MTG Modern General

Just curious, why are there no Standard threads on /tg/? Do people really hate standard that much? And if so... why?

>>49455549
There are always standard threads on /tg/. just not currently.

>>49455549
There is standard threads every now and then. They usually show up more around when a new set is released or game day or some standard event.

Right now it's so close to Kaladesh and rotation that there's not much point to play standard or talk about it.

Alright guys ive pitched this idea before, but lets give it another whirl.

Sultai deck.
Birds of paradise->burning tree-> eldritch evolution-> phyrexian obliterator or thrun.
Thought scour-> delve for tasigur or hooting->eldritch evolution->something big?

Help me make this dream a reality!

>>49455585
I mean, only Dragons is rotating out? I just started playing MTG so I'm really only playing standard right now. It seemed like a lot of people preferred modern saying standern cost too much, which doesn't make sense to me cause I see all these modern decks costing hundreds of dollars, when you can buy singles to make a standard deck for like less than a dollar a piece, unless you buy planeswalkers.

>>49455616
Dragons AND origins

File: 636088383520063047.png (177KB, 265x370px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 265x370px

When Kaladesh drops I was thinking about making a deck that revolves around dropping 4 Aetherflux Reservoirs as quick as possible, then dropping a Alhammarret's Archive, and having the rest of my deck filled with one drop creatures.

File: 1444708759458.jpg (44KB, 282x341px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 282x341px

How many ghost quarters do you guys run in your Nahiri control deck? I'm planning on 25 lands and I got two slots left, currently trying to decide 2 quarters, 1 + another basic for a total of four basics

>>49455616
Dragons and Origins are rotating out

Also people say standard costs too much because when you buy a good modern deck you can play modern forever and you only might need to change a few cards every now and then. Then if you want to just ditch your deck for whatever reason almost all those cards still have good value.

Standard on the other hand you have to drop a couple hundred on a good standard deck. Then another hundred every set or two. Plus you have no guarantee your cards still have value later.

Keeping up with standard at a high level costs quite a bit. While Modern might be more expensive initially you get a lot more long term value for your buck.

>>49455616
Standard Tier 1 decks cost $200+ and a rotation will eventually kill the deck, while Modern decks only die to bans, which happen a lot less and are usually quite predictable.

>>49455616
>It seemed like a lot of people preferred modern saying standern cost too much
Standard has more players in general.

>which doesn't make sense to me cause I see all these modern decks costing hundreds of dollars
Modern is cheaper in that you can player a deck for years with really investing more money into the format because cards don't rotate outside of the banlist. For instance, Affinity was like idk, 200-300 dollars 2 years ago, and the deck has barely changed outside of recent sideboard additions which cost pennies. Jund and some other decks are the same way. In standard, cards rotate so you have to constantly spend money to update your deck. It eventually costs more money to keep playing standard than modern.

Want to buy into Lantern Control but redditfags are scaring me into thinking Mox Opal might get banned

over/under?

>>49455722

Mox wont get banned. Affinity is eternal.

>>49455722
Mox opal won't get banned. That's not the biggest problem right now.

Trust me, I'm an expert on the subject.

>>49455722
If it got banned it would be due to Affinity, which despite still being an incredibly powerful deck, isn't even the best aggro deck in the format right now

I would bet against it, but then again I'm just some random shmuck on 4chan what do I know?

Is there a name for the RUB deck that uses snapcaster mage and young pyromancer plus a bunch of 0 and 1 mana spells or was this some guy's homebrew?

>>49455753
Grixis Delver?

>>49455753
It's either Grixis Control or Grixis Delver. It's not new.

So, I've got $70 dollar in store credit for a cards singles shop and I'm sort of thinking into buying into modern, I would obviously add more money but I want to go for a sort of cheap deck with good options to upgrade it later to a meta deck.

>>49455792
I would say Merfolk

Just buy all the good fish and then later when you have money buy the Aether Vials

>>49455792
Monowhite goats. You'll lose games, but never your opponent's respect

>>49455792
So you've got $70. Are you prepared to throw in the other $930?

>>49455792
There are too many to list. What are you looking for in a deck?

>>49455685
You should run 23 lands, unless your meta is incredibly slow and you get to run a cryptic or two. How do you not have 4 basics and 2 utility lands in your 23 already? Again, unless you're in a slow meta, 3 colonnades is probably correct, and you should fit a desolate lighthouse in if you can. I'm on 8 fetches, 4 shocks, 4 basics, 3 colonnades, 2 checklands, 1 quarter, and 1 loothouse.

>>49455792
>Low tier
Mono u tron
>Médium tier
Merfolk
>Top tier
Dredge
Infect
Affinity

Those are the less expensive decks imo

>>49455963
>Mid tier
D&T
>Top tier
Titanshift

Should i buy UG fastland for infect? Or will the maná base remain the same after kaladesh?

>>49455666
Archive is rotating

>>49456007
Fastlands would be played if Become Immense hadn't been printed.

>>49455871
I sometimes played with my friends decks (back in splinter twin/amulet bloom meta) and more or less my preferences are like this:
Amulet Bloom was fun the first few games, but after a while winning usually didn't feel good.
Legacy Death and taxes was kind of fun I guess.
Mono U tron is okay.
Merfolk seems kind of cool to me, didnt play it that much.
Scapeshift wasn't a good experience.

>>49456131
>I don't like mtg

Ok, I'm still new to high-level magic play and rules are still tricky to me. I want to brew a fun budget +1/+1 counter deck with the new Armorcraft Judge. Can I get a ruling that this works or why it doesn't.

>I have Aquastrand Spider and Renegade Krasis.
>I cast the Armorcraft Judge.
>Graft, Evolve and Judge each trigger. I can pick the order of all three.
>Evolve resolves first. Krasis gets a +1/+1 counter.
>Krasis ability triggers. Put it on the bottom of the stack.
>Now Graft resolves, +1/+1 counter moves from Spider to Judge.
>Judge resolves, draw three cards.
>Krasis ability resolves. Spider and Judge get a +1/+1 counter each.
>I now have a 2/2 spider, a 4/3 Krasis, 5/5 Judge, and I drew three cards.
>Opponent casts Supreme Verdict.

That works, right?

>>49456779
You cannot choose to put a trigger on the bottom of the stack. Once they're triggered, they go on top, and if multiple things trigger simultaneously, you choose the order but they all go on top. The krasis trigger would have to go on top of all the other things and resolve first

>>49456925
Ah ok. That makes sense. Thank you.

So just Spider would get a counter at that point to a 3/3, it Grafts to Judge, Judge is a 4/4 and draw 3 cards. Still not bad but not great enough.

File: better than nuPPG.jpg (165KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 1280x720px

I must know. Are goblins worth a damn in modern or is my only tribal options merfolk and elves.

>>49457054
Artifact tribal is superior

>>49456010
From modern??

>>49457086
Why the fuck would I want to play artifacts?

