Yesterday, I had the chance to Master of Cruelties somebody but decided not to for the sake of letting the player play longer. What about you? Do you take the chance to be a jerk when it presents itself?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
GMR21=OYS, I know you.
Salt is part of the game. Deal with it.
I do the same, try my best to prolong a group game, extra politics, so people can enjoy longer. Unless they become frustrated with certain scenario, then I either change it or ask if people want to restart.
It depends on the type of game I'm playing. If the table's got their strongest, most competitive decks out, then if I have the chance to take someone out of the game, I do so - letting them live is asking to lose to them comboing out next turn. On the other hand, if we're playing more casual decks, then, unless the person is an immediate threat, I'll typically not try to kill someone like this, at least early game when killing them probably leaves them sitting around not playing for quite a while - eventually, you've gotta see things out, somehow even in a casual game (of course, I'm not running cards like Master of Cruelties in my casual decks...)
Wow, Master of Cruelties in edh is, well, cruel. But if not to use, why in there at all? I would never use him, but if I did, I wouldn't then hold him back. I would consider that more of a jerk move. So I guess I'm with Azurhawk and GloriousGoose on this. Anything I put in my decks can and will be used as efficiently as possible.
"Build casually, play competitively." If you build your deck with jerk moves, pull those jerk moves. Now, suppose the player you didn't Master of Cruelties had won the game, you could say "Yea but I could've Master of Cruelties'd you early game" taking away from their victory. THAT is the real jerk move. The second jerk move is including Master of Cruelties in a Kaalia deck.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
I am always building new decks, and I am often playing people I've never played against before. Sometimes, I choose a deck at the wrong power level / realize my deck is more powerful than expected.
I recently built Kefnet the Mindful. I played against a kid who had Ezuri, Claw of Progress, which I know to be a very powerful deck. He mentions he plays Sage of Hours, so I figure the deck is pretty good. I use my Kefnet deck to test it out, and soon realize that my opponent a) is not very good (not to fault him, but I think he must be newer to magic as he was making sub-optimal plays) and b) had some good cards for the deck and some bad ones. I realize this is his first EDH deck, and that he has bought a few cards but otherwise it consists of most of his collection.
In any case, I start taking over the game. then I draw Palinchron and realize I have infinite mana since I have Gauntlet of Power. Do I want to combo him out? Instead, I cast Treachery, Time Spiral, etc. netting a ton of mana, still holding my Palinchron, and start Capsizing a bunch of his board.
He decided to scoop.
I was happier with this outcome. My deck was powerful, sure, but I avoided the feels bad of an infinite combo.
So, to answer your question - when the decks are mismatched, I will sand-bag combo cards and try to win 'fairly'. I could see myself not playing Master of Cruelties because my deck is already winning and I can avoid the feels-bad sentiment. But, I would not avoid playing it to prolong the game. If your deck is better, end the game and change decks.
I am always building new decks, and I am often playing people I've never played against before. Sometimes, I choose a deck at the wrong power level / realize my deck is more powerful than expected.
I recently built Kefnet the Mindful. I played against a kid who had Ezuri, Claw of Progress, which I know to be a very powerful deck. He mentions he plays Sage of Hours, so I figure the deck is pretty good. I use my Kefnet deck to test it out, and soon realize that my opponent a) is not very good (not to fault him, but I think he must be newer to magic as he was making sub-optimal plays) and b) had some good cards for the deck and some bad ones. I realize this is his first EDH deck, and that he has bought a few cards but otherwise it consists of most of his collection.
In any case, I start taking over the game. then I draw Palinchron and realize I have infinite mana since I have Gauntlet of Power. Do I want to combo him out? Instead, I cast Treachery, Time Spiral, etc. netting a ton of mana, still holding my Palinchron, and start Capsizing a bunch of his board.
He decided to scoop.
I was happier with this outcome. My deck was powerful, sure, but I avoided the feels bad of an infinite combo.
So, to answer your question - when the decks are mismatched, I will sand-bag combo cards and try to win 'fairly'. I could see myself not playing Master of Cruelties because my deck is already winning and I can avoid the feels-bad sentiment. But, I would not avoid playing it to prolong the game. If your deck is better, end the game and change decks.
