After years of playing EDH I've come to the conclusion that the ideal EDH deck is one with a minimal board presence. Blue perhaps most explicitly embodies this stratagem with counter-magic, but colors like green (with concessions to the inevitably of mana/land presence and green's ability to accelerate/manipulate land) and black (with it's inherent sacrificial package) also have potential to affect the game with a relatively minimal, or at least less susceptible board presence. I myself am a red player and have been piloting what I believe is a rather anti-EDH deck (Hidetsugu has a tendency to make games end quickly as opposed to dragging them out for hours) at least in terms of average game lengths, but have been toying with the potential for a strong deck with minimal board presence for months now. The closest I've come to a deck of this nature in practice was a Uril voltron list that played Uril with a few enchants and then used of the various balance-esque mechanism white has access to (Cataclysm, Balancing Act, Global Ruin, Razia's Purification, et cetera). It was fun but ultimately repetitive, and thus was deconstructed. I've been playing magic since Ice Age and have what I feel is a strong knowledge base, what I'm looking for is not necessarily cards that I haven't thought of that would facilitate a deck of this nature, but rather more conceptually what options there are for a strong deck with a minimal board presence. I'm open to any color/color combination, am a competitive player, and budget is not an issue. I prefer to avoid degenerate/infinite combos but am not completely opposed to them if they embody the deck design. Thoughts?
You could try Maga, Traitor to Mortals. Focus on board wipes, bombs, and maybe some sac outlet shenanigans, with Maga being your main way of winning. Most of your early-mid game is focused on tutoring for ways to make more mana, so you won't be an immediate threat to anyone. You could throw in some Mikaeus, the Unhallowed combos if you'd like, but it's not necessary. Check this thread for some ideas on how to survive until you have enough mana. http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=394056
Thanks for the tip Tantarus I'll work on blocking my text out, I'm new to the forum atmosphere.
Giodante, I think Maga definitely fits the bill, and the link you posted was very helpful, I like what DasNekros had to say about his decks tending to be innocuous until they explode. The problem with a deck staying relatively innocent at the beginning but then moving quickly towards the mid/end game is people (in this case my playgroup) tend to catch on quick.
I like to play decks that have a macrocosmic synergy, ideally large engines that work to form streamlined goals, but I want my engine to interact largely with my and and my land-base. I think given the hand, the graveyard, and the board, the hand is perhaps the safest in EDH (seeing as discard, with a few potent exceptions, isn't very powerful) and given the various permanent types, lands and perhaps enchantments are on the whole the least targeted.
Again Maga has potential, what with cabal coffers, urborg, crypt of agadeem, for powerful lands and a host of nasty enchantments, but I can't help but feel that green is necessary for land manipulation. Along this train of thought I like Glissa and Sapling of Colfenor.
Glissa Dredge/Stax/Combo can be pretty potent while maintaining a small board. She's an incredibly powerful engine, and a great rattlesnake blocker.
Nath of the Gilt-Leaf Stax/Combo uses a little more board presence, but doesn't play from the yard so much as Glissa. Instead it can attack people's hands very effectively and seal the game.
I've played both of these generals on fairly competitive levels and can assure you're they're capable of being very nasty. B/G Stax is an absolute blast to play.
You know what you might like if you want green and focus on the threats in your hand? Phelddagrif and Jenara, Asura of War. Phelddagriff is more of a political general, and I'm sure you can find a decent list along these lines if you look. I'd check out the list by "darcanegel" from these forums for a starting point.
Now, what I think you might really like is Jenara permission. Your general only costs 3, is naturally evasive, and can be pumped at instant speed. Just fill the deck with a bunch of instant speed counters, answers, and draw, and lean on Jenara and a few choice finishers for actually winning. You'll have green for the ramp and mana stability, and white and blue are amazing for defending without committing to the board, plus you have stuff like Mother of Runes, Sylvan Safekeeper, Benevolent Bodyguard, Devoted Caretaker, Spellskite, Mistmeadow Witch, Kira, Great Glass-Spinner, and Asceticism to protect Jenara and your other wincons. Keep in mind that Bant colors can allow almost ANY strategy, so you can flavor the permission and defense with any other strategy you like.
