For 1 more mana, at instant speed, you get fire//ice.. that can be relevant; doesn’t get knocked by chalice either. The ice half is probably fringe usable; say against a trinisphere or against a vial..
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Legacy decks: mono U painter, strawberry shortcake, imperial painter, solidarity, burn
EDH decks: zedruu voltron, rakdos the defiler, persistent petitioners, blind seer
Wow this is hella spicy.Originally Posted by Michael Keller
I love the Mother of Runes and Lightning Bolts and Swords to Plowshares! Trading out fast mana and going up to 21 lands seems reasonable and that 1x Karakas is a wonderful way to make use of that change.
My concerns:
- I'm not sure that 7 creature-oriented removal is correct in a deck with 2 Ensnaring Bridge and 2 Enlightened Tutor.
- Among that removal, I'm not sure the split is right. Since this deck doesn't look particularly aggressive, why not skew towards Swords to Plowshares to hit Marit Lage and Gurmag Angler? Also, why so many Lightning Bolts? 2 Bolts and 4 StP (along with 4 Pyroblast) would almost certainly be sufficient to keep down aggressive enemy starts (that your current removal package seems to be tuned for) while staying flexible for other threats.
- Only 3 Imperial Recruiter? I feel like with this shell against many decks I'll want to sequence a Mom followed by a Painter or a Cratermaker then a Painter. Neither of which seem very viable without 4 Recruiter. That having been said, I'm a very bad Magic player, so those lines could be very wrong.
- Only 2 filtering/dig? 2 Copter, 0 Light Up the Stage, 0 Faithless Looting seems criminal! What are you going to do when you can't mise what you need?
- Are you not missing Walking Ballista? It's been OKAY for me, but I've heard lots of love for it.
Damn, I liked my list and now I have to wedge in a Mother of Runes? Curse you and your savage tech! ;)
Referring to the art on Stasis:
Seven removal spells is actually much more aggressive holistically towards removal than most Painter builds. Pyroblast also does fit that bill, to a degree. That's eleven (11) potential removal spells. Two Enlightened Tutor as opposed to three is indicative of a shift away from leaning on the combo and more to ground and pound, and two Bridge is always a proper number in Painter - regardless of the number of Tutors you play.
Since the deck isn't focusing more on the combo and fast mana, Lightning Bolt is more aggressive, kills Planeswalkers and gives you reach against decks like Dimir Shadow. Swords to Plowshares is sure-fire removal, but we're also not predominantly base white with our mana.- Among that removal, I'm not sure the split is right. Since this deck doesn't look particularly aggressive, why not skew towards Swords to Plowshares to hit Marit Lage and Gurmag Angler? Also, why so many Lightning Bolts? 2 Bolts and 4 StP (along with 4 Pyroblast) would almost certainly be sufficient to keep down aggressive enemy starts (that your current removal package seems to be tuned for) while staying flexible for other threats
Three Recruiter is fine. There are fewer one-ofs in the deck, so redundant copies and a trifecta of tutors are fine (five if you count Enlightened Tutor for Painter).- Only 3 Imperial Recruiter? I feel like with this shell against many decks I'll want to sequence a Mom followed by a Painter or a Cratermaker then a Painter. Neither of which seem very viable without 4 Recruiter. That having been said, I'm a very bad Magic player, so those lines could be very wrong.
Light up the Stage in some number could be viable, but that would likely require looking elsewhere to make space. Looting isn't very good in a build where you're incidentally looking to abuse Welder as opposed to purposely using Welder. You could make room for a third, though.- Only 2 filtering/dig? 2 Copter, 0 Light Up the Stage, 0 Faithless Looting seems criminal! What are you going to do when you can't mise what you need?
I hate Ballista in Painter. It's a tutor target, sure, but I've never liked it. It mostly comes down as a 1/1 or 2/2. I'd rather invest my mana somewhere else later in the game.- Are you not missing Walking Ballista? It's been OKAY for me, but I've heard lots of love for it.
Ha - to be honest, I think Mother of Runes is probably where we want to be if we're playing white. You all know what it does and what it can do. Painter is the card you really need to protect; Mother is probably the best card in Legacy at doing that. I tried Custody and haven't gotten enough reps in yet with it, but Mother is tried and true.Damn, I liked my list and now I have to wedge in a Mother of Runes? Curse you and your savage tech! ;)
This is the context I was missing. With that context, 4 Bolt and 3 Swords makes much more sense.
