MTG Salvation

Quote from CurdBros »

I have multiple lines to 7-mana by turn 3; and essentially hitting either Karn by turn 3 wins most games.

For the sake of thoroughness, I figure I'd map out every line involving Arbor Elf, Birds of Paradise, Utopia Sprawl, Overgrowth, and Llanowar Tribe that gets to exactly 7 mana by turn 3 using 6 or fewer cards.

Leading Arbor Elf:
7 mana, 4 cards:Land, Arbor Elf —> Land, Overgrowth
7 mana, 5 cards:Land, Arbor Elf —> Land, Arbor Elf, Utopia Sprawl
7 mana, 5 cards:Land, Arbor Elf —> Land, Utopia Sprawl, Utopia Sprawl
7 mana, 5 cards:Land, Arbor Elf —> Arbor Elf, Utopia Sprawl —> Land
7 mana, 5 cards:Land, Arbor Elf —> Utopia Sprawl, Utopia Sprawl —> Land
7 mana, 5 cards:Land, Arbor Elf —> Land, Llanowar Tribe —> Land

Leading Birds of Paradise:
7 mana, 5 cards:Land, Birds of Paradise —> Land, Llanowar Tribe —> Land
7 mana, 6 cards:Land, Birds of Paradise —> Land, Utopia Sprawl, Overgrowth —> Land

Leading Utopia Sprawl:
7 mana, 5 cards:Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Land, Arbor Elf, Arbor Elf
7 mana, 5 cards:Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Land, Arbor Elf, Utopia Sprawl
7 mana, 5 cards:Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Arbor Elf, Arbor Elf —> Land
7 mana, 5 cards:Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Arbor Elf, Utopia Sprawl —> Land
7 mana, 5 cards:Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Land, Llanowar Tribe —> Land
7 mana, 6 cards:Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Land, Utopia Sprawl, Overgrowth —> Land

So, the takeaway here is that, if I want to get 7 mana by turn 3, I'll need to have:

• 3 lands, a 1-drop, and Llanowar Tribe
• 2 lands, Arbor Elf, and Overgrowth
• 2 lands, Arbor Elf, Utopia Sprawl, and one more copy of either Arbor Elf or Utopia Sprawl

Granted, there are some exceptions. There are two different six card lines that each get to 7 turn 3 due to the fact that Utopia Sprawl doesn't cost any mana to develop turn 2. There's also an extremely unusual line in Land, Birds of Paradise —> Arbor Elf, Utopia Sprawl —> Land, Overgrowth. That one gets to 8, but it isn't redundant with any of the 7 mana lines either, so I figured it was worth mentioning anyway. Having said all that, aside from these exceptions, if I want to make 7 mana by turn 3 then I'm going to need a hand containing cards from one of the three bullet points above.

Given a 60 card deck containing 21 lands and 4 copies of each of the mentioned cards:

• What is the chance my opening hand will contain at least three lands, at least one copy of either Arbor Elf, Birds of Paradise, or Utopia Sprawl, and at least one copy of Llanowar Tribe? 9.8%
• What is the chance my opening hand will contain at least two lands, at least one copy of Arbor Elf, and at least one copy of Overgrowth? 9.3%
• What is the chance my opening hand will contain exactly two lands, exactly two Arbor Elf, exactly one Utopia Sprawl, and exactly two other cards that are not lands, Arbor Elf, Utopia Sprawl, Llanowar Tribe, or Overgrowth? 0.3%
• What is the chance my opening hand will contain exactly two lands, exactly one Arbor Elf, exactly two Utopia Sprawl, and exactly two other cards that are not lands, Arbor Elf, Utopia Sprawl, Llanowar Tribe, or Overgrowth? 0.3%

As you might be able to tell from my final two bullets, I've sort of reached my limit in terms of what I know how to calculate via multivariate hypergeometric distribution. I wish I knew how to find the chance of drawing a hand containing exactly some number of one kind of card but which also contains at least some number of another kind of card. Alas, that is beyond my current statistical ability. As it stands, these numbers, while accurate, can be a bit misleading. For example, the first two bullet points don't take into consideration that the extra cards in their hands might overlap with other lines that get to 7 mana by turn 3. As such, I can't tell what the chance of drawing a hand that gets to exactly 7 is. Nevertheless, I hope that what little data I am able to provide still ends up being useful for whoever happens upon it.

Quote from Dos_Rouge »

it would tighten up the deck, but i'd run manamorphose if you need more ways to get the black you need for turn 3, Vraska.

That's an interesting idea. I think the best solution is probably just to jam more fetchlands though.

So, FNM didn't fire at my LGS yesterday because all the Modern players in my area mutinied, and they neglected to give me the memo. Fortunately, another poor sod didn't get the memo either, and I was able to play a few games against him using my new cards. Here's what I learned:

1.) Ramping has never been easier. I found myself consistently casting 6-drops turn 3, and I found my opponent frequently had to disrupt me if they didn't want to get completely buried on mana.

2.) 7 fetchlands aren't enough to support Vraska. At the moment, I only own 3 Windswept Heath and 4 Wooded Foothills, so I wasn't able to play as many as I would have liked. Yes, Birds of Paradise helps cast Vraska and sometimes so does Utopia Sprawl, but Llanowar Tribe makes it so that I frequently need to rely on having exactly Overgrown Tomb if I want to cast Vraska turn 3. And 7 fetchlands weren't enough to ensure I could do that most of the time. Playing too many basics definitely takes its toll.

3.) I need more and/or different cards to support Karn. Right now, I have Tormod's Crypt, Spellskite, Vivien's Arkbow, Mycosynth Lattice in my sideboard. I found myself really wanting Ensnaring Bridge. I'd also like to give Trinisphere a try.

4.) Woodland Bellower was just okay. I played him nearly every game, and while he was always somewhat helpful, he could only do so much to help me stabilize against an overwhelming board presence. This reminded me just how important I found the Madcap Emperion package to be. I'm going to keep playing with Woodland Bellower to see what happens as it may have just been a bad matchup for the card. Nevertheless, his initial debut didn't impress me.

5.) Tooth and Nail is still crazy. Being able to get to 6 easy also means that I naturally have more mana than I might otherwise have at other stages of the game. I found myself casting Tooth and Nail earlier and with fewer cards, and it was also just as effective as it's always been. I absolutely still want to play Tooth and Nail as the top end of my curve.

Quote from CurdBros »

I think the thing I like most about Llanowar Tribe is that it feels like a card that is only for us What I mean is that while it doesn't require Devotion to be good (tapping for three mana is extremely powerful); with Devotion it is bonkers powerful. I like when we can differentiate ourselves from other decks (i.e. so we are not just Amulet, Tron, etc. from a different angle) and I feel like Tribe helps us do that.

Yeah, I like this about Llanowar Tribe too. I mean, if he cost 2G instead of GGG, that wouldn't make any difference; I'd still be playing the card. I just suppose it's nice knowing there's something extremely powerful I can play that other decks can't touch simply because of his casting cost.

Quote from CurdBros »

Three Chandra’s in Core set 2020 were spoiled (uncommon, rare, and mythic). Two seem strong. Keeping my fingers crossed for three Vivien’s Chandra is the face of the set; so it’s very possible she is the only walker to get the “story progression” walkers. It would be really cool if they did it for all three though (and especially useful for us). **edit..magic stated Chandra is the only 3-card walker in the set...but we do get a mythic Green Walker **.

I'm definitely excited to see a new mythic green walker.

On the topic of Chandra, I can't help but roll my eyes. Chandra, Novice Pyromancer will be great in Limited but not anywhere else. Chandra, Acolyte of Flame looks like a steaming pile of garbage. Her 0 abilities are two of the most ineffectual things I've ever seen on a planeswalker to date, and her minus ability is like a slower, disruptable, more restrictive Pull from the Deep. She's not Tibalt levels of bad, but she's a real stinker.

Chandra, Awakened Inferno is the most interesting of the three versions, but she isn't without her fair share of problems either. Her plus ability, while really cool, is painfully slow, so slow in fact that it might not even matter in stalemates. Her having a +2 ability combined with her 6 starting loyalty makes her really difficult to kill, which is excellent, but that incredible amount of loyalty is wasted by not having any worthwhile minus abilities; they're just all so underwhelming. Yes, Firespout is fine. If I'm facing down a board that consists exactly of a bunch of relevant but tiny creatures, her -3 will shine. In too many cases it just won't matter though. And her -X is even worse. One damage for one loyalty is an abysmal rate; Chandra Nalaar taught us that centuries ago. Sure, Awakened Inferno is certainly better at gaining loyalty than Chandra Nalaar is, but that doesn't change the fact that it isn't that valuable as a loyalty sink even if it can hit other planeswalkers. Now, if she could damage players directly, THAT would be amazing. But as she currently stands, this version of Chandra is super ignorable. Even if my opponent casts her during a stalemate where I have no way to deal with her, she's too slow to kill and often lacks ways to use her loyalty meaningfully.

