Magic The Gathering Thread XXIII: Modern is Dead, Long Live Modern

[Suichimo]

Could I get some thoughts on my Modern Boros Aggro/Midrange? I feel happy about most of it but, along with other pieces of advice, I am looking at replacing a few things. I have relative success when I can play against my friends on Cockatrice, but I have no real world experience with this deck and I haven't been able to play with them for a couple of years now. It'd be nice if the deck could be a bit less expensive, but most of the cost is coming from my land base so I don't see much to change there.

Goblin Guide - I feel like, and have been told that, these don't really play that well with my deck. I do want my deck to be fast, like an aggro deck, but be able to extend into the long game if need arises. I'm not entirely sure what to replace the two copies with, though. Obviously, I'd prefer it be at the same CMC but I just can't figure out what to go with. Maybe Ghitu Lavarunner when Dominaria comes out, though I feel like that would be to slow with my Instant package/in general. Bomat Courier for the card draw, something RW clearly lacks. If I want to go up in CMC, how about Smuggler's Copter?

Ajani Vengeant - Honestly, I put him in here because he was a RW Planeswalker, the only one at the time. But now we've got stuff like Nahiri or just a second copy of Chandra. Actually, thinking about it, Nahiri does offer things that I vastly need(looting, artifact/enchantment removal, cheating bigger stuff into play from the deck)... So replace Ajani with Nahiri?

Sword of Fire and Ice/Feast and Famine - This one, I'm just a little unsure of. Do I stick with the combo of the both of them? Do I switch to 2x Fire and Ice or 2x Feast and Famine? These seem like the things I'd want to be more consistent on but, at the same time, having both of their effects would be a large boon.

Lands - Do I need to go up in land count? I'm only running 20, currently, but the majority of them(13/20 or 65%) tap for either R or W and a quarter of them search up other lands. This article says I should be running 22-23 lands.

Any other thoughts about the deck are always welcome. The only criticism I don't like is "just run burn" or "play naya/jeskai instead" and similar comments.

[Gauntlet]

Your deck is trying to do two things at once in my opinion. You probably want to either be aggressive with goblin guides, or slower and more midrange heavy with planeswalkers. Aurelia in particular costs a huge amount of mana which isn't great for any of the other cards in your deck - you don't really want to be hitting six land drops most of the time.

If you want to stay on an aggressive midrange plan, I'd cut some of the top end for powerful 3-4 mana effects instead. Maybe something like this?

2 Grim Lavamancer
4 Figure of Destiny
4 Ash Zealot
4 Eidolon of the Great Revel
4 Boros Reckoner
2 Gisela, the Broken Blade
4 Boros Charm
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Path to Exile
4 Lightning Helix
2 Blessed Alliance

4 Sacred Foundry
4 Wooded Foothills
4 Arid Mesa
4 Windswept Heath
1 Stomping Ground
2 Plains
3 Mountain

- Sideboard -
3 Chandra, Torch of Defiance
3 Ancient Grudge
3 Deflecting Palm
3 Atarka's Command
3 Relic of Progenitus / other graveyard hate

[Techwarrior]

So here's my thoughts:

The most popular Boros deck in modern is Burn, and the way that it beats other decks is that, in general, most decks don't have a good way to interact with a deck that is just looking to 'count to 20' as it were. It doesn't usually care if your opponent plays something like a Jace, because if your opponent taps out without winning and doesn't interact with you on 4, they're probably just dead unless they've already won.

Burn is also a 20 land deck in Modern, just like yours, but it's curve tops out at 2. It occasionally struggles to hit it's second or third land in games and that costs it a non-zero amount of games, so I can't see how your deck is casting 3 and 4 drops in any kind of realistic way. I don't see any real ramp in your deck, and no way of getting extra cards to hand, so 20 lands feels incredibly light to have things like Avacyn and Ajani in your deck. Also zero [link=http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=417819]Inspiring Vantage feels wrong in a deck playing Clifftop Retreat.

My experience in modern is either you out-linear your opponent (Affinity, Burn, or Storm) or you have to play in a way that interacts with your opponent meaningfully. This is usually something akin to a Path to Exile, Logic Knot, or Thoughtseize in the first few turns of the game. Decks that want to get to later turns of the game have to deal with things like Karn Liberated, Grapeshot, Goblin Guide, and Reality Smasher killing them. Your deck is not a deck that can kill on the fourth turn of the game, so if you're serious about trying to extend the game later, you need ways to interact. I'm assuming that since you're saying it does well in your playgroup that the combination of Lightning Helix, Path to Exile, and Lightning Bolt meaningfully interacts, as that's your interaction suite.

