Battle of Wits
At the beginning of your upkeep, if you have 200 or more cards in your library, you win the game.
Printings View all
|Magic 2013 (M13)||Rare|
|Ninth Edition (9ED)||Rare|
|Ninth Edition Foreign Black Border (9EDFBB)||Rare|
Combos Browse all
|Commander / EDH||Legal|
Battle of Wits Discussion
1 month ago
Step 1 for making this deck beter would be to just cut cards untill you are down to 60, before you do this i would recommend determining what the plan of the deck actually is. Aggro decks ussually have a low average cmc but you are rocking a solid 4.40. If you are set on keeping this deck to be this big add some lands as 28 lands is a very low number for a 100 card deck. If you like just having a huge deck i would recommend playing Battle of Wits this would be a control deck but i don't know of a way to make a 100 card aggro deck work.
5 months ago
I have other ways to win without Battle of Wits , these are Guile , Thing in the Ice Flip, Torrential Gearhulk , Crush of Tentacles and Draining Whelk . These can win when played, especially as this is a counter/control deck opponent should have little board presence. this also means that Mystic Snake and Frilled Mystic can be very dangerous also.
While your advice to go the persist route would indeed make a better and more competitive deck, I wanted it to be a counter orientated deck, it is meant to be able to win games which i think it can, while intimidating the opponent with a massive pile of counters!
on Counter Wits
5 months ago
To start, I would say 240 cards is the sweet spot for a Battle of Wits deck. That gives you a relatively decent buffer zone, allowing you to reliably have 200 cards in-hand once you are ready to cast BoW (accounting for an opening hand of 7 cards, use of fetch lands, and card draw). Conveniently, this is also the equivalent of building a 60 card singleton deck, and that's probably the best way to go about designing your deck's proportions--think like you're building a 60-card singleton deck, then multiply everything by four.
With regards to tutors, you should absolutely run them. You have access to a whole host of great cards, such as the 1/2 mana Black tutors, which are necessary to find your singular copy of BoW.
The biggest problem I see with this deck is that it is a bit of a one-trick-pony, though this is probably not as big of a deal in a format where vintage-era tutors are usable. Ideally, you will want to run another backup plan in case something is getting in the way of BoW. My recommendation would be an infinite persist combo. With three moving pieces (persist creature + something to nullify the persist + sacrifice outlet) persist chains are not generally the easiest combos to assemble. However, what sets them apart from other combos is the diversity of options you have. With 240 cards, diversity is important--it means you're more likely to draw into one of your combo pieces, and you can always tutor for the ones you don't have (particularly since you're in an unrestricted format and can run the whole set of 1-mana tutors).
For creatures, you have Kitchen Finks , Murderous Redcap , and Safehold Elite . For enablers, you have Solemnity and Melira, Sylvok Outcast , and any number of cards that confer a +1/+1 counter when a creature ETBs. For outlets, you have all manner of 1-CMC creatures like Viscera Seer , or damage-dealers, like Blasting Station . (These are all modern-legal options, you'll want to do a search for vintage-era cards to see if there's anything more efficient).
5 months ago
18 VIEWS | IN 1 FOLDER
normally Battle of Wits decks are 4 decks smooshed together, however, my idea of this battle of wits deck was to make one huge 240-260 card deck with battle of wits.
I went with a blue counter/control deck, splashing 3 other colours.
Now the problem I have is that I have no tutors, yet, and I need to figure out how to add these, or even if I need to, so could you please lend me your time and advice?
If I ever make this it would be for the kitchen table and done using hand written proxies.
5 months ago
A friend of mine was trying to create a new format. Thinking about it now, I'm pretty sure he was just making up rules on the spot, and the format was as hilariously bad as it sounds.
- Players start with 100 life.
- Your deck can have 4 "commander" type cards: they start the game in the command zone, and can be cast for free from the command zone. If a "commander" would change zones, once per game, you can put it back in the command zone.
- You may only cast each commander once per turn.
- Your 4 "commanders" can't have the same card type, and you can only have one of each rarity.
- Maximum hand size is ten.
- The first turn of the game, you can put all the land from your hand on to the battlefield.
- Each turn, players can choose to draw 2 cards and play 1 land, or draw 1 card and play 2 lands.
- For an initial banlist, if a card is banned in any format, it can't be your commander.