>>49455722
it's not getting banned
reddit sucks, don't go there for magic

>>49457101
because it's tier 1 and goblins is tier 9

>>49457117
It hurts me that this is the best place to have some honest Magic discussion. Because this is the only place where you can say negative-honest shit without getting moderated to shit.

Reddit is only good for the latest news in product. It is useless for anything related to the actual game.

>>49457143
Wew modern sucks ass then, back to legacy with me.

>>49457143

Goblins aren't that bad

It's a fast deck just a little inconsistent

>>49457182
Goblins are shit in legacy and you know it.

>>49455666
shit idea, Satan. It should be one drop cantrips

What's with the meme names on some of these?

https://www.mtggoldfish.com/metagame/modern#online

File: 39770.jpg (80KB, 386x412px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 386x412px

>>49457229
>Goblins are shit in legacy and you know it.

Name when and where you want me to kick your ass.

will they ever ban cranial plating or mox opal? I'm considering building affinity

>>49457356
Wait until Monday, then if it dodges a ban go for it.

>>49457356
Honestly I don't think we're going to see any bans on the next list, I think the format's figured itself out, it's diverse, and it can be slowed down by Wizards printing better control cards, which they seem like they might be doing
If affinity is going to eat a ban, it won't be now

>>49457318
>gw tron
Top

>>49457356
No.
Affinity doesn't represent any sort of harmful influence to the format, they don't have any reason to hit anything from it. The deck has remained more-or-less unchanged for years now, and the metagame has only gotten stronger around it.

>>49457318
>Disco Inferno
>Not Scapeshift

Is it bad if I like these?
!Anyway, who cares what people call their decks? Its It's all the same crap anyways.

File: 1474323519621.gif (3MB, 297x348px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 297x348px

>Jacob Wilson and Shahar Shenhar playing anime delver on CFB
https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL04lbfeNAaS-c4cNnfcwqnoTB51iZO5bl&v=ER6XI4VGa8U

>>49457421
truly the kawaiiest of decks

>>49457222
It doesn't have waste, port, lackey, ringleader, matron, warchief, what could possibly give them an advantage over affinity, fish or coco

>>49457421
why is it called anime delver
what am i missing

>>49457502
A weeaboo invented the deck and went 11-4 with anime sleeves at a recent GP

>>49457536
delicious
any video of it?

>>49457421
>I already own every card in there but the playset of Disrupting Shoal

time to meme I guess

>>49455963
>>49455972
IMO UTron and a bunch of the D&T Variants get criminally underrated because they're typically being piloted by newer/more budget players and both decks are difficult to pilot.
Not saying that either deck is Tier 1 outside of really wonky metas but you couldn't go wrong with either and IMO they're 2 of the most fun decks in modern aside from affinity and RUG Delver

>>49457547
It's on CFB's twitch, can't be bothered to find the exact timing but here's a mothership article, you can see the anime
http://magic.wizards.com/en/events/coverage/gpind16/mono-blue-delver-snapdelverthing-with-arthur-fusco-2016-08-28

>>49457406
>Anyway, who cares what people call their decks?

It's obviously some kind of joke going on.

What do people mean when they say "fair deck"?

The gist I get is an "unfair deck" tries to kill you fast. But that's the nature of the game. When did this "fair deck" newspeak start?

Mardu babies where u @

>>49457911
Unfair decks kill you with an uninteractive combo over 1 turn, like Scapeshift/Goryo's/Ad Nauseam

>>49457911
There can be fair decks that can kill fast

Usually when I think of fair decks I think of something like Jund. It's a very good deck but it doesn't do anything inherently unfair. It just plays good creatures and good spells.

Generally when people say unfair deck I generally think of decks that are very linear and have some sort of stupid combo element. Like Amulet Bloom most people would say was unfair because it didn't really care what the opponent was playing it was just trying to generate a bunch of mana and win absurdly fast every game.

Fair decks interact and are less linear and unfair decks don't interact and are fairly linear

Jund and Twin are good examples of fair decks

>>49457911
A fair deck is generally one that wins by tapping creatures and interacting with the opponent
See: Jund, Eldrazi, Zoo, Affinity
Tron technically fits here too I guess

Unfair decks will win in one turn and avoid interacting as much as possible
See: Ad Nauseam, Goryo's, I want to put Infect here but that one is iffy since your opponent often interacts but you still OTK

Fair and Unfair have nothing to do with how good the deck is, it's about how the decks wins

>>49457911
Fair decks play by the simpler rules of magic. GBx midrange are your most fair, generally. Burn is probably your least fair, while still being called Fair.

Unfair decks play a different game all together. Storm or Dredge are examples of fair decks.

Pretty much any deck falls along this spectrum or Fair- Unfair.

>>49457928
I just don't understand the terminology I guess? I play ad naus and yeah it's kind of boring to play but you can't just say "oh well my deck is more fair because it's only good after turn 5"

I get complaining that those decks are boring or not fun, but unfair? I don't think so. Combo has always been a glass cannon and it's always been stoppable.

File: goldfishbudget.png (836KB, 1315x739px) Image search: [Google]

836KB, 1315x739px

Are the modern budget decks listed on mtggoldfish any good for someone starting out in organized magic with no idea of what to buy?

>>49457984
yeah you don't get it
it's not about boring or fun, it's about how you win

>>49458002
just go bogles, most of the cost in that deck comes down to horizon canopy anyway

>>49457984
It's not a derogatory term

>>49457968
>Affinity
>Tron
>fair

nope

>>49458028
Really? I get the impression that a lot of people use it as one, or wish everyone played "fair" decks because they'd like it better. The implication is in the language. Unfair is bad. It's not good to be told your deck is unfair. It is stigmatizing to the combo player.

>>49457968
Tron is not fair

It aims to play go fish until they play their planeswalker that costs 400 mana thats says your opponent loses

>>49458042
Do you feel oppressed?

>>49458042

people love to complain about things. they will never be happy with a format. a format full of fair decks is midrange value beatdown and that would be a nightmare (and is essentially what standard is)

the format would be fine right now if control were just a little bit stronger.

>>49457968
Original eldrazi was unfair. It had too much fast mana thanks to temple+eye+urborg, and affinity can drop all it's hand in t1.

>>49457911
Fair vs unfair is too much subjective. Jund is fair but BBE and DRS were unfair
Affinity wins by a fair method (damage) but the sinergy is literally unfair

But unfair decks will try to brak the rules of the game, or abuse a mechanic(an example would be Storm, dredge) while fair decks try to play normally and generaly rely on disruption (Control) or in pure goodstuff (Midrange) (UWR rely on counters and removal, while Jund isjust VALUE)

>>49458042
That part is true. Players generally prefer Fair magic, and berate or shun unfair magic.

But people who do play unfair decks own it. Embrace the unfairness. Live inside it. You lose to an unfair deck? Boo- freakin- hoo go cry in the corner.

>>49458060
lil bit. a guy i beat with combo got buttblasted and went off about fair decks.

