Has Jace Mindsculpted the Vintage Community?

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

There seems to be a massive amount of discussion revolving around Jace that may or may not be derailing a bunch of threads so I'm hoping to confine all the discussion on him to one thread. Now that people have had time to test Jace it is no longer wild speculation such as in the pre-WW era. It seems appropriate that I start with my own opinion before asking for yours so:

Recent tournament results and public opinion seem to have solidified Jace as a likely Vintage staple. However, does he deserve this place of honor or has Jace somehow managed to escape his cardboard prison and manipulate our minds? I have a strong opinion that Jace, while a good card, is not worthy of the recent attention he is getting. The phrase of the week seems to be "well if you resolve Jace you just win." Pardon? I severely doubt that Jace is pulling people out of terrible situations to come from behind and contend that Jace is merely a generic card that lets you keep winning once you've already won. Jace is a very slow engine (both in terms of mana cost and turns) that requires your opponent to have no creatures in play to function.

Against Workshops and Fish (let alone Dredge or combo) it is almost impossible to imagine situations where Jace is anything but a 4-7 mana Brainstorm or Unsummon. However, the proponents of Jace will argue that Jace dominates the Tezz and Oath matchups. I have only one thing to say to that, doesn't Tezz do the same thing? Now I'm sure that winning the game when you untap has gotten boring for the Vintage community and that it is way more fun to pretend Brainstorming every turn is interactive. Hell, I hate Time Vault with more emotion than any healthy human should have invested in a piece of cardboard and winning with it feels dirty. However, I'm far from being above using it to win.

Some will cite the flexibility of Jace as a winning point. I respond to this claim by asking how relevant it is. Workshops and Fish have lock pieces and creatures to nullify Jace, Dredge and Combo are far too fast, and control decks can mostly ignore his secondary effect. Tinker->robot is usually a plan F in control mirrors (not to mention Inkwell's popularity)and if you're bouncing Dark Confidant every turn you're doing it wrong. Ah but what about Oath? Their creatures can be bounced and they are also very threatening. Unfortunately, the claim that Jace is good against Oath often gets a spiffy paint job done over it to cover up all the cracks. What are you bouncing? Terastadon blows up Jace, the dragons just kill him, and combo versions just ignore him. Anyone who is running Eldrazi is quite frankly asking to lose. Ah but it gets rid of Iona, which nobody can ignore. That is a 100% true statement and means Jace is a staple. Well...I mean yeah theres some tiny text that says you need Jace before they get Iona in play and also that Iona is accomplished by going infinite or Terastadon so if your opponent has Oath online they've probably already beat you etc. etc.

So why do so many people think Jace is winning them games? My own testing indicates that any game Jace "wins" for me could have just as easily been accomplished by something as mediocre as Concentrate. The simple solution is that somebody is wrong. I'm far from infallible so it is perfectly possible my own experiences are wrong and given the recent support for Jace it is highly likely I am wrong. However, I would like to give this one challenge to the Vintage community. Every time you cast Jace think to yourself "did Jace really win me this game or could it just as easily been won by card X?" Hopefully somebody can take it upon themselves to record just how Jace is dominating compared to other options in that deck slot.

I would love to be proven wrong as it would be quite comforting to know the power level of Vintage isn't so ridiculous in its current form that something as good as Jace is dwarfed so let the discussion hopefully commence.

[honestabe]

I agree.  In my testing, every time I cast Jace, I wished it was Tezz.  One says brainstorm every turn, the other says take infinite turns.

That isn't to say I think he's bad, but Tezzeret is just plain better.  If WoTC was to ban time vault, or whatever, then I might give Jace another chance

[Grand Inquisitor]

2nd'd

...except for this part:

The simple solution is that somebody is wrong.

On an internet chat forum that's like marinating yourself blood and going swimming with sharks.

In my testing, every time I cast Jace, I wished it was Tezz.

I've had this feeling, but it's not that simple.  Sometimes a slot, especially a one-off just feels wrong.  That's how I feel about Jace.  I fully suspect that as I keep playing in this environment some other 60th card will become obvious and bump it out.

[Shock Wave]

I have not been impressed by Jace and would not run it in Tezz if I were to play it, but I concede that I am not a Tezz expert.

[Smmenen]

So why do so many people think Jace is winning them games? My own testing indicates that any game Jace "wins" for me could have just as easily been accomplished by something as mediocre as Concentrate. The simple solution is that somebody is wrong. I'm far from infallible so it is perfectly possible my own experiences are wrong and given the recent support for Jace it is highly likely I am wrong. However, I would like to give this one challenge to the Vintage community. Every time you cast Jace think to yourself "did Jace really win me this game or could it just as easily been won by card X?" Hopefully somebody can take it upon themselves to record just how Jace is dominating compared to other options in that deck slot.

