Fayden has an ultimate?

In all seriousness, Fayden is played because he costs , and because his -2 naturally preys on Shops (and random jewelry, acting as a random Wasteland), while his +1 is all kinds of good. Looting isn't quite the same as drawing, but free access to double loot/turn is pretty insane, and with the Delve cards, it starts to border on insane, because it's an effective +1, draw 2 cards, add to your pool, discard the junk in your hand. The only times I dislike Dack's +1 are when I have 1 card in hand going into the turn. Or perhaps if I already have a winning position and a perfectly sculpted 7, in which case, Dack doesn't really matter.

Fayden is played for his +1 and -2 abilities, not for his -6.

And Kiora shouldn't be played for the ultimate either. Truthfully, no Planeswalker should ever be used for the ultimate alone, unless you're going for some kind of Doubling Season/Superfriends Combo in EDH. Or going for the flavor win of being the only person to ever ultimate Tybalt.

As for Kiora in Vintage... If it has a place, BUG Fishes seems the natural fit, but I do think I find myself largely in agreement with others in that it's a bit underpowered @cc . But I don't deny that there's good synergy in some kind of TasiBUG.

Sigh. Why only foil? The art is sick... 

Fixed that for you.

The crypt comparison is obvious, but to me, this card is a lot closer to what would happen if Wrexial and Tormod's Crypt had a baby. Wrexial's effect is powerful, for sure, but he's far from being a Demonic Tutor on wheels. I like the effect, but I do think hitting the GY is actually pretty weaksauce overall with the current state of the game. DTT goes a long way towards blanking this effect against the opponent you want to land this against, regardless of whether Trove costs 3-4 or 7cc.

Even if Trove were 3-4CC, how often will it truly end up being better than Memory Plunder on a DTT? I think often, the best case scenario won't be too much better than that.

I'd be far more intrigued if it said "Remove the top 10 cards from target player's library. You may play lands exiled this way. You may play a spell exiled this way once per turn."

I think having to hit the GY requires too many conditions to be met, and needing to play at least somewhat similar decks is definitely a drawback (This is just a bad Crypt against Dredge, and I would wager it's not terribly useful against Stax). I think best use case is in a blue deck against another blue deck, both largely control builds, and if I were to try to cheat it into play, I'd probably just rather have Yawgmoth's Bargain or Necropotence (maybe even Phyrexian Arena) as a card advantage engine. And as someone mentioned earlier, Delve is a thing, and DTT doesn't even need to resolve to remove all their best cards and blank this thing.

Interesting card, but my gut says bulk rare that will only see play in casual big deck formats.

Fair enough. And I do like the card, and hope it's playable as at least a singleton in a controlling mentor deck with jace or something, because there's a lot of synergy there.

I guess to some degree it's the rules nazi coming out in me. The card you described is a lot closer to something like Mirari coming in with 3 counters, and instead of paying 3, you can remove a counter to copy a spell once per turn, whereas a more apt comparison to Narset's ability would be something like "Remove a counter: The next time you cast an instant or sorcery, instead of putting it in your graveyard, exile it with 1 time counter. It gains Suspend." That's a lot of rules text, and I just think it's a whole lot cleaner and easier to stick with Rebound. If we're making up theoretical cards to show a similar effect, it should describe the actual effect, or it's not a good comparison. Seal of Rebound has many different qualities than Seal of Fork. I'm really not trying to bust your balls or disagree with the premise, just saying they're different effects in some pretty important ways.

The larger point I was trying to make, especially with what you highlighted, is that I do not think it is correct to classify Rebound as anything other than Rebound. That extra turn is a significant difference between a copy effect and Rebound.

EDIT - And I was responding to a theoretical card "Seal of Fork", with rules text that says "copy".

I get what you, and some others in the thread are saying, but I cannot fundamentally get behind this kind of comparison.

Rebound != Fork

Forgetting about the "if it resolves" portion of the argument. Having to wait a turn to get your "copy" is not an insignificant thing. Yes if you get cantrips going with the ability, and start chaining things, it is a good engine for a few turns. And dreams of rebounding Time Walk and then next turn rebounding Regrowth is effectively a win if the opponent doesn't have an answer. I absolutely like those aspects of the card.