>>49458086
>or abuse a mechanic(an example would be Storm, dredge)

I think this is totally fair though. The same rules and cardpool apply to everyone. Fair is whatever you do with that. Shit that's broken gets banned and what's left is fair play.

>>49458002
Not really. What you should do when you're starting out is buy budget versions of actually good decks that you could later upgrade into the good versions. If you buy a budget deck that's just jank, then when you have more money to spend later, all you'll be able to do is buy another janky budget deck.

Additionally, a good thing to do is to prioritize putting your money into lands. Good lands can be used in a variety of decks, so if you later decide you want to play something different, it'll help get over the initial cost of that deck. Although, a caveat to that, some decks have their own landbase that isn't so interchangeable. Affinity might be a powerful deck, but no other deck in the format is looking for Glimmervoid or Blinkmoth. It's better for your collection to sink a bunch of money into Fetchlands than anything else at the moment.

A common thing to suggest to new players is Burn decks, because pretty much every expensive card besides Goblin Guides are in your lands. You'll either be saving up for Guides, which is a respectable purchase, or for Fetches, which are some of the best things you can be buying.

>>49458002
look into a deck that can be upgraded. something like B/W Tokens or Elves can be built for a relatively cheap price and still be competent but you can also change some slots with better cards over time.

File: 8612984_f260.jpg (24KB, 260x266px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 260x266px

>>49458115
>Spot the combo player
Listen to me, young man, if you are casting 10* rituals and cantrips in your turn, or recurring effects from your graveyard, you are not playing real magic, now go buy some boosters and play the real and fun magic that is standard

>>49458115
See >>49458028

Unfair is not an insult, or a complaint. It's terminology for a category of decks. This isn't about what you think, it's simple categorization.

>>49458152
>mark rosewater did it meme

I don't understand where this comes from

maro is responsible for a majority of the broken shit in mtg, his track record for balance is terrible

and it should be, he's a designer, not a developer

the person you want to criticize is the lead developer in whatever era of magic you're talking about, those are the people who say no, those are the people fucked up shit slips passed accidentally

>>49458155
>Unfair is not an insult, or a complaint.

Yeah it is though. We are playing a game. Games are enjoyable when fair, and not when unfair. Choosing that term to describe a category of decks is inherently derogatory.

File: 1469064362852.jpg (345KB, 1420x840px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 1420x840px

>>49458208
Fuck off maro

>>49458208
It comes from the fact that he is the mouthpiece of MTG and thus is the one saying that they (WotC) would like to continue the trend towards Creatures: the Tappening.
He answers a lot of questions on the Development side on his tumblr as well

File: blank.png (121KB, 250x418px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 250x418px

>>49458224
alright then, continue to be retarded

if you want the game to be different, though, you're aiming your hate boner at the wrong lunatic

>>49458219
It's not, you're choosing to interpret it as insulting, but it's been in place long enough that if it ever was meant to be insulting, most everyone has gotten over it. They're words, context denotes the connotations, and in this context people aren't meaning to use them to denigrate or deride archetypes, but to describe their gameplay process.

Whatever your opinion on the matter, "fair" and "unfair" are the existing terms. You're not going to change them. I'm not going to change them. They are what they are and will continue to be. Get used to it or don't, it honestly doesn't matter.

>>49458219
cry more pussy

>>49458292
it's really the people railing about combo being "unfair" and their special pet decks being "fair" who are crybabies.

>>49458219
>dont call my deck aggressive!
>i-its just fast!

>>49458314
combo decks are fast and aggressive. they're also fair.

>>49458312
no, that's the terminology, nobody's whining about combo

>>49458330
their whining is inherent in their choice of terminology.

>>49458324
>they're also fair

You're not getting this. You're not allowed to barge into a community and decide you don't want to abide by their existing terminology. The words outrank you.

>>49458349
yeah let's never question anything or entertain differing views!

the terminology is loaded and stupid and that's a valid topic of discussion.

>>49458372
>>49458341
You are autistic

Please go to reddit and make some faggoty safespace thread about changing the terminology so it doesn't trigger you so hard

>>49458388
reddit jacks off to "fair" decks even more than you guys.

>>49458372
You're being belligerent at this point. You've already "questioned" the terminology and your different views have been addressed. It's been discussed how the labels have progressed beyond the scope of their origins and are intended to do nothing more than represent two styles of play. Similarly, you need to progress beyond your initial reaction to them, because you don't have any ability to change them, only the ability to change yourself.

>whining about fair vs unfair

Next you'll whine about when decks are called the beatdown, or the terms "big deck vs little deck" or Bugs n Thugs

>>49458372
nobody questions it because it's adequate terminology
magic has and always will be about tapping lands to play creatures and creature combat in some form and will be considered the "correct" or "fair" way to play and win the game, because it promotes interaction between the players. That's why Jund is fair, because it has to tap it's lands to play its creatures and then attack with them
Ad Nauseam, while still needing mana, does not attack with creatures and win. Bloom Titan, Ugin Eldrazi, Living End break those facets in some way and are considered unfair, because the opponent cannot usually interact with what they're doing, they don't use creature combat, or they're abusing tapping lands to play creatures or some degree of all three.

>>49458445
Or "white weenies" or "suicide black"

>>49458388
are you under the impression that "unfair" in this context came from some unrelated etymology?
because it's pretty clear to everyone else that it came from some crybaby bitch whining about how decks he doesn't know how to play against are "unfair"

>>49458436
>>49458449

I yield on these points. I just feel that calling a certain playstyle unfair creates pressure to play "fairly" by the nature of the language. I don't think that pressure should be there because combo is a perfectly acceptable playstyle.

>>49458495
>because it's pretty clear to everyone else that it came from some crybaby bitch whining about how decks he doesn't know how to play against are "unfair"

This is what I assumed was the case.

>>49456779
I think that works but you would have to stack the triggers so that graft resolves before evolve trigger. Once the evolve trigger resolves you immediately put the Krasis' trigger on top of the stack and resolve it next.

>Cast armorcraft judge
>Judge enters the battlefield
>Put Judge, Evolve and Graft triggers on the stack in that order.
>Resolves in reverse order so:
>Graft > Evolve > Judge
>Graft resolves, you move a counter to the Judge. 1/1 spider and a 4/4 judge
>Evolve resolves, you now have a 4/3 krasis
>Krasis ability goes on stack. Stack now looks like: Krasis > Judge
>Krasis ability resolves. You get a 2/2, 4/3 and 5/5
>Judge ability resolves, you draw 3.

>>49458512
>I yield on these points. I just feel that calling a certain playstyle unfair creates pressure to play "fairly" by the nature of the language. I don't think that pressure should be there because combo is a perfectly acceptable playstyle.
than that's your fucking problem and you should get over it
combo is acceptable in terms of a competitive meta, and synergies between cards is perfectly acceptable, it's winning all at once in a single turn in a way that's hard to combat, that goes against the original and current design philosophy of the game
besides, what the fuck else would you call it?

