Basically, focus down on the game plan, which is to spend the first ~3 turns on cheap removal, land drops and engine preparation, then take over the midgame with Madness-powered beatdown and burn. I'm not sure how to balance the discard outlets with the Madness stuff, which has lead to more 3-ofs than I really want to see; one of my first goals would definitely be to consolidate card choices. There's always a best choice.
Also, let me recommend Gavin Verhey's ReConstructed column on the mothership, where he basically does nothing but take reader-submitted decklists and make them work properly. The first one, linked above, specifically goes over, "How many of card X do I want to run." I've learned a lot from reading that column.
Yea - that was a ****ing dope post, lol. I can def agree that waltz is better, as it feeds the engine. However your firebolt/soot argument is a bit more loose. Soot is an instant, which is in and of itself a value that puts it on par with bolt, for me anyways. The reason why cards like flame slash/echoing decay are lower on my list is because if i drop them via discard, I lose them forever, whereas firebolt and strangling soot, are still available, and even potentially generate card advantage.
Dymdez; I'm not looking to get into a peeing match akin the other thread but policehq gave sound advice without ridicule. If you don't want suggestions, keep going at the speed you are, we'll learn. Most of the regulars, which they are easy to spot after a time, give good advice. I certainly have learned what ideas of my own are poor with their help. I'm sorry IF you are feeling unwelcome because I don't think that is anyone's intention and I personally am of the mindset the-more-the-merrier.
As far as singles go; If you have a tool box enabler like Mystical Teachings, then that is great but just running singles with similar effects is worse. I've learned it the hard way, I've read about it from very experienced pro level player's articles, and watched others fail from it. If you want an effect, the one that most often will be the best needs to be the go to.
I LOVE faithless looting as I am hopelessly in love with weird red strategies that aren't burn or weenie rush. Running 4 is way too many though. I used to argue that I could just discard multiples to the first one cast but I quickly realized that I could be choosing between good cards as opposed to discarding redundant ones that I didn't want to see multiples of in the first place, while drawing lands. I'm honestly at a point where 2 is fine and sometimes too much but in a madness deck I could reason with running 3 if only for consistency. The card disadvantage from it is a real cost I've found and I savagely over valued the digging power for a long time.
Braingorgers too suffers from allowing your opponents to decide. If I have lethal and you need a dude to block, I'll gladly sacrifice my smallest dude to push my clock back a turn and keep the 4 power wall off the table. You have to think about it from the other side of the argument. If I had a 4/2 on the stack that read like Vexing Devil except it either allowed you to trade your biggest dude in combat later or your smallest dude right now? Would you ever let it resolve unless you didn't have a dude on the table so it didn't matter or already had an answer to it in hand?
Right, I see what you're saying-- but I think there is a distinction here. Take firebolt and strangling soot, for example. There is no objective standard available (as far as I know, correct me if I'm wrong) that demonstrates firebolt or strangling soot are better than the other. Likewise, Ghoulcaller's Chant or Macabre Waltz. So I don't understand your mystical teachings argument, I don't see how it applies.
There is 1 Echoing Decay. I think it's a safety spell. I don't have room for 4 but I cannot afford having 0.
There is 1 Delirium Skeins. There is never a point in having more than 1 of these. The times in the game where they are good, you will only need one and it will be later on. This card is a potential 3 for 1, maybe more.
The above explanations basically generalize across the board. If the reasoning isn't sound, let me know why. I understand that every choice for the 60 slots we make is crucial to deck stability, but I also see room for deviation here. If it isn't true, explain why.
As for the Brain Gorgers point, it is a good one. The board states I am used to being in, however, are generally more accommodating to the plan, i.e., brain gorgers is generally repeatably castable, which makes their decisions continuously worse, at a cheap price. Maybe, I am over-estimating its ability, in which case the solution is obvious, reduce them and compensate elsewhere, which I can do.
I don't feel unwelcomed, and I see some good advice, but as you can see above, some it of has been wrapped rather unkindly.
I would like to see more 3 and 4 ofs in this build, or either it'd be nice to get some explanation.
Do you want this deck to do well in a daily? I think all rogue brewers have to focus either on beating Post (Deluxeicoff's LD deck, hexproof, elves) or beating Aggro (Stompy, Delver, Goblins, Affinity, Fiend maybe), then shoring up the MBC and UR Post matchups to 40-50% for a chance of success in a daily. All of the aggro decks, with the possible exception of Affinity, are remarkably consistent, which is why I'm discouraged to see so many 1-of cards.
