SCD Razaketh, the Foulblooded

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6281
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 4 years ago



I didn't see this guy with a thread and honestly after playing with it and against it a lot I am pretty sure it deserves one, even if it's not immediately bannable. I do not come down on one side or the other yet, but I wanted to start the discussion up.

I've played it in two decks so far and in both decks it's basically an auto-win once it sticks - with Mimeoplasm it generates an unstoppable stream of value unless it's countered, and it's really easy to reanimate with mime obviously. With Golos mono black it's not quite as egregious but even in that deck where the power level is lower, its power is absurd.

I recently got into a war where I had mime'd a Razaketh and someone mirror galleried it, and we took turns tutoring for all our counterspells until he ran out, and it just felt awful - kind of like Consecrated Sphinx chicken.

The comparison to griselbrand is the most natural I think, and in many ways it's significantly more powerful than griseldad, though Gris has a higher ceiling in casual decks where it's harder to beat just a massive card advantage machine. The more comboey your meta gets the more powerful Raz gets in comparison (Since getting 3 specific cards is usually enough to just win the game).

I have won a few games against an unchecked raz, but generally only by comboing out before they do.

On the no-side it does require some resources, although those resources are fairly plentiful and easy to set up (usually one other creature means you can raz for something that makes more creatures then tutor a bunch more).

At this point I'm not seeing it all that crazy often and the EDHrec stats don't seem to indicate it being everywhere (only 5% or so in decks it can run in, less than other recent black power cards like torment of hailfire.

So what're your thoughts? How has Raz looked in your relative metas? Seeing it much at all?

Tags:

User avatar
WizardMN
Posts: 1965
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 124
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Twin Cities
Contact:

Post by WizardMN » 4 years ago

I have seen Razaketh in exactly one game since he was printed and that was in the 99. So, I can't say if he is more oppressive in the Command Zone or maybe more in the 99 for being easier to cheat out.

Anyway, my experience was that Razaketh was annoying for allowing the player to tutor out anything they want when they wanted it. The player didn't seem to be playing a combo deck so we didn't need to worry about that, but it still felt that we were always falling further behind with each activation.

Now, we were able to destroy Raz before he tutored too often, but I can certainly understand that, in a meta where he is more prevalent, he can be (at the very least) annoying to play against if not outright oppressive in the situations where a player doesn't have an answer right that instant.

I am already not a fan of unconditional tutors in general and a repeatable tutor can make for some boring games. But I don't think that is enough to warrant banning it yet since, as you mentioned, it doesn't seem to see a lot of play. I imagine the 8 mana cost is enough to limit his inclusion.

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6281
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 4 years ago

WizardMN wrote:
4 years ago
I have seen Razaketh in exactly one game since he was printed and that was in the 99. So, I can't say if he is more oppressive in the Command Zone or maybe more in the 99 for being easier to cheat out.

Anyway, my experience was that Razaketh was annoying for allowing the player to tutor out anything they want when they wanted it. The player didn't seem to be playing a combo deck so we didn't need to worry about that, but it still felt that we were always falling further behind with each activation.

Now, we were able to destroy Raz before he tutored too often, but I can certainly understand that, in a meta where he is more prevalent, he can be (at the very least) annoying to play against if not outright oppressive in the situations where a player doesn't have an answer right that instant.

I am already not a fan of unconditional tutors in general and a repeatable tutor can make for some boring games. But I don't think that is enough to warrant banning it yet since, as you mentioned, it doesn't seem to see a lot of play. I imagine the 8 mana cost is enough to limit his inclusion.
Yeah, most of the time I've seen him has been off of reanimation effects, kinda similar to griseldad in modern/legacy.

onering
Posts: 1226
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by onering » 4 years ago

I'm not sure a ban is warranted. Grislebrand does his thing on an empty board, while Raziketh needs a bit more setup. Not a ton of setup of course, but it does matter. From my personal experience, Raziketh hasn't been an instant win. I've only run him in a couple decks, so I don't have much experience actually playing him, but playing against him I haven't seen him be a real issue. Hes definitely better than Grislebrand when you intend to immediately tutor up a combo, but there are usually more efficient, or faster, ways to do that (for instance, you don't see him in the command zone as often as you'd think because Sidisi does the tutor up a combo job better). I've really only seen him used as an absurd value engine, because tutoring up a bunch of crap without comboing is nuts, but as a value engine he's less oppressive than Grislebrand, simply because his abilities cost can be pretty limiting and gives you more of a chance to respond. It's a lot easier to misplay Raziketh, and he's worse the more desperate you are. You stick Grislebrand you can immediately dump 7 or 14 into him to draw that many, while with Raziketh if you don't have many creatures your opponents can remove them to stop you from tutoring much before he even hits. It's not even as if his cost is operating on a different angle than Grislebrand, as you still have to pay life, so he's not even better when your at low life. For me, in a more casual game, I'd rather see someone sac 4 dudes and pay 4 life to tutor 4 cards than to see someone pay 14 life to draw 14. As I see it, he's on par with Consecrated Sphinx, which is pushed as hell and very powerful but not quite banworthy. Being 2 mana more plus his activation costs makes him more fair than con sphinx I think. Once you get into reanimation he becomes scary, but again unlike Grislebrand if you get him out early your usually less set to really go nuts with his ability because you won't have enough creatures to sacrifice (and I'd usually rather exhume a con sphinx turn 2).

