@kengiczar Faerie Miscreant only draws if you control another Micreant. So the first one does nothing, and will most likely die before you get to play the second.

But I do agree with you that Scion should be played at a min of 2, because you will always want more scions, and they will most likely die before they make an impact, considering they can be bolted etc.

Unless you have two on the board of course.

Oh and run Batterskull!! The lifelink it offers to your faerie tokens is soooo good :D ESPECIALLY against aggro decks, as it allows you to block with your tokens and attack, gaining life the whole time :3

Just one though. It's high cmc literally is the only downside...

Familiar's Ruse it will allow you to bounce your creatures. This is totally my dream deck ;-)

A 1-of Tasigur, the Golden Fang has been putting in work for me. Definitely give it a try.

I love this deck! +1 from me. Would you consider putting a Ghost Quarter instead of Tectonic Edge. Works wonders with Surgical Extraction against tron and other decks that rely on certain lands

Pure_Insanity, thanks for checking out the deck :)
I would indeed consider that. It's pretty difficult to choose between those two. Ghost Quarter seems good as it helps vs. Affinity, Infect and Bogles. It might come out on top as it helps early game.

You want some advice? Im an a Faerie player myself. I have tested many versions of this deck. I have discovered a few things. First, while Cryptic Command and Snapcaster Mage are some of the best blue cards, they aren't what's best for Faeries. Snap lacking Faerie creature typing is a problem. So is the triple blue on Cryptic.

To bring out their potential, both need to go. Splashing a 3rd color is infinitely more valuable. Also, Kolaghan's Command is strict ly a better card than Cryptic. Abrupt Decay and Path to Exile are amazing too.

veeonix, thanks for checking out the deck :)
Interesting point about Cryptic and Snapcaster. I'll be testing that out for sure. To start with I think I'll stick with Blue/Black. I like the manabase not hurting my life total. Although Kolaghan's Command does sound nice :)
With all due respect I don't think you know what "strictly better" means, in mtg context. Neither Kolaghan's Command nor Cryptic Command are stricly better than the other. They provide a different selection of choices and cannot be rated as easily as that. One thing that can be said for both is that they have an inherent potential for a 2-for-1.

And with all due respect, I certainly do know what "strictly better" means in MtG context. What I stated is not based on opinion. It is solely objective.

Even ignoring my own personal experience, Kolaghan's Command is the better card. There is never a time Kolaghan's Command is bad. Crypitic Coomand is good at parody, and back breaking when you have field/resource/tempo advantage. The same is true with Kolaghan's Command. but there is a few key differences. First, Kolaghan's Command is good when your down on resources, tempo or field position. Crytic Fogs for a turn and leaves you in the same position the following turn, except they are up another card from drawing on their following turn.

Cryptic is good proactive or reactive. There is no penalty for having "shields down" by tapping down your mana for a turn. Certain things you would rather just die than see return to play when comparing how each spell handles creatures or walkers. Assuming you missed an opportunity to counter something impoortant (Liliana, Jace Vryn's Prodigy, Vendilion Clique etc) it is better to handle the problems than boune them.

Against aggro decks (Fish, Affinity, Elves, Hatebears etc) U/B Faeries have notoriously bad matchups. Kolaghan's Command softens these common matchups heavily. Just red's presence in the deck changes some of them to be in your favor. Lower mana costed cards can be cast at earlier turns in the game. Which is pretty vital against any aggressive deck. Without interacting with an aggressive deck early on, you are unlikely to ever reach 4 lands to cast Cryptic. The problem is still present assuming you even make it to 4 lands. Color access to 3 Blue that turn is a big concern, since you won't always have it. Then, you have to worry about your opponent simply "attacking first" which kills Cryptics value on that game. Man lands allow them to dodge the "Fog" functionof Cryptic as well.

