Has Jace Mindsculpted the Vintage Community?

[vassago]

Yes, because 5 counterspells alone can't win you the game.  

lol

Do you disagree?  Or should people cut those Oath of Druids for REBs?

No, I agree completely. I just thought the reply to FLYFLY's last post with that comment was humorous. To me it seemed as if that was the logical conclusion to the hypothetical game state of 5 counters i hand and whether or not it mattered what you did with jace.

Sorry if it was a bit unclear, or unintentionally insulting in anyway. My immediate response was a laugh when I read it. 

[nineisnoone]

Yes, because 5 counterspells alone can't win you the game.  

lol

Do you disagree?  Or should people cut those Oath of Druids for REBs?

No, I agree completely. I just thought the reply to FLYFLY's last post with that comment was humorous. To me it seemed as if that was the logical conclusion to the hypothetical game state of 5 counters i hand and whether or not it mattered what you did with jace.

Sorry if it was a bit unclear, or unintentionally insulting in anyway. My immediate response was a laugh when I read it. 

Ahh, cool.  Yeah, I was a little unsure what you meant by that when I read it, so I tried to hedge myself between a constructive line of inquiry and a favorably loaded example.

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

Are you fatesealing the opponent or yourself?  I would generally prefer to fateseal myself rather than the opponent.  It's like a Dark Confidant (since you see 1 card deeper) that has 4 power ("wins" in 5 turns) which is pretty good.  Plus, that puts Jace to 13 so he's still around after you use his ultimate.

But I would only start that up if I had a good hand/situation and at least 1 card up on the opponent.

Soly are your opponents conserving fetch-lands to not get locked under Fate-Seal mode.  And how often does it come up that they have two strong cards in a row after you fate sealed to the bottom.  Most of my uses with Jace has been bouncing or brainstorming but I have a feeling I'm not using him 100% in Vintage.

I usually brainstorm with him, but in so many decks you can very easily set up hands where you have answers to everything they have in hand, and then some.  For example, I am playing a Tezzeret deck with FOW, Drain, Thoughtseize.  Often when I stick Jace, I can brainstorm, then counter their next threat.  Then I actively search for a Thoughtseize or more protection, and start ramping the Jace.  You so often get into situations where you know that even if they topdeck an insane card, you can counter it.   You get into these bottleneck games where you have jace, 4 or 5 counterspells, and your opponent has maybe 3 or 4 cards in hand.   You can counter all of them, so why would you brainstorm?   Often enough, people don't have a shuffle effect when you start Fatesealing them, too.

This is one thing I don't understand.  People use Jace to actively search for a win condition, not realizing that Jace itself IS a win condition.

If your hand is 5 counterspells and your opponent only has 3 cards in their hand does it really matter what you're doing with Jace?

Yes, because 5 counterspells alone can't win you the game.  

Did you read at all what I quoted or said? When you basically can't lose does it matter whether you're using Jace to get even more counters+a win condition or just Fatesealing for +2? The answer is no unless Jace is the last win condition in your deck. What does that have to do with cutting Oath for REB?

[nineisnoone]

my point was simple.  you need a win condition and jace is a win condition (as opposed to merely looking for one).

what was your point?  that the fact that jace as a win condition is irrelevant excepting the case where you don't have another win condition?

i mean, it seems like we're both stating the obvious here...

[PETER FLUGZEUG]

yes, it does seem so indeed.
Jace is out there, your hand is insane and now you're bothered wheter to fateseal or keep brainstorming until you find another win condition.

It's like a drug addict rock star who wonders if he should rather take cocaine or heroine now that the concert is over. I mean, sure both drugs are different, but both are options.
Woohoo, big problems, when you have your manager (jace) looking after you as if he was your mother.

[matt_sperling]

yes, it does seem so indeed.
Jace is out there, your hand is insane and now you're bothered wheter to fateseal or keep brainstorming until you find another win condition.

