v
v
R
8
R8/H8 edition
4 Reality Smasher
4 Thought-Knot Seer
4 Matter Reshaper
4 Bearer of Silence
4 Anguished Unmaking
4 Duress
4 Ruinous Path
4 Read The Bones
1 Sorin, Grim Nemisi
3 Declaration in Stone
Mana base, Koilos and Blighted Fens
clearly i have laptop issues
Oliver Tiu's Grixis Control is pretty impressive, I'm on the fence between Kozilek's Return vs Radiant Flames though.
K Return works with Dark Dwellers and is instant speed, even without making use of its built in recursion, it still seems better than Radiant Flames.
>>47142291
I think the 3 damage matters a lot especially when you factor in something like a Gideon Emblem or a Nissa -2
It's pretty easy to go wide but have a lot of stuff about 2 toughness
>>47142291
I prefer Kozilek's Return almost purely because it's instant speed and as such can stop an end of turn Secure the Wastes for 6-7 cold.
>>47143913
Personally I prefer kozilek's return for the shear fact that in online play I have killed a total of 7 avacyns with its rebound effect.
The last time I played standard was last time Innistrad came out. I've started buying into LSV G/B sac deck he played at the pro tour. Has anyone tested with it? Any results?
Westvale abbey. Overpowered or useless?
Advantages:
>Works amazing in token decks such as G/W tokens.
>Can built its own sacrifices if mana screwed.
>The stats on the flip guy make him a wincon by himself.
Disadvantages:
>Clip wings, deceleration in stone, immolation glare, stasis snare, etc are very common in the Meta so it's transformed form has a maximum life span of 1 turn if the opponent is playing white or green.
>Takes a total of 6 lands and 5 dead creatures to flip.
>Sure you can make cleric tokens for 5 mana and a life, but so many things in the current meta absolutely demolish tokens on the field.
>Negate is your bane if you rely on Gideon and nissa for the tokens.
>>47144051
Somewhere in between. Abbey's biggest stength is its ability to slot into any 1-2 color deck at almost no downside. A land that's also a wincon means you're losing nothing from the actual core of your deck to run it, hence why it's played everywhere.
G/U Investigator
4 Tamiyo's Journal
4 Tireless Tracker
4 Graf Mole
4 Briarbridge Patrol
4 Sylvan Advocate
4 Confront the Unknown
3 Weirding Wood
3 Erdwal Illuminator
2 Negate
1 Dragonlord Atarka
1 Thought-Knot Seer
1 Altered Ego
1 Profaner of the Undead
8 Forest, 5 Island, 4 Evolving Wilds, 3 Yavimaya Coast, 2 Lumbering Falls, 1 Mountain, 1 Waste
Briarbridge Patrol underperformed, thinking of cutting a couple and Thought-Knot for a few Angelic Purges. Maybe 1 more Illuminator. Definitely adding a Clip Wings to the main.
Any thoughts? What silver bullets should I be playing?
>>47144027
In fact I tested a budget versionno lilis cause FLGS doesn't have any, used hangarback in placeagainst B/G Eldrazi Tron.inb4 >modern I don't fucking careIt worked consistently and was able to win even against his ramp. Only problem I had was not getting elvish visionary sooner as I was not getting fast enough draws
Why do people say that Werewolves is a good deck? Made a R/G Werewolves deck and I can't transform because niggas keep using spells. Holy fuck this deck is unplayable.
I want to make a silverfur partisan / zada hedron grinder wolf spam deck. I want to get a billion wolves all pumped via cantrips and titan strengths.
>>47146084
Just don't cast spells.
>>47146084
First time I heard that. What is the list going around? Zada shenanigans?
How am I looking?
http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/08-05-16-vampire-madness/
>>47149374
>http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/08-05-16-vampire-madness/
Awful.
Here's a few tips;
Olivia, max 2
Incorrigible Youths, max 2
2 or more Indulgent Aristocrats
Stensia Masquerade should be 4
Drana, max 2
Alms of the Vein
Zombie summoner is garbage. Avacyn's judgment is meh, slot better filled by other things.
Bloodmad Vampire is sideboard material.
Has anyone played the Mono U Brains deck? How was it? Did you have fun? Is it somewhat competitive?
>>47149374
And ditch the westvale abbey.
>>47149577
Brain in a jar is a godsend when the nana costs align and requires a hell of a lot of foresight. Plus being able to eventually scry 7 is amazing.
>>47144051
>Disadvantages
It's colorless
>>47149574
>Alms
>2 Olivia
>2 Youths
Nigga, you stupid.
>>47149574
Here we see someone who has never played Vampires.
>>47149374
Looks pretty good, maybe cut the zombie cards.
>>47149798
>>47149893
>look mommy I'm an internet bully!
how about you tell the guy why you think he's wrong instead?
>>47149968
Alms is a shit card, You need Olivia as often as possible and multiples aren't bad because you can just discard her to herself, Youths are a very strong beater for 3 CMC, Drana is too good to have fewer than 3, and many lists run 4, Bloodmad Vampire is very solid for 2 mana, Avacyn's Judgment is very versatile. To be honest, it feels like you didn't factor in madness cost for several of these cards.
>>47149968
You're definitely right about the zombies, not sure why those are in there.
>>47150153
Explain why Alms is a shit card. Lightning helix for B seems good to me.
>>47150322
It can't target creatures.
>>47149893
http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/madness-mobilized-game-day-4-0/
>Never played Vampires
I won Game Day with vampires you dolt.
>>47150153
>Alms is a shit card
If you're a pleb. Alms is an all-star in a madness deck
Holy shit why this Meta hates Aggro so much? Fuck, Mono-White is not even that strong.
I running a WR Equipaments list and the hate I get is unbearable. Removal turn 1(Dead Weight/Axe) and 2( Ultimate Price, Axe/Temper), board wipes 3(Radiant/Tendrils), 4 (Languish/Chandra) and 5 (Chandra).
Those fuckload of wipes don't even work that well against most of the meta.
I'm going to run fevered visions/mill just to fuck with you Midrange faggots.
>>47150370
6 Life Sway for just 1 mana is absolutely shit. I mean, come on. It's like casting Siege Rhino but instead you only have to spend 1 mana. Who would want that?
>>47144051
>advantages
it doesn't occupy a spell slot
seriously, even if abbey didn't have ormendahl on the back side, a land that shits tokens is still great in most creature based decks
I want to try Jon Finkel's Dark Seasons Past control deck. It looks so damn good. It's the only deck that looks better than Esper Demonic Pact (pre SOI) and that was the best standard deck I've played in a long while.
>>47150360
>fewer than 4 Fiery Temper
Also, saying you won proves nothing.
