Can Shahrazad be competitive?

[arkious]

At the very mention of the word Shaharazad many players will simply roll their eyes and walk away from the table. Nevertheless, for those intrepid few that remain to finish the game, the results can be quite interesting.

Over the years, I have been refining a Shaharazad deck that uses a very simple strategy:
1.   Enter a sub-game as quickly as possible.
2.   Remove as many of your opponents cards as possible from the sub-game.
3.   Return to the main game and decimate your helpless opponent.

Initially, I toyed with the idea of have multiple sub-games, but really it is not necessary. One sub-game, or at most one sub-sub-game is enough to establish a hard lock in the main game. A sub-game can typically be initiated within the first couple of turns and so the deck proves to be quite fast--usually requiring no longer to complete than a match against Stax (or one of its many variants). So without further ado here is my deck list. A sideboard will not be presented at this time--this will of course depend on your metagame, so please adjust to taste.

Sub-game generation:
4 x Shahrazad

Card Removal
4 x Extract
3 x Jester’s Cap
3 x Tormod’s Crypt
2 x Swords to Ploughshares
2 x Traumatize

Mana Acceleration:
1 x Black Lotus
1 x Mox Pearl
1 x Mox Sapphire
1 x Sol Ring

Draw Acceleration:
1 x Ancestral Recall
1 x Time Walk
1 x Timetwister
1 x Windfall
1 x Tinker
1 x Mystical Tutor

Disruption:
4 x Meddling Mage
4 x Force of Will
3 x Chalice of the Void
1 x Memory Jar

Kill Condition:
1 x Darksteel Colossus

Land
4 x Tundra
4 x Hallowed Fountain
4 x Flooded Strand
2 x Island
2 x Plains
1 x Tolarian Academy
1 x Library of Alexandria
1 x Karakas

I had initially thought that combining Flooded Strand with Shahrazad would have left me struggling for mana in the sub-games, but this was not the case and I found them to be a great addition. I am also considering putting another two Swords to Ploughshares in the main deck, but I am not sure what should come out other than Traumatize (x 2).

I have tried including 4 x Raven Guildmaster and found that he could be just devastating when opponents played with very few creatures. Regretfully, given his inconsistency, I have decided to relegate them to sideboard. I also including 4 x Mishra’s Workshop to accelerate the Jester’s Caps--which where four in number at that time--but the guys in the workshop were generally useless (as far all I could tell they just lounged about on the table, smoking cigarettes and telling lude jokes) because there were so few artifacts in the deck. I have also equivocated about adding a couple of Kataki, War's Wage, but have ultimately decided that they are sideboard material. As for mana acceleration, I was thinking about including a Mana Crypt, but I have generally found that the extra colourless mana has not been that helpful. The difficulty of using colorless mana has also brought me to exclude any off-colour moxen. Traumatize is perhaps the greatest waste of space in the deck, but when it resolves it is very satisfying. Lastly, I tried including 2 x Panoptic Mirrors and they were just devastating with Time Walk. Nevertheless, it seems that they are not worth including given how rarely the combo comes out.

If anyone has any other suggestions on how to improve this deck, or comments on its potential competitiveness--which most of you will claim is slim to none--I would welcome your insight. Thank you.

-Ark

[Moxlotus]

You do realize that the opponent can just concede the subgame right?

How do you actually plan on beating the top decks?  Meddling Mage beatdown?  Decking them?

[arkious]

You raise an excellent objection. There is no way that any opponent in their right mind would allow the sub-game to precede very far. Barring a God-hand and first turn kill in the sub-game they would just concede.

Meddling mage beatdown is an option (albeit it a poor strategy), but decking an opponent in a Vintage main game seems hopeless. Consequently, Shahrazad might as well read: “All sane opponents loose half their life points, rounding down. Effects that prevent damage may not be used to counter this loss of life.” 

To make Shahrazad competitive, it seems that a better kill condition is required than meddling mage or "Tinker for Colossuss"… Any suggestions?

-Ark

[RaleighNCTourneys]

Red/White/Blue with red for cheap burn? I really don't think its going to be competetive. You don't need Jester's Cap. A full set of Moxen plus Shrapnel blast and L. bolts are the best thing I can think of right now, but again it just seems horrible. I like Chalice and I think you should go to 4 and ditch the extracts and play with just 3 Tormod's Crypt. I really don't think you need meddling mages either. The deck has no focus right now. Try focusing the deck on a WW 10 damage burn spell and being able to wrap the game up after that with a combination of creatures and/or burn. That's the best I got.

