Misdirection as 1of

[nhk]

Hi all,

I've seen a lot of drain lists that run 1of Misdirection.  I'm kind of curious why.  Usually I justify a 1of by the presence of critical tutor mass - the card is less powerful than another choice, but it makes every tutor in my deck stronger.

In a remora list, I run 1of MisD almost entirely because of this sequence:

Them: Ancestral
Us: Remora on stack, Mystical/Vamp for MisD, Remora resolves, cast MisD.

Here the presence of MisD actually makes three different cards in my deck capable of stealing Ancestral or some similar bomb.

But in a non-remora drain list we need to have both mystical or vamp and a draw spell and the mana to cast both to make MisD a meaningful tutor target.  How often does that happen?

Misdirection in a drain deck is mostly useful in the mirror.  Sure, it  works against Thoughtseize, randomly wins the game against Ancestral, and works in a few corner cases.  However, if it's really that good against other decks, why not run more than 1of? 

I've heard that it's there as FoW #5.  But MisD is a lot weaker than FoW against other decks.  And if I could run 6of FoW in a drain list, I probably would.

So why 1of MisD?

[JudasKilled]

I like it as a 1 of for surprise factor.  In a control mirror its very useful.  If they dont see it g1 great you have a trick possible thyey wont expect. If you use it game 1 they have to play around it.  Running more then 1 just seems bad.  I dont know why it just does.

[arctic79]

It's run as a one of, I believe, because there is just no room for more than 1.  What would you cut for a 2nd or 3rd Misdirection?  And how many spells are your opponent running that you would really want to hijack? Ancestral, FoW, Vamp?  With design space so tight in Vintage it is just too impractical to up the count maindeck, or cut something in the board.

[nhk]

JudasKilled:
Everyone expects your drain deck to run 1of MisD because everyone runs 1of MisD.  In particular, since more than 1of MisD is rarely seen, not seeing MisD in game 1 gives your opponent neither relevant information nor relevant misinformation.

If I wanted surprise, I'd play 1of Daze instead.  Or if returning an island is too much anti-synergy with drain (which isn't given, as some drain lists run LoA for example), 1of Commandeer, 1of Red Blast, 1of Spell Snare, 1of Nix, etc.

None of these cards are that strong in your standard drain deck, sure, and surprise is the only reason you'd run them.  But MisD is weak, too, right?  And narrow.

Also, "it surprises them game 2" sounds like a reason to put something in a sideboard.

arctic79:
You can always cut cards.  If Yawgmoth's Will is unrestricted, I'm running at least 3.  I don't care if the cards I'm cutting are awesome, because Yawgmoth's Will is better. 

If you're playing Tezzeret, cut Tezzeret.  Or Sensei's.  Or Lotus Petal (your mana probably works out fine as MisD is free, and Petal wasn't a stable source anyway, but obviously testing should confirm this before we believe it).

I'm not claiming these cards are the best to cut or that the deck would not have to change in some other way due to the ripple effect of changing card choices.

What I'm claiming is that if MisD is a card worth running as 1of, it's worth running as 2of.  And if it's not worth running 2of, then there are many other cards that are better as 1of, like Sensei's Top.  I would even consider running Street Wraith over MisD if I couldn't think of a good card for slot #60.

To clarify, if I'm running cards A and B in slots 59 and 60, and there is no obvious reason that they should be 1ofs, then either 2of A or 2of B must be a better choice barring the case that 2of A is win-more in some matchups and 2of B is win-more in other matchups and 1of each happens to be just right.

[arctic79]

@nhk

I kind of agree with you.  The problem with misdirection is it is narrow and drain is better, FoW is better.  I tend to think of MisD as a 9th counterspell.  Personally I would prefer Stilfe over MisD (but that is just me).  Also with the increased restriction of blue cards getting 17 relevant blue cards to support FoW is sometimes a challenge, with more MisDs I think I would want my blue count up to 20ish.

