MTG Salvation

So, many, not all, but many EDH players feel that Land Destruction/MLD has no place in EDH. I don't tend to agree, but I see their point. Too many people will drop an Armageddon just because they can, with no thought of how it will play out.

Often I see players, both online and off, getting very angry even about incidental or targeted Land Destruction.

Two examples: 4 man table, opponent is one mana off summoning a massive bomb (forget which, but it had been tutored up a turn or two ago) with Lightning Greaves in play. I Vindicate their Temple of the False God. They call me names for using Land Destruction, and say it has no place in EDH.

Second example (Online): Sydri, Galvanic Genius deck, 4 man table. I have a good board state, and 2 Staff of Nin (one copied) in play. They say "That's it, staves are gone next turn" so I drop Mycosynth Lattice , and use Sydri to kill all their green mana. They curse at me for land D, and quit the game.

I think that those uses of Land Destruction, particularly since they aren't what the deck was built to do, are fair play. Others don't. Thoughts?

First example: Opponent is an idiot.

Second example: If this is a friend, we both get it, do it, and appreciate it. If this person is some rando, they shouldn’t telegraph their move.

- Dropping an Armageddon without rhyme or reason is reckless, and you should be chewed out for it. Using it to stave off certain destruction or close out a game (prolonging or shortening the game, respectively) ? I’m fine with that.
- Everyone has a Maze in their deck; hence targeted permanent removal is fine.

Honestly, I just really hate when MLD is kind of like casually run or run by like one person and everyone else is not running that level of tactic. I play in a playgroup where none of the normal players play any of it but we have a few people who like.... used to play in the playgroup who occasionally come back and they play like 1-2 of these effects in their deck. Its kind of BS because nobody is regularly playing that so we really dont gear to play against MLD or play it ourselves.

I probably would be fine with it if we played that sort of game on a regular basis but because on average nobody is playing it, it hits us that much harder when suddenly one of those people show up.

I am totally cool with targeted land removal though because there are way too many unfair lands that are not cool to let live. I just want to be left with the ability to play the game. I remember one game where I was doing very good and then someone wrathed. The person after them played a creature and blew up the lands and I was like.... wow cool story bro, I am playing mono white and you just did that to me...

My favorite EDH tables to sit down at are like 80-90% decks piloted by players who don't complain about legal cards and don't mind losing. Armageddon is fine by me.

For most players i know MLD is a meta call and matter of play style. Zurgo Helmsmasher, Avacyn, Angel of Hope and others profit from MLD, come with a sign on their forehead "expect MLD" and shouldn't be frowned upon for running it. Never forget the social character of the format though. If i had a deck with MLD and sat down in a pod with people that aren't in favor of MLD i'd openly discuss it and consider swapping decks.

Spot removal of lands shouldn't even be a discussion. Gaea's Cradle, Cabal Coffers, Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx and the likes aren't supposed to stick around - ever. I'd never build a deck without Ghost Quarter, Strip Mine and if possible 1-2 cards like Beast Within that can hit lands if need be.
To be fair, occasionally i get into arguments, whether depriving someone of a certain color or else is to be considered foul play or not. It was a conscious decision to include Avalanche Riders in my Alesha, Who Smiles at Death deck and it certainly triggers people. A friend of mine keeps arguing that i should run Fulminator Mage and/or Ravenous Baboons instead. But i won't. In that slot i want to have the option of destroying a Temple of the False God as well as keeping 4-5C Commanders from being cast too easily. After all it costs me my precious Alesha-trigger and helps most other players as well.

Bottomline: If your playgroup is cool with MLD, go ahead. If you have a problem with spot removal hitting lands, think again.

I have a mono black deck where I can create a lot of black mana in a single turn and have Helldozer. I will use him to close out a game and not feel bad about it. I often wait until we are down to two players ganging up on the threat, or even a dual in order to do this though. I won't just start targeting lands just for the lulz.

I have my Mizzix of the Izmagnus deck with Capsize and have no problem cleaning up my opponent's lands and ending the game.

Those two examples, in my opinion, wouldn't bother me if they happened to me, and I don't feel bad about doing them.

Kaalia can drop threats and play a mass LD effect to lock out the game and clean up. I don't midn that either.

I just have a problem with trolls, which I think is normal. Have a plan and close games out. Don't be a troll.

Spot removal is fine. I can't imagine anyone objecting to blowing up Westvale Abbey in response to its transform activation, or hitting a Volrath's Stronghold to stop a Yosei lock. And it's silly to say that killing a Magus of the Coffers is totally fine and even advisable but killing Cabal Coffers isn't. Things like that justify playing some targeted LD. In the spirit of "build casually, play competitively" I would avoid packing enough to really be effective as mana denial, but if the opportunity comes up to take someone off a colour and delay something nasty, I won't judge anyone for taking it. Just as long as it's actually a good play in the situation rather than just being a dick.

I never play MLD myself, but I don't object to playing against it once in a while as long as you aren't an idiot. (If, after a reasonable trial period, your win percentage in games where you cast geddon is lower than in games you don't, please reevaluate something.)

