Viability of Hard Control without a Draw Engine

[Onslaught]

Inspired by Bomberman (and Blue Angels to a lesser extent), I began playing a Keeper list without any real draw engine. If they could get away without using a traditional draw engine, then why not a 4 Color Control style deck? So I started tweaking a blue deck that didn't have many ways to draw cards. No Bob, no Gush, no Standstill, Remora, Accumulated Knowledge, and so on. Nothing in the deck drew any cards except Brainstorm, Ancestral Recall, and four copies of Jace. While not as often thought of a draw engine, Jace should definitely be counted as one - albeit a lot pricier than the more commonly referred to archetypes. Nobody really says they are playing a "Jace deck," since he is just always there. It would be like saying you were playing a Mana Drain deck.

I moved from a traditional Keeper style list with 4 Wastelands/1 Strip (and 3 DRS), to 2 Wasteland/1 Strip, to non-Strip versions, attempts at utilizing Cavern, blah blah blah. I found that the commonality in success between all of them was having creatures that generated virtual or actual card advantage. Trinket Mage is a prime example. So is DRS, to an extent. This wasn't exactly a huge revelation, it's just common sense. If you aren't drawing more cards, you need to be keeping up in other ways like Trinket Mage for SDT, or Restoration Angel blinking out a Clique, and so on. Clique and Restoration Angel are nice in these types of plodding control decks since you can play threats after waiting to keep your mana open to see if you need to counter something. Again, not rocket science here but being meticulous helped elucidate the overall flow of the deck.

It was at this point that I revisited the idea of Snapcaster Mage as an engine. While he can generate pure card advantage by flashing Ancestral, his real strength is virtual card advantage in the form of flexibility. Running one or two copies of very narrow blowout cards is not very reliable, but they become consistently redundant when backed up by Snapcaster. The deck began to take shape from there - play good old fashioned hardcore control, amass enough mana and find an opportunity to blow them out on the stack with Snapcaster, and then finish the game by trading one for one with anything relevant. This strategy is, of course, easier said than done. But it felt viable in testing, and researching multiple T8 decks in the US and Euro metagames confirmed that it can contend.

The biggest issue I ran into with this strategy was trying to come back from a resolved Bob. If he gets on the board before you can have a Spell Snare online, your goal of grinding out wins with slow and steady trades is not going to work out. Some measures can be taken to mitigate this weakness - running the recently overlooked Fire/Ice as a Merchant Scroll target, choosing Echoing Truth over Hurkyl's Recall, and so on. Ultimately, my solution to this was to include Tinker. I hate to include a blank card like BSC in a deck that so dearly needs to keep a tight grip on things while just drawing one card a turn, but this deck needed some kind of punch and it's the most efficient thing you can include. It fits in naturally with the abundance of artifact mana (to feed Snapcaster), and it gives you something to do with your tutors after racing out your initial Ancestral. Plus with the recent decline of Tinker/BSC, I feel there is a bit of susceptibility to it in general.

At this point, things began to become more clear for what the final list would look like. With Tinker in the deck, I gave mild consideration to Vault/Key - but the risk of drawing Key, Vault, or BSC during crucial periods of the game was just not worth it for this style of deck. The were three main decks I was inspired by when finalizing my list. First, I looked to the European style Keeper lists with x2 Scavenging Ooze, Cliques, and even maindeck Notion Thief. When testing these earlier in the year, it was clear that the best card in the deck was Vendilion Clique. It was a nice "answer" to Bob in that you might be able to outrace their life loss, and as mentioned before it kept your mana up to continue playing the role of the patient control deck. These lists (and their consistent success) confirmed to me the viability of the archetype, as it placed multiple high results and did so with no kind of combo kill whatsoever. My most glaring difference from their lists is rearranging the high land count to fit in more artifact mana. It plays well with Tinker, it plays well with Snapcaster, and it adds some juice against Shops. I didn't want to spend 2 slots on Ooze, despite its high utility and ability to help the deck shift into psuedo beatdown mode. I was adamant about keeping the Flash requirement for creatures, though for a period I did test x1 GSZ, x1 Ooze, x1 Trygon, and x1 DRS. It was oftentimes very useful and provides solid flexibility for only using up four slots, but DRS shines more as a turn one play. I also found that I wanted an extremely minimal investment in green (to the point of going down to only one copy of Tropical Island), so the GSZ package was cut. With Tinker present, I felt less obligated to run the larger creature suite, though it was delicious in earlier builds to resolve a backbreaking Notion Thief.

The next two decks that influenced the build a lot were more about the philosophy of the decks than the card choices themselves. First, I looked to Paul Mastriano's NYSE Bob/Jace Esper Deck as the evolutionary refinement of the Bomberman strategy. Which is to say, straight up jack the Bomberman counter package for my own list since it has been perfectly tuned for the modern Vintage environment. The other deck I looked to was Rich Shay's Young Americans, which reminded me to be willing to cut away things that aren't completely mandatory, and to not be afraid to try new things or unusual card counts. When goldfishing Young Americans, I really, really enjoyed the singleton copy of Trinket Mage. I tried really hard to fit him and a SDT into this list, but he fell by the wayside.

