MTG Salvation

Just went 3-1 at my local store with my BUG Lantern List. Total record over 2 events is now 7-1-2



My only loss was to Naya Zoo but I had beat it earlier, so the matchup is still very doable. He got under bridge game 1 with creatures and finished with burn. Game 2 I had bridge in hand but he lands double Goblin Guide turn 2 and I proceed to get 5 lands into my hand. I land bridge but have too many lands in my hand to play them out fast enough and take my first loss 0-2.

Other then that, I played against:

Jeski Delver (2-0)

Naya Zoo (2-1)

Naya Zoo (0-2)

Mono-Red burn (2-0)


This week, Glint-Nest Crane was essential in blocking early creatures (Namely Goblin Guide) from the aggro decks. Drown in Sorrow was added last second to try and use against these fast decks, but I never drew it. I realized after that even if I did get it, by turn 3, it leaves several 3 toughness cards up, so i'll probably cut it for a Lost Legacy next week.

Ah, okay. Well, it didn't matter in the game that Pyroclasm won for me against Infect, as I had three mana open. In the game I lost, if my opp had drawn a bit more poorly, it would have mattered had it been two Returns, as I wouldn't have been able to clear my opp's board, so Return would have been strictly worse.

I think you are being a bit skewed in your thinking about the Affinity vs. Infect matchup. You are skipping some details on the "kill a dude" part (like killing it using what, exactly? And opp doesn't have protection for said dude?). I'm not theorizing here, I'm using video evidence to come to my conclusion about the Affinity matchup vs. the Infect matchup. Without a doubt, the Affinity matchup is strictly easier than the Infect matchup, and we have actual evidence for this rather than theorizing about who could have what.

I agree on how well Collective Brutality is in the Infect matchup, which is why I'm running three right now in the main. Of course, it also works pretty well in the Affinity matchup (although it wouldn't normally grab a spell). For the second scenario, you are counting three cards, which is exactly the same number of cards you say we need against Affinity. We don't necessarily need Grid, though, as it's okay for one Signal Pest to be on board, as it doesn't give itself any bonus. So really we just need two cards in that scenario.

In any case, I do think that to properly contribute to that conversation, it'd be best that we go through the Affinity videos and verify. I do have a test tomorrow night, and I work full time and have kids, so it might take a while for me to do it, but I'll work on it as I get time. I can understand a need for at least a discussion on the topic, and I can totally respect that wish. I would also very much like to test more against Infect, after knowing how to play against it better, and with Brutality now. I haven't had a chance to do that since I updated my list.

Okdoke, just made time (had to do some laundry for tomorrow anyways). Went through my Affinity videos, here's what I got:

Match 1, 2-0:
Game 1 - Bridge, opp has Ravager and Ornithopter but has to build up enough artifacts to sac to make a swing with Ornithopter lethal (or else it can never swing again). I draw a Needle before that happens. Lock prevents anything else from happening.
Game 2 - Bridge, Nature's Claim, lock

Match 2, 0-2:
Game 1 - Bridge, Needle, lose because I have one card in hand and can't play it (no black mana - this is pre-Opal build, budget).
Game 2 - Spellskite in play, Ornithopters live through first Pyroclasm thanks to Steel Overseer. Land Bridge too late, second Clasm can't kill Ornithopters. Would have lost sooner if Clasm was a Return because all of opp's creatures would have lived through Clasm thanks to two Overseer activations.

Match 3, 2-1:
Game 1 - Spellskite is my only interaction.
Game 2 - Bridge, Grid, Pyroclasm (Return would have worked as well), Grid keeps all creatures dead, no swinging under Bridge.
Game 3 - Clasm on turn two (drew third mana next turn, return would have worked) into Needle into Nature's Claim into Bridge

Match 4, 0-2:
Game 1 - Opp has awesome hand, no Bridge, Needle too late
Game 2 - Bridge gets countered, Needle too late

Match 5, 2-0:
Game 1 - Needle into Bridge
Game 2 - Bridge, Droplet + Spellskite keep me alive through opp's Grid, land 2nd Droplet, Needle Grid to secure lock.

