Shadow of Doubt as a serious sideboard card?

[nataz]

What happened to Red Elemental Blast?  I think REB is the best non drain, non fow counter. 

here is how I see the breakdown of SoD vs REB

flexability against shuffle efeffects in all colors vs. hard counter against blue (draw/counter) spells
REB can't hit the black tutors and fetches
SoD can't hit TFK, Brainstorm, and other counters.

lower mana cost vs. card advantage
REB costs only 1 mana, but is a Card for Card trade.
SoD costs 2 mana, but gives you +1 cards. 

lower mana cost vs. easier color commitment
REB costs 1 mana, but that mana is Red
SoD costs 2 mana, but that mana is (u/b)(u/b)

I see REB being better in a deck like Control Slaver, that has easy acaccesso red mana, and a solid draw engine that can afford the 1 for 1 trade more easily.

I see SoD better in like Fish/GWS Oath, that have much more limited access to red, force a resource denial strategy early in the game vs mana development, and still stop problem cards like tinker, tutor ->balance, and gifts.

Any deck that had stifle on the edge of playability, should probably at least look at SoD as the new super stifle that cantrips and counters gifts. I think this is more like Daze or stifle, which are conditional counters that advance a specific stratigy, then like REB which serves a simply defensive counter.

[lordmayhem]

What part of 'Draw a card' in a tempo based deck, do you not understand? It counters the spell at no loss of cards to you. When you have a deck with limited resources, this is the getting the most bang for your buck.

It's narrow in the sense it can only counter certain types of cards, of course those also happen to be the ones that wreck you...

So your love of a fake counterspell is based on "Draw a card"? Drawing an extra card is a bonus and not a reason to run the card. If drawing a card on a limited (and yes it is limited) ability were the real justification to run a card, then people would go nuts over Squelch and its easy casting cost, its cantripping and its ability to counter fetches.

Also tutors don't wreck you. Its the cards that they tutor up that wreck you. And those tutors can still be countered with any other counter. So let's base the argument on whether the card's ability is good enough to be worthy of inclusion.

I am not 100% against SoD. I like it, but I want to know about it in depth and see whether its worth it or not.

It cantrips.
It pitches to FoW.
It can be cycled because you need no target to cast it.
It fits into mono black and mono blue.

These are all just icing on the cake.

As Disburden mentioned:

Crop Rotation
Tinker
All Fetchlands
Vamp
Demonic
Imperial
Mystical
Gifts
mana severance

can all be pseudo-countered with Shadow along with some others like Scroll. Is it worth running Shadow of Doubt over a counterspell against these cards? Is it worth running it maindecked? How do you play with Shadow? Aggressive countering or save it up for Gifts or the like? What I don't like is that this fake counterspell cannot win you a counterwar.

Just wondering, how would this work with Chains? Pseudo-Countering their TfK, Brainstorm, Ancestral and their tutors at the same time would be interesting.

[Imsomniac101]

I am getting sick of people advocating Shadow of Doubt for Fish. I don't care if I get to cantrip if I can't cast my other cards in the first place. This card is unplayable in Fish. In a tempo based deck you don't want to sit on two mana at any stage of the game, bar the late game where they will just out counter you anyway. In the early game, sitting with two lands open while not developing your board means that you are going to lose the late game anyway.

The two mana cost means that it is unplayable in Fish. Now if it costs only one mana I would consider playing it. But unless Wizards decides to print a one mana version this one will have to go to the trash can.

[rakso]

Yes, it is.

Now let's get back on topic here, people.

I understand where you're coming from, but if we use "tempo" to mean everything from draw to mana to land drops to life, it's rather confusing. If we continue the discussion and consider other dimensions of "tempo," for me, it's not as important that Force of Will costs an extra blue card to play, and in the same vein don't value the SoD's cantrip that highly.
/aside

Fish taps out early, but pointing out the other end of the argument, it does hold mana open when it has the beatdown already on the table.

