up front I will admit I have not playtested this deck yet so I was wondering if someone could give me advice on how well this deck is able to maintain the threats...  Usually decks pack numerous draw/search effecets yet this deck only has 4... granted these 4 are great once they come online especially with land tax online, However this tends to take some time.  The deck is clearly consistant, but when your resources are being spent casting spells to prevent their bombs, you will run out of gas when they do yet they can out draw you unless you top deck a scroll... Has this ever been a problem?  Why or why not?  (if this is explained in premium, i apologize but I do not have it.  Additionally, this seems to be a pretty big issue so at least clarify a bit beyond "go playtest this" to figure it out.  If nothing else, this helps clarify how the deck runs)

Honestly I like the deck idea but why play this over Oath?  Intuition obviously has nice effects besides merely fetching demigod...  However, you still have to hardcast Demigod for bbbbb, you have to fight graveyard hate, etc...  Oath is clearly a different deck, different design, but you only need to play 1 spell that costs g 1...   additionally, Oath doesn't take up as much room with extra creatures (demigod 4, Oath 2 creatures)...  And doesn't need Goyf to help with the clock.  This ultimately leads to more disruption/draw making Oath more resistant.  Honestly I like the idea, its fun to play around with, but how does it match up to Oath since both have the same theme (get powerful creatures into play efficiently) but oath does it for cheaper G1 as opposed to U2 + BBBBB

So I was just flipping through some of the newer sets looking for new cards that may be abused when I stumbled upon Cold-eyed selkie.  Its u/g u/g 1 to cast, is a 1/1 with island walk and whenever you deal combat damage you get to draw cards = to that amount.  Ultimately, the casting cost seems a little prohibitive in that its 3 for a 1/1 that doesn't win the game immediately.  However, in the right shell, I think that this card has a chance at a tier 2 slot.  Primarily, Think of adding a SoFi with this card which, since most decks run blue, means you get to draw 4 cards and either deal 5 damage to the opponent or deal 3 damage to the opponent and kill an annoying creature!  Aka its a two card draw engine that draws 4 cards every turn (1 card if seperate) that adds a clock and serves as protection for 8 mana (2 of which are blue)...  To compare, Intuition/ak engine = uu4 to cast (the same) which nets 3-4 cards (7 if you have another AK in hand)...  Obviously intuition is a better/more diverse card than Cold Eyes, but never-the-less, Cold Eyes does make for an intersting card choice for the proper deck.  The following ideas/decklist are merely theoretical used to spurn ideas and see how to best break this card.

So to begin, Cold-eyes requires that a deck either include blue or green in the list.  Naturally, Blues strength is primarily its ability to control and sometimes help spurn different combo decks.  Since Cold-eyed selkie is not a combo piece, this naturally means that the deck will probably be more controllish making my primary choice blue as it is generally a better color than green.  With that in mind, there are 2 different other basic factors to consider: 1. How to control the game (counters or lock pieces) 2.  What colors should be included? 

1.  To control the deck, blue has two main options: counters and Lock pieces ie mana drain vs. arcane lab, back to basics, or IteoC.  Depending on personal preferences and the sacrifices one is willing to make, this deck can run FoW in both builds.  Mana Drain seems an amazing option as Cold Eyes + SoFi are best played in the late game and require a ton of colored mana to set up.  Additionally, this is ideal since you generally run out of steam mid-late game and these two cards help replenish this incredibly fast.  This strategy, however, relies on one gaining control of the game early which these two cards hinder... (usually these cards are dead since Cold-eyes doesn't offset its cc until SoFi gets into play).  Thus, the counter strategy needs some way to filter these cards out similar to TfK etc... 

The other strategy is the Lock strategy.  To lock the opponent, blue has two main focuses, mana denial and limiting spells being cast.  In terms of Mana Denial, Blue sports B2B, Mindlock (denies fetches), In the Eye of Chaos, all of which have different focuses and prefer different colors.  B2B prefers a 1-2 color max strategy limiting the colors down to a counter/bluecentric deck.  A B2B strategy may work really well with Root Maze and Cold Eyes since this is part of the color theme.  Mindlock and In the Eye of Chaos both have had success in Stax type decks.  This seems like an Ideal draw engine to compliment a stax type deck except for the prohibitive cost of Cold Eyes when one wants to also play workshops. 

In terms of colors, that largely depends on what strategy you will take.  The deck will include blue automatically, but the alternatives depend on preference beyond that.

The strategy that I preferred was the BSB strategy,  This strategy is versatile and takes full advantage of some of the less commonly played but ultimately useful cards that these colors have to offer.

Chilling land


3x B2B
3x Root Maze

3x Chalice of the Void

4x Tarmogoyf
3x Cold-Eyed Selkie

4x Force of Will
4x Mana Leak
2x Disrupt

1x Ancestral Recall
1x Brainstorm
1x Ponder
3x Impulse
3x  Sword of Fire and Ice

9x Islands
7x Forests
1x Black Lotus
1x Mox Saphire
1x Mox Emerald
4x Wasteland
1x Strip Mine

Side Board
3x Trygon Predator
4x Arcane laboratory
4x Energy Flux
4x Tormod's Crypt

Obviously this is just a rough sketch.  However, the idea is clear...  You try to limit the amount of mana the opponent has access to while countering the spells that they finally manage to cast.
Card Choices

Back to Basics -- This card shuts off so many frequently played cards... Bazaar, Workshops, duals, and creates a virtual lock when root maze is implemented since most decks only pack a few basics and rely upon fetches to find them.

Root Maze -- This card drastically slows the game down and gives you an additional land drop on the opponent offsetting the fewer number of artifact mana that you run due Chalice.  This effect is ampliefied when the opponent is using fetch lands (which almost every does) or you have B2B.  This card is not a win card, but definately serves a purpose in this deck.

Chalice of the Void -- With the unrestriction of Mox Diamond, Chrome mox, etc... CotV @ 0 has never been so valuable.  This is in addition to shutting down cards at all cc which Chalice @ 1 is incredibly useful for this deck.

Tarmogoyf -- I'm opting to run green.  This is the most powerful green creature printed.  This guy is kind of an auto-include

Cold-Eyed Selkie -- This is kind of the focus of the deck.  Beyond that, this guy serves as an important draw card that allows me to maintain the pressure.  He is similar to Ninja of the deep hours except he is a little harder to cast.  However, he is unblockable for the majority of decks out there and can net many more cards than ninja.

FoW -- Obvious

Mana Leak -- Since I am runing a lot of green, this card is easier to cast than Mana Drain.  Additionally, since I don't have any major bombs, Drain mana is not as important.  Finally, since this deck is about mana denial, 3 mana is hard to come by which means counter target card for U 1.

Disrupt -- This serves as an additional turn 1 protection that can make players play more conservatively on turn 1 or, with root maze out, turn 2 as well.  This card catches people by surprise and forces people to play even tighter with their limited resources making this card invaluable for the psychological effect it can have.  Additionally, this card at worst is a cantrip allowing me to cycle through my deck.

Impulse -- This card is great at digging deep to find that needed FoW, SoFi for your Cold Eyes, B2B etc...  Honestly this was the shadiest decision... I am still trying to decide what the draw engine beyond SoFi/Cold Eyes should be.

Ancestral/Ponder/Brainstorm -- Blues three favorite draw spells

SoFi -- This card is great at creating an even faster clock on Goyf, protects him from the most common hate (bounce), destroys annoying creatures (welder, canonist, confidant, etc...) and provides draw.  When combines with Cold Eyes, this card is insane because it allows one to draw 4 cards! Finally, it prevents Cold-Eyed from REB's which definately helps.

The Sideboard was just thrown together completely on the spot but here it goes...
Trygon Predator -- With Shards release I'm expecting a lot of artifacts to be played.  This card is great with SoFi and helps destroy pesky artifacts... it also helps with oath which is a huge plus for this deck.
Arcane Laboratory -- Since this is a slower deck, combo is a huge pain.  obvsiously the mana denial helps tremendously with this, but is not always sufficient to stop combo.  Lab coupled with counters stop combo.
Energy Flux -- This shuts down Stax which can overpower this deck w/o B2B to shut down Workshop and to stop decks built around the Shards release
Tormod's Crypt --I need someway to stop the graveyard decks out there and this is the best one for my color scheme

Another strategy is the Fish style deck

Fish Eyes

4x Cold-Eyed Selkie
3x Dimir Cutpurse

4x Null Rod

2x Duress
4x Thoughtseize
4x Force of Will
3x Stifle
2x Negate

1x Ancestral Recall
1x Brainstorm

1x Demonic Tutor
1x Vampiric Tutor
1x Imperial Seal

3x SoFi

1x Black Lotus
1x Mox Sapphire
1x Mox Jet
1x Lotus Petal
1x Mox Ruby
4x Polluted Delta
2x Flooded Strand
4x Underground Sea
4x Wasteland
1x Strip Mine
4x Island
2x Swamp

This deck not only attacks the mana base via stifle, null rod, and strips, but it also employs a ton of discard/counters to ensure that you survive until little men can beat.  The men are not truly scary, but do provide draw which help keep your hand fueled.  To help with this, I included SoFi to beef up the creatures and to provide its own form of protection, disruption, and draw...

