How to make a decent deck.

by angus_02 on 06 June 2012

Main Deck (0 cards)

No cards found.

There's no cards here. Maybe it's a budget deck?

Sideboard (0 cards)

No sideboard found.

The owner of this deck hasn't added a sideboard, they probably should...

Submit a list of cards below to bulk import them all into your sideboard. Post one card per line using a format like "4x Birds of Paradise" or "1 Blaze", you can even enter just the card name by itself like "Wrath of God" for single cards.


Deck Description

I'm starting to get sick of all the decks that are just a bunch of "good" cards smashed together.
So I'm going to explain this very carefully.

For a deck to be good it needs to be consistant. The reason it needs to be consistant is so that it will be predictable for you. When you really need a certain card, it shouldn't be more than a couple draws away. That's why you increase the number of certain cards. That doesn't mean you put in one of everything else. Far from it. Quite often, good decks will have very few different cards in it. I don't mean to say that because your deck has 60 cards, and very little variety between said cards will make your deck good, or because a deck is good it will have always have those things.

For a deck to be as consistant as possible, it contain the minimum number of cards allowed, which is 60. Now 60 cards does not mean 20 land and a bunch of cards that could go together well. Pick a combo, a mechanic, or something; and stick to it. Again, in the sake of consistancy, your going to want 2-4 (depending on their costs or if they're legendary or not) of your best cards, the ones that will win you the game (A.K.A win-cond. or win condition) then you will normally want 2-4 of 'support' cards, cards that will support your win condition; meaning cards that will allow you to get that winning combo, or whatever, out as fast as possible.

Then you fill out the mana curve. That is, the number of cards at the lower CMCs (Converted Mana Cost) should be much higher than the number of higher CMC cards. If your win condition has a CMC above 5, you may only want 2, because it will end up being a dead draw ( a draw that can't be used for quite a while) and will clog up your hand until you can cast it.

The vast majority of your deck should be at or below a CMC of 5. Ideally, the cards with very low CMCs (1 or 2) should take up the largest portion of your deck, the second most being at CMCs of 3, and so on. This will insure that your game will flow smoothly from one turn to the next, and help prevent getting "mana screwed." Depending on the format, the curve can be more or less dramatic. Legacy tournament matches rarely reach turn 7, but standard matches usually gets way past turn 7. So a usual legacy deck will contain almost entirely cards with CMC's of 3 and under; unless the deck has a way to get out the higher cost cards, as fast as possible.


The sideboard exists for a reason, use it. Now, a sideboard can contain a maximum of 15 cards.
The point of having a side board is to "side in" (exchange cards from your main deck and cards from your sideboard) in between matches, so that your deck will be better able to compete against your opponent's deck. To effectively "side in" you take out cards that aren't working or aren't being useful, and put in cards that will be effective.

To build a good sideboard, look at the kind of decks you will be playing against. Decide which decks will be most effective against your deck, and decide upon 15 cards (total) that will help swing the tides of battle. For example, if a deck that plays a lot of artifacts will be extremely effective against your deck, you may want to put cards like shatter or naruralize into your sideboard. Under normal circumstances, a sideboard shouldn't contain 4 of the same card, as it is taking up a spot another card could use.

Now that you have learned the basics, PLEASE refrain from just smashing a bunch of singleton rares together into a 80 card deck and hoping it works. Use probability to your advantage. Don't make the probability of drawing the one card you need 1/60 or however many cards are left in your deck.

Focus on specifically how you are going to win, not on all the different combos or lord effects that you can cram into a single deck. Yes it COULD work out in your favor, but probability says that my 60 card deck of only 10-15 different cards is going to do what it,s supposed to more often than your 80 card deck with 40-50 different cards in it.

But always remember to have fun.

Woo! Front page. 9/13

Deck Tags

  • Other...

Deck at a Glance

Social Stats

61
Likes

This deck has been viewed 32,378 times.

Mana Curve

Mana Symbol Occurrence

00000

Card Legality

  • Not Legal in Standard
  • Not Legal in Modern
  • Not Legal in Vintage
  • Not Legal in Legacy

Deck discussion for How to make a decent deck.

real shit

4
Posted 06 June 2012 at 14:03

Permalink

Feel free to share this explanation with other newbies. It will help them, and I won't have to see so many decks that are just a bunch of singletons.

