[Deck] Death and Taxes

[Adan]

'You get some free wins' is not a small thing. Free wins are huge. DnT operates on super thin margins, especially against fair and midrange decks where turn 2 Thalia isn't the free win. The question is what is the real cost of these new free wins. Yes - you can lose to Blood Moon, but it doesn't actually happen that often - especially not in W/R builds. W/B is a little softer, since a Blood Moon does in fact prevent you from hard-casting some of your cards + people are more likely to actually try to Blood Moon you when you don't play red.

No, both splash builds are equally prone to the variance a fast Blood Moon brings. When that happens, I'll prefer to be the monoW variant with 10 Plains rather than running the splash with 3 Plains. I mean, you are seriously argueing that W/R has Magus that they can hardcast against Moon. It's a fcking 2/2 vanilla for 3 mana in that scenario, it's not going to get anything done really. You need to be able to cast creatures that are actually disruptive or represent a clock, most of these cost W or WW. And you can't tell me that the splash builds are equally likely do draw into Plains to cast Thalia. If you are one lucky guy who always has Aether Vial in his opening hand, I get it, this chance is equal in both builds, but in these scenarios I am certain that the WR build is more likely to lose a game against an early Blood Moon.


Splash builds are a tad softer to Wasteland, but not as much as people think. I usually play 3 Plains 5 Fetch in my splash builds, which gives you exactly as many basic land sources as the mono-white deck that won the GP. If you fetch for basics aggressively vs Wasteland decks, you can barely feel the difference between a splash build and mono-w.

This comparison is not accurate. Imagine you're on the draw against Delver and you keep a hand with 2 fetches, Aether Vial, Mother of Runes and some other good cards. You are not in a position to play around Stifle with this kind of hand, you definitely go fetch Plains, Vial, go. Now if your opponent casts Stifle, you're in a super bad shape. And that example opening hand will never be mulled. And in this case, fetches added another kind of variance to this whole scenario.


So your free wins aren't free. But are they expensive? No, I don't think so. Every deck-building decision is a trade-off and I think that the free wins far outvalue the small edges you lose above, especially since you can manage those things. Don't let Wasteland be good against you, don't get overly greedy with your splash requirements.

And while even splash builds are still 'fair' decks, Blood Moon is not really a 'fair' effect. Neither is Chalice, which has been the route the Europeans have been going down. These are unfair fair cards. They don't cheat a Griselbrand in play, but they tend to end the game on the spot.

So does Sanctum Prelate.

Overall I am just questioning this splash since there is no data or evidence to convince me that splashing red has any advantage over staying monoW. I still have the same problems as before and don't really gain some win% against my bad matchups.

[tescrin]

rather than garbage cards like Stifle.
You've never played Stifle have you..?

Are you saying that when someone stifles your SFM you're the type who goes "LOL 2-for-1!" because you got a 1/2?
You showed them. You showed them all.

[iatee]

No, both splash builds are equally prone to the variance a fast Blood Moon brings. When that happens, I'll prefer to be the monoW variant with 10 Plains rather than running the splash with 3 Plains. I mean, you are seriously argueing that W/R has Magus that they can hardcast against Moon. It's a fcking 2/2 vanilla for 3 mana in that scenario, it's not going to get anything done really. You need to be able to cast creatures that are actually disruptive or represent a clock, most of these cost W or WW. And you can't tell me that the splash builds are equally likely do draw into Plains to cast Thalia. If you are one lucky guy who always has Aether Vial in his opening hand, I get it, this chance is equal in both builds, but in these scenarios I am certain that the WR build is more likely to lose a game against an early Blood Moon.



This comparison is not accurate. Imagine you're on the draw against Delver and you keep a hand with 2 fetches, Aether Vial, Mother of Runes and some other good cards. You are not in a position to play around Stifle with this kind of hand, you definitely go fetch Plains, Vial, go. Now if your opponent casts Stifle, you're in a super bad shape. And that example opening hand will never be mulled. And in this case, fetches added another kind of variance to this whole scenario.



So does Sanctum Prelate.

Overall I am just questioning this splash since there is no data or evidence to convince me that splashing red has any advantage over staying monoW. I still have the same problems as before and don't really gain some win% against my bad matchups.

With 5 fetchlands, a minority of your opening hands even have a fetchland to get stifled. An even smaller number will have nothing but fetchlands to develop your mana early. I'm not gonna do the math on 'how many opening hands have 2 fetchlands but no other lands' but there is a roughly ~10% chance that your hand will have 2 or more fetchlands, so the chance of the situation you described is much lower than that. You'd multiply my previous % by the % chance that you're playing a Stifle Delver player, oh and they actually have Stifle. And they're on the play. The resulting number is so small that it's barely even worth considering. If I had to put a ratio on the number of games where a Delver Stifle-your-fetch was a significant setback vs the number of games that I won on the spot vs Delver with a Magus of the Moon, it would be something like 1 to 25.

Vs. fast Blood Moon decks, if you are on the play (or they don't have a turn 1 Blood Moon) you have ~ 9 Plains sources to get in play turn 1. If you're on the draw and they have a turn 1 Blood Moon, you still have Vials and some basics, so you're better off than most legacy decks against a resolved Blood Moon, but yes that's not a great spot to be in. Obviously any splash build is softer to a fast Blood Moon - especially a turn 1 Blood Moon. But the number of turn 1 Blood Moons on the draw you're gonna face is again, not really a substantial number. Blood Moon is a powerful effect - other Blood Moon decks exist and you can lose to it. You also can win with it - that happens more often.

Overall - I'm not denying that these things happen, I'm arguing that you aren't putting proper value on their frequencies.

There are a lot more Deathrite Shamans out there than Stifles and Blood Moons - giving Deathrite Shaman food is relevant. I think UR Delver is a legitimate tier 1 deck and Burn is already a somewhat rough matchup - you see those decks a lot, and getting softer vs Price + giving them a few free points of damage via your fetches over a match - those things are relevant. These are widely played decks and widely played effects and you're marginally worse off vs them. Magus is also a Grey Ogre g1 vs a certain % of the field - in some cases (e.g. vs Griselbrand decks), worse than a Grey Ogre, since he turns off your Karakas. That's relevant. Stifle...is not.

[Griselpuff]

With 5 fetchlands, a minority of your opening hands even have a fetchland to get stifled. An even smaller number will have nothing but fetchlands to develop your mana early. I'm not gonna do the math on 'how many opening hands have 2 fetchlands but no other lands' but there is a roughly ~10% chance that your hand will have 2 or more fetchlands, so the chance of the situation you described is much lower than that. You'd multiply my previous % by the % chance that you're playing a Stifle Delver player, oh and they actually have Stifle. And they're on the play. The resulting number is so small that it's barely even worth considering. If I had to put a ratio on the number of games where a Delver Stifle-your-fetch was a significant setback vs the number of games that I won on the spot vs Delver with a Magus of the Moon, it would be something like 1 to 25.

Vs. fast Blood Moon decks, if you are on the play (or they don't have a turn 1 Blood Moon) you have ~ 9 Plains sources to get in play turn 1. If you're on the draw and they have a turn 1 Blood Moon, you still have Vials and some basics, so you're better off than most legacy decks against a resolved Blood Moon, but yes that's not a great spot to be in. Obviously any splash build is softer to a fast Blood Moon - especially a turn 1 Blood Moon. But the number of turn 1 Blood Moons on the draw you're gonna face is again, not really a substantial number. Blood Moon is a powerful effect - other Blood Moon decks exist and you can lose to it. You also can win with it - that happens more often.

Overall - I'm not denying that these things happen, I'm arguing that you aren't putting proper value on their frequencies.

There are a lot more Deathrite Shamans out there than Stifles and Blood Moons - giving Deathrite Shaman food is relevant. I think UR Delver is a legitimate tier 1 deck and Burn is already a somewhat rough matchup - you see those decks a lot, and getting softer vs Price + giving them a few free points of damage via your fetches over a match - those things are relevant. These are widely played decks and widely played effects and you're marginally worse off vs them. Magus is also a Grey Ogre g1 vs a certain % of the field - in some cases (e.g. vs Griselbrand decks), worse than a Grey Ogre, since he turns off your Karakas. That's relevant. Stifle...is not.

Too much analysis, not enough Ogreing. What did you do with the real iatee?

[grayryker]

Talking about turn 1 Blood Moon on the draw and Stifle seems like a pretty narrow argument to discredit an entire strategy. But I can understand the concern here is: to what degree does splashing hurt the mana base of DnT?

Depending on how you construct it, very little. The deck I'm using right now is: http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/mardu-dnt-2017-1/

The deck is 80+% human tribal and the advantage is that you can abuse 4 Cavern of Souls. Cavern significantly mitigates the downside of splashing, combined with Aether Vial, and I only need to play 1 dual of each color. I could technically play more basics (currently 5) but I'm testing 3 Wasteland and seeing how effective they are. Notice I'm not running any ports or karakas (yeah call me a heretic) and you can read my explanation there.



In my opinion, Magus is the best card you can have against the fair strategies - hell even some unfair ones. It's certainly not Mirran Crusader - a card which I increasingly value less and less. A card that gets blown away by 5 bolt effects in Grixis Delver/4c control and is too unreliable without equipment sounds like an easy cut to me. Alas, I still have one copy in the main. What about Serra Avenger? Also unreliable and being double white + angel type makes her a big pain to cast. But Magus? Magus puts serious mana constraints on your opponent especially game 1 when they least expect it. That's why you should run 1-2 magus in the main. Because my deck is not heavy on double white casting costs, Magus is quite a bit better in my build than builds that try to run Flickerwisp. It's also stronger against opposing Blood Moon strategies.

And I almost forgot to mention: Dark Confidant and Orzhov Pontiff. Because Death and Taxes is inherently a mana hungry deck and has few card selections, Dark Confidant is phenomenal here. I would argue Bob is better here than in Deadguy Ale. Why? Because of Mother of Runes and 4 Cavern of Souls. Pontiff is the next best thing from the black splash. It's our best out to Pyromancer and True-Name Nemesis, among other things like Elves.


My reasons for eliminating Port and Flickerwisp is really that they are not great without an Aether Vial in play. Port is way better in Goblins and Lands where they either have more ways to cheat creatures in or don't have to proactively advance the board with creatures. With Miracles gone, I find less incentive to run Port. Even ghost quarters is better than port right now. Actually my next experiment is to run ghost quarters over wasteland. Opponents scared of Blood Moon games 2 and 3 will fetch their 1-of basics and quite possibly get screwed hard.

But what to replace Port with? After much testing, I decided on 5 Sol Lands. My original reason for running them was to turbo out a turn 1 Chalice of the Void. But I found out Tomb and CoT are just absolutely insane with creatures and equipments. I wanted to abuse them further by trying to have at least six 3-cmc creatures with one white cost (2 recruiter, 2 Thalia HC, 2 vryn wingmare). Unlike Port that is a reactive way of asking "Did I mana screw you? Maybe?", Tomb and CoT are proactively asking 'hey I'm accelerating these bombs on turn 2 and two creatures on turn 3. Can you answer them? Also I'm backing them with my friend Cavern."

[WashableWater1]

Flickerwisp has won me more games than I can count by just being a temporary vindicate. Or Batterskull reset. Or Stoneforge trigger. Or token killer. Or Chalice killer. Or Recruiter trigger. Or Revoker reset. My biggest gripe with adding red to the deck was that it made Flickerwisp worse and made me unable to play Avenger, while also shut down many of my own cards. The mana goes from being great to being between decent and awkward. If your hand is a Magus and only one fetch as a colored source, what do you do?

Being extremely favored against Turbo Moon may not be something thats going to come up particularly often, but making that matchup worse for marginal gains in other matchups does not seem worth it. As I have understood it, the move towards red was borne out of a fear of Elves making a big comeback, and the red version has a better matchup there. This did not come to pass, and I find Magus to be very unexciting against the top decks.

[Curby]

I definitely think Flickerwisp is one of the better cards in the deck. Flexibility is key for a control deck that can't just say "no" to any spell, and Flickerwisp gives a ton of flexibility.


As I have understood it, the move towards red was borne out of a fear of Elves making a big comeback, and the red version has a better matchup there.

That might have been part of it, but everything from Pontiff (Black splash) to Holy Light (mono-white) would have been additional answers to Elves without going Red. Instead, Red is more for Magus, which is more for Leovold decks, Lands, and other decks that get greedy or tricky with land.

[iatee]

Splash builds can play fewer Caverns and as many Flickerwisp/Avengers as you want - I'm actually playing 2 Serra Avenger at the moment. I even have more pure white sources than Calderon's GP winning mono-w deck did. (13 - 5 fetch 4 Plains 1 Plateau 3 Karakas.)

I honestly think that in the big picture, the manabase issues are trivial. Our normal manabase is *so* not-greedy compared to the average legacy manabase, and while we get some value from that, you don't actually need 12 basic lands to play around Wasteland and Blood Moon. It's overkill. You don't get an extra prize for having a ton of copies of the card Plains in play. (I guess there's always Emeria, the Sky Ruin...) People have even been having success with 3c builds with Ancient Tomb which shows that there's room to be *super* greedy. And I don't think we need to go that far, but that's evidence that you can totally get away with it.

I think the better arguments against Magus would rather be 'well that's not the best use of the maindeck flex spot'. Which I think is sometimes true. If your local meta is SnS, Reanimator, Burn, UR Delver, Dnt then Magus is actually a pretty terrible use of a flex spot and red offers you pretty little in additional sidebord options. If your expected meta is DnT, Elves, Stoneblade decks, red still offers you some good sideboard tech, but maybe Orzhov Pontiff is a more attractive flex spot. One of my friends was the second highest DnT finisher at the GP at 12-3 (two of his loses were Belcher and Elves) and he did it with a Pontiff splash.

In any case, I don't think that 'marginal gains in other matchups' is the right way to describe the way cards like Magus and Orzhov Pontiff play. They tend to win on the spot, and can win in situations where nothing else could - which is not something you'll often say about Serra Avenger.

[iatee]

Too much analysis, not enough Ogreing. What did you do with the real iatee?

Feel like I'm not getting enough credit for baiting a Stifle-player.

[Curby]

I don't think that 'marginal gains in other matchups' is the right way to describe the way cards like Magus and Orzhov Pontiff play. They tend to win on the spot, and can win in situations where nothing else could - which is not something you'll often say about Serra Avenger.

This is exactly what I was talking about on the last page. I agree that metagame is a consideration, but so is playstyle. Do you prefer a deck with big swingy plays like Magus, or a deck that has more consistent options? If it comes to the point where the more consistent option is ineffective, I think it's a bad sign for D&T in general: that could be a signal that D&T's core is no longer (as) viable, and that it requires lining up the performance peaks of swingy cards like Magus against the right matchups and board states in order to succeed.

[zakzes]

Talking about turn 1 Blood Moon on the draw and Stifle seems like a pretty narrow argument to discredit an entire strategy. But I can understand the concern here is: to what degree does splashing hurt the mana base of DnT?

Depending on how you construct it, very little. The deck I'm using right now is: http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/mardu-dnt-2017-1/

The deck is 80+% human tribal and the advantage is that you can abuse 4 Cavern of Souls. Cavern significantly mitigates the downside of splashing, combined with Aether Vial, and I only need to play 1 dual of each color. I could technically play more basics (currently 5) but I'm testing 3 Wasteland and seeing how effective they are. Notice I'm not running any ports or karakas (yeah call me a heretic) and you can read my explanation there.
."

You've cut quite a bit of the core out of D&T. Flickerwisp certainly loses a lot of power without Vial, but Vial+Flickerwisp is of the more powerful combos we have in the deck. A vial on 3 means Flickerwisp has to be respected. Karakas give us so much protection for both our own threats as well as against our opponent's. Also we tend to play Wasteland at virtually no cost. I could be clinging too much to our core, but I feel playing less than 4 is rough, especially with no ports to help leverage the mana denial plan.

[grayryker]

Splash builds can play fewer Caverns and as many Flickerwisp/Avengers as you want - I'm actually playing 2 Serra Avenger at the moment. I even have more pure white sources than Calderon's GP winning mono-w deck did. (13 - 5 fetch 4 Plains 1 Plateau 3 Karakas.)

I honestly think that in the big picture, the manabase issues are trivial. Our normal manabase is *so* not-greedy compared to the average legacy manabase, and while we get some value from that, you don't actually need 12 basic lands to play around Wasteland and Blood Moon. It's overkill. You don't get an extra prize for having a ton of copies of the card Plains in play. (I guess there's always Emeria, the Sky Ruin...) People have even been having success with 3c builds with Ancient Tomb which shows that there's room to be *super* greedy. And I don't think we need to go that far, but that's evidence that you can totally get away with it.

I think the better arguments against Magus would rather be 'well that's not the best use of the maindeck flex spot'. Which I think is sometimes true. If your local meta is SnS, Reanimator, Burn, UR Delver, Dnt then Magus is actually a pretty terrible use of a flex spot and red offers you pretty little in additional sidebord options. If your expected meta is DnT, Elves, Stoneblade decks, red still offers you some good sideboard tech, but maybe Orzhov Pontiff is a more attractive flex spot. One of my friends was the second highest DnT finisher at the GP at 12-3 (two of his loses were Belcher and Elves) and he did it with a Pontiff splash.

In any case, I don't think that 'marginal gains in other matchups' is the right way to describe the way cards like Magus and Orzhov Pontiff play. They tend to win on the spot, and can win in situations where nothing else could - which is not something you'll often say about Serra Avenger.


Yes definitely one can choose to play Flickerwisps and Serra Avenger in a splash build. The reason why I'm not doing this myself is because my deck isn't simply a splash - it's geared towards colorless acceleration. Also, to add to what you're saying: Miracles played 6 basics and it was considered a 'basic heavy' deck. Well maybe that notion is a misconception because I have seen Magus lock down a couple Miracles couple of times but my argument still stands :wink:. When playing with fetches, 4-6 basic land is plenty especially in a strictly-mono-color deck such as DnT.

One thing I want to emphasize though is that my build is not a heavy color splash at all - hence, not super greedy. It's more accurately mono white + colorless. The color requirements come largely from Aether Vial and Cavern of Souls, which I'm willing to play regardless of splashes or not. To add a bit of consistency, I added the 4 fetches to ensure I can hit a turn 2 Dark Confidant and turn 3-5 Magus of the Moon.

Right now the problem with DnT is that there is no universally good beater. Both Crusader and Serra Avengers have their pros and cons. We want human type + flying + vigilance + protection + x > 3 toughness. Is this too much to ask for WoTC? Perhaps a better solution is to simply run more removals. If we don't have the creatures that can play defense, why not just play more Path to Exile and Blessed Alliance?




You've cut quite a bit of the core out of D&T. Flickerwisp certainly loses a lot of power without Vial, but Vial+Flickerwisp is of the more powerful combos we have in the deck. A vial on 3 means Flickerwisp has to be respected. Karakas give us so much protection for both our own threats as well as against our opponent's. Also we tend to play Wasteland at virtually no cost. I could be clinging too much to our core, but I feel playing less than 4 is rough, especially with no ports to help leverage the mana denial plan.

I'll make it very clear that I believe with vial in play, Flickerwisp becomes the best creature in the deck. But what I'll point to you is the numbers. You have roughly 40% to one or more Aether Vial in your opening hand (for simplicity, let's not consider mulligans and 0 land hands). Out of this 40%, whether you are on the draw or not, there is a reasonable chance that it will be countered; if on the draw, chance that it's discarded.

The irony of Wasteland in D&T is that there are better wasteland decks out there. Delver is a good example. The deck can operate on one land and simply find more lands with cantrips. Let's also not forget about Deathrite Shaman, which is a huge factor in how well they can utilize Wasteland. With D&T, we absolutely need an Aether Vial in play so that we can use our Ports and Wasteland to mana denial the opponent while simultaneously advancing the board. Without an aether vial, we're either leaving our ports to get wasteland'd or simply using it as a colorless source until roughly turn 4+ (by then your opponent can often get around mana problems); this is obvious since we need mana to cast creatures.

My replacement for ports come from a variety of things: more focus on the 3-cmc taxes like Thalia HC and Vryn Wingmare as well as the Magus of the Moon strategy. In my experience, these are consistently more powerful in denying the mana of the opponent. They're also better when you don't have the ideal Aether Vial in play, relying just on Sol Lands to dish out taxes after taxes.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

Right now the problem with DnT is that there is no universally good beater. Both Crusader and Serra Avengers have their pros and cons. We want human type + flying + vigilance + protection + x > 3 toughness.



All I have to say is I do NOT want the "best" beater to have a toughness greater than 3. I would very much like to be able to tutor for my beater, ideally. It's why I have disliked Avenger for so long, and while I've got her in my list currently, if they printed a version of Kor Skyfisher with a toughness 2, I'd drop her immediately.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[zakzes]

Flickerwisp is still a pretty powerful creature without vial. And certainly our win% increases more when opening with vial, but our deck hardly falls to pieces without it.

[WashableWater1]

All I have to say is I do NOT want the "best" beater to have a toughness greater than 3. I would very much like to be able to tutor for my beater, ideally. It's why I have disliked Avenger for so long, and while I've got her in my list currently, if they printed a version of Kor Skyfisher with a toughness 2, I'd drop her immediately.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

I've never understood this mindset. If you have one tutorable beater (Stoneforge or 1 Crusader or a Flickerwisp) then why does having another threat that is not tutorable a factor?

[grayryker]

Flickerwisp is still a pretty powerful creature without vial. And certainly our win% increases more when opening with vial, but our deck hardly falls to pieces without it.

You're right it's still a decent creature. But what I'm pointing out is that eliminating Flickerwisp opens up a lot of unconventional but powerful deck configurations that this deck has not explored before. We cannot simply talk about how good Flickerwisp is; we must talk about how good the alternative is and compare.

[Stevestamopz]

All I have to say is I do NOT want the "best" beater to have a toughness greater than 3. I would very much like to be able to tutor for my beater, ideally. It's why I have disliked Avenger for so long, and while I've got her in my list currently, if they printed a version of Kor Skyfisher with a toughness 2, I'd drop her immediately.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

http://static.starcitygames.com/sales/cardscans/MTG/PLC/en/nonfoil/Stonecloaker.jpg

Is this the droid you're looking for? (it's not, this card sucks).

[Bryant Cook]

https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/19780493_10155516650889704_7753101733681075055_o.jpg?oh=2e9296e49adc96277562d652e5226cd3&oe=5A10D098

[colo]

Is this the droid you're looking for? (it's not, this card sucks).

It is (it doesn't, it actually rules supreme).

[Secretly.A.Bee]

http://static.starcitygames.com/sales/cardscans/MTG/PLC/en/nonfoil/Stonecloaker.jpg

Is this the droid you're looking for? (it's not, this card sucks).
No. It says creature, not permanent. It costs 1 more. No.

It is (it doesn't, it actually rules supreme).
No. Hot garbage.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[Secretly.A.Bee]

I've never understood this mindset. If you have one tutorable beater (Stoneforge or 1 Crusader or a Flickerwisp) then why does having another threat that is not tutorable a factor?
Drawing Crusader early can be a problem. If they deal with him, I have no other way to find an Avenger than to lucksack into one. If I draw Avenger early, I'm fine because my other beater is tutorable.

Applying a meaningful amount of pressure in a certain window of time is often the way to win, and not doing a substantial amount of damage in that window can definitely lead to a loss, so I would love another playable beater with flying that can be tutored for via RotG. I don't care if they can bolt it.

Edit: sorry for the double-post. I spaced the earlier post, it's a busy, stressful day.

[WashableWater1]

Drawing Crusader early can be a problem. If they deal with him, I have no other way to find an Avenger than to lucksack into one. If I draw Avenger early, I'm fine because my other beater is tutorable.

Applying a meaningful amount of pressure in a certain window of time is often the way to win, and not doing a substantial amount of damage in that window can definitely lead to a loss, so I would love another playable beater with flying that can be tutored for via RotG. I don't care if they can bolt it.

Edit: sorry for the double-post. I spaced the earlier post, it's a busy, stressful day.

Flickerwisp and Stoneforge both fill that role

[Secretly.A.Bee]

I get that they have ways of functioning that can be construed as beats, but flickerwisp is super fragile and stoneforge is really slow. Also, I'm already playing 4 of each, so unless one of them has a functional reprint, it's no help to say that.

I want a 3/2 flyer that is better than stonecloaker. There.

Edit: I'd take a 4/1 flyer even, and I'd take something that costs 4, but only ww in the cost, no triple color requirement though.

[Curby]

I want a 3/2 flyer that is better than stonecloaker.

I've heard Delver of Secrets is pretty good.

Seriously though, if you're looking for tutorable beats (i.e. you have Recruiter in play or in hand), why NOT get Flickerwisp? Yes 1 toughness is not ideal, but Recruiter means multiple additional Flickerwisps. Tempo may be an issue but they've got to run out of removal at some point if you keep chaining 'wisps off Recruiter.

On the other hand, your hypothetical 3/2 still dies to P.Fire, Push, Bolt, Decay, Swords, Path, Lavamancer, Massacre, and Delver and can't be easily augmented with additional copies via Recruiter.

[Siracho]

I get that they have ways of functioning that can be construed as beats, but flickerwisp is super fragile and stoneforge is really slow. Also, I'm already playing 4 of each, so unless one of them has a functional reprint, it's no help to say that.

I want a 3/2 flyer that is better than stonecloaker. There.

Edit: I'd take a 4/1 flyer even, and I'd take something that costs 4, but only ww in the cost, no triple color requirement though.

why dont you play just more copies of avenger, so that you dont have to recruiter for them? I play a build with 4 avenger, 4 flicker, 4 stoneforge, 1 crusader, 4 revoker, 2 spirit of the labyrinth main and 3 canonist side. But no recruiters. In that build, if i would draw a recruiter, i often wouldnt know what to tutor for exept for flicker loop. But i play enough flyers and beaters anyways. The only downside of that build is that you dont have the additional card advantage of recruiter. But i miss it only in very few games. Often i dont need the card advatage, because my beaters are better than true names or anglers etc... Because i draw so many of them. Its ok for me, if my opponent draws more cards than me, but he cant beat my avengers/flickers/crusader/equ. anyways.

[grayryker]

I've been thinking about creatures that can replace Crusader and Serra Avenger. One creature I have my mind on is this: http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=369098

Basically he has pseudo hexproof for black, red, and green; it gets hit by Swords to Plowshares so it's bad in the mirror but quite good against other midrange decks. Being indestructible is nice for Jitte combat and makes him a great defender against Goyfs and Angler. Four mana can be an issue if you don't play sol lands. Dies to most -/- boardwipes but can actually be good against things like pyroclasm. Wish he had vigilance though.

It doesn't die to TNN which is nice but the only real way to deal with that card isn't running a bunch of flyers but to run things like Orzhov Pontiff and Magus to shut off double blue mana.

Overall, I'm not optimistic but I'm willing to test it out in a few key match-ups. Let the ridicule commence.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

Don't do it, bro. Let's just keep waiting. I've looked a lot specifically (since the printing of Recruiter) for the best tutor target with flying. So far it's Flickerwisp, and I do chain them when I can, but now that Terminus isn't the most played board wipe any more, it's not nearly as strong as it once was.

I guess maybe I'm looking for a replacement for Spirit of the Labyrinth. I just want two tutorable beaters that are good in different matchups. I'll drop the Spirit for Angel #3 when I get the chance to, to see if quantity is a reasonable substitute for being able to tutor for it as needed.


Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[iatee]

He also gets hit by Karakas in the mirror. For a 4 drop to be playable in legacy, it pretty much has to be game ending. Something like Tajic is gonna be a pretty solid card when you get it on the board, but it doesn't come with the same card advantage that cards like Pia/Kiran and Palace Jailer do. I generally don't mind ticking a Vial to 4 to get those guys out because it's hard to lose after they get going. Whereas Tajic can be ignored or chump blocked when you can afford to make those alpha strikes - and you generally can't.

