[Deck] Manaless Ichorid

[Darklingske]

For the life of me, I can not understand why you would play with any less than 4 Phantasmagorian, because I would play with more if I could.
I agree with this. I was very happy with the 4 Phanta. If it is not in your opening hand, he serves as Ichi food. During the tournament it was unbelievable how many times I just dumped my hand with looping Phanta's. Now I know you only need 2 to do this, but it is that more easier to accomplish with 4.

[berry]

@AJfirecracker:

I've come to a conclusion, your meta is Reanimator and ANT. Why else would Leylines be so much everywhere that you'd have to next level (that package is NOT better than grinding vs hate in the form of 2 relic 2 surgical extraction, etc), and why else would you constantly talk about speed vs combo.

ANT is _nowhere_, literally nowhere. It is not something to concern yourself with and I would never ever have 8 slots in my board dedicated to a matchup I just might might might with a little bad luck face.

If you're going to talk race-matchups, talk speedzoo, zoo and Hive Mind, if anything.

PS. Leyline of Sanctity is a much more solid board card since it also negates more regular hate in the form of Crypts, Relics & Extirpate-effects.


@darkslingske:

I love it, finally someone explaining results, etc! Would be awesome to know what it meant when you raced or were "quicker by a turn", sometimes, with that package. You seem to be running a mix of the bauble and the Rauch-list? The FKZ is only mentioned later in the post, how often was the Sphinx/FKZ-package needed?

Just a note, though: You do know you can empty your hand (if it's 6 cards, granted) with just 1 Phanta? Stack the triggers.


@FF:

Talking about mulliganing better seems weird, I've lost probably 1 game in like 25-40 games by drawing no dredger in time.


@Everyone:

I'd love to see some actual explanations and possibly play-by-plays of the Bauble-list, especially with Sphinx/FKZ, where you "go off" on T2-3 as I've seen mentioned. Preferably not in goldfishing situations but vs an actual opponent.

[Darklingske]

@ Berry:

I don't remember much from the matches. I didn't take notes during the games and as such only have my lifetotals to relate to. But I do remember that in all 9 rounds, I DR FKZ 5 times for the win. More often Sphinx just filled the GY and gave me enough Ichi's and Shadows to kill the opponent the following turn.
I don't like the 8 bauble list. It has a bit to much "do-nothing in the GY"-cards. So I started experimenting and decided on 3 Baubles as best for me. The Dakmor & Ghasts are nice in a meta full of blue control, but my meta has a rather big share of Zoo & burn, and they don't shine in those MU. Therefore my mix of the 2 lists.
About the 1 Phanta dump: I didn't know, so thanks!! (It never came up in all the testing & gaming. Maybe that's why I didn't know...)

[ajfirecracker]

@AJfirecracker:

I've come to a conclusion, your meta is Reanimator and ANT. Why else would Leylines be so much everywhere that you'd have to next level (that package is NOT better than grinding vs hate in the form of 2 relic 2 surgical extraction, etc), and why else would you constantly talk about speed vs combo.

ANT is _nowhere_, literally nowhere. It is not something to concern yourself with and I would never ever have 8 slots in my board dedicated to a matchup I just might might might with a little bad luck face.

If you're going to talk race-matchups, talk speedzoo, zoo and Hive Mind, if anything.

PS. Leyline of Sanctity is a much more solid board card since it also negates more regular hate in the form of Crypts, Relics & Extirpate-effects.

@Everyone:

I'd love to see some actual explanations and possibly play-by-plays of the Bauble-list, especially with Sphinx/FKZ, where you "go off" on T2-3 as I've seen mentioned. Preferably not in goldfishing situations but vs an actual opponent.

Actually, Kevin asked for my anti-fast-combo list. That's why I posted an anti-fast-combo list. >_<

I do, however, believe that it's fairly trivial to tune manaless dredge to beat everything (including all graveyard hate) EXCEPT for fast combo, or it's trivial to tune the deck to beat everything (including fast combo) EXCEPT for some of the graveyard hate.

It's not an issue if Leylines are everywhere (although my next-level package has been working wonderfully against them and against a variety of hate options). The issue is what you're going to run in your sideboard. The deck is naturally superior (if fast enough) to just about everything besides combo and graveyard hate. Simply tweaking your speed or graveyard effect composition slightly is entirely a do-nothing sideboard, gaining you 1-2% in any relevant matchup and probably 0% in a variety of matchups. The anti-combo sideboard takes an unfavorable matchup(s) pre-board and wrenches it back in our favor. The Hexmage plan helps the combo matchup slightly, and helps against graveyard hate in a huge way. What sideboard plan do you have that gives better value than either of those?

As to speed being necessary: I slowed down my main-deck significantly when I first introduced the Hexmage plan to my sideboard. It proved extremely problematic, as I started dropping games against slow, controlling decks(!) that could suddenly afford to lose a creature or two, exiling my Bridges, and then just hold off the few recursive beaters I could throw together. (ex: Moat is live only if you reach the 4th turn) If I'd had the tools to have one big turn, I would have been stomping those decks, like almost every other dredge deck ever.

Exitirpate is not stopped by Leyline of Sanctity. Relic of Progenitus "exile all" ability is not stopped by Leyline of Sanctity. Neither is Hive Mind, Tendrils, or basically anything except Burn. (In the case of Tendrils, this is because they basically always have the ability to find a bounce spell once their combo is well and truly underway).

@Final Fortune: Almost all the benefits of running Lion's Eye Diamond can be had by running it in the sideboard, with basically none of the drawbacks.

Re: Phantasmagorian: If you don't play with Nether Shadow, you'll typically find that it's unnecessary. I like 2-3 as a nice little combo bump, but really I don't need them, and I certainly don't need the 2 Nether Shadow I typically run, I just don't have anything better to throw in that slot. When you use them as part of your recursive engine (i.e. for Nether Shadow) you'll likely find that 1-shot hate slows you down more than it should (i.e. your creatures come out a turn later) because you don't want to go below 7 cards. Saying you'd run more than 4 if you could completely agrees with my earlier statement that these decks really want to be running ~6, and are therefore less stable in that regard for little appreciable benefit.

[Final Fortune]

@Final Fortune: Almost all the benefits of running Lion's Eye Diamond can be had by running it in the sideboard, with basically none of the drawbacks.

Re: Phantasmagorian: If you don't play with Nether Shadow, you'll typically find that it's unnecessary. I like 2-3 as a nice little combo bump, but really I don't need them, and I certainly don't need the 2 Nether Shadow I typically run, I just don't have anything better to throw in that slot. When you use them as part of your recursive engine (i.e. for Nether Shadow) you'll likely find that 1-shot hate slows you down more than it should (i.e. your creatures come out a turn later) because you don't want to go below 7 cards. Saying you'd run more than 4 if you could completely agrees with my earlier statement that these decks really want to be running ~6, and are therefore less stable in that regard for little appreciable benefit.

There's a big difference between running Lion's Eye Diamond MD and running Lion's Eye Diamond in the SB considering you a) can't play with Deep Analysis or Cephalid Coliseum without it and b) are only playing Lion's Eye Diamong post-board when it has the least amount of utility vs. hate.

I'm not disagreeing that Phantasmagorian is better in a Dredge deck with Nether Shadow, but saying Phantasmagorian has no appreciable benefit in a Dredge deck without Nether Shadow just makes me question whether or not you're properly playtesting cards. An uncounterable, Dredgable way of putting 9 cards into your graveyard off of 2 Phantasmagorian has an appreciable affect on any Dredge deck.

Phantasmagorian and LED/DA are just too good game 1 not to run.

@Berry

Don't confuse mulliganing better with being able to mulligan at all.

[KevinTrudeau]

fast-combo sideboard

After some more testing, I've also come to the conclusion that Chancellor of the Annex is the best fit for that Leyline of Sanctity/Serum Powder slot.

However, I don't know what you'd board out for Mindbreak Trap (or whatever anti-combo slot nine-twelve would be). 'Gorian, Nether Shadow, and Shambling Shell are the eight cuts for Chancellor and LED (at least in my mind), but past that, you'd be cutting a card that would also be good against faster decks.


tourney report

Congrats on the nice finish.


For the life of me, I can not understand why you would play with any less than 4 Phantasmagorian, because I would play with more if I could.

I agree that the optimal number of Phantasmagorian is above two (I think it's probably three in a Bauble list), but the reason why I've slowly been moving to the eight Bauble, two Nether Shadow, two Phantasmagorian list that aj developed is because it opens the sideboard up more. Whether it's due to my playstyle (I'll usually never cast a Bauble on turn two if I only have one dredger in my graveyard, and will never if it's Shambling Shell or Golgari Thug) or something else, I've found that Baubles six-eight's marginal speed goes down in comparison to one-five. However, because the speed of both lists is still pretty much the same, and because the eight Bauble list increases the quantity of good cards against Relic without having to waste sideboard slots, I think aj's list is objectively superior.


@Everyone:

I'd love to see some actual explanations and possibly play-by-plays of the Bauble-list, especially with Sphinx/FKZ, where you "go off" on T2-3 as I've seen mentioned. Preferably not in goldfishing situations but vs an actual opponent.

I could definitely do a few goldfishes later today and post up the detailed results, and I suppose I could play ~five MWS matches with the deck, although I don't know if my patience will hold out that long. I'd like to point out that a turn two win isn't very common with this deck, it's usually turn three or four.

[Final Fortune]

My problem with Baubles compared to Street Wraith/Phyrexian Probe or Lion's Eye Diamond is that for "accelerators" they don't really accelerate the deck that much or that consistently when you have to draw them, play them after you discard a dredger and wait until your next turn to put cards into your graveyard, and while a Bauble may save you from wiping vs. Relic of Progenitus, we're talking about a 1x copy in most SBs and truth be told even with a Bauble in the graveyard it still buys a lot of time vs. the deck even if we don't scoop.

I really think Baubles are too slow and conservative game 1 vs. the field, and if you guys stop wasting your time trying to make your Storm combo match ups winnable (which they aren't even with a SB) you could just alternate between the most effective MDs between your 60 and 15 to take advantage of the ridiculousness of LED MD, which adds necessary speed vs. jank like Affinity and Elves, and grind thru' everything else. Cut the Baubles for just LED and DA and see what playing a ridiculously overpowered draw engine feels like for a few dozen goldfishes, holding Baubles until turn 3 plus is nothing compared to holding LED for that long.

I just feel like this entire thread has become a masterabotorary excersice in how to solve unsolvable problems instead of just maximizing the effectiveness of the MD and using the SB to absorb the impact of tertiary hate.

[K1w1]

Hey guys,
i played Kevin's list at a tourney in Dülmen (Germany) and went 4-3.
It isn't really important. The important thing is, that another manaless dredger did the 2. out of 73.
It was nice to see it.
He played Sickening Shoal in mainboard. It's a really good card. And 3 Bauble's in sideboard.

[Izor]

Tourney Report

Congratz on the finish.

I noticed that I'm running the exact same list as you, except +1 U's Bauble, -1 FKZ

Though... I wonder if you saw any graveyard hate that day? Just asking, for I've stopped playing Dredge for now, because the people I play against at tourneys usually have between 4 and 10 graveyard hate cards in their boards. (And I am not exaggerating. The 10 is an exception, but 4-6 are the rule.)

[ajfirecracker]

However, I don't know what you'd board out for Mindbreak Trap (or whatever anti-combo slot nine-twelve would be). 'Gorian, Nether Shadow, and Shambling Shell are the eight cuts for Chancellor and LED (at least in my mind), but past that, you'd be cutting a card that would also be good against faster decks.

I agree that the optimal number of Phantasmagorian is above two (I think it's probably three in a Bauble list), but the reason why I've slowly been moving to the eight Bauble, two Nether Shadow, two Phantasmagorian list that aj developed is because it opens the sideboard up more. Whether it's due to my playstyle (I'll usually never cast a Bauble on turn two if I only have one dredger in my graveyard, and will never if it's Shambling Shell or Golgari Thug) or something else, I've found that Baubles six-eight's marginal speed goes down in comparison to one-five. However, because the speed of both lists is still pretty much the same, and because the eight Bauble list increases the quantity of good cards against Relic without having to waste sideboard slots, I think aj's list is objectively superior.

Uhh... I had something I came up with... let me find it.
-1 Bridge from Below, -2 Mishra's Bauble, -2 Urza's Bauble, -2 Nether Shadow, -2 Ichorid, -2 Sphinx of Lost Truths, -1 Flame-Kin Zealot, +4 Mindbreak Trap, +4 Chancellor of the Annex, +4 Lion's Eye Diamond

Obviously the draw creatures are okay, but plopping Chancellor of the Annex into play is a higher priority (generally). FKZ gets worse without support, the Baubles are sort of slow, the Nether Shadow are sort of slow, Ichorid are okay but probably the weakest link of what's left. Maybe you want to cut the River Kelpie instead of the second Ichorid. Not sure.

@Not-Kevin-Trudeau: When I say I think Phantasmagorian are unnecessary, I've goldfished plenty and I've seen how good he is. The thing is, he's only really worth running as a 4-of when he generates creatures, as the 3rd and 4th you hit are total blanks. Due to the double-discard trick, I find that 1 is usually enough for a game whether or not I combo out. Running 2 gets me access to the loop as well as more frequently getting the double discard, so is clearly worth it (in general) but I don't feel like my list needs the third. I get the first one by the time I feel I need it, and the second is just a nice bonus. I could see running a third in a list that's very close to mine, but in mine in particular that seems like it's just not as much of a help as the alternatives for that slot.

@Kevin: Objectively superior! Sweet!

[Darklingske]

Though... I wonder if you saw any graveyard hate that day? Just asking, for I've stopped playing Dredge for now, because the people I play against at tourneys usually have between 4 and 10 graveyard hate cards in their boards. (And I am not exaggerating. The 10 is an exception, but 4-6 are the rule.)

Yes, almost every deck played at least 3 GYhate. The finalist even played 10! I'm glad I escaped that one during the swiss... As for what I really saw: Extirpate (BUGstill), Relic (Bant, Burn, BUGstill, Zoo), Churgical Extraction (HiveMind, BUGstill, The Gate, Zoo) & Crypt (Zoo, Bant).

[K1w1]

@ Darklingske: Is there a link you can post, with the decklists of the top 8 you played?

[Final Fortune]

The utility of your third Phantasmagorian is irrelevant when you're trying to either Draw 1 or Dredge into 2 as fast as possible, it still feeds Ichorid regardless. Seriously tho', I don't think you guys are playtesting your deck G1 vs. competent pilots of Zoo, Goblins, Affinity and Elves and you're just assuming your G1 wins are much higher than they really are: otherwise you'd realize how ineffective Baubles are and you'd cut them for a better draw engine.

Not playing LED/DA and Phantasmagorian MD is wrong, also cut stupid, cute shit like the River Kelpie and play a Terrastadon so you don't auto scoop G1 vs. stuff like Lands and throw your entire match up - it's greedy.

[ajfirecracker]

The utility of your third Phantasmagorian is irrelevant when you're trying to either Draw 1 or Dredge into 2 as fast as possible, it still feeds Ichorid regardless. Seriously tho', I don't think you guys are playtesting your deck G1 vs. competent pilots of Zoo, Goblins, Affinity and Elves and you're just assuming your G1 wins are much higher than they really are: otherwise you'd realize how ineffective Baubles are and you'd cut them for a better draw engine.

Not playing LED/DA and Phantasmagorian MD is wrong, also cut stupid, cute shit like the River Kelpie and play a Terrastadon so you don't auto scoop G1 vs. stuff like Lands and throw your entire match up - it's greedy.

That's just the thing. I'm not trying to draw into Phantasmagorian at all, and I'm certainly not trying to dredge into 2 as fast as possible. What I'm trying to do is win the game, and Phantasmagorian, while a useful tool, is far from necessary for either of my lists to do that. I typically run 2-3, but I don't run any if I don't have the room, such as in the Hexmage list. I think that's an entirely reasonable approach.

The Glimpse Elves matchup is a bit closer than I'd like, but cutting Baubles isn't going to help it at all.

Goblins is dead.

Zoo is an extremely favorable matchup. I've got the testing to back this up.
Affinity isn't quite as favorable as Zoo, imo, but it's darn close.

You have a 15% chance of drawing both LED and DA in your opening hand. Add on the chance of also having a dredger (which is high but far from 100%), and the odds of your DA doing anything at all are looking pretty low. Even if you have LED and cantrip once or twice, you still need to hit multiple dredgers and a DA, which is again not the most likely thing in the world. In fact, it seems like the very definition of 'cute'.

Additionally, what happens if you blank on a dredger or two after dumping your hand? You get to play DDD from 1-2 cards instead of 7. Without LED, the deck can be tuned to turn 3 fairly consistently and turn 2 ~20% of the time. This is fundamentally faster than combo elves, as well as every aggro deck. The only reason to go faster is if you need to win on turn 2 against some sort of turn 3 combo deck. Alternately, you can play combo hate and not introduce 8 questionable cards to the main-deck.

Scooping vs. Lands? You're kidding, right? How many cards do they have that do anything relevant against us? Tabernacle does very little, only Glacial Chasm allows them a chance to win the game, and only if they've already got their engine online. Woodfall Primus seems a lot better than Terastodon in the slot.

Despite the fact that I think LED and DA are inherently unstable, I would be happy to be proven wrong (it's always good to make my deck better.) Can you post your list with them in it? Do you have a sideboard worked out?

[KevinTrudeau]

Uhh... I had something I came up with... let me find it.
-1 Bridge from Below, -2 Mishra's Bauble, -2 Urza's Bauble, -2 Nether Shadow, -2 Ichorid, -2 Sphinx of Lost Truths, -1 Flame-Kin Zealot, +4 Mindbreak Trap, +4 Chancellor of the Annex, +4 Lion's Eye Diamond
Obviously the draw creatures are okay, but plopping Chancellor of the Annex into play is a higher priority (generally). FKZ gets worse without support, the Baubles are sort of slow, the Nether Shadow are sort of slow, Ichorid are okay but probably the weakest link of what's left. Maybe you want to cut the River Kelpie instead of the second Ichorid. Not sure.
@Kevin: Objectively superior! Sweet!
Are you sure cutting draw spells would be a good option? Maximizing the probability of LED + draw spells seems like the best way to go if you’re trying to outspeed something like ANT. It may very well have been greedy of me to cut Shambling Shell in testing, but dredging three in a racing situation seems pretty dreadful anyway. Ichorid also seems like an uncuttable card, simply because of how important it is in hitting the necessary three creatures to cast Dread Return. You bring up a great point though in the fact that a resolved Dread Return on Chancellor might as well be game, so cutting the DR targets before Shambling Shell seems right. If I were you, I’d try out:
-2 Nether Shadow
-2 Phantasmagorian (not completely sure of this)
-4 DR targets
+4 Lion’s Eye Diamond
+4 Chancellor of the Annex,

and if you want to run four more anti-combo cards:

-4 Shambling Shell
+4 Mindbreak Trap/Serum Powder/Shelkin Brownie to amuse yourself/whatever

And yes, with the sideboard in consideration, objectively superior.


The utility of your third Phantasmagorian is irrelevant when you're trying to either Draw 1 or Dredge into 2 as fast as possible, it still feeds Ichorid regardless. Seriously tho', I don't think you guys are playtesting your deck G1 vs. competent pilots of Zoo, Goblins, Affinity and Elves and you're just assuming your G1 wins are much higher than they really are: otherwise you'd realize how ineffective Baubles are and you'd cut them for a better draw engine.
Not playing LED/DA and Phantasmagorian MD is wrong, also cut stupid, cute shit like the River Kelpie and play a Terrastadon so you don't auto scoop G1 vs. stuff like Lands and throw your entire match up - it's greedy.

I’m completely open to LED in the main if it improves the deck. In theory, it could be superior to Baubles in that it potentially speeds up the deck a full turn, which when you consider that the deck wins on turn 3.5 on average (very rough estimate), is huge. I don’t like that DA completely relies on LED mana, and the fact that if you do indeed want to win on turn two you’ll likely have to cast LED on turn one into Force of Will, but I will definitely test your recommendations. Where you lost me, however, was cutting River Kelpie, a card that facilitates any silver bullet DR target you might wish to find, for Terastodon. It’s not greedy at all to not run something like that in the main; a decision to run a card like that is a concrete one rather than an abstract one, pretty much completely dependent on your local scene. Since my area doesn’t really have a Stax representative right now (we can beat Lands easily if it doesn’t draw Chasm or Ensnaring Bridge because Tabernacle doesn’t do shit), I don’t really see the use in running one in the main.


That's just the thing. I'm not trying to draw into Phantasmagorian at all, and I'm certainly not trying to dredge into 2 as fast as possible. What I'm trying to do is win the game, and Phantasmagorian, while a useful tool, is far from necessary for either of my lists to do that. I typically run 2-3, but I don't run any if I don't have the room, such as in the Hexmage list. I think that's an entirely reasonable approach.
The Glimpse Elves matchup is a bit closer than I'd like, but cutting Baubles isn't going to help it at all.
Goblins is dead.
Zoo is an extremely favorable matchup. I've got the testing to back this up.
Affinity isn't quite as favorable as Zoo, imo, but it's darn close.
You have a 15% chance of drawing both LED and DA in your opening hand. Add on the chance of also having a dredger (which is high but far from 100%), and the odds of your DA doing anything at all are looking pretty low. Even if you have LED and cantrip once or twice, you still need to hit multiple dredgers and a DA, which is again not the most likely thing in the world. In fact, it seems like the very definition of 'cute'.
Additionally, what happens if you blank on a dredger or two after dumping your hand? You get to play DDD from 1-2 cards instead of 7. Without LED, the deck can be tuned to turn 3 fairly consistently and turn 2 ~20% of the time. This is fundamentally faster than combo elves, as well as every aggro deck. The only reason to go faster is if you need to win on turn 2 against some sort of turn 3 combo deck. Alternately, you can play combo hate and not introduce 8 questionable cards to the main-deck.
Scooping vs. Lands? You're kidding, right? How many cards do they have that do anything relevant against us? Tabernacle does very little, only Glacial Chasm allows them a chance to win the game, and only if they've already got their engine online. Woodfall Primus seems a lot better than Terastodon in the slot.
Despite the fact that I think LED and DA are inherently unstable, I would be happy to be proven wrong (it's always good to make my deck better.) Can you post your list with them in it? Do you have a sideboard worked out?

I agree with this post pretty much word for word aside from Primus over Terastodon (Terastodon is the safer card). I’ve been using Phanta way more as a discard six than chaining multiples, meaning multiples don’t matter as much, meaning you don’t really need to maximize on it (although I can't blame someone for wanting to run a playset, the card is quite good, and I'd much rather see two than none).

[Izor]

Refering to the two posts above.

As of the matchups mentioned, I also agree that usual aggro matchups like Merfolk, Zoo and Goblins are hugely in our favor. Even if we can only DDD, having so many free creatures and relevant stuff in the bin, we usually overwhelm them pretty easily.

Another story, however, is the Affinity matchup. Among all the aggro matchups, this is by far the worst for us. I can test against Affinity as much as I want (because I own both decks among others) and it's really in their favor. The mana builds can explode in their face and win (I guess a manaless LED+Deep Anal list could do as well), but the usual manaless lists will mostly lose. The main strategy against Aggro decks are two things: block their strongest attackers with Nether Shadows and Zombies and build up a lethal Zombie army. Affinity is the only aggro deck that can attack both of those axes pretty easily. As soon as they have a Ravager, you won't ever have access to any Bridge during the rest of the game. At the same time, 12 Flying dudes as well as the mighty Etched Champion will make quick work if you're trying to defend yourself with Zombie/Shadow chumps, especially if they have Plating.


As of how many Phantasmagorians one should play, I think I'd never run less than 4.

While I can absolutely understand arguments like 'I only want to find one per game and dump 6 into it once', I think that the sole presence of Nether Shadow always makes me want to find one ASAP, which makes the playset necessary. I actually do NOT want to pitch 6 cards to one Taz as soon as I find it, I actually want to find 2 asap and slowly chain them in order to have access to all my Nether Shadows each turn. If I have more than 2 I feed them to Ichorid.

In other instances, it can be huge i you have it in your opener and can start your 2nd turn with Ichorid, Nether Shadows, Bridge and multiple Dredgers already in your yard. Then again, I really want the playset. If I don't have any Taz yet, I just reeealy want to find one. I guess I want to find the first Taz even before the first Bridge. I'm just always happy to have at least 2.

[KevinTrudeau]

Deep Anal

Couldn't resist, could you?

@ Final Fortune- I have a lot of free time tomorrow, so if you post up your latest LED list, I can do a side-by-side speed comparison with the eight Bauble list. Something like a hundred goldfishes apiece seems like it would suffice.

[ajfirecracker]

Another story, however, is the Affinity matchup. Among all the aggro matchups, this is by far the worst for us. I can test against Affinity as much as I want (because I own both decks among others) and it's really in their favor. The mana builds can explode in their face and win (I guess a manaless LED+Deep Anal list could do as well), but the usual manaless lists will mostly lose. The main strategy against Aggro decks are two things: block their strongest attackers with Nether Shadows and Zombies and build up a lethal Zombie army. Affinity is the only aggro deck that can attack both of those axes pretty easily. As soon as they have a Ravager, you won't ever have access to any Bridge during the rest of the game. At the same time, 12 Flying dudes as well as the mighty Etched Champion will make quick work if you're trying to defend yourself with Zombie/Shadow chumps, especially if they have Plating.

As of how many Phantasmagorians one should play, I think I'd never run less than 4.

While I can absolutely understand arguments like 'I only want to find one per game and dump 6 into it once', I think that the sole presence of Nether Shadow always makes me want to find one ASAP, which makes the playset necessary. I actually do NOT want to pitch 6 cards to one Taz as soon as I find it, I actually want to find 2 asap and slowly chain them in order to have access to all my Nether Shadows each turn. If I have more than 2 I feed them to Ichorid.

In other instances, it can be huge i you have it in your opener and can start your 2nd turn with Ichorid, Nether Shadows, Bridge and multiple Dredgers already in your yard. Then again, I really want the playset. If I don't have any Taz yet, I just reeealy want to find one. I guess I want to find the first Taz even before the first Bridge. I'm just always happy to have at least 2.

Affinity is certainly one of the best decks at attacking dredge, but it's still an aggro deck and still loses if you just kill them on turn 3 (and the same is typically true of turn 4). If your list can do that, it'll have a good affinity matchup (although not quite as stellar as most other aggro matchups).

I think we're clearly using Phantasmagorian in different ways, and we both seem to recognize that this leads to a difference in the number of Phantasmagorian. This is fine with me. I do object, however, to people who look at the 8-bauble list and dismiss it based on the relative scarcity of Phantasmagorian / Nether Shadow. I don't think it suffers at all (or very little) for the loss of those cards.

[Final Fortune]

Ok, Lion's Eye Diamond does not require you to draw a Deep Analysis in your opening hand, nor does it require you to draw multiple Dredgers to Dredge twice. Lion's Eye Diamond only requires Deep Analysis to be in your graveyard, which means Lion's Eye Diamond can and should be held in your hand until you've Dredged into a Deep Analysis by either your second or third turn. Furthermore Dredge is a replacement effect, in which case you are allowed to replace the 1st instance of the Draw 2 on Deep Analysis with a Dredge, discarding X cards and potentially an additional Dredger, before you have to replace the 2nd instance of the Draw 2 with another Dredger.

I'm tired of arguing over cutting Phantasmagorian and Nether Shadow, there are just too many unnecessary copies of Dread Return, Dread Return Targets, Shambling Shells and Baubles in your deck that I would cut before core cards - the deck would be so much better with 3 Dread Return, 2 Sphinx of Lost Truths, 1 Flame Kin Zealot, 1 Shambling Shell, and only 7 Baubles for full sets of Phantasmagorian and Nether Shadow.

Regarding the MD Terrastadon, by Lands I meant "RandomLockCards.dec," having some insurance vs. Moat, Glacial Chasm etc. goes a long way, but if you'd rather bare back the metagame that's your call. I just think River Kelpie is way too conditional and win more, you tend to remember all of the games you won by drawing your deck and disregard the games you lost because you only Dredged once where Sphinx of Lost Truths would've won you game by being much better in marginal situations.

As far as what I'm running,

4 Serum Powder
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Deep Analysis
4 Phantasmagorian
4 Golgari Grave Troll
4 Stinkweed Imp
4 Golgari Thug
4 Shambling Shell
4 Narcomoeba
4 Nether Shadow
4 Ichorid
4 Bridge from Below
4 Dread Return
2 Sphinx of Lost Truths
2 Flame-Kin Zealot
4 Cabal Therapy

And

4xStreet Wraith
4xDakmor Salvage
4xBloodghast
3xTerrastadon

That's pretty much my entire philosophy behind the deck as it stands.

Edit @ Kevin, I think you can actually SB Ichorid and/or Nether Shadow in favor of MDing Dakmor Salvage and Bloodghasts game 1, it's something I've been thinking alot about but don't really have time to playtest it.

Edit Edit, also if you guys are desinging your SBs to beat any one, unfavorable match up I think you should disregard Storm and focus on Reanimator, because Storm pretty much auto wins game 1 and laughs at your SB cards games 2/3 but Leyline of the Void and that black Faerie fuck over Reanimator pretty hard. I'm pretty sure you get way more utility out of hedging vs. other graveyard decks than Storm judging from the ass kickings I've received vs TES with even 12 cards SBed in for that match up.

[Michael Keller]

Yesterday I wound up playing Manaless Dredge to a perfect 4-0 record in a twenty-plus-man tournament in Springfield, Virginia. For reference, here is the list I played:

4x Ichorid
4x Bridge from Below
4x Narcomoeba
4x Mishra's Bauble
4x Street Wraith
4x Golgari Grave-Troll
4x Golgari Thug
4x Stinkweed Imp
4x Nether Shadow
4X Shambling Shell
4x Dread Return
4x Phantasmagorian
4x Cabal Therapy
2x Urza's Bauble
2x Sphinx of Lost Truths
2x Gigapede
1x River Kelpie
1x Flame-Kin Zealot

//Sideboard

4x Land Grant
4x Reverent Silence
4x Emerald Charm
3x Forest

I wound up running into BUG, NO-Rug (piloted by Alix Hatfield), and Burn after receiving a first-round bye.

Most of the action was pretty self-explanatory, as you can imagine with a Manaless Dredge-variant. I was able to explode on my opponents with the addition of the fourth Phantasmagorian - who enabled me to setup broken turn two plays involving Baubles and Street Wraith. I am quite happy taking them up to four as they've pretty much allowed me to speed the deck up to extraordinarily fast levels.

I decided for this event that raw speed was necessary as most of the meta there is predominantly Mystic and No-Rug, with the occasional Merfolk and Bant. Either way, I am convinced this is the way to go with the deck; I managed to bypass Deed and Leyline in the BUG match due in large part to the explosiveness behind the aforementioned cards. I was quite pleased with the removal of Bloodghasts and Dakmor Salvages; it just seems a little too slow in the deck and quite frankly it doesn't provide anything except a way to recur threats mid to late game when there really shouldn't be either anyways.

I removed Iona and in its stead played River Kelpie, who effectively let me 'Dredge-out' my entire deck in practically a single turn. I managed to blow the game wide open with him in play against BUG, and it allowed me to dig deeper into the deck to find a second or third Dread Return to nail down a Zealot or multiple Therapies to crush my opponent's hand.

The sideboard needs a little work, but not much. I was very pleased with it - especially again against BUG as my opponent ran cards like Deed and Leyline. He was playing multiples of each at a time, to where a Reverent Silence off the top could have been a blowout. He was trading threats for an overkill package dedicated to hate-out aggressive decks like Dredge, and because I was able to keep a hand with Grant/Charm the third game, I felt comfortable at the very least knowing I have an out to his Ace. Fortunately, he didn't draw one, and his Deed didn't even have time to hit the board as he was dead on turn two.

Against Burn, the deck pretty much raced and I blew the guy out after he ramped up a few spells to my dome and I managed to Therapy away his remaining spells. The Baubles came in especially handy because they let me know what my clock looks like (I used Mishra's Bauble for example to see an Arid Mesa on top of his deck, which gave me less of a sense of urgency). I feel the Baubles' information is actually quite useful, and to be honest Gitaxian Probe just would be a mistake in a deck like this absolutely requiring all means to Dredge additional cards without falling prey to Misstep.

One 'Time Walk' a game should be plenty to give away already.

NO-Rug was a battle predicated on how fast Alix could Natural Order out a Progenitus, which wasn't too much of a threat barring a hand with no burn to knock-out my Bridges. I was able to circumvent that by exploding with Phantasmagorian-Street Wraith-Bauble long before he had a chance to do anything. Nether Shadow beats were relevant, and a solid Dread Return targeting Zealot was just enough to seal the deal.

I'm really happy with my take on the deck, and considering the vast improvement I was able to make from week to week, shuffling cards in and out of the main and sideboard, I was able to rest on a build that seems quite efficient for what it is trying to do.

For reference, here were my changes and additions going into this event:

-4 Bloodghast
-3 Dakmor Salvage
-1 Gigapede
-1 Iona, Shield of Emeria

+4 Mishra's Bauble
+2 Urza's Bauble
+1 River Kelpie
+1 Phantasmagorian
+1 Sphinx of the Lost Truths

The changes made have sped the deck up exponentially and again, have proven at least in testing and tournament play to be quite effective.

The sideboard remains to be adjusted. In a local meta, the current configuration seems appropriate. However, in an event of "Open Series" magnitude, I would probably cut some hate for some additional targets.

[Final Fortune]

@Hollywood

I played a similar MD, -2 Gigapede +2 Bauble, before I turned to Lion's Eye Diamond and I agree 12 cantrips, 0 Phyrexian Probes and the full set of Phantasmagorian and Nether Shadow is the way to go for non-LED lists.

Do you not find the Dakmor Salvage and Bloodghast engine not increasing your win percentage over Baubles game 2 vs. non-LotV hate? I usually find Baubles to be a liability post-board and always want to SB them out.

[Michael Keller]

@Hollywood

I played a similar MD, -2 Gigapede +2 Bauble, before I turned to Lion's Eye Diamond and I agree 12 cantrips, 0 Phyrexian Probes and the full set of Phantasmagorian and Nether Shadow is the way to go for non-LED lists.

Do you not find the Dakmor Salvage and Bloodghast engine not increasing your win percentage over Baubles game 2 vs. non-LotV hate? I usually find Baubles to be a liability post-board and always want to SB them out.

I am in the process of reconfiguring the sideboard to possibly board in to that package; the Baubles game one provide so much speed that it's ridiculous, especially with Street Wraith.

Right now, I am more concerned with the sideboard. I like the hate plan, but I want to trim it down a tad.

Also, Phantasmagorian is arguably the best card in this deck. It enables broken plays much faster than a single discard for the end of turn, and cards like Lion's Eye Diamond can become a liability if you're seriously depending on it. I really feel the deck also wants to keep a Gigapede or two in; it gives you the flexibility to confuse your opponent and baits graveyard hate. It becomes more relevant than one might think in certain circumstances.

[KevinTrudeau]

Sample hands 1-50 w/ Final Fortune's list (aside from -1 Flame-kin Zealot for +1 Sphinx of Lost Truths, which seems almost strictly better in a list with four Phantasmagorian). Testing done using Magic Workstation. You'll just have to trust my playing ability:

Number of cards in starting hand/Was Serum Powder in any opening hand?/Number of Serum Powder uses/Was LED cast?/Winning turn

Hand 1- 7/No/0/No/3
Hand 2- 7/No/0/No/5
Hand 3- 7/No/0/Yes/3
Hand 4- 7/Yes/1/Yes/5
Hand 5- 7/Yes/0/Yes/3
Hand 6- 7/No/0/Yes/2
Hand 7- 6/No/0/Yes/4
Hand 8- 7/Yes/1/No/6
Hand 9- 7/Yes/1/No/4
Hand 10- 7/No/0/Yes/3
Hand 11- 4/Yes/1/Yes/5
Hand 12- 7/Yes/0/Yes/4
Hand 13- 7/No/0/Yes/1
Hand 14- 6/Yes/2/Yes/4
Hand 15- 7/Yes/3/Yes/3
Hand 16- 7/No/0/Yes/3
Hand 17- 7/No/0/Yes/4
Hand 18- 7/Yes/1No/6
Hand 19- 7/Yes/1/Yes/2
Hand 20- 6/Yes/0/Yes/4
Hand 21- 7/No/0/No/5
Hand 22- 7/No/0/Yes/3
Hand 23- 7/Yes/0/No/3
Hand 24- 7/Yes/1/Yes/2
Hand 25- 7/No/0/No/6
Hand 26- 7/No/0/Yes/4
Hand 27- 7/No/0/No/6
Hand 28- 7/No/0/No/4
Hand 29- 7/No/0/No/5
Hand 30- 6/No/0/Yes/4
Hand 31- 7/No/0/No/4
Hand 32- 7/No/0/No/6
Hand 33- 7/No/0/Yes/2
Hand 34- 7/Yes/1/Yes/2
Hand 35- 7/No/0/No/3
Hand 36- 7/Yes/0/No/5
Hand 37- 6/No/0/Yes/4
Hand 38- 7/No/0/No/5
Hand 39- 7/Yes/0/No/4
Hand 40- 7/Yes/0/No/4
Hand 41- 6/No/0/Yes/2
Hand 42- 7/Yes/0/No/6
Hand 43- 7/No/0/Yes/2
Hand 44- 7/No/0/No/6
Hand 45- 7/No/0/No/5
Hand 46- 7/No/0/No/4
Hand 47- 4/No/0/Yes/7
Hand 48- 7/Yes/1/Yes/5
Hand 49- 7/No/0/Yes/2
Hand 50- 7/No/0/No/3

Averages:

Mean starting hand: 6.76
Mode starting hand: 7

Mean winning turn: 3.94
Mode winning turn: 4

Mean winning turn with LED having been cast: 3.296
Mode winning turn with LED having been cast: 2;4

Mean winning turn with LED not having been cast: 4.696
Mode winning turn with LED not having been cast: 6

Mean winning turn with Serum Powder in an opening hand: 4.053
Mode winning turn with Serum Powder in an opening hand: 4

Mean winning turn without Serum Powder in an opening hand: 3.871
Mode winning turn without Serum Powder in an opening hand: 4

Mean winning turn with a use of Serum Powder: 4.000
Mode winning turn with a use of Serum Powder: 2;5

Mean winning turn without a use of Serum Powder: 3.923
Mode winning turn without a use of Serum Powder: 4

[KevinTrudeau]

Sample hands 1-50 w/ ajfirecracker's eight Bauble list (aside from -1 River Kelpie for +1 Sphinx of Lost Truths):

Number of cards in starting hand/Was Phantasmagorian binned (before DR-ing Sphinx)?/Winning turn
Hand 1- 7/Yes/4
Hand 2- 7/No/3
Hand 3- 7/Yes/4
Hand 4- 7/Yes/3
Hand 5- 7/Yes/4
Hand 6- 7/Yes/4
Hand 7- 7/No/4
Hand 8- 7/No/6
Hand 9- 7/Yes/3
Hand 10- 7/Yes/4
Hand 11- 7/Yes/4
Hand 12- 6/Yes/5
Hand 13- 7/Yes/3
Hand 14- 7/Yes/4
Hand 15- 7/No/3
Hand 16- 7/Yes/3
Hand 17- 7/Yes/3
Hand 18- 7/Yes/4
Hand 19- 7/Yes/3
Hand 20- 7/Yes/4
Hand 21- 7/Yes/3
Hand 22- 7/No/4
Hand 23- 7/Yes/3
Hand 24- 7/No/3
Hand 25- 7/Yes/4
Hand 26- 7/Yes/4
Hand 27- 7/No/5
Hand 28- 7/Yes/4
Hand 29- 7/No/4
Hand 30- 7/No/3
Hand 31- 7/No/3
Hand 32- 7/Yes/4
Hand 33- 7/Yes/2
Hand 34- 6/Yes/6
Hand 35- 7/Yes/4
Hand 36- 7/No/4
Hand 37- 7/Yes/5
Hand 38- 6/Yes/4
Hand 39- 6/Yes/4
Hand 40- 7/No/4
Hand 41- 7/No/4
Hand 42- 7/Yes/5
Hand 43- 7/Yes/4
Hand 44- 7/Yes/5
Hand 45- 7/Yes/4
Hand 46- 7/Yes/5
Hand 47- 7/Yes/4
Hand 48- 7/Yes/4
Hand 49- 7/Yes/5
Hand 50- 6/Yes/5

Phantasmagorian available in 74% of games before casting Dread Return

Averages:

Mean starting hand: 6.900
Mode starting hand: 7

Mean winning turn: 3.940
Mode winning turn: 4

Mean winning turn with a seven card hand: 3.844
Mode winning turn with a seven card hand: 4

[K1w1]

What do you think about this new creature?
Reaper from the Abyss
Card Type: Creature
Creature Type: Demon
Power/Toughness:6/6
Casting Cost: 3BBB
Card Text: Flying
Morbid -- At the beginning of each end step, if a creature died this turn, destroy target non-Demon creature.

[ajfirecracker]

...ajfirecracker's list...

Mean winning turn: 3.940
Mode winning turn: 4

This is a pretty remarkable result. It would suggest (apparently fairly strongly) that Final Fortune's package is (on average) the same speed as my (anti-fast-combo, right?) list.

I would be interested in the relevant stats for my Hexmage-transformable list, but don't really have the time to run it myself. With 3 River Kelpie and the Bloodghast package, I'm beginning to suspect that it's actually a bit faster than the anti-fast-combo list. It needs Phantasmagorian more strongly, though, and unfortunately doesn't really have the room (unless you start cutting Baubles, which I'm reluctant to do for SB reasons).

[KevinTrudeau]

This is a pretty remarkable result. It would suggest (apparently fairly strongly) that Final Fortune's package is (on average) the same speed as my (anti-fast-combo, right?) list.

I would be interested in the relevant stats for my Hexmage-transformable list, but don't really have the time to run it myself. With 3 River Kelpie and the Bloodghast package, I'm beginning to suspect that it's actually a bit faster than the anti-fast-combo list. It needs Phantasmagorian more strongly, though, and unfortunately doesn't really have the room (unless you start cutting Baubles, which I'm reluctant to do for SB reasons).

Just to prevent any potential confusion, that was the maindeck Final Fortune presented above (with the noted change) pitted against the maindeck of the eight Bauble list (with the noted change):

4 GGT
4 Stinky
4 Thug
4 Shambling Shell

8 Baubles
4 Probe
4 Wraith

4 Narcomoeba
4 Ichorid
2 Nether Shadow

4 Dread Return
4 Bridge
4 Therapy
3 Sphinx
1 FKZ
2 Phantasmagorian

Also, I'd just like to note that Manaless Dredge won me a game earlier tonight at the weekly Legacy tourney I went to even though I didn't even play the deck. My opponent put me on Manaless since he saw me play it last week, and when he won the roll, he put me on the play. I was playing Reanimator. Pretty sweet.

[Oxmo39]

@ Darklingske: Is there a link you can post, with the decklists of the top 8 you played?

Follow the link :

http://www.benelegacy.nl/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3761

[Final Fortune]

This is a pretty remarkable result. It would suggest (apparently fairly strongly) that Final Fortune's package is (on average) the same speed as my (anti-fast-combo, right?) list.

I would be interested in the relevant stats for my Hexmage-transformable list, but don't really have the time to run it myself. With 3 River Kelpie and the Bloodghast package, I'm beginning to suspect that it's actually a bit faster than the anti-fast-combo list. It needs Phantasmagorian more strongly, though, and unfortunately doesn't really have the room (unless you start cutting Baubles, which I'm reluctant to do for SB reasons).

