So Many Insane Plays Podcast #39: Khans of Tarkir Vintage Set Review

[dangerlinto]

I don't know if a shell will emerge that truly abuses Dig Through Time.  That's possible.  In a vacuum, I think Cruise is the better card and have said so since they were spoiled.  For me, it's all about what they are compared to.

Honestly, Dig makes me want to try a shell of a deck with nothing but two-card combo wins.  Notably, Painter and Grindstone as a 2 card combo win where neither is restricted which makes finding both on the top 7 very easy more likely seems like a perfect fit.  That's where it seems to shine over both Gifts and FoF.  With those two, the only way you were getting both parts were to put recursion alongside the combo.   

[MaximumCDawg]

That sounds like fun, but it's really already possible.  Just play 2 Card Monte and stuff it full of tutor effects for artifacts.  Easy peasy.  The problem with assembling those kind of combos has never been finding the combo -- it has been protecting it from the standard battery of Vintage anti-aircraft weaponry long enough to drop Fat Man.

[fsecco]

That's the thing, I disagree with that. I don't think of Dig is a tutor. It's a draw spell. The fact that you select the best draw possible is what makes it awesome.

[MaximumCDawg]

What's the line between a draw spell and a tutor anymore?  Certainly, if you had a card that said this:

1B, Sorcery
Search all but the bottom card of your library for any card and put it into your hand.

You'd probably agree that's very similar to Demonic Tutor, right?  So what's the cut-off?  I feel like any spell that lets you choose something in more than the top five cards or so starts to smell a lot more like a tutor than a mere draw spell.

[DubDub]

Dig Through Time, by comparison, strikes me as a small upgrade on Demonic Tutor and similar cards.  You trade the ability to get any card in your deck off for getting two from the top of your deck.  Would we run four Demonic Tutors if we could?  Maybe, but then again, maybe not.  We have MANY cards that do similar work to D.Tutor in black and blue, and not all of those are included in every deck.  Heck, even Consultation, which is arguably better that D.Tutor, doesn't see a ton of play.

LOL count = 3.

Thanks CDawg, I needed few laughs.

Repeat after me:
1. Dig Through Time is not a slight upgrade on Demonic Tutor.
2. We would absolutely play four Demonic Tutors if we could.
3. Demonic Consultation is not arguably better than Demonic Tutor.

[John Cox]

The problems I see with dig is the delve cost. Casting it for full delve wont always happen and I think at that point you would play gifts before dig. How many decks play 1 gifts? You can't just jam 4 dig into an existing deck and make it great. I think there is a home for dig, I just don't know what.

[evouga]

I've swapped out 2 Jace for 2 Dig in my Oath list and like the results so far.

[serracollector]

I have been testing three digs in my grixis list and have liked it so far. My list also runs one gifts and one fact or fiction to help fuel digs. I would arguably say it is more like gifts than anything. But i always seen gifts as a four mana instant double demonic. Dig can be and is most times only two mana And is of course pitchable to force and misd. Of course you would play four demonic if you could but would you play them over a two cast blue instant that let you grab best two out of seven? I dont know. This card is not always two mana tho so therefore i consider it more comparale to gifts. Either way this card is most definitely a tutor. If you cant find an answer or a win in your top seven you were destined to lose from the get go.

[serracollector]

I never said it was better than demonic i said if it was just two casting cost and not delve it would rival it in power. That is why i said its closer to gifts ungiven. Delving four cards to cast dig for four is not hard at all especially with fetches  black lotus wasteland lotus petal dark ritual and cantrips.

[MaximumCDawg]

Dig Through Time, by comparison, strikes me as a small upgrade on Demonic Tutor and similar cards.  You trade the ability to get any card in your deck off for getting two from the top of your deck.  Would we run four Demonic Tutors if we could?  Maybe, but then again, maybe not.  We have MANY cards that do similar work to D.Tutor in black and blue, and not all of those are included in every deck.  Heck, even Consultation, which is arguably better that D.Tutor, doesn't see a ton of play.

LOL count = 3.

Thanks CDawg, I needed few laughs.

Repeat after me:
1. Dig Through Time is not a slight upgrade on Demonic Tutor.
2. We would absolutely play four Demonic Tutors if we could.
3. Demonic Consultation is not arguably better than Demonic Tutor.

Jeez, I didn't know I was stepping on your nose when I got out of bed in the morning today.  Let's calm down and take a look at the context here, huh?

The discussion surrounding these comments is over how you should properly look at Dig Through Time.  People have compared it to Impulse, Fact or Fiction, or other cards that let you grab the best card on the top X of your deck.  I'm taking the position that because Dig goes so deep -- 8 cards may well be a quarter of your deck in many situations -- it is actually more comparable to Demonic Tutor.  Particularly in a deck with lots of redundancy instead of silver bullets, it seems to get you what you need when you need it.  That's more what you use Demonic for.  It might be a fine line, but it feels like 8 cards is more like a tutor than a mere draw effect.  or perhaps, you might say, a blend between the two.  Half-tutor and half-impulse.

