[Deck] Dragon Stompy

Who care what type of deck this is? It's a deck that runs creatures and disruption. Enough, new page, new start. To steer conversation else where;

What would be a better sideboard card, Pyroclasm or Pyrokenisis?

On one hand, Pyrokenisis is instant speed and can take out larger threats. On the other hand, Pyroclasm can deal with more creatures at once and only cost two. Can the deck reliably keep another red card in hand to Pyrokenisis when necessary? Is the two damage from Pyroclasm enough to be depend on?

I think that this deck is risky, so 4 Pyrokinesis will be good, even if we cannot pitch a card to it.

We care about hellbent, so I prefer Pyrokinesis now.
Clasm is good against untargettable like Mongoose, but we don't care, our big guys will kill it anyway :)

Honestly, Pyrokinesis' instant speed makes it relevant against some combo decks, while also usually being a board clear against goblins (plus it can remove one of the scariest goblins, Wort) and EoT removal against decks like Eva Green where you need to hope to outtempo them.

Pyroclasm, on the other hand, can sometimes kill an extra guy or two, but also kills many of your own guys unless they are equipped.

Pyrokinesis.

I find that pitch a red card is not as easy as it looks like so I'll choose Pyroclasm. .I still need more experience to decide what red card to be pitched for Chrome Mox so additional spell like that will be nightmare for me. .
This deck has enough disruption to slow opponent down so sorcery speed won't be a problem. .

This is your last verbal warning for poor posting. Please see our site rules and shape up. - Bardo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zork

Honestly, Pyrokinesis' instant speed makes it relevant against some combo decks, while also usually being a board clear against goblins (plus it can remove one of the scariest goblins, Wort) and EoT removal against decks like Eva Green where you need to hope to outtempo them.

Pyroclasm, on the other hand, can sometimes kill an extra guy or two, but also kills many of your own guys unless they are equipped.

Pyrokinesis.

---

I am coming to this conclusion myself. Pyrokinesis is proving slightly stronger in the average metagame than Pyroclasm. It's instant speed and it costs 0 mana. There are times when I really do want Pyroclasm, such as against Goblins and against ETW-packing combo, but Pyrokinesis is still good against these matchups.

However, Pyrokinesis and Chrome Mox together cause a heavy burden on your threat count, so you have to be very careful when using these cards and figure out what to pitch when and where. I'm not altogether convinced a 2/2 split isn't as strong as 4 Pyrokinesis, however, Pyrokinesis at least pitches to other Pyrokinesis, so perhaps not.

What I do like most about Pyrokinesis is that it is at its absolute strongest when you're not getting enough mana. If Dragon Stompy curves out just right, I find it to be an incredible powerhouse, but with too much or too little mana, it suffers greatly. Pyrokinesis at least fixes one of these problems.

Thanks for posting your list. For the record, I ripped this deck off from you and Phantom and have had a blast with it. I was a stax player and trini is the monster in that build. (I used Braids and Stax, that is a hard lock with Trini my friends...) and was having a hard time even thinking of cutting trini because of my success with that card in another deck. But I had the same observation. Lost more games with the mid game draw than won with the first turn drop. We test with dragon stompy a lot as a base line AGGRO match up, right along with goblins. It helps. Losing to DS is a learning experience about your curve. Any weakness in it is fully illustrated by this match-up. More so than even CB control. CB punishes you for being 1-2 drop heavy. DS attacks decks the same way w/ CotV and trini, but also punish you for not being fast enough to respond and get tempo. Now if that isn't an aggro situation, I don't know what is.

Edit: As I test with and vs. goblins alot, and have even been doing some DS-goblins match ups I have to say that being able to kill Wort is a big deal. Warren Weirding is powerful against DS, a barrage of them is frown town. She is must kill, and even powering up Jitte enough can be hard. So Pyrokinesis is keen in my book.

Well Taco, wasted life says he doesn't read the TES forum, so I guess you're off the hook.

