Though its better/worse then FoW I see it having a simular price. Im not so sure about 20+ but I can definetly see it at 10+. Im in the 13-15 range myself.
Edit - To all who say this card "sux" how about expanding your vison beyond standard and block and see the big picture that this IS going to be played in T1 and T1.5 as well as many online formats. This should also see play in std in dragonstorm and soem other big turn kill you decks that I cant think of right now.
Soo horrible. The only decks that would run 4 of these right now are Dragonstorm. And Gigadrowse does basically the same thing the turn before.
I love all the people on e-bay paying 40+ for playsets
Got me my 4 Oriss's for 4 bucks (Pre-re others want it at 6:1!)
Got me my 4 Graven Cairns for 13 bucks (Just want em for safety 3.50:1)
Got me my 4 Shimian Specters for 32 bucks. (8:1 - Nobody would trade em to me <12 (1 awesome guy put it at 10))
Paid 4 each for 3 Inferal Tutors at Pre-re.
I'm wondering if I should get 8 at this one site for 2 dollars each and 2.75/3 Grand Arbiters to make my playset .....
When I see these distribution of prices. This really reminds me of the set up of a funny economic phenomenon commonly known as the winners curse.
When a good has common but yet to be unknown value, the winners of the first set of auctions will almost always be overestimating its value. Based on the numbers I see on the poll, looks like a much more like 10-12$ range then 20+.
at first i thought about it and yaw i said to myself... chant is better, blah, blah, blah, but then i forgot why this card is freaking amazing.
you dont need to play white! in fact, you could play this in a pure artifact deck. the point is you just need 1 card to protect your combo and go off and pact is it.
the upkeep part doesnt even matter. in standard, it might matter, but in vintage or legacy... the game is over and pact is there to stop any unexpecting surprises.
remember... you dont even need to play blue to play pact!!
Soo horrible. The only decks that would run 4 of these right now are Dragonstorm. And Gigadrowse does basically the same thing the turn before.
I love all the people on e-bay paying 40+ for playsets
Got me my 4 Oriss's for 4 bucks (Pre-re others want it at 6:1!)
Got me my 4 Graven Cairns for 13 bucks (Just want em for safety 3.50:1)
Got me my 4 Shimian Specters for 32 bucks. (8:1 - Nobody would trade em to me <12 (1 awesome guy put it at 10))
Paid 4 each for 3 Inferal Tutors at Pre-re.
I'm wondering if I should get 8 at this one site for 2 dollars each and 2.75/3 Grand Arbiters to make my playset .....
specters are going to go down to $1 rare slot... so you over paid. this card will go up. remember you can play any pact in any deck.
Type 2... right now... it only looks like it may be used in Dragonstorm, and possibily as a one of in some control decks.
Extended... I honestly don't know... TEPS???
Legacy... Soladarity sounds like a reasonable home.
Type 1... Dragon players suddenly love this card.
The only problem... is that its best use is in combo decks on the turn the deck goes off. Force of Will is an all-purpose counter that can be used in a far more reaching variety of decks. Of course, this new counter lessens the forced commitment to blue that force of will forces you to do.
This is a combo card. It is limited to combo decks in order to be used to maximum effictiveness, and only (90% of the time) to be used on the turn the combo player goes off. Until then, it is useless. It will not stop the opponent from ripping your combo to shreads before you can get the combo off, unlike Force of Will.
Don't get me wrong, this is a vintage card. It is clearly designed for vintage in mind (and the manacost that you will never pay... clearly a homage to force of will. But I can't see this card going for more than 5 bucks. Why? Remember... a lot of players aren't hardcore vintage players. A lot of players will see the lose the game drawback and cringe. Younger players just wont get what it is supposed to be used for. All of that will limit its price to 5 bucks. After all, if kids are trading them away because they think it sucks, then why in the heck would you go on E-Bay and buy one for $15. You wouldn't.
Just updating on some playtesting I've been doing. It's a good card, but it's difficult to sqeeze it into dragonstorm. D-storms pieces have to be redundant, and I'm finding it tricky to balance this counter into the mix. Even from the side, it can be a juggling act.
OK, now that I have played with this card, I probably have quite a fair amount of expertise on it...
It's GOOD. REAL good.
