Trouble in Pairs - SCD

[RowanKeltizar]

I was browsing this recent set and saw that Trouble in Pairs is currently the most expensive single at 25$ What do you guys think? Nobody seems to be talking about this...

This is the latest in the line of cards like Smuggler's Share, Esper Sentinel, Monologue Tax that tax opponents for playing fast.

Personally, I think it is still below salt levels of Rhystic Study and Smothering Tithe however, in terms of drawing cards I feel this is QUITE GOOD for white. I wouldn't be surprised to see 2-3 draws from this per turn cycle at minimum.

I ordered a copy to see how it does.

[Dunadain]

Didn't everyone lose their minds in the unreleased and new cards forum over this card?

I think it's pretty strong, definitely better than Smuggler's Share, but worse than Smothering Tithe.

[Mookie]

I maintain my opinion of Trouble in Pairs - good, but not broken. 2-3 cards per turn cycle is also my estimation, which puts it above Phyrexian Arena, but below Rhystic Study and Necropotence. It's most notable because it's mono-white, but I think other colors already have comparable options. I haven't seen it in action yet though - it's a somewhat expensive card from a set that only came out recently, so not many copies out in the wild yet.

[RowanKeltizar]

@Mookie thanks for the link. I've been absent from the forums again for a while... just don't have the same kind of time I once did.

Ultimately, I'm debating picking up more copies of Trouble in Pairs at the current price for my white decks. This is definitely power creep in action however I feel there is still a bit of need for this type of card in white to keep my non-blue, non-black decks relevant at more powerful tables.

I have been using Smuggler's Share in a couple of decks and have gotten respectable mileage of it. I like the card and probably won't do a direct swap for trouble in pairs but instead run redundancy where I can.

I don't know, 24$ is a steep price, but then again... I have no ideal how much supply there will be for card like this. I picked up dockside for $20 out of a precon when it was released, now look at that thing!

[3drinks]

FWIW, this card is in the Blame Game pre-built deck (which also has the aforementioned Smuggler's Share), so if you can find it without a markup ($40 is a good price for it), you'll do better than buying it as a single at present.

[pokken]

I think in a casual environment it's likely to outperform Rhystic Study so probably really good. And easier to manage, you just do it.

[PrimevalCommander]

Plenty of talk about this card on this forum. It looks like a great card, and will likely be a white goodstuff staple. I'm holding off on buying until the set settles. Maybe I get burned and it continues to rise, but I'm patient, and this card looks easy to reprint. I suspect it draws 2+ cards per cycle, which is a great floor for white card draw, with the ceiling being much higher. They put so many game actions on there to trigger it, players can't help but let you draw.

Think about your own turn, would you cap your own card draw, Rule of Law yourself and give them a Crawlspace just to prevent them drawing? I suspect I might do one, but certainly not all 3. I like the "second spell" portion as I expect this to draw the most amount of cards. Everyone is optimizing towards casting more spells, because only doing 1 big thing a turn is slow and leaves you vulnerable to interaction.

[yeti1069]

You also have the ability to "tilt the scales" by giving other players a card on their turns, which will in turn get you a card. All the Queen Marchesa players were excited for Smuggler's Share...until they realized that the monarch trigger to draw would resolve after Smuggler's did, and would therefore miss the card. Not so for this.

[onering]

Awesome card, full stop. For mono white or Boros it's great.

I've had a lot of success with Mangara as a commander for mono white, he draws a solid amount of cards and lets mono white control actually perform. A big part of his value comes from being always accessible, but this is harder to remove, draws off of your opponents drawing a second card each turn, and shuts down extra turns. That's a lot of value, and honestly the fact that it's really solid anti extra turns tech earns it the price tag.

With Mangara I average about 2 cards per turn cycle, because I rarely get attacked by more than one creature with him out and opponents casting 2 spells a turn isn't super reliable. That's much needed, reliable card draw for mono white so it's worth it, but this card will outperform him. People drawing multiple cards a turn is the most reliable of the triggers, and I'd expect that alone to add another 2 cards per round over Mangara in a 4 person pod. Unlike the other triggers, this is also one you can have control over with Howling Mine effects, making it serve as a solid parity breaker (granted the attacked by 2 creatures clause you have some control over, but there's fewer cards that force players to attack you specifically and with more than one creature).

