[Primer WIP] Trynn & Silvar Rebel Yell - a Multiplayer Conscious Deck

[toctheyounger]

I see no major harm in that personally. Just because you have a nuclear meltdown switch doesn't mean you press it every game, and I guess being honest shredding the creatures on board won't always cut through for an immediate win anyway, as there's lots of noncreature permanent win cons out there these days, like Bolas's Citadel and Aetherflux Reservoir et al.

It probably makes a nice case for Arcbond, Chandra's Ignition or something similar, too.

[3drinks]

Ooh, right, Chandra's ignition is perfect off the commander. Shame that one commander would kill the other with it though.

I can do some fun things with siege-gang commander and Ankle Shanker too. And, ofc being able to do something meaningful with Shinka, the Bloodsoaked Keep is fantastic.

[tstorm823]

I'm playing ethically dishonest by omitting a key part of the strat (playing sawft ball when I can hit a home run). Players would feel that I'm taking it easy and pulling my punches back.

Nope, you're missing the point again. I'm not saying that Death Pits of Rath is specifically over the top, that might be a fine card for you to play, but the mindset you're using to justify it is backwards. You're supposed to take it easy and pull your punches when deckbuilding. You want people to want you to win, and the better you restrain yourself the more likely that is to happen. If your opponents show up with dodgeballs to have a dodgeball match, and you bring a loaded gun because you have access to it and don't want to "play sawft ball", it doesn't even matter if you never pull the trigger, your opponents won't want you in the game. It's best to match intensities one-to-one, but if you have to lean one way or the other, it's better to be the person trying to play dodgeball with beach balls because everyone will be excited if the beach ball player pulls it off.

Again, I'm not saying that specific card is a gun in that strained analogy, but the point is that you're supposed to handicap yourself in deckbuilding. The properly political win is the one where you never play any individual card that opponents identify as THE game winning threat.

[3drinks]

I'm playing ethically dishonest by omitting a key part of the strat (playing sawft ball when I can hit a home run). Players would feel that I'm taking it easy and pulling my punches back.

Nope, you're missing the point again. I'm not saying that Death Pits of Rath is specifically over the top, that might be a fine card for you to play, but the mindset you're using to justify it is backwards. You're supposed to take it easy and pull your punches when deckbuilding. You want people to want you to win, and the better you restrain yourself the more likely that is to happen. If your opponents show up with dodgeballs to have a dodgeball match, and you bring a loaded gun because you have access to it and don't want to "play sawft ball", it doesn't even matter if you never pull the trigger, your opponents won't want you in the game. It's best to match intensities one-to-one, but if you have to lean one way or the other, it's better to be the person trying to play dodgeball with beach balls because everyone will be excited if the beach ball player pulls it off.

Again, I'm not saying that specific card is a gun in that strained analogy, but the point is that you're supposed to handicap yourself in deckbuilding. The properly political win is the one where you never play any individual card that opponents identify as THE game winning threat.

But how do you know what to play or not play when you don't know the contents of decks or even whom might be at an LGS at any given time? It goes back to that whole "play happy-fun-time Magic where players and permanents have hexproof and no one likes losing any of their cards".

[materpillar]

The more I think on it, the more I think Death Pits of Rath|tmp should be featured as it is the strongest thing to do in a deathtouch deck. It's a terrific payoff and I'm playing ethically dishonest by omitting a key part of the strat (playing sawft ball when I can hit a home run). Players would feel that I'm taking it easy and pulling my punches back.

This is logically incorrect. If we followed this to its logical conclusion than everyone is ethically dishonest for not running a cEDH deck every game. Why play a deathtouch deck instead your Kaalia of the Vast deck? Why limit yourself with Obosh, the Preypiercer when it makes it so you can't play Demonic Tutor? Why try to win without infinite combos when they're just so much more efficient?

Also, I guarantee people will spend effectively zero time wondering if you are or are not running Death Pits of Rath in your deck. I didn't consider this card at all while thinking about your deck and I have a massive mental library for random old magic cards.

Rather, it shouldn't be something I'm aiming to do every game, so much as it should be something I can do that demands to respected more. "If you do this, I will do that, and you won't stick any creatures again." And I can back that bluff up. I can even use Withering Wisps in conjunction, and this morphs into a backup pestilence deck with Brash Taunter and Repercussion.

I don't understand this "demands to be respected more" thing. I'm pretty sure that's the opposite of what you want. If people don't respect your deck, they're much more likely to ignore you. If they ignore you they're using their resources on someone else.

If your deck manages "if you do this, I will do that, and you won't stick any creatures again." with any consistency anyone who relies on creature based wins is going to hate you out of future games really fast because they can't afford to let you get set-up or they'll just lose.

But how do you know what to play or not play when you don't know the contents of decks or even whom might be at an LGS at any given time? It goes back to that whole "play happy-fun-time Magic where players and permanents have hexproof and no one likes losing any of their cards".

*Sits down at table*
"Hey guys, how spicy of decks are we feeling today? I've got herp-a-derp rocking throwing rakdos or viciously murder your lands, your hand, and you Kaalia."
Some people are going to want the former, some people are going to want the latter. When in doubt chose the weaker of your decks. It's better for your reputation long term to take a lose because you undershot and scale up during the next game then it is to pubstomp and scale down.

