5 Color Fish

[Schyl]

Hi,

I’ve been a long-time lurker here at the mana drain. I recently put together a list of my own creation, and have been having a lot of fun with it. I thought I would post it up for suggestions and criticism. I am also hoping someone else might try it, if only confirm for me that I haven’t been misleading myself about how much success I’ve had with it.

I started with the premise of wanting to see if I could build a competitive 5-color deck. This deck is the product of that premise. So far, it has put up some pretty strong results. I’ve tested it in over 200+ games, both on and offline, against everything but dredge.

The deck often feels like you win because you had lucky draws. Opponents certainly seem to have no trouble telling me this. However, the consistency with which I draw the answers I need leads me to believe otherwise.

I started building this list after having a lot of success with the BUG legacy deck, Team America. I liked the combination of Jace, Tarmogoyf, and Dark Confidant. At the same time, however, I knew I wanted to avoid playing a bluish-control style deck. I thought that, in Vintage, trying to be both a fish and a counter-control deck like Team American meant the deck would simply be bad at both.

Instead, I thought I would rely more on the extremely efficient reactive answers each color provides. One thing that prompted this decision was a recognition that most vintage decks play few threats, relying on establishing superior board position to push those threats through.

There were no recent attempts that I could find to build a similar style of deck on TMD.
The deck plays and feels very different from other fish decks I have play. Traditional fish decks try to disrupt the other player by playing creatures like Cursecatcher, Teeg, or Mindcensor, coupled with counter-magic. This list lets other decks do whatever they want. Then, it destroys whatever they cast cheaply, at instant speed.

My favorite thing, so far, about this strategy is that games tend to go long. It is not uncommon to see twenty or thirty turns of play.

Here’s the list:

1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
4 Null Rod

4 Dark Confidant
3 Grim Lavamancer
3 Qasali Pridemage
4 Tarmogoyf

3 Jace, the Mind Sculptor

1 Balance
1 Demonic Tutor
4 Thoughtseize
1 Time Walk

1 Ancestral Recall
3 Ancient Grudge
3 Diabolic Edict
3 Swords to Plowshares

1 Badlands
1 Bayou
1 Plateau
1 Savannah
1 Scrubland
1 Taiga
1 Tropical Island
1 Tundra
1 Underground Sea
1 Volcanic Island

1 Arid Mesa
1 Misty Rainforest
1 Marsh Flats
1 Polluted Delta
1 Verdant Catacombs
1 Windswept Heath

Sideboard:
3 Ethersworn Canonist
4 Leyline of the Void
2 Lightning Bolt
2 Nature’s Claim
2 Yixlid Jailer
1 Plains
1 Swamp

Comments on the List:
The Mana Base:
The current mana base is one of each dual land, plus fetch-lands. The fetch-lands are skewed away from blue, as the deck doesn’t need blue as early as the other colors.
I have also tried three other variations:
1. Multiple copies of certain dual lands: This version worked about as well, except for the odd game where I would draw two copies of the same land and no fetches in my opening hand. The deck really want to have access to three colors in the opening hand. For that reason, I decided against this version.
2. Adding basic lands: Basic lands actually proved unnecessary in the main deck. I still side in basic lands for some match ups, but only because I don’t know what else to do.
3. Multi-color lands: This worked alright. However, due to the games tending to go long, I often found myself in uncomfortable situations when using Gemstone Mine or City of Brass.

The current Mana base surprisingly resilient. Achieving the right colors is emphatically not difficult, even against decks that attack the mana base. I’ve tested it against all manner of such decks, including Mud, Stax, rogue 9 strip fish decks, and decks with Blood Moon effects. The only one of these that presents a serious problem is Blood Moon. (Qasali Pridemage being the only main deck enchantment removal) Magus of the Moon is easy to kill with Lavamancer or by floating mana for removal. Also, the deck still manages to doe quite well against decks that play moon effects off mountains and two moxen.

