[Deck] Non-LED Based Dredge/Ichorid Combo

[JonBarber]

[*]Has an even better matchup against blue-based control decks -- dropping land doesn't use the stack.

Yeah, but BG's landfall ability does, which can be stifled.

[Aleksandr]

Yeah, but BG's landfall ability does, which can be stifled.

But don't forget that it triggers for each BGhast and every time a land enters BF. They don't have that many Stifles. Unless they are on the Stick, of course...

[Grillo]

http://www.magic4all.es/index.php?op...orts&Itemid=10

It's in spanish, you may need a translator

From the report it's pretty clear that bloodghast is just another beater and not an enabler.
Key cards for this guy were putrid imps and therapies.

[4eak]

Yeah, but BG's landfall ability does, which can be stifled.

So, that means they won't have a Stifle for my Ichorid. Stifle isn't very useful against Dredge (not nearly as effective as FoW and Daze), but if there is a serious Stifle target, it would be a CC activation, which BG-Dredge does not rely upon as much (testing without CC has been fairly decent for BG builds; which is was quite a surprise to me, as I that is not my finding for regular LEDless).

The point is that Bloodghast is yet another almost completely non-interactive way to recur. And, for your example, BG-Dredge has way more targets to absorb Stifle than other non-BG builds. If Stifle was a concern, then BG wins out as well.

The engine, for all intensive purposes, is immune to permission. Self-bouncing lands and Bloodghast play right through blue.

-------------------------------------------------

For those who are too lazy, here's a Google translation link of that page:

http://translate.google.com/translat...n&hl=&ie=UTF-8

I have to admit, I don't care for his build very much. He's certainly not going to maximize the value of Bloodghast in his shell. He's even running DR-targets; this is a good sign that he doesn't know how and why the deck would evolve with Bloodghasts.

From the report it's pretty clear that bloodghast is just another beater and not an enabler.
Key cards for this guy were putrid imps and therapies.

Bloodghast is another form of "Ichorid", but instead of requiring a lot of black creatures and heavy dredging to keep him active, you can have very minimal dredging (sometimes doesn't even require it at all) with a suitable bouncing/dredging mana-base. Bloodghast has fewer requirements for activation (lower cost), although he can't block and doesn't kill himself endstep, so he's also not as powerful Ichorid (lower benefit). All in all, Ichorid is no more an enabler than Bloodghast.




peace,
4eak

[jimirynk]

The only way you should be losing to Ux control is if you keep a weak opening hand, or the get enough hate to stop you.

[4eak]

The only way you should be losing to Ux control is if you keep a weak opening hand, or the get enough hate to stop you.

Neither conditions are possible. I guess we shouldn't consider specializing any further as a non-interactive deck which isn't as linear, and we shouldn't worry about being capable of winning in the face of effective hate or winning in cases where we've mulled into weak hands.

I'm not calling Bloodghast the second coming of the Messiah; there are metagames where I don't prefer the build. It seems reasonable, however, to recognize what Bloodghast does, where he belongs, how you should play with him, and so on. I'm wondering how many people have actually sat down and tested Bloodghast--that might produce more fruitful conversation.





peace,
4eak

[bum_man]

Also on bloodghast. I won't go into depth, but I will say this. It is strictly worse than ichorid. That means ichorid stays over it. If you still want to fit it that means you are diluting the deck and making it slower and worse. Any version with bloodghast plays very differently from ichorid versions. I would say LEDless ichorid is more similar to LED dredge than it is to the awful bloodghast lists so if there are separate lists for LED, and LEDless there should be a separate list for bloodghast lists.

Have you even played the card before saying this? Bloodghast is a little worse than Ichorid that's why it shouldn't replace it, it's a supplement. Even with bloodghasts, The deck still wins at the same pace as the pre-ghast non-led lists. I've been playing it that way, If you aren't winning at the same pace, you're doing it wrong, you/your list is the problem and not the card. The deck's philosophy is still the same even with bloodghasts in them, thus, no need for a new thread. Again, if you're not playing it the same way/combo way and/or replaced ichorids with bloodghasts, go create a new "dredge based landfall aggro.dec" thread.

