Paragon Keeper 7/03

[Zherbus]

Since the old thread was way too long to sift through for people, I decided to take the latest build of Keeper and make a new thread out of it. Most of what has been said here has already been said, but is nessecary for completeness sake.

Major changes from older builds of Paragon Keeper have been bolded.

Disrupting Keeper - Basic Skeleton
//  Counter Magic
      2 Duress
      4 Force of Will
      4 Mana Drain
//  Kill
      1 Goblin Trenches
      2 Gorilla Shaman
//  Broken Utility/Card Draw
      1 Time Walk
      1 Future Sight
      1 Fact or Fiction
      1 Ancestral Recall
      1 Yawgmoth's Will
      1 Timetwister
      1 Library of Alexandria
//  Tutor/Search
      4 Brainstorm
      3 Cunning Wish
      1 Merchant Scroll
      1 Demonic Tutor
      1 Mystical Tutor
//  Bullet
      2 Swords to Plowshares
      1 Balance
      1 Mind Twist
//  SoLoMoxen
      1 Mox Jet
      1 Mox Pearl
      1 Mox Ruby
      1 Mox Sapphire
      1 Black Lotus
      1 Sol Ring
//  Land
      1 Strip Mine
      1 City of Brass
      4 Wasteland
      1 Island
      3 Tundra
      3 Volcanic Island
      2 Flooded Strand
      2 Polluted Delta
      3 Underground Sea
SB:  4 Red Elemental Blast
SB:  1 Blue Elemental Blast
SB:  1 Circle of Protection: Red
SB:  1 Stifle
SB:  1 Coffin Purge
SB:  1 Aura Fracture
SB:  1 Skeletal Scrying
SB:  1 Vampiric Tutor
SB:  1 Gush
SB:  1 Disenchant
SB:  1 Shattering Pulse
SB:  1 Swords to Plowshares  

Shamans are huge. Stax, combo, Shining, Hulk, etc are all wounded by a hungry Shaman. With the exception of Hulk, all of these decks really have to play a whole different ball game when Shaman hits the board.

Wastelands are huge. Combined with Shamans, you can really stunt the combo player until you can arrive to the mid-late game where you are the most successful.

Duress is huge maindeck, it gives you what you need when you need it. Stifle is only good against combo mid-late game where as Duress goes to work right away. 3 would be wonderful but the manabase has a hard time supporting that especially combined with needing white and red.

Sb'd Stifle is the way to go. Its nice for killing a fetchland, but this is Keeper and you don't like settling with half-assed effectiveness. It's one of those timely things that only Cunning Wish can bring you.

Coffin Purge is a wishable solution to Academy Rector which is, in essense, Duress proof. It also serves its usefulness against Hulk by taking out potentially 2 AK's in the graveyard. It also serves to stop TnT's engine and take out key Welder targets in both the TnT and Stax matchup.

The win condition I am running right now is Goblin Trenches. Its quicker that Morphling, it's great against Stax, and it still has a strong element of resilence to spot removal.

Many people have had good experiences with Decree of Justice as well, which serves a similiar effect. The major difference being that it is Cyclable but only a one shot deal. The advantage Trenches has over it, is the ability to make many more Tokens after its initial resolution.

Timetwister serves multiple functions in that it makes all the mana denial better and it stunts the strategy of decks who rely on the graveyard. After killing Moxen and lands, a resolved Timetwister will be a weaker quality one for your opponent since he/she will have many more of those resources shuffled into the deck.

Also, a timely Timetwister can force an opponent who has invested time and resources into getting key cards in the graveyard (AK, Welder Targets, flashback cards) to start all over. It is a minor bonus, but a bonus nonetheless.

Timetwister, like many other Keeper cards (Balance, Mind Twist) is extremely conditional. Timeliness is everything with Timetwister and almost as important is the metagame you play in. For instance, this card is terrible in a low powered metagame where Sligh and R/G beats has a heavy presence.

[Grand Inquisitor]

Quote After killing Moxen and lands, a resolved Timetwister will be a weaker quality one for your opponent since he/she will have many more of those resources shuffled into the deck

if you just invested a number of draws and land drops (strips) to destroying their mana capability, why do you want them to get it back?

i haven't tested keeper with twister in it, but it seems much too symmetrical for a deck like keeper.  this is especially true for a format that is gravitating towards combo.

would timetwister be in the deck if morphling was still the desired win condition?  do the two duress really make it that much more playable?  in an environment where everyone is packing duress, do you want your win condition to be a non-creature spell?

i'm skeptical.

[Matt The Great]

The reasoning is that with the mana-denial your opponent will not be able to play out his whole new hand.

[MoreFling]

I'm surprised to see only 2 duress. You need at least 3 to draw it reliably enough to play it first turn. A fifth turn duress isn't all that great. Duress is not for you to force your own spells through. It can be, obviously in a mirror, but how many are you getting those these days?
I'm quite confident I couldn't get more than 1 if I go to any nearby tournament.
So Duress is supposed to disrupt the opponents (who's playing a tier 1 deck, which is often combo) gameplan, by taking a keycard away from them, and then you should have the means, with your mana denial route and 8 counters to battle them. Drawing a 2nd duress is great.

