I did not have any games with a third color splashed in (yet), as I'm currently messing around with some of the spoiler cards coming up, and will discuss my findings when the time comes. I urge you to do the same.
Is collected company the only card you splashed into the deck?
Do you have any cool fan theories that pertain to planeswalkers, or any other aspect of magic? Please, feel free to contribute them below! Anything is welcome!
Now, there are obviously valid reasons as far as game mechanics go for why planeswalker cards are not as powerful as us "real life/player" planeswalkers, but why is this?
To put it in perspective, we are able to access a massive library of powerful spells that span across multiple planes, while planeswalker cards can only really force people to sacrifice creatures or do some burn damage, and up to a limit of three.
---
My theory is that the only thing holding back a planeswalker is their loyalty. Let's compare a player in multiplayer magic to a card planeswalker.
Within multiplayer, especially EDH, it's a game of politics really. You see someone becoming too powerful, you make an alliance with someone to take them down, you seem someone getting pummelled and you believe saving them could mean they help you later, you often help them out, but most importantly, if someone who you are allied with starts relying heavily upon you, you realize you need to stop wasting your resources.
This exists as well with card planeswalkers. We summon them to our plane, through some weird time vortex that allows us to call upon them at different stages in their life, and loyalty represents that feeling of whether or not we rely upon them too much. The keyword here is loyalty, NOT resources or mana to spend.
So let's say we call upon our good ol' pal Sorin Markov. Off the bat, we can reduce an opponent to 10 life. How we view this is nearly making Sorin lose all loyalty to us. How Sorin views it is us calling upon him for a huge favor right off the bat. If, instead, we start just using him for some sangromancy damage, we see it as gaining loyalty counters, but he would view it as us using him as a small aid, thus he believes we are a worthy ally still.
Remember earlier when I said the keyword is loyalty? This is why that matters. Loyalty means his abilities are only limited by how much he wants to contribute. In this sense, card planeswalkers are more powerful than us. If loyalty wasn't a concern, the only thing holding Sorin back would be his own capabilities. He doesn't have to worry about being able to channel a specific spell (draw a specific card), because his abilities are always there, and there is no limit to how many times he can execute them, save for his own capabiltiies.
If you pit a player against a Sorin Markov who can cast multiple of his abilities in a single turn, without the need for mana, or even with the need for some mana, and Sorin would easily come on top.
foodChainGoblins - You are right, we do not know this guy. My words coming out as they did may very well solidify my point, though. Sometimes we act and/or speak in a manor that seems different in our heads than it really is when carried out. My point was there was a "possibility" at least that this was the case.
I'm a little skeptical of this story, only because this one shop I go to has a lot of kids your age and I've seen it first hand. If your opponent is salty, just let it go. You feeding the fire and yelling back IS just as bad as him starting it, because by responding, you make the situation 3x worse.
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure the things you may have said didn't sound bad in your head, but that doesn't mean they aren't. You saying "I hope you are happy now" is a really condescending thing to say, even to a salty opponent. On top of that, while I have seen bigoted store owners, I have never heard one say "I am the boss so what I say goes" so it leads me to believe you are emotional in that situation and may have overdramatized it in your head.
To put this in perspective, I once sat next to my friend in a pre-release who was playing this really snobby kid. The kid was nice enough outside of a game, but inside a game was different. When he played my friend, he got really upset because "there was no way his deck should've lost to a deck like this." Aparantly, this wasn't anything new, because the person next to him told him to stop acting childish *again*.
Then, when I played this same kid the next match, again he seemed nice enough, but when he ended up winning, he pulled the whole "see, this is how my deck wins, I shouldn't have ever lost." then he asked how my deck was doing. I was 3-0 up until that point, and he was 1-2, and he said "how did a deck like yours do better than mine?"
When the store owner got involved, the kid thought he was being singled out, he said he didn't know what he was being "yelled at" about (the store owner was not yelling), but ultimately, he calmed himself and left the store after the event.
Ultimately, you've got to learn not to respond to people like this, and to think about what you're saying before you say it. When you told the story owner "he started it" it demonstrated to him the thought process you were stuck on, that because he started it you shouldn't be to blame. However, it doesn't matter who started it, who fed it, it only matters who's in it, and that's the most important part.
