I wanted to mention a card for this deck here that I have not seen ANYONE else mention. Parallel Thoughts, an enchantment for 3BB, It allows you to search your library for 7 cards, exile them face down, and then has a MAY DRAW replacement effect that allows you to draw from that stack anytime you would draw a card instead. This has been a pretty solid card for me. It's not that hard to protect if you miracle if out on the turn prior to yours, and you can also bait out removal by putting a mix of lands and support cards for non-vital combo pieces or any number of things, it is very versatile and the draw replacement really does actually synergize with this commander. I have been stacking some of my enchantment removal pieces and a board wipe or two under it with a few lands. I have also just jammed every I win card under it when I have found myself playing vs people that lack interaction. Really has out performed for me, you just need to have a read on the table as it is a pretty juicy looking target for removal.
@@fernandostar3507 Aw hell, yeah your are likely correct that it wont trigger miracle, that doesnt change the way i was using entirely but certainlywould explain why it was being over looked...JUDGE!!! EDIT: You are correct it actually allows you to entirely skip the draw phase of your turn. So no it's not going to trigger. Still super useful to stack lands and some removal and use it as a draw replacement for your second draw on a turn to get ur lands since you are often stacking the top card as a non land. So definitely still a card to consider. I've gotten a lot of good use from it as a replacement for land tax.
I hope we visit a plane that has lore that will allow WotC to create more creature spells that have Miracle. Ever since the Warhammer 40K crossover product came out with that mono-white 5/5 lifelink card with Miracle & a sort of recursion effect on it, (It randomly stacks the card in the top seven cards of your library when it is put into the GY from the battlefield) I have noticed there is so many different effects they could add to a creature with Miracle to make it really good & seem like an effect that came out of nowhere & could change the outcome of the game. Hell, they could even add a new legendary creature that gives cards of a certain creature type the Miracle keyword & discounts their cost by some number. It would be a new interesting Kindred commander to have.
I wouldn’t put Meathook Massacre in this deck. Doesn’t really synergize too well with the commander, might as well play a toxic deluge for the board wipe effect.
@@Rickkee007 I didn’t put it in my aminatou deck. If you want to cast it for any X amount sure, but when you try and use her ability on it, it won’t reduce X. Aminatou’s ability is an alternate cost not a cost reduction.
@@ashole6226 yes it does, because as soon as you reveal it as the first spell the miracle triggers thus immediatly casts it putting the spell on the stack. the miracle by definition is a alternate cost with a reduction by definition . you can't as stated alter the original cost regardless else you false state the mana value. you can't alter the mana value period and the mana value is determined by the original cost. as per the example s of casting entreat spells. thus the value of x HAS to be present in the on card cost AND the miracle cost else you break the fundamental rule on miracles To determine the total cost of a spell, start with the mana cost or alternative cost (such as a miracle cost) you're paying, add any cost increases, then apply any cost reductions. The mana value of the spell remains unchanged, no matter what the total cost to cast it was. this is why they gave the example for entreat spells as follows 1)A mana cost of {X}{X} means that you pay twice X. If you want X to be 3, you pay {6}{W}{W}{W} to cast Entreat the Angels. 2) Entreat the Angels's mana value is based on its mana cost of {X}{X}{W}{W}{W}, even if you're casting it for its miracle cost. For example, if you cast Entreat the Angels for its miracle cost and choose 4 for X, its mana value is 11. for this example to be true the value of x Always has to be determined Period. its as we say in law a precedent that must be weighed else the rule itself is meaningless. The Fundamental rules are given on the gatherer web site for aminatou and are dated 2024-09-20 so either WOTC are a little weak in the soup bowl or the interation is so abvious that no special ruling is needed for values of x. hope this helps and have a great day.