What does your normal playgroup play, and are you trying to get into more competitive areas? Where does your deck struggle in your experience? I can tell you things like "play Burn," but that's not meaningful advice for someone asking to improve their deck.

[ImperiousLeader]

So, any opinions about Brawl?

At first, I was dismissive. Why play watered down EDH with rotating cards?

But then ... I got an Admiral Beckett Brass at the Rivals Prerelease. And enough draft chaff pirates to make a 60 card singleton deck. Competitive? Probably not, but a chance to play cards I wouldn't otherwise use. And it's not like I think she could make the jump to a full 100 EDH deck.

And Planeswalkers as Commanders? I'd legitimately consider a few walkers, even some of the intro pack walkers. I'm debating a blue/black artifact deck with the intro pack Tezzeret.

The main challenge is that 60 card singleton is kinda messing with my mind. Not used to building decks at that size. But, that's a good thing, new brain space.

[Suichimo]

Your deck is trying to do two things at once in my opinion. You probably want to either be aggressive with goblin guides, or slower and more midrange heavy with planeswalkers. Aurelia in particular costs a huge amount of mana which isn't great for any of the other cards in your deck - you don't really want to be hitting six land drops most of the time.

If you want to stay on an aggressive midrange plan, I'd cut some of the top end for powerful 3-4 mana effects instead. Maybe something like this?

2 Grim Lavamancer
4 Figure of Destiny
4 Ash Zealot
4 Eidolon of the Great Revel
4 Boros Reckoner
2 Gisela, the Broken Blade
4 Boros Charm
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Path to Exile
4 Lightning Helix
2 Blessed Alliance

4 Sacred Foundry
4 Wooded Foothills
4 Arid Mesa
4 Windswept Heath
1 Stomping Ground
2 Plains
3 Mountain

- Sideboard -
3 Chandra, Torch of Defiance
3 Ancient Grudge
3 Deflecting Palm
3 Atarka's Command
3 Relic of Progenitus / other graveyard hate

Yeah, that is why I'm thinking of taking out the Goblin Guides for something that might work a bit better in their slot, assuming I don't just place lands there. Also, I am aware of the dangers of using high cost creatures, that is why I only have two cards at 5+ CMC.

"You don't really want to be hitting six land drops most of the time." Doesn't mean I won't be hitting it. Certainly I won't be doing any large scale events, especially considering I live at least a couple hundred miles from the nearest one, but no one that I play with is going to really be comboing off for those turn 3 kills either.

I didn't say it before, but I'm not too worried about having a sideboard.

So here's my thoughts:

The most popular Boros deck in modern is Burn, and the way that it beats other decks is that, in general, most decks don't have a good way to interact with a deck that is just looking to 'count to 20' as it were. It doesn't usually care if your opponent plays something like a Jace, because if your opponent taps out without winning and doesn't interact with you on 4, they're probably just dead unless they've already won.

Burn is also a 20 land deck in Modern, just like yours, but it's curve tops out at 2. It occasionally struggles to hit it's second or third land in games and that costs it a non-zero amount of games, so I can't see how your deck is casting 3 and 4 drops in any kind of realistic way. I don't see any real ramp in your deck, and no way of getting extra cards to hand, so 20 lands feels incredibly light to have things like Avacyn and Ajani in your deck. Also zero [link=http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=417819]Inspiring Vantage feels wrong in a deck playing Clifftop Retreat.

My experience in modern is either you out-linear your opponent (Affinity, Burn, or Storm) or you have to play in a way that interacts with your opponent meaningfully. This is usually something akin to a Path to Exile, Logic Knot, or Thoughtseize in the first few turns of the game. Decks that want to get to later turns of the game have to deal with things like Karn Liberated, Grapeshot, Goblin Guide, and Reality Smasher killing them. Your deck is not a deck that can kill on the fourth turn of the game, so if you're serious about trying to extend the game later, you need ways to interact. I'm assuming that since you're saying it does well in your playgroup that the combination of Lightning Helix, Path to Exile, and Lightning Bolt meaningfully interacts, as that's your interaction suite.

What does your normal playgroup play, and are you trying to get into more competitive areas? Where does your deck struggle in your experience? I can tell you things like "play Burn," but that's not meaningful advice for someone asking to improve their deck.

Yeah, so definitely need more lands. That question then becomes "Do I get more utility lands or go for color producing lands?" and "What do I replace for extra land?" As for Inspiring Vantage, I dislike the idea of super fast lands like that, drawing it anywhere past two means you're stuck with a dead land for the turn.

