|Commander / EDH||Legal|
Printings View all
|Return to Ravnica (RTR)||Rare|
Combos Browse all
Slaughter Games can't be countered by spells or abilities.
Name a nonland card. Search target opponent's graveyard, hand, and library for any number of cards with that name and exile them. Then that player shuffles his or her library.
Price & Acquistion Set Price Alerts
|Have (25)||Caldazar , ironax , mcstang1986 , bakunet , pskinn01 , Va1mar , The_Munchkin , Pelli , lolpatrol , CampbellStev , ToolmasterOfBrainerd , TThors , TheRealPeaches , jstn.mrrtt , dizzierabit , rakdos24 , SirFowler , redlegs_17 , switchkill65 , LoneCrusader399 , Antiat , Nemesis , Famicomania , cryptoplasm , GoldGhost012|
Slaughter Games Discussion
3 weeks ago
2 months ago
It's not that I don't get you on being innovative. But there's just no denying that staple cards have that status for a reason (most of them, at least). So as far as I can tell, what you have here is a bad jund shell, with a surprisingly good combo finisher (Generator Servant into Master of Cruelties). But you still need to do all the grindy things a regular jund deck does - that is: win a bunch of 1-for-1 trades, and somehow come out a little bit on top. Lightning Bolt is "played by everyone", because it provides to things - best mana-to-damage ratio at instant speed, and an efficient way of trading 1 for 1. Slaughter Games is a really bad card, because you can't even trust it to trade for anything on your opponents hand - you just name a card, and hope you hit... and it costs 4 mana (compare to Thoughtseize with its 1 mana for trading for the best card in your opponents hand). So, it's not using other cards than the usual staples, I find doubtful, it's using new cards that do that do the same things as more commonly played cards, but are less effective.
If you change a deck fundamentally, you should go out of your way to get something out of it. In jund, you could for example play cards with delirium. Traverse the Ulvenwald would be really sweet in this deck, since you have a finishing combo with 2 creatures, and could use traverse to find the combo pieces. There's a pile of cheap enchanments that can be sac'ed, and that would help on delirium... Grave Peril looks promising, but so does Vessel of Nascency. There's also a couple of spellbombs that aren't too silly, and could put an artifact in GY. And then you could then play Grim Flayer and Whispers of Emrakul... discard 2 at random... that's just nasty. Speaking of discard, Blightning hasn't seen much play lately (since Kolaghan's Command covers the same functions and then some more too) - but it's still a good card, and you could easily get a lot of advantage out of it.
While it's not really card draw, Abbot of Keral Keep comes close enough. It's better when the average cost is a bit lower than what you have here (which is another argument for 1 cmc spells).
Also: Adding in 3 Thragtusks doesn't really reduce casting cost in this deck.
2 months ago
Ok... erhm... stating the obvious: If you need to fill your graveyard for fast delve creatures, you should play fetchlands. You should probably also play Thoughtseize or Inquisition of Kozilek over Faithless Looting. Most jund decks care a lot about card-advantage, and Faithless Looting is -1 card on turn 1. Besides that, there are rather few plays as strong in modern, as picking through your opponents hand on turn 1 and removing the best card they have. It's a lot better than trying to do it in turn 4.
3 months ago
+1, Nice deck! Four things though regarding fine-tuning it:
1) Given this deck's mana requirements, the importance (and prevalence) of Turn 1 and 2 disruption spells, and the relevance of these cards in playing around Blood Moon, I'm not sure your spread of basics is optimal. At very least, I would advocate running 1/2/2 Mountain/Plains/Swamp over the deck's current 2/2/1, and personally, would probably go even further and run 1/1/2 Mountain/Plains/Swamp and up the number of Marsh Flats from 1 to 2. Four basics is totally sufficient IMO, and this would still leave you with 9 fetchable lands for 7 fetches.