It's like a drug addict rock star who wonders if he should rather take cocaine or heroine now that the concert is over. I mean, sure both drugs are different, but both are options.
Woohoo, big problems, when you have your manager (jace) looking after you as if he was your mother.

He's saying you don't always HAVE another win condition.  Sometimes you get Sacramented or the game plays so long all your other threats and your YawgW are in the yard.  In these spots, especially the Sacrament/Jesters Cap situation, Jace being a finisher can be critical. 

[doctrellor]

I was at the card shop yesterday -- and just as I was finishing upgrading my Sui deck -- a guy walked in to grab 2 Jace's -- so they are definately popular.

at 2 , he makes a statement alright - being cheap enough to come out early and make an impact. That -12 ability is just evil. No wonder this Jace is an auto-counter if able.

[Grand Inquisitor]

Sometimes you get Sacramented or the game plays so long all your other threats and your YawgW are in the yard.

Just an aside, but testing has shown that even getting capped/sacramented isn't enough (against TPS, mirror, etc...not goblins).  Beating down with Bobs is a fine way to win.

[Klep]

Beating down with Bobs is a fine way to win.

Indeed. I have won games with Spirit Guides.  Sometimes a Grey Ogre is all you need.

[honestabe]

Sometimes you get Sacramented or the game plays so long all your other threats and your YawgW are in the yard.

Just an aside, but testing has shown that even getting capped/sacramented isn't enough (against TPS, mirror, etc...not goblins).  Beating down with Bobs is a fine way to win.

Even against Sui-black, it happens much more often that one would think

[matt_sperling]

Sometimes you get Sacramented or the game plays so long all your other threats and your YawgW are in the yard.

Just an aside, but testing has shown that even getting capped/sacramented isn't enough (against TPS, mirror, etc...not goblins).  Beating down with Bobs is a fine way to win.

Totally agree, the deck isn't in desperate need of another win condition (hell, I play Thada in mine so I need one even less), but hopefully you can imagine someone Sacramenting you twice.... they probably play YawgWill in their ritual+sacrament deck.  It also isn't difficult to imagine an Oath deck with only 3 non-Jace threats, and this thread is, after all, about Jace in general not just Jace in Tezz.

In Tezz, I've found Jace's fateseal and ultimate abilities to be small, but definitely non-zero, advantages the card has over something like FoF.

[M.Solymossy]

I think you guys are missing the obvious though, as far as win conditions are concerned. 

Not all of us are donkeys who can play Confidants in our Tezz build, because in some metagames, people actually play Oath.  It's not an insult at the people who play Confidants, more of an insult to the retards who haven't picked up Oath. 

[Delha]

It's not an insult at the people who play Confidants, more of an insult to the retards who haven't picked up Oath.

Presumably, everyone playing Confidants is one of "retards who haven't picked up Oath". Just sayin.

[Gekoratel]

Not all of us are donkeys who can play Confidants in our Tezz build, because in some metagames, people actually play Oath.  It's not an insult at the people who play Confidants, more of an insult to the retards who haven't picked up Oath.

If it's not an insult to people who play Confidant but is an insult to those who choose to play Confidant's over Oath wouldn't you be insulting them just the same.  Unless your playing Confidants in your Oath list which seems strong.  On a side non-sarcastic note I think Confidant is quite fine against Oath from Tez's perspective.

[Suicideking]

Not all of us are donkeys who can play Confidants in our Tezz build, because in some metagames, people actually play Oath.  It's not an insult at the people who play Confidants, more of an insult to the retards who haven't picked up Oath.

If it's not an insult to people who play Confidant but is an insult to those who choose to play Confidant's over Oath wouldn't you be insulting them just the same.  Unless your playing Confidants in your Oath list which seems strong.  On a side non-sarcastic note I think Confidant is quite fine against Oath from Tez's perspective.

As an oath player primarily, I love seeing tez players turn 1ing a DC.  Any time a deck plays a card that helps you trigger oath and does nothing to stop you, you're happy.  This is one of the main reasons I was successful playing oath after TFK got restricted. 

