MTG Salvation

I'm surprised no one mentioned distortion strike.


also: tainted strike and psychotic fury for the 1 shot kills.

Indeed. I shall have to see if I have one lying about somewhere unused.

That is actually a really good point. I suppose when I first built the deck that I didn't really have any good ones I was looking to use, which is why the deck was built with extra win-cons over the general. As such most creature tutors don't factor in too favorably right now... If I have my General, I don't really have any creatures I need to search out, and If I don't have my general, I use an alternate wincon.

At one point I had been considering time of need as I was running Azusa in the deck, and had a problem with tuck, but with Azusa out, it's an otherwise dead card.

Green Sun's Zenith would be by far the best one to consider, as now that I have Keeper of Progenitus, it could serve as an enabler to a mana flare. I could also add in Dryad Arbor at that point as the only flare effect that would not affect her is the Gauntlet of Power; the problem I have with her is that outside of GSZ she's just a land that's easier to kill in this deck.

I don't run nearly enough creatures for fauna shaman, survival of the fittest, or birthing pod.

And the biggest problem with most, even if they are an unconditional tutor is that I have nothing else I really want to get with them.

Scratch all that: I just recalled a lot of my removal is currently creature based, for some reason I had completely put them out of my mind. I still don't think that survival of the fittest has any room to play here, but Green Sun's Zenith and other direct tutors may yet have a role. GSZ at the least.

I may also need to add reclaim effects like eternal witness back into the deck. They came out a while back when GY hate was exceedingly rampant in my meta and they got replaced by straight up card draw. Praetor's Councel snuck back in, but it may be time to add the witness back in as well.

+ Green Sun's Zenith
+ Eternal Witness
+ Predator's Flagship
+ Doubling Cube
+ Dryad Arbor

- Forest - Dryad
- Sylvok Lifestaff - GSZ - can just get my warden now.
- Orochi Hatchery - E.Witness - GSZ can fulfill his role as well
- Baru, Fist of Krosa - Doubling Cube
- Gloomwidow's Feast - Predator

are looking like my proposed changes for now, I'll lay the deck out tonight and see how it looks.

Everflowing Chalice may also need to come out. While it has been helpful, I feel in the heavy mana situations its a win more that hearstone would better fulfill, and in the early game, its simply a worse sol ring.

Despite it also raising my curve, and my personal philosophy on him, Prime Time may actually make it into the deck.

The point of it is to steal opponent's stuff. It's actually exceptionally powerful in EDH, as usually people tend to pitch land to it... Then you get free land drops.

Using it as a pseudo haste doesn't work very well. You can stock spells behind it you don't want to discard (vs. a mass discard deck like nath), but its really not an optimal use, and I would rather steal his spells and rip his hand right back.

I fail to see how it saves you two mana. Muse Vessel does not say "You may play this without paying its mana cost." It says: "You may play this this turn."

To play something involves putting it on the stack and paying all costs. In this case, 6. (on top of the 4 to give it pseudo flash).

For examples, see spelljack and Intet, the Dreamer which both explicitly say being able to play without paying the mana cost, and praetor's grasp and Thada Adel, Acquisitor which do not.

I really wish Gloomwidow's feast had deathtouch as well, while it is nice as a surprise, I think Predator Flagship may make a better mark in general, especially as it can be used for so much better effect.

The Acid web spider still feels like a weak link, but I like how it kills sword of feast and famine (as well as greaves and other pesky annoyances), which is fairly prevalent in my meta, so it doesn't get axed quite yet.


Sadly, the sylvok lifestaff has not really played out well for me. It was added in to help the deck stay around and recoup some damage taken in the early game, but honestly has just not provided enough incentive to use. While not settled yet, I think this will be the card removed for doubling cube.

As you are in black you have oodles of choices of removal to play, and oodles more of demons and your own flying things to add.

If you really want the flying protection though, my Nemata Deck (in sig) has been modified to be able to survive the flyer onslaught.

Lethal damage is defined as the creatures touchness or 1 point of deathtouch. It's part of the lethal damage rules.

The Nighthawk is a a valid target for its only longbow-given ability and could target itself. The deathtouch would apply to it like any other creature, and it would die. On dying Death Pact would trigger and your opponent would have to sacrifice a creature.

I have designed a sharazad/wish/copy deck, but I would never play it... at all.

If someone did play one, I would simply scoop the mini game and treat it as a sorcery that says all other players lose half their life. As far as spells in EDH go, thats not even that terribly broken.


I like the theme of the deck though in general.

Quote from Demagogue

The issue with this type of thinking is that you have enough resources to continue casting these threats after each one is removed, ontop of those card drawing spells.

This is an issue of deckbuilding, if you aren't going to have the same mana generation as a green player, you probably shouldn't use the same mana curve. There are many efficient threats available.

The direct counter argument to your argument would be, all that land does you no good if you don't have anything to play with it. Also, keep in mind that those ramp spells cost you card as well; this ties in to cards being one of the most important resources in Magic, you alluded to it as well that many non green decks run more mana sources, and as such have less threat cards.