Right -- So why so many 1 and 2 of's?
Well, if you look at the cards, they aren't actually very different. It may look like a bunch of 1 and 2 of's "scatterbrained" but its really just the same card concept in many different forms. This is a personal habit, I like a lot of flexibility. Sometimes a ghoulcaller's chant is optimal, sometime's a macabre waltz is optimal, i like having all of these choices available to me, closing no doors. Similarly, if i need to ditch cards, strangling soot and firebolt are great choices, it could have been 2 firebolt, but once again, I like options.
I'm not going to sit here and pretend that this list is perfect and in need of no refining, in fact I already can see some strategic changes that have to be made. As for competing with those decks, there's only one way to know for sure. If you get a chance, try it out. I'm unable to play for a while, being on vacation I just get on here at night before I sleep, just to keep my finger on the pulse of the game.
This decklist is "scatterbrained" and inconsistent. Nice job removing the third color. That is a step in the right direction. I would look at this wonderful article telling you why Dredge and Madness are bad choices.
I'd recommend doing your homework and then deciding if you want to stick with the archetype. Best of luck.
Is Lightning Axe and Brain Gorgers a nombo? What order does this happen in? Can they sacrifice the creature being targeted by the Axe? I'm pretty bad at the rules due to MTGO.
Thanks for your collection of favorite mtg pages, I took a look at them.
To answer your first question, you don't ditch brain gorgers to lightning axe, it's simply a stupid play. For future reference, avoid all stupid plays
You recommend me doing my homework? Read my post. This is my homework, silly. I asked for feedback. You provided an underwhelming mixture of disdain and discouragement.
The article you posted about why Madness shouldn't be brewed I already had read -- if you read my post, I carefully mention how I brewed in consideration of these facts.
I think the point is that the onus of proof is on "the brewers" to show that they're doing anything more than messing around with cute cards that can never win a competitive game of magic.
Sure, have fun tinkering with and trying to improve a non-tier concept. Don't go claiming that you're doing anything more than that until you have consistent results in competitive environments to back it up though. I really respected woo's pauper rats article from that perspective (incidentally, nowdays most of his games seem to be in the practice rooms when I bring myself to check his stream out, so I have way less respect for his decks). While I'm not sure he played any dailies with it (others certainly did at the time, and won sometimes), if you take him at his word then he played 100 2-person queue games with tix on the line (to a ~66% win rate). Go play in a bunch of queues or dailies with the deck and present results and claims of "competitive" will be taken much more seriously.
Sorry, but this just isn't right. Take a look at some of the competitive decks. Some of them started out exactly like this blink deck did, as a complete brew. Blouses and that stupid fissure deck, for example, were previously non-existent brews that didn't exist in other formats on a serious level. Then BAM, they continuously topped the boards.
So you say the onus is on the brewers to prove themselves? It isn't a fair proposition. When the brews prove themselves, they are no longer brews because the mindless just take the list and play them (which anyone can do), so by definition, the condition cannot be satisfied.
My argument is this, you can use this thread to shoot the idea down and say it won't happen, or you can help the brewers with critique and ideas of your own, but if your only activity here is just discouragement, don't waste everyone's time.
Oh, i should also point out that E Hustle knows what he's talking about in relation to rogue brews and competitive. About a year ago he brewed a deck that was completely off the wall, RB tortured existence:
He (and a few other imitators) placed in dailies with that deck consistently over a few month period. He found a hole in the metagame, built a deck and exploited it in a competitive environment with a deck seeminly no one else was able to pilot. iirc he even won one of the huge, multi-round, pauper spotlight events that used to be run occasionally with the deck.
I hope he forgives me for pumping him up like this, but he's not just some random net-decker, he's a deckbuilder and knows what he's talking about.
Right, and I don't doubt he's an excellent brewer and player, but we aren't arguing about that. What we are arguing about is this blink pauper deck, and his contribution to the thread is rather slim.
I played a bit of madness variations (RUG, RUB,) but all were three colors. Here's a more concentrated, competitive build, working towards building the engine in a manner that can not get overrun easily. Three colors and mana fixing was always this deck's main problem. Cutting it down to two colors I think gives it a competitive edge. I obviously miss blue for the waterfront bouncer and careful study and looter. I obviously miss green's rootwalla and mongrel -- but I think the power of this deck comes with the massive amount of removal.
Let me know what you think. I am just recently getting back into pauper so please, if I just posted a list that already basically existed, just let me know I wasted everyone's time If not, let's see if we can work on this list and improve on it!
