Second, you will always be choosing your opponents' strongest permanent, and your weakest - I'd say it's worth Chaos Warping three commanders for the price of your own ]. First, just by building the deck you should be including a higher than average number of permanents so right off the bat you are more likely to actually receive something than your opponents. It's really easy to underestimate Vaevictus. I'm NOT arguing against Vaevictus as a decent choice for a commander in general but my impression of her strengths is that they don't line up to a "Jund" strategy that op is asking for. The reason I don't see this strategy as "Jund" in a traditional sense is threefold.ġ) Vaevictus' ability removes things but gives them another permanent to replace it often enough which isn't very Jundy - especially if it's another threat.Ģ) Using the ability on your own board to cheat large bombs into play also isn't very Jundy because Jund is looking to play the fair game.ģ) You end up running a lot less single target removal when your commander can "deal" with permanents and when you want to maximize your threat count which is not very Jundy because Jund wants a pretty equal threat-removal ratio (or maybe even more removal heavy). Vaevictus decks that I've seen are more permanent/threat heavy because you want to maximize the value you get from ]ing your own permanents (while also chaos warping your opponents). Jund in modern is about 1-for-1-ing opponents out with discard and kill spells and then ending the game with a powerful efficient threat. I feel Vaevictus doesn't embody the idea of Jund in the sense that OP is looking for.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |