June 18-19 Pauper Weekend in Review

Normally I examine Pauper through the lens of different releases. In my mind it makes sense that, even if a new set does not completely change the format it does provide a new pool of cards. Given the slow and piecemeal roll out of Battle for Baldur’s Gate on Magic Online, and the rapidly approaching Double Masters 2022 with its powerful downshifts, I have decided to group these post Baldur’s Gate events with Streets of New Capenna season.

With that out of the way, we have our second four week chunk of data from this season, hanging out with trolls under various Bridges. Pauper has seen some interesting developments at its fringes recently, with beatdown Goblins adopting Experimental Synthesizer, Cascade going back to Mulldrifter, Boros Tribe combo emerging, and Turbo Fog establishing itself as a metagame player. All in all, 17 different archetypes topped 2% of the Top 32 metagame (at least six total appearances).

All archetypes with at least 6 T32 appearances May 28-June 19

In case it is not clear, I am going to highlight a segment of this spreadsheet – the righthand most columns.

Despite there being 17 different archetypes with at least 2% of the Top 32 metagame, only one deck topped 10% and it was that same deck that topped 20% – Grixis Affinity. While these decks are not entirely the same – some skew more towards control with cards like Counterspell, for example – the fact that this is the only deck to reach such a level is both impressive and foreboding. If you group all the Spellstutter Sprite decks they come to 13.55% of the Top 32; all the Boros decks here make up 12.15% of the Top 32 metagame.

Put another way, Affinity is just that good.

If you’re reading this article you don’t need me to tell you that Affinity is great. At this point it is clear that some action will need to be taken. I am not going to speculate on what action could be taken today because I’ve done it recently and frankly there’s not much else to be said.

Instead I want to talk about the edges someone can going in this metagame. These days the best way to approach the metagame is to figure out which linear deck is best positioned for that week. Kuldotha Goblins, Red Blitz, Bogles, Heroic – all of these decks excel at enacting their game plan and each have a decent fail rate if met with the correct counterplay. And that is where Pauper is right now – to gain an edge you have to be willing to take a risk.

The best decks – Affinity, Faeries, Boros – are all decks with a high floor and a high ceiling, Affinity being the best there. Many of the linear decks listed previously have a higher ceiling but the floor is subterranean. Still, if you are looking for an advantage that is one area to explore.

And for next week what would I be trying to do? I’d want to do something red for access to Flaring Pain. After a strong showing from Bogles over the past few events, I fully expect Fogs to be out in force.

If you enjoy my more dedicated Pauper content, consider supporting my work via Patreon. Rewards start at just $1 and every little bit is appreciated!

A Rant About Different Tweets

Yesterday the Pauper Format Panel released its view on the current state of the format and everything was quiet for about a day. And then Kalikaiz – someone I respect quite a bit when it comes to Pauper – released this thread on Twitter:

And just like that, the conversation began anew.

Once again, I am going to put this in the big font:

These are my opinions and not those of the Pauper Format Panel. I am not the Scarlet Witch and do not have the kind of power.

Okay let’s go.

Is Affinity a problem? Even if the numbers do not bear it out long term the perception is that the core of the deck has become an issue for Pauper. The Bridges have provided the deck with all the reward and none of the risk. The points about Dust to Dust are valid in that it might be the best sideboard card for the matchup but it still is a two-for-one where you’re spending three mana to deal with two cards which cost almost nothing, if not entirely free. The addition of Deadly Dispute (and other sacrifice outlets) means that you aren’t even going to get the full value off of Dust to Dust all of the time. This has led to a format that is reliant on a sideboard card that isn’t doing the job it is assigned.

But that’s not the whole story. Affinity has eaten up a lot of real estate thanks to its powerful core – material, Galvanic Blast, and Deadly Dispute is a solid combination and forms the backbone of many different strategies at the moment. That Dust to Dust is ineffective here is part of the problem but it is more that the Dust to Dust plan – that is blowing up lands in an attempt to buy time – works better when it involves actual Land Destruction. The Thermokarst decks have picked up steam as a way to go over the top. They run a consistent mana engine that gets them to Cascade threats early and can dominate a “fair” game. The result is a combination of problematic cards and play patterns that many people find less than fun. I do not like using “fun” as a metric since it is so subjective, but when a format becomes “blow up your lands and win” or “blow up your lands and lose”, there might be something underfoot.

