[Deck] Dragon Stompy

[Tacosnape]

for decks running grunt i usually find powder keg to be more efficient. Anything it doesn't hit can usually be dealt with by our creatures, if not lets hope were in hellbent. though sulfur can deal with grunt, i would just board him out if the opposing deck wasn't majority of problematic white creatures.

I would just ignore Jotun Grunt. Seriously. Dragon Stompy puts very few cards in the yard and given all the ways we have to reduce the number of spells an opponent plays, Grunt isn't going to stick around long. If you happen to have Sulfur for it, awesome. If not, oh well.

should bloodfire kavu be given a chance in maguses spot the tibal match ups? anyone tried him before? (my thinking is stuff like goblins will kill magus so i kinda think hes a dead card in such match ups, as well as merfolk all magus stops is maybe waste and mutavault.)

Somehow I didn't actually know this card existed.

I think I'd rather have Kinesis or Clasm against Goblins or Elves, and against Merfolk I'd rather have something that can handle 8-12 Lords, like Keg (or as mentioned later in this same post, FTK.)

Is that so? Well both these top pro players had choices and they both freely and voluntarily chose to play grunt. Moreover, they aren't just "two random players". They are players that represent the two best records at GenCon and the Worlds in the Legacy format respectively.

And they made mistakes. Including Grunt was a mistake.

Everybody who plays this game makes mistakes, either in deck construction, mulliganing, playing, etc. Pro Players do this a lot less than most of us, especially in playing/mulliganing, but not all Pro Players are masters of deck design in unfamiliar formats (Some, like Nassif, Sadin, etc, definitely are, but not all.)

Wow, now this is amusing. Here we have an amateur player (at best) telling a pro player he had no business using a pivotal metagame call (at the time) in his sideboard at the World championships.

Because I'm right and the pro player, like you, was/is wrong.

Could you be any more egotistical?

Yes. See the above post and the below post for proof.

Could you be anymore wrong?

Yes. In fact, it's impossible for me to be any less so.

As far as how it relates to dragon stompy, well the issue pertaining to flametongue kavu in this deck came up and what creatures it can take out. Taco erroneously mentioned it was useless because a lot of the 4 good, 4 toughness creatures were not playable anymore. He was wrong in large measure. In any event, the fact remains whether you agree or not a lot of those creatures are still played in competitive tournaments whether they are for all the right or wrong reasons. Therefore if you want to play Kavu in this deck it is not a terrible choice; especially in the right meta, especially in the sideboard.

I don't recall ever using the word "useless" for FTK (I might have, if so, I withdraw it.) In my very first version of this deck I ran 4. Until Tarmogoyf I still liked it in sideboard. I don't like FTK main because against creatureless decks he blows either himself or your own threats up, and I don't like sideboarding him because if I want to sideboard creature hate I want to generally board in something that's going to blow up the big guys or blow up multiple small guys.

Nowadays, yeah, FTK has a trillion targets. He also has a lot of places where he's useless. But I don't think he's necessarily a bad board choice depending on your metagame. He's been made better by the rise of Merfolk, for one. FTK is great against Merfolk.

As it pertains to Grunt, Sulfur Elemental and FTK both are good against Jotun Grunt. Whatever. This is 2009. People don't run Jotun Grunt. People have figured out it's bad by now.

[Shanghi Knights]

even if you didn't know it existed, gotta admit its sorta better than aether flash against ichorid. but still aether flash being an enchantment makes it a hard card to dismiss altogether.

[Thoughtseizer]

Taco, it is trite to say that you lack no confidence (gross understatement) or demurral. Go down with the ship, way to go!

First and foremost I want to point out that I never have, never will and never in the blue hell advocated even the slim notion of including grunt in dragon stompy. My issue with grunt was two fold. Firstly, that he can still be considered "playable" in some decks in the present legacy format; and secondly, he is still played in the competitive legacy metagame and has been since he was printed in coldsnap.

Now this will be my last reply on this particular issue because it seems this issue is getting very jejune. So with that being said I wish to clarify the following:

And they made mistakes. Including Grunt was a mistake.

Everybody who plays this game makes mistakes, either in deck construction, mulliganing, playing, etc. Pro Players do this a lot less than most of us, especially in playing/mulliganing, but not all Pro Players are masters of deck design in unfamiliar formats (Some, like Nassif, Sadin, etc, definitely are, but not all.)

Although I concur with much of what you stated above when applied to other issues other then the one at bar, how can you consider him playing grunt being a mistake even when it is clear and concise that because of that card and that one card alone he made the finals (top 2 finish); and at the second largest and second most prestigious legacy event of the year? He cut silver knights to slot in grunts knowing there would be an abundance of goblin! Talk about having balls but it turned out to be a wise metagame decision nevertheless. He ended up losing once (in the finals) to a deck he didn't expect to see in the finals which was a counter sliver deck that also took out John Juilfs Dragon Stompy one round earlier in the top 4 semi finals.

I think it is clear that you are missing the point. The fact of the matter is that in hindsight, in retrospect, if he could travel back in a time machine and rebuild and play his deck, he would leave the grunts in. He clearly and unequivocally stated that they were his first star card and "they helped get me to the finals and past all the threshold" (which with goblins made up more then half of the metagame). What does the foregoing mean in a nutshell? He did not make a mistake and would change nothing; end of story.