For comparison, I have been tuning the land base for B/W Tokens for a long time and have found the optimal distribution to be 9 fetches to 6 fetchable lands (four of which are basics). Granted, that is for a two color deck and you are definitely going to have to run more Shocks than I do, but I can tell you that 2 mountains and 2 plains in a 19 land deck is inevitably going to result in more mulliganed hands due to mana conflicts. On that note, your total land count also seems a little low even given the four Baubles. Getting Monastery Mentor out relatively early is usually pretty important, so I would bump the total land count up to 20.
2) To an extent this is personal preference, but I think you are going to get more value from running Vault of the Archangel for your colorless utility land than you would from Westvale Abbey Flip. Your deck has a solid amount of mainboard lifegain opportunities already, but it's hard to overstate the value of being able to turn your 1/1 tokens into Deathtouch killing machines against decks like Eldrazi Tron, Grixis Shadow, Merfolk, Humans, etc. On the other hand, even if you are able to ultimate Westvale Abbey Flip, which is less often in practice than you might think, Ormendahl simply dies to Path.
3) I assume you have Slaughter Games in the sideboard for Combo hate, but in a 19 or even 20 land deck, that card is going to be too slow in practice most of the time, especially against Storm. Surgical Extraction is far and away the superior card, especially given that you are running 8 discard spells.
4) Your suite of sideboard graveyard hate is very strong, and if your meta is filled with Storm and Snapcaster decks, I can't argue with your choices, but given that RIP significantly devalues your own copies of Lingering Souls, I would at least advocate considering Nihil Spellbomb as an alternative, both for the fact that it is one-sided, as well as for the value of the cantrip.
xyr0s on BR Dragons
3 months ago
Dragonlord's Servant is probably going to die by accident to your own sweepers. Exchange for 2 lands (as you are low on lands for a deck with expensive creatures and x-spells).
rakdos return and Slaughter Games should go, and be replaced by Fatal Push. At the current version of your deck, you'll simply never get a game long enough to play any of these for any real value. But Fatal Push is exactly one of the cards you want a lot of, because it's good for early-game survival.
Figure out which dragons you want to play, and stick with those - in multiples. There are not enough Reflector Mages and Meddling Mages around to make it a real advantage to have many different cards, rather than just picking one and using that.
I'm still not agreeing on including rituals, but it's your deck, and you can anyway change it, if you aren't really happy with the way it works.
3 months ago
He isnt wrong(i assume he anyway), about cards that dont have an immediate impact, and cards that aren't great such as Slaughter Games. I won't lie, until much later in the conversation I wad thinking this was more of a kitchen table deck, at which point a lot of these cards would be ok. In an actual competitive modern environment, to succeed you have to do exactly as he says. Your choices are to recreate a modern top 8 list that has already been proven, or to know your local meta so well that you can challenge it with a homebrew. The zoo deck I run has a subtle change of Chained to the Rocks in place of Path to Exile. It usually doesn't impact the game a whole lot, as most of the early turns I am putting out lots of 1 drop creatures anyway, but the times when I have 1 red/white land up for a Lightning Bolt and have chained in my hand, I usually wish that I had the path instead. I mention this because I want to stress the importance of not subbing in lesser cards in place of more expensive versions. With the example I gave I could be using Swords to Plowshares but I know that giving them a chunk of life like that for my strategy would be terrible. I do think that you can play a handful of games in the direction you are going now and win. Like he mentioned, the idea that your deck as is will be able to fight off a large chunk of the field will be unlikely. I do mildly disagree with the idea that you need tons of play sets. If you want your deck to be flexible at least at first till you see where you need to fix stuff, sets of 3 for important cards and 2 for ones you arent sure of would be ok. Now this is a matter of preference, and once the deck is rounded out you will want more play sets than not, but at this stage you can probably squeek by with more 3 ofs, just to get various effects going to see what works best for you. He may or may not agree, and we are all entitled to our opinion. To be fair, most of my actual modern decks do contain play sets, but in standard I tend to run more 3 ofs as the field is more diverse and easy to deal with than modern. I do want to stress also that regardless of anyone's opinion it is your deck, you do what makes you happy. You can play nothing but lands and a single Countryside Crusher if you want, just dont expect to win a lot. I will no longer harp on any of these points and instead try and answer your previous question, in your colors you do have answers. The biggest help is all the discard as the hand hate will remove important pieces they need and make it harder to get going. Aside from that Shattering Spree and Vandalblast come to mind for affinity, and Contaminated Ground really messes with tron, the key being to remove the land they have the fewest copies of. Depending on the tron variant, Expedition Map and Sylvan Scrying should be taken from their hand right away, and write down all the lands they have. Then pick a piece of the urza's they are lacking and enchant it. Small Pox hurts you a little too, but hurts them more if done turn 2 and they have out say a mine and tower. Good luck sir
xyr0s on BR Dragons
3 months ago
With dragons, and your deck with all the 1- and 2-ofs? No chance against established modern archetype decks. All the established decks have very concrete, very consistent plans that they follow, and many are fast.
