I've been considering constructing a Peasant cube quite recently, so I went around to look at other people's peasant cubes and see how everything works and such, as well as getting inspiration for what to include.
A thing I have noticed in a couple of cube lists here and there (I cannot remember the exact names off the top of my head) is that there is at least a cycle of 10 rare lands amongst the rest of the uncommon lands.
They're usually pain lands, which have been chosen in place of lands such as guildgates or life-gain taplands. So my question is, would it be a good or a bad thing to include a cycle of pain lands or even check lands in a peasant cube?
Additionally for anyone who has put a few rare lands in their peasant cube, what are your experiences?
From my experience, rare lands aren't necessary. I have a quite heavy multicolor cube, but between Vivid lands, Trilands, Refuges (Khans), and Karoos, playing 3+ colors has never been a problem. That said, it depends on the risk/reward for going multicolor; my cube has many powerful 2 and 3 color spells making it work the trouble for players to try and draft multiple colors, but people may not bother if the reward for going multicolor isn't worth the risk of mana screwing themselves.
I'm completely and utterly opposed to adding rares to my Peasant cube. I think it ruins the sanctity of Peasant. I guess that makes me a purist, but it's all up to the cuber's preference. I'd windmill slam those cards into Peasant if they were uncommon, but they aren't, and thus I dismiss them completely.
I've been considering adding a rare cycle of duals, but I haven't pulled the trigger yet. I'd probably look to the check lands (Clifftop Retreat, Drowned Catacomb and friends). I'm also considering some of the rare stuff from Conspiracy, mainly Lore Seeker and Aether Searcher. Aggro has the chance to suffer without a little quick mana, but if they stay within two colors it's typically not a problem. I wish I could chuck those bounce lands for something better.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Can you name all of the creature types with at least 20 cards? Try my Sporcle Quiz! Last Updated: 6/29/20 (Core Set 2021).
The biggest problem Peasant cubes have it that there is almost not fixing for aggro decks. Control and midrange have fixing lands galore, but aggro has only City of Brass and Gemstone Mine. This is the reason why some cubes play Rare fixing lands. Others use multiples of certain fixing lands (like Leelue and me). For instance, I play 4 City of Brass and 2 Gemstone Mine (might add a third one). This has the added benefit that you need less fixing lands as these lands fit into any deck regardless of color combinations.
You can use only (un)common lands and/or no multiples, just be aware that you might see a lot of 3 (or more) color control and midrange decks but you might never see an aggro deck with more than 2 colors (and doing well).
I don't think mana or color screw make for better games.
I think better fixing makes for fewer bad games and subsequently a better cube. It doesn't make for a "peasant" cube, but I doubt anybody will look at a couple gold symbols and walk out of a draft.
Personally, I don't use rare lands because Peasant is a restriction I accepted primarily to cut down on the price tag or risk of situations where a friend of a friend of a friend runs off with a $25 piece of cardboard. But some of the rare duals are on a comparable power level to uncommon fixing, if not weaker (especially fetchlands in a shock/ABU dual-free environment, but that goes back to the pricetag thing).
I'm running one Gold symbol card in my cube because the Arabian Nights (uncommon) version of City of Brass costs like 10x more to buy.
So it's in there on a technicality and it makes me feel dirty.
For cycles though, I would just stick to the Khans Refuge cycle, the Wedge and Shard tricolors and the Vivid lands. There is plenty of perfectly good fixing at common/ uncommon.
No one is debating that good fixing exists, but aggro decks are hurt by everything entering tapped. I just removed Ancient Ziggurat, too. Maybe I should rethink that.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Can you name all of the creature types with at least 20 cards? Try my Sporcle Quiz! Last Updated: 6/29/20 (Core Set 2021).
Lol "good" fixing does not exist, c/u lands are pretty terrible. "Rares" cubes sometimes play tri lands or more rarely karoos (yuck), but they're almost always worse and later picks than literally every other land option (don't say Veldt).
I run shocklands, checklands, temples, and tris at a 450 cube. I like people actually casting Qasali Pridemage on T2, or curving Gore-House Chainwalker into Pianna without blindly hoping for the right three basics. Can't imagine ever dropping down to worse lands now that I've played this way for months.
