[Free Article] What's Next For Vintage?

[forests failed you]

Hey guys, new article up on SCG today.  I discuss some of my thoughts on where the format may be headed on the heels of the wildly successful Vintage Championship and the upcoming release of Power Nine on Magic Online. 

Check it out and let me know what you think.

http://www.starcitygames.com/article/27404_Whats-Next-For-Vintage.html

Cheers
, Brian

[Soly]

I specifically love how the comments on the article all say that 0 Abrupt Decay is wrong, and how it needs to be there to answer Grafdigger's Cage.

I have never when playing Oath or Long cared significantly about Grafdigger's Cage. 

[forests failed you]

Soly, some people just haven't played enough Vintage to know how it IS.   

[Commandant]

It's a rather absurd and cavalier stance to both not run and vocally support not running Abrupt Decay in a 5C control list.

[Samoht]

It's a rather absurd and cavalier stance to both not run and vocally support not running Abrupt Decay in a 5C control list.

Abrupt Decay is too versatile and powerful to be dismissed out of hand. I'm sure Brian can defend his rationale. That said - I couldn't see myself on 0, and would probably be closer to 4 than 0. I think you want at least 1 in the main and up to 3 in the SB depending on what you're expecting to see. As far as cards you care about - Chalice (namely on 2), GDC, Tarmogoyf, Bob, Time Vault, Tangle Wire, Sphere, Thorn, etc. all fit the bill. Sure there are other ways to deal with each of  these cards in the deck - as Oath is very effective against the creatures listed - but you don't always have the answer that matches up. AD answers almost everything in the current format, sans Jace/LSG/Resto/Stack/Forge/Hellkite. While that list is longer than I'd like it's not nearly as long as the things it can stop and thus earns it's inclusion.

[forests failed you]

I think it is intuitive that an Oath of Druids deck wouldn't want to play a removal spell that is narrow and difficult to cast.  If you won't take my word for the card being unnecessary, keep in mind that I built the deck with Mastriano and we collectively reasoned that the spell was unnecessary in the 75.  UB is a steep price to pay for a removal spell -- especially considering 9 out of 10 cards I would want to kill are artifacts and many of those artifacts cost more than three mana or can't be hit by Abrupt Decay, i.e. Lodestone Golem, Smokestack,Mishra's Factory.

Keep in mind, that if I made room for an Abrupt Decay in the maindeck (and it was discussed) it would be in place of the Hurkyl's Recall.  We opted for Hurkyl's for three reasons, 1. it is blue and the deck (because it is maxing Thoughtseize and shatters) is a little light on U spells, 2. it answers Tinkerbots with our Merchant Scroll, Mystical, Vamp etc., and it provides a unique effect that can provide an out in games that might otherwise be unwinnable.

The instances where one would NEED Abrupt Decay are really specific -- Chalice on 1 and 2 or they have a bunch of counters in hand and you need to kill a card in play that costs less than 3.  Like I said, Abrupt Decay is a great card but 75% of the greatness comes with the clause that it kills Oath of Druids, which is upside that my Oath of Druids deck can't really capitalize on.

[forests failed you]

To be clear, I'm not saying that it is wrong or bad to play with the card.  It was very close to making my list.  My reasoning for why I am not playing it is that the hedge it creates is not against the specific cards and strategies that I would want to be hedging against.  I really want to make my mana as sleek as possible and I want my Workshop hate to be as good as I can make it. 

[Soly]

I think a card that is ridiculous in Oath of Druids shells that fills the role of Abrupt Decay much nicer is Chain of Vapor.  I am dissapointed it's not even a consideration to most.

What other than Cage does Oath need to Abrupt Decay?   And I don't think they need to Abrupt Decay GDCage either.  I think people are putting way too much value on the Uncounterability.   In my opinion, the uncounterability doesn't isn't worth the fact that it is in two of the support Colors.   Oath needs to always have access to Blue Mana, so you're trying to fetch two non-basic lands or have moxes when your opponents are running wastelands.

