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

[materpillar]

I'm thinking something along the lines of giving you extra stuff...at a cost. Because Ted Dibiase said it best "everybody has a price". Get those Kederekt Parasites flexin, some imputi, Obosh as companion. Drop a Seizan, Perverter of Truth because everyone likes free stuff till they get punched in the mouth.

Group slug politics, I guess. I may be doing too much, but I don't think so.

I'm not a huge fan of group slug personally, so I don't have much to weigh in on your idea. Do note that repeatable damage cards like Kederekt Parasite tend to get larger bullseyes on themselves because you're constantly reminding people that they exist every draw step. The whole pay 1 for that annoyance of Rhystic Study situation.

I think your assessment of what is and what is not a good political card is still rather off. Look at my Lazav deck, I've played this deck 5 times in the last two months in the mid-power level on PlayEDH's discord and won 3 of those games. I win exclusively on the back of navigating the political nature of EDH. Why do you think that this deck does so well politically? When you look at it what cards do you think are the most political? What cards do you think draw me the most hate? When you look at the deck, how strong do you think it is? What cards do you think I should probably cut or is there any obvious omissions? Any cards that stand out to you as extremely weird? There's probably a specific reason I run them because this list has undergone a ton of revisions.

My Lasav Deck

Show

Hide

Decklist

DecklistCMCManaPricesChartsDraw 7

Creature (36)

1 Archfiend of Ifnir

1 Big Game Hunter

1 Bontu the Glorified

1 Butcher Ghoul

1 Cephalid Inkshrouder

1 Daring Thief

1 Deranged Assistant

1 Dimir Infiltrator

1 Disciple of Deceit

1 Dreamscape Artist

1 Eater of Days

1 Fatestitcher

1 Fog Bank

1 Ghostly Pilferer

1 Gingerbrute

1 Guard Gomazoa

1 Gurmag Swiftwing

1 Havengul Lich

1 Hedron Crab

1 Hunted Horror

1 Invisible Stalker

1 Kefnet the Mindful

1 King Macar, the Gold-Cursed

1 Lesser Masticore

1 Masticore

1 Millikin

1 Ovinomancer

1 Phage the Untouchable

1 Phyrexian Devourer

1 Putrid Goblin

1 Rotting Regisaur

1 Royal Assassin

1 Sea-Dasher Octopus

1 Slippery Scoundrel

1 Treacherous Pit-Dweller

1 Wake Thrasher

Land (33)

1 Barren Moor

1 Cabal Pit

1 Castle Locthwain

1 Dimir Aqueduct

1 Drowned Catacomb

1 Drownyard Temple

1 Geier Reach Sanitarium

1 Ghost Quarter

1 Holdout Settlement

1 Homeward Path

8 Island

1 Lonely Sandbar

1 Polluted Mire

1 Sea Gate Wreckage

1 Shizo, Death's Storehouse

1 Survivors' Encampment

8 Swamp

1 Temple of the False God

1 Terrain Generator

Artifact (11)

1 Dimir Cluestone

1 Dimir Locket

1 Ghirapur Orrery

1 Heartstone

1 Heraldic Banner

1 Mask of Memory

1 Null Brooch

1 Sword of the Animist

1 Thran Turbine

1 Torpor Orb

1 Victory Chimes

Commander (1)

1 Lazav, the Multifarious

Instant (13)

1 AEtherspouts

1 Ancient Excavation

1 Arcane Denial

1 Circular Logic

1 Didn't Say Please

1 Foil

1 Frantic Search

1 Mental Misstep

1 Misdirection

1 Pulse of the Grid

1 Reins of Power

1 Rites of Refusal

1 Tolarian Winds

Enchantment (4)

1 Curious Obsession

1 Drake Haven

1 Oath of Scholars

1 Training Grounds

Sorcery (2)

1 Unearth

1 Whispering Madness

Approximate Total Cost:

[toctheyounger]

If you want more Wrong Turn-type effects, try Domineering Will.

That's perfect.

Reins of Power for the original effect.

It does seem like there's a little discussion about who is ideal to helm a political deck though, and it's a tough choice (unless you're Dirk, in which case the answer is implicit).

Personally, the yardstick for me is if you're playing a deck that people freak out about before you've got your 7 cards you're in the wrong territory. I think there's something to a commander that has some sort of inherent weakness meaning that you have to play politically. I'm trying hard to think of my most politically minded decks, and probably the most political (although it is quite spiky in it's current iteration) is Dralnu, Lich Lord.

