Besides, 23 lands is more than enough for everything you would want to do, even if you were to play Smallpox for some reason.
How in god's name did you end up with that calculation?
I mean, I know you both stated the words "for some reason" in the same sentence as "Smallpox" and have earlier made it quite clear you have a few different views on 8-rack and playing Smallpox but seriously...?
No one benefits from false advise, and I would definately say that playing 23 lands is NOT more than enough if you want to play 4 Smallpoxes and run your deck successfully.
Especially if you still want to use Ravens Crime and/or Lilianas.
Besides, 23 lands is more than enough for everything you would want to do, even if you were to play Smallpox for some reason.
How in god's name did you end up with that calculation?
I mean, I know you both stated the words "for some reason" in the same sentence as "Smallpox" and have earlier made it quite clear you have a few different views on 8-rack and playing Smallpox but seriously...?
No one benefits from false advise, and I would definately say that playing 23 lands is NOT more than enough if you want to play 4 Smallpoxes and run your deck successfully.
Especially if you still want to use Ravens Crime and/or Lilianas.
Since you managed to misunderstan what I said, I'm going to explain it again, hopefully without the need to repeat myself.
There has been plenty of research done on Smallpox (in fact, you can find a small writeup in the Primer regarding land counts in a Smallpox-oriented deck) and I'm fairly certain the "correct" number of lands is 24. Here I am, pulling a number out of my ass. Or rather, out of other people's donkeys, because I see it quoted over and over again by Smallpox players (you are correct, I personally see no reason to play this card, but I'm not saying others should share this opinion).
What I said is that 23 lands are more than enough for an 8Rack deck. The deck's curve stops at 3 (which is mostly due to a widely spread misconception, although for the reasons below it's not recommended to play many 4-drops), for which not very many lands are needed. The deck plays virtually no card draw, especially contempopary versions that don't feature either Dark Confidant or Asylum Visitor. You simply don't draw enough cards to notice the difference between 23 and 24 lands unless you play 100 games back to back. Nowhere do I say that "23 is more than enough if you want to play 4 Smallpoxes and run your deck successfully", per the words you try to put in my mouth. What I said is that you don't need to play more than 23 lands in your 8Rack deck, even if you were playing Smallpox. You will simply be flooded with lands rather than your actual cards. I guarantee you, any effect that you can pitch a land to is less powerful than a nonland card in your deck. Now, if you really want to run all 4 Poxes, maybe 23 lands will leave you a bit mana starved, but that's a choice you have to make. You will never see all 4 of them anyway (and it's very had to imagine drawin even 3). Going over 23 lands will hinder your deck quite significantly, given that 23 is already a high land count and the number I recommend is between 21 and 22, depending on how far out your curve goes, although I admit 21 might leave you land behind some % of the time because of the aforementioned lack of draw.
To engage in a reductio ad absurdum, by your logic you might want to play 30 lands because you have quite literally a dozen self-discard outlets. I mean, surely 24 won't be enough to draw, play and pitch to 4x Smallpox, 4x Raven's Crime and 4x Liliana of the Veil, right? Add to that Collective Brutality, which is better than both Smallpox or Crime, and you are starting to look at 16 cards that want you to pitch a land (because pitching other real cards would be madness indeed).
How much are you willing to screw up your draws and hinder your deck in order to play the coveted 4 Smallpox? Making a deal with the devil to become rich and powerful, ensure wealth for your family for a thousand generations and conquering the world seems like a fine deal, but purposefully making your deck worse just so you can play a full set of Smallpox is like making that deal to get an extra portion of fries on your next order.
I quoted your saying that "23 lands is more than enough for everything you would want to do, even if you were to play smallpox for some reason", no more, no less. And you even agree on the fact that your "advise" was false.
You agree that most competetive players and even research tell that 24 is the right number when playing 4 Smallpox (some players go low, and hit 23), but in no way does this even come close to your statement in that "23 lands is MORE than enough...".
You continue to state things in this thread, even from the start, without any proof or testing at all. Robert even challenged you to test stuff out and come back with numbers and actually debate wether your points were valid or not. Well, did you?