That's basically how I start off every interaction I have with the strangers on PlayEDH now a days. I'd say that 60-70% of my games end up being fairly balanced with complete strangers on the internet.

[FenrirRex]

I realize it's the entire premise of this thread and its twin, but I have never seen quite as willful a mindset trying to work against playing politics. I was frustrated that I had to reiterate my points again, but tstorm and materpillar have me covered already, which I appreciate.

So, I won't repeat myself, but will instead continue a line of recommendations and then still more (apparently ignorable) advise for playing politics. Again, I recommend less "mean" versions of deathtouch enabling: Archetype of Finality, Gift of Doom, Onyx Mage, Retreat to Hagra, Vial of Poison (if recurring artifacts), and Zagras, Thief of Heartbeats (who would be a solid commander option if you wanted to go all-in on deathtouch synergies).

As for the question of playing softball and how to approach an unknown table, it comes back to communication again. Your personal perspective is only 1/4th of the experience at the table- you approach things aggressively, with winning and various forms of optimization as primary concerns; neither of which matter to the other people at the table. You can only know what people are expecting or want out of a game by talking to them, in much the same way that you can truly only know the "optimal play" by asking the table what they think a good response to certain scenarios is.

A good multiplayer experience involves plenty of talking and a willingness to sacrifice your own power plays to do what's best for the table altogether. Ideally, winning then comes as the secondary goal, but you can statistically win more games if people actually want to play with you.

[3drinks]

So this is what I came up with. MODO helped me to visualize everything I'm slotting together, and according to tappedout, it's "84% more casual than competitive". So that's good right?

Pet the Kitty or Get a Rock to the Face

DecklistCMCManaPricesChartsDraw 7

Commander (2)

1 Toggo, Goblin Weaponsmith

1 Falthis, Shadowcat Familiar

Companion (1)

1 Obosh, the Preypiercer

Land (40)

1 Ancient Tomb

1 Arid Mesa

1 Badlands

1 Blood Crypt

1 Bloodstained Mire

1 Canyon Slough

1 Dormant Volcano

1 Dragonskull Summit

1 Everglades

1 Fabled Passage

1 Great Furnace

1 Lotus Field

1 Luxury Suite

1 Marsh Flats

1 Polluted Delta

1 Prismatic Vista

1 Rakdos Carnarium

1 Scalding Tarn

1 Smoldering Marsh

2 Snow-Covered Mountain

10 Snow-Covered Swamp

1 Shinka, the Bloodsoaked Keep

1 Shizo, Death's Storehouse

1 Strip Mine

1 Thawing Glaciers

1 Vault of Whispers

1 Verdant Catacombs

1 Volrath's Stronghold

1 Wasteland

1 Wooded Foothills

Enchantment (7)

1 Death Pits of Rath

1 Furnace Celebration

1 Gift of Doom

1 Necromancy

1 Phyrexian Arena

1 Revel in Riches

1 Withering Wisps

Creature (21)

1 Anathemancer

1 Bane of Bala Ged

1 Brash Taunter

1 Brass Squire

1 Covetous Dragon

1 Cunning Sparkmage

1 Disciple of the Vault

1 Dualcaster Mage

1 Fire Imp

1 Fleshbag Marauder

1 Gadrak, the Crown-Scourge

1 Goblin Sharpshooter

1 Goblin Welder

1 Kuldotha Phoenix

1 Merciless Executioner

1 Plaguecrafter

1 Ruin Raider

1 Rune-Scarred Demon

1 Siege-Gang Commander

1 Syr Konrad, the Grim

1 Viashino Heretic

Artifact (11)

1 Arcum's Astrolabe

1 Basilisk Collar

1 Candelabra of Tawnos

1 Crucible of Worlds

1 Darksteel Plate

1 Hammer of Purphoros

1 Memory Jar

1 Skullclamp

1 Sol Ring

1 Sword of Fire and Ice

1 Sword of Vengeance

Sorcery (10)

1 Acidic Soil

1 Chandra's Ignition

1 Crux of Fate

1 Faithless Looting

1 Gamble

1 Grim Tutor

1 Read the Bones

1 Reanimate

1 Toxic Deluge

1 Trash for Treasure

Instant (8)

1 Bedevil

1 Bituminous Blast

1 Chaos Warp

1 Fire Covenant

1 Lightning Bolt

1 Pyroblast

1 Red Elemental Blast

1 Vampiric Tutor

1 Village Rites

Approximate Total Cost:

But how do you know what to play or not play when you don't know the contents of decks or even whom might be at an LGS at any given time? It goes back to that whole "play happy-fun-time Magic where players and permanents have hexproof and no one likes losing any of their cards".

*Sits down at table*
"Hey guys, how spicy of decks are we feeling today? I've got herp-a-derp rocking throwing rakdos or viciously murder your lands, your hand, and you Kaalia."
Some people are going to want the former, some people are going to want the latter. When in doubt chose the weaker of your decks. It's better for your reputation long term to take a lose because you undershot and scale up during the next game then it is to pubstomp and scale down.

That's basically how I start off every interaction I have with the strangers on PlayEDH now a days. I'd say that 60-70% of my games end up being fairly balanced with complete strangers on the internet.

I wouldn't know, PlayEDH kicked me from their server years ago, said I "wasn't the type of person they wanted in their community". Some snowflake bullcrap excuse.