Quote from CurdBros »

Another card I’ve been testing is Garruk, Caller of Beasts. It’s at the 6-mana sweet spot, can refill if you don’t have the pieces you want; and can also cheat-in huge creatures the same turn. Obviously there is the fun of Progenitus; but even for things like Craterhoof, Elderscale Wurm, Terasradon, Dragonlord Atarka, etc. that 1-3 mana difference can be a full turn.

Well, I'd be happy to learn what you think of him once you've gotten the chance to test him thoroughly. From my perspective, he looks pretty bad. His 4 starting loyalty makes him fairly vulnerable, and his minus ability only affecting green creatures means he seriously restricts what I can cheat into play off of him. Not to mention, its usefulness is reliant on me actually having something valuable to put into play, and that's something I won't always have even in the instances where doing so would otherwise be good. I suppose Garruk's most redeeming element is his plus ability. I could generate quite a lot of value with it, and if I hit something expensive, I might be able to play it for free next turn. Even so, I think there are better alternatives. If I want to cheat creatures into play, for the same amount of mana I'd be better off casting See the Unwritten or Summoning Trap. Those cards dig deeper than one activation of Garruk, and they don't limit me to green creatures either.

Quote from BlatantLizard »

Well guys, it's been fun lurking here and occasionally discussing deck lists but I think this is the end of my modern magic career. I just went up to my LGS to get my playset of Llanowar Tribe and opened up my magic bag to find that my modern deck had been stolen. I turned the entire backpack and store inside out looking for it but to no avail. I know it's not at my house because I only goldfish my lists by using TappedOut.net to avoid wear-and-tear on my cards. My deckbox also contained all the D20s and D6s I've been collecting since I started playing magic back in Theros, so my only conclusion can be that I took out the box to use my dice at the War of the Spark prerelease and someone decided to help themselves to my deck when I turned my back.

This is now twice that this has happened at that store, first with my Commander deck several years ago and now with the modern deck I spent years collecting cards for. I simply don't have the money to spend on rebuilding the deck from scratch with what little remains in my trade binder. It's been quite the ride the past couple of years but I can't bring myself to invest more money and emotional energy in this game if my cards are just going to get periodically stolen.

I'll definitely swing by every once in a while to lurk or theory craft around my favorite green cards but this is goodbye for now. I'll always look back on my years playing this game fondly. Until then, keep your Primal Commands looped and your Nykthos's untapped. May RNGesus smile upon you and remember to always play to your outs. Magic my seem like a fickle mistress at times but if there's one thing I've learned from this game over the years it's that there's no point in getting frustrated at the parts of the game that you can't control. Just do the best with the information you have and your win rate will thank you for it in the long run.

Sorry it took me so long to respond to this, but I want to let you know that I sympathize with you. I lost a masterpiece Mana Crypt a few months ago, and while I thankfully got it back, the whole debacle was seriously depressing. I hope things ultimately work out for you in the end.

Quote from Aethelianmage »

2) This is a bit of a sleeper, but I feel like we should be giving more attention to Eladamri's Call. The fact that it can be cast when you don't have a lot of mana, unlike pact or chord, gives it flexibility that our other tutors lack:
- Helps if the hand has top end but not enough ramp by opening up lines like T1 Forest > Sprawl, T2 Land > Call and play elf, T3 Land > 6 mana.
- You can cast it using leftover mana from whatever your play was to set up next turn's threat.
- If it gets countered you didn't spend your whole turn and tap your team casting it.
- It can also find nongreen creatures like Walking Ballista or an eldrazi.

It's also an instant for whatever that's worth. Regardless, I think you make some compelling points. It's a card I think I glossed over, and I should have given it some more thought.

At the moment, I think my biggest fear with Eladamri's Call is that spending 2 additional mana is too disruptive. If I'm curving out into some expensive spell, Eladamri's Call limits what I can cast in the same turn, and I'm not sure the increased flexibility is worth very much in a deck that doesn't care about finding any one specific creature and creating redundant draws of it. Had Wild Growth been printed, I'm sure Eladamri's Call would have been even better than it is now since Arbor Elf would have skyrocketed in value. But to make one concession, I do think Eladamri's Call is a better choice than Finale of Devastation. The white cost may cause some complications, but the instances where spending 2 leftover mana to find a creature to play next turn greatly outweighs the instances where Finale of Devastation gets cast for X equals 10.

Quote from Aethelianmage »

3) Has anyone looked into Winds of Abandon? If your deck can support WW, a spot removal/one-sided sweeper split card that also randomly hates on all this graveyard nonsense sounds good to me.

I don't see the appeal to this card. It's not that it's bad or anything. It's just... why would I want it?

Quote from Aethelianmage »

4) Collector Ouphe. Stony Silence on a green stick? Sign me up.

I'm not sure what to think of Collector Ouphe yet. I'm going to give it a try since I can tutor for it with Woodland Bellower, but the Ouphe being a creature makes it a lot more vulnerable than Stony Silence. For that reason, maybe Stony Silence is still a better sideboard card. Or maybe both cards aren't as important with Karn at our disposal.

Quote from DR1V1R »

Is the additional ramp from Llanowar Tribe worth the loss of card advantage from Wistful Selkie (since Tribe is moving into that slot)?

I find it helpful to frame Llanowar Tribe this way:

Say I play Wistful Selkie. When I do, I get a 2/2, and I draw a card. Now say I play Llanowar Tribe. When I do, I get a 3/3, and I also draw a card. The card Llanowar Tribe draws me isn't a random card like the card Wistful Selkie draws me though. Instead, the card Llanowar Tribe draws me is always a Gilded Lotus. And not only does Llanowar Tribe always draw me a Gilded Lotus, but it also casts that Gilded Lotus for free.

Obviously, this isn't a perfect analogy. (I don't get the mana immediately. I have to tap Tribe to get the mana. Etc. etc.) Still, you get the idea. When I frame it this way, doesn't Llanowar Tribe sound a million times better than Wistful Selkie?

Quote from DR1V1R »

Is it even worth running Ruric Thar in the sideboard if I don't have fetch/shock lands, so just relying on Birds and Utopia Sprawl for red mana?

I'm not even sure Ruric Thar is worth running in the first place. If you do want to play with him though, a single Stomping Ground would give you so much more mileage. Even without fetches, your three Oath of Nissa and four Primeval Titan could find it. Hell, you run so many Forest already, you could even get away with playing one Cinder Glade as a serious budget option.

Quote from dos_rogue »

in the removal section i didn't see you mention Master of the Wild Hunt or huntmaster of the fells Garruk Relentless

That would be because my entire post was about 5-drops, and none of those cards are 5-drops.

Quote from CurdBros »

Yeah...I need to update the primer before they lock it for good.

The-powers-that-be actually found an 11th hour buyer, so now MTGS won't actually be shutting down. From the look of it though, virtually all the staff are still leaving for the new website they had in the works. I'll be joining them on that exodus.

Ugh, this seems awful.

Provided the venue the MTGS staff is creating isn't completely terrible (and I have no reason to believe it will be), the closing of MTGS meant forum-goers had a very clear direction. They could either migrate over to the new place, or they could find someplace else entirely, be that Reddit, Facebook groups, whatever. Now that the figures that be have announced MTGS will stay open, it isn't clear what folks will do. Some people will migrate. Some people won't. ****. This community is small enough as it is. We don't need an even greater schism. I mean, yes, some folks were inevitably going to break away, but they didn't have to make a decision between "do nothing" and "move." Now the new site won't have nearly as many users as it might have had.

Quote from Aethelianmage »

I have been running 21 land, 12 dorks in Tooth and Nail for a long time now, and I think this is the right call. Now that we have both Overgrowth and Tribe to work with, getting to 3 on turn 2 is a must (if it wasn't already - which it was). Birds is sometimes mediocre since it doesn't contribute to the elf-sprawl engine, but it has upside in color fixing and flying.

Yeah, now that I'm 100% positive I ought to be playing 4 Birds of Paradise, I'm also beginning to wonder if playing some number of 5-drops might also be correct. Sure, reaching 6 mana turn 3 isn't that difficult, but there are still some lines that get to 5 but not 6.

