Amulet of Vigor
CMC = 1
Artifact

Whenever a permanent enters the battlefield tapped and under your control, untap it.

Its clearly decent with time vault, although I don't think it will find a home in the current crop of Vault decks.  It plays nicely with root maze, disk, and im sure a host of other cards that couldn't overcome the drawback of cipt.  My initial reaction is that it just doesn't do enough, but this card does provide a unique ability and those are usually worth investigating.

I'd be interested to hear everyones initial reaction, and what cards/decks you think this might boost.

I totally suck at life.  I just realized that the douche bag I drew with in round 3 played a Pact in Game 2 turn 1 on his way to fizzling after drawing enough cards to kill me three times over.  This might explain why he took 10 minutes to fizzle and tried half a dozen shady moves.  I lost focus and he was easily able to combo again on turn 2.

Moral of the story:  I really need to tighten up my play.

thanks for the tourney. i look forward to some more indiana vintage tournies, hopefully i can get some more indy players down for the next one.

im in for sure.  i should have at least one or two others.

This is dead on.  I think those of us using the the word hate would agree with this.  Do you prefer the term answer deck? reactive deck? 

Describing that mode of deck construction is exactly what I was trying to do.  I absolutely feel that these decks are all at a disadvantage, based on your framework and their relatively weaker ability to adapt.

Now that we are done debating what to call these decks, I hope, perhaps you could address the actual debate.

Feel free to replace the word 'hate' with answer in my previous post if that helps.

I read your post, and I feel that I have a pretty good understanding of what you are trying to say.

The 'power' of a card is contextual.  I don't think anyone would argue this.
The 'power' of a deck is contextual (their overall success is dependant upon the metagame).  Again, I don't think anyone would argue this.
All decks in the Metagame are constantly evolving to strengthen their matchups with current and anticipated decks.  I agree.

My issue with these statements is that they essentially tell you nothing about the current discussion of Blue deck vs Hate deck other than they both operate within the same framework.  Given the decks that we are discussing, hate/blue deck, which deck is more likely to thrive given these conditions?

My point is that the blue deck can much more easily adapt.  The blue deck is based on card drawing, tutors, and counterspells.  It can also quite easily access all 5 colors.  The blue deck also has the advantage of just being able to win. The Hate deck typically has to find hate, resolve hate, and then resolve/protect a win condition in order to win.  The blue deck has the luxury skipping the first two steps.

The blue deck seems to have too many inherent advantages over the hate decks.  I think the most important of which is that it’s likely a very good deck, even in a vacuum.   As a result it will also typically have better matchups across the board.  The hate deck appears much more susceptible to losing to random.dec (of course the blue deck is not immune to this, but due to its high number of cards that can win the game, upon resolution, it appears less likely) or even a tier 2 deck that it’s unprepared for.

I think it’s as basic as the general game plan for each deck.
Blue Deck:
1) Resolve some relatively powerful card that puts me far enough ahead to win (tinker, will, tezz, gifts, recall, etc…)
2) Win
Hate Deck:
1) limit my opponents options
2) resolve some threats
3) race
4) win?

Clearly this is oversimplified to some extent, but I don’t think it’s far off. 

Enough derailing of this thread though.  I anxiously await your next article.

As far as the tweaks to the deck.  How has the jet been working out?  I’m still not on sold on Mindcensor, but I’m not really sure what to put in its place.  I’ve been testing Life from the Loam and it’s been fine, but not amazing.  I tried Duress, and I wasn’t particularly impressed. 

I appreciate all of the info that you’re providing in these articles, and I look forward to seeing how you evolve the deck over time.

seriously?  I've seen this argument multiple times now, and it makes no sense at all to me.  We have a context, and its not Alpha Rotissierie Draft.  This is the 'Vintage Open Forum'.  I think its safe to assume that if someone mentions a powerful card in here, they are talking about within the context of the current metagame that the Vintage format is operating within.

Tinker, Will, Recall, Gifts, etc...  These are powerful cards within that context.  These are the cards that you'll see people say "I've never lost after casting x".

Sure Tezz is good within the current Metagame, but the Metagame would have to shift drastically for that to change.  The same is not true for Hate decks.  Take your G/W/B deck for example.  Itou changed a few cards, and by your own admission the matchup became horrible.  No one is claiming that Tezz is good independent of the metagame, but it's difficult to deny that it’s far more stable given small changes in the metagame.  I think of Tezz (insert current powerful restricted deck name here) as being highly inelastic, while Hate decks are highly elastic.  

