Every land that is milled is that much of a percentage less that I can hit a land, so if I'm in a control deck and mill a land it is that much more likely over the next X turns that I don't draw a land. This percentage may not make a different over one or two turns, but in a control deck where I am aiming to take as many turns as I can, turn after turn losing that percentage to draw a land makes a difference. Playing this guy on curve in a control deck with 3 lands if it's my only t3 play and then missing once on a land drop because it's milled seems really really bad. Again, I understand this is not the scenario that is always going to happen and that control decks often have built-in ways to find lands, but when my draw doesn't allow that and I am missing, then the card is helping you lose you the game by letting my opponent mill lands I otherwise would've happily drawn + played. Control decks are probably where this card actually becomes a punisher card for that reason.
Also if you're not turning the corner and the burn is just fire axing them, then it's not really performing in a control deck ideally. It's a card that seems to performs well for the control deck when you are ahead, but is not really that great if you are behind other than being a blocker that dies to everything as you'd rather be drawing these cards that are being converted into burn more likely than you would want to hit them.
When you are playing 17/18 land in a control deck, milling a land really makes little to no difference. You are decreasing your probability from drawing a land from like 12-15/31-30 to 11-14/30-29 depending on if you're on the draw and how many lands you have left in hand. That is pretty much negligible. If the card said from the bottom of your library, nobody would make this complaint because "you wouldn't have drawn the card anyways", but the fact of the matter is, probabilistically, the bottom and top of your library are the same until you have any sort of information.
The main reason I wouldn't play this in a PURE control deck (although I could see playing it in some) is because I don't want to tap out to play a 3/2 on turn 3 that will give me a card in the next some odd turns sometimes while dealing some amount of damage to my opponent. In a midrange or aggro deck, where you are constantly pressuring, this card seems great! I agree that it isn't best in a control shell, but the argument of binning lands is not remotely sound, and I can still see playing it in some control decks depending on curve, top end, and library manipulation.
Maybe I just don't understand the argument and that's a realistic possibility, but they are no longer the same once it's revealed that it would've been your draw, no? Also again, I understand that the short-term percentage is not high, but I'm taking into account the fact that the control deck realistically wants this guy to live so decreasing that amount compounds turn-to-turn.
Either way I 100% agree with your second point, which I noted in my second paragraph.
Every land that is milled is that much of a percentage less that I can hit a land, so if I'm in a control deck and mill a land it is that much more likely over the next X turns that I don't draw a land.
And every time you hit a non-land it's that much more chance you'll hit a land with your regular draw step. Since it's random (in the absence of top-deck manipulation, which should favor the control player) this is a wash.
Also if you're not turning the corner and the burn is just fire axing them, then it's not really performing in a control deck ideally. It's a card that seems to performs well for the control deck when you are ahead, but is not really that great if you are behind other than being a blocker that dies to everything as you'd rather be drawing these cards that are being converted into burn more likely than you would want to hit them.
This I tend to agree with though. If you're not fairly active about pressuring your opponent's life total, this guy's value drops off pretty hard.
Every land that is milled is that much of a percentage less that I can hit a land, so if I'm in a control deck and mill a land it is that much more likely over the next X turns that I don't draw a land. This percentage may not make a different over one or two turns, but in a control deck where I am aiming to take as many turns as I can, turn after turn losing that percentage to draw a land makes a difference. Playing this guy on curve in a control deck with 3 lands if it's my only t3 play and then missing once on a land drop because it's milled seems really really bad. Again, I understand this is not the scenario that is always going to happen and that control decks often have built-in ways to find lands, but when my draw doesn't allow that and I am missing, then the card is helping you lose you the game by letting my opponent mill lands I otherwise would've happily drawn + played. Control decks are probably where this card actually becomes a punisher card for that reason.
Also if you're not turning the corner and the burn is just fire axing them, then it's not really performing in a control deck ideally. It's a card that seems to performs well for the control deck when you are ahead, but is not really that great if you are behind other than being a blocker that dies to everything as you'd rather be drawing these cards that are being converted into burn more likely than you would want to hit them.
It's not true that you draw less lands when having Sin Prodder out on average.
There's two ways to view this. In your view, you would also increase the chance of drawing lands each you binned a nonland card with the prodder.