You know, Dunharrow, I like reading your opinions. You are one of the more grounded commenters here. That being said, I must say I have been the recipient of a Capsize spree numerous times back during the block Capsize premiered. It would been nicer to have it ended instantly than to be bounced to irrelevancy knowing there was no way out of that. It's moot I guess since he wisely scooped, but being shut out of your own deck is always more frustrating than someone else's deck doing its thing to a win. Tough situation either way.
I am always building new decks, and I am often playing people I've never played against before. Sometimes, I choose a deck at the wrong power level / realize my deck is more powerful than expected.
I recently built Kefnet the Mindful. I played against a kid who had Ezuri, Claw of Progress, which I know to be a very powerful deck. He mentions he plays Sage of Hours, so I figure the deck is pretty good. I use my Kefnet deck to test it out, and soon realize that my opponent a) is not very good (not to fault him, but I think he must be newer to magic as he was making sub-optimal plays) and b) had some good cards for the deck and some bad ones. I realize this is his first EDH deck, and that he has bought a few cards but otherwise it consists of most of his collection.
In any case, I start taking over the game. then I draw Palinchron and realize I have infinite mana since I have Gauntlet of Power. Do I want to combo him out? Instead, I cast Treachery, Time Spiral, etc. netting a ton of mana, still holding my Palinchron, and start Capsizing a bunch of his board.
He decided to scoop.
I was happier with this outcome. My deck was powerful, sure, but I avoided the feels bad of an infinite combo.
So, to answer your question - when the decks are mismatched, I will sand-bag combo cards and try to win 'fairly'. I could see myself not playing Master of Cruelties because my deck is already winning and I can avoid the feels-bad sentiment. But, I would not avoid playing it to prolong the game. If your deck is better, end the game and change decks.
I am in this camp (for the most part). I have often played against opponents who have lower powered decks and I will sandbag if I feel right in doing so. I try not to make the game drag on forever as I will still attack and try to close out the game. I will just do it a little slower than normal if they are newer players.
Though, in your case, I would question whether the outcome you achieved was really all that much better in your opponent's eyes. Instead of just generating an "infinite" amount of mana to do whatever you wanted with, you instead.....generated a bunch of mana to do what you wanted (bounce their board in this case). While I agree that not casting Palinchron made it seem better, I would argue that Palinchron has 1 purpose: to generate a bunch of mana. If you are including it, that is what the card does. And your outcome seems like it is basically the same as if you had cast Palinchron anyway. While I agree with the premise you are trying to explain, the situation you outlined just tells me you should have just cast Palinchron and ended the game rather than casting Treachery and Time Spiral and whatever else to get large amounts of mana and then Capsizing causing them to scoop.
I understand you chose a deck based on the power-level you thought the game was going to be so that is certainly excusable. But the outcome was still basically the same. It seems like it would be better to just say "I generate an arbitrarily large amount of mana with Palinchron to draw my deck, bounce your board, etc. Let's move onto the next game where I can play an appropriately powered deck". Basically, just end the deck, explain to the opponent what you were doing (since they are new, they might not know) and then end the game so you can find a better deck to play against them with.
Yesterday, I had the chance to Master of Cruelties somebody but decided not to for the sake of letting the player play longer. What about you? Do you take the chance to be a jerk when it presents itself?
I also agree with others who question why put in Master of Cruelties if not to one shot someone. I don't really understand that logic. Master of Cruelties, in EDH, has one function; it kills players in one attack. There is no other reason to include a 1/4 Demon in the deck if you don't plan on using the trigger to kill someone. Kaalia and Alesha decks can make use of it pretty well and if you are including it, you know the type of game you are expecting to have with it.
If there is a time where you don't want to cast it/cheat it in because of the "feelbad" moment it causes, then you shouldn't be running it. This is different than cards that are included that can do a number of things depending on the situation. MoC is not one of those cards. This is the primary reason I don't run it in my Alesha deck. I found that I often didn't just want to kill one player with it, so I took it out. It was not a play style I enjoyed engaging in so MoC was not right for my deck.
