A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
 
Exclusive: Sword of Truth and Justice
  • posted a message on K rrick decklist under construction
    I am building a K riik deck, and this is the first sketch, crtics, suiggestions and comments are all wel received

    As usual I want to add several cards but I dont know wich cards to cut, damit always the same


    Creature (23)
    1x Big Game Hunter
    1x Blood Artist
    1x Blood Celebrant
    1xBloodgift Demon
    1x Cavalier of Night
    1x Crypt Ghast
    1x Dread
    1xDread Presence
    1x Erebos, God of the Dead
    1x Falkenrath Noble
    1x Geth, Lord of the Vault
    1x Grave Titan
    1x Gray Merchant of Asphodel
    1x Kokusho, the Evening Star
    1xLord of the Void
    1x Overseer of the Damned
    1x Phage the Untouchable
    1x Pontiff of Blight
    1x Razaketh, the Foulblooded
    1x Sangromancer
    1x Sanitarium Skeleton
    1x Solemn Simulacrum
    1x Vilis, Broker of Blood

    Enchantment (9)

    1x Black Market
    1x Exquisite Blood
    1xFont of Agonies
    1x Grave Betrayal
    1x Greed
    1x Necropotence
    1x Palace Siege
    1x Sanguine Bond
    1x Vampiric Link

    Artifact (18)
    1x Aetherflux Reservoir
    1x Ashnod's Altar
    1x Bolas's Citadel
    1x Bontu's Monument
    1x Chrome Mox
    1x Darksteel Plate
    1xDemon's Horn
    1xExpedition Map
    1x Hedron Archive
    1xLightning Greaves
    1xMana Vault
    1x Mirage Mirror
    1x Sensei's Divining Top
    1x Sol Ring
    1x Swiftfoot Boots
    1xUmezawa's Jitte
    1x Well of Lost Dreams
    1x Whip of Erebos

    Land (31)
    1x Arch of Orazca
    1x Bojuka Bog
    1x Boseiju, Who Shelters All
    1x Cabal Coffers
    1x Cabal Stronghold
    1x Myriad Landscape
    1x Sanctum of Eternity
    22x Swamp
    1x Temple of the False God
    1x Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth

    Sorcery (15)
    1x Army of the Damned
    1x Beacon of Unrest
    1x Beseech the Queen
    1x Damnation
    1x Dark Petition
    1x Exsanguinate
    1x In Garruk's Wake
    1x Mutilate
    1x Night's Whisper
    1x Promise of Power
    1x Razaketh's Rite
    1x Read the Bones
    1x Sign in Blood
    1x Tendrils of Agony
    1x Torment of Hailfire

    Instant (3)
    1x Cabal Ritual
    1x Dark Ritual
    1xHero's Downfall
    Posted in: Multiplayer Commander Decklists
  • posted a message on Need advice about protecting K'rrik, Son of Yawgmoth
    Quote from Dragoon91 »
    If you're looking for specific cards to remove, Hymn to Tourach doesn't seem that useful.
    Imp's Mischief can redirect removal and counter counterspells.
    Undying with a sac outlet can protect your key creatures from targeted exile.
    For spells, Boseiju, Who Shelters All might be useful.


    OMG I dint knew Imps mischieff, there any other similar cards for monoblack?
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Need advice about protecting K'rrik, Son of Yawgmoth
    Hi, I am working on a K'rrik, Son of Yawgmoth deck, I love the mana cheating capabilities that this guy has, so I am thinking in a mono black with goodstuff

    Some of the wincons would be

    Aetherflux reservoir + casting a lot of stuff gaining more life than I loose and shooting my oponents to death, can also be used with bola's citadel

    I always wanted to play phage the untouchable and this seems to be the perfect deck for her, I can imagine hard casting her early and equipping some boots for an early kill

    Other wincons could be some deamon fatties like Razaketh, the Foulblooded and other value fatties or why not Army of the Damned, 13 zombies for 5 mana is a cool thing

    Overall I have in my mind a good % of the deck, I am missing ideas about how to protect my plays against counter/removal

    I will be spending a lot of life advancing my game plan and while I will also have some life gain to support my strategy , I may be in a weak position if some pieces are counter/removed after spending half my life, so because the only hardcounter in mono black that I know (withering boon) is not what I really want, I need some ways to disrupt my opponents hands in order to remove the counters and removal from their hands, So I will be running Duress and Hymn to Tourach kind of cards.

