If you need additional creature kill, you could maindeck one or even two more Crypt Rats.  My initial opinion of this list is that you could probably do without Tortured Existence #4 and Deep Analysis #4.  You've tested the deck so you would know better than I do how often you end up throwing them away by dredging.

Any multiples of Tortured Existence are dead draws, though.  Even if you've already got one in hand or on the board and they're showing up in your dredging, they're just getting in the way.  With 3 copies, I don't think you're overly likely to throw it away.

Deep Analysis is a harder cut to make but since you are also using a Mulldrifter engine, I wouldn't be heartbroken to see one go to shore up a weakness you've observed.  

Alternately, think hard when you cast Buried Alive.  You mention Wonder, Sprite, and 'Tog.  You did not, however mention Crypt Rats.  They're as close to Pernicious Deed as you're going to get in the Peasant variant of this deck.

One final consideration.  If a third Psychatog and a second Buried Alive are appealing to you, I think that you could possibly get by without Wonder as one of your uncommons.  I've had great success with Traitor's Clutch in a Pyschatog deck.  When you win, do you tend to have one huge turn in which you deal 15+ damage to your opponent?  If so, I think that Traitor's Clutch would be a suitable replacement for Wonder.

Honestly, I would call it the second-coolest Mesmeric Fiend evar.

From my understanding, eBay works exactly as it is intended to work.  At no point does eBay suggest that they wish to support rounds of competitive bidding.  They use proxy bidding for a reason; that reason is to avoid bidding wars.  I haven't done much buying through eBay, but I can confidently state that I've never been particularly agitated about getting sniped.  I put in the maximum amount that I am willing to pay and then I leave it alone.  (Yare, you suggest that by bidding lower, I might get the cards for less than the maximum I'm willing to pay -- I just factor that effect into my proxy bid.  I always bid less than I would be willing to pay if I needed the item urgently and were using "buy it now" or getting it at the card shop.)  If I don't win the item, it's because somebody else was willing to pay more for it than I was, plain and simple.  I don't care if they sniped the auction, bid with two hours to go, or already had a higher proxy bid in place than I made.

It's interesting that you should mention this.  I read a news article about Ron Paul earlier this week.  He is refusing to support McCain or Obama and is instead encouraging voters to support the Green or Libertarian party candidates.  I intend to write him a letter.  As a congressman, he is actually in a position to propose a Constitutional amendment to institute approval voting.  That would go a long way toward making 3rd party candidates viable, which would in turn force the two large parties to compete on real issues.

I appreciate the link, by the way.  It may well be common knowledge to people who studied history, but I have done so only passingly.  I agree that we should be able to discuss it empirically, but like I said, exercise discretion. (And no, I don't mean that as a euphemism for "be politically correct.")

I always thought that these would be some of the easiest cards to adjudicate in a tournament setting.  "A game" would constitute only a game played formally within the tournament setting.  If you meet somebody in the Top 8 whom you met earlier and against whom you played a "double" card, it still counts as the "next game."  Because the structure of games and matchups is so clearly drawn in tournament settings, I always thought of the "double" cards as some of the most interesting and least wacky cards in the silver-bordered sets -- definitely candidates for inclusion in a future non-silver set.

I think that games that modify the initial state of the game have a lot of untapped potential.  Serum Powder and the Leylines definitely set new boundaries for when cards may be permitted to affect the game.  Having a state carry between games might create memory issues, but I think that if they could resolve those it would be worth it.

Although I don't usually make a big deal about infinite combos, that one seems right up my alley.  Slow enough not to be stupid, but still relying only on two cards, both of which will be useful in the deck.  I wonder if maybe I should forgo blue, though, and go with some other colour.  I'm not altogether impressed with the selection of blue spirits.  White, on the other hand, offers Lantern Kami, Blinking Spirit, and Waxmane Baku.  I guess its selection of Arcane spells is weaker though.  Because of Gilder Bairn, I might not need quite as many as I otherwise would, but I don't want to be unable to get Ichiga fired up.

This space reserved for a deck involving
Callow Jushi // Jaraku the Interloper
Budoka Pupil // Ichiga, Who Topples Oaks
Petalmane Baku
and
Gilder Bairn

Other possible inclusions:
Leonin Bola
Paradise Mantle
(Because I need to tap Gilder Bairn to make it useful.)
Curse of Chains
(Which can be used either against my opponents creatures or to get one potential activation out of Gilder Bairn for each player.)

I predict that Tinkering for Mox Lotus would be hot.  Sounds like an interesting experiment, though.  What would Vintage be like if silver-bordered cards were legal?