The real issue with bloodghast is that not only is it unimpressive, but it does more harm than good. Sure you might be more consistent and it might help some matchups, but it completely screws other matchups up. Please explain to me how a bloodghast list has any game against combo? You go off turn 4 on average compared to their turn 2.

Ichorid has less game against combo since you can't put them back into the battlefield during your combo turn. Bloodghasts are capable of such, thus, making my turn 2-3 returns more frequent. I've piloted this deck and it ran toe to toe against belcher and AdN, so I'm definitely sure that what you said is not the case.

Actually 43 land has put up much better results than bloodghast dredge. Bloodghast dredge has almost 0 results due to the fact that it sucks.

This the same arguement LED Players used to say against Non-LED Players some time ago. The deck doesn't put up as many results because they aren't played as much. Obviously, the deck doesn't suck since it placed 1st 4 times in the span of a month or so.

There is a balance between consistency and speed. Adding bloodghast gives you consistency you don't really need while slowing you down massively. Put it this way. If you could run 8 ichorids would you? I seriously doubt it. If fow didn't exist the LED lists would probably only run 2 or 3 main as ichorid itself is slow.

This is the point, the point of discussing bloodghast in the deck is finding away to fit them in without losing speed through drastically changing the shell /overdoing things and greatly emphasizing on bloodghast. This means finding a list that can play bloodghast effectively enough without necessarilly re-engineering the deck too much that its strategy revolves around bloodghast exclusively.

Bloodghast is not only slow, but requires you to screw up the manabase, and is generally awful. It doesn't die at eot to feed bridges and a 2/1 that can't block isn't all that impressive.

Screwing up the mana base is a good example of over-doing the whole fitting-in the bloodghast plan. Not dying EoT isn't necessarily a bad thing, You have more outs to combo-out a finish after being crypted. Not being able to block is the only bad thing bloodghast does, but in any case, you really shouldn't be in any position where you desperately need to block something and ghast is your only creature, if you are, regardless of any list you play, you lose.

Again, the point of discussion should be finding a way of using Bloodghast in the deck effectively without building the deck around it. Any useful insights on this?

[johanessen]

Again, the point of discussion should be finding a way of using Bloodghast in the deck effectively without building the deck around it. Any useful insights on this?

Have not tried this, but a LED version with Eternal witness?

[Joe_C]

Again, the point of discussion should be finding a way of using Bloodghast in the deck effectively without building the deck around it. Any useful insights on this?

I really dont think there is. You need to manipulate the manabase to run 4 Paradise and usually a dakmor or oboro(s). That changes the deck enough to cause issues in my book. Having 8 permanent discard outlets is why this version (ledless) is as good as it is in my opinion. Being able to activate a coliseum on turn 2 since it doesnt normally run 4 paradise but rather more "permanent" sources of mana makes it stronger. True that turn 1 discard outlet, discard bloodghast+dredger is a busted opening, but ledless ichorid already has busted plays. Now if bloodghast really helped us win games 2/3 I would be way more interested in it. And trust me, I have a build with them that I have been trying to fall in love with, but it is yet to happen

[SlopeeJ]

The real topic conversation should be about games 2/3 and what to have in the sideboard and what to bring in vs what matchups/hate.

No matter how many Ichorid or Bloodghasts you run, you will most likely win game one. So arguing over which creature is stupid, even if you run both or one the problems in game 2/3 are still the same

I sometimes have problems with zoo or merfolk even game 1. For zoo, its hard to side in the 4 firestorms and needle/ancient grudges cause that is so many cards (7-8 cards). Even then zoo is still a pretty tough matchup, not to mention the combo decks and stax.

[BreathWeapon]

IMO Undiscovered Paradise and Cephalid Coliseum do not mesh, so it's not a question of whether or not Bloodghast is worth playing but a question of whether or not consistency/resiliency vs speed is what's in the deck's best interest.

