Printable View
Ok, so I figured out why Ghost Quarter works better in the Modern DnT build. Quite simply, its because the Modern DnT deck ramps with Noble Hierarch allowing you to play a turn 2 Leonin Arbiter followed by a Ghost Quarter while your opponent is on 1 land.
We don't have that line of play open here.
we would be playing Maverick if we did. [emoji4]Quote:
Originally Posted by Tormod
(Sent from my phone, please ignore typos and grammar errors)
Anyone knows when the final of the last SCG legacy open will be played?
Two SGC legacy opens in row won by D&T would be huge :)
DnT won.
Nice!
Would Moat be any good in this deck. I realize that it also stops us from ground and pound but some of us play a lot of fliers. It was probably already discussed but I can't seem to find where
There are a few reasons why I would not use it.
-It does not quite do what this deck needs. It may win some games by its sheer power, but it is an uncomfortable fit in a deck with ~20 ground creatures.
-The mana cost is slightly beyond the curve in D+T. This deck does have 23 land, but that includes Wastelands and Horizon Canopies. Plus it has Thalia. In Legacy, you would often die with the moat in your hand, unable to cast it.
-Dead against combo, including Show and Tell. It doesn't even attack.
Moat is not a terrible suggestion or anything, but in Legacy there are just so many powerful options that you really can't afford a luxury like Moat. Every card has to be a perfect fit. Even Miracles does not use this card. If there was a Legacy deck that could use Moat, that would be the one.
Hello everyone!
I recently found Ports for a GREAT price and I need almost nothing else to finish DnT. Since it is a very powerful deck and I have really liked watching people play it, I have decided to pick up the rest of the pieces.
One question I have is about the Karakas count. It seems the number differs between 2 and 3 in almost all lists. Is 3 used when you are going with Mangara? In some matchups it is just great, but 3 seems high to me. Could someone clarify the reasoning for the 3rd Karakas?
Thanks!
I'm no expert with the deck but I remember when Death and Taxes were actually running the full set of 4 Karakas'. At that time Mangara was also a mainstay of the deck. When Mangara was cut is when I think most lists went down to playing just 3. I personally wouldn't want to go lower than 3. We have no way to tutor/dig for it, and Karakas is one of the reasons we have such a relatively strong game against decks like Sneak and Show and Reanimator. It's also pretty valuable in the mirror.Quote:
Originally Posted by cab0747
As logic goes or the meta follows, I believe for the reason for people's list to run 2 Karakas is either they can't afford to have a full set or that the lack of Show and Tell decks in the meta granted the less application of Karakas in their build. People ran 3 Karakas because they didn't want to have to deal with drawing them a lot of the times.Quote:
Originally Posted by cab0747
Thank you for the reply.Quote:
Originally Posted by dcosiem
There isn't much Show and Tell locally. I may start off with 2 and bump the number to 3 if I see the need.
The reason it played so many Karakas was because Mangara was a serious, good lock in legacy that if it is working, it can slowly change the game state to your favor significantly. It's kinda have the same impact as Counterbalance but possibly not as good. It's still good for us, and not the opponent.Quote:
Originally Posted by cab0747
I guess if you run 2 Karakas, it probably means you're not using Mangara in your deck. It's still good to use as catch fodder for Thalia and other legendary creature in your deck. I would run 3.
Anyone play a black splash or is that taboo here? I feel like shoring up a bad match up in elves is kinda nice as well as getting a powerful draw engine in Bob.
It's not that it would be taboo but you'd be playing a different deck already if you'll splash black. You'll definitely put thoughtseize in your 75 if you plan to splash blackQuote:
Originally Posted by Megadeus
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
See what I mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by The Duck!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Cheese
In response to the black splash...
Black taxes was discussed in this forum a while ago, much like every other splash-able colors like green and red. Yes there are benefits to running a second color in death and taxes. You gain access to a wider card pool and arguably very powerful cards. When I was experimenting with the b/w vial version of deadguy ale the best inclusions were the obvious; Bob and Sculler. You also gain access to the powerful sideboard options of zealous persecution, perish, discard spells... etc.