I don't know about my LGS, I don't have any actual constructed decks at the moment and I usually am working during FNM(hopefully changing that soon), but one of my friends goes hardcore discard/mill along with Megrim, Waste Not, etc. One goes Knight tribal, one is a straight up Timmy, one plays elves, and another does Merfolk Control. As for getting more competitive, I have no dreams of doing any large scale events, such as going to a GT, simply because I don't live anywhere close to them, closest being about 200 miles away I believe, FNM's/store events are something I'd like to do, though.

I'd say the biggest weakness is just the traditional Boros weakness of top decking/crappy card draw. It's been quite a while since I've been able to play this as well, my friends don't usually want to bother with Cockatrice when they manage to get online time anymore.

So, any opinions about Brawl?

At first, I was dismissive. Why play watered down EDH with rotating cards?

But then ... I got an Admiral Beckett Brass at the Rivals Prerelease. And enough draft chaff pirates to make a 60 card singleton deck. Competitive? Probably not, but a chance to play cards I wouldn't otherwise use. And it's not like I think she could make the jump to a full 100 EDH deck.

And Planeswalkers as Commanders? I'd legitimately consider a few walkers, even some of the intro pack walkers. I'm debating a blue/black artifact deck with the intro pack Tezzeret.

The main challenge is that 60 card singleton is kinda messing with my mind. Not used to building decks at that size. But, that's a good thing, new brain space.

Eh, if I'm going to play Commander, I'll just play Commander.

[Gauntlet]

Yeah, that is why I'm thinking of taking out the Goblin Guides for something that might work a bit better in their slot, assuming I don't just place lands there. Also, I am aware of the dangers of using high cost creatures, that is why I only have two cards at 5+ CMC.

"You don't really want to be hitting six land drops most of the time." Doesn't mean I won't be hitting it. Certainly I won't be doing any large scale events, especially considering I live at least a couple hundred miles from the nearest one, but no one that I play with is going to really be comboing off for those turn 3 kills either.

I didn't say it before, but I'm not too worried about having a sideboard.

The issue is, even with 22 lands in the deck, in order to have more than 50% odds of hitting six land drops you'll need to look at 16 cards. Since you start with 7, that means you'd need to draw 9 cards before you play your 6-drop, which means it isn't happening until approximately turn 9 or 10. That's late enough that in a large number of games Aurelia is just going to be dead in your hand. If you want to play for games going that late, you probably want to be retooling the entire deck to be much more controlling. Otherwise, if you're worried about going that late in the game you would rather have some cards which are powerful in the late game but also do something earlier on. A good example is an Act of Treason variant - it's useful for hijacking someone's blocker to finish them off in a 'standard' game end, but it's also very good against huge fatties that may turn up if the game goes late enough. Other examples would be Hellrider, some equipment, Deflecting Palm, Mirran Crusader, and effects that let you go later in the game by recurring previously removed creatures, like Sword of Light and Shadow, or creating multiple bodies for a single card, like Gideon AoZ.

[Dhavaer]

Yeah, so definitely need more lands. That question then becomes "Do I get more utility lands or go for color producing lands?" and "What do I replace for extra land?" As for Inspiring Vantage, I dislike the idea of super fast lands like that, drawing it anywhere past two means you're stuck with a dead land for the turn.

You can look at this article for an idea of how many coloured lands you need and this one for how many lands total.

Using those guidelines, your deck as posted wants 23 land, with 20 sources of white and red each, so you can at most have 6 single colour lands. If you drop Slayer's Stronghold, you can add in 2 more Clifftop Retreats and 2 Inspiring Vantages, dropping whatever 3 things you don't like.

[LoyalPaladin]

Hello, everyone!
I'm not sure how big of a MtG community there is on GitP, but I figured I'd give it a shot since it's my most familiar board. I've been messing around with a Chandra themed commander deck for a while, but I'm definitely not a master deck builder. I want to aim for a Burn themed deck. Now, believe me, I've been warned countless times about burn in Commander and how notoriously underwhelming it can be, but I'd like to push forward and do the best I can. I'd like to keep it decently "cheap" (for commander anyway), so it's pushing its high end right now. Link to the TappedOut page is under the table.

Cheers!
LP

tl;dr Chandra burn deck needs to be critiqued. Please and thank you!

