[Deck] Death and Taxes

[Kuma]

Engineered Plague has to help against Goblins no? And both Jotun Grunt and Stonecloaker should be solid against Ichorid if you ask me.

Sure, Engineered Plague helps against Goblins, but not nearly as much as Silver Knight and Tivadar of Thorn. Playing those cards makes you somewhere around 70/30 vs Goblins.

Exactly what creatures am I missing that you could fit in a mono-white build that handles a threshed Mongoose anyways? If I get a Grunt out vs Threshold that should help alot because in 1 perhaps 2 turns that Mongoose is no longer threshed. Stonecloaker being an instant play could handle Mongoose right away should your opponent attack with 7 cards in his GY.

Samurai of the Pale Curtain. Stonecloaker can be hard to use vs Thresh. You have to get another creature in play through FoW/CounterTop/Fire/Pyroclasm/StP/Whatever in order for Cloaker to be able to stick. Then you have to worry about all the same cards again for Cloaker.

This might be true but this has nothing to do with the splash since Confidant is one of the creatures without a stipulation/condition. Stonecloaker and/or Jotun Grunt could be cut down (but 2 Grunts MD is solid). I haven't felt this to be a problem yet but if I do I will probably think about trying to fix this a bit!

Well, the last time I played D&T at a tournament, I didn't win a game with it, so that may be coloring my perceptions a little, but having too many creatures with stipulations/conditions is a real problem for the deck.

Oh yeah, and Jotun Grunt and Stonecloaker do next to nothing vs Ichorid. Samurai of the Pale Curtain is your best weapon, followed by StP on Ichorid and Cataclysm if you can live long enough to use it.

Cataclysm is reason enough not to splash, IMO. That card is a house.

[CleverPetriDish]

Oh yeah, and Jotun Grunt and Stonecloaker do next to nothing vs Ichorid. Samurai of the Pale Curtain is your best weapon, followed by StP on Ichorid and Cataclysm if you can live long enough to use it.

This is occasionally true. I have played against ichorid soooo many times. After quite a few I discovered that I was using my Grunts the wrong way. Rather than putting all the Bridges back in his library, only to come out again, just don't pay the upkeep on Grunt - let the Grunt die to remove them.

And Stonecloaker, coming out a turn later than everything else will be sitting in your hand in some games while a lot of 2/2 zombies crush you. It usually can not win you the game on its own, but combined with any other disruption even something bad like a couple of stp's or mana tithe or something can keep him off balance long enough to get going. I have found that when I get to turn three with a cloaker in my hand, if he does not already have an army it is all over but the crying.

Considering what I have said, you may be thinking, "okay, so Stonecloaker is bad since it sometimes does not work. Ima take it out." Same with Grunt. That would be a colossal mistake. The deck has no perfect cards. It has never had many dynamite matchups. What it has is a lot of pretty good matchups. Most decks with a god draw will beat D+T. But those same decks, along with all the others, will get bogged down by one annoying creature after another beginning turn two. None of those creatures end the game on their own. But there are always others. That is how this deck wins. Swapping out those annoying [disruptive] creatures for stuff like Mother of Runes or Phyrexian Negator basically unravels the deck's advantage in the long run.

[CleverPetriDish]

Hey crew, I actually won a pretty big tournament with this deck yesterday. I plan to write a report soon.

3 Isamaru, Hound of Konda
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Aether Vial
2 True Believer
4 Serra Avenger
3 Jotun Grunt
3 Samurai of the Pale Curtain
3 Umezawa's Jitte
3 Oblivion Ring
3 Stonecloaker
3 Mangara of Corondor
3 Cataclysm
4 Karakas
4 Rishadan Port
3 Flagstones of Trokair
11 Plains

Sideboard
3 Glowrider
1 Oblivion Ring
4 Orim's Chant
3 Seal of Cleansing
3 Tivadar of Thorn
1 Cataclysm

The Seals are for mostly for Painter Combo. But I found them pretty good all day.

[Xurcks]

Congratulations on your win! Good to see D & T back on top xD
Was there any situation that you think wasteland could be better than rishadan port during the tourney?
Also , i was trying runed halo in my deck in the place you are using true believers. What do you think of it?

[Brehn]

I still have no idea why anybody would consider playing a Grizzly Bear for WW main. Can you give your reasoning on that?

[Shawon]

I still have no idea why anybody would consider playing a Grizzly Bear for WW main. Can you give your reasoning on that?

I guess True Believer is MD'd because it gives the sb more space for additional needed cards and it's a better MD than all the other sb cards as it's still a creature and you can occasionally catch the opponent off guard with a Vialed True Believer in response to one of their tricks.

[FoolofaTook]

I still have no idea why anybody would consider playing a Grizzly Bear for WW main. Can you give your reasoning on that?

Grizzly Bears give you shroud?

[Brehn]

Grizzly Bears give you shroud?

A WINRAR IS YOU

So which matchups does this improve? Combo? Playing two random Believers shouldn't mean that you have a serious chance preboard. What else?