I'm not certain whether or not the mean average is as imporant as the exact distribution of turn 1, 2 and 3 wins LED decks have over Bauble decks, becausing racing other deck's fundamental turns is what's relevant.

Thanks for putting in the work tho' Kevin.

[Final Fortune]

This is a pretty remarkable result. It would suggest (apparently fairly strongly) that Final Fortune's package is (on average) the same speed as my (anti-fast-combo, right?) list.

I would be interested in the relevant stats for my Hexmage-transformable list, but don't really have the time to run it myself. With 3 River Kelpie and the Bloodghast package, I'm beginning to suspect that it's actually a bit faster than the anti-fast-combo list. It needs Phantasmagorian more strongly, though, and unfortunately doesn't really have the room (unless you start cutting Baubles, which I'm reluctant to do for SB reasons).

I'm not certain whether or not the mean average is as imporant as the exact distribution of turn 1, 2 and 3 wins LED decks have over Bauble decks, becausing racing other deck's fundamental turns is what's relevant.

Thanks for putting in the work tho' Kevin.

[ajfirecracker]

I'm not certain whether or not the mean average is as imporant as the exact distribution of turn 1, 2 and 3 wins LED decks have over Bauble decks, becausing racing other deck's fundamental turns is what's relevant.

Thanks for putting in the work tho' Kevin.

Actually it depends entirely on the distribution of fundamental turns in the rest of the format. If a lot of people are playing very fast combo decks (and I mean a lot) then you shouldn't play manaless dredge to begin with, but if you do your only hope is to go for the higher-variance LED-based list and hope to race enough of the time to win. If people are playing decks that kill on turn 5-6 like clockwork you're actually much better off with my list, as you'll win all of the games and lose basically none, versus the LED-based list which will actually lose more games in that case. (Since it has larger numbers of extreme games in both directions).

[NecroYawgmoth]

so, after a lot testing...

how are we supposed to win against a superfast deck like Affinity, which open with double Relic?

Phantasmagorian is by no way an option, when we get double timewalked and they start swinging with Master of Etherium and stuff...

[Michael Keller]

so, after a lot testing...

how are we supposed to win against a superfast deck like Affinity, which open with double Relic?

Phantasmagorian is by no way an option, when we get double timewalked and they start swinging with Master of Etherium and stuff...

I am quite certain the odds of Affinity being able to open with double-Relic of Progenitus are not that good. One, maybe. But two requires a bit of luck. Remember, Affinity doesn't mulligan that often, so you're talking about a straight-seven opening up with two Relic and no mulligan. Supposing that doesn't happen and the Affinity player needs to mulligan into that, that can really dumb their hand down enough to where they might not even have a good clock against you. It would be hard to play around, though.

Also, Affinity's only real way of beating Manaless Ichorid is to apply pressure with Cranial Plating and Ornithopter, and assuming they even can, they get blown out by the time they are able apply lethal on board. Affinity rarely plays removal, so all you need to do is stall with a Narcomoeba and proceed to turn your deck upside down a turn or two later and completely destroy them while they opt to turn their creatures sideways - subsequently opening them up for a lethal counter-attack. If they don't attack, well then they'll have to contend with a horde of Zombie tokens.

Playing around Relic and Crypt isn't that hard, really. In order for Affinity to get double-Relic on board, the rest of their hand isn't going to be very productive besides a threat or two. I'm quite certain any opponent you drops two Relics against a Manaless Dredge player is going to win. Working around one is completely doable, but two is extremely difficult - especially if they have a clock. It really wouldn't matter what they're playing at that point; it's just bad.

[KevinTrudeau]

how are we supposed to win against a superfast deck like Affinity, which open with double Relic?

Every deck has a nut hand that they pretty much auto-lose to: three counterspells and an Ethersworn Canonist against Storm, or three Pyroblasts, a Grim Lavamancer, and a Tarmogoyf against Merfolk, or any keepable Solidarity hand against 43 Lands, for example. That hand happens to be one of those hands for Manaless Dredge. Take the (likely) loss and move on.

[NecroYawgmoth]

sry, I misstyped in my last post... I meant a single Relic... a single Relic followed by a fast beater [like Master of Etherium, or Plated Thopter] is kinda unbeatable, cuz the only way to play around Relic is Phantasmagorian, and then double timewalking yourself with an "response->discard3", okay Response Streetwraith into Relic ativation is okay also, but that happens more rarely than a Phantasmagorian to me...

Problem is not Crypts or Traps and the like...

It's just Relic followed by fast beats seems as unwinnable as Leyline, thanks to 3 rounds waiting to start dredging again...

If I always suppose to lose against Leyline AND Relic than I really se no use in playing this over standard Drede =(

Also, what are the best DR-targets here for the main? Is Kelpie better than Sphinx? Do we need the FKZ maindeck, or is "permanent removal" enough?

[Michael Keller]

sry, I misstyped in my last post... I meant a single Relic... a single Relic followed by a fast beater [like Master of Etherium, or Plated Thopter] is kinda unbeatable, cuz the only way to play around Relic is Phantasmagorian, and then double timewalking yourself with an "response->discard3", okay Response Streetwraith into Relic ativation is okay also, but that happens more rarely than a Phantasmagorian to me...

Problem is not Crypts or Traps and the like...

It's just Relic followed by fast beats seems as unwinnable as Leyline, thanks to 3 rounds waiting to start dredging again...

If I always suppose to lose against Leyline AND Relic than I really se no use in playing this over standard Drede =(

Also, what are the best DR-targets here for the main? Is Kelpie better than Sphinx? Do we need the FKZ maindeck, or is "permanent removal" enough?

I strongly recommend you go back and do some research on this archetype and the archetype of Dredge in general before automatically assuming the deck is completely cold to graveyard hate. You learn to play against cards like that; it isn't just acquired knowledge.

You need time and practice to master playing around hate and with the deck in general. You don't just pick the deck up and automatically assume you're going to run the table with it. It takes serious studying and reading articles published by those players who can better help you understand what it takes to succeed with it.

And to answer your question on Dread Return targets: I would check back on previous posts regarding the various configurations people are suggesting to run. My current configuration looks like this:

2x Sphinx of Lost Truths
1x River Kelpie
1x Flame-Kin Zealot

Zealot is necessary to win the game on the spot without having to worry about waiting a turn to win the game. By clearing the path with Cabal Therapies and running through your deck with multiple Dread Returns (potentially) bringing cards like Sphinx and Kelpie back, you're basically going to dump your deck sideways. Master of Etherium is not going to be a problem at all; he's cold to a single Zombie-block and even sustaining a few extra points of damage he provides to alternate attackers isn't going to do anything against you.

You're going to turn your deck upside down with lightning-fast Dredging and Returning; a single swing with a 'Returned Zealot and multiple Zombies is generally way more than enough to seal the deal. Affinity does apply pressure early, but generally by turn three it isn't going to be enough when you can chump with cards like Zombie tokens, Nether Shadow, and Narcomoeba, and just blow them out the next turn.

[NecroYawgmoth]

But you CAN'T chump on turn 3-4 when they start with Relic -_- ...so hard to understand?

I played "normal Dredge" a lot in the past, and I know how to play around hate with it.. It's not that I am a total stupid Dredrge player. I read every Dredge Article, and I play it for a long time, and know how to "use" the archetype...

Maybe I am not so "lightning fast" atm because my only targets are Angel of Despair and Iona.

[Gui]

Yeah, I know Necro, and I know he meant single relic instead of double relic there. He told me earlier today about his testings and how relic was the hardest hate to fight. (disconsidering leyline, in which there isn't much a fight at the moment anyways.)

No need to talk as if he was some random person, he plays regular dredge for a long time.

Besides, it's well known that hate + clock is Dredge's worse enemy, regular, LED or manaless.

[Michael Keller]

But you CAN'T chump on turn 3-4 when they start with Relic -_- ...so hard to understand?

I played "normal Dredge" a lot in the past, and I know how to play around hate with it.. It's not that I am a total stupid Dredrge player. I read every Dredge Article, and I play it for a long time, and know how to "use" the archetype...

Maybe I am not so "lightning fast" atm because my only targets are Angel of Despair and Iona.

How do you figure?

When you proceed to your discard step, you discard a Dredger. That leaves you with seven cards in your hand. Your opponent will then activate Relic of Progenitus (single tap), and you cycle Street Wraith. This will put five or six cards into your graveyard, and upon resolution, you exile Street Wraith (or whatever other useless card you hit) - while you return back to a healthy seven cards in hand as Street Wraith replaces itself with the Dredger - fully ready to discard next turn after your draw step. This trick can also be used in conjunction with Relic's secondary ability (this is turn three or four, now).

And if you hit a Narcomoeba off of that Dredge, well there is your chump-blocker...if you absolutely need it.

The question is whether or not your opponent will then activate Relic for its secondary ability, which is fine, because all it really did was knock out five or six cards. Your opponent has to weigh when the best time to cash in on his or her Relic is. If they opt to pass on using it sooner than later, you can always slow-Dredge with Shambling Shell or Thug, and bait with Gigapede.

Also, if you say you know how to play around hate (like Relic or Crypt) with land-based Dredge, there really isn't too much of a difference between this archetype and that one as it pertains to playing around hate, so I'm not sure why you're asking a question to which you purportedly should already know the answer to...

@Gui: To be honest, I judge people's ideas here on how well they articulate their thoughts and how well they use proper grammar (like most people should do on the internet or any forum for that matter; it's also necessary here). It (at least) shows they care about what they're talking about and make it easier to understand what they are asking or saying. He obviously meant something different than what he said, which was confusing because of the grammatical errors in his post. Even Kevin sounded confused.

[kirkusjones]

So I've been lurking in this thread for awhile, and its definitely been a big help with tweaking my build. For the most part, I prefer this version to regular mana dredge, though sometimes I miss the utility of firestorm. Anyways, I putting a sideboard together for a tournament next week, but I'm going in essentially blind. Based on what's been put up in here, I think I'm going to go for a mix of dread return targets and the reverent silence fetch combo. I have a couple of questions though.

1. Forests or Dryad Arbor (or 2 and 2?)
2. Land Grant or Fetchlands?
3. Which DR targets? I'm currently planning on 2 sphinx, 1 FKZ, 1 Kelpie maindeck, with Elesh, Terrastodon and Blazing Archon in the board. Should I drop the Archon for Iona/Primus?

[Michael Keller]

1. Forests or Dryad Arbor (or 2 and 2?)

I run Forests because they tap for mana immediately; Dryad Arbor is only really good if you're only running Reverent Silence in the board (I run additional hate-bears). It's a body, though.


2. Land Grant or Fetchlands?

I run Land Grant because it replaces itself with a land back into your hand, keeping you at eight cards in your opening draw. In the event you have a Land Grant in your opening draw and your opponent doesn't open with Leyline, you can still discard your turn two (assuming you're forced on the play).


3. Which DR targets? I'm currently planning on 2 sphinx, 1 FKZ, 1 Kelpie maindeck, with Elesh, Terrastodon and Blazing Archon in the board. Should I drop the Archon for Iona/Primus?

That is my current configuration; I'm really liking it and it seems effective. The Kelpie/Sphinx configuration is really interchangeable, but Kelpie has provided me more explosive plays and pretty much Dredges your entire deck by himself. Sphinx, however, can do roughly the same thing - but he is less dependent on Flashback and recursive creatures the turn he comes into play. Even a simple Therapy can cause Kelpie to go crazy, with two triggers on the stack - one for the Therapy as being cast, another as Kelpie comes back into play (he Persists).

[NecroYawgmoth]

yeah... I know that it works fine with Street Wraithes, but I find myself waaaaaay more often having Phantasm than Street Wraith =/ Bad luck I guess =( -> Maybe I am just pissed that I lost every game to Relic today, but maybe it's just bad luck... I will test more

btw, how is the Land Grant?

I am thinking of Land Grant with 2 Forests and 1 Dryad Arbor, because you can fetch the Arbor if you are going for Silence, and then you can transform the Dryad into Zombies... as a 1 off it looks be more awesome than a Forest to me.

Sry for my grammar errors btw, but it's really late here and I am kinda tired and still multitasking a lot of stuff. I need to focus more on what I am doing =/

[KevinTrudeau]

sry, I misstyped in my last post... I meant a single Relic... a single Relic followed by a fast beater [like Master of Etherium, or Plated Thopter] is kinda unbeatable, cuz the only way to play around Relic is Phantasmagorian, and then double timewalking yourself with an "response->discard3", okay Response Streetwraith into Relic ativation is okay also, but that happens more rarely than a Phantasmagorian to me...

Problem is not Crypts or Traps and the like...

It's just Relic followed by fast beats seems as unwinnable as Leyline, thanks to 3 rounds waiting to start dredging again...

If I always suppose to lose against Leyline AND Relic than I really se no use in playing this over standard Drede =(

Also, what are the best DR-targets here for the main? Is Kelpie better than Sphinx? Do we need the FKZ maindeck, or is "permanent removal" enough?

While there is no way to fully dodge Relic of Progenitus unless you run a sideboard that intends to ignore it (check out ajfirecracker's list), there are ways to negate its power to that of a Tormod's Crypt; since this deck is leagues more resilient than mana builds, Tormod's Crypt is actually not as bad as one would initially think (though it's still bad, don't get me wrong).

You highlighted one way to circumvent the tap ability- discard Phantasmagorian. It's the worst of all solutions, but it's at least something. Hollywood highlighted another one, cycling Street Wraith in response to the tap ability. This is the one you hope for, as you'll assuredly have a dredger in hand to rebuild if your opponent pulls the trigger on Relic, and it doesn't cost you any turns. I know of two others off of the top of my head:

-Play a Bauble on the turn where you would normally discard down to seven. Don't crack it, and pass. Opp. then plays Relic. Draw for the turn, and then discard your dredger. Since no one gets priority during the cleanup step, your opponent will have to wait until their turn to tap Relic (meaning, they can't tap Relic twice during the span between you discarding and dredging for the first time). If they do tap Relic on their turn, simply sac the Bauble and exile it instead of the dredger.

-Play two or more Gitaxian Probes on the first turn, and then discard your dredger.

As for Kelpie vs. Sphinx, that is something I'm still undecided on. Sphinx is definitely the safer card, which is why I tentatively utilize it solely since it has a lower chance of bricking than Kelpie. Kelpie though has a much higher upside in that it has the potential to dredge your entire library while only using one Dread Return, meaning you could potentially cast two forms of permanent destruction post-board (such as Child of Alara and Realm Razer, or Terastodon and Angel of Despair) in addition to a Flame-kin Zealot on the same turn.


Elesh, Terrastodon and Blazing Archon in the board. Should I drop the Archon for Iona/Primus?

I'd for sure cut Blazing Archon for Angel of Despair right off the bat- we can potentially chump with Zombie tokens all day against beatdown decks, and as long as we're above fifteen life, we laugh at Emrakul. I'd also just cut Elesh Norn for more sideboard space since it falls into the Iona category of not guaranteeing a win (or quashing a card that would cause us to lose like Propaganda) when exhumed; that is, unless your meta is chock-full of Dredge, in which case it actually does win the game on the spot (barring Chain of Vapor).


Even a simple Therapy can cause Kelpie to go crazy, with two triggers on the stack - one for the Therapy as being cast, another as Kelpie comes back into play (he Persists).

Just to clear up any potential rules snafu that might occur down the line, Kelpie will only trigger once (or won't if it has a -1/-1 counter), for Persist, if it gets sacced with Cabal Therapy; since saccing it is part of the cost of casting Cabal Therapy, it will be in the 'yard before Therapy is fully cast, meaning it won't actually be in play to see Therapy get cast.

[Izor]

Also, Affinity's only real way of beating Manaless Ichorid is to apply pressure with Cranial Plating and Ornithopter, and assuming they even can, they get blown out by the time they are able apply lethal on board. Affinity rarely plays removal, so all you need to do is stall with a Narcomoeba and proceed to turn your deck upside down a turn or two later and completely destroy them while they opt to turn their creatures sideways - subsequently opening them up for a lethal counter-attack. If they don't attack, well then they'll have to contend with a horde of Zombie tokens.

And what about Arcbound Ravager, who makes sure you'll never have a single Zombie in play for the whole game? What about Etched Champion, being unblockable, thus unstoppable with any means to pump it? What about a turn 2-3 Tezzeret, who gives you exactly one more turn before you lose all your life points? Affinity, if undisrupted, usually has lethal on the board by turn 3-4. And by that I mean evasive lethal. I doubt you can do anything about that.

That being said and in order to answer the initial question, there is just no way Dredge wins through a hate plus presure Affinity hand. Even without hate, Affinity is heavily favored in this matchup.

And I'm saying this from a Dredge player's perspective, I'd be happyif it wasn't so. But it's really bad for us. I miss Ancient Grudge and Firestorm so much everytime I play that matchup (and I play it very often)

[kirkusjones]

Thanks for the input guys! I think I'm going to go with the grants, 3 forests and a singleton arbor. As for DR targets, I'll drop the Archon for an Angel of Despair for sure. I would love to fit the magic baby-razer combo in (I've used it before casually and it was awesome) but I think I'll stick with the dependability of Terrastodon and maybe Primus.

I can't remember if it has, but has a sideboard of land grant, taiga, reverent silence and firestorm ever been discussed? Also, what do you gentlemen think of sickening shoal? Someone mentioned it earlier on and it's grabbed my attention.

[Michael Keller]

And what about Arcbound Ravager, who makes sure you'll never have a single Zombie in play for the whole game? What about Etched Champion, being unblockable, thus unstoppable with any means to pump it? What about a turn 2-3 Tezzeret, who gives you exactly one more turn before you lose all your life points? Affinity, if undisrupted, usually has lethal on the board by turn 3-4. And by that I mean evasive lethal. I doubt you can do anything about that.

That being said and in order to answer the initial question, there is just no way Dredge wins through a hate plus presure Affinity hand. Even without hate, Affinity is heavily favored in this matchup.

And I'm saying this from a Dredge player's perspective, I'd be happyif it wasn't so. But it's really bad for us. I miss Ancient Grudge and Firestorm so much everytime I play that matchup (and I play it very often)

Do you honestly think an opponent taking the time to hard-cast creatures like Etched Champion, Arcbound Ravager, or even a Tezzeret are even going to matter in this match? I hope you're not serious, because I'm sorry to disappoint you but Affinity is far from heavily favored in this match. None of those creatures matter by the time you're able to blow them out, and you can just block Ravager all day. Etched Champion is like the only creature you can't block aside from Ornithopter, and that can be blocked by Narcomoeba.

In fact, I'll go as so far to say Manaless Dredge is slightly favored in this match, for the simple reason Affinity requires several turns to finish a game off, where as this deck requires a single alpha-strike. A smart Affinity player is not going to tap out all of their threats so they can block and hopefully remove some of your Bridges. This is where the game because a mess of stall tactics after turn two, and you can bet Affinity is not going to match you threat for threat when you Dread Return into a Kelpie or Sphinx.

And, by the time an Affinity player gets Tezzeret online, they will hardly be doing lethal damage to you. At most they will only have six to seven artifacts in play by turns three or four, and that amounts to twelve to fourteen damage. This is assuming you've Dredged into absolutely nothing relevant (which is nigh improbable), you haven't 'Therapied away one of only two relevant bombs against you, and you haven't Dread Returned by turn three into any one of your bombs.

Affinity is a deck that can just walk into a multitude of problems. It needs a few turns to go lethal, generally by turn four against a similarly turbo-aggressive deck, and by that time you're already on the way to winning by dumping a dozen 3/3 hasty dudes into play.

I just think you seriously overestimate the Affinity match. I fail to see how dropping a bunch of vanilla 1/1's, 2/2's, and 0/2's are even relevant in this matchup when you hit them with ten times as many creatures faster than they can. Ravager is cute for knocking out Bridges, but in the event that happens, they are being forced to trim their threat-density down, or punish their mana-sources. In other words, a tremendously fast start on their part can be completely contradicated at the cost of a single Bridge from Below. In this instance, you have enough firepower to send in a ridiculous amount of damage either by smashing face with hasty Ichorids and Nether Shadows - which can also be pumped by Zealot for an alpha strike.

Affinity runs no hasty threats - we do.

There are really only two cards that matter in this match: Cranial Plating and Tezzeret. You can race either by forcing blockers or shoving attackers into the red-zone. Ravager is simply there to counter-act your Bridges at the cost of an early creature. You can race just as fast if you want to, if not faster. You run Cabal Therapy; put it to work early.

@Kevin: That is correct.

[ajfirecracker]

That is my current configuration; I'm really liking it and it seems effective. The Kelpie/Sphinx configuration is really interchangeable, but Kelpie has provided me more explosive plays and pretty much Dredges your entire deck by himself. Sphinx, however, can do roughly the same thing - but he is less dependent on Flashback and recursive creatures the turn he comes into play. Even a simple Therapy can cause Kelpie to go crazy, with two triggers on the stack - one for the Therapy as being cast, another as Kelpie comes back into play (he Persists).

Despite Kelpie not working in quite this way, it is extremely explosive. When you sacrifice it to Cabal Therapy, it's already in the graveyard by the time it would trigger, and the ability doesn't work from the graveyard, so it won't trigger (at the very least this is true of MTGO).


... Relic of Progenitus ... You highlighted one way to circumvent the tap ability...

-Play two or more Gitaxian Probes on the first turn, and then discard your dredger.

You can also circumvent it with a single probe. Simply draw a discard a blank card, then on your next turn cycle Gitaxian Probe (by which I mean cast it, of course) and discard a dredger. Relic's tap ability is insufficient to stop this line of play.

[K1w1]

Thanks for the input guys! I think I'm going to go with the grants, 3 forests and a singleton arbor. As for DR targets, I'll drop the Archon for an Angel of Despair for sure. I would love to fit the magic baby-razer combo in (I've used it before casually and it was awesome) but I think I'll stick with the dependability of Terrastodon and maybe Primus.

I can't remember if it has, but has a sideboard of land grant, taiga, reverent silence and firestorm ever been discussed? Also, what do you gentlemen think of sickening shoal? Someone mentioned it earlier on and it's grabbed my attention.

Yeah finally. I just recommend sickening shoal. But it's just for me i think, because i'm not playing the Sphinx/FKZ combo and i can easily kill a Knight. And that's what i want! Because i don't wanna see any Bojuka Bog's by using the ability from a Knight.

Except of Gate ofc. They are also playing 1 main without searching for it.

As i said, i played at a tourney and saw another manaless-dredger placed the 2. out of 73.

This is the list:
1 Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite
1 Iona, Shield of Emeria
4 Narcomoeba
3 Bloodghast
4 Bridge from Below
4 Cabal Therapy
4 Dread Return
4 Golgari Thug
4 Ichorid
4 Nether Shadow
4 Phantasmagorian
4 Sickening Shoal
4 Stinkweed Imp
4 Street Wraith
4 Golgari Grave-Troll
1 Woodfall Primus
4 Shambling Shell
2 Dakmor Salvage

//Sideboard:
1 Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite
4 Contagion
2 Leyline of the Void
2 Ravenous Trap
1 Sadistic Hypnotist
1 Angel of Despair
1 Realm Razer
3 Urza's Bauble

I'm actually playing this list for testing, but i'm really not sure about not playing the Sphinx/FKZ combo.
What do you think about it?

[K1w1]

Thanks for the input guys! I think I'm going to go with the grants, 3 forests and a singleton arbor. As for DR targets, I'll drop the Archon for an Angel of Despair for sure. I would love to fit the magic baby-razer combo in (I've used it before casually and it was awesome) but I think I'll stick with the dependability of Terrastodon and maybe Primus.

I can't remember if it has, but has a sideboard of land grant, taiga, reverent silence and firestorm ever been discussed? Also, what do you gentlemen think of sickening shoal? Someone mentioned it earlier on and it's grabbed my attention.

Yeah finally. I just recommend sickening shoal. But it's just for me i think, because i'm not playing the Sphinx/FKZ combo and i can easily kill a Knight. And that's what i want! Because i don't wanna see any Bojuka Bog's by using the ability from a Knight.

Except of Gate ofc. They are also playing 1 main without searching for it.

As i said, i played at a tourney and saw another manaless-dredger placed the 2. out of 73.

This is the list:
1 Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite
1 Iona, Shield of Emeria
4 Narcomoeba
3 Bloodghast
4 Bridge from Below
4 Cabal Therapy
4 Dread Return
4 Golgari Thug
4 Ichorid
4 Nether Shadow
4 Phantasmagorian
4 Sickening Shoal
4 Stinkweed Imp
4 Street Wraith
4 Golgari Grave-Troll
1 Woodfall Primus
4 Shambling Shell
2 Dakmor Salvage

//Sideboard:
1 Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite
4 Contagion
2 Leyline of the Void
2 Ravenous Trap
1 Sadistic Hypnotist
1 Angel of Despair
1 Realm Razer
3 Urza's Bauble

I'm actually playing this list for testing, but i'm really not sure about not playing the Sphinx/FKZ combo.
What do you think about it?

[Izor]

Do you honestly think an opponent taking the time to hard-cast creatures like Etched Champion, Arcbound Ravager, or even a Tezzeret are even going to matter in this match? None of those creatures matter by the time you're able to blow them out, and you can just block Ravager all day. Etched Champion is like the only creature you can't block aside from Ornithopter, and that can be blocked by Narcomoeba.

Yes, I seriously think so. Manaless typically wins on turn 3-4 (if playing FKZ), I think we agree here. Of course, Affinity goes first. They usually drop Champion on turn 2 and Tezzeret by turn 3. Please don't claim that manaless Dredge can race Affinity all the time on the draw if they kill you by turn 4. Also, you seem to not understand exactly what Ravager actually does in this matchup. Yes, you can block it, that's not the problem. He just makes sure you will never have a single Zombie token in play. Do you realize that manaless Dredge can not win without Zombie Tokens in play, especially not by turn 4-5? Not even if you resolve 5 DRs (not that you would ever be able to without Bridges). Besides, they play 4 Ornithopter, 4 Etched, 4 Vault Skirge and usually 4 Signal Pest as well as sometimes some Blinkmoth Nexus. That's more evasive critters than you gave them.


In fact, I'll go as so far to say Manaless Dredge is slightly favored in this match, for the simple reason Affinity requires several turns to finish a game off, where as this deck requires a single alpha-strike. A smart Affinity player is not going to tap out all of their threats so they can block and hopefully remove some of your Bridges. This is where the game because a mess of stall tactics after turn two, and you can bet Affinity is not going to match you threat for threat when you Dread Return into a Kelpie or Sphinx.

If they have an evasive creature, you are the one who has to go offensive first, losing your Bridges in the process. If they have Ravager, it's even worse. You can of course claim that they have none of those, but that's approximately as probable as you not having a Dredger in your opener.


Affinity is a deck that can just walk into a multitude of problems. It needs a few turns to go lethal, generally by turn four against a similarly turbo-aggressive deck, and by that time you're already on the way to winning by dumping a dozen 3/3 hasty dudes into play.

Another thing that's pretty much invalidated by a Ravager.


I just think you seriously overestimate the Affinity match. I fail to see how dropping a bunch of vanilla 1/1's, 2/2's, and 0/2's are even relevant in this matchup when you hit them with ten times as many creatures faster than they can. Ravager is cute for knocking out Bridges, but in the event that happens, they are being forced to trim their threat-density down, or punish their mana-sources. In other words, a tremendously fast start on their part can be completely contradicated at the cost of a single Bridge from Below. In this instance, you have enough firepower to send in a ridiculous amount of damage either by smashing face with hasty Ichorids and Nether Shadows - which can also be pumped by Zealot for an alpha strike.

Affinity runs no hasty threats - we do.

It's exactly that. All thise vanilla dudes are exactly what will keep your whole deck from working with Ravager. They play like 20 creatures they can sacrifice into Ravager, it's practically impossible that their whole pressure is taken away by one sac. I guess we can agree that you will not ever win via FKZ if you have no Bridges. So don't just pretend that they are the aggro deck that can just try to bash until you pull off your undisruptable combo. They disrupt your whole game plan. At that point our combo finish is pretty meh, if FKZ is your only hasty dude after DR.


There are really only two cards that matter in this match: Cranial Plating and Tezzeret. You can race either by forcing blockers or shoving attackers into the red-zone. Ravager is simply there to counter-act your Bridges at the cost of an early creature. You can race just as fast if you want to, if not faster. You run Cabal Therapy; put it to work early.

They have a huge load of stuff that can kill you in a moment and you can do pretty much nothing against any card that comes down turn 2, because there is just no single way you can cast a Therapy by their second turn.

Today I lost against Affinity with my mana build, even though I had turn 1 Careful Study and turn 2 Careful Study plus Breakthrough. Just because of one single Ravager with a bit of food. And a turn 2 Etched. Dredge just loses to that.


But anyway, I don't want to go overboard with one single matchup in this thread.

[ajfirecracker]

Arcbound Ravager

I think the vast majority of affinity builds these days are cutting Ravager. It's been my experience in games, and it's the impression I've gotten looking at high-placing decklists. Tezzeret, Agent of Bolas is a problem if he ultimates very quickly and we can't punch through their free creatures, but we should usually be able to whack him for some damage, which means they might need to have a very good hand to beat us (sans Ravager). Something along the lines of evasive guy + Cranial Plating + Tezzeret may be necessary to have a good shot at winning.

If they do cut Ravager, we get zombie tokens and the matchup becomes orders of magnitude easier.

[Final Fortune]

Both Affinity and Elves are generally bad match ups, I'd say Affinity is impossible to overcome between game 1 and game 2 + hate without Lion's Eye Diamond racing. Unfortunately Dredge does have bad match ups game 1 vs. anything that's aggro-combo, Storm or Reanimator and Reanimator is the only match up you can really shore up with your SB.

[Izor]

I absolutely agree that Arcbound Ravager is the man who makes the difference. If they don't run it, our chances are significantly better.

However, lists that run Etched Champion do usually run 4 Ravagers, just because he acts as Plating no 5-8 for Champion to become Progenitus. People had started to cut Ravagers back when they cut Disciple, but nowadays, where every list plays Etched, he's usually in there as well. He's also a nice trick against Remoal as well as Batterskull Tokens and Jitte (sac sth in resp to blocking).

[Michael Keller]

Yes, I seriously think so. Manaless typically wins on turn 3-4 (if playing FKZ), I think we agree here. Of course, Affinity goes first. They usually drop Champion on turn 2 and Tezzeret by turn 3. Please don't claim that manaless Dredge can race Affinity all the time on the draw if they kill you by turn 4. Also, you seem to not understand exactly what Ravager actually does in this matchup. Yes, you can block it, that's not the problem. He just makes sure you will never have a single Zombie token in play. Do you realize that manaless Dredge can not win without Zombie Tokens in play, especially not by turn 4-5? Not even if you resolve 5 DRs (not that you would ever be able to without Bridges). Besides, they play 4 Ornithopter, 4 Etched, 4 Vault Skirge and usually 4 Signal Pest as well as sometimes some Blinkmoth Nexus. That's more evasive critters than you gave them.


I absolutely agree that Arcbound Ravager is the man who makes the difference. If they don't run it, our chances are significantly better.

However, lists that run Etched Champion do usually run 4 Ravagers, just because he acts as Plating no 5-8 for Champion to become Progenitus. People had started to cut Ravagers back when they cut Disciple, but nowadays, where every list plays Etched, he's usually in there as well. He's also a nice trick against Remoal as well as Batterskull Tokens and Jitte (sac sth in resp to blocking).

Manaless Ichorid's threat-density is far more involved with grinding out the early game and Dread Return-ing a creature with a significant, game-swinging "come-into-play" effect (like Kelpie or Sphinx) rather than traditional 'Mana' Ichorid variants with a signifiactly higher mulligan percentage and a much less explosive potential than that of its counterpart. Manaless Dredge is notorious for grinding-out games using Ichorid, Nether Shadow, and Street Wraith as a ridiculously fast engine that can put serious pressure on an opponent even without a single Bridge in the graveyard. You can't compare Manaless and Mana Dredge in this match-up; the intricacies are far too important to overlook.

You stated the match-up is "significantly" higher in Affinity's favor, and I'm stating it is untrue. Affinity's opening hands are largely predicated on dumping a large number of inconsequential threats and turning that advantage into something more powerful with the use of cards like Cranial Plating and Tezzeret. Even with these cards, a single attack cannot do nearly the same amount of damage as a single fundamental turn with Manaless Dredge as you have the capability of winning the game in a single turn. And, assuming you can't, you're still forcing an opponent to blow-out his or her threat base and opening themselves up for a devastating counter-strike.

I'm not sure how you're playing this match-up, but the fact is that if an Arcbound Ravager hits the table turns two or three, and you're sitting there with a single Bridge and a few Ichorids, Ravager is either going to suck up all of that player's resources or take some damage - and in a hurry. I'd like to see your 'hard data' that is based on your conclusion the Manaless version's win-percentage is abysmal against Affinity, because frankly it sounds bogus (no offense). Arcbound Ravager does absolutely nothing but sit there and soak up a Bridge or two when you're just going to blow through a very large percentage of your deck the same turn and while your grvaeyard is stacked with Shadows and Ichorids - in conjunction with Narcomoebas and a few Zombie tokens - your hapless opponent will be left to ponder whether they should attack or not (assuming they have a threat still alive from ravager's activation), when you know you will.

It's either you (Affinity player) lose your board turn three or die. It's a pretty fair trade when you consider you can just chump with cards like Narcomoeba or Nether Shadow if you absolutely have to. Manaless Dredge is far better at grinding out wins and there really isn't anything Affinity can do but cast relatively innocuous cards and be forced to either attack and do some damage, or face an unanticipated amount of damage the proceeding turn. I've been sitting here goldfishing dozens of hands against Affinity for the last hour and I'm still trying to figure out where you came to that conclusion.

[Michael Keller]

Yes, I seriously think so. Manaless typically wins on turn 3-4 (if playing FKZ), I think we agree here. Of course, Affinity goes first. They usually drop Champion on turn 2 and Tezzeret by turn 3. Please don't claim that manaless Dredge can race Affinity all the time on the draw if they kill you by turn 4. Also, you seem to not understand exactly what Ravager actually does in this matchup. Yes, you can block it, that's not the problem. He just makes sure you will never have a single Zombie token in play. Do you realize that manaless Dredge can not win without Zombie Tokens in play, especially not by turn 4-5? Not even if you resolve 5 DRs (not that you would ever be able to without Bridges). Besides, they play 4 Ornithopter, 4 Etched, 4 Vault Skirge and usually 4 Signal Pest as well as sometimes some Blinkmoth Nexus. That's more evasive critters than you gave them.


I absolutely agree that Arcbound Ravager is the man who makes the difference. If they don't run it, our chances are significantly better.

However, lists that run Etched Champion do usually run 4 Ravagers, just because he acts as Plating no 5-8 for Champion to become Progenitus. People had started to cut Ravagers back when they cut Disciple, but nowadays, where every list plays Etched, he's usually in there as well. He's also a nice trick against Remoal as well as Batterskull Tokens and Jitte (sac sth in resp to blocking).

Manaless Ichorid's threat-density is far more involved with grinding out the early game and Dread Return-ing a creature with a significant, game-swinging "come-into-play" effect (like Kelpie or Sphinx) rather than traditional 'Mana' Ichorid variants with a significantly higher mulligan percentage and a slightly less explosive potential than that of its counterpart due in large part to the high number of involved discard outlets, higher number of Dredgers, and larger recursive threat base. Manaless Dredge is notorious for grinding-out games using Ichorid, Nether Shadow, and Street Wraith as a ridiculously fast engine that can put serious pressure on an opponent even without a single Bridge in the graveyard. You can't compare Manaless and Mana Dredge in this match-up; the intricacies are far too important to correlate. Affinity has actually (and ironically) steered away from its namesake, trading speed for more powerful threats like Master of Etherium, Tezzeret, etc. But these cards come down too slow for them to matter in a deck which should win by turn three.

You stated the match-up is "significantly" higher in Affinity's favor, and I'm stating it is untrue. Affinity's opening hands are largely predicated on dumping a large number of inconsequential threats and turning that advantage into something more powerful with the use of cards like Cranial Plating and Tezzeret. Even with these cards, a single attack cannot do nearly the same amount of damage as a single fundamental turn with Manaless Dredge as you have the capability of winning the game in a single turn. And, assuming you can't, you're still forcing an opponent to blow-out his or her threat base and opening themselves up for a devastating counter-strike.

I'm not sure how you're playing this match-up, but the fact is that if an Arcbound Ravager hits the table turns two or three, and you're sitting there with a single Bridge and a few Ichorids, Ravager is either going to suck up all of that player's resources or take some damage - and in a hurry. I'd like to see your 'hard data' that is based on your conclusion the Manaless version's win-percentage is abysmal against Affinity, because frankly it sounds bogus (no offense). Arcbound Ravager does absolutely nothing but sit there and soak up a Bridge or two when you're just going to blow through a very large percentage of your deck the same turn and while your graveyard is stacked with Shadows and Ichorids - in conjunction with Narcomoeba and a few Zombie tokens - your hapless opponent will be left to ponder whether they should attack or not (assuming they have a threat still alive from Ravager's activation), when you know you will.

It's either you (Affinity player) lose your board turn three or die. It's a pretty fair trade when you consider you can just chump with cards like Narcomoeba or Nether Shadow if you absolutely have to. Manaless Dredge is far better at grinding out wins and there really isn't anything Affinity can do but cast relatively innocuous cards and be forced to either attack and do some damage, or face an unanticipated amount of damage the proceeding turn. I've been sitting here gold-fishing dozens of hands against Affinity for the last hour and I'm still trying to figure out where you came to that conclusion.

[KevinTrudeau]

Concerning the Affinity matchup- I completely agree with what Hollywood has had to say. I'm just not seeing it as the boogeyman you make it out to be, Izor. The only card in my mind that truly matters game one is Cranial Plating; multiple Ravager activations means that the opponent's armada will be mitigated, Tezz should never ultimate given our forces should greatly outnumber their untapped blockers, and Etched Champion seems much too slow to do any real harm without the aforementioned Plating. Granted, I don't have much physical experience playing against the deck, but in the one match I've played against it in a tournament setting, the only reason my opponent won game two (I took the match 2-1) was because he found two Cranial Plating and hit for close to exactsies the turn before I would have killed him with FKZ.

If you're really having problems with Affinity, though, you could always throw in a Blazing Archon in the side. While I don't think targets like Archon are good for a general metagame like a Grand Prix, I'm a huge fan of meta-specific sideboard cards, and that might do the trick. It's too bad Uktabi Kong isn't a real card and Furnace Dragon has to be worded the way it is.

@thread- Here's a new sideboard I've been testing with a six Bauble, three Nether Shadow, three Phantasmagorian maindeck. I just got my Baubles in the mail, though I still need two more LED to be able to play it in a paper tourney. I'm slowly approaching the eight Bauble list that I feel is the objectively best list (of what I've seen) with the sideboard in consideration, though until I really feel all fifteen board slots will be greatly needed, I'm content with having a few of them be Mishra's Bauble:

4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Chancellor of the Annex
3 Deep Analysis
2 Mishra's Bauble
1 Terastodon
1 Angel of Despair

Boarding plan vs. faster decks that aren't expected to be running non-Leyline grave hate (such as Storm decks of all varieties, the mirror, and potentially Elves!, Flashless Hulk, and combo decks that run countermagic such as Reanimator, Solidarity, and Breakfast iterations, though the latter category might need respective plans for each archetype in question):

-3 Phantasmagorian
-3 Nether Shadow
-3 a combination of Cabal Therapy and/or Bridge from Below
-3 Sphinx of Lost Truths
-1 Flame-kin Zealot

for

4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Chancellor of the Annex
3 Deep Analysis
2 Mishra's Bauble

I've also been pondering over an LED list similar to the one Final Fortune suggested with a resilience package in the board, though it's still in its early stages. I like it conceptually, since a decklist like that would make better use of the sideboard by allowing for a broader range of playstyle.

Also, does anyone think the first post needs to be updated with up-to-date lists and philosophies, a guide on how to correctly play cantrips, an anti-Relic maneuver compendium, better matchup and boarding details, etc.?

[Final Fortune]

Regarding boarding details, what SB cards are you guys typically SBing out and why? I've typically SBed out all of the draw mechanics, Baubles and DR targets, for resiliency but I'm wondering what, exactly, is the most resilient post board vs. aggro-control + hate?

[KevinTrudeau]

Regarding boarding details, what SB cards are you guys typically SBing out and why? I've typically SBed out all of the draw mechanics, Baubles and DR targets, for resiliency but I'm wondering what, exactly, is the most resilient post board vs. aggro-control + hate?

The cantrips seem like the first thing that would naturally come out (the Baubles especially). As you put it once, the list should look as similar to Rausch's as possible, minus Gigapede and Iona. I don't have the resiliency package down pat, so I don't know for sure, but that's what I would try out first and see what works and what's lacking.

Also, here's the proto LED Manaless list I'm working on:

4 Golgari Grave-Troll
4 Stinkweed Imp
4 Golgari Thug
4 Shambling Shell

4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Street Wraith
4 Gitaxian Probe
2 Deep Analysis
3 Sphinx of Lost Truths (or River Kelpie)

4 Ichorid
4 Narcomoeba
4 Nether Shadow

4 Bridge from Below
4 Dread Return
4 Cabal Therapy
2 Phantasmagorian
1 Flame-kin Zealot

In all honesty, this (or something similar) might be better than Bauble lists (still far, far away from a conclusion on that, though). The numbers are solid for the most part; the only thing that needs to be played around with is the balancing act between Deep Analysis, Nether Shadow, Phantasmagorian, and I suppose Sphinx of Lost Truths and Gitaxian Probe. I suppose you could also try to fit Urza's or Mishra's Bauble(s) in there at the cost of some number of Nether Shadow. Some of the negatives are that you're way more prone to overextend your hand and Bridges, and Relic is more dangerous without Baubles postboard to maneuver around them, but if that's the cost for the deck to become (potentially) a fundamental turn faster and to have way more open slots in the sideboard, then it might just be worth it.

As I was typing this, an intriguing thought popped into my head- what if one were to combine the list above (or something similar) with aj's Dark Depths sideboard? I could easily see Bloodghast in place of Nether Shadow (and, unfortunately, Dakmor Salvage in place of Shambling Shell) speeding up an already fast deck since it can CIP the same turn you'd want to go off, and you'd get all of the benefits of being able to dodge all forms of grave hate. Off to test...

[CabalTherapy]

4 Golgari Grave-Troll
4 Stinkweed Imp
4 Golgari Thug
4 Shambling Shell

4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Street Wraith
4 Gitaxian Probe
2 Deep Analysis
3 Sphinx of Lost Truths (or River Kelpie)

4 Ichorid
4 Narcomoeba
4 Nether Shadow

4 Bridge from Below
4 Dread Return
4 Cabal Therapy
2 Phantasmagorian
1 Flame-kin Zealot


I really like your list but as you said ("...balance between...Phantasmagorian") it will need some testing.
My LED build looks very similar to yours but I use 4 Phantas, because they are just too awesome not running them as a playset.
It can be seen as a core list for LED manaless Dredge.

