The problem with Pack Rat is , as with Liliana of the Veil, You do not really want to discard cards if you are playing Mentors... The only cards you could discard are lands if you really are flooded or a discard when the opponent has no card, but this looks really situational.
As a counterpoint, it's also worth considering that discarding cards to Pack Rat fuels delve for Tasigur, Angler and Muderous Cut, while also giving you more options with Snapcaster. Likewise, Lingering Souls isn't terrible when it's in your graveyard.
Pack Rat also lets you play a more reactive game, choosing whether to copy your rat or save your card in hand depending on what the situation warrants. In fact, the more I think about it, the more it appeals to me as a one-of.
I can't imagine when Jace would actually be good. As a creature, it's a 0/2 which really doesn't advance the aggro or midrange plan. As a planeswalker, he's pretty underwhelming. The +1 is okay (helps stem bleeding vs creature decks, I guess), but his -3 does basically nothing for us. What do we want to give flashback at sorcery speed? Path? Thoughtscour? Discard? I don't think so. Seems pretty bad all around for this deck, tbh.
23 lands feels like a lot considering the curve, but I want to maximize my opportunity to 1) recur Bloodghast and 2) make 3-mana plays after casting Smallpox.
Boom // Bust feels like it could be good here, but I also worry that it could be a do-nothing card.
I'm wondering if Darkblast is a necessary inclusion. Upsides: Kills X/1s all day long, dredges for value. Downsides: basically only interacts with X/1s, quickly lands in do-nothing territory.
It might be worth changing out Bloodsoaked Champion for Gravecrawler along with Gatekeeper of Malakir for Fleshbag Marauder. That may be a more consistent method of recursion. Sacrificing Fleshbag to itself with Liliana in play also flips her (this way I don't wait on a Smallpox).
I think the reason why people, including myself, would fight you on this one is that even given what you're saying, it's just not a useful classification.
First of all the link is attenuated. Your reasoning is a vast generalization of what occurred. Notice I didn't say wrong, I just said its a generalization. But if I took your generalization one step further to generalize even more, I would claim that "the use of a position of power to dispossess those with less power of their capital" is merely abuse of power. Abuse of power is not specific to capitalism.
You're right. Abuse of power is not specific to capitalism. But abuse of power is enabled (and encouraged) by capitalism, which is why it is worth examining in the first place.
So now let me claim that the reason why Greece is in the position it's in is because of an abuse of power. Now that answer isn't wrong, I'm sure someone somewhere along the way abused their power in this fiasco. Its just so far removed from the specifics of the situation it's not very helpful.
Its helpfulness depends on your goals. If you want to develop conditions that aren't continually ripe for economic disaster, then it is indeed helpful to examine the systems in which we operate. If you're looking to take someone to the gallows, then it becomes less helpful.
Let's go back to your capitalism concept as the ultimate cause. Are we going to outlaw capitalism if capitalism is the reason? I'm going to boldly claim that the ship has already sailed on that one. Capitalism is here to stay. Therefore, the more productive endeavor is indeed to focus on those who are acting within capitalism.
Uh, what? Political and economic organization changes all the time.
Which bank did what, how can we prevent this from happening again.
How can you even pose this question without a willingness to examine the systems that govern exchange?
The reason I suggested talking about the actual human decisions behind the crisis was to encourage rational discussion that can be conducted on the basis of facts as opposed to things like this. This is just an empty Marxist slogan.
It is not a slogan. It is the way that capital is accumulated and the way its exchange is negotiated. That is to say, is fundamental to capitalism. It is as much a "fact" as is the actions of those operating within capitalism.
In Western liberal society, we all act within capitalism...
Yes, unfortunately.
...and blame attaches only to moral agents.
This is just semantics. You can't (or at least I hope you wouldn't) seriously suggest that our evaluation of what *caused* a crisis should not consider the workings of things other than "moral agents" (like institutions, economic systems, etc.). Institutions wield power, and influence the world just as much as "moral agents."
Blaming capitalism for the current Greek economic crisis is like blaming Newton's laws when someone is killed by a drunk driver. Sure, physics was the proximate cause -- but the drunk guy at the wheel and his poor decision making were the ultimate cause.
