PDA

View Full Version : Deck Building 101


Lelouch32
11-08-2010, 03:37 PM
Deck Building 101

By: Corlando

Hello and welcome to another edition of Cards n’Flux where we look at cards, techniques, and the general flavor of everyone’s favorite game, Magic the Gathering. My name is Corlando and I’m here to be your guide, teacher, and goofy sidekick as we discuss the intricacies and awesomeness of the multiverse. I write this week’s article with a mission in mind, to teach. Over the past few weeks, I’ve talked to several people who have difficulty building decks. They do not know what it is, but either their combos are not working, they draw either nothing but lands or no lands, or are just having a hard time streamlining the whole process. That’s why I’m here. Professor Corlando is in the house and its time to school all of you in a little deck building technique. Adrian, put that spitball down or I’l- … see me after class Adrian.

Before we begin this dissertation on techniques for deck building, a constantly changing and opinionate subject, I just want to put a little disclaimer out there. This is the process I go through to make a deck. This is the process of a guy who has played Magic for all of one year, has only been to Friday Night Magic and small tournaments, and honestly does not have that good of a win ration. The process I discuss may help you; it might not. These ideas may seem weird and unusual, they probably are. However, this is just one way of looking at the process of deck building. Hopefully you will be able to glean (now that’s a good scrabble word) something from this article and hopefully improve your own method for building a deck.

Alright, so without further adieu, let’s get underway. The first thing that is required to start building a deck is to get an idea, a focus. For what purpose are you going to build this deck? This focal point might revolve around a single card, like say Venser, the Sojourner; a combo, like using Fatesticher and Puppet Conjurer, or a concept such as a deck centered around lifegain. Now this seems pretty obvious first step, but you would not believe how hard it is for some people to get this straight. For example, there was this friend of mine from my hometown who just got into Magic and he was so looking forward to using Metalcraft. However, the deck he submitted to me for advice contained all of 11 metalcraft related cards and was dangerously unbalanced in the artifact to other ratio. Good news is that he eventually figured out a few things and I’m sure he’s having a ball with his new deck.

The next thing that I do, after choosing the focal point of the deck, is to figure out how do I want to meet the goal of the focal point. How are you going to power the deck and accomplish its goal? This is where we figure out what cards we will put in the deck. The key here is to be open, but too not get overwhelmed. This is why I build mostly standard related decks because this helps to keep the cards I can use limited, but also gives me plenty to work with, that and the fact I don’t know many cards from older sets. :P Anyway, lets look at an example. How about Venser? Looking at Venser, the Sojourner we have a +2 ability that essentially blinks something till the next endstep, a -1 ability that makes all your creatures unblockable, and a final ability that makes every spell you play essentially an Oblivion Ring. These are all fun abilities and it would be great to be able to put them to good use. First, the first ability is a blink ability meaning that a creature leaves play only to reenter a little later. How do we use that? Well, like cooking, simplicity is always best. The easiest way would be to have just plenty of cards that have come into play abilities. This means cards like Wall of Omens, Aether Adept, and Glimmerpost Stag. Each of these cards is fun to play once, but now they can be played multiple times. The second ability is essentially mass evasion for your army, which is good if you have big creatures and you do not want your opponent to be annoying and try to block. This ability can be used with smaller creatures like the 2/2 Aether Adept and 3/3 Glimmerpost Stag, but what about a 6/6 Frost Titan or 4/5 Sunblast Angel or maybe the infamous Stormtide Leviathan. Venser’s final is definitely for all cards and we’ve already put in a number of cheap cards so if we end up with plenty of mana, we can just Oblivion Ring all your opponent’s stuff away.

The next thing that this deck needs is what I like to call an answer package, essentially what are you going to do to keep your opponent weak, stop your opponent’s damage, and dealing with troublesome issues. This is essentially where your Journey to Nowhere, Lightning Bolt, Doom Blade, Mana Leak, and Naturalize all come into play. Essentially what these cards amount to are seat belts and air bags. Warning car analogy incoming. A deck can be likened to car in many ways. First you have your focal point, taking form as the shell of the car, holding all the parts and goal inside. Next you have the fuel, or land cards, which is important to note because you don’t want to put forests in a red deck. Third is the engine, what is going to power your car and get it to move. This takes several forms and depends on the overall purpose of the deck. The answer package is put in place to help keep you, the planeswalker/driver, safe and on track with your plan. Without these seatbelts and airbags in place, you run the risk of being knocked off the road and becoming nothing more than a smear on the road. For the deck we’re building I think playsets of Mana Leak and Journey to Nowhere should give us just enough to stay on the road.

