Tuesday, November 8, 2011

Losing Casual Pauper


Sometimes I think I hate Pauper. I built a deck that was different. Game 1 I'm dead on turn 3 to Goblins. Fun. Switched decks to something a little more powerful. Lose to recurring Chittering Rats and Pestermites. Frustrating. Then I play this mind-numbing grind of a game vs endless graveyard recursion as win condition: Pit Keeper and Grim Harvest. Barf.

Is it the format or do I just not like losing? I'm learning that you have to build powerful decks if you want to win. Twisted Abomination isn't a good enough finisher. You'll run into infinite graveyard recursion and lose. You need Ulamog's Crusher and you need Cloudpost. You can't shy away from running four Counterspells and four Rune Snags. You need to play Rancor. The format is too powerful to bring decks without powerful cards. The Casual Room doesn't mean weak. I try to build my own decks, but if I want to win I'm going to have to bring the goods.

Saturday, November 5, 2011

1K Post

The beauty of the blog format is I can publish in tiny pieces. For no particular reason the text of this post will be limited to one kilobyte.

I wrote some new tech. It's a mix of the deck viewer and the autopop. Notice this lovely card window on the left. It features the devastating Rancor. Now imagine one of these on a Porcelain Legionnaire. Boom! 5/1 first strike and trample is as cool as that window swap.

Both of those cards are common so I start thinking about Pauper. What other green and white cards can we combine? The new Avacyn's Pilgrim is a very attractive mana fixer in a format with no decent dual lands. Innistrad also brings the interesting Travel Preparations. I'd like use these four cards as a base for a new deck. Throw in Bonesplitter, Vines of Vastwood, Qasali Pridemage, some more quality creatures, and some removal and you'd be in business. 143 bytes to spare.

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

Single-Player Magic


Sometimes you just want to play Magic by yourself. Or at least I do.

I starting playing solo Magic before I played Magic Online, but I still play today. Sometimes I just don't feel like playing online, or sitting behind a computer. Also there is just something special about shuffling cards, tapping your lands, and windmill slamming down a Terra Stomper. Solo play is also especially good for playtesting a specific matchup. It's just you and two decks - play 100 games if you want to.

Don't I know what's in my opponent's hand?


This is really the only thing in your way from making this work, and I believe it is a very solvable problem. First, you have to separate what you know and what each "player" knows. You know player one has a Mana Leak in his hand but player two doesn't know this. All he knows is player one has two mana up and is playing blue, plus whatever other information he's gathered from that game/match. This is a very important distinction. Once you can separate in your mind what each player knows then you can make decisions for that player based on that information. So player two's Leatherback Baloth gets countered and he makes a mental note - "watch out for Mana Leak".

You might think that keeping up with what each player knows is a bit much, but it really isn't too bad. You just have to "track state" for two players instead of one and it probably makes you a better player. Also it's really not as bad as it seems because of the way Magic plays.

I've tried to play as multiple players in other games with mixed results, but Magic probably the easiest game I've tried to "solo". I think this is because the decisions you have to make are relatively few (play which card/ability when), but also because it's a game of probability. The "correct" play for a given situation is the play that yields the best results most of the time even if it didn't work out that particular time. For example, on turn one, should you should cast Duress? Yes, odds are you'll snag a good spell. Even if your opponent had nothing but creatures and lands it was still the right play. So, when you're playing single-player you cast the Duress even though you know your opponent has no viable targets because it's the right play. My point here is focus on making the right plays and don't get bogged down in what each player knows.

Now sometimes it's just too close and too important. Player one has two mana up with a Doom Blade and Mana Leak in hand. Player two attacks with a Leatherback Baloth. Do you Doom Blade the attacker now or save mana for a Mana Leak to try to catch his four drop? You start to decide what the right play is and you remember player two has a Vines of Vastwood in hand. So, when you cast the blade he's gonna kick the vines to void your removal and smash you for eight. Then you won't have the mana for a mana leak and he'll resolve a Skinshifter. You realize the game pretty much comes down to whether you cast Doom Blade right now. What's the right play? It's not obvious and it's really important. What to do? Roll a dice! Odds for Doom Blade even for Mana Leak. Keep your dice handy for important decisions that you don't want to make. I even use this when it's not a 50/50 split. So I ask would player one know to make this unusual and very smart play? Maybe - it depends whether he noticed X, Y, and Z. Ok then if I roll a five or a six then he makes the play.


