Grixis Control lately

[zeus-online]

.

[Chubby Rain]

I think the effect is stronger than either card (FoF/Gifts).
What i am worrying about and the reason that i think a new shell is needed is the casting cost on DTT.

4 Night's whispers could potentially fuel the deck and the DTT's quite well, and i think they are generally superior to preordain in a control shell.

You could be right Zeus. Drawing cards definitely fuels Delve more than simply cantripping. I would also consider Gitaxian Probe as not only does it cantrip, but it also provides knowledge of the opponent's hand which is really strong when resolving a Dig.

[zeus-online]

.

[diophan]

Although it's 4C, starting with LSV's list wouldn't be crazy:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xn15Z7AQggkk0o3xcyFMMqTiXtugDXfQzHhsO_zCLaI/edit?pli=1#gid=454897452

You could also just take out fastbond, gushes, and potentially merchant scroll and have 5-6 grixis slots to work with.

[brianpk80]

I really don't like Gitaxian probe. It does not really advance your plan and either costs you two life or  .
I guess it is somewhat helpful to take a peek, but i would much rather run thoughtseize or duress if that was the purpose. They are also proactive which helps fuel delve.

Part of the reason Gitaxian Probe has increased in value so much is the diversification of the counter suite in the past five years.  It's much easier to make probability analyses v. a deck from last decade running the standard 4 Force of Will and 4 Mana Drain than it is to do so in today's landscape where the designer counters are so high variance, ranging between utterly dead to absolute blowouts.     

[JarofFortune]

I really don't like Gitaxian probe. It does not really advance your plan and either costs you two life or  .
I guess it is somewhat helpful to take a peek, but i would much rather run thoughtseize or duress if that was the purpose. They are also proactive which helps fuel delve.

Part of the reason Gitaxian Probe has increased in value so much is the diversification of the counter suite in the past five years.  It's much easier to make probability analyses v. a deck from last decade running the standard 4 Force of Will and 4 Mana Drain than it is to do so in today's landscape where the designer counters are so high variance, ranging between utterly dead to absolute blowouts.    

I think it really depends on the deck. I could be completely wrong, but I've never liked probe in Delver. I think it's too low impact. Probe has always seemed much stronger in combo decks.

As for grixis, why does it need fof? Dig seems muj more consistently powerful.

[brianpk80]

I think it really depends on the deck. I could be completely wrong, but I've never liked probe in Delver. I think it's too low impact. Probe has always seemed much stronger in combo decks.

That's correct.  It's for more important to clear the path for Tinker than for Delver of Secrets. 

[Smmenen]

I think it really depends on the deck. I could be completely wrong, but I've never liked probe in Delver. I think it's too low impact. Probe has always seemed much stronger in combo decks.

That's correct.  It's for more important to clear the path for Tinker than for Delver of Secrets. 

Probe doesn't actually clear a path.

I actually completely disagree.   I've never liked Probe in combo decks, and the main reason is that combo decks tend to have a low density of business to mana, meaning that the card you draw is probably as likely as not to be a business spell - so the opportunity cost of that spot is really high.

In a Delver deck, constructed on Turbo Xerox principles, the cantrip is far, far more likely to draw you a business spell. 

Probe is actually really good in Delver decks, but I hate it because it's terrible against Workshops. 

[John Cox]

I think it really depends on the deck. I could be completely wrong, but I've never liked probe in Delver. I think it's too low impact. Probe has always seemed much stronger in combo decks.

That's correct.  It's for more important to clear the path for Tinker than for Delver of Secrets.  

Probe doesn't actually clear a path.

I actually completely disagree.   I've never liked Probe in combo decks, and the main reason is that combo decks tend to have a low density of business to mana, meaning that the card you draw is probably as likely as not to be a business spell - so the opportunity cost of that spot is really high.

In a Delver deck, constructed on Turbo Xerox principles, the cantrip is far, far more likely to draw you a business spell.  

Probe is actually really good in Delver decks, but I hate it because it's terrible against Workshops.  

I think the logic is that if cast you probe and see two counters you can lead with two bait cards. Instead of having your tinker or ancestral countered when you could lead with wheel. The perfect knowledge lets you clear a path by out playing your opponent.
I think its wrong to assume that probe's role is as a cantrip in combo (or any deck that wants to utilize it effectively).

[Smmenen]

Maybe from years of playing combo I just know what my opponent's resistance level is -- I can't remember the last time I was genuinely surprised by something someone did. 

[zeus-online]

.