Edit: Changed sideboard to be more reasonable against blue.
Lord Saturn gave you some very sound advice and you basically dismissed it and over exaggerated your match ups and the power level of your deck. Even against aggro your engine and combos are very slow. Running poor cards such as Mournwhelk and Dawnfluke, because they have perceived synergy and because they are similar powered down versions of effects that have been historically useful versus Control and Aggro, respectively does not satisfy your claims. This deck has no chance of beating any of the Tier 1 Decks: Delver, Stompy, Affinity and especially Temporal Fissure. It is possible to beat Stompy, Affinity and Goblins when they have their worst draws or incompetent pilots and you have your best. If you are building this deck casually, then proceed to have fun; Time Spiral and Lorwyn were two of the greatest blocks in limited. Those cards and interactions are certainly enjoyable. J P H Snake took a more realistic take on building around Elementals with his Icy Hot Hottie deck, featured in the Pauper Gauntlet. I'm glad you discovered these interactions and a deck you enjoy, but I would try to be more like Lord Saturn and J P H Snake and less like DeluxeIcoff, i.e. pretend to be 13-0 in the casual room and in reality be 0-2 in the Daily Event.
That's a no-can-do attitude!
Look - you can download the best lists and play them or you can find an original concept and try to make it competitive, I choose the latter. This deck is completely viable -- all it takes is some work. Aven Riftwatcher is a card that can beat aggro on its own. It stalls the board and makes everything complicated. With a cloudshift in hand, there's no way you're dying any time soon. Also, a well crafted sideboard can help compete against control decks.
I see what you're saying, and maybe it's true, but I find fun in non-mainstream methods of winning. That's why I play chess outside of the main lines, that's why I play magic the same way. It's easy to say that something won't work, but it takes skill, energy and insight to try and make it work, which i think the OP and some of the other brewers enjoy doing.
Building a pauper deck, got puzzled by this interaction:
I control 1 creature, Mulldrifter. I cast Wormfang Drake, targetting the Mulldrifter, that resolves, exiling Mulldrifter. Then I cloudshift the Wormfang Drake.. what happens?
Value-grinding decks are very, very difficult to succeed with right now; you've got to balance stumping aggro with blitzing combo, and you're still nearly guaranteed to lose to the hard control deck that runs enough removal.
vs. Aggro, you're going to be very weak unless you can trade with their threats, since anything you bounce is just going to come right back out again. Journey to Nowhere? Temporal Isolation + a blocker? Counters seem dicey, since you're going to need to be tapped out on turns 2 and 3...
vs. Combo, you're going to be very weak unless you can crank them down to nothing before/in spite of a game-resetting storm. I'm not sure this is possible to be consistent with; they don't have to show you anything but lands until the turn they want to blow out, and your beats just can't be good. Definitely this seems like a place for countermagic to shine.
vs. Control, about the only thing you can do is try to trade bounce spells for removal. Maybe that can work?
Honestly the deck just owns aggro, because aven riftwatcher and momentary blink are completely unfair together, and removal doesn't stand a chance against the deck because of the all the 1-drop counter-removal. The sideboard for a lot of these decks should honestly have 4 dispels to confront control decks because mana is so important, the deck relies on all of these 1 drops. The mournwhelks, backed up with some counter-magic, make control a great matchup. Also, against aggro decks you can side in Dawnfluke. When I get home from Paris I will post my list. This deck is definitely underrated!!
I agree, I don't like when they shut down an archetype instead of just nerfing it, it seems unnecessary, and a bit rude. Banning grapeshot would have done the deed just fine.
Thanks for the input. The deck actually started out with a TortEx shell, but was relying too much on Tortured Existence, rather than the original goal, which was to abuse retrace and lands.
As for the card suggestions: I must have missed Gnaw to the Bone when I was building. The deck doesn't run a large amount of creatures, so it's going to rely on resolving Gnaw to the Bone as late as possible, or resolving multiple.
Pit Keeper looks interesting. I'll definitely test him out.
Harvest Wurm is actually worse for this deck than Cartographer, due to needing to grab a basic land. If it could return any land, it would be in the deck within a heartbeat.
Similar deal with Rogue Elephant. He needs a Forest specifically, which the deck has 4 of.
As for Mulch, as much as I would love to add it in, I really don't like having too many cards that throw my spells in the grave. This is pauper and we don't have Snapcaster. I can get back creatures, no problem, but any spell in the grave not Raven's Crime, Syphon Life, or Gnaw to the Bone is completely lost.
