1/8/2013 RC: "Zero to Sixty: Commanding Aurelia"

22 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is for discussion of this week's ReConstructed, which goes live Tuesday morning on magicthegathering.com.
Cloudshift, anyone?
When building a commander deck one has to follow the color identity rule. This means no green, black, nor blue cards can be played in Aurelia's deck. No dryad militant, no rakdos cackler, and no tattermunge maniac.
You are Red/Blue!
You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what I create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.
I have only one complaint with Aurelia.  "Whenever ~ attacks, untap all creatures you control...." and Vigilance are very close to redundant.  Someone on the team should have caught this.
I have only one complaint with Aurelia.  "Whenever ~ attacks, untap all creatures you control...." and Vigilance are very close to redundant.  Someone on the team should have caught this.



It reads "Whenever ~ attacks for the first time each turn..." - without Vigilance, she would remain tapped after her second attack. I suppose they could've modified the trigger to always untap when she attacks but only grant the extra combat step the first time, but that would've given all of your creatures 'vigilance' instead, and would've been much less clear and intuitive. I think the abilities are laid out the best way they could be, without significantly changing their effects...
She actually works well with cipher...
Cloudshift, anyone?



does that work? Cause that is actually playable..

(shame its an angel.. -> restoration angel)
Is anyone else annoyed by the twitter challenge? As in it actually isinconvenient?
 
Cloudshift should allow three attack phases, correct?

1st attack phase - Triggers 2nd attack phase.
Cloudshift Auerilia which resets meaning 2nd attack phase is actually the first for that creature - Trigger 3rd attack phase
Battalion can get pretty nasty with this card.

Two Boros Elite and 1 Aurelia can deal lethal.

A1  Swing for 9
A2  Swing for 13 
Battalion would stack for the Boros Elite

Firemane Avenger also stacks. 

Firemane Avenger, Aurelia, plus 1 doomed traveler also equals lethal.
A1 3 damage, 3 life, swing for 7
A2 3 damage, 3 life, swing for 7
Cloudshift, anyone?



does that work? Cause that is actually playable..

(shame its an angel.. -> restoration angel)

Cloudshift works perfectly. It's the exact same effect as Nephalia Smuggler/Deadeye Navigator in a cheaper package and the right color for Commander (and Standard as well).

And yeah, the Twitter challenge is terrible...
Wizard's first rule: People are stupid.
I tune out Twitter challenges because they tend to be on U.S. time, and I ain't interested in staying up till 2am for an unspecified challenge.

Very confusing to have this article titled "Zero to Sixty" when it's more like "Zero to Ninety-Nine"...

And yes, most definitely naughty naughty with Dryad Militant in a red-white deck! It's a reasonably common group house-rule, but articles on the mothership should really follow the standard rules, I'd say.

You are all, of course, correct about the trouble with hybrid creatures in that deck. It often slips my mind that Commander has very unique deck construction rules in regards to hybrid creatures that is contrary to the norm.

 In this case, please replace Dryad Militant, Tattermunge Maniac, and Rakdos Cackler with: Boros Elite,  Sunhome Guildmage, and Mogg Conscripts. Hopefully that helps all of you out.

As far as the Twitter challenge goes, there are various reasons why I needed to switch away from my previous style. (One of which is to give editing and our graphic artists enough lead time on my articles.) I'm willing to try it for a week or two, see if it works or not, then investigate other options. It's definitely an experiment.




 
The untappy list needs a Preacher!
You are all, of course, correct about the trouble with hybrid creatures in that deck. It often slips my mind that Commander has very unique deck construction rules in regards to hybrid creatures that is contrary to the norm.

 In this case, please replace Dryad Militant, Tattermunge Maniac, and Rakdos Cackler with: Boros Elite,  Sunhome Guildmage, and Mogg Conscripts. Hopefully that helps all of you out.

As far as the Twitter challenge goes, there are various reasons why I needed to switch away from my previous style. (One of which is to give editing and our graphic artists enough lead time on my articles.) I'm willing to try it for a week or two, see if it works or not, then investigate other options. It's definitely an experiment.




 



cool to see you actually read those comments. +1 to you sir!

You are all, of course, correct about the trouble with hybrid creatures in that deck. It often slips my mind that Commander has very unique deck construction rules in regards to hybrid creatures that is contrary to the norm.

 In this case, please replace Dryad Militant, Tattermunge Maniac, and Rakdos Cackler with: Boros Elite,  Sunhome Guildmage, and Mogg Conscripts. Hopefully that helps all of you out.

As far as the Twitter challenge goes, there are various reasons why I needed to switch away from my previous style. (One of which is to give editing and our graphic artists enough lead time on my articles.) I'm willing to try it for a week or two, see if it works or not, then investigate other options. It's definitely an experiment.




 

is it going up pacific time?
GAVIN! why couldn't you just put that up on the article? you didn't say the format or anything. wow that burns me up. i thought it was gonna have moving parts or something, but noooo just a simple post gtc challenge. im gonna assume its standard.
Format: Future Standard (Gatecrash is legal!)
Restrictions: None!


Can you please add a restriction again? I never payed much attention to your articles (sorry for that) but for the last couple of months I did and as far as I can tell, the restriction is ALWAYS none.

