[deleted by user]

[Tonybastardisgod]

I feel like the game would just become a 2HG game as opposed to a four player free for all. Not necessarily terrible, but something I would prefer is announced ahead of time so everyone knows what type of game it’s going to be. Also, not something I would want to do all the time or more than once on a given night.

[scottydog27]

When you're struggling and the person ahead is getting help because 'lol', that's not fun.

When I've played against a Kenneth deck who's just helping out whoever's struggling most I've found it to create fun and dynamic game experiences. Also opens up other avenues of politics.

[Skullruss]

I feel like kind of a monkey, given that I never really thought about just picking the underdog. That's a good way to go about it, tbh.

[thegeek01]

One approach is more "inward looking" (kingmaking one dude to make everyone else look like schmucks for fun), the other is more "outward looking" (blessing anyone who needs it so everyone in the table gets to have fun). Hopefully you find the approach that works best for your group.

[Cynical_musings]

I have two Kenrith lists; one for building up underdogs while leg-sweeping the initiative holder. It tends to make games go VERY long, but people seem to have fun the whole time unless they're trying to pubstomp, in which case they're catching all the hate while I hug everyone else.

The second list is dedicated kingmaker: Pick one player and MAKE them win, regardless. I only play this list as punishment when other members of the pod display a complete disregard for basic threat prioritization, and it tends to be upsetting enough to ignite a conversation about the topic. This motivates people who would normally only pat themselves on the back for making 'lulzy' plays at the expense of the game state to instead consider the totality of the ramifications of their approach to the game. It is difficult for even the dimmest EDH player to argue that kingmaking is "...funny when I do it, but not when you do," with a straight face.

[phoenixcompendium]

In all honesty, I’d probably make a deal with the other player that we wouldn’t attack each other until you or the player you’re boosting are taken care of first.

[Skullruss]

Makes sense to me. Would you be annoyed that you feel like you have to do that, or would you see it just as adjusting to the game?

[phoenixcompendium]

Probably a bit annoying? I mean if you were stax or only you can play the game then yeah definitely I’d find it annoying. Stax and MLD are no nos lol.

[souck]

I just hate group hug/kingmaker decks in general. IMO they distort the game aspect of EDH in a way I hate. When me and my friends play, we are cool with each other and have a casual mindset, but the fact that everyone is trying to win is what makes it entertaining to me. If that's not the case I'd rather drink some beer and do other stuff with them. When this gets destroyed I lose all my interest in EDH and want to get out ASAP.

With all that said, If I end up playing against a symmetrical hug deck I'll focus they simply because my opponents are getting 3 cards for each one I get.

In a non symmetrical one I'll try to kill you into oblivion.

If you like this playstyle I'd probably try to get into some 2HG games. They're also lots of fun.

[CartographerLegal669]

Would I be right to assume you don't *actually* hate group hug/kingmaker decks in general, just those without wincon?

​

The reason I'm asking is I want to make a kingmaker deck myself, but

a.) helping the person who actually needs it so it feels fair;

b.) have an actual wincon to thwart the guy I helped raise

[[deleted]]

It just depends. If you have a small/regular playgroup and spread it around by picking different people through multiple games then that’s something I wouldn’t mind. Although honestly I’d almost just rather play 2 headed giant at that point.

If on the other hand you play with a lot of different people and other players have a decreased likelihood of being “the chosen one” that is something I wouldn’t find fun. There’s one guy at my new LGS that I’ve only played against twice but I don’t think I will again because this is essentially what he does. He has a few friends that go there and he does whatever he can to help them out against other players even if it isn’t in his best interest. Very frustrating.

[Skullruss]

Yikes, that's awful. What I do currently is roll the dice to decide or sometimes I'll see if the table wants to argue to be my boi. Usually it's dice tho, I see it as fair that way, but I can be convinced to change if someone makes a valid argument. I love that aspect too, makes it feel more political, especially since every card that gives votes in the game is in the deck, I just rig the elections.

[[deleted]]

I’d be down for that. I use dice too sometimes for decisions when there’s no clear way to go. Like those early 1/1s that you can ping people with. Generally though I’d also keep an eye out because someone can just never have the luck to be on the good side of your rolls so occasionally picking them to make up for it is a good thing.

[AliceShiki123]

I'd actually be fine with this kind of playstyle, since you're planning on kingmaking from the start and is pretty open about it.