I seriously don't know how to even answer your statements about 8-rack not needing lands as the curve stops at 3... Well, yeah it does. But you don't seem to understand the reason for players having 4 Raven's Crime (as you state that pretty much anything else in our deck, other than lands is better than Raven's Crime) and by that point you explain that we don't need many lands as we rarely even want to use them as fuel for Raven's Crime (It's a bad card, remember?).
Back to the point about Smallpox. How many decks run less than 4 Smallpox, if even running it? I've seen VERY few. Maybe that's why I, and many more, read your advise about playing less lands than 23 as false, as your lands become fuel once again and it will sometimes become very hard to play your Liliana if you don't have enough lands in your deck.
You also continue to argue that Collective Brutality in itself would be a "better" card than Smallpox and Raven's Crime, which is completely absurd and irrelevant, as it doesn't have the immense value that Smallpox offers in most matches, and doesn't give the ability at all to keep our opponent in hellbent-mode (so we can win) as Raven's Crime. It's not just a bad comparison, it has absolutely no meaning and gives no deeper understanding for our deck to new players at all...
I think it would be way better if you (as the primer-writer of this thread) actually would open up your eyes to the fact that cards you don't like (as Raven's Crime and Smallpox, just as an example) are played in our archetype with MUCH success, regardless of your hating and stating irrelevant information and write about things as they are.
The whole community of 8-rack would benefit greatly.
New to the archetype here. Long time storm, ad nauseam, and combo player in general. I have dipped my toes into lanter before and played a little bit of 8 rack. My list is from Mike Penner's impressive GP finish in march. I did have some questions though.
First is there a de-facto "best version" of this deck? I see are lot of arguments from the OP about no smallpox however any list that has come to any decent finish that's listed online seems to run all 4.
Is the white splash to defeat leyline with disenchants and fragmentize in post board matches worth it? or is the pack rat beatdown and better density of lands better for the strategy over all? I also like the idea of having lingering souls for the death's shadow match ups.
Name one nonland card in 8Rack that's worse on its own than Raven's Crime (on its own might be too harsh, use Crime + pitching a land to it instead). Just because the deck scrapes the bottom of the barrel for playable discard engines doesn't make a card it's playing "good" by any stretch of the imagination. Quite frankly, 8Rack is playing Crime because you have to submit a 60-card decklist and it has to be able to keep opponents hands empty, otherwise pretty much every removal or draw spell is a lot better.
As far as Smallpox goes, it's good when it's good, no arguments about that. But the problem is that it's never actually good. Here, take a look at the Modern metagame. Try to list all decks it's good against, all decks it's mediocre against and all decks it's bad against. If you understand matchups correctly or have ever actually played 8Rack against any of these decks (seriously beginning to doubt that, but let's stay positive here) you will know that it's absolutely irrelevant a third of the time, it hurts the player who casts it more another third of the time and against the other third of the decks it's effectiveness is questionable at best. Even against Tron (eldrazi version or not) it's a lot worse than people make it out to be, because the majority of the discussion is based around the theory that making them sac a land and a creature will somehow immediately win you the match, blissfully ignoring the symmetry of the effect. If you want to support your claim, do like others have and bring back some results.
Oh and by the way, if I wasn't clear, since that's apparently not obvious to anybody, I'm only bashing Smallpox in mono-black variants of the deck. I think it's pretty good in BW 8Rack and in fact the vast majority of good finishes have been with non-mono-coloured lists. Sorry if I didn't make this clear previously.
Another "oh and by the way" for @jrschnoebelen - online results don't mean too much, you can see a lot of whacky and crazy decks that do well occasionally. Look at big tournament finishes where a deck can go through multiple rounds of swiss and come out on top, I think the vast majority of those should be included in the Primer even if I missed something very recent. The "best versions" of the deck are currently BW and despite my opinion of the card itself, Smallpox ranges from decent to good (some times very good but that's not often) in those decks. Lingering Souls is one of the best cards you can be playing right now in Modern and fits really well in the deck.