Perhaps one might also consider that SoD costs twice as much as Stifle, and the latter can hit a fetch first turn or when you have an odd number of blue sources in the middle of a counter war.

[Gabethebabe]

Shadow of Doubt is not a serious sideboard card in decks running Mana Drain, because they just don´t have the space for it.

Also I don´t think you should run it in Fish. Fish taps out every turn.

So my answer is: no. The card will be tried ... and rejected.

I have to disagree 100%... First off the card has been tried... and was accepted! Also saying that fish taps out alot depends completely on the build. For the crappy fish that runs null rod your right that list does tap out alot.... However, the new UB versions that abuse vial more then ever dont have that issue. My list taps out yes, but generally I dont like to over-extend ( a common error among fish players), and dont need to use all of my withered wretch ability until the very end of a turn, or in responce.

The card is absolute gold, and for the UB fish lists... UB mana is alot lot easier to get then UU.

Also read the card again... It says you draw a card... a card like an annul while nice cant be cast end of turn to essentially cycle itself away like this.

I see it says draw a card. That doesn´t make the card good. If you play against some Workshop deck, this card is just utter crap, you don´t have the time to spend 2 mana on casting a cantrip, just to get your card back.

Fish taps out. That´s what it does. If your list doesn´t do that, then your deck is not Fish. Fish has quick disruption, quick beats and has to win quick, because that´s what the deck does. If you have two mana open, you have to cast your Wretch or your hatchling or your fearies or whatever threats you´re playing. You don´t sit there and say "go", with Shadow of Doubt in your hand. If your opponent plays something that SoD can´t counter you just have wasted some important tempo.

Stifle is playable in Fish, because Fish runs 2 mana threats, attacking with a factory costs 2 and frequently you´ll have a mana to spare. Two mana you should not have until you´ve past the early game iand in that stage Fish should have won already.

Only a complete idiot would pump mana in wretch to remove cards from the GY while they have SoD in hand. That is no argument at all you´re using there.

I honestly cannot see a deck that could make use of Shadow of Doubt. Mana Drain, Mana Leak, Stifle and Duress are just too tough a competition fot this card.

[nataz]

Fish taps out. That´s what it does. If your list doesn´t do that, then your deck is not Fish. Fish has quick disruption, quick beats and has to win quick, because that´s what the deck does. If you have two mana open, you have to cast your Wretch or your hatchling or your fearies or whatever threats you´re playing. You don´t sit there and say "go", with Shadow of Doubt in your hand. If your opponent plays something that SoD can´t counter you just have wasted some important tempo.

I would consider U/G/W.vial.dec still fish decks, which don't often find themselves taping out on turn two. Taping out on turn two hasn't happened since people stoped playing null rod, and started playing chalice and vial in their fish decks.

Most fish decks (at least in the US) are no longer locked in to a critical turn 2, where you could COF->curiosity/Null Rod/Hatching. Taping out on turn 1 for vial/1cc threat, and taping out on turn 3 to avtivate abilities is common in vial fish, but much less so on turn two, especialy those versions that run Brainstorm over Standstill.
   

[Vegeta2711]

What part of 'Draw a card' in a tempo based deck, do you not understand? It counters the spell at no loss of cards to you. When you have a deck with limited resources, this is the getting the most bang for your buck.

It's narrow in the sense it can only counter certain types of cards, of course those also happen to be the ones that wreck you...

So your love of a fake counterspell is based on "Draw a card"? Drawing an extra card is a bonus and not a reason to run the card. If drawing a card on a limited (and yes it is limited) ability were the real justification to run a card, then people would go nuts over Squelch and its easy casting cost, its cantripping and its ability to counter fetches.

I must've missed the part where Squelch stopped Tinker, Tutors and Gifts Ungiven. Please don't try using horrible analogies to attempt to support your point.

Drawing an extra card is a bonus and not a reason to run the card.

