RE: Glory - highlight on team pride.

The community is closely knit and we are always oh so accommodating to new players.
It's not impossible to borrow a card from a complete stranger or an acquaintance.

Be very sure to stay away from dawgie when visiting the men's room though . j/k 

Congrats to the top8!
I'm so glad to see that storm decks are still represented in the top8 amidst this "Tez dominated era".

Good job Lauren for another successful tourney.
Hopefully my hands won't be tied down to work the next time you hold another one.

@ching:
That is why I'm not an advocate of PoN in ANT.
It's not something that the current meta will allow to shine, IMHO.
It's either you make your list blazingly fast and run PoN, or you give it some resiliency and run discard.
But good job nonetheless!

Now that I come to think of it, maybe another shell of ANT could include Drains and Confidants AND Intuitions. If memory serves, I believe it was meadbert who suggested Drains in ANT although I haven't really come around into building or seeing a shell for it.

@Stormanimagus:
I have tried blue Cantrips (Serum Visions, Sleight, etc.) and black draws (Draw4's, Night's Whisper even Skeletal Scrying) to fill the "draw/cantrip/fixing" void that BS and Ponder left and none seems to come close to the flexibility that Repeal has been giving me. (It's a cantrip AND a utility)
It largely has to do with my meta though, since Fish is common as well as Chalice@0 plays (be it from Oath, Ichorid, RG or Sui variants).
It's pretty common to face a Mage or a Chalice@0 here on turns 1-2.
I'm very sure to replace Repeal with Hurkyl's as soon as:
1. Workshop decks increase in number (there are only 1-3 workshops around, 1 of 'em coming from a team mate)
2. Inkwell catches up (DSC is still heavily favored around here for reasons unknown to me. I would run Inky over DSC in a heartbeat if only this deck will allow it)

@negativecreep:
I really think Demonic, Vamp, Sea, Consult and Mystical are enough, although every once in a while, I do try Vault as well.
I haven't been very impressed with it but at the same time, I haven't been disappointed either.
Can you provide some more detailed analysis of your testing results with Vault?

@ErkBek
I actually have tried Tinker+Jar before and although it is indeed explosive when it works, there are several downsides that never really got the better side of me:
1. I don't run Pact of Negation. Forcing Tinker via discard and then cracking Jar kinda dilutes my initial wave of discard and I'm left praying that my opponent didn't draw any counters off the Jar and that I drew some more discard.
2.The more draw7's I add, the more this deck feels like an inferior TPS deck with multiple Ad Nauseam's. Although I agree that perhaps Jar is the best draw7 out there since it doesn't really let your opponent keep the 7. (I'm not very impressed with Twister other than as a reset button)
3. 5 to the dome hurts bad. Tinker+Jar on an AN run is like a kick to the groin. But hey, AN+Tendrils on an AN run happens a lot anyway so wth.

I can try re-squeezing PoN's back in and see how it works with Tinker+Jar.

I think what Erik is trying to say is that you don't want a full compliment of C.Mox because multiples of it in the opening hand is garbage.
Plus its one of the shittiest topdecks one could get.
I agree that 2-4 is the right number for reasons already mentioned in this thread, but anyone who wants to cut C.Mox altogether should better be thinking of a different shell altogether.

I'm also not a fan of running Confidants main, but in this meta (a Drain meta that spawns decks like Tez and Remora) it could be a good call.
If you're running 'em main, then having Tarmogoyfs on the side would be worthwhile.

I completely agree with Stormanimagus' sentiments with Xantid as well.
However, Drain players have learned to adopt to that strategy by swapping some Drains for discard (off the side) on games 2 and 3 (at least my local meta has adopted already).
Which makes the whole "Tarms + Confidant" strategy even stronger if not of the surprise factor alone.

What I would like to bring on the table though is Slaughter Pact, especially in metagames that have reared toward a Drain vs Fish environment.
Slaughter Pact is very strong against Fish, especially in pushing an early Ad Nauseam.

Additionally, if you have ran ANT in enough tournaments, one realization that you can get about this archetype is that it misses cantrips/fixers heavily (as other combo decks are), especially with the amount of topdeck tutors it has.
Which is why I've always been a fan of Repeal.
Repeal has been very flexible for me.
I'm using the maindeck Chain of Vapor - Repeal - H.Recall trio and won't be changing that config any time soon.