I' ll do: -1 Sphinx, -1 Shell, +2 Phantasmagorian (geez... what a name^^)

[KPnuts]

Hello all

i was wondering what peopls thoughts would be to using Thought Gorger over sphinx would be, as he can draw more cards is a discard outlet big beat stick that leaves your oponents thinking and scratching there heads and ichorid food,

[Darklingske]

Hey guys,

I went to a tournie last W-E and went 3-3. My list was the LED-deep Anal version. Sb was 4 Chancellor of the Annex, 1 Archon, 1 Elesh Norn, 3 Misty rainforest, 3 Forest, 3 Reverent Silence.
R1 against Merfolk 2-0. Just DDD & returning Shadows & Ichi for the win.
R2 against Alluren 1-2. G2 I had lethal on table, he just had 1 recruiter in hand. And then he topdecked an Alluren & combo'ed out. G3 he had leyline and I didn't board against it since I didn't see them G2. So GG
R3 against reanimator 2-0 I was faster then him.
R4 against Stifflenought. 2-1 G2 he got me with a T2 Dreadnought.
R5 against something control-like 1-2 G1 I won easy, G2&3 leyline resolved and he countered my Silences while beating with a meddling mage.
R6 against Alluren. 0-2 he was just 1 turn faster then me in both games.

[Final Fortune]

Hello all

i was wondering what peopls thoughts would be to using Thought Gorger over sphinx would be, as he can draw more cards is a discard outlet big beat stick that leaves your oponents thinking and scratching there heads and ichorid food,

I have never seen Thought Gorger before, but on paper Thought Gorger looks as tho' it has promise because it serves the roll of 2xPhantasmagorian and River Kelpie while also being a 10/10 Trampler without another Dread Return or Cabal Therapy to activate the draw. I mean, other than having bad synergy with Lion's Eye Diamond, I am having a really hard time thinking of a reason this wouldn't be a strict upgrade to River Kelpie in Bauble Dredge variants because it adds an incredible amount of redundancy. I don't know whether or not it can replace Sphinx of Lost Truths tho' because it's rather vulnerable to Swords to Plowshares and slightly more conditional.

I'll definitely give it a go tho' because I really like the card in theorycraft.

@KevinTrudeau

I think you should probably cut a Dread Return and a Sphinx of Lost Truths before you cut Deep Analysis 3 and 4, mainly because once you get rolling with Lion's Eye Diamond and Deep Analysis you don't need anywhere near as many copies of the Dread Return/Target package as traditional LED lists.

I've considering the Dakmor Salvage/Bloodghast package in the MD before, and I think cutting Shambling Shell and Nether Shadow for them may be the right call if you're trying to goldfish game 1 as fast as possible.

Are you not finding Serum Powder to be the nut high? Not that I really have a problem with MD Street Wraith or Gitaxian Probe, but the deck really, really, really wants LED in it starting hand as much as possible.

What do you think of this list?

4 Serum Powder
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Deep Analysis
4 Street Wraith
2 Phantasmagorian
4 Golgari Grave-Troll
4 Stinkweed Imp
4 Golgari Thug
4 Dakmor Salvage
4 Bloodghast
4 Ichorid
4 Bridge from Below
4 Narcomoeba
3 Dread Return
2 Cephalid Sage
1 Flame Kin Zealot
4 Cabal Therapy

[Final Fortune]

Hello all

i was wondering what peopls thoughts would be to using Thought Gorger over sphinx would be, as he can draw more cards is a discard outlet big beat stick that leaves your oponents thinking and scratching there heads and ichorid food,

I have never seen Thought Gorger before, but on paper Thought Gorger looks as tho' it has promise because it serves the roll of 2xPhantasmagorian and River Kelpie while also being a 10/10 Trampler without another Dread Return or Cabal Therapy to activate the draw. I mean, other than having bad synergy with Lion's Eye Diamond, I am having a really hard time thinking of a reason this wouldn't be a strict upgrade to River Kelpie in Bauble Dredge variants because it adds an incredible amount of redundancy. I don't know whether or not it can replace Sphinx of Lost Truths tho' because it's rather vulnerable to Swords to Plowshares and slightly more conditional.

I'll definitely give it a go tho' because I really like the card in theorycraft.

@KevinTrudeau

I think you should probably cut a Dread Return and a Sphinx of Lost Truths before you cut Deep Analysis 3 and 4, mainly because once you get rolling with Lion's Eye Diamond and Deep Analysis you don't need anywhere near as many copies of the Dread Return/Target package as traditional LED lists.

I've considering the Dakmor Salvage/Bloodghast package in the MD before, and I think cutting Shambling Shell and Nether Shadow for them may be the right call if you're trying to goldfish game 1 as fast as possible.

Are you not finding Serum Powder to be the nut high? Not that I really have a problem with MD Street Wraith or Gitaxian Probe, but the deck really, really, really wants LED in it starting hand as much as possible.

What do you think of this list?

4 Serum Powder
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Deep Analysis
4 Street Wraith
2 Phantasmagorian
4 Golgari Grave-Troll
4 Stinkweed Imp
4 Golgari Thug
4 Dakmor Salvage
4 Bloodghast
4 Ichorid
4 Bridge from Below
4 Narcomoeba
3 Dread Return
2 Cephalid Sage
1 Flame Kin Zealot
4 Cabal Therapy

[KPnuts]

thought gorger is, vonrabvle to swords however the draw afect is when it leaves the batle filed not when it gos to the grave yard so if they swords it there just killing them selves as you dredge the holl deck lol no one will want to kill it :P

[KevinTrudeau]

@Final Fortune- I don't think the deck needs more than three Deep Analysis (at the very most), because I don't think LED absolutely needs to be played in an overly-aggressive manner in which having a set of DA would be beneficial. I feel that LED should, in large part, be played in a similar fashion game one to Baubles in that they should be generally cast only if you've got your engine going (basically, not being greedy with it by using it as a catalyst to start up the engine), meaning that you've got time to dredge into DA as you would Phantasmagorian.

In addition, I don't feel a set of DA would necessarily speed up the deck at all in comparison to two or three, simply because it is entirely predicated on LED mana. Unless you've got two LED, you can only cast one DA, which means you likely won't need a playset to up the chances of seeing multiples.

I am indeed not finding Serum Powder to be all that great. I'd rather play Probe over it because Probe guarantees an advantage if it's in your hand, whereas Powder only adds another variable. In addition, it was shown in that 50 game sample set I posted a few pages back to actually make the deck ~1/10 of a turn slower on average when drawn in an opener and even when used.

Unfortunately, I didn't find the Salvage/Ghast plan to be satisfactory in speeding up the deck. Dredging back two to bring back Bloodghast after binning my hand was just abysmal and kind of counteracted the speed boost of LED+DA.

Overall, my findings with the LED Manaless variant (oxymoron!) were satisfactory. The main reason why I wanted to try out an LED list in the first place was because I felt the deck could potentially come close in averaging the same speed on the back of just Probe and Street Wraith since Baubles I feel help reassure a T4 kill more so than up the chances of a T3 kill (at least with how I strategically play them), and running LED main would not only open up sideboard space, but give the deck a prospective chance of winning against faster decks if need be; I found that to be somewhat true. In addition, LED also opens up the possibility of mulliganing, and can also act as a Bauble in "drawing" ~seven cards by binning your hand, which means it might be as good in theory as Bauble already without the added benefit of DA. I still don't know if an LED list is as good as the six Bauble list I posted above, because as aj put it, the deck only needs to be one turn faster than the fundamental turn in (this, due in large part to Misstep, slower version of) Legacy, but I think the possibility is still wide open and needs to be tested much futher.

Sorry if my ramblings are somewhat incoherent, I've been pretty exhausted this past week.

[ajfirecracker]

thought gorger is, vonrabvle to swords however the draw afect is when it leaves the batle filed not when it gos to the grave yard so if they swords it there just killing them selves as you dredge the holl deck lol no one will want to kill it :P

Unless you're playing with Madness cards, you can maintain priority when Thought Gorger's Enters-the-Battlefield trigger resolves and sacrifice it to a flashback spell.

The actual problem is this: You cast Dread Return. Dread Return resolves, plopping a Thought Gorger into play. You put the "+1/+ counter, discard hand" trigger on the stack. In response, your opponent casts Swords to Plowshares targeting Gorger. You gain 2 life and draw zero cards. Then the trigger resolves and you don't discard any cards because you didn't put any counters on Gorger.

[KPnuts]

thank you ajfirecracker i had not thought of it like that, you raise a verry good point and explaind it well tahnk you again

[the Thin White Duke]

So there's this card coming soon...

Desperate Ravings - 1R
Instant
Draw two cards, then discard a card at random.
Flashback 2U

replacement for Deep Analysis?

[KevinTrudeau]

So there's this card coming soon...

Desperate Ravings - 1R
Instant
Draw two cards, then discard a card at random.
Flashback 2U

replacement for Deep Analysis?

This does indeed seem superior. The only real downsides Desperate Ravings has when compared to Deep Analysis are that it's not as good as when you have two LEDs, meaning you can't cast two and then potentially a third (or a Golgari Thug that you might need to dredge back and cast to hit the necessary three creatures for Dread Return), and that it might cause confusion with the abbreviation of Dread Return. Being able to possibly bin a dredger after bricking on a turn one or two LED activation+flashbacked draw spell is absolutely huge, and not losing three life is also pretty nice. Thanks for sharing that.

[ajfirecracker]

This does indeed seem superior. The only real downsides Desperate Ravings has when compared to Deep Analysis are that it's not as good as when you have two LEDs, meaning you can't cast two and then potentially a third (or a Golgari Thug that you might need to dredge back and cast to hit the necessary three creatures for Dread Return), and that it might cause confusion with the abbreviation of Dread Return. Being able to possibly bin a dredger after bricking on a turn one or two LED activation+flashbacked draw spell is absolutely huge, and not losing three life is also pretty nice. Thanks for sharing that.

That you can potentially cast it from your hand is a HUGE upgrade, but the third flashback mana is somewhat significant as well. You can't flashback one and activate a Cephalid Coliseum on the same turn.

Needing two of your very few lands is also way better than needing three, for those times when you can't live in Magical Christmasland and blow out your opponents with LED.

[Final Fortune]

So there's this card coming soon...

Desperate Ravings - 1R
Instant
Draw two cards, then discard a card at random.
Flashback 2U

replacement for Deep Analysis?

It's probably a direct swap unless you're playing Cephalid Coliseum, definitely in the build I advocated.

[KevinTrudeau]

Now that Mental Misstep has been banned, I can't see this variant of Dredge thriving for much longer. It's been a great few months, and hopefully one day I'll be able to sleeve it up again, but for the near future, I'm not seeing it as better than a traditional Putrid Imp/Tireless Tribe list (here's hoping I look like a defeatist jackass in a few weeks). I'm probably going to run it one last time this Thursday now that I've completed my set of LEDs, with a full, detailed report.


That you can potentially cast it from your hand is a HUGE upgrade, but the third flashback mana is somewhat significant as well. You can't flashback one and activate a Cephalid Coliseum on the same turn.

Needing two of your very few lands is also way better than needing three, for those times when you can't live in Magical Christmasland and blow out your opponents with LED.

Well, you're right in that it's not a clear victor over Deep Analysis in mana builds, but I was judging the card from a Manaless perspective, in which it almost seems strictly better.

Another important thing to note is that Desperate Ravings is an instant, meaning you can cast it before Gitaxian Probe/any Street Wraith activations resolve on an all-in LED turn. Not only does this help ensure that SW/GP will in fact dredge cards instead of draw if you brick, it potentially increases the dredge-amplitude of turn one Street Wraiths and Gitaxian Probes, and, therefore, any later draw steps.

[Michael Keller]

Now that Mental Misstep has been banned, I can't see this variant of Dredge thriving for much longer. It's been a great few months, and hopefully one day I'll be able to sleeve it up again, but for the near future, I'm not seeing it as better than a traditional Putrid Imp/Tireless Tribe list. I'm probably going to run it one last time this Thursday now that I've completed my set of LEDs, with a full, detailed report.

I actually disagree. All Misstep really did was shut off cards like Putrid Imp, Tireless Tribe, and Breakthrough@1, but those cards already had susceptibility to Daze, Force, Counterbalance@1, Swords to Plowshares, etc even without Misstep around. Dredge has basically put up the same numbers it always has even during Misstep's short run, but I'm not so sure the viability of this deck has been damaged in any way. Fundamentally, they're still the same deck, except Manaless Dredge doesn't pack it in to relegated counter-magic - which will potentially make a comeback in the format now that Storm has a chance to thrive. It is also less dependent on its mulligans, which traditional Dredge is notorious for.

I just see Control decks playing their role a they always have and with Misstep gone, look for the format to redevelop itself as it once was with some strong brewing all across the board. I still like not casting spells and limiting the interaction within the game, so I think Manaless Dredge has just as much potential now even more than it did before. Misstep's prevalence in the format obviously neutered the viability of traditional Dredge, but I don't think it will affect its counterpart as far as playability is concerned.

If you seek proof, look no further than what 4eak just recently accomplished. He walked into a field of Missteps and won the entire event using cards like Breakthrough and Careful Study - without going overboard on the one-drop selection. He could play the DDD route if he wanted to, and I'm sure a few wins were dedicated to this strategy on his way to First Place. That strategy seems fine even now, at least to me.

[KevinTrudeau]

You're probably right, just a knee-jerk reaction on my part due to a possible resurgence of fast combo decks (I said that knowing full well that the deck actually has a decent shot against storm with a dedicated sideboard and/or an LED maindeck). We definitely won't know a thing until the metagame shapes out.

[Michael Keller]

You're probably right, just a knee-jerk reaction on my part due to a possible resurgence of fast combo decks.

Well the thing is, with the potential resurgence of Storm Combo, look for decks like Merfolk and Counterbalance back in the mix as a safe and legitimate meta call. You might even see Mono Blue Control back in the mix now that Control can be Control again without having to worry about the opposing deck running Misstep against it. I just see Control players being extremely happy the window of opportunity is there to limit opposing decks from using its own weapon against it, even if it means losing Misstep from its own list - effectively 'canceling' out its own utility.

And as we know, Control is not going to stop any form of Dredge - Manaless or Traditional (less the former) - from doing what it does. It's just a safe bet at this point. But then again, who knows.

[Final Fortune]

Agreed, the banning of Mental Misstep is a good thing for Manaless Dredge if for no other reason Manaless Dredge can play Phyrexian Probe.

I've been thinking about Desperate Ravings, is the fundamental turn of Dredge accelerated if instead of replacing Deep Analysis, Desperate Ravings supliments it to 8x? I mean if Serum Powder is slowing the deck down (and I'm not necessarily admitting to that) how much does 2xing the chance of drawing LED + Flashback speed it up?

Edit: Uh, I think I'm on to something, because 4xSerum Powder, Lion's Eye Diamond, Deep Analysis and Desperate Ravings seems theoretically superior to the original Manaless Dredge lists with Cephalid Coliseum (the CC -> DA chain was a bit win more) because we can aggressively mull into LED + Flashback in our opener and never "brick" Cephalid Coliseum after dropping below 7 cards for Threshold compared to just casting Desperate Ravings now.

[Izor]

Actually, I can't help but think that manaless will be a lot less viable with Mental Misstep gone.

While it's true that it can still beat all the control decks like nothing, the vastly increasing number of storm combo decks will keep this deck in check. Also, the big advantage this deck had over the mana builds is now a lot less a factor. And even with MM the mana builds still had the edge over manaless in tournaments.

It's also true that Morrissey won the SCG with a Dredge deck that always DDDs, but still. That's a hybrid list and this is manaless. That's a huge difference. If you read through his tournament report, you'll not only notice that he won many games by DDDing, but also that he would never have made top 8 if he didn't have all that effective anti hate in his board. Something manaless still can't do at all (at least not in the fashion of mana builds).

That's actually what I always said and what kept me kinda away from a totally manaless version. You can't really win a tounrnament in a somewhat prepared metagame without Ancient Grudge and hate for Leylines.

[Michael Keller]

While it's true that it can still beat all the control decks like nothing, the vastly increasing number of storm combo decks will keep this deck in check. Also, the big advantage this deck had over the mana builds is now a lot less a factor. And even with MM the mana builds still had the edge over manaless in tournaments.

To circumvent the (potentially) abhorrent number of Storm Combo decks waiting in the wings, the penultimate foil to decks of that nature are Aggro-Control variants setting up a clock with heavy to mild disruption. Even before Misstep was around, Storm was only a deck sitting at the top tables piloted by competent players dodging one or more rounds of heavy Control. It only makes sense that anyone who understands the format could return to a Storm-heavy environment could also theorize it could return to a Control-heavy environment as well. Control typically has more consistency at the top tables, which is where Dredge (of all variants) can prey on if it can realistically perform well enough in the first three rounds of a given event.


It's also true that Morrissey won the SCG with a Dredge deck that always DDDs, but still. That's a hybrid list and this is manaless. That's a huge difference.

Which basically makes me wonder why people are continuing to compare and contrast both archetypes which are similar in nature but different in composition. Both have inherent strengths and weaknesses, so to dismiss one archetype because the strengths of the other are more beneficial is just inaccurate at this point. In all honesty, I think Zoo and Merfolk are going to make a heavy resurgence now that Misstep is no longer a problem.

The banning of a single Magic card has changed the complexity of the entire format. Fundamentally, however, Dredge variants will change little and will continue to dominate Control and Aggro decks - which have historically done better than Storm decks at large venues. Not everyone is a capable Storm pilot, and the fact is the gross, contrived negligence of everyone perpetuating "Combo-Mania" as the death of decks like manaless Dredge is just a fallacy at this point as Manaless Ichorid can still win - if played properly and adjusted accordingly.


That's actually what I always said and what kept me kinda away from a totally manaless version. You can't really win a tounrnament in a somewhat prepared metagame without Ancient Grudge and hate for Leylines.

Nick Rausche did it, and not everyone runs Leylines unless they feel their deck is completely unable to deal with graveyard-based strategies or just make a poor boarding decision by running a more mulligan-aggessive strategy post-board. This argument has been beaten to death; a very small percentage of players insist on running Leyline of the Void, and by this point it's basically common perception any competent player can play around Crypt or Relic.

[KevinTrudeau]

While it's true that it can still beat all the control decks like nothing, the vastly increasing number of storm combo decks will keep this deck in check. Also, the big advantage this deck had over the mana builds is now a lot less a factor.

While I shared the same sentiments with you concerning the fast combo matchup about thirty minutes after the announcement (my natural pessimism), I actually don't think this deck is necessarily a complete dog to the archetype. If you've got the time, try out this postboard list against a good Storm player:

4 Golgari Grave-Troll, 4 Stinkweed Imp, 4 Golgari Thug, 4 Shambling Shell
4 Street Wraith, 4 Gitaxian Probe, 4 Urza's Bauble, 4 Mishra's Bauble, 4 Lion's Eye Diamond, 3 Desperate Ravings
4 Ichorid, 4 Narcomoeba, 4 Dread Return, 4 Chancellor of the Annex, 3 Bridge from Below, 2 Cabal Therapy

You might need to switch around the numbers in that last row a bit (with cutting Shambling Shell and/or adding Phantasmagorian within the realm of possibilities), but that's a pretty good idea of what I have in mind for the Storm matchup.

What concerns me are people, previously ignorant, now knowing to put Manaless on the play whenever possible, meaning advanced scouting at a large tournament/player familiarity at a local store might hurt a lot. I built up somewhat of a reputation as a Manaless player at my LGS, so I actually got put on the play twice in the last two weeks after losing the roll (thankfully, I was playing Reanimator); it could have been pretty detrimental had I been playing Manaless.

[ajfirecracker]

While I shared the same sentiments with you concerning the fast combo matchup about thirty minutes after the announcement (my natural pessimism), I actually don't think this deck is necessarily a complete dog to the archetype. If you've got the time, try out this postboard list against a good Storm player:

4 Golgari Grave-Troll, 4 Stinkweed Imp, 4 Golgari Thug, 4 Shambling Shell
4 Street Wraith, 4 Gitaxian Probe, 4 Urza's Bauble, 4 Mishra's Bauble, 4 Lion's Eye Diamond, 3 Desperate Ravings
4 Ichorid, 4 Narcomoeba, 4 Dread Return, 4 Chancellor of the Annex, 3 Bridge from Below, 2 Cabal Therapy

You might need to switch around the numbers in that last row a bit (with cutting Shambling Shell and/or adding Phantasmagorian within the realm of possibilities), but that's a pretty good idea of what I have in mind for the Storm matchup.

What concerns me are people, previously ignorant, now knowing to put Manaless on the play whenever possible, meaning advanced scouting at a large tournament/player familiarity at a local store might hurt a lot. I built up somewhat of a reputation as a Manaless player at my LGS, so I actually got put on the play twice in the last two weeks after losing the roll (thankfully, I was playing Reanimator); it could have been pretty detrimental had I been playing Manaless.

Where "pretty detrimental" = "my opponent gets 1 extra card".

[KevinTrudeau]

Correct. It's not the end of the world (which is why I used 'pretty'), but one card is actually fairly huge against decks packing Relic, Crypt, Ravenous Trap, Bog, etc., especially blue decks with Brainstorm, or of course combo decks (although, LED can be a great equalizer in those matchups, but you can't bank on having one all of the time).

[KevinTrudeau]

So, I went to that tournament and went 2-2-1, losing to Reanimator (1-2), beating RW aggro (2-0), losing to Affinity (0-2), drawing with Enchantress (1-1-1), and beating BG Death Cloud (2-0), netting seven sweet, sweet Planeswalker Points. Some thoughts/observations:

-The deck is mighty resilient as is; tonight sort of reaffirmed for me that it doesn't necessarily even need a Salvage/Bloodghast package in the sideboard to be able to grind out games postboard. My Death Cloud opponent had three Faerie Macabre in game two by turn three, and I was still able to win in blowout fashion.
-Even though Reanimator runs a bunch of countermagic, I think it's correct to board in the LED/Chancellor/DA package. You really can't be playing a slower game with the constant threat of an Elesh Norn.
-I used to think Terastodon was better than Woodfall Primus, but now I think the opposite.
-I lost the first game to Affinity because I had to mull, and the second because he had Crypt+a fast clock. We played about six more postboard games just for fun, and I only won once, when I got a turn one kill thanks to two LEDs and two DAs (with the prerequisites that I had to play first every game, and me trying out Chancellor in place of Sphinx+FKZ, which was definitely subpar. To be fair, he had a turn one Crypt in about two-thirds of the test games). The matchup is certainly harder than I gave it credit for when I was debating it with somebody else (Izor?), but I still don't think it's necessarily bad.

[GoldenCid]

Hi everybody!! A bit tired of traditional versions of dredge i thinking on running this one. But first a couple of question:

-Is this deck still viable?
-Make sense ru nthis deck now that MM is out of scenne?
-Has anybody recent results with it?
- What do you think of running Dryad Arbor in MD?

Thank you in advance!

[NecroYawgmoth]

I like manaless more and more over normal dredge, because mana-dredge has so much "useless dredges". Like I am dredging a GGT and have 4-5 lands and some other useless stuff... Doesn't happen with manaless...

Manaless can kill on turn 2-3 [with some luck] and the help of Sphinx of lost Truth & FKZ, so it isn't really slower than mana-dredge.

The only problem this deck has is facing Leyline, so that takes it out of competition in some metas.

Dryad Arbor seems only good to trigger Bloodghasts and then sac it for DR. IMO That's not good enough to waste a slot. I played 2 in the side alongside 1 Forest with Hollywoods old sideboard, but IMO Arbor is not good enough for the main.

[GoldenCid]

I like manaless more and more over normal dredge, because mana-dredge has so much "useless dredges". Like I am dredging a GGT and have 4-5 lands and some other useless stuff... Doesn't happen with manaless...

Manaless can kill on turn 2-3 [with some luck] and the help of Sphinx of lost Truth & FKZ, so it isn't really slower than mana-dredge.

The only problem this deck has is facing Leyline, so that takes it out of competition in some metas.

Dryad Arbor seems only good to trigger Bloodghasts and then sac it for DR. IMO That's not good enough to waste a slot. I played 2 in the side alongside 1 Forest with Hollywoods old sideboard, but IMO Arbor is not good enough for the main.

I liked Arbor to run Nature's claim in side.
Could i see your list?

[NecroYawgmoth]

Yeah... my old board was like:

2 Dryad Arbor
1 Snow-Covered Forest
4 G-Fetchlands
4 Emerald Charm
4 Reverent Silence

[Fetch to Arbor when you want to cast Silence, otherwise the Forest]
Still... it wasn't that good against Leyline, because Leyline is the doom against Dredge.

So I just decided to ignore Leyline... My actual list looks like this [but I am still testing and experimenting]:

4 Bridge from Below
4 Bloodghast
4 Ichorid
4 Nether Shadow
4 Narcomoeba
4 Golgari Grave-Troll
4 Stinkweed Imp
4 Golgari Thug
3 Dakmor Salvage
4 Phantasmagorian
4 Street Wraith
4 Gitaxian Probe
4 Cabal Therapy
4 Dread Return
3 Sphinx of Lost Truths
1 Flame-Kin Zealot
1 Angel of Despair

//Sideboard
SB: 4 Leyline of the Void [or Chancellor of the Annex if you fear Combo that much]
SB: 4 Leyline of Sanctity
SB: 4 Mindbreak Trap
SB: 2 Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite
SB: 1 Realm Razer

Btw... I Like Manaless Dredge A LOT more then regular Dredge...

What's your list for reference?

[GoldenCid]

Looks pretty similar to yours,,,side under construction:

// Lands
3 [FUT] Dakmor Salvage

// Creatures
4 [TO] Ichorid
1 [RAV] Flame-Kin Zealot
2 [ON] Gigapede
3 [PLC] Phantasmagorian
4 [FUT] Street Wraith
4 [RAV] Golgari Grave-Troll
4 [RAV] Shambling Shell
4 [R] Nether Shadow
4 [FUT] Narcomoeba
4 [RAV] Golgari Thug
4 [RAV] Stinkweed Imp
3 [ZEN] Bloodghast

// Spells
4 [NPH] Gitaxian Probe
4 [TSP] Dread Return
4 [JU] Cabal Therapy
4 [FUT] Bridge from Below

Advices are welcomed! :)

[NecroYawgmoth]

Is Gigapede really worth it? It looks always like a blank card to me...

[GoldenCid]

Is Gigapede really worth it? It looks always like a blank card to me...

I found it a good discard outlet together with phantasmagoria but I will run 4 of phantasmagoria. And just one giga. Besides bloodghast do not like as much. I will try something else in that slot.

[Michael Keller]

Is Gigapede really worth it? It looks always like a blank card to me...

Gigapede helps smooth out your dredges so that in the event you dredge something like Golgari Grave-Troll or activate a Phantasmagorian, you can continue discarding those cards and get maximum value out of them. There will be times where your dredges will look something like: Ichorid, Nether Shadow, Street Wraith, Dread Return, etc. That's not necessarily bad, but if you have a Gigapede in your graveyard, it allows you to get rid of that Dredge card from your hand so you are able to continue the process without whiffing on chaining dredgers.

Right now I run two Gigapede in my sideboard as basically an alternative option to see how they would operate in certain match-ups. What makes this deck so powerful right now that people are failing to realize is the abhorrent number of Tempo-based strategies that are making a comeback in this format. Cards like Stifle, Daze, Wasteland and friends are doing a serious number on the format right now (due in large part to being a natural foil to Storm). This is where Manaless can once again shine, but I don't think people are still convinced.

I ran the deck this past weekend to a Top Eight finish in Maryland and I can say that Chancellor of the Annex is for real. It helped win me games against High Tide and Belcher - typically blowout match-ups for this archetype (not High Tide so much) as a whole - even if you run Mana Dredge. I've found the recursion factor to be incredibly sexy in a format now being dictated by conditional counter-magic and spot removal in the form of Bolt and Swords. I also main-deck Faerie Macabre which gives me a huge edge against decks like Reanimator and opposing Dredge or graveyard-based strategies.

[the resurrection]

Manaless Dredge Day 1 undefeated !!!

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/gpams11/welcome#0

[1maarten1]

Manaless Dredge Day 1 undefeated !!!

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/gpams11/welcome#0

And then lost to ANT :(. Won game 1 on turn 2, then lost game 2 due to the storm player playing a well placed cabal therapy and game 3 he just went off too quick.

Looked like the same list as Hollywood

[Michael Keller]

That's actually really funny. I spoke to someone via P.M. about list adjustments and it is possible that person could have been the one who made Day Two.

People do tend to underestimate the Combo match a little. It is absolutely possible to win the game on the second turn or do an irreparable amount of damage to an opponent where Ad Nauseam becomes essentially useless - if they even have a chance to get it off before ripping their hand apart.

Either way, that's awesome. I was also informed by someone who played Manaless Dredge at Star City in Baltimore that they made 17th place. Like I said, the deck is extremely underrated and right now it is very well-positioned with all of the conditional counter-magic and Tempo-based strategies running around. And don't forget, Counterbalance won the whole damn thing, and that's actually quasi-bad for traditional Dredge variants, unlike its manaless counterpart.

[KevinTrudeau]

@the day 1 undefeated list— three Narcomoeba seems really, really bad.

While I do agree that the DDD gameplan leads to a lot of misconceptions concerning the deck's speed, I still think this deck is pretty much a dog to combo. The turn two hands you speak of Hollywood all involve GGT and multiple copies of Street Wraith (in addition to likely needing a Phantasmagorian in the 'yard), hands that are less likely to occur than a combo player getting a T1 kill with Ad Nauseam and rituals, or Thoughtseizing you turn one and then winning on turn three.

[NecroYawgmoth]

That's actually really funny. I spoke to someone via P.M. about list adjustments and it is possible that person could have been the one who made Day Two.



Unfortunately not. My mate pushed me to play Canadian Thresh all the time, so I went 7-2 at day 1 and 4-3 at day 2 with that deck.

Nevertheless, it's good to see that a list with your tweaks/suggestions played 9-0 at day 1. I will test these out the next tourneys. =)

Also, I agree with Kevin that 3 Narcomoebas seem really bad... It can't be so bad to make room for 1 slot which is THAT important.

[Michael Keller]

Four Narcomoeba is a must, without a doubt.

At any rate, I have been looking more at moving a single Gigapede to the main. I think the list has some flex slots available, and I'm finding on occasion that when you don't have an accelerator in your hand (Street Wraith or Gitaxian Probe), you become more dependent on individual dredges - which means you're banking on your deep-dredgers like Stinkweed Imp and Golgari Grave-Troll. In doing so, you need to maximize not only your ability to continue to dredge, but to continue to filter as well. I think Gigapede has a very misunderstood ability in this deck; at first glance, all it looks like is a dead card with an innocuous ability, but in reality, I'm seeing it as a more important engine-smoother than any other card in the deck.

Without Phantasmagorian in the graveyard, you're looking at three to five 'dead' cards in your hand - and no other way to discard them. Gigapede not only ensures these cards find a way into your graveyard, but that you are able to keep chaining dredgers or get that Black creature in the graveyard to feed Ichorids (etc.).

I'm going to try and see if I can find room for one or two in the main. I honestly think it's that good here.

[Klazam]

Another nice use of Gigapede is to constantly discard phantasmorgian. (Use phantasmorgian to discard Giga, GGT, something else, then get the Phantasmorgian back in the GY with the Giga, and dredge the troll, then do it again) The cycle described is a -1 card in hand each time you do it. Otherwise, you're just stuck with Phantasmorgian in hand waiting for another one to show up to discard the rest of your hand.

I'm the one who got 17th in the SCG open. I have to agree with Hollywood here- Gigapedes are very good in this deck. I found myself siding them in almost every match- but i'm not sure what to cut for Gigapedes...

Another note on this deck- I think with the increased popularity of Surgical Extraction as the graveyard hate of choice, this deck gains more power- it is very resilient to the extractions. You can also cabal therapy for surgical extraction game 2/3. Nobody thinks that you will do that, so is always caught off guard by it.

[jin]

Four Narcomoeba is a must, without a doubt.


I've actually played the list a few times and I don't think they are. Narcomaeba is immediate, but with Nether Shadow, I don't think they are too important. Nether Shadows come back and they are food for Ichorid. I think in the long grind out game, Nether Shadow is more important.

Narcomaeba is only necessary if you need to expode and win. Those turns, you usually have at least an Ichorid and/or Nether Shadow and/or zombies in play, so you only really need to hit 1-2 Narcomaebas so the 3 Narcomaebas make perfect sense..

[Klazam]

I think Nether Shadow, Ichorid, and Narcomoebas are equally important. You need a high percentage of creatures that come back from the graveyard.

[Michael Keller]

I've actually played the list a few times and I don't think they are. Narcomaeba is immediate, but with Nether Shadow, I don't think they are too important. Nether Shadows come back and they are food for Ichorid. I think in the long grind out game, Nether Shadow is more important.

Narcomaeba is only necessary if you need to expode and win. Those turns, you usually have at least an Ichorid and/or Nether Shadow and/or zombies in play, so you only really need to hit 1-2 Narcomaebas so the 3 Narcomaebas make perfect sense..

Narcomoeba - in all Dredge variants - should always be at a four-of. (You can also reference this article (http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/legacy/17238_Deep_Analysis_Tuning_Legacy_Dredge.html) which goes in depth about Dredge invariables.)

Dredge in its most basic, fundamental construction requires you to be able to hit or chain Narcomoebas to accelerate your combo engine with Dread Return and Bridge from Below. The less Narcomoeba you run, the less chance you have of hitting one in any one of your dredges - and that's assuming you're not even dredging an 'Imp or Grave-Troll to begin with. They are the main facilitator of being able to win games faster; there's absolutely no question it's that important.

Running three Narcomoeba makes no sense. It's the backbone of an archetype predicated on direct synergy involved with just about every card in the deck. Manaless Dredge is far more reliant on its Dread Returns than its counterpart; once the engine is going, these (Narcomoeba and Bridge from Below) are the cards that lead to degenerate Dread Returns.

You run four.

[jin]

I think Nether Shadow, Ichorid, and Narcomoebas are equally important. You need a high percentage of creatures that come back from the graveyard.

I think that's why Narcomoeba is only a 3-of. Because you have Ichorid + Nether Shaodw to supplement him


Narcomoeba - in all Dredge variants - should always be at a four-of. (You can also reference this article (http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/legacy/17238_Deep_Analysis_Tuning_Legacy_Dredge.html) which goes in depth about Dredge invariables.)

Dredge in its most basic, fundamental construction requires you to be able to hit or chain Narcomoebas to accelerate your combo engine with Dread Return and Bridge from Below. The less Narcomoeba you run, the less chance you have of hitting one in any one of your dredges - and that's assuming you're not even dredging an 'Imp or Grave-Troll to begin with. They are the main facilitator of being able to win games faster; there's absolutely no question it's that important.

Running three Narcomoeba makes no sense. It's the backbone of an archetype predicated on direct synergy involved with just about every card in the deck. Manaless Dredge is far more reliant on its Dread Returns than its counterpart; once the engine is going, these (Narcomoeba and Bridge from Below) are the cards that lead to degenerate Dread Returns.

You run four.

Well he ran three and he didn't do too poorly.

The fact of the matter is, Manaless Ichorid isn't only a combo deck anymore. It doesn't rely on the immediacy of Narcomaeba. You have cards like Ichorid and Nether Shadow to supplement him. In essence, you have 3 + 4 + 4 creatures you can Dread Return with. Nether Shadow just comes back easier and more consistantly than Narcomaeba. They are better for grinding out and they help you get Zombie tokens more reliably. With the cantrips, this deck can dredge really hard, so having 3 makes perfect sense.

The reason why Narcomaeba replaced Nether Shadow before is because that Ichroid deck was a pure combo deck. This isn't so much..

[NecroYawgmoth]

It's by no means and no way true that Ichorid was a pure combo deck before >.<

[KevinTrudeau]

I've actually played the list a few times and I don't think they are. Narcomaeba is immediate, but with Nether Shadow, I don't think they are too important. Nether Shadows come back and they are food for Ichorid. I think in the long grind out game, Nether Shadow is more important.

Narcomaeba is only necessary if you need to expode and win. Those turns, you usually have at least an Ichorid and/or Nether Shadow and/or zombies in play, so you only really need to hit 1-2 Narcomaebas so the 3 Narcomaebas make perfect sense..

I've played the list thousands of times and I think that they are. This is a Dread Return deck first and foremost, because the deck needs to be able to somehow beat decks faster than it if it wants to succeed at a large tournament. The grinding/resiliency aspect acts as a function of the Dread Return plan (Plan A) because it will naturally occur as the game plays out. You know what creature helps cast Dread Return the most? Our small-yet-deadly oceanic companion.

[jin]

It's by no means and no way true that Ichorid was a pure combo deck before >.<

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/vintage/13443_Crushing_Vintage_Without_Power_Nine_The_Manaless_Ichorid_Primer.html

Maybe Sutured Ghoul and Dragon Breath was before your time..


I've played the list thousands of times and I think that they are. This is a Dread Return deck first and foremost, because the deck needs to be able to somehow beat decks faster than it if it wants to succeed at a large tournament. The grinding/resiliency aspect acts as a function of the Dread Return plan (Plan A) because it will naturally occur as the game plays out. You know what creature helps cast Dread Return the most? Our small-yet-deadly oceanic companion.

I have to disagree. Manaless Ichorid, in nature, is about the Ichorid beats. The combo finish Dread Return is simply a bit more reach to finish the game. At least that's what I saw from Rasche's videos.. The only decks faster are storm combo decks, and you really aren't winning off the back of Dread Return unless you play Jin-Gitaxian. The plan is is always Ichorid beats. Given the chance to finish them off, you Dread Return.

The only reason why it runs so many Dread Returns is because it doesn't have Breakthrough to dig through the deck.

[Michael Keller]

Well he ran three and he's undefeated.

The fact of the matter is, Manaless Ichorid isn't only a combo deck anymore. It doesn't rely on the immediacy of Narcomaeba. You have cards like Ichorid and Nether Shadow to supplement him. In essence, you have 3 + 4 + 4 creatures you can Dread Return with. Nether Shadow just comes back easier and more consistantly than Narcomaeba. They are better for grinding out and they help you get Zombie tokens more reliably. With the cantrips, this deck can dredge really hard, so having 3 makes perfect sense.

The reason why Narcomaeba replaced Nether Shadow before is because that Ichroid deck was a pure combo deck. This isn't so much..

Just because he ran three Narcomoeba doesn't make it correct. In fact, the guy basically ran my build. It's a very powerful enabler that grants you the ability to even beat Combo (Storm, High Tide) a turn faster than you normally would if you only have two creatures available. The deck is tailored to grind games out, but the fact is the deck relies on a Combo finish to win games more thoroughly. There's no reason to short-change yourself when you can win the game a turn faster with a full set of Narcomoebas in your deck.

There have been a large number of people who have written about this and studied the intricacies of this deck over the years, and after playing the deck incessantly over the course of several months, I have come to that conclusion as well. I could lay out a ton of scenarios where Narcomoeba is a game-breaker, but it would just be rhetoric at this point. The 'grind 'em out' plan has already been established and works well, but you have to assume by the time you can obtain lethal damage, your opponent will already be ready to combo-out on you before you get the chance to kill them.

This is why Manaless runs a set of four Dread Return and Narcomoeba - to max out its ability to finish a game using the combo route in case damage on hand is not enough. Narcomoeba solidifies this strategy to a "T." The deck is hungry to gets creatures into play in any way that it can.

I see no reason to dilute a powerful strategy by cutting a card which facilitates not only your Dread Return package, but your Bridge from Belows with Cabal Therapies. Sometimes - remember - you don't want to attack with Ichorid if you have multiple Bridges, but to create an alpha-strike turn by simply letting them die.

Rausch's list was also seriously, seriously flawed. That much everyone can agree on. He just happened to surprise people who ran absolutely no graveyard hate in that event. Not to take anything away from the archetype itself, though.

[jin]

Just because he ran three Narcomoeba doesn't make it correct. In fact, the guy basically ran my build. It's a very powerful enabler that grants you the ability to even beat Combo (Storm, High Tide) a turn faster than you normally would if you only have two creatures available. The deck is tailored to grind games out, but the fact is the deck relies on a Combo finish to win games more thoroughly. There's no reason to short-change yourself when you can win the game a turn faster with a full set of Narcomoebas in your deck.

There have been a large number of people who have written about this and studied the intricacies of this deck over the years, and after playing the deck incessantly over the course of several months, I have come to that conclusion as well. I could lay out a ton of scenarios where Narcomoeba is a game-breaker, but it would just be rhetoric at this point. The 'grind 'em out' plan has already been established and works well, but you have to assume by the time you can obtain lethal damage, your opponent will already be ready to combo-out on you before you get the chance to kill them.

This is why Manaless runs a set of four Dread Return and Narcomoeba - to max out its ability to finish a game using the combo route in case damage on hand is not enough. Narcomoeba solidifies this strategy to a "T." The deck is hungry to gets creatures into play in any way that it can.

I see no reason to dilute a powerful strategy by cutting a card which facilitates not only your Dread Return package, but your Bridge from Belows with Cabal Therapies. Sometimes - remember - you don't want to attack with Ichorid if you have multiple Bridges, but to create an alpha-strike turn by simply letting them die.

Rausch's list was also seriously, seriously flawed. That much everyone can agree on. He just happened to surprise people who ran absolutely no graveyard hate in that event. Not to take anything away from the archetype itself, though.

Sorry if this is incoherent. I'm quite sleepy right now, but here goes:

Yes, I don't disagree with the immediacy of Narcomoeba. I just don't see that it is necessary to have the immediacy. The way you beat storm combo decks really isn't racing them. It's by destroying their hand, because even if you Dread Return, you really aren't going to kill them. The only thing that might come close is dredging your library into FKZ. Any other target is moot. Speaking from the Epic Storm's point of view alone, I can tell you that this is not a race in your favour.

Like I mentioned above, the multitude of Dread Returns isn't to maximize the Dread Return plan. It's really so you can hit one to finish off the opponent after a grind out. You don't have breakthrough to dig as hard.

Yes, given that you have multiple Bridges, your Narcomaoba explosion will be awesome. But given that you only have 1 Bridge, the recurring Nether Shadow is better because he simply makes more zombies.

I think your comment about Ichorid not swinging is really an overgeneralization. I mean given that the opponent has something like Meddling Mage or Gaddock Teeg or summoning sickness SFM, I think I"d still swing with Ichorid, if it'll allow me to win next turn. Yes, you don't have to tell me about building an alpha strike, I come from playing Vial Goblins. I know all about the alpha strike.

In the storm combo match up, their in it to race as well. You are racing against a Lamborghini in your BMW...

The point is, the deck is designed from the start with grinding out in mind. That is the plan A. If you don't see that, then you are playing this deck wrong. A deck that is in it to win through speed will not choose to draw. This is simple logic. The plan B is Dread Return which provides the deck with reach. Rasche preferred Iona, the other guy preferred FKZ.

Narcomoeba provides a lot of immediacy, but that is unnecessary in Manaless Ichorid because it is now more of an aggro-beat-down-grind-out type of deck rather than a spit-in-your-face-combo deck. It has the ability to explode and win turn 3 on the draw, but the main plan is still the Ichorid plan. The Nether Shadows help this because it not only provides consistent zombies, but it also provides a consistent 1/1 haster or what I like to call "little Ichorid". Believe me or not, but that's how Manaless is suppose to be like. If you want to explode and race storm combo, play Morressey's hybrid Dredge list or LED dredge. You won't race a storm deck with this one.

[NecroYawgmoth]

Friggorid was played 2006 in Extended already with Ichorid and Psychatog beats, backed up with Ashen Ghouls and Soul Shrieks in the old Legacy which was also 2006, way before the article...

Also, I thought you meant the definition combo about Ichorid in the current Legacy meta the last 2-3 years...

Still, combo, by classic definition is a deck which wins by a combination of cards, like ProsBloom does.
Some people call NO -> Prog a combo... But Dredge is not really a combo... it's more like an engine for the deck, but nowadays everything that is broken seems to count as "combo".