Yeah, extra cards totally mean jack in this format. -_- Have you even played Fish-esque decks? At this point I seriously doubt it. You have limited ways to replenish resources with those decks, hence 'draw a card' isn't a bonus, it's a major consideration.

Also tutors don't wreck you. Its the cards that they tutor up that wreck you

...that's some awesome logic you got there. So you're arguing what exactly? That countering the tutor that finds the Will isn't worth considering?

What I don't like is that this fake counterspell cannot win you a counterwar.

Use it first and then use FoW?  :shock:

EDIT: Why is everyone comparing this to Stifle btw? When did Stifle have the ability to counter spells like Tinker? Hell when was Stifle good as anything OTHER than a mana deterrent?

Stifle is playable in Fish

Not really. Wow you can counter Fetchlands, congratulations. Run other cards instead. REB, Counterspell, Shadow of Doubt, more Jitte and about 20 other cards deserve consideration before settling on Stifle.

[xrobx]

Also tutors don't wreck you. Its the cards that they tutor up that wreck you. And those tutors can still be countered with any other counter. So let's base the argument on whether the card's ability is good enough to be worthy of inclusion.

Ahaha, this is great.  Where have you been for the last 6 months?? (or more?) Have you heard of a card called gifts ungiven? You should check it out before they restrict it

All kidding aside, it's a hard call whether or not shadow of doubt could be played in UB fish.  I've been playing it steady for the last 2-3 months and I'm still tinkering the ideal build.  Yes, I do like to tap out early on, and 2 mana is alot to keep open.  Especially if I use factories, as they require constant mana.  The draw a card is great; its what makes this card even considerable.  Tinker and will are by far the most defining cards this format has to offer, and shadow stops tinker and somewhat stops will.  Other than get huge CA, what else will a yawgwin pull them?? Definatly not a tinker/DT, maybe a burning wish tendrils but that should be hard enough without using mystical/merchant/vampiric/DT/tinker/new portal tutors (I doubt they'll see play in gifts, maybe combo)...


I don't have much to contribute; except that I play alot of fish and I don't see the card sticking in the deck too long   I'm testing, and I believe that the concept of UB fish should be much different than the concept of other fish builds, which therefore screams out a completely different card setup which unfortunatly doesnt like to keep 2 mana open very often.

[lordmayhem]

I must've missed the part where Squelch stopped Tinker, Tutors and Gifts Ungiven. Please don't try using horrible analogies to attempt to support your point.

No you must have missed the part where you said "What part of Draw a Card don't you understand". Horrible analogies are perfect to support my point. Why is Squelch bad? Because it doesn't do enough. Hence the draw a card on Shadow of Doubt is is just a bonus, like it is on Squelch.

Yeah, extra cards totally mean jack in this format. -_- Have you even played Fish-esque decks? At this point I seriously doubt it. You have limited ways to replenish resources with those decks, hence 'draw a card' isn't a bonus, it's a major consideration.

So, at first the "draw a card" on Squelch is a horrible analogy and then the "draw a card" is a major consideration. Fish taps out and keeping 2 mana open in the early game hurts. And if you're going to be playing against Stax or any other Workshop deck, Shadow is just worthless. If you had maindecked Shadow, then you've got 4 dead cards. Sure you can cycle, but is it smart to waste time cycling? If you had them in the side, that's 4 less hate cards against Workshop.

...that's some awesome logic you got there. So you're arguing what exactly? That countering the tutor that finds the Will isn't worth considering?

Countering Gifts is worth it since it gets 2 Regrowth spells along with it. Countering Demonic Tutor for Will is not worth it in my opinion. Why? Because the player can still draw into it, whether by topdeck or by a draw spell that Shadow just cannot counter.

Use it first and then use FoW?  :shock:

AWESOME logic YOU got there. Use it first on what? Are we going to assume that every spell they play is going to be a tutor? Lets say they play a threat. You Force. They Force back and instead of a Drain or a Leak, you're holding SoD.

