What's the best mtg format for home brewing and why? I

>>48622847
Pauper, the decks are all so low power level you can play with basically anything

>home brewing

You use that word, I don't think it means what you think it means.

>>48622877

How would you call it? home brewing rogue decks?

>>48622868
Yeah but that also kind of sucks because lower rarity cards are usually really boring too. Like all the flashy effects and what not are at higher rarities.
Or am I wrong?

>>48622911

> home brewing rogue decks

What? Are you talking about casual play?

>>48622969
No, I'm talking about not net decking or running meta decks but trying to come up with stuff that's semi decent at dealing with the current meta (not necessarily anti-meta though).

>>48623024

Ok so yeah, casual play people get cards and make decks from what they got.

Pretty much any set that isn't too self-contained will be good (try to avoid Mirrodin, Cold Snap, Kamigawa) but even those will have some great cards in them.

The Ravnicas are really good for that and same with Innistrad.

I played a lot of Lorewyn and that had a lot of fun diversity.

>>48623120
Not really.
Try to make a deck that doesn't suck with the CURRENT meta, not choosing an arbitrary set or block and playing there... alone.

I play with xmage, there's no "what you got" there.

I want to know what is the better sanctioned format for rogue brews.

I don't think there really is a 'best' format for brewing. Brewing success in any format is based pretty heavily on knowledge and experience in that format. Knowing not just what strategies are popular, but also what you have available to counter them efficiently, as well as a knowledge of the card pool to enable you to be able to find the right tools are all important skills for brewing.

That said, modern is probably your best bet if you're looking to find a format to become familiar with to brew for. The cardpool is wide enough that there are a lot of strong strategies that are not necessarily known, unlike standard where the smaller card pool restricts what strategies can be strong, and the power level is not as high as legacy, so you aren't required to have answers to turn one or two combo wins in your deck to be viable. The main concern is price, which is you're interested in brewing will be an issue in terms of acquiring cards to test with, as good brewing means lots of testing. But if you have an already existing collection, or if you're prepare to use programs like Cockatrice or Xmage then that can be alleviated.

>>48623178

Homie, you are making no sense here

>look up rogue brewing
>whole weird ass MtG lingo bullshit

Oh god wow why the fuck to people want to make up their own terms for shit?

>>48623273
Awesome, yeah, this is exactly the kind of answer I was looking for.

I know I need to get really familiar with the format to eventually start brewing but that's fine with me.

>>48623415
The best advice I can give then is to not be afraid to look at decklists. Not necessarily to copy them but to both get a picture of what the decks to beat have, and to see what kind of shells are strong. For example, lets say you want to make BUG work in modern. Cool, take a shot at it, but take a look at some jund or junk lists to see what a core of strong GB card are. You don't have to run them verbatim, but getting a picture of what they run gives you a framework to work with. You can add and remove things with the knowledge of what purpose those cards serve in the overall deck, and what bases you're trying to cover.

>>48623625

Thanks man.

It's not like I think that netdecking or looking at decklists is a sin, though. It is necessary to know what are the good cards in the meta and what cards are staples, a lot of the times to run them yourself.
May be using the amulet bloom engine to run some other kind of creatures and do hybrids is fun for me too.

I guess what I'm saying is that I'm not exactly a purist anyway, so no ned to worry.

My friends and I are playing Block Constructed, fighting Blocks against Block. It's ton of (casual) fun and you can come up with crazy things.

>>48622925
>Or am I wrong?

yes.

>>48624717
ISn't pauper all zoo and "tempo" decks though?

>>48624783
no

>>48624783
theres a few combo decks, some shit like green stompy and elves, and the rest is pretty much UR/UB goodstuff midrange shit

so you can play anything but its not really the most fun thing to brew in

>>48624783
Not that guy

Generally for every rare there is a common equivalent that does the same thing, maybe even on a bigger body for usually a CMC that make you shout out "For HOW much!?"

But in pauper that generally doesn't matter.
90% of the time. There are yes some rares that don't have a common partner.

File: 002.jpg (76KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 1000x1000px

>>48624806
>but its not really the most fun thing to brew in

only if you're bad at brewing

>>48624830
get out of here, you're a dumb poster.

>>48624783
Actually the tier 0 of the format is currently combo-control (Drake) fighting off various aggro decks trying to go under. Midrange and traditional ramp (RUG Tron) hasn't existed in the competitive meta since EMA downshifted Peregrine Drake to common. The truest draw-go deck of all mtg is UB Teachings (make no mistake, Miracles is a pseudo-prison deck with a 1mana wrath). So it's definitely not all turning creatures sideways, especially after Drake gets banned.

File: Zappi, Ace Artificer.png (975KB, 744x1039px) Image search: [Google]

975KB, 744x1039px

Adversary.
Make custom Vanguard style cards and play with them.
https://discord.gg/XeXZeJV

>>48624820

Lol no

Pauper is about cheap spells for the most part

Overcosted Jank is not played

>>48626589
Zappi is cute. Cute!

>>48624806
You have no idea what you're talking about. I can't think of a single commonly played "UR/UB goodstuff midrange" deck. The only decks people play in those colors are Drake Combo, Izzet Blitz, Teachings, and possibly Angler Delver, none of which are "goodstuff" decks.

