First, remember that Spellskite and Defense Grid are big nonbos. Sometimes I accidentally bring them up and I always try to go back and correct that. Don't play them; you'll regret it during a combo turn.
Against removal, I really think the best reactive answer is Silence. It stops even Abrupt Decay and oddballs like Sudden Shock. It also stops countermagic. All that for one mana and just 3-4 slots in the SB: sign me up. I suspect this card will be even better post-Push. The other option to beat removal is pack in threats: Mentor and Geist stand out here.
I don't want to dedicate specific cards for Eidolon, because Burn is unlikely to ever sustain 10%+ of the format. It generally hovers no higher than 6%-8% in all but the most warped or unstable formats. I really can't condone running anti-Eidolon tech based on that, unless I knew my local metagame was Burn infested. Because of that, I want to stick with the usual generic answers like Echoing Truth, Repeal, and Path to Exile. Those cards are relevant in other matchups while also helping against Burn, and if there's anything Modern has taught me it is sideboard efficiency, and these cards embody that approach. More specialized Burn answers include Angel's Grace, Kor Firewalker, and Timely Reinforcements.
silence is generally the best (i.e. least conditional) protection. *If* we really want to combo off T2, hope of ghirapur can free up mana on T2, but is overall less reliable. Otherwise noxious revival is also semi-reliable, but the fact that they untap and draw between casting their removal and you getting the card is a serious negative.
In terms of protection spells, there are half a dozen to choose from. Gods willing is generally the best one-mana protection. As mentioned above, Faith's shield is a situationally good choice vs burn as it can clutch against Eidolon. emerge unscathed is a relatively weak choice as the rebound is relatively useless, since they can just respond to the rebound trigger with removal, and because unblockability is relatively low-value in this deck. We don't really need to protect artifacts, so apostle's blessing is a relatively weak choice. brave the elements doesn't do much as we generally don't need to save more than one creature.
snapback is a more situational, but not necessarily bad, choice, but only if you also want offensive flexibility. More useful in a grindier build.
I think that as a sideboard slot spirit link is really not a terrible choice, particularly since sram works with auras. At worst it is a bad pacifism, but the upsides are incredible: attached to bastion inventor you can grind out many decks, and attaching it to an opponent's eidolon of the great revel can really turn the tide. Note spirit link is NOT lifelink, gains YOU the life, and stacks.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: is geist of saint traft really any good for this deck? At all? I just can't see it, it is too small of a body to trade profitably and CMC 3 is just not great.
Hey, I have recently played around with this deck and decided to get a bit more serious when Sram was spoiled. I wanted to ask about the general concensus on Paradoxical Outcome. Currently I play with 2 Outcomes and no Cantrips, hoping to either draw one engine card in my starting hand or playing a huge Outcome in my opponents EOT, trying to find one. Maybe I am too reckless after the boost in consistency offered by having 4 additional Puresteel Paladins, but I am not sure if this deck should be anything but greedy.
I side the Outcomes out for Monastery Mentor in creature-heavy matchups, but otherwise I thought they are still pretty good.
My analysis of Outcome is as follows:
A - 4 Mana is just a huge problem. I found I could cast it reliably with, and only with, lotus bloom or ritual shenanigans, but that diluted the deck and in any event, the bloom/rituals reduced the number of equipment I had in hand to bounce. Fun, but neither consistent nor reliable. Even if you do cast it, finding additional mana to then cast grapeshot or paladin is impossible. I found that it was much more viable with aetherflux reservoir, since you can outcome after reservoir, rather than the other way around, but the 4 mana on that too makes it clunky to say the least. And prone to artifact hate. reshape and whir of invention or the expertises *could* make this a better strategy, but it very much risks over-complicating the deck. Likewise, in a ritual-heavy version, empty the warrens becomes fantastic, since you need a minimal storm to win. But this is just not reliable, since it really only works if you have an optimal opening hand.
