People building their first de..

Umm...Sometimes people put singles or doubles in their deck not because their noobs or they don't know what they're doing, but sometimes they are either fitting a budget or going with the cards they own. If something as juvenile as people putting less than 4 copies of a card in their deck is annoying you, then you truly ARE a broken record.

*they're

Depends a lot....

I can easily make a deck that uses only 1 copy of each card and beat a lot of decks running multiple copies of a card. The only reason you want multiple copies of a card is because that card is highly played or very powerful or is your win condition.

Having multiple copies of a card for the sake of multiple copies of a card creates a flaw deck that is weak. Of course most of the time, 4 copies of Lightning Bolt is always nice because it can easily remove your opponent's creatures or kill your opponent is their life is low enough. But what about 4 copies of something like Baneslayer Angel? Its high converted mana cost means it is probably going to be a dead hand for at least 5 turns on average because you can't do anything with it on your 5th turn.

A good deck will try to minimize their time doing nothing by running multiple copies of cards that are highly playable, or your win condition. Having 4 copies of Baneslayer Angel with low amount of lands or almost no mana acceleration is asking to look at the shiny card and feel helpless.

BOTTOM LINE: Multiple copies IF highly playable or win condition.

Very powerful* = doesn't mean super strong and cost a lot of mana.

Very powerful = strong in relation to its mana cost and playable by your deck.

It's true havening a play set of every card in you deck does increase your odds ALOT its what the rule of 9 is based around a play set of 9 cards and 24 lands But like stated above thats not always possible or even usable if you are running quite afew search cards you would not need 4 of 1 legendary creature that you are only going to be able to play one of, and more importantly no 2 decks work exactly the same (unless they are identical like unmodified precos) perhaps havening 4 of every card works well in your deck and hey, Thats Great but i have quite afew decks where if i tried to put in 4 of every card in there i would lose half my deck or be way way over 60 and it would Fail....

im not going to rank you down on this because on 1 note you are right haveing 4 of everycard in some decks is very good but in every deck....NO

Lol it would be funny if you had only 1 of strength in numbers and superior numbers

Dude, I'm sorry, but looking at a deck with 42 different cards in it is a waste of time. If you're building on a budget or with cards you own, state that in the summary along with where you want the deck to go. Posting a deck that has no goal in mind is quite moronic. I personally use this site not only to showcase decks I already have, but also to give my deck ideas birth and some sort of organization so that I can either proxy the deck and tweak it before I build, or show other players some of the insane ideas I have. Look at my decks. How many of them have over 15 different cards in them? One, and it's a Battle of Wits deck.

42 different cards doesn't equal having no goal in mind.

Common types of decks that run many 1 copy of a card instead of 3-4 copies of a card are:
Sliver Decks (Multiple copies of Slivers that give like Flying are kinda useless)
Power 9 Decks (Restriction causes them to run only 1 copy of certain cards)
Leyline of Singularity Decks (The Leyline makes everything Legendary, so they take advantage of it by running only 1 copy of each card to cripple their opponent who is running 4 copies)

Alright, I think somethings need to be cleared up. I didn't say exactly 4 copies, I said 2-4. I get that people keep to a budget, I normally do. I build decks that might have cards that cost a lot in a deck but I know places to get cards cheaper than online or I wait till i get some spending cash. People should use this website for critiquing their current decks or for asking for help on decks they want to own. If you put a deck on here that's only made of spare cards and say you don't have money for more cards, you have to know that most people will say "This deck needs xxxx and fix xxxx." Yet people seem to think that just because they build decks on here, everyone should give them a high rating. If a card is worth being in your deck, then normally it's wroth running more than one copy of it. Yes there are decks that don't need 4 copies of everything, but normally those people know what they are doing. This was mostly aimed at the people who say "This is my first deck made out of spare cards. I don't have anything else to use, help me?" I think today alone I said on three different decks that they need to run less types of cards but more copies and I was only on for 20 minutes. I could care less if you -1 this, for the most part it's true and I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels like this.

This is a great thought, and I'd love to see it hit front page.

I've quite frankly all but given up on posting on anything that remotely appears like a first deck, I enjoy helping somebody mature as a magic player, and to help develop a deck, but this has got to be the piece of advice I've given most often.

I was looking through old decks, and this clearly shows that you sir, are an troll.

If some noob wants to post a deck with random card counts and no organization, more power to them, they should be allowed to enjoy it without some perfection nazi getting to tell them that they did it "wrong".
I for one, used to think that my 70 card unorganized decks were the best things ever, and I know that they are shit now, but I can at least relate to other people.

posting a pointless deck solely to bitch about people doing things their own way, be it "wrong" or not, is just plain rude. let people do what they want. this isn't your website. if you want to go make a website for people who make decks that don't disturb your aura of perfection, go right ahead, but don't be an ass about it here.

