04/21/2011 FtL: "Common Courtesy"

15 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is for discussion of this week's From the Lab article, which goes live Thursday morning on magicthegathering.com.
It's funny - invokers are a recurring theme in Pauper combo decks, it seems.  Again, due to the relative lack of X-spells.
You should do Pauper more often.  I don't think this deck is atually competitive in Pauper standard, but it's better than JVL's netdecking of Pauper decks and writing a column about them.
It may not be very competitive in Pauper standard, but I'd love to try this out at a casual table or two. 

That said, I don't feel like it has enough defenders.  The whole combo is built on getting a single Overgrown Battlement to tap for five mana (i.e. having five defenders on the battlefield) but the deck, by my count, only has 10 defenders.  You need to draw and play half of of your defenders without any being removed to combo off.  If you could squeeze a third color into the deck (hello Terramorphic Expanse and Evolving Wilds), adding red would let you play Battle Ramparts and/or Ogre Sentry for extra defenders and use the cheaper Oxidda Daredevil as your sacrifice outlet instead of Rusted Slasher.  Just a few random thoughts.
I play Standard Pauper almost exclusively.  This deck is not a very good introduction to the format at all.  It's a fun infinite combo, yes, but it does not reflect the metagame.  Most decks run 4x Kor Skyfisher for flying beats and to re-use powerful enters-the-battlefield effects like Sea Gate Oracle, Gravedigger, and Manic Vandal.  Squadron Hawks were definining our metagame several months before everybody's jaw dropped in Paris; they are a crucial piece in many prevalent decks that run the gauntlet from aggro to control.  Esper Control, Bant Tokens, Boros Landfall, White Weenie, and similar decks will crush this thing well before being able to combo out.

An article that actually examined how to brew a Johnny deck within this metagame would have been a better introduction to the majority of players who have yet to dip their toes into Standard Pauper. This list seems like it would confirm preexisting prejudices that all-commons in Standard isn't a serious environment, and that's very far from the truth.

Check out PDCMagic.com to find out about the two weekly Standard Pauper Player Run Events and check me out on puremtgo.com for my monthly reports on the metagame, Standard & Pauper.  It's the most affordable way to play Magic ever, which is great for people who like to brew mutliple  decks.  I've already had one success story winning a season finale with a homebrewed Four Color Allies deck and am currently working on porting Kuldotha Red to Pauper.  Hey, bring your Defender-Infect-Artifacts combo deck to the next event, see how it does :-)

My weekly group recently tried doing a Pauper Standard format night, and I came up with a Green/Red deck similar to this in structure, although with many more defenders. While not really a tricky Johnny deck, the addition of more defenders including Vent Sentinels, which also add to Overgrown Battlements mana making ability, made for a powerful damage combo. In more than one game I had 5 defenders out, 2 of which were Sentinels, scalding people for 10 points each turn. I added in a few Ulamog’s Crusher so I had at least a couple creatures that weren’t walls, as well as something to sink my abundant mana into. Toss in a few Lightning Bolts and Naturalizes to round it off and it’s a pretty fun deck to play.

All of you, not only on this article but also on JVL's article, who think that this is a better BoaB deck than whatever it is that JVL comes up with are missing the biggest point - JVL's decks win games. This deck is not competitive. Which is fine, since NdC's column is about making combos, and not about breaking the metagame, but to compare the two is like comparing a cheap, fun combo deck with a more-expensive deck that can compete at a high level. JVL from the start wanted to make the cheapest competitive deck he could, not make decks that fall into your definition of budget (which runs the gamut from $10 to $100 - seriously, $10 is your limit for buying a magic deck?!).

I really don't see what anyone is complaining about either - guess what guys, if you think this deck fits into your budget better than what JVL lists, build this deck! It fits your budget! Magic! Everyone is happy, the people that need a $10 deck and the people that want to compete at a high level but dont want to shell out $400 for a playset of jace. Stop being greedy, you've got the budget decks that you desire in this very column. Stop trying to steal JVL away from the people that actually like the decks he builds.
Yeah, but he didn't actually build a deck this week.
blah blah metal lyrics
All of you, not only on this article but also on JVL's article, who think that this is a better BoaB deck than whatever it is that JVL comes up with are missing the biggest point - JVL's decks win games. This deck is not competitive.


1) This column is explicitly about building decks about interesting card interactions. It's not about competitive play.

2) JVL's deck was better because he took the dominant deck and wrote a column about it.
2) JVL's deck was better because he took the dominant deck and wrote a column about it.



Which is Mike Flores's job.
2) JVL's deck was better because he took the dominant deck and wrote a column about it.


Which is Mike Flores's job.


No, Flores' job is to pretend it deserves to be dominant.
Quick general question:

Do you think there is a Pauper deck (legacy, standard, anything I guess) that could withstand a match with current RUG or Caw-Blade itterations?

Hmmmmm...
Quick general question:

Do you think there is a Pauper deck (legacy, standard, anything I guess) that could withstand a match with current RUG or Caw-Blade itterations?

Hmmmmm...



Not likely, since pauper decks don't get access to powerful rare cards.
IMAGE(http://pwp.wizards.com/1205820039/Scorecards/Landscape.png)

There are plenty of legacy pauper decks that could hang with current standard decks.  Now standard-pauper competing with regular t2 decks that would be quite a site.  Maybe something combo/control.....lots of cheap burn/counters to control the board and something that goes for one big swing to win? 

As a fan of pauper, I like this article a whole lot more than the most recent BoaB.  This standard list would likely get crushed in the current standard pauper meta, but, at least the author came up with something on his own and didn't just net-deck an outdated pauper decklist. 

There are plenty of legacy pauper decks that could hang with current standard decks.  Now standard-pauper competing with regular t2 decks that would be quite a site.  Maybe something combo/control.....lots of cheap burn/counters to control the board and something that goes for one big swing to win? 

As a fan of pauper, I like this article a whole lot more than the most recent BoaB.  This standard list would likely get crushed in the current standard pauper meta, but, at least the author came up with something on his own and didn't just net-deck an outdated pauper decklist. 


Yeah I bet in the right conditions, with a burn/control you might be able to swing in for a win 1/20 times. I guess that would be the fun of it to me. Rather than playing yet another robotic and nigh automatic "turn 1, colonade, then hawks,.... mystic------> sword-----> swing -----> win.

What is the most successful pauper deck of recent?
Sign In to post comments