Great article. Timmy, Johnny, and Spike aren't very clear-cut, but this makes them look clear-cut. I think I'm kind of a Johnny/Spike that plays for fun (is that Timmy?).

I see KrazyCaley's note and that is definitely something I would read had I not read that already. Next time, I'd remember to do that. I guess it is proof that KrazyCaley reads the articles before or just after posting them, though.

Both, if I can find the time.

If I were you, I might start using the # tab (it makes text bigger) instead of bolding and italicizing text, but maybe you want the bold and italics.

I'm definitely a Jhonny/Spike.

Uh, yeah I'm a Johnny. No question, really.

Can a Johnny please explain the appeal of combo decks to me? Maybe I just don't get it but... Every time I see a player combo off, everybody else who was playing just kinda shares that look of "well... that WAS fun until that jackass pulled the infinite combo out..." and pick up their cards in silence.

For the record, when I say combo I'm talking about Pestermite + Splinter Twin , Sanguine Bond + Exquisite Blood and the like. I can see the appeal in "combo decks" that win with Grapeshot or Laboratory Maniac because you have to work a lot more towards those wins.

I hope I don't sound condescending, I have nothing against combo players. I just don't personally get the appeal.

Definitely a Johnny/Spike. I love to win, but I do so on my own terms and with decks that aren't top tier, but are competitive, but I always add my own style to them.

Well, EvenDryke, what you're describing is a bit of a Spike thing. R/U Combo decks are definitely good and the players that use them know this well. The appeal of playing those types of decks is often a bit of both Johnny and Spike, mixing the desire to see a grand scheme realized while also playing for the sheer joy of winning. Playing a deck that works towards a specific highlight point walks a delicate line where you balance counter-magic and other pesky forms to control while hitting the field with chosen permanents. It introduces this additional level of play where both players are aware of what one player strives to do. The game is then reduced to 'either you stop me or you're done for'. That's a very powerful high to ride and it hits home for many players. It's not so much about irritating your opponents, but denying them. At least that's how I see it. I don't know about others. I hope I helped give you some insight into other players like myself. We don't REALLY want to piss you off; We're simplt willing to resort to pretty nasty strategies when playing.

This is a cool article. Most of my friends who play can be fit into one of these, or some hybrid. Where do control players go, though? I always play for fun, but sometimes that fun comes from sucking out all the fun from my opponent.

About combos: I definitely see the appeal of trying to pull off something like "Elite Tactics" or Boros Reckoner /Azorius Charm /Boros Charm in standard. Playing Exquisite Blood /Sanguine Bond or Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind //Curiosity in not-for-money multiplayer commander is griefing as far as I'm concerned.

To the OP: I'm definitely a Timmy/Spike. When I see a cool card, I think "I want to win. With this." Doesn't matter if it's a $0.40 or $40.00 card. Restoration Angel , Scourge of Valkas , or Tibalt, the Fiend-Blooded .

(I had a sick midrnage deck that put me in the top four at FNM for three months with Resto; I barely won any games with Tibalt.)

Oh I'm 100% a timmy. I always play standard, but some of my favorite cards are Ooze Flux , Ratchet Bomb , and Pack Rat . I have a standard artifacts deck and I'm currently working on Grixis Superfriends for standard. I HATE netdecks, and I love beating the tier 1 decks with unheard of cards like Haunted Plate Mail .

I don't necessarily agree that Johnny's are combo players. I think combo players are probably Johnnys, but Johnnys aren't always combo players. In fact, wizards don't mention combos in the original piece of writing about Johnny players. Their description is just a general, 'creative' player. Whilst I agree that combos require creative thought, I disagree that all creative players play combo based strategies.

I am a combination of the three. Which one comes out more is based solely on the deck I am building at the time.

I have my Spike esque netdeck lists with slight tweaks to try and win hard - Sorin's Aristocrats.

I have my Timmy decks where I just want to ramp into the biggest creature as fast as possible (typically dragons) - Domri's Bloodrush Buddies.