After years of playing EDH I've come to the conclusion that the ideal EDH deck is one with a minimal board presence. Blue perhaps most explicitly embodies this stratagem with counter-magic, but colors like green (with concessions to the inevitably of mana/land presence and green's ability to accelerate/manipulate land) and black (with it's inherent sacrificial package) also have potential to affect the game with a relatively minimal, or at least less susceptible board presence. I myself am a red player and have been piloting what I believe is a rather anti-EDH deck (Hidetsugu has a tendency to make games end quickly as opposed to dragging them out for hours) at least in terms of average game lengths, but have been toying with the potential for a strong deck with minimal board presence for months now. The closest I've come to a deck of this nature in practice was a Uril voltron list that played Uril with a few enchants and then used of the various balance-esque mechanism white has access to (Cataclysm, Balancing Act, Global Ruin, Razia's Purification, et cetera). It was fun but ultimately repetitive, and thus was deconstructed. I've been playing magic since Ice Age and have what I feel is a strong knowledge base, what I'm looking for is not necessarily cards that I haven't thought of that would facilitate a deck of this nature, but rather more conceptually what options there are for a strong deck with a minimal board presence. I'm open to any color/color combination, am a competitive player, and budget is not an issue. I prefer to avoid degenerate/infinite combos but am not completely opposed to them if they embody the deck design. Thoughts?
I've got a draw-go control Wydwen build that usually has very minimal board presence and doesn't have infinite combos. The threat of Wydwen flashing in and blocking deters a lot of small creatures from attacking. Not sure if that's what you're looking for though since the decks you've played look more aggressive and this deck is very slow.
I've talked a fair amount in the past about the "value of being 2nd best." If you're the primary power on the table, you'll get targeted. If you're just under the radar, you'll get to make your move when everyone else takes out the strongest guy. It's a delicate balance and a dangerous game, but is part of the multiplayer experience.
It's not so much a lack board presence as a management of threats and many players don't know how to roll their threats. A deck like Maga relies heavily on doubling effects and while youll probably blow players out the first few times you play it, most players wise up and destroy your coffers/caged-sun/doubling cube the instant they see it. Or they just keep swinging at you out of fear that you can kill someone at a moment's notice.
In summation, your theory holds true initially, but against solid players who are familiar with how combo decks like Maga and others work, you will actually find yourself perhaps even more in the position of "The Threat." There is a certain honesty in a developed board state; your opponent can see what you can do, roughly judge correctly or incorrectly what you can do based on what you have in your hand, and as long as you haven't slammed down a game-ending threat, will likely move on.
Personally I like to only think about a cards board presence when I build my decks. Then again, Skithiryx is my general of choice so even on an empty board I expect and am prepared for the ire of the table. I think that you have a point IF you don't want to be the driving force of the game. Personally however, I like to set the pace and I think that if that is how you like to play then you need to think ONLY of board presence.
I feel like this has happened with my playgroup as well, so much so that I prefer 1v1 so that I don't get the tar kicked out of me. I can understand that my Kaalia draws fire(people hate its ability to put tonnes of power on the board so soon for so cheap), that's fine, but when I play as Wrexial, Stonebrow, Wydwen, anything, I get demolished.
Even online, I was in one of the Chaos events run by Julie/BMWarner, was playing...Lyzolda, the Blood Witch as the theme was "creatures only" and one of the guys in the game mentioned to me I was being "too aggressive" and that was why I was being so focused on by everyone.
Combo is really out of the question for me, as I've been labeled as a "known combo player" by my group, and I always find some nifty combo to use in my decks. Even in a Bant list, I found a combo with Kitchen Finks+Drogskol Reaver+Juniper Order Ranger+Phyrexian Altar for infinite life, infinite draw, and infinite mana, using Felidar Sovereign and Test of Endurance as win-cons. Truthfully the deck is just supposed to be about life and dissuading people from coming at me though. You'd think it's a fragile enough combo to stop, but it still gets me their ire. Maybe this might work for you TC though.
