I refuse to understand how some people says that four Snapcasters are too many. This IS, in fact, a Snapcaster deck. If I were to play less than the full set, I would just play Shadow Jund/Abzan/whoknows.
I never thought in my life I would want to cut down Lightning Bolt or Snapcaster Mage in a deck, but this deck doesn't seem to really need full playsets. Snapcaster is very slow most of the time (usually only relevant turns 4 or 5 and on). He's terrible in your opening hand, especially in multiples. Plus with K Command, you have functionally another Snap for each K Command. We aren't needing Prowess or Pyromancer triggers, and often our lands struggle to bolt-snap-bolt anyway. The benefit from Snap is there with 3 copies, but you are rarely flooded with them (something that happened a lot with Delver, but was OK when most of your deck was spells that cost 0-1 mana).
Yup. This guys gets it.
Snapcaster is great at grinding, but clunky when you need to be on the aggressive. I find I never really need more than 1 in a game. I came from RUG Delver, which often ran 1-2. Contrary to what most people seem to think, jamming 4 snaps in any deck that wants some amount of them is not always right. Most of the time you're just using them to grab that final bolt to finish them off, or to remove their last blocker by snapping a Fatal Push from the grave, so your Death's Shadow can close out the game.
I'd say it's a meta call really. If you find that you have to play a controllish role more often than not, run the full 4. If your meta is full of decks like Tron where you need to put the screws to them immediately, then shaving a 1 or 2 of them may actually be the right choice.
Snap is great. I wasn't trying to argue that he's not. But in many matchups, I don't want to draw more than one per game and there are instances where he takes more time to get back online because I need to eat the graveyard to ensure a T2 Tasigur, or I just can't afford to recast Thoughtseize because I'm pressing a beefed up Death's Shadow. Just because he can ALLOW me to cast anything in my grave doesn't mean I NEED him to, when I still have a full mitt in my hand.
I’m not saying that 4 is incorrect (I currently run 4), but I don't think that immediately assuming that we need to max out on 4 is correct as well.
I don't have much to add except that I agree with 3 Snaps instead of the playset. I don't think I'd ever want it in my opening hand in game 1 when I'm trying to be more proactive. The 4th in the sb is probably needed, but 3 mb is just right in my experience.
I think 4 is absolutely the correct number in the main deck, but I have been quicker to board them out in faster matchups than in previous Snapcaster decks I've played.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern UBR Grixis Shadow UBR UR Izzet Phoenix UR UW UW Control UW GB GB Rock GB
Commander BG Meren of Clan Nel Toth BG BGUW Atraxa, Praetor's Voice BGUW
Snapcaster is very slow most of the time (usually only relevant turns 4 or 5 and on). He's terrible in your opening hand, especially in multiples.
Snapcaster is great at grinding, but clunky when you need to be on the aggressive. I find I never really need more than 1 in a game
Snapcaster being clunky in a deck that plays an insane amount of cc1 spells (Thoughtseize, Inquisition, Stubborn, Bolt, Push, Visions, Scour) is just admitting you're not reading what you're writing. We're not playing RUG Delver, nor we're playing UW Midrange. I also ran several blue decks with only 1-2 Snappy in it, but this isn't the case. You're relying on Snapcaster not only for grinding, but manly because it sinergyzes a lot with every single spell in this deck.
How often are you actually wanting to Snap those back? TS/Inquisition are usually horrible Snap targets, because you either want to be playing more things out of your hand, or late enough in the game where it's mostly irrelevant. Visions and Scour never feel good to Snap, and are often last-ditch efforts because many other things are going wrong. Stubborn, Push, and Bolt are all excellent targets, but again, often not super necessary in the early game (and RR is hard to get). If anything, I would rather bring in a 3rd K Command than the 4th Snapcaster. Though I could see running a 4th in the side...
Now, I don't have a ton of time with this specific deck, but it definitely has specific differences and similarities with Grixis Delver, which I've been on for the past year.