Obviously both decklists are incredibly raw and untested.  I merely through them together to illustrate some of the variations that Cold-Eyed Selkie can spurn.  Like I said, he probably will not generate a tier 1 deck, but that does not mean he cannot do some very interesting things.  Even him coupled with blood lust could be fun as a draw 5 (not feasible, but interesting regardless)...  The primary engine I found was SoFi, but I am curious as to what other cards people can think of that interect well with Cold Eyes and what deck ideas can be generated.

fair enough... first, i want to apologize... I alluded to the fact that gifts.dec was more interactive and that MS was able to get better interactive cards.  I did not want to make this into a Gifts.dec discussion because those days have changed (at least in terms of that style of play)...  I mean we could talk about gifts.dec vs. the best PT deck to arise in the next year or two in today's meta but that will take a year or two of development to hammer it out the way gifts.dec was... the way that started was through a forum like this.  I apologize because I know that MS and gifts interact in different ways than I was discussing... And I was not discussing those issues because those days are over but I must allude to them to get the point across... its why we discuss Long.dec of old vs. Long.dec of today but only in their effective meta...  PT has a vastly different feel to it than MS.  It is not a card that you use primarily for Interactive computations... its a card that you want to make the other person react to you.  It plays more like a combo deck than combo/control in that it searches for cards to win... Winning may be a really powerful card like Will.  It may be Tinker.  It may be Mind's Desire, Tendril's of Agony, or DT to find a card that you need to win.  It doesn't matter what you are looking for, PT is looking for a card to win and those cards happen to be sorceries for this particular deck.  It may be a Painter's.dec.  But maybe you are missing a combo piece... How do you get it?  PT for tinker for Combo -> win as an example.  The advantages of the PT style of play (alluded to earlier) is that you get a style of play that has versatility because powerful sorceries like tinker and Will (as an example) don't take up many slots to create a win condition.  You must deal with two different strategies than before 1. no fixers like ponder and BS to help you leaving a Turn  1 or 1 1/2 play uncertain and 2. instead of 9 (4x MS, 4x Gifts, 1x card to win) ways to get the win conditions you have 5.  Hence the deck needs alternate strategies, cannot hope to find the right answer and thus out interact them etc...  The deck needs to be more focused and Hence a combo deck comes to mind.  The deck I listed and thus you are referring to as the only sign of a strategic PT deck as, i admitted, was only thrown together in 30 minutes.  I through it together on the basis of PT being more of a combo deck in the long style variant.  With initial playtesting (albeit very minor) I found I was looking for Tinker more.  It just has that feel to me but that is a preference not a deterrminate.  That is not to say that something like a PT deck for Tinker and Transmute Artifiacts in some form of Painter or some new and exciting combo of its own is not viable.  Point is, and the reason I left out a specific Gifts restriction and why I emphasize the parts about CC U taking over brainstorms spot is because if nothing else, while its true brainstorm did serve multiple functions in terms of hiding cards, a true fixer especially with shuffle effects, etc... PT in a post-brainstorm/ponder era can fill a niche where people are looking to set up something up for later, or attempting to disrupt first turn.  PT serves as a card to establish a clock or, albeit not as efficiently as MS since its card DA, disrupt.  However, PT is 1 CC less than MS and can be played first turn like BS as a fixer where either you are on the play and are setting up turn 2 tinker -> DSC with disruption or you are on the draw and need the first PT to grab a bounce to bounce their turn 1 play which, because you often only have 1 mana turn 1 (ie no mox) means you have the disrupt for turn two just like MS would have had plus you have more mana free that turn to help with no mox hands...  I am not saying that MS is not a better card.  But the MS we knew, was also played with BS, Ponder, Gifts, etc... all unrestricted.  I am talking about now where, because of the restriction of BS and Ponder, there is now a hole left between the CC U spot and Turn 2 where MS comes in handy.  PT fills that gap for me.  There are definately issues with it since PT is not as good as either.  But it does Serve a role in both which creates a degree of versatility that neither of the other two have too...

Still the argument is why not Imperial Seal... PT is blue.  Thus, it can pitch to FoW.  Especially with the restriction of auto-include and semiauto-include ponder the need for blue cards in a deck has increased.  Taking out a role that MS and BS used to fill and replacing that with Imperial Seal just doesn't seem to be as good.  Especially since, as I've been describing it, With fixers being decreased decks are looking to either set themselves up for later like draw or looking for some sort of disruption for turn 1 like null rod, CotV, duress etc...  As such, forcing these decks which are preparing for the long haul to suddenly deal with a bomb that comes off the draw on turn 2 that their turn 1 plans didn't prepare for (b/c you want your deck to be versatile) which sorceries CAN fulfill.  Tinker in a painter.deck is not unreasonable to ask for.  5 tinkers would be better right? if the idea is to set up the combo and win? obviously each deck will have its own feel to it (I realize that the deck just described does work well with I. Seal, i'm merely using it as an example of an alternate deck that can use PT if designed for it).  The whole point of this discussion is to figure out how to break PT... Instead of thinking I did a TON of tests across various archetypes across generations to determine this article... i did not...  I also admitted that at the beginning...  I want to figure out how to break this card.  There are clear ads and disads to this card as with any card.  Exploit those and we have a new deck

personal tutor gives two benefits over imperial seal... 1. its blue.  Thus it works better with FoW, and fills the cc U slot that brainstorm left behind.  If merchant scroll had been another color it would not have been nearly as powerful even if it still searched for blue cards 2. Imperial seal forces you to lose life where PT does not... Ultimately life loss is not a huge deal, but, considering some deck ideas, life loss can matter. 

To Hi-Val...

I absolutely agree about the DA and draw issue as well answer finder...  That is why in my deck list I really didn't throw in any sorcery speed draw and was thinking about only 1 answer being sorcery (b/c it would still be useful even if clunkier than its counterparts simply because you could have it now vs. later).  In addition I agree about the Will argument which is why, the deck I was envisioning, would try to get tinker on line first, deal with their threats, and then finish them up with a small tendril's around mid-game...  Even though the deck I posted looks like a will deck, I would probably play it as a tinker deck first and fore-most depending on draw and match-up.  With tinker/DSC online, the opponent is on a clock while I still get to continue my game plan... draw, disrupt, and find bombs.  If they happen to remove the clock, hopefully they are either strapped on resources from my disruption and them having to find an answer allowing me time to recover and set up a nice Will...

As to your points...  there also are no instants that guarantee a win in vintage either.  Gifts requires a ton of mana, ancestral doesn't actually win you the game although it does help, etc...  If you had the option of scrolling for a gifts or going straight in and getting either tinker or will based upon the game state what would you do?  My point is that you can either find instants which allow you to find cards that do cool things or cards that win (the main win condition cards in decks now tend to be either permenants or sorceries)...  So instead of using MS to find instants that find permenants or sorceries... I figured I would just find the win condition and win...  Like I said, I know gifts is way more complicated than that and allows for the gifts player to use gifts to be incredibly more interactive than I'm letting on... but I did acknowledge that interactivity was on the side of MS...  Thats why decks based on PT have to have a different feel to them...

To desolutionist:
     MS was not good b/c it could get FoW...  FoW is definately a nice card to have, but that is not the #1 card it would get...  There are definately situations that you  know you need a FoW... but usually you don't know b/c you have no clue as to what is in their opening hand and by the time you realize you need one it is too late (MS is sorcery speed meaning you still have to pre-empt their spell by finding a counter to a spell they may or may not have).  However, I completely agree... PT may not be a 4of... I am just throwing that out there as a place to start.  Originally, MS wasn't a 4of either and people have played with many different #'s of them to great success.  I am merely saying that the card has a lot more potential than I think people think...

This discussion is set in place to discuss two main issues:
      1.  The power level of personal tutor (recently unrestricted) vs. that of merchant scroll (recently restricted)
      2.  Possible decks that can exploit Personal tutor the most
This discussion is going to be a very generalized description of both issues as it is meant to merely start the brainstorming process for this insanely powerful card.  This is by no means a well established article designed to elicit set in stone principles.  Rather, I hope that this thread can be used to delegate the true power/viability of this card in today's meta.

On Sept 1, Personal tutor was finally unrestricted while not in the too distant past Merchant scroll was restricted.  At first glance, this stance seems to be a little awkard considering both cards are blue and can tutor for insanely powerful cards (not to mention that Personal Tutor costs 1 less).  As such, I will analyze the differences between the two since they do constitute vastly different playing styles/card structure that they attempt to search for.
      Differences: 1. Tutor for instant vs sorcery
                       2. Tutor for blue card only vs. any color sorcery
                       3. Get in hand immediately vs. on top of library.
                       4. Merchant scroll costs 1 more to play
1.  Tutor for Instant vs. Sorcery:
     The fact that both cards are blue, and blue is the god of instants and sorceries, means that both cards have an insane card pool to choose from merely by being blue.  Ultimately, instants tend to be cards that do not win the game whilst sorceries power tends to be higher but is limited to being played during your turn (this is not to say that Gifts does not -> to win or that scroll -> ancestral is not powerful, rather, that PT for tinker saves resources vs the Gifts player who has to scroll-> gifts -> tinker = expend massive resources to play the same card.)  Merchant scrolls main use, thus, tends to be limited to finding support cards (draw, removal, other tutors) etc... which help progress the game along like a bulldozer.  In contrast, Personal Tutor has the ability to grab Yawgmoth's Will, Burning tutor, Tinker, etc... directly allowing the PT player to simply win.  While there are sorceries that can help with draw/removal/tutoring, in general, the person running PT will most likely be focused on merely grabbing the winning card that happens to be a sorcery ultimately speeding the game up vastly.  To summarize, Merchant scroll players have an advantage in that their cards are instants and thus more interactive.  This allows the MS player to play MS, and then pass the turn with mana open giving them options to either play an instant like gifts, or, if the opponent plays a spell that needs to be countered or you realize that you need to draw more cards, you can substitute playing the card you searched for with the other card to ensure that you are still in a better game state than your opponent (interactivity because you are reacting to your opponenets moves).  PT, in contrast, forces you to decide to either go for the win because the card you tutor for is a sorcery and thus must be played on your turn or to wait and play a different card relying on your current hand strength to survive for the turn.  This is not to say that PT can't substitute a sorcery draw or bounce spell, but ultimately, those cards tend to be slightly weaker than their instant bretheren forcing you to decide between a good card and a less good card.

