Gfreeman

but in modern you can be 2 for 1. If someone destroys your creature with an aura on it falls off. (i know with rancor it comes back to your hand but I would rather have might of alara or tribal flames.

Anytime man. I hope it works out better for you.

this is a modern deck. It wouldn't be as powerful in this type of deck. That's also why I don't like rancor in this deck either.

In an aggro deck you have all the life gain you need with vampire nighthawk. I feel that bllodghast is more consistent and more of a threat compared to child of the night. Plus the fact you are not running any 1 drops, child becomes the first threat, what happens to the first threat of any game? They die. Hence the bloodghast holds his own, cause they wont waste spells on him cause he will come back and even if they do they just wasted a spell on it. also if your counting on your vamps becoming 5/5 or better you more then likely have already won and life gain is pointless.

I like bloodghast cause if someone kills your guys you can always rely on a good creature to come back. I wish I could play my vamps and show you what I mean.

I like your deck. Its pretty simple I don't like the high curve on mana though. To many 4 drops. I would play some one mana vamps instead of tragic slip. Also way to many 2 drops. I would play bloodghast cause he comes back. I also tested feast of blood to be a hit or miss and when it missed it cost me the game.

I like your idea, however zoo is way faster then this. If its meant for just fun I like it. If its competitive then this isn't the way it should be. Tribal flames? might of alara? lightning helix?

That is also fine. I like a debate about a deck, that's were better opinions come from and where a better deck is made because of it. It will help you be a better player and it will help me be a better player as well.

I agree with that. We are only trying to help. Trust me I play modern ALOT and I know having a snapcaster and trying to get that 4th land can be very difficult. Its your deck. But I'm not saying this out of ignorance, i'm saying it out of experience. I have a deck that is kinda like zoo (4 colored but a mill deck) VERY similar CMC and i play 4 snaps and they just don't always cut it. Most of the time I have to waste them just for a chump block cause I'm at 2 or 3 lands when I need 4.

You are correct but Honestly you only need goyf to be a 4/5 at most and you win with him. I love using my Goyf's that way.

Very true. :-)

That is what Zoo plays. SO many 1 drops except goyf. You have to have 4 mana to use snap with flames. This deck doesn't get to 4 mana very often. Its your deck but I really don't think the logic "they all die to supreme verdict" is a valid argument since everything dies to it. that's like saying "i wont play creatures cause they die to everything". This deck should kill your opponent on or before the 4th or 5th turn anyway.

it also allows your deck to play 4 of the zoo creatures.

I understand, but with the mana curve. its to hard.

look at my deck
http://www.mtgvault.com/gfreeman/decks/zoo-modern/

I think this deck shouldn't need blue. Use grim lavamanacer.

Those would be really fun. I like the theme of it.

I agree. Sounds like a great plan.

I like the highborn but the "pay" a mana to use its ability in a deck that is 95% of the time tapping out to cast vamps I would only get 1 trigger if I'm lucky. Blood artist does it when ANY creatures goes to the graveyard. Highborn doesn't. I've won so many games attacking for 12-16 cause of Vampire Nocturnus and then at the second main phase sac'd everything with falkenrath and my opponent dies. its a great combo.

@kightofdisorder I would play grave pact over butcher just cause of CMC.

I think read the bones is SUPER awesome, just your mana curve is already heavy 3CMC, wouldn't hurt though.