Dragons of Tarkir Limited Overview - Red

Hi all.

This continues the discussion of the common and uncommon creature cycles in Dragons of Tarkir, taking a look at the cards that make up the majority of limited decks as a whole rather than analysing card by card. Blue and Black and Green are in previous posts. In summary, the common / uncommon creatures in these colours indicated that the colours were generally slower, looking to get to the late game in the case of blue and black and somewhat in the middle in green where the colour was deeper and had cards straddling both an aggressive and controlling game-plan.

Red is next. Here are the cheaper red creatures.

What is traditionally the most aggressive colour in Magic follows a trend we have seen in the block as a whole. The (mega)morph mechanic exists, so the sets are designed to allow players to get to later stages of the game so that they have the opportunity to turn creatures face up. This means the draft format should not promote very low cost efficient aggressive creatures. If we're not seeing it in red's 1- and 2-cost creatures, we're not going to see it. Kolaghan Aspirant is the best of the 4 here with an ability to trade up and X/1 creatures cannot block it. Simply trading with a morph is not necessarily the kind of interaction you want in an aggressive strategy though. There are also eight different 1/3 creatures around which this also only trades with. That lack of a 2nd toughness is a big deal. Dragon Fodder suffers from many (in some cases more) obstacles that the Aspirant does when deployed as an aggressive card. 

The cards can fill a mana curve role and I would expect Dragonlord's servant to be best at that. He does a job of holding off morphs and allows the cumbersome megamorph dragons to come down on turn 5. Generally 5 mana for a 3/3 flier is not quite a good deal these days (it used to be the going rate in limited) but it's acceptable enough, especially given their incidental extra abilities. In summary though, the 1 and 2 mana red dudes are not cards I'd like taking up many spots in my deck. If you're thinking otherwise, try imagine what a vanilla 2/2 - at either 2 or 3 mana - does to all of these cards.

At 3 and megamorph mana, we've got:

3 mana red cards are really not doing much of anything either. I suppose it is tough to design a colour to be aggressive while keeping costs relatively high. I see 2-3 cards here that I would consider more than filler in a 22 or 23 spells. 3R for a 2/2 that gives haste to another dude is not a card I would want to play and Kolaghan Skirmisher has more functionality than this. Neither mode of Atarka Efreet is appealing either; even at 6/2 it still only trades with a morph and the single damage it deals when turning face up is near irrelevant in a world of 2/2s. Hardened Berserker has a similar issue. You may think his trigger is appealing but generally, you'll want to cast your instant or sorcery spell before attacking to make sure your 3-power monster connects. His trigger doesn't help this. Qal Sisma Behemoth certainly can take over games and I do like it at both a turn 3 play (meaning you can attack and deploy a 2-cost creature on turn 4) and almost any stage of the game from there on as the 5/5 body will be very relevant on later turns whereas the 2 mana "upkeep" cost will not be. Note though, I don't think he operates very differently from a 5-mana 5/5. You still pay 5 to attack once and it essentially has "cannot block" text. A good card but not spectacular. Screamreach brawler is the most well-rounded in cost vs' return of the red 3-drops. The 3 toughness is a big deal facing 2/2's but as we learnt in Khans draft, that specific 2/3 body can be easily made redundant from opposing 4-drops or unmorphing. A final note for the 3-drops is with regard Kolaghan Forerunners. I suggest asking yourself how many creatures you want before this becomes an appealing play. For me, 3 is a minimum and is achievable. 4 is where it begin to get enticing but there is already a common at red that offers this for a single extra mana without having to jump through some hoops to get it. 

The return in power and toughness for your mana at red at 4 and 5 mana is considerably better than the other costs. Summit prowler did not perform at a high level in Khans of Tarkir but here, the 4/3 body is certainly above expected rate for 2RR. Consider also that your decks will be primarily 2-colour, meaning access to the 9 or 10 mountains needed to reliably make it on turn 4 is expected. Note, a full 54% of every single available common or uncommon creature available in Dragons-Dragons-Fate cannot block this successfully. From a creature point of view, this may be the top common. Maybe. 4 damage is a lot...

It's worth highlighting the Outrider here. I mentioned with the green cards that formidable should not be difficult to achieve. Anything in addition to a basic morph or manifest creature will allow the Outrider to crash in happily into most combat situations. 4/2 trample, first strike is not easy to block, especially if the attacker has any mana open at all. Luckily, the formidable wording doesn't end up in trading down if you end up with less than 8 power after the trigger has resolved.

Warbringer has a home to fill curve at 4 and also offer some mid-game dash overrun effects. I see no evidence that he will be much better as a card than Alesha's Vanguard. The two 5-drops are also playable but unspectacular. You won't always want to send in your 5/4 and Feral Krushok was not more than a playable curve-filler in the previous format. I don't see his "worse" version being very much more or less playable. Atarka Funneler is a genuine good return in size for cost with an ability that may help break through a stall. 5 mana is not a small amount though and it can leave you vulnerable in combat even with difficult blocking for your opponent, you've tied up much if not all of your mana.

Red has some OK cards but that's about the extent of it. That the best common or uncommon creature is a reprint and "just" a 4/3 for 2RR. If I'm drafting, the creature base offered would make me want to not lean on red. The non-creature spells certainly do make up for some of the loss in creature power level with respect to other colours but that would suggest your creature base should come primarily from these other colours with only superficial curve-filler cards coming from your red base.

Thoughts as always, are welcome,

- AJ

Dragons of Tarkir Constructed Considerations - i

Hello all.

I've been writing about the common and uncommon creatures available in each colour but want to focus on the first part of a constructed review here as a detour from limited. The set has been out for a couple of weeks now. It has had some interesting implications on constructed already, most notably from the Star City Games Events such as their invitational and opens in Richmond and Syracuse. The standard format with Dragons of Tarkir is still in it's infancy though. As usually occurs with a large set entering into standard, the Pro Tour sets the bar and the weeks after help shape the true format. The early weeks barely scratch the surface of what can be explored with player's opting for known / safe / obvious strategies. I don't see any evidence to suggest this set is any different.

I find this time in a set's life is a source of excitement for players based fundamentally card evaluation. A player has read the spoiler before a set, process what they read and deduces the implications; the card power level, it's effect with respect to their commander deck etc. They may get a brief encounter with the card in a game or 2 playing against, or if lucky with, at their Pre-Release. If rated poorly, the card is ignored from there. If it's rated highly, a player will want to build a deck with it and are on the look out for what tournament results might include the new toy. 

I find that the evaluations players apply though is often flawed. Inaccurate ratings emerge, based on misunderstanding of what a card really does or how it fits into the context of a current constructed or limited environment. Assumptions on playability are made with little more than superfluous analysis. I have encountered this again and again, even in seasoned players where they are doing no more than applying a knee-jerk comparison to cards they're already encountered. This approach can devolve into hyperbolic statements which give little or no information as to weather a card is good or not.