B - You don't really want to cast outcome quickly anyway, even if you can cheat it out. If you cast early, you're going to draw, say a max of 7 cards? Usually 3-4? That often isn't enough to win the game.
C - Dead mid-combo, so you don't want to draw it late either.
That said, there's really only one place for Outcome to do any work: if you combo and fizzle. If this is happening to you, outcome can be a viable way to recover a game. So my short answer is Outcome is viable as a one-or-max-two-of as a recovery tool in a deck with relatively high land count. While it could potentially be breakable, you'd have to warp your entire deck around the card, and I'm not sure that that is desirable.
I've been doing some refreshing in the old thread and I'm moving Sigil of Distinction back into my Cheeri0s pool to make the engines more threatening when I need to go fast.
I decided that three Grapeshot are too much and I'll have to live with the cornercase of two in a bad opener with Serum Powder. It only happened once in a couple hundred attempts but the one time hurt. This allows me to play a couple Nox, which are just great.
I've been doing some refreshing in the old thread and I'm moving Sigil of Distinction back into my Cheeri0s pool to make the engines more threatening when I need to go fast.
I also keep Saws and Sigils for exactly that reason. Some decks really struggle to beat a 5/11 vanilla creature!
My equipment list is:
4 Accorder's Shield
4 Paradise Mantle
3 Spidersilk Net
3 Sigil of Distinction
3-4 Bone Saw
1-2 Cathar's Shield
I'm still bouncing around between 19-20 equipment (18 felt low). I'm -1 on Spidersilk Net because Affinity isn't that big now and Infect just took a little hit with Probe. That might go +1 if the meta shifts.
Yea, I was super pumped about Cathar's Shield with Sigarda's Aid in the main, but maybe putting Bone Saw back in will let me keep a creature-free sideboard with nothing but answers. As it stands I was expecting to put 3-4 of something in the board.
My list is running so consistently and I'm loving not having to track Mentor/Myth triggers or do Gaveleer math. Speaking of Gavaleer, instead of him in sideboard I'm so tempted to go janky with something like Invigorated Rampage.
EDIT: In case it wasn't clear, I'm joking about IR. Gavaleer isn't instant speed, but becomes a removal target, goes big quickly, helps us go wider, etc...
We dont really need cantrips we should be running protection like sigardas aid or pact or negation instead.
@Dralin619 So beforehand you stated that protection is better than cantrips and now starting to test it? - maybe you should think about your sequencing...
Again, this notion of protection before dig doesn't make mathematical or gameplay sense. Protection increases variance by filling slots with cards that are neither engines, fuel, nor dig spells for engines/fuel. This increases the number of bad draws and bad mulligans at all points of the game. It also forces our deck to depend on more combo interactions. Pact and Aid are only good if you already have an engine out. So now instead of only banking on the N% chance of drawing an engine, we now have a bunch of cards in that deck that only function with that engine out AND don't actually win the game.
I 100% hear the argument that cantrips aren't necessarily the best dig option, even if I will argue that they are better than Muddle, RE, TS, etc. But I strongly disagree with the idea that we should include protection before filling out the dig suite. No other combo deck does this in the history of successful Magic combo decks, particularly in Legacy and Modern.
We dont really need cantrips we should be running protection like sigardas aid or pact or negation instead.
@Dralin619 So beforehand you stated that protection is better than cantrips and now starting to test it? - maybe you should think about your sequencing...
Ever heard the expression: "You'll catch more flies with honey than vinegar"?
@Dralin is responding to feedback/guidance and giving cantrips a shot. As a valued member of the forum, this behavior should be encouraged. I for one am keen to hear his results and conclusions as he is clearly committed to winning and investing a lot of energy in brewing and testing that can benefit all of us. -Cheers!
@Dralin619 So beforehand you stated that protection is better than cantrips and now starting to test it? - maybe you should think about your sequencing...
That is still my opinion. I am currently trying to see if i can find a balance between the optimal protection mainboard and some card draw or cantrips to find paladins. Im still running protection mainboard though i'm testing between serum visions and RE.
