Dry Slaver: Deck Discussion and Myriad 4-Way-Split Tournament Report

[Eandori]

Thanks for this post Rich.  It's really nice to see new builds of Control Slaver and hear the strategy that players use to pilot it.  The tournament report is an added bonus as well.  Much like you, Slaver is a favorite deck of mine and it's been my golden child for the last 1.5-2 years.  My build has been nearly unchanged though, because even in the varying metagame, I've always had a nostalgic love for Brian Weissman's "The Deck."  I even got to play a mirror match against him in California like 8 years ago.  I'm a pretty decent player, but a casual player based on my job.  So having one solid deck that is a really well rounded answer in nearly any metagame really appeals to me.

Based on that, I have posted my build of Gifts-Slaver several times in threads and discussed it.  Mine is the one sporting the maindeck tundra, cunning wish, and lots of solid answers in the sideboard.  Plus I've had many many posts defending Gifts Ungiven and Crucible in my version of Slaver.  After literally playing thousands of games with it (using real cards too, not proxies) I can easily claim that my build is a very average-metagame build.  It has the tools to deal with every meta I have run up against, but as a result will not perform as well as perfectly metagamed versions of Slaver.  For me though, with my very limited tournament time, it works.

The list you posted here is very innovative.  I don't think I have hardly ever seen people play a list so short on TFK.  I can understand your reasons for it, they are well thought out.  I too have to wonder how many times I would find myself with active welder on the board, Mindslaver in my hand, wishing I could hit a TFK for the win.  Since your "goal" with this deck is different then the typical slaver strategy, I also understand that the situation I just described is not the same for this deck as it would be for a typical slaver build.

Your maindeck list of 2 welders, the REB, and 2 crypts looks VERY much like a metagame call to me.  It obviously worked for you and I'm really happy you had a great time with the build.  When I run into lots of fish, Stax, or Sullivans Solution type decks, keeping a welder on the board can be the difference in a game win or not.  It does not sound like you played against those decks alot, so I'd be curious to see how you reacted to them.  I use my welders to not only do their job and accelerate my game plan, but also just to threaten my opponent.  Any good vintage player knows (you included) that active welder with thirst mana open is keeping your opponents king in "check."

I also run 2 Mindslavers in my build.  Many times I have wanted to go to 1, but EVERY time I test it out, I ALWAYS end up regretting it because I needed that 2nd slaver to close the deal.  At this point, I do believe it's just the synergy for how my build works.  Many things I do in my build (like the Tundra/Cunning wish) would not work well in other slaver builds, but my build really relies on it's specific makeup.  The Crucible is another keystone to my build, it enables my game plan and resiliance to the entire metagame of Vintage in a big way.  Most games end through slaver lock (Crucible, 3 mana, 1 welder, citadel, slaver) with my build.

I have also played in many other Vintage metagames where players rely on their mana in a big way.  Maindeck Strip Mine/Crucible, and Sideboard Gorilla Shaman/3 Wasteland has literally handed me hundreds of wins against those decks.  If for not other reason, because nearly nobody expects slaver to go mana denial.  I see you don't play crucible in your list, but it's obvious that you are trying to get that single slaver activation, not the lock.  I'm also guessing that nobody was hitting the mana base really hard in the meta you played in.

Again, thanks a ton for the post.  I really enjoyed reading it and the replies.  Thanks also for all your contributions to vintage, including Control Slaver.  My absolute favorite deck in the 11 years I've been playing Magic. 

[InfinityCircuit]

I really like the new list and I've been playtesting it a lot.  However, I have to question the inclusion of Red Elemental Blast as the twelfth disruption spell.  I think that this is a suboptimal choice in comparison to alternatives, notably Trickbind.  As I see it, both are a serious boost to the Gifts matchup, and Trickbind adds a nice surprise to the combo matchup.  It seems like the unique benefit to Red Elemental Blast is that it costs less and that it can destroy Meddling Mage.  It seems like the need to destroy Meddling Mage isn't as important in a varied deck like Slaver, and the one mana difference is minimal because it requires a Volcanic Island.  Therefore, I think Trickbind is a better maindeck choice.