[DirkGently]

The thing that annoys me about Trouble in Pairs is that the flavor makes no sense to me. Okay, there's a troublesome pair of people, presumably the opposition given that the card triggers off opponents doing things "in pairs"...so why do we benefit from that? If it was, like, "double confiscation" or something, then I'd kinda get it, but I don't see any element of the flavor that explains why we're benefitting from this troublesome twosome.

Smuggler's Share it like - okay, we're taking our share, that's why we're benefitting from our opponents. Trouble in pairs...shrug?

Anyway it's probably a fairly strong card, though I rarely end up actually playing generic, non-synergistic draw engines in my decks.

[Treamayne]

The thing that annoys me about Trouble in Pairs is that the flavor makes no sense to me. Okay, there's a troublesome pair of people, presumably the opposition given that the card triggers off opponents doing things "in pairs"...so why do we benefit from that? If it was, like, "double confiscation" or something, then I'd kinda get it, but I don't see any element of the flavor that explains why we're benefitting from this troublesome twosome.

It's Punny, like Fodder Cannon - In world flavor is you causing trouble for things that comes in "pairs". . .

[DirkGently]

It's Punny, like Fodder Cannon - In world flavor is you causing trouble for things that comes in "pairs". . .

Maybe I'm revealing my ignorance but I'm not sure what you mean. Fodder cannon/cannon fodder, ok, sure, that's a play on that term. Trouble in pairs is a play on...what? I thought maybe "Trouble in Paris" was something, but either Google is massively failing or it's not a thing. "Trouble in Paradise" is a term, but that seems too different from the title to fit.

And even setting that aside, "fodder cannon" makes sense on its own. It's a cannon that shoots fodder. If the flavor of "trouble in pairs" is supposed to be that you are causing trouble for things that are happening in pairs...first of all, that's a really weird and nebulous concept...and second of all, why "in" pairs? Shouldn't it be "trouble FOR pairs"? And what about the art or flavor text indicates that this "pair" is encountering any trouble from you? Seems like they're causing trouble for you, not the other way around. If anything, the flavor text indicates that they're working well together, not having "trouble in paradise" at all.

[onering]

I think the flavor is that the caster has ensorcelled some of the less savory elements in the oppositions employ, so that when two of them get together without anyone else they steal stuff for the caster. Dirks right, it's dumb.

My bigger problem is the art though, it sucks, and unfortunately it's a growing problem in modern magic.

Look at it, not already knowing the set it's from, and tell me what the %$#% is going on. The background gives some mild clue about the setting, but not much. Maybe it's Ravnica, or maybe Kaladesh, or New Capenna, or really any plane honestly. Then those two mooks, what even are they? Simic mutants? Elves? Vampires? Orcs? Maybe it's Mercadia and they're goblins? %$#% if I know, it could be any of those! And what the hell are they wearing? Did they get portaled in from The Warriors? Why are there stereotypical 70s punks on Ravnica, or in magic at all? These two might as well be a couple of vampires from Buffy, where they canonically forget to keep track of trends, maybe part of Spike's crew. I know Rakdos is supposed to be punky, but they're supposed to either be Hellraiser fetish punk or Dark Carnival punk, not Carter era NYC punk. These two jabronis, and I think that word is apt, look like generic mooks from an 80s action movie set in an urban area.

JFC wizards, what happened to art direction? Ravnica used to have a look. You already had New Capenna cribbing it's city scape and guild themes, why the hell make half of Ravnica dress like 1930s gumshoes? I'm shocked Carmen Sandiego didn't get a damn card. Then these random subway moshers show up? What the hell man?

[Mookie]

"Trouble in Paradise" is a term, but that seems too different from the title to fit.

Trouble in Paradise looks like the most likely fit for the name. No idea for the art though.

Based on the 1931 play The Honest Finder (A Becsületes Megtaláló) by Hungarian playwright László Aladár, the lead characters are a gentleman thief and a lady pickpocket who join forces to con a beautiful woman who is the owner of a perfume company.

[DirkGently]

Trouble in Paradise looks like the most likely fit for the name.