Playing with 5 colors does take a slight shift in thought to get used to. Against decks that don’t attack the mana base, getting the right color is never an issue. You might not be able to cast every card in your hand with the colors available on the first turn, but you don’t need to worry, let alone mulligan. It is exceedingly rare that you will have to pass a turn without playing anything only because you have the wrong mana. Duals and fetches provide excellent consistency.

Against decks that do attack the mana base, it remains surprisingly stable. Everything in the deck except Jace costs 1 or 2. While I do have trouble getting to four mana for Jace, the diversity of lands and the relatively even color split ensures that I still manage to find the right colors with consistency. It doesn’t matter if they wasteland my dual land when I only needed that particular color for the spell I already played.

Card Advantage:
I have found Confidant plus Jace and Recall to be sufficient. Confidant’s card drawing occurs at highly consistent life loss.

The Lack of Vial:
The first version of this deck that I tried played Aether vial. The problem with vial, however, is that this deck is five colors, and wants to run spells (in addition to creatures) from each of the five colors. This requirement renders me unable to run wasteland. And, without waste effects of my own, I don’t think vial really results in as much of an advantage. This effect is compounded by the relative cheapness of all the other spells. When I did run vial, too often I would have a lot of extra, unused mana, or I would draw a second copy when I needed an answer instead.

The Lack of Tinker/Bot
I tried this with a few different targets. The problem, however, is twofold. First, you cannot be sure of having an artifact in your hand. Second, it is impossible to cast a robot should you draw it. I have never had that much land in play.
The Lack of Brainstorm/Ponder/etc:
I tried the deck with these, but was under-whelmed. I don’t know why, exactly, but they failed to provide the power that they do in other decks.

Cards I’m not sure of:
Balance
Tends to either be a life-saver or useless. It has helped me win several games after sacrificing my board to an attacking Emrakul. But it has also sat there staring at me when I have a 1/1 spirit token the turn before they attack with Emrakul.

Demonic Tutor
I always like it when I draw it, as it lets me find an answer or a threat. But, it could just be an answer or threat instead.

Null Rod
Does wonders against a first turn metalworker. If their metalworker sticks, I usually don’t have enough to deal with the number of threats and spheres they can play on the following turn.
Its also nice against vault, but I usually find myself with grudge and/or pridemage on top of it.
Other than the metalworker, where it shines, I just haven’t had much need for it.

Ancient Grudge
Wonderful when it works. Unfortunately, at two mana, I’ve had several games where I’m unable to cast it under spheres because its one mana too expensive. I’ve thought about ingot chewer in the maindeck, but I really like the consistency I currently have when drawing blind with confidant. I don’t have to worry about dying until I get to two life.

Comments on the Sideboard:
Its not thought out particularly well. The basic lands are there more to make sure I can answer threats with swords and edict under moon effects then to solve any wasteland problems.
Bolt works against lodestone, and serves as another answer to magus of the moon.
Canonist is a nod to the decks storm match-up.

Vs. Oath: (neutral/favorable)
Despite being reliant on creatures to win, this deck has done well against oath. The 3 edicts and 3 swords have so far been successful at requiring them to oath multiple times. Emrakul can be a problem without edict, but I think that’s true for most decks. Many games see my deck dealing with all of their oath targets (and Emrakul more than once after shuffling him back in) before winning.

Vs. Metalworker (favorable)
Mud Aggro is one exception to decks that don’t play many significant threats. Here, many things work in this decks favor. First, because the cost of everything is so low, (and thorn doesn’t hit creatures) its relatively easy to play around spheres. Second, Null Rod and Lavamancer shut off Metalworker (which, if unaswered does create seriously problems for this deck). Without metal worker, Mud tends to lay out only one threat per turn. This deck can handle that, and will eventually win through the card advantage provided by Confidant and Jace. However, I will note chalice at two is pretty effective at shutting down my deck.

Vs. Stax (favorable)
Smokestack is often less of concern for me than it is for them. I tend to have several permanents in play. Grudge and swords work effectively to remove their threats. Crucible is usually game, however, unless I have an immediate Grudge or Pridemage.

