Creature — Antelope Beast
Trample (This creature can deal excess combat damage to the player or planeswalker it's attacking if lethal combat damage would be dealt to all blocking creatures.)
At the beginning of your upkeep, return a green creature you control to its owner's hand.
Combos Browse all Suggest
|Commander / EDH||Legal|
|Commander: Rule 0||Legal|
Stampeding Wildebeests Discussion
9 months ago
Yeva is my favourite mono coloured commander, as she really changes how green typically plays. Nice list! A few things..
1) Land count seems a little low, especially as your ramp seems to rely more on Seedborn Muse style effects. Stuff like Farhaven Elf and Elvish Pioneer work well for me. Also get Emergence Zone in there, handy flash back-up plan if Yeva is MIA.
3) Bounce effects. Instant speed creatures are great, but being able to repeatly cast for value is better. Temur Sabertooth is a baller, and even stuff like Stampeding Wildebeests and Stampeding Serow work really well.
2 years ago
Hey big fan of the deck list. Gunna make it in paper soon. Some questions, ever think about adding Waterfront Bouncer or Stampeding Wildebeests or Temur Sabertooth to go infinite with Eternal Witness and a Time Walk effect?
Also Equilibrium and Erratic Portal do something similar but aren’t creatures so less synergy. I like Waterfront Bouncer the most out of all the options because of its low mana cost so it can contribute to your early game plan of being aggro and drawing cards and can bounce opponents hate bears and also transitions later into your combo.
Nostalgic Dreams and Skullwinder seem like very decent options too. Dreams has little downside if you’re swinging with your creatures and Skullwinder is E-Witness number 2 that requires very little play around.
2 years ago
Since the number of things that produce squirrels is limited, you may want Fauna Shaman for additional search to get the hermits, etc. and perhaps something like Stampeding Wildebeests that can bounce them back each turn to make another squirrel token engine.
2 years ago
I don't know if this is a good suggestion but maybe Savage Swipe . You definitely have enough 2 power creatures. Although I wouldn't recommend just playing a Prey Upon so I don't know. I do think however that Temur Sabertooth would be good for sure. It's not a bear but it could let you easily bounce your cheap (2 mana) bears back to your hand to get extra ETB effects. Decoction Module , Roaring Primadox , Stampeding Serow , Stampeding Wildebeests and Ambush Krotiq all have a similar effect but I don't think they are all worth playing. I also think that maybe Conjurer's Closet or Mimic Vat could be good additions. I think since bears aren't a supper strong tribe by them self your best bet is to maximize the ETB effects. (Which seems to be what you're doing.) I would say you could take out a few of the 2 mana 2/2s just because they don't do too too much and you seem to have a lot of them but I don't know. Like you said there aren't too many bears. Anyways I hope this is helpful. :)
2 years ago
Also, I see you have plenty of enter the battlefield effects, but no real way to flash them in and out once they've landed. Roaring Primadox , Stampeding Serow and Stampeding Wildebeests will help you get more out of your stuff! And since you mentioned draw card mechanics, Elvish Visionary is a nice, cheap way of getting more cards into your hand.
Hope this helps!
2 years ago
I agree that having a critical mass of high cost creatures can be a fundamental flaw in the Naya design. However I also stated that the line didn't necessarily have to be at power 5. It could be power 4.
Additionally Caretaker also takes CMC into account, so it functions with any creature spell that is CMC 5 or higher. That grants a lot of open space to utilize the mechanic outside the strict nature of Naya's theme.
Recent post: "“Wanted [the soulbond] to be a restrictive pairing” is not what I want at all. I was suggesting that creatures who pair with specific types of creatures is ground worth exploring. I think, in fact, that most of them will just be plain ‘ol Soulbond."
Earlier post: "Soulbond's biggest strike against is it's a complex mechanic. Many players like it, though. and if you can follow what's going on, it has good gameplay. I really don't know if this mechanic will ever return, but its popularity makes me think there's a chance.
So you see where I’m going with this? If X is paired with a creature with power Y or less, ...
Maybe some will be normal Soulbond, some will care about power/toughness, maybe one or two will care about beasts."
You contradict your previous statement. I can understand if you changed your mind but you make an adamant statement that you did not want restrictive pairing for Soulbond at all... whereas you previously stated that you want Soulbond that cares about who they pair with and only some would be normal, now you want the majority to be normal Soulbond.
How do you figure that Caretaker is played into a very different gameplay space than Exploit? Both requires a cost of a permanent on your board. Exploit is flexible in what cost it is, while Caretaker is locked and you have to play it before the benefit happens. Caretaker is definitely the weaker version of an Exploit cost due to those restrictions and setup, but I think it fits given that this kind of cost is not something that is normally within Green, so it does it worse. However because Caretaker is worse I think you can get away with granting higher payoffs.
As for breaking the color pie... No break is happening here to the color pie. Red, Green and White definitely have multiple sources of bouncing own permanents or creatures, so it is not a break of the color pie. You may argue about a break of what is traditionally Naya, but we are trying to make a new mechanic for Naya and after the conflux, Blue and Black mana have entered Naya. I wouldn't say it's a large stretch to have such a mechanic within .