[Moxlotus]

  It seems like the unique benefit to Red Elemental Blast is that it costs less and that it can destroy Meddling Mage

Don't forget the whole "countering blue spells" thing.  That's a pretty good benefit over trickbind.

[InfinityCircuit]

Don't worry - I certainly agree that it is important to counter spells.  Let me rephrase my arguments:

For Trickbind:
1) As was mentioned in the tournament report, Trickbind can act as a counter by stifling fetchlands.
2) Trickbind is better than a hard counter when facing storm decks without Duress.
3) Other decks function fine without a ninth hard counter, opting for something else like Misdirection.
4) Against decks where Red Elemental Blast is traditionally brought into control decks, TAL brought in Trickbinds with great success.

Against Trickbind:
1) The mana cost - it costs more, but it can also be cast off a random mox + island instead of requiring a volcanic island.
2) It isn't a hard counter for blue spells.
3) It can't kill blue creatures.

[Eandori]

Hey Rich, one more question for ya.

You also mentioned how Control Slaver is generally more resiliant to a Jesters Cap activation.  I agree with this fully, but looking over your list again with that in mind I'm not sure this build is.  Many versions of Control Slaver play 2 Mindslavers, and 2 more big nasty artifact creatures.  So even after a single cap activation, typical slaver lists have a threat in the deck.  Also, most slaver lists play 4 welders or 3 welders and a shaman, etc.  So in a pinch, you have some very weak beatsticks.

But your list has just 2 welders, and 3 game winning cards (Sundering Titan, Mindslaver, Triskelion).  So it seems your build is in much more danger to the Cap then typical slaver.  In your play testing and tournaments with this build, has anybody yet tried to, or successfully capped you?

Thanks,

[The Atog Lord]

I too have to wonder how many times I would find myself with active welder on the board, Mindslaver in my hand, wishing I could hit a TFK for the win.

You're more likely not to have the Mindslaver in hand than to have it in hand at any given point in the game. Further, should you have it in hand, you've both Thirst and a pair of Merchant Scrolls with which to discard the Mindslaver -- only one less than the number of discard outlets in my previous Control Slaver builds.

Your maindeck list of 2 welders, the REB, and 2 crypts looks VERY much like a metagame call to me.

You're right. I know that I've said it before, but I'll reiterate here: Control Slaver is properly built as a function of the expected metagame. This configuration was designed for the specific metagame of Myriad Games at this time. In another metagame, more Welders, fewe Crypts, or a maindeck Fire/Ice could all be correct. I know that having a single static "correct" Control Slaver list would be easier to conceptualize, but quite frankly Control Slaver cannot be optimized in a vacuum.

I see you don't play crucible in your list, but it's obvious that you are trying to get that single slaver activation, not the lock.

You are correct. I dropped the "lock" objective quite a while ago and have not looked back. In fact, I can say that there has not been a single game, either in testing or in a tournament, which I lost but would have won with a lock present in the deck. In other words, while a single Mindslaver activation may not be lethal, establishing a lock takes so much setup that should the effort put into that setup be channeled elsewhere, the net result will be the same. If I wanted to have even more "punch" in my Mindslaver activations, then rather than include a Crucible, I'd simply replace Echoing Truth with Chain of Vapor. This simple change would allow a single Mindslaver activation to decimate an opponent's mana base, and would also require no additional maindeck slots than are currently used. For this tournament, I decided that Echoing Truth's ability to handle multiple token creatures and evade a chalice at one made it the better card, but I could certainly see Chain of Vapor being good too.

As for Crucible, I really think that card is bad in Control Slaver. I've tried it, both in testing and in multiple tournaments. I found that it was a weak card to tutor for, and less exciting than many other options when hardcast. I was never happy with it. If I'm going to be spending three mana on a card, I want it to do a lot more for my vintage deck than ensure that I make my land drops.

I'm also guessing that nobody was hitting the mana base really hard in the meta you played in.