Match 6, 2-1:
Game 1 - Thoughtseize into Bridge, lose to Plating at instant speed equip.
Game 2 - Iok into Needle into Clasm
Game 3 - Decay into Seal of Primordium into Bridge into Needle

Match 7, 1-0 (opp quit):
Game 1 - Iok into Decay x2 into Ghost Quarter for Nexus, Grid into Bridge. Opp did have two Nexus, but couldn't pump Nexus with 2nd one or else I grid at instant speed and kill it. Thus, Grid ensured a slow enough clock that I had time to find Bridge.

Match 8, 1-0 (opp quit...actually kicked me from the room when he/she realized that I won):
Game 1 - Bridge into Spellskite when opp tries to swing under Bridge and use Ravager. Lock was out so the game was over anyways, opp wasn't going to draw a Plating.

So with all that, the biggest take-aways seem to be:

* Opals are important to ensure that colored-mana spells aren't stuck in hand (old news really)
* Grid stabilized two games out of 10
* Two out of the three times I cast Clasm, Return would have worked as well. The third time I drew poorly after the Clasm, otherwise Clasm would have worked whereas Return wouldn't have

Other than that, the obvious "Bridge and Needle wins games against Affinity" I'm thinking I should take a look at other matchups in which Clasm vs. Return might make a difference, like Burn or Merfolk. Not tonight, but I'll look into it. With the above information, it appears to me that Return may well work about as well as Clasm 66% of the time. That potential 33% is worth it to me for now to keep Clasm. I'll keep looking to make sure that we know for sure which is better.

I ditched the whole Ornithopter + Kessig Wolf Run thing, i was spending my time finding the Galvanic Blast loop anyway. Figured i'd try Mishra's Bauble in the thopter's place. I haven't been able to properly evaluate it, but it does seem to be a nice little edge.

I'm currently running 2/1 Decay, 2/0 Brutality, 3/0 Inquisition, 2/0 Thoughtseize. (Just added the side Brutality for testing.) These numbers have been working for me really well.

Yes on Grid! I bring it in against Affinity/Infect, and control matchups which i know will take forever. Being able to burn out slow opponents is soooooooo good.

I have to say, Nephalia Drownyard has been working pretty well. Besides having the benefits of Duskmantle, the extra two cards milled have proven to be quite a bit of a clock (and that clock won me a game today against the grindiest Deflowered Amulet match ever -- i say deflowered because it's Amulet Bloom minus the bloom). It's only wise to activate it against opponents with little to no graveyard interaction (Burn/Affinity/Infect, Titan Breach, Hatebears/Taxes), but in those games can easily clock opponents on its own. Three cards spread over ten turns is ... well, thirty cards, or half our opponent's deck! I'll continue testing with it, and will only recommend Duskmantle for now.

For those that are running Aether Hub over Tendo Ice Bridge, I recommend Tendo if you can afford it. I don't currently run either, but in Modern the Tendo Ice Bridge is better.

If there is a Blood Moon in play and you play Tendo, it enters with a counter. If you play Aether Hub it does not.

If you play Aether Hub and the opponent has a Fulminator Mage or Ghost Quarter, they can destroy the hub before you gain the energy because that's a triggered ability. This can't happen with ice bridge.

Actually, if you play Hub, and they destroy it in response of the energy trigger, you keep the energy to use later, while with Ice Bridge the charge is just gone. Destroying the source of a trigger does not stop it from going to the stack and resolving. Hub isn't always better, but usually it is an upgrade from Ice Bridge.

Not really relevant, but funny: http://imgur.com/7FygbGo. Opp quit out after telling me to "learn their deck". Also, how the hell do I put the pics on here?