He doesn't have quite the reputation he once did when he was nearer the top of the cEDH pile, Kess, Dissident Mage has kind of eclipsed him in most people's minds. I think the pertinent point, though, is that he has a massive thorn in his side in his first ability, at least ostensibly. I've never had it become an issue, but the point is the onus is on you to tread carefully and manipulate the board state or you're hosed fairly easily. Again, he can combo, he can storm, but if you're building with this sort of thought experiment in mind, I think he makes a good case for himself.

I'm not sure if that's helpful, and honestly, I'm not sure I'm even recommending this commander, I more mean this as suggestions as to where you ought to start in looking for political and social commanders. I personally think most of the 'precon political' commanders are a little ham-fisted about it, and because they make it really very overt that you're playing the political game they sort of jump the shark for you before you've even started. In my experience they sort of make people go 'oh ok, THIS commander - well, I better take him out so that I can make my own choices', and while you can fight through that, it's not the lesson you're trying to learn.

Personally, here's who I'd recommend:
Dralnu, Lich Lord - you've got to play the politics to some degree
Queen Marchesa - people will leave you alone to some degree, but Monarch is inherently political and the Queen won't win you the game on her own
Mathas, Fiend Seeker - Net advantage for destroying creatures that aren't your own - this is as close as precons get to politics done right imo
Glissa, the Traitor - she needs a board state to trigger. Obviously she can be really nasty, but if you're trying to learn lessons here build for that.
Tasigur, the Golden Fang - Sort of self-explanatory I guess.

I feel like this is attempting to set you back at square one, so if that's the case I apologise. I just think it's good to start as you mean to go on, and you really shouldn't be letting WotC tell you what politics is, they often overdo it in the command zone.

[WolfWhoWanders]

You seem to enjoy Mardu, have you considered maybe Mardu enchantress with Ghen, Arcanum Weaver or maybe a partner set up of some kind? Maybe don't focus on the curse thing too much, seems like it might draw hate but you could smack some gods and maybe a few self-recurring enchantments, some pillow fort and just try to be dumb. Maybe instead of going for a political deck try some kind of slow burn deck that maintains a low profile for the entire early game. Play stuff that's good but isn't the must answer threat on the board. Mardu does aikido type stuff pretty well too. Make your opponents wonder if they gonna get wrecked by a comeuppance and should maybe go elsewhere. I have built several Queen Marchesa's and have enjoyed all of them. My current one has Alesha as a kind of back up general.

[3drinks]

I think your assessment of what is and what is not a good political card is still rather off. Look at my Lazav deck, I've played this deck 5 times in the last two months in the mid-power level on PlayEDH's discord and won 3 of those games. I win exclusively on the back of navigating the political nature of EDH. Why do you think that this deck does so well politically? When you look at it what cards do you think are the most political? What cards do you think draw me the most hate? When you look at the deck, how strong do you think it is? What cards do you think I should probably cut or is there any obvious omissions? Any cards that stand out to you as extremely weird? There's probably a specific reason I run them because this list has undergone a ton of revisions.

Argh, it's like the only thing I can do to play politically is one of those durdle turtle decks where they don't do anything. Which is basically what's gonna happen if I built an enchantress like Ghen, Arcanum Weaver as mentioned below. Worse cause Ghen turns into prison quick.

Every idea I come up with is "not political". It's frustrating.

[3drinks]

What if I've been going at this all wrong and my real target all this time should have been Blim, Comedic Genius..........

[not-a-cube]

What if I've been going at this all wrong and my real target all this time should have been Blim, Comedic Genius..........

A posibility, but he forces discard which will generate a certain amount of hate. Although as an answer to theft decks I think he's a great tool. Pretty much: you steal our stuff? you lose your hand.

[materpillar]

I think your assessment of what is and what is not a good political card is still rather off. Look at my Lazav deck, I've played this deck 5 times in the last two months in the mid-power level on PlayEDH's discord and won 3 of those games. I win exclusively on the back of navigating the political nature of EDH. Why do you think that this deck does so well politically? When you look at it what cards do you think are the most political? What cards do you think draw me the most hate? When you look at the deck, how strong do you think it is? What cards do you think I should probably cut or is there any obvious omissions? Any cards that stand out to you as extremely weird? There's probably a specific reason I run them because this list has undergone a ton of revisions.