You can also view the situation as this: Your library is random, so drawing the 1,3,5,7 ... all the odd number of cards from it should yield the same amount of land as the even cards.
Right, I get that the inverse is true that I have a higher chance to draw lands if I am binning non-land cards, and I get that the average is a wash, what Im saying is that it seems awful for a control deck to be on the binning-lands side of the chart determining the average performance for this card. It just seems bad to me to play a card in a control deck that could stop that control deck from drawing lands when drawing + playing lands is one of the more important things a control deck can do, despite this not being the average scenario.
Every land that is milled is that much of a percentage less that I can hit a land, so if I'm in a control deck and mill a land it is that much more likely over the next X turns that I don't draw a land. This percentage may not make a different over one or two turns, but in a control deck where I am aiming to take as many turns as I can, turn after turn losing that percentage to draw a land makes a difference. Playing this guy on curve in a control deck with 3 lands if it's my only t3 play and then missing once on a land drop because it's milled seems really really bad. Again, I understand this is not the scenario that is always going to happen and that control decks often have built-in ways to find lands, but when my draw doesn't allow that and I am missing, then the card is helping you lose you the game by letting my opponent mill lands I otherwise would've happily drawn + played. Control decks are probably where this card actually becomes a punisher card for that reason.
Also if you're not turning the corner and the burn is just fire axing them, then it's not really performing in a control deck ideally. It's a card that seems to performs well for the control deck when you are ahead, but is not really that great if you are behind other than being a blocker that dies to everything as you'd rather be drawing these cards that are being converted into burn more likely than you would want to hit them.
It's not true that you draw less lands when having Sin Prodder out on average.
There's two ways to view this. In your view, you would also increase the chance of drawing lands each you binned a nonland card with the prodder.
You can also view the situation as this: Your library is random, so drawing the 1,3,5,7 ... all the odd number of cards from it should yield the same amount of land as the even cards.
Exactly that. Unless, you want to go super wide and never miss any land drop, I think this card is more than servicable in a 17 lands midrange deck as well. It's a random effect, so you can also end up binning a non-land and then draw the land you needed. And the reason why it would not be that good in a control deck, like ryansaxe has already mentionned, has nothing to do with land count at all. Anyhow, some may still like it anyway depending on their deck's composition. Tapped out control, for example, may enjoy it.
I wouldn't get hung up on the punisher piece for those struggling with that part of it. Other punisher cards suck because there is always one option that is clearly underpowered for the cost, so if the opponent can always choose that one you wind up with a weak card overall.
This is not true. The choices are often very close in powerlevel on paper. However if you meant that in a given situation there's a weak choice, that the opponent can choose, then you're exactly right.
Sure, some scenarios will be better than others. But even worst case, it's still upside attached to an already playable card (3/2 menace for 3 is perfectly serviceable IMO). And I'm not sure it's true punisher since 2/3's of the time, they are going to be faced with a lose/lose (non-land card - either give you gas or take damage).
It is exactly a punisher effect, which is when you give an opponent a lose/lose choice. Only when hitting lands, and they're arguably milling you, could it instead be called a downside.
I think the fact that we are even discussing if a red aggro 3 drop beater might be decent in some controlish builds says a lot. And when many of my cards are 3-6 drops this guy will pressure life totals on its own. Bin my critter, take 5, bin my kill spell take 3, bin my Titan take 6.... How long can they go doing that? Sure it might just get bolted but I it is only a 3 drop. The only sad thing is it is kind of a bad blocker.
Right, I get that the inverse is true that I have a higher chance to draw lands if I am binning non-land cards, and I get that the average is a wash, what Im saying is that it seems awful for a control deck to be on the binning-lands side of the chart determining the average performance for this card. It just seems bad to me to play a card in a control deck that could stop that control deck from drawing lands when drawing + playing lands is one of the more important things a control deck can do, despite this not being the average scenario.
Then if we toss averages aside, by your own argumentation, you should play the card in control, since it sometimes digs down to extra lands. Which is very important for the control deck.
And you are flipping coins to draw land in your draw step in each turn of every game of magic. You can't base your game on when the coin hits tails, you have to take both head and tails into account.
I really like this guy in counter/burn type decks but I probably wouldn't run him in my other control decks since he'll probably just gut swept away the turn after I play him on curve.
