Happy day to you! I hope your week has been pleasant and productive. Welcome back to the column dedicated to the casual. Today is the third installment of a related series that goes over some multiplayer strategies and politics. Multiplayer is a great way to play Magic, but not everybody realizes the changes in that format from duels.

One of the things I've learned over the years is that Magic is great at being different things to different people. Magic is a great mirror. You look into it, and always see something unique and different from anyone else, and that's what intrigues us. Multiplayer really scratches my major itch for Magic. I can play a Magic night a week for a year's worth of weeks, and be totally happy even though I may not make a single tournament. On the other hand, tournaments are fun too, and I've been known to shuffle up and play in them. I want to go to tournaments with friends, so even there I'm living a multiplayer experience.

For reference, this article is a direct sequel to two articles:

In CasualNation 5, I go over three basic multiplayer strategies – card advantage, versatility, and the rattlesnake effect. It's a good overview of the format issues. Check it out here.

In CasualNation 6, I talk about politics in multiplayer and go over ten tips. You can read it here.

Today I want to mention five additional strategies that take some of these ideas and move them to the next level. Most of these strategies are important enough that a whole article could be dedicated to each one. The basic idea here is to give an overview of the strategy. Perhaps later, I will take about a few of these at greater length. What I want to do is show you that multiplayer strategy does not end at card advantage and politics, it goes much, much deeper.

Being in the Middle

The first strategy is a politics next level one. In the politics article, I talked about how you shouldn't let a player linger for too long. The longer you leave players in the game without threatening them, the more likely they are to win. We saw that with Margaret.

You also don't want to be the Path of Least Resistance. In the first article, we saw how rattlesnakes can prevent you from being the easiest to attack. You want to send attacking creatures elsewhere.

The best place to be is in the middle. If there are five players at the table, and most think you are the third biggest threat, then you are in the good place. Two are weaker, and likely to fall. Two are stronger, and likely to fall. You are not targeted by anyone. That's a good place to be.

Play creatures, and let them die. Play artifacts and let them get used and perhaps destroyed. Be a part of the game. Don't look like you are sitting back, but at the same time, don't take the lead. Don't fight from the front. Fight from the middle.

You want to be active, and you want to have fun. You also want to keep people off you as long as possible. The best way to do both is to be in the middle of the pack.

Let's consider creatures. If someone has out Akroma the First, then your own Mahamoti Djinn doesn't look that bad. If some is rocking Darksteel Colossus, then Child of Gaea doesn't look that bad. Understand when to push, and when to fall back. This is about feeling the table, and then taking a seat in the middle. It may take a while to get enough experience to figure this out, but when you do, you'll be quite powerful.

Don't Look Like You are Going to Combo Out

A combo deck gets exactly one chance to combo win. Then, every time you play that deck in the future, you are going to get all of the pieces killed and hated on.

If you want to get that win in, you need to not look like you are a combo deck. Some cards look like pieces of a combo. If someone plays Duress on you and you have to reveal your hand to everyone, you had better not have Donate or Mana Severance in it. Permanents like Krark-Clan Ironworks spell combo. You cannot play one of these cards and expect good players not to react.

They will react. They will come after you. They will destroy all of your pretty toys.

If you want to go off, then you need to either play all of your cards in one turn, or to have combo pieces that don't look like combo pieces.

For example, you could Scapeshift your whole board into Valakut and ten Mountains. You can kill one or two players that way. Surprise! That works very well. You could also play Painter's Servant and Grindstone in the same turn. Ahh, someone just got decked…

Some combos have normal parts. I mention a Gravedigger/Gravedigger/Blasting Station/Deathrender combo in an earlier article. Gravedigger is hardly a typical combo element, so you could have them in play long before you combo off. Deathrender is not automatically a combo card either (but if your table just got burned by a combo with it, then they are much more likely to view it as such). Just the Blasting Station looks like a combo. You could have a Gravedigger in play, Deathrender on it, Gravedigger in hand, and then just play the Blasting Station and go off. No one saw it coming.

People will jettison from the table any opponent they believe is about to go off and win the game. Even if you are, you cannot look like it.

As a corollary, this also means I'd recommend steering away from combo element cards in a deck without a combo. There's no reason to play an Ashnod's Altar just for fun. When you play it, it will get zarked. People may attack you thinking that you are with combo.

The only exception to this is if people know that your combo looking cards are harmless. After all, if you have a reputation for playing stuff like Pemmin's Aura or Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker then you no one will bat an eye if you drop Great Whale or Palinchron. Of course, that means you might get away with building an actual combo deck with nasty combo parts, and no one will attack you. That'd be a fun thing to pull off. You might lose that reputation, so maybe it isn't worth it (but it could be).

Push

I mentioned in an earlier article about how cards like Pernicious Deed or Nevinyrral's Disk are very effective rattlesnakes. They threaten the entire board. There is something you should know about these board sweeping rattlesnakes.

Barring something like Krosan Grip, they will go off. It's just a matter of time. Unless you need them in play, you should force them to get used.

Perhaps they are protecting you. You might have a weak defense, but there are not enough creatures out to break through, so another's Disk keeps you happy, since no one wants to play major threats anymore. Understanding when someone else's plan is also your plan is part of multiplayer success.

Most of the time, that Disk is just going to hurt you badly. You might as well get it over with. Attack the player with the Disk. Force them to use it defensively. If you can get them to destroy it on your turn, then you can be the first player to play things after the sweeping removal (which means you'll be the first player who can attack after the sweeping removal (barring haste)).

