Mattblog! for all things Matt

[Harlequin]

An interesting way to have newer player's learn is to play a few games with "No inner Dialog."  Basically, both players get into the mentality that no thought can be thought without saying it allowed.  This stratigy doesn't work great if one deck is designed to be really tricky (like a counterspell deck), but even then it has some merit. 

I think this is a better aproach, then helping a new player over thier shoulder in another game.  From my experiance with this, the new player can get really flustered and mildly insulted when you sugest better lines of play.  And stuff tends not to stick.

With you and them both just babbling your thoughts, the new player isn't worried so much about the 'best' play. At the same time they become consciously aware when they are making a play "because they don't know what else to do."  You also get a chance to sorta covertly suggest good lines of play.  By saying (to your example) something like: If I attack this turn, and you sac 1 guy to trade, I'll be ok because we both lose a major player.  But if you sac 2 guys I'll be down a major guy and you won't.  Now I have 4 cards in hand, so I'm putting the burden of choice on you.  I'll attack and  you'll have to make a decission based on whether you think I have another major dude in hand or not. 

Now you've put the right question in thier mind, without telling them how to play.  Now they still might do the 'wrong' play but you've cleaverly made niether play absolutly incorrect.  Because they can justify thier choice by saying "well I think you DO have (or don't have) that other creature so I'm going to do this..."

As far as hand's go, You don't nessiarily need to dictate what you draw, but keep them thinking about it.  Like if you draw a peice of removal, you could say something like "I can afford to wait on this right now."  The better they are, and the more they learn/remember about your deck they better they will get at understanding what these cryptic statements mean.  That is a great feeling, because eventually that will translate back into the 'normal games' as they start to learn to vissualize what you drew based on what you play and don't play.


At first it feels really awkward and very 'forced' but as the game gets rolling its almost hard to -stop- just rattling off your thoughts. 

[wiley]

He's gotten much better about strict mechanical things; he rarely forgets to put his chump blockers into Spawning Pit, or miss a Scavenging Drake counter; the only thing he still fucks up regularly is tapping his basics before his Orzhov Basillica. What he needs help with now is stuff like: do I play out Teysa this turn and Bone Splinters that fatty next turn, or the other way around? Etc. He doesn't have that instinctive sense of ebb and flow that defines Magic, doesn't know when to take a control deck into "aggro-control mode", and can't yet easily figure out Who's The Beatdown.

A technique that I have found quite useful for advancing someones game after they begin to have a good grasp of the mechanics of the game is to take two decks that both you and the opponent know quite well and explain the expected game plan of each deck in reference to the other (this is very important, so it is good to play two decks that can swing the games fairly well and fairly consistently) and then play a game.  Once you have the upper hand (read: established your overall plan) explain any nuances you tried in order to get where you are.  Finish the game and explain what you did again.

Now switch decks and repeat the whole process.  This is how I was taught and how I have taught other players and it has always show speedy and remarkable effects.  I suppose this is very much like Harlequin's way of teaching, so you may try the "No inner Dialog" rule along with switching decks.  The key here is to show them the many ways that two decks can interact by showing them the ebb and flow of your deck and then having them try to recreate it as you show them the ebb and flow of their deck, intrinsically teaching "who's the beatdown" in the process.

[Matt]

So I'm gonna go all Andy Rooney/William Safire* on you now.

When did it become unfashionable for Magic players to use auxiliary verbs? There's these weird verbal constructions I hear from time to time:

"Clearly you take the Skyfisher."
"Oh yeah, I definitely block here."

When what is meant is, "you SHOULD take the Skyfisher" or "I WOULD definitely block here." I don't get this at all. Is it imported from some other language that doesn't have these kinds of verbs? Is it a consequence of the natural desire to appear competent in the face of uncertainty? Do Magic players just like bossing people around?

Kids these days!





*Now try not to think about Rooney/Safire slash fiction.

[The Atog Lord]

I blame a lack of teachers' showing their students the difference between the Subjunctive and the Indicative.

[Godder]

I loves me some subjunctive mood as much as the next guy, but English has very few uses for it (unlike French, where it's still a fully functioning part of the language).

On the subject at hand, maybe they don't like the conditional any more?

[Matt]

So when is Wizards going to get around to printing a cantrip Edict? And which would you prefer:

It Gets the Hose Again
1BB, instant
Target player sacrifices a creature. Draw a card.