Wow, this thread really opened my eyes on how combo players feel about me calling their decks "unfair" with such loaded and toxic language

From now on instead of "unfair", I'll call the conglomeration of decks that don't play by the regular rules "faggot decks". The people that pilot these decks will be "faggots"

I encourage my fellow magic players to do the same

>>49458576
Rude

>>49458576

Personally, my favorite faggot deck is Krak-Clan Ironworks/Eggs.

>>49457456

Goblin God hands are faster than any of those decks, nigh unbeatable

As I said it's a consistency issue

>>49458576
that'd be great you'll get kicked out of the LGS and I'll get a bye

>>49458569
do combo decks annoy you?

File: 8ee58da36e042ad4a26fb222a32d208b.jpg (413KB, 717x880px) Image search: [Google]

413KB, 717x880px

>>49458607

>>49458607
not at all, that's actually all I play, I haven't played a fair game of magic since I started
you're just a faggot

>>49458495
Are you under the impression that a term can't become divorced from it's etymology?

No matter how it was established, they exist now with a specific usage that renders irrelevant any emotional factor that precipitated their adoption.

tell me when to stop...

WU rev for 15 is an unfair deck
URG Delver is an unfair deck
junk is an unfair deck
jund is an unfair deck
jeskai nahiri is an unfair deck
merfolk is an unfair deck
burn is an unfair deck
affinity is an unfair deck
death shadow is an unfair deck
infect is an unfair deck

>>49457911
A fair deck plays Magic without abusing any sort of rule or mechanic.

An unfair deck plays cards in a way they aren't meant to be played or abuses a strange interaction.

Decks that focus on cheating things into play (reanimator, any sort of tinker effect, etc...) are unfair. Tron is similarly unfair because it aims to generate 7 mana on turn 3, something the game is not designed around players having access to. Amulet Bloom is unfair for a similar reason.

Most combo decks are also unfair (Ad Nauseum isn't supposed to read 'draw your entire deck' because it would kill you. Angel's Grace makes it an unfair interaction. Living End is just reanimator/cheating creatures into play, Storm is based around casting upwards of 10 spells in a single turn which is not supposed to be a thing players do thanks to both the mana system and maximum hand size, etc...)

Jund, Burn, Delver, Merfolk, Hatebears, and any UWx control decks are fair decks in that nothing they do is inherently broken by game standards.

Affinity and Infect are basically straddling the line. Infect is arguably unfair because any pump spell is essentially twice as good. If Pendelhaven gave a creature +2/+2 or if Mutagenic Growth gave +4/+2 for free it would be kind of busted. Having your opponent's starting life total be 10 is kind of unfair but it was a specifically designed mechanic so the argument doesn't fit as well. Invigorate would absolutely be a broken/unfair interaction in the deck if it were legal though.

Affinity often plays out like a combo deck and vomits out 4-5 spells on turn 1, which is unfair even for an aggro deck that is looking to vomit its hands out asap. On the other hand it wins almost exclusively through creatures attacking over the course of multiple turns, which is a reasonably fair win condition for a deck.

>>49458686
>WU rev for 15 is an unfair deck
no
>URG Delver is an unfair deck
no
>junk is an unfair deck
no
>jund is an unfair deck
no
>jeskai nahiri is an unfair deck
no
>merfolk is an unfair deck
no
>burn is an unfair deck
no
>affinity is an unfair deck
yes, it can dump it's hand early. while you could just play a deck chock full of 0-1 mana creatures, affinity can then use other artifact cards to make those cards into very powerful threats
>death shadow is an unfair deck
no, just really fast
>infect is an unfair deck
poison is an unfair mechanic because 2 cards in the entire game can counter it and only 1 is modern legal, and even that doesn't see play
t. infect player

>>49458692
>my version of playing magic is the right one, and yours is no good

>>49458750
You're getting held up on the choice of terms again.

>>49458750
Where did the Jund player touch you?

Why are you such an asspained combo player?

>>49457093
Of course not. >>49456010 probably wasn't paying attention if he saw "MTG Modern General"

>>49458750
>http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/making-magic/unfairest-them-all-2013-12-20

>Fair vs. Unfair

>Fair decks tend to be straightforward creature strategies that look to resolve spells for the costs in the upper-right corner of the cards, then turn guys sideways until the game is over. "Unfair" decks tend to contain the potential for serious abuse with narrow, powerful cards that can do ridiculous things when the plan comes together.

There's not any emotion to the descriptions, they're just jargon.

>>49457178
but I thought "/tg/ is bad at Magic". What other places on the internet do you know of that talk about magic, but aren't suitable places for honest discussion?

>>49458750
Nowhere did I imply that unfair decks are 'no good'. It would be stupid to call mono red burn a control deck just as it would be stupid to call ad nauseum a fair deck. Magic game design and balance is based around an intended cost and resource management for cards. The most obvious of these resources is the mana system, but R&D also focuses balance on the expectations that you will be drawing 1 card a turn, will have no more than 7 or 8 cards in your hand at any given time, will be casting your spells for their mana costs, will have a finite amount of life, generally not more than 20. When some cards are allowed to bypass these expectations they become significantly more powerful than they were designed to be and have a significant advantage over cards that do not bypass the expectations/balance that R&D tries to design.

The problem arises when idiots (like you) assume that unfair decks are either (1) stronger or (2) less legitimate than fair decks. Neither of these things are true. Storm is an unfair deck but it is significantly weaker than Jund, a fair deck. Most of the time unfair decks are more vulnerable to targeted hate and thus are significantly more fragile. The distinction between fair and unfair has no moral or emotional component, it's just whether or not your playing spells as the game was designed and balanced around, or are finding a way to subvert that design and take advantage of the rules to bypass balance.

Not that I expect a shitposting retard like you to actually understand any of what I've said mind you ;^)

>>49458814
Saying "/tg/ is bad at Magic" isn't necessarily implying the average users of other sites are actually any better. Everyone is retarded during spoiler season.

>>49458832
>The problem arises when idiots (like you) assume that unfair decks are either (1) stronger or (2) less legitimate than fair decks

I haven't said either of these and even argued against the second. It's the language itself that implies unfair decks are less legitimate. I think that language is retarded precisely because the decks are legitimate.

>>49458860
autismspeaks.org

>>49458860
mate, it's time to give it up
we're here for you, we just want what's best

>>49458208
He used to be a developer, so it's possible he gained some of his reputation then, although that might have only been before the internet was common place.

Most games makers don't have the distinction between design and development like magic does. In most places the people that start making a game are the people that finish making it. So the distinction between designer and developer in Magic is understandably lost on some people who aren't as Mel as other players. Also MaRo is the head of one of those 2 (interchangeable to the enlightened) departments and the is most visible member of R&D.

>>49458895
I meant unenlightened, not enlightened.