But vintage is a format that cheats 10 mana Enchantments into play, and I don't think anyone ever tried to SnT a Cast Through Time into play, which gives Rebound to all instants and sorceries you play for the rest of the game. I'm pretty sure the only crowd chomping at the bit to get their hands on that effect was the casual/EDH crowd.

Anyway, I'm not sure what to make of the card overall. I largely like the abilities, and I like the card. Is it vintage playable? I don't even begin to know (although it does seem to have decent synergy with Mentor). But Rebound and Fork/Twincast effects are not at all the same thing, and I do not think it's right to compare those effects as above. Unless the first thing you resolve with Rebound is Time Walk (which is probably pretty close to an insta-win for )... A lot can happen between you saying "Go" and your opponent doing the same thing.

I feel like I need to add a disclaimer to my sig for a while... I know I'm still very new to modern vintage, so if I make a stupid statement in ignorance, I apologize, but outside of pretty specific Restricted cards, I'm not sure that giving a spell rebound is really that powerful when compared to Twincast or Fork (Or Wild Ricochet, for that matter). And some of the restricted cards will never want or need Rebound. Why would you give Yawg Will rebound? If you resolve the first, you should probably pretty much win, right? I've won 1 game where my opponent resolved Yawg Will, and that was because he pretty much straight up bricked on a Preordain and Ancestral when I was already ahead on board.

EDIT - Meant to take out the bit about Chandra, The Firebrand... It's not that relevant, really, so if you saw it, please forget I said it.

Good point. For some reason, I was thinking Night of Soul's Betrayal's effect, in that it was just all critters or something. Too many cards. Too long playing casual.

That's a lot narrower than I was thinking, despite still being somewhat decent. I assume Night of Soul's would probably not work that well. {B} is a pretty rough mana cost for something that wouldn't just win the game when it hit. I do wonder if it might not be a slightly better answer than Moat in the abstract, though, since it would kill actually things, rather than just slow them down while they build their army looking for an answer.

It's not an answer for your pyro or mentor builds, but Engineered Plague stomps on both Mentor and YPyro pretty hard. Mentor becomes a 1/1 with prowess, and tokens die to state as they hit play, before they can be pumped. YP and all her elementals just die, Delver has to already be flipped and on the board to live, and it's an answer that dodges Misstep completely. And it's kind of nice that they have to remove it before working to build their board again if you stick it.

Judging by the MTGO daily results, that card seems to be showing up in a lot of sideboards, and even the occasional copy in the main.

As for fog effects... If you go that route, Moment's Peace is probably a better way to go than a generic Fog. The 2cc isn't prohibitive against mentor or pyro, dodges misstep, and if you've got 5 mana, they have to counter it twice. Occasionally, it may even end up being double fog if you need it. It is far from a permanent answer, but if you're discussing fog already... Another alternative that dodges Misstep is Tangle, although I think the extra text there is worse than Flashback in the case of Moment's Peace.

I'm going to maybe tinker with it a bit, and will hope to give it another go this weekend.

I'm a little torn on the Sudden Shock v Wing Shards for the tempo matchup, so I may give both a whirl. I just really like the blowout potential of Shards, but it's going to leave Monks. And while I'm a little worried about them just making tokens before I get priority, as you point out, that's not likely going* to happen.

Anyway, thanks very much for the feedback and pointers. I don't have a clan or playgroup at present, so a lot of this is me trying to Absorb as much information as possible, and filter it down on my own, and compare it all with my own experiences, which is a little daunting, to be honest. So getting feedback like this, especially as a friendly bit of a back and forth with regards to the original list, article, and broader tips is EXTREMELY helpful.

If I do get to give it a run, I'll let you know how it goes.

*EDITED - Realized what it was you actually said about the priority thing.

I think ultimately the Grixis control player was looking to lock up with a resolved Gifts into a Vault kill pile. He resolved a Gifts in G2, but it was after a counter-war over one of the lock pieces which hit the yard, and it seemed he had no way to get it back in time with the pile he left me to choose. I forget the exact split on the pile, but I was able to give him 2 cards that, while helpful to him, would not just win the game. I think the pile was something along the lines of Key, Ancestral, Snapcaster, and YawgWin, with the Vault (or possibly Key or YawgWin) in the yard. I forget which and why. Anyway, it resulted in me having an option to give him 2 cards that were beneficial, but not a guaranteed win, even over time.