Thats the context of the first "LOL" moment you're talking about -- is Dig better than Demonic?  Obviously it depends on context.  If you are using Demonic to get Time Vault, then no, Dig is not better.  However, if you need to get one of the four Bolts in your deck, then yes, Dig may well be better.  First off, it's Blue, and that gives you a bunch of benefit right off the bat.  Second, it's Instant, so you get to wait until the end step to use it.  Third, it likely grabs you your sought-after four-of and then also the next best card in your top 8.  You've gone up a card, got what you needed, and are good to go.  On the down side, of course, it requires a full yard to cast for a reasonable cost.  So, no, I don't think it's hilarious to suggest that Dig may have upside over Demonic depending on the deck and circumstances.  

The next question is whether people would run four Demonic Tutors.  I don't perceive this to be as silly of a question as you do.  Consider what we CAN play:

Demonic Tutor
Vampiric Tutor
Cruel Tutor
Grim Tutor
Imperial Seal
Demonic Consultation
Mystical Tutor
Personal Tutor
Merchant Scroll

Do decks, even combo decks, jam as many of these into the deck as they possibly can?  No, they don't.  You typically see Demonic, Vampiric, and maybe two others depending on the deck.  Certainly the cards are different.  Some cost more, some cost less, some just put it on the top of the deck, whatever.  The point is that many of these cards do something very similar to what Dig and Demonic do -- get you the card you need -- but we don't just jam all of them all the time.  Certainly Demonic is the most reliable universal tutor.  You have to imagine, though, that if you could run 4 those four copies would just displace the other tutors we currently use, like Mystical or Merchant Scroll.

So, if Dig is giving you a tutor-like effect, do we want to jam four of them?  Probably not, since it goes into the normal rotation of other tutor effects.  

Finally, Demonic Consultation.  Yes, it is usually going to be better than Demonic Tutor, PROVIDED that the card you want is not in the top six cards of your library.  In that case:

1. Consultation is instant speed.
2. Consultation costs B.
3. Both put the card directly into your hand.

Sure, there's the off-chance that you kill yourself wishing for a one-of using Consultation.  That's a real thing.  But most of the time you're not going to, and then Consultation is just better.  Think about it like Arc Slogger; people originally poo-pooed that card because it hurt your library too much, then realized the effect was completely worth it.  Here, too.

So, again, my point here was that I don't think Dig, as a quasi-tutor, will see more play than Treasure Cruise.  I could be wrong as I'm theorycrafting only, and my own brews do not have full power, so the one blue mana difference is actually a big deal.  But, my thought process is that it is NOT necessarily a no-brainer that people would play a good new tutor effect as a 4-of.  They WOULD run Ancestral Recall as a 4-of.  And when you consider that Dig has lots of competition for the effect it provides, where as Recall does not, the deal seems even more sealed.

Bottom line: There are less cards that do what Ancestral Recall does than do what Demonic Tutor does.  If you think Dig is more like Tutor, Dig should see less play that Cruise.

[Smmenen]

Demonic Tutor would be a 4-of in tons of decks if it was legal.  consult sucks because most decks that would play it rely on restricted cards or singleton finishers. DT is probably top5 card of all time.

[MaximumCDawg]

Demonic Tutor would be a 4-of in tons of decks if it was legal.  consult sucks because most decks that would play it rely on restricted cards or singleton finishers. DT is probably top5 card of all time.

Does that suggest to you that Dig Through Time should be a four-of, too?  Or at least that it should be run more than Treasure Cruise?

[Smmenen]

Demonic Tutor would be a 4-of in tons of decks if it was legal.  consult sucks because most decks that would play it rely on restricted cards or singleton finishers. DT is probably top5 card of all time.

Does that suggest to you that Dig Through Time should be a four-of, too?  Or at least that it should be run more than Treasure Cruise?

Dig Thru Time isn't DT in my book.  Can it reliably find Black Lotus when I need it?  Tendrils when I need it?  Tinker when I need it?  No.

[fsecco]

Demonic Tutor would be a 4-of in tons of decks if it was legal.  consult sucks because most decks that would play it rely on restricted cards or singleton finishers. DT is probably top5 card of all time.

Does that suggest to you that Dig Through Time should be a four-of, too?  Or at least that it should be run more than Treasure Cruise?

Dig Thru Time isn't DT in my book.  Can it reliably find Black Lotus when I need it?  Tendrils when I need it?  Tinker when I need it?  No.