Ahaha, this is great.  Where have you been for the last 6 months?? (or more?) Have you heard of a card called gifts ungiven? You should check it out before they restrict it 

OMG What is this card called Gifts Ungiven?!? Omg is it uncounterable? Counterspells take care of Gifts in much the same way, along with other spell that they may play. I really like how you took the first two sentences and twisted my point. No Gifts does not wreck you. Its the cards it gets that wreck you. But since it tutors for 4, 2 of which are Regrowth effects, you're not going to counter the 2 spells they play with it, hence getting wrecked. You're going to counter Gifts. What you will counter it with is the topic at hand. SoD or Force or Drain or Leak or freakin Counterspell.

[rakso]

Countering Gifts is worth it since it gets 2 Regrowth spells along with it. Countering Demonic Tutor for Will is not worth it in my opinion. Why? Because the player can still draw into it, whether by topdeck or by a draw spell that Shadow just cannot counter.

Whoa there.

While I don't quite agree with some of Vegeta's points, I'd ask you to be less hasty.

Fish is defined by tempo and disruption and aims to win quicker than control can set up. In this context, for example, postponing the arrival of a key card in his hand (ex. Demonic Tutor for Yawgmoth's Will) at no cost in cards or mana could be stronger than you initially think.

[xrobx]

Ahaha, this is great.  Where have you been for the last 6 months?? (or more?) Have you heard of a card called gifts ungiven? You should check it out before they restrict it 

OMG What is this card called Gifts Ungiven?!? Omg is it uncounterable? Counterspells take care of Gifts in much the same way, along with other spell that they may play. I really like how you took the first two sentences and twisted my point. No Gifts does not wreck you. Its the cards it gets that wreck you. But since it tutors for 4, 2 of which are Regrowth effects, you're not going to counter the 2 spells they play with it, hence getting wrecked. You're going to counter Gifts. What you will counter it with is the topic at hand. SoD or Force or Drain or Leak or freakin Counterspell.

Did you read what you posted before you clicked submit??  If so, then I'm quite lost...first, you say that you'd never counter a tutor.  It's a terrible idea to do so.  THEN, you go on to use the good old counterspells stop everything argument,

"Counterspells take care of Gifts in much the same way, along with other spell that they may play"

Does this even make sense?

No Gifts does not wreck you. Its the cards it gets that wreck you.

  I mean sure, its quite obvious that if it resolves, then you are wrecked, so you must mean you counter the tutor right?  But you said you never counter tutors....so its kind of a paradox for you to win, correct?  If gifts resolves, you lose, and it resolves if it isn't countered; hence, you must counter gifts, or you must lose.  The idea here is called card advantage; by turning 1 spell into essentially 4 cards that will each be played twice.  Hence, isn't it better to counter 1 spell than 8 spells? Or do you always keep a mit full of counterspells, rewinds, and manadrains

[UR]

If you had bothered to read his LM's posts you would have seen that he would counter Gifts because it fetches the opponent 2 cards instead of just one.

I'm in the SoD isn't very good camp... I just think that I cannot find the space in my decks to put it in. If I had to play 100 cards, this card would perhaps make it. But 60... even if you are playing control, you'll choose FoW and Drain over this card anyday because they simply give you a greater advantage...

If you don't want them to play Tinker, play a Meddling Mage on it. You're playing Fish, right?

[lordmayhem]

Did you read what you posted before you clicked submit??  If so, then I'm quite lost...first, you say that you'd never counter a tutor.  It's a terrible idea to do so.  THEN, you go on to use the good old counterspells stop everything argument, "Counterspells take care of Gifts in much the same way, along with other spell that they may play"

Did you even read my post? I'm getting the impression that you haven't. Yes countering a tutor IS bad, (tutoring one for one) because countering what they tutored is better, since they cannot topdeck it or draw into it.

For example. They will Demonic into a Yawg Will. If you counter the Demonic and they end up drawing into Yawgmoth's Will by a draw spell, you still have to face a Yawg Will, whereas if you let the Demonic resolve and then you counter the Yawg Will, you don't have to face the Will. Ie : They lose Demonic and Will. You lose a counterspell.