             Differences: MS gives you more options/more interactive whilst PT grabs stronger cards.
2.  MS only allows you to tutor for a blue card while PT allows you to tutor for any card.
     This seems to be both a boon and a downfall of PT.  Ultimately, MS would be infinately better had it been allowed to grab ANY instant.  However, the fact that it was limited to blue, its own color, and the color known to have by far the best instants in the game, is only a small draw back.  the main difference comes from the versatility that PT gains by being able to grab ANY sorcery.  AKA where MS decks had to house primarily blue to maximize the effect of MS (FoW was helped by this as an additional bonus), PT allows the deck to expand its focus to include whatever card it may need allowing the deck to house whatever set of combos to win that it wants.  Ex.  MS usually got either AR, or gifts.  PT can get tinker (one kill condition), Yawgmoth's will or Burning wish (another win condition), etc...  This allows the card to promote a varied kill condition ultimately making the PT deck harder to hate out.

3.  MS allows the card to be put directly into hand vs. on top.
      This is the biggest drawback of PT vs. MS.  Namely, with a lot of the cheap cantrips like BS or ponder gone, and the fact that the card doesn't go straight into hand definately limits the power of the PT player by forcing the PT player to either expend resources or time to get the card and making their "bomb" subject to hate in the form of a shuffle effect (extirpate as an ex) or even grindstone.  While this can be limited by effects like street wraith (questionable power even with PT) or draw, w/o the cheap cantrips this has become much more difficult.  There is no getting around this difference, PT is strictly worse in that the card goes on top of library instead of in hand.  While this can be a benefit when you tap out to play PT hoping to play your tinker the next turn and the opponent has a duress or thoughtsieze, this does not outwiegh the general overall cost that this incurs.

4.  MS costs 1 more to play.
     This is generally useful in that with BS's restriction, there are less blue cards that you want to play with CC U... Ultimately, since MS is used to set up a bulldoze effect, and PT is looking for the quick win/bomb theory, the casting cost isn't a huge difference (it is more so now than when BS was not restricted).

Differences Summary:
         MS is a stronger card in that it allows you to recieve the card you want now, encourages interactivity, gives the MS player more "good" options, with little drawback from being color dependant since most good instants are sorceries.
          Pt Is a stronger card in that it gets, in general, strictly more powerful cards, expends less resources to win, gives the PT player varied win options by not being limited to blue, and fills the niche that BS left at the CC U slot...
Ultimately, I would venture to say that PT is stronger, but more limited and that its viability depends on the play style that people tend to prefer.

Possible deck ideas:  This is something I literally threw together in the last 30 minutes just to brainstorm possible options.  Clearly it is not optimal, the mana base in terms of the new moxes, dark rituals needs to be hammered out as well as the draw that I will use.  However, it does demonstrate an interesting idea that can be developed.  I'm hoping that this will spurn thought not only on the development of this deck, but as to others as well...

4x personal tutor
1x demonic tutor
1x Vampiric Tutor

1x Yawgmoth's Will
1x Tinker
1x Darksteel Collosus
2x Tendril’s of agony

4x force of will
4x Duress
2x Thoughtseize

1x bounce/removal (sorcery)
1x Chain of Vapor
1x Rebuild

1x Ancestral Recall
1x Brainstorm
1x Ponder
3x Thirst for Knoweldge
2x Impulse

32 cards

4x  Polluted Delta
2x Flooded Strand
1x Volcanic Island
4x Underground Sea
2x Island
1x Swamp

5x Mox
1x Lotus
4x Chrome Mox

4x Dark Ritual

Clearly the deck should look familiar to many.  The nice thing about this deck vs. other similar decks is the incredible ease in which one can find both a yawgmoth's will and tinker.  Aka, the objective is to play as much disruption/draw as possible until you can get a tinker or will online and go off.  PT helps find all three win cards (will, tinker, and tendril's) as well as serving as a utility card to find removal and draw (albeit not good oens vs. the cost)  If any of the win conditions fail, then the PT player should still be in a good position because their deck is still focused on disrupting the opponent, and drawing as quickly as possible, to find another win condition which is not subject to the same hate as the other (in general)...  As a result, the difference between this deck and many others is that you don't expend a TON of resources to find the kill condition allowing you to recover much easier.  If the opponent does halt your plans, hopefully you have crippled them enough and they have expended enough resources to leave you in a better situation to recover.

I could also see some variant of a tinker/transmute/PT deck being cooked up with DSC, PS, Grindstone all constitute the win.

I was not expecting this change on the B&R list and thus have not had time to truly test anything, but I am curious as to people's initial reaction to PT's power level, what decks it could find a place in, etc...  There is a lot of talk about the new moxes and timespiral however i think that this card deserves more credit than any of the others and thus deserves its own recognition.
 

to me the problem with painter stems from the various decks that are starting to accumulate that share similar focal points or use cards that mitigate painter's ability (goblin welder as a prime example).  Various decks are trying different strategies based upon how they can best compete against these decks.  Painter has 3 options it can go... it can go the control route involving the REB plan, it can go combo withe all resources attempting to set up the combo, or it can be thrown in as another out.  Ultimately, the problem is that painter turns into a mere 2/2 w/o REB or grinder which, because of the limited # of cards that abuse it cause vast differenes in the game play of the archetype due to player preferences.  w/o more variety or a stronger power play than what it currently exhibits then painter becomes an unpredictable archetype.

I realize that strip effects have dramatically decreased in the format.  However, having only two white duals, a mox, petal, and lotus to find white, do you ever have problems finding the right combination of mana?  5 mana sources to play 8 cards in the deck seems to be a little low considering that 2 of those sources can only be used once.  This tends not to be as big of a deal when those cards have tremendous effects like dt, yawgwill, etc... but for specified hate like stp or hide//seek that seem to have relatively small effects does it seem worth it?  What has your testing shown?  (I realize that STP and Hide//seek can be powerful hate cards in the format right now given the right situations, I am just wondering about how they have tested as part of the main rather than sb?  Like what effect have they had on the deck?)

Just as a question, has anyone tried tolarian winds for this deck?  Initially it was said that windfall could be used since its synergy with gush is amazing...  Likewise, since in general you will be holding more cards than your opponent b/c gush gives you 4 would tolarian winds not be considered?  It seems relatively simple to string together a bunch of U1 cards which would not only help find cards such as fastbond, but tendril's, counters, etc...  Once the engine starts (gush + Tolarian Winds) it seems like its GG...  And in the cases its not, at least Tolarian Winds helps filter through the deck really fast and sets you up for an amazing Yawgmoth's Will if need be which allows you to just play the deck at the speed it wants you to go at without forcing it...  IDK, just a thought, but has anyone tested it?

Right... my point wasn't to say that duress is bad... in fact I list the 3 cards of the 4 that directly enable the combo (scroll, flash, summoner's pact)...  Its true that duress will buy time, but my point was that if they are in a situation where they will win next turn (likely since they win turn 1-2), and they can counter your counter, then they will probably also counter the duress as well to ensure that they go off next turn...  As such, the two cards work relatively the same except one has the potential of screwing up both pieces of the combo (if they pact for hulk and then play flash)... which because of the lack of draw is pretty much GG where losing only one piece of the combo in a deck designed to find combo pieces isn't AS good...

Again, this was not to say that duress is bad but i was hoping for a more comprehensive analysis as to the way the two cards function... IMHO it seems that FoW is a better card than duress although it comes with a drawback...  does that outweigh the comparative value of duress etc...?  A lot of analysis has been given pre FS... i was more curious how it would relate in post FS?  maybe pact of negation in hulk makes counters worse? idk, that's why i'm asking the question

Hey, i just want to begin by saying great primer...  Additionally, I have to admit I don't know much about the play style of this deck directly in terms of matchups etc... and so I had just a few questions...


Since you are saying that Chalice is one of the biggest threats to you often being able to be played turn 1 @ 1, doesn't removing mystical and rebuild kind of hurt you?  Like I realize that mystical is also shut off by Chalice @ 1 but it does allow you to play mystical in response to search for rebuild to answer the chalice... 

I also realize that Street Wraith is an amazing card in its own right, but cutting out 2 cards that help you fight against a relatively common hate card that pretty much means you lose seems pretty bad to me...  If you could explain why those cards are being cut in more detail it'd be appreciated.


I realize you said that you haven't had the chance to test a lot of FS... but how does this deck fair against Flash decks? specifically the hulk kiki ones...  They can consistently go off turn 1 or 2 with protection... Duress goes a long way in helping stop them from having the combo pieces (flash, scroll, summoner's pact) but is only a 4 of and can be FoW'd...  Flash doesn't really care as much about card advantage as your deck since once it resolves 1 card with hulk in hand it wins regardless of advantage... (i realize card advantage still helps to set this up)...  With decks like this or even decks like doomsday that are being looked at, often duress will simply be suboptimal where once they play their namesake then they effectively win against GWS Long because duress won't be able to stop them at that point...

This is not to say that duress is a bad card, or that it should even be cut...  I am just wondering if the meta continues to get faster and attempts to win merely by playing 1 card rather than the set-up of decks like gifts, tednril's.dec, etc... that pitch spells may become more useful...  Obviously this has disynergy with the deck as a whole, but I was wondering if you could give a more comprehensive explanation of duress over FoW in relation to these changes... 

Like duress is great when a deck needs to draw into cards to win since you can either steal their bomb or draw spell... But against a deck like flash where half the deck is fixed as a tutor or the win condition... taking one of these cards won't stall them nearly as much IMHO as merely waiting until they try to play flash and then countering it...  If they counter your counter then in all liklihood they could counter your duress and so you were going to lose anyway... but if they play flash and break summoner's pact for it, using a FoW is definately a superior play than duress as that will set them back much further than duress...

The final question I have is... when playing this deck since you say that it switches from combo to combo control... what turns do you typically shoot for the win by pre and post board?

Anyway, again thanks for the amazing primer and, as stated, your advice on these issues would be of great help!

Just to play devil's advocate...

