TLDR: Why not run a basic island or forest in the basic mountain's (Jordan's most recent sideboard addition) place? It replaces Breeding Pool just as well- if not better when you want a fast Blood Moon, and enable Huntmaster of the Fells about as easily.
I have always run 18 lands in RUG delver. This probably stems from when I was running UR delver. I recently began to test 17 lands, and thus far I have been impressed by the deck's ability to run smoothly, while fitting an extra action card in the deck. Jordan's mention of the two respective land counts when he spoke of basic mountain in his most recent article (part of this was in comments0, has made me very interested in discussing the land.
I hate basic mountain in this deck. I hate it a lot. The reason is two-fold. Basic mountain is nearly useless with and against Blood Moon. Unless you land one of each basic by turn three (or have more basics in hand- a bit unlikely), your Blood Moon will cut you off of a colour. Being cut off of a colour is not fun, and I don't want to build my manabase around cutting myself off of colours. The second part is Simic Charm. UG. You will never cast a Simic Charm with two lands if one of those lands is a basic mountain. NEVER. I love Simic Charm. It is one of the best reasons to play RUG over other URX decks. We often end up on two lands. Therefore, basic mountain is bad.
Now I will talk about Breeding Pool. Breeding Pool is the best and worst land in the deck. How many hands have you kept with a fetch as your only land? If the other cards in the hands consisted of mostly blue and green cards, you probably went to find that one-of Breeding Pool. Let's say you mulled to six and kept fetch, delver, goyf, shoal, visions, denial. That sort of hand has justified running Breeding Pool time and time again for me. This is important for me because I initially hated Breeding Pool. We boast of our Burn matchup to Grixis players who have to fetch, shock; fetch, shock to cast their spells, but Breeding Pool does the same to us! Without that mountain (which kills Simic Charm), Breeding Pool will probably make us shock twice. It also plays quite badly with Blood Moon. I want to get a red shock, a forest, and an island when I land Blood Moon on curve. Breeding Pool makes this impossible when it shows up.
Overall, I would say that Breeding Pool has earned its slot for me due to the tight margins of mana that we run on.
Mountain has not, but I have never given it a chance. It is simply too clunky.
Then Jordan said he put a mountain in his sideboard.
I thought this was a waste of a slot. Why would you want a land that kills one of our best spells? T1 mountain also notably prevents us from playing the highly coveted T2 Hooting Mandrills with Stubborn Denial up. After more thoroughly reading the articles though, I have come to appreciate this idea.
The mountain is said to come in in two scenarios: When you want to land Blood Moon ASAP, and when missing a land drop will get you killed. I can see this being useful against Tron, GBX, decks that try to get away with five colours, and decks that can't use R. The second point applies to aggressive decks that will kill you if you miss a beat.
Now that I understand the rationale behind the basic land, I kind of like it. Having just switched to 17 lands, I can imagine needing an extra to hit early land drops reliably. I think this is most relevant when you board in Huntmaster of the Fells. Our resident four drop has given even my 18 land deck trouble sometimes, so the extra land could be helpful. I won't know until I run more games with 17 lands.
My concerns about Simic Charm being turned off are also gone as long as the Breeding Pool stays in. Adding a land doesn't worsen your mana (unless you keep bad hands because of it). Even if the Breeding Pool comes out, the interactive nature of post-board games makes hitting a third land, and turning Simic Charm back on, more likely.
The part of this that I am most interested in is the role of the mountain to land Blood Moon early. Jordan said that he often takes out Breeding Pool for this purpose. The mountain replaces Breeding Pool because you can't go Breeding Pool, island, forest, Blood Moon. Mountain enables this line. But why stop with mountain? I think that the other basic lands could do an even better job of this. As I said above, I want to get a red shock, a forest, and an island when I land Blood Moon on curve. The downside to this is that you have to shock, while mountain allows your life total to remain intact. But our life total is not that relevant in most of the matchups that call for early Blood Moon. Abzan and Jund spend most of their time not applying pressure, and dedicated control decks (Tron, Grixis, UW) don't know what pressure is. I think the two life is well worth the versatility here. Especially because you are decently likely to draw a shock in the first three lands. The extra island/forest also will tap for the right colour if drawn later.
What do you guys think of changing the basic mountain to a forest or island? Am I still missing something? Also, shout out to anyone who took the time to read that.
How reckless are you guys with early Probes? I find that when I am playing against an unknown deck, I will cast Gitaxian Probe as soon as possible to cantrip and get that wonderful information. This generally means Probe is the first spell I cast, as that allows me to choose my line as early as possible.
I have been doing some practice against Burn and find that early Probes make me cringe. I've had games in which not Probing could have kept me alive ling enough to close the game out.
This is only really relevant on the play because most of Burn's T1 plays are iconic. I don't really want to Probe after a Goblin Guide or suspended Rift Bolt.