In my eyes, combo is something like... "I have these 2 or 3 cards, bam you're dead" and not something like: "I Mindtwist you, and create some Zombies to attack you next turn." Dredge has a pure Aggroplan, sometimes played passive, with Ichorid and Moeba beats each turn, sometimes really hard and aggressive with 27 Zombies and more... This is still no "combo".

[jin]

Friggorid was played 2006 in Extended already with Ichorid and Psychatog beats, backed up with Ashen Ghouls and Soul Shrieks in the old Legacy which was also 2006, way before the article...

Also, I thought you meant the definition combo about Ichorid in the current Legacy meta the last 2-3 years...

Still, combo, by classic definition is a deck which wins by a combination of cards, like ProsBloom does.
Some people call NO -> Prog a combo... But Dredge is not really a combo... it's more like an engine for the deck, but nowadays everything that is broken seems to count as "combo".

In my eyes, combo is something like... "I have these 2 or 3 cards, bam you're dead" and not something like: "I Mindtwist you, and create some Zombies to attack you next turn." Dredge has a pure Aggroplan, sometimes played passive, with Ichorid and Moeba beats each turn, sometimes really hard and aggressive with 27 Zombies and more... This is still no "combo".

Suttened Ghoul + Dragon Breath = 2 card combo.

It's not about how you get to the 2 card combo. Dredge is just an engine to get there like Ad Nauseam, Yawgmoth's Will. Mindtwist is just consequential.

[Michael Keller]

Yes, I don't disagree with the immediacy of Narcomoeba. I just don't see that it is necessary to have the immediacy. The way you beat storm combo decks really isn't racing them. It's by destroying their hand, because even if you Dread Return, you really aren't going to kill them. The only thing that might come close is dredging your library into FKZ. Any other target is moot. Speaking from the Epic Storm's point of view alone, I can tell you that this is not a race in your favour.

I think you're rambling a bit here. The deck's primary objective is to attack first and ask questions later. You aren't banking your entire game-plan on four discard spells before the third turn - you're looking to race their life total with attackers so you can neuter Ad Nauseam in the process.

I spent most of the better half of the last ten years playing against Bryant Cook in Syracuse on a weekly basis. Rest assured, the race isn't that far out of your favor as you'd think. T.E.S. has a much more fragile outlet of winning games in comparison to the general simplicity of ANT, and you can actually race Empty the Warrens as your creatures gain haste and ability to attack first - inherently forcing your opponent to block. The flip-side of this is dealing directly with Ad Nauseam, which I've already covered. T.E.S. also mulligans more aggressively than traditional ANT, and does not run Leyline of the Void (I'm not insinuating all ANT builds do, but there are some that opt to run graveyard hate).


Like I mentioned above, the multitude of Dread Returns isn't to maximize the Dread Return plan. It's really so you can hit one to finish off the opponent after a grind out. You don't have breakthrough to dig as hard.

A "grind out" is rather vague. If you're implying an attack or two with an Ichorid and Nether Shadow, that still doesn't win you the game. No one should have to go into detail explaining what a 'combo' is here, so we can safely say that no matter what time you opt to play Dread Return, it still should ice the game and either win the game outright, or effectively end the game for all intents and purposes.


Yes, given that you have multiple Bridges, your Narcomaoba explosion will be awesome. But given that you only have 1 Bridge, the recurring Nether Shadow is better because he simply makes more zombies.

I'm a little confused here; in what way does a Nether Shadow make more Zombies than a Narcomoeba? Both do not leave play at the end of turn and both make tokens when they die. Nether Shadow's recursion factor is rather moot; by the time you're able to re-re-recur Nether Shadow, the game should be on ice. Nether Shadow is also more conditional than Narcomoeba - more often than not.


I think your comment about Ichorid not swinging is really an overgeneralization. I mean given that the opponent has something like Meddling Mage or Gaddock Teeg or summoning sickness SFM, I think I"d still swing with Ichorid, if it'll allow me to win next turn. Yes, you don't have to tell me about building an alpha strike, I come from playing Vial Goblins. I know all about the alpha strike.

Vial Goblins and Dredge are two completely different archetypes with two completely varying strategies regarding phase structure and the Attack Step - so we can pretty much describe this as a moot point. The similarities in which you're trying to parallel only derive from the strategic inference of attacking or not attacking with Ichorid. You obviously weigh your options at this point, but you're completely forgoing in your response that Manaless Dredge is non-interactive and that Goblins is. That completely changes the perplexity of these two archetypes in contrast.


In the storm combo match up, their in it to race as well. You are racing against a Lamborghini in your BMW...

You're talking to someone who has won sets of Blue Dual Lands with Polar Kraken, so maybe it's just me but it's not about how you race it but how you play it.


The point is, the deck is designed from the start with grinding out in mind. That is the plan A. If you don't see that, then you are playing this deck wrong. A deck that is in it to win through speed will not choose to draw. This is simple logic. The plan B is Dread Return which provides the deck with reach. Rasche preferred Iona, the other guy preferred FKZ.

I never disagreed with you on this point. However, if you think that basing your entire strategy around simply "grinding out" wins through the Attack Step is optimal when you have fourteen to eighteen cards dedicated to another potent strategy (the Dread Return plan), then you are wrong.


Narcomoeba provides a lot of immediacy, but that is unnecessary in Manaless Ichorid because it is now more of an aggro-beat-down-grind-out type of deck rather than a spit-in-your-face-combo deck. It has the ability to explode and win turn 3 on the draw, but the main plan is still the Ichorid plan. The Nether Shadows help this because it not only provides consistent zombies, but it also provides a consistent 1/1 haster or what I like to call "little Ichorid". Believe me or not, but that's how Manaless is suppose to be like. If you want to explode and race storm combo, play Morressey's hybrid Dredge list or LED dredge. You won't race a storm deck with this one.

Immediacy, what you are not understanding, is what makes winning *now* more consistent and prevalent to this whole discussion. Nether Shadow does not come into play once it hits the graveyard, which is actually very relevant against Storm. It's completely foolish to think otherwise. Have you not even looked at my sideboard - or the sideboard of the deck that went undefeated at the Grand Prix on Day One?

Chancellor of the Annex backed by a solid beat-down plan - with supplemental discard - is just a thrashing to Storm. And try and tell me that Dread Returning a Chancellor is bad against Storm, which is by far not out of the question. It's still a bad match-up, but you are completely off-base in your assumption you can't race them - especially when factoring in things like mulligans and poor draws.

I've raced - and beaten - Storm with Manaless Dredge. You have a lot more outs and lines of play than you think you do, as I think you're not paying a little closer attention to the intricacies of the deck strategically. Trying to 'pawn off' my analysis to a mana-based Dredge build or hybrid list is just moot - the discussion here is about Manaless Dredge and the fact that it can race Storm using a critical set of Narcomoebas.

[KevinTrudeau]

Sorry if this is incoherent. I'm quite sleepy right now, but here goes:

Yes, I don't disagree with the immediacy of Narcomoeba. I just don't see that it is necessary to have the immediacy. The way you beat storm combo decks really isn't racing them. It's by destroying their hand, because even if you Dread Return, you really aren't going to kill them. The only thing that might come close is dredging your library into FKZ. Any other target is moot. Speaking from the Epic Storm's point of view alone, I can tell you that this is not a race in your favour.

Like I mentioned above, the multitude of Dread Returns isn't to maximize the Dread Return plan. It's really so you can hit one to finish off the opponent after a grind out. You don't have breakthrough to dig as hard.

Yes, given that you have multiple Bridges, your Narcomaoba explosion will be awesome. But given that you only have 1 Bridge, the recurring Nether Shadow is better because he simply makes more zombies.

I think your comment about Ichorid not swinging is really an overgeneralization. I mean given that the opponent has something like Meddling Mage or Gaddock Teeg or summoning sickness SFM, I think I"d still swing with Ichorid, if it'll allow me to win next turn. Yes, you don't have to tell me about building an alpha strike, I come from playing Vial Goblins. I know all about the alpha strike.

In the storm combo match up, their in it to race as well. You are racing against a Lamborghini in your BMW...

Narcomoeba's immediacy is NOT unnecessary. You will have a much harder time defeating faster decks without running all four. It's that simple. I can tell you're arguing from conjecture rather than experience, which is making this all the more infuriating for me.


A deck that is in it to win through speed will not choose to draw. This is simple logic.

This deck is faster on average than traditional Breakthrough Dredge.

I'll make a more fleshed-out response tonight when I have time.

@Hollywood- have you considered incorporating LED into your seventy-five yet?

[jin]

I think you're rambling a bit here. The deck's primary objective is to attack first and ask questions later. You aren't banking your entire game-plan on four discard spells before the third turn - you're looking to race their life total with attackers so you can neuter Ad Nauseam in the process.

Yeah, it felt like rambling. I was quite sleepy. Sorry about that.

Yes, I realize it must attack first, but unless you can take out 15 life in one hit, chances are you will die to Ad Nauseam regardless, so Cabal Therapy is a stronger plan. Racing will give you another option, but I'm saying it really shouldn't be your main plan.



I spent most of the better half of the last ten years playing against Bryant Cook in Syracuse on a weekly basis. Rest assured, the race isn't that far out of your favor as you'd think. T.E.S. has a much more fragile outlet of winning games in comparison to the general simplicity of ANT, and you can actually race Empty the Warrens as your creatures gain haste and ability to attack first - inherently forcing your opponent to block. The flip-side of this is dealing directly with Ad Nauseam, which I've already covered. T.E.S. also mulligans more aggressively than traditional ANT, and does not run Leyline of the Void (I'm not insinuating all ANT builds do, but there are some that opt to run graveyard hate).


Maybe I don't play like Bryant Cook, but from my experience as a TES player, ETW gets sided out in this match up, so I'm not sure what's going on here. I'm sure most TES players know that ETW is bad here. I'm sure most would go for Ad Nauseam or Ill-gotten gains which just wins it out right, probably Past in Flames now, more than IGG. I think I'm rambling again. The point is TES players deal with Ichorid like they do with Zoo. To TES players, you are pretty much a fast aggro deck. Your only real advantage is Cabal Therapy which is probably the most scariest card to see you dredge.

Post-board Chancellor of the Annex will help here.



A "grind out" is rather vague. If you're implying an attack or two with an Ichorid and Nether Shadow, that still doesn't win you the game. No one should have to go into detail explaining what a 'combo' is here, so we can safely say that no matter what time you opt to play Dread Return, it still should ice the game and either win the game outright, or effectively end the game for all intents and purposes.


It is, but that is exactly what I'm implying. Sure, it doesn't win you the game, but it gets you close enough to kill them with a small FKZ. Yes I agree Dread Return does 'ice the game' but I really don't think it is the be-all-that-ends-all. A fat troll, flaming zombies, or giant angels don't really finish the game immediately in the power level of today's Legacy. I hardly feel safe Dread Returning while my opponent is at 20 life.

Beating them down a little always makes it much easier.



I'm a little confused here; in what way does a Nether Shadow make more Zombies than a Narcomoeba? Both do not leave play at the end of turn and both make tokens when they die. Nether Shadow's recursion factor is rather moot; by the time you're able to re-re-recur Nether Shadow, the game should be on ice. Nether Shadow is also more conditional than Narcomoeba - more often than not.


Nether Shadow can die multiple times. Narcomaeba can only die once. Nether Shadow is more conditional, but with Phantasmagorian and Street Wraith, it's hardly a challenge to bring him back.

With 4 Narcomoebas, you have a much higher chance of opening one in your hand than with 3 Narcomoebas making the 4th quite unnecessary and redundant.



Vial Goblins and Dredge are two completely different archetypes with two completely varying strategies regarding phase structure and the Attack Step - so we can pretty much describe this as a moot point. The similarities in which you're trying to parallel only derive from the strategic inference of attacking or not attacking with Ichorid. You obviously weigh your options at this point, but you're completely forgoing in your response that Manaless Dredge is non-interactive and that Goblins is. That completely changes the perplexity of these two archetypes in contrast.


I'm only really comparing them on a very basic level. The point is, both decks want to do the same thing. They both want to litter the board with their tribe and swing in for a massive hit. The comparison here is really that and not moot at all. I'm drawing a similarity here and it is the similarity in positioning the board.



You're talking to someone who has won sets of Blue Dual Lands with Polar Kraken, so maybe it's just me but it's not about how you race it but how you play it.


I'm really not interested in going into what famous person I'm talking to. I'm just here to discuss the implications of not running a full set of Narcomoebas which I have always felt like a nuisance.

If it has worked for you in the past, that's fine. And I take it that this comment reflects how much experience you have, but I'm just curious how someone with some much experience can so easily deny the possibility of a flex slot in, for lack of better words, 'core part' of the deck.

In my experience with building decks, there is never anything that is a must and almost every card can be shifted. The stubbornness in accepting change is just puzzling.

Strictly speaking regarding this topic though, I find that the only real arguments here are Narcomoeba provides the necessary speed this deck needs to win a turn faster, but does 1x Narcomoeba really affect this speed? I'm not so sure...



I never disagreed with you on this point. However, if you think that basing your entire strategy around simply "grinding out" wins through the Attack Step is optimal when you have fourteen to eighteen cards dedicated to another potent strategy (the Dread Return plan), then you are wrong.


That's not my only strategy, but it is the main one. I feel that Dread Return seals the deal, but it's not the strategy I b-line for. Simply put, the aggro plan is much more effective in that it is much harder to play against.

Throwing your whole hand out for a single Dread Return can be very dangerous. I prefer to have the field littered with zombies. Maybe this is my Goblin background speaking, I'm not too sure..



Immediacy, what you are not understanding, is what makes winning *now* more consistent and prevalent to this whole discussion. Nether Shadow does not come into play once it hits the graveyard, which is actually very relevant against Storm. It's completely foolish to think otherwise. Have you not even looked at my sideboard - or the sideboard of the deck that went undefeated at the Grand Prix on Day One?


Yes, again, I don't deny that Narcomoeba is faster on the combo turn. I have looked at it. He plays Chancellors to slow down the storm combo player. Sorry I haven't seen your list.



Chancellor of the Annex backed by a solid beat-down plan - with supplemental discard - is just a thrashing to Storm. And try and tell me that Dread Returning a Chancellor is bad against Storm, which is by far not out of the question. It's still a bad match-up, but you are completely off-base in your assumption you can't race them - especially when factoring in things like mulligans and poor draws.


I don't understand your fury here. I agree that "beat-down plan - with supplemental discard - is a [...] thrashing for storm."

In fact, that's the only plan I see Ichorid players doing in order to beat TES. Like I said before, you have to rely on Cabal Therapy. Chancellor really helps here I think, but by slowing them down, it really gives you another turn to get Nether Shadow and Ichorid into play. That way, you can easily Dread Return the Chancellor by that time.

I don't know, that just sounds like you hope they keep a crap hand while you dredge into all of your business. That's too optimistic for me.



I've raced - and beaten - Storm with Manaless Dredge. You have a lot more outs and lines of play than you think you do, as I think you're not paying a little closer attention to the intricacies of the deck strategically. Trying to 'pawn off' my analysis to a mana-based Dredge build or hybrid list is just moot - the discussion here is about Manaless Dredge and the fact that it can race Storm using a critical set of Narcomoebas.

Yeah, with the list 8 cantrip list, it seems to be pretty capable of winning turn 3 on the draw. The suggestion is merely a metaphor - mana/hybrid dredge after all is more combo oriented.

I think you are starting to take this a little personally. This really isn't a storm vs Ichorid discussion. I'm not saying that Ichorid is incapable of comboing off. All I'm saying is it is a known fact that Ichorid is generally slower than storm combo and that the focus here shouldn't be to combo out, but to disrupt. Given that your opponent has a crap hand, you can easily just go and kill them.


I can tell you're arguing from conjecture rather than experience, which is making this all the more infuriating for me.

It has been unpleasant talking to you too. Thanks.



Narcomoeba's immediacy is NOT unnecessary. You will have a much harder time defeating faster decks without running all four. It's that simple.



This deck is faster on average than traditional Breakthrough Dredge.

I'll make a more fleshed-out response tonight when I have time.

Thanks. I recognize that Narcomoebas has been a staple in Ichorid for many years, but the 4th really does seem redundant to me. Instead of dredging them in multiples, chances are you can easily open with 1 or 2 in your hand. Nether Shadows in your hand hurt much less than Narcomoebas as Nether Shadows in your hand can be pitched and generate tokens later while Narcomoebas cannot.

Nether Shadow comes back constantly.

Narcomoeba is faster, but keep in mind that I'm not cutting Narcomoeba from the deck, I'm still running 3 of them.

By the time you can actually kill with Dread Return (let's say you have a broken dredge and you are going to kill turn 3 on the draw), that already gives you sufficient amount of time to have 1-2 other zombies (Ichorid, Nether Shadow) on the board that you don't need to rely heavily on dredging 3 Narcomoebas.

[Michael Keller]

tl; dr

Expert-tested analysis over the course of years' worth of efforted, proven, basic functionalities of this archetype have been completely debunked by you in what appears to be nothing more than effortless opinion than tested conclusions. You're simply immune to understanding something so simple and precise that you're forcing others into having to repeat themselves into oblivion.

I'm afraid you're just going to find that there are people more experienced than you in this archetype of play, which I recommend you learn and understand from instead of trading jabs with people when you appear to have little to no experience with Manaless Dredge. I'm sorry if that sounds offensive, but I'm afraid you're going to find most others will agree.

Even if we're wrong, it's borderline offensive to the historical hard data, professional tournament play, and countless hours of efficiency testing that has gone into this archetype and proven to be optimal. It's not that people are dismissing your ideas, it's that your argument is relatively weak.

I encourage you to let us all know how running three Narcomoeba works for you.

[jin]

Expert-tested analysis over the course of years' worth of efforted, proven, basic functionalities of this archetype have been completely debunked by you in what appears to be nothing more than effortless opinion than tested conclusions. You're simply immune to understanding something so simple and precise that you're forcing others into having to repeat themselves into oblivion.

I'm afraid you're just going to find that there are people more experienced than you in this archetype of play, which I recommend you learn and understand from instead of trading jabs with people when you appear to have little to no experience with Manaless Dredge. I'm sorry if that sounds offensive, but I'm afraid you're going to find most others will agree.

Even if we're wrong, it's borderline offensive to the historical hard data, professional tournament play, and countless hours of efficiency testing that has gone into this archetype and proven to be optimal. It's not that people are dismissing your ideas, it's that your argument is relatively weak.

I encourage you to let us all know how running three Narcomoeba works for you.

I think you are just conservative and grouchy. I never claimed to be an expert. I'm just trying to stir up conversation about Narcomoeba and how it has worked for the guy from Amsterdam.

I think outright stating that him and Rasche is just doing it wrong is fatal and condescending. I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just suggesting the implications that the 4th Narcomoeba is a flex slot. You are the one straight up rejecting the idea. In that regard, you are the one immune to understanding. To summarize the "TL; DR" (which you started):

Nether Shadow comes back constantly and is ok in your opening hand.

Narcomoeba is faster, but keep in mind that I'm not cutting Narcomoeba from the deck, I'm still running 3 of them. By the time you can actually kill with Dread Return (let's say you have a broken dredge and you are going to kill turn 3 on the draw), that already gives you sufficient amount of time to have 1-2 other zombies (Ichorid, Nether Shadow) on the board that you don't need to rely heavily on dredging 3 Narcomoebas.

I've tested it this past week constantly. It's been fine.

PS: TL;DR sounds more like you are unable to accept rationale more than I am. Rather than attacking me, maybe you should focus on the discussion. If I knew that when losing in rationale, you would resort to name calling, then I wouldn't have voiced out my opinion.

[Klazam]

Jin- What is the list you have been testing with? I'm curious to see what you think Narco should be cut for.

[Izor]

Really, Hollywood. Calm down.


This is a forum where it's about sharing opinions and testing results. He had an opinion, did some testing and wanted to know what other people think about it. You don't have to take other people's arguments apart like that each time you don't 100% agree with them.

If mana Dredge people thought like you, Manaless wouldn't even exist.

[Michael Keller]

Really, Hollywood. Calm down.


This is a forum where it's about sharing opinions and testing results. He had an opinion, did some testing and wanted to know what other people think about it. You don't have to take other people's arguments apart like that each time you don't 100% agree with them.

If mana Dredge people thought like you, Manaless wouldn't even exist.

I am actually quite calm and very relaxed. We can all voice our opinions, but you can't say something is strictly superior without proving your claims. Instead of asking for advice, he generalized - without budging - that one ideology was better than another when it has been proven by individuals who have spent years honing their lists that a specific core group of cards must exist to optimize their deck. The fact is, The Source is overrun by individuals who generalize and theorize more than actually proving what they claim, and it gets old really quick.

The archetype is developing itself and it is nice to see it doing so well. I am actually being polite. My replies have been relatively tame compared to what Parcher would say to something like this. All I'm doing is reiterating that you need to prove what you're saying before you say it. Once you say that fifteen times in a row in a discussion that needs to advance itself but cannot, it gets redundant.

[KevinTrudeau]

@Hollywood— I thought the post you deleted was very well-spoken, cogent, and not incendiary in the slightest. Also, I was more suggesting LED in a sideboard role against fast combo decks like we were discussing a few months ago; doubling up (along with Chancellor) on the number of cards that accelerate the game by a full turn (or more if you have draw spells in hand) in our favor is pretty good, in addition to the other benefits LED specifically grants.

@Izor— Hollywood was doing just that, sharing his opinion and contributing to the discussion. To say that dismissing the notion of running less than four Narcomoeba is akin to blindly putting down every single "outside of the box" idea (ideas of such a nature did of course contribute to the formation of Manaless Dredge) is pretty ludicrous. Would you go into the Zoo thread and say that you've had success with just three Wild Nacatl, and then say that every dissenter (who disagreed with lengthy, well-spoken counterpoints I might add) was just stifling innovation?

@jin— first, I'd like to apologize if I offended you in any way. Even though I strongly disagree with your hypothesis concerning Narcomoeba, it's always nice to have lengthy discussions. Second, I'd like to address two misconceptions that numerous people have had concerning Manaless Dredge over the past few months before I get into why running four Narcomoeba is important for the deck to succeed:

Misconception #1: Manaless Dredge is a "grind-'em-out" deck, and must abide by that/adhere to that philosophy as much as possible; if you're looking to kill the opponent with Dread Return, there's no point in playing Manaless Dredge over traditional variants of Dredge since they have access to more potent accelerants in the forms of Breakthrough, Cephalid Coliseum, and Careful Study.

The reason why we play Manaless Dredge isn't to force a particular style of play, it's to take advantage of the increased density of graveyard-useful cards one gets by forgoing the playing of lands. We play it to take advantage of a blue-dominated metagame in gaining virtual card advantage by blanking, for the most part, all of their countermagic. One of the benefits of upping the density of graveyard-useful cards is increased resilience against one-shot forms of graveyard removal (Tormod's Crypt, Bojuka Bog, Nihil Spellbomb, and I suppose Faerie Macabre being the best examples). Another key benefit of it is increasing the effectiveness of "grinding"— which I will define as attacking over the course of a few turns with recurring (and largely unstoppable) Ichorids, Zombie tokens, Nether Shadows, Narcomoebas, and sometimes Bloodghasts with virtually no cost to you. Grinding is the best way to beat decks with counterspells, because as I stated before, you gain an immense amount of virtual card advantage when you don't cast spells. So, why not max out on that strategy? The entire point of playing this deck was to trump blue strategies, right?

There are two key reasons why I do not think that doing so would be beneficial for the deck:

Reason #1— The derivative function of the effectiveness of grinding creatures decreases in value as x approaches sixteen (which would be running full playsets of Ichorid, Narcomoeba, Nether Shadow, and Bloodghast). This is to say that each additional creature you add to aid in grinding against blue opponents becomes more and more redundant and less and less useful once you reach a certain point. Your CounterTop opponent with two Tarmogoyf in play was already quite past the point of no return with your two recurrable Ichorids, six Zombie tokens, and two Nether Shadows threatening their well-being every turn; did you really need those two Bloodghast as well? This is especially true for pre-board games, games where the opponent will not likely have any form of dedicated grave hate. The thing we have to find as players looking to optimize our Manaless lists is that point in which the function starts decreasing in value, the peak of the negative parabola (so far, I've found it to be around eleven, although to actually find it one would need to devise a computational algorithm of some sort).

Reason #2— Even in a blue-dominated metagame, numerous decks exist that are faster or on par in terms of speed with us. Reanimator and ANT, for example, were the two most played decks during day one of GP Amsterdam (even though, if I'm not mistaken, the blue decks that we thrive on still achieved combined plurality). These decks our our bad matchups because they can simply ignore our gameplan entirely and win before we can really do anything, and are what we should be focusing on beating most. Increasing the number of grinding creatures slows the deck down and decreases the likelihood of winning against such decks. The most optimal way we can combat faster strategies, in addition to resolving a multitude of early Cabal Therapies, is to kill them before they kill you. The best way to go about doing that is through a Dread Return package.

So then, if faster strategies are somewhat predominant, why would you play Manaless in the first place? Traditional Dredge builds have access to Breakthrough, which enables turn two kills (and by that, I mean establishing a lethal board presence while stripping the opponent's hand with multiple Cabal Therapy) better than any other card, after all. The reason lies largely in the second common misconception, and also because traditional builds lack the density of graveyard-useful cards [and therefore, natural resiliency against grave hate and grinding capability (more black creatures to ensure Ichorid can come back every turn, more dredgers, more recurrable creatures, etc.)] that we have.

Misconception #2: Manaless Dredge is inherently slower than traditional variants of Dredge, mostly because it has to draw first and spend its first turn doing nothing other than discarding a dredger.

This is, simply, put, false. I've found that a six-eight Bauble Manaless variant (with four Dread Return, three Sphinx of Lost Truths, and one Flame-kin Zealot) wins on average by turn 3.7, all without exposing itself too much to countermagic by sometimes banking on resolving an outlet or draw spell like traditional builds do. This is, of course, faster on average than conventional builds (at least in my experience). Breakthrough resolving does give Dredge unmatched, consistent explosiveness, but Manaless isn't too far behind in that department, and doesn't necessarily rely on one card to attain such results.

Now, jin, by looking at the first misconception I detailed, you should see why a 3/4 configuration of Narcomoeba/Nether Shadow would be suboptimal; the added grinding capability of the fourth Nether Shadow isn't all that necessary, while the fourth Narcomoeba is very necessary in increasing the percentage of casting an early Dread Return and/or Cabal Therapy against our bad matchups (remember, Nether Shadows dredged into won't be online for a minimum of one turn). You contradict yourself by saying that Cabal Therapy would be the best way to win against combo, and then cut a copy of the creature that fuels Cabal Therapy better than any other. The addition of the fourth Narcomoeba is indeed only a small percentage better in attaining such a feat, but small percentages are everything in the optimization of decklists.

[jin]

Jin- What is the list you have been testing with? I'm curious to see what you think Narco should be cut for.

It's not my list. I was playing the list from Amsterdam. It was linked before. Here it is again:

MB:
1x Angel of Despair
1x Elesh Norn
1x FKZ
1x Iona
1x Sphinx of the Lost Truth
4x Faerie Macabre
4x GGT
4x Stinkweed Imp
4x Golgari Thug
4x Shambling Shell
4x Phantasmalgorian
4x Ichorid
4x Nether Shadow
3x Narcomoeba
4x Street Wraith

4x Bridge from Below

4x Cabal Therapy
4x Dread Return
4x Gritaxian Probe

SB:
1x Ancestor's Chosen
1x Blightsteel Colossus
4x Chancellor of the Annex
2x Gigapede
1x Platinum Angel
1x River Kelpe
1x Sphinx of the Lost Truth

4x Cranial Extraction



@jin— first, I'd like to apologize if I offended you in any way. Even though I strongly disagree with your hypothesis concerning Narcomoeba, it's always nice to have lengthy discussions. Second, I'd like to address two misconceptions that numerous people have had concerning Manaless Dredge over the past few months before I get into why running four Narcomoeba is important for the deck to succeed:

Misconception #1: Manaless Dredge is a "grind-'em-out" deck, and must abide by that/adhere to that philosophy as much as possible; if you're looking to kill the opponent with Dread Return, there's no point in playing Manaless Dredge over traditional variants of Dredge since they have access to more potent accelerants in the forms of Breakthrough, Cephalid Coliseum, and Careful Study.

The reason why we play Manaless Dredge isn't to force a particular style of play, it's to take advantage of the increased density of graveyard-useful cards one gets by forgoing the playing of lands. We play it to take advantage of a blue-dominated metagame in gaining virtual card advantage by blanking, for the most part, all of their countermagic. One of the benefits of upping the density of graveyard-useful cards is increased resilience against one-shot forms of graveyard removal (Tormod's Crypt, Bojuka Bog, Nihil Spellbomb, and I suppose Faerie Macabre being the best examples). Another key benefit of it is increasing the effectiveness of "grinding"— which I will define as attacking over the course of a few turns with recurring (and largely unstoppable) Ichorids, Zombie tokens, Nether Shadows, Narcomoebas, and sometimes Bloodghasts with virtually no cost to you. Grinding is the best way to beat decks with counterspells, because as I stated before, you gain an immense amount of virtual card advantage when you don't cast spells. So, why not max out on that strategy? The entire point of playing this deck was to trump blue strategies, right?

There are two key reasons why I do not think that doing so would be beneficial for the deck:

Reason #1— The derivative function of the effectiveness of grinding creatures decreases in value as x approaches sixteen (which would be running full playsets of Ichorid, Narcomoeba, Nether Shadow, and Bloodghast). This is to say that each additional creature you add to aid in grinding against blue opponents becomes more and more redundant and less and less useful once you reach a certain point. Your CounterTop opponent with two Tarmogoyf in play was already quite past the point of no return with your two recurrable Ichorids, six Zombie tokens, and two Nether Shadows threatening their well-being every turn; did you really need those two Bloodghast as well? This is especially true for pre-board games, games where the opponent will not likely have any form of dedicated grave hate. The thing we have to find as players looking to optimize our Manaless lists is that point in which the function starts decreasing in value, the peak of the negative parabola (so far, I've found it to be around eleven, although to actually find it one would need to devise a computational algorithm of some sort).

Reason #2— Even in a blue-dominated metagame, numerous decks exist that are faster or on par in terms of speed with us. Reanimator and ANT, for example, were the two most played decks during day one of GP Amsterdam (even though, if I'm not mistaken, the blue decks that we thrive on still achieved combined plurality). These decks our our bad matchups because they can simply ignore our gameplan entirely and win before we can really do anything, and are what we should be focusing on beating most. Increasing the number of grinding creatures slows the deck down and decreases the likelihood of winning against such decks. The most optimal way we can combat faster strategies, in addition to resolving a multitude of early Cabal Therapies, is to kill them before they kill you. The best way to go about doing that is through a Dread Return package.

So then, if faster strategies are somewhat predominant, why would you play Manaless in the first place? Traditional Dredge builds have access to Breakthrough, which enables turn two kills (and by that, I mean establishing a lethal board presence while stripping the opponent's hand with multiple Cabal Therapy) better than any other card, after all. The reason lies largely in the second common misconception, and also because traditional builds lack the density of graveyard-useful cards [and therefore, natural resiliency against grave hate and grinding capability (more black creatures to ensure Ichorid can come back every turn, more dredgers, more recurrable creatures, etc.)] that we have.

Misconception #2: Manaless Dredge is inherently slower than traditional variants of Dredge, mostly because it has to draw first and spend its first turn doing nothing other than discarding a dredger.

This is, simply, put, false. I've found that a six-eight Bauble Manaless variant (with four Dread Return, three Sphinx of Lost Truths, and one Flame-kin Zealot) wins on average by turn 3.7, all without exposing itself too much to countermagic by sometimes banking on resolving an outlet or draw spell like traditional builds do. This is, of course, faster on average than conventional builds (at least in my experience). Breakthrough resolving does give Dredge unmatched, consistent explosiveness, but Manaless isn't too far behind in that department, and doesn't necessarily rely on one card to attain such results.

Now, jin, by looking at the first misconception I detailed, you should see why a 3/4 configuration of Narcomoeba/Nether Shadow would be suboptimal; the added grinding capability of the fourth Nether Shadow isn't all that necessary, while the fourth Narcomoeba is very necessary in increasing the percentage of casting an early Dread Return and/or Cabal Therapy against our bad matchups (remember, Nether Shadows dredged into won't be online for a minimum of one turn). You contradict yourself by saying that Cabal Therapy would be the best way to win against combo, and then cut a copy of the creature that fuels Cabal Therapy better than any other. The addition of the fourth Narcomoeba is indeed only a small percentage better in attaining such a feat, but small percentages are everything in the optimization of decklists.

Thanks, this must have taken a lot of time.

This is what I got from this post: you are saying that the 4x Nether Shadows/3x Narcomoeba split is too much in the direction of the grind-out plan and is reaching the point of redundant. What the deck needs is move a bit in the combo-direction because it relies on speed in some match ups.

Yes, that is quite contradictory. These are logical argument I can accept.

What about 4/3 the other way? I noticed Nether Shadow was being cut for bauble which I didn't like. I quite like the list from above though.


Too long, but I read it..

I'm actually quite disappointed I didn't get to read that last post. It seemed very exciting. If you presented a logical argument, instead of saying that it's simply better or faster for Dread Return, then I would have accepted it. You didn't present any underlying theory behind the 4th Narcomoeba.

You simply attacked me and backed yourself up with history which really doesn't explain to me why the 4th is relevant at all. I'm not going to believe you simply because you say so and many other people before said so. I need reason, and you gave me no relevant ones.




This is a forum where it's about sharing opinions and testing results. He had an opinion, did some testing and wanted to know what other people think about it. You don't have to take other people's arguments apart like that each time you don't 100% agree with them.

If mana Dredge people thought like you, Manaless wouldn't even exist.

Agreed

[4eak]

Hollywood and KevinTrudeau have given great explanations (imho). I don't know if I will be able to add much, but here goes.

I wholeheartedly disagree with you jin. Narco and Bridge are about as 'set in stone' as you can get for any version of this deck, so much so that I'm willing to say that the burden of proof is on you (and those on your side) to show us why we should play only 3 Narco's. We aren't necessarily correct, obviously, but the 4-Narco convention does not look like mere dogma. I'd like you to actually provide better arguments, as so far, you've not provided a good case. Now, if experience and anecdote bring us to a stalemate, then give us some math to ponder. I think once you begin to dig deeper theory and math behind this deck, you may come to agree with 4 Narco's (or so I hope).

Hopefully these numbers will juice your intuitions, jin.

# of Narco's in your deck -- % Chance to open with 1 Narco in opening 8-card hand -- 2 Narco's -- 3 Narco's -- 4 Narco's
1 -- 13% -- n/a -- n/a -- n/a
2 -- 25% -- 02% -- n/a -- n/a
3 -- 35% -- 04% -- 00% -- n/a
4 -- 44% -- 08% -- 01% -- 00%

# of Narco's left in your deck after opening 8-card hand -- Total # of cards dredged before you have a greater than 50% chance to flip at least 1 Narco (added # of cards in deck for context) -- 2 Narco's -- 3 Narco's -- 4 Narco's

1 -- 28 of 52 cards -- [n/a] -- [n/a] -- [n/a]
2 -- 17 of 52 cards -- 39/52 -- [n/a] -- [n/a]
3 -- 12 of 52 cards -- 28/52 -- 43/52 -- [n/a]
4 -- 09 of 52 cards -- 22/52 -- 34/52 -- 46/52

Obviously, this doesn't prove anything, but it does give us firmer ground on which to make claims and to explore the theory behind this deck.

Clearly, there is a speed difference provided by running the 4th Narco. Even you, jin, appear to agree that dredge really wants to flip at least 1 or 2 Narco's in every game. When do you need to flip those? I want to flip at least one on turn by 3 (which gives me 2 turns to dredge). This appears likely to occur (but not even consistently, merely greater than a 50% chance) in the 4-Narco build, but it is appear likely in 3-Narco build.

I think Narco provides a great deal of speed to this deck at a minimal cost in deck space. Nether Shadow, presumably your alternative for the 4th Narco slot, is far slower, and it doesn't seem the 'grind' and 'recursive' ability that it provides, which is suffering from severe diminishing returns (as you already have Ichorid and your other Nether Shadows), is more useful than the 4th Narco. You lose very little of your ability to 'grind' and gain a great deal in speed and early game consistency. This is a small sacrifice worth making.

Edit: I don't like that list. Those DR-targets demonstrate a fundamental lack of comprehension of the goals of this deck. If that is what you've been using, it is no wonder that you don't understand why we are arguing for speed. Make the appropriate adjustments to your DR targets (-1 Junk Target, +1 Sphinx -- bare minimum, and I'd argue for 2), and perhaps you'll be in a better position to understand the value of that 4th Narco.


peace,
4eak

[John Cox]

In the turns you spend dredging nether shadow and recuring him you could easily dredge two Narcomoebas if you have 4 in the deck, without that setup you slow down immensely.

[Michael Keller]

I'm actually quite disappointed I didn't get to read that last post. It seemed very exciting. If you presented a logical argument, instead of saying that it's simply better or faster for Dread Return, then I would have accepted it. You didn't present any underlying theory behind the 4th Narcomoeba.

You simply attacked me and backed yourself up with history which really doesn't explain to me why the 4th is relevant at all. I'm not going to believe you simply because you say so and many other people before said so. I need reason, and you gave me no relevant ones.

As 4eak said, the burden of proof is on you. That's what I've been trying to explain all this time. You're the one who needs to prove that the accepted, tried and true theory is wrong or suboptimal. If you cannot, then the continued methodology for which most (if not all) variants of Dredge operate on will continue to thrive. You're the one going against what is considered the 'norm.' If you can't explain to us intelligently why you feel one option is better than the other, then there's no point in saying something for the sake of saying something.

If it's to generate discussion, that's fine, but ultimately it means nothing when it creates an illogical conclusion that won't prosper into a legitimately tested product.

@Kevin: Thank you.

[Parcher]

My replies have been relatively tame compared to what Parcher would say to something like this.

Hey! What's that supposed to mean!?

Screw you, buddy!

[jin]

Hollywood and KevinTrudeau have given great explanations (imho). I don't know if I will be able to add much, but here goes.

I wholeheartedly disagree with you jin. Narco and Bridge are about as 'set in stone' as you can get for any version of this deck, so much so that I'm willing to say that the burden of proof is on you (and those on your side) to show us why we should play only 3 Narco's. We aren't necessarily correct, obviously, but the 4-Narco convention does not look like mere dogma. I'd like you to actually provide better arguments, as so far, you've not provided a good case. Now, if experience and anecdote bring us to a stalemate, then give us some math to ponder. I think once you begin to dig deeper theory and math behind this deck, you may come to agree with 4 Narco's (or so I hope).

Hopefully these numbers will juice your intuitions, jin.

# of Narco's in your deck -- % Chance to open with 1 Narco in opening 8-card hand -- 2 Narco's -- 3 Narco's -- 4 Narco's
1 -- 13% -- n/a -- n/a -- n/a
2 -- 25% -- 02% -- n/a -- n/a
3 -- 35% -- 04% -- 00% -- n/a
4 -- 44% -- 08% -- 01% -- 00%

# of Narco's left in your deck after opening 8-card hand -- Total # of cards dredged before you have a greater than 50% chance to flip at least 1 Narco (added # of cards in deck for context) -- 2 Narco's -- 3 Narco's -- 4 Narco's

1 -- 28 of 52 cards -- [n/a] -- [n/a] -- [n/a]
2 -- 17 of 52 cards -- 39/52 -- [n/a] -- [n/a]
3 -- 12 of 52 cards -- 28/52 -- 43/52 -- [n/a]
4 -- 09 of 52 cards -- 22/52 -- 34/52 -- 46/52

Obviously, this doesn't prove anything, but it does give us firmer ground on which to make claims and to explore the theory behind this deck.

Clearly, there is a speed difference provided by running the 4th Narco. Even you, jin, appear to agree that dredge really wants to flip at least 1 or 2 Narco's in every game. When do you need to flip those? I want to flip at least one on turn by 3 (which gives me 2 turns to dredge). This appears likely to occur (but not even consistently, merely greater than a 50% chance) in the 4-Narco build, but it is appear likely in 3-Narco build.

I think Narco provides a great deal of speed to this deck at a minimal cost in deck space. Nether Shadow, presumably your alternative for the 4th Narco slot, is far slower, and it doesn't seem the 'grind' and 'recursive' ability that it provides, which is suffering from severe diminishing returns (as you already have Ichorid and your other Nether Shadows), is more useful than the 4th Narco. You lose very little of your ability to 'grind' and gain a great deal in speed and early game consistency. This is a small sacrifice worth making.

Edit: I don't like that list. Those DR-targets demonstrate a fundamental lack of comprehension of the goals of this deck. If that is what you've been using, it is no wonder that you don't understand why we are arguing for speed. Make the appropriate adjustments to your DR targets (-1 Junk Target, +1 Sphinx -- bare minimum, and I'd argue for 2), and perhaps you'll be in a better position to understand the value of that 4th Narco.


peace,
4eak

Yeah, I'm not too great with numbers, but the conclusions you draw from your data are acceptable. KevinTrudeau has already explained the bolded part of your quote, so I get where you and he are both coming from.

Again, I'm not claiming to be an expert on the deck. I'm just trying to stir up discussion and talk about the list from Amsterdam which opted to play without the 4th. Also, I'm not saying you guys are incorrect, I'm saying we should open our minds up to the possibility of the 4th being a flex slot whether it is or not is really not up to me.

I didn't build the deck, so I'm not sure why the Dread Return targets are those ones. I do see a second Sphinx, which you agree with, in the sb, so he must know what he is doing. I suppose his choices are quite metagame dependant. I don't quite see what junk target you are speaking of though. I suppose Flame-kin Zealot and Iona both being in the list is quite redundant. Could you clarify here?


As 4eak said, the burden of proof is on you. That's what I've been trying to explain all this time. You're the one who needs to prove that the accepted, tried and true theory is wrong or suboptimal. If you cannot, then the continued methodology for which most (if not all) variants of Dredge operate on will continue to thrive. You're the one going against what is considered the 'norm.' If you can't explain to us intelligently why you feel one option is better than the other, then there's no point in saying something for the sake of saying something.

If it's to generate discussion, that's fine, but ultimately it means nothing when it creates an illogical conclusion that won't prosper into a legitimately tested product.

@Kevin: Thank you.

You haven't explained much past your first post. Most of it was quite offensive and attacking my character more than explaining your position. Even though it was quite difficult to weed away your assaults and dig at your basis for your conclusion, it proved to be impossible and unacceptable as evidence for your claims, but others have cleared things up, so thanks for your time.

[Final Fortune]

Sorry to interrupt your guy's inane converastion about Narcomoeba, for fuck's sake just play 4, but have any of you guys compared the difference in speed between playing a set of Baubles and playing a set of Chancellor's Annex MD in a variety of matches? The reason I ask is Bauble is a turn 3, or at the earliest turn 2, card that increases the speed of the deck at the cost of exposing it to counter margic where the Chancellor is a turn 0 card that essentially "negates" going second uncounterably. I've been really wondering whether or not that "hiccup" in the opponet's game plan is more consistent tempo/board development for us than the worse draw cards in the deck by way of comparison?

Basically, anybody MDing Chancellor of Annex over Baubles and/or LED/DA?

Also, what bad or break even match up do you think you can "swing" post-board with your board space the most? I've all but given up on Manaless Dredge out racing Storm, but Faerie Macabre and Phyrexian Extirpates have been turning around the Reanimator (and mirror) match ups ridiculously well and my personal bias is that targeting Reanimator with the SB is the highest +EV.

