[Deck] Death and Taxes

Even one Gaea's Cradle is a gamble in a deck like this. There are plenty of games when I do not have a creature out until turn 2. That means that in those games, you would need two other lands plus this one to call the hand a keeper, and it may only produce a single green when you play it on turn three.

I have not mentioned it much here, but I have been testing Oust with much success recently. The deck really does not want to have only STP for cheap removal (I am not including all the forms of dependent removal here). Oust has been stand out better for me than

Condemn
Path to Exile
Sunlance
Oblivion Ring

I see a few D+T decklists with PtE and I have to scratch my head at how foolish it is to run that card in a deck that wins its matches by denying its opponents resources. I tried it briefly when Leonin Arbiter came out and I was still hating it. The life gain from STP is almost never a problem because of the way this deck plays. I understand that it is hard to see how the land hurts you when you are unfamiliar with the idea. And I understand that it is a relatively new card with players from Standard and Extended familiar with it. But when you play the card the first time and see the opponent get a free land drop, you have to note that it really hurts your gameplan - and then question its value in the deck. The free land makes such a big difference that I will reiterate what I said in the Zoo thread way back.

Path to Exile is a decent card, but it can sometimes be a pain to sacrifice a creature every time you want a free land drop.

I can't say that I agree with you %100 on path. I ran it this past weekend as a 2-of in my sb and I absolutely loved it. Most decks can survive off of 2-3 mana and once the late game gets going them getting another land is less of an issue than a 5+ power creature beating my face in and the life gain from swords is relevant at times especially if you have fallen behind and you need to swing in for lethal with a limited amount of damage, where swordsing a creature would give them another 2 turns or so. Oust just seems too clunky to me, it also does not remove the problem, it just delays it. If it was an instant I would be all over it since it could be used in response to a fetchland.

Joe, you compared Path to STP there. You are best off not conflating the two unless you think we should be trading in STP for Path. Man, I hope that is not the case. Oust always gives 3 life, so that is much less of an issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joe_C

...once the late game gets going...

---

I have read these words before.So do you Path the Lavamancer or Confidant or Lackey or Mother of Runes on turn 1 or 2 or whatever? You have to. But considering how many of our opponents are going to be working at beating us on tempo, what have you really gained? Oust is a good tempo card that gets better when you are denying the opponent mana. You are not allowing the opponent to draw his creature again, you are forcing him. And he may not want it. If you are taking down a couple of lands that game, what he really wants is land. If you just Pathed that creature you have shot yourself in the foot.

On the other hand, I am willing to give my opponent 3 life since I have pretty much taken control if I am attacking for the win. It is an extreme rarity for us to be eeking out a victory without first establishing superior position. But it does happen against control. In fact, Oust loses some more ground against control versus Path since they are unlikely to land an early threat when path is at its weakest. However, it is against those opponents that you are likely to side out either of these cards so this is hardly a problem. I am not saying that Oust is perfect. It is still a sorcery and there are times in which I do not want my opponent to see the critter again. But I am saying that (a) Path to Exile sucks and (b) Oust is a serviceable secondary removal spell behind Swords to Plowshares.

Oust looks good but there is one problem with it:
Its sorcery..

Oust has potential as you mentioned, but for most of the creatures you mentioned, I'd rather give them a land (if they even have any basics left) and be permanently done with said creature rather then them playing it again 2 turns later making me have to use another removal spell on it since they'll likely still have 1-2 lands left even after LD. And if you have superior board position when casting the spell, it shouldn't matter if its Oust or Path.

I realize that some of the posters here are playing green, so there is a bit of apples and oranges going on.

I often have superior board position specifically because I have kept my opponent off a color. Countless times, I have kept my Countertop opponent off Green until he topdeck a Tropical Island or fetches or Ponders into it or whatever. He will immediately cast a Tarmo, and pass. On my turn, I Wasteland the land or begin Porting it as I always do. Then, I can Oust the Tarmo or I can Path it. One of these is the overwhelmingly better choice. And this is against a control deck where Oust is not as strong. Even then it is way better than Path.