[Zombie Shakespeare]

You might want to check out this list. It placed 26th out of 117 Day 1 at the SCG Power 9 event in Boston.

The guy who played/created it (Seymourws) posted a brief tournament report in the White Weenie in Vintage thread over on StarCityGames.com.

Hope this helps.

[M.Solymossy]

I had a guy play a Shaharazad against me @ Gencon on 2nd turn.  I laughed histerically, said "Damn that's a double White casting cost 10 damage spell"  Shuffled, took 7 cards, I conceeded, then combo'ed him out on my 2nd turn.

[vroman]

in a Richard Garfiled article, he discussed that he considered not printing shahrazad bc of this scenario. in the days before the 4of a card limit you could conceivably make this deck:

50 black lotus
50 shahrazad

and have an unstoppable (ie pre-chalice/FoW) decking engine that is guaranteed to inevitably halve away all their life down to zero in the main game and win.
it only takes 5^7 subgames.

[Purple Hat]

panoptic mirror and shahrazad were made for eachother.  why doesn't anyone believe me?  think about it, you can shahrazad EVERY TURN...for free!!!!!

[rmn]

As stated, any opponent in their right mind will just concede the subgame.  The only way to make Shahrazad any good is to make it a lose-lose situation.  In other words, make it clear that the opponent would be better off conceding, and then punish them for it.  I threw together a deck for Legacy a while ago; if I were to test it in Vintage, I would likely start with something like this:

4 Shahrazad
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Tormod's Crypt/Leyline of the Void
3 Dust to Dust
4 Orim's Chant/Abeyance

4 Savannah Lions
3 Isamaru, Hound of Konda
4 Icatian Javelineers
3 Jotun Grunt
3 Kataki, War's Wage

4 Wasteland
1 Strip Mine
1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Pearl
1 Lotus Petal
16 Plains

STP, Dust to Dust, and Tormod's Crypt remove things from the game and make the opponent want to conced subgames.  So they take some damage, which speeds up your white weenie plan like a Time Walk.  Each card is fine without Shahrazad also.  Obviously, Samurai of the Pale Curtain and Ture Believer are contenders also, and if we add enough 1W-mana creatures we could justify the use of additional Moxen.

Conceivably, we could splash a color pretty easily.  Splashing Blue might allow the power blue, Extract, and Rootwater Theif, although those last two are pretty much generally considered crap.  Splashing red looks better, as it gives Hide/Seek, burn, and more quick creature options.  (And if you want, Burning Wish -for Shahrazad!)

Hopefully it won't undermine my credibility to say that one of the attractions of playing the deck in Legacy is the addition of, you guessed it, Tivadar's Crusade to the sideboard.  Goblins?  What goblins?

[wethepeople]

Why dont you just win the original game like you are supposed to rather than just piss people off and take half their life the dumbest way imaginable?

Can Shahrazad be competitive?

no.

[arkious]

Making Shahrazad competitive is obviously difficult. So far the suggestion I like most so far is to use Shahrazad to force your opponent to concede the sub-game then use weenies and burn to kill your opponent. For this I am setting a target kill by turn 3. Here is a potential way to do it:

Sub-game generation:
4 x Shahrazad

Card Removal
3 x Swords to Ploughshares
3 x Tormod’s Crypt

Mana Acceleration:
1 x Black Lotus
1 x Mox Pearl
1 x Mox Ruby
1 x Sol Ring
1 x Mana Crypt
1 x Lotus Petal

Burn:
4 x Lighting Bolts
4 x Chain Lighting
1 x Black Vice
4 x Ankh of Mishra

Disruption:
1 x Wheel of Fortune

Weenies:
4 x Grim Lavamancer
4 x Savannah Lions
3 x Ismaru, Hound of Konda

Land
4 x Plateau
4 x Battlefield Forge
4 x Gemstone Mine
4 x City of Brass
3 x Sacred Foundry


On turn 1 you want to cast Shahrazad or otherwise get an Ankh or Weenie in play. Let us consider the worst case scenario in which we can only cast a 2/1 or 2/2 Weenie.

On turn 2 you cast Shahrazad, opponent concedes, you attack with a Weenie for 2 and you opponent down to say 8.