[matt_sperling]

Not all of us are donkeys who can play Confidants in our Tezz build, because in some metagames, people actually play Oath.  It's not an insult at the people who play Confidants, more of an insult to the retards who haven't picked up Oath.

If it's not an insult to people who play Confidant but is an insult to those who choose to play Confidant's over Oath wouldn't you be insulting them just the same.  Unless your playing Confidants in your Oath list which seems strong.  On a side non-sarcastic note I think Confidant is quite fine against Oath from Tez's perspective.

As an oath player primarily, I love seeing tez players turn 1ing a DC.  Any time a deck plays a card that helps you trigger oath and does nothing to stop you, you're happy.  This is one of the main reasons I was successful playing oath after TFK got restricted.  

It doesn't depend on your hand?  You just always love seeing it because you are playing Oath in your deck?  Even if you have an Orchard (or two) but no Oath?  This doesn't make any sense.  In fact, the subset of games DC hurts the Tezz player is {Oath player doesn't have an Orchard AND Oath player can resolve Oath AND Tezz would have won the game even given the resolved Oath if it didn't have a creature out}.  We might argue the size of this subset, but it isnt equal to the entire set {games vs. Oath} as your quote indicates.  At the risk of being preachy, and realizing this isnt about Jace directly anymore, sloppy analysis like this prevents you from really thinking about the costs/benefits of the various cards.

EDIT: further query whether T1 Bob does "nothing to stop you."  Ever had a turn 2 Oath countered?

[The Atog Lord]

Please do not insult people because they choose to play a particular card or a particular deck. Soly, please don't call people retarded if they happen to disagree with you.

Please tread carefully in this thread from here on out.

[M.Solymossy]

People are way too touchy.  I honestly wasn't insulting people, I'm just saying that as a person who has piloted Dark Confidants to wins in SEVERAL archetypes, I would NEVER play Dark Confidant in this metagame.  A few extra cards aren't worth "OMGWTFElephantOnMyFace".

[nineisnoone]

lol.  so anyways.... Since it seems now the only major point of contention is whether fatesealing to win is ever a correct choice over brainstorming to win, I guess we can say at this point that we're all more-or-less convinced that Jace is a good card?  

yes, it does seem so indeed.
Jace is out there, your hand is insane and now you're bothered wheter to fateseal or keep brainstorming until you find another win condition.

It's like a drug addict rock star who wonders if he should rather take cocaine or heroine now that the concert is over. I mean, sure both drugs are different, but both are options.
Woohoo, big problems, when you have your manager (jace) looking after you as if he was your mother.

If you're belittling me or Magic the Gathering that's fine....  
But drug addict rock stars...   that's just wrong man.  That's just wrong.

[Demonic Attorney]

Please tread carefully in this thread from here on out.

Vassago, Phoenix888, and A_Outcast did not heed this valuable advice.  Image spamming is not conducive having a productive conversation about Jace, the Mindsculptor.  Lolcat posts are sometimes okay in Community or Announcements, when they don't serve to derail an otherwise useful discussion.  Here, not only did they have that effect, they were posted after a moderator specifically asked for people to monitor their behavior.

Verbal warnings for spam.

[M.Solymossy]

EDIT: further query whether T1 Bob does "nothing to stop you."  Ever had a turn 2 Oath countered?

You're missing the point.  Confidant might draw you 3 cards before I land oath, but I most likely will land an Oath against the modern Time Vault decks which don't run Dures/sieze.   I play 3 Drains, 4Pierce, 4 Fow against your 4 fow 4 drains.  You're also negating my having to find an orchard.  You're putting the odds against you.

I played Bob Tendrils.  hell, I'm the guy that brought it to the post-gush apocalypse... and I hated playing Confidants ever against oath, and this was with a deck that could kill my opponent much easier/quicker than Tezz can. 

[matt_sperling]

EDIT: further query whether T1 Bob does "nothing to stop you."  Ever had a turn 2 Oath countered?