>>47150517
>>47150517
>>47150597
Where's yours, anon? Since you know better than me how to play vampires.
>>47150507
It's terrible. Only looks good because Jon Finkel
>>47150507
It feels more of a meta call to me. If there's lots of humans and naya companies, it works great because of languish.
>>47144051
Flipside of abbey has indestructable, so immolating glare won't work. Declaration in stone is sorcery speed and clip wings is a sideboard card. It's not as bad as you make it out to be anon.
>>47150347
That's fair. But honestly 3 damage to opponents face, and 3 life, for 1 mana.
Hardly ever matters in B/R Madness vamps, because you don't need to remove their creatures. Just go face. Most vamps have flying evasion anyways.
>>47150347
Hurr
You need to damage life anyway, no Card disavantage for discard spells and cheaper than Helix.
Run 4 on every Vamps deck or you're just bad.
>>47150630
>>47150597
Aren't you the guy who said he never shared decklists?
>>47150935
>>47151015
Yeah, somehow my friendwho doesn't play standard now that I think about itconvinced me it was shit.
>>47151254
Alongside Lightning Axe, it's basically 5 to target creature, drain 3 from target player for BR at instant speed. Not bad.
>>47150630
So, why only three Fiery Temper/Alms, and only 2 Lightning Axe? I'm the one who originally posted the deck, just came back to a shitstorm that I may have accidentally caused.
>>47146084
land destruction
>>47149374
Cut Drana. I'm serious, cut Drana. She'll die before you even get a chance to swing with her against many decks and you're generally looking to have RRB on turn 3 because your black spells are only single B where as your burn removal and abilities are R to activate.
Also Insolent Neonate should be in the list as well as Asylum Visitor for easy madness activations or card draw. Stensia Masquerade should be 3-4. Touch of Moonglove is a neat trick but I would change it for Ultimate Price or work in Tormenting Voice.
SB should be slightly transitional with more burn/drain spells with Alms of the Vein and maybe Exquisite Firecraft's because they WILL board in more removal against you. Shadows of the Past as a 1 of has been good to me as has copies of Duress in the side.
>>47151366
Everything you said seems legit, other than Drana. Did you mean Shadows in SB or Main?
>>47151366
And what should I cut for Neonate?
>>47151405
Shadows in SB. This is a Languish and Radiant Flames meta. They will wipe your board so then you just start flinging burn spells at their face and essence draining them for 2.
Honestly I've tested Drana and she did not work as well as she should for me. Maybe your meta she can sneak in for extra points but she always dies in my store meta but nobody can do shit to Stensia Masquerade in game 1.
Don't tell anyone but the best madness enabler for vampire deck isRavenous Bloodseeker
>>47151439
4 Duress?
>>47151437
Drop touch of moonglove. It's a neat trick but you could just play proper removal on whatever is in the way early and hit in for more damage.
>>47151492
Just 3 Duress in the SB unless you have an extremely heavy planeswalker/control meta then you could probably go to 4 but you don't want to dilute your gameplan too much.
>>47151520
Great, I only have 3 of the nice Graveborn ones anyway.
>>47151503
Already did.
>>47151562
Just for reference this is my list, while this is not the be all or end all of lists you can see how i've built it. The Tainted Remedy is a meta call of mine here, you may want Virulent Plague instead or something else. I cannot stress how impotant it is to adjust your cards for your local area. If you can't run K-commands for budget reasons then don't worry because they're not absolutely vital to the deck, I use them because there have been times where I've reanimated a madness Vampire with the card at instant speed mid-combat or EOT.
http://deckstats.net/deck-10010184-a7ce1f33a45d5318333eab0e59a805bf.html
You know I remember some stupid fuckwit saying in these threads that new Sorin would drop to be a $10 or bulk rare card one month after release and that B/W control wasn't a deck nor would it ever become one.
>>47151806
C'mon at this point do you really think tg is bad at magic is just a meme? A week before the release of SOI there were hundreds of faggots dismissing every single tricolor deck at sight laughing at the mana base.
There were asshats complaining prowess was bad, narset was OP, newlamog was bad, seasons past would never see play out of commander., oath Chandra was trash, the list goes on and on.
>>47151719
How do you feel about Sinister Concoction? If you drop it early, it's a clear threat, it discards cards, and once it's out, it's one-mana unconditional removal.
>>47151806
>playing b/w control when you could play esper control
>not playing the card known only as "counterspell" in standard
>2016 anno domini
>>47152076
It's fine, it will allow you to hit most manlands if you have mana up and they animate it but in most cases so could a Fiery Temper at Madness or regular levels barring a Lumbering Falls or Wandering Fumarole however most manlands being played are either Hissing Quagmire or Shambling Vents at the moment. Most of your removal is instant speed anyway so if you want something cheap and unconditional out turn 1 then sure if you feel like you need it then run it.
Though I would honestly like to drop a 1 drop vampire dude and start attacking. Lot of the control decks end up with lands tapped on turn 1 anyway so you can swing in for free. Nothing is going to block the Neonate on Turn 1 either way and your Falkenrath and can always get in for 2 if you just remove whatever they have blocking you with Lightning Axe/Ultimate Price.
But hey test it and see if it works for you!
>>47152140
>playing esper control
>not playing B/G Seasons Beatings/Golgari Durdletown
>20XX
>>47151935
So you didn't listen when I told you Nahiri was the best planeswalker in the set and way undervalued?
>>47152468
but nahiri is shit, anon
>>47152208
Looking at my list right now, I don't see anything to cut for Neonate. Any ideas?
>>47152739
if you're a pleb
>>47152845
Neonate is only good if you're a pleb
>>47152845
Change Ravenous Bloodseeker to Insolent Neonate. The menace is stronger and being able to trigger madness and draw a card is better than the Ravenous Bloodseeker, get a few hits in with Stensia Masquerade and you've got a really big menace first striking dude. Drop Olivia to 2x. She's not a bad card by all means but you're never going to need her in opening hand.
Call the Bloodline should be a 1 of, put the extra copy to the side. And up the Land count to 22 and drop Abbey. You should win before you even have mana to flip it.
>>47152951
Ravenous Bloodseeker is better because you get to affect the board and it's a repeatable enabler.
>>47152989
I disagree. In my testing I've been able to Drop Neonate turn 1 and then cast either Falkenrath or hold up mana to Fiery Temper them in the face in case they use removal on Neonate or trigger madness easy in later turns.
Second of all making your opponent use removal on Insolent Neonate is a win for you because they're being forced to use 2 cmc+ removal spells on a 1 cmc card. You tap out for Ravenous Bloodseeker Turn 2 and they remove it you will get nothing.