[Volt]

.

[Brehn]

Meh. I don't really care about Believer's strength against janky Sui Black with Edicts or janky Scepter Chant. Unless you're preparing your list for an extremely specific meta, in which these decks are very likely to show up, True Believer should not be considered mainboard material. Let's have a look at some of the decks that see play in more than 2 places in the world:

Threshold - Against UGw it's a Grizzly Bear that gets killed by Mongoose. Against UGr it's a Grizzly Bear that gets killed by Mongoose and prevents their Burn from hitting you - but usually their burn aims for your creatures anyway. Against UGb it's a Grizzly Bear that gets killed by Mongoose (and Bob, lol) and prevents them from playing Thoughtseize, which is neat, but doesn't justify an inclusion of Grizzly Bear. You'd never set a Meddling Mage on Thoughtseize against UGb Thresh, would you?

Landstill - Against every variant it's a Grizzly Bear that can't swing if there's a Factory on the board. Not disruptive.

Goblins - It's a Grizzly Bear. It kills every swinging x/2 Goblin, because that's what Grizzly Bears do. Nearly any other creature would do the same job. Not disruptive.

Aggro Loam - It's a Grizzly Bear that's smaller than their creatures. Not disruptive.

Ichorid - It's a Grizzly Bear that prevents them from Therapying you. Well, what Ichorid-disrupting spell might they get with Therapy? The Samurai which is sitting in your hand? Well, why didn't you just play Samurai instead of Believer? The Grunt in your hand? Why didn't you just play Grunt instead of Believer? That Swords in your hand? Ok... but why didn't you just cast it in response to the Therapy or even before? If they're able to resolve Dread Return for a Fattie they've won anyway.

Dreadstill - It's a Grizzly Bear that gets killed by Trinket Mage, lol. Not disruptive.

Survival - it prevents them from Seizing and Therapying you after turn 2. It might actually be a little bit useful here. Not sure though.


Summary: Look at these 7 decks, the decks that are currently the Decks to Beat/Watch. Compare True Believer to Leonin Skyhunter. Would you run Leonin Skyhunter? I guess you wouldn't. Well, against 5 out of the 7 best decks (exceptions are Ichorid and Survival) Leonin Skyhunter is almost strictly better than True Believer. That said: Don't play True Believer main if you don't know your meta in and out. If it really asks for it (Sui Black + Scepter Chant Oo), sure, play him. But don't recommend it to others just because it worked in your extremely specific Meta. It won't do its job in a general meta.


And actually, that's why I asked CleverPetriDish. The Top 8 of the tournament he won consisted of Dragon Stompy, Ichorid, 2 Threshold, 2 Goblins and Aggro Loam. Believer is not good in any of these matchups. But who knows - maybe he got paired against Combo twice and won these matchups because of Believer? That's why I asked.

[Volt]

.

[Brehn]

A significant percentage of any sizable tournament is going to be comprised of "jank" such as Sui-Black and Scepter-Chant. And Burn. And Belcher. And Tendrils combo in all its incarnations. Also, given the proliferation of Thoughtseize, True Believer is at least a minor nuisance to a lot of decks.

If True Believer would reliably beat the shit out of "random" decks, it would be ok. But with every "random" deck you name that he is good against, I can name another one that he isn't good against. Sui Black you say? Reanimator. Scepter Chant? Aluren. Burn (is he really good here? I mean, he's just a Healing Salve for WW)? Enchantress. Belcher? Meathooks. TES? Fetchland Tendrils? Welder Survival. Rifter. See where this is going? He is not even good against a huge portion of the more "random" decks.

And seriously, if there's no better card to take its slot and you start playing "minor nuisances" - there can't be a more obvious sign that says "SPLASH A COLOR, NOW". Dark Confidant and Tarmogoyf both cost 2 mana. They don't require 2 mana of the same color. And they are better in quite some matchups.

[Galroth]

Death and Taxes always is, and has been a meta-game deck. That is to say, many of the cards which make the cut are based on ones particular meta-game. At one point Silver Knight was a staple because of the omni-present goblins. Jotun Grunt found its way in to combat Threshold and Ichorid. The 2cc creature spot the is commonly vied for by True Believer, Silver Knight, Jotun Grunt, etc. does not host one particular creature that is head over heels better than all other options. Otherwise we'd probably have identified it by now (see Serra Avenger).

I know that if we had an identified meta this would probably not be an issue. As is, I believe the question stands at 'what creature is best in this slot for an undetermined random meta'.

I for one have several other questions which I place above this (though I don't want to spurn discussion over it... I just think the inclusion or exclusion of True Believer is a question without an answer until more information about a meta is provided).

More Important Questions:

1) Should Mana Tithe be maindecked?
2) Are Rishadan Ports (and Wastelands) required?
3) Is Oblivion Ring really that good; and if so, how many should be run?

All replies welcome.