[Michael Keller]

I apologize if I offended you, jin. It's just as someone who takes this very seriously, I am very particular about certain things. I get short-fused sometimes on here due in large part to people purporting something as being optimal without so much as explaining themselves. I should have given you the benefit of the doubt. Sorry about that.

At any rate, I am looking at reconfiguring the sideboard a bit. Chancellors I believe belong in the side as we already have a leg-up on Reanimator with Faeries. Does anyone think bringing Gigapede back to the main is a good idea?

Kevin: Personally, I'm trying to keep the list as non-interactive as possible. L.E.D. opens the door to some degenerate plays, but also forces the deck to go all-in.

Also, I had this really 'crazy' idea that I was just tossing around for fun earlier today (and I don't think it is optimal, but worth a look at): I understand none of us are really on the Dakmor Salavage/Bloodghast plan anymore. I was just playing around with running a full set of Salvages, in addition to Leyline of the Void in the sideboard with Sharuum and Helm of Obedience as two side slots as well. It actually went off a few times against Maverick and Merfolk, as they just couldn't stop it outright. This would make L.E.D. decent in the deck, too.

Again - I'm not being too serious, but I thought it's a neat trick to share. Your dredges are almost acting like pseudo-'tutors' in that your just dredging until you hit them and then Dread Return into Sharuum. You could even bring back L.E.D. and flashback a dredged-away D.A.

[Final Fortune]

Gigapede is terrible, unless you're playing a version of Manaless Dredge that eliminates all counterable spells for non-interactivity, all of the alternatives are superior in that slot.

I don't see how LED/DA makes the deck any more interactive than Baubles, nor do I see how "going all in" game 1 is actually a problem. We're only playing LED/DA game 1 vs. any non-combo deck boarding hate, and they can't punish you for "going all in" game 1 so why not do it?

MDing Faerie Macabre seems kind of bleh, if Reanimator is that prolific in your metagame Dredge is not the deck to be playing.

What's the reasoning behind Chancellor of the Annex being a SB card? I mean the Chancellor has a relevant impact vs. the entire field game 1 where Faerie Macabre is terribly specific, and if pseudo-Dazing the opponent slows him down enough to be equivalent to us speeding ourselves up with a cantrip it seems like the better choice to me because it's uncounterable, a Dread Return target and pumps Grave-Troll.

[Michael Keller]

Gigapede is terrible, unless you're playing a version of Manaless Dredge that eliminates all counterable spells for non-interactivity, all of the alternatives are superior in that slot.

I don't run Gigapede in my seventy-five anymore. It's far from ''terrible," however, as it actually operates quite well as an unstoppable means of allowing you to continue chaining deep-dredgers, discarding important Dread Return targets, and allowing you to keep Phantasmagorian in your graveyard. Dread Return and Cabal Therapy will always be Dredge staples, and they are interactive. A very large percentage of the deck still remains non-interactive, and thus Gigapede still fits within the scope of that deck structure.

There aren't (to my knowledge) any other unstoppable means of discarding cards from your hand available from the graveyard, so I fail to see how this ranks as a terrible option. It's just difficult finding space for it.


I don't see how LED/DA makes the deck any more interactive than Baubles, nor do I see how "going all in" game 1 is actually a problem. We're only playing LED/DA game 1 vs. any non-combo deck boarding hate, and they can't punish you for "going all in" game 1 so why not do it?

I played Baubles for a long time and they're just too slow. You never want to give your opponent the ability to react to a delayed effect of your during their turn, where you have virtually no way of ensuring the cards you dredged away are secured, in addition to being able to keep Narcomoeba in play and usable for Dread Return/Therapy fodder. You're at the mercy of your opponent in this instance.

L.E.D. and D.A. are not worth playing in this deck. That's not to say they're "bad," however. Lion's Eye Diamond forces you to discard your entire hand upon activation. You also have to cast the card first. Assuming it gets countered, you've now 'Time-Walked' your opponent - dropping your hand size down to a 'non-discardable' seven - and relegated that Deep Analysis in your hand as useless. That seems completely suboptimal in a deck that needs a dredger in its 'yard as often and early as possible.

Dropping an L.E.D. is akin to going "all-in" because you're ditching your entire hand in hopes your opponent can't stop it game one and doesn't have graveyard removal games two and three. It forces you to be mulligan-aggressive in searching for Deep Analysis, and that's just not good here. Manaless never wants to mulligan - even if a hand looks suspect. There's no point in playing an L.E.D., risking it being countered, thus putting you out of a discard for the turn, and if it resolves and you activate it, there's no telling if your opponent will drop Crypt or Relic. In those instances, you've now put yourself at a disadvantage - no matter how you look at it.

It's overly situational, completely risky, and just not worth it here.


MDing Faerie Macabre seems kind of bleh, if Reanimator is that prolific in your metagame Dredge is not the deck to be playing.

Reanimator is one of the best decks in the format today, and is certainly not the only deck abusing the graveyard. Faerie Macabre has multiple uses, some I've utilized in tournament play, and some I've encountered in testing.

1. It obviously hits relevant Reanimator targets - notably Elesh Norn.
2. It can be brought back into play subsequently with a resolved Exhume.
3. It shrinks potentially lethal Tarmogoyfs (that occurred at SCG - Baltimore as someone mentioned to me it saved them the game and they wound up in 17th place).
4. It feeds to Ichorid.
5. It can be discarded to target zero targets and allows you to put the potentially critical third creature above your Nether Shadows, thus allowing his recursion.
6. It's basically non-interactive and unstoppable.
7. It hits Life from the Loam and its subsequent targets (happened in sanctioned play, hitting Chasm and Bojuka Bog off Intuition).
8. It hits Snapcaster Mage targets, including targeted Surgical Extraction.
9. It's a blowout against opposing Dredge builds.
10. It's completely unexpected.

I think these validate its overall utility and power in the first sixty. I've always been happy to open-hand one, and I've heard nothing but good things about it from other players. Definitely a solid contributor and worth the main-deck space in Legacy today.


What's the reasoning behind Chancellor of the Annex being a SB card? I mean the Chancellor has a relevant impact vs. the entire field game 1 where Faerie Macabre is terribly specific, and if pseudo-Dazing the opponent slows him down enough to be equivalent to us speeding ourselves up with a cantrip it seems like the better choice to me because it's uncounterable, a Dread Return target and pumps Grave-Troll.

That might be true, as I've played Chancellor main-deck, but the fact is there are plenty of ways to play around Chancellor once the game begins. Faerie Macabre is the blowout waiting to happen, and forces your opponent to walk into a punishing mistake. Chancellor is a card your opponents can play around because they know you have it, and while its ability is certainly not overlooked, it really doesn't do anything beyond its opening ability against most decks. Faerie's ability to be fed to Ichorid is actually really relevant, as are the other aforementioned reasons.

I've teetered between swapping the two main-deck, but Faerie to me has been the better choice so far. I only really like Chancellor against decks like High Tide and Storm, which are obviously good, but I'm finding decks predicated on abusing the graveyard more prevalent at the moment. Storm tends to get knocked out of the early rounds in events with poor pilots, but graveyard-based strategies at the moment - namely Reanimator and opposing Dredge - are dominating the top tables in larger events by punishing poor pilots, bad hands, and bad decks in general. Faerie dictates those match-ups, and again I'm finding its overall utility more attractive.

I'm not disagreeing with you, I just prefer Faerie over Chancellor main.

[Final Fortune]

I'm not certain you're playing LED/DA the way I'm playing LED/DA, you don't play LED turn 1 vs. Islands, you don't mulligan for DA at all and you don't keep LED/DA game 2 vs hate. The deck can and should be played in DDD with LED/DA regardless, and once your first Dredger is discarded at the end step and a second Dredger or Phantasmagorian is put into the graveyard you can continue to Dredge until you reveal a Deep Analysis and then go off on turn 2, 3 or 4 regularly with a "discard your hand" and a "double cantrip."

I'd recommend you play something like,

MD

4 Golgari Grave Troll
4 Stinkweed Imp
4 Golgari Thug
4 Shambling Shell
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Deep Analysis
2 Phantasmagorian
4 Street Wraith
4 Phyrexian Probe
4 Cabal Therapy
4 Narcomoeba
4 Nether Shadow
3 Dread Return
2 Sphinx of Lost Truths
1 Flame Kin Zealot
4 Ichorid
4 Bridge from Below

SB
4 Dakmor Salvage
4 Bloodghast
4 Faerie Macabre
3 Phyrexian Extirpate

And just get use to playing LED cautiously, and try playing with it vs. Goblins, Elves, Affinity, Lands, High Tide and some of those other, closer match ups to see how much the speed makes a difference (I'm certain this is the fastest, most consistent version of Manaless Dredge - altho' not necessarily the best)

It's not that Gigapedge in and of itself is terrible, it's that Gigapedge is underpowered when you compare it to its alternatives, it's significantly worse than Phantasmagorian and redundant as well.

We can always chalk up Chancellor of the Annex vs. Faerie Macabre as prefereance, but I don't think "playing around" Chancellor of the Annex is an argument because if they "play around" it they are just foregoing their one or two drop and we're accelerating our game plan by decelerating theirs. The other thing I like about Chancellor of the Annex is that it protects the deck from Duress and Thought Seize, which is a plus. My point tho' was that I think Chancellor of the Annex is better than Baubles because the relative tempo is the same, it's uncounterable, it has minor utility in the graveyard and potentially saves SB space.

[Michael Keller]

Dredge makes the semifinals at SCG Open - Kansas City!

[igri_is_a_bk]

Yeah, and punts game three hard. He made two critical errors that were game-breaking. First, he forgot to make two Bridge tokens, which would have been relevant on his last turn. Then, he scooped when his opponent had two Dark Confidant with three life and both triggers were going to be blind flips. A Riptide Laboratory would bounce one, but that doesn't mean the other wouldn't hit a Jace or Force or something.

It's too bad. He should have made the finals.

[Michael Keller]

Yeah, and punts game three hard. He made two critical errors that were game-breaking. First, he forgot to make two Bridge tokens, which would have been relevant on his last turn. Then, he scooped when his opponent had two Dark Confidant with three life and both triggers were going to be blind flips. A Riptide Laboratory would bounce one, but that doesn't mean the other wouldn't hit a Jace or Force or something.

It's too bad. He should have made the finals.

I saw that. It was very hard to watch.

[John Cox]

Opening post updated

[KevinTrudeau]

@Hollywood— Something you forgot to add about Macabre is that you can pitch it (RFGing nothing) to dodge Relic's tap ability as well. I'm pretty sure it has a place in the seventy-five given the current meta, but I don't necessarily think it's in the maindeck.

@Final Fortune— I'm really liking all of the ideas you're pitching (again). Some of the slots would need to be reevaluated a teensy bit (I'm thinking a 4/2 split of the correlated Nether Shadow/Phantasmagorian slot right off the bat), especially with opposing Surgical Extractions, Relics, and Extirpates in mind, but cutting six Baubles for 4 LED and 2 Desperate Ravings (which is strictly better than DA in Manaless Dredge specifically) sounds like it could be very good. I was playing Baubles in addition to an LED package as an anti-combo sideboard plan, but I'm not even sure the Baubles were necessarily increasing the speed of the deck in that config as the density of grave-synergistic cards decreased.

I could also see CotA replacing the Sphinx/FKZ package maindeck (which seems like the slot it would naturally replace if one were to wish to maindeck it), though I'd need to do some thorough testing before coming to a conclusion on that. This would then enable a Bloodghast package to be played in the 'board, although I'm still not sure one is completely necessary. So many potential things to do with the deck, I'm kind of excited. I'll have most of the day tomorrow free to test as well, so I'll try to see if I can come up with any conclusions. This deck still has a long way to go before it's really optimized.

Also, I'd just like to reiterate to the forum that LED should not be used as crutch against an unknown opponent/blue opponent if you play it maindeck like you would initially think; you play it like you would a Bauble if you're not sure you can resolve it. The difference between Bauble and LED though is that LED has the ability to be played in an all-in fashion when needed for some potentially broken turns (e.g. play LED, Probe, resp to Probe with SW cycle, resp to cycle by cracking LED and discarding at least one dredger, cast the Desperate Ravings you binned with SW activation and Probe still on the stack), in addition to a few other sweet benefits.

[RaNDoMxGeSTuReS]

@ SCG KC Dredge Semi-Finals:

For what it's worth, an earlier Dark Confidant trigger revealed a Brainstorm. The first trigger for the turn revealed a land and Surgical Extraction. Alex had two lands and the Brainstorm in hand to stack the second trigger.

[Final Fortune]

@Hollywood— Something you forgot to add about Macabre is that you can pitch it (RFGing nothing) to dodge Relic's tap ability as well. I'm pretty sure it has a place in the seventy-five given the current meta, but I don't necessarily think it's in the maindeck.

@Final Fortune— I'm really liking all of the ideas you're pitching (again). Some of the slots would need to be reevaluated a teensy bit (I'm thinking a 4/2 split of the correlated Nether Shadow/Phantasmagorian slot right off the bat), especially with opposing Surgical Extractions, Relics, and Extirpates in mind, but cutting six Baubles for 4 LED and 2 Desperate Ravings (which is strictly better than DA in Manaless Dredge specifically) sounds like it could be very good. I was playing Baubles in addition to an LED package as an anti-combo sideboard plan, but I'm not even sure the Baubles were necessarily increasing the speed of the deck in that config as the density of grave-synergistic cards decreased.

I could also see CotA replacing the Sphinx/FKZ package maindeck (which seems like the slot it would naturally replace if one were to wish to maindeck it), though I'd need to do some thorough testing before coming to a conclusion on that. This would then enable a Bloodghast package to be played in the 'board, although I'm still not sure one is completely necessary. So many potential things to do with the deck, I'm kind of excited. I'll have most of the day tomorrow free to test as well, so I'll try to see if I can come up with any conclusions. This deck still has a long way to go before it's really optimized.

Also, I'd just like to reiterate to the forum that LED should not be used as crutch against an unknown opponent/blue opponent if you play it maindeck like you would initially think; you play it like you would a Bauble if you're not sure you can resolve it. The difference between Bauble and LED though is that LED has the ability to be played in an all-in fashion when needed for some potentially broken turns (e.g. play LED, Probe, resp to Probe with SW cycle, resp to cycle by cracking LED and discarding at least one dredger, cast the Desperate Ravings you binned with SW activation and Probe still on the stack), in addition to a few other sweet benefits.

Agreed, the LED/DA engine (I agree Desperate Ravings is superior to Deep Analysis, but writing Deep Analysis is a matter of habbit so you'll have to excuse me) is arguably the most misplayed engine in Dredge because "bad" players have a tendency to play LED too quickly without Dredging into Deep Analysis first, stocking the graveyard with a second dredger or discaring counter spells with Cabal Therapies before playing the LED. Essentially, LED/DA's purpose is to accelerate Dredge into faster, undisrupted wins game 1 vs. the aggro-combo matches the stand a chance vs our DDD or combo and is more of a "sand bagging" strategy vs. aggro-control.

As far as replacing the Sphinx/Zealot package with the Chancellor, I don't think it's a really good idea because it reduces our explosiveness and the board position we gain from Sphinx/Zealt is much more relevant than from Chancellor.

Really, I think the questions Manaless Dredge needs to ask itself is "how do I accelerate my game plan and what cards become least desirable post-board vs. hate?" Basically, it comes down to comparing Baubles, Chancellor, LED/DA and I think there are a couple of other questions, like whether or not 4 Dread Return, 3 Sage, 1 Zealot is significantly better than 3 Dread Return, 2 Sage, 1 Zealot, what number of Phantasmagorians should you have if you're playing LED already and a really fundamental question that has been bothering me lately is whether or not the deck should be playing Dakmor Salvage and Bloodghast MD over Shambling Shell and Nether Shadow if you're playing LED/DA because if you "luck sack" both in hand or Dredge into it on your second turn you can develop a board position much more quickly.

I've also been wondering whether or not Desperate Ravings is actually better than Deep Analysis, because if you do play Salvage/Ghast MD you'd shoot yourself in the foot by randomly discarding Dakmor Salvage after Dredging so Deep Analysis may still have its place in that particular scenario.

The Deep Analysis and/or Desperate Ravings count is another question, because both you and I have looked at it from opposite angles. I've tried pretty much playing every copy of those cards as I could while you were playing less than 1 set.

About the only thing I'm really sure of right now is that SBing for Storm Combo is a fucking waste of time, Trap and Chancellor aren't enough to do dick shit to the match up percentage but SBing vs Reanimator seems to have a pretty positive effect on the win rate post board. I still think Chancellor is a pretty good SB card tho', the Daze effect makes a huge difference in match ups like Elves (don't laugh, it's a really popluar budge aggro-combo deck around here) where they have to forego their 1 drop and you're in a much better position to race. I'm also a really big fan of SBing Probe if you're not MDing it because it's pretty good filler and being able to check for hate vs. aggro decks that can't counter probe or make your Therapies slightly more accurate is awesome.

Sorry if some of that came off as rambling, hopefully tho' it'll open up some discussion or hard core gold fishing.

[Michael Keller]

@ SCG KC Dredge Semi-Finals:

For what it's worth, an earlier Dark Confidant trigger revealed a Brainstorm. The first trigger for the turn revealed a land and Surgical Extraction. Alex had two lands and the Brainstorm in hand to stack the second trigger.

He was playing awfully loose though in such a critical game. I remember him flipping for Dark Confidant blind at a very low life total - a potentially lethal flip - when he could have Brainstormed or bounced it with Laboratory. Even though he hand multiple lands, his line of play was a little off given the scenario.

It didn't matter, however, as the Dredge player completely missed his Bridge tokens and made several play mistakes towards the end of that game. It was just a mess overall.


About the only thing I'm really sure of right now is that SBing for Storm Combo is a fucking waste of time, Trap and Chancellor aren't enough to do dick shit to the match up percentage but SBing vs Reanimator seems to have a pretty positive effect on the win rate post board. I still think Chancellor is a pretty good SB card tho', the Daze effect makes a huge difference in match ups like Elves (don't laugh, it's a really popluar budge aggro-combo deck around here) where they have to forego their 1 drop and you're in a much better position to race. I'm also a really big fan of SBing Probe if you're not MDing it because it's pretty good filler and being able to check for hate vs. aggro decks that can't counter probe or make your Therapies slightly more accurate is awesome.

I'm not so sure about this. The Storm match-up might be relatively weak, but it doesn't mean it is completely out of reach. Obviously, tearing apart their hand with Therapies (in conjunction with Gitaxian probe) is important, as is using attackers to dwindle their life total low enough where Ad Nauseam becomes more of a liability than anything else. I think it's important to have at least something relegated to improve the Storm match-up so that we can at least tilt the percentages even marginally in our favor.

I don't think, however, that Dread Returning a Chancellor is benign against Storm. That's actually quite relevant and unless they spend a few turns (or more) trying to come up with an answer to it, their life total will dwindle and dwindle fast. I would straight-up Dread Return a Chancellor into play even if it means no tokens on my side the second or third turn if I had to.


As far as replacing the Sphinx/Zealot package with the Chancellor, I don't think it's a really good idea because it reduces our explosiveness and the board position we gain from Sphinx/Zealt is much more relevant than from Chancellor.

I personally never do this. If anything goes out on my side, it's usually the Street Wraiths or Shambling Shells.

The problem is, even though we can explode into ridiculous amounts of creatures at any given time, sometimes we just can't get to a lethal strike and a Storm player often does have the capability of 'going off' at any time. Chancellor ensures a complete shutdown for at least several turns and grants us the ability to do damage while staving off a goldfish at the same time. With four Dread Return, taking a turn or two to setup a game-ending strike while getting cover and some serious damage in from a devastatingly protective force like Chancellor in play is completely worth the effort of boarding into.

I'm just against L.E.D. and Deep Analysis all together, including Baubles and Desperate Ravings. Keeping the deck as non-interactive as possible seems like the best strategy. If the deck is already functioning powerfully on the premise of not playing virtually any spells, keeping that strategy going helps relegate many of an opponents' cards useless. And even if they have a Spell Pierce or Daze in hand for a Dread Return, most Tempo decks don't run a lot of lands, and it would force them to forgo playing threats or blockers and keep mana open - perfect for us.

L.E.D. seems like more of a liability than anything.


I'm really liking all of the ideas you're pitching (again). Some of the slots would need to be reevaluated a teensy bit (I'm thinking a 4/2 split of the correlated Nether Shadow/Phantasmagorian slot right off the bat), especially with opposing Surgical Extractions, Relics, and Extirpates in mind, but cutting six Baubles for 4 LED and 2 Desperate Ravings (which is strictly better than DA in Manaless Dredge specifically) sounds like it could be very good. I was playing Baubles in addition to an LED package as an anti-combo sideboard plan, but I'm not even sure the Baubles were necessarily increasing the speed of the deck in that config as the density of grave-synergistic cards decreased.

Phantasmagorian is probably one of the most important cards in the deck. I would never go any less than four. Open-handing one of these turbo-charges your ability to dump important cards like Ichorid, Shadows, Bridges, etc. into the graveyard without having to naturally dredge into them. It's a critical component of this archetype, so I'm on not on board with anything less than maxing out on a full set. Also, getting two 'interchangeable' Phantasmagorians is huge, as you can keep chaining them if you need to dump deep-dredgers into the graveyard.

[KevinTrudeau]

Really, I think the questions Manaless Dredge needs to ask itself is "how do I accelerate my game plan and what cards become least desirable post-board vs. hate?" Basically, it comes down to comparing Baubles, Chancellor, LED/DA and I think there are a couple of other questions, like whether or not 4 Dread Return, 3 Sage, 1 Zealot is significantly better than 3 Dread Return, 2 Sage, 1 Zealot, what number of Phantasmagorians should you have if you're playing LED already and a really fundamental question that has been bothering me lately is whether or not the deck should be playing Dakmor Salvage and Bloodghast MD over Shambling Shell and Nether Shadow if you're playing LED/DA because if you "luck sack" both in hand or Dredge into it on your second turn you can develop a board position much more quickly.

I already know the answer to the Ghast/Salvage vs. Shadow/Shell problem after some testing a few months ago— Shadow/Shell is much better. The immediacy Bloodghast provides in helping resolve a DR on turn one unfortunately has a kicker in that you have to dredge two at some point, which kind of negates the whole thing. Shell is also very important in ensuring Ichorid can come back every turn, something a lot of people take for granted. In addition, I've done probably around fifty test games so far, and Nether Shadow has surprisingly helped win on turn two far more than I expected. The optimal number of Phantasmagorian is still up in the air for me.


The Deep Analysis and/or Desperate Ravings count is another question, because both you and I have looked at it from opposite angles. I've tried pretty much playing every copy of those cards as I could while you were playing less than 1 set.

Yeah, I'm only running two because it's strictly predicated on LED; every copy after the first is dead a large majority of the time. I could see 2 Sphinx/3 Desperate Ravings being better though (I'm hesitant to cut the fourth Dread Return).


About the only thing I'm really sure of right now is that SBing for Storm Combo is a fucking waste of time, Trap and Chancellor aren't enough to do dick shit to the match up percentage but SBing vs Reanimator seems to have a pretty positive effect on the win rate post board.

I agree that siding in matchup-specific anti-Storm cards (Mindbreak Trap being the best example) is a waste of time, but I think boarding out the Sphinx/Zealot package for a Chancellor package while running LED could change things a lot. You're right in that Reanimator should be focused on more because it can be boarded against more effectively.


I don't think, however, that Dread Returning a Chancellor is benign against Storm. That's actually quite relevant and unless they spend a few turns (or more) trying to come up with an answer to it, their life total will dwindle and dwindle fast. I would straight-up Dread Return a Chancellor into play even if it means no tokens on my side the second or third turn if I had to.

Agreed, DRing Chancellor is usually game over against Storm.


I personally never do this. If anything goes out on my side, it's usually the Street Wraiths or Shambling Shells.

NEVER board out Street Wraith. Ever. Trust me on that one. I've experimented with boarding out Shambling Shell and I didn't like it as well, but that's at least an option (even though I think it's just worse than swapping Sphinx/Zealot and Chancellors against Storm).


I'm just against L.E.D. and Deep Analysis all together, including Baubles and Desperate Ravings. Keeping the deck as non-interactive as possible seems like the best strategy. If the deck is already functioning powerfully on the premise of not playing virtually any spells, keeping that strategy going helps relegate many of an opponents' cards useless. And even if they have a Spell Pierce or Daze in hand for a Dread Return, most Tempo decks don't run a lot of lands, and it would force them to forgo playing threats or blockers and keep mana open - perfect for us. L.E.D. seems like more of a liability than anything.

Keeping the deck non-interactive does not seem like the best strategy when there are faster decks out there. Again, LED doesn't even have to increase interactiveness with an opponent if you play it like you'd play a Bauble.


Phantasmagorian is probably one of the most important cards in the deck. I would never go any less than four. Open-handing one of these turbo-charges your ability to dump important cards like Ichorid, Shadows, Bridges, etc. into the graveyard without having to naturally dredge into them. It's a critical component of this archetype, so I'm on not on board with anything less than maxing out on a full set. Also, getting two 'interchangeable' Phantasmagorians is huge, as you can keep chaining them if you need to dump deep-dredgers into the graveyard.

Phantasmagorian is still up in the air for me; I could see anywhere from zero-four being correct. I'm positive a set isn't necessary in the maindeck (especially if you're playing LED), but postbaord, running a set seems like it would be an excellent foil for Surgical Extraction.

@forum— I've done about fifty test games so far with LED in the maindeck, and I've been comboing out on turn two more than I ever have before. I'm going to, at some point today, log one hundred games and post the results.

[Michael Keller]

So, assuming everyone is looking seriously at L.E.D. as a faster combo finish, has anyone considered looking at running Obsessive Search as an option at all? I've been tinkering with running a full set of L.E.D.'s and splitting the Gitaxian Probe set apart at 2/2 (Deep Analysis and Search).

This way, if you go L.E.D. (UUU floating --> Obsessive Search (UU floating) --> Dredge --> Hit a Deep Analysis --> Flashback Deep Analysis (with the UU floating), you'd just explode all over someone...even on your first turn (if you're not playing against Islands). I'm not saying dropping L.E.D. and going for it all is the optimal line of play, but if you've got a feeling it could be and your opponent puts you on the play, that could be a catastrophic mistake on their part - one that could cost them the game. At the absolute minimum, it gives us some reprieve after sighing and knowing our first turn will be more than simply "Go."

I would still run Probe in the sideboard, though - at least.

[Final Fortune]

@Kevin

Looking forward to seeing your results, really appreciate you putting in the time.

@Hollywood

Obsessive Search is just worse than Gitaxian Probe, because you can stack the LED trigger for the same effect and Desperate Ravings is worthless without LED.

As far as interactivity, I don't think the cards that replace LED/DA and make the deck less interactive are as valuable as the speed LED/DA gives you, it comes down to either Gigapede (which is garbage IMO) Dakmor Salvage and Bloodghast (which is redundant) Chancellor of the Annex (it's probably the only card worth its salt) or Gitaxian Probe and Baubles (which are just as interactive as LED/DA)

None of the alternatives are "that" good, and LED/DA just lets Dredge blow any deck without counter magic out of the water game one and at least gives it a fighting chance vs. storm combo by giving the possibility of turn 1 and 2 wins. It's also the only card that lets the deck actually mulligan, so in the event we do get stuck without a Dredger we can still mull for LED + Dredger and the opponent's can't just put us on the play game 2 any more as Storm combo without risking us dropping LED before they can Duress it away.

LED just changes this deck on a fundamental, strategic level where the rest of the cards that could take its place only increase the deck's effectiveness on small, redundant levels.

I really think 4x of all the core cards + LED/DA is probably the best set up for this deck as a default.

Edit: Actually Obsessive Search is just way too shitty compared to Cephalid Coliseum at that rate.

[Michael Keller]

Obsessive Search is just worse than Gitaxian Probe, because you can stack the LED trigger for the same effect...

L.E.D. has no trigger; discarding your hand is part of its activation cost. I think you're referring to playing Probe and then cracking L.E.D. without passing priority. You can still play Probe; I'm simply iterating that you can increase the level of your explosiveness by including another card that interacts optimally both mathematically and functionally with Lion's Eye Diamond and Deep Analysis, respectively. You can also stack the Madness triggers at Instant speed off cracking L.E.D. - something multiple Probes cannot do.

I'm not saying Probe is worse, because it isn't (I play four), but Search seems like it deserves at least a look. We play without a single land, so finding any and all avenues trying to abuse discarding a card should at least be considered. Obsessive Search is really not that bad when you consider what its cost and function is - in addition to how well it interacts with L.E.D.

Also, Desperate Ravings dredges you two cards. Nailing a Search with L.E.D. and subsequently dredging into Deep Analysis nets you potentially three dredges.


None of the alternatives are "that" good, and LED/DA just lets Dredge blow any deck without counter magic out of the water game one and at least gives it a fighting chance vs. storm combo by giving the possibility of turn 1 and 2 wins. It's also the only card that lets the deck actually mulligan, so in the event we do get stuck without a Dredger we can still mull for LED + Dredger and the opponent's can't just put us on the play game 2 any more as Storm combo without risking us dropping LED before they can Duress it away.

I agree with this statement. I do believe L.E.D. lets this deck explode into realistically powerful starts on its opening turn and swings the Combo match extensively.


Edit: Actually Obsessive Search is just way too shitty compared to Cephalid Coliseum at that rate.

Cephalid Coliseum in a deck with no other support and an open susceptibility to Stifle and Wasteland is really no better than playing a card (Obsessive Search) off L.E.D., which still leaves you mana available to pay for Spell Pierce and Daze. Because this archetype is without lands all together, Cephalid Coliseum has no other support besides an L.E.D. for activation. Those are two completely different cards that require completely different conditions to be optimal. Obsessive Search seems more reasonable as a slot in this deck as opposed to Coliseum in that respect.

I'm not sold on it yet, though; I'm just opening up ideas. I'm probably just going to stick to trying the Deep Analysis and L.E.D. plan.

[KevinTrudeau]

Goldfish stats are in. The list again:

4 Golgari Grave-Troll
4 Stinkweed Imp
4 Golgari Thug
4 Shambling Shell

4 Ichorid
4 Narcomoeba
4 Nether Shadow

4 Bridge from Below
4 Cabal Therapy
4 Dread Return
3 Sphinx of Lost Truths
1 Flame-kin Zealot
2 Phantasmagorian

4 Street Wraith
4 Gitaxian Probe
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
2 Desperate Ravings

I kept track of five things in each game: the number of cards in the starting hand, whether or not Lion's Eye Diamond was ever cast, whether or not Desperate Ravings was ever cast, whether or not Phantasmagorian was in the graveyard before casting Dread Return, and the winning turn.

All games played assuming I was on the draw against an opponent without countermagic/disruption. Note that this prerequisite didn't force me to auto-cast LED every turn one, as it wasn't necessarily correct to go all-in on turn one; in fact, I drew LED and never even cast it in a few games as I had the win otherwise. 'Winning turn' meant turns where I actually dealt the twentieth point of damage and not in a colloquial sense, like if I established a lethal board presence after having cast multiple Cabal Therapy. I never mulliganed hands with a dredger in them.

Counts:

Number of cards in opener:
7- 94
6- 6

Was LED ever cast?
Yes- 32
No- 68

Was Desperate Ravings ever cast?
Yes- 19
No- 81

Was Phantasmagorian binned before casting Dread Return?
Yes- 69
No- 31

Winning turn:
1- 1
2- 12
3- 38
4- 32
5- 15
6- 2

Averages:

Mean winning turn: 3.54
Median winning turn: 3
Mode winning turn: 3

Mean winning turn when LED was cast: 2.97
Median winning turn when LED was cast: 3
Mode winning turn when LED was cast: 2;3

Mean winning turn when LED wasn't cast: 3.81
Median winning turn when LED wasn't cast: 4
Mode winning turn when LED wasn't cast: 3

Mean winning turn when Desperate Ravings was cast: 2.63
Median winning turn when Desperate Ravings was cast: 2
Mode winning turn when Desperate Ravings was cast: 2

Mean winning turn when Desperate Ravings wasn't cast: 3.75
Median winning turn when Desperate Ravings wasn't cast: 4
Mode winning turn when Desperate Ravings wasn't cast: 3

I'll write out some conclusions/observations tomorrow since I'm pretty tired right now. If you have any questions about the data, just ask.

[Final Fortune]

Interesting to see the number of turn 1, 2, 3 wins LED produces without 4 Desperate Ravings, right now I'm playing the full set of Desperate Ravings and Phantasmagorian (No Gitaxian Probes MD) and I think being able to open up with LED/DA turn 1 has its advantages vs. combo etc. It's not nearly as scary to the opponent when they know that you're relying on Dredging into it to go off, which I think is kind of a problem.

[Michael Keller]

I only had time for two rounds yesterday at our local event (2-0), but had to drop to take care of some stuff. At any rate, I played against nitewolf9 (Dan Signorini) and wound up taking it down 2-1. He was on BUG, and I was on the older plan (without L.E.D.'s; they're on the way).

I opened the third game up with a revealed Chancellor of the Annex, and subsequently found myself with an Ichorid and Nether Shadow in the graveyard. Dan was on Crypt and Relic as sideboarded hate, and with an active Sylvan Library on the board, I had to go for it the following turn. I had no Bridges in the graveyard, and recurred Nether Shadow and Ichorid. I dredged six into a Narcomoeba and Dread Return, and decided to go for it (as any graveyard removal would blow me out the following turn).

So, I decided to Dread Return the Chancellor back into play, as I knew Dan would be on Tombstalker. Sure enough, he dropped Crypt that turn and blew my graveyard out. After swinging for five, the following turn Dan dropped a Tombstalker. However, I rode Annex all the way to victory after three more successive attacks. His ability is just ridiculously good and so relevant against decks that are mana hungry.

Thankfully, it was the right call and it served up the victory.

The following round, I beat Merfolk relatively soundly and attacked my opponent Game Three for over forty damage on turn two. I played around Relic Game Two, as I played Gitaxian Probe early, drew a card, moved to eight, and forced him to hit the Probe with the Relic. The following turn, with a Troll in the graveyard, he activated Relic, and I subsequently activated a Faerie Macabre in my hand for a target of zero cards - again forcing him to miss it. I wound up keeping a healthy eight in my hand as often as I could and dredged into some goodies early, but he wound up barely taking that game off three successive Cursecatchers and a second Relic.

The game was played perfectly, and it was not out of reach until those later turns. Just kind of a mini-report.

[KevinTrudeau]

@Hollywood— well played, awesome to see a real life example of Relic getting played around. EDIT: never mind.

Also, Obsessive Search doesn't seem too good, especially when you consider you have to have it in hand and the fact that it's completely predicated on LED. I'd rather run a Bauble at that point.

So, after yesterday's testing, I think I've come to the conclusion that there should be at least three Phantasmagorian in the maindeck, even if you're playing LED. It was the card I wanted to see most every game I didn't have LED, especially when you consider how much better it is when you're running the full set of Nether Shadow. We just need to find the optimal numbers of all non-graveyard interactive spells before we can really build a definitive list (Probe and Ravings in particular, although LED does fall into that category and isn't necessarily a sacred cow). I used to think jamming in as many draw spells made the deck faster, but I'm actually starting to see it go off faster without them because of the increased density of the quality of cards in the graveyard (Phantasmagorian in particular). I'd say we have seven slots to play around with (assuming Nether Shadow is a four-of), those currently being represented in the above list as:

4 Gitaxian Probe
2 Desperate Ravings
1 Sphinx of Lost Truths

What the optimal configuration is at this point, I don't know, but I'd like to cut at least one of those seven for a third Phantasmagorian (River Kelpie might be better than Sphinx at that point of you cut the number of DR targets by one). Keep in mind, we can always change up the config with sideboard space.

[NecroYawgmoth]

Is LED a 4-off? Meaning you call it "core" without the 7 flex slots?

German lists look a lot different than these here, and we always play 4 Phantasmagorians and 0 LEDs. :rolleyes:

[KevinTrudeau]

Is LED a 4-off? Meaning you call it "core" without the 7 flex slots?

German lists look a lot different than these here, and we always play 4 Phantasmagorians and 0 LEDs. :rolleyes:

I would consider it a four-of, yes, as it does a lot in giving us game against decks that can win or establish locks (something like Enchantress) before we can do anything. It also does a bit more than that, like giving us an out if we have to mulligan and potentially punishing opponents who choose to put us on the play game two. I wouldn't set LED in stone as an integral part of the deck just yet, but it's certainly looking like it could be.

I wouldn't say that all of those seven cards are necessarily flex slots per se, but slots that the numbers can be played around with to find the optimal build. For example, -2 Gitaxian Probe, +1 D. Ravings, +1 Phantas. Semantics.

I think that three Phantasmagorian is a very safe number once you consider the amount correlates with the number of Probes and LEDs you're playing. You could probably get away with two, but three feels a lot safer. Four might very well be correct though, the card is very good; I'd much rather see two than none in games without LED having been cast.

[Final Fortune]

I just think you should cut Gitaxian Probe for a full set of Phantasmagorians and Desperate Ravings, there's no reason you have to shoe horn in more draw when we previously calculated 4 Lions Eye Diamond/Deep Analysis lists were just as fast as 16 Cantrip lists and this list has Street Wraith on top of that already.

Playing less than 4 Lions Eye Diamond is terrible if you're playing any number of Desperate Ravings.

[Michael Keller]

I think cutting Gitaxian Probe could be a mistake. It's obviously a "flex" slot (if you want to call it that), but I feel as though the information it provides, how well it plays with Cabal Therapy, its basically "free" cost, and that it accelerates a dredger is absolutely huge in this deck. Lion's Eye Diamond is really good, but I've actually shifted a set of those with Deep Analysis into the sideboard. I'm finding Faerie Macabre to be far more useful, and I think Legacy right now is predicated on cheap counters and a high level of interactivity. I don't want to lose (or at least fall back on) Lion's Eye Diamond as a full-blown win condition unless I'm playing against Storm.

Gitaxian Probe offers everything you could want at practically no cost. It's a critical "draw now" component when you want to accelerate into the win. Lion's Eye Diamond tricks the Manaless player into getting greedy and mulliganing more aggressively, and I think that hurts the overall strategy of this deck. Against decks like Storm, you can afford the loss of a card because you're also running Chancellor, which could buy you a turn in the instance you draw into a Lion's Eye Diamond. I just think L.E.D. strategically requires you to play with your deck differently in a big way, and it might not necessarily be for the good.

Now granted Kevin, your numbers have provided some key information, but your test hands also didn't take into account what your percentages would have been had you been playing against disruption/counter-magic, and that makes a world of difference as Legacy right now is circling in a world of Dazes. Those raw numbers help in determining how fundamentally fast the deck could start, but again - we have to assume that an opponent will be ready for it. I just think L.E.D. is nuts against the right deck, but I'm finding it to be more of a liability than anything else Game One.

We can safely assume the deck is fast enough with L.E.D. to win with it (or close to it) paired with a Deep Analysis, but Manaless Dredge is notorious for its consistency. I just think L.E.D. cuts into that a little bit. It's a card that begs to be played with correctly - and timely (which also opens the deck up even further to discard). I would much rather keep Gitaxian Probe and Faerie Macabre at the ready; they function much smoother and serve a multilateral purpose in the deck which rounds it out nicely. Faerie Macabre is definitely not narrow, as indicated by the example above. I was able to play around Relic because of it, and I just think its utility is severely underestimated here.

If you're going with the L.E.D. plan, you're opening yourself up to counter-magic and taking out slots that have evolved into key components of the archetype, so just think twice about what you're doing. L.E.D. is a card that you build and play around. But there's a reason the deck went undefeated Day One of the G.P., and I'm sure Faerie Macabre and Gitaxian Probe had something to do with that.

[kirkusjones]

I played Hollywood's LED-less list yesterday at Jupiter games to. 2-2 drop. I was surgically extracted, bogged and extirpated in the matches I lost, but more than once was able to come back from being relic'd and single extracted. The deck is a blast to play, even with so much graveyard hate running around. I beat u/w stoneblade and cephalid breakfast, and narrowly lost game 3 against junk to a top decked bog after having my bridges extracted and my ichorids extirpated. Multiple opponents commented on how useless their cards were against the minimal interaction of the deck. All in all, I had a great time.

[Michael Keller]

I played Hollywood's LED-less list yesterday at Jupiter games to. 2-2 drop. I was surgically extracted, bogged and extirpated in the matches I lost, but more than once was able to come back from being relic'd and single extracted. The deck is a blast to play, even with so much graveyard hate running around. I beat u/w stoneblade and cephalid breakfast, and narrowly lost game 3 against junk to a top decked bog after having my bridges extracted and my ichorids extirpated. Multiple opponents commented on how useless their cards were against the minimal interaction of the deck. All in all, I had a great time.

Interesting. I'd like to hear more about your experiences at Jupiter. I think a lot of it depends on variance, and there is certainly a lot of that going around at Jupiter. I think in such a highly concentrated Blue meta, I'm kind of surprised you only went 2-2. Junk can be tough, though. What was your other loss to?

I get extremely aggressive when I play. I am not afraid to take chances, and there are times when I won't fear powering out a solid Dread Return, bringing back a 6/6 or 7/7 Troll and getting three to six Zombies out of it. The deck can attack from all angles of play (combo, direct attack, hand-shredding, etc.), which is one of the reasons it works so well. It's a deck that requires you to pay attention to detail very carefully and know what triggers and when. I hope you didn't miss any or too many of them that could have perhaps cost you a game or two.

I'm playing in our weekly local here on Wednesday which always brings solid competition. I'll be sure to do a small write-up. (There's actually a slew of events coming up, for that matter.)

[K1w1]

Hey,
Is it possible to see your decklist Hollywood? I'm very interested to see it, so i can brainstorm a bit. Did you already post your deck?
K1w1

[Final Fortune]

I think cutting Gitaxian Probe could be a mistake. It's obviously a "flex" slot (if you want to call it that), but I feel as though the information it provides, how well it plays with Cabal Therapy, its basically "free" cost, and that it accelerates a dredger is absolutely huge in this deck. Lion's Eye Diamond is really good, but I've actually shifted a set of those with Deep Analysis into the sideboard. I'm finding Faerie Macabre to be far more useful, and I think Legacy right now is predicated on cheap counters and a high level of interactivity. I don't want to lose (or at least fall back on) Lion's Eye Diamond as a full-blown win condition unless I'm playing against Storm.

Gitaxian Probe offers everything you could want at practically no cost. It's a critical "draw now" component when you want to accelerate into the win. Lion's Eye Diamond tricks the Manaless player into getting greedy and mulliganing more aggressively, and I think that hurts the overall strategy of this deck. Against decks like Storm, you can afford the loss of a card because you're also running Chancellor, which could buy you a turn in the instance you draw into a Lion's Eye Diamond. I just think L.E.D. strategically requires you to play with your deck differently in a big way, and it might not necessarily be for the good.

Now granted Kevin, your numbers have provided some key information, but your test hands also didn't take into account what your percentages would have been had you been playing against disruption/counter-magic, and that makes a world of difference as Legacy right now is circling in a world of Dazes. Those raw numbers help in determining how fundamentally fast the deck could start, but again - we have to assume that an opponent will be ready for it. I just think L.E.D. is nuts against the right deck, but I'm finding it to be more of a liability than anything else Game One.