0
Posted 07 June 2012 at 02:19

Permalink

Would you care to take a look at the decks I have posted and see if I'm heading in the right direction and, perhaps, provide some extra pointers?

0
Posted 14 September 2012 at 02:00

Permalink

Thank you, i hate seeing decks that look like EDH decks with 75 cards!!! Its just dumb, no winning factor whatsoever to them.

0
Posted 20 June 2012 at 07:19

Permalink

Agreed at most of what you said but I kinda' didn't like when you said:
"CMCs of 1 should take the largest portion of your deck"
I don't know but most of the time CMCs 1 just provides a card advantage for you (like discard, destroy, enabler spells) and most of the time a lone defender. I usually use 8(at max) spells with CMC 1 on my deck.

Cards with CMCs 2(always a good build up), 3 & 4 (both provides the drastic changes in the game) should be enough to make your win.

1
Posted 15 July 2012 at 16:27

Permalink

This is just a guideline. Different decks will have different mana curves. I'm not saying that you have to follow everything this as if they are the laws of physics.

0
Posted 12 September 2012 at 23:03

Permalink

I wouldn't say 1cmc should make up the largest portion.

At the start 1cmc is great but later in the game, too many single mana spells will have you emptying your hard too quickly. You need more bang. I try to run around 8 usually and then more 2s and 3s.

You should also include how to work out how many of each card in the deck

1 copy - If I find it great but doesn't matter or I can search for it ie Winning combo card
2 copies - I'd like to find one or Important card I can search for plus a backup if countered
3 copies - I really need to find one but two in my opening hand would cripple me
4 copies - I really need to find one and I'm laughing with a couple in my opening hand.

1
Posted 14 September 2012 at 09:03

Permalink

Mashitta has deleted this comment.

Posted 14 September 2012 at 13:57

Permalink

I left my comment 2 months ago. It just sounded as if they are the laws of physics when there's still that "CMCs of 1 should take the largest portion of your deck" written.

Then you removed that part so that you can turn things around as if it didn't exist. -_- This is a good guideline but you really need to accept mistakes and learn from it instead.

0
Posted 14 September 2012 at 14:07

Permalink

@angus_02 The fact that you said that people don't need to follow everything in this doesn't make it a good guideline after all. Doesn't make sense when you're just pointing out black from white. Good luck with that Captain Obvious.

0
Posted 14 September 2012 at 18:38

Permalink

This is more of a generalization. You would normally have to have a rare at least to pull off serious power plays at four mana such as recently released Sublime Archangel (Mythic), which is a four mana win condition when used properly.

0
Posted 14 September 2012 at 21:12

Permalink

EXACTLY! ^^

0
Posted 15 September 2012 at 13:47

Permalink

It really depends on the deck you are playing... some decks require bigger bombs at the end, while most of the decks i like to play have the mana curve cut off at 4cmc. (not the biggest fan of big cards).

Merfolk are a great example of this, incredibly powerful with the highest cmc being 3 in my deck.
another strong deck that thrives on cmcs of 1 and 2 is this sacrifice deck:
http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=385556

Again, magic is very versatile, so it depends on the deck. but these guidelines are for new players, and as such it helps newbies learn the game to have low cost, consistent decks.

0
Posted 18 September 2012 at 17:28

Permalink

I like seeing a post like this, even though i've gotten a few years of MTG experience under my belt since first joining this particular website, it's nice to see people giving tips to the newest crop of magic players, who may not know how to make their own deck quite yet, and just cram their best cards in with a starter pack they bought because the spoiler card looked cool.
+1 for the post, accurate throughout also, so +1 again.

0
Posted 16 July 2012 at 18:29

Permalink

...and as long as i'm at it, could you use your ever-so precise good deck criteria and critique my deck if you have some time?
http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=360297 Thanks!

0
Posted 17 July 2012 at 01:21

Permalink

I have an idea u might like for m13. its a mono-black that still has a few cards from previous block but i know what i will replace when it rotates. Its control-ish but plays big creatures fast with lots of card draw.

http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=362155

Besides lacking a sideboard wich i will be adding soon, what do you think of this?

0
Posted 16 July 2012 at 22:58

Permalink

Beowulf85 has deleted this comment.

