[Deck]Hadley Presents- Gro-still 2K4, How to beat up Togs

[Eastman]

This is the list Steve Houdlette played to 2nd in the Waterbury TMD Open.  This deck was started as something I threw together so my brother could play in the Newington tournament. I was using all my keeper cards so he basically got what was left over. At the time the list was only green/blue, and features Nevinyrral's Disk and maindeck Echoing Truth.

Well he won both of the two rounds he played and frankly, he didn't do so bad when we trying to get him some practice with the deck, so when he went back home over spring break I kept it together and started toying around with it.

We tried a few things that I should mention because they weren't horrible and you all might be thinking the same things.

We tried not running AK and using Deep Analysis/Merchant Scroll/Gush in that slot but those cards just didn't fit as well.

We had Cunning Wish in the Null Rod's slots and berserk/smother etc. in the board for awhile, but eventually decided the wish was too expensive/reactive.

We also ran Gush/Fastbond for awhile but cut them because they were inconsistent.



Grostill:


5 Threats:
4 Dryad
1 Tog

11 Draw:
4 AK
4 Brainstorm
3 Standstill

12 Counters:
2 MisD
2 Daze
4 FoW
4 Drain

4 Utility:
2 Stifle
2 Null Rod

4 Broken:
1 Dtutor
1 Yawg
1 Walk
1 Ancestral

24 Land:
1 Strip mine
3 Wasteland
3 Factory
3 Sea
4 Trop
4 Fetch
1 Island
4 LoMox (on color)
1 LoA


SB:
2 Tsabo's Web
3 Ground Seal
2 Plaguebearer
2 Gilded Drake
2 BEB
2 Oxidize
1 Null Rod
1 Naturalize


There are three things that have stayed the same since he played the deck, they are:

1. 12 Counters
2. 12 Cards that can draw you 3 more cards
3. 4 Quirion Dryad

It is this efficient and consistent little cluster that makes the deck run really smoothly. You basically only run cheap counters and cheap draw, so things are pretty consistent.

The problem with only running 4 Dryad's as the kill condition is that sometimes you can't find one early, and playing one late (through yawg will or something) isn't usually enough to seal a game. The single Tog ups the threats to 5, which is 20% more threat (a significant difference) and seems to be the right number.  He's mostly there to tutor for when you're going nuts with Yawg Will, but he also works marvels alone as we all know.

Demonic Tutor and Yawgmoth's Will were obvious inclusions with Black and are a large part of why we decided on Black for the third color.


The biggest thing to keep in mind about this deck is that it is more like fish than it is like GAT. It has many of the early strengths of Fish but with powerful spells and threats as opposed to the relatively weak ones in Fish.

I wish I could expound a bit more but I don't have much time until after tomorrow night. At that point I'll get you some sideboarding strategies and matchup analyses.  

I'm curious to hear all of your comments.  I'm sure Steve has some thoughts on what should be changed based on his results Saturday.

[DavidHernandez]

I'm just going to quote myself from the old thread:

Removing the AK's (from the graveyard with Tog) is an excellent point (regarding running a seemingly random single Tog), and Tog is better than Werebear...

Since you are running the Standstills and Green, do you think Hidden Gibbons could have a place? if the opponent casts a spell, you can draw your 3 plus get a big critter. This is one of the combos I've been considering. It's only drawback is that you end up with another castable spell.

Here is the list I've been working on for T1:

Emerald Alice 2004 – Dave H.

4 Quirion Dryad
4

4 Force of Will
4 Mana Drain
3 Misdirection
3 Stifle
14

4 Brainstorm
4 Standstill (or Impulse. Still testing.)
3 Thirst for Knowledge
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Fact or Fiction
1 Gush
1 Time Walk
1 Mystical Tutor
16

2 Null Rod
2 Damping Matrix
1 Berserk
5

1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Emerald
1 Black Lotus

4 Tropical Island
4 Flooded Strand
1 Wooded Foothills
4 Island
1 Forest
3 Wasteland
1 Strip Mine

The Mana Base is still being worked on...

SB
3 Back to Basics
...?

My biggest concern has been breaking my own Standstill.  I'm thinking that Hidden Gibbons could be a very strong addition since I dont have the man-lands.

Question: Did DAZE come through, or was it often dead?

Dave.

[CrazyCarl]

Question: Did DAZE come through, or was it often dead?