Your idea of talking to players before the game starts is a foreign one, players don't care in my experience, they just want to hurry up and start, and you end up with lil Jimmy with their Craw Wurm beats deck in the same environment as the person comboing off with Bolas's Citadel. Or worse, people that outright lie about how strong their deck is or isn't, or that "doesn't know" how strong their deck is. But I'm the bad guy because I like to attack with my two drop.

I realize it's the entire premise of this thread and its twin, but I have never seen quite as willful a mindset trying to work against playing politics. I was frustrated that I had to reiterate my points again, but tstorm and materpillar have me covered already, which I appreciate.

So, I won't repeat myself, but will instead continue a line of recommendations and then still more (apparently ignorable) advise for playing politics. Again, I recommend less "mean" versions of deathtouch enabling: Archetype of Finality, Gift of Doom, Onyx Mage, Retreat to Hagra, Vial of Poison (if recurring artifacts), and Zagras, Thief of Heartbeats (who would be a solid commander option if you wanted to go all-in on deathtouch synergies).

As for the question of playing softball and how to approach an unknown table, it comes back to communication again. Your personal perspective is only 1/4th of the experience at the table- you approach things aggressively, with winning and various forms of optimization as primary concerns; neither of which matter to the other people at the table. You can only know what people are expecting or want out of a game by talking to them, in much the same way that you can truly only know the "optimal play" by asking the table what they think a good response to certain scenarios is.

A good multiplayer experience involves plenty of talking and a willingness to sacrifice your own power plays to do what's best for the table altogether. Ideally, winning then comes as the secondary goal, but you can statistically win more games if people actually want to play with you.

Ignorable? No. I'm reading everything, every word, and applying it to the thread and how my brain is interpreting the advice. Then I'm both getting recommendations of even cmc cards, and then getting feedback that "I liked it better when Obosh was there" and it's got me pulled in different directions at the same time leaving me worse off than when I started. When i am trying to incorporate everything. Even this list that I just started visualizing before these last suggestions came in.

I'm about ready to just give up and accept I'm never going to figure this crap out.

[FenrirRex]

Ignorable? No. I'm reading everything, every word, and applying it to the thread and how my brain is interpreting the advice. Then I'm both getting recommendations of even cmc cards, and then getting feedback that "I liked it better when Obosh was there" and it's got me pulled in different directions at the same time leaving me worse off than when I started. When i am trying to incorporate everything. Even this list that I just started visualizing before these last suggestions came in.

I'm about ready to just give up and accept I'm never going to figure this crap out.

My apologies, I recognize that you're approaching this from your own frustration. Ignore my salt, the fact that you're trying to get to a better place in a multiplayer environment is already taking more steps than a lot of players would attempt.

I do worry that you're trying to combine the deckbuilding process with the philosophy of multiplayer at once. You may be adding to your frustration by trying to figure out cards that are both fun to play for you and help make a good multiplayer experience- hence the deck being pulled in so many directions all at once (adding yet another layer of frustration for you. That's an unpleasant loop.).

I don't hate the decklist you've pulled together so far, though will note that Repercussion is another notorious "mean" card that you may want to nix if you want to avoid people getting mad at any singular card, and sadly Ankle Shanker has white in her identity.

[3drinks]

I knew there was a reason I never plucked ankle shanker up in the first place.................

[Rumpy5897]

That's what you get when you try to consult your build with many different folks. We're all from different MTG walks of life, have our own preferences and experiences, and due to this we'll pull you in different directions. It's entirely up to you which pieces of this advice you choose to act on.

Now, to muddle this further with my unsolicited take - you shouldn't go too deep on blowing up stuff with a deck that's meant to be casual and fun. There's a difference between your maligned "everything has hexproof" and multiple creatures dying at your hand every single turn cycle. If people feel that they can't even try to get their game plan going because you've got copious deathtouching pings at your disposal, they are likely to not enjoy the experience too much and may start colluding against you. I'm not saying don't do it at all, but don't go too deep on it. On vaguely related grounds, I'd recommend losing Bane of Bala Ged. It has no synergy with the rest of your list, it costs a lot to get out, and people hate annihilator.

Here's a question for you - how does your deck win? I popped by as I'm working on a {b/r} Toggo myself and am struggling with creative ways to close out, and was hoping to find something inspiring in your build. Disciple of the Vault won't help you out here much, as that's 1/120th of your win condition with each rock death. Furnace Celebration is also egregiously slow. Repercussion has some promise, you could just splash Blasphemous Act to face. Brash Taunter also has some potential. But it seems like you'll struggle with closing. I have more finishing in my list yet I find it insufficient.

In terms of deck construction, I feel you'd be better off without Obosh for the flexibility. You're also running some cards which feel like they're going to underperform once you actually try to run them out in the wild. Covetous Dragon is a vanilla flyer, Brass Squire is a Darksteel Ingot more often than not, and the main beneficiary of its discount (Sword of Vengeance) doesn't feel like it does a lot for you either. The keywords combine nicely with deathtouch and menace, but your commanders are tiny and you don't have much other pump. You don't seem to make disposable bodies easily, so Village Rites costs you a creature in play, and the Rites itself, and a mana, to draw two cards.

