This supported my color requirements just fine. I also found the Lighthouse to help a lot in flood situations (and Nahiri as well). Only having 6 Blue fetches doesn't seem great with Cryptic in your deck though, unless you're willing to take a fair chunk of damage from your mana.
I don't think I could advocate going below 24 lands.
As for Cryptic, I like it a lot, though I don't play Ancestral Vision in the main deck (which, imo, takes up the Cryptic/Sweeper slot).
I feel like every time I change deck in modern I run into you, and we have very, VERY similar tastes, in playstyle too.
Could you please share your list?
I am currently playing Jeskai flash (or old control style) because I have been off of GPTs and stuff like that, but I feel like I have some time now and I would like to get back into competitive regional level.
To me Jeskai Nahiri with cryptic is the way to go, it is very much my playstile.
I am also not a fan of AV (but I saw Mclaren play with 2 in the main and was a nice addition).
Just one thing about your manabase, don't you think you could switch one of the steam vents for a second hallowed fountain?
Many times I have found myself wanting to have the second white, to play path + helix or nahiri + path.
Especially now that you have removed the double red from anger in the main.
Just wanted to put that out there.
Sounds like you have good taste! My current list is this:
My sideboard is currently in flux because my local meta is kinda small and really weird.
You do have a point on the Hallowed Fountain. My deck is slightly heavier on White than Red and I'm not positive that I want the 4th Colonnade because I hate taplands, so Vents->Fountain should be an easy change.
I also agree about AV. I do not like the card (just a personal preference thing) and prefer Cryptic Command. One of the big pulls to playing Blue in Modern for me is Cryptic, so I refuse to leave home without it haha
If you want to run cryptic off a 23 land manabase you probably shouldn't run any colorless lands at all. A ninth fetchland can work. I also like chaos021's suggestion of reflecting pool, although you should treat it like a filterland; you probably don't want to run more than a singleton
Just ommit that I said 23 lands please, the important bit is about if filterlands should be the way to go (and which) or if cryptic is not worth it in the current meta. I know I should play 24 lands, but I get constantly flooded (it's more an individual luck thing as I never got stuck with 23 lands nor I get to miss a color). I also play a single timely reinforcements mb but I didn't mention it becasue it doesn't stress the mana base at all.
Right now it seems to me that I can play 2 cryptics, 1 anger, and 1 timely, or 3 AV, 1 wrath, 1 anger, and 1 timely, since AV plus cryptic feels like way too much draw and not enough answers. I'll test 2 filterlands and loothouse tonight to see if there's a difference (also I'll go 24 lands k?).
To be perfecttly honest, Ancestral Vision SHOULD be played in the deck along with Goblin Dark-Dwellers. It works really well for me, and it also combos with Nahiri's +2, essentially giving the +2 a kicker for 3RR that says: Summon a 4/4 with menace and draw 3 additional cards.
To be perfecttly honest, Ancestral Vision SHOULD be played in the deck along with Goblin Dark-Dwellers. It works really well for me, and it also combos with Nahiri's +2, essentially giving the +2 a kicker for 3RR that says: Summon a 4/4 with menace and draw 3 additional cards.
I cannot disagree more. Dark Dwellers is an incredibly clunky card and I heavily dislike tapping five mana at sorcery speed just to turn on my opponent's removal. Ancestral Vision itself is a good card, but I prefer Cryptic over Ancestral.
If you want to run cryptic off a 23 land manabase you probably shouldn't run any colorless lands at all. A ninth fetchland can work. I also like chaos021's suggestion of reflecting pool, although you should treat it like a filterland; you probably don't want to run more than a singleton
True. I only run one in the deck. Playing more is riskier proposition. The question I have is this: Would you run it in place of one Celestial Colonnade or something like Sulfur Falls?
..random question on Vendilion Clique: why are we playing only 1 ?! Feels like a very strong card, even against the aggro match-ups, where it either trades or chumps+value ..
..is anyone considering playing 3 Nahiri ? I have seen the full playset in almost all versions of this deck, even though some lists feature only 3. with all the card-draw and -selection (SV/AV) it could be argued that 3 might be enough... how do you feel about this?
If you don't want to see her as much, then I don't see a problem with cutting a Nahiri. Should function fairly similar to having 4. Less likely to have her in the opener. Personally I like to see her very early, but that's just me.
Sideboard counterspells and unconditional wraths come in, wear//tear is great as well. Special shoutout to crumble t dust for being a complete trap that will kill you if you try to crumble an inkmoth nexus; spreading seas is great though.
I'm not sure what you mean by Crumble to Dusting an Inkmoth = trap/bad. Is there an interaction that I'm missing?
Hi, i'm going to try playing Jeskai Nahiri, I have read a lot of content about thise deck but need to see it in action bit more. Who knows any videos, twitch recaps/channels or something?
MTGcoverage.com and check modern. Last SCG contains alot of Jeskai so that's a start
So... I know I'm not currently playing Nahiri. But I could really use some help with my list.
