Hard Lock in Modern?

Modern forum

Posted on April 23, 2015, 4:14 p.m. by HolyFalcon

Is using Erayo, Soratami Ascendant, Eidolon of Rhetoric, and some cheap 0 mana cards like Memnite and Relic of Progenitus viable? You can combo off T3. Or, wait until T3 to cast Erayo for counterspell back up by using Spell Snare to make sure they don't Abrupt Decay Erayo, or cast Tarmogoyf. Mental Misstep could also help flip him, as well as protect against Lightning Bolt. As for finishers, you could go Bant for Tarmogoyf, Vengevine, and others.

HolyFalcon says... #2

April 23, 2015 4:15 p.m.

klone13 says... #3

Mental Misstep is illegal in modern. And abrupt decay can't be countered. But the concept is good.

April 23, 2015 4:22 p.m.

ChrisH says... #4

Very neat. I really like it, but it is fairly tough to make sure you have the cards at all times. I say this because I made some cool decks but without the 2-card combo they often were weak. But hopefully you can find a way to make it work.

April 23, 2015 4:24 p.m.

What about Esper/Jeskai with Demigod of Revenge as the finisher?

April 23, 2015 4:25 p.m.

Arvail says... #6

No. The problem is that you'll never consistently have enough spells to both protect your setup and transform Erayo. Even if you get this thing off, it doesn't automatically win you the game. A simple Tarmogoyf on board could just out-tempo you. If you spend this much time and effort setting something up, you better win on the spot or put yourself so far ahead that it's highly unlikely that you'll lose.

April 23, 2015 4:32 p.m.

HolyFalcon says... #7

Instead of counters, it could use cards like Mizzium Skin. I do like the concept of Demigod of Revenge.

April 23, 2015 4:33 p.m.

HolyFalcon says... #8

TheDevicer: When I set it up, my opponent can't do ANYTHING. That is, unless they have manlands.

April 23, 2015 4:34 p.m.

Hmm I think I need to build this.

April 23, 2015 4:40 p.m.

Arvail says... #10

Erayo's Essence+Eidolon of Rhetoric only stops your opponent from casting spells. They could still attack with whatever they have on board. If you're sticking your deck full of low-costing stuff to cast to flip this guy, you aren't actually putting many answers in your deck.

April 23, 2015 4:45 p.m.

PValBlanc says... #11

Magicrafter As above mentioned, your opponent can use anything that can't be countered. So yes, your opponent can do something.

April 23, 2015 4:46 p.m.

HolyFalcon says... #12

TheDevicer: The combo can happen as early as T3, very rarely, and also T4, not giving them too much time to get answers. I would probably go with cards like Tormod's Crypt that get sacrificed, so I can play Murderous Cut.

PValBlanc: Yeah, but there's really no way to get around that.

April 23, 2015 4:50 p.m.

Arvail says... #13

Something like Tarmogoyf or Kitchen Finks hitting to board wouldn't be unrealistic. Lingering Souls could also be really awkward. This archetype of yours will be too reliant on setting up that flip to reliably come up with answers. Even if you control the first few turns, now you likely don't have the means to flip your creature. What about the games you start without Erayo, Soratami Ascendant in your hand. THis deck will mulligan terribly. Not trying to be a bitch or anything. Just saying you simply won't have a good matchup against things like abzan, affinity, burn, and some other prevalent decks.

April 23, 2015 4:59 p.m.

PValBlanc says... #14

I'm just pointing out that Abrupt Decay and Supreme Verdict are a thing. And thus it isn't per se a hard lock, and treating it as if it is will lose you games. Just like ignoring the possibility of a Pact of Negation will lose you games with a Mindslaver Academy Ruins lock.

April 23, 2015 8:11 p.m.

sonnet666 says... #15

PValBlanc Not exactly on topic, but if you have someone in a Mindslaver lock, wouldn't you see them draw Pact of Negation and be able to just force them to cast it on their own spell or something?

April 23, 2015 8:58 p.m.

Arvail says... #16

You'd pact the mindslaver as it's being cast. Yeah, it only buys you a turn, but it's better than having to lose to not being able to pay the pact later on.

April 23, 2015 9 p.m.

This discussion has been closed