It would be cool if they printed some pushed RW legendary creatures, but I don't think this guy is one. He didn't see Standard play. He was pretty solid for me in a limited game once...

[Fry]

http://static.starcitygames.com/sales/cardscans/MTG/PLC/en/nonfoil/Stonecloaker.jpg

Is this the droid you're looking for? (it's not, this card sucks).

I've used it in Modern as a 1 of, flash fliers are very nice, also saving a dude randomly is pretty cool too.

:tongue:

[Secretly.A.Bee]

It's fine, but requires another critter in play. That is a major problem in my opinion.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[grayryker]

He also gets hit by Karakas in the mirror. For a 4 drop to be playable in legacy, it pretty much has to be game ending. Something like Tajic is gonna be a pretty solid card when you get it on the board, but it doesn't come with the same card advantage that cards like Pia/Kiran and Palace Jailer do. I generally don't mind ticking a Vial to 4 to get those guys out because it's hard to lose after they get going. Whereas Tajic can be ignored or chump blocked when you can afford to make those alpha strikes - and you generally can't.

It would be cool if they printed some pushed RW legendary creatures, but I don't think this guy is one. He didn't see Standard play. He was pretty solid for me in a limited game once...

I love Pia/Kiran but it requires too much dedication to the red splash; for similar reasons, I don't put cards like Sudden Demise in the sideboard. I liked Palace Jailer until I played with Dark Confidants, which just puts it to shame.

Another card I thought of was Restoration Angel. Dodges lightning bolt cards (e.g don't forget about forked bolt and Kolaghan's Command) and abrupt decay. Can often dodge a fatal push. Being 4 toughness makes it very resilient to all forms of common boardwipes. It's an angel but a single white requirement and Sol Lands mean it's often a turn 3 play. Not as versatile as Flickerwisp when it comes to flicking things but it's a far better blocker netting you card advantage against Delver and creature decks. It has the same level of potential in saving your creatures. Has the essential 3 power to race TNN if necessary. Still combos with recruiter and stoneforge mystic. Oh and flash... so it's consistently good even without aether vial.

You can't recruit it but you know, we can't have everything in life.

I feel very optimistic about testing Restoration Angel :smile:

[H]

He also gets hit by Karakas in the mirror.

Indeed, if I am going to play a beater that is Karakas-able, it'd probably be Brimaz, King Of Oreskos, but obviously that guy has other downsides too.

Like Resto, he has a lot of upsides versus Bolts (and P. Fires), but certainly not so great versus Decay.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

You can't recruit it but you know, we can't have everything in life.



That attitude in legacy won't get you far. My feeling after playing for almost two decades is that you can, it just depends on how long you are willing to wait for it. The white recruiter is my case in point. That's why I said wait. I'm going to try a black and taxes build sometime, also.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[iatee]

Well, we can have everything because Wizards prints a bizarrely large quantity of new cards for DnT. Like I'm sure they'll give us a Rest in Peace bear one day, which will be sweet. Someone at WotC is probably gonna read this - please give us one Rest in Peace + bear. That's all. Easy design. Maybe it should be legendary too. Let me know if you have any questions.

P.S. Don't make it 3 mana.

[H]

P.S. Don't make it 3 mana.

Monkey's Paw there, you failed to say "and definitely don't make it 4."

[Colin]

http://static.starcitygames.com/sales/cardscans/MTG/PLC/en/nonfoil/Stonecloaker.jpg

Is this the droid you're looking for? (it's not, this card sucks).

Do we just not talk about how this card is some dude blowing a gargoyle?

[H]

Do we just not talk about how this card is some dude blowing a gargoyle?

First rule of talking about Stonecloaker is "you don't talk about Stonecloaker's art."

Second rule of talking about Stonecloaker is "you don't talk about Stonecloaker's art."

[grayryker]

First rule of talking about Stonecloaker is "you don't talk about Stonecloaker's art."

Second rule of talking about Stonecloaker is "you don't talk about Stonecloaker's art."

Wow I just looked at the card a bit closer... what the hell? :confused:

[grayryker]

That attitude in legacy won't get you far. My feeling after playing for almost two decades is that you can, it just depends on how long you are willing to wait for it. The white recruiter is my case in point. That's why I said wait. I'm going to try a black and taxes build sometime, also.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

No but what I'm saying is legitimate. If restoration angel had 2 toughness making it recruitable, it would be a significantly worse card. Even serra avenger might be arguably worse if it had one less toughness.

[Sardukar]

Hello everyone. I'm playing w/b version now with 2 Orzhov Pontiff (1 main 1 side) and 3 Perish in side. It's good answer with Elves (many in my meta), also it kills deathrite, leovold, tarmogoyf. Besides, i'm testing Judge's Familiar in main. For my point of view, it's very interesting creature and can upgrade many matches, especially fast combo.

[grayryker]

Hello everyone. I'm playing w/b version now with 2 Orzhov Pontiff (1 main 1 side) and 3 Perish in side. It's good answer with Elves (many in my meta), also it kills deathrite, leovold, tarmogoyf. Besides, i'm testing Judge's Familiar in main. For my point of view, it's very interesting creature and can upgrade many matches, especially fast combo.

I tested Judge's Familiar for a while and it wasn't great. In the fair matches, they'll play around it so you have a useless creature (at least without equipment) on the field that's too slow to clock anything. I don't know how heavily you are invested in the black splash but I'd rather play Thoughtseize against combo.

[Sardukar]

Not heavy really that's why i cant play black spell on 1st turn. Btw, familiar always greAt first drop and amazing comes from vial) can counter fast hymn or removal and it's synergy with thalia/vryn on table.

[Farone]

Lately I have been playing more and more against Food Chain decks. It is not a bad matchup, but I would like to know if there is a supergood card vs this deck that I havent seen before. The decks I play against play btw like 4xHymn and some Toxic Deluges in the side.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

Prelate on 3, Revoker on ballista, Mom. That's been my approach.

I think it can easily be a poor matchup. I don't do well against it with this deck very often.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[grayryker]

Lately I have been playing more and more against Food Chain decks. It is not a bad matchup, but I would like to know if there is a supergood card vs this deck that I havent seen before. The decks I play against play btw like 4xHymn and some Toxic Deluges in the side.

I don't think it's a good match for us because they have so many ways to wipe our board. They also run Golgari Charm and Ballista so yeah.

I think the best counter is to go Magus of the Moon. You shut off so many cards in their deck - especially their board wipes - that I think it is the best proactive solution. Their mana base is not great. Deathrite shaman you can stop with Revokers, Swords to Plowshares, etc.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

Good food chain players fetch basics a lot, the deck plays ~4; 2 island, 1 Swamp, 1 forest, generally. I don't think that play is as strong as you think it is.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[grayryker]

Good food chain players fetch basics a lot, the deck plays ~4; 2 island, 1 Swamp, 1 forest, generally. I don't think that play is as strong as you think it is.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Most players are not aware you're running Magus so they usually fetch a dual in order to cast all their spells. But more importantly, many of their spells are dual color in different combinations (e.g baleful strix vs golgari charm vs hymn to tourarch). This is what I mean by a greedy mana base.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

A recent but past teammate of mine as well as .dk here on the source always seem to make it a point to get multiple basics as fast as possible since no matter what version of DnT you play, you always have ways of attacking the mana base. Believe what you will, good pilots of the deck know that it's a grindy matchup and will always do their best to make it difficult for you to attack their mana, and that includes nullifying wasteland as a meaningful interaction, which in turn limits the Moon effect.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[grayryker]

A recent but past teammate of mine as well as .dk here on the source always seem to make it a point to get multiple basics as fast as possible since no matter what version of DnT you play, you always have ways of attacking the mana base. Believe what you will, good pilots of the deck know that it's a grindy matchup and will always do their best to make it difficult for you to attack their mana, and that includes nullifying wasteland as a meaningful interaction, which in turn limits the Moon effect.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Yes true most good players once they realize they're playing against DnT they will try to minimize Wasteland effects. That's actually one big reason I am deviating from the land denial plan with 4 wasteland 4 port. That's not as relevant here because FoodChain uses a ton of multicolored cards. Shutting off 1-2 colors is huge. I've seen blood moon destroy old Miracles often and that deck isn't exactly color intensive or basics-deficient.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

I don't really care to discuss the blowouts of mediocre players making incorrect sideboarding choices that end up in a lucky situation, so I'll leave the conversation at that.

There were a BUNCH of mediocre miracles players. I was one every now and then.

Do as you please, my friend.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[grayryker]

I don't really care to discuss the blowouts of mediocre players making incorrect sideboarding choices that end up in a lucky situation, so I'll leave the conversation at that.

There were a BUNCH of mediocre miracles players. I was one every now and then.

Do as you please, my friend.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

It is not simply a matter of mediocrity but a matter of probability, drawing a particular sequence of lands and needing to play color intensive cards. I don't think this is difficult to understand...

[WashableWater1]

It is not simply a matter of mediocrity but a matter of probability, drawing a particular sequence of lands and needing to play color intensive cards. I don't think this is difficult to understand...

What color intensive cards? It doesn't stop the ones that matter, such as the combo kill, and if they really need to they can ballista it away. Basically, you're saying the best card you can have is a 3 drop that has a chance to cut them off one color assuming you have the answer to Deathrite. If you aren't on the play, it can come down once they have the ability to fetch for 3 basics and now does very little.

[grayryker]

What color intensive cards? It doesn't stop the ones that matter, such as the combo kill, and if they really need to they can ballista it away. Basically, you're saying the best card you can have is a 3 drop that has a chance to cut them off one color assuming you have the answer to Deathrite. If you aren't on the play, it can come down once they have the ability to fetch for 3 basics and now does very little.

I never said Magus is the best card here... I said it's the best counter to the boardwipes in addition to shutting off their color intensive creatures. Their deck can't afford to fetch a basic every single time without a Shaman to pull double duty. The 'best' cards here will be Revoker and Prelate on 2/3. Overall, not a good match-up at all.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

Edit: Never mind, don't want to egg this on...

[Finn]

I want to note that fetching lots of basics is not always the way to go for your opponents. I have had this discussion a number of times.

On Grixis, if I G.Probe my D+T opponent, spot two Wastelands and a Karakas, and I am holding four lands, I am happy to play this game. I am happy to fetch duals with the expectation that I might run D+T out of lands in hand. There is no way I am fetching basics. On that same note, Ports throw the whole math of when to fetch basics into disarray. If I am on D+T, and have a hand of Ports, I want my opponent fetching basics.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

I want to note that fetching lots of basics is not always the way to go for your opponents. I have had this discussion a number of times.

On Grixis, if I G.Probe my D+T opponent, spot two Wastelands and a Karakas, and I am holding four lands, I am happy to play this game. I am happy to fetch duals with the expectation that I might run D+T out of lands in hand. There is no way I am fetching basics. On that same note, Ports throw the whole math of when to fetch basics into disarray. If I am on D+T, and have a hand of Ports, I want my opponent fetching basics.
I think some of us understand this, and its a solid point in that discussion, but we were discussing specifically the BUG Food Chain matchup. Grixis tempo is definitely a different beast.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[Finn]

I think some of us understand this, and its a solid point in that discussion, but we were discussing specifically the BUG Food Chain matchup. Grixis tempo is definitely a different beast.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Sure. Grixis was my example. The same ideas float to BUG and essentially all of the greedy manabases. BUG makes this relationship even more interesting and calculation-intensive because they have a touch fewer lands total and Deathrite Shaman. DRS hates Ports and loves Wasteland so choose wisely.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

I'm a little confused. They both play DRS, but one list plays 4 basics. The lowest land count I've seen in food chain is 19, the same as Grixis Delver (or are we talking pyromancer builds?), except delver plays 4 wasteland in that 19. Food chain seems a LOT less greedy than Grixis, and especially so compared to builds with Trop.

I agree it is possible to mess them up with ports if they go basics, and with wasteland if duals, but you have to have those draws and they have to make the accommodating plays for the draw to be effective.


Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[grayryker]

I've been testing both mono white DnT and the stompy Mardu DnT and my thoughts:

(1) Mirran Crusader is worse than Thalia HC in most match-ups right now. I'm making the comparison because they're both great against the 3-color Delver decks. Though they're both easy to kill, Thalia buys you a lot of time because these Delver decks depend heavily on fetchlands. I've been able to slow down opposing decks 2-4 turns. Being 3 power first strike makes her good enough to pair her against opposing Tarmogoyfs and Angler with a sword active. Crusader is the better card against Sultai and some 4 color control variants but overall, Thalia has won me more games a wider variety of match-ups.


(2) I added 1 more sol land (City of Traitor) in addition to the 4 Ancient Tomb. I've been appreciating their power that much. I find their power level is phenomenal when you're playing against Daze decks (combined with 4 Cavern, your whole deck is counter-proof many games). In addition, I added back 4 Chalice of the Void in the side for a turn 1 interaction against combo decks; ironically, I find Chalice to be better than Mother of Runes or Swords to Plowshares against some fair matches (e.g RUG Delver).

The Sol Lands were also great with the 2 Phyrexian Revoker in the main, making it playable turn 1. Have I been missing Wasteland and Port? Well even with Vial on the field, I didn't find they were relevant at least 60% of the time (rough estimate). I actually tested 3-4 Wasteland in the Mardu build but it just wasn't necessary except maybe to slow down Lands for a turn or two. However, the 2 Karakas I tested were great. I drew them just often enough to have some additional power against Reanimator and Show and Tell.


(3) Replaced Batterskull with Swords of Light and Shadow. I just wanted better cards against things like Angler and Baleful Strix. Because the deck is fueled by Sol Lands that can play a Swords by turn 3, the Swords of LaS has better synergy than Batterskull here. This does make Abrupt Decay better against us but I'll just have to see.


(4) Love the 3/3 Confidant/Mystic split. No more terrible multiples drawn and I seem them almost as often. They're usually late-game cards anyways so I appreciate the 2 extra slots for combo hate in the main. Confidant is basically a superior Palace Jailer for 2-mana and will win you many games on its own. I don't think 3 Mystic is necessary in a mono white build but the 1 extra slot could easily be a Canonist or a Revoker in the main.

Orzhov Pontiff and Magus are just insane against TNN and Delver decks. I also love Magus against Lands, which is unfavorable match-up for us (imo).


(5) Don't think 4 Swords to Plowshares is necessary in the main. Yes best removal in Legacy... but turns out it's just dead in too many match-ups. I even side it out frequently in the fair match-ups for something like Chalice of the Void and Council's Judgment. I'm playing 3 and only because I'm respecting the danger of Deathrite Shamans and creature based combo decks.

[Miniscus]

I've been testing both mono white DnT and the stompy Mardu DnT and my thoughts:

(1) Mirran Crusader is worse than Thalia HC in most match-ups right now. I'm making the comparison because they're both great against the 3-color Delver decks. Though they're both easy to kill, Thalia buys you a lot of time because these Delver decks depend heavily on fetchlands. I've been able to slow down opposing decks 2-4 turns. Being 3 power first strike makes her good enough to pair her against opposing Tarmogoyfs and Angler with a sword active. Crusader is the better card against Sultai and some 4 color control variants but overall, Thalia has won me more games a wider variety of match-ups.


(2) I added 1 more sol land (City of Traitor) in addition to the 4 Ancient Tomb. I've been appreciating their power that much. I find their power level is phenomenal when you're playing against Daze decks (combined with 4 Cavern, your whole deck is counter-proof many games). In addition, I added back 4 Chalice of the Void in the side for a turn 1 interaction against combo decks; ironically, I find Chalice to be better than Mother of Runes or Swords to Plowshares against some fair matches (e.g RUG Delver).

The Sol Lands were also great with the 2 Phyrexian Revoker in the main, making it playable turn 1. Have I been missing Wasteland and Port? Well even with Vial on the field, I didn't find they were relevant at least 60% of the time (rough estimate). I actually tested 3-4 Wasteland in the Mardu build but it just wasn't necessary except maybe to slow down Lands for a turn or two. However, the 2 Karakas I tested were great. I drew them just often enough to have some additional power against Reanimator and Show and Tell.


(3) Replaced Batterskull with Swords of Light and Shadow. I just wanted better cards against things like Angler and Baleful Strix. Because the deck is fueled by Sol Lands that can play a Swords by turn 3, the Swords of LaS has better synergy than Batterskull here. This does make Abrupt Decay better against us but I'll just have to see.


(4) Love the 3/3 Confidant/Mystic split. No more terrible multiples drawn and I seem them almost as often. They're usually late-game cards anyways so I appreciate the 2 extra slots for combo hate in the main. Confidant is basically a superior Palace Jailer for 2-mana and will win you many games on its own. I don't think 3 Mystic is necessary in a mono white build but the 1 extra slot could easily be a Canonist or a Revoker in the main.

Orzhov Pontiff and Magus are just insane against TNN and Delver decks. I also love Magus against Lands, which is unfavorable match-up for us (imo).


(5) Don't think 4 Swords to Plowshares is necessary in the main. Yes best removal in Legacy... but turns out it's just dead in too many match-ups. I even side it out frequently in the fair match-ups for something like Chalice of the Void and Council's Judgment. I'm playing 3 and only because I'm respecting the danger of Deathrite Shamans and creature based combo decks.Have you got a list for your mardu list? I've been testing the list from the mtggoldfish 'This Week in Legacy' article ~1 month ago. I really like it, but found it heavy on the 3 drops. I agree with you completely on Thalia HC, found her to be much more impactful than Mirran Crusader (not to downplay MC, it still has its benefits). Can't believe I didn't think of Dark Confidants before...

[grayryker]

Have you got a list for your mardu list? I've been testing the list from the mtggoldfish 'This Week in Legacy' article ~1 month ago. I really like it, but found it heavy on the 3 drops. I agree with you completely on Thalia HC, found her to be much more impactful than Mirran Crusader (not to downplay MC, it still has its benefits). Can't believe I didn't think of Dark Confidants before...

http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/mardu-dnt-2017-1/

Yeah Dark Confidants are worth the slots in the deck, giving you way stronger mid-late game power like Stoneforge Mystic. Personally don't think Pia and Kiran Naalar and Alesha are worth it. The main characteristic of this deck isn't that it plays 3 colors but rather, it tries to proactively develop the board faster and safer with Sol Lands + Cavern, rather than reactively denying mana with lands. One strategy isn't necessary worse than the other; simply put, I'm just disappointed by the consistency of Port + Wasteland even with active vial.

[Miniscus]

http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/mardu-dnt-2017-1/

Yeah Dark Confidants are worth the slots in the deck, giving you way stronger mid-late game power like Stoneforge Mystic. Personally don't think Pia and Kiran Naalar and Alesha are worth it. The main characteristic of this deck isn't that it plays 3 colors but rather, it tries to proactively develop the board faster and safer with Sol Lands + Cavern, rather than reactively denying mana with lands. One strategy isn't necessary worse than the other; simply put, I'm just disappointed by the consistency of Port + Wasteland even with active vial.Pia and Kiran has been ok when I've played it, but I don't often find myself really stretching for it or needing it to get out of a jam. Not tried Alesha so can't speak for that. I'm also heavier on the red splash for sideboard options against Delver and the like (quite big in my meta) so I'm at 1/3 split of scrublands/plateaus and not doing the sol lands. I can see the benefit of them for sure, and your point about essentially being uncounterable is pretty worthwhile. I like the 4 caverns also, especially since you've dropped port. I'm on 4 wasteland no port, mainly just because I want to go harder on the mana denial plan in some matchups with early wastelands/fast magus of the moon. Definitely going to try out the dark Confidants, as well as the warping wail in the side. Not got access to sol lands, but I recognize their benefit

[WashableWater1]

So what's the over/under on the right number of Prelates to run? I've been on 2 forever and liked it, but lately I haven't been in love with it against Delver and other fair decks. What slot is it competing against for everyone else? I always find it competing for a second Crusader or the first Spirit of the Labyrinth. Is anyone really in love with Mirran Crusader right now? I'm not that afraid of the BUG decks being too prevalent any more.

[grayryker]

So what's the over/under on the right number of Prelates to run? I've been on 2 forever and liked it, but lately I haven't been in love with it against Delver and other fair decks. What slot is it competing against for everyone else? I always find it competing for a second Crusader or the first Spirit of the Labyrinth. Is anyone really in love with Mirran Crusader right now? I'm not that afraid of the BUG decks being too prevalent any more.

My problem with Crusader is that a lot of bolt effects are going around (e.g 4 lightning bolts and kolaghan's command). You better have Mother of Runes on board to make it worthwhile. Spirit of the Labyrinth is okay but I never loved the card due to its fragility. I've went from 1 Prelate to 2 Prelates... I think its sheer power level and diversity makes it fine to have 2 copies. Sometimes when you're in control, you want to lock down any answers your opponent might have (e.g Abrupt Decay, Bolt, Toxic Deluge, Ensnaring Bridge, etc.). Not bad in the fair match-ups and an absolute necessity in the unfair ones.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

Until something better comes along, Mirran Crusader will always be a minimum 1-of in my main as the best tutorable beater for this deck.

You may not be in love with Prelate, but it's pretty necessary, and I play 1/1 main/side split. I think it's still correct.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[monovfox]

Here's a list I will be running this weekend. I really hate recruiter of the guard. I hate drawing it. I Hate it in my opening hand. I hate that it's 3 mana. I Hate that it's slow. I hate casting it. I hate being unable to cast it. I hate that it does literally nothing by itself. I hate that it isn't an answer to a problem immediately. So I decided to drop it, and go back to playing the spell queller version I was playing right before he got printed, because that was the last time I had fun with this deck. Also, sideboard mulldrifter for funsies (when it should probably be something else, possibly back to basics and an e-tutor).

The theory behind the UW build is that you value tempii over everything. This makes you a lot weaker when you don't play tight, and don't stick to a tempo oriented gameplan. Luckily Death and Taxes is quite good at generating tempi. Because you can eventually get to a point where you are ahead or even in tempo, flickerwisp in conjunction with spell queller allows you to actually beat the cards that kill you regardless of your acquired tempi (TNN, Jitte, Punishing Fire, Toxic Deluge). Your opponent can't win the game if the card they want to use is exiled.

Also sideboard mulldrifter is super cute (in against anything grindy like grixis, lands, BUGx). Casting it off of cavern of souls naming elemental is so satisfying :P. It also has a super fun interaction, since you can decide how the triggers stack. What you do is you evoke it, put evoke on the stack first, and then put the draw cards trigger on the stack. You then draw 2 cards. If one of them was a flickerwisp, you can flicker mulldrifter while evoke is still on the stack. Congrats, you just netted 4 cards.

// 60 Maindeck
// 7 Artifact
4 Aether Vial
1 Sword of Fire and Ice
1 Umezawa's Jitte
1 Batterskull

// 26 Creature
3 Spell Queller
3 Flickerwisp
1 Mirran Crusader
4 Mother of Runes
3 Phyrexian Revoker
4 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
4 Stoneforge Mystic
1 Spellskite
2 Meddling Mage
1 Sanctum Prelate

// 4 Instant
4 Swords to Plowshares

// 23 Land
2 Tundra
3 Flooded Strand
3 Karakas
4 Wasteland
2 Cavern of Souls
4 Rishadan Port
4 Plains
1 Island


// 15 Sideboard
// 1 Artifact
SB: 1 Pithing Needle

// 5 Creature
SB: 1 Sanctum Prelate
SB: 2 Ethersworn Canonist
SB: 2 Mulldrifter

// 2 Enchantment
SB: 2 Rest in Peace

// 5 Instant
SB: 1 Path to Exile
SB: 2 Spell Pierce
SB: 1 Blessed Alliance
SB: 1 Disenchant

// 1 Planeswalker
SB: 1 Gideon, Ally of Zendikar

// 1 Sorcery
SB: 1 Council's Judgment

[iatee]

I have a question - what do you do with all of the tempi that you generate? I understand that generating tempi is good, but tempi alone is not going to win a game because even though tempi is an important part of the game tempi isn't the only thing magic is about. I feel like it is easy to overrate tempi because so often we play a game that was all about tempi and we think "Damn, tempi is awesome, all I really need is tempi, I'm going to play more tempi cards (to generate more tempi)." But sometimes you have so much tempi that you don't even have anything to do with it. You get flooded...in tempi.

[monovfox]

I intend to attack their faces with said tempii? All I need is for my opponents to not resulve deluge or get punishing fire online, and that usually is enough time for me to kill them.

[grayryker]

I intend to attack their faces with said tempii? All I need is for my opponents to not resolve deluge or get punishing fire online, and that usually is enough time for me to kill them.

The problem with Death & Taxes is it's not that great as a pure tempo deck. The ideal tempo play is turn 1 Aether Vial and have Wasteland/ Ports to (hopefully) mana screw them while cheating in Thalia. When you don't have this tempo play, it can be very slow and you have to rely heavily on hatebears / Flickerwisps and Stoneforge Mystic to carry the late game. In essence, the deck is half tempo and half good stuff (prison or card quality).

You're running things like Spell Queller which seems like a great tempo card but you run into a lot of problems (e.g not getting to 3 lands, going through aether vial is too slow, gets killed and instead gives your opponent the tempo, etc.). In Modern it's actually pretty good because (a) you can combine it with other disruptive 1-2 mana spirits and (b) in Jeskai builds, you generate tempo with the sheer number of removals since Modern is a creature-centric format, allowing you to make an impactful turn 3 Queller.

The creatures I would add from other colors would involve giving this deck either (a) card advantage/ card filtering or (b) superior lockdown power. When you creatures/ land base don't align well with your opponent's, you want more universal threats on the board (this is why Thalia and Stoneforge are staples).

[grayryker]

Added 4 Chalice of the Void back into the main. Here is my reasoning:

(1) Against Delver decks, yes having Swords to Plowshare is great. But the deck's consistency with cantrips and 'free' counterspells means their average draw is going to be way better than yours. Chalice of the Void shuts off all their future cantrips, their own removal spells against us, things like Dread of Night, and every one of their 1-cmc threats which are not only good in the early game but also dangerous in the late game (e.g Deathrite Shaman).

As a result, I took out the Swords to Plowshares. In the side, I run Blessed Alliance and Warping Wail instead. Still keeping some Mother of Runes as you can cast it through 4 Cavern of Souls and 4 Aether Vials.

(2) Chalice is also universally powerful. I often want it on both x=0 and x=1, which is why I'm running the full set. It's ironically better than a removal spell against some creature decks.

(3) It provides the lockdown and tempo advantage this deck wants on TURN 1-2. In my opening hand, there are two cards that I want to see every game: Thalia and Aether Vial (assuming I have no idea what the match-up is). Why? Because they're universally versatile. Chalice of the Void also meets this criteria. More importantly, it's a valid turn 1 play in a deck with 6 Sol Lands and quite fine as a turn 2 play as well.

[monovfox]

The problem with Death & Taxes is it's not that great as a pure tempo deck. The ideal tempo play is turn 1 Aether Vial and have Wasteland/ Ports to (hopefully) mana screw them while cheating in Thalia. When you don't have this tempo play, it can be very slow and you have to rely heavily on hatebears / Flickerwisps and Stoneforge Mystic to carry the late game. In essence, the deck is half tempo and half good stuff (prison or card quality).

You're running things like Spell Queller which seems like a great tempo card but you run into a lot of problems (e.g not getting to 3 lands, going through aether vial is too slow, gets killed and instead gives your opponent the tempo, etc.). In Modern it's actually pretty good because (a) you can combine it with other disruptive 1-2 mana spirits and (b) in Jeskai builds, you generate tempo with the sheer number of removals since Modern is a creature-centric format, allowing you to make an impactful turn 3 Queller.

The creatures I would add from other colors would involve giving this deck either (a) card advantage/ card filtering or (b) superior lockdown power. When you creatures/ land base don't align well with your opponent's, you want more universal threats on the board (this is why Thalia and Stoneforge are staples).