I honestly wonder if he boarded out other win cons, because while the game went on for a while after that, he never threatened me with anything else for the duration, and I just had a feeling that he couldn't lock up the game anymore. Anyway, it's kind of a moot point. From my perspective, it seemed like a bad Gifts from him, since the pile that seemed like it was going for the win left me with an out. If you're going for the win off Gifts, you shouldn't leave the opponent an out. If you can't guarantee a win off the pile, it seems like you should just go for a bunch of draw spells/tutors, and try to dig for your win, rather than put it in the GY with no reliable way to get it back.

You're probably right with regards to the cantrip Young Delvermancer Mentor builds being softer to things like Stax, especially since it looks like they try to work on a similar land count to actual Young Delver builds (14 w/Ruby, Sapphire, Pearl, and Lotus), so it's maybe a bit of a trade-off there. The difference between 2 and 3 is a LOT more pronounced v Stax decks in my limited experience.

I do like the theory-side of Balance in the pseudo-mirror, just because it does give a possible out to an opponent resolving Mentor before me. It might be that I'd want access to it in the s/b at least if it looks like the meta really does shift online to lots and lots of Mentor decks. I agree with you that it's a bit weaker in a critter deck, but if you truly are playing the control route, you may very well be able to leverage the power of the card. Gush in response is a bit scary, though. I could see trying to splash Black for Deluge instead, perhaps, since that's a bit more control-able, doesn't auto-fail to Gush, and black gives you access to the B tutors, but I wouldn't want to go changing the list that much on my own yet.

Wing Shards is an extremely interesting idea. I've never looked at that card in competitive light (I was not playing when OLS came out, but am very familiar with the card from Prismatic and EDH, where I've seen it be an absolute blowout), but since their entire goal is to chain spells on the attacking turn, something like that even just going on to the stack should absolutely wreck an opposing Mentor player sans Flusterstorm. It'll leave them with some monks, but should still be something of a blowout, since they are probably emptying a large portion of their hand expecting to win. I like it a lot more than Ghostly Prison effects, since it actually removes the threats and should be a surprise. Even if they know you have it in your deck, its existence seems like it would force them to play far less aggressively on their turn, which should give you some more time, at least.

I'm not really sure what the answer is. I'm still pretty woefully inexperienced with modern Vintage, and while I've been playing the game for 21 years or so (off an on), for the last 10 of that, I've largely been a casual player. I'm now trying to get back into competitive, just to see if I can actually do it now that I'm an adult, and Vintage is attractive because it has access to all of the old power cards I used to love playing back in the day, but I still have so much to learn.

As for the Peacekeeper/Meddling package, might I suggest adding in Elixir of Immortality to make sure you can deck your opponent as your win-con? You can even grab it with your Trinkets!
(I'm totally not serious in case it's not obvious)

I tried out your list in one of the MTGO Dailies yesterday, with 1 change. I cut 1 STP for 1 Misdirection. I ended up going 2-2, with both losses coming to Monks, although they were both pretty different from this list. Major differences I saw:
1) Looked like both were straight U/W
2) Both were running Gush
3) 1 of them ran some number of Mystic Remoras, possibly just in s/b

The second match loss was 0-2, and in G2, my deck just failed to deliver a 3rd mana source in timely fashion on a possibly iffy keep.

I would guess both of those lists were playing the full 4-some of Mentors.

Largely, what happened both matches was that they were eventually able to land a Mentor, and because they laid theirs first, were able to build too much of an army before passing the turn that I just couldn't deal with it, even when I was able to remove the Mentor and/or land my own.

My observation largely came down to this:
We were both doing very similar things, but their decks were more streamlined, and simply did those things better. Where I would sometimes be stuck without a whole lot of proactive business to boost my Monks, they were refilling their hands and gaining monks with gushes and such, which just gave them a power edge in a pseudo mirror. Certainly a small sample size, and I don't think I'm anywhere near the best Vintage player in the world, but this deck does seem to be a bit of a dog to a streamlined mirror build.

The people I lost to both seemed to have largely used the U side of the U/R Delvermancer shell, cutting all Delvers, and using only the monks as win cons.

