Latest posts of: Tha Gunslinga

Rune-Scarred Demon is more subtle, whereas Griselbrand is just a sledgehammer. The problem with Demon is that the combo is disruptable, either through countermagic, graveyard hate, sphere effects, or just your own bad luck--maybe you pitched Walk to Force, or you put Revival, YawgWill, and Time Walk in your graveyard before hitting a Demon. I had a fairly clean setup in my build, but things still go bad every once in a while. On the plus side, either way you still get a 6/6 flier AND a tutor effect, so if you're not getting Walk, you can still get Will, or half of Key/Vault, or Mana Drain, or Ancestral, or whatever.

However, Griselbrand gives you a 7/7, which may be a faster clock, AND it has lifelink. Weenie decks can be problematic with Rune-Scarred Demon, where you may have to hold one or both back to block, and may have issues with their disruption. If they have Swords to Plowshares, you may be in for some trouble.

Griselbrand's lifelink means they really can't attack into it, and you can safely attack without worrying about taking too much damage. The draw 7 for 7 life ability means you can usually draw 14 cards, which is likely to end the game for your opponent, since you can probably find either Time Walk or enough fast mana and tutors/combo pieces to set up Key/Vault.

Quote from: xouman on September 14, 2015, 10:12:32 am

Well, it's potentially a draw 4 or even 5 under spheres/thalia/glowrider, but of course that's not really realistic. However, in christmas land, in a 5c colors, or even humans deck...

Just one question: when was the time somebody tried Infernal Contract? {B}

is not cheap and losing half your life can be painful, but drawing 4 cards is no joke.

http://morphling.de/search.php?type=3&app=10&sorting=DESC&search=infernal+contract&sent=1

Various combo decks have played it over time. It's not terrible, but the difference between possibly three and definitely 4 cards is pretty heavy, especially since you can Ritual out the Contract. The life loss is generally not relevant in that sort of deck.

Can you post it here? I mean, this is the Vintage Magic site and all.

As someone who played ICBM Chalice Oath for years, and won/split numerous tournaments with it, that list looks really interesting. The Ancient Tombs are a nice touch. This is clearly a "sledgehammer Shops" kind of deck. Nice job!

In case you're curious, here's what I was running back in the day:

Creatures [2]
1 Akroma, Angel of Wrath
1 Razia, Boros Archangel

Instants [20]
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Crop Rotation
1 Intuition
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Wipe Away
3 Thirst for Knowledge
4 Brainstorm
4 Force of Will
4 Mana Drain

Sorceries [4]
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Gaea's Blessing
1 Life from the Loam
1 Time Walk

Enchantments [4]
4 Oath of Druids

Artifacts [12]
1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
2 Null Rod
4 Chalice of the Void

Lands [18]
1 Strip Mine
2 Flooded Strand
2 Mishra's Factory
2 Polluted Delta
2 Underground Sea
2 Wasteland
3 Tropical Island
4 Forbidden Orchard

4 Leyline of the Void
1 Life from the Loam
2 Mishra's Factory
3 Oxidize
3 Pyroclasm
2 Simic Sky Swallower

Quote from: TheWhiteDragon on September 02, 2015, 11:18:21 pm

it sucks that competitive vintage has devolved into "play shops or U"

This has been the case for what, the last 12 years?

I've had a number of people tell me that he was a cheater. Glad he finally got punished.

Fire/Ice and Lightning Bolt have been fine for me.

Quote from: Demagoguery on November 03, 2014, 11:11:41 pm

Additionally Wizards have gone back on the Reserved List in the past. Many of us know the foil promo loophole that existed for a while and was recently closed, but there was a time where they did a vote to take off various cards, which allowed them to print Clone in Onslaught and a couple of other cards. They also removed a massive amount of cards at another point as the cards weren't rare or something, as far as I remember. So it's not like there isn't precedence for the Reserved List being violated quite heavily by Wizards on multiple occasion.

I mean it's an antiquated thing, that is reaching legal drinking age in the USA, so I can't imagine it's legal standing is anything great.

Those all happened a while ago. Wizards has not messed with the Reserved List for quite a few years. They have no reason to, since Magic is doing well, and they get the vast majority of their money from casual and Type 2 players. Why risk killing the golden goose in order to please 1% of their players? It would be incredibly stupid and short-sighted.