Yes. I understand. I've also been playing the deck with 6-7 years at this point. I understand that other colors provide other things. I played way before we had recruiter or any of this fancy stuff.. We won by playing the tempo game. Blue provides better tempo. The issue I have with the "value cards" is that they don't win me the game against the cards I'm actually scared of. Recruiter of the guard -> mirran crusader is just a request to get blown out by a toxic deluge or removal spell + liliana (etc, etc, etc).

[grayryker]

Yes. I understand. I've also been playing the deck with 6-7 years at this point. I understand that other colors provide other things. I played way before we had recruiter or any of this fancy stuff.. We won by playing the tempo game. Blue provides better tempo. The issue I have with the "value cards" is that they don't win me the game against the cards I'm actually scared of. Recruiter of the guard -> mirran crusader is just a request to get blown out by a toxic deluge or removal spell + liliana (etc, etc, etc).

I agree with you Recruiter can be quite slow. I think it's a mistake to play more than 2, even in my deck where I can play it on turn 2.

But what must be discussed is whether you think this situational tempo advantage is worth integrating blue into the mana base. When I think of the best tempo cards, I think of being able to cheat things in for almost no cost. Aether vial, Daze, and Force of Will are what comes to mind. A 3-mana tempo card is almost an oxymoron, especially in Legacy. Spell queller is very inconsistent without vial in play. It's a card that's meant to operate largely in instant-speed-decks, as you will have to consider "do I keep 3 mana open or do I play my bears/ equipment?" I think with blue, things like Daze seem more reasonable but requires significant deck constraints. Overall, these are all just food for thought, rather than a rejection of the blue splash concept.

[J ♥ 5]

It's been a pretty big gap between semi-major events for me lately, so I've been experimenting (really close to just messing around) with different, or old-school mono W lists to varying success.

Here's an oldschool 'aggro' list


// MB
10 Plains
2 Cavern of Souls
4 Wasteland
4 Rishadan Port
3 Karakas

4 Mother of Runes
4 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
4 Stoneforge Mystic
3 Phyrexian Revoker
3 Serra Avenger
4 Flickerwisp
4 Mirran Crusader

4 Aether Vial
1 Umezawa's Jitte
1 Batterskull
1 Sword of Fire & Ice

4 Swords to Plowshares

//SB
2 Armageddon
2 Ethersworn Canonist
2 Rest in Peace
2 Surgical Extraction
2 Council's Judgement
1 Blessed Alliance
1 Sword of War & Peace
1 Holy Light
1 Pithing Needle
1 Path to Exile

Last week had me swapping Serra Avengers for Spirit of the Labyrinths, and going to a 2/2 split Mirran Crusader/Brimaz.
I have to say, being back at playing 4 mirran crusaders really felt good against a lot of decks, especially with the Geddon out of the board.

Does anyone have some suggestions for some wilder things to test as I'm on this fun streak? I have a lot of stuff in my maybeboard I'm working through, next week I think its the 24 land 2 Restoration Angel & Dustbowl.

[WashableWater1]

It's been a pretty big gap between semi-major events for me lately, so I've been experimenting (really close to just messing around) with different, or old-school mono W lists to varying success.

Here's an oldschool 'aggro' list


// MB
10 Plains
2 Cavern of Souls
4 Wasteland
4 Rishadan Port
3 Karakas

4 Mother of Runes
4 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
4 Stoneforge Mystic
3 Phyrexian Revoker
3 Serra Avenger
4 Flickerwisp
4 Mirran Crusader

4 Aether Vial
1 Umezawa's Jitte
1 Batterskull
1 Sword of Fire & Ice

4 Swords to Plowshares

//SB
2 Armageddon
2 Ethersworn Canonist
2 Rest in Peace
2 Surgical Extraction
2 Council's Judgement
1 Blessed Alliance
1 Sword of War & Peace
1 Holy Light
1 Pithing Needle
1 Path to Exile

Last week had me swapping Serra Avengers for Spirit of the Labyrinths, and going to a 2/2 split Mirran Crusader/Brimaz.
I have to say, being back at playing 4 mirran crusaders really felt good against a lot of decks, especially with the Geddon out of the board.

Does anyone have some suggestions for some wilder things to test as I'm on this fun streak? I have a lot of stuff in my maybeboard I'm working through, next week I think its the 24 land 2 Restoration Angel & Dustbowl.

I've been wanting to play around with Eldrazi Displacer and Aven Mindcensor, but I think I would probably go to 3 Crusaders 1 Brimaz. I also really love 4 Revokers or at least 1 Spirit in that lists because your 2 slot is a little slim (Avenger doesn't count as a 2 for the purposes of curving out)

[J ♥ 5]

I've been wanting to play around with Eldrazi Displacer and Aven Mindcensor, but I think I would probably go to 3 Crusaders 1 Brimaz. I also really love 4 Revokers or at least 1 Spirit in that lists because your 2 slot is a little slim (Avenger doesn't count as a 2 for the purposes of curving out)

Yeah I'm thinking if I was re-doing it I'd go 4 revokers and 2 avengers, I'm not really a fan of Spirit even given a blowout last week.
Brimaz was something I haven't touched in years and it felt so good against the bolt matchups, but I don't think its good enough in general at the moment to justify.

I like the idea of displacer, might try a build with like 3 port 2 eldrazi temples, or I guess maybe just 2 ancient tombs

[WashableWater1]

Yeah I'm thinking if I was re-doing it I'd go 4 revokers and 2 avengers, I'm not really a fan of Spirit even given a blowout last week.
Brimaz was something I haven't touched in years and it felt so good against the bolt matchups, but I don't think its good enough in general at the moment to justify.

I like the idea of displacer, might try a build with like 3 port 2 eldrazi temples, or I guess maybe just 2 ancient tombs

I figure if you want to go Dustbowl, try Displacer and 2 Recruiters. Displacers can do a lot with the cards you already run, they're just slow

[Cringe]

So what's the over/under on the right number of Prelates to run? I've been on 2 forever and liked it, but lately I haven't been in love with it against Delver and other fair decks. What slot is it competing against for everyone else? I always find it competing for a second Crusader or the first Spirit of the Labyrinth. Is anyone really in love with Mirran Crusader right now? I'm not that afraid of the BUG decks being too prevalent any more.

I went down to one a while back in favor of SotL in the main. The best feeling in the world is Vial into SotL in response to a Brainstorm. Makes me smile every time

[Curby]

The best feeling in the world is Vial into SotL in response to a Brainstorm. Makes me smile every time

Everyone loves Spirit in response to Brainstorm, but plenty don't play it precisely because it only happens once in a blue moon. I guess another question is what's the conventional wisdom on that single maindeck Spirit?

[Finn]

Dust Bowl and Flagstones of Trokair is good times.

[WashableWater1]

Everyone loves Spirit in response to Brainstorm, but plenty don't play it precisely because it only happens once in a blue moon. I guess another question is what's the conventional wisdom on that single maindeck Spirit?

It's sort of like Thalia #5 for me. It attacks a lot worse, but being able to come down turn 2 and shut down cantrips while attacking is nice. It's a tempo card that also counteracts Leovold, so I've been happy enough with it.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

It also turns off Griselbrand.

I play one where a 4th Revoker or a 1st Vryn Wingmare would normally be.

I like it, but it could also be something else and I would probably be just as happy.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[gh0st_b1rd]

Everyone loves Spirit in response to Brainstorm, but plenty don't play it precisely because it only happens once in a blue moon. I guess another question is what's the conventional wisdom on that single maindeck Spirit?

Its also a 3rd Ethersworn Canonist pre-boarded in the maindeck. Except instead of being an Arcane Lab effect (except in the case vs Elves), it just makes virtual card advantage instead. Its also run as a 3/1 body oddly enough which makes it a light hedge for the Eldrazi MU where you often 2-for-1 yourself during combat transactions and that three power helps with combat permutations.

I cant say I am in love with Spirit either, but the card hasnt been bad. You do feel pretty good when you turn off a Griselbrand activation without having planned for it, and then proceed to durdle with a Mom and Wisp.

[J ♥ 5]

Its also a 3rd Ethersworn Canonist pre-boarded in the maindeck. Except instead of being an Arcane Lab effect (except in the case vs Elves), it just makes virtual card advantage instead. Its also run as a 3/1 body oddly enough which makes it a light hedge for the Eldrazi MU where you often 2-for-1 yourself during combat transactions and that three power helps with combat permutations.

I cant say I am in love with Spirit either, but the card hasnt been bad. You do feel pretty good when you turn off a Griselbrand activation without having planned for it, and then proceed to durdle with a Mom and Wisp.

I'm way more happy to play a main deck canonist :cool:

[Secretly.A.Bee]

I tried it, didn't like it in the metas I play in as there are lots of blue, noncombo decks where they can profitably play around the inconvenience until they find a removal spell or win the game.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[gh0st_b1rd]

I'm way more happy to play a main deck canonist :cool:

If you think about having a maindeck Canonist vs, say, a Sneak and Show deck, the Canonist is infinitely worse than the Spirit.

[J ♥ 5]

If you think about having a maindeck Canonist vs, say, a Sneak and Show deck, the Canonist is infinitely worse than the Spirit.

I dunno, canonist vs omniscience is pretty solid assuming they don't have Grisslebrand/Emrakul immediately in hand (in which case spirit is pretty poor too)

[Secretly.A.Bee]

Unless that is relevant to you at a local level, I find that argument weak. SnS lists only run 2, and that's mostly in the board. Obviously there are omnisneak players, but that version is less popular. I can't imagine this is relevant for a discussion of one slot in a deck with no card selection to speak of.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[J ♥ 5]

Unless that is relevant to you at a local level, I find that argument weak. SnS lists only run 2, and that's mostly in the board. Obviously there are omnisneak players, but that version is less popular. I can't imagine this is relevant for a discussion of one slot in a deck with no card selection to speak of.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

I can definitely agree that this isn't part of a groundbreaking or worthwhile discussion :)

[grayryker]

I'm way more happy to play a main deck canonist :cool:

As do I. The nice aspect of main decking Canonist is it almost auto-wins a lot of your bad match-ups (e.g infect, elves, tes, etc.). It's not bad at all in your fair matches either, being a notable nuisance that can buy you a turn or 2. Being able to slow down cabal therapy is nice for instance. Vialing in a SotL is kind of a magic christmas land move but must admit it is quite beautiful to behold.

[Medea_]

Generically, I don't think Canonist is a good maindeck card unless the stars align in the metagame. I ran one or two main when both Elves and ANT were everywhere about two months ago. Now that Elves has taken a back seat to everything else, I don't think this is the time. I don't want too many "bad at combat" things in my deck.

[Medea_]

New article on D&T and Maverick (http://www.thrabenuniversity.com/?p=1179).

[grayryker]

Generically, I don't think Canonist is a good maindeck card unless the stars align in the metagame. I ran one or two main when both Elves and ANT were everywhere about two months ago. Now that Elves has taken a back seat to everything else, I don't think this is the time. I don't want too many "bad at combat" things in my deck.

That's fair. Sometimes I run into a bunch of delver and maverick decks and I want things like serra avenger. For me, the toughest part of constructing this deck is in balancing the cards good in the fair matches and the unfair ones.

What is your opinion on Recruiter of the Guards? Obviously it's a great card but sometimes I just wonder if it couldn't have been more copies of something else. Paying 3 mana for a tutor effect, albeit a body that can be wisped, feels way too slow sometimes.

On a side note, I'm realizing mirran crusader is way better with chalice of the void builds. Before you needed a mom to protect him from bolts and plowshares but 4 chalice almost ensures his survival.

[J ♥ 5]

That's fair. Sometimes I run into a bunch of delver and maverick decks and I want things like serra avenger. For me, the toughest part of constructing this deck is in balancing the cards good in the fair matches and the unfair ones.

What is your opinion on Recruiter of the Guards? Obviously it's a great card but sometimes I just wonder if it couldn't have been more copies of something else. Paying 3 mana for a tutor effect, albeit a body that can be wisped, feels way too slow sometimes.

On a side note, I'm realizing mirran crusader is way better with chalice of the void builds. Before you needed a mom to protect him from bolts and plowshares but 4 chalice almost ensures his survival.

If the deck existed in a world without flickerwisp I think recruiter would be way worse.
But the ability to 'army in a can', or simply tutor for what you need, then later flicker him for value is the closest this deck is really going to come to card advantage and selection.

I have been having success with my oldschool builds I've been messing around with with no recruiters, but you definitely give up a lot of flexability in favour of a consistent 'one dimensional' plan

[ManyCookies]

For fun, thoughts on Sword of Dungeons and Dragons (https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/wehxty6da39zndacg9th.png) if it were Legacy legal?

[grayryker]

If the deck existed in a world without flickerwisp I think recruiter would be way worse.
But the ability to 'army in a can', or simply tutor for what you need, then later flicker him for value is the closest this deck is really going to come to card advantage and selection.

I have been having success with my oldschool builds I've been messing around with with no recruiters, but you definitely give up a lot of flexability in favour of a consistent 'one dimensional' plan

True but if I'm searching for Flickerwisp, I'm usually doing this to flicker something else. Usually I just don't have the time or luxury to get a little bit of extra value.

I think I'll start goldfish testing various hands to see if the Recruiters won't just be better of being something else.

For my non-Flickerwisp build I've been testing Restoration Angel. Really powerful card in the Delver match-up...



For fun, thoughts on Sword of Dungeons and Dragons (https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/wehxty6da39zndacg9th.png) if it were Legacy legal?

It's a very offense oriented card which makes it worse than the more balanced Jitte or Swords. The thing about those two equipment is it's easier to meet their damage requirements and better at saving you on defense.

[Medea_]

I think it's perfectly viable to play old school, very aggressive D&T (4 Crusader, 3 Avenger) without Recruiters and be just fine. That being said, Recruiter for various things, especially Prelate locks up a ton of matches like Lands that otherwise are a pain.

[WashableWater1]

After top 8ing an 81 player event yesterday, I think I'm finally ready to cut Spirit of the Labyrinth. Are there any other good 2 drops that you can reasonably run?

[J ♥ 5]

Other 2017 commander decks spoiled as Grixis Wizards and Mardu Vampires.

Since Wizards can't print a supplemental set without giving us 1-2 goodies, whats your bet on for gifts for mono-w D&T - GW Cats or Mardu Vamps?

[grayryker]

http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/mardu-dnt-2017-1/?cat=type&sort=cost

Chalice of the Void has overperformed for me. It gives the deck a strong control element against blue tempo/midrange decks and combo. Because Abrupt Decay is on the decline after the top ban, I find it to be stronger in the meta than before. Having another potential turn 1 play aside from Aether Vial has improved the deck significantly.

Dark Confidant winning me games as usual. Ancient tomb also doesn't deserve further comment than what I had before but I would add that I hate drawing multiples and could potentially cut one for another City of Traitors. Due to the popularity of Stifle-Delver decks, I think this deck is quite strong due to its resistance to counterspell (Tomb + Cavern + Vial) and Chalice of the Void to lock cantrips, stifle, cabal therapy, removals, delver, deathrite, etc. Actually I just took a look at a Delver list and they have 32 cards on average at 1-cmc. Wasteland and Port don't contribute as much as they used to when half your opponents operate on 1-2 mana with deathrite shaman and cantrips. On the other hand, their wasteland is quite good against your own and Port.

In other words, Death Taxes should lean a lot less on tempo and more on lockdown cards.



Restoration Angel is a card I've recently tested. It's too early to sound totally conclusive. But her defensive ability and the ease with which this deck can cast her makes her phenomenal. Unlike Flickerwisp, she does not need an Aether Vial to be flashed in. Her toughness makes her a +1 against Delver decks. She lacks the vigilance of Serra Avenger but at the price of being bolt, decay, and push proof. Will keep 2 copies of her for now.

I've taken out Recruiter of the Guards for now. Instead, I just raised the number of copies of cards I'd normally search for: Mirran Crusader and Sanctum Prelate. The problem with Recruiter is I have too many important cards in the deck to reserve a space for it.

Have 2 Blessed Alliance in the side. Provides additional answers to True-Name Nemesis and also some life gain. Not bad at all.

[Medea_]

@greyryker

Let us know if you put up any meaningful results with it. I'm pretty skeptical personally.

[grayryker]

@greyryker

Let us know if you put up any meaningful results with it. I'm pretty skeptical personally.

By 'meaningful' you mean MTGO or tournament results, that will be quite far into the future. I only own a standard mono white DnT and only test this Mardu version on cockatrice/ xmage. The reasons are obvious since (a) no need to financially invest hundreds for experiments, (b) allows quicker changes to the deck, and (c) can test a greater variety of match-ups.

Which portion of the deck are you skeptical about? Any concerns about the design can be valuable. Of course the most valuable feedback is from someone who tested it but I doubt anyone cares enough to test it.

[DisgruntledElk]

http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/mardu-dnt-2017-1/?cat=type&sort=cost

Chalice of the Void has overperformed for me. It gives the deck a strong control element against blue tempo/midrange decks and combo. Because Abrupt Decay is on the decline after the top ban, I find it to be stronger in the meta than before. Having another potential turn 1 play aside from Aether Vial has improved the deck significantly.

Dark Confidant winning me games as usual. Ancient tomb also doesn't deserve further comment than what I had before but I would add that I hate drawing multiples and could potentially cut one for another City of Traitors. Due to the popularity of Stifle-Delver decks, I think this deck is quite strong due to its resistance to counterspell (Tomb + Cavern + Vial) and Chalice of the Void to lock cantrips, stifle, cabal therapy, removals, delver, deathrite, etc. Actually I just took a look at a Delver list and they have 32 cards on average at 1-cmc. Wasteland and Port don't contribute as much as they used to when half your opponents operate on 1-2 mana with deathrite shaman and cantrips. On the other hand, their wasteland is quite good against your own and Port.

In other words, Death Taxes should lean a lot less on tempo and more on lockdown cards.



Restoration Angel is a card I've recently tested. It's too early to sound totally conclusive. But her defensive ability and the ease with which this deck can cast her makes her phenomenal. Unlike Flickerwisp, she does not need an Aether Vial to be flashed in. Her toughness makes her a +1 against Delver decks. She lacks the vigilance of Serra Avenger but at the price of being bolt, decay, and push proof. Will keep 2 copies of her for now.

I've taken out Recruiter of the Guards for now. Instead, I just raised the number of copies of cards I'd normally search for: Mirran Crusader and Sanctum Prelate. The problem with Recruiter is I have too many important cards in the deck to reserve a space for it.

Have 2 Blessed Alliance in the side. Provides additional answers to True-Name Nemesis and also some life gain. Not bad at all.

I feel a deck that has cut rishadan port and wasteland is no longer death and taxes (though honestly, Flickerwisp feels almost as integral to a seasoned DnT player). One of our core advantages is having a rock-solid manabase while at the same time being able to leverage the additional lands we draw into utility. Without the ability to filter your draw meaningfully (if you either do not have a Bob, or they have removal for an x/1), I feel you will flood out on unstable mana. I'm also not sure how you are reliably casting Bob or Pontiff when you have Magus in your deck. I think you may be stretching too far, but I wish you luck.

[filln]

For fun, thoughts on Sword of Dungeons and Dragons (https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/wehxty6da39zndacg9th.png) if it were Legacy legal?

Nonbo with Mother of Runes :laugh:

[iatee]

Good vs TNN, though. I suspect that card would be pretty strong.

[Medea_]

@greyryker

I'm not going to beat around the bush here. I'm going to give you my opinion on a couple of things in the hope that this helps you improve as a player and deckbuilder. This is meant to be constructive criticism.

I thought this deck might be a Cockatrice special when I saw it... I'm sure you are aware by now, but the average Legacy player on Cockatrice is extremely unskilled at whatever deck they are playing. Since card availability and finance is removed from the equation, people try out all sorts of stuff. That means players have less experience with each individual deck on average, and it means that people are not going to be familiar with all the intricacies and interactions that are important to any given matchup. You (probably) aren't getting good playtesting data from it, and you're actually (probably) forming bad habits. People also don't know how Magic rules work, so constantly having to explain things like Port and Flickerwisp to your opponents isn't worth your time. People also preemptively concede too much on there. I had a very inflated sense of how good I was back when I tested on Cockatrice 5 or so years ago. If you are going to continue testing on Cockatrice, I encourage you to find skilled players and exclusively test against them. Preferably people you know irl so that you can Skype or something to go over lines while you play.

Your deck is fighting itself a ton since you are trying to do so many things. Let me explain:

You are damaging yourself more with Ancient Tomb and Fetch lands, while also taking away one of your best life gain option (Batterskull) and your best removal spell (StP). If your opponent actually sticks a threat, you have very few ways to actually remove it. You are forced to either try and wall it out, or push through with equipment.

Your manabase is, uh, ambitious. With Warping Wail in the board, you are effectively trying to play a four color deck. Your deck would love to sequence something like Mom into Dark Confidant into Magus of the Moon. That sort of thing can be very tricky, and it's going to be a real thing that your own Magus locks you or sets you back a mana out from time to time. City of Traitors is also a pretty loose choice in a deck that wants to keep hitting lands drops like D&T. Without Port and Wasteland, you've lost your primary way of interacting with some otherwise tricky matchups as well.

One of the advantages of playing a splash build has always been utility, yet your version doesn't run Recruiter of the Guard. Having extra virtual copies of things like Magus, Pontiff, and Prelate as silver bullets was one of the big reasons people were so keen on the splash builds, and your version eschews that. You have also given up the opportunity for creature based removal that is tutorable; that's especially important if you aren't going to have StP in your deck.

Your deck does not have Flickerwisp. If you've been playing D&T for long enough, you should realize how big of a problem that is. You've lost your best piece of protection and general meddling. A good portion of your trickery and interaction is gone.

Also, if you are trying to empty your hand quickly via sol lands, Aether Vial does lose some stock. Vial is also noticeably worse without Flickerwisp around.

In terms of being a lock deck, this sort of thing is probably just going to be inferior to the Red Prison decks that have been popping up.

Now, I'm not saying your approach has no merit; however, in order to keep playing something like it seriously, you have to genuinely believe that the upside to your version beats out all of the potential downsides. Good luck!

[grayryker]

Disclaimer: long long text. Sorry all.

Thank you for your comment :smile: I mostly test on xmage for reasons you listed on cockatrice, as things are more streamlined and there is a noticeable difference in skill level. However, my reasons for working on this deck isn't because of inflated win/loss ratio. It's because when you're playing the deck, you can see the strengths and weaknesses regardless of whether you are winning or losing.

On the lifeloss, this has not been an issue over 30+ games in testing. I can't really formulate a verbal argument on this as it's a purely empirical observation. If anything, being able to equip 1-2 turns earlier and get around Daze have been more critical in my success. The matches I lose comes down to boardstate most of the time, rather than a race.

The deck loses Swords to Plowshares but I'm considering what I gain in return. Yes you lack reactive answers in the mid-late game and this becomes more obvious on the draw. But look at what Chalice of the Void gets you. It gets you a very strong turn 1-2 interaction vs half the Legacy decks and turns off 30+ cards in the Delver match-up where Swords to Plowshare is at its best. Of course a card like Swords to Plowshares is probably better in the mirror but even there it's a potential dead card because of Mother of Runes.

You may be right about warping wail. I run 9 colorless lands but maybe this is not consistent enough. I replaced one with Ratchet Bomb which have been a superb sideboard card so far. Warping wail is also strangely better than Swords to Plowshares in the mirror - at least, against most threats.

But I want to emphasize again that you are misunderstanding this deck as a 3-color deck. 4 Cavern of Souls and 4 Aether vials allow this deck to keep a very mono white template. This deck does not want to curve into Confidant into a turn 3 Magus - this would be both unrealistic and not an ideal curve! Nor does this deck go all in on the Magus plan. It's simply a late game auto-win card against decks like Lands and Delver (which almost never run basics).

Not every build runs tutorable creature based removals like Banisher of the Priest. I do not think this is a good criticism of the deck. I agree with you Recruiter seems like a very appealing choice. I ran 2 in previous builds and currently testing 0. Sometimes it's too slow even in this deck, where I can play it on turn 2.

I don't want to understate the power of Flickerwisp. But as I have explained before, losing Flickerwisp is in align with the design philosophy of not being overly dependent on a turn 1 Aether Vial. As I play (and watch) DnT gameplays, I am keeping track of the relevance of Port and Wasteland without a vial in play. My view is this deck is not great at denying mana like Goblins (which has 8 ways to cheat creatures) or Delver (which can operate on 1 mana, play cantrips to find lands, and use Stilfe/Wasteland to deny mana better). A typical (and not ideal) DnT line is playing Wasteland/ Port around turn 3+ after deploying your 2-cmc and 3-cmc threats, but by then they lose most of their effectiveness (i.e straining mana). To compensate for the lack of mana denial, this is why the deck is running 4 Chalice, more disruptive 3-drops, and Magus of the Moon.

I'm not necessarily trying to empty my hand quickly. Again, I think you are viewing this as a traditional stompy deck or a blood moon deck! The Sol Lands are there for these key functions: allowing turn 1 chalice, allowing key plays around Daze (turn 1 vial, turn 2 creature), allowing turn 2 curve into Thalia 2.0 & Wingmare, allowing turn 1 revoker, and being able to afford equipments faster (SoFaI equipped by turn 3 for example). Experiencing these benefits have eliminated my fear of the lifeloss entirely. This deck does not want to keep hitting land drops after a certain point because you're not using Wasteland or Ports, which both leave you mana hungry. Hence, the City of Traitors is actually quite good.

Now maybe you could argue that this deck is trying to do too much. I don't think this is the case because the new additions (Ancient tomb, Cavern of Souls, etc.) have a ton of different utility. Perhaps the Magus can be a 1-of and instead, I should focus more on the Dark Confidants and Recruiter of the Guard. Getting the proportions right is definitely the hardest part.

I expect this deck to be worse against Burn and the mirror, but better across (most) of the board. I'm using the words 'expect' because I've gone 2-0 against Burn and 2-1 against mirror so far but this is probably just variance.

Again, I really appreciate your extensive feedback. I don't mind the skeptical tone. I think even if people view this deck as garbage, it is productive to consider different possibilities.

[grayryker]

I feel a deck that has cut rishadan port and wasteland is no longer death and taxes (though honestly, Flickerwisp feels almost as integral to a seasoned DnT player). One of our core advantages is having a rock-solid manabase while at the same time being able to leverage the additional lands we draw into utility. Without the ability to filter your draw meaningfully (if you either do not have a Bob, or they have removal for an x/1), I feel you will flood out on unstable mana. I'm also not sure how you are reliably casting Bob or Pontiff when you have Magus in your deck. I think you may be stretching too far, but I wish you luck.

Thank you for the response. Yes as a mono white DnT player, I understand Port and Wasteland are some of the most iconic key parts of the deck. You can read the second half of my response above for why I am experimenting with a no-Port/Wasteland build.

I'm not sure what you mean by filtering. Sure if we flood on lands, Port/ Wasteland can serve as 'additional' spells but half the times they make no impact on the game. We should also consider the unfavorable cases, where you're stuck on 2-3 lands and you need all the mana you can get to cast your threats without vial. Now let me ask this: if Flickerwisp and Serra Avenger were human type, would we not all play 4 Cavern of Souls? I only ask this to point out that a basic heavy land base is not always important. And maybe it's a bit ironic but I do occasionally struggle to cast a double white spell even on mono white DnT.

It's hard to cast Bob/ Pontiff without vial and with Magus in play, but this is why Magus is a late game card. This deck does not want to curve into a turn 3 Magus usually. I use it the same way Imperial Taxes used the card.

[Medea_]

Thoughts on Prelate vs Czech Pile in post sideboard games?