It is interesting to note that if you had grunt out and were playing kavu he would probably be able to take out goyf now wouldn't he? But seriously, just for the record, my board for Dragon Stompy consists of three tormod's crypt's for yard hate. I recently cut one because fatal graveyard effects aren't overwhelming in my metagame presently. Although, it would be interesting to see if Relic could be as or more efficient then crypt in Dragon Stompy's board?

[damionblackgear]

even if you didn't know it existed, gotta admit its sorta better than aether flash against ichorid. but still aether flash being an enchantment makes it a hard card to dismiss altogether.

For a moment, I thought you were talking about Grunt... I got you though ;). the Kavu is nice but, the fact of the matter is that an answer for a deck like Solitaire (it's an example but I'll run with the idea) is more important than dredge since we already slow them down and have hate for them in the board (Keg, Crypt, ... ). People in my meta have started playing Solitaire and I was never happier to audible away from DS as I was this last Saturday. 3 Solitaire decks showed up randomly oddly enough all had different win conditions ?:| I was thinking of ways to deal with the deck and Everlasting Torment came up. I thought wither was a great idea for the decks that are running Goblin Assault in the Mauler slot. also makes confinement not single handedly beat us. I know it's not something that's normal but the rest of the decks are changing and better (it's been a while since T1 Moon was an end all). Maybe it's time to rely on somethign new.

Also I agree with the lack of Sloggers. He's been a little underwhelming and T1 Slogger has also not really blown my socks off in a while. Maybe something that costs a little less (like 3!) should take it's place. Then we can also cut song, since 1st turn dragon isn't as good as it might seem. Just storming some idea's. *Fight*

[Thoughtseizer]

Cut song? Common! I mean yeah, everybody would rather have a better card in its place. Indeed, it is tempting to replace but it is the glue that holds this deck together. Song x4 is a staple card in this deck and is not really open to negotiation. Slogger is needed and if you want to, go down to 2 or 3 but don't cut him all together. How can you go wrong with a turn one Slogger? really? The only way that powerhouse play is going to happen (consistently) is with both Slogger and Song.

[Fons]

Sloggers and Songs should always be four ofs, you can side them out against control but never take them from the maindeck.

[damionblackgear]

I'm just saying that a T1 Slogger hasn't been as threatenening as it used to be. It seems like most decks just deal with it and we look at them like a kid who just got punked for his/her candy. I've been happier with second turn more than 1st.

[Fons]

I think it is almost always correct to lay a chalice at one or a trinishere on turn one before your slogger however, if you start cutting sloggers and songs it won't happen on turn two as often.

[Thoughtseizer]

I think it is almost always correct to lay a chalice at one or a trinishere on turn one before your slogger however, if you start cutting sloggers and songs it won't happen on turn two as often.

It won't happen on turn two at all! Slogger does not have to come out super early to be efficient and effective. Other then Magus he he the best creature in the deck.

[Wereodile]

It won't happen on turn two at all! Slogger does not have to come out super early to be efficient and effective. Other then Magus he he the best creature in the deck.

I run 3 Maulers and 3 Sloggers along side 2 Jittes and I have been happy with those numbers so far though sometimes having those two extra beaters would have been nice.

Slogger is my least favorite creature in the deck but you know what my opinion doesn't matter! The deck needs them and wins with them. He has pulled out a couple wins for me.

[Thoughtseizer]

I run 3 Maulers and 3 Sloggers along side 2 Jittes and I have been happy with those numbers so far though sometimes having those two extra beaters would have been nice.

Slogger is my least favorite creature in the deck but you know what my opinion doesn't matter! The deck needs them and wins with them. He has pulled out a couple wins for me.

Do you really think that Mauler is a tier 1 card/ creature for this deck?

BTW: You are so lucky where you live right now. Ottawa and Kingston are the only places in Ontario that consistently have weekly good turn outs and sanctioned legacy tournaments right now? Toronto is all about standard, draft and extended right now. Where do you play legacy, 4-Colour 8-Bit Comics & Games? If so, what is the metagame like there? Are you finding dragon stompy viable up there?

[Dark_Cynic87]

It won't happen on turn two at all! Slogger does not have to come out super early to be efficient and effective. Other then Magus he he the best creature in the deck.

Hand:
Mountain
City of Traitors
SSG
Slogger
Chalice
S. Song
Moon

Turn one: City, SSG, S. Song, Chalice, Moon. Other option: City, SSG, Song into Slogger.

That's on Turn one with a hand that happens. It's not extremely uncommon to be able to pump out a threat on turn 1, and especially not turn 2.

Pce,

--DC

[damionblackgear]

Hand:
Mountain
City of Traitors
SSG
Slogger
Chalice
S. Song
Moon

Turn one: City, SSG, S. Song, Chalice, Moon. Other option: City, SSG, Song into Slogger.

That's on Turn one with a hand that happens. It's not extremely uncommon to be able to pump out a threat on turn 1, and especially not turn 2.