A balance between the two is totally fine. I'm also curious to hear what balance you decide on. I just wouldn't want you to spend valuable time and energy testing a deck with no dig spells and exclusively protection in the dig slots. The chance of that actually working in real events is so low that I don't think it's a good way to spend your tests. In an ideal world, we'd have infinite time to test every permutation of the deck. But because we don't have that, we need to make smart testing choices, and testing all protection and no dig is not a smart choice.
That said, I 100% believe there's a balance between dig and protection which works in the maindeck. I'd be very interested in seeing what that balance is and what cards are good in those slots.
On the 17th of February there will be two modern Grand Prix where the deck could have it´s break out. If so, i hope it doesn't escalate too much because in the B&R-announcement they said that 5 weeks after the tour there will be another.
Darn, I just realised I will be travelling at the time of the GP so I can't take this deck for a spin; I would've loved to run this at the Brissie GP. Alas, no more modern GPS in AU for the rest of the year...
Agreed. That's what I'm currently working on.... I've also opted for 2 repeal in the main. Without them I've found that the deck can stall if comboing on turn two.
If you're still trialing with serum powder, how many noxious revivals do you have?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cheeri0s is the breakfast of championsWRU Everyone loves an angry mobRWG Why so Bloo?RU
Yeah that was one of the ideas but it's too good so 4 may be the way to go. I'm just trying between the 2 alot ATM.
Also for those who are running/ were running cavern of souls how awkward was the mana base? I'm thinking of adding some number in but I'm curious to see how it worked out for others.
I don't run Caverns maindeck anymore. For one, there isn't nearly enough maindeck countermagic in top-tier Modern to justfiy it. Two, if you're running Aid or cantrips, Cavern can really mess up your hand and force a mulligan on an otherwise playable grip. If we had lots of countermagic to beat in G1, I would reconsider this position, but because we don't, the benefits of Cavern don't remotely outweigh the costs.
Green is probably unnecessary but the argument for adding black to go Esper would be to slow down the deck and make it more control-y rather than super explosive by adding stuff like hand disruption, Push, and creatures like the boltproof scrying aetherborn. Since it's in-color, it's also possible to supplement Sram+Paladin with Riddlesmith for a third draw effect, and compensate the discard with Ovalchase Daredevil...
I don't think anybody's ever given this build serious consideration, however. It's possible but I'm not sure if it would be better or just different. Some testing would be required.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vorthos-y Johnny. All will be One
Modern - Cheeri0s (building), Belcher (building), Lantern (building), UW Control (building)
RIP Magic Duels. Wizards will regret what they did to you.
Agreed. That's what I'm currently working on.... I've also opted for 2 repeal in the main. Without them I've found that the deck can stall if comboing on turn two.
If you're still trialing with serum powder, how many noxious revivals do you have?
The last list I posted is still what I'm running, so two 2 Nox. The list is a very dangerous weapon, however the Burn matchup is horrific. I exile hands with Powder fearlessly now, and find I'm casting Serum Visions mid-combo T3-4 opportunistically to help insure I keep going off. My local meta is going to be heavy on removal and black hand disruption because everyone sees me coming, and I don't care.
Yeah that was one of the ideas but it's too good so 4 may be the way to go. I'm just trying between the 2 alot ATM.
Also for those who are running/ were running cavern of souls how awkward was the mana base? I'm thinking of adding some number in but I'm curious to see how it worked out for others.
I don't run Caverns maindeck anymore. For one, there isn't nearly enough maindeck countermagic in top-tier Modern to justfiy it. Two, if you're running Aid or cantrips, Cavern can really mess up your hand and force a mulligan on an otherwise playable grip. If we had lots of countermagic to beat in G1, I would reconsider this position, but because we don't, the benefits of Cavern don't remotely outweigh the costs.
I said I was going to remove Cavern but haven't yet. It hasn't been that much of a problem for me, and I won't have room in the board for it.