And then I have my Johnny decks which I probably love the most (Corpsejack Menace + Bioshift + Desecration Demon ) - Golgari Combine.

Whatever inspires me at the time, I just enjoy building decks. Some win, most don't but I have fun.

I am so a Timmy.

My first deck was a shadow deck revolving around Dauthi Slayer and other Dauthi, Endless Scream and Dark Ritual .

I picked up the Dauthi and was like SHADOW!!! you cant block me, lets make it big so i can do 20dmg fast!

My current deck revolves around Venser, the Sojourner and all the Bouncy Bouncy fun.

ChiefBell No, johnny's arent always combo players. But wizards does acknowledge trhat a majority of them are actually via Johnny, Combo Player

Yeah, Johnny is all about playing on his own terms. Want to make that sick deck that uses Storm Crow and Chimney Imp ? Johnny. Deck that uses a 5 card, infinite combo? Johnny.

The point isn't to just win, winning is great and all, but Johnny want's to win exactly how he says he will. If he plays a Battle of Wits deck and then wins by attacking, he hasn't really won.

I would actually encourage everyone to read the revisited version of Timmy, Johnny, Spike since Maro explains a bit better what each of the types are beyond "Big Creature Timmy", "Combo Player Johnny", and "Winning is the Only Fun Part Spike". I fall into Diversity Gamer Timmy / Offbeat Designer Johnny. I love creating decks that take a single mechanic or card and build a deck off of synergies and I like playing a lot of different decks.

I wholeheartedly support Gidgetimer's suggestion, go read MaRo's articles about the psychographics. In my opinion this article is oversimplifying the psychographics: it's not about how players want to win, it's about what aspect of the game they enjoy.

For example, a player who just wants to frustrate his opponents with lockdown effects might be a Timmy: maybe he is just seeking the experience of seeing opponents growl at their misery.

Yeah, the thing is that really the basis of each of the psychographics is more what you are seeking from the game than just how the profiles have been simplified.

Timmy wants to have fun above all else. To some this means swinging in with the horde of 1/1s that they have amassed or the 64/64 Primordial Hydra trampling over all possible blockers that Timmy is stereotyped as. To others it means pulling off a 1 in 100 combo that has no reason to work. To some it means playing permission control. The thing that unites Timmies is that they just want to have a good time with the game.

Johnny wants to use Magic as a creative outlet. Whether that be crafting the perfect combo; building a deck around cards that others would dismiss as "unplayable"; or make a LoTR themed deck. Johnnies want to create and a lot of the time the deck is more important than the game to Johnny.

Spike is out to prove something. It may be that he is the best player in his area (even if he is no where close, Spike isn't always a good player). He may be trying to prove to himself that win or lose played flawlessly. He may be trying to prove that he can understand the meta well enough to win a GP with a rogue deck. Spike always has something to prove.

To everyone saying i've oversimplified it; yes i have simplified it quite a bit. All of these articles i write are more of an introduction to whatever the topic is, hence the simplification. Had the subject been interesting to any said person they could further research the topic. My goal was just to introduce some people to the idea of the three types of players. By no means was i saying these examples are the only types of players in each.

definitely a Johnny, minus the infinite combos. Love crazy combos that can almost never go off though! :D

@Dalektable: I personally wasn't saying that you in particular were over simplifying it. A lot of the community has only ever read the first article that MaRo wrote on the subject in which he by his own admission in the later article oversimplified it. I'm a bit sensitive about it I guess because I fall heavily into the Timmy category and I feel that the stereotype of Timmy is that he is young and dumb which isn't me. I enjoy the well costed and powerful cards and know how to evaluate them, but this is a game and you might as well have fun. Sometimes it is fun to just play ridiculously large creatures. But it is more fun to play reanimator than trying to hard cast Worldspine Wurm . Sometimes it's fun to play Slivers, but if that is all you do it can get boring quick. So mostly I was trying to give a fuller explination of Timmy since we aren't all just "play 1 each of the 40 biggest creatures in magic and 4 of each basic land."

