This deck has gone through a few iterations. I regret calling it Torpor Beef now because Torpor Orb itself is no longer required.
Eater of Days has been tried in the earliest incarnations. The main reason that I personally prefer the WBG version that plays all of the CMC-matters board wipes is because we can proactively play Hunted Horror, take a hit, then wipe the board next turn. Eater of Days' biggest downside is that that option is completely off the table. Its downside is SO BAD without an Orb out that you simply can't risk it. And an Abrupt Decay in response to Eater is also basically game over.
I'm very down on Eater. By all means, try it yourself, though. I just wanted to provide my opinion since I did run it for a short while.
I had originally decided against playing blue because Hunted Phantasm, while good, was double blue and I wasn't in love with any other blue cards. Displacement Wave might be enough to change my mind. It definitely looks good pre-testing.
I tested Troll a few times and always wound up agreeing with Luke71 -- it being completely chump blockable makes it significantly worse than the options with Trample or Flying. We're already using our removal on guys that we incidentally give them. We don't want to *have* to remove creatures they play from hand, too (even though it's nice to have that option).
I'm very much not a fan of the Blood Artist + Torpor Orb. My gut says that Blood Artist adds too many moving pieces, but if you do want to try that I'd encourage running green for Crime // Punishment and going for the route that maximizes CMC-matters sweepers. I used to love Blood Artist + sweepers as a way to get reach in Standard. We can do the same thing in Modern and it might just provide some nice reach.
Hello to eveyone im starting to use this deck and i dont know how does the Ricochet trap works, can you redirect the counterspell to it?
Exactly right. You occasionally get the opponent that doubt that this works or that makes you say it to make sure that you know how it works, so it's good to know the mechanics. When you cast the spell you only choose one target: the counterspell. On resolution you choose what the new target of that counterspell is going to be, and Ricochet Trap is a valid choice at that time because it's on the stack in the middle of resolving. As a bonus, if it's Remand that you're doing this to, they don't get to draw a new card off of it because it winds up being countered by the game rules.
So apparently the guy LSV was playing that was on Soul Sisters was Rogue Deck Builder. I know that guy and watch his videos on YouTube, but didn't notice the screen name until... Rogue Deck Builder posted HIS side of the match:
My hopes for impromptu raid are fairly low, to be honest, but I'm also going to try it out, I think.
I've never been happy with beast within being our only real out to rest in peace. It's better than not having an out, but it frankly is pretty bad. We have to draw it, possibly using cyclers as just cyclers to do so. Then we have to give them a beast. All for the honor of basically starting the game over. Blah!
It may wind up that living twin just solves the same problem better, though By giving us a second combo that doesn't need the graveyard.
Btw, thanks for linking the card. Usually I would, but I'm stugging to even post via phone right now.
I have almost won against burn once. Actually, I should have won, but saw the line too late. What did it take? Drawing literally all four of the sideboard brindle boars. That match up is TOUGH.
About LSV: I haven't been playing this deck as much as I'd like lately, but when I have, I've been trying a new play style. I basically have been playing against everyone the way I play against twin: slow, methodical. Even if the don't have blue and I have the cascade in hand, I wait until they tap out or I can't wait any longer. It's been... working.
Watching the LSV video, I think that version of the deck is better set up for the waiting game. Two combos they have to play around, etc. I am still wary of it, but my local store allows a small number of proxies on thursdays. I may try the living twin next week...
On a side note, has anyone discussed impromptu raid yet as a sideboard card v rest in peace? Stumbled upon it today and it looks reasonable for that purpose.
I ran AoW as a singleton a good while back (GP Minneapolis if you want to look up a time frame) and was a big proponent. The Meta was undoubtedly different. Take this with a grain of salt.
* Yes, it's not bolt-proof. That matters against a few decks, but honestly having a creature or two that die to bolt isn't that bad. Your creatures already die to all the non-red removal. Their removal is still dead in the early game and too little too late usually after a cascade. I personally strongly believe that Bolt-Proof is an overstated concern. I want my creatures to be big so that the opponent dies in fewer swings, not because that protects them from bolt. I dislike VERY low toughness creatures (5/1 or something) not because of bolt, but because things like Snapcaster Mage are now relevant blockers. I want my average opponent to have literally zero relevant blockers. (Note: I played before Siege Rhino... I take it your opponent having no creatures as big as Living End is a thing of the past.)
