Posts made by EmoPizza
posted in Official Tournament Results read more

My tourney report is a lot shorter:

Fastbond is good.
20 out of 20.
Would Fastbond again.

posted in Vintage Tournaments read more

@garbageaggro Can confirm. Strip Mine is a cool card.

posted in Decks read more

I could see Grove/Fire getting the axe due to the 21 liability, though PFire seems like the most resilient way to end Planeswalkers though.

Thoughts on using the tiny bit of black in the manabase for a MD Demonic Tutor? Seems pretty decent in any match that you'd likely bring Decays in for.

posted in Decks read more

@hierarchnoble Do we have a Lands thread? If not, we should probably make one.

Also, how much of this do we want to move? We should give Brassy more specifics as to make it easier for him to "get right". Maybe we just cherry-pick everything onto a dedicated Lands thread?

posted in Decks read more

Regarding Song of the Dryads:

Something nice about it is that it dodges Flusterstorm, which usually means they have to Force it or Drain it. If you think they will just remove it, you can keep a Wasteland effect open and Wasteland the enchanted permanent in response to their removal if you suspect they just want to disenchant it and move on. It makes it into a Forest, not a Basic Forest 😄

Edit: If you have a Land Drop and a Wasteland in hand, your opponent might even let the Song resolve despite having countermagic if they (falsely) think they can just disenchant it. Just make sure you play the Wasteland as soon as you have priority after the Song resolves.

posted in Decks read more

@hierarchnoble Ah, I very much approve of this list. I'm really sad that I missed the league, since Tuesdays are when I play my weekly Legacy. I hope you manage to run this back for another 5-0 in the future!

posted in Decks read more

@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.

posted in Decks read more

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

posted in Decks read more

@poxeveryturn Not fond of Tabernacle vs Oath?
I find it useful to to prevent getting Oathed since you can dump any number of your tokens on your upkeep. It and a Wasteland are pretty good at keeping Oath off. Additionally, it can answer Oathed up creatures.

posted in Tournament Reports read more

I played something similar to this lately. From my experience with the deck, I also agree that Gamble seems kind of meh. The only thing I like about gamble is being able to Gamble for Chalice on 0 on the play. I'm probably still going to cut Gambles from my list.

Punishing fire somewhere in the 75 is probably correct, though it's not something I played. I really should have tried some number of Null Rods in the MD though.

How was the Engineered Explosives? I'm not sure if I'd find those to be particularly good in most MUs.

How do you feel about 4 Depths and 4 Stage in the 75 for G2s against Blue decks? Natural Depth/Stage seems reasonable against slower Blue Decks and decks with postboard Leylines/RIPs. With a Portal in the yard, Bazaar -> Stage -> Depths == 20/20

Fun fact: Riftstone Portal in the GY gets you green mana through a Blood Moon.

posted in Workshops read more


...GarbageAggro, who seems to be new to the forum.

I chuckled at this.

He's been around for quite awhile.

posted in Tournament Reports read more

Sure was a fun event. Red bull was in fact used extensively during the "Yangtime" Top8 announcement. Malort was also utilized to keep myself and the other Top8 competitors in a state of constant distress.

Note on one of the pictures above: It's not actually of Kevin vs myself, but of our RD3 match. (See the light outside)

posted in Vintage Community read more

@Smmenen It's entirely likely. The guy from the Shay camera match hadn't played sanctioned mtg since 1994 or so.

posted in Vintage Community read more

Also to comment on the Brainstorm guy, there is no 'theory' to be had about "compensating for vintage" with him.
A simple interview with the parties involved gave the HJ sufficient suspicion to pull the trigger on a cheating DQ.
The action he took was incredibly difficult to explain as anything remotely resembling a mistake.

Edit: I don't necessarily believe what he did was really malicious, but could easily fit the guidelines for a DQ.

posted in Vintage Community read more

@Solomoxen said:

  1. There was a judge call from a bystander regarding a TKS, StP interaction where he would have hidden the drawn card from me prior to my enter play trigger.

Quick side note about this one: it's a legal play for him to hope you miss your detrimental leaves-play TKS trigger, resolve the ETB one, then call a judge to get you a warning for missing a detrimental trigger and to have that trigger put on the stack. It's your responsibility to remember your own triggers, especially the detrimental ones.

posted in Vintage Community read more

@diophan said:

Moreover, from what I could tell he was playing a single sleeved deck, which would make foil bending more apparent. A fellow spectator relayed this to the head judge. From what I could tell, the judging staff made Joseph take out his foil sol ring and crucible of worlds, but they waited until after he won against Andy.

If this is true, there is a dangerous lack of logical consistency. If the cards were marked, Joseph should habe received a game loss/DQ (much like people who had marked delvers in Champs two years ago). If they were not marked, he should not have been required to switch out his cards.

This is wrong. It's a warning by default with an upgrade path. See relevant IPG:

IPG 3.8 Tournament Error — Marked Cards Penalty: Warning
The Head Judge has the option to upgrade this penalty to a Game Loss if he or she believes that a player noticing the pattern of markings would clearly compromise the integrity of the game

This is typically only done where you could cut to the desired card consistently. Say, if you had 4 foil Snapcaster Mages that were all Pringles, cutting to a Snapcaster would be trivial. In this case, there was enough variance in the marked cards to make an upgrade questionable.