Gifts is different (tutoring one for four) because it tutors 4 cards, 2 of which are Regrowth effects, meaning they get more than 1 or 2 cards. They get 4. In that case, yes, you counter it because countering the 4 cards they get after a resolved Gifts is stupid.

I mean sure, its quite obvious that if it resolves, then you are wrecked, so you must mean you counter the tutor right?  But you said you never counter tutors....so its kind of a paradox for you to win, correct?  If gifts resolves, you lose, and it resolves if it isn't countered; hence, you must counter gifts, or you must lose.  The idea here is called card advantage; by turning 1 spell into essentially 4 cards that will each be played twice.  Hence, isn't it better to counter 1 spell than 8 spells? Or do you always keep a mit full of counterspells, rewinds, and manadrains

Again I get a sense of you not reading what I said.  :lol: Yes you counter Gifts. But what is it better to counter with? Shadow or good old counterspell stops everything?

@ rakso : Shadow doesn't cost cards but it does cost mana. But isn't countering Will itself better than postponing it from getting in his hand.

[sean1i0]

I think that Shadow of a Doubt is very similar to Stifle:  It can be really savage in certain situations and almost always as a sideboard card if you can afford the space, but, most of the times, there will just be better cards to play in its place.

[rakso]

@ rakso : Shadow doesn't cost cards but it does cost mana. But isn't countering Will itself better than postponing it from getting in his hand.

In the sense that your two-mana SoD negates his two-mana Demonic Tutor, you break even on the mana.

Not countering tutors is a good rule of thumb, but remember that these rules of thumb are never absolute.

Consider it might be more difficult to counter the card tutored for, and with respect to Yawgmoth's Will, that wouldn't be tutored for unless it can already be protected or unless desperate. Outside the SoD example, there might even be value in stopping him from reshuffling post-Brainstorm to further slow him down.

Anyway, my main point in this thread's context is that a Fish deck hitting a control deck's Demonic Tutor with SoD is not as bad as you initially perceived.

[MaxxMatt]

So me times ago I used to counter the card that any Tutor would get.
Since now, smart players started tutoring Bazaars, Strips, LoA, Bosejiu, Protections, DSC ( thanks to Tinker ), Squees, Flashback-Based-Cards. Aside with those targets, they played this game far better than 3 years ago.

Since now I ALWAYS carefully weight the possibility of countering some of them.
SoD would help me doing it.



On the other hand, I think that this card can be used only in a deck that would start/continue/end doing OTHER synergic things AFTER it.

Fish and similar decks are only the ones that come in my mind.


Maxx
 

[Imsomniac101]

@ rakso : Shadow doesn't cost cards but it does cost mana. But isn't countering Will itself better than postponing it from getting in his hand.

In the sense that your two-mana SoD negates his two-mana Demonic Tutor, you break even on the mana..............

Anyway, my main point in this thread's context is that a Fish deck hitting a control deck's Demonic Tutor with SoD is not as bad as you initially perceived.

But Fish doesnt want to break even when disrupting the opponent. It wants to answer an opponents threat with a cheaper answer. Hence why REB is so good because I pay one mana to counter your two mana Drain or three mana TfK. I thought that this would be really obvious to someone who was familiar with the concept of Tempo. And even if you do break even, the other deck's superior acceleration ( or your lack of it) mean that he will have mana to do other things.

@Vegeta:
Answer this. If you were playing Fish why would you sit on two open islands when you could be putting down lock pieces (ie Meddling Mage, Null Rod) and developing your board. Sitting with two untapped lands waiting to counter an opponents tutor is a losing proposition. If you would like to play this type of game then play a Drain deck where sitting on two islands is a viable strategy.

[lordmayhem]

Anyway, my main point in this thread's context is that a Fish deck hitting a control deck's Demonic Tutor with SoD is not as bad as you initially perceived.

