What's the idea behind revival? I suppose it's solid flex for either digging something out of our yard, or putting a dead card on the top of the other persons deck if necessary?
I guess I just don't see how that's better than Grid.
I'm still playing probes, but I might take them out soon, I've noticed they've been coming out on the draw a bunch regardless.
It isn't that revival is better 1 for 1 over grid. It just fits into the deck better. At most we can only run 2 grids and we can't search it with stirrings, so more often than not we see it either when it's too late or when we have already won. Noxious is almost always good, becoming the best card in your graveyard or the worst in your opponent's.
I'm sure this has been brought up already, but what are people's opinions on Forbidden Orchard, especially in lists that run Aether Grid? Seems to fit all the criteria we're looking for in a land, with a drawback that gets shut off if we have Bridge, Grid, or Droplets in play.
With Orchard I imagine the amount of games you lose because it puts more damage on the board (especially early on) is far higher than the amount of games you win because it's flexible mana.
Here is a game 1 mirror (just game 1, sadly I was playing at work, not enough time for a full match with the boss wandering around the office lol). As always, watch in HD for quality: https://youtu.be/64TnH7fOc-8
The interesting thing why I'm uploading it, my 1of Pyxis of Pandemonium & 1of Duskmantle, House of Shadow won the game as I had expected. In the mirror and against people bringing in Needles or even Surgical Extraction, having different millers is key.
Turn 1 I got confused, he put a Lantern on field and I revealed my top card but he was actually revealing Lantern from Ancient Stirrings (Guess this issue doesn't come up in MTGO lol). After that mistake the game went on smoothly.
The one bizarre thing: I fired off Stirrings 6 times trying to hit a Needle and failed every single time. True story, lol. Game could have been mine much sooner had I hit that Needle because he had Bell Needled and I wanted to Needle Codex since those were his only 2 millers and I had Duskmantle on field early and had Pyxis somewhere in the library.
EDIT: Sorry for not readjusting the graevyard windows, I was doing it in a hurry in the office.
In game 2, when Rob had a Noble Hierarch in play, would you guys have used Pyroclasm earlier even without knowing his hand? Or tried to use it for more value as Orson did? Love to hear your guys thoughts, thanks!
In game 2, when Rob had a Noble Hierarch in play, would you guys have used Pyroclasm earlier even without knowing his hand? Or tried to use it for more value as Orson did? Love to hear your guys thoughts, thanks!
I would have held on Pyroclasm until a tap out. When you used Might on Heirarch and kept 2 lands untapped, I might have used Decay right there. It meant either Heirarch died or you would tap out to save it, and I would have Pyroclasmed next turn.
He definitely should have used it when you tapped out for Become Immense and Vastwoods. It was a given that you had no more Heirarchs or Spellskite, so even if you had an infect creature he was still at 0 counters as opposed to 1 life against Heirarch or Spellskite. Chances of you also not having another pump spell were good so any infect creature you might have been holding was essentially a 10 turn clock, enough time to find Bridge with 3 mill rocks out.
One problem I see with him is that he is not efficiently using the mill rocks to dig through his library. In game 1, the turn he died, he drew Decay when he should have known it was a dead card. Instead he should have used Bell at your EOT, then use both mill rocks at his upkeep to see if he hit a Bridge, his second Spellbomb or an Ancient Stirrings to go deeper for those.
Edit: Who made your post? That last paragraph is confusing. "when Rob had a Noble Hierarch in play," & "Or tried to use it for more value as Orson did?" makes it seem we are talking to a third person.
Edit 2: Thinking more about it, maybe you could have had a 2 Heirarch in hand after all. You knew about Pyroclasm in his hand, so you might have held on to a second copy.
just got a chance to play with the gifts ungiven list that he created and i think this deck could cause us problems for obvious reasons. i won a mini with it today and i have to say it's pretty powerful.
let me know what ideas u guys have about dealing with it, especially you @shadowgripper.
btw added the third welding jar, definitely improves the BGx match up. thx for the advice.
Lol, sorry about the way its written zerodown. Both Orson and Rob control this account and we both agreed that we'd write things in such a manner that it never was just one of us... I can see how that'd get confusing.
just got a chance to play with the gifts ungiven list that he created and i think this deck could cause us problems for obvious reasons. i won a mini with it today and i have to say it's pretty powerful.
let me know what ideas u guys have about dealing with it, especially you @shadowgripper.
btw added the third welding jar, definitely improves the BGx match up. thx for the advice.