Is this the writeup to which you are referring?  It's the only one that I can find that involves Skyshroud Cutter, although I don't see Heroes' Reunion there.

Relentless Assault is an interesting possibility.  I very seldom consider it, but I have three copies lying around here somewhere that won't find use in any other deck.  I still haven't gotten my hands on 3 Thornscape Battlemage, so I could fill those empty slots with Relentless Assault.  If I decide that I like them, I'll probably need to rework the mana base later.  I'm pretty sure that I do not have support for three cards with RR in their casting cost.

I had an opportunity to try out this deck in a duel setting yesterday evening and I discovered a few anti-synergies that I hadn't really considered.

Faith's Fetters, for example, does not go particularly well with Blood Clock because my opponent, using Blood Clock's own ability, can return the permanent that I've enchanted with Blood Clock, and ruin that strategy.  I am going to leave a single copy of Faith's Fetters in the deck because I can harmlessly enchant one of my own basic lands and still use it as a life-gaining mechanism.

Generally speaking, however, Blood Clock turned out to be a very good card in the deck (good enough that I am adding a 4th copy.)  Cloudstone Curio wasn't as strong once I realized that Spellstutter Sprite counters a spell with converted mana cost X or less and does not counter a spell unless its controller pays X.  With that in mind, I think that I need to put a few more faeries in the deck.  I am torn between cutting Cloudstone Curio entirely and going down to a single copy.  My previous arguments about using it to save my own permanents is still valid, but in practice I didn't ever see that situation come up when all of the necessary pieces were available. 

Plumeveil is likely to get cut.  I would probably be better with Faerie Harbinger, Scion of Oona, or Pestermite instead.  A 4/4 Defender is swell, but there's no surprise after the first time.  A Pestermite, at least, will protect me from a Chameleon Collosus indefinitely.

Finally, the "tax" side of the deck definitely didn't feel like it was pulling its weight.  If I am looking to draw a bunch of cards in a multiplayer game, I think that Sygg, River Cutthroat would be a better option than Rhystic Study.  The games I played with this deck went so long that long before the game was determined, everybody had access to more mana than we could reasonably use.  I could replace Spelltithe Enforcer with just about anything.  It might be interesting to use Knacksaw Clique.  I have three Orzhov Signets in the deck that I could easily replace with Fellwar Stones, so that could be an amusing, if unthemely, addition to the deck.

There aren't so many dupes, but from what I recall, they still have the same economy that they implemented to deal with duping.  I've never seen a Stone of Jordan in my life, despite needing what, like 12 of them to do any really fun crafting.

It is a highly superiour bear, but at the end of the day, in my opinion, it's still just a bear.  If it works for you, I'd recommend keeping it.  I was playing PEZ with people fielding excessively fast Affinity decks and impressive storm combo decks (before they banned Brain Freeze from the format.)  Against opponents like that, a bear, even a very good one, didn't impress me.  Also, I'm a control player at heart.  I gravitate toward efficient control rather than toward efficient aggro.

This description of the Vintage to come may be what gets me back into the format.  That sounds like the plot synopsis of a campy, holiday movie that would be awesome to see with a pack of hyperactive children.  Santa's Elves versus the Robotic Nutcracker Army or something like that.  And if that isn't enough to make anybody love Vintage, then they're definitely a Grinch with a heart two sizes too small.

I still see no reason to believe that this change will cause any greater attrition from the established player base than that which already occurs anyway.  I think that it is entirely possible for them to both maintain the existing player base and also to attract new players to the game more effectively than they have previously done.  In my opinion, the addition of mythics will probably annoy many people, but will cause few to quit playing Magic.  On the other hand, I trust that WotC's market research is at least a little accurate.  I certainly don't think that they're changing for no reason.  I agree that greed is a partial motivator.  In fact, WotC anticipates that this maneuver will help them to sell more packs to more players, so greed is probably a major motivator.  Here is the kicker:  Some people perceive this change as decreasing the value of each pack.  If that was the general perception, however, it would fail to produce the results that WotC intends.  Therefore, many or most of the players who will be motivated to investigate Magic as a result of this change will do so because it increases the perceived value of the game.  If, in fact, the majority of the established player base believes that this is a negative change, then, yes, it will have been executed "at the expense of older players."  I would speculate, however, that after initial reactions have subsided, that older players will, as a whole, be ambivalent.