Thanks, Steve. People really should get over the Dig x D.Tutor comparisons. They have nothing in common, I'm sorry. Dig can't find any card you want. Really, it's a draw spell, not a tutor. Once you understand that, you can use it for it's best role. It can't be compared to anything because it's a very novel effect. There's nothing that does what it does (except, of course, Ancestral Memories). I don't think I can stress this more without telling people to just play the card and see for themselves.

[kalisia]

That said, DT is imho the best black card in vintage and of all time.

Hmm... there is a fight between DT and Yawgmoth's Will for the first place  

Anyway, the "instant" property of Dig leads me to think that it will be more played than Cruise, even with the UU in the mana cost.

[Chubby Rain]

Anyway, the "instant" property of Dig leads me to think that it will be more played than Cruise, even with the UU in the mana cost.

I think it is a big mistake to look at cards individually and not in actual decklists. Treasure Cruise is absolutely insane in URx delver and will see more play at least in the near future because Delver is the better deck, not necessarily because it is the better card. The same with Dig vs. Demonic Tutor. In decks like UW Bomberman, Dig is really good whereas including Demonic Tutor warps the manabase too much. I went 9-3-1 at TDG and the NY Grudge Match with that deck, punting a match against 4c Deathblade in the Top 8 of TDG, drawing to Terra Nova with lethal on my Time Walk turn (unfortunately that was turn 6), and legitimately losing to URg delver and 4c Delver twice.

[DubDub]

{wall of text}

First of all, Dig Through Time looks at the top seven cards of your library, not the top eight.

Second, you're taking as given that the deck in question is one with lots of redundancy.  Of course reducing the options and potential value of Demonic Tutor brings it closer to DTT.

Third, what if you need that Lightning Bolt on turn 2?  You're probably not casting DTT on turn 1, whereas Demonic can be cast off any fetchland/natural-Underground and any Mox.  So...?

Fourth, backing off your claim that "Dig Through Time, by comparison, strikes me as a small upgrade on Demonic Tutor and similar cards." to say "So, no, I don't think it's hilarious to suggest that Dig may have upside over Demonic depending on the deck and circumstances." is a step in the right direction.

Fifth, a hand with two lands, a Mox, and Vamp/Imp/Mystical/Personal DOES NOTHING.  A hand with two lands, a Mox, and Demonic/Demonic/Demonic/Demonic WINS ON TURN TWO.  You cannot group all *tutors* into one big bucket.  There are significant differences in power level between Demonic and all the topdeck tutors.

Sixth, there are other reasons you might not want four DTTs; for instance, you can't reasonably expect to delve 18 cards away (assuming you pitch one to FOW), unless you're filling the grave with very bad cards like Thought Scour/Frantic Search.

Seventh, the other issue with Consultation is that you exile something else that you need while burrowing to the Black Lotus/Yawgmoth's Will/Tendrils you cannot win without, not just that you exile the card(s) you name and deck yourself.  Plus it forces you to build your deck to avoid fragility, i.e. with four Tendrils, or with four Burning Wish and Tendrils/Yawg in the sideboard, which may not be worth the benefit of a single Consultation.

And then suddenly at the end you're bringing Treasure Cruise and Ancestral Recall into the discussion?  And somehow that fits into DTT not being played as a four-of despite being, in your words, a slight upgrade on Demonic Tutor?  I ended up confused.

[vaughnbros]

{wall of text}

{wall of text}

This was comical to me.

[kalisia]

I think it is a big mistake to look at cards individually and not in actual decklists. Treasure Cruise is absolutely insane in URx delver and will see more play at least in the near future because Delver is the better deck, not necessarily because it is the better card.

I don't know where you have seen that Delver is the best deck...
Many decks are at least as strong as this deck, and even more powerful.

The same with Dig vs. Demonic Tutor. In decks like UW Bomberman, Dig is really good whereas including Demonic Tutor warps the manabase too much.

Demonic Tutor warps the manabase ?? There is nothing strange in the fact of playing 3 colors in a deck.
Many blue decks (that play more than 2 colors) win a lot of events everytime in the world. There is nothing strange with that.
I understand that adding a black splash only for DT is not a good reason, but adding black for VT, DT and YawgWill begins to be a really good reason.

[Chubby Rain]

I don't know where you have seen that Delver is the best deck...
Many decks are at least as strong as this deck, and even more powerful.

"Better" is not synonymous with "best". The deck is very prevalent on Magic Online and has done very well in the two mans and TMD MTGO Open. It is seeing a large amount of play in legacy and is easy to translate into a Vintage deck. We will see how it fares this weekend, but the main point was the second part, "because X is a better deck, not because Y is a better card." Regarding your previous post, I was criticizing the fact that you highlighted a particular aspect of a card (i.e. that Dig is an instant) without looking at external factors such as synergy. The entire comment wasn't really directed at just you, though - I think the discussion is getting bogged down in a comparison of two cards without looking at the bigger picture.