I would love to be proven wrong as it would be quite comforting to know the power level of Vintage isn't so ridiculous in its current form that something as good as Jace is dwarfed so let the discussion hopefully commence.

You are ignoring jace in Oath, where it is arguably at its strongest due to the importance of the Brainstorm effect and as a secondary win condition. 

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

So why do so many people think Jace is winning them games? My own testing indicates that any game Jace "wins" for me could have just as easily been accomplished by something as mediocre as Concentrate. The simple solution is that somebody is wrong. I'm far from infallible so it is perfectly possible my own experiences are wrong and given the recent support for Jace it is highly likely I am wrong. However, I would like to give this one challenge to the Vintage community. Every time you cast Jace think to yourself "did Jace really win me this game or could it just as easily been won by card X?" Hopefully somebody can take it upon themselves to record just how Jace is dominating compared to other options in that deck slot.

I would love to be proven wrong as it would be quite comforting to know the power level of Vintage isn't so ridiculous in its current form that something as good as Jace is dwarfed so let the discussion hopefully commence.

You are ignoring jace in Oath, where it is arguably at its strongest due to the importance of the Brainstorm effect and as a secondary win condition. 

Is Brainstorming back a fatty better than just winning next turn with Tezz?

[Smmenen]

So why do so many people think Jace is winning them games? My own testing indicates that any game Jace "wins" for me could have just as easily been accomplished by something as mediocre as Concentrate. The simple solution is that somebody is wrong. I'm far from infallible so it is perfectly possible my own experiences are wrong and given the recent support for Jace it is highly likely I am wrong. However, I would like to give this one challenge to the Vintage community. Every time you cast Jace think to yourself "did Jace really win me this game or could it just as easily been won by card X?" Hopefully somebody can take it upon themselves to record just how Jace is dominating compared to other options in that deck slot.

I would love to be proven wrong as it would be quite comforting to know the power level of Vintage isn't so ridiculous in its current form that something as good as Jace is dwarfed so let the discussion hopefully commence.

You are ignoring jace in Oath, where it is arguably at its strongest due to the importance of the Brainstorm effect and as a secondary win condition. 

Is Brainstorming back a fatty better than just winning next turn with Tezz?

Ok....

Is Brainstorming a fatty better than just winning next turn with Tez?  In the abstract or in general, of course not.  that's a ridiculous question, and no one would answer that question in the affirmative.   but that's not really what we're talking about.

your original post seems to start with some idea about your perception of how you see the vintage community utilizing or thinking about Jace's role in the format.   i think you overstate your case in a large measure.   there is a big difference between being a vintage staple (i.e. underground sea or Mox ruby) and being a vintage playable card.   Jace is clearly vintage playable.   he's appeared in many vintage top 8s, and is doing pretty well.   but i wouldn't say he's a vintage 'staple,' at least not yet. 

you've also got a highly reductoinist appraoch to his viability -- is he winnig the game or not?  that's the wrong question, and always frames the issue badly.   the question is whether his ability to contribute to game wins is better than some other card -- which is really the question your driving at, i think.   it's an opportunity cost question.

here's how I see it: jace has several very useful abilities.   Jace's brainstorm ability is at a premium in oath.   paying 4 mana to brainstorm is -- odly enough - not a terrible thing since sometimes DT for Brainstorm is the right play in Oath, particularly if you've got oath all ready to win the game, but youre holding 1-2 key creatures in hand.   if that were jace's only ability, no i don't think he'd be playable.  but that's the question you posed.   it's the fact that he brainstorms and serves as an alterantive win condition at that level of efficiency (i.e. 4 mana) that makes him worthwhile.   if you try to separate out any one of those, you're being reductionist.   it's like saying Tezzeret can only untap artifacts, but ignores the fact that he tutors and can win the game.   

why run him over a second tezzeret?  a number of reasons, but I think the main one is that the marginal utilty of the first jace is probably greater than the second tezzeret.   there are a number of reasons why this may be so.  one, you may have oathed and time vault is in the yard  second, you may only have 4 mana available to cast jace.  third, maybe you need to braistorm now to find something that can win the game now rather than hope to win next turn.  fourth, maybe your opopnent has creatures (i.e. orchard tokens) and can kill your jace or tezzeret, but being ale to brainstorm will allow to actually win next turn with oath where tez couldn't.   and there are other reasons besides.   

