Glissa, the Traitor is also an option if you go the Golgari route. She is a solid defender that can take out any creature and keep on going. Deathtouch and Firststrike are brutal, and she cost around $2.50. She could replace Leatherback Baloth. People are hesitant to even block her, so she almost guarantees you'll deal 3 damage or more if she is buffed and you decide to attack with her. She also pairs well with Ratchet Bomb, which can give you a board wipe against decks with a lot of similar low cost cards.

I think having both Dryad Militant and Scavenging Ooze is a bad idea. If for some reason there is a sorcery or instant in a graveyard that you'd like exiled, SO can do that and much more. I'm also not a huge Groundbreaker fan. Personally this is what I would change up in the deck:

Remove 4 Dryad Militant and add 4 Dungrove Elder

Remove Groundbreaker and Scavenging Ooze and add two Hooting Mandrills

Then have 2 Scavenging Ooze in the side board for when you're against a Burn deck.

Just my thoughts :) hope you like the suggestions

This has potential. If you do decide to invest in some cards to make it a bit more competitive, one card at a time or so, I recommend to start with Khalni Hydra and Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx.

No, Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx doesn't fit particularly well with this deck. Demonstration:

turn 1: land, Experiment One

turn 2: land Kalonian Tusker, opponent: Lightning Bolt/Fatal Push/ at Kalonian Tusker

turn 3: Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx... not worth activating. can't play Leatherback Baloth, trouble playing most 1 drop + 2 drops.

Is it maybe better later on? Perhaps... but this is not really a deck that goes for a lategame with a huge threat, as far as I can tell. While it might yield a pile of mana in turn 5 or so, it's not really that interesting, when all you have in hand by turn 5 is a Vines of Vastwood for which you need 2 mana.

PickleNutz Thanks for your help. I understand that a deck even being budget can become competitive, the problem is that, as you said, it need more than one color. I know that there are ways to make a deck multicolour without breaking the bank but if you want to do it properly you can't do it in a budget way. Some dual lands aren't enough for a color splash, you need also fetch lands to search for the color you need and this, with new color cards prices, will surely overcome the 100$ cap I set. So I'm not saying your suggestions are bad, but simply I can't afford them. I shared this deck because it is the one I play in paper, I want to be useful for someone else that wants a pretty cheap, almost competitive and I think enjoyable deck and this is useful for me because I can make this deck even better with your advices.

DJMintEFresh Thanks for your suggestions. I don't clearly understand your criticism to Dryad Militant and Scavenging Ooze, they are really strong cards, I play only one Ooze cause I want to be more aggressive but it's amazing. For the same reason I didn't include Dungrove Elder, I'll put it in SB if I need it but for now seems I don't. Hooting Mandrills is good only if I put a lot of cards in graveyard but this is not the case so I don't think it is a good idea.

User:Naksu Thanks for your advices. I think xyr0s explained it well, for this deck devotion is important, no doubt, but this is not a ramp deck, it doesn't need more than 3-4 mana. I mean with 4 mana you can Groundbreaker+Aspect of Hydra that is the ultimate finisher we have, no need for more.

Both are right, I jumped the gun too early without properly figuring your deck out. Though Khalni Hydra is relatively easy to get online on t4 with your setup. It's susceptible to removal without haste, but it still rocks on a majority on green stompys.

You don't necessarily have to have fetch lands, and some dual lands are in the 3 to 5 dollar category in mint condition that will enter without becoming tapped. When playing paper magic and looking for cards to buy you can always go for moderately played or even slightly damaged cards and save up to 75% off on the card's value. It still plays the same. I have seen guys build dual colored budget decks for less than thirty dollars using that shopping method, so it can be done. You can also use very cheap spells to fix mana, cards like Abundant Growth are an example. Woodland Cemetery in moderately played condition can be found as low as $2.00 on average too. It's all about if you want to have low quality cards in your collection and if you're comfortable sacrificing condition for playability in a budget deck. Of course shopping at median to high end prices for near mint cards the splash would bust your budget to make the deck effective.

