Most "Bribed" Cards

33 posts / 0 new
Last post
A couple of times I've pitched decks, and people have urged against using certain good cards for fear that Bribery could target them.  From what I can tell, Bribery seems to be a staple.  So I have two questions:

1) How often is your deck targeted with Bribery? (Your deck, not anybody's deck)
2) What are the cards most often targeted with Bribery? 
Oddly enough, we've mostly eschewed the use of bribery. It punishes you for playing good stuff in your deck, and forces games into degenerate states more often than not. Its like playing too many tutors in a combo deck... it just stops being fun.


 But the answer is the best green deck on the board gets targeted. Either for Primeval Titan or Terastodon... or the black deck for some eldrazi or Rune-Scarred Demon.

3DH4LIF3

I'm assuming the 'we' refers to your local meta, niheloim?  I commend the control you guys have...I still see a few people in my metas(two or three) that play it in one or two of their decks.  It appears that there is enough control to keep that from going into degenerate states...either by having ways to get the best creatures into one's hand, or by countering any such attempts in the first place.

And obviously, Prime Time is not an issue at this point.

To answer purple's questions, I have had my deck targeted about 4 or 5 times...once when I had Blightsteel Colossus in the deck.  Take a wild guess which one they picked.  That's partly why I stringently warn anyone against running it.  And while I agree with niheloim about the most targeted(Terastodon and Primeval Titan, when it was legal), I would think second most targeted is easily Blightsteel.
When I bribery people I usually look for Sheoldred, Eldrazi, PrimeTime (pre ban), Blightsteel, or Rune-Scarred Demon.
Duplicant was one of my favourites.
Not at all, people tend not to want to give me access to my own best creature. Homeward Path is good for a reason.
Yes, by "we" I meant my group.

3DH4LIF3

I get targeted sometimes, but it really depends on what deck I play. I have a Kaalia and rarely play it (not because of bribery, but usually there is one person in the group that does nothing but complain when people do, so to avoid whining, i don't play it, but there is always whining for one reason or another). If I play that, and a person has a bribery, sure, I'll probably get targeted. Then again, it also depends on who the person playing the bribery feels like being a douche to. I don't however not put a card in becuase of bribery or control like effects.

In the event that someone in my group plays a bribery (not many people have one) they will go for the usual stuff, Eldrazi, dragons, Titans, witnesses, etc. I got briberied and the guy took a Sigarda, it wasn't the best play at the time considering another player had a Ghave with beefier creatures than I did, but it did work out well for him. Thankfully I was playing krond and had a sigil of the empty throne in play and was able to play enchantments to keep a blocker out. 
  
I have a teferi deck that is my douche deck. It's not really counter oriented although I play choice ones like dissipate and hinder for example, but I do have bribery in that, as well as an acquire, and I just picked up a treachery for added douchery!...the hopeful win in that deck is knowledge pool.
Hinder and dissipate are 'choice' counters??
Hinder and dissipate are 'choice' counters??



 If I counter a spell, I don't wanna deal with at again, and since Dissipate exiles the spell, it is very nice.   But Hinder is mostly used to tuck commanders.
Hinder is good. But dissipate can easily be a cheaper spell. If you've exhausted those dissipate is at least better than cancel. I think I play it in two decks... ? But its not my go to.

3DH4LIF3

The most common seen cards bribried in my meta are:

Any Eldrazi
Blightsteel colossus
Terastadon
Sheoldred
Elesh Norn
Jin-gitaxis

The threat of bribery alone is usually enought to keep these cards out of peoples decks.
Seedborn Muse is the card I search for the most. I will copy/steal those as often as possible.

Bribery doesn't get caston me enough to say what people get from me. It's usuallt not me because my green decks don't usually profit from Seedborn enough to run but that's usually the most targeted card in my entire meta. Tutoring an answer to the board or a Consecrated Sphinx would be the runner up choices.
Hinder and dissipate are 'choice' counters??



In a format when you can only play one copy of a card, don't you think it's a good idea to remove it from the game out-right / bury it in a library?
exiling 1 of the 297 cards being played againt you? No I don't think that's particularly good.

To the original post, I think consphinx and ulamog are at the top of my list. 
All six of my decks are huge Bribery targets. In my Child of Alara deck [Maelstrom Archangel[/c] Progenitus and Ulamog the Infinite Gyre are the three main offenders. Acorss the rest of them Avacyn Angel of Hopes Hellkite Overlord Craterhoof Behemoths Vorinclex Voice of Hungers  etc. Also, doing auto card is really really tidious.
exiling 1 of the 297 cards being played againt you? No I don't think that's particularly good.