[Smmenen]

The value of probe is also probably relative to format experience and matchup experience. 

[Samoht]

Maybe from years of playing combo I just know what my opponent's resistance level is -- I can't remember the last time I was genuinely surprised by something someone did. 

Was it mid summer of this year?

[brianpk80]

Probe doesn't actually clear a path.

I disagree.  With 4x Force of Will and 4x Mana Drain circa 2005, using straightforward probability analyses might have been sensible but now that the palette expanded to include Spell Snare, Flusterstorm, Mindbreak Trap, and Mental Misstep, you cannot reliably guess the permutation of counters in an opponent's hand and otherwise correct sequencing can and will lead to blowout losses as a result of guesswork.  Probe pitches to Force, fuels Yawgmoth/Treasure Cruise, and cycles through a Sensei Top.  I side it out v. Shop.  It's experience in today's format that leads one to value precise information, not inexperience or ignorance.  

[Smmenen]

Probe doesn't actually clear a path.

I disagree.  With 4x Force of Will and 4x Mana Drain circa 2005, using straightforward probability analyses might have been sensible but now that the palette expanded to include Spell Snare, Flusterstorm, Mindbreak Trap, and Mental Misstep, you cannot reliably guess the permutation of counters in an opponent's hand and otherwise correct sequencing can and will lead to blowout losses as a result of guesswork.  Probe pitches to Force, fuels Yawgmoth/Treasure Cruise, and cycles through a Sensei Top.  I side it out v. Shop.  It's experience in today's format that leads one to value precise information, not inexperience or ignorance.  

I understand your point, but it doesn't support your claim about clearing resistance.
Applying your journey metaphor, it would be more accurate to say that Probe illuminates a path, not clears.  That's why I disagree with you.

[Chubby Rain]

Maybe from years of playing combo I just know what my opponent's resistance level is -- I can't remember the last time I was genuinely surprised by something someone did. 

Was it mid summer of this year?

I was pretty surprised when someone tried to Misdirect a Memory's Journey.

[zeus-online]

.

[Chubby Rain]

one mana, one card required:
red elemental blast
pyroblast
spell pierce
flusterstorm
Spell snare

At any given time when i want to resolve a spell, only a few of them are relevant since most of them are specific in what they can do.

Seems like knowing your opponent's hand would be quite relevant if he/she has one card in hand and a volcanic island up. Unless you always have the soul read that your opponent has the pyroblast and not the spell snare so you can vampiric tutor for time vault and not tinker.

[brianpk80]

I understand your point, but it doesn't support your claim about clearing resistance.
Applying your journey metaphor, it would be more accurate to say that Probe illuminates a path, not clears.  That's why I disagree with you.

Stephen, you are aware that identifying the optimal timing and sequencing for one's spells to mitigate interference (including it taking the form of an opponent blowing you out w. a wincon because you did not hold up your own Flusterstorm/Ancient Grudge/etc.) is a form of clearing resistance.  There's no need to feign genuine disagreement.

Categories of counterspells with some unfortunate omissions.

Simply knowing most of the counterspells out there and their casting requirements is not the same as knowing an opponent's hand regardless of how uncannily skilled one believes themselves to be at reading opponents.  That is overconfidence, a trait that deteriorates play skill.  Additionally, concrete knowledge has usage beyond trying to resolve one's own spell.  In one case, I Probed an opponent who had led with Land, Sol Ring, Divining Top, Spin to see a grip full of four+ drops and no relevant interaction.  Because it was a control Oath opponent, the Engineered Explosives in my hand are usually set at 2 to stop Time Vault and Oath of Druids and without the perfect information I would never have made the risky tempo play of setting it on 1 and immediately blowing up my own Sol Ring as well as his and the top, choking his mana long enough for me win by comboing out.  Had I gone with a more reasonable probability analysis of what the opponent may have had in hand, I would have figured perhaps an Oath, an Abrupt Decay, 1-2 counterspells, possibly a Griselbrand, etc. 

There's also the turn 1 Probe when you don't know what your opponent is on and seeing their hand enables you to sequence plays to avoid Wasteland, Chalice, etc., decide whether to throw down jewelry to mount a defense or ride Library of Alexandria to victory, and more.  Gitaxian Probe is underplayed in Vintage.  It an all-star card in multiple formats for good reason.   All I'm hearing against it is, "I'm so smart I don't need to know what my opponent's real options are," which, as I witnessed firsthand several times this year, is hot air. 

[serracollector]

Also dont forget Foil Negate Mana Leak and Commandeer.

[zeus-online]

.