Jace is a very nice fit into oath.   i also think his fateseal ability is very underrated.  the better of a player you are, the better fateseal will actually be for you.   

[D_erutrot]

Does Jace then win spots in other decks besides Oath?
Does he deserve his $35 Perch?
I agree with Smem in his approach to this arguement that flyfly is being reductionist.
However, I believe that someone with Smem's knowledge and intelligence would address the rest of the issue, and bring it to life, speak the as of yet unspoken, as it were.
What other use does Jace have in the vintage metagame, is he the staple it would suggest?
I also agree that he isnt, however, I cannot ignore both points, the brainstorm and bottom ability, both of which have shown to be game changing effects.
Why is brainstorm restricted? (rhetorical)

[TheBrassMan]

First off- I think that all the conversation about Jace is a great thing... I dont think it's stopping people from talking about other stuff, I genuinely think it's creating good content that wasn't there before, which is seriously awesome.

About Jace, my experience with it is pretty limited, but so far I'm in line with the original poster.... but only to an extent.  While Jace doesn't feel anywhere near the bomb that Tezzeret is, he fills entirely other roles that Tez can't.  I had been running Empty the Warrens partially as a redundant win condition to hedge against Cap effects, but Jace can do that without dipping into another color.  People have been running Echoing Truth forever, and Jace handles the majority of important E-Truth targets.  He's not quite a Fact or Fiction the turn you play it, but he can be close.  I'm not excited about him as an archetype defining bomb -- but I'm totally satisfied with him in my maindeck... for now.  I value flexibility, consistency, and threat diversity, and Jace feels like a fine support player in these roles.

edit: I know this probably goes without saying, but the price tag on Jace is unmistakeably a result of Standard first, legacy, extended, and block second, and vintage dead last... we just don't drive prices like that, and it really has nothing to do with the viability of the card in vintage (especially in proxy metagames)

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

So why do so many people think Jace is winning them games? My own testing indicates that any game Jace "wins" for me could have just as easily been accomplished by something as mediocre as Concentrate. The simple solution is that somebody is wrong. I'm far from infallible so it is perfectly possible my own experiences are wrong and given the recent support for Jace it is highly likely I am wrong. However, I would like to give this one challenge to the Vintage community. Every time you cast Jace think to yourself "did Jace really win me this game or could it just as easily been won by card X?" Hopefully somebody can take it upon themselves to record just how Jace is dominating compared to other options in that deck slot.

I would love to be proven wrong as it would be quite comforting to know the power level of Vintage isn't so ridiculous in its current form that something as good as Jace is dwarfed so let the discussion hopefully commence.

You are ignoring jace in Oath, where it is arguably at its strongest due to the importance of the Brainstorm effect and as a secondary win condition. 

Is Brainstorming back a fatty better than just winning next turn with Tezz?

Ok....

Is Brainstorming a fatty better than just winning next turn with Tez?  In the abstract or in general, of course not.  that's a ridiculous question, and no one would answer that question in the affirmative.   but that's not really what we're talking about.

your original post seems to start with some idea about your perception of how you see the vintage community utilizing or thinking about Jace's role in the format.   i think you overstate your case in a large measure.   there is a big difference between being a vintage staple (i.e. underground sea or Mox ruby) and being a vintage playable card.   Jace is clearly vintage playable.   he's appeared in many vintage top 8s, and is doing pretty well.   but i wouldn't say he's a vintage 'staple,' at least not yet. 

you've also got a highly reductoinist appraoch to his viability -- is he winnig the game or not?  that's the wrong question, and always frames the issue badly.   the question is whether his ability to contribute to game wins is better than some other card -- which is really the question your driving at, i think.   it's an opportunity cost question.

here's how I see it: jace has several very useful abilities.   Jace's brainstorm ability is at a premium in oath.   paying 4 mana to brainstorm is -- odly enough - not a terrible thing since sometimes DT for Brainstorm is the right play in Oath, particularly if you've got oath all ready to win the game, but youre holding 1-2 key creatures in hand.   if that were jace's only ability, no i don't think he'd be playable.  but that's the question you posed.   it's the fact that he brainstorms and serves as an alterantive win condition at that level of efficiency (i.e. 4 mana) that makes him worthwhile.   if you try to separate out any one of those, you're being reductionist.   it's like saying Tezzeret can only untap artifacts, but ignores the fact that he tutors and can win the game.   

why run him over a second tezzeret?  a number of reasons, but I think the main one is that the marginal utilty of the first jace is probably greater than the second tezzeret.   there are a number of reasons why this may be so.  one, you may have oathed and time vault is in the yard  second, you may only have 4 mana available to cast jace.  third, maybe you need to braistorm now to find something that can win the game now rather than hope to win next turn.  fourth, maybe your opopnent has creatures (i.e. orchard tokens) and can kill your jace or tezzeret, but being ale to brainstorm will allow to actually win next turn with oath where tez couldn't.   and there are other reasons besides.   

