Nathan's Spellslinger

by ~Nathan_A~ on 25 November 2011

Main Deck (60 cards)

Sideboard (17 cards)

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

Time for a quick-draw showdown.

How to Play

Well it's a self explanatory deck. What makes it different is the ratio and types of cards in it. With almost 30 burn cards, each other card drawn should be another bullet to be fired. With almost 20 draw cards, every three cards should include a reload for two more cards, and with another card each upkeep, that means chances of drawing another reload are safe. The land is scarce for three reasons: because you only need 2 mana for most of these spells, beacause extra land can be a pain to draw when you need ammo instead, and because with all the drawing this deck does, you are bound to get more land every four cards drawn. The Elixirs are for a tad of lifegain and for reshuffling your shells. The Swans make for a good second target when you need a reload right away. Guttersnipe's for party crashers. The neatest combo for this deck though is with the Firedancer and the Exoskeleton. When it's equipped and you focus on the opponent, he deals with the creatures, and with them wiped out (indestructible and all), he ends those who like to rely on lifegain for a quick second strategy. Basilisk Collar was a good candidate, but the lifegain isn't necessary. Quietus Spike works almost just as well, but infect can kill indestructibles, so it was chosen over.

Deck Tags

  • Burn
  • Fun
  • Calculated
  • Quick

Deck at a Glance

Social Stats

0
Likes

This deck has been viewed 1,570 times.

Mana Curve

Mana Symbol Occurrence

8160320

Card Legality

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

Deck discussion for Nathan's Spellslinger

Jparks has deleted this comment.

Posted 18 January 2012 at 09:44

Permalink