Think of it this way...
It will be played in ALL heavy blue control decks in type 2. UBR tron, UR tron, UB tron, UG tron, etc, will all play it. ALL combos will play it.
In the early turns, you don't play this, because you have better stuff like remand and mana leak and delay for the early game. Come turn 5, you play this. Control decks should hit their first 6-7 land drops...if you have to play this on turn 5, it's not awesome, but you should have the mana turn 6 to play something, at least one counter or think twice, ESPECIALLY with signets. A control deck will have a counter in a case where it will be tapping out to play this guy.
Trust me, I can kill this horse and beat it all day until FS comes out and you see that it's good.
Take the argument over extirpate...a card whose value is more questioned than this. Looks like, after 3 months, that it's value is still...hang on...
Consistency is the key here. Current Type 2 counters range from 2 mana to 4 mana. Would a control deck really play a situational counter that can potentially deprive you of 5 mana next turn?
In Type 2 combo, it could be used in TSPS. But Dragonstorm? Both Remand and Gigadrowse are both good against aggro and control. With Pact of Negation, it's near useless in the aggro match-up.
OK, now that I have played with this card, I probably have quite a fair amount of expertise on it...
It's GOOD. REAL good.
Think of it this way...
It will be played in ALL heavy blue control decks in type 2. UBR tron, UR tron, UB tron, UG tron, etc, will all play it. ALL combos will play it.
In the early turns, you don't play this, because you have better stuff like remand and mana leak and delay for the early game. Come turn 5, you play this. Control decks should hit their first 6-7 land drops...if you have to play this on turn 5, it's not awesome, but you should have the mana turn 6 to play something, at least one counter or think twice, ESPECIALLY with signets. A control deck will have a counter in a case where it will be tapping out to play this guy.
Trust me, I can kill this horse and beat it all day until FS comes out and you see that it's good.
Take the argument over extirpate...a card whose value is more questioned than this. Looks like, after 3 months, that it's value is still...hang on...
9.80 on MOTL.
The defense rests, your honor.
I'm finding that all the pacts I've tested so far (Slaughter and Negation) are good. And not just in combo. There's a natural rhythm to a game of Magic that these cards disrupt- they allow you to be proactive during your turn and reactive at the same time, playing threats AND having the capability to deal with them at the same time.
Just as an example, I hardcasted Teferi at my opponent's EOT with my 5 mana. He remanded it, I Negation Pact'd Remand. He played another remand on NP, didn't draw another solution, so I replayed the Pact, and my Teferi resolved, next upkeep I easily payed the 5 mana, and went on to win the game [[It occurs to me that he made an error, probably should have countered Teferi with the second Remand. In any case had he not had the second Remand this situation would have worked]]. Two things happened there that just don't normally happen - one, being able to play out my 5 mana creature with 5 lands out in control while simultaneously being able to protect it and two, being able to replay my counterspell because it costs nothing in net resources to do it, without losing cards (as FoW would have done). It's actually very good in control - obviously not until it comes online (ie you can pay for it), but it does make reactive decks have a bit of proaction to them.
As for Slaughter Pact, it worked quite similarly. Instead of losing tempo by either dealing with a threat or casting a threat, I was able to do both at the same time. Yes, I paid for it next turn, but I took two turns' worth of action in one turn. And the turn later I am able to drop a land and possibly still do other things.
I'm not saying these are the best cards ever but they do have uses beyond combo, as I thought they'd be rather limited. Honestly any deck that can afford the upkeep might want to think about at least testing these out.
(BTW, on the combo deck thing, while yes it's true that Dragonstorm might not want this because of space, why are people missing the possibility that there are plenty of other combo decks out there that aren't T1 right now because they roll over to disruption, and that this might be the missing piece of the puzzle?)
i really think the example u posted was flawed. U say the counter allow u to tap out at turn 5 for teferi, assuming they dnt have 2 counterpspells. Which is usually not the case, and even if u did manage to resolve it, u would need to pay 3UU next upkeep and unable to stop wrath/damnation/what ever removal the opposing control deck run. I still think that the pact of negation is a strictly combo card and will not find a home in control. Simply because it leaves the opponent a window of oppotunity the very next turn to force through crucial spells which mite very well lose u the game.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
This member has been found guilty of ripping a number of users on MTGSalvation. As a result he has been banned on this site and all his positive feedback has been removed. The MTGSalvation Staff wants to strongly encourage you NOT to trade with this member ever again in whatever situation might come up.