Argh, it's like the only thing I can do to play politically is one of those durdle turtle decks where they don't do anything. Which is basically what's gonna happen if I built an enchantress like Ghen, Arcanum Weaver as mentioned below. Worse cause Ghen turns into prison quick.

Every idea I come up with is "not political". It's frustrating.

You say "durdle turtle where they don't do anything". I don't actually know what you mean by that in the slightest so I can't help you find a political non-durdle deck. Your Sunforger shell looked extremely durdlely without accomplishing much of anything, while also not being particularly politically savy. For me someone is durdling when I start losing track of how long their turn is taking because they have so many triggers likely without a clear gameplan. I feel like your definition of durdling is resolving any spell that doesn't immediately threaten to end/take over the game or isn't removal (preferably stax-like permanent removal of all problems).

The best way to go about politics (in my opinion, dirk might disagree) is to be the second most dangerous threat at the table. That way no one messes with your stuff because the most dangerous person has stuff that needs to be dealt with now. You're also not appearing weak so everyone throws their random Craw Wurm attacks at you. Not being the biggest threat at the table strongly incentivizes you against doing terrible political moves. If your board state isn't in a position to win off Ruination, you're not going to cast it because everyone will turn and immediately kill you.

I glanced through your decks and you seem to only play extremely threatening cards to be on the bleeding edge of murdering everyone. Your decks appear to be fairly incapable of faking weakness. If all you do is flex how strong you are, everyone is going to rightly decide you need to die first.

I really feel like you should go through my Lazav deck and figure out why it is fairly successful. If not that then explain to me the upsides of casting Putrid Goblin. Is casting Putrid Goblin with the intent of only attacking/blocking with it (no sacrifice synergies or infinite persist combos) being a "durdle turtle where they don't do anything"?

[DirkGently]

I don't like Blim politically. He's got a similar problem that Xantcha has, except probably worse. The problem is that, while both those commanders are good at punishing one specific player, they're not great at adjusting to new information. One player is scary at first, so you smack them with Blim to give them a few enchantments. They lose their hand, and now they're way behind and someone else surges into the lead. But you can't move those enchantments to the new leader easily - you're still punching the guy who's now likely on your side. Not great.

And the second issue is that Blim is going to be a major removal target if he ever gets going. If I've got 3 of your permanents, you can bet that I'll throw whatever I have to at Blim to prevent him from connecting again - even if I otherwise wouldn't have any bones to pick with you.

Every idea I come up with is "not political". It's frustrating.

I think maybe the issue is that you're trying to brute force it a little too much. I think you're looking at a lot of gimmick commanders that are "political" in wotc's sort of hamfisted way that doesn't really understand the dynamics all that well.

Imagine you're sitting across from the commander you're considering. Are you thinking "hmm, this looks interesting/fun" or are you thinking "ugh, how am I going to solve THIS problem?" You probably want to avoid any commander that makes you think the latter.

The best way to go about politics (in my opinion, dirk might disagree) is to be the second most dangerous threat at the table.

Lol, I can't remember if you've read my primer, but in there I argue that it's best to be the THIRD most dangerous. If you're first, everyone else wants a piece of you for obvious reasons. If you're second, then the first player wants a piece of you because you're the greatest threat to their victory. If you're in fourth...well, you're just behind, and that sucks. So third is where it's at, imo.

I glanced through your decks and you seem to only play extremely threatening cards to be on the bleeding edge of murdering everyone. Your decks appear to be fairly incapable of faking weakness. If all you do is flex how strong you are, everyone is going to rightly decide you need to die first.

This is very true. You want a deck that's sneaky-strong, not obvious-strong. I wouldn't go full-on combo, but having some sweet blowouts like Rakdos Charm, Wild Ricochet, or Deflecting Palm can be a way to get a surprise victory without appearing threatening. And they're also not likely to raise anyone's hackles for game 2.

[3drinks]

I think I'm afraid of playing weak cards and everyone just ignores me because my whole deck is weak so I over correct and make sure I'm always capable of going the distance.

