[Premium Article] So Many Insane Plays -- Understanding Dredge, By the Numbers

[meadbert]

For all  of those times that you didn't have enough tokens to win with FKZ, does that outweigh the cost of having a dead card all of the times that you CAN just win with FKZ?  If you are running Hypnotist, you aren't running something else -- something potentially more useful in the early game, such as Leyline or Strip Mine or Unmask. 

I believe the comparison is between Zealot and Hypnotist.  I do not think anyone has suggested dropping Leyline, Strip Mine or Unmask so you can run both 3xZealot and 3xHypnotist.  That would be bad.

Most of the time you win with either one.

Then there are cases where you only have a few creatures tot sacrifice so emptying a hand with Hypnotist wins and Zealot loses.

Finally there are other times where you have enough creatures to just win right now with Zealot, but Hypnotist passes the turn and your opponent Vamped for Yawg/Vault/Key and just untaps and wins.

I have not kept a careful count so this is not scientific, but I test Dredge a ton and I would say that the Hypnotist is more likely to win than the Zealot.  This does not mean that 3x Hypnotist is correct.  In fact the best mix may be 2xHypnotist and then 1 Zealot.  This way you sometimes get an option.

[Sam101]

This might be a little off topic, but I think one of the reason's ichorid is underperforming is because its just so boring to play.  I've stopped bringing ichorid to tournaments because all the games are so similar and lack any real decision making, and I think a lot of other players have done the same.

Its not that its not a powerful deck, its just that I play magic because its fun and mentally stimulating (and I like winning big, but that never happens) and playing with ichorid takes away from those two factors.

[Troy_Costisick]

This might be a little off topic, but I think one of the reason's ichorid is underperforming is because its just so boring to play.  I've stopped bringing ichorid to tournaments because all the games are so similar and lack any real decision making, and I think a lot of other players have done the same.

Ichorid decks are not underperforming at all.  In fact, the last 4 months have shown it to be a top tier deck.  It has enjoyed quite a bit of success lately.

[Smmenen]

For all  of those times that you didn't have enough tokens to win with FKZ, does that outweigh the cost of having a dead card all of the times that you CAN just win with FKZ?  If you are running Hypnotist, you aren't running something else -- something potentially more useful in the early game, such as Leyline or Strip Mine or Unmask.  

I believe the comparison is between Zealot and Hypnotist.  I do not think anyone has suggested dropping Leyline, Strip Mine or Unmask so you can run both 3xZealot and 3xHypnotist.  That would be bad.

Take another look at the article, including the breakdown.  For example, only 2 of the 38 lists had Strip Mine maindeck.   And the vast majority of lists only ran 1 Flame Kin.   The 2nd Flame Kin only showed up in 11 of the 38 lists.

There wasn't a SINGLE decklist in the 38 top 8 decks taht ran 3 FKZ.   I'm not sure where you are getting this from. 


We are definitely not talking about 3 Zealot v. 3 Hypnotist.  We are talking about Hypnotist v. other cards.  

[wiley]

For all  of those times that you didn't have enough tokens to win with FKZ, does that outweigh the cost of having a dead card all of the times that you CAN just win with FKZ?  If you are running Hypnotist, you aren't running something else -- something potentially more useful in the early game, such as Leyline or Strip Mine or Unmask.  

I believe the comparison is between Zealot and Hypnotist.  I do not think anyone has suggested dropping Leyline, Strip Mine or Unmask so you can run both 3xZealot and 3xHypnotist.  That would be bad.

Take another look at the article, including the breakdown.  For example, only 2 of the 38 lists had Strip Mine maindeck.   And the vast majority of lists only ran 1 Flame Kin.   The 2nd Flame Kin only showed up in 11 of the 38 lists.

There wasn't a SINGLE decklist in the 38 top 8 decks taht ran 3 FKZ.   I'm not sure where you are getting this from.  


We are definitely not talking about 3 Zealot v. 3 Hypnotist.  We are talking about Hypnotist v. other cards.  