I'm not saying that that is not the right play style... only that i don't know if duress will truly slow you down THAT much... granted, flash has a high chance of comboing off turn 1 for which PoN is exceedingly good...  there are also a lot of times in which flash will have to go for the turn 2 win (75% of the time) meaning that chalice, SoR, etc... can come down... additionally, the opponent can then use this turn to find more counters via merchant scroll or draw or to disrupt your land via strip or null rod (chalice serves this roll too) causing an even further delay...  I'm not saying that flash shouldn't try to pound them hard and early, but flash also doesn't have the draw engine of other decks to just keep on hammering the strategy spell after spell...  Duress helps games 2 and 3 and is a solid turn 1 play when you can't go off to pre-emptively stop chalice (so you don't spend time looking for CoV with scroll instead of flash) etc...  And Remember, duress can also fetch a counter if thats the biggest threat in the hand and so it still helps with the counter war... just pre-emptively

the only draw back is the casting cost which can delay it sometimes by a turn making the card useless, but you don't have the random losses and can determine if you can actually win... Not to mention, as stated, 75% of the time you will pass turn 1 anyway (or use it for scroll etc... admittedly)...  Is the tradeoff not worth it? do you truly think that with the format being so fast that decks are not packing hate that, if you don't win turn 1 on play that you will be significantly slowed?  even if they duress you and grab summoner's pact, flash, or scroll will that not slow you down a lot?

not to mention that many of the cards in the 3cc range that people are wanting to play are enchantments or creatures while cards that cost 4 like smokestax are seeing a drastic decline in popularity... Even uba mask has diminished gains compared to a few years ago as every deck is packing tutors...  This is one of the reasons for the insurgance of blood moon, in the eye of chaos, aven mindcensor, orb of dreams, etc... (not to say that the other decks are gone or that the new "stax" decks are better... just showing a trend)...  As such, these cards are more easily played with ancient tomb or are easily castable (such as chalice or SoR) with tomb or, with cards like orb, with tomb and mox (common)...

The other trend that may also have a significant reason to do with people desiring tomb over factory is bazaar...  bazaar is arguably the best draw engine in the format besides necro or bargain...  More and More the decks that pack factories also pack bazaars which is making it increasingly difficult to use non-artifact spells since that takes up two drops...  While there is undeniable synergy between welder, artifacts, factory, and bazaar... and decks can definately be piloted well, tomb fills in for factory relatively well especially with moxen and allows flexibility through enchantments to be able to adapt to the ever increasingly fast format... (ex tangle wire just won't cut it anymore)

I think that both have their own uses... but in general I prefer misdirection over pact for the reason you listed... Like I've said before, one of the greatest problems i see with the deck is its ability to deal with hate that are permaments...  FoW is the only true means of stopping such hate with Scroll -> CoV being the other...  Since the scroll method is slower and has more steps, it is easier to disrupt requiring some type of protection = misdirection...  PoN is definately a better card when going off 99% of the time, but Misdirection still can serve as a means of protecting the combo while going off with the difference being relatively marginal...

Additionallly, Misdirection has the cute ability to not have 0cc which means it is still effective against chalice at 0 which is a major threat to the deck already

More important is the implication posed by


I feel that PoN is a great "combo" card in that it is free and can protect the combo once the process has begun...  However, considering that in those situations you probably are going to win anyway (barring a lucky FoW or sometimes Daze) and considering how bad PoN is unless you are attempting to initiate the combo would duress be better as a maindeck solution instead of PoN?  It can consistantly stop hate before the combo (like chalice, still can get counters, SoR, etc...) and can provide you valuable information as to whether or not you will be able to force your combo through... If they have 2 counters regardless if you have 1 PoN or 1 duress the combo will be stopped...  At least you are not guaranteed a loss with duress...

Additionally, duress also does not have the nasty habit of being stopped by chalice at 0 which is a very common play in vintage...  As such, you will have duress available more often than PoN...

With increased versatility comes a price... Namely duress would definately require more mana to be truly effective without slowing the combo down too much...  This may be beneficial, however, in that the mana base is the  easiest thing to attack with the deck proving that the pure speed of the PoN route is not as viable as a more consistent versatile route...

This is to by no means say that PoN is a bad card... but since this deck is not a storm deck, and does not draw a lot of cadrs, we have to be sure that the disruption used will be the most effective for the purpose we need...  Just food for thought

Seriously dude... before you consistently make such claims respond to the numerous posts that have been made before this...
1.  Legacy is different than type 2
2.  Overall efficiency of card in terms of beating metagame
3.  Synergy with the deck (does that one extra mana matter)
4.  Etc...

The point is, before making such claims, tell us what decks should run which split second cards, give us detailed analysis how that improves the matchup etc... and why that card is THE card to use versus all of the other "hate" cards that could be used.

Since the Errata on Flash has been changed everyone has been scrambling to come up with the best deck list.  This process thus far has centered around Flashing into rector and Protean Hulk (various win conditions)...  Each list has posed several problems... Rector Flash is relatively resillient in that it has multiple means of getting rector into play and can sometimes just combo out without rector.  However, Rector Flash has less disruption and is generally slower overall than other flash decks.  The best Hulk variant now uses carrion feeder, Karmic guide, and Kiki for the win... This version is insanely fast, and has a very strong "free" disruption package.  The problem with the deck is its ability to defend itself before its going off and its weak mana base...

Additionally, both decks are hurt by bounce at critical points, creature remova (StP)l, and graveyard hate to varying degrees.  All three of these are bad in that nearly every deck sports at least some degree of hate that is tailored to hit the deck.

As such, I present the new Flash list:  To my knowledge no such list has been presented.  If someone else has already posted a similar list I apologize.

Flash Tendril's 1.0:

4x  Flash
4x  Grozoth

4x  Brainstorm
1x  Ancestral Recall

2x  Spoils of the Vault
1x  Demonic Tutor
1x  Demonic Consultation
4x  Grim Tutor

3x  Pact of Negation
4x  Force of Will
2x Stifle

1x  Hurkyl’s Recall
1x  Chain of Vapor

1x  Burning Wish
2x  Tendril’s of Agony
1x  Yawgmoth’s Will

4x  Dark Ritual
2x  Cabal Ritual
5x  Moxes
1x  Black lotus
1x  Lotus Petal

4x  Polluted Delta
1x  Island
2x  Swamp
4x  Underground Sea

Sideboard:
2x  Shred Memory
1x  Tendril’s of Agony

This deck is obviously in its beginning stages and as such I would truly apreciate the help.  The sideboard, obviously, is incomplete for starters.

Card choices:

Flash: Obvious... its the namesake

Grozoth:  Much better than Rector in that It is less suceptable to enchantment hate, creature hate/bounce, or graveyard hate... Additionally it gets all of the combo pieces you need (not requiring yawgmoth's will) as well as hate removal and disruption for you as soon as flash resolves.  Essentially, once flash resolves, with the different kind of combinations that can be created, there should be no way that you can lose...  This all goes for the Hulk version as well...

Brainstorm:  Unlike the other flash variants, this card is not used to put back combo pieces...  Sometimes it would be beneficial (like you don't need the yawgmoth's will or tendril's this early) but that just falls back into brainstorm's traditional role of card quality... trading one card for another that is necessary at that time.

Ancestral recall:  its good

Spoils of the Vault:  This deck's greatest asset is its life.  The deck is fast, packs a lot of disruption, and only needs a few specific cards to win (which are 4 ofs...).  As such, this card is good.  However, I do not want to lose all of my combo pieces and thus this at 2, combined with demonic consultation, should help prevent me from getting too many of these cards in hand.

Demonic tutor:  best tutor in game

Demonic Consultation:  Better than spoils of the vault.  Is an incredibly cheap tutor that gets me the card I need now (can be critical because of PoN)

Grim Tutor:  Definately a good tutor... (will have more explanation as to why I chose this card over vampiric and imperial seal etc.. down below)

Pact of Negation:  Free tutor that can be used to protect the combo and up the storm count.  I only have 3 because I do not want more than one in my hand until I'm going off and because 4, when going off, is unnecessary.

Force of Will:  Best counter in game if you have the blue to support it... this deck does

Stifle:  The deck often leaves mana open at the end of turn 1 (either to spoils, BS, etc...)  This card can delay the game by shutting off fetches, or stop faster combo from going off.  Additionally, it allows me to PoN at the end of turn, search for flash or Grozoth, play it during my upkeep, and then stifle PoN... Meaning that my PoN's can sometimes be used before I go off (if necessary... just a cool little trick)... All assuming that I don't just have the stifle in hand anyway.

Hurkyl's Recall:  Because I need bounce.  My worst enemy is chalice and null rod is close behind.  This helps remove any annoying artifacts that I may encounter

Chain of Vapor:  Similar function as Hurkyl's recall... however it also hits other cards that may be troublesome like enchantments, creatures, etc... and is back up in case chalice at 2 is set to ensure i don't lose.

Burning Wish:  Back up in case Tendril's is removed... Can also be used for sideboard tech however I don't have the red to consistently support it now unless going off at which point i'm already winning.

Tendriil's of Agony:  The win... Simply put, it is one of the best win cards available since it is so hard to prevent

Yawgmoth's Will:  Its yawgwin... (only thing to note is that I don't consistently get this in my hand to win... its not necessary but too good not to include)

Dark Rituals: needed acceleration

Cabal Rituals:  I only have 2 since I don't always need that much black mana and it costs more than dark ritual...

SB options:

Tendrils:  Burning Wish instead of tendril's in hand saves me 2cc of cards i can "tutor" for with Grozoth... This allows me to go off easier

Shred Memory:  It helps against any deck using the graveyard hopefully delaying them until I can go off...  Additionally, it can serve as a tutor for flash which is why it gets the cut... Other GY hate still needed probably.

In essence the deck tries to get Grozoth into play via flash... Once that happens you grab tendril's of agony or burning wish, Hurkyl's Recall or CoV if needed, then all of the acceleration that you want and the 3 PoN's...  Obviously there are a lot of variant piles that can be made (including multiple grozoth activations)...

the reason this deck is better than other flash variants is it is harder to hate out being hurt most by chalice, and null rod (like most combo including the other flash variants)  However, it sports better disruption than the rector version, and is more resilient than the Hulk version.  The deck is slightly slower than Hulk, but faster than rector (on average because its easier to find the combo pieces)

I just developed the deck today and began testing it... I truly like what i've seen thus far and would like to encourage others to try and further this deck construction...  I will add more to the deck analysis later but am really strapped for time this week and wanted to get it out to the community early since I won't be able to test it much further for a bit...

mods please don't delete... much more in depth analysis coming.