This is important because the value of a card to you is higher than it is to me. Conversely the value of mana to me is higher, as I will have less of it, and must use it more efficiently. Every ramp spell you draw is a non-threat card; every draw spell I get can be a multiple threat card (as well as getting more mana, I am simply more limited in how many I play a turn).

Card draw also scales better as a game progresses. Mana ramp is most useful at the beginning of a game, to get to your desired curve faster. It is about tempo. As the game progresses, anything past your target point is essentially useless, any land you cannot use has zero value.

For card draw, you have less mana early game, and such have less things you can do. As such you play fewer spells, which means you play fewer card draw spells. As the game progresses, your mana, through card draw turns into more threats, more mana, and more card draw. It is a self enabling process that enables you to use the most of all your available resources: in this case mana and cards. Finding the correct balance of card draw (such that you are not simply using card draw to draw into more card draw) is the challenge of deck building, to balance the usage of your resources to the best potential.

This is why direct color vs color comparisons don't work; most EDH decks are multiple color, so really the debate is more of, "what theme helps a deck more." My answer, for the reasons I have stated, is card advantage, specifically quantity over quality; when you get down to it, blue is the color most associated with card advantage, and especially the quantity of it.

The other issue is that when Green ramps, it increases threat Density in its deck

This is similar to card quality, which is similar to tutoring, which is an extra mana tax to have the highest card quality possible. This mindset can be seen in the card sensei's divining top which is a very popular card in many EDH decks. My general point is that while card quality is good (many top tier decks run black for specifically that, and most casual decks run black and thus have access to good card quality), card quantity is better.

Stating that one colour can draw more than another colour isn't a great argument in terms of how good a colour is.

Essentially, while the focus of my post was Draw specifically, what it generally comes down to is card advantage is simply the most important thing in the game, and when you examine the colors for which can provide the most to card advantage, it is blue.

Quote from Weebo

The problem with this mindset is that you're not answering every threat from every other player, unless you're playing Archenemy or something. Generally, anything that threatens you will be threatening to at least one other player on the board. Giving other people a chance to use their own resources to answer threats is a huge part of multiplayer, and one of the reasons instant speed is so important. It's also part of the reason 1-for1 removal isn't the dreck that some posters here seem to hold it in.

Card draw is certainly important, but using it so you can answer everything is generally a poor decision.

That is certainly true, and I would advocate strongly against even trying to answer everything; not only would you over extend your capability, but it is often unneeded and unnecessary, and will in fact draw more attention to yourself. Rather the point that I was making was that if you were placed in a position where you needed an answer, card draw makes certain that you would more often have one; even if the individual cards themselves are "sub par," your overall position will be stronger. So while blue may have weaker cards in general in other categories, is draw capability ensures it has the strongest position.

An extreme example of what I meant for be - using boomerang and counter spell would typically be viewed as a terrible 2 for 1 play, and it is, but if you have enough card draw that the number of cards that you expend is meaningless, then the idea of a 2for1 becomes meaningless in that situation and you can actually make plays like that if needed.

That doesn't represent the most competitive or most powerful generals, just the most played. While there is some overlap, there's significant bias as well.

Perhaps putting those together was my fault. I meant for those statements to be taken separately. From what I have understood the most cometitive generals (in no order) are:

5color combo, sharumm, azusa, zur, (tier 2, uril, rasputin, etc.).

From the lists of those that I have seen, more of them have blue than any other color (followed by black). I believe this goes more for the strengths or the colors in that card draw, disruption, and control (blue) and tutoring (black) are most valuable at the competitive level where the combo field is stronger. This can be a very skewed list as the general's abilities themselves play a large factor, as much or more than their colors.

The second line was more for the strength of colors on a more casual front, from the masses. Black seems to have taken over, but blue remains almost tied at the forefront. I believe this ties into a longer games need to be able to recover from wipes and maintain threats and options. This testifies to the fortitude of recursion (black) and the strength of card draw (blue, with black in second place) which are both forms of card advantage. Even most other generalizations of this format (Advocacy of using sweepers instead of single target removal) tend to be decisions based on card advantage, and blue is simply the crown of CA, perhaps not every form of CA, but in general.



These statistics are often skewed by personal playstyle though, most people want to be the guy that gets to smash things, and DO stuff. Black and Green drop big threats fast, green gets you mana to be able to do MORE, and blue gives you card draw to just HAVE more stuff, as well as giving you instants and flash so you can do stuff on other peoples turns.

I really think the white is the most undervalued color in EDH, just on its strength of surviving and holding on, especially in casual. Casual games tend to be longer, and reward players who tend to be more retaliatory, who wait things out, and who survive. White is very good at this, but it is a very passive game style, which I would never have the patience for.

Here's a few more reality inspired cards:

• Alter Reality
  
• Deny Reality
  
• Illusion/Reality
  
• Ixidor, Reality Sculptor
  
• Reality Ripple

White is actually the most undervalued color out there. The problem (and I am one of them) is that people like to be active. Like to play spells, draw cards, answer threats, and DO stuff.

