Oops, All Spells! (Formerly The Rogue Hermit)

I went 3-1 in my lgs weekly tourny

Lost to enchantress round 1 . G1 won turn one. Went for both combos game two because during side boarding he mentioned he knew bout the belcher plan since he had seen me play last week. He started game two off with a leyline, I had belcher in hand so I tried drawing for a rogue. Didn't get it in time before a Rip was played so I conceded. Game three was similar as he has a rip in play really quickly and I had mulled to 6 without a rogue.

Match 2:goblins g1: he goes firt and puts a chalice on one, I go off with 4 spirit guides and cantor after evoking my main deck ingot chewer. G2 won with belcher after another Ingot chewer in hand killed his chalice for 0 (holding it when i saw a trinisphere in hand but he drew the chalice)

Match 3: Jund. Turn 1 win he was really angry I was playing this deck. He had me play out the whole combo, responding to cabal therapy with a bolt to my ballustrate spy after I went off, thinking it might be relevant. Game two he puts out DRS and Liliana making me discard but adding cards to my graveyard and surgical extracting a discarded narcomoeba (I converted to belcher). So eventually I have 3 cabal rituals in hand manage the last one to get hell bent through his DRS and play belcher and activate it. He makes me go through the process and declines to shake my hand and sarcastically thanking me for bringing this deck tonight.

Match 4: against miracles : g1 :on the play turn one go off he doesn't have fow and concedes (I didn't know what he was on, he played elves last week but has a different deck box and deck sleeves this week).
Game 2: I go off with belcher turn 2 and again he doesn't manage to find a fow.

Nice job Grad Student. You play 1 Ingot Chewer main? Thank you for smacking that Jund player.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah I went with Jtorrez's deck except I think he went for 2 bridge or one more therapy instead of the Ingot chewer, but it won me two games last night.

I was playing against lands tonight (went 3-1 wins versus lands, enchantress, and belcher. lost to infect) and the topic came up with how he could combat our combo. He said he was trying to get crop rotation for bojuka bog. I was just wondering if there was some way to play around that if I see a crop in hand after going for the win. Or do I just have to wait to deploy combo after cabal therapying him. He said he would've waited until the narcomoeba triggers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GradStudent

I was playing against lands tonight (went 3-1 wins versus lands, enchantress, and belcher. lost to infect) and the topic came up with how he could combat our combo. He said he was trying to get crop rotation for bojuka bog. I was just wondering if there was some way to play around that if I see a crop in hand after going for the win. Or do I just have to wait to deploy combo after cabal therapying him. He said he would've waited until the narcomoeba triggers

---

I would just side into the Belcher plan. That's an instance in which we can either bank on a) finding a Pact of Negation or dying or b) siding into Belcher.

Granted, they've got five chances to have a Bojuka Bog when they need it, so it's not impossible to just jam the combo and force them to have an out. I tend to prefer not needing to bluff that, but I think it could work.

I feel like waiting to build mana for a Therapy is usually a bad idea. The principal strength of this deck is that it can go off faster than anything else, and we shouldn't alter that gameplan unless we're reasonably sure they can stop us on turn zero (e.g., if we were playing against Miracles and we're on the draw).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronald Deuce

I would just side into the Belcher plan. That's an instance in which we can either bank on a) finding a Pact of Negation or dying or b) siding into Belcher.

Granted, they've got five chances to have a Bojuka Bog when they need it, so it's not impossible to just jam the combo and force them to have an out. I tend to prefer not needing to bluff that, but I think it could work.

I feel like waiting to build mana for a Therapy is usually a bad idea. The principal strength of this deck is that it can go off faster than anything else, and we shouldn't alter that gameplan unless we're reasonably sure they can stop us on turn zero (e.g., if we were playing against Miracles and we're on the draw).