First of all, I see some people here having really stubborn opinions over the game. I mean, personally, I have an old saying, marked on my heart, who tells "play what you like and be the best at it", and I feel like some might forget that magic is a game before anything. Playing a game, by nature, hasn't a defined goal nor ideal end, "winning" is not universally seen as the same, and it's even more not seen universally as the goal. Competitiveness is not the ultimate thing to achieve, it can be to one, and be the opposite to the other.

Yes, interaction is important in playing magic for fact, and if you have no removal nor clear plan you won't go further against opponent who will, but the fact is that even if the deck you play is called agro by the majority, it doesn't define it's nature to the unique, you can't just say "it works like this and there's no way you can change it". This deck is not more aggro then what you may think, like, calm down with the unstoppable need to win, stop comparing everything to what used or is winning right now, statistic aren't mirror of reality nor definitive answer to what we should play.

What I mean is that if you really want to win each game, or go competitive like so many people want to, stompy is definitely not the deck to play, so there is no reason to not have fun in tweaking the deck as one may like. If the deck was to become competitive, it would have been WAY before because the deck is old as hell, old as modern itself. So play the deck as you like, splash color or play mono-green, use only forest or use non-basic lands, play removal or don't, do whatever you like, no one cares beside you.

Anyway, that was a small rant, I can't stand this irreparable will to make everything competitive. If you still want to hear my (personal) thoughts on the deck, here are they, but take them as they are, opinions, not facts:

• I prefer mono green, less life loss, cheaper (even if it shouldn't be a problem in a perfect world), and you can work around with Dismember and Prey Upon for removal. If you need more protection, there's lots of response even in "mono green": Blossoming Defense, Wilt-Leaf Liege for instance;
• No ramp, ensuring a better start is less interesting than thinking about a better late-game, the speed you gain doesn't make you apply more pressure nor save you after they stop your treats, I suggest late-game alternative over them if you really want to spice up your list. Otherwise, play more aggro;
• Groundbreaker is easily removed, for 3 mana it's not enough of a treat, even as a one-of, if the opponent knows how to play, he will never tap out against you, you are the danger, playing one and get it bolted means literally loosing a turn. Don't bother playing them, I know they are funny and surprising, but they are once, not twice;
• The graveyard hate plan is better than the Hooting Mandrills one, your graveyard play is far less efficient than grixis player's one, no cantrip or anything to fill it, don't count on them to kill your creature and keep them in your graveyard, they play Scavenging Ooze too. If you can't play with it properly, stop them to too, or else they will beat you on that level, don't bite more than you can chew and keep on nurfing Tarmogoyf and Snapcaster Mage;
• I prefer having a diverse land base and skipping over Dungrove Elder, it's good with Hexproof, but against wipes it's like any other creatures, so I suggest not to bother building around it too much, that's the more subjective that I can be. It's good as a one-of, but not more than that with a different land base (I like playing rich and diverse land base, strictly subjective like I said);
• Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx is indeed not really good, unless you run some more mana-sink like Scavenging Ooze mainboard, you should probably skip it;
• Don't overdo cards that depends on the board state, like Aspect of Hydra and Khalni Hydra, if the board doesn't cooperate, it's a dead draw, unless you want to make the deck a little bit more midrange. I wouldn't suggest you to do it, but if you still want to (I'm culprit of this), don't play too much late-game cards, still keep in mind you don't want to go in late-game, and if you do, play interactive cards, they will at least spice up your play and assure you have fun and give a interesting fight with your opponent;
• lastly, never play 4 CMC spells, seriously, you won't be able. The only 4 CMC spell you should consider is Collected Company, and personally, the value of this card is good when you run more than 28 creatures, and especially when the majority cost 2 CMC or more, which you don't, so I wouldn't suggest it. It's good, really good, but still, you can perfectly go without it.

Otherwise, have fun m8, it's one of my favorite deck and I can't keep seeing it played!