Posted 11 September 2012 at 10:48

Permalink



Generally I would agree with all of this advice, it should be noted there are exceptions though.

Firstly, you can add mana acceleration to your deck to play higher CMC cards sooner.
Secondly, you can tutor for cards you might need, thus if you are running 4-8 different kinds of tutors, having 1-2 of each kind of card might be acceptable and will allow your deck more versatility.
Thirdly, you can cheat cards in to play using other card abilities.
Fourthly, you can add lots of card draw.

I currently have a front page deck, Fat Fat Fatties, that breaks most of your rules and wins fairly consistently by doing that things I just said. However I will concede that if you are going to break one of the great rules you listed, you do need to compensate for it.

My front page deck:

http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=381549

0
Posted 11 September 2012 at 10:49

Permalink

Sometimes decks make it to the front page, not because they're particularly good, but because it has gotten that many suggestions... not saying yours is bad, I haven't looked at it yet.

0
Posted 14 September 2012 at 02:00

Permalink

What amuses me, is that those crappy decks are always tagged "Tournament Quality". Really? I've been playing Magic for like 10 years, and I hesitate to say that something is "Tournament Quality".

My take is, screw them and let them learn Magic the hard way. But I like what you're doing, so good job.

2
Posted 11 September 2012 at 12:25

Permalink

I haven't labeled any of my decks as "tournament quality" for that reason. To me, tournament quality decks should consistently win in three turns or less.

I don't like tournament quality decks. My decks are casual, fun, combo/creature based decks.

1
Posted 13 September 2012 at 14:44

Permalink

I completely agree with you. Calling your deck "Tournament Quality" is essentially labeling your deck "Good Deck". People should choose deck types that actually tell what the deck is like (ex. Aggro, Control, Delver, etc.)

0
Posted 13 September 2012 at 23:14

Permalink

I've labeled quite a few decks of mine tournament quality but there's also a gap between a tounement standard deck and a legacy deck I wish they had two categories one for format then one for deck type (delver control aggro etc)

0
Posted 14 September 2012 at 01:05

Permalink

3 turns or less is Vintage/Legacy stuff.

They tend to start banning shit when standard turns into turn 3 who draws the wincon first tournaments.

1
Posted 14 September 2012 at 02:01

Permalink

This is something I'm guilty of, yet I feel my decks are tournament quality seeing as, well, Most tournaments I play and do good. Haha

I probably should label my decks more appropriately because the term is very broad.
For example, my Sneaky Blinkster deck is primarily token building/aggro. Labeling it as such would be a good description, but often enough I just toss the Tourny tag on muh decks.

http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=382445

0
Posted 15 September 2012 at 15:38

Permalink

I Label mine Tournament Quality when i can get more than a 90% Win rate playing Double Goldfish. (Where i roll Two dice, and on a 1 i destroy my most valuable creatre, 2 Artifact, 3 lost 10 life, etc etc)
When it can handle something that harsh happening every turn, It is worthy of being called Tournament Quality. Notice how very few of them i have (One...Just One, out of 43 Decks) LOL

0
Posted 17 September 2012 at 04:49

Permalink

i only label decks tournament quality if ive played them in an actual tourney and have placed in top 10 or are variations of tourney decks that i have made from top decks in the current meta.

0
Posted 17 September 2012 at 22:42

Permalink

bump to front page :)

0
Posted 14 September 2012 at 00:06

Permalink

This is great! Can you post this on the forums also?

Also, a consider labeling a deck Tournament Quality to be really arrogant. The deck is usually not as good as you first think it is, and if I have any decks labeled as so, it was a misclick. I hate seeing 80 card singleton decks landless as Tournament Quality :/

1
Posted 14 September 2012 at 02:35

Permalink

One thing I noticed is that you've stated

"Now, a sideboard can contain a maximum of 15 cards."

While this is true, it's also a tad misleading. You CAN have 15 cards in your sideboard, but if you don't, you MUST have 0. It's either a full sideboard or an empty one. The rules don't allow for anything in between.

1
Posted 14 September 2012 at 03:37

Permalink

Which is why when i make a deck, I just ignore the sideboard. If im going to put anything in it, i just put in what i need and cant be arsed to fill it. I know its lazy, but i only put in what i NEED, i can toss in more copies of cards already in the deck if i need to fill it.

0
Posted 21 September 2012 at 02:50

Permalink

Why don't you just get a blog?

