Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 63

Thread: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

  1. #1

    The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    I have loved Natural Order decks for a long time. They all suffer from the problem of how to protect their fragile combo and how to regain card disadvantage inherent in casting Natural Order (and Force of Will). The legends of Trest help to address these problems, and play well with NO, GSZ, and FoW. This is the deck I am starting with.

    Creature (13)
    1x Birds of Paradise
    4x Deathrite Shaman
    1x Edric, Spymaster of Trest
    3x Leovold, Emissary of Trest
    1x Noble Hierarch
    1x Progenitus
    1x Tarmogoyf
    1x Vendilion Clique

    Instant (15)
    3x Abrupt Decay
    4x Brainstorm
    4x Daze
    4x Force of Will

    Enchantment (1)
    1x Sylvan Library

    Sorcery (12)
    3x Green Sun's Zenith
    4x Natural Order
    2x Ponder
    3x Thoughtseize

    Planeswalker (1)
    1x Jace, the Mind Sculptor

    Land (19)
    2x Bayou
    1x Dryad Arbor
    1x Forest
    4x Misty Rainforest
    2x Polluted Delta
    3x Tropical Island
    2x Underground Sea
    4x Verdant Catacombs

    Sideboard (15)
    1x Abrupt Decay
    2x Disfigure
    2x Engineered Plague
    2x Flusterstorm
    1x Kitchen Finks
    2x Scavenging Ooze
    2x Surgical Extraction
    2x Null Rod
    1x Reclamation Sage

    Main deck has 1 too many cards currently. The sideboard is also a work in progress. The main deck Tarmogoyf is really intended as a road block, or occasional cheap beater. That is my most likely cut to get to 60 but I am open to suggestions.

    I like the mana base, # of dorks, and # of ways to get a naturally draw Progenitus back into the deck. Blue card and green creature counts are both acceptable, plus eight fetches into arbor is solid.

    Alternatively the deck could be built without the GSZ package, going towards baleful strix, more ponders and cliques. This probably improves the delver matchup, but would require a dramatically different sideboard, and alteration of the acceleration and protection packages.

    Thoughts?

  2. #2

    Re: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    I really like it. if you could find spot for 4 Delver, with Shaman that would be already a great plan-b winning condition.

    Also 1x Gurmag Angler to make a use of the graveyard would be fine. Imho it's better than Tarmogoyf. It's not tutorable though

    Also Vendilion is good but also Therapy + Probe would be

  3. #3
    Member
    KobeBryan's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jun 2011
    Location

    Arcadia, CA
    Posts

    2,090

    Re: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    Quote Originally Posted by limbo View Post
    I have loved Natural Order decks for a long time. They all suffer from the problem of how to protect their fragile combo and how to regain card disadvantage inherent in casting Natural Order (and Force of Will). The legends of Trest help to address these problems, and play well with NO, GSZ, and FoW. This is the deck I am starting with.

    Creature (13)
    1x Birds of Paradise
    4x Deathrite Shaman
    1x Edric, Spymaster of Trest
    3x Leovold, Emissary of Trest
    1x Noble Hierarch
    1x Progenitus
    1x Tarmogoyf
    1x Vendilion Clique

    Instant (15)
    3x Abrupt Decay
    4x Brainstorm
    4x Daze
    4x Force of Will

    Enchantment (1)
    1x Sylvan Library

    Sorcery (12)
    3x Green Sun's Zenith
    4x Natural Order
    2x Ponder
    3x Thoughtseize

    Planeswalker (1)
    1x Jace, the Mind Sculptor

    Land (19)
    2x Bayou
    1x Dryad Arbor
    1x Forest
    4x Misty Rainforest
    2x Polluted Delta
    3x Tropical Island
    2x Underground Sea
    4x Verdant Catacombs

    Sideboard (15)
    1x Abrupt Decay
    2x Disfigure
    2x Engineered Plague
    2x Flusterstorm
    1x Kitchen Finks
    2x Scavenging Ooze
    2x Surgical Extraction
    2x Null Rod
    1x Reclamation Sage

    Main deck has 1 too many cards currently. The sideboard is also a work in progress. The main deck Tarmogoyf is really intended as a road block, or occasional cheap beater. That is my most likely cut to get to 60 but I am open to suggestions.

