I'm happy to see the damn thing go. I think they're stupid, and the only fun I ever had with them was taking them out of the opponent's deck with extirpate. Counterspell should not be a permanent. Yes, Legacy is competitive, but it's a game, and it's supposed to be fun. Watching some kid fiddle with his top and go 'ummmm' for 10 minutes every time you try to play a card is not fun. Only being able to play lands is not fun. One time I had nothing but an inkmoth nexus, a pendelhaven, and a wasteland and I won the game against a top/counterbalance lock. It felt really good. Miracles had gotten to be almost 15% of the meta. Everybody hates Miracles, even people who play Miracles. It's WoTC's job to keep the game fresh and challenging, and they're doing a good job for a change. Let's see if they can fix D&T next.
I was hellbent on trying to play Legacy without duals but eventually I broke down and got a Bayou. I guess I kind of resented that people treat them like status symbols, that how 'good' of a legacy player you are has something to do with how many duals are in your deck. I don't regret buying it, it just made my BG decks a lot faster. I've won matches without duals playing Mono B Pox and Mono G Infect, but not very many. If you're playing two or more colors the only real reason to avoid them is the price, but I'd tell anybody to get fetchlands first. If you're playing a fast deck I don't think 2 life is a very steep price to pay to be able to use a shockland on the turn you play it, but every little bit does help. I don't think it's an absolute rule that you need them to win at legacy, and it's possible have a well-tuned mana base without them.
I went to a legacy even and used a deck from a friend.. i went 4-1 went finals and lost to miracles due to no exp. Against it. His deck wich i used was rg lands deck. Is it a strong deck in a large tourny? I already traded my ur delver with fetch duals for a tabernacle in very good shape no nics etc.. if rg lands isnt good enough how about loam pox?
If you want my opinion, don't worry about whether other people think your deck is 'good enough.' Spending money doesn't necessarily make you a better MTG player or deckbuilder. Your deck is good enough if it wins. Both Lands and BG Pox will win at the top levels of competition, and my guess is that neither of them are 'fad' decks. If you can afford to do either of them- and do them well- I'd just play the deck that you're most excited about playing and matches what you're good at and like to do in gameplay. I'm a fan of Pox, personally. If I was spending that much money on a deck, and was that serious about playing competitively, I'd try to pick one that has a reputation as being more complicated and difficult to pilot, one that you'll keep getting better at playing with for a while. If you really can't make up your mind you could try to brew some sort of hybrid deck. You probably wouldn't win as often as with 'pure' loam pox or 'pure' lands, but I think playing with a deck that feels like 'yours' is more fun. The more fun you're having, and the more you like your deck, the better you'll probably play it. It also depends on the meta you play in. If everyone at your card shop plays Blood Moon, Lands is probably a bad choice. The further your deck is from the mainstream, the less prepared people will be to go against you.
Hey, I've always been more of a collector than a player but I'd like to try my hand at Legacy. I've been trying to get good staples in black and green and was wondering if anyone had advice or ideas about which ways to expand my collection. The cards I have that may or may not be Legacy-worthy:
I don't have much experience with organized play. I think if I got Lilianas at this point I could make an ok Pox deck for Legacy. If I got Verdant Catacombs I think I could make an ok B/G Infect deck for Modern, and I'm weak in fetchlands anyway. You people seem to know what you're doing. Any suggestions? Hope I didn't take up too much space on your board.
Lengthy card list spoiler tagged to avoid cluttering up the thread. No warning issued.
- Teia
I recently got back into MTG after playing/collecting some in the 90s. Like a lot of newer players I probably think I know more than I do, so please correct me if I’m spreading bad information. But I think my opinion is valid.
Maybe I’ve just got my nostalgia blinders on, but there’s something about the older cards I connect with that isn’t there in MTG anymore. The flavor and art of the older cards was rooted in mythology, legends, fairy tales, literature, archetypes, and folklore in a way that made it much more relevant and relatable to me. Cards like Book of Raas, Sylvan Library, or Dark Sphere made me feel like I was playing with the same sources of power that ‘real’ wizards did, and they made me feel more invested in whether I won or lost. Now it just seems like an afterthought, something to fill the space on the cards other than rules text. Cards like Orcish Librarian or Urza’s Sunglasses made me smile, and cards like Amnesia and Cosmic Horror shocked and frightened me like a good horror movie. MTG art just doesn't stir anything in me anymore.
The art and flavor of the newer cards- by which I mean maybe since the Urza Block- doesn’t really inspire me to play MTG. The art all has this very glossy, cookie-cutter, computer-generated look to it. The flavor quotes all just sound like soundbites from a C-rate video game. There are newer cards that I think have cool art, like Eon Hub or Crucible of Worlds, but people like Anson Maddocks (Maze of Ith), Drew Tucker (Dust to Dust), and Tony Diterlizzi (Urborg Mindsucker), who can stand as artists in their own right, just don’t seem to do magic cards anymore. The flavor text from Pendelhaven is from a Henry Wadsworth Longfellow poem. Imagine that these days.