Example: Modern decks never play Slaughter Games. Or at least, I've never seen it (ok... there are 4 decks on mtgtop8.com that have played it). They play Thoughtseize, and has Surgical Extraction in the sideboard for match-ups where they want some card to be permanently gone. Slaughter Games is turn 4 at realistic earliest. Thoughtseize happens on turn 1. And as long as you play as if a turn 4 card is as good as a turn 1 card, you'll lose a lot.
If you want to have a fighting chance, you have to tighten up your deck a lot. Make it consistent by having many copies (many = 4) of the cards, you want in every game from the start of the game. If you have a plan of doing something, bring enough cards focusing on what-you-wanna-do to have them in hand/play at the same time.
Example: You play Blood Seeker and Blood Artist. That could be a whole other deck, right there... if there was 4 of each, and some way of giving your opponent creatures which would then die. You could build onto this plan by adding Curse of Death's Hold and Hunted Phantasm. Forbidden Orchard for mana. Suture Priest for redundancy and reliability. Massacre Wurm for a finisher that goes with the concept. But for any of that to work, you'd need 4 of each. If you only have one of them sometimes in a game and never the whole bunch at once, they don't work with each other, and you don't have a consistent plan (the flipside is, that modern decks can seem boring - they are made to do the same thing, repetitively, over and over, again and again, reproducing the same game every time, rather than being unpredictable and having access to many different angles of attack). Especially the early turns of each game are planned out - either for winning the game very fast, or for fighting against decks that try to win early. The trap to avoid is thinking that you'll automatically get to turn 5 or so, and then you can start playing good cards.
A subtle element in deck construction is to avoid cards that don't do anything. Crucible of Fire is one of these. You play it on turn 4, and nothing happens. You don't have a dragon from turn 3 under any circumstances. And wasting turns without doing anything of impact on the table, that's something you have to avoid. And yes, there is a bit of an exception with soul sisters' Honor of the Pure (and a few others, I guess), but not really because those decks always have creatures on the table from turn 1.
tl;dr - get rid of random 1-ofs. Play 3 or 4 of each important card. Assume that you'll run into decks that aggressively try to win in turn 4.
3 months ago
I agree Firebreathing should go because I never have the mana free to use it, so that's gone. Sengir Vampire was there for his ability to keep getting stronger and cheaper CMC than the dragons, but I'm probably better off removing him and Furnace Whelp for Thunderbreak Regent (which I tend to do when sideboarding) and more removal for the cheaper cards. I do have Blightning and Slaughter Games but I took them out when I was adding creatures. They're probably going back in.The reason I have Archetype of Finality is to give the dragons deathtouch for their abilities that can hit opponent's creatures. Stormblood Berserker also hasn't been that useful but I thought he could be able to protect me earlier with Lightning Bolt and Tormented Soul to get damage in for his Bloodthirst. Are there better lower cost cards I can replace it with?