>>49458840

Spoiler season is the worst, because people that usually don't play try to speculate and the obvious shills.

>OMG I'M SO EXCITED FOR THIS SET GUYS
>GET HYPE FOR KALADESH
>this obvious chase rare is really good for modern dude
>this 1WW flier is gonna shake the meta
>hype trains confirmed

>>49458895
Shout outs to MaRo being able to deal with the bullshit he does, while being chipper about it. Poor bastard has to pretend to be excited for some obvious limited garbage. Not to say he doesn't deserve the flak he gets (like Urzas Block fuck him for doing that, for real)

>>49458860
Language exists to communicate thoughts and concepts. In this case, you're conflating the usage of "fair and unfair" as terminology with the common usage of "fair and unfair" to describe something in reference to an assumed standards of legitimacy or justice. The point being, part of using language is determining context and then translating words through that context to determine what thoughts or concepts the other person is trying to communicate to you. When someone describes a deck as "fair or unfair" in relation to Magic, they're not necessarily invoking a comparison based on perceptions of legitimacy, they're using those terms to reference communally understood concepts of strategy.

To put it very simply, you're reading it wrong.

>>49458860
Your victim complex is fucking huge

>>49458937
IIRC he's assured us that he doesn't pretend to get excited. IIRC he also said he get's excited easily.

im suprised no one is talking about zoo. lets talk about zoo. im still waiting to get the rest of my deck built, just need 6 more fetches and a playset of gobby guides.

>>49459229
Nobody is talking about Zoo because it's been outdone by Zooicide.

>>49459229
Is there anything to talk about zoo in regards to kaladesh besides the fast land cycle finishing and how potential changes in decks besides zoo might change zoo's match ups with those decks?

How good would the fast land mana base even be in a deck with wild nacatls and kird apes?

Who actually plays Zooicide
I've never seen anyone play it online or in person, and I've never seen it on SCG, yet it's still a decent chunk of the meta

>>49459287
Well I guess there is potential match-ups against brand new decks.

I'm interested to see what tier any dubious challenge or madcap experiment decks reach.

>>49459356

I'd play it if Shadow wasn't $60 for a playset and I didn't just blow that much on a playset of SFM (with requisite SFaI and Batterskull) on a bet they're unbanning her.

If they don't, I've got a decent chunk of Legacy dnt already then

>>49459394

Im sitting on a playset of death shadows and I cant trade it off at all. I ordered them way back when they were completely meme cards on the cheap to make a extremely silly deck.

>>49458937
maro dick sucking shill detected

>>49455603
Might as well add in SSG so you turn have more turn 2 all-in Evolutions.

The Delve plan has been thoroughly tested and has failed to put up results so you can probably skip that.

For D&T and GW Hatebears, what would you guys sideboard against Bant Eldrazi? I'm looking at Magus of the Moat and Marble Titan, respectively

>>49459356
I play Zooicide and love it to death.

>>49459691
Did you try pucca trade? It's been in some mtg mentioned channels recently, but I didn't pay close attention to what they said.
That aside, there's always the monetary route.

File: 1363592389762.jpg (125KB, 500x418px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 500x418px

Mind Sculptor unban soon fellow modern players

>>49460859
All blue cards banned soon is more likely

>>49460873
That'd only be banning Snapcaster

Blue has no other cards

>>49460880
All blue cards banned in every format

>>49455746
>isn't even the best aggro deck in the format right now
You think DS is? lol

Why play Modern when the only format of value to Wizards is Standard?

>>49461277
>why not base your decisions on how much they will benefit a for profit corporation
do you dream of being cattle too?

>>49461277
1. Standard sucks now
2. Wizards sucks now

>>49461341
>>49461378
All the events and support are for Standard bros

Become Immense

Prized Amalgam

Cranial Plating

Eldrazi Displacer

BANN PLS!

>>49461725
You forgot to mention Tron, Jundo.

>>49461725
>>49461788
Let's not stop there let's throw some more decks into the list.

>Tarmogoyf
>Lightning Bolt
>Nahiri
>Ancient Stirrings

Modern Nexus did an All Ban List Modern thought experiment a while ago. Very interesting. I'm pretty sure every card ended up on the ban list except like, basic forests and battle of wits.

>>49461848
With Goyf, Jund would just run lists from 2 months ago but with Flayer in his place, then continue to stomp all over the format.

>>49461878
Nah, Goyf is the only irreplaceable card in BGx. Every other creature the decks can run that is even remotely as threatening as Goyf either doesn't play well in multiples or is significantly more expensive. There are plenty of other choices for value walkers, efficient removal, and at this point even beaters with card advantage attached, but no other creature rivals Tarmogoyf's board presence for its cost.

>>49456779
I feel like armorcraft judge would be playable alongside a deck using gavony township

>>49455549
>>49455585
>tfw right around when innistrad first was going to rotate out the mana was so good in standard there was constant new decks popping up. SUre there was thragtusk but there would be usually 2 threads up for standard and they'd cap out several times a day

>>49459394
I never got into Zooicide because I didn't want to sink $100 into fucking Baubles.

>>49460580
how about intrepid hero?

> ub faeries will never be a viable deck

>>49462773
Shit I completely forgot about that card, thanks anon! It also goes better with the curve than either of the four-drops

>>49462773
>>49463161
How are you going to protect it from a Displacer?

>>49462866
Faeries was the first Modern deck I made.

>>49463375
Tap it in response to the displacer trigger. The matchup is honestly really rough and I'm only considering boarding for it because three people are running it on my LGS

>>49463490
>Tap it in response to the displacer trigger.

Who says you're going to have the haste to do that? Also, of note, you can't kill Displacer with it so at best you're getting one activation out of that.

>>49463602

>the deck l i t e r a l l y only has intrepid hero as interaction

you might as well be on the other side as the eldrazi player and say "how are you going to protect it against intrepid hero?"

Why the fuck wasn't displacer's ability a tap ability
why is thought-knot seer a 4/4 with an upside for 4
why does reality smasehr get 3 abilities and is a 5/5 for 5
why is mimic a 2/1 instead of a 1/1 or 0/1

fuck development

>>49463645

not only that but reality smashers third ability is a guaranteed 2 for 1 if you don't have a dude big enough to answer it

wizards r&d really fucked up with those dudes

>>49463645
4/4 for 4 with an upside isn't that impressive, 4/4 for 3 with upside is the only reason it's played

File: Nissa.png (137KB, 223x311px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 223x311px

>go past LGS
>oh hey they have some oath boosters left
>guess i will buy one
>pull this
hey it feels nice

>>49463645
Because Wizards wanted epic Eldrazi to do well in the Magic Super Bowl so people would buy a ton of Oath packs

This is also why they banned Twin

>>49463692
>Pull Promo Duel Deck Nissa out of a booster.

>>49463631
And Displacer isn't the Eldrazi's only out to Hero. The point being that you're not reliably going to be able to do anything with Hero before it gets taken out of the picture. It's not a particularly potent enough sideboard card to really guarantee you anything.

