How do I intentionally lose a game of Magic the Gathering while looking like I am trying to play seriously? It seems that I either play badly, but not badly enough to lose to this person or play in a way that is far too obvious to the person. Assume that the decks are evenly matched.Trying to build another players confidence so they don't feel like they lose every single game.
>>48049959
Build a cheap janky shitty yet challenging threat of a deck.
I recommend haunting misery, it can win turn one but anyone with skill can actually beat it and it's a good trainer for a vintage-legacy speed decks.
Don't cast all your spells.
Really, that's it. Your opponent can't see what's in your hand, and all you have to do is play while holding onto some reserves. New players are pretty bad at counting cards in hand, and even if you end up with a big hand, there's a number of excuses you can use, like too high CMC, your cards are too situational, you're holding onto reserves, or you're missing a vital color.
>>48049959
Find some bulk rares/uncommons with synergy and build a durdly synergism deck. for example I built a deck with Secrets of the Dead/Burning Vengeance that looped Mystic Retrieval and Runic Repetition, took advantage of Gravecrawler and Infernal Plunge as a mana generating engine, and used Zombie Infestation to get the engine started with only one Gravecrawler and doubled as a wincon with more than one Secrets out and even let me cast my Mystic's at a discount with flashback. It's a sweet deck that's slow to get going and transparent but it's also fun and interesting to play with all the lines of play you can take.
>>48050143
This can only work so many times before OP's opponent catches on unless you build a deck for it.
>>48050156
That will work. You gotta build a training wheels deck to teach your opponent. Or you could build them a really powerful deck that they would enjoy playing.
What does your opponent person enjoy playing?
>>48050143
I tried doing this, but it didn't work. They still ended up losing.
>>48050156
We played two pauper decks together; he played delver and I played UW reality acid. I am unsure if I can get much more durdly than that.
>>48050196
I am not sure entirely. He seems to either have slower aggro decks or control decks.
>>48050335
Maybe they want you to dominate them in the game like they want you dominate them in bed <3
>>48050335
Well, tireless tribe about face is a turn two pauper deck that requires some skill to pilot. Have them try it.
>>48050362
Not every battle partner is sexual fampai
>>48049959
Stop coddling him or else he'll never get better
>>48049959
Make both decks; one for you, and one for your opponent. This is how I got my best friend into Magic back in High School
For your opponent's deck, make it a creature focussed deck. Give it mana-dorks, but not much ramp. Make sure you add in a bunch of cards that say "must attack each turn if able," so that your opponent doesn't play too pasively.
For your deck, make a 3 colour value/midrange deck with only basic lands and no life-gain. To further expand this, give it a few abilities that actually require you to pay life.
neither deck should have more than the most basic removal.
>>48049959
Are you playing against a kid like a younger sibling? If yes, it's pretty easy to stack their deck for them while shuffling, I used to do this for my younger brothers when they were new to the game. Against random people, not casting everything works best since they have no way to know what you have in hand. You can also just build a casual oriented decks by picking a neat theme that isn't super powerful or building a good deck but omitting the expensive part
Would it be a good idea to use intro decks? Or are those too poorly constructed to be enjoyable?
>>48050335
If you were sandbagging spells the entire time and they still lost, they're bad enough that they won't notice if you make misplays.
>>48049959
Make several decks using only Kamigawa cards and building around Bushido, Spirits, Arcane spells, Ninjitsu, Oni, or Soratami as a theme. The cards are generally mediocre but have excellent flavour and are represented in most colours, so you can make a ton of different decks. Use mostly commons, a few uncommons, and one or two rares at most.
Kamigawa has excellent flavour, the art is top-notch, and the power level of the sets is very low. The decks will seem fair and well-made while being inferior to most kitchen table fare.
If all else fails, raise the average CMC of cards in your deck and put in too little mana. You won't have to hold back if you can't play most cards in your hand. When combined with the general low power level of Kamigawa this should be more than sufficient to weaken yourself for your friend.
>>48050335
>pauper
>durdly
Pauper decks tend to be on par with Modern decks.
They're a smidge less consistent, but that's about it.
Beyond that, you're missing the point.
It's not "run bad decks together", it's "run a worse deck than them".
>>48051265
UW reality acid is like tier 3 at best in pauper while delver is tier 1. Should we both try more casual decks instead with mine being much weaker?
>>48049959
Set up the There's the Door combo and use it on yourself
>>48051335
Oh lawdy lawd. I have seen old wcw wrestlers do less jobbing than that m80.
>>48049959
>>48051321
Reality Acid it's great once it gets going.
Delver it's amazing, but requires some knowledge to play. Start with a more straightfoward deck.
>>48051371
Why not do it the old fashioned way you fucking hipster
>>48051360
What
>>48051484
I don't like that one as much. It leaves a mana floating, and I think the updated combo is more interesting.
Play to win, but with a handicap.
Starting with 5 or 6 cards in hand should be enough.
It's honest with the other person and hopefully an interesting challenge to you.
As he or she gets better you can slowly lift the handicap, giving a fun sense of progression.
>>48051604
You don't lose until the start of your next turn, your mana pool empties long before then.
>>48051731
The idea is to build confidence, so a deliberate handicap might not be the best idea.
"Accidently" skipping draws might work better.
>>48051743
Leaving things to clean up after themselves is so irresponsible and dirty, though.
>>48051731
>It's honest with the other person
That's quitter talk.
Just say you're mulliganning.
Mulligan most amazing hands, too.
>>48051604
>>48051484
Also, the updated combo uses all the cards for their intended purposes.
Where the old one, you kind of have to cheese with DC by naming a card not in your deck. It's lamer.