What are you specifically worried about from the deck?
the deck doesnt worry about what is on top of the library because it can cast anything with 5 cmc or lower with bring to light. i've played against gift decks in the past and they can be tough to handle in that they circumnavigate our strategy through tutors. idk though the deck can produce very janky hands and with the right amount of hand disruption we can probably still lock them them out. the life from the loam/ghost quarter package could cause us problems though.
I would have to play against the deck to get a better idea on how that would play out. But generally Gift lists aren't that problematic for me, though this is another case where 4 Thoughtseize main plays well for me as both Gift and Bring to Light are above 3cmc for IoK.
The argument against Thoughtseize is mainly due to the life loss regarding mostly the burn matchup, which even without Thoughtseize we've come to accept its almost unwinnable game 1. We're better prepared for aggro with enough removal and Bridge to handle the life loss, so generally the argument is just for the burn matchup. I can understand this argument, but personally I am willing to risk some life loss in an already bad matchup than risk having my discard spells fizzle in a lot more other matchups where I am favorable and could end up losing because I couldn't target a certain spell.
Have you guys ever tested playing 4 Thoughtseize for a while? Or have you always played a split of IoK/Duress and maybe 1 or 2 TS based on the life loss argument?
i run 2 thoughtseize 1 duress 3 inquisition, that way i still have three that can hit big mana cards, only to that deal damage, and 5 that can get creatures.
i run 2 thoughtseize 1 duress 3 inquisition, that way i still have three that can hit big mana cards, only to that deal damage, and 5 that can get creatures.
4 TS & 2 IoK = (4) That hit big mana and (6) that hit creatures.
4 TS, 1 IoK & 1 Duress = (5) For big mana and (5) for creatures.
I rather take the extra damage risk vs burn in favor of a wider range of targets for my discard suit in every other matchup.
For Company the first one is revealed and the other 5 are not. For Serum, it's the first one after the draw and the second one is not. Don't know how it works on MTGO though.
Hello guys, one question here
If Lantern is on the battlefield, which cards such as Serum visions or Collected company reveal?
In the finals I think I can hear shadowgripoer saying "first one is revealed, second one is not", but on Magic online I'm pretty sure none is revealed.
Thank you very much
Lantern reveals the TOP card of the deck at all times. Serum visions reads "Draw a card (aka, draw the top card of the deck), then scry 2." To scry, you look at the top 2 cards of your deck. Well, if you are looking at the top 2 cards, one of them IS the top card of the deck, so that has to be revealed.
The same is true with CoCo. Look at the TOP 6 cards of the deck. Youre looking at cards on top of the deck. And we know only the top card of the deck is always revealed.
If the top card of your library changes while you're casting a spell or activating an ability, the new top card won't be revealed until you finish casting that spell or activating that ability.
This means that you don't get to see the card underneath the card just drawn with Serum Visions until after it has fully resolved (i.e. after the Scry).
If the top card of your library changes while you're casting a spell or activating an ability, the new top card won't be revealed until you finish casting that spell or activating that ability.
This means that you don't get to see the card underneath the card just drawn with Serum Visions until after it has fully resolved (i.e. after the Scry).
Actually, that rule applies to the scrying, not to the revelation of the card in between drawing and scrying. (read edit 2) After you draw a card from Serum Visions, you reveal the next card immediately, then you scry and WHILE you are scrying you don't reveal the card on top of the library while you are scrying (looking at 2 cards in your hand.).
You have to read the third rule on Gatherer to understand.
4/15/2013 When playing with the top card of your library revealed, if an effect tells you to draw several cards, reveal each one before you draw it.
That means you reveal each card on top after every draw, regardless of if the spell has not finished resolving. So you would draw from Serum Visions, and immediately reveal the next card before scrying. This is why you can see one of the two cards being scried.
If a judge happens to read this and confirm, that would be nice.
Edit: You are a judge? Now I really need a confirmation on this.
Edit 2: I think that rule you quoted doesn't even apply to the scrying. Its applies when you CAST a spell or ACTIVATE an ability and due to some other effect from another spell or ability, the top card changes. I think this applies to situations like:
Player taps codex shredder (to mill card #1 from opponent's library). Opponent cracks a fetchland in response, searchs for a land, shuffles library and now, the new card on top won't be revealed until Codex Shredder finishes its effect, milling it blindly.