In lieu of the above premise, has anyone tested a singleton SDT, especially in builds with maindeck Confidants?
I'm thinking it could be a good cantrip since most of the times we're producing lots of black mana anyway, making blue cantrips less appealing.

Lastly, I'm dubious about Mystic Remora.
I just can't see it improving the game against control more significantly than how Xantid does.
Not to mention the costly upkeep.
Thing is, we're supposed to bring on the pain early, especially against control.
Using Remora could have the effect of "buying the control deck its most needed turns against combo", since you'll be tapping precious resources every turn to make the enchantment effective.
I'm not ready to discount it completely yet though, since many spells in this deck might look trash on paper but perform splendidly in practice.

Oh and I've tested Bargain as well, and to put it simply, it sucks.
You will want it to be an Ad Nauseam or a Brainstorm/Cantrip in far greater circumstances than you will want it to be itself.
Necro and Twister (and to some extent Confidants) are enough alternate routes to victory already.

@meadbert

Well I haven't really tried Drains but having maindeck Confidants is already pushing the deck's playstyle to border near combo-control.
I'm not saying it's strictly bad (having Drains and Confidants main), but I'd rather go TPS and have FoW at that point.
I think one main advantage of this deck over TPS is raw speed; it's arguably faster than Ichorid and on par with Belcher.

And yeah, it might seem moot, but revealing dead cards to AN and losing two points of life in the process frequently decides the game's outcome (I'm talking about Confidants here, it could get even more ugly if Drains would be included).

I'm thinking I'd probably stick in Time Vault + Key in there first (since they're cheap and revealing one 'of em and a tutor on an AN run already = win) before I'd consider Drains.
Not to mention taking infinite turns to storm out is uber cool.

Lastly, I really never found having sufficient mana source to cast Ad Nauseam a problem in the first place, but then again I could just be lucky.

It could be helpful if you can post some sort of a draft.
I'm having problems sticking in Drains to the skeleton that I have in mind.

@Purple Hat

I go Necro->mini Tendrils->Necro->mini Tendrils an awful lot myself.
I am still not convinced to drop Necro altogether especially in a storm deck that already runs 3 Tendrils main.

Something different is happening here on the janky side of the Pacific ocean.
Aggro/hate decks are common (yes, Goblins and Artifish even gets played around here) due to the scarcity of proxy tourneys, yet Tez decks end up in the top 8.
That's not to mention Ichorid and Shops show up in decent numbers and that Oath is everywhere.

I think people should focus more on the "consistency" side when addressing the Tez issue.
Tez is just so darn consistent even in the absence of unrestricted Brainstorm while nearly all the other decks struggle.

And the funny thing about playtesting against Tez is this: I ran a fish-esque build with 4 Chalice, 4 Null Rod, Spheres, Strip effects, Teeg and the whole gang with a quick clock just to try and subdue the monster.
Yet somehow, I can't come to the conclusion, in as much as I would want to, that it was a bad match-up for Tez.
We tested nearly all night and still, Tez has those amazing come from behinds, broken openings and the usual super controlled games.
Then it dawned on me: it was like playing against Ichorid, only my hate is not doing enough damage to put the deck dead on its tracks.

Aside, I feel like a golden idiot for remotely thinking that a meta with 4 Balance is healthy.

Congrats on the strong finish!
It's great to see that the naysayers were wrong with Master T.

A couple of questions regarding Inkwell Leviathan tho:

Can you please expound more on running a singleton of this card VS nothing at all?
Its strength against Fish is notable, but if you expect lots or little of Fish in your meta, has your testing shown that it's worth to increase its numbers (lots of Fish) or cut it completely from the MD (little Fish)?
Wouldn't Titan almost always be better in dealing with control/Fish, that is, remove their ability to cast their removal in the first place (and punish them if they ever resolve one on Titan) while protecting it via Master T?
Thing is, I see nearly all of your robots have some nifty ability of their own other than just being beatsticks (BIG beatsticks, that is).
Leviathan somehow shy's away from that trend.

Don't get me wrong, I love Leviathan, I just don't see evident compelling reasons to run it main.