[bum_man]

I really dont think there is. You need to manipulate the manabase to run 4 Paradise and usually a dakmor or oboro(s). That changes the deck enough to cause issues in my book. Having 8 permanent discard outlets is why this version (ledless) is as good as it is in my opinion. Being able to activate a coliseum on turn 2 since it doesnt normally run 4 paradise but rather more "permanent" sources of mana makes it stronger. True that turn 1 discard outlet, discard bloodghast+dredger is a busted opening, but ledless ichorid already has busted plays. Now if bloodghast really helped us win games 2/3 I would be way more interested in it. And trust me, I have a build with them that I have been trying to fall in love with, but it is yet to happen

I'll be looking to play my deck more but so far, Bloodghasts have been a factor in post-board games, especially enabling a return for FKZ for the finish after a wave or two of beats. I run 3 Paradise Effects (2 Undiscovered Paradise and 1 Oboro), 3 Coliseums, 2 Dakmor Salvages, 6 Discard Outlets. 3 each of paradise effects and coliseums, so far, have been good to me. I've never liked playing 4-ofs of both because both of them are terrible in multiples, they "slow" the deck down; 3 makes them show-up enough to make them very effective in the deck. I understand that this may just be the danger of cool things but it's good to me so far and I'll be changing it once I see a reason to do so.

[Aleksandr]

I'll be looking to play my deck more but so far, Bloodghasts have been a factor in post-board games, especially enabling a return for FKZ for the finish after a wave or two of beats. I run 3 Paradise Effects (2 Undiscovered Paradise and 1 Oboro), 3 Coliseums, 2 Dakmor Salvages, 6 Discard Outlets. 3 each of paradise effects and coliseums, so far, have been good to me. I've never liked playing 4-ofs of both because both of them are terrible in multiples, they "slow" the deck down; 3 makes them show-up enough to make them very effective in the deck. I understand that this may just be the danger of cool things but it's good to me so far and I'll be changing it once I see a reason to do so.

With only two Und. Paradise, do you have enough black/colored mana for your discard outlets? (I hope that by "discard outlets" you mean PImp and Tribe, not Study or Breakthrough... in such a case I understand that you don't need that many colored mana...)

Are three colliseums really enough? Because I play four-of and many times I find none of them in my starting seven and/or first one or two card I draw. (And one cannot rely on drawing them later, once the dredging starts.)

[bum_man]

[QUOTE=Aleksandr;408679]With only two Und. Paradise, do you have enough black/colored mana for your discard outlets? (I hope that by "discard outlets" you mean PImp and Tribe, not Study or Breakthrough... in such a case I understand that you don't need that many colored mana...)
I play 4 City of Brass, 3 Gemstone Mines, and 2 Undiscovered Paradise which makes 9 out of my 15 lands. I tried it with 14 lands and it wasn't consistent enough, this led me to add the 14th land. So far, this set-up has been good to me, I am able to consistently start with a rainbow land and permanent discard outlet everytime.

Are three coliseums really enough? Because I play four-of and many times I find none of them in my starting seven and/or first one or two card I draw. (And one cannot rely on drawing them later, once the dredging starts.)

One of the few things that I'd really like to find space for in my list is a 3rd Dread Return and a 4th Coliseum. A 4th Coliseum is great but three works just as well, I get alot of rainbow land + Coliseum hands consistently enough when I need them.

[Joe_C]

we all know bloodghast can be good. The situation here is more playstyle and preference I think. I cant bring myself to like this deck if it runs more than 13 land. It may just be me but when I increase my land count up tp 15 I dredge lands away instead of business. And running 4 coliseum makes me draw just a singleton in my opening hand (as in its my only land) or multiples of it. I would drop to 2, but I do want to see it when I drop a turn 1 imp/tribe. I also dont like going below 12 dredgers or less than the full playset of tribe/imp. And I have tried many configurations, this is just what works best for me I guess

[Aleksandr]

we all know bloodghast can be good. The situation here is more playstyle and preference I think.

Seconded.