Edit: On further thought, I suppose not all CounterTop players have a basic forest. Most of my experience against this opponent comes from two particular players. One of them definitely does and I don't know about the other. I have no idea how many of my tournament opponents did.

And you are actually diding in oust against cb decks?

For me, pte is there to help against zoo and affinity mostly. Matchups where its drawback is not really an issue.

{facepalm} Don't use Path to Exile against Zoo! You need extra removal, yes. You do not need to give them extra lands. This is getting out of hand.

Please refer to my primer if you need guidance on cards.

http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=306633

Finn: I don't want to make this argumentative, as everyone has their own preference for cards etc. I like to think I play the deck very well, as i have top 8'd with it multiple times and only losing to poor matchups or the occasional mana screw. Does the mana denial plan come online for you "every" game? I can honestly say it doesn't pan out for me as often as I like. Most of the time past turn 3-4 unless my opponent is really dying for mana I need to invest tapping my lands to play/ equip equipments. Im not saying path is perfect, but for me the instant speed and no life gain is something I prefer to have. I would not bring it in against zoo (I just run 2 path in my board).

Personally I think Path to exile is not a good card for death and taxes. the wastelands and ports are counter acted by the path, making them pointless to have in the deck. Granted I play a mono white version so I don't have the color intensity of other builds, I can wait a turn for the other land in my hand to play a critter or equipment so I can still lock down my opponents land for another turn or waste one without hurting my own position. I'll state again that Path is not a good card for this deck that has a large game plan of mana denial, even late game it's still there, cutting your opponent out of a color and shuffling the wastes back in with jotun grunt to the bottom then searching your library with mystic or some such other thing to keep the denial package going. Mangara is also good at denial when it gets online since permanently looking them on a certain number of land or out of a color can be very crucial to your own sucess with this deck.

Has nobody tried Journey to nowhere as the backup removal for swords ?

My thoughts on Oust and PTE
• Oust - is so so but i still don't like it bec:
- sorcery.
- you have to deal with that creature again after one turn.

• PTE - not a great card early on since mana denial is a big part of DT, but this would be a very debated issue here.

If your your deck is a mono w DT which runs ports and wastelands i will not use this card.

If your your deck is GT which can only have a light mana denial plan you could use it as mana denial is not a big part of your game plan.

@Cradle
Yes i know drawing it early is crap but i'll take that risk any day as the land provided me more wins over loss in my playtesting. Yes you don't need tons of green mana but the ability to cast an equipment and equipping it to a tapped out opponent is what i like about it.

@GT
I know my GT build is not your regular GT builds which is posted in the opener in another forum nor has the traditional DT feel. As i continue to playtest my deck its beginning to feel more like WG maverick. There are times in where maganara is okay and times i wish it was something else. Mangara is really strong in mono W DT as it taxes opponents mana resources.

As i playtest both GT and DT i found that GT will have a hard time following DTs mana denial plan even if it was a very very light splash for 2 teeg 4 pridemages only. as colored mana will be a big issue if you still run ports.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by _erbs_

• PTE - not a great card early on since mana denial is a big part of DT, but this would be a very debated issue here.

If your your deck is a mono w DT which runs ports and wastelands i will not use this card.

If your your deck is GT which can only have a light mana denial plan you could use it as mana denial is not a big part of your game plan.

---

I think this is the best way to look at Path for D&T.

I only board mine in when I know I'm going against an aggro deck. In those situations I don't really care if they get the extra ramp since I can deal with just about anything they play. If they play a high cc creature, I'll just StP/Path/Mangara it, if they play a Planeswalker, I'll kill it with combat damage. If they play Upheaval, I look confused and laugh. I think mass removal is the only possible "big" spell I worry about in matches where I would board in Path, but I also tend not to overextend as much as I used to when I have superior board position.

True True. BTW Fry congrats on the finish I only got to meet you briefly as you were facing your friend. I had play GT the month before and done well and looking at your DT list really shows some of the best elements of white.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Finn

{facepalm} Don't use Path to Exile against Zoo! You need extra removal, yes. You do not need to give them extra lands. This is getting out of hand.

