[Deck] Death and Taxes

Yeah, in a meta where combo is non-existant, mono-white lists are a house. I thought, when a bad Kithkin White Weenie list can top 8 the master, I can win a trial with a good "White Weenie" list. For reference, I faced

Severance Belcher 2-1 (obviously I get one of the "combo" decks, although this was more like MUC with Severance/Belcher instead of Morphling/Meloku. Every game was really close).
Goblins 2-1 (Silver Knight, Jitte, Tivadar. I lost the game when I drew neither and my opponent topdecked his third Ringleader with Vial set at 4 after a resolved Cataclysm)
Vaka Pox 2-0 (Game 1 he destroys 6 or 7 lands, but I get seriously mana flooded :). Game 2 I vial out 2 Avengers with no lands and he doesn't draw Prison or Tabernacle
Ichorid 2-1 (Jotun Grunt and SotPC take this one home. It's so much easier if you are on the play.)
Dragon Stompy 2-0 (Silver Knight > Arc-Slogger. Silver Knight > Tephraderm. Mangara > Pit Dragon. Need I say more?)

I only resolved Cataclysm once, and I lost that game. Strange. Stonecloaker was also pretty underwhelming all the time, I always had one in my hand, but I never even casted one. I found that 6 colorless lands were too much, I often had to mulligan to 6 because of colorscrew. The ports weren't doing a thing all day long so I will take them out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tao

http://www.magic-league.com/deck/384...&%20Taxes58249

---

Brehn is that your list? Congrats.

Thorns AND Chants in the board. I was going to go that route as well, but didn't know if I should cut my Tivador numbers down. I don't really know how many goblins are running around in my area so I was unsure.

Wastelands over Ports? You've found them to be superior? They were working great for me, but that's all I was running (4 Ports) as far as colorless mana producers. I guess with Goblins on the decline mana bases are less stable and Wastes are the way to go? I wish I knew this before I shelled out the cash for them.

edit: Maybe you guys could give me some input on this? I'm gonna use the list posted above as an example (my actual list is fairly similar) and see if I even have a grasp on boarding. This is what I'd do:

Belcher: -3 Grunt, -2 SotPC, -4 StP, -1 Mangara / +4 Thorn, +2 Chant, +3 Believer, +1 Disenchant

TES: -3 Mangara, -4 StP, -2 Grunt /+4 Thorn, +2 Chant, +3 Believer

Thresh: -3 Cataclysm/+1 Grunt, +2 Thorn

Ichorid: -3 Cataclysm, -1 Knight/+1 Grunt, +3 Thorn

Survival: -1 Knight, -4 Mana Tithe/+2 Seal, +2 Disenchant, +1 Grunt

Breakfast: -3 Knight/+1 Grunt, +2 Disenchant

Goblins: -4 Mana Tithe, -1 Mangara/+1 Tivadar, +2 Seal, +2 Disenchant

Sui (Black based discard ect): -3 Silver Kinght/+3 Believer

Dragon/Faerie Stompy: Bring in Seals for Chalice?

Am I even close or completely clueless (as usual)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brehn

Yeah, in a meta where combo is non-existant, mono-white lists are a house. I thought, when a bad Kithkin White Weenie list can top 8 the master, I can win a trial with a good "White Weenie" list. For reference, I faced

Severance Belcher 2-1 (obviously I get one of the "combo" decks, although this was more like MUC with Severance/Belcher instead of Morphling/Meloku. Every game was really close).
Goblins 2-1 (Silver Knight, Jitte, Tivadar. I lost the game when I drew neither and my opponent topdecked his third Ringleader with Vial set at 4 after a resolved Cataclysm)
Vaka Pox 2-0 (Game 1 he destroys 6 or 7 lands, but I get seriously mana flooded :). Game 2 I vial out 2 Avengers with no lands and he doesn't draw Prison or Tabernacle
Ichorid 2-1 (Jotun Grunt and SotPC take this one home. It's so much easier if you are on the play.)
Dragon Stompy 2-0 (Silver Knight > Arc-Slogger. Silver Knight > Tephraderm. Mangara > Pit Dragon. Need I say more?)

I only resolved Cataclysm once, and I lost that game. Strange. Stonecloaker was also pretty underwhelming all the time, I always had one in my hand, but I never even casted one. I found that 6 colorless lands were too much, I often had to mulligan to 6 because of colorscrew. The ports weren't doing a thing all day long so I will take them out.