-or-

Walk the Plank
2B, sorcery
Target player sacrifices a creature. Draw a card.

???

[The Atog Lord]

Those are both really good for Limited. Perhaps too good. I think it would have to cost BBB or 2BB. Or as an alternative, how about:

Walking the Plank Constantly 1BB
Target opponent sacrifices a creature.
If he or she does, you draw a card.

[Matt]

Those are both really good for Limited. Perhaps too good. I think it would have to cost BBB or 2BB. Or as an alternative, how about:

Who said they would be commons? They're fine as uncommons. No need to fuck up a perfectly good, clean design.

I'd always take Marsh Casualties or Incremental Blight over either of them (in their respective formats), and possibly Infest too. If the format has a bunch of tokens and/or pacifism/thirst effects, it might not even be that good. In many ways, Gatekeeper of Malakir is the same: more restrictive mana, yes, but since it's stapled to a creature, there are multiple ways to reuse it at common.

In Ravnica, say, this would have been mediiocre. Strong against some decks, but very sad against Selesnya and Simic, which often had expendable guys sitting around (saprolings and graft guys, respectively). And not amazing against Golgari's dredge guys.

Anyway, there's a reason I didn't post this in the CCF: I don't need help modifying the design, I want to know which of the proposed cards you would be more interested in.

[The Atog Lord]

Alright. Then I'd prefer 1BB. First, being BB is common to all of those uncommon limited bombs you mention. Second, killing an Akroma before you get hit and drawing a card would be awesome.

[Matt]

Question 1: How different would the game be if you dew your hand, mulliganed, and THEN rolled the die to see who decides who goes first? Apart from making Gemstone Caverns even worse, I mean.

Followup Question: same question, but whoever wins the die roll MUST go first and cannot elect to draw first.

[Anusien]

Two small notes on the subject.

In some matchups, like Jund Mirrors at PT: Honolulu, it was correct to draw first.
At some PT, Wizards did an analysis of match wins versus drawing first, and found that 57% of people who drew first won the match.

[Matt]

I love Magic thought experiments. I was fascinated reading the "slowest deck" thread a couple years back.

And now, a Challenge! Find the best deck in the following format:

-normal starting game conditions. 7 cards, 20 life, 1 land per turn, etc.
-60 card minimum.
-Your deck may include any number of basic lands or snow-covered basic lands.
-Your deck may only include 1 copy of 1 card besides basics!
-sideboards exist but they are still subject to the above rule, so Wishes are pretty useless.
-Sharazhad is banned, because that card can never be banned in enough formats. No Unglued or Unhinged either.

Go! Is this even an answerable question? Who knows! Give it a try!

[Anusien]

Shivan Hellkite
Commandeer
Banefire
Desertion
Uyo, Silent Prophet


All seem like strong contenders.

[Matt]

Commandeer/Desertion is a draw (well, a coinflip) since the opponent can just choose to never play their spell.

Sadistic Sacrament seems like the deck to beat.

[Anusien]

Are we assuming full knowledge of the opposing deck?

If you can mulligan Commandeer/Desertion and mulliganing down farther than the other guy becomes a winning strategy.

[Matt]

Are we assuming full knowledge of the opposing deck?

If you can mulligan Commandeer/Desertion and mulliganing down farther than the other guy becomes a winning strategy.

No, we are not assuming that, and yes, you can mulligan.

Desertion loses to Quagnoth/Banefire, Commandeer loses to Sprout Swarm...and both lose to Urza's Factory (which is more or less strictly superior to Mishra's Factory). But those three lose to Seismic Assault.

Sadistic Sacrament becomes a game of mulligan chicken and luck.

Some more interesting ideas:
Bloodghast/Nether Spirit
Land's Edge
the epic spells from Saviors
Gaea's Blessing
Chronatog
Kjeldoran Outpost

[Anusien]

Commandeer doesn't necessarily lose to Sprout Swarm.  Sure they can just cast it once on turn 2.  But you'd feel really awkward if the opponent was on any guy then.

[zeus-online]

Glen elendra archmage
Voidmage prodigy

Glen elendra beats the sacrament deck, if you draw and play it before he does.

Voidmage prodigy beats and if he draws and plays his card, you can atleast counter it.

Edit: Must have been stoned when i wrote this....That is so easy to discover that it suggests conspicuousness or little need for perspicacity in the observer. it's not worth countering sacrament if you've already drawn your 1 card. But my point still remains: It can counter the opponents 1 card.