I don't really like 2 Shamans. To destroy a Sphere, you need 5 mana. To destroy a smokestack, you need 9 (!!) mana. I know you are thinking that you have the mana denial and the time to build up, but with only 2 duress, I don't think you can disrupt them enough in the mid game (read: turn 1 and 2 ) to reliably get an active shaman ruining their day.

And then there's Welder to boot. I'm seriously missing Fire/Ice. I know it's been a rather mediocre card during the Growatog months, but now, with Welders everywhere, and a few Togs as well, I think it should be the main way to get rid of a creature next to StP. At the very least, throw one in your sideboard.

About the kill condition. I loved Trenches when I first tried it after copying your original list (I c/p-ed my list somewhere in the end of the thread). One of the arguments was that it's great against Stax, since you exchange 1 permanent for 2. If you have the mana denial, and a superior board position in terms of mana, wouldn't Decree be a lot better? You can either Drain into a load of angels (or tokens ), or just cycle eot with your 10 mana available, and suddenly have 7 extra permanents. I'm not really sure if this is making sense, but at least it is to me
Maybe in the morning I'll try to elaborate on the kill condition a bit more.

4 wastelands is great, and definately the way to go.
Is city of brass really needed? Wouldn't you just as much like a 4th Underground Sea, since that's basicly the main colors anyway.

[Zherbus]

Quote i haven't tested keeper with twister in it, but it seems much too symmetrical for a deck like keeper.  this is especially true for a format that is gravitating towards combo.

Balance is also very Symmetrical. You might think of Twister as a second Balance of sorts.

Quote would timetwister be in the deck if morphling was still the desired win condition?  do the two duress really make it that much more playable?  in an environment where everyone is packing duress, do you want your win condition to be a non-creature spell?

No, in fact if you really don't like the Twister, just pack something else. Duress doesn't make it as playable as the 2 Shamans do. Really, timing a Twister at the correct time is a matter of board control which is what the STP's, Shamans, and Wastelands achieve.

Quote The reasoning is that with the mana-denial your opponent will not be able to play out his whole new hand.

Yes!

Quote I'm surprised to see only 2 duress. You need at least 3 to draw it reliably enough to play it first turn. A fifth turn duress isn't all that great. Duress is not for you to force your own spells through. It can be, obviously in a mirror, but how many are you getting those these days?
I'm quite confident I couldn't get more than 1 if I go to any nearby tournament.
So Duress is supposed to disrupt the opponents (who's playing a tier 1 deck, which is often combo) gameplan, by taking a keycard away from them, and then you should have the means, with your mana denial route and 8 counters to battle them. Drawing a 2nd duress is great.

I totally agree, in fact Carls version has 3 Duress. However, it's relly straining on a 4 color manabase to properly support 3. It's either a 3rd Duress or a Mind Twist and with an all time low in Misdirections, I'll opt for Mind Twist.

Quote  don't really like 2 Shamans. To destroy a Sphere, you need 5 mana. To destroy a smokestack, you need 9 (!!) mana. I know you are thinking that you have the mana denial and the time to build up, but with only 2 duress, I don't think you can disrupt them enough in the mid game (read: turn 1 and 2 ) to reliably get an active shaman ruining their day.

The Shamans are there for Moxen/Crypt/Etc to make the permanent count in your favor. Also, Draining a Smokestack has more than often resulted in the munching of a Sphere that slipped through other removal and Duress.

Quote About the kill condition. I loved Trenches when I first tried it after copying your original list (I c/p-ed my list somewhere in the end of the thread). One of the arguments was that it's great against Stax, since you exchange 1 permanent for 2. If you have the mana denial, and a superior board position in terms of mana, wouldn't Decree be a lot better? You can either Drain into a load of angels (or tokens ), or just cycle eot with your 10 mana available, and suddenly have 7 extra permanents. I'm not really sure if this is making sense, but at least it is to me
Maybe in the morning I'll try to elaborate on the kill condition a bit more.

I get what you are saying, I am just sticking by the condition that I more times than not need to make more tokens as the game wears on. Also, Trenches is, in itself, a permanent available to sacrifice when it is no longer needed.

Quote Is city of brass really needed? Wouldn't you just as much like a 4th Underground Sea, since that's basicly the main colors anyway.

Yes, as a matter of fact the Island might come out for a second. It really makes the Duressing more possible. A City of Brass supports the manabase of Keeper better now that you have actual red spells in the maindeck. Before, you only needed white for removal and black for everything else. Now you need white for removal, red for shamans, and black for hand disruption and Yawgmoths Will.

[CrazyCarl]

When I had 3 Duress in the deck I cut the Island for a 4th Underground Sea.  You need four or else you'll never be able to cast Shaman then follow it up with a Duress.