With the counter package in place, the most fun part of the deckbuilding experience was next: random utility! This is where you get to go wild in a deck with lots of Snapcaster Mages, and it can frequently change depending on what you expect to see in your meta. The goal should always remain the same: create the illusion of redundancy with minimum investment while maintaining maximum flexibility. First, I stepped down on one copy each of Misstep and Snare from the Bomberman package due to the Snapcaster factor. Then I filled things out with ideal Snapcaster targets like Steel Sabotage, Lightning Bolt, Duress (prefer it over Flusterstorm with Snapcaster right now), and so on. I was hesitant to not include Abrupt Decay, but again I wanted to keep the green requirements to a minimum. Perhaps someday I'll try it as a sideboard card for extra insurance against Bob.

The rest of the deck is filled out with the full tutor package (minus Imperial Seal), which is to find and play Ancestral as early as possible. That is a stupid statement since every blue deck in Vintage would love to make that happen, but a) you have to make it happen since you have no other way to draw cards, and b) Snapcaster lets you be a little more reckless in attempting to fire off Ancestral since you get another whack at it. Of course, if you resolve Ancestral and successfuly snap it back later on, you are probably going to win. But just that one little burst happening at some point is necessary to set up the Great Wall of defense.

As far as the mana base goes, LOA would be ideal in this archetype but I wanted to be as greedy as possible with the land count due to the full artifact mana package. I don't think you can justify running LOA in a 15 land deck with 4 colors, and Tolarian Academy was cut for the same reason. Between Grudge, random Steel Sabotages on Moxes, and even Fire/Ice to an extent - you have a legitimate mana denial aspect to the deck. At the very least you keep them off Jace long enough to play your own, and it does often give the edge in counter wars. This makes me think that a version with some amount of Wastelands and a Strip Mine is worth a significantly higher land count (and again, most likely with 3-4 copies of DRS). That's nothing new, just worth thinking about as a variant on this build.

The main card I find myself wanting to fit into the deck is Gifts, but I am against cutting Thirst for it since it is another way (along with Brainstorm, Jaces, and Clique) to rid myself of Blightsteel and it has minor synergy with Snapcaster. I am very happy with the sideboard, but if I could be greedy and sneak in Abrupt Decay, Volcanic Fallout, a Mindbreak Trap, and perhaps even a Notion Thief, I would be happy. The sideboard in general is meant to continue augmenting the theme of Snapcaster flexibility. REBs are amazing with Snapcaster, as is Flusterstorm. I gave the nod to the 2nd REB over the 2nd Fluserstorm due to Jace considerations. The Nature's Claims are somewhat awkward since there is only 1 Trop, but there are thirteen total green sources and Claim has uses against non-Workshop decks. The unorthodox dredge package is actually quite serviceable while allowing more flexibility in other matchups (I often bring in Surgicals against combo, decks with Wasteland, Welders, or a single copy against another Big Blue).

Against Shops you have: 2 Ingot Chewer, 1 Mountain, 1 Dismember, 1 Ancient Grudge, and 2 Nature's Claim. Against Dredge, I bring in 4 Surgical Extraction, Yixlid Jailer, and a Flusterstorm. Against Blue you have 2 REBs, Flusterstorm, Dismember if they have Bobs, Extractions if they have Gush, and possibly Grudge/Claims depending on the match. Against combo you have pretty much the same options you have against Blue, and vs. aggro I mostly just bring in Dismember and the occasional Claims vs. Stony Silence. Volcanic Fallout would be nice for this matchup, as well as any emerging Young Pyromancer builds.



I've been having loads of fun with this deck, and it opened my mind more to thinking of yet another option for Blue based control. It really is quite amazing how many different directions you can go: Bob decks, Gush decks, Turbo Tezz style decks, Landstill, Bomberman, Snapcaster decks, Remora decks, and then all the different combinations of those amongst themselves. Then the decision to slant more aggro control vs. pure control, to have a combo finish (and if so, which one? Tendrils? ETW?) The choice to fit in Vault/Key or eschew it completely. Or even the decision to run Tinker at all (and if so, perhaps Inkwell or Myr Battlesphere instead of BSC?). The choices are seemingly endless...

[marcb]

It's interesting to read your post. You and I have been testing the same decks. I recently added spell snare to my list after seeing Paul's list as well. Before I started playing versions of "the deck" I played a list almost identical to the one you are playing now. My biggest trouble was workshop decks where I couldn't afford to play snapcaster and another spell in one turn. That's what eventually lead me down a path to add deathrite shaman, dark confidant, and other creatures that could function as virtual card advantage for no extra mana beyond the initial casting cost. Have you found it difficult to play post sb games against shops with snapcaster as your only engine? I did. Have you tried young pyromancer in this build? You have a high instant count for snapcaster already. Dropping permanents against shops and having another blowout potential to compliment or ecen replace tinker might be good.

Marc

[vaughnbros]

Inspired by Bomberman (and Blue Angels to a lesser extent), I began playing a Keeper list without any real draw engine. If they could get away without using a traditional draw engine, then why not a 4 Color Control style deck? So I started tweaking a blue deck that didn't have many ways to draw cards. No Bob, no Gush, no Standstill, Remora, Accumulated Knowledge, and so on. Nothing in the deck drew any cards except Brainstorm, Ancestral Recall, and four copies of Jace. While not as often thought of a draw engine, Jace should definitely be counted as one - albeit a lot pricier than the more commonly referred to archetypes. Nobody really says they are playing a "Jace deck," since he is just always there. It would be like saying you were playing a Mana Drain deck.