I have felt for a while that big blue decks were underpowered relative to a nice streamlined Delver, LandStill, or Oath deck, and that by this point they're just a bunch of good cards shoehorned together. The problem is that when so many good players play them, they still do well. I'm glad to see some of the pros picked up better decks this time.

Quote from: jamestosetti on October 27, 2014, 02:07:07 am

I was wondering how Thirst for Knowledge can be restricted with a cc of u2, but Dack Fayden is ok?

Because they're totally not the same card? Dack requires you to play two colors, and is sorcery-speed, and is card disadvantage when its draw/discard ability is used. Thirst is seriously a totally different card. You're better off comparing Tezzeret the Seeker to Enlightened Tutor or something.

Quote from: Tha Gunslinga on October 26, 2014, 06:38:21 pm

Are standings available anywhere that's actually updated? WotC's site is stuck at round 4.

Looks like that got them moving--they just jumped to round 7 now.

Are standings available anywhere that's actually updated? WotC's site is stuck at round 4.

Quote from: AmbivalentDuck on September 05, 2014, 06:13:15 pm

I read your post correctly: you think cost is the issue. Cost isn't the issue: no matter how much you're willing to pay for a Black Lotus, no new ones will be printed.

And there are currently dozens of them available for sale on the internet, and far more if you really look. Supply drives price up but it's not that people can't FIND a Lotus, it's that they can't afford one. Cost is obviously the issue and I don't understand why you'd say otherwise.

Double Progenitus beats Painter, and Greater Gargadon beats Oath and is not a bad card in general. I would play both of those over Reaper King unless you find yourself able to cast Reaper King occasionally.

Quote from: hashswag on August 15, 2014, 12:07:41 am

You can -12 Jace at yourself.

That's about as likely as going to cut your deck and losing a finger.

Quote

That’s two games I’ve won now off my opponent’s decks killing themselves. Wunderbar.

Another reason I love playing LandStill. You just can't hurt yourself with it.

6 Michaels out of 23 players.
Interesting.

Too bad the "Restrict Chalice" thread is closed. This is a pretty impressive refutation of that idea. I can't believe MUD didn't even make top 8. That's pretty embarrassing for Shops.

The issue with Cockatrice and whatnot is that there is no screen at all, and no way to enforce rules issues, so if you and an opponent disagree about how the upkeep works or something, you're just stuck. On MODO all that is enforced and you can't argue over it. Makes things much smoother.

As far as the gambling thing goes, Wizards of the Coast's parent company Hasbro has a market cap of 7 billion dollars. I'm pretty sure they can afford lawyers who can figure out a way around or through whatever nebulous "internet gambling" laws might be an issue.

Quote from: evouga on June 30, 2014, 10:25:40 pm

This card is unplayable, but because of the casting cost, not because of the effect.

Yeah, but the issue I have with this is that if it cost 2 then what? You drop it with two lands in play, sac both, then what? You don't have mana to cast stuff, you can't play any more lands, so you lose?

I think this is far more of a double-edged sword than people realize. It's like a Dark Confidant where you lose three times as much life. It kind of reminds me of another red card no one plays--Final Fortune.

Skullclamp just called. It wanted to remind you that it's still unrestricted, and infinitely better than this in that situation you described, and most others. Also it sees pretty much zero play.

Ingot Chewers to clear the way for Energy Flux are the way I've rolled IRL, and that combo does a number against MUD and other Shop decks. Obviously Metalworker can handle Flux, but that's what you use your Lightning Bolts for...

Typically late-game you want to cast things that actually win the game, instead of sacrificing lands to very slowly draw you cards. This is terrible and basically unplayable.

Not with the tilt-o-meter at 11.

"Countered upon resolution" is the term we're looking for, I believe.

Who top-4-splits a 15-person tourney?

You pretty much always want 3-4 Drains. I would personally go with 0 on the Negates--I think pretty much anything is going to be better, but that's just me.

Quote from: evouga on April 14, 2014, 02:08:59 am

The problem with this guy though is that he's dead when he's facing down an opposing Lodestone Golem, Tarmogoyf, or other blocker with 3+ toughness. Unfortunately, that's exactly the situation where red decks need help most...

Presumably your red deck plays Lightning Bolt or something similar.

I was a lurker on BD. I swear I archived a bunch of it before it crashed, but I have no idea where it would be.