However, other parts of the construction make less sense. 2 Bridges, Mom, and a 21st land all seem counter to a creature-attack design.
I feel that if you want to attack, I think the mono-red shell is correct. You can fit 4 LUtS to compliment the offense. You can play Pia and Kiran (in multiples!) without mana color concerns. Hell, you could maindeck Chandra ToD to guarantee Spectacle (plus her other obvious benefits).
If you want to hybridize, want options, or want more combo focus then that's where Shortcake shines. All of which are among the reasons that I'm on Shortcake.
Referring to the art on Stasis:
I actually really like mother of runes in the deck and would argue that if you are going to play it, you probably want 3-4 so you can get it out early. It does the job of Hanna's custody or leonin, etc. without being clunky.
The thing I don't like about this list is that you are portraying it as more of a "ground-and-pound" list but you are trying to do that with a bunch of 1 and 2 power creatures. You are simply going to get outclassed. This list should really be all about copter. Otherwise you are just spending turns trying to kill your opponent's creatures while naturally drawing into your combo. I admittedly really don't like the 7 removal cards in the list. It just feels really schizophrenic. It's a bad hate bear deck with a 2 card combo in there as an after thought. I would say cut the removal, up your copter count and get LotS back in the list. Then you are definitely on to something.
I'm feeling hyper critical these days I guess. Sorry. Just my $0.02.
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
That's part of how Painter plays. Painter decks - in practice - have always run one or two Ensnaring Bridges with a load of random creatures. That's just how the deck plays. Twenty-one lands (seven of which add two mana) is perfectly acceptable. Aether Vial in Death and Taxes is effectively a mana accelerator and uses multiple colorless-producing lands. Nothing in this iteration uses more than a single color to cast anything, which makes it easier on the mana base.
And sometimes, sticking a Bridge and flooding the board is fine lining up for an eventual alpha assault. It's not like you're playing Brainstorm or Ponder here; you're creating lines of play off of what's in your hand and what you're against. Ensnaring Bridge may seem counter-intuitive on the surface, but it's ultimately there to protect you against larger threats cheated into play.
I disagree. Just because you have a second color doesn't mean you can't win the game on the ground. Most games in Painter I'd argue are won without Grindstone and just grinding out victories through asymmetric mana shutdown from Blood Moon or Blast effects and attackers.I feel that if you want to attack, I think the mono-red shell is correct. You can fit 4 LUtS to compliment the offense. You can play Pia and Kiran (in multiples!) without mana color concerns. Hell, you could maindeck Chandra ToD to guarantee Spectacle (plus her other obvious benefits).
I disagree again. You can run either version and change the architecture of the deck to support your strategy, and R/w is really the same with a few mana adjustments and Enlightened Tutor. Cards like Swords to Plowshares and Lightning Bolt clear the path for attackers to pin down damage.If you want to hybridize, want options, or want more combo focus then that's where Shortcake shines. All of which are among the reasons that I'm on Shortcake.
Painter is a "weeny" deck at heart - and first and foremost. Grindstone is just a scare tactic for opponents that makes them think twice about what you're going to do and how they need to sequence their plays. All the meanwhile the only thing you care about is clocking them each turn, whittling away at their life total and winning that way or then with Grindstone.
Enlightened Tutor again adds major security vulnerabilities to the deck post-board in some match-ups because of Extraction. I'd argue that in games two and three you actually want to go aggro as opposed to combo.
I'm following your logic more now.
However, as far as I can understand, your list does not comply with your intent. If you intend to attack, would you not chose more combat viable creatures?
Hangarback Walker, Endless One, Dauntless Bodyguard, Figure of Destiny, Herald of Anafenza, Hope of Ghirapur!, more Smuggler's Copter, Pia and Kiran Nalaar, there are so many options for attackers.
Yet you picked 2 Mother of Runes (which seems like a combo-focused choice) and an extra Cratermaker and cut down to 2 Copter. I don't see how that provides combat viability for the weenie plan. What am I missing?
Referring to the art on Stasis:
I was considering Mother of Runes in this deck as well. I've been playing Death and Taxes long enough to appreciate how good that card is. Now, I also respect Ethersworn Canonist for its ability to grind the Xerox engine to a halt (and it's just insane with Mother in play), but as far as combo protection goes... has anyone of you ever considered Grand Abolisher? I realize WW isn't necessarily easy to cast, but since some of you seem to be considering alternatives to the Sol land manabase anyway, I think it could still fit...