QFT.
For someone who's been playing/testing against Tezzeret.dec on a regular basis and still losing horribly to it in a major tournament, I think the people who still underestimate its consistency and brute force are greatly underexposed to its monstrosity.
It's ability to run a third, even a fourth, color to shove up potentially weak matches especially for games 2 and 3 ain't helping the format either.
But then again as everybody has mentioned, it's been out for only a few months, probably the meta is still adjusting, probably people are still looking for tech, so IMHO restrictions/unrestrictions for the sole sake of nerfing the deck is too hasty at this point (see Ichorid).

That aside, of the mentioned cards in this thread, I think it would be most interesting to see Balance go unrestricted.
Balance willl push mono-W or Wx stax-like archetypes to some level of consistency and thus, competency. (and heck, 4 Balance.dec is fun!)

Enlightened Tutor would be very dangerous to unrestrict, especially in this era of TimeVault + Key.
Crop Rotation, although I would love to see it become a 4-of, cards like Bazaar, Shop, Strip/Waste, Academy and what-not will continue to make this no more than a dream.
Burning Wish is a potential monster, I'm not sure how safe it is to let the monster loose.
Ditto with Flash. It'll be less consistent with BS, Ponder and Scroll restricted, but the huge potential of warping the format will always be there.

Strip Mine, I would have to disagree.
It's as close as it can get to giving Workshop back its Trinispheres, really.
4 StripMine.dec will pose a threat to control.deck, sure.
The problem is, combined with Workshop, it can now take down any.deck. (maybe even aggro)
Bold words, I know, but I'm more afraid of the meta that 4-Strip Mine will give way to.

Grim Monolith should've been unrestricted with Key a long time ago.

Exactly what you said, plus:
1. Doomsday.dec can stop opponents from going off or impede its plans courtesy of FoW and discard.
2. Discard + FoW, I believe, is the way to go for storm-combo decks in a meta where decks can only run singleton Brainstorms. (except of course for the notable exceptions like ANT and EtW Belcher)
3. Doomsday has a more stable mana base.

However:
1. This deck can win easily with Null Rod in play.
2. This deck will hardly be affected by Chalice@0, also a very common play.
3. This deck can hardly be stopped as soon as Channel+Mirror goes online.



So I goldfished a bit and true enough, Stars and SDT's outshine Street Wraith.
I'm not ready to give up with the Wraith though.

I see. Thanks for the quick response.
I somehow missed that Chromatic Stars and SDT's are already filling up the delay that Personal Tutors cause very nicely.
I guess I should goldfish with the deck more so I may assess the strength of Street Wraith with the deck appropriately.

Your tournament results with the deck is quite remarkable as well.
Now I'm intrigued with the general negative response that this thread is receiving.
Do continue to post future tournament results (especially from your team mates that run this deck as well).

Lastly. although I agree that this deck has the upper hand vis-a-vis Doomsday.dec on grounds of fighting through the hate, I think Doomsday wins in the "stopping the opponent" department since it runs discard.
I have been running PoN in a couple of decks lately and I'm not very happy with it.
It serves its purpose in a few occasions, but It's a dead draw in even more games.
I'm more of a "discard in combo" fan in this Brainstorm-restricted era.

Have Duress or Thoughtseize been tested in place of the PoN's?
Or would it compete with SDT's, Stars and Personal Tutors' casting turn?
I've read earlier in this thread that the random, lone Duress was doing great, so maybe it would be worth running a full compliment after all.

I have to echo the sentiments above.
I'm having trouble tying the word "consistent" with any combo deck that needs a restricted card to go-off.
This could be possible if the deck type is bordering along the lines of combo-control, but then again I can see that this deck's playstyle is far from that.
The only real counter that the deck has is FoW, since PoN can be easily outmaneuvered by countering the tutor for Channel (i.e. Personal Tutor) and if your opponents still haven't realized this, wait 'til they do.
Unlike Doomsday with Mirrors, which can go off via Channel, a Doomsday stack and traditional draw-7 routes, while running counters AND discard, this deck only has FoW to impede an opponent's plan and progress its own -- I find that an inferior strategy, unless of course, you can push its going-off turn to turn 1 and 2.
In lieu of making this deck faster, has Street Wraith been tested?
It'll help increase the percentage of finding a Channel in your deck and it works wonders with Personal Tutors.