[theorigamist]

Quote About the kill condition. I loved Trenches when I first tried it after copying your original list (I c/p-ed my list somewhere in the end of the thread). One of the arguments was that it's great against Stax, since you exchange 1 permanent for 2. If you have the mana denial, and a superior board position in terms of mana, wouldn't Decree be a lot better? You can either Drain into a load of angels (or tokens ), or just cycle eot with your 10 mana available, and suddenly have 7 extra permanents. I'm not really sure if this is making sense, but at least it is to me

For most one-shot kill conditions to be any good, they pretty much have to win the game right away.  Sure, you can lay down 7 Angels and bet you'll win on your next turn.  But Goblin Trenches is more reliable, because it sticks around, and the Decree doesn't.

[Rico Suave]

Timetwister isn't all about mana-denial though, if you eat their Moxen and then cast Timetwister you can oftentimes screw your opponent over by giving them 2 Moxen in their hand.  It's like the opponent mulliganed to 5, and every Mox they draw is a wasted draw.

[MarkPharaoh]

Steve, quick question, do you miss your Library?  When playing against other control decks online, I loved it when I saw the LoA in my opening hand.  Or with all the combo popping up, is it: a.) too slow and b.) impossible to keep a 7 card hand against all the disruption they are packing?

EDIT: Sorry, I was only looking at the manabase.  My NEW question is, if Tendrils becomes the most played deck, will you keep LoA in there, or cut it for something like Dust Bowl for more Land Disruption?

[Zherbus]

LoA is as good as ever with Cunning Wish fetching Vampiric Tutor and Gush.

Against most combo, I fear the Dust Bowl moves too slowly and offers nothing the 4 Wastelands already do.

[PucktheCat]

Zherbus, did you cut Skeletal Scrying from the main for space, or did you have some other reason to feel it wasn't cutting it?

Leo

[Zherbus]

I cut it because there wasn't any room, though there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. I would be happy to include it once the format shifts again.

[Grand Inquisitor]

Quote Balance is also very Symmetrical. You might think of Twister as a second Balance of sorts.

true, but balance moves the game state to a situation with lower 'potential energy' (to use a physics analogy), as opposed to twister which dramatically increases risk for plays beyond being stopped by the control player.  i don't think this is a small point at all, but i'll concede to those who have played much more keeper than i.

Quote The reasoning is that with the mana-denial your opponent will not be able to play out his whole new hand


Timetwister isn't all about mana-denial though, if you eat their Moxen and then cast Timetwister you can oftentimes screw your opponent over by giving them 2 Moxen in their hand.  It's like the opponent mulliganed to 5, and every Mox they draw is a wasted draw.

well which is it?  do you want them to draw into moxen to reduce their immediate threat density, or do you not want them to be able to drop their hand?  if its the latter, then gorilla shaman really doesn't have any synergy with twister.

[Zherbus]

The answer is 'some of both'. If you get them to draw a fistful of moxen after you have been Shaman'ing away, you are in great shape for the reasons Rico Suave mentioned. If you get them to draw all business cards, but you kept them light on mana you are still at the advantage since you have a better mana position. This can translate nicely into things like counter wars where you can afford to hardcast more counterspells than they would be able to and they have to rely more on what they can pitch. Either way, its an advantage despite Timetwisters symmetry.

Quote true, but balance moves the game state to a situation with lower 'potential energy' (to use a physics analogy), as opposed to twister which dramatically increases risk for plays beyond being stopped by the control player.  i don't think this is a small point at all, but i'll concede to those who have played much more keeper than i.

Well the only deck I can really translate that to is Sligh which is universally known for loving people to play Draw 7's. Against something explosive like Tendrils.dec, you really only want to Twister when Shaman has gone to work.

One thing I never touched on before about Timetwister is that a spell doesn't always have to be the nut all the time to be playable. Sure, 2 years ago when people weren't playing as many moxen and they missed the common ability to Brainstorm the more situational cards away, it was often a dead draw.

However today with ALL of the upper tier of decks (from Tendrils and Trix to Stax and TnT to The Shining and Hulk) running at least a full compliment of P9 and many running Sol Ring, Mana Crypt, and even Mox Diamond, the Shaman/Timetwister combo is really solid. I already mentioned the positive side effect Twister has on graveyard dependant matchups, but combined with the fact that if all else fails we can Brainstorm it away.

Oh, Steve, don't take my word for it because I am experienced with Keeper. You're no slouch either and if something doesn't look right to you, I really urge you to keep questioning it until you are comfortable with your own knowledge.

[Fishhead]

I dumped my Twister a long, long time ago for the symmetry reasons mentioned above.

But I think you have to play Twister in a deck with (multiple?!) Future Sights and a lone win condition.  I've found myself drifting towards the end of the deck due to FS turbo mode even with 2 win conditions.  Even more so, if you get your Trenches Duressed away early, you don't want Will to be your only option for getting it back.  You don't want to lose that sort of game; you don't want to lose games where your Trenches are in your last 3 cards.

