[Oath Article] My Elephant Oath

[Cyberpunker]

Disclaimer:

All of these are just my thoughts and my opinions. I'm just a normal guy. So take these advice at your own discretion.  

Table of Contents:
Introduction
Decklist
Chapter 1: Show And Tell my 4 Creatures!!!
Chapter 2: The Tinker Robots
Chapter 3: 4 Mana Drains and the Random Thoughtseize? Why?
On the next article of “My Elephant Oath”

Introduction
Hello, my name is Stanley Chen and I’m just your average Southern Californian player. But I have been noticing a decline in interest in further developing Elephant Oath among the Vintage community worldwide. This is alarming because I believe Elephant Oath to be the best deck in the format and am willing to prove any doubters wrong. But last week at a tournament in Los Angeles, I failed to do so and got only 3rd place. So I am not going to write an article about Elephant Oath. But I’m just going to explain my card choices and strategy for my Elephant Oath.

Decklist:

Win:
4 Oath of Druids
1 Iona, Shield of Emeria
2 Terastodan
1 Sphinx of the Steel Wind
1 Voltaic Key
1 Time Vault
1 Tinker

Awesomeness:
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Yawgmoth’s Will

Protection:
4 Mana Drain
4 Force of Will
4 Spell Pierce
1 Thoughtseize

Plan B Packet:
1 Show and Tell

So So but still necessary:
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Brainstorm
1 Ponder
1 Merchant’s Scroll

The Universal Vintage Blue Deck Bomb:
1 Gifts Ungiven

Mana:
4 Polluted Delta
3 Island
2 Underground Sea
2 Tropical Island
4 Forbidden Orchard
5 Mox
1 Black Lotus
1 Mana Crypt
1 Sol Ring
1 Library of Alexandria
1 Tolarian Academy

Sideboard:
 
Dredge
4 Ravenous Trap
2 Planar Void

Workshop
3 Nature’s Claim
1 Hurkyl’s Recall

Control Mirror/Combo:
3 Thoughtseize (Usually just 2 get side in, more on that later)

Selkie
2 Massacre (Also the 3 Thoughtseizes)

Chapter 1: Show And Tell my 4 Creatures!!!

I will start off with why I include 4 creatures maindeck. When I ran 3 creatures, I have had experiences where I have lost games because I decked with Oath because I drew my other creatures. I have also read and heard too many reports where other players have decked because they ran only 3 creatures. There has even been an incident when my Robot was Swords to Plowshared and I could not Oath anymore because I drew my other creatures. It is really that simple. I believe Elephant Oath needs 4 creatures because as an Oath deck, you will draw your creatures and you need to have more creatures in your deck so that you do not lose because you drew your creatures. Also, 4 creatures survive Sadistice Sacrament and Jester’s Cap. I know what you must be thinking, so does Jace or Tezzeret. But Jace and Tezzeret do not help prevent you from decking yourself after Oathing. It really is that important to prevent yourself from decking because if you can make sure you win after you start Oathing, you probably have just won even more games that you otherwise would have lost.

I also know what you must be thinking. “Oh wait, what about drawing your creatures?” Well that is why I use 1 copy of Show and Tell as a backup plan. It is my experience that Show and Tell turns hands that are not keepable to hands that are playable. You put the creatures that are dead draws directly into the battlefield instead of having to wait for Oath! What a great deal! “What happens if they put down Sower of Temptation or Duplicant?” Well, when playing Show and Tell I generally reserve it as a last resort. Basically it is the route I am suppose to take if all other routes are gone. And so at that point, I usually have nothing to lose. “What if it does happen?” Well, magic is has a luck factor as well as a chess factor; you just have to gamble. “But I might lose!” Well you might win too, and keep in mind this is just the last resort plan. “What about See Beyond, Latnam’s Legacy, or Jace?” Well See Beyond is way too weak of a card to play with. It is like a Night’s Whisper without the card advantage. And the fact that it costs 2 mana, is a sorcery, does not net you advantage, and does not help you win the game or survive makes it too weak in my opinion for metagame that demands answers or threats right away. Latnam’s Legacy suffers from almost exactly the same weaknesses that See Beyond does, except that See Beyond gives you cards right away while Latnam’s Legacy makes you wait until the opponent’s upkeep.