    But I was thinking adding some more hand disruption but for all my opponents, I am looking for asymmetrical effects.

    Any ideas/suggestions?
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on What are fun proactive decks
    Quote from Dunharrow »
    Quote from kraus911 »
    Yennett, Cryptic Sovereign

    She's basically a fixed Narset, letting you cast some big spells for free but not 4 a turn that turn into multiple turns. Mystical Tutor into Approach of the Second Sun is a thing, but I took that out after it won the first game. You can put cards in to make it more consistent, to manipulate your topdeck, and it's kind of silly not to put Top in the deck, but I also just like spinning the wheel because even if I don't get a free Mind's Dilation or eldrazi, I still get to draw a card. You don't even need to fill the deck with a huge density of fat cmc odd spells, you can have a fairly slim esper deck that sometimes throws out a fatty for free.

    I like the card, but it seems kinda voltron-y, in that I need to protect my general and if I can swing enough times I should win the game. I also think that people will be terrified about this and do everything they can to stop it from attacking.
    After all, it could be a Ponder and it could be Void Winnower that you reveal. I am not sure if this is different enough from Narset to not get the same kind of hate.


    Yennet is not a voltron deck, and is really fun to play, proactive and reuires a lot of thinking (link in my sig for a decklist)

    Another great proactive deck is the Markov low mana curve agro deck (link also in my sig)
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Need help cutting cards for Yennet, Criptic sovereign
    OK, this is my list right now, I dont know if 12 are not too many rocks

    1x Yennett, Cryptic Sovereign *CMDR*


    #Lands
    6x Island
    4x Plains
    3x Swamp
    1x Sea of clouds
    1x High market
    1x Drowned catacomb
    1x Watery grave
    1x Hall of the bandit lord
    1x Temple of deceit
    1x Fetid pools
    1x Temple of enlightenment
    1x Halimar depths
    1x Homeward path
    1x Concealed courtyard
    1xGodless shrine
    1x Arcane sanctum
    1x Temple of silence
    1x Hallowed fountain
    1x Polluted delta
    1x Flood plain
    1x Marsh Flats
    1x Irrigated Farmland
    1x Darkslick shores
    1x Sunken hollow
    1x Detection tower

    #Mana rocks
    1x Orzhov signet
    1xAzorius signet
    1x Dimir signet
    1x Sol ring
    1x Mind stone
    1x Talisman of dominance
    1x Talisman of progress
    1x Commander's sphere
    1x Chromatic lantern
    1x Worn powerstone
    1x Solemn simulacrum
    1x Gilded lotus

    #Equipment
    1x Whispersilk cloak
    1x Swiftfoot boots
    1x Lightning greaves

    #Top manipulation
    1x Index
    1x Sensei's divining top
    1xSoothsaying
    1x Scroll rack
    1x Brainstorm
    1x Aminatou, the fateshifter
    1x Mystic speculation
    1x Prognostic sphinx
    1x dream cache
    1x Thassa, god of the sea


    #Card draw
    1x Rhystic study
    1x Phyrexian arena
    1x Future sight

    #Spot removal
    1x Anguished unmaking
    1x Path to exile
    1x Swords to plowshares

    #Extra turns
    1x Temporal mastery
    1x Time warp
    1x Temporal trespass
    1x Nexus of fate

    #Counters
    1x Swan song
    1x Negate
    1x Dovin's veto
    1x Counterspell
    1x disallow


    #Value stuff
    1x Mirage mirror
    1x Crucible of world
    1x Trinket mage
    1x Mystical tutor
    1x Temporal cascade

    #Mass Removal
    1x Plague wind
    1x Fumigate
    1x Merciless eviction
    1x Rout
    1x Cyclonic rift
    1x In garruk's wake
    1x Terminus
    1x Aetherize
    1x Evacuation


    #Wincons
    1x Bane of bala ged
    1x Elesh Norn, grand cenobite
    1x Teysa, envoy of ghosts
    1x Artisan of kozilek
    1x Sheoldred, Whispering One
    1x Rune scarred demon
    1x Ulamog, the infinite gyre
    1x void winnower
    1x Entreat the angels
    1x Approach of the second sun
    Posted in: Multiplayer Commander Decklists
  • posted a message on How does Mirror entity + shared animosity works?
    Imagine I have 2 vampires and Mirror entity and Shared animosity in play, so if I attack i get all my creatures to have +242+0 ?