I joked during the finals about a lacky getting dazed, and then it did.  So I'll say it came through.  Granted, he didn't win the match, but it was damn cool

[DavidHernandez]

he didn't win the match

Perhaps if Daze had been something else, he would have had a better chance?  I go back and forth with Daze.  Usually, I dump it for what I consider to be "better cards".  The thing is, it pops up in decks that go all the way in big tournaments, which makes me question my sanity regarding the card.

The biggest thing to keep in mind about this deck is that it is more like fish than it is like GAT.

This is really important.  It's why man-lands and Daze probably belong here, and it's why I may be having inconsistency in my builds.  I think "GAT" too often.  Thanks for pointing that out.

Another card that may have a place in the deck is Skeletal Scrying (to remove AK's while growing Dryads).  Was this tested?

Dave.

[jpmeyer]

When, if ever do you board out Null Rod?  I know that in U/G Madness anyway they're usually never bad but I found that it was kind of like my "modular" slot in the deck where I would usually board in all kinds of different cards depending on the matchup.

[Eastman]

Obviously Rod is boarded out against landstill/fish and other low powered decks. There are some other matchups (FCG for example) where you want to be bringing in a lot of hate but you don't want to dilute your aggressive/controllish strategy. The stifles and the Null Rod's do NOT play a major part in that strategy (they fit the many denial side game) so they're free game. Against FCG out go rods, stifles obviously stay in.

The standstills come out more than anything else, except with the possible exception of misdirection. It isn't so much that they are BAD in a lot of the matchups, as there is a lot of really quality hate in the board (no wishes is beautiful) so you'd rather be bringing that in.  Trading standstill away in amtchups where it is inconsistent and bringing in consistent hate is usually a good play.


Oh and Dave, Daze is awesome, just awesome in this deck. The mana curve is very low so Daze doesn't hurt too badly.  In testing we did not only the myriad ancestral/brianstorm (with two wastes in hand)/ counterspell EARLY dazes but saw such sweet dazes as Future Sight and Memnarch. Trust me, if you thought Ancient tomb hurt, try having the Memnarch you played with the mana dazed in your face.


Scrying has NOT been tested. It strikes me as being a little too costly for this deck (see: no FoF). You're welcome to test it yourself however, let me know what your results show.

[Methuselahn]

The biggest thing to keep in mind about this deck is that it is more like fish than it is like GAT. It has many of the early strengths of Fish but with powerful spells and threats as opposed to the relatively weak ones in Fish.

I guess I have some questions about the nature of the deck.  (note, this is without any testing yet, I'll wait for your upcoming analysis.)  I am not understanding some of the resource denial aspects incorporated here.  Advocating cards like Null Rod and Wastelands seems like it would be hindering your ability to go proactive and gro like a Dryad wants to.  I can see to some extent how Dropping a Dryad then Standstill is enough of a threat to just ride him out until the opponent breaks it.

What is your thoughts on Damping Matrix/Tinker/Darksteel Colossus?  There are some lists floating around on TMD and it seems like this might be one avenue.

Anyway, I anticipate your in depth coverage.  Who says innovation is dead.  Nice work Hadley, and congrats on the kickass placing.  

[Smmenen]

I just don't understand these decks.   Dryad suffers from what I consider "Tog syndrome."  Without Gush and Misdirection being really good, Dryad just is not a bigger/ better creature than Tog, and is barely more efficient. For that reason, I can't understand how this deck wouldn't be better with 2 more Togs and 2 less of something else.

Steve

[Eastman]

I just don't understand these decks.   Dryad suffers from what I consider "Tog syndrome."  Without Gush and Misdirection being really good, Dryad just is not a bigger/ better creature than Tog, and is barely more efficient. For that reason, I can't understand how this deck wouldn't be better with 2 more Togs and 2 less of something else.

Steve

I just have to disagree here. First turn dryad is one of the plays control fears more than any other. First turn psychatog is hardly that, and occurs significantly less often because of the heavy mana cost. Dryad comes down a turn earlier, and beats for more in the early turns. 50% more mana is a LOT more expensive.

Your point about tog being bigger than dryad is arguable. Early game he simply isn't.  In the late game, yes tog is bigger. We have one tog because late game when he's the play you have the resources to find him and cast him.