However, in order to run a black splash... or any splash, is that your forced to do a couple obvious things.
1) Run fetch lands
2) Run more nonbasics
These two necessities for a dual color manabase have pronounced ripple effects on the rest of the deck. For the sake of not writing a long winded post i'll just list them below.
- opens you up to stifle
- makes your sideboard cards inefficient under thalia
- increased weakness to blood moon
- more vulnerable to waste land
- deck thinning
***this one I feel is very underrated. One of the problems with merfolk is that many of their cards are UU in casting cost. Fetch lands in folk effectively takes islands out of the deck, minimizing the risk of them drawing islands in the late game. However merfolk wants to draw islands. If they get hung up on one land and without an aether vial they have a hand full of un-castable cards. Death and taxes has the same problem. Many of the cards we run (crusader, brimaz, serra avenger, flickerwisp, councils judgment) all have WW in the casting cost. We need to draw plains, and having 8 non plains lands in our deck doesn't help fullfill the WW cost of those cards. Taking plains out of the deck (albeit to avoid flooding) with fetches is a double edged sword.
Running the dual mana base has its consequences. DnT as a monowhite decks preys upon decks that try to abuse mana as a win con. RUG Delver, painter, and sneak attack are overwhelmingly positive match ups for us. By running fetches and more nonbasics DnT opens itself up to the stifle/waste plan of RUG effectively giving them a more than reasonable chance of winning that match up. Secondly, painter and sneak attack both use blood moon as "i win" cards to attack the legacy metagame. There's no reason for us to give those decks a free win over us to add cards like thoughtseize and bob and sculler.
Dnt as a whole is a deck the relies on stability and synergy. None of the cards outside of stoneforge mystic are objectively powerful. The pieces of the deck work together to create an environment where our opponents deck cannot thrive. We are very much like RUG Delver in a sense, progressing our board while preventing the opponent from establishing theirs. Cards like Bob don't actively do that. Sculler would fit the Dnt game plan more then Bob does, and in my flirtation with black taxes that was the conclusion I came to as well. Bob was more a win more card. After I would deploy my thalia's, my stoneforges, my revokers... I would vial in my Bob and my opponents would just scoop. Bob was the last nail in the coffin, but he didn't actually do anything. Now keep in mind I am not argueing that Bob is not a good card, its arguably one of the most powerful creatures in magic and if left unchecked will just win you games. I am saying howerever it's not what Dnt needs.
All in all the monowhite build of Dnt is very unique towards it's success in the metagame. Running multiple colors actually weakens the deck and the decks ability to implement its game plan. So to answet the question originally I wouldn't say that a black splash (or any splash) is taboo; it's just been deemed inefficient/unnecessary by most DnT players.
Yes, the manabase is definitely weaker, although it's not like the mono-white version doesn't have its share of Wasteland targets. Stifle becomes more of a thing for sure, but so far I've found that Vial largely mitigates any attempts by other decks to attack the manabase. I run 6 fetches, 4 Scrublands, and 2 of each basic, and I've had very few issues with mana. Still, it's a non-zero number, so there's definitely a drawback. I think what you have to ask is whether the stuff you're adding is strong enough that you're willing to live with that new weakness. Personally I think it definitely is.Quote:
Originally Posted by raikenxy
I think Black is able to address the two biggest problems the deck has: lack of card advantage and early disruption against combo. Bob may not seem like he synergizes well with the rest of the deck, but just by virtue of being a creature and a 2-drop, he fits in perfectly. The Horizon Canopies in D&T have always struck me as a kludgey solution to this issue. Turn one discard (I run 2 Thoughtseize, 2 IoK main and 4 Duress in the board) is primarily there to fight combo, but is usually huge against almost every deck in the format. It can be a crappy topdeck in the late game, but that's why I'm only running 4 pieces, plus Bob to fight dead draws. So far I've not dropped a game against storm combo thanks to early discard buying me a turn or two to establish a board. Vial + Sculler is also the business against Burning Wish (and Miracles).
