New Card:Smelt

[AmbivalentDuck]

, Instant, Destroy target artifact.

First impression: very playable.  Very different from Nature's Claim: can't destroy enchantments, but doesn't give your opponent 4 life.

[InfectedMushroom]

The difference being the casting cost and green splash required by Ancient Grudge. I can see it being used in some decks, but the 2-for-1 card advantage given by Ancient Grudge seems better.

Certain builds will like this card, due to not being vulnerable to Wasteland as much.

[hvndr3d y34r h3x]

is this better than shattering spree?

[InfectedMushroom]

Sorcery speed is the only downside of Shattering Spree. Getting to use Smelt under a Tangle Wire is useful, but Spree can hit a couple more targets.

[hvndr3d y34r h3x]

Sorcery speed is the only downside of Shattering Spree. Getting to use Smelt under a Tangle Wire is useful, but Spree can hit a couple more targets.

I realize that, but is it still better than potentially being able to shatter like multiple things? Consider the types of decks this will see play in, its an interesting question.

[AmbivalentDuck]

Sorcery speed is the only downside of Shattering Spree. Getting to use Smelt under a Tangle Wire is useful, but Spree can hit a couple more targets.

Even better to nail a Tangle Wire at the end of your opponent's turn instead of during your upkeep.

[InfectedMushroom]

But, you may already be tapped down. Obviously it's better at EoT, but that is not always possible.

[hvndr3d y34r h3x]

Standard blue decks really don't care about +4 life with vault and blightsteel. Plus claim works against more decks.  Most beat down decks have multiple permanents to tap down to wire and are already running green for Goyfs. If they have red, seems likely that grudge would be better. If its heavy red, like gobos, seems like they'll have permanents and spree would be better.
If this were to see play it seems like there'd have to be some mythical high red low permanent deck out there. I just don't see that happening except maybe in belcher, or somewhere else in the bottom tier.

[Daenyth]

I think this is a good card, but the metagame right now is not favorable toward it. Against control you'd rather have Grudge, and against fish you'd rather have claim. Against shops you'll face chalice@1 a lot already, and I'd rather have Ingot Chewer or Sabotage.

[hvndr3d y34r h3x]

You bring in claim against fish?

[oshkoshhaitsyosh]

Great card, will see play in the right deck 

[Commandant]

I'm extremely pleased with this card and it seals my choice on Red as a tertiary color. I've always chosen Green over Red due to the flexibility of Nature's Claim across a wide meta. With creatures becoming more and more relevant in Type 1 Pyroclasm is where it is at and Smelt seals the last hole in my board replacing Ingot Chewer. People underestimate the value of Instant speed versus something like Espresso Stax and I have been unhappy with the Sorcery speed Chewer for quite a while. Red Elemental Blast, Pyroblast, Pyroclasm, Grafdiggers, and Smelt - fantastic!

Also while I love Grudge I find it hard to justify a 4C mana base in this meta and personally is why I have stayed away from running it.

[Tha Gunslinga]

Ingot Chewer plays through both Thorn of Amethyst and Chalice of the Void at 1.  It also is hardcastable as a win condition.

As far as the Nature's Claim comparison, does the extra 4 life really mean anything 99% of the time?  I think the advantage of being able to Claim your own Mox in order to survive another turn is more likely to be relevant.

[oshkoshhaitsyosh]

This card is clearly inferior to nature's claim, BUT this card is great if you don't want to run green. A 1 mana instant speed shops hater is great in combination with other hate pieces. I could see this card being used in a UBr big blue decks sideboard, or possible landstill sideboard. This card just means you don't need to run green to have a 1 mana instant speed shops hate.

[Daenyth]

You bring in claim against fish?

Not usually, but claim can remove Stony silence where smelt is 100% dead.

[hvndr3d y34r h3x]

You bring in claim against fish?

Not usually, but claim can remove Stony silence where smelt is 100% dead.

gotcha'

[Commandant]

Ingot Chewer plays through both Thorn of Amethyst and Chalice of the Void at 1.  It also is hardcastable as a win condition.

Current Workshop lists run two or less Thorns and Chewer eats it to Tangle Wire and Smokestack. If you have five mana + tax effects to hard cast Chewer main phase you are already winning or could have won. They both have + and - personally Smelt fills a void in my board as a one or two of so I'm pleased.

[xouman]

I don't think smelt is a great addition. I'd prefer ligtning, chewer, grudge, rack and ruin and of course viashino heretic. That for red, cards as claim or sabotage are also better imho.

Thorn is often sided out, but I have played against 2 thorns + 2 metamorphs on thorn, so I hardcastes chewer for the same mana as smelt would have cost. A very marginal case, but no so impossible to find.