I personally think that packing SoD instead of counters is sub-par. As you said, you don't always stick to the "don't counter tutors" rule, so how can one shift from "don't always counter them" to "always counter them" by throwing in SoD?

[sean1i0]

The main problem with packing SoD in a fish deck is that the card is so situational AND costs UU, BB, or UB.  The best you'll get with it is maybe catching the opponent by surprise in Game 1.  The fact that it costs 2 colored makes it very easy in games 2 and 3 to keep hands with low fetch land counts/break fetch lands before they could be succeptable to SoD.  And, as has already been stated, but should be emphasized, countering the cards that come out of the tutors instead of the tutors themselves is generally a better strategy.  Since you have to replace something in any given deck with an SoD to fit it in the deck, then, by the previous assumption, a counterspell would always make a better card than SoD.  If it's fetch land disruption that you're after, then go for stifle instead.

[Vegeta2711]

@ rakso : Shadow doesn't cost cards but it does cost mana. But isn't countering Will itself better than postponing it from getting in his hand.

In the sense that your two-mana SoD negates his two-mana Demonic Tutor, you break even on the mana..............

Anyway, my main point in this thread's context is that a Fish deck hitting a control deck's Demonic Tutor with SoD is not as bad as you initially perceived.

@Vegeta:
Answer this. If you were playing Fish why would you sit on two open islands when you could be putting down lock pieces (ie Meddling Mage, Null Rod) and developing your board. Sitting with two untapped lands waiting to counter an opponents tutor is a losing proposition. If you would like to play this type of game then play a Drain deck where sitting on two islands is a viable strategy.

Let's see... Aether Vial on turn 1. Odds are I MAY play another spell on turn 2, but otherwise I'll just sit on open mana all day against you. It doesn't hurt me in the least and it means you always have to play around a potential counter situation.

Alternatively playing threats on turns 1/2. Playing a 1 mana spell which still leaves me with 2 mana open on turn 3/4.

BTW,, if you aren't sitting on some mana to in preperation to answer Tinker or Gifts, you will lose those games vs. Drain decks. There's 2 reasons Fish hasn't done well recently and half of it is because people never adapt their playing fundementals to new threats in decks.

LM: Ok, clearly you missed the boat entirely. So I'll try this again.
Squelch = Awful, because it doesn't actually counter anything relevant. It's 'Draw a card' is nullified because the card sucks.
SoD = Decent, because it counters cards that typically wreck tempo based strategies, but not all of them. However it draws a card which will usually outweigh that drawback.

AWESOME logic YOU got there. Use it first on what? Are we going to assume that every spell they play is going to be a tutor? Lets say they play a threat. You Force. They Force back and instead of a Drain or a Leak, you're holding SoD.

Let me make this very clear so you can't get this wrong.

Most of the cards that wreck Fish-esque strategies can be countered with this card. Hence I assume most of the cards you will be fighting a counterwar over will usually be these relevant cards. That was the point of me saying that. What 'threat' are YOU talking about? Hardcast Darksteel Colossus? Goblin Welder's which a Fish deck should already have plenty of anwsers too? The mythical hardcast Belcher? Drain decks barely play any 'threats' in the conventional terms. Most of their threats come from amazing tutors and two broken cards.

Ok I'm done. I made this as clear as I possibly could. If you still can't see the points where SoD would have an advantage, you're lost.

[Imsomniac101]

@ rakso : Shadow doesn't cost cards but it does cost mana. But isn't countering Will itself better than postponing it from getting in his hand.

In the sense that your two-mana SoD negates his two-mana Demonic Tutor, you break even on the mana..............

Anyway, my main point in this thread's context is that a Fish deck hitting a control deck's Demonic Tutor with SoD is not as bad as you initially perceived.

@Vegeta:
Answer this. If you were playing Fish why would you sit on two open islands when you could be putting down lock pieces (ie Meddling Mage, Null Rod) and developing your board. Sitting with two untapped lands waiting to counter an opponents tutor is a losing proposition. If you would like to play this type of game then play a Drain deck where sitting on two islands is a viable strategy.