>>48622847
Honestly, probably modern or standard. Both are rotating formats, so every year or so you've got an opportunity to find a new deck or tweak an established deck archetype.

>>48628815
>Both are rotating formats
Is this supposed to be a joke? If it is, I chuckled.

>>48622847
Modern. 3 reasons:
>Huge card pool
>Does not rotate
>No oppressive Legacy staples

>>48626589
You people still exist?, Where do you operate?, I lost track of the threads after you stopped making them.

I actually liked the format and I'd like to contribute again.

File: Vampire cops.png (262KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

262KB, 375x523px

>>48629765
>Modern
>Missing out on all the fun old cards and new commander-cards.
Well, could be worse

Probably legacy cause pretty much everything is legal there. Though im not sure YOU know what your talking about. Just stick with casual man, its the best format

>>48626589
Has that custom format gained any traction like Commander did?

>>48622847
I'll never netdeck a deck completely. The only thing I do is acquire the essential cards for the deck (such as the essentials for Tron) and then I'll brew the rest of the deck.

For instance, instead of using Karn or Ugin for Tron, I use BFZ Eldrazi that has good "when you cast" effects. I also use Conduit of Ruin to fetch Newlamog or Emrakul, and Conduit also reduces the cost of the first creature spell you cast each turn by 2. I still use Wurmcoils though.

It's not as good as the "official" RG Tron Decklist, but its up there in terms of power. Complete netdecking has the unintended consequence of stagnating the format over time.

>>48622847
Pauper - Is ok, not overpower cards allowed
Wizard's Tower - Just one deck for all players

None mention Wizard's Tower and is an amaizing format to "home brew" a deck

>>48624783
It's mostly aggro decks of some kind that do well. The combo decks are too slow or inconsistent, and there are no good sweepers, so there's little reason to not play as many creatures as possible.

I'm trying to make swirling sandstorm work because it would be really good in the current meta.

>>48629765
We exist mostly on that Discord I linked to. Does a better job of keeping us organized than Adversary general used to, I would say.
>>48630648
We have a fair amount of active players who are playing eachother constantly, but it's not even close to Commander status. You won't have much trouble finding people to play with if you're in the Discord, but if you're not then you'll probably never hear the name Adversary again.

>>48622847
>i want original deck ideas and not a highly polished metagame.
>Ideally you will want to play limited, like sealed or draft.
>Failing that, you will want to play something unusual, like block.
>Failing that, you will want to play something with a lower power curve, like pauper, edh pauper, or a format with price restrictions on your cards/decks to avoid the most common/effective cards from being played.

>>48626589
>>48629765
Bumping because I'm curious about this format too.

File: image.jpg (306KB, 744x1039px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 744x1039px

>>48634035
I'll be sure to check it out later today. Meanwhile, how many Adversaries do you currently have?

I remember some of the old I helped make, boy, was that fun.

>>48634190
We have 75 in the Main Set and around 20 in the new MSE set, which has less strict standards on entry. Karesh, for example, wasn't accepted into the main set, but he would likely be added to the MSE set immediately.

I'm glad to see that people are interested.

>>48622847

>What's the best mtg format for home brewing and why?


Kitchentable. You can even run a skeleton tribal.

>>48622868
>>48631925

>t. people who never played pauper

>>48622925
New commons arent as spicy but magic has been around for 25 years. Theres a pauper storm, affinity, goblins, elves deck that are all cheap and good and thats just scratching the surface. Pauper isnt a deckbuilders paradise, but thats what commander is for.

File: 1387016423460.gif (1MB, 306x230px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 306x230px

>>48631458

>For instance, instead of using Karn or Ugin for Tron, I use BFZ Eldrazi that has good "when you cast" effects.
>I don't like to play efficient cards

Where's the uncommon only format?
>Powerful and complex
Yet cheap

>>48634894
>I don't like to sell a kidney in exchange for cardboard
FTFY

>>48634153
Oi, we've gotten a revival around a week ago, main set has gone up to 75 adversaries and there's a small splinter set of 20+. We have a handful of players now.

>>48628849
Arbitrary bans (not including necessary ones like after Eldrazi Winter) for competitive diversity or whatever excuse they whip up each year is de facto rotation.

>>48635232
You have to decide whether you're just poor or don't "netdeck" (desu in an age where just about all information about anything that's not under government lock and key is available for everyone everywhere 24/7 this term is meaningless, any player that's not a complete mong could come up with the current meta decks after looking at the available card pool for a sufficient amount of time) on some stupid Timmy principles to keep your story straight.

File: image.jpg (2MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4032x3024px

>>48622847
Casual will always be the best as it was how the game was originally designed to be played. Back when you just used cool cards and made decks the way you liked them. And not all this banlist shit and formats making dumb cards far too expensive.

Also, what does /tg/ think of this casual deck?

>>48636950
>set of sol ring
>casual
/_\

>>48636950
> all Dick Islands

>>48636973
Where else are you supposed to play a set of Sol Rings? Hmm?

