This would have been much funnier had the packs not been so full of good cards. I mean, look a the first pack! I just couldn't help thinking "Man, he just passed a maelstrom pulse..."
Didn't really find this one that funny but then I'm a bad drafter (so I'm stuck to suggest any better picks) I play goblins in any format I stumble upon (so no issues with rare drafting them) and into 'Metal' (which it is obvious the writer isn't as the digs are at the sterotype level).
Having said all of that I really can't see why some people are getting upset. The guy took a shot at it and has made some people laugh. Job done. Not everyone was going to like it and I'm sure it would be impossible for everyone to find one single article funny. Writing is hard enough but writing comedy is even harder.
We get tons of great articles on this site for FREE. Some are better than others but they are all FREE..... Some people seem to forget that.
That last deck would really appreciate firespout, I think. I helps the deck survive the early game, and if you reveal it off a cascade, it just pumps your Witch-Maws and Viashinos.
Ditto was expecting some sort of shroud/indestructible deck perhaps a combo Dauntless Escort w/ a persisting engine. Still it was an ok article just a little deceiving, and just 1 well times Fracturing Gust could really ruin your whole day.
This article put a smile on my face. I'm also laughing at some of the reactions to this piece. I am looking to trade ACR for a sense of humour and I'll be happy to donate that to the most bitter poster.
I can't believe I read past the first pick. I am officially stupider from reading this. This has been the biggest waste of 5 min. that I have ever experienced. I want my money back.
Well, it's certainly different. I can't see anything you could have done better this draft, but it's a shame you didn't open any good rares except that totally sweet demon.
Amusing. An interesting little challenge for yourself. I'd probably go the literal route and build a deck of indestructible creatures, of which a surprising number are in standard and all are in extended.
Keep up the good work! I still love your depth in these articles.
I would have bit on the p4 Tower garg - and in swiss (shame on you! 8-4s are for good players like you, with the benefit that mostly good drafters frequent it making each pick and game more relevant in general) people 'stay tight' with their picks, so if you can be flexible you can take advantage of their rigidity. (note - I realize that I may seem hypocritical as I play swiss sometimes - and never ever 4322 - but I don't write articles. If I did, I'd stick to 8-4s for them. Just my suggestion to you, good sir)
Actually since I read this article and started looking into putting a deck together I've been surprised how many cards I've found that look useable in Commander but are not tournament staples so the cost is quite small.
Yeah sure there are the money cards that are good in both but I'm going to try and throw a pile together and see how badly I get beat up on. I'll keep an eye on my spending (including cards that I already own) and let people know how much it's cost me to experiment and what I think of the format. I've never played multiplayer online before so it will be as much about the play experience as the deck building.
unless the other elements are: Loads of auras + random creatures that are good with auras, wrong!
I do appreciate the point though. It's like sitting down at a multiplayer table and playing steam vents and a suspended lotus bloom. Even if there aren't going to be 4 kokushos anytime soon, you still get t-bagged.
It's pretty irritating though, as i certainly can't afford to build another EDH deck, so it pretty much means i won't be playing EDH. aww.
You hit on one of what's called the 'Trifecta" Commanders: Zur, Arcum and Braids (who's now banned).
All three are very aggressive Commanders with well known decks styles which are built around them.
You might not be playing the actual "prison" cards (like Armageddon) in your Zur deck, but I'm willing to wager it probably still contains many of the other elements. And people don't want to risk it on the off chance that you truly *are* playing the competitive style Zur.
That's one of the factors you need to take into consideration before you ever sit down: "How will my choice of Commander effect the other players perception of me as a threat?"
This causes problems for me, as people just assume the contents of your deck based on the commander! I built one deck for the format, a completely casual and daft deck with Zur the enchanter as commander.
Every time I join a game, i get whacked first by pretty much everybody, as there's apparently a competitive zur deck, and they don't want to play it. So perhaps the format is self-correcting as long as you play a commander who isn't deemed too competitive, but you will often find you just get stomped based on your commander if you pick one who has shown up as being powerful in other decks.
I am the newest member of your community and I enjoyed the format a lot during my two weeks journey. I am playing a lot of different formats and I enjoy all of them, and Standard Pauper is definately one of them from now on. The Monday tournament's starting time looks fine and I will try to join it in the coming weeks.