If you find a nice way to tweak the deck to add more triggers, let me know. I was thinking it over, but I just wasn't sure how I felt about getting rid of some of these cards. I suppose you could trash some of the cards that don't help drain/gain life in favor of more triggers.
It's important to note that some of these great vampires were unintentionally allies.
More-so importantly, and unfortunately, the deck really "needs" Kalastria healer. Having just *one* of him allows us to drain life when we have creatures enter, or when we use march from the tomb.
Getting rid of kalastria healer in favor of adding a splash of another color isn't a bad idea, but it is a different deck when you do that. It's a matter of questioning which is more effectiive/efficient. To that, we would need to pit the two decks against each other or against same opponents and compare.
I agree. Most "annoying" playstyles have a balancing factor/way to stop it. Infinite combos have a setup, and if the setup isn't stopped, at least the game ends immediately and there is time for a new one. Slowdown at least you know eventually the slowdown will end (stasis) and all it takes is some time (albeit, sometimes too much time.)
Lockdown, on the other hand, tends to just get people in my playgroup killed. My friend plays a lockdown EDH deck with Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir as his commander, and if he puts him out, all it takes is the slightest hint of doubt for my friends to gang up on him.
My playgroup is a kooky one though...
*The guy who uses infinite combos that are easy to spot, yet is REALLY good at convincing people he is far from the threat.
*The guy who is somehow strangely good at putting cards in a pile and having them work really well, whether intentionally or not.
*The guy who makes decks that just decimate the board (his commander is Rakdos, Lord of Riots) and gets really salty that people then gang up on him.
*The guy who does well because his deck is weak, so he isn't perceived as a threat, and sneaks in for the kill.
*The guy who will either do miserably bad, or just come out of nowhere making you draw 4 cards on your upkeep and take 16 damage.
*The guy who never shows up, and when he does, ruins the game because he does not know his deck at all.
*The guy who plays slowdown/lockdown decks, but plays so slow the group has had to give him "slowplay" penalties and give other people extra turns (once took 3 minutes to make one decision that affected nothing.)
*The guy who builds a deck on flavor, and goes with the flow each game. His strategies are unpredictable because he never has one, and yet, it works.
I was very fond of a similar deck to this in standard. After googling some B/W life-drain decks, I was disappointed by them. They seemed like they didn't take advantage of some of the cards, but then again, I am new to modern so it might be due to the meta that I am unaware of.
Essentially, the deck focus's on being able to dish out a lot of ally triggers for life-gain/drain, aided by Sanguine Bond, Exquisite Blood, and Wound Reflection. Any and all suggestions are welcome. This is not a budget deck, but if you do offer up any crazy expensive cards, alerting me of a cheaper counter-part would be much appreciated. Thanks guys!
Kalitas, Traitor of Ghet Will also be a valuable asset. It essentially is a way to get 2/2's to enter the field and trigger our other abilities. On top of that, he can buff and become a nice life-gainer.
It's a zombie creature, it'll not trigger our abilities?
And of course the landbase should be adjusted to splash green.
We now also can use Veteran Warleader, Dromoka's Command orAbzan Charm.
Collected company can fetch every creature because all is 3 CMC or less.
Please let me know if you guys have any other ideas suggestions ^^
I have considered splashing a third color, but ultimately am against it. The synergy of this deck is essentially about unstoppable life-drain, massive swings, etc. Do not get me wrong, splashing in a third color would be nice, but I don't believe the cards we could add justify messing up what has done well in my playtesting sessions. I will play-test the color splash, however, and get back to you.
Another thing is, I feel like there are good cards coming out that are better than the third color splash cards, and would replace them, thus removing the point of a third color splash.
Kor Bladewhirl isn't in the mainboard because it hasn't been needed against the decks I play-tested against. Granted, I haven't been playing much standard recently, so things might have changed. Essentially, first-strike is never needed, so why add it? Lantern Scout was considered, but removed, because all she does is give us life-link when we already have plenty of life-gain. I wouldn't want to get rid of the current line-up of creatures for her.
Read what I said about about splashing a third color. Maybe red will be a different story, but I am not too sure. Usually my draws have been secure, and rearranging them might not be that needed.
Not sure what you mean in the last question. March from the Tomb has a secure mana cost, and what it allows us to do is take a massive swing that they are forced to block or else they die, then just put them all back onto the battlefield to trigger massive ally effects (which may very well kill them.)