Jace requires a whole new paragraph. A lot of people like Jace because he provides a Brainstorm every turn while also acting as a secondary win condition. He can also fateseal your opponents if you already have control of the game. But I have a problem with Jace because Jace costs way too much mana. Four mana is too much in my opinion and you will never get him down in time against Workshop or Dredge. Versus Fish he is also pretty bad and can be destroyed by creatures. He is also vulnerable to random things like Red Elemental Blast or even Pithing Needle. I know he digs 5 cards deep for you by the second turn. And that is very good. But he is just too much harder to cast than Show and Tell and he does not guarantee you the win until 2-3 turns later. The first turn is a normal Brainstorm at best. The second turn is a free Brainstorm, which is great and can greatly help you win. But it still doesn’t guarantee that you win. So basically that is why I do not like him. He costs too much, is too slow, is too vulnerable, and too often he will sit dead versus Workshop, Dredge, or Fish. I already run Gifts Ungiven because I judge him to be way more amazing in the Control Mirror and in the Dredge matchup because you can assemble the KeyVault combo or get the cards you need to win. I cannot run more than 1 4cc spell (that is not a creature) in the Post Lodestone Golem and Spell Pierce metagame.

Chapter 2: The Tinker Robots

Now I want to address why I choose Sphinx of the Steel Wind as my Tinker Robot. Well, first let’s look at the alternatives. Inkwell Leviathan has cost me games versus Dredge that Sphinx would have won. Inkwell Leviathan gives Dredge one more turn to win and cannot defend you from their attacks while attacking. Against Workshops and Fish, you can also be outraced. “But 7 damage is a lot!” Yes it is but not enough to kill them in time and too little to save you at times.

Darksteel Colossus is way vulnerable to everything almost and it is a little better than Inkwell against Dredge but still cannot defend while attacking. And again you can still be outraced in the other matchups. Furthermore, it is the hardest to hardcast and cannot pitch to Force of Will. “But it gives them only 2 turns to live!” Very true, but you need to defend yourself while doing so. Often times I Tinker at lower life than my opponent and he gets the opportunity to race me for the win. “Hardcasting should not really be taken to account” I believe that it should because too often have I had 8 mana to hardcast Sphinx but not Darksteel. “But your other creatures do not pitch to Force of Will!” Which is why I should avoid further diminishing my Force options!

Sundering Titan blows up your own lands versus everything nonblue. Can be too easily chumpblocked with your spirit tokens.

Platinum Angel is too slow and vulnerable.

My theory is that you have to be able to win after you Tinker. And that is already very hard to achieve with Sphinx of the Steel Wind. But I believe I have come the closest to reaching that goal by running Sphinx. He has flying, vigilance, lifelink, prored/green, and first strike. That means he is not vulnerable to as many things as Darksteel, can still evade blockers, can kill the opponent while staying untapped to defend you from the opponent’s creatures. That means you almost always will win the damage race with Sphinx out except against Dredge. And even then, you have a chance if they do not get too many tokens out in one turn. Finally he is easier to cast and can pitch to Force of Will. White mana is not too difficult with 4 Orchards, Pearl, and Lotus. “It is!” Don’t complain too much, Sphinx is the best of the Tinker options.

Chapter 3: 4 Mana Drains and the Random Thoughtseize? Why?

We have been moving away from Mana Drain. Why is that? I do not know. In my experience, Mana Drain has saved me too many times in the Workshop, Dredge, and Control Mirror that it should not be cut. But after seeing all the people cutting it for more maindeck Thoughtseizes, I tried it out. And I lost to Leyline of Sanctity because I could not target him and rip that Karn out of his hand. Mana Drain would have saved me and I regret cutting it.