Flash.dec is hurt a lot by extirpate no question about it...  but ichorid isn't worried because it has so many cards that need to be removed before it is scarred etc... As for dragon, the deck for the most part is dead.  It can't compete against ichorid and is hit by the same hate...  In reality, extirpate is a neat parlor trick that every now and again destroys a deck but there are too few circumstances that this arises for the card to be includd even as a SB card to justify the inclusion...  Instead, decks tend to favor other cards like LLvoid, crypt, etc...  Unless Flash.dec becomes a true powerhouse worthy of its own slots extirpate won't see a drastic increase in numbers as people will just add in LLvoid instead...

In terms of duress, it should either be included main or not at all in my opinion...  Although, considering how hard it seems to cut cards from the deck, maybe duress as a SB option will be justified since you just swap out useless coutners for it but who knows... I'm not really sure what the SB should be, i just feel that if it truly is "generally" good and can be supported post sideboard then it should also be included pre-sideboard...  Obviously there is some discrepency there but its just my gut instinct


I agree... I've already mentioned the problem of the manabase and still feel that this illustrates a greater flaw with the deck design beyond just the mana base... Namely its ability to be resilient when not going off... The only answer to hate comes from FoW and Chain of Vapor (reactively) Chain of Vapor, while helpful, isn't always THAT great of an answer since it often takes a turn to find it, a turn to use it, and then a turn to play flash because of the bad mana base...  This means FoW is the only true answer unless you want to risk another disruption piece being dropped which is pretty much good game since the deck has no draw engine to speak of and can't afford to play "catch up" very well...

For the most part you will be tutoring for the answer.  On average, you will be using a 2cc card to search for echoing truth.  This means that you already have the mana needed to play echoing truth.  In the cases that you only have 1 mana and happen to have only a 1cc tutor then you can still search for chain of vapor...  In other words, the only time that this truly COULD be an issue is when you are short on land and happen to have drawn the echoing truth instead of of chain of vapor rather than tutoring for it which is a very improbable situation overall considering its a 1 of and "statistically" you should have at least 2 mana;)  If not, then you probably would mulligan the hand anyway...


I'm not saying the ichorid matchup is bad (I have yet to test it)... I am merely saying that you shouldn't discount it either...  If they drop LLvoid then you probably will spend a turn either dealing with it or searching for an answer delaying your clock for a turn or 2 at the least just to play the answers...  At the same time, the Ichorid player will still be using their basic game plan to dump a bunch of cards into the gy...  Almost immediately this means they can Therapy if they get Narcomeoba or a turn or 2 later through ichorid etc...  This really begins to hurt as they continually deny you from using your lock pieces while they just "combo" out...  This is made exceptionally possible by the fact that Hulk.dec doesn't use a lot of draw preferring quality over quantity and that it has such a light mana base and thus can't play many things at once to force through hate.


That doesn't answer my point...  If it has been good in testing please explain my questions...
    !.  How do you find Xantid with little to no draw and w/o the use of Summoner's Pact...
    2. If you tutor for Xantid's, how often do you find that you also needed that tutor to find a combo piece?  This would slow the deck down too much and make it pointless
    3. I understand that pitch counters will hurt you in long drawn out counter wars... But since this deck tends to win turn 1-2 on average (that's its aim) how many counterspells are they playing that can hurt you?  Most likely just FoW... For the most part, fish is the deck with the highest pitch counter rate and it is almost the same as yours replacing PoN with Daze...  At the least its an even fight and in most cases you should be well ahead (on average).
    4.  I still don't know how you play Xantid apart from emerald, lotus, and 1 ESG...  Maybe I'm looking at a different list since so many have been posted on this thread but please explain.
    5.  If your main concern was merely over the counter war once flash resolves and the combo has begun (only way xantid would have haste) then you can just give all of your creatures protection from everything instead of worrying about an StP which started the counter war
T  6.  How is Xantid not too slow due to the whole summoning sickness thing?  Like the reason most people don't use him now is because of the side hate like lava dart, darkblast, etc... Summoning sickness gives the opponent time to look for answers, put down more hate, win, etc...


That's cool and all, but it still doesn't address the fact that you are looking to hit multiple decks with your SB cards and thus you must weigh a lot of different factors...  Hulk.dec is one of the few decks I think split second to be necessary for although there are definately many situations that it may be beneficial against other decks...  Even against Hulk.Dec, often I can play other disruption cards to slow the game down or to force them to use their only counterspell on stopping that piece of hate meaning that a stifle is 90% as useful as trickbind etc...  Couple this with Stifle needing less mana, the matches that stifle helps against .dec and of those matches the 1 mana being critical as a difference etc...  (the fish/stifle example is merely an example not actual stats)  To merely say a split second card is a SB tech card requires much deeper analysis of not only the deck you are playing but comparisons between the split second card and the other cards in terms of matchups...  Why play wipe away for example when the matchups i'll side it in against don't have counters?  Why not just play chain of vapor etc..  Remember, I made the argument that type 1 is vastly different than type 1.5 and that we not only have access to more cards, but the vintage community is already used to dealing with fast decks...  As such, a turn 1 SoR followed up by Chalice at 0, turn 2 smokestack or some such would also be sufficient to cripple your deck (i doubt stax will side in trickbind and extirpate isn't necessary due to the monored revolution... please give us detailed analysis as to why this is necessary... what decks should use it... comparisons etc...

maybe i'm missing something but I see a TON of logical fallacies being presented


Your statistics imply that you have an accelerant over 100% of the time...  Since less than 1/6th of your deck is an accelerant I truly do not see how this can be true...  At the least, there will be goldfish hands that come up two land, 1 land and no accelerant, etc...  It just simple facts...  Please learn more about math before making such an obvious error


You may not see the reason, but its called a "plan b"...  99% of the time you may scroll for a Chain of Vapor...  But in the case that they have LotV and a chalice at 1 it would be nice to have some means of removing it even if echoing truth is not normally your first choice of bounce spell...  Overall, it should hardly affect game play considering how rarely you'd draw it and, when you do, will be as useful as chain...  The minor inconvenience of it costing 1 more to play is offset by versatility.



If they have Leyline on the board how do you win?  you have to have some means of removing it which takes time (maybe you have flash and not scroll or chain of vapor in hand)  This allows the Ichorid player to get to turn 3 and destroy you with some minor disruption (flashbacked therapies) in the mean time due to bridge and narcomoeba...

I'm not saying that this is a bad matchup... I'm merely saying that they have more tools to hurt you than you give them credit for... If you have the nuts, then who cares... but you won't always have them so you need resiliency.


How do you find xantid?  will he come up often enough that it won't matter?  How do you play him with no lands that produce green?  You have ESG and Pact... but the ESG is too rare w/o the pact which will probably be used to find xantid (summoning sickness makes pact bad as a search tool for either with the goal of playing xantids).

What counter wars are you losing?  you have 4 PoN 4 FoW and 3 Misdirections...  Since you are going off turn 1-2 (hopefully) they shouldn't have drain mana open and when they do often they won't have FoW back up...  Even IF they do, you still have a good chance of being able to defend the combo.


Yea and as you stated... We play type 1 not type 1.5...  The difference comes from a variety of decks/resiliency strategies meaning we can't always pick "the best" hate against any one deck but must pick a card that is slightly weaker but hits many different decks...  Part of this decision comes from testing the mana curve of various cards and the overall importance of the card...  I can compare trickbind to stifle in fish and realize that i would rather use stifle so I can play another threat more consistently...  If stifle is countered, oh well... I use it more to stop fetch's than tendril's and so I'd be willing to let them counter it knowing that that's one less counter for me to worry about so I can stop their true threats...  Similarly, why play wipe away when chain of vapor costs 1U less?

This is not to say that split second isn't the shit, but you have to weigh varying factors before determining it is THE way to go which is why some decks use it and others don't.

In Type 1.5, flash has increased the speed dramatically something that we in vintage are use to due to much more acceleration and thus Hulk.dec, while arguably better than some other combo decks, isn't THAT much faster because other decks still win turn 1...  As such, while still a beast of a deck, it does not mean that ALL hate is centered around how to best beat hulk...  Coffin purge, Leyline, crypt, StP, darkblast (on carrion feeder) are all direct hate that are used relatively often and attack various parts of the deck.  This goes beyond the "other" means of beating the deck such as Chalice, SoR, etc...

I forget who said it, but it was in this post and frankly i'm too lazy to scroll up and find it at the moment...  But they commented that Hulk has a lot of disruption, but, that the disruption is used to protect the combo while going off...  This is problematic because a lot of vintage uses hate cards to slow down an opponent pre-emptively rather than reactively...

Ex.  You are on the draw and your hand is Land, mox, scroll, summoner's pact, FoW, Imperial Seal, carrion feeder

Overall, this hand has a little bit of everything but isn't the nuts...  First turn scroll, second turn win with Seal and FoW as back-up (seal to find the combo piece that was countered)...  Should you keep the hand?  The hand combines disruption, with resiliency and has all of the components necessary to win...

Chalice @ 0 is a very common play in vintage and would completely screw this hand...  It means you can't activate pact... your mox can't be played leading to flash etc..  It leaves you with two options...
      1.  FoW it meaning you no longer have a scroll to search for flash with delaying the combo for a bit since you have limited mana sources in play (and are unlikely to draw too many more) and will need to use imperial seal to look for an answer so you can use pact and your mox...
      2.  Let it resolve and cast seal for an answer...  This leaves you open to counters on the "answer" or further hate that you simply would NOT be able to deal with.

Keep in mind, that of all of the counters, only FoW is a good answer for permenant hate...

Similarly, wasteland (since underground sea would probably be fetched so Seal could be used), could absolutely destroy the hand...

In effect, I find the deck to be incredibly resilient in defending the combo, but not at stopping pre-emptive hate...   Even duress can drastically harm the hand...  The numbers are such that you should have 1 of all of the cards you need for the combo in your opening hand...  If anything disrupts that plan, then, because of limited draw, it can be hard to recover.