[WashableWater1]

Prelate seems alright, but certainly not a star. Early enough on 1 it can stop them from finding the 3 drops that really kill you, or if you can protect it 3 can be ok. The matchup seems hard to evaluate, but Serra Avenger seems awful. Is RIP worth bringing in? It turns off Snapcaster and Deathrite, which both seem to be what usually kills me.

[Medea_]

Prelate seems alright, but certainly not a star. Early enough on 1 it can stop them from finding the 3 drops that really kill you, or if you can protect it 3 can be ok. The matchup seems hard to evaluate, but Serra Avenger seems awful. Is RIP worth bringing in? It turns off Snapcaster and Deathrite, which both seem to be what usually kills me.

Yeah, I bring in Rip x2, SoLaS, and Gideon x2. Usually board out 4x StP and one random card I feel like is bad at that given moment.

[WashableWater1]

Yeah, I bring in Rip x2, SoLaS, and Gideon x2. Usually board out 4x StP and one random card I feel like is bad at that given moment.

I've been boarding a little differently, taking in CJ as well and boarding out some number of Revokers or Serra Avengers, and also bringing in Prelate. If I leave in Avenger, I leave in a couple plows. Revoker being 1 toughness and an artifact make him a bit of a liability

[Medea_]

I've been boarding a little differently, taking in CJ as well and boarding out some number of Revokers or Serra Avengers, and also bringing in Prelate. If I leave in Avenger, I leave in a couple plows. Revoker being 1 toughness and an artifact make him a bit of a liability

So the only real reasonable CJ target they have is Jace, right? You can snag other things, but largely I'm not sure that is going to be worth the mana investment. I'm not sure I'm sold on that part of your plan.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

I was under the impression that Czech pile played some number of TNN. Is that not the case?

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[Ayiluss]

I was under the impression that Czech pile played some number of TNN. Is that not the case?

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Some of the lists do but not all of them and even then it's usually as a 1 of.

[WashableWater1]

So the only real reasonable CJ target they have is Jace, right? You can snag other things, but largely I'm not sure that is going to be worth the mana investment. I'm not sure I'm sold on that part of your plan.

Because of that color combination they have a chance of playing something weird that you need to be able to deal with, be it a Dread of Night, Null Rod, Garruk Relentless, Liliana of the Veil or something else. The games also typically go long and come down to a race, and having the option to remove a blocker for a lethal attack is nice to have, and the mana cost typically becomes less noticeable when you're drawing one card a turn and playing it because you don't really gain much by not.

[NeckBird]

So the only real reasonable CJ target they have is Jace, right? You can snag other things, but largely I'm not sure that is going to be worth the mana investment. I'm not sure I'm sold on that part of your plan.

Played against it a few times over the weekend. I think Judgment is a necessary evil in the matchup. Czech Pile has so much removal for our creatures that a resolved Jace is actually difficult to kill. Leovold is also kind of an issue cause he makes our mana denial plan a lot worse so Judgment not targeting is relevant.

[grayryker]

Sword of light and shadow are great here, for obvious reasons. Since they have a diverse range of cmc, neither chalice nor sanctum prelate locks the game out but you generally want to call 1, 2, and 3 in that order, though adjust accordingly to boardstate. Magus of the moon can lock the game out if you play any.


The key to winning here from my experience is getting an equipment to stick. They are not heavy on counterspells and play like a removal heavy Modern deck. But instead, they have 4 artifact hate and 2-3 more in the sideboard. This makes it difficult to gain any sort of advantage. I think theoretically speaking, apostle's blessing is great against planeswalkers, baleful strix, and protecting our artifacts. Combine this with your other protectors like mother of runes and chalice. I never tried it but it seems like a reasonable sideboard card considering everyone brings in artifact hate.

[WashableWater1]

I've been running SoLaS and it's been running into the problem that I thought it would have. In the matchup, typically I struggle to make any creature stick. SoLaS does not help you if you have nothing to put it on. I'm thinking that I want something that goes wide. To start brainstorming, I was thinking something like Raise the Alarm. Obviously that card isn't good, but is there a white creature CMC 2 or 3 that makes a second creature? Brimaz kind of works, but he's slow. He does dodge a lot of their removal so I may give him a whorl. Something like a Mog War Marshall might be the ticket, but I don't think one exists.

[grayryker]

I've been running SoLaS and it's been running into the problem that I thought it would have. In the matchup, typically I struggle to make any creature stick. SoLaS does not help you if you have nothing to put it on. I'm thinking that I want something that goes wide. To start brainstorming, I was thinking something like Raise the Alarm. Obviously that card isn't good, but is there a white creature CMC 2 or 3 that makes a second creature? Brimaz kind of works, but he's slow. He does dodge a lot of their removal so I may give him a whorl. Something like a Mog War Marshall might be the ticket, but I don't think one exists.

Brimaz seems a bit worse than Crusader. Both of them can be answered but the difference is Crusader can attack through Baleful Strix and the extra cat token doesn't get blocked by something like Deathrite Shaman and die.

Sure there are many options. Blade splicer, raise the alarm, and if you are willing to do some black splashes you can go wide with Lingering Souls or Bitterblossom. Out of those, blade splicer is the most relevant in a standard DnT shell. Combine it with Flickerwisp or Restoration Angel for value.

Chalice of the Void is great here because it serves as additional copies of Mother of Runes (kind of) against all the 1-mana removals. Abrupt decay, Kolaghan's Command, and Ancient Grudge are all answers that Czech Pile runs so winning the match comes down to timing. There are a number of protection spells available: spellskite, apostle's blessing, and sanctum prelate.

[Medea_]

Lots of new content (http://www.thrabenuniversity.com/?p=1275) 5 new primers and my thoughts on SoLaS.

[grayryker]

Lots of new content (http://www.thrabenuniversity.com/?p=1275) 5 new primers and my thoughts on SoLaS.

Nice analysis. I agree SoLaS is a mediocre card in a vacuum but after the Miracles ban, it matches against an increasing number of decks better than SoWaP or SoFaI.


On a side note, I realized Fiendslayer Paladin is quite a good card against 4c control. Their only out is a well timed Liliana and Toxic Deluge. Something to consider if the meta is 4c control heavy.

[staticgripped]

Nice analysis. I agree SoLaS is a mediocre card in a vacuum but after the Miracles ban, it matches against an increasing number of decks better than SoWaP or SoFaI.

I have also been recently testing SoLaS (Not previously a huge supporter of the card) and have found the card to be pretty playable in UBXx decks be it Grixis, Esper, or 4c, but by no means have I found it to be a better equipment then SoFaI. SoFaI much more consistently provides card advantage, and also helps to deal with a lot of what those style of decks are trying to accomplish giving another way to remove DRS, Pyro, and any other random dudes. I have been keeping SoFaI in against all the decks I bring SoLaS in for, because the card is still great.

[zebotc]

Keeping on the topic of card advantage; Commander spoilers just began. There are actually a few cards from it that seem like they could be playable. But to start out what do you all think of this?

http://www.magicspoiler.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Alms-Collector.png

**edit: the image did not work.. so here are its stats;
Alms Collector. 3W
Flash
If an opponent would draw two or more cards, instead you and that player each draw a card.
3/4

It seems like it would've been better against a miracles meta. However with sol lands it could be a viable option for card advantage, while also shutting down opponent's brainstorms and similar cards.

Alms Collector fills a similar role as Palace Jailer, and is possibly not as good in a vaccume. But having flash and a 3/4 body (it's bolt resistant) does seem like it could be useful.

[Curby]

There are actually a few cards from it that seem like they could be playable.

I must be old and jaded, 'cause I don't see it. Let's apply my sig:

Alms Collector: I don't run Spirit, but I'd run Spirit before this guy. Collector does nothing against an opponent casting multiple Ponders and Preordains in a single turn. Also, he's simultaneously not tutorable and not something I'd want to run a ton of to actually draw it. Lastly, if I were to go with mana acceleration and more expensive cards I'd take a closer look at THC, Resto, and Palace Jailer first.

Balan: 3 toughness is the worst toughness for D&T: it's neither recruitable nor boltproof. He's got no evasion and needs two Equipment to provide more damage than Crusader. The ability is a cute way to reset/equip 2-color swords and Batterskull, but we have Flickerwisp for Batterskull already.

Stalking Leonin: See 3 toughness above. Doesn't hit TNN. Lets Emmy wipe our board. Fairly certain I'd rather run Banisher Priest or Fiend Hunter in the 3 CMC slot despite the lower power.

Mirri: Takes at least four turns to protect us. Doesn't help against single big attackers or TNN decks. I don't think this is enough to make people splash :g: over :br:.

[iatee]

Despite not being tutorable, Stalking Leonin seems pretty strong. It's a big dude, so it's not totally useless in creature-light matchups. It exiles the thing forever, so even if it gets bolted you're up a card. The biggest drawback mostly just seems to be 'It's not as strong as Palace Jailer'.

I don't know that the card will be amazing, but it's def in the broad category of 'playable flex creatures'.

Alms Collector is pretty clearly garbage though.

[zakzes]

On the plus for stalking leonin he's a 3/3 for a single W and 2 colorless which is strong. Also we can reset him with flickerwisp and it's permanent exile. Also has not 4 mana which is my main objection to palace jailer. I hate ticking vial up to 4.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

I have a question about Stalking Leonin. It says activate this ability only once, but it says so during the resolution part of the ability. Can I do it again in response to a Stifle, since the ability hasn't resolved yet? Or like, in response to a Mother of Runes activation?

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[Curby]

I'd guess no, cause then why not activate multiple additional times in response to itself?

[Secretly.A.Bee]

Right, but it's ambiguous in it's wording, just looking for clarification.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[WashableWater1]

Right, but it's ambiguous in it's wording, just looking for clarification.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

It works exactly like every other card that says "activate only once". They usually add "per turn" but that's how they all work.

Is the Czech Pile matchup as bad as I think it is, or have I just been having bad luck? I'm finding that they always have enough lands to ignore wasteland and are able to get 2 for 1s until I'm top decking, then they have more live cards so they win.

[Curby]

Yeah I think the source of contention/confusion is that, "Activate this ability only once," appears at the end of the rules text. Despite that placement, it's not part of the resolution of the activated ability.

[gh0st_b1rd]

It works exactly like every other card that says "activate only once". They usually add "per turn" but that's how they all work.

Is the Czech Pile matchup as bad as I think it is, or have I just been having bad luck? I'm finding that they always have enough lands to ignore wasteland and are able to get 2 for 1s until I'm top decking, then they have more live cards so they win.

Treat the match up like how you would play vs Shardless BUG and just try and leverage your own mana advantage. Its close and grindy, and Wastelanding them will hurt you more than it will hurt them. Just hang tough and play for two-for-ones.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

It works exactly like every other card that says "activate only once". They usually add "per turn" but that's how they all work.


And I'm sure that if I played other cards that had this particular clause, I'd know the rulings, but I don't, so I don't, and then I asked, and then it was now and then I don't know what happens.

I guess I'll just go with "doesn't work" and get my relevant information elsewhere...

[WashableWater1]

And I'm sure that if I played other cards that had this particular clause, I'd know the rulings, but I don't, so I don't, and then I asked, and then it was now and then I don't know what happens.

I guess I'll just go with "doesn't work" and get my relevant information elsewhere...

Wire wood Symbiote and Quirion Ranger and Scryb Ranger are the big ones

[Medea_]

I put a Czech Pile primer up today. I think it's pretty even. I'm winning it most of the time online, for what that's worth.

[grayryker]

I've only faced it twice now with mono white DnT and I would also say it feels near 50/50.

Ironically, it's a 4 color deck that's actually decent against the Wasteland + Port strategy. This is also true for Delver because cantrips + deathrite shaman makes it difficult for the mana denial strategy to work. Don't forget you need a lot of mana in these match-up to put up pressure. Not every match will start with a turn 1 Aether Vial. Their weakness is a slow clock. Getting equipment on a creature will nullify their card advantage altogether.

[mykatdied]

Is the Czech Pile matchup as bad as I think it is, or have I just been having bad luck? I'm finding that they always have enough lands to ignore wasteland and are able to get 2 for 1s until I'm top decking, then they have more live cards so they win.

Basically Kolaghan's Command is the worst card for us. The fact that they can gum up the board and have a lot of removal is rough. Luckily they don't run wasteland and for that reason I love Mangara in this match up. Once they have exhausted many of their resources that card gets pretty nutty. Gideon is insane post board against them as a way to beat dread of night and ensure we match up better against leovold without the worry of giving them even more card advantage. Because they run Deathrite, snapcaster mage and kolaghan's command Rest in Peace is pretty good here. Play at instant speed as much as you can with Vials when applicable and if you can swords an early deathrite port and wasteland are decent. Sword of Fire and Ice is great

[IRS]

I put a Czech Pile primer up today. I think it's pretty even. I'm winning it most of the time online, for what that's worth.

Hey Phil,

My local meta is infested with Grixis variants (Control, Delver, Czech pile) and I am sick of playing Grixis mirrors so I thought I might break the D&T loose again. Given the meta, I think Magus of the Moon should be pretty good here, you mentioned on Thraben University that you still play Magus on paper and wanted to know your current paper list. At the moment I am considering using one of your 3 color lists but wanted to know your thoughts.

EDIT:there is also a significant number of Stoneblade decks, hence why I want Black for Pontiff. There is very little combo ATM, only reanimator has a decent representation share.

[CptHaddock]

Basically Kolaghan's Command is the worst card for us. The fact that they can gum up the board and have a lot of removal is rough. Luckily they don't run wasteland and for that reason I love Mangara in this match up. Once they have exhausted many of their resources that card gets pretty nutty. Gideon is insane post board against them as a way to beat dread of night and ensure we match up better against leovold without the worry of giving them even more card advantage. Because they run Deathrite, snapcaster mage and kolaghan's command Rest in Peace is pretty good here. Play at instant speed as much as you can with Vials when applicable and if you can swords an early deathrite port and wasteland are decent. Sword of Fire and Ice is great

Mangara seems like he gets hit by removal a lot of the time in this MU. I feel like one of the strongest cards that D&T has in this MU is palace jailer, you can usually end up drawing 3-4 extra cards off him since 4c Control is pretty light on threats to take away monarch from you.

[Medea_]

I'm more interested in Teferi's Protection than most of the cats, honestly. The card is so weird and flexible that it might find a home somewhere, even if that isn't D&T.


Hey Phil,

My local meta is infested with Grixis variants (Control, Delver, Czech pile) and I am sick of playing Grixis mirrors so I thought I might break the D&T loose again. Given the meta, I think Magus of the Moon should be pretty good here, you mentioned on Thraben University that you still play Magus on paper and wanted to know your current paper list. At the moment I am considering using one of your 3 color lists but wanted to know your thoughts.

EDIT:there is also a significant number of Stoneblade decks, hence why I want Black for Pontiff. There is very little combo ATM, only reanimator has a decent representation share.

I'd try something along the lines of this if you want to pump up those numbers against Grixis and Stoneblade:

Lands (24)
4 Wasteland
2 Rishadan Port
1 Scrubland
1 Arid Mesa
2 Cavern of Souls
1 Flooded Strand
4 Windswept Heath
4 Plains
3 Plateau
2 Karakas

Creatures (25)
4 Mother of Runes
4 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
4 Stoneforge Mystic
2 Recruiter of the Guard
2 Magus of the Moon
3 Flickerwisp
2 Phyrexian Revoker
1 Orzhov Pontiff
2 Mirran Crusader
1 Flex creature slot based on personal preference (Palace Jailer, P&K, Resto, Aven Mindcensor, another copy of one of the creatures, etc)

Other Spells (11)
4 Aether Vial
4 Swords to Plowshares
1 Umezawa’s Jitte
1 Sword of Fire and Ice
1 Batterskull
Sideboard: (15)
2 Surgical Extraction
2 Containment Priest
2 Ethersworn Canonist
2 Cunning Sparkmage
1 Orzhov Pontiff
1 Manic Vandal
1 Manriki-Gusari
1 Sword of Light and Shadow
1 Council’s Judgment
2 Rest in Peace

The pingers and Pontiffs should let you push damage through pretty much anything Czech Pile puts out there. I like having Gideon in the matchup, but that's ambitious with the manabase as is.

The rest of the sideboard is there to muck with opposing equipment so you don't lose on that front, while not sacrificing too much else in other matchups.

[grayryker]

Mangara seems like he gets hit by removal a lot of the time in this MU. I feel like one of the strongest cards that D&T has in this MU is palace jailer, you can usually end up drawing 3-4 extra cards off him since 4c Control is pretty light on threats to take away monarch from you.

I kinda doubt jailer is good. They are light on threats but remember they are very good at clearing the board as well as having baleful strixes. I will put my money on fiendslayer paladin which gets around shaman and strix in combat but unlike crusader lives through all the red spells like bolt and kolaghan. I agree Mangara is slow, maybe at best exiling one card.

[Mad Mat]

From what I can tell, there's nothing really for us in the new Commander set so far. Stalking Leonin isn't bad, but too unreliable at what she does. I feel like the design is cool, but they at least should have made the ability as and not when, just like True-Name Nemesis. Teferi's Protection is a catch-all against a lot of combo and sweepers, but too unreliable at 3 mana. Nothing else stands out.


I kinda doubt jailer is good. They are light on threats but remember they are very good at clearing the board as well as having baleful strixes. I will put my money on fiendslayer paladin which gets around shaman and strix in combat but unlike crusader lives through all the red spells like bolt and kolaghan. I agree Mangara is slow, maybe at best exiling one card.
Crusader has protection from Kolaghan's Command. You're really only playing around Bolt, which Grixis Control and Czech Pile only play few copies of (2 max). I'd probably play a third Crusader before I'd go for Fiendhunter Paladin. Mangara is not good because he is slow and because the worst threats these decks throw at us are spells, not permanents. You can't expect him to deal with Jace, because you can be damn sure that by the time they slam Jace they either have enough removal to protect him or they're in a tight spot where they don't expect him to live through combat anyway.

Jailer's card advantage ought to allow you to keep up with the tons of removal and card advantage these control lists can throw at us, same as with Shardless and Miracles. Downside is that Grixis plays quite a few more creatures than decks like Miracles and has access to flash unlike Shardless, so losing the Monarch is more of a risk. This makes Gideon the better value card, but he is not recruitable and more easy to counter. Jailer is also deployable against more decks than just control, like Eldrazi, Show and Tell and Reanimator.

[gh0st_b1rd]

Just loop Pia and Kiran Nalaars with Karakas until your opponent concedes. On a similar note, Brimaz isnt bad vs Czech Pile but is still much worse than P+K.

[grayryker]

From what I can tell, there's nothing really for us in the new Commander set so far. Stalking Leonin isn't bad, but too unreliable at what she does. I feel like the design is cool, but they at least should have made the ability as and not when, just like True-Name Nemesis. Teferi's Protection is a catch-all against a lot of combo and sweepers, but too unreliable at 3 mana. Nothing else stands out.


Crusader has protection from Kolaghan's Command. You're really only playing around Bolt, which Grixis Control and Czech Pile only play few copies of (2 max). I'd probably play a third Crusader before I'd go for Fiendhunter Paladin. Mangara is not good because he is slow and because the worst threats these decks throw at us are spells, not permanents. You can't expect him to deal with Jace, because you can be damn sure that by the time they slam Jace they either have enough removal to protect him or they're in a tight spot where they don't expect him to live through combat anyway.

Jailer's card advantage ought to allow you to keep up with the tons of removal and card advantage these control lists can throw at us, same as with Shardless and Miracles. Downside is that Grixis plays quite a few more creatures than decks like Miracles and has access to flash unlike Shardless, so losing the Monarch is more of a risk. This makes Gideon the better value card, but he is not recruitable and more easy to counter. Jailer is also deployable against more decks than just control, like Eldrazi, Show and Tell and Reanimator.

Good point I did not realize 4C control was moving away from bolts. Seems like most lists are playing only 1 copy now. Crusader is definitely better than Fiendslayer in this match-up, though Fiendslayer still has applications against Lands, Burn, Jund, etc.

I would always take Gideon over Palace Jailer here. Czech pile only runs Force of Wills for counters and they have a weak board presence. My opinion of Jailer is probably a bit biased because I see him as a significantly worse Dark Confidant but I think it's safe to say Gideon > Jailer between the two.

[Medea_]

Imo, Palace Jailer is not a safe card to play against Czech Pile.

[Mad Mat]

If you're splashing so you can reliably afford double red, Pia and Kiran Nalaar definitely seems like the card to make Czech people cry. Don't just look at their lack of wasteland though, also remember that your vials are not quite likely to stick around if you even drew them early on. Moon effects can be helpful, but they do nullify your Karakas shenanigans.


Good point I did not realize 4C control was moving away from bolts. Seems like most lists are playing only 1 copy now. Crusader is definitely better than Fiendslayer in this match-up, though Fiendslayer still has applications against Lands, Burn, Jund, etc.
While the Paladin has protection from Punishing Fire, this engine is something better addressed thoroughly through wasteland, rest in peace and sanctum prelate rather than a single immune creature that is still susceptible to maze of ith, Lily and goyf (never mind barbarian ring and molten vortex). So its main advantage would lie in burn, where at 3 mana and two life next turn it's still not that stellar.


I would always take Gideon over Palace Jailer here. Czech pile only runs Force of Wills for counters and they have a weak board presence. My opinion of Jailer is probably a bit biased because I see him as a significantly worse Dark Confidant but I think it's safe to say Gideon > Jailer between the two.
In most lists (with 2 recruiters), you are three times more likely to draw into a singleton Jailer than a Gideon. The card is not hampered by Thalia and can be cast with cavern mana, making it both immune to FoW (and Counterspell from Grixis Control) and also more likely to be castable colorwise. The fact that these decks have weak board presence makes the Jailer even better, as they're less likely to steal the Monarch.

Jailer is not comparable to Confidant: the card is virtually guaranteed to replace itself and at least temporally take away an opposing threat. As additional reward, it may net you an untargetable card advantage engine that wins you the game after a turn or two. The downside is that it comes with a high risk, i.e. that you will almost certainly lose if they steal the Monarch from you before that. But you have to keep in mind that if you're in a spot where they can deal with all aspects of the Jailer and you can do nothing to interfere, there's no card that is not Jailer that would have saved you that game at that spot.

EDIT:


Imo, Palace Jailer is not a safe card to play against Czech Pile.
If it's not a safe card in this match-up, it's not going to be a safe card in any match-up.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

The only matchup I've ever cared for Jailer in was Miracles with top. I absolutely dislike it otherwise.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[grayryker]

If you're splashing so you can reliably afford double red, Pia and Kiran Nalaar definitely seems like the card to make Czech people cry. Don't just look at their lack of wasteland though, also remember that your vials are not quite likely to stick around if you even drew them early on. Moon effects can be helpful, but they do nullify your Karakas shenanigans.


While the Paladin has protection from Punishing Fire, this engine is something better addressed thoroughly through wasteland, rest in peace and sanctum prelate rather than a single immune creature that is still susceptible to maze of ith, Lily and goyf (never mind barbarian ring and molten vortex). So its main advantage would lie in burn, where at 3 mana and two life next turn it's still not that stellar.


In most lists (with 2 recruiters), you are three times more likely to draw into a singleton Jailer than a Gideon. The card is not hampered by Thalia and can be cast with cavern mana, making it both immune to FoW (and Counterspell from Grixis Control) and also more likely to be castable colorwise. The fact that these decks have weak board presence makes the Jailer even better, as they're less likely to steal the Monarch.

Jailer is not comparable to Confidant: the card is virtually guaranteed to replace itself and at least temporally take away an opposing threat. As additional reward, it may net you an untargetable card advantage engine that wins you the game after a turn or two. The downside is that it comes with a high risk, i.e. that you will almost certainly lose if they steal the Monarch from you before that. But you have to keep in mind that if you're in a spot where they can deal with all aspects of the Jailer and you can do nothing to interfere, there's no card that is not Jailer that would have saved you that game at that spot.

EDIT:


If it's not a safe card in this match-up, it's not going to be a safe card in any match-up.

When I say weak board presence, I mean they have very little ways to take Gideon down quickly as they have low powered creatures. Baleful strix will present a serious problem with the monarch mechanism but the main criticsm against Jailer goes beyond this.

I make the comparison with confidant here because their main draws (pun intended) are card advantage in a deck that desperately needs it. There is a lot of "ifs" in making jailer a very reliable card (as a 4 drop should be). I have to ask myself why I wouldn't rather run another mirran cruasader or gideon in its place because there are not many matchups where Jailer provides a unique "i win" scenario that Gideon himself provides.

I'm not really sure why you are comparing paladin with those cards. Paladin is not meant to be a complete solution against a deck. It is like saying one shouldn't play Thalia HC because old thalia is better, when in reality they are not competing for the same slots. I was only implying that having a recruitable card that survives the punishing fire combo can be very good, in addition to the lifelink. Perhaps it is not worth playing but I am only brainstorming here.

[Mad Mat]

I make the comparison with confidant here because their main draws (pun intended) are card advantage in a deck that desperately needs it. There is a lot of "ifs" in making jailer a very reliable card (as a 4 drop should be). I have to ask myself why I wouldn't rather run another mirran cruasader or gideon in its place because there are not many matchups where Jailer provides a unique "i win" scenario that Gideon himself provides.
Jailer will never contend with Crusader slots as it has a completely different purpose. It is sort of in the same bracket as Gideon, where I think the factors that it is easier, safer and more reliable to cast are very relevant. That doesn't mean that I wouldn't run Gideon, just that I would run a singleton Jailer first.

A key difference between the two is that Gideon operates mostly as the final nail in the coffin. He comes down at a game shift situation and turns it definitely in our favor (which is very relevant, as these are games we could very well lose without the timely Gideon). Jailer has this function less often because of the inherent risk in his effect: he is more often a last resort tactic, where you come back after the game already shifted in your opponent's favor by simultaneously attacking his board state, improving your hand and forcing your opponent to aggressively deal with the problem now or lose. I really like this functionality, the opportunity to get a back-into-the-game card out of a recruiter.


I'm not really sure why you are comparing paladin with those cards. Paladin is not meant to be a complete solution against a deck. It is like saying one shouldn't play Thalia HC because old thalia is better, when in reality they are not competing for the same slots. I was only implying that having a recruitable card that survives the punishing fire combo can be very good, in addition to the lifelink. Perhaps it is not worth playing but I am only brainstorming here.
My point was not that he competes with those sideboard cards, but that I don't think paladin is that great against punishing fire strategies and hence that he doesn't bring that much to the deck after all. When you're facing punishing fire, you don't beat it by getting a creature out that can't be hit by it. You win by disabling the combo or racing it.

[WashableWater1]

I've actually found Gideon to be way more fragile than he looks on paper against Czech Pile. They have a lot of incidental creatures that can attack for just enough. He'll still be good, but sometimes they can Snap push the token then attack with Snap Strix Shaman or whatever. I've lost a lot of Gideons to Bolts and K Commands as well.

[grayryker]

Jailer will never contend with Crusader slots as it has a completely different purpose. It is sort of in the same bracket as Gideon, where I think the factors that it is easier, safer and more reliable to cast are very relevant. That doesn't mean that I wouldn't run Gideon, just that I would run a singleton Jailer first.

A key difference between the two is that Gideon operates mostly as the final nail in the coffin. He comes down at a game shift situation and turns it definitely in our favor (which is very relevant, as these are games we could very well lose without the timely Gideon). Jailer has this function less often because of the inherent risk in his effect: he is more often a last resort tactic, where you come back after the game already shifted in your opponent's favor by simultaneously attacking his board state, improving your hand and forcing your opponent to aggressively deal with the problem now or lose. I really like this functionality, the opportunity to get a back-into-the-game card out of a recruiter.