“What about during the Control Mirror? Wouldn’t Mana Drain’s 2 casting cost prevent you from using it too often?” It is true and has happened. I could not cast Mana Drain because I did not have 2 mana or I had 3 Mana and they Spell Pierced it. But that is what the other spells in my deck is for. I run 4 Spell Pierces and 1 Thoughtseize for that reason. In the early game in the Control Mirror or Combo match I rely on my Spell Pierces and my Thoughtseize to keep them in control. And it is important that you Spell Pierce everything that you can (Brainstorms, Ponders, Sol Rings, Black Lotus, Duress, etc). But do not Spell Pierce Moxen because not only are they free, but you open yourself up to whatever else they can do with their untapped land. Also if you have 2 Spell Pierces and only 1 land and they Duress you, don’t counter it because you need your mana open in case they try to pull anything after the duress (Mox, Ancestral Recall for example). And in my tournaments, I have never had an experience where I did was unprepared for the early game and wished my Mana Drains were Thoughtseizes. Spell Pierce does get worse as the game goes on, and Mana Drains get stronger. So I should include 4 Mana Drains, and I do.

I have one Thoughtseize because after choosing my 25 mana sources and all the other essentials in my deck, I had one extra slot missing. And since I believe that all my cards should either be a threat, an answer, or part of my win condition (Keyvault/Oath), I included Thoughtseize in that missing slot. “What about Regrowth?” I have been asked this question too many times. And I was even made fun of by Connelly Woods during Gencon 2010 for not running Regrowth. But I have tried Regrowth(along with Eternal Witness) and my conclusion was that it is just “tech.” In the beginning when you draw Regrowth instead of Thoughtseize or another threat, it will be very dead. And it requires that you already have a threat in the graveyard for it to be effective; meaning it does not even get you the threat but you have to have already drawn it in the past. “Those arguments can be applied to Yawgmoth’s Will” Yeah but Yawgmoth’s Will is basically another bomb and you can play all of your graveyard with it instead of just one card. You can powerup your spells with the Mox/Lotus/Land in your graveyard too. “But wouldn’t Yawgmoth’s Will suffer from the same weakness Regrowth suffers?” Yes, that is why you want to limit the cards that are dead in the beginning. And since Yawgmoth’s Will is so much more awesome than Regrowth, you use Yawgmoth’s Will. “Regrowth helps with Gifts Ungiven” With a little bit of brain power you can Gifts just fine without it. “But is Thoughtseize really better than Regrowth? After all, Regrowth still does something” Yes Thoughtseize>Regrowth, the ability to do something right away rather than usually having to wait 1 turn or having a dead card is just better. Keep in mind this is my humble opinion though.

On the next article of “My Elephant Oath”:

I will explain my sideboard strategies for the matchups and why I do as I do. NOTE: I will only write it if people want me to. So give me feedback if you do. If not I won’t write it.  

[madmanmike25]

Interesting decklist.  I have a few questions for you:

1.)  Why don't you run Thirst for Knowledge?

2.)  Why don't you run at least 1 SDT?

3.) Is it really that hard to cast Jace with 4 Mana Drains?  Usually if Jace sticks it's gg.

4.)  Have you tried running the typical three creature package with Show and Tell?  I'll have to disagree with you on four creatures in Oath, though I really like the Show and Tell option.  I just wonder if it can be done with three.  ~BTW, running SDT and Jace really help to avoid/remedy the 'drawing creatures' and decking dilemma.

5.)  From your experience, do you think it's possible to go up on the maindeck Show and Tell count?  Extra thoughtseizes in the sb seem to complement this possibility.

So I am not going to write an article about Elephant Oath.

  Very tricky to post this in the "Article Discussion" forum!

[Cyberpunker]

Interesting decklist.  I have a few questions for you:

1.)  Why don't you run Thirst for Knowledge?

2.)  Why don't you run at least 1 SDT?

3.) Is it really that hard to cast Jace with 4 Mana Drains?  Usually if Jace sticks it's gg.