But, otherwise, I don't think Twister belongs.  It's fundamentally a roll of the dice; it doesn't matter what sort of crazy board advantage you have; if you Twister and get poop while your opponent draws answers you will lose.  That's why people are very circumspect about Twistering from a winning position.

[Zherbus]

Quote But, otherwise, I don't think Twister belongs.  It's fundamentally a roll of the dice; it doesn't matter what sort of crazy board advantage you have; if you Twister and get poop while your opponent draws answers you will lose.  That's why people are very circumspect about Twistering from a winning position.

In addition to being in a superior board position, there is no point in Twistering if you have the same amount or more cards in hand than your opponent. For me, the Twister comes after I have worn down the defenses a bit and have run out of bombs. I'll typically be down like 2 cards to 4 with board position (which is more mana and a Shaman who has just feasted), and that is the prime time to Twister.

Also, I just want to point to Rector combo decks that run 8(12) Duress. Having 5 (Demonic Tutor, Mystical Tutor, and 3 Wishes to get Vamp) ways to get to a Twister in that matchup is much better than it may seem.

Like Fishhead said, if you don't think you are going to brave the Timetwister, then don't. My suggestion for that slot would be either a Morphling, Skeletal Scrying, or another Future Sight.

[Eastman]

Quote (Zherbus @ July 22 2003,18:16)The answer is 'some of both'. If you get them to draw a fistful of moxen after you have been Shaman'ing away, you are in great shape for the reasons Rico Suave mentioned. If you get them to draw all business cards, but you kept them light on mana you are still at the advantage since you have a better mana position.

Isn't the most likely outcome somewhere between these two? Rather than your opponent drawing a hand you can deal with such as a 'fistful of moxen' or just business spells, aren't they most likely to draw into a more balanced hand with spells and the mana to play them, something much more difficult for you to deal with?

Wouldn't you be better off just leaving their moxen in the yard and pushing your existing mana advantage? You aren't going to mana screw them when you're letting them draw up extra lands.

[jpmeyer]

Timetwister provides both real and virtual card advantage when Keeper plays so many Strips and Shamans.  Your mana denial forces their hand size to grow while their board position stays the same (which is to say, fairly small.)  Because you can actually play your spells, you will have more in play but most likely less in hand.  The Twister will generate raw cards for you but probably not your opponent.  Then, it will also provide virtual cards through both Gorilla Shaman, as it's already been pointed out, but also because your enhanced board position will make it so that you will have a higher concentration of business spells in your hand while they will have "lost" spells that they drew pre-Twister which will instead be replaced by mana.

[Kerzkid11]

I totally disagree with the addition of Timetwister to Keeper in the current type one metagame.

It doesn't have any synergy with the new trend of "Disrupting Keeper", You give them back all of thier lands and cards duressed away.

In my opinion, Gorrila Shaman has zero synergy with Twister.  The argument being used is that every mox they draw will be one less card in their hand, so when you twister you end up with the advantage. What are the actual odds of a deck to draw 1-5 (depending on the deck) single specific cards (The moxen) out of 60?

Also, with type one becoming the "Combo Format",  why would you want to give your opponent 7 new cards? In keeper you dont have that many ways to say "no", and with the outrageously high threat density of the new breeds of combo combined with 8 disruption spells, how do oyu plan on combatting then drawing 7 new cards?

I understand and agree that with only one win condition you need another recursion card. Why not just play 2 win conditions? Personnally I play 1 Decree of Justice and 1 Morpling in my keeper right now, the Decree still in testing over the Masticore. I can understand that twister could be better because it has other uses besides just winning the game for you (who needs that anyway?   ), but I feel the disadvantages outweigh the advantages for the Keeper player.

Quote But, otherwise, I don't think Twister belongs.  It's fundamentally a roll of the dice; it doesn't matter what sort of crazy board advantage you have; if you Twister and get poop while your opponent draws answers you will lose.  That's why people are very circumspect about Twistering from a winning position

Quote In addition to being in a superior board position, there is no point in Twistering if you have the same amount or more cards in hand than your opponent. For me, the Twister comes after I have worn down the defenses a bit and have run out of bombs. I'll typically be down like 2 cards to 4 with board position (which is more mana and a Shaman who has just feasted), and that is the prime time to Twister.  

I agree with the 1st statement. Even when you twister in losing position, or to re-stock your bombs, your also restocking your opponent's bombs, while still rolling the dice on your opponent getting a better twister hand than you.

Why is twister good again? It sucks, or is just worse than Scrying, FS #2, or especially a Morphling in nearly every match you are going to encounter in the new format. The keeper mirror twister is insteresting, I would imagine it could be pretty game breaking but also ass in a lot of situations.

[MisterShark]

...and then there's always the possibility that you'll TimeTwist into a sweet Duress or 2 and/or Mind Twist, and pick the goodness out of your opponent's hand.  This hopefully leaving your opponent with nothing left worth playing, and you with Duress-knowledge of what to counter if there is anything nasty left that he will then try and cast.

