What makes cards good? Simply put, a card is good in a given format if it interacts favorably with other cards in the format, in a positive way for you or negative way for your opponent. Some cards are generally good, like Disenchant effects- they will useful a large portion of the time. Other times, a card's time to shine is dictated by the metagame that the card is thrust into- think Hearth Kami or Moment's Peace. Sometimes, a card is just awful and will never see play. However, cards themselves are not good nor bad by themselves, but rather in the context of the format.
I bring this up because very often people will look at Pauper and get excited, because they see a chance for their pet cards to shine. Sometimes this card was stellar in a Standard gone by or perhaps it was a limited standout, but they see a format with what they perceive as a reduced power level and start salivating like canines under the purview of one Pavlov. What they fail to recognize, however, is that power levels shift from format to format, and Pauper is no exception. The only reason I believe people ignore this is because they see a format full of commons, and if a common was good enough to see major play in more powerful formats, then surely it must be good enough for those lowly Paupers.
This is not the case.
|
If you have not yet figured it out, this article is inspired by the writings of one Motu, who on this very site promoted a deck based around combination of Gush and Wild Mongrel. With these two, he crafted a basic aggro-control deck that sought to win with countermagic and Gushing into a giant [D]astard. This is a fine interaction, but is far too weak to build a deck around. The question lies in why, as both these cards spent their time as potent spells in other formats.
Again, the answer lies in context, as both these cards are part of engines that do not exist in Pauper. Let us start with my favorite dog (hound?). This guy is an extremely good beater, turning extra cards into additional damage late, and is on my short list of creatures for aggressive green decks every time. However, this card did not shine because of its ability to pump out damage, but rather because it was a fantastic engine in its day for Block, Standard, and Extended. Engines are cards that help make decks go, and Mongrel was able to do that thanks to cards like Circular Logic, Nimble Mongoose, and Call of the Herd. Mongrel did not makes these cards good, rather the presence of these cards helped to make Mongrel a viable engine. The fact that Mongrel doubled as a win condition was excellent, as you did not have to waste slots on both engine and kill card, but these decks were more likely to kill with Arrogant Wurm and Werebear. |

|
Now, can Mongrel be an engine piece in Pauper? Of course it can! We do have Werebear after all, as well as a decent number of Flashback spells and cards like Fiery Temper and Basking Rootwalla. However, we lack cards like Circular Logic and game changing spells that make 6/6 creatures for a measly four mana. Without a strong enough supporting cast, Mongrel is just another piece of the puzzle. Take, for example, this version of Deep Dog:
While some cards are approximated- Rune Snag standing in for Logic, this deck plays very differently from the UG Madness decks of yore. Those decks were described as many as feeling like combo decks- you drew the cards and there was nothing your opponent could really do to stop you. It just so happened that your combo beat down as well. Here, Mongrel is a piece of a puzzle rather than the impetus for the entire deck. Yes, you can pull tricks with it, but nothing like being able to leave a blue up and Logic them for seven.
Next up on the chopping block, so to speak, is Gush. This card has a reputation- it has been restricted in Vintage and part of degenerate combo decks and dominating control stacks. It is a free way to draw two cards. Its descendant, Fathom Seer remains a popular card in certain Pauper MUC builds for the decent butt and free draw. Yet this card has not yet had a breakout performance in Pauper. Why is this?
| Once again, Gush is part of an engine, but there is far more to it than that. Two alternative cost to Gush, returning two Islands to your hand, is a significant tempo loss in Pauper. In Pauper, the loss of two turns is not as easily made up as it is in Vintage thanks to the presence of cards like the Moxen. In Extended, Gush was used as a way to fuel Quirion Dryad and reset under a Winter Orb lock in the same deck, setting up a hard to deal with monster and locking the opponent out of the game, thanks to “free” counters. The fact that Gush can also be cast for no mana investment makes it enticing to combo decks, allowing them more options during their combo turn without costing them precious mana and adding to a Storm count (if they swing that way). Combine this with the presence of Fastbond in Vintage, allowing the lands to be put back into play for a cost of damage and it becomes apparent why the card sees play in the most eternal of formats. Pauper lacks these pieces, and unlike Mongrel lacks analogues. Gush, in Pauper, is a draw spell that is unwieldy thanks to its high mana cost and lack of support cards. |
 |
Let us take a look at a inverse example. A card that Pauper decks must be prepared for is Rush of Knowledge. In Pauper, when combined with the Affinity mechanic this sorcery gives a deck access to the most potent draw package in the format. While other spells are cheaper and perhaps more efficient for other decks, Rush shines in Pauper because of the environment in which it exists. I do not believe that any high level deck out side of Pauper and Limited formats have ever run Rush, simply because there are both better things to do in those formats and the formats lack the necessary requirements to make Rush strong (they have better removal and Affinity has better ways to kill you than to draw seven).