The zealot comes in a package that includes cephalid sage (or river kelpie).  They usually run 3-4 dread returns, 1 fkz and 1-2 sage.  The hypnotist package, while only being worthwhile in a fatestitcher build, requires 2 dread returns and 2 hypnotists and 2-4 fatestitcher.  The fatesticher build requires more space if you include the fatestitchers (which are debatable).  However, with the stitchers you have an uncounterable way to dredge through your deck as opposed to using a dread return on sage.  This means that for two slots you get a deck that is a) effectively as fast, b) harder to disrupt with common hate, c) requires less resources to actually win.

I still don't think that either one is the correct choice, but those are the comparisons for a fkz package vs. sh package.  I've been thinking that it might just be better to stick with grave troll as your main dread return target and use the 2-6 freed slots for even more disruption.  I haven't been able to test it in a few months though.

EDIT

Finally, even if you don't have enough tokens to win, do you really need Hypnotist to not lose?  For every scenario set out: where you don't have enough tokens to win with FKZ, but you can Dread Return Hypnotist, it is obviously not the case that you will need Hypnotist to not lose every single one of those instances.  The question is: which proportion of them?

There is a second part to this question as well that leads me into my thinking above.  How many games do you dread return fkz with >6 zombies for the win where you would not have won the next turn with just a grave troll?  I kept track of that for a long time (triple digit games) when testing during the early portions of the gush era (a fairly fast environment) and noted that even if I hadn't used the sages I would have won with whatever size troll I had + ichorids and zombies on the next turn a wide majority of the time.  The kill conditions have shifted, so it might be a different story today but it is still worth looking at.

[voltron00x]

Adan:

Wiley and Meadbert answered this in Replies 15 & 16. Flame-Kin Zealot is a win if you have enough tokens, but if you don't have lethal damage, giving them the extra turn may be game over. Sadistic Hypnotist is a slower win, but it rips apart their hand, and they're forced to hope for Yawg Will, and even then, they'll have needed to have dropped 3 mana producers beforehand.

It's a matter of choice, but if you can't guarantee 6 tokens to swing with the Zealot, the Hypnotist looks better.

But there are important counter-arguments.

For all  of those times that you didn't have enough tokens to win with FKZ, does that outweigh the cost of having a dead card all of the times that you CAN just win with FKZ?  If you are running Hypnotist, you aren't running something else -- something potentially more useful in the early game, such as Leyline or Strip Mine or Unmask.  

Finally, even if you don't have enough tokens to win, do you really need Hypnotist to not lose?  For every scenario set out: where you don't have enough tokens to win with FKZ, but you can Dread Return Hypnotist, it is obviously not the case that you will need Hypnotist to not lose every single one of those instances.  The question is: which proportion of them?  

Was typing up an answer to your first argument, but I got ninja'd.  The argument is between targets like Cephalid Sage / Kelpie to speed the deck into hitting FKZ, sometimes supported by one other creature (like Angel, Primus, Titan, etc).  This is the Dread Return model we see in Legacy and often in Vintage.  The other package runs Fatestitcher and Hypnotist.  You can argue between those two packages, but throwing the cards you mentioned into the mix just derails the conversation.

Regarding your second argument, that one IS valid but would require a lot of testing to figure out the proportion with any amount of accuracy.  Clearly, though, it IS quite possible that giving your Tezzeret opponent a third turn will result in them assembling Key / Vault, or your TPS opponent killing you, etc.  Further, in the third game, you can use a CoV to bounce, say, Jailer, and then assemble enough from one Bazaar activation to Hypnotist away the Jailer from their hand.  

The relevant question isn't the one you asked, which is a question that really can't be answered accurately, but rather:  what proportion of games do you Hypnotist someone's hand away on turn 2 and STILL lose?  I guarantee it approches very close to 0%.  Given that fact, why would you EVER give your opponent another turn to beat you when that % is definitely higher?  That makes no sense from an EV standpoint.

EDIT:  Regarding your question above, as I stated on SCG, those extra Hypnotists aren't really going to be "dead" cards.  They're food for Ichorid and can be pitched to Unmask.

[Smmenen]

EDIT:  Regarding your question above, as I stated on SCG, those extra Hypnotists aren't really going to be "dead" cards.  They're food for Ichorid and can be pitched to Unmask.

I misspoke when I said "dead." I meant have too high of an opportunity cost.   

I don't think the question you posed is actually the most relevant one.  It's an important question, but the most important question is the first one I asked, but tweaked:

For all  of those times that you didn't have enough tokens to win with FKZ, does that outweigh the cost of having a less than optimal card all of the times that you CAN just win with FKZ? 