Table: Decklist

Commander (1)	Artifact (9)	Creature (15)	Enchantment (8)
	1x Caged Sun 1x Isochron Scepter 1x Paradox Engine 1x Primal Amulet Flip 1x Pyromancer's Gauntlet 1x Pyromancer's Goggles 1x Sol Ring 1x Sphinx-Bone Wand 1x Staff of Nin	1x Anarchist 1x Chandra's Spitfire 1x Charmbreaker Devils 1x Cinder Pyromancer 1x Dualcaster Mage 1x Embermaw Hellion 1x Fire Servant 1x Firebrand Archer 1x Galvanoth 1x Guttersnipe 1x Heartless Hidetsugu 1x Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker 1x Satyr Firedancer 1x Thermo-Alchemist 1x Thunder Dragon	1x Curse of Bloodletting 1x Dictate of the Twin Gods 1x Dual Casting 1x Furnace of Rath 1x Leyline of Punishment 1x Outpost Siege 1x Repercussion 1x Sunbird's Invocation
Instant (16)	Land (36)	Planeswalker (3)	Sorceries (12)
1x Chandra's Fury 1x Chaos Warp 1x Comet Storm 1x Fall of the Titans 1x Fork 1x Increasing Vengeance 1x Lightning Bolt 1x Lightning Strike 1x Magma Jet 1x Ravaging Blaze 1x Reiterate 1x Reverberate 1x Skullcrack 1x Smash to Smithereens 1x Volt Charge 1x Wild Ricochet	32x Mountain 1x Myriad Landscape 1x Reliquary Tower 1x Thawing Glaciers 1x Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle	1x Chandra, Pyrogenius 1x Chandra, the Firebrand 1x Chandra, Torch of Defiance	1x Act on Impulse 1x Banefire 1x Blasphemous Act 1x Cathartic Reunion 1x Collective Defiance 1x Exquisite Firecraft 1x Fireball 1x Howl of the Horde 1x Mizzix's Mastery 1x Past in Flames 1x Red Sun's Zenith 1x Vandalblast

Tapped Out

[LoyalPaladin]

I didn't realize there was a thread like this! I just posted a thread about my new deck I'm trying to build... should I repost it here?

[Zhentarim]

[MTG] What is the philosophical difference between Black/Green and Black/White? Also, could these colors be any alignment if converted to pathfinder or do they lend themselves to a particular alignment?

[GAZ]

I think B/G is more Neutral Evil. They just take and consume selfishly since B/G is kind of a corruption of natural cycles. I also think that B/W is more Lawful Evil. They would go more structured and dominated approach since B/W is kind of a corruption of social systems.

[Lord Raziere]

The difference is one of civilization vs. nature.

They're both philsophically selfish, but B/W prefers to gain what they want where they are comfortable, civilized, law-abiding and so on, while B/G is probably more of a "survival of the fittest" mind set where they do whatever it is they can to survive at the expense of everyone else....that they don't care about at least, green does have some heart.

a B/W is more likely to exploit laws and economy for their own gain, and a B/G is more likely to slit your throat out in the wilderness so that they don't have to share the food they got from the hunt with you or just become the alpha of the pack through an "accident".

at their best however, B/W won't screw you over because of the laws and civilization, while B/G won't screw you over because your family and family sticks together and kills anyone who threatens it.

[thethird]

Lord Gareth did an interesting brew piece in which the color alignments were explored, you can find it here

As to the differences between Black/White and Black/Green. Black is focused on the acquisition of power, leaning towards the individual. It is in conflict with both white and green. But White and Green are not the same. White works towards on order, on civil laws, the society, white builds rules. Green strives to be in tune with nature and use that to grow. Black will add to them a twist of looking for more power and enhance themselves.

So Black/White will care more about societal rather than natural (which would be Black/Green).

The only colors that when translated into classical D&D alignment chart lean any way are White that leans towards Lawful and red that leans towards Chaotic. You can read Black as leading towards Evil, but the individual focus of black is not necessarily evil, and there are several black heroic examples.

Edit: Ninja'd

[Zhentarim]

Just what I was looking for. Thanks!

I agree with Black/Green and Black/White.

Is Black/Green/White a philosophy?

[Lord Raziere]

Just what I was looking for. Thanks!

I agree with Black/Green and Black/White.

Is Black/Green/White a philosophy?

A complex one, but yes, probably.

Thing is, at that point it becomes less "what do I believe?" and more "what DON'T I believe?" because the two colors that aren't this are red/blue. passion and intellect. two emotional extremes of "ALL THE EMOTIONS!" and "none of the emotions."

So B/W/G cares. But not too much. They care about themselves and their family, they care about believing in a system but also benefiting from it. they think, but not too much. They aren't THAT curious about things. just enough to know how protect whats important: their culture, their family, their friends, and themselves. in short they are a creature of loyalties, but not unreasonable ones. as long as they benefit, as long as the status quo comfortable to them and the people they know and they profit from it, they're ok with it. They don't rock the boat. They like things safe.

