Article -- Vampiric Tutor or No?

[Rakso]

http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/expandnews.php?Article=4162

There are some plays you couldn't possibly visualize "The Deck" without, like Mystical Tutor-Ancestral Recall or Mana Drain-The Abyss. New releases, though, continue to prove that Type I isn't all about Beta and Arabian Nights antiques. As discussed, the consistency added by the Onslaught fetch lands forced the unimaginable - almost sacrilegious - step of cutting Regrowth.

If you thought that was something, then this segment of the Bible is going to be discussing major blasphemy.

[Nevyn]

I'll give you the exact same reply as I did on StarCity:

For the record, against TurboNevyn, a typical Keeper list and sideboard would either be tutoring for enchantment/artifact removal (usually to kill a fastbond) or a wish if they had none maindeck, a wasteland to kill an LoA, or just typical power like Mind Twist (happens rarely as keeper does not like committing main phase mana here), Ancestral, etc. None of these are particularly spectaculor uses, but that reflects more the fact that keeper doesn't metagame answers to TurboNevyn than a weakness of the card. Still, against TurboNevyn I would likely score a point for 'NOT vampiric'.

(and also for the record, there are 4 duress and 1 abeyance for maindeck disruption in TurboNevyn and 3-4 REB in the side). Other than that, I liked the article. I have to admit that cutting vampiric from Keeper always seemed counterintuitive to myself, but not having played it much I tend to defer to the more experienced players.

PS. Rakso, you can e-mail me at markacheson@hotmail.com if you need TN information for an Article.

[Freddie]

My favorite part was:

Quote "When I mentioned the idea, Brain Weissman's comment was blunter: All the skill in the world won't make you draw Ancestral Recall more often."

PRECISLEY

All the skillful play in the world does not allow you to decide what card will magicly apear for your next draw...

That is why we should play cards that allow us to find anything we want.

-Freddie

[Dozer]

You forgot to mention that Vampiric Tutor is never cut in Combo Keeper builds. Other than that, the article was good as usual.

Dozer

[Azhrei]

Brian Weissman still runs four Gorilla Shamen and never even played against BBS in its heyday. We could start quoting Mike Long too, but then we'd all cut Balance and sideboard Spelljack.

Quoting pros serves no purpose unless they're willing to support their statements with evidence as to why their statements are correct.

Furthermore, if you want more ways to get Ancestral, try Merchant Scroll. Does Weissman even run those?\n\n

[Zherbus]

Quote "When I mentioned the idea, Brain Weissman's comment was blunter: All the skill in the world won't make you draw Ancestral Recall more often."

While this is true, all the skill in the world won't make Ancestral gain any more than a 2 for 1 when you Vampiric Tutor for it.

[The Bahoo]

Quote (Azhrei @ Dec. 13 2002,13:10)Brian Weissman still runs four Gorilla Shamen and never even played against BBS in its heyday. We could start quoting Mike Long too, but then we'd all cut Balance and sideboard Spelljack.

Quoting pros serves no purpose unless they're willing to support their statements with evidence as to why their statements are correct.

Furthermore, if you want more ways to get Ancestral, try Merchant Scroll. Does Weissman even run those?

I don't know that his statement needs any evidence.

Would you argue with the fact that a tutor is better at getting cards than a well-played non-tutor?

[Freddie]

Yes Weismman does run Merchant Scroll according to the last decklist that I saw, although I am not sure what he is running since Onslaught.

Although Merchant scroll is good fetshing ancestral, and F/i etc...

It has never and never will get you the abyss.

It has never and never will get you Balance.

It has never and never will get you Yawgmoth's Will.

It has never and never will get you Mind Twist.

It has never and never will get you Geyser.

It has never and never will get you Morphling.

It has never and never will get you an anti LOA.

It has never and never will get you Lotus, to make your will back breaking.

So at least SOME of the time Vamp is better then Merchant Scroll.

I was quoting Rakso, quoting Weissman BTW.