Leading Arbor Elf:
5 mana, 4 cards:Land, Arbor Elf —> Birds of Paradise, Utopia Sprawl
5 mana, 4 cards:Land, Arbor Elf —> Land, Utopia Sprawl
5 mana, 4 cards:Land, Arbor Elf —> Utopia Sprawl —> Land
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Arbor Elf —> Land, Arbor Elf, Arbor Elf
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Arbor Elf —> Land, Arbor Elf, Birds of Paradise
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Arbor Elf —> Land, Birds of Paradise, Birds of Paradise
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Arbor Elf —> Arbor Elf, Arbor Elf —> Land
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Arbor Elf —> Arbor Elf, Birds of Paradise —> Land
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Arbor Elf —> Birds of Paradise, Birds of Paradise —> Land
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Arbor Elf —> Land, Arbor Elf —> Land
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Arbor Elf —> Land, Birds of Paradise —> Land

Leading Birds of Paradise:
5 mana, 4 cards:Land, Birds of Paradise —> Arbor Elf, Utopia Sprawl
5 mana, 4 cards:Land, Birds of Paradise —> Land, Overgrowth
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Birds of Paradise —> Land, Arbor Elf, Arbor Elf
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Birds of Paradise —> Land, Arbor Elf, Birds of Paradise
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Birds of Paradise —> Land, Birds of Paradise, Birds of Paradise
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Birds of Paradise —> Land, Birds of Paradise, Utopia Sprawl
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Birds of Paradise —> Land, Utopia Sprawl, Utopia Sprawl
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Birds of Paradise —> Arbor Elf, Arbor Elf —> Land
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Birds of Paradise —> Arbor Elf, Birds of Paradise —> Land
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Birds of Paradise —> Birds of Paradise, Birds of Paradise —> Land
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Birds of Paradise —> Birds of Paradise, Utopia Sprawl —> Land
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Birds of Paradise —> Utopia Sprawl, Utopia Sprawl —> Land
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Birds of Paradise —> Land, Arbor Elf —> Land
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Birds of Paradise —> Land, Birds of Paradise —> Land
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Birds of Paradise —> Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Land

Leading Utopia Sprawl:
5 mana, 4 cards:Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Arbor Elf, Birds of Paradise
5 mana, 4 cards:Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Land, Arbor Elf
5 mana, 4 cards:Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Arbor Elf —> Land
5 mana, 4 cards:Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Land, Overgrowth
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Land, Birds of Paradise, Birds of Paradise
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Land, Birds of Paradise, Utopia Sprawl
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Land, Utopia Sprawl, Utopia Sprawl
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Birds of Paradise, Birds of Paradise —> Land
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Birds of Paradise, Utopia Sprawl —> Land
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Utopia Sprawl, Utopia Sprawl —> Land
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Land, Birds of Paradise —> Land
5 mana, 5 cards:Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Land, Utopia Sprawl —> Land

These are all the lines involving Arbor Elf, Birds of Paradise, Utopia Sprawl, and Overgrowth that get to 5 mana turn 3 with five or fewer cards that don't get to 6. Admittedly, many of these lines are redundant, but I decided to include every possible sequence this time because topdecks will sometimes affect the order in which I play cards despite the cards themselves all still being the same. I also added an Overgrowth line I overlooked the previous time. (Oops!)

From this information, it looks to me that getting to 5 on turn 3 usually involves drawing no 3-drops, two lands, two 1-drops, and either a third land or a third 1-drop. Clearly, this is not always the case. There are lines that get to 5 with one land. There are lines that get to 5 with Overgrowth. There are lines that get to 5 with four cards. But generally speaking, getting to 5 on turn 3 usually means having no 3-drops, two lands, two 1-drops, and then a third land or third 1-drop. Birds of Paradise noticeably has the most lines that get to 5 since, for all intents and purposes, it's effectively always +1 mana. Utopia Sprawl is similar, but since it and Overgrowth interact with Arbor Elf in ways that make more than 5 by turn 3, not as many lines involve them. And Llanowar Tribe is nowhere to be seen since, if I cast Llanowar Tribe turn 2, I'm guaranteed to make it to 6 mana turn 3 barring shenanigans.

Anywho, I took a look at all the 5-drops available, and this is everything I thought was notable:

I think a lot of the qualities that I want in a 6-drop are qualities I want in a 5-drop too. Essentially, if it's the only non-ramp spell I have, I want to make sure that whatever 5-drop I have doesn't leave me stranded in the event something happens to it. That could mean being resilient by having hexproof or indestructible. That could also mean being resilient by making multiple bodies. Even cards that draw other cards can help me dig for whatever I need the following turn. Whatever the card, I want to be sure it has gusto. Playing lots of ramp spells inherently means playing fewer business spells, so the business spells I do play need to be carefully curated lest I choose poorly and suffer at the hands of some ineffectual card.

Additional Mana — Not a fan of any of these. Once I reach the upper half of my curve, I want to be casting spells that meaningfully impact the game, not spells that don't do anything significant aside from make even more mana. That's what the less expensive cards are for.

Big Chungus — These suck. If all I'm getting for 5 is a body, I may as well get a resilient one. Their increase in size doesn't make up for their vulnerability.

Card Draw — The only card I'd consider here is Urban Evolution as the others are all too fragile. Is the ability to make an extra land drop worth an additional blue? Maybe. I'm not sure. With the Land, Arbor Elf —> Land, Utopia Sprawl line, it's possible to get to 4 turn 2, and Harmonize turn 2 is big game. But in every other case, Urban Evolution is going to be better since the land it puts into play still leaves me with the same amount of mana as Harmonize.

Land Destruction — Deus of Calamity is salient in that it takes over games better than any other card. As a whole, I think it's still worse than a card like Primeval Titan though. There are just so many ways to take over the game while still getting some kind of value in the event my card is destroyed before it gets started. Plow Under is another brutal 5-drop. It works best with pressure, and that's something I can't provide alongside it most of the time, but it may be worth playing just as a way to stall for more turns/mana. Losing two lands/draw steps is no joke.

Life Gain — There are a few different ways to gain life, but it's hard to beat Thragtusk and Primal Command. Batterskull is interesting in that it provides recurring life gain as well as a resilient/flexible body, but the fact that it doesn't immediately gain me life when it comes into play makes me sour to it. Tolsimir, Friend to Wolves can gain life and kill an aggressive creature at the same time. I'm not sure it will be better than Thragtusk against a deck like burn though. The raw amount of life a card initially gains matters quite a lot.

Multiple Bodies — There are a lot of cards in this category but not too many I'm especially fond of. Thragtusk and Tolsimir, Friend to Wolves are both solid. Deep Forest Hermit provides the most effective bodies the turn it comes into play. Biogenic Ooze provides a useful mana sink, but it falters a lot like Deep Forest Hermit if it's removed the turn it's played. I don't think I care much for any of these.

Other — This is a mixed bag. Not a lot to say here. None of these cards look like especially great options.

Planeswalker — I like planeswalkers A LOT. They do something relevant the moment I play them, so even if they're removed I still got something out of them. They threaten to take over the game by repeating some action each turn they remain on the battlefield. That makes it so they frequently can't be ignored. They're also less prone to removal; fewer cards outright kill planeswalkers than do creatures. And if they're ignored long enough, their ultimates can win the game on their own. Hell, about the only thing planeswalkers have going against them is that they're soft to on-board threats if I don't have a way to protect them. As such, I might not get enough out of them if they happen to die prematurely. Still, having said all of that, planeswalker is an awesome card type. It provides exactly what a ramp deck wants in an expensive card.

Looking over the walkers I listed, it's unfortunate that none have any +2 abilities. Of the bunch, I'm only giving any kind of real consideration to the ones with five starting loyalty. While it's possible that a planeswalker's abilities can compensate for their lack of initial loyalty, four starting loyalty is pretty underwhelming for a 5-drop, and three is downright insulting. That's just way too fragile.

Recently, I've experimented with Nissa, Who Shakes the World thinking her static paired with her +1 might be great both at ramping and at breaking a stalemate. What I didn't consider is just how few lands I usually have in play. The extra mana she makes, while nice, just isn't worth the price of the card, and her ability to spit out 3/3s wasn't impressive enough to make me want her in the absence of ludicrous mana.

Nissa, Vital Force is another card I have experience playing albeit not in modern. What I least like about Vital Force is her +1 ability. When I play a planeswalker, what I want is a minus ability that strongly impacts the game and a plus ability that I can feel great about using turn after turn in the event that I don't need to use the minus ability. Untapping a land and making a temporary 5/5 isn't something I can really get behind though. Her Horn of Greed, while not too hard to reach, is too slow in this style of deck, and her Nature's Spiral can't return some of my most powerful cards which are sorceries. Overall, her two minus abilities don't compensate for her lackluster plus ability.

That leaves Vivien Reid. She's the best of the lot in my opinion. Her minus ability is both impactful and provides interaction. Her plus ability is stellar, certainly better than drawing a card each turn. Sure, she only Impulses for creatures, so Vivien can't find other planeswalkers, but as long as I play enough creature cards both in my top end and overall, I'm sure I'll get enough mileage out of her even if sometimes she does brick on a land. When I'm seriously far behind and not facing down something Vivien can specifically destroy, Vivien's likely a dead card. Nevertheless, I think she's a strong consideration. There will be instances where digging four cards and redirecting six damage is still a worthwhile play at 5 mana.

Removal — Not a lot to consider here. Acidic Slime is reasonable, but likely worse than Vivien Reid in most cases. We see Tolsimir here again as he sort of dips into every category. He's not exceptionally great at killing creatures though. Probably best at dealing with Lavinias and Gaddock Teegs.

Resilient — Thornling and Vorapede both look terrible. Oversoul of Dusk is interesting, but I don't think I want a 5-drop that's an evasive, resilient beater and nothing else. Underrealm Lich seems promising. While still vulnerable to effects like Path to Exile, the Lich is generally difficult to get rid of. That, and it helps find additional threats (or whatever else I might need) to play on subsequent turns. Possibly one of the better 5-drops I could play.