I haven's tested the deck extensively, so take my criticisms with a grain of salt, but perhaps like me, you've been playing all sorts of combo decks since 4 LED/B.Wish Long.
I did try to resurrect 'em all every time an enabler gets restricted (i.e. LED, Gifts, Flash, Gush, etc) but I always came to the conclusion that I have to be insanely lucky if I want to consistently put up good numbers while relying on a restricted card.

I have to ask how this deck is doing against discard, especially since Tez lists are now sporting both counters and heavy discard, not to mention it's pretty common to face equally fast combo decks that run the full compliment of 8 discard effects.
I've read a report somewhere here saying this deck fails miserably when pummeled with discard (GWB Aggro thread, I believe).

Since you frequently mention that you're winning quite consistently, I have to ask if you also have taken this deck in:
1. Another metagame, especially one that is different from yours, and;
2. At least 6 rounds of swiss, excluding the top 8 playoffs (at least 30 players, if my computation is correct).

If yes, I would be very interested with your data in the above scenarios.
If not yet, then please post data as soon as you do.
Because if I have to be honest, those are the only data that will mean something for most of us here.
And I think that's also why people find it hard to take this deck seriously.
It's not that they discard every single deck that doesn't see play in their meta; it's just that you have to win either a BIG tournament first (i.e. 50+ players) then play it consistently afterwards or top 8 consistently with it in varying metas before anyone can consider this as a real metagame "factor", at least before they take your word that this is indeed a winning deck.

Nonetheless I have to agree that it looks like an awful lot of fun to play, especially if you still have the surprise factor.
I have to praise the "tricks" part of your primer as well.
It's one of the best "card usage" sections that I've read by far.
Fabricate has long been a potential card, good job in finally finding it a home.
I'd be the first to thank you if this deck goes the distance; that will surely help increase the value of my Lich' s Mirrors here.

@shirow79:

You are correct with your assumption re: RG Fish-type decks vs typical U-based Fish.
People here usually categorize R-based hate decks as a different archetype altogether (and for good reason), with TMWA (the mountains win again) as its predecessor.
Typical colors are RW, RG and RWG.
A good place to start would be:

Topic: [Premium Article] SMIP: Vintage On a Budget -- Christmas (R/G) Beatings!

The above deck also doesn't require power, so it would be perfect if your meta doesn't allow proxies.
Best of luck with the deck!

Fish is a kind of deck that capitalizes on the strengths of its opponents' decks.
It's mostly mana denial (Null Rod -> Mox; Strip/Waste -> Duals; Stifle -> Fetch lands) combined with efficient and irritating creatures (Meddling Mage, Ethersworn Canonist, Cursecatcher, etc), some countermagic and/or discard (FoW, Duress, Negate, Thoughtseize) and a decent punch (Jotun Grunt, Tarmogoyf, etc).
Since all contending Vintage decks nowadays have very focused strategies on winning the game, it would be easy (or relatively easy) for Fish to attack its main goal (i.e. cast a Tendrils for 20).
Now instead of Fish' opponent getting right on with its plan, it would have to deal with cards like say, Null Rod first.
All the while cards like FoW, Stifle, Negate, Thoughtseize, Cursecatcher and Aven Mindcensor are disrupting all efforts that the opponent are exerting to get rid of the "problem card" and/or get on with its main plan.
And while the opponent is trying desperately to get rid of the problem card, other potentially problematic cards are joining the fun, like say Meddling Mage, Ethersworn Canonist and Dark Confidant; and of course such cards swing for damage too.

The weakness of Fish lies in the fact that while some cards are brutal against a few decks, some would almost do nothing against the others.
It's also weak against decks that employ multiple strategies in winning the game.
So one should properly metagame before running Fish in a tournament.
And that's what Fish is mostly about: it's a metagame deck.
Some builds will work well in some matagames, other versions would run more smoothly on the others.

So if you want to run a "hate deck", Fish is probably a good choice for you.
But then again it really requires a lot of patience and experience, so you might want to get started on the department right away.

I would really think a million times before I run such a marginal card to make another bad card playable.

