Tag: Legacy
Lightning Round with Romario Vidal: The Great Thing About Doomsday is…
Welcome to the first installment of Lightning Round, where we “sit down” with someone from the magic community and ask a few quick questions. Our keynote speaker? Romario Vidal, Legacy streamer and recent Legacy Super Qualifier finalist piloting the all too fitting for now deck, Doomsday.
The great thing about Doomsday is…
Romario: No one believes you when you say the card is actually good and can win matches.
Mana Tutor’s own storm aficionado, Michael Clifford wants to know when you realized dark ritual was better than Chalice of the Void?
Romario: When I started casting Doomsday on turn two followed by “Romariovidal wins the match.”
What don’t you want to see across the “table” when you’re playing Doomsday?
Romario: decks that play small creatures that tax my mana (I am looking at you Maverick and DnT). I used to hate playing against BR reanimator, but after I added the leylines to my sideboard I feel pretty good about the match up.
How do you prepare for a tournament like this?
Romario: I played four leagues with similar lists to what I played in the qualifier, as usual if I can do 4-1 or better with a list then that’s the deck I will play in the next important event I play. I also read and asked some questions on the doomsday discord server, eventually I came up with my final list. Honestly, I wasn’t too worried about playing the tournament. I found out the MOCS (Magic Online Championship Series) points were about to reset sometime soon and I didn’t want to just waste the ones I had accumulated, which was enough to play in two large events. I woke up twenty minutes before the starting time, thought about for a bit if I wanted to commit to playing the whole day, then, the rest is history.
Thanks for joining us for Lightning Round today, where can we find your legacy content?
www.twitch.tv/romariovidal for streaming
@romarioneto3 on twitter
I have also started creating some Legacy content in Portuguese on my youtube channel
Thanks again for joining us, here is the qualifying decklist below.
BLACK DETH
DETH’S SERVANT
So, I haven’t been playing a ton of legacy lately as I was spending a good portion of my magic time preparing for the limited portion of GP Vegas. However, the last time I did I was able to turn a few heads with an even CRAZIER brew of DETH. For those of you that are in “the know”, read on, for those of you that are soon to be in “the know,” this link is for you. I shall attempt to impart a modicum of wisdom here with the hope that you come away from this enlightened, excited, and above all else, ready to play some DETH’s Servant. What is DETH’s Servant? Well, for an in depth conversation about this deck, the card choices, an overview of the matchups, sideboard and a whole lot of laughs, I would first advise you to listen to Leaving a Legacy . Jerry Mee and Pat Euglow invited me to come on the show to highlight this particular list. I did, and it was awesome. Have you listened to it yet? I’ll wait…
Here is the link again. I’m not messing around, you’re going to want to check out that podcast.
Okay, I think it’s safe to assume that by now you’ve checked out the origin story and listened to the podcast. We’re now prepared to dive into the depths of DETH. Today’s dive will include the changes I made and why, mulligan decisions and general sideboarding strategies.
THE ADDITIONS
Why did I add a fourth combo? Well, aside from my bottomless need for attention, there were also a couple of other legitimate reasons. First and foremost: what I learned in my initial build was that the more combos I added, the better the deck seemed to get. Keeping this in mind, I decided to add yet another combo and see if the trend continued in a linear fashion or started to pass the apex of the theoretical combo parabola.
X axis = number of combos
Y axis = deck performance
The first league I played I was able to secure a 5-0. This continues to suggest that the graph on the bottom is, in fact, the correct one. So, it follows that, if I could conceivably cram an infinite number of combos into a 60 card deck, I would never lose. I am currently working on this theorem, and feel I am close to a breakthrough.
The next reason has to do with decks that tax. Eldrazi and Taxes, Death and Taxes, Death and Taxes and Taxes (this is when you are actively being audited by your D&T opponent),lands, mono red prison, you get the idea. Essentially, I wanted a cheaper combo that wouldn’t be as punished by cards like Thalia, Guardian of Thraben or Thorn of Amethyst. I also wanted a viable way to win the game if my opponent resolved a Gaddock Teeg game one with a Wasteland up (which happens more frequently than one might think). Additionally, having another two card combo that can potentially win the game on the spot helps even out the Sneak and Show match up. Your opponent now has to gamble with Show and Tell if you have even one of the following cards in play: Painter’s Servant, Grindstone, Leyline of the Void, or Helm of Obedience.
The other addition that I made was Echo of Eons as a one of in the main deck. My reasoning for this doesn’t amount to much more than these two reasons and in this exact order: I thought it was cool. Second, I found that in match ups where my opponent thwarted my turn two kill and was grinding me down, I did not have a way to bounce back into the game effectively. I see my Echo of Eons as the fourth quarter Hail Mary against these long game strategies. However, it is also quite good against any deck that has minimal interaction on your turn. Does it get stuck in my hand sometimes? Absolutely. This, however, brings me back to the number one reason I decided to run it, which is that it is in fact, very cool. Not much on this Earth beats waiting until your opponent is tapped out, playing your hand, drawing 7, playing another hand and usually just winning on the spot.
The last change that I made was cutting two duress for two Inquisition of Kozilek. This was mostly due to a drastic shift in the meta. I was playing against delvers and True Name-Nemesis quite frequently. I wanted a way to strip early pressure out of my opponent’s hand to allow the deck to draw into its win conditions. The downside to this change is, of course, that inquisition does not hit Force of Will, which is often a primary target.
MULLIGAN DECISIONS
With any deck your starting hand and the decisions you make to keep or mull are extremely important. It is no different here, in fact, I believe it is even more important. It is also a little more complex than most linear decks. There are hands that are easy to keep, of course. For instance, when you have a turn one kill or a turn two kill, no problem.
This is a turn one kill and an example of those easy keeps I mentioned above. On the play in game one, my approach is to always jam. You will get blown out by Force of Will from time to time, but you will win way more often. Sadly, most of the time you will not have a turn one or even turn two kill. Which hands you decide to keep depends greatly on what you are playing against, which makes your game one decisions even more crucial.
When you play with a linear deck, your deck does a thing, let’s call it X. When you draw a hand if you think your hand will allow you do X it is a keep, if it does not do X then it is a mulligan. DETH differs from this in the sense that it is looking to do W,X,Y, or Z. So, when you draw a hand does none of those things it does not mean you should mulligan those hands 100% of the time. For example, if we think of Leyline/Helm and Painter/Servant, Depths and Stage/Hexmage as two card combos and LED/Ritual/Tutor as a three card combo we can assess our hands in valuations. For instance, here is a sample hand that I kept in the blind against an opponent game one.
This hand I can look at as ⅔ x and ½ y, or ⅔ storm and ½ depths. What this means is that on my first draw of the game I can draw 12 cards that will complete one of these combos(all copies of LED, Ritual, Stage, Hexmage, and Plunge into Darkness). That is nearly 25%. The disruption can slow down my opponent and help set up my win. This hand is especially nice because you have a back up plan, go all-in with Depths. It also has potential versatility. If I cast Thoughtseize and I see my opponent is sitting on Wasteland and Knight of the Reliquary I will be looking to complete my storm combo. I may play out my Depths to bait their Wasteland to buy another draw free of pressure and clear the way for my lake of the dead. As it panned out, this particular opponent was playing UW control and I was able to strip away meaningful cards turn one and two and use Infernal Tutor discarding my hand to LED for Hexmage to attack for 20 on turn 4.
This hand may be an obvious keep as it contains ½ Helm combo, full Depths combo and ⅓ storm combo. I am only including it here to discuss the power starting with Leyline in play. Not only do we have a good aggressive plan, but beginning the game with Leyline of the Void in play enables much of our deck to function at a much higher efficiency (It is also noteworthy to mention that simply by starting with a Leyline in play you will receive a concession in roughly 4-5 percent of your game ones). Even if one or both Depths and Stage were swamps, I would likely keep this hand, especially in game one. Leyline of the Void enables our Ill-gotten Gains as well as our Helms and turns them into “your opponent exiles their hand and you get three sweet cards back from your graveyard.” Even if you get your Helm of Obedience surgically extracted you can still storm off without fear of the FOW once you resolve your first Ill-gotten Gains. As it turned out, this game actually ended on turn three with another 20/20. Let’s look at one more example.