Jace is a very nice fit into oath.   i also think his fateseal ability is very underrated.  the better of a player you are, the better fateseal will actually be for you.   

Thank you this answer is certainly more satisfying than your original post and you make a very strong case for Jace in Oath. Do you see him as being worthwhile in other decks to any significant degree? Also do you think that See Beyond will increase the amount of Jace we see in decks, decrease it, or have no impact?

[Cruel Ultimatum]

In my small tournament exerience with jace, he has been very good. Against watskeburst I was able to brainstorm and eventually run him out of cards, which in turn let me fateseal him to lock up the game. I also played against tezz where he was able to keep me ahead of my opponent. Obviously he has synergy with bob, as well as serving as an alt win after time vault key. 

Jace may not win the game on the spot when you cast him, but he puts you so far ahead in the blue control deck mirrors.

One rules aside of jaces fateseal, when you seal your opponent you should be the one physically holding the top card, since if your opponent just picks it up, and let's you look at the top card while you decide where to put it, if it is a foil he will be able to know.

[Smmenen]

So why do so many people think Jace is winning them games? My own testing indicates that any game Jace "wins" for me could have just as easily been accomplished by something as mediocre as Concentrate. The simple solution is that somebody is wrong. I'm far from infallible so it is perfectly possible my own experiences are wrong and given the recent support for Jace it is highly likely I am wrong. However, I would like to give this one challenge to the Vintage community. Every time you cast Jace think to yourself "did Jace really win me this game or could it just as easily been won by card X?" Hopefully somebody can take it upon themselves to record just how Jace is dominating compared to other options in that deck slot.

I would love to be proven wrong as it would be quite comforting to know the power level of Vintage isn't so ridiculous in its current form that something as good as Jace is dwarfed so let the discussion hopefully commence.

You are ignoring jace in Oath, where it is arguably at its strongest due to the importance of the Brainstorm effect and as a secondary win condition. 

Is Brainstorming back a fatty better than just winning next turn with Tezz?

Ok....

Is Brainstorming a fatty better than just winning next turn with Tez?  In the abstract or in general, of course not.  that's a ridiculous question, and no one would answer that question in the affirmative.   but that's not really what we're talking about.

your original post seems to start with some idea about your perception of how you see the vintage community utilizing or thinking about Jace's role in the format.   i think you overstate your case in a large measure.   there is a big difference between being a vintage staple (i.e. underground sea or Mox ruby) and being a vintage playable card.   Jace is clearly vintage playable.   he's appeared in many vintage top 8s, and is doing pretty well.   but i wouldn't say he's a vintage 'staple,' at least not yet. 

you've also got a highly reductoinist appraoch to his viability -- is he winnig the game or not?  that's the wrong question, and always frames the issue badly.   the question is whether his ability to contribute to game wins is better than some other card -- which is really the question your driving at, i think.   it's an opportunity cost question.

here's how I see it: jace has several very useful abilities.   Jace's brainstorm ability is at a premium in oath.   paying 4 mana to brainstorm is -- odly enough - not a terrible thing since sometimes DT for Brainstorm is the right play in Oath, particularly if you've got oath all ready to win the game, but youre holding 1-2 key creatures in hand.   if that were jace's only ability, no i don't think he'd be playable.  but that's the question you posed.   it's the fact that he brainstorms and serves as an alterantive win condition at that level of efficiency (i.e. 4 mana) that makes him worthwhile.   if you try to separate out any one of those, you're being reductionist.   it's like saying Tezzeret can only untap artifacts, but ignores the fact that he tutors and can win the game.   

why run him over a second tezzeret?  a number of reasons, but I think the main one is that the marginal utilty of the first jace is probably greater than the second tezzeret.   there are a number of reasons why this may be so.  one, you may have oathed and time vault is in the yard  second, you may only have 4 mana available to cast jace.  third, maybe you need to braistorm now to find something that can win the game now rather than hope to win next turn.  fourth, maybe your opopnent has creatures (i.e. orchard tokens) and can kill your jace or tezzeret, but being ale to brainstorm will allow to actually win next turn with oath where tez couldn't.   and there are other reasons besides.   