---

sweet :cool: I had a match with a pox deck at my last tourny and got similar results. It seems like you did well against your two combo matches. If the Magic-League list is yours, then I must applaud you; it seems very well thought-out. You balanced the sideboard and MD very well. I like how it screws with graveyard-based stuff. It looks very anti-goyf / anti-thresh. The biggest differences I see in this build are 1) only 20 lands (14 that produce W) 2) exclusion of MD Thorn of A., Glowrider, etc. I love the aggro vibe of the list; it looks like it would open up quickly and apply early pressure.

How many turns does it usually take you to kill your opponent?
How often do you get your opponent in some type of lock?
Have you considered excluding Cataclysm, since you said you played it once and lost that game, lol?

In a meta such as Magic League -- 62 decks, not a single copy of Tendrils of Agony (but one Tinker and one Vamp. Tutor O_o) -- you really don't need Thorns and Glowriders in the main. I built this deck with the Burn/Sligh, Threshold and Baseruption matchups in mind, as these get played very often. That somewhat explains maindeck Silver Knights and Grunts, but still the dissynergy between Grunts and SotPC was annoying. As I said, 6/20 colorless lands is probably too much. About Cataclysm: it's been a while since I really tested this deck so I can't tell.

Concerning the questions about when I win or when I achieve a lock: it totally depends on my draw. There are hands with Vial and triple Serra Avenger, but there are also hands with Karakas, Mangara and double Mana Tithe. That means, you're playing an absolutely different deck every game. Unfortunately you can't take too much influence on which deck you're playing because of the lack of manipulation, you just have to get lucky and draw the Silver Knight/Mangara/Karakas hand vs Dragon Stompy and the Isamaru/Grunt/SotPC hand vs Ichorid like I did, an not the other way round. This is why I'm considering the blue splash for a more general meta.

Brehn, how do you feel about:

9 Plains
4 Karakas
3 Flagstones
3 Wastes
3 Ports

Still 6 colorless mana sources, but 16 white and the ability to run Ports and Wastes togeter. If you feel 20 lands is working for you then by all means drop the Ports and add in 2 Plains, but -1 Isamaru/-1 Grunt MD would allow for the mana base above. Just a suggestion.

I'm gonna test that way for a few days and see how that works.

I would be careful about 6 colorless sources no matter what. A lot of the creatures (much more than in Goblins, which was the basis for the land supply early on) are WW or 1WW, so you are really taking chances. Brehn, if you go the Blue splash, the mana supply is very tricky. I posted one that worked out fairly well for me a few pages back. I got color problems rarely, but also was without special lands from time to time. Again, consistency over "cool things" was the idea.

One more thing for the moment, guys. I played this in Massachusettes last weekend like I intended to (faced Phaerimm Archlord in a finals mirror), and I came upon something. I am returning Glowrider to the sb.

Look at this:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JakeH

i side cataclysm - the only uses i can find for it is against enchantress and goblins. Glowrider is money because thresh HATES it. As long as half of the top8 finishes at major tourny's are thresh - i will continue to maindeck both glowrider and trinisphere...

---

I don't agree that Cataclysm is only good in a few matchups. It is usually GG. Before you even consider taking it out, just play enough games where you get to see it in action versus just about every deck not called Threshold. You don't have to time it all that much. It is not dead early or late. It is just a huge shift in board position to your advantage.

But!
In the matchup in which Cataclysm is decidedly poor - Threshold (and its close cousins) Glowrider is a major pain for them. Since this is an important matchup, and a since Glowrider can also come in against a few other key matchups (Belcher, Solidarity), I am going to include it for now. The major drawback of it costing 3 instead of 2 has been largely mitigated by the presence of both Mana Tithe and Orim's Chant. That is, I am seeing atleast one of these guys in my opening 7 g2 and g3 often enough to be able to make a 3-drop against combo almost always now.

EDIT: I almost forgot. This all applies only to nonblue versions. Glowrider is bad with Brainstorm, etc. in your deck.

Death and Taxes isn't played here in Finland at all and I have to say that the concept looks extremely intriguing. I just have to give it a try in some form.

I noticed people mentioning the deck having problems with enchantress. If your meta is enchantress-heavy, how about some Patricia's Scorns in sideboard? By playing a mere small creature or Mana Tithe you're able to wipe their board. This could be occasionally effective against awkward stuff like Pernicious Deeds as well. And it's instant speed which might be relevant when hardcasting it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Finn

I would be careful about 6 colorless sources no matter what.

---

I tested for a few hours last night and admittedly I have to agree here. Too many times did I have colorless mana and no Vial while creatures sat in my hand a turn or two. I'd rather the stability on my end then further disruption on theirs.

Now that Glowrider is being brought up again, wouldn't Thorn still be the better more stable option? Or do you perfer Glowrider as a body and the ability to come in at instant speed via Vial?

