The original name of the deck is "Scamanimator". I came up with the concept in our Prague Legacy group, and it was customized and piloted to top8 by Martin Pelikan. I myself went 4:1 and then lost to GW Depths and Scam (those and Doomsday which Martin lost to in top8 are probably the worst matchups) with a faster version with Faithless Looting Instead of Liliana, and with inclusion of Caves of Chaoes Adventurer against control decks. Nice to see the deck featured, I hope to see more people come up with new cool variants! 😊
Ah yes Perry the Platypus, here to stop me! But wait, this is a magic the gathering content video, you can't fight me here. The comments are a place for discussion, not brawling. I have you trapped by social conventions. Now sit down.
“There was a period where this was banned.” RIP My high school Worldgorger Combo deck 🫡 First combo deck I ever played, and the first of many times I quit playing MtG 😅
Ponder is in the imperative because it refers to both the action of deciding whether to mulligan and what is likely the first action of the match. As an infinitive, it would translate to "Keep the pondering island." If you wanted to show purpose as with "keeping for the purpose of pondering," then you need the subjunctive in an ut clause. Island Ponder Keep is a rhetorical phrase known as a zeugma or syllepsis, where the word ponder has two meanings: decide what to do and cast the spell with the same name. To create the phrase accurately in Latin, you have to use the imperative. Using an ut clause or an infinitive and there would be only one meaning due to the grammar. The zeugma/syllepsis rhetorical device makes for clever phrases. When one has a naughty meaning it is called a double entendre. Thank you for the opportunity to make use of 10 years of Latin, it is not frequently of very much practical use and I sometimes question my higher education.
Deck seems really difficult to pilot. Im guessing the builder played this to the level where he was doing it in his sleep, so he knew the lines in each matchup. It was a solid effort for playing such a deck
I don’t like playing with or against scam decks because they just feel like high-rolling the opponent, but it’s very funny to see other people high-rolling each other
I mean, yeah, but is destroying the mox diamond worth slowing his rogue beats down by a turn? It's a line worth thinking about on t2, but I'm not sure it was right.
32:30 as you stated correctly, villain had the option (and basically had to) use the R you gave him with magus to Gamble after having played his petal, he'd have had U available all along with the petal instead of sitting and waiting to die. Small mistakes are not so small :)
44:00 strictly forbidden to reanimate the archon over atraxa in my professional point of view 😱 (I cannot imagine any 10 cards revealed by the big beast that don't make you win the game even VS good drawing such as land + multiple good cards in a row) thank you for the vid!