    I like the mana base, # of dorks, and # of ways to get a naturally draw Progenitus back into the deck. Blue card and green creature counts are both acceptable, plus eight fetches into arbor is solid.

    Alternatively the deck could be built without the GSZ package, going towards baleful strix, more ponders and cliques. This probably improves the delver matchup, but would require a dramatically different sideboard, and alteration of the acceleration and protection packages.

    Thoughts?
    You probably don't need 4 NOs.

    I think this deck is missing a plan b of attack. 1 tarmogoyf isn't enough.

  4. #4

    Re: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    Quote Originally Posted by KobeBryan View Post
    You probably don't need 4 NOs.

    I think this deck is missing a plan b of attack. 1 tarmogoyf isn't enough.
    Agreed. In my limited time playing RUG NO, having access to essentially 7 copies of Goyf won a lot of games on its own. Opponents visibly frustrated at facing multiple a game.

  5. #5

    Re: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    Quote Originally Posted by KobeBryan View Post
    You probably don't need 4 NOs.

    I think this deck is missing a plan b of attack. 1 tarmogoyf isn't enough.
    So your initial read would be that I should have a beat down aspect as the alt-win? Thoughtseize for goyf/GSZ targets or something of that ilk?

    I use to play Bant NO, and there I always had Knight as the alt-win plan and GSZ got amazing hate bears. I would love to keep the deck truly 3 color.... Hmmm. Thanks for the input.

  6. #6
    Member
    Weapon X's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2014
    Location

    Winnipeg, Mb
    Posts

    208

    Re: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    Beat down should be the main plan with the option to NO
    The Parfait Meta-Game

  7. #7
    Member
    Qweerios's Avatar
    Join Date

    Dec 2010
    Location

    Montreal
    Posts

    788

    Re: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    The main issue with this deck is that GSZ and NO love green creatures and Edric loves evasive creatures. There aren't many good green evasive creatures... Leo is amazing but he is best as a silver bullet, multiple mainboard copies aren't very good.
    Do you know what assuming does? It makes an ass out of you and me.
    Get it...? Ass, u, me?

    ... ffs I was trying to be funny...

  8. #8

    Re: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    This is a build that has more beef in the main, and a bit more grave hate and life gain (oozes) as supplemental disruption (where thoughtseizes had been). Edric is clearly weak in creature matchups, I was thinking of it as a card for control matchups main deck (similar to sword of fire and ice in stoneblade decks).

    Creature (16)
    4x Deathrite Shaman
    1x Edric, Spymaster of Trest
    2x Leovold, Emissary of Trest
    1x Noble Hierarch
    1x Progenitus
    2x Scavenging Ooze
    3x Tarmogoyf
    2x Vendilion Clique

    Instant (15)
    3x Abrupt Decay
    4x Brainstorm
    4x Daze
    4x Force of Will

    Planeswalker (1)
    1x Jace, the Mind Sculptor

    Sorcery (8)
    3x Green Sun's Zenith
    3x Natural Order
    2x Ponder

    Enchantment (1)
    1x Sylvan Library

    Land (19)
    2x Bayou
    1x Dryad Arbor
    1x Forest
    4x Misty Rainforest
    2x Polluted Delta
    3x Tropical Island
    2x Underground Sea
    4x Verdant Catacombs

    Sideboard (15)
    1x Abrupt Decay
    2x Disfigure
    1x Empyrial Archangel
    2x Engineered Plague
    2x Flusterstorm
    2x Kitchen Finks
    2x Null Rod
    1x Reclamation Sage
    2x Surgical Extraction

    -Edit-
    Relevant numbers
    Blue Count: 21
    Green Creatures: 14 (counting arbor, not counting Progenitus)
    Fetches that hit Dryad Arbor: 8
    Ways to get Progenitus out of hand: 7

    Also of note, without thoughtseize, this is quickly becoming simply UG with a light splash, so going back to my preferred Bant colors and splashing Leovold isn't out of the question. I try to get out but that Shard keeps pulling me back in.