---

with Jtorrez's list (the one with maindeck ingot chewer, how should I board versus a FoW deck? I lost to infect yesterday trying to mulligan into a rogue + pact in hand. got one game that way but he beat me the third game before i had enough mana to cast the rogue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GradStudent

with Jtorrez's list (the one with maindeck ingot chewer, how should I board versus a FoW deck? I lost to infect yesterday trying to mulligan into a rogue + pact in hand. got one game that way but he beat me the third game before i had enough mana to cast the rogue.

---

Against FoW-Decks I like to board out the entire como (I want Pact of Negation and a graveyard-independant win)
7 Rogues (keep a single Informer), 1 Dread Return, 1 Lab Maniac, 1 Cerberus, 3 Moeba, 2 Bridges
In goes the Entire package of 4 Belcher, 4 LED, 4 Pacts, 3 Spoils of the Vault.
This scenario plays a lot slower. I prefer to have a solid combo in hand and deploy permanents (Petal, LED, Mox) as soon as possible.
When a single Pact of Negation appears I consider my life total and the board state if I can play "Draw.Go." for a 2nd Pact.
Once either the 2nd pact appears or the game is going to end soon I just play the combo and see if he has a counter spell. But mind you, the more time you take
the more time he has to find a 2nd counter spell. I win 50% of G2/G3 with this playstyle.

But it seems that you just want to keep your regular Rogue-combo and play with Pacts.
Take out 4 Gitaxian Probes and put in the 4 Pact of Negation.
Reasoning: You do know what he plays already and you need the two life. And it makes the mulligan much easier. But now you have to mulligan into 2 specific cards. But since you (hopefully)
won G1, he has priority to take a mulligan. So you can base your mulligan-decision on his (and his facial expressions :-D ).

I hope that helped a bit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by muntah

Against FoW-Decks I like to board out the entire como (I want Pact of Negation and a graveyard-independant win)
7 Rogues (keep a single Informer), 1 Dread Return, 1 Lab Maniac, 1 Cerberus, 3 Moeba, 2 Bridges
In goes the Entire package of 4 Belcher, 4 LED, 4 Pacts, 3 Spoils of the Vault.
This scenario plays a lot slower. I prefer to have a solid combo in hand and deploy permanents (Petal, LED, Mox) as soon as possible.
When a single Pact of Negation appears I consider my life total and the board state if I can play "Draw.Go." for a 2nd Pact.
Once either the 2nd pact appears or the game is going to end soon I just play the combo and see if he has a counter spell. But mind you, the more time you take
the more time he has to find a 2nd counter spell. I win 50% of G2/G3 with this playstyle.

But it seems that you just want to keep your regular Rogue-combo and play with Pacts.
Take out 4 Gitaxian Probes and put in the 4 Pact of Negation.
Reasoning: You do know what he plays already and you need the two life. And it makes the mulligan much easier. But now you have to mulligan into 2 specific cards. But since you (hopefully)
won G1, he has priority to take a mulligan. So you can base your mulligan-decision on his (and his facial expressions :-D ).

I hope that helped a bit.

---

I disagree with this gameplan vs. Permission especially on the play. The #1 permission deck right now in Legacy is Miracles and they would simply LOVE you to give them more turns to sculpt the perfect hand and board vs us, i.e. dropping top/counterbalance or rest in peace. Taking more turns to draw the second PON is a bad idea. A simple turn two counterbalance or RIP just shuts us down hard, and the longer you wait the more brainstorms/ponder effects they are going to fire off to get leagues ahead of us in card quality.

Basically the best plan vs blue (IMO) is to bring in chancellors and pacts and keep the original combo in the deck and try to kill them before they have a chance to stabilize (or see their turn 2). This means taking out cyclers for Chancellors and PON's.

The worst miracles/delver can do you you before they see a land drop is Force of will. They don't always have it.

Once they drop a land, they can ponder/brainstorm and now they have seen 11 cards.. not only do we have to fear FOW but now DAZE has also become a threat.