So hypothetically speaking what happens if the Bridges go away? The hope is that other decks can assert themselves in an old new way. Boros and Faeries return and Affinity sticks around in a more vulnerable state. The hope then would be that aggressive decks could make a comeback and help handle the Cascade/Land Destruction decks that are currently keeping bounceland strategies from competing.


If the Bridges go Affintiy probably reverts to a viable Tier 1.5/2 option. The deck still has to face the wrath of Mox Monkey but with Deadly Dispute and Makeshift Munitions that probably is not as scary a proposition. Maybe Etherium Spinner catches on for real this time or the deck just cycles through various less robust cores from week to week.

Boros is likely to get stronger in such a world. Without having to dedicate the same number of sideboard slots to Dust to Dust it can round out its extra stack with some of white’s more powerful sideboard options. What probably won’t happen is a return to the decks that relied on four drops – why would Boros do this with access to Experimental Synthesizer? – as it can be far more efficient and lean.

Faeries will continue to do what it always does and be one of the best decks in the format. Maybe it gets better with fewer copies of Makeshift Munitions but maybe it also takes a hit as more people can focus on Spellstutter Sprite as opposed to Myr Enforcer. Perhaps something needs to be banned from this core in the future but honestly at this point who knows?

But what about aggro? We’ve seen the emergence of a Goblin deck that leans on artifacts and Kuldotha Rebirth but other than that the innovation has mostly been in “go tall” decks like Bogles and Infect. This is not a Pauper problem as much as one that plagues non-rotating formats. The removal gets better, the card draw gets more efficient, but it’s really hard to have a better aggro creature than a 2/2 for one mana.

I don’t think the decline of Affinity – and with it Krark-Clan Shaman and Makeshift Munitions- is going to lead to a resurgence in aggro decks akin to Stompy. I do not think the incentives are there to play traditional beatdown in Pauper. Will creature-combo return? Possibly, but that doesn’t mean the Thermokarsts are going away.

Pauper is on the same timeline as other non-rotating formats. Over time the interaction will get cheaper and more efficient. The best card draw will rise to the top and creature decks are forced to look for another angle. Legacy has Death & Taxes and Modern has at different times had Hammer Time, Hardened Scales, and Humans (as well as others).

So really, what’s the problem?

The problem is not only about cards at the moment but rather that the cards present are encouraging some less than ideal play patterns. The hope appears to be that by knocking the Bridges down (and potentially taking some other cards with them) the format can achieve some previous state of grace. The hope is that doing this removes the incentives to engage in those play patterns and instead opens things up.

But my question is this: does it? Does removing the Bridges and sure, let’s throw the Monarch in (as it is also a popular subject in these discussions) really change things up? If such action is taken, what do you think will happen?

Mono-Black Control is a deck that has, by and large, been surpassed by the format. When almost every color has two and three drops that generate value the incentive chain Chittering Rats into Gray Merchant of Asphodel is low. No one bats an eye at this (and in fact MBC is a bit of a meme in some competitive spheres). The same can be said of Stompy but for different reasons. Unless you want to take a phalanx of chainsaws to the format, I’m not sure traditional aggro can every achieve the level of success it did when Stompy was at its apex.

But this is just one person’s opinion and I want to hear from you: what action do you think should be taken and, importantly, what are the consequences of that action? What will the format look like if your plan is enacted? Sound off in the comments, in the #MTGPauper Discord, or in the replies to the tweet where I post this.

Catching Up with Pauper – May & June 2022 Edition

Every so often I need to step away from Pauper. It is not an indictment of the format but rather sometimes, the world just gets to be too much. Without getting into too many details, the past few weeks were really rough on my as a parent of a school-aged child in the United States. Normally at the end of these posts I make a request to sign up for my Patreon but today I’m asking that if you were going to sign up to instead donate that money here.

There’s been a lot going on in Pauper the past few weeks, especially given the announcement that Battle for Baldur’s Gate would not be released on Magic Online in a way the coincides with its paper release. While there are some clues as to which cards are going to be available (thanks to the collection filter on the platform), the Pauper playing masses are trying to piece together what the near future is going to resemble. Affinity remains the fulcrum of the metagame thanks to its powerful threats and ability to easily reload. Krark-Clan Shaman and Makeshift Munitions also give the deck a way to defend against swarm strategies. Looking at the sum of its parts it makes sense that the rest of the format revolves around Affinity.