Please refer to my primer if you need guidance on cards.

http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=306633

---

Warning for flaming. Keep this shit off the boards. - zilla

Seriously though, I've been doing just fine PtE'ing zoos bigger dudes, obv you waste their first few mana sources and no you are not pathing their first creatures mindlessly. When they have their mana on the table, path "turns on". They don't really get much of the 1 extra land (if they havent already fetched their basics at this point) when they have 3 or so out already, so meh.

Playing path properly takes a little more strategy than throwing around swords at moving objects. I suggest you look into that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timmycolossus

True True. BTW Fry congrats on the finish I only got to meet you briefly as you were facing your friend. I had play GT the month before and done well and looking at your DT list really shows some of the best elements of white.

---

Thank you, I'll be at Jupiter next weekend for the awesome double day of legacy

I enjoyed playing the deck immensely and I think I'll make one change to the deck which some would call me crazy for. I'm going to switch the sword of light and shadow for sword of feast and famine. My reasons include, but are not limited to, it gains the deck main board answers to tarmogoyf and knight of the reliquary. Also it forces a discard which at times is better than getting back a creature from your graveyard which is sometimes a moot point if you have a Jotun Grunt in play. Also putting it in play with stoneforge then equiping it(which is the most likely senario) swinging allows you to play another threat, or use your ports during your opponents upkeep and gives you the ability to bluff a swords to plowshares.

@Joe
Oust comes out against some combo and control stuff, but don't you think that extra removal is necessary specifically for faster opponents and Zoo is naturally on the top of that list? If you are not bringing in Paths against Zoo, I don't really understand why they are in your sb.

I am with you on keeping this cool. It is a sophisticated topic, and having difference of opinion is what the forum is for. It is rare to actually convince someone outright. More often you sow the seeds of a new perspective.


@deviant, for starters, Oust is in my main.

Of course Path is fine on big guys late in the game. Time Stop is a great counterspell once you hit six mana. And Rapid Fire is particularly good at making a Craw Wurm rip up those 4 blocking Merfolk of the Pearl Trident when you have an effect forcing them to block. Telling us where a card is strong does not change the fact that it is weak elsewhere.

You are instructing us not to Path anything until after Zoo has a few lands on the battlefield? Just let the first few dudes kick you in the nuts then? You have 4 Swords to Plowshares accompanying those secondary removal spells not 12 or 14 others ala Zoo. The chances of just choosing another option are slim. So you likely have to decide if you care to screw yourself by allowing a Nacatl or Lackey or Mom or whatever to do what they do or by giving the opponent a giant tempo boost with a free land when what you really need to be doing is killing the ones they already have. He does not only get that land next turn. He gets it on every turn that follows. You will be behind for the rest of the game. And if you are successfully depriving an opponent of mana and then he sneaks one in and plops a guy down, what then? Do you Path it and just give up disrupting mana? Path is ONLY good if you are in the latter stages of the game and ONLY if you are not able to deny mana. Why would anyone play a spell with such limitations when there is another good alternative? Oust is good all game every game.

See, the benefit of a proper home for info on a deck like a primer is that the info has been thought-out, discussed, tested, and discussed some more.

EDIT: @Fry, I think that is definitely worth testing. Funny thing about L+S is that what I usually want is the life gain and the +2 bonus. Jitte can already do that. I want to give F+F a try myself.

I would have to say the bonus of SoLS that I like the most is the returning of creatures. Taking back a grunt someone has countered or that died to itself is a plus I wouldn't want to be without. I would likely be more comfortable with SoFI in the board and sword of feast and famine in the main in it's spot. SoLS also gets you back in the game where I don't see any other sword aside from jitte accomplishing.

Also, I've only played with path once in tournament play. I'm not sold on it, but it did come in very handy the time I did play it

I still think that SoFaF is still relatively weak compared to the 2 swords... SoLaS = protection from STP, in my opinion the most commonly played removal spell in the format... For that reason alone, I can't say I would want SoFaF over it... Also, equipping SoLaS to your x/2 guys gets them out of the 3 damage range as well, making them almost immune to targeted removal... SoFi on the other hand is auto win against merfolk and gobs (more against merfolks than gobs)...