When he got released, I was pretty sure he'd be banned within the year. I was surprised when, after playing against him several times, he wasn't as insane as I expected. I think I underestimated how limiting the sacrifice a creature clause can be in practice. Sure, it's not hard to build your deck around him, but that's a strike against banning, as that limits the number of decks he can really go nuts in. Its kind of amazing that we're sitting here a couple of years after the release of a repeatable tutor on a stick that can be activated multiple times a turn without mana and not be sure it needs a ban. If you told me that two years ago I'd have thought you were nuts.

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6281
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 4 years ago

I think that the fundamental thing that makes him stay "fair-ish" is what most people have hit on is that you kind of have to design for it and by the time you're designing for it you're not the target demographic of bannings.

If you present a spectrum like (and don't mind the accuracy it's just for illustration)
image.png


Razaketh seems maybe further up and left from Paradox Engine on the spectrum of requiring extreme buildaround to be insanely overpowered, somewhat like necropotence and protean hulk.

The delicate balance that makes something narrow enough to be self policing is very interesting to me because at the start of the format I would have said necropotence was gonna be worse than prophet of kruphix.

User avatar
ISBPathfinder
Bebopin
Posts: 2154
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: SD, USA

Post by ISBPathfinder » 4 years ago

I own a copy and I think I might have put it in a list once or twice. I can't say that I really recall seeing it do much of anything for me and I honestly don't think I have ever played against him.

I guess, I don't have enough info to really say much. But the lack of playing with and or against him is I guess something for me. I don't really see it as a problem personally but I have hardly put in the testing for and against it to really be educated on that.

I guess for me, its 8 mana and doesn't win the game on resolution. Its probably more mana and more things cast before you can try to do that and I guess that to me is kinda ok. Then again, I don't actually have any problems at all with Survival of the Fittest and I would say this guy feels like an expensive build around survival to me. I also don't play with infinite combos generally speaking so if I resolve him, its like, great I can now attempt to slowly grind resources from here.
[EDH] Vadrok List (Suicide Chads) | Evelyn List (Vamp Mill) | Sanwell List | Danitha List | Indominus List | Ratadrabik List

BounceBurnBuff
Posts: 66
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by BounceBurnBuff » 4 years ago

I've faced zero decks running him and only run him in Korvold atm, where he is honestly a bit slow for my taste. Sure, I could Entomb>Reanimate him early, but even I did that consistently, I have no fodder then to make immediate use out of him (thus allowing interaction).

Honestly, I've found Vilis, Broker of Blood to be way more prolific and problematic. I could cope with players tutoring 1 or 2 cards a turn in a deck where they don't win that turn with it, but being buried under 4-8 cards on average from the turn Vilis drops is a nightmare. Not to mention that whilst having creatures out isn't a difficult clause to meet, losing life is possible in so many ways, including all the damage you'll take for being the arch enemy.

User avatar
Sinis
Posts: 2034
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted
Location: Toronto, Canada

Post by Sinis » 4 years ago

I have a couple of copies, have played them pretty extensively, and honestly... it's probably fine.

1. The mana cost is relevant. Usually, I would not say this is the case but, to be really abusive, his ability pretty much requires you to have wide(r) short board, and a saturation of reanimation cards usually requires an equal saturation of looting and fatties, both of which don't really help with having a wide-short board. If you're going to reanimate Razaketh, that's even more setup on top of the bodies you want to grind up.

2. He admits some interaction. While he's on the stack, you can torch the poor saps who are about to be ground up into tutors. The interaction is narrow, but it's there (I'm mostly thinking of Pestilence and its cousins, instant speed removal, or even something like Rout).

3. The conditions in which Razaketh are really abusive are the same conditions in which plenty of other cards are also really good, like Beastmaster Ascension, (other) Aristocrat effects, Skullclamp, etc. The other effects tend to more aggressively costed, as well.

I would venture that Razaketh is on the upper end of powerful for casual play; the effect is great and it generally requires you to play a specific kind of deck. When you set these points next to Griselbrand, I think it's pretty clear why Griselbrand languishes on the banlist while Razaketh runs free.

schweinefett
Posts: 114
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by schweinefett » 4 years ago

I gotta be honest; the few times i do land razaketh (cheat him out, more like...), i usually either win overwhemlingly, or lose overwhelmingly within the turn or the next turn. I have some number of effects like entomb → shallow grave, tutor for the last combo piece then win sort of thing. But I'm not sure that it's the guy who's the problem. I mean.. I really gotta work hard to make it work.
Griselbrand, on the other hand, doesn't really require any work to make work. I'm not sure he's banworthy. Good to keep an eye out for him tho.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Rules and Philosophy”