My point was not that he competes with those sideboard cards, but that I don't think paladin is that great against punishing fire strategies and hence that he doesn't bring that much to the deck after all. When you're facing punishing fire, you don't beat it by getting a creature out that can't be hit by it. You win by disabling the combo or racing it.

I was talking about Crusader because we're talking about "which card X should be in sideboard to deal with Czech Pile"; hence it doesn't matter if I'm comparing a 3-mana beater with 4-mana card advantage machines. In this case, Crusader might actually be better than Gideon or Jailer. The argument for Gideon is that it's a better card against boardwipes like Toxic Deluge. Czech pile has a bunch of small threats and many lists don't even run TNN or Gurmag Angler, which is why I believe Gideon is not that easy to kill compared to Jailer. If you're in a board state where Gideon is easy to kill, that's probably the same kind of board where your opponent becomes the monarch with Jailer. They run 1-3 combination of K-command and bolt max, in most recent lists.

The second thing I was noting was the cards' uses outside of just this 4c control match-up. Where do we want to side Jailer in? Miracles is gone. Shardless sultai is a good place to be, except Crusader is probably good there as well. Probably too vulnerable against Grixis Delver and Deathblade decks run plenty of removals + 4 True-Name Nemesis. The mirror? Gideon is better there.

[Mad Mat]

I was talking about Crusader because we're talking about "which card X should be in sideboard to deal with Czech Pile"; hence it doesn't matter if I'm comparing a 3-mana beater with 4-mana card advantage machines. In this case, Crusader might actually be better than Gideon or Jailer. The argument for Gideon is that it's a better card against boardwipes like Toxic Deluge.
There's good arguments to be made for running extra crusaders right now. They are probably the best choice against BUG and grixis dominated meta's. But they're rather narrow otherwise, being not as good against miracles, against esper (Gideon) or against big creature decks (Jailer). I also like Jailer or Gideon for doing something special people do not really expect from this deck: producing a threat that is not a creature or an equipment/artifact. Decks vulnerable to crusader will dedicate a bunch of slots to cards that can take care of him. They will have a much harder time warping their gameplan to address Gideon or Jailer.


The second thing I was noting was the cards' uses outside of just this 4c control match-up. Where do we want to side Jailer in? Miracles is gone. Shardless sultai is a good place to be, except Crusader is probably good there as well. Probably too vulnerable against Grixis Delver and Deathblade decks run plenty of removals + 4 True-Name Nemesis. The mirror? Gideon is better there.
Miracles is not gone and in fact in the DTB section of this website. I would never board in Jailer against delver, blade decks or the mirror. He has merit however against show and tell, eldrazi and red stompy.

[FeX]

before running the 3rd crusader i'd rather run a paladin at the moment, seeing how polluted the meta is with grixis decks of all variants. paladin is a good card to cast right now, especially since the post-board games against grixis delver are harder than pre-board and having a resilient creature that counteracts their tempo strategy with lifelink is valuable.

also, jailer wins games. yes, he can backfire. but if you use him in the right match ups you can minimize the chance while having an angle of attack that DnT is usually lacking (pure CA).

also, am i the only one who likes ethersworn canonist in the main as a 1-of? ive found that it isnt as narrow as some people make it out to be and really can be an annoyance for unfair and fair(especially cantrip) decks alike. IMO it is much better than spirit of the labyrinth. i never found that card to be really useful. ethersworn canonist seems to be the best genrically good 2 drop disruptive creature we have at the moment aside from the usual DnT core 2 drops. and sometimes it just randomly wins a game while very very rarely being completely dead. i juust wish it had first strike but well...we cant have everything i guess

[grayryker]

There's good arguments to be made for running extra crusaders right now. They are probably the best choice against BUG and grixis dominated meta's. But they're rather narrow otherwise, being not as good against miracles, against esper (Gideon) or against big creature decks (Jailer). I also like Jailer or Gideon for doing something special people do not really expect from this deck: producing a threat that is not a creature or an equipment/artifact. Decks vulnerable to crusader will dedicate a bunch of slots to cards that can take care of him. They will have a much harder time warping their gameplan to address Gideon or Jailer.


Miracles is not gone and in fact in the DTB section of this website. I would never board in Jailer against delver, blade decks or the mirror. He has merit however against show and tell, eldrazi and red stompy.

People don't dedicate specific hate cards against Crusader. They sideboard cards that overlap (e.g Toxic Deluge). I don't see your logic of how Jailer is harder to address than a Crusader. Anyways I think I'm beating a dead horse here by this point. Jailer is only situationally good against the three decks you listed; in fact, in most situations you're better off replacing it with Council's Judgment here.

[Mad Mat]

People don't dedicate specific hate cards against Crusader. They sideboard cards that overlap (e.g Toxic Deluge).
I never said that they run cards specific for crusader. I said that they will dedicate some of their sideboard slots to cards that can take care of him, such as Toxic Deluge and Diabolic Edict. Probably this is more with true-name rather than crusader in mind, but the outcome for us is the same.


I don't see your logic of how Jailer is harder to address than a Crusader.
Crusader is taken care of with a single removal spell or by having chump blockers. It needs to be the right removal spell and the right color of blockers due to protection, but these decks have access to these sort of cards, in particular after siding. If all else fails, they can accept 4 damage a turn for a few turns.

Jailer necessitates that they try to steal the monarch as quickly as possible or lose. The Monarch is not something that can be destroyed by a spell, it requires combat which is what control is not very good at. Jailer himself constitutes a double obstacle to this combat approach, as he takes away a creature and is a blocker himself.

[Stevestamopz]

Have you all forgotten that Cataclysm and Armageddon exist? The way to beat big blue decks is quite obviously not to try and play big white.

[Medea_]

Have you all forgotten that Cataclysm and Armageddon exist? The way to beat big blue decks is quite obviously not to try and play big white.

I could see that being a decent approach. Sideboard is a little tight, but that might be worth exploring again.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

Are we talking specifically about using those two spells against Czech Pile/4c Control? That seems reasonable, especially if they decide to swap their counters for removal. Yes, that is pretty great. I'm in.

What else is it good against, Lands, ig?

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[Stevestamopz]

Are we talking specifically about using those two spells against Czech Pile/4c Control? That seems reasonable, especially if they decide to swap their counters for removal. Yes, that is pretty great. I'm in.

What else is it good against, Lands, ig?

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

I haven't paid attention to the minutia of the most recent posts, but seeing people talk about more gideons and more 3 mana 2/2s as a way to beat the attrition decks just seems awful. Cataclysm is good against basically every fair/control deck, especially if you're a baller and play lots of Flagstones. Just don't bother bringing it in against Delver.

[mykatdied]

If you're on Wr then From the Ashes seems great against czech pile and some of the other greedy mana bases in legacy, also basically does nothing to you.

[Curby]

Doesn't From the Ashes overlap a little too much with Magus? I think I'd want an actual reset button that leaves them with 0-1 land.

[grayryker]

I haven't paid attention to the minutia of the most recent posts, but seeing people talk about more gideons and more 3 mana 2/2s as a way to beat the attrition decks just seems awful. Cataclysm is good against basically every fair/control deck, especially if you're a baller and play lots of Flagstones. Just don't bother bringing it in against Delver.

Yeah except a big portion of fair decks tend to be Delver and the mirror, where Cataclysm is awful. I'm not sure I'd want it against Deathblade or Jund, and maybe Shardless. Gideon is something you can side in against a wide variety of match-ups, though perhaps there are better universal options for grinding. Magus of the Moon, for example, is probably the best lockdown card in my deck to handle Czech Pile and other 3-color delver decks.

[zakzes]

Doesn't From the Ashes overlap a little too much with Magus? I think I'd want an actual reset button that leaves them with 0-1 land.The mountains are still nonbasic, which helps destroy them. Unfortunately it lets them grab basics, but presumably there won't be many to grab.

[Mad Mat]

I haven't paid attention to the minutia of the most recent posts, but seeing people talk about more gideons and more 3 mana 2/2s as a way to beat the attrition decks just seems awful. Cataclysm is good against basically every fair/control deck, especially if you're a baller and play lots of Flagstones. Just don't bother bringing it in against Delver.
Cataclysm/Armageddon became less attractive sideboard options when miracles started to play more mentors. It was always a tricky card to pull off correctly anyway, because top allowed them to come back faster than we could and set up terminus about as easy as before. Now with top gone and a greater chunk of control based around grixis, Cataclysm seems much better again. I wouldn't play Armageddon, because you really want the function to insta-kill any Jace or Liliana lying around.

Two potential problems I can see is that more people are splashing now, which makes it impossible to play Flagstones and renders Cataclysm more painful, in particular as there is a lot of artifact destruction going around for our vials. Second, Conspiracy 2 has lead to an increased number of 3-drops being played, which makes the deck more mana hungry and thus blowing up your own lands is extra painful. With this in mind, the card seems positioned excellently for a mono white build with flagstones and a reduced 3-drop count (7-8, rather than 10+).

[WashableWater1]

I'm running a list with Cataclysm through a league and thus far it's been stellar. In games that Gideon would have lost its traded for their entire land base + a Jace and a creature. I'm just replacing Gideon in my board. That being said, is going to an EW trail on Sunday and I don't have Flagstones in paper. Is it still worth running without Flagstones?

[Medea_]

New article! (http://www.thrabenuniversity.com/?page_id=1288) This one is by Chris Cunningham, and focuses on the math of splash manabases.


I'm running a list with Cataclysm through a league and thus far it's been stellar. In games that Gideon would have lost its traded for their entire land base + a Jace and a creature. I'm just replacing Gideon in my board. That being said, is going to an EW trail on Sunday and I don't have Flagstones in paper. Is it still worth running without Flagstones?

Could you try to keep some notes and collect some data on it? I'm interested in whether Cata or 'Geddon would be better.

You *can* run it on paper without Flagstones, you just have to accept that it's going to be 10% worse or whatever.

[IRS]

I'm more interested in Teferi's Protection than most of the cats, honestly. The card is so weird and flexible that it might find a home somewhere, even if that isn't D&T.



I'd try something along the lines of this if you want to pump up those numbers against Grixis and Stoneblade:

Lands (24)
4 Wasteland
2 Rishadan Port
1 Scrubland
1 Arid Mesa
2 Cavern of Souls
1 Flooded Strand
4 Windswept Heath
4 Plains
3 Plateau
2 Karakas

Creatures (25)
4 Mother of Runes
4 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
4 Stoneforge Mystic
2 Recruiter of the Guard
2 Magus of the Moon
3 Flickerwisp
2 Phyrexian Revoker
1 Orzhov Pontiff
2 Mirran Crusader
1 Flex creature slot based on personal preference (Palace Jailer, P&K, Resto, Aven Mindcensor, another copy of one of the creatures, etc)

Other Spells (11)
4 Aether Vial
4 Swords to Plowshares
1 Umezawa’s Jitte
1 Sword of Fire and Ice
1 Batterskull
Sideboard: (15)
2 Surgical Extraction
2 Containment Priest
2 Ethersworn Canonist
2 Cunning Sparkmage
1 Orzhov Pontiff
1 Manic Vandal
1 Manriki-Gusari
1 Sword of Light and Shadow
1 Council’s Judgment
2 Rest in Peace

The pingers and Pontiffs should let you push damage through pretty much anything Czech Pile puts out there. I like having Gideon in the matchup, but that's ambitious with the manabase as is.

The rest of the sideboard is there to muck with opposing equipment so you don't lose on that front, while not sacrificing too much else in other matchups.

Played this list in the league today with the following modifications: -1 Plateau +1 Plains and Prelate as the flex creature. SB: -1 Manic vandal - 1 Cunning Sparkmage -1 Ethersworn canonist -1 containment priest +1 Magus of the Moon +1 Path to Exile +1 Rest in Peace +1 Kanbal, Consul of Allocation and went 4-1. I beat UW Stoneblade, some sort of weird prison deck, UWr Stoneblade and BU Reanimator. I lost vs 4 color Standstill. The mana base was seldom a problem, the prison deck tried to moon me but jokes on him, and Pontiff was a house versus TNN/Snapcaster boards. Sadly, I did not run into any Grixis and was not able to try out SoLaS, I boarded it in vs UW but I found SoIaF to be more effective in that MU and never fetched it. I also never got to try out Kanbal :(.

Overall the deck felt strong, although it was only 5 games and was pretty lucky as some of my opponent made decisive missplays that cost them games. My thoughts are that Magus is really strong in matchups where he matters but the rest of the creatures (esp. Pontiff) give you the flexibility to get the answers when he does not matter.

[Medea_]

How are people feeling about various Stoneblade decks these days?

[WashableWater1]

I typically feel pretty favored against them. I took down UWR today. What I lose to is TNN+batterskull or Jitte, but when they're stuck being an awkward control deck it feels pretty much like easy miracles. I got to resolve a Cataclysm against them and it set them back so far that I was able to dig out of being low on pressure before they got lands.

Since I've been playing Cataclysm it's won me a number of games that Geddon and Gideon would have lost. I've brought it in against Aluren and Goblins, where it was able to function as a board reset and wrath, where my one creature was better than the one they were left with. Against Mentor Control it was able to destroy Jaces and slow down Mentors. It's been winning me games that Gideon loses, where they've got a better board and you need to catch up. The only times I've wished I had a Geddon was when I was stuck on one White source.

What's the optimal number of Flagstones to run? I was initially thinking 4, but Flagstones hasn't been as free as it looks. I'm thinking of sticking with 3.

[grayryker]

I typically feel pretty favored against them. I took down UWR today. What I lose to is TNN+batterskull or Jitte, but when they're stuck being an awkward control deck it feels pretty much like easy miracles. I got to resolve a Cataclysm against them and it set them back so far that I was able to dig out of being low on pressure before they got lands.

Since I've been playing Cataclysm it's won me a number of games that Geddon and Gideon would have lost. I've brought it in against Aluren and Goblins, where it was able to function as a board reset and wrath, where my one creature was better than the one they were left with. Against Mentor Control it was able to destroy Jaces and slow down Mentors. It's been winning me games that Gideon loses, where they've got a better board and you need to catch up. The only times I've wished I had a Geddon was when I was stuck on one White source.

What's the optimal number of Flagstones to run? I was initially thinking 4, but Flagstones hasn't been as free as it looks. I'm thinking of sticking with 3.

The problem with Cataclysm (aside from casting it through potential counterspells) for me is that the board state has to align in your favor. If you're behind, this card is not necessarily good (e.g Jitte and TNN on the field). Even if you did run the card, the probability that you happen to have one of 3 Flagstones on the field and Cataclysm resolved is extremely low, bordering on win-more mentality, and isn't even necessarily a game mattering combo.

The reason Cataclysm mattered against Miracles was because that deck needed a ton of mana to finish the game and could not stop your Cataclysm from resolving (e.g hard with counterbalance lock and low number of counterspells). In some ways Cataclysm is better and worse against the new Miracles but overall, I don't think it's a reliable sideboard card. Even for things like Aluren, it's not going to be reliable on the draw.

Note I'm not saying Gideon would necessarily be better in these cases.

[WashableWater1]

I'm not entirely sure what you're saying here. Cataclysm doesn't beat the combination of cards that you need a very narrow set of cards to beat. Sure it can be countered. The same can be said of any card that would be occupying that slot. I'm also not sure how we get from "Bad Balance" to win-more. The effect typically is looking to equalize the board, but you're better able to leverage keeping artifacts or bigger creatures.

[grayryker]

I'm not entirely sure what you're saying here. Cataclysm doesn't beat the combination of cards that you need a very narrow set of cards to beat. Sure it can be countered. The same can be said of any card that would be occupying that slot. I'm also not sure how we get from "Bad Balance" to win-more. The effect typically is looking to equalize the board, but you're better able to leverage keeping artifacts or bigger creatures.

I'm simply saying running 3 legendary land in the hopes of having one on the field when cataclysm resolves is an improbable magic christmas scenario. On top of this, having one land above your opponent is win-more, especially if you resolved cataclysm in a favorable scenario.

And you are over simplifying my argument. Unlike 4c control and miracles, traditional midrange/tempo/ control blue decks have a way higher counterspell density and this is (one reason) why you could rely on cataclysm resolving against old miracles. You are saying any sideboard card can be countered (obviously) but a cluncky 4 mana spell is hell of a lot harder to resolve when you take into many factors (daze, snapcaster, having opponent tapped out, having mana available, thalia tax, etc.) so whatever 4 mana spell we play, it should be nearly guaranteed to win us the game.

[Colin]

A quick opinion poll:

How do D&T players feel the average MTGO player stacks up to the real world? And across the various play options: Daily, general match making etc.?

I finally conceded to not having enough access to paper players and I bought into MTGO and have been play testing quite a bit.

I've found my success rate against the new U/W miracles, grixis and 4 color is much higher than i think my play skill warrants.

[Curby]

I'm simply saying running 3 legendary land in the hopes of having one on the field when cataclysm resolves is an improbable magic christmas scenario.

I'd love to see some math to back up that statement.


On top of this, having one land above your opponent is win-more, especially if you resolved cataclysm in a favorable scenario.

What I quoted above would apply to most cards. If you're already ahead, pretty much any additional spell will make your position even stronger. On the contrary, my understanding of "win-more" is a card that is ONLY viable when you're ahead, and that does not apply to Cataclysm.

The key is that Cat can dig you out of a hole, or break a stalemate in your favor. To be clear, Cat depends not on existing board state but on post-resolution board state. If your best 2-3 permanents beat those of the opponent, you're golden. I get that this is obvious, but what you're writing seems to imply some other interpretation of the card's role. TNN+Jitte is not the only way in which you can be behind, and in some cases (Revoker on Jitte with air force or SoFI) you can even attack profitably.

tl;dr I'm confused why Cat and "win-more" are even being talked about in the same sentence.

[grayryker]

I'd love to see some math to back up that statement.



What I quoted above would apply to most cards. If you're already ahead, pretty much any additional spell will make your position even stronger. On the contrary, my understanding of "win-more" is a card that is ONLY viable when you're ahead, and that does not apply to Cataclysm.

The key is that Cat can dig you out of a hole, or break a stalemate in your favor. To be clear, Cat depends not on existing board state but on post-resolution board state. If your best 2-3 permanents beat those of the opponent, you're golden. I get that this is obvious, but what you're writing seems to imply some other interpretation of the card's role. TNN+Jitte is not the only way in which you can be behind, and in some cases (Revoker on Jitte with air force or SoFI) you can even attack profitably.

tl;dr I'm confused why Cat and "win-more" are even being talked about in the same sentence.

I'm making a very simple argument. Running 3 lands that make you more susceptible to blood moon and legendary rule for the sake of playing a card that (a) you may not even draw into (b) does not even matter if resolved in your favor and (c) would be unlikely to be on the field anyhow etc. Again I can construct more arguments than this and they add up to suggest it is not worth running flagstones at all (for the sake of getting an extra win-more land from a resolved Cata).

The calculation is not worth doing but to give you a (simple generalized) idea, to have one copy of flagstones in your hand is 28% and 31.5% to have one or more (not a scenario you want). We can say we want one of two cataclysm at least in the first 7 turns and that is 39%. I don't want to review my probability theory but combine these two with other constraints and you are probably looking at sub 10% of a flagstone making a reasonable difference with a resolved Cata.

Now when evaluating Cata, my argument is also pretty simple. There is a lot of 'if' in making this card work. If our permanents are superior to their, if we reach the 4 mana in time, if the spell resolves, etc. For a sideboard card, you want a lot less 'ifs' imo. Every card has an 'if' constraint attached to it but the key idea is they differ in the number and probability of 'ifs'.

[Curby]

Ok, I see now that you meant win-more with the question of whether to run Flagstones. I think we still disagree on the overall potential of Cataclysm but that's another matter.

[grayryker]

A quick opinion poll:

How do D&T players feel the average MTGO player stacks up to the real world? And across the various play options: Daily, general match making etc.?

I finally conceded to not having enough access to paper players and I bought into MTGO and have been play testing quite a bit.

I've found my success rate against the new U/W miracles, grixis and 4 color is much higher than i think my play skill warrants.

Success rate depends on the number of samples you have against these decks. If we are talking 30+ games where you come out on top against each of these archetypes maybe you are just good. Overall, I don't have mtgo but just from seeing clips online I find players to be better decision makers. You will find more players who are more knowledgable about the format whereas paper players don't really review a wide variety of decks that go beyond their local meta. Sure they might do some last minute research for a big tournament but people I know don't study a match-up until they face it personally. Also, some decks are harder/easier to play online and that also affects decision making skills.

[WashableWater1]

I'm making a very simple argument. Running 3 lands that make you more susceptible to blood moon and legendary rule for the sake of playing a card that (a) you may not even draw into (b) does not even matter if resolved in your favor and (c) would be unlikely to be on the field anyhow etc. Again I can construct more arguments than this and they add up to suggest it is not worth running flagstones at all (for the sake of getting an extra win-more land from a resolved Cata).

The calculation is not worth doing but to give you a (simple generalized) idea, to have one copy of flagstones in your hand is 28% and 31.5% to have one or more (not a scenario you want). We can say we want one of two cataclysm at least in the first 7 turns and that is 39%. I don't want to review my probability theory but combine these two with other constraints and you are probably looking at sub 10% of a flagstone making a reasonable difference with a resolved Cata.

Now when evaluating Cata, my argument is also pretty simple. There is a lot of 'if' in making this card work. If our permanents are superior to their, if we reach the 4 mana in time, if the spell resolves, etc. For a sideboard card, you want a lot less 'ifs' imo. Every card has an 'if' constraint attached to it but the key idea is they differ in the number and probability of 'ifs'.

The Legend rule is not exactly a problem for Flagstones. As for Blood Moon, my builds still run 6-7 basics. The cost of running it is incredibly low, and it allows for Cata into have Port online for their only land, or simply being slightly closer to casting spells again.

All those "Ifs" seem to be assuming that you bring in Cataclysm against random decks. You pick when to bring it in. You pick when you cast it. Against the decks that you want it, your creatures are almost always superior. Very few decks are running the same number of powerful artifacts, and typically the worst case scenario involves them keeping a Library or Dread of Night. The card takes Big Blue style decks that are typically more resistant to mana denial because they run more lands. You sort of force a game reset, where you play out the early game again. You are able to apply pressure and force them to cantrip into answers while choked on mana, and strand the expensive cards that Taxes typically has difficulty beating.

[Curby]

@Water, what's your Flagstones manabase look like?

[Medea_]

A quick opinion poll:

How do D&T players feel the average MTGO player stacks up to the real world? And across the various play options: Daily, general match making etc.?

I finally conceded to not having enough access to paper players and I bought into MTGO and have been play testing quite a bit.

I've found my success rate against the new U/W miracles, grixis and 4 color is much higher than i think my play skill warrants.

The general free to play tournament practice room has many pretty terrible players. It's a ton of people learning their decks and the MTGO client. Spend some time here when you first start out so you don't lose games to stupid stuff (and my god, does that happen in those first few games...), but then move on to paid events. People scoop too early, drop before playing sideboard games, etc. If you want experience against fringe decks though, this is a good place to find that.

The average MTGO Legacy player in a league is likely better than the average Joe who shows up to your Legacy night in town or maybe on par with people who go to play in Opens. They might not always be dedicated experts of the decks or anything, but play level is usually competent to good.

The great MTGO players (e.g. Legacy specialists like Bryant Cook) are wonderful to play against and likely better than most or all of the people you will play against locally. These players will be on par with what you see towards the end of an Open or GP in terms of skill.

edit: You also should be able to go infinite pretty easily on MTGO if you're a good player. I haven't put any money into the system other than what I paid for the deck. A 3-2 finish lets you enter another for free with about $2 profit to boot, and a 4-1 or better finish puts you pretty far ahead in terms of value with all the treasure chests you get.

[grayryker]

The Legend rule is not exactly a problem for Flagstones. As for Blood Moon, my builds still run 6-7 basics. The cost of running it is incredibly low, and it allows for Cata into have Port online for their only land, or simply being slightly closer to casting spells again.

All those "Ifs" seem to be assuming that you bring in Cataclysm against random decks. You pick when to bring it in. You pick when you cast it. Against the decks that you want it, your creatures are almost always superior. Very few decks are running the same number of powerful artifacts, and typically the worst case scenario involves them keeping a Library or Dread of Night. The card takes Big Blue style decks that are typically more resistant to mana denial because they run more lands. You sort of force a game reset, where you play out the early game again. You are able to apply pressure and force them to cantrip into answers while choked on mana, and strand the expensive cards that Taxes typically has difficulty beating.

I wasn't assuming "bring in Cataclysm against random decks"... I gave specific examples covering a variety of blue decks that people normally side it in against. All you did was describe to me what Cataclysm does without covering any of its flaws. In addition, I'm saying this idea of "slightly closer to casting spells again" is such a weak (and improbable) advantage it doesn't merit running flagstones purely to combo with Cataclysm. Contrary to popular belief, running 6-7 basics doesn't make a deck good to blood moon [I]especially in a non-fetchable build. Anyways, this topic has been discussed to death and it's time to move on.

[WashableWater1]

@Water, what's your Flagstones manabase look like?

I've been running this online:

4 Flagstones of Trokair
4 Wasteland
4 Rishadan Port
3 Karakas
6 Plains
2 Cavern of Souls

If I decided that Flagstones are a higher cost than I'm comfortable with Ill swap them 1:1 with Plains

[Stevestamopz]

@Water, what's your Flagstones manabase look like?

For reference, my manabase is:

1 Cavern of Souls
3 Flagstones of Trokair
3 Karakas
8 Plains
4 Rishadan Port
4 Wasteland

I remember Bahra played the full 4 but I just never bothered buying the 4th. I don't think it matters that much anyway because Cataclysm doesn't need Flagstones to be good. It's simply another utility land that has virtually no-downside to include in your mono-white deck and is a nice pay-off if you manage to be charmed enough to draw both Flagstones and Cataclysm and have Cataclysm resolve.

Also lol @ calling Cataclysm win-more while advocating for a 4 mana Planeswalker in the same spot.

[Colin]

Success rate depends on the number of samples you have against these decks. If we are talking 30+ games where you come out on top against each of these archetypes maybe you are just good. Overall, I don't have mtgo but just from seeing clips online I find players to be better decision makers. You will find more players who are more knowledgable about the format whereas paper players don't really review a wide variety of decks that go beyond their local meta. Sure they might do some last minute research for a big tournament but people I know don't study a match-up until they face it personally. Also, some decks are harder/easier to play online and that also affects decision making skills.

I'm just playing at this point, taking some tallies when I get to play against DTB instead of fringe. Maybe 15-20 matches against both Grixis and UWx. I'm probably ~75% game win rate and ~85% match win. I think Medea's response is probably why I'm experiencing these numbers. I need to play more league/pay to play events.


The general free to play tournament practice room has many pretty terrible players. It's a ton of people learning their decks and the MTGO client. Spend some time here when you first start out so you don't lose games to stupid stuff (and my god, does that happen in those first few games...), but then move on to paid events. People scoop too early, drop before playing sideboard games, etc. If you want experience against fringe decks though, this is a good place to find that.

The average MTGO Legacy player in a league is likely better than the average Joe who shows up to your Legacy night in town or maybe on par with people who go to play in Opens. They might not always be dedicated experts of the decks or anything, but play level is usually competent to good.

The great MTGO players (e.g. Legacy specialists like Bryant Cook) are wonderful to play against and likely better than most or all of the people you will play against locally. These players will be on par with what you see towards the end of an Open or GP in terms of skill.

edit: You also should be able to go infinite pretty easily on MTGO if you're a good player. I haven't put any money into the system other than what I paid for the deck. A 3-2 finish lets you enter another for free with about $2 profit to boot, and a 4-1 or better finish puts you pretty far ahead in terms of value with all the treasure chests you get.