Random Thought: Have anyone tried a different style of 8-rack with eldrazis? Seems that Thought-Knot Seer and Reality Smasher could have very good sinergy with discard theme.
@esperino, Which deck would you play in a modern GP today? BW list in the primer?
Our mana curve is too low for Reality smasher, which would be the only viable eldrazi to consider for 8rack. Thought knot in the end allows them to discard a card. If you're running smallpox rack, i wouldnt even consider eldrazi; however if you're running a non pox variant it COULD be up for consideration, but i'd prefer a phyrexian obliterator tbh. I've been wanting to squeeze one in as a one of win con, but at the same time thats a 4cmc card, i rather have the new aura Torment of Scarab
I've been playing 8-rack for a little while now. I'm definitely loving having 3-4 Surgical Extraction in my board because it helps shut down so many problems cards such as Tron lands, Ancestral Vision and Ad Nauseam. I bring it in for a surprising number of match-ups.
However, I feel like it's not quite enough for the dredge in my metagame. I'm considering some number of Relic of Progenitus or Nihil Spellbomb in my side for the graveyard decks. I'm not particularly enamored with Leyline of the Void due to its cost if drawn beyond the starting hand.
Spellbomb can be easily activated in this deck due to the density of black. It can be activated without mana if necessary. It replaces itself. It hits only their graveyard so your Raven's Crime are still safe.
Relic can incrementally hit the opponent's graveyard and can still be activated at instant speed, but it does hit both players.
What does the thread thing of those two graveyard hate cards?
@esperino, Which deck would you play in a modern GP today? BW list in the primer?
Honestly, not too sure, right now I'm testing other decks.
But probably yes. The Primer decklists have to be updated soon when I have some more time on my hands, but yes. BW is better than any other version currently.
It's not a bad list to start, I definitely want Necrogen Mists in there, at least 2-3 and maybe add a Mutavault or Swamp. Creatures and Smallpox don't work together unless it's lingering souls or something like that, so I'd drop the Visitors.
As far as Smallpox goes, it's good when it's good, no arguments about that. But the problem is that it's never actually good. Here, take a look at the Modern metagame. Try to list all decks it's good against, all decks it's mediocre against and all decks it's bad against. If you understand matchups correctly or have ever actually played 8Rack against any of these decks (seriously beginning to doubt that, but let's stay positive here) you will know that it's absolutely irrelevant a third of the time, it hurts the player who casts it more another third of the time and against the other third of the decks it's effectiveness is questionable at best. Even against Tron (eldrazi version or not) it's a lot worse than people make it out to be, because the majority of the discussion is based around the theory that making them sac a land and a creature will somehow immediately win you the match, blissfully ignoring the symmetry of the effect. If you want to support your claim, do like others have and bring back some results.
Off the top of my head;
Death shadow (all variants)
Elves
Merfolk
Burn
Eldrazi Tron
Counters Company
Gifts Storm
Are all common matchups where smallpox is great. You mention Eldrazi Tron and the symmetrical effect of smallpox which is interesting because it is the matchup where we are able to break the symmetry to greatest effect. Assuming an Eldrazi Temple in play, reality smasher represents a 5 card investment to get on the board (4 lands + the smasher), End Bringer requires a 6 card investment. Our cards require between 1 - 3 lands with most being in the 1 land range. Smallpox allows us to trade 3 cards for 3 of their cards, and our deck is simply far better at working with limited resources than the deck we want to smallpox. To simplify, with 4 cards we can cast Liliana of the Veil. With 4 cards Eldrazi Tron can't do a lot of the things their deck wants to do, and those they can do such as TKS aren't particularly difficult for us to deal with.
Of the decks that you list only a couple are actually good matchups for a Smallpox deck. Death's Shadow, the most common form of which is Grixis, runs enough counterspells and recursion that your Smallpox is never going to resolve. Elves and Company flood the board, which Smallpox is notoriously bad against and Merfolk uses AEther Vial to play their dudes - you are getting the bad end of the bargain because they barely care about their lands as much as 8Rack does. Burn can operate on ever fewer resources even than 8Rack.