>>49463888
Do you guys have any other recommendations in lieu of it?

File: nissa-voice-of-zendikar-p224102-189816_image.jpg (49KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 500x500px

>>49463862
i mean this particular planeswalker, not exact art.
Booster pack art. Pic related.
God damn you guys like to nitpick

>>49463645
My question is how did the Gatewatch beat them. if all drazi are like those three, they would destroy a deck of just those walkers and a handful of allies

>>49461413
Who gives a fuck about their shitty events?
Go enjoy your bank company mirrors elsewhere

>>49463949
Wow. Thanks for this fascinating update in the modern thread

>>49463708
Would Twin have even been able to do much against eldrazi
Has anyone tested twin vs ugin eldrazi?

>>49463645
>because colourless can do what every other colour can do but worse >:^)

>>49463949
>7 dollar planeswalker that sees no play in modern
Flaunt harder famaladingdong

>>49463949
welcome to the safe haven of autism

>>49464238
Testing showed eldrazi had ~75% win rate vs twin at the time.

>>49464238
I'm not saying Twin could beat Eldrazi at the time of the pro tour but Wizards didn't know how strong the new-eldrazi were with sol lands

They just wanted Twin gone so Eldrazi had a better shot at doing well

>>49464306
So banning twin would have done nothing
I wonder how it fairs vs Bant Eldrazi, I feel like it's in Eldrazi's favor because it has speed and disruption but maybe not enough

>>49464316
You Twin conspiracy theorists are ridiculous sometimes.

>>49464325
Bank eldrazi runs 4 path and thoughtknot last I checked. Seems in bant eldrazi's flavor if only slightly. Twin had a hard time with tarmogoyf ending games so fast, now imagine a 5/5 trample haste.

>>49464238
Uh no. They banned twin literally just to shake up the meta. It's still a retarded reason but it wasn't to Jew oath packs

Why is abzan beating out Jund for top 8 spots so often now?

File: wew.jpg (31KB, 223x310px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 223x310px

>>49464292
never got any planeswalker so i am happy with that even if it is 7 dollaridoos jank
>>49464236
no problem my good anon
>>49464294
i already like it here

>>49464425

Because it's the good guy wins episode.

File: 172.jpg (61KB, 312x445px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 312x445px

I want wizards to reprint Aether Flash.

>>49464591
This is an odd name for that effect

Is Delay or Familiar's Ruse any good in a tempo deck or is it better to just stick with Remand? I'm playing UW Spirits and I feel pretty good about it. I just can't decide if it needs more counters or removal. I'm only using 2 Vapor Snag in the main and 2 Path in the side

>>49464691
Remand is better than delay. Familiar's Ruse depends on your list but I would err towards it being worse as well. It really depends on how many things your deck just can't deal with if they resolve.

>>49464691

The only reason people play Remand is because it replaces itself with a card draw, and unfortunately Delay or Familiar's Ruse don't do that. With the card draw aspect taken out, you might as well just play a hard counterspell like Mana Leak, Negate, Remove Soul, or Spell Pierce in its place.

>>49464691
Remand draws you a card, which is huge
Delay I think sees play as like a one of in some lists

>>49464711
>>49464719
>>49464720

Cool thanks guys

>>49464691
Ruse only goes in eternal command

>>49463888

The way I see it though, if a card is a mandatory removal or else it effectively wins you the game, it's worth running. You can't say it's bad because a deck has answers to it.

>>49465049
A card they can't answer is better.

>>49464711
>>49464719
>>49464720

I'm of the mindset that Delay is a hard counter as long as you can win in the meantime. The issue is that control decks play the long game. I could see it being played in a deck that will never let the countered spell see resolution, or maybe something with wasteland strangler.

>>49465071

What do you suggest?

>>49465103
Play bogles

>>49465079
Remand is a better tempo play since it gets you the card though
If you're trying to win in the next few turns, sure delay would be better, but odds are you're already an OTK deck and pact would be better there anyway
The strangler idea is cool, I'd love to see a UB eldrazi deck like before they became a meme

>>49465079

Right, if the stars align just right they'll never get that spell off, Remand does that and draws you a card, and a hard counter just deals with the spell permanently. If you really want to run delays, you need to figure out a way to make the unique "cast this 3 turns later" effect relevant, otherwise it's just going to be an inferior counterspell to the other options you have.

File: Image.jpg (34KB, 223x310px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 223x310px

Building first modern deck.

Souls sisters or infect?

hey guise i've got some random question, is there a site like danbooru etc. that specialises in MTG fanart? thanks

>>49465165
Infect

>>49465180
and mtg art in general*

>>49465165
infect is a real deck

>>49465133

There are also situations, such as a spell like Path after turn 2, where a delay will do better than a remand. Remand is a great tempo play, but it isn't for when you actually want to answer something. Don't get me wrong, it's not often that they will have must-answer 1 CMC spells because a control deck often won't have permanents to protect, but I have a soft spot for a 1U counter that gets rid of it regardless of remaining mana.

>>49465165

Do you want to have fun or do you want to have people bitching about how cheap your deck is?

Fun and Fair: Stake Sisters
Unfair and Will Probably Be Banned In The Future: Infect

>>49463949
I'm going to make a Wilted Abzan list and put 4 of this one it.
Since it's gone from 20$ to only like 7$ now I think it's worth a shot.

File: Image.png (118KB, 223x311px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 223x311px

>>49465133
>need to figure out a way to make the unique "cast this 3 turns later" effect relevant,

>>49465165
That's easy, do you want to win or lose?

>>49466071

I'm sad that that's the only good processor. Why wouldn't we get ones with other cool processing? I wanna see a 1cmc 1/1 that you could process 1, tap to add {C}{C}. Or 2RR with ETB process 3 or 4, discard your hand and draw 7. maybe not necessarily all constructed playable, but.. at least not just draft fodder.

why not a bear that processes 2 on ETB to give you a second 2/2? that would seem fine. Those sorts of things. just not mana sink trash.

File: combo.jpg (117KB, 817x555px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 817x555px

y/n?

>>49466969

you're late. people have been theorycrafting this since the day of madcap spoiling.

>>49466980
I know I didn't come up with it I was just wondering what people's thoughts were.

>>49466969
not Platinum Angel?

>>49466965
Eh, Blight herder is OK. Not great but solidly sorta OK I guess tier.

>>49467004

platinum angel puts you one path or any artifact removal from the game. at least emperion makes you safe from the damage.

>>49467004
If you flip platinum angel you still take a ton of damage, and if you go below 1 life you'll die immediately if they kill the angel. This guy prevents the madcap experiment from damaging you. I want to try it in blue moon.

>>49467004
>Platinum Angel
>Reveal 24 cards until Platinum Angel
>Receive 24 Damage
>Be on -4
>Opponent then just Paths the Platinum Angel
>GG WP

>>49466969
n

>>49466969
I can see this in something but I don't know what
Control maybe?
Maybe a new blue red archetype?