I'd greatly recommend Rings of Brighthearth. You can copy the fetchlands, which is very nice for amassing land piles (and complementary rock piles). You can also copy rock tosses, which might not be the worst thing in the world. My Toggo partner of choice is Keskit, the Flesh Sculptor, who happily turns the rocks into card advantage. Might be of some use to you? Inspiring Statuary is a nice way to get extra value out of the rocks, you seem like you'd get a lot of discounts from it. Indomitable Creativity is also a fun option for turning rocks into things of actual value.

[3drinks]

@Rumpy5897

I've been sitting on an Indomitable Creativity for years like a r Genesis Wave waiting for it to find a home............wow that's genius.

I don't like the direction Keskit pulls me into because it's very Kuldotha Forgemaster esque. Once I go down that rabbit hole, I'm looking into the disk/forge/lattice nuke button...and daggson does that way better. I like Keskit more with wellsprings, and the SOM spellbombs though, and it makes a terrific Salvaging Station deck so that's an option latre maybe. I like the statuary, rocks don't have to tap to get chucked. That gives me something other than welder effects to use with them. Rings is an obvious card.

Yea, brass squire is my little Kuriboh, the cute cuddly guy that is weak but does something somewhere to let you win. In this example, he instant attaches deathtouch equips to make combat math impossible, or saves me 2-3 mana on an equip. Insta attach darksteel plate for the gotcha when they try to smack my kitty (how dare they, how could you hit such an award winning grinning cat?) Truly, I wanted originally to use it with deathrender and su-chi

I'm honestly at-odds with Obosh as well. i like him, and want to use him, but I did like him better with Kederekt Parasite in the [Blim] deck, and I despise his keeping me off of Bob. Bob is the first card I add to any xb deck and I'm really feeling the hurt without him. but then I have a house of a companion that finishes games quick, so I kinda want to keep easy access to him. Perhaps it's just more correct to move it into the 99, which then opens up access to things like Slobad, wellsprings, and other manner of both payoffs for excess artifacts and artifacts that fuel the rest of the deck.

The win-con was Repercussion yes. The idea being get that auxiliary damage mirrored off rock throws and just keep attacking on a clear board.

I miss my younger days when middle school me didn't care so much about optimizing every detail and instead just wanted to slam shivan dragon|3EDs on the table during lunch. Those middle school days when we used Survival of the Fittest to pitch Rootbreaker Wurms and set up Living Death fairly. Or just the days when Rathi Dragon|tmp wasn't a terrible card.

[tstorm823]

But how do you know what to play or not play when you don't know the contents of decks or even whom might be at an LGS at any given time? It goes back to that whole "play happy-fun-time Magic where players and permanents have hexproof and no one likes losing any of their cards".

Well there's not going to be a precise answer to that. You can't prepare for every possibility, that's fair to say, but that's why I'd say lean one way over the other.

And the frustration over "happy hexproof funtime" is an entirely unrelated matter. You should play removal, you should remove other people's things. Frankly, the removal options in the gun deck should probably be half or more the same as the options in the beach ball deck. Removal is good at every level. People complaining about removal, period, are being problematic themselves, but even in the "I killed Blind Obedience and they kicked me out of the group" example, it's more about the usage of the card than the inclusion. Nobody is upset at a player having Disenchant in their deck, but they might be inclined to complain about the usage. It's a play issue, not a deckbuilding one.

Like, if you use removal to save the table, you're a hero and people like you. If you use removal to save yourself, it's a fair exchange that everyone else will be indifferent of. If you use removal to advance your boardstate, people aren't going to be happy with you, especially if that exact same removal could have saved the table one turn later. Booting you is extreme, but you made the wrong play. And I'd argue it was the wrong play even without knowing what the other player was going to do. Burning an instant speed removal spell to give yourself marginal resource advantage in a multiplayer setting is not often going to be the right line, regardless of politics.

[3drinks]

But how do you know what to play or not play when you don't know the contents of decks or even whom might be at an LGS at any given time? It goes back to that whole "play happy-fun-time Magic where players and permanents have hexproof and no one likes losing any of their cards".

Well there's not going to be a precise answer to that. You can't prepare for every possibility, that's fair to say, but that's why I'd say lean one way over the other.

And the frustration over "happy hexproof funtime" is an entirely unrelated matter. You should play removal, you should remove other people's things. Frankly, the removal options in the gun deck should probably be half or more the same as the options in the beach ball deck. Removal is good at every level. People complaining about removal, period, are being problematic themselves, but even in the "I killed Blind Obedience and they kicked me out of the group" example, it's more about the usage of the card than the inclusion. Nobody is upset at a player having Disenchant in their deck, but they might be inclined to complain about the usage. It's a play issue, not a deckbuilding one.

Like, if you use removal to save the table, you're a hero and people like you. If you use removal to save yourself, it's a fair exchange that everyone else will be indifferent of. If you use removal to advance your boardstate, people aren't going to be happy with you, especially if that exact same removal could have saved the table one turn later. Booting you is extreme, but you made the wrong play. And I'd argue it was the wrong play even without knowing what the other player was going to do. Burning an instant speed removal spell to give yourself marginal resource advantage in a multiplayer setting is not often going to be the right line, regardless of politics.