4.)  Have you tried running the typical three creature package with Show and Tell?  I'll have to disagree with you on four creatures in Oath, though I really like the Show and Tell option.  I just wonder if it can be done with three.  ~BTW, running SDT and Jace really help to avoid/remedy the 'drawing creatures' and decking dilemma.

5.)  From your experience, do you think it's possible to go up on the maindeck Show and Tell count?  Extra thoughtseizes in the sb seem to complement this possibility.

So I am not going to write an article about Elephant Oath.

 Very tricky to post this in the "Article Discussion" forum!

Hi, I'll try to answer your questions as best as I can.

1. I think TFK is really heavy and does not do much by itself. My Oath barely runs enough artifacts as it is anyway so most of the time I'll be paying for an expensive cantrip. 3 mana cards should be cards that help you win the game in the current metagame, and not simply dig cards.

2. Whats a SDT? If it is Sundering Titan, you will lose games because it has been chumpblocked by 1/1 or something not so important(Narcomoeba, Zombie Token, Noble Hierarch, Metalworker, Karn etc etc). And you will lose games because you blow up your own lands. Terastodan is much better while doing vitually the same thing and remaining flexible (blowing up your own permenants for up to 18 damage)

3. You shouldn't run spells that require situational cards to work. Drain mana is very situational and I treat it as a bonus rather than trying to rely on it to cast my spells. Jace is often too hard to cast. And too often I will Mana Drain something and have nothing to do with the mana. Also, if Jace sticks its often GG. But Jace needs to stick around for 2-3 turns for it to be GG. And that is only if you can get it out through the spheres, wastelands, spell pierces, dazes, null rods, etc etc. And it is often not even game right away. That is why I run Gifts Ungiven over Jace and I do not think my deck can handle 2 4cc spells.

4. I don't know whats a SDT but I have tried it with 3 creatures and have found that I simply deck too much. Jace goes to the graveyard just as all the other cards when you Oath. And that is a problem. You cannot Oath Jace up and so you will deck way too often (once is just way too often) if you run 3 creatures.

5. From my experience, the second Show and Tell is often dead. It is the same reason why you do not run 2 Voltaic Keys. The most you will Show and Tell is just once in my experience and the 2nd one is dead. And even if the 2nd one was not dead, you would be cutting more powerful cards for it. All of those routes lead to me weakening my deck in my opinion. And that is not an option for me  

And this is just an article about MY Elephant Oath, not Elephant Oath in general. 

[Delha]

2. Whats a SDT?

Sense's Diving Top.

[Rico Suave]

I certainly see where you are coming from in regards to 4 creatures and S&T.  In the past, I have almost always run a 2nd Terastodon in the SB and enjoyed it tremendously.  In fact, I would say that a 2nd Don is critical to my approach to several matches. 

I've also enjoyed S&T too, though finding room for it can be difficult at times.  I've always viewed it as a card that helps side-step an opponent who is attacking the Oath pretty hard, and not so much a primary plan of attack. 

I think my biggest disagreement in regards to this approach is a fundamental one.  This deck has quite a large number of slots devoted to disruption.  4 Spell Pierce, 4 Mana Drain, 4 Force, and Thoughtseize on top of that is a significant chunk.  While this helps to slow down the opponent, it also means that we are running those cards at the expense of other cards.  Personally, I've always enjoyed having a wide variety of what I like to call action cards.  These are cards that go out and do something.  They are cards that if I am in a losing position, I can draw them off the top and go on to improve my position.  And if I'm in a winning position, I can play these cards to cement my advantage and win the game.  These are cards like Sensei's Divinin Top, Regrowth, and Jace.

As such, when I've played Oath I've tended towards running 4-5 less slots devoted to disruption, and 4-5 more slots devoted to a combination of card draw, tutoring, and bombs.  I tend to view Oath as somewhat of a Tinker deck, meaning it wants to overwhelm the opponent with powerful threats at an early stage of the game.  I just never felt that running more disruption would help with the fundamental problem of not drawing an Oath of Druids. 

