Vampires post WWK

[(nameless one)]

Alright,

Basically the argument is does post WWK Vampires have enough firepower to be the next tribal aggro in Legacy?

Theres already that Dark Depths + Vampire Hexmage combo.

Maybe add Vampire Nocturnus + Sensei's Divining Top? Why not add Dark Confidant to that mix?

They're missing a one-drop? Why not run Vials?

Vampire Lacerator and Guul Draz Vampire are awesome one-drop as well. With the bloodied mechanic, Ruthless Cullblade is easily a 4/2 for 2. I dont see anything wrong with that.

Vampire Nighthawk is a house. Not to mention that he's a beast when wearing a Jitte.

Bloodghast is an awesome fodder to things like Cabal Theraphy. Pair that up with Kalastria Highborn and you have a reccuring Drain Life.

Gatekeeper of Malakir is an awesome removal with body. He can get rid of Progenitals!

Malakir Bloodwitch looks like it has potential to be that late game drop. I know for the most part its a win more card but a creature thats Pro-white, out of burn range and black; thats really hard to remove. Not to mention that shes has evasion.

Any thoughts or should we wait until ROE shows up? Goblins did have to wait until Scourge saw print to be Tier 1.

[dorsch]

You listed a bunch of more or less solid suicide creatures, which happen to have all the same creature type. Vampire Nocturnus and Kalastria Highborn, as only creatures which care about vampire creature type, give no reason to play vampire tribal. I would rather play normal Suicide Black and add those of the vampires you listed, if they are good enough on their own.

[conboy31]

They key will be if a BB or 1BB Lord gets printed in the future. However, create a decklist and start trying it out. Then you can figure out, vials? rituals? Helm/Leyline combo? etc.

Edit- I think the curve should top out at Nocturnus at 1BBB.

[umbowta]

Can Vamps hit Legacy? I hope so 'cause thats about the only tribe I'm interested in playing aside from Elves. I've made use of Ghast/Therapy synergy alongside Gatekeepers in mono black already. It's still mostly casual but I did manage to go 3 out of 5 in games agaist Merfolk this weekend despite the deck being untuned and not having a board.

[FoulQ]

The problems facing vampires right now is that there is no synergy. Cards like vampire nighthawk, gatekeeper of malakir, etc., are all good cards in legacy, but not STELLAR cards. If there was more synergy between them, then the deck would have potential. Look at deck like goblins or aggro loam: those decks live and die on synergy. There is no reason to force tribal on vampires when the added synergy is not that great. I think there are two questions here that are really being asked:

1) Suicide Black post WWK
2) Will there ever be a point in time where sacrificing efficiency to complement the tribal theme be worth it for suicide black decks? Basically, will there even be a point in time where vampires are synergistic enough to warrant cards that benefit having a lot of them in your deck?

[TorpidNinja]

It's points like FoulQ's which make shudder when people discuss new "tribes" that Wizards churns out. Goblins, merfolk and elves are tribes which have the benefit of both history and focus. WotC has been producing these creature types consistently since the beginning of time and that has lead, inevitably, to the growth of synergies and power-creep within the those groups. It is unlikely that we will see cards of the caliber which produced the power which goblins exhibited in the past simply because Wizards, at this point, is more wary and - more to the point - unwilling to focus on a niche creature type that way in a single block.

[Sevryn]

You listed a bunch of more or less solid suicide creatures, which happen to have all the same creature type. Vampire Nocturnus and Kalastria Highborn, as only creatures which care about vampire creature type, give no reason to play vampire tribal. I would rather play normal Suicide Black and add those of the vampires you listed, if they are good enough on their own.

Urge to Feed (http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=100425&d=1263963681) is a pretty good reason to try to stick to Vampires. Hopefully a a cheap lord gets printed as well.

[MMogg]

Urge to Feed (http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=100425&d=1263963681) is a pretty good reason to try to stick to Vampires.

How so? I think it's worse than Smother, and the second ability would only be good with creatures you have just cast otherwise you're losing an attack in there. Even so, how many creatures will you have in play at one time that you want to tap? 2? 3? 1?

[Mark Sun]

How so? I think it's worse than Smother, and the second ability would only be good with creatures you have just cast otherwise you're losing an attack in there. Even so, how many creatures will you have in play at one time that you want to tap? 2? 3? 1?

Isn't it more of a "defensive" card anyways? Declare blocks, before damage cast this, kill the creature, all your guys grow +1/+1 for the next turn? Anyhow, that's the way I see it being used.

I mentioned in the general WWK discussion thread that Vampires is desperately missing a :1::b::b: Lord that a lot of the tribes have. Nocturnus is just one turn too slow for Legacy, really.