I feel like some kind of midrange/combo artifact deck might actually be legit with the new cards
None of them are super broken on their own but I think there might be enough power to make something work using something similar to a twin shell, using counters and bolts

File: Madcap.png (188KB, 256x365px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 256x365px

>>49467609
It's just a package. It's the kind of thing where absolutely nothing else in the deck actually needs to acknowledge it, and it doesn't interrupt anything else the deck is doing. It's basically just a question of what deck would play a card that looks like this.

>>49467823
Jund could probably play it as its only 4 drop. Accidental Emperion draws can just be fed to Lilly. Though Bob's gonna getcha.

>>49467823
>It's just a package. It's the kind of thing where absolutely nothing else in the deck actually needs to acknowledge it

To an extent. It's the the kind of thing where absolutely nothing in the deck CAN acknowledge it. If you run a single other artifact you run the chance of killing yourself.

Anyone else notice Ajani on the art for Dramatic Reversal?

>>49465103
>>49463919
Worship

File: onlinerage.jpg (290KB, 1652x855px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 1652x855px

why is online play full of anti fun people?

>>49468016

>someone tried to play bogles: shit edition
>sees anything that remotely reminds a competitive deck
>scoops on 1st turn as he can only play against other barely playable jank
>the guy probably goes on rants how netdeckers are ruining the game by playing good cards when all he wants to do is to play jank.

File: 1474435817248.jpg (14KB, 249x225px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 249x225px

>>49468136
>mfw its deso

>>49465341
You guys are fucking retarded if you actually think infect is going to see any bans with any of its cards.

Anyone else feel like the Processor deck still might actually work

>>49468285

It's breaking the turn four rule with regularity, winning on turns 2 and 3 even when hate is aimed at its creatures.

It's dead, jim.

>>49468285
You think Bloom Titan was at 70% of the meta when Summer Bloom was banned?

>>49468404
Bloom Titan was worse than infect

>>49468404
>70% of the meta
Try 7%.

>>49467609
UR madcap saheeli whirler virtuoso

play around energy and artifacts using saheeli to accelerate out decoction effects for infinite thropter generation with energy, and otherwise putting huge ass artifacts into play like such.

With nothing but modules/or no modules at all, you'd probably be able to hit platinum emperion/other big artifact fairly regularly. You might even be able to potentially go RW with madcap and various control effects and maybe just splash lifelink/life gain to offset the experiment damage. Madcap in BR with rush of vitality/Noxious/Combustible gearhulks could also be fun

>>49468285
Infect is almost guaranteed to lose either Mutagenic Growth or Become Immense. Cost reducing effects are how the deck is scoring turn 2/3 kills and that's not what they want out of Modern right now.

For the same reason, there's some risk they might axe Simian Spirit Guide, since Goryo's very recently overperformed at an event and showed it was flagrantly breaking the turn 2/3 rule and when it was it often came down to Spirit Guide as how.

>>49468562
I was thinking something similar, yeah

>>49468565
Goryo's also hasn't shown up anywhere else, and the 4 recent tournaments after Orlando didn't have very much infect and it didn't win any of the tournaments
The meta is cyclical and people are going to start playing decks that beat it. It's going to be fine, it's a beatable deck and it's not a huge part of the meta. I think wizards lets it stay around is because despite being able to kill early, it can easily lose if it gives up any tempo since it's so fragile.

>>49455666
>not using wispweaver angel for the ultimate etb combo
lol mate

File: 20160922_191012.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

>>49465165
Put together a bunch of pieces for Norin Sisters

Spent 110, did I fuck up? Had to go with her promo paths because Dat art

>>49469524
Yes. The deck is bad. Just play normal soul sisters if you must be a memer

>>49466969
http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/madcap-experimentation-in-modern/

>>49469524
Do you want to win or have a fun deck?
If you answered yes to the first one, probably. It depends on your metagame.

As for the second one, depends on your play style or something probably.

File: laughing dc.gif (3MB, 284x309px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 284x309px

>>49469645

>channel fireball

File: 1473954439707.jpg (179KB, 872x872px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 872x872px

>playing strangler eldrazi
>get matched up against restore balance
>mfw pulling his gargadon with a strangler, then inquisitioning and getting balance and extracting it

>>49469524

No you didn't waste your money. You may not win all the time, but there is truly, truly no better feeling than watching salty burn players' faces when you drop martyr with mana open. This also goes for death shadow shitters

>>49470368

Wait wtf you're not even plating martyr that's the sole entertainment of the deck.

>>49469524

nah man, you did good.

File: mrc.jpg (2MB, 3150x1613px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3150x1613px

What's the best control deck and why is it Mono Red?

>>49455963
Merfolk is tier 1 you mongoloid

Been trying madcap
Emperion still isn't great even on turn 3

>>49470545
>all white border

WEEEW LAAD

>>49470545

How'd you do the white borders? Acetone?

>>49470982
Actually it's just printed on the inner sleeves. Wouldn't do my cards no harm

>>49471039
gross

File: image.png (124KB, 223x311px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 223x311px

>>49455666
I was thinking about abusing the first ability and making a life gain storm deck, where instead if casting all the spells in one turn, it has more control elements and is more resistant to c-c-c-combo breaking. Maybe even run Kambal and spells that make you lose life, that can be negated? Right now I'm concentrating on making a good standard deck, so I'm just talking out of my butt right now.

I want to get into Modern but I'm a desperate poorfag- are there any decks that are relatively easy on the budget and still fun/can win every now and then?

>>49471219
not really

>>49471219
Bogles I guess

>>49457355
I chuckled

>>49471219

Nah man. Unless you want to do shit like poorfag UR Delver or poorfag Rock.

Like even if you started with mono-white dnt, you'd still have to pay for paths ($50) and vials ($160 or so). The main shit isn't cheap either, probably $150 or so. The sideboard can get pricey too. Pray that SFM doesn't get unbanned, because her price is going to skyrocket.

There's merfolk too, but that's for literal homos. You can try boggles, and pray that you have something else in play when they drop Lily.

>>49457820
I'm more offended by the giant gut crammed in a sports sweater. Atleast Brad Nelson knows better.

>>49471305
>pray that you have something else in play when they drop Lily.
>2016
>not holding a fetch against BGx

>>49471328
He probably doesn't play the deck, so he doesn't know that trick.

>>49471415

Fetch into Dryad? Cute play.

Terminate/Bolt/Dreadbore

>>49471219
goblins are a pretty easy on the budget if you don't buy the goblin guides.

>>49471504
yeah, but that requires you to have 4 mana on that turn
bogles should have figured something out by then

>>49471504
Those removal spells are sure great against a deck playing hexproof creatures.

You don't even have a line in that scenario, you have 3 mana available on t3 against Bogles, who likely has a 3-4/x by then with hexproof. If you pass turn you lose 100% of the time. A retarded player wouldn't even fetch then.You are showing you have no comprehension of how to play either BG/x or Bogles.

