@poxeveryturn said in Another 2nd place finish on Lands and encouraging others to give it a try!:

@fsecco yes you could cut ghost quarter 4, or possibly null rod 4. Honestly, I just like the set up and the deck plays really well at 61 so I kept the set up and packed in everything. I usually run 61 in this list with varying setups.
I think it’s one of the few decks that can remain consistent and get away with 61 due to the high volume of lands and the fact it’s largely redundant in its effects. It’s certainly not a necessity but I like it at 61.

Yes, you could cut the 4th null rod but at what cost? How many of our play test matches early on ended for me when null rod hit the board? Even if I didn't know it was over yet.

@khahan exactly. Which is why I like the set up where it is right now. 61 is certainly unconventional and may even be wrong but I don’t really care, it has served me well and Null Rod has been a powerhouse for the deck in so many matchups. I think the card is really well positioned right now if you have a deck that can run it and this deck just loves it.

last edited by Guest


I've been testing against Landstill alot and I find this match very frustrating actually. If you cant find the Depths combo naturally they Waste your Bazaar very quickly, then use their near infinte counterspells to stop the Loam engine and plop down a Jace. Just giving some feedback. Also wondered if youd be willing to chat via other social media as I want to develop this deck further.

@rolko I like to mulligan pretty hard In the landstill match to try and find the natural combo. You know the match certainly isn’t going anywhere fast so I think you have a lot more leeway to mull a little further and look for either the combo or a hand with multiple fastbond effects. That can be a great parody breaker sometimes if your engine can get online at all before a standstill comes down they run out of effective counters pretty fast.

Durdly blue matchups are why I like having the 4th Depths in the MD. Natural Depths is a strong plan against walls of counterspells.

@emopizza my paper meta just gives me so much dredge and shops to face I like the 3/3 count. If you see a lot of those slow blue matches I could def see where 4 would come in strong.

After more testing I believe that forcing the issue against Landstill is incorrect. By going slow and forcing them to interact late only after the Depths token is STP'D (and we've often drawn 3 off their Standstill), we can make them dump their hand. We also often get to Waste/Strip/GQ all their lands while we wait making their Standstill a one side Armeggedon. Jace is the biggest issue, Chasm/Tabernacle cleans up everything else with Grudge acting as an intermediate Factory removal tool. 2nd Bog main helps to keep alot of Delve spells offline also, which suprisingly matters quite often in the blue matches.
Ive cut x2 Mental Misstep main and the x1 Chalice of the Void for x1 Forest (x4 GQ makes it fetchable basically), x1 Exploration (the 4th), I always want this effect and 4th Manabond was clunky, x1 utility land that changes or 3rd Crop Rotation (I think this is meta dependent), some metas you want 2nd Karakas or x1 Maze of Ith main for Shops/Oath. The deck feels great in larger events where you can percentage the format out after a few early rounds.

@rolko I definitely agree with cutting the 2 missteps. Since the above decklist I cut both of mine for a second Bog and a third crop rotation to further sure up the dredge match and give me extra tech against storm and blue. Removing their graveyard can add a nice tempo boost. I also just hate misstep and every time I drew it I wanted to toss it across the room. Lol.

What is your reasoning behind removing chalice?
Chalice has been great for me and I feel really brings the tempo into the deck's favor. Many times I’ve gone null-rod chalice zero and it’s just such a great defense to hide behind and set up.
It’s also really good against stp decks where you can set it on one to turn off their swords, cantrips, and you are playing for a natural combo and don’t need exploration effects as much. I feel like the card is indespensible to have around.

Why is Crucible considered, in your opinion, to be clunky? Does it not have synergy with this deck, naturally? Not to mention when you throw 4 Bazaar into the mix? It seems like it could do work even if your mind isnt on the Orb/Fastbond/Crucible combo

is there truly no slot in this deck for a crucible?

@childe_roland My reasoning here is bi-fold. First, the way I approached building the list was trying to maximize the cards that can come out of the graveyard as a recursive spell thereby helping the deck move forward and also helping the deck protect against counterspells by making them worse to point at a recurring spell.
Second, if it wasn’t a recursive spell or restricted (I.e. null rod, exploration, etc.) I wanted it to be a card I could run in multiples to have a better chance of drawing because the deck isn’t great at searching cards, and also be able to play more than one if it got countered or a card that simply couldn’t be countered. Furthermore I wanted all the spells in the deck to generally stay at a cost of 2 or lower (only card that costs three is Krosan grip which I want because it’s guaranteed hate, I’ve cut beast within). That might sound crazy in a deck with 35 lands but a lot of the lands either don’t produce mana or don’t stay in play and if I can’t land a fastbond effect saying play land go for three turns just feels awful to play a spell that costs three. I have had plenty of games where I have had a huge abundance of lands but it’s not always the case.