"That's awesome, it's a game - changer for sure"

"Wow, how can they print this?"

"This card will make your deck redundant"

and so on. I find this kind of talk both irritating and useless.

A more clinical and considered approach, asking questions about what a card actually does, what is it's return for the cost when you play it and how it fits with a current known environment help reveal a much more accurate picture of what to expect during the cards lifetime in a format. I gave in depth examples in an earlier post when Khans of Tarkir was released.

I'll be applying this type of approach now to evaluate the cards in Dragons. The first part here will consider cards with respect to the current standard format and future posts deal with the set from a limited perspective. My rating system is to attach a numerical value to each card, ranging from 0-10 or from "worst card printed in this format" to "best card printed in this format". For standard now I would apply 0 to something like __ (there are many possible zeros) and 10 to Thoughtseize as the current winner of the "best card" award.

Before considering specific cards, it's worth while noting that Dragons does not add any cycle of non-basic mana producing lands to standard. Our mana is as we have it from Khans so we'll be stuck with the mana-based as they are to allow us to cast out spells from here on it. An older post in this blog did go in depth regarding mana bases and what colour combinations the available lands promote and which combinations they hinder. Here are the pertinent points from that post:

• Mono-colour mana base are possible, as always
• 2-colour mana bases for low-curve aggressive decks were not viable
• "Wedge" colour combinations had the most potential for stable reliable mana bases
• "Shard" mana bases (friendly tri-colour combinations) were possible but not stable, primarily due to Fetch-lands acting only as short-term fixing.

This is a very accurate description of how the format has played out since Khans was released.

With that, thar' be Dragons!

The set is heavy on dragons, so it's not a bad thing to begin the discussion with a the new Elder Dragon. Without examining any of the card apart from it's set symbol and art, I expect this to be a high-impact board dominating card. I would expect this from any of the main character Elder Dragons from this set and Dromoka certainly demonstrates such characteristics. 

A total return of 12 power and toughness for 4GW - or 2 total per mana spent - is a very acceptable rate, he kind we get from known powerhouse standard cards like Siege Rhino or Goblin Rabbleaster. The text-box is also a considerable return in addition to the power and toughness. 

Often "tapout for big dude" strategies naturally suffer vs' countermagic and fail in the tempo-test with 5 or 6 mana being traded for your opponents 2 or 3, which this ignores. As an evasive lifegainer, it also helps weight races heavily in your favour. An opponent has to be attacking you for 10 just to keep up! 

The final line of text also has significant meaning. Not only can Dromoka not be countered but none of your other spells can either (should you cast them on your turn). You need not consider any combat trick from them, or any kind of removal on your turn. The implications of such an effect on a creature are not easily predictable. It is possible the opponent will be satisfied with casting their instants during their turn with the timing not greatly effecting their game-plan. It is also possible that the free-reign you have with Dromoka coupled with it's size allows you to close a game out in short order after untapping with it. 

This "untapping with it" aspect is an aspect of Dragons of Tarkir that will define how our standard format evolves with the set's addition. Dromoka is just one of many high-cost, high-impact in Dragons as well as current standard-legal sets. To some extent, a large cost threat is almost interchangeable. Many, many of them offer large upside, considerable board presence and allow you to close a game quickly if unanswered. Cards like Tassigur the Golden Fang, Whisperwood elemental, Hornet Queen, Ugin the Spirit Dragon... 

They are cards in the vein of "if you untap with this in play, you're likely winning". Dromoka is no different. The classic Dies to Doomblade argument is often bandied about to dismiss such ,creatures that require a (near) tapout to cast. This fear of vulnerability has helped highlight the power of cards that leave incidental advantage furthering your board state when cast - Siege Rhino, Wingmate Roc, Sidisi, Brood Tyrant etc. - so that even cheaper removal is still not directly trading 1-for-1. 

This doesn't make cards that don't leave behind advantage bad but does make them a little riskier. For cards like this, like Domoka, the opponent is required to have that "Doom Blade" or whatever the current removal spell is the following turn or else you will have been the benefit of a significant resource-swing with Dromoka. It is a card that can single-handedly close out a game while simultaneously making it more difficult for your opponent to do the same. Even if they do have the removal spell, the going rate is 3 mana which will tie up a lot of their resources for their own development the turn they cast it, as they'll be unable to do so on your turn. That is the card considered in and of itself and it's characteristics and type of impact it might have in a game. Context of the current standard format offers some further insight into how it might fit into the current format. 

The current decks with both G and W mana are the various flavours of Abzan, Naya Aggro and GW Devotion Clearly, an aggressive deck is not usually in search of a 6 cost monster. This rules out Naya and Abzan Aggro. I can see this card finding a home in either of the slower Abzan decks or in GW devotion as a potential way to break a mirror but the issue is Hornet Queen offers more power to your board and is a trump for Dromoka long term. This really just leave Abzan mid-range or Control. The question then would be, would you prefer to cast this, or something like Elsepth? I'm unsure of the answer. Both have their benefits. While flying is a rare commodity in today's standard and I can certainly imagine a world where Domoka is used to be bigger than whatever the opponent is doing.

The ability to use later-game Thoughtseize to clear a path through potential removal from an opponent is also appealing. However, as a 6-cost threat whose main job is to close out a game, Elspeth, Sun's Champion allows you to do it a whole turn faster (assuming ultimate required) as well as being far more robust and flexible. It is possible the Dromoka's existence allows for a new GW mid-range to develop but on the surface that appears as simply being an Abzan deck without black for no particular reason. 

I am a big fan of Dromoka, I like the card and it will see some play. Liking doesn't make a card good though I don't it seeing very much standard constructed play for now though with better options available for the job she is being interviewed for. Given all that, she rates at a 3.5 for me. 

 I have applied the same process to the remaining cards in Dragon of Tarkir and rated those I consider playable from such analysis. Further commentary was added where I think it's warranted for a particular card. I'd love to hear any feedback, questions or comments you may have regarding my card evaluations.

5.0

3.0

4.0

3.5

The set's namesake cards are above with respective ratings. It is to be expected that as the power level of mythics in a typical set are pushed; it's a basic characteristic of "Mythic-ness". The Elder Dragons are certainly powerful when considered in a vacuum. Many of the same principles and thought process applied to Dromoka hold true for the others; superbly powerful casts if you can resolve them, and untap. They are cards with considerable board impact and all offer high rates of damage (even if it comes from what you steal with regard to Silumgar) with which to close out games. Those positive traits appear at odds with the relatively low ratings but once format context from previously known information in considered, the become appear more appropriate.