[hitman]

I really liked this article.  These composites really get to the meat and potatoes of a list.  The composite list at the end of the article is excellent. 

Regarding Sadistic Hynoptist, if I'm using it as a source of disruption, I don't want to have to assemble two cards in the graveyard, three creatures in play and have cleared the way with Cabal Therapies to resolve the Dread Return in the first place.  If you're going through all this trouble, wouldn't it be more efficient to just run two Flame-Kin Zealot and two Cephalid Sage?  If you don't have enough creatures to win with, Cephalid Sage will all but ensure that you will by the time you're done dredging.  If your goal is to overwhelm your opponent with disruption, there has to be something better than a strategy that has you jumping through all those hoops.  I think if the problem is not having enough creatures for Flame-Kin Zealot to be lethal, the solution to this problem is just making it more likely that you have enough creatures in play, not discarding your opponent's hand.

[Adan]

Adan:

Wiley and Meadbert answered this in Replies 15 & 16. Flame-Kin Zealot is a win if you have enough tokens, but if you don't have lethal damage, giving them the extra turn may be game over. Sadistic Hypnotist is a slower win, but it rips apart their hand, and they're forced to hope for Yawg Will, and even then, they'll have needed to have dropped 3 mana producers beforehand.

It's a matter of choice, but if you can't guarantee 6 tokens to swing with the Zealot, the Hypnotist looks better.

Still makes no sense to me. There are 2 situations described here:

The first one is: You Therapy your opponent, have 3 creatures and 2 Bridges (which should be the average on Turn 3). You Dread Return FKZ and smash the opponent with 21 damage.

The second would be yours: You have 3 creatures, 0-1 Bridges in your graveyard (and that after dredging like... 3 times 15 cards average?). This should be against all odds anyway.
But even if that happens, you can still swing for ~ 15 Damage and hand-rape the opponent with multiple Therapies (assuming I still have some in the GY which is possible) afterwards. And then I am still winning on the turn after if the opponent doesn't topdeck like Nassif. Same effect! Plus you will have some tokens remaining to beat up the opponent.

In the same scenario with 0-1 Bridges, Hypnotist should be worse than FKZ, because you will Dread Return it, get 3 tokens which you sacrifice to mindtwist the Opp. So, on the next turn, the only thing you can beat the opponent with are some Ichorids and the Hypnotist. And I don't think that's lethal either.

[voltron00x]

Adan:

Wiley and Meadbert answered this in Replies 15 & 16. Flame-Kin Zealot is a win if you have enough tokens, but if you don't have lethal damage, giving them the extra turn may be game over. Sadistic Hypnotist is a slower win, but it rips apart their hand, and they're forced to hope for Yawg Will, and even then, they'll have needed to have dropped 3 mana producers beforehand.

It's a matter of choice, but if you can't guarantee 6 tokens to swing with the Zealot, the Hypnotist looks better.

Still makes no sense to me. There are 2 situations described here:

The first one is: You Therapy your opponent, have 3 creatures and 2 Bridges (which should be the average on Turn 3). You Dread Return FKZ and smash the opponent with 21 damage.

The second would be yours: You have 3 creatures, 0-1 Bridges in your graveyard (and that after dredging like... 3 times 15 cards average?). This should be against all odds anyway.
But even if that happens, you can still swing for ~ 15 Damage and hand-rape the opponent with multiple Therapies (assuming I still have some in the GY which is possible) afterwards. And then I am still winning on the turn after if the opponent doesn't topdeck like Nassif. Same effect! Plus you will have some tokens remaining to beat up the opponent.

In the same scenario with 0-1 Bridges, Hypnotist should be worse than FKZ, because you will Dread Return it, get 3 tokens which you sacrifice to mindtwist the Opp. So, on the next turn, the only thing you can beat the opponent with are some Ichorids and the Hypnotist. And I don't think that's lethal either.

Turn 1:  Play Bazaar, activate, discard Fatestitcher, Grave-Troll, Ichorid.  Play chalice of the void (which opponent may FoW depending on their hand).

