Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord + Phyrexian Devourer = Each opponent loses life equal to the total CMC of your deck. Technically non-infinite but I think we can call it an infinite combo. In a similar vein, Jarad + Lord of Extinction. Maybe throw those under commander-specific.
AFAIK Jarad and Devourer wouldn't work because Devourer would get too big too fast.
</blockquote>
Nope. You can respond to the "sacrifice Devourer trigger" by continuing to make it bigger and then fling. I play this combo all the time.
Living Death and Yawgmoth's Will are mostly cut for speed. They're great effects but I need the slots for more manadorks. With the inclusion of more manadorks, Diabolic Intent will be added. Updates pending
I recently posted an article on 5colorcombo.com about the ineffectiveness of points systems. I'm curious what the people in this thread think about the content.
You kind of ignored The Joker. He's correct - you need to have Buried Alive -> infinite mana in there. Niv-Mizzet is much better than Shivan Hellkite or Scholar of Athreos. Your commander is an infinite-mana outlet - or, at least, can turn itself into one. If you're worried about opponents you can't deal damage to or target, you can play both Niv-Mizzet and Scholar, but allowing for Buried Alive + Reanimate to be a win that doesn't care about spot removal is really, really powerful. Survival of the Fittest turns into a one-card combo too.
Hey guys, been awhile since I posted here. Between managing a tournament on /r/ and a new position on 5colorcombo.com writing articles, I've been pretty busy. Which is what I'm here to talk to you guys about actually - it may come to pass (fingers crossed) that I start making video content for them using MTGO. Awhile ago I tried with Cockatrice but it was just too bad. Obviously this would mainly be playthroughs of Jarad. I'm here to ask you guys if you're interested and what kind of information you would want?
Good to see you join us again Hellnoire. Null Rod seems real terrible, a lot of people tell me to play it though. Should I try it?
Anyway, there are some changes I want to be making to the deck. Most of this is still long-term reaction to the mulligan change. I want to add in more low-cost ramp, likely manadorks, though definitely add Carpet of Flowers back in too. (I know I've been off and on with this - it's a hard choice!) I want to play one more land. I want to decrease the amount of spot removal I run, likely cutting Abrupt Decay and Slaughter Pact. I want to cut some of the mana-innefficient cards - Lili Vess is first on that list. Other possible cuts here are Living Death and Yawgmoth's Will. I want to have a target for Reanimate more often, so I think I'm going to add a few things. I want to test Corpse Connoisseur. I also want to test Morality Shift since it could just be an instant-win with Dread Return in the 'yard (previously the library). I also want to test Mesmeric Orb + Basalt Monolith combo - either card is decent (read: not terrible) on its own and being able to mill myself any amount I want is really powerful, possibly game-winning even. I also want to test draw-graveyard spells like Mulch, Grisly Salvage, etc. All of this will be reflected in the next update.
Following what gma said, I also think a working definition of what's a "competitive" deck would be helpful. And I would define it like this. Any deck that is NOT strictly inferior across all matchups and metas under game-theory optimal play to another deck is a competitive deck.
That definition might sound strict, but I think it's actually pretty broad.
An aggro deck might fit the definition, because maybe it's something like Surrak and the only answers opponents run are counters. Not an actual situation, but it's not a strictly inferior deck.
On the other hand, homarid tribal can be shown to have a strictly inferior matchup against all known decks than some other deck. Maybe some of these matchups are even, but if it does as well against some things but worse than an alternative against others, then that's a non-competitive deck.
This is all in the player's best judgment, of course. They might be mistaken about matchup percentages across the board. They'll also probably be unaware of all possibke alternatives, or even entire strategies. But anyone who is not deliberately playing a deck known to them to be inferior to another known deck can be said to be playing competitively.
The intention to play the best deck possible with the goal of winning.
I tend to think Tyrannon is on the right track. "Competitive" is not an attribute of a deck but rather an attribute of a player - it matches the intent of the deck rather than some characteristics inherent to a list. The Casual-Competitive divide can be thought of as a spectrum but in my view there are two distinct mindsets. The competitive mindset does not care at all about specific attributes of the game like flavor, speed, variance, etc. They care about one variable, the win percentage. Now, obviously this mindset can be applied at different stages. The majority of players we call "competitive" do not begin with the mindset - they choose an archetype or deck they think will be fun or interesting (possibly factoring in competitive viability - but still using other variables) and from there look to optimize it. You can also take a sub-par strategy and from there optimize it. But the fact remains that picking a sub-par strategy, even if there are no "strictly better" decks, is not a competitive decision. Optimizing that strategy is.