* All-In isn't a binary thing. AoW pushes you toward a faster combo, but it's not like it forces you to remove all of your other non-combo pieces. You can still decide where you are on the spectrum. I ran a blood moon version, which made me up the number of landcyclers a bit. I was mostly running AoW because I had more two-mana cyclers and I wanted another one-mana cycler to try and improve my average opening hand.
* The ETB effect is actually fairly relevant. If you believe that they have nothing that can interact with a resolved LE, AoW often (usually ONE of the top three cards are relevant) gives you two attack steps. That's often enough to win the game. Even if you're unlucky and they have three relevant spells, you have more information about the opponents future plans than they do.
Four AoW seems like a LOT. THAT deck is super all-in with only four non-combo spells in the main deck. I can't say if that's good or bad, I've fallen out of modern and meta-calls are my super weak point right now.
But AoW is a card that I was quite happy with as a one-of and I strongly believe should be in the Living End players' toolbox. It can do a lot more things than just make you all-in. For instance, I often wanted to bring in more than one copy against control (I only had the one, so I couldn't). Why? Push their wraths to the bottom. I love AoW against any deck that has in their deck a one-card answer to a resolved LE.
Slaughter Games against Twin has always disappointed me. Even if it resolves, you're taking only half of their cards since they can use either Splinter Twin or Kiki-Jiki. Slaughter Games goes a bit better against decks like Scapeshift (or, sadly, us) that have one card that they *really* want to have and for which there is no replacement.
My personal list was blood moon instead of fulminator. That was when jund was king and blood moon got several turn three scoops and hasty thoughtseizes. I've also had a rwu control player realize that they only ran a single plains and could not wrath anymore.
I probably wouldn't run both. BUT I think "is this a blood moon meta or a fulminator meta?" Is a question that shouldbe seriously considered periodically instead of thinking the answer is always fulminator.
Scapeshift, as mentioned earlier, has so many answers to a Blood Moon that it is not anywhere as effective in use as it is in theory and discussion. Most lists are running 4-10 counters as well 6-8 basics and most decent scapeshift players aren't powering out the Duals early anyways.
[...]
Fulminator Mage on the other hand is mana denial 100% of the time. It plays alongside the game plan of Living End in general as well as allowing you to hit key components of opposing decks while not changing the way your game has to advance.
Counters and basic lands neuter Fulminator Mage just as much, so that's not really a point in either direction. It gets a bit better because if it's countered it comes back when you cascade, but if your Living End resolves, you're very favored to win anyway, so I tend to ignore situations that are only good if you resolve a Living End. Prior to Living End resolving, Blood Moon and Fulminator Mage are actually pretty similar. Blood Moon is slightly easier to cast, while Fulminator can swing and/or block. There's also a few counter spells that rotate in/out of favor that can only counter creature spells or only non-creature spells that may or may not be randomly relevant. But overall pretty similar prior to Living End.
Blood Moon is a fine-to-great card depending on the meta. You don't have to convince the entire board that it's good to make it good. Just play it. It took a big hit when Jund stopped being one of the best decks, then again when Delver took over, but the meta will shift to where it's a great card again.
Anyone that says that blood moon is unplayable in our deck just because it's three colors likely hasn't tested it for any real length of time. The cyclers we run are either colorless or include red in their hybrid mana requirements. It's actually very very easy to keep advancing our game plan when blood moon is out by just cycling. It sometimes prevents us from casting a cascade spell until turn five or six, but the vast majority of those times, our opponent is doing literally nothing while we cycle.
Cycling will eventually come back, it's too solid an ability not to, I feel like I have heard that Maro has stated it's like his favorite ability in the past, so I think until the we should not try to shoehorn these cards in.