I find that 3 is a good number. Lets you have variety, but keeps consistency on lock as well. ;D

My main issue with this is that some people forget that there are those of us out here who only play casual Magic. One of the things I really enjoy about a casual, less-competitive format is that the decks are more about the fun of them than getting the same combo every time. Playsets are great for tournaments because it allows you to be more likely to get a certain combo or two to go off. A deck that has 1s and 2s of really good cards, while not necessarily reliable, can be a lot of fun to play because it offers a different experience every time and still be a good deck.

There are many decks that stop fuctioning properly if you start to play too many copies of it. For example, a deck that uses a legendary land doesn't benifit well from having 2 copies rather than 1, if it has a way to tutor in the first place. It always depends on the deck itself.

What I find annoying with this topic is people forget that they made the "mistake" of singles in their decks when they started playing Magic. This wonderful game is a very complicated game and it takes time for people to grasp the ideas of consistency (among other things), even if someone constantly tells them about it. Remember, you where new to the game at one point too.

The '4 of' "rule" is something I follow, but there are exceptions:
1) It's a legendary card / costs ALLOT of mana - I then run 2 of or maybe 3, but that depends on how important the card is.
2) If I have a way to 'tutor' for the card, I only run 1 - 2 of it.
3) The card costs ALLOT of money - I run 1 or 2 as I can't afford more.

I like to keep excessive copies of Squadron Hawks in my decks.

It seriously makes me mad that this hits the front page.

this is great advice unless you are playing EDH

I honestly think this should be removed.
the huge amount of controversy is a huge problem, considering the name draws in newer players, and that leads to confusion among new players. now that it hit the front page, there are going to be a lot of newer players coming here and getting confused over what is right due to the conflicting opinions. that is not to mention that newer players will be drawn away from a game if they think that they are unwelcome because they don't understand the game too well, and people are telling them what to do. the major issue here is that there is no right side to the argument. both sides have rights and wrongs, but are also true in their own ways. This has really just become a major debate, and telling people what to do is no way to introduce someone to a game.
part of what I love about magic is the community.I got into this game because people were calm and patient when I was new, and respected my opinion, even if it was wrong. telling people that they need to spend $100 to have a good deck is not only misleading, but also drives people away, so we are really doing a disservice to those people.

to newer players reading this. please do things your way. if you truly get into this game, you will be more willing to spend more money on a better deck, but for now, being casual is fine. if you find that you don't like it as much as we do, then good for you. you don't need to drop your wallet on a deck unless you truly want to. enjoy magic, and don't let the arguments sway you in either direction.

Some people use "1 of's" because they want more than 4 cards that do the same thing, or they can tutor it up. I think this point is less than valid, but it isn't wrong.
There actually are non-EDH singleton decks as well, just saying (which gives me an idea).

I agree that singleton decks are bad SOMETIMES, there are some decks where they can survive.

I agree that decks with specific strategies, combos, or win-conditions need a lot of consistency (especially for speed), but decks that are more general strategies don't always need great consistency. One of my absolute best decks (has won several tournaments) is my elf deck which is VERY inconsistent. What makes it good is that, with less pressure on consistency and more on fluency, i was able to make it more adaptable to the opponent. A deck with 4 of every card can never hope to handle what the opponent is going to do (destroy enchantments, mill, control, artifacts, etc.) Decks like Burn, Tribal, Ramp, Control, etc. with a large card base and many different options can very easily be singleton.

Also, having too much consistency takes the fun out of it, you know? It's playing the same game over and over and over again. What's the use of that? I have one deck (my standard) which is focused on always getting the cards i need and is very consistent, and i literally never play it because its always the same game.

Here's an example:
Which is better in a hand -
4 x Kargan Dragonlords OR

1 x Kargan Dragonlord, Dragonmaster Outcast, Obsidian Fireheart, Comet Storm
The four kargan's probably costs more, and its in no way prepared for whatever your opponent may throw out. Exclusion cards would murder your deck, as would an anti-flying deck. With the second option, you would be applying pressure from every angle and would be able to deal with your opponents deck better.

if you want to have lots of tutoring options then you need less of the same card and more diversity, especialy if its legendary.
also you may want 5 of something and find a substetute e.g. flame slash/lightning bolt but you still want as many of the better one as posible.
also it may be a good card but not good enough to put more then one in.
maybe you have 59 cards that you need and are looking for a little burn or something.
all in all your deck building rule has an extreme lack of legs to stand on.

I want to clear this up:
I am not against this thought, but putting it on the front page leads newer players to believe that there is a right way to build a deck, and in reality, there isn't. if youdon't want to look at someone's 42 card deck, don't, but don't lose your shit over someone posting one, and don't go talking about yourself saying that you do everything right. if you want to be in tournament play, sure, here's a good piece of advice, but it isn't supreme law. I've seen this thread's poster say once that cards with good synergy win games, so by that logic, shouldn't a really good designed be able to make a deck that doesn't rely on drawing a single card or one of a few cards needed to win?

likely one of the most versatile decks that I've seen was at a local card store, where someone had a deck with cards that gave him multiple winning conditions, but fueled whatever cause he was aiming for regardless of what cards he drew. good deck design -does- include cards with synergy, but in a well designed deck, you don't need to draw any particular cards because any combination will do.

tl;dr version: decks rely on strategy, and a well designed deck can have many different cards, while still not relying on any particular combinations. having more of a card is good, but not strictly needed in a well designed deck.

