So I've applied the modifications I mentioned, then tried the sample hand generator to see how it all worked. It seems that it may be harder to make work with the Captive Flame option than with the creatures that have the pump ability built-in. Debating whether to add some Diabolic Tutors to the deck or to just revert those changes back to the way it was originally. I will likely keep out the Dark Rituals in favor of Reverberate though...there's no need for the extra mana, and Reverberate is such a boon to the deck that it really should be there. Going to leave it as is so you guys can check it out and see what I mean here, but I think I may stick with the original creatures instead of Captive Flame...unless you can think of some pumpable 0-power fliers...
126 2012-06-25 02:07:22
Re: Maddening Imp deck needs tweaks and sideboard... (26 replies, posted in Decks and Deckbuilding)
127 2012-06-25 00:51:02
Re: Maddening Imp deck needs tweaks and sideboard... (26 replies, posted in Decks and Deckbuilding)
I was actually considering the exact same thing. I just was thinking about what would be more versatile in the long run. Reverberate would function against counter magic as well, but against removal it's terrible. I could copy their Terminate, for example, but my creature would still die as a result...then again, I could copy my OWN instants as well...
Theoretically I could do both...was thinking that Dark Ritual would be pointless outside of the first couple turns, although I still say the Manaforge Cinder is still worth keeping in there as filters. Gives me more options in case of the dreaded Mana Screw...if all I have is Mountains in play, or Swamps for that matter, at least I'll be able to cast spells from the other color. Maybe removing Dark Ritual and adding Reverberate is the way to go. The logic for keeping Shunt is simple - if Counterspell or a similar spell is cast, I can go with Reverberate, but if Unsummon or Boomerang is used, I could still use Shunt to change targets to another valid target...or I could use it to steal a beneficial creature enchantment, or other options that Reverberate can't do.
128 2012-06-25 00:05:35
Re: Maddening Imp deck needs tweaks and sideboard... (26 replies, posted in Decks and Deckbuilding)
Actually, I can...
10/4/2004: You can choose to make a spell on the stack target this spell (if such a target choice would be legal had the spell been cast while this spell was on the stack). The new target for the deflected spell is not chosen until this spell resolves. This spell is still on the stack when new targets are selected for the spell.
In other words, if someone plays Counterspell, and I cast Shunt and declare Shunt as the new target, it's perfectly legal. What happens is Counterspell is on the stack, then Shunt goes on the stack after. Then Shunt resolves first, and when the Counterspell resolves, there is no valid target, causing it to fizzle.
129 2012-06-24 21:34:27
Re: Maddening Imp deck needs tweaks and sideboard... (26 replies, posted in Decks and Deckbuilding)
Hmm...while inventorying my cards, I stumbled across another possibility for a Maddening Imp combo...Crawlspace! Something to consider on a later build, but kind of surprised nobody thought of it
130 2012-06-24 21:09:11
Re: Maddening Imp deck needs tweaks and sideboard... (26 replies, posted in Decks and Deckbuilding)
I'm still not sold on running both the Annexes and the Bridges in the same build...I like to shoot for simplicity in my builds. However, chump blockers like Will-o'-the-Wisp are definitely an option I failed to explore previously. The Wisps would even be suited to either style build (either 0 power creatures to pump, in this case via Captive Flame, or for the baiting/paying of life from the Annex). As for retrieval, I would go with either Necromancy or Shallow Grave, depending on the circumstances. If the opponent has targeted removal and kills my imps, I can simply cast Shallow Grave during their turn and tap the Imps. I could also use Necromancy to steal their dead creatures either as a sorcery on my own turn or as a means to gain an extra blocker if needed (from either graveyard). I don't think I'd want to run both, but having one in the deck and one as a sideboard card to swap removal types. Animate Dead would also work well for the Ensnaring Bridge version...not only could I bring the Maddening Imp back into play, but suddenly it could attack as well, since it would be a 0/1 creature. And if there is no removal in their deck, with any of them I could simply use their own creatures against them (in either possible build).
I'm thinking about making the following alterations:
OUT:
4x Flamekin Brawler
4x Blistering Dieflyn
4x Kiln Walker
IN:
4x Will-o'-the-Wisp
4x Captive Flame
4x Ornithopter
SIDEBOARD:
4x Darkness
4x Shallow Grave
3x Breaking Point
4x Animate Dead
I'm also wondering if Dark Ritual would really be necessary, but I'm going to leave it in for the time being. I decided to sideboard some reanimation instead of putting it in the main deck because, well, it may not really be necessary. I sideboarded Darkness and Breaking Point in case I need to stall, but since I won't know how well everything works until it's built, it may not be necessary (and hopefully I find the real weaknesses in play testing to deal with them later). Breaking Point provides a bit of damage as well when paired with Blood Artist. As for the main deck changes, I went with 0-power fliers instead of the land based assault I had initially built, and added Captive Flame so I could pump them. I figure with fliers, I don't have to worry if I can't get the imps out, so long as I have enough mana to pump the chumps to deal lethal damage (or use them to whittle away the opponent over a few turns). Just figure I'll see what you both think before I make the changes official and start hunting for the cards I don't have
On a side note, thanks to both of you for your suggestions. Even the ideas I didn't roll with have some merit, and have sparked ideas for a few new decks, either directly (Norn's Annex) or indirectly (noticed several awesome cards I never would have looked at otherwise while looking for options).