I'd be interested what you come up with though TC, as I feel like what works for you might just work for myself.
My GR Commander deck runs that way, with over 20 ramp spells, it just throws out land, with little else on the battlefield. Then when it is time to go off, the deck taps 25+ mana and hurricane/earthquakes the table out, or beats face with one or two large dragons. I get less hate then my momir vig combo deck with 2 - 4 combos pieces out.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
All foil Invasion Draft Set (1 Rare, 3 Uncommon, 6 Common) California DCI Level 2 Judge
My closest current work to this would by my Kaervek the Merciless deck. It plays 3 creatures and a LOT of effects that make peoples' decks not work. As much as there's a lot of things like Sudden Spoiling and Inferno to keep things from hitting you, it will very much invest in the enchantments and artifacts on board.
I feel like this has happened with my playgroup as well, so much so that I prefer 1v1 so that I don't get the tar kicked out of me. I can understand that my Kaalia draws fire(people hate its ability to put tonnes of power on the board so soon for so cheap), that's fine, but when I play as Wrexial, Stonebrow, Wydwen, anything, I get demolished.
Even online, I was in one of the Chaos events run by Julie/BMWarner, was playing...Lyzolda, the Blood Witch as the theme was "creatures only" and one of the guys in the game mentioned to me I was being "too aggressive" and that was why I was being so focused on by everyone.
Combo is really out of the question for me, as I've been labeled as a "known combo player" by my group, and I always find some nifty combo to use in my decks. Even in a Bant list, I found a combo with Kitchen Finks+Drogskol Reaver+Juniper Order Ranger+Phyrexian Altar for infinite life, infinite draw, and infinite mana, using Felidar Sovereign and Test of Endurance as win-cons. Truthfully the deck is just supposed to be about life and dissuading people from coming at me though. You'd think it's a fragile enough combo to stop, but it still gets me their ire. Maybe this might work for you TC though.
I'd be interested what you come up with though TC, as I feel like what works for you might just work for myself.
I posted a thread about playstyles in general a few months back after becoming really frustrated with how some folks in my playgroup played and how I played. I often found that people were too foolish to notice the player just leaving out some chump or a pillowfort whilst sculpting their hand to be able to win. They would then use that to dissuade people from attacking them into the biggest threat at the table. Once the 'biggest' threat had their board position taken care of he would just drop a bomb on the new biggest threat and from that point just take the game under his wing.
After seeing some comments in the thread (I think you posted in it actually) I noticed that I didn't need to alter my decks to be able to squash that one opponent, but instead I needed to alter my decks to make me less of a perceived threat. What that turned into was taking out every permanent that had no immediate impact on board position and mostly keeping opponents boards in check with spot removal that had bodies. While I'm sure your decks already feature plenty of things like this, I'd like to bring up a recent game I had played.
Was playing a four player game, myself with Jenara, a friend with Kaalia, another friend with Azusa, and a guy we normally play with at our shop playing Bladewing the Risen. Looking at the generals it's pretty obvious that Azusa, Jenara, and Kaalia are all incredibly powerful. Kaalia and Azusa are well known for being able to downright kill people or take them out of the game in one or two turns. However both of those players are afraid of my jenara deck, and it was essentially 2v1 + bladewing. Bladewing too can be pretty potent, but I tend to notice the 'better' decklists including things like mass discard and land D to end the game. This player has very few early game cards in his deck and has a tendency to get swung at early on, and has even mentioned it before.
Now with all of that background information and knowing how Bladewing plays, I'll get into the game itself. (Breaking this into a much quicker synopsis than I had originally typed). Kaalia played stoneforge and I cloned shortly thereafter. Both of us tutoring up SoFaI, Kaalia took his sworded stoneforge over to bladewing for each swing since he was completely open saying he deserved it. I took mine between Azusa, and Kaalia taking one swing at Bladewing for a trigger I needed. Kaalia played attempted to play general, which I countered, he then passed only to have Bladewing blow up his sword after finally having enough mana / cards. Kaalia was extremely frustrated at this point and couldnt understand why, perceiving me as the bigger threat, he would blow up his sword as apposed to mine.