This is a hand I would ship back. It only has ⅓ storm. If I knew that I was playing against storm, I would probably keep this, but game one, I would mulligan.
Hopefully this gives you an idea of how I evaluate hands with DETH. It is built in such a way (that is without brainstorms, ponders, or any efficient cantrip) to maximize the value of the top card of your deck. So, if you’re starting hand doesn’t have the win in it, but has varied pieces of your combos, do not despair. As George Michael would tell you, “you gotta have faith.”
SIDEBOARDING
“You must do what you feel is right, of course.”
- Obi Wan Kenobi
Sideboarding with DETH can be a tricky endeavor. There are a few certainties, but many more uncertainties. For example, against control, I will always bring in Hymn to Tourach. Against elves I will always bring in Toxic Deluge. Against Mono red Prison I will always bring in Phyrexian Obliterator. Aside from these type of examples the rest of my sideboarding strategy is greatly dependent upon what happened game one and two. This differs from many sideboard strategies in the sense that I don’t necessarily do the same thing match to match, or even game to game. For instance, if I beat my opponent game one with my Dark Depths combo and they only see cards that could viably be in Turbo Depths, I may lean away from that strategy in game two(especially if they have Wasteland and Karakas), anticipating that my opponent will side heavily into stopping that particular win condition. If I happen to storm out my opponent game one, I might side out my storm combo completely and lean into my Painter/Grindstone combo with Obliterators for back up. It is a game of cat and mouse. Against control I may side out three or all of my lotus petals on the draw as I want my cards all to impact the game state in a meaningful way, where as I may bring them in on the play in an attempt to win before they can develop their board. My best advice is to think about the game that was just played and consider these factors:
- What combo did I win with (if you won)?
- What cards did my opponent see (if you lost)?
- What combo is my opponent’s deck most vulnerable to?
- What strategy are they likely to take against me?
- What do they expect that I will do?
It’s important to remember that as difficult as it can be to sideboard with DETH, it is also difficult to sideboard against. The benefit of having four distinctive modes to victory is that many of the strategies do not share sideboard cards. Your opponent’s strategy versus storm and Painter/Grindstone, for example, are not going to share many cards. Make the best decisions you can with the information you gathered during game one and remember that your opponent has some difficult choices to make as well.
CLOSING REMARKS
That’s the crash course on DETH’s Servant. If you have any questions or remarks please feel free to ask below in the comment section. You can also find me on Twitter @traswidden and I am traswidden on twitch.
The Medium Guide to Big Magic Tournaments (part 2)
This is part two of a multiple article series. The first article covered gameplay improvements and suggestions. This part covers some meta decisions about how to do well at tournaments. Part three will cover logistical suggestions.
Plan to beat the winner’s metagame
Sometimes is feels really bad when you sit down at a legacy tournament and lose to burn repeatedly (your fault for not having win conditions). However, being soft to a deck that is unlikely to perform well is better than being an all-rounder against bad decks. Tobi Henke covered this very well in a recent article, but I think it bears repeating.
The winner’s metagame are the decks that you think are most likely to compose the top tables. These are the decks you want to beat, not the junk that sometimes populates the early rounds of a tournament. This is one of the benefits of having byes at a GP (byes just barely still exist as of this writing). Getting to skip lesser known or lower likelihood of success decks can inform deck decisions and allow you to skip worrying about bad decks. If all the good decks are on 3-4c Energy midrange in Kaladesh standard, you better have a good plan for beating them. Play to win the tournament, don’t put narrow cards in your board to beat the 1% of the field deck that dumpsters you. When you build a sideboard, keep in mind what you are expecting to face in the winners meta and make sure you have a focused plan against them. Don’t devote 10 cards to beating the standard burn matchup, no matter how much you hate losing to it, when burn is 2% of the meta.
This is critically important for a format like modern, especially for those who are new to the format. The tendency is to put very specific answers into their sideboard to deal with their local meta. If you are playing burn and hate infect, play Searing Blood, not Burn the Impure. Searing blood is just as effective against infect in most situations, but is also useful against creature combo decks and other random nonsense you might encounter.
Sometimes one deck is likely to be the most represented deck (*cough* Hogaak *cough*) in the format and it is necessary to devote specific sideboard cards (Leyline of the Void) to beating this strategy. Most of the time in modern it pays to have answers that can be used more widely like Relic of Progenitus, but there are always exceptions. Damping Sphere covers more bases than Molten Rain, etc. There are many articles discussing sideboarding, especially in modern, but I think it is always worth rehashing.
In older formats part of playing to the winner’s meta is also ignoring that some players just “want it more.” Sometimes you’re playing rb reanimator and your round 2 opponent has 10 pieces of yard hate. You should still play reanimator if you think it is the best deck. Some people hate losing to a specific deck and will over-prepare for it. These people will likely feel the burn later in the tournament when they don’t have cards to bring in against other decks. Sometimes you run into them, they have it all, and there’s not much to be done.
If you can, perform focused testing
Jamming modern modo games might be ok for getting the hang of your deck, but at a certain point you need to sit down and focus on the winner’s metagame. I am fortunate enough to have a network of friends who between us can proxy up and test important matchups. Fun fact: you will never get enough reps in with a deck to know for sure the matchup percentages. I would go so far as to say you will never get enough reps with a deck.
Period.
Ever.
Welcome to magic.
Maybe I’m just neurotic. I have certainly never gone into a tournament feeling like I couldn’t have prepared more. There might be people that feel like they have spent enough time on their deck and testing. These people are either very wrong, or have a great deal more time than I do. Point being, we’re going to have to be efficient.
10 game sets with alternating first players can give you a very good feel for what is going on and what is important. The streamer Jeff Hoogland is very good at talking about this. At the end of videos he often loudly proclaims that we ignore the record and focus on how things felt. Mixed feelings around the net regarding Mr. Hoogland notwithstanding, I think that this self- analysis is very important while testing and tuning decks. There is a reason that computers are very bad at magic. I perform my serious testing with individuals (preferably ones who know the deck they are piloting well) and in longer sets. I prefer this be done in paper magic, but an online tool might be faster or easier for some depending on format and individual taste.
Test matchups! Leagues are ok testing but not the best.
Play good decks
I love bad combo decks (Narset cannon and meandeck tendrils are particular favorites). I play them often at weekly tournaments so that I get it out of my system and don’t play bad decks at big events. The fact that neo-griselbrand straddles this line in modern could lead to significant shenanigans down the road and is amusing to me.
There are many reasons people play bad decks. Comfort, the lolz, the burning need to show how cool you are (Antony Benedetti is particularly cool). The fact is that there is a hive mind of magic online players that are actively trying their darndest to break the game and get all the moneys. The result is that the creme of the crop tend to rise up after they’ve been discovered.
Tangent: The “after they’ve been discovered” bit is important here. I’m of the opinion that the modo hive mind acts similarly to machine learning. As Hari Seldon might say, humans in groups are easy to predict. Everyone tries everything over enough time (infinite monkeys, infinite typewriters, etc.) and as a result the best decks tend to be the most played decks over time. I recommend looking into basic machine learning/neural net stuff (cool mario link here). I’ll probably devote an entire article to this some time in the future. The thing about taking a lot of inputs (players and decks) and jamming them into a few metrics for success (published lists), is that they will tend to wander off into local maxima. That is, the meta-magician is very good at tuning decks, and not so good at discovering them. This goes along with Patrick Chapin’s information cascades article. We humans tend to follow, not invent.