Spread the word.
I played with this at the prerelease, and I have to say I'm very impressed. My deck was VERY control heavy (Pact of Negation, Cancel, Logic Knot, Spell Burst, Spiketail Drakeling, Voidmage Prodigy, and 2 Aven Augers (wizards to sac tothe prodigy as well as the double boomerang) for a limited deck, but the Pact and the Prodigy were the real MVP's (working together no less!). The pact allowed me to over extend with creatures on a turn, shut down what they wanted to do with their turn, and I still had the Prodigy and possibly Drakeling to deal with their next turn while getting damage through. Yeah that means I had 7 mana which is a lot easier to do in limited, but I was running green as well so I had some good mana accel.
Based on the power of mana accel, I'd say the best standard deck for this right now (if we all agree that Dragonstorm doesn't have room; I'm not an expect on that subject so I'll go with it) is Scryb Force. You can cast your Spectral Force on turn 3 or 4 now without having to worry about if it will be Wrathed away since you already have the 5 mana (Assuming breeding pools and/or a bird were involved not all forests and elves) to pay for the pact. Can the Wrath the next turn? Not if you have another pact, but you probably just did 10 damage, assuming a Yavimaya Dryad was your turn 2 play.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Wizards could put $100 bills in packs and people would complain about how they were folded. http://www.twitter.com/Dr_Jeebus - Follow me on Twitter!
Check out www.mtgbrodeals.com for daily content from the brothers of Mu Tau Gamma!
Just as an example, I hardcasted Teferi at my opponent's EOT with my 5 mana. He remanded it, I Negation Pact'd Remand. He played another remand on NP, didn't draw another solution, so I replayed the Pact, and my Teferi resolved, next upkeep I easily payed the 5 mana, and went on to win the game [[It occurs to me that he made an error, probably should have countered Teferi with the second Remand. In any case had he not had the second Remand this situation would have worked]].
In this case the Pact only worked because your opponent made a glaring mistake.Had he Remanded your Teferi you would have spent your next turn paralyzed without mana and no Teferi,giving your opponent free reign.
Negation Pact is only good in desperate times,otherwise,I'd be more than happy to lose 1 spell to have you paralyzed for a turn.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It is always easy to be tolerant and understanding...Until someone presents an opinion completely opposite to your own.
i really think the example u posted was flawed. U say the counter allow u to tap out at turn 5 for teferi, assuming they dnt have 2 counterpspells. Which is usually not the case, and even if u did manage to resolve it, u would need to pay 3UU next upkeep and unable to stop wrath/damnation/what ever removal the opposing control deck run. I still think that the pact of negation is a strictly combo card and will not find a home in control. Simply because it leaves the opponent a window of oppotunity the very next turn to force through crucial spells which mite very well lose u the game.
I do appreciate your comment (I figured I'd just state that up front ). No its not a perfect situation, but that was the play I wanted to make and it was a play that ended up shutting my opponent down. The opponent's deck wasn't U/B control so I wasn't worried about wrath (was showing U/R lands).
It's a weird situation, to be sure. You have to weigh whether the tempo advantage that turn is worth hampering your next turn (when you'll presumably only get 1 land drop, 1 card draw, etc). But I guess my point is that no one so far had really brought up the question of whether the card is worth the tempo advantage you gain in the short term (plus the ability to bluff a counterspell while tapped out isn't too shabby either) vs. waiting and deploying your strategy later, when your opponent might be in an even better position to respond.
In the Slaughter Pact example, I had drawn into 2, and had a Ghost Council out. I was able to get rid of my opponent's blockers two at a time (I had enough mana to, on one turn, mortify my opponent's blocker and castigate him, then on their turn, slaughter pact their new guy, pay the upkeep for SP on my turn, drop a land and mortify the temporal isolation they played on the GC, THEN SP another threat they dropped after I was tapped out on their turn.) It technically put me behind on tempo but the fact that I had control of the board was worth it in that case. I dunno, like I said, I kinda want to hear other peoples' impressions with these in practical usage.