My first thought was to play an Infect deck, but I forgot one of the rules.
- Well, since you start with 5 times as much life, it would take 50 Poison counters to cause a player to lose.
Next idea: I use Battle of Wits and 300 islands. "You can't do that," he says.
- No alternate win conditions (except for infect, I guess)
Finally, I decided on the commanders: Seismic Assault , Treasure Hunt , and a 100-card blend of islands and mountains for the rest of the deck. I wanted to have Reliquary Tower as another commander, but I couldn't. He explained to me:
- Lands can't be commanders.
- The rarity of a creature commander doesn't count towards the 1-of rarity limit.
- Your commanders are face-down in the command zone.
I'm guessing the became a rule because he forgot about the 1-each rarity limit. So, I add in Ashling the Pilgrim , since its rarity didn't matter. On my first turn, I dump some lands on the battlefield, summon Ashling the Pilgrim and pump it up a few times. He stops me, "I forgot to tell you the rule that makes this format so much fun..."
- During the first ten turns of the game, creatures can't attack, and players can't be targeted.
Since we draw 2 cards each turn, and start with 10 cards in our hand, that means we'll have seen at least 30 cards before real interaction can begin. So, Ashling and I sat there for 10 turns watching him masturbate. He had an enormous army of bulk rares. At some point, he summons one of his commanders: Sensei's Divining Top . "What is that? You said that card is banned."
- You can have Sensei's Divining Top as a commander, but you can't use its second ability.
- Also, commanders have flash.
"This format is such bs." On the upkeep of my 11th turn, I Treasure Hunt and Seismic Assault him for 100 damage. He responds by summoning Ghosts of the Innocent . Five lands later: "And now back to your face," GG Worst format ever. I forgot I didn't even need to let the Ghosts resolve to keep comboing. Oh well.
What do people think of this new format?
Has anyone else ever had an experience like this?
Can anyone think of a better combo for the format?
7 months ago
@: LET'S BUMP IT UP 200 NOTCHES; Battle of Wits STYLE.
Two new Mu Yanling 's have been confirmed awhile back: Mu Yanling, Sky Dancer , & Mu Yanling, Celestial Wind . For Mu #1: if she makes it in, is she worth the re-add of Prismatic Omen for Infinite Draw? or is Mu Yanling, Celestial Wind decent enough? I, mean, one of the Elspeth's Ultimates gives your Creatures Flying as an Emblem; something Archetype of Imagination should be able to remove, though it's for another time.
1: Wrenn and Six : Recurring Lands to your Hand is great, one damage is okay, but giving your Nonpermanents (Instants & Sorceries) Retrace? AWESOME!
2: Xenagos, the Reveler : Lots of Tokens? No problem! You'll be netting a lot of ramp in the form of & Mana of any combination! a 2/2 Satyr w/ Haste is good too! Oh, & it's not like you'll need to use that Ultimate of his; it's completely optional!
3: Kiora, the Crashing Wave : Why did I cut her? She stops damage heading to & coming from any target. Does both Card advantage & Mana Ramp at one time; & the thought of a 9/9 every turn is just fearsome. Which would you give the Approval of, & Rejection of these three?
Heh. I just threw that in there as an alt. Solution in case the current Manabase might need minor improvement. Guess not... Ah well...
I ended up simply adding Mirari's Wake as a result of this. But I'd still like some thought on Night of Souls' Betrayal . Is it worth adding? I already have a list of Combos of Potential Consideration in my head as we speak; & one of the combos might include this...
I just wanted to bring these questions back up. Once I got them answered, then I'll leave the rest of the damn job to me; after all, The Mono- deck I'm planning has a Philosophy for WHY needs more Artifice (They're just fine w/ Enchantments though.), Flying Creatures ( Birds of Paradise much?), basically every point against WotC about & its conventional traits. I'll begin after I finish off my Morophon, the Boundless Human Tribal. Or, maybe my Exile Matters Deck... Who knows... Hyro… dorodorodoro…
(Okay, that part made no sense.)
9 months ago
Even worse: A horrible blue deck consisting of Storm Crow s and a ton of copies of Search the City , along with a lot of Battle of Wits so that it adds up to two thousand cards. Essentially, 1/5 islands, 1/5 Storm Crows, 1/5 Battle of Wits, 1/5 Search the City, and 1/5 Random Removal Spells just to make it the worst blue deck ever.