In regards to specific matches, Mana Drain is a card that I do not want to see against Dredge.  If I were to play a Mana Drain deck, I would go so far as to call it one of the first cards to board out in that match. 

Furthermore, including Mana Drains in an Oath deck has a serious issue when facing other Mana Drain decks.  By including Mana Drain we are dragging the game on and making it longer...except other Mana Drain decks excel in the later stages of the game and will be at a considerable advantage should the Oath player hang onto a Drain for some period of time.

Lastly, Workshops are quite strong right now.  And holding a reactive 2 mana spell against such a deck is a death wish, in my opinion. 

But that's just me.  There are many ways to approach the Oath deck, but I would be most interested to see why you feel running 13 disruption is best for this deck and in the current metagame.

[Cyberpunker]

I think my biggest disagreement in regards to this approach is a fundamental one.  Personally, I've always enjoyed having a wide variety of what I like to call action cards.  They are cards that if I am in a losing position, I can draw them off the top and go on to improve my position.  And if I'm in a winning position, I can play these cards to cement my advantage and win the game.  These are cards like Sensei's Divinin Top, Regrowth, and Jace.

As such, when I've played Oath I've tended towards running 4-5 less slots devoted to disruption, and 4-5 more slots devoted to a combination of card draw, tutoring, and bombs.  I tend to view Oath as somewhat of a Tinker deck, meaning it wants to overwhelm the opponent with powerful threats at an early stage of the game.  I just never felt that running more disruption would help with the fundamental problem of not drawing an Oath of Druids.  

In regards to specific matches, Mana Drain is a card that I do not want to see against Dredge.  If I were to play a Mana Drain deck, I would go so far as to call it one of the first cards to board out in that match.  

By including Mana Drain we are dragging the game on and making it longer...except other Mana Drain decks excel in the later stages of the game and will be at a considerable advantage should the Oath player hang onto a Drain for some period of time.

Lastly, Workshops are quite strong right now.  And holding a reactive 2 mana spell against such a deck is a death wish, in my opinion.  

I think in regards to the Drain mirror you and I do see it from a different perspective fundamentally. I still see Elephant Oath not as an "traditional" Oath deck but a combination of the strengths of Tezzeret and Oath. I basically replaced Dark Confidant with Oath of Druids and replaced spells that did not do anything in my opinion, with creatures.

It is true that I cut spells like Regrowth, Jace, and Top for more protection (or disruption). And so I would open up with hands full of protection and no threats. So basically in those situations I would sit there with protection spells and trade cards 1 for 1 with my opponent until I eventually topdeck a threat. Also often times I would be in a losing situation (opponent has resolved a threat) and I topdeck Mana Drain or Spell Pierce. That is a pretty bad situation. But in spite of those reasons, I still would rather run more protection because I deem all the other "action cards" as too slow or too mediocre to run. If I am in a bad situation already, topdecking Top would still make it a 2cc Ponder. And I would be basically trying to Top into...another threat. Jace is almost the same in that situation except he is more expensive to cast (making him sometimes uncastable). And if you do cast him, you either use unsummon right away (a 4cc bounce spell) or you are in the same situation as Top where you have to brainstorm into another threat.

Regrowth does the same thing. You are just trying to Regrowth a threat or draw spell or even worse another cantrip to answer the opponent.

Here's how I look at it. I cannot answer a Lodestone, a Confidant, or an Ancestral Recall with a Top, Regrowth, or Jace. Sure I can use those cards on my turn (after they resolved their threat) to search for an answer. But that is what game 2/3 Nature Claims or Thoughtseizes are for. And those cards are often too situational and useless early on. Top is a 2cc Ponder early on and Regrowth and Jace sits dead in your hand most of the time.

I believe basically that the times when protection spells would be dead are fewer than the times when Regrowth, Top, or Jace would be dead. There are situations where your approach would perhaps get you a threat or an answer to your bad situation. But I know that you can too often blank with Top, Regrowth, or Jace. And I believe that the situations when more protection spells can help me occur more often than the situations when the cards you mentioned can help me. Protection prevents me from getting into the bad situation is what I'm trying to say also. Though you could still be right and I could be dead wrong...so yeah. My thoughts only.