See, this is why I like rock throwing because I don't have to throw them. I can choose to, if in need of defending myself or maybe brokering a deal. I think that's politics. Here I seem to be getting a lot of this being anti-politics because I'm still a threat anyway because I can use them despite not using them. it's lose-lose. The only way to be truly political is to play the flash deck and all you do is play land for turn. But then that doesn't work either because you get suspected. You can't pull it off, and I keep trying to but things go back to this.

[FenrirRex]

See, this is why I like rock throwing because I don't have to throw them. I can choose to, if in need of defending myself or maybe brokering a deal. I think that's politics. Here I seem to be getting a lot of this being anti-politics because I'm still a threat anyway because I can use them despite not using them. it's lose-lose. The only way to be truly political is to play the flash deck and all you do is play land for turn. But then that doesn't work either because you get suspected. You can't pull it off, and I keep trying to but things go back to this.

You'll find in actual practice that the threat of the rock is not really all that of a lose-lose situation. In my experience with deathtouch-heavy decks and decks that sit on powerful mana sinks (my The Scarab God deck runs the deathtouch zombie lords and keeps mana open to reanimate with the commander, leaving plenty of options for interaction), people have no choice but to respect the ability for your creatures to trade up or remove their pieces, resulting in them pointing their guns in another direction and leaving you alone.

If you then start aggressively nuking their things or playing cards that they deem "no fun," you lose that advantage and instead become a target yourself- which sounds like the line of play you trend towards since you enjoy powerful, disruptive effects. I'm the broken record here but that's why I love mana sinks and on-board threats rather than the "flash" deck. It keeps you honest and literally leaves your cards on the table for everyone else to see, but then it all becomes about "correctly" playing to avoid becoming the threat.

[Rumpy5897]

Nah, you can stick some rocks on your Toggo and Falthis. That's perfectly cool. But if you're suddenly sitting on a ton of other ways to ping with deathtouch and can reliably stop everyone in their tracks, then it's a bit troublesome.

Here are some choice even-costed nuggets from my build to try to tempt you towards abandoning Obosh (who isn't even that good a finisher here?): Cranial Plating, Fathom Fleet Swordjack, Hellkite Tyrant, Marionette Master for finishing, Reprocess for intense refuel and mad style points.

I'd probably also upgrade the removal suite to jam Bedevil and Chaos Warp. Like tstorm said, removal is very transferable. It's fine to have good utility cards supporting cores of garbage. That's kinda what all of my decks are about Another card that's done well for me is Nesting Dragon. Gum up the board, gum up the skies. A wall of chumps disincentivisies swings as you can just chump and rebuild more chumps, right?

[toctheyounger]

I totally get that you're pretty inundated with advice. Honestly, take it all with a grain of salt and just apply it in the best way you can. Try and read between the lines of what we're saying to the theory moreso than 'run this card and don't be a spike' and try to see why we're suggesting what we're suggesting. And honestly, I have nothing but kudos to offer you for embarking on this mental journey; it's not an easy one from where you've wound up in the wider EDH zeitgeist, if at all, and most players are simply unwilling to consider changing the way they play the game, whether it means more or less wins or more or less ostracism. So yeah - big ups to you wherever this ends up, even if it reaches no more than being a thought experiment, you've done very well being so open minded and receptive to change. That %$#% ain't easy. It also sounds like you've come across more than your fair share of jerks in previous games, so being open to doing this despite your previous experience speaks volumes about the person you are.

To be fair doing precisely what we say isn't going to help you anyway; if you want to learn politics it's about learning to think for yourself in a more empathic way rather than just following someone's directions verbatim. And that's the great thing about playing politically - because there's so many ifs, most games will turn out differently and there's a ton of variation in what can happen. It also makes games less of a 'my expensive cards trump your budget cards, I win' affair, and applying the might of your mental influence on the board means your weird niche cards can punch way above their weight, and that's super cool. To me, I relish a political victory far more than a victory by superior firepower, because it's me that has won, not necessarily my cards.

I'm going to say I think Obosh, the Preypiercer is a step too much to build around, clearly I've found it tough to make tangible suggestions. If you wanna stick with it by all means do so, predominantly the reason I want it gone is to that I can put two more cents in for some of the goad mechanic suggestions I made earlier. For what's ostensibly a landfall deck I think Geode Rager is pretty damn great even at 6, and having played against Grenzo, Havoc Raiser before, coming down as early as he does he's a seriously good tempo card. Being able to play opponent's cards is a little feelbad, but you can always offer these up to the table as ways to keep the board balanced - say you turn someone's, I dunno, Beast Within. Before you cast it, if you choose to do so, you ask the table for votes as to what needs to go and target having taking that into consideration. Chances are the target they suggest is one you were looking at anyway. Or if it's something seriously degenerate you can either cast it for a massive swing or just keep it in exile and be seen as a peacekeeper. Besides, either way this effect plays out you can play it as balanced as you like and people can't really get too mad, you're playing cards they chose to include.

2nd edit deep here - I really like some of @Rumpy5897's suggestions with Fathom Fleet Swordjack, Hellkite Tyrant and Marionette Master. Those are all great ways to get yourself closer to a win. Even costs also gives you options with Arcbound Ravager and Krark-Clan Ironworks too if you wanna head right down the artifact matters route.

Also, would Armix, Filigree Thrasher be of any help to you here? Decent removal if you can withstand the discard.