Out of curiosity, has anyone actually sat around and done serious testing with 4 Akroma, Angel of Fury in a 24-threat build? Or 3 in a 23, for that matter? I'm contemplating trying this out despite my brain telling me it's not a great idea, but I've been testing the deck so much lately I sort of need a break from it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tacosnape

Out of curiosity, has anyone actually sat around and done serious testing with 4 Akroma, Angel of Fury in a 24-threat build? Or 3 in a 23, for that matter? I'm contemplating trying this out despite my brain telling me it's not a great idea, but I've been testing the deck so much lately I sort of need a break from it.

---

I've actually done it although like you I assumed it would be a bad idea. As we both pre-concluded it doesn't work well you end up with a 2/2 Morph that you can't unmorph most games you play them. I Personally Feel we should just not play Akroma AoF and just run:
4 Rakdos Pit Dragon
4 Simian Spirit Guide
4 Gathan Raiders
4 Magus of the Moon
3 Arc-Slogger
3 Taurean Mauler
as the threats this particular 22 threat count has been magnificent for me.

@Jan: Strange. I haven't liked Taurean Mauler, although he's not bad early on. I find that with Chalice and Moon, my opponent doesn't play many spells, and if they stop Chalice and Moon, I struggle to keep them from removing my threats anyway. What's your metagame like? I'm curious to know what Mauler's been thriving in for you.

Still according to me the perfect DS build is done like this:
30 mana sources (10 mountains, 8 2manalands, 4 chromemox, 4 SSG, 4 Seething)
16 lock pieces (8 moon, 4 trini, 4 chalice)
14 beaters (4 Raiders, 4 Dragons, 3/4 Arc-Slogger, 2/3 ???)

For the unknown slots:
- Taurean Mauler is bad because your locks prevent your opponent from playing. If your lock works, then you have a vanilla 2/2. If it does not, then you're probably ------ up.
- Sulfur Elemental is bad because it's only a 3/2. The good thing about it is that it is uncounterable which is really fine, even with lock pieces. but striking only for 3 is bad in the strategy I explained earlier.
- Akroma: it's good because it looks like a Gathan Raiders but it's bad because it's not a Gathan Raider. Unmorph is very random, but once unmorphed it's really a bomb. I'm not decided on it.
- Countryside Crusher: the casting cost is quite problematic, requiring RR, but eventually, with moons and all the mana acceleration, it's not that much a constraint. It provides topdecks as long as it gets bigger. the problem with it is that it can be risky to play it when you are low on mana sources.
- Masticores : quite nice but the upkeep cost is completely unplayable with hellbent and not being pitchable to chrome mox is quite a problem too. They get rid of chump blockers and make your magus/SSG attack. However, in my strategy, I don"t thing that you'll need several threats at the same time. Maybe on of the best shots.

I don't know if you considered other creatures.

Edit: mmm forgot Chandra Nalaar. Looks solid too. I mean 12 dmg in 3 turns, it's really great.

My list is not the perfect one, but I use it like a primer or an archetype... ok,let's do this:

22 creatures.
4 Magus of the moon - utility
4 Simian Spirit guide - utility
4 Rakdos pit dragon
4 Gathan Raiders
3 Arcslogger
2 Sulfur Elemental
1 Akroma - Stompy

18 lands.
10 Mountain
4+4 :2: lands

8 mana.
4 Chome mox
4 Seething song

total so far: 48.

Lock-
4 Chalice of the void
+
3 trinisphere +1 Blood Moon = THIS IS JUST A META CALL, YOU CAN SPLIT THIS SLOT THE WAY YOU LIKE.

Equipment
4 slot.
I use 3 Jitte and 1 Sofi. 4 is good in my opinion.


---

SB:

4 slot: mine is 1 trinisphere and 3 Blood Moon. Your slot should depend on your maindeck choice.

3 pithing needle
4 tormod's crypt
4 PyroSOMETHING



*****************

OK, now: is this list something we can start from?

:smile:

Rinello > your argumentation is very interesting. If I did a 20lines argumentation, it's not to be answered with an explanation-free list.

Zulander > Right. But playing a lock (chalice/pillar/trinisphere) is often far better, mostly because even with the perfect hand Taco's signature described, he needs a very random topdeck to have that 2nd turn kill, and he is likely to be killed on turn 1 or 2 of the combo player anyway. With a turn1 chalice or trini, that is absolutely impossible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sanguine Voyeur

Who care what type of deck this is? It's a deck that runs creatures and disruption. Enough, new page, new start.