Yet the metagame around Affinity continues to churn. For a few weeks we saw Familiars, both Azorius and Esper, get a ton of press. More recently Turbo Fog and base-green Cascade/Ponza decks have been picking up popularity. While drastically different on the surface, these decks all share a very important elements that might be contributing to their success.

First, these decks are strong in a place where Affinity is weak: Dust to Dust. Availing itself as a key card these days, not being hit by Dust to Dust is a great way to gain an edge in the current metagame. In a similar vein these decks are resilient to Blue and Red Elemental Blasts. While each of these decks does have cards that get hit by these cheap spells, they all have some way to combat them – Familiars and Turbo Fog have recursion engines that can rebuy key pieces while the green ramp decks have Cascade threats to get around countermagic.

Out of all of these I think that Turbo Fog is the best positioned moving into this weekend. Despite their strength, both Familiars and Cascade have a common weakness to a resolved Magma Spray while Turbo Fog can just ignore a lot of commonly included interaction. There has also been a decline in Burn decks recently while Kuldotha Goblins has seen more play. To that end it makes sense for Turbo Fog to make gains this weekend. So if I were trying to game the system, I would look for a way to run Pestilence without getting run over by Affinity since it provides a convenient way to end the game through Moment’s Peace.

A Rant About Tweets

Let’s start by saying I was not expecting to write this today. Normally the posts I release at the start of the week go over the Challenges from the previous weekend and talk about shifts in the metagame. But I saw this tweet from Pauper regular Raptor56 and it got me thinking about the format and the perception of Pauper both from within and without.

The part that stood out to me was this: “I really wish the bridges did not have the artifact subtype. The format has revolved around then, and it’s gotten quite stale.” Now this is a pretty common refrain from people who play Pauper a ton and is something that I’ve observed, but I wanted to see if this sentiment was held by a wider population and not just those who are heavily engaged with the format. And so I posted this, and more than a day later my notifications continue to explode:

Before I continue, I want to be as crystal clear as I possibly can:

The following opinions are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect the feelings of the Pauper Format Panel.

And if that was not clear enough, here’s another tag line:

Just because I write something here doesn’t mean that it is going to happen. Chill the Eff Out.

With that out of the way, let’s get down to business.

First, there were a ton of responses the hearkened back to the glory days of the past, when Pauper used to be good and you could win a game without your opponent taking meaningful game actions – when you could Daze their first play and Spellstutter Sprite their next one or use Invigorate on Glistener Elf to kill them on turn two. In this era Pauper had an identity as a powerful format but it was incredibly punishing and the choices boiled down to bringing the right deck. A format where most of the decision making has to take place outside of the actual game leaves little to actual gameplay and that’s a bad time (this is a knock on the current iteration of Pauper for what it’s worth).

Another suite of responses focused on Pauper’s inclusion of all commons. Strixhaven Championship winner Sam Pardee opined that the Monarch and commons from other supplemental sets undercut the ethos of the format by taking some liberties with the nature of what a common can do. The fact that common is a completely arbitrary delineation wholly contingent on the limited environment and not intrinsically tied to individual power level does create some issues.

Pardee’s sentiment is echoed by Bryan Gottlieb and Gerry Thompson in this episode of the Arena Decklists podcast where Gottlieb advocates for Pauper to move to the Modern cardpool, eschewing the outliers from before Eighth Edition as well as the nonsense caused by sets such as Conspiracy, Commander Legends, and going back as far as the Magic Online Masters Editions which fudged the rarity of cards for limited concerns. While I disagree about cutting out everything that didn’t first pass through Modern, this gets to the kernel of the issue brought up by Raptor in their post that inspired this exercise.

Supplemental sets, whether they be focused on Modern or Commander or whatever, have different needs than sets that have to go through Standard first. Because of this they tend to feature Commons that are outside what many would consider an appropriate power band. To me this alone if not a reason to exclude these cards as the format still contains Lightning Bolt and Preordain. Rather it is when these cards are geared towards formats with more than two players that things start to get dangerous. The other time when these supplemental cards cause issues is when they prop up existing archetypes in a way to wallpaper over their weaknesses. We can look at two case studies here in the Monarch and Bridges.

