General comment...people should take the time to THINK about what other people post. If someone's comment seems painfully obviously wrong, back up and consider that YOU may not be looking at the comment in the proper context.
To wit, a few have commented that black aggro has been the "best" deck...to which a number have people have railed that no, black aggro has not been competitive and black devotion has been dominant. Now, step back and think...what sense would it make to be commenting on the current Standard relative to a card (Despise) that will not be played within it? Answer: It would make NO sense. The people who have commented on the dominance of black aggro are likely speaking of BLOCK CONSTRUCTED, which is the only format that is meaningfully predictive of post-rotation Standard. In that format, Black Aggro--alongside Junk--has been relatively dominant; given the love that black has thus far seen in Khans spoilers, it is not unlikely that black aggro will play a meaningful role in the new Standard.
People need to let go of this Mythic covetousness...the phoenix is at Mythic simply because it would be outrageously OP as a regular turnup as a short set rare in Limited. A 5/5 flyer for 4 in red is powerful and will see play. Mono red playing Hammer of Purphoros and RB playing Exava, Rakdos Blood Witch both make the Tribute drawback far from cut-and-dried, and the current Standard is not exactly choked with chump flyers to throw in front of the phoenix. Tmaw was a truly OP card and I think has warped many players' abilities to evaluate cards...not every card has to break the format to be good.
He's a common...should be anywhere from okay to a full-blown bomb in Limited.
He's not Corrupt, however...Corrupt is as strong as the percentage of Swamps in your deck. Thus, if you are playing it in mono black, you are always looking at a minimum of a 12-point life swing.
Gray Merchant is less consistent in that it is looking at your board state rather than your land count. If you have a decent board with lots of black mana symbols up, he's going to make a huge impact; if you are behind with an empty field, he's going to be a 4-point swing and a 2/4 body for 5. Thus, he will always improve your board state to some degree, but the life drain is situational.
All things considered, it's a potentially powerful card. I certainly look forward to trying him out in black-based control of some sort.
Am I alone in thinking that Gray Merchant of Asphodel is potentially really good? In monoblack that might be a 5 mana corrupt with a 2/4 body.
To me, that actually seems like a better card than the God.
State-based question...Will Gray Merchant's ETB see him as part of the Devotion? It seems that he would since he has to resolve before the ETB triggers, but I wanted to clarify. He is without a doubt an interesting card for Limited, but if he is coming in with at least a 4-point life swing, he may be Constructed playable.
Decks that depend on +1 counters as a central strategy completely fold to Azorius Charm; that's why nearly all of these cards have been unplayable since UWx got the mana and card selection they needed to be viable in a creature meta.
The same applies relative to removal-heavy decks like Jund; they can let you spend your time and resources growing creatures, then just drop your overstuffed hydra with a 2CMC spell. It regrettably kills a lot of fun deck ideas, but counter strategies are almost never viable at this point in the year (biggest card pool before a block rotates).
Junk just doesn't seem like a good bet with Lifebane Zombie so prevalent in the format...and 3 colors doesn't sound any more appealing with Burning Earth gaining a head of steam.
That being said, I love this list that hobbymax took down a MTGO daily with:
Conceptually, the first thing to ask yourself is whether BW can give you something strategy-wise that the existing BG "Rock" lists can't. If you can't justify white cards over green, this is academic. BW is just as threatened by Lifebane Zombie stripping its creatures as BG, so there's no benefit in that regard...
From there, look at card choices. Disciple of Bolas has relatively few targets in this deck that you want to sac to it, so its effectiveness in questionable. And as you said, the archangel is really just floating here without much synergy; if you are truly trying to play controllish, Obzedat makes more sense.
Sin Collector seems like a sideboard card; true, it can pluck a Return from Jund or Revelation from UWR game 1, but if come up against a creature-heavy deck (quite likely) he whiffs and leaves you with a really poor return on the mana spent.
You flat-out need more removal in the main if you're playing midrange control; again, look at how BG Midrange or Jund are constructed as they are great examples of the archetype. Without a decent selection of spot removal and your sweeper together mainboard, fast aggro decks are going to overwhelm you before you get any board presence. Lingering Souls definitely helps, but if you can't reliably stop the Kibler Dragonmaster deck from getting out a T3 Hellkite you're setting yourself up to get run over.
Reckoner is made for the non-human version. There just isn't enough room for him in this variant unless you want to remove either Falkenrath or Blood Artist.
Personally, I won't be using Falkenrath and going BW. With the inclusion of Gather the Townsfolk and Xathrid Necromancer, I feel it is a more token-oriented build than Act I The Aristocrats. Red just takes away from that. I especially see that since AJ Sacher's BW version took 1st at SCG Richmond and The Aristocrats (human version) took 22nd.
