If I don't want to play Metalworker...

[Kiriyuu]

Hello!

I want to play MUD, but I'm unimpressed by metalworker. They way I see it, the only other spells I play that don't *directly* disrupt the opponent are Steel Hellkite, and Crucible of worlds. Both of those have the potential to be disruptive too. Metalworker doesn't, and only seems good if you get to play him turn 1.

Before Phyrexian revoker there was a problem in the mirror if they had metalworker and you didn't, but revoker helps address that, so I'm wondering if you guys think MUD with revokers main and no metalworkers is viable, or is it just worse that using metalworker, and weathering top decking him when you really want something to lock them down.

The list I was thinking of was:

4 Mishra's Workshop
4 Wasteland
4 Ancient Tomb
1 Ghost quarter
1 City of Traitors
1 Tolarian Academy
1 Strip mine

1 Black Lotus
1 Sol Ring
1 Mana crypt
1 Mana vault
1 Mox Opal
1 Mox sapphire
1 Mox ruby
1 Mox emerald
1 Mox jet
1 Mox Pearl

4 Chalice of the void
4 Smokestack
4 Tanglewire
4 Sphere of resistance
4 Thorn of amythyst
1 Trinisphere
2 Cruicible of worlds
1 Memory Jar

4 Phyrexian revoker
4 Lodestone Golem
2 Steel hellkite

SB:

4 Serum Powder
4 Leyline of Sanctity
4 Leyline of the void
3 Duplicant / sword of fire and ice (not sure about this slot)

I've played MUD on and off for a while, but never in a tournament, so I wouldn't claim to be good with it, or experienced with it at all, so any advice or constructive criticism would be well received!

Thanks.

[Tha Gunslinga]

What are you using Revoker for?

[TheWhiteDragon]

I saw a lot of Revokers used in several MUD lists lately, but I can't see what is so great about them.  Not hitting lands is big.  They can hinder time vault, a single mox, jace, pridemage, triskelion.  That's about all I can see.  Am I missing other big uses?  I also see fish with pridemage easily killing the revoker with claim/plow and then pridemaging bigger stuff.  Cards like precursor golem and trike kill jace just as effectively.  Null rod hits all moxen, metalworkers, and TV at once.  I'm just not seeing what this guy is targeting that makes it a 4-of since most decks don't have a lot of targets other than Jace (who, again, is easily handled by other MUD tools).  What am I missing?  I know this is a question on a single card, but since this deck seems to use revoker as its major "targeted disruption", I'm wondering what exactly its uses are in practice.

[The Atog Lord]

Revoker can hit opposing Metalworkers, which is otherwise difficult for MUD decks to do. Revoker and Null Rod are about the only reasonable mono-brown options for stopping him on the first turn.

[Smmenen]

Revoker can hit opposing Metalworkers, which is otherwise difficult for MUD decks to do. Revoker and Null Rod are about the only reasonable mono-brown options for stopping him on the first turn.

Exactly.

Mike Bomholt said Revoker was an all star in his MUD list.   

[serracollector]

If your worried about Metalworker and the MUD mirror then a setup of:

4 x Null Rod
4 x Revoker
4 x Sculpting steel
 
would be a good starting point. 

The only problem with Revoker is you almost need to have the first one name trisk or steel hellkite before naming metalworker anyways, so not sure how well this might work.  with 6 or more strips and a crucible build maybe.  more of a lock MUD.

[Will]

The only problem with Revoker is you almost need to have the first one name trisk or steel hellkite before naming metalworker anyways, so not sure how well this might work.  with 6 or more strips and a crucible build maybe.  more of a lock MUD.

Why do you need to name Triskelion or Steel Hellkite before Metalworker?  This is fundamentally flawed because:
a) If a hand can get to 6 mana on turn 2 then Metalworker is the least of your worries.
b) Most lists that run Metalworker seem to be running 2 or less Triskelions and proactively naming Steel Hellkite is not worthwhile as well. 

For these reasons, it seems like it is almost always correct to name Metalworker before either Hellkite or Triskelion unless they have yet to resolve Metalworker and you have 2 Revokers in hand.

[madmanmike25]

Revoker and Null Rod are about the only reasonable mono-brown options for stopping him on the first turn.

Don't forget that Tangle Wire is a nice delay tactic if they plop down a t1 Metalworker.  Many players will keep a mana light hand when they see they have a t1 Metalworker.

The reason that Revoker is a playable card is that you have the choice to run him alongside Null Rod, OR run him in a deck that utilizes artifact abilities that Null Rod would not allow.  Trike, Metalworker, Hellkite, Karn, and Sword of Fire and Ice come to mind.

Revoker can act as another Sphere effect when you name an opposing piece of jewelry. 

I have an idea:  Let's make a list of all the cards Revoker can stop that are commonly used in vintage decks.  Maybe then people will get it.  I'll start and you guys can add on to it.