  9. #9
    Member
    Qweerios's Avatar
    Join Date

    Dec 2010
    Location

    Montreal
    Posts

    788

    Re: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    It's difficult to justify jumping through hoops for Progenitus when you could just be casting True-Name Nemesis... You can easily turn TNN into Prog with a single Rafiq and you won't even have to sacrifice anything.
    If you are absolutely determined to use NO, then I think Thoughtseize is the way to go. You don't really want to Daze in a slow deck that doesn't pack Wasteland and aims at casting big Zeniths and Orders.
    Do you know what assuming does? It makes an ass out of you and me.
    Get it...? Ass, u, me?

    ... ffs I was trying to be funny...

  10. #10

    Re: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    Awesome list OP. NO 4cc Progenitus is very underrated.

    I would play the 9/9 that destroys 3 permanents as well though

  11. #11

    Re: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Hammer View Post
    Awesome list OP. NO 4cc Progenitus is very underrated.

    I would play the 9/9 that destroys 3 permanents as well though
    My only concern is that it dies to plow, and other various removal. I would really like to see another NO target also in the MB

  12. #12

    Re: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    Quote Originally Posted by moseby View Post
    My only concern is that it dies to plow, and other various removal. I would really like to see another NO target also in the MB
    The other poster was talking about Terastodon. You often blow up some of your own permanents to get the extra elephants, so dying to plow isn't a huge issue.

    Other options: I don't think this deck puts enough creatures into play to run Craterhoof. When I played NO Bant I used Hornet Queen as a second target since it is castable and 5 deathtouch flyers is great against a lot of decks.

  13. #13
    Member
    KobeBryan's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jun 2011
    Location

    Arcadia, CA
    Posts

    2,090

    Re: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    Quote Originally Posted by limbo View Post
    The other poster was talking about Terastodon. You often blow up some of your own permanents to get the extra elephants, so dying to plow isn't a huge issue.

    Other options: I don't think this deck puts enough creatures into play to run Craterhoof. When I played NO Bant I used Hornet Queen as a second target since it is castable and 5 deathtouch flyers is great against a lot of decks.
    The real problem here is terminus

  14. #14
    The crazy nastyass honey badger

    Join Date

    Dec 2013
    Location

    A desk chair, The Netherlands
    Posts

    1,510

    Re: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    A new NO deck that aims to fix whatever problems NO decks normally has but fails to see that the deck still has to win in the same way as every other NO deck, effectively changing nothing. Awesome.

    The problem w/ NO-decks is how they try to win. To fix that problem, you have to be able to win without NO (at which point you don't need NO anymore). What you end up with now is a horrible NO deck (I mean, Elves! just does it better. I win this turn > I win in a couple of turns) or a worse, slower BUG Tempo deck.
    Quote Originally Posted by cavalrywolfpack View Post
    DAMMIT ECHELON

  15. #15

    Re: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    no well this deck doesn't scoop to comb and with U and B can do its thing against any deck in the format.

    The only terrible marchi here would be Eldrazi seen the list

  16. #16
    The crazy nastyass honey badger

    Join Date

    Dec 2013
    Location

    A desk chair, The Netherlands
    Posts

    1,510

    Re: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    Quote Originally Posted by Poron View Post
    no well this deck doesn't scoop to comb and with U and B can do its thing against any deck in the format.
    Yes, except it probably does it a full turn slower than anything it tries to compete with. It's nice that the deck has some counters, but I can't see a Storm deck caring about that (let alone a 3 mana pseudo-hatebear that does not stop their combo).

    It's a worse NO deck than Elves!
    It's a worse tempo deck than BUG Delver.
    It's a worse prison deck than D&T.
    And Edric is just stupid in a deck that runs about as many creatures as every other deck out there and less than the decks where you'd probably need it most (making it useless).

    But hey, don't let me piss on your parade. Good luck to you and I'll stand corrected when you manage to reach the DtB section.
    Quote Originally Posted by cavalrywolfpack View Post
    DAMMIT ECHELON

  17. #17

    Re: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    Quote Originally Posted by Echelon View Post
    Yes, except it probably does it a full turn slower than anything it tries to compete with. It's nice that the deck has some counters, but I can't see a Storm deck caring about that (let alone a 3 mana pseudo-hatebear that does not stop their combo).

