[Deck] Death and Taxes

My advice: Good decks use good cards. Ghost Quarter and Path to Exile both suffer from the same problem - they suck. How often has the life gain from STP actually mattered? Now I can admit that I am keen on finding an adjunct for it, but Path will, as Kirby essentially said, undo the benefits of Arbiter as often as it compounds them. I will still stick with Condemn for now.

4 Port
3 Wasteland
4 Swords to Plowshares
0 Ghost Quarter
0 Path to Exile

Even in games where you are able to get Arbiter out before your opponent's turn 2, Port will better than Ghost Quarter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penguinizer

Mana denial to mana denial doesn't seem like a bad trade. Port is one of those cards that I've never been a massive fan of though.

---

Sure but the advantage of Port is that it does something on its own. Rarely will Ghost Quarter be good without Arbiter. So I question cutting them, especially if you aren't running the full playset of Arbiters as to maximize the chances of Ghost Quarter being a Stripmine.

I'm with Finn on this one. Ghost Quarter and PtE have no place in DnT, even with access to Arbiter you are still running cards that suck without Arbiter.

May be it's a good idea to try both: Ghost Quarter and Wasteland.
The advantage of Ghost Quarter and Arbiter is the possibility to attack the mana base of players with a lot of basic lands (e.g. merfolk).
PtE has the advantage that it takes out big cratures without spending to much live...

Just because Leonin Arbiter may make the cut in D&T, it doesn't mean that you should run cards like Path to Exile or Ghost Quarter. You've only got four Arbiter and you will only draw one half the time (and you still have to stick it on the board). Plus there are some matchups against top-tier decks (such as mono-blue Merfolk) in which he is nothing more than a bear.

If you wanted to go with the "players can't shuffle thier libraries" theme, you should probably run Aven Mindcensor in addition to Arbiter, and only then should you consider Path or Ghost Quarter. But really, would such a deck be any better than most current D&T lists? I doubt it. Do you really want to cut your Flickerwisps to pursue a theme, that more often than not, won't pay off for you in a major way?

Path to Exile would never make it in my list, even if i would use 4 arbiter because Swords to Plowshares is better in any way and has a way minor drawback reguarding our strategy, but maybe a 2 of ghost quarter can make it in there, but only as addiction to my 4 wastelands and 3 ports
only problem with this is that we lose more and more white mana, if that will disturb me, i will immedieately cut the quarters again

quarter would only make the cut due to the following reasons:

it can slow opponent if you quarter his land during his upkeep (nothing special though)
it is a strip mine with arbiter (almost at least)
it is occasionally a strip mine without arbiter if opponents play very few basics (very situationally, and unlikely to happen most of the times)

i would say including quarter is everyones choice but in my opinion it would never replace a single copy of our other manadenial-lands, and in that case it could never become more than a 2 of IMO for the simple reason that consistency is more important

i hope this post was able to help everyone to understand that both, Path to Exile and Ghoust Quarter(this one is a bit metadependant) are suboptimal cardchoices, which normaly wouldn't make the cut.

Here's a list I'm thinking of running when I get my hands on the Hatebears:
10x Plains
4x Karakas
4x Wasteland
3x Mishra's Factory

4x Mother of Runes
2x Goldmeadow Harrier
4x Serra Avenger
3x Stoneforge Mystic
3x Leonin Arbiter
2x Jötun Grunt
4x Flickerwisp
3x Mangara of Corondor

4x Aether Vial
4x Swords to Plowshares
Umezawa's Jitte
3x Oblivon Ring
Sword of Fire and Ice
Sword of Light and Shadow

SB:
3x Wing Shards
3x Tormod's Crypt
3x Kitchen Finks
3x Ethersworn Canonist (Or anything really. No real idea as to what run here.)
1x Leonin Arbiter
1x Sword of Body and Mind
1x Jötun Grunt

2x Jötun Grunt in the MB with 1 in the side, combined with 3x Crypt, should be sufficient gravehate for a lot of matchups. 7 hatebears post-side with mana-denial should make the combo matchup a bit more bearable. Wing Shards has proven itself a fantastic card against Aggro, and Kithen Finks also helps in that matchup. The Sword is in the SB so I can switch swords around depending on the matchup. Otherwise, fairly standard build.

I could probably cut Goldmeadow Harrier completely, but I still like it in some matchups. I could possibly remove the sword in favor of a third on in the SB. This depends largely on the meta at the time, as well as how the sword performs.

If you are worried about SoBaM's performance, let me assure you that it will not dissappoint you. I ran 1x SoBoM, SoFaI, SoLaS and Jitte last week. It was AWESOME, even causing two people to scoop when it landed on the field EOT.