Turn 2: Upkeep, activate Bazaar.  Dredge into one Narcomoeba.  Draw for turn, Dredge.  Play City of Brass, Unearth Fatestitcher, Dredge twice more.  At this point we've been able to Dredge 5 times, which we'll call 25 cards, so we've seen somewhere around 30 cards total.  At this point, it is relatively safe to assume we've hit another Narc (so 2 total) and have 2 Bridges in the yard, so including Fatestitcher there are 3 creatures in play.  If we're playing at least 2 Hypnotists, there is a good chance we hit one, as well as a Dread Return.  Cabal Therapy on one Narc will leave us with 2 Zombies, 1 Narc, and 1 Fatestitcher.  Dread return at this point will yield a total of 2 more zombies, which is not enough to go lethal with FKZ.  

If you had 3 Bridges, you may be able to go lethal with FKZ (sac one to cabal therapy, yielding 3 tokens.  Sac 3 other creatures to bring back FKZ.  You will have 5 zombies plus FKZ totaling 18 pts of damage).  OR, you can choose not to Cabal Therapy and just go blind, which would be lethal if it resolves (DR 2 narcs plus fatestitcher yielding 6 tokens and FKZ, for 21 damage).  However, after 30 cards, 2 Bridges is the average, 3 the exception.

The question is this:  which would you rather do at this point, Dread Return into Cephalid Sage, allowing you to Dredge again and hopefully hit more Bridges, Narcs, and therapies?  OR, would you rather just Dread Return into Hypnotist?  If you bring back Hypnotist, you'd sacrifice Narc, Fatestitcher, and a token, ending up with 3 tokens and Hypnotist.  Your opponent should have 4-7 cards in hand, so worst-case scenario you can sacrifice all 4 creatures to clear out their hand, leaving them with only a land in play and leaving you with 2 2/2 zombies and a graveyard full of gas.  Best case scenario (if they have 3-4 cards in hand), you only have to sac one token and the Hypnotist, leaving you with 4 2/2 tokens and them with no hand, and you with a graveyard full of gas.  

Again, you SHOULD be able to win if you DR into Sage, but you WILL have cards left in your library, so there is a chance that you'll whiff and they'll get another turn.  

In my mind, playing Hypnotist is just playing the averages.  Ichorid is a very random deck.  You're at the mercy of whatever flips over off your library.  Turn 2 Hypnotist is relatively easy to achieve based on the average draw with the deck, and will win you probably 99.9% of games once Hypnotist hits the, uh, Battlefield.

Man that sounds weird.

[nataz]

Turn 2: Upkeep, activate Bazaar.  Dredge into one Narcomoeba.  Draw for turn, Dredge.  Play City of Brass, Unearth Fatestitcher, Dredge twice more.  At this point we've been able to Dredge 5 times, which we'll call 25 cards, so we've seen somewhere around 30 cards total.  At this point, it is relatively safe to assume we've hit another Narc (so 2 total) and have 2 Bridges in the yard, so including Fatestitcher there are 3 creatures in play.  If we're playing at least 2 Hypnotists, there is a good chance we hit one, as well as a Dread Return.  Cabal Therapy on one Narc will leave us with 2 Zombies, 1 Narc, and 1 Fatestitcher.  Dread return at this point will yield a total of 2 more zombies, which is not enough to go lethal with FKZ.  

Why this obsession with sage. At the point in time you describe, and using your lose odds (aka seen half the deck) why not follow thought with this line of play. First dread return hits grave troll. Second return hits FKZ. win. It does require 2 returns and 2 cabal therp, but that isn't that unlikely if you see half your deck.Also, if you had played fast mana, you could have played it before chalice, and fatestiched first turn. This would allow a better second turn, almost assuring a win. Double so if you hit another fatesticher for turn 2. Grave troll is the best offensive weapon in the deck, you you are going to play 4 anyways. Why not maximize its use.

I'd stop comparing FS + Hypnotist with FKZ and Sage. Rather compare it against FKZ and Fast Mana and Fatesticher.  

[meadbert]

Still makes no sense to me. There are 2 situations described here:

The first one is: You Therapy your opponent, have 3 creatures and 2 Bridges (which should be the average on Turn 3). You Dread Return FKZ and smash the opponent with 21 damage.