Infinite combos, because while you may be able to interact with the setup, it's pretty much impossible for most fair decks to meaningfully interact with 'infinity.'
It depends what you are playing. If you have an EDH group, it usually isn't that bad. I once pulled an infinite mana combo, paid infinite for X to deal infinite damage to a buddy. Someone played a redirect spell (his commander was Nekusar) and killed me with it instead, haha. It was a fun match.
Is collected company the only card you splashed into the deck?
Now, there are obviously valid reasons as far as game mechanics go for why planeswalker cards are not as powerful as us "real life/player" planeswalkers, but why is this?
To put it in perspective, we are able to access a massive library of powerful spells that span across multiple planes, while planeswalker cards can only really force people to sacrifice creatures or do some burn damage, and up to a limit of three.
---
My theory is that the only thing holding back a planeswalker is their loyalty. Let's compare a player in multiplayer magic to a card planeswalker.
Within multiplayer, especially EDH, it's a game of politics really. You see someone becoming too powerful, you make an alliance with someone to take them down, you seem someone getting pummelled and you believe saving them could mean they help you later, you often help them out, but most importantly, if someone who you are allied with starts relying heavily upon you, you realize you need to stop wasting your resources.
This exists as well with card planeswalkers. We summon them to our plane, through some weird time vortex that allows us to call upon them at different stages in their life, and loyalty represents that feeling of whether or not we rely upon them too much. The keyword here is loyalty, NOT resources or mana to spend.
So let's say we call upon our good ol' pal Sorin Markov. Off the bat, we can reduce an opponent to 10 life. How we view this is nearly making Sorin lose all loyalty to us. How Sorin views it is us calling upon him for a huge favor right off the bat. If, instead, we start just using him for some sangromancy damage, we see it as gaining loyalty counters, but he would view it as us using him as a small aid, thus he believes we are a worthy ally still.
Remember earlier when I said the keyword is loyalty? This is why that matters. Loyalty means his abilities are only limited by how much he wants to contribute. In this sense, card planeswalkers are more powerful than us. If loyalty wasn't a concern, the only thing holding Sorin back would be his own capabilities. He doesn't have to worry about being able to channel a specific spell (draw a specific card), because his abilities are always there, and there is no limit to how many times he can execute them, save for his own capabiltiies.
If you pit a player against a Sorin Markov who can cast multiple of his abilities in a single turn, without the need for mana, or even with the need for some mana, and Sorin would easily come on top.
I look forward to adding them to this deck when the spoilers are fully released.
Wow, I am honored, thank you, and thank you to whoever nominated the thread! When I first started it, I never thought it would get as far as it did.
Only all the more reason for me to be vigilante at pre-release and attend game-day with this deck.
Also, thank you to everyone who contributed to the thread, a lot of the positive shaping of this deck is thanks to you all!
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure the things you may have said didn't sound bad in your head, but that doesn't mean they aren't. You saying "I hope you are happy now" is a really condescending thing to say, even to a salty opponent. On top of that, while I have seen bigoted store owners, I have never heard one say "I am the boss so what I say goes" so it leads me to believe you are emotional in that situation and may have overdramatized it in your head.
To put this in perspective, I once sat next to my friend in a pre-release who was playing this really snobby kid. The kid was nice enough outside of a game, but inside a game was different. When he played my friend, he got really upset because "there was no way his deck should've lost to a deck like this." Aparantly, this wasn't anything new, because the person next to him told him to stop acting childish *again*.
Then, when I played this same kid the next match, again he seemed nice enough, but when he ended up winning, he pulled the whole "see, this is how my deck wins, I shouldn't have ever lost." then he asked how my deck was doing. I was 3-0 up until that point, and he was 1-2, and he said "how did a deck like yours do better than mine?"
When the store owner got involved, the kid thought he was being singled out, he said he didn't know what he was being "yelled at" about (the store owner was not yelling), but ultimately, he calmed himself and left the store after the event.
Ultimately, you've got to learn not to respond to people like this, and to think about what you're saying before you say it. When you told the story owner "he started it" it demonstrated to him the thought process you were stuck on, that because he started it you shouldn't be to blame. However, it doesn't matter who started it, who fed it, it only matters who's in it, and that's the most important part.