1.)  SoloMoxenCryptVaultGrim (I'm cheating because that's 10 cards.)
2.)  Goblin Welder
3.)  Metalworker
4.)  Jace
5.)  Noble Heirarch
5.)  Qasali Pridemage
6.)  Sensei's Divine Top
7.)  Aether Vial
8.)  Vampire Hexmage
9.)  Dark Depths (only the ability to remove counters for long long games.)
10.)  Forgemaster
11.)  Necropotence
12.) Tezzeret (both of them)
13.) Steel Hellkite
14.) Triskelion
15.) Karn, Awesome Golem
16.) Gorilla Shaman

That's just off the top of my head too.  Yes, yes, yes, Null Rod can hit all the aforementioned artifacts.  The reason Revoker is playable is that it can hit NON-artifacts as well.  Another lame (but not irrelevent) point is that sometimes games are a stalemate and in those rare situations, Revoker can tap whereas Null Rod cannot.

[Yare]

Nitpick: Can't name Dark Depths with Revoker because it's a land. That being said, you can name Vampire Hexmage (as you noted) and it's not a bad list overall.

[TheWhiteDragon]

It just seems to me that the biggest use named is stopping metalworker.  Revoker is symetrical though.  if you are shutting out your opponents worker, that means you aren't using your own workers.  I think sacrificing speed for disruption is not good.  It's like running unpowered null rod fish instead of a powered deck.  Raw speed and explosivity is often better in my opinion.  Rod/Revoker effects can wiff, explosiveness never wiffs.  Even naming jewlery cuts off your own moxen.  Naming any artifact threat in the mirror essentially cuts off one of your own tools.  Personally, I dislike metalworker, yet still use them myself just because tapping turn 2 for a combined 15 mana with the original workshop is retarded and pretty much wins the game with any decent hand.

[GrandpaBelcher]

I think Revoker is especially good if you think about MUD being a deck filled with Time Walks. Most of the common artifacts in MUD -- Sphere of Resistance, Thorn of Amethyst, Tangle Wire, Lodestone Golem, and now Revoker -- set your opponent back a turn in comparison to you. Sphere, Thorn, and Golem are obvious; opponents have to play two lands (or some extra mana source) to catch up to where their mana production should be. Tangle Wire can shut off several lands or other permanents during critical early turns.  And now Revoker can shut off a non-land Mana Producer that was helping your opponent catch up to your Spheres.

And it attacks for two!

Seems like a bargain to me.

Permanent mana acceleration like Sol Ring and Mana Crypt used to be the bane of the Workshop deck's existence since they make so much extra mana every turn. Revoker gives a playable threat that effectively answers those cards.

[TheWhiteDragon]

I see a use in shutting down jewelry and worker, but my point is that revoker cuts you off those same sources, making you less explosive and more dependent on workshops.  I don't know if stopping the speed of your opponent is worth the sacrifice of not having an obscene amount of mana yourself.

[StanleyAugust]

I see a use in shutting down jewelry and worker, but my point is that revoker cuts you off those same sources, making you less explosive and more dependent on workshops.  I don't know if stopping the speed of your opponent is worth the sacrifice of not having an obscene amount of mana yourself.

Theoretically yes, but it won't happen like that in game. If your opponent plays Mox X, chances are that you don't have that same Mox on table or will even draw it this game. Besides, shutting down a Mox is symmetric, yes, but it will often hurt your opponent more than you since you play Workshops, Tombs and City of Traitors.

[madmanmike25]

I'm kinda confused why shutting off your own potential moxen is such a big deal, White Dragon.  MUD frequently sets CotV@ 0 and some MUD decks even run Null Rod, both of which can hurt their own artifact acceleration.  This is nothing new, so I wouldn't be so concerned about symmetry.  The difference with Revoker is that you get to choose which mox to nullify.

In most situations I would probably drop a t2 Revoker if my opponent laid a t1 Metalworker, even if I had a Metalworker in my hand.

[TheWhiteDragon]

The idea of chalice is understood, but would you drop a chalice @0 to block your opponent's moxen before you played the moxen in your hand?  Sometimes when you have no moxen, you take the probable chance that your opponent has moxen and you will gain benefit in slowing them down while not immediately affecting your own mana.  The big advantage to chalice though is playing your jewels and THEN dropping chalice so that your opponent gets 1 mana off a land while your next turn has land mana + X mana in the form of lotus, moxen, crypt.  It is in being the shop deck that says "now I can go nuts and you can't - you will be playing catch up."  Blocking your opponent's metalworker when you have one in hand is fine because they will activate first.  That's akin to letting one storm deck tendrils for 20 when you can do it the next turn.  Too late, you're already dead.  But this is not the scenario we are talking about.  This thread is saying not that they are trying to stop you from "going off" FIRST, it is actually forgoing your own ability to "go nuts" just so you can stop your opponent "maybe" from doing so.  It's the same theory behind null rod.  You give up your own resources to attempt to stop your opponent's resources.  My beef with this strategy and not so much the cards in general is that you try to stop your opponent from being explosive by skipping your own ability to be explosive.  Especially in the mirror where you are "shutting down workers," BOTH of you have workshops, tombs, etc.  So now you are stopping their ability to go nuts to keep both mana productions on an equal par instead of having your own chance to "go nuts first."  If you want answers to stop your opponent's turn 1 metalworker, fine, run revoker...but put your opponent in the same predicament by running workers yourself so you can go ape shit.  Giving your opponent a turn 0 answer to this "problem of the mirror" by not running any workers yourself is ridiculous.  It puts you in the position of having to answer him, and him already having an answer to you immediately.  Putting a wad of gum in my enemies rifle might be effective....but I'd rather be the guy with the rifle.