Anyway, modo is a very good deck-tuning machine and a so-so deck-finding machine. I am willing to bet that there are a very large number of very good decks out there that haven’t been discovered yet. Recall how the best versions of death’s shadow weren’t even discovered until gitaxian probe was banned. The problem is that you are incredibly unlikely to find and tune one of these mythical hidden best decks. If Matt Nass were given an infinite amount of time to test older formats I’m sure he could develop an entirely different ecosystem of insane combo decks that would be stronger than our current meta (I like to call this the infinite Nasty theorem).
Most of us aren’t Matt Nass or Patrick Chapin and we don’t have infinite time. We also largely don’t have massive pro teams bolstering our every whim. The result is that we need a good deck to play and we probably don’t have much time. Don’t play bad decks. Play meta decks and try to learn them and tune them in the time you have. You don’t always have to play the Gaak, but play something that already exists and has a reasonable plan against it. Play brainstorm in Legacy, play linear in modern, and play midrange (probably) in standard.
Your brew is bad. Keep tuning it, play it at weeklies and have fun. Maybe at some point it will be less bad. If your goal is to maximize win percentages, play a meta deck.
Always have a sideboard guide
It is important to know how you plan to sideboard, this ensures that your sideboard makes sense and that your outs and ins map correctly. For me, the hardest part is deciding which things need to come out of my deck. Especially for dedicated combo decks, it is very hard to determine how much of the deck you can remove before it ceases to function correctly. My first step is usually to find someone else’s guide, because developing my own takes many hours of additional time that I often do not have. If you are lucky enough to know an experienced pilot, talking through their plans is always better than a stale guide that can be found online. A sideboard guide as a tool helps determine how many cards are needed for a matchup while still understanding what the plan is against certain decks.
The hardest decks for me are midrange decks (especially in standard). Plans for midrange decks usually are not obvious because you are altering your deck to perform a specific role. Midrange mirrors especially can be particularly nuanced. During the reign of mardu vehicles, for example, each mardu deck was trying to go over the top of the others, but some of the threats were so hard to deal with (scrapheap scrounger) that going under one another was a completely viable option, especially on the play. No two players agreed on sideboarding choices and trying to anticipate what role the other person was taking could be critical for victory.
In limited, while you may not have a specific plan, you should have a general idea what the weakest cards in your deck are as well as your strongest sideboard options. In extreme cases, especially in sealed, it is correct to have a whole other deck sleeved up and ready to swap out. The tendency for many players is to not bother with boarding too much in limited, but this leaves a lot of percentage points on the table. In limited, every deck is a midrange deck and you should be adjusting your role according to how it matches up to other midrange decks. Know your role and have a plan. You don’t even have to write down the plan in limited, just try not to forget that you have disenchants in your pool. I find that having it written down helps me know what I think I should be doing and makes it easier for me to improvise in the actual tournament itself.
There are many articles that are against sideboard guides. These all make excellent points. Someone else’s guide implemented without any thought is probably out of date and does not account for changes. Using guides as rote also keeps you from making important changes on the fly that are often needed for slight variations in decks. The important part is to start with a guide for structure and to aide in understanding. From there it is important to move forward from the guide as you make changes and updates, and be willing to mix things up on the fly depending on how your opponents might differ from the norm.
For me, guides are a very important jumping off point for understanding a deck quickly and a great tool for not having to always remember my own sideboard plan. They give structure to help aide in understanding.
Don’t hand out free information
A magic player’s second main hobby is complaining about magic. Have you ever had an opponent come to the round complaining about their last match and basically tell you what they’re playing? I don’t recommend doing that. Having a conversation with your opponent is part of the fun of the magic tournament experience. Loudly proclaiming bad beat stories to strangers is not the best way to make friends and can lead to accidentally giving away information. It is also obnoxious. Also, be mindful of how you hold your cards. As a taller player I can sometimes see some of my opponents’ cards. When I can see my opponents’ cards I try to inform them immediately, but it is still up to them to hold cards in a way that I can’t see them. Sloppy shuffling also tends to reveal cards unnecessarily. Watch how you shuffle, maybe have a friend give you an outside opinion. In team tournaments it can be very easy for the other team to see cards in your deck while you shuffle; make sure to shuffle away from opponents.
Try to use a card case that doesn’t flash the world every time you take your cards out. The clear cases, or the ones that open from the top are the worst offenders. I like having flaps and other things that I can hide cards behind as I take things out. This also is helpful for sideboarding behind your case to keep the number of cards going in and out secret.
Try to keep composed while drawing cards. If you can, know what cards you could draw and what you would do with them if you do. Basically, don’t just slump in the chair every time you draw a land, and jump out of the chair every time you draw a bomb. You don’t have to perfectly control your tells, but being mindful of what you’re doing is useful, especially if you can turn some of your body language into a bluff.
Have a plan to win
LSV is very good about this and talks about it in depth, so I won’t go over it too much. This is especially relevant when way behind in a game. As you are being cut out of outs and things are looking very grim, take a minute to think of what needs to happen in order to win. If you need the top of your deck to be precisely lightning bolt, play in a way such that it is true. If you need your opponent to brick, and you need runner-runner pump spells to kill with your infect creature before they kill you, make sure that you are set up so that those pump spells are most likely to kill. If you are way ahead and can only lose to a haste creature in limited, keep a blocker back to not lose if it doesn’t affect your clock. In short, don’t play cards at random, especially when way ahead or way behind, visualize what it takes to win and play towards that end.
Thus ends additional ramblings. The Isaac Asimov reference was my favorite one probably.
On a fun note. I just won the MCQ for Richmond for the bay area (northern CA) playing the Gaak. Turns out that deck is busted, who knew? I hope those that were in Vegas had fun and maybe played the gaak for the last time.
Am I a dumb jerkface who doesn’t know anything? Comment below, I welcome your hate. I welcome your love and questions even more, also please put those below. See you next time.
The Medium Guide to Big Magic Tournaments (part 1)
This is part one of a multiple article series. The first article will cover gameplay improvements and suggestions. Part two will cover some meta decisions about how to do well at tournaments. Part three will cover logistical suggestions.
Over the course of a few years I went from coming back into magic with no cards and on a 5+ year hiatus, to finishing top 16 in Grand Prix tournaments in every format. I haven’t been the best at spiking tournaments, but I have done an above average job of putting myself into a bubble slot to get there. I think my perspective is more interesting because I am not a full time magic player, and I do not necessarily travel or prepare as much as other more entrenched players. I go to about 6-8 mostly local GP’s a year, many local PTQ’s, play almost zero online magic. In short, I don’t have as much play time in any given format as many of my opponents, have a full-time job, don’t spend a ton of money on travel, and am therefore closer to the average mtg player than many higher-level pros. The purpose of this article will be to give several small tips and other edges that I think will help you improve your win percentages in larger tournaments and maybe help with some of the other less talked about aspects of magic. Many of these may be obvious to you, while others might not apply, but hopefully one or two nuggets of wisdom stick and help in your future endeavors.
A draw is a loss
I’m going to start with one of my biggest pet peeves, and a point that I think is often misunderstood by newer players. A DRAW IS A LOSS.
Don’t play to draw, especially in a large tournament, if you can help it. The first reason for this is literal, for the purposes of making day two and for pairings for the rest of the tournament, a draw functions as a loss. It doesn’t help for making day two, it doesn’t help for more pro points, and it only marginally helps with payouts at the end if you get that far. Until/if you get to the final round, then it might act as a “really good tiebreaker” on a loss at best. The second reason you don’t want a draw is because the draws tend to beget more draws. Once you are in the draw bracket at a GP, the only people you will be playing for the remainder of the tournament will also be people that took draws; these are players that probably will not set speed records for decision making and there is an above average chance that they are control players. The reason I am hyperbolic here is because I think the mental shift of considering a draw to be a loss will actively change how you play, usually for the better. By playing as if a draw is literally losing it forces you to change your perspective. You can also take all of this to mean that you should play faster. But I think it would be more precise to say “be mindful of time” and “be more efficient.” The clock system being used in paper magic is different from digital magic, and put constraints on both players very different from those online.
