|
|
Post by Daij_Djan on Jul 20, 2020 20:25:40 GMT
Welcome to the Deckbuilders' Challenge originally created by sdfkjgh! To participate in this Contest you'll have to design a deck along the contest guidelines and throw it into the arena with other competitors' entries! At the end of every two weeks, a winner will be determined by forum poll, and the winner decides the challenge for the next fortnight's Contest! Here we go, competitors: our ninth challenge!
The winner of the “Random Rares Rumble poll“ was Lady Mapi with... |
{Comments} It's a very linear deck that tries to get The Magic Mirror out as soon as possible (Honor the God-Eternals and Jace's Sanctum help me dig for one of my copies and help me fill up my graveyard with instants and sorceries), make a massive Zombie Army token (with cards like Invade the City and Commence the Endgame), then use Widespread Brutality to clear the field so that I can swing in to win.
It's... not very good. |
And the challenge issued by our winner was... You are all invited to submit a pauper brawl deck - this special format works like Pauper Commander, except it's based off of Brawl instead of EDH. That means that you have to build around a single Uncommon commander, supporting them with a 59-card singleton deck that can only contain basic lands and commons! And now, time to begin the challenge! Best of luck, competitors! |
|
|
|
Post by Flo00 on Jul 21, 2020 1:40:43 GMT
Lady Mapi : Is a planeswalker commander allowed? Anyway, here is Mischieving About Basically it's a control deck that wants to cast the chimera and then cast one spell during each opponent's turn.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lady Mapi on Jul 21, 2020 2:49:37 GMT
Lady Mapi : Is a planeswalker commander allowed? Anyway, here is Mischieving AboutBasically it's a control deck that wants to cast the chimera and then cast one spell during each opponent's turn. Yep - Brawl allows planeswalker commanders by default. |
|
|
|
Post by Daij_Djan on Jul 23, 2020 14:43:02 GMT
Sorry for the delay, just noticed I completely forgot about setting up the poll (  ), but it's finally up. Also I'll set up the forum's front page to include the winning deck probably over the weekend! 
For this challenge, after looking at the possible options, I decided to go with a Gnarlback Rhino Pauper Brawl deck. How about a Voltron-style deck where each pump spell and Aura cantripps?
|
|
|
|
Post by Lady Mapi on Jul 23, 2020 19:53:34 GMT
Revenge of the Weenies
Sigil CaptainThis deck is pretty darn simple - we want to get Sigil Captain out as early as possible, swarm out some cheap 3/3s, and overwhelm our opponents with value.EDIT: Hey, guess who forgot that Brawl requires all of the cards to be standard legal? I did. It was me. I mean, technically 902.31b only says that it "usually" requires you to play with Standard legal cards... but I think I'll submit a different deck that's 100% copacetic. OK, here we go: Munch on Memories Mill yourself for fun and profit. |
|
|
|
Post by Flo00 on Jul 24, 2020 15:44:34 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Lady Mapi on Jul 24, 2020 18:28:55 GMT
I wish I had thought of that  . |
|
thaneofglamis
8/8 Octopus
Thane's activated abilities can't be activated
Posts: 444
Favorite Card: Slimefoot, the Stowaway; Phyrexian Rager; Swarm Shambler
Favorite Set: Midnight Hunt
Color Alignment: Green
|
Post by thaneofglamis on Jul 24, 2020 21:30:09 GMT
Presenting: Solid Snake
In which I attempt to draw many cards and then swing in with a giant, evasive snake. |
|
|
|
Post by Flo00 on Jul 27, 2020 13:10:56 GMT
|
|
thaneofglamis
8/8 Octopus
Thane's activated abilities can't be activated
Posts: 444
Favorite Card: Slimefoot, the Stowaway; Phyrexian Rager; Swarm Shambler
Favorite Set: Midnight Hunt
Color Alignment: Green
|
Post by thaneofglamis on Jul 27, 2020 15:04:27 GMT
Oops. Fixing that.
