Sin Collector vs. Duress
Standard forum
Posted on July 17, 2013, 9:13 p.m. by Araj
Where is Sin Collector better and why? What about Duress ? Discuss!
Sin Collector is better in creature based decks, such as junk aristocrats or reanimator, to keep up creature pressure while being sac fuel/reanimator target.
Duress
is more all around, and can fit in non w/b decks, not to mention being cheaper. But most often you will be hitting instants or sorceries anyway.
They're both really good for the niche they fill.
July 17, 2013 9:19 p.m.
Sin Collector tends to be better because you get two things in one card. Duress trades one card for another with your opponent. This is often in your favor. Sin Collector often does the same thing, but leaves you with a 2/1 body, which is a big bonus.
July 17, 2013 10 p.m.
It depends on who you're playing against. Lifebane Zombie
against creature heavy decks, Sin Collector
versus control style decks.
With all the multicolor floating around, lifebane is really good now. He gets rid of ghost council and reckoner, among other problematic things. Both are good SB material.
July 17, 2013 10:18 p.m.
ChiefWannaHacka says... #7
Not to hijack the thread, but what do you guys think about Sin Collector vs. Tidehollow Sculler in modern?
July 17, 2013 10:30 p.m.
Sculler comes down a turn earlier, is beefier, and is an o-ring for any card. More applications, but its a temporary solution. What modern deck runs Tidehollow Sculler ?
July 17, 2013 10:56 p.m.
ChiefWannaHacka says... #9
I'm not sure if any tier 1 decks do, but I run a Gifts Ungiven deck, and I'm a sucker for value on a body. I currently chose Sin Collector for the permanence, and if I have to gifts for her I should be able to cast her anyway.
July 17, 2013 11:09 p.m.
@Krayhaft: I run a B/W tokens modern deck that runs 3 of Tidehollow Sculler . It's good disruption on a solid 2/2 body. Since the release of Sin Collector , I've been battling with the optimum ratio of Sculler to Collector.
Narwek says... #2
Its a creature, so you can blink it
July 17, 2013 9:18 p.m.