I don't think I've ever sided snapcaster out. Nor,been upset about having multiples in hand. With Fatal Push, Bolt, discard, Serum, scour, I don't know if Snapcaster has ever been an irrelevant card. It also allows me to play aggressively knowing that my graveyard is just an extension of my hand on turns 3 and beyond. Especially with thought scour milling instants and soceries into the graveyard.
As ridiculous as it may sound, doesn't getting rid of Snapcaster lower your threat count as well as the ability to play spells at instant speed? Multiple times I have needed to snap a Stubborn Denial or even Snap --> Thought Scour to have the ability to play a Gurmag or Tasigur on my turn.
I side out the 4th Snapcaster in a lot of matchups and could see cutting 1 in the MD. Snap + discard or Stubborn D on turn 3 is great, but multiple snapcasters early is really clunky against a large swathe of the metagame. I've been considering making this cut for a bit now, to be honest.
I honestly can't fathom wanting to even trim Snapcaster Mage in this deck. It fits amazingly well. I can't imagine a metagame context that has me thinking "maybe I should shave some Snappies." It'd have to be something absurd, like 20+% of decks packing Rest in Peace mainboard (at which point Snapcaster's not the only thing that looks bad).
Decks I often shave a Snapcaster against (depending on what I have to bring in): Ad Nauseum, Storm, GR Valakut, Tron variants, etc. Basically in matchups where you need to win fast, and clunkiness gets you killed. Siding one out vs. some of the fast aggro decks isn't the worst for similar reasons, but you need to have a ton of stuff to bring in because Street Wraith and sometimes Thoughtseize are on the chopping block first, so I don't think I've ever shaved a Snapcaster against those decks.
I've even had situations where snap puts in work as a surprise blocker or an extra beater. Opening hand with 2 snaps never feel awful to me, if there's plenty of action to go with it. 3 snaps? Yeah that would be annoying but that's very rare. I could understand cutting him in delver in certain situations but in this deck that means you essentially trim yourself down to 8 threats since Street Wraith rarely comes down as a creature. The Jund version can traverse for more stuff but we can't.
Decks I often shave a Snapcaster against (depending on what I have to bring in): Ad Nauseum, Storm, GR Valakut, Tron variants, etc. Basically in matchups where you need to win fast, and clunkiness gets you killed. Siding one out vs. some of the fast aggro decks isn't the worst for similar reasons, but you need to have a ton of stuff to bring in because Street Wraith and sometimes Thoughtseize are on the chopping block first, so I don't think I've ever shaved a Snapcaster against those decks.
I suppose it matters what you're sideboard configuration is. The first thing I usually cut is most of the spot removal. With surgicals extraction and stubborn denial, I'd prefer to have "more copies" of interaction that Snapcaster allows.
I think Snapcaster is better in Delver than it is here because they can't close the game as fast. They're forced to have a stronger mid-late game to compensate.
I usually have more cards to bring in than I have removal spells to take out, and leaving a couple pushes or terminates in is definitely correct vs a lot of these decks. Ad Naus will often bring in Dromoka or sometimes Grave Titan, so having access to a terminate or two is reasonable. Storm has a bunch of fairly important Push targets. Terminate on a Primeval Titan is reasonable if you're pressuring your opponent enough. Terminate on a Worldbreaker or occasionally on a Wurmcoil (as bad as it feels) can turn a game. It's easy for me to have 8-10 cards to bring in when Surgical Extraction is in my SB.
So I'm new to this deck and I am questioning Street Wraith's presence in the deck. I see the synergy it has with this deck and it seems to confer the following benefits to the deck:
free cycle allows for faster delve threats
life loss makes shadows bigger
allows us to get away with maybe 1 less land
creates a 56 card deck, increases consistency
The downsides to it include:
not a real card, so makes evaluating opening hands difficult
Life loss can be too much to afford in situations where you are on the defensive
Has anyone done any testing with 'wraithless' lists? I am inclined to believe that those 4 slots could be better filled with more threats, discard spells, or removal.