Now, everything we have talked about is all well and good, but the one thing all decks need is a way to win. This is essentially the front bumper of your deck car and depending on the deck you have very different bumpers. Red decks probably have something a kin to a pitchfork sticking out the front. Black has a sort of rusting bumper that might not kill you right away, but will most likely cause you to contract some sort of infection that kills you slowly. Green is a steamroller, no subtle way around that. It all depends on what your original focus was and how well the focal point and the victory plan meld together. A perfect example of this is the deck that I’m currently running. It’s a white token deck based around Conqueror’s Pledge and Honor of the Pure. Essentially I create a huge army of 2/2s or 3/3s, sometimes as high as 5/5s, and then just smash with power. However, the original centric idea for the deck was to use Conqueror’s Pledge in conjunction with Nomads’ Assembly so that my already impressive army would grow to unprecedented size and power. However, in playtesting I noticed that since Nomads’ Assembly and Conqueror’s Pledge were both rather late game cards. I knew that from the start but I thought that the deck could handle it. However, as I played, it became more and more clear that though Nommads’ Assembly was impressive, but it still left a lot to be desired. Coming in at turn 6, not bad. Rebounding on turn 7 to get me an army, Awesome. Not always drawing it, bad. Having it sit in my hand as I waited for a Conqueror’s Pledge to make it useful, very bad. The original deck idea was a flop, but that’s okay. Through playtesting I was able to really see how the deck worked, and how well the cards interacted. That is the ultimate technique of deck building, playtesting. Run your deck through the ringer, battle hard opponents, and notate what happens during the matches. That is the real key to figuring out how well your deck is going to work. Never be afraid to change a few things up, you never know what you will think of next.

As for the deck we were building throughout the article, here it is in its first draft form. This deck is definitely fun to look at and the theme of Venser can be felt throughout, but it has a long way to go before it can be really effective. The addition of Everflowing Chalice, Chimeric Mass, and Contagion Clasp essentially serve to pimp out the deck. Hey if you’re gonna build a nice car, at least make it look nice, right? Plus the addition of Chimeric Mass gives another sort of win condition and another big creature. This should be a lot of fun once it gets cleaned up and tweaked. If anyone decides to build a deck like this, please contact me and tell me how it worked out. Anyway here’s the deck:

Venser Deck:

Leader:
3x Venser, the Sojourner

Creatures:
2x Frost Titan
4x AEther Adept
4x Augury Owl
2x Sunblast Angel
4x Wall of Omens
3x Glimmerpoint Stag

Artifacts:
4x Chimeric Mass
3x Contagion Clasp
2x Everflowing Chalice

Land:
4x Glacial Fortress
8x Island
2x Celestial Colonnade
7x Plains

Spells:
4x Journey to Nowhere
4x Mana Leak

http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/venser-deck/

And with that we have everyone’s favorite section, the Closing Questions section:

1. What is your way of building a deck? What is your overall process of doing things?

2. What are some problems you are having with your current deck or decks?

3. What did you think of the car analogy, good, bad, or stupid?

Well, well, there goes another bit of time you’ve used reading the thoughts of an old man and his beard. Hope you had fun reading and feel free to leave comments or ideas about what you’d like to have me write about. I have plenty of ideas, mind you, it’s just… jus…j-anyway. And as always, remember, “Etherium is limited. Innovation is not.” This is Corlando signing out.

DedWards
11-09-2010, 05:08 AM
1. I tend to use this pattern:
a. what's my goal?
b. what colour does my goal best?
c. http://gatherer.wizards.com to get a list of cards that do what I'm trying to do.
d. narrow down the list I just got to about 10 different cards (10 X 4 = 40)
e. select any lands that mite help the deck idea and fill the rest with basic lands (untill I reach 20 lands) [my normal ratio is 1 land to every 2 spell]
f. {the most important step} playtest to figure out what the deck's missing and then go back and edit the deck.

2. Not having the money to get the cards I need for my decks.

3. It was OK, I guess.

reishan
11-11-2010, 12:56 PM
1. This is how I make decks
i. first, i check my local fnm decks that has been successful and create theories in my head on how to beat them.
ii. Then, I go through the gatherer on wizards to find the cards I may be using.
iii. After that, I create and playtest the deck based on my theory and then add variations if needed.
iv. Finally, I always ask people for their opinions and views on my decks and comment whenever possible.