I think this is mainly a function of their game plan.  Tezz is trying to win, and the Hate decks are trying to stop their opponent from winning (or at the very least slow them down), and then winning themselves.  If they have more card drawing, more tutors, answers to your hate, and counterspells then they have a considerable advantage.

I’m not saying that Hate decks aren’t good, and can’t win tournaments.  I simply think that they will always be at a disadvantage.  I have no idea who to attribute this quote to, but I think it says it all “Threats will always be better than answers”.

This is only true given that every thing else is constant.  Given that their deck has some combination of a dozen tutors, 8 counterspells, and blue draw spells vs your 4 discard (assuming this is still the case), 2 tutors (same) and 4 x/1 bobs I'm not so sure that your 1 is easier than their 2.  Not to mention that those two cards pretty much win the game on the spot, if you want to win you're still going to have to resolve another spell.

I think vontron00x illustrates my point to some extent.  While you're busy trying to beat the decks that were on top last week, their pilots are quite possibly moving on to a newer shinier version of the deck or at the very least tweaking their deck in ways that might make your tweaks irrelevant. (see Itou's deck)

I don't want to derail this thread though.  I really look forward to your next article, and I'm glad to hear that Choke and more importantly Mindcensor won't be included.

With so much time between big tournaments and seemingly constant innovation amongst the top decks, are Fish decks in vintage doomed to always be behind the curve by one tournament?

Sure you can plan for what you think is going to be played at any given tournament, but thats just one more layer of decisions that you need to be correct for your deck to be good. 

Also, isn't it, by their very nature, always going to be easier for the tutor decks to solve the fish decks than for the fish decks to solve the tutor decks?

Maybe I'm way off, but I'm curious what everyone thinks about the fact that Fish decks appear to be at a competitive disadvantage vs the decks they are trying to beat.

mind sharing what it is about his list that makes the matchup so difficult?

Using Mindcensor as your Tinker answer makes this deck even more vulnerable to Darkblast.  With the number of Confidants running around, a singleton Darkblast already seems really powerful in the tutor decks.   I think this deck is vulnerable to blast already, and therefore have an x/1 be the answer for one of their biggest threats doesn't seem great.

I still don't have the data to support this, but I think this deck might be too focused on beating highlander decks.  At some point it might be worth shaving a few % points against that deck to try and shore up some other matchups.  Just my initial reaction.

Looking back, I see I haven't really mentioned how good Teeg was.  Teeg was amazing against the blue decks, and I never once got "stuck" with a second one in hand.  Turn 1 Teeg was one of my favorite plays.  It practically guarantee's a turn 2 free of counters.  It's ability is relevant in almost every match.

I'm sure you're right about Choke.

I would like to try out Life from the Loam.  Continually attacking your opponents mana, while your guys keep beating down seems really good.

I don't think Jet is really necessary with the current build.  I'm not sure what you'd cut, and I think I'd prefer the fourth spirit guide anyway.  If you add something like Sculler or Duress then clearly I'd find a way to include Jet.

I forgot to add that I recall wishing I had a Plains on more than one occasion.

While I do like having data from playing in an actual tournament, my opinions are still based a relatively small number of games.  As I get in more significant testing I'll let you know what I conclude.

Given what information I currently have, I will probably play around with the Mindcensor/Choke slots.  The mana will probably change a little depending on what goes in those slots, and I will probably test with either a 3rd mox or 4th spirit guide.

steve

in an earlier article you mentioned Tidehollow Sculler.  Just curious if you ever got around to testing it.  I think you'd have to find room for jet, but I really think this could be a really solid card in this deck.

I'd also like to say my opinion's about the cards in the deck are based solely off minimal testing and one tournament so i could be way off on my evaluations.  I do plan to continue testing as I think this deck is going to remain strong for the foreseeable future.

the dredge player was on the play 7 cards, played bazaar (6), drew 2 from bazaar (8), discarded 3 (5), played chalice (4 cards in hand).  he passed the turn with 5 cards in hand.  

looks like he drew three off bazaar = game loss

Quick report from gencon

I’m playing steve’s list card for card.