I've had cards physically thrown at me before because I cast Mwonvuli Acid-Moss on a bounceland. Like, if you're going to play a card, accept the risks inherent to doing so. I don't understand casuals' "no disruption" mentality; the goal of the game is to WIN. And getting mad at someone for trying to do so - especially with a fair deck - is ridiculous. LD is fair game. It's how some colors interact with combo.

Quote from OneRingToGruulThemAll »

I've had cards physically thrown at me before because I cast Mwonvuli Acid-Moss on a bounceland. Like, if you're going to play a card, accept the risks inherent to doing so. I don't understand casuals' "no disruption" mentality; the goal of the game is to WIN. And getting mad at someone for trying to do so - especially with a fair deck - is ridiculous. LD is fair game. It's how some colors interact with combo.

For some reason, people consider their mana sacred in this format, it is a very odd trend. In Legacy, I play Pox, and I never hear "What? HOW DARE YOU DESTROY MY LANDS?!"

I've faced against a Keranos, God of Storms deck using Obliterate, Decree of Annihilation, Jokulhalps, and a Sigarda deck using Armageddon and Catastrophe, those decks have a stratedgy to win games using MLD.

It seems annoying, but just think about all the other fast combo decks with counterspell backup they are even worse.

Even my G/R deck I run Blood Moon/Magus of the Moon to lock my opponents manabase, it is part of a stratedgy to win.

I find having targeted Land Destruction is something of a staple for myself. You need it for all the powerhouse, troublesome lands in this format.

MLD is also fine, so long as there's a follow-up or win-condition behind it. The most upset I've ever been was a Daretti deck cycled Decree of Annihilation on something like turn 4 or 5, but didn't have any discernible way to win. Ended up durdling until everyone else eventually managed to crawl back in, and as the resident ramp deck in that game, I made sure to Tormod's Crypt and make his Emblem Worthless.

Land destruction and land hate is fine. Can even be amusing and unexpected with something like Curse of Marit Lage or Boil and then using something like Mind Bend while on the stack.

Fair play.

Compare to 60 cards deck where you can run multiple copies of the same LD card, EDH is far less consistent, most people would just run MLD when they're prepared, i.e., giving me time to prepare and win during that time.

I've been annihilated by too many ignored lands to even take the question about targeted LD seriously. I am COMPLETELY fine with it, because there are too many dangers out there(Dark Depths, Westvale Abbey, plus the aforementioned) to not put that into just about any deck's gameplan.

MLD is...eh. I get it, some decks love it, and sometimes your combo requires it. I can't come down on it myself because one of my decks has a Kamahl/Elesh combo, and yes...that's part of the gameplan if everything else fails.

I guess I fall into the majority camp: if it ends the game shortly after, great. If you're doing it for durdles and derps, you're gonna be finding someone else to play with in the future.

I understand that people rely on their mana way more than other resources. If everyone were to build decks with the goal of keeping their land drops going the way they recur creature threats, it would be a different format that wouldn’t be everyone’s cup of tea. I get that.

But if people are going to continue to run Kor Haven, Maze of Ith, Glacial Chasm , Tower of the Magistrate, so on, then they should fully expect any deck that wants to attack with their general to run LD. Same thing with Academy Ruins and Volrath’s Stronghold used to recur some defensive piece. If people want to claim privilege for their mana resources, then they should be prepared to stop using their lands for other things.

That’s to say nothing of Gaea’s Cradle, Cabal Coffers, etc. that produce extra mana rather than non-mana effects. In my opinion that is an arms race that is easily resolved by some Strip Mine play, but if people are correct that they are more easily stopped by dealing with their threats than their mana, then I will probably perceive the reality (or falsity) of that idea also. But typically in my experience, players that can afford Cradle know how to use it in a way that a Wrath won’t resolve.

And as to the MLD v spot LD discussion, it’s a hard argument to win whenever you’re arguing that someone should use a deliberately less effective means of accomplishing the same in-game goal, whether in shutting off Maze effects or what have you. The reason is that if someone has altered their build for a substitution like Vindicate for Anguished Unmaking, they are fully justified in assessing that substitution for accomplishing the goal that they set out for it. Now, they can’t exile cards like Purph, so on. If that person decides that their plan works better with spot removal doing what it does, and that casting Armageddon is better when they come across problem lands, then that is how the arms race will go. The waffling between getting hosed by Maze and running sub-optimal answer cards due to problem lands is not an equilibrium point that many groups will find themselves in.

Also, it’s something that players just need to accept more often when a deck of theirs has a vulnerability to the resource denial game. Yeah, your Riku of Two Reflections deck might struggle a lot against land wipes. Not every deck will struggle that badly against it. Accept that one deck’s weakness is another deck’s strength, and explore some of the variety in this format.