[CrazyCarl]

Quote (Kerzkid11 @ July 22 2003,18:10)I totally disagree with the addition of Timetwister to Keeper in the current type one metagame.

It doesn't have any synergy with the new trend of "Disrupting Keeper", You give them back all of thier lands and cards duressed away.

In my opinion, Gorrila Shaman has zero synergy with Twister.  The argument being used is that every mox they draw will be one less card in their hand, so when you twister you end up with the advantage. What are the actual odds of a deck to draw 1-5 (depending on the deck) single specific cards (The moxen) out of 60?

Also, with type one becoming the "Combo Format",  why would you want to give your opponent 7 new cards? In keeper you dont have that many ways to say "no", and with the outrageously high threat density of the new breeds of combo combined with 8 disruption spells, how do oyu plan on combatting then drawing 7 new cards?

I understand and agree that with only one win condition you need another recursion card. Why not just play 2 win conditions? Personnally I play 1 Decree of Justice and 1 Morpling in my keeper right now, the Decree still in testing over the Masticore. I can understand that twister could be better because it has other uses besides just winning the game for you (who needs that anyway?   ), but I feel the disadvantages outweigh the advantages for the Keeper player.

Quote But, otherwise, I don't think Twister belongs.  It's fundamentally a roll of the dice; it doesn't matter what sort of crazy board advantage you have; if you Twister and get poop while your opponent draws answers you will lose.  That's why people are very circumspect about Twistering from a winning position

Quote In addition to being in a superior board position, there is no point in Twistering if you have the same amount or more cards in hand than your opponent. For me, the Twister comes after I have worn down the defenses a bit and have run out of bombs. I'll typically be down like 2 cards to 4 with board position (which is more mana and a Shaman who has just feasted), and that is the prime time to Twister.  

I agree with the 1st statement. Even when you twister in losing position, or to re-stock your bombs, your also restocking your opponent's bombs, while still rolling the dice on your opponent getting a better twister hand than you.

Why is twister good again? It sucks, or is just worse than Scrying, FS #2, or especially a Morphling in nearly every match you are going to encounter in the new format. The keeper mirror twister is insteresting, I would imagine it could be pretty game breaking but also ass in a lot of situations.

I totally disagree with your argument that Timetwister is a bad addition to Keeper in the current Type 1 metagame.

First off, it goes very well with the trend of "Disrupting Keeper" as yes, you give them back all their lands and cards, but they are a) behind you tempo wise because you have more mana sources in play, hence, the ability to play the answers that you have to the cards they draw, and b) you get to use your Wastelands and Duresses again, only you have a stronger board position and they're putting you further into the lead.

Your opinion that Gorilla Shaman has zero synergy with Timetwister is utterly absurd.  If you have Gorilla Shaman in play EVER, every single Mox and Artifact that you have the mana to kill is a dead card, hence, giving you card advantage.  I'd rather not calculate the odds of them drawing Moxen out of their deck, however, they will have lands in play, so they aren't drawing out of 60 .  The odds of them drawing a Mox are pretty good(depending on how many they play) and Gorilla Shaman also kills artifacts other than Moxen(Scrolls, Ankhs, Spheres, etc).

And with Type 1 becoming the Combo Format(which I regret to inform you, it is not), giving your opponent 7 new cards is risky yes, but if you have the mana advantage(which you will have if you are casting Timetwister and have some grasp upon how to play Magic), you have the advantage.  You are playing your own Duresses as well as countermagic.  They will have more lands and artifacts in their deck, so they won't be drawing as many "business" spells, meaning less that you have to Duress and counter(on that note, you will be drawing more Duresses and counters because you have fewer mana sources left in your deck).  So it's really not that bad to give them a new hand.

The kill condition issue has been gone over already, but since some people are incapable of reading before posting, I'll go over it again.

Decree is a one shot thing.  Yes, it cycles and cycling is amazing.  However, Trenches sits on the board and is there for you to use it when it's conveniant.  This is a key thing SO MANY PEOPLE seem to forget.  There is nothing on Goblin Trenches that says you have to activate it right away.  You can wait a turn, or two, or three, or twenty.  You use it when you have the lands to spare.  Decree is a one shot thing, and is far more vulnerable to Duress than Trenches.  Trenches is easier to cast(I know you can cycle the Decree, but you may not have the mana to make enough guys to win with, you don't worry about that with Trenches), and, like I said earlier(as did Zherbus), it's reusable.  It also combos well with Timetwister(it sits in play wheras you'll draw Decree again.  Not always a bad thing, but not always a good thing either).