My problem is that if I Probe against an unknown opponent and see a hand full of burn spells, I'm going to have a bad time.
Should I be Probing T2 on the play to be safe? Is there a threshold of Burn's meta percentage at which I should stop Probing T1 and instead Probe T2?
I don't think Dual Shot can replace Forked Bolt well. Forked Bolt provides great reach against combo and control in game 1. We also have enough early plays that I don't often find myself cursing a Forked Bolt in hand and passing without anything to do when on the play.
Pia and Kiran is an interesting proposition. Hitting double red can be painful (lots of shocking), but Traverse could tutor lands early to get the other colours we need, letting us shock for more red. I don't know if Pia and Kiran are better than Huntmaster, but the Thopters could be great on stalled boards. I'd say they are worth a try.
I was so focussed on man-lands that I forgot about hitting their Breeding Pools. I'm not sure if moon is worth it here. I definitely agree that I like it more on the play than the draw. Shutting them out of double green could be really good.
Took Temur Delver to the shop today for the first time and had a blast. Went 2-2 like so:
Round 1: Loss vs Infect
Round 2: Win vs Soul Sisters
Round 3: Win with Jund
Round 4: Loss vs affinity
Overall the meta looked pretty great for Temur Delver as almost every deck was either linear aggro or combo with the occasional Abzan / kiki chord decks.
That being said, my question is this: can anyone provide some sideboard advice and general matchup strategy against infect? Both online and on paper the matchup feels rough, but Jordan and others have commented that when played correctly the matchup can be won and is favorable.
Against Infect I generally bring in all of my removal. I'm not sure if it is right to bring in Blood Moons to take care of Inkmoth. I'm sure others can weigh in on that. If you have enough cards to take out, maybe.
Edit: I just remembered that we have revelry and grudge. Don't bring in moon. Also, they could Nature's Claim the moon, and you'll be sad.
Thoughtscour can come out because you don't need to be fast here. Against Infect you are definitely not the beatdown. Counters are pretty good if they start to stumble and you can hold up mana (Shoal is a plus in that regard).
Never try to kill their guys pre or mid combat! Following this rule can improve your Infect matchup (assuming you do this, I think it's a fairly common pitfall) considerably. Always go to damage if they attack and you'll only take one or two. Infect plays way more pump spells than we do removal. You won't win that fight. Their pump will resolve, bolt will damage a 4/4, and you'll take extra poison.
Essentially, don't be aggressive. Stay safe and eventually establish a clock. Bolt their creatures on their end step. Using instant speed removal on your own turn is also totally acceptable.
And if so, was it for an open meta, expected linear decks after the Eldrazi go down a peg, or for a specific meta you encountered?
Also if so, what did you remove/what is your current sideboard?
All very good points. I suppose all we really need to grind is Huntmaster. Most midrangey creatures cost too much mana for us to curve adequately anyways. Huntmaster only really works because he is a must-answer top end. I think the biggest issue is the opposite of your Inquisition point: If they take your one-of Huntmaster with Thougtseize, you won't be tutoring a second.
My least favourite part of the card is the land tutor. I see how you might want to tutor a land in a pinch, but Serum Visions does draw fixing fairly well for us. Mulliganing also somewhat takes care of getting lands.
Traverse the Ulenwald out of the sideboard is interesting. I've never played RUG Prowess (I have trouble putting down my Insect Humans for long), but I think the only time you'd want that effect in Delver is when you are switching to the Midrange role. I don't see the tutor being effective whilst tempoing, especially because it requires Delerium to get a threat.
I don't like fancy nonbasics in this deck. I run 18 lands (one more than most) and I still had nightmares of drawing my one-of Kessig Wolf Run out of the sideboard too early when I played it. Colourless doesn't cast my spells. Land light hands are common enough that I consider such lands a serious liability to my manabase.
Toolboxing creatures could be interesting though. You could put one or two Traverse in the board and cut a couple grindy threats from it. The main benefit to the tutor would be to get extra slots out of it. The following sideboard essentially has 4 Huntmasters, 3 Thragtusks, and 3 Scavenging Oozes for consistency purposes. Just don't let your one-of die. Then you're out of luck.
2 Traverse
2 Huntmaster
1 Thragtusk
1 Scavenging Ooze
1 Any other grindy creature not off the top of my head
3 Blood Moon
2 Pyriclasm
2 Destructive Revelry
1 Ancient Grudge
I don't like those ETB destroy target artifact/enchantment creatures. Tutoring for them could really hurt your tempo. I'd stick with Grudge and Revelry.
I think Prowess could make betteruse of Traverse. Pump your creatures and get a threat to seal the game. Getting in for an extra 2 or 3 damage while putting a [whatever one-of curve topper Prowess uses] in your hand could be a real play.