[madmanmike25]

I get what you are saying, but why do you think you have to forego running Metalworkers if you run Revoker?  You can run both, therefore you have your own explosiveness.  Thats why I gave that example of casting Revoker t2 if my opponent had a t1 Metalworker.  If I chose to play my own Metalworker instead of Revoker, thereby going for explosiveness, who's to say I will even get to tap my own Metalworker?  If they empty their hand t3 and lay a Tangle Wire its probably gg. 

Why not carry a rifle AND the wad of gum?  I still feel that if you run 4 Revokers and 4 Metalworkers (and the obv 4 Lodestones), that a few Sword of Fire and Ice seems really, really good.

[LSD25]

i played metalmud and loved the aggro and got top4, then i put together meandeck mud 2011 and have been underwhelmed by it.  i typically name jace, metalworker, vault and welder... or mana pieces.  Some of these choices are dead if you draw into null rod, but null rod can win games sometimes if you have some beaters.  I think pithing over null rod might be better... or full control mud (aka stax) seems better than the null-revoker mud.  Only thing I like about the build is the precursor golem.  I think I would prefer your list to meandeckmud

:2cents

[TheWhiteDragon]

@Madmanmike:  I totally agree with running both.  That was my point and I even said that in my last post.  If you wwant to run revoker, fine, but don't give up your gun because you want everyone to fight with knives.  If you need to stop worker then revoker is fine, but if you lead with worker, now your opponent is up shit creek.  The thing though is this thread is all about NOT playing metalworker and using the presence of revoker to justify it.  That's bad mojo in my book.

[TheBrassMan]

TheWhiteDragon brings up an excellent point.  If you just don't like playing against Metalworker, that's no reason not to run it.  (Honestly that's a great reason TO run it).  If however, like the original post states, you just don't think Metalworker is very good ... then you're in luck - but I'm a little confused. 

People have been playing with Null Rod and without Metalworker for a while (or without either), before Revoker was printed.  I think you could totally play a deck like the one you listed, and be successful - particularly if you added Null Rod.  Check out the first place list here: http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=41949.0 , for an example of that strategy already being winning in a field of Metalworker.    Joe Brown defined MUD the archetype without Metalworker with his win at the most prestigious north american tournament outside of GenCon last year: http://sales.starcitygames.com/deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=34886 .  An even larger tournament in Germany here: http://morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=1340 has a top 8 with a No Metalworker/No Rod deck, and no other Shop decks made it.

I guess I'm curious why you'd think Metalworker was necessary at all.  It's certainly very popular right now (much more popular than metalworker-free lists), but in the grand history of Workshops there have been far less successful decks with Metalworker than without. 

So if you're asking whether a deck that has won several major tournaments tournaments within the year is viable... um... yes?

I guess that depends on your definition of viable.

[Kiriyuu]

Thanks for the responses everyone.

I just saw the list from the Meandeck open, which is really interesting. Why Precursor Golem? Is it just because it's 9 power for 5 mana? I can see the attraction there!

[LSD25]

here is a pile that went 1-10 aginst tezz tonight:

    3 Chalice of the Void
    3 Mishra's Factory
    1 Mana Crypt
    4 Ancient Tomb
    2 Crucible of Worlds
    3 Wurmcoil Engine
    3 Pithing Needle
    3 Sphere of Resistance
    3 City of Traitors
    4 Phyrexian Revoker
    1 Mox Sapphire
    3 Null Rod
    4 Mishra's Workshop
    1 Black Lotus
    1 Mox Emerald
    1 Mox Pearl
    1 Mox Jet
    1 Tolarian Academy
    1 Mox Ruby
    4 Lodestone Golem
    4 Precursor Golem
    3 Thorn of Amethyst
    4 Wasteland
    1 Strip Mine
    1 Sol Ring

// Sideboard:
SB: 4 Leyline of the Void
SB: 4 Leyline of Sanctity
SB: 4 Duplicant
SB: 3 Serum Powder

never did SB.  think his deck ran rebuild and hurkyl main, which is odd, but was able to get out of chalice/null lock.  revoker and pithing seems overboard... naming time vault, jace and tezz (he played both tezzs too).  i found it important to get null rod and set chalice to 2.  spheres did a better job at lock than anything else.  i would say put pithing in SB and tangle wire main.  by playing null there is a huge amount of technology lost from karn, hellkite and trisk not being present. i think null-stax is far superior to revoker.