[Free Podcast] Avacyn Restored Review: SMIP # 14

[Smmenen]

http://www.mtgcast.com/?p=24666

Kevin Cron and Steve Menendian discuss Avacyn Restored’s Vintage playables and the funniest movie(s) of all time.

Contact us at @ManyInsanePlays on Twitter or e-mail us at SoManyInsanePlaysPodcast@gmail.com

Your Host(s): Kevin Cron , Steve Menendian
Show’s Email: SoManyInsanePlaysPodcast@gmail.com
Show’s Twitter: http://twitter.com/ManyInsanePlays

As always, let us know what you think.

[BC]

I think you covered the most promising cards of the set.

As for the movie stuff, I didn't love Borat for the same reason I don't love Curb Your Enthusiasm.  Both are fundamentally based on awkward situations, which makes me uncomfortable.  The funniest movie ever is Wayne's World.  Of course that may only apply if you were born between 1975 and 1983.

[Smmenen]

I think you covered the most promising cards of the set.

As for the movie stuff, I didn't love Borat for the same reason I don't love Curb Your Enthusiasm.  Both are fundamentally based on awkward situations, which makes me uncomfortable.  The funniest movie ever is Wayne's World.  Of course that may only apply if you were born between 1975 and 1983.

You aren't the only person who feels that way, but I must admit I don't understand it.  My dad thinks Larry David is a "F****** A*****e."  I think he's a genius.

It is precisely that uncomfortable social tension that I find so humorous.   

My set review for EC will have lots of decklists, which obviously can't be provided in an article like this.  I also cover alot more cards in my set review. 

We only covered the cards that were requested, but I think they missed alot of the more relevant cards. 

[MagicMan]

Thanks for the podcast Steve and Kevin, as always it was informative and enlightening. If I may give a suggestion it would be this, but I don't know if others will agree or not.  I'm not sure if I'm a fan of one of you doing the support/Pro's for why the card will be good and the other doing the Con's/why the card won't be good, way u reviewed the cards this time. The reason being and I'll use Grislebrand as my example cause it bothered me most on your review for this card. I believe Kevin did the Pro's for the card which was fine, while you did the Con argument. My issue is that when you finished doing the Con's and I'm listening to what you have to say about specific cards, which I value your input, you then state you really like the card and don't believe most of your Con argument you just made and then very quickly say that you think the card could be awesome and have potential. I felt a little cheated because that's what I really want to know your opinion about and because you were on the Con side of the debate I didn't really feel I got to hear you thoughts on why you liked Grislebrand so much and potential great ways to use it.   Its was just your quick thoughts on why it was awesome cause you spent most of your time on the card debating the potential Con's about it , which it seemed you didn't really believe as much, but for the sake of the debate reviewed the card that way anyway. 
    In a much quicker way to say it, I think it would be more productive and informative if you both feel a card has a potential to be awesome then both of you talk about ways you think it will be utilized and taken advantage of instead of one of you trying to come up with a Con's argument just for the sake of the debate. I'm sure while reviewing cards you will fit in both positives and negatives about them, but it just seemed that you feel Griselbrand is going to be really playable, but I didn't get to hear that much of an analysis as to why, from you specifically : (

Anyway, thanks again!

[Smmenen]

Thanks for the podcast Steve and Kevin, as always it was informative and enlightening. If I may give a suggestion it would be this, but I don't know if others will agree or not.  I'm not sure if I'm a fan of one of you doing the support/Pro's for why the card will be good and the other doing the Con's/why the card won't be good, way u reviewed the cards this time. The reason being and I'll use Grislebrand as my example cause it bothered me most on your review for this card. I believe Kevin did the Pro's for the card which was fine, while you did the Con argument. My issue is that when you finished doing the Con's and I'm listening to what you have to say about specific cards, which I value your input, you then state you really like the card and don't believe most of your Con argument you just made and then very quickly say that you think the card could be awesome and have potential. I felt a little cheated because that's what I really want to know your opinion about and because you were on the Con side of the debate I didn't really feel I got to hear you thoughts on why you liked Grislebrand so much and potential great ways to use it.   Its was just your quick thoughts on why it was awesome cause you spent most of your time on the card debating the potential Con's about it , which it seemed you didn't really believe as much, but for the sake of the debate reviewed the card that way anyway. 

I feel the same way.  I doubt we'll use that format again, but it was a nice experiment.  Thanks for the feedback. 

[Troy_Costisick]

Yay! Can't wait to listen!

[MaximumCDawg]

What kind of attorney admits that he really doesn't believe in his client's case after trial?

For shame, Steve, for shame.

