Comments on: Shaman Ain’t Easy https://www.quietspeculation.com/2012/11/shaman-aint-easy/ Play More, Win More, Pay Less Wed, 05 Jul 2017 17:12:33 +0000 hourly 1 By: Rogue Gaming https://www.quietspeculation.com/2012/11/shaman-aint-easy/#comment-1887268 Wed, 05 Jul 2017 17:12:33 +0000 http://www.quietspeculation.com/?p=33499#comment-1887268 and/or shardless agent? cascade fun!

]]>
By: Rogue Gaming https://www.quietspeculation.com/2012/11/shaman-aint-easy/#comment-1887267 Wed, 05 Jul 2017 17:10:30 +0000 http://www.quietspeculation.com/?p=33499#comment-1887267 how about snapcaster? seems feasible.

]]>
By: Fabian van Duurling https://www.quietspeculation.com/2012/11/shaman-aint-easy/#comment-38199 Tue, 11 Dec 2012 10:12:59 +0000 http://www.quietspeculation.com/?p=33499#comment-38199 I Like the deck a lot. Going to take it as a base for my deck, thanx Ryan

]]>
By: Brojangles https://www.quietspeculation.com/2012/11/shaman-aint-easy/#comment-37253 Tue, 20 Nov 2012 15:34:03 +0000 http://www.quietspeculation.com/?p=33499#comment-37253 In reply to Ryan Overturf.

Boom! Roasted!

]]>
By: JasonAlt https://www.quietspeculation.com/2012/11/shaman-aint-easy/#comment-37111 Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:35:00 +0000 http://www.quietspeculation.com/?p=33499#comment-37111 What\’s the matter, pussies? Too afraid to try and deal 20 with a Deathrite Shaman? Turns out it\’s totally doable.

]]>
By: Ryan Overturf https://www.quietspeculation.com/2012/11/shaman-aint-easy/#comment-37092 Wed, 14 Nov 2012 21:53:20 +0000 http://www.quietspeculation.com/?p=33499#comment-37092 In reply to Tyler Tyssedal.

I had Jace, took Jace out and put it back in again a couple times with this list. As I said, I’ve played with the deck actual zero (which you’d think people would connect with the fact that this isn’t anywhere close to finished :P), but Jace is something that is on my list of cards I may want to add as I battle.

]]>
By: Ryan Overturf https://www.quietspeculation.com/2012/11/shaman-aint-easy/#comment-37091 Wed, 14 Nov 2012 21:50:08 +0000 http://www.quietspeculation.com/?p=33499#comment-37091 In reply to no wincon.

The guy that tells everybody that his list is rough and asks for suggestions (me) is probably a stronger deck tuner than the guy commenting that can’t even add a win condition himself (you).

It’s true that I worry a lot less about winning the game than playing the game as I approach a deck early on, but you only embarrass yourself when you criticize instead of critique.

]]>
By: Ryan Overturf https://www.quietspeculation.com/2012/11/shaman-aint-easy/#comment-37090 Wed, 14 Nov 2012 21:47:09 +0000 http://www.quietspeculation.com/?p=33499#comment-37090 Guys, I have a Tar Pit. It’s fine.

]]>
By: Nimblehands https://www.quietspeculation.com/2012/11/shaman-aint-easy/#comment-37083 Wed, 14 Nov 2012 18:21:24 +0000 http://www.quietspeculation.com/?p=33499#comment-37083 I vote for a single mist hollow griffen

]]>
By: no wincon https://www.quietspeculation.com/2012/11/shaman-aint-easy/#comment-37081 Wed, 14 Nov 2012 18:02:46 +0000 http://www.quietspeculation.com/?p=33499#comment-37081 “He fancies himself a strong deck tuner”

^ lololol

]]>
By: no wincon https://www.quietspeculation.com/2012/11/shaman-aint-easy/#comment-37080 Wed, 14 Nov 2012 18:02:09 +0000 http://www.quietspeculation.com/?p=33499#comment-37080 you forgot the wincon.

]]>
By: Brojangles https://www.quietspeculation.com/2012/11/shaman-aint-easy/#comment-37079 Wed, 14 Nov 2012 17:55:59 +0000 http://www.quietspeculation.com/?p=33499#comment-37079 Seems like it might be hard to actually win games.

]]>
By: Tyler Tyssedal https://www.quietspeculation.com/2012/11/shaman-aint-easy/#comment-37078 Wed, 14 Nov 2012 17:50:51 +0000 http://www.quietspeculation.com/?p=33499#comment-37078 This almost looks like my current Food Chain BUG list. 🙂

But no Jace for the long game?

]]>