Thirdly Insolent Neonate replaces itself and has evasion where as Ravenous Bloodseeker does not.
>>47153042
>neonate replaces itself
anon...
>>47153202
If you draw neonate late with a some cards in hand you can play it, trigger madness on a card if you have it and draw a card. So yes it can replace itself.
>>47150417
>it's like casting siege rhino for one mana
This is what retards actually believe. Because, yeah, the lightning helix was what made siege rhino good, not the 4/5 trampler it was stapled to.
>>47152951
The thing is, Bloodseeker with counters from Olivia or Masquerade can dump two cards a turn and swing for 5.
jesus christ people think alms of the vein is a playable card?
HURK
>>47150597
How important is it for you to come out and swinging in the early turns? I'm seriously debating Jund Vampires, which really only means R/B Vamps splashing green for CoCo and sideboard options, but the manabase is a little clunky and normally the first two turns are either evolving wilds or a tapped battleland.
The entire reason why I'm even considering this is because I already own a playset of CoCos and I don't want to run white.
>>47153398
Explain why it isn't.
>>47153398
Not just playable anon, it's a good card.
But that's ok, keep applying Limited card evaluations to Standard Constructed.
>>47153485
Not him, but you really do need to come out roaring. If you don't have at least a 2/1 out by the end of turn two, just forget about winning,unless the other deck is really slow.
>>47153490
doesn't affect the board, life gain is not relevant for the burn player in most matchups? i guess im feeling generous so ill give you the whole lesson. you see, lava spike effects are only playable when you have an extremely high concentration of them. alms or other lava spike effects wouldn't have been playable in theros - khans standard when we had lightning strike and stoke the flames, and it sure as hell isn't playable now. also this one in particular is mana inefficient unless you run a bunch of shitty creatures just to make your bad card not cost 3 mana, which is just a bad game plan to begin with. obviously the only way to build the madness aggro deck is to take advantage of those creatures, which means that you're on a creature beatdown plan. so why would you run bad madness cards that don't affect the board, or don't help you get damage through? the answer is you wouldn't, because there are definitely already enough madness cards for you to be running that aren't garbage. the life gain on alms is also particularly ineffective because the aggro decks that are in the format right now hit you with creatures and not with burn spells - gaining 3 life is extremely powerful in the burn mirror in modern, but in standard all you've done is fogged 1 of their creatures for a turn.
>>47153509
who is talking about limited?
>good card
don't make me laugh
>>47153389
Ok if it has counters on it sure but how will it have counters on turn 3? Some of the madness cards cost 2 and 3 and you're not going to be able to dump two cards a turn and cast them easily for value nor will you be able to dump two cards a turn if you don't have any counters on it. At the same time you're quickly running out of cards if you end up dumping extra cards and then they just target your Bloodseeker with removal. Neonate if they target with removal you just sac and draw a new card while getting rid of another card or using it to trigger madness.
You're looking at casting it on Turn 2 and then turn 3 you are doing what? Trying to hold Stensia Masquerade back to throw in mid combat? If they have a 0/1 plant token on the ground or a 1/1 or 1/2 on the ground then what? They just chump you then? In the same situation Neonate would become stronger over time with Stensia and still retains Menace and is not as easily chumped. In the same cmc slot Heir of Falkenrath sets up better for the next turn or Olivia's Bloodsworn can be cast and setup haste for another Heir of Falkenrath or another Bloodsworn and swing in with evasion. Bloodseeker does not draw me an extra card when it comes down in a useless situation if I need to topdeck into a Fiery Temper or some other burn spell to the face to finish them off.
>>47153398
It's playable in R/B Vampires. Not much anywhere else. It's basically Lava Spike Drain. You don't need it to affect the board you just need it to finish them off or get them low enough to swing in next turn. Combined with Fiery Temper and you have about 8 cards that can do 3 to the face for 1 mana.
>>47153680
It's a 1/3 blocker, 3/1 attacker, and once per turn (including opponent's turn) free discard.
>>47153729
i mean, considering that the b/r vampires deck itself isn't even playable, i can't really argue with that
>>47153751
dank meme, bruh
>>47153762
uh... i uh, i have some bad news for you and your meme deck if you think that was a joke
>>47153778
And what do you play, edgelord?
>>47153791
no i mean like, i'm not joking, and i'm not here to make fun of you either. all i meant to say was that b/r vampires isn't a real deck. it's not viable. it's just not strong enough. like, there's no shame in it, i just wasn't aware people had built it thinking it was a real deck that's all. i'm sorry for your loss, anon.
>>47153751
Actually the deck is playable and underrated at the moment. It should be played as a pseudo burn deck to close the gap and work well in that regard. Most lists are jamming in things that they think fit but are actually clunky and don't actually work(Kalitas) given some proper testing.
>>47153822
And I was just asking a shitposter and obvious baiter what he played.
>>47153843
So you agree with me that Kalitas is too slow and unsynergistic? Great, I thought I was the only one.
>>47153869
no like, i'm genuinely trying to tell you that your deck isn't playable. it's not an opinion, this is just an objective fact. literally every fnm in the world has vampires players. literally every pro team no doubt tested the deck. b/r vampires was almost certainly the FIRST thing anyone considered playing in this format. and yet, not a single b/r vampires list has so much as top 8'd an event. not a SINGLE one. do you know how many standard events we've had so far this season? we've had enough to have half a THOUSAND decks make it into top 8s. we've had top 8s with DEMONIC PACT in them, that's how varied they are. you know which deck has not even been SEEN in a top 8 because it's so grossly unplayable that nobody has been able to win with it? b/r vampires.
i am truly, genuinely, so sorry.
and despite not being a shitposter nor a baiter, i play esper control, thank you very much.
What do you think about Avaricious Dragon as a one-of for the madness deck? Seems like great synergy with Asylum Visitor to draw 3-4 cards per turn and madness cast them all.
>>47153918
>objective fact
That's your opinion.
>no top 8s
Despite being a rude dick, >>47150597 did prove that he won game day with it.
>>47153740
>1/3 Blocker
We're really not a deck that's looking to keep back a blocker on turn 2.
>3/1 attacker
That can get chump blocked by a Hangarback, Blisterpod, Thraben Inspector very easily and will most likely die to one of these.
Your 2 drop should either have evasion or lead into evasion somewhere in the list. Similarily on turn 2, Heir of Falkenrath, Olivia's Bloodsworn or Asylum Visitor is much stronger than Ravenous Bloodseeker.
>>47153979
You don't make it 3/1 until it's unblocked.
>>47154003
And then it will have removal played on it and you're down two cards if you didn't play anything for madness then. If it gets blocked anyway then not only did your attack accomplish nothing but you also have nothing to block/trade with against their attack.