Red/Blue on the other hand? they question, whether rationally or irrationally. They explore, they are bombastic, they filled with an energy for discovery, whether its through scientific inquiry or passionate speeches and violent impulses they want to shake things up for better or worse. they are gamblers, risk-takers, people who question and fight against whats known and safe no matter what. Despite the two colors differences, they are in the same in their willingness to risk the destruction of the current status quo for another one tomorrow no matter what. they are anything but safe. they're not particularly moral, neither are they particularly selfish, but they don't place a high value on family or anything natural. they just feel with all their heart and think endlessly with all their mind, in art and in knowledge. whatever it is, they devote their life to it in both heart and mind.

its when the status quo is disrupted that you get BWG's dark side: suddenly you get a person willing to do anything to make the disruption stop so that things go back to the way they were and so they and the ones they care about can benefit from that status quo. in short: foreign things are bad and probably out to screw you and everyone you love over with lies or something.

[Zhentarim]

A complex one, but yes, probably.

Thing is, at that point it becomes less "what do I believe?" and more "what DON'T I believe?" because the two colors that aren't this are red/blue. passion and intellect. two emotional extremes of "ALL THE EMOTIONS!" and "none of the emotions."

So B/W/G cares. But not too much. They care about themselves and their family, they care about believing in a system but also benefiting from it. they think, but not too much. They aren't THAT curious about things. just enough to know how protect whats important: their culture, their family, their friends, and themselves. in short they are a creature of loyalties, but not unreasonable ones. as long as they benefit, as long as the status quo comfortable to them and the people they know and they profit from it, they're ok with it. They don't rock the boat. They like things safe.

Red/Blue on the other hand? they question, whether rationally or irrationally. They explore, they are bombastic, they filled with an energy for discovery, whether its through scientific inquiry or passionate speeches and violent impulses they want to shake things up for better or worse. they are gamblers, risk-takers, people who question and fight against whats known and safe no matter what. Despite the two colors differences, they are in the same in their willingness to risk the destruction of the current status quo for another one tomorrow no matter what. they are anything but safe. they're not particularly moral, neither are they particularly selfish, but they don't place a high value on family or anything natural. they just feel with all their heart and think endlessly with all their mind, in art and in knowledge. whatever it is, they devote their life to it in both heart and mind.

its when the status quo is disrupted that you get BWG's dark side: suddenly you get a person willing to do anything to make the disruption stop so that things go back to the way they were and so they and the ones they care about can benefit from that status quo. in short: foreign things are bad and probably out to screw you and everyone you love over with lies or something.

I'll say this: I went through a phase as a teenager where Red/Blue fit me. I threw off my childhood religion I previously championed and I explored things like RPG games and foreign cultures, deciding which foreigners I liked and which ones I didn't. A lot of the changes I made during my teenage years to my childhood have persisted to this day (like my interest in RPG's, my dislike of religion, and strong opinions on foreign cultures) but in my 20s, I returned to a BWG philosophy, which is actually a lot like what I was as a young child. I don't like the fast pace of change in the world. I think it would be easier to find a niche for my family and myself if technology, social attitudes, and culture would stop changing as fast. Don't get me wrong, I made good marks in school and was in advanced classes throughout my education. I did so well, in fact, I regularly won awards for being a top academic performer. All the colleges wanted me. That said, I only somewhat relate to blue. I use knowledge to help myself and if not myself, then at least my friends, family, and community (though a lot of that is to garner favor in the long run so...I'm still helping myself regardless). Blue seems a little excessive when it comes to perfect knowledge. I'd pick blue over red, though. Red really scares me. Its people letting their passion run wild and I can't predict that.

I'd rank the colors I subscribe to as:

Black>Green=White>Blue>Red

[Zhentarim]

Continuing from last thread, Eldrazi Titans are easy to answer if you have instant speed removal or other ways to get around indestructible/shuffle grave.

Like a set where more creatures in the graveyard make you stronger?

[Fable Wright]

Hello, everyone!
I'm not sure how big of a MtG community there is on GitP, but I figured I'd give it a shot since it's my most familiar board. I've been messing around with a Chandra themed commander deck for a while, but I'm definitely not a master deck builder. I want to aim for a Burn themed deck. Now, believe me, I've been warned countless times about burn in Commander and how notoriously underwhelming it can be, but I'd like to push forward and do the best I can. I'd like to keep it decently "cheap" (for commander anyway), so it's pushing its high end right now. Link to the TappedOut page is under the table.