In this case the Pact only worked because your opponent made a glaring mistake.Had he Remanded your Teferi you would have spent your next turn paralyzed without mana and no Teferi,giving your opponent free reign.
Negation Pact is only good in desperate times,otherwise,I'd be more than happy to lose 1 spell to have you paralyzed for a turn.
Right, I agree, but I would have had to wait another 2 turns to deal with any potential counter spells without NP; with it I was able to push a couple of turns early to establish control of the board earlier than normal. The alternative would have been waiting until turn 6 or 7 to leave mana open for Remand rather than casting Teferi on turn 5, and by turn 7 a Remanded Remand is pretty pointless.
In this case the Pact only worked because your opponent made a glaring mistake.Had he Remanded your Teferi you would have spent your next turn paralyzed without mana and no Teferi,giving your opponent free reign.
Negation Pact is only good in desperate times,otherwise,I'd be more than happy to lose 1 spell to have you paralyzed for a turn.
Well as a fellow Pact of Negation tester, i must really say you should give the card a test-run before commenting on how awful it is for control. Granted, the card is not a 4-of, probably not even a 2-of considering we have Mystical Teachings, but it does allow you to play a proactive control game.
Play mistakes aside (which this card does lend itself to), you're basically trading resources and tempo with your opponent. During the mid-game, while you're at your most vulnerable playing this card, they still have to answer your win condition or play a bigger threat (which you could be prepared to answer), a requirement that usually counterbalances the Pact's tempo loss. In the meantime, you just robbed your opponent of considerable tempo, dealt with several answers, and you are in a position to basically dictate the game's pace.
I know it's difficult to grasp since you have to see it in action, but I do advise you to speak from your personal playtest experience with the card instead of theoretical analysis. The Pacts are quite different from anything we've seen so far and I'm not sure the standard tempo analysis applies to these cards...
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
People hiss and grunt at Mark Rosewater for the state of the game. Few realize, though, that it is Aaron Forsythe who is directly responsible of the current state of affairs due to negligence as head of Magic R&D and a completely skewed view of the game as a whole.
So next time you want to make an avvy with Rosewater pissing on something, take a deep breath and consider pasting Forsythe's face there instead...
Hard to tell right now, but I'm going with R_E and saying 15-20 bucks (permanent), possibly even more. C'mon guys, it's blue. It's a counter. It's a rare. It's absolutely free to play. The immediate effect and playability of the card is actually stronger than force of will; force of will you pitch another blue card and lose 1 life, with the very strong possibility that it could be countered. With this, you simply play it without any immediate mana or pitch costs, and get the very strong effect of countering a spell. If you're opponent absolutey must resolve something, and is forced to counter your negation pact, congratulations you just played a functional counterspell for 0 mana.
If wizards designed a card like this:
[CARDNAME]
0, Instant
Counter target spell
It would be absolutely broken beyond imagination. Beyond black lotus, beyond force of will, beyond anything in the history of magic. But that's exactly what this spell does. The 5 mana drawback has several flexible ways to deal with it. Firstly, control decks hit 5 mana at around turns 3-4; paying the cost actually isn't that much of a problem. Secondly, cards exist to turn Pact of Negation into a Force of Will. This turn, pact of negation, next turn, "pitch" trickbind or angel's grace (or stifle etc). If Force of Will was in the standard/extended, every blue deck would pack 4x of them, and an extremely similar feat can be accomplished with Pact of Negation.
Also, Pact of Negation, if nothing else, is such a strong tempo card. Why do people like remand? When you remand your opponent's spell, you are giving them a guaranteed card whereas the card that you draw from it is entirely random; it could just be a useless land. So why do nearly all control decks pack 4? Because stopping your opponent's plan while furthering yours by negating their spells with cheap ones of your own = tempo. Nobody really cares if you have to pay 5 for pact, just like nobody really cares if remanding your opponent's compulsive research only drew you an island. It's like winning a race and then accidentally bumping into a wall after you've crossed the finish line. The disadvantages don't matter if your opponent can't exploit them. And later in the game when control has enough mana, pact simply becomes a functional counterspell for 0 that I demonstrated above. It is just so amazing at every point in the game except for maybe turn 1. But what blue card is, really?