@mahdik Not to be a know-it-all or anything, but... erhm... winning is pretty well defined in magic. You know: Reduce your opponents life total to 0 or less, or have your opponent attempt to draw a card without having any cards left in library - in both of these cases, you win the game. Other than this, there are a few cards with their own conditions for winning, like Felidar Sovereign. And playing a game like magic, poker or parcheesi, actually has some fairly clear conditions for determining when the game is over, and what the results of this particular match was, including who won. And while some players may appreciate other things you can do in a game like magic other than winning (splashy plays, theme decks), those that mark their deck with the "competitive" tag, probably care about winning, at least with this particular deck. Those that also mark their deck "budget" cares about winning, but without having to sell their firstborn to do so. What can seem a little odd, is a long and eloquent essay about how you find the urge to make every deck competitive hard to tolerate - you could see the "competitive" tag, so... why bother complaining about it? There is a whole pile of casual decks, that you could comment on.

Regarding this deck: Yes, it's possible to classify decks in terms of their approach to winning, and many cards are only played in one type of deck. This deck is an aggro deck. That defines how it's going to win. It's also a budget deck. Like a couple of other decks, it's a metacall: Sometimes the local environment shapes up in a way, where certain decks would be easy to win with. This one would be pretty good if there's a lot of burn decks, I think. But in a UW-control heavy meta, it wouldn't really shine. It's probably one of the decks, that are that little bit too fair to be really competitive. but it does have it's uses.

I agree on a couple of your opinions: 4 cmc cards are hard to play in modern, at least if you are going to do so on curve - you don't suggest Wilt-Leaf Liege as a 4 cmc creature, but a way to deal with discard, right? Also, this deck might have a bit too many buffing cards - and a correspondingly low creature count (it's a bit of interpretation, but that's what I think you meant).

The single copy of Groundbreaker I really like. At a single copy, it's unlikely to clutter your hand. And it's the type of card, that can end a game against an opponent who runs out of removal, or thinks he is safe for some other reason. More than 1 copy would be too much, though. And I think a point about it could be, that some opponents might hold back removal specifically for this, and let some of your other creatures live.

xyr0s I think we didn't understand each other well. My point is that winning is not by nature the goal every player have in mind. What I meant is that definition of words or concept are a mirror of human interaction, words have the meaning we give them. Winning has definitely a definition, a game-related definition, but it also have a human-related definition, which are not necessarily equivalent. What my stance was is that whether or not you want to win, you must define it's definition within yourself, and then play alike. If you follow me, if you wanted to win game-wise, in a competitive environment, play another deck, stompy is good but there's better, but if you want to win flavor-wise, or within your own definition of the concept of winning, play whatever you like, which englobe the deck and a thousand other casual ones.

In the same way, the deck is how you define it as much as how people defines it around you, names have no universal meaning and can (and will) change within a population and time. It's not more of an aggro deck for everyone as a midrange deck for you. I know it's meta and not really important, but nonetheless, it's true. Even if I must admit that yes, it's quite frankly a aggro deck, no need to be Einstein to understand that, my point is that there is no need to fall into a obscurantism of opinions, in which strange place only one matters: there is no "real" way to play the deck, nor "real" way to win. You can't assume the intention of players by the fact they play magic, it's not because they wrote "competitive" on top of the page that they are playing to win, as strangely as it may sound.

How many time have I seen people play douchebag decks only to make people suffer, not even to win. They feel good even if they lose at the end. It happens especially in commander, and they call their decks competitive.

Anyway, Wilt-Leaf Liege is against discard, yes. Loxodon Smiter is another good exemple of great answer against discard. With Death's Shadow decks all around and our ability to play everything we have in our hand super fast, discarding it to a surprise Thoughtseize (having no other target) or a late game Liliana of the Veil is great way to punish them. I prefer them in sideboard tho, unless your meta is full of discard.