Eldrazi Tron is hindered, of course, but it's not nearly as much as you make it out to be. Obviously Smallpox is great against Gifts Storm.
8Rack, contrary to popular belief simply doesn't "break the symmetry" as well as people seem to think it does. It's biggest "advantage" is that it usually doesn't have a creature in play to sacrifice but lets not pretend like that's a good thing. That said, it's a lot better off taking advantage of Smallpox's devastating effect than most other decks. But at some point you have to wonder if that's actually worth it and I don't think so. White variants have Souls to either sac, discard or both while black versions should have a draw dork, which unfortunately I don't see in most lists, and that simply is in conflict with what Smallpox wants to do. If you're betting on it to "get you there", you will be symmetrically screwing over both yourself and your opponent and then get outdrawn by every single deck you face, leading to them recovering much quicker than you from the effect. It's just not worth it.
Just added the 3rd Bontu's Last Reckoning but went 4-1 in the last 2 comp leagues I did. I don't have any surgical which is why I run Extirpate. Leyline of the Void is amazing against GY decks and I will often mulligan once or twice to get one vs dredge since we only help them.
Just added the 3rd Bontu's Last Reckoning but went 4-1 in the last 2 comp leagues I did. I don't have any surgical which is why I run Extirpate. Leyline of the Void is amazing against GY decks and I will often mulligan once or twice to get one vs dredge since we only help them.
Let us know how it goes! I like the list and have been looking for a change to my mono-black.
Deck has really been working out for me. I've been building it up for the past 5 months and this is what it has evolved into. Bontu's wrath is a great card for us and I don't feel like it's a dead draw. Even if it is, Lili and Smallpox would love to use them instead of other useful cards
A huge ton of formatting can be learned from hitting quote on a post you want to learn from, seeing how they did it, then not hitting post. Just hit cancel. There is also a test forum here (main forum page, scroll down, right above Market Street) where only you (and mods?) can see what you post. I use it for keeping a few different kinds of notes about the site. Also double posting is generally frowned upon, look for the edit button instead.
Nice pick in Infernal Tutor. I think that's a pretty solid one of.
I would probably drop the Fulminators since you're using Smallpox anyway, I don't think they're that effective and they don't further your game plan.
Disenchant vs Fragmentize? Availability issue? I guess it doesn't really matter since we're hellbent all the time, Disenchant might even be better because of Chalice on 1 plays.
And Bloodchief Ascension might be pretty funny against Death's Shadow decks if it's in your opening hand or close to. Beyond that though it might just be dead since they might not have enough life left to finish 3 counters. It's probably either a dead card or game winning with no real in between. Against other decks it's probably win more since getting them to 3 counters likely means you're hitting them consistently with racks.
Looks pretty stock otherwise. Maybe find some more Bontu's or Tendrils. Maybe a few Ensnaring Bridge. I don't think Gofer is much different than Push; certainly hits Eldrazi at least. I'm wondering if anyone has considered Seal of Doom as a way of having removal at all times; might be too expensive though.
Infernal tutor is great. it is a great way to find silver bullets/ bridges.
Speaking of bridges, i have the playset, im trying out a bridgeless build as i find myself a sitting duck to all the k commands that are running around.
I was using a split of fragmentize/ disenchant, as i can respond to a chalice on 1, and a chalice on 2.
Bloodchief triggers with shock lands, which i think is very relevant. I know what you mean though...its an awful top deck...only great early game.
As for go for the throat, my meta is very heavy on eldrazi haha
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
How in god's name did you end up with that calculation?
I mean, I know you both stated the words "for some reason" in the same sentence as "Smallpox" and have earlier made it quite clear you have a few different views on 8-rack and playing Smallpox but seriously...?
No one benefits from false advise, and I would definately say that playing 23 lands is NOT more than enough if you want to play 4 Smallpoxes and run your deck successfully.
Especially if you still want to use Ravens Crime and/or Lilianas.
Since you managed to misunderstan what I said, I'm going to explain it again, hopefully without the need to repeat myself.