Decks I often shave a Snapcaster against (depending on what I have to bring in): Ad Nauseum, Storm, GR Valakut, Tron variants, etc. Basically in matchups where you need to win fast, and clunkiness gets you killed. Siding one out vs. some of the fast aggro decks isn't the worst for similar reasons, but you need to have a ton of stuff to bring in because Street Wraith and sometimes Thoughtseize are on the chopping block first, so I don't think I've ever shaved a Snapcaster against those decks.
I think it'd be a mistake to cut snapcasters in those matchups because t3 snapcaster+discard or snapcaster+denial is a real thing vs those decks and a 2/1 body isn't insignificant IMO
I play LotV in this deck. I think LtLH often doesn't impact the board. When it's good, it's real good though.
That's why I play it on my sideboard. I board it in for the grindy matchups where my removal is bad and/or I need threat density. Also against go wide strategies like CoCo; Tokens; Elves; potentially Affinity/Infect.
LotV can potentially be more justifiable on the mainboard but there aren't any matchups where she just takes it home by herself like LtLH does.
Yeah, I think that's pretty fair. I have LotV main, or occasionally 1 main and 1 SB. If CoCo starts popping up all over the place, I'll probably switch Lilys. The main place I really like LotV is in the (pseudo-) mirror. I think LtlH is a bit overrated there - at least in Grixis.
Decks I often shave a Snapcaster against (depending on what I have to bring in): Ad Nauseum, Storm, GR Valakut, Tron variants, etc. Basically in matchups where you need to win fast, and clunkiness gets you killed. Siding one out vs. some of the fast aggro decks isn't the worst for similar reasons, but you need to have a ton of stuff to bring in because Street Wraith and sometimes Thoughtseize are on the chopping block first, so I don't think I've ever shaved a Snapcaster against those decks.
I think it'd be a mistake to cut snapcasters in those matchups because t3 snapcaster+discard or snapcaster+denial is a real thing vs those decks and a 2/1 body isn't insignificant IMO
I understand the upsides. But there are downsides too. In these matchups Snapcaster gives you card advantage in the form of its small body and card selection in the form of having the right piece of interaction (if it's already in your graveyard). The downsides are it's relatively expensive, and it needs a bit of enabling. Hands with multiple Snapcasters + delve creatures can be pretty awkward because you need to get those delve creatures in play to pressure your opponent, but Snapcaster represents about half of your interactive ability so you need to preserve the graveyard to some extent. Also, sometimes we only draw 2 lands early. Or maybe 3, but we need to flashback a 2 mana spell, or cast a fatty + hold up interaction, or the colors don't work out for the thing you want to flash back. And if you need to cast multiple pieces of interaction on the same turn, e.g. to fight through a Pact of Negation, the extra mana requirements from Snapcaster can be deadly. Now none of this means the card is bad, but it has a common fail state in these matchups. And that fail state is "drew to many before I could reasonably use them." Shaving one does a lot to mitigate that fail state, assuming you're bringing in a useful piece of interaction for the matchup.
That said, I'm also not playing Lightning Bolt. If you're playing bolt, Snapcaster is a little more useful as a pure threat. I'm not sure this tips the balance completely, but it is at least worth considering.
It was my first time playing it on paper. I didn't know that the deck would be pretty tiring to play because making a misplay or keeping a bad hand would really cost you a game.
Hey guys. Been playing grixis control for 8 months now. I jumped over to this extremely aggressive control. Been doing okay. Mainly because I use bad list haha.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Yup. This guys gets it.
Snapcaster is great at grinding, but clunky when you need to be on the aggressive. I find I never really need more than 1 in a game. I came from RUG Delver, which often ran 1-2. Contrary to what most people seem to think, jamming 4 snaps in any deck that wants some amount of them is not always right. Most of the time you're just using them to grab that final bolt to finish them off, or to remove their last blocker by snapping a Fatal Push from the grave, so your Death's Shadow can close out the game.
I'd say it's a meta call really. If you find that you have to play a controllish role more often than not, run the full 4. If your meta is full of decks like Tron where you need to put the screws to them immediately, then shaving a 1 or 2 of them may actually be the right choice.