Quote from lucasbpc »

Actually, if you play Hub, and they destroy it in response of the energy trigger, you keep the energy to use later, while with Ice Bridge the charge is just gone. Destroying the source of a trigger does not stop it from going to the stack and resolving. Hub isn't always better, but usually it is an upgrade from Ice Bridge.

He's saying that if they GQ/FM in response to the Hub trigger, then you won't be able to tap it for colored mana in response. With the Tendo, you can because it enters with the counter.

Honestly, i still use a counter on Aether Hub and basically treat it as if it were a Tendo Ice Bridge. When i have two in play, i put one counter on each land. I like having the counter on the land because i might otherwise forget it's available, and it's convenient for me to think of Hub as Tendo.

I honestly don't think the GQ / Blood Moon interactions are worth enough for me to invest the $3 into Tendo (the price tanked hard!), especially since i traded junk uncommons for my Hubs and Spirebluff Canal for my foil Hub on prerelease day, when they were cheap. Plus, my foil Hub looks absolutely beautiful, and Tendo doesn't.

For someone else, though, if they had to buy one or the other, sure, buy Tendo.

I wrote an article going over the new cards from Kaladesh. Also answered common questions about cards like Aether Grid, Infernal Tutor, and Sea Gate Wreckage.

http://www.numotgaming.com/lantern-control-an-overview-of-the-new-cards-from-kaladesh/

It seems to me that both Tendo and Hub are sub-optimal at this point in time. Other than players on a budget, does anyone run either, and if so, why? Maybe I'm missing something.

Also, great article, Zac. Thanks for linking to it.

Fantastic article, Zac! It's nice to see your insight behind including or removing certain cards.

I run Aether Hub because i needed a filler for my 17th land, and wanted something painless that produced all colors.

@Al_Z_Heimer, I really do feel Pyroclasm is worth the slot. In the matchups where it's good, it is *real* good. They act as pseudo bridges in a way; buying you precious time. Playing this deck at GP Charlotte and GP OKC the one thing I knew about the sideboard I liked were the three clasms. They were so important to have access to.

The slot occupied by the abrupt decay in the sideboard needs to be able to kill Chalice of the Void. Grudge and Decay do this, claim doesn't. I also wanted this slot to be able to kill stony silence. Decay does this too.

Sea Gate is personal preference. If you still like running it, then you have to come up with a manabase that works. I talk about how restrictive our manabase is. You can try more colorless lands but you'll find 1/20 games or more you lose because of lack of colors of mana at the right times.

So I took Lantern to the first Modern FNM I've been able to play in months (god damn college class schedule ruining my Magic playing time T__T) and I ended up going 3-1. This is the list I was using:


Round 1 I played against some really weird looking Goblin Storm deck. Apparently he had nothing to beat a Bridge, because he conceded to me when I landed one on turn 3 for both games 1 and 2. Quickest round I have ever played.

Round 2 I played against Mono U Tron, and man was this a fun match up. First off, I now 100% understand why Zac has that third Abrupt Decay in the sideboard. Chalice on 1 just wrecked me until I was able to deal with it, and having more ways to make that work is definitely a good plan. I will be swapping the second Nature's Claim for the extra Decay. I ended up winning in 3.

Round 3 this happened:
Opponent: "So what are you playing?"
Me: "Lantern Control"
Opponent "Hey TO! I concede the round."

Round 4 I played against Dredge. Now this was a little entertaining for me since the guy I was playing against had been taking my advice on how to play Dredge for the longest time. So I figured we'd get a pretty good match out of this. Not only did he get 3 of 4 Prized Amalgam and a Narcomoeba to recur them off of his turn two Cathartic Reunion both games, in Game 2 his very first Dredge trigger also milled over every single copy of Ancient Grudge he boarded in. Game 1 I saw exactly 0 Bridges, and was dead on turn 4. Game 2, I got 1 Bridge, no Surgicals, no Cages, and died on turn 5. Oh well. Sometimes Dredge has horseshoes up their ass.