If you find a nice way to tweak the deck to add more triggers, let me know. I was thinking it over, but I just wasn't sure how I felt about getting rid of some of these cards. I suppose you could trash some of the cards that don't help drain/gain life in favor of more triggers.
More-so importantly, and unfortunately, the deck really "needs" Kalastria healer. Having just *one* of him allows us to drain life when we have creatures enter, or when we use march from the tomb.
Getting rid of kalastria healer in favor of adding a splash of another color isn't a bad idea, but it is a different deck when you do that. It's a matter of questioning which is more effectiive/efficient. To that, we would need to pit the two decks against each other or against same opponents and compare.
Lockdown, on the other hand, tends to just get people in my playgroup killed. My friend plays a lockdown EDH deck with Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir as his commander, and if he puts him out, all it takes is the slightest hint of doubt for my friends to gang up on him.
My playgroup is a kooky one though...
*The guy who uses infinite combos that are easy to spot, yet is REALLY good at convincing people he is far from the threat.
*The guy who is somehow strangely good at putting cards in a pile and having them work really well, whether intentionally or not.
*The guy who makes decks that just decimate the board (his commander is Rakdos, Lord of Riots) and gets really salty that people then gang up on him.
*The guy who does well because his deck is weak, so he isn't perceived as a threat, and sneaks in for the kill.
*The guy who will either do miserably bad, or just come out of nowhere making you draw 4 cards on your upkeep and take 16 damage.
*The guy who never shows up, and when he does, ruins the game because he does not know his deck at all.
*The guy who plays slowdown/lockdown decks, but plays so slow the group has had to give him "slowplay" penalties and give other people extra turns (once took 3 minutes to make one decision that affected nothing.)
*The guy who builds a deck on flavor, and goes with the flow each game. His strategies are unpredictable because he never has one, and yet, it works.
You'll have to guess which is me
Essentially, the deck focus's on being able to dish out a lot of ally triggers for life-gain/drain, aided by Sanguine Bond, Exquisite Blood, and Wound Reflection. Any and all suggestions are welcome. This is not a budget deck, but if you do offer up any crazy expensive cards, alerting me of a cheaper counter-part would be much appreciated. Thanks guys!
4 Zulaport Cutthroat
2 Ondu Cleric
4 Kalastria Healer
2 Liliana, Heretical Healer
3 Drana, Liberator of Malakir
4 Drana's Emissary
2 Sorin, Solemn Visitor
2 Gideon, Ally of Zendikar
Spells (13)
2 Altar's Reap
3 Exquisite Blood
3 March from the Tomb
3 Sanguine Bond
2 Wound Reflection
4 Caves of Koilos
2 Shambling Vent
2 Scoured Barrens
8 Plains
8 Swamp
As for the cards, I shall get back to you on that, as new spoilers were released.
You are forgetting about Zulaport Cutthroat.
I have considered splashing a third color, but ultimately am against it. The synergy of this deck is essentially about unstoppable life-drain, massive swings, etc. Do not get me wrong, splashing in a third color would be nice, but I don't believe the cards we could add justify messing up what has done well in my playtesting sessions. I will play-test the color splash, however, and get back to you.
Another thing is, I feel like there are good cards coming out that are better than the third color splash cards, and would replace them, thus removing the point of a third color splash.
Kor Bladewhirl isn't in the mainboard because it hasn't been needed against the decks I play-tested against. Granted, I haven't been playing much standard recently, so things might have changed. Essentially, first-strike is never needed, so why add it? Lantern Scout was considered, but removed, because all she does is give us life-link when we already have plenty of life-gain. I wouldn't want to get rid of the current line-up of creatures for her.
Read what I said about about splashing a third color. Maybe red will be a different story, but I am not too sure. Usually my draws have been secure, and rearranging them might not be that needed.
Not sure what you mean in the last question. March from the Tomb has a secure mana cost, and what it allows us to do is take a massive swing that they are forced to block or else they die, then just put them all back onto the battlefield to trigger massive ally effects (which may very well kill them.)
It depends what you are playing. If you have an EDH group, it usually isn't that bad. I once pulled an infinite mana combo, paid infinite for X to deal infinite damage to a buddy. Someone played a redirect spell (his commander was Nekusar) and killed me with it instead, haha. It was a fun match.
What is the upgradeable penalty for people who make game rule violations? What about for regular ftmgs?