>>47153970
>facts are opinion!
ah, and here we move into the second stage of loss for the casual brewer: denial.
>>47154039
Why would you trigger it if not for madness?
>>47150597
>touch of moonglove
Why? Avacyn removal provided it's not the turn she flashed in?
>>47150597
>tough of moonglove
hahahHAHAHAEHAHAHAHA
OH GOD IM DYING
>>47153937
Hell play 3 draw extra 3 from dragon alone
>>47154085
Because if you're just pumping it just because you can then it accomplishes nothing. If you're not casting more threats/playing burn then you would have been better off just swinging with evasion dudes anyway. All the other 2 drops either flip into flyers(Heir of Falkenrath) or have flyers(Bloodsworn) or have madness to let it be cast at instant speed(Asylum Visitor).
Consider this potential hypothetical situation. You have one land in hand, nothing on board and you are facing lethal next turn but your opponent is on 2 life and you have not drawn into Fiery Temper or Alms of the Vein yet and there's at least another 2 Olivia's Bloodsworn in the deck remaining and your opponent has no flyers to block it with. Your next draw is Ravenous Bloodseeker. You get nothing and you're dead.
Now same situation but you draw Insolent Neonate. You play Neonate, sac Neonate and discard land card and draw a new card. Maybe you just topdecked a burn spell to win or the Bloodsworn, maybe you didn't but either way you are one extra card further down than if you had drawn Ravenous Bloodseeker.
Point i'm trying to make is even in bad situations Insolent Neonate can give you an edge, Ravenous Bloodseeker will not help you if you are in that dire situation. In good situations Neonate will do far more damage and provide more value than Bloodseeker will and is much harder to block. In the case you do hold back a Neonate to block, you can chump, sac, trigger madness on a card or pitch another card to draw a new one. Ravenous Bloodseeker isn't going to give you an extra card like this.
>>47154485
I don't run Bloodsworn, though.
>>47153937
I like the idea and it's worth a shot. I'll consider testing it.
>>47154522
Well you should because 2/1 flyer for 2 that can give itself and any future drops haste is gold.
Turn 2 Bloodsworn into Turn 3 Heir of Falkenrath, discard non-vital card into at least 5 damage flying in the air on turn 3 barring spot removal. Ideally going into Drana or Olivia coming down on turn 4 will still be able to swing in the air and do more damage if they have 0 aerial defence and/or tapped out. If not then swing again then burn to the face. It curves fantastically in the deck
>>47153918
The deck is honestly playable and shouldn't be underestimated though deck is not quite tier 1 or tier 2 yet since there's risk because nobody wants to risk it in a heavy Languish/Radiant Flames era and the problem is that most Red removal/burn is kinda slow at the moment unless you're advocating the madness route. Not to mention everyone jumped on the White Weenie bandwagon with Humans since it was easier on the manabase and lets people play Avacyn or people just prepared for aggro by packing as much board wipes as possible thus a result of heavy control decks in this new Standard. As far as I'm concerned the deck needs a proper vampire lord like Stromkirk Captain and even something like Stromkirk Noble to give an extra one drop speed to the list. Both Vampires and Zombies are really close to being "real" decks, more closer than Werewolves are right now.
As far as I know it's had one top 8 finish in one event called "States Glassboro"
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/archetype/standard-r-b-vampires#paper
>>47154715
yeah i mean there are a lot of good cards, it just turns out that white weenies is a better aggro deck. anything can happen in eldritch moon. even zombies could end up being viable, god forbid we have any fun tribal decks in standard.
remember, nobody was playing languish until it turned out that the format would be dominated by tokens, white weenie, and coco decks. even at that point in time, when those decks started crushing everyone, vampires could not perform. the deck is REALLY bad right now. I agree that the primary reason is the red removal spells are all garbage tier. cards like drana or olivia, i mean you look at them and you can tell that that is an inherently powerful magic card. but that doesn't matter if the other pieces of the deck aren't there. gimping the deck to accommodate madness hurts ALMOST as bad as not having even fucking lightning strike in standard right now. like, for real, HOW do we not have lightning strike? OR SHOCK? come on wizards. the other reason is that the white removal spells are just incredibly powerful.
>>47154856
White's removal is fucking absurd right now. You can get rid of any card no questions asked with Stasis Snare at instant speed. Dec in Stone is retarded as well for W1 "get rid of anything and anything with the same name", even if it isn't instant speed.
Meanwhile Black has Ultimate Price and Grasp of Darkness for instant speed removal, both of which are situational. Red has maybe lightning axe and maybe fiery impulse.
Who thought this was a good idea?
>get a shitbox from the prerelease
>the only good card I got was the thing in the ice
>haven't played the game since then
So is this new set good? I might give it another chance again.
>>47154856
Drana is actually bad in the vampires deck. You would think she works into it but believe me I've been doing testing with this deck with some people who are silver and gold pro and she just does not perform in the list as expected. Olivia is fine though because she doesn't need to connect on an attack to actually provide some value.
You mentioned Zombies and speaking of which, that's the only deck where in testing we've found that Epiphany at the Drownyard is 100% a fantastic card in the shell. With Nantuko Husk and Relentless Dead it has practically complete immunity to any form of spot removal. Desperately needs a good lord though, Risen Executioner is not good enough.
>>47155066
Yes this new set is good. Also i'd recheck some of your cards again beacuse some may have gone up in value. Uncommons like Duskwatch Recruiter are going for like $2-$3 a piece.
>>47155074
yeah, I know she's bad in the deck, every card is bad in the deck. the deck isn't a deck. you can't play black red aggro when you don't even get lightning strike but white gets 1W exiling unconditional sorcery speed bile blight
I'm surprised you even settled on running olivia, as far as I can tell the closest you can get the deck to being playable is going super low to the ground aggro and trying to finish them with burn
>>47155074
>Drana is bad in Vamps
Why? Is it because she's a removal magnet? Now that I think about it, it might be pretty good psychological warfare for smaller events where you don't have to provide decklists for your opponent. Your opponent just keeps holding onto removal spells waiting for Drana to come down and she never does. By the time they realize it it'll be game.
>>47155197
she costs 3, she's small, she doesn't hit hard, and she doesn't do anything else for you until you untap with her AND at least 1 other creature
>>47155197
>do this every FNM
>people catch on
>start blowing removal on Olivia and Heir
>start running 2-4 Drana
>randomly swap decklists between events/sideboard her in/out between games
Could be fun.
>>47155312
>>47155197
jesus christ you guys are noobs. why can't my secret club be exclusive for good players only?
>>47155335
There are other websites for people like you to shitpost one.