The Myriad Games metagame has the highest proportion of Wasteland decks I've ever seen. However, as Fish and MountainsWin are stripping your land away and dropping Chalices, I'd rather do something more constructive than ensure my land drops. Making a bunch of Goblin tokens, resolving Tinker, and resolving Yawgmoth's Will are all more important to me than playing a card that lets me replay my fetchlands. I've played a lot with Crucible and just found that the card never did enough to justify its inclusion in my deck.

However, I have to question the inclusion of Red Elemental Blast as the twelfth disruption spell.  I think that this is a suboptimal choice in comparison to alternatives, notably Trickbind.

As Moxlotus said, REB stops blue spells from resolving. Of course, given a slightly different metagame, the REB could well be better as another card. The proper configuration of control elements very much depends on what exactly you plan to control. In an environment with Gifts resolving and Meddling Mages seeing play, REB seems like a strong choice.

In your play testing and tournaments with this build, has anybody yet tried to, or successfully capped you?

It hasn't happened yet with this build. While it would be difficult to fight back with only a pair of Welders left in the deck, it would certainly not be impossible. Gifts wouldn't do nearly so well. I've done similar things with previous builds -- used Yawgmoth's Will to generate such an advantage that the opponent was unable to win before a pair of Goblins won. The further thing to bear in mind is that Goblin Welder tends to be especially potent against decks using Jester's Cap in the first place.

Thanks for the great questions.

[Dakkon]

If Thirst for Knowledge is only being used to discard an artifact in hand then why not use Frantic Search instead? It can be fetched with merchant scroll, discard artifacts, and it can untap lands which keeps drain mana up while making it possible to weld and activate slaver in the same turn.

[Smmenen]

The one thing that I find most frightening about Control Slaver is the speed with which good Slaver players combo out.

There is a difference between designing your deck to be aggressive and taking advantage of the opportunity when it arises. Control Slaver, by virtue of its broken cards, often finds itself able to quickly combo off. However, it has cards that do nothing to help with this process. Consider that every single card in Meandeck Gifts contributes to the deck's ability to combo out the opponent. The bounce spells add to Storm, and the Drains and other counters can defend its threats. On the other hand, Control Slaver has cards such as Echoing Truth and Tormod's Crypt which cannot function aggressively at all, and are in the deck only as answers. It isn't that I don't take the chance to win when I see it; but I build the deck with cards that function outside of an aggressive role as well.

As I wrote about quite extensively circa Nov and Dec, I almost always assume the control role as the MDG player.   Esp. against Slaver.    I explained why in an article I wrote in 2005:
http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/10315.html

My plan against Slaver was always to attack their draw engine.  My focus was to stop Thirst from resolving, build a critical mass in doing so, and then win. 

[Corvel]

I think that one of the reasons that people choose to play Control Slaver is because the deck tends to set up winning combinations very quickly.  The inclusion of Gifts into this list makes it lean more towards the control side than the typical Control Slaver lists.  Control Slaver seems to use gifts much less effectively than Meandeck Gifts, so I think if you want to play a more controlling deck Meandeck Gifts would be a better choice overall.  This is because Meandeck Gifts can sit back and play the control role and when they are ready to win, they are only a Gifts Ungiven away.  I don’t think a single Gifts can yield the same type of advantages in Dry Slaver as it does in Gifts.  Taking away TFK from Slaver seems to weaken it in ways that Gifts Ungiven can not repair.  Thirst is the engine that slaver depends on to quickly draw into new cards and set up situation where it can just win.  It seems that Thirst is to Control Slaver as Gifts is to Meandeck Gifts.  They are the cards that will allow those decks to quickly set up for the kill.  However I find that one or two Gifts do have their merits in Control Slaver, but playing without Thirst just seems like it will take the life force away from the deck.  Obviously Dry Slaver is good and I congratulate you on your finish with this deck, but it just doesn’t seem to have as many broken possibilities as other Slaver builds.

[JR]

Steve,

If you were playing MDG against Dry Slaver, would you still incorporate the same plan of trying to stop Dry Slaver's draw engine? With only one thirst in the deck, would you rely on countering gifts ungiven? Assuming you were playing against Rich's list, would you counter different threats due to the number of maindeck cards such as tormod's crypt and reb that hurt MDG?

JR.

