The pros and cons of a more than 60 deck? - Magic General - Magic Fundamentals - MTG Salvation Forums (2024)

The advantage of running 60 is you maximize your chances of drawing any one of those 60 compared to 61+...in other words, you have a 1/60 chance of drawing your single copy of Elesh Norn, or a 1/61 chance. This is a very basic level of the stats behind it.

Only reason I can see playing more than 60 is to play 61 when you don't know what card should be cut and you'd rather not cut the wrong card.

One of the major disadvantages is that your deck becomes less streamlined. You have a lesser chance of drawing the card you need to draw, and a greater chance of drawing a blank at any given point in the game.

The only reasons to run more than 60 cards is:
1) If you don't care about the cards in your hand (Dredge?).
2) You have a very spell dense deck and NEED the extra land to round out your curve.

There is actually a legitimate reason to run more than 60 cards in a deck: it gives you access to more possible targets if you're running tutor suites like Green Sun's Zenith, Chord of Calling, Natural Order, Summoner's Pact, Stoneforge Mystic, Enlightened Tutor, Knight of the Reliquary, etc.

You sacrifice a tiny amount of consistency in order to gain a bit more flexibility. I can't see ever running 64 cards, but if 61 cards means you get to fit in another tutor target, the loss of consistency is low enough that it's probably worthwhile.

It can also give you a slightly finer tune on your mana to spell ratio. Maybe 23/60 is too few lands, but 24/60 is too many, so 24/61 might be just right.

Quote from Wildfire393

It can also give you a slightly finer tune on your mana to spell ratio. Maybe 23/60 is too few lands, but 24/60 is too many, so 24/61 might be just right.

I've played a 61 card deck competitively for this reason.

Another possible reason for running slightly more than 60 cards is when you are playing a stasis type deck, where you basically lock everyone down so nobody can play a spell at all, and just wait for your opponent to deck out. Won't make you a popular player at all, but it can, at times, work.

I also saw a deck that used 62 Forests, and 2 Lost in the Woods. The extra four cards were to survive a deck out duel. If the opponent could not win it in the first four turns, they lost to deck out.

As others have pointed out, the 61st or 41st card should be to balance your land/spell ratio. For instance, control decks that want to resolve spells like Cruel Ultimatum on curve have a legitimate reason to be at 28/61.

There is also a theoretical downside to running an extra card, though. No matter how many cards are in your deck, you will always have a "worst card". By running an extra card, you are adding a card that is theoretically worse than your worst card, and you have therefore decreased the overall power level of your deck.

Quote from Frenadol

I constantly 3-0 in drafts with 41-45 card decks. If you don't know what to cut, or your mana base is awkward, just put in more cards.

It is especially bad in limited to run more than 40 cards in your deck. You make your entire deck significantly worse by adding a 41st, 42nd, 43rd, 44th and 45th best card to your deck.

Pros of 61+ cards:

- Big decks tend to have multiple themes or combos, meaning they are more fun and unpredictable. Some 75 and even 80 card decks are a blast to pay.

- If you are intentionally putting stuff in your graveyard, you probably want more cards.

- Nothing wrong with 1 extra card if it is a wanderers twig or similar.

Cons

- Reduces the odds of getting the card you need at that moment, and sometimes aggravates runs of not drawing land or drawing pure land.

There was talk for a while about blue-based decks in Vintage going up to 67 cards, and moving Ancestral Recall, Brainstorm, Ponder, and the four Preordains to slots 61-67, thus freeing up those below-60 slots for more business.

All seven of those cards, at worst, replace themselves and the mana investment is minimal. They also serve as filters and diggers. With Ancestral, you straight up draw three cards for U. With Brainstorm, you draw three cards and put back two less useful cards for U, then crack a fetch and shuffle them away. With Preordain, you get to look at the top three and can either keep one (and possibly shuffle the other two away with a fetch) or shuffle away all three and get a random card for U. And with Preordain, you get to look at the top two cards, set them up how you want, and then draw one (with the possibility of putting both on the bottom of your library and drawing a third unseen card) for U.

Can't find that discussion on TMD anymore, unfortunately.

Quote from socalpsych

It is especially bad in limited to run more than 40 cards in your deck. You make your entire deck significantly worse by adding a 41st, 42nd, 43rd, 44th and 45th best card to your deck.

Not necessarily...Under most circ*mstances I'd agree, but it's usually a good idea to break the default rule against any deck focusing on mill strategy. I brought my M12 prerelease deck up to 44 cards because I had enough to work with and was playing against someone who opened a Jace, memory adept, and doing so let me survive that extra turn I needed to pull off the win.

As previously mentioned, sometimes running 61-64 cards in other formats can also give you that perfect mana base ratio when 23/60 lands doesn't feel just right. It's also not a big deal and doesn't ruin the consistency of draw too much when you're running tutors or other cards which let you fetch and the out the deck. As mentioned by Wildfire393, it can sometimes be beneficial to trade a little consistency for additional flexibility.

