Phenax Deck List
I'm looking to cut five cards from this deck list, but I'm having trouble making a decision. The main cards on the chopping block are the following:
Maze of Ith - Useful for a control deck, but perhaps less useful when I'm running high toughness blockers that will rarely tap on my turn.
Spoils of Evil - Potentially a large chunk of mana to sink into Umbral Mantle, Pemmin's Aura, Morphling, or Geth, Lord of the Vault. Only source of life gain. However, it's vulnerable to graveyard hate and has the potential to be too slow or ineffectual.
Oona, Queen of the Fae - One of the few fliers in the deck and can boost the deck's defense. The ability is a nice mana sink for when I have nothing better to do, and the creatures it creates can mill. Some synergy with Oblivion Sower. However, her ability has a relatively low pay-off, and I feel the only time I'd use it is if I literally don't have other options.
Necropotence - While it is great card draw, the deck has no way to gain life (except for, perhaps, Spoils of Evil). Considering the number of cards that cost five mana or more, this card may not be worth the price.
Mindslaver - Combos with Academy Ruins and is generally fun to use, but is cost-prohibitive in an already high-curve deck.
Telemin Performance - This is mainly in here to blow out a few decks in my meta that run no creatures. I may cut it since it's not universally useful.
Feel free to share any thoughts on these cuts, other cards that you feel should be cut, or additions that I overlooked. In regard to potential additions, please keep in mind that I prefer to be in control of who is getting milled and when, so items like Mesmeric Orb and Hedron Crab are probably out of the question.
Assuming it could be meaningfully enforced, I probably wouldn't take that deal. If that one person becomes the threat at the table, it's entirely reasonable to kill them off. An open-ended promise to not hit someone gives them free rein to develop their board into something that I can't deal with. Eliminating the other players in the game increases the odds of that happening as well. I don't mind temporary deals and alliances, but I and everyone I play with know that they're basically in effect as long as they're mutually beneficial. If we work together to take down the big threat at the table and I end up with the most threatening board position afterwards, I'm going to be next in line.
Okay, so let's say you didn't take the deal, I stifled your Hornet Nest trigger, and later I became a threat. Are you somehow in a better position to deal with that threat without the hornets? No, you're not. In fact, even if you had done nothing but used the 13 hornets as defenders, you'd still be in a far better position than not having received the hornets at all. Isn't this just obvious? The deal was "immunity to the hornets I'm giving you," not "immunity to you."
Up to a certain point, you should honor a deal. But if the game state changes and the deal greatly out favors another party, there is no reason to stick to it.
Is there no reason, though? He would have surely lost the game had I not given him the hornets, and he won't receive such opportunities in the future now that he can't be trusted. Is this really the best possible outcome?
But how long were you expecting him to keep to the agreement? Was he supposed to eliminate the other two players first and then never attack you with the tokens and just have them sit there? Was this a reasonable expectation on your part from him?
I think you gave him the tokens in order to have him defeat the other two players while you were trying to find a way to win yourself. You didn't find such a thing and when the hornet player looked at the board, he decided that between you and the half-dead player, you were the one most likely to prevent him from winning in two turns. I think it makes sense to attack you. Now if he had attacked you after killing the first player while the other opponent had the stronger board / better shot of winning, I could see you taking issue with his actions, but as it stood. I don't think you should hold it against him.
I guess I just think differently than most of you, because if my choices are either "receive 13 1/1 flying deathtouchers that can't attack one person" or "make someone burn an extra card and receive nothing," I'm going to choose the former just about every time, as it clearly seems better for me. Betrayal of this agreement presumably means that the first option (and anything like it) will never be available to me again unless the offerer has an easy answer to it, which seems undesirable for me.
Up to a certain point, you should honor a deal. But if the game state changes and the deal greatly out favors another party, there is no reason to stick to it.
Is there no reason, though? He would have surely lost the game had I not given him the hornets, and he won't receive such opportunities in the future now that he can't be trusted. Is this really the best possible outcome?
Deception in respect to the game's hidden elements (i.e., what is in one's hand or deck) is par for the course and perfectly acceptable, but violating a deal made with another player seems like a bridge too far. I understand how some might think that potential betrayal is just another variable that one must consider and adds to their enjoyment of the game, but I feel that the subsequent lack of trust is too high a price to pay in how it discourages diplomacy and interesting plays.