I feel like I want to add the 24th land... but no idea what to cut for it. I feel like the deck wants to keep all the other cards 0_o.
I think you can afford to cut Restoration Angel, Spell Queller, Remand, Electrolyze, or Mana Leak. I'd go with cutting a Resto in favor of 24th land; it's not as easy to curve to 4 lands with less than 24, and having a full playset of Restos would make this even more apparent. I'd up the count of SV to 4, but 3 works too; Jeskai Flash (Geist variants) run 3 SV to good effect.
I've been trying recently some sort of variation with the deck but I seem to have a lot of trouble to make the manabase work, basically I want to play these cards MB
I was thinking replacing the sulfur falls for some filter lands, maybe rugged prairie, what are your opinions regarding cryptic command? is the effort not worth it?
BTW: I listed 23 lands because I always flood with 24, I know it's not optimal but that's just my luck I guess.
I think since you're looking to hit as many colors as possible, you can afford to shave down to just 2 Islands. Maybe shave Ghost Quarter as well. Might want to go up to a 9th fetch land and yeah, a filter land can work fine. IMO accommodating Cryptic Command is worth the investment; it's such a strong card.
To all the people who have issues with color requirements, have any of you considered Reflecting Pool? I've been using it for a while and it works fine. I like that it comes into play untapped and makes any mana you already have. We play enough fetch lands to not worry about getting cut off from a particular color.
I've seen it in Esper Control (Wafo-Tapa). I believe it can be run. Much like Bearscape said, probably best to consider it like a filter land.
If you want to run cryptic off a 23 land manabase you probably shouldn't run any colorless lands at all. A ninth fetchland can work. I also like chaos021's suggestion of reflecting pool, although you should treat it like a filterland; you probably don't want to run more than a singleton
True. I only run one in the deck. Playing more is riskier proposition. The question I have is this: Would you run it in place of one Celestial Colonnade or something like Sulfur Falls?
I personally wouldn't cut down on Colonnades any further; I think 3 is a good spot for it; I like having the option to close games with Man-lands and IMO 2 is too loose to feasibly rely on it as a subsidiary game plan. Therefore, I'd be more inclined to cutting Sulfur Falls and the like.
Reprints the one card that people point to when saying that art objectifies women.
Well done Wizards.
Liliana does not objectify women in any way at all. We have gotten to a point in our society that every single picture of a women must be objectifying a women in some negative way......blah blah blah.. That is not the case. (((Sarcasm)))Picture of a girl drinking a milk shake, must be sex related and putting women down, picture of girl sitting on a beach, picture of a girl driving a car, picture of a girl on the moon at a new space station.)))
You have a picture of an attractive strong power women who girls dress up as for anime conventions. What more do you want? The picture is fine, happy to see a reprint. Sick of of seeing people claim that everything in existence must be putting women down. Then all I have to do is replace the word "women" with anything else to get the same mentality; fish, cats, arabs, blacks, jews, men, environment, whites, chinese, old people, etc. It doesn't matter what word I put in. Stop sucking life out of everything man. That artwork of her is awesome. Stop putting stuff down man. Just stop. If the picture was really as negative as you claim she would totally nude, in a kitchen, making sandwiches and giving blow jobs. Her abilities would be horrible as well. +1 do nothing -2 do nothing -6 do nothing. Instead liliana of the veil is an amazing planeswalker comparable to jace, the mind sculpter with great art to appreciate.
My suggestion listen to some comedy radio for a while, pandora is free, youtube is free there is something out there for you. ***** go make fun of somebody. The whole world is so serious and campaigning for some cause, or someones rights, everything is a hate crime, racist, sexist. blah blah blah.
"O no mcdonalds must be slandering a hate crime against skinny people every time they make a big mac." hahaha jeeze You're just someone perpetuating another groups negative perspective that they've made you believe is correct. Look at the picture for a hour and tell me what's wrong with it? I don't see anything.
I have heard vague rumors of a moustache-dispensing vending machine in a distant laundromat, across the street from a tattoo parlor. However, this information is shaky, and time is of the essence.
If you want to run cryptic off a 23 land manabase you probably shouldn't run any colorless lands at all. A ninth fetchland can work. I also like chaos021's suggestion of reflecting pool, although you should treat it like a filterland; you probably don't want to run more than a singleton
True. I only run one in the deck. Playing more is riskier proposition. The question I have is this: Would you run it in place of one Celestial Colonnade or something like Sulfur Falls?
I'd run it over the colorless lands:
8-9 fetches
4 shocks
4 basics
3 colonnades
2-3 checklands
1 reflecting pool
[quote from="Bearscape »" url="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/modern/tier-1-modern/728834-jeskai-harbinger?comment=523"]Sideboard counterspells and unconditional wraths come in, wear//tear is great as well. Special shoutout to crumble t dust for being a complete trap that will kill you if you try to crumble an inkmoth nexus; spreading seas is great though.