You want some decent deckbuilding advice, kids? Here goes.

You see everything I do and post? Don't do that, and you'll be the best Magic player ever.

So...what you're saying is I can't play this in standard? Ha ha!

Portugaru has deleted this comment.

Everyone of you are wrong

The main thing about doing the deck is to have fun while doing them, them test it if it works put it in a closet or a bag if not dismantle it, and surewhynot a deck can have 20 lands and be amazing, a deck can have 8 lands and win on your first turn i know you know this, if you mean standard(t2) play them there has been only a few times in magic that it is recomended not to use less them 22 lands...

but for me i that am a johny player and i love doing decks and i have fun doing them , the main plot of magic is creating fun and functional decks, a 200 cards deck can work... though not so well...

Have fun, magic should be a hobby not a profession

All im going to say:

Theyre making thier first deck.........teach them how to make a one decent deck, and theyll be able to make lots. This website was created to share decks to have other's critique it, so that it can become better. Even sharing an idea that they have, so other's can expand upon it. You should not be upset by the fact more people are learning to play and need help, if that''s the case, get off the site, go to a new one, and start hating there. Negative attitudes only spread to others. Be a good player and help other people, and give them pointers.

You would make a horrible teacher

To be honest, I use alot of singles in my knight deck, but that is not because I'm noobish. The reason why I use singles is because I like a deck with a lot of diversity. For me I want a deck that is exiting and varied, but still capable of being a threat. But I agree that it is easier and a lot of times stronger to simplify your deck.

-Ivan Ooze

Okay, lets look at a really good example of decks that run 1 of a card in them (excluding EDH) Jon Finkel's deck (the MTG year 2000 tournament winner) he ran 1 copy of these cards in his deck: Phyrexian colossus, Mishra's Helix, Crumbling sanctuary. Granted that he ran 4 tinkers this is still an example of a deck that ran multiple 1 copies of different cards. Just because a person has 1 of a Blightsteel colossus or a Emrakul, or maybe even 1 Mycosynth lattice in their deck doesn't mean they are noobs.

And why does this have 180 likes? :s

Since people seem to comment on random old crap, I guess I should put my two cents in.

When I posted this, this website didn't have the same quantity of decent deck builders it does now. Back then, it was a lot of decks with very little real thought process behind them and a lot of times people would ask for help but refuse to go get new cards so they would just refuse your assistance, and quite often would just try to flame you. The day I wrote this, I had gone through this same cycle five or six times that day alone and was honestly fed up by the community. The language is a bit crude, but I never expected it to ever been seen by any number of players. It took two years, but here it is. Honestly, I don't want it here but won't just delete it for that purpose. If a mod doesn't want it up, feel free to take it down.

I personally use a maximum of 2 of any card only to make the game last longer and make the final deck more of a challenge to create. Its almost too easy to make a deck revolving around 10 playsets and tends to get boring by the fifth time you playwith it. Its fun to be surprised and hide multple combos in a deck. That being said i dont play tournaments so sorry.

That's a really nice iniciative.

Please check an comment my deck: http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=230572

Have fun building an EDH!!!!! TRY MULTIPLES THEN!!!!

I've been playing for 10 years and I see no reason to run multiple unless its good for the deck like if you have mana ramp elves is it a good i idea to have rampant growth yes 4 of them no you could get away wit 2 as long as you had 3 lianowar elves but I would imagine so small creatures yes do you need 4 rampaging baloths or bellowing tanglewurms no 1 should suffice and your scared of loosing him put an elixir of immortality your deck needs built on functionality not well ill have a better chance at drawing this card if i have more all of my decks are based around up to 6 strategy's if one fails as with a deck that runs 4 of almost everything=usually 1 strategy your versatility just went down the drain like say someone is milling you and they mill 10 to 15 cards you have no control on what gets milled or what is next to each other more likely than not you will have copys end up next to each other so the 4 mythic rares and your stuff that buffs them up gone now all your left with is a crap strategy with small creatures and too much mana I really hope i'm getting my point across is it ok to run 2-3 of a single card yes as long as it helps the initial goal of your deck if it doesn't then why do it. I'm one of those guys people hate to play because they can never beat me do I have mythics in my deck yes every one i builds has at least 4 or 5 because I usualy spend 140 bucks when a new set comes out its all luck of what I pull unless i absolutely need to order a few singles which when i do they are usually commons

hey budd i redid the tempo deck i was workin on, give it a look see. deff better then last time thanx to your help and if others see this please let me kno what you think of the deck also :) THANX!

http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=273473