I think you are misconceiving Bomberman/Blue Angels.  They both do have a "draw" engine.  2 Senei's tops and 4 Trinket Mages goes a long way in the hand manipulation department.  Jace himself is also a draw engine if you can keep him protected.

That being said I think non strip keeper has been a viable deck for quite a while.  It still top 8's periodically when someone decides to pick it up.

[TheWhiteDragon]

I think you are misconceiving this deck.  It's titled hard control without a draw engine, yet it has thirst, brainstorm, ancestral, ponder, 3 jace, 4 snapcaster.  That's a lot of an engine.  Ponder/brainstorm would really fit in more as "filter", but all those other cards are a +2/-1 or better in the CA department which is what a draw engine is.  Anytime you get two or more  spells or "cards", for the investment of one, it is CA.  Running a variety of these effects doesn't mean it lacks a draw engine.  You're not running bob, gush, etc., fine....but you still have 10 spells that give you CA and 2 that filter.  That's a lot more than a deck running nothing except 4 bobs, which you would consider a "draw engine".

[MTGFan]

Why would you play this over UR Landstill though?

If you want to play control in this format, I'd need really pressing reasons to play something different over UR Landstill. Landstill plays Jace, but it also has 5 draw-3s in its deck.

It also plays Mana Drains and Bolts and whatever else too.

I don't think that playing 4 Snapcasters to flash back 1-2 copies of stuff is significantly better strategy than simply playing more of those flashback targets in the first place (which is what Landstill does - it just plays more Mana Drains and Bolts instead of playing Snapcaster).

And if you are positing that Snapcaster has additional functionality as a 2/1 body (attacking, chumping), well then, I will claim that its body is inferior to a Mishra's Factory, which is a 4-of in Landstill. And yes, I understand that Factory doesn't flash things back, but it pulls double-duty just like Snapcaster, in that it functions as a land drop while Snapcaster functions as a regrowth.

I'd rather play more of the flashback targets (Drain, Bolt, Misstep, Pierce, etc) instead of the Snapcasters - so that my answers are cheaper (no additional 1U tacked on if I want to play them from the graveyard), and the body to me is irrelevant because Landstill plays Factories which are better blockers and similar attackers.

And the downside of Snapcaster is non-trivial in a control deck - all of your flashbacked answers are more expensive purely as answers when you need them. I'd rather pay UU for a Mana Drain than 1UUU. And you need to have the right answer in your graveyard to use the Snapcaster in the first place - what if someone uses Deathrite Shaman on it, or a Grafdiggers Cage, or you simply haven't cast it yet?

[Grand Inquisitor]

Why would you play this over UR Landstill though?

(1) Because standstill is not always ancestral recall
(2) Snapcaster doesn't just replace individual additional copies of spells.  It can represent all of the relevant spells you've already cast at once. (edit: this point is made rather clearly by the OP)

[forests failed you]

Why no Voltaic Key + Time Vault in this deck?  The deck already has all the tutors, it only makes sense to add the combo.  You are not giving up very much to add something very powerful, and also to give your deck a whole other way to attack people.

IMO -1 Snapcaster and -1 Vclique and add the combo is a no brainer here. 

[Onslaught]

Have you tried young pyromancer in this build?

I have given it some thought as a x2 of, but ultimately I would want to take a more aggro control approach with Pyromancer to cantrip and protect it with free/cheap counters. All of your other points are well taken though, and (as you probably have noticed in your testing) a 4 color control with some amount of Wastelands/Strips and 3-4 DRS is a total house against Shops.

---------------------------

I think you are misconceiving Bomberman/Blue Angels.  They both do have a "draw" engine.  2 Senei's tops and 4 Trinket Mages goes a long way in the hand manipulation department.  Jace himself is also a draw engine if you can keep him protected.

Trinket Mage is definitely a card advantage engine of sorts, but nobody really refers to it as a draw engine. You hear about Bob decks, Gush decks, etc. Have you ever heard someone categorize their deck as a Trinket Mage deck? He certainly generates advantage, but comparing a 2U creature that finds a 1 mana artifact and requires 1 mana to spin is hardly comparable to Bob, Gush, Standstill, etc. As far as mentioning Jace as an engine, this is from the OP:

While not as often thought of a draw engine, Jace should definitely be counted as one - albeit a lot pricier than the more commonly referred to archetypes. Nobody really says they are playing a "Jace deck," since he is just always there. It would be like saying you were playing a Mana Drain deck.

-----------------------------------

thirst, brainstorm, ancestral, ponder, 3 jace, 4 snapcaster.  That's a lot of an engine.  Ponder/brainstorm would really fit in more as "filter", but all those other cards are a +2/-1 or better in the CA department which is what a draw engine is.  Anytime you get two or more  spells or "cards", for the investment of one, it is CA.  Running a variety of these effects doesn't mean it lacks a draw engine.  You're not running bob, gush, etc., fine....but you still have 10 spells that give you CA and 2 that filter.  That's a lot more than a deck running nothing except 4 bobs, which you would consider a "draw engine".

Running staple restricted cards and Jaces doesn't equate to having a draw engine when every other deck is doing the exact same thing. Since the majority of blue decks run Jace, you can imagine some kind of parity between them - so they match your "Jace engine" and then distinguish their draw power from you with the traditionally categorized engines like Bob, Gush, etc.