We can safely assume the deck is fast enough with L.E.D. to win with it (or close to it) paired with a Deep Analysis, but Manaless Dredge is notorious for its consistency. I just think L.E.D. cuts into that a little bit. It's a card that begs to be played with correctly - and timely (which also opens the deck up even further to discard). I would much rather keep Gitaxian Probe and Faerie Macabre at the ready; they function much smoother and serve a multilateral purpose in the deck which rounds it out nicely. Faerie Macabre is definitely not narrow, as indicated by the example above. I was able to play around Relic because of it, and I just think its utility is severely underestimated here.

If you're going with the L.E.D. plan, you're opening yourself up to counter-magic and taking out slots that have evolved into key components of the archetype, so just think twice about what you're doing. L.E.D. is a card that you build and play around. But there's a reason the deck went undefeated Day One of the G.P., and I'm sure Faerie Macabre and Gitaxian Probe had something to do with that.

I really dislike the argument of not playing LED because LED causes players to misplay by mulliganing too aggressively or rushing head long into counters, I mean Manaless Dredge is already pretty idiot proof once you understand the triggers so 1 card that requires rational thought and timing isn't the end of the world.

I think it really just depends on what you're seeing, LED/DA is pretty much your plan vs every fast deck not playing counters and helps seal up the aggro match up air tight.

[Michael Keller]

Hey,
Is it possible to see your decklist Hollywood? I'm very interested to see it, so i can brainstorm a bit. Did you already post your deck?
K1w1

This is the list I've been playing to a great deal of success:

[4x] Nether Shadow
[4x] Golgari Grave-Troll
[4x] Stinkweed Imp
[4x] Narcomoeba
[4x] Shambling Shell
[4x] Ichorid
[4x] Faerie Macabre
[4x] Bridge from Below
[4x] Dread Return
[4x] Street Wraith
[4x] Gitaxian Probe
[4x] Cabal Therapy
[4x] Phantasmagorian
[4x] Golgari Thug
[1x] Flame-kin Zealot
[1x] Iona, Shield of Emeria
[1x] River Kelpie
[1x] Sphinx of Lost Truths

//Sideboard
[4x] Lion's Eye Diamond
[4x] Desperate Ravings
[4x] Chancellor of the Annex
[2x] Surgical Extraction
[1x] Blightsteel Colossus

Again, you could argue the Lion's Eye Diamond slots to be interchangeable in the main, but so far I haven't been liking it. Lion's Eye Diamond, unless you open hand it or draw into it with your first draw, is dead. And assuming you actually do dredge into a Deep Analysis and sandbag it (which as I mentioned opens you up to discard and gives your opponent a chance to draw into relevant countermagic), I see no reason able to convince me L.E.D. is stronger right now with conditional countermagic everywhere.

If you're going to activate on your second or third turn, you'll probably already have the game well in order by being able to advance the game with Street Wraith or Gitaxian Probe - which offers a tremendous amount of versatility where none previously existed in that slot. I'd much rather know my opponents' hands and dredge - making my Therapies that much stronger - than risk dropping an L.E.D. which does effectively nothing by itself except forces you to work directly with Deep Analysis (assuming you actually have it in the graveyard).


I really dislike the argument of not playing LED because LED causes players to misplay by mulliganing too aggressively or rushing head long into counters, I mean Manaless Dredge is already pretty idiot proof once you understand the triggers so 1 card that requires rational thought and timing isn't the end of the world.

This deck has some very intricate decision-making going on in it, more than what you'd consider "idiot proof." Lion's Eye Diamond is a powerful enough card with Deep Analysis to force you to think twice about keeping a relatively slower hand with smaller dredgers and opens up the option for you where there was none before to be able to mulligan your hand into an aggressive start. This line of play which gives the player the option of finding this combination of cards can - and will - force some players into at least pondering a mulligan. That is where trouble comes, in the form of no L.E.D. in your six and a 'Time Walk' for your opponent.

It's not a matter of playing L.E.D. right; I'm sure we all understand that clearly. What it is a matter of is creating a level of consistency outside the realm of a start without L.E.D. and Deep Analysis, because without them in your opening hand you now have eight total dead slots predicated on what - trying to better your Combo matchup? I just think the collective utility of Faerie Macabre and Gitaxian Probe provide greater stability and consistency than L.E.D. and D.A. pre-board, which is what we need because it's a match (typical Game One's) we're supposed to win.

Faerie Macabre as noted by several other players has now found its place as a key element of being able to hit those cards which would steal the 'automatic' Game One win, cards like Bojuka Bog and Glacial Chasm off Intuition, Elesh Norn and friends in Reanimator, opposing Dredge builds prepared to 'go off,' etc. Feeding to Ichorid has actually been extremely relevant in the instances you need to ride on the back of a Shambling Shell to dredge into goodies, as you just can't afford to exile the only dredger you have at times. It's also an 'ace in the hole' against Relic, something I've already experienced multiple times first hand.


I think it really just depends on what you're seeing, LED/DA is pretty much your plan vs every fast deck not playing counters and helps seal up the aggro match up air tight.

The Aggro match is already sealed up enough. This deck absolutely houses traditional Aggro and Aggro Control decks, so an overcommitment to dedicating eight slots on the premise you'll be facing Storm or Belcher seems relatively inane when you consider you can already try and race them Game One enough to steal a win and subsequently hammer them games Two and Three with the L.E.D. package and Chancellor of the Annex.

I saw it happen with traditional Dredge at the Open Series in Las Vegas during live coverage; there's no reason to believe Manaless can't do the same by ripping their hand apart and nailing some serious damage in - relegating Ad Nauseam to being useless. I just think the overall utility of cards like Faerie Macabre and Gitaxian Probe outweigh the utility of L.E.D. and D.A.

Of course, I wouldn't mind being proven wrong.

*One more thing to note: I run two relatively flexible slots in the sideboard at the moment which happen to be Surgical Extractions. Because I run Faerie main, I have been evaluating and looking at the meta and I'm starting to consider different options for those slots at the moment. With Burn making a surge at Las Vegas and Top Eight berth, I'm wondering if bringing back Ancestor's Chosen is a good idea. It obviously helps against Storm, too.

[flrn]

Just wondering, why are you playing Deep Analysis over Desperate Ravings?

Desperate Ravings doesn't cost you life, has the chance to get you a Dredge card back in the yard and can't be targeted by Misdirection effects. And it only costs one mana more, which shouldn't be a problem, when you plan on casting it with mana from Lion's Eye Diamond (and if you cast it with LED, you will definitly get a Dredge card back in the yard).

[Michael Keller]

Just wondering, why are you playing Deep Analysis over Desperate Ravings?

Desperate Ravings doesn't cost you life, has the chance to get you a Dredge card back in the yard and can't be targeted by Misdirection effects. And it only costs one mana more, which shouldn't be a problem, when you plan on casting it with mana from Lion's Eye Diamond (and if you cast it with LED, you will definitly get a Dredge card back in the yard).

Desperate Ravings eats it to Spell Snare, which sees much more play than Misdirection. The discard is rather negligible when you consider you'll probably hit a Phantasmagorian. Even if you don't you've still exploded into as much as a Desperate Ravings - which also eats it to Daze.

At any rate, I would only bring those combination of cards in against Storm, so you're probably right. However, those reasons aforementioned would probably make someone think twice about running them main.

[kirkusjones]

Interesting. I'd like to hear more about your experiences at Jupiter. I think a lot of it depends on variance, and there is certainly a lot of that going around at Jupiter. I think in such a highly concentrated Blue meta, I'm kind of surprised you only went 2-2. Junk can be tough, though. What was your other loss to?

I get extremely aggressive when I play. I am not afraid to take chances, and there are times when I won't fear powering out a solid Dread Return, bringing back a 6/6 or 7/7 Troll and getting three to six Zombies out of it. The deck can attack from all angles of play (combo, direct attack, hand-shredding, etc.), which is one of the reasons it works so well. It's a deck that requires you to pay attention to detail very carefully and know what triggers and when. I hope you didn't miss any or too many of them that could have perhaps cost you a game or two.

I'm playing in our weekly local here on Wednesday which always brings solid competition. I'll be sure to do a small write-up. (There's actually a slew of events coming up, for that matter.)

My other loss was to RUG. Everyone seemed to come prepared with a variety of graveyard hate, and there were times when I would whiff on dredges or not see Ichorids. Most of this is probably due to not shuffling enough, which I spent a lot of time doing after the first match. I also don't play super aggressively which probably could have eeked out some of those close matches. As I said, the deck is a blast to play and will begin testing the LED board version this week.

For the board, what would be the first thing you'd side out going into game 2? My board was a little wonky, and I usually just went for Chancellor of the Annex, pulling out an Ichorid, a Shell, a probe and a Phantasmagorian. These choices were probably not optimal but I was unsure what would be best. In short, the losses were essentially my own error and I'm going to continue practicing with the deck.

[K1w1]

Is your meta full with high tide? Or why are you playing Blightsteel colossus? I would take Elesh-Norn. She can help you more against mirror Or reanimate. Imo.
Another point i wanna know, why LED and DA ? Isnt it better to take DR targets & a full set of extraction? Sure you are faster with it, but i would play more saver.
K1w1

[KevinTrudeau]

@kirkusjones- if you were to run 4 LED + 2 Desperate Ravings in the board along with a set of Chancellors with Hollywood's list, I'd go -2 Phantasmagorian, -4 Macabre, -4 DR targets, +4 LED, +2 D. Ravings, +4 Chancellor.

@Hollywood- Ravings is almost strictly better than Analysis in Manaless Dredge. I'm at school right now so I can't talk for long, but I'll make a long post tonight concerning maindeck configuration philosophy with respect to LED.

[Michael Keller]

Is your meta full with high tide? Or why are you playing Blightsteel colossus? I would take Elesh-Norn. She can help you more against mirror Or reanimate. Imo.
Another point i wanna know, why LED and DA ? Isnt it better to take DR targets & a full set of extraction? Sure you are faster with it, but i would play more saver.
K1w1

Blightsteel Colossus is effectively an auto-loss for Painter-Grindstone variants trying to get the quick win. It also does help against High Tide in some instances.

Iona can also seal that up good, as an opponent naming 'Blue' off Painter would never be able to cast spells again with an Iona on that color. Blightsteel Colossus' slot has absolutely nothing to do with Elesh Norn. It does nothing to help the Reanimator matchup; that job is left for Faerie Macabre to handle. L.E.D. and D.A. (or Desperate Ravings which is what I would run) are basically there for Combo.

[K1w1]

Thank you for your quick answer, but why LED + DA if you already run 4 Chancellor + FKZ/Sphinx/Kelpie + Cabal Therapy? Dont think this is enough?
K1w1

[Final Fortune]

Unless you're running really terrible cards like Gigapede, or maybe Dakmor Salvage and Bloodghasts MD, any cards you put into the LED/DA slots are virtually dead whenever they're in the graveyard (I liken it "feeds Ichorid" to it "pitches to FoW"). I think you're much more confident in the aggro and aggro-combo match ups than I am, because I still have some pretty close games vs. Affinity, Elves, Goblins and Zoo and if you don't close out game one vs. aggro it's a fucking disaster to go into game two with a loss.

I just can't get behind the "LED is bad because it lets you mulligan argument," because that is exactly why I like LED, it gives you more options in your starting hand selections and lets you potentially blow out an opponent who gets cute and lets you play on game 2.

Spell Snare is actually a really good argument against Desperate Ravings tho', I completely missed that.

[Michael Keller]

Thank you for your quick answer, but why LED + DA if you already run 4 Chancellor + FKZ/Sphinx/Kelpie + Cabal Therapy? Dont think this is enough?
K1w1

Because Manaless Dredge has a ridiculously high level of consistency, its sideboard has an unusually high number of flex slots in it based on its strength of winning Game One's. In examining the deck's worst possible matchups, you have to start right at the top with Storm Combo - which is not necessarily an 'auto-loss' - but a significant uphill battle to climb. Chancellor of the Annex provides protection not just in that matchup, but also against greedy manabases using lower curves.

One could argue the combination of cards you mentioned is enough, but again you have to remember this isn't a 'traditional' sideboard; our utility is restricted to free spells or useful D.R. targets because we have no mana resources to begin with. If we can use some of those slots to improve our worst matchup significantly, then that seems like a good idea to me. Chancellor could go main (I've had it there before), but with the abhorrently large number of Tempo decks out there right now I'd just rather win those games the 'old-fashioned' way and free up some main-deck space for some of our harder matchups, namely Reanimator.

My sideboard is usually always in flux depending on what's hot at the moment.

[KevinTrudeau]

So, after more rigorous testing, I'm back on the four Phantasmagorian, LED-less bandwagon for the time being, and not just because it gives the deck more resiliency and makes it less susceptible to countermagicks (although, that axiom is pretty questionable); I was also finding that the deck had a more consistent turn three kill, probably because of the reduction of dead cards in the form of Desperate Ravings (less of a boom/bust feel if you catch my drift, but of a considerably lower magnitude than an idiom such as that would imply). It would probably post a lower abstract average winning turn than the 4 LED, 2 Desperate Ravings, 2 Phantasmagorian list I tested with* (3.54 if you're forgetting). I was just really underrating the speed of not only four Nether Shadow, but four Phantasmagorian and the synergy between both as well. I have a lot more to write about the deck and its inclusions, but I'm having a hard time putting all of my thoughts into words right now.

As for the tentative decklist, I would recommend Hollywood's list** with the kicker that the four Faerie Macabre could be arbitrarily swapped for a four LED (in addition to cutting something else for some number of Ravings, as LED is a bit worse without it) or Chancellor of the Annex configuration, the latter of which I'm liking the most at the moment. I suppose a set of Baubles should also not be overlooked in that slot as well. I'm pretty sure there is a decklist lurking somewhere that would be more optimal than running four of everything, but I'm having a frustratingly hard time finding it right now. Until something better hits me, the sideboard I'd advocate would be 8 LED/Chancellor/Faerie Macabre (one of the three options being in the maindeck, of course), 4 Desperate Ravings (or some combination of Ravings and Phantasmagorian should you choose to maindeck an amount of Ravings and four LED), 3 Return targets. I don't know for sure if running a full set of Ravings will indeed make the deck faster as every game where you don't draw LED it slows the deck down somewhat, but I'm liking it at the moment.

*just finished testing one hundred games with the aforementioned list (Hollywood's with -1 Kelpie, -1 Iona, -4 Macabre, +2 Sphinx, +4 Chancellor of the Annex) with all of the prerequisites as the last one and it looks like I was wrong, though not by much; the mean average came out to an even turn 3.6. Mode was turn 3, median was turn 4. This is obviously discounting what Chancellor can bring in virtual turns since I didn't have an actual opponent.

**as long as you cut Iona for another Sphinx of Lost Truths, since maindecking Iona seems suboptimal.

So, what are you people thinking those targets should be? One should for sure be able to deal with problem permanents such as Ensnaring Bridge or Glacial Chasm (Angel of Despair/The Rasta Don/Woodfall Primus).

[Michael Keller]

So tonight I wound up going undefeated and winning the tournament - splitting with Alix Hatfield in the Finals. I actually played L.E.D. and Deep Analysis in the board only because I hadn't picked up Ravings yet. Anyways, on to the report:

Round One versus Dan (nitewolf9) w/ BUG

Game One: So Dan and I meet again after playing each other last week. We start the game off and I'm right on the money with a Phantasmagorian ready to explode into some seriously broken action. Dan fires out a Delver and Goyf, but before they can become relevant I am able to overrun him with Zombies and a Dread Returned River Kelpie. I go bonkers and Dan just concedes, as we both know what's going to happen.

Game Two: Dan puts me on the play and winds up mulling himself. He does, however, hit a good string of cards and forces me to play around double Crypt and Engineered Explosives - in addition to double 'Goyf, Tombstalker, and Delver. I am actually able to overcome almost all of this, as I eventually play through both Crypts and find myself in a position needing to dredge into a Dread Return to go off. I can't find it, but I had a chance - playing around Crypt(s) perfectly. Dan wins it though with that key E.E., and it's on to Game Three...

Game Three: Dan keeps his hand and I do too. The game teeters back and forth for a few turns, with him sending a few beats in and me exploding into Ichorids and Shadows. I am able to hit four Bridges early, make a boatload of tokens, and power through his board for some serious damage. I eventually Dread Return Chancellor of the Annex, and Golgari Grave Troll (10/10) and it's just too much, as Dan needed to pay extra for his 'Goyf but left him powerless to activate his on-board E.E. which was effectively useless against the recursive threats (Ichorid and Shadow).

1-0, [2-1-0]

Round Two versus James w/ Zoo

Game One: After some brief chit-chat, we get down to business. I am able to discard Phantasmagorian into some serious action, and I blow the game open during my second turn by using Gitaxian Probe. I wind up winning a relatively close game, as he was able to get some serious damage on board - until River Kelpie allowed me to turn my deck sideways with him having a stripped hand. I swing for an arbitrary amount of damage with F.K.Z. and tokens.

Game Two: I had a feeling he was on Ooze with Zenith, and I was right. He blows me out by drawing into his singleton Crypt (running the E. Tutor package) and having the turn two Ooze. Too much to handle, even with Phantasmagorian again.

Game Three: So for shits and giggles, I decide to bring in the L.E.D. and Deep Analysis package. I announce I will be playing, which concerns him. Sure enough, I open with an L.E.D., D.A., and Stinkweed Imp, and I blow the game open - much to his chagrin. I need one more turn to actually win though, so I let him know if he has Crypt I'll scoop. He doesn't and I am able to attack him to death with an 11/11 Grave-Troll and four Zombie tokens. He did E. Tutor for it before, but it was too late.

It was risky boarding it in against Zoo but I wound up taking it down because of them. I can't say for sure if I would have won otherwise, but it didn't matter.

2-0, [4-2-0]

Round Three versus Nice Guy with U/W Mystic

Game One: I am on the draw and discard a Phantasmagorian. I also have two Trolls and two Street Wraith in hand, which allow me to secure the turn two win after Dread Returning into Kelpie and blowing the game open.

Game Two: He plays a land and passes. I discard a Troll and dredge the following turn into goodies. I play it safe, though, as he finally drops Relic and exiles my graveyard. I draw to eight and discard Phantasmagorian. I then proceed to discard six and cycle a Street Wraith into the absolute nuts. He has nothing else and I win the game by swinging with two Zombie tokens, a F.K.Z., and an Iona - all in the same turn. He ran out his Snapcasters too quick, and I was able to capitalize.

3-0, [6-2-0]

Round Four versus Alix Hatfield: I.D.

3-0-1, [6-2-1]

Thoughts: I just really like the overall configuration of the build that I currently run. There were times I was staring down serious damage - especially from Zoo - and found a way to blow the game open with River Kelpie. It was very nice seeing the L.E.D. and D.A.(/Ravings) plan in action - in a matchup it really has no business coming in to. I just wanted to try it, and it wound up winning me the game. I just think there are lots of angles this deck can attack from and the lack of interactivity is just ridiculous.

Gitaxian Probe was key, as usual. The information it provided allowed me to knock out the key S.T.P. that would have exiled my 'Returned Troll against Zoo, which I 'Therapied away. Once again, Chancellor brought back into play housed BUG, and I was able to put the pressure on and take it down again.

All in all, everything worked very successful. The deck fired on all cylinders, and I was only a card away in my losses playing around Crypt that could have won those games in a single turn. That even in defeat is ridiculously awesome - and hard to stop - as the deck is just able to pour and pour the pressure on.

Either way, Manaless Dredge takes it down.

[KevinTrudeau]

Good to hear, I plan on playing it tomorrow instead of the usual Storm, hopefully with the same results.

After goldfishing around twenty times with Final Fortune's suggested build (which is -4 Gitaxian Probe, -4 flex slot, +4 LED, +4 Ravings), I can assuredly say that it's slower on average in the abstract than both of the lists I previously tested, with turn four being the overwhelmingly high winning turn on average. Makes me pretty sure we just want to minimize the amount of draw spells that are solely predicated on each each other, i.e. run Gitaxian Probe.

[Final Fortune]

Good to hear, I plan on playing it tomorrow instead of the usual Storm, hopefully with the same results.

After goldfishing around twenty times with Final Fortune's suggested build (which is -4 Gitaxian Probe, -4 flex slot, +4 LED, +4 Ravings), I can assuredly say that it's slower on average in the abstract than both of the lists I previously tested, with turn four being the overwhelmingly high winning turn on average. Makes me pretty sure we just want to minimize the amount of draw spells that are solely predicated on each each other, i.e. run Gitaxian Probe.

That's odd, because previous calculations of yours over larger sample sizes showed LED/DA (with Serum Powder) being just as fast as 12 Cantrip builds and that Serum Powder actually decreased the speed of the deck, which is what lead me to replace Serum Powder with Street Wraith so the deck should be even faster. I've played LED/DA in Manaless Dredge probably more than anyone from my MTGO Classic days, and it definitely wins faster than a mode/mean average of turn 4. I'm also not certain whether or not adjusting the mode/mean average of the deck is as important as being able to win as soon as turn 1, 2 or 3 with Lion's Eye Diamond because the threat of those accelerated turns is more important than our fundamental turn as long as it can still realistically race rogue.dec without LED.

Lion's Eye Diamond isn't solely predicated on Deep Analysis, because the deck will eventually Dredge into Deep Analysis or at least serve as an outlet, the only dependent card in the deck is Deep Analysis itself. I'm also completely against Desperate Ravings as of now and I'm absolutely certain Deep Analysis is better, being immune to Spell Snare was incredibly relevant IRL this week.

As far as what SB Dread Return targets to run, honestly I just run 2 Sphinx of Lost Truths, 1 Flame Kin Zealot and 1 Angel of Despair MD (I run into shit like Propaganda and Elephant Grass MD) and really think that's more than enough.

As far as the SB goes, what do you guys think of playing Bojuka Bog instead of Surgical Extraction? I think Reanimator players wont expect it at all, and they'll likely Entomb or Careful Study their reanimation target on their first turn with a Daze in hand and we can confidently RFG it with another set of uncounterable answers. I'm honestly thinking pretty long and hard about just playing a board full of graveyard hate to completely burry that match up.

[KevinTrudeau]

That's odd, because previous calculations of yours over larger sample sizes showed LED/DA (with Serum Powder) being just as fast as 12 Cantrip builds and that Serum Powder actually decreased the speed of the deck, which is what lead me to replace Serum Powder with Street Wraith so the deck should be even faster. I've played LED/DA in Manaless Dredge probably more than anyone from my MTGO Classic days, and it definitely wins faster than a mode/mean average of turn 4. I'm also not certain whether or not adjusting the mode/mean average of the deck is as important as being able to win as soon as turn 1, 2 or 3 with Lion's Eye Diamond because the threat of those accelerated turns is more important than our fundamental turn as long as it can still realistically race rogue.dec without LED.

Right, but it was turn 3.94, and it was being compared to a 16 cantrip list. However, these are two completely different lists now that Serum Powder is gone and it must be tested thoroughly again. It will achieve a faster mean average than turn four, and it might prove to have the highest overall combined turn 1/2 kill count, but remember, the test results are somewhat flawed in that I'm counting the winning turn as the turn where the twentieth point of damage is dealt, not necessarily the turn where you Cabal Therapy their hand away and establish a huge armada of dudes. I'll of course need to complete the full one hundred test games before coming to any conclusions.


Lion's Eye Diamond isn't solely predicated on Deep Analysis, because the deck will eventually Dredge into Deep Analysis or at least serve as an outlet, the only dependent card in the deck is Deep Analysis itself.

You're right in that LED isn't completely dead without Desperate Ravings, but it becomes a lot less useful, to the point of where I'd rather play a set of Chancellor of the Annex above it in the maindeck. Its two biggest benefits as a four-of without a flashback draw spell are:

1. It gives you an out if you have to mulligan, and
2. It deals with player familiarity by potentially letting you punish people who know you're playing Manaless, won the roll, and put you on the play.

Other than that, it services as a worse Phantasmagorian in the sense that Gitaxian Probe is worse than Street Wraith (though it's actually a bit worse than that).


I'm also completely against Desperate Ravings as of now and I'm absolutely certain Deep Analysis is better, being immune to Spell Snare was incredibly relevant IRL this week.

That's one of the reasons why I decided to move LED for the time being (I'm not dead-set on that) to the board, because it does open you up to countermagic in order to function, whereas the last build I tested is pretty much just as fast on average (though it did have half of the turn two kills and obviously no turn ones). I would consider DR superior to DA even if DA didn't cost you three life; not only does it do wonders in preventing you from bricking, it increases the quality of the next dredge as well (which will give out a higher probability for stronger dredges in every subsequent dredge), and it's an instant, meaning you can (and should) stack it above any Street Wraiths and Gitaxian Probes to help ensure that they'll not only be dredging something back, but that they'll be dredging for more cards. Yeah, it can get countered by Spell Snare, but LED probably wasn't even necessary to have been cast against a deck that was playing it.


As far as the SB goes, what do you guys think of playing Bojuka Bog instead of Surgical Extraction? I think Reanimator players wont expect it at all, and they'll likely Entomb or Careful Study their reanimation target on their first turn with a Daze in hand and we can confidently RFG it with another set of uncounterable answers. I'm honestly thinking pretty long and hard about just playing a board full of graveyard hate to completely burry that match up.

If Reanimator is getting played a shit-ton where you live, then yeah, that sounds reasonable (although good Reanimator players won't just Entomb as a sorcery). You'll just have to fully weigh the pros and cons of both Extraction and Bog. What are you cutting for it, though (LED package I'm guessing)?

[Michael Keller]

So, how exactly is a Bojuka Bog in Manaless Dredge going to stop a Reanimator player from casting Entomb during your End Step and putting an Elesh Norn into play during their Main Phase? No offense, but that's about the worst idea I've ever heard for a card suggestion before. It's even a land in a deck with "Manaless" in its title (which is now collectively accepted as 'literally' instead of 'figuratively'); no good here. Surgical Extraction can also force your opponent to shuffle away graveyard-based hate in conjunction with Enlightened Tutor - something I've seen happen out of numerous sideboards as of late.

The card has no place in this deck - not even the sideboard. Stick with Faerie Macabre; its utility stretches far greater than simply against graveyard-based strategies where it's already an ace.

[KevinTrudeau]

Alright, I just got back from the weekly tourney at my store (Monster Den in South Minneapolis). A quick report:

I get there about an hour early and buy a set of Faerie Macabre. The store's unfortunately out of Desperate Ravings, meaning I'd have to sleeve up Deep Analysis instead. I play two matches with my homie Alex (AlexAI here on The Source) piloting Affinity, and lose both 1-2. We talk about random things Magic related, like Brainstorm and Planeswalker Points.

Round 1 vs. Stephen with the mirror

That's right, the first recorded Manaless Dredge mirror in history. Stephen's playing a Bauble variant.

G1— I win the roll and draw first, opening with Chancellor of the Annex. Forcing him to play first and opening with Chancellor buys me more than enough time to kill him with recurring dudes and Zombie tokens (I believe on turn four).

G2— I side in the LED package, along with the Macabres. He puts me on the play, but I fortunately open a hand with LED and Wraith. I play both and dredge very, very well into three Nether Shadows with three creatures to put on top of all of them. I brick on dredgers the following turn, but I DR a Sphinx to bin the ones in my hand (and generate tokens while I still assuredly can) and luckily draw a Macabre in the process, the final nail in the coffin. I win on the next turn.

After the match, Stephen and I have a lengthy discussion about the deck.

1-0, 2-0

Round 2 vs. Bennett with UW Stoneblade/Snapcaster

Bennett's a year younger than me and went to my high school. This is the third tournament in a row that we're playing each other.

G1— Not much to say; it was a usual Dredge vs. blue game one. He gets out Batterskull, but I have more than enough firepower to overcome it.

I'm sitting next to Stephen, the guy who I played last round, and he winds up playing the mirror match again. In a thirty-plus person tourney, there were three Manaless players, and two mirror matches in the first two rounds. Crazy stuff.

G2— I side in the Macabres because of Snapcaster, and swap FKZ with the Iona I decided to play for whatever baseless reason. He correctly puts me on the play. He Surgical Extractions my first discard, and buys enough time by Pathing/STPing my first two recurring creatures to win via Batterskull.

G3— He has an Extraction again for my first discard, but I have the Street Wraith to counter it. I continue to slowroll dredge while he casts a Snapcaster, flashes back Extraction, and removes all of my Nether Shadow. I continue slowrolling, and he has two Path for my first two recurring creatures again, but he's not applying any serious pressure whatsoever. I eventually get four creatures out, Therapy him for countermagic, and DR Sphinx. I assemble a huge armada of tokens, with more than enough business in the 'yard for lethal. I also DR back Iona naming blue (which I believe was correct; he had Snapcaster+the land that bounces Wizards in play along with two Path and a Brainstorm in the 'yard), stupidly neglecting the tapped Karakas he had in play, but it didn't matter at that point. He doesn't draw an Extraction, and I take the game the next turn.

2-0, 4-1

Round 3 vs. Michael with NO RUG

G1— Another standard Dredge vs. Blue game one.

My former high school frisbee coach Martin Lohman is sitting next to me. Back when Mystical Tutor was legal, he used to bring his ANT deck to school when he was a student-teacher just so he could whoop a few of the kids playing with their casual decks. He tells me he's disappointed in me for my deck choice. :frown:

G2— I side in just Blazing Archon, taking out FKZ. He correctly puts me on the play. I get off to an average start, but he drops a turn three Scavenging Ooze and leaves up a green mana at every moment I could cast a sorcery for the rest of the game, forcing me to play more conservatively, lest I be vanquished. I can't overcome it after two or three turns, and succumb to the gelatinous being.

G3— I dredge into two Narcomoeba on turn two after Probing him twice (he countered the first one with Daze, but the second one got through), seeing Fire//Ice, Natural Order, and Scavenging Ooze. I Therapy him with no Bridges in my yard. He Fires my other Narcomoeba. I take the Ooze. He casts a Brainstorm the next turn, but can't find any gas, and I win in short order.

3-0, 6-2

Round 4 vs. Dana with Affinity

Dana is unfortunately not wearing one of his awesome trademark anti-Obama shirts (it's funny because Minneapolis is a pretty liberal city). I tend to be liberal-leaning on many issues even though I really don't give a fuck about politics, and I just think it's funny as hell.

G1— I open an excellent hand of Phantasmagorian, GGT, and Street Wraith. He mounts some early pressure and gets me down to ten by turn three. He even has the Galvanic Blast for one of his Ornithopter to remove two of my Bridges during my draw step, but because of Phantasmagorian, I have more than enough creatures to DR Sphinx into another Sphinx into Zealot for the turn three kill.

G2— He correctly puts me on the play and opens with a turn one Relic. I mulligan and have the turn two Phantasmagorian to bypass it somewhat, but that in turn gives him more than enough time to assemble a lethal strike force before I can really do anything.

G3— He plays a land and passes. I discard a dredger. He unfortunately has another Relic and easily takes the game because of it, as I didn't really have anything to combat it with.

3-1, 7-4

Round 5 vs. Ian "The Warrior" Ellis

I heard Ian randomly singing "Booty Butt Cheeks" by Thugnificent earlier in the night and sang along with him, which really put a smile on my face as I hadn't heard that song in years (a link to the song if you're interested) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrgv3D0sWc8&feature=related). He's been in the Minneapolis Magic scene for a very long time and IIRC took down a Standard SCG Open a few years ago with Jund. He's usually playing some version of Junk, so I put him on that.

G1— I open with a Chancellor. He plays a Mox Diamond to rid himself of the Force Spike trigger, plays a land, and passes. I discard a GGT and pass back. He plays a Bojuka Bog, exiles my GGT, and passes back. I discard Stankweed Imp and say, "Go". He drops a Scavenging Ooze with a green up to exile my Imp and it's all she wrote. An amusing game one.

G2— I have to mulligan. He fetches and announces that he's going to cast Scavenging Ooze on turn two while searching for the land, but is just messing with my mind to scare me to amuse himself and casts Stoneforge instead. I discard on my turn, and it turns out, like I kind of suspected, he was just slowrolling the Ooze and casts it on turn three with a green up, sealing the deal.

3-2, 7-6

After the round, Ian, being the extremely fucking awesome guy that he is, slips me five dollars out of the ~$14-20 dollar prize (depends on attendance) everyone who's X-1 or better at the end of the night gets, in essence paying for my entry. Thanks again, man.

I won every roll so I never had to run into the player familiarity issue. Chancellor was pretty awesome all night.

Also, I'd just like to note that I highly recommend every aspiring Magic player get some Zubaz; the amount of comfort they provide is great in aiding in concentration and examination of board states. Here is a picture of some if you are unfamiliar with them. (http://www.mamapop.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Zubaz-Pants-80s.jpg) In addition, I just found out that they were created by two Minneapolis-based professional wrestlers back in the late '80s, proving once again that Minnesota is indeed the greatest state of them all.

[Final Fortune]

So, how exactly is a Bojuka Bog in Manaless Dredge going to stop a Reanimator player from casting Entomb during your End Step and putting an Elesh Norn into play during their Main Phase? No offense, but that's about the worst idea I've ever heard for a card suggestion before. It's even a land in a deck with "Manaless" in its title (which is now collectively accepted as 'literally' instead of 'figuratively'); no good here. Surgical Extraction can also force your opponent to shuffle away graveyard-based hate in conjunction with Enlightened Tutor - something I've seen happen out of numerous sideboards as of late.

The card has no place in this deck - not even the sideboard. Stick with Faerie Macabre; its utility stretches far greater than simply against graveyard-based strategies where it's already an ace.

My thinking was players wont play around Bojuka Bog game 2 because they wouldn't know it's in our SBs as a 4x and it's the only "other" uncounterable answer to graveyard threats which ignores their Force of Will and Daze (unlike Surgical Extraction). It's probably "too much," but I can't think of another anti-graveyard SB card that lets us DDD, is 0 cost and doesn't require us to tip it off by playing it pre-emptively. Being a land is kind of tangential, I was actually thinking about playing Wasteland in Manaless as a pretty good all purpose SB card.

Actually Ravenous Trap cuts off Careful Study, so maybe that's the best way to go if I want hate 9+

@Kevin

I only think Desperate Ravings is better than Deep Analysis in gold fishing, resolving a turn 1 Lion's Eye Diamond by default to no Force of Will or Daze in hand only to get your Desperate Raving Spell Snared is kind of an unnecessary point of interaction vs. blue.dec and also Lion's Eye Diamond protects Deep Analysis vs Daze as well.

That aside, yeah I'm finding Chancellor of the Annex to be my favorite MD card in the four flex slots after Gitaxian Probe, and it also helps protect the deck from early disruption like Duress or the auto-lock out like Relic of Progenitus. And as stubborn as I am regarding LED/DA I do play the Gitaxian Probe + ??? lists as well and have nothing against them.

[Michael Keller]

While I think the cost of Desperate Ravings has some issues with decks packing condional countermagic, I wouldn't advise bringing those cards in against them anyways. You already have a solid matchup against decks of that sort, so if you're bringing them in in that instance, you're asking for trouble.

Typically, I bring Lion's Eye Diamond and Desperate Ravings in against Storm, Belcher, and the like (sometimes against Elves, too). Three life can be very precious in some of those matchups, and I just think if you're going to play these cards for the purpose of explosiveness, you'd want to consider when and when not to bring them in.

Also, back to something else: has anyone considered post-board bringing in Sharuum? This way, if you start with a reasonably powerful grip that doesn't contain L.E.D., you can D.R. him back, recur an L.E.D., and go off from there. Highly reasonable and makes those L.E.D.'s not so worthless in the graveyard. Seems worth a slot in a fluctuating sideboard; that could even open up more options for other helpful targets to retrieve.

EDIT: I fucking love this deck, by the way.

[Ziilot]

I don't think it's very worthwhile to animate Sharuum if you can just animate Sphinx and dredge three cards instead of two. About Ravings vs. DA, I'm not sure if anyone does this, but Ravings doesn't get hit by REB.

[Final Fortune]

While I think the cost of Desperate Ravings has some issues with decks packing condional countermagic, I wouldn't advise bringing those cards in against them anyways. You already have a solid matchup against decks of that sort, so if you're bringing them in in that instance, you're asking for trouble.

Typically, I bring Lion's Eye Diamond and Desperate Ravings in against Storm, Belcher, and the like (sometimes against Elves, too). Three life can be very precious in some of those matchups, and I just think if you're going to play these cards for the purpose of explosiveness, you'd want to consider when and when not to bring them in.

Also, back to something else: has anyone considered post-board bringing in Sharuum? This way, if you start with a reasonably powerful grip that doesn't contain L.E.D., you can D.R. him back, recur an L.E.D., and go off from there. Highly reasonable and makes those L.E.D.'s not so worthless in the graveyard. Seems worth a slot in a fluctuating sideboard; that could even open up more options for other helpful targets to retrieve.

EDIT: I fucking love this deck, by the way.

It's still a relevant decision for anyone MDing LED, I'm not really a fan of SBing it at all because you can probably find more dedicated, effective hate for particular match ups.

[Michael Keller]

I don't think it's very worthwhile to animate Sharuum if you can just animate Sphinx and dredge three cards instead of two. About Ravings vs. DA, I'm not sure if anyone does this, but Ravings doesn't get hit by REB.

Who said we were boarding out Sphinx? We can still run Sharuum in the board to help smooth out our dredges in the early game by giving us access to lost L.E.D.'s. Sometimes we aren't going to get that lucky and hit our Sphinx and go ape-shit. But remember, we're bringing it in against Combo; it's not like we're looking to plow it through Daze or Spell Snare. It's just another target that can be far more relevant than given credit for because it's making relevant cards active again, and then letting us go off after the fact. I think the card is very proactive, and doesn't just sit there like most other targets would.

Again, because of what we're bringing it in against, I don't think that matters a whole lot against certain types of Combo. It's possible, but highly unlikely. The first sixty are so synergistic and powerful that the sideboard is all I'm concerning myself with now. I've fallen back on the list I really enjoy.

[Final Fortune]

The problem with Sharuum is that it's more dependent on your graveyard than Sphinx, you need LED + DR + X Dredgers where Sphinx just needs X Dredgers and I think if you're SBing more Dredge return targets you'll either want Iona or Chancellor of the Annex first.

Edit: As an aside has anybody tried playing with Jin Gitaxis instead of the Sphinx/Zealot package at all? That dude seems pretty ridiculous regardless of your graveyard state.

[Michael Keller]

The problem with Sharuum is that it's more dependent on your graveyard than Sphinx, you need LED + DR + X Dredgers where Sphinx just needs X Dredgers and I think if you're SBing more Dredge return targets you'll either want Iona or Chancellor of the Annex first.

I'm trying to figure out how this makes any sense, when your entire deck is dependent on your graveyard.

Obviously, we play different lists. I run Iona in my sixty, as she (like 4eak mentioned in another forum) is about as close to a "catch-all" as this deck can get. It's extremely versatile, and can pretty much hose any mono-colored decks outright. I bring Chancellor in too, and the only reason I would consider Sharuum is that he is able to add consistency to the L.E.D. 'engine.' It's a very strong plan, but you're also banking on opening up with them in your starting grip. This way, if you can find a way to bring him back under dire circumstances, he adds that consistency where it is lost by bringing those cards in and subsequently not starting off with them.

Remember, without an L.E.D. in your starting seven, you're looking at eight dead cards in your entire deck. Sharuum makes all of them live, and enables what you were originally intending on going to do. I understand cards like Sphinx and the sort allow you to 'go off,' but in this instance, Sharuum gives you that versatility so that if you dredge into mediocre cards and an L.E.D. here and a 'Ravings there, you actually might find it more attractive to bring Sharuum back from the graveyard - with an L.E.D. - and blow the game wide open.

Remember, I'm taking into consideration what my configuration looks like. I run a split between Kelpie and Sphinx to avoid any Surgical Extraction shenanigans. It's been working beautifully thus far. Again, the sideboard is relatively flexible, so it's worth consideration.


Edit: As an aside has anybody tried playing with Jin Gitaxis instead of the Sphinx/Zealot package at all? That dude seems pretty ridiculous regardless of your graveyard state.

I just think it depends on your sideboard configuration. I have been working with multiple configurations and the most efficient 'kill switch' the deck manifests itself with is the Zealot package, straight-up. Jin Gitaxis does nothing when it comes into play, which is relatively bad when you're banking on cards doing something for you when they/as they enter play.

[GoldenCid]

Sorry guys, i was out of magic for a long time and came back today...the thread has grown up a lot and i have a short but key questions to me:
1- Why gigapede is out of list?
2- How do you use chancellor when sideboarding?
3- Leyline of sancticity is not useful?

These are my 60, any advice?

Creatures
4 [TO] Ichorid
1 [RAV] Flame-Kin Zealot
4 [PLC] Phantasmagorian
4 [FUT] Street Wraith
4 [RAV] Golgari Grave-Troll
4 [RAV] Shambling Shell
4 [R] Nether Shadow
4 [FUT] Narcomoeba
4 [RAV] Golgari Thug
4 [RAV] Stinkweed Imp
1 [SHM] River Kelpie
1 [ZEN] Sphinx of Lost Truths
1 [ZEN] Iona, Shield of Emeria

// Spells
4 [TSP] Dread Return
4 [JU] Cabal Therapy
4 [FUT] Bridge from Below
4 [MI] Lion's Eye Diamond
4 [ISD] Desperate Ravings

I built it basing on the last decklist i used to run gigapede instead of kelpie and a raving.

[John Cox]

There's really better things than gigapede. As for chancellor against storm, its a pregame effect and dread return target.

[Michael Keller]

Big event this Sunday in Baltimore. I'll be piloting Manaless as usual, with a few minor adjustments.

[Adan]

3- Leyline of sancticity is not useful?

No, since your main plan ist to always Draw-Discard-Dredge, no Leyline should be in any 75 of this deck because it donates a Timewalk to your opponent.

[Daesik]

Big event this Sunday in Baltimore. I'll be piloting Manaless as usual, with a few minor adjustments.

Mind sharing the adjustments? I'm currently running your list with a few minor changes (-1 Iona +1 Sphinx MD, -2 SE +1 Elesh Norn +1 AoD SB).

Thanks

[Michael Keller]

Mind sharing the adjustments? I'm currently running your list with a few minor changes (-1 Iona +1 Sphinx MD, -2 SE +1 Elesh Norn +1 AoD SB).

Thanks

My sideboard is really the only thing that has changed. I'll be running Angel of Despair in the sideboard, and possibly shifting some quantities around.

The two Surgical Extractions might possibly be taken out, as I'm already running four Faerie Macabre main deck. Enlightened Tutor is really only played as at most a two or three-of in decks supporting it, and the Angel can take care of most of those targets.

[bakofried]

Ah, Angel of Despair?

[Michael Keller]

Ah, Angel of Despair?

Yes sir - thanks.

I think we really need a utility creature in there somewhere, and he's obviously one of the best there is.

[bakofried]

No problem. I have the deck built, apart from LED's. But as my meta is hardly developed, it doesn't seem necessary. The issue with that, however, is my guilt for playing it. At least Maverick keeps *some* of the normal rules of Magic. However, I am trying to build a Legacy scene here in my hometown, so it's a perfect deck to lend out - fairly cheap, easy to play but with high rewards for mastery, and easily capable of putting up strong results. In a relatively undeveloped meta (meaning hate would be your primary concern) how would you configure the sideboard?

[Michael Keller]

No problem. I have the deck built, apart from LED's. But as my meta is hardly developed, it doesn't seem necessary. The issue with that, however, is my guilt for playing it. At least Maverick keeps *some* of the normal rules of Magic. However, I am trying to build a Legacy scene here in my hometown, so it's a perfect deck to lend out - fairly cheap, easy to play but with high rewards for mastery, and easily capable of putting up strong results. In a relatively undeveloped meta (meaning hate would be your primary concern) how would you configure the sideboard?