Jace is a very nice fit into oath.   i also think his fateseal ability is very underrated.  the better of a player you are, the better fateseal will actually be for you.   

Thank you this answer is certainly more satisfying than your original post and you make a very strong case for Jace in Oath. Do you see him as being worthwhile in other decks to any significant degree? Also do you think that See Beyond will increase the amount of Jace we see in decks, decrease it, or have no impact?

good question; hard to say.  if I were building Oath, i'd probably cut jace for see beyond.   See beyond seems so good to me.   

[zeus-online]

Haven't actually tested jace since i'm stuck in my Year 2000 vintage experiment....But....

I hate Tezzeret, the seeker. The only reason i ran him in my tez decks was because i wanted an additional win condition in case my tinker target got removed. I never wanted to cast tezzeret and he very rarely contributed to game wins due to null rods, creatures ready to kill him, his 5 mana casting cost making him hard to sneak by counterspells/mana denial. So if i where to play tez again, i'd test jace heavily to see if perhaps he is better since he costs 4 instead of 5.

I've played jace in standard though, but that's entirely different since he's much stronger compared to the other cards then he is in vintage compared to the other cards.

[nineisnoone]

However, I would like to give this one challenge to the Vintage community. Every time you cast Jace think to yourself "did Jace really win me this game or could it just as easily been won by card X?"

I think the question should be placed the other way around.

If card X could have won you the game, could Jace have instead?  And if Jace could win you the game instead of that card, would you run it over that card?  Or if Jace can't win you the game, then are there other reasons to run that card instead of this single case?

Tinker/Oath -> not Inkwell not Terrastodon.  
Jace can win instead of Echoing Truth.
Is Jace stronger than Echoing Truth?

Tinker -> Inkwell/Terrastodon.  
Jace can't win while Hurkyl's or Rebuild can.  Nothing "beats" Terrastodon really.
Are there other reasons to run Hurkyl's than Inkwell?

Concentrate for the win.
Jace can win instead of Concentrate.  
**Let's also be clear that despite the fact that it is a mediocre card, that's not important.  The important thing is that this card could win you the game.  Is Leyline of the Void a great card?  The abstract doesn't matter, what matters is that it wins you the game.
Is Jace preferable to Concentrate?

Bouncing an opposing creature decks.
Jace can win instead of Echoing Truth or Repeal.  
Is Jace preferable?

Killing an opposing creature decks.
Jace can't win instead of Massacre or Perish.  
Are those cards needed anyways?

Winning the game.
Jace can win instead of Tezzeret.
Is Jace preferable to Tezzeret?

Down the list I'd say...

It's better than Echoing Truth against Tinker.
- It is cast preemptively.  This means you can go for a plan A of casting Jace, rather than having to react to a Tinker play or hold onto a possibly dead bounce card in your hand in case that is the play.
- Uncounterable.  Obviously, only after it is cast, but still.  It can turn opposing Tinker's to dead draws.
- Does more than Truth otherwise.
- Against, Terrastodon at least it is another permanent and can help you draw into a better solution to you overall situation.  

Hurkyl's or Rebuild are important for Shop decks.
- I'd say that you're probably going to want these cards anyways as a meta decision against shop decks.  So Jace's lack of ability to replace these cards is irrelevant.

Jace is better than Concentrate.
- Obviously.

Jace is better (in some cases) than other bounce/kill options.
- Jace can hold off a board that only consists of one opposing creature better than other bounce cards.  
- Also, even though he can only bounce one if often times they won't be able to make multiple creature drops (or at least do so ideally) it might not matter.

Massacre or Perish are probably necessary sideboard cards at times.
- Also, Jace works well with either.  Massacre doesn't hit Jace (nor would infest), so it can hit the little ones and Jace can bounce the big ones.  Jace can bounce what Perish can't kill.

Jace is better than Tezzeret.
-

The phrase of the week seems to be "well if you resolve Jace you just win." Pardon? I severely doubt that Jace is pulling people out of terrible situations to come from behind and contend that Jace is merely a generic card that lets you keep winning once you've already won.