To the original post, I think consphinx and ulamog are at the top of my list. 



then stifle is bad, since you can only do it to the 1 of the 297 abilities being done.
Stifle is bad.

3DH4LIF3

The same comparison could then be said for STP / PTE.
No. The window for removal is larger, and appropriate targets in greater quantity, and redundant effects in greater supply when we're talking about creature removal.

3DH4LIF3

Wouldn't it be good to discourage counterspell in multiplayer EDH over some better form of removal?
Wouldn't it be good to discourage counterspell in multiplayer EDH over some better form of removal?




I don't think so.
  
I view counterspelling like removal, actually preemptive. As opposed to killing it when it is in play, I just won't let it in play to begin with. if you're playing mono blue, your removal spells are fairly limited (there is a new blue removal spell in Gatecrash that is just like beast within).

Counterspelling, like removal spells, or creatures with come into play abilities can still be used wrong. it's still up to the player to make the right play, and even so, that could turn out wrong depending on how the game plays out.   
Removal, disenchants, land destruction, and counters all fall into the same category as far as I'm concerned. They're answers. They're there to answer something that would otherwise be a huge problem for you. For example if your gameplan is to smash face with a 27/27 Kresh, and an opponent casts ensnaring bridge, you can't win. You need a way to answer the cards that shut you down.

You don't answer cards because 'answering things is good' or because you want to harass your opponents. You have multiple opponents. Spending mana and cards from your hand to hurt one single player hurts you and that one player only. The rest of the table just surged ahead of you both, relatively speaking.

In multiplayer, answer cards are there solely to protect your own gameplan. You don't naturalize someone's gilded lotus...you save it for the ensnaring bridge. You don't stop the reanimator from reanimating something (unless it's game-winning), you save your counter to stop the living death that wipes your precious board position.

So no, I don't think it's worth paying extra mana to add salt to the wound of whoever's play you're answering. Especially when you're talking about counterspells....because you have to hold back mana for them, without knowing if they'll be needed or not, the mana cost is a HUGE factor. I'd play negate over dissipate in this format, anyday. And the choice counters, in my opinion, are mana drain, arcane denial, and counterspell
Wouldn't it be good to discourage counterspell in multiplayer EDH over some better form of removal?


Kinda... It serves a definite purpose. If I'm in blue/black I might have to counter some obnoxious enchantment that makes my life suck because of how few cards my deck runs that can run it... or hope its just so bad for one of out mutual opponents that they remove it. 

Counters certainly aren't for griefing your opponents (though on occasion I do get vindictive and will counter my buddies stuff out of spite... that will teach him right?)

I know this is the wrong thread- there's an underrated cards thread somewhere- but since Tremor mentioned protecting your gameplan, I think Memory Lapse is a pretty funny counterspell. 

3DH4LIF3

Removal, disenchants, land destruction, and counters all fall into the same category as far as I'm concerned. They're answers. They're there to answer something that would otherwise be a huge problem for you. For example if your gameplan is to smash face with a 27/27 Kresh, and an opponent casts ensnaring bridge, you can't win. You need a way to answer the cards that shut you down. You don't answer cards because 'answering things is good' or because you want to harass your opponents. You have multiple opponents. Spending mana and cards from your hand to hurt one single player hurts you and that one player only. The rest of the table just surged ahead of you both, relatively speaking. In multiplayer, answer cards are there solely to protect your own gameplan. You don't naturalize someone's gilded lotus...you save it for the ensnaring bridge. You don't stop the reanimator from reanimating something (unless it's game-winning), you save your counter to stop the living death that wipes your precious board position. So no, I don't think it's worth paying extra mana to add salt to the wound of whoever's play you're answering. Especially when you're talking about counterspells....because you have to hold back mana for them, without knowing if they'll be needed or not, the mana cost is a HUGE factor. I'd play negate over dissipate in this format, anyday. And the choice counters, in my opinion, are mana drain, arcane denial, and counterspell




Then we all agree to disagree : ). I like mana drain too, not its $100 price tag or i'd have one, maybe 4, and I would guess most people on a budget may be in that boat. I love arcane denial but not as much anymore though. A friend of mine hates it due to the opponent drawing cards...you counter his 1 spell yet you net him 2 cards next turn, bad trade-off there, and I agree with that ideaology now (although still have a place in my heart for the card). Well, counterspell, it's counterspell, never to be printed again!