The 2 decks I beat were Burning Tendrils (with a really odd s/b plan that included Young Pyromancer as a backup... Which 1 monk was able to destroy, even though he had 2 YPs with a 2 turn head start before I found a Monk. Monk pwns YP HARD), and a Grixis Control build using multiple Gifts, and even with a minor misplay on my part here and there, I was able to pretty much trounce them. I will also note that I almost lost to the Pyromancers because I couldn't find a Monk. I found 2 Trinkets and Snappie to help keep me alive, and it helped that my opponent had to kill Jace before he could move to me, since that bought me a couple of turns, but I was looking for a Monk for 4-5 turns with Top and Jace active for part of that, and simply couldn't find one. It's just 1 game, but combined with the losses to the Mentors in the other 2 rounds, it left me thinking that a 4th might actually be the right call to make sure you get 1. I also think Balance might be a solid addition to help clear the board if someone does land a Mentor via Cave before you do, or if you get caught without an STP to deal with it immediately (which might be too late, to be honest... If they have a bunch of instants, or can bait you into a counter war...).

The only other observation I had was that Spell Snare seemed a lot like a dead card in all of the matchups I had, and at least twice, when it was in my hand, I was wishing it was Spell Pierce or something like Preordain. I think Snare gets better against Shops and Oath, and probably some things I'm missing. But I didn't play any of those, so I'm not quite sure how to feel about it. I also felt a few times like I'd have wanted Pithing Needle over Cage as a 1-of main. But then I did run into a Library (t1, g1), opposing Jace, Necropotence, Yawg Bargain, Sensei's Top, and a few other random things I'd have loved to have a chance to shut down with a resolved Trinket Mage in the first game. But I didn't hit the matchups where Cage shines. Anyway, I feel like Cage v. Needle might at least be somewhat meta dependent.

Anyway, I was hoping this info might help others out tinkering with this type of build. It's a lot of fun to play.

EDIT - Misdirection came up twice, and was helpful both times. Once as a 5th FoW, and once to save one of my mana sources. I liked having access to it a good deal, but not sure it's really necessary.

I wouldn't have really thought about it in conjunction with Pikula, but I can see that.

I guess I was thinking that having redundancy with a virtual 7 Cages maybe being more reliable. Although the more I think about it, I think Priest is better against Dredge than I originally realized. I knew it largely stopped Bloodghast, Ichorid, and Narco, but didn't think it would stop the shenanigans with the bridges. But... If Priest is in play, they would have to hard cast any critters to get bridge chains going. That makes Priest a lot more valuable than I was originally thinking she would be in that matchup.

Anyway, thanks for the reasoning response. I'm still pretty new to modern Vintage, so this sort of thing is really helpful to me.

Cheers!

Thoughts on cutting the 3 Containments in the s/b for 3 more Cages? They serve similar purposes, and Priest is probably more resistant to removal where it's relevant (Dredge/Oath, although don't some Oath lists run Abrupt Decay?), but outside of SnT, it seems like Cage shuts the door a lot harder on Dredge and Oath if it resolves. Cage is a bit more fragile in matches where it's relevant, being an artifact, and having a CC of 1, but you end up having an effective 7 Cages with the Trinkets, along with the other goodies you can fetch in the s/b or main.

I've been looking for a place to play Mentor, and have largely looked at/tinkered with updating Pyromancer lists, but in those decks, Mentor really feels somewhat like a worse Pyromancer to me unless it hits the board on t1 or t2, so I'm really interested in messing around with your list, but at present don't have the Priests. The obvious swap to me is Cage, but since cost is a bit of a concern to me right now, and I have the Cages, I was thinking of trying those. But I'm interested in your thought process for choosing the 3 Priests over the 3 Cages in the s/b, and what ultimately pushed you towards Priests. In the article, you somewhat gloss over the selection of Priest, just noting it hits Dredge/Oath, and is a superb s/b card.

Hey all,

I've been lurking and reading posts here since the mid 00s, and have been playing off and on since '93 (while no one truly quits Magic, I did take about a 7 year hiatus from playing). I'm a Tim at heart, and love all things Limited, but now that Vintage is effectively live on MODO, I've been trying to break into it for the first time since Full on Trix and some of the original GAT lists were still a thing. For Vintage, time and budget restrictions will keep me exclusively on MODO, but I've accumulated a pretty solid collection capable of fielding multiple decks and am starting to look for playtest partners and people to bounce ideas off from time to time, so figured it was time to stop lurking here, and actually join up.

-Nyght