[serracollector]

I think this works well in tandem with steel sab, helping ensure an early game answer to early MUD threats (the only threats that matter really), and unlike chewer it doesn't nail BOB for 5 life.  Also it allows for URB decks without having to splash green for ancient grudge, and also it helps flip Delver.  4 delver, 4 bob, 2 steel sab, and 2 smelt maindeck, seems like a good start for a URB deck vs MUD g1.

[xouman]

Would you play this card over lightning in a deck with 4 delvers and surely snapcasters?

Maybe in a deck with confindats, little aggro and red instead green (tezz, possibly), this card could be a nice addition, but for most of top tiers does not seem the best option.

[AmbivalentDuck]

To me, the obvious placement is in UR with Snapcasters and Delvers.  Possibly also in UR Landstill.

Obviously decks that can painlessly use Claim will, but plenty of decks elect red over green for far superior critter removal.

[vaughnbros]

To me, the obvious placement is in UR with Snapcasters and Delvers.  Possibly also in UR Landstill.

Obviously decks that can painlessly use Claim will, but plenty of decks elect red over green for far superior critter removal.

It competes with steel sabotage and smash to smithereens in such lists.  Both of which are much better main deck cards because of their versatility.  The fact that oxidize sees nearly no play at all should point to this cards playability.  Nature's claim is completely incomparable since it has a lot more uses than just artifacts.

[Commandant]

To me, the obvious placement is in UR with Snapcasters and Delvers.  Possibly also in UR Landstill.

Obviously decks that can painlessly use Claim will, but plenty of decks elect red over green for far superior critter removal.

It competes with steel sabotage and smash to smithereens in such lists.  Both of which are much better main deck cards because of their versatility.  The fact that oxidize sees nearly no play at all should point to this cards playability.  Nature's claim is completely incomparable since it has a lot more uses than just artifacts.

Prior to Nature's Claim Oxidize saw plenty of play. Smash to Smithereens, you must be trolling?

[Bill Copes]

* Waiting for the obligatory, bad, "he who Smelt it, dealt it," joke. *

Red really needed an instant, single blow up an artifact spell.  I am happy about this.

[Tha Gunslinga]

Ingot Chewer plays through both Thorn of Amethyst and Chalice of the Void at 1.  It also is hardcastable as a win condition.

Current Workshop lists run two or less Thorns and Chewer eats it to Tangle Wire and Smokestack. If you have five mana + tax effects to hard cast Chewer main phase you are already winning or could have won. They both have + and - personally Smelt fills a void in my board as a one or two of so I'm pleased.

http://morphling.de/search.php?id=0&type=3&app=10&search=thorn+of+amethyst&sorting=DESC&sent=1

I'm seeing a lot more 4x Thorn than I am 2x Thorn.  As far as the hardcasting thing goes, if you're both in topdecking mode on turn 12 or whatever, drawing Ingot Chewer vs drawing Smelt is drawing a win condition vs drawing a removal spell.  Playing Landstill, I have had very little trouble hardcasting Ingot Chewer in the late-game.  Yes, you may be "already winning," but there's a HUGE difference between drawing a Shatter and drawing a Shatter with a body attached.

[xouman]

Smash to smithereens is no joke :/ Not only against mud, but also against vault, and against Jace/Tezz. Since it deals 3 damages to player, you may redirect it to jace/tezz and kill it lots of times. Against MUD 3 damages could be important under tombs and crypt, and I had smashed a precursor golem a couple of times (LOL)

[Commandant]

http://morphling.de/search.php?id=0&type=3&app=10&search=thorn+of+amethyst&sorting=DESC&sent=1

I\'m seeing a lot more 4x Thorn than I am 2x Thorn.  As far as the hardcasting thing goes, if you\'re both in topdecking mode on turn 12 or whatever, drawing Ingot Chewer vs drawing Smelt is drawing a win condition vs drawing a removal spell.  Playing Landstill, I have had very little trouble hardcasting Ingot Chewer in the late-game.  Yes, you may be \"already winning,\" but there\'s a HUGE difference between drawing a Shatter and drawing a Shatter with a body attached.

You cannot say Ingot Chewer is the superior choice by stating its viability in the context of a list that runs fewer threats, more basic lands (compared to most blue shells), and Crucible of Worlds. Considering a Drain Tendrils shell, Smelt is the superior choice when taking into account supporting cards like Snapcaster Mage – it’s all relative.

The Morphling.de link you posted while interesting is relatively misleading as the majority of the top 8’s listed are from Europe, both you and I are not from Europe.