131 2012-06-24 01:49:49
Re: Maddening Imp deck needs tweaks and sideboard... (26 replies, posted in Decks and Deckbuilding)
So, like, 2 of each instead of 4 of one or the other? I figure if I use the Maddening Imp to force an attack, and am running Norn's Annex in place of Ensnaring Bridge, I would also have to run something like Darkness to ensure that I could survive the attack. In such a case, maybe Tsabo's Decree might have a place in the deck (or sideboard, either or). I'm hesitant to go with it because, although awesome against Tribal decks, it does nothing for me against decks with a variety of creature types. I think Darkness would still be the way to go in that situation. I'm hesitant to run both the Annex and the Bridge though...either I want to go with boostable creatures and the Bridge, or the Annex and a way to deal with the damage coming back my way. If I run both, I run the risk of trying to do too many different things and having a hard time getting what I need to win.
132 2012-06-24 01:07:30
Re: Maddening Imp deck needs tweaks and sideboard... (26 replies, posted in Decks and Deckbuilding)
So it is...for some reason I read that as "Enchant Creature." Guess that's a far better suggestion than I had initially thought. Actually, that does indeed give me some far better options with regard to my choice of creatures...it either makes the freebies that much better, or it makes a powerless creature with an ability that costs a bit more that much more useful in the deck. It really would open an array of options for me...I'm very sorry I missed that!
133 2012-06-23 23:25:55
Re: Maddening Imp deck needs tweaks and sideboard... (26 replies, posted in Decks and Deckbuilding)
imsully2 - I actually considered including 0-drop creatures, but felt that it wouldn't really work too well overall...I would want to have 0 cards in my hand when using the imp's ability, so in order for me to use an instant-boost type spell, I would have to have it in my hands...and with no way to draw extra cards and no way to guarantee the order of the cards I do draw, and since hanging onto them would be counterproductive to the deck's main purpose, and with enchantments it kills the element of surprise, so I figure why use two spells costing a total of three mana (assuming Captive Flame on an Ornithopter) when I can simply play Flamekin Brawler for one mana and have the effect already included...although it does open up some other possible options. As for Moonveil Dragon, I just don't feel I have enough mana acceleration to really make use of it. Experience tells me to avoid high casting cost creatures unless I have the acceleration to bring it out reasonably early. I may consider Wild Ricochet for the sideboard though, since the duplicating effect would be awesome against spells to gain life, or spells to remove creatures/enchantments, etc, but would be entirely redundant against a counterspell (and cost more to cast it). However, if the deck I'm facing has removal up the wazoo, it would be a great addition.
TyWooOneTime - You're correct in your assumption that it's mainly for casual play. It's just an idea I've been toying with that I would like to actually use. It will primarily be a duel deck, as I don't really know enough people who play to get good multiplayer games going anyway.
I love the idea of using Norn's Annex instead of Ensnaring Bridge! It would really allow a bit of flexibility to the deck to help against the possibility of removal or simply not getting the combo...if I don't hit the combo, instead of low power creatures I could include bigger options. Not too worried about having an empty hand, I usually have no issues with that when I've run Ensnaring Bridge decks with low casting cost spells, but it allows me to save useful spells for when I need them instead of having to burn through them to keep my hand empty...very good call!
With regard to Dingus Staff, it seems to serve the same purpose as Blood Artist, in that when creatures die, damage is dealt. However, with Blood Artist, I don't have to worry if they use a Wrath of God to deal with my creatures, as every creature killed will inflict damage upon my chosen target instead of on the creature's controller. With the current build, it was simply meant to help weaken my opponent so I could still defeat them if I had a limited amount of mana to pump my creatures with.
Unfortunately though, Word of Binding won't work with the imp, since it's a Sorcery. Icy Manipulator is an option, but at most that accounts for 4 creatures, and could only reasonably expect to get one or two out at most. Something like Word of Binding that would work at instant speed would be perfect.
Some great suggestions though, really gets me thinking about this. If I can get something to ensure that anything getting past Norn's Annex will be dealt with (Darkness comes to mind, especially if the opponent has no white mana and has to pay the life instead), and would make it easier to get a backup win condition (maybe Pyroclasm to take further advantage of Blood Artist's ability)...plenty to think about here...
134 2012-06-23 06:42:12
Topic: Maddening Imp deck needs tweaks and sideboard... (26 replies, posted in Decks and Deckbuilding)
I've been toying with putting together a Maddening Imp deck for a good while now, ever since I first saw the card. I love the idea of destroying my opponent's creatures with a well-timed tap, and Ensnaring Bridge was the obvious combination to use...but since I hate direct-damage decks, I wasn't sure how to do it. Originally I was planning to use Shatter to eliminate the Ensnaring Bridge after eliminating my foe's army, but felt it was too inefficient a tactic for proper play, so that idea was out. Then it hit me - 0 Power creatures! Even with an empty hand, they'd be able to attack, and one can pump the crap out of them to deal the damage. So armed with an idea, this is what I came up with:
http://deckbox.org/sets/190410
I went with a Black/Red build based on my initial build...since I wanted to destroy the bridge with Shatter, Red was almost a required choice, and although Shatter was eventually discarded as a plan, I still liked having Shunt in the deck (really, who sees a red counterspell coming?). Anyway, I'm more or less settled on the build, but since I've been out of the loop a few years (still played, just never bought new cards), I'm not really sure what has come out in some of the more recent sets that may be better than what's listed. I also really don't know what to add to the sideboard...the deck has an obvious weakness against Wall decks (Maddening Imp doesn't affect Walls), and although they're not really commonplace, I still feel a sideboard that includes Pyroclasm is a must...just in case. I just don't know what other problems would come up, and since I'm missing a number of the cards, I can't really test before I buy. Also, I'm not adverse to altering the mana base, I just generally go with an even split and tweak it after a few games if needed. Badlands would be an obvious addition as well, but I don't have any, and don't have any desire to spend the money required to get them.
*AHEM*
Sorry, I tend to ramble. I'm sure you get the idea here...basic tweaks and sideboard ideas, and general feedback...that's pretty much it. Thanks