Of course we could also start quoting plenty of avenues of differences in opinion on non vamp choices as well, but that wouldn't belong in this thread correct?

-Freddie

[Freddie]

Just another thought to add.

I love hearing, or reading about keeper players reporting:

Quote  I Merchant Scrolled for Mystical, then Mystical tutored for Demonic, then fetched; a. COP Red, b. Zuran Orb, c. The Abyss, d. Morphling.

Then I say, wow... thats allot of activity going on for that last card...

I just vamp for it.

-Freddie

[Fishhead]

One thing I was wondering was if the addition of Dust Bowl was going to make Vampiric better in the control mirror.  

Basically, everyone's worried about "card disadvantage" in the control mirror, "My opponent will just counter my Vamp and I will have lost a card!"  The obvious solution was always to fetch something uncounterable like LoA or Wasteland if you felt you couldnt win a counterwar.  

The problem is that Wasteland is great if you have a specific target, a like a weak color or an opposing LoA.  But it is a one-shot threat, assuming that the board is static and everyone is just draw-go'ing.  A Dust Bowl is actually a much longer term threat.  So will the threat of Vamp->Dust Bowl cause people to think harder about countering Vampirics?  I hope so, I've had all too many games where I successfully Vamp'd or Demonic'd for something because my opponent lazily said, "Resolves, I'll just counter what you get with the Tutor."  Maybe, maybe not.  

[Zherbus]

Maybe its just me, but I would say like 1 out of every 30-40 games or so, I will resort to the 'Tutor Chain.' I do Merchant Scroll for a Wish quite often in certain matchups, though.

Personally, the only way I would ever run Vampiric is if:

1) I wanted to run the Power/Monolith combo.

2) Abyss was actually better against aggro than it actually is.

3) If Misdirection wasn't prevalent. Tutoring for Mind Twist or Geyser would be badass more often.

4) Gorilla Shaman's weren't around to eat Zuran Orb

I just don't believe in the Silver Bullet theory anymore, and I'm not losing with no Vampiric. If the Silver Bullet theory is working for you, then by all means keep on running it. Until players I'm facing stop building decks intellegently to deal with 'bullets', I'd rather go the card advantage route with the exception of the FoW-Pitchable-in-color-non-damaging Mystical Tutor.


EDIT:

5) If my LoA or Dustbowl weren't done in by the average 4 Strip Mines I see in almsot every deck.

[Rakso]

Er... the article mentioned that worrying about the control mirror is no longer the main strike against Vampiric. You have problems against decks that aren't hit by the conventional silver bullets, or not hit enough.

[Ufactor, the Restricted]

Quote Brain Weissman's comment was blunter: All the skill in the world won't make you draw Ancestral Recall more often.

anyone know what the old man is playing these days?
how is he dealing with all this cunning wish/fetchland foolishness?

[Ufactor, the Restricted]

Quote Incidentally, if you want the end of my story, I left Vampiric in - unlike most of the people I correspond with. However, that's because I have different reasons for doing so.

@ Rakso-have you tested 2MD wishes with 1SB vamp?  what disadvantages have you found from this?

[DigDug]

I use two Cunning Wishes with a sideboard Vampiric Tutor.  These are the cards that I would typically Vtutor for: Zuran Orb, Morphling x2, Moat, The Abyss, Stroke of Genius, Balance, and Braingeyser.  There are two Morphlings that cost a lot and you don't need them early.  The same for the enchantments and the draw X.  That leaves Zuran Orb and Balance as the only needed cards to use the Vtutor before you get to 2BU.  I do feel I need it in the sideboard, though, because I use silver-bullet enchantments and I treat it as an extra copy.  I just figured this out this past weekend.  Now I need to get a second Cunning Wish.

[Milton]

Quote Just another thought to add.

I love hearing, or reading about keeper players reporting:

Quote  
I Merchant Scrolled for Mystical, then Mystical tutored for Demonic, then fetched; a. COP Red, b. Zuran Orb, c. The Abyss, d. Morphling.