Hypnotist is a poor choice if you are planning to Dread Return on turn 3.  Now with Fatestitchers for Powder Dredge and Breakthrough/Careful Study for Mana Dredge the fundamental turn is closer to turn 2.  If FKZ could reliably win on turn 2 then I would be all for it.  Winning now is just best.  The trouble it is still common to only have 2-3 creatures post Dread Return on turn 2 thus forcing your opponent to discard 4-6 cards is better than swinging for 6 or 9 damage.

I could definitely see 2xHypnotist and 1xZealot being the optimal solution.  You will still usually have Hypnotist on turn 2.  You will usually have the win now option if you must wait for turn 3 and if you are lucky enough to have mana creatures on turn 2 you may be lucky enough to have Zealot and go for the turn 2 win.

[Adan]

The question is this:  which would you rather do at this point, Dread Return into Cephalid Sage, allowing you to Dredge again and hopefully hit more Bridges, Narcs, and therapies?  OR, would you rather just Dread Return into Hypnotist?  If you bring back Hypnotist, you'd sacrifice Narc, Fatestitcher, and a token, ending up with 3 tokens and Hypnotist.  Your opponent should have 4-7 cards in hand, so worst-case scenario you can sacrifice all 4 creatures to clear out their hand, leaving them with only a land in play and leaving you with 2 2/2 zombies and a graveyard full of gas.  Best case scenario (if they have 3-4 cards in hand), you only have to sac one token and the Hypnotist, leaving you with 4 2/2 tokens and them with no hand, and you with a graveyard full of gas.  

I would just Therapy him for relevant cards and win on the next turn...? I mean, if I'd DR Hypnotist, I'd do EXACTLY the same (oh, well, you would sac 1 or 2 more creatures to discard the chaff as well).

On a sidenote, I play Powder Dredge without Stitchers (as seen here: http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=1036)
Optionally, I sometimes play with Petrified Fields: (as seen here: http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=1051&highlight=Petrified_Field)

The list only plays 2 FKZs as Dread Return targets as they allow you to win immediately (the list from Annecy runs only 1 due to slot-issues caused by the inclusion of the Fields though).

[FAVO!!!!1]

I don't think the question you posed is actually the most relevant one.  It's an important question, but the most important question is the first one I asked, but tweaked:

For all  of those times that you didn't have enough tokens to win with FKZ, does that outweigh the cost of having a less than optimal card all of the times that you CAN just win with FKZ? 

The only answer I have ever come to your question has been "Do I want to give my opponent another opportunity?" The obvious answer is no, which means our next question is "How do we prevent this?" My answer has also resulted in running the Hypnotist build as well, with the same scenarios presented by meadbert.

Hypnotist is a poor choice if you are planning to Dread Return on turn 3.  Now with Fatestitchers for Powder Dredge and Breakthrough/Careful Study for Mana Dredge the fundamental turn is closer to turn 2.  If FKZ could reliably win on turn 2 then I would be all for it.  Winning now is just best.  The trouble it is still common to only have 2-3 creatures post Dread Return on turn 2 thus forcing your opponent to discard 4-6 cards is better than swinging for 6 or 9 damage.

FKZ fundamental turn in Powder Dredge is usually turn 3, where Hypnotists fundamental turn is often turn 2. In the games where you don't dredge 30 cards by turn 2 (aka hands without the mana needed to unearth Fatestitcher), you will rarely yield the hit you need to win on turn 2 with a FKZ. The Hypnotist version needs less specific cards to win, which is why he gets the nod over FKZ in my builds. I would like a land in my opening 9 or less (counting Bazaar activation) to help power through my deck, but it isn't the end of the world if I don't get it.

Where with FKZ, not hitting enough Bridges on turn 2 when you want to Dread Return (assuming you hit 3 Narcomoeba in 18 cards), will give your opponent another turn (you generally want 2 Bridges in this case.) Hypnotist needs at most 2 Bridges/2 Narcomoebas or 3 Narcomoebas/1 Bridge in addition to your Dread Return to get your turn 2 Mind Twist. Which is easier to assemble?

Don't get me wrong, I understand the fact that assembling both of these outcomes with the scenario of only "drawing" 18 cards a turn is a high probability. But I can assure you (please don't make me do the math, I forgot how I did it before and I won't have time to do it for another 3 weeks) that drawing the perfect Hypnotist hand is easier than the perfect FKZ hand.

