Hmm, 1) I only have 8 white sources (the splash is very small), 2) i am not sure why they wouldn't still attack, even if they kill it, it is like a creature got doom bladed. If that single card stops them from attacking me I think the red decks operator is a baddie. (i guess on the play it might be a decent 2 drop, but on the draw they have already got an attack in).
Pack rat is pretty much unbeatable for non-devotion type mono red decks. If you're running bw high priest of penance is extrememly strong against the type of deck that only tries to attack you down. Both of these should be utilized along with a strong removal package. High priest will always trade with their best creature and can't be burned if they have a creature (you shouldn't play him on an empty board, ever), if its 1 guy against 1 guy its obviously a mediocre ability. But if it trades up for something like a boros reckoner or firefist striker you should be pretty happy about that.
The reason you are struggling with aggro is you are constantly 1 for 1ing their threats and can never gain card advantage or keep up if you happen to not draw desecration demon or another finisher.
You're still ignoring my points about Disciple. Read the previous page please, I'd like to understand what you think about them.
e.g. : you currently say in your primer "However, she should be relegated to the sideboard to help keep the game 1 of the aggro match-up on our side. Side her in against every other match-up.". I explained why Duress is way better against control (please read it), and I don't think it is needed as a SB option against midrange because it's our best matchup and we can win it without a single swing.
And please, read why I keep asking about Disciple: I just want to understand why it is good, maybe I'll play it too.
You're clearly stuck in your way of thinking and nothing more can be said to sway you. Play the damn card for yourself and see what you think, its really the only way to evaluate a card anyways. This dumb theory crafting and why this card might be better only does so much, so again, play it for yourself come to a conclusion and be done with it.
You obviously are highly informed. 2 reasons farseek was played was color fixing and deck thinning. Any avid Jund player from last season could tell you that answer.
Edit: Just to touch base, ignoring a pro side of a card just because you said so is bad logic in general.
You can do your own simple math to discover that these farseek decks that only ran 4 "thinners" didn't run these cards to thin their decks. In fact the amount the deck got thinned of lands is so minuscule I would argue that it has absolutely no impact at all on selecting which card to run.
If deck thinning really was a strategy, cards like evolving wilds would see play just to fix the numbers. But since mathematics tells us that these probability differences are so minimal there is no upside to run these type of cards for these effects.
Lilianna is a fine, albeit very slow, card for a deck like this. I personally think she only has a place in the mono-black lists that run corrupt because the multi-colored decks do not need an excessive amount of lands for a card like corrupt.
If the general consensus of this forum is that corrupt is a playable card and not a "jankfest" then I don't know how you guys can call this a competitive discussion forums.
We are discussing role-playing cards and all of you are automatically dismissing a 4 mana coercion that leaves behind a 1/3, which in the past was a very playable card and now we get a body for extra devotion for 1 more mana. If coercion was playable before disciple certainly is now. Instead people are discussing the merits of a proven sideline, fringe limited playable card in corrupt.
The other half of people in here are suggesting cards we are already running to play over disciple. This is all well and good until I realize that I am already playing all of these suggested cards and have played over 200 games with these cards. And based on my games and my opinion, which is apparently the only thing that matters on here is that disciple is better than the alternatives that we are not running. Turn 1 thoughtseize, turn 3 lifebane zombie into turn 4 disciple is game ending, no non-aggro deck can come back from this and if you are still unsure I insist that you try it for yourself before coming back and calling it unplayable jank which seems to be the only argument against it so far.
I just want to say I like your list a lot and I can see how you won with it. Seems very solid with ways of gaining life, removal, and win cons. I dig it. I think this should be the example of a real 'Devotion' deck that OP should be considering instead of playing janky Disciple.
Just to play devils advocate, if those two corrupts were instead janky disciple this list would be awful? I'd go far to say that corrupt is significantly worse than most cards one could be playing in this deck yet it receives praise from you just because it isn't disciple. I don't understand your hate with the card and why some bad and janky cards like corrupt get your stamp of approval. I don't want or need your approval I'm just trying to understand your logic here.