Sidenote: one can take advantage of knowledge of the draw bracket. For example, in legacy the draw bracket is usually dominated by bad miracles players, if you are playing something like post that is 70-30 against miracles, a draw might be an interesting heads up play. I say “bad” miracles players, because miracles is a deck with a lot of decisions and very few win conditions, and it takes a lot of practice to be able to make all of the necessary decisions quickly and the newer players to the deck tend to be glacial; this also applies to UW control in modern, and occasionally to win-conditionless standard decks. Basically, this is always kind of a joke scenario I discuss among friends, and I don’t recommend taking draws early just to try and beat inexperienced control pilots (which might backfire anyway, as they might play you into additional draws).
I have one unintentional draw in my magic career, and that is because of a spirits mirror where we both had worship in play; I was playing lightning fast trying to get to my 2 remaining outs to remove his enchantment (he was out of outs to remove mine). Honestly, it’s my fault for having the card in my sideboard in the first place. By the end of the season we had discovered that often Gideon Jura performed a similar role better (especially against other worship decks), and were using this in the same slot.
There are several reasons I do not draw very often:
- I try to get to my seat early to get a clear view of the round timer; being able to see the timer is a good way to be able to steer the speed of the match. My rule of thumb, if your first game looks to be going over the 15 minute mark, try to see how you can speed things up and evaluate how both players’ pacing is going.
- Be willing to concede against a control or prison deck game 1 if you are less than 5% to win; this is/was especially key against decks like lantern control in modern (or if both players are on a control mirror in standard), where they are so slow that if you let the games play out all the way the match could be a single game affair. Sometimes if you can see that the match might go very long, it can be best to try to move along so that you have a chance to get to a reasonable game 3 if you win game 2.
- Often for decks like lantern the fault of “slowplay” isn’t on the part of the lantern player; rather, their opponent tends to take a longer time to make plays or refuse to concede because they don’t know they are beaten.
- I have seen a local bay area grinder unintentionally draw himself out of top 8 contention on at least 2 occasions because he a) tends to play slower decks, b) is unlucky enough to face opponents that are both slow decision makers and unwilling to concede when effectively beaten, and c) doesn’t call a judge soon enough. This leads us to the next point.
- I am ready and willing to call a judge on my opponent for slow-play. You do not have to be rude about this. I usually give my own verbal warning first, something along the lines of “hey, it’s already been 15 minutes this game, let’s both try to play faster so we don’t draw.” After I talk to my opponent and they are still playing slowly I am happy to call a judge to watch our pace of play. This is not a dirty, shameful act, and your opponent does not have any reason to be salty because of this. It is in both players’ best interest to finish a match on time and judges are there to help for just that kind of thing.
- My pace of play is slightly above average. This is largely because whenever there is downtime in a game, while someone is shuffling or my opponent is thinking, I am thinking about what my next move(s) will be, and what counter plays I might have to his possible moves. This is also useful for having meaningful bluffs; if you can jam your cards quickly without having to pause to think it makes you much more believable. I will adjust my sideboarding based on how much time is left and if I need to play to win quickly.
- I tend to play proactive decks. Obviously this isn’t always correct (unless the format is modern: friends don’t let friends play control in modern) and it isn’t everyone’s style, but boy do I like having time between rounds in a large tournament. I will play a more controlling deck, but only if I have sufficient time to learn the deck thoroughly enough to not draw.
- I’m not an over-shuffler. We’ve all sat across from the player who takes 5 minutes shuffling EVERY TIME. Then they spend just as much time shuffling your deck as they did their own. Don’t be that guy. This is a substantial waste of time for both parties no matter how much you feel like you’re controlling your destiny by over-shuffling (you aren’t). 7 riffles is enough to sufficiently randomize; a few more is fine, but please for the sake of us all, don’t overdo it.
You are going to make mistakes
Unfun facts. You are going to punt important matches, you are going to make bad deck choices, you might mis-register your deck, be late for a round, or draw yourself into 9th (I just did this at a recent CFB legacy 3k), or misread an opponent and get beaten on a bluff. It is all your fault and you might feel bad about it.
I have found that the best thing for me is to acknowledge the mistakes, find the parts that you did not do wrong, and then kindly and gently (not forcefully, if that makes sense) shelve it and put it behind you as best you can. You brain will try to focus on the bad more than the good, and the only thing you can do is try to acknowledge it and move along. Similarly, you must trust the man on the ground. Looking back at video footage with future knowledge might make it easy to be down on yourself, but it is important to realize what you knew at the time. I unnecessarily gave Jeremy Dezani a 3 outer to beat me in game 3 of a legacy GP win-and-in. It bothered me immensely for a day or two, but eventually I had to calmly recognize that I made a mistake, and that is ok. This is doubly true mid-tournament, where it is very easy to go on tilt and cause additional losses. I think this is also important for team events. You’ve chosen your teammates beforehand, they will make mistakes and that is ok, just try to help each other out as best you can. My friends and I have a saying we will yell at each other when someone tilts mid-tournament: “new round new tournament!” This doesn’t really make sense, but it is a reminder that each round is an independent entity, and there is no reason to go in with baggage from previous rounds.
Don’t always do the same thing
I provide a lot of heuristics, as do various other authors, for what one should do in specific situations.
These are great as general rules, but there are always times to improvise. I’ve been told by a few different storm opponents that I am difficult to play against; largely because when they present a difficult situation I will react differently or at least think it through each time. Many players, especially playing against a complicated combo deck like storm, will always do X. For example, some people will always counter the dark ritual, while others refuse to. Your opponent can take advantage of this, especially if they have played against you multiple times. If you always counter the ritual they can try to bait your counterspells with rituals. If you never counter they know they can just go off with ritual into duress. When you are playing a match you are building a narrative with your opponent. Maybe they have an overrun effect in sealed that they showed you the first game, and now they know you have to respect that overrun for the rest of the match. Similarly, I will often attack my 2/2 into their 0/3 early in a game/match. They either call my “bluff” and block, in which case I might be able to make the same play later and get them with a combat trick on a more important creature, or they give me free damage. Whatever way you do it, always keep in mind you are giving and receiving information from your opponent about what level you are on, how willing you are to bluff, and how you are most likely to respond to any given situation.
It is usually correct to jam, especially in limited
It is very common for midlevel players (grinders, I consider myself to fit this description) to want to play around everything. Maybe you are playing against standard control and want to play around turn two syncopate, or you don’t want to lose to overcome in sealed from the green deck. I think it is an important skill in magic to be able to realize what could happen that would make things go wrong. Maybe they have force of will, maybe you can get blown out by a combat trick, maybe they kill you when you let them untap in modern. However, knowing something can go wrong is not the same as acting like they always have it. I usually have a rough idea of what they might be able to do to stop me and what the percentages are based on card % and how they’ve been acting in the game. It is often correct, knowing the risks, to just make the proactive play.
In sealed if I know that my all out attack to put them dead in two turns loses to a threaten effect, I will jam because a) they have to put threaten in their deck, and b) they might have wrath of god or something much worse waiting to get you dead if you give them extra time. I tend to play magic like Doyle Brunson plays poker: loose-aggressive. It is usually worth it to push your advantage rather than give them time to catch up. This is important for control players as well. Sometimes snapcaster mage’s job is to be ambush viper so that you can actually end the game against a combo opponent. This also depends on the level of your opponent. If they are a good player, they might be enticing you with a position of weakness instead of actively being weak, trying to get you to over commit into a sweeper. Basically, what I am trying to say is that most players, especially at the grand prix level, are on level 1. They probably are not bluffing, their obvious tells are actually tells, and they probably don’t have it. Of course, this is susceptible to how you read your opponent. I once lost a match against Dan Ward because I made an aggressive attack into him game one, thinking there’s no way he is main-decking threaten because that card is bad. Turns out he was and I was immediately punished.