I bring up these points not only because they are fresh in my mind from a forum debate, but because Pauper has been given access to spells that are seeing serious constructed play at the Pro Tour level: Cascade spells.
Cascade is an absurdly good mechanic, allowing you more options and increased potency for the spells you cast. The downside to this is that for what they do (by themselves), the Cascade spells are all a tad expensive (in Pauper at least; Bloodbraid Elf is savage no matter how you slice it). In other formats, Cascade spells are able to swing games with their free offerings and generate significant card advantage. This is because Cascade helps to break the investment rule in an interesting way: you are getting two spells for the price of one, but you are not sure what free spell you will be getting unless you are very precise in deck construction (see Swans Combo).
What does this mean for Pauper? Simply put, due to the cost of the Cascade spells, they are only as good as the worst card in your deck. This means that when building with cascade you must ask yourself “Am I willing to pay this much for the effect of the card and the worst card in my deck?” Some decks with uniformity of mana cost will embrace Cascade since they will understand exactly what they are getting themselves into when they start flipping over the top cards.
So, from worst to first:
Stormcaller's Boon: While the cost is nice, this enchantment comes tacked with a high mana cost. In any deck that would likely want to run it, you would flip over a smaller creature that could not benefit from flying immediately or perish the thought, an Oblivion Ring with no permanents on the other side of the board. Turn four for aggressive decks tend to be critical, and spending it to tap out in Blue-White for this card just seems bad. I mean, what happens when you flip over Mana Leak?
Deny Reality: Suffers from the same shortcomings as its aforementioned cousin- namely it is blue. Even more, the decks best suited to use its ability are those that would seek to get ahead on tempo on curve, meaning a good chance that the deck would run mana acceleration cards. Let me tell you from experience, flipping over a Prismatic Lens on turn four is, well, not exciting. To make the front side of Deny Reality good, you would have to run cards that make it bad.
Demonic Dread: This is a card that has been moving up in my estimation now that I have begun tinkering with BR Tokens. In that deck, removal was often used to clear out a blocker. Dread has the option to do that on a key turn and also flip over more damage or combo pieces. The fact that it is tied for the lowest cost of Cascade spells means that you have a greater chance of knowing what you will be flipping over when you move this card from your hand to the Stack. This is a card to watch for when aggressive Rakdos decks spring up, as I think it has potential in metas that favor blocking.
| Captured Sunlight: Build your own (Loxodon Heirarch). This card has moved up in my estimation for one very important matchup: the Sliver mirror. As these matches are often drawn out races, the ability to get a Loxodon Sliver seems mighty enticing to me, as it can set back the opponent a turn while advancing your own board. Four life is a non-insignificant amount in Pauper, and tacking that on to a potential 3/3 creature seems mighty good in this format. Slivers is another deck where flipping over just about anything (again, in the mirror) will result in good things for you. I could also see this mattering against Red decks, but not nearly as much. All this means that the last, and therefore best Cascade card for Pauper is... |
 |
Violent Outburst: Okay, first things first: This is the only instant Cascade spell we have. This is awesome because it can give you the opportunity to get a surprise blocker, an end step flash creature, or Duress dodge. The ability to deal extra damage is nice, but it is the colors in which this card exists that makes it shine. Red Green aggressive decks tend to have very tight and redundant curves and can easily be build to top out at Outburst. Thus, any flip of Cascade will net you either burn or a creature. Now, if the worst card in your deck is an Incinerate, are you willing to pay 1RG for three damage plus a micro-Overrun? I sure as hell am. In fact, here is a deck attesting to that fact:
Speaking with Will, he loves the deck, but thinks it would be much better without Outburst. This deck is a blast to play as no matter what you do with Outburst, it is going to translate into more damage. It is often right to cast this one pre-combat, as it can clear out a blocker or provide another beast with which to swing. Colossal Might is another card that can just swing games. I thought this card would make a splash in Pauper, as four damage for two mana is a fantastic deal. However, this card is a blowout. Four damage chunks are hard to come by in Pauper, as the best way to go about it usually involves sacrificing two Mountains at the end of the game. Might,while more fragile than Fireblast, is slightly more flexible in this deck as it can help to save creatures from dying and deal extra damage. Combine that with an absurdly low cost, and the ability to Cascade into it (for a whopping five [FIVE{5}]!) damage, and, well, you know. Extend the hand and on to the next round.
