Strictly better Exsanguinate?
Commander (EDH) forum
Posted on Feb. 10, 2016, 11:15 a.m. by PhotogenicParasympathetic
So I'm a fan of Exsanguinate. You know, it's a pretty okay card. I hear it's won a game or two. But doesn't Debt to the Deathless just straight outclass it? Sure, DttD is a bit harder to run since it requires black and white mana, but in any Orzhov/Esper lifedrain build, it seems like it's just... better. Am I the only one who thinks so? Am I some kind of EDH heathen?
Also I play Wrath of God not Day of Judgment, play Sol Ring on Turn 2, and sometimes play black decks without Phyrexian Arena. Something's wrong with me.
MrDilliams says... #3
Personally I would say they are about the same. I you consider that if you ignore X DttD costs twice as much as Exsanguinate, and that DttD requires two colors. So due to the mana restrictions on DttD it equalizes them a bit.
February 10, 2016 11:20 a.m.
PhotogenicParasympathetic says... #4
I'd argue that if I'm using it as a combo finisher, the downsides are also pretty moot, excepting of course that I have to be playing a black/white deck, not just a black deck.
The only time the cost matters is when it's being cast for less than infinite mana. Exsanguinate is better at six, but at six the effect is barely worth the investment. But late game, without a combo, DttD let's me drain out twenty life from everyone, potentially killing several players whilst refreshing my own life, for fourteen mana (pretty easily obtainable by the mid-late game), whereas Exsanguinate requires twenty-two mana for the same effect. That doubling effect just stacks up so much as you get into the later game that I feel DttD is a much better non-combo finisher.
February 10, 2016 11:31 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #5
I should point out that my perspective is slightly different because I play only competitive combo. I don't like expensive, vulnerable haymakers that don't guarantee a win at all times. If you're playing casually or less competitively, ymmv.
February 10, 2016 11:33 a.m.
In terms of pure effectiveness in draining life, the result is variant. I wrote a quick script to test some values. The results show that you would need to spend at least 7 mana for Debt to the Deathless to be strictly more efficient than Exsanguinate.
In the case of Commander/EDH, you would probably use either of these cards as a finisher. So hopefully, you would be able to dump more than 7 mana into it in any instance late enough in the game for it to be a finisher.
That being said, it's not just a matter of mana input to drain output. It's a matter of reliably being able to assemble the colors needed. Debt to the Deathless is definitely more mana-intensive. But, as I said before, at a point in late game where this would even be capable of being a finisher, should should hopefully have enough of the corresponding colors of mana to do the trick.
Overall, it just depends on what you want to do. If you want a late game finisher, Debt to the Deathless is probably the way to go. If you want more early-to-mid game pings, you get more bang for your buck at small total mana payments.
February 10, 2016 11:38 a.m.
One thing to keep in mind: Exsanguinate will always result in a drain of 2 less than the total amount of mana spent to cast it. Where as Debt to the Deathless results in a drain of more than the amount of mana spent to cast at 9 mana or more. Just adding to the point that Debt to the Deathless is more cost-effective if you have more mana to spend on it.
February 10, 2016 11:44 a.m.
griffstick says... #9
You're running 
so just run them both. Sometimes the large games of 4 or 5 players makes it worth at early game just to gain some life
February 10, 2016 3:09 p.m.
ClockworkSwordfish says... #10
Why would you ask if one card is strictly better than another if you're aware that there are situations wherein it's worse?
February 10, 2016 5:47 p.m.
Because that's negated by the fact that there are situations where the same card is better.
February 10, 2016 5:48 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #12
"Strictly better" requires that one card be unconditionally superior to another.
February 10, 2016 6:33 p.m.
PhotogenicParasympathetic says... #13
Which was more or less my point. The only time Exsanguinate does better is in an effectively useless position (being cast for 6- mana), where most times you'd be better off waiting for more mana to activate. Aside from the fact that Exsanguinate fits in more decks by virtue of being mono-colored, my point is that I think DttD is, in fact, better.
February 10, 2016 11:54 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #14
It's better in many cases, but it isn't strictly better. People seem to misuse that term a lot.
Epochalyptik says... #2
Wrath of God is strictly better than Day of Judgment, so that's a non-argument.
Debt to the Deathless is not necessarily better than Exsanguinate. It's more expensive to cast, and you need to dump at lease seven mana into it to make it more efficient than Exsanguinate. Further, you need
to get it started, making it less playable at any given time.
At the point where you're using it as a combo finisher, any benefits of Debt to the Deathless are moot and you only look at the downsides.
February 10, 2016 11:20 a.m.