Cheers!
LP

So, the big question. How do you plan to count to 40 * the number of other players at the table?

My first impression is "Big X cost spells, and duplicate them." So mana doublers like Gauntlet of Might, Gauntlet of Power, Caged Sun, Extraplanar Lens, even Doubling Cube; colorless mana providers like Everflowing Chalice, then drop a Furnace of Rath, cast a big Comet Storm (X = 10), and duplicate that a couple of times to kill every player at the table.

The other option, which would be more difficult, is "Become Guttersnipe Storm". Then all you need to do is resolve 20 instants or sorceries with Guttersnipe on the table, which... granted, isn't happening without Past In Flames, and you're SoL if Guttersnipe is removed, but that's life.

Doing the burn deck thing is dramatically easier (and cheaper) if you're willing to go U/R, though. With Epic Experiment, Gelectrode, Firemind's Foresight for the Reiterate + Reset + Lightning Bolt combo, Izzet Guildmage + Reset + literally anything, Izzet Guildmage + Training Grounds, Nivix Guildmage + Training Grounds, Rite of Replication + Guttersnipe, and the card draw you need to fuel the madhouse.

But... well, if you're looking for a Sligh style deck, W/G just has bigger creatures for cheaper. If you're going for count to 20, mono-Black has the tutors, mana doublers and Exsanguinates you need to get there in EDH. If you're going for Deadguy Red, then... I'm sorry to say that the deck has never been good at multiplayer in general, and scales extremely poorly when everyone has 40 life and big creatures.

[Svata]

The best x-spell in commander is Fall of the Titans, in case you wanted to go that route.

[deuterio12]

Green/Black is basically Nurgle from Warhammer. Disease, decay, why bother to clean anything if it will just get dirty again, just embrace the uncleanliness, eat trash, spread the pestilence around, rot, GLORIOUS ROT! May be anything between neutral-evil and plain chaotic evil.

White/Black in the other hand basically nepotism/mafia. Evil, but teamworking evil. When you're part of the group, they'll back you up all the way-as long as you follow the rules. Lawful Evil all the way.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Green/black is undeniably kudzu.

[hamishspence]

I could see Black/Green and White/Green combined, making a particularly sinister LN druid, who specialises in "hive-minds".

[Zhentarim]

I’m leaning more white-black now

[Emmerlaus]

I would appreciate any comments on it, I wanted to mix two ideas I had, one based on Atheros, God of Passage and... Tainted Remedy.

I'll explain the combos if needed. I know I didn't put "Swords to Plowshares" in this deck but I'll explain the combos after I posted the cards.

Creatures: (20)

4 x Wall of Shards
2 x Serra Ascendant
1 x Stonecloaker
2 x Bygone Bishop
2 x Ghoulcaller's Accomplice
2 x Doomed Traveler
1 x Elenda, the Dusk Rose
3 x
Athreos, God of Passage
3 x Cartel Aristocrat


SPELLS: 22

2 x Awe Strike
3 x Rest for the Weary
3 x Reknit
3 x Devour Flesh
4 x Needlebite Trap
3 x Tainted Remedy
1 x Infernal Tutor

Artefact:

3 x Godsend


LANDS (18)

Godless Shrine x 4
Marsh Flats x 4
Temple of Silence x 3
Arcane Lighthouse x 2
Bojuka Bog x 2
Orzhov Basilica x 2


RESUME : I wanted a deck that is surprising in his executing and and get myself lots of healing with using the one of the opponent against them... WITHOUT going full vampire.

I decided to go with "Devour Flesh" instead of "Swords to Plowshares" because of how it synergies with sacrificing my Wall of Shards to it. Wall of Shards become very important in this deck because the drawback is removed with " Tainted Remedy " and our favorite God of passage. I can also use it as a sacrifice for Cartel Aristocrat if needed.

I made it for standard setting and I believe the deck price wouldn't be too much high like this.

ANY help would be appreciated for this new deck of mine. I tried posting it on MTG forums but I had no answers at all!

[Ebon_Drake]

The important thing when looking at two-color philosophy is understanding where the two colors intersect. That's particularly the case with enemy color pairings where there isn't much clear common ground - after all, the two colors are fundamentally opposed to one another.