------------------------------

I don't think that playing 4 Snapcasters to flash back 1-2 copies of stuff is significantly better strategy than simply playing more of those flashback targets in the first place (which is what Landstill does - it just plays more Mana Drains and Bolts instead of playing Snapcaster).

I disagree with this in theory, because (as noted by Grand Inquisitor) Snapcaster has infinitely more flexibility. If you are using him on Mana Drain and paying UUU1, would you rather have just had the Drain in your hand instead? Of course. But Mana Drain doesn't also offer you the option of replaying a countered Yawg's, or using Ancestral again, or Bolting a Lodestone, or Time Walking again with Jace out, and so on.

------------------------

Though I am curious about the whole premise of this post...Being inspired by Blue Angels instead of by Cano's list from almost a year ago that beat 200 people:
http://morphling.de/printview.php?c=1648&d=1

I devoted an entire paragraph to how heavily my thought process was influenced by the European Keeper lists with x2 Ooze (and more recently, x1 Notion Thief). From the OP:

First, I looked to the European style Keeper lists with x2 Scavenging Ooze, Cliques, and even maindeck Notion Thief...These lists (and their consistent success) confirmed to me the viability of the archetype, as it placed multiple high results and did so with no kind of combo kill whatsoever. My most glaring difference from their lists is rearranging the high land count to fit in more artifact mana...

-----------------

Why no Voltaic Key + Time Vault in this deck?  The deck already has all the tutors, it only makes sense to add the combo.  You are not giving up very much to add something very powerful, and also to give your deck a whole other way to attack people.

I wouldn't mind cutting BSC and something for Vault/Key, but I can't imagine playing all three of them together. The thought of having so many blank cards to draw into while going land/pass in the early game (while waiting to be able to cast/protect Jace) is really offputting to me.

[forests failed you]

Is a combo piece really any more of a blank than a second Snapcaster Mage in your opening hand?  I would just be concerned that trying to attack for 20 with 4 2/1s and a 3/1 while having to answer every card one's opponent plays isn't the most efficient way to win a game of Vintage.  If you look at basically every top tier Vintage "control" deck ever, they almost always have two combo win conditions.  Slaver + Robot.  Tendrils + Tinker.  Blightsteel + Keyvault. 

I like a lot of the things you have going on with the shell of this deck, in particular the numbers and types of counters you are using, but not being able to actually close games would be my biggest concern with this deck.  Anyways, cheers.

[Onslaught]

Fatesealing with Jace is my usual mode of victory (really easy to counter anything relevant with Snapcasters while building up to Jace Ultimate once you get them in topdeck mode), but your point about closing out the game is well received. Since I don't have the Oozes and second Clique like the previously mentioned Euro lists, I can't realistically count on swinging as my backup victory condition to BSC. Those lists are able to win with no form of combo kill due to the extra creature slots for a faster clock. I'll fiddle around with Vault/Key and see if it is clogs things up less than I theorized.

[TheWhiteDragon]

Quote from: TheWhiteDragon on Today at 05:01:25 AM
thirst, brainstorm, ancestral, ponder, 3 jace, 4 snapcaster.  That's a lot of an engine.  Ponder/brainstorm would really fit in more as "filter", but all those other cards are a +2/-1 or better in the CA department which is what a draw engine is.  Anytime you get two or more  spells or "cards", for the investment of one, it is CA.  Running a variety of these effects doesn't mean it lacks a draw engine.  You're not running bob, gush, etc., fine....but you still have 10 spells that give you CA and 2 that filter.  That's a lot more than a deck running nothing except 4 bobs, which you would consider a "draw engine".

Running staple restricted cards and Jaces doesn't equate to having a draw engine when every other deck is doing the exact same thing. Since the majority of blue decks run Jace, you can imagine some kind of parity between them - so they match your "Jace engine" and then distinguish their draw power from you with the traditionally categorized engines like Bob, Gush, etc.

So basically you're saying since other control decks run thirst, brainstorm, ponder, ancestral, yawg will, 4x jace...that those don't count as a draw engine?  And since you are running 4x 2/1s that give you an immediate 2-for-1 instead of bob which is a 2/1 that doesn't even give you the extra card until the next turn, that you're still not running a draw engine?  You basically took the 4x gush or 4x bob slot and made it 4x snapcaster...which is still a CA engine and a selective CA and not random draw at that.

So you're ignoring the CA gained by 4x snaps, and ignoring the other 8 slots because other blue decks run them and calling it control without a draw engine....I'm baffled.  Shops that go into topdeck mode after spurting their hand, fish that doesnt run blue...THOSE are decks without a draw engine.  Taking a 3color keeperish list and replacing the bobs, gushes, standstills - whatever - with 4x snapcaster and keeping the other 8 CA cards is not at all a "draw-engineless deck".  But call it what you want.  Since Golem is also a sphere and revoker can play mana denial by shutting down moxen and karn eats moxen and metamorphs are only as good as what they copy, then I'm going to call my MUD deck with all of those cards "sphere-redundant, mana denial" and consider my shops deck "creatureless".

[oshkoshhaitsyosh]

Grafdigger’s cage seems like a beating for this deck...sorry will, tinker, and snappy stuff

 Would say you probably want to play additional beats or key vault. But I vote decree of justice and say FTW lol jk...kinda

[brianpk80]

I like Snappers in moderation but even running two, I've had hands with Snapcaster x2 and no business spells.  As a result, even with tweaks to get more out of him, I would think there would be a higher frequency of opening hands that need to be mulled whereas they'd be instant keepers with Bob. 

