You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 04, 2016, 08:37:05 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)  (Read 6463 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Drake Valentine

  • Architect of Worlds
  • Knight
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2009
  • Location: In the Deepest Depthes of Your Twisted Mind
  • Gender: Male
  • Making Your Darkest of Fantasies a Reality
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #175 on: February 10, 2015, 10:04:08 AM »
Eh? Was Brainstorm ever modern? I didn't see it listed at all for modern on the gather's site. Unless they completely wrote it off.

There are plenty ways, there are a few one drop scry 2 spells. 2 drop scry three. Dreaded 4 for scry 4 which I will never add into deck.

There is also that one card that scrys without scrying, oh the wonderful Index. Look at top 5 and put them back in any order for 1 blue. Sure, scry is better, but it still provides deck cycling to plan out next turn. Who knows, answer could be amongst those 5 or you will have to do more filtering with scry. xD

Offline CountessJess

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #176 on: February 10, 2015, 10:49:17 AM »
Eh? Was Brainstorm ever modern? I didn't see it listed at all for modern on the gather's site. Unless they completely wrote it off.

There are plenty ways, there are a few one drop scry 2 spells. 2 drop scry three. Dreaded 4 for scry 4 which I will never add into deck.

There is also that one card that scrys without scrying, oh the wonderful Index. Look at top 5 and put them back in any order for 1 blue. Sure, scry is better, but it still provides deck cycling to plan out next turn. Who knows, answer could be amongst those 5 or you will have to do more filtering with scry. xD

My mistake. I thought Brainstorm was in Coldsnap; it's actually in Ice Age. Mistakes were made.

You can Sage of Epityr, or Index, but it doesn't get rid of useless cards that are sitting on the top of your library. Granted, fetches exist, which means you can shuffle away useless cards from the top of your library. Fact remains if you happen to draw into your Eldrazi, they're completely dead. Or if you're unlucky with your deck you might never even hit them. Scry is simply not reliable enough, since you're only searching through the top few cards. If you have the Eldrazi in your hand (if you tutored, or drew into them), scry is useless because you can't put them from your hand on top of your deck.

Unlike Tron, which has multiple ways of finding the Eldrazi, together with different wincons, which makes it reliable. As for manifest flicker, it's far too fragile to work reliably enough, imho. You need a very specific order of cards, all of which are generally useless if you draw them alone. If you want to roll the dice against incredible odds, all power to you.

Offline Eranil Morathim

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #177 on: February 10, 2015, 11:03:09 AM »
First off I'm not trying to sound like a jerk in the least.

To me it sounds like a lot of you are relying heavily on specific 2 to 4 card combos. I could be wrong in that bu that strategy is just faulty to me. Yes, Magic is a strategy game but there is also luck involved. Relying on a few specific cards out of an entire deck is just asking for problems, I know from experience.

Now granted I am just getting back in the game after a rather long absence and yes I have seen some things I don't quite understand. You folks could be discussing a format I'm not familiar with. But I honestly don't feel the mechanics of the game have changed that much. My decks may not be type 2 legal anymore, but I have a good amount of experience. Enough that I feel comfortable when I say 5 cards do not a deck make.

Offline CountessJess

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #178 on: February 10, 2015, 11:21:42 AM »
First off I'm not trying to sound like a jerk in the least.

To me it sounds like a lot of you are relying heavily on specific 2 to 4 card combos. I could be wrong in that bu that strategy is just faulty to me. Yes, Magic is a strategy game but there is also luck involved. Relying on a few specific cards out of an entire deck is just asking for problems, I know from experience.

Now granted I am just getting back in the game after a rather long absence and yes I have seen some things I don't quite understand. You folks could be discussing a format I'm not familiar with. But I honestly don't feel the mechanics of the game have changed that much. My decks may not be type 2 legal anymore, but I have a good amount of experience. Enough that I feel comfortable when I say 5 cards do not a deck make.

Most of the combos being discussed are for a format called EDH, or Commander, which is a hundred card singleton deck. Because of the high deck variance from having ~70 different single cards (except for basic lands), games often drag on for much longer than they normally are, allowing for ridiculous combos.