>>47155197
It's not the fact that she's a removal magnet but if we have to use the removal argument she's a card that gets hit by Ultimate Price compared to Olivia who doesn't so that's one plus to Olivia.
The double black requirement in a deck that's mostly just single black and more double red in its costs is one factor. The other factor is that she has to connect with the attack to actually be of merit. She works better in an Allies list than a Vamps list to be honest because she can be better protected there. Also the fact that she either lacks madness or isn't aggressively costed enough weakens her a bit. Most R/B vampires want to be dropping things out for 1 or 2 on turn 3 and swinging in more while holding up one R to threaten Fiery Temper or another Madness vampire EOT.
>>47155128
>yeah, I know she's bad in the deck, every card is bad in the deck. the deck isn't a deck. you can't play black red aggro when you don't even get lightning strike but white gets 1W exiling unconditional sorcery speed bile blight
Every card is not bad in the deck. Problem being that literally every deck getting clues gets to have extra card advantage and you start to find the gas running out fast.
>I'm surprised you even settled on running olivia, as far as I can tell the closest you can get the deck to being playable is going super low to the ground aggro and trying to finish them with burn
That's exactly what the deck does, there is nothing over 3 played.(Incorrigible Youths while being cmc 5 is really there for played at madness of 2R). Olivia is in there as a good top end curve that lets you have an evasive creature and a powerful madness enabler+haste for whatever you drop. Game 2 you bring in a crapload of burn spells and just throw it at their face. Fiery Temper, Exquisite Firecraft and Alms of the Vein. Throw in a bit of tech like Shadows of the Past and the board wipes and removal let you start filtering and then draining them for 2 to finish them off.
Anyone else feel like this meta is more boring than the last one? Now it's "Run white, aristocrats, or lose".
>>47157845
Nothing is more boring than "4 color goodstuff the format". At least white weenies and aristocrats look like different decks.
>>47157918
As we just had two four color decks top 8 a tournament (admittedly they were the same basic deck.)
>>47158231
And what decks did they play against to get there, barring mirrors? Compare that to the number of "Clan + Color" named decks that existed and dominated the meta pre rotation.
>>47144051
Its a manland, theyre always good no matter what when they have flying.
>>47158554
It's not a traditional manland though, you can't exactly evaluate it with the same criteria. That being said there's not really much reason not to run a card that will sometimes just win the game, especially one that happens to be a land.
>>47150384
Lightning Axe and fiery temper are pretty easy to counter - if you know they are going to play a deck like this, hold out til you have enough mana to summon things and use eerie interlude to temporarily counter it, make sure you have 1-3 always watchings out which makes most of your creatures borderline immune to fiery temper, radiant flames, languish, biting rain - and if you are running a higher mana cost deck then things like sigarda and odric in combination can be helpful to avoid dying to burn decks.
BW/BR control are cunt decks to verse if you are playing aggro but there is still potential to win. I usually side deck seasons past, eerie interlude and strength of arms against control decks since they are the only real w/g aggro options. Titanic growht and so on might also help.
I want to try out magic, but I don't want to commit too financially. Are vampires the most viable way to cheaply try out this game?
>>47160644
Play the free online game. It's the best way for new players to learn.
>>47160806
Official or simulator?
>nobody talking about the great aurora deck ITT
What
>>47161046
This is just me but it seems really unexciting and boring. Sit on good creatures and kill spells until you get aurora off then recast good creatures.
>>47160985
Official, the free one on steam. Don't invest any money in it, unless you find yourself really enjoying that format of course, but use it to learn the game.
saffron olive rofl
>>47161947
I do not understand.
>>47161916
If it means anything I already play Force of Will, and I want to jump ship because no one plays FoW other than like three of my friends. I'm familiar with the mechanics and enjoy it, so should I just go ahead and buy a deck? I really want the face to face interaction.
>>47162028
In that case, buying a standard deck that's cheap but not super weak is a decent way to go. Alternatively, you could dive into modern with something like monogreen stompy, if that's your thing, but modern is probably a little too overwhelming for a new player, even if interaction and semicompetitive play is what they're looking for.
>>47162083
I'd prefer standard, so would you say vampires are my best bet or should I look into something else?
>>47149577
It seems strong in playtesting online. I just ordered it in paper for this Friday, will report back after.
>>47149577
I played against it.
You're fucking hosed if they have virulent plague.
>>47162028
As a former FoW player I am happy to see more people jumping ship from that pile of shit, whatever the reason. The Modern scene in my area picked it up on the side for a while last year and everyone has since dropped it.
As for your question and the one >>47162241 here. I'd say picking up a budget-ish deck is a good way to go (keep in mind though, there ARE differences between FoW and MTG, make sure you know them). Don't buy vampires though, it's a meme deck at its best (popular but otherwise unremarkable and any results it does show are more likely due to sheer numbers than actual potency) and a literal pile of trash at worst. You don't have to go for top tier of course, but do some research, possibly use a simulator to try out decks you are interested in before you buy. And be prepared to spend more than FoW, even for this budget deck, in case you were unaware.
>>47162419
If I have a hard budget of $100 what would you recommend looking into? I'd prefer a more straight forward play style maybe aggro since I'm intimidated by the game.
>>47162535
For $100? You could maybe look into the core of white weenies. I don't know the builds myself, I'm not a huge fan of aggro. Hopefully someone else with more experience can chime in on if budget white weenies is worth the investment, and if not then what you could give a shot.
>>47162535Vampires
But actually, Brain in a Jar is the only viable sub-$100 deck. It isn't aggro, though.
>>47162705
Is there a particular decklist you'd be willing to share?
>>47162791
Google it. The MTGGoldfish one seems good, and is around $50.
>>47162802
Is it called "Mono-U Brains" for $46.33?
>>47162851
That sounds like it.
>>47162881
Thanks a bunch man
>>47162889
No problem. Sorry I couldn't get you an aggro one other than Vampires. If you want, I can link you my Vampires list too, but it's a little over your budget and not too great in the current meta.
>>47162918
It's okay. I'm more willing to learn the Brain deck since it's cheaper as performs better
>>47162535
buy a pre-constructed starter deck in the store. Attend drafts and have local players help you construct decks.
http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/bu-zombie-graveyard/
This is the Zombie deck I'm gonna take to my first FNM. Any thoughts?
>>47153889
Rest in peace on a creature has no place in a burn deck unless its a sideboard against reanimator decks
>>47151276
Makes it better than pic related
>play fnm for only second time in the last 7 years
>opponent flips ormendahl
>i flip mine in response thinking it makes him sac his
>"anon, when was the last time you played?"
>mfw
http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/dog-sledge-hedron-collider/
What I'm brewing. Anything I HAVE to add comes to mind?