A perfect example of this happened not long ago when two players had built up massive boards while the other player and I stagnated. My fellow stagnant player had a Hornet Nest on the field, so I offered him a deal: "I'll cast Blasphemous Act and give you 13 hornets if you grant me immunity to those hornets" (I was at 13 life). He agreed, so I torched the board and gave him a hornet army instead of casting Stifle on the Hornet Nest trigger. Long story short, one of the previously well-off players gets stung to death, the other loses about half of his health, and the incessant goading of the players and those watching us leads the guy I bargained with to murder me with the hornets and win the game.
So, should this sort of play be acceptable? Am I just a fool for not anticipating the backstab? Does it make a difference that the Hornet Nest player is fairly inexperienced and likely would have lost to me without use of the hornets? Frankly, I'm bummed about the situation, because I feel that my playgroup has taken yet another step toward playing a game devoid of politics.
While the undying trigger goes on the stack above Dread Return, isn't it though that the spell is still resolving? So Dread must resolve first, and then Flayer's undying resolves next?
Sacrificing three creatures is part of the COST to flashback Dread Return, not part of its resolution. Dread Return goes on the stack, you pay its cost, Flayer of the Hatebound's undying ability is triggered and goes on the stack above Dread Return.
hardened scales only matters when a +1/+1 counter is being put on, so undying already won't trigger. I think it is very strong with Ghave.
If he has Mikaeus, the Unhallowed out, he now has to spend double the mana to remove all of the +1/+1 counters from his undying creatures. The same is true for Geralf's Messenger.
I'm actually having difficulty imagining a scenario in which I'd care to have this card out. What purpose does it serve?
I personally use (and recommend) searching for cards in magiccards.info.
Yes, I discovered this site today while searching for an answer to my question. It's quite nice; I'll be using it until I find the information to use the preferred Gatherer.
Does such a thing exist? I'd like to know all of the searchable symbols and how to use regular expressions for more complex searches. I already know the basics; what I'm looking for is a complete list of search functions. Thanks.
Mitotic Slime is the only card I'd consider removing from that list, but he does a lot of work between Blasting Station, the altars, and Nim Deathmantle. Cadaverous Bloom allows me to cycle through my deck and win if I have a draw engine out. Blasting Station is a game-winner that doubles as colorless removal by providing a sac outlet for my undying creatures, Sun Titan, and Mitotic Slime. Dark Prophecy is a second Fecundity (invaluable). Dance of the Dead is cheap recursion that can be targeted by Sun Titan.
I used to play Genesis, but his ability is so expensive that it rarely proved timely and useful, and my graveyard also tends to get destroyed quite often. Masked Admirers is a poor card, in my opinion. At a minimum, it draws one card in exchange for SEVEN mana, which is far too costly to be competitive. Disciple of Bolas, Momentous Fall, and Greater Good are all pointless in this type of deck, as the vast majority of creatures have low power. Harvester is too expensive for what he does; if I were going to play a creature that did nothing until other creatures died, I'd play Mikaeus, as his synergy with Ghave is far more powerful. Mikaeus proved too weak against removal-heavy decks.
Thanks for the replies; I just wanted to see if there was something I hadn't yet found or considered.
I'd really like to add a creature that I can search up and/or reanimate to draw cards. Stoneforge Mystic is excellent because she can get Skullclamp, but I'd like it if the creature itself would draw the cards in order to synergize with my reanimation spells. I'm already aware of Mentor of the Meek, Regal Force, and Skullmulcher and have ruled them out, but I'm open to arguments for including one of them.
Why is it that a copy of Phantasmal Image will gain its forced sacrifice ability, but a copy of a creature put onto the battlefield by Sneak Attack will not gain the creature's haste ability? The Phantasmal Image causes itself to "gain" the sac ability, and Sneak Attack causes the creature it puts in to "gain" haste.
I'd like to create a deck that I can enjoy using against players who tend to hate combos, oppressive control, and early blowouts. I'm not against attacking people to win, but I don't enjoy Voltron (unless it's interesting like Vish Kal or Prossh), and I tend to enjoy decks that have a lot of synergies. Some examples of my decks include Ghave combo, Rasputin blink, Thrax reanimation, Phenax mill, and Oloro control.
