mtg, mtg cards, magic the gathering, gaming, geeks
I've been playing Magic on and off for a number of years now. I got back into it right before M12 came out. I like playing standard because I like the pay-as-you-go approach, as opposed to dropping hundreds of dollars at once on a legacy deck. It also forces me to keep making and playing new decks, which is half the fun.
I did recently drop my collection to pick up a legacy deck, and I've been having lots of fun with it. The people at my LGS help me tweak it, and it's been smooth sailing.
I also love playing in limited formats and EDH, because they turn deck making into a skill, and forces creative play choices.
|Avg. deck rating||3.70|
|Favorite formats||Commander / EDH|
|Good Card Suggestions||5|
|Last activity||20 hours|
The Grand Melee idea seems fun, but defeats the purpose of having a multiplayer match. If you can only attack one person then some people will have clear game advantages. If there's a largely creature-less deck to your left you are able to attack with impunity. Magic without fear of crackback attacks is sad.
The only two things that would keep you from making that play would be:
1) If Polukranos' ability said "activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery"
Since neither of those things are true, you are free to activate Polly's Monstrosity ability as you please.
No other cards in Standard are truly comparable to Stormbreath. I'd recommend Reaper of the Wilds but it's already in the build.
You could try going aggressive with efficient creatures and Varolz, the Scar-Striped . Polukranos' very existence makes Varolz better than he used to be. And you can get some big damage in quickly if you pair him with Dreg Mangler .
That template falls completely apart in certain combo decks and/or decks with significant tutoring.
Many combo decks have singleton copies of the main combo piece because they know that they'll hit it when they "go off".
Decks with a lot of tutoring (or Birthing Pod decks) can get away with more 1-of cards because they can search for whatever they need at the time.
I'd just wait for Epoch's full article, as I'm sure it will go into this argument in detail. If you still have any questions you can ask them then.
Until then, stick with the basics.
4-of: I want to see this card every game. It makes my deck tick.
3-of: I want to see this card almost every game, but not necessarily on turn 1.
2-of: It's not the end of the world if I don't see this card, but I'd like to draw it eventually.
1-of: Usually a "catch-all" card that can bail you out of a weird situation. 1-of cards are usually versatile so as not to be dead draws.
If you're trying to make a 3-color deck in Standard, you can't really gripe about the price. When you decide to play 3 colors, it's likely that you're doing it to run the best cards from each of them. The best cards always come with a significant price tag. And that's not counting the lands.
3 color decks aren't meant to be budget-friendly.
(Yes, there are budget ways to build a mana base, but those almost always make the deck objectively worse)