In your case, you either include it and use it or you take it out. It is hard to sandbag it so if you are including it, just use it, get the game over with, and choose a different deck that is not built to one shot people if you don't feel that is what makes sense for the group you are playing with.
[quote from="Dunharrow »" url="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/commander-edh/784601-do-you-choose-to-be-a-jerk-if-you-have-the-chance?comment=8"]You know, Dunharrow, I like reading your opinions. You are one of the more grounded commenters here. That being said, I must say I have been the recipient of a Capsize spree numerous times back during the block Capsize premiered. It would been nicer to have it ended instantly than to be bounced to irrelevancy knowing there was no way out of that. It's moot I guess since he wisely scooped, but being shut out of your own deck is always more frustrating than someone else's deck doing its thing to a win. Tough situation either way.
I am in this camp (for the most part). I have often played against opponents who have lower powered decks and I will sandbag if I feel right in doing so. I try not to make the game drag on forever as I will still attack and try to close out the game. I will just do it a little slower than normal if they are newer players.
Though, in your case, I would question whether the outcome you achieved was really all that much better in your opponent's eyes. Instead of just generating an "infinite" amount of mana to do whatever you wanted with, you instead.....generated a bunch of mana to do what you wanted (bounce their board in this case). While I agree that not casting Palinchron made it seem better, I would argue that Palinchron has 1 purpose: to generate a bunch of mana. If you are including it, that is what the card does. And your outcome seems like it is basically the same as if you had cast Palinchron anyway. While I agree with the premise you are trying to explain, the situation you outlined just tells me you should have just cast Palinchron and ended the game rather than casting Treachery and Time Spiral and whatever else to get large amounts of mana and then Capsizing causing them to scoop.
I understand you chose a deck based on the power-level you thought the game was going to be so that is certainly excusable. But the outcome was still basically the same. It seems like it would be better to just say "I generate an arbitrarily large amount of mana with Palinchron to draw my deck, bounce your board, etc. Let's move onto the next game where I can play an appropriately powered deck". Basically, just end the deck, explain to the opponent what you were doing (since they are new, they might not know) and then end the game so you can find a better deck to play against them with.
Hey, I appreciate the honesty. I've always hated when someone drops a Palinchron and goes infinite, so to me it felt like if I generated a bunch of mana and Capsized my opponent's creatures (I didn't hit his lands), and deployed a bunch of my own creatures... and I took Ezuri with Treachery... to me, that seemed like it would present itself as "I generated a bunch of extra mana and was able to have a huge turn". He scooped because I had a lot on board, and he just had mana, and because I still had Capsize.
I know that the line I took can be a feels-bad play, but to him it was more a "luck of the draw" situation.
I just know how much I used to hate losing to infinite mana with Palinchron when I played in a less competitive meta. I hated the feeling of "no matter what I've done in this game, he drew Palinchron so I lose."
Hey, I appreciate the honesty. I've always hated when someone drops a Palinchron and goes infinite, so to me it felt like if I generated a bunch of mana and Capsized my opponent's creatures (I didn't hit his lands), and deployed a bunch of my own creatures... and I took Ezuri with Treachery... to me, that seemed like it would present itself as "I generated a bunch of extra mana and was able to have a huge turn". He scooped because I had a lot on board, and he just had mana, and because I still had Capsize.
I know that the line I took can be a feels-bad play, but to him it was more a "luck of the draw" situation.
I just know how much I used to hate losing to infinite mana with Palinchron when I played in a less competitive meta. I hated the feeling of "no matter what I've done in this game, he drew Palinchron so I lose."
That makes a little more sense and I can see why that line is preferable to the all-in Palinchron play. When I read that you started bouncing his board, I just assumed you were hitting lands since that is what Capsize does with a bunch of mana
In any case, it does follow the topic at hand that you chose to execute a sub-optimal play rather than your combo to avoid being a jerk (though obviously there is dissent in how "sub-optimal" that play really was). It does at least support your position that sometimes not going for the insta-kill is a better overall play to increase enjoyment of the game. I will admit that I hate infinite combos too. I once Plagiarized a player before casting Timetwister because they cast Behold the Beyond the turn before and I knew they were playing some combos. I realize this made them shuffle it in, but I wanted to make a point I guess.