I will say it now, I think that Decree of Justice is a fine kill card for Keeper with or without Timetwister.  If you're going to play Timetwister, you're aiming to play a little bit of a differant game than if you're playing with Decrees(you're going for more of a total control thing whereas with Decree's you're just going for the throat and/or sitting around for a while).  I think both have their merits, however, Trenches has very very few detriments.  People continue to say it's vulnerable.  Vulnerable to what?  If they could Duress it, you couldn't have cycled Decree(or else you'd have likely cast Trenches), and no one plays MD Disenchant effects, they're all Wished for or sided in.  If they're sided in, you Mind Twist them, then drop Trenches.  If they're Wished for, you have two turns to prepare, and if they Wish before you drop the Trenches, that's one less card you have to deal with.

In summary:
Timetwister = Good in Keeper
Gorilla Shaman = Good in Keeper and with Timetwister
Trenches = Good with Timetwister
Decree of Justice = Fine with/without Timetwister

Carl

[Zherbus]

Quote (Kerzkid11 @ July 22 2003,21:10)It doesn't have any synergy with the new trend of "Disrupting Keeper", You give them back all of thier lands and cards duressed away.

Please reread the entire thread for the rebuttal to this. Its been clearly laid out and you have yet to rebut the explanation.

Quote In my opinion, Gorrila Shaman has zero synergy with Twister.  The argument being used is that every mox they draw will be one less card in their hand, so when you twister you end up with the advantage. What are the actual odds of a deck to draw 1-5 (depending on the deck) single specific cards (The moxen) out of 60?

Opinion has nothing to do with this. Again, read the explanations that Jp, Carl, or myself have given to Timetwister then come back with a more substantial arguement.

Quote Also, with type one becoming the "Combo Format",  why would you want to give your opponent 7 new cards? In keeper you dont have that many ways to say "no", and with the outrageously high threat density of the new breeds of combo combined with 8 disruption spells, how do oyu plan on combatting then drawing 7 new cards?

1. Combo decks can have 7 new cards if I can also have 7 new cards, I have moxen and they don't, and I have lands and they don't.

2. You combat 8 disruption spells by following up their efforts with a Timetwister. It's just like the days when Suicide Black was good; you get your hand ripped apart and then you fill it back up later, this time with a better mana position that the first time you were being pelted with discard. This, in effect, makes the discard worse since they cannot outpace you will discard and spells since you are at a better mana position...or at least that is what the idea behind it is.

Quote I understand and agree that with only one win condition you need another recursion card. Why not just play 2 win conditions? Personnally I play 1 Decree of Justice and 1 Morpling in my keeper right now, the Decree still in testing over the Masticore. I can understand that twister could be better because it has other uses besides just winning the game for you (who needs that anyway?   ), but I feel the disadvantages outweigh the advantages for the Keeper player.

By playing only one actual win condition, you are less likely to have one sitting in your hand while you try to establish control. For example, when you are trying to stop Hulk or Rector from establishing its draw engine, would you rather have a business spell in hand or a Morphling?

Quote I agree with the 1st statement. Even when you twister in losing position, or to re-stock your bombs, your also restocking your opponent's bombs, while still rolling the dice on your opponent getting a better twister hand than you.

Why is twister good again? It sucks, or is just worse than Scrying, FS #2, or especially a Morphling in nearly every match you are going to encounter in the new format. The keeper mirror twister is insteresting, I would imagine it could be pretty game breaking but also ass in a lot of situations.

If you Twister in a losing position, what could possibly go worse? There are time when you are safe to Twister and times when you are not. When you stand to gain more from the symmetrical 7 cards or when you in desperation, it is at least as good as any other draw spell in its place.

You really haven't gotten into the actual justifications of Timetwister at all. Everything you wrote has come down to your opinion or flawed arguements which has to deal with not understanding how Timetwister can create any advantage.

@ Eastman -

Quote Isn't the most likely outcome somewhere between these two? Rather than your opponent drawing a hand you can deal with such as a 'fistful of moxen' or just business spells, aren't they most likely to draw into a more balanced hand with spells and the mana to play them, something much more difficult for you to deal with?

Wouldn't you be better off just leaving their moxen in the yard and pushing your existing mana advantage? You aren't going to mana screw them when you're letting them draw up extra lands.

When I said 'a fistful of moxen', I meant really any number of moxen. To simplify what I said, each mana source - land or mox - that is shuffled back into your opponents deck, is 1 more mana source that he will have to draw during the Timetwister and the sequential turns after. Each land drawn, on either side of the board, is one less business spell - counterspell, draw card, or game ending bomb - that you will draw during the Timetwister and the turns thereafter.

For example, and I really don't mean to be condescending but people just aren't getting this:

I waste the first 3 lands in addition to the 2 moxen that I kill with my Shaman. My opponent has 2 lands in play and that is all. In the meantime, I have 2 moxen in play, a Shaman, and 3 lands myself. I timetwister while my opponent has 5 cards in hand and I have 2, 1 being the Timetwister.

5 Mana sources (more if they had to used fetchlands) are shuffled back into the deck which makes him basically start the game with a fresh deck over minus 2 lands that are in play. In the meantime, I start the game with a fresh deck minus 3 lands, 2 moxen, and a Shaman.

