Printable View
With all due respect, I don't believe the deck is going anywhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by Secretly.A.Bee
With WoTc's policy of printing ever more powerful creatures, it's just a matter of time before they fuck up and we can abuse one of their creations ;).
As long as t2 Griselbrand is viable in the format, Reanimator will be here to stay, so unless the game power creeps to unplayable levels, reanimator will be a thing.
The creatures are getting powered up by becoming leaner, meaner and cheaper though. The whole point of reanimating a game-ending creature in the first three turns is sort of lost when opposing decks can play their own game-ending creatures in the early game without jumping through hoops and risking getting blown out by GY hate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpt-Qc
Hi everyone!,
I have a (stupid?) question. Would it make any difference if I play this deck with the U/G and U/B shocklands instead of duals? I do not have them and I, nowadays, donīt fancy spending loads of money on them
Thanks a million
If I recall correctly people said it's fairly OK with shock duals, at least that's what I`d say.
But here's something for you to think about. Bear with me and follow my idea for a min.
Let's say we play a list with five finishers - when would extra finishers be good?
If we have
a) Entomb in hand
we would much rather have a thought seize in hand than a finisher
b) already have a finisher in hand, I mean we have five
we would much rather have a TS or cantrip than a second finisher the majority of the time
c) If we don't have careful study in hand
most of the time we want anything but a finisher
What I mean to say is - what are all those finishers good for? I know, you're thinking now - well, I need enough finishers to make careful study work.
My point is: How often do you have it? 40-50% of the time.
How often do you have it without already having a finisher in hand? 20-25%
How often do you have it without already having a finisher in hand and without having entomb? 10-15%
Of course missing a finisher costs games. My point is missing a thought seize or cantrip costs way more games. For me it mathematically makes no sense to play so many finishers. The situation everyone seems to fantasize about doesn't happen much!
Let's say the 15% dream scenario happens. We are still not guaranteed to hold a finisher now if we pack two extra, because with two extra we have like 20% chance to hold one of them!
Think honestly. What do you want them for? As a silverbullet they have nice value. On the other hand, if we discard a random fatty that is not Griselbrand because we can play just four of those, the price for our silverbullet is we discard weak creatures in many of our matches because only Grisel works nearly all the time.
The price is just so very high. Imagine we have entomb. How much rather would I have a thoughtseize or a cantrip than a finisher now. Isn't the awesomeness of reanimator it's an easy two-card combo, why dilute it so hard just to add an extra 5-10% combo potential instead of just adding TS and cantrips?
Reanimator is probably one of the decks that cares the least about playing shocks in legacy. I used to do it for a long time before I got my duals and it only ever was important once. The only scenario where it matters is having a starting hand with 1 fetch, 1 daze, 1 reanimate and the creature targeted being griselbrand (fetch -1, shock -2, using an enabler, dazing T1 play, replaying shock -2, reanimate -8, griselbrand -7). Having a dual lets you do all this with 4 life left so you're able to take 1 hit from any T1 creature and defend with force of will.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ling
I would say playing with shocks is perfectly fine as if you have 2 lands hands you are probably fetching 2 basics anyway.
What exactly do you categorize as a "finisher"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuddlecow
If you mean creatures, then the need to have a few is to be able to toolbox for the right one. Unlike storm decks, reanimator is not guaranteed to win when going off. If you don't have the right creature, you could have wasted 2-3 cards.
Also, although this is not the primary use for it, careful study acts as a pseudo cantrip so having stuff to discard can actually be an advantage if you want to find permission while you combo.
@Cuddlecow, I haven't run the math on that particular case, so I don't know the actual difference in percentages, but I claim it doesn't really matter.
Let's create a five creature set for our deck:
3 Griselbrand
1 Elesh
1 Iona
We need to maximize our griselbrand count for careful study (it's not creature count we (I?) care about for study, but griselbrand count) while also having creatures that are situationally strong. I'd argue that this deck is fundamentally weaker against nonblue decks as a whole, since a lot of nonblue decks have access to problem lands like karakas or maze of ith or thespian depths. There are so many matchups that swing wildly with the addition of tidespout tyrant, DnT, lands, GWx, are all made much easier when tidespout tyrant exists in the deck. You can add tidespout, but then you're giving up on free wins against elves and dredge (cut elesh), or burn and combo (cut Iona).
I personally run 7 creatures (though I frequently board down to 6):
3 Griselbrand
1 Elesh
1 Tidespout
1 Archetype of Endurance
1 Jin-Gitaxias
I agree that running the minimum number of creatures is in some sense optimal. We want to run as few creatures as we can to plug as many holes as possible, and in my personal construction of the deck, my creature choices also reflect 75 card deck building rather than 60, so I'd advise you to think ahead to sideboarded games as well when choosing what creatures you want.
For reference, my creature suite is composed of:
-3 griselbrand (catch all, great in unknown matchup)
-Iona (for combo or mono colored decks)
-Elesh (for aggro/swarm decks)
-Tidespout (for prison decks and karakas decks)
-Grave Titan (for edict decks and karakaa dexks)
This way I have options against most decks g1. Of course you can drop/replace one or two of those for your meta.