Round 1 vs Belcher
g1 I lose the die roll, and my opponent has turn 1 necro, and im dead on turn 2.
g2 I win on turn one with land + esg + teeg (he later tells me he also had a turn one win in hand)
g3 he plays a few cards followed by wheel of fortune.  I look at my new seven and see:  fetch, esg, and teeg.  He doesn’t kill me on turn one.  He informs me that he has no answer to teeg at all.
(1-0)

Round 2 vs Tezz
g1 I lose the die roll.  He opens with loa, ruby, mana vault, key, and top.  He does some cool tricks with top and key on turn two, after which I consult for null rod (7th card down).  I play some Pridemages and win.  This is a recurring theme throughout the day. Pridemage is the MVP.
G2 is pretty much the same, except this time I have bobs to go with my pridemages.
(2-0)

Round 3 vs Tezz
G1 I lose the die roll. In the first 3 turns I case 2 thoughtseize and he casts 2 duress and a thoughtseize.   I get out a mindcensor and a teeg (this is pretty much the only match all day where mindcensor pulled its weight).  I attack with dudes for the win.
G2 he leads with turn one Recall, and I’m unable to catch up.  He gets out vault + key, and eventually hardcasts an ingot chewer.
G3 I play thoughtseize and see his hand of lotus, a recall, tezz, mystical tutor, and fire/ice.  He draws a few lands in a row to make it interesting.  I start beating down with dudes, and he eventually taps out for tinker.  I hold my breath and pray its not inkwell.  He gets DC.  I untap, swords his robot, and cast choke.  From there I just attack with guys.
(3-0)

Round 4 vs Selkie
G1 I lose the die roll.  He leads with lotus, cursecatcher, and recall.  I play 2/2’s and goyf and attack for the win.
G2  he plays more goyfs than I do.
G3 He gets in some early beats, and then I begin to stabilize.  He has kira, goyf, and noble hierarch to my pridemage and mindcensor (carrying a jitte with 4 counters.)  He cast Trygon Predator, and I respond by killing kira and noble hierarch and casting edict targeting him.  Thinking I’m in good position to win if it resolves, and not totally out of it if gets countered.  Shortly thereafter the edict is now targeting me and the game is over.
(3-1)
Round 5 vs Dredge
G1 I lose the die roll.  My opponent leads with bazaar, activate, discard 3, chalice for 0.  He passes turn with 5 cards in hand and we are off to game 2.
G2 I keep a hand with turn 1 wasteland, turn 2 vamp for planar void.  He leads with bazaar and cycles two wraiths to dredge a good portion of his deck.  I draw for turn and needless to say there was a planar void on top.  He puts some nether shadows into play and gets off a dread return on sutured ghoul.  I vamp for swords and attack for the win.
(4-1)

Round 6 vs RG Stax
G1 I WIN the die roll.  My opponent mulls to 6.  I lead with land, emerald, lotus, goyf, and pridemage.  My opponent plays bazaar, activates and concedes before discarding.  I assume he’s on stax as dredge is very unlikely to scoop in that situation. Knowing that planar void is good against both decks I bring them in along with swords for chokes and null rods.
G2  He leads with land, mox, sphere.  I play land mox.  He plays his shop and cast tangle wire.  My hand is bob, goyf, and a couple lands so I think im in ok shape.  He gets a smokestack into play, and Icast bob hoping I can keep up with permanents.  He plays crop rotation for tabernacle and its over quickly from there.  I board the voids back out for the null rods.
G3 I keep a pretty solid 7, and he mulls to 4.  This game wasn’t even close.  His turn one play was: shop, mox, sphere.  I waste his shop, and his second turn play is shop + sphere.  He gets a third sphere into play, and im never able to really do anything.  Embarrassing.
(4-2)

Round 7 vs BUG fish
G1 I’m exhausted from the last game, and im pretty much not in this match mentally.  Not that it mattered as darkblast and loam proved to be better than my whole deck.  It was a blowout.
G2 was about as close as game 1.
(4-3)

In the end I think the deck is really good.  Pridemage was way better than I ever expected.  Bob and goyf did their thing.  Choke was fine, but maybe not 100% necessary? Not sure.  You really really need a turn one play, and as such I think I’d run the 4th spirit guide (I attacked with these guys more than once throughout the tournament.)  I was kind of disappointed with Mindcensor.  With petal, spirit guide, wasteland, keeping mana up for pridemage, etc… you don’t often have 3 mana early enough for mindcensor to be great.  Its flying is a nice way to resolve ground stalls, and pridemage makes it a decent clock.  I’m not sure if there is something better for this slot, but I think there needs to be for this deck to really shine.  I really wanted clique here. 