I do not think Mana Drain should be sided out versus Dredge because you still need to answer their cards against you. For example, if I side out Drains for Dredge hate and they side in answers for my Dredge hate, it barely changes the game because now all they have to do is to stop me hate with their answers and then go off. The strength of Blue decks is that they can stop threats with counterspells. And so if I side out my counters, I am weakening my deck for the reason I mentioned above. With counterspells and Dredge hate, I become a deck that focuses on blowing them out with Dredge hate while stopping them from stopping you with your counterspells. I hope this is clear ><. Plus I feel that I have cards that are more dead than Mana Drain in the Dredge matchup (Merchant's Scroll, 2x Terastodan, 1x Island, 1 Spell Pierce, 1 Yawgmoth's Will [if I run Planar Void])

Workshops is a matchup where Mana Drain shines in my opinion. If Oath of Druids is still castable, then I believe Mana Drain should still be good too. I think I need answers to halt Workshops advance and then eventually lay down Oath or Tinker or Show and Tell or KeyVault. If I have early Threat, than great. Otherwise I think 2cc counterspells is not a problem versus Workshop. I usually have enough mana to use it.

Right now, Trygon Jace is Oath's main competitor for the dominant Mana Drain deck. And they are running just as many blanks in the beginning as Oath is. 3x Jace and 1 Robot=3x creaturse and 1 Robot in the beginning. If they resolve Trygon, my Oaths become dead. If I resolve Oath, their 7-8 creatures become dead (plus Trygon costs 3! so I am a little bit ahead in the race!!!). Yes I know that Jace becomes a problem as the game goes on, and that is why I need more Mana Drains and other protection. The fact that I run more protection than some Trygon Jace builds (they have to sacrifice slots for...Trygon  ) means that I can still answer their threats while they have less answers for mine. Jace itself is not an answer to Oath and neither is Confidant. I am even happier if they run Top and/or TFK because they have even less threats or protection to answer me. Its a race in the Drain mirror and I aim to try and either slow them or accelerate me. Jace does not accelerate me fast enough so I use cards to slow them.

Though the fact that their Jaces eventually become a problem is daunting. But there are situations where Jace and Confidant and Trygon would not be that big of a threat because I am already poised to win the next turn. Keep in mind that Confidant is a cantrip the following turn and Jace is a 4cc Brainstorm/Fateseal/Unsummon the first turn. And Trygon cannot do much. I do not really know how to explain it but I think that those situations make their deck weaker at times than mine. And I look to take advantage of those situations and win. Also keep in mind that you will also eventually be able to cast your creatures...

That is again also my approach and I could be totally dead wrong. Oath is in the end more explosive than Trygon Jace afterall and that could be it.

[brianpk80]

I would recommend having some sort of bounce/removal spell maindeck.  I like Repeal and Echoing Truth in Oath, since the Spirit tokens can get out of control at times. 

Countermagic is not good v. Dredge because they use discard.  This is an ugly match-up that forces a blue mage to get out of the ivory tower and get dirty.  It's not going to matter much what you do, rather, the whole focus is on their graveyard and how lucky they get with Bridges.  Relic of Progenitus is getting better since it doesn't target and dredge runs Leyline of Sanctity.  Magus of the Moat/Blazing Archon are good Oath targets here. 

What you say about running four creatures is sound. 

Intuition is my favorite spell in Oath since it tutors for it at Instant Speed.  Good luck. 

[evouga]

I agree that you should give Sensei's Dvining Top another chance; I run two in my Oath deck and am almost never unhappy to see them. They are neither expensive nor mediocre. They smooth your draws (guaranteeing, in particular, that your Oath creatures stay out of your hand), dig for answers, speed up tutors by a turn, hide countermagic where it can't be hit by Duress effects, give your Key something useful to do... and in a pinch, can be sacrificed for Tinker fuel. Sure, sometimes it's a 2cc Ponder, but most of the time it sticks around to tilt the rest of the game in your favor.