0
Posted 14 September 2012 at 06:13

Permalink

This stuff is pretty damn basic. Hopefully it gets into the heads of some of the people on here.

0
Posted 14 September 2012 at 08:45

Permalink

I read lots of posts like this one and tried to follow the "rules".
This is the result:
http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=380933

Would someone please give me some advice?

0
Posted 14 September 2012 at 09:49

Permalink

i have a black experimental deck would appreciate if you would check it out ?? thanks

0
Posted 14 September 2012 at 16:07

Permalink

Include your decks link when you post, and your much more likely to get some feedback. :] You don't seem knew so it might just be something you forgot. haha

0
Posted 14 September 2012 at 20:43

Permalink

First off, consistency is a term used by bad players to describe how a play was suppose to go but didn't. It's a fail safe term, or otherwise, a term poor Magic players use to display that they are a poor deck builder rather than a player, as if there was really a difference in the first place, and as if it made a difference to how one loses a game of magic.

It's an almost clever way to pull off the ideological play theory of how any one deck should be played at any one time, but the player themselves making "luck" seem a larger part of the game than it is in an attempt to cover there own butt for lack of being able to adapt to the decks current draws.

Secondly, just because a card is good doesn't mean four should be played under any circumstance. This is a generalization that a lot of player I feel make a mistake on often. The biggest factor is casting cost, and how fast your deck covers the mana curve to play it. I don't have time to explain my ideas on this, or delve into examples, though that is a pretty simple enough statement that could be elaborated on.

1
Posted 14 September 2012 at 20:26

Permalink

So, "You're wrong, but I haven't the reasoning or time to say why"

Solid argument

0
Posted 15 September 2012 at 07:28

Permalink

Considering there are several Pro players that have written books on the subject of deck construction, yes, that sounds about right. It's a pretty solid argument. Do you want to write a book on how play, and construct magic decks? If that's what you do with your time I don't judge.

I post my decks for feedback, and I give feedback on decks. I didn't come to the site to teach. I'd rather just instruct someone, "Your pretty wrong, you should learn to use google more," and be on with my day because that takes less than 10 minutes.

I just clicked on this because I always try to learn what I can, and when I can. I saw this topic being offered, and thought maybe it would be informative. I clicked on it, read it, and found it's mainly just crying about people playing over the 60 card minimum. Back during WW I saw a 130 card five color deck stomp the piss out of some really good Titan ramp decks. I'd rather not squash ingenuity just because I don't agree with it.

Is this elaborate enough for you, Mr IthinkIcantrollbutnotreally?

0
Posted 15 September 2012 at 15:25

Permalink

Hey guys I'm trying to build an inexpensive starter deck if some of you could offer some help I'd really appreciate it. http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=384964

0
Posted 15 September 2012 at 02:03

Permalink

http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=385218 Any suggestions? Trying to use strictly defenders and exploit Vent Sentinel's ability?

0
Posted 15 September 2012 at 03:55

Permalink

I have a deck that does that. You can look at it for ideas if you want:
http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=337413

0
Posted 15 September 2012 at 07:42

Permalink

Yeah I took a couple ideas from your deck, thanks for the help.

0
Posted 15 September 2012 at 16:14

Permalink

No problem. :). Glad to help.

0
Posted 15 September 2012 at 20:52

Permalink

fuck you. this is a bunch of bullshit.

0
Posted 15 September 2012 at 19:53

Permalink

How so? Why do you say that?

0
Posted 16 September 2012 at 00:49

Permalink

Look, i disagree with some of what he said...But Bullshit? WTF are you talking about? Its not perfect, but its damn good ideas that any new player should take to heart. Seriously d00d...How can you say that? Thats Crazy Troll Logic!

1
Posted 17 September 2012 at 04:42

Permalink

I am inclined to disagree with some of the points on here but at the same time i can see where you are coming from on this, just because a deck has a lot of singletons in it sometimes just means its got more versatlility. For example one of my friends decks has a lot of singletons and because of this has multiple winning strategies and will win about 75% of the time in games I have seen:
http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=350039

But I do know what you are getting at in terms of making sure u have a win condition you are aiming towards and that you have a way to make it there as I have seen some decks on this sight which have no aim in them atall and sometimes dont even have any lands in them.