I will put more focus into the pay-to-play. For reference, when I can make it out to large legacy/vintage events, I'm a pretty solid top 64 player. usually in contention for top 32 until I punt over something really stupid (or sit down to fucking tinfins in round 6 of eternal weekend in the 5-0 bracket and get turn 1'd two games in a row. seriously, did nobody have FOW sleeved up that day!)

I'm flying for EE7 and EW2017 and I just need to get in reps.

[WashableWater1]

A quick opinion poll:

How do D&T players feel the average MTGO player stacks up to the real world? And across the various play options: Daily, general match making etc.?

I finally conceded to not having enough access to paper players and I bought into MTGO and have been play testing quite a bit.

I've found my success rate against the new U/W miracles, grixis and 4 color is much higher than i think my play skill warrants.

My experience is that the skill ceiling is the same, the best players often are active online and in paper. I do find that the floor is significantly higher than paper, where I run into more newbies, people that borrow decks, and people that play because it's fun to do with your friends. These people I feel like I see less online. My experience is almost completely Leagues though.

[Medea_]

I'm just playing at this point, taking some tallies when I get to play against DTB instead of fringe. Maybe 15-20 matches against both Grixis and UWx. I'm probably ~75% game win rate and ~85% match win. I think Medea's response is probably why I'm experiencing these numbers. I need to play more league/pay to play events.



I will put more focus into the pay-to-play. For reference, when I can make it out to large legacy/vintage events, I'm a pretty solid top 64 player. usually in contention for top 32 until I punt over something really stupid (or sit down to fucking tinfins in round 6 of eternal weekend in the 5-0 bracket and get turn 1'd two games in a row. seriously, did nobody have FOW sleeved up that day!)

I'm flying for EE7 and EW2017 and I just need to get in reps.

Ahahahaha, I'm pretty sure that was my roommate. Either that, or there was another guy who went 6-0 with Tin Fins.

[grayryker]

Anyone find BR Reanimator to be an unfavorable match-up? I've definitely lost more than I've won with either mono white and the multicolored version of the deck. Being locked down by Unmask, Collective Brutality, and Chancellor of the Annex games 2 and 3, not drawing the right sideboard card, none of your cards doing anything remotely effective to stop their sheenanigans, etc... I don't think I am playing poorly in this fairly straightforward match-up.

I've had some success with Faerie Macabre as a quick playable interaction past Chancellor and Thalia (this is where surgical extraction lets me down). It's pretty decent against Lands as well. I feel somewhat ambivalent about Containment Priest. Was wondering how many cards you guys dedicate to this match-up.

[WashableWater1]

I find it reasonably unfavorable, but it's just inconsistent enough and we pack enough answers that I don't think it's terrible. My current grave hate side board is 2-2-2 Containment Priest, RiP, and Macabre. My sideboarding plan always takes in Path and Pithing Needle when I run it. Path is pretty obvious, they go fast and having more ways to beat turn one fatty is necessary. Needle on Griselbrand is unexciting, but if you can stop them from drawing 7-14 he's actually not that scary. It clips his wings enough for me, and that's how I lose most games.

[Medea_]

Anyone find BR Reanimator to be an unfavorable match-up? I've definitely lost more than I've won with either mono white and the multicolored version of the deck. Being locked down by Unmask, Collective Brutality, and Chancellor of the Annex games 2 and 3, not drawing the right sideboard card, none of your cards doing anything remotely effective to stop their sheenanigans, etc... I don't think I am playing poorly in this fairly straightforward match-up.

I've had some success with Faerie Macabre as a quick playable interaction past Chancellor and Thalia (this is where surgical extraction lets me down). It's pretty decent against Lands as well. I feel somewhat ambivalent about Containment Priest. Was wondering how many cards you guys dedicate to this match-up.

http://www.thrabenuniversity.com/?page_id=1252

[rostov]

Anyone find BR Reanimator to be an unfavorable match-up? I've definitely lost more than I've won with either mono white and the multicolored version of the deck. Being locked down by Unmask, Collective Brutality, and Chancellor of the Annex games 2 and 3, not drawing the right sideboard card, none of your cards doing anything remotely effective to stop their sheenanigans, etc... I don't think I am playing poorly in this fairly straightforward match-up.

I've had some success with Faerie Macabre as a quick playable interaction past Chancellor and Thalia (this is where surgical extraction lets me down). It's pretty decent against Lands as well. I feel somewhat ambivalent about Containment Priest. Was wondering how many cards you guys dedicate to this match-up.

Thanks medea for latest article. Brings back memories.

13yo son's scribbled notes, GP Vegas, round 5:
G1:
T1, G (I'm guessing griselbrand) in GY / karakas.
T2, thoughtsieze vial / plains, mom.
T3 (my comment: basically with karakas in play the rest went down locked in)

SB: 12 (I'll ask him later what the heck he took out. Guessing the SFM package plus a few avengers and some)

G2:
T1, Iona, faerie / karakas
T2, collective brutality, canonist / topdeck RIP, plains, RIP
T3: (my comment: things went pretty downhill for opponent)

SB registered:

[Sideboard]
2 Surgical Extraction
1 Faerie Macabre
2 Rest in Peace
1 Manriki-Gusari
2 Council's Judgement
2 Containment Priest
3 Ethersworn Canonist
2 Sanctum Prelate

He's got 3 mirran's in his mono-white MB, and has been very grumpy pre-event about reanimator, having lost a lot of online and training matches against them. Took me a bit to convince him to go easy on a playset of Macabres when registering but still his GY hate was still high for a wide meta... He was happy with results though, but attributed G1 to pure luck having to be on the draw with a karakas and nothing bad coming out of the GY yet....

[iatee]

BR feels like a bad matchup because you don't have any agency when you lose, but I am pretty sure my win % is something like 75% vs it overall. It's annoying to face it, since you still can always be turn 1'd twice in a row - but I definitely think we're favored, unless they really stack their board to beat DnT.

As with all combo matchups, you really want to win the die roll. But even if you don't and lose g1 - the deck loses to itself a good % of the time and white gets to play some of the best sideboard cards against it.

Unlike a lot of legacy decks, we have tons of answers to a reanimated Chancellor / whatever big dude in the main. I always play at least two Path to Exile, which is card that's both good against them without being super narrow graveyard hate.

Faerie Macabre allows you to beat hands that a FoW deck couldn't beat.

[Medea_]

BR feels like a bad matchup because you don't have any agency when you lose, but I am pretty sure my win % is something like 75% vs it overall. It's annoying to face it, since you still can always be turn 1'd twice in a row - but I definitely think we're favored, unless they really stack their board to beat DnT.

My online win percentage against it is probably in that ballpark as well. The B/R Reanimator players really feel favored, but I don't see it. Unless you get the nuts twice in three games, we pull ahead pretty quickly.

[grayryker]

Thanks for the input everyone. The games that I do win are almost purely due to their slow starts, rather than how exceptional my hand is. I'm interested in how probable they can reanimate a turn 1 creature because that percentage has always felt quite high from my perspective (maybe I can google later). Overall, it feels like it comes down to their opening hand rather than my own.

There is an interesting data on the mtglegacy reddit page where DnT is scoring in the 40ish percentage rate. This would be an interesting to discuss I think on whether we take this percentage seriously.

[rostov]

Meant to ask: one thing that wrecked my DnT darling during Vegas was Dread of Night. Is Council's judgement the preferred way to deal with that?

[Medea_]

Thanks for the input everyone. The games that I do win are almost purely due to their slow starts, rather than how exceptional my hand is. I'm interested in how probable they can reanimate a turn 1 creature because that percentage has always felt quite high from my perspective (maybe I can google later). Overall, it feels like it comes down to their opening hand rather than my own.


There is an interesting data on the mtglegacy reddit page where DnT is scoring in the 40ish percentage rate. This would be an interesting to discuss I think on whether we take this percentage seriously.

The RB Reanimator primer on this site has some of that stuff. It's worth reading if you are struggling. I think there's also math about how likely you are to find X missing piece.

I haven't checked in the last few days, but my MTGO Legacy League win percentage somewhere around the 70% mark. The average pilot is bombing hard though. Not sure how much of that is due to budgetary constraints, but something is way off there.


Meant to ask: one thing that wrecked my DnT darling during Vegas was Dread of Night. Is Council's judgement the preferred way to deal with that?

Council's Judgement gets it off the table, and a Gideon, Ally of Zendikar emblem negates it.

[rostov]

Understood. From what I understand the council's didn't go in (belief was to board in storm disablers) post-board against one of the rounds against ANT, and ANT boarded in the single dread and drew it early. Guess we'll chalk it to lesson learnt / inexperience with understanding format.

Cheers

[grayryker]

The RB Reanimator primer on this site has some of that stuff. It's worth reading if you are struggling. I think there's also math about how likely you are to find X missing piece.

I haven't checked in the last few days, but my MTGO Legacy League win percentage somewhere around the 70% mark. The average pilot is bombing hard though. Not sure how much of that is due to budgetary constraints, but something is way off there.



Council's Judgement gets it off the table, and a Gideon, Ally of Zendikar emblem negates it.

Do you mean it's 70% overall or just against Reanimator? Either way that's extremely high and it would be nice if you post some sort of data sheet with samples (if MTGO provides this). This sort of data would be useful for all of us.

The data posted by reddit user nocley and Julian Knab all seem to indicate DnT is not doing too well at the moment. I think it would be foolish to dismiss this as "players who do badly are new or using a budget version or both". Multiple statistics are placing this deck below 45%, which is surprising even on MTGO where Delver has greater popularity than on paper. There is a lot of overlapping consistency between the data posted by the two. Looking at Knab's article, some outliers definitely exist (100% against Infect on 3 samples) but the others seem much more consistent (54% against Show and Tell, with 13 matches) and justifiable, if not shocking (25% against Grixis Delver, with 25 samples). Also, the data posted by nocley seems to strongly indicate that meta differences (local vs online vs paper tournaments, etc.) are not substantial to the winning percentage of a deck, given enough samples.

[grayryker]

Understood. From what I understand the council's didn't go in (belief was to board in storm disablers) post-board against one of the rounds against ANT, and ANT boarded in the single dread and drew it early. Guess we'll chalk it to lesson learnt / inexperience with understanding format.

Cheers

Well to be fair, Council's of Judgment is extremely bad against 99% of that deck. So it's not a bad idea to NOT sideboard this card in, unless you knew beforehand that Dread of Night is coming in.

You probably want to side in a single artifact/enchantment hate like Seal of Cleansing, if you have the space, as you can also hit all the mana rocks. Ratchet Bomb is also an underrated option in my opinion, as it handles turn 1 Empty the Warren and is fairly versatile.

[WashableWater1]

Well to be fair, Council's of Judgment is extremely bad against 99% of that deck. So it's not a bad idea to NOT sideboard this card in, unless you knew beforehand that Dread of Night is coming in.

You probably want to side in a single artifact/enchantment hate like Seal of Cleansing, if you have the space, as you can also hit all the mana rocks. Ratchet Bomb is also an underrated option in my opinion, as it handles turn 1 Empty the Warren and is fairly versatile.

Whenever I used to play ANT I'd always have 3 Dreads in the board. I always bring in all my CJs because I expect them to have something like that, and there are a ton of bad cards in the maindeck to cut.


Do you mean it's 70% overall or just against Reanimator? Either way that's extremely high and it would be nice if you post some sort of data sheet with samples (if MTGO provides this). This sort of data would be useful for all of us.

The data posted by reddit user nocley and Julian Knab all seem to indicate DnT is not doing too well at the moment. I think it would be foolish to dismiss this as "players who do badly are new or using a budget version or both". Multiple statistics are placing this deck below 45%, which is surprising even on MTGO where Delver has greater popularity than on paper. There is a lot of overlapping consistency between the data posted by the two. Looking at Knab's article, some outliers definitely exist (100% against Infect on 3 samples) but the others seem much more consistent (54% against Show and Tell, with 13 matches) and justifiable, if not shocking (25% against Grixis Delver, with 25 samples). Also, the data posted by nocley seems to strongly indicate that meta differences (local vs online vs paper tournaments, etc.) are not substantial to the winning percentage of a deck, given enough samples.

Where is this data being gathered from? I have found that Delver and Sneak and Show have been tougher to beat up on recently. I'm seeing way more Omni's out of SnS and actually seeing dedicated DnT hate out of Grixis Delver. I've faced multiple Dreads and Null Rods.

[grayryker]

Whenever I used to play ANT I'd always have 3 Dreads in the board. I always bring in all my CJs because I expect them to have something like that, and there are a ton of bad cards in the maindeck to cut.



Where is this data being gathered from? I have found that Delver and Sneak and Show have been tougher to beat up on recently. I'm seeing way more Omni's out of SnS and actually seeing dedicated DnT hate out of Grixis Delver. I've faced multiple Dreads and Null Rods.

Yeah I see variations of 0 to 3 Dread of Nights and that's probably enough incentive to bring in Council's Judgment actually.

Here is Julian's article ( http://itsjulian.com/too-much-information-mkm-series-frankfurt/ ) and you can find the other data from reddit, which are split between two posts. Objectively speaking, it looks like Deathblade has the best percentages in the meta due to its near 60% win percentage in both data. I've played the deck and it's fantastic, with a ton of early and late game power.

There are many reasons why Grixis Delver has an edge over Death and Taxes. The first is that mana denial does nothing to this deck except with Thalia, as they can operate on 1 mana and have access to Deathrite Shaman. It's a 3-color deck that doesn't fear Wasteland. The second is due to cards like Cabal Therapy which really hurt your late game by taking away equipments taken by Stoneforge. They also have multiple ways to deal with your Aether Vial even on the draw, which slows down you a lot. Sultai Delver is a bit easier in my opinion but only because they have a higher curve. Deathrite Shaman is one of the main reasons why I'm moving away from Port/Wasteland but also many other non-shaman decks (Show/Tell, Reanimator, Lands, Elves, Burn, Storm, etc.) are rarely affected by Port/Wasteland as well. I would say out of those decks, Port/Wasteland can be good against Lands - with Rest in Peace - but the odds are not likely when they have their own Wasteland/Port and Life from the Loam.

And yeah Omnishow is a pretty bad match-up.

[FeX]

Grixis Delver is an interesting one. many grixis players have considered DnT as one of their worst MUs but lately DnT seems to struggle.
i personally have more trouble post-board than pre-board and i think it really depends on how much DnT hate the Grixis Delver player is packing in the sideboard. i really dont know how to rate this MU. I've always considered it to be pretty even or slightly in our favor rather than that much in favor of the Grixis player...

[Medea_]

Do you mean it's 70% overall or just against Reanimator? Either way that's extremely high and it would be nice if you post some sort of data sheet with samples (if MTGO provides this). This sort of data would be useful for all of us.

Yeah, I think I'm just short of 70% overall match win percentage on MTGO. When the next League season (or whatever they call it) starts up in like a week, I'm going to start getting at least some minimal statistics on specific matches.


have found that Delver and Sneak and Show have been tougher to beat up on recently. I'm seeing way more Omni's out of SnS and actually seeing dedicated DnT hate out of Grixis Delver. I've faced multiple Dreads and Null Rods.

The post board games have always been harder vs Delver, it has just been exacerbated a bit with Miracles gone. Without having to fight that monster, opposing decks have more room for annoying things like K. Command and Marsh Casualties.


Yeah I see variations of 0 to 3 Dread of Nights and that's probably enough incentive to bring in Council's Judgment actually.

I've been alternating bringing in Gideon and Council's Judgment against ANT for game 3 scenarios where I saw one or more Dread of Night in game 2. I'm not sure that I necessarily like either or which is better if one of them is necessary. It may be play/draw dependent as well. Council's Judgment occasionally can snipe a piece of artifact mana that was played out early and is one mana more efficient at answering Dread of Night. Gideon provides a bit of "haste" damage in the form of his emblem, assuming you have some creatures on board; that surprise factor is not irrelevant. Gideon also threatens 7 damage the following turn, which closes the Ad Nauseum window very quickly.

[zakzes]

Admist talk of Armageddon and Cataclysm, have we considered Land Tax at all? It could be helpful against decks like Lands, or decks we bring cataclysm in against. I don't know if it's worth a damn or not, but it feels worth trying.

[zakzes]

And when I suggest Land Tax, I mean 1-2 sideboard.

[Medea_]

Admist talk of Armageddon and Cataclysm, have we considered Land Tax at all? It could be helpful against decks like Lands, or decks we bring cataclysm in against. I don't know if it's worth a damn or not, but it feels worth trying.

Land Tax has rarely been good enough for Legacy. Even when you try to abuse it with Brainstorm and Scroll Rack, it still usually ends up on the wrong side of playability. It doesn't do enough on its own, and even with other enablers, you are still working too hard for something that doesn't win you the game.

[zakzes]

Land Tax has rarely been good enough for Legacy. Even when you try to abuse it with Brainstorm and Scroll Rack, it still usually ends up on the wrong side of playability. It doesn't do enough on its own, and even with other enablers, you are still working too hard for something that doesn't win you the game.I've never liked it as a "combo" with scroll rack. But, and I haven't play tested it at all, I figure if we can make our draws more live by removing basics from our library, which simultaneously garuntees us to hit our resources/allowing us to gain an even better advantage from cataclysm it could be worth it. I agree it has not previously been legacy-playable and I doubt there's much to support it being good now.

[iatee]

If I felt like I needed to beat Lands (I don't, I think it's one of our better match-ups and with W/R it's probably 75-25), I would play up to 4 Sanctum Prelates long before I would even think about playing Land Tax. Why play a card that could sometimes be good against a deck when you can play cards that are consistently great against the deck?

[zakzes]

Makes sense, just throwing it out. I'm still on mono-w and Lands can feel tedious at times.

[pedro]

in the 75 I play:
2 prelate
1 jailer
2 faerie macabre
2 rip
1 needle

Since I play these and 2 recruiters, lands is no more that hard to beat. (I mean post side)

[zakzes]

in the 75 I play:
2 prelate
1 jailer
2 faerie macabre
2 rip
1 needle

Since I play these and 2 recruiters, lands is no more that hard to beat. (I mean post side)I play almost the same, no jailer, and 2 surgicals instead of macabre. I just often find myself under a tabernacle+ghost quarter lock.

[pedro]

Well, in my opinion, palace jailer vs lands is one of the most powerful cards. I usually play it "random" to start drawing 2 cards each turn.
I prefer faerie over surgicals because they are recuitable, exile 2 cards (works well vs reanimator decks for example) and it's an ability, not a spell.
Against problematic lands (tabernacle and barbarian ring) the only way is destroy them with wasteland and exile them with rip or faerie macabre.
Against prelate on 2 they can't do much, you block loam and punishing fire.
With these cards I don't feel safe but I think they are enough, I'm quite comfortable.

My aim is understand how to deal vs stoneblade. I have a friend that used to play miracles; He is a nice player and I NEVER won versus his new stoneblade deck.
Online is similar....to me, It seems much difficult to win vs stoneblade than miracles (new or older with top).
True name nemesis is a big problem when placed in a control deck (In BUG decks seems less relevant to me).

In general, I'm still evaluating Serra Avenger, sometimes it is not so good.

[CptHaddock]

If I felt like I needed to beat Lands (I don't, I think it's one of our better match-ups and with W/R it's probably 75-25), I would play up to 4 Sanctum Prelates long before I would even think about playing Land Tax. Why play a card that could sometimes be good against a deck when you can play cards that are consistently great against the deck?

Would you mind sharing your current Wr D&T list? Is it still basically what you top 16'd with at SCG Worcester with a few sideboard changes?

[IRS]

Grixis Delver is an interesting one. many grixis players have considered DnT as one of their worst MUs but lately DnT seems to struggle.
i personally have more trouble post-board than pre-board and i think it really depends on how much DnT hate the Grixis Delver player is packing in the sideboard. i really dont know how to rate this MU. I've always considered it to be pretty even or slightly in our favor rather than that much in favor of the Grixis player...

I have been playing Stifle Grixis Delver (http://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=16548&d=302361&f=LE). The only change is I subsitute the diabolic edict in the sideboard for a Fatal Push (sometimes I take the forked bolt in the main and add a 2nd push).

I feel that the D&T players have a strong edge in case of the classic W builds to decisive for splash builds (If you have no Bolt/Forked bolt and they resolve Magus it is GG, Cunning Sparkmage/Orzhov Pontiff are very crippling). The most problematic issue is that the mana denial suite in DT is a lot stronger combined with the extremely fragile mana base of Grixis Delver. Wasteland hurts Grixis a ton but it is almost negligible for Mono white builds, combined with Rishadan Port and Thalia, means that as the game goes on you will not be able to cast spells, while DT just plows on with Vial and basic plains. StP stops Angler cold in its track even if it gets to come down early. Sanctum Prelate on 1 pretty much kills you except if you are packing K Command/Diabolic Edict/Marsh Casualties/Deluge (rare).

Stifle/Daze can buy delver a little time, but eventually they are going to be mana constricted and run out of removal, and when that happens DT just steamrolls them since all its cards are very good versus Delver. My conclusion is that Delver needs a very good hand to beat DT, while DT only needs an average hand. They are going to need an early threat, removal and some counterspells and a lot of lands to prevent the mana constriction and that is lot to ask. DT only needs a good curve with some redundancy (mom+vial, SFM+thalia, or other easily pairable threats) and it can put Delver in a bind really fast. Getting charges on Jitte is almost always GG and batterskull on the field is almost impossible to deal pre-board. The only card that is hard for D+T to deal with is TNN, but you can easily swarm him by the time he gets it down, and SoFaI just makes him irrelevant.

Post board Grixis Delver will bring in some more cheap removal (Push, Edict, Forked Bolt), double Ancient Grudge, usually just a single DoN, dismember and Pithing Needle. He will usually board out Forces, Stifle/and or probe, many people board out Daze on the draw, I personally maybe shave 1 if needed. DT can board in Path to Exile which is devastating as Grixis Delver packs no basics. Rest in Peace is a bomb postboard as it denies DRS and Angler + potential snapcaster and Council's Judgement is good to take care of TNN and Dread of Night. D+T can also bring in Disenchant or maybe Leonin Relic-Warder to preempt DoN. So overall, I feel that the cards DT can bring are definitely more impactful than those Delver can bring in. In the case of the splash builds, post board is it even harder for Grixis Delver as the D+T player will also have more Pontiffs/Magus, Sparkmage all who are really strong. The fetches and nonbasics are going to make the mana denial game more even, but as Eetai states, this can almost always be negated by aggresively fetching Plains in the early game.

Just my .05 as a D+T and Grixis Delver player in paper.

[grayryker]

I have been playing Stifle Grixis Delver (http://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=16548&d=302361&f=LE). The only change is I subsitute the diabolic edict in the sideboard for a Fatal Push (sometimes I take the forked bolt in the main and add a 2nd push).

I feel that the D&T players have a strong edge in case of the classic W builds to decisive for splash builds (If you have no Bolt/Forked bolt and they resolve Magus it is GG, Cunning Sparkmage/Orzhov Pontiff are very crippling). The most problematic issue is that the mana denial suite in DT is a lot stronger combined with the extremely fragile mana base of Grixis Delver. Wasteland hurts Grixis a ton but it is almost negligible for Mono white builds, combined with Rishadan Port and Thalia, means that as the game goes on you will not be able to cast spells, while DT just plows on with Vial and basic plains. StP stops Angler cold in its track even if it gets to come down early. Sanctum Prelate on 1 pretty much kills you except if you are packing K Command/Diabolic Edict/Marsh Casualties/Deluge (rare).

Stifle/Daze can buy delver a little time, but eventually they are going to be mana constricted and run out of removal, and when that happens DT just steamrolls them since all its cards are very good versus Delver. My conclusion is that Delver needs a very good hand to beat DT, while DT only needs an average hand. They are going to need an early threat, removal and some counterspells and a lot of lands to prevent the mana constriction and that is lot to ask. DT only needs a good curve with some redundancy (mom+vial, SFM+thalia, or other easily pairable threats) and it can put Delver in a bind really fast. Getting charges on Jitte is almost always GG and batterskull on the field is almost impossible to deal pre-board. The only card that is hard for D+T to deal with is TNN, but you can easily swarm him by the time he gets it down, and SoFaI just makes him irrelevant.

Post board Grixis Delver will bring in some more cheap removal (Push, Edict, Forked Bolt), double Ancient Grudge, usually just a single DoN, dismember and Pithing Needle. He will usually board out Forces, Stifle/and or probe, many people board out Daze on the draw, I personally maybe shave 1 if needed. DT can board in Path to Exile which is devastating as Grixis Delver packs no basics. Rest in Peace is a bomb postboard as it denies DRS and Angler + potential snapcaster and Council's Judgement is good to take care of TNN and Dread of Night. D+T can also bring in Disenchant or maybe Leonin Relic-Warder to preempt DoN. So overall, I feel that the cards DT can bring are definitely more impactful than those Delver can bring in.

Just my .05 as a D+T and Grixis Delver player in paper.

With the ideal Aether Vial + Thalia + Wasteland/Port Hand, yes Grixis Delver will typically lose. But most hands are not like this and the game will come down to Stoneforge getting equipments and providing stronger inevitability. You can't wasteland/port a Grixis player when you have a mana hungry hand. The newest builds in DnT have more shiny toys to play with but at the expense of a higher curve; before, the deck could safely beat stick with Avengers and Crusaders to finish the game much more quickly. I think game 1, DnT is definitely favored overall.

Now game 2 and 3, I think is a different story. Delver can actually find its sideboard cards in time with cantrips. Rest in Peace is powerful but does very little when you're drawing it past turn 5. Bringing in reactive cards like Disenchant for a card that the opponent might already have gotten value from feels quite awkward. Kolaghan's Command and Ancient Grudge are not always in grixis sideboard but when they appear, it is a huge boost in percentage points for the grixis player.

I've been looking at some Grixis Delver vs DnT matches on YouTube to analyze why the percentages against Grixis Delver is so low (some data, on both paper and mtgo, range from 18% to 30%, which honestly I did not expect). Game 1 definitely feels like DnT has an edge but really I think it's the post games that is shifting the percentage points.

[redtwister]

What are people running right now? I haven't been playing legacy as much, but when I do I am running very close to the list Medea_ posted here

http://www.thrabenuniversity.com/?p=1179

Personally trying Grixis Control too, but I just miss DnT. It's my style of play much more than Uxx decks or combo..

[IRS]

Now game 2 and 3, I think is a different story. Delver can actually find its sideboard cards in time with cantrips. Rest in Peace is powerful but does very little when you're drawing it past turn 5. Bringing in reactive cards like Disenchant for a card that the opponent might already have gotten value from feels quite awkward. Kolaghan's Command and Ancient Grudge are not always in grixis sideboard but when they appear, it is a huge boost in percentage points for the grixis player.

I agree on RiP after Turn 5 and Disenchant (I do not play it myself). Ancient Grudge is definitely on the board of Grixis Delver with the amount of Blade decks running around. Kolaghan's Command is the new trend in bigger Grixis Delver lists and very present in Grixis Control builds (Which I find heavily unfavorable for D&T mainly because Kommand is a huge blow everytime).

[grayryker]

I agree on RiP after Turn 5 and Disenchant (I do not play it myself). Ancient Grudge is definitely on the board of Grixis Delver with the amount of Blade decks running around. Kolaghan's Command is the new trend in bigger Grixis Delver lists and very present in Grixis Control builds (Which I find heavily unfavorable for D&T mainly because Kommand is a huge blow everytime).

Yes Kolaghans Command is a complete disaster for us.

[iatee]

Would you mind sharing your current Wr D&T list? Is it still basically what you top 16'd with at SCG Worcester with a few sideboard changes?

So based off that list: https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/613117#paper

I'm now at
-1 Cavern + 1 Plains (with Miracles gone you can go lighter on Caverns)
-1 Mirran -1 SotL + 2 Serra Avengers / or testing out random stuff.

Have actually been trying Thraben Inspector lately, haven't had enough games with it to come to any real conclusion.