Then I say, wow... thats allot of activity going on for that last card...

I just vamp for it.

-Freddie

Then, the same people try and argue that Vampiric is card disadvantage!!

Vampiric is superior to Mysitcal in almost every way, the two exceptions being 1) it isn't blue (thus non-pitchable) and 2) it does 2 damage.  Otherwise, it is clearly superior.  The fact that it isn't blue only matters if you are running a low amount of blue spells and need the extra pitch fodder.  This generally isn't the case anymore as Keeper is running Brainstorms and Wishes in multiples and has access to enough blue for fodder.  The two damage is two damage.  Can't get around that.  But, that two damage disadvantage isn't a big enough disadvantage for me to forsake the Vamp.  If it gets me an Abyss, a Zorb or a COP, then I take the disadvantage any day.

So, why is Vampiric bad but Mystical good?  And if Vampiric is bad and Scroll is good, then why not two or three scrolls?

By the way, I'm up to running 1 Demonic, 1 Vamp, 1 Scroll and 1 Mystical in my r/B/U control deck.

[spin13]

Running 2 Scrolls is an option, and I am currently (and others have in the past), running 2.

Vampiric isn't bad against a lot of decks; its simply not good enough.  I agree that anybody who argues that Vampiric is a bad card is wrong.  It may not fit a particular deck, or style of deck (mono-B), but its not a card that shouldn't be considered.  I do agree, for the most part, that it should be considered and then discarded.  In OSE the only matchup where I really felt I lost anything with Vampiric was Suicide.  While losing an important tool against a deck that is already strong against your deck isn't good, the strengthing of the deck in other ways against other decks more than made up for it.  This also assumes I would simply change decks if Suicide became problematic.

Also, the Tutor chain is crap, but there are times when running 4 different tutors, you are still going to end up with Merchant Scroll when you need Zuran Orb.  In cases like these, Vampiric still isn't going to help you.  In fact, in cases where you need ZOrb, you're probably better off with Mystical/Ancestral than simply Vamping for ZOrb.  If you have the time and life to Vamp, you're better off netting a card rather than losing 2.

 -Eric

[Zherbus]

Quote Then, the same people try and argue that Vampiric is card disadvantage!!

Vampiric is superior to Mysitcal in almost every way, the two exceptions being 1) it isn't blue (thus non-pitchable) and 2) it does 2 damage.  Otherwise, it is clearly superior.  The fact that it isn't blue only matters if you are running a low amount of blue spells and need the extra pitch fodder.  This generally isn't the case anymore as Keeper is running Brainstorms and Wishes in multiples and has access to enough blue for fodder.  The two damage is two damage.  Can't get around that.  But, that two damage disadvantage isn't a big enough disadvantage for me to forsake the Vamp.  If it gets me an Abyss, a Zorb or a COP, then I take the disadvantage any day.

So, why is Vampiric bad but Mystical good?  And if Vampiric is bad and Scroll is good, then why not two or three scrolls?

By the way, I'm up to running 1 Demonic, 1 Vamp, 1 Scroll and 1 Mystical in my r/B/U control deck.

2 Scrolls is fine, if you need the extra tutoring. However, where my views and experience differ from yours, Freddies, and other pro-vampiric people is that Vamp is too costly for too little. The silver bullets no longer work.

As I said, aggro has gotten smarter. How many aggro decks arent too bothered by Abyss nowadays? Milton, you and others got hammered by Mongoose's (Yes, I believe thats the right plural form) at Gencon and correct me if I am wrong, but its because you relied too heavily on targeted removal (and more importantly Abyss).

Once upon a time, you simply tutored for Abyss and watched little fellahs fall in. Now, you go through all the trouble of finding Abyss and its not always the end all of aggro. TnT can survive it, Zoo can survive it, and Mask can survive it.