Edit: Also testing Last Rites. Delirium Skeins seems less useful than Raven's Crime until you have less than 3 cards in hand, and the opponent has 3 or more.
Awesome!! Maybe add more basics to accomodate Harvest Wurm? If it compromises "the plan" too much, then youre probably right.
Also, mulch ditching your spells shouldnt be a problem, seeing as everything in the deck recurs, right? In fact, it seems like a perfect spell, it can ditch retrace cards, get you lands to cast them and effectively ditch creatures and gnaws which can all be rebought with pit keeper. I think its quite a fair card for the deck.
Been testing. The problem I've been having is speed. Also, early game defense is very lacking.
Right, Aven Riftwatcher needs to be 4 of, 3 at least.
My list has Aethersnipe, Mulldrifter, Mournwhelk, Aven Riftwatcher, Deputy of Acquittals for creatures and the rest is blink stuff (cloudshift, momentary blink, saving grasp, ghostly flicker) and some control (mana leak, daze, counterspell, 4 dispel in sideboard)
Don't have the deck with me but I'll give you the list when I get home.
I'll just add that, because the deck is typically quite slow, it needs to be based on 1 drop instants (dispel, saving grasp, cloudshift, maybe undying evil, daze (0),) because you need to drop your evokers and riftwatchers as soon as possible.
It's true. I end up trying to recycle Quicksands as much as possible, while staying alive with Syphon Life, making it difficult to find the right play between the two. It works beautifully against burn, MBC isn't much of an issue, and most other rogue decks are just grind to win.
You know what? This is pauper which means we can make this deck viable with minor modifications.
First of all -- we need to remove everything that doesn't either 1) win us the game with our plan, 2) keep us alive to do so, 3) fill in the blanks with the best possible cards. So let's do this (Sorry, bored in Paris right now its like 4am). I am not giving exact card amounts for the additions because I'm too tired to think about that so I'll just ramble.
Remove
Syphon Life is a 1-of in this deck. It just has no force, but I can see it being perfect at the desired board-state. (-2)
Crippling Fatigue is good in theory, but I think you will find that paying 3 life is not something you want to be doing with a deck like this. Remove them all I think. (-2)
Frightcrawler should be removed. It's too slow and cannot help keep us alive or win at any appreciable pace. (-4)
Raven's Crime is actually quite good in this deck, but 3 is too many, 2 should be fine. (-1)
Grim Discovery and Cartographer and just not good. I could see an argument for 2 of each, but there has to be something better out there for these spots.
Add
First things first. Evolving Wilds seems like a card you want to play. When the engine begins to run, it can help thin your deck out quickly. Maybe not a 4 of, but certainly needs to be there for this utility.
Tortured Existence seems like a good way to keep the deck fresh. Ditch the dredgers and pull the utility guys back to your hand. I'm going to say 2 is enough because once you bank too much on this card, the deck concept changes. However, I could see an argument for 3.
Lastly, we can't forget that we actually have to win. What happens if they a 4/4? Doesn't this deck just lose?? Cards like Mongrel and Werebear can help you get there, but that comes much later in the game. Innocent Blood maindeck and Evincar's Justice sideboard (echoing decay is good too) should be considered.
I know I added a lot more cards than took out, but I want you to consider all of them and maybe test out different variations. Test against aggressive decks, because we know this deck can fair against a slow deck.
Yea - that was a ****ing dope post, lol. I can def agree that waltz is better, as it feeds the engine. However your firebolt/soot argument is a bit more loose. Soot is an instant, which is in and of itself a value that puts it on par with bolt, for me anyways. The reason why cards like flame slash/echoing decay are lower on my list is because if i drop them via discard, I lose them forever, whereas firebolt and strangling soot, are still available, and even potentially generate card advantage.
I like your list and look forward to using it.
Right, I see what you're saying-- but I think there is a distinction here. Take firebolt and strangling soot, for example. There is no objective standard available (as far as I know, correct me if I'm wrong) that demonstrates firebolt or strangling soot are better than the other. Likewise, Ghoulcaller's Chant or Macabre Waltz. So I don't understand your mystical teachings argument, I don't see how it applies.
There is 1 Echoing Decay. I think it's a safety spell. I don't have room for 4 but I cannot afford having 0.
There is 1 Delirium Skeins. There is never a point in having more than 1 of these. The times in the game where they are good, you will only need one and it will be later on. This card is a potential 3 for 1, maybe more.