In the board I have been playing with:
2 Faerie
2 Containment Priest
2 Ethersworn
2 Relic Warder
2 Mirran Crusader
1 Cunning Sparkmage
3 Path to Exile
1 Sanctum Prelate

If I were going to an event soon, I think I would try to have at least 3 spots in the board for Czech Pile, which I think a lot of people consider the deck to beat right now. Rest in Peace is solid and I think Fiendslayer Paladin or Mystic Crusader are both cards we should be playing around with. Fiendslayer Paladin is more useful vs Delver and Burn, but Mystic Crusader has evasion (eventually) / won't be halted by a wall of Snapcasters and Deathrites or a Leovold.

So maybe something like:

2 Faerie
1 Containment Priest
2 Ethersworn
2 RIP
1 Relic Warder
1 Mirran Crusader
1 Fiendslayer Paladin
1 Mystic Crusader
1 Cunning Sparkmage
3 Path to Exile

[grayryker]

So based off that list: https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/613117#paper

I'm now at
-1 Cavern + 1 Plains (with Miracles gone you can go lighter on Caverns)
-1 Mirran -1 SotL + 2 Serra Avengers / or testing out random stuff.

Have actually been trying Thraben Inspector lately, haven't had enough games with it to come to any real conclusion.

In the board I have been playing with:
2 Faerie
2 Containment Priest
2 Ethersworn
2 Relic Warder
2 Mirran Crusader
1 Cunning Sparkmage
3 Path to Exile
1 Sanctum Prelate

If I were going to an event soon, I think I would try to have at least 3 spots in the board for Czech Pile, which I think a lot of people consider the deck to beat right now. Rest in Peace is solid and I think Fiendslayer Paladin or Mystic Crusader are both cards we should be playing around with. Fiendslayer Paladin is more useful vs Delver and Burn, but Mystic Crusader has evasion (eventually) / won't be halted by a wall of Snapcasters and Deathrites or a Leovold.

So maybe something like:

2 Faerie
1 Containment Priest
2 Ethersworn
2 RIP
1 Relic Warder
1 Mirran Crusader
1 Fiendslayer Paladin
1 Mystic Crusader
1 Cunning Sparkmage
3 Path to Exile

I think Fiendslayer Paladin is better than the Mystic Crusader in this match-up. If we're bringing Rest in Peace, it kind of negates the Mystic Crusader's evasion, which is its main appeal over Paladin. Without threshold, Paladin is more evasive on the board getting around Strix, Snapcaster, and Deathrite Shaman. With an equipment on, its a much better card usually. Currently, I'm running a human tribal version of DnT and I like the 1/1 split between Fiendslayer and Mirran Crusader, being able to use Recruiter to fetch whichever beater is superior in a given match-up.

I'm starting to see some lists play Liliana the Last Hope in the sideboard. That card can single-handedly beat this deck like the other 3-drops in that deck. Sanctum Prelate seems like our best board protection on x=3, with Mother of Runes to protect it (hopefully).

[iatee]

I think Fiendslayer Paladin is better than the Mystic Crusader in this match-up. If we're bringing Rest in Peace, it kind of negates the Mystic Crusader's evasion, which is its main appeal over Paladin. Without threshold, Paladin is more evasive on the board getting around Strix, Snapcaster, and Deathrite Shaman. With an equipment on, its a much better card usually. Currently, I'm running a human tribal version of DnT and I like the 1/1 split between Fiendslayer and Mirran Crusader, being able to use Recruiter to fetch whichever beater is superior in a given match-up.

I'm starting to see some lists play Liliana the Last Hope in the sideboard. That card can single-handedly beat this deck like the other 3-drops in that deck. Sanctum Prelate seems like our best board protection on x=3, with Mother of Runes to protect it (hopefully).

Yeah, that's a good point, I hadn't even thought about it - we're so not graveyard dependent that you forget that RiP ever has downsides. Still 'real' pro-RB means that Mystic Crusader (or Paladin En-Vec) still has evasion and gets past everything that isn't Snapcaster or TNN.

[Barook]

What are people running right now? I haven't been playing legacy as much, but when I do I am running very close to the list Medea_ posted here

http://www.thrabenuniversity.com/?p=1179

Personally trying Grixis Control too, but I just miss DnT. It's my style of play much more than Uxx decks or combo..
Can anybody post the list? Or can Medea fix the connection error?

[Medea_]

Can anybody post the list? Or can Medea fix the connection error?

I'm aware of the issue. My tech guy who resets it is on vacation and might night be able to get to it for a little while. Looks like I need to learn how to do that myself...

My stock WW list at the moment is something like:

4 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
4 Stoneforge Mystic
4 Flickerwisp
4 Mother of Runes
2 Recruiter of the Guard
2 Mirran Crusader
2 Serra Avenger
1 Sanctum Prelate
3 Phyrexian Revoker
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Aether Vial
1 Batterskull
1 Sword of Fire and Ice
1 Umezawa's Jitte
4 Wasteland
4 Rishadan Port
2 Cavern of Souls
3 Karakas
10 Plains

Sideboard
2 Rest in Peace
2 Containment Priest
2 Surgical Extraction
2 Ethersworn Canonist
2 Path to Exile
1 Sword of Light and Shadow
2 Gideon, Ally of Zendikar
2 Council's Judgment

[geneyquakes]

My stock WW list


Would like to second this exact list, particularly the 37 spells. This is what stock DnT looks like.

For reference, this is the most recent list of mine I have on the internets: http://www.hareruyamtg.com/jp/k/kD08340W/
(Note that the Swords to Plowshares in the board is a mistake and is actually a Sword of War and Peace. This is also intentionally very low on graveyard, bump up the RiP numbers and add Surgical or Macabre if you expect Reanimator and Friends)

The 26 creatures are perfect. This is not to say that they are set in stone and you can't change them if you have good reason, but it is well balanced, no nonsense, and has 4 of all the good ones. There are lots of fair decks so the Avengers and Crusaders represent your rumbling potential, and are a good clock at worst. You can fiddle around and find room for a Palace Jailer, Spirit of the Labyrinth, etc. if you think they are particularly good, but if you are unsure what to play this is a great starting point. I don't see any reason for cute or durdly one ofs at the moment. Prelate is the only one-of I advocate for right now, but thats the number that I have felt is correct for a long time and it still feels right. All the 2 and 3 ofs more than pull their weight, and the 4-ofs require no introduction.

The 11 spells rarely ever change, and there is no reason to be playing with them now. The best three equipment just are what they are.

I am generally in the "9 Plains plus have some fun with my lands" camp, hence the Mishra's Factory, but 10 Plains and 2 Caverns is a pretty good sweet spot of strong utility and limited nonsense.

[screallix]

Last week, Martin Nielsen played Death and Taxes in a legacy league. He also wrote some words about the deck. I've been thinking about switching from Maverick to Death and Taxes but I'm unsure how good both decks are at the moment.

More at: https://snapcardster.com/blog/the-fun-police/

[sarpedon]

We have an Ixalan preview card that is worth discussing.

Kimalla's Sunwing
2W
Creature - Dinosaur
Flying
Creatures your opponents control enter the battlefield tapped.
2/3

Notably, we can't search for this with Recruiter of the Guard, and I don't think it's good enough; I think we'd rather play Thalia, Heretic Cathar. But, still, it's interesting.

Image on Mythic Spoiler: http://mythicspoiler.com/ixa/cards/kimallassunwing.html

[Mannaus]

Hello,

To be honest I cannot see any advantage over Thalia, Heretic Cathar. The body is not interesting; a 2/3 trades one for one with delver and takes all imaginable hate. Thalia taps both lands and creatures, is legendary thus interacts with Karakas, plus has first strike and is tutorable, for the exact mana cost. At the moment, Thalia is already too heavy on mana, and thus not fulfilling its disruption duty early enough. I believe the 2W cost, or worse 1WW cost, is pretty high at the moment, so only worth to enter creatures/spells at that cost that are truly reversing momentum, or at least giving you an edge in the game.

[grayryker]

I always lean towards an aggro suite in a mono white shell, with 3 Avengers and 2 Crusaders. This deck isn't a pure prison deck so it needs to apply offensive pressure as soon as possible because eventually the taxing wears off (if it taxed at all). I also don't mind the old lists with 3-4 Vryn Wingmare that is useful in combat (trading delver, evasion) and taxes simultaneously.

[Medea_]

If THC is on the wrong side of the line of playability in most cases, that is too. If we are getting white dinos of that ilk though, we might be able to find a new toy in the set.

[WashableWater1]

I am generally in the "9 Plains plus have some fun with my lands" camp, hence the Mishra's Factory, but 10 Plains and 2 Caverns is a pretty good sweet spot of strong utility and limited nonsense.

I'm a huge fan of the 9 Plains + 3 Flex Lands manabase. The 10th Plains is just my favorite flex land. Its this awesome nonbasic that produces all your colors, and is also immune to Wasteland and Blood Moon!




How are people feeling about Revoker these days, specifically against Czech Pile and Mentor Control/Miracles. It has more live targets in Czech Pile, but I find myself boarding it out in that matchup because it is pretty unexciting most of the time.

Against Mentor Control/Miracles, the only cards to name are JTMS or EE. Still, I feel like JTMS is a pretty integral part of their deck, and you want all the bodies you can muster. How does everyone else sideboard against the deck? I find myself changing up my plan a lot, with Council's Judgment and Plow being the big cards that I'm never sure about how many, if any, make sense.

[geneyquakes]

I'm a huge fan of the 9 Plains + 3 Flex Lands manabase. The 10th Plains is just my favorite flex land. Its this awesome nonbasic that produces all your colors, and is also immune to Wasteland and Blood Moon!




Thats true. I think that 8 is the bare, bare minimum for mono-white and then there are 4 more slots. Plains is usually first place by a lot for the first slot, and there is a hypothetic combination of Wasteland, Back to Basics, and Price of Progress that exists where 12 Plains would be right.

I just personally like attacking Jace with Mishra's Factory way too much.


As for Revoker, it is often something I want 1 or 2 of against fair decks but there is no need to overload. You want as many as possilble against Storm and Sneak Attack, and exactly zero in some spots, but against DRS decks with few other targets I will often want 1, and against Jace decks I like two as spot.

Against Czech Pile, Revokers are usually right on the 57~63 borderline, you can leave them in or cut them depending on how much is coming in or out. You get a lot of value out of the first, but then they drop off. They are hardly ever awful though, as it hits their best card and the lynchpin of their manabase. My default is two if there are a lot of walkers and one if there aren't.

How much I sideboard against UW depends on how heavily they are going in on Mentor. If it looks like a 3-4 Mentor deck plus things like Clique and SCM then I don't mind having a lot. 4 can be overkill, but undisrupted Mentors murder us very quickly. I like 2 Revokers here because of Jace, but wouldn't mind 3 if there are excess Walkers, multiple EE, or anything like that. Gideons and any pro-white sword are excellent here. Council's Judgment kills Jace and is a general catch all. If they are extremely cantrip or Snapcaster heavy Ethersworn Canonist is also fine to have. As for cuts, I often do something like one Revoker, one Avenger, one Crusader, one or two Plows. All of these are fine but the brawlers just eat plows like anyone else and their stats matter less. Sanctum Prelate is also kind of borderline IMO if they have multiple different costed ways of hitting it, but its also hard to cut against 4x Brainstorm Ponder Portent Plow so that might be going to far. I generally keep the core of the deck the same but trim a little around the edges to clear up some space for a few heavy hitters.

[grayryker]

Thats true. I think that 8 is the bare, bare minimum for mono-white and then there are 4 more slots. Plains is usually first place by a lot for the first slot, and there is a hypothetic combination of Wasteland, Back to Basics, and Price of Progress that exists where 12 Plains would be right.

I just personally like attacking Jace with Mishra's Factory way too much.


As for Revoker, it is often something I want 1 or 2 of against fair decks but there is no need to overload. You want as many as possilble against Storm and Sneak Attack, and exactly zero in some spots, but against DRS decks with few other targets I will often want 1, and against Jace decks I like two as spot.

Against Czech Pile, Revokers are usually right on the 57~63 borderline, you can leave them in or cut them depending on how much is coming in or out. You get a lot of value out of the first, but then they drop off. They are hardly ever awful though, as it hits their best card and the lynchpin of their manabase. My default is two if there are a lot of walkers and one if there aren't.

How much I sideboard against UW depends on how heavily they are going in on Mentor. If it looks like a 3-4 Mentor deck plus things like Clique and SCM then I don't mind having a lot. 4 can be overkill, but undisrupted Mentors murder us very quickly. I like 2 Revokers here because of Jace, but wouldn't mind 3 if there are excess Walkers, multiple EE, or anything like that. Gideons and any pro-white sword are excellent here. Council's Judgment kills Jace and is a general catch all. If they are extremely cantrip or Snapcaster heavy Ethersworn Canonist is also fine to have. As for cuts, I often do something like one Revoker, one Avenger, one Crusader, one or two Plows. All of these are fine but the brawlers just eat plows like anyone else and their stats matter less. Sanctum Prelate is also kind of borderline IMO if they have multiple different costed ways of hitting it, but its also hard to cut against 4x Brainstorm Ponder Portent Plow so that might be going to far. I generally keep the core of the deck the same but trim a little around the edges to clear up some space for a few heavy hitters.

I like to keep 1 Ratchet Bomb in the side. It has universal applications but one particular utility is in killing Empty the Warren and Monastery Mentor tokens. Also kills flipped Delvers (converted cost = 0) and Pyromancer tokens. An overlooked sideboard card I think, especially when DnT has a hard time dealing with tokens without Orzhov Pontiff.

One card I want to replace 1-2 copies of Swords to Plowshares with is Blessed Alliance. It gets around a ton of weird things (Marit Lage, TNN, Leovold, Reality Smasher, etc.) and also do weird things itself with the untap ability. Card is great but wish the card had a cooler art.

[mrjumbo03]

^Ratchet Bomb on 0 doesn't work on flipped Delvers anymore.

[Barook]

How's D&T positioned in the current MTGO meta? I'm feeling the itch to play the deck again and looking up the prices, Port prices have finally gone done to a reasonable level.

https://www.mtggoldfish.com/metagame/legacy#online

There is ALOT of Grixis Delver and 4C Leovold decks.

[NeckBird]

How's D&T positioned in the current MTGO meta? I'm feeling the itch to play the deck again and looking up the prices, Port prices have finally gone done to a reasonable level.

https://www.mtggoldfish.com/metagame/legacy#online

There is ALOT of Grixis Delver and 4C Leovold decks.

I've been going 3-2 in pretty much every league I play if that means anything. Personally, I don't think D&T is particularly well positioned right now. Even Grixis Delver seems to be just barely favorable now. D&T hosers are more common now that people can actually afford the deck. If I owned the necessary cards, I would be playing Czech Pile myself. It doesn't help that some people are playing Marsh Casualties in the main too.

[redtwister]

I know this is crazy, but if this is real (I believe it is unconfirmed atm) it might be quite good in the SB:

Settle the Wreckage
Instant
2WW

Exile all attacking creatures target player controls. That player may search his or her library for that many basic land cards, put those cards onto the battlefield tapped, then shuffle his or her library.

[grayryker]

^Ratchet Bomb on 0 doesn't work on flipped Delvers anymore.

I guess I'm late to the party. Oh well it's not too bad on 1 haha...

[grayryker]

I know this is crazy, but if this is real (I believe it is unconfirmed atm) it might be quite good in the SB:

Settle the Wreckage
Instant
2WW

Exile all attacking creatures target player controls. That player may search his or her library for that many basic land cards, put those cards onto the battlefield tapped, then shuffle his or her library.

Seems interesting. But it feels bad knowing your opponent can do a one-sided wipe of our board with multiple low cmc cards while we need a 4-mana reactive card to blow out theirs...

[Marungo]

WARNING: LONG INFORMATION DUMP POST

I wanted to wait until I had gotten enough tournament games in before I talked about my mono-white list. I had posted it earlier and have tweaked it here and there at times so it's only mildly different. I want to post about my conclusions. If this sounds boring for you or you just don't care that's totally fine. I just felt it was worth sharing after I have had 23 matches with the deck. With that being said, here's my list.

Creatures:
4 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
4 Stoneforge Mystic
4 Mother of Runes
4 Flickerwisp
3 Phyrexian Revoker
2 Recruiter of the Guard
2 Mirran Crusader
2 Serra Avenger
1 Sanctum Prelate
1 Spirit of the Labyrinth

Spells:
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Aether Vial
1 Sword of Fire and Ice
1 Umezawa's Jitte
1 Batterskull

Lands:
10 Plains
1 Cavern of Souls
3 Karakas
4 Rishadan Port
4 Wasteland

Sideboard:
2 Ethersworn Canonist
2 Rest in Peace
2 Surgical Extraction
1 Faerie Macabre
2 Council's Judgment
2 Gideon, Ally of Zendikar
1 Pithing Needle
1 Containment Priest
1 Sanctum Prelate
1 Path to Exile

In addition to keeping track of wins and losses, I kept track of what the record was and against which decks.
Wins: Losses:
Grixis Delver (2-0) 4C Delver (0-2)
Burn (2-0) Grixis Delver (1-2)
Burn (2-0) Miracles (0-2)
Burn (2-1) DNT (0-2)
Elves (2-0)
Esper Deathblade (2-0)
UW Stoneblade (2-1)
4C Waterfalls (2-1)
Lands (2-0)
Mono Red Stompy (2-1)
4C Delver (2-0)
DNT (2-0)
DNT (2-0)
DNT (2-1)
Eureka Tell (2-1)
Eureka Tell (2-1)
Eureka Tell (2-0)
Reanimator (2-1)
Grixis Pyromancer (2-0)

Based on these results you can see I have had a good mix of opponents. Ones that play combo, midrange, and agro decks alike. I wish I had some games against BUG or Czech Pile to show other than playtesting but it is what it is. These results have come from my trip to Cleveland where I played 5 of these matches, and from the newly formed Baltimore Legacy League that I am competing in. I don't think I'm being overconfident in saying that Maryland has a great Legacy scene and community overall, and I wouldn't say more than 2 or 3 of my opponents have been below average. Of course this is all subjective opinion, but take it as you will. There are a few things I want to discuss about the deck and how I feel it has done.

22 Lands
I have played Death and Taxes for about 2 and a half years now and I know the deck like the back of my hand. During this entire time, until GP Vegas, I never played 22 lands. It felt like I was just asking for trouble. Then Calderon won and while I really disliked some of his choices (such as his decision to board out 4 vial in the finals vs. UR Delver and Sword of Light and Shadow being in the deck) a lot of his choices made a lot of sense. The 22 lands scared me though. We have all done the math before, 23 is pretty much the go to number. But I wanted to test the list and thus went with 22 lands for the past matches. I have only lost once to mana screw and it had nothing to do with the land count. Because the card I would have cut did not show up that game. Overall I have had no issue and really like the idea of having that 27th creature. Can I recommend this to everyone? No. Really go with what you think is best. I still find myself reaching for that 23rd land anxiously sometimes, but always stop myself. Take my experience in this case as you will. I like it. Speaking of that card that would be a land...

Spirit of the Labyrinth
One of the most polarizing cards in Death and Taxes. This card has been brought up, played, thrown away, made fun of, and praised endlessly... all by me. And I guess the community too. I would consider myself a 50/50 type of player on this card. I always liked it and felt its ability was powerful. But that 3/1 body simply can't be ignored. Spirit is a card I feel is either typically overhyped with some calling it incredible and should be a 2-3 of, or severely underhyped with some calling it unplayable. All in all, it's good. I actually think right now it's really good and that in general more people should be playing it. The cantrip heavy decks like Miracles, Delver, and Grixis Pyromancer are on the rise as well as blue combo decks. This card has been great against them. At this moment I cannot imagine cutting it. Cool things it has done so far: Made a Sylvan Library, Jace, all my Eureka opponent's cantrips, and a glimpse of nature worthless. What has it not done? The ultimately great brainstorm play... One day pal, one day

Sideboard Faerie Macabre
Medea covered this card best. Don't play it. It's worse than Rest in Peace and Surgical. I don't like this card. This card is a metagame call. For those of you who don't know the Quest for Power 9 series in Maryland had 2 BR Reanimator in the top 8. I got to witness the deck personally as I was commentating (shameless plug). And I will be commentating again this Sunday and expect to see a lot of BR again (so shameless... sorry I'll stop). But in all seriousness the deck has seen a rise in popularity. It's strong, quick, and resilient. And I want to be prepared for it. Let's just say the little Faeries basically won me game 2 vs. UB Reanimator. Awkward Collective Brutality. I would not play this card at a big tournament though. Likely I'd run a Sword of War and Peace since DNT and Miracles are back again, I feel we have a bad Miracles matchup, and because I think Sword of Light and Shadow sucks. It typically does nothing in the matchups I want it. It just give pro white. I'll take war and peace any day personally.

The Wins
The wins have come vs. a variety of decks. The DNT mirrors have either been close struggles that were 2-1 with a really complex game, or a pure blowout where I had 2 vials and killed his revoker, or he turn 2'd a palace jailer because I path'd his Mom and he had ancient tomb in his deck. I am very surprised how well I have faired vs. the combo decks. If you count Lands and burn, I'm 8-0. I don't really see those as combo decks though so more realistically I am 4-0. The secret to winning? Guys I don't know if you know this but... Sanctum Prelate is one hell of a card. Also god drawing against Elves game one is quite effective. I've had some luck in a lot of these wins. I somehow resolved a Judgment on an Omni after flickerwisping it off Show and Tell. I somehow drew Jitte vs. Burn the turn before he was gonna kill me (it was one of the 2-0 games but still). I had my one of Faerie Macabre vs. Reanimator. The list can go on. Overall the deck has functioned beautifully. I never felt like I wish I had a different card save for one week when everyone and their mother played combo and I wish the second Prelate had been main... then the following week when I moved the Prelate main and everyone switched to fair decks. Ah well what can ya do? Besides I've had some bad luck too. Speaking of which...

The Losses
No not all my losses were to "bad luck." This isn't a bad beats story time event. But I do want to talk about the losses and the one or two times I was a little unlucky. The loss to DNT was straightforward. He has 2 vials game one and I don't, and I've talked about what happened game 2 already. The loss to Miracles was confirming my fears that we have a bad game one matchup against them. It was a mentorless version. 4 Terminus, 3 UA, 4 Plow, 4 Snap. It was rough. Game 2 he got Containment Priest and I believe he said a 4th UA. It was really rough. I don't like that matchup at all game one, but with my sideboard and some testing I feel it's about 50/50 post board. Plus spirit is pretty good here. Loss the 4C Delver was due to being outraced by one turn game one thanks to Tombstalker, then drawing 12/22 lands and 4 spells game 2. That was just bad luck. The loss to Grixis Delver was a mull to 5 game 2 and losing a wasteland fight somehow game 3. I had 3 wasteland, he had 3. Problem was he had 3 lands after the wastelanding and I had 1. Seems statistically unlikely and I'd do it again. I wasn't actually that mad about it though since it was my friend who's been working real hard the last 6 months since getting into legacy and who beat me for the first time in tournament. Overall the losses felt like it was variance and one or two bad matchups mixed in. Pretty sure the Ancient tomb DNT version is not a great matchup since he gets access to maindeck Palace Jailer and THC which when I don't have karakas is a little rough.

Final Conclusions
Deck great I'm great. In all seriousness though the deck has functioned great and the general ideas of Calderon I think are really good and worth trying. I'd highly recommend 74/75 and feel this deck is just real good if you're experienced with DNT. But let's be honest. You didn't come here to hear me talk about DNT. You came to see the Thalias I got altered.

http://i.imgur.com/lteeKAX.jpg

[grayryker]

WARNING: LONG INFORMATION DUMP POST

I wanted to wait until I had gotten enough tournament games in before I talked about my mono-white list. I had posted it earlier and have tweaked it here and there at times so it's only mildly different. I want to post about my conclusions. If this sounds boring for you or you just don't care that's totally fine. I just felt it was worth sharing after I have had 23 matches with the deck. With that being said, here's my list.

Creatures:
4 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
4 Stoneforge Mystic
4 Mother of Runes
4 Flickerwisp
3 Phyrexian Revoker
2 Recruiter of the Guard
2 Mirran Crusader
2 Serra Avenger
1 Sanctum Prelate
1 Spirit of the Labyrinth

Spells:
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Aether Vial
1 Sword of Fire and Ice
1 Umezawa's Jitte
1 Batterskull

Lands:
10 Plains
1 Cavern of Souls
3 Karakas
4 Rishadan Port
4 Wasteland

Sideboard:
2 Ethersworn Canonist
2 Rest in Peace
2 Surgical Extraction
1 Faerie Macabre
2 Council's Judgment
2 Gideon, Ally of Zendikar
1 Pithing Needle
1 Containment Priest
1 Sanctum Prelate
1 Path to Exile

In addition to keeping track of wins and losses, I kept track of what the record was and against which decks.
Wins: Losses:
Grixis Delver (2-0) 4C Delver (0-2)
Burn (2-0) Grixis Delver (1-2)
Burn (2-0) Miracles (0-2)
Burn (2-1) DNT (0-2)
Elves (2-0)
Esper Deathblade (2-0)
UW Stoneblade (2-1)
4C Waterfalls (2-1)
Lands (2-0)
Mono Red Stompy (2-1)
4C Delver (2-0)
DNT (2-0)
DNT (2-0)
DNT (2-1)
Eureka Tell (2-1)
Eureka Tell (2-1)
Eureka Tell (2-0)
Reanimator (2-1)
Grixis Pyromancer (2-0)

Based on these results you can see I have had a good mix of opponents. Ones that play combo, midrange, and agro decks alike. I wish I had some games against BUG or Czech Pile to show other than playtesting but it is what it is. These results have come from my trip to Cleveland where I played 5 of these matches, and from the newly formed Baltimore Legacy League that I am competing in. I don't think I'm being overconfident in saying that Maryland has a great Legacy scene and community overall, and I wouldn't say more than 2 or 3 of my opponents have been below average. Of course this is all subjective opinion, but take it as you will. There are a few things I want to discuss about the deck and how I feel it has done.

22 Lands
I have played Death and Taxes for about 2 and a half years now and I know the deck like the back of my hand. During this entire time, until GP Vegas, I never played 22 lands. It felt like I was just asking for trouble. Then Calderon won and while I really disliked some of his choices (such as his decision to board out 4 vial in the finals vs. UR Delver and Sword of Light and Shadow being in the deck) a lot of his choices made a lot of sense. The 22 lands scared me though. We have all done the math before, 23 is pretty much the go to number. But I wanted to test the list and thus went with 22 lands for the past matches. I have only lost once to mana screw and it had nothing to do with the land count. Because the card I would have cut did not show up that game. Overall I have had no issue and really like the idea of having that 27th creature. Can I recommend this to everyone? No. Really go with what you think is best. I still find myself reaching for that 23rd land anxiously sometimes, but always stop myself. Take my experience in this case as you will. I like it. Speaking of that card that would be a land...