I feel, when it comes to multiple opponents (and all I typically play is 4+ player ffa's, sometimes with a variant like planeschase thrown in), the trick is to not blow your load all at once (patience helps, of which i can have little at times), hang around, let other people take care of things, odds are in a multiplayer game, if an opponent plays something that effects you badly, it effects everyone else the same way. So, most other people at the table might view a threat the same way and they will prioritize it's removal, taking the worry away from you (this is what I do in games, and find it works a good portion of the time). It can be done, but it isn't easy....and like I said, countering a spell, like playing any removal has an inherent risk in it being played at the wrong time, on the wrong thing, that's part of the fun!

I understand what you're saying, but, I don't think the mana cost is a huge factor considering we're only talking 2 / 3 cmc, and then the fact that not every deck playing blue would run counters.   

@ niheloim, seriously, we all have that guy in the play group who plays a counterspell just because, just last week, I played a spell early in the game green sun's zenith for 2 in a mono green edh deck. of course I was going to fetch up a rofellos. It got negated. Now, this guy has a tendency to counter anything that I do, regardless of how stupid that play may have been. So, what happened, a player after me (there were 2 left), played something worse (don't recall what, but it was worse than the zenith). This is an example of what I'm saying, playing cards right / wrong. Sure the player thought it was right countering the zenith, but in the end, it bit him in the butt...we just never really know the outcome due to the luck of the draw.
I think Memory Lapse is a pretty funny counterspell.

Oh yeah, remand too. Some of the time, postponing a big play is even better than actually stopping it.

EG: you make a big attack against someone who tries to flash in bogardan hellkite and wreck you. You remand/lapse it, the attack is a success, and he later ends up using the hellkite to roast someone else's kiki-jiki that was about to go infinite. Win-win-win.
 I love arcane denial but not as much anymore though. you counter his 1 spell yet you net him 2 cards next turn, bad trade-off there

Your friend is stuck thinking in 1v1 mode. I'd rather be on par with the table and have one opponent one card ahead than have me and one other player a card behind.

Plus, for all you know those 2 cards you gave him are ammunition he'll end up using against someone else. I mean, if you're at a 5 player table and he draws swords to plowshares, there's only a 1 in 4 chance he'll target one of your creatures with it, right? So from a tit-for-tat perspective, you can think of it as an opponent drawing 2 cards is more like letting him draw 0.5 cards that you might need to worry about.

if an opponent plays something that effects you badly, it effects everyone else the same way.

You don't waste removal on stuff that doesn't affect your standing relative to the rest of the table. You answer the stuff that hurts you more. EG if no one can attack through ensnaring bridge then I agree, you don't *have* to answer it. but if rhys, the redeemed is running the show with his token swarm and edric, spymaster of trest  is still sending his unblockable weenies all over the place to draw dozens of cards while you get chipped away, you need to be able to do something.

In multiplayer you need a whole new way to assess threats. You can't just say "is that a strong card?" You have to wonder "does that set me behind the rest of of the table?"
I ask myself, "self, does that beat me?" If the answer is: "no self, you can handle that." I flick my cards and pass priority.

3DH4LIF3

Oddly enough, we've mostly eschewed the use of bribery. It punishes you for playing good stuff in your deck, and forces games into degenerate states more often than not. Its like playing too many tutors in a combo deck... it just stops being fun.


My playgroup is the same way regarding Bribery.
It punishes you for playing good stuff

Hm I dunno that it's really that big a deal to have one single card thinned out of your deck. Especially given that once something you own is in play there are plenty of ways to regain access to it yourself. You can kill/reanimate, blink it back to your side, O-ring it and lose O-ring somehow, or just bounce it to your hand. And hey, maybe you're playing homeward path.
Hm I dunno that it's really that big a deal to have one single card thinned out of your deck. Especially given that once something you own is in play there are plenty of ways to get access to it yourself. You can kill/reanimate, blink it back to your side, or just bounce it to your hand. And hey, maybe you're playing homeward path.


It usually doesn't matter, but given the prevalence of blue in the meta if we all played it things could quickly devolve into Elder Dragon Bribery.

3DH4LIF3

Yeah but 5 mana isn't nothing. It's not like you're going to see this landing turn 1. It's pretty powerful to be able to pay 5 for an 8-drop but it's no tinker
I played it turn 2 off the god hand once, but I usually have to wait until turn 5 or later to play it, especially if I have to use tutors for more relevant things like Sol Ring. It's powerful and sometimes game-changing, but not game-breaking or format warping.
Sign In to post comments