Good artists, regardless of what they’re drawing or painting, know how to lead a viewer’s eye around a piece of art and reward observant viewers with details that tell a story or say something worthwhile. Most MTG players would probably gloss over the art on a card like Flood from the Dark. But if you look closely, you can see an animal stranded in the tree, that the rooftop belongs to a church, and the dejected looking figure huddled on top of it. It’s a picture that’s about how man’s faith and institutions like religion won’t protect him from the cruel indifference of nature. The art on MTG cards isn’t really about anything anymore, other than itself. It doesn’t seem to assume anyone will give it more than a cursory glance.
A lot of people accuse the art and flavor of MTG in the 90’s as being ‘bleak,’ compared to the more brightly colored and inoffensive art that comes out now. It seems like WOTC has just become afraid of offending or disturbing anymore, making anyone think too much, or being politically incorrect around themes like religion and the occult. WOTC just doesn’t seem to want to take artistic risks with their big cash cow anymore.
The mechanics of MTG have certainly improved since I collected cards as a kid, which is great. It’s also great that the price of cards has gone down to the point where it’s a competition about who has the sharpest mind, not the fattest wallet. But I think it’s really lost touch with creating compelling settings or stories. If I just wanted to play a well-balanced or designed game, I’d play chess or go. That’s not what makes MTG unique to me.
I bought three Unlimited copies of Berserk for my Stompy deck recently. It didn’t really bother me to pay that much money because it felt like I was buying a work of art, a ‘real’ magic spell, a kind of artifact. But I go to pay $40 for an Inkmoth Nexus, or $80 for a Verdant Catacombs, with the ugly, cluttered-looking new borders, and it feels like I’m just buying a piece of paper that would have no value to anyone except MTG geeks. I think that has a lot to do with why MTG is losing its relevance to casual, and newer, players, and if WOTC was willing to bring in artists who did something new, memorable, and different, the ‘outside world’ would have much more of an interest in the game.
If you want my opinion, don't worry about whether other people think your deck is 'good enough.' Spending money doesn't necessarily make you a better MTG player or deckbuilder. Your deck is good enough if it wins. Both Lands and BG Pox will win at the top levels of competition, and my guess is that neither of them are 'fad' decks. If you can afford to do either of them- and do them well- I'd just play the deck that you're most excited about playing and matches what you're good at and like to do in gameplay. I'm a fan of Pox, personally. If I was spending that much money on a deck, and was that serious about playing competitively, I'd try to pick one that has a reputation as being more complicated and difficult to pilot, one that you'll keep getting better at playing with for a while. If you really can't make up your mind you could try to brew some sort of hybrid deck. You probably wouldn't win as often as with 'pure' loam pox or 'pure' lands, but I think playing with a deck that feels like 'yours' is more fun. The more fun you're having, and the more you like your deck, the better you'll probably play it. It also depends on the meta you play in. If everyone at your card shop plays Blood Moon, Lands is probably a bad choice. The further your deck is from the mainstream, the less prepared people will be to go against you.
That's garbage. Plenty of people win in Legacy without duals.
https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/445257#online
http://www.starcitygames.com/events/coverage/deck_tech_mono_g_infect_with_c.html
http://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=13723&d=280873&f=LE
Black:
4x Hypnotic Specter
4x Nyxathid
4x Tombstalker
2x Nether Spirit
4x Will o' the Wisp
3x Nantuko Shade
4x Vampire Nighthawk
2x Phyrexian Obliterator
1x Skitheryx
4x Plague Stinger
3x Phyrexian Crusader
4x Dark Ritual
1x Slaughter Pact
4x Doom Blade
4x Snuff Out
4x Go for the Throat
2x Hero's Downfall
4x Extirpate
3x Darkness
4x Hymn to Tourach
4x Inquisition of Koziliek
4x Duress
4x Skeletal Scrying
4x Drain Life
4x Funeral Charm
2x Spoils of the Vault
2x Beseech the Queen
4x Sinkhole
2x Toxic Deluge
4x Ashes to Ashes
2x Mind Shatter
4x Wrench Mind
4x Sign in Blood
4x Innocent Blood
2x Pox
4x Smallpox
4x Unearth
4x Raven's Crime
1x Greed
2x Phyrexian Arena
4x Engineered Plague
4x Vampiric Link
4x Liliana's Caress
4x Waste Not
2x Underworld Dreams
4x Blight
Green:
2x Viridian Corrupter
2x Wall of Roots
4x Glistener Elf
4x Xantid Swarm
4x Become Immense
4x Predator's Strike
4x Invigorate
4x Groundswell
3x Berserk
4x Nature's Claim
4x Crop Rotation
1x Tranquility
2x Regrowth
2x Carrion Call
4x Mutagenic Growth
4x Vines of Vastwood
4x Rancor
4x Concordant Crossroads