@@ashole6226 aminatoiu refers to the original cost thus withing the miracle you must aply the same rule as follows because in the rule there is an (or) To determine the total cost of a spell, start with the mana cost or alternative cost (such as a miracle cost) you're paying, add any cost increases, then apply any cost reductions. The mana value of the spell remains unchanged, no matter what the total cost to cast it was. entreat the angels is a good example of this :1)A mana cost of {X}{X} means that you pay twice X. If you want X to be 3, you pay {6}{W}{W}{W} to cast Entreat the Angels. 2)Entreat the Angels's mana value is based on its mana cost of {X}{X}{W}{W}{W}, even if you're casting it for its miracle cost. For example, if you cast Entreat the Angels for its miracle cost and choose 4 for X, its mana value is 11. Because she refers back to the original cost the mana value MUST be the originals costs mana value so if x is 1 the mana value MUST be 3 in both the original cost AND the miracle. Your rulling for massacre hook as example is Miracle = {B}{B} because in you own word it wont reduce the cost thus fundamentally altering the mana cost. if i was to aply {0} your statement is true but it cant happen because if i apply X= {1} the mana value of the card as per rulling is 3 but you miracle cost implies mana value 2 the statement is false now lets view how aminatou is worded Miracle = (Mana Cost) - {4} this implication make all values given to X returning a true statement As follow i reveal trigger miracle, replace mana cost, aminatou wording miracle = [({X}{B}{B})- {4}} making x = 2 return a mana value of 4 {2}{B}{B} then you aply the reduction or taxes if any are on the board making you pay {B}{B} for the cost because reducing generic is know by all Mana valkue of spell is still 4 thus true when aminatou reduces by {4} its not applied to X its plied to (Mana Cost), or you return critical errors for any value past 0, using your rulling. Any other way breaks the rules of casting.
Because miracle triggers on your 1st Draw on any turn not only yours. If you can draw cards on enemy turns while aminatu is down potentially you could miracle out enchantments
@@ollisuokas5981 that way people can see this deck tech pop up when they look for the Precon upgrades. It helps the video reach more people and it’s definitely a huge upgrade compared to the Precon 😁
i may hate the cEDH cards but being able draw on opponents turn to miracle (flash) in an enchantment EVERY turn is tough to pull off without them. Still think WotC taking over EDH, they need to readdress her ability with X cost cards not working out the way we would like. How you going to make the alt commander not work with the face commanders ability? Hopefully they know EDH is one of their most popular formats and start fixing some of the rules make no sense only in EDH and start printing cards that are legal but just aren't available anymore due to lack of reprints.
Unless you’re playing cards to get around the legendary rule, which seems off to what the deck is trying to do, then you can’t make token copies of Meathook Massacre because it is legendary.
More importantly, Meathook Massacre can't be discounted with Aminatou so you pay the full X and if you copy it while it's on the battlefield, it does nothing on ETB.
I think Propaganda and the white propaganda are must have in the deck to make people less inclined to attack you while you do your thing. Also add Zur the enchanter to tutor them out.
@@fernandostar3507 I also added 3 enchantments that make copies of my enchantments and in many games I end up with multiple propagandas/ghostly prisons so people have to pay 8-10 mana to attack me with 1 creature. I love this commander :|
Ok for anyone saying that meathook does not synergize well with aminatou need to know that you cannot by default say x is xero due to this very specific line of ruling on miracle cost's : To determine the total cost of a spell, start with the mana cost or alternative cost (such as a miracle cost) you're paying, add any cost increases, then apply any cost reductions. The mana value of the spell remains unchanged, no matter what the total cost to cast it was. we can use the example of miracles that have x as values so let's see how entreat the angels gives the example : 1 )A mana cost of {X}{X} means that you pay twice X. If you want X to be 3, you pay {6}{W}{W}{W} to cast Entreat the Angels. 2)Entreat the Angels's mana value is based on its mana cost of {X}{X}{W}{W}{W}, even if you're casting it for its miracle cost. For example, if you cast Entreat the Angels for its miracle cost and choose 4 for X, its mana value is 11. in this exemple why is the mana value 11 it alway considers the cost of the spell regardless of the miracle cost. using the ruling from the miracle the mana value has to be related directly to the cost of the spell as written so all aminatou does is specifiy the reduction granted by the hoops to get the reduction so if we use the interpretation that is running around x is always zero then how can you get a mana value of 3 if x is {1} if its always interpreted as zero. look at it like an equation regular cost of Meathook is {x}{b}{b} corrrect so for this to be both aplicable for the regular cost and the miracle cost, it has to make logical sense due to fact that the mana value cannot be changed so for it to return a true statement on all values of x the miracle cost would look like this ( mana cost ) - {4}, thus is stays true to the definition of how you calculate the mana value else you get this statement wich everyone seem to say it the correct way miracle = {b}{b} due to x alway being zero thus this is true if x is zero but fall short once you consider any value other than zero A.E regular mana cost when x is 1 = mana value 3 and with incorect ruling mana value can only be 2 period wich breaks the clause (The mana value of the spell remains unchanged, no matter what the total cost to cast it was.) this would redefine the original casting cost wich cannot happen. both the original cost and mana value must be true for the ruling to be coherent. thus using the correct formula you : draw > reveal > triggers miracle > you state the mana value of x due to the spell being cast due to the trigger [( {value of x} {B} {B} ) then you reduce it by {4} ] as it is written on the card in that specific sequence so if i say as i reveal x = 2 the mana value is 4 ({2}{B}{B}) then i reduce by 4 you pay {B}{B} because a generic cannot go into the negatives , this is also true for all values of x , if i use as i reveal say x = 9 thus the mana value is 11 ({9}{B}{B}) then you reduce it by {4} you pay {5}{B}{B} mana value is still 11 it continues to stay true. there is not other way oir WOTC would have specified it before hand.