(If budget is a thing, you could just sharpie through the ETBT line on your guildgates)
I do wish our fixing was better, but I can't break the rarity rule for it. I think the restriction is what makes Peasant fun and interesting to build. We make do with what we have! Maybe I'm just old fashioned! haha
you might never see an aggro deck with more than 2 colors (and doing well).
I think if you're trying to build an aggro deck with more than 2 colors then you're doing it wrong anyway most of the time. Aggro decks should be aiming for consistency as much as possible; our most successful aggro decks are usually as close to mono-colored as possible with a small splash for the best support cards in your second color.
This is probably true if you're playing in an environment without dual lands that ETB untapped. It's certainly possible, though uncommon, to draft a three-color aggro deck in an environment with them. It usually looks like a two-color deck splashing for a third and has to have a lot of fixing lands. If the fixing doesn't come together, you're almost definitely better off going with two colors instead. Supporting the occasional three-color aggro deck is one of the benefits I've noticed of adding the painlands to my cube, along with just increasing the overall consistency of all decks and making aggro marginally better. You can certainly get some improvement to aggro decks just by trimming some of the CC cards, but your aggro decks are still going to be better and more consistent with painlands than without.
I do wish our fixing was better, but I can't break the rarity rule for it. I think the restriction is what makes Peasant fun and interesting to build. We make do with what we have! Maybe I'm just old fashioned! haha
When I decided to go peasant, it was because pauper seemed a bit boring, and "normal" cubes suffered from "everything is a bomb, therefore nothing is" syndrome. I chose the format because I liked that particular chunk of spells. Putting rare lands in will just help me play those spells. It isn't the slippery slope people think it to be. I won't be playing planeswalkers and Tarmogoyf just because I threw some pain lands or check lands into the mix.
Having said all of that though...I still haven't been able to pull the trigger. I'm still torn. Freakin' gold symbols mucking up my blacks and silvers...
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Can you name all of the creature types with at least 20 cards? Try my Sporcle Quiz! Last Updated: 6/29/20 (Core Set 2021).
I run revised duals, fetches, and shocks in my Pauper cube and everyone I have talked to agrees it works better that way for us. It really gives you the chance to focus on enjoying the cards within your rarity restriction without people feeling handicapped by slow/unreliable mana. I think it increases the diversity of decks that are viable and is a vital part of appreciating the value of many cards (my cube is Pauper so Wood Elves, Farseek, land cyclers, Wild Nacatl and Kird Ape, Adventuring Gear, and many more). It also helps sell the format to people used to play powered cubes.
I've been running pain lands in the aggro color combinations for quite some time now. Fixing in general is not bad for Peasant cubes. You can make the colors you need. It's just slow. Trying to play an aggro deck where all my dual lands ETB tapped quickly turns my aggro deck into an awkward midrange deck. Throwing the pain lands in has helped this issue out tremendously. I would highly recommend it. And if you don't like the gold symbols, you can always stick with the Ice Age versions for the allied ones.
Unlike the similar conversation we're having about rares, there's no slippery slope here. Land is an easy barrier. Even though I don't remember how we lost noshadowkick to the traditional cube people anymore.
I see no issues with this. I get the purity argument, and if you want to be true to the common/uncommon rules that's cool.
That said, I think we all know that aggro suffers a bit when almost literally every dual comes into play tapped. I am thinking about doing this myself. Personally, I would go with the pain lands first and add the buddy/check lands second. I choose these because they don't really "feel" like rare lands to me and because they are appropriately inexpensive and not in my constructed decks (so I can put them in my cube without buying more copies). If I didn't have them in various modern decks, I'd even consider shocks instead of buddies. Revised duals are past my personal line but if you want to I say go for it. I don't feel like it's a slippery slope so long as rare duals are the ONLY rares in the cube.
To the purists (and again, do what you want, this is just my opinion), I feel like playing karplusan forest or stomping ground is much more in line with the spirit of peasant cube than some of the more absurd uncommons (mana drain, Force of will, demonic tutor) or pseudo-uncommons (freaking library of Alexandria? REALLY???) that I've seen in peasant lists.
I have also considered adding R lands to my C/U cube, but I'm torn. I hate breaking peasant spirit but having good mana is fun.