I didn't call anyone "netdeckers", I just said that people play with netdecks and that makes them predictable. I ment nothing else nor did I mean to insult anyone.
Having said that, I also have to mention that there is still a lot of room in the format for innovation. Even though the main card I took for a ride wasen't a "new" card for the format, the deck I played was at least a little bit original or let's say that it was a new approach to it. So it is possible to try new things in the format and have fun and have success.
Partly, I've been lucky. In the drafts I've posted, I would say my mana has worked out better than average for those bases.
I also mulligan a lot when the mana isn't there, and I feel there are many players who would keep mana-shaky hands that I would toss back. Then they write it off as mana/color screw after it doesn't work out, when it was in fact a mulligan mistake.
I'll try go into more depth on mana bases in a future article, but I want a *minimum* of 7 ways to secure dense/early colors--8+ to feel good about it--5 or 6 for a third shard color, and a minimum of 3 for a single-card splash, hopefully 4.
When I make my base I start by hitting those minimums (counting, say, Igneous Pouncer as a red and a black source, or Gleam of Resistance in a heavy white deck as everything but white) then see if I have any land slots left to pad the core colors into the 8+ range.
As an avid player of standard pauper I greatly enjoyed an article giving it the credit that it's due. It is a very fun format, with a pretty healthy metagame. I also appreciated the praise you gave my decklist. However, I would still say that the DDW archetype (Clout of the dominus + UR creatures + lots of burn spells) is the one that really defines the format. I have lost to it many times, especially the somewhat infuriating play of turn one stream hopper, turn 2 clout.
You covered most of the other top archetypes of the format including the hybrid enchant decks (Shield of Valeron, Steel of the Godhead Variants), Dark Star (esper control), and Gruul (RG) Aggro. A few others that have done well in the format are: Nightsky Mimic aggro (monowhite or black/white), Strix Alchemy (Blue/Black aggro control with Parasitic Strix and Sedraxis Alchemist), U/B Faeries (this one's been kind of dormant for a while), Various Domain Aggro decks similar to the one you played above, UR Demise (a counter/burn deck with morselhoarder and mulldrifters as the only creatures), and BUG Rock (Aggro Control in blue/green/black with heavy removal and card advantage.
Also I feel calling your opponents "netdeckers" in a kind of derogatory fashion is a little bit off base. I recognized a few of the opponent's names you were playing as regulars in the PDC player run events, so they may have had a hand in a few of the archetypes becoming "netdecks" in the first place.
There are currently two player run events with the Standard Pauper format: MPDC which runs every monday at 6:00 PM GMT (2:00 PM US EST), and SPDC which runs every thursday at 12:30 AM GMT (8:30 US EST). To enter these events, simply join the "MPDC" or "SPDC" (respectively) room a little before the tournament registration begins and follow the instructions of the host. Both tournaments typically get 24+ people for 4 rounds of swiss play and a cut to Top 8. The tournaments are very relaxed, fun and a great way to play competitively for a small amount of money. Go to www.pdcmagic.com or the gleemax player run events forum(http://forums.gleemax.com/forumdisplay.php?f=590) for more information. The pdcmagic forums are a great place for the discussion of Standard Pauper deck ideas.
Again, this was a great article, and I hope to see the format gain even more steam.
PS. If you ever really want that SnB rematch, feel free to PM me for a game (SN: GreatClownPagliacci) :)
I think the number one thing I have learned so far from these walkthroughs is the importance of mana fixing and building a good mana base. I have been studying your mana bases and sometimes am confused by how well it ends up working. Is there a typical chart you use or a model of some sort that you could share as how many fixers you like to take and how you come up with your base?
This would have been much funnier had the packs not been so full of good cards. I mean, look a the first pack! I just couldn't help thinking "Man, he just passed a maelstrom pulse..."
Didn't really find this one that funny but then I'm a bad drafter (so I'm stuck to suggest any better picks) I play goblins in any format I stumble upon (so no issues with rare drafting them) and into 'Metal' (which it is obvious the writer isn't as the digs are at the sterotype level).