Gidgetimer Lol, i will say that i have a casual huge ramp deck that can ramp into Worldspine Wurm on turn 4 which is pretty fun

I mean hell, at least make it 4 each of the Shardlands :P

Well, I'm a johnny player and totally dislike instant-win-combos. I even take possible infinites out of the mainboard and only side them in against competitive or dick deck players.

Lol, I think I just discovereded a new player type: The dick deck troll... His only purpose is to show off or give you a hard time. He will play life gain decks without wincons or infinite life combos only to steal your time and mock you. He doesn't want to win, he wants you to lose. His favorite card is this one:

That card is awesome.

The Johnny and Timmy in me laugh maniacally whenever I cast Worldspine Wurm off an Unexpected Results Turn 3 with my RUG deck.

I'm a Timmy and a Spike. I like to win, I want to win, but I want to do it my way, and in a big way. I see a card like Worldspine Wurm , and I build a deck to get it out (with some consistency) on turn 3. I may play $500 decks like a spike, but most of the time, I built them myself, and I built them to do big, big things.

I was under the impression that a Johnny was someone who tries to build decks that are mainly about being creative; combos are definitely part of it, but easy infinite combos are usually more of a Spike thing, as I take it.

Also, don't forget the somewhat secondary types; Vorthos and Melvin.

Sometimes I doubt the claim that Spike personalities enjoy the game they are playing. Spikes tend to be rude and aggressive, I have heard stories of tournament players turning violent and aggressive when losing a game. These people should remind themselves what Magic is and why they should play a game.

I've met plenty of rude spikes, but I've met some who are easy enough to get along with. Depends on the person, really.

I am by all means a Johnny/Timmy. I try to build decks with incredible synergy and I love using cards that seem really bad. I once won a game with Laboratory Maniac and Leveler , but they killed the maniac, I flashed back Memory's Journey during my upkeep to return a Laboratory Maniac , Pact of Negation and Darksteel Plate to my hand. I also love any combo or card that if it goes wrong, I lose the game. Especially, Last Chance . It feels so good to take that risk, y'know?

I know a Spike who came to an unofficial (read: casual) tournament we were holding with a multiple hundred-plus-dollar-card deck because we said it was a legacy tournament (not many people in it knew the formats, so we chose legacy assuming nobody would take it so seriously.) He won undefeated. He's a very good player, and not a terrible person, but he owns a lot of older power cards, knows a lot about magic and is quite prideful at times about his abilities. He once repeated something I said during a game in a child-like tone after he won because I suppose it bruised his pride.

Well, the way I see it, one will be more troubled about losing the more one wants to win. Therefore, Spike players have a harder time not to be a sore loser when they do. If they've got a Timmy streak and must win with that one overcosted card, they're not to be envied...

Don't get me wrong, a lot of Spikes are good sports despite their strive for victory.

Also, two links i feel have been missing.
Timmy, Johnny, and Spike revisited
Melvin and Vorthos

TIIIMMMMAYYYY! But I think to be a Timmy/Spike, you have to have some innovation. Reanimator, 12 Post, Urza Tron, fit the bill quite nicely. I also like super fast Aggro like RDW, although I've never seen Infect as fair.

Think I am a john/spike

I'm a Johnny/Timmy with a spike side. I love to show off with my decks I create, I love to create decks from concepts/card synergy, and I love to win. But if you are getting mana swamped or screwed, I'll slow down and give you a chance to get back in it.

I once made a Nightveil Specter /Play your opponents deck back when Nightveil Specter was just a junk rare. Took it to FNM and got my butt handed to me. I did win a match and a few games however.

Personally, I like to win. But I prefer cruelty, and I'm a control player. Some of my favorite cards include Day of Judgment , Detention Sphere , and Mana Leak (I've only been playing for a few years so things like Force of Will really aren't in my agenda). Is there a fourth kind of player?

I'm probably between a Timmy and a Johnny. I usually play decks that are combo and synergy heavy (like a Johnny), but I won't run infinite combos like Exquisite Blood + Sanguine Bond . And, like Timmy, I have a blast playing these decks.