Hope I’m not too late. You wrote a lot to explain something incorrectly. Aminatou does not reduce the cost of any of your enchantments. She creates an alternative casting cost for them. So remove every instance of the words “reduced” to “alternate”. And an alternate casting cost does indeed have different rules from a cost reduction.
@@ZeIose how can i have it incorrectly the ability adds the miracle keyword to your enchantments, while in your hand to only time that ability is relevent is on reveal then it is automatiucally on the stack as your triggered the stack. why in the hell do they not explain the correlation with X spells for enchantments if it need an alternate ruling . that is because all aminatou does is spell out the ruling correctly you determine the cost then aply the reductioon else you SUPOSSED. Your version rederse TWO MANA VALUES for X you can not apply the reduction directly to X from the get go its ludecris. Also Explain how Entreat the engel always has a mana value of 11 when you miracl cast its for X = 4 . Either you can't read the rule or your purpusly misleading when you CAST the RULE has AN [or] in it Let me ressend you the rule 2024-09-20 To determine the total cost of a spell, start with the mana cost =[OR] = alternative cost (such as a miracle cost) you're paying, add any cost increases, then apply any cost reductions. The mana value of the spell remains unchanged, no matter what the total cost to cast it was. how can people not know you need to apply the rule even on the alternative cast your reseaoning always return a mana value of 2 it breaks the rule all aminatou say is mana cost reduced by 4 she refer back to the original cost then aplies the reduction. Read for god sake is this hard
I’ve saw a lot of videos from this commander and this is from far the best one! I actually bought all the cards and made one for me! Thanks a lot!
I wanted to mention a card for this deck here that I have not seen ANYONE else mention. Parallel Thoughts, an enchantment for 3BB, It allows you to search your library for 7 cards, exile them face down, and then has a MAY DRAW replacement effect that allows you to draw from that stack anytime you would draw a card instead. This has been a pretty solid card for me. It's not that hard to protect if you miracle if out on the turn prior to yours, and you can also bait out removal by putting a mix of lands and support cards for non-vital combo pieces or any number of things, it is very versatile and the draw replacement really does actually synergize with this commander. I have been stacking some of my enchantment removal pieces and a board wipe or two under it with a few lands. I have also just jammed every I win card under it when I have found myself playing vs people that lack interaction. Really has out performed for me, you just need to have a read on the table as it is a pretty juicy looking target for removal.
Does it work though? Because the reading of the card says PUT the top card of your pile into your hand, it doesn’t say draw
@@fernandostar3507 Aw hell, yeah your are likely correct that it wont trigger miracle, that doesnt change the way i was using entirely but certainlywould explain why it was being over looked...JUDGE!!!
EDIT: You are correct it actually allows you to entirely skip the draw phase of your turn. So no it's not going to trigger. Still super useful to stack lands and some removal and use it as a draw replacement for your second draw on a turn to get ur lands since you are often stacking the top card as a non land. So definitely still a card to consider. I've gotten a lot of good use from it as a replacement for land tax.