White is bad at all of that. What white has is staying power. White has creatures that simply survive. It doesn't care about replenishing threats after a wipe, because its stuff never went away. And if you attack a white player, you can go dig it back up, or you just gained some life, or the white player kindly asks you to stop attacking him. White is a very political color, and is very good at surviving and just staying in the game, and then can take the last contender on head to head.

White would lose in a removal war, for the points I raised in why I think blue is the strongest color, but it doesn't have to win. Yeah, if enough people attack the white player, they'll run out of answers. But no one wants to be the one to eat up the answers.

I was hoping to stay out of this debate, as playstyle will severely skew your opinions of what is powerful. I will give my rendition of priorities, followed by a very skewed example.

For me, the most important thing I consider when building a deck is card draw. In this format, and multiplayer in general where you are at inherrent card disadvantage as you are drawing only 1 card to your opponents four, card quantity is far more important than quality. No matter how sweeping your effects, you will always lose on the recovery as your opponents will still have 4 times the recovery that you do.

Card Draw is simply the most important thing in any deck building for me. The quality of my threats (green's big creatures or blacks pick) and the best advantage (x for 1 removals, etc) are worthless if you cannot keep up with the number of threats an opponent has.

Example: If I have a deck full of 3 for 1 removal spells, it does me no good if my opponent draws four threats for every removal that I draw. Card Draw aids in recovery of board wipes, or replacement of threats that are destroyed.

Example 2: z is a problem. If I have a removal spell that deals with x and y, it does me no good against z. If I have a tutor, I can get the answer for z, but then I am screwed by y, that drops later. If I have 3 removal spells that respectively deal with x, y, and z, I am covered, despite each individual card being worse. Card draw maintains options better than any other ability

Summary: Card draw enables you to maintain a good number of threat in hand. This means developing a good board presence, recovering from the loss of that board presence, and maintaining answers to any threat.

Every color has good card draw, every color has individual cards that are amazing card draw (Necropotence, greater good), every color has access to good card draw at the artifact level (Mind's Eye But in the average level of card advantage, and in drawing cards without another effect or conditional clause, Blue is the undisputed winner.
Even if Blue's threats or answers are less powerful, blue will make up for it by having more of it.

Whenever I build a deck that is not blue, my biggest problem is finding ways to get card draw into it. When playing blue, I rarely have any issue in factoring in the strength of a threat. With that much CA, threats make themselves.

There is no coincidence that among the most competitive generals, blue is the most prevalent color. In our own forum here is a Comprehensive Deck Guide where black and blue are the most prevalent colors (blue appears to have been surpassed! but not by green...).

Having a better threat is irrelevant, when every other player will be looking to answer it. Having a better answer is irrelevant when every other player will be dropping threats again afterward. Having the ability to always answer and retaliate is what is needed.


(for curiosity, my importance of stuff for EDh is Draw - Ramp - Threats, the draw lets me get ramp, which lets me draw more, which gets me more threats, which I can play more of, because I ramped.)

Quote from King_Shane

Yes, it does. It allows you to drop two fatties from hand.

Sadly it doesn't. Kaalia has a triggered ability on when she attacks, not when she deals combat damage. This triggers once, when you declare attackers. Sunhome gives double strike, this does not make her attack twice, rather she deals damage in both the First Strike Damage resolution step, as well as the Normal Damage Resolution step.

The order of the combat phase goes: combat phase
Beginning of Combat Step
Declare Attackers - This is when Kallia Triggers.
Declare Blockers
First Strike Damage (If a creature has Double Strike or First Strike, otherwise this doesn't happen) - This is where Sunhome has an effect.
- to see more about the two combat damage steps, in the link above click on combat damage, and read through the last point.
Normal Damage
Cleanup

Having multiple combat phases (via Helkite, or relentless assault) will let you have multiple Declare Attackers phases, which will allow Kaalia to trigger again.

Because whenever I draw it, my Kaalia is pumping full speed already. People tend to underestimate just how evasive she is in this deck. Once she hits the board, she stays. A permanent permanent. It's undoubtedly a good card that I recommend for any other Kaalia deck, but it's just not needed in this one.

Sneak Attack is usually a backup plan. If Kaalia is going full force and its in your hand, you hold it. I realize your gameplan is to make Kaalia prone to 'not die,' but no matter how sculpted your gameplan, sometimes bad things just happen. The Sneak is for those times, when you don't want to pay full price for the big nasty surprises in your hand. It can also be used defensively to throw surprise blockers for R. It can also be used with rule of law as sneaking things out is an ability of the Sneak Attack, and not playing a spell. It can also be used defensively with kaalia as protection, by sneaking out something like lava zombie. (Zombie used by example, there are much better things out there).

It could be simply that your current deck plan has enough protection that Sneak Attack is rarely necessary as a back up, which from your answer seems to be the case for you.

No, I meant Reaper of the Abyss, the new demon in Innistrad. Yes, I'm aware that he's not legal yet blah blah, its a proxy and I notify everyone beforehand.

Ah, spiffy guy. I'd say he's a pretty good inclusion for any kaalia deck. You still need a way to kill your own creature, but thats rather nice. The Magus actually works fairly well too, it seems.