Running 6 would be better but would concede to some matchups which I dont like as if we dont win G1 we are in trouble.
Thanks a lot mate!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpt-Qc
I'll play it with shocks until I got my duals
Enviado desde mi iPhone con Tapatalk
My pleasure and welcome to the original cheater's deck! :cool:
We're a long ways from fair decks casting a 7/7 lifelinking flyer in even 5 turns.Quote:
Originally Posted by RNGesus
And let's not forget we're reanimating the only legal Necro variant, which is the real reason he's the most powerful target.
I do think 4 Grisel is too much, but the toolbox creatures will pull you out of a lot of situations. I don't know that there's any real math that can encapsulate such things, other than just statistically counting how often you use each one. Anecdotal, but if you know you never Entomb for it's probably bad maindeck (or bad period).
The main reason I don't run 4 griselbrand is I hate getting surgicaled and losing 4 creatures... feels so bad... at least now I still have 4 creatures to look for.Quote:
Originally Posted by DoorDie
I also hate opening with double Griselbrand. I mean, I like him but not THAT much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpt-Qc
I'm looking to possibly put this deck together. I really like the lists that include Show and Tell, I would really like to run 2 in the main and 2 in the side. Do you guys have any updated lists I could work off of?
Thank you.
Has anyone ever tested running Intuition in this deck, perhaps at 1-2 copies?
In the abstract, it seems quite powerful in being able to grab whatever card you need for the given game-state (including counterspells, discard, and/or sideboard hate when needed), and at the minimum it can function as a pseudo-Buried Alive. It's 'Awesome' thanks to having :u: in its cost, which is always a welcome aspect.
Some of the obvious down-sides:
1. Yes, 3 mana is quite expensive, but it is an Instant that could be cast at the end of an opponent's turn after the initial first few land drops that could yield a win out of seemingly nowhere.
2. Surgical Extraction is a beating against it, but then again that card is a beating against Reanimator.dec to begin with. If you suspect your opponent to be holding Extraction, you would simply just not tutor for anything too critical.
I realize that Show and Tell decks have an easier time casting Intuition thanks to playing Sol lands, but it just seems like such an absurdly powerful spell that could slot into UBx Reanimator just as easily, perhaps with a few additional land slots. Just wondering if anyone has tested this card lately.
I've goldfished Intuition, and unfortunately yes it's about a turn too slow. It's the setup card, so you have to durdle until turn 3 or add in acceleration just for this card. A standard build will reliably combo out by T3 without acceleration.
I'd love to brew a Slow Reanimator with Intuition and/or Buried Alive just for the shiggles because those cards are sweet.
That's my list atm. Note that I did not join the abrupt decay hype as I prefer to stay on basics in most of my games and I lack a trop.Quote:
Originally Posted by CovenantElite30
I'm also testing a darkblast in the side instead of the second massacre and a fifth Force of Will.
There are enough flex slots to be able to shape the deck however is best for your meta.
Creature (10)
1x Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite
1x Grave Titan
3x Griselbrand
1x Iona, Shield of Emeria
3x Putrid Imp
1x Tidespout Tyrant
Instant (16)
4x Brainstorm
3x Daze
4x Entomb
4x Force of Will
1x Misdirection
Land (15)
2x Bloodstained Mire
2x Flooded Strand
1x Island
4x Polluted Delta
2x Swamp
4x Underground Sea
Sorcery (16)
4x Careful Study
4x Exhume
2x Ponder
4x Reanimate
2x Show and Tell
Artifact (3)
3x Lotus Petal
Sideboard (15)
1x Ashen Rider
1x Blazing Archon
1x Darkblast
2x Echoing Truth
2x Engineered Explosives
1x Inkwell Leviathan
1x Massacre
2x Pithing Needle
1x Show and Tell
3x Thoughtseize
I find that even 2 cc is to slow for an enabler. I would rather keep as little 3 cc as possible (I would definitely maindeck Pithing Needles or go back to Animate Dead instead of SnT if it wasn't for my meta which requires it main).Quote:
Originally Posted by wcm8
Thanks for the list, appreciate it!Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpt-Qc
Quick question why not play 4 lotus petals and 4 Dazes? I feel like you want turn 1 renanimate as often as possible which lotus petal does. Also it hedges against Blood moon which can completely shut off the deck. As for a 4th daze, having ad many counter spells as possible seems to be great in this deck, no?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N930A using Tapatalk
3 petals is pretty much the norm as if you don't have it early you don't want to mana flood (this deck can operate on a single land pretty easily). Don't forget this is not the B/R version: we don't need to go off T1. We usually go off T2-3 more reliably even tho those petals allow the occasional T1.Quote:
Originally Posted by CovenantElite30
Some people play 4 dazes, I just find that the card is so dead if you don't have it in your opener that I would rather have a fifth force (which will do pretty much the same thing).
Also Blood moon is way too slow to matter against reanimator. By the time it's out you either have permission or you've gone off already.
I doubt anyone sides it against us (nobody ever did against me) but if they do I'm actually fine with it since we can either shred it with thoughtseize or counterspell it or as you said power through with petals.
Another question why Putrid Imp over Hapless Researcher? Isn't having more blue cards to pitch to Force of Will better?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpt-Qc