That said, I don't think a black splash is necessarily better than mono white. I've had good results with it for the most part, but don't have nearly the same body of evidence the white version does, so at this point there's no way I could even think about making that claim. I do think it's a very good deck in its own right though, and as much as I want Deadguy to be a thing again, I just think this is the more appropriate forum based on how the deck plays. Especially with Mangara losing favor, the playstyle is really similar. My "told you so" comment is because in certain threads people seem very protective of their deck name, and insist that anything off-color or missing a specific card can't be called the same deck. My deck is obviously D&T with a black splash, but all I got when I posted about it here was "well then you aren't playing Death and Taxes". It's like when people claimed that anything not running the card "Pox" couldn't be called a Pox deck, or that Big Zoo isn't a Zoo deck.
Playing a variant of your list, it most certainly playsmore like death and taxes than dead guy. Simply for the fact that it is more creature based it pays similarly. I played the "mirror" today and it was an absolute grind fest
You have fair points, and I do remember the name-bashing you recieved a while back on this forum so I will sympathize with the "i told you so" comment you wrote before, intellectual discussion over deck theory is a lot more beneficial when the conversation I feel is civil and respectful; so please understand everyting I say is coming in that tone :).Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Cheese
I played the black splash myself for a bit and came to some of the conclusions I spoke about before based off my experience with the deck. If you'll bear with me I would love to elaborate more on those points and some of the ones you brought up in your reply.
A: Play style
I will concede that the decks do play out very similarly. Especially if running ports, you still make the same drops and decisions the majority of the time. Mom, Vial, Plowshares, equipment, Thalia, stoneforge, wasteland/port, revokers... all pieces of both decks that allowed Black taxes to function in very much the same way as monowhite death and taxes. You're still playing disruptive creatures; you're still taxing your opponents manabase; your still probably winning with wheenie beatdown or a batterskull; etc... etc... etc...
In this light yes, both Black Tax and DnT are very similar. Now as opposed to being the exact same deck, I'm not sure. The play styles of each are similar but Black Taxes and DnT each run different cards that allow for different decision tree's and card selections... very much like how all of the Delver Decks are structed. Tempo Decks in general all universally (at least to my knowledge) right now run very similar card choices which revolve around Delver, Daze, Wasteland, Ponder, Brainstorm, Force of Will... etc... RUG, BUG, and UWR Delver are all capable of playing the tempo strategy against their opponents as a viable path to victory. However as well all know each one of those decks have distinct differences that allow them either greater flexibilty or vulnerability against certain match-ups. RUG is the best out of the three at abusing stifle and is the most tempo oriented of the three. UWR is probably the stronger of the two in a fair metagame, having 8 pieces of removal to control the board and access to both true-name nemesis and stoneforge mystic means it has a much stronger mid-late game then RUG does. BUG Delver (team america) has access to abrupt decay, lilliana, and deathrite shaman. Deathrite is a much more proactive tempo card, accelerating the threats and disruption of BUG delver like Tnn/hymn/goyf/liliana while also being in and of itself probably the most powerful one drop in legacy.
Now in relation to black tax and DNT, I would say we are very similar in the ways that RUG and UWR are similar. Our game plans prevent the development of our opponents board by deploying cheap taxing creatures and taxing manabases. However like RUG and UWR we also have different tools at our disposal to end games. You run Sculler, Bob, thoughtseize mainboard which gives you an extra element of disruption while creating actual card advantage. Death and Taxes relies of creating "Virtual Card advantage" instead. By preventing an opponent from playing there cards efficiently under taxing effects we are slowing them down to the point where our board pressure kills them. When I played black tax most often Bob was the win condition. After stunting my opponents development and creating a board presence landing a Bob would seal the deal. There would be no way that my opponent would be able to keep up with the card draw.
You are correct in saying that by adding black you gain access to cards that create card advantage and early disruption. That is the by product of gaining more power from your land base. I do disagree though on your points of saying that death and taxes has no form of early disruption or card advantage.