I went and checked - I believe you're right. Please disregard my previous post, I was just trying to offer some insight in this question - turns out I wasn't correct.
edit: Giving a longer answer. I'm *very* interested in the deck (I went ahead and bought the deck on paper) and want to know its ins and outs - and part of that is knowing the correct rulings. I checked Gatherer's rulings and, to the best of my rules knowledge, they seemed to indicate that the answer I gave above was correct, but after thinking a bit longer and checking with other judges I now realize that the ruling does not contradict at all the answer that Zac gave above. My bad. Please get back to the deck development, I'll go back to lurking
Turn 2: Opponent plays Ghost Quarter and nukes my Ruins. I fetch for the 1x Forest. EoT, I tap the Forest and play Noxious Revival, putting Ruins back on top. Replay Ruins, play Lantern of Insight, baiting him to use Explosives. By the time he does, I have two Bridges in play and Mox is still online, so I easily bring back Lantern and Shredder with Ruins, according to plan.
Kill my Academy Ruins because it brings back stuff? That's fine, I have Revival to bring back the card that brings back stuff.
It isn't that revival is better 1 for 1 over grid. It just fits into the deck better. At most we can only run 2 grids and we can't search it with stirrings, so more often than not we see it either when it's too late or when we have already won. Noxious is almost always good, becoming the best card in your graveyard or the worst in your opponent's.
Lantern Prison
Dredge
Nahiri Harbinger
The interesting thing why I'm uploading it, my 1of Pyxis of Pandemonium & 1of Duskmantle, House of Shadow won the game as I had expected. In the mirror and against people bringing in Needles or even Surgical Extraction, having different millers is key.
Turn 1 I got confused, he put a Lantern on field and I revealed my top card but he was actually revealing Lantern from Ancient Stirrings (Guess this issue doesn't come up in MTGO lol). After that mistake the game went on smoothly.
The one bizarre thing: I fired off Stirrings 6 times trying to hit a Needle and failed every single time. True story, lol. Game could have been mine much sooner had I hit that Needle because he had Bell Needled and I wanted to Needle Codex since those were his only 2 millers and I had Duskmantle on field early and had Pyxis somewhere in the library.
EDIT: Sorry for not readjusting the graevyard windows, I was doing it in a hurry in the office.
"When you get your opponent down to 0 sanity, you win the game!"
In game 2, when Rob had a Noble Hierarch in play, would you guys have used Pyroclasm earlier even without knowing his hand? Or tried to use it for more value as Orson did? Love to hear your guys thoughts, thanks!
I would have held on Pyroclasm until a tap out. When you used Might on Heirarch and kept 2 lands untapped, I might have used Decay right there. It meant either Heirarch died or you would tap out to save it, and I would have Pyroclasmed next turn.
He definitely should have used it when you tapped out for Become Immense and Vastwoods. It was a given that you had no more Heirarchs or Spellskite, so even if you had an infect creature he was still at 0 counters as opposed to 1 life against Heirarch or Spellskite. Chances of you also not having another pump spell were good so any infect creature you might have been holding was essentially a 10 turn clock, enough time to find Bridge with 3 mill rocks out.
One problem I see with him is that he is not efficiently using the mill rocks to dig through his library. In game 1, the turn he died, he drew Decay when he should have known it was a dead card. Instead he should have used Bell at your EOT, then use both mill rocks at his upkeep to see if he hit a Bridge, his second Spellbomb or an Ancient Stirrings to go deeper for those.
Edit: Who made your post? That last paragraph is confusing. "when Rob had a Noble Hierarch in play," & "Or tried to use it for more value as Orson did?" makes it seem we are talking to a third person.
Edit 2: Thinking more about it, maybe you could have had a 2 Heirarch in hand after all. You knew about Pyroclasm in his hand, so you might have held on to a second copy.
"When you get your opponent down to 0 sanity, you win the game!"
http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/top-decks/bringing-modern-light-2015-09-25
just got a chance to play with the gifts ungiven list that he created and i think this deck could cause us problems for obvious reasons. i won a mini with it today and i have to say it's pretty powerful.
let me know what ideas u guys have about dealing with it, especially you @shadowgripper.
btw added the third welding jar, definitely improves the BGx match up. thx for the advice.
What are you specifically worried about from the deck?
the deck doesnt worry about what is on top of the library because it can cast anything with 5 cmc or lower with bring to light. i've played against gift decks in the past and they can be tough to handle in that they circumnavigate our strategy through tutors. idk though the deck can produce very janky hands and with the right amount of hand disruption we can probably still lock them them out. the life from the loam/ghost quarter package could cause us problems though.
The argument against Thoughtseize is mainly due to the life loss regarding mostly the burn matchup, which even without Thoughtseize we've come to accept its almost unwinnable game 1. We're better prepared for aggro with enough removal and Bridge to handle the life loss, so generally the argument is just for the burn matchup. I can understand this argument, but personally I am willing to risk some life loss in an already bad matchup than risk having my discard spells fizzle in a lot more other matchups where I am favorable and could end up losing because I couldn't target a certain spell.