Having said all of that I really can't see why some people are getting upset. The guy took a shot at it and has made some people laugh. Job done. Not everyone was going to like it and I'm sure it would be impossible for everyone to find one single article funny. Writing is hard enough but writing comedy is even harder.
We get tons of great articles on this site for FREE. Some are better than others but they are all FREE..... Some people seem to forget that.
That last deck would really appreciate firespout, I think. I helps the deck survive the early game, and if you reveal it off a cascade, it just pumps your Witch-Maws and Viashinos.
If you can not take the time to read something for entertainment value, I feel bad.
However, I loved the article, thought it was funny, and ran with it. I understand that it's not everyone's cup of tea.
Neither are pirate hats. I think we reserve the right to take one day in July and be goofy.
Ditto was expecting some sort of shroud/indestructible deck perhaps a combo Dauntless Escort w/ a persisting engine. Still it was an ok article just a little deceiving, and just 1 well times Fracturing Gust could really ruin your whole day.
I'm glad I didn't give up after the first pick. This article was hilarious.
Not my sense of humor ... but the more content on this site the better ... might I suggest an EMO draft for your next article ... heh
This article put a smile on my face. I'm also laughing at some of the reactions to this piece. I am looking to trade ACR for a sense of humour and I'll be happy to donate that to the most bitter poster.
made me laugh
I also figured it would be indestructible or even a shroud deck ... which I would really find interesting.
I can't believe I read past the first pick. I am officially stupider from reading this. This has been the biggest waste of 5 min. that I have ever experienced. I want my money back.
\m/ \m/
Well, it's certainly different. I can't see anything you could have done better this draft, but it's a shame you didn't open any good rares except that totally sweet demon.
Amusing. An interesting little challenge for yourself. I'd probably go the literal route and build a deck of indestructible creatures, of which a surprising number are in standard and all are in extended.
Appreciate what you're trying to do, but this seems pretty narrow even for casual.
Keep up the good work! I still love your depth in these articles.
I would have bit on the p4 Tower garg - and in swiss (shame on you! 8-4s are for good players like you, with the benefit that mostly good drafters frequent it making each pick and game more relevant in general) people 'stay tight' with their picks, so if you can be flexible you can take advantage of their rigidity. (note - I realize that I may seem hypocritical as I play swiss sometimes - and never ever 4322 - but I don't write articles. If I did, I'd stick to 8-4s for them. Just my suggestion to you, good sir)
Actually since I read this article and started looking into putting a deck together I've been surprised how many cards I've found that look useable in Commander but are not tournament staples so the cost is quite small.
Yeah sure there are the money cards that are good in both but I'm going to try and throw a pile together and see how badly I get beat up on. I'll keep an eye on my spending (including cards that I already own) and let people know how much it's cost me to experiment and what I think of the format. I've never played multiplayer online before so it will be as much about the play experience as the deck building.
unless the other elements are: Loads of auras + random creatures that are good with auras, wrong!
I do appreciate the point though. It's like sitting down at a multiplayer table and playing steam vents and a suspended lotus bloom. Even if there aren't going to be 4 kokushos anytime soon, you still get t-bagged.
It's pretty irritating though, as i certainly can't afford to build another EDH deck, so it pretty much means i won't be playing EDH. aww.
You hit on one of what's called the 'Trifecta" Commanders: Zur, Arcum and Braids (who's now banned).
All three are very aggressive Commanders with well known decks styles which are built around them.
You might not be playing the actual "prison" cards (like Armageddon) in your Zur deck, but I'm willing to wager it probably still contains many of the other elements. And people don't want to risk it on the off chance that you truly *are* playing the competitive style Zur.
That's one of the factors you need to take into consideration before you ever sit down: "How will my choice of Commander effect the other players perception of me as a threat?"
This causes problems for me, as people just assume the contents of your deck based on the commander! I built one deck for the format, a completely casual and daft deck with Zur the enchanter as commander.
Every time I join a game, i get whacked first by pretty much everybody, as there's apparently a competitive zur deck, and they don't want to play it. So perhaps the format is self-correcting as long as you play a commander who isn't deemed too competitive, but you will often find you just get stomped based on your commander if you pick one who has shown up as being powerful in other decks.