Well, in that instance, you're probably not looking at playing against many intricate Combo decks like Storm, so you're probably going to run into more diversified Aggro and Control variants. Even if you did run into the occasional Combo player, they might not be as skilled a pilot as some other people, which is obviously something to keep in mind.

The important thing with this deck as it pertains to the sideboard is maintaining at least some sort of balance with solid hosers or efficient Dread Return targets. I would look at something like this:

[4x] Lion's Eye Diamond
[4x] Desperate Ravings
[4x] Chancellor of the Annex
[1x] Angel of Despair
[1x] Sharuum the Hegemon
[1x] Blightsteel Colossus

The deck already rolls traditional and tribal Aggro really well, so that's not a concern. I am concerned with the Combo matchup, which we can fix in the board. Even an incompetent Storm pilot can still win games with it. L.E.D. has become incredibly important to help in that matchup so that we can blow the game open right off the bat.

Sharuum is a personal choice of mine and makes his way into the sideboard for the second and potentially third games to help facilitate the L.E.D. engine. As I mentioned previously: if you're going to dedicate eight slots to your sideboard to help in this matchup and you can't open with the most important card, you're essentially looking at eight dead cards, which actually hurts, not improves, what is arguably your worst matchup. He makes all of those cards live again. At one slot to help smooth out the other eight, it seems worth it. He is a "win now" target like Sphinx and Kelpie, which are actually huge in this match. It gives you another way to explode into the win.

Chancellor is really good against a lot of different decks, but I choose to run it in the sideboard because Faerie Macabre is more flexible in more circumstances. His static ability is very relevant against mana-hungry decks, in addition to being a serious clock.

Angel is there to supplement matchups like Enchantress and Enlightened Tutor strategies. I really think his utility is amazing, especially in recursion with multiple Dread Returns. He also blows up cards like Propaganda, Elephant Grass, and Moat, which are highly relevant.

Blightsteel is obviously in there for Painter variants, which have been popping up more and more recently. Without proper attention, this card is almost an auto-win for you.

[Daesik]

I might be missing something, but isn't Sharuum a worse Sphinx of Lost truths? If you do assemble the sharuum combo, you Dredge less than with Sphinx. Maybe if there was a utility artifact worth reanimating.

[Michael Keller]

I might be missing something, but isn't Sharuum a worse Sphinx of Lost truths? If you do assemble the sharuum combo, you Dredge less than with Sphinx. Maybe if there was a utility artifact worth reanimating.

I am playing Sphinx of the Lost Truths as well. My point is (and I've noticed this through goldfishing), is that when you try to 'go off' with either a Sphinx or Kelpie in play, some dredges are diluted with multiple L.E.D.'s or Desperate Ravings. Sharuum has helped out in that area immensely by allowing you to bring back those 'dead' L.E.D.'s (thus turning on your Ravings) and opening the door up for a blowout - the same way a Sphinx or Kelpie would.

Playing any split of Kelpie/Sphinx/Zealot is fine, but there have been no instances where adding Sharuum as another Dread Return target where L.E.D. would come in has been 'bad.' At the very worst, it can be fed to Ichorid if it absolutely has to, so it's not going to sit in your graveyard if you need to recur multiples.

[Final Fortune]

I am playing Sphinx of the Lost Truths as well. My point is (and I've noticed this through goldfishing), is that when you try to 'go off' with either a Sphinx or Kelpie in play, some dredges are diluted with multiple L.E.D.'s or Desperate Ravings. Sharuum has helped out in that area immensely by allowing you to bring back those 'dead' L.E.D.'s (thus turning on your Ravings) and opening the door up for a blowout - the same way a Sphinx or Kelpie would.

Playing any split of Kelpie/Sphinx/Zealot is fine, but there have been no instances where adding Sharuum as another Dread Return target where L.E.D. would come in has been 'bad.' At the very worst, it can be fed to Ichorid if it absolutely has to, so it's not going to sit in your graveyard if you need to recur multiples.

Sharuum is terrible compared to Sphinx of Lost Truths or River Kelpie, when I said Sharuum is dependent on your graveyard state I meant Sharuum is more dependent on your graveyard state than Sphinx of Lost Truths because it requires both Lion's Eye Diamond and Deep Analysis to be in your graveyard in addition to Dredgers for a Draw 2 effect where Sphinx of Lost Truths only requires Dredgers for a Draw 3 effect. The fact that Sharuum "enables" Lion's Eye Diamond and Deep Analysis in the graveyard is completely ass backwards, because Lion's Eye Diamond and Deep Analysis "enables" Sharuum if you consider he is effectively replacing a 4th copy of Sphinx of Lost Truths. There is no synergy here, there is simply a greater co-dependence on multiple cards having to be in your graveyard at the same time in order to enable each other for a worse effect than a single Sphinx of Lost Truths. And I'm certain the discard your hand clause of LED isn't enough to make up for it, because if you resolve a Sphinx of Lost Truths with +1 draw odds are you are going to turn over a Phantasmagorian anyway.

Edit: I suppose Deep Analysis can also be in your hand in order for Sharuum to work, but my point about co-dependence stands.

Also, the whole "LED/DA" are dead in your graveyard argument needs to be nixed, because unless you're playing Gigapede and Greater Mossdog every card in that slots is dead in your graveyard except Chancellor of the Annex or Forge which only have marginal utility as Dread Return targets. I agree Deep Analysis is dead if drawn in your opening hand without LED, but you have to pay a price for how ridiculously overpowered LED is or there'd be no contest.

As an aside, I don't have anything against the Gitaxian Probe and Chancellor of the Annex builds if you don't want to play with LED, both are completely viable and the Probe/Chancellor list is understably cheaper.

Edit Edit: And if you guys are looking for random DR targets to turn around match ups, Realm Razer is awesome vs lands - which is a really rough match up game 1 without LED fwiw.

[Michael Keller]

Sharuum is terrible compared to Sphinx of Lost Truths or River Kelpie, when I said Sharuum is dependent on your graveyard state I meant Sharuum is more dependent on your graveyard state than Sphinx of Lost Truths because it requires both Lion's Eye Diamond and Deep Analysis to be in your graveyard in addition to Dredgers for a Draw 2 effect where Sphinx of Lost Truths only requires Dredgers for a Draw 3 effect. The fact that Sharuum "enables" Lion's Eye Diamond and Deep Analysis in the graveyard is completely ass backwards, because Lion's Eye Diamond and Deep Analysis "enables" Sharuum if you consider he is effectively replacing a 4th copy of Sphinx of Lost Truths. There is no synergy here, there is simply a greater co-dependence on multiple cards having to be in your graveyard at the same time in order to enable each other for a worse effect than a single Sphinx of Lost Truths. And I'm certain the discard your hand clause of LED isn't enough to make up for it, because if you resolve a Sphinx of Lost Truths with +1 draw odds are you are going to turn over a Phantasmagorian anyway.

Everyone has varying selections and quantities of selections regarding their Dread Return targets. Manaless Dredge has a very restrictive sideboard due to its inherent ability to cast cards without using mana. I don't have it "ass-backwards" at all; you have a far greater chance dredging into a L.E.D. and Desperate Ravings (or Deep Analysis to the minority) over the course of two or three turns than you do open handing both cards as you're able to actually see and meddle with more cards as you dredge. He's no worse than a Shambling Shell in the face of a Grave-Troll or Stinkweed Imp (as he also feeds Ichorid if need be). His slot is strictly for utility, if at worst to act as a serious beater when need be.


Edit: I suppose Deep Analysis can also be in your hand in order for Sharuum to work, but my point about co-dependence stands.

The deck requires certain cards to be in the graveyard at certain times for it to work strategically optimally. If you're going to be boarding into L.E.D. and Desperate Ravings/Deep Analysis, you're trading some level of consistency for explosiveness. Your dredges become more warped than they were before, as now you have to contend with even more useless cards being dredged away in a matchup where every dredge is absolutely critical.

You're also basically arguing against yourself by iterating the entire L.E.D. & D.R./D.A. plan is completely suboptimal compared to Sphinx of the Lost Truths outside the first turn, which is complete nonsense. Sphinx enables one way for you to explode. Kelpie gives you another. Sharuum ensures if you hit it those L.E.D.'s they will not be dead - as you don't have to have a card-drawing spell in the graveyard immediately for it to work. It's simply an additional target to ensure if you don't open with L.E.D., those dredged ones have utility after being lost in a pile of cards where they'll sit and rot, thus turning what would be a completely useless pile of cards in your graveyard into a game-winning swing.

Combo isn't going to sit round and wait for you to find answers. Your Dread Return targets are key in being able to blow the game open when they hit play. The Manaless sideboard is incredibly flexible, so committing one slot as an insurance policy that you'll be able to support and sustain a plan you reworked more than half of your sideboard to is at least worth taking note of. Also, it's not as though a Black, 5/5 flying creature is useless aside from its obvious synergy with L.E.D.

Additionally, Deep Analysis is strictly worse than Ravings because in the instance you bring those cards in against decks like Storm (and hopefully not Tempo), you do not want to give your opponent a 'free spell' by losing three life and making their job easier in the process.


Also, the whole "LED/DA" are dead in your graveyard argument needs to be nixed, because unless you're playing Gigapede and Greater Mossdog every card in that slots is dead in your graveyard except Chancellor of the Annex or Forge which only have marginal utility as Dread Return targets. I agree Deep Analysis is dead if drawn in your opening hand without LED, but you have to pay a price for how ridiculously overpowered LED is or there'd be no contest.

No.

I am not paying any 'price.' I am going to find and exploit all intricacies and synergy this deck has to offer in order to improve and allow strategies that are being purposely implemented to have maximum sustainability over the course of a game that you may need to 'grind out' and win. This deck has plenty of flex slots post-board against atrocious matchups where enabling and supplementing a - as you called it - a "ridiculously overpowered" card so that it operates outside the realm of the opening hand and through the graveyard where the deck specializes.

I'm also not sure what you mean by "marginal utility" from Chancellor of the Annex; I have never lost a game with this deck in sanctioned tournament play where he has been Dread Returned. Its effect is extremely powerful and warps an opponent's entire strategy from that point on, effectively shutting them down long enough to beat in for the win.


As an aside, I don't have anything against the Gitaxian Probe and Chancellor of the Annex builds if you don't want to play with LED, both are completely viable and the Probe/Chancellor list is understably cheaper.

I agree, but it still isn't going to give you the best results against Storm which you'll have to beat these days to make it all the way. L.E.D. is about as fast as it gets, and there's really no substitute for the same effect.

[NecroYawgmoth]

Finished 14th in a 92 man event and 2nd in a 16-Man event the last 2 weeks...

The Deck feels really constant and I still play without LEDs...

my list for reference:

4 Golgari Grave-Troll
4 Stinkweed Imp
4 Golgari Thug
4 Phantasmagorian
4 Ichorid
4 Narcomoeba
4 Nether Shadow
4 Bridge from Below
4 Cabal Therapy
4 Dread Return
3 Sphinx of Lost Truths
1 Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite
1 Angel of Despair
4 Street Wraith
4 Gitaxian Probe
4 Sickening Shoal
3 Faerie Macabre

///////

4 Surgical Extraction
4 Chancellor of the Annex
3 Soul Spike
1 Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite
1 Iona, Shield of Emeria
1 Sadistic Hypnotist
1 Blightsteel Colossus

[KevinTrudeau]

Sharuum is terrible compared to Sphinx of Lost Truths or River Kelpie, when I said Sharuum is dependent on your graveyard state I meant Sharuum is more dependent on your graveyard state than Sphinx of Lost Truths because it requires both Lion's Eye Diamond and Deep Analysis to be in your graveyard in addition to Dredgers for a Draw 2 effect where Sphinx of Lost Truths only requires Dredgers for a Draw 3 effect. The fact that Sharuum "enables" Lion's Eye Diamond and Deep Analysis in the graveyard is completely ass backwards, because Lion's Eye Diamond and Deep Analysis "enables" Sharuum if you consider he is effectively replacing a 4th copy of Sphinx of Lost Truths. There is no synergy here, there is simply a greater co-dependence on multiple cards having to be in your graveyard at the same time in order to enable each other for a worse effect than a single Sphinx of Lost Truths. And I'm certain the discard your hand clause of LED isn't enough to make up for it, because if you resolve a Sphinx of Lost Truths with +1 draw odds are you are going to turn over a Phantasmagorian anyway.

Edit: I suppose Deep Analysis can also be in your hand in order for Sharuum to work, but my point about co-dependence stands.

Also, the whole "LED/DA" are dead in your graveyard argument needs to be nixed, because unless you're playing Gigapede and Greater Mossdog every card in that slots is dead in your graveyard except Chancellor of the Annex or Forge which only have marginal utility as Dread Return targets. I agree Deep Analysis is dead if drawn in your opening hand without LED, but you have to pay a price for how ridiculously overpowered LED is or there'd be no contest.

As an aside, I don't have anything against the Gitaxian Probe and Chancellor of the Annex builds if you don't want to play with LED, both are completely viable and the Probe/Chancellor list is understably cheaper.

Edit Edit: And if you guys are looking for random DR targets to turn around match ups, Realm Razer is awesome vs lands - which is a really rough match up game 1 without LED fwiw.

Completely agree with the bolded text. I don't really have much to add, Final Fortune's said pretty much everything I had to say regarding Sharuum in his post on the last page and the one below mine.

Likewise, I don't have anything against 4 LED/4 DR lists. It's just a matter of whether you want a higher chance of comboing out on turn two in the maindeck or not; a meta-specific decision. I did the 100 test games and it did have the highest turn 2 count IIRC (not by a whole lot, but it did), but I accidentally deleted the file before I could tabulate the averages.


The Deck feels really constant and I still play without LEDs...

Did you play any decks that were faster than you or on par in terms of speed?

Can't say I'm a huge fan of that list at first glance.

-Cutting Shambling Shell entirely is pretty greedy. I've considered boarding a few out before, mostly against combo decks; that line is certainly still on the table as a valid option, but not running any at all in your 75 will cause you to mulligan (and therefore, lose against the blue decks we're supposed to beat) more. It seems like a shitty card, but it's actually a huge part of the foundation of the deck. Keep in mind I'm not saying running sixteen dredgers is 100% correct at all, but running only twelve seems a bit shaky.
-Sickening Shoal has never impressed me theoretically, though I have never played with it so I can't say for sure.
-Angel of Despair is defensible in the maindeck, but Elesh Norn above FKZ?
-2x Elesh in the 75?
-Soul Spike?

I do like that your list has a bit of forethought, as it appears you have easy swapping plans given by the specific numbers of certain cards (-4 Shoal -1 Elesh +4 Extirpate +1 other target against Reanimator, -4 Shoal -1 Elesh and possibly -3 Macabre for +4 Chancellor +1 Sadistic +3 S. Spike for instance). If you could elaborate on some of your choices, that would be great.

[Final Fortune]

Stuff

I completely disagree, your argument is that Sharuum enables the Lion's Eye Diamond and Deep Analysis engine when it's already been discarded, but that argument is illogical because what you're really doing is playing a less powerful, more conditional pseudo-Sphinx under the delusion that you're getting "utility" out of your LED/DA by requiring them to be in your graveyard in order to do the exact same thing a Sphinx would have done regardless.

What you're suggesting makes absolutely no sense, because if you replaced Sharuum with Sphinx you would win more games than not considering Sphinx does the same thing, better and with less cards in your graveyard than Sharuum - which is what matters -

I have absolutely no clue how you interpreted my argument in favor of LED/DA as an argument against Sphinx/Zealot, those two engines have absolutely no interaction with each other and Sharuum doesn't really have any interaction with LED/DA either other than requiring them to be in your graveyard in order to be a shitty Sphinx substitute.

I really just think you're throwing out a list of logical fallacies regarding Sharuum, if you just gold fished X games with that card as either Sharuum or Sphinx and calculated the number of games where you couldn't "combo out" with Sharuum instead of Sphinx because LED and/or DA weren't in your graveyard you'd see first hand how bad it is (I had similar experiences with Eternal Witness a long time ago)

And sorry if I'm comming off like a complete dick, I just think the whole Sharuum thing is one of the only things about this deck that you can confidently prove is wrong in theory and practice.

[Michael Keller]

Tested a bit more with Sharuum and it's garbage.

[NecroYawgmoth]

@Kevin Trudeau:

I don't play that much against combo/fast decks. The last 2 fast matches where like this:

S&T: Won G1, G2 I had a Chancellor in the opening which slowed him... He S&Ted Progenitu, me Chancellor... I ended my turn wit 3 Chancellor on the board.

Doomsday ANT: Won G1, G2 he missbuild his Doomsday-Pile cuz I trashtalked him too much. =P


about the other stuff:

-Shambling Shell: The thing is that I dislike dredging for 3... it's garbage and hasn't a good enough chance for finding more Dredgers. If need to Dredge for 3, like... 3 times I think I'll lose anyways. I would keep a hand with 1-2 Drawspells and maybe a Phantasmagoran all the time, and I don't fear to timewalk myself 1 turn to find a GGT instead of starting to Dredge for 3.

-Sickening Shoal: Can kill Knights which are summoning sick or a 2nd turn Zenithed Ooze... It can also kill stuff like Peacekeeper and can "save" your own Bridges, when you attack and the opponent flashes in a crature like Vendillion Clique [kill your own blocked creature before damage] It's utility like Darkblast in regular Dredge. I also killed a Pyrexian Dreadnaught with it [Shoal it and Teamblock] and Phyrexian Obliterators which can be quite annoying if they land turn 2. also: Phantasmagorian is always a card which can jump to your hand and pitch for 7.

-Angel, Elesh: Angel is picked over Primus because it can kill creatures, and is more evasive... It also won me a few games against Oozes and Knights [like Shoal did]. It's also in the main against stupid stuff like Ghostly Prison or other random-things where you don't want to lose against G1. Elesh is there because I don't think you need FKZ. Manaless Dredge can follow the option to grind out games... In this case, you don't need FKZ and Elesh can help. Other than that, there are 2 possible routes...
A: You can flip over your whole deck with DRing 1-2 Sphinxes. In that case, you can Hellbent-Therapy the opponents hand and kill annoying stuff with Angel or kill all the creatures with Elesh. In that case you win anyways next turn and FKZ is not needed.
B: If you can't flip over your deck easily then Sphinx is always > FKZ. If you can't flip over your deck DR targets that can actually "do" anything are better then FKZ. [I had games where I had 3 creatures, and 0 Bridges but a DR and a Elesh, which simply spells GG to many decks. FKZ can't do that.]

-2 Elesh: Aggro, Maverick, Dredge... She is just too good.

-Soul Spike: As an addition against decks like Maverick. They have so many blowouts in creature Form and can Tutor them with GSZ that it's always good to have more creature hate. +4 Life isn't bad against Aggrodecks like Maverick, also. It has also reach and can kill your opponent, which I did once =P I can easily Swap out 3 Macabres VS 3 Spikes. Nevertheless, its still a testing / flex-slot. Also. Maverick is hugely overplayed here, and I think its one of our worst MUs.

Boardings for common MUs are like this in genreal:
Aggro: -3 Faerie, -1 Sphinx, +3 Soul Spike +1 Elesh Norn
Combo: -3 Faerie, -4 Shoal, -1 Angel, -1 Elesh, +4 Chancellor, + 0-1 Iona, +1 Hypnotist +3-4 Surgical /3 Soul Spike [depends]
Dredge: -4 Shoal, -1 Angel, +4 Surgical, +1 Elesh
Reanimator: -4 Shoal, -1 Elesh, +4 Surgical, +1 Iona

Hope I could enlighten you a bit :wink:...

:laugh:

[GoldenCid]

I know that you answered me that leyline of sancticity is crap, here. But, i dont find a consistent way to fight mana free artifact grave hate. Sorry for the insistence but maybe i'm too get used to mana version.

[KevinTrudeau]

Scavenging Ooze has indeed been a pain in der Arsch. I'll definitely test Shoal at some point. Looks like it could be another meta-specific card (like Faerie Macabre) that can be maindecked.

I did a lot of testing today with a Shambling Shell-less, four LED, four Ravings build, and I was actually surprised at how well it did. The seven card hand percentage went from ~94% to about 85%. Keep in mind, those aren't the true probabilities, which are 91% and 81% respectively if I'm not mistaken (rounded to the nearest integer and assuming you keep very hand with a dredger and mull every hand without one). It was definitely faster on average than any other previous build I've tested, in addition to having far and away the highest turn two kill count. I did seventy-five test games, but my computer crashed after I'd only saved around half of that, so I can't report back the actual data just yet. Can't say for sure if cutting Shambling Shell completely is correct, but it very well might be (shaving it down to three, two, or one also could be correct). At the very least, I now have the most optimal configuration against TES I've come up with yet, which would be:

4 Golgari Grave-Troll
4 Stinkweed Imp
4 Golgari Thug
4 Ichorid
4 Narcomoeba
4 Nether Shadow
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Desperate Ravings
4 Street Wraith
4 Gitaxian Probe
4 Phantasmagorian
4 Cabal Therapy
4 Bridge from Below
4 Dread Return
4 Chancellor of the Annex

with -1 or -2 Phantasmagorian for +1 or +2 Shambling Shell still under consideration.

[Final Fortune]

I'm not certain cutting Shambling Shell is the right move, even tho' I hate Shambling Shell, because the density of Dredgers in a deck that focuses on a Draw 2 spells instead of cantrips is even more important considering if you don't have enough Dredgers to replace both draw effects and it reduces are ability to "grind thru' hate.

@GoldenCid

If you're talking about Tormod's Crypt, the plan is to just board in Salvage/Ghast and grind thru' it. You have to get out of your "answer their answer" mind set and just learn to dig yourself out of hate by hand.

[Michael Keller]

Scavenging Ooze has indeed been a pain in der Arsch. I'll definitely test Shoal at some point. Looks like it could be another meta-specific card (like Faerie Macabre) that can be maindecked.

I did a lot of testing today with a Shambling Shell-less, four LED, four Ravings build, and I was actually surprised at how well it did. The seven card hand percentage went from ~94% to about 85%. Keep in mind, those aren't the true probabilities, which are 91% and 81% respectively if I'm not mistaken (rounded to the nearest integer and assuming you keep very hand with a dredger and mull every hand without one). It was definitely faster on average than any other previous build I've tested, in addition to having far and away the highest turn two kill count. I did seventy-five test games, but my computer crashed after I'd only saved around half of that, so I can't report back the actual data just yet. Can't say for sure if cutting Shambling Shell completely is correct, but it very well might be (shaving it down to three, two, or one also could be correct). At the very least, I now have the most optimal configuration against TES I've come up with yet, which would be:

4 Golgari Grave-Troll
4 Stinkweed Imp
4 Golgari Thug
4 Ichorid
4 Narcomoeba
4 Nether Shadow
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Desperate Ravings
4 Street Wraith
4 Gitaxian Probe
4 Phantasmagorian
4 Cabal Therapy
4 Bridge from Below
4 Dread Return
4 Chancellor of the Annex

with -1 or -2 Phantasmagorian for +1 or +2 Shambling Shell still under consideration.

I really like where this is going.

I wound up playing yesterday and going a mediocre 2-3. Each one of my losses was attributed to top-decked hate in the most critical of moments in multiple Game Three's. I was unable to recover at those points, and suffering those three daggers to the heart (Wheel, Crypt, and Relic respectively) was just devastating. I even played in a side event where my opponent decided to run Leyline (awful), and after getting blown out Game One, he decided to hit one in both subsequent games off of mulligans of six and five.

It did, however, open me up to changes in the main I would make from now on.

I really think L.E.D. could be strong enough to warrant its inclusion in the main. What I'm really liking is the explosiveness of Street Wraith, Probe, and Ravings all in here. I don't think the loss of Shambling Shell is going to affect the deck at all, as Phantasmagorian can still dump those dredgers back into the graveyard and allow you to continue chaining dredges.

Also, with the L.E.D. package, does anyone think Gigapede could perhaps be a stronger choice as an enabler to discard Ravings and deep-dredgers? While losing Shambling Shell isn't the absolute end of the world, it does decrease the odds of open-handing a dredger, and being able to discard Phantasmagorian and Ravings is just huge to keep the chain going. Most people have already dismissed it - myself included - but it was a card originally included as another means to allow the Manaless player to get quality cards into the graveyard as early and often as possible.

I'd be interested to hear everyone's thoughts because I'm still on tilt from yesterday.

[KevinTrudeau]

I'm not certain cutting Shambling Shell is the right move, even tho' I hate Shambling Shell, because the density of Dredgers in a deck that focuses on a Draw 2 spells instead of cantrips is even more important considering if you don't have enough Dredgers to replace both draw effects and it reduces are ability to "grind thru' hate.

Yep.


I really like where this is going.

I wound up playing yesterday and going a mediocre 2-3. Each one of my losses was attributed to top-decked hate in the most critical of moments in multiple Game Three's. I was unable to recover at those points, and suffering those three daggers to the heart (Wheel, Crypt, and Relic respectively) was just devastating. I even played in a side event where my opponent decided to run Leyline (awful), and after getting blown out Game One, he decided to hit one in both subsequent games off of mulligans of six and five.

It did, however, open me up to changes in the main I would make from now on.

I really think L.E.D. could be strong enough to warrant its inclusion in the main. What I'm really liking is the explosiveness of Street Wraith, Probe, and Ravings all in here. I don't think the loss of Shambling Shell is going to affect the deck at all, as Phantasmagorian can still dump those dredgers back into the graveyard and allow you to continue chaining dredges.

Also, with the L.E.D. package, does anyone think Gigapede could perhaps be a stronger choice as an enabler to discard Ravings and deep-dredgers? While losing Shambling Shell isn't the absolute end of the world, it does decrease the odds of open-handing a dredger, and being able to discard Phantasmagorian and Ravings is just huge to keep the chain going. Most people have already dismissed it - myself included - but it was a card originally included as another means to allow the Manaless player to get quality cards into the graveyard as early and often as possible.

I'd be interested to hear everyone's thoughts because I'm still on tilt from yesterday.

Sorry to hear about the tournament, that's the risk you take when playing really any variant of Dredge. It is, after all, fundamentally a metagame gambit.

I've never been a fan of Gigapede (in this deck, I love the card otherwise), and am still not. If its trigger were an ability you could activate as an instant like you can Phantasmagorian it would be one thing, but it's not. It still probably wouldn't be good enough anyway even if it did have that attribute.

There's no need to be able to discard Ravings since the card that it relies on to perform its duty does the job itself.

Just to clarify, I'm not necessarily advocating cutting Shambling Shell right now, this is just kind of an experiment that looks nice in goldfishing, but is possibly worse in a real game (especially one against a non-combo opponent). I'm just saying that if you plan on racing an opponent, it's a card that can be cut for optimal results in that regard. When you cut it, you open yourself up to more mulligans and less resilience, which will likely lead to more losses against matchups we're supposed to beat; it pushes the deck much further towards the 'Explosive' side of the delicate 'Consistency-Explosive' spectrum, which might be good or bad. Since we can board into the above configuration, I'm fine with keeping Shell for the time being. Of course, I encourage everyone here to mess around with the numbers, because I (intuitively, not logically mind you) can't see fifteen four-ofs being the most optimal list. I could see the best build not include Shell, because dredging three is kind of subpar and might lead to losses anyway, or I could see it involve a number of Greater Mossdog as well (not likely).

A quick reference to the probabilities of keeping a seven card opener while running between twelve and twenty dredgers (assuming you keep every hand with a dredger and mull every hand without one):

12 (0 Shambling Shell, 0 Greater Mossdog)- 80.9353307%
13 (1 SS, 0 GM)- 83.715595%
14 (2 SS, 0 GM)- 86.1409319%
15 (3 SS, 0 GM)- 88.2499205%
16 (4 SS, 0 GM)- 90.0777107%
17 (4 SS, 1 GM)- 91.6562567%
18 (4 SS, 2 GM)- 93.0145405%
19 (4 SS, 3 GM)- 94.1787837%
20 (4 SS, 4 GM)- 95.1726499%

As you can see, the derivative and double derivative functions of this probability table aren't linear; this is to say that there is less value in adding dredgers seventeen and eighteen than twelve and thirteen.

Remember that running LED in the maindeck gives you the bonus of having an out to mulligans (opponent interactivity aside, which is actually pretty huge), as well as dealing with being put on the play.

[GoldenCid]

I'm not certain cutting Shambling Shell is the right move, even tho' I hate Shambling Shell, because the density of Dredgers in a deck that focuses on a Draw 2 spells instead of cantrips is even more important considering if you don't have enough Dredgers to replace both draw effects and it reduces are ability to "grind thru' hate.

@GoldenCid

If you're talking about Tormod's Crypt, the plan is to just board in Salvage/Ghast and grind thru' it. You have to get out of your "answer their answer" mind set and just learn to dig yourself out of hate by hand.

Ok, but I have not seen those cards in any side. What you say is siding in a set of bloodghast and some salvage?

[Final Fortune]

Ok, but I have not seen those cards in any side. What you say is siding in a set of bloodghast and some salvage?

You haven't seen Tormod's Crypt in SBs? Has your metagame become so Reanimator centric that everybody has abandoned Relic/Crypt for Faerie/Extraction? As far as the SB, if you're MDing LED/DA then you need to be able to SB out all of those slots game 2/3, so you SB Dakmor/Ghast to replace the LED/DA engine and just Dredge thru' hate with shear redundancy.

[GoldenCid]

You haven't seen Tormod's Crypt in SBs? Has your metagame become so Reanimator centric that everybody has abandoned Relic/Crypt for Faerie/Extraction? As far as the SB, if you're MDing LED/DA then you need to be able to SB out all of those slots game 2/3, so you SB Dakmor/Ghast to replace the LED/DA engine and just Dredge thru' hate with shear redundancy.

It's plagued of relic effects, that's why my question. But off course, i have to learn how to play without answer. Reading the last pages i haven't seen ghast/salvage in sides and i was curious, but it's ok it's run a 3x of each one in the side.

[KevinTrudeau]

It's plagued of relic effects, that's why my question. But off course, i have to learn how to play without answer. Reading the last pages i haven't seen ghast/salvage in sides and i was curious, but it's ok it's run a 3x of each one in the side.

Here's my take on a Bloodghast list if you're interested:

4 Golgari Grave-Troll
4 Stinkweed Imp
4 Golgari Thug
4 Dakmor Salvage
4 Bloodghast
4 Ichorid
4 Narcomoeba
4 Nether Shadow
4 Street Wraith
4 Gitaxian Probe
4 Phantasmagorian
4 Cabal Therapy
4 Bridge from Below
4 Dread Return
3 Sphinx of Lost Truths/River Kelpie
1 Angel of Despair

SB:
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Desperate Ravings
4 Flex slot (your choice of Faerie Macabre, Chancellor of the Annex, Sickening Shoal, etc.)
3 DR targets [Sadistic Hypnotist (if not running Chancellor), Woodfall Primus, and Elesh Norn/Blazing Archon, for example]

The Ghast/Salvage resiliency package and the LED/Ravings explosiveness package are interchangeable. Salvage acts as dredgers 13-16, but are really only fail-safes in that regard. The four sideboard flex slots would probably go in for the Gitaxian Probe slot unless you decide upon Chancellor, in which case you'd board out all other DR targets. The singleton DR targets go in for the Angel of Despair.

[Final Fortune]

So Faithless Looting was confirmed, I think it's the obvious LED + Flashback Drawspell to play considering it discards your entire hand instead of only half at random and dodges Spell Snare all the same.

Altho' I am kind of concerned Faithless Looting is going to propel traditional LED Dredge above Manaless Dredge or at least put Dredge on everybodys radar.

[NecroYawgmoth]

Here's my take on a Bloodghast list if you're interested:

4 Golgari Grave-Troll
4 Stinkweed Imp
4 Golgari Thug
4 Dakmor Salvage
4 Bloodghast
4 Ichorid
4 Narcomoeba
4 Nether Shadow
4 Street Wraith
4 Gitaxian Probe
4 Phantasmagorian
4 Cabal Therapy
4 Bridge from Below
4 Dread Return
3 Sphinx of Lost Truths/River Kelpie
1 Angel of Despair

SB:
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Desperate Ravings
4 Flex slot (your choice of Faerie Macabre, Chancellor of the Annex, Sickening Shoal, etc.)
3 DR targets [Sadistic Hypnotist (if not running Chancellor), Woodfall Primus, and Elesh Norn/Blazing Archon, for example]

The Ghast/Salvage resiliency package and the LED/Ravings explosiveness package are interchangeable. Salvage acts as dredgers 13-16, but are really only fail-safes in that regard. The four sideboard flex slots would probably go in for the Gitaxian Probe slot unless you decide upon Chancellor, in which case you'd board out all other DR targets. The singleton DR targets go in for the Angel of Despair.

IF I play with Ghasts, I play the exact same mainboard, except -1 Salvage +1 DR Target (most likely Elesh). The thing is... ...what to board out? I always board out the Ghast / Salvage package, because I don't see any other exchangeble stuff in the main, except this 7 Slots.

IMO this 8 Slots [4 Ghast, 3-4 Salvage, 0-1 DR-Target] are generally the only slots you want to board out, regardless in which MU. The other 52 cards seem to be core. I still don't like the "all-in" nature of LEDin the board, but I think I need to test it some day...

[KevinTrudeau]

More sample hand data, this time with a Shambling Shell-less, Ravings list. Same prerequisites as always. Pretty cool results:

Counts/Percentages:

Starting hand size
7 cards— 209; 83.6% (2.7% above the actual probability)
6 cards— 31; 12.4%
5 cards— 7; 2.8%
4 cards— 3; 1.2%

Winning turn
1— 7; 2.8%
2— 54; 21.6%
3— 90; 36%
4— 65; 26%
5— 27; 10.8%
6— 5; 2%
7— 1; 0.4%
8— 1; 0.4%

Was LED cast?
Yes— 95; 38%
No— 155; 62%

Was Desperate Ravings cast?
Yes— 85; 34%
No— 165; 66%

Averages:

Mean winning turn— 3.30
Median winning turn— 3
Mode winning turn— 3

Mean winning turn when LED was cast— 2.54
Median winning turn when LED was cast— 2
Mode winning turn when LED was cast— 2

Mean winning turn when Desperate Ravings was cast— 2.44
Median winning turn when Desperate Ravings was cast— 2
Mode winning turn when Desperate Ravings was cast— 2

Mean winning turn when LED wasn't cast— 3.77
Median winning turn when LED wasn't cast— 4
Mode winning turn when LED wasn't cast— 3

Mean winning turn with a seven card opening hand— 3.12
Median winning turn with a seven card opening hand— 3
Mode winning turn with a seven card opening hand— 3

Mean winning turn with one or more mulligans— 4.22
Median winning turn with one or more mulligans— 4
Mode winning turn with one or more mulligans— 4

So, if you keep a seven card opener, your opponent will have 3.12 turns on average before they're dealt 20+ damage with this configuration (huge disclaimer: barring disruption of any sort).


So Faithless Looting was confirmed, I think it's the obvious LED + Flashback Drawspell to play considering it discards your entire hand instead of only half at random and dodges Spell Snare all the same.

Altho' I am kind of concerned Faithless Looting is going to propel traditional LED Dredge above Manaless Dredge or at least put Dredge on everybodys radar.

It's actually pretty close between the red Careful Study and Ravings, and I'd actually at this point side with Ravings.

Completely agree with the second line.


IMO this 8 Slots [4 Ghast, 3-4 Salvage, 0-1 DR-Target] are generally the only slots you want to board out, regardless in which MU. The other 52 cards seem to be core.

I agree as long as the "if I'm dredging three, I'm losing anyway" axiom is correct.

[Final Fortune]

I'm kind of at a loss as to why you would play with Ravings over Looting, discarding 2 cards intead of 1 at random and dodging Spellsnare just seems better.

[KevinTrudeau]

Ravings is an instant and can be cast above any Gitaxian Probes and Street Wraiths, mitigating the damage bricking could cause in addition to potentially allowing you to dredge more total cards. For instance, if you open a hand of LED, GGT, Ravings, SW, GP, and 2x random non-dredgers, Ravings is going to be a lot better than Looting because the first draw could brick (Looting however isn't absolutely horrible here though as it will ensure you have a dredger for the next turn, something Ravings can't necessarily do). Looting is indeed pretty much strictly better when it's the sole draw spell, but I think situations such as the aforementioned push Ravings above it. Not 100% on that, though.

I'm still not seeing Spell Snare as a good reason to not run Ravings; you're only going to be playing against it game one (hard for the blue opponent to justify keeping it in postboard against Dredge, seems like the first card they'd cut), and running LED itself out against a blue opponent not only isn't necessary a lot of the time, it also means you've likely already ensured the coast is clear countermagic-wise.

[Final Fortune]

and running LED itself out against a blue opponent not only isn't necessary a lot of the time, it also means you've likely already ensured the coast is clear countermagic-wise.

That's kind of a logical fallacy considering you can only Cabal Therapy so many counter spells, Force of Will and Daze are annoying enough without having to worry about Spellsnare on the end. It just randomly sucks, you'll feel differently when it happens to you in a tournament setting.

Speaking of tournament settings, I've been doing extremely well with the Chancellor of the Annex and Gitaxian Probe lists (my LEDs are on loan) and I think it's probably the most consistent list I've played. Chancellor MD is ridiculously good, because it pretty much prevents them from resolving a 1 drop and 2 drop and lets you race Tide, Elves and other odd ball decks while doing other really good shit like protecting the deck from Duress and Relic of Pregenitus lock out turn 1.

[NecroYawgmoth]

Has anyone here ever tested Chancellor of the Annex in the main? If yes, were the results good? I am still trying to find the optimal cards for the flex-slots.

Also... there are people who say that Chancellor of the Forge is really good in the main... Anyone has results with them?

[KevinTrudeau]

I've been running the Probe (or Shambling Shell depending on how you look at it)/Chancellor maindeck configuration at the past few tournaments I went to, and it was pretty good. I'd liked to have opened a few more hands with it, though, as I'm still not set on it or anything. It did flat out win a match against Bant one time, as it set him back a full turn to cast GSZ->Scavenging Ooze (I now officially hate that card). Overall, it seems its opening hand effect is pretty good against Noble Hierarch/GSZ decks, which have been pretty annoying for me as of late, as well as a variety of other matchups.

I tested Chancellor of the Forge in my initial list, but quickly cut it. It was only really good for casting early Cabal Therapies. I found that by the time I would have the necessary cards to (safely) go off with Dread Return, I would most of the time have three or more Narcomoebas, Ichorids, and/or Nether Shadows at my beck and call anyway. It's definitely playable enough to warrant more testing, but I think it's a tad subpar.

[Final Fortune]

I don't think a token or the pseudo-ETW Dread Return is any where near as good as the tempo Chancellor of the Annex generates, I've set back decks multiple turns by opening it and then Dread Returning it back later and I'm pretty convinced it's stronger than a Bauble. It also beats down surprisingly well.

I'm pretty happy with my LEDless list all in all, I'm still running Shambling Shell regardless, but it just feels remarkably solid.

[Michael Keller]

So, this past weekend I played a variation of Manaless Ichorid I've been tinkering with on my own these last few weeks. There were five rounds of action, but I wound up having to leave for an emergency after round four (which I purposely scooped a friend into so he could potentially make Top Eight). Aside from that, I was able to play through the first three rounds netting a 2-1 [5-2-0] record. I was very impressed with my new list, and my opponents couldn't believe half the time what they were seeing from the other side of the table with some unexpected options deployed.

For reference, here is the list I played:

Manaless Ichorid
[4x] Golgari Grave-Troll
[4x] Stinkweed Imp
[4x] Golgari Thug
[4x] Narcomoeba
[4x] Cabal Therapy
[4x] Dread Return
[4x] Lion's Eye Diamond
[4x] Desperate Ravings
[4x] Bridge from Below
[4x] Street Wraith
[4x] Ichorid
[4x] Nether Shadow
[4x] Phantasmagorian
[2x] Faerie Macabre
[2x] Serum Powder
[2x] Sphinx of Lost Truths
[1x] Iona, Shield of Emeria
[1x] Flame-kin Zealot

//Sideboard
[4x] Leyline of Sanctity
[4x] Chancellor of the Annex
[2x] Faerie Macabre
[2x] Surgical Extraction
[1x] Blightsteel Colossus
[1x] Ancestor's Chosen
[1x] Angel of Despair

Round One: Versus Mono Green Combo Elves [2-0]

Game One: I win the die roll and put my opponent on the play. He is wise to my choice in doing so, and understands it's going to be a battle of speed. Thankfully, his quick start was neutered by an opening hand consisting of L.E.D., Desperate Ravings, Street Wraith, Grave-Troll, and some beaters (Ichorids and Shadows). I was able to annihilate his hand and prepare for a Dread Return on Sphinx to end the game the following turn - which I did.

-2 Faerie Macabre

+2 Leyline of Sanctity

Game Two: I open the game with a Leyline of Sanctity and Lion's Eye Diamond, which winds up being relevant as my opponent begins the game with a Tormod's Crypt. I wound up drawing into Street Wraith and with the activation on the stack, I sacrificed L.E.D. and wound up hitting a Desperate Ravings off a dredged Grave Troll. I've been recently weighing my options in certain circumstances with this combination of cards and the use of the stack, and the optimal play in most circumstances is making sure - if you can - to cast Desperate Ravings with the Street Wraith activation still on the stack. This way, you're able to drop that dredger back into the graveyard with the random discard and ensure you'll be able to dredge with the cycling activation still present.

I wound up winning in short order after all of that. Running the Serum Powders in testing has given me flexibility in the matchups where Faerie Macabre is not relevant enough to warrant inclusion, and in its stead bringing in two Leylines against relevant hate like Crypt. It provides stability where it was lost with the absence of Shambling Shell, and it wound up playing a serious role in the round that followed.

[1-0] [2-0-0]

Round Two: Versus R/b Goblins

Game One: It has been a long time since I've played against Goblins in an event. Game One wasn't much of a contest, as I was able to combo out on my opponent by Dread Returning a Sphinx on my turn two.

-2 Faerie Macabre

+2 Leyline of Sanctity

Game Two: Being forced on the play, I begin the game by revealing a Serum Powder with some relatively innocuous cards. My following draw netted me Leyline of Sanctity with L.E.D. - also complete with Desperate Ravings - and the blowout commenced. My opponent's start only began with Wasteland and Aether Vial, and while he was able to get in some action with Pyrokinesis, it wasn't enough to keep me off three creatures (Bridge tokens) that were able to bring back Sphinx and go off from there.

In this match, I didn't put too much weight on Leyline's effectiveness, as I was far more impressed with Powder's ability to strike away a weak start and get me that L.E.D. and blowout the game from there. I was able to hit a Narcomoeba and Cabal Therapy, which almost surely would have named "Relic of Progenitus," as the already neutered Crypt became irrelevant. It didn't matter in the end, though.

[2-0] (4-0-0)

Round Three: Versus T.E.S.

Game One: This round to me was a measuring stick as to how important my changes were to the sideboard and main. After playing a land and passing, I was able to go deep at the end of his turn with Street Wraith and Phantasmagorian. The following turn I was able to recur two Ichorids and a Nether Shadow. I was, however, "Orim's Chanted" during my upkeep, so I couldn't cast the Dread Return into Sphinx that turn (which almost assuredly would have ended the game). I still managed to get in there for seven damage, and his Ad Nauseam turn two with thirteen life managed to be enough to just win the game.

Heartbreaking, but I felt the deck proved its power here in this matchup. My opponent was stunned at my start.

-2 Faerie Macabre
-2 Serum Powder
-1 Desperate Ravings

+4 Leyline of Sanctity
+1 Ancestor's Chosen

(You'll notice how I decided against bringing in Chancellor here. I'll explain later.)