Since the deck has such an incredible game vs Tezz is it possible that the chokes are overkill?  Clearly they are relevant against other decks, fish and oath come to mind, but would something like maindeck edicts be better?  It's still relevant vs tezz while being more relevant in a broader number of other matches.

Are the chokes crucial to the deck?  If not what would you most likely run in that slot, in the expected GenCon meta?

I said a non trivial % of of stax players, not all of them.  The very next sentence I estimate that 75% of stax players choose Sphere of Thorn.  Clearly thats just a guestimate, but I dont think its very far off, and the difference is likely neglible to the analysis.

with 18 lands, 4 spheres, 9 accelerants, 4 sstax, and 4 shops this will happen roughly 5% of the time. 

Given that a non trivial % of stax decks are running thorn over sphere that makes this opening less devastating.  If 75% of stax players are running 4 sphere of resistance, and that hand beats you 75% of the time, then you are losing about 3 games out of 100 to that opening.  When you factor in that you should be on the play 50% of the time.  By my calculations you will lose to the scenario that you presented about 1.5% of the games that you play against stax.

@steve  this is my first sanctioned tournament, and im not really sure how that will impact the meta.  do you expect maindeck choke to still be optimal?  would something like Edict possibly be more relevant in the potentially skewed metagame?

i know that combo doesn't make up a significant portion of the meta, but can you touch on how this deck plays against tps or ad nauseam?  how you would board against them?

your opponent can more easily play around swarm, with regards to mindcensor, by playing tutors and cracking fetches on their own turn.

with shusher you can respond to their tutor/fetch with an uncounterable mindcensor.  with swarm you only get to cast uncounterable mindcensors at sorcery speed which greatly diminishes the value of mindcensor, imo.  although it's still a solid card, just not a semi counterspell.

final version, for now.  at least it would be if i would learn to check these things before i print them.

good points.  problem with 7 starting, like Paul pointed out, is that your not likely to ever get the ultimate.  With 7 +3 -3 -10 even 1 damage keeps you off the ultimate, and its probably not worth playing if you're never going to hit the ultimate.  I'm not saying that my loyalty is better, just not sure where the balance between too high and too low is.

first off, I love the card.  A little wordy, but great idea.  Please keep us updated if you come up with new wording.

I finally got a new and improved proxy printing method: 




yes i misspelled permanent.  i also still haven't found out if we are going to go to have 3 islands tap for mana or not.  This was more trying to prove out my new method.

Jacowned and Terraform i've seen, but I'd be really interested to see what other kinds of cards you guys have come up with.

Please?

I'm quickly becoming obsessed with this format.  Thanks to everyone who developed / wrote about it.

That's pretty much what i was aiming for (not an insane 1st pick, but still a good card).  I think we'll just put it in as is, and test it out.  Thanks.


I'm still learning as I go.  We've never played with such a rule.  Sounds like a really interesting idea though.  I love counterspells, and anything that makes them better is good in my book.  If my group decides that we should adopt that rule then I might change the second line of text to state:
Three Islands is blue, counts as three Islands, and can tap for UUU.

Island is clearly the best card in Magic so Three Islands should be stupid good, right?

thanks everyone for your input.

Yeah.  I was attempting to make it a good card all on its own.  I was trying to address Wagner's concern that if its always going to be a last pick, then why bother.  I think he's right, and I thought this would make the card good on its own, and really good when you actually got to use it to enhance another spell.

Too good?  If this was in your stack, as currently worded, would it be a high pick?

I think the idea of making Starting = Ultimate is a really good idea. That makes it a sorcery when you really need it, and something even better when you're in a position to defend it.

Thanks for your input.

i guess the planeswalker's starting loyalty could be higher than its ultimate.  Maybe something like starting 20, +4, -4, -18.  That would ensure that you get it's ultimate ability, if it hits play.

It might need to be:

 -18 : destroy all other permanents in play.