So, yes, I can see where your play (since you left their lands alone) would show a little "mercy" especially since you didn't have "infinite" mana every turn (or, at least, your opponent didn't know you did since you did it without Palinchron).
To me, it's not mean to make the right play. I've been in both camps. I remember a game a few months back 1v1 against my wife in which I had Panharmonicon out, played Terastodon and had no other permanents to hit other than her lands, and chose not to. I ended up giving her too much leeway and she won. She also told me afterwards that she would've been angry, but if the tables were turned she would've destroyed my lands. There's nothing wrong with making a competitive play, and in my case I'm more likely to get a good game if I game hard.
That being said, there's a time and a place. Against a new player I'd ease them into it. I don't necessarily think of it as 'being a jerk' though.
Yesterday, I had the chance to Master of Cruelties somebody but decided not to for the sake of letting the player play longer. What about you? Do you take the chance to be a jerk when it presents itself?
I originally slated Master of Cruelties for Alesha when I was thinking about what other commander I might want to build, but when I actually started to build her, I decided it wasn't the kind of card I wanted to play for that same reason. I was trying to get away from 1-shot infect kills that were happening in Tajic all too often, ejecting a single player from the game far earlier than the game would actually be over.
To your question: I don't want to be a jerk. I want people to like me. I want to help people. I want to see someone's quirky deck work. I want to cooperate. Being a jerk makes me the target and prevents every single one of those goals. I totally want to win if I can, but I enjoy the cooperative role if I can get it in games.
Basically these things are all attributes outside of the game as well. I don't want to make someone upset with me. I don't understand why someone would want to do that with that as the goal. I get that in games conflict is inevitable, but why someone would want to upset someone just for kicks is a mystery to me.
Another thing to consider, OP.
Sometimes, a win condition like Laboratory Maniac can feel bad - but the game ends and you can start a new game.
Master of Cruelties kills one player, then people prepare for it or kill it. Then that person you killed has to sit there and watch the rest of the game.
That sometimes feels worse than losing to a insta-win combo.
Yes and no. I have included Master of Cruelties in decks, and I have one-shotted someone with it and Kaalia once. That player had been rather jerky the game before, playing a control deck that slowed the game to a miserable pace. I had the chance before he locked the board, and I took it. 40 to 0 in one combat, everyone else was grateful. That, however is not the typical result of such a kill. Normally, a kill like that signals to the rest of the table that you're the threat and "holy crap, we have to kill him before he does something like that to us!" I will hold such a kill in hand sometimes, not to avoid being the jerk, but rather to avoid bad politics. The later it is in the game, the fewer players left, and the more it makes sense to knock someone out.
Mixed feelings on this one. Sometimes I just feel that being too nice isn't really good. Like withholding an instant boardwipe (starstorm with 7 lands) as a player got landscrewed (3 lands on turn 7) and have to depend on the single burnished hart activation to get out of it, only to have the same player kill my creatures here and there while I wasn't even attacking him but the strongest player on the board. It's a new group which I've joined, perhaps the style of politics is different or a new player (me) will get more heat.
Next time when I see a player getting land screwed and have to depend on burnish hart or permanent (artifact/dork) ramp, I'll just go ahead and boardwipe and perhaps add in a stripmine or 2. Better to take 1 player out of the game then to be friendly about it and instantly regret it later lol.
I take it including him in Alesha is the third jerk move?
Not nearly as much. Alesha needs a fair bit of work compared to Kaalia, who can simply drop Kaalia, look at an open player, equip greaves and be like "Boom, you're dead." Alesha needs to pitch the Master first and then pay 2 more mana to reanimate him, so it's not nearly on the level of Kaalia's abuse.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
I ever let tbe vame fun lobger tba it shojld. One gug had blood moon which wiuld have takdn two oppone ts out lf tbe game but did not play it. I then played narset and with doubling season used the emblem.
A week later. Similar scenario. I reminded him what i did sobhe llayed bmood moon a d tnen wk tbe game.
IMO, Laboratory Maniac is pretty tame and just the face of an already-won scenario.