[Anusien]

Willbender might be a better version of the Commandeer deck.

[Matt]

Commandeer doesn't necessarily lose to Sprout Swarm.  Sure they can just cast it once on turn 2.  But you'd feel really awkward if the opponent was on any guy then.

No, I play it with buyback. The opponent can have 1 token, sure. Then I get the Swarm back and make a couple dozen more tokens and win.

Glen elendra beats the sacrament deck, if you draw and play it before he does.

Literally any creature beats Sadistic Sacrament if you draw it first, and a drawn Desertion beats it as long as the SS player doesn't draw and play SS before turn 5. I guess if you go up to 75 cards you can always beat SS but then you give up points versus every other deck.

The majority of games in this format are going to be blowouts, where one player draws their spell, and the other doesn't. But there's equal chance of that happening on both sides. So to gain an edge, you need to win the games where you both draw your spell.

[TopSecret]

I was going to say that Pride of the Clouds is pretty badass,
since it can evade counters, board destruction, and chump large creatures while flying overhead,
but it loses to any larger guy with evasion.

I don't know if there's an optimal answer.
This strikes me as more rock paper scissors than anything else,
since the player who will win the most matches is the one who succeeds in anticipating what the opponent(s) will be playing.

That said, I'd totally enter a tournament for this.
Also, the sideboarding strategies would be hilarious.

This might be better as something that uses the EDH rule where you get to set your selected special card aside.

Either way, I think there is potentially a fun casual format that could be made by tweaking around with this idea.

[Anusien]

Commandeer doesn't necessarily lose to Sprout Swarm.  Sure they can just cast it once on turn 2.  But you'd feel really awkward if the opponent was on any guy then.

No, I play it with buyback. The opponent can have 1 token, sure. Then I get the Swarm back and make a couple dozen more tokens and win.

Oh right, you gain control of the spell, so if it was kicked, it stays kicked.  You're right.

[zeus-online]

Here's a few cards that might do nicely aswell:
Martial coup - Beats their creature (unless it's indestructible or has regenerate)
Draining whelk - Counters their threat and beats for the win.

[Matt]

Decree of Justice might be better still, as it's uncounterable.

Worldheart Phoenix and an even split of land types is probably very good. Progenitus is actually just hilarious!

DubDub suggests Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle. Uncounterable, but neither as fast nor as versatile as Kjeldoran Outpost, which kills one turn faster (and several turns faster if it's in the opening hand or a few cards down), and can block.

Fanning the Flames is borderline-playable.

Black Vise seems very good (and Viseling slightly better!). Only bad matchup is Seismic Assault and Sprout Swarm (If one player draws their card earlier than the other, that player wins. If you both draw your card at the same time, Swarm wins unless it's before turn 5, and the later the game goes, Swam can actually draw their card a turn or several turns later than Vise and still win).

[Anusien]

I'm assuming the optimal strategy is to mulligan until you find your card or go to 1 trying.  Black Vise seems terrible if you can mulligan.

[Matt]

I'm assuming the optimal strategy is to mulligan until you find your card or go to 1 trying.  Black Vise seems terrible if you can mulligan.

You're still highly unlikely to find it, and highly unlikely to find it in the first 7. The average game should be, what, 20ish turns each? More? All but one of which are draw-go?

[thorme]

Could go all in with Countryside Crusher.dec and mulligan all the way down shooting for the turn 4 kill every time you can get him in your opener and they aren't playing a cheap blocker.

[Anusien]

Awesome idea, except he would deck you.

[thorme]

Awesome idea, except he would deck you.

You mean draw comes after upkeep?  Yeah, I know how to play this game...    



Matt - You should run a 3-Card-Blind type of tourney for this format where each deck of 59 basics + 1 card starts with that card + 6 basics in hand for each game.  Would be interesting.

[Harlequin]

You can't play Plangalcial Wurm when they are Sad Sac'ing You can you?

If you could, then PGW would be a hate deck for Sad Sac ^_^

... oh wait, actually Sac Sac is a terrible deck.  You are force mulled to 3 no matter what.  If you happen to draw Sac in the first 7 cards, you lose if you keep.   Because if your opponent draws their card, they will undoubtably kill you before they get decked, and your Sac is worthless.  If they don't draw thier card, they are mulling to 1 (to find thier card) meaning the sac deck is going to get decked first (even after the -3 cards).