I am mainly thinking about fetches (Scalding Tarn & friends) instead of the checks, painlands or shocklands. To clarify, the fetches would only get basics, no OG duals or shocks. The reasons for this are follows:
1. Bolsters aggro. The main point of adding R lands to C/U cubes. In particular, makes Zoo stronger (Kird Ape, Wild Nacatl, Steppe Lynx, ect). It also helps other aggro color combinations better, no tap lands.
2. Plays with the graveyard. I'm a fan of these strats. Green, in particular, loves fetches (although not as much at C/U).
3. Requires more skill/planning to play than other duals. Particularly in the beginning of the game, when choosing which basic to grab. Also makes splashing a third or even fourth (control) color easier by getting your singleton basic.
I've also been thinking about if I should add fetches, should I add a cycle of rare lands to my peasant cube.
Despite going against c/ube tradition, I feel the Khans/Onslaught/Zendikar fetches help out not only with fixing for decks but also filtering out the deck during gameplay.
I also do like the idea of putting multiples of certain lands to make gameplay easier for people (multiples of City of Brass, Evolving Wilds and Gemstone Mine) in order to stick to traditional c/ube, also saving a fair bit of money along the way.
Once I get my cube completely assembled I wouldn't mind trying out different ideas for land bases, perhaps either a cycle of pains, checks or fetches or even just multiples of certain uncommon multi-colour lands (because City of Brass and Gemstone Mine are awesome). I don't plan on putting any original or shock duals any time soon (forgive me zoo).
I've been considering constructing a Peasant cube quite recently, so I went around to look at other people's peasant cubes and see how everything works and such, as well as getting inspiration for what to include.
A thing I have noticed in a couple of cube lists here and there (I cannot remember the exact names off the top of my head) is that there is at least a cycle of 10 rare lands amongst the rest of the uncommon lands.
They're usually pain lands, which have been chosen in place of lands such as guildgates or life-gain taplands. So my question is, would it be a good or a bad thing to include a cycle of pain lands or even check lands in a peasant cube?
Additionally for anyone who has put a few rare lands in their peasant cube, what are your experiences?
- My Sig/Banner Shop -HIATUSMy Peasant Cube thread !!! (380 cards)
Draft my Peasant Cube on Cube Cobra !!!
My 720 Peasant Cube
My main concern is that the whole aesthetic and gameplay of the cube will change dramatically if faster mana access is provided.
If I were to add a cycle of rare lands (which I might not) I would potentially go for check lands due to how they can occasionally be tap lands.
But then again I'm more than happy playing with taplands in a cube (preferably the recent KtK life-gain lands).
- My Sig/Banner Shop -HIATUSYou can use only (un)common lands and/or no multiples, just be aware that you might see a lot of 3 (or more) color control and midrange decks but you might never see an aggro deck with more than 2 colors (and doing well).
My C/Ube on Cube Cobra
I think better fixing makes for fewer bad games and subsequently a better cube. It doesn't make for a "peasant" cube, but I doubt anybody will look at a couple gold symbols and walk out of a draft.
Personally, I don't use rare lands because Peasant is a restriction I accepted primarily to cut down on the price tag or risk of situations where a friend of a friend of a friend runs off with a $25 piece of cardboard. But some of the rare duals are on a comparable power level to uncommon fixing, if not weaker (especially fetchlands in a shock/ABU dual-free environment, but that goes back to the pricetag thing).
So it's in there on a technicality and it makes me feel dirty.
For cycles though, I would just stick to the Khans Refuge cycle, the Wedge and Shard tricolors and the Vivid lands. There is plenty of perfectly good fixing at common/ uncommon.
My 720 Peasant Cube
I run shocklands, checklands, temples, and tris at a 450 cube. I like people actually casting Qasali Pridemage on T2, or curving Gore-House Chainwalker into Pianna without blindly hoping for the right three basics. Can't imagine ever dropping down to worse lands now that I've played this way for months.
(If budget is a thing, you could just sharpie through the ETBT line on your guildgates)
My CubeCobra (draft 20 card packs, 2 packs.)
430, Peasant, Very Unpowered
Why you should take your hybrids out of your gold section
Manamath Article
My CubeCobra (draft 20 card packs, 2 packs.)