The Monarch, as it was released, was not designed for two player games of Magic. Here is where people point to articles from Mark Rosewater that describe how the Monarch was borrowed from Ixalan design when it was called The Edge and gave a bonus. We don’t know a lot about The Edge; we do not know if the benefit was a card every turn or if it would even make it out of what was then called development. Because of this it creates an imbalance when brought into games where there are not a requisite number of players to help balance out its benefits – in a four player game, each turn cycle means two “free” cards for the Monarch and three “free” cards for their opponents. This is one reason why I am cautious around Initiative and the Undercity.

The Bridges, on the other hand, were designed for a specific limited format and have done a number on Pauper. Affinity is a broken mechanic and taking away one of the archetypes main weaknesses – its fragile manabase – has shown Pauper exactly how busted the machine can be. The result is that in an effort to return Pauper to some semblance of balance, many believe the Bridges have to go. The issue with this stance is that it doesn’t actually address the issue of Affinity as a mechanic and leaves the door open to more things going wrong in the future (but I’ll get to this more later).

In order to ensure Pauper’s continued success, I believe there needs to be both short term decisions and long term action. I think the Pauper Format Panel is well set up to handle the “thousand yard view” that the format needs. I am an advocate for more aggressive use of the banned list to deal with problem cards but I also am happy this is not the stance everyone holds as it forces us to explore problems from multiple angles. That being said I think in order to move past the current morass, some cards need to be examined.

First up, the Monarch and upcoming cards with Initiative need a good, long look. Cards designed for multiplayer games that scale, like Encore, Myriad, or Melee, are fine in Pauper since they check the number of opponents before granting a benefit. Monarch and Initiative do not care about the other players in the same way and as a result have the potentially to completely throw off the balance of the game.

Second, and this is contingent on the third point (I’m going out of order for a reason, I think) is to examine ways to weaken the Faerie/Ninja core. The core game plan of cantrip into Spellstutter Sprite into Ninja of the Deep Hours is extremely powerful and if the other steps laid out here are taken, could exert a ton of pressure on the format at large in a way that makes blue the undisputed ruler once again.

As for Affinity, here is where I’m veering off course. I do not like the Bridges, but I think they do one thing exceptionally well: the encourage decks to play more expensive cards. The interaction between these lands and Cleansing Wildfire encourages decks to play more expensive cards and build towards a long game. This should not be discounted as otherwise the format would follow the trend of other large card pool formats, as Gottlieb and Thompson pointed out, towards 0, 1, and 2 mana spells. Being able to buck this trend is important for diversity in my opinion.

Rather, I think the time might be nigh to come for Pauper’s low-threshold one mana-draw twos. If you remove Thoughtcast from the equation, Affinity loses a key way to keep chaining draws for cheap. I also think that time has shown Deadly Dispute might just be too good for Pauper as it also effectively costs one mana and has a low threshold towards including in a deck. Unlike Reckoner’s Bargain it leaves behind a Treasure and unlike Village Rites it can be fueled by material that might be extraneous. Of One Mind is probably safe since it requires far more specific deckbuilding restrictions than simply “include artifacts”.

Supplemental sets are not going anywhere and they provide an opportunity to give Pauper some cards that might otherwise be out of the format’s reach. However when they do get released, action needs to be taken to identify problems they might cause and decisions need to be made about what to do.

But of course if you’ve been following me for any stretch of time, you already knew that’s where I stand.

If you could take a moment to support my content through Patreon I would greatly appreciate it. Rewards start at $1 and allow me to take the time to dive deep into the issues surrounding Pauper.

May 14-15 Pauper Weekend in Review

We had our normal Saturday and Sunday Challenges, as well as a Showcase Challenge that ran on Saturday. While there were plenty of decks that performed well the story of the weekend was one that has been told time and time again over the past several months: Affinity, Boros, and Faeries are all jockeying for position with decks like Azorius Familairs and Goblin Combo making their presence felt. But three weeks into New Capenna season, here is what the big three archetypes are doing in the Winner’s Metagame:

I am not here to say whether or not this is a good thing or a bad thing – this is just the way Pauper is right now, with the best decks consistently making up over 50% of the winner’s metagame. Both Boros and Faeries encompass several sub-archetypes while Affinity is overwhelmingly made up of the Grixis variants. Still, having a metagame so dominated by these decks is something to watch, especially as we get ready for the next release in Battle for Baldur’s Gate.

Multiplayer focused sets tend to do a number on Pauper. Conspiracy: Take the Crown introduced the Monarch which reshaped the format and Commander Legends brought with it Fall From Favor, which broke the format for several months. There is already concern about Initiative, which mashes up the Monarch with Forgotten Realms‘ Venture Mechanic.