Of the two Big Blue wincons, I think you picked the right one in running Tinker over Key/Vault which seems to be increasingly awkward and fragile w. all the Missteps & Abrupt Decays flying around. 

I agree with White Dragon that the deck does have a draw/search engine and a lot of spells that generate card advantage.  My gut impression is that the cons slightly outweigh the pros, the pros being that Snapper can reuse silver bullet like instants such as Fire/Ice to decimate certain opponents but the tradeoff is you don't curve as easily into Jace by using Dark Confidant, Gush, or Standstill to bridge that sometimes frustrating leap to 4 mana.  The low # of creatures is also a disadvantage in the Jace wars although Snapper on removal and V. Clique are effective when drawn. 

The above critiques are mild; I'm sure the deck is capable of doing well.  Good luck.

[The Atog Lord]

While I doubt the original poster had intended for this to become a discussion about how one defines a draw engine, the very name of this thread invites such a discussion. So, I don't believe I'm being off-topic if I delve a bit into how one defines a draw engine.

Traditionally, a draw engine has been a way for a deck to get more cards from the deck into its hand, at a better ratio than one-for-one. And a draw engine is based on one or more unrestricted cards.

Thus, Gush and Dark Confidant are draw engines. Ancestral Recall, while an amazingly good draw spell, cannot rightly be considered an engine because there is only one copy of it in a deck (if Merchant Scroll were unrestricted, the synergy between those two might be considered a draw engine, however). Further, while Young Pyromancer does generate plenty of card advantage, he doesn't dig through the deck, and is therefore not a draw engine. Now, add in Skullclamp, and you have a draw engine. Brainstorm is not a draw engine, because while it does dig through the deck, it doesn't generate a better ratio than one-for-one.

With that aside, it is quite clear that this deck does, in fact, have a draw engine: Jace. Jace is a draw engine just as Gush and Bob are draw engines. In fact, you can't really make sense of Blue Angels as a deck unless you realize that Jace is its draw engine.

As draw engines often are, this deck runs auxiliary cards to support its engine. Mana Drain helps Jace arrive more quickly. Lightning Bolt and Fire/Ice help remove creatures that would otherwise be dangerous to Jace. And Snapcaster Mage is happy to jump in front of an oncoming Tarmogoyf to give Jace one more turn.

In short, this is a Jace deck. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

[Smmenen]

"The Deck's" draw engine was Jayomdae Tome.  Any deck with 3-4 Jace has a draw engine. 

[Protoaddict]

4 Snapcasters seems like too much to me.

They can be a bit counter synergistic with Yawgs will and a nonbo with anceint grudge
They come on line a bit later in the game typically
They are weak against gravehate with is more and more maindeck common

I would think 2-3 is the proper number.
Also the off color mox seems strange to me. I know you need tinker bait but to run pearl over another useful artifact like Key/Vault or top, I think I would rather have the top or even some utility artifact like a spellbomb or reintroduce strip mine. Maybe even library of Alexandria as an actual "draw engine"?

[MTGFan]

Why would you play this over UR Landstill though?

(1) Because standstill is not always ancestral recall
(2) Snapcaster doesn't just replace individual additional copies of spells.  It can represent all of the relevant spells you've already cast at once. (edit: this point is made rather clearly by the OP)

This flexibility comes at a price that often nullifies the benefits gained by that very flexibility.

Because you run fewer copies of those answers, you will often need a particular answer that is not in your graveyard. So while in theory using Snapcaster + fewer answers gives you access to a toolbox from your graveyard, in practice it is actually *more* constricting.

If I play only 2 Mana Drains, my chances of drawing it as an answer to, say, Tinker are lessened vs. if I played 4. Now instead of those extra Mana Drains I am playing Snapcasters. What do I do on Turn 3 if opponent plays Tinker and I have a Snapcaster in hand and, say, a Lightning Bolt in the graveyard? I would much rather simply play more copies of all of my answers, which gives me a greater density of answers, and in fact often gives me more flexibility because I am drawing multiple copies of all of them and not relying on any particular answer to be sitting in my graveyard.

Playing Snapcaster incurs a hidden cost on both card quality and tempo fronts. Card quality of answers for a control deck is directly dependant (in the Snapcaster deck) on drawing fewer copies of those answers *and* having specific answers already played and in the graveyard. Additionally, tacking 1U onto every answer is a huge tempo loss if you're playing a control deck. The body is mostly irrelevant in a control shell, and is inferior to the body provided by a Mishra's Factory.

And that doesn't even call into question the fact that commonly played graveyard-hate will additionally render Snapcaster a completely terrible card.

[Chubby Rain]

Because you run fewer copies of those answers, you will often need a particular answer that is not in your graveyard. So while in theory using Snapcaster + fewer answers gives you access to a toolbox from your graveyard, in practice it is actually *more* constricting.

The card that made the standard U/W delver lists work was ponder - it allowed the delver player see a relatively large number of cards per game and run a diversified removal suite between the main deck and sideboard. While ponder is restricted, vintage does have a large number of tutors and other card draw that can find specific answers that can be reused with snapcaster mage. It might be better to be proactive with the tutors and fetch up key/vault, tinker, or will, but it is an option somebody could explore.

