Magic: The Gathering Guide - How to "Play Around" Cards and Strategies

Have you ever listened to bad advice?

Michelangelo is clearly not a great TCG player.

In this article, we'll discuss a super popular concept (that most players apply to their matches, consciously or not): playing around cards and strategies.

This technique isn’t actually very complicated, but it has a huge impact on every match. I know this may seem strange, but the truth is that the effort required to get something right and the impact of getting it right or wrong don’t always go hand in hand. Sometimes a high-impact decision takes little effort, and sometimes a difficult decision ends up not affecting the match at all.

Nonetheless, "playing around" something refers to the act of making decisions based on what the opponent has in hand. But how, exactly, do we do that?

Poker

I really like talking about poker because it is extremely simple, rules-wise. We can easily draw parallels and think of good examples based on it. When the matter is "playing around" cards and strategies, this comparison is even better because every poker game centers around that.

If you don't know or have never played poker, let's consider the Texas Hold'em variant in particular. In this version of the game, each player has 2 cards in hand, 5 cards are drawn for everyone on the table, and you need to build the best 5-card hand possible (that can mean 0 to 2 cards that you already have and, consequently, 5, 4, or 3 cards from the table).

This hand has a sequence, or a straight: one jack and one 9 of clubs in our hand and the king, queen, and 10 of spades on the table. This is a good hand. Which other hands could beat it?

As there are 3 "spades" on the table, we can lose to any two spades in our opponents' hands (which would make a flush), or to an ace and a jack (which would also make a straight, but one that scores more points than the one we have). There are other hands that beat our straight, but they're all impossible (for instance, no player will have four of a kind because there aren't two copies of a card on the table).

What is "playing around" something in this case? Basically, it's deciding whether you bet on your hand or not! At the end of the day, you don't really know what your opponents have. Considering all possible hands, there are two that can beat us.

I'm not going to explore this example further because this article is not about poker. But this is what we mean when we talk about "playing around" something. Let's say a player bets 2 chips on their hand. If we decide to give up, that would be playing around these two possible hands that can beat us (after all, why would you bet on a losing hand?), but if we bet on it, we would be ignoring these possibilities (we're beating all other hands, after all.)

Hidden Information

In game theory, there is something called imperfect information and perfect information. Imperfect information means that players don't have access to every piece of information in play, and perfect information means that everyone knows everything there is to know.

Chess, for instance, is a game of perfect information. Each player knows what every piece does and the board state. The game is decided on the strategies both of them create based on that.

Poker has both imperfect information and perfect information. The cards open to everyone on the table are examples of perfect information, while the cards in each player's hand are imperfect information. In this game in particular, the information everyone has access to is easy to work with (how strong is your hand, which hands it loses to, and which hands it beats), but the game itself is based almost entirely around how you assess the imperfect information.

Magic: The Gathering is a very special game. The cards in the opponent's hand (imperfect information) are extremely relevant, and the battlefield (including the graveyard and exile pile) is full of perfect information. To make the best decisions, strategically speaking, you'll have to consider all of these factors.

That's what makes it such a great game: it is as "exciting" as poker and strategic as chess, all in one game. It's clear why I like all three games so much.

You control 2 islands and your graveyard is full. You have these two cards in hand. If you cast an Octavia now, you'll have an 8/8 creature. But, if your opponent casts a Supreme Verdict, you'll lose a very strong creature that you would not lose if you had another mana (which you may draw at any moment!).

Basically, in this case, not casting Octavia would be playing around Supreme Verdict, while casting it would be "ignoring" this possibility.

To put it bluntly: if you want to play around something, you need to consider what you might face next!

The main factors to consider when you try to play around something are:

1 - The current game state.

2 - What your opponent can do.

3 - What are your options, realistically.

Let's see a few examples.

Do You Pay 1?

Usually, when we hear this question, we think of Rhystic Study, but in this case we're talking about the most "played around" card on the planet: Daze.

Let's say you have 2 lands on the battlefield and one 2-mana spell that you would really like to resolve. An Emperor of Bones, for instance.

If we consider that the more imperfect information is in play, the harder it is for the opponent to decide what to do, you should cast Emperor of Bones before you play another land. This will make the opponent's position a bit more difficult because they'll make their decision (to counter it or not) without a piece of information (if you're going to play a third land or not).

On the other side, if they cast a Daze, Force Spike, or Mana Tithe, you just made a card that would soon be dead in their hand incredibly useful.

Nowadays, there are many conditional counters in the game:

Most players play their lands before they play their spells (this has become the standard, almost), but I believe many of them don't realize that this is a way to "play around" cards without even knowing it.

Playing Against a Global Removal

Your opponent has 10 HP. You control a Laelia with 1 counter and your hand includes a 3/3 creature with haste.

In this case, you have a few options:

1 - Attacking with Laelia and putting a counter on it. It deals 4 damage, the opponent goes to 6 HP, and you can attack on the following turn (once Laelia deals 5 damage to them, they'll have 1 HP, or you can play Bugbear and deal lethal damage - 8).