What I'm claiming is that if MisD is a card worth running as 1of, it's worth running as 2of.  And if it's not worth running 2of, then there are many other cards that are better as 1of, like Sensei's Top.  I would even consider running Street Wraith over MisD if I couldn't think of a good card for slot #60.

I don't agree wholly with this statement.  I believe some cards are just not good in multiples.  Just because a card is not worth running 2of doesn't mean it's not worth running. I do agree I would take any of the cards you listed for slot #60.

Really though it comes down to the deck, and the player to make this choice.

[nhk]

What I'm claiming is that if MisD is a card worth running as 1of, it's worth running as 2of.  And if it's not worth running 2of, then there are many other cards that are better as 1of, like Sensei's Top.  I would even consider running Street Wraith over MisD if I couldn't think of a good card for slot #60.

I don't agree wholly with this statement.  I believe some cards are just not good in multiples.  Just because a card is not worth running 2of doesn't mean it's not worth running. I do agree I would take any of the cards you listed for slot #60.

Sorry, I wasn't clear.  I definitely think some cards are running 1of but not 2of because either they make your tutors stronger but are otherwise too weak (Colossus and Inkwell are the most extreme examples here), or they are just plain bad in multiples (many cards fit this category).

But I don't think Misdirection is one of those cards.  There is no reason to believe that the second MisD is weaker than the first.

[arctic79]

Fair enough.

[Cyberpunker]

Not to mention Misd is your 5th-6th FoW in terms of counter wars. And it is also the 5th-6th FoW when trying to Hurkyll's Recall, Disenchant, Dredge Return, Sinkhole, Hymn to Tourach, Dark Blast, Thoughtseize, anything that targets.

In a control heavy and stax light metagame, Misd can definetly be a 2 of.

[LennoxLewis86]

I think it's fine as a one-of. You definitely don't want to cut Tezzeret, Petal or Top in favor of Mis-D because it can often be seen in Tez lists that players like to play 2 Tops or 2 Tez and if they could play 2 Petals they most likely would. Simply because it supports Drain mana on turn 1 and we all agree that Drain is a better counterspell than Misdirection. I have never seen 2 Misdirections in a Tez list so I suppose there are better options for slot #60.

The risk you'll be taking is playing dead cards in some match-ups and that would not only be a waste, but also dangerous. Sure, it can be really strong in the control mirror and stealing random Ancestral wins you games, but I believe it's too much of a risk to play more than one copy. Playing a controldeck is about cardadvantage and having the better, or more, options. Having Mis-D in your hand could be worse than having a Mountain Goat against some decks, you don't want that.

Misdirection was played x3 in Pitch Long but there is a HUGE difference in using Misdirection offensively or defensively.

[nhk]

I think it's fine as a one-of. You definitely don't want to cut Tezzeret, Petal or Top in favor of Mis-D because it can often be seen in Tez lists that players like to play 2 Tops or 2 Tez and if they could play 2 Petals they most likely would. Simply because it supports Drain mana on turn 1 and we all agree that Drain is a better counterspell than Misdirection. I have never seen 2 Misdirections in a Tez list so I suppose there are better options for slot #60.

So why not play 2of Tezz, 2of Top, 0of MisD?

Not that this is relevant to the MisD question, but Petal is a highly debatable inclusion.  There are a lot of opening hands where you wish it was an Island, up to and including most hands that don't have a drain at first (~60% of them).

Petal doesn't show up in many of the lists I've seen.  Turn 1 drain mana is nice, but if that's all that mattered, we'd run 8of Spirit Guides and 4of Manamorphose.  (That would be a hilarious deck to play, though... some of your opening hands can support turn 0 drain.  I guess I'll save the idea for the day that turn1.dec is dominant.)