Reaching a critical number of Humans in the deck (Mother, Abolisher, Recruiter, Canonist all share that type) could make Cavern of Souls a valid option for colour fixing that does not impede the two main combo pieces, and between blasts, Mothers, Abolisher and Canonists, it should be possible to combo out with impunity quite often.
You are too spicy for me. I can't handle it. I just wanna understand Keller's aggro plans.
Referring to the art on Stasis:
Why do you think that a card that isn't even playable in the dedicated white weenie deck is playable in this one?
I'm testing a defense grid in the side, which should do more or less the same thing as abolisher but is easier to cast and interacts well with welder. Not sure if it's good enough vs control but I think it's a better fit than abolisher.
I really think you should fix the mana especially since you actively need a white source for a turn 1 mom. Frank Karsten wrote a great article about this: https://www.channelfireball.com/arti...t-your-spells/. He recommends 14 for a turn 1 play.
Abolisher completely shuts out your opponent during your turn own, so any instant speed interaction with Painter's Servant or (casting) Grindstone is nullified, which will win the game for Painter - while it won't win the game for a "White Weenie" (assuming D&T, which I've been playing since 2008) deck.
@finksfinksfinks: How do you like it, and when/against what do you board it in? The fact that Defense Grid has a symmetric effect makes it *far* worse in my book, but the fact that it's an artifact and can be cast off of any mana sources is an obvious and siginficant upside.
I feel that Canonist + Blast make for a decent defense against our-turn interaction. Canonists and Blasts are both relevant on the opponent's turn, which Abolisher and Defense Grid are not. Abolisher requires double white. Defense Grid stops us from countering their plays with Blasts. I'm going to stick with Canonist + Blast.
@Michael Keller: Please come back and explain to me the attacking aspects of your latest Shortcake list. I'm still so confused.
Referring to the art on Stasis:
I'm mainly bringing it in vs control decks, miracles and grixis. Any time where they care more about my turn than I do theirs.
The idea is that I don't care about countering anything they're doing unless it's interrupting my game plan, so I only need to interact on my turn.
So they play their removal at sorcery speed. And sorcery speed removal IS strictly worse than instant speed removal. However, unless you're planning on putting Painter and Grindstone onto the field and immediately activating Grindstone all within one turn, sorcery speed removal will still be sufficient to stop you.
Referring to the art on Stasis:
Agreed here. Unfortunately our combo is 6 total Mana to cast and activate. It's not unreasonable to get to by any means, but it is a lot.
well, 4 mana in play plus 1-2 petal and SSG makes the 6 mana not too impossible. and anyways, we're usually planning to combo off over like 2 turns, right?
I'm right now testing leonin abunas and earnest fellowship. basically locks out our blasts (sort of), but protects everything outside of wraths and edicts. recruitable and enlightened tutor-able too. but its basically only useful in really grindy control games.
Regarding grand abolisher, i think it might be more playable if you feel that a heavier white splash is necessary. There are certainly a lot of good white cards that works in shortcake; canonist, abunas, mom, swords, E-tutor, containment priest. i could probably even make an argument to make the deck even more grindy and staxy with trinispheres, defense grids and smokestack and dropping the blasts, bolts and swords (which i'm actually trying, and having it explode on me quite often).
If we do run more white, and wanting that double-white i'd probably go with 4 arid mesa, 2-3 plateau, 2 plains and 1 karakas at minimum.
I'm wondering though, especially for you guys who are a lot more experienced with the deck, what's the sort of "cost" between threatening a blast and playing protection for your stuff? As in is the cost of making our manabase worse and adding more fluff in the deck worth adding the protection? So far, i feel like most of the protection cards I'm playing are either blanking like 10+ cards and therefore wins the game, or is completely irrelevant and slows me down too much and could have done the same thing with blast and/or other effects i already have in-deck.
The point is though that if you have defense grid or abolisher then they can still use their removal at sorcery speed. So playing part of your combo and then passing the turn makes it so your grid is irrelevant. For grid to matter you need to go off all at once
Thank you for making my point more eloquently that I did. Hopefully everyone understands now.
So, seeing as Michael Keller hasn't shown up in a while, does anyone want to weigh in on his statements? Specifically that Strawberry Shortcake was always a weenie deck at heart.
Referring to the art on Stasis:
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Reply With Quote