Please take a minute to look at my Wurm's Armageddon Deck
http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=347832

0
Posted 17 September 2012 at 00:19

Permalink

Re: My above post.

0
Posted 17 September 2012 at 10:55

Permalink

Am I doing this right? http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=385611

0
Posted 17 September 2012 at 01:04

Permalink

I agree with about 90% of what you are saying....But you also have to realize that its not the only way to do things. Lets say, for example, You play with a deck like this every single time, and yes its good, but everybody knows that this is a very popular deck type, So there may be some surprises, but in the end you are only going to have 2 of a creature or something. You have made yourself so predictable at this point that they know if they can kill two of something, You wont have any more, and thats the game. While your way of building a deck does work very well, There are other ways. A deck full of Singletons wont be useless if 4 or 5 of them get destroyed. Even a deck with no discernible WinCon isnt always bad. If the enemy is looking for a WinCon, and cant find one, They cant react to straight up Burn or Combat damage. Im not saying there is anything wrong at all with how you build decks, Im just saying in this infinitely variable game, its not the End-All, Be-All of strategies.

0
Posted 17 September 2012 at 04:39

Permalink

It made me so happy when I saw this thread, because every time I see someone make a deck with a bunch of expensive singleton cards and go on "how stable it is", it just makes me sad. Of course your deck works most of the time if it doesn't matter what you draw out, it's a winning card anyways. Those are the kind of decks _anyone_ can make, you don't even have to know anything 'bout magic, just list the cards by price and click. As far as this I think most of you agree with me? Then again I personally don't appreciate theme decks that much either. In a theme deck you can do some variation, but mostly it's just a bunch of cards printed out which are made to work together, you don't have to figure anything out. I am thrilled to stumble upon people who keep their decks price low, by combining cheap cards to make a reasonably powerful. But people have different standards and that's what keeps mtg community fresh and full of variations.

1
Posted 18 September 2012 at 10:40

Permalink

What i really hate is when someone just tosses money out and POOF, has a good deck. I had a friend who looked up an awesome deck, payed 1400 bucks for it, and acted like he was the god of all MTG. Just to prove to him that its his deck and not him, we made a deal. I said that if i could have any card i wanted, He would never win another game. He took the bet. So i printed out Proxies of a 0 turn kill (Hulk Flash) and proceeded to destroy him in 10 straight games, none of them lasting longer then 2 turns. It. Was. Glorious!

0
Posted 21 September 2012 at 02:56

Permalink

Not to sound like a broken record.. I agree with a lot of what you're saying, because it helps NEW players. People who aren't familiar with the game need to work on simple, straightforward, and consistent decks. However, as people become better with deck construction, it's best to steer away from the all 4of rule.

All in all, I think this is a great post that should be read by all of those who are new to magic.

0
Posted 18 September 2012 at 17:24

Permalink

You call THAT a deck?

0
Posted 18 September 2012 at 19:20

Permalink

Even though its not a Deck, It has passed 200 likes and continues to be front page. Id say, for something that doesnt have a single card posted, Its doing pretty damn good. Also, It has brought a few really annoying occurrences into the light, Which can now be more often prevented. Overall, Id call this page a pretty big Success.

0
Posted 18 September 2012 at 20:50

Permalink

agreed. :)

0
Posted 19 September 2012 at 06:01

Permalink

You didn't include Instructions for building good EDH decks though. Therefore I do not care :P

1
Posted 19 September 2012 at 16:58

Permalink

Nitpicker!!!! Lol. :).

0
Posted 19 September 2012 at 20:33

Permalink

I know a few hundred people who play MTG...Two of them play commander, and nobody else wants to. It just seems like a clunky, half realized game concept to me.

0
Posted 20 September 2012 at 19:40

Permalink

Don't Forget good decks tend to have a theme for example the legacy tourney that happened a month or 2 ago that douchy sneak attack deck.. yea that deck is built around sneak attack you see when you have a good card and cards that are synergistic with it your going to end up with a good deck another good thing to take note of is cards that give you one of the most important things but first what do these cards have in common that make them soo good?
Jace, The Mind Sculptor
Trading Post

Now take a second to think...
..........
..................
..............................
Okay guessed what they have in common? The answer is THEY GIVE YOU OPTIONS! and in magic options are good options save you and win you games when you have options you win when you win you learn and when you learn you become a better player.