Ojutai is the best of this cycle. The card has received considerable press over the past weeks, indeed the hype has resulted in the card tripling in value on the secondary market. At least some of this hype is warranted Prior to Dragons of Tarkir, some Blue-black based control decks were putting up high or winning finishes at GPs, SCG opens and so on. Control was certainly a viable strategy but did suffer on some fundamental points, most notably in the mana cost and damage pace of it's win conditions - think Silumgar the Drifting Death and / or Ugin the Spirit Dragon - and available interactive early plays. Ojutai solves this issue with an ability to close out a game in 4 turns while still offering the safety you a tap-out threat that is not vulnerable. I suggest not looking at Ojutai as a white addition to UB control decks but instead a reason to build a new archetype from the ground up, such as by Soorani. Indeed, Ojutai's W requirement also has many incidental benefits. 

The card's primary functionality is in it's ability to allow a player to deploy a 5-power evasive threat without being vulnerable to almost all removal while simultaneously offering a control element against smaller threats from your opponent with it's 5/4 body. What has drawn many to Dragonlord Ojutai beyond these appealing characteristics is how once it connects to trigger it's mini-Impulse ability, the ability itself helps you find ways to protect Ojutai when it's tapped which in turn allows you to connect again to find more cards and so on, especially given the first turn you connect from on-curve play you can expect up 6 total mana. I would not be surprised to see Ojutai being a mainstay in control strategies for it's lifetime in standard.

The other Dragonlords are appealing in some ways with Atarka topping the list. It does so due to the nature of it's come-into-play ability so that you should expect a benefit regardless of weather the opponent immediately removes it or not. It certainly offers a trump strategy to most things your opponents may do, even making Ugin spend all it's loyalty in dealing with it. 7 mana is an enormous amount and even though it had success in Syracuse the "enormous top-end threat for my aggro deck" aspect is often replaceable, sometimes necessarily so depending on how a format adapts; think prevalence of Terror effects or countermagic. It certainly could end up as the go-do high cost card of choice for a particular build of RG deck but as the format evolves, I could also see the card being relegated to sideboards.

Kologhan and Silumgar both can be the kind of cards you want to add to your deck. Do you have a BR core and need a high end 6-mana threat to break though? Some decks will. Rorix Bladewing certainly saw play in it's time and Dragonlord Silumgar will fill a similar role. currently though, exploration is needed to find if decks like that do have a home. Do you need to have a stall-breaking card to take over a long drawn out game? Dragonlord Silumgar is your giant flying lizard but shares a similar vulnerability to Dromoka. 

All of the Dragons will see some play but the only one of the bunch that ticks the right boxes regarding cost, durable board presence, ability which can advance your board and / or protect itself and so on. One major consideration when looking at the Dragonlords is a card whose very existence causes the level of impact these will have to be limited: Hornet Queen. In recent months, it was an all-star in many decks as one of the best late-game trumps to almost any board state an opponent could muster. The card subtly altered how decks were built and what game-plan they could employ to the extent that entire strategies rose in popularity to specifically battle the card. At the very worst, it trades with any of the Dragons and has a colour and cost that both the Queen and a Dragonlord can be expected to be cast on similar turns. It's a major consideration if you plan on leaning on the big fliers from Dragons of Tarkir.

Another cycle of cards which have received a lot of press in recent weeks are the Dragon's command cycle

Another cycle of cards which have received a lot of press in recent weeks are the Dragon's command cycle. How does one go about rating cards with so much functionality? The cost vs' return analysis is complex. In the past, cards such as these have been slightly over-costed to balance the flexibility. There is a lot going on for each card and many players will simply point to the options allowed to justify the playability of a command. Each combination of modes is certainly potentially one you may want but how can you tell if it's "good enough"....if the card fits that hard-to-define criteria to warrant a place in a main deck? I found breaking down each Command into all it's possible mode combinations made this decision far easier and clearer. Here's a rough-and-ready chart displaying these. I've highlighted the modes which would be "good enough" for me given the cost of the card itself and the mana cost along with my own ratings. The modes I have not highlighted I do not consider a good return for the costs involved, although this isn't to say they will never be useful modes.

Atarka's Command RG 4.0	Dromoka's Command WG 4.5	Kologan's Command 1RB 1.5	Ojutai's Command 2UW 4.0	Silumgar's Command 3UB 4.0
3 damage to opp, +1/+1 and reach	+1/+1 counter, Fight a creature	Shatter, Opp discards a card	Counter a creature spell, Gain 4 Life	Counter a non-creature spell, Boomerang
3 damage to opp, Opps can't gain life	Fight a creature Prevent instant or sorcery damage	Opp discards a card, 2 Damage	Return CMC 2, Gain 4 Life	Counter a non-creature spell, -3/-3 to a creature
3 damage to opp, You can play a land card	Fight a creature, Player sacs and enchantment	Opp discards a card, Return creature from grave to hand	Return CMC 2, Draw a card	Counter a non-creature spell, Destroy a planeswalker
+1/+1 and reach, Opps can't gain life	+1/+1 counter, Prevent instant or sorcery damage	Shatter, Return creature from grave to hand	Return a CMC 2, Counter a creature spell	Boomerang, -3/-3 to a creature
+1/+1 and reach, You can play a land card	+1/+1 counter, Player sacs and enchantment	Shatter, 2 Damage	Draw a card, Gain 4 life	Boomerang, Destroy a planeswalker
Opps can't gain life, You can play a land card	Player sacs and enchantment, Prevent instant or sorcery damage	2 Damage, Return creature from grave to hand	Draw a card, Counter a creature spell	Destroy a planeswalker, -3/-3 to a creature

I'd be very interested top hear in the comments about what which of the above you agree with and which you disagree with. Do you think 2UW and a card is typically worth "Gain 4, cantrip"? Or do you think "kill your walker, bounce a guy" is overpriced at 3UB and a card?

Please feel free to give your opinion. I want to go to the next cycle of cards and keep discussing but I think this post is long enough for now.

More later, it's time to enjoy some of this Irish springtime sun.

- AJ

Dragons of Tarkir Limited Overview - Green

Hello all.

continuing from the previous post that focused on Black and Blue common and uncommon creatures with a focus toward limited. The creatures amongst the two colours encouraged decks that rewarded a slower more controlling roll. The presence of the megamorph mechanic across all colours suggests that these remaining, classically more aggressive colours, will still reward players for reaching latter stages in a game. I'm also applying a base-line development for a player to be a face-down 22 on turn 3 at a minimum. 

Indeed, we see a continuing trend with the cheaper green cards. Everything so far tell us this format will be slow. There are some acceptable or better than expected returns for 2 mana in Atarka Breastbreaker and Scaleguard Sentinels respectively with the latter moving to exceptional if you have a dragon. This isn't a scenario to expect. For those interested in some of the numbers required - primarily from a 60 card perspective - I'll refer you to Frank Karsten's recent number crunching article. It suggests you can expected to open a little more than 1 dragon over your two Dargons of Tarkier packs. For cards like Scaleguard Sentienls the bonus is really that, just gravy and not something to expect at all. Still, it's a card that can battle through your opponent's 2-drop or megamorph either on the play or draw. That is a big deal for any deck that wants to be aggressive. At uncommon however, you can't rely on it. 