One final point that I would like to make is that I believe that it is unhealthy for the game to differentiate between new and old players.  I identify with the vintage community as well as with the standard community mostly because I like to play Magic.  Even if this change results in old players being a little more unhappy about Magic, if it attracts many new players who are all happy about Magic, then the aggregate satisfaction with the game among Magic players will be greater than it was before.  That, I think, is good for the game.  In fact, one positive attitude I'm trying to adopt is that of civic-mindedness.  Even if I am a little bit unhappy about this change, I'm very happy about new players learning and enjoying the game that I love.

SNAKES ON THE DRAIN!

How can you even say something like this with a straight face?  Your argument amounts to, "People who play Magic right now are closed-minded and Wizards of the Coast should cater to nobody but us."  Frankly, I don't think that they're doing anything "at the expense of older players."  Although I am inclined to see aspects of greed in this change, I don't think they're taking anything away from us.  I'm trying to maintain perspective regarding this decision and ultimately, it really doesn't upset me all that much.  I believe that I qualify as an "older player" so, clearly, there's some subset of older players that finds this upsetting and another subset that does not.  I predict that you will try to claim that most older players think like you and not like me, but I will preempt that claim unless you can provide evidence to back it up.  (Polling TMD is not going to be sufficient.  The Vintage community is not a representative sample of all "older players.")

My first inclination was to disapprove of this move, but after reading the feature article and MaRo's explanation, I am satisfied regarding the introduction of mythic rares into the game.

I think that MaRo was entirely forthright that they are doing this, in part, to attract younger players to the game.  He cited that having only three rarities makes Magic feel less state-of-the-art than more contemporary CCGs.  Magic now has to compete with its own progeny for mindshare.  I agree that meeting the expectations of people who do not currently play Magic is one way to make Magic more appealing to them.  I also think that if they follow the execution that MaRo laid out, that the introduction of mythics will not aversely affect the game, nor its primary and secondary markets.

I also think that it was appropriate that they introduced this change in the same article in which they introduced the plan to create smaller sets.  That will increase the overall density of each individual card, making coveted mythics and rares less rare than they otherwise could be.  (Tangentially, I am also excited about smaller sets because I have gotten really sick of buying a booster box and a fat pack and not ending up with a playset of commons.)

Finally, I must note that I object to the phrasing of your question.  I have little experience with Yu-Gi-Oh, so I won't pretend that I can speak for its quality.  Nonetheless, you have explicitly included "being like Yu-Gi-Oh" in your list of negative traits and you've used the word "pander" to insinuate that appealing to a younger audience somehow cheapens the game of Magic.

I have to admit that I do find it a little bit thrilling to imagine cracking open a Shards of Alara booster to find a mythic Planeswalker card.  Granted, I am a somewhat childlike adult when it comes to my appreciation of the different aspects of Magic.  I happen to enjoy the wonder of looking at each card in my booster pack, reading flavour text, studying the illustration, and generally soaking in the flavour.  I think that I will also enjoy the anticipation of opening up a pack that might contain a mythic, just like I now opening up a pack and seeing that it has a foil card, but not knowing until the end whether it's a foily common, uncommon, or rare.

I don't think that Air Elemental is a common.  Gatherer is down, but I consulted another search DB and it showed it as an uncommon across every printing.  I can see your concern about the deck becoming too blue.  In that case, Blade of the Sixth Pride is probably still a better option for you than Safehold Elite, because of Momentary Blink.  Other possible replacements for Safehold Elite:  Mesa Chicken, Benalish Cavalry, Order of Leitbur, and Youthful Knight

If you are looking for other white instants that you might consider over Echoing Truth or Brainstorm, I have always had a fondness for Awe Strike, Raise the Alarm, and Guided Strike in white Scepter-based decks.  You might also consider Judge Unworthy, which has some of the library-manipulation element of Brainstorm but also gives you some creature kill (albeit light creature kill, since the deck is low-cc).  Razor Barrier or Shelter are also worth considering.

I used to play a lot of Peasant Magic and I think that you have a solid base here.  You've independently discovered "Iso Blue" and you've added a sound white element to it.  You are correct that Isochron Scepter is one of the most popular cards in the format.  It's been a while since I've touched PEZ and I think you've hit upon some solid new technology in Momentary Blink.

How well does Serra Angel work out for you?  I know that in similar decks, I would normally run 2 Isochron Scepter, 3 Swords to Plowshares.  Serra Angel is certainly a strong beater, but have you considered whether improving your control scheme and using a less efficient beater, like Snapping Drake, would improve the deck?  You say that having just one extra uncommon slot doesn't make much difference, but I think that it does.  Consider, for example, 2 Isochron Scepter, 2 Swords to Plowshares, 1 Serra Angel.  It's almost certainly better to remove that Serra Angel to make room for an additional copy of one of the other two uncommons.  Having 6 uncommon slots means that you can run 2 of each, which isn't all that bad.

