A New and Exciting Beginning
The End of an Era
Exclusive: Sword of Truth and Justice
  • posted a message on [Primer] Soul Sisters
    Played the usual SS with 3 Ghost Quarters, 8 Sisters at FNM. I'm really glad I moved from 3 Honor of the Pure to 4. It might be the best card in the deck.
    First of all, I can only repeat myself about Ghost Quarters + Flagstones of Trokair. These cards go hands in hands to thin your deck, mana screw the opponent, and fight Tron. Especially good with Aven Mindcensor. 3 GQ and 4 Flagstones will almost never mana screw you for T3 Procession either since you can GQ yourself for all the W you need. Only downside is Blood Moon.

    I ran into Mono Red Goblins, thinking this would be a cakewalk after an easy game 1. 4 Leyline of Punishment in the sideboard proved me otherwise. This completely destroys our game. I got lucky when my opponent kept a Leyline hand without lands on game 3.

    I faced Pyro Storm in the final (we splitted the prizes) and the guy went 2-0 for the whole evening including against me. I got him to 1 life on turn 4 with Honor of the Pure x2 on our first game, but you can't do much against Pyromancer's Ascension. Sided into 1x Ethersworn Canonist, 1x Rule of Law and 1x Rest in Peace but mulled to 4 without finding any of these.

    Added an Oblivion Ring for getting rid of the enchantment to the SB and I'm also thinking about siding Silence since it seems like a good /cheap way to fizzle the combo.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on Magic 2.0 (AKA screw the mana screw)
    As I state in the OP: "If you are allowed to play more than one land in a turn, you are also allowed to apply the M2.0 rule that many times."

    So, if you play Explore, your limit to play lands goes up by one and you can also channel two cards in that turn. But you can play lands you didn't channel for in that turn and you can also keep the channeled lands in your hand. I fail to see the clunkiness.

    I just prefer to combine it in the land-playing action. It's lighter on words easier to integrate to the rules. Also easier for lands that come into play tapped (multicolored cards). The only thing I (potentially) don't like about my version is that it might make cards like Exploration too good by channeling a multicolored card and playing it untapped as the second "play land" action. I don't mind this being counter-intuitive because that's bound to happen in MtG (Jace, the Mind Sculptor avoiding Lightning Bolt), but it might just be too good.

    It's about universality. 3-color cards combine powers of 3 colors (charms, battlemages), thus being more powerful and/or universal. Therefore, there should be a trade-off to using them for mana, compared to 2-color cards. If there's no such trade-off, 3-color cards become more attractive for deckbuilding and certainly for drafting. To make M2.0 a viable alternative, I'm trying to keep the power level of individual cards as close as possible to what it is in M1.0 - in this case, 3-color cards are still more powerful but less viable for manafixing.

    I have 2 objections here: first, I dislike random lands. It's against the spirit of M 2.0 in my opinion (less random). Second, when you compare 2 color cards to 3-4-5 color cards you must consider that 3-4-5 colored cards will be very hard to cast in 2.0 because the prevalence of basic lands makes casting cost very rigid. In 1.0, using fetches and shocklands allows you to play a T1 Wild Nacalt followed by 2 T2 Lightning Bolt and T3 Geist of Saint Traft. 3+ color cards naturally force you to get these 3 lands when you might also need multiple Plains for example. Basically, I haven't been able to test anything yet, but I would not initially suspect 3 color cards to be that good and needing more nerf then entering tapped. If the meta is full of 3 color cards because they are that good then I'll reconsider this.

    I just pointed out that "you may reveal a card" should be "you must reveal a colored card". Otherwise, you're either creating a Barry's Land, which doesn't work (see https://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/mm/25 ), or a no-type colorless land, which doesn't exist. To me, allowing a channeling attempt that leads to a dead end is counter-intuitive, I'd rather stick the additional cost to it.

    Yeah, the possibility of fizzle was not needed, fixed.

    Which can be achieved just as well by nerfing those cards instead and prevent unexpected scenarios by allowing opponents to call land/nonland. Or do you have some particular justification for 2.0.3. got through testing or other research?