I kinda think that, at least for now, this deck could use Ethersworn Canonist in the maindeck (in addition to Leonin Arbiter). Finn is right to remind us that decks should be slow to play cards that suck, and I think the attention that Path to Exile and Ghost Quarter are receiving is, accordingly, unwarranted, but the Survival-Madness deck is *everywhere*, and Canonist (like Arbiter) is awesome against it. It's also randomly good against storm combo and whatnot.

I'm also experimenting with a more aggressive version that runs Chrome Moxes. Arbiter rocks on turn 2, but he can just win games singlehandedly on turn 1. Equipment cards, in particular Sword of Fire and Ice, are especially important in this version, as they help to compensate for the card-disadvantage you suffer from Chrome Mox. I suspect that I'll abandon this strategy eventually, though.

Alcibiades, I think a lot of people are kicking around the idea of Chrome Mox. I know I have. I bet it would end up going radically in a different direction that would look a bit like Faerie Stompy in white or even Stax.

Also, I am not ready to even try Canonists in the main right now. In fact, I might sooner include Orim's Chant over more Canonists in the board. Storm has a free ride against us until we get two lands and their anti-hate cards only need to handle permanents. Orim's Chant makes their life harder way more than more Canonists. I realize that you are thinking something different - as you are talking about a main deck use. But what are you going to cut for it? We are all about to make room for a different hate bear right now.

Also, unless anyone wants to posit that Ghost Quarter is going to be a better card than Wasteland, we should put the discussion to rest as the heavy mana denial versions of this deck cant fit 4 Wastelands.

Hmm... I dunno if rushing out a Leonin arbiter is the best use for him. Should D&T be running him, of course. I am almost tempted to say he is better as a post Cataclysm play. Maybe the deck is better off bringing Cataclysm back into the main and going from there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Finn

Also, I am not ready to even try Canonists in the main right now. In fact, I might sooner include Orim's Chant over more Canonists in the board. Storm has a free ride against us until we get two lands and their anti-hate cards only need to handle permanents. Orim's Chant makes their life harder way more than more Canonists. I realize that you are thinking something different - as you are talking about a main deck use. But what are you going to cut for it? We are all about to make room for a different hate bear right now.

---

Just chiming in to say I don't agree with that. Almost all storm decks pack Duress (Not Toughtseize!) main, and they're not going to side it out. Duress laughs at Chant. When I play TES, the worst starting I can face is turn 1 Mother, turn 2 Canonist. Only a Krosan Grip/Wipe Away (there is 1 of each in the side) can solve this, and Wipe Away just buys me a turn. Also, Canonist beats for 2 (making the Ad Nauseam plan harder), is annoying in general (no multiple cantrip, no wish -> answer the same turn...) and you can fetch it with E-tutor (and Arbiter is quite poor against combo, except Doomsday, so it will get sided out). Finally, decks like TES can rebuild after a back-breaking Chant/Silence faste than you think if you put pressure on them.

Canonist >>>> Chant/Silence against TES, DD and the like.

Aside from that, I've been toying with the Chrome Mox idea. I usually play with G splash, so having Mox would permit, aside from broken 1st-turn-Arbiter-openings, to make up for the potential loss of value in my fetchlands (which is not that awful as I only run 4). This hatebear has a lot of potential.

The devil may be in the details here, Lorgalis.

You are not going to be nabbing Chants from my hand in game 1 because they are coming in from the side board. And the Tuto -> Canonist technique is not changing in any way. The question is whether or not to have more Canonists in the SB. First off, the ability to disrupt on turn one forces storm pilots to decide if they are going to go for it or not. Without Chants (or any of the various other cards like it), they know for sure that they can. That is a pretty big disadvantage for D+T.

Also, if you are playing against me in game 2 and your Duresses are still in your deck, what do you hope to get? Game 1 here are your options.

4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Aether Vial
2 Condemn
1 Oblivion Ring
3 Equipment

...in other words, nothing.

This is all the legal targets in my current (not tuned for storm) list for game 2:

4 Enlightened Tutor
4 Aether Vial
1 Runed Halo

Seeing as how I am very likely to be going 1st, your new list of legal targets are:

4 Aether Vial
1 Runed Halo

Are you actually going to be keeping Duress in to hit these cards? I sure hope so if you are facing me. But you are not an idiot, so you are not going to. That means that the Duresses come out and the appropriate hate comes in. That is, spot removal and bounce come in. And your combo is essentially the same. But if I am playing Orim's Chant (all of this assumes that know my deck) you really need to keep the Duresses in. Now you have specialty hate for just a few cards. And you still need to keep your other hate in. Duress does not help against permanents and Wipe Away can't do jack to a Chant. I am not mentioning the simplicity of dropping a Canonist and beating. That is, Chants require a spare mana and some thought - and these are worth considering. But the demands placed on the opponent's deck is far greater with Chant as well.