[Smmenen]

How soon people forget.  Even in the Original Groatog, Tog was only very slighly less good than Dryad.  For a while, some people were runnnig 3 Dryads and 4 Togs (*cough Rudy *cough*).  The synergy with Gush and Tog was ridiculous - but so did the synergy  between free spells and Dryad.  

I am just mystified at how people are so in love with Dryad.  The fundamental problem is that the cards are assymetric in purpose.  Dryad needs to come down on turn 1-2 to be good, while Tog can come down at any point in the game and be good.  That makes Dryad based decks inherently more inconsistent.  

Moreover, just taking a look at the deck on the merits, Tog is way too symmetrical with this deck for you to rely on your bare bits of tempo too actually make the Dryad too big for Tog.  You have 2 more counters not counting Stifle, and Wastleands and that is baout the key difference.   I am going to test your list, but I will admit surprise if it puts up good numbers against Tog.

Steve

[Gabethebabe]

I find this an unimpressive deck.

Steve did well with it, congrats, but his report lacked the demonstration of why Standstill is good in the deck. I consider this deck as an inferior GAT that is trying to do too many things.

You´re running Standstill, but only 3 manlands and they can´t fly. Standstill is bad against many turn 1 plays of your opponent (Lackey, Welder, things that Landstill can overcome with its cheap removal) and when you´re playing against a deck that runs Decree, Standstill just sucks. Landstill has lands that fly, so they can overcome some Soldier tokens. And against Landstill, don´t even think of dropping a Standstill.

You´re running 8 colourless lands in a 3-colour deck.

Dryad can´t gro under a Standstill.

The maindeck ideas are too counterintuitive.

Maybe the deck was a good metagame call. I could imagine you play some Factories and Standstills in the side for some transforming type of sideboard against decks that don´t lay threats in the first round.

IMO this deck will not stand time.

[DavidHernandez]

Smennen:

I am just mystified at how people are so in love with Dryad. The fundamental problem is that the cards are assymetric in purpose. Dryad needs to come down on turn 1-2 to be good, while Tog can come down at any point in the game and be good. That makes Dryad based decks inherently more inconsistent.

The more I play and test GAT, the more I find I want to completely drop Togs!  They come in as a 'win more' card for me.  Dryad does NOT have to come down on turn one or two for success.  I recently beat Workshop Slaver where Memnarch stole a mid game Dryad (4/4)--then, he cast a Shatter to deny me mana, but I Misdirected it to Memnarch.  On the next turn, I played Deed for 2, clearing the board.  After that, I played YawgWill...

It may sound like a very specific situation, but I find that Dryads get lethal no matter when they hit the board, and plays like the above are typical because the GAT/GRO decks we're testing are so consistent.  I believe there is a different mentality and game-play required when using the deck as Emerald Alice vs. Hulk/GAT.

I mentioned that I'm testing Hidden Gibbons, so I'll share this list:

Emerald Alice 4-27-2004 – Dave H.

4 Quirion Dryad
4 Hidden Gibbons

4 Mana Drain
4 Force of Will
3 Misdirection

4 Brainstorm
3 Thirst for Knowledge
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Gush
1 Fact or Fiction
1 Time Walk

2 Cunning Wish
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Yawgmoth's Will

2 Damping Matrix

1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Emerald

4 Tropical Island
4 Underground Sea
4 Polluted Delta
2 Island
2 Volcanic Island
1 Flooded Strand
1 Strip Mine

Sideboard:
1 Hurkyl's Recall
1 Berserk
1 Magical Hack (it's just me)
1 Blue Elemental Blast
1 Coffin Purge
1 Stifle
1 Artifact Mutation
1 Fire/Ice
1 Naturalize
1 Pernicious Deed
1 Rack and Ruin
2 Red Elemental Blast
2 Null Rod

The Gibbons delay the opponent, just as Standstill does.  I'm working on a list now that will include 3-4 Standstills.

Gabe:

Dryad can´t gro under a Standstill.

True, from a certain point of view, but False from another. If the opponent doesn't break the Standstill, they will die to a 1/1 or 2/2 Dryad, just like Workshop and Slaver decks that will kill with Welder Beatdown.  If/when they DO break the Standstill, you should have answers or card-drawing available to counter the item that was cast.  That will give you the 3-cards from the Standstill, and probably a Brainstorm-->Force/MisD.  The Dryad will grow 2-3 tokens, and on your turn you can cast more stuff and drop another Standstill (adding another 2+ tokens).