The risk you'll be taking is playing dead cards in some match-ups and that would not only be a waste, but also dangerous. Sure, it can be really strong in the control mirror and stealing random Ancestral wins you games, but I believe it's too much of a risk to play more than one copy. Playing a controldeck is about cardadvantage and having the better, or more, options. Having Mis-D in your hand could be worse than having a Mountain Goat against some decks, you don't want that.

You're saying 2of MisD sucks.  I agree with you.  I'm wondering why the card is played at all in drain builds.

[LennoxLewis86]

It's not the only thing that matters and drawing a comparison of playing 8 spirit guides and manamorphose to cast turn 0 Mana Drain is just off.
I could just as easily say that you should cut Mana Drain altogether and play Negate because you're playing with full artifact acceleration. Then you can justify cutting the Lotus Petal to play 2 Misdirections..? That's equally silly.

I'm no Drain player but if I would play Drains I would love to have the turn 1 Mana Drain. If you don't have a FoW in your openinghand it would be nice to have a turn 1 Mana Drain instead. I'd personally play a Lotus Petal in my Tez deck to increase the chances of having a counterspell available from the start, whether it's Drain or FoW. If I could play 2 Petals, I would play 2.

Perhaps I'm grossly mistaking and the turn 1 Drain (or any counter) isn't that much of a concern but often times it feels like it does. I for one am disgusted with an opening of Island and Petal/Sapphire if I know the guy is playing Drains. Whether he has it or not, you'll be forced to keep it in mind and most likely you'll be baiting a counter before trying to play the best card in your hand.

[Grand Inquisitor]

While many of these carry for all Tez lists, I'm thinking specifically of the one Eastman's been using which runs Bob and is more controlling:

(in order of importance)

- In a control metagame, often winning the first counter war can be critical to victory.  Pitch counters get you there; Misdirection acts as the best FoW #5 to push through your own Bob or Ancestral or to steal their Ancestral.

- With Time Vault combo being the most common route to victory, if you're not playing 'control' you can go to guns early on this plan and misd protects this play as well.  Duress may effect your tempo (if you need even that one mana) or it may fail to stop them (e.g. if they have 2x mana drain, but only two blue mana).

- It's blue

- It can be put in a gifts pile with FoW, Drain, Duress, etc

- I don't run mystical tutor often, but it can be tutored on top for sensei's top (or mystic remora).


This isn't a secret, but in an inbred control metagame with a tilt toward the early game, misdirection is often a good choice.  As for why run a single versus more, for me it's a matter of never wanting two in hand.  Also, I try to build decks with enough one-of's, in the right combinations, so that you don't topdeck too badly.

[nhk]

It's not the only thing that matters and drawing a comparison of playing 8 spirit guides and manamorphose to cast turn 0 Mana Drain is just off.

The spirit guides were just a dumb example to make the point that sacrificing consistency for a few awesome potential opening hands isn't always a good idea.

Perhaps Mox Diamond is a better example.  Two Islands and a Mox Diamond almost exactly the same in an opening hand as two Islands and a Petal.  In both cases, you lose a stable mana source and get UU on turn 1 instead.

Diamond is inferior to Petal mostly because a hand of one Island and a Diamond for mana sources is likely a mulligan, wheras a hand with one Island and a Petal could be keepable depending on what else it has.  But I don't run either card for the same reasons.  Petal and Diamond work similarly if you get the right hand, and both make you ask why you included them when you've mulled to 4 and your only mana source is one of them.

I could just as easily say that you should cut Mana Drain altogether and play Negate because you're playing with full artifact acceleration. Then you can justify cutting the Lotus Petal to play 2 Misdirections..? That's equally silly.

If Negate read "counter target spell" I believe it would see a hell of a lot of play.  The problem is it rolls over and dies to aggro.

I'm no Drain player but if I would play Drains I would love to have the turn 1 Mana Drain. If you don't have a FoW in your openinghand it would be nice to have a turn 1 Mana Drain instead. I'd personally play a Lotus Petal in my Tez deck to increase the chances of having a counterspell available from the start, whether it's Drain or FoW. If I could play 2 Petals, I would play 2.