I think this deck now has great potential for taking over Modern and/or forcing a shift in the meta. It's way too consistent. It feels like twin in that, you can pass with two lands up and if the opponent taps out they just lose.
I would like to find room for the fourth Serum Visions, but that will have to wait until I put more games in with the deck. The Swan Song main works similar to how a lot of twin lists ran Dispel, except it catches more things. Dispel was good in twin because games could go long or grindy. Cheeri0s won't have grindy games where you gain advantage via cards, so giving them a swan is acceptable. Spell Pierce is not good enough, as being on the draw means they will be able to pay for bolt, path, push on your turn 3.
Defense Grid is a clever answer to any removal or countermagic, forcing them to be worthless until turn 4. Leyline of Sanctity is necessary for decks with early hand disruption. The other slots are flex for the time being. Wear // Tear hits red Eidolon, Stony Silence, opposing Leylines and Chalice of the Void. Void Snare is the most efficient answer to any of the previously mentioned cards.
I don't think this deck is very fair, especially when taking it to a tournament where most competitors won't know what you are doing until they tap out t3, and then they're dead.
The deck has to be at least 3 colours. Blue for retract and cantrips if there used. White for the paladins and red for grapeshot. The mana from grapeshot normally comes off mox opals. I'm not sure how we would benefit from black or blue. With black we have hand disruption and green possibly assualt formation as a different win con but we don't really need either as goblin gaveleer and mass hysteria is good enough as a different win con.
Green is probably unnecessary but the argument for adding black to go Esper would be to slow down the deck and make it more control-y rather than super explosive by adding stuff like hand disruption, Push, and creatures like the boltproof scrying aetherborn. Since it's in-color, it's also possible to supplement Sram+Paladin with Riddlesmith for a third draw effect, and compensate the discard with Ovalchase Daredevil...
I don't think anybody's ever given this build serious consideration, however. It's possible but I'm not sure if it would be better or just different. Some testing would be required.
While the conclusion that the deck is WU is ultimately correct, I feel these posts don't justify the testing that's gone on in the past, or the considerations for each colour splash. Here's a detailed analysis of the colour issues:
Prelim: our primary concern with splashing colours is the number of lands in the deck. The core engine needs only two lands to go off, and consumes both lands to cast puresteel paladin. Since it is a very safe assumption that you're comboing the same turn paladin hits the board, you're realistically only going to have 1 spare mana up at any given time (the land on T1). Sometimes you will have an extra land on T3, but not always. The mana gained through mox opal is unreliable, but also typically needs to be held up midcombo (i.e. to cast retract). This means most of the analysis for a colour splash depends on what 1-cost cards are in that colour which support the combo, or what 3-cost plan B cards in that colour.
1: White: obvious; Puresteel Paladin costs WW. This means that white is essential to all builds. With fetches, we can reliably go tri-colour, with two Wx shocklands. Quad-colour can raise the question of whether to use fetches or rather rainbow lands like mana confluence, etc. The new spire of industry adds to that option.
2: Blue: retract costs blue, so we want blue. It isn't safe to assume that retract will always be cast off a mox- often you can only dig a couple cards deep before needing to fire off retract, so you may not have drawn a mox yet. Adding blue lands therefore adds to the consistency of the deck. Add to this that blue has cantrips, which, while not the best tutors around, are the easiest to slot in, and the case for blue is strong. Blue also has some backup plans by offering protection and (historically) riddlesmith. Because of this, blue can tend to crowd out the other colours. That doesn't mean the deck has to be built blue however, and significant consideration has been put into the other three colours, discussed below. The general consensus is that blue is superior, predominantly because the tutor effects in those colours are not strong enough to warrant diverging from blue.