I typically see it winning via drawing your whole deck, which if you have that much draw power, you've basically already won since you probably had infinite mana to get there and could cast all those cards anyway. Going the extra step of winning through Laboratory Maniac is just a speedy formality that introduces an element of risk if they have removal for it.
I try to make the optimal play. If I think the killable player is the biggest threat at the table, you bet I'd take the chance to kill them. If the killable player is weak and more likely to be a potential ally against another more threatening player, then I probably wouldn't.
That said I don't play cards like master of cruelties (or commanders like kaalia) because I think they're boring, and this is a decent example of why.
Salt is part of the game. Deal with it.
Shu Yun, the Silent Tempest WUR Voltron Control
Temmet, Vizier of Naktamun WU Unblockable Mirror Trickery
Ra's al Ghul (Sidar Kondo) and Face-Down Ninjas
Brudiclad, Token Engineer
Vaevictis (VV2) the Dire Lantern
Rona, Disciple of Gix
Tiana the Auror
Hallar
Ulrich the Politician
Zur the Rebel
Scorpion, Locust, Scarab, Egyptian Gods
O-Kagachi, Mathas, Mairsil
"Non-Tribal" Tribal Generals, Eggs
[Primer] Erebos, God of the Dead
HONK HONK
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
I recently built Kefnet the Mindful. I played against a kid who had Ezuri, Claw of Progress, which I know to be a very powerful deck. He mentions he plays Sage of Hours, so I figure the deck is pretty good. I use my Kefnet deck to test it out, and soon realize that my opponent a) is not very good (not to fault him, but I think he must be newer to magic as he was making sub-optimal plays) and b) had some good cards for the deck and some bad ones. I realize this is his first EDH deck, and that he has bought a few cards but otherwise it consists of most of his collection.
In any case, I start taking over the game. then I draw Palinchron and realize I have infinite mana since I have Gauntlet of Power. Do I want to combo him out? Instead, I cast Treachery, Time Spiral, etc. netting a ton of mana, still holding my Palinchron, and start Capsizing a bunch of his board.
He decided to scoop.
I was happier with this outcome. My deck was powerful, sure, but I avoided the feels bad of an infinite combo.
So, to answer your question - when the decks are mismatched, I will sand-bag combo cards and try to win 'fairly'. I could see myself not playing Master of Cruelties because my deck is already winning and I can avoid the feels-bad sentiment. But, I would not avoid playing it to prolong the game. If your deck is better, end the game and change decks.
8.RG Green Devotion Ramp/Combo 9.UR Draw Triggers 10.WUR Group stalling 11.WUR Voltron Spellslinger 12.WB Sacrificial Shenanigans
13.BR Creatureless Panharmonicon 14.BR Pingers and Eldrazi 15.URG Untapped Cascading
16.Reyhan, last of the Abzan's WUBG +1/+1 Counter Craziness 17.WUBRG Dragons aka Why did I make this?
Building: The Gitrog Monster lands, Glissa the Traitor stax, Muldrotha, the Gravetide Planeswalker Combo, Kydele, Chosen of Kruphix + Sidar Kondo of Jamuraa Clues, and Tribal Scarecrow Planeswalkers
I am in this camp (for the most part). I have often played against opponents who have lower powered decks and I will sandbag if I feel right in doing so. I try not to make the game drag on forever as I will still attack and try to close out the game. I will just do it a little slower than normal if they are newer players.
Though, in your case, I would question whether the outcome you achieved was really all that much better in your opponent's eyes. Instead of just generating an "infinite" amount of mana to do whatever you wanted with, you instead.....generated a bunch of mana to do what you wanted (bounce their board in this case). While I agree that not casting Palinchron made it seem better, I would argue that Palinchron has 1 purpose: to generate a bunch of mana. If you are including it, that is what the card does. And your outcome seems like it is basically the same as if you had cast Palinchron anyway. While I agree with the premise you are trying to explain, the situation you outlined just tells me you should have just cast Palinchron and ended the game rather than casting Treachery and Time Spiral and whatever else to get large amounts of mana and then Capsizing causing them to scoop.