You say "durdle turtle where they don't do anything". I don't actually know what you mean by that in the slightest so I can't help you find a political non-durdle deck. Your Sunforger shell looked extremely durdlely without accomplishing much of anything, while also not being particularly politically savy. For me someone is durdling when I start losing track of how long their turn is taking because they have so many triggers likely without a clear gameplan. I feel like your definition of durdling is resolving any spell that doesn't immediately threaten to end/take over the game or isn't removal (preferably stax-like permanent removal of all problems).

You know the types. The decks that would rather recur STEve over and over twelve times in a game, rather than actually win. The Legacy players that would intuition for life from the loam, and blinkmoth nexus, and then kill you with that. They're sooooooo slow and not exciting. The antithesis of action.

[tstorm823]

I think Blim, Comedic Genius could be a political deck if you want it to be, it just wouldn't necessarily be commander-centric. The real problem with Blim is the Intet, the Dreamer effect, where they strapped a novel effect to combat damage, so by the time you get to do anything sweet with it, the opponent has died to flying commander damage anyway.

[materpillar]

I think maybe the issue is that you're trying to brute force it a little too much. I think you're looking at a lot of gimmick commanders that are "political" in wotc's sort of hamfisted way that doesn't really understand the dynamics all that well.

This. ^^

The best way to go about politics (in my opinion, dirk might disagree) is to be the second most dangerous threat at the table.

Lol, I can't remember if you've read my primer, but in there I argue that it's best to be the THIRD most dangerous. If you're first, everyone else wants a piece of you for obvious reasons. If you're second, then the first player wants a piece of you because you're the greatest threat to their victory. If you're in fourth...well, you're just behind, and that sucks. So third is where it's at, imo.

I've read through your primer before, it's just been a while. I do remember that now that you mention it. I could argue with you about the semantics of when during the coarse of the game you want to be in what position of strength, but basically I agree.

One of my friends once told me "The most scared I am of Materpillar is when it looks like he's just about to lose."

I think I'm afraid of playing weak cards and everyone just ignores me because my whole deck is weak so I over correct and make sure I'm always capable of going the distance.

I have an immensely difficult time empathizing with this. My favorite EDH memory is casting Rishadan Pawnshop. My opponent reached over, read it and then they openly berated me in front of the table for playing such a bad magic card and bluntly stating that I was "a terrible player". A few turns later I Act of Treason'd their general and tucked it. They scoop'd in response. I love killing people with "weak" cards.

From a more spikey position if I start out the game with a Privileged Position emblem because I'm playing weaker cards than you are... are your cards actually better? Getting ignored usually upside not a drawback.

You know the types. The decks that would rather recur STEve over and over twelve times in a game, rather than actually win. The Legacy players that would intuition for life from the loam, and blinkmoth nexus, and then kill you with that. They're sooooooo slow and not exciting. The antithesis of action.

There's a middle ground between playing cards that actively hurl the game towards its conclusion and playing cards/resource loops that actively don't change the gamestate in any meaningful fashion.

If your deck does nothing powerful ever, you're going to lose a ton. If your deck does only powerful things all the time, people will focus you and you'll lose a ton. Maximizing your win % is landing your deck somewhere in the middle. This also means you need to aim to lose with some regularity (if you have a consistent IRL playgroup), otherwise people will notice and they'll make sure you lose.

[3drinks]

So you'd say I was off to a better understanding with Kynaios and Tiro of Meletis than any of these other choices (sunforger counters notwithstanding)? More Sun Titan + armillary sphere, unexpected results, and fertillid, less mystical tutour + temporal mastery, edric, and eternal witness?

[FenrirRex]

So you'd say I was off to a better understanding with Kynaios and Tiro of Meletis than any of these other choices (sunforger counters notwithstanding)? More Sun Titan + armillary sphere, unexpected results, and fertillid, less mystical tutour + temporal mastery, edric, and eternal witness?

It seems like you're trying a little too hard to push the politics from the perspective of the commander and the cards themselves, as opposed to trying to playing politically from yourself. Which is to say, you're still more worried about the text on the cards, not about how you are playing them.

With that in mind, I'll add another voice that I'm not sure Blim is the right choice either, nor really are any of the overtly grouphug or "political" commanders that want you to build around their supposedly friendly nature. My immediate recommendation is to find a commander that you actually like (which could be Blim or Kynaios, though I have not gotten the impression that you actually enjoy their mechanics?), whether because it's powerful or it simply tickles your fancy, and then approach your build with one simple question in mind: "Will my opponents hate this card?"