---

Agreed. Further discussion about the deck's archetype will be deleted. If needed, warnings will be issued.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maveric78f

Rinello > your argumentation is very interesting. If I did a 20lines argumentation, it's not to be answered with an explanation-free list.

Zulander > Right. But playing a lock (chalice/pillar/trinisphere) is often far better, mostly because even with the perfect hand Taco's signature described, he needs a very random topdeck to have that 2nd turn kill, and he is likely to be killed on turn 1 or 2 of the combo player anyway. With a turn1 chalice or trini, that is absolutely impossible.

---

The only thing that he would have been unable to play was a 5cc card like arc slogger. I'll take my chances of top decking a 3 of with 52 cards in my deck if it means I win on turn 2-3. Mulling to 6-5 looking for a lock piece < winning turn 2-3. If they combo out then oh well because the hand that was given to you has made you the aggro player and combo the control one, and unfortunately combo is not a good control deck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tacosnape

Out of curiosity, has anyone actually sat around and done serious testing with 4 Akroma, Angel of Fury in a 24-threat build? Or 3 in a 23, for that matter? I'm contemplating trying this out despite my brain telling me it's not a great idea, but I've been testing the deck so much lately I sort of need a break from it.

---

You know shes a legend right? Anyways I dont think more than 1-2 Akroma is right, I think that many is justified because she is never dead, being a 2/2 for :3:.

Also, why are people running less than 4 Arc Slogger? Its pretty much the strongest creature in the deck except a hellbent RPD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maveric78f

Still according to me the perfect DS build is done
- Taurean Mauler is bad because your locks prevent your opponent from playing. If your lock works, then you have a vanilla 2/2. If it does not, then you're probably ------ up.

---

But if your opponent doesn`t play any spells, cuz of your lock pieces, than mauler is a 10-turn clock ? any thoughts on this ? If they play something and don`t have removal he`s just bigger.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bovinious

Also, why are people running less than 4 Arc Slogger? Its pretty much the strongest creature in the deck except a hellbent RPD.

---

The five mana can be hard to reach later in the game, especially with moons out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by savemysoul

But if your opponent doesn`t play any spells, cuz of your lock pieces, than mauler is a 10-turn clock ? any thoughts on this ? If they play something and don`t have removal he`s just bigger.

---

That's ten turns of your opponent not playing any thing. The only things he could be doing involve man lands, 42Lands, and Ichorid. Any other deck will either play spells, or lose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bovinious

You know shes a legend right?

---

When will this ever become relevant? When you manage to get the mana to flip two of them over?

While I mostly agree 4 is probably too much, Red Akroma's going to usually be a 2/2 morphed guy. She's going to draw removal because people fear she's a Gathan Raiders or fear you might flip her. She's going to be the first card imprinted on Chrome or pitched to Pyrokinesis, and she's very often going to be used to flip a Gathan Raiders. But games will arise when you flip her, and you will win. She ends the game insanely fast on her own, and she's a complete nightmare to get rid of. You can't STP her, you can't Vindicate her, it's going to be rare that you can Deed her, and if you ever somehow get the mana to hardcast her, they can't counter her either. Chances are they'll just counter the Seething Song you play before you cast her, but if they don't know you have Akroma, it'll go through. Alternately, if they -do- know you have Akroma, you can use midgame Seething Songs to actually bluff-bait counters.

The point of all of this, which I've now digressed from, is that you will almost never need to flip more than one.

This has me wanting to test a build with all my Sloggers (3 right now) replaced with Akromas. I like the fact that they have to waste their removal BEFORE I use my Song, and the fact that getting hellbent would be like a breeze in this build. I understand that I'd be losing that whole turn 1-2 Slogger, whoops I win factor (not that a flipped angel doesn't act similar), and that we'd be more vunerable to burn removal than ever, but I want to try it.

I still don't see Akroma being better than Taurean Mauler. You arugue that Akroma will never be dead since you can morph her but in that situation, she's just a worse Mauler. Mauler will always be better than a 2/2 since if your opponent doesn't play spells, you are winning the game (With the possible exception of Dredge). While this might not matter against most combo decks, neither will Akroma so there is still a slight edge for Mauler since there can be situations arising where they spend some spells trying to get through your disruption and that gives you a faster clock. The only times I really see Akroma being better is when you're in the mid-late game and mana flooded, which is bad for you, or you gain some advantage with the Gathan Raiders bluff, which won't happen too often. That being said, I'm still not sure Mauler is better than Sulfur Elemental, his flash ability has been quite useful.