4x Bequeathal
4x Wild Growth
4x Instill Energy
4x Birds of Paradise
3x Sylvan Library
4x Multani's Presence
4x Gaea's Touch
4x Wild Defiance
2x City of Solitude
Black/Green:
4x Abrupt Decay
3x Pernicious Deed
1x Squandered Resources
Artifacts:
2x Chalice of the Void
4x The Rack
2x Ensnaring Bridge
2x Lightning Greaves
4x Nevinyrral's Disk
4x Geth's Grimoire
2x Helm of Awakening
2x Howling Mine
2x Anvil of Bogardan
4x Ichorclaw Myr
1x Null Rod
4x Cursed Scroll
4x Lotus Petal
4x Ratchet Bomb
4x Necrogren Spellbomb
4x Pithing Needle
4x Tormod's Crypt
Lands:
4x Overgrown Tomb
4x Bojuka Bog
2x Pendelhaven
4x Inkmoth Nexus
2x Lake of the Dead
2x Wasteland
4x Mishra's Factory
3x Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth
2x Maze of Ith
2x Twilight Mire
I don't have much experience with organized play. I think if I got Lilianas at this point I could make an ok Pox deck for Legacy. If I got Verdant Catacombs I think I could make an ok B/G Infect deck for Modern, and I'm weak in fetchlands anyway. You people seem to know what you're doing. Any suggestions? Hope I didn't take up too much space on your board.
Lengthy card list spoiler tagged to avoid cluttering up the thread. No warning issued.
- Teia
Maybe I’ve just got my nostalgia blinders on, but there’s something about the older cards I connect with that isn’t there in MTG anymore. The flavor and art of the older cards was rooted in mythology, legends, fairy tales, literature, archetypes, and folklore in a way that made it much more relevant and relatable to me. Cards like Book of Raas, Sylvan Library, or Dark Sphere made me feel like I was playing with the same sources of power that ‘real’ wizards did, and they made me feel more invested in whether I won or lost. Now it just seems like an afterthought, something to fill the space on the cards other than rules text. Cards like Orcish Librarian or Urza’s Sunglasses made me smile, and cards like Amnesia and Cosmic Horror shocked and frightened me like a good horror movie. MTG art just doesn't stir anything in me anymore.
The art and flavor of the newer cards- by which I mean maybe since the Urza Block- doesn’t really inspire me to play MTG. The art all has this very glossy, cookie-cutter, computer-generated look to it. The flavor quotes all just sound like soundbites from a C-rate video game. There are newer cards that I think have cool art, like Eon Hub or Crucible of Worlds, but people like Anson Maddocks (Maze of Ith), Drew Tucker (Dust to Dust), and Tony Diterlizzi (Urborg Mindsucker), who can stand as artists in their own right, just don’t seem to do magic cards anymore. The flavor text from Pendelhaven is from a Henry Wadsworth Longfellow poem. Imagine that these days.
Good artists, regardless of what they’re drawing or painting, know how to lead a viewer’s eye around a piece of art and reward observant viewers with details that tell a story or say something worthwhile. Most MTG players would probably gloss over the art on a card like Flood from the Dark. But if you look closely, you can see an animal stranded in the tree, that the rooftop belongs to a church, and the dejected looking figure huddled on top of it. It’s a picture that’s about how man’s faith and institutions like religion won’t protect him from the cruel indifference of nature. The art on MTG cards isn’t really about anything anymore, other than itself. It doesn’t seem to assume anyone will give it more than a cursory glance.
A lot of people accuse the art and flavor of MTG in the 90’s as being ‘bleak,’ compared to the more brightly colored and inoffensive art that comes out now. It seems like WOTC has just become afraid of offending or disturbing anymore, making anyone think too much, or being politically incorrect around themes like religion and the occult. WOTC just doesn’t seem to want to take artistic risks with their big cash cow anymore.
The mechanics of MTG have certainly improved since I collected cards as a kid, which is great. It’s also great that the price of cards has gone down to the point where it’s a competition about who has the sharpest mind, not the fattest wallet. But I think it’s really lost touch with creating compelling settings or stories. If I just wanted to play a well-balanced or designed game, I’d play chess or go. That’s not what makes MTG unique to me.
I bought three Unlimited copies of Berserk for my Stompy deck recently. It didn’t really bother me to pay that much money because it felt like I was buying a work of art, a ‘real’ magic spell, a kind of artifact. But I go to pay $40 for an Inkmoth Nexus, or $80 for a Verdant Catacombs, with the ugly, cluttered-looking new borders, and it feels like I’m just buying a piece of paper that would have no value to anyone except MTG geeks. I think that has a lot to do with why MTG is losing its relevance to casual, and newer, players, and if WOTC was willing to bring in artists who did something new, memorable, and different, the ‘outside world’ would have much more of an interest in the game.