Right, I get that the inverse is true that I have a higher chance to draw lands if I am binning non-land cards, and I get that the average is a wash, what Im saying is that it seems awful for a control deck to be on the binning-lands side of the chart determining the average performance for this card. It just seems bad to me to play a card in a control deck that could stop that control deck from drawing lands when drawing + playing lands is one of the more important things a control deck can do, despite this not being the average scenario.
Then if we toss averages aside, by your own argumentation, you should play the card in control, since it sometimes digs down to extra lands. Which is very important for the control deck.
And you are flipping coins to draw land in your draw step in each turn of every game of magic. You can't base your game on when the coin hits tails, you have to take both head and tails into account.
I am, I am saying that the bad of hitting tails is a lot worse than the good of hitting heads is great, i.e. the chance of losing the game due to binning needed lands is a lot higher than the chance of winning the game is by the opposite result. Perhaps it's negligible, but I'm not so sure about that.
Testable, but not high on it like many here.
Analyzing this in the context of a red aggressive deck in a powered cube:
Agressive 3 drops that provide no value to sorcery speed removal, need to have a strong impact on the early game to be a good cube card.
3/2 menace is fine stats, but as a body independent of an ability, that's closer to 2 mana worth of value than 3 mana.
Now how good is the ability?
When examining a punisher card, I like to examine the worst of the options, then figure out how often it's going to be even worse than that.
Imagine your opponent ALWAYS milled the card. With 16 lands, 24 spells at an average cmc of low 2's, will add up to like 1.25-1.5 damage a turn.
That's if your opponent always picks one option. On a clogged board, your opponent will happily hand you some jackal pups or plated geopedes. The cards like greater gargadon, treasure cruise, tasigur that have deceptively high CMC's will be given to your hand...So the overall value will be lower. Maybe avg damage of like 1-1.25 a turn?
Compare that + 3/2 body to the damage output of the other 3 drops in medium sized cube that also provide no value to sorcery speed removal, and it's well below par.
Now, maybe it can be played in some sort of Jund midrange reanimator type deck? One I'm imagining new Olivia might excel in. Much higher average CMC, a deck that can take advantage of the graveyard , has some ability to interact/delay the game against linear decks. Harder to evaluate the demon in that context, but his ability gets more exciting at least. Good sideboard card for control mirrors etc..
Slam dunk in large lists, as competition falls off pretty hard, but I'm skeptical how good it will be for medium and small. I'm predicting on the cusp of being cut/included for cubes around 450-500 range. Ultimately making the cut for the next year or two as solid agro curve filler.
I am, I am saying that the bad of hitting tails is a lot worse than the good of hitting heads is great. Perhaps it's negligible, but I'm not so sure about that.
I hope I get your point. Getting another land when you have 3 matters more than getting one when you have 8? If not, please go into further depth, so that I can understand.
But the effects of milling each other card in your deck, is that you just get another random card.
The head and tails of this coin are the same. Sometimes you get stuck at 3 mana because of it, but other times it will save you from having 3 mana. It's the same odds, but you'll get screwed in diffenrent games than if you hadn't.
To anyone confused or worried about this card potentially starving you of mana, don't. This doesn't do that.
Lets assume Sin Prodder is in play and at any given upkeep you have L lands left in your deck of D cards. Your opponent will always mill any land that gets revealed.
The probability of revealing a land is L/D and the probability of not revealing a land is (D-L)/D.
If the revealed card was a land, then the probability of drawing a land on your natural draw step becomes (L-1)/(D-1).
If the revealed card was a non-land, then the probability of drawing a land on your natural draw step becomes L/(D-1).
So the probability of drawing a land on your draw step is consequently L/D*(L-1)/(D-1) + (D-L)/D * L/(D-1) which is just equal to L/D, the probability of drawing a land if Sin Prodder wasn't in play.
I'm amazed so many are arguing against this card. Punisher effects are not awful by default, we just haven't really had a good one yet. If you kept tacking on extra cards/damage, Browbeat would eventually be good enough no matter what the opponent chooses.
This one you keep getting chances at that extra damage/card advantage every turn until they deal with it. And with 3 difficult to block power to boot. This card seems ridiculous. Not to mention red's 3s are kind of sparse to begin with...
