Let's make an alternate win-con EDH deck!
Deck Help forum
Posted on May 12, 2013, 1:37 a.m. by tigersfan774
I thought it would be fun to make an EDH deck with as many crazy alternate win-cons as possible. It would probably have to be five colors so don't feel restricted by colors when making suggestions. After some people weigh in and I look up some stuff myself, I'll draw the deck up on here for and post the link for everyone.
Suggest away!
Epochalyptik says... #3
Is this deck supposed to be even remotely effective, or just packed full of alternate win conditions. I.e. do you want to be able to win, or do you just want to do crazy things.
May 12, 2013 4:30 a.m.
tigersfan774 says... #5
More the latter. I'm not looking for something that will win every time. Just a crazy deck that would be fun to play in larger multiplayer formats.
May 12, 2013 11:25 a.m.
tigersfan774 says... #6
I've created the prototype of this deck if anyone would like to look at that as well. It can be found here: A win by any other name would smell as sweet
May 12, 2013 11:49 a.m.
Looking things up on Gatherer: Barren Glory , Celestial Convergence , Chance Encounter , Epic Struggle , Mortal Combat , Test of Endurance , Phage the Untouchable , Vraska the Unseen 's ult.
May 12, 2013 12:18 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #8
@theemptyquiver: A deck can be fun and still win. Winning shouldn't be equated with competitiveness.
May 12, 2013 1:51 p.m.
theemptyquiver says... #9
A deck can be fun and still winA deck can be fun and not win.A deck isn't fun and can still win.A deck isn't fun and will not win.
You, in your statement indicated that with the OR in your sentence that you expected the deck to do either one thing OR the other.
Also winning by nature is competive because to wins, means to obtain a victory in a contest or competition. unless you are defining it as the proceeds of gambling...then yes. i agree. but still only kind of.
May 12, 2013 2:25 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #10
The demarcation isn't as absolute as you interpret it to be. "Do you want to be able to win" is markedly different from "do you want to win" and "do you want to only win."
And winning is not by nature competitive, especially in EDH, where there is a split between competitive and casual decks. It's egregiously unreasonable to argue that any deck that wins is automatically competitive because doing so also implies the inverse: casual decks can only lose. A competitive deck in EDH is typically one that is designed and played predominantly for the purpose of winning. A casual deck in EDH is typically one that is designed and played predominantly for the experience and excitement of the game, but not necessarily one that cannot win.
Plenty of decks can win, but also focus on the atmosphere of the game. Many other decks focus on atmosphere, trolling, or hilarity at the expense of their ability to actually achieve a victory. Because this difference exists, I asked OP to classify the deck in question.
Don't extrapolate my statements beyond the bounds of their context; absolutes rarely apply in Magic and almost never apply in EDH.
May 12, 2013 3:02 p.m.
theemptyquiver says... #11
semantics.
i'm not arguing any such point specifically. i'm just pointing out that in my original post the OP expressed in his post that he wanted it to be FUN and have crazy win-cons.
your implications that if he were to go that route, were that he would never be EVEN REMOTELY EFFECTIVE. I thought it seemed like a strange response, and even moreso because as you say EDH is by nature designed to be more casual and promote more fun in it's format. so effectiveness be damned i say.
play to have fun.
extrapotating is also fun.
also, you mentioned that 'because this difference exists, I asked the OP to classify the deck in question."........ but to what end? simply because asking it helps the rest of the community understand the complicated issues at hand and without that one specific clarification all other help would be rendered useless?
i didn't get that out of it....it must be something different....i can't quite put my finger on what it could be...
May 12, 2013 3:13 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #12
Again, semantics. Effectiveness is, contextually, the alternative to a deck full of alternate in cons that aren't held together in any cohesive way.
I asked because I would like to provide help that is tailored to the individual requesting it. Nowhere did I imply that other help would be useless.
May 12, 2013 3:21 p.m.
Azor's Elocutors , a bunch of stuff that was already listed by other posters, and proliferate keyword cards ... oh and also things like Luminarch Ascension that similarly give you bonuses (although not wins immediately) for racking up counters (however you can manage it).
yinfinity says... #2
lots of defenders and fog effects, Azor's Elocutors , Darksteel Reactor , all the gates and Maze's End , Helix Pinnacle , Door to Nothingness , Felidar Sovereign , Biovisionary and clones, Hellkite Tyrant and Mycosynth Lattice , Laboratory Maniac , Mayael's Aria , Mortal Combat , Near-Death Experience and Worship . that's all i got
May 12, 2013 3:26 a.m.