>>47164113
I'm also trying to abuse Silverfur. I'd probably dump 2 confronts for Negate. You're going to be so weak to languish/dec in stone.
>>47164141
Glint counters both, or swap to white where you can use center soul or survive the night vs hard removal. Languish is countered by pretty much all the boost spells once zada is out tho.
>>47163991
at the cheap cost of 2 cards!
>>47164169
I also have issues with Confront if that's your only source of Investigating
>>47164192
2 cards, 2 mana, a dead creature, and a six point life swing.
>>47164245
2 cards for one card. I've been playing a deck utilising madness for a little while, the main problem is that they all draw like a bitch. When you get the right cards in the right order it's incredible, value flows forth and you stomp. When you have to pitch real cards to your Lightning Axe because you need to kill that creature but there's no other way of doing it, and you have to discard to flip the heir but the worst card you have is the land that you need to make your land drop next turn, it falls apart. At the moment, madness strategies are inconsistent in my experience. Which is terrible for aggro, where one of the big selling points of the strategy is consistency.
Can't wait for Origins and Dragons to rotate out and start the two block rotation for STD.
Tired of these old decks that just get tweaked every time new sets drop.
>>47164351
Do you really think a whole new meta will emerge once dragons and origins are gone? I hope so...
Can I get some feedback on the Jund Midrange I'm building?
http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/junding-4/
Basically I hate being stomped by the aggros running around and the deck feels like it plays well against Humans depending on my opening hand even without boarding in Languish, but obviously could use some fine tuning.
Also, the big question: Will Arlinn fit the deck? I can't quite make up my mind about her.
>>47164380
It has two since the staples are all rotating out at the end if the quarter. When we're down to two block rotation. We should be seeing new decks every rotation.
>>47164457
God I hope so
>mfw no more jace/coco
>>47164226
Its the closest a green boost spell comes to a cantrip in standard ;_; I'm not really playing it for any other reason. if you sideboard white you have survie the night as secondary cantrip. together with zada a single confront will give 3+ tokens tho.
i maindecked clip wings for fnm this past friday.
everyone at my lgs mains westvale abbey, and many play avacyn. i figured, why not?
In game 1 against g/w tokens, i clipped two avacyns and he got so pissed. "Are you sure you maindecked those?"
Yeah motherfucker, I am. For that reason alone.
Lore question - we have rise of the eldrazi, where Nahiri confronts sorin for not helping her re-seal them - then we have BFZ where Nissa and Sorin go to reseal them but nissa releases them instead - then OTG where neither Sorin or Nahiri are present even though Ugin is and by all means should be able to contact them somehow.
So my question is - why the fuck is Nahiri only showing up now to fuck with Innistrad when realistically the eldrazi titans are dead (no thanks to her) and her reason for being angry happened in what we can only assume is a minimum of years ago, if not significantly longer. Why is she only just now attacking his plane?
>>47165093
avacyn and sorin locked her in the hellvault for circa a millennia
>>47164457
it will be 3 block rotation since dtk is out
cuz now we have 2 expansions blocks and standard will be 6 expansion anyway, wotc announced that
>>47164744
I've been maindecking negates, for much the same reason. Coco, Always Watching, Goggles, planeswalkers, etc, most decks lean pretty hard on noncreatures, even the ones theoretically very creature heavy. It's definitely an interesting meta, and I'm glad we finally got away from 4 colour cancer land.
>>47165126
is that cannon? it would make sense desu
>>47165276
I either do 2x negate 2x clips or 4x negate.
Depending on the deck, I'll side in another Elvish Visionary or Duskwatch Recruiter.
Fuck Coco, fuck Planeswalkers. I run 2x nissas. My deck is alright, but I get fucked against g/w tokens. I can usually be competitive against Bant Company, and B/G Aristocrats just can't get the board presence I can, and Nissa's Ult lets me gain a shitload of life, as well as Ormendahl
>>47154331
Touch of Moonglove + Stensia Masquerade
First Strike, Deathtouch is ultimate offense and best protection of creatures. Stensia Masquerade hits the field in 90% of my matches and Touch of Moonglove was my wincon in the last round of GameDay.
>>47154345
Where's your game day mat? Touch of moonglove is a handy combat trick.
>>47153970
Thank you.
>>47151437
Nothing. Insolent Neonate a gimmicky shit.
>>47151297
Needed more space for other things.
>>47151366
First of all, Drana has great survivability and adds additional +1/+1 counters. Drana instantly makes your board bigger. Secondly, Olivia's Bloodsworn fixes that problem. Thirdly, and most important, if you can spend 3 mana to toss out a creature that will instantly make your opponent need to use his mana to clear a single creature, it's worth the spell. Odds are they'll spend at least as much mana as you did, then they won't have mana to add to their attempt to stop your aggro. Drana is a great card in this deck.
>>47155307
Drana doesn't have Inspired, she has combat damage trigger, buffing your other attackers. Are you even playing aggro? Drana can have haste turn 4 if you have Olivia's Bloodsworn on the field. That makes her a big threat.
>>47151242
Yeah, I figured there's no harm in it. Game Day has passed and /tg/ isn't even grabbing it anyway. I haven't seen one bit of constructive criticism, either. It's a bunch of non-top-8 shitters just freaking out because they thought one card had good application so it should be a playset in every deck.
>>47153485
Coming out swinging is very important, and stumbling hurts. If you miss a turn swinging, there's a serious problem. However, do not trade board presence for a pointless swing. I see new aggro players make the mistake all the time of going "well this deck only wins if I keep attacking so I'm going to send all my creatures to their death just to attack one more time"
Preserve your board presence if you have to, wait for a ramp.
>>47153577
Pretty much this. Checked btw.
>>47165306
Yes, the story ended with sorin using avecyn to win a planeswalker duel when they were standing next to the helvault.
Any thoughts on the sideboard and my lands?
>>47162535
I recommended this to a friend a while back, but he's been too busy to build or play it. I asked about it here before and people suggested Goblin Bushwacker.
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/archetype/standard-w-r-weapons-trainer#online
how the fuck are decks going to deal with nissa/gideon token decks after rotation?
>>47165933
if only there was a way WotC could introduce new cards to keep the meta balanced
>>47165814
Bushwhacker is a must.
Resolute Blademaster should be only 2 or even less.
Munda, Ambush Leader should be there as well. It provides an interesting filter and has haste.
>>47162352I ordered the rares because they were rising in price, so I went ahead and ordered everything for it.
I feel the list can be even better, some people are running U/R for board wipes and Geistblast.
>>47162412
Blue has a thousand of bounces, so it shouldn't be that big of a problem.