In short, there is no time Cryptic isn't useful. No matter the turn, no matter the matchup, No matter the board state, it offer consistent value. Cryptic varies greatly. Even the lack of consistency of casting it on curve is an issue. The worst comes from the blowout of getting Spell Pierced, Dispelled, Remanded or Mana Leaked. There is a large differences between 3 and 4 mana. Especially when 3/4 of that mana was your precious Blue mana. This makes it difficult to win counter wars. The blow outs are real. Kolaghan's at 3 mana (and not requiring your important Blue mana) allows you to power through taxing countermagic (Leak/Pierce) at early turns due to less mana consumption. It also leaves your blue mana sources open to fight a counter war. Also, while fighting a counter war, you have an additional mana to work with since you spent 3, rather than 4 mana to initiate the exchange of cards influencing the stack.

Now, lets talk about reach. U/B is extremely gimped on its abillity to handle artifacts and enchantments. And to a lesser extent, Planeswalkers. But lets get real, who plays Hero's Downfall? Red offers damage spells to pick off walkers at instant speed without having to get an attack through. Not to mention Dreadbore is an actual Magic card, unlike Downfall. Additionally, the reach to handle resolved creatures with efficient mana investment is nice in a format Aethervial and Cavern of Souls exist in. Speaking of, both are cards U/B Fae never want to see. Grixis gets fast and efficient exchanges of 1-1 or 2-1 exchanges. Another thing U/B is soft at, especially in the early turns.

While its true Damnation works well at closing this deficiency in U/B Fae to a decent extent, being Sorcery speed, 4 mana, not handling Man lands or Aethervial's influence on the game all prove to leave exploitable holes in a control decks gameplan. You can't always counter everything, but play enough removal and you can kill what you want after they resolve.

*typo. 3rd paragraph should start with Kolaghan's Command, not Cryptic.

In short, there is no time Kolaghan's isn't useful. No matter the turn, no matter the matchup, No matter the board state, it offer consistent value. Cryptic varies greatly. Even the lack of consistency of casting it on curve is an issue. The worst comes from the blowout of getting Spell Pierced, Dispelled, Remanded or Mana Leaked. There is a large differences between 3 and 4 mana. Especially when 3/4 of that mana was your precious Blue mana. This makes it difficult to win counter wars. The blow outs are real. Kolaghan's at 3 mana (and not requiring your important Blue mana) allows you to power through taxing countermagic (Leak/Pierce) at early turns due to less mana consumption. It also leaves your blue mana sources open to fight a counter war. Also, while fighting a counter war, you have an additional mana to work with since you spent 3, rather than 4 mana to initiate the exchange of cards influencing the stack.

This is corrected. Sorry for the errors. I am typing from a Wii u gamepad.

I agree with much of what you say. By saying that you don't know what "strictly better" means, I'm not saying that you don't know your mtg. You put forth a great argument and can argue which card is the better choice overall. But neither card is strictly better. You can have a look at the definition here: http://mtgsalvation.gamepedia.com/Strictly_better
I agree that the mana cost is problematic. I agree that it is problematic vs. man lands. I agree that it's a bad spot to bounce a planeswalker.
However Cryptic can do stuff that Kolaghan's can't. It's an inherent counterspell, which is better than discard if you're against combo. It can hit multiple creatures, which can open attack routes or fog an aggro deck instead of killing one creature. It can save one of your own permanents. Generally it can have a larger impact on the game, but that impact happens later than Kommand. I really don't think that one of them is better. It's up to the player which direction they want to take their deck. How slows/fast to play.

Kommand also rebuys your creatures to recast them, by getting them from the grave rather than the field. This is the same as bouncing your own creature to avoid removal (exile being the exception).