They're all really close. Sulfur Elemental's flash is very nice as a pseudo-removal spell. Akroma's a game-breaking threat when you can flip her. And Mauler's just nice and consistently mediocre-to-good. There are situations where it's fairly logical to want any of the three of them.

However, the less equipment I run, the more I find myself wanting the removal of Sulfur Elemental or the evasion of a flipped Akroma. I need to do some serious testing with Mauler over the next week or two to get a better feel for him, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tacosnape

@Jan: Strange. I haven't liked Taurean Mauler, although he's not bad early on. I find that with Chalice and Moon, my opponent doesn't play many spells, and if they stop Chalice and Moon, I struggle to keep them from removing my threats anyway. What's your metagame like? I'm curious to know what Mauler's been thriving in for you.

---

My Meta has a lot of Thresh, some Goyf Sligh, Angel Stax, Cephalid Breakfast, some MBA, 1 Faerie Stompy, a few Goblins, 1 Meathooks (Mauler has fun agains't this deck... :wink: ) , a few Ichorid Decks, landstill, storm variants, and some random. Also to add to this my build has been cut down to Just 3 Umezawa's Jitte for equipment which makes Sulfer Elemental and Akroma less appealing.

How does this look for a list. It has alot more denial then normal builds, running 7 moons effects while still running 4 chalice and 3 3sphere. This is a big reason as to why i dont run taurean mauler. Akroma is pretty good but its extremely expensive so i run 1.

4 Chrome mox
4 City of traitors
4 Ancient tomb
10 mountain
4 Seething song
4 Magus of the moon
3 Blood moon
4 Chalice of the void
3 Trinisphere
4 SSG's
4 Gathan raiders
4 Rakdos pit dragon
3 arc slogger
3 jitte
2 Sulfur
1 Akroma

I honestly don't like sword less build's anymore... Swords of Light and Shadows helps against the Burn, Angel Stompy, and MBA match ups, while Sword of Fire and Ice helps against Burn, Dragon Stompy, MUC, and numerous other match ups. Honestly I think that decks that don't use one or the other (possibly even both) are asking for trouble. Meanwhile Decks that don't utilize Jitte's are also asking for trouble. Which is one more reason for taking out the 3sphere's as it allows for people to load up on more equipment cards.

To add something to this discussion about metagame calls and creature selection - why is Flametongue Kavu neglected?

I mean, it's a great card. I'm thinking of running it as a 2-of, perhaps a little because my meta has quite a lot of fairie stompy and it is obviously good against it. But still, if you have no targets for it you can do the usual hide under mox/feed raiders thing, but when you have targets... Yay, we have "board control elements".

If pyrokinesis is discussed as maindeckable I think it's time to reconsider ftk.
Or am I missing something obvious? ( Besides Tarmogoyf. )

I tried FTK early on in my testing of the deck as it seemed really solid but it is not that impressive. I could see him in the board as Faerie Stompy is probably where he shines most though. The problem I saw was that getting a 2 toughness guy for 4 almost always set you up to trade him for their 2 drop, which is really bad for this deck.

As a former Thresh player I never really had to mulligan. The once-in-a-blue-moon mulligan I had to take with Thresh was basically the no-land hand. DS, however, forces me to consider it quite often, and I go down to six, even five quite a lot. But due to the fact that I like turn 1 lock (be it chalice or a moon effect) backed up by turn 2-3 threat, and taking a mulligan reduces the odds of getting that play, I was wondering what kind of hands you guys usually mulligan? I typed up some examples below. What would you do with the following hands:

(I know it depends on what you're playing against but just try to consider these hands in general)

1) CotV, Mountain, SSG, Mox, Mox, Blood Moon, Seething Song
This hand offers a powerful lock early game, but lacks in threats

2) Tomb, Mountain, SSG, Raiders, Raiders, Seething Song, Mox
This hand offers threats and pressure early game, but has difficulty enabling Hellbent (unless you want to waste the cards in your hand). It lacks in locks, and a deck with removal might take advantage of this fact.