I also agree that 70-80 card casual decks can also be a lot of fun to play because they offer more variety and unpredictability. In fact one of my favorite decks of all time was an 80 card five color deck I played with way back in early high school when the game was still relatively new. Granted I wasn't a very experienced deck builder back then and probably would've done terribly if I played it competitively despite having all the revised duals one might need, but it was still fun to see the look on people's faces when they realized I was running multiple grinning totems and a few other cards they never expected to make the cut in a five color deck.

Quote from Mystic-X

Not necessarily...Under most circ*mstances I'd agree, but it's usually a good idea to break the default rule against any deck focusing on mill strategy. I brought my M12 prerelease deck up to 44 cards because I had enough to work with and was playing against someone who opened a Jace, memory adept, and doing so let me survive that extra turn I needed to pull off the win.

Oh I've brought in 10+ cards after sideboard before against a mill deck. I was more talking about the deck that you "submit" at first. I will also agree that some corner case draft decks call for running more than 40 cards, it is just very rare.

Quote from Wildfire393

There is actually a legitimate reason to run more than 60 cards in a deck: it gives you access to more possible targets if you're running tutor suites like Green Sun's Zenith, Chord of Calling, Natural Order, Summoner's Pact, Stoneforge Mystic, Enlightened Tutor, Knight of the Reliquary, etc.

You sacrifice a tiny amount of consistency in order to gain a bit more flexibility. I can't see ever running 64 cards, but if 61 cards means you get to fit in another tutor target, the loss of consistency is low enough that it's probably worthwhile.

It can also give you a slightly finer tune on your mana to spell ratio. Maybe 23/60 is too few lands, but 24/60 is too many, so 24/61 might be just right.

Interesting. May I ask how will I know the lands:card count ratio is just right for a given deck? Perfect example would be dredge or even a reanimator deck. My friend runs a FRITES deck(standard), he said that maximizing the deck count to 64 is not too bad especially if you have 12 cards (e.g. Tracker's Instinct, Mulch, Faithless Looting) that makes cards pile up in the GY then bringing it back. I'm too skeptical about it even since I really don't get the play of GY interaction decks. Him running 23 lands with a bad manabase too, and I just don't know if he still get good draws off his deck.

Pros: Makes you feel 'smarter' because you know for a fact that the exact number of lands your deck needs is 23.4, not 23 or 24.

Cons: Makes the average card in your deck worse.

Quote from wie2323

Interesting. May I ask how will I know the lands:card count ratio is just right for a given deck? Perfect example would be dredge or even a reanimator deck. My friend runs a FRITES deck(standard), he said that maximizing the deck count to 64 is not too bad especially if you have 12 cards (e.g. Tracker's Instinct, Mulch, Faithless Looting) that makes cards pile up in the GY then bringing it back. I'm too skeptical about it even since I really don't get the play of GY interaction decks. Him running 23 lands with a bad manabase too, and I just don't know if he still get good draws off his deck.

If your friend's going up to 64 cards, he's probably full of it. I can see decent reasons for going up by one or two cards, but not four. The extra cards don't help him in a graveyard-using deck unless he's expecting to be milled a certain amount of the time, which isn't really a concern in today's standard. And especially with Frites, you need a good manabase.

Perfect example would be dredge or even a reanimator deck. My friend runs a FRITES deck(standard), he said that maximizing the deck count to 64 is not too bad especially if you have 12 cards (e.g. Tracker's Instinct, Mulch, Faithless Looting) that makes cards pile up in the GY then bringing it back. I'm too skeptical about it even since I really don't get the play of GY interaction decks. Him running 23 lands with a bad manabase too, and I just don't know if he still get good draws off his deck.

Your friend is wrong.

He needs to play 60 cards. Playing 23 lands (out of 60 cards) is okay because the deck runs 9 mana creatures and some Mulches. There is no justification for having extra cards in a deck that really wants to find one of its 4 Unburial Rites.

Cons:
-Reduces chances of you getting your best plays, what you might need at a key moment, or game-breaking cards.

Pros:
-None

Always run a 60 card deck.

Sometimes when im making a deck ill start out with 70 or so cards and gradually cut it down. It lets me test out a bunch of the cards i want and decide which one to keep for a final version.

It really depends on the format youre playing in and what kinds of decks youre playing against. If theres a lot of milling going on, having a larger deck is an easy way to make it harder for them and essentially start out with more life. Some deck strategies tend to deplete your library faster than normal decks and might require some additional cards.

The main disadvantage of a large deck is the loss of consistency. Generally 60 cards is more than enough for a deck to contain a solid strategy, and having extra cards only decreases your chance of getting the combinations of cards/lands that you need.

I often find myself up at 61 cards, but only if im tutoring or drawing extra cards.

That said i have a 70 card multiplayer deck. It isnt legacy legal either since i have a demonic tutor and 2 skullclamp and 1 sol ring(which isnt as good as the everflowings that get overcharged from other things in the deck) but it runs like a dream. So depending on format sometimes you can get away with more but thats usually best left at the kitchen table.