>>47165408
>First of all, Drana has great survivability
Lots of removal in this format that can take care of her
>Drana instantly makes your board bigger.
It needs to survive until it hits, which is at least 1 extra turn unless you have Olivia out. Even then it needs to Hit.
>>47165408
>First of all, Drana has great survivability and adds additional +1/+1 counters. Drana instantly makes your board bigger.
Playing any creature instantly makes your board bigger, that's not really an argument for her. Lets look at the most commonly played removal at cmc 3 or less that she will be hit with to that are frequently being played right now. Ultimate Price, Grasp of Darkness, Declaration in Stone, Stasis Snare, Silkwrap, Transgress the Mind, Fiery Impulse spell mastery(or copied twice with Goggles), Radiant Flames, Languish or even hit with a Reflector Mage if cast on turn 3. All of these are frequently played cards in my area.
>Secondly, Olivia's Bloodsworn fixes that problem.
Sure that's not a problem, Bloodsworn is great. Problem is going turn 2 Bloodsworn into turn 3 Drana doesn't help. Secondly is that in a deck that is mostly singular black on costs for cards and with quite a few that cost RRx or have activated abilities requiring R need to have access to at least 2 red sources on turn 3 to maximise the most flexible lines of play.
>Thirdly, and most important, if you can spend 3 mana to toss out a creature that will instantly make your opponent need to use his mana to clear a single creature, it's worth the spell. Odds are they'll spend at least as much mana as you did, then they won't have mana to add to their attempt to stop your aggro. Drana is a great card in this deck.
Again almost all the removal options I listed above are all cmc 2 or less with the exception of Stasis Snare and Reflector Mage. So really in fact they are spending less mana than you did to deal with your Drana. If you're trying to swing her in with Olivia's Bloodsworn out then realistically you're looking at doing it on turn 4. You may connect with her on turn 4 on the play but if you don't kill them on turn 4 then they're going to Languish you. If you're on the draw then if you cast her on turn 4 you will probably get languished or removed right there and then.
>>47165152
Dragons and Origins rotate out together later this year. Then Zendikar and Oath rotate out a few months later when the new block hits.
>>47167357
BFZ and Oath don't rotate until 2017's first set. It's two blocks a year, and three in standard.
>>47166507
How many Bushwackers and Leaders should the deck have?
>>47168114
Standard will only have 2 blocks from here on. This is the finally transition phase. After this it will be 3-4 sets total in standard depending on the time of year, but there will never be 3 different blocks.
>>47168630
They said 2 sets per block, 3 blocks in standard, retard.
>>47168630
>>47168114
Disregard, I was misreading the wiki. It is indeed 3 blocks per standard rotation
I fucking hate Avacyn fags
>>47165408
Drana only makes things that attack bigger. You cannot use her evasion to pump your board and swing for lethal when it's safe.
what do the clues mean
cryptolith rites
zada
silverfur
cheap pump
burn from within
r8/h8
>>47172384
no clue
I am going to play Standard for the first time ever since Darksteel.
What should I expect from the meta?
What are the decks to beat?
I've decided to play that Mono U Brains deck since it looked appealing. Have you tried it? Would you recommend it to anyone? Is it FNM competitive?
>>47168249
Whackers should be 2-4
Munda should be 2, he's legendary.
The number of Whackers should be in tune with how many creatures are you running.
>>47174347
>What should I expect from the meta?
Avacyns, Collected Company, Gideons, Kalitas, Jaces and Dark-Dwellers.
>What are the decks to beat?
Bant Company, GWTokens, Midrange BW, BWR, GB Season's Past
>Have you tried it?
No
>Would you recommend it to anyone?
No, but i would recomend RB Fevered Visions Mill on this Midrange meta.
>Is it FNM competitive?
It depends where you live. FNMs can be just a casuals gathering or a Pro Players testing den.You can ask the store owner about it.
>>47175116
That sounds kinda bad, I mean, W/B is king in this meta because W has Avacyn and Languish is the only way to deal with all these small creatures.
Brains might not have a good matchup against Tokens, everything else seems fine though.
What the fuck is RB Fevered Visions Mill? That sounds like the dankest meme at the moment.
All I know is that my city has some spots for the PTQ, so people here can get pretty competitive. I should try to play at a smaller store if I find it.
If I have 3 Silverfur Partisans in play with Zada and I use Confront the Unknown, how many wolves tokens and clues would come into play?
I think it's 4 clues, but is it 3 or 9 wolves? Does the effect trigger for each Silverfur?
>>47146084
Literally no one says that.
>>47146084
because werewolves is a shit deck
just use silverfur/zada for tokens.
>>47166773
>>47166999
>susceptible to removal
>don't play it
Wow. Creatures are so underpowered and just fucking worthless, huh?
/tg/ really is shit at magic.
>>47175154
RB Visions Mill is deck made around Sphinx Tutelage, Engulf the Shores, Red draw spells and Fevered Visions.
Drop Tutelage, get insane draws on fevered visions and use engulf the shores to keep you opponent at bay. All those midrange decks can't handle it because they are slow, and EtS fucks with tokens.
Anguished Unmaking can hurt, but you can side for as you're in blue.
>>47175711
That's not the point you dumbass. The point is she does nothing more aggressively costed vampires don't without you getting multiple vampires into face every turn. On her own she's barely a better clock than Olivia.
And this "dies to removal is a bad argument" meme needs to end for the next few sets. When a fucking white weenie deck can pack unconditional removal and sacrifice none of the speed of a standard aggro deck we're in a format where players need to be wary of how many times their opponent can kill their stuff and build their decks accordingly.
>>47175889
Do you think it's better than the Brains deck?
Do you have a list for that?
>>47175711
Creatures that have to attack/trigger abilities to have any value are always going to be a little bit worse than others since they can be removed before you can do anything with it.It's ironic that you're posting in /tg/
i need to make a sideboard for this.
but
god
damn
I play tested with a friend and it is insane
>>47175889
Do you mean ru?
>>47149374
>>47150153
Vamps representing up in this bitch
Creature (29)
2x Asylum Visitor
4x Drana, Liberator of Malakir
4x Falkenrath Gorger
4x Heir of Falkenrath Flip
3x Incorrigible Youths
4x Indulgent Aristocrat
4x Olivia, Mobilized for War
4x Ravenous Bloodseeker
Land (23)
2x Cinder Barrens
4x Foreboding Ruins
6x Mountain
4x Smoldering Marsh
7x Swamp
Instant (8)
4x Fiery Temper
4x Lightning Axe
Sideboard (15)
3x Avacyn's Judgment
2x Duress
3x Fiery Impulse
2x Grasp of Darkness
3x Transgress the Mind
2x Ultimate Price
>>47177277
If you're going to play this shit deck at least try to minimize the shit by not running 4 of your legendary creatures.