With our seven cards, statistically I will draw more business spells since I have a good chunk of mine in play, while the oppopnent will draw more mana (effectively losing a shitload of tempo in addition to the card advantage). My opponent will now have to work on building his manabase (which will be harder since moxen are useless until you removal the Shaman) in addition to stoping the business cards I've drawn.

In summary, Timetwister gave me 6 for 1 for cards in hand. While it only gave you 2 free cards, which in all likelyhood could be mana (moxen hopefully).

If you don't like Timetwister, do like Fishhead and don't run it. He recognizes the valid reason why we run it, but chooses not to run such a risky spell (despite all of the defending of the card choice Carl and I have done, there is no doubt that it is risky AND very tricky to pull off). If you'd rather not deal with either a) the risk or b) the finesse of using Timetwister, then really I insist that you not run it.

[PucktheCat]

[/QUOTE]true, but balance moves the game state to a situation with lower 'potential energy' (to use a physics analogy), as opposed to twister which dramatically increases risk for plays beyond being stopped by the control player.  i don't think this is a small point at all, but i'll concede to those who have played much more keeper than i.

This comment gets to the heart of why Timetwister is good now and wasn't two months ago.  Gorilla Shaman and Wasteland help, as was mentioned, but the real thing is this: we are now playing in a metagame more dominated by discard spells than ever before.  Decks with discard want the game to be reduced to only a few cards because they think their few cards are more likely to win the game on their own than yours.  Timetwister fights against the discard strategy by making the game again about who has the best hand of cards and not about who has the best single card.  Discard decks want a low energy game and twister denies them.

In a sense even a card advantage neutral Twister can be good against discard because they will spend another few tempo attacking your hand - and that is a bit more mana base you have when they decide to make their real play.  More mana for both sides is better for Keeper than for Rector because Rector is betting on its discard getting it to a depleted game state where Dark Rituals make it the more efficient deck rather than a state where mana is available and Rituals are less broken.

That is not to say that all the things mentioned above by Zherbus and others aren't important to consider when casting Timetwister, it simply means that part of the consideration with a Twister not what the game state is but what each deck wants the game state to be.  For example the post Twister game state is likely to be closer to what Keeper wants than what Rector combos want, but likely to be closer to what Sligh wants than what Keeper wants.

Leo

PS, sorry if this post rambles a bit.  I wrote it in bits and pieces.

PPS, I just read Carl's and Zherbus's posts, and I realize they make some of the same points I do.  That's what I get for composing offline then logging on and sending without checking first.  Oh well.

EDIT:  To avoid double posting.

I just wanted to add that I think people need to get beyond the idea of Rector Trix/Tendrils as a combo deck, at least for the purposes of Timetwister.  Yes, Rector has a fundamental turn and a broken draw engine, but strategically it is much more similar to Black Summer Necro than to Academy.  The reason Timetwister is bad against combo don't really apply to Rector.  Other combo decks want a new hand because they need about 14 cards to win.  Rector decks only need 1 to win, the Rector.  The twister isn't going to 'refill' them on combo pieces because there isn't a combo, just one creature that wins if it resolves (give or take a Coffin Purge).

[Grand Inquisitor]

Quote If you have Gorilla Shaman in play EVER, every single Mox and Artifact that you have the mana to kill is a dead card

This is true on the assumption that they (and you) need another turn before winning.

You are right Carl, combo isn't coming back in the way that the doomsayer's in the 'state of the format' posts are claiming, but it is stronger now than it has been in a while (unless you count GAT as combo).

With the amount of discard floating around Timetwister is a good metagame card.  I completely agree with the arguments put forth for using twister.  However, I still think that there are no shortage of decks (non-rector combo, sligh, stax, mask) that even after receiving intense disruption to their mana base, will abuse seven new cards better than keeper.

I view keeper as the standard for optimal card choices.  I think keeper can do better than timetwister for that spot.

[Eastman]

Quote (Zherbus @ July 22 2003,23:55)To simplify what I said, each mana source - land or mox - that is shuffled back into your opponents deck, is 1 more mana source that he will have to draw during the Timetwister and the sequential turns after.

...With 5 strip effects and 2 Shamans, wouldn't you rather leave them mana light? If your opponent has 5 cards in hand when you twist, it is likely that all 5 (or at least 4) are business spells, as they have already played out their moxen and their first few lands.  The entire point of your mana disruption is to have destroyed their ability to cast those business spells, leaving them with only 1 or 2 playable cards in hand. When you Twist you give them lands that they can use to rebuild their spent resources, this seems to defeat the purpose of destroying it in the first place.

Doesn't the disadvantage of giving them usable resources outweigh the miniscule advantage provided by the 1/3rd of an 'extra' card you will draw because you have 2 more permanents?

Quote (Zherbus @ July 22 2003,23:55) I timetwister while my opponent has 5 cards in hand and I have 2, 1 being the Timetwister.

