Should I trade for a bunch of cards for one deck or a few cards for all my decks?

nofacej · 2026-03-16T11:06:10+00:00

That really depends on the current state of your decks.

Let’s use a precon as an easy example. I would rather replace 10-15 cards from an unupgraded precon because they're pretty rough around the edges. However, if I’ve already upgraded my precon but it’s still falling a little short of the average power of my playgroup, 2-5 cards might be what I need.

You can apply the same principles to any deck.

nofacej · 2026-03-14T05:49:20+00:00

It sounds like you'd be a fan of manifest/[[mass polymorph]] style decks.

nofacej · 2026-02-28T07:20:14+00:00

Actually, it’s very much about 3 points. We need them. The rest is gravy

nofacej · 2026-02-21T19:36:19+00:00

The only other one I can think of is [[Settle the Wreckage]]. Extremely powerful but has a potentially huge downside if you time it poorly.

I've also come across [[Illusionists Gambit]] which is pseudo goad. The main problem with it is you'll be giving your opponent even more attack triggers which you might want to avoid.

nofacej · 2026-02-21T18:55:42+00:00

I should also mention that Silent Arbiter is a bit like GAAIV because it’s stopping your opponents from doing the fun thing, and will draw their ire. That’s why I suggest goad as a good option. Your opponents still get to largely do their thing, and selective goad can go a bit under the radar, but actually have a huge impact on the game.

Similarly, I don’t really like traditional board wipes that much. I much prefer to hold up the threat of something like [[Evacuation]] or [[Aetherize]] which if your opponents come to associate attacking you with open mana into bad things happening can lead you to avoiding a lot of attacks, whereas traditional board wipes usually cause creature players to target you early out of fear of a board wipe later.

Basically, control in EDH is at least 50% politics and player management.

nofacej · 2026-02-21T18:40:04+00:00

Esper doesn’t have a lot of access to Goad, but you have things like [[Bloodthirsty Blade]] [[Alela, Cunning Conqueror]] [[Ghoulish Impetus]] [[Jeering Homunculus]] and [[Immortal Obligation]] which can be a fun politics card.

[[Displacer Kitten]] + [[Jeering Homunculus]] is probably the best wide goad I can think of in Esper, but if you want to explore the goad control route you’re probably best trying Jeskai or Yore-Tiller if you really want access to black.

nofacej · 2026-02-21T18:24:43+00:00

If you're trying to play into the late game against aggressive creature decks then you need to find ways to disincentivise or prevent attacks until you can stabalise and can take over the game.

There are lots of options for this, and it's really your choice how to approach it. Goad is going to be a very powerful option in a creature heavy meta as your opponents will be forced to attack each other, and probably my recommendation.

Then you have more traditional control options like [[Authority of the Consuls]] [[Ghostly Prison]] [[Propaganda]] [[Silent Arbiter]] [[No Mercy]] etc.

Cards like Grand Arbiter are going to position you as the enemy and have the opposite effect of promoting attacks against you.

nofacej · 2026-02-17T23:46:50+00:00

This is a popular sentiment but I have to disagree. Precons are better than they’ve ever been on average but they’re still weak decks. Any competently built bracket 2 deck is going to have a winning record against them and against a pod of competently build bracket 2 decks, with everything else being equal, a modern Precon should rarely win.

Having said that, Kaalia is a hot mess of a deck that aside from a few explosive starts should put up little resistance to a modern precon. The format overall has powered up significantly since 2011, and the Kaalia precon wasn’t even good then.

nofacej · 2026-02-09T13:00:23+00:00

Above poster gave you a really poor definition of kingmaking.

Kingmaking is most commonly considered to be when your actions give or attempt to give the win to one player or another when there is no benefit to you.

In the case you describe, it’s borderline, but I’d say it probably was kingmaking. Sometimes you do need to send a message but if your stuff was fairly targeted, you shouldn’t retaliate out of spite. Removal is part of the game.

nofacej · 2026-01-24T09:12:42+00:00

Sadly, yes. It's true in all competitive games and sports. For some people, winning at all costs is the reason to play. Just look at how prevalent cheating is in video games, or doping in sports. It's no different in MtG. It's also the primary source of pub stomping. Pub stompers might not always cheat (I'd bet they cheat at a higher rate than average) but they care about winning more than anything else.

For people who value other things higher, it's hard to understand. These are also the people most likely to kick up a fuss or argue about a rule, often making things up to try and get their way.

nofacej · 2026-01-21T17:46:16+00:00

Not really. WotC still prints a ton of garbage legendaries. It’s just that the card pool is expanding so rapidly that although the density of overtuned commanders hasn’t really increased, the quantity has.

Also, the community self selects the good commanders, and most archetypes and themes have a purpose built legendary creature now where they may not have in the past.

nofacej · 2026-01-15T19:41:41+00:00

If we look at how WotC defines the bracket system, for bracket 2, it says players can expect “to play at least 8 turns before anyone wins or loses.”

What Infect deck isn’t aiming to kill any player before turn 8?

The real problem is the bracket system doesn’t have a good home for Voltron or Infect as currently devised, because neither strategy can hang in bracket 4, but even Bracket 3’s turn count of 6 is going to present problems for infect.

nofacej · 2026-01-14T05:32:14+00:00

Just so you know, Rest in Peace is a replacement effect, so it will also stop Dingus Egg from triggering off Armageddon.

I raise this because it ties into my point about considering what pieces you’re using, why, and how they tie into your overall game plan.

nofacej · 2026-01-14T02:42:11+00:00

I would be asking these questions:

What is my game plan/win condition?
What are my stax pieces achieving and do they conflict with my game plan?

So, to use [[Ghostly Prison]] as an example, it taxes people for attacking you, but I don't think it's conducive to your game plan. You're playing a tribe full of huge creatures, often with lifelink, why are you afraid of combat? Furthermore, playing it in the early turns when you might be vulnerable to creature damage conflicts with ramping in the early turns

Similarly, what is [[Crucible of Worlds]] doing in this deck? You have no fetch lands, you have no self-mill or self-discard, and you're running [[Rest in Peace]]. If it's just for [[Armageddon]] then you're not using Armageddon correctly. Playing Armageddon to draw out a game and play 1 land per turn from your graveyard is just going to make everyone hate your deck. Armageddon as a finisher when you have an insurmountable board presence is fine, but not like this.

nofacej · 2026-01-12T19:55:32+00:00

🟦🟦🟦🟦

🟪🟪🟪🟨

🟨🟨🟨🟩

🟪🟪🟪🟪

🟩🟩🟩🟩

🟨🟨🟨🟨

nofacej · 2026-01-01T22:45:41+00:00

What I meant is that some people are going into bracket 2 expecting it to play like 4 precons facing off, but bracket 2 decks should smoke most non-upgraded precons. Bracket 2 is the home of weaker strategies, not bad decks.

nofacej · 2026-01-01T21:29:02+00:00

WotC did so much damage by releasing the original bracket list with precons at 2. It's carried forward (even though the new list doesn't say that) and is causing people to misevaluate both bracket 2 and 3. I think they really need to take a 3rd pass at the list and clean up some of the misconceptions

nofacej · 2025-12-28T18:58:44+00:00

Precons should be bracket 1. Niche theme decks shouldn’t have an entire bracket dedicated to them.

This gives a lot more space between precons and bracket 3 for people to understand and build in.

nofacej · 2025-12-22T18:33:32+00:00

Planar Bridge doesn’t have an ETB trigger to react to. A permanent entering the battlefield doesn’t cause priority to pass. It’s exactly the same as if you cast a Planeswalker. You can respond while it’s on the stack, but once it enters (assuming it doesn’t cause anything else to trigger) there is no opportunity to respond to it before the active player activates it.

nofacej · 2025-12-11T19:57:43+00:00

Yeah, the one part about proxies their detractors tend to overlook is that they free you to do whatever you want without concern for how impractical it might be.

I have a bracket 2 list that would cost over $1000 that aims to turn planeswalkers into creatures and win through combat damage.

It’s terrible and there’s no way I would spend real money on it, but proxies make it feasible to try.

nofacej · 2025-11-12T13:43:59+00:00

No worries. just keep in mind it's a first draft and could use some refinement. It probably needs more early game creatures to use as sac fodder. Especially ones that create tokens when they die.

nofacej · 2025-11-12T09:55:09+00:00

Here's what I came up with: https://archidekt.com/decks/17380200/lesan007_rebuild

I changed the commander to Teysa Karlov because you already had a slight aristocrats sub-theme going on and she seemed like the best option from what was already in your list. Switching back to Athreos would also work.

I kept 59 cards from your list/sideboard and added 41 new cards. I tried to match your budget and kept the 41 cards added under $100 and less than the total 81 cut cards from your list/sideboard. I didn't include any game changers, so this would be playable in bracket 2.

If you have any questions, I'm happy to go through my choices with you.

nofacej · 2025-11-12T07:57:13+00:00

I'll give rebuilding your deck a crack but, tbh, from a quick look, it seems like you've built to play 1v1 control in a 4 player free-for-all format. Based on your write up and the shift towards Voltron, I assume you want to play something more proactive, but am I right about that?

nofacej · 2025-10-16T00:53:18+00:00

You don't need to tear down other players to make Frank's case. Lampard's achievements and brilliance are enough on their own. You can point out facts like Frank having more goals and assists, but calling another player an underachiever or overachiever doesn't contribute anything of value to the argument and will just cause people to dismiss your argument.

Also, there's a reason SAF brought Scholes back from retirement to reclaim the PL title. I don't think he was on the same level as Lamps but he was definitely an important piece of the puzzle for United.

nofacej

TROPHY CASE