Any ideas on what would be good for me in this situation?
I'm looking to cut five cards from this deck list, but I'm having trouble making a decision. The main cards on the chopping block are the following:
Feel free to share any thoughts on these cuts, other cards that you feel should be cut, or additions that I overlooked. In regard to potential additions, please keep in mind that I prefer to be in control of who is getting milled and when, so items like Mesmeric Orb and Hedron Crab are probably out of the question.
Okay, so let's say you didn't take the deal, I stifled your Hornet Nest trigger, and later I became a threat. Are you somehow in a better position to deal with that threat without the hornets? No, you're not. In fact, even if you had done nothing but used the 13 hornets as defenders, you'd still be in a far better position than not having received the hornets at all. Isn't this just obvious? The deal was "immunity to the hornets I'm giving you," not "immunity to you."
I guess I just think differently than most of you, because if my choices are either "receive 13 1/1 flying deathtouchers that can't attack one person" or "make someone burn an extra card and receive nothing," I'm going to choose the former just about every time, as it clearly seems better for me. Betrayal of this agreement presumably means that the first option (and anything like it) will never be available to me again unless the offerer has an easy answer to it, which seems undesirable for me.
Is there no reason, though? He would have surely lost the game had I not given him the hornets, and he won't receive such opportunities in the future now that he can't be trusted. Is this really the best possible outcome?
A perfect example of this happened not long ago when two players had built up massive boards while the other player and I stagnated. My fellow stagnant player had a Hornet Nest on the field, so I offered him a deal: "I'll cast Blasphemous Act and give you 13 hornets if you grant me immunity to those hornets" (I was at 13 life). He agreed, so I torched the board and gave him a hornet army instead of casting Stifle on the Hornet Nest trigger. Long story short, one of the previously well-off players gets stung to death, the other loses about half of his health, and the incessant goading of the players and those watching us leads the guy I bargained with to murder me with the hornets and win the game.
So, should this sort of play be acceptable? Am I just a fool for not anticipating the backstab? Does it make a difference that the Hornet Nest player is fairly inexperienced and likely would have lost to me without use of the hornets? Frankly, I'm bummed about the situation, because I feel that my playgroup has taken yet another step toward playing a game devoid of politics.
Sacrificing three creatures is part of the COST to flashback Dread Return, not part of its resolution. Dread Return goes on the stack, you pay its cost, Flayer of the Hatebound's undying ability is triggered and goes on the stack above Dread Return.
If he has Mikaeus, the Unhallowed out, he now has to spend double the mana to remove all of the +1/+1 counters from his undying creatures. The same is true for Geralf's Messenger.
I'm actually having difficulty imagining a scenario in which I'd care to have this card out. What purpose does it serve?
Yes, I discovered this site today while searching for an answer to my question. It's quite nice; I'll be using it until I find the information to use the preferred Gatherer.
I used to play Genesis, but his ability is so expensive that it rarely proved timely and useful, and my graveyard also tends to get destroyed quite often. Masked Admirers is a poor card, in my opinion. At a minimum, it draws one card in exchange for SEVEN mana, which is far too costly to be competitive. Disciple of Bolas, Momentous Fall, and Greater Good are all pointless in this type of deck, as the vast majority of creatures have low power. Harvester is too expensive for what he does; if I were going to play a creature that did nothing until other creatures died, I'd play Mikaeus, as his synergy with Ghave is far more powerful. Mikaeus proved too weak against removal-heavy decks.
Thanks for the replies; I just wanted to see if there was something I hadn't yet found or considered.
I'd really like to add a creature that I can search up and/or reanimate to draw cards. Stoneforge Mystic is excellent because she can get Skullclamp, but I'd like it if the creature itself would draw the cards in order to synergize with my reanimation spells. I'm already aware of Mentor of the Meek, Regal Force, and Skullmulcher and have ruled them out, but I'm open to arguments for including one of them.
Here is a link to the deck: http://deckbox.org/sets/347809. I look forward to hearing people's opinions.
Any ideas on what would be good for me in this situation?