I'm "That Guy." Every Magic group has their own "That Guy", whether it's a newer play-group, or a long-standing testing team. Keep in mind, there is nothing wrong with being "That Guy." It is simply a state of existence. And being "That Guy" does not necessarily mean you are a bad player. Case in point, here is probably one of the most well-known of the "That Guy" club:

Yes, none other than The Brian Kibler falls into the club. Why? He's the guy always looking to play one particular deck. For him, it's usually something GWx, with Knight of the Reliquary, Loxodon Smiter, Noble Hierarch, or the like somewhere in the mix. While Brian can be convinced to play something else, and often does, when left to his own devices, this is where he gravitates to, and apparently it's also where he starts from. The same could probably be said of someone like Craig Wescoe as well, and his affinity for White Weenie strategies.

"That Guy" is the person who basically has one stock deck, or deck type, that they go to for pretty much any format. For me, it is basically any deck that is Red-Green. Sure, I dabble in the occasional other stuff, but generally, I'm simply the Red-Green guy. If there isn't a viable RG deck in the format? Who cares? I'm still rocking the Mountains and Forests.

There is an interesting dynamic which comes from getting the "That Guy" title in your group. Aside from the, "No, I don't want to hear about your latest RG deck," comments, there is also the deck sharing aspect of your relationship with all other Magic players. If there is ever a RG deck that does well, I am sure to get someone to share the list with me, usually accompanied with the, "Did you see this!??!?!" tag. Now, don't think I'm in any way complaining. It's really convenient to NOT have to look up decks and scour the net for anything that is close to your preferred selection. Sure, occasionally, people try to slip in things like Jund or Naya because, well, it's two-thirds correct so it's close enough, right? (Hint: No, it's not). But for the most part, all I get are the Gruul lists.

Funny enough, I got to experience this twice over the last couple days. Sunday morning, upon waking, getting some coffee started, and firing up the old Facebook, I was greeted with the following shared by my friend Brandon Bennett:

Not to be out done, none other than our own Joshua Claytor shared the following less than 24 hours later:

So, there I was with two differing Red Green Land Destruction decks, both with impressive 5-0 records in league, during the **cough cough** unbeatable Eldrazi Winter **cough cough** period. There is a lot of overlap between these two decks, although it should be noted that I absolutely hate the mana bases of both of these decks.

Normally, the biggest issue that comes up when playing LD is that you get out ahead early by blowing up lands, but fail to get enough pressure on to close out the opponent, which gives them the opportunity to recover and come back. Both of these decks seem to be attempting to get around that by cheating on lands and running a lot of fetch lands to help thin out the deck and hopefully draw more action, be it in the form of more LD or threats, and fix the mana. Playing the first deck as-is, and watching none other than Frank Lepore test the same deck on his stream, the fragility of the mana base became very apparent, as multiple times, the deck does not give you enough red mana to cast your finishing creatures. Also, in a world where lots of people are looking to interfere with lands to interact and slow down the Eldrazi, there are quite a few other Stone Rains, as well as Sea's Claim and Spreading Seas floating around to wreak havoc on the few red sources these decks run.

Another way that the second version tries to combat the issue of lack of threats is by using creature based land destruction, with Avalanche Riders, Goblin Ruinblaster, and Acidic Slime in the mix over spells like Mwonvuli Acid-Moss. I will say that the Moss is the hotness, and does help get you ahead to your five and six drops. Again, though, running few sources in a world of hostility to lands, there were times I had 7 or more lands out, and was unable to cast one of the huge threats. I do kinda like the more creature based version, but, I would definitely change the lands around some, and possibly consider a few swaps between the main deck and board.

Given the growth of Eldrazi online, and the probable increase in paper as well, LD seems well placed in the metagame right now. For a strategy that gets hated out or is seen as poor most of the time, it's nice that we may see at least a temporary revival of the archetype. After seeing these two decks, it piqued my curiosity to see if there were any other options. There was one deck in the day two metagame from SCG this past weekend that was listed as "R/G Ponza", but sadly, that deck didn't finish in the Top 32, so there is no list available for me to reference. I was not deterred, and continued searching to see what there was. I was fortunate to stumble across a deck that made Top 4 of an SCG IQ:

This list, while not shared with me directly (a tragedy I'm still kinda recovering from), went with some cheaper creature options, and avoids most of the creature based land destruction in favor of the more popular 3-drop LD spells, and then recurs those spells with Goblin Dark-Dwellers. The beefy goblin has seen some sporadic play in Standard, and a little play in the RW LD deck, but this was the first version I saw running them in the Gruul colors. The sweet interaction between the goblin and split cards works is a rather fortuitous way as well.

While I'm still not completely sold on the overall construction of this deck, I can't argue with the final finish. I would need to put it together online and run it some and see how it comes out. I do like that it has some threats available up the curve, so there is always the option of playing a big beater if the LD plan either doesn't come together, or is not the best strategy in a particular match up.

Of course, it wouldn't be a proper RG article if I didn't at least acknowledge the Eldrazi member of the family:

This deck finished in the Top 4 of SCG Louisville. This list cuts the Eldrazi Mimic in favor of Dismembers and a couple main deck Oblivion Sowers. I do like the change. While it does mean I'm not getting the Eye-Triple Mimic-Thought-Knot-Reality-Smasher turn three victory, it also means I'm not getting blown out by extending into Arc Trail or Forked Bolt. Looking at the board, I'm not in favor of Crucible of Worlds, or the third Sower. I can see the desire to play Crucible, especially if you are expecting to see a lot of LD (weirdly, the crux of this article...hmmm), and with playing Ancient Stirrings in the main, you have the ability to dig for it if needed, but I'm just not sold, no matter how much I like LD personally, that there are significant enough numbers of these types of decks in the metagame to warrant the inclusion. What would I prefer to see in those two slots?

Of course I would want Eldrazi Obligator. It seems like a competent mirror-breaker, allowing you to grab that one extra, unaccounted for attacker in games than often can tend to bog down or become grind-fests. I'm not saying it makes the mirror (or quasi-mirror, given all the flavors of Eldrazi seeing play) a slam-dunk, but it gives you additional outs and tools that you may not otherwise have available.

Honestly, being "That Guy" is a pretty fun place to be. I accept that many in my various play groups will disagree with my deck choices or preferences, but I do like that they actually accept me for the Gruul guy that I am, and I always look forward to being sent random RG lists, regardless of how bad some of them may be.

Peace,

Carl Wilt