- You could say the same thing for Tezzeret though.  Casting Tezzeret won't win you games where there is a Null Rod in play.  So they both have "terrible situations" where they won't win you games.  While you can say Null Rod is perhaps a narrow theoretical situation, isn't it a pretty common one?  And is it more common where Jace's card advantage and utility would be insufficient to win the game?  
- I would say that Null Rod is a more likely possibility than being in a situation where Jace's abilities wouldn't be worthwhile.  I would say, if you are in a situation where Jace couldn't win you the game, there is probably an error in play or in your deck otherwise.  
- I think the mistake in comparing Tezzeret and Jace is thinking them of both as being the same sort of win condition.  Tezzeret is a combo win condition.  Jace is a control one.  Combo is about "opps I win" barring the case of "oh crap, I can't win."  Control is about leveraging resources.  Combo is about waiting for a (or forcing a) window to win.  Control is about being able to take the most out of every window.  They have different purposes, and it depends upon how you plan on approaching the game.  A Combo win isn't always the best plan, even if it is by definition the fastest one.



So overall, I'd say that Jace is as good as "claimed."  Now, I think there is just a bit of puffery that needs to be acknowledge.  I've seen people say "I never lose when I cast Top" and other things like that.  

Is that true or is that not true?  Who knows, but it's true enough to accept that Top is a good card and we can go past an evaluation of whether or not Top is good in the abstract.



But, of course, I've always been a fan of the card so I guess I'm somewhat biased.  

[Xyre]

I think the dynamic the poster is missing is that these are two different cards with different aims. Jace is a jack-of-all-trades that specializes as an engine. Tezzeret is a win condition. Just because you have a win condition doesn't mean you play six copies of it. Sure, you can draw it more frequently, but oftentimes having the engine gets you the win condition, and can work in places where the win condition doesn't.

Obviously, it doesn't fit in all decks. It's a control card; it's specifically useful in places where it can work double-duty, like Oath mirrors (reseeding your guys, bouncing theirs). But a topic of "why do people play this card, it's worse than Tezzeret" is too narrow; sure, Jace doesn't win the game next turn barring disruption, but that's a) a comparison of apples and oranges, and b) missing some of the dynamics at work.

[Evenpence]