Offline Hemingway

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #179 on: February 10, 2015, 01:52:38 PM »
To me it sounds like a lot of you are relying heavily on specific 2 to 4 card combos. I could be wrong in that bu that strategy is just faulty to me. Yes, Magic is a strategy game but there is also luck involved. Relying on a few specific cards out of an entire deck is just asking for problems, I know from experience.

Not luck - statistics! Which may sound like it's the same thing, but it really isn't.

I also wasn't aware blink effects would turn morphs face-up. Interesting ( if irrelevant in the current standard ).

Also: Why not Ponder? Look at the top three cards, rearrange them as you like ( or shuffle ), draw a card. For B. Oh ... Banned in Modern! For good reason, too! Whoever designed Ponder was clearly insane.

Offline Eranil Morathim

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #180 on: February 10, 2015, 02:55:04 PM »
Ok that makes a bit more sense then. I honestly thought you all were talking about building regular decks around one crucial combo. I've tried it and seen it tried, usually with terrible results. I like combos as much as anyone but I learned quickly not to make them the main purpose of my deck. Sure, try to get it if you can, but don't rely on it. Then again pulling Slate of Ancestry in my opening draw with my elf deck has given my a fair few turn 4 or turn 5 wins.

Have any of you ever done team format before? I used to play it with people around here, but lately it seems like it just died out. The people Iknew used to call it 2 headed giant or 3 headed giant.

Offline CountessJess

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #181 on: February 10, 2015, 03:08:16 PM »
Also: Why not Ponder? Look at the top three cards, rearrange them as you like ( or shuffle ), draw a card. For B. Oh ... Banned in Modern! For good reason, too! Whoever designed Ponder was clearly insane.

Ponder doesn't solve the issue of having no way of putting stuff from your hand, or your deck, back on top of your library. Most of the cards that do that so you can manifest something big are in Legacy. Worldly Tutor, Sensei's Divining Top, Brainstorm, all of them are Legacy cards.

Ok that makes a bit more sense then. I honestly thought you all were talking about building regular decks around one crucial combo. I've tried it and seen it tried, usually with terrible results. I like combos as much as anyone but I learned quickly not to make them the main purpose of my deck. Sure, try to get it if you can, but don't rely on it. Then again pulling Slate of Ancestry in my opening draw with my elf deck has given my a fair few turn 4 or turn 5 wins.

Have any of you ever done team format before? I used to play it with people around here, but lately it seems like it just died out. The people Iknew used to call it 2 headed giant or 3 headed giant.

Storm's a combo deck ;D

Offline Eranil Morathim

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #182 on: February 10, 2015, 03:14:40 PM »

Storm's a combo deck ;D

Wait what? Did I miss something there?

Offline CountessJess

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #183 on: February 10, 2015, 03:20:34 PM »
Wait what? Did I miss something there?

Using Tendrils of Agony for the Legacy Format, or Grapeshot for Modern, cast 10-15 spells during your turn and win the game. Very combo. Legacy version can win on turn 0, I think. Modern can pull off reliable wins turn 3 or 4.

Offline Hemingway

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #184 on: February 10, 2015, 03:43:17 PM »
Ponder doesn't solve the issue of having no way of putting stuff from your hand, or your deck, back on top of your library.

I'm not sure I see the big issue with that - but I'm not a Modern player, so I may be missing something that's vitally important.

My only Modern deck at the moment is the forbidden Puresteel deck. Which still needs a Batterskull ( which wouldn't actually improve the deck, since the main interaction that makes it attractive is still banned in Modern ).

It could probably make for a decent deck if I paid another few hundred bucks for some essential cards, though.

Offline Eranil Morathim

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #185 on: February 10, 2015, 03:48:18 PM »
DEAR LORD THAT'S INSANE!!!
Insanely awesome that is. My elf deck with the Slate I can usually just play everything in my hand then drop a huge fireball thanks to my mana producers which include 4 priest of titania, 4 wirewood chaneller and 4 seeker of skybreak, or I take an already huge heedless one, pump her up more with 4 timberwatch elves and attack or hit with a bunch of 7/7 tokens with trample from voice of the woods.

Offline CountessJess

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #186 on: February 10, 2015, 03:58:48 PM »
I'm not sure I see the big issue with that - but I'm not a Modern player, so I may be missing something that's vitally important.