I cant bring myself to like this deck if it runs more than 13 land. It may just be me but when I increase my land count up tp 15 I dredge lands away instead of business. And running 4 coliseum makes me draw just a singleton in my opening hand (as in its my only land) or multiples of it. I would drop to 2, but I do want to see it when I drop a turn 1 imp/tribe. I also dont like going below 12 dredgers or less than the full playset of tribe/imp. And I have tried many configurations, this is just what works best for me I guess

Dakmor Salvage is both land and dredger (otoh: awful at both roles...), so I don't find problem with three of them. Even though it is not an "insane play" to put it tapped on turn1, but going turn2: PImp, land, BT/Study is far from weak.

Is the playset of Tribes that important? I think that 4x PImp+BT+Study (and occasional Therapy) is enough. (With support of 2-3 Tribes.) But I don't use Tribes, because I play 15 lands, so maybe it is right call to have four of them.

[4eak]

In case others might be interested, I've tried a more extreme route in my testing:

// Lands -- 12
4 [VI] Undiscovered Paradise
4 [SOK] Oboro, Palace in the Clouds
4 [FUT] Dakmor Salvage

// Draw and Discard -- 16
4 [TO] Putrid Imp
4 [TO] Breakthrough
4 [OD] Careful Study
4 [FUT] Street Wraith

// Dredgers -- 14
4 [RAV] Golgari Grave-Troll
4 [RAV] Stinkweed Imp
4 [RAV] Golgari Thug
2 [RAV] Darkblast

// GY-Goodies -- 18
4 [TO] Ichorid
4 [ZEN] Bloodghast
2 [TSP] Dread Return
4 [FNM] Cabal Therapy
4 [FUT] Bridge from Below


Bloodghast provides serious incentive to run bouncing lands and Dakmors, to an extent that it edges out our ability to consistently have more than 1 land in play. In addition, those lands are tailormade for DDDing (pickup the list, and you'll see it). So, I bit the bullet, went for the full change in the manabase, and I've been testing a build which revolves around extremely consistent chain dredging and 1cc spells exclusively.

8 Self-bouncing lands and 4 Dakmors might seem over the top. If you aren't trying to cast 2cc spells or abilities, then this change isn't as bad as you would think; there isn't actually a huge difference for casting PImps, Study, Breakthrough, Darkblast, and Therapy. Dropping Mines and CoBs for a very consistent abuse of Bloodghast is reasonable.

You'll notice (very sadly) that the coloration of the deck takes a hit. This means that I've chosen not to run Tribe in this build. I find this acceptable because I always DDD with this build, and with 18 Dredgers, it isn't as necessary to empty your hand. Breakthrough and PImp do a fine job, but it isn't as important. I have tried other options which are U or B, such as Raven's Crime, Drowned Rusalka, Hapless Researcher, and Trickster Mage; but, I wasn't impressed.

Street Wraith is surprisingly good. I really dislike SW in normal LEDless, but it has worked out in a more focused BG-Dredge list. While you don't have CC for explosiveness, DDD->SW is actually a relevant play with so many dredgers. As a mere bonus, it makes Ichorid more consistent. This curbs some of the speed issues I've faced in the surgical processes the deck had to undergo to effectively abuse Bloodghast.




peace,
4eak

[Zappa]

@4eak

I just tried that list since I have access to all those cards. The deck seems to lose out some speed by 1 turn and a few games it actually feels like its 2. When I was testing that list also, I really do miss the Narcs.

That configuration seems good for game 2/3. However, for game 1, I feel that there is only so much speed we can lose. Otherwise, even game 1, when we start losing speed, other decks that can put up a clock can race us.

[Nidd]

I'm going to take a list that is a bit similiar to 4eak's to our local Legacy tournament. I hope it works out the way I want it to...

[4eak]

For clarification, I am testing that build. It is quite experimental. I'm giving you my train of thought and relatively brief experience with it. I consider Bloodghast to be a largely untested segment of the Dredge world. If you want a surer bet, then stick to what you know.





peace,
4eak