Their turn 2, even if they didn't draw a force or a daze they can just cast RIP and we are almost dead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slylie

I disagree with this gameplan vs. Permission especially on the play. The #1 permission deck right now in Legacy is Miracles and they would simply LOVE you to give them more turns to sculpt the perfect hand and board vs us, i.e. dropping top/counterbalance or rest in peace. Taking more turns to draw the second PON is a bad idea. A simple turn two counterbalance or RIP just shuts us down hard, and the longer you wait the more brainstorms/ponder effects they are going to fire off to get leagues ahead of us in card quality.

Basically the best plan vs blue (IMO) is to bring in chancellors and pacts and keep the original combo in the deck and try to kill them before they have a chance to stabilize (or see their turn 2). This means taking out cyclers for Chancellors and PON's.

The worst miracles/delver can do you you before they see a land drop is Force of will. They don't always have it.

Once they drop a land, they can ponder/brainstorm and now they have seen 11 cards.. not only do we have to fear FOW but now DAZE has also become a threat.

Their turn 2, even if they didn't draw a force or a daze they can just cast RIP and we are almost dead.

---

I agree but he was talking after sideboarding (i assume on the draw knowing opponent will just mull to FoW), I dont want to be waiting. but i also dont play both PONs and Chancellors... not sure where id fit them in based on current deck list (John Torrez's)

As a preface to my opinion on dealing with hard control and sideboarding, a couple of things: I maindeck a quad of Pact of Negation, I only run one copy of Manamorphose main, and I use the sideboard Belcher plan.

The principal problem this deck will face in every tournament is free countermagic. It's what makes us fold at least 70% of the time we lose game 1, and our only real answers to it—in games 1, 2, and 3—are either to bank on connecting with Pact of Negation backup or to just try to power out 5 mana to hardcast Cabal Therapy. Sideboarding into the Belcher plan or sideboarding into redundant reanimation targets will not solve this problem, so I'd advocate making light changes—if any—to the combo package.

Countermagic is this deck's worst enemy, which is why I've been maindecking a quad of Pact of Negation. Aside from running that card, I don't think we have any particularly useful answers to heavy control. I wouldn't mess around with an alternate sideboard plan or a change to the deck's basic win condition in such a matchup: sure, they might be able to stop graveyard shenanigans, but they absolutely WILL be able to stop a slower/more fragile combo. Think of it this way: we can go so fast that we don't need to worry about our opponents' strategies; we need to worry about specific hate cards that can stop us on turn 0-1 (Force, Mindbreak Trap, Surgical Extraction, etc.). If we play a slower combo, we're effectively changing that parameter to "cards that can stop us on turn 1-2," greatly increasing the number of cards our opponents can use against us (Daze, Spell Pierce, Swords to Plowshares, Thoughtseize, Tormod's Crypt, Extirpate, Stifle, etc.).

The usefulness of the Charbelcher plan is that it works well in matchups like Lands, Jund, or D&T that may run heavy graveyard hate but lack any other way to interact meaningfully with our combo. Belcher clashes with Pact of Negation pretty severely because LED makes you discard your countermagic. In other words, Charbelcher is what we use when the opponent runs graveyard hate but doesn't have countermagic. Pact is what we (I) maindeck because countermagic is so pervasive and graveyard hate tends to show up in post-board games.

If you're not on the Belcher plan, you could try switching to Sutured Ghoul-Dragon Breath to shave a card from your combo package. Not sure what's best to fill that slot, though.

Haven't tested this deck in a while, but I was thinking to board in a couple of copies of Autumn's Veil versus blue control. Not sure it's a good plan, but might be worth a try.

I wouldn't recommend running Chancellors. They look much more useful than they actually are because there are plenty of decks that can afford to throw away a T1 spell to deactivate ALL your Chancellors for a cost of 0-1. If your hand is a turn or two away from a kill, you can hold onto one or two Pacts and play draw-go; you can't do that with Chancellor.