Perhaps I'm grossly mistaking and the turn 1 Drain (or any counter) isn't that much of a concern but often times it feels like it does. I for one am disgusted with an opening of Island and Petal/Sapphire if I know the guy is playing Drains. Whether he has it or not, you'll be forced to keep it in mind and most likely you'll be baiting a counter before trying to play the best card in your hand.

An opening of Island, Mox Sapphire is definitely scary.  However, there's still a 60% chance your opponent does not have mana drain in their hand (ignoring mulligans... it's not like they will mull a hand because it didn't have a turn 1 mana drain).

Your argument that seeing UU open forces you to play a bait spell doesn't make much sense.  If your opponent plays Island, go, they have six cards, one of which might be Force of Will with approximately a 40% chance.  If they have UU open, they have five cards, one of which might be Force of Will or Mana Drain with approximately a 60-65% chance.  I'm doing the math in my head here based on the 40% chance that a 4of will be in a random hand of seven cards, and the probabilities change a bit when you account for the cards already known, but the point is that in either scenario, you want a bait spell.  In particular, if you're playing against drains and you kept a hand with only one bomb and no protection, you're probably doing it wrong.

Add to this that if your deck is the type to resolve bombs on turn 1, and they kept a hand without UU open on the first turn, it was probably because that hand had Force of Will in it.

Petal in drains is definitely not the worst idea ever, and plenty of people run it, but I believe it to be suboptimal.

- It can be put in a gifts pile with FoW, Drain, Duress, etc

- I don't run mystical tutor often, but it can be tutored on top for sensei's top

This makes a lot of sense.  I forgot about the interactions with Gifts and Top.  I can see how MisD is strong in a deck that runs those cards.

[honestabe]

It's a 5th force of will in controll mirrors

Screws with thoughtseize

protects your permanents from random hate

Infamous Shenanigans with Ancestral recall

[Eastman]

I think you guys are missing the most important MisD stack. I don't run a MisD but when I do it is to set up the following, using it WITH Ancestral, as bait:

Them: relevant spell
Me: ancestral recall
Them: counter my ancestral
Me: MisD their counter to their relevant spell
(sometimes) them: counter
(sometimes) me: counter

this setup also works with Gifts, it's a gg interaction that I set up any time I am holding gifts/ancestral/misd and vamp/demonic. It is enormous in the control mirror, but to me still too narrow to justify MisD over other more versatile protection.

[gamegeek2]

It's a 5th force of will in controll mirrors

Screws with thoughtseize

protects your permanents from random hate

Infamous Shenanigans with Ancestral recall

I think you guys are missing the most important MisD stack. I don't run a MisD but when I do it is to set up the following, using it WITH Ancestral, as bait:

Them: relevant spell
Me: ancestral recall
Them: counter my ancestral
Me: MisD their counter to their relevant spell
(sometimes) them: counter
(sometimes) me: counter

this setup also works with Gifts, it's a gg interaction that I set up any time I am holding gifts/ancestral/misd and vamp/demonic. It is enormous in the control mirror, but to me still too narrow to justify MisD over other more versatile protection.

QFT.

[John Jones]

QFT.

I agree.

[beder]

Your argument that seeing UU open forces you to play a bait spell doesn't make much sense.  If your opponent plays Island, go, they have six cards, one of which might be Force of Will with approximately a 40% chance.  If they have UU open, they have five cards, one of which might be Force of Will or Mana Drain with approximately a 60-65% chance.  I'm doing the math in my head here based on the 40% chance that a 4of will be in a random hand of seven cards, and the probabilities change a bit when you account for the cards already known, but the point is that in either scenario, you want a bait spell.  In particular, if you're playing against drains and you kept a hand with only one bomb and no protection, you're probably doing it wrong.

Add to this that if your deck is the type to resolve bombs on turn 1, and they kept a hand without UU open on the first turn, it was probably because that hand had Force of Will in it.