B: Lack of disruption
By adding black you do gain thoughtseize, inquisition, duress, cabal therapy... all the great turn one discard spells. However, turn one, even with Black Tax, if I was on the play and playing against an unknown opponent if i was given the choice of playing either mother of runes, aether vial, or thoughtseize... im almost always just gonna play the aether vial first. If it's a fair deck I'd rather take the chance and play the vial which sets me up for the rest of the game then waste my turn one play discarding their turn one play. If it's a combo deck and I didn't lose on the spot... I got lucky and can proceed with my game. If I did lose on the spot then my opponent got lucky and drew the nut perfect turn one hand, things happen in life.
There really arent many combo decks in the metagame right now that DnT cares about too much. The only problem ones are turn 0 decks like belcher and Oops, and to a lesser extent TES. Dredge is a bitch to play against as well, but sideboard games are slightly better. And against all of those decks if they don't kill you on turn one... they are probably losing. Decks like ad nauseum, sneak attack, high tide, combo elves we have game against in the form of Ethersworn Cannonst, Grafdiggers cage, and enlightened tutor. These decks we will most likely live till turn two against, and we have very positive match ups sideboard wise against them just being monowhite (excluding elves, even I will admit the black tax version was much stronger versus elves).
To clarify everything; I'm not saying that the black disruption is better or worse, but that as a monowhite build we just don't need it as we are resolved to just waiting till turn two or playing a one cost artifact turn one.
C: Card Advantage
In terms of actual card advantage yes; DnT does not draw physical cards outside of builds with horizon canopy. Much like merfolk our deck is relatively redundant which mitigates the need to draw physical cards. Also, as I have stated already our deck creates "virtual card advantage" (sorry don't mean to sound like a broken record). Preventing the opponent from playing spells, or a game in general, is one of our solid routes to victory and the deck goes in on this concept hard. DnT is very much like rug in its ability to prevent opponents from developing, I've often laughed to myself about how very "tempo" like a dnt game can be when we go turn one vial, turn two port your land vial mom in end of turn, vial in a thalia waste your dual port your other land on turn 3. Granted that is a "nut hand" scenario, but many games are won like that.
Secondly, are deck does have many tricks that create card advantage. Noteably the inclusion of stoneforge mystic is itself a card that creates actual card advantage. Flickerwisping a stoneforge also creates card advantage, or an O-ring in response to an O-ring trigger to get multiple problem permanents. Its not blatant "drawing more cards"; but they are extra plays that often lead to blowouts. Also the recent inclusion of sword of fire and ice due to TNN is also actual card advantage.
D: Name-Shaming
It's probably not right to bash black taxes as just a deadguy deck. It does have a very similar play style and card selection as Dnt; however I would not believe it appropriate to post in this forum on its deck development. In fact I would proudly celebrate it as a new branch of the Dnt family tree. Black tax is in itself a unique creation, having greater power due to access to black mana while coming at the price of weaker mana base is just all forms of flavorful from a players perspective. But the decks are clearly different enough to warrant seperation. The power of Bob will hand down win games for Black Tax that DnT will most likely have to grind through for another twenty minutes, where as bob will probably win the game in half the time. In the same regard Death and Taxes won't lose so hard or as often to bloodmoon on turn one without a vial as black tax would ( which happened quite frequently to me sadly haha). Aether vial is a great tool to circumvent it, but so is just playing a lot of basic plains lol. Black tax easily has a stronger elves match up and I'm surevice versa for Dnt against some other decks in the meta.
So much like the delver decks Dnt and Black Tax are similar, but I would say they are different enough to be completely distinguished from each other. Saying that black tax is just "DNT splash black" i think would be a disservice to it as an emerging archetype. I also certaintly wouldn't want to stunt it's growth by discussing it in the mono white forum amongst a pool of players who are dead set on staying mono-white lol. Be proud of the similarities, but also be proud of each decks own uniqueness as well.
it's very late as i write this soplease excuse the grammer and lack of editing as I am quite tired lol, long night of legacy fnm tonight (got first with good ol monowhite ;) )
I just picked up a Mufasa, playing it is as a one-of in place of one Crusader (dropped to two).
I like that he's Bolt proof and has incremental board presence.