The above explanations basically generalize across the board. If the reasoning isn't sound, let me know why. I understand that every choice for the 60 slots we make is crucial to deck stability, but I also see room for deviation here. If it isn't true, explain why.
As for the Brain Gorgers point, it is a good one. The board states I am used to being in, however, are generally more accommodating to the plan, i.e., brain gorgers is generally repeatably castable, which makes their decisions continuously worse, at a cheap price. Maybe, I am over-estimating its ability, in which case the solution is obvious, reduce them and compensate elsewhere, which I can do.
I don't feel unwelcomed, and I see some good advice, but as you can see above, some it of has been wrapped rather unkindly.
Dymdez
Right -- So why so many 1 and 2 of's?
Well, if you look at the cards, they aren't actually very different. It may look like a bunch of 1 and 2 of's "scatterbrained" but its really just the same card concept in many different forms. This is a personal habit, I like a lot of flexibility. Sometimes a ghoulcaller's chant is optimal, sometime's a macabre waltz is optimal, i like having all of these choices available to me, closing no doors. Similarly, if i need to ditch cards, strangling soot and firebolt are great choices, it could have been 2 firebolt, but once again, I like options.
I'm not going to sit here and pretend that this list is perfect and in need of no refining, in fact I already can see some strategic changes that have to be made. As for competing with those decks, there's only one way to know for sure. If you get a chance, try it out. I'm unable to play for a while, being on vacation
Thanks for your collection of favorite mtg pages, I took a look at them.
To answer your first question, you don't ditch brain gorgers to lightning axe, it's simply a stupid play. For future reference, avoid all stupid plays
You recommend me doing my homework? Read my post. This is my homework, silly. I asked for feedback. You provided an underwhelming mixture of disdain and discouragement.
The article you posted about why Madness shouldn't be brewed I already had read -- if you read my post, I carefully mention how I brewed in consideration of these facts.
Sorry, but this just isn't right. Take a look at some of the competitive decks. Some of them started out exactly like this blink deck did, as a complete brew. Blouses and that stupid fissure deck, for example, were previously non-existent brews that didn't exist in other formats on a serious level. Then BAM, they continuously topped the boards.
So you say the onus is on the brewers to prove themselves? It isn't a fair proposition. When the brews prove themselves, they are no longer brews because the mindless just take the list and play them (which anyone can do), so by definition, the condition cannot be satisfied.
My argument is this, you can use this thread to shoot the idea down and say it won't happen, or you can help the brewers with critique and ideas of your own, but if your only activity here is just discouragement, don't waste everyone's time.
Right, and I don't doubt he's an excellent brewer and player, but we aren't arguing about that. What we are arguing about is this blink pauper deck, and his contribution to the thread is rather slim.
1 Rotting Rats
4 Brain Gorgers
2 Gathan Raiders
2 Keldon Marauders
2 Vampire Hounds
4 Grave Scrabbler
Spells (23):
3 Lightning Axe
2 Tortured Existence
1 Strangling Soot
1 Macabre Waltz
1 Ghoulcaller's Chant
1 Echoing Decay
1 Delirium Skeins
3 Dark Withering
1 Firebolt
3 Fiery Temper
4 Faithless Looting
1 Burning Inquiry
1 Call to the Netherworld
4 Rakdos Guildgate
1 Bojuka Bog
10 Swamp
7 Mountain
3 Duress
2 Geth's Verdict
2 Diabolic Edict
2 Evincar's Justice
1 Dark Withering
2 Terminate
3 Pyroblast
I played a bit of madness variations (RUG, RUB,) but all were three colors. Here's a more concentrated, competitive build, working towards building the engine in a manner that can not get overrun easily. Three colors and mana fixing was always this deck's main problem. Cutting it down to two colors I think gives it a competitive edge. I obviously miss blue for the waterfront bouncer and careful study and looter. I obviously miss green's rootwalla and mongrel -- but I think the power of this deck comes with the massive amount of removal.
Let me know what you think. I am just recently getting back into pauper so please, if I just posted a list that already basically existed, just let me know I wasted everyone's time
Edit: Changed sideboard to be more reasonable against blue.
That's a no-can-do attitude!
Look - you can download the best lists and play them or you can find an original concept and try to make it competitive, I choose the latter. This deck is completely viable -- all it takes is some work. Aven Riftwatcher is a card that can beat aggro on its own. It stalls the board and makes everything complicated. With a cloudshift in hand, there's no way you're dying any time soon. Also, a well crafted sideboard can help compete against control decks.