Let's see... Aether Vial on turn 1. Odds are I MAY play another spell on turn 2, but otherwise I'll just sit on open mana all day against you. It doesn't hurt me in the least and it means you always have to play around a potential counter situation.

Alternatively playing threats on turns 1/2. Playing a 1 mana spell which still leaves me with 2 mana open on turn 3/4.

BTW,, if you aren't sitting on some mana to in preperation to answer Tinker or Gifts, you will lose those games vs. Drain decks. There's 2 reasons Fish hasn't done well recently and half of it is because people never adapt their playing fundementals to new threats in decks.

Ok I'm done. I made this as clear as I possibly could. If you still can't see the points where SoD would have an advantage, you're lost.

You won't have Aether Vial on turn 1 all the time. And even if you do you will still have to cast Jitte; equip Jitte; Pay mana for Ninja and Mishra's Factory. Also you might want to cast a Chalice for 1 which costs 2.

I never said that SoD didn't have a powerful effect. I was just debating whether or not Fish can afford to delay its board development just to play a counter and cantrip in one. IMO you can't.

[xrobx]

I'm going to have to second what Imsomniac101 said in regards to fish not being able to afford the 2 mana delay.  I believe that much of fishes power is in the crucial low mana permanents that it drops, and specifically chalice of the void.  Chalice at 0/1 is fishes strongest play; it accomplishes the most of what this deck is trying to do.  For 1 card, you often can trade for 8-9 mana sources, or on average 8-12 cards (set at 1).  This is a far more reasonable game plan than to sit back and hope to disrupt 1 card with one of your cards, IMHO.

I do understand the argument of the psychoanalytic approach; which would be that game 1 you could convince your opponent that you are plaing a mana drain style deck simply through the way you play your cards, and how you manipulate their gameplan on the first few turns.  This is a valid argument if the case were that you were not running chalice.  Chalice calls for an entirely different approach, because probability says that 1 card for 8 is better than 1 for 1 in any case.  In this case, that is to run no chalice, you could get away playing brainstorm, SoD, and another cheap 1 mana cantrip for end of turn effects.  Atleast this way, you are negating the loss of tempo from potentially unused lands.  If this were the build of the fish deck, then yes, SoD seems perfectly reasonable.  At the same though, wouldn't stifle/misD/gush/mystical/vampiric/possibly mana leak all be needed?  Or atleast considered, which drastically changes the way your deck is setup.

[rakso]

But Fish doesnt want to break even when disrupting the opponent. It wants to answer an opponents threat with a cheaper answer. Hence why REB is so good because I pay one mana to counter your two mana Drain or three mana TfK. I thought that this would be really obvious to someone who was familiar with the concept of Tempo. And even if you do break even, the other deck's superior acceleration ( or your lack of it) mean that he will have mana to do other things.

I think you can drop the major atttitude problem.

Okay, you know how to count mana. Another possible aspect, however, is Fish having a couple of creatures beating down which could make even mana trades passable? Again, there are many dimensions to slowing an opponent down.

If you've played control, I think you should have had a few games where getting a tutor countered, particularly a sorcery like Demonic Tutor or Merchant Scroll, proved fatally disruptive.

[Imsomniac101]

But Fish doesnt want to break even when disrupting the opponent. It wants to answer an opponents threat with a cheaper answer. Hence why REB is so good because I pay one mana to counter your two mana Drain or three mana TfK. I thought that this would be really obvious to someone who was familiar with the concept of Tempo. And even if you do break even, the other deck's superior acceleration ( or your lack of it) mean that he will have mana to do other things.

I think you can drop the major atttitude problem.

I'm sorry if I come off as arrogant as this is not my intention. The main point I was trying to convey is that Fish cannot afford to sit on its ass waiting for the other deck to cast a tutor. The effect is undoubtably good, however Fish as a tempo based deck cannot afford such a strategy.