Groundbreaker as a one of, in the situation you've shown, is quite funny and interesting I must admit. keeping them from playing their removal is interesting, good interaction. It could surprise a lot of players game 1, and keep them on the edge game 2. You can even side it out and the opponent won't even know it, no one will ever Surgical Extraction you so they won't search your library. I'd say go for it, I agree. I personally prefer consistency over surprise win (in which case I feel like playing against my own deck), but it's a matter of taste/meta :)

mahdik xyr0s I'm glad you're doing some constructive discussion here but I think it's important to keep focus on the deck. I started playing magic for one reason: have fun and I think this is the same for almost everyone. Someone enjoy just playing magic, someone else enjoy winning, I enjoy playing magic and winning. I can't spend too much on magic so I looked for a deck that I enjoy playing and that can win games, I've found Stompy. I know this can't be competitive as a more expensive deck, I don't care about winning every match but I want to win, so I want the best deck I can afford. In short words trying to have the best from your deck doesn't mean winning is fundamental for you. Closed this topic let's talk about the deck.I agree about monogreen, no ramp, etc. About discard cards a lot of them doesn't let you choose which card to discard so it's not so easy to counter that. About Groundbreaker xyr0s understand why I put it in, I'm currently trying this list and it's working fine. I've recently seen a list on a popular forum (I don't know if I can say the name) with 4 Groundbreaker and no Baloths affirming that it gives more reach and it halos closing games. I'll try that list to see if this is true even if I'm a bit sceptical. Never stop learning.

MagicMat, perfect then! Winning and having fun is possible with this deck.

I think the deck is solid has it is, changes only matter meta-wise. Less Dismember if people play less big creature like Gurmag Angler and Death's Shadow, less pump spell and more creature/late-game cards if people play control and some Groundbreaker if the meta is more aggressive but none if there's a lot of removal. Just try it out in your local area and twick it in consequences.

Same for the possible anti discard package, the artifact one, the token one, and the burn one in your side, matter of meta.

I would personally run only 2x Dismember, just a thought.

Have fun :D

Maybe Terra Stomper could work?

frostyballs high mana cost. This deck will probably never reach 6 lands.

I like the deck some on budget alternatives could be mutigenic growth or groundswell or might of the krosa In stead of the aspect of Hydra devotion is good but there are bigger pumps and I would add an arbor elf and Utopia sprawl seeing as with both by turn 2 you get 4 Mana and by turn 3 a potential 11 Mana and as a pay off for that Mana use any X casting cost Hydra I have made a primordial Hydra an 8/8 by turn 3 using this combo and every turn it doubles and has trample

Bloodweb I appreciate you like it, but this is not the deck you are suggesting about. No ramp, no high mana creatures, just play the most efficient and fat creatures for low mana and stomp pumping them. I'm not saying your deck doesn't work, it's just different.

Another great pay off for your pump spells is setessan oathsworn as heroic will buff him by an additional+2/+2 Everytime you use a pump spell on him and with things like vines of vastwood kicked and a might of old krosa making him hexproof and a 13/13 on turn 4 is hard to deal with

I understand mine is more of a half ramp half stompy I use the ramp instead of pump spells to get big creatures out early

And since mutigenic growth can be payed with life not Mana you don't need any more then 4 Mana to turn 3 setessan oathsworn then turn 4 vines of vastwood kicked might of old krosa and mutigenic growth by Paying 2 life you still have 1 Mana free for another pump of your choice making him swing for most likely game on turn 4

Best part is it's all 3 cmc and under for all 3 bucks and under.

Bloodweb 1/1 for 3 CMC without any kind of evasiveness is too risky. I would play Predator Ooze instead, it's indestructible and grows by itself.

That's true but it doesn't get as big as quick and the vines of vastwood giving it hexproof is a sort of evasion

We've had this discussion about ramping before, haven't we? Or is it just me having a strange feeling of deja vu?

Other than that: Setessan Oathsworn is only good in a format with very little unconditional removal - in a world of Fatal Push, Path to Exile, and Abrupt Decay, it just dies, and takes one of your pump-spells with it. Also, in order to get it to hit hard, you have to have piles of spells in your deck that can target it. Like... I dunno... 20 spells? And all those spells take up space, where you'd otherwise have creatures. Besides, it still costs 3 mana on its own, making it a midgame threat. At best you get to swing it in turn 4, and every modern deck ought to have a plan for the circumstance "big creature attacks". Yes, yes, it's good with Mutagenic Growth, but so is every card with heroic or prowess.

xyr0s yes, we have. However I completely agree.

Absolutely love this deck and my only suggestion would be a Mistcutter Hydra It's just awesome and gives you a small late game if needed