You're missing the point.  Confidant might draw you 3 cards before I land oath, but I most likely will land an Oath against the modern Time Vault decks which don't run Dures/sieze.   I play 3 Drains, 4Pierce, 4 Fow against your 4 fow 4 drains.  You're also negating my having to find an orchard.  You're putting the odds against you.

I played Bob Tendrils.  hell, I'm the guy that brought it to the post-gush apocalypse... and I hated playing Confidants ever against oath, and this was with a deck that could kill my opponent much easier/quicker than Tezz can. 

You mention a Vault deck with Bobs, 4 FoW 4 Drain and 0 spell pierce and 0 duress/seize.  I haven't seen that deck.  Spot me 3 cards and a Bob like you said, and you aren't a favorite to win the game, I promise.

[M.Solymossy]

So you're going to run out a Dark Confidant, then plan to counter their oath?  you're most likely going to have a Force, where-as they may have a force, or Spell Pierce.  That doesn't seem like a winning scenario to me.


But it is what it is.  Neither one of us are going to give ground on this arguement.   Shall we not derail the Jace thread?

[vassago]

It's been my experience that an early BOB against the current Oath list leads to bad results if you do not have a repeal/bounce spell and a counter spell.

Anyway

lol.  so anyways.... Since it seems now the only major point of contention is whether fatesealing to win is ever a correct choice over brainstorming to win, I guess we can say at this point that we're all more-or-less convinced that Jace is a good card? 

I guess this is obviously situational, but if your hand is "loaded", why bother with brainstorming?  Doesn't it make sense to end the game as soon as possible?

The answer to this is up in the air, to some, and I can see why.  You have to fate seal 5 times, and that translates into 6 turns until victory. Is it quicker to dig into the randomness of the deck and see what the cards give you? Or is your "loaded" hand + controllling what they draw enough to last you that long? 

 

[Razvan]

After BoM I can honestly say that Jace is really good. It's not better OR worse than Tezz, it's different, but it is absolutely excellent. Every ability is incredibly relevant, even the +2 one that can often lock your opponent out of the game. It's not as absolutely crazy as it is in Legacy, but as a win condition, it is great.

[conboy31]

After BoM I can honestly say that Jace is really good.

What more can you say about Jace at the BoM? I have been looking for deck lists and tournament reports without much luck.  As far as I can tell Mud/stax dominated the majority of the top 8 slots.  Did you happen to face jace over the course of the tournaments?

[T1scrub]

Jaze is a bad card , for vintage .

cc4 brainstorm on sorcery speed when it resolves .

The only matchup this guy can win is drains ,and all other played drawspells are better.

If i want a slow card to win the control i play confidant .And in 5 turnaments i never lost a game to jaze

regards

[Delha]

Jaze is a bad card , for vintage .

cc4 brainstorm on sorcery speed when it resolves .

The only matchup this guy can win is drains ,and all other played drawspells are better.

At least we can't say that your name is inaccurate.

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

Jaze is a bad card , for vintage .

cc4 brainstorm on sorcery speed when it resolves .

The only matchup this guy can win is drains ,and all other played drawspells are better.

If i want a slow card to win the control i play confidant .And in 5 turnaments i never lost a game to jaze

regards

Obvious troll is obvious.

[Razvan]

After BoM I can honestly say that Jace is really good.

What more can you say about Jace at the BoM? I have been looking for deck lists and tournament reports without much luck.  As far as I can tell Mud/stax dominated the majority of the top 8 slots.  Did you happen to face jace over the course of the tournaments?

I would agree on Jace not doing especially well in a MUD meta. It's difficult to cast and the best it can do is bounce one artifact creature before the rest murder you. In a more control metagame, the card is excellent.

Also, it's insane in legacy.

BoM decklists will be up soon I believe, and I don't remember about top-8, but there were a LOT of the little bugger running around. I ran Dredge, so it really didn't do much against me, so I haven't really faced Jace in vintage to a degree that would worry me (in legacy, i more or less got hard-locked by the thing).