Game Two: I wasn't able to start the game with a Leyline, but with a hand containing L.E.D., Street Wraith, and Grave-Troll, I decided to keep anyways. I managed to blow out his hand by taking three Dark Rituals with Therapy and ground out the game by attacking with several Ichorids and Zombie tokens over the course of a few turns, capped off by an "Iona on Black."

Game Three: My opponent decided to play first, and his start was relatively harmless: "Mine, Ponder, go." My start was a little different: L.E.D., Ravings, Street Wraith, draw into Grave-Troll. I managed to dig very deep into my deck, and while I assuredly had the turn two win in hand with three Ichorids, three Nether Shadows, Dread Returns, Sphinx, Iona and three Bridges, I hit no Narcomoebas or Cabal Therapies. (At that point, I dug into close to twenty cards + my start.) I lost the game on his second turn - but only because his Ad Nauseam could provide at most nine Storm (18 points of damage), my exact total at the cost of Street Wraith.

Another heart-breaker.

[2-1] (5-2-0)

I am really happy with the changes to the deck I've been working with. I felt as though my Combo matchup was drastically improved with the updated main and sideboard, including Leyline of Sanctity. My confidence wasn't shaken a bit, and the deck impressed a great deal. I could have potentially made Top Eight with a slew of Tempo decks in the 2-1 bracket, but as I mentioned I had to leave early.

Chancellor of the Annex: After testing with Chancellor for a great deal of time, I've come to the conclusion that - at least in my build - it just isn't as good as Leyline against the matchups it is most relevant in. No one realistically is going to sideboard Enchantment removal against you, and it is a complete blowout when it lands. In conjunction with Serum Powder, the card shows up more often than not, and if you start a hand without it, you're apt to hit an L.E.D. and go from there. I just haven't found Chancellor to be as useful more often than not outside of the reveal effect, and although it can be effective when it hits play, I've just found that other D.R. targets like Sphinx are just win-on-the-spot as opposed to stalling the game a turn to give my opponent an answer.

I can't say for certain at this point whether or not it's necessarily "better" than Chancellor, but now that we're running L.E.D., we have the ability to dump our hand if need be. And against most decks who know what they're playing against games two and three, they're more apt to mulligan aggressively to find that hate piece. This is where Leyline shines - especially against Crypt, Bojuka Bog, and Wheel of Sun and Moon. If anything, the Chancellors are now my flex slot in the board which will likely be vacated. The Faerie's are still relevant main, and the split with Powder has improved the deck's stability a great deal - even giving you the option of finding your L.E.D. Game One against a known Storm player.

Ultimately, I was happy with the changes and I am comfortable where the deck stands.

[Final Fortune]

While I don't think I'd ever agree Faerie Macabre is a serious MD consideration, I do like the idea of replacing the Shambling Shells with Serum Powders (That Iona should be the second FKZ for redundancy vs Serum Powder mulligans, IMO).

What I worry about tho' is whether or not you're going to get stuck with more dead cards in your MD that you can't SB out of, because while Leyline of Sanctity may have its moments the problem is that Reanimator is more popular than Dredge and as a result Faerie Macabre and Surgical Extraction have become more common than Tormod's Crypt fwiw. When I ran the Powder/LED/DA lists, I found boarding out the Powder/LED/DA and DR Package for just 15 "grinder" cards like Dakmor/Ghast, Greater Mossdog (feel free to laugh) and Street Wraith (in your case it could be Shambling Shell or Gitaxian Probe) and just raw dogging it was the most consistent answer I had to random SBs.

Chancellor of the Annex is a terrible SB card and an awesome MD card, in the sense it doesn't really address anything in the SB but is always useful in the MD. I agree you never really want to DR Chancellor over the other targets, but the thing is the more targets you have the less likely you have to DR something half ass like Phantasmagorian in clutch situations (and it is bonkers vs. Storm obviously)

Glad to see you picked up the idea and ran with it tho', I always felt Serum Powder had to fit in here some where and just couldn't figure out what to cut because Street Wraith was too good not to run - cutting Shambling Shell and making up for the lossed consistency in keepable hands (if hands with Shambling Shell are even keepable) by being able to mulligan aggressively seems extremely sound in theory

[Michael Keller]

I'm not really too overly concerned though with cards like Faerie Macabre and Surgical Extraction against this deck, as Street Wraith provides a credible, unstoppable means of returning relevant dredgers back to your hand. I've never dropped a tournament game to either of those cards, yet cards like Wheel of Sun and Moon and Bojuka Bog are seeing just as much (if not more) play than Faerie Macabre, so it all really evens out in the end. Most relevant, "game-ending" graveyard hate is targeted towards the player more so than individual cards they target, and this deck as I'm sure you know has the capability of withstanding individual shots to those single targets.

I kept the Faerie Macabres in due in large part to having a leg-up in the Reanimator match Game One. Obviously you have a certain level of flexibility with the Powder/Faerie slots in that respect but I have been very happy with the configuration up to this point. Packing the additional Faeries and Surgical Extractions in the sideboard helps tremendously in those circumstances, as an obvious hit on Show and Tell with Cabal Therapy seriously makes things harder on the Reanimator player to ideally reanimate something cold post-board.

I also think Reanimator being "more popular" than Dredge is not really true depending on your general meta. I think that's a generalization at best, and while Reanimator certainly puts up good numbers, it doesn't mean it's necessarily a more popular choice depending on where you're playing. I give respect to either of those matchups by still playing the Faeries anyways.

As for Chancellor, I do agree it's a terrible sideboard option at this point, and while I've enjoyed his ability when it hits play, rarely has his opening ability been relevant unless its staring down a turn one Relic, which isn't as effective as it once was against us now that we have L.E.D. to drop our hands and go back to work. With Leyline, Relic's first ability is also nullified, so in essence you're getting the same value out of the Leyline as you would a Chancellor because the opponent has to wait a turn to exile it (in this circumstance, they cannot use the first ability).

I just love L.E.D. in this deck, though. It was so sorely lacking a discard outlet in the event of a blowout effect, and I think L.E.D. and Serum Powder - in conjunction with Leyline out of the sideboard - gives this deck some much needed resiliency against relegated hate.

[Final Fortune]

I think Chancellor's "Daze" is always relevant, it's just not as good vs hate as Leyline, but it's still a critical tempo boost in matches like Goblins, Elves, Zoo, Tide, Reanimator etc. and puts them behind on board state for two turns. The card is literally game breaking vs Tide, I went from 40/60 to 60/40 vs that deck on the back of Chancellor alone.

I don't really buy into Leyline being an answer to Relic, the problem with the Leyline and Chancellor comparison is that with Leyline you're down a card in hand and you've lost a turn DDDing to set Relic "back" so they just equalize each other. If you're seeing that much Crypt/Bog tho', then I guess roll with Leyline until you stumble into a metagame that's dedicated to Reanimator - the predominant card in people's SBs fwiw is Faerie Macabre, because of it being uncounterable and instant vs Reanimator.

What I wanted to get across tho' was is that I think you need to consider what you're going to do when you do run across a match up where Leyline is worthless and you're looking at only Faerie/Extraction, because you have to decide just how effective keeping the conditional engines in is if you're going to have SB space for your own Faeries etc.

[Michael Keller]

I think Chancellor's "Daze" is always relevant, it's just not as good vs hate as Leyline, but it's still a critical tempo boost in matches like Goblins, Elves, Zoo, Tide, Reanimator etc. and puts them behind on board state for two turns. The card is literally game breaking vs Tide, I went from 40/60 to 60/40 vs that deck on the back of Chancellor alone.

I don't really buy into Leyline being an answer to Relic, the problem with the Leyline and Chancellor comparison is that with Leyline you're down a card in hand and you've lost a turn DDDing to set Relic "back" so they just equalize each other. If you're seeing that much Crypt/Bog tho', then I guess roll with Leyline until you stumble into a metagame that's dedicated to Reanimator - the predominant card in people's SBs fwiw is Faerie Macabre, because of it being uncounterable and instant vs Reanimator.

What I wanted to get across tho' was is that I think you need to consider what you're going to do when you do run across a match up where Leyline is worthless and you're looking at only Faerie/Extraction, because you have to decide just how effective keeping the conditional engines in is if you're going to have SB space for your own Faeries etc.

I'm not inferring Leyline's sole, exclusive utility being geared towards Relic; I'm simply stating its ability is relevant in the instance they do run it.

As for the sideboard, with Chancellor's removal, that opens up four slots better used for other troublesome matchups. Chancellor's initial effect is nice main, but with L.E.D. you now have an incredibly fast engine to match those decks like Elves and Tide Game One where you didn't before. If you're looking to stall with it, any competent oponent will play around it and still be able to match you speed-wise on the combo end of the spectrum. As I mentiomed previously, I play around Faerie and Extraction if I suspect my opponent as being on it. The sided Faeries are there to help with that, and it seems to be working smoothly so far.

If Combo Elves is of concern to me, I'll reconsider Contagion in the sideboard. People seem to hate it, but with four open slots, it's worth testing in my meta. It's also an answer to Scavenging Ooze, which is very relevant ATM.

[NecroYawgmoth]

Sickening Shoal is way better in hating Knights and Oozes than Contagon.

I also think that Soul Spike is way better than Contagion here...

Contagion is only good against "strange" decks like elves.

[Michael Keller]

Sickening Shoal is way better in hating Knights and Oozes than Contagion.

Sickening Shoal is only relevant against a single target at optimum capability within the first two turns (which is when it would be used). Contagion is able to spread its wealth to several creatures (like Dryad Arbor and Noble Hierarch, respectively) and has the capability of killing a Scavenging Ooze immediately, in addition to killing a turn two Knight (minus a fetch, but I'd bring in Leyline anyway in that matchup as a two of with Serum Powder). I like that it has the ability to cause a mana-crippling effect to opponents, in addition to completely blowing out decks like Combo Elves and decks utilizing a fast setup early with other smaller creatures.

Most reliable graveyard hate-bears are going to be hitting the table within the first two turns, and Contagion can kill multiple threats while dealing specifically with the important ones alone. Sickening Shoal can kill only one creature reliably, which isn't really all that great when you consider you're probably casting it early enough to deal with a creature with a maximum toughness of two anyways. Contagion hits multiple targets, which is far better under those circumstances.


I also think that Soul Spike is way better than Contagion here...

Contagion is only good against "strange" decks like elves.

I've played Soul Spike before in The Gate and while it can serve a very basic purpose, the card provides massive disadvantage to you where you would probably need those two other Black cards in your hand to do what you need to to win. Soul Spike is relatively terrible, far more situational, and only good against Storm where a player would Ad Nauseam low enough to steal a win, but Leyline just shuts them off completely in that respect or at the very least slows them down immensely.

You need the cards to work with, so slowing yourself down like that seems relatively terrible. I understand L.E.D. is here, but that doesn't excuse the fact you'll be down three cards to deal four damage to a single target, thus quadruple 'Time-Walking' your opponent in the process. I can see its utility, but I don't think it's as good as Contagion here. If you give your opponent three to four turns, they will find a Knight, Zenith, or Ooze fast enough to kill you.

[KevinTrudeau]

@Hollywood— it was a mistake (a potentially huge one) to not board in the four Chancellors there for the DR package you had in the maindeck against your TES opponent. It has pretty much the same effectiveness as Iona once exhumed, but you get a 40% chance of starting the game off with a Force Spike; I'm just not seeing how the Sphinx/Iona/FKZ package is better there. Whether or not Chancellor is (for the most part) redundant against a combo opponent if you've got a singleton Iona is irrelevant here (they very well might be, but I'll get into that later), since you were in fact still playing the Chancellors and had the ability to board into them.

Regarding Serum Powder— I never really liked it in testing, and I still think it's bad for the most part. If you're running it so you can increase the chances of hitting an Eleedee, it only increases the chances of finding it in the next seven cards to 44.2721762% if you whiffed on it the first time (after the initial 39.9499626%). Those aren't odds I'd be willing to go all-in on at all, especially if I've a dredger in hand already, and at that point, you'll be kicking yourself for running it in place of Gitaxian Probe (as you would if you opened Powder and LED). If you're running it in place of Shambling Shell as a pseudo-dredger, you'll still have less of a probability of finding a dredger in the top seven and subsequent top seven (80.9353307% and 85.4148886% respectively) compared to the 86.1409319 opening hand percentage you get for just running fourteen dredgers (although, an 85% chance of finding a 4+ dredger is probably better than an 86% chance of finding a 3+, but meh). In addition, the exiling-the-top-seven characteristic is actually quite relevant, and can be crippling at times. There was an uncomfortable abundance of times where I'd have a 2x Dread Return, Serum Powder hand, and then never find another DR to go off at a reasonable time. You can substitute Bridge from Below for DR in that situation as well. Gitaxian Probe is just a better, more consistent, less volatile option.

Regarding Leyline of Sanctity— I don't like it one bit, especially in this general metagame. That's all I have to say right now. I have more to say, but yeah, it's bad (sorry for the engaging argumentation).

Regarding Chancellor of the Annex— I liked the way Final Fortune put it for the most part, that Chancellor is a good general maindeck option but is less good as a sideboard card because there are more potent matchup-specific options. If you don't find it useful in the maindeck, then cutting it seems perfectly defensible as long as you have a singleton Iona or something (which you do). In the Bloodghast list I was testing (which was the list I posted up on the previous page combined with NecroYawgmoth's suggestion of -1 Dakmor Salvage for +1 maindeck DR target), I didn't really find a use for it since there was obviously no maindeck room, so I cut it. Of course, due to the immense number of uncovered testing ground and potential configurations, I would never rule it out. +4 Chancellor, -4 Sphinx/FKZ maindeck could be correct for all I know (likely not).

Regarding Contagion— I like Sickening Shoal more conceptually, but I've never played with either card yet, so I don't know for sure. Note that a good player will usually leave up a green after casting or GSZing for Scavenging Ooze (fucking hate that card) to blank Dread Return, and if they know that you're running Contagion, they probably won't even activate it EOT so that they'll have at least two green up when they first activate it. I'd also never trust it to kill a KotR. I like the situation you described, completely tempoing them out by kill off all of their mana dorks, but Chancellor reveal does pretty much the same thing.

Speaking of that Bloodghast list, I'm having a really hard time finding what the optimal card in the sideboard flex slot is. Since the Ghast/Salvage and LED/DR packages are seven-eight cards each, you can't really fit in a four-of without either making things incredibly dis-synergistic or boarding out Gitaxian Probe.

Also, Hollywood, if you ever have time, I'd be down for some general testing on MWS. Just PM me or something if you're interested.

Lastly (and this isn't being directed at anyone, this is just a random thing I'd like to say), Manaless Dredge is definitely not a 'noob' deck. It might be once optimized lists surface and more and more standardized lines of play come to fruition (basically, once more hours are put into it by many people), but in its current state, it's definitely not. It's not a super incredibly challenging deck to play, but it doesn't just play itself.

[Michael Keller]

@Hollywood— it was a mistake (a potentially huge one) to not board in the four Chancellors there for the DR package you had in the maindeck against your TES opponent. It has pretty much the same effectiveness as Iona once exhumed, but you get a 40% chance of starting the game off with a Force Spike; I'm just not seeing how the Sphinx/Iona/FKZ package is better there. Whether or not Chancellor is (for the most part) redundant against a combo opponent if you've got a singleton Iona is irrelevant here (they very well might be, but I'll get into that later), since you were in fact still playing the Chancellors and had the ability to board into them.

I don't really see this as being a mistake here. Lion's Eye Diamond provides an incredible amount of speed, and it was the reason I easily won the second game and almost won the third game if not for a narrow set of circumstances benefiting my opponent after going through nearly half my deck on my turn two. The reason I left them out was to test the power of Leyline in this matchup, which coincidentally would have shored up that win Game Three if I had drawn into it to start the game with the L.E.D. in hand.

Chancellor's effect, while attractive in the Combo match, doesn't seal the game for good by any means. It's a card measured by an opponent's level of skill, and most players whom I've played and tested against (i.e. the Hatfields, NoVA players, etc.) have easily adjusted to his ability and played around it without any problems. Instants like Lightning Bolt and Brainstorm can be easily played with with the ability in effect, which in turn breaks the effect and still allows your opponent to drop Crypt or whatever else they have turn one against you. I just feel as though it's a card that gives your opponent options, where Leyline is a concrete-based game-changer and forces your opponent into finding answers or risk facing the consequences. I have played both variations, and I have found Leyline to be strictly better under those circumstances.

It is by no means "bad." In fact it's the complete opposite in my experience.


Regarding Serum Powder— I never really liked it in testing, and I still think it's bad for the most part. If you're running it so you can increase the chances of hitting an Eleedee, it only increases the chances of finding it in the next seven cards to 44.2721762% if you whiffed on it the first time (after the initial 39.9499626%). Those aren't odds I'd be willing to go all-in on at all, especially if I've a dredger in hand already, and at that point, you'll be kicking yourself for running it in place of Gitaxian Probe (as you would if you opened Powder and LED). If you're running it in place of Shambling Shell as a pseudo-dredger, you'll still have less of a probability of finding a dredger in the top seven and subsequent top seven (80.9353307% and 85.4148886% respectively) compared to the 86.1409319 opening hand percentage you get for just running fourteen dredgers (although, an 85% chance of finding a 4+ dredger is probably better than an 86% chance of finding a 3+, but meh). In addition, the exiling-the-top-seven characteristic is actually quite relevant, and can be crippling at times. There was an uncomfortable abundance of times where I'd have a 2x Dread Return, Serum Powder hand, and then never find another DR to go off at a reasonable time. You can substitute Bridge from Below for DR in that situation as well. Gitaxian Probe is just a better, more consistent, less volatile option.

Now that the deck has lost some of its consistency with the absence of four dredgers and the addition of L.E.D., there is no reason to assume two Serum Powders would completely warp your entire start if you feel as though you can improve your situation before the game begins. Unlike before, I have options at the beginning of the game. I understand your interest in the percentages here, but the fact is you haven't taken into account variance with starting hands where Powder could be extraordinarily useful, as explicitly defined by my Game Two against Goblins where I was able to win the game - and match - because of it.

I have tested it incessantly and have found it to an invaluable resource that gives you stability where it was lost with the bonus of having the ability to begin the game with an explosive start. If you begin the game with multiples of a key card that contains a Powder, you probably weren't doing anything relevant with your Shambling Shell to begin with so either taking the "keep" or giving yourself a chance to get another hand is completely worth two slots relegated to improving your situation. It can never be worse, as you don't have to reveal the card if you don't want to.


Regarding Leyline of Sanctity— I don't like it one bit, especially in this general metagame. That's all I have to say right now. I have more to say, but yeah, it's bad (sorry for the engaging argumentation).

I just disagree wholeheartedly. In fact, with L.E.D. present, that slot in my board will forever be a staple now that I have a blatant, unexpected, and efficient means of protecting my hand, my life total, as well as my graveyard from a variety of circumstances ranging from Storm to Burn.


Regarding Contagion— I like Sickening Shoal more conceptually, but I've never played with either card yet, so I don't know for sure. Note that a good player will usually leave up a green after casting or GSZing for Scavenging Ooze (fucking hate that card) to blank Dread Return, and if they know that you're running Contagion, they probably won't even activate it EOT so that they'll have at least two green up when they first activate it. I'd also never trust it to kill a KotR. I like the situation you described, completely tempoing them out by kill off all of their mana dorks, but Chancellor reveal does pretty much the same thing.

No one is going to know you're running out Contagion Game Two, let alone a Sickening Shoal, and even if they do, it doesn't change the fact that if it's hard-cast on turn two, you can kill it, or if it's "Zenithed" into play turn three, it's killed too. An opponent will probably only be able to get it into play with a lucky start of Zenith turn one for Arbor into hard-casting it turn two, which is already unlikely given it as being a singleton or one-of in most G/w/x boards. By the time turn four rolls around, the card is relatively useless against you if you can kill them or accumulate threats before they do anything relevant against you.

Faerie Macabre is no better than two Leylines which at minimum can stop Bojuka Bog in its tracks and allow you flexibility with some sideboard slots to bring in the second and potentially third games.


Also, Hollywood, if you ever have time, I'd be down for some general testing on MWS. Just PM me or something if you're interested.

Sure, I'm always around and up for it.

[NecroYawgmoth]

@KevinTrudeau
+4 Chancellor, -4 Sphinx/FKZ maindeck could be correct for all I know (likely not).


I don't think that this is a really good idea, you just need the "ability" to flip your deck from time to time. About boardngs, I most likely board out the Salvage / Ghast Package because I cant see other effective things to board out. I think pack the Bloodghast Pack out, for 4 Chancellor and fill the other 3 Slots with whatever you like. I really really <3 Ghasts, but they are really not needed most of the time, cuz you board them out anyways, and getting them after a Sphinx-Dredge is overkill 98% of the time. You can Therapy Sphinx for Tokens and Dredge again with her if you have another DR, or just already have enough Tokens. and you have Moebas which will transform into Zombie Tokens. [backed up by too many Ichorids and Shadows next turn] I don't see any situation where you would need Ghasts there.

When I am at it: for the remaining 3 slots... You have any news about the ""if I'm dredging three, I'm losing anyway"-axiom"? =P maybe I should fill up this Slots with Shambling Shells, but I rather test out flex cards until someone can prove that the 13th,14th,15th dredger are better here.

For what would you use te "new" Sideboard-space? [Assuming that you don't play LEDs in the board.] 4 LLotV or Surgical, 4 Sickening Shoal, 1 Elesh, 1 Iona, 1 Blightsteel leaves the 4 Chancellor slots open. I could Play 4 White LL as an addition against Combo or 4 Soul Spike / Contagion against maverick. i don't really see any other options atm. There is also the Option of 4 Surgical and 4 LLotv but this seem like a huge overkill. =P


@Hollywood
No one is going to know you're running out Contagion Game Two, let alone a Sickening Shoal, and even if they do, it doesn't change the fact that if it's hard-cast on turn two, you can kill it, or if it's "Zenithed" into play turn three, it's killed too. An opponent will probably only be able to get it into play with a lucky start of Zenith turn one for Arbor into hard-casting it turn two, which is already unlikely given it as being a singleton or one-of in most G/w/x boards.

IF they have G mana left via first turn GSZed Arbor or 1st turn Hierarch, they can just cast Ooze with 3 Mana in play, and Contagion won't harm it. Also we are effective 1 Turn slower because we need to DDD. Your list is the exception here, because you play LEDS main, but that still doesn't change the fact that you can't Contagion kill a 2nd turn Ooze when the GW Player has 3 Mana... Also... some lists play 2-3 Oozes.

[Michael Keller]

@Hollywood
IF they have G mana left via first turn GSZed Arbor or 1st turn Hierarch, they can just cast Ooze with 3 Mana in play, and Contagion won't harm it. Also we are effective 1 Turn slower because we need to DDD. Your list is the exception here, because you play LEDS main, but that still doesn't change the fact that you can't Contagion kill a 2nd turn Ooze when the GW Player has 3 Mana... Also... some lists play 2-3 Oozes.

That's exactly my point.

In the scenario that your opponent actually has the first turn Zenith into Arbor, they would have to draw naturally into a Scavenging Ooze - which isn't all that likely. In that instance, it wouldn't matter even if you did have Sickening Shoal because you would be losing two cards anyway and a brick off your discarded dredger would effectively be devastating to you as waiting two turns and giving your opponent plenty of time to find an answer is definitely not good.

Contagion, however, allows you to cripple their "mana dork" mana supply and kill a hard-cast turn two Ooze (with no Zenith turn one), or a turn three Zenith into Ooze (with no mana left over). Given the likelihood of the latter two scenarios, I'd much rather have that overall flexibility. Sickening Shoal is also more situational, as exiling a Cabal Therapy, Nether Shadow, another Shoal, or Golgari Thug will not be able to do the job under the circumstances you've provided. That's potentially sixteen cards that would wiff in killing Ooze, and with an even lighter Dredge count (12), exiling a critical Stinkweed Imp or Street Wraith (so unappealing) would just seem terrible for you anyways.

Contagion lets you exile any Black card and always provides at least -4/-2 to any individual creature, which under the circumstances I've provided would be more than reasonable and more likely overall. If your opponent has the nuts with a T1->Zenith, T2->Ooze+Mana, then it doesn't matter anyway (unless they opt to exile your dredger immediately, in which case you can kill it).

[NecroYawgmoth]

Contagion, however, allows you to cripple their "mana dork" mana supply and kill a hard-cast turn two Ooze (with no Zenith turn one), or a turn three Zenith into Ooze (with no mana left over).


I can't see your logic here because Sickening Shoal does exactly the same in all 3 situations. If you have the Situation where you can 2 for 1, like 1st turn Zenith into Arbor, 2nd Turn Hierarch or Vice Versa they are wasting 1 whole turn, in which we could easily do more than enough to win, regardless of Contagion, don't you agree?



Sickening Shoal is also more situational, as exiling a Cabal Therapy, Nether Shadow, another Shoal, or Golgari Thug will not be able to do the job under the circumstances you've provided. That's potentially sixteen cards that would wiff in killing Ooze, and with an even lighter Dredge count (12), exiling a critical Stinkweed Imp or Street Wraith (so unappealing) would just seem terrible for you anyways.


To be honest, your logic fails here also. This is an rather strange comparsion. Another Shoal, A Shadow or a Thug will give -2. Exactly like Contagion does, so only Cabal Therapy is valid here. So it's 4 cards and not 16. And even Cabal Therapy can kill their mana dork if its needed, so it's only 4 cards which matter against Ooze.

Contagion will also fail to kill a Knight ~80% of the time IMO.

I do agree, that we will lose ANYWAY, regardless if we have Contagion or Shoal if they have the nut-draw, but I can't see any of your arguments proving that Contagion is better than Shoal.

Against Elves... 1-2 Elesh Norn is still enough and still needs less space than a "narrow" card like Contagion. ANY Dredge-Player should play at least 1 Elesh in their 75 anyways. There is also Iona, which wrecks Elf-Combo, and Chancellor which slows them down 1 turn. This all should be enough.

[Michael Keller]

I can't see your logic here because Sickening Shoal does exactly the same in all 3 situations. If you have the Situation where you can 2 for 1, like 1st turn Zenith into Arbor, 2nd Turn Hierarch or Vice Versa they are wasting 1 whole turn, in which we could easily do more than enough to win, regardless of Contamination, don't you agree?

Uh, no because if you're claiming that both function the exact same way under the exact same set of circumstances, Contagion is strictly better because it has the ability to kill more than one creature if need be.

See, this where players like yourself don't see the importance of what an opponent is trying to do or why they decided to keep the hand that they did. That isn't "wasting" a whole turn - that's called setting you up for the knockout punch the next turn with something relevant. Very relevant. Sickening Shoal - in that instance - would only be able to kill one creature, where as Contagion (and not "Contamination," as you put it), can kill multiples at one time. You boarded them in for the purpose of either killing a relevant creature(s) or generating a huge amount of tempo, which is far more multilaterally useful that one card that only trades - with one card.

You're giving this deck too much credit as far as "easily being able to do enough to win" in one turn. I certainly hope you don't go 'all-in' on an opponent if you're absolutely incapable of assessing their options - as well as yours - first. This is where blowouts occur, and ones certainly not always in your favor. Manaless Dredge has the explosive capability of being able to reel off quick wins with impressive hands, but the fact is unless you're playing L.E.D. into Ravings (in conjunction with Street Wraith), your level of explosiveness goes down drastically.

You want to be cautiously optimistic, but at the same time not mercilessly throwing your hand away for the sake of throwing your hand away, because according to this statement -
they are wasting 1 whole turn, in which we could easily do more than enough to win - you seem to be under the impression that no matter what form of acceleration an opponent presents him or herself with to start the game, you automatically decide to go all-in at that point because your opponent is "wasting time" setting up their turns up, where with Contagion, you have the opportunity aside from Sickening Shoal to cripple their productivity, perhaps setting them back two to three turns in the process.


To be honest, your logic fails here also. This is an rather strange comparsion. Another Shoal, A Shadow or a Thug will give -2. Exactly like Contagion does, so only Cabal Therapy is valid here. So it's 4 cards and not 16. And even Cabal Therapy can kill their mana dork if its needed, so it's only 4 cards which matter against Ooze.

My logic is pretty straightforward here, and I think you're just completely missing the overall utility of a card that actually has the ability to kill more than one creature at any given time, whereas Sickening Shoal kills only one creature in the instance being able to kill Knight or Ooze becomes invalid. Two for two is straight-up better than two for one; pretty easy to figure out.

It is sixteen (16) cards because those sixteen cards are incapable of killing an Ooze with a land available to pump it, which is what I was referring to.


Contamination will also fail to kill a Knight ~80% of the time IMO.

I think that number is incredibly inflated, and while I do tend to lean more on the side of agreeing with you that Contagion probably won't kill it, I am more concerned about Ooze in my build aside from yours, because I run Leyline of Sanctity (with L.E.D.) and Bojuka Bog means nothing to me. I am more concerned about killing a "rushed out" Ooze than Knight, and I am a firm believer that opponents will retard their opening hands with some form of hate and a mediocre start otherwise to try and offset the threat of being blown out quickly, which is where Contagion is better than Shoal because you have the choice of what to exile, rather than not having a situational start where Shoal and Therapy are your only two Black cards in hand.

That's kind of awkward.


I do agree, that we will lose ANYWAY, regardless if we have Contagion or Shoal if they have the nut-draw, but I can't see any of your arguments proving that Contamination is better than Shoal.

Contagion is more multilateral in more matchups than simply Maverick and has the ability to potentially set an opponent back who's running Elves or a similarly fast, aggressive start. Sickening Shoal is isolated to one target, and I just don't see your argument why relegating one sideboard card to hitting one creature where you could bring in four other cards that have the ability to kill more than one creature - including the most sought after one - as being a suboptimal choice.

That makes little sense, if any.


Against Elves... 1-2 Elesh Norn is still enough and still needs less space than a "narrow" card like Contamination. ANY Dredge-Player should play at least 1 Elesh in their 75 anyways. There is also Iona, which wrecks Elf-Combo, and Chancellor which slows them down 1 turn. This all should be enough.

I think it's funny how you're referring to Contagion (I know you'll get it right sooner or later, hence the hyperlink attachments) as being "narrow," when you're talking about Elesh Norn who is about as narrow a target there is. It doesn't win a game on the spot like Sphinx or Zealot would, is strictly inferior to Iona in most circumstances, and does nothing but open itself to any form of spot removal in the format. Sphinx, Zealot, Iona, Kelpie, etc. all progress the game in favor of you winning it immediately, where something abhorrently irrelevant like Elesh Norn does nothing but force you to spend a Dread Return on it, rush out a slower attack (nothing with haste), get it Plowed or Pathed, and then run into creatures now capable of killing your attackers.

That not only seems suboptimal, but if you're relegating a sideboard slot to thinking Elesh Norn will 'speed up' your kills, then you're mistaken. Lion's Eye Diamond already speeds the deck up faster by a turn (as Kevin pointed out), so I see no reason - in Manaless Dredge - to opening it up to removal without having a 'CiP' effect that wins on the spot. Elesh Norn is just a bit too slow against Elves unless you get it into play by turn two, in which case they would have gone off on you by then.

Chancellor is a whole other story, and I'm not about to get into that.

[Gui]

I think it's funny how you're referring to Contagion (I know you'll get it right sooner or later, hence the hyperlink attachments)
The discussion is getting some high valid points on both sides, I don't think ad hominem is needed. He got it right already and you quoted him on that, what's the point of this statement?

Everyone makes writing mistakes from time to time, specially when english isn't our native language.

[Michael Keller]

The discussion is getting some high valid points on both sides, I don't think ad hominem is needed. He got it right already and you quoted him on that, what's the point of this statement?

Everyone makes writing mistakes from time to time, specially when english isn't our native language.

He mentioned the word "Contamination" willfully four times throughout his entire post, well-spoken and easy to understand. Please don't speak on his behalf; I can tell when someone speaks English well and there were no grammatical errors as far as card names are concerned. Necro is smart enough to speak for himself.

Thank you.

[Gui]

He mentioned the word "Contamination" willfully four times throughout his entire post, well-spoken and easy to understand. Please don't speak on his behalf; I can tell when someone speaks English well and there were no grammatical errors as far as card names are concerned. Necro is smart enough to speak for himself.

Thank you.

Not saying he isn't smart enough, I just don't like the tone of your statement, whether about Necro or any other person. There's no need for that kind of thing, your ideas are great, but speaking like that diminishes your reliability.

As I said, he wrote it right some times, and you know which card he was talking about. If you were so worried about other people not understanding, you could say that in some other way, that's all.

As far as I can tell, this isn't a private conversation, I'm free to talk if I'm willing to.

[Michael Keller]

Not saying he isn't smart enough, I just don't like the tone of your statement, whether about Necro or any other person. There's no need for that kind of thing, your ideas are great, but speaking like that diminishes your reliability.

As I said, he wrote it right some times, and you know which card he was talking about. If you were so worried about other people not understanding, you could say that in some other way, that's all.

As far as I can tell, this isn't a private conversation, I'm free to talk if I'm willing to.

You're right. I should be a little less personally argumentative in that respect. I apologize. :cool:

[K1w1]

Now back to the good part.
I have a really important question.
My opponent plays surgical extraction with the target " Bridge from below ", and i'm discarding faerie macabre in response, target Bridge too. Is it true, that my other bridges are removed, which are in my Deck? I really cant understand it, if its true. There is no target after my faerie discard.

[Michael Keller]

Now back to the good part.
I have a really important question.
My opponent plays surgical extraction with the target " Bridge from below ", and i'm discarding faerie macabre in response, target Bridge too. Is it true, that my other bridges are removed, which are in my Deck? I really cant understand it, if its true. There is no target after my faerie discard.

Upon resolution of the Faerie's activated ability, the targeted Bridge will become exiled and there will be no target for Extraction to follow through with, thus leaving all your Bridges left in your deck in tact.

[HokusSchmokus]

Just to add something here: Necro and me are playing in about 90% the same meta, And the density of Dredge and GW is extremely high around here. Therefor, Elesh Zorn is quite neccessary and we may be a bit biased when it comes to this.


Gonna have me some Dredge action again on sunday and I might as well try out manaless with LED and ravings, though most likely a different SB than Hollywoods list. This looks so much fun!

[KevinTrudeau]

Just to add something here: Necro and me are playing in about 90% the same meta, And the density of Dredge and GW is extremely high around here. Therefor, Elesh Zorn is quite neccessary and we may be a bit biased when it comes to this.


Gonna have me some Dredge action again on sunday and I might as well try out manaless with LED and ravings, though most likely a different SB than Hollywoods list. This looks so much fun!

I've actually been liking the idea of running two DR targets, the second one at the expense of the sixteenth dredger (if one were to choose playing more than twelve dredgers as opposed to ~eight opening hand effects) after playing around with that Bloodghast list (I'm still not sold on them); this decreases the likelihood of keeping an opening seven by two percent (91-89%), but gives you a lot of outs in situations were FKZ just won't do much, and opens up a slot in the sideboard. I've been trying out Angel of Despair, but I understand that Deutschland there's a bunch of Maverick, so Elesh Norn makes the most sense there. Make sure that you're running a minimum of two Sphinx of Lost Truths though. I'd highly, highly recommend three, as Sphinx is the great river upon which you can navigate your way towards the precise tributaries (FKZ, Elesh) that lead to victory. If you dry up the great river by running too many tributaries, you're more likely to be fucked. Sorry for the nautical metaphor, I'm very tired.

Yes, few things are more fun in Legacy than opening a Manaless Dredge hand with LED and a few cantrips.

@Hollywood- I now know why your name is Hollywood.

[tetesc89]

Hi guys.
I have some questions, i am testing manaless dredge.
Why prefers Yourmelia's Gay list over the nicholas rausch list?
I dont understand the faerie macabre, only to remove with ichorid, and other creature two nether shadow?
Why dont like Gigapede?
Its more consistence a bloodghast+dakmore list?
Thanks!

[Daodras]

While I don't think I'd ever agree Faerie Macabre is a serious MD consideration [...]

Hija Guys!
I'm completely new to thesource (so you have to forgive me that I don't know yet :laugh:), but I can't see the sense of a Faerie Macabre, too.
I was fascinated by this thread and had to try out the deck (I only read pages one to three and the last two ones, so I tried the first and third deck (no1 being posted by JohnCox and no3 by FinalFortune) and the last one from page 24, by Hollwood.

I played 32 games, one lost due to unability (and unexperience), all the others won. My humble opinion here is that LED / Ravings is essential - but I never came to use one of the Faeries. I could see a meaning in playing these AGAINST manaless ichorid, but IN the deck?

Yeah, well, would be nice if someone could explain this to me. Huhm, I think that I, at least, found this:


Upon resolution of the Faerie's activated ability, the targeted Bridge will become exiled and there will be no target for Extraction to follow through with, thus leaving all your Bridges left in your deck in tact.

Thanks to Hollywood here alreday, but...
Is that the only thing it's supposed to do? Has the Macabre noother option? Would be poor, would'nt it?
Can't I just leave 'em out and put, like one more Serum Powder and one Sphinx, in it?

Ah and second question what do I play against Yixlid Jailer , I've had this problem once...

Thanks and greetings,
daodras

[Vandalize]

Ah and second question what do I play against Yixlid Jailer , I've had this problem once...

Thanks and greetings,
daodras

Contagion might be the only viable option for Manaless Ichorid. Still, Yixlid Jailer is just like Leyline of the Void for this deck, just dodge it.

[GoldenCid]

Hey folks!! Pretty dead this topic. Give it life with my list for needed, really, suggestions:

// Deck file for Magic Workstation (http://www.magicworkstation.com)

// Creatures
4 [TO] Ichorid
1 [RAV] Flame-Kin Zealot
4 [PLC] Phantasmagorian
4 [FUT] Street Wraith
4 [RAV] Golgari Grave-Troll
4 [RAV] Shambling Shell
4 [R] Nether Shadow
4 [FUT] Narcomoeba
4 [RAV] Golgari Thug
4 [RAV] Stinkweed Imp
2 [ZEN] Sphinx of Lost Truths
1 [ZEN] Iona, Shield of Emeria
4 [SHM] Faerie Macabre

// Spells
4 [TSP] Dread Return
4 [JU] Cabal Therapy
4 [FUT] Bridge from Below
4 [NPH] Gitaxian Probe

// Sideboard
SB: 4 [M11] Leyline of Sanctity
SB: 4 [AL] Contagion
SB: 4 [NPH] Chancellor of the Annex
SB: 3 [ZEN] Mindbreak Trap

I'll try to edit this post in order to get more acceptance. This is the decklist i built some time ago. MD is pretty standar with the exception that it has no "vindicate creatures" maybe i cuould cut 1 sphynk or iona in order to include Angel of Despair. The main concern is in side.

Usually i use leyline + chancellor to fight grave hate
Chancellor and trap to fight combo.
And contagion to fight jailer (loose to leyline of the void and cage is just to much).

Most of people uses a "tool box" of creature. Could you suggest me some cards for the side??

Thx!!

[Gui]

So, this deck isn't dead, huh?

http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/deck.php?id=8039&iddeck=58596

[Final Fortune]

Provided you dodges Leyline and Cage like a ninja, it should still be viable.

[NecroYawgmoth]

Provided you dodges Leyline and Cage like a ninja, it should still be viable.

THIS

Also, Grieselbrand should be better in this Dredge-Build than in any other build.

[Gui]

Provided you dodges Leyline and Cage like a ninja, it should still be viable.

It's fun, because a friend of mine invented (or at least modifyed) this list which I took the liberty of slightly modifying, and is built exactly to fight Leylines and Cages, and can even side Nature's Claim to g2, and also features Firestorm:


// Lands
1 City of Brass
4 Gemstone Mine
4 Undiscovered Paradise

// Creatures
4 Golgari Grave-Troll
4 Stinkweed Imp
4 Golgari Thug
4 Ichorid
4 Narcomoeba
4 Nether Shadow
4 Street Wraith
4 Phantasmagorian
1 Angel of Despair
1 Sphinx of Lost Truths
1 Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite

// Spells
4 Cabal Therapy
4 Bridge from Below
4 Firestorm
4 Dread Return

// Sideboard
SB: 1 Sphinx of Lost Truths
SB: 1 Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite
SB: 4 Nature's Claim
SB: 1 Sadistic Hypnotist
SB: 2 Ingot Chewer
SB: 2 Emerald Charm
SB: 4 Faerie Macabre

[GoldenCid]

Provided you dodges Leyline and Cage like a ninja, it should still be viable.

Do you say this because of acidic slime¿?¿?

The thing i see in the side (the maindeck is identical of mine) is the savage ghast plan!

[NecroYawgmoth]

Do you say this because of acidic slime¿?¿?

The thing i see in the side (the maindeck is identical of mine) is the savage ghast plan!

He says it because this deck autoscoops to Leyline and Cage.

[GoldenCid]

He says it because this deck autoscoops to Leyline and Cage.

Are they that much played???

[Mindlash]

Are they that much played???

Haven't seen Leyline in a while. Cage is played in more decks in my experience. But the most hate I'm running into is Extirpate/Extraction, Ooze, random Tormod's / Bojukas which are not that problematic for Manaless Dredge despite the early Ooze with a bad hand (which can occure due to the inability to mulligan).

The biggest problem is the chance of running into Leyline/Cage despite the fact that they are not seeing much play.
You can make it to Nr.1 the one tournament without ever encountering them. But you can also face them nearly every match and be killed by Combo the other games for a 0-x-0 finish :-/

Like Hollywood said in his new primer: Such an ultimatum is not something a competitive player wants when choosing a deck to play, but it certainly can be challenging.

[Gui]

Also, Grieselbrand should be better in this Dredge-Build than in any other build.

I know, right? I'll have to test it, mostly because of the 7 life points investment. It doesn't happen that often, specially because I only use 1 in my maindeck, but every time I DR a sphinx, I win the game. So it's hard to say if Griselbrand is needed, but it certainly looks strong.

[Final Fortune]

If nothing else, I think Flayer of the Hatebound should probably replace Flame Kin Zealot considering we already play 4 Dread Return to begin with.

[Mindlash]

If nothing else, I think Flayer of the Hatebound should probably replace Flame Kin Zealot considering we already play 4 Dread Return to begin with.

He works pretty good here. I also addet a bunch of Ghasts to the mix (the list I posted in the new Primer earlier) and they are really nice with Flayer. DR one of the 3 Sphinx which dredges me to Flayer, Landdrop for Ghasts who generally burn the Opp to 10 or below and go into hasted attackmode :D

Griesel might be better than Sphinx here. I sometimes encountert problems with DR on Flayer cuz I used most of them to find the Flayer :-/ Griesel doesn't need the DR -> Sphinx -> Sac to Cabal -> DR again until Flayer thing. He can use his Ability multiple times on his own.

I am not sure if its doable HP-wise. Street Wraith and Probe eat up a good chunk of your life already.

Gisela might work in Manaless as well in Combination with Flayer as win condition. She also augments your already high count on reccuring threats like Ichorid, Ghasts, Shadows. Something like 2 Griselbrand, 1 Gisela and 1 Flayer might work here. But once your life is too low due to Burnspells, Probes etc Grisel becomes useless and Sphinx shines again...

Continue testing (GlaDos Voice)

[Gui]

If nothing else, I think Flayer of the Hatebound should probably replace Flame Kin Zealot considering we already play 4 Dread Return to begin with.

Honestly, in the list I'm using above, I don't miss FKZ, and don't think I need a way to win right away. Maybe it's because I don't play much against combo, but for the other match-ups, winning the next turn is enough.
But well the list I play is relatively different too.