I think if we're debating what the name was supposed to reference, whatever allusion they were going for has failed.

[Hermes_]

The thing that annoys me about Trouble in Pairs is that the flavor makes no sense to me.

It makes sense to me,but then I know what a rap sheet in this context means

[DirkGently]

It makes sense to me,but then I know what a rap sheet in this context means

I know what a rap sheet is. What context are you referring to?

If you're saying "the controller of TiP must have already caught them and confiscated their stolen goods if they have rap sheets"...I mean that seems like a massive stretch to me. And this card is already stretching things pretty massively by implying that an opponent drawing 2 cards has the flavor of being 2 thugs somehow.

To me this card 100% feels like it was designed mechanically first and then given a very lazy, word-association, first-thing-that-comes-to-mind flavor.

[yeti1069]

Finally got TiP out in Queen Marchesa. It didn't draw nearly as often as I thought it would, but I was playing against Marchesa the Black Rose (doesn't have to cast much, dropped Sneak Attack, which also helped avoid casting), a janky Mycotyrant (playing slow, didn't have attacks or draw for most of the game) in addition to the new Alela flash (mostly casting a spell each turn, and attacking 1 at a time). Still, I probably averaged 1.5-2.5 cards/turn off it over the course of a very long game. I also had a silly start with Esper Sentinel, mana rock, TiP, Marchesa for t1, 2, 3, 4. Then dropped a Thought Vessel, and had basically 10+ cards in hand all game.

[Hermes_]

It makes sense to me,but then I know what a rap sheet in this context means

I know what a rap sheet is. What context are you referring to?

If you're saying "the controller of TiP must have already caught them and confiscated their stolen goods if they have rap sheets"...I mean that seems like a massive stretch to me. And this card is already stretching things pretty massively by implying that an opponent drawing 2 cards has the flavor of being 2 thugs somehow.

To me this card 100% feels like it was designed mechanically first and then given a very lazy, word-association, first-thing-that-comes-to-mind flavor.

they're greater together ( the two in the art perhaps) than the sum of their parts or in this case the sum of their rap sheets. That's what i mean in that it makes sense to me. But then I don't try to justify or reconcile the art with flavor text or what the card does.

[DirkGently]

they're greater together ( the two in the art perhaps) than the sum of their parts or in this case the sum of their rap sheets. That's what i mean in that it makes sense to me. But then I don't try to justify or reconcile the art with flavor text or what the card does.

Yes, I agree that's what's being communicated by the art and flavor text. I've said as much already. What I find confusing is why 2 "somethings" working well together would benefit YOU, when mechanically it's your OPPONENTS doing 2 "somethings"?

Like, if 2 creatures are attacking you, and those two creatures are "greater together", then I'd expect the trigger from this card to make those creatures more effective...at beating your face in, I guess? Drawing a card for the person they're attacking seems like it's making them WEAKER together, the opposite of what this card is conveying in its flavor text.

[Hermes_]

they're greater together ( the two in the art perhaps) than the sum of their parts or in this case the sum of their rap sheets. That's what i mean in that it makes sense to me. But then I don't try to justify or reconcile the art with flavor text or what the card does.

Yes, I agree that's what's being communicated by the art and flavor text. I've said as much already. What I find confusing is why 2 "somethings" working well together would benefit YOU, when mechanically it's your OPPONENTS doing 2 "somethings"?

Like, if 2 creatures are attacking you, and those two creatures are "greater together", then I'd expect the trigger from this card to make those creatures more effective...at beating your face in, I guess? Drawing a card for the person they're attacking seems like it's making them WEAKER together, the opposite of what this card is conveying in its flavor text.

I'll quote the back half of my response "I don't try to justify or reconcile the art with flavor text or what the card does."

[DirkGently]

I'll quote the back half of my response "I don't try to justify or reconcile the art with flavor text or what the card does."

Then why would you involve yourself in a conversation about that topic?

[Hermes_]

I'll quote the back half of my response "I don't try to justify or reconcile the art with flavor text or what the card does."

Then why would you involve yourself in a conversation about that topic?

why not? lol

[3drinks]

I'm shocked Carmen Sandiego didn't get a damn card. Then these random subway moshers show up? What the hell man?

Now this is something I could get behind.