I understand you chose a deck based on the power-level you thought the game was going to be so that is certainly excusable. But the outcome was still basically the same. It seems like it would be better to just say "I generate an arbitrarily large amount of mana with Palinchron to draw my deck, bounce your board, etc. Let's move onto the next game where I can play an appropriately powered deck". Basically, just end the deck, explain to the opponent what you were doing (since they are new, they might not know) and then end the game so you can find a better deck to play against them with.
I also agree with others who question why put in Master of Cruelties if not to one shot someone. I don't really understand that logic. Master of Cruelties, in EDH, has one function; it kills players in one attack. There is no other reason to include a 1/4 Demon in the deck if you don't plan on using the trigger to kill someone. Kaalia and Alesha decks can make use of it pretty well and if you are including it, you know the type of game you are expecting to have with it.
If there is a time where you don't want to cast it/cheat it in because of the "feelbad" moment it causes, then you shouldn't be running it. This is different than cards that are included that can do a number of things depending on the situation. MoC is not one of those cards. This is the primary reason I don't run it in my Alesha deck. I found that I often didn't just want to kill one player with it, so I took it out. It was not a play style I enjoyed engaging in so MoC was not right for my deck.
In your case, you either include it and use it or you take it out. It is hard to sandbag it so if you are including it, just use it, get the game over with, and choose a different deck that is not built to one shot people if you don't feel that is what makes sense for the group you are playing with.
Hey, I appreciate the honesty. I've always hated when someone drops a Palinchron and goes infinite, so to me it felt like if I generated a bunch of mana and Capsized my opponent's creatures (I didn't hit his lands), and deployed a bunch of my own creatures... and I took Ezuri with Treachery... to me, that seemed like it would present itself as "I generated a bunch of extra mana and was able to have a huge turn". He scooped because I had a lot on board, and he just had mana, and because I still had Capsize.
I know that the line I took can be a feels-bad play, but to him it was more a "luck of the draw" situation.
I just know how much I used to hate losing to infinite mana with Palinchron when I played in a less competitive meta. I hated the feeling of "no matter what I've done in this game, he drew Palinchron so I lose."
8.RG Green Devotion Ramp/Combo 9.UR Draw Triggers 10.WUR Group stalling 11.WUR Voltron Spellslinger 12.WB Sacrificial Shenanigans
13.BR Creatureless Panharmonicon 14.BR Pingers and Eldrazi 15.URG Untapped Cascading
16.Reyhan, last of the Abzan's WUBG +1/+1 Counter Craziness 17.WUBRG Dragons aka Why did I make this?
Building: The Gitrog Monster lands, Glissa the Traitor stax, Muldrotha, the Gravetide Planeswalker Combo, Kydele, Chosen of Kruphix + Sidar Kondo of Jamuraa Clues, and Tribal Scarecrow Planeswalkers
In any case, it does follow the topic at hand that you chose to execute a sub-optimal play rather than your combo to avoid being a jerk (though obviously there is dissent in how "sub-optimal" that play really was). It does at least support your position that sometimes not going for the insta-kill is a better overall play to increase enjoyment of the game. I will admit that I hate infinite combos too. I once Plagiarized a player before casting Timetwister because they cast Behold the Beyond the turn before and I knew they were playing some combos. I realize this made them shuffle it in, but I wanted to make a point I guess.
So, yes, I can see where your play (since you left their lands alone) would show a little "mercy" especially since you didn't have "infinite" mana every turn (or, at least, your opponent didn't know you did since you did it without Palinchron).
That being said, there's a time and a place. Against a new player I'd ease them into it. I don't necessarily think of it as 'being a jerk' though.
I want to win with Molten Primordial or Sepulchral Primordial, so not including it also forces me to go other routes.
To your question: I don't want to be a jerk. I want people to like me. I want to help people. I want to see someone's quirky deck work. I want to cooperate. Being a jerk makes me the target and prevents every single one of those goals. I totally want to win if I can, but I enjoy the cooperative role if I can get it in games.
Basically these things are all attributes outside of the game as well. I don't want to make someone upset with me. I don't understand why someone would want to do that with that as the goal. I get that in games conflict is inevitable, but why someone would want to upset someone just for kicks is a mystery to me.