5 Mana sources (more if they had to used fetchlands) are shuffled back into the deck which makes him basically start the game with a fresh deck over minus 2 lands that are in play. In the meantime, I start the game with a fresh deck minus 3 lands, 2 moxen, and a Shaman.

The highlighted sentence is the real issue at hand. Despite all our quibbling the most all of paragraph two quoted above will give you (statistically) is 1/2 a card. The sentence in bold (which is the source of Timetwister's playability) will give you 3.

The discussion of how Shaman enters into this is superflous, but for purposes of discussion it can be condensed down to a more simple explanation:

It is obviously advantageous to have more permanents in play and fewer cards in hand when you 'reset' with a Timetwister.
Whether you should play it or not depends how often you believe you will stand to gain.

[wuaffiliate]

im no keeper player, but it seems rather counter productive to twister when they have no land and 5 card and you have 2 and a good amount of mna resources. isnt twisting in that situation really just twistering when u are already winning?. in that situation would it not be better to have that 2nd win condition to cast rather than twister?.

[theorigamist]

I think a lot of the same arguments for or against Twister are getting posted over and over, so there's really no point continuing the argument.  Everything's been said, and each person should just choose what's best for them and shut up.

That said, I'd like to change the topic completely and ask about the Aura Fracture in the sideboard.  Not having tested this list, I still wonder if you can support the sacrifice.  You already are dumping 5 lands to themselves (Strips), and at least 2 lands usually to Trenches.  Even with the mana fixing powers of Brainstorm, don't you think Aura Fracture will force you to use only the bare minimum of land, leaving you vulnerable to opponent's Strips, Wastelands, Shamans, discard, et cetera?

[Dante]

Quote (theorigamist @ July 23 2003,11:37)That said, I'd like to change the topic completely and ask about the Aura Fracture in the sideboard.  Not having tested this list, I still wonder if you can support the sacrifice.  You already are dumping 5 lands to themselves (Strips), and at least 2 lands usually to Trenches.  Even with the mana fixing powers of Brainstorm, don't you think Aura Fracture will force you to use only the bare minimum of land, leaving you vulnerable to opponent's Strips, Wastelands, Shamans, discard, et cetera?

Basically, you're going to be destroying "must-kill enchantments" - things like blood moon, B2B, survival in TnT, illusions of grandeur, etc, so it's not really a matter of "can I afford the land loss" because if you leave those type of enchantments on the board, your position is MUCH worse off anyway.

Dante

[Fishhead]

Quote That said, I'd like to change the topic completely and ask about the Aura Fracture in the sideboard.

Exactly as Dante says; you are destroying Blood Moons and BtBs.  It's better to lose one land than to lose all your land.

My question is whether 1 Fracture is enough.  A lot of the decks around here that used to play BtB would also play a big handful of counterspells; I always felt nervous trying to draw and resolve Fracture when both players know it is vital to the game.  I usually played 2 myself in order to be sure to draw one in time.

[leviat]

I've read a lot of the arguments about TimeTwister and I keep seeing the recurring theme of "With heavy disruption combo, Twister is needed to fill your hand back up." Simply put, I think this logic is fundementally flawed because nothing stops them from drawing those disruption cards again.

Using the Rector-Tendrils build as an example, this deck has a lot of potential to win very fast and it is a very explosive deck in terms of just going-off and in terms of ripping your hand to shreds. If they don't win almost immediately, then I thank my lucky stars that they got a poor draw and the last thing I want to do is give them another 7 cards to play with to try again.

Quote 1. Combo decks can have 7 new cards if I can also have 7 new cards, I have moxen and they don't, and I have lands and they don't.

What you really need against combo is control elements. Moxen and Lands are nice, but if you only have one control element and your opponent opens with a Duress, all the mana in the world won't save you. (You also have to keep in mind the cost of casting Twister on your turn.)

Also, the Mox Monkey is great but it's doesn't prevent Mox from producing mana. The better Tendrils players I've seen don't even play their Mox until they have a use for them. They hold on to them because it's an extra spell if they're trying to go off, and because it's a good card to put back with a Brainstorm.

Quote 2. You combat 8 disruption spells by following up their efforts with a Timetwister.

But that doesn't exactly prevent them from redrawing those same disruptions spells unless your also playing graveyard hate.

Quote It's just like the days when Suicide Black was good; you get your hand ripped apart and then you fill it back up later, this time with a better mana position that the first time you were being pelted with discard. This, in effect, makes the discard worse since they cannot outpace you will discard and spells since you are at a better mana position...or at least that is what the idea behind it is.

I don't feel this analogy can be applied. The new metagame decks that pack disruption are much more aggresive than the old Suicide Black. Having the stronger mana position doesn't do anything unless you get another chance to use that mana.

My feelings are closer to what G-I said. Timetwister is a fine card and I think the newer builds of Keeper take better advantage of it, but I personally feel it's the wrong card for the new metagame. There are better cards that you could be playing in that slot.

Obviously, play the card that you feel comfortable with, but if your going to play with Twister, you better have a really good feel for your metagame.