This is a very loose heuristic, and one that gets me in trouble if followed without thinking. My win percentage for modern horizons has been significantly lower than other limited sets because I tend to play more aggressively. The problem is that modern horizons has many more powerful cards than most sets, and there are more ways to be punished for loose play. There are also many more modal cards that might otherwise be so-so such as stirring address. Basically what I am trying to say is don’t be too meek, each of use will lose games to being too loose or too defensive, but I would rather be on the too loose side, at least then I have time to get lunch. I play like an ape and get rewarded, and do best with decks that reward this behavior (Legacy show and tell). This isn’t for everyone. At a minimum however I think it is a useful skill to know all the ways that a thing could go wrong, know exactly what decision you are making, and then make the loose/aggressive decision anyway. Inaction is just as dangerous as pushing, and giving your opponent extra time is always a risk.
Thus ends this particular week’s ramblings. Tune in soon for part two of this article, detailing higher level meta decisions and other tournament prep notes.
Revisiting Legacy Storm: Daze
Edit: Before going through this I would like to add that this was written right before Modern Horizons became legal and the meta has become a little less hostile and less focused around WAR haymakers since then. This article was written with a meta of spring 2019 in mind and a few points may be less impactful as of this article’s release in July 2019. That being said, this is still a very comprehensive guide on one of the many options we have in the Dark Ritual world and well worth discovering. Also I would like to credit Kai Sawatari and Jonathan Alexander for originating this plan. Enjoy.
In a format driven by velocity, mana efficiency is at a premium. Almost every viable deck tries to take advantage of card costs in some way, whether it’s through delve, Phyrexian mana, graveyard recursion, or an alternative cost. Following Force of Will and Surgical Extraction, we see Daze as a premier “free” spell in the format. Probably the greatest tempo spell ever printed, the card has proven its strength along side quick clocks and mana denial strategies. Recently banned in Pauper, this powerhouse can and has allowed combo decks with too low of a blue count for Force of Will to interact on an axis they normally cannot. Having a short shelf life however, Daze comes at a cost. War of the Spark has given legacy quite a shake-up, introducing many new problematic cards for combo strategies including Karn, the Great Creator , Narset, Parter of Veils , and Dreadhorde Arcanist , as well as a resurgence in old staples like Chalice of the Void and Counterbalance .
I think our friend from Nemesis may be the answer
What does daze offer to Storm?
Although you can try to play the counter war game, that’s likely not going to earn a slot in the storm box. Much more often than not, storm has no issue dealing with a pile of counter-magic since it is a completely reactive form of interaction and is not really something we need to care about until we want to win. This is something that becomes more and more apparent the more games you play vs blue mages and how sequencing your spells correctly can bait or encourage your opponent to spew their counters where they should not.
Similar to Abrupt Decay , Daze allows storm to play answers to permanent based hate that are generic enough to have text in most matchups. Being a Counterspell, the card has at least a little value across the board. Where Daze shines however is the fact that this is a Zero Mana answer to Chalice of the Void, Thalia, Guardian of Thraben , Counterbalance and others. One of the issues that Abrupt Decay has against taxing permanents is that you normally need to spend a turn or more off to answer it and by this time, there’s a good chance that you’ve lost the window that Decay was supposed to create; They may have played another permanent or two to slow you down or possibly turned off your Ad Nauseam line. If this card still seems out of place to you, let’s look at how Daze lines up against the metagame.
But first, the list:
Sawatari Daze Strom(SDS): By Kai Sawatari
First off, I just want to say that nothing about this list plays out the way you think it does in your head (or at least it did for me). Everything about this list that I wanted to change upon initial glance demonstrated its purpose when I played with it. Many of the concerns that I had ended up not being as big of a deal as I thought they were once I learned how the machine works. As you can see, there are a lot of changes made from the stock list to incorporate the Daze plan. This may seem a little extreme or unnecessary but the gameplan of this list will become more apparent as we look at how this lines up against the field. I am going to group the field into three groups: Combo, Fair-Blue, and Prison. The 2019 meta is much more diverse than this but most decks tend to take the role of one of these three when against ritual-based combo decks.
Daze Storm Vs. The World
How Storm battles Prison Decks and the “No Fear Pivot”
Well normally we don’t, but here’s how we think we do. Game 1 generally is a lot of crossing our fingers, prioritizing discard over cantripping, and playing around as little as possible after the first lock piece comes down. This varies a lot by matchup but generally we are in goldfish mode and make more aggressive decisions with our cantrips. We also lean on poor Ad Nauseam lines over waiting for a deterministic line because passing the turn is more often incorrect when you have the option to not do so.
Postboard games with a stock list are much slower as you board in 6 to 7 bounce or removal spells, diluting your deck on almost every axis. Ad Nauseam gets worse because you have more non-goldfish cards to flip. Past in Flames is more often off the table since most decks in this category run hard graveyard hate like Tormod’s Crypt or Leyline of the Void . Postboard hands missing a Lion’s Eye Diamond can be especially clunky as well. In addition to cutting cantrips, many games can be lost by having a redundant removal spell or simply the inability to punish your prison opponent when they mulligan into the ground and miss.
Introducing the “No Fear Pivot”
The Daze list takes a lot more of a “No Fear” approach against prison. Our game plan here is to cut all discard for Decays, an additional Daze, and extra goldfish cards like Dark Petition or an extra Tendrils of Agony, both of which make our Ad Nauseams much smoother by not requiring a flip of Lion’s Eye Diamond to win that turn. This configuration is surprisingly good at goldfishing on turn 2 or 3 while answering a permanent based piece of hate and avoids most of the issues a stock list runs into postboard. Keeping in all 12 cantrips and boarding up in “business” spells as opposed to down lets us do this much more often than it appears on paper. It’s worth noting that this deck is worse than stock at fighting through an excessive, above average amount of hate. A traditional list having access to Echoing Truth , Chain of Vapor , and Hurkyl’s Recall will provide more resilience, however I have found this plan to be favorable against the vast majority of Ancient Tomb decks since most of the time you face a large pile of taxing artifacts you aren’t winning regardless of what your plan is.
How Storm Beats Other Combo Decks
This is obviously quite a sliding scale but most combo decks in legacy can be grouped into the ones that play Force of Will and the ones that don’t.
Force of Will Combo decks tend to rely on cantrips and blue permission to protect their combo and ensure they live to tell their tale. This category includes decks like Sneak and Show, High Tide, and Infect. Discard has historically beaten countermagic in combo mirrors and that still holds up in 2019. These all tend to favor storm because discard tends to be harder to fight through as a combo deck than countermagic since blue permission is a completely reactive form of interaction and has a much larger mana tax to play it. These matchups tend to involve lots of calculated risk-taking because passing the turn could mean death. That being said, even if they are aware of us playing daze, they probably cannot afford to play around it if it changes their clock. Having both forms of interaction, especially in a game 1, is very strong and will win you games from the inability to play around it. 8 Discard is nice in game 1s here but so is beating your opponent. For these matchups we have the best of both worlds, having up to 6 counterspells and 8 discard spells postboard if we choose so. Speed is almost always the name of the game and playing around cards game 1 although situational is more often incorrect in the blind because of how proactive these decks are.