So, I've never played with Ertai's Meddling before, and when I started constructing this post I thought I knew exactly how it worked. Boy, was I wrong! Ertai's Meddling isn't intuitive at all, and I did not know I would be spending the next several hours poring over old rules questions in order to learn how it works. Just to make sure anyone reading this is on the same page, here's what you need to know about Ertai's Meddling:

• Ertai's Meddling can never be cast if X would equal 0. For example, if I cast Bloodbraid Elf and Bloodbraid Elf cascades into Ertai's Meddling, the cascade "bricks" and Ertai's Meddling isn't cast. Pretty straightforward.


• "The player puts it onto the stack as a copy of the original spell." is an extremely misleading sentence. Ertai's Meddling doesn't create a copy of the exiled spell and then cast it like Isochron Scepter. Ertai's Meddling literally puts whatever physical card it exiled back onto the stack from exile. Only now, the card Ertai's Meddling returns isn't itself anymore. Oh no. That card is instead a copy of whatever it happened to be whenever Ertai's Meddling first exiled it. In many cases, there won't be any difference. If I cast Grizzly Bears, and it gets exiled by Ertai's Meddling, that Grizzly Bears is going to be a regular Grizzly Bears when it returns from exile. But if I controlled a Conspiracy naming Sliver whenever I cast Grizzly Bears, Grizzly Bears will still be a Sliver when it's put back onto the stack even if Conspiracy is no longer on the battlefield.

(I don't know if Grizzly Bears will continue being a Sliver once it hits the battlefield. Text changing effects like Artificial Evolution make it so that creatures that have their text changed while they are on the stack continue having their text changed once they enter the battlefield. Conspiracy isn't a text changing effect though, so it may work differently. Grizzly Bears is for sure still a Sliver while it is on the stack though.)


• In tune with my second bullet, if you use Ertai's Meddling to exile a spell that targets something, when you remove the last delay counter and put the exiled spell back onto the stack, you don't change any of the spell's targets; the spell will have exactly the same targets as when it first got exiled. This is because, despite the exiled card being a new spell, the exiled card still becomes identical to whatever it was whenever it first got exiled, and that includes what it targeted. As a result, spells returning from exile are sometimes going to fizzle; if none of the things an exiled spell initially targeted are still hanging around, the exiled spell will have no effect and will be put into its owner's graveyard once it resolves.

Spells that target other spells on the stack like Counterspell are almost guaranteed to do this. Spells that target cards on the battlefield (like Doom Blade) might also fizzle. It just depends on whether the creature Doom Blade targeted is still on the battlefield or not.


• Unlike Delay, if you exile an X spell with Ertai's Meddling, the exiled spell will remember its X value when it returns from exile. This is because, again, the exiled spell becomes an exact copy of whatever it happened to be when it got exiled.


• Something else I thought was worth mentioning: when you remove the last delay counter from a card exiled by Ertai's Meddling, you don't actually cast the exiled card. You just put it onto the stack. In most cases, this is exactly the same as casting a spell; a spell put onto the stack (like with Twincast) resolves the same whether you cast it or not. The only difference is that stuff which cares about players casting spells won't take effect. For example, Forgotten Ancient won't get a +1/+1 counter when a spell exiled with Ertai's Meddling is put onto the stack. Iona, Shield of Emeria also won't stop cards of the named color from returning since nothing is being cast. As far as I'm aware, Ertai's Meddling is the only card in all of Magic that puts spells onto the stack from another zone without ever actually casting them. (And, on an unrelated note, that may have implications for Mr. Bones.)


• Finally, if you exile a spell with Ertai's Meddling and you lose the game before that spell returns, the exiled spell will stay in exile forever. This is because the player who cast Ertai's Meddling is the one who controls the delayed trigger that removes delay counters. And once that player has lost the game, they're out. They won't continue creating triggered abilities.

Is that everything? I think that's everything. About the only thing I'm unsure of is whether or not a Commander exiled by Ertai's Meddling will still get delay counters if it's put into the command zone instead of into exile. Intuition tells me no, but nothing about Ertai's Meddling is all that intuitive, and there was a relatively recent response to a rules question stating that commanders exiled by Ertai's Meddling would in fact get delay counters despite those counters not doing anything. It being the only answer of its kind makes me skeptical though.

Quote from CurdBros »

So I have actually been kinda surprised...I wasn't certain Llanowar Tribe was going to be good in my more Walker-centric Devotion deck. It is. It is very near busted. It seems like a must kill 3-drop or the opponent just loses (often the next turn). I knew the card was bonkers in the creature-heavy decks; but wasn't entirely sold on my deck (I just have reservations about 3-drops that I think comes from a VERY distant past when fair decks actually mattered but I was wrong. It seems bonkers even in my deck. Makes me excited for the true viability of Devotion.

I think sometimes people fail to remember that Llanowar Tribe is just a mana source. That's it. I'm not playing Llanowar Tribe because it's a 3/3, and I'm not playing Llanowar Tribe because it adds three devotion. I'm only playing Llanowar Tribe because it's great at making mana.

With the exception of decks like Manaless Dredge, literally every deck needs mana. It's the reason every deck plays lands; it's so they can cast their spells. Llanowar Tribe isn't a free mana source like lands are, but mana sources don't need to be free to be worth playing. They just need to be better at making mana than other cards. This is why ramp spells have always been attractive to me. Yes, making more mana sooner is a great quality to have, but ramp spells aren't awesome only because they put me further ahead on mana. They're awesome because they can make mana better than lands can. And if I have to make mana to cast the spells that I want, I may as well be good at it, right? It only makes sense.

Quote from CurdBros »

Having said this, I actually think it may not be great in the Pact lists necessarily. It feels like more of a "combo" style card. Playing ramp at 3-CMC is risky and can lead to potential blow outs if not mitigated well. Becoming too focused on a game plan (especially in ramp) can be a really poor plan. This is because we "stack" the "one good discard spell" or "one good counter" issue with the "draw the wrong half of the deck" issue ramp decks have.

I can understand this sentiment. Some cards, despite being better than other cards of the same kind, won't fit equally well in every deck because some considerations must be made beyond whether one card is better than another. Mana curves are one example of this. If Card A costs 4 mana and Card B costs 3 mana but Card A is also ten times better than Card B, even though it might seem crazy to ever play Card B when I could play Card A, perhaps it's still possible that I already have so many other cards that cost 4 that what I realistically need is anything other than another 4-drop even if that means playing something objectively worse in a vacuum.

Quote from CurdBros »

Another obstacle we have to think about is the new speed of what will be the meta for the next 6 months. Even with Tribe we are still slower than the fastest decks (and thanks to Horizons/London Mulligan rule we now have at least two more turn 2-3 decks in Hoggak/Vengevine and Neoform decks). I am winning more on turn 3 than I ever have; but still not as consistently as the fastest combo decks do. Karn has helped (as on the play a turn 2-3 Karn can grab a good hate piece); but sideboards are where we will make most of these decisions. Maybe a full playset of Leylines?

I'm not worried about faster decks for several reasons.

1.) Super fast decks tend to be extremely inconsistent. Sure, it feels bad when my opponent gets a lucky hand and kills me out of nowhere without me having any recourse. That doesn't mean they'll always be quick enough or consistent enough to warrant taking action against.

2.) Super fast decks tend to be hyperlinear. This makes them especially soft to sideboard cards. Decks like Dredge are powerful, but unless they draw some very specific cards, they often fold to a resolved Rest in Peace. Being prepared by having the right sideboard cards to combat these kinds of decks can go a long way towards not losing to them. As for what sideboard cards I should play specifically, I'm not sure. Leyline of Sanctity might be worth playing. I just don't have enough experience sideboarding to say much with confidence yet.

3.) Super fast decks that are somehow both consistent and resilient still run the risk of something getting banned. If any specific deck becomes too problematic, Wizards can always course correct and ban whatever card or cards that they deem are too much trouble.

4.) Perhaps the best reason why I'm not worried about faster decks is that I simply don't care. I want to play ramp. If I cared about losing, I could play "the best deck" instead. If I cared about losing in very specific ways, I could pack my deck full of interaction. I don't care about those things though. What I want to do is play ramp. That means I'm willing to accept the consequences of my decision. Every deck is going to have weaknesses, and one of ramp's weaknesses is that it tends to be linear; it has to play a lot of redundant cards to achieve its goals, and it often won't have space (or even the right colors necessary) to play more interactive cards. These are all things I'm okay with. If I wasn't, I ought to play something else.

My decision to play Reliquary Tower generally depends on whether or not I think discarding down to seven is going to be something that matters.

Here's the thing: if I value having no maximum hand size, I'll need to play one or more cards that can do that. At this moment, there are only 15 cards with that ability. That's so few cards! And to make matters worse, several are extremely prohibitive. Enter the Infinite and Finale of Revelation both cost 12. Tishana, Nezahal, Price of Knowledge, and Praetor's Counsel all cost 7 or more. Tamiyo won't even bestow her ability unless I can reach her ultimate. That doesn't leave a lot left. And the lousy thing about the particular cards I listed above is, if I'm drawing enough cards to place value in having no maximum hand size, I'm going to want something that's easy to play lest I draw too many cards all at once and have to discard down because I don't have enough extra mana to cast a no max hand size card despite drawing into one.