Petal in drains is definitely not the worst idea ever, and plenty of people run it, but I believe it to be suboptimal.

I feel like you are missing the point : "having my bomb countered by fow" cannot just be compared to "having my bomb countered by drain" through purcentages analysis.
Sure, in both case, it is countered, but
- if countered by fow : then they lost one extra card, which is some kind of compensation for my "countered bomb"
- if countered by drain : then they get extra mana, which is some kind of extra penalty

"Compensation vs. Extra penalty" is a pretty huge huge difference :  I sometimes play my bomb withouth back-up counter if they can't drain, but I will reluctantly do if they can.

[nhk]

Your argument that seeing UU open forces you to play a bait spell doesn't make much sense.  If your opponent plays Island, go, they have six cards, one of which might be Force of Will with approximately a 40% chance.  If they have UU open, they have five cards, one of which might be Force of Will or Mana Drain with approximately a 60-65% chance.  I'm doing the math in my head here based on the 40% chance that a 4of will be in a random hand of seven cards, and the probabilities change a bit when you account for the cards already known, but the point is that in either scenario, you want a bait spell.  In particular, if you're playing against drains and you kept a hand with only one bomb and no protection, you're probably doing it wrong.

Add to this that if your deck is the type to resolve bombs on turn 1, and they kept a hand without UU open on the first turn, it was probably because that hand had Force of Will in it.

Petal in drains is definitely not the worst idea ever, and plenty of people run it, but I believe it to be suboptimal.

I feel like you are missing the point : "having my bomb countered by fow" cannot just be compared to "having my bomb countered by drain" through purcentages analysis.
Sure, in both case, it is countered, but
- if countered by fow : then they lost one extra card, which is some kind of compensation for my "countered bomb"
- if countered by drain : then they get extra mana, which is some kind of extra penalty

"Compensation vs. Extra penalty" is a pretty huge huge difference :  I sometimes play my bomb withouth back-up counter if they can't drain, but I will reluctantly do if they can.

That all makes sense.  What I was saying is that if you are casting a must-resolve bomb with no knowledge of your opponent's hand there is a 40% chance that you are screwed regardless of how much they have open.

Playing into UU open definitely sucks.  But the post I was arguing with didn't make any sense.  If you can't play a bait spell before a must-resolve bomb against drain control, you should have mulliganned.  You will really regret not mulliganning against UU open, but the extent to which you will regret not mulliganning is irrelevant because you should have just mulliganned.

For example, you're playing Long against drains game 2.  Your hand is: Dark Ritual, Underground Sea, Mox Emerald, Mana Crypt, Mox Ruby, Necropotence, Hurkyl's Recall.  This hand is a mulligan.  It doesn't matter whether your opponent runs Lotus Petal or not.

(And my other point which I haven't explicitly stated until now is that if their hand is Island, Lotus Petal, Force of Will, Blue Card, Mana Drain, and two other cards, then you roll over and die.  But this hand doesn't show up frequently enough to offset the times that their hand is Lotus Petal, Island, Time Walk, Thirst for Knowledge, Tezzeret, Duress and they are just sad.)

[vassago]

I wouldn't run MisD right now. Sadly, I think I wouldn't even run it unless Tendrils was the dominant deck.  I mean its cool card, dont get me wrong, but I think it's more cute than anything else.  It really doesn't do anything in my opinion anymore. Yeah I know one out of like ten times you use it you catch a recall off it. However, most of the time I see it as a rather dead card.  The only time I could see using it is when you really want the pseudo FOW number five, kind of like steel reserve vault reallys wants it. Even then, I am pretty sure you could find another card that has more business in your strategy then MisD, like "top" or what ever.  I know I could be wrong, but thats honestly how I feel about it now.  Wish I would have thought this way before I bought the two japanese foil ones.   