I'm not sure what you mean by Crumble to Dusting an Inkmoth = trap/bad. Is there an interaction that I'm missing?
First of all you could only play it if inkmoth is their only infect creature on the board; if they also have a glistener elf tapping out will kill you. Then, if inky is their only threat, they can activate it in response crumble to to protect it with vines of vastwood or apostle's blessing, or just simply spell pierce it. Again, you die on their untap. Four mana for a stone rain is way too inefficient against infect.
Ancestral vision has to be built around. I think it is worse in a deck with a higher curve with cards like cryptic command and wrath main deck etc. In this case, I can see lowering it to 2, or 0, since your late game is based on cryptic+snapcaster cryptic so you don't really need the draw 3.
On the other hand, AV is the best card in the deck in the list I run, which is no cryptic, low mana curve, with timely/anger main deck (I run 3, very close to Ingram's list from an SCG, with some adaptations). The idea is that all of your cards aside from Nahiri and Emrakul allow you to survive in the early turns (remand, leak, path, snare in higher numbers, only 2 colonnades, 23 lands), and all of them can be cast before turn 4. That means that an early ancestral is almost guaranteed to resolve, and that you are not sad to draw one later, since you can just repeat the process: trade 1 for 1, gain time, draw 3. Eventually, you'll stick a Nahiri, protect her and win. I have never found AV clunky, even in the fastest of MU, since my deck is built in a way that I survive long enough for it to resolve (I basically never side it out).
One other perk of AV is that your deck is full of answers, but you have to find the right answers at the right time. Even post side, drawing a lot of cards ensures that you will draw your counterspells against combo, or your removal against infect, or your SB cards against dredge.
My SB is still varying, but even in MU where it's not that good (like burn), I would have to side in a lot of cards for AV to come out
Sure, sometimes, I'll be in topdeck mode and draw one and cry. Or I'll have a hand with 2 AV, colonnade sulfur falls and serum visions. But most of the time, drawing it late after stabilizing is not bad, and Nahiri allows to pitch extra unwanted ones. I'll also note that drawing unwanted AV is as clunky as having cryptic in your opening hand. That's why I don't like playing both in the same deck
I think I can safely say that in every single matchup, I want to draw at least one AV but never want two suspended at the same time. I have won so many games just stalling for AV to resolve then completely turning around the game, it's ridiculous. 3 is definitely the right number to draw exactly 1, you can side one out in the faster matchups to make sure you don't draw more than one.
..random question on Vendilion Clique: why are we playing only 1 ?! Feels like a very strong card, even against the aggro match-ups, where it either trades or chumps+value ..
..is anyone considering playing 3 Nahiri ? I have seen the full playset in almost all versions of this deck, even though some lists feature only 3. with all the card-draw and -selection (SV/AV) it could be argued that 3 might be enough... how do you feel about this?
If you don't want to see her as much, then I don't see a problem with cutting a Nahiri. Should function fairly similar to having 4. Less likely to have her in the opener. Personally I like to see her very early, but that's just me.
Sideboard counterspells and unconditional wraths come in, wear//tear is great as well. Special shoutout to crumble t dust for being a complete trap that will kill you if you try to crumble an inkmoth nexus; spreading seas is great though.
I'm not sure what you mean by Crumble to Dusting an Inkmoth = trap/bad. Is there an interaction that I'm missing?
Hi, i'm going to try playing Jeskai Nahiri, I have read a lot of content about thise deck but need to see it in action bit more. Who knows any videos, twitch recaps/channels or something?
MTGcoverage.com and check modern. Last SCG contains alot of Jeskai so that's a start
So... I know I'm not currently playing Nahiri. But I could really use some help with my list.
I feel like I want to add the 24th land... but no idea what to cut for it. I feel like the deck wants to keep all the other cards 0_o.
I think you can afford to cut Restoration Angel, Spell Queller, Remand, Electrolyze, or Mana Leak. I'd go with cutting a Resto in favor of 24th land; it's not as easy to curve to 4 lands with less than 24, and having a full playset of Restos would make this even more apparent. I'd up the count of SV to 4, but 3 works too; Jeskai Flash (Geist variants) run 3 SV to good effect.
I've been trying recently some sort of variation with the deck but I seem to have a lot of trouble to make the manabase work, basically I want to play these cards MB
I was thinking replacing the sulfur falls for some filter lands, maybe rugged prairie, what are your opinions regarding cryptic command? is the effort not worth it?
BTW: I listed 23 lands because I always flood with 24, I know it's not optimal but that's just my luck I guess.
I think since you're looking to hit as many colors as possible, you can afford to shave down to just 2 Islands. Maybe shave Ghost Quarter as well. Might want to go up to a 9th fetch land and yeah, a filter land can work fine. IMO accommodating Cryptic Command is worth the investment; it's such a strong card.
