|
2 years ago ::
Feb 11, 2008 - 6:56AM
#1
|
|
|
 A version of this deck was piloted by Andreychikov Denis to a 3rd place finish in a Wubrg.net Standard tournament on 2/3/08. The deck utilizes token producers, along with Greater Gargadon, Marsh Flitter and Nantuko Husk as sacrifice outlets in tandem with Grave Pact to control your opponent's board. His original build ran 25 lands which I felt was a little high, and I tested this past weekend at FNM with 23 and had absolutely no problems. Here's the build I played: Tallowisp24's list
Show
 Testing Results:I placed 1st, going 4-0 in matches, 7-1 in games. I was relatively happy with it being that it was my first time piloting the deck. My one game loss was to UW Control.
My overall matches:
R1: (2-0 W) BG Rack
R2: (2-0 W) Doran Doran
R3: (2-1 W) UW Control
R4: (2-0 W) UB Fae
The Doran matchup for me was easier than I thought it was going to be. An early Bitterblossom and/or War Marshal gave me plenty of time to establish Grave Pact and from there it was smooth sailing. Even post board when he brought in Naturalize it wasn't a problem. Bitterblossom was his primary target, and after Extirpating both Naturalize and Doran, it was basically GG. I think this deck has a lot of potential in the current creature-dominated meta. I do want to get some heavy testing in against Reveillark Combo, but I feel Extirpate, Thoughtseize and Needle out of the board are going to give me the necessary edge in that matchup. Special Thanks to: Hodoku for the dividers. Thanks for reading, Tallowisp24
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 11, 2008 - 9:15AM
#2
|
|
|
there was a BR husk deck a while back like this one, didnt have marsh flitter though id run Epochrasite over torchrunner too
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 11, 2008 - 9:47AM
#3
|
|
|
there was a BR husk deck a while back like this one, didnt have marsh flitter though
id run Epochrasite over torchrunner too
I'm sure it didn't run Bitterblossom either. Epochrasite < Torchrunner because of 1, the direct damage aspect, and 2 the fact that Torchrunner can use Marsh Flitter as a sacrifice outlet, Epoch can't. If I was going to run Epoch it would be over the War Marshal, not the Torchrunner.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 11, 2008 - 11:50AM
#4
|
|
|
Deck decision question:
Choosing between the 4th Torchrunner and the 1-of Grim Harvest, what do you all think makes more sense for the deck? A 4th Torchrunner adds consistency, but the 1-of Harvest makes for some amazing plays.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 11, 2008 - 12:24PM
#5
|
|
|
Deck decision question:
Choosing between the 4th Torchrunner and the 1-of Grim Harvest, what do you all think makes more sense for the deck? A 4th Torchrunner adds consistency, but the 1-of Harvest makes for some amazing plays.
I'd always run a 4th of something rather than a 1 of, if that 1 of isn't going to be able to be searched out. Because you'll see the effects of always drawing a Torchrunner, more than you'll see the effects of drawing that singleton once every 3-4 games or so.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 11, 2008 - 12:40PM
#6
|
|
|
I'd always run a 4th of something rather than a 1 of, if that 1 of isn't going to be able to be searched out. Because you'll see the effects of always drawing a Torchrunner, more than you'll see the effects of drawing that singleton once every 3-4 games or so.
Well, the mathematic aspect of it is one thing...the 1-of Grim Harvest though is a little different in this argument. Having 4 Torchrunner's with no Harvest means I only have 4 Torchrunners. 3 of them with 1 Harvest means over the course of the game I can potentially have "more than" 4 thanks to the recurral ability.
I think I'm going to keep the 1-of Harvest and drop to 23 lands and put the 4th Torchrunner in and test with it.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 11, 2008 - 3:13PM
#7
|
|
|
Well, the mathematic aspect of it is one thing...the 1-of Grim Harvest though is a little different in this argument. Having 4 Torchrunner's with no Harvest means I only have 4 Torchrunners. 3 of them with 1 Harvest means over the course of the game I can potentially have "more than" 4 thanks to the recurral ability.
I think I'm going to keep the 1-of Harvest and drop to 23 lands and put the 4th Torchrunner in and test with it.
I have to agree with tallowisp on this one. In a deck that wants its creatures in the yard, the harvest is absolutely golden. I can see shenanigans with most of the engine and with enough mana, your deck turns into a machine gun of sorts mowing down creatures like nobodies business or creating an army of tokens and whatnot.
Oh yeah, and don't go down to 23 lands as this deck is super mana hungry. You'll want to hit 4 and 5 mana consistently, and with no acceleration this could be hard to pull off. Other than that, this deck is an absolute house vs anything aggro.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 11, 2008 - 3:48PM
#8
|
|
|
I'm not sure how well your deck would handle the RR for Evoke, but Spitebellows may deserve a place in your deck, especially with Harvest. I would say replace a Sulfurous Springs with a 4th Graven Cairns. I'm really stoked to see someone piloting a Grave Pact deck competetively though. B/R is also my favorite two color combination.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 11, 2008 - 3:49PM
#9
|
|
|
I have to agree with tallowisp on this one. In a deck that wants its creatures in the yard, the harvest is absolutely golden. I can see shenanigans with most of the engine and with enough mana, your deck turns into a machine gun of sorts mowing down creatures like nobodies business or creating an army of tokens and whatnot.
Oh yeah, and don't go down to 23 lands as this deck is super mana hungry. You'll want to hit 4 and 5 mana consistently, and with no acceleration this could be hard to pull off. Other than that, this deck is an absolute house vs anything aggro.
Yeah, I goldfished with it a little, and I'm sticking with 24 lands. The current build in the OP is where it's staying, for now...thanks man.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 11, 2008 - 4:03PM
#10
|
|
|
24 land with Grim Harvest is without a doubt what it should be. Like Mobiustech said, you have a bit of a high curve, and you'll pretty much have to pay the Recover cost on the Harvest about every turn. Aside from that, the deck looks pretty solid. I've been waiting for a bit to see if anyone could come up with a decent Grave Pact deck, and yours is by far better than anything I've come up with in the past. Good job on the deck and good luck with it.
|
|
|