There has been plenty of research done on Smallpox (in fact, you can find a small writeup in the Primer regarding land counts in a Smallpox-oriented deck) and I'm fairly certain the "correct" number of lands is 24. Here I am, pulling a number out of my ass. Or rather, out of other people's donkeys, because I see it quoted over and over again by Smallpox players (you are correct, I personally see no reason to play this card, but I'm not saying others should share this opinion).
What I said is that 23 lands are more than enough for an 8Rack deck. The deck's curve stops at 3 (which is mostly due to a widely spread misconception, although for the reasons below it's not recommended to play many 4-drops), for which not very many lands are needed. The deck plays virtually no card draw, especially contempopary versions that don't feature either Dark Confidant or Asylum Visitor. You simply don't draw enough cards to notice the difference between 23 and 24 lands unless you play 100 games back to back. Nowhere do I say that "23 is more than enough if you want to play 4 Smallpoxes and run your deck successfully", per the words you try to put in my mouth. What I said is that you don't need to play more than 23 lands in your 8Rack deck, even if you were playing Smallpox. You will simply be flooded with lands rather than your actual cards. I guarantee you, any effect that you can pitch a land to is less powerful than a nonland card in your deck. Now, if you really want to run all 4 Poxes, maybe 23 lands will leave you a bit mana starved, but that's a choice you have to make. You will never see all 4 of them anyway (and it's very had to imagine drawin even 3). Going over 23 lands will hinder your deck quite significantly, given that 23 is already a high land count and the number I recommend is between 21 and 22, depending on how far out your curve goes, although I admit 21 might leave you land behind some % of the time because of the aforementioned lack of draw.
To engage in a reductio ad absurdum, by your logic you might want to play 30 lands because you have quite literally a dozen self-discard outlets. I mean, surely 24 won't be enough to draw, play and pitch to 4x Smallpox, 4x Raven's Crime and 4x Liliana of the Veil, right? Add to that Collective Brutality, which is better than both Smallpox or Crime, and you are starting to look at 16 cards that want you to pitch a land (because pitching other real cards would be madness indeed).
How much are you willing to screw up your draws and hinder your deck in order to play the coveted 4 Smallpox? Making a deal with the devil to become rich and powerful, ensure wealth for your family for a thousand generations and conquering the world seems like a fine deal, but purposefully making your deck worse just so you can play a full set of Smallpox is like making that deal to get an extra portion of fries on your next order.
I quoted your saying that "23 lands is more than enough for everything you would want to do, even if you were to play smallpox for some reason", no more, no less. And you even agree on the fact that your "advise" was false.
You agree that most competetive players and even research tell that 24 is the right number when playing 4 Smallpox (some players go low, and hit 23), but in no way does this even come close to your statement in that "23 lands is MORE than enough...".
You continue to state things in this thread, even from the start, without any proof or testing at all. Robert even challenged you to test stuff out and come back with numbers and actually debate wether your points were valid or not. Well, did you?
I seriously don't know how to even answer your statements about 8-rack not needing lands as the curve stops at 3... Well, yeah it does. But you don't seem to understand the reason for players having 4 Raven's Crime (as you state that pretty much anything else in our deck, other than lands is better than Raven's Crime) and by that point you explain that we don't need many lands as we rarely even want to use them as fuel for Raven's Crime (It's a bad card, remember?).
Back to the point about Smallpox. How many decks run less than 4 Smallpox, if even running it? I've seen VERY few. Maybe that's why I, and many more, read your advise about playing less lands than 23 as false, as your lands become fuel once again and it will sometimes become very hard to play your Liliana if you don't have enough lands in your deck.
You also continue to argue that Collective Brutality in itself would be a "better" card than Smallpox and Raven's Crime, which is completely absurd and irrelevant, as it doesn't have the immense value that Smallpox offers in most matches, and doesn't give the ability at all to keep our opponent in hellbent-mode (so we can win) as Raven's Crime. It's not just a bad comparison, it has absolutely no meaning and gives no deeper understanding for our deck to new players at all...
I think it would be way better if you (as the primer-writer of this thread) actually would open up your eyes to the fact that cards you don't like (as Raven's Crime and Smallpox, just as an example) are played in our archetype with MUCH success, regardless of your hating and stating irrelevant information and write about things as they are.