Problem with Disciple is that you are not presenting a threat. It is 1 power. That is wanting to be followed by a Grey Merchant for another 2 power on turn 5.
This doesn't work s anything mid range or control. You must have something threatening in the first 3 turns of the game. Hitting there hand doesn't matter when they can rip it off the top of their library.
I was really skeptical of disciple at first too but he does more than meets the eye. Personally I play a white version of this deck and mainboard lifebane zombies, and going turn 1 thoughtseize, turn 3 lifebane and turn 4 disciple is gamebreaking. You have 4 power on the board and potentially took their best three cards. You are also working with perfect information so your next few plays can be sculpted in any way you see fit.
On paper, I agree, this card looks underwhelming but try him before you knock it. It's deceptively powerful.
Pack rat is pretty much unbeatable for non-devotion type mono red decks. If you're running bw high priest of penance is extrememly strong against the type of deck that only tries to attack you down. Both of these should be utilized along with a strong removal package. High priest will always trade with their best creature and can't be burned if they have a creature (you shouldn't play him on an empty board, ever), if its 1 guy against 1 guy its obviously a mediocre ability. But if it trades up for something like a boros reckoner or firefist striker you should be pretty happy about that.
The reason you are struggling with aggro is you are constantly 1 for 1ing their threats and can never gain card advantage or keep up if you happen to not draw desecration demon or another finisher.
You're clearly stuck in your way of thinking and nothing more can be said to sway you. Play the damn card for yourself and see what you think, its really the only way to evaluate a card anyways. This dumb theory crafting and why this card might be better only does so much, so again, play it for yourself come to a conclusion and be done with it.
You can do your own simple math to discover that these farseek decks that only ran 4 "thinners" didn't run these cards to thin their decks. In fact the amount the deck got thinned of lands is so minuscule I would argue that it has absolutely no impact at all on selecting which card to run.
If deck thinning really was a strategy, cards like evolving wilds would see play just to fix the numbers. But since mathematics tells us that these probability differences are so minimal there is no upside to run these type of cards for these effects.
Lilianna is a fine, albeit very slow, card for a deck like this. I personally think she only has a place in the mono-black lists that run corrupt because the multi-colored decks do not need an excessive amount of lands for a card like corrupt.
We are discussing role-playing cards and all of you are automatically dismissing a 4 mana coercion that leaves behind a 1/3, which in the past was a very playable card and now we get a body for extra devotion for 1 more mana. If coercion was playable before disciple certainly is now. Instead people are discussing the merits of a proven sideline, fringe limited playable card in corrupt.
The other half of people in here are suggesting cards we are already running to play over disciple. This is all well and good until I realize that I am already playing all of these suggested cards and have played over 200 games with these cards. And based on my games and my opinion, which is apparently the only thing that matters on here is that disciple is better than the alternatives that we are not running. Turn 1 thoughtseize, turn 3 lifebane zombie into turn 4 disciple is game ending, no non-aggro deck can come back from this and if you are still unsure I insist that you try it for yourself before coming back and calling it unplayable jank which seems to be the only argument against it so far.
Just to play devils advocate, if those two corrupts were instead janky disciple this list would be awful? I'd go far to say that corrupt is significantly worse than most cards one could be playing in this deck yet it receives praise from you just because it isn't disciple. I don't understand your hate with the card and why some bad and janky cards like corrupt get your stamp of approval. I don't want or need your approval I'm just trying to understand your logic here.
I was really skeptical of disciple at first too but he does more than meets the eye. Personally I play a white version of this deck and mainboard lifebane zombies, and going turn 1 thoughtseize, turn 3 lifebane and turn 4 disciple is gamebreaking. You have 4 power on the board and potentially took their best three cards. You are also working with perfect information so your next few plays can be sculpted in any way you see fit.
On paper, I agree, this card looks underwhelming but try him before you knock it. It's deceptively powerful.