Spirit of the Labyrinth
One of the most polarizing cards in Death and Taxes. This card has been brought up, played, thrown away, made fun of, and praised endlessly... all by me. And I guess the community too. I would consider myself a 50/50 type of player on this card. I always liked it and felt its ability was powerful. But that 3/1 body simply can't be ignored. Spirit is a card I feel is either typically overhyped with some calling it incredible and should be a 2-3 of, or severely underhyped with some calling it unplayable. All in all, it's good. I actually think right now it's really good and that in general more people should be playing it. The cantrip heavy decks like Miracles, Delver, and Grixis Pyromancer are on the rise as well as blue combo decks. This card has been great against them. At this moment I cannot imagine cutting it. Cool things it has done so far: Made a Sylvan Library, Jace, all my Eureka opponent's cantrips, and a glimpse of nature worthless. What has it not done? The ultimately great brainstorm play... One day pal, one day

Sideboard Faerie Macabre
Medea covered this card best. Don't play it. It's worse than Rest in Peace and Surgical. I don't like this card. This card is a metagame call. For those of you who don't know the Quest for Power 9 series in Maryland had 2 BR Reanimator in the top 8. I got to witness the deck personally as I was commentating (shameless plug). And I will be commentating again this Sunday and expect to see a lot of BR again (so shameless... sorry I'll stop). But in all seriousness the deck has seen a rise in popularity. It's strong, quick, and resilient. And I want to be prepared for it. Let's just say the little Faeries basically won me game 2 vs. UB Reanimator. Awkward Collective Brutality. I would not play this card at a big tournament though. Likely I'd run a Sword of War and Peace since DNT and Miracles are back again, I feel we have a bad Miracles matchup, and because I think Sword of Light and Shadow sucks. It typically does nothing in the matchups I want it. It just give pro white. I'll take war and peace any day personally.

The Wins
The wins have come vs. a variety of decks. The DNT mirrors have either been close struggles that were 2-1 with a really complex game, or a pure blowout where I had 2 vials and killed his revoker, or he turn 2'd a palace jailer because I path'd his Mom and he had ancient tomb in his deck. I am very surprised how well I have faired vs. the combo decks. If you count Lands and burn, I'm 8-0. I don't really see those as combo decks though so more realistically I am 4-0. The secret to winning? Guys I don't know if you know this but... Sanctum Prelate is one hell of a card. Also god drawing against Elves game one is quite effective. I've had some luck in a lot of these wins. I somehow resolved a Judgment on an Omni after flickerwisping it off Show and Tell. I somehow drew Jitte vs. Burn the turn before he was gonna kill me (it was one of the 2-0 games but still). I had my one of Faerie Macabre vs. Reanimator. The list can go on. Overall the deck has functioned beautifully. I never felt like I wish I had a different card save for one week when everyone and their mother played combo and I wish the second Prelate had been main... then the following week when I moved the Prelate main and everyone switched to fair decks. Ah well what can ya do? Besides I've had some bad luck too. Speaking of which...

The Losses
No not all my losses were to "bad luck." This isn't a bad beats story time event. But I do want to talk about the losses and the one or two times I was a little unlucky. The loss to DNT was straightforward. He has 2 vials game one and I don't, and I've talked about what happened game 2 already. The loss to Miracles was confirming my fears that we have a bad game one matchup against them. It was a mentorless version. 4 Terminus, 3 UA, 4 Plow, 4 Snap. It was rough. Game 2 he got Containment Priest and I believe he said a 4th UA. It was really rough. I don't like that matchup at all game one, but with my sideboard and some testing I feel it's about 50/50 post board. Plus spirit is pretty good here. Loss the 4C Delver was due to being outraced by one turn game one thanks to Tombstalker, then drawing 12/22 lands and 4 spells game 2. That was just bad luck. The loss to Grixis Delver was a mull to 5 game 2 and losing a wasteland fight somehow game 3. I had 3 wasteland, he had 3. Problem was he had 3 lands after the wastelanding and I had 1. Seems statistically unlikely and I'd do it again. I wasn't actually that mad about it though since it was my friend who's been working real hard the last 6 months since getting into legacy and who beat me for the first time in tournament. Overall the losses felt like it was variance and one or two bad matchups mixed in. Pretty sure the Ancient tomb DNT version is not a great matchup since he gets access to maindeck Palace Jailer and THC which when I don't have karakas is a little rough.

Final Conclusions
Deck great I'm great. In all seriousness though the deck has functioned great and the general ideas of Calderon I think are really good and worth trying. I'd highly recommend 74/75 and feel this deck is just real good if you're experienced with DNT. But let's be honest. You didn't come here to hear me talk about DNT. You came to see the Thalias I got altered.

http://i.imgur.com/lteeKAX.jpg

Don't be afraid to share your thoughts on this forum. I enjoy reading pretty much everyone here, even if it's an opinion I disagree with.

But let me nitpick a couple things. Faerie Macabre isn't really a substitute for Rest in Peace. Yes they're both graveyard hate but the reason to run Surgical or Macabre at all is to have a 0-mana free interaction against decks that we can't stop until turn 2. For Reanimator I prefer Macabre because it doesn't get stopped by Chancellor and Brutality; it's also a fun Recruiter target.

Sword of Light and Shadow is most relevant for pro-black - helping you get around Leovold, Gurmag Angler, and Baleful Strix - and recursion against removal heavy decks like Czech Pile which use primary black removals.

22 vs 23 lands is statistically not a big difference. In fact, I would guarantee 99% of people would never notice it in a double blind test unless they play hundreds of matches and built a good internal intuition for how many lands they should see for a given land count. Likewise, similar arguments can be made between 26 vs 27 creatures. The one extra creature is not going to be relevant unless you're building a toolbox deck and that 1 creature plays a key role in certain match-ups.

I agree with you Sanctum Prelate is great. I don't even think he is bad in the fair match-ups at all unless it's very creature heavy like Maverick. When we consider the cost/benefit ratio, this is a dead card in a few match-ups but wins you a ton in many other match-ups. I think it's worth playing 2 in the main, even if it's dead in a couple match-ups. I see some lists play 1 copy in the 75, which I think is a huge unnecessary limitation.

[Marungo]

Don't be afraid to share your thoughts on this forum. I enjoy reading pretty much everyone here, even if it's an opinion I disagree with.

But let me nitpick a couple things. Faerie Macabre isn't really a substitute for Rest in Peace. Yes they're both graveyard hate but the reason to run Surgical or Macabre at all is to have a 0-mana free interaction against decks that we can't stop until turn 2. For Reanimator I prefer Macabre because it doesn't get stopped by Chancellor and Brutality; it's also a fun Recruiter target.

Sword of Light and Shadow is most relevant for pro-black - helping you get around Leovold, Gurmag Angler, and Baleful Strix - and recursion against removal heavy decks like Czech Pile which use primary black removals.

22 vs 23 lands is statistically not a big difference. In fact, I would guarantee 99% of people would never notice it in a double blind test unless they play hundreds of matches and built a good internal intuition for how many lands they should see for a given land count. Likewise, similar arguments can be made between 26 vs 27 creatures. The one extra creature is not going to be relevant unless you're building a toolbox deck and that 1 creature plays a key role in certain match-ups.

I agree with you Sanctum Prelate is great. I don't even think he is bad in the fair match-ups at all unless it's very creature heavy like Maverick. When we consider the cost/benefit ratio, this is a dead card in a few match-ups but wins you a ton in many other match-ups. I think it's worth playing 2 in the main, even if it's dead in a couple match-ups. I see some lists play 1 copy in the 75, which I think is a huge unnecessary limitation.

Thanks for the response. I hope you don't mind if I share my thoughts.

When it comes to 22 lands you're right that the difference is mostly negligible but being that we play recruiter I feel my results were somewhat important. Not only did I not struggle , but the one of utility creature I played was great.

I also agree with you about prelate. I played 2 and felt it was fine and if I had to play 2 main tomorrow over the second crusader, I'd likely be pretty fine with it. I just love me a mirran crusader and worry enough about the fair decks where prelate is mediocre.

I just don't find light and shadow giving pro black worth it. I find that to be largely irrelevant and never really even found myself saying, "man I wish I had a better wuipment to fetch." In the matchups where the cards you listed were prevelent. To each their own but I think the card is pretty mediocre at best and I've played it before and found it just as mediocre. To be fair I have had the exact same opinion about cataclysm my entire time playing the deck so I clearly do not think like other people do about the deck

On macabre, I just think it's strictly worse than extraction. I'm well aware it's not supposed to be an RIP replacement and never treated it as such. It's just another graveyard hate card, but one I can tutor for. I think that because BR is prevelent it deserves a slot. Otherwise though I just think it's a mediocre card by comparison to surgical in every way. Again to each their own.

Overall though I really like some of your thoughts on the deck and how you think about it in general. I personally never found myself wanting pro black but clearly you have an identified that SoLaS is a good fit.

[grayryker]

Thanks for the response. I hope you don't mind if I share my thoughts.

When it comes to 22 lands you're right that the difference is mostly negligible but being that we play recruiter I feel my results were somewhat important. Not only did I not struggle , but the one of utility creature I played was great.

I also agree with you about prelate. I played 2 and felt it was fine and if I had to play 2 main tomorrow over the second crusader, I'd likely be pretty fine with it. I just love me a mirran crusader and worry enough about the fair decks where prelate is mediocre.

I just don't find light and shadow giving pro black worth it. I find that to be largely irrelevant and never really even found myself saying, "man I wish I had a better wuipment to fetch." In the matchups where the cards you listed were prevelent. To each their own but I think the card is pretty mediocre at best and I've played it before and found it just as mediocre. To be fair I have had the exact same opinion about cataclysm my entire time playing the deck so I clearly do not think like other people do about the deck

On macabre, I just think it's strictly worse than extraction. I'm well aware it's not supposed to be an RIP replacement and never treated it as such. It's just another graveyard hate card, but one I can tutor for. I think that because BR is prevelent it deserves a slot. Otherwise though I just think it's a mediocre card by comparison to surgical in every way. Again to each their own.

Overall though I really like some of your thoughts on the deck and how you think about it in general. I personally never found myself wanting pro black but clearly you have an identified that SoLaS is a good fit.

I don't care much for Cataclysm either actually.

I was just giving a reason why SoLaS is worth playing in some match-ups but I personally don't play it right now. I would agree with you that in many cases it is mediocre.

For Macabre, I was referring to your "worse than Rest in Peace" comment. Surgical extraction is definitely the better card in some match-ups, but not downright superior.

[Medea_]

@marungo

Those are some nice Thalias.

Your main is one card off mine and your sideboard is 3 off of mine. The list is definitely solid. I think I've played 80 or 90 matches on MTGO now, and these (http://www.thrabenuniversity.com/?p=1275) were my thoughts on SoLaS. It's not great, it really isn't, but it does have a set of flexible roles.

My list.
(http://www.thrabenuniversity.com/?page_id=11)

I've bombed out of my last two leagues due to some unfavorable pairings (Elves 3 times in 6 matches was rough...) and unfortunately draws, but otherwise it has been performing very well. Of the common decks, I only don't like my percentage points in the mirror and against Stoneblade. I'm also a little less favored against Delver than I used to be.

I'm messing around with cards to improve the Delver matchup at the moment. I'm dropping more games to Delver than I used to now that they have a bit more room in their sideboard for dedicated hate (Dread of Night, K. Command, Marsh Casualties) and now that TNN is becoming a more common flex creature. I'm going to try a few games with some of the cards I dismissed in the past to see how I feel about them in the new metagame. I'm trying Fiendslayer Paladin in the current league and will try Aerial Responder again in my next one. Sanctum Prelate #2 is also on the list to try. I want to try these due to issues against Young Pyromancer in particular, who has been going wider than my deck in many of my games where I don't get an active piece of equipment. I want something that can wall the 2-1 body or the tokens and gain me some life. Many of our game one cards (Recruiter, Revoker, Prelate) don't do that.

I'm frequently losing the mirror to players who are, in my opinion, over-prepared for the mirror. I think lists like that one that Marungo and I are running are pretty close to optimal for the metagame as a whole. I keep finding players who have a bunch of Seal of Cleansing, Needle, Jailer, and Manriki-Gusari in the board. It's a little hard to beat all that. Similarly, my numbers against Stoneblade aren't the best either. Disenchant followed by Snapcaster Disenchant is rough. I think I probably want to sneak a Needle back into the board to compensate for dropping more games to those decks.

[redtwister]

Aside from +1 Containment Priest and +1 Faerie, -2 Surgical, my list is an exact copy of Marungo's. Feels pretty good most games. I like 2nd Priest for Sneak and Show, Reanimator and Elves.

Been trying 22 lands as well, so far it hasn't brought sadness.

[Mad Mat]

I'm testing around with this right now. Kambal has been great in a meta of grixis and miracles, but he pushed the mana curve back up again and 2 revoker is really on the low end (I worry about the sneaky show and stoneblade match-ups). The manabase also probably needs an extra black source to accomodate the extra black creatures.

I tried Sword of Light and Shadow, but didn't like it. For a sword, its boon effects just don't really do enough in the match-ups where it's supposed to be good. The protection is nice, but too often they can afford spending a few turns finding artifact removal and ignoring the little points of damage the sword gets through. The red swords are fundamentally way more threatening and sowap is boardable in more match-ups.

I'm still a fan of Judge's Familiar, but unlikely ever more than the single slot. That card has won me quite a few games I had no business winning, but most of the time he does some damage while slowing the opponent and coercing him into bad sequencing of his spells. It's nice to have a one-drop creature which, unlike mother, is actually good against combo and control and (like mother) still fine against midrange. You lose a tiny bit in the delver match-up, but these tend to be very good pre-board anyway.

Up for debate right now:
-1 plains
+1 flooded strand

Blood Moon will be more of a problem, but that is the inevitable price for splashing. I still think Pontiff is worth that price. At least with 4+ basics and vial the deck remains relatively impervious to blood moon, making decks that run it waste slots only on a conditional piece of hate and often a very double-sided one at that (because fetchlands, duals and/or sol lands lose their functionality).

-1 Gideon
+1 Revoker

Double Kambal is already extremely punishing against the decks where Gideon would also be great. A third revoker on the other hand would be a great help against a variety of combo as well as stoneblade.


4 Wasteland
4 Rishadan Port
3 Karakas
5 Plains
3 Flooded Strand
2 Scrubland
2 Cavern of Souls

3 Mother of Runes
1 Judge's Familiar
4 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
4 Stoneforge Mystic
2 Serra Avenger
2 Phyrexian Revoker
4 Flickerwisp
2 Recruiter of the Guard
2 Kambal, Consul of Allocation
1 Mirran Crusader
1 Sanctum Prelate
1 Orzhov Pontiff

4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Aether Vial
1 Batterskull
1 Umezawa's Jitte
1 Sword of Fire and Ice

Sideboard:
2 Rest in Peace
2 Ethersworn Canonist
2 Council's Judgment
1 Path to Exile
1 Leonin Relic-Warder
1 Pithing Needle
1 Palace Jailer
1 Gideon, Ally of Zendikar
1 Blessed Alliance
1 Sword of War and Peace
1 Mirran Crusader
1 Sanctum Prelate

[grayryker]

I'm testing around with this right now. Kambal has been great in a meta of grixis and miracles, but he pushed the mana curve back up again and 2 revoker is really on the low end (I worry about the sneaky show and stoneblade match-ups). The manabase also probably needs an extra black source to accomodate the extra black creatures.

I tried Sword of Light and Shadow, but didn't like it. For a sword, its boon effects just don't really do enough in the match-ups where it's supposed to be good. The protection is nice, but too often they can afford spending a few turns finding artifact removal and ignoring the little points of damage the sword gets through. The red swords are fundamentally way more threatening and sowap is boardable in more match-ups.

I'm still a fan of Judge's Familiar, but unlikely ever more than the single slot. That card has won me quite a few games I had no business winning, but most of the time he does some damage while slowing the opponent and coercing him into bad sequencing of his spells. It's nice to have a one-drop creature which, unlike mother, is actually good against combo and control and (like mother) still fine against midrange. You lose a tiny bit in the delver match-up, but these tend to be very good pre-board anyway.

Up for debate right now:
-1 plains
+1 flooded strand

Blood Moon will be more of a problem, but that is the inevitable price for splashing. I still think Pontiff is worth that price. At least with 4+ basics and vial the deck remains relatively impervious to blood moon, making decks that run it waste slots only on a conditional piece of hate and often a very double-sided one at that (because fetchlands, duals and/or sol lands lose their functionality).

-1 Gideon
+1 Revoker

Double Kambal is already extremely punishing against the decks where Gideon would also be great. A third revoker on the other hand would be a great help against a variety of combo as well as stoneblade.


4 Wasteland
4 Rishadan Port
3 Karakas
5 Plains
3 Flooded Strand
2 Scrubland
2 Cavern of Souls

3 Mother of Runes
1 Judge's Familiar
4 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
4 Stoneforge Mystic
2 Serra Avenger
2 Phyrexian Revoker
4 Flickerwisp
2 Recruiter of the Guard
2 Kambal, Consul of Allocation
1 Mirran Crusader
1 Sanctum Prelate
1 Orzhov Pontiff

4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Aether Vial
1 Batterskull
1 Umezawa's Jitte
1 Sword of Fire and Ice

Sideboard:
2 Rest in Peace
2 Ethersworn Canonist
2 Council's Judgment
1 Path to Exile
1 Leonin Relic-Warder
1 Pithing Needle
1 Palace Jailer
1 Gideon, Ally of Zendikar
1 Blessed Alliance
1 Sword of War and Peace
1 Mirran Crusader
1 Sanctum Prelate

Kambal seems a bit weak in a deck that is actually trying to prevent noncreature spells from being cast / slow down the opponent. I am not saying it can't situationally make a difference but a 3-drop with taxing on life seems... questionable.

[Mad Mat]

Kambal seems a bit weak in a deck that is actually trying to prevent noncreature spells from being cast / slow down the opponent. I am not saying it can't situationally make a difference but a 3-drop with taxing on life seems... questionable.
This deck is very poorly equipped at preventing spells from being cast. Only a few lists run chalice and the others only have sanctum prelate and the hope that their opponent gets manascrewed. Our strategy is to slow down the consistent gameplan of fair decks by taxing their mana, especially cantrips, and the broken gameplan of combo by disrupting some or all of their pieces (and/or slow down their consistent gameplan if they're blue-based combo). We accomplish this through creatures, by far the most vulnerable sort of cards in the format. The advantage of creatures is that they constitute a clock. We slow down, then race for the kill before they can stabilize. But we don't prevent them from casting their cantrips and removal spells. We just try to make them cast them in the poorest ways possible.

The inevitability of Kambal fits very well into this plan, in particular in conjunction with karakas. A deck like grixis, miracles or anything midrange with punishing fire is not very well equipped at gaining life. This makes them vulnerable to late-game burn, which is even only a part of what Kambal accomplishes. A deck like burn or delver will try to race us, as our late-game threats tend to be much more powerful than theirs. Kambal alters that dynamic as well, because he adds to our pressure and takes away from theirs. A lot of combo decks will use their life source as a resource in order to fuel their combo or to buy time to assemble it optimally. Kambal also can put a snag in that strategy (e.g. storm, sneaky show, lands), as he can very well suddenly lock them out of the game regardless of whether they have answers to hate pieces. However, there are also quite a few combo decks which are not very vulnerable to Kambal (e.g. elves, infect, food chain), hence this is where he is at his weakest. He's also obviously horrible in the mirror.

[mistercakes]

What about Thalia? I thought it was quite good at keeping spells from being cast...

[grayryker]

This deck is very poorly equipped at preventing spells from being cast. Only a few lists run chalice and the others only have sanctum prelate and the hope that their opponent gets manascrewed. Our strategy is to slow down the consistent gameplan of fair decks by taxing their mana, especially cantrips, and the broken gameplan of combo by disrupting some or all of their pieces (and/or slow down their consistent gameplan if they're blue-based combo). We accomplish this through creatures, by far the most vulnerable sort of cards in the format. The advantage of creatures is that they constitute a clock. We slow down, then race for the kill before they can stabilize. But we don't prevent them from casting their cantrips and removal spells. We just try to make them cast them in the poorest ways possible.

The inevitability of Kambal fits very well into this plan, in particular in conjunction with karakas. A deck like grixis, miracles or anything midrange with punishing fire is not very well equipped at gaining life. This makes them vulnerable to late-game burn, which is even only a part of what Kambal accomplishes. A deck like burn or delver will try to race us, as our late-game threats tend to be much more powerful than theirs. Kambal alters that dynamic as well, because he adds to our pressure and takes away from theirs. A lot of combo decks will use their life source as a resource in order to fuel their combo or to buy time to assemble it optimally. Kambal also can put a snag in that strategy (e.g. storm, sneaky show, lands), as he can very well suddenly lock them out of the game regardless of whether they have answers to hate pieces. However, there are also quite a few combo decks which are not very vulnerable to Kambal (e.g. elves, infect, food chain), hence this is where he is at his weakest. He's also obviously horrible in the mirror.

I do agree with you that this deck is not as good at locking down spells as people think it is. That's why I run a Chalice build and I feel the deck is so much more powerful. The deck is no longer super reliant on Thalia. Chalice solves so many inherent problems with the deck that I just left the land mana denial strategy altogether, which gave me room to substitute powerful options like the 4 Cavern of Souls, Dark Confidant, etc.

But my original point was that Kambal is doing something that's counterproductive to what other parts of the deck are doing. The second major weakness of Kambal is that it's a 3 drop (often late with any relevant taxing) and is just a poor top deck in general. It's kind of the same issue with Thalia Heretic Cathar, who arguably has superior taxing on average but cannot be played early to take great use out of it. I think you are presenting Kambal as a sort of lockdown 'inevitable' card and this is the part that would leave me skeptical.

[Mad Mat]

What about Thalia? I thought it was quite good at keeping spells from being cast...
Thalia is good at keeping multiple spells from being cast, but not specific ones. People still get to cast their cantrips and removal, they just don't get to string them together efficiently in one turn.


I do agree with you that this deck is not as good at locking down spells as people think it is. That's why I run a Chalice build and I feel the deck is so much more powerful. The deck is no longer super reliant on Thalia. Chalice solves so many inherent problems with the deck that I just left the land mana denial strategy altogether, which gave me room to substitute powerful options like the 4 Cavern of Souls, Dark Confidant, etc.
As soon as you are running chalice, I see little reason not to go for (White) Eldrazi or Red Stompy rather than a hybrid with D&T. D&T is fundamentally a vial deck, as its strategy would not be possible in the Legacy format without the insane boost to acceleration, stack interaction and color-fixing vial provides. But Chalice has terrible synergy with vial. Chalice decks do not go for a utility card like vial, but shut down the other deck through chalice then bomb the battlefield with big bad threats, like Thought-Knot Seer, Reality Smasher, Chandra, Knight of the Reliquary... They count much less on synergies and much more on swarming with singular threats.


But my original point was that Kambal is doing something that's counterproductive to what other parts of the deck are doing.
If you tackle people on mana through denial and taxes, yes, you can expect them to cast less spells and hence take less damage from Kambal. But that's not the point of running him. He's not the card to save you when your board is gone and they have superior presence. There's really no card in D&T that can reliably allow you to come back from that other than Cataclysm, situationally. Kambal is the card that can kill them even if they have all the answers, because answering him requires losing life. He is the card that really punishes them while they're digging for answers or trying to answer your other threats. Whereas Thalia taxes their early game, constraining them on mana which is scarce then, Kambal taxes their late game, constraining them on life, which tends to be scarce then. If it's not, things aren't looking very good anyway as our end game is not that good. In match-ups where our end game is good, Kambal helps because he often turns off the ways they can still steal the game. He's not as win-more as he seems, he's the card that enables wins that would otherwise have ended as losses while only a few life points away.


The second major weakness of Kambal is that it's a 3 drop (often late with any relevant taxing) and is just a poor top deck in general. It's kind of the same issue with Thalia Heretic Cathar, who arguably has superior taxing on average but cannot be played early to take great use out of it. I think you are presenting Kambal as a sort of lockdown 'inevitable' card and this is the part that would leave me skeptical.
Kambal is meant to tax the late game, not the early. That makes him a rather good top deck, at least considering the strategy I outlined (tax, then race, then seal the deal before they get to stabilize). Thalia HC is different, because she gets ignored, chump-blocked, randomly killed (or slowed if you got karakas) and does not really penalize the casting of spells now your opponent has the mana. She has a similar role in that she seals the deal when she comes down at the right time, but I think this window is much less narrow than it is with Kambal, because Thalia's danger is still dependent on the combat step. That makes her much slower than Kambal and much easier to answer. Worst case, they take three a turn while for the rest casting whatever they want to find answers or improve their hand. Of course, Thalia does have the advantage that she is overall a much better card against combo.

[grayryker]

Thalia is good at keeping multiple spells from being cast, but not specific ones. People still get to cast their cantrips and removal, they just don't get to string them together efficiently in one turn.


As soon as you are running chalice, I see little reason not to go for (White) Eldrazi or Red Stompy rather than a hybrid with D&T. D&T is fundamentally a vial deck, as its strategy would not be possible in the Legacy format without the insane boost to acceleration, stack interaction and color-fixing vial provides. But Chalice has terrible synergy with vial. Chalice decks do not go for a utility card like vial, but shut down the other deck through chalice then bomb the battlefield with big bad threats, like Thought-Knot Seer, Reality Smasher, Chandra, Knight of the Reliquary... They count much less on synergies and much more on swarming with singular threats.


If you tackle people on mana through denial and taxes, yes, you can expect them to cast less spells and hence take less damage from Kambal. But that's not the point of running him. He's not the card to save you when your board is gone and they have superior presence. There's really no card in D&T that can reliably allow you to come back from that other than Cataclysm, situationally. Kambal is the card that can kill them even if they have all the answers, because answering him requires losing life. He is the card that really punishes them while they're digging for answers or trying to answer your other threats. Whereas Thalia taxes their early game, constraining them on mana which is scarce then, Kambal taxes their late game, constraining them on life, which tends to be scarce then. If it's not, things aren't looking very good anyway as our end game is not that good. In match-ups where our end game is good, Kambal helps because he often turns off the ways they can still steal the game. He's not as win-more as he seems, he's the card that enables wins that would otherwise have ended as losses while only a few life points away.


Kambal is meant to tax the late game, not the early. That makes him a rather good top deck, at least considering the strategy I outlined (tax, then race, then seal the deal before they get to stabilize). Thalia HC is different, because she gets ignored, chump-blocked, randomly killed (or slowed if you got karakas) and does not really penalize the casting of spells now your opponent has the mana. She has a similar role in that she seals the deal when she comes down at the right time, but I think this window is much less narrow than it is with Kambal, because Thalia's danger is still dependent on the combat step. That makes her much slower than Kambal and much easier to answer. Worst case, they take three a turn while for the rest casting whatever they want to find answers or improve their hand. Of course, Thalia does have the advantage that she is overall a much better card against combo.

The simplest answer I can give you for why I no longer play Eldrazi Stompy is because it's usually a bad Eldrazi deck. Displacer is insane if you get it to go off but it doesn't happen often. A lot of the powerful interactions you get with him doesn't happen enough to warrant playing the deck.

"But Chalice has terrible synergy with vial". Have you played Merfolk/Goblins? It's an occasional nonbo at worst because most games you don't draw them simultaneously. If I draw both an Aether Vial and Chalice, I typically play the Vial first. This deck is content with playing a turn 2 Chalice. Against a blue deck, if I have an Ancient Tomb I will typically play the Vial first to get around Daze anyhow. It's not the best Chalice deck (as in playing it turn 1) but that's because it's playing other powerful 1-drops for consistency. When I play Eldrazi, it feels super vulnerable without a turn 1-2 Chalice.

Your overall argument is telling me what (some) decks with Chalice do and using this as a set criteria for other Chalice decks. This is a bad argument.

"Kambal is the card that can kill them even if they have all the answers" You're telling me a card that takes away 2 life after taking a removal spell to its face is that dominant? Again, even if this card is really good I don't find these arguments convincing. You're telling me he is good in the late game (say turn 6+) even when that's when he loses most of its value? You're saying it's a good card when your opponent is hellbent so aren't you already winning by that point? Why do you need a 3-drop that probably can't attack and instead deals 2 damage based on what your opponent is doing? But wait towards the end of your paragraph you're saying this is a card that actually saves you inches away from death, despite the fact that it's a 2/2 body that is terrible on a losing board. Again, you leave me very confused my friend. Overall, the argument you're presenting seems to be that Kambal is a good card in a few very specific clutch situations, which to me sounds like it is a bad card.