Vs. Fish (favorable)
So far this deck has destroyed other fish decks. I’ve played mainly against BUG, UR, and UGW but have also tested against more fringe versions like W and BUGW. Lavamancer shines against anything running small creatures. I think counterspells, particularly force of will, hurt the other fish decks in this match up. This version seems to have more threats and answers then other fish decks.

Vs. Storm (unfavorable)
Always a race. Tends to be a relatively non-interactive game. I can sometimes slow them down by destroying/nullifying their artifacts. Other than that though, there isn’t a whole lot I can do to stop them from going off. A medium-sized Will is usually game over. Sometimes I can be cute and swords my goyf to stay alive after one tendrils, but its rare. That being said, I seem to do decently well against gush/based storm, not quite as well against traditional TPS, and even worse against Grim Long.

Vs. Turbo-Tezz (favorable)
Haven’t had much trouble winning here either. Null rod and the main deck grudges keep their artifacts from working. It is a rare game indeed where they can assemble vault/key unopposed. Tinker also doesn’t tend to do much here, between the swords and edicts. The creature base is also dense/strong enough ensure Tezzeret can’t stick on the table. I typically find myself losing only when I tap out early to cast Jace.

Vs. Blue Control (favorable)
I think this tends to be an even stronger match-up then the faster Turbo-Tezz variants. These decks don’t tend to play a lot of threats. By the time they get around to casting one of them, I usually have two or three answers in my hand for it.

Thanks for reading! Please let me know if you have any suggestions or criticisms.

[TopSecret]

This list seems really, really strong and this post seems very comprehensive to me. Good work!

I'm wondering though how good Grim Lavamancer is. Is it necessary, or would something else be good in that slot. Like perhaps Wild Nacatl?

[brokenbacon]

I actually like this a lot. I've never been a huge huge fan of 5c decks in Vintage, but this is a cool looking hybrid between Fish and Control.
First and foremost: I don't think you should run that mana base. 1 of each dual is nice, but Wasteland goes to town on your deck. Instead, you should focus on one color and focus your fetches and duals towards that color, with splash duals and fetches for the less important colors. Also, City of Brass looks like it would be pretty awesome in this deck.
Second: I don't think you need that much creature hate. Unless your meta is rampant with Fish or other aggro based decks, I agree with TopSecret in that you should probably drop Lavamancer. I say this because it hits 0 cards vs. MUD, which is an incredibly important matchup these days.
Third: 3 Jace is probably too many. You don't have any significant mana accel (Mana Drain, Sol Ring, Mana Crypt, etc.), which means you will be lucky to hit him turn 3. 1 Jace sounds a lot more friendly, IMO. This way, you can still rip him like a champ, but you won't be stuck with Jace in your hand after the opponent has Wasted your lands and locked you out with Spheres.
Finally: Your matchup vs. Storm is going to be pretty rough g1. It would probably be a good idea to bolster the g1 matchup by adding a few cards like True Believer (helps vs. Oath too!) or maybe some more Duress effects. Just because lack of Force in this deck really really hurts.
But anyway, all that aside I really like the deck! Keep up the good work, it is very classy to build your own decks (I wouldn't know lol netdecking champ 2011)

[Meddling Mike]

1) I think Grim Lavamancer is probably just bad in Vintage. There are very few matchups where he is a blowout like he can be in Legacy. Sure, sometimes he'll get a metalworker, dark confidant or Jace, but he requires shrinking your Tarmogoyf and additional mana invested to do the job.
2) if you are going with a 5-color mana base, go with a 5-color mana base. I see that goyf would like a land in the graveyard and Lavamancer would too, Jace would enjoy the shuffle effect, bit I am not sure that any of that is worth compromising on color consistency. I think City of Brass, Gemstone Mine, etc. might be better.
3) Aether Vial and Null Rod should never be in the same deck. I also think you might be packing too much fast mana for a deck with Null Rods.
4) If you are playing black you should have Demonic Tutor.

