Has Anyone Tried a Multi Deck Format?
The Kitchen Table forum
Posted on March 13, 2024, 8:31 a.m. by Niko9
I feel like we all do it casually, say your friend just beat you in game one and you think, my other deck would be more fun, but I guess I was wondering how good multi deck would be as an actual format.
Maybe something like best of 3, two decks each, no side deck, and open decklists so both you and your opponent can plan which deck you pick first.
Mostly I think that something multi deck could make for a really fun tournament for both players and the audience. It could create mind games around whether your opponent is switching, and maybe even could incorporate some game effects on the switch, like if one player switches then the other player gets to decide play/draw. Or players could play one all around good deck and one that hoses a bad matchup, or something like that.
So, I'm wondering if anyone has played around with anything like that. I guess I'm thinking of it mostly from a tournament viewer perspective where I kind of wish there was something that would be a big splash in games like a full deck swap. In something like a modern tournament right now, I feel like most matchups aren't very close, like it's rare to see a 5-5 or 6-4 matchup for different decks, and almost every game starts with one player fighting back from a significant disadvantage because their deck has a great matchup against some other opponent.
Sometimes it just seems like the power level of decks has outpaced an ability for someone to side deck for it. Say your deck is really good into something like Scam but then you match up against Yawgmoth or something. Sure you might have some decent tools, but there is only so much space in the side deck, only so much chance to draw those cards, and a lot of the time it feels like players are just trying to plug holes in the boat from the first hand of the first game, and I wonder if there is a way to mitigate that some.
jethstriker That is very cool with the shadow and reanimator swap : ) I guess I meant more of trying games in modern or something where both players have 2 decks and they can start with either one or switch between games, but both players know the decklists of their opponent, and maybe with a stipulation that the two decks you are playing can have no nonland cards in common.
I'm just thinking of it as a way to both spice up games by adding a, which deck did the players start with, and how do they switch to counter each other.
It may not be the best solution either, just kinda throwing out ideas, but a problem I see sometimes is that side decking devolves to, make a good proactive deck and side in specific answers, then you win if you draw them or don't if you don't.
The big problem I'm thinking about is how rough it is to actually watch competitive play right now. Between Thoughtseize and Grief and The One Ring being a worse Time Walk plus a slow Ancestral Recall is that interaction feels like it's at an all time low because of hand knowledge, ring loops, and cascade or tron being able to break their playstyles by having tons of ways to stall until they explode.
So, my thought was, what if players had two decks they could switch in, but they also had the limitation of nonland cards can only be in one of the two. Could it create more interaction in games? I really have no idea : ) I'm sure someone has tried it.
March 13, 2024 7:34 p.m.
It's an interesting idea, but it feels like it rewards prediction, or even lucky guesses, more than gameplay.
Let's say I'm in a Modern tournament, and I start with Yawgmoth. Opponent starts with Tron, and I lose to the bad matchup. I switch to Boros Burn, thinking I can win a race, but opponent switches to Izzet Murktide and grinds out a match win with lucky pulls from Ragavan, Nimble Pilferer. If either of us had started with our other deck, I would have had the better matchup in both games.
Yawgmoth < Tron
Yawgmoth > Izzet Murktide
Boros Burn > Tron
Boros Burn =< Izzet Murktide
So assuming both people know what the other one's bringing, and have a reasonable idea of the +/- matchups, once you see the other person switch decks you know what to do. The best way around this is to use the same boxes and sleeves for both, and not reveal whether or not you switched (put both under the table and pull one back out or something). And that just goes back to pre-and mid-match prediction/guessing, rather than gameplay.
March 13, 2024 8:27 p.m.
Another option would be to have the winner decide whether or not to switch, then the loser gets to choose based on that. This might just force a lot of game 3s where the winner of game 1 has the advantage, though. Game 1, unknown matchup, I win. Game 2, I choose to stay, opponent chooses to switch, opponent wins. Game 3 opponent chooses to stay, I choose to switch, I win.
I guess my question is, does the opponent know whether or not you're switching? If so, when do they find out? If not, how do the judges keep the decision secret?
March 13, 2024 8:44 p.m.
jethstriker says... #6
Ah, I understand now.
I would like to share, if you're not aware yet, Team Unified Constructed has quite the same deck building restriction from your idea. A team of three build 3 decks to battle another team all at once. The catch is that, with the exception of basic land, none of your teammates can use the same card you are already using. So you can try to build the best deck in the format using the best cards, but your teammates will have to resort to other tools. Also, the best deck may win a matchup, but at least one of your other teammates has to win in order to win that round. So its like 3 decks across 3 players from your idea, but you are forced to play all decks.
March 13, 2024 9:12 p.m.
legendofa That's very true that there would be prediction and luck involved, and I'm sure it would create some bad games, but I just think a two deck game might give some decks that have one bad meta match up a place to shine. It might make something like death and taxes more viable because DandT just gets crushed in some matchups, but something like DandT and Boros Burn might make a great combo.
I think there would be a lot of logistics to work out to run smooth. Maybe to cut down on prediction the winner of each game is locked in and the opponent can switch?