Snap is great. I wasn't trying to argue that he's not. But in many matchups, I don't want to draw more than one per game and there are instances where he takes more time to get back online because I need to eat the graveyard to ensure a T2 Tasigur, or I just can't afford to recast Thoughtseize because I'm pressing a beefed up Death's Shadow. Just because he can ALLOW me to cast anything in my grave doesn't mean I NEED him to, when I still have a full mitt in my hand.
I’m not saying that 4 is incorrect (I currently run 4), but I don't think that immediately assuming that we need to max out on 4 is correct as well.
UBR Grixis Shadow
URG Amulet Titan
UBR Grixis Shadow UBR
UR Izzet Phoenix UR
UW UW Control UW
GB GB Rock GB
Commander
BG Meren of Clan Nel Toth BG
BGUW Atraxa, Praetor's Voice BGUW
Now, I don't have a ton of time with this specific deck, but it definitely has specific differences and similarities with Grixis Delver, which I've been on for the past year.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
I suppose it matters what you're sideboard configuration is. The first thing I usually cut is most of the spot removal. With surgicals extraction and stubborn denial, I'd prefer to have "more copies" of interaction that Snapcaster allows.
I usually have more cards to bring in than I have removal spells to take out, and leaving a couple pushes or terminates in is definitely correct vs a lot of these decks. Ad Naus will often bring in Dromoka or sometimes Grave Titan, so having access to a terminate or two is reasonable. Storm has a bunch of fairly important Push targets. Terminate on a Primeval Titan is reasonable if you're pressuring your opponent enough. Terminate on a Worldbreaker or occasionally on a Wurmcoil (as bad as it feels) can turn a game. It's easy for me to have 8-10 cards to bring in when Surgical Extraction is in my SB.
Follow the link for nice cheap clothing.
Playing:
Death's Shadow Jund
Played:
Kiki Chord, Zoo variants, Goblins, Burn
allows us to get away with maybe 1 less land
creates a 56 card deck, increases consistency
The downsides to it include:
Has anyone done any testing with 'wraithless' lists? I am inclined to believe that those 4 slots could be better filled with more threats, discard spells, or removal.
Let me know what you think.
I think it'd be a mistake to cut snapcasters in those matchups because t3 snapcaster+discard or snapcaster+denial is a real thing vs those decks and a 2/1 body isn't insignificant IMO
Yeah, I think that's pretty fair. I have LotV main, or occasionally 1 main and 1 SB. If CoCo starts popping up all over the place, I'll probably switch Lilys. The main place I really like LotV is in the (pseudo-) mirror. I think LtlH is a bit overrated there - at least in Grixis.
I understand the upsides. But there are downsides too. In these matchups Snapcaster gives you card advantage in the form of its small body and card selection in the form of having the right piece of interaction (if it's already in your graveyard). The downsides are it's relatively expensive, and it needs a bit of enabling. Hands with multiple Snapcasters + delve creatures can be pretty awkward because you need to get those delve creatures in play to pressure your opponent, but Snapcaster represents about half of your interactive ability so you need to preserve the graveyard to some extent. Also, sometimes we only draw 2 lands early. Or maybe 3, but we need to flashback a 2 mana spell, or cast a fatty + hold up interaction, or the colors don't work out for the thing you want to flash back. And if you need to cast multiple pieces of interaction on the same turn, e.g. to fight through a Pact of Negation, the extra mana requirements from Snapcaster can be deadly. Now none of this means the card is bad, but it has a common fail state in these matchups. And that fail state is "drew to many before I could reasonably use them." Shaving one does a lot to mitigate that fail state, assuming you're bringing in a useful piece of interaction for the matchup.
That said, I'm also not playing Lightning Bolt. If you're playing bolt, Snapcaster is a little more useful as a pure threat. I'm not sure this tips the balance completely, but it is at least worth considering.
[Game 1] 0 - 2 Bant Eldrazi
[Game 2] 2 - 0 Kuldotha Burn
[Game 3] 2 - 1 Naya Burn
[Game 4] 2 - 1 Eldrazi Tron
It was my first time playing it on paper. I didn't know that the deck would be pretty tiring to play because making a misplay or keeping a bad hand would really cost you a game.