Plus, I've opened up about a caseload of cards already and caught I think only 1-2 pact of negations. This card is RARE, and for good reason.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Mind over muscle"
- Unknown
"Slow and steady wins the race"
- The Tortoise and the Hare
"A [deck] that is slightly slower and slightly more control-minded than the opposing deck has an edge.
Hard to tell right now, but I'm going with R_E and saying 15-20 bucks (permanent), possibly even more. C'mon guys, it's blue. It's a counter. It's a rare. It's absolutely free to play. The immediate effect and playability of the card is actually stronger than force of will; force of will you pitch another blue card and lose 1 life, with the very strong possibility that it could be countered. With this, you simply play it without any immediate mana or pitch costs, and get the very strong effect of countering a spell. If you're opponent absolutey must resolve something, and is forced to counter your negation pact, congratulations you just played a functional counterspell for 0 mana.
If wizards designed a card like this:
[CARDNAME]
0, Instant
Counter target spell
It would be absolutely broken beyond imagination. Beyond black lotus, beyond force of will, beyond anything in the history of magic. But that's exactly what this spell does. The 5 mana drawback has several flexible ways to deal with it. Firstly, control decks hit 5 mana at around turns 3-4; paying the cost actually isn't that much of a problem. Secondly, cards exist to turn Pact of Negation into a Force of Will. This turn, pact of negation, next turn, "pitch" trickbind or angel's grace (or stifle etc). If Force of Will was in the standard/extended, every blue deck would pack 4x of them, and an extremely similar feat can be accomplished with Pact of Negation.
Also, Pact of Negation, if nothing else, is such a strong tempo card. Why do people like remand? When you remand your opponent's spell, you are giving them a guaranteed card whereas the card that you draw from it is entirely random; it could just be a useless land. So why do nearly all control decks pack 4? Because stopping your opponent's plan while furthering yours by negating their spells with cheap ones of your own = tempo. Nobody really cares if you have to pay 5 for pact, just like nobody really cares if remanding your opponent's compulsive research only drew you an island. It's like winning a race and then accidentally bumping into a wall after you've crossed the finish line. The disadvantages don't matter if your opponent can't exploit them. And later in the game when control has enough mana, pact simply becomes a functional counterspell for 0 that I demonstrated above. It is just so amazing at every point in the game except for maybe turn 1. But what blue card is, really?
Plus, I've opened up about a caseload of cards already and caught I think only 1-2 pact of negations. This card is RARE, and for good reason.
Aside from the tempo argument, which I'd have to see to buy (not really directed at you, just my own thoughts), I actually agree with all of this.
This is the ultimate anti Remand
"I cast a spell!"
"Negation pact!"
"Remand!"
"Uh... I'll let that resolve... Negation pact again!"
I would remand my own spell in that situation, because remanding a negation pact is rediculous. Or I would just delay the negation pact because Delay > Remand
Either way, I'm going to say 9-11 because some people actually think it's good, but it's not.
I would say that it would settle down on 7-9 but will remain at 9-11 for quite some time. Its a "free" counter. people will go gaga for it the way they did for cursed scroll(which by the way still is going for 3-6 dollars, even if few people are playing it.).
Probably 11-13, simply because combo decks will love this card to bits, especially in vintage and legacy. I'm in the process to trying to get 4 of these, just because I'd like to have a playset to figure out how many is good for protecting the game-winning (or losing if it gets countered) combo. Dragonstorm might play this, but it will be at best second to remand (the extra card is more important).
And my argument is that cards that are in print or that were in print recently that are only great in vintage and legacy do not sell for a lot because those are niche markets which makes my trinisphere example all the more relevant
Oh yes,Black Lotus isnt legal in standard, it CANT go for much, right?...uh....
Vintage and Legacy players can afford to pay $20, so its really not a big deal...Many cards mostly good in vintage have become some of the most popular cards in new sets these days...Ravnica was so standard-based, its good to see more cards designed in this set for vintage/legacy...
Extarbags is right about everything, what a GOD!!!