And yet, these "ultimate causes" result directly from capitalism's modus operandi: use your position of power to dispossess those with less power of their capital. To narrow down the blame for the crisis to those who are acting within capitalism, rather than looking at the conditions that make their poor decisions rational (from the perspective of the lender) or seemingly necessary (from the perspective of the borrower), is to miss the forest for the trees.
Why is Turn Aside better than Dispel? Does the fact that it answers sorceries trump the limitation of the "that targets a permanent you control" clause?
It would feel pretty awful to get bolted at three life, look down at your hand and see a Turn Aside staring at you mockingly...
More specifically: Does Zealous Persecution's "until of turn, creatures you control get +1/+1" apply to all creatures regardless of when they enter play, so long as they enter before my end of turn?
My intuition is that it applies to creatures regardless of when they enter the battlefield, not just the ones that were there when Zealous Persecution resolves, but I figured I'd ask the experts
Another budget consideration is mono green Stompy. Not sure how well positioned it will be at your local games store, but it's extremely inexpensive to build.
To be honest, I'm pretty skeptical about the inclusion of Vryn Wingmarein addition to Thalia. That's 6 "noncreature spells cost on more" abilities, which I think narrows down the strategic focus too much on taxing noncreature spells.
One of the great things about hatebears is the diversity of hate. Cards like Aven Mindcensor and Hushwing Griff allow you to hate from different angles and in sometimes more effective ways. Cost-taxing effects can be pretty easily played around. Sure, it makes the opponent's mana less efficient, but they still will usually end up with a 1-for-1 at the end. Creatures are a real thing in Modern, so being able to nullify a Snapcaster Mage's, Siege Rhino's, or Deceiver Exarch's ETB abilities is great (a la Hushwing Griff). And forcing your opponent to whiff on a Chord of Calling or fetch land via Aven Mindcensor has the potential to be a 1-for-0 in your favor.
That's not to say that there is no place for Vryn Wingmare. I'm just not sure whether the cost-taxing effect is so good that I would want it to play such a prominent role in my hate strategy.
I see no reason not to play both Rootbound Crag and Karplusan Forest. There will be awkward draws where those are your only two lands, and if you're thinking about not playing Flinthoof Boar then nothing you have really cares about which land types you have on the battlefield. This will also help you to pay GG for Avatar of the Resolute, if you decide to play it.
I'm not to keen on Boartusk Liege to begin with, and if I were you I would actually run 4x Ghor-Clan Rampager. In my experience, it really is that good. Nettle Sentinel is fine, but like you said, it causes you to lose the synergies you have built.
As a counterpoint, it's also worth considering that discarding cards to Pack Rat fuels delve for Tasigur, Angler and Muderous Cut, while also giving you more options with Snapcaster. Likewise, Lingering Souls isn't terrible when it's in your graveyard.
Pack Rat also lets you play a more reactive game, choosing whether to copy your rat or save your card in hand depending on what the situation warrants. In fact, the more I think about it, the more it appeals to me as a one-of.
Since it looks like you're trying to play midrange, I'd highly recommend checking out this thread: http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/modern/developing-competitive-modern/220048-azorius-midrange-uw-midrange
It will give you some nice replacements for some of the poorer card choices in here (Azorius First-Wing, Ascended Lawmage and Wall of Denial).
I can't imagine when Jace would actually be good. As a creature, it's a 0/2 which really doesn't advance the aggro or midrange plan. As a planeswalker, he's pretty underwhelming. The +1 is okay (helps stem bleeding vs creature decks, I guess), but his -3 does basically nothing for us. What do we want to give flashback at sorcery speed? Path? Thoughtscour? Discard? I don't think so. Seems pretty bad all around for this deck, tbh.