>>49471573

>a bgx deck hasn't taken out the auras before then
>not setting up engineered explosives
>no maelstrom pulse

Hilarious.

>>49471662
>Shows no awareness of how to play matchup
>Starts thinking of ways to blow up auras
>1 of maindeck
>Postboard card
kek dude, do you even play modern or are you really this stupid?

>>49471687

>matchup is about auras
>lol it's not about that

"lol ur dumb" doesn't mean shit when you don't actually elucidate on it.

It wasnt even about killing auras either. Think Inquisition and Thoughtseize. Shit that would go after the problem auras (namely the ones that provide evasion of some sort, you can just chump through with Tarmo ) or just snipe out their scout or boggle in the first place because they probably mulled down to 5 to get a hexproof dude in the first place.

>>49466969
Currently building a jeskai madcap into blightsteel colossus with intervention pact. It needs some fine tuning but it's not bad so far.

>>49470545
how's that list working out for you? mizzium morders is good, and eternal scourge is cute, but how are you liking no reckoners?

i just want it to be monday so i can figure out what to play at Milwaukee and start hardcore practicing it

>>49471994
What's the point of building Madcap if you're just making it into an unreliable two-card combo that doesn't even win on the turn you play it?

>>49471918
I don't have to elucidate on "lol ur dumb" because you make it easy for me. Then you back that up with a bunch of hypotheticals.

>Maybe if they mull to 5 and I have discard I can win
Well no shit, against most decks you win if that happens. That doesn't take skill.

>>49458950

I like you. You are well spoken. Thanks for posting.

>>49472198
In a control shell it's working so far. Just durdle around and play counters, removal, and serum visions/sleight of hand to flip through the deck. With saheeli out you can minus 2 her and attack immediately with it. Plus usually you'll have more than enough life to just turn blightsteel colossus sideways a couple times and win.

And why? Because it's fun and awesome. I really like madcap, it's a very "red" card. It's volatile, chaotic, and powerful.

>>49472242
I just think that if you're stuck with all the weaknesses of a combo deck, you should be playing a combo with the strength to kill someone the turn you use it.

>>49472282
Yeah probably, but look at it as a control finisher. It will pretty much always win within 3 turns, maximum, and sometimes immediately. It's a pretty sharp corner to turn.

How can I work on working a line and figuring out which lines to play
I can play and do decent with decks but I have no idea why I one, and I want to learn how to evaluate complex lines, looking for a super oldfag to give some tips

>>49470815
mind stone + boros pariah

>>49472314
Could get fucked over with instant speed artifact removal.
If I'm remembering stack injection right. And he's able to hit on the body hitting the field, but before the damage is applied.

>>49472756
The only removal being bandied around right now that can take down a Blightsteel is Path.

Also, nobody gets priority after Blightsteel enters the battlefield but before damage is dealt. They have to wait for the entire spell to finish resolving.

File: 0nlKJd2nWhD6zbL.gif (261KB, 500x385px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 500x385px

>>49455685


I run 3 in this deck (http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/cranial-flush/) just for the deck search trigger for archive trap along with extirpate. I almost always run 2x just for the nonbasic land removal though.

Also looking for advice on an 8-rack deck. (http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/16-09-16-assisted-suicide/)

Is there something cheaper I can use instead of bloodghasts? I was thinking relentless dead

>>49472883
Yeah, I'm usually misremembering the rules in the more advanced scenarios.

Probably conflating it with blink-shinanigans with things like banisher priest and Ishacron Scepter.

>>49472908
There aren't any blink shenanigans with Banisher Priest. If anyone, you're thinking of Fiend Hunter.

>>49470545
i've lost to the infect guy at my shop twice on skred and it feels so awful...
I was generally able to control his board for several turns but never could tap out for koth or a threat and ended up running out of removal. I've been thinking that i should board out my high drops and bring in 3 rabblemasters so i can apply pressure sooner. What do you think?

>>49462866
is that only because of zoo decks? i tried it a couple times and it felt good against everything that wasn't dumb aggro

>>49463919
yeah, worship is probably better. hero just came to mind because a bunch of chord deck were running him in summer. without tutors you might as well go with the enchantment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFgAeyzAln0

wtf redpill me on this pls

>>49471219
what is your price range?

>>49472935
Right, at looking it seems that they walked back the ruling I know was there before that the scepter, if properly blinked, gets to cast two spells for one activation.

>>49472962
wizards is full of fags
end of story

>>49471994
The only thing I like about Madcap with prevention effects is that it makes for very interesting sideboard plans. You can bring in Inkwell against decks with Path, Emperion against decks that can't get past it, or Steel Wind against decks where you need the life. Maybe Sundering Titan if the deck has trouble with Scapeshift or something.

>>49472970
>Right, at looking it seems that they walked back the ruling I know was there before that

No, Banisher Priest's wording was specifically designed to close the loophole that existed with previous similar effect. I'm dead certain what you're thinking of is Fiend Hunter.

As for Isochron Scepter, there's not any way you can cast two things by blinking it. As soon as it leaves the battlefield, it breaks the link between it and the card it was imprinted with, or if you blink it before resolving its Imprint ability it will not link up to that ability to the Isochron Scepter once it returns to the battlefield.

The only way to get Isochron Scepter to cast two things at once is with Strionic Resonator.

Is Tron dying?

Haven't seen the shit in a long time

File: D3tmeHV.png (186KB, 265x370px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 265x370px

Everyone seems to be forgetting a key interaction with the madcap decks. And that is if you're running a Intervention Pact variant, you're gonna gain a fuck ton of life. And you know what artifact was spoiled that cares about life and goes for an instakill? Pic related.

Here is what I have so far. Land base can be worked on obviously, but through playtesting the deck is pretty fun.

http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/boros-reservoir-1/

>>49474398
Kinda
http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/post-kaladesh-premier-play-2016-09-22
2 decks out of the 70 or so in the World Magic Cup Qualifiers were tron. One was even Blue White tron and was honestly more of a gifts deck.

>>49474416
I think a big problem you'll have with this deck is not reaching 50 life a good % of the time. Nearly all your spells are white, consider running martyr of sands.

>>49474471
I did consider it. But I have no idea what to cut. I'd also like to include a copy of Emrakul as a secondary wincon through nahiri.

>>49472899

>Also looking for advice on an 8-rack deck. (http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/16-09-16-assisted-suicide/)

>8 rack
>there's no rack
>2 shrieking afflictions

>phyrexian arena
>modern legal

>Ensnaring Bridge in sideboard instead of mainboard

>dakmor salvage for no reason

>8rack
>bloodghast
>winning by creature combat

Anon...

>>49471219

>monogreen stompy
>8whack (no guides build)
>soul sisters
>bogles (no canopy build)
>elves (no cavern of souls build)

From least competitive to the most competitive. Fuck autists who say "tier 1 or bust".