While we do not have all the cards with this mechanic, our first look is one that generates about a cards worth of value on each step of the Undercity Dungeon. Pairing the Sneak with Ephemerate will put you fairly far ahead for only five total mana and if there are any Initiative cards that are cheaper than four, Pauper could be in for another tempestuous series of events.

However that is not set in stone. Fall From Favor took one of the best strategies and made it significantly better while also providing counterplay for Faeries against Monarch decks in preboard games. Fall From Favor also came out when the format was at a lower power level. Since Fall From Favor was banned the overall strength of the decks in Pauper has gone up. Also, without knowing all the cards it is hard to contextualize how they will fit into the format at large. So for now I’m taking the “wait and see” approach and hope rather than adding more fuel to the existing engines, Initiative provides incentives to build new decks.

But there’s a very good chance I’m wrong and that by the time we reach July something will have to change.

If you enjoy my more dedicated Pauper content, consider supporting my work via Patreon. Rewards start at just $1 and every little bit is appreciated!

May 7-8 Pauper Weekend Recap

The May 7 and May 8 are not telling us anything new about the format. Affinity, Boros, and Faeries remain the big players in Pauper and unless there’s a format update that is not likely to change. But instead of digging deep on these early results I instead want to talk about a recurring topic of conversation in the #MTGPauper Discord: play patterns.

More specifically, what play patterns are acceptable and which ones should be excised from the format.

The majority of discourse these days centers around the presence of the Modern Horizons 2 Bridges and how their indestructible status fosters certain lines of play. Prior to the printing of Bridges, Affinity was a “high risk, high reward” decks where it was possible to have a significant chunk of its mana base eradicated via Gorilla Shaman. As someone who played a ton of Pauper in those days I want to be clear about one thing: Gorilla Shaman was not an automatic victory against Affinity.

Mox Monkey did a ton of work, chewing up copies of the Mirrodin artifact lands with gusto. But experienced Affinity players knew what was up and would pivot to a longer game plan where the hate-card was less effective. Sometimes it still mattered in these longer games but it was far from a slam dunk.

Instead, Gorilla Shaman and Dust to Dust both promote similar angles of attack: choke off their resources. And in both instances these cards have limited utility against other decks in their respective fields. The big difference is that you did not need to run Gorilla Shaman in your deck to have a chance against pre-Bridge Affinity and today, it at least feels like you need to have Dust to Dust to stand a chance if pitted against the current iteration. It is this feeling, coupled with Affinity’s overall strength, that has left some players unhappy with the play patterns available in Pauper.

But then again, a lot of play patterns in the format have been less than desirable. Having to play against Spellstutter Sprite can be a misery; facing off against Palace Sentinels and Prismatic Strands can leave players feeling overmatched; when someone taps Axebane Guardian for an obscene amount of mana and hits Boarding Party off Annoyed Altisaur, well, it doesn’t make me jump for joy. All of this is to say there are plenty of lines of play that feel downright depressing to play against if you are not expecting them.

So what makes the Affinity scenario different? I am not sure but I think it is a confluence of a few things. First, that Affinity was not this powerhouse a year ago and a set that changed everything led to several cards being banned also gave Pauper the Bridges. Perhaps they are seen as a mistake that still needs to be corrected.

But I don’t think that’s everything – I think the fact that the Pauper Format Panel exists has also fueled some of the discontent. Full disclosure: I sit on the panel. Because the Panel helps to manage the format and has gone after Affinity twice in an effort to rein it in (not kill the strategy outright) the fact that it continues to put up big numbers might come across as a failure.

The last big piece of this puzzle, to me at least, is that there are lots of other powerful things you can do in Pauper and very few of them have clean answers. Deadly Dispute is an absurd card; Spellstutter Sprite remains a format defining card; Azorius Familiars can take complete control of a game on the 4th turn; and so on. In all these instances there are several things that can be done but there is debate on what should be done. At least in Affinity’s case the answer seems clear: knock down the Bridges.

Speaking outside of my role on the Pauper Format Panel, I would not advocate for that at this time. The format, despite being top heavy, still has a decent amount of play to it. There is a clear top tier but no one macro-strategy is consistently dominant week after week after week. Coupled with this the format now has a suite of powerful cores that deckbuilders can use as the supporting architecture for variant builds. I am not saying the format is perfect, but it is the best it has been in a long time.

