Deviations: When Things Go Wrong

Magic as a game and card game specifically is known for being very difficult. When talking to my friends who don't play, I sometimes mention that Magic's rule book is 250 pages long. It always gets insane reactions.

Still there are players who will complain that some decks are braindead, or that someone won a game that anybody could have won. Where does the dissonance come from? I believe it has to do with the question whether or not games "go your way." If you like, you can think of this article as an appreciation post for the nuances of decks otherwise thought of as "easy."

When Things Go Your Way

You play Tron and just draw all three of Urza's lands, you play Burn and never draw a land after the first three, or maybe you play Cascade and finish the game on turn three having cast with backup. Such games exist, and coming in, you probably wish for them: just execute your plan and win easily.

A lot of players will navigate games the same when circumstances don't leave much room for a personal touch. It seems like the game was predetermined and you were just an actor who moved the cardboard around in an otherwise fully scripted performance. Such a phenomenon even exists when you play an interactive strategy. You kill a threat on turn one, on turn two, slam on turn three. What changes from deck to deck is how different your draws can be, how different the games play out match to match, and how the postboard dynamics looks.

That's why you suggest Burn and Bogles to a beginner—80% of games look the same. Conversely, you do not recommend Four-Color Control as you have to keep adapting on the fly to what's happening, and you only get your perfect linear draws a slim percentage of the time.

When Things Do Not Go Your Way

What distinguishes a good player from an excellent player? It's the ability to deal with a difficult situation in a way that constitutes a deviation from the norm. I really like to think of it as: It's very easy when it's easy and very difficult when it's difficult. This seemingly tautological sentence does make sense. Let me explain why.

When you pilot Bogles, look at the opening seven cards, and see , two lands, and four enchantments on the play, you happily keep. Most players would, in a heartbeat. However, what if you mulligan down to five and your only creature is or your postboard ? What should you do now? It's not as clear, is it? Only having played hours with the deck, in a given format through different metagames, can you confidently say whether in this matchup this hand is a keep. And this is the deviation I am talking about. A tough, out-of-the-ordinary decision that you need to make.

Deviations also happen when heuristics fail. You're playing and you know that when hits the battlefield you're toast. And it does hit. You concede as, almost by definition, you don't beat hard graveyard hate like that. A more experienced friend and fellow cascade player approaches you afterward and explains that, in this particular game, you could have won by going for the hardcast-my-creatures plan, considering all these mulligans your opponent took to find Rest in Peace. You've only seen your friend win "easy" games but they clearly know how to react when unconventional tactics ought to be deployed.

While of course there are easy games, these 10–20% of situations or singular turns that deviate from the norm really do add up, and one has to be proficient to recognize them. I've got the deepest respect for the masters of their craft as they know how to stack against a , deck or play through double as Burn. And if you play a deck a lot, these 10% plays will come up by sheer virtue of the sample size.

I've been witness to and been deeply impressed by numerous plays that I know I wouldn't have been able to find there and then. You play Yawgmoth and draw twenty cards, which unfortunately include your that you intended to get via and have no mana to cast. The solution, which I was honored to witness: Go to the cleanup step, discard the Artist, on the opponent's upkeep yourself to put the Artist back in the deck, and then Chord for it. I would not in a million years have seen the line. Now I do though! I am richer by that experience and have got that 0.5% covered.

In a game I played with my opponent reanimated and did not have . I already had creatures on the battlefield so casting my would just reset the game, which is not an ideal scenario. I took some time to think with my mouse hovering over the concede button, and it dawned on me: Let them attack and resolve annihilator, sacrifice the creatures, and then cast Outburst, killing their Emmy and bringing my board back. This play won the game, and now every time I play against hard Reanimator I am mentally ready.

Deviations from the prescripted games may be seen within a game like mentioned above but also through keeps, mulligans, and sideboarding. You mull to a difficult five-card hand, and you have to choose whether you want to be linear or proactive. Maybe you play against a deck you've never seen and have to reassess your sideboarding strategy on the fly.

If I can leave you with a short message, it's this: True proficiency comes with covering those last 10–20% of situations that happen very rarely but you know how to address anyway, better than any good player would. As always—hold my hand, and let's pass the turn together. Cheers!

---

Opinions expressed in this article are those of the author, not of Cardmarket.