    I have it right?
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Talk - It is conceading fair play to you?
    Quote from DirkGently »
    Quote from mASTERsELF »
    [quote from="DirkGently »" url="/forums/the-game/commander-edh/808982-talk-it-is-conceading-fair-play-to-you?comment=77"]So people will be tactical scooping as it gives them a slight advantage and being the "best at magic means leveraging EVERY tool", but a meta with tactical scooping will not really encourage people to play combos that don't care if someone tactically scoops even if it gives them an advantage?


    I love infinite combos and competitive extra turns decks, so I am actually ok with tactical scooping if it is clear beforehand as I can just play my favourite type of decks. I guess my main issue with tactical scooping is people don't normally declare whether that is allowed or not when playing with new people (you could certainly argue they should and I'd agree, but would you agree it isn't common to do so?). Couple this with the fact I think it is fair to say a majority do not support tactical scooping and this generates king making games and animosity between players when someone out of the blue threatens tactical scooping when it isn't expected. It almost feels like the rules of the game are changing in that instance and nullifies any 'win' (even though I agree with others that a win is a win). What are you thoughts on that?

    Additional thoughts:

    When playing competitively I normally automatically assume the 'worst' and that someone will play as cutthroat as possible. I've been in competitive and less competitive games before and sometimes I point out tactical scooping potentials in game, but so far none of the 50+ people I've ever played commander with came out in favour of tactical scooping to deny combat triggers (one other person and myself would be ok with it if it was clear beforehand, but we were both the most cutthroat players in any of the groups I've played in).

    I understand the purpose of allowing tactical scooping. That being that players own their cards and need to be able to take them and leave whenever they want, but that's why it seems tactical scooping is an accident of the rules. Perhaps a slightly messier rule that could support the majority who are against tactical scooping could be that scooping at anytime is allowed, but if someone insta-scoops players are allowed to move back a phase of the game (or move back to declare attackers step if insta-scooping occurs at any point during combat). It does seem allowing tactical scooping was the easiest way to have the rules though when making rules for the majority as a whole.
    deckbuilding and gameplay are two different beasts. "Build casually, play competitively" as the edh mantra goes. Personally, I strive for the best play I can reasonably achieve. I don't usually play powerful decks, though.

    Also "should" and "will" are different things too. People should be non-interactive combo decks if they want to maximize wins, speed scooping or no, but they generally don't (for which I'm grateful). And I don't think speed scooping really has enough impact to push that needle very far.

    I generally agree with the rest of what you've said. I don't think the origin of the rules being simplicity/convenience is good reason not to "exploit" them when trying to play well, though - to go back to the astral slide example, it seems most likely to me that the whole "object forgets its prior state when it changes zones" rule was invented for simplicity's sake, so you don't have to track a bunch of stuff in other zones. Which then resulted in the somewhat strange "exploit" around morph. But hey, if those are the rules, then it's fair game. If you don't like those rules being exploited, then bust out the house rules.
    </blockquote>

    The morph scenario is an INGAME move, the "dirty scoop" (I refuse to called it tactical) is not an ingame move, is cheap, low and spitefull

    Or maybe I am wrong and I can use "tactical threteaning" in my next games, so the next time someone atacks me, I will just blink my eyes to the atacker and say "are you sure" and then I will flex my arms towards him closing my fist, and because I am a 104kg bodybuilder maybe they will not atack me, so cool, or because I am the one hosting the games I will say "if you attack em tehn I wont invite you anymore to this playgroup", both strategies are not ingame but is good politics right?