I would be wary of treating the results of one SCG event as definitive of the "correct" build for this deck--or anything else for that matter. Sacher dodged some serious bullets and could have finished very differently; the fact that he came out where he did speaks more to his play and circumstance than any dominance of his deck. Gerry T even said as much, and he's one of the main advocates of B/W Humans.
If you're going to take something away from the SCG results, it should be a recognition of the number of Jund (40% of the total field) and Bant Pants players that were there. What are your plans for Curse of Death's Hold? Bonfire? Hexproof? These are important questions that you can actually peg as relevant from the Richmond stats.
Quite honestly, the only significant reason to even consider B/W over Dega colors--and abandoning Falkenrath Aristocrat, which is a cornerstone of the deck--is concern over mono-red with Burning Earth in their strategy. FA is an absolute terror in a human heavy build, and Sacher's deck would get stuffed in the mirror against a traditional Aristocrats build, particularly if it's carrying Ratchet Bomb in the side. Which, by the by, is another card you better be prepared to deal with in a token-centric build.
My guess is that the more viable B/W creature strategy is going to be a lifegain-heavy deck...
Regarding Thatcher Revolt--people naysaying the card need to actually try playing it in the deck before pontificating about "bad cards". Anyone can point at a given card in a vacuum and bemoan its existence...but that doesn't mean a damn thing in the context of a given deck. Blasphemous Act is a card that absolutely no one had any use for--until Reckoner came on the scene and buddied up with it and Souls in Act 2 to make a viable kill strategy. Revolt, while not as flashy, is incredibly synergistic in an Aristocrats build that can maximize its value, and its "downside" makes it incredibly relevant if you don't happen to have a sac source in play but have Artist, Necromancer or Champion on the board to reap benefit. And if you do have FA in play...last I checked a 7/4 indestructible flyer is a potent clock. Yes, the fact that Revolt offers no defensive benefit means that it isn't the right card in certain matchups, but that's the nature of higher risk/higher gain strategies.
I have a feeling that some mix of Souls, Revolt and Gather in the 75 is going to be the best overall strategy for Necromancer-inclusive builds, but obviously we need to do more actual playtesting to see what's ideal beyond the theorycrafting.
Does anybody else see the synergy between Thatcher Revolt and:
Falkenrath Aristocrat
Champion of the Parish
Xathrid Necromancer
Blood Artist
It triggers both "dying" and "etb" effects and its 3 humans!
The issue is that it doesn't advance your board state or provide blocking as compared to Reckoner and Souls...it needs other cards on the field to be good and sucks if you are on your back foot.
Sanguine Bond into Crypt Incursion against Rites seems hilarious...while Bond being played by Rites seems scary as hell. Blink Tusk=10-point life swing? Yikes...
The only creatures you drop are 4 Cackler and 4 Noble since they're completely outmatched from turn 3+ and are basically dead topdecks. In addition you drop the 4 Pillars since the only thing it does against them is kill half a creature.
You bring in creatures that they can't profitably deal with, spells that swing CA back in your favor, and removal that is relevant against their guys.
You don't do this to try and out-Midrange them, you do this to take dead cards out of the deck and replace them with relevant alternatives. You're still Aggro in that MU, but you're Aggro that doesn't have to worry about drawing a Rakdos Cackler on turn 5 against an Olivia.
I should have specified that my comment on Cackler was relative to the general midrange SB plan that windstrider put up, which is further relative to the sideboard one is playing. That SB plan was to go a net of 7 fewer creatures against Jund after board; I totally and uncategorically disagree with that as it is going from a creature-driven aggro deck to a poor version of the Jund mirror. If you cannot apply damage pressure, you cannot beat them with any consistency. And while Cackler sucks as a topdeck in the later game, Mortars sucks even more if they have nothing for you to remove and you blow another turn unable to pressure them.
Again though, I'm coming at this from the perspective that I always played a more creature-based sideboard in Dos Rakis. Yes, I would have sided out Cackler when I was playing the Hellrider/Cackler version, but I would have brought in Conscripts/Hound/Hellkite/Olivia in whatever numbers were defined by my board, as well as any sorcery-speed Threatens. Pillar indeed would swap out to broader removal (I always ran some number of DBore main so the count depended), Slaughter Games, and whatever X-spell I was running (usually RR or DP).
Bottom line, significantly reducing your creature count against Jund is a losing proposition. I would personally not pull Jester against them, and I would only pull Cackler if I had something in the board capable of exerting more pressure while still drawing their removal. That's just me; I totally follow the logic of siding in more relevant cards, but not to the point of reducing one's creature count to midrange levels against the best midrange deck in the format.