To reiterate:

Except that Scroll Rack is uber slow and situational compared to both TfK and Impulse.
With TfK, you are always secured of digging 3 cards. With Impulse, 4.
Quite effective if your opening hand doesn't have Oath.
They both don't rely on the amount of dead cards in your hand that you would like to return on your library.
They both doesn't die to Null Rod (which sees frequent play, and which also shuts down your other filter, SDT)
They are also both blue, enabling a more consistent FoW.
Not to mention Rack forces you to tap out on turn 2 when Negate / Oath / Counterbalance should be online.
Then the next turn, you need to invest yet another 1 mana to activate it.
Again, it's too slow.

And if you're too scared of ripping Gaea's Blessing (which has a slim chance of 2% to be drawn after drawing your first seven cards and casting a TfK - very very slim is you ask me) then you can always run a second copy.
You can also run a 3rd creature if you really are scared of not having enough beatsticks to Oath into play.

I would really only consider running Scroll Rack if I have some sort of enabler like Land Tax stuffed in my deck as well.

My 2 cents.

Thirst for Knowledge + Gaea's Blessing (i.e. Discard the creature to TfK, allow Oath to trigger hopefully revealing a Blessing to shuffle the creature back to the library) is one of the more preferred way of putting drawn creatures back into the library and into play.
You already run a lot of artifacts so it could be worthwhile.
Otherwise, you really need to run at least Impulse to filter your draws.

Good luck with your list! 

I think the card suffers greatly from its CMC.

Speaking strictly for Vintage, cards that cost this much should have:
1) A built-in ability to cheat its CC (FoW, Mis-D, Gush)
2) Other format-staple cards that can consistently put it into play easily (Workshop, Oath, Mana Drain for Trike, Hellkite Overlord, Tezzeret)
3) Should win you the game outright or at least almost let you (Bargain, Ad Nauseam, Tezzeret), and/or;
4) Should net you an overwhelming board position that the chances of your opponent from recovering upon its resolution would be very slim (Mindslaver, Possessed Portal?).

Of course those are pretty narrow examples, but you get the point.

Unless some creature-less deck starts breaking the format wide open, and Dream Halls suddenly finds a home, this will remain on the crap rare binders.

Sidenote:
It's also almost always better to take care of Oath by removing the enchantment or not allowing it to trigger in the first place than going for its creatures.

Actually, thanks for fucking proving my point, Vegeta2711.

Just in case you seriously need to be pummeled into the head with the agenda behind the welder comment which was wittingly done to show that Welder can never be easily replaced in current shop lists (and not as a dense attempt to expose its non-flaws to put Transmuter up a pedestal), the over-extension was written to demonstrate how hilarious it would be to simply put Transmuter into ANY deck that utilizes both Welder and Metalworker, in hopes of REPLACING any or both cards, then base the usability of Transmuter from that stance.

Just in case you jumped at the reply button after reading my sarcastic attempt at proving that Transmuter does not fit current Welder lists, I clearly said:


I also said this:


But clearly you are bent on gauging the merit of Transmuter as if EVERYBODY suggest that it should replace Metalworker, heck even Welder. (Come to think of it, I haven't read anybody suggest that, so seriously, WTF man?)

Thanks for pointing out the obvious reasons to run Welder over Transmuter.
However, I disagree to this:


Think T.Wire. Think comes into play. Think instant speed.
That's where RE-USE comes in for Transmuter.
I know, it's dumb narrow at this point, which is why, again, I said:


I said Transmuter has a Vintage-worthy ability that can probably find a deck somewhere, sometime.

Did that fucking get your facts straight?

Full Warning for inflammatory posting. You may be replying to someone else's flames, but provocation is a poor excuse.
-Godder

EDIT:
If the above is not enough, please read my last post over and over again for this tidbit:


If you still think that I'm (or ANYONE IS, for that matter) remotely advocating the use of Transmuter to replace Welder or Metalworker in decks that resembles current Workshop lists, then you seriously need to lay down the pipe, and the steroids. Especially the steroids.

"Goblin Welder requires a Mountain, which no other part of the deck makes use of, not to mention it delays the turn that I play my Metalworker, thereby causing me a full turn, takes a turn to come online, and on top of that, requires you to have both a broken artifact in your graveyard and a cheap artifact to cheat it into play with. Quite situational."

Now do you want to drop your welders and just run Metalworker then?

Apples and oranges man, apples and oranges.