To all the people who have issues with color requirements, have any of you considered Reflecting Pool? I've been using it for a while and it works fine. I like that it comes into play untapped and makes any mana you already have. We play enough fetch lands to not worry about getting cut off from a particular color.
I've seen it in Esper Control (Wafo-Tapa). I believe it can be run. Much like Bearscape said, probably best to consider it like a filter land.
If you want to run cryptic off a 23 land manabase you probably shouldn't run any colorless lands at all. A ninth fetchland can work. I also like chaos021's suggestion of reflecting pool, although you should treat it like a filterland; you probably don't want to run more than a singleton
True. I only run one in the deck. Playing more is riskier proposition. The question I have is this: Would you run it in place of one Celestial Colonnade or something like Sulfur Falls?
I personally wouldn't cut down on Colonnades any further; I think 3 is a good spot for it; I like having the option to close games with Man-lands and IMO 2 is too loose to feasibly rely on it as a subsidiary game plan. Therefore, I'd be more inclined to cutting Sulfur Falls and the like.
Crazy idea: what about cutting cryptic entirely? (for spell snare or dispel?)
Currently running the "newest" shaun mc list with 2AV Cryptic and Electrolyse. You can make an argument for both "styles" if you check goldfish both with AV or without AV managed to 5-0 league but the majority (73%) plays AV.
I don't think these are opposed styles at all, is just about what is the best mana base to run all those cards. Personally I wouldn't run AV with two cryptics, 3 remand, 4 SV, and nahiri, since I feel there are enough drawing effects already. I want to keep cryptics to help my mirror and grixis matches.
I just want to point out that this recent talk about Ancestral Vision has a lot to do with the clunkiness that I was trying to reference. The idea of trying to shave some number from the main deck or maybe just move some number to the sideboard in between games is weird for a card that can be the greatest thing since sliced bread or the worst draw ever. More importantly, I didn't bring it up. I'm not questioning how good the "good" is. I was trying to understand how people deal with the "bad" because it can be really bad, and my philosophy is to have as close to 0 bad cards after sideboarding if possible. What @derFeind describes is not an uncommon scenario where you want to pitch the card for a chance at something else. It's also why I had been keeping Desolate Lighthouse in my mana base as well, but tapping down/out to toss a card feels bad. You can't always count on having a Nahiri on the board in derFeind's scenario either. I mean who plays a Nahiri into an unstable board with no protection? I guess you could as a value play to exile something, but that seems really expensive/inefficient. The end result (usually for me) is that your hand ends up getting clogged up and you're just praying for the least crappy scenario to pan out. I feel like I'm missing something that you guys are doing to deal with this. Am I wrong in saying that all the lists running sans Cryptic Command or on 23-land are all-in on Nahiri?
Currently running the "newest" shaun mc list with 2AV Cryptic and Electrolyse. You can make an argument for both "styles" if you check goldfish both with AV or without AV managed to 5-0 league but the majority (73%) plays AV.
I don't think these are opposed styles at all, is just about what is the best mana base to run all those cards. Personally I wouldn't run AV with two cryptics, 3 remand, 4 SV, and nahiri, since I feel there are enough drawing effects already. I want to keep cryptics to help my mirror and grixis matches.
I'm almost wondering if cryptic isn't as good vs the mirror or grixis matches. It costs far too much.
First of all you could only play it if inkmoth is their only infect creature on the board; if they also have a glistener elf tapping out will kill you. Then, if inky is their only threat, they can activate it in response crumble to to protect it with vines of vastwood or apostle's blessing, or just simply spell pierce it. Again, you die on their untap. Four mana for a stone rain is way too inefficient against infect.
Oh. That's what you meant. Thought there was some technical interaction I'm missing (like Spellskite or whatever).
Reprints the one card that people point to when saying that art objectifies women.
Well done Wizards.
Liliana does not objectify women in any way at all. We have gotten to a point in our society that every single picture of a women must be objectifying a women in some negative way......blah blah blah.. That is not the case. (((Sarcasm)))Picture of a girl drinking a milk shake, must be sex related and putting women down, picture of girl sitting on a beach, picture of a girl driving a car, picture of a girl on the moon at a new space station.)))
You have a picture of an attractive strong power women who girls dress up as for anime conventions. What more do you want? The picture is fine, happy to see a reprint. Sick of of seeing people claim that everything in existence must be putting women down. Then all I have to do is replace the word "women" with anything else to get the same mentality; fish, cats, arabs, blacks, jews, men, environment, whites, chinese, old people, etc. It doesn't matter what word I put in. Stop sucking life out of everything man. That artwork of her is awesome. Stop putting stuff down man. Just stop. If the picture was really as negative as you claim she would totally nude, in a kitchen, making sandwiches and giving blow jobs. Her abilities would be horrible as well. +1 do nothing -2 do nothing -6 do nothing. Instead liliana of the veil is an amazing planeswalker comparable to jace, the mind sculpter with great art to appreciate.