I guess my biggest question is if this deck is better than Noble Fish. The mana base seems like no matter how it's built would be less reliable and without wastes or strip mine it can't really attack an opponent's mana either. The red seems weak for Lavamancers and a miser's Ancient Grudge. I really like Dark Confidant and Demonic Tutor, but I am not sure that it is so much better than alternatives card drawing engines like Cold-Eyed Selkie that I would want to splash black for it. The Diabolic Edicts are nice, but 4 Swords to Plowshares should be enough to handle the creatures out of most Vintage decks.

[Schyl]

Thanks for the input thus far. I have tested everything suggested. There were some things I agreed with, and some that I did not.

First, my agreement:
I thought about Lavamancer and decided I had only become attached to him because of how efficiently he could deal with multiple Magus of the Moons. However, the Magus is not nearly as prevalent as Lodestone. Therefore, I switched out Lavamancer for Lightning Bolt. It accomplishes the same goals, but has the added benefit of also hitting Lodestone. All around, it feels much better. Against Metalworker Aggro now, I’m pushing an 80% win rate. I only seem to lose if Chalice at 2 is played before I can play anything significant.

Second, the in-between:
I do think Swords is better than Diabolic Edict. I am testing a 4/2 split instead of the current 3/3 split. However, the additional removal (beyond four Swords) is necessary. Against workshop decks, removal cards are never dead. In fact, the plethora of removal contained within this deck is precisely what creates the extremely favorable workshop match-up. Against blue-based decks, the deck wants and needs at least two copies of removal in hand. Unlike other fish decks, this list runs no counter-spells. To actually remove a tinkered robot or oath target requires the ability to play through counter-spells.

I also partly agree with the comment about the number of Jaces. There certainly are occasions where Jace will be stuck in hand, or I will draw multiples. However, it seems that I am happy to draw him a majority of the time. I would also note that playing him turn three is rarely the correct choice. In fact, I think that is my most common source of losses against blue-based decks. Without force of will, there is nothing to stop them from finding vault/key while you are tapped out (which happens quite frequently, as I noted in the original post).

Third, my disagreement:
I’m not sure what to make of the comment about Aether Vial and Null Rod. I am not running Vial in this deck. I have a paragraph in the original post about the decision to not run Vial. Similarly, I am running demonic tutor.

As for the mana base, I did test the five-color lands. They are not as good in this deck.
Wasteland, again, is emphatically not an issue. It is a rare game indeed where I am “cut off” from access to a color. As a person who usually plays TPS, I fully understand the traditional mind set of protecting oneself against wasteland effects. However, I think the idea of protecting against Wasteland is much more relevant for blue-based decks, where (1) it is relatively easy to cut off access to splash color completely if no basic lands are played and (2) the deck wants or needs several lands in play to cast its spells.
This deck is split evenly amongst all five colors. There are five sources of each color (four duals and one mox), produced by lands that can easily be fetched (raising the number of “sources” of each to eleven). Typical splashes in blue-based control will run one or two duals, and maybe one basic land. To cut this deck off a color requires the opposing player to draw 4 of 5 waste effects. Furthermore, the deck does not need many lands in play to win. It is perfectly happy playing its lands as one-shot uses if it needs to.

Finally, Confidant is, without question, miles better than Selkie. Most critically, Confidant comes out one turn faster. I question whether you could ever even cast Selkie against a multi-sphere workshop deck.

I welcome any additional comments and feedback, particularly if someone is willing to build and test the deck. My win-rates are feeling a bit absurd for a “creative” deck, and I would be interested to see if that experience is unique to me.

[Meddling Mike]

Second, the in-between:
I do think Swords is better than Diabolic Edict. I am testing a 4/2 split instead of the current 3/3 split. However, the additional removal (beyond four Swords) is necessary. Against workshop decks, removal cards are never dead. In fact, the plethora of removal contained within this deck is precisely what creates the extremely favorable workshop match-up. Against blue-based decks, the deck wants and needs at least two copies of removal in hand. Unlike other fish decks, this list runs no counter-spells. To actually remove a tinkered robot or oath target requires the ability to play through counter-spells.