A note on the other cards above. Servant of the Scale is still a 1 mana 1/1. Even with a significant upside, which this doesn't offer.Adding +1/+1 to your board for a mana and a card is not be something you should accept taking up space in your 40 cards. Glade Watcher is a little more reasonable. It does follow the trend of helping you get to latter stages of the game as a road block against opposing 2 and 3 drops. It might even act as a card that hinders some aggressive strategies as it is common. It also be a non-zero body later. Assuming this is your first card cast and you 3-drop is a megamorph, you only need 3 more power to start attacking with this creature. On the play, I certainly think this is a relevant body to attack with, especially with the dearth of good 4-drops that we saw so far. If you do indeed have a 4-drop creature in green, we're lucky that 3 of the 4 available get to you formidable. there are some abilities akin to the 3/3 attacking that I would suggest as incidental and not something to expect but in this instance I would be surprised if he did not get to attack now and again given how himself and a single facedown get you 63% of the way there. Indeed, this particular combination of creatures is one that I can see being the basis of turning on formidable across the colours which exhibit the ability.

Similar to the other colours, we've a lot of depth at 3 mana in green, again including megamorphs.

So far, the majority of our megamorphs have given incentive us to play them face down first. That doesn't quite carry through into green. Both Aerie Bowmasters and Salt Road Ambushers are more desirable on turn 4. The Bowmasters primarily due to their size. It trumps megamorphs or any two-drop we've seen so far (bar 1 with deathtouch) along with many 3- and 4-mana creatures. They're also a distinct concern for a blue deck in shutting down many of it's fliers. This coupling of defensive and aggressive roles is not one we've seen so far as atrait for Dragons of Tarkir creatures. Salt Road ambushers also fulfils this role to some extent allow for an unexciting but low-level acceptable body on turn 4 but also giving you an even greater incentive to get to face-up mana for your megamorphs. Even a simple Guardian Sheild-Bearer ends up as a 5/4 attacking on turn 5!

The other 3 -drops offer some specialised characteristics depending on the direction your deck goes. Again we see green acting well in the middle of the aggro-control axis. Maybe your BG or UG control deck requires a 2/4 for 3? Maybe your GW aggro or RG Monsters deck wants a 4/1 for 2G to bash through after tapping/removing a block? Well, you've got access to both. I think it good to highlight here that much as how Abzan picks played out in Fate-Khans-Khans draft, the kind of Abzan deck you draft (analogous to the kind of green deck you might aim for in Dragons-Dragons-Fate) require a focus to some very different cards depending on weather or not you are a lower-curve aggressive green deck or want to aim for a big-monster role.

At 4 and 5 mana for non-megamorphs, we've got a few creatures but none hugely exciting. Circle of Elders and Conifer Strider both don't match up well with opposing face-down 2/2's which will make a large part of what your opponent is doing  in their early turns. Both of these trade down in mana cost putting you at a disadvantage - the former only after a double block but without your own trick there, you're not going to be able to attack through any more than one creature on your opponent's side.Lurking Arynx suffers the same fate a lot, even if you use it's formidable ability. 

Stempeding Elk Herd is more than acceptable though. In fact the power / toughness return vs' cost ratio is as large as any other 4 or 5 cost card we've seen so far. For a larger-monster green deck I can see this being one of, if not the top common. The fact that is offers a considerable formidable bonus in giving a pesudo-evasion is also very significant. I described above how formidable is a clause that is not met with difficulty. The presence of trample on those high-power low-toughness green commons results in a much more beneficial interaction than just "My 3 or 4 drops vs your 2 drop" which would otherwise be commonplace. The easily accessible common Elk* allows this transaction to be a 1-for-1 trade couple with 2-3 damage coming through, not even considering the kind of damage the Elk causes.

Green contrasts well with both black and blue. It offers more of an aggressive slant but still allows you to fill out a controlling creature curve.What strikes me most is that it is a deeper colour, offering more subjectively playable cards than either blue or black. I would expect a higher proportion of sealed decks to end up green because of it's depth of playables and as far as drafting goes, the colour allows such distinctly different directions in deck strategy that I can easily foresee two green players as neighbours with very little competition over picks.

Red is next! 
As always, comments welcome,

- AJ


*Some approximate numbers (I'm a physicist, not a mathematician :-) . Consider a draft table with 8 players, each in a 2-colour combination. 16 colours are taken up by this in total, meaning just over 3 instances of each WUBRG. An even distribution of colour focus amongst such a table would result in around 3 players sharing the cards of each colour. 107 commons are in Dragons with 160 available for the table over 2 packs. Something like 1.5 of each common is to be expected per table meaning if you're fighting with 2 other users of this colour for that particular common, you can expect one about half the time.

Dragons of Tarkir Limited Overview - Black and Blue

Hello everyone.

Dragons of Tarkir pre releases are coming this weekend. There are set-reviews and card rating lists popping up all over websites, on podcasts and through social media outlets. Card rating lists can be useful as they can quickly illustrate the expected power level of a set together with which colours appear deepest. Instead of repeating what many will say about the cards in the set I've taken a different approach. I'll be examining the set more homogeneously and letting it and the individual cards show us what kind of decks to expect and how limited games might play out. We can start this examination without reading a single spell!

We've had around 5-6 months of Khans of Tarkir sealed and draft play. The set was widely popular with people enjoying everything from mono to 5 colour decks made possible by the abundance of non-basic mana fixing. We got used to drafting a Khans for a particular seat or examining which colour combinations were possible from out multilands in our sealed pool. The format offered a wide range of deck types, even amongst a Khan with Abzan ranging from aggressive with a Black-White (warrior) base to a bigger, slower Green-black based outlast-driven deck. With Dragons of Tarkir, every single one of the decks you knew and loved are thrown right out the widow!

We've not just got a new set of cards but an entirely new way of drafting. I would call it a near "classical" limited format. Decks will be predominantly 2-colour with 3,4 or 5 colour strategies being the exception and only available to the base-green mages. I know this because are only friendly-pair multicolour cards available and only 1 non-basic land for mana fixing in Dragons with a handful of Rampant Growth style effects. There are some non-basic lands in Fate Reforged but there will be exactly 8 per draft table. You'll get 3 in a sealed pool but this results in something like a 3% chance of having these 3 lands fit into the same friendly-wedge "Shard". For this set in limited, single colours will be far more important. Mana will be smoother but the format should not be too fast as (mega)morph is still present, suggesting the set is designed to allow players to achieve the 6 or 7 lands to turn a card face up which means games that are not over by turn 5!.

So now that we've got a rough impression of how the format might look, I want to take each colour as it stands and examine the cards that will make up the vast majority of your decks. The commons and uncommon creatures. The types of decks possible may have changed but the tacit concept of limited Magic that the games revolve around creature interaction has not. By examining the colour mechanic, creatures and their abilites, the mana curve and where the more powerful cards lie on it, an idea of the kinds of decks that each colour encourages can be revealed. The non-creatures spells, which make up only around 20% of a typical limited deck, are examined after we have a good impression from the creatures. The rares and mythic cards will all be looked at with a round-up of what all of this analysis reveals about the way we expect the format to play out.