I actually completely agree with this statement...  However, I feel that this is a deck that truly needs innovation to be truly successful otherwise it'll just flop.  Without innovation, Rector is still relatively hard to find (slows down the combo) has a relatively worse disruption package than other decks (therapy instead of duress for first turn disruption) etc...  Innovation is needed to try and maximize the ability to find rector/play rector while being able to protect the combo... Merely adding flash is not sufficient.


That's why we add in instant speed free spells to the hulk combo (summoner's pact) which double the amount of "rectors" we will be able to produce through hulk.  In addition, pact can get ESG for extra mana when needed, if you play fastbond it provides a way to play that etc...  In effect, the hulk version has a very high probability of winning turn 2...  With that in mind, i'm confused how the "mirror" will be able to deal with this deck since the hulk version packs virtually the same disruption... (i'm talking about hulk rector).

Additionally, this deck does NOT have to be like meandeck SX to be competitive...  All it needs is to look at the meta, realize where the gaps are, and fill those gaps in terms of hate/speed/resilience.  This deck is fast, is more resilient when going off than most "long" decks etc... and packs similar disruption...  The only difference is that the game plan is slightly more streamlined as in you must play rector in some way before you win.


I understand the importance of versatility and so on... but if 4 of the slots are rector, its not useless because you can still cast it... its like a tutor for bargain = good on its own...  Flash may be "useless" on its own, but it is an accelerant...  at this point you have to make a comparative analysis to determine the "useless" value versus the "speed" value in terms of the format, deck construction, etc...  In the case of a hulk variant, 1 in every 7.5 cards is effectively flashable making flash almost never "useless".  Not to mention, if nothing else, flash is still able to be pitched to FoW if need be.

There is a huge misconception built around this line of thinking... Namely, that a flash deck and meandeck gifts has a similar gameplan...  In reality, every deck requires more mana sources to utilize their combo than a flash deck for two reasons.  First, flash only needs 2 mana for the combo (similar to Oath).  Second, other combo decks usually attempt to play a lot of acceleration/spells before they play a yawgmoth's will to maximize its effect for a lethal tendril's...  Flash rector does not need to do this because of bargain...  I will delve into this more later on in this post

The second huge misconception is that the deck will be hit hard by graveyard hate inspired by Ichorid. 
      1.  There are different flash lists that have differing requirements of the graveyard...  All flash decks require that the creature go to the graveyard, but the deck should be able to find a bounce spell to bounce the "hate" before going off...
      2.  Some Flash rector decks can still combo off normally w/o rector.

The third misconception is revolving around therapy...  I am not saying that therapy is the best disruption spell out there. However, that does not mean it is not the right card for the deck.  Therapy is considered to be amazing in Ichorid because of the synergies that exist.  A cards overall value is increased if the card is able to perform two key functions at once... in this case, it serves as A. information to see if the combo can work and mild disruption B. Major disruption as it is used from GY and C. A means to get bargain into play via rector.  Since there are only a handful of cards that you should truly be worried about as the rector player, therapying a player blind still is useful as you can still call FoW, StP, etc...  and, if you missed the first time, and realize they have a "disenchant" in their hand... then when you sacrifice rector, you call "disenchant" and protect bargain.  This is not to say that therapy is the best card... This is only meant to empahsize that people are  trying to compare therapy to other cards like FoW and duress which do not take into account the way the cards interact with the deck.

The final misconception is about Hulk...  there are two type of Flash - Hulk decks that currently exist.  The first one uses hulk to get artifcat creatures/disciple and win...  The second one uses hulk to get rector/korlis/centaur.  Since this is a rector thread, i'm going to now compare hulk-rector to flash-rector...

Hulk-rector vs. Flash-rector Pros:
     1.  Faster (more 0cc spells)
     2.  Easier to find the creature (pact)
     3.  Draw more cards off bargain
     4.  Less reliant on the graveyard (yawg will is less important)
     5.  more slots open for disruption (requires less mana because you draw more cards with bargain, can pact for ESG etc...)

Hulk-rector vs. Flash-rector cons:
     1.  Less resilient (fewer win options)
     2.  Can randomly lose (if you don't win this turn you lose because of pact)
     3.  Weaker draw engine
     4.  Less versatile tutors

In effect, the difference between the two decks is speed vs. resiliency.  This is not to say that Hulk-rector is worse as I feel that the trade-offs are pretty legitimate.  For example, Hulk-rector can still use tinker->titan as an alternate win or flash->titan etc...  The only difference is that Hulk-Rector can't hardcast rector (making therapy useless) and replaces those slots with more cards to find hulk.  This inherently speeds up the deck, but also makes it more vulnerable since pact is a scarry card to not resolve.  Additionally, the Hulk version uses Korlis which allows the player to draw the entire deck making the deck dynamics a little different.

For me, I prefer the Hulk version.  I feel that trying to combo out w/o rector or flash is silly.  Other combo decks are more suited to comboing out w/o bargain than this deck is meaning that this deck stalls a lot more.  In terms of hardcasting rector, while it does provide a nice alternative, it was considered too slow back in the day and is probably still that way now.  Obviously options are a good thing, and not every game plays out like it should on paper... but that just means to me that we should look for innovation rather than relying upon traditional modes of thought.

In conclusion, I have been working on a Flash Hulk-rector deck for a while now and will try to fine-tune it and post the list with a full comparison between this deck, traditional flash-rector, and other combo as soon as I can

1.  Choke doesn't seem to fit the deck nearly as well as moon...  The two are not very synergistic *they have a similar effect or attempt to do the same thing* except when a moon is in play there is no need to have choke...  Like other disruption that more effectively harms the opponent is better...  I am not saying that Choke is bad... I jsut feel that you are too concerned with ensuring that they have no useable lands when having only 1 land of the color you need is often just as effective

2.  Dwarven Blastminer:  He is too slow to effect the early game (as in his ability requires that you use a lot of mana preventing you from casting other lock pieces)  In addition, he isn't THAT useful once moon hits either since the non-basics are pretty much useless... The only thing he does is prevent opponents from having a lot of mana on the board (which should almost be all mountains)...  So in effect, he wastes a turn of disruption (summoning sickness) wastes a turn to activate meaning you prevent another static effect all to kill "mountains"... IDK i definately see how he is good but I do not think he is optimal...  Especially as a fragile 1/1

3.  Petravark is just plain bad... 4cc to remove 1 land from the game unless they remove him (he's a 2/2 so its not that difficult)... If you are truly afraid of that 1 basic (which you shouldn't be since most decks require at least 2 colors to operate fully)  Why would you need him THAT much...

In effect I think you miss the basic premise of the deck and go overboard with it...   The idea of a basic monoR deck is to color screw the opponent... While Choke definately helps with that, I find tha the effect isn't nearly as useful on average as moon, requires another color be added to the deck, and is able to be worked around much easier than moon unless moon is already on the table..  Blastminer's effect is also cumbersome to do something that should already be taken care of by other cards... the only hate that is unique is petravark and simply put he's overcosted for the effect which doesn't have a significant enough effect except in the right situations (meaning you should already be winning)...  Stop worrying about how much land they have and worry what color they have...  On average decks only carry a handful of basics meaning that at most they will probably have one in play with little to no way of getting more...  In the time it takes them to develop their plan and execute it (considering that most decks require two colors) you should have already won...

so i guess my critique comes down to several things:
1.  Is the card worth having if moon is not already in play
2.  If moon is already in play, is the card still useful
3.  If moon is in play, is the other card necessary for me to win?

In addition, Blastminer and Petravark that are not static=not nearly as good (especially in Blastiminer's case since he needs mana to activate)... So why not put Uba Mask in or some other card which provides a static effect and helps solve some of the problems that you are facing (such as them searching for more basics) as well as being useful on its own...

In terms of the beatz comment... I would say that your deck isn't like fish at all...  granted the creatures serve a purpose...  But the creatures/abilities in question tend to be overcosted for minimal effect = useful as a creature to attack not as effective disruption...  In contrast, meddling mage (always useful), Grunt (helpful, cheap, and still a clock versus your 1/1's and 2/2's), confidant (always useful), etc...  Granted Fish also use lions but they can afford to b/c of the mana curve and strategy... something that your deck cannot afford to do because you do not have free disruption... This means that you need more static effects so that you do not waste turns on things that simply do not matter so that you can create a hard lock and win small...

If you do find that land destruction is key why not just add in Destructive Urge instead of either blastminer or petravark?

Finally, just because the deck beats gifts doesn't mean that it is viable...  Gifts is already a decent matchup due to the high mana requirements and the number of cards that already disrupt that plan... I would be more worried with other matchups for which you could add in other disruption to make the deck more viable...

I think that this shows a very clear reason why tomb should be included... The top two cards you want to play on turn one consist of only 5 cards with the number one choice being a restricted card and thus should not weigh in too heavily into the decision.  that leaves what orb...  as you said, orb is good as long as you have a solid turn 2 play... However, if you play shop, orb, go... then the number of turn 2 plays are drastically diminished leaving you with the option of either playing null rod, trini, or another orb...  All in all only null rod is consistent enough to count heavily on as being effective (trini is too random to rely on).

If you go... shop, mox, orb... then you have the option of also casting simulacrum which, as has been discussed in this post, is a great card...

To weigh the alternatives, if you play tomb the only card that you can effectively play turn 1 is null rod (not bad since it is one of the top three)  However, the difference is the turn 2 play where you then can play orb, moon (which is 6-7 cards in the deck), trini (still effective at this point if on play and regardless a good card at shutting down a lot of top decks...), heretic etc...  In other words you give up a really strong turn 1 play for a strong 2nd and 3rd turn play (still not ideal but what is?  besides, you won't always have shop or tomb so not really THAT backbreaking).