@Finn

I cannot disagree with you. Cataclysm is a good card. I forgot to mention it is also good against landstill in my previous post. However, running ports/wastes/glowriders/trinispheres seems to have given me more leverage in controlling tempo throughout my playtesting. Cataclysm has good synergy with alot of the other cards in D+T like Mana Tithe, R.Port, Flagstones, Glowrider, Vial .... just about every other card in the deck. However, I have found that when i drop the Cataclysm i end up screwing myself. I would always lose more than my opponent. Even though I would (usually) be in a better position afterwards, it seemed like a bad move. Cataclysm, as you said, is a game winning card when played correctly. Maybe im just bad :frown:

anyway, it looks like goblins are coming back and other weenie decks are on the rise. maybe I should MD 2 Cataclysms or something... I'll keep it in mind.

@Brehn

Ive said this like 3 times in this thread already - D+T is appealing because of its ability to be different each time you play it. I love it!!! Randomness is hard to disrupt and deal with.

Hey, i've played the deck for a while and have been going to over the inclusion of blue...

What do u guys think about leyline of singularity? seems really good on paper but i havent had any really good testing yet >_<

The great thing about cataclysm is that it's one of these few cards that can change radically the course of the game. Sure, it's not great if you have 2 or 3 creatures in play and still some cards to play in your hand (and even then...), but in that case you are probably already winning. It's a great card when it's most needed, ie when you lose control of the game. This is why you shouldn't automatically play it when you have the mana available, but only if you've lost the advantage on the board.
Against aggro, they will usually have more creatures in play than you, so you will gain time and CA. Against control (if you manage to play it), it will make them unable to play alot of cards (and you shouldn't have more than 2 creatures in play anyways). Against aggro-control (I'm thinking in particular of thresh) it's not very good, true. Not particularly useful against combo (apart solidarity), either.
Personally, I've never thought of taking out the card from MD. Some people even decide to play 4 (to add the chances to get one), but it's quite bad in multiples so I only play 3.

Death in Texas by Geoff Pederson (Fayt)

4 Tarmogoyf
2 Silver Knight
4 Samurai of the Pale Curtain
3 Glow Rider
3 Exalted Angel
3 Gaddock Teeg
3 Mother of Runes
3 Isamaru, Hound of Konda

3 Aether Vial
4 Swords to Plowshares
2 Umezawa’s Jitte
2 Sword of Fire and Ice

1 Forest
3 Plains
4 Windswept Heath
4 Rishadan Port
4 Wasteland
4 Savannah

Side Board:
3 Thorn of Amethyst
3 Tivadar’s Crusade
3 Pithing Needle
3 Seal of Cleansing
3 Armageddon

This is my list that I've been playing for the last few 1.5s I've played in. I don't have much time to explain it right now. But I'll be back a little later to post some match-ups I've had and some changes I'll be making to the deck before the next 1.5

-2 SoFI +2 Cataclysm from the main and I want to cut the geddons from the board... but I think they might do some good the turn after a cataclysm gets played but countered. Please post any thoughts you may have as well as questions.

As for my match ups

Goblins
Its a cake walk... the only thing to keep an eye on is if your starting hand is garbage.

Threshold
For me U/G and U/G/r thresh are just another deck this one just stomps, But U/G/w thresh gives me some problems. You just have to drop an early samurai of pale curtian and your off to a good start. With him in play resolving a cataclysm is golden cause you don't help them get to threshold. But thats just pointing out things we already know.

combo stormbased
The main deck has good hate and after board you just have more. 2-0 and your on to the next match.

belcher
Did they go off turn 1? No? ok play stuff you win dropping teeg says NO! to all their win conditions

salvagers
Haven't played against it, But I do play the deck and I would say that it would be a tuff match cause of the deeds and any other removal they may have. They only main deck hate would be the samurai.. so hope to drop that before they fire off. And hope they don't hit a deed.

Landstill
I've only played against a white landstill once and both times I played teeg turn 3 off a vial with a mom turn 2. But i would think this is another tuff match up.

A number of the cards are the same, and the green splash is one of the more popular recent ones. But you really don't have the same gameplan with the card selections you have made there. What you have there, my friend, is a bastardized Angel Stompy deck. You would be hard-pressed to fit it under what has apparently become the Death and Taxes blanket.

You are missing or under-representing most of the disruption elements, plus you don't have Cataclysm, Karakas, or Mangara. Yikes.

Try those cards out. You will find that it is a tad slower, but it wins a lot of games that are flatly out of reach for Angel Stompy.

I saw so little Death and Taxes at worlds. I cry.

So I put this question to every one. What prevented D&T from making a showing?