First off, black! 

The mechanic we have in black this tie is exploit. Immediately when we examine the 1 lone 1 cost creature we see that the mechanic is likely pushed with the Festering Goblin reprint giving a benefit when it dies. This makes me want to keep an eye out for the exploit cards or cards that are similarly beneficial to sacrifice. I would also expect black wishes to pursue a later game because of it's mechanic. In general, cheaper creatures are more aggressive but also less significant on the battlefield over a longer game. Exploit by it's very nature wants to make use of such less-significant cards in the mid-late game rather than exploiting something more expensive. It is also noting what X/1 creatures are floating around the various colours because of the Goblin's trigger when he dies. The 2 cost creatures in black:

It's immediately seen that black is not going to be an aggressive colour, for the most part. 2-mana creatures are the meat and spuds of an aggressive strategy and only 1 of these really fits that n Blood-Chin Rager and it's uncommon. A 1/3 with a low-impact exploit ability is not aggressive, neither is a cheap death-touch creature. I'm not suggesting you can't get some damage through with a 2/1 deathtouch for 2 but that kind of card is not designed for attacking. Almost every opponent will happily throw their worst creature at the Hand of Silumgar to get it off the battlefield to make way for their larger monsters. The return for a card and 2 mana for the above is just about acceptable and I can see all of them filling a role as a 2-drop but overall, black 1 and 2 drops appear somewhat defensive. Does this carry through to the 3-cost creatures?

You'll notice I have lumped the megamorphs into the 3 cost slots also. We learnt from Khans that morph creatures had their larger effect when cast on turn 3 and later morphed to fill use of mana / increase board presence. There is no evidence so far that Dragons will be any different. The more defensive aspect rings through again in both the Drudge skeleton upgrade of Marang River Skeleton and Dutiful Attendant, the latter a card that says "Let me chump block or exploit me!" meaning you'll be the defensive player. 

Minister of Pain is the first interesting exploit card we see but like Shambling Goblin it relies on opposing X/1's for greatest effect. Black has 3 so far so it's not yet looking as if these effects are what you might want.  There are another smattering of dash creatures but they are at odds with the other black creatures so far. It will be worth looking toward the Red of Blue creatures and see if they can compliment aggressive strategies in those colours. The megamorph creatures also push you to want to get to a later game - 4/4 fliers or 5/7 ground pounders are pretty significant damage sources - and the other black creatures so far promote this.

The remaining common and uncommon creatures follow the trend of slower more controlling creatures which shine as the game draws out. I've coupled the 4 and 5 cost cards together.

You will get your reward in black for making it to the later game. All 3 of the exploit creatures here offer a significant advantage turning a cheaper perhaps redundant creature on your side into a -3/-3 spell, 2 creatures of 4 power and 4 toughness!! Those are very significant numbers for 4 or 5 mana. Even the more vanilla Ukud Cobra is a significant return for it's cost of 3B and a card from your hand. We've no yet examined the removal in the set but a 2/5 body is rarely fragile in a limited format, meaning it can hold off an opposing army itself by making beneficial attacks very unlikely for your opponent. 

None of these black black creatures strike me as utterly unplayable but some are certainly not cards I would be happy taking a space in my 40 card deck. These cards, such as Kologhan Skirmisher or Qarsi Sadist can certainly do a job in an early game as a curve filler in a defensive black deck, block or trading for a (mega)morph respectively but also acting as great exploit fodder for the 4 and 5 mana dudes. Remember though, you still did pay 1B and a card for them if you exploit, the cost is not "free". 

Black's creatures here overall advocate that your deck should be aiming for a slower more controlling role in a game. Your cheaper creatures are not best at attacking and your most board-impacting monsters are a higher resource cost in both mana and board resources (remember, exploiting isn't free!!). It is likely that the "Dimir" of Dragonlord Silumgar is the basic friendly-colour pair deck that black has it's best home in but the other creatures and non-creature spells need examination before any preferable colour combinations become clear.

I'll take blue's dude's next, breaking them down in a similar fashion.

If you thought blacks low-cost creatures were defensive, check out the 3 power amongst 5 creatures at 1 and 2 mana for blue! That isn't the whole story though. 2.5 of these cards are deceptively aggressive. I say 2.5 as some of the defensive attributes of the 3 cards need a little work. Gudul Lurker has been likened to Mystic of the Hidden Way, a card that caused some problems against low-removal decks of Khans of Tarkir. The salamander is a megamorph and a 2/2 unblockable is a far better clock than a 1/1. I placed him with this group however as I can certainly see scenarios in particularly aggressive deck that might want to simply sneak him out with that one loose mana on a developmental turn of 3,4 or even 5. He's not going to do nearly as much as if you megamorphed him. But casting your primary card for that turn and this guy will often add up to more damage in the short than just making him for 3U. It's not what I necessarily want to do and will aim to megamorph this guy, especially given the -1 to toughness effects already seen from black creatures but I think it is a point that will be overlooked. We also have an aggressive 1/3 for 1U...well, not exactly aggressive but he doe the job asked of him well. Hold off early megamorphs and 2/1s, and then sneak in for some additional damage in the later game. In scenarios where you use a removal spell to make an opening for a good attack, the Spellfist essentially adds an extra two damage incidentally. The last of the 3 is Palace Familiar. This is printed with the idea to exploit it and get a "free" card in return together with the exploit effect. If you can also get a couple of points of early flying damage from it too, that's all the better. Even if you don't have any exploit cards, having this bird soak up 4-6 damage from a blocking a larger creature which also replacing itself with a random card later in the game is also very beneficial. 

The remaining creatures not not what I'm actively looking to use. A 0/4 OR a sorcery-speed unsummon for U and a card is not a good return for cost. Neither is 1U for a 0/4. Don't be fooled the it's ability! It's a trap. If you disagree, I'd be very interested in hearing an example of a game sequence over some turns where you would want to cast to use its mana ability while getting an acceptable return.

How do these fits into the blue 3 cost creatures?

For starters, we only have 3 true 3-cost blue creatures. Every other one will be a vanilla 2/2. This again implies the colour is trying to get to the late game to enable it pay for megamorphing. The two non-megamorphs are also in the controlling vein. Although a Silumgar Sorcerer is certainly a card that can start the beatdown early and it a very classic return for cost on a blue card, you would much prefer to sandbag this to ensure exploitation. In the mid- to-late game, you can use this card to trade on of your worse creatures (even itself!) for a much high-cost threatening creature from your opponent. Again, exploit means you will want to have had the opportunity to resolve a worse (read cheaper) creature, and get to the stage in the game where not only do you have 3 mana open on your opponent's turn that you were not otherwise developing with but a stage where they are tapping a large amount of mana for a significant board presence.