[Curby]

And seriously, if there's no better card to take its slot and you start playing "minor nuisances" - there can't be a more obvious sign that says "SPLASH A COLOR, NOW". Dark Confidant and Tarmogoyf both cost 2 mana. They don't require 2 mana of the same color. And they are better in quite some matchups.

Yeah, and they screw up your manabase even worse. There's been quite a bit of development on MTG Salvation, where the point was made that many cards in D&T are situational, and some will be suboptimal in any matchup. However, the strength of D&T is its flexibility, and the cards are in that deck for a reason. Sure, I've replaced True Believers with Protction Knights and Knights of Meadowgrain from time to time, but True Believer is a solid inclusion.

I do think it's funny that while one person's taking out Grunts for Believers, someone else is doing the opposite. Regarding poor synergy, Samurai has a lot. As another example, casting Cataclysm with a Samurai and Flagstones in play kind of sucks.

[CleverPetriDish]

So which matchups does this improve? Combo? Playing two random Believers shouldn't mean that you have a serious chance preboard. What else?

Thoughtseizes were everywhere. He was certainly handy. But I still would like to have something more along the lines of Aven Mindsencer, Meddling Mage, or Grim Lavamancer. Thing is, most of the two-drops in here aren't turn 2 two-drops. He is.

[Alfred]

I think Brehn is right here. There isn't much in this format that True Believer is good against. I think it's basically just decent against combo.

I think Knight of the Holy Nimbus is better, hell, even without black in the deck, I think Spectral Lynx is better.

[Misobizo]

Hello,

about the things that have just been sais about grunt, believer and stonecloaker.

These appear indeed as the weakest slot in the deck...but in fact it is really they very heart and soul of this deck. They all provide unexpect solution and are much better in real life than on the paper. the advantages of each of them are well known so I won't develop any further. I think spirit of this deck is not to put big pressure on the opponent and beat for the win. it is to be annoying, yet developing your game plan progressively and have original and unexpected answers to random problems. in this way is differs from regular Wennie W.
Now you may think random is really too random. I think legacy is good because of this freaking damn randomness.
That being said, I personnaly play in japanese metagame where people really tend to be very random and play what they like. So I admit there may be a bias there.

By the way, I dont like samurai of the pale curtain. usefull only against ichorid (sometimes).

(I realize this is not very constructive. sorry for that)

[Alfred]

Hello,

about the things that have just been sais about grunt, believer and stonecloaker.

These appear indeed as the weakest slot in the deck...but in fact it is really they very heart and soul of this deck. They all provide unexpect solution and are much better in real life than on the paper.

What? If you can't explain how something is useful, then it just seems to me like "the danger of cool things". You see it work once or twice and assume that it's much better than it actually is. Think about the real decks and situations where the card you're talking about is going to be good, and go from there.

the advantages of each of them are well known so I won't develop any further.

What we're saying is that the strengths of True Beleiver don't match up with the current metagame.

I think spirit of this deck is not to put big pressure on the opponent and beat for the win. it is to be annoying, yet developing your game plan progressively and have original and unexpected answers to random problems.

The spirit of any competative deck is to have good answers to relevant problems that you could encounter, not random solutions to irrelivant problems.

Now you may think random is really too random. I think legacy is good because of this freaking damn randomness.

True Believer isn't broad enough to be a solution to random decks. As Brehn pointed out, even among the "random" decks, True Believer doesn't have a broad enough application to warrant inclusion. Also, if you're preparing for the crap decks, you aren't going to do very well later on in the tournament when you start facing real, actually decent decks.

[Guy I Don't Know]

These appear indeed as the weakest slot in the deck...but in fact it is really they very heart and soul of this deck.

If a card is weak, replace it, even if it leads you to a different kind of deck. Having weak cards is never a good thing unless they are so synergistic with the whole plan that they are needed. For instance, in flash, sky hussar was a necessary weak card when drawing it but is included because it wins games. True Believer doesn't win games. It doesnt really do anything. A deck that it would be good against has answers to it, and the decks that it is good against are few. It is very metagame dependent, but i would look elsewhere for a better creature.

[Misobizo]

I think your analysis is relevant, no doubt.

As I said before, metagame in Japan is special, probably not as mature as in other countries. Lots of pikula and combo.

Having maindeck protection against discard and most combo kills (millstone, belcher, tendrills) seem pretty decent to me. You have very few relevant card against combo game 1 and discard is really annoying because it ruins your "trick" strategy.

Of course, true beliver is VERY often sided out is a bear in many machup.

Still, replacement suggested for him (holy nimbus, pale curtain, lynx ....) are really not convincing....


Grunt is one of the best answer to all deck based abusing the grave yard and is a solid beater. I admit it is not so good against ichorid giving a free turn before it does anything. But against survival, goyf, loam deck...he is a house. Not to mention amazing synergy with cataclysm.

Stonecloaker is very versatile, difficult to count the number of situation is will save your ass as well as the many situation he is completly useless. But again, what replacement for him ?

So my point is : yes you can find better beaters. but it will weaken the overall strategy and versatility of answers G1.