IMO this deck will not stand time.

I disagree.  Standstill may seem counter-intuitive in a deck that casts spells, but you have the advantage of dropping a threat and then waiting out the opponent.  As long as you know the Standstill is coming, you have a huge advantage.  My biggest surprise with the build is that there are only 3 Standstills, and not 4.

Dave.

[Toad]

If the opponent doesn't break the Standstill, they will die to a 1/1 or 2/2 Dryad

Does that imply the deck works fine with Grizzly Bears over Quirion Dryads?

[Grand Inquisitor]

Maybe the deck was a good metagame call. I could imagine you play some Factories and Standstills in the side for some transforming type of sideboard against decks that don´t lay threats in the first round.

IMO this deck will not stand time

First of all, we're not promising anything, I've readily admitted that the deck is underdeveloped.  Second of all, I can't help but throw out the old addage: test the damn thing.

Results from our testing and Waterbury show that it has good game against Hulk and GAT.  That should be enough to warrant further testing.

Dryad needs to come down on turn 1-2 to be good, while Tog can come down at any point in the game and be good

This simply isn't true.  Tog can come down any point and be a good defensive creature.  In the early game Tog will simply loom as a threat that will eventually be lethal.  He doesn't eat into your opponent's life total the way dryad does.  If he's removed, he hasn't added anything to your strategy.

Dryad isn't required first turn to be effective.  Often it would be around turn 5-6 when I had the first opportunity to play it, and it finished just fine.  The reason for this is that dryad is a one card combo, where Tog requires a Wish for Berserk to be truly effective.  Also, without counter back up Tog is just a much riskier creature as well, since pumping him is a cost.

I'm certainly not arguing that Quirion Dryad is better than Psychatog.  However, for the purposes of this deck, we need a creature that is fast (2cc), works without help, and isn't a one-trick pony.

Dryad suffers from what I consider "Tog syndrome." Without Gush and Misdirection being really good, Dryad just is not a bigger/ better creature than Tog

cards like Null Rod and Wastelands seems like it would be hindering your ability to go proactive and gro like a Dryad wants to

Remember, Fish, not Gro!  This deck doesn't need or want an 8/8 dryad.  If you look at my report, I didn't have to deal with too many big threats (except for U/G).  This deck wins by limiting the amount of threats the opponent can play through LD and cheap counters, and then rides a dryad or factory to victory.

This is another reason why Tog isn't a good choice.  Without wish for 'zerk, I can't let them hang out at 15 life, and then win in a fell swoop.  This deck wins in the margins by taking a little life here, a little there, and then usually winning over with board position.  It wins through having more threats, not just bigger threats.

You´re running Standstill, but only 3 manlands and they can´t fly. Standstill is bad against many turn 1 plays of your opponent (Lackey, Welder, things that Landstill can overcome with its cheap removal) and when you´re playing against a deck that runs Decree, Standstill just sucks. Landstill has lands that fly, so they can overcome some Soldier tokens. And against Landstill, don´t even think of dropping a Standstill.

You're right, this isn't a deck where you mindlessly drop standstill.  Obviously there are other decks that abuse it better.  However, our entire deck is geared towards gaining an early advantage in board position.  Against any non-standstill deck, its going to be another ancestral recall (or a brainstorm for the better players in the audience).  Either way, it allows our deck to maintain the tempo of play we want.

I will admit that there were a few times where I drew it mid-game during a stand-off and I'd have rather have had something else.  Again, this deck is up for criticism.  We want to improve it.  In the meantime you should test it yourself and see how often Control Slaver or Hulk, or any aggro or workshop deck needs to break this because they're about to lose.

The deck plays three different strategies:

Against a tog deck (hulk, gat), it plays hyper-aggressive.  It needs to cause serious life loss early, so it can win with numbers since their threats are bigger later on.

Against a standstill deck (fish, landstill), it plays like gro.  It defends its dryad and tries to ride it to victory.  Here is where Yawgwill can be paramount at setting up 2-3 'killer' attack phases in a row.

Against any other deck it uses wasteland and null rods to make the window of opportunity (big plays an opponent can make) as small as possible.  This makes our counters (daze, misd, stifle) more effective, and should limit their options long enough to let dryad do its job.