Recently went 4-1 in a league with this deck

match 1: 2-0 manaless dredge, relatively uneventful game 1, game 2 he decided to pitch his hand to phantasmagorian instead of forcing my cabal therapy? I think he thought it would ruin my bridge?? but ez gg

Match 2: BUG something, 2-0. never saw what he was playing aside from bug colors, game one he Abrupt decayed my tinder wall, I won the next turn, game 2 he kept force + 4 lands and I won turn 1.

Match 3: Miracles, 0-2
infinite counterspells both games

Match 4: Elves, 2-0
easy win game one, game two I kept a turn one hand of like, spy, bridge, narco, petal, dark ritual, spirit guide, cabal rit. he thoughtseizes me, takes the bridge then surgicals it. I win on my first turn.

Match 5: Manaless Dredge (again) 2-0
easy game one, again, game two I go off, get hit by force, draw go for 3 turns, go off again, hit by shoal, draw go, go off and finally win.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dominic Pain

Recently went 4-1 in a league with this deck

match 1: 2-0 manaless dredge, relatively uneventful game 1, game 2 he decided to pitch his hand to phantasmagorian instead of forcing my cabal therapy? I think he thought it would ruin my bridge?? but ez gg

Match 2: BUG something, 2-0. never saw what he was playing aside from bug colors, game one he Abrupt decayed my tinder wall, I won the next turn, game 2 he kept force + 4 lands and I won turn 1.

Match 3: Miracles, 0-2
infinite counterspells both games

Match 4: Elves, 2-0
easy win game one, game two I kept a turn one hand of like, spy, bridge, narco, petal, dark ritual, spirit guide, cabal rit. he thoughtseizes me, takes the bridge then surgicals it. I win on my first turn.

Match 5: Manaless Dredge (again) 2-0
easy game one, again, game two I go off, get hit by force, draw go for 3 turns, go off again, hit by shoal, draw go, go off and finally win.

---

Well done! No surprise that Miracles remains the deck's Big Bad.

There's some really good news here, because wins against Elves (post-Thoughtseize!), BUG, and Dredge indicate to me either that people are running light on discard (the second-biggest threat to this deck) or that they largely have forgotten that this is a real deck. Did you see any other discard in those matchups? In the Elves game with the Thoughtseize, it's a no-brainer to snipe our Rogues, and the fact that he had Surgical means that he could've crippled your deck unless you had one of each Rogue in hand. Of course, then it'd make sense to target your accelerants. Not sure what the opponent was thinking here, and that's a good sign.

What sort of list were you running? Pacts main? Number of Manamorphose? I'm still kicking around bringing the deck back next time there's a tournament. Also still hoping to get my hands on Unmask sometime this century.

I've been turning in my mind the idea of dropping back to three Summoner's Pacts because they're so fragile, but I don't know what I would do to replace the fourth one. Probably a second Cantor or Probe #4, or maybe Manamorphose (if I really have to). We're still light on turn-1 mana sources, and Mox Diamond and Opal are pretty useless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronald Deuce

There's some really good news here, because wins against Elves (post-Thoughtseize!), BUG, and Dredge indicate to me either that people are running light on discard (the second-biggest threat to this deck) or that they largely have forgotten that this is a real deck. Did you see any other discard in those matchups? In the Elves game with the Thoughtseize, it's a no-brainer to snipe our Rogues, and the fact that he had Surgical means that he could've crippled your deck unless you had one of each Rogue in hand. Of course, then it'd make sense to target your accelerants. Not sure what the opponent was thinking here, and that's a good sign.

What sort of list were you running? Pacts main? Number of Manamorphose? I'm still kicking around bringing the deck back next time there's a tournament. Also still hoping to get my hands on Unmask sometime this century.

I've been turning in my mind the idea of dropping back to three Summoner's Pacts because they're so fragile, but I don't know what I would do to replace the fourth one. Probably a second Cantor or Probe #4, or maybe Manamorphose (if I really have to). We're still light on turn-1 mana sources, and Mox Diamond and Opal are pretty useless.