I see what you're saying, and maybe it's true, but I find fun in non-mainstream methods of winning. That's why I play chess outside of the main lines, that's why I play magic the same way. It's easy to say that something won't work, but it takes skill, energy and insight to try and make it work, which i think the OP and some of the other brewers enjoy doing.
So politely, I disagree..
I control 1 creature, Mulldrifter. I cast Wormfang Drake, targetting the Mulldrifter, that resolves, exiling Mulldrifter. Then I cloudshift the Wormfang Drake.. what happens?
Honestly the deck just owns aggro, because aven riftwatcher and momentary blink are completely unfair together, and removal doesn't stand a chance against the deck because of the all the 1-drop counter-removal. The sideboard for a lot of these decks should honestly have 4 dispels to confront control decks because mana is so important, the deck relies on all of these 1 drops. The mournwhelks, backed up with some counter-magic, make control a great matchup. Also, against aggro decks you can side in Dawnfluke. When I get home from Paris I will post my list. This deck is definitely underrated!!
Awesome!! Maybe add more basics to accomodate Harvest Wurm? If it compromises "the plan" too much, then youre probably right.
Also, mulch ditching your spells shouldnt be a problem, seeing as everything in the deck recurs, right? In fact, it seems like a perfect spell, it can ditch retrace cards, get you lands to cast them and effectively ditch creatures and gnaws which can all be rebought with pit keeper. I think its quite a fair card for the deck.
I have a blink pauper deck somewhere, its really amazing, i'll get you the list soon
Right, Aven Riftwatcher needs to be 4 of, 3 at least.
My list has Aethersnipe, Mulldrifter, Mournwhelk, Aven Riftwatcher, Deputy of Acquittals for creatures and the rest is blink stuff (cloudshift, momentary blink, saving grasp, ghostly flicker) and some control (mana leak, daze, counterspell, 4 dispel in sideboard)
Don't have the deck with me but I'll give you the list when I get home.
I'll just add that, because the deck is typically quite slow, it needs to be based on 1 drop instants (dispel, saving grasp, cloudshift, maybe undying evil, daze (0),) because you need to drop your evokers and riftwatchers as soon as possible.
You know what? This is pauper which means we can make this deck viable with minor modifications.
First of all -- we need to remove everything that doesn't either 1) win us the game with our plan, 2) keep us alive to do so, 3) fill in the blanks with the best possible cards. So let's do this (Sorry, bored in Paris right now its like 4am). I am not giving exact card amounts for the additions because I'm too tired to think about that so I'll just ramble.
Remove
Syphon Life is a 1-of in this deck. It just has no force, but I can see it being perfect at the desired board-state. (-2)
Crippling Fatigue is good in theory, but I think you will find that paying 3 life is not something you want to be doing with a deck like this. Remove them all I think. (-2)
Frightcrawler should be removed. It's too slow and cannot help keep us alive or win at any appreciable pace. (-4)
Raven's Crime is actually quite good in this deck, but 3 is too many, 2 should be fine. (-1)
Grim Discovery and Cartographer and just not good. I could see an argument for 2 of each, but there has to be something better out there for these spots.
Add
First things first. Evolving Wilds seems like a card you want to play. When the engine begins to run, it can help thin your deck out quickly. Maybe not a 4 of, but certainly needs to be there for this utility.
Tortured Existence seems like a good way to keep the deck fresh. Ditch the dredgers and pull the utility guys back to your hand. I'm going to say 2 is enough because once you bank too much on this card, the deck concept changes. However, I could see an argument for 3.
Gnaw to the Bone is necessary. Look. You need to stay alive somehow. (barring delving into some life combo with Golgari Brownscale and Tortured Existence)
Mulch just seems positively essential to the deck's plan. Find a way to fit it in there.
Last Rites and Delirium Skeins seem viable as spells, too.
Wild Mongrel and Pit Keeper should also be considered.
I don't play MTGO but if you have access to Harvest Wurm then it is just 100x better than Cartographer, it seems vital.
Elves of the Deep Shadow could help with the engine, help speed it up.
Lastly, we can't forget that we actually have to win. What happens if they a 4/4? Doesn't this deck just lose?? Cards like Mongrel and Werebear can help you get there, but that comes much later in the game. Innocent Blood maindeck and Evincar's Justice sideboard (echoing decay is good too) should be considered.
I know I added a lot more cards than took out, but I want you to consider all of them and maybe test out different variations. Test against aggressive decks, because we know this deck can fair against a slow deck.