If I play only 2 Mana Drains, my chances of drawing it as an answer to, say, Tinker are lessened vs. if I played 4. Now instead of those extra Mana Drains I am playing Snapcasters. What do I do on Turn 3 if opponent plays Tinker and I have a Snapcaster in hand and, say, a Lightning Bolt in the graveyard? I would much rather simply play more copies of all of my answers, which gives me a greater density of answers, and in fact often gives me more flexibility because I am drawing multiple copies of all of them and not relying on any particular answer to be sitting in my graveyard.

And if you have a mana drain in hand, lightning bolt in the yard, and your opponent just played cavern of souls into lord of atlantis; you are going to wish you had a snapcaster instead. Or if the opponent just countered your tinker, and the next card you drew is a mana drain, you would rather have snapcaster in that case. The flexibility of snapcaster mage is that while it might not be as good as a dedicated hate card or a bomb, it adds percentage points across a variety of different match ups. Having more drains might increase your odds in the control match up but would hurt you in the fish matchups. Snapcaster gives you more copies without having to actually play more copies. The cost is definitely not zero, as you go on to say, but I think you are underestimating the utility a few copies of snapcaster mage can add to a deck.

[forests failed you]

"The Deck's" draw engine was Jayomdae Tome.  Any deck with 3-4 Jace has a draw engine. 

I have noted in several articles that the Ux Control decks that tend to win events play 4x of an unrestricted, 2cc, card drawer -- Standstill, Dark Confidant.  I think that is more specifically what is being addressed here.  Can Ux work without a 2cc drawer.

[TheWhiteDragon]

I think running more copies of bolt, drain, sabotage, etc gets you the card you need more often than snapcaster.  That said, snapcaster does have utility in ways that extra copies do not.  For one, snapcaster can flash in to block an attacking bob while recovering your best graveyard spell.  Additionally, snapcaster can regrowth your bombs - tinker, yawg will, ancestral - after they have been used or countered.  You CAN'T run extra copies of your bombs, so in this case, I think snapcaster at least draws even to additional copies if not wins out.  I do think singletons with snapcaster is particularly weak, however and requires a lot of luck for you having the right spells in the grave.  The better approach would be to have multiple copies of answers with snapcasters.  Landstill with snaps (or just UR control) runs 3-4 bolts with the 3-4 snaps, so they very often have a bolt in hand or in the yard.  UW has the same argument for plows.  1 bolt is not enough to reliably get it, you need 2 or 3 really.  Also, ancient grudge is awesome, but runs contrary to snaps.  I'd run more e-truth (or steel sabotage) in addition to the grudge so you are more likely to draw it.  Actually, I'd swap out grudge altogether for a shattering spree.  It's cheaper through spheres, can dodge chalice, and can wreck a board in one swipe (or double swipes with snapcaster).  I know the question is then, "What to cut?", and that will take some testing and tweaking to answer.  I'd probably start with thirst and clique, but that's just off my initial perception.  I think this deck is trying to fit in a little bit of everything and it is coming at the cost of redundancy.  Every game is going to have lands, counters, and then a mystery of what cards will flip over.  You'll most likely draw a snapcaster, but what is in your grave will rarely be consistent and you won't have the smorgasbord of options that you are anticipating.

[TheWhiteDragon]

"The Deck's" draw engine was Jayomdae Tome.  Any deck with 3-4 Jace has a draw engine. 

I have noted in several articles that the Ux Control decks that tend to win events play 4x of an unrestricted, 2cc, card drawer -- Standstill, Dark Confidant.  I think that is more specifically what is being addressed here.  Can Ux work without a 2cc drawer.

Snapcaster IS the 2cc drawer in this deck.  It's not "drawing" random cards, but is instead recurring a specific card.  It's still a 2-for-1, so don't kid yourself that snapcaster is not the draw engine.  If a deck ran 4 night's whisper, you'd call it a draw engine.  4x snapcaster is similarly a 2-for-1 CA at the cost of 2 mana.  drawing from the deck vs drawing from the grave isn't entirely different when talking about a CA engine.

[Grand Inquisitor]

flexibility comes at a price that often nullifies the benefits gained ...you run fewer copies of those answers

The card that made the standard U/W delver lists work was ponder

Yeah, this exactly.  Obviously Snapcaster's utility is going to be contingent on the rest of your draws and card selection plays supporting it.  But look at the rest of his list: mostly draw and tutors.  This strategy predates Snapcaster and the evidence is clear that it works in many different metagame types.

The card relevance problem is central to deckbuilding for control, but it's there whether you play snapcaster or not (eg, you either draw mana drain or bolt in the wrong situation).

Can Ux work without a 2cc drawer.

Brian's got it, this is the much more interesting question for these types of lists.  Obviously they can work, they're all over T8s.  But whether they can be built correctly as new metagame threats evolve is something different.  I think the above list is pretty solid, but I don't have a strong sense of whether snap/instants are better positioned than trinket/toolbox.

It's still a 2-for-1

Only if the body of snap/trinket are relevant in a given matchup.  Eg, against Oath these guys are terrible unless they're getting a Nature's Claim or Grafdiggers to stick.  The extra card advantage does nothing here, so the rest of the deck needs to compensate.

The natural tension in deckbuilding for control right now is handling a diversity of threats while building advantage.