I'm not saying that SoFaF is a bad sword... It's actually good and if only DnT isn't as tight as it is, I would love to put one in... The effects you get from successfully connecting with SoFaF dull in comparison to the effects you get with the 2 original swords... I'm not sure if it's here or in the other forums but someone once said this, "If I'll be investing 4-5 mana into playing and equipping an equipment, I'd rather shock somebody and draw 2 cards, or gain 3 life and get a creature back than force my opponent to discard a card and untap my lands..."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Finn

@deviant

---

If they are manascrewed for a while, and then find a land and pop out a dude, I would expect having used the time I had to develop my board. Get bigger dudes, more dudes, swords and stuff. At this point it should not matter if you path or not. Kissing a nacatl for a few turns is hardly an issue, and I doubt I'd waste a removal on it anyways. Kotr kinda dudes are the real issue, not nacatl, or goyf.
Anyway, I'm not saying PtE is the stoneblade against zoo, I'm saying it's a decent tool to supplement the swords. Here it helps you out when the game isn't going your way, and is worse when it is going well. Seems good to me.

As to pathing a turn one lackey, well I'm not thrilled about it but I'd rather do that than let them get the 5 mana that turn.

I dunno. Maybe your list cannot use pte at all, but at least in my gw bear deck it has been good. I wouldnt go lower than 2 in the sb.
Not every mu is all about mana-advantage or mana screwing the opponent. Sometimes there is stuff that needs to get killed and pte does that job just fine, where as oust is only delaying the inevitable.

And in the case where you win before the ousted creature makes a comeback, the land from pte wouldn't have had time to do much dmg either.

Did you btw know oust is a sorcery? That is pretty big.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Finn

So you likely have to decide if you care to screw yourself by allowing a Nacatl or Lackey or Mom or whatever to do what they do or by giving the opponent a giant tempo boost with a free land when what you really need to be doing is killing the ones they already have. He does not only get that land next turn. He gets it on every turn that follows. You will be behind for the rest of the game. And if you are successfully depriving an opponent of mana and then he sneaks one in and plops a guy down, what then? Do you Path it and just give up disrupting mana? Path is ONLY good if you are in the latter stages of the game and ONLY if you are not able to deny mana. Why would anyone play a spell with such limitations when there is another good alternative? Oust is good all game every game.

---

Which hurts more: Your opponent getting an extra basic land or your opponent replaying a cheap threat that you've already had to use 1 removal spell on? Using Oust on a Lackey or Mom is a waste since they'll just play it again in 2 turns. And locking down their mana isn't an issue when they can drop a land the same turn to play it.

If your opponent drops Siege-Gang are you going to Oust that and give them more tokens in 2 turns? Saying you'll cut their mana so they never play it isn't an answer since Goblins run Ports as well and have other ways to cheat it in.

Also, as others mentioned, Oust being a Sorcery is a bigger limitation than giving an opponent a land. While its only 1 deck, Meandeck MUD runs Lightning Greaves which just laughs at Oust since the creature they need will have Haste and be protected before you even get a chance to use Oust.

Any consideration for Journey to Nowhere? Or is it being a prison card not suitable for creature removal where StP and PtE are both cheap and permanent.

@rukcus
I use journey to nowhere as my backup removal its not that great but it gets the job done. I feel its much better over oust bec you still get to kill a creature if your opponent will hit it with pridemage or spend another resource via disenchant, etc. as compared to oust which your opponent will surely re cast that threat again. Another reason my i picked journey as my backup removal it also doubles up against show and tell decks as compared to pte which can't deal with them. As for PTE in GT its not that bad bec GT doesn't have the mana denial strength as compared to mono w, but again pte is a very situational card when used properly is perfect aswell.