My suggestion listen to some comedy radio for a while, pandora is free, youtube is free there is something out there for you. ***** go make fun of somebody. The whole world is so serious and campaigning for some cause, or someones rights, everything is a hate crime, racist, sexist. blah blah blah.
"O no mcdonalds must be slandering a hate crime against skinny people every time they make a big mac." hahaha jeeze You're just someone perpetuating another groups negative perspective that they've made you believe is correct. Look at the picture for a hour and tell me what's wrong with it? I don't see anything.
I have heard vague rumors of a moustache-dispensing vending machine in a distant laundromat, across the street from a tattoo parlor. However, this information is shaky, and time is of the essence.
I just want to point out that this recent talk about Ancestral Vision has a lot to do with the clunkiness that I was trying to reference. The idea of trying to shave some number from the main deck or maybe just move some number to the sideboard in between games is weird for a card that can be the greatest thing since sliced bread or the worst draw ever. More importantly, I didn't bring it up. I'm not questioning how good the "good" is. I was trying to understand how people deal with the "bad" because it can be really bad, and my philosophy is to have as close to 0 bad cards after sideboarding if possible. What @derFeind describes is not an uncommon scenario where you want to pitch the card for a chance at something else. It's also why I had been keeping Desolate Lighthouse in my mana base as well, but tapping down/out to toss a card feels bad. You can't always count on having a Nahiri on the board in derFeind's scenario either. I mean who plays a Nahiri into an unstable board with no protection? I guess you could as a value play to exile something, but that seems really expensive/inefficient. The end result (usually for me) is that your hand ends up getting clogged up and you're just praying for the least crappy scenario to pan out. I feel like I'm missing something that you guys are doing to deal with this. Am I wrong in saying that all the lists running sans Cryptic Command or on 23-land are all-in on Nahiri?
I do like the Shaun McLaren as well though.
This type of statement (bolded) always confuses me a little. Sure, McLaren's list (link) has a bit more burn (3 Helix, 1 Electrolyze intead of 1-3 Helix only), and has a second Vendilion Clique, but is the win condition really that different? Compared to Ingram's SCG Dallas list, for example (link), McLaren has ~3-4 cards that help with the secondary burn/beatdown plan (Clique, Electrolyze, 1-2 Helix), but dilute the primary Nahiri/Emrakul plan (no Timely, no sweepers, -1 Path to Exile). But McLaren also cuts a Colonnade, so that hurts the secondary plan, and he includes two Ancestral Vision, which (combined with two Cryptic Command and 3 Remand) seem to be drawing into less impactful cards than Timely/Anger/Verdict.
I guess, sure, it feels like McLaren is trying to incorporate Nahiri and Emrakul into the type of Jeskai Control deck he played at Pro Tour Born of the Gods (link), and Ingram/Davis' lists are built more around Nahiri's (and Ancestral Vision's) strengths, but it seems like a subtle difference -- 60% Nahiri, 40% burn/Colonnade for Ingram/Davis vs. 55% Nahiri, 45% burn/Clique/Colonnade for McLaren -- more than one list being "all in" and the other not.
I don't have the most experience with this deck or Modern in general, so I could be completely wrong. I do appreciate this kind of higher-level theoretical discussion though. It helps me understand the deck better.
* * *
Side note: It would be much appreciated (by me, at least, if not others) if people could trim the posts they are quoting. Quoting a 150+ line post just to post a single sentence reply is really unnecessary and just makes it more difficult to read through the thread.
Am I wrong in saying that all the lists running sans Cryptic Command or on 23-land are all-in on Nahiri?
I think running 23-24 lands is a matter of personal luck. I would always play the decklist which makes more sense but if I'm getting constantly flooded I'm going to cut a land no matter what the internetz says. Also a list without cryptics isn't all-in in my opinion, you can pretty much play a wrath, an anger, a timely reinforcements, a clique and what not, since the mana base will hold and that deck would be really controlling and extremely good in it's plan to ride colonnades to victory.
I agree with the notion that AV and Cryptic Command shouldn't be played together.
Like someone above said, AV 23-lands are more lean low to the ground, basically the plan is disrupt with counter spells and removal, then protect Nahiri for 2 turns.
The Cryptic 24-lands are more grind oriented, like classic UWR control shells. This is where Nahiri shines less because you really don't want to draw multiples, because tapping out is bad for a exile effect or a rummage. In those cases,for example, Jund players manage to resolve Liliana and the game just crumbles to dust.
I personally haven't decided yet which one is better. I've had trouble with Ingram/Davis lists in the past, being stuck on 3 lands most of the game, or just can't find the right spells.
Im running Gerry list from the SCG video and it has been pretty good. It seems to understand the difference between a full control deck, and a Jeskai Harbinger deck. Not sold on AV though...