4x Bloodsoaked Champion
4x Bloodghast
2x Gatekeeper of Malakir
2x Fulminator Mage
3x Liliana, Heretical Healer
1x Gurmag Angler
Sorcery 9
4x Inquisition of Kozilek
1x Thoughtseize
4x Smallpox
2x Darkblast
4x Lightning Bolt
3x Terminate
3x Kolaghan's Command
Lands 23
4x Bloodstained Mire
1x Temple of Malice
3x Lavaclaw Reaches
2x Blood Crypt
2x Blackcleave Cliffs
2x Graven Cairns
1x Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth
5x Swamp
2x Mountain
1x Ghost Quarter
Some stuff right off the bat:
23 lands feels like a lot considering the curve, but I want to maximize my opportunity to 1) recur Bloodghast and 2) make 3-mana plays after casting Smallpox.
Boom // Bust feels like it could be good here, but I also worry that it could be a do-nothing card.
I'm wondering if Darkblast is a necessary inclusion. Upsides: Kills X/1s all day long, dredges for value. Downsides: basically only interacts with X/1s, quickly lands in do-nothing territory.
Other cards I've been considering as one-ofs: Wrecking Ball, Demonfire, Languish, Grim Lavamancer, Tymaret, the Murder King.
It might be worth changing out Bloodsoaked Champion for Gravecrawler along with Gatekeeper of Malakir for Fleshbag Marauder. That may be a more consistent method of recursion. Sacrificing Fleshbag to itself with Liliana in play also flips her (this way I don't wait on a Smallpox).
Comments/criticisms very welcome!
Edit: Various changes to list and comments
You're right. Abuse of power is not specific to capitalism. But abuse of power is enabled (and encouraged) by capitalism, which is why it is worth examining in the first place.
Its helpfulness depends on your goals. If you want to develop conditions that aren't continually ripe for economic disaster, then it is indeed helpful to examine the systems in which we operate. If you're looking to take someone to the gallows, then it becomes less helpful.
Uh, what? Political and economic organization changes all the time.
How can you even pose this question without a willingness to examine the systems that govern exchange?
It is not a slogan. It is the way that capital is accumulated and the way its exchange is negotiated. That is to say, is fundamental to capitalism. It is as much a "fact" as is the actions of those operating within capitalism.
Yes, unfortunately.
This is just semantics. You can't (or at least I hope you wouldn't) seriously suggest that our evaluation of what *caused* a crisis should not consider the workings of things other than "moral agents" (like institutions, economic systems, etc.). Institutions wield power, and influence the world just as much as "moral agents."
And yet, these "ultimate causes" result directly from capitalism's modus operandi: use your position of power to dispossess those with less power of their capital. To narrow down the blame for the crisis to those who are acting within capitalism, rather than looking at the conditions that make their poor decisions rational (from the perspective of the lender) or seemingly necessary (from the perspective of the borrower), is to miss the forest for the trees.
It would feel pretty awful to get bolted at three life, look down at your hand and see a Turn Aside staring at you mockingly...
More specifically: Does Zealous Persecution's "until of turn, creatures you control get +1/+1" apply to all creatures regardless of when they enter play, so long as they enter before my end of turn?
My intuition is that it applies to creatures regardless of when they enter the battlefield, not just the ones that were there when Zealous Persecution resolves, but I figured I'd ask the experts
Thanks!
Check it out here: http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/modern/developing-competitive-modern/556919-stompy
One of the great things about hatebears is the diversity of hate. Cards like Aven Mindcensor and Hushwing Griff allow you to hate from different angles and in sometimes more effective ways. Cost-taxing effects can be pretty easily played around. Sure, it makes the opponent's mana less efficient, but they still will usually end up with a 1-for-1 at the end. Creatures are a real thing in Modern, so being able to nullify a Snapcaster Mage's, Siege Rhino's, or Deceiver Exarch's ETB abilities is great (a la Hushwing Griff). And forcing your opponent to whiff on a Chord of Calling or fetch land via Aven Mindcensor has the potential to be a 1-for-0 in your favor.
That's not to say that there is no place for Vryn Wingmare. I'm just not sure whether the cost-taxing effect is so good that I would want it to play such a prominent role in my hate strategy.
I'm not to keen on Boartusk Liege to begin with, and if I were you I would actually run 4x Ghor-Clan Rampager. In my experience, it really is that good. Nettle Sentinel is fine, but like you said, it causes you to lose the synergies you have built.