The place that tomb really shines however is when you have tomb with accelration... This means that the number of effective turn 1 plays is SIGNIFICANTLY higher than with shop... you can't play simulacrum, but can now play moons and have the option of a really strong 2nd and 3rd turn...  Since you have 12 accelerants in the deck this should be a fairly common option (1 in 5 cards should be an accelerant)...  This is also good because it allows you to create a lock faster rather than having to play simulacrum which, although good, is used primarily to get resources to lock the opponent meaning he can be played later with tomb and still serve a similar purpose...

Essentially tomb comes with a few drawbacks but, considering the power of the lock cards, how often they occur, and how they play out... tomb seems to better serve that purpose... I havent tested tombs in a build like this but that's just my gut instinct...

As to this turning into a r/g beatz deck... that should definately not occur...  5c stax often plays few artifacts preferring to splash in more enchantments etc... That's the way I see this deck evolving too the only problem is figuring out how much and of what should be cut...  (razormane will always be tough to play, even with shops, because either orb will limit mana, moons will make shops produce R, etc...  They tend not to come out until a little later int eh game regardless and so they will still serve the same function as will duplicants and titan which often use welders to come into play...

Jaya doesn't have the full REB ability... Sure, he can destroy blue permenants but he can't counter blue spells like gifts etc... Since the only blue spells that you may actually destroy are B2B and possibly ITEoC neither of which truly hurt this deck Jaya merely becomes a Razor thatis a longer clock and eats up mana..  The fact that you may not have to discard a card is minimal since either A. the deck you are playing is something like gifts where you should have already established a "lock" before playing either creature or B. the card you must discard is essential to creating a lock and thus you let razormane die, cast the lock piece, and then either continue to beat with other 2/2's or weld razormane in... This slight drawback does not outweigh the boost of not needing mana, faster clock (which also means you can sometimes kill 2 creatures since razormane is sometimes blocked), and welderable

On the deck as a whole I have just a few questions:
1.  Why is ancient tomb not being included?  I understand that shops provide 1 more mana and all and don't deal damage but, considering there are only a few artifacts in the deck that need mana to be cast and considering that one of the main cards you need to resolve is either an enchantment or a creature both of which need 2 colorless... why not include it?  Not to mention, once a moon is resolved then tomb no longer deals damage to you.... It seems that the trade-off being able to cast your most powerful hate card sooner would be worth 2 damage early on...
    With this in mind, I know that this disrupts the simulacrum play making the creature worse... but is the creature really necessary to the deck?  One of the reasons he was needed was to smoothe out the mana base b/c if one had a shop in play then the deck had to get out non-shop mana quickly to be able to cast moon etc...  Tomb seems to mitigate this and, while i know simulacrum is cool with welder tricks and all are there not better cards that can be included?

2.   The deck's focus seems to be a little off but maybe that's just me...  with 7 moons (since you talk about adding in the 4th magus) hopefully you will draw one in the top 9 cards (sooner would be best)...  Before other cards needed to be included to provide enough disruption till you found a moon and could cast it to solidify the lock...  Since that card is so powerful and you have it much quicker it seems that the other lock pieces are kinda secondary...  Don't get me wrong, a turn 1 orb will still be a good play... but how does it compare to a turn 1 moon?  How effective does orb become after a turn 1 moon has been dropped?  I am not saying that other disruption pieces should be kicked... but it seems that the deck has the potential to play much more aggressively than before... IDK just food for thought I'm just curious what your testing has shown.

3.   On Gargadon... I understand how cool it is to be able to just play him and forget about him when you have the chance...  However he seems like a win more card and so I have two questions about him
      A.  How often are you truly sacrificing permenants to him?  I understand some cool tricks can occur, but is it truly often enough to get him into play early?
      B.  In the cases that you have sacrificed a lot of permenants to him, at that piont in the game don't you generally have a sufficient lock on them?  Meaning that whether or not the creature is 9/7 or a 2/2 that you should win?

All in all I'm just wondering what testing has shown

Turn 1 chalice 1 is a very common play and is as likely as you being able to play hermit turn one...  Granted, most people play it for 0 against an unknown deck, but still... you have to deal with games 2-3...  Duress is cool and all but it'll be doubtful that you'd randomly name chalice on a turn one cabal when you could just as easily name FoW etc...

As for the Bridge, you're right, i misread the card (its a new card give me a break lol)...  I definately see the synergy now and how not only can you kill someone with it and Flame-kin Zealot but how it can provide a lot of creatures for you to sac for return or therapys etc...  Overall I think this is incredibly powerful and will look more into it... My only question is does the card's ability stack?  Even if it does, why do you need 4 bridges doesn't that seem like overkill since you shold consistently be sacing 4 creatures (druid and 3 naromoebas) making a total of 4 tokens...  This leads to a damage potential of 15 when combined with the zealot with only one bridge in the GY... why do you need so many more?  Wouldn't 2 or, if you were afraid of having one in hand, 3 be sufficient?

There are 4 reasons...
       1. it shouldn't be a big deal with all of your acceleration... i mean as you said
       2. It gives you an extra turn in case something goes wrong
       3. The card is useful besides ensuring you don't deck yourself (return an important card to deck)
       4.  Allows you to return an animate dead in case the dread gets stuck in hand,or  is removed, etc...  It gives you another out to ensure that you don't lose

and regardless, you hardly answered my question about hate...  Remember, your therapy's are most likely going to miss turn 1... duress will hit, sure, but that's 4 cards in your deck and, if you choose to therapy turn two after you duress turn 1 then you risk not being able to play druid...   Additionally, remember many decks play BS which means they can hide the cards that are going important if it matters...
This means you only have 4 cards that will consistently disrupt an opponent turn 1... (and BS definately hinders that sometimes)
        A.  What do you do if you are on the draw?  They could duress away your tutor/hermit (whichever is in your hand at the time) or even duress away your duress if it mattered etc...  Or they could play turn 1 chalice etc...
        B.  How do you deal with permenants that disrupt you?  your answers have summoning sickness and are hard to find (sure you can tutor for them, but that will take another turn since they only put the creature on top)  During those three turns, (which doesn't help if its LotV since its an enchantment) you are unable to keep up the pressure since you have very limited draw and your disruption is not static.  This means that the opponent will then be able to fight through the lone duress that you sent against them, draw more threats/counters, and either find an answer to your answer, apply more pressure from another card, or just win...

Overall, I will definately have to give your list more thought now that bridge has been included which will depend a lot, in my mind, on whether or not its stackable (which would make it just insane)

I am a little confused as to these two statements...  First lets talk about the disruption factor...

What do you do if they cast chalice for 1?  All of your disruption will be shut off (including the lone creature that can kill artifacts)... This opens you up for counters etc...

What is the game plan if they pay extirpate on dread return after the druid is activated?

what is Legacy's weapon supposed to do?  its only ability is to be shuffled back into the library repeatedly...  Why not use krosan reclamation instead since it can get a druid that has been killed and put it back into your library etc... if nothing else.

As to winnining turn 3?  How?  at the earliest you can activate druid turn 2 which means you play him turn one which means you started with him in your hand...  Even if you do that, you will only be able to return one creature with a dread unless you happened to also play another creture which means turn 3 kill...  The liklihood of you  not only starting with druid, 1cc creature, land, and free accelerant is very unlikly...  Turn 4 kills seem much more likely...

Additionally, I realize that you are able to add in more utility creatures and so on, but why forgo the ghoul kill?  its a turn faster and allows you to have double cabal back up... what gain do you truly see from it?  the only way you could have that much disruption is if you get a bridge from below which would be played at the earliest turn 3 (w/o lotus, petal, or jet)...  Why worry about playing this card?  why not just play ghoul with safekeepers if you are truly worried about removal... it is more consistent disruption with 2 cabals every turn and still provides protection...

If nothing else, this is a strong reason to play YawgWill...  Yawgmoth's Will can serve two functions depending upon the build
       1:  It can provide a means of gaining huge tempo boosts late in the game if both decks have been stalling the other... Maybe this means playing back a countered/destroyed oath, orchard, some BS etc...  Regardless, it definately serves a strong late game function which is VASTLY outweighed by the fact that you donj't want to see it too early (as a 1 of this is also pretty rare).
       2:  In Tyrant builds, YawgWill can serve as an alternate win condition...  Sure, the primary one is and probably should be tyrant lock/beat down if for no other reason than ensureing that something doesn't go wrong.  In the case that something does go wrong then you have your alternate win condition and can probably win that turn after they've exhausted their resources to remove your Tyrants.

Now lets consider your scenario of Tormod's Crypts...  This means that the opponent is siding out 4 cards to bring in 4 cards that will hate against 1...  The one card that it is hating out either serves as a means of gaining tempo during the late game or as a secondary win condition...  With the inclusion of Crypt, now the opponent has less cards that will serve a critical role in the late game, is still vulnerable to the primary win condition, and in effect crypt serves no other purpose than to hate out Will which makes it a 4-1 trade off for something that isn't essential (removing krosan reclamation may be annoying but hopefully you won't oath that far).

As a side note, however, just because Will isn't essential doesn't mean that it isn't incredibly valuable to the deck...  This is why it is such a great card... It serves a vastly different function than any other card in the deck and provides versatility while not truly hindering the deck in any way... Thus hate designed to beat it will miss the other cards and, in the case, everything else is hated out then Will can still function and win you the game...

I'm not truly opposed to the mask idea however I do have a few questions...

While the deck does include street wraith, 3 tutors, and dark confidant my question is this sufficient draw?  don't get me wrong, it sounds like a lot since it is 11 cards, but my concern is more about quality in terms of overall strategy...  The reason why someone would want to play both strategies is that the one they have in hand may be able to be prevented.  In such cases, how do you win?  the alternative is to use a different win condition...  Mask requires two cards to be truly effective (sure it can hide druid but, common, dreadnaught is its purpose)...  Wraith will only dig one card in... confidant takes 2 turns to see any gains and that is also only one card per turn.  While the three tutors are efficient, the others do not seem to be this way for a deck that is trying to be a combo deck...  this is not to say that I think wraith is a bad card...  In fact, I think it does a lot for this deck, probably more than for ay other deck besides ichorid...  However, wraith combined with confidant as a draw engine seems to be kinda slow...  What about instead of condiant we add in grim tutors, or worldly tutors (if grim then also dark ritual) and cut the number of dreadnaguths down to two. 