What do you think of the idea of playing archenemy in competitive EDH. How much of a disadvantage do you think decks like Momir, which play entirely to the board, face by demonstrating their threat level essentially face up. On the other hand, do you think there is an opposite effect from commanders like Zur or Sisay who pose a substantial, but not specifically quantifiable threat? What about "random" examples like Narset or something less competitive like Muzzio, who pose an unknown threat? I think there's an interesting discussion there.
I don't think your examples necessarily fit well. Zur is a pretty quantifiable threat, Sisay even more so since you generally know what she's going to grab. Better examples of decks that play openly might be something like Jarad, Sharuum, et cetera. But I agree with the message you are sending - decks that build up advantage over time have are slightly disincentivized by the four-player nature of the game. If a deck that requires a couple turns of setup like Azami is setting up, then I know to disrupt and have counterplay. On the other hand, a deck that wins out of nowhere like Prossh doesn't give me the warning - end of turn Vampiric Tutor, cast Food Chain, win the game.
With decks like Zur or Narset, which could be playing a non-optimal list, you still really have to assume they are the optimal list. Even if they are not playing an optimal list, the Commander itself is powerful enough that directing hate their way would not be incorrect.
When it comes to something "under the radar," that you can't quantify just by looking at it... first of all, it kind of depends on the situation you're playing in. If you don't know anything about the deck, but are working with the assumption that every deck at the table is built to be played competitively, you can still expect broken things from a deck regardless of whether they're running the optimal Commander or not. However, it's multiplayer, and we can't assume that we can deal with everything, so known threats probably always take priority over unknown threats, unless you know that you are strong against the known threat and have a good reason to believe the unknown is a strong counter to you.
I guess the logical next step is to ask if there is any benefit in playing something relatively unknown. I think we too quickly answer this question, "No!" from the competitive mindset that handicapping in any way automatically makes a deck not competitive. I think that's the conclusion the discussion will come to anyway, but maybe it's worth thinking about. I think there is undeniably some benefit to not being other players' priority #1, especially in a multiplayer situation, and certainly some benefit in not having your opponents know exactly how you are trying to win from the moment you turn your Commander over. I think that we've also come to the conclusion that there are good Commanders but there are also good archetypes, many of which don't need a specific Commander to function (even if some are better than others). So, some questions...
Are there any archetypes that rely on the Commander so little that the benefit of being an "unknown" threat might outweigh the benefit of playing the "strictly optimal" Commander?
Do people typically evaluate decks based on the Commander, or just the colors? If you saw, say, someone playing Thraximundar would you assume they were playing Grixis storm the same as if they were playing Jeleva? I think this is a big argument against unknown Commanders, because I will always see BUG or BG and think reanimator, and see Grixis and think storm. I guess if someone showed up with GW I might not know what to think, but...
To what extent are targets chosen at the beginning of a game? Do we have the luxury of going a turn cycle (or however long) to see who has the strongest start, or if you have a turn-one Thoughtseize will you always point it at the most obvious threat, based on the Commander? Things like targeted discard are proactive in this sense, and require some assumptions to be taken, but reactive cards like counterspells or spot removal more likely have their targets chosen based on in-the-moment threat assessment than prediction.
Is making threat assessment decisions based on Commanders correct? At some point, that's all the information you have, of course. But in a decidedly competitive situation, can you assume that all players are bringing roughly equivalent threats to the table? Do you target someone out of the gate because you feel their Commander is objectively the best at the table, because you have a hard time interacting with the archetype you assume they're playing, or are there other factors?
I will assume we are talking about tournaments against unknown foes and not playgroup play. There are a couple problems with this line of thought however. The first is that your target audience has to be other cEDH players. If I sit down at a table with Thraximundar vs Jeleva, the only people who would treat me differently would be people who know that Jeleva is often used for Storm decks, meaning people who read about EDH online, who are on average more committed than your typical opponent and more likely to be paying attention. If you're playing Thrax and your turn one is Mana Vault, I'm gonna keep an eye on you. If you always fetch blue, I'll know you're on High Tide. It's not hard to figure out and I will likely know by the time I have to keep up countermagic. Also, there isn't a terribly great advantage to my opponents not knowing that I'm doing a specific thing.
To be honest I kind of agree. GSZ finds Scavenging Ooze, Teeg, etc. Dryad Arbor is pretty good just in that you can fetch for a creature when you need one for pattern or Skullclamp or whatever. Count it as a creature if you think it's that bad. *And* now there's one more manadork in your deck - GSZ.
I'm not a fan of Mirri's Guile. Not long ago you weren't even running Sensei's Divining Top, which is a much stronger card in my opinion. We also already have Sylvan Library which puts this card to shame, albeit for one extra mana. The problem for me is that you only get to use it during your upkeep, and it can't really do anything to give you additional advantages like Library's ability to draw extra cards or Top's ability to draw something for you at instant speed.