With Mangara, O Ring, and Karakas, I didn't get the feeling that this deck had any concern whatsoever with Emrakul, other than when he is Sneak Attack'ed in.
I haven't tried Oust yet, but I actually think it might have a place in this deck. You are right that it doesn't remove the threat all together, but it does slow a deck down. The big problems for this deck are things like turn 1 Lackey or Nacatl. Using an Oust means that those decks won't be attacking until turn 3 at the earliest, which is an enormous help. I don't think Ousting a turn 1 Lackey is a waste at all, because by turn 3 you're going to have a blocker out. Without Oust, Mother of Runes or StP are your only chances of stopping the guy, and once he starts connecting it's pretty much game over. I'm going to give it some serious testing in the sideboard for Zoo and Goblins, as both of those matchups pretty much depend on Taxes just surviving the first 4 turns. If it gets to that point, Taxes will almost always take over the game and end up winning. Path to Exile seems a bit riskier to me when used for this purpose, as ramping them on turn 1/2 is a pretty big effect, especially for a deck running Waste/Port. Path obviously gets much better as the game goes longer, when mana denial stops being significant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by deviant

As to pathing a turn one lackey, well I'm not thrilled about it but I'd rather do that than let them get the 5 mana that turn.

---

"It's better than nothing" is about as weak an argument as you can possibly make here. Try making this comparison using Path and Oust instead of Path and a grilled cheese sandwich.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whipporwill

Which hurts more: Your opponent getting an extra basic land or your opponent replaying a cheap threat that you've already had to use 1 removal spell on?

---

You are also not making an accurate comparison. The actual comparison is that the opponent gets a free land or (in most cases) gets the threat back 1.5 turns later. Path is not only tempo disadvantage, it is card disadvantage as well. And, for the record, Ousting the Lackey we are discussing is excellent. On turn 1 a Lackey is a bomb. On turn 3 it is pretty mediocre unless the goblin player has something like another Lackey, a Warchief, and a Piledriver also in play on turn 3. We know that this will not be the case because we took out the Lackey that facilitates that start. In fact, in my testing, my opponent usually did not even replay the Lackey right away. You may want to consider the relevance of that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by _erbs_

I use journey to nowhere as my backup removal its not that great but it gets the job done. I feel its much better over oust bec you still get to kill a creature if your opponent will hit it with pridemage or spend another resource via disenchant, etc. as compared to oust which your opponent will surely re cast that threat again.

---

Yet another person who is not making a proper comparison. Oust does not put the creature in the opponent's hand. The opponent can use a Pridemage to destroy Journey, costing him a card, or he can redraw the ousted creature two turns later, using a drawn card. Even total mana spent between players is pretty close to a wash.

Guys, I don't want to oversell the benefits of Oust. But, I can tell you that I am plenty familiar with the inner-workings of this deck and I have actually tested all these cards (well not Journey) and I can tell you that Oust has been the least bad secondary removal spell against the opponents we need it most against. Goblins, Merfolk, Zoo, Bant, Horizons, etc. It comes out against MUD of course, as well as most control and combo after game 1 (we have plenty of good sb cards for them and something has to come out). In most circumstances I have encountered, the sorcery-ness of it has been a nonfactor. Goblins,ehh, it is occasionally kinda clunky. SGC and hasty guys are certainly happy that it is not an instant. But Goblins with a splash color gets rocked by D+T due in part to their high CMC versus our denial, and I will not be giving them lands. Even still, I am not asking you to take me at my word. Of us, I think I am the only person to actually try Oust. At any rate, I just encourage you to take those crappy Paths out and use whatever else you like.

@deviant, mana denial is an issue often enough that I don't want a card that diminishes that part of the disruption suite when I can get a very similar effect from a card that does not. D+T has a bajillion ways to handle pesky creatures if it can just keep up on tempo. Oust works toward that goal where Path works against it.

Quote:

---

EDIT: @Fry, I think that is definitely worth testing. Funny thing about L+S is that what I usually want is the life gain and the +2 bonus. Jitte can already do that. I want to give F+F a try myself.

---

The only reason I've ever been happy to see L&S is against swords, elspeth tokens or the mirror.

I think (am hoping!) that being pro firespout, goyf, kotr, terastodon, and still letting our revokers be pro pridemage, and our canonists pro-grip will help. Now we just need a pro-emrakul sword.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Star|Scream

Now we just need a pro-emrakul sword.

---

Tajuru Preserver

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rukcus

Tajuru Preserver

---

"in monowhite"

Why are you limiting yourself to just white? Adding a color is not hard and provides significant benefits. That being said, Tajuru Preserver is a pretty bad way to deal with Emrakul as it still bashes for 15 in the air.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CorpT

Why are you limiting yourself to just white? Adding a color is not hard and provides significant benefits.