    It's a worse NO deck than Elves!
    It's a worse tempo deck than BUG Delver.
    It's a worse prison deck than D&T.
    And Edric is just stupid in a deck that runs about as many creatures as every other deck out there and less than the decks where you'd probably need it most (making it useless).

    But hey, don't let me piss on your parade. Good luck to you and I'll stand corrected when you manage to reach the DtB section.
    What a pissy troll fest.

    If you don't have anything worthwhile to contribute to this thread, why bother posting in it?

    Your post also makes it abundantly clear that you have no idea what the hell is the whole point of the developmental section. So go netdeck something instead since that's clearly your inclination.

  18. #18
    The crazy nastyass honey badger

    Join Date

    Dec 2013
    Location

    A desk chair, The Netherlands
    Posts

    1,510

    Re: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    Pointing out that a bad idea is a bad idea is not worthwhile. Noted.

    To quote the Lego movie - Everything is awesome! Is that better? Worth your while?

    I'm curious to see what that attitude produces.
    Quote Originally Posted by cavalrywolfpack View Post
    DAMMIT ECHELON

  19. #19
    Member
    KobeBryan's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jun 2011
    Location

    Arcadia, CA
    Posts

    2,090

    Re: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Hammer View Post
    What a pissy troll fest.

    If you don't have anything worthwhile to contribute to this thread, why bother posting in it?

    Your post also makes it abundantly clear that you have no idea what the hell is the whole point of the developmental section. So go netdeck something instead since that's clearly your inclination.
    Hes right...this deck does nothing special that another deck cant do better. Its that old bant deck problem being a jack of all trades. 50/50 match up with some really bad match ups but nothing that guarantees you a win

  20. #20
    The crazy nastyass honey badger

    Join Date

    Dec 2013
    Location

    A desk chair, The Netherlands
    Posts

    1,510

    Re: The Natural Order of Trest (BUG Natural Order)

    Quote Originally Posted by KobeBryan View Post
    Hes right...this deck does nothing special that another deck cant do better. Its that old bant deck problem being a jack of all trades. 50/50 match up with some really bad match ups but nothing that guarantees you a win
    Yeah, well, you can probably go piss off to netdecking too (I lol'd, by the way), you're not helping the deck in any form or way either. This thread is better off wasting a lot of time and effort only to come up short in the end. How dare you try to speed that process along so people can spend their precious time on useful things rather than this magical chistmasland, you silly bastard, you Jon Snow of The Source?

    Oh wait, I'm doing it again.

    Excuse me. This deck is a brilliant marvel of deckdesign and absolutely solves any flaw any previous iteration had. Sparkles, glitters and rainbows. Criticism and reality checks are bad. There, the deck is helped. Expect it in a T8 near you soon!

    @Captain Hammer: Let me share something with you. Maybe it'll help you understand where I'm coming from and perhaps even teach you something in the process. A couple of years ago I dabbled with a rogue NO list of my own. Right here on The Source. Turned out it was horrible. And that's a fine conclusion to come to. You know who the first person was that suggested that the deck should be killed? Me. Without any bitching, no hard feelings whatsoever. It just was the inevitable outcome of the list so I decided to pull the plug as soon as I realised that. It's what had to be done, I was perfectly OK with that. For reference, here's a link to the thread:
    http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...ock&highlight=

    The point I'm trying to make is this: It's fine to want to brew but for fuck sake, be realistic and don't try to turn it into something it isn't. Magical Christmaslanding doesn't make a deck viable. To brew a contender you have to be brutally honest and critical. Accept that you can come to a conclusion you rather wouldn't come to, but never settle for anything less than the best. Debate. Be critical. Try to pick every fucking nit you can. Identify and troubleshoot every possible flaw, consider every possible angle. How do you think the current DtBs came to be? It sure as shit wasn't through some casual la-di-da approach.
    Quote Originally Posted by cavalrywolfpack View Post
    DAMMIT ECHELON

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)