Keep slingin' commons-
-Alex
9 Comments
Im taking your deck, but making it standard. I dont really like classic, and I dont own any Lightning Bolts. I had a dozen in paper years ago, but thats another story. 5 mountains to you.
I don't know, I think the article is interesting and your reasoning is good, but the destruction of Motu's column was a bit petty. His article certainly missed the mark, because of the lack of game descriptions and matchup analysis, but the jury is still technically out on Gush. It's just Motu (and anyone else who thinks the card has potential)'s job to prove the card good with actual results. I know you were trying to write about synergy, but in the end you just ended up talking about how Gush is not good and can't be good, and I think that's bringing it a bit too far - it just ends up being an attack on his opinion.
In fact, if you take out the half of the article you have dedicated to bashing Gush, you end up with a pretty short article on Cascade and a deck that while I'm quite sure is good, doesn't seem like it would be all that different with Fireblasts instead of the outbursts, and possibly more consistent.
I've been having success with a very similar deck. I run scuzzback scrappers instead of fanatics as they turn on blades of which I run 8. The mongrel gets replaced by werebear as I also run spark elementals to cascade into, so I never have a problem with threshold. Lastly Volcanic Hammer instead of colossal might as Pump is weak to removal. Only entered one 2-man, but beat MUC. And have gone 4-2 in tournament practice with a close loss to slivers and a flat out butt whooping by a B/R aggro cascading with demonic dread.
I wish I had known you were interested in writing an article like this. I think we could have done a two-part article point-counterpoint style on Mongrel and/or Gush or any number of other cards after slinging a set of matches on MTGO that would have been interesting.
you can still do that article.
sounds good.
I've tried R/G aggro in paper pauper at my store (throwing in all stars like Blastoderm of course), and I just can't get the deck to perform. I would have loved to see some testing results for this build.
there was certainly a time when rush was favored in constructed, it oscillated for a long time, I believe even making type 2 affinity decks, in the mirror in block it was amazing as your dorks could trade with their dorks and rush won you the attrition war, certainly there was a longer period where affinity was played without it especially when it hit extended, but rush was a specter to be afraid of for a long long time as it is now in pauper constructed.
I think your analysis of cascade is correct; Violent Outburst is the best common. Here's an Alara Block deck I'm interested in:
Land:
8 Forest
8 Mountain
4 Firewild Borderpost
1cc:
4 Wild Nacatl
4 Magma Spray
2cc:
4 Jund Hackblade
4 Naya Hushblade
4 Rip-Clan Crasher
4 Dragon Fodder
4 Colossal Might
3cc:
4 Ember Weaver
4 Branching Bolt
4 Violent Outburst
The mana base is a little shaky (with no turn 1: Terramorphic Expanse option in block).
...regarding this deck and other fast decks like it running Borderposts over Terramorphic Expanse. Let's say it's your opening turn and you've got a borderpost and another one drop creature. for speedy decks like this, is it better to set up your board w/ the creature in order to attack next turn or to delay the creature drop and set up your mana position w/ the borderpost? I'm just getting back into the game and little things like this are hard to figure out after being away for so long.
My gut is telling me to drop the border post since delaying a turn one 1/1 creature isn't that big of a deal.
Thanks for the Pauper Decks and the website in general, it's one of the main reasons why i'm getting back into the game online after being away since Odyssey Block.