3: Red: grapeshot costs red, however, grapeshot is typically cast off mox opal, so that's not the main reason red can be splashed. Instead, the main reason is that red has the best "plan B"s - i.e. alternate wincons outside of white. Examples are in the primer, but include ghirapur aether grid, goblin gaveleer, Jeskai ascendancy, the list is long. So overall, red is a very flexible colour choice that fits in with many different builds. However, red is the worst colour for tutoring out paladin, and doesn't protect paladin. As such, red considerations are typically about putting in alternative threats, rather than supporting the main plan. With Sram, the main plan got much more consistent, which is why you've seen the degree of red splash reduce in most people's lists.
4: Green: The main reason people don't run green is that a 4-colour build can't be reliably sustained on fetches and shocks. This colour cost is seen to outweigh the additional benefits green can bring. Specifically, green has the best 1-drop creature dig, in commune with nature. Other green options are of a similar ilk (e.g. oath of nissa), but the marginal benefit compared to, say serum visions is not huge, so rather than risking the extra colour, most people choose not to splash green. Also, green does not give us a sound "plan B". If it did, I feel that a green splash would be more than justified. By way of example, cards like managorger hydra are inferior to monastery mentor. Green's protection cards are also not superior to white's protection cards. Overall, green isn't a bad colour, but doesn't do much the other colours do. Assault formation is bad in this deck since we can't get creatures to stick, so it just does nothing most of the time. Unlike red's Plan B, which fit in naturally, this requires a build-around, which means a substantial departure from the combo. Green also has some midrange options, like congragation at dawn, but that's considered too slow.
5: Black. Black contains spoils of the vault, so was considered extensively. However, it's generally accepted that the risk of just randomly loosing a game isn't worth it. Other than that, black doesn't have protection and doesn't really dig. In terms of the Plan B's that are possible with black, there are some (painsmith, glaze fiend) but they are typically outclassed by red, or require an extensive build-around. ovalchase daredevil was experimented with a number of players, but that doesn't count as a black splash since we never cast it. Midrange options are relatively good in black, with the new fatal push and battle at the bridge helping us out, but that begs the question- why are we trying to prolong the game? That's not to say this option can't be good, but it requires dedicated deckbuilding.
6:multi-colour: I once dabbled with signal the clans I think most people agree that its not worth the two extra colours, but just thought I'd put it out there, as the only reliable 2-cost tutor.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Against removal, I really think the best reactive answer is Silence. It stops even Abrupt Decay and oddballs like Sudden Shock. It also stops countermagic. All that for one mana and just 3-4 slots in the SB: sign me up. I suspect this card will be even better post-Push. The other option to beat removal is pack in threats: Mentor and Geist stand out here.
I don't want to dedicate specific cards for Eidolon, because Burn is unlikely to ever sustain 10%+ of the format. It generally hovers no higher than 6%-8% in all but the most warped or unstable formats. I really can't condone running anti-Eidolon tech based on that, unless I knew my local metagame was Burn infested. Because of that, I want to stick with the usual generic answers like Echoing Truth, Repeal, and Path to Exile. Those cards are relevant in other matchups while also helping against Burn, and if there's anything Modern has taught me it is sideboard efficiency, and these cards embody that approach. More specialized Burn answers include Angel's Grace, Kor Firewalker, and Timely Reinforcements.
In terms of protection spells, there are half a dozen to choose from. Gods willing is generally the best one-mana protection. As mentioned above, Faith's shield is a situationally good choice vs burn as it can clutch against Eidolon. emerge unscathed is a relatively weak choice as the rebound is relatively useless, since they can just respond to the rebound trigger with removal, and because unblockability is relatively low-value in this deck. We don't really need to protect artifacts, so apostle's blessing is a relatively weak choice. brave the elements doesn't do much as we generally don't need to save more than one creature.
snapback is a more situational, but not necessarily bad, choice, but only if you also want offensive flexibility. More useful in a grindier build.