[dorsch]

In a suicide black-style deck you should use every opportunity to attack. You have to be very lucky to create out of -3/-3 in addition to +1/+1 more than a 1:1 trade. In Legacy there aren't very often 2 creatures on each side of the table.

Why would you add a "defensive" card in a tempo/aggro/tribal deck?

[Roman Candle]

I think Vampires is actually better as a control deck than as a Suicide deck. Nighthawk, Bloodghast, Hexmage, etc. are all awful in Suicide Black decks because they're pretty small for their mana cost. I've been playing Vampires in Standard, and its always been more about controlling the board than it has been racing for the kill.

[caiomarcos]

I think Vampires is actually better as a control deck than as a Suicide deck. Nighthawk, Bloodghast, Hexmage, etc. are all awful in Suicide Black decks because they're pretty small for their mana cost. I've been playing Vampires in Standard, and its always been more about controlling the board than it has been racing for the kill.

The difference in Legacy is that we have Dark Ritual and Jitte as one option and Dark Depths as another option to race for the kill, options you don't have in Standard.

I've played a bunch of games in MWS with some variations of Vampire.dec for Legacy and one of the strengths I've found is that the deck can change its style of play very easily depending on what the opponent is playing, what the opening hand is and how the game evolves.

Also, people are VERY afraid of Hexmage. Doesn't matter what you have in play, they will get rid of the Hexmage ASAP.

[Roman Candle]

The difference in Legacy is that we have Dark Ritual and Jitte as one option and Dark Depths as another option to race for the kill, options you don't have in Standard.

I've played a bunch of games in MWS with some variations of Vampire.dec for Legacy and one of the strengths I've found is that the deck can change its style of play very easily depending on what the opponent is playing, what the opening hand is and how the game evolves.

Also, people are VERY afraid of Hexmage. Doesn't matter what you have in play, they will get rid of the Hexmage ASAP.

But aren't Jitte and Dark Ritual better cards when you have better creatures to use them with?

[caiomarcos]

But aren't Jitte and Dark Ritual better cards when you have better creatures to use them with?

I didn't say that Vampires is the best deck to play Jitte and Dark Ritual, but they add a lot to the legacy list, giving it something that the Standard list can't work it, making it more versatile, fast and aggressive. I mentioned those cards just to counter the argument that since Standard Vampires is more controlish, so should be the legacy one. Not true.

But yes, I still feel that Jitte, Dark Ritual and friends are better in Sui Black, Eva Green or Deadguy Ale of some form.

[Forbiddian]

Vampires in Legacy would be as bad as having to watch New Moon.

[Captain_Morgan]

The tribe seems to be more than just a fad, it seems to be a new direction for black in general. Vampires are human looking, they can look good, and be multiple things. It's basically the ultimate creature type for them. I believe that vampires is black's new "it" creature type. The issue though is whether they'll be a goblin, a zombie, or a soldier. Personally I think for now they'll be a soldier after the third set of this block when they usually push the envelope a bit for all their themes.

One of the main characters for the next block is the vampire PW, so therefore I'd expect some new vampires in ROE.

So overall, I think in the third set we'll finally see the "Sivvi" of Ally and Vampires. Whether vampire, or on the off shot of ally, will be playable is dependent on the third set.

[Skeggi]

Vampires will hit Legacy and see play just because there are always a couple of Vampire freaks around. I doubt if it'll be a good deck though.

[Nihil Credo]

The tribe seems to be more than just a fad, it seems to be a new direction for black in general. Vampires are human looking, they can look good, and be multiple things. It's basically the ultimate creature type for them. I believe that vampires is black's new "it" creature type.

Pretty much (http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/mm/61), unless maybe they get reallly bad feedback on them, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Regarding the Vampire deck, it's like Dorsch said: there isn't one. There are some really good Vampire cards, and some pretty uninspiring Vampire tribal enablers. And thank the nether gods for it: tribal decks get boring rather fast.

[kkoie]

I don't see the point of running vampires as a tribal deck. There are as many non-vamp black creatures that are seriously good in suicide black as their are vamps. That and why open your self up to random hate like engineered plague unless there is a really good reason? Unless they print a Vamp Matron, etc etc, I see no reason to go overboard with vamps.

[Skeggi]

Regarding the Vampire deck, it's like Dorsch said: there isn't one. There are some really good Vampire cards, and some pretty uninspiring Vampire tribal enablers.
Sooner or later they'll come.

[(nameless one)]

I am building a Pseudo-Tribal Vampire deck (for a tribal wars legacy tournament... yes, I am expecting Goblins, Merfolk, Elves, Slivers and even Cat-based Zoo decks)

I basically stole Eva Green's disruption package (sans M. Pulse)

Does anyone have any suggestion for a creature base? WWK will be part of this tournament.