    What kind of nerf are you proposing? My nerf seems pretty full proof (though some cards that check for creatures/colors/other are still too probably too good). Since the controller is usually the one owning the card, if giving control to the opponent is dangerous you can just play other cards. This effectively bans problematic cards (I checked my list on page 2) by rendering them unplayable without the need of a banlist. Unexpected scenarios are bound to happen when you agree to play with other rules, people will figure out fast enough what not to play. (for draft I would recommend removing all these problematic cards from the pool)

    Well, there's no way constructed metagame in M2.0 would look anything like metagame in M1.0. So, I don't see a reason to accomodate scenarios from M1.0 (1-of AEtherling) to influence M2.0 rules. I see it as a balancing factor - on one hand, no mana screw/flood. On the other hand, if you search too much for lands, you might accidentally lose access to some cards. But it's ultimately your choice - if you want to search a lot, don't set up your strategy on winning through a 1-of.

    However, allowing players to let their land search fizzle in exchange of not losing whatever card they flip seems like a reasonable trade-off because then it doesn't seem to be hand-tailored for combo decks only. Let's go with it.

    Again, I don't want more randomness to mess up the game. This would have been a side-effect not present in 1.0 and I don't see why it should be added to 2.0. Glad you agree on this.

    Again, it's not about forcing anyone to do anything. It's a trade-off anyone can do. A landfall/retrace might be a reasonable winning strategy, especially in Limited. So if someone drafts 2-3 Windrider Eels, they might take the risk of a little flood by including some lands/fetches in exchange for a 4/4 flyer, which we know is very powerful in Zen drafts. The alternative is that landfall/retrace cards become close to broken in their respective drafts... Needless to say that this needs more testing so I'm leaving this an open question for now.

    2 things to consider: Referring to the Retrace and Landfall mechanic in the rules feels like patchwork. Also, I'm sure many cards aren't broken, a short banlist should suffice.

    Keep in mind that the idea with these rules is to make them as short and elegant as possible.

    On an other topic, I keep talking about about 2.0 but I still haven't played it. I want to play it badly because of all the bad games where lands screw a player over (I feel like almost all best-of-3 have a game like that). Does anyone have experience with a system to know when others are available to play online on Cockatrice or something similar?

    I almost forgot! I edited the concise rules a bit, and add the term Land Channel. This sounds very bad, I really need a term more resonant. Ideas?
    Posted in: Homebrew and Variant Formats
  • posted a message on Magic 2.0 (AKA screw the mana screw)
    About the "you may play that land" and "counts as playing a land" part:
    It's clunky to say "you can channel as many times as you can play lands" (actually I'm not sure whether you stance on this right now is this or "unlimited channels per turn" or "once per turn", both of which break certain cards like Explore and Trade Routes). So instead, I prefer to include the channeling action into the land playing action. Also makes it easier to keep track of which land ETB tapped since you have to play it immediately.
    Also, I'm note sure that 3 color cards need to be nerfed further, there are not that many and they are color intensive. Color intensiveness makes them hard to cast in 2.0 because you usually don't have dual lands. I'm leaving them alone for now.

    Seems you missed the point of 2.0.2, it's doing exactly what you are talking about. I'll edit it to make it clearer:
    2.0.2. When you exile a card with a colorless color identity from your hand, you may reveal a card from your hand. This card (ambiguous reference) is used for color identity purposes in place of the exiled card.

    2.0.2. When you exile a card with a colorless color identity from your hand, you may reveal a card from your hand. The revealed card is used for color identity purposes in place of the exiled card.

    Meaning: you can exile colorless cards for lands, when you do, you can reveal a colored card. Otherwise, you channel wiffs because no land corresponds to colorless mana identity (so you don't do it, unless you really want to get rid of an artifact for a cornercase scenario)

    2.0.3: Just don't play Avenging Druid. Or play it in a deck with Donate and Mindslaver. A few cards have the same problem but that just means they won't be played.

    Exiling critical cards from the bottom of your library with land search: I'm talking about exiling the 1-of Aetherling when you flip the bottom card, making the game unwinnable. There are many cases like this that can be easily avoided by simply using the fact that you don't have to find a card when you search. If you flip Aetherling, you can opt to not channel it but the land search wiffs.

    About Retrace and Landfall: these might get too good, but I suspect only a very small number of them (and not many card have that mechanic). Landfall is a bit counterbalanced by the fact that fetchlands are usually absent. I don't want mana flood to be a thing and forcing mana flood on people using Retrace and Landfall sucks. Call the Skybreaker is way too good obviously in 2.0 draft so I'd opt with only banning this one card instead of making a rule case.
    Posted in: Homebrew and Variant Formats
  • posted a message on Magic 2.0 (AKA screw the mana screw)
    I tried to streamline to rules a bit, attempting to follow the formalism of the comprehensive rules, to use as a reference in case of disagreement and to still introduce the players to the rules quickly.