For those who want to turn it into GAT or Hulk or Landstill, this is why the deck exists:  In a format of big swings, this deck tries to crunch the entire game state, which will favor this deck.  It wins in small strokes, but it makes these early in the game.

edit:

One thing I forgot to mention, is that this deck also packs an awesome amount of hate between MD/SB, which makes all of the aforementioned tactics work even better.

For example,

Ground Seal is manageable for dragon if it can find pernicious deed.  Resolving deed through wastes, null rod, and stifles is hard.

Null Rod is magageable for workshop, if it can drop fat.  Trying to resolve fat through wastes, a real counter wall, as well as spot removal is difficult.

Its these types of things that add up games 2&3.  Not to mention fun things like gilded drake on exalted angel

[DavidHernandez]

Does that imply the deck works fine with Grizzly Bears over Quirion Dryads?

I see your point, but Quirion Dryads are superior because they grow.  If you ran a creature like Grizzly Bears, you would have to add Curiousity and make other tweaks.  Who would have thought that Flying Men would 'work fine' in a current deck?

It is your own argument that Welder Beatdown is a viable win condition.  Your question is similar to me asking you if you could replace Welders with Mons Goblin Raiders...

Gro/SuperGro/Grostill/Emerald Alice are all viable exactly because Dryad's are available.

Dave.

[Gabethebabe]

If the opponent doesn't break the Standstill, they will die to a 1/1 or 2/2 Dryad, just like Workshop and Slaver decks that will kill with Welder Beatdown.
Dave.

Nitpick: A Dryad under Standstill will generally not be 1/1, unless you opponent stifled the triggered ability of the Dryad in response to the Standstill coming into play

[PucktheCat]

If the opponent doesn't break the Standstill, they will die to a 1/1 or 2/2 Dryad

Does that imply the deck works fine with Grizzly Bears over Quirion Dryads?

Oh, come on.  Just because a 2/2 Dryad is enough to force someone to break Standstill doesn't mean you would want to always have a 2/2.

Maybe Grizzly Bears would make the cut if they had the text "No one can play a spell for the rest of the game" - that is the only situation where Quirion Dryad with Standstill and Grizzly Bears with Standstill are equivilent.

Leo

[Hi-Val]

Further defense of the Dryad: One of the paramount selling points of Dryad is that when you do nothing, it gets bigger. This means that you just go along and play spells as usual, and on top of whatever your spell does, it ends up being a Zap on your opponent as well. On the other side, Psychatog requires you to invest cards that you would otherwise like to put to good use to stop things. For example, with an attacking Arrogant Wurm, the Tog has to drop cards out of the graveyard (crucial when those cards are AKs or Will fodder) while the Dryad just has to have some spells cast that draw you into more. Psychatog has advantages in that it doesn't require mana to pump. However, Dryad ends up being the better early- and mid-game attacker just because it gets huge when you follow your SOP.

Another HUGE advantage: Dryad is not succeptible to the same hate. Tog and Dryad both die to Smother, a common SB card. Psychatog also dies to REB and becomes useless in the face of Crypt. Dryad does none of these things.

[Smmenen]

Against a tog deck (hulk, gat), it plays hyper-aggressive.  It needs to cause serious life loss early, so it can win with numbers since their threats are bigger later on.

See, this is my criticisim of all Dryad based decks versus Tog: there is no larger threat in the later game.  Both decks operate on the *exact* same time frame.  That's my Point! The assumption is that the Gro deck can steal tempo and force the Tog player into an untenable position so that they can't win.  Tog doesn't cost 5.  It isn't morphling.  It comes down on turn 2.  

Steve

[DavidHernandez]

G.I./Eastman:
In an effort to get back on topic...the list looks really solid.  Thinking "Fish", I could see you dropping one Mox and adding a Standstill.

Dave.

Edit: Steve posted almost simultaneously.

[Grand Inquisitor]

The assumption is that the Gro deck can steal tempo and force the Tog player into an untenable position so that they can't win. Tog doesn't cost 5. It isn't morphling. It comes down on turn 2.

This is a problem gro-still is accutely aware of.  The games gro-still loses to Hulk are when Tog hits the table.  The games it wins are when either:
1) Hulk doesn't see tog
2) Gro-still can disrupt Hulk's mana base
3) Gro-still can take enough life early so that if Tog hits the table, a 2nd dryad, factory, or tog will be enough to overwhelm.