Monkey, maybe you aren't paying attention, but whoever you quoted said cards that ARE IN PRINT OR THAT WERE IN PRINT RECENTLY. I don't recall them printing Black Lotus anytime recently. Also, Black Lotus would be great in every format were it legal, unlike his Trinisphere example (Good enough to be restricted in vintage, useless enough in every other format to be a $3 card because it was printed so recently).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Wizards could put $100 bills in packs and people would complain about how they were folded. http://www.twitter.com/Dr_Jeebus - Follow me on Twitter!
Check out www.mtgbrodeals.com for daily content from the brothers of Mu Tau Gamma!
Edit - To all who say this card "sux" how about expanding your vison beyond standard and block and see the big picture that this IS going to be played in T1 and T1.5 as well as many online formats. This should also see play in std in dragonstorm and soem other big turn kill you decks that I cant think of right now.
I love all the people on e-bay paying 40+ for playsets
Got me my 4 Oriss's for 4 bucks (Pre-re others want it at 6:1!)
Got me my 4 Graven Cairns for 13 bucks (Just want em for safety 3.50:1)
Got me my 4 Shimian Specters for 32 bucks. (8:1 - Nobody would trade em to me <12 (1 awesome guy put it at 10))
Paid 4 each for 3 Inferal Tutors at Pre-re.
I'm wondering if I should get 8 at this one site for 2 dollars each and 2.75/3 Grand Arbiters to make my playset .....
When a good has common but yet to be unknown value, the winners of the first set of auctions will almost always be overestimating its value. Based on the numbers I see on the poll, looks like a much more like 10-12$ range then 20+.
">Helping to Invent Thopter/Depths in Old Ext
Creator of the Magic Humor Videos:
The Vintage Metagame The Original
you dont need to play white! in fact, you could play this in a pure artifact deck. the point is you just need 1 card to protect your combo and go off and pact is it.
the upkeep part doesnt even matter. in standard, it might matter, but in vintage or legacy... the game is over and pact is there to stop any unexpecting surprises.
remember... you dont even need to play blue to play pact!!
specters are going to go down to $1 rare slot... so you over paid. this card will go up. remember you can play any pact in any deck.
Extended... I honestly don't know... TEPS???
Legacy... Soladarity sounds like a reasonable home.
Type 1... Dragon players suddenly love this card.
The only problem... is that its best use is in combo decks on the turn the deck goes off. Force of Will is an all-purpose counter that can be used in a far more reaching variety of decks. Of course, this new counter lessens the forced commitment to blue that force of will forces you to do.
This is a combo card. It is limited to combo decks in order to be used to maximum effictiveness, and only (90% of the time) to be used on the turn the combo player goes off. Until then, it is useless. It will not stop the opponent from ripping your combo to shreads before you can get the combo off, unlike Force of Will.
Don't get me wrong, this is a vintage card. It is clearly designed for vintage in mind (and the manacost that you will never pay... clearly a homage to force of will. But I can't see this card going for more than 5 bucks. Why? Remember... a lot of players aren't hardcore vintage players. A lot of players will see the lose the game drawback and cringe. Younger players just wont get what it is supposed to be used for. All of that will limit its price to 5 bucks. After all, if kids are trading them away because they think it sucks, then why in the heck would you go on E-Bay and buy one for $15. You wouldn't.
Just updating on some playtesting I've been doing. It's a good card, but it's difficult to sqeeze it into dragonstorm. D-storms pieces have to be redundant, and I'm finding it tricky to balance this counter into the mix. Even from the side, it can be a juggling act.
It's GOOD. REAL good.
Think of it this way...
It will be played in ALL heavy blue control decks in type 2. UBR tron, UR tron, UB tron, UG tron, etc, will all play it. ALL combos will play it.
In the early turns, you don't play this, because you have better stuff like remand and mana leak and delay for the early game. Come turn 5, you play this. Control decks should hit their first 6-7 land drops...if you have to play this on turn 5, it's not awesome, but you should have the mana turn 6 to play something, at least one counter or think twice, ESPECIALLY with signets. A control deck will have a counter in a case where it will be tapping out to play this guy.
Trust me, I can kill this horse and beat it all day until FS comes out and you see that it's good.
Take the argument over extirpate...a card whose value is more questioned than this. Looks like, after 3 months, that it's value is still...hang on...
9.80 on MOTL.
The defense rests, your honor.