Trying to out-midrange Jund with Dos Rakis is like me (5'7" out-of-shape white guy) trying to out-dunk Shaq...the tools just do not match up. Any Jund player will tell you that what kills them is creatures; if they can control creatures and keep threats on the table, they win; if they cannot, aggro makes short work of them. By siding out all early aggression, you allow them to ramp straight into their game unmolested and save their removal for your remaining threats. Arguably, Noble comes out because he gets blocked by damn near everything they run, but Cackler and Jester are still the key to early pressure and getting them down before low enough to kill before they stabilize. Jester in particular demands that they deal with him; he's too serious a clock for them not to.
Beyond that, removal should be optimized to kill their creatures and walkers, Slaughter Games if you play it can come in to remove Swagtusk, and more resilent creatures like Hound (again if you're playing him) can come in to help exhaust their removal. Return really doesn't bug them unless you're using it for the kill--they are happy to play most decks in a topdeck war, hence mainboard Sire.
I admit that I'm not actively playing Rakis atm, but I played many matches against Jund from RTR into GTC and creatures nearly always carried the day.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Common Sense is now a Mythic Rare.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
To wit, a few have commented that black aggro has been the "best" deck...to which a number have people have railed that no, black aggro has not been competitive and black devotion has been dominant. Now, step back and think...what sense would it make to be commenting on the current Standard relative to a card (Despise) that will not be played within it? Answer: It would make NO sense. The people who have commented on the dominance of black aggro are likely speaking of BLOCK CONSTRUCTED, which is the only format that is meaningfully predictive of post-rotation Standard. In that format, Black Aggro--alongside Junk--has been relatively dominant; given the love that black has thus far seen in Khans spoilers, it is not unlikely that black aggro will play a meaningful role in the new Standard.
Except in every deck concept other than red devotion...:rolleyes:
He's not Corrupt, however...Corrupt is as strong as the percentage of Swamps in your deck. Thus, if you are playing it in mono black, you are always looking at a minimum of a 12-point life swing.
Gray Merchant is less consistent in that it is looking at your board state rather than your land count. If you have a decent board with lots of black mana symbols up, he's going to make a huge impact; if you are behind with an empty field, he's going to be a 4-point swing and a 2/4 body for 5. Thus, he will always improve your board state to some degree, but the life drain is situational.
All things considered, it's a potentially powerful card. I certainly look forward to trying him out in black-based control of some sort.
State-based question...Will Gray Merchant's ETB see him as part of the Devotion? It seems that he would since he has to resolve before the ETB triggers, but I wanted to clarify. He is without a doubt an interesting card for Limited, but if he is coming in with at least a 4-point life swing, he may be Constructed playable.
The same applies relative to removal-heavy decks like Jund; they can let you spend your time and resources growing creatures, then just drop your overstuffed hydra with a 2CMC spell. It regrettably kills a lot of fun deck ideas, but counter strategies are almost never viable at this point in the year (biggest card pool before a block rotates).
That being said, I love this list that hobbymax took down a MTGO daily with:
6 Swamp
4 Woodland Cemetery
4 Isolated Chapel
4 Godless Shrine
4 Overgrown Tomb
2 Cavern of Souls
1 Vault of the Archangel
CREATURES
4 Restoration Angel
4 Thragtusk
3 Desecration Demon
3 Disciple of Bolas
3 Geralf's Messenger
3 Lifebane Zombie
3 Sin Collector
3 Vampire Nighthawk
2 Obzedat, Ghost Council
3 Tragic Slip
1 Putrefy
1 Abrupt Decay
OTHER SPELLS
1 Sorin, Lord of Innistrad
1 Liliana of the Veil
1 Lifebane Zombie
1 Tragic Slip
1 Sin Collector
2 War Priest of Thune
3 Scavenging Ooze
2 Mutilate
1 Curse of Death's Hold
3 Appetite for Brains
1 Underworld Connections
It needs some tweaking and focus, and I think I like Blood Baron over Obzedat in it possibly, but it seems like an interesting build to work from.
From there, look at card choices. Disciple of Bolas has relatively few targets in this deck that you want to sac to it, so its effectiveness in questionable. And as you said, the archangel is really just floating here without much synergy; if you are truly trying to play controllish, Obzedat makes more sense.
Sin Collector seems like a sideboard card; true, it can pluck a Return from Jund or Revelation from UWR game 1, but if come up against a creature-heavy deck (quite likely) he whiffs and leaves you with a really poor return on the mana spent.