It's interesting that you run 12x countermagic. How do the extra 4x Drains compare to running more diversified answers in those slots instead, e.g. Nature's Claim, Repeal, etc?

[conboy31]

Magus of the Moat/Blazing Archon are good Oath targets here. 

Blazing Archon yes.  But Magus of the Moat?! Are you planning on letting dredge deck itself with your 0 power clock?  The magus gets bounced like Archon does with chain, but also dies to a blocking Narco with darkblast + dredge darkblast.

[brianpk80]

Magus of the Moat/Blazing Archon are good Oath targets here. 

Blazing Archon yes.  But Magus of the Moat?! Are you planning on letting dredge deck itself with your 0 power clock?  The magus gets bounced like Archon does with chain, but also dies to a blocking Narco with darkblast + dredge darkblast.

The best Oath decks are the ones that can hardcast its creatures when Plan A goes awry.  I would be very happy to have a Magus of the Moat in play against dredge.  It's the Moat that can't be Nature's Claimed.  I kept a Moat Magus in my Tyrant Oath sideboard and brought it in against Fish & Dredge years ago.  It's good. 

And no offense, but that stuff you're saying about attacking with him makes no sense.  I can't think of a reason to attack dredge with a 0/3, and even if I could, his own ability prevents him from attacking. 

[conboy31]

And no offense, but that stuff you're saying about attacking with him makes no sense.  I can't think of a reason to attack dredge with a 0/3, and even if I could, his own ability prevents him from attacking.  

That was entirely my point.  He doesn't attack.  Hence your 0 damage clock.  Which went with my joke about winning by decking dredge.  Magus does not stop narcs from attacking, or Iona/angel of despair/any other flyer that they could have if they left in their DR package.

The 5 damage from the Archon can still crush fairly fast and stops all corner cases of attacking.

[Cyberpunker]

I agree that you should give Sensei's Dvining Top another chance; I run two in my Oath deck and am almost never unhappy to see them. They are neither expensive nor mediocre. They smooth your draws (guaranteeing, in particular, that your Oath creatures stay out of your hand), dig for answers, speed up tutors by a turn, hide countermagic where it can't be hit by Duress effects, give your Key something useful to do... and in a pinch, can be sacrificed for Tinker fuel. Sure, sometimes it's a 2cc Ponder, but most of the time it sticks around to tilt the rest of the game in your favor.

It's interesting that you run 12x countermagic. How do the extra 4x Drains compare to running more diversified answers in those slots instead, e.g. Nature's Claim, Repeal, etc?

Thanks for the feedback! In all my matches, I never wish I had a Sensei's Divining Top. If it works out for you and your build, then I encourage you to keep on trying it. I know it combos with key but I can never bring myself to play it after testing it out and disliking it.
Also, most of the time I don't draw into my creatures. Instead the creatures are usually in my opening hand if I draw them. I don't know why is that, but that also influences me not to run Top. Finally, I don't think it would smooth my draws fast enough to be relevant.

As for the 4 Mana Drains question. My theory is that Mana Drains stops almost every problem there is. If you include "specialized" answers like Nature's Claim and Repeal etc. Then you open yourself up to other threats like Ancestral Recall, Necropotence, Demonic Tutor, etc etc that those answers cannot stop. That is why Mana Drain is very good and I look at it as if it is a defensive rather than offensive weapon. Hope that makes sense.

@Brianpk
I think Intuition is good with Life from the Loam and Strip Mine but I would need to cut slots for it and I do not think cutting Counterspells is a good option right now. You have a focus and that is getting huge guys or Keyvault out. Intuition is a nice backup offense but too often you will need protection rather than threats. Or else you risk becoming like MUD. And blue decks cannot do what MUD does as well as how MUD does it.

Blazing Archon and Magus of the Moat are too weak and don't shut down the opponent enough (they can still cast spells etc etc)