[tribet]

Swan Song, Annul, ...

but then if you play combo, knowing if they have Ravenous Trap or Notion Thief can also be pretty relevant. Probe can tell you that

[zeus-online]

.

[tribet]

Annul is not horrible at stopping Grixis' Time Vault (and if you allow me to stretch further maybe against Mana Rocks mid-game if one of their plans is also to constrict Grixis mana).

It's really not stupid to think that Merlfolk decks could be running some Annul in the side to fight both Oath & MUD which are relevant decks. Is it then stupid to admit that there may be a tiny possibility that Merlfolk may side some Annul against your Grixis (at they expense of maybe 1 Reejerey, 1 Waterfront Bouncer or whatever).

People seem too certain about too many things in this thread. They clearly don't need Probe then.

[orgcandman]

Because it was a control Oath opponent, the Engineered Explosives in my hand are usually set at 2 to stop Time Vault and Oath of Druids and without the perfect information I would never have made the risky tempo play of setting it on 1 and immediately blowing up my own Sol Ring as well as his and the top,

relevant:

blowing up my own Sol Ring as well as his and the top,

Read:

blowing up ... the top,

If your opponent lets you do this, they're probably not very smart. 2-for-1'ing yourself is a play I'll let you make all day long. That play isn't just risky, it hedges on your opponent forgetting to tap sensei's divining top, which is the larger section of text on the card. I don't think this anecdote is the one you need, because it signals that you played worse because of Git. Probe.

[brianpk80]

The most widely played counterspell you omitted was Steel Sabotage, which is particularly relevant to the Grixis Control archetype.  In addition to pure countermagic, there are instant speed effects all over the format that can wreck someone if not accounted for, like Vendilion Clique, Notion Thief, and Aven Mindcensor.  Then there are destroy effects that require awareness if your win-con is a Time Vault (Decay, Grudge, Nature's Claim, Disenchant) or Robot (Swords, Steel Sabotage, Hurkyl's), Suppose you have Key, Tinker, and Flusterstorm in hand with mana available.  Do you Tinker for Vault or Blightsteel?  The difference between an Abrupt Decay and a Jace/Dack in opponent's hand is likely the difference between game win and game loss.  You can assess based on cards in graveyard, opponent's archetype, and the game state what the relative probabilities are of each potential roadblock.  It may be "more likely" by X% that the opponent has Decay than Jace but there's still too great a chance of losing even while making the mathematically "correct" choice.  Decks are so diverse right now and loads of players tweak their own numbers of staples to taste so you may not even know what's in an opponent's list let alone their hand.  And opposing decks of all archetypes are fierce, putting you in hard spots where you have to make tough choices outside the comfort zone of having a gazillion mana sources and 6 counters in hand.  

People in my playtest group know to counter the Probe because they know from experience what happens when they don't. Information is huge.  

[brianpk80]

If your opponent lets you do this, they're probably not very smart. 2-for-1'ing yourself is a play I'll let you make all day long. That play isn't just risky, it hedges on your opponent forgetting to tap sensei's divining top, which is the larger section of text on the card. I don't think this anecdote is the one you need, because it signals that you played worse because of Git. Probe.

He drew with it as I anticipated and had to use his only mana source to replay it the next turn. The next turn, he had to use his only mana source to spin the Top looking for land which was not found.  The point is that 2-for-1-ing myself is not something I would voluntarily do without good reason (who plays Force of Will, right?), but that the info from the Probe illustrated that this otherwise incorrect and counterintuitive play was correct under the circumstances. 

[zeus-online]

.

[xouman]

2-for-1'ing yourself is a play I'll let you make all day long. That play isn't just risky, it hedges on your opponent forgetting to tap sensei's divining top, which is the larger section of text on the card. I don't think this anecdote is the one you need, because it signals that you played worse because of Git. Probe.

If my opponent has a hand full of 4cc spells and no mana sources and just a land and a sol ring, I would happily 2x1 myself. 

Gitaxian probe in a deck capable of different roles (as grixis) would help defining the best role in a given match. I have seen videos of players holding ancestral or even discarding cards to save mana for countermagic. Duress/tgz work in a "similar way", and I remember them being maindecked years ago in similar decks.

[diopter]

People in my playtest group know to counter the Probe because they know from experience what happens when they don't. Information is huge.

Can you describe some typical scenarios here? E.g. I would like to hear about situations you encountered where you got Probed, had the counter for it but did not use it, and that decision significantly contributed to you falling behind or even losing the game (even though you kept the counter)