    By the way, This is a good video about this topic, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsAxHq5IM5M
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Talk - It is conceading fair play to you?
    Quote from DirkGently »
    [quote from="Alexev »" url="/forums/the-game/commander-edh/808982-talk-it-is-conceading-fair-play-to-you?comment=68"]

    Must be fun to be your own rules manager, deciding what is, and what isn't, the "intended" functionality of the rules. And making people "pay" for their transgressions. o_O


    I understand why you don't see the dirty move a scoop is in the situations we are mentioning, its ok.

    But by your own logic, If you are free to screw our games, then I am free to just not play with you anymore or even better, every time I play with you again then I will get my Markov battle cruiser and delete you by turn 3 every single time to the point you will concede as you want at instant speed while I am shuffling or you will behave like a player who cares about everyone's game, your choice everytime
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Talk - It is conceading fair play to you?
    Quote from JqlGirl »
    My two cents: Coming from a judge/tournament Magic background, it goes against most of my instincts to insist on anything other than being able to concede at any time for any reason. I understand that there are strategic and political implications to concession in multiplayer games, but those are things that the playgroup can work out among themselves.


    In a 1v1 tournament or not environment, conceding at instant speed does not affect anyone else, you concede, I win, so in a tournament I wont care if you concede against me at any speed, If I am attacking you with a 202/20 lifelik and you concede before damage I wont have the life gain, but I will won anyway so, who cares?

    But in EDH, the same situation is different, because if you concede before damage you are denying me the life gain and I am still have to play against the other two in the table, so you are messing my game by not playing and I think this is a wrong use of the rules, an exploit to the rules.

    In any case, If I see a player doing this, first I will try to convince him to behave if it works, great, if don't, then that is the last time I play with that guy if he is a PUG and if he is a friend, he will pay for that decision
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Talk - It is conceading fair play to you?
    Quote from illakunsaa »
    I think I got it.

    You wanna use feelings (your feelings to be precise) to argue against facts and logic. You also want to use peer pressure to bully people into doing what you want and finally you want to claim moral high ground.



    Who is this answer for?
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Talk - It is conceading fair play to you?
    Quote from DirkGently »
    Quote from RxPhantom »
    You can dress it up by calling it "tactical," but scooping to deny value is scummy, and no amount of flowery language will ever convince me that it's a noble act. If a player casts a game-winning Insurrection and you can't stop it in-game, then that player earned the win. Shuffle up and start a new game. Like adults.
    -If you've agreed that speed-scooping is off-limits, then yes, they earned the win. But if it's not, then they didn't. The funny thing about "earned" wins is that, if they're actually earned...they're just wins.

    In that particular case, were I the player with a big, insurrection-able board, then I'd try to make a deal with the insurrection player not to eliminate me in exchange for not ruining their insurrection by scooping. And if I were the insurrection player, I'd be quick to offer/accept such a deal, since I could still presumably put myself in a very good position afterwards. Maybe the insurrection-able player would also have to agree not to attack on the next turn...you get the idea. It's all just more levels of politics.

    If you don't like those levels, then house rule it.
    I think threads like this are great arguments for building less interactive decks. Who wants a big Commander-like win by stealing all the creatures on the board and turning them back on their owners when they'll just invalidate you anyway. Build early turn combo decks so that tactical scoopers can only speed up your inevitability. I suppose I'm mostly just amazed that this topic even has two sides.
    People way overrate the risk of speed-scooping. Not only do very few people do it, but most strats aren't particularly affected by it. Insurrection, perhaps, although as mentioned above it can usually be politicked through if everyone is playing logically. Theft decks in general (such as Geth, which I've played a fair amount of) are pretty vulnerable to people leaving the game, whether from being eliminated, scooping out of spite, or just needing to catch the bus. It's an important part of the strat to be able to keep your hosts alive while you feed from them - if you aren't putting pressure on them until you've eliminated the other players, they're less likely to want to scoop, or be eliminated by the other players.

    But these are corner cases, most decks are barely affected by speed-scooping, if at all. And combo is much stronger than what most people are doing, with or without speed-scooping on the table. Saying that people will play fast combo if speed-scooping is allowed is ridiculous - if people wanted to maximize wins during deck construction they'd all be playing fast combo decks regardless. But if they did have to worry about speed-scooping, it might make them think a little harder about politics.