[Smmenen]

Steve,

If you were playing MDG against Dry Slaver, would you still incorporate the same plan of trying to stop Dry Slaver's draw engine? With only one thirst in the deck, would you rely on countering gifts ungiven? Assuming you were playing against Rich's list, would you counter different threats due to the number of maindeck cards such as tormod's crypt and reb that hurt MDG?

JR.

No.  I would DEFINately play the control role and I think that Rich's Dry Slaver would have little chance.   If MDG tries to play aggro, it will get annhilated against a build like this.

I mean, here's the thing: he only has 2 Welder.    MDG isn't going to lose counterspell wars on the stack.  Unlike Thirst, Gifts is much more unweildy.   

Whether I would counter Tormod's Crypt is a highly context specific decision.    My presumption would be _not_ to counter T. Crypt.   My early Gifts, if possible, would be control gifts.  This would be the case especially if he has a T. Crypt on the table.   I would get cards like Scroll, Brainstorm, Gifts, and Fact and build my way out.  With only two Welders, there is a realistic chance that Tinker for Colossus is also a viable game plan.   What you would have to do, once you have successfully got into the control role, is decide which route is most viable  If he has Crypt on you, then I would go for the Tinker plan.  If he has Welder on you, I would go for the Will plan in the late game.    If he has both, I would probably just try to bounce a welder and Tinker away for the win.   Alternatively, you may be able to just Chain and win with Tendrils. 

In either case, the scariest thing about Slaver, for me, was Thrist (after Tinker, of course).   The complete absence of that card means that I do not have to fear just getting reamed because his deck has "clicked".   THis looks like SSB, which is a bad Gifts deck.

[Gandalf_The_White_1]

In either case, the scariest thing about Slaver, for me, was Thrist (after Tinker, of course).   The complete absence of that card means that I do not have to fear just getting reamed because his deck has "clicked".   THis looks like SSB, which is a bad Gifts deck.

It does look like SSB, but maybe a bad Gifts deck is better than a good Slaver deck .

On a more serious note, however, I admire Rich's innovation with the Slaver archetype.  I was quite surprised to see a build like this, and were it not for the results that Rich has put up with it I think that a great many people would be more dismissive of the build (as some people still are).  It's certainly an interesting way to eliminate the problem of having dead cards in hand, which seems to happen to me all to frequently when I play Slaver.

[zeus-online]

I have actually always been very impressed by the speed which the thirst engine turns dead card hands into game winners, having a couple of dead-draws is pretty bad turn 1 and 2, but after that the engine usually takes care of it.

I'd say its an interesting build, but i liked the night's whisper build alot more.

/Zeus

[Sam Best]

I played this build at TMD Open X. Well a similar build with two Thirst for Knowledge and three Goblin Welders. I like the deck so much. I think it is a lot better against other decks because of the fact taht the deck relies more upon Gifts Ungiven to get the artifacts in the graveyard. In addition Empty the Warrens is such a good card. I think that putting one in the main might be a good idea, but that's just me.

[forests failed you]

Congratulations on your finish, Rich.

You have assembled a very interesting list; However, I am very skeptical about your having cut Thirst for Knowledge from the maindeck.  In my opinion, the Thirst for Knowledge draw engine is the reason to play Slaver in the first place.  The Synergy between Welder and Thirst is considerable, and the ability to make quick tempo based plays involving Thirst for Knowledge on the second turn setting up a powerful turn three is very common.

It makes me wonder if this Slaver varient lacks to ability to make big swingy tempo plays (based on the 4cc of Gifts), and how that fact changes its role from match up to match up.  I would assume that it makes the deck slightly slower and slightly less explosive than traditional CS.

[Sam Best]

I play a build similar to what shay posted. I think the deck is better using Gifts Ungiven over Thirst for Knowledge although still keeping one thirst for knowledge in the deck is still a good idea. Personally I think this makes the deck a bit faster because you can get the artifacts garenteed in the graveyard as long as it is not countered nor an artifact is not in your hand, thus working with welders alot better.