2. I normally face all tcg players problems which is funding and sometimes the devoted time.
3.Quite good

kinghemp
11-15-2010, 05:16 AM
as a player from the late 90's i have learned watching others. ive been pulling between 18th an 13th place in local tounoments. then i came up with a idea a deck that needs to be fast an devestating has to run like a fine tuned car to much gas it chokes. same for a deck to much manna equils a choke then a person needs to look at their theme an mana costs. i am trying to stay between 1 an 5 mana to cast stickinfg to the lower casting cost. i tuned my deck to this idea i pulled 6th on friday. i just built 4 more decks around this concept an two of them stomp my vampire deck.

Anon
11-26-2010, 03:59 PM
Hi guys,

I'm back for just a short time so here is my feedback:

1) I personally go for a theme or a focused effect and from there try to develope the deck. If I happen to want to use the deck I often limit myself to what I already have available and buy cards only as a last resort.

On the other hand, if all I want is to build an "ideal" deck, (as most of my decks here are) I use a system by which I test the cards I pick for effectivity and overall playability. Like this I build a deck which is easy to use and with compatable cards.

2) No problems what so ever!!!! Lol
(Joking aside) You will always find problems with your decks and that is normal since no deck is practically perfect. I for one have been working on my decks for quite sometime and often manage to improve or modify them according to the times.

For example I have a very powerful beast deck which trashes any other deck except a faster tribal deck. (yes even a control deck dies under this stampede!!) I couldn't improve it since the creatures were too expensive mana wise and there were no better substitutes, that is until Shards of Alara pack came in. Even then when I changed the deck it still wasn't fast enough, but hey it was still strong enough to bash a few heads into the ground.

So what I am trying to say is every deck is unique, so are strong against one thing and not against the rest. You just have to practice and use trial and error to make it better.

3) Your analogy is very unique and I find it quite innovative.


Ok so that was my input into a very interesting topic.
This is Anon phasing out... for now.

Dacenguy
01-16-2011, 09:06 AM
First, let me start by introducing myself as kind of a Johnny/Spike when it comes to how I play, and a bit of a Melvin when it comes down to deck construction. I like combo cards, not necessarily combo decks like the terrifying Pyrite Spellbomb Second Sunrise (http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/boab/11) deck that beat the snot out of me in 3 turns (20 damage in one main phase while I was tapped out to be exact), but I enjoy decks built to take advantage of heavy synergy. Simplistic builds like "white weenie" with glorious anthem bore me. However, when it comes to cards with multiple interactions, that really gets my gears turning. And that brought forth the inspiration for my Eldragon deck.

My process works thus:

I see a card or group of cards that fit an idea I like and could see myself playing a deck around.
I check the gatherer for any support, and carefully read the comments on those cards.
If I have the land lying around, a list of cards that do something, some spare time, and a bit of money to go out and get the cards, I build the deck.


Some problems I have with my decks and making them playable include fixing my mana curve, making my decks playable against a variety of other decks.

All in all, I saw the car analogy as insightful. More and more I'm moving towards including planeswalker cards in my decks because of the card advantage they offer and how often I end up with an empty hand and lots of mana to do stuff. Assigning them the role of driver makes them easier to include in my decks.

Lelouch32
01-16-2011, 12:45 PM
Glad to have your imput Dacenguy. Can I ask what your Eldragon deck is? Elf and Dragon?

Dacenguy
01-16-2011, 08:04 PM
Glad to have your imput Dacenguy. Can I ask what your Eldragon deck is? Elf and Dragon?

Certainly, but it has nothing to do with Elves :). I posted it here (http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=135033). It's not tournament quality I suppose, but I think you can make almost any deck tournament ready with enough nonbasic lands. That aside, this deck does 3 different things; either it swarms you with spawns, it burns you with dragons, or you get smashed by a humongous Thunder-Thrash Elder with his Rockslide Elemental sidekick. The main idea came from seeing the Build Around contest results (http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/ftl/114) on Daily MTG. I really just wanted to break Dragon Appeasement and it went on from there.

Lelouch32
01-17-2011, 12:47 AM
Not bad, my one suggestion is that you might want to consider adding in Predator Dragon over HoardSmelter Dragon. Not only can you Eldrazi spawn into it early, but you can get a very big creature very easily. Just a suggestion.

goblinguide
04-03-2011, 01:29 PM
Analogies are useful because it serves as a way of making comparisons between two different things. They may not be exactly alike, but they help us to understand abstract concepts - after all words are abstact in the literal sense.