If you enjoy my more dedicated Pauper content, consider supporting my work via Patreon. Rewards start at just $1 and every little bit is appreciated!

April 30-May 1 Pauper Weekend Recap

The April 30 and May 1 Pauper Challenges were the first to feature Streets of New Capenna. A grand total of three cards – Tramway Station, Jewel Thief, and Inspiring Overseer- made it into the Top 32 decks on the weekend. It is still too early in the season to draw any conclusions, but once again, Faeries is setting the pace of the field.

But today I don’t want to talk about that. Where I live – the United States – just saw the hint of what is to come in our future. A leaked document from our Supreme Court is looking to overturn a previous decision and endanger the health and welfare of anyone who can bear children, denying them healthcare regardless of circumstance or potential harm. It has the horrible potential to turn humans with wombs into little more than just that: wombs. And if this decision comes to pass several states already have laws on the books that will make abortion illegal.

Just as worrying is the language used in this decision, which is structured as to roll back rights for marginalized groups. Rights that should be inherent but due to the structure of this country had to be won in hard fought battles.

So forgive me today for not talking too much about Pauper. Instead I encourage you to donate to an abortion fund. Organize and protect your friends and neighbors – protect other humans. And as I posted to Twitter earlier, if you’re reveling in this decision and what it means for the people of this country, I want nothing to do with you.

Normally here I’d put a plug for my Patreon. If you were going to sign up this week thank you, but donate that money to an abortion fund instead.

Neon Dynasty Season Wrap

The April 23 and April 24 closed the books on the Kamigawa: Neon Dynasty season. Seven weeks after the most recent format update Pauper is ready to turn the page to Streets of New Capenna. There are plenty of stories to tell about the past two months, but if there is one overarching theme it is one of change.

First, I think it is fair to say that there are three macro-archetypes at the top of the standings: Affinity, Boros, and Faeries. As I said earlier this week if you asked me to pick a “best” strategy it would be Faeries but I think Affinity is the one that does the most to define how the format is played currently.

It’s hard for Faeries to not be the best. It has access to the best hand sculpting in the format as well as the best answers in Counterspell and Spellstutter Sprite, and two fantastic card flow engines in Ninja of the Deep Hours and the Monarch. It can vacillate between red, black, and blue to pick the best potential supporting cast for a given weekend and its cards have a significant amount of “play” to them, that is they are not prescribed. The cards in Faeries provide you with a bounty of options and reward making the correct choices in a given moment. Compared to other decks, Faeries has additional opportunities to use the same game pieces to make hugely impactful plays.

So why do I say that Affinity does the most work to determine the field of battle? It is a collection of the most powerful cards and requires specific hate to combat. While it is somewhat less flexible than Faeries in execution of cards, it is more flexible in composition, with several possible builds all finding success on the back of the potent core of Deadly Dispute and material.

The Big Idea

If there is a narrative for this season it is that cards that generate material are much better than they look on the surface. Wire to wire, any card that could put stuff on to the board mattered in Neon Dynasty season. While this may have started with Deadly Dispute needing fodder it ended with a land destruction strategy topping their curve Imperial Oath.

If this paradigm shift persists it means taking a long hard look at any card that brings something along for the ride. Whether that’s a reemergence of Mogg War Marshal or a deeper appreciation of Wakedancer, cards that bring along friends are poised to be incredibly important.

Weirdly enough I think the color best positioned to take advantage of this potential change is green. Cards like Scion Summoner, Kozilek’s Predator, and Yavimaya Sapherd have been bringing material to bear for years before Deadly Dispute became a thing. If Casualty picks up steam in the form of Dig Up the Body then a Saproling token might be worth about as much as a Blood token, which is saying something.

Running the Streets

So what does this mean for the first days of the new season? Ignoring Faeries and Affinity seems like a mistake and cards like Dust to Dust will remain a premium inclusion, but so will cards that can effectively trade up with Faeries. We also cannot ignore the late surge in the popularity of Azorius Familiars. So if I were trying to attack this metagame, I would be trying to find a shell for Pestilence or Crypt Rats that also had redundant pieces of graveyard hate and enough life gain to buy time against Affinity.

If you enjoy my more dedicated Pauper content, consider supporting my work via Patreon. Rewards start at just $1 and every little bit is appreciated!