You fret a lot about your own experience, but if your goal is multiplayer satisfaction then, aside from your core commander and pet cards, you need to more strongly consider how the rest of the table is feeling.

[3drinks]

So, what you're saying is, stop squeezing the optimal play lines from everything and just....play in a more light hearted way?

Like Toggo/Falthis throwing explodey rocks of death at things.

[FenrirRex]

So, what you're saying is, stop squeezing the optimal play lines from everything and just....play in a more light hearted way?

Like Toggo/Falthis throwing explodey rocks of death at things.

100% this, yes, that sounds like a lot of fun without worrying half as much.

[materpillar]

So you'd say I was off to a better understanding with Kynaios and Tiro of Meletis than any of these other choices (sunforger counters notwithstanding)? More Sun Titan + armillary sphere, unexpected results, and fertillid, less mystical tutour + temporal mastery, edric, and eternal witness?

It's hard because you're asking for extremely blanket statements that very wildly depending on who you're playing against. If I sit down with my The Ur-Dragon changeling deck against a cEDH or pseudo-cEDH pod, I'm going to get utterly blown out to the extent that I'm actively harming the game by being such dead weight. On the other hand, if I sit down against a table of 3 pre-cons and I assemble one of my wonky 4-card infinite combos and kill the table turn 7 I could ruining the game a similar amount just in the opposite direction of being oppressive.

I'm personally not a fan of tutors and extra turns but that might fly with other people. You can also do interesting things that don't involve durdly ramp engines. *shrug*

So, what you're saying is, stop squeezing the optimal play lines from everything and just....play in a more light hearted way?

Like Toggo/Falthis throwing explodey rocks of death at things.

I like this Toggo, Goblin Weaponsmith + Falthis, Shadowcat Familiar deck start idea better than the others you've mentioned so far. Just don't build the deck to kill each and every creature. Keep in mind a good political deck doesn't even need to be able to kill all of your opponents. You just need to be able to kill the last one after you've enticed your opponents to kill each other for you. If you want your opponents to kill each other, they need to have the resources and board state to actually do that. You need to be a gardener. Pruning your opponents here and there to keep them from growing too out of control, not going full Vietnam war and napalming the entire forest.

Just because you've got a rock equipped to Falthis doesn't mean you need to throw it at something at the end of turn because you're about to untap and that's the most mana-efficient play. I assume that's what you mean by optimal. The optimal political decision is often times very different than the optimal constructed 1v1 tournament decision. They use completely different metrics. I try to always squeeze out the optimal play lines with my decks, I think it's fairly dishonest to do otherwise. That being said frequently it's optimal to not kill someone you have the ability to because you need an ally at the moment. Not killing someone is literally never optimal in 1v1. Sometimes it's optimal to simply waste mana and not cast your spell because it'll draw more of the table's hate onto your head. This is never optimal in 1v1. There's a lot of situations of this nature.

I'm a pretty big fan of chilling out and playing in a more lighthearted way for sure. Some of my least enjoyable EDH games have been between rounds at a PTQ against full on tryhards who called me out for missing triggers by about 2 seconds.

[FenrirRex]

Another notable advantage to the Toggo, Goblin Weaponsmith/Falthis, Shadowcat Familiar plan is that it still lets you play something of a strategic gameplan, still with plenty of decision making, without having to worry as much about the optimal play. Having the rattlesnake option of a couple of deathtouch rocks on the field (or even just 2 damage rocks, those add up) lets you keep mana open and interact, but will never "force" you to attack into something or throw a rock that doesn't take out a politically relevant threat. It's also a good tester for your ability to play politically- being okay with not throwing a rock at every opportunity is great, and it also gives your opponents plenty of ways to interact.

[tstorm823]

So, what you're saying is, stop squeezing the optimal play lines from everything and just....play in a more light hearted way?

No. Even better. Playing in a more light-hearted way is the optimal play line.

[DirkGently]

Some really good advice getting thrown around in this thread.

I agree that toggo/falthis is probably the best option so far. And I also agree that the key part to playing it politically is going to be NOT killing every single thing. The more potential control you have over a game, the less you NEED to control it. Let your opponents kill each other while you bide your time, let them absorb each others' resources. Then when the moment is right, chuck those rocks!

[3drinks]

Finally, a place where that Thawing Glaciers can truly shine. Rakdos Landfall...who'd have thunk it.