On top of this, playing the Hypnotist version cuts down on the number of outs your opponent has to your turn 3 FKZ. Force of Will is not the end all answer to Ichorid main deck (although it is a very good answer to someone walking in blind), because some people still run Echoing Truth, Tormod's Cyrpt, and Engineered Explosives main deck (not many, but those people still exist and I prefer to not get blown out by them.)

(BTW: Feeding Ichorid and Casting Unmask is just icing on the cake to me.)

[Doomsday]

Sorry if this seems like a dumb question.  Why does no one use Sutured Ghoul in the manaless build anymore?  He wins the game the turn he comes out, where the Zealot can take an extra turn.  Not trying to argue for one over the other, just genuinely interested in the reason for the switch from some of the older decks. 

[Troy_Costisick]

Sorry if this seems like a dumb question.  Why does no one use Sutured Ghoul in the manaless build anymore?  He wins the game the turn he comes out, where the Zealot can take an extra turn.  Not trying to argue for one over the other, just genuinely interested in the reason for the switch from some of the older decks. 

He doesn't have haste, so it gives your opponent a turn to find bounce and get rid of him.  At least, that's why I don't.

[Doomsday]

Whoops, I should have explained.  It uses Dragon Breath as well to give him haste when he comes into play.

[wiley]

Because the zealot kill is split up betweem 7 different sources, meaning chain of vapor and swords to plowshares don't ruin your day.  It also leaves you with ichorids in the yard in case something else goes wrong.

[Doomsday]

So it's for when you have enough creatures to dread return but not enough to use therapy first (or multiple times depending on what you see) and no unmask?

[wiley]

Sutured Ghoul / Dragon Breath


Pros:
Fewer pieces are required to be dredged away to win than other kills


Cons
Pieces are useless without each other
Vulnerable to bounce of all sorts
Harder hit by graveyard hate


Flame-Kin Zealot & flashpoint of creatures

Pros:
Takes up fewer slots than Ghoul
Vulnerable to only Echoing Truth via bounce
Narcomoeba and Bridge from Below are both great on their own.


Cons:
The combo needs at least six other 2/2 (One can be a 1/1) creatures in play when Flame-Kin returns to play for lethal damage. This almost always requires at least two Bridges in the graveyard, or a bit of luck with turn 1 dredging for Ichorid or hitting multiple Narcomoeba. Certainly not unfeasible, but notable.

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/vintage/14098_Deconstructing_Constructed_Not_Another_Ichorid_Article.html

Better?  Being forced into running crap like shambling shell and street wraith kind of suck with current dredge as well.

[Doomsday]

Thanks man.  I wasn't being sarcastic or anything, just trying to see what people were saying the actual advantage was.

[Beralt]

I initially wrote off Hypnotist when it was brought into the build but more and more I see it as a valuable tool for ensuring a win against a well prepared opponent - stripping their hand so they are forced into top deck mode and then winning over a few turns seems a more inevitable win then trying for the one big turn win scenario.

It does pitch to Unmask and feed Ichorid.  It can clear the way against hidden threats - but I am still not 100% sold - maybe M10 will bring us closer to a decision by including some metagame altering cards.

[Korhil]

New Zealands Vintage Nationals were won by Fatestitcher Dredge.

The list played:

4 Bridge from Below
4 Serum Powder
4 Narcomeba
4 Ichorid
3 Fatestitcher

4 Unmask
4 Cabal Therapy
4 Chalice of the Void

4 Golgari Grave Troll
4 Stinkweed Imp
4 Golgari Thug

3 Dread Return
2 Sadistic Hypnotist
1 Flamekin Zealot

4 Bazaar of Baghdad
4 City of Brass
3 Gemstone Mine

Sideboard:
1 Gemstone Mine
4 Chain of Vapor
3 Emerald Charm
2 Contagion
2 Dark Blast
3 Ancient Grudge

There were no Leylines in the field, so the Charms could have been something else.
Ancient Grudge was key in atleast one game. EOT bounced a Relic, then dropped a Chalice for 1 (Chalice for zero was already on table) after failing to dredge into a Cabal Therapy/Narco.
The Grudge was able to remove Chalice on the following turn and allow him to go off.

---Korhil