My only Modern deck at the moment is the forbidden Puresteel deck. Which still needs a Batterskull ( which wouldn't actually improve the deck, since the main interaction that makes it attractive is still banned in Modern ).

It could probably make for a decent deck if I paid another few hundred bucks for some essential cards, though.

It's not a modern issue, it's the issue with manifest. Manifest requires you to manifest the top card of your library; ergo, you need a reliable way of placing a card on the top of your library. Scry doesn't guarantee that, since your Emrakul can be in your hand, or somewhere in the middle of your deck, more often than it is going to be in the top two cards of your deck when you scry. What makes Brainstorm, or Sensei's Divining Top good is that you have access to both the top 3 cards of your library and your entire hand to have your Emrakul, which you can then put at the top of your deck. Worldly Tutor will help you because it tutors and places Emrakul at the top of your deck. None of these options are available in Modern; instead you have to use unreliable scry.

DEAR LORD THAT'S INSANE!!!
Insanely awesome that is. My elf deck with the Slate I can usually just play everything in my hand then drop a huge fireball thanks to my mana producers which include 4 priest of titania, 4 wirewood chaneller and 4 seeker of skybreak, or I take an already huge heedless one, pump her up more with 4 timberwatch elves and attack or hit with a bunch of 7/7 tokens with trample from voice of the woods.

A pity none of those cards are available in any format that people actually play nowadays =( tribal is so dead in Modern magic outside of Faeries.

Offline Eranil Morathim

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #187 on: February 10, 2015, 04:06:29 PM »
That sucks, oh well play people casual and I can play it. I want to build a goblin deck but its lacking something. I had a dragon deck back when i still had dual lands but I couldn't make it play fast enough with five colors.

Offline Drake Valentine

  • Architect of Worlds
  • Knight
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2009
  • Location: In the Deepest Depthes of Your Twisted Mind
  • Gender: Male
  • Making Your Darkest of Fantasies a Reality
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #188 on: February 10, 2015, 07:34:00 PM »
Actually polymorph could work as well for a U/W manifest modern theme. Only thing there is that I have to be sure I have big unremovable nasties. ;\

Be they hex proof or indestructible to avoid most kill spells. Of course anything that makes me sac em is another story.

Needless to say, with plenty of scrying you are likely to find an answer or manifest something useless that may not be a creature for bait or target of polymorph.

Alternatively there is also quicksilver amulet for cheap summoning as well in case of accidental draws of a big nasty like Emarkul(pretty sure he is the biggest of nasties beyond that infect colossus)

Offline Drake Valentine

  • Architect of Worlds
  • Knight
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2009
  • Location: In the Deepest Depthes of Your Twisted Mind
  • Gender: Male
  • Making Your Darkest of Fantasies a Reality
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #189 on: February 11, 2015, 05:16:06 AM »
Treasure cruise in Jeskai deck for standard is boss as hell. Especially if I can early summon Narset with that red creature that sacs itself gives creature haste and providez 2 coloress mana. Treasure cruise for days.

I hear 'thats banned' and I tell em not in Standard. ;3

TREASURE CRUIIIIISE~

Offline DimirTopic starter

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #190 on: February 11, 2015, 06:39:06 PM »
There's a store in my city that's selling a foreign language Wurmcoil Engine for $15 and an English one for $20. Would it be a good addition to my mono-black EDH deck?

Offline Hemingway

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #191 on: February 11, 2015, 07:06:45 PM »
In short, yes. Wurmcoil Engine is an EDH staple. It's a monster that doesn't care if you kill it. Short of it getting exiled, it'll always come back for more.  It works better in black than most colors, too, because you ( should ) have more or less unlimited graveyard shenanigans - say with Rescue from the Underworld, or similar ( and probably better - that's the best I can come up with at 2AM ). Unlimited fun!

Offline DimirTopic starter

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #192 on: February 11, 2015, 07:08:10 PM »
In short, yes. Wurmcoil Engine is an EDH staple. It's a monster that doesn't care if you kill it. Short of it getting exiled, it'll always come back for more.  It works better in black than most colors, too, because you ( should ) have more or less unlimited graveyard shenanigans - say with Rescue from the Underworld, or similar ( and probably better - that's the best I can come up with at 2AM ). Unlimited fun!

I have a lot of graveyard support so it sounds like it would be an amazing card.