Non-Force Combo decks in legacy either rely on either efficient discard, a powerful backup plan, a plan that is hard to interact with, or raw speed. This encapsules the Reanimator and Dredge variants, Marit Leige variants, Elves, Storm variants, and others. These matchups tend to have interesting decisions, mostly on how to use your interaction. A common one in discard mirrors, both fair and unfair, is if you spend your interaction on disrupting them or to stop their disruption. Daze tends to not be very useful in these matchups as mana is rarely a bottleneck when players are shredding each others’ hands and players can normally afford the tempo to play around it. The main exception to this is the “raw speed” combo decks, mainly Black Red reanimator. This is an atrocious matchup for storm since they are a turn faster on average and have pregame interaction via Chancellor of the Annex . Daze is an amazing card for this matchup since they are a turn 1 combo deck with little resilience that really does not want to pass the turn.
How Storm Beats Fair-Blue and the “Blue Pivots”
Fair-Blue decks are the largest subgroup of legacy and, in my opinion, the biggest reason to play ANT. On paper, most of these decks look like they crush storm but play out differently when the stars don’t align. Daze is far from an all-star here but we have quite a maniacal plan accounting this. Once again, there is a lot of deviation in these strategies but from the view of a storm pilot, Fair-Blue mostly breaks down into Aggro-Blue, UBx “Strix-Pile” Blue, and “Tundra Blue”.
UBx Blue decks like Grixis Control and Czech Pile tend to be the easiest of these three despite looking like the hardest on paper. I am categorizing this group as “strix-pile” decks from their use of Baleful Strix as a glue. these decks use countermagic, Snapcaster Mage[c] , powerful discard like [c]Thoughtseize and Hymn to Tourach , and a strong Xerox package, which are all powerful, proactive forms of disruption against us. However, the high amount of dead cards and lack of a clock make game 1 a heavy favorite due to the strength of Past in Flames and Ad Nauseam undoing all discard. The fact that most of these decks more often rely on Surgical Extraction over other hate like Nihil Spellbomb both means this is often true postboard. Replacing the Daze package with more action and discard makes this matchup feel quite lopsided even post-board. Although we are not playing it, Empty the Warrens is also an insanely effective card that demands them to find a 2 or 3 of in short time. Often times 6 goblins will either be enough to cross the finish, or put a serious constraint on their cantrips and planeswalkers.
Aggro Blue, which is basically only Delver of Secrets decks in 2019, is a little rougher than the strix blue matchup but has consistently been a good match up throughout history and remains so today. Our gameplan is usually to establish stable mana, play around everything possible, and go off at the last possible second. Absolutely nothing about this is what Daze is trying to do.
Introducing the Semi-Pivot
In this matchup we transform into a Grinding Station-esque list, cutting all the cards with a shelf life for multiple copies of Tendrils, an extra Past in Flames, as well as Carpet of Flowers and more discard. The goal with this is to ignore all soft disruption by invalidating it and win by naturally drawing a copy of tendrils, if not two. That being said, Carpet of Flowers is important too and very much worth fetching into wasteland to play. Without Deathrite Shaman in the format, most Delver decks can’t afford to play at least 2 lands into it. When it’s time to go off, keep in mind that a ritual or discard spell normally provokes a reaction with cards like Spell Pierce and Daze, adding to the storm count. Cantrips can also be saved for storm count on the combo turn once mana is no longer a bottleneck. This plan relies pretty heavily on the fact that these decks do not play discard and have no way to punish you for stockpiling your hand until the last second. That being said, when the plan works, their hand is basically irrelevant. Since you always have inevitability in the match up, it is often worthwhile to take a threat with a turn one Thoughtseize to extend the game.
Tundra Blue breaks down mostly into the Miracles and Stoneblade variants of legacy. Although they function very differently, both play similar forms of interaction and have anemic clocks, so we will group them together. Notably Daze can save us from losing to a Counterbalance on the spot or losing control to an early Jace, the Mind Sculptor , but the card is much worse postboard when both players are constantly passing the turn with mana up. These decks try to hide behind a wall of Snapcaster Mages and Flusterstorms until either a Jace or mediocre creature beats takes the game. Outside of troubling permanents like Counterbalance and Search for Azcanta , the Snap-Fluster interaction can be very hard for a discard-based combo deck to beat if they do not come prepared to face it.
Now is time to introduce the Full Pivot
(Prepare Yourself)
In these matchups we board out dazes as well as the Infernal Tutor-Lion’s Eye Diamond package entirely and bring in basically our entire sideboard. Thirteen cards, all but the 4th Daze and 2nd Dark Petition come in and we are a different deck entirely. This configuration will basically never be able to go off in the first few turns but if the game goes as planned our engine will run almost without a choke point. Going on manual mode means that our discard can basically ignore all spells that aren’t Snapcaster Mage, Surgical Extraction , and Flusterstorm. Sometimes we can even pay for Flusterstorm or fight over them with our own! Abrupt Decay is our greatest utility spell in the match up and a necessity to answer permanents Tundra Mages play like Counterbalance. Keep in mind not to spew these, even when you have multiples; A surgical on Decay into counterbalance is the best line our opponent can take against our plan. Cabal Therapy outperforms other discard spells since it is normally a must-counter, meaning it generates multiple storm; The 3 3 2 split also provides incidental insulation from a proactive Surgical Extraction. Carpet of Flowers either functions as a ritual by changing phases the turn you cast it or gives you the velocity to sculpt your hand while holding up interaction. All in all, we take the control role in the matchup and take advantage of the opponent respecting our explosiveness from game 1. One could think of this as a pump-fake: You keep them waiting on their countermagic for a Tutor or Past in Flames and then you cast 2 Tendrils off 8 mana with a Flusterstorm to fight back.
Why is There No Empty the Warrens?
Empty the Warrens has been the secondary win condition of Storm decks since the card was printed. Serving as a second angle of attack, Empty the Warrens fills a different role in each matchup. As we go through the matchups, keep in mind how our deck pivots postboard in each case.
Against prison decks, Empty serves as a speed option, normally a calculated risk. Most prison decks have an answer to a wide board; Death and Taxes has Batterskull , Eldrazi has Ratchet Bomb, Moon Stompy has Fiery Confluence ; The list goes on and on . When we empty in these matchups, it’s generally in fear of something we cannot or do not want to play through, serving as an alternative of passing the turn. Our “No Fear” pivot is shockingly consistent at casting Ad Nauseam or Past in Flames on turn 2 or 3 through a piece of hate. It is very rare with this configuration that you could tutor for Empty the Warrens and not simply win. In the wise words of Cedric Phillips, “This is the classic plan of Ponder, kill you.”
Against Fair-Blue, Empty the Warrens serves as either a low-resource alternative that plays well through blue interaction or a “gotcha” or “cheese” play when you happen to naturally draw it. Our configuration here, with the exception of the “strix blue” decks, is really set up to play a much more patient game. Since we never really have a lack of resources, we generally don’t need to take on the risks associated with this plan.
Empty the Warrens is still a great storm card. Having the option to go all in with as few as 8 goblins (or less!) when you know the coast is clear is very strong. If there was a 16th slot, Empty the Warrens would be fine to add…but we don’t have that privilege. Empty would just be a little too low impact with this gameplan to warrant a slot. The main appeal that I view from Empty the Warrens is the ability to board into a Blue Pivot vs the Discard “UBx” decks. As the list is, there is too much risk of a discard spell followed with a surgical taking your Tendrils of Agony when you have a full 3 in your deck against any UBx deck. If you were inclined to run one, I would recommend playing it over a Tendrils rather than the Dark Petition since it is not good in combo mirrors.
Conclusion & Sideboard Guide
I cannot stress enough how different this list plays out than one would think it does. A lot of choices may seem suspect, but this is a very well-tuned machine that executes better than theory may suggest. I would highly recommend trying the list card for card before making any changes and having faith in the board plan. Make sure to Join the Ad Nauseam Tendrils Facebook group if you found this interesting and would like to read more on this.