3) Tomb, City, RPD, Seething Song, CotV, MotM, Jitte
This hand is pretty powerful if you draw a red source. Do you wait and hope to draw that red source, as you have eighteen in your deck, and have not yet drawn a single one?

4) Mox, Mox, MotM, Blood Moon, Mountain, SSG, Trinisphere
This hand might be worth playing, but how much of your hand do you want to contribute to speed? Turn one Magus, Moon or Trinisphere is doable, but eats up a lot of your hand. How to play this? Mountain --> go?
Also: if you do not know what your opponent is playing, do you drop turn1 Blood Moon or turn 1 Magus?

5) Mountain, Mox, SSG, Slogger, RPD, MotM, SSG
This is a similar example; it offers an explosive start at the cost of almost your entire hand. Without a :2:mana land it's often possible to make that 3-drop turn one; is it worth it? Do you wait?
Do you drop turn one MotM or turn one RPD? Dropping MotM means cutting yourself out of turn 2 RPD.
Consider this hand if it were:
6) Mountain, Mox, SSG, Slogger, RPD, MotM, CotV
Would that change it?

And finally:

7) Tomb, SSG, MotM, RPD, Trinisphere, CotV, Blood Moon
I get this quite often; in general number 7 is basically a hand that nails you a three-drop turn one, but leaves you at two mana turn 2 (if you drop trinisphere), or more often: at one mana if you drop MotM or Blood Moon as they turn the :2:land into a mountain. What to do with hands that mean a turn 1 drop for you, but leaves you out of the mana turn 2?

For all of them, I consider that I'm g1 on the play so that I have absolutely no information on my opponent's deck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mayk0l

1) CotV, Mountain, SSG, Mox, Mox, Blood Moon, Seething Song
This hand offers a powerful lock early game, but lacks in threats

---

I keep. I play mountain mox on Song chalice@1, pass.
Turn 2 depending on my draw, and on my opponen't play I would play (more probably) moon or (less probably) SSG, by imprinting the other one under the other mox.

Quote:

---

2) Tomb, Mountain, SSG, Raiders, Raiders, Seething Song, Mox
This hand offers threats and pressure early game, but has difficulty enabling Hellbent (unless you want to waste the cards in your hand). It lacks in locks, and a deck with removal might take advantage of this fact.

---

I would not keep. No lock = no way.

Quote:

---

3) Tomb, City, RPD, Seething Song, CotV, MotM, Jitte
This hand is pretty powerful if you draw a red source. Do you wait and hope to draw that red source, as you have eighteen in your deck, and have not yet drawn a single one?

---

I don't keep because Chalice is a too weak lock element. If there were trinisphere instead of jitte, I would have kept though...

Quote:

---

4) Mox, Mox, MotM, Blood Moon, Mountain, SSG, Trinisphere
This hand might be worth playing, but how much of your hand do you want to contribute to speed? Turn one Magus, Moon or Trinisphere is doable, but eats up a lot of your hand. How to play this? Mountain --> go?
Also: if you do not know what your opponent is playing, do you drop turn1 Blood Moon or turn 1 Magus?

---

Turn 1 trinisphere of course! (mountain, moxSSG, moxBM, turn1 trini).
Turn 2 magus.
Then beatdown hope of death from your opponent and topdeck from you. It may be very riskey though.

Quote:

---

5) Mountain, Mox, SSG, Slogger, RPD, MotM, SSG
This is a similar example; it offers an explosive start at the cost of almost your entire hand. Without a :2:mana land it's often possible to make that 3-drop turn one; is it worth it? Do you wait?

---

Turn 1 Magus with slogger under the mox. If I play against gob or burn I'm clearly ...... up but against the rest of the meta, it's very strong.

Quote:

---

Do you drop turn one MotM or turn one RPD? Dropping MotM means cutting yourself out of turn 2 RPD.

---

With my play, if I draw a land I can play RPD.

Quote:

---

Consider this hand if it were:
6) Mountain, Mox, SSG, Slogger, RPD, MotM, CotV
Would that change it?