Honestly I haven't figured it out : )
March 13, 2024 9:29 p.m.
jethstriker That's very cool! I wasn't aware of it but I'm definitely checking it out. Thank you : )
March 13, 2024 9:30 p.m.
TypicalTimmy says... #9
That's kind of how my friends and I largely played for the past 10 years, up until very recently.
I use to have a group of friends that would all bring multiple decks. We'd play a game, retire the deck and pick another one. It even got to the point we would sleeve everything in black and put them all in black UltraPro boxes and shuffle the decks around into a pile and randomly pick, so literally nobody knew what anybody was playing. At one point it was so crazy that we went with a new rule.
You draw seven cards face down and take it. You aren't allowed to look until it's your first turn. You literally keep whatever your first hand is, no matter what.
Made for very intense games. Also was a ton of fun when someone would discover something about a deck you built that you didn't even realize.
I miss those days. Now all I've got left is a single Miirym, Sentinel Wyrm deck and a few disheveled precons strewn about, and I only have one friend who plays in person anymore. To make matters worse, our schedules seldom align so we really only see each other maybe once every two or three months now.
Realistically, I haven't even bought Magic in probably close to two and a half years, except for an occasional precon here or there. It simply isn't worth the time and effort and expense anymore for me.
The only thing that keeps me in the hobby anymore is the custom card forum here on Tappedout which, let's be honest, only has like 5 other participants. :/
March 14, 2024 3:13 a.m. Edited.
Gidgetimer says... #10
Lopsided matchups are a feature, not a bug. Players are being rewarded for going all in on some matchups at the expense of others. Changing formats isn't the solution, shifting the meta would be the solution. However; that would probably involve lots of bannings and people are unlikely to react well to that.
March 14, 2024 12:49 p.m.
Gidgetimer I agree that changing the meta would be the ideal solution, but I also think that wizards would probably be more open to a new format than anything else. Sure, they'll probably ban problem cards, but they'll wait so long to do it and then there will be something else.
I'm really just thinking about the topic here because I haven't paid much attention to new cards over the last year and tried to watch some modern games to see what the meta was like, and the format is terrible as a spectator right now. Not saying anything bad about the players either, they're awesome, it's just so uninteractive between the two players, and the only thing that gets me really excited thinking about the game again is some format that doesn't exist. Not necessarily the one I'm tossing around here, but I don't know, something : )
March 14, 2024 5:24 p.m.
TypicalTimmy I hear you on missing it : ) If I could play like 7 player ice age block with my brothers and all their friends again, it would be my favorite format ever. And that's a really fun way to do it that you guys had with the face down keeps draws. I could see that really being a factor in deckbuilding, having to be consistent and playable hands as much as possible.
I also hear you on time, effort, and expense, for sure. I really like playing my decks with friends, or every now and then testing them on this site vs current meta, but the direction of card design has really killed it for me. I mean, my favorite set ever was Ixalan, and I haven't even looked at the new one at all, just because there are too many external factors crumpled up with design now. Wizards used to just want to make a good game or a good story, and sometimes it had hiccups, but for the most part there was a single direction. Now it's like, sets have to be designed to have big pops, probably big bans down the road, but we won't address that for a while while the packs are selling.
And the part that really gets me (and this might be part rant) is that Wizards will address things publicly but always skirt the actual issue, and it often comes off to me as super patronizing to players. They won't say that they won't ban Ragavan, Nimble Pilferer because it's going to see a secret lair reprint and they are directly invested in how much of a staple it is in modern, but they will talk about how it helps red aggro stay competitive. The game isn't being designed to be a good game, and formats aren't being moderated for anyone playing in them, so it's just a feeling of, what can make this feel fresh again?
But definitely keep at the custom cards! You have some really fun ones : )
March 14, 2024 5:41 p.m.
TheoryCrafter says... #13
I created a format named Mortal Kombat(3 guesses where I got the name). Each player starts out with a minimum of 2 decks. Player one's decks A and B plays Player 2's decks C and D respectively. If Player 1 wins with Deck A and Player 2 wins with Deck D then Player 1 and Player 2 play with Decks A and D, respectively. Each deck must be played at least once and cannot be played 2 games in a row unless its you're last remaining deck.
In matches where 3 or more decks are started with, when a player is down to their last deck, if the opponent has 3 or more decks you can play an opponent's deck and "challenge" another. This can only be done once per game.
The match ends when only one player has any decks remaining, thus becoming the winner. I only played it a few times but it was fun each time.
I've heard of an instance where players built an Oathbreaker deck into a Commander deck.
jethstriker says... #2
I'm not entirely sure if I'm understanding the topic correctly, but yes I think I have a deck like that. My Legacy UB Reanimator can easily transform into a Legacy UB Death Shadow because it shares more than 50% of cards in maindeck and sideboard combined. The "two" decks can theoretically fit in a double sleeved Commander deck box (around 115 cards) and I can go to LGS and from there decide what to play. The same is true for my Legacy Burn and Modern Burn, but this time same archtype across two formats.
March 13, 2024 7:06 p.m.