---

1 Angel of Glory's Rise
1 Azami, Lady of Scrolls
1 Laboratory Maniac
1 Tinder Wall
1 Wild Cantor
4 Balustrade Spy
4 Elvish Spirit Guide
4 Narcomoeba
4 Simian Spirit Guide
4 Street Wraith
4 Undercity Informer
4 Chrome Mox
4 Lotus Petal
1 Bridge from Below
3 Summoner's Pact
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Dark Ritual
4 Manamorphose
1 Dread Return
2 Cabal Therapy
4 Gitaxian Probe

SIDE
3 Spoils of the Vault
4 Goblin Charbelcher
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
3 Pact of Negation
1 Tinder Wall

this was the 75 I played, it felt fairly solid I was able to go off consistently by turn 2-3 every game. I did not very much like the sideboard, tho the only time I ever used it was when I expected a possible rest in peace from miracles. When I played this deck last months ago, it used a transformational sideboard into Shelldock Isle - Emrakul - Doomsday. Is such a sideboard still viable? Moreso just from my own preference than anything else; I think a combo like that is hilarious but it might just be too fragile when compared to Belcher

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dominic Pain

1 Angel of Glory's Rise
1 Azami, Lady of Scrolls
1 Laboratory Maniac
1 Tinder Wall
1 Wild Cantor
4 Balustrade Spy
4 Elvish Spirit Guide
4 Narcomoeba
4 Simian Spirit Guide
4 Street Wraith
4 Undercity Informer
4 Chrome Mox
4 Lotus Petal
1 Bridge from Below
3 Summoner's Pact
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Dark Ritual
4 Manamorphose
1 Dread Return
2 Cabal Therapy
4 Gitaxian Probe

SIDE
3 Spoils of the Vault
4 Goblin Charbelcher
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
3 Pact of Negation
1 Tinder Wall

this was the 75 I played, it felt fairly solid I was able to go off consistently by turn 2-3 every game. I did not very much like the sideboard, tho the only time I ever used it was when I expected a possible rest in peace from miracles. When I played this deck last months ago, it used a transformational sideboard into Shelldock Isle - Emrakul - Doomsday. Is such a sideboard still viable? Moreso just from my own preference than anything else; I think a combo like that is hilarious but it might just be too fragile when compared to Belcher

---

Thank you very much for the report and decklist!

Can you please explain why you use the Azami + Angel combo instead of Underworld Cerberus? I am a long-time player of this deck and while I have played both I have found Cerberus to be superior in several situations. I would like to know if there is something I am missing.

Here is what I have off the top of my head :

Azami + Angel: (pro)
1. Do not *require* cabal therapy to win, so for instance if your opponent Surgical Extracts your Cabal therapies you can still win.
2. Can win right after Dread Return resolves and through 2 removal spells, or 3 if played cautiously.
3. Only requires 1 spell to be cast, which might be relevant against something like a Rule of Law effect or Mindbreak Trap.
4. ??? Please help me out here I can't think of any more at this moment ???

Underworld Cerberus: (pro)
1. Only takes one card slot while the alternative takes 2.
2. Immune to removal spells (you sac him to therapy before even passing priority)
3. Actually very relevant colors when sticking him on a mox as opposed to Angel or Azami.
4. Can be easily hard cast in this deck and actually a nightmare for decks to deal with that don't run STP and especially if they are on the "mull to leyline" plan.
5. Actually very narrow but his middle ability is relevant against Reanimator.
6. Returning all creatures to your hand also gives you back x Street Wraith, which means you have x responses to opponent using removal on your Lab Man.

Thanks!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slylie

Thank you very much for the report and decklist!

Can you please explain why you use the Azami + Angel combo instead of Underworld Cerberus? I am a long-time player of this deck and while I have played both I have found Cerberus to be superior in several situations. I would like to know if there is something I am missing.