This helps explain why Reliquary Tower is so good. It costs no mana to play, and it doubles as a mana generating card. That's frankly amazing. And Wastes, while not a great card in its own right, is still quite a handsome upside when compared to something like Spellbook. Yes, Reliquary Tower being a colorless land does cause some opportunity loss; if I want to play Reliquary Tower, I can't just jam every other utility land I might want to play into the same deck. Even so, if inexpensive no maximum hand size cards are important to me, none of the alternatives offer anything nearly as valuable as Reliquary Tower. There's just so little competition.

Now, having said all that, I think the conversation surrounding Reliquary Tower isn't usually about whether Reliquary Tower is actually good at what it does or not. What I think people really want to talk about when they discuss Reliquary Tower is how much they ought to value having no max hand size in the first place. That's a different conversation.

I found some of these last few comments confusing, so just to make sure everyone is on the same page, Hornet Queen does not create tokens until after Finale of Devastation has finished resolving. This is because, whenever you start resolving a spell or ability, you do everything that spell or ability tells you to do from top to bottom until you finish resolving the entire thing. If that spell or ability would put another spell or ability onto the stack while it's resolving, you put the new spell or ability onto the stack, but you do not begin doing the new spell or ability until after the original has completely finished resolving. So, if I cast Finale of Devastation for X equals 10 and put Hornet Queen onto the battlefield, Hornet Queen's triggered ability would be put onto the stack immediately once it comes into play, but that triggered ability won't actually occur until after Finale of Devastation gives my team +10/+10.

Quote from Thorshammer813 »

Finale of devastation as a finisher. X=10 for two hornet queen and I'm swinging for over a hundred with those 12 creatures alone. Plus it grabs dudes from the graveyard should anyone of significance make it there. Seems decent.

The eldrazi and such are just because goldfishing got boring I guess. Haha. I like to experiment.

Well, I mean, I guess that sort of answers your own question then. If what you want is to do is experiment, just experiment. You don't need to justify anything if all you care about is finding out what it's like to play different cards.

Quote from Thorshammer813 »

Nissa is a very relevant card with an x natters theme.

It looks rather dubious to me. The more X spells you play to work with Unbound Flourishing, the more often you'll whiff with Nissa's 0 ability. Sure, it gets a lot easier to reach her -6, but aside from that Nissa has anti-synergy with X costing cards more than anything.

Quote from Thorshammer813 »

I decided to try a playset of finale of devastation and two hornet queens.


I'm also contemplating going to two primeval Titans and adding a terrastodon, or a couple eldrazi with devastator.

Yay? Nay?

I mean, why do you want to play these cards specifically? Is it just to try stuff out?

Quote from GurmagAngler1234 »

Too bad they didn't print Wild Growth in Modern Horizons, that would be the ultimate jizz.

Yeah, Wild Growth would have been ridiculous.

Quote from CurdBros »

The Karn deck is doing great! It really is a crazy good card. I will post a bunch of results this weekend; but it seems like one of the best things you can do in a big-mana deck in Modern right now.

I don't doubt this at all. I simply wonder how many copies I should play. I'm inclined towards two since Karn seems especially bad in multiples, but maybe Karn is so good that I actually want even more. I don't know yet. I probably ought to buy a couple right now. Thankfully, I already own a copy of Lattice, being a Commander player and all. That card has gotten expensive.

Quote from CurdBros »

I was only on 2-birds. I will probably go up to three given your data (and probably begrudgingly four )...I do think we are one of the decks that actually benefits from the London Mulligan rule more than most (give the importance of a 1-drop on turn one and curving right). It is gonna take some time for me to get to 4x bird I don't doubt your data at all. My gut keeps telling me I would top-deck too many of them late (I likely pay more attention to this as it is usually a close game when you remember this happening).

Well, you're not wrong. If I play more 1-drops, I'm going to draw more 1-drops. That's just sort of inevitable. If anything, the fact I can draw a bunch of Birds in the late game demonstrates just how important it is that I choose the right payoff cards. If I choose poor payoff cards and my opponent answers them without them putting me in a winning position, it's entirely possible I just draw dead the rest of the game. If I don't play lots of 1-drops though, I'll be way less likely to ever cast my payoff cards in the first place. It's sort of a necessary trade off.

Quote from CurdBros »

I have found myself siding in Primal Command a lot (so may end up moving it to the main board)...but having both gives you a real "control" feel.

By "both" I presume you mean Eternal Witness.

Here's a thought: maybe Primal Command isn't important if I'm already playing Woodland Bellower. The two cards clearly aren't the same, but they're similarly costed, and nearly all the modes on Primal Command can be imitated by Woodland Bellower. If I want to find a creature, Woodland Bellower already does that (and casts it for free!) provided the card costs 3 or less. Hell, Arbor Elf was one of the cards I found most with Primal Command anyway. And if what I want is life, there's Knight of Autumn. Naturalize? Also, Knight of Autumn. That's especially nice considering Primal Command couldn't permanently address noncreature permanents without also choosing the shuffle graveyard mode. And speaking of graveyards, there's both Loaming Shaman and Scavenging Ooze to deal with those. About the only thing I lose on Primal Command is the ability to Time Walk opponents by casting half a Plow Under. But considering that typically wasn't useful for me beyond being a stall tactic since I frequently wouldn't have a board state to capitalize off the momentum, it isn't something I'd be too sad to see myself lose.

Quote from Deruvid »

Really good work on that math, arrogantAxolotl. Thanks for sharing the numbers.

Thank you for the praise. I put a lot of effort into that.

Quote from Deruvid »

Is Oath of Nissa falling out of favor? I've liked having the extra card filter to smooth out draws that might've otherwise been too land-light or lacking a creature. I'll have to try changing those 4 slots to something else and see how my consistency changes.

Here are my thoughts on Oath of Nissa. It's exactly the kind of card I would want to play if I thought I could ever afford to cast it.

On turn 1, I want to cast a 1-drop and absolutely nothing else. That means I'm going to play several 1-drops to ensure I always have one in my opener. Sure, if I had Oath of Nissa in my hand and I didn't have a 1-drop, then I would happily cast Oath of Nissa instead. That isn't a situation I ever want to be in though, hence the reason for playing so many 1-drops. Playing a 1-drop turn 1 is always more important than playing Oath of Nissa.

On turn 2, because I'm casting a 1-drop turn 1, I want to cast a 3-drop, and preferably either Overgrowth or Llanowar Tribe. Granted, I won't always have one of those, and even when I do there's a chance my opponent bolts my bird, so sometimes I'll have 2 or 3 mana and no way to spend it. In those instances, I would gladly cast Oath of Nissa since I gained a turn I wouldn't have otherwise had. It is, however, also possible that I just have two more 1-drops that I can play to fill the void of the first one, so Oath of Nissa won't always be a feasible line even when I can't play a 3-drop.

On turn 3, provided everything went according to plan, I want to cast my payoff card. That will probably use most if not all of my mana. Again, things won't always go so smoothly, so there's room for deviation, but depending upon how much mana I have, Oath of Nissa would often be a good play here. If I don't have a payoff card or enough mana to cast said payoff card, Oath of Nissa can find either, and sometimes I'll even be able to play what it finds the same turn.

So, when's the earliest I'll realistically cast Oath of Nissa? Turn 2? Maybe turn 3? A lot of the utility in Oath of Nissa comes from the fact that it can be played on turn 1 when I wouldn't otherwise have anything useful to do. But in this deck, I do always have something useful to do on turn 1. And once I have lots of mana, there are other cards like Harmonize and Hydroid Krasis that compete with Oath of Nissa's effect, so I'm not sure where it fits. It's possible that a cantrip effect like Oath of Nissa is still what I want despite being awkward the first couple of turns. I'm just not completely sure though.

Okay! I'm ready to share some new findings.

As I mentioned in a previous post, I've been playing around with hypergeometric distribution calculators to find the chances of starting with certain hands. One thing I learned is that, given a deck of 60 cards, if I want to maximize my chances of seeing exactly two or exactly three lands in my opening hand, then I need to play 21 lands. That gives me a 59.6% chance of finding the right combination of lands and spells. Why two or three land specifically? Because, in my experience, I've found those numbers work best. One land hands, while sometimes playable, commonly falter, and hands with four or more lands seldom possess the specific spells necessary to produce a victory. That makes two or three lands where I want to be. I don't mind drawing more lands across the course of the game. That's practically inevitable anyway. And when I do open with two lands, I'll almost certainly want to make a third land drop too, if not by turn 3 then at least by turn 4. Having two or three lands in my opening hand just ensures I won't stumble during the first couple turns of the game.