How do you sit on both sides of the table?


Don't! Check it out.



You just play side by side. No need to move to the other side of the table or read upside down cards. Sometimes it gets a little crowded on one playmat. You can spread out if you want or just stack cards.

What about goldfishing?


Why not just use one deck? No don't do that! You're teaching yourself to be a bad player when you play vs an opponent with nothing but 20 life. You're never going to play a goldfish. The most you could possibly learn here is "if my opponent does nothing I can win on turn X". That's not all that useful. Bad players ignore the opponent. Good players understand that your opponent's cards are just as important as your own.

Why would I ever do this?


It's fun. I really enjoy playing this way; It's like Magic Solitaire. Maybe I'm just weird, but what I enjoy most about Magic is trying to understand the complexities of the game. Build two decks with whatever cards you have and play them against each other ten times and you will learn a lot. Each matchup has a story to tell. If you pay attention to who won each game and more importantly why, then as you play more games your understanding of the decks, the matchup, the cards in the decks, and Magic in general increases.

Try it out!

Saturday, October 29, 2011

A Box of Innistrad



It was my friend Neil's birthday. His present/party to himself was having three of his friends come over for a private sealed deck tournament. It was a blast.

He bought a box of Innistrad and we each got six packs. He gave us the option to pay $15 to keep the packs or play for free as long as we gave what we opened back to him. That left 12 packs for prizes split 6-3-2-1 which he let us keep even if we played for free. We each got three matches in a round robin.

Sitting around the kitchen table eating donuts, drinking coffee, and opening fresh booster packs is an excellent way to start a Saturday.

My pool didn't have any super bombs that I had to play so I began eliminating my weakest colors. I ended up in white and blue. Here's my deck (reconstructed from memory by the way - which took me about half an hour).





3 Stitched Drake
1 Invisible Stalker
2 Silver-Inlaid Dagger
1 Avacynian Priest
1 Cackling Counterpart
1 Champion of the Parish
2 Civilized Scholar
1 Deranged Assistant
1 Doomed Traveler
1 Forbidden Alchemy

1 Murder of Crows
1 Rebuke
1 Selhoff Occultist
1 Spectral Rider
1 Think Twice
1 Voiceless Spirit
1 Manor Gargoyle
2 Bonds of Faith
2 Shimmering Grotto
6 Plains
9 Island



White provides the removal in the form of two Bonds of Faith and a Rebuke. The main offense is three Stitched Drakes which are backed up by a variety ways to get creatures into the graveyard: two Civilized Scholars, Deranged Assistant, Forbidden Alchemy and Selhoff Occultist. I learned the power of the Silver-Inlaid Dagger in the pre-release last month so I ran both of mine. One Invisible Stalker hopes to equip the dagger and steal some games.

I ended up winning first place by the skin of my teeth. My last match was vs Kris. We were both 2-0 (all the matches were very close) and this one was for all the marbles. Game one was going ok until Olivia Voldaren shows up. She dismantled my team and smashed my face. I reflect as I shuffle up for the next game. I think my deck is a little better than his, but winning two in a row is going to be difficult. Hopefully we don't see Olivia again. All I can do is focus on the next game. Game two: Turn one Silver-Inlaid Dagger, turn two Invisible Stalker, turn three equip. He had one card in his deck which could stop that, Tribute to Hunger. I played another creature the next turn and it was over. Final game. I'm looking pretty good with a two or three fliers in play. Then guess who? Olivia the Terrible. She wipes my board and gets huge. I'm going to lose. Then I draw the only card in my deck that can save me: Rebuke. She swings, she dies. I draw some Stitched Drakes, make a few copies with Cackling Counterpart and seal the deal.

I traded all the good stuff in my prize packs for some classic loot: a 4th edition Wrath of God and a beautiful revised Sol Ring.