Ever read 'Every Card is a Time Walk'? The way I see Vampiric is this: You give aggro a Time Walk and a free shock. If the bullet was a game ender, then that would be fine. However, unless your going to Power Artifact/Grim Monolith/Stroke them, there is no single card you can fetch that will stop the best aggro decks in Vintage.

Editorial Note:  According to a redcoat (no offense to those of you who might be   ) dictionary, both 'mongeese' and 'mongooses' are acceptable.\n\n

[BigChuck]

Upfront, I will say that I didn't read most of the article, but I'm surprised to see so little brought up about vampiric being in the sideboard. With two wishes, it has potential, and I'm not sure what testing has been done, but I've tried it, and liked it, in the past, and am going to try it in my current build.

[Milton]

Quote As I said, aggro has gotten smarter. How many aggro decks arent too bothered by Abyss nowadays? Milton, you and others got hammered by Mongoose's (Yes, I believe thats the right plural form) at Gencon and correct me if I am wrong, but its because you relied too heavily on targeted removal (and more importantly Abyss).

It's not because I relied too heavily on targeted removal, it's because EVERYBODY relies too heavily on targeted removal and Mongooses are a good call.  Keeper has one edict.  It's not enough.  

When facing multiple Mongooses I could tutor for Balance or for Masticore or Morphling for blocking.  You can't get creatures with Scroll or Mystical.

[theorigamist]

This may sound newbie-ish, but has anybody tried making a current list of a Moat-Keeper?  That would stop Mongooses, and be a much more reliable aggro stopper in general.  Obviously, it does upset the balance (no pun intended) of Keeper, but not much.  It would essentially be, out with Abyss, in with Moat, out with Polluted Delta, in with Flooded Strand.  Or maybe I'm just being naive, which is entirely possible.  But I'm willing to try it out for a while.

[TunaBoo]

Quote (theorigamist @ Dec. 16 2002,21:21)This may sound newbie-ish, but has anybody tried making a current list of a Moat-Keeper?  That would stop Mongooses, and be a much more reliable aggro stopper in general.  Obviously, it does upset the balance (no pun intended) of Keeper, but not much.  It would essentially be, out with Abyss, in with Moat, out with Polluted Delta, in with Flooded Strand.  Or maybe I'm just being naive, which is entirely possible.  But I'm willing to try it out for a while.

Well I am not going to argue either way the merits of the moat. But

a) Be aware you can play both   Moat could replace some piece of anti-control in your deck, if you expect a lot of aggro.

b) Polluted delta vs. flooded strand is a non issue. Both fetch every dual land in your deck. Personally, I find that using delta is a mistake. If you expect lots and lots of bloodmoon, I would possibly side/main a single plains. This lets you get out of the lock. Only flooded strand can do this.

I realize that you normally wouldn't do that, but it is a possibility. There is NO reason in the world I can think of to have a single basic swamp. I use delta's in my decks for this reason *shrug*

[cooberp]

Moat is good now that Keeper is running more W, methinx--but only in the SB.

Any suggestion of cutting Abyss is foolishness.

[DigDug]

Quote If you expect lots and lots of bloodmoon, I would possibly side/main a single plains. This lets you get out of the lock. Only flooded strand can do this.

Good thought.  This is actually what I do.

Quote has anybody tried making a current list of a Moat-Keeper?

Yes, but you do need both.  Moat works great against Mongooses, Tubbies, and weenie hordes.  It's one of those cards that can slide between the main deck and the sideboard depending on what you normally play against.

[Fishhead]

Quote So, why is Vampiric bad but Mystical good?  

Smemmen asked this same question a while back and dared anyone to give him a decent answer.  I asked the same question in this form -- "How many Mysticals would you play if the card wasn't restricted?"  