Now, if I had to pick a perfect number of lands to start in my hand, I would probably choose to open with two knowing full well that I don't need many lands to operate but that I can also still afford to (as well as expect to) draw more lands in the future. (On the play, a 60 card deck with 21 lands opening on two will draw one or more lands by their third turn 59.3% of the time. On the draw, this number increases to 74.4%.) Maximizing my chances of drawing exactly two lands doesn't seem worth it to me though. I'm most likely to draw exactly two lands when playing 17, and that will occur 33.9% of the time. This increases the chance of me drawing exactly two lands by an additional 2.6%, but it also increases the chance of me drawing no lands at all from 4% to 8.3%, more than doubling it. A 17 land deck also opens with exactly three lands 6.6% less often than a 21 land deck, and while three land hands aren't as preferable as two land hands, they aren't that much less preferable. The trade-offs aren't worth seeing hands with exactly two lands slightly more often. Thus, the 21 land choice.

Another sweet aspect about running 21 lands is that 60 card decks with 21 lands also have the highest chance to open with exactly one, two, OR three lands. Obviously, one land hands aren't what I'd call ideal (as I already mentioned above). Still, one land hands are probably preferable to four land hands, making one land hands the next best combination behind two land hands and three land hands. There's a lot to like about playing 21 lands. Having said all that, I'd like to share something else I learned. Consider the following 60 card deck:

• What is the chance my opening hand will contain at least one land and at least one copy of either Arbor Elf or Utopia Sprawl? 62.1%
• What is the chance my opening hand will contain at least two lands and at least one copy of either Arbor Elf or Utopia Sprawl? 48.3%
• What is the chance my opening hand will contain at least two lands, at least one copy of either Arbor Elf or Utopia Sprawl, and at least one copy of either Llanowar Tribe or Overgrowth? 27.7%
• What is the chance my opening hand will contain at least two lands, at least one copy of either Arbor Elf or Utopia Sprawl, at least one copy of either Llanowar Tribe or Overgrowth, and at least one 6-drop? 14.2%

Now compare that to the following 60 card deck:

• What is the chance my opening hand will contain at least one land and at least one copy of either Arbor Elf, Utopia Sprawl, or Birds of Paradise? 77.2%
• What is the chance my opening hand will contain at least two lands and at least one copy of either Arbor Elf, Utopia Sprawl, or Birds of Paradise? 61.1%
• What is the chance my opening hand will contain at least two lands, at least one copy of either Arbor Elf, Utopia Sprawl, or Birds of Paradise, and at least one copy of either Llanowar Tribe or Overgrowth? 35.8%
• What is the chance my opening hand will contain at least two lands, at least one copy of either Arbor Elf, Utopia Sprawl, or Birds of Paradise, at least one copy of either Llanowar Tribe or Overgrowth, and at least one 6-drop? 18.9%

The differences here are pretty profound. By including four copies of Birds of Paradise, I raise the chance of starting with at least one land and one 1-drop from 62.1% to 77.2%. That's more than a 15% increase! In fact, the chance of assembling all of these hands increases by a substantial amount, with the most soulcrushing, game-ensuring hands occurring a little less than one out of every five games. I just find that phenomenal. And considering hands without 1-drops suck because there aren't any lines of play available turn 2 that can't already be made on turn 1 without the help of a 1-drop (barring sideboard cards), increasing the likelihood that my opening hand will contain 1-drops seems even more crucial. Hell, even when things go sour and my Birds immediately gets Bolted, playing more 1-drops still increases the probability that I'll have a replacement to play on turn 2, so that's another reason to want to play more. (I'm not a skilled enough as a statistician to be able to tell you how big of a difference that specifically makes though.)

Now, you might be thinking: arrogantAxolotl, this is terrific! Why not play even more 1-drops? That would make landing one on turn 1 even more likely! While true, the reason I shouldn't play more 1-drops is the same reason why I shouldn't play more 3-drops or more 6-drops; it's because each set of cards I include decreases in quality for each other set of cards of the same type that I choose to include before it. For example, take a look at the 1-drop ramp spells. There's quite a few in Modern, but the best at ramping appear to be Arbor Elf and Utopia Sprawl. Those are both amazing, and I can play eight of them total, but what if I want to play more 1-drops? Now I have to look for the next best 1-drop, and for this deck that's probably Birds of Paradise. Birds of Paradise, while still an amazing card, isn't as good as Arbor Elf or Utopia Sprawl, but it's still good enough for me to want to play it regardless. If I keep repeating this process though, I find myself having to pick from weaker and weaker cards. What's the next best 1-drop after Birds of Paradise? Noble Hierarch? Llanowar Elves? Whatever the card, it's noticeably worse to the point that even if I did want to play additional 1-drops, the dip in card quality offsets the benefit of playing more. This is especially true when it comes to the 3-drops. After Llanowar Tribe and Overgrowth, what's the next best 3-drop? Is it Somberwald Sage? Lotus Cobra? Greenweaver Druid? Whatever it is, it's substantially worse than both Llanowar Tribe and Overgrowth to the extent I wouldn't want to play it. The decrease in quality exceeds the benefit of playing additional 3-drops.

Even if I could include as many copies of any one kind of valuable card that I want (like, say, Relentless Rats for instance), there would still be a limit to how many copies I would want to play, and that's because what I ultimately care about isn't the quantity of any given card but the probability that my opening hand will contain the right assortment of cards I want. There's a specific ratio of lands and 1-drops and 3-drops that I want to draw in my opening hand, and while I can increase the chance I'll draw those kinds of cards by playing additional copies, after I reach a certain point playing extra copies won't significantly increase my chances of drawing them. This is because each copy of a card that I play increases the chance I will draw it by an amount less than the copy before it. For example, the 2nd 1-drop that I put in my deck increases the chance that I will draw a 1-drop less than the 1st 1-drop I put in my deck. The 3rd 1-drop I put in my deck increases the chance I will draw a 1-drop less than 2nd 1-drop I put in my deck. And so on and so forth. At a certain point, I'd be better off including cards of a different type because those cards would affect the probability of starting with a hand that I want by an amount greater than if I continued adding cards of the same kind as before.

Going back to the numbers above, you might be concerned (especially after I just hammered home how important it is to make 1-drops) that 37.9% of the time I won't make one of eight 1-drops and that 22.8% of the time I won't make one of twelve 1-drops. Albeit, this is somewhat mitigated by being on the draw (as sometimes I will be) since the odds of finding both a land and a 1-drop within my first 8 cards jumps from 62.1% to 68.5% if I'm playing eight 1-drops and from 77.2% to 82.9% if I'm playing twelve 1-drops. Still, if I draw a hand and it doesn't have any 1-drops, being on the draw won't make that hand not sketchy. 84.9% of the time that hand won't make a turn 1 play provided it has eight 1-drops. A deck with that hand and twelve 1-drops will miss its turn 1 play 77.4% of the time instead. There is some good news though. Mulligans, while they come at a price, significantly increase the chance of drawing a playable opener.

With the upcoming London mulligan, the chance of finding at least one land and at least one 1-drop in a 60 card deck with eight 1-drops goes from 62.1% to 85.6% after the first mulligan and from 85.6% to 94.6% after the second. Likewise, the chance of finding at least one land and at least one 1-drop in a 60 card deck with twelve 1-drops goes from 77.2% to 94.8% after the first mulligan and from 94.8% to 98.8% after the second. That's crazy consistent and all the more reason to play twelve total 1-drops. Hell, even the chance of drawing a "god hand" containing at least two lands, a 1-drop, a 3-drop, AND a 6-drop bumps from 18.9% to a whopping 34.2% provided you're playing twelve 1-drops. And if you're always willing to mull to five, those exact cards can be found 46.7% of the time. That's almost half!

Quote from Rendroc »

Not sure anyone mentioned it, but Deep Forest Hermit could be good in devotion. A lot of value for 5 mana and great with Garruk ultimate and craterhoof. Kind of a mini Hornet Queen. I play Wolfbriar Elemental in my deck, and it’s amazing, and this card is quite similar, but better at 5 mana.

For what it's worth, I think Deep Forest Hermit is a very powerful card, but at 5 mana it probably only belongs in decks that make going wide effective.

Quote from BlatantLizard »

Nice to see another Tooth and Nail player posting here. I frequently visit here to check up on other people's lists but rarely post, as Tooth and Nail is hardly ever discussed so I feel like I don't have much to contribute to the current discussion. My pre-Horizons list is here http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/30-05-16-temur-tooth-and-nail/?cb=1559744262. It was a hyper focused T&N list with a Command/E witness loop backup plan. The sideboard mainly consisted of silver bullets for primal command, bolts for aggro decks, and additional ramp redundancy for racing other combo decks like storm.

Thanks for sharing your list. It looks a lot like where I started.

Quote from BlatantLizard »

I had come to the same conclusion that you had about Garruk and only really ran him as worse copies of Kiora, Master of Depths that would occasionally steal me a game on the off-chance that I had lots of mana dorks but no ramp payoff.

Happy to know I'm not alone.

Quote from BlatantLizard »

After seeing Llanowar Tribe I knew that I needed to revamp the deck as its basically addition copies of Overgrowth, which has always secretly been T&N's best card. My new test list is here http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/modern-horizons-tooth-and-nail/?cb=1559745177. Tribe means that getting to 3 mana on turn 2 is actually important in most games (whereas it only mattered before if you had managed to draw overgrowth), so I've added a copy of Birds of Paradise and after many test games I would highly recommend that you also run at least 1 copy somewhere in your list, as landing a tribe on 2 all but guarantees that you can play a 6 drop on turn 3.

