This is the third Profile in the Pilot Archetype series, where I discuss four major archetypes I have identified, across two specific questions:

1. How aggressive is your threat assessment?

This question aims to understand not the quality of a player’s threat assessment, which is more closely tied to their experience with that skill, but rather how a player responds to threats. Are players proactive in their threat assessment, targeting certain decks, commanders, and playstyles, or are they reactive, targeting only problematic permanents, varying how quickly they respond?

2. How flexible are your card choices?

This question aims to understand whether you pick more synergistic or functional cards. This is not a question necessarily about the cards themselves, although that certainly plays a factor, but more about what the pilot prioritizes.

These two questions, together, provide a spectrum of information that can be understood as archetypes. The four major archetypes that I have mapped out are as follows:

• Assassin

• Opportunist

• Snowballer

• Field General

I believe they can be mapped out across quadrants, like so:

The Field General is a pilot with passive threat assessment and makes card choices that cover a wide variety of functions.

When asked, “How aggressive is your threat assessment?”, the Field General will laugh it off, saying that no details go into those decisions. When asked, “How flexible are your card choices?”, they are more likely to discuss how their cards can be used across various scenarios rather than specific instances or plans. For this reason, both Field Generals and Snowballers tend to focus more on general synergy. A card doesn’t necessarily need to fit a specific plan for the deck, but it needs to consistently provide support to the overall strategy the deck is trying to achieve.

As I write this, I realize that the difference between planning and strategy may not be clear. When I use these terms, I typically refer to a plan as a specific sequence of effects to achieve a defined goal, while a strategy is a broad theme or scenario the deck is trying to create to win. The devil, as is often the case, is in the details, and this is no more true than in the Field General.

How does the Field General differ from the Opportunist?

Field Generals and Opportunists share passive threat assessment, so a table with both of these players may be boring in the early phases of the game. The Opportunist is trying to assemble the pieces of their bomb, but the Field General is playing slowly because they constantly monitor who is coming out ahead. This can often lead to situations where the Field General plays the role of policing the table, preventing a single player from gaining an unfair advantage, and ensuring that damage is spread evenly across all players.

But where an Opportunist is trying to wait until the moment is right, the Field General uses their card choices to sculpt a general environment that is favorable to win. This is why, even though they share a passive threat assessment, their play style can differ significantly. I think the defining feature of the Field General is constantly assessing the overall board state, rather than the board state of a single player.

How does the Field General differ from the Snowballer?

If Field Generals are the Police, Snowballers are the robbers. I’ll discuss the difference between Opportunists and Snowballers later, as Field Generals tend to look out for both. Still, Snowballers are especially troubling for the Field General as they will accrue so much value that the even-keeled Field General can’t keep up if they allow things to continue.

Both players tend to be more general in their card choices. But Snowballers tend to focus on accruing value and other resources, while Field Generals are doing so to create a general environment in which they can win. This explains the behavior of Field Generals, keeping everyone at an even life total, because an environment in which a player can win tends to be one where it is more likely for other players to lose. Even a small difference in life totals can make a difference to the Field General, who is trying to be the last man standing.

Next Week: We talk Snowballers and finish the final round of the Pilot Profile series!

Bonus Card Review: Second Guess

With the release of Tarkir Dragonstorm, we are seeing the theme of “second spells” show up more and more. This leads players to rely more on the sequencing of spells to maximize the benefits of the first and second spells cast, typically with the second spell being the one they lean on and the first being some setup.

Second Guess is an interesting counterplay that can shut down any spell for the price of a Negate. While this can disrupt second spell strategies, it can also be used as a powerful defensive tool. If you cast your commander and someone else casts removal, whether a counterspell or something else, Second Guess can protect it. What differentiates this spell from Negate is the coverage, as WOTC keeps designing creatures with flash that achieve various effects, or cards that are multiple card types, so having a counter to that can be helpful.