TL;DR - take it all with a grain of salt, you're doing great for having read through all of this and being open to it.

[3drinks]

Thanks guys. Man, I'm really stoked about the obvious synergies with rocks + Cranial Plating the most. And there's so many more options, though leaning into this is gonna go super aggro towards Arcbound Ravager|dst and it's ilk. Much as I'd like having a Scrap Mastery deck, I've done so many artifact decks I think I need something else - even if this one can't abuse Master Transmuter. That's not a bad thing, but I have multiple aggressive slant decks between Kari Zev, Kaalia.

I wonder. What if I just scrap this thing here, and promote Trynn/Silvar to the role of the political deck? Still staying within pre-modern cards for that nostalgic vibe. I feel like I haven't developed that deck enough and I absolutely adore having the partner-with mechanic with the way they support each other. It's also not not leaning into a strat super hard, with the exception of my forced pariah|usg nonsense. I really want to get some more reps in with that. The idea is, Silvar makes a terrific damage sponge which coincidentally makes him the perfect banding commander ironic, because he's the one devouring the people that Trynn leads to freedom) which also beefs him up to knock players out. Power Matrix gives him evasion. And the two have natural in-built shuffle effects, so you can mess around with Land Tax + Scroll Rack.

And before anyone says it, yes, yes, I know, skip the winter orb|5ED. Even if I do want to use it with icy manipulator|dkm for the memories. Ahem, let's see what that looks like;

Trynn/Silvar the Multi Friendly Nightmare Kitty

DecklistCMCManaPricesChartsDraw 7

Commander (2)

1 Trynn, Champion of Freedom

1 Silvar, Devourer of the Free

Engine

1 Pariah

1 Baton of Morale

1 Helm of Chatzuk

1 Cooperation

1 Cho-Manno, Revolutionary

1 Auramancer

1 Monk Idealist

1 Land Tax

1 Scroll Rack

1 Pestilence

1 Academy Rector

Judge Promo [because they do come up on a scryfall old style face search] (5)

1 Dark Confidant

1 Crucible of Worlds

1 Sword of Feast and Famine

1 Sword of Fire and Ice

1 Sword of Light and Shadow

Lands (38)

1 Badlands

1 Scrubland

1 Plateau

1 Polluted Delta

1 Flooded Strand

1 Windswept Heath

1 Bloodstained Mire

1 Wooded Foothills

1 Thawing Glaciers

1 Kjeldoran Outpost

1 City of Brass

1 Reflecting Pool

1 Thran Quarry

1 Sulfurous Springs

1 Battlefield Forge

1 Caves of Koilos

1 Urborg Volcano

1 Strip Mine

1 Wasteland

1 Phyrexian Tower

1 Volrath's Stronghold

9 Swamp

5 Plains

2 Mountain

Tutours

1 Enlightened Tutor

1 Entomb

1 Gamble

1 Vampiric Tutor

1 Demonic Tutor

1 Diabolic Intent

1 Grim Tutor

1 Imperial Recruiter

Approximate Total Cost:

The question is...do you go in on Lin Sivvi's rebels as a tertiary strat? They also just happen to be human so you have a field of fetchable bodies to feed to the cat as well.

[tstorm823]

See, this is why I like rock throwing because I don't have to throw them. I can choose to, if in need of defending myself or maybe brokering a deal. I think that's politics. Here I seem to be getting a lot of this being anti-politics because I'm still a threat anyway because I can use them despite not using them. it's lose-lose. The only way to be truly political is to play the flash deck and all you do is play land for turn. But then that doesn't work either because you get suspected. You can't pull it off, and I keep trying to but things go back to this.

I agree. I think rock-throwing deathtouch is a fantastic political angle. But then the question is what are you doing with the rest of the deck? If you pack the deck full of more pingers and more deathtouch, you'll find yourself in situations where your only available options are deathping machinguns or to sit on your hands and wait. I think the two commanders holding rocks is plenty of political pressure already without more support than that. It makes people not want to threaten you and lose their resources to a dumb rock throw, but likely allows people to play around you as the rocks are limited.

If I see that across the table, I'll play things that aren't must-kill threats knowing you have limited rocks to throw and have to preserve them for more problematic targets, and I won't attack you because then I risk losing my creatures AND losing your ability to stone our mutual opponents' threats. If, OTOH, you have Goblin Sharpshooter and Death Pits of Rath, you've created a board state where I'm effectively locked out of playing creatures until I or someone else can kill one of those pieces. That's a bad scenario, because now we're using removal against removal and likely leaving an opening for someone else to swing in for the win behind us.

Like, you can't reliably stop everyone from doing something, and if you try to stop everyone from doing something, you'll effectively stop them from doing anything other than focus you down. What you want to do it stop them from threatening you and otherwise let them largely be on their way. You may not be able to stop later-game big splashy ramp plays, but there are other players to push back on that as well, and then you've got temporary teammates, which is ultimately the goal here.

So like, the rest of the deck doesn't need to push the theme of deathtouch pinging. You already have that in the command zone. I think the other things you have that synergize laterally are the right direction to go. I like the monarch cards with deathtouch commanders. I like the artifact synergies with rocks. I think if you wanted, you could do funny things with rocks and inspired creatures or rocks and untap things like Hateflayer, If you want to kill people by killing their creatures, Vicious Shadows is a stellar big flashy win condition. There's a thread up talking about making a deck that kills people in response on the stack because it's cool, and that enchantment does that. Like, you've given yourself permanent access to political options, the rest is what cool things you'll do with the time that they can keep people off of your back.