On turn 3, you need two burn spells and a strike with your Weenie to win.

I would have to do some extensive play testing on this to see if it would be any good. It would never make top 8, but it might just be semi-competitive…

Any thoughts?

PURPLE HAT: I agree with you that Panoptic Mirror and Shahrazad are awesome (in one construction I helped the Panoptic Mirrors out with 4 Mishra’s Workshops and was laughing when ever I had a Shahrazad or Time Walk in my hand). Regretfully, to draw the spell effect using Panoptic Mirror requires one extra turn (i.e., the turn after the Mirror comes into play). The Mirror is really hard to get out on Turn 1, even with a fully powered deck and 4 Mirrors. At best it will not come into play until Turn 2 and you will not reap the benefit until Turn 3. At which point your opponent still gets a turn in between Shahrazad casts. Consequently, I concluded that Panoptic Mirror is just not viable in competitive vintage.

[Purple Hat]

Consequently, I concluded that Panoptic Mirror is just not viable in competitive vintage.

neither is shahrazad but that's not stopping you....


heres the thing.  you have basically 3 possible situations:

1) your opponent doesn't care because you're playing white weenie and he's playing vintage.
2) your opponent cares but has a counter cus you're playing white weenie and he's playing vintage.
3) your opponent cares and doesn't have a counter.

that's assuming it's game 1.

now assuming it's game 2 and you just lost game 1 cus uh....well....you get the idea about your opponent playing vintage....you are faced with the question "do I side out my shahrazads because I CAN'T cast shahrazad and still win this match?"  and since the card is integral to your strategy you can see how this might be a problem for you. 

a turn 3 kill with little to no significant disruption and little to no protection, based around a card that 50+% of the time your opponent won't care about isn't even close to competative.

[AmbivalentDuck]

IFFFFF I was trying to make Shahrazad competitive, here's how I'd do it: gWU Stasis with a butt load of pitch counters, Chalice, and  Root Maze.

The deck wouldn't be *good*, but playing against Stasis is already painful enough: Stasis and Shahrazad together might be enough to make your opponent give him/herself brain damage banging their head against the wall.

Heck, that even makes your opponent easier to beat the next time, sounds like a strategy!

[seymourws]

Since I think I am one of the only people in recent memory to play a deck with Shahrazad in it I will lend some of my thoughts on it.

There are many ways to interact with Shahrazad and that card in particular can mess with an opponent's state of mind more than any others that I know of. I have had people concede sub-games to me after resolving a mere Tormod's crypt or Samurai of the Pale Curtain or Swords to Plowshares and that is generally only if the opponent knows the interactions with the card.

If the oppoenent does not know the card very well than you cause them to get flustered and worried over what might happen. The card often leads to play mistakes by my opponent that they probably would not have made other wise. Because you are playing the card you are much more likely to win a sub-game, especially if your opponents deck revolves around win processes that might remove cards from the game.

Not to mention it isn't that terrible of an early spell and many players will simply counter it because they do not want to deal with the card taking counters away from other threats more relevant to the currnet matchup. Assuming you win the sub-game and you are the aggro deck the clock is much greater than normal fish decks. I can honestly say I haven't lost many sub-games. The most restricting nature of the card is the WW casting cost which can be hard for a lot of decks to play because white is often a splash color in Vintage.

Much to the popular belief of people on the fourms, almost none of my oponnents have immediately conceded a sub-game.  In my particular case, they see I am playing White Weenie, they assusme I must be a scrub and should be able to beat me and then decide to play the sub-game out.  A very subtle interaction with the card from a sub-game is that by identifying the threats your opponent is playing, you can reasonably figure out what his main game plan/hand must consist of therefore you can mentally prepare yourself for how to play the turns immediately following the sub-game.  More often than not, it acts as a 10 point burn spell for 2.

Short story:  My opp. is at 4 life and has dominant board posistion.  I had earlier resolved Shahrazad and won the sub-game.  Since i first cast the spell my opponent has been making numerous errors and was in a complete state of mental disarray.  On my turn I cast Shahrazad, the kid then mana drains it, I then cast a second Shahrazad for the turn the kid immediately concedes since we were drawing near time taking him to 2.  I pass and Orim's chant him during the upkeep.  He simply draws a card and says go.  I point out he burns from drain mana and that I win and the kid came as close to crying/fighting me that I have ever seen from a magic player.