What I'm getting at here is it isn't about whether or not you're aggressive or have board presence it's all about how you're being perceived. I don't think many would disagree when I saw that the most pervasive issue among most playgroups is just that people are dumb or have no sense of threat assessment. When you sit down at a table with a general like Azami, many times you should be public enemy number one. However most people don't recognize this fact simply because of the perceived threat of playing dorky little wizards that can be used to chump block.
If your playgroup is smart and recognizes this then you need to adapt and move out of what they would consider to be normal behavior. If you're getting beat up for being too aggressive in a deck like Lyzolda, don't play your general right away. Don't dump Anger in your graveyard on turn four. I've seen a turn 3 anger in a graveyard into a turn four Kaalia going towards a player. A completely nonthreatened player then cast hallowed burial causing Kaalia to scoop out of frustration. Lifegain, global haste, beaters that do nothing but beat, constantly blowing up lots of permanents (even if it's saving people) are all things that are going to get you hated off of the board regardless of whether or not your opponents are smart or dumb. One thing that keeps me from wanting to play the game more frequently is that the 'most effective' way to play EDH is to either be absurdly aggressive and kill the table in five turns or to hang out and keep people from attacking you. Then play the one card that screws one or two people over and then just taking everyone down from there.
It really is a game of extreme politicing and unless everyone knows your deck is going to win on turn X then you should be okay just pillowforting until you can take the game.
Or you can accept your role as archenemy and push the power/broken curve as much as possible.
When people complain about you comboing too fast, tell them they brought it on themselves with their inept threat analyses, then let them know you're switching back to something to more benign.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
.
Knowledge is power, money is power, time is money, you are actually gaining time by reading my posts
Honestly OP, if I notice someone hasn't been doing much at all, that's the player I'm immediately afraid of. This let's me know that either he is playing combo or has something major up his sleeve coming up soon. You know why I suspect that guy? Because often times I'm that guy. The one doing nothing attracts the most attention. Perhaps I've got good threat assessment skills, but I just know he's cooking up some devious plan that is going to wreck us all unless we stop him.
"Some of the other guys dared me to go out, but I knew it weren't no ordinary giant giga-blasting blaze of unending flames that would scorch the whole world."
—Norin the Wary
What I'm getting at here is it isn't about whether or not you're aggressive or have board presence it's all about how you're being perceived. I don't think many would disagree when I saw that the most pervasive issue among most playgroups is just that people are dumb or have no sense of threat assessment. When you sit down at a table with a general like Azami, many times you should be public enemy number one. However most people don't recognize this fact simply because of the perceived threat of playing dorky little wizards that can be used to chump block.
If your playgroup is smart and recognizes this then you need to adapt and move out of what they would consider to be normal behavior. If you're getting beat up for being too aggressive in a deck like Lyzolda, don't play your general right away. Don't dump Anger in your graveyard on turn four. I've seen a turn 3 anger in a graveyard into a turn four Kaalia going towards a player. A completely nonthreatened player then cast hallowed burial causing Kaalia to scoop out of frustration. Lifegain, global haste, beaters that do nothing but beat, constantly blowing up lots of permanents (even if it's saving people) are all things that are going to get you hated off of the board regardless of whether or not your opponents are smart or dumb. One thing that keeps me from wanting to play the game more frequently is that the 'most effective' way to play EDH is to either be absurdly aggressive and kill the table in five turns or to hang out and keep people from attacking you. Then play the one card that screws one or two people over and then just taking everyone down from there.
It really is a game of extreme politicing and unless everyone knows your deck is going to win on turn X then you should be okay just pillowforting until you can take the game.
So really, if I'm understanding this correctly(which my comprehension isn't the best, heh) I'm just stuck with this "reputation" of being the aggro guy that everyone needs to get rid of quick. I mean, for my Bant list, I even used Arcades Sabboth as my general, going vintage with it just to give off more of a "casual" vibe.
Doesn't help matters that I'm "not allowed to play U because when I play U, we all lose." >_>
Sidenote: You may want to break up that block of text with paragraphs so it is easier to read.