One of the things I was testing with this build was Glint-Nest Crane. I decided to take the list Zac posted in his article and make the following changes to the deck to fit them in:
-1 Land (I've always preferred 17 land as opposed to 18 in this deck)
-2 Spellskite (Moved them to the sideboard)
-1 Ghoulcaller's Bell (Like the land, I prefer 8 slots for mill rocks)

All in all, the Cranes weren't terrible. They could help me find lock pieces and cards like Pithing Needle when I needed them. I feel that they are also pretty good against Burn just as a body to throw in front of a Goblin Guide for a turn or two. The biggest downside to them is they can't grab lands, which actually did matter every single time I cast them. Additionally I had a bit of trouble casting them sometimes as I had 1 or 2 games where I didn't have the blue mana for it until later than I would have liked.

Quote from AlRchrist »

I've been making constant changes to my decklist(don't even try to compare it to the one listed in my sig), and have a few take aways. And I got a second top 8 a couple weekends ago, but will spare you the play by play.

I have been testing with 2 Glint-Nest Crane, and have had a fairly positive experience. They do help dig, and provide an early game blocker when trying to setup the lock, but feel bad mid to late game and offer a target for our opp's kill cards. Searing Blaze feels real bad. While I do like the additional digging and chump, it doesn't seem to really work for Lantern.

Quote from Skitzafreak »

One of the things I was testing with this build was Glint-Nest Crane. I decided to take the list Zac posted in his article and make the following changes to the deck to fit them in:
-1 Land (I've always preferred 17 land as opposed to 18 in this deck)
-2 Spellskite (Moved them to the sideboard)
-1 Ghoulcaller's Bell (Like the land, I prefer 8 slots for mill rocks)

All in all, the Cranes weren't terrible. They could help me find lock pieces and cards like Pithing Needle when I needed them. I feel that they are also pretty good against Burn just as a body to throw in front of a Goblin Guide for a turn or two. The biggest downside to them is they can't grab lands, which actually did matter every single time I cast them. Additionally I had a bit of trouble casting them sometimes as I had 1 or 2 games where I didn't have the blue mana for it until later than I would have liked.

Hey guys. Just wanted to chime in as I've been testing Crane for a month now. This is, in my Tezzeret control shell that's really the lowest-to-the-ground Ensnaring Bridge build that I have been perfecting since modern is a thing. Ensnaring Bridge: what a broken card! The further down I go this deckbuilding and playstyle route, the more similarities with the Lantern deck I find. So I have started to watch and learn to play Lantern as a side project and I have to say, it has helped me further my understanding of what's the cornerstone of both our decks: Gameplan = buy time and Bridge lock. Then win with inevitability.

So what I have to say is that Glint-Nest Crane plays a huge role toward succeeding in this gameplan, in Tezz. Benefits that our two decks share: its digging power is great. At 23+ artifacts, it's better than just a «blind» cantrip really (you can opt not to take anything even, super relevant when you need turn on that bridge ASAP!)

But this would be nothing if it wasn't for its extremely relevant flying 1/3 body. Firstly and obviously its a chumper that you can throw in front of any Tarmogoyf, sure. But Bridge deals with Tarmogoyfs. Crane will wall and kill MANY problecmatic creatures that can often slip under a Bridge before you lock it out -- we all have died to a lone Noble Hierarch we couldn't deal with in time, no? Crane walls off these. Among other things, it will block for days: Any Burn critter, Young Pyromancer, Noble Hierarch, most Robots that slip under a Bridge, Infectors and even flying ones, Bloodghasts, Narcomoeba, more more more. Again: we have found its flying body highly relevant.