[TrollMcSmash]

    It depends a lot on the meta-game. I used to play in a Stax heavy meta-game and I found a lot of the time Misdirection was a dead card, mainly useful as pitch fodder for FoW. Ironically, some of it's best uses came in match-ups against Fish. The fish decks would try to burn / blade / StP my few support creatures (like Confidant) and I could use misdirect to turn their own removal against them (admittedly, another 5 cc spell in decks with Bob had it's own drawbacks... ). This tempo swing actually helped win several rounds. Now that fish decks are mainly fishing-rod decks, it's not quite as useful... but personally I still have good experience with it.
    In control match-ups, it mainly acts as another pitch counter / ancestral steal. Its use as a pitch counter cannot be under-rated. For the more aggressive decks, the inherent card disadvantage of 6 pitch counters may not make it useful. Also, some decks simply don't have the density of blue spells required for the pitch counters. Also, you have to look to your deck and your deck's vulnerabilities. Tezz decks aren't threatened by Fire/Ice unless they run Bob; they instead have much bigger fears from Null Rods / RaR / Ancient Grudge. Against those spells that really threaten the deck, Misdirection is relatively weak to utterly worthless. It makes sense for Tezz decks to drop it down to 1 of for its use as a pitch counter, but running 2 of would be a bit illogical because it needs those slots in the deck for answers to cards that kill it.   
    Decks like Bomberman, on the other hand, can get much more mileage out of Misdirection and I've seen it played 2-of in that deck because it tries to pressure with it's creatures; if those creatures are hobbled it has a much more difficult game. Misdirection goes from being just a pitch counter to a way to turn targeted removal against opponents. Of course, I don't see Bomberman much anymore... but that is a situation where 2 Misdirects are useful.

[Scyther]

i dont see the problem . as long as we dont have another free counterspell (maybe mindbreak trap wil fill that spot) the most important thing u want with MisD is not stealing Anc... oO' what are you guys talking about?

u want to protect your bomb/ bombs with another free counterspell. be it tezzeret, anc, time vault, oath or whatever... of course it has the benefit of stealing anc and doing nice counterwar shinanigans.
so for me it was always a VERY versatile spell in certain decks. i really dont see why this should be such a big issue.. oO

[LennoxLewis86]

That all makes sense.  What I was saying is that if you are casting a must-resolve bomb with no knowledge of your opponent's hand there is a 40% chance that you are screwed regardless of how much they have open.

Playing into UU open definitely sucks.  But the post I was arguing with didn't make any sense.  If you can't play a bait spell before a must-resolve bomb against drain control, you should have mulliganned.  You will really regret not mulliganning against UU open, but the extent to which you will regret not mulliganning is irrelevant because you should have just mulliganned.

I'm a bit surprised by you claiming my post didn't make ANY sense. I was only trying to argue why I think Lotus Petal is a strong card in a Tezzeret deck and the argument I was giving was that my opponent having UU online is demoralizing. You can't argue that you need to play more cautious, you gave the rough percentages yourself. I wasn't saying anything about hands that need to be mulliganed because they contain only one bomb.

Like beder said, playing around Mana Drain is a big difference with playing around FoW. two for one on your bomb is a much better deal than having it drained.
I'm not talking about having only one bomb in my hand, where did you get that idea? Imagine having two of them, having one drained is much more devastating than having one forced. So definitely yes, I'm very worried if my opponent has a quick UU online, and for that very reason I think Petal is great in Tez.

But now that I think of it, in some situations on the play (with a deck like Grim Long) I'm willing to risk everything by trying to turn 1 my opponent.

I'm aware this isn't really relevant anymore but I can't help feeling degraded by you and I'm trying to correct the misunderstanding.

[nhk]

That all makes sense.  What I was saying is that if you are casting a must-resolve bomb with no knowledge of your opponent's hand there is a 40% chance that you are screwed regardless of how much they have open.