The whole community of 8-rack would benefit greatly.
First is there a de-facto "best version" of this deck? I see are lot of arguments from the OP about no smallpox however any list that has come to any decent finish that's listed online seems to run all 4.
Is the white splash to defeat leyline with disenchants and fragmentize in post board matches worth it? or is the pack rat beatdown and better density of lands better for the strategy over all? I also like the idea of having lingering souls for the death's shadow match ups.
Appreciate all the help folks!
As far as Smallpox goes, it's good when it's good, no arguments about that. But the problem is that it's never actually good. Here, take a look at the Modern metagame. Try to list all decks it's good against, all decks it's mediocre against and all decks it's bad against. If you understand matchups correctly or have ever actually played 8Rack against any of these decks (seriously beginning to doubt that, but let's stay positive here) you will know that it's absolutely irrelevant a third of the time, it hurts the player who casts it more another third of the time and against the other third of the decks it's effectiveness is questionable at best. Even against Tron (eldrazi version or not) it's a lot worse than people make it out to be, because the majority of the discussion is based around the theory that making them sac a land and a creature will somehow immediately win you the match, blissfully ignoring the symmetry of the effect. If you want to support your claim, do like others have and bring back some results.
Oh and by the way, if I wasn't clear, since that's apparently not obvious to anybody, I'm only bashing Smallpox in mono-black variants of the deck. I think it's pretty good in BW 8Rack and in fact the vast majority of good finishes have been with non-mono-coloured lists. Sorry if I didn't make this clear previously.
Another "oh and by the way" for @jrschnoebelen - online results don't mean too much, you can see a lot of whacky and crazy decks that do well occasionally. Look at big tournament finishes where a deck can go through multiple rounds of swiss and come out on top, I think the vast majority of those should be included in the Primer even if I missed something very recent. The "best versions" of the deck are currently BW and despite my opinion of the card itself, Smallpox ranges from decent to good (some times very good but that's not often) in those decks. Lingering Souls is one of the best cards you can be playing right now in Modern and fits really well in the deck.
Random Thought: Have anyone tried a different style of 8-rack with eldrazis? Seems that Thought-Knot Seer and Reality Smasher could have very good sinergy with discard theme.
@esperino, Which deck would you play in a modern GP today? BW list in the primer?
However, I feel like it's not quite enough for the dredge in my metagame. I'm considering some number of Relic of Progenitus or Nihil Spellbomb in my side for the graveyard decks. I'm not particularly enamored with Leyline of the Void due to its cost if drawn beyond the starting hand.
Spellbomb can be easily activated in this deck due to the density of black. It can be activated without mana if necessary. It replaces itself. It hits only their graveyard so your Raven's Crime are still safe.
Relic can incrementally hit the opponent's graveyard and can still be activated at instant speed, but it does hit both players.
What does the thread thing of those two graveyard hate cards?
Honestly, not too sure, right now I'm testing other decks.
But probably yes. The Primer decklists have to be updated soon when I have some more time on my hands, but yes. BW is better than any other version currently.
Legacy: Pox, R/B Goblins
Commander: Mono Black, Mono Blue
Pauper: Goblins
Off the top of my head;
Death shadow (all variants)
Elves
Merfolk
Burn
Eldrazi Tron
Counters Company
Gifts Storm
Are all common matchups where smallpox is great. You mention Eldrazi Tron and the symmetrical effect of smallpox which is interesting because it is the matchup where we are able to break the symmetry to greatest effect. Assuming an Eldrazi Temple in play, reality smasher represents a 5 card investment to get on the board (4 lands + the smasher), End Bringer requires a 6 card investment. Our cards require between 1 - 3 lands with most being in the 1 land range. Smallpox allows us to trade 3 cards for 3 of their cards, and our deck is simply far better at working with limited resources than the deck we want to smallpox. To simplify, with 4 cards we can cast Liliana of the Veil. With 4 cards Eldrazi Tron can't do a lot of the things their deck wants to do, and those they can do such as TKS aren't particularly difficult for us to deal with.