One of the original concepts of the game's creator, Richard Garfield, sometimes gets lost in the "shuffel". Pardon the pun. The boardless game involved a duel between two mages (wizards) each casting spells from their vantage point in order to subdue the other wizard. A mage is either getting enough energy to cast spells to subdue their opponent or they are gathering enough energy to cast answers to thwart the opposing wizard's spells.

So within the context of that simple summary of Richard Garfield's boardless collectible card game a new player can learn a lot. First is the concept of a "vantage point". Magic the Gathering has five key vantage points that a Mage determines he or she is aligned with. Of course there are Forests, Islands, Mountains, Plains, and Swamps. The original thread began with a Mage discussing the vantage point of Islands and Plains. My suggestion, if you are a new player, is to experiment with all five vantage points. Notice the back of your cards - there is a color wheel. This is not for learning primary colors, rather this wheel shows the synergy or complement between colors and the colors that sharply contrast one another. Hopefully, MtG designers at WotC constantly review the foundations of Magic the Gathering when working out their new card designs, sets, and new game mechanics, i.e. Metalcraft. As you can see in the color circle next to white is blue or green. So blue or green should complement white spells in some fashion. As you can see black and red are opposite of white on the wheel. Here is an example of this contrast: white typically has spells that gain a mage additional life (to prolong the game) whereas black has spells that cause the opposing mage and even themself to lose life (to shorten the game). Players of MtG will hear how a deck plays slow or that a deck plays fast. The characteristics of the spells that a mage (deck designer) includes in their deck will influence whether the deck plays slow or fast. So after you have experimented with the five colors or vantage points of MtG and learned what type of temperment you have - long games versus short games you have your first starting point. Sure the artwork on some of the cards is cool and you will also learn that some of the rares and mythic cards can become quite valuable, but if you start out from that point of view the deck you end up with may not have the foundation that supports your values.

I have decided that I enjoy the vantage point of Swamps. I also want a game to be shorter because I am a slower player (deliberate) and this assures that there is time for all three games of a duel if needed. But as games become shorter as I am able to make play decisions more quickly with experience provides extra time between rounds to trade cards and to watch the other duels. Blue and red are the complementary colors. If I do not play mono black spells, excluding artifacts of course which are colorless, I need to decide if I will support my black spells with blue or red spells. A tip: if a lot of the decks you face where you duel are white - plains based decks for example (they maybe complemented with blue or green), then red is opposite of white and blue is not. So now I know that I will build either a mono black deck or a black deck complemented with red spells. My vantage point(s) to cast my spells from, then, will be Swamps and/or Mountains.

So as a new player you can sort your cards - black spells, red spells, and colorless spells, and mana sources. Since we are playing in Standard events we will stick with the newer card sets currently in Standard as did the founder of this column/blog did. Limited, Legacy, etc. are fun formats, but if we are a new player our collections are somewhat limited, at least mine is.
So I can currently (April 2011) utilize cards from the base M11 set, Zendicar Block and Scars of Mirrodin Block.

Tip: One of Black's weakest areas is the inability to remove non creature based artifacts from play. Unless black can remove an artifiact from their opponent's hand, with a hand destruction spell, once a non creature artifact is put into play black will have trouble dealing with it. So black's complementary color, red, will be used to handle this. Complementary colors are used, then, to shore up weaknesses or to increase a deck's strength. One of reds strengths, then, is artifact destruction! Also some of the colorless artifact spells, i.e. Ratchet Bomb, can also remove pesky artifacts. Recently, decks have emerged that run a lot of magnets and clasps and use the "Proliferate" mechanic to keep the magnets energized or to slowly poison you to death if they can deliver just a single poison counter to your realm of magic! So we will definately want to utlize some of the artifact destruction spells that red offers - our side board, at least, will contain 8 artifact destruction spells.