I think that as a sideboard slot spirit link is really not a terrible choice, particularly since sram works with auras. At worst it is a bad pacifism, but the upsides are incredible: attached to bastion inventor you can grind out many decks, and attaching it to an opponent's eidolon of the great revel can really turn the tide. Note spirit link is NOT lifelink, gains YOU the life, and stacks.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: is geist of saint traft really any good for this deck? At all? I just can't see it, it is too small of a body to trade profitably and CMC 3 is just not great.
My analysis of Outcome is as follows:
A - 4 Mana is just a huge problem. I found I could cast it reliably with, and only with, lotus bloom or ritual shenanigans, but that diluted the deck and in any event, the bloom/rituals reduced the number of equipment I had in hand to bounce. Fun, but neither consistent nor reliable. Even if you do cast it, finding additional mana to then cast grapeshot or paladin is impossible. I found that it was much more viable with aetherflux reservoir, since you can outcome after reservoir, rather than the other way around, but the 4 mana on that too makes it clunky to say the least. And prone to artifact hate. reshape and whir of invention or the expertises *could* make this a better strategy, but it very much risks over-complicating the deck. Likewise, in a ritual-heavy version, empty the warrens becomes fantastic, since you need a minimal storm to win. But this is just not reliable, since it really only works if you have an optimal opening hand.
B - You don't really want to cast outcome quickly anyway, even if you can cheat it out. If you cast early, you're going to draw, say a max of 7 cards? Usually 3-4? That often isn't enough to win the game.
C - Dead mid-combo, so you don't want to draw it late either.
That said, there's really only one place for Outcome to do any work: if you combo and fizzle. If this is happening to you, outcome can be a viable way to recover a game. So my short answer is Outcome is viable as a one-or-max-two-of as a recovery tool in a deck with relatively high land count. While it could potentially be breakable, you'd have to warp your entire deck around the card, and I'm not sure that that is desirable.
Creatures: 8
4 Puresteel Paladin
4 Sram, Senior Edificer
Spells: 38
4 Mox Opal
4 Paradise Mantle
3 Spidersilk Net
4 Accorder's Shield
4 Cathar's Shield
3 Sigil of Distinction
4 Retract
2 Grapeshot
1 Muddle the Mixture
2 Noxious Revival
3 Serum Visions
4 Serum Powder
4 Flooded Strand
4 Cavern of Souls
3 Hallowed Fountain
2 Plains
1 Island
4 Echoing Truth
3 Sigarda's Aid
4 Repeal
4 Silence
I decided that three Grapeshot are too much and I'll have to live with the cornercase of two in a bad opener with Serum Powder. It only happened once in a couple hundred attempts but the one time hurt. This allows me to play a couple Nox, which are just great.
I also keep Saws and Sigils for exactly that reason. Some decks really struggle to beat a 5/11 vanilla creature!
My equipment list is:
4 Accorder's Shield
4 Paradise Mantle
3 Spidersilk Net
3 Sigil of Distinction
3-4 Bone Saw
1-2 Cathar's Shield
I'm still bouncing around between 19-20 equipment (18 felt low). I'm -1 on Spidersilk Net because Affinity isn't that big now and Infect just took a little hit with Probe. That might go +1 if the meta shifts.
My list is running so consistently and I'm loving not having to track Mentor/Myth triggers or do Gaveleer math. Speaking of Gavaleer, instead of him in sideboard I'm so tempted to go janky with something like Invigorated Rampage.
EDIT: In case it wasn't clear, I'm joking about IR. Gavaleer isn't instant speed, but becomes a removal target, goes big quickly, helps us go wider, etc...
Again, this notion of protection before dig doesn't make mathematical or gameplay sense. Protection increases variance by filling slots with cards that are neither engines, fuel, nor dig spells for engines/fuel. This increases the number of bad draws and bad mulligans at all points of the game. It also forces our deck to depend on more combo interactions. Pact and Aid are only good if you already have an engine out. So now instead of only banking on the N% chance of drawing an engine, we now have a bunch of cards in that deck that only function with that engine out AND don't actually win the game.