I guess Mirri's Guile can be worth it with enough shuffle effects. It's like top except without the (very important) second ability but you get to shave a mana of activation cost every now and then.
I did decide I'm going to test it, mostly because I've been wanting to cut Cabal Coffers for a long time. It doesn't tap for mana in the early-game, ever. I don't really even think of it is a land - it's a ramp spell, and probably the worst in the deck. I don't know that Mirri's Guile will be good but hey let's playtest.
what i have in mind is that hermit kermit deck.
one could just use your reanimator list and replace jarad with gifrog.
remove lord of extinction and maybe another jarad specific card to add some discarders that still work for reanimating but also add the on dregde land to have another powerfull and cheap combo out of nowhere.
do you think that angle could give your deck another strenght/benefit?
I think the deck in question (henceforth Frog-Jarad) might have a place in some very, very grindy metas with few decks that need to be raced. You obviously play the best engine cards like Life from the Loam, Golgari Grave-Troll, Crucible of Worlds. Having Dakmor Salvage combo in addition to Necrotic Ooze might just make the resilience worth losing Phyrexian Devourer + Jarad. And at some point, I may test that version of the deck. But ultimately the advantage Jarad gives is the ability to play very few cards in its win-slots, and dedicating the rest of my deck to a solid plan B (reanimate a big creature) and tonnes of spot removal.
Thanks for the reply razz. So I've been testing the frog and it is absolutely insane! The amount of card draw it gives me is asinine. I think it is more suited to the grindy long game but it can quickly fill up our graveyard even with so few lands. I know you have been testing him as the head of his own deck over on competitive edh but I think he has found a permanent home here in my 99. I have also really love traverse the ulvanwald so far because we can quickly fill up out yard. Here is my updated list http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/jarad-golgari-graveyard-combo-1/
I'm much more excited about him in the 99. I have yet to pick one up but will test it when I do. I really miss Oracle of Mul-Daya as a target for Green Sun's Zenith, and this will make up for that.
So in a perfect world, you should be able to draw your entire deck with just a discard outlet and dakmor salvage?
With Kozilek somewhere in the deck, you don't need a perfect world, you need this one. Without Koz, you can loot your entire library and draw lots of cards too.
Thanks bobby, I forgot you can apply replacement effects in any order you want. For some reason I thought they happened in timestamp order or something - like you couldn't dredge the draw because Chains has been in play longer than Life has been in your graveyard. I totally think you guys should play this card.
Edit: I figured out a loop to allow you to combo with Chains in play if for some reason all your permanent removal is exiled. There's probably a more elegant way to do it, but this is the best I could get.
1) Get entire deck in hand with a clean grave.
2) Put Skirge Familiar in hand using Lotus Petal and ritual. Use our combo to get entire deck in hand with a clean grave again.
3) A nonland and Kozilek, shuffle up.
4) Discard Dakmor Salvage, get a Frog trigger. Dredge your library, shuffle up. Repeat this step for infinite black.
5) Finish this by cycling a land to draw your cards back.
6) Cast Praetor's Grasp.
7) Discard Kozilek. Resolve Koz trigger. Praetor's Grasp, the cycle land, and Koz are in your library.
8) Cycle a land, get two draws, hold priority.
9) Move to resolve your draw, replace with Chains. Discard a land to Chains and draw the top card. Frog triggers. Repeat until you get back your library. Discard Kozilek to Familiar to shuffle up.
10) Repeat infinitely, adding cycling lands where needed to keep the pile small. You can also add Lotus Petal and cast Life from the Loam to get cycle lands out of your yard and keep your pile small.
Hopefully there's an easier way to do this but at the very least this works if you need it to.
Nope. You can respond to the "sacrifice Devourer trigger" by continuing to make it bigger and then fling. I play this combo all the time.
http://www.5colorcombo.com/magic/edh/turning/creatures/sideways/2016/03/27/turning-creatures-sideways-edh.html
Good to see you join us again Hellnoire. Null Rod seems real terrible, a lot of people tell me to play it though. Should I try it?
Anyway, there are some changes I want to be making to the deck. Most of this is still long-term reaction to the mulligan change. I want to add in more low-cost ramp, likely manadorks, though definitely add Carpet of Flowers back in too. (I know I've been off and on with this - it's a hard choice!) I want to play one more land. I want to decrease the amount of spot removal I run, likely cutting Abrupt Decay and Slaughter Pact. I want to cut some of the mana-innefficient cards - Lili Vess is first on that list. Other possible cuts here are Living Death and Yawgmoth's Will. I want to have a target for Reanimate more often, so I think I'm going to add a few things. I want to test Corpse Connoisseur. I also want to test Morality Shift since it could just be an instant-win with Dread Return in the 'yard (previously the library). I also want to test Mesmeric Orb + Basalt Monolith combo - either card is decent (read: not terrible) on its own and being able to mill myself any amount I want is really powerful, possibly game-winning even. I also want to test draw-graveyard spells like Mulch, Grisly Salvage, etc. All of this will be reflected in the next update.