This causes me to not even bother. I have no clue where you want us to go. Should I make the best deck to break the meta? (beside the point if this is even possible) should I use new cards in a weird way thats never going to win a pro tour but might go 2-2 at FNM?

I like working with restrictions, beside the fact that it makes deckbuilding interesting, sometimes its not even that bad in the end.

I restricted myself to build a deck with Demonic Rising. I won an FNM and will update the list with Orzhov cards, if the charm and/or mass removal spell is anygood, that decklist might actually be PTQ decent..

So anyway: MOARRRR restrictions!
Format: Future Standard (Gatecrash is legal!)
Restrictions: None!


Can you please add a restriction again? I never payed much attention to your articles (sorry for that) but for the last couple of months I did and as far as I can tell, the restriction is ALWAYS none.

This causes me to not even bother. I have no clue where you want us to go. Should I make the best deck to break the meta? (beside the point if this is even possible) should I use new cards in a weird way thats never going to win a pro tour but might go 2-2 at FNM?

I like working with restrictions, beside the fact that it makes deckbuilding interesting, sometimes its not even that bad in the end.

I restricted myself to build a deck with Demonic Rising. I won an FNM and will update the list with Orzhov cards, if the charm and/or mass removal spell is anygood, that decklist might actually be PTQ decent..

So anyway: MOARRRR restrictions!



Thanks for the feedback! In the past couple months I actually have had a fairly high number of restrictions. (For example, every other week was a guild week where your deck had to be of that guild.) This week's deck even had a restriction on it! (It had to be blue/black) If it would help your direction at all for this week, as I note below the challenge, I'm especially looking for decks that utilize Gatecrash cards in cool ways. It's hard to phrase in a requirement, but perhaps that would help guide your deckbuilding.

What kind of restrictions are you looking for? I'm always open to ideas.

Hope that helps!

Format: Future Standard (Gatecrash is legal!)
Restrictions: None!


Can you please add a restriction again? I never payed much attention to your articles (sorry for that) but for the last couple of months I did and as far as I can tell, the restriction is ALWAYS none.

This causes me to not even bother. I have no clue where you want us to go. Should I make the best deck to break the meta? (beside the point if this is even possible) should I use new cards in a weird way thats never going to win a pro tour but might go 2-2 at FNM?

I like working with restrictions, beside the fact that it makes deckbuilding interesting, sometimes its not even that bad in the end.

I restricted myself to build a deck with Demonic Rising. I won an FNM and will update the list with Orzhov cards, if the charm and/or mass removal spell is anygood, that decklist might actually be PTQ decent..

So anyway: MOARRRR restrictions!



Thanks for the feedback! In the past couple months I actually have had a fairly high number of restrictions. (For example, every other week was a guild week where your deck had to be of that guild.) This week's deck even had a restriction on it! (It had to be blue/black) If it would help your direction at all for this week, as I note below the challenge, I'm especially looking for decks that utilize Gatecrash cards in cool ways. It's hard to phrase in a requirement, but perhaps that would help guide your deckbuilding.

What kind of restrictions are you looking for? I'm always open to ideas.

Hope that helps!




Thanks for your response!

Well for example, if you say: ''build a golgari deck!'', maybe you can clarify if you want us to build a black/green deck, or actually use X scavenge cards. Might be fun if you said something like ''use at least 6 different cards with the golgari watermark'' or something along those lines.

I believe that restrictions breed creativity, the smaller the vacuum, the more I am trying to think outside the box. However I also think that if you make it too specific (for example, build a mono blue deck with X & Y) you might only reach a very specific group (blue mages) and cut down the rest. Finding the perfect in-between is hard but key here

Some restriction ideas might be:

- Build your deck around card X
- Build a deck around the interaction between card X & Y
- Build a competitive deck with no (or cheap) rares or mythics (however this is more fit for building on a budget I guess, it does however have a restriction built in already ;)*
- Build a deck around a specific guild (but be clear how you would like to see this. Is just playing the colors enough or do we have specific instructions?)
- Build the best deck to beat Deck X (this might actually be a very very interesting one. With all the readers trying to create a deck to beat for example Zombies, a decent (or original) answer might appear. While this might be hard (after all, all the pro players are trying to figure out the best deck for the meta all the time) you can narrow it down to JUST being able to beat Deck X (and not the whole field). Im sure everyone knows that feeling of losing to the same stupid deck 8 times in a row and just want to build a deck that at least beats that deck, no matter how crap you lose to (for example) blue-white control.

I hope you like some of the suggestions
woutva nailed it for me.

"restrictions" is perhaps a poor word as I believe you're looking at it.  You shouldn't restrict anything (or very very little).

What most people want is a direction, and a few guidelines to follow.  

No one wants to be told "don't use a creature in the deck" or "you can't use the color red" as that's kind of a turn-off.

I'd focus more on something like "for this week, focus on a keyword ability for your deck...such as scavange, and make it as tournament worthy as possible"  of course you could word it a bit more eloquently than that.

People want to know if you want quirky decks that do something funny....win in an unconventional way....are tournament worthy (or close as can be) when they make their decisions.  

There's just looking for you to guide them a bit more is all. 
Yes! Guide the little sheeps that we are! :P