This last becomes important and is a strong reason for grim tutor... The other reason why the deck seems weakened by the inclusion of mask is that it can often take several turns to find both combo parts and, when you do, it takes a total of 3 turns to kill them... During this time, hate can definately be found (like ennaring bridge etc...) which can hinder your plan... Sure duress and therapy do their job, but you probably won't be recurring a therapy on a dreadnaught and regardless both spells can only do so much... Eventually with the opponents own duress/counters etc... hate will get through and an answer needs to be available.  To that end, a better draw system definately needs to be added b/c the deck seems vulnerable to hate.

Right... they all attack different decks... meaning that each creature isn't versatile on their own...  Meddling mage is effective against any deck...  Child is not
Ex...  I understand the power of Wretch vs. Grunt if they have to stand off... but in reality they don't very often meaning that we only look to comparative value in terms of what they attempt to do...  Grunt also stops the very same decks that you are talking about... Additionally, it doesn't take mana to use its ability meaning that you can then play more threats securring a better position.  If, for whatever reason, the deck you are playing against is not GY deck... then grunt can still swing in for 4 which is a much bigger threat than a wretch...
          Sure, compared to one on one wretch may own Grunt... but grunt is more versatile and still hates out the decks that need to be hated out (making his overall value better)

This was just an example so don't get too hung up on it...  I am merely trying to say that your creatures tend to be focused on beating different decks...  Similarly, this means, that if you draw kataki, confident, and child w/o ghoul then you may have problems with ichorid b/c the only card that would help you is wretch.  Similarly, if you are facing stax... sure, you may be able to turn off welder with wretch, but w/o kataki, and with a smokestack in play (common) you will eat up your resources trying to keep welder unusable and thus prevent more drops -> being unable to keep up with smokestack -> lock etc...

Obviously these are scenarios that may or may not cause overall problems since you also carry duress/therapy/extirpate but do show the fundemental flaw with what you have chosen...  Sylvan and confidant are a slow draw engine (not saying that you can find better) both of which will only get you on average 1 extra card by turn 3...  Assuming that you do not draw the right disruption in your hand, how do you plan on getting to the right hate card/preventing them from winning? 

Additionally, besides confidant, thiese are the reasons that cards like wretch and kataki are most often seen in sideboards... they may do a better effect against the deck in question, but you trade versatility for that effect...  It is better to have a slightly weaker deck that doesn't matter what creature it draws with the option of sideboarding than a deck that is hit or miss...

I understand cabal/duress/extirpate can all be strong...  However, you do have limited mana availability...  On average you will only have 2-3 mana for the first few turns especially w/o early draw to help even this out...  If you waste/strip then you are stuck with the choice of either playing no creature, paying wretch's ability, or casting disruption in your hand only... not all three which is what your deck strongly advocates...
For Ex.   lets look at therapy...  If you play it turn one, then you are guessing as to what they have and will often miss.  If you play it on turn 2 after you figure out what is in their hand, then you forgo a creature drop (so trading off one disruption for another)... and if you decide to play a turn 2 cabal and plan on using therapy twice then you play turn 1 duress (presumably) turn 2 cabal (trading one disruption card for another) and then turn three play a creature and sac it (thereby removing your own disruptive force)...  The turn 1 play is often not that helpful.  If you then try to sac a creature turn two after playing a turn 1 therapy, then you are removing two disruption cards for one of the opponents and have barely hurt them.  Turn 2 play can be helpful, but only if your opponents hand allows b/c it means you have done nothing to create a clock and the effect is not static meaning they have the option of recovering much quicker at this point if they play draw spells... the turn 3 option means you are able to destroy their 3 biggest threats in hand...  At the same time, you are left with very little disruption, have not been drawing cards (and will take you at least another two turns to do so) and have created no permenant damage (like a static effect)...  This is not to say that removing their 3 biggest threats thus far is nothing to laugh at, butit does mean that you are for an uphill battle in terms of a resource war which they are better designed to take advantage of from this point.  This all of course assumes that they do not have any disruption/do not use it which is kinda silly...

As a final note on the duresss/therapy/extirpate cards... Just because you include these cards does not make your deck as a whole viable.  These cards are not unique to your deck design... If these cards are truly as powerful as you say then in reality the shell of this deck has nothing to do with the creatures involved but rather the non-creature disruption...  Those same cards could be included in shop aggro, fish, Oath of Druids (therapy would be worse but you say that you tend to know their hand anyway), etc...  With this in mind, the basic shell is created up of the non-creature disruption and you have to justify why your creature strategy is better than these other decks/does something unique.  To this end, I truly think that you do do something unique.  However, I do not think that it can do it consistently enough (b/c of versatility and draw issues that i talked about previously) as compared to what other decks have to offer...  I would much rather cast turn 1 duress, turn 2 meddling mage than turn 1 duress, turn two child against an opposing dragon deck etc...


I agree, but this does not mean he is viable... If you are truly afraid of ToA for 1, why not play chalice set at 0 followed up by a therapy/duress?  This eliminates mana and the duress can take a dark ritual, draw spell, etc...  Namely whatever they need for gas to win.  This play is much stronger than playing creatures in that it prevents the opponent from performing his strategy vs. a turn 1 korlis which does not thus allowing removal to be found (every combo deck carries removal)...  I think Korlis is a cool trick for sure, but what do you do against the opponent then casting an ETW for 10-12 creatures turn 1/2?  you prevent damage for a turn, but w/o oath you have no way of truly competing.  Since ETW is being added into a lot of ToA builds (gifts, long, etc...)  Korlis seems to not be that effective anymore...  It is better to prevent them from performing the way they want to than to play a card that prevents them from winning only (b/c an answer or alternative win condition will be found).


Finally, I just don't find your deck to be that resilient.  Sure, Ghoul may be able to bring a creature back... but that takes a turn (during which I may win) and your creatures are not versatile.  Additionally, ghoul is probably a good counter target etc...  What I'm more concerned with is how do you deal with more generalized disruption.
Like your deck seems to do well in goldfish mode... but I still don't understand how you deal with opposing disruption...  Chalice for 1 backed up with counters seems pretty strong...  Or what if they play orb of dreams turn 1 meaning you have no mana until turn 3 since you will probably use a fetch to get the land... during that time they will definately get a huge advantage on you...  What if they counter confidant so that your draw engine is shut off? (instant draw isn't hurt as bad since you get more bang for your buck and you get it now rather than having to wait for the cumulative effect).  How do you then continue to apply pressure?  What do you do when they play turn 1 oath (on the play) and you don't have a Korlis in hand?  Do you not play creatures to stop activation?  or, what if a dragon deck decides to duress you and takes wretch?  your plan against dragon is now destroyed and you have to have extirpate and hope that you haven't already used it as a means of looking at their hand to make your own therapy stronger to even have a chance... 

To sum up
1:  Your deck is not as disruptive as you like to think:
      a.  resource issues/trade-offs
      b.  not versatile
      c.  limited draw/search to find key disruption and recover when disruption exhausted
2:  Your disruption is not unique to your deck.
      a.  lack of focus (fish's focus is to disrupt and have clock... it does this with free disruption... what is yours?)
      b.  Other decks have a better shell than you and can still utilize the part of your deck that makes you so strong... why is your deck, as a whole, viable?
3.  Your inability to deal with opposing disruption effectively.
      a.  Limited draw/search
      b.  not versatile enough

Angrychilla...

how can you afford to run FoW when you only have 13 blue spells... Doesn't that seem a bit low?

Additionally, how does this deck fair when chalice is set to 1?  I understand that this deck can still win b/c Hermit is at two and all... but by shutting off your ability to disrupt the opponent they can just counter w/e you want to play, find an answer during summoning sickness (of hermit), etc... 

Or what if the opponent plays Crypt or LotV... The only win condition you can then go for is tinker->titan...  However, how do you find tinker considering you have very limited draw and even more limited tutoring power...

Finally, I understand how this deck has a variety of ways of winning... However, the disruption package becomes significantly worse when trying to defend the titan (b/c you can't recur therapys and you put them on a slower clock in which they can utilize their better draw/tutor engine to find bounce, STP, etc...)  Additionally, the means of finding and setting up those alternative win conditions is very limited making them much slower unless you are lucky...

I am not saying that the deck is not viable... In fact I am very interested in it...  My observation is that the deck is functionally Oath except utilizing different cards (i know oxymoron right?)  Both decks attempt to get a creature into play by using a 2cc green card that takes a turn to activate.   However, in contrast to Oath, the deck relies much more heavily on the GY, has a much worse draw engine, uses a card that not only needs mana to activate, but is much easier to destroy, and packs more disruption... This is in large part due to a difference in what it takes for each deck to "combo" off... Hermit requires more cards to make the combo a one turn clock, but only needs 1 card to work: hermit (oath requires that the opponent have a creature in play which often means orchard + oath), which means that Hermit doesn't really need draw spells preferring instead tutors like Worldly tutor and Living Wish.  Thus, Hermit plays relatively recklessly where it attempts to get Hermit into play (probably turn 2 after turn 1 duress)... pray they can defend them for a turn... and then win with double therapy back up to ensure a safe win condition...

This plan is great and all, but what do you do when something of yours does gets disrupted... like what if you are on the draw and they play any sort of hate spell... how do you recover?  Obviously speed and the ability to duress/therapy/FoW (which seems shaky with only 13 blue cards) looks sufficient, but is that enough?  Tormod's Crypt being laid first turn requires FoW to deal with it which won't always happen... And in the case of LotV there is nothing this deck can do except hope to win by using tinker (without the double therapy back up and 1 turn clock) 

Someone else compared it to ichorid, but ichorid uses dredge, is often slower, and is more susceptable to hate (in some ways)...   In my mind, the only shell that seems to fit is the Oath one but even that sems a bit shaky because of the difference in purpose...