Thanks!
That’s super generous thank you! I’m glad you enjoyed 😁
Just bought the precon today
She would be a great 99'r in my Zur deck but this is fun as well!
Awesome video. The precon is pretty fun out of the box. Definitely needs ramp added bc it's a bit slow, but I am looking forward to powering it up.
I played an upgraded version of this deck yesterday and turned archenemy VERY quick. Definitely feels like a cedh leaning commander
Do you have the deck list :O
Deck list please
could you post the decklist pls
Aaaaand where is that moxlink amigo? 😅❤
Thnx!!!!!
@@jdrenting3084where's the link?
I hope we visit a plane that has lore that will allow WotC to create more creature spells that have Miracle. Ever since the Warhammer 40K crossover product came out with that mono-white 5/5 lifelink card with Miracle & a sort of recursion effect on it, (It randomly stacks the card in the top seven cards of your library when it is put into the GY from the battlefield) I have noticed there is so many different effects they could add to a creature with Miracle to make it really good & seem like an effect that came out of nowhere & could change the outcome of the game. Hell, they could even add a new legendary creature that gives cards of a certain creature type the Miracle keyword & discounts their cost by some number. It would be a new interesting Kindred commander to have.
I won a match just by playing inkshield on a turn to create 25 tokens. XD
I will never remove that from this deck after that.
Nice! 🎉
I wouldn’t put Meathook Massacre in this deck. Doesn’t really synergize too well with the commander, might as well play a toxic deluge for the board wipe effect.
yes it does.
@@Rickkee007 I didn’t put it in my aminatou deck. If you want to cast it for any X amount sure, but when you try and use her ability on it, it won’t reduce X. Aminatou’s ability is an alternate cost not a cost reduction.
@@ashole6226true but it's still a boardwipe in enchantment form so other triggers and tutors synergize with it
@@ashole6226 yes it does, because as soon as you reveal it as the first spell the miracle triggers thus immediatly casts it putting the spell on the stack. the miracle by definition is a alternate cost with a reduction by definition . you can't as stated alter the original cost regardless else you false state the mana value. you can't alter the mana value period and the mana value is determined by the original cost. as per the example s of casting entreat spells.
thus the value of x HAS to be present in the on card cost AND the miracle cost else you break the fundamental rule on miracles
To determine the total cost of a spell, start with the mana cost or alternative cost (such as a miracle cost) you're paying, add any cost increases, then apply any cost reductions. The mana value of the spell remains unchanged, no matter what the total cost to cast it was.
this is why they gave the example for entreat spells as follows
1)A mana cost of {X}{X} means that you pay twice X. If you want X to be 3, you pay {6}{W}{W}{W} to cast Entreat the Angels.
2) Entreat the Angels's mana value is based on its mana cost of {X}{X}{W}{W}{W}, even if you're casting it for its miracle cost. For example, if you cast Entreat the Angels for its miracle cost and choose 4 for X, its mana value is 11.
for this example to be true the value of x Always has to be determined Period.
its as we say in law a precedent that must be weighed else the rule itself is meaningless.
The Fundamental rules are given on the gatherer web site for aminatou and are dated 2024-09-20 so either WOTC are a little weak in the soup bowl or the interation is so abvious that no special ruling is needed for values of x.
hope this helps and have a great day.
@@ashole6226 aminatoiu refers to the original cost thus withing the miracle you must aply the same rule as follows because in the rule there is an (or)
To determine the total cost of a spell, start with the mana cost or alternative cost (such as a miracle cost) you're paying, add any cost increases, then apply any cost reductions. The mana value of the spell remains unchanged, no matter what the total cost to cast it was.
entreat the angels is a good example of this
:1)A mana cost of {X}{X} means that you pay twice X. If you want X to be 3, you pay {6}{W}{W}{W} to cast Entreat the Angels.
2)Entreat the Angels's mana value is based on its mana cost of {X}{X}{W}{W}{W}, even if you're casting it for its miracle cost. For example, if you cast Entreat the Angels for its miracle cost and choose 4 for X, its mana value is 11.
Because she refers back to the original cost the mana value MUST be the originals costs mana value so if x is 1 the mana value MUST be 3 in both the original cost AND the miracle.