---

tbh I didn't even realize that the Underworld Cerberus build was a thing? I suppose next time I'm getting new cards on mtgo I'll pick one up

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dominic Pain

tbh I didn't even realize that the Underworld Cerberus build was a thing? I suppose next time I'm getting new cards on mtgo I'll pick one up

---

:) Sweet. Yes when I first saw the card in place of Azami and Angel in decklists I wasn't sure how it worked and if it was superior, but I completely feel that it is now. I'm assuming those who still run Azami and Angel just haven't clued into it yet.

I just saw that someone went 5-0 with the deck on MTGO.

http://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/427563#online

Congrats to whoever that is, if you check this thread.

Here is the list: It appears he didn't even submit a sideboard? I think that is pretty balsy however I would probably want at least a couple of cards to switch out since pact of negation is bad against decks like Eldrazi Stompy and lands.


Creatures (28)
1 Wild Cantor rg 0.02
4 Narcomoeba 1u 0.28
4 Elvish Spirit Guide 2g 20.72
1 Laboratory Maniac 2u 0.06
4 Simian Spirit Guide 2r 1.44
4 Undercity Informer 2b 0.04
4 Balustrade Spy 3b 0.08
1 Azami, Lady of Scrolls 2uuu 0.07
1 Angel of Glory's Rise 5ww 0.02
4 Chancellor of the Annex 4www 1.80
Spells (32)
4 Chrome Mox 0 13.16
4 Lotus Petal 0 42.24
4 Pact of Negation 0 26.80
4 Summoner's Pact 0 12.96
3 Cabal Therapy b 20.79
4 Dark Ritual b 0.12
4 Cabal Ritual 1b 0.16
4 Manamorphose 1rg 4.24
1 Dread Return 2bb 0.04
60 Cards Total

Hi all. I recently went 11-4 at my first GP in Prague.

4x Balustrade Spy
1x Bridge from Below
4x Cabal Ritual
2x Cabal Therapy
4x Chrome Mox
4x Dark Ritual
1x Dread Return
4x Elvish Spirit Guide
2x Gitaxian Probe
1x Laboratory Maniac
4x Lotus Petal
4x Manamorphose
4x Narcomoeba
4x Pact of Negation
4x Simian Spirit Guide
3x Street Wraith
4x Summoner's Pact
4x Undercity Informer
1x Underworld Cerberus
1x Wild Cantor

//

4x Goblin Charbelcher
4x Lion's eye diamond
4x Spoils of the vault
2x gitaxian probe
1x street wraith


I lost against

mono-b
rug delver
grixis delver
eldrazi (with 3 trinisphere maindeck. --> this one: https://magic.wizards.com/en/events/...ckl-2016-06-12)

Most of my losses come from mulling myself to death. But I could have gotten a win out of the mono-b deck. I'll explain:

I thought I could combo of (forgetting about his mikokoro).. At the end of my combo when I cycle street wraith he says: mikokoro.. which doesn't help him.. because it's simply to late.. I thought I may have said my monologue a bit too quick, but he did say yes when laboratory maniac hit the table. If I had called a judge I might have swooped a win in a very dicky way. But I just thought.. Well, his win was on the table, so ok. (after thinking a little about calling the judge) Another problem was that his english wasn't that great.. So it was hard to understand what he meant.. Ugh.. I should have called a judge, even if it was just to clear things up. (This could have changed the outcome of the game, because I don't feel like the mono-b player had a lot to say against this deck, except t1 dark ritual thoughtseize hymn. But he has to be on the play for that)

My wins

2x elves
1x uw painter
3x grixis delver
1x rug delver
1x eldrazi
1x something with force
1x ANT

I thought of a scenario that might argue for 4x narcomoebas in main.
lets say you're about to go off, have an extra chrome mox in hand, you somehow manage to play a rogue with a chalice on one in play already from the opponent. Instead of worrying about playing the wild cantor, can you purposefully miss the trigger on a narcomoeba so it goes to the graveyard? Then saccing the cerberus will have it go to your hand, in which case you can exile it to your chrome mox to play the lab maniac?

Cerberus returns them all to your hand anyway. There's no reason to forget a narc trigger. You must have that Chrome or Petal though


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk