Quote from Tinfoil HatWhy no reckoner?
I run Reckoner in my paper build, but I did not really want to buy in online. It is okay in this deck, but I really don't miss it when I am testing on MTGO.
-
- DrWorm
- Registered User
-
Member for 19 years, 1 month, and 13 days
Last active Thu, Sep, 7 2017 14:18:57
- 8 Followers
- 9,008 Total Posts
- 681 Thanks
-
Jan 18, 2014
DrWorm posted a message on Modern: X-ForcePosted in: DrWorm Blog
I run Reckoner in my paper build, but I did not really want to buy in online. It is okay in this deck, but I really don't miss it when I am testing on MTGO. -
Jan 18, 2014
DrWorm posted a message on EDH: PunisherPosted in: DrWorm BlogQuote from krichaiushiiI am a fan of Kaervek.
My version runs additional enchantments, particularly Last Laugh, Exquisite Blood, and Rain of Gore.
Ramp is common in my meta, so I have responded by adding Tunnel Ignus, Ankh of Mishra, Acidic Soil, and Zo-zu the Punisher.
Your targeted discard is vicious in a duel, but might be better as something else for multiplayer.
Oh, giving infect to Kaervek really irritates people.
I like Midnight Banshee and Grim Poppet alongside Kulrath Knight and will be stealling that idea.
Cheers!
Glad you liked it. I have been playing it a lot in multiplayer, and have a version for 2HG that I removed all the cards that would punish my ally. One card that has torn up a couple of games is Price of Knowledge. Damn, that thing does obscene things to blue players.
By biggest annoyance about Kevin is how hard the bastard is to cast a second and third time in RB. By biggest joy with this deck is winning games or causing rage quits when they get down to 0 life without me ever attacking.
Oh, and Gary is amazing at bringing home wins. He has been my finisher a lot lately. -
Aug 3, 2012
DrWorm posted a message on The Magic Between Us: it's all in the cards.Posted in: DrWorm Blog
I actually have a better and longer version that I am trying to get published.Quote from germandrafterA very interesting read. Thx for sharing. -
Aug 3, 2012
DrWorm posted a message on Worm's Deck Box: The Rod (Scepter Control)Posted in: DrWorm Blog
Two reasons-Quote from KamotzI really want to get a build like this going in Standard format. I think it could be insanely fun. Throwing out more and more Drakes. Unfortunately there's no Iscron Scepter in Standard, I don't think.
But for this build, why no Mana Leak? With Isochron Scepter it seems...so brokenly abuse-able.
1) Modern has a lot of counters to mess with, and it is always possible to work around Leak.
2) My assessment is that my largest potential problem this deck faces right now are creature based tempo decks, so I am would rather have a targeted hard counter. - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Gonna respond out of order. I think this deck had a LOT of people getting on board early and quickly. The hype has been broad and most of the pieces were still quite affordable after the initial buzz. There will always be a monetary hindrance eventually, but I genuinely think that enough people got on board in meatspace that there are plenty of potential players. I fully expect the presence of Eldrazi decks in the competitive metagame to be relatively low, but that is really not what I was getting at (see below)
My question was based on this comment:
So, I am not asking my question about metagame saturation, I am asking in regards to aggro. The answer from a few posters was that BW and BR are the best for aggro, with Overmaster saying "The BR version is insane too for removal like Terminate, no problem running Lili, and Kolaghan's Command.". With all that said, the last couple of large events where aggro was very prevalent there have been very low top showings from any Eldrazi deck. One of the stated reasons for aggro to be bigger now is that people were anticipating Eldrazi and Tron heavily, because they answer the decks well. Nothing wrong with that, that is the way metagames ebb and flow, but I am trying to sync the idea that aggro is bigger in part in order to deal with Eldrazi decks with the statements that BW and BR seem to be being put forth as great against those decks. Just trying to square two opposing viewpoints.
Okay...I am not predicting anything, and I am not commenting on the metagame as it is now. I'm making a comment regarding the type of play that Wizards would have a problem with purely because of how it appears on camera. Wizards wants people to watch PT coverage, and there are certain archetypes that, when too common, do not create the kind of on-camera entertainment that I think they are looking for. I also think that this is above an beyond any actual play experience, because I have had plenty of games in which both players were challenged and had a good time, but would probably have been dull to watch. I think that spectator appeal it self is a factor in how Wizards makes metagame decisions.
I said "if the meta becomes burn heavy", not that it was. I know full well the meta is creature aggro heavy, at least by the indicators we have seen.
If these are better (or insane) in an aggro meta then why are very few Eldrazi decks getting traction in large events. I know some builds have traction online, but in big events where aggro is strong it is not putting up good numbers. I'm not challenging you, since I play an Eldrazi deck as well, just trying to find the reason for the optimism.
Wow...that's two games I won't be watching. I'm a multi-non-tasking mad man!
I think it's funny how people are talking about whether the meta will "fix itself" by PT. When the format had a lot of midrange goodstuff decks people complained that it had to be fixed. When the format had a few different linear combo decks people said it needed to be fixed. I'm sure that if Modern ever had a metagame for any length of time that had a few late game control decks people would hope for the metagame to be fixed. Saying something needs to be fixed (either by itself or from outside) implies that it is somehow inherently not as it is intended to be, when I'm sure there are plenty of aggro players that have not had a chance to really shine since Miss Kitty got banned the first time. I hated the ban, and prefer the pre-ban metagame, but just because things may be more aggro-centric does not mean I believe the meta is objectively worse. It's are not to my taste, but I don't think things need to be "fixed".
It's like if you got a chocolate chip cookie for free from the CEO at work every day, and then you come in and there are only oatmeal raisin cookies. The change in cookie is not objectively worse. There is no fix that needs to be made. The people who didn't care for chocolate chip cookies all this time finally get a cookie they like and probably think that they should be getting them for few weeks since they had to make due with cookies they don't really like.
One thing I will say is that if the meta becomes burn heavy (eg non-creature based aggro) WotC they will see it as something that needs to be fixed, because I suspect most people would find that kind of deck being on camera more than one or two times to be boring. In that case it could be argued that it needs to be fixed from their perspective because they have an objective criterion (views) that did not meet expectation.
It's funny, you say you are not much of a gambler, and neither am I, but we look at it differently. I am not willing to gamble on having to buy a card later for more money (or even less money when I have less to spend), so I hold on to the cards I think I may want to play again even if I know it is at peak and will be dropping in value. Some people don't mind selling close to peak and then re-buying when the price drops a lot, but for me it is almost never worth the risk or additional time it would take me to do so. With my staples it really doesn't matter to me what their price is because I almost never get rid of them.
When it comes to my trade/buylist/Puca cards, like extra staples or cards desired in formats I don't play, I may watch closer and work on my timing. That is more as a sort of game rather than any real need for the value cloe to peak. It does give me more MTG capital to play with, however.
I am a dedicated builder of a pool of Modern staples. It is one* of the reasons that when the Eldrazi deck got noticed at the end of last year all I needed to acquire to play was 1x Eldrazi Temple, 1x Eye of Ugin, and 1x Ulamog. I say this for you to understand where I am coming from when I say that selling IoK seems like a bad idea to me.
Inquisition of Kozilek has been an often played Modern card since day 1, and I have put mine in so many decks in the last 4 years. I think it is better than Thoughtseize most of the time. They are super overpriced right now (and it may even be peak price) so it is tempting to sell/trade them, but I know I would rather miss out on a potential peak than risk needing them and not wanting to pay the price they settle at. Ktkenshin usually has pretty solid information, so I give him the benefit of the doubt most of the time, but I had not heard that there was any confirmation of (or even strongly implied) Emmy in SOI. There has been speculation, and I understand how it would fit, but that is as solid as I thought it was. I don't know what the source is, but if true then there is a pretty decent chance of them wiggling a reason for a card with the name "Kozilek" to be in the set. IoK is not even definitively better than Duress in Standard so I would think it would be only lightly played. That said, if it doesn't then it will have another stupid spike. I play it safe and keep at least one playset of IoK, but I have a pretty decent collection so I don't need to churn my cards to get other cards as much as some people do.
So, knowing my conservative stance if I had a mono-black Eldrazi deck and needed to churn the cards for other cards I would sell:
That's about it. I would keep my Eldrazi Temples because I suspect a few of the OGW cards that require C are going to find their way into other decks and it is a solid land to include for that. Maybe go down to two, but even that makes me squirm. Relic of Progenitus is almost certainly at peak price, but even if they go back to $1.50 before too long the $14 you missed out on getting by selling now is not worth not having them later. As I said when this all started, I had absolutely no sympathy for people that had been playing Modern for a while and balked at having to buy $5 Relics. They should have already been in your SB staples ages ago.
Everything else in the deck- removal and such, should just stay in your staple collection.
*The other reason is that I had grabbed the processor Eldrazi when they came out for very little. It was not a prediction per say, I just thought they had potential for brewing and I was not out much if they ended up being casual chaff.
Scapeshift is easily the most Shockland heavy popular deck in Modern. deck I play Bring to Light Scapeshift and I find that 10 mountains is the right number, though I have seen others say 11. BtL makes the deck essentially a 4 color deck, so most of your mountains are shocklands* and 1-2 basic mountains. That is in addition to a couple of Breeding Pools. The Temur or Gifts versions can run a couple more basic mountains, and the RG Titanshift deck is another archetype entirely, so I can't say. My land base is:
4 Steam Vents
3 Stomping Ground
1 Sacred Foundry
1 Blood Crypt
1 Mountain
2 Breeding Pool
1 Poluted Delta
1 Windswept Heath
3 Wooded Foothills
1 Reflecting Pool
1 Plains
3 Island
1 Forest
There are a few quirks to my choices based on my deck and play preferences, but the ratios are not that different than most builds. I say this to tell you that depending on which style or archetype you choose you may need more than just 8 shocks.