I don't remember him saying that it's his favorite ability (though he may have), but he has said that in modern design rules that they like having a "consistency/draw-smoothing mechanic" around somewhere in standard. Right now we're rocking scry, which fills that role.
I just plotted it up and since Kamigawa we've been following a pattern which may or may not be accidental. Kamigawa/Ravnica standard had neither cycling nor scry. Then Time Spiral had both. Then when Time Spiral fell out of standard and we were with Lorwyn Shadowmoor, we once again were without cycling or scry. Then Alara brought cycling. Then Alara rotated out and we were without either in Zendikar/Scars. Right after that, M11 gave us Scry. Then in Innistrade/RTR, we had neither. Theros gave us Scry. When Theros rotates, we're relatively likely to go without for one Standard season, then get either Scry or cycling. Unless that's just an accidental pattern. It probably is accidental, but it does go to show that they like having those sort of mechanics in more often than not.
I was slightly leaning toward #1 before reezel mentioned the collector numbers. Given what reezel said it's more than a lean for me. I think option 1 is the clear winner.
This deck has gone through a few iterations. I regret calling it Torpor Beef now because Torpor Orb itself is no longer required.
Eater of Days has been tried in the earliest incarnations. The main reason that I personally prefer the WBG version that plays all of the CMC-matters board wipes is because we can proactively play Hunted Horror, take a hit, then wipe the board next turn. Eater of Days' biggest downside is that that option is completely off the table. Its downside is SO BAD without an Orb out that you simply can't risk it. And an Abrupt Decay in response to Eater is also basically game over.
I'm very down on Eater. By all means, try it yourself, though. I just wanted to provide my opinion since I did run it for a short while.
I had originally decided against playing blue because Hunted Phantasm, while good, was double blue and I wasn't in love with any other blue cards. Displacement Wave might be enough to change my mind. It definitely looks good pre-testing.
I tested Troll a few times and always wound up agreeing with Luke71 -- it being completely chump blockable makes it significantly worse than the options with Trample or Flying. We're already using our removal on guys that we incidentally give them. We don't want to *have* to remove creatures they play from hand, too (even though it's nice to have that option).
I'm very much not a fan of the Blood Artist + Torpor Orb. My gut says that Blood Artist adds too many moving pieces, but if you do want to try that I'd encourage running green for Crime // Punishment and going for the route that maximizes CMC-matters sweepers. I used to love Blood Artist + sweepers as a way to get reach in Standard. We can do the same thing in Modern and it might just provide some nice reach.
/json/version.json /json/version-full.json, and /json/changelog.json have the information you want in different levels of detail.
Exactly right. You occasionally get the opponent that doubt that this works or that makes you say it to make sure that you know how it works, so it's good to know the mechanics. When you cast the spell you only choose one target: the counterspell. On resolution you choose what the new target of that counterspell is going to be, and Ricochet Trap is a valid choice at that time because it's on the stack in the middle of resolving. As a bonus, if it's Remand that you're doing this to, they don't get to draw a new card off of it because it winds up being countered by the game rules.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhB8iHt-w9I
Want to see the utter and complete shatterpause in game one when LSV cast Deceiver Exarch?
I've never been happy with beast within being our only real out to rest in peace. It's better than not having an out, but it frankly is pretty bad. We have to draw it, possibly using cyclers as just cyclers to do so. Then we have to give them a beast. All for the honor of basically starting the game over. Blah!
It may wind up that living twin just solves the same problem better, though By giving us a second combo that doesn't need the graveyard.
Btw, thanks for linking the card. Usually I would, but I'm stugging to even post via phone right now.
About LSV: I haven't been playing this deck as much as I'd like lately, but when I have, I've been trying a new play style. I basically have been playing against everyone the way I play against twin: slow, methodical. Even if the don't have blue and I have the cascade in hand, I wait until they tap out or I can't wait any longer. It's been... working.
Watching the LSV video, I think that version of the deck is better set up for the waiting game. Two combos they have to play around, etc. I am still wary of it, but my local store allows a small number of proxies on thursdays. I may try the living twin next week...