[narglfrob]

+1 for Toggo, Goblin Weaponsmith/Falthis, Shadowcat Familiar, it seems like a very politcal deck because of the strong rattlesnake effect (only kill things that attack you). It also telegraphs to the table that you are not playing cEDH-lite, or goodstuff which should lower your threat level.

Thinking ahead to brewing, it seems like what this deck wants is a) land drops, b) mana and c) bodies to throw rocks. Some cards that come to mind...
Field of the Dead - turn land drops into bodies to hurl rocks
Crucible of Worlds - reanimate fetchlands for double landfall each turn
Praetor's Grasp - tutor your Green opponent's deck for landfall cards like Exploration

[toctheyounger]

Yep, this seems a good mix. Strong but innocuous enough not to draw ire.

In terms of suggestions, the one neat landfall trigger I've seen in red that looks cool to me in a quasi-political way is Geode Rager. You could almost run a bidding war for who this targets as it resolves. Who wants to keep their stuff from swinging/life total high, and how much will they give you for you not to target them? Grenzo, Havoc Raiser is a nice low to the ground way to keep folk away from you too, and might even net you the odd mana rock/extra land thing. Retreat to Valakut is similar to Geode Rager too, could do some work.

This also seems like it could be a good place for Goblin Welder/Daretti, Scrap Savant/Goblin Engineer/Scrap Mastery. It's probably not something you need to go all in on though, so some of these might be a bridge too far.

You probably want some advantage for when stuff dies, so things like Pawn of Ulamog, Sly Requisitioner and Revel in Riches might do nicely. Pitiless Plunderer is great if you're sacrificing your own stuff but I don't necessarily know if that applies. Probably not so much.

In terms of neat tricks you could add, I love how versatile Rakdos Charm is. Obviously Chaos Warp too, and Disrupt Decorum is fun. Clock of Omens can tap down your rocks so you can untap mana rocks for more mana, Inspiring Statuary turns them into Wastes (thanks Josh Lee Kwai).

I did a quick dig for artifacts entering the battlefield triggers and got Quicksmith Genius and Reckless Fireweaver, so they could be good.

Not sure where else you wanna go for advantage, but hopefully some of this is helpful stuff.

[3drinks]

Since deathtouch is a thing, I guess I should be on Cunning Sparkmage and Death Pits of Rath?

[toctheyounger]

Since deathtouch is a thing, I guess I should be on Cunning Sparkmage and Death Pits of Rath?

And I also agree that the key part to playing it politically is going to be NOT killing every single thing.

See above - there probably isn't the need. But also considering the kitty only gives your commanders deathtouch you probably get more mileage from ways of equipping rocks to your commanders cheaply than including other Tim effects.

Just remember if you obliterate the boardstate you're really encouraging people not to play more or less at all. While that gives you some breathing space in some ways it also makes you archenemy. If you give people a bit of space of their own they have resources to throw at each other, rather than forcing them to throw them at you.

[FenrirRex]

Since deathtouch is a thing, I guess I should be on Cunning Sparkmage and Death Pits of Rath?

See, now here we have to walk back to the other part of my post, asking the question "Will my Opponents hate this card?" when deckbuilding. Allow me to briefly roleplay a table for you as you play Death Pits of Rath:

Control Player:
"Oh, dang, I only have a handful of creature-based win conditions and I can interact much more easily with creatures than I can enchantments. Guess that means Toggo is kill on sight now."

Aggro Player:
"Wait... you mean now anyone can trade anything with my creatures? I can't even attack into a mana dork? Ugh, better knock out 3drinks first then, can't have that."

Durdling Value Player:
"Sick, now all my utility creatures and dorks trade up. I'm sure the rest of the table will see that as a bigger threat, so I'll bet they focus on him instead of me."

Congratulations! You've now made two enemies, one of which is intent on outright knocking you out of the game for daring to mess with his creature-based plan, and you've turned attention away from the value across the table.

That aside, I do like the idea of adding Obosh, the Preypiercer into the mix to further show how "fun" your deck is and add some creative constraints to what you are doing. In addition, while directly impacting the entire board with Death Pits is a losing political proposition, some deathtouch synergies and redundancy are real good. Basilisk Collar lets everyone get in on the fun while gaining you back healthy little chunks of life with your rocks.