Updraft elemental is something that will very much help you get to that later stage in the game. It will happily block any face down creature, without a worry of a -1 toughness effect taking it down as well as successfully blocking every non-dragon flier we've seen so far. It makes Reckless Imp look positively garbage. Much like some of the 1 and 2 mana blue cards, it also will be able to sneak incidental points of damage in that you did not otherwise expect. Zephyr Scribe is a special kind of card though. We've not had such a "looter" for some time. A single blue mana is so close to zero, especially as often a 4-drop will be a megamorph and a loose mana. His body can trade with those 2/2's but his main function wants to push you into a later game, seeing more cards. Every extra land you draw with him turns into a fresh random card and often it can snowball with one use of his ability finding a non-creature spells to allow you to use it again! A game is not going to be out of your control if you do draw 1-2 more cards than your opponent every turn and effectively never have to draw any unwanted land again! I will be keeping an eye out but so far I have not seen a single meramorph that I would rather cast than this 2/1.

On the subject of megamorphs, blue does have some big bodies here. Belltoll Dragon and Dirgur nemesis illustrate the kind of vanilla, slightly overpriced to unmorph card (compared to Khans) in this set.They do hit hard though (well, the Nemesis only once!) are are very difficult bodies to get rid of but that is what I would expect for paying a total of ten mana! The others in Monastary Loremaster, Silumgar Spell-Eater and Ojutai Interceptor are much more interesting and appealing. After the initial 3 mana investment for a 2/2 which is now considered an acceptable baseline, the loremaster gives you a decent sized 4/3 body after it's turned face up as well as a free card. I say this with certainty as I suggest you not turning him face up without a card to return or anything else to do with your 6 mana or you absolutely need a 4/3 over a 2/2. I apply this logic to Silumgar Speel-Eater also. If you've gone to the trouble of putting these cards into your 40 and then cast them as a 2/2, you want to extract as much bonus as much additional effect from turning them face up as possible and both of these effects are equivalent to an entire extra card. 

The Interceptor is a little more difficult to understand and requires some consideration by itself. A high-power evasive creature is something preferable early. The extra power is also appealing for an aggressive creature however to get this I must forgo casting a different 3-mana attacker. Her megamorph counter does make up for that other source of damage in two turns. The question as to weather you want to megamorph or not then comes down to the damage clock it represents for your opponent. Four damage with a counter over turns 4-8 would be a lethal 20. I expect there to be games where attacking for 3 from turns 5-8 (a total of 12) plus the damage from the other megamorph you cast on turn 3 would amount to more (it would come to 22 on the same turn if the megamorph always connects). Normally I would adhere to the idea of spreading out my threat base, meaning casting it as a 3/1 but if the extra mana does not hinder my board development, I will always aim for the 4/2 version.

The final uncommon and common blue creatures follow the trend of black showing that there are not so many at higher cost. I would not expect the more mana intensive creatures to be outright cast almost exclusively because of the megamorph mechanic. There must be an exceptional reason as to why you would forgo the additional counters. There is a lot of mana space in between turns 3 and 6 or 7 though, and we do need to consider creatures that occupy that position in your game development. Both of the above do different jobs at these kind of mana costs but both jobs are very different. 

Youthful scholar fits so well into the blue (and previously black) regimen of seeking the late game. On its own it prevents any attack of consequence from your opponent's facedown or otherwise X/2 creatures. We previously listed Vulturous Aven as one of the top end black creatures and the Scholar outshines it on many levels. You need not sacrifice another creature, it ends up in combat (trading or chump blocking) a lot more often to allow those additional cards to pressurise a resource-depleted opponent and it does not cost life! This is a spectacular card with a cost vs return greater than any creature we have examined so far. The blue 5-drop Squid is a different story. Not nearly as spectacular but a very well-cost ground-clogger. His functionality certainly depends on how many 3 and  4 power attackers there are in this format.

 Originally I neglected the blue-mono-group due to searching for only creatures. This is effectively a creature. Air elemental stats for cost has almost always been a go-to for any limited blue deck. There are some pros and some cons in comparison to our friend from Alpha. It is certainly not a defensive card; adding only 2 power and 2 toughness to your board state for 5 mana is far, far below the expected board development, The monk will only be able to battle with much cheaper cards from your opponent putting you at a net loss for that turn. One might be inclined to suggest that it's only half a card lost if you trade it for their 2 or 3 drop which is true to an extent, but how much is the other half really going to do for you when the spell rebounds? It's an even later stage in the game offering an even low net change in your board state that the first monk. These points really emphasise to me that you do not want to use this card defensively

Using it aggressively though, it's often BETTER than Air Elemental. It never does quite the same amount of damage (as the 2nd monk will be sick) but it does distribute the power threat making blocking that little more difficult for your opponent. If we look at the flier in this set also, there is very little that really trumps it at common/or uncommon with one Djinn trading for / bouncing off of the fliers I see in this set. We do have the perennial green reach-monster but we've always had similar as flier opposition. The cycle of uncommon dragons does beat both monk over time but they are overcosted at best and blue is very much a colour in this set to promote the "get that one dude of of the way" strategy is has with for instance bounce or ice-effects. A last note is not highlight the rebound aspect of this card. It interacts fantastically with Zephyr Scribe allowing you to see 3 cards  from your deck at a minimum the turn you rebound. The presence of the Scribe at common would give me all the incentive I need to rate the non-creature creatures such as the Summons over an equivalent or perhaps even marginally superior monster.

Blue continues the theme we had from black in being a defensive colour, pushing you into the alter stages of the game. Unlike black, the benefit does not come specifically from higher costed creatures but from the abundance of additional card advantage offer by the blue creatures. A scholar trading, Scribe looting or one of Silumgar's wizards unmorphing all offer 2-for-1's at worst. You want to reach the later game to get these rewards.

The next post continues with the green and red common and uncommon creatures.

Best!
- AJ

A Fate Reforged Sealed Exercise

Hello all.

The Pre Release for Fate Reforged is coming up in a few days. I'm currently working on my set review for constructed but I thought it a good exercise to focus on sealed a little before the weekend. Very often, participants will  be building a deck from a sealed pool for the first time since they last Pre-Released. There are many reasons for this (cost, logistical, time...) but it does result in a greater instance of mistakes. I have no empirical reasoning for this point of view apart from concluding that mistakes in card evaluation, deck building and play should be more likely in a format that is practised considerably less than Draft or Standard.

I firmly believe that sealed Magic is a way of playing the game that greatly helps in both draft and constructed format. You're forced to game with cards of far more wildly varying power level than you would in constructed meaning that it can greatly help in areas of constructed where lines of play based on analysis of very unfamiliar strategies is required.

You also need skills to fine-tuned a deck build from a very limited pool, even more-so than in draft. In draft, you've got the leeway of having a far higher density of cards in a chosen colour resulting in your pool being a lot more forgiving when building from it.