Edit: You posted another idea entirely while I wrote this, but imma post it in anyway.

[Rumpy5897]

Story time!

It's 2016. Old me has acknowledged Contamination got a dismal reception, but hasn't quite figured out how to handle negative feedback about decks yet. As such, the deck dies. Prime Speaker Zegana gets built, and the deck is nondescript Simic goodstuff. The reception is middling, but not dismal. I feel the deck has trouble closing, so I add Palinchron to the mix. Suddenly the deck turns into a Palinchron combo deck, surprise surprise. Reception flatlines hard. What does old me do? Take out the damned Palinchron? No, kill the deck.

It's 2020. I revisit the general trope of Simic goodstuff with Eligeth + Gilanra. However, I'm a few years into my defanging, so I pay attention to what happens during games and adjust the list accordingly. I even took out Reshape the Earth, a card I loved casting, because it was simply back-breaking in resource generation and the rest of the table would have gigantic trouble catching up. If something problematic happens, I make it go away deck-side, and run more interesting cards like Sphinx Ambassador and Psychic Possession. The end result is a wildly suboptimal pile, but one that is accepted by the group.

The very fact we're not running some high-end cEDH deck or a brew tailored to try to exploit the high-end cEDH meta means we're already not optimal. This means that it's okay to kill your darlings in service of the deck as a whole. If problematic reception is encountered, it's important to differentiate between global play patterns that are extremely hard to resolve, and localised complaints about a subset of cards that can be taken out. My Eutropia had to go, as once the deck took shape the core gameplay became about a massive fast-action snowball, and you'd feel like a dick for trying to stop it before it'd get rolling, yet once it did you couldn't do anything anymore. There was no alternate angle to pursue. Meanwhile, the feedback you've gotten on relentless deathtouch pelting is very firmly in the latter category. Lose the Death Pits of Rath and the Goblin Sharpshooter, keep an eye on Basilisk Collar and you're good to go. Especially since you seem interested in pursuing the "mountain of garbage" angle. There's nothing stopping your "mountain of garbage" deck being political by having some rocks to pelt at things. There's nothing political about the Trynn/Silvar combination. Continue massaging the original idea, we're all learning a lot by discussing all this stuff.

[materpillar]

I miss my younger days when middle school me didn't care so much about optimizing every detail and instead just wanted to slam shivan dragon|3EDs on the table during lunch. Those middle school days when we used Survival of the Fittest to pitch Rootbreaker Wurms and set up Living Death fairly. Or just the days when Rathi Dragon|tmp wasn't a terrible card.

The only thing holding you back from your younger days is you. You can literally sleeve up Shivan Dragon and put it in this deck. That's an option. You can do this thing. The only excuse you have if some weird philosophy of optimization that is 100% in your control. I swear to god, if you tell me Shivan Dragon is a card so bad it is uncastable I'm going to hit you with a barrage of garbage cards I've blown people out with that is so long you'll choke on it. For just a taste, I literally killed someone with Mana-Charged Dragon just over two weeks ago. I killed someone with functionally a Shivan Dragon on November 21, 2020. Is that card good? No. Did it win without a ton of help? No. Did it swing as roughly a 32/5? Yes. Am I happy about that? Yes. I'm extremely pleased with the list of terrible cards I've won with or done stupid things with so please, please give me an excuse to brag about them.


In fact, if you cut Obosh, the Preypiercer as your companion (which is fine if you do it for the right reasons) every following post I'm going to have is going to start by telling you to run Shivan Dragon and cards you can run to maximize your Shivan Dragon beats.

If you don't cut Obosh, the Preypiercer you should consider running Searing Wind and Urza's Rage. Casting those for 20 damage sounds hella fun.

[edit]: You could totally make this into a Living Death deck that casts Buried Alive for Shivan Dragon, Spirit of the Night, and Avatar of Woe.

I'm also having an immensely enjoyable time mentally building a deck around murdering people with Shivan Dragon. It's got some banger synergies. The main idea is Stonework Packbeast + Heartstone + Cabal Coffers + Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth + Lightning Greaves + Shivan Dragon.

[3drinks]

There's nothing political about the Trynn/Silvar combination. Continue massaging the original idea, we're all learning a lot by discussing all this stuff.

How do you figure? It's allowing me to over-op and satisfy my Spike needs, while my Johnny needs are Quench'd by building my own puzzle and you can't defeat me without breaking my puzzle first. But I only get to do it with pre-modern cards for nostalgia, and the cool factour of two commanders that work hand-in-hand but don't keep forcing me into a setup where I machine gun everything and force my weight. Also while not aggroing the crap outta everyone.

and I could even play dragon, just to satisfy @materpillar before they come back and say something to that effect.

Plus I do big things with a jank tribe (rebels), if I wanted to add that avenue to the deck. Which also satisfies my Spike needs.

[Rumpy5897]

A Pariah + indestructible setup is not exactly politics.

Trust me, it takes a while to build a mountain of trash. I don't think you need to be concerned with being too aggro here

[materpillar]

There's nothing political about the Trynn/Silvar combination. Continue massaging the original idea, we're all learning a lot by discussing all this stuff.