I 100% hear the argument that cantrips aren't necessarily the best dig option, even if I will argue that they are better than Muddle, RE, TS, etc. But I strongly disagree with the idea that we should include protection before filling out the dig suite. No other combo deck does this in the history of successful Magic combo decks, particularly in Legacy and Modern.
@Dralin is responding to feedback/guidance and giving cantrips a shot. As a valued member of the forum, this behavior should be encouraged. I for one am keen to hear his results and conclusions as he is clearly committed to winning and investing a lot of energy in brewing and testing that can benefit all of us. -Cheers!
A balance between the two is totally fine. I'm also curious to hear what balance you decide on. I just wouldn't want you to spend valuable time and energy testing a deck with no dig spells and exclusively protection in the dig slots. The chance of that actually working in real events is so low that I don't think it's a good way to spend your tests. In an ideal world, we'd have infinite time to test every permutation of the deck. But because we don't have that, we need to make smart testing choices, and testing all protection and no dig is not a smart choice.
That said, I 100% believe there's a balance between dig and protection which works in the maindeck. I'd be very interested in seeing what that balance is and what cards are good in those slots.
Darn, I just realised I will be travelling at the time of the GP so I can't take this deck for a spin; I would've loved to run this at the Brissie GP. Alas, no more modern GPS in AU for the rest of the year...
If you're still trialing with serum powder, how many noxious revivals do you have?
Everyone loves an angry mob RWG
Why so Bloo? RU
I don't run Caverns maindeck anymore. For one, there isn't nearly enough maindeck countermagic in top-tier Modern to justfiy it. Two, if you're running Aid or cantrips, Cavern can really mess up your hand and force a mulligan on an otherwise playable grip. If we had lots of countermagic to beat in G1, I would reconsider this position, but because we don't, the benefits of Cavern don't remotely outweigh the costs.
>Paladins are bought out on TCG player;
IT'S HAPPENING.
Also the deck stays blue white, I assume? What's the thoughts on running other colors, or is blue an absolute must have?
RWGisela, Blade of Explosions
I don't think anybody's ever given this build serious consideration, however. It's possible but I'm not sure if it would be better or just different. Some testing would be required.
Modern - Cheeri0s (building), Belcher (building), Lantern (building), UW Control (building)
RIP Magic Duels. Wizards will regret what they did to you.
I said I was going to remove Cavern but haven't yet. It hasn't been that much of a problem for me, and I won't have room in the board for it.
It's happening all right!!
EDIT: I'm seeing plenty of Puresteel there. Was it really bought out earlier??
Here's what I'm currently testing.
4 Puresteel Paladin
4 Retract
3 Serum Visions
2 Swan Song
2 Grapeshot
1 Noxious Revival
4 Mox Opal
4 Accorder's Shield
4 Cathar's Shield
4 Spidersilk Net
4 Paradise Mantle
3 Bone Saw
2 Sigil of Distinction
4 Adarkar Wastes
4 Gemstone Mine
3 Plains
4 Leyline of Sanctity
4 Defense Grid
3 Wear // Tear
2 Void Snare
2 Swan Song
I would like to find room for the fourth Serum Visions, but that will have to wait until I put more games in with the deck. The Swan Song main works similar to how a lot of twin lists ran Dispel, except it catches more things. Dispel was good in twin because games could go long or grindy. Cheeri0s won't have grindy games where you gain advantage via cards, so giving them a swan is acceptable. Spell Pierce is not good enough, as being on the draw means they will be able to pay for bolt, path, push on your turn 3.
Defense Grid is a clever answer to any removal or countermagic, forcing them to be worthless until turn 4. Leyline of Sanctity is necessary for decks with early hand disruption. The other slots are flex for the time being. Wear // Tear hits red Eidolon, Stony Silence, opposing Leylines and Chalice of the Void. Void Snare is the most efficient answer to any of the previously mentioned cards.
I don't think this deck is very fair, especially when taking it to a tournament where most competitors won't know what you are doing until they tap out t3, and then they're dead.
