"Janky" card rant

[BlackJester]

Free non-{U} counter?

[Kareason]

Free non-{U} counter?

Yeah, hard to keep a thought straight sometimes.

[Jbombard51]

{vexing devil} is jank, that's what the internets keep telling me!  Seriously though, as long as your deck and sideboard has good synergy and you can maintain mana and card advantage you'll have better odds of winning more consistently.  If deck X is always going to beat any other deck, then the game would get pretty stale, because even a trained monkey could eventually figure out the skill set of that deck and it would basically boil down to a game of chance only. Personally I enjoy building decks that have great synergy while always having enough countermeasures (if needed) against better players/cards I may encounter.  Straight burn is pretty straight forward on one end of gameplay, while strong control is on the other.  I enjoy a good burn deck vs a good control deck match, it's fun to me to see who plays their hands better and gambling on either when to bring on the burn or when to counter.  I miss {glasses of Urza} lol. 

[Dudecore]

I understand not all cards are "horrible", but some cards are just bewildering.

I know most things have their uses, and others seem to be apologized for. Something like {Otherworld Atlas} might be good in a deck with {Underworld Dreams}, but it's at rare and I just don't like the card. It has it's defenders, but I wonder how many actually include it in their decks.

Basically, most Johnnies have never seen a card they didn't like, and I am not a Johnny.

[Milo109]

You need bad cards. There was a very good article about it.

[Coffee Vampire]

Some cards are just boss. Boss in every way. My dog could pick those cards out and separate them from a big pile. It's obvious. They could almost win on their own.

Some cards aren't as good but can compliment the good ones. They can help pull off neat combos and stuff if you use them right. But they wouldn't be good alone.

Some cards force you to really think of how this would actually benefit me in a deck. At first a card likr this may come off as god-aweful. Then the next moment you are making a deck around it.

Some cards are restrictive to progress in certain formats, while they blossom in others. A card may cost way too much mana for its benefits in a certain format, but in another world, mana may not be an issue because of various factors such as game length.

Some people say cards are bad because there is a better substitute. But I say that if you can put a card in a deck and win with the deck, the card isn't bad. Sure a 5/5 for 5 mana is better than a 5/5 for 6 mana...but that doesn't make the 5/5 for 6 mana any worse. It just makes it worth less money. It is still a 5/5 that you can swing with...a 5/5 that you can win with.

So...can a card be "janky"? Well I define "janky" as being hard to use (though still useable in some way), and/or not competitive when printed. But can a card really be bad? Eh I say no. Not truely bad.

[cltrn81]

Look at dredge for example.  When it came out it was considered a jank ability not worth using.  A little divergent thinking turned that ability into a new way to play magic.....no mana required.  The whole sound of that goes against the grain of magic and I doubt R&D foreseen the possibility of manaless dredge.  Now dredge is one of the most formidable decks in Legacy.  Not to mention it made a bunch of jank cards from past sets very useful .....{ichorid} case in point.

[SpiritedAway]

{CoffeeVampire} broke it down pretty well. Every card is useful somewhere. I learned this when I won an EDH match with {Bar the Door}. To me, the glory of this game is finding ways to use random cards somewhere. I've won plenty of games with {Snapcaster Mage} and {Geist of Saint Traft}, but the games you win with {Bar the Door}, {Noggle Ransacker}, {Orcish Settlers} or {Sanctuary Car} are the games you remember forever.

As for counter arguments, sorry BJ, you know everyone on this forum is just too nice and too optimistic. Where's our token negative dude who complains about Standard when we need him, though?

[Milo109]

Orcish settelers is a good card. JS

[Quackmaster5]

I agree with everything. I have made so many decks just on the whim of a good card and then surrounded it with, not the same type of card, but compliments. Example, I made a bird deck many many years ago. When I started playing it, my friend just thought it was weenies waiting for a bigger creature. Little did he know that the whole deck was filled with birds. Birds are formidable, but when you have a flock of them? They get pretty annoying. That game, I beat my friend 14-0. You would never use alot of birds in one deck besides as weenie walls. But I did that for fun and it worked. Now, with {favorable winds} out, I am looking forward to playing it again

[cltrn81]

I have had an idea of a {favorable winds} deck ever since I seen it as a spoiler.  I am also considering birds but I am torn between birds, spirits, or a mix of both.

[Quackmaster5]

I have had an idea of a {favorable winds} deck ever since I seen it as a spoiler.  I am also considering birds but I am torn between birds, spirits, or a mix of both.

How about spirit birds like {moon heron}? 😜😝

[Gorzo]

I have had an idea of a {favorable winds} deck ever since I seen it as a spoiler.  I am also considering birds but I am torn between birds, spirits, or a mix of both.

Same here, I chose spirits and built away. Winds + {Voiceless Spirit}s and {Drogskol Captain}s? Yes sir! Add a couple {Call to the Kindred} for grins...

But yeah, as for 'janky' cards, I absolutely love building around cards that people say aren't very good. It adds a new element to the game for me, making them work. I don't care that the deck won't win any pro tours, I just want it to function enough for a laugh, and get that reaction of "what the...you're playing THAT card?" followed by "THAT card is posing a problem for me?"

I'm such a Johnny-Timmy.