[forests failed you]

It is also important to note that Snapcaster Mage IS NOT a 2cc card drawer.  In order to Snapcaster back a Ponder, it costs 1UU.  Also, the Snapcaster only replaces itself in your hand in most cases.  Also, the card advantage is much more expensive.  In order to Ponder, Snap, Ponder, it costs 1UUU (granted over two turns).  The Ponder replaces itself in your hand and the Snapcater + Ponder replaces the Snapcaster and you are +1 2/1 body.  With a Dark Confidant, for instance, if it survives for two turns a player is +1 card AND +1 2/1 body and every turn thereafter will net +1 card.  Confidant is EXTREMELY efficient and gains a sizable advantage as the game goes on.  Also Snapcaster requires help to do anything. 

Imagine you mulliganed to five on the play.  A hand of Snap, Snap, Mox, Mox, Land sucks.  Bob, Bob, Mox Mox, Land is very strong.  Standstill, standstill, Mox Mox Land is also the blade.

[Samoht]

"The Deck's" draw engine was Jayomdae Tome.  Any deck with 3-4 Jace has a draw engine. 

I have noted in several articles that the Ux Control decks that tend to win events play 4x of an unrestricted, 2cc, card drawer -- Standstill, Dark Confidant.  I think that is more specifically what is being addressed here.  Can Ux work without a 2cc drawer.

Yes, they can. They generally run 4 copies of a 5 cc card drawer.

[MTGFan]

Ponder is not a "draw engine" any more than Regrowth is a draw engine.

What the Snapcaster is doing is replacing additional copies of a certain card with a Regrowth effect attached to a 2/1 body. On its own, Snapcaster doesn't generate any card advantage unless you consider the body valuable.

The benefit of playing Regrowth instead of merely additional copies of cards, however, does manifest itself more in Vintage than any other format because it is possible to replay very powerful cards that are restricted to 1 copy per deck - i.e. Ancestral Recall and Time Walk. Without Regrowth/Snapcaster/YawgWill, a deck would only be able to cast these once per game at most. Snapcaster/Regrwoth/YawgWill give you the ability to cast multiple Recall/Walk, which itself is a powerful strategy.

[Onslaught]

First, some initial thoughts from lots more testing:

-I'd really like to fit an Abrupt Decay somewhere in the 75. I love the current utility package in the main, so I'm thinking of dropping something in the side. The first inclination is Dismember or a Nature's Claim, but it's painful to cut something that kills Lodestone for 1 mana. On the other hand, Decay does kill a Chalice at 2 to put the Grudges back online. The whole strength of this kind of deck though is the ability to tune the utility package for what you expect to see, so Decay can slip in if you expect more Bobs than Shops, or you can change the Echoing Truth to Hurks, etc. On a side note, I've considered Far/Away in the Echoing Truth slot. Random stuff like Negate, maindecking one of the REBs, fitting Strip Mine or LOA, adding Noxious Revival, maindecking the Flusterstorm, and so on are all options.

-Viashino Heretic is another card that comes to mind, I would prefer him over Trygon Predator in this build.

-Another option besides Decay to nearly guarantee an answer to Bob is Darkblast. Nice to bring in vs. Aggro as well, but again you are most likely cutting something that kills Lodestone to fit this in the board.

-Still feel justified in using Thirst over Gifts, but Gifts would be a really nice inclusion (even before the 4th Jace)

Grafdigger’s cage seems like a beating for this deck...sorry will, tinker, and snappy stuff

 Would say you probably want to play additional beats or key vault. But I vote decree of justice and say FTW lol jk...kinda

Cage is definitely annoying as shit, but I have 7+ ways to deal with it if it resolves and sometimes I can straight up ignore it and out-Jace them. Also, Decree of Justice! Would feel like 2004 all over again haha.

Also the off color mox seems strange to me. I know you need tinker bait but to run pearl over another useful artifact like Key/Vault or top, I think I would rather have the top or even some utility artifact like a spellbomb or reintroduce strip mine. Maybe even library of Alexandria as an actual "draw engine"?

The fast mana is pretty key, stuff like Land/Mox/Go with Misstep and Snapcaster in hand, or on the play having Fetch, Spell Snare, and some way to get 3 mana on turn 2, or T1 Duress, T2 Snap a Duress, or even just YOLO Tinker are all contingent on lots and lots of artifact mana. Plus powering out turn 3 Jaces is never a bad thing if you got a peak at their hand with Clique or Duress (or Surgical postboard) or you have FOW backup.

And if you have a mana drain in hand, lightning bolt in the yard, and your opponent just played cavern of souls into lord of atlantis; you are going to wish you had a snapcaster instead. Or if the opponent just countered your tinker, and the next card you drew is a mana drain, you would rather have snapcaster in that case. The flexibility of snapcaster mage is that while it might not be as good as a dedicated hate card or a bomb, it adds percentage points across a variety of different match ups. Having more drains might increase your odds in the control match up but would hurt you in the fish matchups. Snapcaster gives you more copies without having to actually play more copies. The cost is definitely not zero, as you go on to say, but I think you are underestimating the utility a few copies of snapcaster mage can add to a deck.

Well said.

I have noted in several articles that the Ux Control decks that tend to win events play 4x of an unrestricted, 2cc, card drawer -- Standstill, Dark Confidant.  I think that is more specifically what is being addressed here.  Can Ux work without a 2cc drawer.