Keep Storming,
Michael Clifford
For questions and inquiries, contact me at clifford@manatutors.com
Sideboard Guide:
Vs Delver “Semi Pivot”
Vs Tundra “Full Pivot”
Vs Grixis Control
Vs DnT “No Fear Pivot”
Vs Sneak and Show
Vs Storm
Vs Elves
OTD
OTP
Vs GB Depths Variants
Vs BR Reanimator
Vs Lands
Vs Eldrazi / Moon stompy
Either this approach or
Vs 4c “Aggro” loam
SB Guide by Michael Clifford (Cl1ffy81)
DEPTHS TENDRILS HELM (DETH)
Meet DETH
I am most well known in the magic community for designing this deck. So far, it hasn’t exactly made waves in the legacy format, but there has been a ripple or two. My first two live tournaments I made top 16 (CFB 4k) and split top 4 (Forgotten Path Games 1k) respectively. My List combines 3 well known (or long forgotten) combos all in one insane amalgamation I have named DETH, an acronym that represents the ways it can win while clearly explaining what happens to your opponent when any of those modes are implemented. I have nurtured it, watched it grow and am proud of the deck it’s become. However, it wasn’t born as the glorious work of art you see today.
It all started in 2018 when I was reading through some old cards and stumbled upon Ill-gotten Gains. I thought to myself, “wow, this would be pretty sweet with Leyline of the Void.” When I voiced this idea to my dear brother, he agreed, that it would indeed be “sweet” but followed up with a question I was not yet prepared to answer, “yeah, but how do you win?” I toyed around with this idea until I landed on Helm of Obedience. I then built my deck, which, at the time, consisted of Leylines, Helms, Ill-gotten Gains, a bunch of discard spells, baubles and infernal contracts. I took it to my local legacy weekly tournament and got destroyed. Turns out, my “sweet” idea wasn’t so great in practice. One pithing needle, Disenchant or Assassin’s Trophy (just to name a few) completely locked me out of the game.
Instead of becoming discouraged (despite the taunting and teasing of my friends) I went back to the drawing board, a Lone Ranger facing terrible odds. After a few weeks of tweaking the build I had; testing cabal rituals, trying various mana bases and transformative sideboards (which may or may not have included Doom Whisperer), I finally conceded that the deck, as it was, couldn’t hang with the big boys and gals. By big boys and gals, of course, I am referring to the Tiered decks we all know and love (or hate). Even with the baubles, the discard and the card draw, I just couldn’t assemble my combo fast enough, and sure I stole some matches, however, if I didn’t start with a Leyline in play the game rarely went my way.
I decided I needed a more efficient way to get the card I needed when I needed it, and decided I would give Infernal Tutor and Lion’s Eye Diamond a trial run. I cut the baubles and exchanged them for lotus petals, I was going all in. I took it back and started to see instant results, posting my first winning record at my local event. After additional testing I realized I had a very relevant piece of the Iggy-pop shell already in my main board. So, I figured, I may as well throw a Tendrils of Agony in and see what happened. It was great! It gave the deck another way to win, I could finally play around a Pithing Needle, a Disenchant AND an Assassin’s Trophy.
As the ancient riddle goes “what is better than two combos?” Three combos! I jokingly suggested that I should jam the Dark Depths combo into the deck as well. The response, “why not?” Yes, why not indeed? So, that’s exactly what I did. I then had my triple threat deck, DETH. DEpths Tendrils Helm. I went to work testing various copies of Vampire hexmage, Thesbian’s stage and Dark Depths and ultimately decided to run 3 of each land and 2 hexmage.
That week, my friend Jay Trojan asked me if I was going to the Legacy 4k at Channel Fireball the following weekend, and told me that he had a deck I could borrow should I want to attend. I remember deciding that I would go, and that I would be bringing my homebrew. I ended up surprising the field (and myself) that day stealing match after match. I started 3-0 and lost round 4 in 3 games to my friend Isaac Sears who knew and had played against my list. Then I was 4-1, then 5-1, for the last round I got the CFB feature match and again was paired against a friend who knew my list, Marshall Janakowski. I was bested in 2 games. I finished 5-2 and 15th overall. Channel Fireball brought me into their streaming booth for a brief interview about the deck. It was then that I decided I would continue to refine the deck and begin streaming it.
That more or less brings us to today, I am still streaming the deck at traswidden on Twitch and I am still refining the build and sideboard.
My Two Cents: There are a ton of undiscovered competitive decks out there, and a lot of great ideas. A good idea by itself does not equate to a good deck. With enough time, care and patience some of these ideas can become competitive decks. I took a ton of learning losses to find the right combination of cards to make this deck competitive. Is it the best deck of all time? Maybe not, but if you ask me, it’s the most fun.
THE COMBOS
Leyline of the Void/ Helm of Obedience. This is an old favorite of mine. Leyline of the Void causes your opponent’s cards to be exiled rather than placed in the graveyard, while Helm of Obedience states that you must place X cards into your opponent’s graveyard until a creature is placed there or X is reached. The result, of course, of having both of these cards on the battlefield together is being able to mill your opponent’s entire library with X being equal to 1. Since a card is never placed in the graveyard, the condition is never satisfied, thus winning you the game on your opponents next draw step due to them being unable to draw a card. Naturally, getting two cards that take 4 mana into play is no small feat. Being able to start with a Leyline in play is a huge advantage for this particular combo and is generally good against the field. It shuts off reanimator shenanigans, dredge nonsense, snapcaster mage trickeries, as well as Life from the Loam strategies to name a few. The graveyard is a huge resource in legacy and sometimes taking that away is enough. However, this deck also works proactively to win with Leyline of the Void in addition to thwarting your opponent’s game plan. In addition to running 3 Helm in the main deck, there are also 5 cards that can tutor for it.
Ill-gotten Gains is another all-star when paired with Leyline, it doesn’t immediately win you the game if you resolve it, but often your opponent may concede. Since your opponent can’t place cards in their graveyard, Ill-gotten Gains effectively exiles their hand while allowing you your choice of any 3 cards from your graveyard to come back to your hand. Mind Twist? SOLD.
I’m sure many of you are familiar with this combination of cards, being able to make a 20/20 flying, indestructible creature on turn one is pretty great. Hexmage is also useful on its own as a way to take out planeswalkers or clear counters off of a chalice of the void when you need it. Similarly, Thespian’s stage can copy many of the utility lands your opponents control that the deck can’t afford to play. Two of my favorite targets : locus lands versus Eldrazi post and Karakas against Death and Taxes, also, every once in a while you can get away copying a Dark Depths controlled by an unsuspecting opponent.
This is the third and final win condition. Storm. This can lead to some tricky lines in actual gameplay, but the math and theory behind it are simple enough. Cast 10 spells and then cast Tendrils of Agony. In order for this plan to work, you need a six mana loop. The simplest way to achieve this is with 2 mana, 2 Lion’s Eye Diamonds and one Infernal Tutor. Cast Infernal Tutor with your 2 mana, sacrifice your 2 LEDs with your spell on the stack floating 6 black mana and tutor for Ill-gotten Gains. Cast your Ill-gotten Gains with 4 of your six floating mana targeting LED, LED, and infernal tutor from your graveyard. Use the last 2 floating black mana to cast Infernal Tutor again sacrificing the LED’s in the same fashion. You can repeat this process until you have cast enough spells to tutor for your Tendrils of Agony and end the game. Similarly, you can run this combo the same way with 3 mana, 1 dark ritual and 1 LED. Since this loop only nets you 5 mana, you are -1 mana for each loop you do, so in order to get to 10 spells you would need the third land to cast the dark ritual leaving you with exactly 4 mana after casting infernal tutor and sacrificing LED.