So I know one of my color's major weaknesses - artifacts, I know that I want a black deck complemented by red (because I face a lot of white spell based decks) and I want it to play shorter games (can win quickly). What is black's strength? A major strength of black is permanent creature removal - colored creatures and artifact creatures. This keeps the board clear for a fast finisher. So I will set aside both red and black spells in my collection which can keep my opponent's field of play free of creatures. Some black examples are Assasinate, Black Sun's Zenith, Deathmark, Disfigure, Doom Blade, Go For the Throat, Grasp of Darkness, Nemesis Trap, Shrivel, Vendetta, etc. Red examles are Arc Trail, Fork Bolt, Lightning Bolt, Searing Blaze, Staggershock, etc. There are key differences between black and red "removal spells". First, red spells do a specific amount of damage. Lightning Bolt, for example, does three damage only. So creatures with a toughness greater than three will require two or even more red damage spells to destroy it which means you lose card advantage. And you also have to be holding two red spells in hand. The black removal spells on the other hand can remove a creature regardless of its toughness with only a single spell. But black removal spells cannot target the opposing mage's life or even his planeswalkers, whereas the red 'burn" spells can burn either the opposing mage, a planeswalker, or a creature. In other words we learn that our cards can be "situational". In other words if you hold a black creature removal and a red burn spell and you are deciding whether or not which spell to remove the creature with, in general, use the creature removal spell and save the burn spell to target your opponent directly or a Planeswalker as it has more flexibility. Now just as I suggest this, because these are postulates and not 100% hard and fast rules, someone will play a larger creature after you use the black spell which the burn spell cannot remove. Another example of a situational card is Assassinate which was in the black removal list. This is a sorcery so it can be only played on your turn - that is pretty situational. and it can only be played during Main Phase I or II - not during upkeep or combat. That makes it even more situational. And it can only destroy a tapped creature that it has to be able to target. Just too much situational business going on to include this in a Standard constructed deck, but a strong card in draft, sealed deck play, etc. Also because so many decks are utilizing lands that transform into creatures to attack or block and then become a nonbasic land at end of turn again, Assisssinate is further excluded for a removal spell which is much less situational and even less expensive to cast! One last important tip for new players about using removal or burn spells before moving back to thoughts about constructing a deck. Tip: Do not use a burn spell to remove an opponent's small creature to allow your small creature to do damage early in the game. (There are exceptions to every rule, however, so stay flexible and learn to recognize when to violate principles.) I made a play mistake the other day violating my own principle. Instead of attacking first and seeing if my opponent would block first which would remove both 2/2 creatures from the playing field and then I could save my burn spell I used it to do a measly 2 points of damage early in the game. then my opponent played an even more menacing creature and then I had no longer had an answer for it. So if you have a blocker (an answer to a creature on the playing field) save the spell in hand to answer an unexpected or unknown question your opponent may pose for you to respond to. Even though you may like to play fast this is one instance where patience really can be a virtue!!

Demon of Death's Gate, a black +9/+9 creature with flying and trample has the potential to end a game quite quickly. So does Death's Shadow which can be potentially a +12/+12 creature. both spells (permanents) are situational so a new player needs to build their deck to bring about the desireable situation. Even Assasinate can be good if you can bring about the situation where your opponent must tap their creatures or tap to attack!! Again we are complementing with red and blue has most of the tap spells so again tapped creatures is not a situation we can bring about very easily.

Black/Red "Death's Shadow" Deck

CREATURES (26x)
Black Knight 3x
Blood Ghast 3x
Death's Shadow 1x
Demon of Death's Gate 1x
Gatekeeper of Malkir 4x
Nantucko shade 3x
Thought Gorger 1x
Vampire Hexmage 3x
Vampire Lacerator 3x
Viscera Seer 4x

SPELLS (10x)
Duress 2x
Diabolic Tutor 3x
Rise from the Grave 2x (or Morbid Plunder 2x)
Vendetta 4x

Lands (24x)
Evolving Wilds 2x
Terramorphic Expanse 2x
4x Mountains
13x Swamps
3x Tectonic Edge

SIDE BOARD (15x)
Arc Trail 3x
Black Knight 1x
Crush 3x
Duress 2x
Nemisis Trap 2x
Shatter 3x
Vampire Hexmage 1x

Note: Dark Tutelage 2x in Side Board in place of Hexmage & Black Knight. Dark Tutelage works great with Viscera Seer and Blood Ghast (Hint: sacrifice Ghost to Seer to scry and put a land if you can on top for a land draw and another card each turn and minimize damage from Tutelage or even choose to speed up damage to grow Death's Shadow along with Vendettas!

aspanishman07
01-08-2012, 08:01 AM
I am friends with one of the best magic players in new York and he tends to help me with the decks I am building look him up his name is Joshua Horton