In Type 2 combo, it could be used in TSPS. But Dragonstorm? Both Remand and Gigadrowse are both good against aggro and control. With Pact of Negation, it's near useless in the aggro match-up.
I'm finding that all the pacts I've tested so far (Slaughter and Negation) are good. And not just in combo. There's a natural rhythm to a game of Magic that these cards disrupt- they allow you to be proactive during your turn and reactive at the same time, playing threats AND having the capability to deal with them at the same time.
Just as an example, I hardcasted Teferi at my opponent's EOT with my 5 mana. He remanded it, I Negation Pact'd Remand. He played another remand on NP, didn't draw another solution, so I replayed the Pact, and my Teferi resolved, next upkeep I easily payed the 5 mana, and went on to win the game [[It occurs to me that he made an error, probably should have countered Teferi with the second Remand. In any case had he not had the second Remand this situation would have worked]]. Two things happened there that just don't normally happen - one, being able to play out my 5 mana creature with 5 lands out in control while simultaneously being able to protect it and two, being able to replay my counterspell because it costs nothing in net resources to do it, without losing cards (as FoW would have done). It's actually very good in control - obviously not until it comes online (ie you can pay for it), but it does make reactive decks have a bit of proaction to them.
As for Slaughter Pact, it worked quite similarly. Instead of losing tempo by either dealing with a threat or casting a threat, I was able to do both at the same time. Yes, I paid for it next turn, but I took two turns' worth of action in one turn. And the turn later I am able to drop a land and possibly still do other things.
I'm not saying these are the best cards ever but they do have uses beyond combo, as I thought they'd be rather limited. Honestly any deck that can afford the upkeep might want to think about at least testing these out.
(BTW, on the combo deck thing, while yes it's true that Dragonstorm might not want this because of space, why are people missing the possibility that there are plenty of other combo decks out there that aren't T1 right now because they roll over to disruption, and that this might be the missing piece of the puzzle?)
-E
Spread the word.
Based on the power of mana accel, I'd say the best standard deck for this right now (if we all agree that Dragonstorm doesn't have room; I'm not an expect on that subject so I'll go with it) is Scryb Force. You can cast your Spectral Force on turn 3 or 4 now without having to worry about if it will be Wrathed away since you already have the 5 mana (Assuming breeding pools and/or a bird were involved not all forests and elves) to pay for the pact. Can the Wrath the next turn? Not if you have another pact, but you probably just did 10 damage, assuming a Yavimaya Dryad was your turn 2 play.
Wizards could put $100 bills in packs and people would complain about how they were folded.
http://www.twitter.com/Dr_Jeebus - Follow me on Twitter!
Check out www.mtgbrodeals.com for daily content from the brothers of Mu Tau Gamma!
In this case the Pact only worked because your opponent made a glaring mistake.Had he Remanded your Teferi you would have spent your next turn paralyzed without mana and no Teferi,giving your opponent free reign.
Negation Pact is only good in desperate times,otherwise,I'd be more than happy to lose 1 spell to have you paralyzed for a turn.
I do appreciate your comment (I figured I'd just state that up front ). No its not a perfect situation, but that was the play I wanted to make and it was a play that ended up shutting my opponent down. The opponent's deck wasn't U/B control so I wasn't worried about wrath (was showing U/R lands).
It's a weird situation, to be sure. You have to weigh whether the tempo advantage that turn is worth hampering your next turn (when you'll presumably only get 1 land drop, 1 card draw, etc). But I guess my point is that no one so far had really brought up the question of whether the card is worth the tempo advantage you gain in the short term (plus the ability to bluff a counterspell while tapped out isn't too shabby either) vs. waiting and deploying your strategy later, when your opponent might be in an even better position to respond.
In the Slaughter Pact example, I had drawn into 2, and had a Ghost Council out. I was able to get rid of my opponent's blockers two at a time (I had enough mana to, on one turn, mortify my opponent's blocker and castigate him, then on their turn, slaughter pact their new guy, pay the upkeep for SP on my turn, drop a land and mortify the temporal isolation they played on the GC, THEN SP another threat they dropped after I was tapped out on their turn.) It technically put me behind on tempo but the fact that I had control of the board was worth it in that case. I dunno, like I said, I kinda want to hear other peoples' impressions with these in practical usage.
