Hi I just started playing mtg a week ago and bought a white/green intro deck. However, I would want to create a deck combining one of these colors (if possible) with one that focuses on a more aggressive play style. I understand red and black are the most aggressive ones (please correct me if I'm wrong), and this has made me think on building a white (defensive) / black (aggressive) deck in the following weeks. Is such a combination of colors viable? If it is not, what other combination would allow me to have a more aggressive play style without giving up all my defense?

Thank you very much.

  • You don't need to go outside of W/G to be aggressive. You just need Dryad Militant, Savannah Lions, Elite Vanguard, Kytheon Hero of Akros, Mardu Woe-Reaper, Soldier of the Pantheon, Garruk's Companion, Watchwolf, Call of the Conclave... Getting in fast damage before your opponent can mount a defense can be very effective, especially in a play group of new players that are enamored with decks full of big expensive dudes. – Kevin Sep 3 '15 at 13:30
  • I believe this question could be a good question. If it asked more along the lines of "How can one tune a White/Green intro deck to be more aggressive?" or "What archetypes support adding Black to a low-powered White/Green deck?" – corsiKa Sep 3 '15 at 17:29
  • I'll also point out that the world championships just finished, and 3 of the top 4 decks were Abzan (which is Whilte/Black/Green). – corsiKa Sep 3 '15 at 17:29

Short answer: yes - a black and white deck is completely viable.

Long answer: it is a lot more complicated than that, and will depend on what cards you have available.

For example, in Origins 2015 (the most recent set of cards at time of writing) the most effective* strategy to take with a black and white deck is to build a deck that includes many enchantments, where as the most aggressive deck is probably one that includes red and white.

In Khans of Tarkir (part of the second most recent set of cards) black and white had lots of warrior creatures that tended to lend themselves to aggressive decks. However in Ravnica expansion a few years ago the black and white deck was about gaining yourself life while making the opponent loose life simultaneously. This was focused on a much slower victory.

Depending on what format you are playing (anything from strict Standard-Constructed to loose "kitchen table" rules) you can use different cards. As you start to take cards from more than one set you will probably find that these archetypes become less prescriptive, but I have added them to give you an example of some of the flavours that B/W combos can bring.

In my opinion Red will often be more aggressive than green, and is usually more aggressive than either white or black (though again it is dependant on the cards that you have available) - so if you want a more aggressive deck then red might suit you better. It tends to have a higher concentration of spells that directly damage your opponent and opponents creatures, as well as creatures that have a higher power - though this often comes at the price of lower toughness.

*your mileage may vary

| improve this answer | |
  • The question appears to be asking about constructed, but your answer seems primarily focused on limited. – Rainbolt Sep 3 '15 at 15:46
  • 1
    @Rainbolt - what part of my answer do you think is about limited? – Jonny Sep 3 '15 at 15:49
  • All of it. The archetypes you mention in your answer are archetypes I remember clearly from Draft and Sealed. With the exception of Blind Obedience, what B/W lifegain/life loss cards from RTR saw constructed play? What B/W enchantments from Origins see constructed play? I'm browsing through decklists from recent tournaments, and I don't see any. – Rainbolt Sep 3 '15 at 16:03
  • I only did a brief search, but I didn't see any B/W decks in those decklists, so saying there aren't any B/W enchantment decks seems like a fallacy. I doubt that OP was looking for tournament level decks - they tend to be too expensive for entry level decks. – Jonny Sep 4 '15 at 8:06

Is this viable? Yes.
Will this always be the best choice? No.

An example of an old deck which I played in the past: Black and white knights (pro black on the WK), pestilence, circle of protection black (old rules: pump pestilence once with 2-3 mana. Power CoP black once. A castle or two, sengir vampires and serra's if you can find them. Pegasi, (with castle they survive 2 damage), ... hypnotic specters, unholy streght, terror, ...

That deck would not survice and serious competion, but against similar decks of starters it did quite well. So yes, depending on your environment you can build quite viable decks.

If you move up en anvironment where people are actually buying current generation cards to build a tournament deck, then the answer if different and it will vary between releases of new expansions.

But as I read it you are just starting with MTG and a agressive black deck with some help from white can do just fine.

| improve this answer | |
  • 5
    Banding? Oh, please don't suggest banding to a new player :-P (It doesn't even exist on recent cards anyway) – David Z Sep 3 '15 at 12:41
  • Thank you very much for your time! I think I will give this a try! – Arturo González Sep 3 '15 at 17:09

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.