1) Transmuter can return itself; it's an artifact.
2) If I insert it in a deck without broken artifacts, then I seriously have to reconsider my deck building skills.
3) Cheap artifacts like say Moxen, B.Lotus, Artifact Lands, C.Mox, Mana Vault, Mana Crypt, Sol Ring, LED, Lotus Petal, Needle, Top, T.Crypt, Explosives, CotV? Man they are few.
4) Transmuter is blue. I think you know the implications of that.
5) If I put Transmuter in a deck that can't withstand discard and 5-minute turns that involve the resticted list, I probably play in your described Vintage meta.

Again, I'm not saying Transmuter > Metalworker or Welder.

Thinking along the lines of:


however, is futile.
They play different roles, they probably would wind up in different decks.

QFT.
I always put in mass artifact bounce against Oath, whether I saw Chalices or not in game 1.

I would have to abandon the naysayers on this one.

It's blue - it can pitch to FoW.
It's an artifact - it can pitch to TfK. Likewise, it can be put into play by Workshops. It can be Tinkered, heck it can be Transmuted.

It can put any artifact into play at instant speed.
DSC is not a dead draw, instant Armageddon via Titan, instant salvation via Angel, instant Canonist/Sphere in response to tutors or Y.Will, cute tricks with Duplicant/Sharuum and what-not.
I'm perplexed as to why the surprise EoT or in-repose factor is greatly underestimated.

It can enable a permanent fresh T.Wire soft lock needing ONLY T.Wire and no other components, it overrides counter spells, it laughs at graveyard hate.
It overcomes pinpoint artifact removal. (can even save itself)

It's not an early game card really, more of a mid-game card to solidify board position.
Got it too early? Pitch to Force, discard to TfK.

Although I have to agree that a deck is still blurry at this point, I would say it has potential in Mono-U Workshop deck of sorts. (Yeah yeah, mass artifact bounce and Null Rod is still a problem, but at least you can now run Force)

I think the problem is people look at this card and thinks "Must replace Welder. Must plug and play in current Workshop.dec".
It should be looked at like Ad Nauseam. It warrants a deck of its own, albeit similar to its Stax mother.
The question is if such a deck is already possible with the current quantity of U-stax components.

EDIT:
Changed the mentioned T.Wire trick as a permanent "soft lock" rather than a permanent "lock".
Thanks for the heads up, policehq.

If CotV is non-prevalent in your meta, then 3-4 Chain of Vapors would generally suffice.
Otherwise, you need to throw in at least a lone Hurkyl's Recall in the mix.
Note that experienced Shop players will slap a CotV set to 1 into play the earliest possible time against combo (or to 0 if they're going first) and that will greatly retard your going-off turn.
Facing CotV at 0 is winnable; it's a whole lot of different story when it's set to 1.

I am not a fond of relying on draw 7's in ANT since it suddenly causes the deck to be more of a GrimLong/ANT hybrid.
This is evident in your "longing" to run Mind's Desire and your cutting of an Ad Nauseam.
IMHO, ANT is not a Yawgmoth's Will deck.
It may run Yawgmoth's Win, but the whole idea of running bomb after bomb that ultimately culminates into a lethal Tendrils is not its agenda.
It functions similar to Flash, in that you only need to resolve one card (Ad Nauseam), then your chances of winning suddenly sky rockets upon its resolution.
This is much apparent in the original Meandeck skeleton: it's focus is to make AN resolve the earliest possible time. No cute tricks. No draw 7 route. Just plain force AN and win.

I do run a lone draw 7 in my build, Timetwister, not as a fuel but as a "last restort" or a "reset button" especially when my opponent has already chipped off a lot of life from my total. (It's also great against Ichorid, which is darn prevalent in my meta)

I think if you continue to cut AN's and add Long cards, the deck will lose its focus and will play like an inferior Long deck that runs a less potent AN.

My 2 cents.

I will have to disagree that Flux is greater than Deed speaking strictly of the neo-Stax match-up.
Note that new Stax lists tend to shy away from the all-artifact line up and use creatures and enchantments as well for pressure.
Also, the thing about Deed is I can side in a lone copy in almost every match-up.
I also agree with the Oxidize being by far the best solid artifact removal, but unfortunately, once a Welder hits play, its impact on the game decreases dramatically.
I am not completely sold out on ditching Mutations yet too, the reason being a well aimed and well timed Mutation can be game.
The lone Island on the board seems attractive too, especially if your GAT list run the minimum of 18 mana sources.