    Magic 2.0 Principle: Every card in a deck can be used as a source of mana.

    2.0. New Special Action: Land Channel - Exile this card, replace it with a basic land card from outside the game producing a color within the exiled card color identity.
    (The color identity of a card is made of its color plus any color of mana symbol in its text except in reminder text)
    (Special Actions don't use the stack and thus cannot be responded to)

    2.0.1. (From hand) Anytime you can play a land, you may Land Channel a card from your hand. You may then put that land on the battlefield. If the exiled card color identity is multicolored, that land enters the battlefield tapped. Using this special action counts as playing a land. (Even if you don't put the land into play)
    (Reminder: You can only play lands on your turn when you have priority and the stack is empty: Sorcery speed)

    2.0.2. (From library) When an effect searches your library for a basic land card, instead, choose a valid basic land type and reveal cards from the bottom of your library (or the part of library searched) until you reveal a card that can be Land Channeled for the searched basic land. You can Land Channel that card or end the search. (Exile that card and put the land where instructed)
    (Then shuffle your library as usually instructed)
    (Ending the search without finding a card simply ends the effect)

    2.0.3. (Artifacts) When you Land Channel a card with a colorless color identity from your hand, you must also reveal a colored card from your hand. The revealed card is used for color identity purposes in place of the exiled card.

    2.0.4. When an effect checks specifically for a “land card” or a “[basic land type]” on the top of a library, an opponent of the player controlling the effect (priority to the owner of the library) chooses whether each card is Land Channeled or not.

    2.0 Rule:
    (…may then put that land…): This allows you to use the land for other purposes such as Retrace or Trade Routes.
    (…multicolored, that land enters the battlefield tapped…): This is for balance purposes. Mana of multiple colors is easier to manage in 2.0 and multicolored cards giving more mana options was shifting the balance too far from usual Magic.
    (…counts as playing a land…): Otherwise you could use it too many times.
    (…reveal cards from the bottom of your library…): This is to prevent people exiling the least useful card. Saves time. Up to debate if it messes with combo too much (might exile critical cards at time). I guess you can opt out and say you don’t find a land if it would exile a critical card.
    (or the part of library searched): Aven Mindsensor and similar effects
    2.0.2: This rule exists to make every card able to produce mana. Also makes artifacts a little better, opposite of multicolored cards.
    2.0.3: To fix Mind Funeral and similar cards. Will probably still need bannings.
    Note: Channeled lands enter the battlefield tapped only when played from hand immediately from channeling a multicolored card from hand or an artifact when a multicolored card is revealed.

    I'm not sure about the wording to make every rule follow the same conditions without repeating myself. I should include the "Channel" term to this to make it clearer instead of "exiling a card for a land".

    I tried to cover all bases concisely, so that nothing is ambiguous. Tell me what could be improved in this regard.

    Edit 17 Feb 2014: Coined the term Land Channel to be more specific + Many clarifications for corner-cases in all rules to make choices more obvious.
    Posted in: Homebrew and Variant Formats
  • posted a message on Print this Wizards (so I can play it in modern)
    I'm a bit surprised the fetchland talk has stopped so soon.

    One of my main gripe with Modern at the moment is that mono-color decks are almost inexistant. Devotion is a step in the right direction.
    Also, these are the top lands: http://www.mtggoldfish.com/format-staples/modern/full/lands

    1 Island 41.85% 50.00% 3.3
    2 MistyRainforest 35.17% 44.14% 3.2
    3 Scalding Tarn 31.85% 34.14% 3.7
    4 VerdantCatacomb 29.61% 30.69% 3.9
    5 Mountain 28.84% 42.93% 2.7
    6 Steam Vents 26.29% 36.38% 2.9
    7 Forest 23.36% 44.31% 2.1
    8 Marsh Flats 17.89% 26.72% 2.7
    9 Arid Mesa 17.11% 17.59% 3.9

    All 5 fetchlands are more played then Swamps and Plains.
    I don't mind good cards, but I think fetches are too central to the manabase of almost all viable decks. They outclass every other land. As such, they are auto-include.
    No card (save basics) should be auto-include because that's the definition of being restricted in deck-building.