I always question Brainstorm when I see it in PEZ.  It is rightly considered one of the powerhouses of Vintage, but I think that the paucity of both shuffle effects and really broken plays hampers its effectiveness in PEZ.  At the very least, I might suggest cutting back to 3 copies and add a 4th copy of either Momentary Blink or Thnik Twice.

The last card about which I am not sure is Safehold Elite.  It's a solid combat creature, but I don't think that Persist adds a lot of value for you.  With Momentary Blink in the deck, especially on an Isochron Scepter, having your creatures die is less of a worry.  You might use Blade of the Sixth Pride if you're concerned about combat effectiveness or something that would take advantage of comes-into-play effects:  Mulldrifter, Primal Plasma, or even Artful Looter might be good choices.

These statements would lead me to believe that if he does answer you, he is obligated to provide you with a truthful answer.  He is not, however, obligated to provide you with any answer at all.

You missed a great opportunity.  With your avatar being Andrew Ryan and everything, you should have said something like, "A man chooses.  A slave plays Diablo II."

I'm pretty sure that calzones are in the sandwich section of the menu at the bar where we usually play sandwich punch.  If they're not, then we'll just have to be a heretic sect of the whole sandwich punch culture.

I played a couple of games with this deck on Friday and it performed terribly.  Granted, I was dueling with a Type 2 deck designed to compete, but I still feel as though it did particularly little.  I definitely had too few threats.  The one or two big creatures that I was able to play presented no great challenge for my opponent's removal.  Wall of Shards and Birds of Paradise have to go.  I could also use one fewer Creeping Mold.  That gives me six slots that I can fill with more effective threats.

My 3- and 4-casting-cost slots are underutilized, so I'll look there.  Thornscape Battlemage looks especially good.  It belongs to my main colour, I can utilize both of its Kicker modes, and it provides additional removal.  I'll add three of those.  Wildslayer Elves also look pretty good, so we'll try them.  (At this point, I'm honestly just experimenting with whatever strikes my fancy in the Standard environment.  I think I'm devoting more than enough space already to the Kavu Predator theme and trying to find more space where overlaps with the need for more threats is difficult.)

I would use your 'Drain mana to do something really out there.  I think that Oath and Landstill don't sound casual enough for your crowd.  Dark Depths seems like a good suggestion, though.  Drawing upon your inner Timmy-Johnny is your best bet, in my opinion.  Reach for Tooth and Nail, Biorhythm, Time Stretch, Earthquake, Hurricane, Djinn Illuminatus, or Tidespout Tyrant.  Use the mana to cast a bunch of little spells to empower Wee Dragonauts or Gelectrode.  Funnel it into a Gemstone Array and find something to do with it later.  The problem is honestly too broad to offer you a really good solution.  Suggest two or three other cards that you'd especially like to use in this deck and we can start hammering out a list for you.

Creatures (18)
4 Zealous Guardian
2 Plumeveil
4 Spellstutter Sprite
2 Faerie Harbinger
3 Wasp Lancer
3 Spelltithe Enforcer

Spells (18)
2 Repel Intruders
3 Faerie Tauntings
3 Rhystic Study
3 Faith's Fetters
3 Blood Clock
2 Cloudstone Curio
3 Orzhov Signet
1 Enlightened Tutor

Land (24)
3 Dromar's Cavern
9 Island
8 Plains
4 Swamp

***

There are several interconnected ideas being put to use in this deck.  The general principle, though, is that it is highly defensive while wearing away opponents through attrition with minimal expenditure of resources.  It is also presents itself as a nuisance rather than as a threat.  Combined with its defensive strategy, I expect that this will deter other players from bothering me too much.

Faerie Tauntings is the foundation of my win condition.  I have a large selection of creatures with Flash, which will allow me to whittle away at my opponents' life totals.  Cloudstone Curio and Blood Clock also add to this goal.  If I have several mana available right before my turn, I can chain several Zealous Guardians, maintain the status quo, and shave off 2 or 3 more life from my opponents.

Cloudstone Curio also improves the defensive strength of the deck.  Kill spells will find their targets missing, combat damage will resolve upon thin air, etc.  With multiple Spellstutter Sprite, I will also be able to chain counter effects to stop spells that I can't allow.  (Wasp Lancer's primary purpose, by the way, besides being cool, is empowering Spellstutter Sprite.)