One more thing: Arbiters don't seem to do much against TES. I kinda didn't think about that before.

I think Canonist is good in the main. How many times does DnT even cast more than 1 spell a turn? What, with Vial and only like 6 non creature non artifact spells?

My freind Blazelix has the most showings-50+- with DnT online and at 50% cash out to joining ratio.
The deck is in 2nd place since Legacy came online in April this year, in terms of prize cash outs and he has over half those placings-without him the deck would be in like 9th place-.

He plays 3 Canonist main and never looked back. The card is good in a slow deck like DnT.

His list for ref:
http://www.classicquarter.com/decks/...ecklistID=3441

@Finn: It seems I missunderstood. Are you advocating for Canonist + Chant on the side? That seems too many hate cards for storm combo; I would only run that in a meta filled with such decks. When I play D&T I personally run 2 Canonists + 3 ETutor on the side, and so far so good. Adding more of either Canonist or Chant seems wrong to me, at least in a varied meta as mine. Storm combo is hard, but Canonist (+ ETutor) (+ Mother) can shore it up quite nicely, so why devote more cards in the sideboard only to make the MU slightly more favorable? Also, in a tournament, unless they know your list, smart storm players will always keep at least 2 Duress on game 2. Why? I'd rather have a (possibly) dead card that adds +1 storm for B, than risk you having a Chant/Mindbreak Trap. Not to mention that Duress let's me peek at your hand to evaluate your clock.

On Arbiter: It only stops Infernal Tutor against TES, but it is golden against Doomsday and IGGY variants. It doesn't do anything at all against Blecher nor Ad Nauseam.

@Menace, the pertinent question is probably: Do you think Canonists are better than Arbiters in the main (or are you thinking to run both?)? I don't expect anyone to have an answer to this just yet. But I know that I expect the answer to be a firm NO.

I am familiar with what Blazelix has been doing online. I think it is wonderful, and I noted that he has been using Canonists since the beginning of MODO Legacy. I bet he gets as much testing done as I do so I would really like to ask him about it. I also note that the online decks seem to be going in the same direction we all are with their card choices in general. I wonder how much they reads these posts.

@Lorgalis: Yeah, I don't have any Chants right now. I came to that same conclusion some time ago. Most of the SB right now is focused on having 4 E-Tutors to fetch parts, like Canonists. But with the way the meta is shifting I am about to rework mine again as soon as I get some testing with Arbiters. And I think some of the silver bullets are going to come out.

I am not a fan of Arbiter, I think Aven is flat out better as it is one-sided and doesn't allow any loop holes for 2 mana, it also flys and has flash, only upside to Arbiter is 2 mana opposed to 3.
Either way, I think Canonist is better than either of them.

My view is that Canonist slows down the 8 cantrip or tempo decks that rely on eot instants and 8 free counters to set up early, MErf/Gobs looking to plop down an army for alpha strike-not that DnT needs much help here-, and of course increases the chance to steal game 1 vs combo-which is a bad MU-.

It seems to me that a Doomsday deck running 7-8 fetches of which it'll have one of before Arbiter hits and 9-10 other lands, plus petals, rituals, and LEDs will have no trouble finding an extra two mana to kill you with. Doomsday only costs 4-5 on average to kill you anyway. It's not like D&T has a real clock anyway. Turn 5 goldfishes are scary....

I still think Arbiter is better than Mindcensor MD. Arbiter is faster to hardcast and vial in and even if they can pay two to fetch, that's setting them back a good bit.

Arbiter vs. Canonist MD is a meta pick in my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by emidln

It seems to me that a Doomsday deck running 7-8 fetches of which it'll have one of before Arbiter hits and 9-10 other lands, plus petals, rituals, and LEDs will have no trouble finding an extra two mana to kill you with. Doomsday only costs 4-5 on average to kill you anyway. It's not like D&T has a real clock anyway. Turn 5 goldfishes are scary....

---

I'm not experient with the DD deck, but...It seems to me that Arbiter can at least apply some pressure. Also, you don't have plenty of mana to spare every hand with DD (my idea is that TES usually has more mana), so the Arbiter might actually steal some wins, probably by stalling until you can get more hate. Arbiter + Canonist seem golden in that matchup; and if you play green, you have access to Gaddock Teeg too. Anyways, the matchup against combo will always be rough, but not unwinnable, specially if you have access to multiple hatebears. Having diverse hate that can still apply some pressure by kicking but seems to me the way to go, and not Chants/Mindbreak Trap et al.

Arbiter and wasteland could really cripple their manabase. Arbiter also makes DD cost 5 mana. It's basically why I'd main Arbiter instead of Canonist.

Either way, combo is still a very bad matchup.