The next level Domain deck.

[@legendarye172]

15:02 there’s actually a line where if you binding the overlord that the opponent has, and you get lost your own binding with that overlord under it, you get the overlord since it returns under its owners control and you own the overlord

[@danielstein8769]

Is this something you do in paper? Because binding doesn't change who owns the permanent when it's exiled

[@YouTubeChonce]

​@@danielstein8769 The owner never changed in the first place. Even if the card was stolen from you with outrageous robbery, you are still the "owner" of those cards, but your opponent is allowed to play them and the permanents resolve under their control as they are the one casting them. If an effect causes them to return under their owners control that still means under your control. As far as I know, you can't lose ownership of your cards except through ante.

[@luismanuellmf]

​@@danielstein8769no but the game does. Opponent is the controller of the overlord, not the owner. So if you somehow blink it, it returns to its owner control wich in this case is you.

[@luismanuellmf]

Something similar happened to me playing timeless. Opponent cycled a troll of khazad-dum. I used a "reanimate" on his troll. Then opponent played "phelia", he just had to attack, blink the trol and returning it back to his control without losing any life from reanimate wich I did. You can learn from my mistakes today 😂

[@danielstein8769]

I didn't realize it was robbery'd. I thought he was playing overlords too was kind of bored of that matchup while watching eating my lunch 🤣

[@tippychat6293]

Great video, will there ever be another joy of deckbuilding? I always struggle to learn deck building and those videos really helped, a series would be godly thanks for your engaging content VD!

[@thatguydennis2]

The Your Go/ concede games are always my favorite

[@Fullmetal85]

😂

[@Say_Tin]

Domain Expansion: Value Engine

[@TheForswornKing]

The value being the wildcard cost of this deck

[@Kuryux]

14:40 they aint playing white, they got white from u XD

[@GMOPsyche]

The opponent in match 2 couldn't have exiled Zur with the cover up since there was no Zur in the graveyard, he was exiled by annoint with affliction.

[@vargasmir]

Love the deck!

[@skipper7152]

It is as they say, Zur go brr.

[@TheForswornKing]

Zrr goes burr on your wildcards

[@migsterman67]

Played a Naya Zur overlords at FNM, included overlord of the Boilerbilges as removal instead of the blue one. Added 4 x Fabled passage and other basics. Really fun. For me anyways…..!

[@SBaldo8]

Favourite deck in all of standard, you play with some different number of copies of the cards, I'll try your build

[@CC-xn6di]

I real like you Videos do you play the card game to like Tours/ Worlds or just online?

[@lancelee338]

13:49 I think that’s the most I’ve ever seen someone pay for Leyline Binding

[@NickTemperistic]

I've had my opponent pay 8 mana for one before

[@louisnemzer6801]

More Leyline Bindings than targets 😅

[@RomeoNevan]

Sorry but nothing new, its the stock version of domain. At least you can show us the domain/caretaker hybrid

[@theaeskey2502]

Loving the new domain deck LVD. You could even say it’s a domain expansion. 😉 🤣

[@outtaideas849]

What would his Domain Expansion be called?

[@J3str-z9w]

@@outtaideas849infinite value

[@theaeskey2502]

@@outtaideas849 I’m thinking something to do with the value he provides. Something like Reggie’s Contractual Recreation mixed with nanami’s 7-3 binding vow. 🤔 How about Domain Expansion: Value Domination. ALSO glad you caught the reference. 😊

[@BigZaddyYumYum]

Domain expansion: LIBRARY OF MAGIC

[@Emry-q7m]

Cringe

[@rabidcabbage7230]

👍

[@finniansarver2003]

So tired of seeing zur in every overlord deck😪

[@braedenwinstead1984]

Aye 2nd! Checked at just the right time