Eldrazi Tron is hindered, of course, but it's not nearly as much as you make it out to be. Obviously Smallpox is great against Gifts Storm.
8Rack, contrary to popular belief simply doesn't "break the symmetry" as well as people seem to think it does. It's biggest "advantage" is that it usually doesn't have a creature in play to sacrifice but lets not pretend like that's a good thing. That said, it's a lot better off taking advantage of Smallpox's devastating effect than most other decks. But at some point you have to wonder if that's actually worth it and I don't think so. White variants have Souls to either sac, discard or both while black versions should have a draw dork, which unfortunately I don't see in most lists, and that simply is in conflict with what Smallpox wants to do. If you're betting on it to "get you there", you will be symmetrically screwing over both yourself and your opponent and then get outdrawn by every single deck you face, leading to them recovering much quicker than you from the effect. It's just not worth it.
3x Bontu's Last Reckoning
3x Collective Brutality
3x Inquisition of Kozilek
3x Raven's Crime
4x Smallpox
3x Thoughtseize
3x Wrench Mind
Enchantment (4)
4x Shrieking Affliction
4x The Rack
Land (23)
4x Bloodstained Mire
4x Concealed Courtyard
1x Godless Shrine
4x Mutavault
6x Swamp
4x Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth
Instant (3)
3x Fatal Push
4x Liliana of the Veil
3x Disenchant
3x Extirpate
3x Fulminator Mage
3x Leyline of the Void
3x Lingering Souls
Just added the 3rd Bontu's Last Reckoning but went 4-1 in the last 2 comp leagues I did. I don't have any surgical which is why I run Extirpate. Leyline of the Void is amazing against GY decks and I will often mulligan once or twice to get one vs dredge since we only help them.
Let us know how it goes! I like the list and have been looking for a change to my mono-black.
Forgive my outlay...first time posting a decklist =)
4x Smallpox
4x Raven's Crime
3x Thoughtseize
4x Liliana of the Veil
4x Inquisition of Kozilek
2x Fatal Push
2x Go for the Throat
4x Shrieking Affliction
4x The Rack
1x Infernal Tutor
1x Godless Shrine
4x Concealed Courtyard
2x Marsh Flats
4x Mutavault
1x Plains
8x Swamp
4x Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth
1x Bontu's Last Reckoning
2x Disenchant
1x Flaying Tendrils
1x Fragmentize
2x Fulminator Mage
2x Leyline of the Void
2x Lingering Souls
2x Stony Silence
2x Surgical Extraction
"Reveal a Dragon"
4 Concealed Courtyard
1 Godless Shrine
2 Marsh Flats
4 Mutavault
3 Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth
9 Swamp
Instant/Sorcery (19)
4 Inquisition of Kozilek
4 Thoughtseize
4 Wrench Mind
4 Dismember
3 Raven's Crime
4 Shrieking Affliction
4 The Rack
4 Ensnaring Bridge
2 Torment of Scarabs
Planeswalker (4)
4 Liliana of the Veil
1 Fragmentize
2 Disenchant
2 Rest in Peace
4 Surgical Extraction
4 Ghost Quarter
2 Bontu's Last Reckoning
I've been piloting the deck for the past week or so, and have settled on the list above.
I wasn't a huge fan of Smallpox, so I replaced them with a playset of Ensnaring Bridge. I've played with Funeral Charm, Blackmail, Pack Rat, Dark Confidant, Fatal Push, ..., but think I've settled on this for the time being. Torment of Scarabs is awesome, if you haven't tried it out.
I've really liked the sideboard, so far. I'd replace the Ghost Quarter's with Fulminator Mage, but I don't own any.
Suggestions are welcome.
Speaking of bridges, i have the playset, im trying out a bridgeless build as i find myself a sitting duck to all the k commands that are running around.
I was using a split of fragmentize/ disenchant, as i can respond to a chalice on 1, and a chalice on 2.
Bloodchief triggers with shock lands, which i think is very relevant. I know what you mean though...its an awful top deck...only great early game.
As for go for the throat, my meta is very heavy on eldrazi haha