    So, how do you diversify the land-bases?
    Making fetches worst by printing more hosers like Stifle, Blood Moon and Aven Mindcensor can work a bit if it's maindeck material, but that's more like patching the problem rather then fixing it. What happens: 1. Matchup variance increase because not all decks run the hate or 2. The hate is so good that it becomes the auto-include. Both scenarios are bad.
    Banning fetches back to Legacy? It's not like they are breaking the format.

    Printing competitors to the fetches? Onslaught fetches in Modern would be more options, very good. They give even more consistency to greedy 3-4 color mana-bases though.
    Printing a new type of fetch that would be better in certain cases? Now that's more what I'd be aiming for.

    Someone suggested something similar on page 1 I think, but here is a fetch that could be better in 1-2 color decks:

    Unstable Thicket
    Tap,Sac: Search in your library for a Forest card and put it into play.

    The downside should not be 1 life since that would be strictly worse. Here are a few ideas:
    -Each opponent gains 1-3 life
    -Enters the battlefield tapped unless (you reveal card of the color) (control a land/permanent of the color)

    It doesn't offer the same flexibility as bi-color fetches but is still good in bicolor:
    -Be able to grab Ravnica and original duals
    -Shuffle effect for Diving Top and similar cards
    -Contribute to threshold/delve/other grave-relevant mechanics
    -Contribute to Tarmagoyf's/Knight of the Reliquary's/Similar creatures' P/T
    -Same thinning as normal fetch (minimal but it still exists)

    I could see this being printed in an other graveyard-matters set.

    What other possible downside can you think of? What do you think about more fetchlands options?

    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on [Primer] Mono Green Devotion - Nykthos Green (10/2013 - 7/2014)
    Here's what I tested today, it's quite similar to the Woo one:

    Staff of Domination is neat, he wins the game out of nowhere with a big Nykthos or Forest+untapper. Can get you trough infinite life with Kessig Wolf Run. You can cast it early for utility.
    Strangleroot Geist is there to help against aggressive decks, possibly killing a /2 and then a /3 thoughness. Also a Lightning Bolt rod to lift pressure from your druids.

    Sideboard:Defense Grid is much needed help against counters. Spell Pierce and Mana Leak will ruin your early game while Cryptic Command can bounce the mega-Forest. Side in against any blue. Preferable to Boil in many cases. Harmonize and Vexing Shusher help against control too.

    Firespout is there for Wild Nacalt and friends. It's a hard matchup. Works for affinity too. Will kill flying fairies and not your guys.Predator Ooze could replace Geist maindeck in many cases but it's slower. Good against anything but combo and fast evasive beatdown. Wheel of Sun and Moon is pseudo-rest in peace for Melira Pod or other graveyard shenanigans. Doesn't remove your grave for Witness.Pit Fight is about the only thing we can do against Gaddok Teeg.

    Notable omission of:
    Tooth and Nail - It cost 7 or 9.
    At 7, Wave is almost trash while Tooth and Nail lets you do a double-Command tutor or play the big dude you drew. Can set you quite ahead 20% of the time or give your good things to play next turn. I'd say drawing it instead of Wave is a win 20% of the time you have 7 mana.
    At 9 mana, Wave can get you 2-3 lands and 2-3 creatures, mostly more ramp. If you get a Garruk, a Nykthos and that you have something else to cast, your turn continues. Often sends you too far ahead for the opponent unless they have lethal next turn. Now, T&N get your 2 biggest dudes (Emrakul and Hoof are popular). You can swing for lethal most of the time, or you can be far ahead. I'd say odds are +20% again to win with T&N.
    Also, with this deck, you often have more mana then that. Between 11-15 mana, Wave gets more reliable then T&N. In my experience, once the untappers and auras are assembled, your mana goes exponential and you often go from 6-8 to 12+ on the next turn. So, while these cases are better for T&N, they aren't always relevant.
    We also have to take in consideration that you need big dudes for T&N to work. These can be discarded, Path'ed. They take space in the deck and are often dead cards unless you get T&N(40%+ of the time).
    This loss of efficiency makes the deck less consistant, and I'd say that it's the main problem of the deck: you rely on specific combinations. T&N wins with a bit less mana but that's not what this deck needs.