Thank you for this phrasing. This is exactly what I was getting at, unfortunately my choice of words for the thread title has led to a lot of semantics debate that have nothing to do with the viability of the strategy/archetype. Though, in the very opening of the OP I do acknowledge that Jace is a draw engine, just not in the "Vintage engine classification" sense like Gush, Bob, Standstill, etc.

As Rich pointed out, this is very much a "Jace deck" - I just have never really heard that phrase tossed around before. Bob Jace decks, Gush decks, sure. A Jace deck? Eh....

Brian's got it, this is the much more interesting question for these types of lists.  Obviously they can work, they're all over T8s.  But whether they can be built correctly as new metagame threats evolve is something different.  I think the above list is pretty solid, but I don't have a strong sense of whether snap/instants are better positioned than trinket/toolbox.

Agreed on all counts, which begs the question - is there an effective way to combine them both? I tried to fit a Trinket Mage in here, but if you went down to 3 Snaps, less utility, full Bomberman counters, and the Trinket Mage/SDT/maybe Pithing needle package....could be juicy.

What the Snapcaster is doing is replacing additional copies of a certain card with a Regrowth effect attached to a 2/1 body. On its own, Snapcaster doesn't generate any card advantage unless you consider the body valuable.

Since we've established that this is a Jace deck, I think his body has a fair amount of value. He blocks for Jace, you can blow people out by -1ing Jace to recur a Snapcaster lategame, and he harasses opposing Jaces very well (which in combination with the minor suite of mana denial options can let you frequently out-Jace other control decks). And then there is always the occasional midgame situation where you are both doing nothing and Snapcaster resolves and swings for 6 turns or whatever while you 1 for 1 anything relevant, especially if a Clique or Time Walk or another Snapcaster shows up.

[serracollector]

Since your not running Bob's would Thoughtseize be better than Duress in most cases?  Especially in the growing critter meta.  TS turn 1 to remove said Lodestone could be game changing obv.

Also instead of adding Abrupt Decay, have you not thought/tried Wipe Away?  Yes its 1 more mana, but you would always have the right colors for it, its uncounterable, and it can pitch to FOW.  Actually surprises me more people don't run it.

Otherwise Im liking it.  I was gonna test my own version running 3-4 cliques, and no Snaps, since the legend rule changed,  I personally think a deck starting off with 4 jace and 4 cliques, could be viable.  Anyways continue testing and good luck!

[vaughnbros]

As Rich pointed out, this is very much a "Jace deck" - I just have never really heard that phrase tossed around before. Bob Jace decks, Gush decks, sure. A Jace deck? Eh....

Jace decks have been a term that is starting to be thrown around more often now.  Bomberman, blue angels and landstill are just that.  They are Jace decks.

Since we've established that this is a Jace deck, I think his body has a fair amount of value. He blocks for Jace, you can blow people out by -1ing Jace to recur a Snapcaster lategame, and he harasses opposing Jaces very well (which in combination with the minor suite of mana denial options can let you frequently out-Jace other control decks). And then there is always the occasional midgame situation where you are both doing nothing and Snapcaster resolves and swings for 6 turns or whatever while you 1 for 1 anything relevant, especially if a Clique or Time Walk or another Snapcaster shows up.

There are such a number of issues with Snapcaster that it can be extremely underwhelming.  
1. He is really a 3+ drop.
2. He is not only shut off by grafdigger's cage, but also deathrite shaman, scavenging ooze, and nihil spellbomb.
3. He can't be played until turn 2 at the earliest and multiples are bad in your opener.

Point number 1 combined with 2/3 have really made me wonder recently why you would want snapcaster over trinket mage or vendilion clique in a control shell.  He certainly has his strong points, but he has a much greater downside than the two aformentioned.  Especially since clique now benefits from the new legend rule.

[Onslaught]

Since your not running Bob's would Thoughtseize be better than Duress in most cases?  Especially in the growing critter meta.  TS turn 1 to remove said Lodestone could be game changing obv.

With City of Brass (and to a lesser extent, Crypt) I've found the life loss from Tseize to be relevant. Especially if you were to snap it. Plus the oddball scenario of Landstill Misdirecting it at you, which Duress is immune from....haha

Point number 1 combined with 2/3 have really made me wonder recently why you would want snapcaster over trinket mage or vendilion clique in a control shell.  He certainly has his strong points, but he has a much greater downside than the two aformentioned.  Especially since clique now benefits from the new legend rule.

Trinket Mage is obviously a viable and consistently high performing card, but I don't see the comparison to Snapcaster at all. Paying 2U at sorcery speed to fetch SDT or whatever is on the complete opposite end of the spectrum from passing the turn and having Mana Drain mana up, then snapping something for value at EOT. If you wanted to make the argument for more Cliques and less Snapcasters then that makes sense to me, but I don't think Trinket is a straight up replacement for Snapcaster in blue based control lists.

[vaughnbros]

I think snap and trinket mage are very comparable.  They are both a 2 power body attached to a spell.  The simple fact is that when snapping a sorcery his flash is irrelevant.  Trinket mage can fetch lotus or sapphire in order to keep drain up.

Clique is far less versatile, but as a 3/1 flier I find it to be overwhelming powerful as a clock against most decks especially after you bottom the best card in their hand.