Your rulling for massacre hook as example is Miracle = {B}{B} because in you own word it wont reduce the cost thus fundamentally altering the mana cost. if i was to aply {0} your statement is true but it cant happen because if i apply X= {1} the mana value of the card as per rulling is 3 but you miracle cost implies mana value 2 the statement is false
now lets view how aminatou is worded Miracle = (Mana Cost) - {4}
this implication make all values given to X returning a true statement
As follow i reveal trigger miracle, replace mana cost, aminatou wording miracle = [({X}{B}{B})- {4}} making x = 2 return a mana value of 4 {2}{B}{B} then you aply the reduction or taxes if any are on the board
making you pay {B}{B} for the cost because reducing generic is know by all Mana valkue of spell is still 4 thus true
when aminatou reduces by {4} its not applied to X its plied to (Mana Cost),
or you return critical errors for any value past 0, using your rulling.
Any other way breaks the rules of casting.
I could suggest something dirty like Decree of Silence/Phyrexia Unlife/Nine Lives and Solemnity Combo just for the taste of your enemies' tears
Maybe a dumb question, but how are you casting enchantments on other players turns without some kind of vedalken orrery effect?
Because miracle triggers on your 1st Draw on any turn not only yours. If you can draw cards on enemy turns while aminatu is down potentially you could miracle out enchantments
Draw off rhystic study or esper sentinel on opponents’ turn, if you drew an enchantment, play it
Awesome video.I Don’t have around 1k to add into my precon. Need to sell a kidney. 😂
I should have linked the budget upgrades at the beginning 😅
@@decktechsfordecks Hello, where is the 1k version?
This upgraded Precon beat my Squirrel deck 😮
The Enchantment All-Stars Deck hehe
Ok but what cards do you remove to add these?
This isn’t the Precon upgrade this is a full non budget decklist 😁
@@decktechsfordecks Yet the description of the video says "Duskmour precon upgrade" - why ?
@@ollisuokas5981 that way people can see this deck tech pop up when they look for the Precon upgrades. It helps the video reach more people and it’s definitely a huge upgrade compared to the Precon 😁
i may hate the cEDH cards but being able draw on opponents turn to miracle (flash) in an enchantment EVERY turn is tough to pull off without them.
Still think WotC taking over EDH, they need to readdress her ability with X cost cards not working out the way we would like. How you going to make the alt commander not work with the face commanders ability?
Hopefully they know EDH is one of their most popular formats and start fixing some of the rules make no sense only in EDH and start printing cards that are legal but just aren't available anymore due to lack of reprints.
You forgot the moxifield link :D
It looks like it's in the description at least
sweet
Unless you’re playing cards to get around the legendary rule, which seems off to what the deck is trying to do, then you can’t make token copies of Meathook Massacre because it is legendary.
He copies it for the board wipe effect. Itll case etb trigger then one will be destroyed
More importantly, Meathook Massacre can't be discounted with Aminatou so you pay the full X and if you copy it while it's on the battlefield, it does nothing on ETB.
@@savsa-ythuh
@@savsa-ytthat's just not true.
If you can cast an x spell with cost reduce, you can chose whatever you want for X and AFTER that, it will reduced.
@savsa-yt that is incorrect. When you play an x spell, you reveal the card, choose x, then play for the cost. Cost reduction works😊
Cool :D
Newsom?
You couldn’t fit omniscience in the deck, or was it too much solitaire 🤣
Already in the precon 😅
@@786Demigodno
shadow of nyx lol
I think Propaganda and the white propaganda are must have in the deck to make people less inclined to attack you while you do your thing. Also add Zur the enchanter to tutor them out.