-E
Right, I agree, but I would have had to wait another 2 turns to deal with any potential counter spells without NP; with it I was able to push a couple of turns early to establish control of the board earlier than normal. The alternative would have been waiting until turn 6 or 7 to leave mana open for Remand rather than casting Teferi on turn 5, and by turn 7 a Remanded Remand is pretty pointless.
-E
Well as a fellow Pact of Negation tester, i must really say you should give the card a test-run before commenting on how awful it is for control. Granted, the card is not a 4-of, probably not even a 2-of considering we have Mystical Teachings, but it does allow you to play a proactive control game.
Play mistakes aside (which this card does lend itself to), you're basically trading resources and tempo with your opponent. During the mid-game, while you're at your most vulnerable playing this card, they still have to answer your win condition or play a bigger threat (which you could be prepared to answer), a requirement that usually counterbalances the Pact's tempo loss. In the meantime, you just robbed your opponent of considerable tempo, dealt with several answers, and you are in a position to basically dictate the game's pace.
I know it's difficult to grasp since you have to see it in action, but I do advise you to speak from your personal playtest experience with the card instead of theoretical analysis. The Pacts are quite different from anything we've seen so far and I'm not sure the standard tempo analysis applies to these cards...
So next time you want to make an avvy with Rosewater pissing on something, take a deep breath and consider pasting Forsythe's face there instead...
If wizards designed a card like this:
[CARDNAME]
0, Instant
Counter target spell
It would be absolutely broken beyond imagination. Beyond black lotus, beyond force of will, beyond anything in the history of magic. But that's exactly what this spell does. The 5 mana drawback has several flexible ways to deal with it. Firstly, control decks hit 5 mana at around turns 3-4; paying the cost actually isn't that much of a problem. Secondly, cards exist to turn Pact of Negation into a Force of Will. This turn, pact of negation, next turn, "pitch" trickbind or angel's grace (or stifle etc). If Force of Will was in the standard/extended, every blue deck would pack 4x of them, and an extremely similar feat can be accomplished with Pact of Negation.
Also, Pact of Negation, if nothing else, is such a strong tempo card. Why do people like remand? When you remand your opponent's spell, you are giving them a guaranteed card whereas the card that you draw from it is entirely random; it could just be a useless land. So why do nearly all control decks pack 4? Because stopping your opponent's plan while furthering yours by negating their spells with cheap ones of your own = tempo. Nobody really cares if you have to pay 5 for pact, just like nobody really cares if remanding your opponent's compulsive research only drew you an island. It's like winning a race and then accidentally bumping into a wall after you've crossed the finish line. The disadvantages don't matter if your opponent can't exploit them. And later in the game when control has enough mana, pact simply becomes a functional counterspell for 0 that I demonstrated above. It is just so amazing at every point in the game except for maybe turn 1. But what blue card is, really?
Plus, I've opened up about a caseload of cards already and caught I think only 1-2 pact of negations. This card is RARE, and for good reason.
- The Tortoise and the Hare
- Roel van Heeswijk
Control. Always. Wins.
Aside from the tempo argument, which I'd have to see to buy (not really directed at you, just my own thoughts), I actually agree with all of this.
-E
I would remand my own spell in that situation, because remanding a negation pact is rediculous. Or I would just delay the negation pact because Delay > Remand
Either way, I'm going to say 9-11 because some people actually think it's good, but it's not.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=35073
Proud Member of the MWS Haters Clan
燃える時計秘密めく花の香り
www.pokemoncrossroads.com
Oh yes,Black Lotus isnt legal in standard, it CANT go for much, right?...uh....
Vintage and Legacy players can afford to pay $20, so its really not a big deal...Many cards mostly good in vintage have become some of the most popular cards in new sets these days...Ravnica was so standard-based, its good to see more cards designed in this set for vintage/legacy...
Extarbags is right about everything, what a GOD!!!
:spam::spamlock::spam::spamlock::spam::spamlock:
<--never really understood this guy
Wizards could put $100 bills in packs and people would complain about how they were folded.
http://www.twitter.com/Dr_Jeebus - Follow me on Twitter!
Check out www.mtgbrodeals.com for daily content from the brothers of Mu Tau Gamma!