Offline Geeklet

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #193 on: February 11, 2015, 07:16:26 PM »
Honestly, for $15, without knowing anything about your mono black deck, I am gonna give Wurmcoil Engine a "meh." Don't get me wrong, it is the kind of card that is really good in just about any EDH deck. However, just because it is good, it might not fit the theme of certain decks. In a deck like Animar, where it can be cast for literally nothing, or Glissa, the Traitor where it can be recurred over and over, it really shines, and is probably worth the money. But there are also other cards for other decks where Wurmcoil's abilities aren't abused as much, that there are other cards which are just as impactful, but cheaper. So depending on your deck, and how you value the card, it is your call.

Offline CountessJess

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #194 on: February 11, 2015, 08:03:40 PM »
Take it this way - Wurmcoil Engine is one of those cards which is just good. Is any deck going to be stronger because you chose to include a Wurmcoil Engine, or a Batterskull, or a Karn Liberated? Yes, of course. Does the lack of synergy strike people the wrong way and should you just be playing something degenerate like BUG or RUG if you just want to play goodstuff legacy singleton? Yes, of course.

Additionally, $20 is pretty steep for a Wurmcoil Engine, and especially if it's the commander version. If you buy it, you probably will be never sad to draw it. But don't expect it to make massive waves unless you're running one of those hyper-efficient reanimator decks, or an Animar zoo. I mean, for 20 you could probably buy a Kokusho and a Sheoldred and both would have far more impact in your deck. Or a Massacre Wurm and a Sorin Markov.

Offline DimirTopic starter

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #195 on: February 11, 2015, 08:06:09 PM »
Honestly, for $15, without knowing anything about your mono black deck, I am gonna give Wurmcoil Engine a "meh." Don't get me wrong, it is the kind of card that is really good in just about any EDH deck. However, just because it is good, it might not fit the theme of certain decks. In a deck like Animar, where it can be cast for literally nothing, or Glissa, the Traitor where it can be recurred over and over, it really shines, and is probably worth the money. But there are also other cards for other decks where Wurmcoil's abilities aren't abused as much, that there are other cards which are just as impactful, but cheaper. So depending on your deck, and how you value the card, it is your call.

I can very easily look over my cards I never use and sell them for a profit to make up for the $15-20 cost. There is a lot of graveyard casting in my deck (but it's not the central theme). It would easily be better than Ob Nixilis Of The Fallen Oath though.

Also Sheoldred and Kokusho sound like excellent options as well. I've ponder them over.

Thanks for the suggestions everyone.

Offline CountessJess

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #196 on: February 11, 2015, 08:22:25 PM »
On another note, any ideas on how to run a good Tasigur deck? I'm thinking of converting my degenerate Damia, Sage of Stone into something less unfun. Also that topless card art is so attractive :3 But yeah, any ideas, or has anyone played opposite a deck that runs him?

Offline DimirTopic starter

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #197 on: February 12, 2015, 11:53:37 AM »
I got Sheoldred and Solemn Simulacrum for $14 (two dollars off by trading some other things). Now I feel I can actually win a four way commander match with Sheoldred as the commander. My matches will be rather fun now.

Offline DimirTopic starter

Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #198 on: February 13, 2015, 11:17:06 PM »
Just wanted to add that I won a multiplayer commander match for the first time tonight with Sheoldred as the commander. It was actually very fun since someone played Havoc Festival, following by something that board wiped the field since I was going to win with Sheoldred and the rest of my creatures. So we kept reducing our life until someone dropped down to zero on purpose to win a pack and I outplayed the other opponent, he got a pack and I got three. So we all won something in the end in a very cool fashion. So thanks again everyone who offered deck suggestions.

Good rare cards I got were Dragonscale General and Dromoka, The Eternal.

Offline Drake Valentine

  • Architect of Worlds
  • Knight
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2009
  • Location: In the Deepest Depthes of Your Twisted Mind
  • Gender: Male
  • Making Your Darkest of Fantasies a Reality
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Magic: The Gathering (Discussion)
« Reply #199 on: February 14, 2015, 12:10:47 AM »
Thought on modern infect deck.

Bloodrush infect
Wondering if you blood an infect creature would player get infect dmg.
Same thing for fling.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2015, 12:12:15 AM by Drake Valentine »