|
|
PEacefulOtter
1/1 Squirrel
Posts: 87
Formerly Known As: MTG_Sappy
Favorite Card: Shape Anew
Favorite Set: Throne of Eldrain
Color Alignment: White, Blue, Red, Green
|
Post by PEacefulOtter on Jul 31, 2020 14:38:42 GMT
@lady Mapi
Well um. Petitioners are banned in pauper
|
|
|
|
Post by Lady Mapi on Jul 31, 2020 16:03:00 GMT
@lady Mapi Well um. Petitioners are banned in pauper Was that just announced? I can't find anything about it online, and it's not on the official banlist. EDIT: I found it. It looks like it was banned from a specific Arena tournament? I don't see anything official about it being banned-banned, though. |
|
|
|
Post by ZephyrPhantom on Jul 31, 2020 18:39:06 GMT
@lady Mapi Well um. Petitioners are banned in pauper Was that just announced? I can't find anything about it online, and it's not on the official banlist. EDIT: I found it. It looks like it was banned from a specific Arena tournament? I don't see anything official about it being banned-banned, though. Just for clarity, it was the Arena Pauper event around May 2019 , with the primary issue seemingly being that 3 toughness invalidates a lot of (presumably damage based) removal and combat situations, meaning every deck was either a "Can this beat Petitioners or not?" type deck. Personally I don't think it's a big deal though since this is a brewing contest for a different specific format anyway and people's preferences will be reflected in the votes. |
|
PEacefulOtter
1/1 Squirrel
Posts: 87
Formerly Known As: MTG_Sappy
Favorite Card: Shape Anew
Favorite Set: Throne of Eldrain
Color Alignment: White, Blue, Red, Green
|
Post by PEacefulOtter on Jul 31, 2020 22:50:39 GMT
Hmm on Arena, when crafting petitioners, it lets you know that its banned in pauper. Also this is pauper brawl so its basically pauper standard
|
|
|
|
Post by Lady Mapi on Jul 31, 2020 23:42:21 GMT
Hmm on Arena, when crafting petitioners, it lets you know that its banned in pauper. Also this is pauper brawl so its basically pauper standard I'm aware of this. But if you look on WotC's official pauper banlist, Petitioners aren't banned, and they've never been mentioned in any of the paper ban announcements I've found. I think it's literally just a thing on Arena. |
|
PEacefulOtter
1/1 Squirrel
Posts: 87
Formerly Known As: MTG_Sappy
Favorite Card: Shape Anew
Favorite Set: Throne of Eldrain
Color Alignment: White, Blue, Red, Green
|
Post by PEacefulOtter on Aug 1, 2020 14:09:44 GMT
Hmm on Arena, when crafting petitioners, it lets you know that its banned in pauper. Also this is pauper brawl so its basically pauper standard I'm aware of this. But if you look on WotC's official pauper banlist, Petitioners aren't banned, and they've never been mentioned in any of the paper ban announcements I've found. I think it's literally just a thing on Arena. And we're using cards, literally on Arena |
|
|
|
Post by ZephyrPhantom on Aug 1, 2020 22:09:15 GMT
(Quick aside: Since Daij is sick atm, I'm currently stepping in as the one managing the competitions, which is going to be relevant for the post below:) I'm aware of this. But if you look on WotC's official pauper banlist, Petitioners aren't banned, and they've never been mentioned in any of the paper ban announcements I've found. I think it's literally just a thing on Arena. And we're using cards, literally on Arena Alright, so I think what's going on here is that there's a bit of a misconception on what the prompt is supposed to be, based on individual user's experiences. 1) One interpretation of the prompt is that you are making a Pauper Commander deck, that must also follow the constraints of Brawl. In this interpretation, you are just combining the two individual banlists of each format together, and Persistent Petitioners is legal.
2) The other interpretation is that you are making a Brawl deck that is faithful to Arena's version of Pauper, except the Commander follows the rules of Pauper Commander. In this interpretation, Arena's version of Pauper's banlist takes priority while adapting some of Brawl/Pauper Commander's rules, and thus Persistent Petitioners is not legal.
Since Lady Mapi is the prompt giver, interpretation 1 is the one we're currently going with right now. If they change their mind, it's their call to make.