Lastly, I might've painted the wrong picture of myself sitting on fetch lands just to be able to cast a multi-colored spell.
This is untrue.
I do cast spells, even opt for the first turn USea + Duress game plan against Stax if I have a brainstorm and another fetch land in my opening hand and no FoW.

So basically for me:
2 Artifact Mutations -> must be well timed/aimed, fallback option if all else fails in getting rid of chalice @0 or @1.
1 Oxidize -> just cast it, also for chalice@2 settings
1 H.Recall -> to set up a big win next turn or to just reset your opponent's board and counter key spells
1 Rebuild -> H.Recall's lil' brother, for chalice@2 circumstances
2 P.Deed -> deal with enchantments and creatures. ultimate reset button.

Well perhaps my playtesting partners haven't been mulling enough, but as far as unrestricted Gush GAT lists are concerned, they seldom hit my non-basics anymore with Wastes or Strip.
I think I can give a confident rate of 1.5 non-basic destroyed per game. (which is why I usually fetch the basic island first)
Forgive me if I may sound cocky but I can say with much confidence that keeping B and G against Stax is not such a gargantuan problem for me, barring misplays, broken Stax openings and a myself having a lame opening hand.
And again, you only need 2 lands to cast Deed.

I think the only strong counter-argument that I've read is the possibility of Deed being much more expensive to cast - this I agree to strongly.
The problem with our discussion, so far, is that you guys tend to segregate Deed from the other SB options, namely, Mutations and Bounce.

So let's give actual numbers here:  How many bounce and Mutations do you guys run?
Coz I can only afford to run 2 Mutations, 1 Oxidize, 1 H.Recall and 1 Rebuild.

My experience taught me that more often than not, these 5 aren't enough; after all, Stax was built to deal with GAT - even pre-board.
(Not unless you were able to nail a Mutation on an artifact that costs at least 3 and has a Dryad in play already)
Also since I only run 1 Volcanic Island, usually, my opponent would attack it above the Tropics and Seas (simple because they know I run Mutations).

The thirst for something solid is there;  and I found it in Deed.

I advocate the use of Deed as a sinleton, a pair at most because in all situations that I managed to cast it against Stax, I was able to turn the tide of the game. (Usually Drain->Tutor -> Deed)

So yeah, hopefully a lot of Stax players will be present at the coming proxy tourney I'm joining so I can give a more solid evaluation of running Deeds on the board.

My experience taught me otherwise.
Deed is there for mass removal; a "reset button" to wit.
That's something that bounce and spot removal can't do.

And Gush is unrestricted already, meaning you only need 2 lands to cast Deed. (on the 3rd turn)
Plus, both Underground Seas and Tropical Islands are supposed to be your main lands.
Arguing that Deed costs BG is actually dubious.
If anything, relying on Artifact Mutations and Fire/Ice, which both requires R, your real splash color, requires your second look.
How many Volcanic Islands do you run? I only run 1 and 1 Mox Ruby.
That's pretty risky for me, as opposed to 3 USeas and 3 Tropics against the mana denial deck who will surely attack your sources of red mana, post board.

Hurkyl's is only relevant when you already have pressure (i.e. Dryad) in play. (not unless you can bounce Workshops and counter all your opponent's spells - which is something you should've been doing in the first place)

Mutations are nice and as I've suggested, they should be run in tandem with a Deed or two.

Fire/Ice is nifty but if I may use your example (chalice for 0 and sphere in play), would you rather kill Welders on turn 2-3, or destroy Welders, Spheres, Chalices, etc. and and drop your bombs on turn 3-4? (note that I'm highlighting desperate situations coz this is where Deed is needed).
I don't think Fire/Ice should be run as a SB card too. It's more of a MD card IMHO.

Expensive? Yes - if you plan to use it as spot removal, casting only in time of need.
But note that you can always play it to screw up your opponent's strategy, even play a Dryad with it in play, thus investing only 4 mana max a turn.
Exepensive? True - which is why I don't advocate relying on it alone.

And what would you do if you draw your Fire/Ice against Spheres and Chalices?
How about your Mutations with a Welder in play?
Again, if I may point out, flexibility - something that's even more attractive in the evolving vintage meta - is what makes Deed shine.