I’m adding propaganda, ghostly prison (white propaganda) and no mercy
@@fernandostar3507 I also added 3 enchantments that make copies of my enchantments and in many games I end up with multiple propagandas/ghostly prisons so people have to pay 8-10 mana to attack me with 1 creature. I love this commander :|
@Screcy last time I played her i had 3 sphere of safety, and 3 sigil of the empty throne. It was great
7:40 i mean i guess you could copy Meathook Massacre but most of the time it probably wouldn't do much since it's legendary
Hey can you make the budget version for coram. The video reached 700 likes !! 🎉🎉🎉
It’s already live 😁
Ok for anyone saying that meathook does not synergize well with aminatou need to know that you cannot by default say x is xero due to this very specific line of ruling on miracle cost's :
To determine the total cost of a spell, start with the mana cost or alternative cost (such as a miracle cost) you're paying, add any cost increases, then apply any cost reductions. The mana value of the spell remains unchanged, no matter what the total cost to cast it was.
we can use the example of miracles that have x as values so let's see how entreat the angels gives the example :
1 )A mana cost of {X}{X} means that you pay twice X. If you want X to be 3, you pay {6}{W}{W}{W} to cast Entreat the Angels.
2)Entreat the Angels's mana value is based on its mana cost of {X}{X}{W}{W}{W}, even if you're casting it for its miracle cost. For example, if you cast Entreat the Angels for its miracle cost and choose 4 for X, its mana value is 11. in this exemple why is the mana value 11 it alway considers the cost of the spell regardless of the miracle cost.
using the ruling from the miracle the mana value has to be related directly to the cost of the spell as written so all aminatou does is specifiy the reduction granted by the hoops to get the reduction
so if we use the interpretation that is running around x is always zero then how can you get a mana value of 3 if x is {1} if its always interpreted as zero.
look at it like an equation regular cost of Meathook is {x}{b}{b} corrrect so for this to be both aplicable for the regular cost and the miracle cost, it has to make logical sense due to fact that the mana value cannot be changed so for it to return a true statement on all values of x the miracle cost would look like this ( mana cost ) - {4}, thus is stays true to the definition of how you calculate the mana value else you get this statement wich everyone seem to say it the correct way miracle = {b}{b} due to x alway being zero thus this is true if x is zero but fall short once you consider any value other than zero A.E regular mana cost when x is 1 = mana value 3 and with incorect ruling mana value can only be 2 period wich breaks the clause (The mana value of the spell remains unchanged, no matter what the total cost to cast it was.) this would redefine the original casting cost wich cannot happen. both the original cost and mana value must be true for the ruling to be coherent. thus using the correct formula you :
draw > reveal > triggers miracle > you state the mana value of x due to the spell being cast due to the trigger [( {value of x} {B} {B} ) then you reduce it by {4} ] as it is written on the card in that specific sequence so if i say as i reveal x = 2 the mana value is 4 ({2}{B}{B}) then i reduce by 4 you pay {B}{B} because a generic cannot go into the negatives , this is also true for all values of x , if i use as i reveal say x = 9 thus the mana value is 11 ({9}{B}{B}) then you reduce it by {4} you pay {5}{B}{B} mana value is still 11 it continues to stay true. there is not other way oir WOTC would have specified it before hand.
Hope I’m not too late. You wrote a lot to explain something incorrectly.
Aminatou does not reduce the cost of any of your enchantments. She creates an alternative casting cost for them. So remove every instance of the words “reduced” to “alternate”.
And an alternate casting cost does indeed have different rules from a cost reduction.
@@ZeIose how can i have it incorrectly the ability adds the miracle keyword to your enchantments, while in your hand to only time that ability is relevent is on reveal then it is automatiucally on the stack as your triggered the stack. why in the hell do they not explain the correlation with X spells for enchantments if it need an alternate ruling . that is because all aminatou does is spell out the ruling correctly you determine the cost then aply the reductioon else you SUPOSSED. Your version rederse TWO MANA VALUES for X you can not apply the reduction directly to X from the get go its ludecris. Also Explain how Entreat the engel always has a mana value of 11 when you miracl cast its for X = 4 .
Either you can't read the rule or your purpusly misleading when you CAST the RULE has AN [or] in it
Let me ressend you the rule
2024-09-20 To determine the total cost of a spell, start with the mana cost =[OR] = alternative cost (such as a miracle cost) you're paying, add any cost increases, then apply any cost reductions. The mana value of the spell remains unchanged, no matter what the total cost to cast it was.
how can people not know you need to apply the rule even on the alternative cast your reseaoning always return a mana value of 2 it breaks the rule all aminatou say is mana cost reduced by 4 she refer back to the original cost then aplies the reduction. Read for god sake is this hard