In my eyes looking at crucible through this lens it had several drawbacks. 1) it was above my curve with no built in defense 2) it was a card that was almost guaranteed to get countered and it couldn’t be recurred 3) it was a card I didn’t want to run in multiples because it took spots away from other cards I really wanted in the build 4) it was a repetitive effect to the loams to some extent and I like loam a lot better with Bazaar 5) I didn’t need it for my good matchups and it felt weak in my bad matchups. What I mean here is there was a good possibility I wasn’t going to cast it against shops either due to spheres etc and would rather have loams and I never felt like I needed it there, and against dredge I just didn’t need it. Against blue it was another card to counter that I had put extra resources into and couldn’t protect meanwhile taking turns off of wastelanding them or playing a combo piece in order to get up to the requisite mana.

Yes, I will admit the card definitely has synergy with the deck and if you could land the card it is probably game over for the opponent. I will also admit that I have seen people including myself in prior builds try it and Ramunap excavator. In the end I just didn’t like it for too many reasons and wanted to be on the loam plan and stick to my build parameters to make the deck as low and streamlined as possible.

I’m not saying this is correct it’s just my opinion and I encourage you to try it if you’d like. Scary things can definitely occur with that card in play.

@poxeveryturn I personally avoid Crucible like the plague because I really don't want it Dack'd. Ramunap at least would eat a StP that would be at Larit Lage otherwise.

@emopizza very good point. Have to certainly agree with you on both accounts.

I actually won a game through a dack emblem once against a mentor opponent because they decked themself. That was a real barn burner of a game. Lol.

@poxeveryturn do you think this deck will be able to use the new damping sphere card in the sb or maindeck to shore up the storm matchup?

Chalice of the Void feels clunky. 1. We have no way to search it, 2. Its not a must counter for almost any deck (assuming the logic of placing it on 0 turn 1), 3. Placing it on 1 always burned me later. I think Id rather have a utility land or another enchantment, overloading on enchantments has been good. Right now for me its 3rd Crop Rotation to ensure we steal game one from Dredge. Post your most updated list, Id love to compare.

@stormanimagus it’s possible but I can’t say I’m a big fan of the card, it would definitely work against them in theory and would have to be in the sideboard, but the fact it’s also an artifact I think is a drawback. I love null rod against them but after seeing you’re on a null rod deck they are going to bring in Hurkyl’s effects as hard as they can to defend against it. With the new sphere it’s just a matter of the same hurkyls hitting even more artifacts on your side of the board and then they go off on their turn anyway and you still can’t interact. If anything I think normal spheres out of the side are just better because they hit more decks in the meta and immediately tax the opponent on every spell, though in testing I haven’t been a big fan of these either. It could certainly be a card worth trying, just my thoughts.

I’ve been a fan of trying to find non-artifact interaction against them because I kept getting burned so hard by the artifact hate and a lot of times they will sideboard not expecting enchantment and instant hate from the deck. So keeping in things like bogs to shut off dark petition and yawg will, bringing in chains out of the side and lately I’ve been running 2 mindbreak trap.
A lot of times they are lulled into a sense of calm by knowing you don’t interact and the traps blow them out of the water while everything else slows them down.

@rolko Here is the most recent list I’m running. Giving serious thought to a second Chains in the sideboard. Trap has been really good too in testing


4 null rod
1 mox diamond
1mox emerald
1 mox ruby
1 chalice of the void

4 life from the loam

3 crop rotation
3 ancient grudge
1 fastbond
3 manabond
3 exploration

4 bazaar of bahgdad
4 mana confluence
4 grove of the burnwillows
4 ghost quarter
4 wasteland
3 riftstone portal
3 dark depths
3 thespian’s stage
2 The tabernacle at pendrell vale
1 strip mine
1 glacial chasm
2 bojuka bog
1 karakas

4 abrupt decay
1 krosan grip
1 maze of ith
2 nature’s claim
2 urborg, tomb of yawgmoth
2 punishing fire
2 mindbreak trap
1 chains of mephistopheles

Chains x2 has been great in the board. Emopizza also has been playing Mindbreak Trap x2 for awhile and it works well.

@rolko I’ve also been testing Abeyance and Angel’s Grace for the really fast combo decks. Angel’s Grace has been pretty busted in several test games.

I also think there’s some merit to something like rule of law or arcane lab which I’ve done some testing with in the past. That affect helps a lot of matchups and this deck can easily get away with one spell a turn because it does so much without playing spells.

One of the reasons I keep the mana confluences in over fetches and duals is to have the ability to open the board to any colors I think will be helpful and not get chocked on any color. I know a lot of people disagree with this approach but it has served me well.

Thats interesting, I also tested Arcane Lab, and also Eidolon of the Rhetoric, often times if he eats STP we win and if he doesnt they lose to playing one spell per turn. I wonder about Angels Grace, I feel like its almost too cute, but it does have built in protection. What are you afraid of, Storm/Belcher?

@rolko my main concern was bargain storm which I’ve seen an uptick in my meta lately playing paper. I am starting to think it might be too corner case though.
My idea was they blow all their resources and run straight into it and then take a long time to rebuild or it would basically act as a one mana time walk for me and I would make merit lage and swing on a turn they can’t hope to win and they really can’t respond at all to the card. I’m going to do some more testing but it might not be the best option.

Spirit of the Lab has some merit as well and also presents a reasonable clock and good defense when paired with null rod or an arcane lab effect

  • 115
  • 47207