>>48636984
Nowhere, since its inherent brokenness is recognized by having it banned or restricted in every competitive format. Maybe it's just my trouble of understanding the casual mentality; I mean you're already running a playset of the most powerful manarock in the entire game so why not just build Memory Jar storm/MonoU Belcher or something? Is there an unwritten rule on how much "power" a deck can contain in your playgroup?

>>48634637

This.

Pauper is "cheap Legacy", not "low power Modern".

>>48637268
why would anyone think a format with counterspell being legal as weaker than modern?

>>48637069
Sol Ring is great and all, but don't act like its Power Nine worthy. Because it's not. And do you really think that having a playset of Sol Rings makes this deck "ridiculously overpowered"? So, again. What do you think of the deck itself?

Also, no, to my group "casual format" means "anything goes but un-sets".

>>48637314
> thinking "Counterspell" breaks a format
Pffsh.

>>48636950
That deck is literal cancer.
>So many card draw cantrips
>Half the deck is counterspells
>4 Sol Rings
>Wincon is literally just pinging the opponent to death with 1/1 creatures that tap for 1 damage.

>>48637461
Hehe. You know that it's an infinite combo, right?

>>48635095
Middle-Class Magic.

File: image.jpg (2MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4032x3024px

>>48637522
Then Rares Only Format is Upper Class?

Then what is Foils Only Format?
The 1%?

Pic related is all foil.

>>48637489
Yes. Double cancer.

>>48637558
Foil only is like vintage. Only rich elitist cuntwaffles play it.

File: 1469849447056.gif (87KB, 192x197px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 192x197px

>>48636950
>the way it was ment to be played
4x Ancestral Vision
4x Black Lotus
4x Brainstorm
4x Force of Will
4x Gitaxian Probe
10x Island
2x Leyline of Sanctity
4x Lion's Eye Diamond
4x Serum Powder
4x Sol Ring
4x Strip Mine
4x Tendrils of Agony
4x Time Walk
4x Yawgmoth's Will

>>48637952
That was ment to be recall not vision obviously

File: image.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

>>48637952
Pffsh. Peasant.

>>48637998
At least you get the point a 60 card deck of playsets of all the best cards doesn't belong in any format and there is no point to a format without restrictions/bans cause someone would put together that's pile of hate you have there

>>48638066
Well, I started playing in 96 and ended up buying a guy's collection for $60. I used what he had and trades to build this deck. Though, I wish I had sleeves back when I first started playing. If any of these cards were in remotely good condition, I would have them sent off to be graded and incased. But, I agree that this type of deck should never be played seriously.

This seems like a good thread to ask. I've been play testing a couple decks and I'm ready to start trying them against the meta. So I want to put a handful of the popular decks, but when I look at mtggoldfish top 8 or whatever, there are soooo many different builds. So I'm wondering if you kind anons could post what you would consider definitive decklists for miracles, grixis delver, storm, reanimator, or anything else you consider a premier deck in legacy. Thank you.

File: LaughingMarines.jpg (12KB, 385x278px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 385x278px

>>48636950
>run 4 sol rings
>still make a complete pile

>>48637369
It doesnt, thats the joke lmao.

>>48638351
You don't like the deck, anon?

>>48638234
definitive decklists do not exist in magic, it's all meta game dependent.

>>48623024
http://www.sirlin.net/ptw/
stop being a scrub.

>>48635095

>I know nothing about magic

>Top, Wasteland, FoW, Bazaar of Baghdad, Aether Vial, Mana Drain, Library of Alexandria, Karakas, Mishra's Bauble
>cheap

And there's many more uncommons like that.

>>48622925
It depends on the person. I think the relatively weak and sometimes weird and niche effects of common cards are really fun, but in a different way than a mythic with four keywords and a degenerate combo enabling or "you win" effect.

I suggest at least trying it, you may like it. But if you don't like it, you don't like it.

>>48622847
Legacy or Commander.
The larger the card pool the more likely you are to find a strategy others are unprepared for and even little things like adding a new card to an already existing archetype can make an impact on gameplay.

Compare it to the smallest card pool avaliable: Pauper Standard. Where nothing can reliably beat Pulse of Murasa decks, and there's not even enough cards avaliable to hatebrew against it specifically.

Good brewing is more about variety than about power levels.

>>48623310
>Not knowing the tier lingo
Guess that makes you not a spike
>Not enjoying brewing
Not a Johnny either
>Not appreciating the quirkiness of lingo
Or a Voorthos

Guess you're either a Timmy or a shitposter, but Timmy isn't so ready to accept netdecking so I'm betting for shitposter.

>>48623273
The problem with brewing in Modern is that it's a sideboard format and lots of sideboard tech that ruins the Tier 1 decks also ruins most rogues.

Jund sucks.

>>48637314
Because in Modern Magic commons are shit.

>>48637558
Rares only would be wonky as fuck actually.
>All bombs, no engines, no fuel, final destination.

>>48637369
It doesn't, but a 2cmc answer to anything that's not Thrun, Loxodon or Emrakul is undeniably stronger than anything Modern has.

>>48638767
Oooooh, that really explains a lot.