I still see the same weak answers to the original question; namely:

1) "Vampiric is card disadvantage."  Bah.  So is Mystical.  So why are you unquestioningly still playing Mystical?
2) "Vampiric isnt blue".  So we only play with blue cards in Keeper now?  No, we play with the most broken cards we can find in the 4 major colors.  There are already plenty of blue cards to feed FoW in the deck.
3) "Two life!"  This matters in some matchups and not at all in others.  Even in the matchups where it matters, there's presumably a card somewhere in your deck you'd pay 2 life to get.  Balance or Zorb for instance.
4) "Vampiric isnt good enough."  That's not even an answer to the question.  Its a vague hand-wave in the general direction of the question.

[Desert Fox]

I found this part to be the most interesting (off topic, but I had to comment)...

Quote Dragon is considered the weakest of the feasible Type I combos, and is mainly a lot of combo and setup cards. This means it doesn't have both the disruption and the cheap draw the more powerful combo decks pack. There isn't any special silver bullet against Dragon, but "The Deck" in particular can remove all its permanents if it can catch Worldgorger Dragon with Swords to Plowshares.

How exactly is Dragon the weakest of the Type I combo decks? It may not be the strongest, but I seriously think you're underestimating the deck. Now I may not be the Dragon expert that Mana Drain's own dicemanX is, but I think that a first-turn kill unpowered is pretty tough to handle if you're caught without a FoW or Mis-D, or if they get a god-like hand with the kill and FoW backup (hey, it's happened to me before...). This is not even going into a discussion on a powered version or a slightly more patient approach with FoW and/or Abeyance backing. Anyway, just curious as to how you got this impression. Of course, giving the little opening you had for this article, you might be playing someone without that disruption...

To get back on topic, I've got to second what Fishhead pointed out above. I don't see how Mystical is any better than Vampiric, personally. Then again, I don't play The Deck since I am a mere poor college student with no Power 9. I can only speak with limited experience with the deck, but I almost always would rather draw a Vampiric than a Mystical.

Good article, . Even though I can't afford to play The Deck, I enjoy the articles.

[spin13]

Quote
3) "Two life!"  This matters in some matchups and not at all in others.  Even in the matchups where it matters, there's presumably a card somewhere in your deck you'd pay 2 life to get.  Balance or Zorb for instance.

Anybody who Vamps for a ZOrb deserves to die a fiery death in a hail of Bolts and PoPs.  Having to cast Vamp, wait a turn, play ZOrb, and sacrifice a land just to break even is horrible.

Vamp is never the card you want to topdeck when you're losing.  It may get you any card in your deck next turn, but it does crap for you now except take a chunk of your life.  The argument's don't stand alone either.  It's not that Vampiric Tutor is card disadvantage; it's that it is card disadvantage with drawbacks, and many at that.

Steve is very right; Keeper can no longer rest its entire gameplan on a single card to be victorious.  You have to cut Vamp for the same reasons people started cutting Impulse; the deck needs more answers, not more [poor] ways to find a small number of answers.  Its less about being able to find one answer that solves all your problems (because they become fewer and far between as time progresses) than finding many answers to solve many of your problems.  Who Ancestrals for an Impulse to find a Vamp to get the Abyss when you can simply Ancestral up removal and draw that will, without disadvantage, get you to the same result?

 -Eric

[ShadowLotus]

No one is saying that Vampiric Tutor is the worst thing imaginable for Keeper players to be running.  It's just not the optimal card for a deck that is severely cramped for space as it is.  Plus, one has to take into account that not everyone believes that tutoring for one card during a game is the only way to win (i.e., "silver bullet" theory).  Keeper is not the same deck as it once was, and the newly-emerging aggro decks just solidify that fact.  If you want to play the combo (Power Artifact/Grim Monolith), that's fine - in that situation, I would play Vampiric Tutor, too.  But the fact remains, that in a format that offers players thousands of different card choices for an extremely limited amount of deck space, any card that has as many drawbacks as Vampiric Tutor needs to be re-inspected w/ each set change.

After all, what should be cut to play it?  Brainstorm?  No thanks.  Cunning Wish?  Definitely no.  Mystical tutor?  I don't think so.  All those cards add to Keeper's flexibility, and shouldn't be touched.