The cards on top of your deck are random. This does not affect you drawing lands at all, it is literally just mill. If anything it will help you find mana sources by your opponents giving you mana rocks or rampant growths or card draw.
I am, I am saying that the bad of hitting tails is a lot worse than the good of hitting heads is great. Perhaps it's negligible, but I'm not so sure about that.
I hope I get your point. Getting another land when you have 3 matters more than getting one when you have 8? If not, please go into further depth, so that I can understand.
But the effects of milling each other card in your deck, is that you just get another random card.
The head and tails of this coin are the same. Sometimes you get stuck at 3 mana because of it, but other times it will save you from having 3 mana. It's the same odds, but you'll get screwed in diffenrent games than if you hadn't.
Im saying that getting stuck at 3 mana because of it is awful and is not a floor I want to give my control decks for a card that is best in those decks when Im ahead.
This card getting you stuck at 3 mana is just as likely as all your lands being at the bottom of your deck.
Having my first and third cards on my deck being 2 of my x amount of lands is probably a lot higher of a chance to happen than that. If Im missing 2 land drops cause of this card, I am probably not doing well/I am going to lose, and not every draw in a control deck can help you dig by that point no matter how ideally your deck is composed.
Every draw is still random and you still draw one per turn. You're exactly as likely to get mana screwed or flooded with this as you are normally. The triggers feel like pure upside. Even if you hit lands off of the upkeep trigger when you want them, you're still drawing random cards that could just as easily be lands, and the cards could have just as easily been in a different order.
I'm not sure why everyone is talking about filtering lands away like this is some sort of Countryside Crusher effect. It does not affect your chances of drawing lands at all. I am evaluating this as a splashable red 3/2 with menace for 3 with an aggressive upkeep ability that does some extra damage if the creature sticks around. I think overall this a solid creature for aggressive decks, as it has two different ways of getting through evasive damage (attacking with menace and upkeep trigger).
Ah, punisher effects. Nothing generates discussion quite like them. A strictly better Boggart Brute isn't a bad place to start, since that card already sees pauper play (and yes, it is strictly better- this doesn't choke you on mana any more than Courser of Kruphix chokes you on spells).
I'm merely skeptical that this will have the desired effects in many decks, since the average red aggro deck has very few spells of significant CMC, and the higher your curve, the less likely you'll be able to pressure your opponent's life total and get the desired draw. I think it's close enough to warrant testing, but it may prove to be the victim of a slot that has vastly improved as of late.
Every draw is still random and you still draw one per turn. You're exactly as likely to get mana screwed or flooded with this as you are normally. The triggers feel like pure upside. Even if you hit lands off of the upkeep trigger when you want them, you're still drawing random cards that could just as easily be lands, and the cards could have just as easily been in a different order.
Also, LOL at this thing with Top.
Top really makes this card interesting. It filters lands when you don't want them and it causes damage or draws cards. I am not sold on this card but I can test it over ire shaman (probably) or fire imp.
The only time the milling can cause you to be out of lands is when the lands in your grave > cmc of the highest spell in your deck or you deck yourself which only happens off of JTMS in my cube. I am a little disappointed with the 40%ish chance of being a wiff.
I think the "mill-doesn't hurt you" horse has been browbeaten to death. All the arguments are on the table. We're repeating ourselves at this point.
On topic, i hope this card might support a big-red with burn type of deck. The one where Chandra parents, Thundermaw and stoke the flames are great cards.
I am, I am saying that the bad of hitting tails is a lot worse than the good of hitting heads is great. Perhaps it's negligible, but I'm not so sure about that.
I hope I get your point. Getting another land when you have 3 matters more than getting one when you have 8? If not, please go into further depth, so that I can understand.
But the effects of milling each other card in your deck, is that you just get another random card.
The head and tails of this coin are the same. Sometimes you get stuck at 3 mana because of it, but other times it will save you from having 3 mana. It's the same odds, but you'll get screwed in diffenrent games than if you hadn't.
Im saying that getting stuck at 3 mana because of it is awful and is not a floor I want to give my control decks for a card that is best in those decks when Im ahead.
That's like saying that you don't want to run Counterspell in your control deck because some games you'll cast it and never draw a 3rd land. Casting Sin Prodder doesn't change the chance you get stuck on lands at all
Ah, punisher effects. Nothing generates discussion quite like them. A strictly better Boggart Brute isn't a bad place to start, since that card already sees pauper play (and yes, it is strictly better- this doesn't choke you on mana any more than Courser of Kruphix chokes you on spells).