Okay, you know how to count mana. Another possible aspect, however, is Fish having a couple of creatures beating down which could make even mana trades passable? Again, there are many dimensions to slowing an opponent down.

Would you even be in a position to beat down if you were holding two islands open just to cast SoD?

If you've played control, I think you should have had a few games where getting a tutor countered, particularly a sorcery like Demonic Tutor or Merchant Scroll, proved fatally disruptive.

Yes I have had that situation come up. Only against other control decks. However, what kind of pressure would I be under if my opponent (playing Fish) countered my Gifts or whatever with SoD (or any kind of two mana counterspell for that matter)? The answer is most likely none, as he wasted a few of his turns doing nothing waiting for me to cast Gifts. I can then try again.

[rakso]

Okay, okay, apology accepted. However, instead of lecturing to me on how to count mana costs and attempting to summarize EDT in half a sentence, consider that my premise is that no aggro-control player is going to hold mana open until he has some threat on the board (or first-turn Vial).

Count slowly to ten before replying.

[Gabethebabe]

Fish wants to cast turn 1 Vial, Turn 2 threat. With Vial you can´t get a 2cc threat out turn 2 and you really cannot wait until turn 3 to start making pressure. Against many decks, that will be too slow and they will have sufficient time to establish. If SoD is nbot good turn 1 or turn 2, than I seriously doubt its value (in Fish)

Sure, Tinker for Colossus is Fish´s biggest nightmare. But there are better cards available to Fish in defense. Swords, REB or landing a Bouncer, a Mage or a Mesmeric Fiend are all options. And these are options that fit Fish´s gameplan a whole lot better than SoD.

Stifle is playable in Fish

Not really. Wow you can counter Fetchlands, congratulations. Run other cards instead. REB, Counterspell, Shadow of Doubt, more Jitte and about 20 other cards deserve consideration before settling on Stifle.

Dude, Stifle has been used as maindeck material in Fish ever since it was printed. It has been competing with e.g. Daze and Misdirection and has never been the ultimate Fish card, but to doubt that it is playable is just plain wrong. Stifling an early Fetch can be utterly devastating. And what more: you know it.

Note that we´re going off-topic. We´re discussing whether SoD is a maindeck card in Fish, not whether it is a serious sideboard card

[Klep]

In the sense that your two-mana SoD negates his two-mana Demonic Tutor, you break even on the mana..............

But Fish doesnt want to break even when disrupting the opponent. It wants to answer an opponents threat with a cheaper answer. Hence why REB is so good because I pay one mana to counter your two mana Drain or three mana TfK. I thought that this would be really obvious to someone who was familiar with the concept of Tempo. And even if you do break even, the other deck's superior acceleration ( or your lack of it) mean that he will have mana to do other things.

And in that situation, Fish doesn't break even; it comes out ahead.  Both players invest 2 mana and a card.  One player gets nothing for his investment, the Fish player gets a card.  The Fish player has now gained a card on his opponent, and neutered a potent threat.  Sounds like a good deal to me.

[Guli]

To make things simple:
What decks do not use tutors,fetch,strips,tinker,... Are those decks  capable of winning against a fish deck who has maindecked SoD. Maybe fish can afford to play with SoD. If u get what i mean. I would like someone to post about this because i need the insight. I have a lot catching up to do after my long break.

[Imsomniac101]

Okay, okay, apology accepted. However, instead of lecturing to me on how to count mana costs and attempting to summarize EDT in half a sentence, consider that my premise is that no aggro-control player is going to hold mana open until he has some threat on the board (or first-turn Vial).

Count slowly to ten before replying.

A fair enough assumption. However, by the late game it is more than likely that the opponent will have more than enough mana to cast his tutor and what not + his Mana Drain.

[rakso]

Well, honestly... If you're up against a control deck that has amassed enough mana to trade counters for your disruption AND cast his stuff, then I think you're in trouble no matter what you're playing unless it's pre-restriction GAT.