Thanks Athos, glad you liked it.
GreatClownPagliacci, thanks for the comments.
I am the newest member of your community and I enjoyed the format a lot during my two weeks journey. I am playing a lot of different formats and I enjoy all of them, and Standard Pauper is definately one of them from now on. The Monday tournament's starting time looks fine and I will try to join it in the coming weeks.
I didn't call anyone "netdeckers", I just said that people play with netdecks and that makes them predictable. I ment nothing else nor did I mean to insult anyone.
Having said that, I also have to mention that there is still a lot of room in the format for innovation. Even though the main card I took for a ride wasen't a "new" card for the format, the deck I played was at least a little bit original or let's say that it was a new approach to it. So it is possible to try new things in the format and have fun and have success.
Thanks again for taking time and commenting.
LE
Partly, I've been lucky. In the drafts I've posted, I would say my mana has worked out better than average for those bases.
I also mulligan a lot when the mana isn't there, and I feel there are many players who would keep mana-shaky hands that I would toss back. Then they write it off as mana/color screw after it doesn't work out, when it was in fact a mulligan mistake.
I'll try go into more depth on mana bases in a future article, but I want a *minimum* of 7 ways to secure dense/early colors--8+ to feel good about it--5 or 6 for a third shard color, and a minimum of 3 for a single-card splash, hopefully 4.
When I make my base I start by hitting those minimums (counting, say, Igneous Pouncer as a red and a black source, or Gleam of Resistance in a heavy white deck as everything but white) then see if I have any land slots left to pad the core colors into the 8+ range.
As an avid player of standard pauper I greatly enjoyed an article giving it the credit that it's due. It is a very fun format, with a pretty healthy metagame. I also appreciated the praise you gave my decklist. However, I would still say that the DDW archetype (Clout of the dominus + UR creatures + lots of burn spells) is the one that really defines the format. I have lost to it many times, especially the somewhat infuriating play of turn one stream hopper, turn 2 clout.
You covered most of the other top archetypes of the format including the hybrid enchant decks (Shield of Valeron, Steel of the Godhead Variants), Dark Star (esper control), and Gruul (RG) Aggro. A few others that have done well in the format are: Nightsky Mimic aggro (monowhite or black/white), Strix Alchemy (Blue/Black aggro control with Parasitic Strix and Sedraxis Alchemist), U/B Faeries (this one's been kind of dormant for a while), Various Domain Aggro decks similar to the one you played above, UR Demise (a counter/burn deck with morselhoarder and mulldrifters as the only creatures), and BUG Rock (Aggro Control in blue/green/black with heavy removal and card advantage.
Also I feel calling your opponents "netdeckers" in a kind of derogatory fashion is a little bit off base. I recognized a few of the opponent's names you were playing as regulars in the PDC player run events, so they may have had a hand in a few of the archetypes becoming "netdecks" in the first place.
There are currently two player run events with the Standard Pauper format: MPDC which runs every monday at 6:00 PM GMT (2:00 PM US EST), and SPDC which runs every thursday at 12:30 AM GMT (8:30 US EST). To enter these events, simply join the "MPDC" or "SPDC" (respectively) room a little before the tournament registration begins and follow the instructions of the host. Both tournaments typically get 24+ people for 4 rounds of swiss play and a cut to Top 8. The tournaments are very relaxed, fun and a great way to play competitively for a small amount of money. Go to www.pdcmagic.com or the gleemax player run events forum(http://forums.gleemax.com/forumdisplay.php?f=590) for more information. The pdcmagic forums are a great place for the discussion of Standard Pauper deck ideas.
Again, this was a great article, and I hope to see the format gain even more steam.
PS. If you ever really want that SnB rematch, feel free to PM me for a game (SN: GreatClownPagliacci) :)
I think the number one thing I have learned so far from these walkthroughs is the importance of mana fixing and building a good mana base. I have been studying your mana bases and sometimes am confused by how well it ends up working. Is there a typical chart you use or a model of some sort that you could share as how many fixers you like to take and how you come up with your base?
I bet the Wizards would make a super foil (like mystic VS rare...) once day just wait... they would call it......... shimmering card