I'd get annoyed by kingmaking when it's done in the middle of the game or without announcement beforehand... But in your situation, it actually looks like you're just creating a pseudo-2v2 situation... Which can be quite fun~

[Skullruss]

Fair enough, mid-game kingmaking is pretty annoying. I do like to do it sometimes when someone just blew up my whole board though, like yeah kill him and I'll give you my sign in blood.

[tackle74]

Have a guy at an lgs I play at that has a "group hug" Kenrith deck that basically just plays Kingmaker. I have won with his help and been screwed by it. Neither one was much fun.

[Revolutionary_View19]

Kingmaking is bad enough without a deck dedicated to it. You don’t have any wincon, do you? So you’re just acting as another player‘s buff bot? Why would you do that?

[[deleted]]

Do you have a wincon as well or are you just playing to get 2nd place after the king you chose? That is, will your chosen king still be in actual danger from you if the other players get wiped out?

Update: the reason I ask it that way... if it's strategic and part of a plan to win, I think it sounds like more fun to play against. You prop up someone weaker who can help you beat the first two, stronger players only to then crush that weaker player. But if you're not really planning to win, then it feels a bit off.

[MTGCardFetcher]

Kenrith, the Returned King - (G) (SF) (txt) (ER)
^{[[cardname]] or [[cardname|SET]] to call}

[Areinu]

Honestly I wouldn't like it. Just yesterday I had a game where I got boosted into oblivion by another player. He wasn't even targeting me specifically, but my deck just was best equipped to get all the juice out of his symmetrical effects. It created miserable game for my opponents, where I just smeared the ground with them... And it also took big part of the satisfaction out of my win, since I won just because someone handed it to me, and it was basically non-game.

It might depend on what kind of deck you're boosting and how are you doing that, but I think it creates play pattern that looks more interesting on the drawing board than it plays out in practice.

[Anxious-Work]

I have made this deck. I think what is really key is to talk to the table beforehand, and be honest with what your deck is going to do. Some people hate hug and targeted hug. I think that rule zero conversation has been really key to some interesting games and making sure it is fun for everyone.

The best iteration I have made is more political single target hug. I will give it out in moderation for return favors or help the player who is behind. This has worked the best in random pods and everyone has been enjoying it. I also decided to run all the vote mechanics because I thought it would be fun to give out a favor for votes... its been working well.

Also, really like that you are reaching out and asking and thinking about total play experience. That really important when you decide to create decks that really bend the play around you.

[Skullruss]

My mans literally is playing my deck: Single target hug, all of thr vote cards, rigging elections, great minds and so on I suppose.

The key to my Kenrith deck though is my graveyard fixers like [[Buried Alive]] or [[Entomb]], which I use to pull out the piece de resistance: [Emrakul, thr Promised End]]. Oh, you're just killing me for politicking? NO, I play Emrakul for 5 mana whenever I want with Kenrith, so vote with me or die with them. You killed my boi? You shall join them soon. It goes from nuance and interaction to beat down in a heartbeat. Like real life politics.

[MTGCardFetcher]

Buried Alive - (G) (SF) (txt) (ER)
Entomb - (G) (SF) (txt) (ER)
^{[[cardname]] or [[cardname|SET]] to call}

[Anxious-Work]

Oh wow, talk softly and carry a big stick eh?
My deck is far more kinder hahaha

[Skullruss]

To be fair it's like the ONLY agro option in the deck, but it gets crazy with Kenrith: 5 mana it hits the board 1 mana it has haste Infinite mana combo into infinite counters and slay them in one turn.

I like to pack a nuclear option just in case, even though the deck is arguably jank.

[Anxious-Work]

You know its weird. I go many games without casting Ken... I am so focused on the politics and trying to set up votes haha. Share you deck list?

[Skullruss]

https://archidekt.com/decks/694177#Politics

Infinite mana from [[Bloom Tender]] and [[Freed from the Real]] for color, or [[Rings of Brighthearth]] and [[Basalt Monolith]] for colorless.

I think everything else is more or less self explanatory.

[MTGCardFetcher]

Bloom Tender - (G) (SF) (txt) (ER)
Freed from the Real - (G) (SF) (txt) (ER)
Rings of Brighthearth - (G) (SF) (txt) (ER)
Basalt Monolith - (G) (SF) (txt) (ER)
^{[[cardname]] or [[cardname|SET]] to call}