My current Tooth and Nail list is actually playing 4 Arbor Elf, 4 Utopia Sprawl AND 4 Birds, so I suppose I'm already taking your advice (though I suppose my newest rendition ought to reflect this).

I think what led me to playing Birds was me getting sick of Voyaging Satyr. Costing 2 was always awkward because, if I didn't have a turn 1 play, I already wasn't ramping, which also means I don't have Utopia Sprawl to use with him. Then, on turn 2, I can play the Satyr, but unless I have Overgrowth on 3, Voyaging Satyr won't make me any more than 1 mana, and that's just atrocious. Sure, when I've got a decked out Forest, the Satyr is quite good. In fact, I think I liked him better than Garruk, being easier to cast and all. But Voyaging Satyr frequently disappointed me.

If what I wanted was ramp, it made more sense to increase my number of 1-drops. Turn 1 is the best time to play a ramp spell for so many reasons. It's at the very beginning of the game meaning not only will my opponent not be pressuring me yet, but I'll also be getting the maximum possible return on my card since I can extract value out of it every single turn it remains in play, and there's no possible way to play something sooner. Turn 1 is also the turn where I have the least useful things to do because I don't yet have any significant resources at my disposal, so I may as well capitalize off that fact by finding something productive to do at that time. After all, if I intended to ramp on 2 and do nothing on 1, I may as well just ramp on 1 instead. And in the event I draw multiple 1-drops, that's okay too. Playing additional 1-drops on 2 is fine. If anything, it ensures I don't stumble if my opponent does kill a 1-drop.

On a separate note, I spent a lot of time yesterday reading Frank Karsten's articles on multivariable hypergeometric distribution because I wanted to learn how to find the probability of starting with certain hands. After having crunched a few numbers, I now see why I intuitively made the transition from Satyr into Birds. From what I've seen so far, I'm getting the impression that playing anything less than 12 1-drops might be crazy. Playing 4 more 1-drops seems to dramatically increase the chances of making 3 mana turn 2 which, as you mentioned, is now more important than ever given the printing of Llanowar Tribe. I'm going to spend more time with the calculator and report my findings later.

Quote from BlatantLizard »

It will also allow you to diversify your threats by running a larger variety of bombs without reducing deck consistency (i.e. you can cut 1 Bellower for 1 Primeval Titan while still being able to get Bellower when you need it).

This sounds like a perk; diversifying my 6-drops so I can Primal Command whichever one best fits my circumstances seems beneficial. I can foresee a few problems possibly arising as a result of this decision though.

First, my 6-drops won't probably all be creatures. That means Primal Command won't be able to find all of them, diminishing the point of diversifying my 6-drops in the first place.

Second, every 6-drop I play beyond the first is theoretically worse than the 6-drop before it. In practice, having "the right card" for any situation is usually better than having "the best card" for every situation even if "the best card" is better in a vacuum than "the right card" is, but that only holds true to an extent. If the quality of the 2nd best 6-drop and the 3rd best 6-drop (and so on and so forth) begins to drop dramatically after a certain point, then the consequences of playing independently weaker 6-drops may outweigh the benefits of having a diverse set of 6-drops with which to access. Now, I personally don't think this will be a problem. I think there are likely enough good 6-drops at the tippy top to ensure the quality doesn't take a serious dive once I reach the 3rd or 4th one. Even so, it is something worth paying attention to.

Third, there's a deckbuilding cost associated with playing certain 6-drops. For example, Primeval Titan requires I play enough utility lands to make his tutor ability useful beyond just finding basics. Woodland Bellower also requires I play enough 3-drops to consistently find. Those sorts of costs aren't insignificant, and won't necessarily always be compatible with one another either.

I'm not sure if these three concerns outweight the benefits of having a diverse set of 6-drops or not, but I thought I may as well point them out.

Quote from BlatantLizard »

As for other cards to fill your remaining 4 slots I would highly recommend 3 copies of Primal Command and an additional copy of Eternal Witness. Primal Command will allow you to tutor up creatures with CMC of greater than 3, effectively giving you more threat redundancy while allowing you to dodge the effects of cards like Grafdigger's Cage.

.
.
.

This also gives the deck a strong Plan B in games where you don't draw T&N by Time-Walking your opponent with Primal Command/Eternal Witness loops (in my experience most opponents concede after you tutor up the 2nd Eternal Witness). Finally, Primal command lets you run sliver bullets in the sideboard without having to worry about "over-sideboarding" and diluting your deck's main T&N game plan.

Earlier versions of my Tooth and Nail deck played four copies of Primal Command and three copies of Eternal Witness. During some of my first games ever, I actually drew a few nut draws leading to early Primal Command loops. Having that kind of power just felt awesome. Over time though, I began to realize just how little I ever wanted to draw Eternal Witness. Despite Command loops winning me games in spectacular fashion, it was also losing me games by creating dud hands. Eternal Witness just isn't a good proactive play, and I never want to see it in my opening hand because it frequently doesn't do anything; it's reliant upon my opponent putting valuable cards into my graveyard, and I won't always have valuable sorceries of my own to put there.

Once I made that observation, I started shaving copies, and now I'm down to three copies of Primal Command and one copy of Eternal Witness. Thus far, I'm happier with the results. Eternal Witness is a card that I always want access to, but it's also a card I never want to draw, so one copy seems like the most fitting number. That has the unfortunate side effect of not being able to loop opponents more than once, but after playtesting the new number I found myself never wanting to loop more than once anyway, so I'm okay with losing that privilege.

Quote from BlatantLizard »

This means you can have single copies of cards like Elderscale Wurm and Hornet Queen for Aggro and Midrange matchups respectively.

It's funny you mention the Wurm. While building my very first rendition of Tooth and Nail months ago, I saw the card and thought it would make for some great sideboard tech. After playing it, I actually found it rather frustrating. At 7 mana, the card proved prohibitively expensive against aggro, and in one game in particular I learned its limitations extensively. Sitting smugly behind both an Elderscale Wurm and an Inferno Titan, I thought my game unloseable. My elven opponent just shrugged and cast Shaman of the Pack. The Wurm doesn't prevent life loss. Since then, I've replaced the Wurm with Madcap Experiment and Platinum Emperion.

What I liked most about Elderscale Wurm was that it helped me with my biggest problem. Because all I ever did was ramp, I would always fall behind on board and backpedal the entire game. By the time I had enough mana to cast something, I was frequently on death's door. That made it essential for my first relevant spell to get me back in the race. I tried a few different cards: Thragtusk, Dromoka, Elderscale Wurm. Absolutely nothing beat Platinum Emperion though. He just crushed it. And there's so much to like about him too!

For one, there's no deckbuilding cost to play him; Tooth and Nail doesn't want artifacts. For two, he can be cast off Madcap Experiment, making him much more reliable in aggro matchups. And if I open with Land, Arbor Elf —> Land, Utopia Sprawl, Madcap Experiment, I can even land Platinum Emperion turn 2, and an 8/8 assailant turn 2 is no joke. In fact, I won so many games at my LGS last Friday solely off the back of Platinum Emperion alone. If he resolves, some decks just can't interact with him.

Another thing that's great about Platinum Emperion is that it isn't unreasonable to cast in Tooth and Nail either. 8 mana is very achievable, and can even happen turn 3 off of lines like Land, Arbor Elf —> Land, Overgrowth —> Land or Land, Arbor Elf —> Land, Overgrowth —> Utopia Sprawl. It's just such a great card. It truly has the right combination of attributes. If you've never tried it before, I'd highly recommend it.

Quote from BlatantLizard »

On a related note, I really appreciate your writeup on 6-drops. Vraska, Relic Seeker is a card I had never really considered before but it definitely seems like the kind of card that this deck wants. T&N has needed a threat that also interacts with the opponent when needed for a while and I had never really considered a black splash for big Vraska until your writeup. It's nice to know that there are green mages out there still innovating in this archetype.

Aww, thank you man. I appreciate the kind words. I put a lot of effort into everything I write, so it's nice to see someone get some worth out of it.

Vraska wasn't a card I had ever considered either. I glossed over it so many times looking for the perfect 6-drop. Now that I've realized what it can do, I have high hopes for the card. I think it'll be exactly what the deck needs.

Quote from CurdBros »

I agree with a lot of what was said here. I LOVE Woodland Bellower and Vraska in particular. I've played Vraska quite a bit (any black deck and/or any deck that doesn't support Karn Liberated) and I was never been disappointed casting her. With Vraska, just a few turns makes her a win-condition (as we can normally deal 1-damage).

Yeah, the fact the pirates have menace means it isn't likely the opponent will be able to block.

I'm pleased to hear your experiences with Vraska were positive ones. I know it's kind of an esoteric card, but I'm an iconoclast, and when I have good reasons to go against the grain, I tend to bet hard. My initially testing is backing me up so far, but we'll see how everything turns out in a few weeks time.