With BW Eldrazi, if you intend to play anything needing C then you might be better off grabbing 3-4 Caves of Koilos before getting too many Godless Shrine.
*Admittedly some people are perfectly happy playing a single Cinder Glade in Temur Scapeshift as one of their mountains, but since supply is not an issue for me I just don't think it is worth the risk of a slow start vs maybe 2 life.
I think that of those cards the easiest one to drop is O-Stone. It generally has slow to no growth, and is really played in only one deck. EDH keeps it propped up too. The same is true for Karn, but I personally hang on to PW unless I have more than 3-4 due to the fact that they are harder to reprint and have a pretty good markup to begin with. Ugin is a tad more volatile since it is in Standard, but is probably not going to increase in price too much over the next few months. There is a chance that he goes up again after rotation because mana-fixing gets worse and colorless decks could go up in popularity, but $42 is about the ceiling for a Standard PW (baring outliers).
I would definitely sell your Eyes if you are not going to play Tron or Eldrazi and you don't want to keep them for a staples collection. The price has no where to go but down. I guess it could gain 10% or so, but honestly that is about it, and if the Eldrazi decks prove to be not as strong on the PT as people think they will drop a lot.
That is overstating it a bit. If you are running a two color deck you will generally run 4 shocks and of course all of them will be the same. If you are running 3+ colors that is where you want to spread out your color combos. If the third color is just a splash, say for something like Path to Exile, and the other two colors fairly even, then you might only run one of a land that produces W, and the rest being all the same. My point is that a hard and fast rule of no more than 2 is a bit too basic.
I have not paid much attention to the competitive Modern since I stopped playing after the ban (so I don't know for sure), but I also think people are overstating the play value of Battle lands. They are certainly budget, but if you have some shocks then I would use pain lands, check lands, or fast lands before I looked to battle lands. It does really depend on the deck when you are talking check lands vs fast lands, but I think pain lands are really under utilized in modern. If you are running them 1-2 and are running them with other duals you will tap them for colored mana 1-2 times most games you get them in play, and they do something almost no other dual land in Modern does- tap for C. I think things like TKS and Sea Gate Wreckage are going to want to find their way into more than a few decks over time and running wastes is almost never the optimal way to get C.
On MTGStocks it is listed as $89, but there is no high or low price listed, so I am sure this is due to a transient lack of supply when they updated their prices. Just not enough data points for their algorithm for an accurate price. It happens more than you might think.
As an aside, that was in interesting essay. The points it brings up and the counterpoints brought up by the comments are all pretty compelling. I'm not sure where I stand, as there are holes in both arguments as well. It is a complex issue, but that is off topic.
On Topic: Like I said at the end of my post, all that is supposition until I can find a reliable source that states exactly what rights were given to the artists in the initial contracts. I thought it was a fact, but tracking it down is harder than I thought, so the truth might have been twisted along the way.
They probably paid royalties (or whatever it is called) to print it. The early FTV sets were not hugely printed, and they would only have to pay the artist based on the wholesale cost, not based on the retail markup.
I suspect that they bought the right to do so from Amy Weber, so that WotC can print it as much as they want. A few individual cases do not disprove the whole. For example it is pretty widely known that the art for Alpha BoP was created for the dual land, but the bird front and center was a problem, so they created Birds of Paradise. I don't think it is all of Alpha that certain illustrators own the rights to reprint the card, but it is the case for some (a lot of them as I understand).
Honestly, as much as I have heard this stated as fact and believe it, I cannot find an official source for it. I'll keep looking.
They could, but not for a long time. Fetches and Shocks (even separately) shape Standard pretty hard when they are legal. No other land I can think of has done that. Standard will always make use of the duals that are legal, and mana availability is always going to be a factor that shapes the format, but nowhere near as much as Fetches and Shocks. They are good and not overly powerful when the format is built correctly, but if you print those lands too often then formats start to not feel new enough.
Also, though they could do so, it would be an incredible troll for them to reprint the allied fetches again before the enemy fetches are reprinted and it is pretty clear that they won't print all 10 in one set, so I suspect we will see a reprint of enemy fetches first and then allied no sooner than a year after that.
Right...that's what I get for posting first thing in the AM. The emberassing thing is I have played an EDH deck that used Leyline of Punishment (and other stuff) to do mass damage to protect creatures. It was a bit narrow, but I clearly was not thinking the whole thing through when I mentioned 'Quake.
Big red sweepers. I know there are more, but Earthquake is the first one to pop in my head.