For Black/White, the intersection is in the power of social structures. White believes firmly in law and order as fundamental concepts that benefit society. It creates institutions like parliaments, nobility, judiciary, organised religion and so on to regulate society and maintain peace. Black doesn't believe in the intrinsic value or legitimacy of any of those things, but it does understand that they can be tools for holding power if you have the strength to enforce your claim. It also understands that making deals with those in power can be mutually beneficial. Black won't obey a king or worship a god because society says you should, but it will bow before any king, god or demon that has demonstrable power that Black can benefit from. White/Black therefore is about using laws and social structures (whether they be existing or of your own creation) for your personal advancement. Make contracts with the powerful for mutual benefit and make contracts with the weak to exploit them. Circumvent the laws that don't benefit you. Use the letter of the law to harm and hinder those that oppose you. Pay your debts only until you can either wrangle out of them, climb to a position of superiority over your creditor or find a way to bring them down. As mentioned, organised crime is the classic model for W/B: organisation is White, crime is Black. Organised crime doesn't care about wider societal laws, but it has its own structures of fealty, loyalty, primacy and deference that maintain discipline within an organisation. It's also a cutthroat world where power can dramatically shift, and loyalties along with it. The stereotypical view of W/B is the classic Lawful Evil, but it's worth noting that no color in Magic is strictly good or evil. It's certainly possible for W/B to be neutral or even good, with Taysa Karlov and Sorin Markov both being examples of good (if not necessarily nice) W/B characters.

Green/Black is actually a fairly different thing to W/B. The intersection there is in the concept of survival of the fittest. Green believes in it in the proper Darwinist sense, while Black believes in it more in the Social Darwinist "it's a dog-eat-dog world" sense. In combination, they see life as a constant contest for supremacy. The strong consume the weak, and are in turn consumed when their strength fades or they meet a stronger rival. Whereas mono-black would be constantly striving to be the strongest and reach the top of that pile, B/G tempers Black's desire for power with Green's more philosophical acceptance of the natural cycle of growth and decay, so tends to view the survival of the fittest with a level of resignation; it's all an endless cycle of life leading to death leading to life. All we can do is play our parts in it and try to get by. If you're on the losing side, hey ho sucks to be you. To look at Ravnica's Golgari Swarm in particular, the upper echelons of the guild are more on the Black side in being fairly ruthless and constantly vying for power, but the guild as a whole isn't particularly evil and tends to just get on with rot-farming or whatever. If anything, they're actually one of the more sympathetic guilds on the whole.

I'm not really a fan of tri-color philosophy, especially for the "wedge" combinations like W/B/G since it severely stretches the concept of the color pie and I feel leaves you with a very thin identity to a faction. However, it is something that's been explored within the game - The clans of Tarkir were each based on enemy tri-color combinations, with the Abzan being the W/B/G one. Weirdly though, WOTC went for White as their core color rather than Black.

[lord_khaine]

Unfortunately i dont play magic myself any longer. But dam the combo of Wall of shards and Tainted Remedy looks nasty.

[tgva8889]

Depending on your goals, the best X-spell in Commander (that does damage) is almost certainly something like Rolling Earthquake. But if you want to play the big X-spell burn deck, you should probably just play Neheb the Eternal or Heartless Hidetsugu. You might just want to play one of those anyways for this plan, because sadly Chandra just isn't very strong in Commander.

If you want to play a burn deck like this, you're going to need a lot more ways to generate value. You're likely to run out of gas just trying to play 3-damage spells and whatnot against opponents who start at 40 life. I suggest some bigger spells, like many have suggested (Heartless Hidetsugu is a must), and probably a lot more ways to draw cards, play multiple spells, and use your graveyard to get back spent cards. Card drawing is really the biggest deal here: you need a lot of it to have enough gas for Chandra to be doing enough damage for you. You really want cards like Mirari to get more out of each burn spell, and you really want cards like Loreseeker's Stone to help you when you run out of gas.

[Emmerlaus]

Depending on your goals, the best X-spell in Commander (that does damage) is almost certainly something like Rolling Earthquake. But if you want to play the big X-spell burn deck, you should probably just play Neheb the Eternal or Heartless Hidetsugu. You might just want to play one of those anyways for this plan, because sadly Chandra just isn't very strong in Commander.

If you want to play a burn deck like this, you're going to need a lot more ways to generate value. You're likely to run out of gas just trying to play 3-damage spells and whatnot against opponents who start at 40 life. I suggest some bigger spells, like many have suggested (Heartless Hidetsugu is a must), and probably a lot more ways to draw cards, play multiple spells, and use your graveyard to get back spent cards. Card drawing is really the biggest deal here: you need a lot of it to have enough gas for Chandra to be doing enough damage for you. You really want cards like Mirari to get more out of each burn spell, and you really want cards like Loreseeker's Stone to help you when you run out of gas.