That isn't the greatest comparison. Courser of Kruphix increases the number of spells you draw, this doesn't increase the number of lands you draw. Sure this also doesn't decrease the number of lands you draw, but it's not the same effect as Courser.
When you are playing 17/18 land in a control deck, milling a land really makes little to no difference. You are decreasing your probability from drawing a land from like 12-15/31-30 to 11-14/30-29 depending on if you're on the draw and how many lands you have left in hand. That is pretty much negligible. If the card said from the bottom of your library, nobody would make this complaint because "you wouldn't have drawn the card anyways", but the fact of the matter is, probabilistically, the bottom and top of your library are the same until you have any sort of information.
The main reason I wouldn't play this in a PURE control deck (although I could see playing it in some) is because I don't want to tap out to play a 3/2 on turn 3 that will give me a card in the next some odd turns sometimes while dealing some amount of damage to my opponent. In a midrange or aggro deck, where you are constantly pressuring, this card seems great! I agree that it isn't best in a control shell, but the argument of binning lands is not remotely sound, and I can still see playing it in some control decks depending on curve, top end, and library manipulation.
Social Media: Twitter, Twitch
MTG Articles: 200+ Articles on StarCityGames.com, MTG Draft AI Article
MTG AI Code: Limited Draft Bot, CubeCobra Recommender System
Either way I 100% agree with your second point, which I noted in my second paragraph.
Also, follow us on twitter! @TurnOneMagic
And every time you hit a non-land it's that much more chance you'll hit a land with your regular draw step. Since it's random (in the absence of top-deck manipulation, which should favor the control player) this is a wash.
This I tend to agree with though. If you're not fairly active about pressuring your opponent's life total, this guy's value drops off pretty hard.
It's not true that you draw less lands when having Sin Prodder out on average.
There's two ways to view this. In your view, you would also increase the chance of drawing lands each you binned a nonland card with the prodder.
You can also view the situation as this: Your library is random, so drawing the 1,3,5,7 ... all the odd number of cards from it should yield the same amount of land as the even cards.
Also, follow us on twitter! @TurnOneMagic
Exactly that. Unless, you want to go super wide and never miss any land drop, I think this card is more than servicable in a 17 lands midrange deck as well. It's a random effect, so you can also end up binning a non-land and then draw the land you needed. And the reason why it would not be that good in a control deck, like ryansaxe has already mentionned, has nothing to do with land count at all. Anyhow, some may still like it anyway depending on their deck's composition. Tapped out control, for example, may enjoy it.
Zetsu's Cube on CubeTutor.com
Zetsu's Ebay MTG Online Store
Zetsu's Poker Draft Method
This is not true. The choices are often very close in powerlevel on paper. However if you meant that in a given situation there's a weak choice, that the opponent can choose, then you're exactly right.
It is exactly a punisher effect, which is when you give an opponent a lose/lose choice. Only when hitting lands, and they're arguably milling you, could it instead be called a downside.
Then if we toss averages aside, by your own argumentation, you should play the card in control, since it sometimes digs down to extra lands. Which is very important for the control deck.
And you are flipping coins to draw land in your draw step in each turn of every game of magic. You can't base your game on when the coin hits tails, you have to take both head and tails into account.
My High Octane Unpowered Cube on CubeCobra
I am, I am saying that the bad of hitting tails is a lot worse than the good of hitting heads is great, i.e. the chance of losing the game due to binning needed lands is a lot higher than the chance of winning the game is by the opposite result. Perhaps it's negligible, but I'm not so sure about that.
Also, follow us on twitter! @TurnOneMagic
Analyzing this in the context of a red aggressive deck in a powered cube:
Agressive 3 drops that provide no value to sorcery speed removal, need to have a strong impact on the early game to be a good cube card.
3/2 menace is fine stats, but as a body independent of an ability, that's closer to 2 mana worth of value than 3 mana.
Now how good is the ability?
When examining a punisher card, I like to examine the worst of the options, then figure out how often it's going to be even worse than that.
Imagine your opponent ALWAYS milled the card. With 16 lands, 24 spells at an average cmc of low 2's, will add up to like 1.25-1.5 damage a turn.