---

Clearly chalice turn 1 with slogger under mox. Then probably turn 2 magus. And wait to topdeck mana.

Quote:

---

7) Tomb, SSG, MotM, RPD, Trinisphere, CotV, Blood Moon
I get this quite often; in general number 7 is basically a hand that nails you a three-drop turn one, but leaves you at two mana turn 2 (if you drop trinisphere), or more often: at one mana if you drop MotM or Blood Moon as they turn the :2:land into a mountain. What to do with hands that mean a turn 1 drop for you, but leaves you out of the mana turn 2?

---

This hand is not that poor because of chalice. after chalice@1, you can check what your opponent plays. Usually you'll want to play magus on turn2. But be careful because wasteland is a huge threat to this kind of hands. I'm really unsure of what I would do.

just a quick question, and keep in mind i haven't read every single post in this thread so if the answer is somewhere here already just point me to the relevant post.

Are we sure that zero is the correct number of fetch lands to play in this deck? I've seen many DS lists and never a single fetch land.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sunshine

just a quick question, and keep in mind i haven't read every single post in this thread so if the answer is somewhere here already just point me to the relevant post.

Are we sure that zero is the correct number of fetch lands to play in this deck? I've seen many DS lists and never a single fetch land.

---

I think zero is the right number. There´s no sense of fetchlands in DS. You lose one life. Yeah, sounds great. Especially in addition to the lifeloss of the tombs. You don´t gain any advantage of shuffling your deck and you don´t splash any colours. So, what is the sense of fetchlands in DS?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by technogeek5000

How does this look for a list. It has alot more denial then normal builds, running 7 moons effects while still running 4 chalice and 3 3sphere. This is a big reason as to why i dont run taurean mauler. Akroma is pretty good but its extremely expensive so i run 1.

4 Chrome mox
4 City of traitors
4 Ancient tomb
10 mountain
4 Seething song
4 Magus of the moon
3 Blood moon
4 Chalice of the void
3 Trinisphere
4 SSG's
4 Gathan raiders
4 Rakdos pit dragon
3 arc slogger
3 jitte
2 Sulfur
1 Akroma

---

this deck is 61 cards.

*********

I think that we don't need fetchlands, 10 mountains are very few and if we topdeck a land we can drop it and mantain hellbent even if mana is low (as sometimes is, when we used up our SSG or seething songs)

Flametongue Kavu is bad:
Killed by a Mongoose and must be played after an opponent plays a creature.
we want to LOCK our opponent, so we hope he does not have any creature on board.

If you want to test some stuff,
try Pyrokinesis, Char or Fireblast.

playing fetchlands, even when you don't need access to more than one color, still thins your deck and increases your threat density thereby improving your draws - the only real reason not to play any at all is if you actually want to draw lands in the mid to late game (yes, there is life-loss as well but one point is hardly relevant).

I guess this means the question really is how often do you find yourself actually wanting to topdeck lands? I've never played this deck outside of a testing session.

first time poster.
i been playing w/ dstompy and proxying the mauler in.

My thoughts:

Taurean Mauler is really solid if you can get out first turn on the play
(SSG/Tomb/Traitors, however you get him out)

Opponents have to deal with him early on it just grows out of hand. Had it up to 6/6 and so forth.

The mauler is relateivly weaker in the late game. usually not as a strong impact in the long game. My take is that mauler is good early and average mid-game.

Maveric78f I quote: "You should play it like an aggroish Stax" which is how you said you'd play Dragon Stompy.
I've heard other people disagree on this, saying Dragon Stompy is thé most aggressive deck in the format right now, and should be played as such.
There has already been, however, a warning on posts about the deck's archetype, so I will leave it at that.
However I do want to ask to the players who seem to play this deck very aggressively (like Tacosnape if I'm not mistaken), how they would play hand like:
2) Tomb, Mountain, SSG, Raiders, Raiders, Seething Song, Mox, along with other hands that sport several threats (exluding MotM) but no locks.


Maveric78f: Comparing hand 1 to 3, you keep hand 1 with the option of hardcasting SSG as a 2/2, but mulligan hand 3. If I understand correctly, you consider Chalice of the Void a powerful turn 1 drop if backed up by a threat turn 2, but can a SSG be considered a threat in this situation?
Chances are, you draw a red source; and can go for the MotM/Jitte equip with hand 3. What's the difference that makes you keep hand 1, and mulligan hand 3?