Going back to the beginning of the year where Espresso seemed to take precedence over straight Aggro MUD (I could be wrong I feel like I saw more at that time):

Selden 14.01.2012
The 4. deck contains 3 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Selden 14.01.2012
The 5. deck contains 2 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Selden 14.01.2012
The 6. deck contains 2 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Westmont 07.01.2012
The 1. deck contains 2 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Bloomsburg 21.01.2012
The 5. deck contains 4 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Clarks Summit 28.01.2012
The 1. deck contains 4 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Clarks Summit 28.01.2012
The 8. deck contains 2 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Valley Stream 04.02.2012
The 1. deck contains 2 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Valley Stream 04.02.2012
The 4. deck contains 2 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Valley Stream 04.02.2012
The 5. deck contains 2 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Grudge Match IV 11.02.2012
The 3. deck contains 4 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Grudge Match IV 11.02.2012
The 5. deck contains 4 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...
Selden 18.02.2012
The 2. deck contains 4 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Selden 18.02.2012
The 3. deck contains 4 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Selden 18.02.2012
The 6. deck contains 2 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Los Angeles 26.02.2012
The 2. deck contains 4 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

NEV 10.03.2012
The 1. deck contains 2 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

NEV 10.03.2012
The 2. deck contains 2 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

NEV 10.03.2012
The 6. deck contains 4 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

NEV 10.03.2012
The 7. deck contains 4 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Selden 24.03.2012
The 1. deck contains 4 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Selden 24.03.2012
The 4. deck contains 2 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Selden 24.03.2012
The 5. deck contains 2 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Selden 24.03.2012
The 6. deck contains 4 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Bloomsburg 31.03.2012
The 2. deck contains 3 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Bloomsburg 31.03.2012
The 3. deck contains 2 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Bloomsburg 31.03.2012
The 5. deck contains 2 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Bloomsburg 31.03.2012
The 8. deck contains 2 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Columbus 18.03.2012
The 3. deck contains 4 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Columbus 18.03.2012
The 4. deck contains 4 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Clarks Summit 21.04.2012
The 1. deck contains 4 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Clarks Summit 21.04.2012
The 3. deck contains 4 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Selden 05.05.2012
The 1. deck contains 4 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Selden 05.05.2012
The 5. deck contains 2 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

Bloomsburg 12.05.2012
The 5. deck contains 4 copies of \"Thorn of Amethyst\" in its maindeck...

I apologize if I made an over generalization, when I said current I did not mean the archetype as a whole in the sense of the current generation of Workshop lists. Rather I meant current as in most recently played which if you look at lists played by Nick D. and other Workshop proponents especially in the NY area they are running a lower number of Thorns. You are correct there are still a decent number of people running 4 Thorns but I\'m not positive that will remain true going forward.

If we count the events where decks ran 3 Thorns we split even from what I could find for US events since January. The fact of the matter is in my area and from what I can tell in Workshop heavy areas Thorns have gone down in number primarily due to the switch from Aggro to Control Stax in addition the abnormally high number of Trygon Predators penetrating the meta as a whole. I’d be hard pressed to argue (as a Workshop pilot) that running more Thorns in the current meta is a great idea which in turn lowers the value of Chewer for blue pilots.

Edit: TLDR: Both cards have their strong and weak points. I do believe going forward that Smelt will be a strong addition to the Red splash and perhaps superior to Chewer in certain builds.

[Saya]

I like smelt very much.

VS Nature's Claim:Of course Claim is better than smelt.but it is green.Players who touch G only to run nature's claim are now free from Green(In 2009-2010 Oath is tier1 deck of Vintage,but now out of tier).And MUD pays his life more rapidly becuz of Phyrexia-mana.4 life can't be ignored.

VS Ingot Chewer,Shattering Spree:They can pass through interrupt from MUD like Chalice1.But they are sorcery and Smelt is instant,which sometimes determine the outcome of the game.[P.S.especially against Kuldotha type MUD]

[ErtaiAdept]

VS Ingot Chewer,Shattering Spree:They can pass through interrupt from MUD like Chalice1.But they are sorcery and Smelt is instant,which sometimes determine the outcome of the game.[P.S.especially against Kuldotha type MUD]

This oh god this.  I can't tell you the number of times I have been holding an ingot chewer in my hand and gone...well if I could cast this right now, It'd probably swing the game in my direction.  Where as staring at the now useless card means I have probably lost.  I do agree that in a list that is already running green claim is better to have just for the sheer versatility, but for a tri-color tendrils list, I think red is the better choice right now.

[Tha Gunslinga]

In a tri-color Tendrils list, wouldn't you just go with the classic Chain of Vapor+Hurkyl's Recall+Rebuild?  Aren't those all better than this?

I mean, I can see this being good with Snapcaster, but almost ANYTHING is good with Snapcaster, and I think Snapcaster+Hurkyl's Recall or Nature's Claim would be better.  Oath is a more played deck than Tendrils, anyway.