(My thoughts is that interpretation 2 does a lot of cherry-picking from individual formats to create this technicality, and thus isn't really a graceful solution to the "problem", if it really is one. Like I said before, if content in these competitions is designed in a way that's not appealing to the voters, it's generally reflected in the votes.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Lady Mapi on Aug 1, 2020 22:18:16 GMT
(Quick aside: Since Daij is sick atm, I'm currently stepping in as the one managing the competitions, which is going to be relevant for the post below:) And we're using cards, literally on Arena Alright, so I think what's going on here is that there's a bit of a misconception on what the prompt is supposed to be, based on individual user's experiences. 1) One interpretation of the prompt is that you are making a Pauper Commander deck, that must also follow the constraints of Brawl. In this interpretation, you are just combining the two individual banlists of each format together, and Persistent Petitioners is legal.
2) The other interpretation is that you are making a Brawl deck that is faithful to Arena's version of Pauper, except the Commander follows the rules of Pauper Commander. In this interpretation, Arena's version of Pauper's banlist takes priority while adapting some of Brawl/Pauper Commander's rules, and thus Persistent Petitioners is not legal.
Since Lady Mapi is the prompt giver, interpretation 1 is the one we're currently going with right now. If they change their mind, it's their call to make.
(My thoughts is that interpretation 2 does a lot of cherry-picking from individual formats to create this technicality, and thus isn't really a graceful solution to the "problem", if it really is one. Like I said before, if content in these competitions is designed in a way that's not appealing to the voters, it's generally reflected in the votes.)
The weird part of interpretation #2, to me, is that Pauper tournaments on Arena aren't DCI Sanctioned. It'd be different if, say, MTGO had banned Petitioners (because that's where Pauper originated, and it's a platform where the tournaments are actually sanctioned), but Arena? Arena is irrelevant here. It'd be different if, I dunno, we were building Historic decks or whatever. |
|
PEacefulOtter
1/1 Squirrel
Posts: 87
Formerly Known As: MTG_Sappy
Favorite Card: Shape Anew
Favorite Set: Throne of Eldrain
Color Alignment: White, Blue, Red, Green
|
Post by PEacefulOtter on Aug 1, 2020 22:21:35 GMT
(Quick aside: Since Daij is sick atm, I'm currently stepping in as the one managing the competitions, which is going to be relevant for the post below:) Alright, so I think what's going on here is that there's a bit of a misconception on what the prompt is supposed to be, based on individual user's experiences. 1) One interpretation of the prompt is that you are making a Pauper Commander deck, that must also follow the constraints of Brawl. In this interpretation, you are just combining the two individual banlists of each format together, and Persistent Petitioners is legal.
2) The other interpretation is that you are making a Brawl deck that is faithful to Arena's version of Pauper, except the Commander follows the rules of Pauper Commander. In this interpretation, Arena's version of Pauper's banlist takes priority while adapting some of Brawl/Pauper Commander's rules, and thus Persistent Petitioners is not legal.
Since Lady Mapi is the prompt giver, interpretation 1 is the one we're currently going with right now. If they change their mind, it's their call to make.
(My thoughts is that interpretation 2 does a lot of cherry-picking from individual formats to create this technicality, and thus isn't really a graceful solution to the "problem", if it really is one. Like I said before, if content in these competitions is designed in a way that's not appealing to the voters, it's generally reflected in the votes.)