The General Idea
Having three distinctly different win conditions in the deck is difficult for your opponents to navigate, but it can also be challenging to pilot. Often times, I have discovered that you need to pivot between game plans as your opponents shut one path of victory off. For Instance, Thalia makes it impossible to win by storm, where Karakas makes your Depths combo useless. The ability to adapt and innovate is crucial. What deck are you playing against? Which combo is most likely to beat them? Which combo are you closest to assembling? There are a lot of moving parts in all magic games, which is what makes the game so great, but it is especially true with DETH. If you’d like to see the deck in action I stream it often under the handle Traswidden. Next time I will go a little more in depth about the deck’s good, and not so good match ups and general sideboard strategies and answer some of the questions I posed above.
The medium guide to metagames
Every time something new happens in magic, the community goes through a predictable cycle finding out what the best decks are, and content creators spend a great deal of time shouting from the rooftops what the best decks, how you should build them, and how you should sideboard with them. I intend to similarly yell advice at you in future articles. First, however, let’s break down what the cycle is, and find some ways to take advantage of this cycle.
I am reminded of one of the best magic articles of all time, which still gives an excellent description of how magic players act in groups. If you haven’t given “information cascades in magic” a read, I highly recommend doing so. If you don’t know what “ghost dad” is, don’t worry about it, just insert the name of a bad deck that people love to play and will defend to the death (think of the rock or merfolk in modern). We have significantly more information about deck percentages, meta percentages, and conversion rates, but much of the information regarding how players tend to follow blindly is still very evident in tournament magic.
Ok, so we’ve got this cool new format due to cards either entering or leaving a format. Usually it’s because a new set just came into standard (War most recently), but maybe it’s because a set just came into modern (horizons), or maybe they just implemented the London mulligan rule AND IT’S RAINING GRISELBRANDS! BAN THE DREDGE MECHANIC!
Take a deep breath. Things are probably going to be fine. Here’s a simple timeline of any given first month of standard:
Week 1: Many show up with THE DECK that everyone is afraid of (nexus of fate, rw angels, bant flash, esper control), it generally does not go well for them. The good aggro decks (mono red/white) probably win the first tournament of the cycle or are heavily represented. Something like 10 different decks are represented in the top 16; 8/10 will never be spoken of again.
Week 2: Now that we know aggro is good and brews are bad, fewer people show up with aggro and the true midrange deck of the format emerges (gb/bug midrange). Aggro dies to a wave of life gain and sweepers.
Week 3: The midrange arms race begins. Decks become tuned and start cutting obviously bad cards. Opponents are now set to grind mode (esper midrange, gw tokens). By the end of the week an unexpected hero emerges to dumpster midrange (mono blue); this hero probably has a bad time against aggro.
Week 4: The midrange arms race has reached its peak. Ramp decks come out of the woodwork (gates, ug ramp) to tron themselves all over midrange decks. Control might be part of this arms race, depending on how they match up against hate cards.
Week 5-bored: If the format is healthy, the balance of aggro->midrange->midranger->combo->control->aggro will cycle indefinitely, probably with no more than 3-4 decks in tier 1. If the format is bad, everyone is playing rb vehicles because the midrange decks are killing too fast to be taken advantage of by bigger decks. The best deck is probably a midrange deck with either a transformative/strong sideboard, a combo finish, or is more aggressive than it has any right to be while still grinding.
If your format of choice is modern, double the amount of time and replace the word “midrange” with “combo.” If your format of choice is Legacy, quadruple the amount of time and remember that “midrange” in this context means “fair blue deck.” If your format of choice is Vintage, octuple the time, replace your 4 non-restricted list flex slots with the cool new planeswalker(s)/draw engine, rename your deck if your draw engine changed or was restricted, and call it a day.
Based on the assumptions from our week by week breakdown, we can draw a few conclusions. This all assumes that the goal is to maximize win rate; an obvious assumption, but not always a true one. This also assumes one can switch decks with some regularity; this is true even less often, but we can address that a little later.
Aggro is almost always best in week one when people are trying to brew; this is repeated ad nauseum and hardly worth going into. Basically just be wary of the dangers of doing cool things during week one when everyone knows to burn you out. There’s also an argument for bringing the thing that beats aggro week one, especially if there is a midrange deck well-tuned for doing this from last season (g/b midrange); this assumes that something actually beats aggro, which is not always the case (mono blue of pre-war).
Week two is when you’re likely to play against the remnants of aggro and the up and coming midrange deck; now is probably the time to be going over the top. Week two is also when the rules of engagement start to become defined; this season it’s the hunt for the best planeswalker deck, last season it was a race to see who could draw the most cards, preferably with hydroid krasis, before that it basically a matter of finding the best deck that could contain aggro (golgari, thanks to find // finality).
Week three is deep into arms race territory; now is probably the time to zag and try to do something that abuses midrange decks: combos, ramping, mono blue, etc. Previously this was around the time when the pro tour took place. This is no longer necessarily the case, so it is harder to find a single event to answer the simple question: what am best deck?
By the time week 4 hits there’s usually a pretty good idea of what the “best deck” is, if it exists. The best deck often checks more than one of the archetype boxes. If it’s the best aggro deck and the best midrange deck, it’s probably busted (rb vehicles); if it’s the best midrange deck and the best combo deck (4c command the dreadhorde?), probably not a bad choice. This standard season there are an unreasonable number of decks that have an excellent fair plan backed up by a combo finish. Command the Dreadhorde, bolas’s citadel, and bontu all allow a player to win in a position where they are significantly behind on board. This is somewhat unique to just-before-rotation cycles and older formats, usually the deck that best interacts while still enacting its own consistent game-plan is the best deck (think phoenix decks in modern).
I’ve pretty much laid out how level 0 and 1 work out for the first month of a cycle. The level 0 solution to metagames is: play aggro, then play midrange, then tune midrange to be midrange-ier (in many ways control is the midrange-iest midrange of all), then keep tuning midrange to actually win once we’ve found the midrange-iest deck. Level 0 is the safest bet and will probably give you the most consistent good-but-not-winning-the-tournament results. The level 1 solution is one step faster than level 0; play midrange, then make it durdlier, then find a combo or trump, then probably go to aggro or combo to finish out the season and punish durdlers; in short, try to be one step ahead of the level 0 players. Level 1 is mostly likely to win or very quickly lose you the tournament; i.e. playing to the winner’s meta. Level 1, if you can manage it, is where you’re supposed to be if the goal is to spike a tournament; I usually end up somewhere in level 0 and as a result I have a ton of top 16s. Just don’t be on level 2; don’t play ramp/durdly midrange versus a sea of aggro, and don’t play aggro into slightly more interactive aggro decks.
If you don’t have the ability or desire to repeatedly swap decks, that’s fine, we can use these results to select 1 or 2 decks in a cycle that let you keep playing magic without continuously changing things. In general, if you can only get one deck, and the goal is to minimize win-rate, you should probably pick up an aggro deck. Aggro decks are cheaper, good week 1 and week 4+ and usually aren’t too awful in the bad weeks, as you can always catch a stumbling opponent.
If you have access to multiple decks, but not all the decks, I would still recommend having an aggro deck for the start of any given season, followed by the most obvious midrange deck with a good endgame and tools to break up combo (duress, spell pierce) and aggro (shock, cry of the carnarium). For the last 6+ months or so this would mean carrying around mono white or red, coupled with gb/bug midrange or drakes. No matter the meta, one of these two decks will be close to correct, and they persist across different metagames with minimal changes; naturally the gb midrange deck will run you up a pretty penny, especially if you had to buy Hydroid Krasis at the wrong time, but it is a reasonable long term investment given how long it has been a player in the format.
Anyway, after all that rambling there should probably be a conclusion. Metagame cycles are predictable and magic players follow information cascades in a repeatable fashion. Doing what everyone else is doing will give good but not great results but takes significantly less effort; being one step ahead of the cycle is ideal, but only comes with a great deal of testing work and is very punishing if misjudged. This applies to all magic formats (including limited), but that will take further discussion in the future.
Good luck out there!