Is it Goyf? Cephalid Breakfast? Really, what actually hurts this deck to the point where pros wouldn't consider playing it?

Well, I think I can explain it. I played D&T in both side events at Worlds and not only was I the only one, but the majority of my opponents didn't even know what it was. Everyone had to read Karakas. Most thought it was just WW. In fact there were a few, "Awww, Isamaru? How cute" remarks made and just confusion came when I played a Vial. If the average Legacy player in the know of the format is ignorant of the Archetype, it's not very surprising for the Pros who don't focus on 1.5 to be as well.

Looking at the deck list just makes people scratch their heads. "Where's Savannah Lions???", "Why don't you run MoM??", "Mangara?!?"

I think in order for the majority to take the deck seriously, they have to see it in action while being played optimally. Unfortunately I was unable to provide that. While coming in 12th on Thursday, I did absolutely horrible at Saturday's event. I just kept drawing crap. Never sticking creatures for more than a turn, never getting the Mangara lock, and on the games where I resolved Cataclysm it wasn't to help me seal the deal, but to refrain from losing. I just couldn't get anything going.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Galroth

Is it Goyf? Cephalid Breakfast? Really, what actually hurts this deck to the point where pros wouldn't consider playing it?

---

Its a white deck. I think the deck that had the most white at worlds was Enchantress. A pro searching for a good record has to play a deck with many good matchups rather than mediocre ones. D&T doesn't have an auto win against anything as far as I know.

Goyf is not a problem in my games. I see it a lot, but there are so many answers for it, both obvious and nuanced. Breakfast is not very popular in these parts, but the guy I DO see playing it says he does not like the matchup because of all the outs D+T has. So no and no. You know, I couldn't tell you why it hasn't been more popular.

But Happy maybe right. There are no autowins. Well, if you resolve a turn 2 Samurai against Ichorid, that's an autowin. And Cataclysm resolving against Landstill in the late game is as well. Jitte landing even once against Goblins can do the same. Mangara lock is usually enough to sway even a hard matchup. So there are plenty of autowin scenarios, but those things don't happen every game. Sometimes you are looking at Isamaru and Stonecloaker against Solidarity. Maybe the random factor is a turnoff.

Yes, you guys are right - no autowins. But what about autolosses? None of the most popular decks dominate D+T. It is funny how few people even know about the combo. The first tournament i played D+T in EVERYBODY i played called a judge to the table the first time i tried to bounce mangara. i found it quite funny; the judge was getting irritated by the end of it :laugh: . as for professional quality, D+T is like a hybrid of WW and Stax.

Versus, what did you play against?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JakeH

Versus, what did you play against?

---

First off, I just want to say I don't blame the deck in way or think it inferior. I'm almost possitive the fault lies in the pilot (me). However, my draws just felt really random. So many spells being 2 or 3 ofs and no way to dig for them seemed to leave me with the wrong answer at the wrong time. I made a tourny report for Thursday in that forum, but I'll breifly go over what I remember about saturday as painful as it may be.

UGwb Thresh: Couldn't resolve Vial, never draw SoTC, and when I did draw Grunt he had Shackles on the table. Game 2 I sided in the extra Grunt and 3 Thorns. Mulled to find the Thorn and he FoW'd it. I even waited an extra turn to lay it down and back it up with Tithe, but he had the :1: open anyway.

Thresh: All Vial attempts were countered. Counterbalance stopped me cold. Never stuck a Grunt. Game 2 I actually had the Mangara lock in place and he Stifled Karakas.

Goblins!: I got SLAUGHTERED by Goblins. A match I almost felt was an auto win. Game 2 I mulled to 5 to find a Silver Knight, but ended up with a single Plains and Port and couldn't cast him. I took the chance he didn't have the first turn Lackey and he did. S-G and friends joined the party and even after I had the Knight on the table he was able to get a second Piledriver and overan me. Never saw Tivadar, Jitte, or Karakas in either game.

Standstill: On the games where I resolved Vial I won, but it only happened once. I tried to play around counters. I tried to outpace, nothing. Then the whole 3 judge debacle on weither or not a bounced Isamaru wearing Jitte created counters and I just got disenchanted with the day as a whole and started playing like shit.

Survival: Never drew Stonecloaker or Grunt, he kept recurring Squee and got Genesis in the Yard.

Standstill: The guys brother from the previous match. Same exact deck. Same exact results.

Like I said, I'll just chalk it up to player error and REALLY bad luck. It was my second time ever playing Legacy out and I was completely inexperienced with the decks I was matched against. A better, more experienced player would have met much better results I'm sure. It did real well in testing for me, but tanked in application. Honestly, it was just one of those days I guess.