Khans block, as with most multi-colour blocks, throws an extra level of complexity into sealed deck building, specifically the mana considerations / colour fixing. I regularly hear and see players are limited events comment on their mana not being correct or them just not knowing how to approach a reasonable mana base for a deck.

I also often see other fundamental errors in approaching a sealed deck competition: inefficient method for examining a pool, inaccurate (and sometimes just plain wrong) card evaluation often based on hyperbolic and absolute often shallow card interpretation of a card, misunderstanding of the format's turn sequences, focusing on niche strategies instead of the basic creature combat, not having enough creatures, choosing to play / draw when one is very inappropriate for a format and so on and so forth. Tackling all of these at once is a large task. I'll touch on a few throughout this exercise and some of my comments will detail methods that can help avoiding these kind of errors.

What I'll do here is show my own approach to a sealed pool from opening to having a deck ready for play in round 1 and each step in between. I'd hope everyone reading can take something from it and perhaps they'll get a better experience at the Fate reforged Pre Release. As always comments are welcome and encouraged.

I'm going into details for each colour so fair warning, this is a longer than normal.
Enjoy and thanks for reading,

AJ

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The following is the content of a sealed pool generated on a good online site. It contains cards from 2 Khans of Tarkir packs and 4 Fate Reforged packs to mimic the Pre-Release sealed pools as best as possible. The names of the cards will be clearly visible in the images below but not always the text so I'd suggested opening up a site like this one in case you're not familiar with all of the cards.

After opening (generating) the pool, I separated cards based on the 5 colours, the multi-coloured cards and the artefacts/lands. In each pile, I made 2 rows with creatures on top and non-creatures on the bottom arranged in increasing mana cost. Included in the creature row for each colour will typically include non-creature spells that generate creatures, token generator spells (Hordeling Outburst) or as will be common in Fate Reforged limited, cards with the Manifest effect.

I have always found this method allowing a particular colour and it's types of cards to be very clearly displayed. More importantly, as limited games are near exclusively determined by creature combat this method allows the optimum creature colours to be identified very quickly as well as those which do not offer enough creature depth. Accurate card evaluation is necessary here and I will give detail on some cards but not all. I've highlighted my method of cost vs' return card evaluation in previous posts here.

Ultimately though, you need to determine yourself if a card is "good enough for you". This card quality level is almost always relative to previous cards placing each one somewhere on the spectrum from "best card ever printed" to "worse card ever printed". Is the effect you get in relation to a cost you pay, the mana and the card from your hand and the space it occupies in your deck, worth the return for you? It's a question you need to answer yourself for each card.

Here is how each colour would look, starting with white.

I would almost immediately discount white as a potential colour here. This may appear like a snap-decisions which I cannot be certain about as I've not even looked at other colours yet. The thing is, white offers a total of 4 creatures, one of which is marginal at best. A 1/1 flier for a single mana is a reasonable deal for return vs' cost but the situations where a 1/1 will matter are very narrow and almost non-existent beyond turn 1.Sandblast is a potentially good removal spell, especially with the time-based development advantage (some call this tempo) it can offer if used to destroy a creature your opponent just morphed. I am not interested in Honor's Reward at all. I would never play a 2W "gain 4" card (or even if it was "gain 8"!). While bolster will certainly have applications, I see it as a creature pump / combat trick that that can only target your smallest creature. Often that is the one you want to target anyway but does make the new keyword very limiting in it's application. It can also end up only making a creature that was sub-par become acceptable at the cost of an entire card. I am not ignoring the obvious beneficial applications of bolster cards with Outlast creatures so I'll keep an eye out for any.

Blue is usually next:

You might notice here that I did not adhere to strict mana costing in the columns. Treasure Cruise is costed at 7U but experience has told me that it is likely a 5 or less mana card. It is vitally important to not get too far behind on board development in early turns in a limited game or the game will get out of reach for you very quickly. As such, there is rarely a luxury of being able to cast a non-board-developing card before turn 5 or 6. It almost forces you to play well the way it is costed. In any case, I'd expect if I am casting it it is something like as a 5 drop. Will of the Naga is similar but has the benefit of being more aggressive. I will treat many delve cards like this with respect to mana cost.

Sadly, 3 of the blue spells are countermagic. Generally countermagic is poor at best in limited for reasons linked to board development as above. It can act as general removal for anything but it is time dependant. Topdeck a Rakasha's Disdain the turn after your opponent casts an Abzan Guide, and it doesn't do anyhting against the 4/4. Draw a Throttle though...this mean you prefer to draw your countermagic early to ensure you have it ready when your opponent does make a significant play. The dichotomy though is that this strategy to make counterspells effective means you cannot develop your own board state at the desired pace. Certainly the Windscout and Lotus Path Djinn are very efficiently costed aggressive creatures but the rest of the spells do not offer enough depth. It's simply a numerical issue of creature density. As of now, I'd say blue is also unlikely. Next, black:

Now we're getting somewhere. White and blue did not contain a card that was powerful enough (toward the top-end of our evaluation scale) that would make you want to play that colour just ot have access to that card. Black does. Archfiend of Depravity is a significantly sized body for it's cost, a 5/4 vanilla for 3BB is more than expected from black. Flying and the ability to destroy several of your opponent's creatures on top of that? I believe this to be one of the top cards in the set for limited. Another black card from FRF I am excited about is a lowly 1B 1/1 Sultai Emissary. I believe it will be more of a constructed card but the effect of a 1/1 AND a 2/2 (at minimum) for 1B and a card is, like the demon, offering more in return than expected for the cost. Having an early play is important, especially in a world of morphs. The initial body not hugely significant but not wholly irrelevant either, it trades with Mardu Skullhunter, Mardu Hateblade, Bloodfire Expert, incidental tokens - all cards which commonly appear in Khans limited - while leaving behind a free Manifest creature.

I'm also a fan of the Gurmag Angler. It is a body of size and cost you would expect to find in green.The specific size is very relevant when compared to larger creatures in Khans. It matches very well vs' card like Sultai Flayer, Glacial Stalker, Hooting Mandrils etc. Overall, I'm looking at 8 black cards which would be acceptable to play in a deck with that as a primary or secondary colour. Mardu Shadowspear and Sibsig host are not up to scratch on my cost vs' return evaluation on the creature front and neither are Dutiful Return, Bitter Revelation or Grave Strength but the former 2 could have applications if the deck we build ends up in a particular direction, specifically if the delve enabling is required or if a far longer gameplan is expected for the deck. I would prefer not to play these kind of cards in my main deck however.

Red next.