Blood Clock allows me to recur my Flash creatures when I have failed to do so with Cloudstone Curio.  It also plays very nicely with Faith's Fetters.  I only have to return it to my hand one turn in three to keep my life total even.  More importantly, though, it segues into the Tax portion of the Flash-Tax deck.  I wanted to slow down the mid- and late-game because my win condition is not especially fast.  Rhystic Study and Spelltithe Enforcer both encourage my opponents to play less aggressively.

"Never put a card that one player owns into another player's hand" is a rule that WotC follows pretty zealously.  I think that it has has been violated only once in recent memory and that was on a silver-bordered card.  Putting a card into somebody's deck seems like a worse offense to me.  At its most extreme interpretation, you have to call a judge over every time this card is played so that there is third-party confirmation of the card.  Otherwise, how do you prove ownership of one of your cards in the opponent's deck?  Or, if the card you pick pushes an opponent above four copies of that card, how does the opponent prove that it was your Twist of Fate and not them cheating?

I have a correction to make.  For me, this is the best part.  For my friend, it is the perverse amusement he gets from eating a sandwich with knuckle imprints in it.

I introduced sandwich punch to one of my friends here.  We're very good natured about it, though.  It isn't so much about obliterating the other guy's sandwich as it is about confusing the other bar patrons.  He'll be having a bad day or something and I'll be like, "I know what will cheer you up" and then I genially slide my calzone toward him so that he can punch it.

I am going to have to think before I can make any recommendations about what I would add.  I would be very careful, though before adding Timesifter.  With cards like Tangle Wire and Smokestack in play, you do not want to be the only person taking turns.  Unless you can find some way to make your opponents take extra turns more often than you do, that's probably not a good plan.  You might find better synergy in a card like Bosh, Iron Golem.  You already get to shuffle Sundering Titans around with Goblin Welder, but if you have the mana around, then Bosh gets you 7 damage instead of another artifact back.  That's probably something that would be more fun than powerful.

I actually got around to building this deck.  You'd be amazed, though, how difficult it can be to find obscure, unpopular cards.  For example, I would've sworn I had a few copies of Reward the Faithful lying around, but I don't -- and you can bet your behind that I'm not going to buy them.  As you'll see, I deviated somewhat from the initial concept and from my own recommendations.  I wanted a few more "utility" slots and I also wanted a bigger portfolio of threats, since having just four Kavu Predator seemed like a tenuous strategy.

Creatures (16)
3 Birds of Paradise
4 Thornweald Archer
4 Kavu Predator
2 Wall of Shards
3 Giant Warthog

Spells (20)
4 Swords to Plowshares
3 Collapsing Borders
3 Healing Leaves
3 Invigorate
3 Creeping Mold
4 Fiery Justice

Land (24)
9 Forest
5 Mountain
7 Plains
3 Rith's Grove

***

The Giant Warthogs are the new addition to my collection of threats.  They aren't the most amazing card ever, but I think that they'll give me a little more steam than I otherwise would have.  I may trade for a playset of Rhox for that slot.  If I am going to be "serious" about multiplayer Magic, I think that Rhox would probably be a worthy investment. I also expect Collapsing Borders to wear my opponents down.  In many games, it will slowly, but surely pick away at at least one opponent.  I also expect it to be the card that generates the most utterances of, "no freaking way."  Like Fiery Justice, it is worth almost as much for the amazement that it will generate as for the effect.

Swords to Plowshares was mentioned in JeremM's initial post and I forgot about them until I noticed them in my own collection and remembered this deck.  Healing Leaves is the card that I selected to replace Reward the Faithful.  It probably doesn't fill the role quite as well, but it was easier to get my hands on.  Creeping Mold may be a mistake.  I'm not really sure.  It seems reasonable that I should have some way of dealing with enchantments and artifacts.  As many multiplayer writers have mentioned, it's a tough decision between packing my deck with business spells and ensuring that I'm not at the mercy of an opponent when something is played with which I can not abide.  When I find a fourth copy of Invigorate, I will replace one copy of Creeping Mold.

Thornweald Archer is kind of random.  The original deck concepts were very poorly defended, though.  A Kavu Predator that remains in play for more than two turns is going to become a huge threat and that is going to make me a target.  Having a guaranteed trade on the table is going to help warn off any player who isn't determined to take me out.

I think that the politics of this deck are going to be interesting.  In different circumstances, one might spread around the love from Fiery Justice, Invigorate, and Wall of Shards evenly.  In other situations, you'll be one other player's best friend.  The tension that other players will face between surviving Kavu Predator and taking advantage of the free life gain will make for some really fun games.