[The Atog Lord]

Excellent questions, Brian. Is the deck less explosive than traditional Control Slaver? There isn't a clear answer to that. One the one hand, this build is down three copies of Thirst for Knowledge -- a card which digs three deep for three mana. However, consider that the deck has added two Merchant Scrolls (while I've run a single copy in past builds, most CS builds run none). Merchant Scroll, should Ancestral not have already been cast, emulates a draw-three spell for 1UU. Thus, in some ways the added power of Merchant Scroll alleviates the pain of losing Thirsts. Thus there is really only a single draw spell under 3 mana lost in this build.

The gain, however, is a consistent win off Gifts. If there is a Welder in play, a resolved Thirst sometimes ends the game, but a resolved Gifts almost always ends the game. Moreover, once four mana is on the table, Thirst sometimes brings you closer to winning, but a resolved Gifts usually takes you a long ways toward winning.

How many times have you resolved a Thirst only to be disappointed by it, and wish that it did something better? I remember one of our games at SCG -- you resolved three Thirsts but none of them dug you into anything worthwhile. Gifts, on the other hand, is never disappointing -- it always does something really good. I've found that resolving a Gifts with this build secures victory much more often than resolving Thirst. I think that had you resolved a pair of Gifts instead of the three Thirsts in our game, you may well have won.

[Eandori]

How many times have you resolved a Thirst only to be disappointed by it, and wish that it did something better? I remember one of our games at SCG -- you resolved three Thirsts but none of them dug you into anything worthwhile. Gifts, on the other hand, is never disappointing -- it always does something really good. I've found that resolving a Gifts with this build secures victory much more often than resolving Thirst. I think that had you resolved a pair of Gifts instead of the three Thirsts in our game, you may well have won.

Sure, there are definately lots of times where my TFK digs down into three dead cards.  No doubt.

However...

There are also times where the game winning card is in my hand already and Gifts would be bad.  There's also many times that my mana is getting cut off at the knees and I just can't get to 4 until I do something threatening.  There's also times where games go late, I have 2 solid cards in the deck I need to dig to, and if I gifts for them they go into the wrong pile.

Having said all that, I'm not knocking this deck.  In my eyes, it's more of a gifts deck that can abuse welder and goes for a single slaver activation, then a Control Slaver deck that's abusing gifts.  Welder and Thirst is funny, because while not typically being the win condition, they are the backbone to Control Slaver.  Steve's comment for attacking the TFK's when playing against slaver is a good one.  When opposing decks hit my TFK's it's FAR harder for me to win.  Based on that, my typical sideboard against gifts is shaman/wasteland/REB/Stifle and maybe a plow.  So while that gifts deck is building up a hand to win a counter war, I'm knocking out his mana supply.

[Kirika]

Congratulations on your finish.  Nice Report and analyasis it was a very good read.

I like the Gifts Slaver Hybrid alot.  However not to sure on cutting down to just 1 Thirst for Knowledge.  I understand your arguments for it but it is a draw card for 3.  Yes sometimes it sucks to not have an artifact to discard and it makes sense that you cut down on Thirsts since you cut down on big artifacts to discard but why not 2 or 3 for more draw power?  Seems to me having more draw power is always good.  Sure sometimes you draw blanks and have to discard but that gets you by 3 cards so you can see more of your deck to get to what you need.  Sure gifts gets you waht you need but that doesn't mean you should cut all the thirsts sans one.  I feel having more draw power is good especially in control mirrors.

Why do you not run Burning Wish? You are runnning Tendrils and Empty the Warrens sideboard why not run burning Wish to enable the combo kill game 1.  This also gives you another way to win if you get caped for slaver, titan, triskelion. It also lets you fetch Pyroclasm to help the aggro match up which I find myself doing quite a bit since I play mostly at a local shop with no proxies.  I do also find myself wishing for tendrils or empty the warrens sometimes as well.

I understand trying to minimize the amount of cards that sit in your hand but it seems you are really vulnerable to cap.  I would think a 4th win condition would be a good idea.