[ed0]

*psst* it's #14

i agree on the comment that splitting it up into clear pros and cons might not be the best idea. obviously every card has cons in some fashion (even ancestral recall requires you to play at least a single blue manasource *eww* and it's couterable *eww*) - the interesting part is in what relation those stand to the pros, and in what setting one might be able to break the card. that can only be answered (or rather attempted to be answered) in a more integrated fashion.

i also really miss the situation analyses - those were a lot of fun and i would like to see them return.

[Troy_Costisick]

Funniest Movie: Cheech and Chong Up in Smoke
Card I'd Like You To Review: Risky Bet

[serracollector]

Really good smip.  I am loving this set, and I must agree that you guys only covered a very few cards from this set that will see play.
Anyways a few comments from the peanut gallery:

Temporal Mastery - I 100% agree with steve that taking an extra Turn is one of, if not the most powerful play you can have in magic.  Since this card was revealed I have been testing it on cockatrice in a plethora of decks.  The best one I have made thus far is a UBR aggro deck using delvers, snaps, tandem lookouts (another amazing AVR card), Bobs, tops, ponder, bs, jace and such. Magma Jet is another card that is amazing, with all these aggro decks, with Temporal that people haven't used, as well as Information Dealer.  With Bob's, Snaps, Delvers, and Dealer all being wizards, you can easily look at and rearrange your top 3-5 cards for free every turn.  Also synergizes with bob, without having to play Top. Grim lavamancer is another good red wizard, and also works well in this aggro meta.  And ofc these all work well with Caverns as they are all humans/wizards.  Anyways enough digressing about my deck, but on to another Pro you missed, you can use cards like Gush, Opt, Brainstorm, Thirst, and Top to draw and cast Temporal During an opponents turn, meaning you get 2 turns in a row, with all your mana accessible to you.  EOT temporal I get two turns, will be a very common play I see happening.  And as for some Cons you guys didn't Mention, even if you get it for its Miracle cost, this card still gets stopped by Gaddock Teeg.  Also, getting one of these Mana Drained, and your opponent getting 7 mana (very ironic if they hard cast a temporal off your Drained temporal btw), can easily lead to you getting BLOWN out of the water.  7 mana is a lot.  Despite these cons, as mentioned, this card is so good, I see it being ran by a lot of people.

Unfortunately I haven't heard the rest of the SMIP so far, as it is 2 hours long, but will listen to the rest tonight, and update this post at the end.  Great so far tho.  Temporal is gonna be a beating.  

One question for you guys tho, something me and my friends noticed while testing the card.  We were all trying or own Temporal Mastery decks vs eachother, and almost every time it became a "jace war".  Whoever got and stuck their jace, and thus got to Walk 2-3 times, even every other turn as Steven mentioned, it was GG.  So if this trend turns into an uprising, could these Miracle cards lead to Jace getting the axe and being restricted in t1?  Obv a draw 7 for 2, or having 5 timewalks, is WAY more degenerate in t1 than it is in legacy, and as mentioned by both of you and agreed upon by me, Jace is the best way to abuse the Miracle Mechanic in t1.  So with the power level of these cards, and the power level of jace just as is, could this lead to the Restriction of Brainstorm on a stick?  What are your guys opinions on that?

[MaximumCDawg]

I would not be surprised in the slightest if Jace eventually gets restricted, but he's not there yet.  I feel like it's only in the last five months or so that people are starting to realize you want to be running 4x Jace because he wins the game when he resolves.  Others might disagree, but whenever I'm brewing, I find that using Jace as my primary draw engine in a blue deck is almost always a no-brainier because of his versatility.  I always run 2, would run more if I owned them. 

Once top 8s start really showing people are all running 4x Jace as an auto-include in blue decks, he'll probably get axed.

[DubDub]

Only  card I could think of was Shattering Spree, which doesn't see much play currently.

Uba Mask is pretty freaking terrible against a resolved Jace, btw.

Here's what Tibalt's first ability should have been: "Draw a card.  At end of turn, discard a card at random."  They need to give you a window of time to use the extra card.

Here's what I would say about Gristlebrand vs RSD: Time Walk is restricted in Vintage.  Contract from Below is BANNED in Vintage.  QED.

Kevin was mistaking Thoughtseize for Peppersmoke, maybe?

[MaximumCDawg]

Query: If Contract from Below was not an ante card, but just said "Pay half your life" or some other extreme cost to draw 7, would it be banned or restricted?  I have a hard time seeing what WotC would do with a blunder of that magnitude...

Basically, is DubDub right?  Is Contract bannable even if it wasnt ante?

[Troy_Costisick]

Funniest Movie: Cheech and Chong Up in Smoke
Card I'd Like You To Review: Risky Bet

Not Risky Bet.  I meant Dangerous Wager.