Have you guys ever tested playing 4 Thoughtseize for a while? Or have you always played a split of IoK/Duress and maybe 1 or 2 TS based on the life loss argument?
"When you get your opponent down to 0 sanity, you win the game!"
4 TS & 2 IoK = (4) That hit big mana and (6) that hit creatures.
4 TS, 1 IoK & 1 Duress = (5) For big mana and (5) for creatures.
I rather take the extra damage risk vs burn in favor of a wider range of targets for my discard suit in every other matchup.
"When you get your opponent down to 0 sanity, you win the game!"
WBG Elves WBG
Cheeri0s
EDH:
RG Omnath, Locus of Rage RG || GWUB Atraxa, Praetors' Voice GWUB
R Zo-Zu the Punisher R || WU Brago, King Eternal WU
UB Gisa and Geralf UB || BGW Ghave, Guru of Spores BGW
Lantern reveals the TOP card of the deck at all times. Serum visions reads "Draw a card (aka, draw the top card of the deck), then scry 2." To scry, you look at the top 2 cards of your deck. Well, if you are looking at the top 2 cards, one of them IS the top card of the deck, so that has to be revealed.
The same is true with CoCo. Look at the TOP 6 cards of the deck. Youre looking at cards on top of the deck. And we know only the top card of the deck is always revealed.
This means that you don't get to see the card underneath the card just drawn with Serum Visions until after it has fully resolved (i.e. after the Scry).
Former DCI L2 Judge
My old Cube podcast on ManaDeprived, with Goodking and artbcnco: http://manadeprived.com/podcasts/mtgin3d/
You can find me on Twitter as well.
Actually, that rule applies to the scrying, not to the revelation of the card in between drawing and scrying.(read edit 2) After you draw a card from Serum Visions, you reveal the next card immediately, then you scry and WHILE you are scrying you don't reveal the card on top of the library while you are scrying (looking at 2 cards in your hand.).You have to read the third rule on Gatherer to understand.
4/15/2013 When playing with the top card of your library revealed, if an effect tells you to draw several cards, reveal each one before you draw it.
That means you reveal each card on top after every draw, regardless of if the spell has not finished resolving. So you would draw from Serum Visions, and immediately reveal the next card before scrying. This is why you can see one of the two cards being scried.
If a judge happens to read this and confirm, that would be nice.
Edit: You are a judge? Now I really need a confirmation on this.
Edit 2: I think that rule you quoted doesn't even apply to the scrying. Its applies when you CAST a spell or ACTIVATE an ability and due to some other effect from another spell or ability, the top card changes. I think this applies to situations like:
Player taps codex shredder (to mill card #1 from opponent's library). Opponent cracks a fetchland in response, searchs for a land, shuffles library and now, the new card on top won't be revealed until Codex Shredder finishes its effect, milling it blindly.
"When you get your opponent down to 0 sanity, you win the game!"
edit: Giving a longer answer. I'm *very* interested in the deck (I went ahead and bought the deck on paper) and want to know its ins and outs - and part of that is knowing the correct rulings. I checked Gatherer's rulings and, to the best of my rules knowledge, they seemed to indicate that the answer I gave above was correct, but after thinking a bit longer and checking with other judges I now realize that the ruling does not contradict at all the answer that Zac gave above. My bad. Please get back to the deck development, I'll go back to lurking
Former DCI L2 Judge
My old Cube podcast on ManaDeprived, with Goodking and artbcnco: http://manadeprived.com/podcasts/mtgin3d/
You can find me on Twitter as well.
I'm a believer.
Turn 1: Opponent plays a land and Engineered Explosives with 1 charge counter. It's Game 2, so I know my opponent wants to hit my my Lantern and millrocks. I have Academy Ruins and Noxious Revival in hand, so I know I have an advantage. I play Academy Ruins, Mox Opal, and Codex Shredder.
Turn 2: Opponent plays Ghost Quarter and nukes my Ruins. I fetch for the 1x Forest. EoT, I tap the Forest and play Noxious Revival, putting Ruins back on top. Replay Ruins, play Lantern of Insight, baiting him to use Explosives. By the time he does, I have two Bridges in play and Mox is still online, so I easily bring back Lantern and Shredder with Ruins, according to plan.
Kill my Academy Ruins because it brings back stuff? That's fine, I have Revival to bring back the card that brings back stuff.
Featured Writer, Manaleak
MTG Videos: Modern Lantern, Standard Eldrazi