2 - Casting Bugbear and attacking for 7 damage, which would leave the opponent with 3 HP (and the two creatures on your board represent lethal damage).

3 - Then you have options that aren't really options (for instance, casting Bugbear and not attacking with it - something that can make sense in a real game but not in this case).

To make things simpler, let's assume the opponent's deck only has 4 cards and that they can't draw any extra copies of them besides their lands:

Let's consider what happens in each scenario above (1 or 2) according to the cards the opponent might have in hand.

Swamp + Swamp

If the opponent only has lands, they'll lose the game in both scenarios in just 2 turns.

Damnation + Swamp

If the opponent casts a Damnation on your Laelia (scenario 1), you can play Hulking Bugbear in the following turn. Here's how it goes: you attack for 4 damage, take Damnation, play Bugbear (and attack to get the opponent to 3 HP), and kill them when they draw their land.

In the second scenario, you attack for 7 damage immediately. You'll untap and the opponent will have 3 HP, but you won't be able to put any pressure on them. You'll have to rely on the next cards you draw.

1 Long Goodbye + ???

In the first scenario, the opponent uses Long Goodbye on Laelia and still has 10 HP left.

In the second scenario, the opponent removes Laelia but takes 3 damage. They'll have 7 HP and you'll have a Hulking Bugbear on the board (which puts a lot of pressure on them).

I feel comfortable saying that, in this scenario, the game is far from over. Even if the opponent draws lands, you'll still have to rely on the next cards you draw to finish them.

Yargle + ???

In the first scenario, the opponent will have 6 HP and a Yargle. You can play Bugbear, and Yargle and Laelia will die in combat. The opponent will end up with 3 HP and you'll have your Bugbear (they'll still have to draw a removal).

In the second scenario, the opponent will have 3 HP and a Yargle. You'll have 2 creatures, and that represents lethal damage.

After this assessment, it's easy to see a few things:

1 - You have great chances of winning this match.

2 - If the opponent has a Long Goodbye, it's game over.

3 - If the opponent blocks with Yargle, you'll be good (and you must probably play Bugbear).

4 - If the opponent has a Damnation, you're good (and you must probably not play Bugbear, but you'll still be well-positioned if you do).

Let's discuss this last observation a bit more. Playing Bugbear will set your opponent to 3 HP, and you won't be able to put pressure on them anymore. This might seem terrible, but the truth is that you'll draw a card (and have mana) and can end the game on that very same turn (which you probably won't be able to do in the first scenario, considering you'll use your mana to put Bugbear in play). A deck that uses Hulking Bugbear certainly plays more creatures with haste and some copies of Lightning Bolt.

Making this decision seems super complicated because you'll need to consider information like the card you'll draw next (and obviously you don't know what they are).

Furthermore, usually the cards that see play are not Hulking Bugbears or Yargles...

Your creatures with haste will bring you more cards from the top of your deck and complicate everything. Your opponent's creatures might put pressure on you instead of the other way around or have lifelink, your removals might be conditional, you'll both have various effects to use, etc...

But, if we put these factors aside and get back to our example, it seems clear to me that casting Bugbear is the best choice, and the only situation it wouldn't be is if your opponent has Damnation + Land. In this case, I'd say playing Bugbear is the standard play, and not doing it would be playing around Damnation.

Does it seem simple? That's because it is. The challenge is guessing what the opponent has in hand (that is, deducing what they might have based on what they played on the previous turns) and staying focused to make these decisions. Think about it like this: you need to assess all of this before everything you do (which land you play, which spell, when you save mana for answers and when you don't...).

Flipping the Game

"Flipping the game" refers to when we condense an entire match into an uncertain, risky play, like a coin flip.

This is an interesting scenario. You have Yoshimaru and other creatures and are ahead. You have an Open the Armory. You can get an Embercleave, which will certainly represent lethal damage. But this strategy involves attacking with all your creatures.

If your opponent has exactly one of these free spells, then your attack isn't lethal all of a sudden. Worse yet, it will probably be terrible, and you might lose all the advantage you have.

On the other side, if you get a removal aura (like On Thin Ice, as we suggested), you won't win straight away, but you'll increase your advantage. You might not even get the best card possible and simply do something else (or nothing at all!) and reassess this strategy on the following turn.

It's difficult to tell when you're making a risky decision. In Duel Commander, what are the odds of your opponent having a free spell (considering they only play 1 copy of it in their 99-card deck)? And even if they did draw it, why would they be behind in the game, and why would they not have played it already to try to stabilize the board?

One concept I truly enjoy is that there are 3 types of players:

1 - Beginners, who often "flip" the game without realizing it.

2 - Players with some experience that are super careful and play around everything.

3 - Really experienced players that play around answers but sometimes decide to "flip" the game.

But why would I flip a strategy game?