How is Libary working for you?  I know its awesome in slower control matchs but I haven't run Library in awhile.  It does just win games sometimes but I always run Crucible / Stripmine / Darksteel Citadel so I have alot of colorless lands so I haven't run Library in awhile since the enviroment is so much faster you don't get to abuse it as much as in the past.  Considering going to Seat of Synod and using Library.   I understand you do not like Crucible of worlds but I like it because of the two locks that you can get with it and it can help with mana development with fetchlands netting card advantage.  Its not as good as it used to be in the new fast metagame but I still like to have the slaver or strip lock.

Have you tried Academy ruins?   I currently testing it but haven't really gotten to use it in the test games I have played.  It just seems not that great so far but a friend said to test it.

Also I found it odd that you didn't run Sphere of Resistance sideboard.   Is trickbind enough against storm combo?   They might just duress your trickbind or get out a defense grid or swarm.

[Mon, Goblin Chief]

Solid list & great post! Even though I think this should really rather be called Tinker-Gifts than a Slaver-deck.
Some basic comments:
Chain of Vapor MD would be great, simply because it's the single most storm-enabling card ever. This would be important, because like some other people in the thread I'd like to see B-Wish MD. Having a game one instant-kill can be very important in certain matchups. The one big problem I see with adding Chain is that it would take all scroll-able outs to Chalice at 1 away. (the B-Wish would give you one general one, but well...).

And now to what inspired me to post in a Slaver-threat actually. As Academy Ruins was already mentioned, this is pretty much the one single card that made me want to fool around with Slaver again after years. I mean Ruin + Welder (+ Mox) is a  slaver hardlock with 6 other mana and either way makes sure you don't run out of artifacts to weld when you need it. It'S also nice to draw Lotus once in a while for that mana-boost to power out Gifts or hardcast Slaver/Titan. It makes mana-Gifts-piles even more ridiculous in the same way. I think it should at least arguably be tried over LoA, especially without the TfK's to get back to seven.

[The Atog Lord]

Solid list & great post!

Thanks

Chain of Vapor MD would be great

There is no clear-cut better card between Chain of Vapor and Echoing Truth. Chain costs one less. Chain lets you ruin people after you Slave them, but that's not too important. In the end, I went with Truth because it gets around Chalice for One and it answers Empty the Warrens. In the end, either or both would be correct.

simply because it's the single most storm-enabling card ever.

There aren't any storm cards in the maindeck. There are in the sideboard, but I bring in Hurkyll's Recall there. HRecall costs one more, but it builds storm without destroying your lands. I've found that it's often a better card than Chain for the sole purpose of building Storm.

I'd like to see B-Wish MD. Having a game one instant-kill can be very important in certain matchups

It seems that everyone's first instinct is to add a kill card to the maindeck. However, there has not been a single game yet, either at the tournament or in testing, that I've lost but would have won with a maindeck kill spell. The explosive Yawgmoth's Wills, even when non-lethal, have so far left the opponent buried under such a pile of card advantage that the game is basically over at that point. Again, I understand the sentiment of wanting a kill in the maindeck, and the existence of Gifts decks which do rely on killing with Tendrils only makes it stronger. But I'll be more likely to include a kill spell just as soon as I lose a game to not having it.

As for Academy Ruins, that's worth testing. I honestly haven't tried it yet, and while I wouldn't expect too much, it could well be worth running. However, I'd not cut Library for it. I've won too many games with that one card. I don't understand why so many players are so quick to cut Library -- I can't imagine doing so.

[Sam Best]

Rich I have the same feeling as you do on Academy Ruins. Like you have told me in the past that once you slave someone it usually will wreak them. Plus there are enough artifacts that you can weld in and out to recur the Mindslaver, at least thats how I feel

[Mon, Goblin Chief]

About Burning Wish and CoV: I think I was not clear enough on what I was thinking about, the idea for the two was pretty much that of adding both at the same time. At the moment this deck basically seems very focussed on winning with Tinker/Welder after Gifts, rather than with Will. This can cause some problems especially under Null Rod or against something  a bit more random like Oath. Having MD Tendrils-access (through Wish) and the CoV would allow the deck to simply push for the typical Gifts Will-kill in situations where the big artifacts just turn out to not be feasible (pitched Time Walk comes to mind here, too). It's also not that hard to kill with Chain and Wish, as long as you have drawn a few Moxen.
What makes this an interesting thing to do for me is the low opportunity cost the move has (CotV= 1 aside, which is the one big problem I see). Burning Wish is actually good, giving you Warrens access game one, getting Duress (-which i really think is to sweet a SB card atm to ignore either way), Shattering Spree and, if you free a SB slot, Deep Analysis. Chain is simply the cheapest solution ever (aka a fine card) and has some synergy with Slaver (I see this as a minor point, too. If you Slaver, life should usually be good).

