General Fight Club
- Thread starter Jason Waddell
- Start date
So I had some troubles with red based aggro decks being the stromngest thing you could do in my format. I already did some minor tweaks, but not much really. And now I've had an idea: If I would support a different theme for mono red, I would decrease the incidental overlap with support for 
prowess, sacrifice, and madness, which would, hopefully, make it harder to just force red aggro and always end up in very good spot. That new theme would be Goblins.
I want to now, essentially, which option you prefer here, but I need to know it before the end of tomorrow, as that's the last day I am allowed to make changes to my list, since it's featured in the Cube Open in two weeks in Braunschweig.
Please vote until tomorrow evening <3
answer if you want to differentiate or formulate your thoughts of course.
prowess, sacrifice, and madness, which would, hopefully, make it harder to just force red aggro and always end up in very good spot. That new theme would be Goblins.I want to now, essentially, which option you prefer here, but I need to know it before the end of tomorrow, as that's the last day I am allowed to make changes to my list, since it's featured in the Cube Open in two weeks in Braunschweig.
Please vote until tomorrow evening <3
answer if you want to differentiate or formulate your thoughts of course.
The goblins seem like they might be fun, but I think you need more available in the draft to justify the payoffs. Do you already have other goblins in your cube?
They also look like they would support sacrifice decks but not any other archetypes.
The other selection, on the other hand, just doesn’t spark as much joy, though there are cards for discard decks as well as sacrifice.
They also look like they would support sacrifice decks but not any other archetypes.
The other selection, on the other hand, just doesn’t spark as much joy, though there are cards for discard decks as well as sacrifice.
I already have these 17 cards that are goblins or make goblin tokens:
That would make for 27 goblins. At 500 cards, you would see 19.4 goblins in an average 8-player draft. That seems like enough, even though I guess Goblin Engineer and Blast from the Past shouldn't really count.
Last edited:
I think you should definitely give the goblin package a go. No room for Siege-Gang Commander?
Pretty easy goblin decision for me considering the others you’re running…most of the 27 goblins are good on their own which is my favorite way for tribal to present itself in cube.So I had some troubles with red based aggro decks being the stromngest thing you could do in my format. I already did some minor tweaks, but not much really. And now I've had an idea: If I would support a different theme for mono red, I would decrease the incidental overlap with support for
I want to now, essentially, which option you prefer here, but I need to know it before the end of tomorrow, as that's the last day I am allowed to make changes to my list, since it's featured in the Cube Open in two weeks in Braunschweig.
Please vote until tomorrow evening <3
answer if you want to differentiate or formulate your thoughts of course.
Trying to figure out which of these blue dragons is the most reasonable as a harder-to-interact-with threat that has enough value to make players not feel bad spending 5 on them.
Hraesvelgr of the First Brood lets you get in with your other dudes, Diviner of Mist gives you the most value if you can untag with it, and Iymrith, Desert Doom is the hardest to interact with on turn 1. Which is the most interesting, and are these just too weak for everything I'm trying to do in my Cube?
Hraesvelgr of the First Brood lets you get in with your other dudes, Diviner of Mist gives you the most value if you can untag with it, and Iymrith, Desert Doom is the hardest to interact with on turn 1. Which is the most interesting, and are these just too weak for everything I'm trying to do in my Cube?
Chris Taylor
Contributor
I've had the most success with Immy
Thanks folks, I am properly convinced.
vs. I'm in the market for a 1 mana piece of graveyard hate/bauble that can be fetched by Urza's Saga and Brightglass Gearhulk. I've never played much with Claws, but I use Soul-Guide pretty frequently in EDH decks as a cycling piece of graveyard hate to keep decks honest. I think Claws has more play to it, but Soul-Guide is a better bauble option. Which of these do you prefer?
Of the two, I'd prefer Claws, because it lets me get the card while I'm hating on the graveyard... but, for the same reason, my actual selection might end up being Relic of Progenitus? Depending on how many cares-about-bauble-and-graveyard things you have.
There's a surprisingly large number of things to consider:
-how much does the card do the instant it arrives (Lantern > Claws = Relic, because it hits a single target card rather than a single card of your opponent's choice)
-how much do you get for zero additional investment in mana (Lantern > Claws = Relic, because you get an entire graveyard versus one card per turn of opponent's choice)
-the exact opposite of the above line, something like "can grind your opponent's graveyard slowly but repeatedly" (Claws = Relic > Lantern)
-how quick is it to hit an entire entire graveyard (Lantern > Relic > Claws, because it's 0 mana, 1 mana, impossible)
-whether or not it hits your own graveyard (Lantern = Claws > Relic, obviously)
-can you get the card while still graveyard hating (Relic = Claws > Lantern, 1 mana investment vs not possible)
-can you get the card while NOT graveyard hating yourself (Claws = Lantern > Relic, 1 mana investment vs not possible)
-ease of recursion (Lantern > Claws > Relic, because Lantern can put itself in the graveyard for free if you don't need to cycle it, Claws takes 1 mana, Relic always exiles itself)
I think I'd pick Claws if you expect anyone wants to keep their own graveyard intact, because when Relic wrecks your own fun plan it's such a feel-bad even if it's right. When it comes down to Claws vs. Lantern, I think of them - totally unfairly - as Scavenging Ooze vs. Tormod's Crypt. If that incredibly insane comparison helps any, uh, I'm glad!
There's a surprisingly large number of things to consider:
-how much does the card do the instant it arrives (Lantern > Claws = Relic, because it hits a single target card rather than a single card of your opponent's choice)
-how much do you get for zero additional investment in mana (Lantern > Claws = Relic, because you get an entire graveyard versus one card per turn of opponent's choice)
-the exact opposite of the above line, something like "can grind your opponent's graveyard slowly but repeatedly" (Claws = Relic > Lantern)
-how quick is it to hit an entire entire graveyard (Lantern > Relic > Claws, because it's 0 mana, 1 mana, impossible)
-whether or not it hits your own graveyard (Lantern = Claws > Relic, obviously)
-can you get the card while still graveyard hating (Relic = Claws > Lantern, 1 mana investment vs not possible)
-can you get the card while NOT graveyard hating yourself (Claws = Lantern > Relic, 1 mana investment vs not possible)
-ease of recursion (Lantern > Claws > Relic, because Lantern can put itself in the graveyard for free if you don't need to cycle it, Claws takes 1 mana, Relic always exiles itself)
I think I'd pick Claws if you expect anyone wants to keep their own graveyard intact, because when Relic wrecks your own fun plan it's such a feel-bad even if it's right. When it comes down to Claws vs. Lantern, I think of them - totally unfairly - as Scavenging Ooze vs. Tormod's Crypt. If that incredibly insane comparison helps any, uh, I'm glad!