    Boseiju - Defense Grid doesn't suck up all your life and protects your auras from Spell Pierce
    Posted in: Modern Archives - Established
  • posted a message on [Primer] Soul Sisters
    About Brave the Elements:
    1. Use it to attack unblocked
    2. Use it to block non-evasive creatures and save life
    3. Use it to save your creatures from Pyroclasm (or other damaging wipes)
    4. Use it to save your Pridemate from removal

    That looks like a bunch of cool reasons to run it, but:
    1. You can almost always wait for flyers/kill them 1 by 1 with Pridemate. Lots of opposing creatures to block usually mean a good matchup for SS.
    2. You have lots of life and chumping 1 more turn won't help you much.
    4. It's 1 for 1, doesn't matter too much on the long term. If you need to kill a combo quickly you probably won't have the mana open for this on turn 2/3.

    Pyroclasm lose you games though. That's why I like Burrenton Forge-Tender. It can save you from red wipes, it's a creature trigger, it doesn't sit in your hand and it's tutorable with ranger.
    Depending on your meta, you might need to alpha strike more often, but playing cards that are always active and being on the offensive has been more fruitful to me then countering removal with Brave.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on [Primer] Soul Sisters
    Quote from gibbousm
    The reason most people don't use Flagstones is not because they are bad, its because they are a relatively expensive card for this deck. I personally won't be using them unless I manage to find a cheap set.

    It's a good investment, with a name like that I don't see it getting reprinted. An (almost) strictly better Plain is bound to only rise in value. It's good in any Plains deck.

    Quote from gibbousm
    Elspeth is for the Control matchups where you want to constantly generate card advantage, if you don't play against a lot of Control decks, you don't want Elspeth.

    I have a hard time finding out a worthwhile deck for this. Against blue control, you'd be better playing something you can play again against remand or pay 3 for mana leak. Against Jund and spot removal control, Ranger does quite the same thing with a 3 card for 1. I'd like to hear what deck exactly you are thinking about.

    Quote from gibbousm
    Champion is great against Zoo decks as you get another Sister granting you life and the ability to survive almost all their removal. She's decent against Jund as they have no way to kill her with spot removal. She's great in that she forces aggressive decks to play around her as she can chump forever in many matches.

    Auriok Champion is growing on me. More sisters make the deck much better and she helps a lot in very popular matchups. I went with a 2/1 main/side split today and I never regretted drawing one.

    Quote from gibbousm
    Never cut the Honors, ever. They win so many games. Going down to 3 Martyrs is fine, I often sideboard by cutting, 1 Martyr and 1 of each Sister. Against some decks I just cut Martyrs completely.

    You are right. It also helps a lot against spot removal where you need to make everything threatening.

    Also for the sideboard, I can vouch for 2/2/2 Rest in Peace/Stony Silence/Suppression field. These really help against most of the meta.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on [Primer] Soul Sisters
    Here is my classical take on the deck. I played a quite similar version in a few recent FNM with positive results.

    I'd like to discuss lands, notable omissions and the number of each card main/side.

    First, LANDS:
    Flagstones of Trokair is almost a strictly better plain by now. I can see a few disadvantages: Blood Moon and wanting 2 mana at instant speed. I don't run any WW instants and I don't know who who would board Blood Moon against Soul Sisters. Please tell me why so few people run them. Flagstones have many advantages: Can thin your deck in multiples, can cycle Ghost Quarters for 2 plains, and are also harder to destroy obviously. Stone Rain is something that can come up (it did at Vienna Final at least) and having a land almost guaranteed is often all you need in SS.
    Ghost Quarter cost over Plain is mainly that it can mess up your turn 3 Spectral Procession, but that's a risk that is worth it considering the utility it give you. It makes the hard Tron matchup quite easier and the ability can be useful in almost all matchups.
    Windbrisk Heights is the tapland of choice. I think 3 taplands is optimal because multiples can really mess your tempo. Hideaway gives you a card for 3 mana (ETB, W, Tap) that will often be worth at least 2 mana, so it's kind of a card for a mana more often then not.

    Cards I think should not be played (sub-optimal):
    (Keep in mind that there isn't much control in my meta, I don't know how it plays out very well)
    Emeria, The Sky Ruin this seemed like a pretty good deal at first, I ran it for a few tournaments. Never came online, messed my tempo. Would play 4 Windbrisk before this. The same can be said for Mistveil Plains. It looks neat on paper to play a singleton, but it's very rarely relevant, in very few matchups, while entering the battlefield tapped is almost always very relevant.
    Elspeth, Knight-Errant in the sideboard: I played it maindeck, and it was the card I would side out every single game 2. I would almost always run a 4th Ranger over this.