Mono Red's Strengths and Mono White's Strengths
Giodante, I think Maga definitely fits the bill, and the link you posted was very helpful, I like what DasNekros had to say about his decks tending to be innocuous until they explode. The problem with a deck staying relatively innocent at the beginning but then moving quickly towards the mid/end game is people (in this case my playgroup) tend to catch on quick.
I like to play decks that have a macrocosmic synergy, ideally large engines that work to form streamlined goals, but I want my engine to interact largely with my and and my land-base. I think given the hand, the graveyard, and the board, the hand is perhaps the safest in EDH (seeing as discard, with a few potent exceptions, isn't very powerful) and given the various permanent types, lands and perhaps enchantments are on the whole the least targeted.
Again Maga has potential, what with cabal coffers, urborg, crypt of agadeem, for powerful lands and a host of nasty enchantments, but I can't help but feel that green is necessary for land manipulation. Along this train of thought I like Glissa and Sapling of Colfenor.
Nath of the Gilt-Leaf Stax/Combo uses a little more board presence, but doesn't play from the yard so much as Glissa. Instead it can attack people's hands very effectively and seal the game.
I've played both of these generals on fairly competitive levels and can assure you're they're capable of being very nasty. B/G Stax is an absolute blast to play.
Glissa, the Traitor, Ulasht, the Hate Seed, The Mimeoplasm
Now, what I think you might really like is Jenara permission. Your general only costs 3, is naturally evasive, and can be pumped at instant speed. Just fill the deck with a bunch of instant speed counters, answers, and draw, and lean on Jenara and a few choice finishers for actually winning. You'll have green for the ramp and mana stability, and white and blue are amazing for defending without committing to the board, plus you have stuff like Mother of Runes, Sylvan Safekeeper, Benevolent Bodyguard, Devoted Caretaker, Spellskite, Mistmeadow Witch, Kira, Great Glass-Spinner, and Asceticism to protect Jenara and your other wincons. Keep in mind that Bant colors can allow almost ANY strategy, so you can flavor the permission and defense with any other strategy you like.
Mono Red's Strengths and Mono White's Strengths
I've got a draw-go control Wydwen build that usually has very minimal board presence and doesn't have infinite combos. The threat of Wydwen flashing in and blocking deters a lot of small creatures from attacking. Not sure if that's what you're looking for though since the decks you've played look more aggressive and this deck is very slow.
In summation, your theory holds true initially, but against solid players who are familiar with how combo decks like Maga and others work, you will actually find yourself perhaps even more in the position of "The Threat." There is a certain honesty in a developed board state; your opponent can see what you can do, roughly judge correctly or incorrectly what you can do based on what you have in your hand, and as long as you haven't slammed down a game-ending threat, will likely move on.
Isperia, Supreme Judge: Control
Malfegor: Control
Even online, I was in one of the Chaos events run by Julie/BMWarner, was playing...Lyzolda, the Blood Witch as the theme was "creatures only" and one of the guys in the game mentioned to me I was being "too aggressive" and that was why I was being so focused on by everyone.
Combo is really out of the question for me, as I've been labeled as a "known combo player" by my group, and I always find some nifty combo to use in my decks. Even in a Bant list, I found a combo with Kitchen Finks+Drogskol Reaver+Juniper Order Ranger+Phyrexian Altar for infinite life, infinite draw, and infinite mana, using Felidar Sovereign and Test of Endurance as win-cons. Truthfully the deck is just supposed to be about life and dissuading people from coming at me though. You'd think it's a fragile enough combo to stop, but it still gets me their ire. Maybe this might work for you TC though.
I'd be interested what you come up with though TC, as I feel like what works for you might just work for myself.
Steel Sabotage'ng Orbs of Mellowness since 2011.
California DCI Level 2 Judge
Child of Alara may be closer to what you're thinking though. Lots of ramp spells, very stable removal engines, and a Spearbreaker Behemoth making a Thraximundar indestructible.
I posted a thread about playstyles in general a few months back after becoming really frustrated with how some folks in my playgroup played and how I played. I often found that people were too foolish to notice the player just leaving out some chump or a pillowfort whilst sculpting their hand to be able to win. They would then use that to dissuade people from attacking them into the biggest threat at the table. Once the 'biggest' threat had their board position taken care of he would just drop a bomb on the new biggest threat and from that point just take the game under his wing.