>>47165814
I prefer angelic captain, so I can swing for in the air for a fuck ton of damage.
Creature (12)
4x Jaddi Offshoot
1x Omnath, Locus of Rage
4x Outland Colossus
2x Soul Swallower
1x Ulvenwald Hydra
Artifact (4)
4x Chitinous Cloak
Land (22)
4x Cinder Glade
10x Forest
2x Game Trail
6x Mountain
Enchantment (6)
4x Skin Invasion Flip
2x Vessel of Nascency
Instant (8)
2x Expedite
4x Fiery Impulse
2x Pulse of Murasa
Sorcery (6)
2x Radiant Flames
4x Traverse the Ulvenwald
Planeswalker (2)
2x Nissa, Voice of Zendikar
G/R deck, thoughts on sideboard/what to replace Hydra and Omnath with/any other wise suggestions to make it flow a bit better
>>47176120
already got posted
>>47164113
>>47176323
>>47175980
RU, sorry.
>Do you have a list for that?
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/articles/budget-magic-88-32-tix-fevered-thing-tutelage
>>47181486
No it didn't. That deck is trash and inefficient.
>>47179140
>not running 4 so you can maximize your draws
yeah his deck is shit, but your advice is also shit
How many of you sheep are already piecing together the Devil token Goggles meme deck?
>>47181923
I find that 3 is best unless the legendary is a card I want to get in my first hand.
>>47182123
I guess it depends on the deck.
In what I'm working on, I'm putting in 4 copies of a legendary because I'm only running 3 different creatures for a combo. I'm abusing certain cards so I can make sure I get those three creatures. So, having 4 is advantageous
Anyone a little better with rules than me?
If I had Zada+Silverfur Partisan+some dumb wolf in play and I played Confront the Unknown how does the stack resolve?
(Zada first obvs)
If I targeted the dumb wolf, I'd investigate and then +1+1
then Silverfur would investigate and it would get +2+2
Then it would finally resolve on Zada with investigate +3+3, right?
>>47182222
>target Zada with Confront
>Zada triggers, trigger puts copies of Confront on the stack targeting Partisan and wolf, triggering Partisan twice
>Confront and two copies on stack, two triggers of Partisan on top of them
>Partisan triggers resolve, putting two wolf tokens onto the battlefield
>Confront and two copies on stack
>resolve them, get 3 Clues and +1/+1 for Zada, Partisan and the wolf
If you target the Partisan or the wolf, you just get a Clue, a wolf token and +1/+1. Zada only copies spells when she's targeted.
>>47182253
Ah okay. That's essentially all I wanted from the combo, but I wasn't sure if it actually did more.
Thanks :)
>>47182253
>>47182271
Keep in mind that it checks on resolution the +1/+1 per clue, so zada will have +3/+3 when that cast is resolved after all relevant triggers
>>47182320
Oh, that's what I was asking. I guess I worded it poorly.
But the wolves would only be getting the +1/+1?
>>47181923
>running 4 of and risking dead draws in a deck thay needs every single card it draws to close out games
No, you are the shit
How do I mix discard costs with madness?
Say I play lightning axe and I discarded a madness card, and want to use the madness effect. The discard was part of a cost. So, does the madness happen before lightning axe AND before picking a target for lightning axe?
>>47182630
You choose the target for Lightning Axe when you put it on the stack, not as it resolves
>>47182583
>thinking that my deck gets dead draws
o i am laffin
>>47183262
One day the heart of the cards will betray you.
>>47183337
>every card in his deck isnt synergized perfectly so you can make use and get max value out of every single card
i am sorryfuck, im probably going to get karma'd at fnm this week
>>47181269
>landfall deck
>22 lands
>>47182630
You cast lightning Axe. You declare targets for lightning axe. You pay any costs associated with casting the spell. You then put Lightning Axe on the Stack. You don't deal with the madness trigger until you've actually cast lightning axe. When LA goes on the stack, you get to resolve the madness ability, choosing whether or not to cast the other spell for it's madness cost. If you do, it goes on stack on top of LA, and resolves before it.
>>47183262
>drawing a copy of the legendary creature you have in play isnt a dead draw
I mean if you want to just be wrong...
>>47183539
when the one legendary in my deck is going to be the target of every removal spell my opponent has, i wont be mad if i have a backup in hand.
>>47183547
> Drana and Olivia
>one legendary
Ok.
And a dead draw is a draw that does nothing the turn you draw it, dumby.
>>47183572
im not that idiot lamo
>>47183592
Then why did you reply to the comment chain discussing that deck?
>>47183609
I'm not allowed to comment on some guy saying that you should NEVER run 4 legendaries in a deck?
Oy vey
>>47183613
When did I say that? I said running 4 of a legendary creature in a deck that needs to top deck gas is a bad idea.
>>47183425
Thank you for the break down.
>>47183539
>>47183572
>>47183626
So today we learn that legendaries are ideal as 3-ofs. Hurray fo /g/
>>47184245
>>47183626
If you need to topdeck gas, it probably means you don't have an Olivia or Drana on the battlefield, because then you wouldn't really need to topdeck gas. Your plan is to end games before you draw a fourth of your deck and this makes it pretty unlikely that you'll draw more than a total of 3 legendaries. They're your best cards in RB vampires and gigantic removal priorities so running 4 of each is probably correct. At most you'd go down to 3 Drana because Olivia solves the multiples problem by itself anyway with being a discard outlet.
Radiant Flames and Languish are in literally every deck that isn't aggro and your creatures are going to die often.
>>47184245
I hold an exception for flipwalkers since they can be out as a creature while the planeswalker is out, and then just replace the damaged one.
>47179140
Olivia and Drana won't stay more than 2 turns on the Field. If they do, you probably won already
brb gonna brew a devils deck
Aggro peeps be sleeping on this card
>>47185433
I made sure to buy up cards for devils decks just because I feel like their value is going to skyrocket soon.
>>47184245
I don't know why I am surprised everyone is putting words in my mouth on the internet , but, again, i never said that. The only rule I'll ever condone regarding legendary creatures is that their number should be evaluated differently than non-legendary creatures due to the legend rule. If you are putting 4 of a legendary creature into your deck you better have a good reason.
>>47184448
>Olivia and Drana
>best cards in the deck
I mean, only because the entire deck is a piece of shit.
But br vampires can rarely kill with its starting hand, especially with all of the removal in the format, so it needs multiple draws of gas.
>>47184245
Expensive legendaries, yes. If not just 2.
Cheap legendaries like Jace should be 4 to maximize first hand chances.