Older Magic as a Board Game: Panglacial Wurm , Mill
Sometimes, a win condition like Laboratory Maniac can feel bad - but the game ends and you can start a new game.
Master of Cruelties kills one player, then people prepare for it or kill it. Then that person you killed has to sit there and watch the rest of the game.
That sometimes feels worse than losing to a insta-win combo.
8.RG Green Devotion Ramp/Combo 9.UR Draw Triggers 10.WUR Group stalling 11.WUR Voltron Spellslinger 12.WB Sacrificial Shenanigans
13.BR Creatureless Panharmonicon 14.BR Pingers and Eldrazi 15.URG Untapped Cascading
16.Reyhan, last of the Abzan's WUBG +1/+1 Counter Craziness 17.WUBRG Dragons aka Why did I make this?
Building: The Gitrog Monster lands, Glissa the Traitor stax, Muldrotha, the Gravetide Planeswalker Combo, Kydele, Chosen of Kruphix + Sidar Kondo of Jamuraa Clues, and Tribal Scarecrow Planeswalkers
2023 Average Peasant Cube|and Discussion
Because I have more decks than fit in a signature
Useful Resources:
MTGSalvation tags
EDHREC
ManabaseCrafter
Next time when I see a player getting land screwed and have to depend on burnish hart or permanent (artifact/dork) ramp, I'll just go ahead and boardwipe and perhaps add in a stripmine or 2. Better to take 1 player out of the game then to be friendly about it and instantly regret it later lol.
WUBRG Reaper King - Elf Tribal WUBRG | Tribal Fun
WRG Gishath, Sun's Avatar - Dinosaur Tribal WRG | Rawr!!!
WUG Derevi, Empyrial Tactician - Enchantress Tactics WUG | Enchantments Focused
GBG The Gitrog Monster - Land Shenanigans GBG | Lands/Mill Focused
WBW Kambal, Consul of Life Allocation Matters WBW | Life Gain/Loss focused
UBR Kess, Dissident Mage of the Lotus UBR | Spellslinger
BGB Hapatra, Vizier of Poisons - Counters & Tokens BGB | -1/-1 counters focused
This is awesome play.
WUBRG Reaper King - Elf Tribal WUBRG | Tribal Fun
WRG Gishath, Sun's Avatar - Dinosaur Tribal WRG | Rawr!!!
WUG Derevi, Empyrial Tactician - Enchantress Tactics WUG | Enchantments Focused
GBG The Gitrog Monster - Land Shenanigans GBG | Lands/Mill Focused
WBW Kambal, Consul of Life Allocation Matters WBW | Life Gain/Loss focused
UBR Kess, Dissident Mage of the Lotus UBR | Spellslinger
BGB Hapatra, Vizier of Poisons - Counters & Tokens BGB | -1/-1 counters focused
epic
Salt is part of the game. Deal with it.
Generally speaking there's a deck and time for anything. Yup, i enjoy my Buried Alive = Filth + Anger + Master of Cruelties plays in Alesha, Who Smiles at Death.
Yet, in the same deck, i love durdling around with Lim-Dûl's Paladin or play less power- but flavorful cards like Lieutenant Kirtar, Palace Jailer, Dauthi Embrace and Tragic Arrogance
Modern:R 8Whack R|W White Knights W
Not nearly as much. Alesha needs a fair bit of work compared to Kaalia, who can simply drop Kaalia, look at an open player, equip greaves and be like "Boom, you're dead." Alesha needs to pitch the Master first and then pay 2 more mana to reanimate him, so it's not nearly on the level of Kaalia's abuse.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
A week later. Similar scenario. I reminded him what i did sobhe llayed bmood moon a d tnen wk tbe game.
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
I typically see it winning via drawing your whole deck, which if you have that much draw power, you've basically already won since you probably had infinite mana to get there and could cast all those cards anyway. Going the extra step of winning through Laboratory Maniac is just a speedy formality that introduces an element of risk if they have removal for it.
Older Magic as a Board Game: Panglacial Wurm , Mill
That said I don't play cards like master of cruelties (or commanders like kaalia) because I think they're boring, and this is a decent example of why.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6