On a side note, has anyone discussed impromptu raid yet as a sideboard card v rest in peace? Stumbled upon it today and it looks reasonable for that purpose.
* Yes, it's not bolt-proof. That matters against a few decks, but honestly having a creature or two that die to bolt isn't that bad. Your creatures already die to all the non-red removal. Their removal is still dead in the early game and too little too late usually after a cascade. I personally strongly believe that Bolt-Proof is an overstated concern. I want my creatures to be big so that the opponent dies in fewer swings, not because that protects them from bolt. I dislike VERY low toughness creatures (5/1 or something) not because of bolt, but because things like Snapcaster Mage are now relevant blockers. I want my average opponent to have literally zero relevant blockers. (Note: I played before Siege Rhino... I take it your opponent having no creatures as big as Living End is a thing of the past.)
* All-In isn't a binary thing. AoW pushes you toward a faster combo, but it's not like it forces you to remove all of your other non-combo pieces. You can still decide where you are on the spectrum. I ran a blood moon version, which made me up the number of landcyclers a bit. I was mostly running AoW because I had more two-mana cyclers and I wanted another one-mana cycler to try and improve my average opening hand.
* The ETB effect is actually fairly relevant. If you believe that they have nothing that can interact with a resolved LE, AoW often (usually ONE of the top three cards are relevant) gives you two attack steps. That's often enough to win the game. Even if you're unlucky and they have three relevant spells, you have more information about the opponents future plans than they do.
Four AoW seems like a LOT. THAT deck is super all-in with only four non-combo spells in the main deck. I can't say if that's good or bad, I've fallen out of modern and meta-calls are my super weak point right now.
But AoW is a card that I was quite happy with as a one-of and I strongly believe should be in the Living End players' toolbox. It can do a lot more things than just make you all-in. For instance, I often wanted to bring in more than one copy against control (I only had the one, so I couldn't). Why? Push their wraths to the bottom. I love AoW against any deck that has in their deck a one-card answer to a resolved LE.
I probably wouldn't run both. BUT I think "is this a blood moon meta or a fulminator meta?" Is a question that shouldbe seriously considered periodically instead of thinking the answer is always fulminator.
Counters and basic lands neuter Fulminator Mage just as much, so that's not really a point in either direction. It gets a bit better because if it's countered it comes back when you cascade, but if your Living End resolves, you're very favored to win anyway, so I tend to ignore situations that are only good if you resolve a Living End. Prior to Living End resolving, Blood Moon and Fulminator Mage are actually pretty similar. Blood Moon is slightly easier to cast, while Fulminator can swing and/or block. There's also a few counter spells that rotate in/out of favor that can only counter creature spells or only non-creature spells that may or may not be randomly relevant. But overall pretty similar prior to Living End.
Anyone that says that blood moon is unplayable in our deck just because it's three colors likely hasn't tested it for any real length of time. The cyclers we run are either colorless or include red in their hybrid mana requirements. It's actually very very easy to keep advancing our game plan when blood moon is out by just cycling. It sometimes prevents us from casting a cascade spell until turn five or six, but the vast majority of those times, our opponent is doing literally nothing while we cycle.
I don't remember him saying that it's his favorite ability (though he may have), but he has said that in modern design rules that they like having a "consistency/draw-smoothing mechanic" around somewhere in standard. Right now we're rocking scry, which fills that role.
I just plotted it up and since Kamigawa we've been following a pattern which may or may not be accidental. Kamigawa/Ravnica standard had neither cycling nor scry. Then Time Spiral had both. Then when Time Spiral fell out of standard and we were with Lorwyn Shadowmoor, we once again were without cycling or scry. Then Alara brought cycling. Then Alara rotated out and we were without either in Zendikar/Scars. Right after that, M11 gave us Scry. Then in Innistrade/RTR, we had neither. Theros gave us Scry. When Theros rotates, we're relatively likely to go without for one Standard season, then get either Scry or cycling. Unless that's just an accidental pattern. It probably is accidental, but it does go to show that they like having those sort of mechanics in more often than not.