How do you figure? It's allowing me to over-op and satisfy my Spike needs, while my Johnny needs are Quench'd by building my own puzzle and you can't defeat me without breaking my puzzle first. But I only get to do it with pre-modern cards for nostalgia, and the cool factour of two commanders that work hand-in-hand but don't keep forcing me into a setup where I machine gun everything and force my weight. Also while not aggroing the crap outta everyone.

Casting Pariah on Silvar, Devourer of the Free isn't politics. You're locking your creature based opponents out of the game again, just like with Death Pits of Rath + Goblin Sharpshooter. This is a different angle of locking your opponents out of the game, but at the end of the day you're trying to completely remove your opponents abilities to do stuff.

You seem to have a massive control complex. Wipe lands so opponents can't do stuff. Attack hands so opponents can't do stuff. Null rod so opponents can't do stuff. Lock out creatures so opponents can't do stuff. Now it's Pariah so opponents can't do stuff. If opponents can do stuff, then they can kill you. We can't allow that, that's way too dangerous. Gotta throw everyone in jail instead.

Politics isn't casting Pariah so you literally can't die. Politics is getting opponent A to attack opponent B even though opponent A has a lethal attack on you on board. For that to happen, opponent A has to actually have the ability to kill you.

and I could even play dragon, just to satisfy @materpillar before they come back and say something to that effect.

Plus I do big things with a jank tribe (rebels), if I wanted to add that avenue to the deck. Which also satisfies my Spike needs.

You're the one who said you miss the days of casting Shivan Dragon. You're the one who said they wanted to build a deck based around Obosh, the Preypiercer. I'm not going to stand by passively while these Johnny/Timmy desires that I like and agree with fold before your onslaught of Spike desires that have only brought you grief.

[3drinks]

Wow I'm really effin clueless I guess. Yes, all my strats are about some form of denial because if don't, then rando #78 wins because no one else stops them. 😐

[toctheyounger]

Without attempting to be rude it almost feels like you're struggling to conceive of a way to win without locking your opponents out. The reason were trying to steer you away from that is that it'll always end up the same way. You might win a game or two, but the returns diminish, and you maintain your reputation for being a fun miser.

Start thinking about ways your opponents can edge you closer to a win. If you can convince them either subtly or overtly to put their efforts into taking someone else down you're closer to the last man standing and (this is the main push here) your opponents can't get mad about it.

See this is where what we're suggesting has a distinct advantage over the way you've played to date. What we're doing means everyone has fun, you learn more about how people think and most crucially, you can do this again and again game after game and no one gets angry that you're doing it. If anything they dig it and you get encouraged to play and win this way. So instead of diminishing returns on your success you get proliferative returns. You'll win more. You'll have more people want to game with you and you'll all have more fun. Withiyt trying to sound hurtful, what you've been doing to win games can be alienating. This is the opposite of that. Its inviting people to assist you in your campaign for success.

But, in order for it to be successful you need to afford people a certain amount of trust. You don't need to, and probably shouldn't, trust them all the way to the bank, because there comes a time in every game for someone to tear away from the pack and make a move. But trust that you can make deals with people and that they'll be as good as their word, and trust that you can use other people's resources for mutual success. Its not 'everything has hexproof', it's 'you scratch my back and ill scratch yours'.

Thing is, you've been playing a form of politics already, you just didn't know it because you've not taken the opportunity to bargain with anyone. You've been playing the despot, the dictator. You rule with an iron fist. You've been true to your word, insofar as you promise nothing but misery for all who oppose you. And while thats successful in many ways the one thing that always rings true about those sort of figures is that they're not popular, and people will take any opportunity they have to rid themselves of tyranny. With a little more diplomacy you can achieve the same goals, but you'll have people happy to help achieve your ends.

Analogy time, and if you don't know the source it may be a waste of time but here we go anyway. In Terry Pratchett's Discworld series, the largest metropolitan city. Ankh Morpork, is ruled by Havelock Vetinari. Hes a former assassin, capable of inflicting death personally and with a wide network of spies, thugs, assassins and henchmen to do whatever he deems necessary. The reason most people never see them is that he's well aware that the moment he shows the extent of his tyranny he then needs to defend his right to power at all times with extreme force, and that's very difficult. Instead, he uses his city watchmen, his government officials and what he knows about human behavior to inform his decisions and achieve what he wants through mutual goals. Everyone who deals with him is well aware of just how deadly he is, but because they want the same things he retains his power and expends other people's energy to meet his ends.

This turned out a ton longer than intended. I hope its starting to sink in a little. Ultimately this format is built on a certain level of trust, and the human experience you've come up against is people trying to tell you (however effectively or rudely or in between) that you're breaking that trust. And they're not wrong when you lock them out of a game. By shuffling up you've agreed that you want to play a game with them. And then you proceed to play a game at them.

Ultimately it doesn't really matter who helms your deck, or what win conditions you engage, to some extent. So long as you have ways and means to interact with the table you're moving towards a more political bent. And that's what we're here for right? Before you consider inclusions just ask yourself how fun it would be on the receiving end, and if it would suck, you shouldn't include it. Just remember that your opponents all have access to resources you don't and they are up for grabs if you can play the game well.