The best way to force a Disk is to use Disenchant on it. I often use this to force the Disk to be sacrificed when I'm being attacked by someone else, or just before my turn begins. Then the player of the Disk must choose between using it or not. They usually use it, but it was on my timetable, not theirs.

There are a few cards with a similar power level. Oblivion Stone, Scourglass, Magus of the Disk, and more. They have a very powerful impact on multiplayer, and Anthony Alongi was known for claiming Pernicious Deed as the single best card in multiplayer.

There are other permanents I will push into. I regularly attack someone with a Spike Weaver just to get them to pull off counters. Then there are others I don't bother with. I don't really care about a one shot card like Seal of Doom. I won't push into that at all. And unless I'm taking stupid pills, I would never push into an active Door to Nothingness.

Crowd Control

When talking about the rattlesnake effect, I was careful to show that rattlesnake cards send people away by their choice. There are many other cards that send them away in a different way. Seal of Doom says, "Attack me, and I kill your creature." Lieutenant Kirtar says "Attack me, and I exile your creature."

There are other cards that have a different effect. For example, take a Five Color deck rocking Collective Restraint. If you don't have the resources to pay five mana per attacker, then you are forced to attack elsewhere. It's not your choice.

These cards I call crowd control. They have a different impact. A rattlesnake card is typically not obtrusive. When I have out a Seal of Fire, you can attack, and the Seal goes or not. Since you choose what to do, then you feel you have power. When I remove that choice from you, then you feel powerless, and thus are more likely to come after my enchantment.

Compare a card like Aurification with another – Terferi's Moat. One says, "If you hit me, your creature becomes a wall with defender." No big deal. The other prevents you from ever attacking me (with certain creatures). One gives you a choice, and the other removes it.

Examples of similar effects are Silent Arbiter and Dueling Grounds. Probably the strongest crowd rattlesnake card is No Mercy. Hit me, and deal me the damage, and loose the creature. There's a choice, but it's nasty. It's so powerful that it probably best viewed as crowd control rather than a rattlesnake.

Cards like Ghostly Prison, Web of Inertia, and Caltrops are simply ways of keeping the number of times you get attacked down. Since many are not nearly as powerful as "You can't attack me," you can often get away with them.

There is a lot of value in funneling creatures to attack other people.

Random McRandom

I want to attack and get out there in the red zone. However, you'll notice that if you start to pick on people too much, some may start looking your way. How do you attack other people?

I roll dice. And for fun, I include myself in the dice count (which means I don't attack). Sometimes you need to attack someone. If I have a chance to hit someone with a Stigma Lasher, I am not rolling a die and attacking another with an Angelic Wall.

I will roll the dice, and then attack the result. Therefore, no one feels picked on – it's random!

Additional ways to enhance this is to remove anyone who will kill my creature. I'm not attacking into a 4/4 with a 2/2, that's silly. The only random targets are those open. That encourages people to add defense to their deck. If I have a lot of possible targets, I'll do a round of attacks before I come back. What that means is that if I roll Steve to attack first, I will reroll his number if I get it later, until everyone has been attacked once.

If I have just two targets, then I'll just rotate back and forth. I get in hits, and yet I often keep out of people's Anger Zone. You do not want to enter an Anger Zone. (Plus you don't want to have Anger Zones – keep it professional, not personal. But not everyone does that. )

Again, this also encourages the playing of good defense. When you attack someone, this proves it's not personal, and it's not necessarily going to continue for a while. That's why it works. It's particularly valuable in the early game before you get a feel for who will be the threat.

Throughout Magic, there have been a lot of theorists in the tournament end of the Magic pool. There have not been many theorists in the multiplayer end of the pool. We have a great deal of knowledge about deck construction, sideboarding, the mana curve, how to play cards that are Time Walks, and more. There have only been a few multiplayer strategists out there. There are two masters worth studying. The Ferrett's early work on SCG is one of the best places you can find great multiplayer theorizing. Anthony Alongi's work on SCG is the other.

For later reading, check them out Here:

The Ferrett - StarCityGames Archive

I'd look at articles in the 2000-2001 spread. You might particularly enjoy these I picked out for you:

Redefining Multiplayer Politics

How To Cheat Effectively At Multiplayer

Anthony Alongi - StarCityGames Archive

Anthony is the better theorist, and The Ferrett is the better strategist. By that, what I mean is Anthony is absolutely amazing at breaking down the multiplayer game and cards into various parts. He sees multiplayer as a game, and looks at the Magic parts of it. The Ferrett is great at seeing and slicing into the reality of the game. Why didn't you win? That's The Ferrett's bread and butter.

Here are some great Alongi articles:

The Renovated Alongi School of Multiplayer

Funky Animals After Twilight (Skip ahead to multiplayer hall of fame)

Here is the article that The Ferrett is responding to: You are the Weakest Link, Goodbye.

The best part is that it includes politics in it, when Anthony attacks someone guiding a young player at the table who to attack, and then attacking a kid after he Giant Growths Anthony's creature, to prove that he doesn't like suck ups (both politics in different senses).

I personally have a lot of Alongi in my articles. The Rattlesnake Effect from two weeks ago? That was named after Alongi. There are a lot of other things you'll note as well. (And some are pretty subtle. In his article about multiplayer politics, he discusses three types of politics. What was the name of my politics article? "Politics, Politics, Politics" – repeated three times. )

Anyway, next week I'm going to have one final article on multiplayer and strategy. This one will be major. It will be the first time I will have ever mentioned this theory in my writings. It will be taking a theory for the tournament world, and applying it to casual land. (So, I think it will have some value for tournament players). What theory is it? What danger lurks in the hands of those who shuffle against many enemies?

See you next week,

Abe Sargent