    The thing that annoys me most about this topic really, though, is how much people want to make it a MORAL issue. "speed-scoopers are babies, grow up, play like an ADULT, he EARNED that win with the SWEAT OF HIS 5RRR BROW". Do I think speed-scooping is a little lame, and a lot of people do it pointlessly out of spite? Sure, but it's a legal move, and used correctly it can actually be the CORRECT move. And I think anyone who plays magic, even if they don't necessarily like it, has to give a certain amount of respect to the correct play, and not try to turn a move in a game into a reflection of someone's character.

    And seriously, I hate this "earned win" thing. If it was earned, it would be a win. You show me where in the comp rules it says anything about earning a win and I'll eat my tabernacle (ok, not really, but also I just ctrl+Fed the comp rules for "earn", just in case :p )


    Ok, I will try to explain myself better this time (my natal tongue is not English as you may guess due my absolute failure to explain me so far)

    Scenario #1

    Player 1 plays Insurrection and takes all creatures, you have a huge board but 2 life, before damage you tap a mountain and lightning bolt yourself to deny the win to player 1.

    This scenario is fine, is good and fair game, you used a in game play to deny your opponent the victory, it very well could be a teferi's protection, a counterspell or even a fog

    Scenario #2
    Player 1 plays Insurrection and takes all creatures, you have a huge board but 2 life, before damage you concede denying the victory because your creatures are not longer in the game

    This is wrong, because you are using a non-game play, conceding is not a game move and in multiplayer it should not be allowed

    In a 1v1 scenario, you can concede because the only player affected is you, you are not changing the outcome of the game by conceding in a 1v1 situation. so if you get salted because you are getting bet up in a 1v1 then conceding or not have zero impact in the result

    But when you concede in a multiplayer game, then you are affecting other players and you are affecting the game by NOT PLAYING instead of affecting the game playing.

    So conceding in the Insurrection situation scenario is cheap, low, wrong, childish, against the very basics concepts of fair play and sportsmanship.

    If you can win by playing then great, if you can deny other peoples win while playing GREAT, but using 'tactical scoop' , as you like to call this dirty action (because it is an action just as flipping the table , not a play) only shows salt, trolling I have seen only in the very low skilled players and/or immature ones (no offense for anyone, it is just anecdotal evidence)



    This answers goes also to Fenrir
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Talk - It is conceading fair play to you?
    Quote from Fenrir Rex »
    Quote from Alexev »
    Quote from Fenrir Rex »
    I believe whatever makes the game enjoyable for the greatest number of people is the correct play.

    The biggest example to this kind of issue has come up with Insurrection. My big, dumb battlecruiser deck has the best, spookiest board, and can kill the table if blockers are cleared with the mass mind control.

    I respond by conceding. One player is salty, I’ve definitely lost (though helped play kingmaker), while two more players are still in the game- net political positive for the next game, and the current game continues with 2/3rd content.

    Usually, the insurrection player is then allowed the classic take backsies and can use their turn and mana differently, essentially killing target player for nothing! Lots of ways around it without taking away the agency of concession at whatever speed you want.


    And this kind of behavior is why conceding at instant speed should not be allowed, you are scooping to deny their legitimate wincon, is insurrection any worst than Triumph of the horde or similars.

    Again, if you do that, if you concede to an insurrection you lack sportsmanship to say the least, and why those people will want to play with you again?


    I mean, you can read, the answer to your question is in what you quoted: politics. My playgroups love me because I focus entirely on what provides the most enjoyable experience for the greatest number of players- full stop. If that means conceding so my overextending into an Insurrection doesn't end the game for half the table, it's entirely welcomed.

    The problem with your arguments, concepts of sportsmanship itself aside, is that you're coming at it exclusively from the angle of the salty player. You aren't the only player in the game, and you definitely aren't the only voice or opinion that matters at any table. The delineation between "spite-scoop" and "tactical scoop" is telling- you're spitting one player, but being tactical to the benefit of the rest; it's all in the perspective. If the table at large disagrees with the scoop, I.E. the majority isn't happy, then I wouldn't do it. But, in every game where I've offered up my head on the block so the game can continue (which, mind you, isn't a huge sample size, but still relevant), the majority loved it and my reputation for kingly politicking persists.