Cabal Coffers, Gaea's Cradle, Serra's Sanctum, Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx, Maze of Ith, Academy Ruins, Eye of Ugin, The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale, etc. are all very dangerous if left unchecked. You should have some minimal ability to destroy lands in your deck just in case. It just makes strategic sense.

If someone wants to run mass-LD, I just want to know ahead of time. That way, I can make deck and/or play choices accordingly.

Quote from Jusstice »

Accept that one deck’s weakness is another deck’s strength, and explore some of the variety in this format.

Very well said!
I think a lot of problems in playgroups and threads on here would be easily resolved if players would adapt to that instead of expecting each deck and color (combination) to have an answer for everything.

Quote from Forgotten One »

You should have some minimal ability to destroy lands in your deck just in case. It just makes strategic sense.

A friend of mine refuses to play spot removal for lands. No Strip Mine, no Ghost Quarter, no Dust Bowl - nothing.
His argument is, that there's always enough players to deal with problematic lands, so he won't... Which resulted in dozens of akward rounds.
Playing Wort, the Raidmother and Glacial Chasm on the battlefield? He wasn't able to deal with it, but if he killed the other 2 players with lethal Comet Storms he'd sit there and do nothing for the rest of the game.
Mirri, Weatherlight Duelist + Holdout Settlement against his The Locust God deck and no one else playing a swarm deck? Fine.
The list goes on and on. I'm puzzled to this day, that these rounds won't teach him a lesson. In EDH (or MTG overall) you should never rely on others to solve your problems. Especially with lands, as all other card types are far more likely to be dealt with by some Wrath effect sooner or later.

Targeted LD I have time for, there are a few lands in EDH like Cabal Coffers that need answering because of the advantage they bring.

I think the stigma of MLD is the spite Armageddon and scoop. If you're using MLD to win in the next two turns or so (for example Worldslayer on Zurgo Helmsmasher) then its fine but dropping Armageddon because you have nothing else to do is just irritating.

To this day, I have never seen someone cast Armageddon or similar, then scoop up their cards. If I did, I would imagine that the other players would keep playing.

It's ok with me, though I'd prefer it was known ahead of time. Some of my decks are fairly casual and don't really have the capacity to win through geddon.

I guess my issue is more with: "Please play at somewhat of the same playing field as everyone else".

Its sort of like when you sit down and pull out a mono white deck expecting a nice fun casual game of commander and you look over and see Zur the Enchanter across the table. I just want to be on the same concept of play as my opponents I guess. The same thing can be applied to combo, MLD, and just intensity of decks. I dont want to play a casual tribal deck vs your CEDH deck.

If everyone is on board to play with / against MLD / combo / intense commanders I don't have an issue with it. I just don't like playing on a completely different playing field as everyone else because I didnt know what they were intending to play.

Like a couple others, I'm good with MLD as long as it's used with a purpose. I'd prefer to know that it's an option, because it's not common in my regular group and I am going to play differently when I know it's a possibility.

I played against someone a few years back who didn't realize Balance was banned and cast that just before scooping. I've also seen MLD just for the sake of doing it and I've seen it when it sealed the game for someone other than the caster. There are definitely players who are either interested in griefing or who don't have a good sense of how to use the effect.

Targeted LD shouldn't even be a discussion. Too many powerful lands in the format to let them run rampant. If someone is playing a dedicated LD deck or enough of those effects that it seems like that, see the above points.

I don't like mod myself it I will use it. I plan you build a zurgo deck with mod and board wipes as a constant theme.

Quote from Weebo »

Like a couple others, I'm good with MLD as long as it's used with a purpose. I'd prefer to know that it's an option, because it's not common in my regular group and I am going to play differently when I know it's a possibility.

The problem with this is knowing whether it's an option ahead of time. Most of the decks I build have no MLD or other deliberate mana-denial, but most of them would work better in the abstract if they did have it. So even in running something like Rite of Ruin, a good chunk of the time players complain about it, but then other times someone opens a deck that goes creature, creature, Armageddon. So, it feels like players are falling victim to MLD because they aren't letting each other build decks that are resilient to it. And that's to say nothing of the decks that go Mana Crypt into Coalition Relic into Impending Disaster/Land Equilibrium, Ward of Bones, so on.

That's the crux of the issue with this topic really. A card like Desolation Angel gets you labeled the worst kind of player, so that option is off the table. Whereas, using a couple of options is actually far from the arms race the people claim that it is. Speaking of public games mostly, but I also know it can be hard for a private group to meet in the middle. After one session someone is unsleeving their Tangle Wire, the next someone else brings Zurgo MLD tribal. All because on some level, people are suspicious of the game turning into a repeating Turn 2-3 Nether Void affair.

Needs another option:

Ok, but don't be stupid about it.


Basically, this means don't randomly blow up all the lands because it seems powerful. Geddon to seal the game? Good play, good game. Geddon with mana open for a Splendid Reclamation follow up? Good play, good game. Geddon because you want to "disrupt the game"? Stop being stupid. Randomly sinkhole an island? Dude... . Sinkhole a Cradle? Dude, nice.