Quote from CurdBros »

I have tried to play Woodland Bellower many times in my builds. I had a really fun build with Bellower, Devoted Druid and Elder of Laurels (as with enough creatures on board Elder+Devoted Druid creates infinite mana and/or an infinitely large Druid for a turn).

Huh. I didn't know that was a thing when I put Elder of Laurels on my list. Good to know.

Quote from CurdBros »

It is also one of those cards that just gets better with time;

Man, I'm totally waiting for the day Wizards accidentally prints a fetchable clone or Flickerwisp variant. Altered Ego was so close to breaking Woodland Bellower. Soulherder would have also been amazing had it been green. End of turn, blink Woodland Bellower, get another 3-drop, and then continue to blink Woodland Bellower or whatever other card it found every turn thereafter. It's only a matter of time before something breaks Woodland Bellower.

Quote from CurdBros »

and when I played him it was a good card to help build a board around (as it can grab the new Ouphe, Reclamation Sage, Loaming Shaman, etc..

Loaming Shaman might actually be better than I first thought. In a vacuum, Scavenging Ooze is almost certainly the better card, but if I need to disrupt a graveyard immediately, I can't cast Woodland Bellower into Scavenging Ooze without also having additional mana, and I might need a lot. On the other hand, Loaming Shaman solves that issue immediately. Perhaps it's worth considering over Scavenging Ooze for that reason.

Quote from CurdBros »

I think if you are not playing Primeval Titan; you are right that these are your best answers.

Glad for the vote of confidence.

Quote from CurdBros »

I'm excited to hear more about your list. Looks like a really cool take on Devotion and I'd love to hear about your games.

I'll make sure to keep you up to date.

Quote from CurdBros »

I think Devotion has a few ways to play...as long as we answer the questions:


1. How are we getting to our mana quickly?
2. What are we doing with that mana once we get it.

The best ways I've seen in my history with Devotion are:

1. Some form of "Combo"
2. Overrun

This is because Devotion by its very nature requires us to load the board with green permanents. This comes with significant downsides (both in terms of the ability of our opponent to interact with us and in terms of speed). So we have to turn that negative into a relatively quick positive. Thus far, the best ways I've seen are the above two (Overrun or Combo).

Overrun -

There really isn't a better way to do this than Craterhoof Behemoth. I've tried it a few ways; but in the end a few value creatures and one Craterhoof will do the job . Craterhoof in its own way is a "1-card combo" as it wins the game all by itself; but it is s little different in the sense that it does require a board and of course can be cast without the board being there. There are a few other ways to overrun (Garruk of course, Ezuri in elf decks, Overwhelming Stampede, etc.) but really nothing beats Craterhoof.

Combo -

There are a few ways to go about this. Be it Tooth and Nail, Karn/Lattice, Devoted Druid/Vizier, or even Witness/Command etc. Generally the "one card" combos tend to be best; but we have numerous options. Tooth and Nail at 9-mana, Karn at 10-mana, Witness/Command at 8-mana, etc...each have their own set of pros and cons. All of the options, however, make for a relatively simple game plan. Genesis Wave also tends to focus as a "combo" card as well (as most Wave decks are built in a way that once you cast your first Wave for X=6 or more you should be able to either chain/loop waves; or win from there). Really all of the decks are functioning with a "Plan A" of "get to X mana and cast my payoff/wincon".

In the end its actually quite simple. We spend our first 1-3 turns ramping to our end point and hopefully can cast our win-con by turn 3-4. While ramp decks in standard can tend to play a few dorks and play cards 1-2 turns early up the curve; Modern makes it very difficult to do that. Ramp in Modern tends to be ramp, ramp, win We are fortunate to have multiple win-conditions (Craterhoof, Tooth and Nail, Karn, Wave, etc.) all as "big mana" win cons...so our job really becomes (a) how do we get there, (b) how do we deal with interaction (i.e. resilience), and (c) what is the most effective plan B.

This is why Garruk tends to be really good in the decks he works in (as he functions both as part of the "Plan A" of the deck while also allowing for a Plan B. This is mostly true of Craterhoof Decks though...and I fully agree that Garruk does not need to be in every Devotion deck (just a great piece in those it is in). So I think that the argument for Garruk is what decks he really shines in (as he is a REALLY strong four drop...but you really want to get all of the use out of him (the untap and the threat of overrun). He fits in more decks than he doesn't...but I can understand when people play decks without him despite my preference for the card.

Good Analysis.

From a strategic standpoint, I think combo kills are preferable to overruns because combo kills aren't predicated on having a board state (depending on the combo anyway). With overruns, I might have the mana, and I might have the overrun, but I might not have the boardstate necessary to end the game for one reason or another, perhaps due to interaction. That majorly sucks, and combo kills don't have that same stipulation. Obviously, either can work, but combo kills definitely have a leg up in that race.

Also, not to be a pedant, but are devotion decks really devotion decks? Like, aside from Nykthos, it doesn't seem like anyone cares about green mana symbols. I mean, there's the gods. Tooth and Nail plays Xenagos, but the fact he has devotion is mostly an afterthought. There are some other cards too I suppose. Karametra's Acolyte can make tons of mana. Nylea's Disciple might also have some utility. Past that, there really isn't anything. I don't know. Generally speaking, I never really hear about these cards. It seems like all anyone cares about is Nykthos, and that's it, so the whole devotion name feels like a misnomer.

On the subject of Nykthos, for as good as it is, it's only one card, and legendary at that. Breaking my back to support it by playing suboptimal cards I wouldn't otherwise be playing if they didn't have several green mana symbols attached (I'm looking at you, Wistful Selkie) seems like a poor way to go about ramping, especially considering I won't always have Nykthos, and even when I do I also won't always have a way to spend the mana it makes profitably. In addition, Nykthos relies on having a substantial board state, something I can't guarantee due to luck and due to the fact that my opponents will often interact with me.

Meanwhile, if I simply run Nykthos without caring about my devotion, provided I'm playing enough green permanents to support it (and I wouldn't include Nykthos if I wasn't), Nykthos will often make additional mana naturally without having to make any kind of deckbuilding concessions. Four green symbols is enough to net extra mana, and everything after that is gravy. Knowing that, it feels like maximizing Nykthos's effectiveness is more trouble than it's worth as doing so causes tons of complications, but not doing anything still reaps hefty benefits.

Quote from Thorshammer813 »

https://archidekt.com/decks/100243#Green_devotion

Here's one I'm tinkering with. I don't have All of the cards yet, but that's a good thing, as I'm sure it's missing a thing or two.

Any and all pointers are welcome. Light it up or praise it. Up to you. I'll learn from criticism no matter positive or negative

That's a good attitude to have. I like that you use Archidekt too. Here are three things I noticed:

1.) If you're in the market for Plated Crusher, you ought to play Carnage Tyrant instead. It's strictly an upgrade.

2.) You're not playing any copies of Overgrowth. Unless you have specific metagame reasons for not doing so, you should be jamming four of those suckers. Having extensively studied all of Magic's ramp spells for a guide I'm writing in Commander, I can confidently say that Overgrowth is one of the best, if not THE best 3 mana ramp spell ever printed. It's resilient, it refunds 2 mana immediately, something unheard of in other 3 mana ramp spells that tap for 2, and it improves the quality of all your land untapping effects. You seriously want this card.

3.) I know you said you don't have all the cards yet, so this may just be a budget thing, but to support cards like Kessig Wolf Run and Vraska, Relic Seeker, you really, really want shocklands and fetches to accompany them. At the moment, the only way you can even produce non-green mana is with Utopia Sprawl, and that's just horrendous, especially once you consider that you'll sometimes just want to name green with it to cast Llanowar Tribe on turn 2. You're just not always going to draw Utopia Sprawl, so you need additional sources of color if you want to support multicolored cards. If you had a couple shocklands, at least you could fetch those with Primeval Titan, but at the moment you can't even support Wolf Run with Primeval Titan alone. Either cut out all the multicolored cards or increase your number of nongreen sources substantially to support them.

Quote from Gary238 »

Re: Primalcrux... if you want this to work you really need to run ways to give it haste

Good observation, and there are ways to enable haste in mono-green alone. Obviously, there's equipment like Lightning Greaves and Swiftfoot Boots, but Surrak, the Hunt Caller and Samut, Tyrant Smasher also work.

Quote from Gary238 »

to add one more quick note to the Primeval Titan discussion; Inkmoth Nexus is worth considering as a target that can give you lethal the next turn, if you grab it along with wolf run. I dont like having that many colorless sources, but it is another way to get the kill.

I think this is a bad idea. To make Inkmoth good, I'd need 1 mana to activate it, 2 mana to activate Wolf Run, 9 additional mana to sink into Wolf Run, and I've got to tap Wolf Run and Inkmoth itself. That's 14 mana from lands alone. If I delay my kill over two turns, I only need 9 which is a bit more reasonable, if still expensive, but none of that even takes blocking into consideration which makes Inkmoth even more costly to trample through. Also, if my opponent kills my Inkmoth, perhaps with a blocker, all of it was for naught. If I want a manland, I suspect Raging Ravine is the way to go.