Coin Flip Situations

To play around something, you must make sure you'll gain something from it and that flipping it wouldn't be better. For instance:

Battlefield:

Hand:

You're losing the game, and you know your opponent might have a Daze in hand. Your game plan is playing a Lightning Helix, the third land, and a Sheoldred on the following turn. As you don't have a lot of HP and only a few cards in your deck give you some, you'll probably not be able to cast that Sheoldred on turn 5.

In these cases, playing Lightning Helix and Raucous Theater is the right decision. It's true, playing a basic land before that would be playing around a Daze. But on the following turn you'll already be doing something that loses to a Daze. What's the difference between losing to that card this turn or the next?

If you had a Barrowgoyf in your hand, it would be entirely different. You'd have the opportunity to play around this Daze in a real strategy. In this case, you'd have to reassess everything.

Another common situation is facing an opponent that has lots of cards in hand, and a certain play you make loses to a removal. However, if you pass that turn, you won't lose to that removal but lose to another 10 cards in their deck. In these situations, flipping the game is probably better than playing around a removal and often gives you more wins.

We've already discussed Atraxa before. When this deck is involved, players often have to "flip" the game, whether they're playing it or facing it. I mean, when you're playing aggro lists, how many strategies can you really think of and execute against a 7/7 creature with lifelink and vigilance?

At the same time, when you're playing control lists, oftentimes your best (and only?) alternative is praying your commander stays in play. I know that's a bad plan, but when we have 10 lands and a Cut Down, what else could we do?

Less common situations involve understanding your opponent won't give you a better opportunity. For instance, when we play Storm, oftentimes a simple Counterspell can beat us. But is it worth it to wait a few turns to draw a Duress, considering the opponent is also drawing cards and will possibly draw more counters than we'll draw discards?

The main lesson to take away from this is that sometimes we know we'll lose, but we have to try to win anyway. Every time someone says, "you only won because I didn't have a removal", you can be sure you flipped a game correctly, and if you hadn't, you'd probably lose.

The answer to this question varies from format to format and meta to meta. The more "solved" a meta is, the simpler it will be to play around certain things (but not easier).

One of the things I really enjoy about Duel Commander is how complex it is. It is a highlander format, so your decisions are much more complex and interesting. You can probably be certain your opponent has a removal in hand, but which one...?

Imagine playing a Palantir of Orthanc so that you don't take a removal, and then you find an Abrupt Decay in the opponent's hand. Or playing a Barrowgoyf to play around Cut Down and Fatal Push, but finding a Go For the Throat in the opponent's hand.

Please note that the player who plays the removal is also making decisions and sort of playing around cards. For instance, when the opponent plays their Barrowgoyf, you might have to decide between playing a Long Goodbye (which is perfect, but you might want to save it because it can't be countered) and a Sheoldred's Edict (which answers indestructible creatures and planeswalkers but might be less efficient if the opponent plays something even worse later).

There is a popular expression in poker: seeing ghosts. To sum up, every winning play can lose to something. If you try to play around everything, you'll inevitably make the wrong play. It's very comfortable to say, "I did that because I wanted to play around Orcish Bowmasters" because that would mean you lost to variance and not because you made the wrong decision.

Unfortunately, that's not how you play MTG, at least not how you play it well. The truth is that you'll have good cards and bad cards at different points of the game, and your opponents will answer you. Overthinking and making bad plays is definitely a common phenomenon.

Let's finally discuss bluffing. Bluffing deserves an article of its own, but we must say that, in a Magic: The Gathering match, not everything that shimmers is gold.

In all honesty, if your opponent says they'll pass with 4 lands, you know they have answers. Counters, removals, everything! We must try to play around all of this... But let's flip things.

As the control player, what can you play? Your cards are almost all instants in some way.

The truth is that if the opponent's hand includes lands and card draw, they'll pass with some mana open. Even if they have something, like a Shorikai, Genesis Engine, they'll probably not play it because using all their mana at this point of the game would make it clear that they don't have any great answers in hand (and that information is too valuable to give up).

In real matches, bluffing is a lot more subtle and implied. Don't forget that the opponent might have bluffed their cards and led you to think they have something. For instance, they might not have played a spell on curve because they thought it would be more impactful later, or something similar.

Other times, the right play will seem like bluffing. For instance, you might play a creature that you think would be removed on the spot - a Dark Confidant, for instance. Your opponent has a removal, but they want to play a Toxic Deluge on the following turn. They might decide to let you keep Confidant for a turn because saving a removal for after they play Deluge is a decent decision. But if you deduce from this that "if they had a removal, they'd already have played it", you'll make the wrong decisions from this point onward.

MTG is a complex game.

Every player knows this, but it's always a good idea to show that some skills are not exactly limited to this game - which explains why competitive players easily adapt to different TCGs and strategy-based games.

"Playing around" something is a topic that could yield 2 articles from us, and we can think of several other abilities that would require a lot of words. Can you think of anything?

Tell us your thoughts in our comment section below.

Thank you for reading, and see you next time!