[Samoht]

I think it is intuitive that an Oath of Druids deck wouldn't want to play a removal spell that is narrow and difficult to cast.  If you won't take my word for the card being unnecessary, keep in mind that I built the deck with Mastriano and we collectively reasoned that the spell was unnecessary in the 75.  UB is a steep price to pay for a removal spell -- especially considering 9 out of 10 cards I would want to kill are artifacts and many of those artifacts cost more than three mana or can't be hit by Abrupt Decay, i.e. Lodestone Golem, Smokestack,Mishra's Factory.

Keep in mind, that if I made room for an Abrupt Decay in the maindeck (and it was discussed) it would be in place of the Hurkyl's Recall.  We opted for Hurkyl's for three reasons, 1. it is blue and the deck (because it is maxing Thoughtseize and shatters) is a little light on U spells, 2. it answers Tinkerbots with our Merchant Scroll, Mystical, Vamp etc., and it provides a unique effect that can provide an out in games that might otherwise be unwinnable.

The instances where one would NEED Abrupt Decay are really specific -- Chalice on 1 and 2 or they have a bunch of counters in hand and you need to kill a card in play that costs less than 3.  Like I said, Abrupt Decay is a great card but 75% of the greatness comes with the clause that it kills Oath of Druids, which is upside that my Oath of Druids deck can't really capitalize on.

Of course, you mean BG, which is even more difficult than UB.

Answering Fish cards is something it does very well also. Even if we're going to accept the clause that GDC is not something to consider, which I won't, they often follow GDC up with something oppressive like Goyf, Thalia, Mayor, etc. Your inclusion of Thoughtseize and Preordain show that you are planning to not Shops significantly more than you are planning to play Shops. That's a very reasonable assumption for Champs or large fields. Here in the NE we see a lot more Shops for obvious reasons and those 4 slots are spent elsewhere. I'm sure that has a lot to do with the valuation of the card to me. I can't think of a time that I had Decay and was not able to make exceptional value from it.

Lastly, why do you guys still stick to Hurkyl's in the main when you could play Sabotage? Is it to dodge Chalice 1?


@soly: Orchard helps with the offcolors quite well. I find a lot of Blue players to be overly confident with a GDC in play and thus have won several games because of it.

[Meddling Mike]

I was thinking that 1 copy of AD might be right because with Demonic, Vamp and Mystical in the deck I prefer to have a diverse toolbox of answers to tutor for; but with forces and merchant scroll in the deck I would probably want a blue answer over a non-blue answer.

[oshkoshhaitsyosh]

I am 100%  agreeing with Samoht here. Decay is definitely a 1 of main deck and 2-3 sideboard. Playing a forest helps with mana base issues then you fetch black when needed or orchard smoothes things over. But Decay is definitely definitely a card that should be played in oath. Not even close...

[Meddling Mike]

On another note, were you considering streaming or making Vintage videos on MTGO. One of the things I'm hoping for with the introduction of Vintage to MTGO is to see seasoned pros like yourself, LSV and Ochoa streaming their play on MTGO or recording vids.

[forests failed you]

I would really like to Stream Vintage once it becomes legal. 

[shrewarmies]

I do have to preface this by pointing out that I have not played the lists from  your article but I have one question for you brian.

How do you deal with the inherrant randomnes you face when you do trigger oath? You have a purely aggressive target in Blightsteel Colossus and what I view as a much more controlling target in Griselbrand. Do you find that this dichotomy hurts in some games where you are looking for one but flip the other? Do you really care what you flip/do you find yourself hoping tto hit one more often.

Comparing with older lists I think really draws this into focus. GG oath for example uses 2 purely aggressive targets in Blightsteel and Emrakul which if left alone basically guarantee the kill within 2 turns, especially when used in conjunction with Dragon's breath. Both targets are used because of their aggressive efficiency.  It doesn't really matter in most cases what the deck hits because they both play out in a similar fashion.

