Very Basic Decks: Green

Forty card decks for 2 reasons:
- I think it will be easier for the younger kids to track what's going
on.
- I ran out of energy to make anything bigger.

I guess I didn't want it to be much more complicated than Chutes and
Ladders, you know? I want to give them just a little taste, then, if
they like it, they can move to the regular starter decks, or even more
complicated fare.

As for giving away, no, these would be mine to play with with my kids.
So anything is fair game.

I think the thing with trample is, it involves subtraction and it's not
immediately graspable. Whereas flying makes immediate sense. "You
can't stop a flying guy unless you can fly, or if you've got a spider,
but the flying guy can swoop down to block anybody."

Peter
 >> Stay informed about: Very Basic Decks: Green 

"Risser" <peterrisser.DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1133107151.519728.12090@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> 16 forest
> 4 llanowar elves
> 4 canopy spider
> 4 blanchwood armor
> 4 trained armodon
> 4 giant growth
> 1 spined wurm
> 2 panther warriors
> 1 ancient silverback
>
> I tried to keep a good mana curve. Green's abilities are mainly growth
> and mana-speed. Trample is good, but I'm forgoing it because it's
> tough to explain to Kindergarteners.
>
> I've included an instant and an aura in each deck.
>
> The elves can tap for mana, obviously.
> I included Canopy Spider instead of Giant Spider because I wanted to
> keep the mana costs low, but still be able to block fliers. The rest
> are vanilla except Silverback, which can regenerate. But, I think it
> can be explained pretty easily. "If you activate it, you don't die."
> Blanchwood Armor is slightly complicated too, but it's not hard to
> count Forests and add them to the P/T.

Hmm, I build a beginner's deck in Green to gie to a kid out of leftover cards.
The creatures I used could all be played as vanilla. Graned 1 sacrificed for
an effect, 1 regenerated and 2 cycled but they weren't too complicated, at
least I thought they weren't.

Trample shouldn't be too hard to explain. "First you stomp the blocking
creature ... then you stomp the guy that sent it" It might not be as easy as
that if they're too young, but it's a start.

Two questions arise before I really comment on cards:
1) Why 40 card decks instead of the standard 60-card constructed deck?
2) Are these meant to be given away or are you planning on keeping them?

-------
Clayton

Random Tagline:
Magic for Dummies? Why not?
 >> Stay informed about: Very Basic Decks: Green 

Risser wrote:

> I guess I didn't want it to be much more complicated than Chutes and
> Ladders, you know? I want to give them just a little taste, then, if
> they like it, they can move to the regular starter decks, or even more
> complicated fare.
>
In this case, I would be wary of Giant Growth - or any other instant
for that matter. I do realize that they are very straightforward but
stack might be complicated. Or are you going to explain the classic
Shock/Giant Growth interaction (whoever plays it first loses)? I'd add
those later, after they picked the most basic stuff.

I would include Lure as a way for Green to push the damage through...
Put Monstrous Growth in to illustrate temporary boosting effects.

FWIW,
Arkady.
 >> Stay informed about: Very Basic Decks: Green 

That's true. I used instants, because I wanted them to learn about
"tricks", but maybe that's too much. I could easily find sorcery
versions of all the instants, then swap them for instants when they
understood better.

Also, while I like the forest-growing math in the armor, I can see how
Lure would be good evasion, also showing how sometimes it's good to
sacrifice to make a play.

Good stuff. Thanks!
Peter
 >> Stay informed about: Very Basic Decks: Green 

Risser wrote:
> Oh yeah, I forgot. Green has only 16 lands, where the other have 17,
> since it has the elves. This gives it a few more biggies to play with.
> I think Green is screwed a little because it has no removal or evasion,
> and all the others have, at least, fliers.

How about adding Treetop Bracers (that's in 9th, isn't it?) Panther
Warriors are a curious choice, harking all the way back to Visions, and
Spined Wurm already exemplifies green's power/toughness tradeoff.
Naturally for a colour as versatile as green there are a lot of its
characteristic abilities missing - trample aside, there's no
neo-rampage (Pygmy Troll, anyone?), no library manipulation, no
graveyard resource, no basilisk or Lure effects (Lure effects having
been quite prominent in recent sets), no landwalk, no cheap efficient
beasties with drawbacks (things like Hunted Wumpus or Stampeding
Wildebeests), no creatures that pump themselves, no untargetability, no
cast-as-instant. I'd suggest something along these lines:

16 Forests (9th)
4 Llanowar Elves (9th)
2 Pygmy Troll (Exodus)
2 Canopy Spider (8th Edition? Tempest originally)
2 Rogue Elephant (Weatherlight)
2 Humble Budoka (Champions of Kamigawa)
2 Treetop Rangers (Urza's Saga)
1 Emperor Crocodile (9th Edition)
2 Spined Wurm (9th Edition)
1 Enormous Baloth (9th Edition)
4 Giant Growth (9th Edition)
1 Needle Storm (9th Edition)
1 Might of Oaks (9th Edition)

This deck stresses green's efficiency - those creatures directly
comparable with ones available to other races (Pygmy Troll vs. Drudge
Skeletons, Humble Budoka vs. Glory Seeker) are strictly superior, while
showcasing fairly straightforward green abilities, and the undercosted
beasties likewise have very basic drawbacks - Rogue Elephant a straight
sacrifice, Emperor Crocodile just dies if you run out of creatures (and
counting up to one other creature is even easier than counting forests
for Blanchwood Armor). There's a good stepwise progression in both cost
and size, with a decent mix of 1/1s, 2/2s and 3/3s supplemented by the
bigger beasties. Treetop Rangers give basic evasion, as landwalk's too
unreliable, trample too complex and Scryb Sprites too old, while Canopy
Spider and Needle Storm let the deck put up a defence. The Baloth is
just there to show how big green things can get - Hunted Wumpus might
be a little too complex for this deck.

Philip Bowles
 >> Stay informed about: Very Basic Decks: Green 

Zarin wrote:
> Risser wrote:
>
> > I guess I didn't want it to be much more complicated than Chutes and
> > Ladders, you know? I want to give them just a little taste, then, if
> > they like it, they can move to the regular starter decks, or even more
> > complicated fare.
> >
> In this case, I would be wary of Giant Growth - or any other instant
> for that matter. I do realize that they are very straightforward but
> stack might be complicated. Or are you going to explain the classic
> Shock/Giant Growth interaction (whoever plays it first loses)? I'd add
> those later, after they picked the most basic stuff.
>
> I would include Lure as a way for Green to push the damage through...
> Put Monstrous Growth in to illustrate temporary boosting effects.

As this is green, if we do away with instants and the like why not try
using creatures with in-built effects - most of the standard green
spell types are duplicated on creatures. So Rootwalla replaces
creature-pumpers, while Elvish Bard or one of the other alluring
creatures might replace Lure (I'd suggest Matsu-Tribe Decoy, but would
the paralyse effect be too complex?).

Philip Bowles
 >> Stay informed about: Very Basic Decks: Green