It's not if we're going to this again, but when. Next time maybe I'll host. I highly recommend splitting a box with a few friends for your own Kitchen Table Invitational.

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

The Turbo Xerox Rule

Notice anything odd about this deck?



Delver Blue by newplan. 4-0 Daily Event 2925834



4 Cloud of Faeries
4 Delver of Secrets
4 Ninja of the Deep Hours
4 Spellstutter Sprite
2 Brainstorm
4 Counterspell
2 Curse of Chains
4 Daze
2 Echoing Truth
4 Gitaxian Probe
2 Gush
2 Intervene
4 Preordain
4 Think Twice
14 Island


Only 14 lands. Fourteen!? I've never seen a land count that low. A standard midrange deck should run 24 lands. Control decks need a few more and aggro decks can use less. But the minimum I've seen is 17, and that's for very aggressive Goblin and Infect decks. At first I thought the list had a typo. Then I thought maybe that deck was just super inconsistent. Then SpikeBoyM over at PDCMagic, in a roundabout way, taught me a little history lesson. He said, "I encourage you to read everything out there about Turbo-Xerox".

I dug up what I could about this mysterious "Turbo Xerox".

Our first reference is an email from 1997:

Subject: Re: A Chance With Common Cards?
From: Alan Comer
Date: 1997/06/27

Even without weatherlight, it is possible. The deck I took 2nd place in the So. Cal Regionals had no rares. It was more by coincidence than by design. Around here, it has been dubbed the Turbo Xerox deck, as everybody copied it due to the lack of rares.


4 x Force of Will
3 x Dissipate
4 x Counterspell
4 x Powersink
4 x Memory Lapse
4 x Foreshadow
4 x Portent
4 x Impulse
4 x Suq-ata Firewalker
4 x Waterspout Djinn
4 x Man-o-War
1 x Dream Tides
17 x Islands

The important thing to remember with this deck is that early on, you MUST use the library manipulation to get to your land. Later, you can use it to get to cool spells. Things like: I portent your library. I foreshadow away your good spell...

The library manipulation he's referring to are the cheap cantrips Portent, Impulse, and Foreshadow.

Mike Flores wrote about this deck in 2005:
The principle of the original Xerox deck is that for every four 1-2 mana cantrips, you can remove two lands. Therefore, even though Alan played only 17 actual Islands, the Foreshadows, Impulses, and Portents raised his effective count considerably. In the early game, Alan would have to use his cantrips to find land, but in the late game, he could use them to always have a counter in hand."
I'll call this the Turbo Xerox Rule.
The Turbo Xerox Rule
For every four 1-2 mana cantrips, you can remove two lands.

Looking back over newplan's deck we see:

One mana cantrips:
2 Brainstorm
4 Gitaxian Probe
4 Preordain

Two mana cantrips:
4 Cloud of Faeries
2 Gush
4 Think Twice

Ten one mana cantrips and ten two mana cantrips.
20 cheap cantrips / 4 = 5 sets of cheap cantrips.
5 sets * 2 lands = 10 lands saved.
24 lands -10 lands = 14 lands.

Like I said, I've never seen that before, but it makes sense. I guess most Storm builds operate on the same principle.


I wonder what Alan Comer would think about pushing the rule to that far of an extreme. To me the concept makes sense in general but I have to feel it starts to break down at some point. This is just conjecture, however. Another very important point is the Delver deck is fully operation on two lands. You can't put five drops in a 14 land deck no matter how many cheap cantrips you have.

Another thing to watch out for: You need to have plenty of one mana cantrips. If you only have two mana cantrips then you run the risk of never getting to two lands. This deck has the nice even split though.

This is definitely an expert level deck-building trick, but it's good to understand. I don't see myself building any 14 land decks in the immediate future, but I've often struggled with finding four slots for a set of Ponders. Armed with the knowledge of the Turbo Xerox Rule I can cut two lands making a full set of Ponders only cost two slots! Early you dig for land and late you dig for business spells. Very cool.

Patrick Chapin provides some interesting additional insight into Turbo Xerox in this article.