    Triumph of the Hordes is a poor example, if only because you'll find that poison is a contested win condition for roughly half the people I play with. To the point, however, any win condition that relies on your opponents is one that has to be weighed- while the haymakers of Insurrection, Bribery, and friends are the most relevant, there are countless other ways that you can get screwed over by relying on theft effects- whether a player is knocked out or concedes. I'm in the camp that a win-condition that relies on your opponents is not, in fact, "legitimate," but more because of the feels-bad nature of it, rather than any kind of fear of spite plays (oh curse my bleeding "fun first" philosophy).


    What I mean is, if you want to counterspell insurrection then play some Counterspell or Homeward path, or even a fog can screw that move by actually playing magic but you are using a concesion just to screw a player by NOT PLAYING, because if you counter the spell then you are playing magic, ok, if you are at 1 life and tap a painland to deny the insureccion is also OK you are actually playing magic and denying the efcect, but "quit playing" to deny an effect is not playing, so I think is cheap, wrong and unaceptable

    But if your playgroup thinks you are a hero for that and they cheer you that kind of playstyle is OK, every playgroup has their own rules spoken or not
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Talk - It is conceading fair play to you?
    Quote from Fenrir Rex »
    I believe whatever makes the game enjoyable for the greatest number of people is the correct play.

    The biggest example to this kind of issue has come up with Insurrection. My big, dumb battlecruiser deck has the best, spookiest board, and can kill the table if blockers are cleared with the mass mind control.

    I respond by conceding. One player is salty, I’ve definitely lost (though helped play kingmaker), while two more players are still in the game- net political positive for the next game, and the current game continues with 2/3rd content.

    Usually, the insurrection player is then allowed the classic take backsies and can use their turn and mana differently, essentially killing target player for nothing! Lots of ways around it without taking away the agency of concession at whatever speed you want.


    And this kind of behavior is why conceding at instant speed should not be allowed, you are scooping to deny their legitimate wincon, is insurrection any worst than Triumph of the horde or similars.

    Again, if you do that, if you concede to an insurrection you lack sportsmanship to say the least, and why those people will want to play with you again?
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Talk - It is conceading fair play to you?
    Quote from DirkGently »

    In both cases the strategic value of the threat is that they might decide not to do the thing you don't want them to do. If they need the lifelink or they'll die on the crack back, for example, they could very well attack elsewhere, or at least non-lethally, to ensure the life gain.

    There's no strategic value in actually scooping, except to ensure people take you seriously in the future. And if they don't change course, then ideally you've lost nothing since you were dead anyway (or basically so, although people frequently suck at knowing when that is).

    Scooping without threatening to is pointless since there's no opportunity for them to change course.

    Threatening to scoop to trivial stuff is dumb since you have so much to lose if they don't change course.

    .


    I have to disagree, there is not a strategic value of that threat, because if you are at 6 life and I am atacking with a 6/6 lifelinker and you threat to concede to deny me the life gain, then one or more of this things will happend.

    1. I will attack you no matter what, you will die and if you concede I will add up those 6 life anyway
    2. I will never ever play again with you because you are just saying 'if things are nor my way, I am out' so for me, be out forever.

    you say that 'crying' and threatening to concede is a strategy? really??? for me is the same strategic value my kids have when they cry and threat for a toy, I will denied them always and will be punished for that behavior.

    After reading your primer I thought better of you, how disappointing
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Talk - It is conceading fair play to you?
    Quote from illakunsaa »


    You are advocating here that you actually cheat. I think "actually cheating" -sportmanship is little worse than "playing the game according to the rules" -sportmanship.

    People who cheat don't deserve to play this game.


    Sorry my natal tongue is not english and I didn't understood exactly what you are saying, can you rephrase this sentence?

    I said, that if you attack me with a 6/6 lifelinker and I concede before damage just to prevent you from gaining life, it is bordeline cheating and in my playgroup even this is not allowed, is poor sportmanship, I have never sufer that kind of bad behavior even in a PUG game on my LGS but I can assure you that if I am ever seated with a player that actually do this kind of things, that would be the last time I play in the same table
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.