I just want to point out that this recent talk about Ancestral Vision has a lot to do with the clunkiness that I was trying to reference. The idea of trying to shave some number from the main deck or maybe just move some number to the sideboard in between games is weird for a card that can be the greatest thing since sliced bread or the worst draw ever. More importantly, I didn't bring it up. I'm not questioning how good the "good" is. I was trying to understand how people deal with the "bad" because it can be really bad, and my philosophy is to have as close to 0 bad cards after sideboarding if possible. What @derFeind describes is not an uncommon scenario where you want to pitch the card for a chance at something else. It's also why I had been keeping Desolate Lighthouse in my mana base as well, but tapping down/out to toss a card feels bad. You can't always count on having a Nahiri on the board in derFeind's scenario either. I mean who plays a Nahiri into an unstable board with no protection? I guess you could as a value play to exile something, but that seems really expensive/inefficient. The end result (usually for me) is that your hand ends up getting clogged up and you're just praying for the least crappy scenario to pan out. I feel like I'm missing something that you guys are doing to deal with this. Am I wrong in saying that all the lists running sans Cryptic Command or on 23-land are all-in on Nahiri?
I do like the Shaun McLaren as well though.
This type of statement (bolded) always confuses me a little. Sure, McLaren's list (link) has a bit more burn (3 Helix, 1 Electrolyze intead of 1-3 Helix only), and has a second Vendilion Clique, but is the win condition really that different? Compared to Ingram's SCG Dallas list, for example (link), McLaren has ~3-4 cards that help with the secondary burn/beatdown plan (Clique, Electrolyze, 1-2 Helix), but dilute the primary Nahiri/Emrakul plan (no Timely, no sweepers, -1 Path to Exile). But McLaren also cuts a Colonnade, so that hurts the secondary plan, and he includes two Ancestral Vision, which (combined with two Cryptic Command and 3 Remand) seem to be drawing into less impactful cards than Timely/Anger/Verdict.
I guess, sure, it feels like McLaren is trying to incorporate Nahiri and Emrakul into the type of Jeskai Control deck he played at Pro Tour Born of the Gods (link), and Ingram/Davis' lists are built more around Nahiri's (and Ancestral Vision's) strengths, but it seems like a subtle difference -- 60% Nahiri, 40% burn/Colonnade for Ingram/Davis vs. 55% Nahiri, 45% burn/Clique/Colonnade for McLaren -- more than one list being "all in" and the other not.
I don't have the most experience with this deck or Modern in general, so I could be completely wrong. I do appreciate this kind of higher-level theoretical discussion though. It helps me understand the deck better.
The bolded statement should've been on its own line. It actually has nothing to do with the rest of that paragraph. No, it's not a major difference if you're looking at just the cards, but after watching many pros and hearing some of how they go through things, they do play the decks differently. Shaun piloted a list very close to what he took to WMCQ for a couple months prior while testing some new ideas. He generally like to play a control style and based on arguments with his chat, he's equally fine using Nahiri for bait, as value and a finisher. Gerry T. early on also played the deck with a control style, but over time, he has focused his list on the combo, and the way he plays it shows that (as well as his explanations). He also doesn't mind playing it for value, but he specifically stated that he wants put it down and protect it (sort of at all costs).
Peter Ingram has said in interviews that he was not a fan of Lightning Helix in his deck and that he tended to board them out a lot. Gerry T. has mirrored a similar sentiment. The only reason they have kept some number around is respect for the Zoo and Burn matchup IIRC. They're not really interested in going with the Burn plan.
[BTW, typing this out helped me figure out a couple things I've definitely been doing wrong/confusing].
I feel you on wanting more higher-level discussions. I just feel like I don't know what questions to ask.
As a long time writer in this thread I'm getting a bit tiered of the conversations sometimes :), as we tend to repeat ourselves a lot latly. But since the old primer is closed:
This is very useful thanks
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Sounds like you have good taste! My current list is this:
4 Scalding Tarn
4 Flooded Strand
3 Celestial Colonnade
1 Hallowed Fountain
1 Glacial Fortress
3 Steam Vents
2 Sulfur Falls
1 Sacred Foundry
2 Island
1 Plains
1 Mountain
1 Desolate Lighthouse
4 Snapcaster Mage
1 Vendilion Clique
1 Emrakul, the Aeons Torn
Spells (30)
4 Nahiri, the Harbinger
4 Serum Visions
2 Spell Snare
2 Remand
3 Mana Leak
2 Cryptic Command
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Path to Exile
2 Lightning Helix
1 Electrolyze
1 Supreme Verdict
1 Timely Reinforcements
My sideboard is currently in flux because my local meta is kinda small and really weird.
You do have a point on the Hallowed Fountain. My deck is slightly heavier on White than Red and I'm not positive that I want the 4th Colonnade because I hate taplands, so Vents->Fountain should be an easy change.
