Type 1.5

As promised, here is my version of a Yawgmoth Priest Su-Chi deck. It is a fast-large-creature / burn deck. Let me break it down by card purpose.

For mana we have a bunch of dual lands (because I added white—more on that later), Mishra's Factory, Dark Ritual and Mana Vault. I had to ditch the Basalt Monoliths. If it were a pure burn deck I would have been able to justify that much mana production, but since it is also a fast creature deck Mana Vault was the obvious choice, especially with the creatures I chose.

For creatures we have Su-Chi, Juggernaut, Black Knight, Mishra's Factory and Priest of Yawgmoth. The Su-Chi and Juggernaut have their weaknesses, but a creature that only costs 4 and has a combined power+toughness of 8 is a good deal, and with a Dark Ritual or a Mana Vault you can summon one on the second turn. That is everything I like about an opening combo. You have a high probability of drawing it in your opening hand because there are two cards that if you pull either one of them will work with either of the two other cards. And in this deck each of the four cards is still useful later in the game. The creatures are still big creatures at a low cost, and the fast mana can be converted directly into points of damage by a burn spell.

I ended up only having 3 Priest of Yawgmoth even though they were the genesis for the deck because unless you're casting an end game x damage spell they are under-powered for their cost compared to all the other creatures in the deck.

For direct damage we have Lightning Bolt, Fireball and Disintegrate. That's plenty of creature removal to keep your Juggernauts and Su-Chi out of creature combat where the Juggernaut's low toughness and the Su-Chi's tendency to blow up in your face can be a liability. And in the absence of creatures to remove, unlike the creature specific cards like Swords to Plowshares or Control Magic, direct damage can be brought to bear on your opponent (though clearing their creature threats and killing them with your own is still the most efficient way to win—if this were just a burn deck it would have Basalt Monoliths, remember?).

For non-creature threats (nasty enchantments or artifacts like Moat or Winter Orb) we have a few Disenchants. Yes, I added a third color for a single card, and you know what, even if red or black did have a means of dealing with enchantments I think still would.

Let's play a "what if." What if black had a spell called Rottenchant (1, Instant, Destroy target enchantment.)? Then you could play Shatter and Rottenchant in a red/black deck and be able to deal with artifacts and enchantments. But now you've invested two different cards to deal with one situation—that nasty environmental enchantment or artifact that's got you locked so bad you can't burn or attack your way out off. And you have to get lucky enough to draw the correct one. If your opponent doesn't have any enchantments, then one of your cards is useless. If they don't have artifacts the other is useless. If they don't have either you're looking at a lot of useless cards. That's why I prefer having one card that destroys either type, and will add another color to a deck just to have that card.

The only downside that I see is Blood Moon, but that's far less of a threat since we're playing primarily red/artifact. The worst that could happen is that you end up sitting on a Black Knight because you can't come up with the .

So that is how I justify adding a third color for a single card. If you have any counter arguments please add a comment. In the meantime you will see this technique continue in my next post, a deck called "Giant Howling Wurmies," a very similar fast-large-creature / burn deck, but red/green/white and a co-dependent combo (not as consistent but potentially game winning).

posted by Nils T. Devine  # Tuesday, May 24, 2005