Community

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.

The untappy list needs a Preacher!

Jan 8, 2013 -- 8:52AM, Lesurgo wrote:

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?

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!

Jan 15, 2013 -- 9:16AM, Lesurgo wrote:

Jan 15, 2013 -- 12:58AM, Woutva wrote:

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