---

I guess that's because the mana denial plan is stronger in mono white.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lebarion

I guess that's because the mana denial plan is stronger in mono white.

---

In my case I just hate playing GREEN.

I love playing green, but I do a mono white death and taxes because the mana denial plan is so much more effective than if you splash a color.

From the looks of it monowhite is the favored version of death and taxes in this thread but seeing as it does not have its own thread I figured I'd talk about my Green and Taxes list here in case anyone preferred that version. I played in two events at last week's Edison New Jersey Star City Open. My list was a take on Lewis Laskin's list with some besieged cards and a retooled SB. I talked to Laskin during the standard event about the changes and he seemed in favor of them and gave me some input on other cards he had tried in the deck. After our discussion my 75 came out as follows:

4 Tarmogoyf
4 Knight of the Reliquary
3 Qasali Pridemage
3 Mother of Runes
3 Stoneforge Mystic
3 Mangara of Corondor
2 Serra Avenger
1 Gaddock Teeg
1 Eternal Witness
1 Noble Hierarch

1 Sword of Fire and Ice
1 Umezawa's Jitte
3 Green Sun's Zenith
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Aether Vial

4 Wasteland
4 Savannah
4 Windswept Heath
3 Plains
2 Forest
2 Horizon Canopy
2 Karakas
1 Dryad Arbor

Sideboard:
2 Enlightened Tutor
1 Choke
1 Runed Halo
1 Dueling Grounds
1 Ethersworn Canonist
1 Pithing Needle
1 Wheel of Sun and Moon
1 Aura of Silence
1 Bojuka Bog
2 Krosan Grip
3 Path to Exile

I used an enlightened tutor SB because I was bothered by my lack of answers to Progenitus as well as my inability to combat combo decks without drawing my hate cards. Enlightened tutor allowed runed halo against progenitus, I had a reliable way to get ethersworn canonist, choke was great against control, dueling grounds felt amazing in the tribal matchups, and aura of silence was there for control and the enchantress decks I had seen running around on Saturday. I am considering cutting the Aura of Silence in favor of Null Rod in the future since my combo match up is so rough.

On Saturday I played in the legacy challenge going 4-0 in the event. I faced off against spiral tide in round one winning 2-1 thanks to gaddock teeg and GSZ. I played ANT in round two and won 2-1 thanks to him flipping his second ad nauseum off the first for lethal. Round three I beat junk 2-0 and round four I beat 43 Lands 2-0. Sunday I played in the main event and finished 32nd going 6-3. My wins came from landstill (uwb) [2-1], Fish twice [4-0], Laskin Bant [2-1], 4C counterbalance [2-0], and Dredge [2-0]. I lost to Deedstill (ubg) [1-2], Combo Elves (ug) [0-2], and 12 post [0-2].

Serra Avenger was a house all day and won me multiple games. The tutor sideboard worked amazingly well and played much better then my old board was. GSZ is ridiculous but I think everyone has figured that part out already. Over all I loved the deck and how it played, I just wish I had drawn Mangara more often, especially against 12 post.

@chags
how is GsZ working for you ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Finn

You are also not making an accurate comparison. The actual comparison is that the opponent gets a free land or (in most cases) gets the threat back 1.5 turns later. Path is not only tempo disadvantage, it is card disadvantage as well. And, for the record, Ousting the Lackey we are discussing is excellent. On turn 1 a Lackey is a bomb. On turn 3 it is pretty mediocre unless the goblin player has something like another Lackey, a Warchief, and a Piledriver also in play on turn 3. We know that this will not be the case because we took out the Lackey that facilitates that start. In fact, in my testing, my opponent usually did not even replay the Lackey right away. You may want to consider the relevance of that.

---

Its also not uncommon for Goblins to start with Vial on turn 1 which nullifies quite a bit of your mana denial strategy. I don't think it would be too uncommon for them to Vial in a Warchief turn 4 then play a Piledriver and/or other Goblins. Situations like this is where Oust is terrible since its a Sorcery. I agree with you that its great early on against Lackey, but Goblins also leads with Vial when it doesn't have Lackey. And when they Vial in things at eot, you're stuck with that Oust in your hand hoping you survive to get another turn.