You flat-out need more removal in the main if you're playing midrange control; again, look at how BG Midrange or Jund are constructed as they are great examples of the archetype. Without a decent selection of spot removal and your sweeper together mainboard, fast aggro decks are going to overwhelm you before you get any board presence. Lingering Souls definitely helps, but if you can't reliably stop the Kibler Dragonmaster deck from getting out a T3 Hellkite you're setting yourself up to get run over.
I would be wary of treating the results of one SCG event as definitive of the "correct" build for this deck--or anything else for that matter. Sacher dodged some serious bullets and could have finished very differently; the fact that he came out where he did speaks more to his play and circumstance than any dominance of his deck. Gerry T even said as much, and he's one of the main advocates of B/W Humans.
If you're going to take something away from the SCG results, it should be a recognition of the number of Jund (40% of the total field) and Bant Pants players that were there. What are your plans for Curse of Death's Hold? Bonfire? Hexproof? These are important questions that you can actually peg as relevant from the Richmond stats.
Quite honestly, the only significant reason to even consider B/W over Dega colors--and abandoning Falkenrath Aristocrat, which is a cornerstone of the deck--is concern over mono-red with Burning Earth in their strategy. FA is an absolute terror in a human heavy build, and Sacher's deck would get stuffed in the mirror against a traditional Aristocrats build, particularly if it's carrying Ratchet Bomb in the side. Which, by the by, is another card you better be prepared to deal with in a token-centric build.
My guess is that the more viable B/W creature strategy is going to be a lifegain-heavy deck...
Regarding Thatcher Revolt--people naysaying the card need to actually try playing it in the deck before pontificating about "bad cards". Anyone can point at a given card in a vacuum and bemoan its existence...but that doesn't mean a damn thing in the context of a given deck. Blasphemous Act is a card that absolutely no one had any use for--until Reckoner came on the scene and buddied up with it and Souls in Act 2 to make a viable kill strategy. Revolt, while not as flashy, is incredibly synergistic in an Aristocrats build that can maximize its value, and its "downside" makes it incredibly relevant if you don't happen to have a sac source in play but have Artist, Necromancer or Champion on the board to reap benefit. And if you do have FA in play...last I checked a 7/4 indestructible flyer is a potent clock. Yes, the fact that Revolt offers no defensive benefit means that it isn't the right card in certain matchups, but that's the nature of higher risk/higher gain strategies.
I have a feeling that some mix of Souls, Revolt and Gather in the 75 is going to be the best overall strategy for Necromancer-inclusive builds, but obviously we need to do more actual playtesting to see what's ideal beyond the theorycrafting.
The issue is that it doesn't advance your board state or provide blocking as compared to Reckoner and Souls...it needs other cards on the field to be good and sucks if you are on your back foot.
WW + 2nd body can't block + no evasion = Sucks
I should have specified that my comment on Cackler was relative to the general midrange SB plan that windstrider put up, which is further relative to the sideboard one is playing. That SB plan was to go a net of 7 fewer creatures against Jund after board; I totally and uncategorically disagree with that as it is going from a creature-driven aggro deck to a poor version of the Jund mirror. If you cannot apply damage pressure, you cannot beat them with any consistency. And while Cackler sucks as a topdeck in the later game, Mortars sucks even more if they have nothing for you to remove and you blow another turn unable to pressure them.
Again though, I'm coming at this from the perspective that I always played a more creature-based sideboard in Dos Rakis. Yes, I would have sided out Cackler when I was playing the Hellrider/Cackler version, but I would have brought in Conscripts/Hound/Hellkite/Olivia in whatever numbers were defined by my board, as well as any sorcery-speed Threatens. Pillar indeed would swap out to broader removal (I always ran some number of DBore main so the count depended), Slaughter Games, and whatever X-spell I was running (usually RR or DP).
Bottom line, significantly reducing your creature count against Jund is a losing proposition. I would personally not pull Jester against them, and I would only pull Cackler if I had something in the board capable of exerting more pressure while still drawing their removal. That's just me; I totally follow the logic of siding in more relevant cards, but not to the point of reducing one's creature count to midrange levels against the best midrange deck in the format.
Beyond that, removal should be optimized to kill their creatures and walkers, Slaughter Games if you play it can come in to remove Swagtusk, and more resilent creatures like Hound (again if you're playing him) can come in to help exhaust their removal. Return really doesn't bug them unless you're using it for the kill--they are happy to play most decks in a topdeck war, hence mainboard Sire.
I admit that I'm not actively playing Rakis atm, but I played many matches against Jund from RTR into GTC and creatures nearly always carried the day.