Demonic Tutor warps the manabase ?? There is nothing strange in the fact of playing 3 colors in a deck.
Many blue decks (that play more than 2 colors) win a lot of events everytime in the world. There is nothing strange with that.
I understand that adding a black splash only for DT is not a good reason, but adding black for VT, DT and YawgWill begins to be a really good reason.

Again, the point was that there is a definite cost to splashing any card. You have to weigh the benefits of Demonic Tutor with the inconsistencies introduced running a third color and/or the increased susceptibility to Wasteland. Of course other people can win with broken black cards in Esper or Grixis - I'm not even arguing that they are wrong to run them as I consider this more of a metagame and personal decision. I'm am merely saying that in my experience with UW Bomberman it had been more beneficial to keep the deck two colored than splash powerful cards of a third color. Other people may reach different conclusions and these people may win tournaments with Demonic Tutor in their Bomberman list...

TLDR:
A) The prevalence of a card is based on extrinsic factors such as synergy, availability, etc and intrinsic factors such as what that card actually does, mana cost, etc.
B) Comparison of two cards often ignore the extrinsic factors and overemphasize the intrinsic factors.
C) ALL CARDS have pros and cons, even if one con is arguably just taking up a deck slot.

[MTGFan]

It's interesting that everyone's talking about Dig in terms of Demonic Tutor similarity.


From the best (or one of the 5 best) Magic players in the world right now:

Part of me actually believe that it was a mistake to print a card this powerful and that Dig Through Time will change the way we play all formats of Magic. I know it's great in Standard and it wouldn't surprise me in the least if it saw play in either Modern or Legacy. It's remarkably similar to just having double Demonic Tutor. It's also creates such a large advantage that you'll be able to leverage that into your next Dig Through Time.

http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/owens-a-win-ptktk-with-ub-control-11th/

[Bibendum]

Yes in a deck full of 4 of's you will usually hit what you want. Tiny bit different playing with the restricted list

[hashswag]

It feels like DT in decks that can reasonably expect to hit a wincon or two every 7 cards, such as Grixis. It doesn't feel like DT in decks that need to search for specific singletons at specific times, like Storm.

The analogy is too situational to say that they're actually similar cards. You could say that an EOT Dig is like a Yawg's will turn, since you have a load of options to work with, but limited mana and you lose access to a bunch of the cards that you can't immediately use. You could say It's like an instant speed Acall+Snap+Acall to find an answer, since you can't use lands/sorceries/etc to save you, etc.

[MaximumCDawg]

It's interesting that everyone's talking about Dig in terms of Demonic Tutor similarity.


From the best (or one of the 5 best) Magic players in the world right now:

Part of me actually believe that it was a mistake to print a card this powerful and that Dig Through Time will change the way we play all formats of Magic. I know it's great in Standard and it wouldn't surprise me in the least if it saw play in either Modern or Legacy. It's remarkably similar to just having double Demonic Tutor. It's also creates such a large advantage that you'll be able to leverage that into your next Dig Through Time.

http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/owens-a-win-ptktk-with-ub-control-11th/

Not everyone, really.  It's mostly people disagreeing with me about that.

[Smmenen]

It's interesting that everyone's talking about Dig in terms of Demonic Tutor similarity.


From the best (or one of the 5 best) Magic players in the world right now:

Part of me actually believe that it was a mistake to print a card this powerful and that Dig Through Time will change the way we play all formats of Magic. I know it's great in Standard and it wouldn't surprise me in the least if it saw play in either Modern or Legacy. It's remarkably similar to just having double Demonic Tutor. It's also creates such a large advantage that you'll be able to leverage that into your next Dig Through Time.

http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/owens-a-win-ptktk-with-ub-control-11th/

Owen is never prone to hyperbole.

[MaximumCDawg]

So, now that we've had some more data to chew on, I want to point out that things are playing out consistent with what I've been saying since day one about the Khans delve cards. Treasure Cruise is seeing more play than Dig Through Time.  You get 23 results on Morphling.de for Cruise versus 8 for Dig.  Also, and I don't think this is insignificant, we saw a Cruise-fueled deck take down a Dig-fueled deck pretty handily in the finals of the Vintage Super League.

I'm bringing this up because people were incredibly dismissive -- derisive, even -- of the concepts that: (1) Dig is most like a Demonic Tutor; and (2) people would snap-play 5 Ancestrals but not necessarily 5 Demonic Tutors.  I think we are seeing that the results back these ideas up.  Dig is seeing play in decks with combo finishes, like Oath or Grixis, which is exactly what you would expect of a tutor.  Cruise is seeing play in a huge variety of decks, not just Delver -- check out Morphling's list.

EDIT: Note that you could argue that Cruise's numbers are inflated because it is being played in Delver, which is potentially cock of the rock right now.  I don't think that's true, and the different decks using it on Morphling back this up.