Sometimes I lose because I draw island instead of Tezzeret when I'm in a position to win the game.  I'm thinking about replacing all my islands with Tezzerets.

~~~

I didn't think Jace was going to be good when he was first spoiled.  Oh, how wrong I was.  The reason I was wrong about Jace was because I was looking at him with the wrong attitude.  I thought (as the OP does) why not just play a second copy of Tezzeret?  Tezz wins me the game NOW, why do I want to risk it with Jace?

As mentioned above, Jace is an engine.  He's a good one, too, particularly in Oath.

[M.Solymossy]

Jace is insane as fuck in what it does:  FUCKING BREAK Control Mirrors.     And he does it better than even Library of Alexandria.

[A_Outcast]

I'm not an adept, hell im probobly not even on the same level as most of you guys but I see a huge fundamental mistake most people are making.  They compare Jace to Tezzeret.

Now that might sound weird, but think about it for a second, and you'll see that hes an engine not a win-con.  It's the same as dark confidant is an engine not a wincon.

Saying you should cut Jace for Tezz is like saying you should cut Dark Confidant for Tezz, or Thirst for Knowledge for Tezz.  "It would work because there are so many times I drew "insert engine here" and it couldn't win me the game".  Of course it couldn't because thats not what it's purpose was.

The fact is Jace is solid.  The best way to look at it is this way, what would this card do on t1?  Start pulling you ahead in either card advantage OR card quality or go back and forth on both.  While a t1 tezz might give a t2 win it also might just give them a t1 destroy vault with "insert random artifact destruction here"

[Cyberpunker]

I'm not the most reliable source when it comes to Jace because I have not tested him in Oath yet. But I have played against him.

Jace is a must counter. But so is Gifts, Fact, Concentrate, Cryptic Command, and all other 4cc spells.

Does that mean he is good? He is good. But does that mean you can cast him often enough for him to be reliable? I do not think so.

The meta right now is full of Wasteland decks or decks that race for the win on turns 1-4. Having a 4cc spell is reliably strong in the mid-late game against Control mirrors. So with that in mind, I do not want to run Jace maindeck and my sideboard is packed too tightly for me to run him.

[Odd mutation]

The phrase of the week seems to be "well if you resolve Jace you just win." Pardon? I severely doubt that Jace is pulling people out of terrible situations to come from behind.

Well, that's exactly what jace has been doing in testing!

Jace certainly has proven his merit.

Robrecht

[Demonic Attorney]

One important difference between Jace and Tezzeret is the number of countermeasures in the format for each of them.  If your opponent is holding a Krosan Grip, or has Seal of Primordium in play, or has a Gorilla Shaman and sufficient mana, or has a Pithing Needle on Time Vault, or has a Null Rod on the board, or has somehow managed to counter or destroy your singleton Time Vault, Tezzeret does much less.  If your opponent has a Nature's Claim in hand or an Ancient Grudge in their graveyard, or an active Goblin Welder, you'll need to devote additional resources to defending Tezzeret to ensure he's optimally effective.

Conversely, the only things that really interfere with Jace are attackers and REB effects, both of which are equally as effective against Tezzeret.  So, there are many more cards that can stop Tezzeret from being effective than cards that can stop Jace.  This is particularly true against Oath, where attackers are a liability and REB doesn't stop the deck's main line of offense.  

The last thing I'll add is a point along the lines of Brassman's post.  Right now, one Jace does what I'd otherwise have to devote numerous slots to in my Oath list.  He's bounce for creatures, he's a source of long-term card advantage/inevitability, he's a filter for creatures that get stuck in my hand, and he's a win condition hedge against Cap effects. 

In the best-case scenario, is he as strong as Tezzeret?  No.  But neither is Thirst for Knowledge, Echoing Truth, Dark Confidant, or many other cards that still consistently find their way into blue-based control decks.  And I think the reason for that is, you need versatility in your deck in addition to game-finishing power.

[zeus-online]

Jace is insane as fuck in what it does:  FUCKING BREAK Control Mirrors.     And he does it better than even Library of Alexandria.

Why do i find this quote to be entirely unbelievable? Jace costs 4 mana, library is free and uncounterable. Turn 1 LoA is much much stronger, although i'll admit that i would probably rather draw jace turn 3 then library.

And for the record: Yes ofcourse i'd rather have jace then library on the board - That dosn't mean it's better.

[Tha Gunslinga]

Yeah, Tezz is much less exciting when your Time Vault is in jeopardy or in the graveyard, or vs Null Rod.  Jace shines no matter what situation you're in.  It's also 1 less mana, which does come up.  I know it doesn't seem as exciting as "fetch Time Vault, win game," but Jace is pretty amazing.

Vs James King I had an opening hand that contained Mox, Island, Lotus, Recall, Tezzeret, Jace.  If I had led with Tezzeret, he would have Forced it and I'd have no turn 1 play.  Instead I led with Recall, he Forced it, then I resolved Jace and began Brainstorming.  I won turn 4 or so with ridiculous card advantage.

[Klep]

Jace isn't a flashy card in the sense that he's going to do awesome ridiculous things that win the game outright (barring an activation of his ultimate) the way so many cards in Vintage do.  He's just a workhorse card that does the stuff that needs doing.  He smooths your draws, he bounces troublesome guys, and he screws up your opponents' draws.  Those are things that all decks want to be able to do, and he does all of them.  The Brainstorm ability gets most of the attention, but the fateseal ability is also very strong.  It's possibly weaker in Vintage than in other formats because of Vintage's greater potential for explosiveness, but every time I've seen him played and not immediately dealth with, that fateseal ability has really defined the remainder of the game.  It's not to be underestimated.

[Marske]

Obviously people I'm going to be biased as hell... everybody that knows me knows I've been running Jace since it's release in just about every Vintage deck that supports U.