So ultimately you may have had missed my suggestion and for your enlightenment, I'll say it again:
As SB against a deck that was built supposedly to beat GAT, run a deed or two, artifact mutations and bounce.

All these are my suggestions if Stax and MUD will indeed make a ressurgeance in the meta.

Now I don't know about you, but all these make some ton of sense for me.

I have to agree that Nev's Disk are slow for this purpose.
Since most of the mentioned lock pieces costs 4 mana at most, Engineered Explosives can be viable for those who splash red.
However, my vote still goes to good old Pernicious Deed. (was very fond of it during the GAT->Trix-> Stax era)
Besides the possible larger mana investment, perhaps the only downside on running P.Deeds over E.Explosives is unlike E.Explosives that can act as "spot/selective removal", careful planning has to be invested in running P.Deeds so as to avoid wasting a well grown Dryad.
The pros of running P.Deeds over E.Explosives are pretty obvious with versatility, which is relevant in the evolving Vintage meta, being most attractive.
It can also be effective against Fish post board, among others.
I'd say 1-2 on the board is ok, coupled with the usual Artifact Mutations, Energy Flux and/or bounce spells to combat supposed "new incarnations" of Stax.

Well for one, I never considered playing multiple spoils in a single game.
In much the same sense, casting multiple consults in a single game is way too risky for such a deck as dragon is.
Dragon.dec, unlike other combo decks, thrives in redundancy and not explosiveness.
As such, a well built dragon deck would miss 1 or 2 combo pieces in hand most of the times, barring disruption and counterspells.
This ultimately overshadows the "additional" benefit that Demonic Consultation has, being able to be cast in multiples in a single game.
Maybe you should've tutored for Bazaar in the first place.
That way, you would just be "digging" for whatever you like and not desperately tutoring  for it.

Next, arguing that running multiple consulations is better than multiple spoils is kinda pointless.
DC is restricted ya know.
If anyone here plans in running them, planning on running more than 1 copy is plain wishful thinking.
If the purpose, however, in your post is to emphasize the uber brokeness of consult, then let me tell you that yours truly was a pilot of both Necro deck in black summer and UB Donate way back in extended so don't bother.

I echo your feelings about spoils going horribly wrong being more of a personal killer than a "miss-consultation", however.
I personally dropped the spoils and switched to +2 tainted pact, +1 random metagame card, since they're (spoils) just being SB'd out 100% of the time or I often just don't have the guts to cast it in an actual tournament and loose.

In my relative average experience in playing both SD and recently, BG dragon(to deal with the increasing popularity of Ground Seals in my meta) the best win conditions for me are still Ambassador Laquatus and Caller of the Claw.
Caller of the Claw, IMHO, is strictly superior to Sliver Queen since you can go off without mana - something CoW's recent rise to popularity is to blame for (getting mana screwed).
Also, there's the random Root Maze; something that my very random meta often consists of.
Furthermore, but less likely, if you're running a BG version, going off even without Bazaars is possible if you happen to draw CotC.
The only advantage I can possibly think of that SQ has is that by itself, it's a very neat animate target.

Eternal Witness kills seems to be interesting, but against Oath, I'm sticking to Coffin Purge(s) as SB tech.
Just dump your purge(s) to your graveyard while going off, mill them for a gazillion, remove those Gaea's Blessing(s) upon trigger through your purge(s), and mill them again for a gazillion.
Works well against first-turn welders too to keep those Platinum Angels from getting welded in after milling their entire library.

Demonic Consultation, unlike spoils, removes the top six cards of your library from the game; that alone is very risky for a combo deck that runs very limited win conditions (two at the most in more common builds).

I'm not sure if I was able to follow your reasoning, DEA, but just so to make things clear, here's what i meant:

Firstly, Hardcasting Shivan Hellkites or WGD's, obviously outside of the combo, happens and won't necessray mean you're losing.
I've won some games with a hardcasted WGD on my side of the table.

Secondly, if you're opponent is playing ankh-sligh and he managed to play a second turn Ankh of Mishra, that means you won't be able to combo-out with whatever animate you have (may it be animate dead, dance of the dead or necromancy targetting a WGD), because each time your lands re-enter play, you'll take 2 damage form each of them, thereby killing you before you can even shoot your opponent via Hellkites for even 1 life.