If you force your opponent to a topdecking position, using Kommand during their draw step when they drew their one and only card, forces them to discard it (instants/flash being the exception. The argument made that counering is better than discarding is an interesting view point, but they are not the same. Players tend to hold onto spells they don't want destroyed or countered. They look tonmake their plays at a profitable time. Whether it's when you are tapped down, or they bait the counter spell or play their own discard spell to pre-emptively hit your counter spell. Black discard can avoid these options, making it much faster, and often much stronger. However, discard suffers from only being able to target the hand. Threats not yet drawn can be drawn and problematic. But this is where Surgical Extraction the ype effects come in. It's blacks way to handle things they don't want to see. Assuming you are relying on Black rather than blue.

You are running a control shell primarily. If you lost so much field and resource advantage that you need a tempo swing from Cryptic to get a full attack through to finish your opponent to get your win, then you were in a position a control deck never wants to be in. The reason is, you won't always have enough presence to two shot your opponent. And if they disrupt your plan with a removal spell to change the math or turn clock, you can get blown out and lose. I believe I already mentioned when Cryptic is bad, its really bad. And its an easy card to get blown out on. When I win with Faeries, its usually a commanding victory. To the point my opponents field is empty, I still have counter magic up, and creatures smacking down the opponent. The close games I win are when both opponent and I are top decking, but I still have superior board. Having to Cryptic to attack is a desperation play control decks shouldn't seek to need. If you grund your opponent out, you will get attacks in leisurely when your opponent cannot actually block. This is as good to win, but doesn't rely on a desperation push of aggression that you can be blown out on.

Kommand has an equal impact of greatness on the game. The better benefits come from the harder to see aspects. Its less taxing on colored mana, it consumes less mana, it casts earlier, getting blown out is harder, getting blown out is less painful, the benefit of red in the deck/board is better than having exactly 1UUU mana held up each turn on your mana.

I am a control player at heart. I absolutely love Cryptic. It is the most powerful counter spell in Modern. Counter magic is very powerful, and very important. I'm not contesting any of these facts. I am stating that Kommand is better than Cryptic for this deck.

The notion that Faeries have to be U/B, run Cryptic and Snapcaster are horrible traditions that need to be thrown out. They limit the deck's evolution and make some matches difficult to impossible. Something that is unnecessary and inefficient. People believed this notion because years ago in standard, thats what the deck looked like. This isn't standard, this isn't all those years ago, and the stereotype U/B Faeries never top. That isn't a coincidence. The deck has to evolve to keep up with a changing meta.

Why not more scions of oona? I get high cmc but still it's a faerie lord

The card is horrendous by itself. There's not a high number of faeries in the deck, which means that Scion doesn't have a lot of soldiers to command. A higher number of Scions makes more sense in a deck which relies more heavily on creatures.

But you do get a lot of faeries from Bitterblossom, a card I really don't understand the popularity of. Whenever I have seen other people play it, it seems to end up killing them.

It's too risky to rely on the opponent not removing Bitterblossom for the 3-4 turns it takes to mass up a faerie force, or for the opponent to wipe the board. Scion is a nice ace up your sleeve, but a bad card to be stuck with. The deck doesn't reliably mass faeries, unlike other tribes like Elves, Humans or Goblins.
Bitterblossom has huge potential. You can look at your life total as a resource. It doesn't matter whether you have 1 or 10 life when you win the game, you still win the game. Trading 1 life for a 1/1 flier is worth it, especially when you keep getting them :)

Since this deck does run both, i have to ask something thats on my mind for some time, but i didnt get to ask at my LGS last time i was there.

On Scion of Oona it reads "Other Faerie creatures you control get +1/+1" and "Other Faeries you control have Shroud" so...when i read this i'd say your Bitterblossom get's shroud out of the Scion since it is a Faerie...if it wouldnt, the wording on Scion would explicitly say "Faerie creatures you control have Shroud", wouldnt it?

SpiritKing, that's correct. Scion provides shroud for Bitterblossom also. That means for instance, that Scion is one of few cards that can save Bitterblossom from an Abrupt Decay.

Rathaelix

Thank you! Nice! It just bothers me now, that i missed it for so long, until i read the card a bit more careful xD