Prelim: our primary concern with splashing colours is the number of lands in the deck. The core engine needs only two lands to go off, and consumes both lands to cast puresteel paladin. Since it is a very safe assumption that you're comboing the same turn paladin hits the board, you're realistically only going to have 1 spare mana up at any given time (the land on T1). Sometimes you will have an extra land on T3, but not always. The mana gained through mox opal is unreliable, but also typically needs to be held up midcombo (i.e. to cast retract). This means most of the analysis for a colour splash depends on what 1-cost cards are in that colour which support the combo, or what 3-cost plan B cards in that colour.
1: White: obvious; Puresteel Paladin costs WW. This means that white is essential to all builds. With fetches, we can reliably go tri-colour, with two Wx shocklands. Quad-colour can raise the question of whether to use fetches or rather rainbow lands like mana confluence, etc. The new spire of industry adds to that option.
2: Blue: retract costs blue, so we want blue. It isn't safe to assume that retract will always be cast off a mox- often you can only dig a couple cards deep before needing to fire off retract, so you may not have drawn a mox yet. Adding blue lands therefore adds to the consistency of the deck. Add to this that blue has cantrips, which, while not the best tutors around, are the easiest to slot in, and the case for blue is strong. Blue also has some backup plans by offering protection and (historically) riddlesmith. Because of this, blue can tend to crowd out the other colours. That doesn't mean the deck has to be built blue however, and significant consideration has been put into the other three colours, discussed below. The general consensus is that blue is superior, predominantly because the tutor effects in those colours are not strong enough to warrant diverging from blue.
3: Red: grapeshot costs red, however, grapeshot is typically cast off mox opal, so that's not the main reason red can be splashed. Instead, the main reason is that red has the best "plan B"s - i.e. alternate wincons outside of white. Examples are in the primer, but include ghirapur aether grid, goblin gaveleer, Jeskai ascendancy, the list is long. So overall, red is a very flexible colour choice that fits in with many different builds. However, red is the worst colour for tutoring out paladin, and doesn't protect paladin. As such, red considerations are typically about putting in alternative threats, rather than supporting the main plan. With Sram, the main plan got much more consistent, which is why you've seen the degree of red splash reduce in most people's lists.
4: Green: The main reason people don't run green is that a 4-colour build can't be reliably sustained on fetches and shocks. This colour cost is seen to outweigh the additional benefits green can bring. Specifically, green has the best 1-drop creature dig, in commune with nature. Other green options are of a similar ilk (e.g. oath of nissa), but the marginal benefit compared to, say serum visions is not huge, so rather than risking the extra colour, most people choose not to splash green. Also, green does not give us a sound "plan B". If it did, I feel that a green splash would be more than justified. By way of example, cards like managorger hydra are inferior to monastery mentor. Green's protection cards are also not superior to white's protection cards. Overall, green isn't a bad colour, but doesn't do much the other colours do. Assault formation is bad in this deck since we can't get creatures to stick, so it just does nothing most of the time. Unlike red's Plan B, which fit in naturally, this requires a build-around, which means a substantial departure from the combo. Green also has some midrange options, like congragation at dawn, but that's considered too slow.
5: Black. Black contains spoils of the vault, so was considered extensively. However, it's generally accepted that the risk of just randomly loosing a game isn't worth it. Other than that, black doesn't have protection and doesn't really dig. In terms of the Plan B's that are possible with black, there are some (painsmith, glaze fiend) but they are typically outclassed by red, or require an extensive build-around. ovalchase daredevil was experimented with a number of players, but that doesn't count as a black splash since we never cast it. Midrange options are relatively good in black, with the new fatal push and battle at the bridge helping us out, but that begs the question- why are we trying to prolong the game? That's not to say this option can't be good, but it requires dedicated deckbuilding.
6:multi-colour: I once dabbled with signal the clans I think most people agree that its not worth the two extra colours, but just thought I'd put it out there, as the only reliable 2-cost tutor.