I also agree about AV. I do not like the card (just a personal preference thing) and prefer Cryptic Command. One of the big pulls to playing Blue in Modern for me is Cryptic, so I refuse to leave home without it haha
URW Control
WBG Abzan
GRW Burn
EDH
GR Rosheen Meanderer
Just ommit that I said 23 lands please, the important bit is about if filterlands should be the way to go (and which) or if cryptic is not worth it in the current meta. I know I should play 24 lands, but I get constantly flooded (it's more an individual luck thing as I never got stuck with 23 lands nor I get to miss a color). I also play a single timely reinforcements mb but I didn't mention it becasue it doesn't stress the mana base at all.
Right now it seems to me that I can play 2 cryptics, 1 anger, and 1 timely, or 3 AV, 1 wrath, 1 anger, and 1 timely, since AV plus cryptic feels like way too much draw and not enough answers. I'll test 2 filterlands and loothouse tonight to see if there's a difference (also I'll go 24 lands k?).
I cannot disagree more. Dark Dwellers is an incredibly clunky card and I heavily dislike tapping five mana at sorcery speed just to turn on my opponent's removal. Ancestral Vision itself is a good card, but I prefer Cryptic over Ancestral.
URW Control
WBG Abzan
GRW Burn
EDH
GR Rosheen Meanderer
True. I only run one in the deck. Playing more is riskier proposition. The question I have is this: Would you run it in place of one Celestial Colonnade or something like Sulfur Falls?
Ad nauseam runs a card called patrician's scorn that makes leyline of sanctity useless in that matchup, even in multiples.
If you don't want to see her as much, then I don't see a problem with cutting a Nahiri. Should function fairly similar to having 4. Less likely to have her in the opener. Personally I like to see her very early, but that's just me.
I'm not sure what you mean by Crumble to Dusting an Inkmoth = trap/bad. Is there an interaction that I'm missing?
Are you referring to SCG Dallas (Modern Open)?
I think you can afford to cut Restoration Angel, Spell Queller, Remand, Electrolyze, or Mana Leak. I'd go with cutting a Resto in favor of 24th land; it's not as easy to curve to 4 lands with less than 24, and having a full playset of Restos would make this even more apparent. I'd up the count of SV to 4, but 3 works too; Jeskai Flash (Geist variants) run 3 SV to good effect.
I think since you're looking to hit as many colors as possible, you can afford to shave down to just 2 Islands. Maybe shave Ghost Quarter as well. Might want to go up to a 9th fetch land and yeah, a filter land can work fine. IMO accommodating Cryptic Command is worth the investment; it's such a strong card.
I've seen it in Esper Control (Wafo-Tapa). I believe it can be run. Much like Bearscape said, probably best to consider it like a filter land.
I personally wouldn't cut down on Colonnades any further; I think 3 is a good spot for it; I like having the option to close games with Man-lands and IMO 2 is too loose to feasibly rely on it as a subsidiary game plan. Therefore, I'd be more inclined to cutting Sulfur Falls and the like.
I'd run it over the colorless lands:
8-9 fetches
4 shocks
4 basics
3 colonnades
2-3 checklands
1 reflecting pool
First of all you could only play it if inkmoth is their only infect creature on the board; if they also have a glistener elf tapping out will kill you. Then, if inky is their only threat, they can activate it in response crumble to to protect it with vines of vastwood or apostle's blessing, or just simply spell pierce it. Again, you die on their untap. Four mana for a stone rain is way too inefficient against infect.
On the other hand, AV is the best card in the deck in the list I run, which is no cryptic, low mana curve, with timely/anger main deck (I run 3, very close to Ingram's list from an SCG, with some adaptations). The idea is that all of your cards aside from Nahiri and Emrakul allow you to survive in the early turns (remand, leak, path, snare in higher numbers, only 2 colonnades, 23 lands), and all of them can be cast before turn 4. That means that an early ancestral is almost guaranteed to resolve, and that you are not sad to draw one later, since you can just repeat the process: trade 1 for 1, gain time, draw 3. Eventually, you'll stick a Nahiri, protect her and win. I have never found AV clunky, even in the fastest of MU, since my deck is built in a way that I survive long enough for it to resolve (I basically never side it out).
One other perk of AV is that your deck is full of answers, but you have to find the right answers at the right time. Even post side, drawing a lot of cards ensures that you will draw your counterspells against combo, or your removal against infect, or your SB cards against dredge.
My SB is still varying, but even in MU where it's not that good (like burn), I would have to side in a lot of cards for AV to come out
Sure, sometimes, I'll be in topdeck mode and draw one and cry. Or I'll have a hand with 2 AV, colonnade sulfur falls and serum visions. But most of the time, drawing it late after stabilizing is not bad, and Nahiri allows to pitch extra unwanted ones. I'll also note that drawing unwanted AV is as clunky as having cryptic in your opening hand. That's why I don't like playing both in the same deck
Currently Playing:
Modern Grixis Shadow, Storm
Legacy: Grixis Delver, Sneak and Show
Duel Commander: Kess High Tide
Vintage Big blue(MTGO)
Crazy idea: what about cutting cryptic entirely? (for spell snare or dispel?)