[MaximumCDawg]

Finally finished listening to the whole podcast travelling to Fort Collins to do a Meeting of Creditors.  The meat of the discussion was great, but was it really necessary to sperg out for 20 minutes about what makes a movie funny...?   I kept thinking, "they're gonna loop this back to Magic, I should keep listening," but instead I was treated to an in-depth analysis of whether laughs-per-second or artistic value makes a comedy / funny movie good.  Okay?

I was happy to hear my concerns about Tibalt mirrored in the podcast.  Far too many professional players have been writing articles basically saying, "Look, it's a planeswalker that costs two. It doesn't matter what it does, it HAS to be good."  Meanwhile I look at a wasted draw on a fail card you never actually want to use, since you have better alternatives in the event you do want to repeatedly loot, in red, for cheap.

Anyway, to answer your question about other interesting cards in Avacyn Restored, I have a few that interest me:

(1) Gloom Surgeon.  It's basically an indestructible grizzly bear in a better color.  The closest analogue to this fellow I can think of is Beloved Chaplain, but since Surgeon has 2 power, he can actually kill alot of creatures in the format.  I feel like a basically indestructible grizzly bear is much, much better than people are realizing right now in Standard and Modern.  I don't know if there's a home for him in Vintage, but I'm watching and thinking.

(2) Misthollow Griffin.  He combos with Food Chain, but this seems cumbersome to pull off in Vintage and I'm skeptical it'll ever be a tier one strategy.  More importantly, for me, is the concept of running one or two Griffins expressly as pitch fuel for Force of Will, Misdirection, Commandeer, Snapback, and Disrupting Shoal (some more than others, of course).  A 3/3 flier for 4 is not terribly exciting, but if you could play each game of Vintage with a 3/3 flier for 4 as your General -- as if you're playing EDH -- that's actually really powerful.  He's bigger than most (non-goyf) fair creatures in the format, too.  I'm conceiving of a deck featuring 4x Force, 2x MisD, 1x Commander, and some number of Snapback as fattie answers, with a playset of Griffins expressly as pitch fuel and win condition.  

Every deck list I've cobbled together so far suffers from the sin of playing bad cards in the hope that Griffin makes them good, but the concept of getting truly free counters or unsummons is really darn appealing.

(3) Descendant's Path.  There are several of "top creature in your library comes into play" cards, but this is the best one yet.  The rest all cost 4 and typically exile or bury the creature at end of turn.  For three mana, as long as you're playing Mutavault, you make your Worldly Tutors and Lim Dul's Vaults into Tinkers for any creature in your deck.  The big problem: its cogs are identical to those used by Oath and hit by the same hate as Oath (land + enchantment = creature from library into play) but it's not as cheap or reliable as Oath.  Maybe this card, while powerful, will simply never see light of day because it's inferior to other even more powerful options.  If so, I think we look to Modern to make this card sing.

[Smmenen]

What's interesting to me is that there are a number of cards that I think actually could see play in vintage that aren't discussed in my podcast, but are in my set review, and none of those were the cards you just listed :p

[MaximumCDawg]

Haha!  Well, "playable in vintage" and "interesting" are different things.  There are alot of other playable cards that we've done to death on the forms (like Lighthouse, Terminus,etc), but I didn't include them specifically because I'm not sure there's more to say about it.

I mean, take lighthouse.  It's a looting effect that's easy to include because it's on a land.  Useful spell effects at reasonable costs on lands tend to be at least playable, and this one probably has a home somewhere.  I could even see running it in Tezz or The Deck just to filter in the late game.  But, it's not unprecedented and it just doesn't seem particularly interesting.  For the three I mentioned above, I feel like there are interesting aspects that are unexplored.  The first two are just unique in the world, and the third seems like Oath's retarded step-brother for Modern.

[MTGFan]

I was listening to this recently for some reason (wanted to see what they said about a different card), and I was struck by how adamant Steve was regarding the playability of Temporal Mastery. Steve and Kevin (mostly Steve) absolutely gushed about the power of temporal mastery, and proclaimed that it would be completely broken in Legacy and highly playable in Vintage. Steve, in fact, pondered a possible banning of Brainstorm in response to this card in Legacy.

So what happened? Why was Mastery never the card we thought it would be? It certainly seemed powerful enough - with enough filtering you could play 4 Time Walks. What were we missing with this card? It hasn't done anything in either Vintage or Legacy since its printing.

[Smmenen]

I didnt think it would be that good in Vintage, but was fairly certain it would be broken in Legacy -- primarily because you could play 4 Brainstorm in a tempo format.  The reason I didn't think it would be that good in Vintage is because Brainstorm was restricted.  My published set review had a fairly detailed assessment.  

The problem with the card is that it lacks sufficient value without Brainstorm, and is pretty terrible in an opening hand.  Chaining Time Walks is of value, but not enough value to justify the set up.  

Even though Kevin was much higher on the card in Vintage than I was, we were wildly off the mark in out top 8 prediction.