Option #2 is the most likely, since Hulk can't use AK's to draw out of tight mana without giving gro-still another way to beat it.  Games 2&3, gilded drake and spot removal (the likely replacement for plaguebaerer) make it so Hulk has to do more than drop tog to win.

[Hi-Val]

Another defense of the Dryad is that it makes killing with Tog easier. In GAT at least with Berserk, but ostensibly with GroStill too, the extra five or six damage that Dryad puts through makes your game against Hulk easier because you need less cards to kill them than they do to kill you.

ALSO: Hulk runs a risk by discarding to Tog for the win, whereas Dryad has no such risk. Hulk should always Duress/FoW when it has Berserk in hand or about to, but situations do come up.

Does this deck have space for a maindeck or SB Berserk to bring in against troublesome matchups? May be a crappy idea anyway.

And I'll say now that I thought that Dryad + Standstill was the worst combo in the game, but I stand corrected. I still don't know how strong this deck is, as I need to test the damn thing, but one tournament win does not a good deck make.

[DavidHernandez]

Standstill may become the next very broken card.  Running 5 Ancestral's is better than cheating.  It's just a matter of dropping a large threat and then Standstill.

For example, remember using Meditate in Stax?  Skip your next turn to draw 4 worked well with the right components on the table. Well, what if we drop Eater of Days followed up by Standstill?  Does Eater become more of a threat, instead of an almost unusable card?

Or cycling DoJ following Standstill in Keeper...?

Dave.

[rvs]

With meditate however, YOU had control over the timing of the draw. With standstill you don't. That's the fundamental flaw in the card, and is what is keeping it from being totally nuts.

[Toad]

At the end of your turn, I'll cast Brainstorm.

[hulk3rules]

At the end of your turn, I'll cast Brainstorm.

The reason standstill works in this deck is because you'll usually have a 3/3 dryad down, plus a factory.  That's 5 damage a turn.  If your opponent waits until your hand is at 6-7 cards to try to negate the card draw of standstill they'll be dead, or so low on life that you easily win next turn since you have a full hand to grow the dryad.

[Shock Wave]

I'm with Gabethebabe on this one. I don't like the deck, although I'm happy to see that Steve did so well with it. The problem with Standstill in this deck is that it pretty much sucks ass UNLESS you have business on the board. If you don't have a Dryad down, it is pretty awful considering you only have 4 lonely factories to do your dirty work.

My reasoning as to why this deck performed so well: Nobody has seen it before and it probably freaked a lot of opponents out. Trust me, when you have a deck that is not that great, yet has some synergy and NOBODY knows what the fuck it is, you will win games. I promise that I would not have T4'd at Gencon last year with that shitty Dragon build if people had half a clue what I was playing and how to play against it.

On a positive note, I'm really happy that this type of deck CAN do well because the results encourage people to INNOVATE and create their own shit, instead of net-decking the latest monsters that the real type 1 players have spent time honing to perfection.

[jpmeyer]

At the end of your turn, I'll cast Brainstorm.

The reason standstill works in this deck is because you'll usually have a 3/3 dryad down, plus a factory.  That's 5 damage a turn.  If your opponent waits until your hand is at 6-7 cards to try to negate the card draw of standstill they'll be dead, or so low on life that you easily win next turn since you have a full hand to grow the dryad.

A better way to put this is that while people normally want to fight over draw spells, you don't necessarily need to fight over Standstill like you would over AK or maybe Thirst for Knowledge.

[hulk3rules]

I'm with Gabethebabe on this one. I don't like the deck, although I'm happy to see that Steve did so well with it. The problem with Standstill in this deck is that it pretty much sucks ass UNLESS you have business on the board. If you don't have a Dryad down, it is pretty awful considering you only have 4 lonely factories to do your dirty work.

I agree that standstill without dryad down is kind of a weak play.  This is why we only run 3 standstills.  The goal is to put dryad down first, then follow it up with standstill.

[Eastman]

The problem with Standstill in this deck is that it pretty much sucks ass UNLESS you have business on the board. If you don't have a Dryad down, it is pretty awful considering you only have 4 lonely factories to do your dirty work.

There are only 3 factories.


The added pressure that faerie conclaves in a deck like landstill put on the opponent is hardly significant. Standstill is nearly as 'awful' (drawing 3 is awful because your opponent decides 'when' you draw 3? I still don't understand the logic) as it is in Landstill with nothing on the table. Landstill NEVER has anything on the table, at that.