The weird part of interpretation #2, to me, is that Pauper tournaments on Arena aren't DCI Sanctioned. So it's on the level of if Goblin Piker got banned at a Modern tournament that your FLGS was running, and then going up to someone else building a Modern deck with Goblin Piker in it and telling them that "Goblin Piker is banned in Modern". I guess I'm out of the picture then in this debate. The thing is, Lady Mapi is the one that is doing Petitioners, and the Prompt giver, so I feel there is some prejudice in their decision making on this matter. Even if its smaller than a nanometer, I feel there is prejudice |
|
|
|
Post by ZephyrPhantom on Aug 1, 2020 23:50:01 GMT
I guess I'm out of the picture then in this debate. The thing is, Lady Mapi is the one that is doing Petitioners, and the Prompt giver, so I feel there is some prejudice in their decision making on this matter. Even if its smaller than a nanometer, I feel there is prejudice Perhaps if it was a no-effort Relentless Rats type deck that jammed about 50 of the same card I would understand where you're coming from, but as is it's clearly just a 1-of generic mill creature in the deck. I seriously doubt Lady Mapi is exploiting their own ruleset here and I think it's more likely the deck was sincerely made thinking this is the way the competition should work. |
|
PEacefulOtter
1/1 Squirrel
Posts: 87
Formerly Known As: MTG_Sappy
Favorite Card: Shape Anew
Favorite Set: Throne of Eldrain
Color Alignment: White, Blue, Red, Green
|
Post by PEacefulOtter on Aug 2, 2020 17:01:08 GMT
I guess I'm out of the picture then in this debate. The thing is, Lady Mapi is the one that is doing Petitioners, and the Prompt giver, so I feel there is some prejudice in their decision making on this matter. Even if its smaller than a nanometer, I feel there is prejudice Perhaps if it was a no-effort Relentless Rats type deck that jammed about 50 of the same card I would understand where you're coming from, but as is it's clearly just a 1-of generic mill creature in the deck. I seriously doubt Lady Mapi is exploiting their own ruleset here and I think it's more likely the deck was sincerely made thinking this is the way the competition should work. Well um, you see, uh, this may sound stupid but I never checked their deck and thought they were jamming 50. I sincerely apologize ZephyrPhantom and LadyMapi, I never thought to look. I just stereotyped off what your comment said. I'm dearly sorry again |
|
|
|
Post by Lady Mapi on Aug 2, 2020 19:04:21 GMT
Perhaps if it was a no-effort Relentless Rats type deck that jammed about 50 of the same card I would understand where you're coming from, but as is it's clearly just a 1-of generic mill creature in the deck. I seriously doubt Lady Mapi is exploiting their own ruleset here and I think it's more likely the deck was sincerely made thinking this is the way the competition should work. Well um, you see, uh, this may sound stupid but I never checked their deck and thought they were jamming 50. I sincerely apologize ZephyrPhantom and LadyMapi, I never thought to look. I just stereotyped off what your comment said. I'm dearly sorry again That's alright - I can see why you'd get that impression from what I've said in this thread. |
|
|
|
Post by ZephyrPhantom on Aug 3, 2020 5:03:09 GMT
Place your taxes on the altar, for it's time for an Orzhov The deck's main objective is to get out Cruel Celebrant early, in order to play a ton of sacrifice-based payoffs that will bleed our opponent to death. To help this along, we have a lot of token producers like Raise the Alarm that give us two creatures for the price of one card, allowing us to have plenty of sacrifice fodder, and cards like Serrated Scorpion that have a significant payoff when they die. Cards like Imperious Oligarch fill both roles, rewarding us with a token when they die, encouraging us to sacrifice as many small creatures as possible. Our payoffs come in three flavors: We have our sac outlets, like Malevolent Noble, that sacrifice creatures as often as possible to beef themselves up, or draw cards repeatedly to fuel our gameplan like Spark Reaper. We also have one-off "burst sacrifice" cards like Final Payment and Wicked Guardian, which allow us to sacrifice a creature just once for a big effect or some kind of card draw or advantage. And lastly, we have payoffs that reward constant sacrifice like Rising Populace and a few ones that incidentally benefit off all the tokens that will be entering the battlefield like Impassioned Orator. Our setup makes Corpse Knight a possible alternative as a Commander, but I chose Celebrant because I felt we had a sufficient number of sacrifice cards and 2-life swings on every sacrifice are bigger than 1 life swings. You could also go in more on Malevolent Noble type antics and add some food cards like Bake into a Pie for fun, but I found it was better to keep the deck consistent than spread itself thin with multiple gimmicks. Either way, enjoy your cruel celebration! May your opponents be drained in short order. |
|
|
|
Post by ZephyrPhantom on Aug 3, 2020 23:14:15 GMT
This thread is now closed, the poll can be found here. And here's the next challenge! |
|
"When in doubt, do a common." 
), but it's finally 
.
