MTG Salvation

Quote from Aceanddeuce »

Hi guys, this is an article I wrote on the deck if you wanna check it out: http://www.numotgaming.com/a-complete-guide-to-bant-eldrazi-in-modern/

I really enjoy your article! Seems like you have a really good handle on the intricacies of the deck. I think Boreal Druid could be brilliant, I didn't even know it existed.

Not having played the deck personally, I'm always curious whether the fifth removal spell and the fifth mana dork are really worth it main deck. Would you consider them essential to the deck functioning properly or a matter of preference?

Elspeth strengthens the post-board matchup against many of the 'fair' decks in the format. Ultimately the extra percentage points post board are worth 1, maybe 2 sideboard spots.

Quote from whyjesse »

What do you all think of Dimensional infiltrator? The obvious comparison is to skyspawner, but Infiltrator has a few advantages:
- Can ambush viper an important creature in the burn, zoo, affinity, and infect matchups
- Is a resilient threat in the late game and allows you to weather through times when you flood out; if you have the mana up, it's very hard to kill
- Is an alternate win con in prison scenarios (late game you can mill them 3-5 a turn)
- Doesn't need acceleration to be played turn 2
- Can be played turn 2 while holding path or dismember mana up
- Can screw up decks that rely on one-ofs
- Can screw up scry

Dimensional Infiltrator

You've done a great job of detailing the positives Dimensional Infiltrator could bring to the deck, I just think it's a matter of the role you're looking to fill. With Skyspawner, it's a one or two of at best with two main benefits: flying and acceleration into our more devastating threats. Infiltrator has flying but does nothing else that assists in our regular game plan. Also, the resources you'd be investing in Infiltrator are better spent on Displacer anyway. I could see Infiltrator being a sideboard card against prison decks or Death and Taxes, but that would be very meta dependent.

True, and really good point about the mana cost. I think that is the reason it's played despite it's conditional nature. I do understand the other side of it though too. I think it just comes down to what you feel is most important and most tolerable to you personally throughout the course of playing the deck.

For me, I've got a 2 Stubborn Denial/1 Negate split currently. I'm comfortable with the risk personally, but I can definitely see both sides of the debate.

At the same time however, BBD played 3 Negates in the sideboard at the SCG Open in Orlando after writing his article. Here's his decklist:

http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=107571

I think Negate might be the best option for a couple reasons:

First, it's not conditional. Unified Will costs the same as Negate but is completely useless if we don't control more creatures. That's even more conditional than Stubborn Denial, which at least is still relatively functional without Ferocious enabled.

Second, and I think BBD alluded to this in his article pretty clearly, there aren't many creatures we're scared of enough that we'd need to counter them. We tend to do well against creature-based decks, so why waste spots on a conditional counter spell that we don't really need? The notable exception to this logic are creatures like Primeval Titan or Emrakul. That said, Emrakul is very rarely hard cast and Negate hits all the ways it's cheated onto the field. For Primeval Titan, you'd just have to save your Paths and use your Negates for Summoner's Pact and Scapeshift.

I hope BBD addresses his sideboard logic again in the near future, that was definitely a good read.

Also, I can see the logic with Blessed Alliance not being necessary either, but I think that it can really help against Burn and Death's Shadow (since you can target them with the lifegain at instant speed).

Thoughts?

Good point on the double green for Eternal Witness, that's definitely a relevant consideration. This way I can be more comfortable running 2 plains/1 forest for Elspeth out of the sideboard and potentially running one main deck Ghost Quarter as well. I'll swap the Eternal Witness and Eldrazi Skyspawner and not look back. I hadn't thought of running one main deck Elspeth, although it might not be a bad idea if there's a high percentage of "fair" decks in the local meta.

For reference, here's my deck:

What do you think?

I like BBD's idea of Elspeth in the board, but I'm also interested in 1 Eternal Witness in the main over a single Skyspawner. I recognize that it would be difficult to support both with the mana base, so I'm going to have to choose. My question to the group is which card is more impactful overall and why?

(I'm still in the process of building the deck, so I haven't been able to test personally.)

Of course, that first question has a potential follow up too... If I keep Elspeth and therefore run the singleton Skyspawner, is it worth the 3 Matter Reshaper/2 Skyspawner split or should I keep the full playset of Reshapers?

Thanks in advance for the input!

Relic is more limited because it only focuses on the graveyard. Nahiri, Chord of Calling, and Collected Company are shut off by Grafdigger's Cage but aren't affected by Relic.

If your local meta is light on Abzan CoCo, Elves, and Jeskai Nahiri, then you'd probably be alright with Relic. I'm sure there are other similar matchups to consider, but I feel like those are the most relevant.

Hope that helps!