Hand 5: My first thought was also that turn 1 MotM is better than turn one RPD anyday. So in this situation you would wait for a red source, agreed

Hand 7 is, in my opinion, one of those really difficult ones. It can go explosive if the topdeck works for you, but you could be completely screwed over if it doesn't. A lot of times it's quite difficult to decide if turn 1 MotM/Blood Moon is worth cutting yourself out of the mana. Perhaps the right way to go is indeed Chalice for 1 turn one, so that you get at least one topdeck to shoot for three mana at least once without using SSG.
With this specific hand I would probably go for turn 1 Trinisphere (and pray the opponent doesn't have Wasteland) to buy myself some time to topdeck that Mountain or Mox, instead of CotV 1. Turn 1 MotM would be the way to go I guess if you know you're playing an opponent who can't handle it (like Fetch-reliant decks, Landstill, Threshold most of the time).

Hand 7 is also a strange hand, being the only one that gives you acces to any of your locks turn 1. Be it Trini, Moon or Chalice. How do you decide which one you play first, if you don't know what your opponent is running?

Hand 7 becomes even more difficult if you get it on a mulligan and you don't have Chalice or Trinisphere. Meaning, you get the same mana-problem situation but with a Lockpiece less.

How do you guys handle situations like this?
What's the most powerful lockpiece when you're up against John Doe?

On the play, I'd have to go with Trinisphere unless you're facing another Dragon Stompy deck. While Chalice and Moons are stronger, if you're facing DS, Deadguy Ale or another deck packing high disruption with basics those cards come up dead. Chalice for 1 is usually a good play, BUT a Trinisphere will almost always give you time to create a game plan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mayk0l

(I know it depends on what you're playing against but just try to consider these hands in general)

1) CotV, Mountain, SSG, Mox, Mox, Blood Moon, Seething Song
This hand offers a powerful lock early game, but lacks in threats

2) Tomb, Mountain, SSG, Raiders, Raiders, Seething Song, Mox
This hand offers threats and pressure early game, but has difficulty enabling Hellbent (unless you want to waste the cards in your hand). It lacks in locks, and a deck with removal might take advantage of this fact.

3) Tomb, City, RPD, Seething Song, CotV, MotM, Jitte
This hand is pretty powerful if you draw a red source. Do you wait and hope to draw that red source, as you have eighteen in your deck, and have not yet drawn a single one?

4) Mox, Mox, MotM, Blood Moon, Mountain, SSG, Trinisphere
This hand might be worth playing, but how much of your hand do you want to contribute to speed? Turn one Magus, Moon or Trinisphere is doable, but eats up a lot of your hand. How to play this? Mountain --> go?
Also: if you do not know what your opponent is playing, do you drop turn1 Blood Moon or turn 1 Magus?

5) Mountain, Mox, SSG, Slogger, RPD, MotM, SSG
This is a similar example; it offers an explosive start at the cost of almost your entire hand. Without a :2:mana land it's often possible to make that 3-drop turn one; is it worth it? Do you wait?
Do you drop turn one MotM or turn one RPD? Dropping MotM means cutting yourself out of turn 2 RPD.
Consider this hand if it were:
6) Mountain, Mox, SSG, Slogger, RPD, MotM, CotV
Would that change it?

And finally:

7) Tomb, SSG, MotM, RPD, Trinisphere, CotV, Blood Moon
I get this quite often; in general number 7 is basically a hand that nails you a three-drop turn one, but leaves you at two mana turn 2 (if you drop trinisphere), or more often: at one mana if you drop MotM or Blood Moon as they turn the :2:land into a mountain. What to do with hands that mean a turn 1 drop for you, but leaves you out of the mana turn 2?

---

1. Probably keep on the play, maybe or maybe not on the draw. Your opening play is Mountain, Mox-imprinting-Song, Chalice for 1. Hold back the SSG and the Moon, as you don't know what the correct thing to imprint is yet. Keeping either the Threat or the Moon back for a turn may help you win the game.