Roaring Primadox , Stampeding Serow and its brother Stampeding Wildebeests , Temur Sabertooth , Ambush Krotiq , Invasive Species are some of them. Not bouncing a creature but bouncing none the less; Quirion Ranger Scryb Ranger I based these on mono green cards, but there's obviously a lot of others with other colors within the Nayan color pairing. Stuff like Fleetfoot Panther or Horned Kavu , Shivan Wurm . Red green had a lot of this stuff in the past. As far as I recall it was not a particularly liked mechanic in my LGS mostly because your opponent could interact with the "cost" and kill your only bounce target, so you had to bounce the creature itself. This was also back when creatures wasn't as pushed as they are now. Also having Caretaker as an optional cost that can't be interacted with and granting a benefit could make Caretaker work where the Red Green bounce for an undercosted big fattie failed.
Again; this is not a color pie break.
While I agree that Soulbond as a gameplay mechanic is more flexible in its core form, as it just requires a Soulbond creature and any other creature, I think Soulbond as a design mechanic is a lot more restrictive than you realize.
As for what decks are fun or not, I'm not going to go into that discussion. I would say most decks that are competitive are pretty linear in my eyes, because that is what makes them consistent and good.
Naya is exactly about the circle of life and normal predation to survive, not for sport like it may seem on Jund. I wouldn't say there's a bond between the gargantuans and their worshippers, as the gargantuans are the prime dangers to the humanoid inhabitants on Naya. The beasts prey on the populace and rampage through the jungle, destroying settlements.
I think for the gargantuans, it's more a tolerance thing. Like when a crocodile rests and opens its mouth to let birds eat out the scraps and clean for them. The crocodile doesn't care for the birds, but there's a symbiotic relationship that benefits both. I wont call it a bond. And certainly not one of the soul. That's why I called it a flavor break.
Thank you for the sauce on the popularity. I recognize that Naya is the least popular of the shards according to WotC's data. However it doesn't say that the mechanic is disliked. Shards of Alara fell into the top of the 25-50 percentile, which WotC classifies as a "liked" position, with the 0-25 percentile to be "disliked". They said some shards (like Esper) broke through the 50 percentile into the "popular" category.
So unless Naya is a vast outlier on the bad end, I don't think it's correct to say that Naya was disliked. Since they positively mentioned Esper to break the category but nothing else, I think it's safer to assume that Naya fell within the 25-50 percentile and is considered "liked, but not popular". You only know that Naya was the least popular of the shards. The rest is speculation.
And this speculation and personal bias is exactly why I kept going with this argument - which I reckoned was lost from the start. From your first post it is pretty clear that you don't consider the ideas applicable, so at first I wanted to know what thought went behind that, also to know what I might not have considered. From thereon it became clearer that some personal bias was present more than thought through criticism. I want people to argue with facts, and not use personal bias and present it as facts.
I don't mind you not liking my suggested mechanic and what it builds on. And if you have some factual or anecdotal evidence that supports a broader consensus which you claim to present, then I'll have to reconsider my position and revalue my viewpoints.
I thank you for our little discussion, but I think it is past time to end this.
3 years ago
First, the deck looks really fun. A few thoughts though, in no particular order:
- Land Destruction is not a wincon. If it's working for you, that's awesome. But I worry that 1x Thrun, 1x Nissa, and 1x Strombreath may not be enough to actually close out the game.
- Your mana- and dork-base would benefit a little from -3x Forest, -1x Birds of Paradise, +3x Green Fetchlands (Windswept Heath are the least expensive, but any of them are fine). Because the Fetches allow us to grab Stomping Ground as well, they give us a slightly better chance of getting the 2R we need to cast Blood Moon on Turn 2, which would allow you to drop a Bird for something better in the late game. Here's a piece on our Ponza Mana Simulator if you'd like to play with the numbers yourself.
- I like Ancient Grudge better than Artifact sweepers, personally. But if your meta demands sweepers, Shatterstorm is strictly better than Creeping Corrosion.
- Unless your meta is just overrun with Tron and Titanshift, 4x Crumble to Dust may be excessive. Surgical Extraction is another similar(ish) option, which is great in other match-ups as well.
Also, I TOTALLY get the desire to make a deck competitive "without necessarily carbon copying someone else's card list", but I always recommend starting with other lists and then tweaking (sometimes drastically) to fit our meta and playstyle. If you haven't already, I'd strongly recommend looking at these:
- The Eternal Witness + Primal Command softlock is GREAT, especially with Stampeding Wildebeests/Stampeding Serow. But the Serow has seen play in exactly one Competitive Modern deck, so I'd give that a hard look for sure.
- This one and this one are very different than yours, but probably worth a look.
- And FWIW, here's the Primal Command deck I ran for a while: Primal Ponza.
Good luck (and good skill) with the deck!
3 years ago
This is absolutely my favorite style of deck and I'd like to take it seriously competitive without necessarily carbon copying someone else's card list. I've decided to go heavier on the removal aspects, making up for fewer creatures with some recursion effects via Stampeding Wildebeests and being able to go get what I need when the time is right with Primal Command. I'd be very interested in anyone's serious thoughts on the archetype and this deck/approach in particular. If you think that there is a card that I'm lacking, please let me know what you think I should remove to make room for it and why. If you're curious about the reasoning behind my various choices, I go into detail in my deck description.
I've had a lot of success with this deck early on, but I'm stepping up in competition and I'm interested in learning about as many facets of this strategy as possible from those who've played it or played against it. Thanks in advance!
SCORE: 1 | 156 VIEWS | IN 1 FOLDER