In the Deck Box #5: Intet, the Dreamer

Hey guys, David here! Here's the introduction of the much anticipated review of my Intet, the Dreamer EDH/Commander deck. I've been testing the build for the past 4-5 months and it's definitely streamlined to combat my Orlando, Fl metagame.

But first, some history! I approached building a Casual deck for Intet in 2008 and designed a ramp deck that played a bunch of bomb creatures and used Clone effects to make copies of huge fatties to take names and crush dreams. The deck was really funny; I remember controlling 5 copies of Darksteel Colossus in a Casual game, which actually convinced my friend, Sean Wang to start playing Magic. Going one story deeper (Inception!), Sean and I were participating in an on-campus event called Mudfest (TWERN, for you UF dorm- savy individuals) at the University of Florida and I played Intet alongside Sean's first U/G Zendikar concoction in a 2v2 and... we lost. Ironically, losing made me want to build better decks to fight random opponents and never lose that badly again. After that, Intet was thrown into a box and left alone for a couple years. What does all of this mean? The amount of nostalgia that Intet carries is pretty heavy.

So if you didn't get a chance to look at the sneak peek, click HERE to see the decklist.

There's a few small differences between this version and the version posted a couple weeks ago

-Far Wanderings
-Garruk Wildspeaker
-Asceticism

For

+Exploration
+Mind's Eye
+Kodama's Reach

Threshold for Far Wanderings was a little difficult to obtain in the early/midgame. Garruk often sat in my hand as a mana accelerant that was late to the party. Finally, Asceticism is a bit mana intensive to hexproof your team which usually gets shut out by Damnation anyways. Asceticism was generally good at protecting Blightsteel Colossus from Mind Control effects, but people just made Cloned copies of it anyways (that Hexproof can't unfortunately stop), so it didn't really get the job done. Goblin Bombardment and Lightning Greaves will have to carry a little more work, but I think the pair can handle it.

Exploration is just a really strong accelerant that's cheaper to cast than Garruk and works better with Future Sight/Magus of the Future. It's also my counter to C.J., who runs Burgeoning in Rith, the Awakener, since it can go toe-toe with Burgeoning land drop speed at about the same rate and it forces/encourages my opponent to overextend land drops so you can see how many nonland cards they have in hand.

Mind's Eye is in there to break stalemates a little better. I played Intet in a 4 man FFA at the University of Central Florida against Memnarch, Jhoira of the Gitu, and Thraximundar. Rough set of opponents. Although I did eventually win, the game took longer than was necessary (3 freaking hours) since I couldn't break through the stalemate quickly enough. And finally, Kodama's Reach makes our Exploration stronger and is better in the early game compared to Far Wanderings. Although the Far Wanderings gave our Avenger of Zendikar some insane mileage out of Landfalling Plant Token madness, I'll have to sacrifice shennanigans for better development.. this time.

So, why did I pick Intet, the Dreamer and how does Intet compare to Animar, Soul of Elements and Riku of Two Reflections?

It's a dragon, who doesn't like dragons? It's also a huge beater. Animar is less exciting because it can combo kill players very easily. Personally, I don't like playing generals whose lists of 99 are consistent across the board with little variation. The Animar build is also very Animar-dependent and without Animar (being the victim of a Hinder or Spell Crumple), only really wins by playing R/U/G good stuff. As for Riku, it's difficult to ignore the possibility of copying a Tooth and Nail entwined. After all, I love gimmicks. But copying things isn't always necessary and the strategy is extremely mana intensive. One Armaggedon or Jokulhaups sends you so far back that you're sitting on a very irrelvant 2/2 general. Intet can fight with her 6/6 body and has an ability that creates very unique gameplay with a different experience every time.

What theme did you use for your deck and are themes a good idea to use?

The theme of the deck is a simple idea taken to an extreme complexity. I manipulate the top card of my library in order to cast spells for free; well, more like a bargain discount. Knowing what you're going to draw is useful when compiling your next couple turns, which gives you an edge against your opponents. Although your opponents get to see what you're drawing, once the turns become really complicated, they generally forget or are unable to keep track of what's going on (unless they're writing it down).

Personally, I think it's very healthy to have themes. It gives the deck some personality and you know the role you'll be playing so it makes piloting much more manageable. In terms of gameplay, themes generally give you strong synergy between the cards in your deck, which increases the weight each card in your list of 99 can hold. Themes also keep your build unpredictable, since you'll be using cards that are less mainstream in the EDH/Commander format. I also feel themes give you a set of guidelines to follow. A lot of color combinations, especially for R/U/G, it's very easy to fall into the good stuff trap since there's so many cards available to play. The deck just becomes a poor accumulation of good cards in the right colors. I have nothing against these types of players, but I don't feel there's much creativity put into this type of deck building.

What decks did you play against in testing and how do you think Intet faired against them?

If you follow the Bramble On series, you'll know our metagame is pretty diverse. I've tested against Dromar, the Banisher, Ertai, the Corrupted, Rith, the Awakener, Arcum Daggson, various builds of Kaalia of the Vast, Sharuum the Hegemon, and Oona, Queen of the Fae in our metagame. I also had some experience tackling Ghave, Ghuru of Spores and Sheoldred, Whispering One. Testing always takes a long time; I spent about a month grinding out the deck and making small changes. Once I'm happy with how the deck plays, I move towards playing tech that's specifically good against my friends. It's cruel, I know. Getting a handle of how the deck plays and how to tutor up the right answers at the right time can take some practice.

I think Intet faired very well against most of the decks in our format I didn't feel I had any particularly bad matchups. The most difficult matches were against Arcum Daggson in the beginning, but I teched against Darksteel Forge with Into the Core and Cryptic Command. The aggro decks did pose a problem towards the end of testing, so I added in Savage Twister and Comet Storm to close out those matchups more cleanly. Unfortunately, I don't play as much removal as I'd like to (other than sneaky Clone effects to kill off opposing generals), so I expect to have problems against G/B/x Rock decks but I haven't encountered the matchup yet.

Finally, if you'd like to check out Sheldon Menery's version of Intet, the Dreamer click HERE! I made my deck completely independent of his list (although I credit him to the inclusion of Noxious Revival). In his Starcitygames articles he frequently refers to Intet as a very difficult deck to pilot, which gives you some idea of the skill level behind the strategy. I will have to agree, Intet is a very difficult deck to pilot and you deceptively need to have a lot of knowledge of what's in the deck to play it effectively. If you're looking for a real challenge and an interesting play style, Intet might be the general for you. Compare my list to Sheldon's and let me know what you think! Until the next deck insider, Magic players!

Can't get enough Commander/EDH content? Check out the Commander Series on the MTG Casual Network Archive!

-David J.

Follow us on Facebook!