That's if your opponent always picks one option. On a clogged board, your opponent will happily hand you some jackal pups or plated geopedes. The cards like greater gargadon, treasure cruise, tasigur that have deceptively high CMC's will be given to your hand...So the overall value will be lower. Maybe avg damage of like 1-1.25 a turn?
Compare that + 3/2 body to the damage output of the other 3 drops in medium sized cube that also provide no value to sorcery speed removal, and it's well below par.
Now, maybe it can be played in some sort of Jund midrange reanimator type deck? One I'm imagining new Olivia might excel in. Much higher average CMC, a deck that can take advantage of the graveyard , has some ability to interact/delay the game against linear decks. Harder to evaluate the demon in that context, but his ability gets more exciting at least. Good sideboard card for control mirrors etc..
Slam dunk in large lists, as competition falls off pretty hard, but I'm skeptical how good it will be for medium and small. I'm predicting on the cusp of being cut/included for cubes around 450-500 range. Ultimately making the cut for the next year or two as solid agro curve filler.
Last Updated 02/07/24
Streaming Standard/Cube on Twitch https://www.twitch.tv/heisenb3rg96
Strategy Twitter https://www.twitter.com/heisenb3rg
I hope I get your point. Getting another land when you have 3 matters more than getting one when you have 8? If not, please go into further depth, so that I can understand.
But the effects of milling each other card in your deck, is that you just get another random card.
The head and tails of this coin are the same. Sometimes you get stuck at 3 mana because of it, but other times it will save you from having 3 mana. It's the same odds, but you'll get screwed in diffenrent games than if you hadn't.
Lets assume Sin Prodder is in play and at any given upkeep you have L lands left in your deck of D cards. Your opponent will always mill any land that gets revealed.
The probability of revealing a land is L/D and the probability of not revealing a land is (D-L)/D.
If the revealed card was a land, then the probability of drawing a land on your natural draw step becomes (L-1)/(D-1).
If the revealed card was a non-land, then the probability of drawing a land on your natural draw step becomes L/(D-1).
So the probability of drawing a land on your draw step is consequently L/D*(L-1)/(D-1) + (D-L)/D * L/(D-1) which is just equal to L/D, the probability of drawing a land if Sin Prodder wasn't in play.
This one you keep getting chances at that extra damage/card advantage every turn until they deal with it. And with 3 difficult to block power to boot. This card seems ridiculous. Not to mention red's 3s are kind of sparse to begin with...
Im saying that getting stuck at 3 mana because of it is awful and is not a floor I want to give my control decks for a card that is best in those decks when Im ahead.
Also, follow us on twitter! @TurnOneMagic
Having my first and third cards on my deck being 2 of my x amount of lands is probably a lot higher of a chance to happen than that. If Im missing 2 land drops cause of this card, I am probably not doing well/I am going to lose, and not every draw in a control deck can help you dig by that point no matter how ideally your deck is composed.
Also, follow us on twitter! @TurnOneMagic
Also, LOL at this thing with Top.
I'm merely skeptical that this will have the desired effects in many decks, since the average red aggro deck has very few spells of significant CMC, and the higher your curve, the less likely you'll be able to pressure your opponent's life total and get the desired draw. I think it's close enough to warrant testing, but it may prove to be the victim of a slot that has vastly improved as of late.
Cubetutor Link
Top really makes this card interesting. It filters lands when you don't want them and it causes damage or draws cards. I am not sold on this card but I can test it over ire shaman (probably) or fire imp.
The only time the milling can cause you to be out of lands is when the lands in your grave > cmc of the highest spell in your deck or you deck yourself which only happens off of JTMS in my cube. I am a little disappointed with the 40%ish chance of being a wiff.
On topic, i hope this card might support a big-red with burn type of deck. The one where Chandra parents, Thundermaw and stoke the flames are great cards.
That's like saying that you don't want to run Counterspell in your control deck because some games you'll cast it and never draw a 3rd land. Casting Sin Prodder doesn't change the chance you get stuck on lands at all
That isn't the greatest comparison. Courser of Kruphix increases the number of spells you draw, this doesn't increase the number of lands you draw. Sure this also doesn't decrease the number of lands you draw, but it's not the same effect as Courser.