The one point I strongly disagree with you is about Hurkyl's being a better storm-enabler than Chain. Even though I'm playing more standard-Gifts, usually, the fact that CoV costs one mana less makes very regularly superior (especially if you have to Scroll for it during your kill turn). That doesn't mean I wouldn't run the Hurkyl's -every deck with Merchant Scrolls should have one - just that in my experience Chain is in most cases stronger as a combo-piece when figuring out tight wins.

[Methuselahn]

I think the problem with your logic here is that you assume this deck is a Gifts deck that wants to combo out with Tendrils.  This isn't the Plan A of the deck.   As said before, the deck isn't built to be a storm deck in game one AT ALL.  The reason for Gifts is to abuse Tinker first, then Will.

Your argument for facing Null Rod and Oath is nullified by the fact that Rich ran this list in an Oathless and Null Rod-less meta.  Actively choosing this deck because of what we expected.

I guess it's worth mentioning that Burning Wish has almost exclusively been used by Demars.  We've stayed away from Wishes for quite some time.   The belief is that you are spending 2 mana when you don't have too as well as nuetering a large section of your sideboard.

[Mon, Goblin Chief]

I think the problem with your logic here is that you assume this deck is a Gifts deck that wants to combo out with Tendrils.  This isn't the Plan A of the deck.   As said before, the deck isn't built to be a storm deck in game one AT ALL.  The reason for Gifts is to abuse Tinker first, then Will.

The point here is that you give up not much at all and gain a complete plan B. I don't want it to play as Storm-Gifts first and foremost, I just think it might be interesting for the deck to actually have a maindeck plan b that does not rely on artifacts and creatures. The investment necessary for that seems so low to me, that it should at least be considered.

Your argument for facing Null Rod and Oath is nullified by the fact that Rich ran this list in an Oathless and Null Rod-less meta.  Actively choosing this deck because of what we expected.

Well, if I understood the purpose behind Rich's post correctly, he didn't post to brag about how great his deck was, but to present it as a viable option for being played, and, following from that obviously possibly in other metagames. With which I completely agree, as, honestly, selling this deck as a pure meta-choice (as I'd have to take your argument if different metagames wouldn't come into play) is would be a waste, imo. I was looking for a way to get Mindslaver into Gifts (before I cut Tinker that is), but didn't find a well balanced, 60 card way. This deck seems to be at least very very close.
That is what makes the deck looks strong in general to me, it focuses on setting up the second most busted card in the format, the one that actual needs directed help, while using the most broken one as it's general smashing tool. I think this direction for Gifts to go in, is very promising and might turn out to be one of the lasting top decks of the format - at which point looking at all kinds of metas and matchups becomes very relevant.

I guess it's worth mentioning that Burning Wish has almost exclusively been used by Demars.  We've stayed away from Wishes for quite some time.   The belief is that you are spending 2 mana when you don't have too as well as nuetering a large section of your sideboard.

Well, in this case the "large section of the SB" would be one card (the Deep Analysis you might have to add), as I strongly believe Duress should be there anyway. As for you having stayed away from Wish for a long time, well, you usually were running Slaver with more TfK's and less Gifts and Recoups, I assume. If you don't have pretty much the whole Gifts-engine in place and don't have Storm-cards already in the SB, there obviously is far less incentive for running Burning Wish.
As for the two mana thing, you could also look at it as a set-up play like Merchant Scroll. It just fetches Duress instead of FoW, EtW instead of Fire/Ice, D.A. instead of FoF and happens to allow for an instant kill in addition to it (not to mention random Recoup-synergies).