You also ignored the point I had made about Siege-Gang Commander which is a fairly relevant threat since it's one of the main ways for them to kill Mom.

I'll concede that Oust is good in the first few turns, but the longer the game goes, the worse it gets. And I can agree that Path is pretty much the opposite. I still prefer to be permanently finished with a threat though and much prefer the Instant speed.

I love this deck personally. I feel like splahing black would be good, but the more I look into the deck the more I see how different it is from everyother confidant deck. I do see that splashing just for seize could be powerful like Eli Kassis did, but at that point it seems Junk would be a better metagame call. I have read a ton into legacy lately and it definitly seems like this is one of the strongest decks in a CB and vial meta game. Drew Lewin had it right, find a good Knight deck and this definitly seems like it's the one. Now we just have to wait for control to get rid f all these combo decks.

I've been toying with giving Leonin Arbiter one more shot before I switch to GW Splash. This is mainly since I don't really have much else to use instead at this point in time. I'll do a few tests on Cockatrice and see how it does.

Here's the working list:
10x Plains
4x Karakas
4x Wasteland
3x Rishadan Port

4x Mother of Runes
4x Leonin Arbiter
4x Serra Avenger
3x Stoneforge Mystic
2x Jötun Grunt
2x Phyrexian Revoker (meant to be 3. Still lacking one.)
4x Flickerwisp
3x Mangara of Cornodor

4x Aether Vial
4x Swords to Plowshares
Umezawa's Jitte
Sword of Fire and Ice
Sword of Light and Shadow
2x Oblivion Ring

SB:
3x Wing Shards
2x Cataclysm
1x Jötun Grunt
3x Enlightened Tutor
1x Tormod's Crypt
1x Wheel of the Sun and Moon
1x Pithing Needle
1x Phyrexian Revoker (might just switch this to the MD. Have no idea what to play in the SB instead.)
2x Ethersworn Canonist

I'm mainly sticking with the tried and true.

@ Penguinizer, there is something wrong with your lists even if assuming those islands are plains, i'm pretty sure that 14 is not the correct number... Also, arbiters are still great in the post-survival era (well i've really been one of the main advocates of this card, so maybe I'm biased...haha) but to really maximize the mana denial plan, as you are already playing the arbiters, go to 4 ports as well... our lists are almost identical except I have dropped the oblivion rings from the main altogether and have gone for an all-in enlightened tutor sb...

@ penguinizer: for the sideboard slot you are missing i would suggest a 3rd canonist

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrjumbo03

@ Penguinizer, there is something wrong with your lists even if assuming those islands are plains, i'm pretty sure that 14 is not the correct number... Also, arbiters are still great in the post-survival era (well i've really been one of the main advocates of this card, so maybe I'm biased...haha) but to really maximize the mana denial plan, as you are already playing the arbiters, go to 4 ports as well... our lists are almost identical except I have dropped the oblivion rings from the main altogether and have gone for an all-in enlightened tutor sb...

---

Oh crap. I just noticed.

I rightfully deserve a whack to the noggin for that. I wrote that post around 4 AM-ish.

It's meant to be 21 total lands, so 10x Plains.

@Penguinizer

We have very similar main boards, here's what I use:

Main Board:
3 Flickerwisp
3 Jotun Grunt
3 Leonin Arbiter
3 Mangara of Corondor
4 Mother of Runes
2 Oblivion Ring
4 Serra Avenger
3 Stoneforge Mystic
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 AEther Vial
2 Phyrexian Revoker
1 Sword of Feast and Famine
1 Sword of Fire and Ice
1 Umezawa's Jitte
4 Karakas
3 Rishadan Port
4 Wasteland
12 Plains

Side Board:
2 Goldmeadow Harrier
3 Leyline of Sanctity
3 Wing Shards
2 Faerie Macabre
1 Phyrexian Revoker
1 Sword of Body and Mind
1 Sword of LIght and Shadow
2 Wheel of Sun and Moon