[Purple Hat]

so to paraphrase the last post:

"my opponents are bad players therefore my deck is good"

do you see the flaw in this logic?  There's another thread somewhere on this topic (maybe scg?) where someone explains that shahrazad is a good card because he was playing a game where his opponent used will, rfg'd ancestral timewalk and tinker, thus winning the subgame, then returned to the main game and realized, much to his dismay, that he didn't have good cards left in his deck.  that isn't shahrazad being good.  That is your opponent being an idiot.  People REALLY need to begin to understand this distinction.  it's a bad card, but it's a bad card that sometimes, randomly, allows your opponent to punt the game by not knowing what he's doing.  Why not play with good cards instead?

[AmbivalentDuck]

The ready-made answer is that most people *don't* know how to play against it.

Standstill was worth running in UW Fish for a while because people did idiotic things with it in play.

Relying on your opponent's incompetence is actually fair strategy as long as your opponent can't "cram."

Personally I'd rather rely on my own competence to win games, but many/most opponents will be incompetent if you choose an obscure enough area.

[Purple Hat]

you're unlikely to make top 8 if your chances of winning a game/match are dependant on your opponent screwing up that badly.  People at top tables make play mistakes, but they're not gonna make play mistakes like casting will in the subgame and RFGing their good cards.

[lordmayhem]

What happens if during the subgame you draw another Shahrazad? Do you play the sub-sub-game to deal him 10 points of burn during the sub-game or do you just sit around with a dead card in your hand?

I once played against Shahrazad. I played out the first subgame. He beat me. So I dropped to 10. Then he played out another Shahrazad. We draw our 7. He played another Shahrazad. I quit.

I believe this is the most annoying card ever. I don't think it will become competitive because of timing issues in tournaments.

[assassin]

i played against shahrazad in legacy, and game one he got me to the subgame.  i opened my hand, and the conceded.  Game two I had a weak hand he goes to the subgame, and i pull an awesome hand, kill him, he takes ten, and then beat him with 3 mogg Fanatics.  So i think smart people will play this correctly making it hard to beat competitive vintage players.

[netherspirit]

Could this see any use in a deck like TMWA that has a fast reliable clock? Seems to me that if your opponent doesn't concede you could just beat them senseless for the subgame, while that may not be ideal in terms of damage (20 damage for half their life), it means you will have nullified some of their cards.

[AmbivalentDuck]

Price of Progress does about-ish the same amount of damage that Shahrazad does (when successful).  You don't really see "burn" decks running that anymore as spells that deal damage aren't much of a clock. 

If you ran Shahrazad, it would be to abuse the interaction of the subgame with the "real" one, such as with Extract effects...or Unglued cards (at which point we're no longer talking about competitive vintage).

[BruiZar]

Price of Progress does about-ish the same amount of damage that Shahrazad does (when successful).  You don't really see "burn" decks running that anymore as spells that deal damage aren't much of a clock. 

If you ran Shahrazad, it would be to abuse the interaction of the subgame with the "real" one, such as with Extract effects...or Unglued cards (at which point we're no longer talking about competitive vintage).

How does a first or second turn 10 damage spell compare to a spell thats only shooting for 10 after turn 5, IF no basics were played, in competitive vintage?

Shahrazad is a great way to legally stall, mess up opponents game, shoot for 10 and randomly extract cards
B

[AmbivalentDuck]

The reason that they're so comparable is that they do the same thing: they hit for 6-8 damage for 2 mana without changing board positions.  Life is a resource.  It doesn't matter when it leaves, only the turn that they hit 0 matters and playing Shahrazad turn 2 stunts your board development.

An opponent who cares about Extract effects will just concede in response to any such effect and possibly win while preventing you from resolving them making their job in the main game much easier.

[Pomaxx]

stop trying to build a Sharazad-ish deck.
instead look a sharazad as a way to make your opponent test his own aggressive potential 
seriously, i think sharazad could be a nasty sideboard card for fish, TMWA or anything else able to support double white and *cough* 3-4 sideboard slots *cough*.
if you somehow win game one; tatatataaaaa. the famous Sharazad is sideboarded in to stall the nuts out of the remaining games, while 10 to the dome is nothing that should hurt fishs/TMWAs gameplan, playing more than one subgame would not hurt you anyway. dont forget to quote some arabic tales and poems during opponents turns, thought.