430, Peasant, Very Unpowered
Why you should take your hybrids out of your gold section
Manamath Article
My CubeCobra (draft 20 card packs, 2 packs.)
430, Peasant, Very Unpowered
Why you should take your hybrids out of your gold section
Manamath Article
I do wish our fixing was better, but I can't break the rarity rule for it. I think the restriction is what makes Peasant fun and interesting to build. We make do with what we have! Maybe I'm just old fashioned! haha
My Peasant Cube thread !!! (380 cards)
Draft my Peasant Cube on Cube Cobra !!!
CubeTutor: www.cubetutor.com/cubeblog/72
Thread: http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=512410
When I decided to go peasant, it was because pauper seemed a bit boring, and "normal" cubes suffered from "everything is a bomb, therefore nothing is" syndrome. I chose the format because I liked that particular chunk of spells. Putting rare lands in will just help me play those spells. It isn't the slippery slope people think it to be. I won't be playing planeswalkers and Tarmogoyf just because I threw some pain lands or check lands into the mix.
Having said all of that though...I still haven't been able to pull the trigger. I'm still torn. Freakin' gold symbols mucking up my blacks and silvers...
My 720 Peasant Cube
My Peasant Cube thread !!! (380 cards)
Draft my Peasant Cube on Cube Cobra !!!
MTGS Average Peasant Cube 2023 Edition
Follow me. I tweet.
My CubeCobra (draft 20 card packs, 2 packs.)
430, Peasant, Very Unpowered
Why you should take your hybrids out of your gold section
Manamath Article
That said, I think we all know that aggro suffers a bit when almost literally every dual comes into play tapped. I am thinking about doing this myself. Personally, I would go with the pain lands first and add the buddy/check lands second. I choose these because they don't really "feel" like rare lands to me and because they are appropriately inexpensive and not in my constructed decks (so I can put them in my cube without buying more copies). If I didn't have them in various modern decks, I'd even consider shocks instead of buddies. Revised duals are past my personal line but if you want to I say go for it. I don't feel like it's a slippery slope so long as rare duals are the ONLY rares in the cube.
To the purists (and again, do what you want, this is just my opinion), I feel like playing karplusan forest or stomping ground is much more in line with the spirit of peasant cube than some of the more absurd uncommons (mana drain, Force of will, demonic tutor) or pseudo-uncommons (freaking library of Alexandria? REALLY???) that I've seen in peasant lists.
I am mainly thinking about fetches (Scalding Tarn & friends) instead of the checks, painlands or shocklands. To clarify, the fetches would only get basics, no OG duals or shocks. The reasons for this are follows:
1. Bolsters aggro. The main point of adding R lands to C/U cubes. In particular, makes Zoo stronger (Kird Ape, Wild Nacatl, Steppe Lynx, ect). It also helps other aggro color combinations better, no tap lands.
2. Plays with the graveyard. I'm a fan of these strats. Green, in particular, loves fetches (although not as much at C/U).
3. Requires more skill/planning to play than other duals. Particularly in the beginning of the game, when choosing which basic to grab. Also makes splashing a third or even fourth (control) color easier by getting your singleton basic.
My reservations are:
1. Breaking C/U spirit. Cost is also a factor.
2. These cards break Blue even more. Brainstorm and Treasure Cruise come to mind.
Thoughts about this? What are the pros/cons to painlands/checks vs fetches? I'll probably start by testing checks first and going from there.
~David Hayden
[420 Peasant Cube] (work in progress)
http://www.cubetutor.com/viewcube/21789
Despite going against c/ube tradition, I feel the Khans/Onslaught/Zendikar fetches help out not only with fixing for decks but also filtering out the deck during gameplay.
I also do like the idea of putting multiples of certain lands to make gameplay easier for people (multiples of City of Brass, Evolving Wilds and Gemstone Mine) in order to stick to traditional c/ube, also saving a fair bit of money along the way.
Once I get my cube completely assembled I wouldn't mind trying out different ideas for land bases, perhaps either a cycle of pains, checks or fetches or even just multiples of certain uncommon multi-colour lands (because City of Brass and Gemstone Mine are awesome). I don't plan on putting any original or shock duals any time soon (forgive me zoo).
Would Mana Confluence be a bad idea?
- My Sig/Banner Shop -HIATUS