    Main/side numbers:
    Auriok Champion is very great against many matchups. Very resistant to removal. Also, I think 8 is the right number of sisters to go crazy often on Pridemates and activate Serra. One of these sisters can be a 2 drop IMO. The mainboard Auriok Champion leaves space in the side (you never have enough in white) and can be sided out for hate cards.
    Aven Mindcensor is a crazy dude in Modern. It can Stifle fetchlands so it's good against 90% of matchups (what's that, mono red? yes, our best matchup anyway). It combos well with Path to Exile and Ghost Quarter. I'd say about 50% of decks in modern rely on library search besides fetches, so it's even better. Did I mention he is ALSO a flying beater? I'd play 4 of these main deck but we already play Spectral Procession and we want that low curve. I'm debating right now if I should cut a land for 1 more of these dudes.
    Talking about lands: 21-22 seems to be the consensus (primer MTGO 4-0 lists have 21 and 22). I feel that with all the thinning offered by GQ and Flagstones leaning toward 22 is better. It also counteracts the negative effects of colorless and tapped lands a bit more.

    The problem with this deck is knowing were to cut. I'd like to have 4 Honor of the pure and 4 martyr but I realized they are only the secondary game plan.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on [[BNG]] Kiora is up!
    Sideboard material for standard, unless aggro becomes instinct.

    She won't affect the metagame much, as it's not a dominant card and the color is rarely played.

    Pretty good against midrange and control, the -5 is really threatening here.

    If the deck has a good matchup against aggro, she can be maindecked as an explore+fog, not that bad. The opponent has to attack her with more creature then you can block.

    Overall, her +1 is a changable pacifism that wins you the game. You can also explore as a backup plan.

    2-4$ once she rotates though.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Magic 2.0 (AKA screw the mana screw)
    To people who simply dismiss the idea: Game design 101. Every idea should be playtested even if it sounds silly. Mana management is an integral part of Magic, yes. This variant scraps mana base management in favor of more spell choice and less games where one player is just mana flooded to death. That's a compromise I see many experienced people willing to take.
    People in this thread aren't saying that playing Magic with lands is dumb, just that it might be worthwhile to try playing without.
    While this format may "caters to those who cannot shuffle and build proper decks" and not develop the same deckbuilding/mulligan skills, that doesn't mean it also lack other appeals.

    My main gripe with Magic 2.0 is how hard it is to play because of the lack of people willing to try:
    -Many only like to play games with the true rules
    -Many invested too much time in mastering the normal rules/metagame
    -Newer players can be overwhelmed by the choices
    -Building a deck takes time/money that might be wasted if you don't play often.
    Posted in: Homebrew and Variant Formats
  • posted a message on All In on Green
    How does the Gu variant deals with very aggro-oriented decks like Mono Red? Nylea's Disciple in the sideboard?

    Also, against mono black? I have a though time dealing with Desecration Demon and Merchant of drain life. Arbor Colossus was my best friend for this matchup.
    Posted in: Standard Archives
  • posted a message on All In on Green
    You are right, there are about 16 blue sources and that's plenty for a 6 drop.
    Tower Defense would be a good sideboard card for Blue small flyers and sweepers. Nobody expects that.

    Comparing Green/blue devotion to a deck that placed pretty well with Green/Red, it looks like you are mainly trading cheap planeswalkers for more big creatures. Red also gives nice sideboard options. You can trade Mizzium Mortars for Cyclonic Rift. Burning Earth is pretty good against Azorius though. I'm sure blue can give other nice options, Dissolve could be worth it.
    Posted in: Standard Archives
  • posted a message on All In on Green
    That Green/Blue variant actually looks quite solid. The mana base works well in this build:
    Lands that ETB tapped don't hurt too much because you only have 4 1-drop.
    4 Nykthos and BTE for colorless mana ain't too bad because most 2-drops are 1G.

    Not sure about Prime Speaker Zegana, double blue is kinda hard to pull off. Worth it for the combo with Prophet though.

    This deck definitely needs Mistcutter Hydra in the sideboard too.

    What I fear is the death of a prophet. At 2/3 they are pretty hard to protect and if you lose it to something like Anger of the Gods, Mizzium Mortars or Supreme Verdict, most of the stuff you play in response will also die. Might need some countermagic or something.
    Posted in: Standard Archives
  • posted a message on [[COMM]] Oloro, Ageless Ascetic
    Came up with this list of nice cards. The idea is to build mana, control the board, be untouchable and draw lots of cards to control with. Also either kill with attrition or some Exquiste Blood combo.

    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.