What people indeed fail to realize and what I find amusing is the comparison to Tezz, No, Jace is no Tezz in that it wins you the game on the spot. I can't add more then what others have stated, Jace is an engine card, a workhose like TFK was, he's an Unsummon, he's a Fateseal and a brainstorm with the benefit of not having to run all those cards. That's the main reason why I love him.

Vs James King I had an opening hand that contained Mox, Island, Lotus, Recall, Tezzeret, Jace.  If I had led with Tezzeret, he would have Forced it and I'd have no turn 1 play.  Instead I led with Recall, he Forced it, then I resolved Jace and began Brainstorming.  I won turn 4 or so with ridiculous card advantage.

THIS is exactly what I mean when I say Jace won me every game I resolved him in and a perfect example, sure, he may not have done it the turn he came into play, maybe not even 2 turns after I had him in play, but what people fail to realize is the shitton of cards and selection he's giving you is putting you in a situation where you simply cannot "LOSE" the game which is equally good as winning on the spot.

[coldcrow]

I am no vintage expert, but to me it is pretty obvious why Jace is good. Alot of the reasons he is so have been said already.

In Oath he is comparable to Necro in TPS, with the added benefit of being a wincon by itself and unsummon in a pinch.

[Webster]

I ran Jace in a deck because I was tired of playing garbage like Echoing Truth and other bounce spells that were too niche.

I ran Jace as my "bounce" spell. I compared him to Repeal, Hurkyl's, Rebuild, Echoing Truth, et al. and decided that he was better than the alternatives for my meta.

Jace has a dual function; he is a bounce spell and a win condition which seems awesome to me. If unsummon isn't the best for your meta, then run something else.

People want to compare Jace to different types of cards than I did (like Tezzeret, Fact or Fiction, and Tinker) whose functionality is different than Echoing Truth.

People are categorizing Jace incorrectly, at least that's the way I see it.

Perhaps I'm wrong. Perhaps my thought process is too muddled in semantics.

[matt_sperling]

It is important to state why Jace might be better than Fact or Fiction (pure enabler), and also why it might be better than Tezzeret (mostly a win condition).  

Compared to Fact or Fiction:
So Jace can't be cast at EOT, and it can get attacked and killed.  The effect of (choose 1: brainstorm, fateseal/scry 1, unsummon) is worse than FoF if you only get to do it once, but better if you get to do it even twice.  In some situations (e.g. wherever bounce a creature is better than FoF), even one activation is better than FoF.  On balance, I like Jace more than FoF.

Compared to Tezzeret:
Tezzeret is only better where you have 5 mana AND just getting either Vault or Key is gg OR the Tezzeret 2 turn kill cannot be disrupted by your opponent AND Jace would not have won you the game if it were in your hand instead of Tezzeret.  So Tezz is only better in a narrow range of situations, the thing to note, however, is that these situations aren’t all that uncommon.  Tezz is often better than Jace, such as when you're light on mana and you use drain mana or Lotus to cast it, and it wins the game.  Jace might not be good enough to win these games since you might need both mana and something to do with your mana.  Tezz also tends to be better vs a deck like Ichorid or Storm, since the "race to combo off" is impacted more by Tezz than it is by Jace.  

Jace just seems better than FoF to me, and FoF doesn’t give me something different that Jace can’t give me, it just gives me cards from the top of my library.  Ah, but here is where Tezzeret is different.  It gives me something Jace does not: a way to find Vault or Key regardless of their position in the deck, and a way to untap Vault.  This is more of a qualitative difference than FoF can provide.  Thus, even if I conclude that Jace is just better “on average” than Tezz, if it is isn’t better on average by a wide margin, I’ll choose to play 1 of each rather than 2 Jace.  The same is true in the other direction.  Even if Tezz is better on average, but not by much, I’ll choose 1 and 1 over 2 Tezz.  This principle explains why Tezz plays so many 1-ofs in the first place.  The deck has tutors and Gifts Ungiven.  Access to qualitatively different effects is valuable even if those effects are “on average” less powerful, all else being equal, when drawn.  Repeal is a better draw step than Fire/Ice or Hurkyl’s Recall, on average, all else unknown, but I don’t advocate cutting all your Fire/Ice and Hurkyls to go up to 4 Repeal because a) I’m not European, and b) your deck becomes less flexible as you’re searching through it for Gifts or Tutor choices.

I thus advocate  0 FoF, 1 Tezzeret, and 1 Jace in Tezz decks, and this position is not equivocal or uncommitted.  

[scifiantihero]

a) I’m not European

Heh.

[JACO]

Yeah, Tezz is much less exciting when your Time Vault is in jeopardy or in the graveyard, or vs Null Rod.  Jace shines no matter what situation you're in.  It's also 1 less mana, which does come up.  I know it doesn't seem as exciting as "fetch Time Vault, win game," but Jace is pretty amazing.

Vs James King I had an opening hand that contained Mox, Island, Lotus, Recall, Tezzeret, Jace.  If I had led with Tezzeret, he would have Forced it and I'd have no turn 1 play.  Instead I led with Recall, he Forced it, then I resolved Jace and began Brainstorming.  I won turn 4 or so with ridiculous card advantage.

You won that game because you had 5 mana available to you on the first turn. If you would have cast Tezzeret and he Forced then on your next turn you probably would have cast Ancestral unimpeded and won from there. Not much of a difference. Your opening hand had 4 bombs in it (and 3 Restricted cards), and it doesn't really matter at that point what you resolve in what order.

Jace is a great card, but in Vintage it's a lot like Dark Confidant. It will gain you massive card advantage and just win you the game if left unchecked. The added mana cost is offset by the additional utility it offers.

I think both Jace and Tezzeret are staples and here in Vintage for the long run.

EDIT: Does it make sense that Jace is $48 and Tezzeret is $7.50 when they're both highly played Mythics? Not really. Jace is much more played in Standard, but that's way too big of a gap. I expect Jace to drop in price (probably down to about $30 area) after Standard settles over the next 6 months and some other technology changes the format a little.