Elephant Oath (and to a large extent most non BW Griselbrand lists) use the target to control the opponent and every target in thise lists help to control the opponent to some degree, whether destroying permanents, locking the opponent out of a colour, drawing you into a bajillion couterspells. Each target increases your grip on the opponents options.

Your build just seems to be pulled in two different directions, represented by the two targets oath can flip over.

Do you feel this dichotomy in your targets is a help for your deck, and how does it improve the oath shell rather than  gunning for a more streamlined approach?

[Twiedel]

Great article, as usual. What I really loved was the promotion of Magic Online Vintage - I think this will be a huge deal for all of us long time Vintage passionates, and it will mainly serve the community two very important functions:

- we will have the opportunity to play a lot more Vintage
- the will be lot more "coverage" (i.e. streams)

And for the first point, what's not to love. I guess I am not the only one who has a tough time finding an opportunity to play/test due to moving to a "dry" area or due to time issues. Altough the creation of an online metagame will lead to some strange real/online world delay as experienced in other formats, it will be interesting to observe nonetheless.

As far as streaming goes, I am really looking forward to it! I am not sure if this could be a good starting point to finally get some more coverage/interest in Vintage as far as Europe is concerned (we have waaaay too little right now), but anyways we will get much more dedicated Vintage content on the web, which is great.

Another great opportunity could be the mixing of European and American metagames. I feel it is a shame that there is so little interchanging, and it can only change for the better as soon as there are weekend events that all of us can compete in.

Hope to see you online some time, hopefully not with Oath though, haha.
Marc

[vaughnbros]

There was an oath deck in the top 8 of worlds... You'd have a hard time convincing me that version isn't superior to this one, especially considering that it was built by the one who I'd consider the foremost expert at oathing creatures, Greg Fenton.  Notably it played 2 abrupt decay and 2 show and tell main.  It also didnt play tinker-bot or swan song.

[Grand Inquisitor]

I ran one AD main, and two in the board...and they were phenomenal

I tested a TON of Oath (main and SB) before Philly and I can attest to this as well.  Grafdigger is quickly becoming the SB card of choice vs. Oath and having access to ADecay is crucial to making it a gambit for them:  In a well developed mid-game, they really have to consider whether they let Oath resolve, even if they have Cage out.

However, I by no means think ADecay is an auto-include and agree with a lot of Brian's arguments.

if I made room for an Abrupt Decay in the maindeck t would be in place of the Hurkyl's Recall

I actually made this exact choice for Philly in a BobBUG list, however, my ADecays were great post-board.

75% of the greatness comes with the clause that it kills Oath of Druids, which is upside that my Oath of Druids deck can't really capitalize on

Here I disagree.

(1) Even in the Oath mirror it's important to have lines of play that can deal with Oath superiority.  Often times mirror players will leave in 1x Oath, and it's extremely potent to have an uncounterable way to deal with it, especially since they can gain the advantage in an uncounterable way (Orchard).

(2) Besides ShowNTell the most common route to victory in Oath mirrors is TVKey, where ADecay is clearly strong.

...Granted none of this mitigates the difficulty of finding BG, which is a real factor.  That's why I went with a rather greedy amount of non-basics (1x Island MD and 1x Forest SB), for the express purpose of supporting ADecay.  It's not automatic, but I think it's worth it...Fenton did too.

[Greg]

There was an oath deck in the top 8 of worlds... You'd have a hard time convincing me that version isn't superior to this one, especially considering that it was built by the one who I'd consider the foremost expert at oathing creatures, Greg Fenton.  Notably it played 2 abrupt decay and 2 show and tell main.  It also didnt play tinker-bot or swan song.

Thanks.

Abrupt Decay is certainly an awesome card with a variety of uses. In regard to an Oath of Druids deck, I'm not sure whether the correct answer is to play one, two, three, or four right now, but I'm certain the correct answer can't be zero. I'm usually playing two or three in my 75.