Oh wait so does Animar
I tend to think Tyrannon is on the right track. "Competitive" is not an attribute of a deck but rather an attribute of a player - it matches the intent of the deck rather than some characteristics inherent to a list. The Casual-Competitive divide can be thought of as a spectrum but in my view there are two distinct mindsets. The competitive mindset does not care at all about specific attributes of the game like flavor, speed, variance, etc. They care about one variable, the win percentage. Now, obviously this mindset can be applied at different stages. The majority of players we call "competitive" do not begin with the mindset - they choose an archetype or deck they think will be fun or interesting (possibly factoring in competitive viability - but still using other variables) and from there look to optimize it. You can also take a sub-par strategy and from there optimize it. But the fact remains that picking a sub-par strategy, even if there are no "strictly better" decks, is not a competitive decision. Optimizing that strategy is.
I don't think your examples necessarily fit well. Zur is a pretty quantifiable threat, Sisay even more so since you generally know what she's going to grab. Better examples of decks that play openly might be something like Jarad, Sharuum, et cetera. But I agree with the message you are sending - decks that build up advantage over time have are slightly disincentivized by the four-player nature of the game. If a deck that requires a couple turns of setup like Azami is setting up, then I know to disrupt and have counterplay. On the other hand, a deck that wins out of nowhere like Prossh doesn't give me the warning - end of turn Vampiric Tutor, cast Food Chain, win the game.
I will assume we are talking about tournaments against unknown foes and not playgroup play. There are a couple problems with this line of thought however. The first is that your target audience has to be other cEDH players. If I sit down at a table with Thraximundar vs Jeleva, the only people who would treat me differently would be people who know that Jeleva is often used for Storm decks, meaning people who read about EDH online, who are on average more committed than your typical opponent and more likely to be paying attention. If you're playing Thrax and your turn one is Mana Vault, I'm gonna keep an eye on you. If you always fetch blue, I'll know you're on High Tide. It's not hard to figure out and I will likely know by the time I have to keep up countermagic. Also, there isn't a terribly great advantage to my opponents not knowing that I'm doing a specific thing.
I did decide I'm going to test it, mostly because I've been wanting to cut Cabal Coffers for a long time. It doesn't tap for mana in the early-game, ever. I don't really even think of it is a land - it's a ramp spell, and probably the worst in the deck. I don't know that Mirri's Guile will be good but hey let's playtest.
I think the deck in question (henceforth Frog-Jarad) might have a place in some very, very grindy metas with few decks that need to be raced. You obviously play the best engine cards like Life from the Loam, Golgari Grave-Troll, Crucible of Worlds. Having Dakmor Salvage combo in addition to Necrotic Ooze might just make the resilience worth losing Phyrexian Devourer + Jarad. And at some point, I may test that version of the deck. But ultimately the advantage Jarad gives is the ability to play very few cards in its win-slots, and dedicating the rest of my deck to a solid plan B (reanimate a big creature) and tonnes of spot removal.
I'm much more excited about him in the 99. I have yet to pick one up but will test it when I do. I really miss Oracle of Mul-Daya as a target for Green Sun's Zenith, and this will make up for that.
With Kozilek somewhere in the deck, you don't need a perfect world, you need this one. Without Koz, you can loot your entire library and draw lots of cards too.
Edit: I figured out a loop to allow you to combo with Chains in play if for some reason all your permanent removal is exiled. There's probably a more elegant way to do it, but this is the best I could get.
1) Get entire deck in hand with a clean grave.
2) Put Skirge Familiar in hand using Lotus Petal and ritual. Use our combo to get entire deck in hand with a clean grave again.
3) A nonland and Kozilek, shuffle up.
4) Discard Dakmor Salvage, get a Frog trigger. Dredge your library, shuffle up. Repeat this step for infinite black.
5) Finish this by cycling a land to draw your cards back.
6) Cast Praetor's Grasp.
7) Discard Kozilek. Resolve Koz trigger. Praetor's Grasp, the cycle land, and Koz are in your library.
8) Cycle a land, get two draws, hold priority.
9) Move to resolve your draw, replace with Chains. Discard a land to Chains and draw the top card. Frog triggers. Repeat until you get back your library. Discard Kozilek to Familiar to shuffle up.
10) Repeat infinitely, adding cycling lands where needed to keep the pile small. You can also add Lotus Petal and cast Life from the Loam to get cycle lands out of your yard and keep your pile small.
Hopefully there's an easier way to do this but at the very least this works if you need it to.