Pce,

--DC

Was making reference to my statement about cutting slogger for other options.

[Tacosnape]

Hand:
Mountain
City of Traitors
SSG
Slogger
Chalice
S. Song
Moon

Turn one: City, SSG, S. Song, Chalice, Moon. Other option: City, SSG, Song into Slogger.

That's on Turn one with a hand that happens. It's not extremely uncommon to be able to pump out a threat on turn 1, and especially not turn 2.

Are we assuming this is game one and you're on the play? Because if it is, I wouldn't play either of those as my opening play.

I'd lead with Mountain, SSG, Chal-1. This frees you up for either a turn two City/Song/Slogger and turn three Moon, or a turn two Moon if you deem it necessary to fire out the Moon right then.

The Chalice-1 will raise your chances of being able to maximize everything in your hand, plus you get to make your decision based on the next card you draw. For example, if your opponent dropped a Tropical Island and you topdeck a Gathan Raiders, you might want to go ahead and drop your moon, since you're now any mana source away from dropping the raiders and pitching the Slogger to flip it. If you see a mountain or forest, though, you may want that Slogger down quicker.

[Nihil Credo]

I agree on the turn 1 play, but if my opponent dropped a Tropical Island (indicating a lack of fetches, and hopefully of basics too) and I drew Raiders, I would never walk my only Moon effect into Daze. The two options, IMO, are going for the throat with Song -> Moon and hoping they don't have a FoW (or that they are left with a weak hand which you have time to beat), or baiting with Raiders which allows for solid follow-ups regardless of their hand but gives them the time to drop Standstill (the really scary card in this situation).

[Tacosnape]

I agree on the turn 1 play, but if my opponent dropped a Tropical Island (indicating a lack of fetches, and hopefully of basics too) and I drew Raiders, I would never walk my only Moon effect into Daze.

Well, this gets highly speculative, as I think the next play depends completely on what you draw and what you think your opponent is holding based on the fact that he lead with Tropical Island-go. (You definitely lead with the moon if you topdeck another SSG or Moon effect, for example).

I admit I didn't really think about it when I made the post, as I was just tossing it out as a random dual to illustrate the point, but upon thinking about it? I'm not so sure I wouldn't press with the Moon anyway here, though. If it gets Dazed, they're going to spend their next turn making land drop #1 again and passing, and then I'm going to drop down Song/Slogger next turn followed by Raiders/morph, and I'm willing to bet I win far more than I lose here. Even if they answer both with a Tarmogoyf, Slogger/Raiders is the favorite.

[Thoughtseizer]

How are people that play this deck regularly in a relatively competitive metagame finding this decks over all consistency in totality?

And is it just me or is it a trite fact that this deck destroys Zoo? (Even without powder keg)

[heroicraptor]

What about Flowstone Wyvern or Ogre Shaman instead of Arc-Slogger?

Flowstone Wyvern gets there in the air (which is a similar capacity to Arc-Slogger--clear the ground).

Ogre Shaman clears the ground/provides reach, and helps keep hellbent.

[Shanghi Knights]

How are people that play this deck regularly in a relatively competitive metagame finding this decks over all consistency in totality?

And is it just me or is it a trite fact that this deck destroys Zoo? (Even without powder keg)

given chalice is main board i dunno why we would ever have a problem with zoo.

Consistancy i find to be a bit annoying, yet i love going hellbent dragon so i keep playing it. I just can't get a break between the landstill players and the quinn players at my local tournament. I lock them down they get out like houdini.

Often though i find the deck stalls out a lot. very often i hit them hard with a lock or big creature and then get hit by a land draw for more than 1 turn and no reinforcements come down the pipes. This is why i advocate mutated builds for instance the addition of browbeat or barbarian bully, or even duallands with burning wish answer board. i claim i advocate but i'm not a very good advocater.

the thought occured to me perhaps since my meta is heavy white shenanigan i should invest into sword of light and shadow over running fire and ice, getting a creature back is far more effective possibly than the surprise top deck. Honestly if this deck had card draw i think its racing capabilities with the stuff it struggles against would be the breaking of the deck. such as a card for one red and 2 thats a creature and allows you to draw cards if it deals damage to a player. maybe throw in a "unless" clause on top of that.

Anyone experimented with seize the day in there dragon stompy deck?

[Zork]

@Thoughtseizer - Consistency in this deck is bad. I've tried everything possible to fix this, but barring wizards allowing more than 4 of a nonbasic in a deck, or major cards getting functional reprints, it will not get better. Honestly, though, inconsistency is what keeps this deck in check from being too good.

@heroicraptor - Those do not do what Arc-Slogger does. Arc-Slogger swings big, pings 4-5 times, and has a big ass. Flowstone Wyvern is smaller unless you open it up to more removal, while Ogre Shaman is smaller all the time, costs more to ping, and doesn't work if you already have hellbent (which you hopefully will). I might try Ogre Shaman, but I wouldn't play more than 1 as a 3/1 split.

@Shanghi - Yes, I tried Seize the Day, but it only ended up helping when I was going to win anyway. A better card to try is Threaten, which can help swing games if they get a huge Goyf or something just in time.