Playing into UU open definitely sucks.  But the post I was arguing with didn't make any sense.  If you can't play a bait spell before a must-resolve bomb against drain control, you should have mulliganned.  You will really regret not mulliganning against UU open, but the extent to which you will regret not mulliganning is irrelevant because you should have just mulliganned.

I'm a bit surprised by you claiming my post didn't make ANY sense. I was only trying to argue why I think Lotus Petal is a strong card in a Tezzeret deck and the argument I was giving was that my opponent having UU online is demoralizing. You can't argue that you need to play more cautious, you gave the rough percentages yourself. I wasn't saying anything about hands that need to be mulliganed because they contain only one bomb.

Like beder said, playing around Mana Drain is a big difference with playing around FoW. two for one on your bomb is a much better deal than having it drained.
I'm not talking about having only one bomb in my hand, where did you get that idea? Imagine having two of them, having one drained is much more devastating than having one forced. So definitely yes, I'm very worried if my opponent has a quick UU online, and for that very reason I think Petal is great in Tez.

But now that I think of it, in some situations on the play (with a deck like Grim Long) I'm willing to risk everything by trying to turn 1 my opponent.

I think we might have semantic differences here.

I interpret the word bomb to mean a spell that has a good chance of winning the game for you if they resolve.  Cards like Necropotence fall into this category.  Thirst for Knowledge, for example, does not.  Your opponent may want to counter a Thirst, but it is not the case that that is the correct play in all situations that it is possible in.  Thus, if you have a hand with turn 1 Tinker and turn 2 Necropotence, you probably don't care if they drain your Tinker.  Even if they cast Fact or Fiction off the drain mana, chances are they are not able to counter your turn 2 Necro.

Under this definition of "bomb", if your hand has more than two bombs/protection, at least one of which is a bomb, the fact that drain costs your opponent less than force is pretty irrelevant because you are probably going to win anyway.  If you're playing Grim Long, for example, the other thing you typically do is tutor, and your opponent probably won't counter your tutor unless they really need the drain mana for their next turn (like if they're using disposable mana sources like Lotus Petal, I guess).  I know that if I'm playing drains and my opponent tutors, I'd typically rather cast Brainstorm at the end of their turn than drain the tutor.

In summary, my argument is that if you kept your hand you are probably either going to win the game no matter what, or you are not doing something on turn 1 that they want to drain. 

Perhaps when you use the word bomb, you mean a spell that provides you a significant but not game-winning advantage if it resolves.  It is true that for many of these spells, having them drained is bad for you while having them forced you don't really feel like you've lost out.  This makes a bit more sense to me.  However, the difference made by casting a card worth drain but not force on turn 1 is not spectacular when compared to the difference made by having to throw out a hand because it doesn't have enough stable mana.  I've played with Lotus Petal and gotten screwed by it a lot more than turn 1 drains have helped me.

The other thing I haven't mentioned yet is that so many Tezzeret lists run Duress, and that Lotus Petal does not help at all with the plan of turn 1 Duress, turn 2 drain.  The goal of these decks is not to get drain up as soon as possible, however nice of a bonus it is when it happens.

I'm aware this isn't really relevant anymore but I can't help feeling degraded by you and I'm trying to correct the misunderstanding.

Sorry, I didn't intend to offend you at all, and my language was stronger than I intended.

I write directly and make strong claims so that people will tell me when I'm wrong.  Your post didn't make sense to me.  This could be for any number of reasons including that I failed to fill in the blanks in your argument correctly.  If I thought it was devoid of intelligent thought, I wouldn't have responded to it.

[LennoxLewis86]

Alright, thanks for the reply. I'm glad that the misunderstanding is out of the way because your arguments are definitely sound. It's just that I tried to make a different point, perhaps my writing was a bit chaotic. After re-reading my earlier post I can see why you responded the way you did.

Anyway, let's agree to disagree about the Petal.

Again my apoligies for dredging up this topic because the question regarding Mis-D as a one-off has been answered, discussed and pretty much agreed upon.