0
Posted 20 September 2012 at 00:31

Permalink

You can learn and become a better player when you lose too. Its all about familiarizing yourself with the game

0
Posted 20 September 2012 at 02:15

Permalink

Right you are raginggoblin. In fact you usually learn more from a loss than a win, by quite a bit.

So, i do have a question....All my MTG career i have been using 20 lands...exactly 1/3 of the deck. Is this not optimal? Its how i was taught and seems to work for me, but im just curious...Have i been screwing up that bad for this many years?

0
Posted 21 September 2012 at 02:47

Permalink

I thought that was the right amount of lands originally too, but then i was told depending on the type of deck you should really have between 21 and 26 lands i think but if only 20 lands works then well played :)

0
Posted 21 September 2012 at 15:09

Permalink

That makes me feel pretty good actually....If i have been playing with such mana light decks all this time, and doing as good as i have....Yay Me!

0
Posted 21 September 2012 at 23:18

Permalink

Learning from Winning/Losing Isn't the point i'm trying to make. the point is more along the subject of how to build a solid deck and identifying good cards and how use solid cards at their maximum capacity

0
Posted 01 October 2012 at 23:09

Permalink

this is pretty basic, but its real and based around a type, check it out http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=329214

0
Posted 21 September 2012 at 04:19

Permalink

At least some1 here knowes how to do magic!..

A deck is stabil & reliable, when U have 3-4 copies of most pieces of your arsenal, so U have only a slight posibillity to have a bad draw...
A good deck builder - expecially in standard format - alwayes sees through the possibilities of making the most competitive decks in the given time period... Very few has that completely...

Here is a discussion I'm starting, regarding the upcoming set: http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=386870

0
Posted 21 September 2012 at 15:29

Permalink

I thought a Sideboard, has to be 15 cards, not a maximum but a requirement of 15(if your using a sideboard for tournament play).

0
Posted 22 September 2012 at 10:19

Permalink

My god people, so this guy got pissed at noobs building terrible decks and labeling them amazing - which we all do, don't lie to yourself - and he decided to write a guide to help them. To help THEM!

So this is a basic guide for an average performing deck. Obviously it doesn't pertain to ALL decks but it accomplishes its goal of relating to most decks for beginning players. So you may think your unique deck is good - which it probably is, no offense meant - and its different than what this guy says a good deck is. That doesn't mean you have to tear at his every word trying to poke holes in his theory. Let's face it, what he is saying is BASICALLY true and is a great starting point for NEW players. If it doesn't pertain to you than be on your way, no need to nag, sheesh.

Angus 02: I must say that this guide supplies a good outline for performing decks. I'd say its even a good idea to build each new deck this way and then adapt it to whatever strategy the deck uses, good job!

0
Posted 23 September 2012 at 00:20

Permalink

First Non-Douchey comment here in a long time. And its also full of Intelligent Thought....Frankly, Im shocked. Pleasantly Shocked.

0
Posted 24 September 2012 at 08:49

Permalink

MatthewBroviak has deleted this comment.

Posted 27 September 2012 at 05:56

Permalink

can you check out my treefolkl deck i want to make sure its ready to start playing against my friends with... there kinda pros when it comes to building decks so i need alot of help :P

Thanks

0
Posted 24 September 2012 at 17:15

Permalink

Great advice. Right now I'm working on a new deck for Ravnica standard, and I'm following these same principles. Bant Hexproof is easy - play cheap effective threats (Geist of Saint Traft, Invisible Stalker) and buff them with cards like Spectral Flight, Wolfir Silverheart, and Increasing Savagry.
Add a little card draw, mana fixing, and tricks, and you've got a deck!

http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=388720

0
Posted 27 September 2012 at 16:38

Permalink

Yes, these are good points.
No, they are not perfect nor do they pertain to everything.
But, for a new magic player these are excellent ways to base your deck off of.

0
Posted 27 September 2012 at 21:55

Permalink

Any suggestions on some "anti-mill" cards for a W/B life gain deck? It's based around Felidar Sovereign's ability. Trying to stick with an Angel and Vampire theme as much as humanily possible though. Anyone?

0
Posted 14 December 2012 at 06:53

Permalink

White/Black

0
Posted 14 December 2012 at 16:15

Permalink