Wow Im so out of touch that I though we still started at 20 life points !! O_O

LOL not sure which deck start with 40 points, Im curious now.

I also had help on MTG (finally, after two days) and I realized I should reintroduce myself to MTG slowly by getting a deck that people say it works first and that I understand teh mecanics. Only then will I get some enjoyement in playing again.

Its a shame this deck wont work though... Their was a lot of cards that spoke to me.

I still wanna thank you for your advices. That was well thoughtand I appreciated your imput. Thank you for your kindness and your patience.

EDIT: Can you suggest me a good deck where Stonecloaker would be a nice addition? It is my personnal favorite card so far... I can do without I guess but Im curious.

Also, I might just do a Aristocrat deck. It had the playstyle I had in mind and it looks fun to play. Their is also a budget version of it so it will be nice to try that out.

[Dhavaer]

Wow Im so out of touch that I though we still started at 20 life points !! O_O

LOL not sure which deck start with 40 points, Im curious now.

In Commander games you start at 40 life. In Two-Headed Giant and Brawl you start at 30. Most other formats start at 20.

[Zhentarim]

The important thing when looking at two-color philosophy is understanding where the two colors intersect. That's particularly the case with enemy color pairings where there isn't much clear common ground - after all, the two colors are fundamentally opposed to one another.

For Black/White, the intersection is in the power of social structures. White believes firmly in law and order as fundamental concepts that benefit society. It creates institutions like parliaments, nobility, judiciary, organised religion and so on to regulate society and maintain peace. Black doesn't believe in the intrinsic value or legitimacy of any of those things, but it does understand that they can be tools for holding power if you have the strength to enforce your claim. It also understands that making deals with those in power can be mutually beneficial. Black won't obey a king or worship a god because society says you should, but it will bow before any king, god or demon that has demonstrable power that Black can benefit from. White/Black therefore is about using laws and social structures (whether they be existing or of your own creation) for your personal advancement. Make contracts with the powerful for mutual benefit and make contracts with the weak to exploit them. Circumvent the laws that don't benefit you. Use the letter of the law to harm and hinder those that oppose you. Pay your debts only until you can either wrangle out of them, climb to a position of superiority over your creditor or find a way to bring them down. As mentioned, organised crime is the classic model for W/B: organisation is White, crime is Black. Organised crime doesn't care about wider societal laws, but it has its own structures of fealty, loyalty, primacy and deference that maintain discipline within an organisation. It's also a cutthroat world where power can dramatically shift, and loyalties along with it. The stereotypical view of W/B is the classic Lawful Evil, but it's worth noting that no color in Magic is strictly good or evil. It's certainly possible for W/B to be neutral or even good, with Taysa Karlov and Sorin Markov both being examples of good (if not necessarily nice) W/B characters.

Green/Black is actually a fairly different thing to W/B. The intersection there is in the concept of survival of the fittest. Green believes in it in the proper Darwinist sense, while Black believes in it more in the Social Darwinist "it's a dog-eat-dog world" sense. In combination, they see life as a constant contest for supremacy. The strong consume the weak, and are in turn consumed when their strength fades or they meet a stronger rival. Whereas mono-black would be constantly striving to be the strongest and reach the top of that pile, B/G tempers Black's desire for power with Green's more philosophical acceptance of the natural cycle of growth and decay, so tends to view the survival of the fittest with a level of resignation; it's all an endless cycle of life leading to death leading to life. All we can do is play our parts in it and try to get by. If you're on the losing side, hey ho sucks to be you. To look at Ravnica's Golgari Swarm in particular, the upper echelons of the guild are more on the Black side in being fairly ruthless and constantly vying for power, but the guild as a whole isn't particularly evil and tends to just get on with rot-farming or whatever. If anything, they're actually one of the more sympathetic guilds on the whole.

I'm not really a fan of tri-color philosophy, especially for the "wedge" combinations like W/B/G since it severely stretches the concept of the color pie and I feel leaves you with a very thin identity to a faction. However, it is something that's been explored within the game - The clans of Tarkir were each based on enemy tri-color combinations, with the Abzan being the W/B/G one. Weirdly though, WOTC went for White as their core color rather than Black.

If you put it that way, I still fit both B/G and B/W, but I fit B/W a little more. That said, I still do random acts of kindness every now and then if I feel my needs are met for the day and I hate seeing individuals being oppressed by big groups, especially if the oppression isn’t to benefit me in some way. I try to get rid of laws through legal means if they both aren’t of use to me and trample individual rights. I love individual rights.