Even without examining the nature of the red cards, I would say I am likely to include it in my deck as a primary or secondary colour, simply as it has the most creatures of any colour so far. I don't want to have fewer than 15 creatures at an absolute minimum simply as limited games revolve around creatures and combat. Unlike black, I see no creature that offers a very significant return for it's cost. Red also has a few "pseudo creatures" in a pair of Lightning Shriekers. I think I would begin by trying one to experiment. It only has a singularly aggressive role in your deck and has been accurately likened to Lava Axe. These kind of non-board-impacting cards fail on several fronts. They don't help defend, they opponent can take a hit on the chin and have you down a card, and they take a considerable amount of mana often being the only possible play in a turn. The cost - return ratio is high, 5 evasive hasty damage for 5. This is appealing. Having access to it in some future turns is also appealing as there are only so many times an opponent can take such a hit before they have to start block / using removal.

The other red creatures are not exciting but certainly make up for that in quantity. There'll all only giving you about the expected return for the cost, 4/4's for 4R, 3/2 for 3R and so on. Getting expected return for cost is for me a minimum criteria for playability.

The red non-creatures also offer 3 removal spells, although I don't rate Collateral Damage as playable. Losing a creature is a significant effect on your board position and even if the argument of "well I can get rid of a creature I don't care about" you are still down on the trade as 3 damage will not kill the creatures in an opponent's deck that matter, the Dragons, Big green monsters and blue fliers of the format. The small creature you sacrifice will be on a comparative power-level to any you can destroy. They lose a guy, you lose a guy and a card. This is not a good trade. It can be argued that it is a good response to your opponent's removal spell but again, you'll be typically killing a mediocre creature with it. Those situations where it becomes a powerful spell - such as using it to sacrifice a very good creature your opponent is using a removal spell for AND Collateral Damage does enough damage to kill a significant creature. Generally, a creature which is significant at 3 toughness or less means an oppressive activated ability. These cases are exceptions, corner cases and not reasons to play such a card.

A comment on Temur battle Rage. I believe it to be worse in this format that in others. Even in full Khans it would be a level in power better than in the 2-set limited format. In battle of 2/2 vs' 2/2 a double strike effect is straight up removal, but there will be far fewer of these. The primary reason is the reduction in instances of morph-on-morph combat. Manifest exists, sure but 40% of the cards which produce manifest creatures have an effect which makes the creature more than a base 2/2. I still think it an acceptable combat trick if there is space in my deck. The other red spells either are unplayable main deck and often always (Shatter...) or solid removal.

Green has the following:

We see a similar characteristic amongst the creatures here as we did with red; some reasonable ones and a good bit of filler. Smoke Teller, Abzan Guide...solid but uninspiring. I rate the Archers as unplayable main deck. It's a very scenario specific removal spell at best and often just won't block as you'll want to trade for at least a 4 or 5 mana creature. It certainly has the power to take such cards down but all the while a Morph or Manifest can trundle through past it.

We've got 1 dinosaur in the Colossodon which is attractive and of course the Warden can get out of hand if games go long enough. Being big enough to tackle Morphs or Manifests as early as turn 3 is important but the card is even more appealing due to it's ability to be impacting on the board on much later turns.There are 3 "fight" cards which is the highest volume of removal yet but we would need to pair green with a colour deep in larger creatures for them to shine.

Finally, the remaining cards:

Dramoka is a draw to try have access to white mana in the build we end up with. A 5/5 flier on turn 5 will likely be the largest and most dominant creature on the battlefield. Harsh sustenance is another draw to white meaning that colour needs reexamination; I expect this to act as a 2-damage, gain 2 for 3 mana at worst. As with other cards noted here, it almost makes you play well. Develop your board, cast creatures, and the card gets better!

We've also got a few cards to help fix mana. The type and number of each do apply some constraints for choice of colour combinations.

Specifically, we are guided to the following:

• Abzan

• Jund

• Mardu

• Naya

I'm neglecting the non-wedge combinations as Khans was not developed with those as a theme. Given the sparsity in depth of blue spells coupled with the mana limitations I would disregard blue.
Green, black and red offer the most depth but there are significant reasons to have access to white.

• Drakoma, the Eternal

• Herald of Anafenza

• Harsh Sustenance 

• Warden of the First Tree

• Sandblast

My first instinct is to try Abzan. Black and green offer the greatest combination of depth and quality. The only tri-colour combination we have access to mana fixing for is Abzan.

Here is my first take on the Abzan coloured playables.

This amounts to 19 potentially playable creatures with a reasonable curve (weighted toward the lower end) and 10 non-creatures, amongst those 7 potential removal spells. This core of removal and creatures is precisely what I aim for in a sealed deck build. Adding spells that don't fit into these categories tend to remove focus from the basic limited-format concept of managing creatures and combat being the primary route to victory. Any cards that do not develop your own board position or peg back your opponent's must be able to warrant their presence in your 40 cards as there simply isn't an enormous amount of space. Cards like Ghostfire blade do this job well as it does add power and toughness to your board in all but narrow cases where you are not winning (when you have no creatures to equip it to). At any other stage, it is a significant presence often giving you the biggest creature on the battlefield.

With the lower number of Morph creatures and a reasonable curve, I don't believe 18 lands is needed here. A classic 23-17 split is where I'd aim for to begin with,. I know we've got 2 lands, both producing white mana to help, as well as our green 2-drops to fix mana draws where needed. My very simple approach in getting to this 23-17 split is simply to remove the 6 "worst" cards in my deck, while ensuring keeping a high creature count and maintaining a curve. I identified the following as the weakest cards:

• Bitter Revelation
• Dragon-Bell Monk
• Abzan Runemark
• Harsh Sustenance
• Gurmag Angler
• Chief of the Scale

Certainly some of the cards I have picked are better than some remaining; Chief of the Scale vs' Smoketeller for example, but the choices were based on mana colour considerations. Some of the fixing comes from a 2-mana 1/1 so the cheaper white cards become worse, more specifically, less reliably cast in those early turns where they would matter most. Something like Herald can have a significant impact later in the game which is why it still remains. 

Adding our 2 multilands, 3 plains (we now only have 5 cards that require white mana, 3 of which are perfectly acceptable when cast quite late into a game) and 6 each of Swamps and Forests I think we are reasonably set up. The deck is nothing to get overly excited about but I would expect something that could easily be navigated to an X-1 or better record. There are several considerations for good sideboard cards too but most of them rely on games getting into later turns.

So to summarise the process I used knowing I want a 40-card deck with 15 creatures minimum

• Separate cards by colour and then by type and cost
• Examine each colour for number of playables, creature count and mana curve, noting ones which offer the best combination of the above
• Check mana fixing that is available
• Match deepest colours with mana fixing within the pool to get a first take on a playable colour combination
• Arrange all main-deck playables within these colours, and remove cards until you are at your spell limit, keeping in mind creature count, mana curve and colour considerations
• Add basic land to arrive at a ratio that is acceptable to you. As a baseline, a primary or secondary colour requires no fewer than 7 sources, a 3rd if a splash, can be accommodated by fewer but with at least as many as the number of cards in this colour. i.e. Adding 3 red cards would require at least 3 red sources.

Best of luck at the Pre Releases!