[Premium Article] So Many Insane Plays -- Return to Ravnica Vintage Set Review

[Smmenen]

http://www.eternal-central.com/?p=3126

Teaser:

Stephen Menendian surveys the landscape of Return to Ravnica with his characteristic entertaining and methodical manner, examining this exciting new set for both Vintage and Legacy playables. Stephen will tell you which cards are likely to see play, and which cards won’t, and may change the way you think about cards in Return to Ravnica. In addition, Stephen has radically updated and revised the Complete Checklist of Vintage Playables. This article is worth its price in trade advantages you will have going to the prerelease or the next major event with both a list of Return to Ravnica playables you should be on the lookout for, and by knowing which cards you should trade out of your collection and which cards you should continue hunting for.

You'll definitely want to see my analysis of Epic Experiment.

Free excerpt:

Welcome to Ravnica. Welcome back, that is. This seems to be a motif of Magic: revisiting old haunts, often with new twists. If we look more deeply, Return to Ravnica is less of a return than a revolt from Ravnica. While superficially similar, the mechanics, themes, and ideas are a rejection of what we found in Ravnica. Yes, the Guilds exist. Yes, hybrid cards are here. Yes, dual lands and mana producing artifacts are here.

But what’s not here are the incredible mechanics, top tier creatures, and powerful bombs. Ravnica was a set of huge spells, potent engines, and broken mechanics. Ravnica was the home of Dark Confidant, Life from the Loam, Remand, Dredge, and Golgari-Grave Troll. It was the set of Darkblast, Seeds of the Past, Flame-Kin Zealot, Stinkweed Imp and Muddle the Mixture.

This set is far more timid in terms of the splashy spell. Epic Experiment and Jace, Architect of Thought highlight and exemplify the limitations of the set. These are cards that want to be great, that could be great, but are just a hair away or a subtle limitation from reaching that aspiration. In contrast to the bold mechanics of the Golgari or Dimir from the original Ravnica (Dredge & Transmute), we have weak and anemic mechanics that are, admittedly, flavorful, but far less interesting in the older formats.

If there is a card from the original Ravnica era that reminds of this new Ravnica, it’s Dimir Cutpurse: a creature that is almost, but not quite good enough. This new Ravnica features plenty of near playables, aggressively costed gold cards that demand attention, but perhaps not a spot in your 75.

But perhaps most surprising of all, and certainly the most subversive to the original Ravnica, is the fact that the best Eternal cards from this set aren’t threats, but answers. Again and again, the cards that stand out for Eternal play aren’t huge bombs, flashy spells, or dangerous mechanics, but exactly the opposite: brutal hosers, stallwart answers, and utility tactics. Could that be more different than the original world of Ravnica?

[bactgudz]

I liked this review less than your previous ones.  I like the reviews you've given but think at a minimum it's missing discussions on counterflux, nivmagus elemental, loxodon smiter, deathrite shaman, and ash zealot...even if you think all of these are completely unplayable, your discussion of JAOT shows that you like to explain why cards are unplayable, and they have all been intriguing enough to warrant discuss on eternal forums.
Would love to hear your thoughts on them in an addendum.
Maybe I'm just spoiled since your AVR article classified every single card in the set.

Also would like to say, I really like the summary of changes added to the end...might be helpful to add a line at the beginning of the checklist stating they are there (I missed them on my first read through).

[Smmenen]

Thanks for the feedback. I will consider an addendum for the cards you mentioned.  Glad you like the updated checklist.

[Smmenen]

I am probably going to add blurbs on Deathrite Shaman and Nivmagus Elemental.  I'll have Jaco send that out if I do.  Thanks for the feedback.

Edit:  the addenda was sent out today.

[Solaran_X]

I found three issues with your most recent list Steve.

1) You have Timetwister starred as a format staple, and Time Walk unstarred as a niche card. I think you got those reversed.
2) You have Scalding Tarn double starred, and you've switched to a starred/unstarred system instead of a multiple star rating system.
3) You took Worldgorger Dragon, Animate Dead, Necromancy, Dance of the Dead, and Read the Runes out of the list - all part of the newer Dragon shell. But you left Oona, Queen of the Fae on the list when, I believe, Dragon was the only deck in Vintage running her (as a win condition).

[Smmenen]

Thank you very much for the feedback.  I will get those fixed. Those are obviously just errors.   I always appreciate the valuable feedback.

I hope the updated checklist is valuable, since I made such a tremendous effort at updating it.

Also, the promised addenda was sent out yesterday, so let us know if you didn't get it.

***

A note on the possibility of future set reviews:

Although this set review has sold well (and I believe has been our second highest selling set review on EC), I am not sure I will write set reviews in the future.   The podcast has really provided a powerful outlet for set reviews, and if I just devote my analysis to the podcast, I can go even deeper into my analysis on the podcast without having to duplicate much of that work.  I believe that the written medium does offer certain advantages (like the table I created for Epic Experiment, or the possibility of creating decklists (which are hard to convey in a audio format)).  

But one of the key reasons I wanted to do set reviews is because I always believed I could be more thorough, comprehensive, and frankly, more predictively accurate than anyone else doing these (and I think my track record bears that out), but I think the podcast actually offers a more natural, far less time intensive way to do that.

Given how much research I like to do, pound for pound, set reviews take up far more time and much longer to write and produce than anything else I can generate.    The two big primers I wrote this year, Burning Long for Vintage and Maniac Doomsday for Legacy, have done many times better than set reviews.   And, with my new series starting up on the History of Vintage, I just don't see much time in my already far overtaxed schedule.  

I definitely realize that there is an audience for this work -- and appreciate those of you who have supported my written set reviews for EC & QS the last few years -- and I also realize that these articles are very useful for many newer players as well for different reasons, but I just don't think it's the absolute best use of my time, since I only write maybe 6 or so really big, serious articles per year.  

[MaximumCDawg]

At the very least, keep your Vintage Checklist up to date.  You could even do a quarterly newsletter with that information each month on a recurring charge or something.  Scouring the top8s for what is played and what is not played is a very useful service for those of us who only dip our toes in the format.

Also: I think you've been a bit too harsh with your Vintage checklist recently.  There are lots of unique cards that may have not have seen play lately that are still possibilities for Vintage play.  Personally, I keep a Vintage binder full of cards that not only see top8 play, but also those that go into fun decks that are just on the wrong edge of current competitiveness, like Elf combo, until more powerful cards come out that simply invalidate or replace the deck or its components entirely.  Bottom line, there are lots of "playables" in decks you might not bring to Worlds but you can certainly run to some success in a small local metagame.