2. Keep every time. This is a fantastic hand. Lead with Tomb, Mox-Imprinting-Song, Raiders. You should be able to drop the second Raiders and go Hellbent next turn.

3. Eh. Hands without red aren't generally good, but if you draw one Source, the Magus can fix that. You do have the Chal-1 play, but you don't have any morph guys to function off colorless, so I'd only keep this if I knew that Chalice-1 would be very devastating and they couldn't stop it.

4. Hands like this are why I -hate- Trinisphere. You're basically forced to go the Trinisphere route if you keep this hand, leading Mountain, Moxes imprinting SSG and Blood Moon, Trinisphere. Second turn is the Magus, and hope you're playing against something that only has Force/Daze as an answer to Magus.

5. If you keep this, and I probably would because it's better than a random six, you have to risk the big assault, because you don't have enough permanent mana sources to afford to slow-play it. Imprint the Slogger on the Mox, power your way into the Dragon, and hope for the best. If your Dragon gets stopped, you can always topdeck a land or SSG and get your Magus out the next turn, so all isn't lost.

6. This is a completely different hand from 5. Five is Rakdos Pit Dragon combo. Six is a disruption hand. Again, imprint the Slogger on the Mox, but this time lead with Chal-1. Next turn, if you don't get a land, you can SSG into the Magus if you have to. If you -do- get a land, you can drop the Dragon, followed by the Magus the next turn, and you're in pretty good shape.

7. Toss it, period. It sucks on the play, and you scoop if they Thoughtseize your SSG on the draw.

In short, keep 2, 4, 5, and 6. Ditch 3 and 7. On 1, use what information you have to make the decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mayk0l

What's the most powerful lockpiece when you're up against John Doe?

---

You have to know your metagame... but in a more generic, but serious tournament, where you're expecting like 40% of the decks to be Thresh variants, the Blood Moons become critical if your opponent doesn't know what you are playing. Game 1, when your deck is as much a question mark as theirs, they will look at their hands with no consideration of fetchlands becoming negated by a quick Blood Moon... save the mirror match, burn, or Goblins. They may end up fetching non-basics, only further entrenching them before you play the Blood Moon. If you don't have a turn 1 play, I'd rather drop a mountain than an Ancient Tomb to conceal what deck type. 1 Red with no immediate drop can mean any number of things, but an ancient tomb really makes your opponent zero in on deck types and prepare for them.

However, if I do not know what my opponent plays, I'd rather drop down the Chalice for 1 ASAP, being as it protects against the most prevalent forms of active removal and is somewhat of an orim's chant against many a deck. Rather than going for the 'absolute win' against certain decks with Blood Moon, Chalice for 1 buys you time against almost every deck save mirror matches... as it prevents, for example:
Swords to Plowshares
Lightning Bolt
Duress
Thoughtseize
Extirpate
Cabal Therapy
Aether Vial
Goblin Lackey
Mogg Fanatic
Careful Study
Rite of Flame
Dark Ritual
Nimble Mongoose
Manabond
Exploration
Brainstorm
Pithing Needle
Phyrexian Dreadnought
Berserk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sunshine

playing fetchlands, even when you don't need access to more than one color, still thins your deck and increases your threat density thereby improving your draws

---

Hardly. Although there is a slight better chance to draw threats, it's minimal and doesn't justify fetchlands in this deck.

Source

Playing fetchlands also opens you up to cards like Stifle and Suppression Field, as well as lowers your life total in a deck that can easily deal 6-8+ damage to itself and has to still be relied upon to win a damage race. Bad idea.

What do you think of burn spells like Fireblast and Char?

can they be used as finishers or to control the board removing serendib efreet, tarmos and jotun grunt or they are just useless in this deck?

I just wanted to think about a red card to be used as a threat and I thought "ok maybe a non creature spell is fine too".
Maybe I'm wrong, but maybe after testing some burns they'll shine more that akroma / sulfur (or silly mauler)

Another card worth testing: Jaya ballard.
We can use it to eliminate counterbalance or a standstill, we can burn our opponent and she just help us going hellbent in zero time, even if we have 1 land and 1 mox.

I think she deserves a test, maybe replacing sulfur elemental.

Only problem: casting cost. :1: :r: :r: is a pin in the ass.