After seeing some comments in the thread (I think you posted in it actually) I noticed that I didn't need to alter my decks to be able to squash that one opponent, but instead I needed to alter my decks to make me less of a perceived threat. What that turned into was taking out every permanent that had no immediate impact on board position and mostly keeping opponents boards in check with spot removal that had bodies. While I'm sure your decks already feature plenty of things like this, I'd like to bring up a recent game I had played.
Was playing a four player game, myself with Jenara, a friend with Kaalia, another friend with Azusa, and a guy we normally play with at our shop playing Bladewing the Risen. Looking at the generals it's pretty obvious that Azusa, Jenara, and Kaalia are all incredibly powerful. Kaalia and Azusa are well known for being able to downright kill people or take them out of the game in one or two turns. However both of those players are afraid of my jenara deck, and it was essentially 2v1 + bladewing. Bladewing too can be pretty potent, but I tend to notice the 'better' decklists including things like mass discard and land D to end the game. This player has very few early game cards in his deck and has a tendency to get swung at early on, and has even mentioned it before.
Now with all of that background information and knowing how Bladewing plays, I'll get into the game itself. (Breaking this into a much quicker synopsis than I had originally typed). Kaalia played stoneforge and I cloned shortly thereafter. Both of us tutoring up SoFaI, Kaalia took his sworded stoneforge over to bladewing for each swing since he was completely open saying he deserved it. I took mine between Azusa, and Kaalia taking one swing at Bladewing for a trigger I needed. Kaalia played attempted to play general, which I countered, he then passed only to have Bladewing blow up his sword after finally having enough mana / cards. Kaalia was extremely frustrated at this point and couldnt understand why, perceiving me as the bigger threat, he would blow up his sword as apposed to mine.
What I'm getting at here is it isn't about whether or not you're aggressive or have board presence it's all about how you're being perceived. I don't think many would disagree when I saw that the most pervasive issue among most playgroups is just that people are dumb or have no sense of threat assessment. When you sit down at a table with a general like Azami, many times you should be public enemy number one. However most people don't recognize this fact simply because of the perceived threat of playing dorky little wizards that can be used to chump block.
If your playgroup is smart and recognizes this then you need to adapt and move out of what they would consider to be normal behavior. If you're getting beat up for being too aggressive in a deck like Lyzolda, don't play your general right away. Don't dump Anger in your graveyard on turn four. I've seen a turn 3 anger in a graveyard into a turn four Kaalia going towards a player. A completely nonthreatened player then cast hallowed burial causing Kaalia to scoop out of frustration. Lifegain, global haste, beaters that do nothing but beat, constantly blowing up lots of permanents (even if it's saving people) are all things that are going to get you hated off of the board regardless of whether or not your opponents are smart or dumb. One thing that keeps me from wanting to play the game more frequently is that the 'most effective' way to play EDH is to either be absurdly aggressive and kill the table in five turns or to hang out and keep people from attacking you. Then play the one card that screws one or two people over and then just taking everyone down from there.
It really is a game of extreme politicing and unless everyone knows your deck is going to win on turn X then you should be okay just pillowforting until you can take the game.
When people complain about you comboing too fast, tell them they brought it on themselves with their inept threat analyses, then let them know you're switching back to something to more benign.
Knowledge is power, money is power, time is money, you are actually gaining time by reading my posts
Click here and check out my Formerly Pauper Cube.
check out my EDH and Pauper EDH decks here
Cockatrice Username: seriph0
So really, if I'm understanding this correctly(which my comprehension isn't the best, heh) I'm just stuck with this "reputation" of being the aggro guy that everyone needs to get rid of quick. I mean, for my Bant list, I even used Arcades Sabboth as my general, going vintage with it just to give off more of a "casual" vibe.
Doesn't help matters that I'm "not allowed to play U because when I play U, we all lose." >_>
Steel Sabotage'ng Orbs of Mellowness since 2011.