The most recent changes to Keeper have made the deck a lot more versatile than it was before Onslaught in the competitive Type I environment.  Decks such as Mask and TnT aren't the best matchups for a Keeper player, and thinking that one card in a Keeper maindeck says "I Win" against these archetypes is foolish.  These aggro decks are fast, consistent, and have a late-game.  This isn't like playing against Sligh, where they try to beat you as fast as they can, or they lose.  Frankly, I'd rather improve my matchups against decks such as those that are potentially more threatening, then include a card like Vampiric Tutor, just because of matchups that Keeper does well against anyway.

Plus, weren't players complaining that Keeper was dying not too long ago?  My thoughts have always been that this was because some believed that fetching "silver bullets" was the only way to win; and if it failed, then the archetype would fall as well.  The deck has evolved, and it seems like those who are most vocal about the Vampiric Tutor issue are those who refuse to cut it.  Many of us have cut it, and generally, we are experiencing better results because of it.  If you want to run it, then run it - just don't expect everyone to do the same.

Just as pro-Vampiric Tutor players don't buy the card disadvantage, not being blue, loss of two life, and the fact that it isn't "good enough" arguments, I don't see how (when you put all these facts together) one can reasonably justify all those points by merely pointing out, "well, it fetches everything in the deck, so it's better."  To me, that's a weak argument, and trying to debunk each point made for cutting it individually, rather than looking at the card's problems fully, means that one is missing the entire message (which is that, when all the positives and negatives are put together, that Vampiric Tutor isn't as good as it used to be, since there are other options that are a lot more flexible, and w/ less shortcomings).

In the end, the way Keeper will be able to survive is by giving a player more options to work w/ over the long run for all the problems encountered, rather than providing a limited amount of silver bullets that don't always secure control in games against smart (aggro) players.

[Dante]

Quote (Zherbus @ Dec. 16 2002,19:45)Milton, you and others got hammered by Mongoose's (Yes, I believe thats the right plural form)

Actually, there's no apostrophe

from Meriam-Webster online dictionary:

Main Entry: mon·goose  
Pronunciation: 'män-"güs, 'mä[ng]-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural mon·goos·es also mon·geese

both are correct plural.  (whoops, didn't see the edit on Z's post).


Also, I've been running both Moat and Abyss maindeck in my Keeper forever and it's worked out great.  I can't tell you how many times an early Moat has turned an unwinnable game 1 against Suicide into a watch-them-scramble-for-a-hyppie win.  They're both good in various situations and complement each other well.

Dante

[rozetta]

Point 1:

Again, back to the ideas stated in previous posts that vampiric:
a) is card disadvantage
b) doesn't get you what you need immediately
c) _shouldn't_ be used to get "silver bullets" e.g. ZOrb, LoA, etc.

What advantage (apart from being pitchable to FoW) does running Mystical tutor give? After all:
a) one shouldn't be getting silver bullets e.g. Balance with it
b) getting an ancestral nets only +1 cards after it's cast (assuming no MisD)

Therefore, what cards are worth getting with it?

Point 2:
I often use those tutors during my upkeep to get something to sink my Mana Drain mana into, e.g. FoF, Stroke, Braingeyser, Abyss. It sucks to have to take burn off a mana drain if you're holding a handful of reactive spells or don't need to cast the will/balance/etc. that's in your hand. This arguement goes for both Vampiric and Mystical Tutors.

Both these cards shuffle your library, which is good synergy with brainstorm. That's a plus, although the fetchlands do similar, it's always good to have more shuffle effects, because if you use brainstorm, you need that shuffle effect NOW.

Admittedly, one could go for a cunning wish or demonic tutor with mystical, thus propagating the tutor chain. This can be done with vampiric also. Both situations lead to card disadvantage (in the sense of the previous posts).

My question is, again, if vampiric isn't good enough to run, isn't there also a better substitute for mystical?