAP. Garza Zol sits around useless for the turn it's Oathed into play, and only serves for five in the air on the second turn it's in play.

Garza Zol is only good if it draws you a counterspell, but you only run four Force and four Drain/Leak to begin with, one of which was probably in your hand to defend Oath, and more of which were probably used up in the process of finding Oath and Orchard to begin with. Sure, you could draw a counterspell and just blow your opponent out - but more than likely, you'll draw a Chalice, or a land, or something else irrelevant, and you just gave your opponent an extra turn to wreck you. In my opinion, it's just not worth it.

Garza < < DSC < Spirit < Razia < Akroma.

[zeus-online]

Garza Zol does not have haste, does not have vigilance.

Well it actually does say "Haste" right next to "Flying"

But i'd have to agree that akroma/spirit/Razia seems better.

/Zeus

[wraith985]

Oh wow, I'm a moron.

Okay, scratch all that stuff about it not having haste...but it still doesn't change my opinion. Too many liabilities, not enough assets IMO.

[Zias]

While I believe that Razia is the stronger choice of the two, the argument about Red Elemental Blast isn't entirely correct. Red Elemental Blast is a card that apprears after sideboard. If you believe that REB or other spot removal cards to be a threat, you simply side out your Vampire for Simic Sky Swallower.

[oneofchaos]

I'm very happy with my razia, and I don't even think Garza Zol is that great.  More castable is one thing, but if your hardcasting creatures in oath, chances are pretty good, you have already lost.

[Kieranwolf]

More castable is one thing, but if your hardcasting creatures in oath, chances are pretty good, you have already lost.

Either that or your opponent just cast Cranial Extraction for Oath on the play and you kept a $2,000 hand, dropping the Vampire first turn and going all Baron Sengir on their sorry ass.

[oneofchaos]

More castable is one thing, but if your hardcasting creatures in oath, chances are pretty good, you have already lost.

Either that or your opponent just cast Cranial Extraction for Oath on the play and you kept a $2,000 hand, dropping the Vampire first turn and going all Baron Sengir on their sorry ass.

Wait, huh?  Simic Sky Swallower is better and still more castable.  And who plays cranial extraction? 

[TimDeluxeIt]

Wow, Pitching one of your two win conditions to force of will, not such a good play.

[AmbivalentDuck]

Wow, Pitching one of your two win conditions to force of will, not such a good play.

If you *would* do it, it's far better than not being able to.  Obviously you can't pitch Razia, so it gives you an option you wouldn't otherwise have; NOT one that you necessarily have to take.

[Mr. Type 4]

Totally have to agree here.  Not having that blue card to pitch for Force of Will is the suck.  Like, what if they're casting Bargain?  You have to counter that or lose, who cares if you're pitching your Oath creature, it already sucks that it's in your hand. 

Aside from that, I think that the one more damage and vigilance is typically more valuable than having the extra card, although I do think that Garza deserves testing in some less conventional Oath builds, like combo Oath.  Check this play out- You Oath out your deck and Kro Rec Yawg Will and Force of Will.  You hit with Garza and then cast Yawg's with FOW back up, that doesn't sound so bad.

[Kieranwolf]

Aside from that, I think that the one more damage and vigilance is typically more valuable than having the extra card, although I do think that Garza deserves testing in some less conventional Oath builds, like combo Oath. Check this play out- You Oath out your deck and Kro Rec Yawg Will and Force of Will. You hit with Garza and then cast Yawg's with FOW back up, that doesn't sound so bad.

Yes! If you topdeck like a combo player, why not think like one too? More options=good. Still smashing face at the same time=awesome. Other than that it's a decision about which will win: Extra damage, or more cards?

I think there could definitely be Oath builds that abuse Garza better than they would Razia. Y'know, in that "I wanna win now!" sense (if anything).

[Tha Gunslinga]

Totally have to agree here.  Not having that blue card to pitch for Force of Will is the suck.  Like, what if they're casting Bargain?  You have to counter that or lose, who cares if you're pitching your Oath creature, it already sucks that it's in your hand. 

Aside from that, I think that the one more damage and vigilance is typically more valuable than having the extra card, although I do think that Garza deserves testing in some less conventional Oath builds, like combo Oath.  Check this play out- You Oath out your deck and Kro Rec Yawg Will and Force of Will.  You hit with Garza and then cast Yawg's with FOW back up, that doesn't sound so bad.

You don't need Garza to do that; you can just play it creatureless and do it just as easily.

[AmbivalentDuck]

Garza is now fully confirmed via a scan on MTG Salvation. 

[jpmeyer]

You're slowing yourself down with the hope that the extra card that you draw will make a difference.  It seems like the best case scenario is that this card is as fast, but the worst case scenario is that it is much slower.