It's not like I'm saying "omg, moron, how can you not have run Burning Wish and Chain of Vapor, wtf!!11!!", I'm just suggesting that one should consider running those cards in the deck as the necessary synergies are for the most part already there and they give you a whole bunch of additional options and extra raw power for a surprisingly small investment.

[Methuselahn]

You're right on several accounts.  Cards should be constantly re-evaluated.  I agree that Wish and Chain should be considered.  During the final tuning that was done before Rich took this to the Myriad tournament we opted not to run Chain of Vapor.  Also, If I recall correctly, we discussed the availability of having a win-now gameplan.  We decided not to include one.  So, this small investment for a plan B that you suggest wasn't used and it seemed to pay off.

It's true that Rich posted the list and thread to introduce a fresh way of playing Gifts.   In this sense, you're right, the build can be considered for any meta.  In my opinion, the caveat is making sure you only play the deck when conditions are ripe for it.

I'll just say that comparing Burning Wish to Merchant Scroll is unfair.   They really are two different tutors.  Sure, they're both 2 manas, but Scroll is far more useful in the early-mid game being able to fetch Force (where tutoring for a SB Duress requires 3 mana and may be too slow versus Long decks.)  Merchant Scroll also acts as a real draw engine, netting 3 cards off Ancestral for 3 mana, rather than 6 mana for 2 cards (wish for DA)

By all means, play this deck with Burning Wish and any other tweaks you deem appropriate.  I would love to see more Slaver varients win.   

[Godder]

Burning Wish is also restricted, so a comparison between Merchant Scroll and Cunning Wish is probably more apt. In that case, you get a Sorcery, but it's 1 cheaper, and you don't need to build a Wishboard, so you still have a sideboard (although it's possible to run 1 Cunning Wish to Scroll for at a hideous loss of Tempo).

[+t]

I've also really been liking Warrens main.  Like Tinker, it is a great early/midgame threat, is virtually uncounterable, and at the very worst gives you some chumps versus fish/ichorid.  Am I horribly off base here?

[The Atog Lord]

I've also really been liking Warrens main.  Like Tinker, it is a great early/midgame threat, is virtually uncounterable, and at the very worst gives you some chumps versus fish/ichorid.  Am I horribly off base here?

Not at all. Empty the Warrens is quite a powerful card. There may well be a metagame that calls for its maindeck inclusion.

[rammgorr]

hi everyone,

i want to play a Dry Slaver Deck at my regional Tournament (many Gifts, Fish etc..., no proxy). But unfortunately i didn't own a lotus and a twister and LoA. ok, lotus is the more needed and useful card. so i want to play it like this:

Mana Base (24):
    1 Flooded Strand
    3 Island
    4 Polluted Delta
    1 Tolarian Academy
    2 Underground Sea
    4 Volcanic Island
    1 Mox Emerald
    1 Mox Jet
    1 Mox Pearl
    1 Mox Ruby
    1 Mox Sapphire
    1 Mana Crypt   
    1 Mana Vault
    1 Lotus Petal or Gilded Lotus or Lotus Bloom or one more land instead of Black Lotus ????
    1 Sol Ring

Control Package (12):
    4 Force of Will
    4 Mana Drain
    1 Red Elemental Blast
    1 Tormod's Crypt
    1 Echoing Truth
    1 Repeal

Main Base (19):
    4 Brainstorm
    1 Ancestral Recall
    2 Gifts Ungiven
    2 Thirst for Knowledge
    2 Merchant Scroll
    1 Mystical Tutor
    1 Vampiric Tutor
    1 Demonic Tutor
    1 Recoup
    1 Empty the Warrens
    1 Time Walk
    1 Tinker
    1 Yawgmoth's Will

Control Slaver Engine (5):
    2 Goblin Welder
    1 Sundering Titan
    1 Triskelion
    1 Mindslaver

Sideboard (15):
   2 Red Elemental Blast
   1 Tormod's Crypt
   2 Empty the Warrens
   3 Pithing Needle
   2 Hurkyl's Recall   
   2 Trickbind
   1 Massacre
   2 Flametongue Kavu

What did you think of this Deck missing the Black Lotus? Or, it is playable?

Greez