I certainly haven't tested the deck, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, but Vintage tends to be such a creature light format that I could see 6 dedicated creature removal slots leading to dead cards. You mention the workshop matchup, but you already run multiple Ancient Grudges, at that point it's overkill.

I’m not sure what to make of the comment about Aether Vial and Null Rod. I am not running Vial in this deck. I have a paragraph in the original post about the decision to not run Vial. Similarly, I am running demonic tutor.

You say that you're not running vial, but I think the reasoning was flawed. The glaring reason not to run Aether Vial is Null Rod, any other reasoning is a much smaller consideration. When you were discussing Demonic Tutor you ended by saying

But, it could just be an answer or threat instead.

This was my saying that I think it would be a mistake to replace Demonic Tutor with anything else, agreeing with it's current inclusion.

Finally, Confidant is, without question, miles better than Selkie. Most critically, Confidant comes out one turn faster. I question whether you could ever even cast Selkie against a multi-sphere workshop deck.

I'm not claiming that Selkie is a better card, I'm questioning whether Confidant is better enough to warrant stretching the mana base into additional colors. I have the same skepticism regarding the red spells in the deck. I am also viewing Selkie from the perspective of Noble Fish which does have some additional cards available to help abuse Selkie. In terms of being able to cast it, I think a less fragile mana base could probably handle it.

My win-rates are feeling a bit absurd for a “creative” deck, and I would be interested to see if that experience is unique to me.

Where/Whom are you testing this against? Tournament play? MWS? Cockatrice? IRL testing?

[/quote]

[Schyl]

I think the reason I haven't felt the amount removal to be a problem thus far is that I see their purpose in the deck a little differently. The deck doesn't play to win, it plays to stop the other person from winning. Blue decks run few win conditions. At most, they might have (1) Tinker/Robot (2) Vault/Key (3) Jace or Tezzeret Ultimate and (4) Replaying one of these via Will or Regrowth. If I draw three or four removal spells, even if they sit in my hand for many turns, I feel confident it will be near impossible for a blue deck to with through (1) or (2). Unlike a "disruptive" fish deck like BUG, I don't feel any pressure to win before my disruptive effects end. As a result, I'm not worried when two cards in my hand are currently dead. I know that, because of them, I have usually prevented the other deck from winning. The lack of creatures in blue-decks also tends to mean their Planeswalkers can't amass loyalty.

I see now that in my original post I forgot to write that I had replaced the Vials with the Rods. I do agree that running Rod is the best reason not to run Vial.

As for whether Confidant if worth stretching into other colors for, I purposefully avoided your comment regarding comparing the deck to Noble Fish in my response  I thought I would spend more time tweaking to see if it is a truly viable concept before dismissing it through comparison to existing decks. If I were to make a comparison, I'd make it to deck that, to my knowledge doesn't exist: A three color non-disruptive fish deck. I think you could probably find enough removal in three colors to achieve the same effect I intended with this deck. If I eventually determine that this deck is, in fact, too unwieldy, that's the next place I will go.

I didn't mean that this deck can't make the colors to play Selkie, but rather that, against Spheres, the deck (any deck) could have trouble making the number of mana required to play Selkie. I haven't played with Selkie in Noble Fish myself, so I don't personally know how easily Noble Fish can cast it against a deck running 13 sphere effects.
 
I've been testing the deck IRL, but mostly on Cockatrice. It seems like Cockatrice tends to have a fairly high percentage of rogue decks, which might explain why I was initially so concerned about the effect of Magus on this deck.

Having said all of that, I was playing the deck earlier today, and little seemed to be working at all. The high win-rate I was experiencing dropped to around 30-40% for the day. Many of the earlier comments came true: I'd have two Jace in hand and be unable to cast one, I'd want to play Rod but had two necessary Moxes in play, or I didn't draw any fetch-lands and so couldn't get the right color.

I'm thinking about removing 1 Jace, and dropping Null Rod. With as much removal as I have, I wonder if I might not need Rod.

[Daenyth]

Could Revoker be a sub-in for Rod? I've heard people say he's almost as effective while being far more flexible.