Twitter: twitter.com/axmanonline
Stream: twitch.tv/axman
Current Decks
Modern: Affinity
Standard: BW Control
Legacy: Death and Taxes :symw::symr:
Vintage: NA
It's not crazy, that's precisly what I was asking, I guess I just wanted to have my cake and eat it :/
I don't think these are opposed styles at all, is just about what is the best mana base to run all those cards. Personally I wouldn't run AV with two cryptics, 3 remand, 4 SV, and nahiri, since I feel there are enough drawing effects already. I want to keep cryptics to help my mirror and grixis matches.
I do like the Shaun McLaren as well though.
I'm almost wondering if cryptic isn't as good vs the mirror or grixis matches. It costs far too much.
Twitter: twitter.com/axmanonline
Stream: twitch.tv/axman
Current Decks
Modern: Affinity
Standard: BW Control
Legacy: Death and Taxes :symw::symr:
Vintage: NA
Oh. That's what you meant. Thought there was some technical interaction I'm missing (like Spellskite or whatever).
I tried main board dispel at GP Charlotte as a 1-of. I didn't really like it.
This type of statement (bolded) always confuses me a little. Sure, McLaren's list (link) has a bit more burn (3 Helix, 1 Electrolyze intead of 1-3 Helix only), and has a second Vendilion Clique, but is the win condition really that different? Compared to Ingram's SCG Dallas list, for example (link), McLaren has ~3-4 cards that help with the secondary burn/beatdown plan (Clique, Electrolyze, 1-2 Helix), but dilute the primary Nahiri/Emrakul plan (no Timely, no sweepers, -1 Path to Exile). But McLaren also cuts a Colonnade, so that hurts the secondary plan, and he includes two Ancestral Vision, which (combined with two Cryptic Command and 3 Remand) seem to be drawing into less impactful cards than Timely/Anger/Verdict.
I guess, sure, it feels like McLaren is trying to incorporate Nahiri and Emrakul into the type of Jeskai Control deck he played at Pro Tour Born of the Gods (link), and Ingram/Davis' lists are built more around Nahiri's (and Ancestral Vision's) strengths, but it seems like a subtle difference -- 60% Nahiri, 40% burn/Colonnade for Ingram/Davis vs. 55% Nahiri, 45% burn/Clique/Colonnade for McLaren -- more than one list being "all in" and the other not.
I don't have the most experience with this deck or Modern in general, so I could be completely wrong. I do appreciate this kind of higher-level theoretical discussion though. It helps me understand the deck better.
* * *
Side note: It would be much appreciated (by me, at least, if not others) if people could trim the posts they are quoting. Quoting a 150+ line post just to post a single sentence reply is really unnecessary and just makes it more difficult to read through the thread.
I think running 23-24 lands is a matter of personal luck. I would always play the decklist which makes more sense but if I'm getting constantly flooded I'm going to cut a land no matter what the internetz says. Also a list without cryptics isn't all-in in my opinion, you can pretty much play a wrath, an anger, a timely reinforcements, a clique and what not, since the mana base will hold and that deck would be really controlling and extremely good in it's plan to ride colonnades to victory.
Like someone above said, AV 23-lands are more lean low to the ground, basically the plan is disrupt with counter spells and removal, then protect Nahiri for 2 turns.
The Cryptic 24-lands are more grind oriented, like classic UWR control shells. This is where Nahiri shines less because you really don't want to draw multiples, because tapping out is bad for a exile effect or a rummage. In those cases,for example, Jund players manage to resolve Liliana and the game just crumbles to dust.
I personally haven't decided yet which one is better. I've had trouble with Ingram/Davis lists in the past, being stuck on 3 lands most of the game, or just can't find the right spells.
Im running Gerry list from the SCG video and it has been pretty good. It seems to understand the difference between a full control deck, and a Jeskai Harbinger deck. Not sold on AV though...
The bolded statement should've been on its own line. It actually has nothing to do with the rest of that paragraph. No, it's not a major difference if you're looking at just the cards, but after watching many pros and hearing some of how they go through things, they do play the decks differently. Shaun piloted a list very close to what he took to WMCQ for a couple months prior while testing some new ideas. He generally like to play a control style and based on arguments with his chat, he's equally fine using Nahiri for bait, as value and a finisher. Gerry T. early on also played the deck with a control style, but over time, he has focused his list on the combo, and the way he plays it shows that (as well as his explanations). He also doesn't mind playing it for value, but he specifically stated that he wants put it down and protect it (sort of at all costs).
Peter Ingram has said in interviews that he was not a fan of Lightning Helix in his deck and that he tended to board them out a lot. Gerry T. has mirrored a similar sentiment. The only reason they have kept some number around is respect for the Zoo and Burn matchup IIRC. They're not really interested in going with the Burn plan.
[BTW, typing this out helped me figure out a couple things I've definitely been doing wrong/confusing].
I feel you on wanting more higher-level discussions. I just feel like I don't know what questions to ask.
This is very useful thanks