MTG Modern General

Correction: This is a troll thread and old thread is still live. Let this one fall off the board.

Remember to sage any and all replies.

>>53475780
Why do people keep calling me a troll? Are people this against players entering modern?

death shadow ban inc edition

We haven't even hit bump limit and this OP is garbage

We need the fucking $$$$$$$ holy shit

>>53476102
Why would death shadow be banned?

File: 34124321412.png (91KB, 223x311px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 223x311px

What would happen to modern if Gush was reprinted?

>>53477175
>1 mana 3/3 used to be on the ban list

>>53478811
But its a card that forces you to get to low life totals to be useful, so its fair.

>>53478984
>Blazing Shoal is a card that forces you to play Progenitus so it's fair.
Shut up faggot.

>>53479028
>having a potential dead card in your hand out
>having to be at a life total low enough where bolt loses you the game
Nice strawman

>>53479061
At this point in time I don't think it's possible for anyone to actually believe that having a low life total is a problem for decks running Death's Shadow. Just look at Burn. The one deck that wants to drop its opponents life total suddenly has to plan an entirely new game plan.

>>53479127
But they just die to any deck with even the slightest amount of reach. Its good matchups are decks like ad nauseam that have no reach outside of the combo.

>>53479464
>But they just die to any deck with even the slightest amount of reach
Which is precisely why the deck is doing so well, right? Because nobody but you has figured out the solution to the deck. Quick, Reid Duke is playing against Death's Shadow on SCG right now, tell him the error of his ways!

>>53479551
He isn't playing enough reach. Maybe use a spell that deals 5 damage to the opponent as a means to counter it; it forces them to keep their shadows small and if used in conjunction with lightning bolt, it makes it very hard for them to win.

>>53479578
>Warp your deck to deal with Death's Shadow's mere existence

File: grixis assault swans.png (14KB, 284x564px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 284x564px

>>53478880
>>53479053

Think 31 lands is enough?

>>53479578
which card are you talking about?

File: path_exile.jpg (90KB, 532x399px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 532x399px

>>53475780
Old Thread has reached bump limit.

Here's the real new Modern thread:
>>53479270

Again, sage any and all replies on this thread and let it fall off.

>>53479638
>implying sideboards don't exist

File: 789078978907890.png (172KB, 265x370px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 265x370px

Should this go into storm?

>>53482699
Nope

XXU death shadow lists would be a lot stronger as it would let them replay shocks for more life total manipulation.
Mono U lists of tron and merfolk would get more gas.
Blue moon would do better as they already run mostly basics.
Delver lists would love it for obvious reasons.
Control decks would run it, but find it troubling to have to replay shock lands and thus make basics more common in lists.

>>53480457
If you think the deck only can win through the power of DS then you clearly don't understand the decks.
There are pleanty of games they win without ever needing to resolve a DS as they run pleanty of high power beaters.
Some run the Grixis classics of zombie fish and fruit bowl prince.
Pretty much all of them have goyfs.

You also can't just win by holding bolt + 5 damage. The deck lists always have at least 4 THOTsiezes, and some amount of Inquisitions. Your hand is going to be lacking any real power in most games. Some lists even run Collective Brutality as even more hand destruction.

There are some good answers to the deck we saw in the tournament though. It's hard to argue against living end proving to do well as the deck isn't as easily beaten by hand destruction, and can easily out race a pair of DS.