There are a couple of things that favor Crane in the Tezzeret build however: running Thopter foundry, Crane can play a role in chipping at opponent's life total overhead from under a Bridgelock (saying: in non-combo situations this has won us games). It's 1 power is relevant in that sense. The couple of dmg it can push through when it's not on blocking duty usually puts people down to around 14-16 life, which really hastens Tezzeret's ultimate lethality (read: resolve Tezz, win next turn). We also have a curve that's a tad higher, but we have more lifegain and chumpers to make up for that. Running some mana rocks and Darksteel Citadel, Executioner's Capsule (I KNOW! I hate it, but it works, I swear haha...), Crane finds us Bridge, Thopter-Sword, hate cards, removal, or ramps us. True swiss-army knife of a bird. It dodges all the hate that hurt us. And hey, who cares should they remove it? It's been better-than-cantripping for us, and best case scenario it's one less bolt to our face.

But most of all, Crane is a great on-curve blocker and its digging power is extremely useful at finding us our Bridge.

So I'm thinking maybe there's a lantern version that could try to optimize the Crane. And maybe it's just another bad experiment. But I think it's definitely worth looking into as I know, it's doing huge work for us in Tezzeret control. The printing of this, Inventors' Fair and Collective Brutality have flipped so many unfavorable matchups on their head!

Being on the lookout, I have also noticed that a lot of pros are giving Lantern attention lately, in streaming or otherwise. But none of them, or Zac in your latest article, seem to have given the Glint-Nest Crane a try. Why is that?

Here's my latest (Tezz) list for reference:

Quote from DapperDane »

Quote from AlRchrist »

Lastly, I'm curious to know if anyone here has had issues running two Ruins and two Fairs. Ideas?

I'm a bit greedy in my testing right now. I run 2 ruins, 2 fairs and 2 sea gate wreckages. It has come up several times, that I draw two of a kind, but that is usually in the late game where I am in control, so it dosen't matter.

Further more: I'm not sold on the new Blooming Marshes. I'm fearing not being able to play them untapped on a crucial turn as well as being able to activate Sea Gate Wreckage. I would like to hear your thoughts on this!

Thank you for bringing up the land issue and for a great report! It's nice to hear your take-aways.

About the Blooming Marsh, it's a super upgrade for the deck, that painlands bite hard. I really think you don't have to worry about that fast lands enter tapped, that really doesn't matter becouse you already drop almost your enterely hand, and all the CMC it's from 3 to down.

Even with mox opal in play, you have 4 mana in total, if you have a fastland, you even don't needed for achieve the 0 hand. Remember that modern defines in the first 3 turns, and fast lands are the best in the first turns. What if you get your fastland entering to the battlefield tapped ? It's late game, you achieve buy time, you already have the combo or almost achieve gather the lock pieces, and first fastlands already done their job.

i have seen list that run blood moon. i'm thinking it is worth a slot in the board for our tough matchups i.e. tron and valakut

so how are you guys feeling about burn now with the inventors fair? think we can cut some sun droplets ?

Quote from Kerotan1989 »

Quote from artfranc007 »

i have seen list that run blood moon. i'm thinking it is worth a slot in the board for our tough matchups i.e. tron and valakut

That's an interesting idea. Certainly very few decks will expect to see Lantern bring in Blood Moon (at least to begin with), and so it has the potential to steal some game 2s. But Tron will be bringing in nature's claim from the board against us anyway, which will hit blood moon. I agree it would hose a lot of valakut decks, which are often light on enchantment destruction. However, Blood Moon also has the potential to screw our manabase completely, and make us unable to keep our hand empty for Bridge, unless we have the luxury of being able to control our own draws whilst controlling our opponents. On balance I'm not yet convinced, and think we just have to stick to the discard/surgical strategies against these decks, and accept that they're not our best matchups.

emptying your hand against valakut or tron is not really neccessary. by the time you drop your singleton bmoon, you've probably played most of your colored spells. it is not something you would want to drop early, but could win you the game against those tough match ups. not saying i am def gonna run it, but it is a thought. i mean i def think it is better than mindlock orb, which is what cheon has in that slot.