I don't think this card is going to be very effective in this deck.
I imagine its primary purpose would be to draw cards in a grindy game. For this to generate Clues, we need one or more creatures to deal combat damage to a player. The Clues are a mana sink that I don't think we can afford.
This is essentially what needs to happen to draw with this:
Land and untap with a threat
Resolve Ongoing Investigation
Connect with the threat
Have mana open later to sacrifice the Clue
While it could theoretically produce enough card advantage to win you the game, it seems unlikely that it will produce two or even three Clues. Not to mention the fact that you need to sacrifice them too. While you are trying to draw cards, your opponent will be killing the threat you just connected with. As a tempo deck, I think it is more important for us to maintain the board and turn it into damage. This seems like going through too many hoops. As Ashton suggested, Snapcaster Mage does a really clean and concise job of "drawing" cards. For example, flashback a counter to protect another threat. Now you have two threats! Or use Huntmaster. You need a lot of mana for Ongoing Investigation anyways, and you bring them in during matchups in which you'll be hitting a lot of land drops.
I think the best comparison is to Curiosity. Curiosity does have the potential to 2-for-1 you, but this essentially does too. If you cast this but never have a chance to use it, you are effectively down a card. Curiosity is at its best when you have counters up, your opponent is tapped out, or you've probed to confirm that the way is clear. This is safer in that you don't need to be as careful with it, but I think it is too conservative.
On to the secondary purpose. You pay two mana and exile a creature from your graveyard to gain two life. This isn't really relevant in the grindy matchups. Jund and Junk don't care about your life total- they care about theirs. Your life total doesn't really matter against them (please correct me if I am playing this matchup totally wrong). Moreover, Scavenging Ooze does this WAY better. He is an extra threat, grinds nicely, shrinks enemy goyfs, and gains as much life per mana.
How do you guys think Thoughtscour fairs against linear aggro?
Against combo, I can see the appeal of being able to consistently go for a quick Mandrills to clock them or to be able to hold up counters in case an important spell hits the stack and just Thoughtscour if it doesn't, but I'm not sure how good it is against aggro decks.
I find that against aggro decks, I'd rather use some removal/counters on the first couple of turns and sort of Midrange my way into a one-mana-Mandrills with backup than go for an early Thoughtscour trying to land my Mandrills on turn two. I don't think aiming for Mandrills to block early is as viable as simply preventing them from getting a board in the first place. Being able to delve the removal and counters makes Mandrills the same tempo play, but without risking my opponent getting an advantage.
Am I evaluating this properly? I have gone down to two Thoughtscours to make room for more removal.
We can't know exactly what the post-Eldrazi meta will look like (so this last bit may be entirely moot), but I've read a lot of people say it will be linear aggro. The recent uptick in Company and Chord decks make me really like more removal (Forked Bolt is so nice) over the one or two cantrips I dropped. Especially because letting those decks build up a board can make for a nasty stall.
How has the lack of thoughtscours treated you? I'm considering moving in a similar direction. Probably down to 2 from 3 because I don't think I'm ready to give up turn 2 mandrills with denial up.
You have many counterspells, and very little removal. I imagine you just want to be able to take out small creatures before you turn the corner. You don't run any dismembers or roasts in the 75, so large creatures seem hard for you to push past. Has vapour snag helped with pushing damage through after larger creatures come down?
I was really excited when I saw her, but I don't think she fits too well with the current iteration of RUG delver.
It looks like she would be best as a curve topper for a more creature heavy deck. Slam down threats and on turn four drop her for a big push.
I like that she is versitile. If your opponent is playing red, +1 her to get her out of bolt range. If not, make a wolf and have some fun. The problem is that the +1 doesn't help us if we don't have a creature already.
I think she could be really effective in a build with more creatures and around 18 or 19 lands. I'm not sure how low delver will let us put the instant and sorcery count though.
I'm currently running 18 lands for a one-of huntmaster in the main. I like him as a curve topper because he is a sort of nail in the coffin. If my opponent got past all the other threats, they probably don't have the gas to stop huntmaster. I think Arlinn might be able to fill a similar role if more creatures are around. I think she could be effective if you can keep something on board long enough for her to matter.
I want to talk about mulligans for a second (again).
Im not sure if the cockatrice RNG is busted or not. But it seems like most of the time, if Im mulling to less than 7, Im probably mulling at least twice. A few times, I mulled to 0 (gave up) simply because no lands were present through all the mulligans.
Its started to create a fear of mulliganing. Should mulliganing be reserved only for the most extreme situations? Sometimes I have 3-4 lands and some removal/permission, but no threats or cantrips. These hands seem anemic. But I wonder if they are better than mulling to 4 or 5 because of land count.
Again, with cockatrice (m using it to practice this deck), if I dont mana short, I hardcore mana flood. Sometimes drawing lands 3-6 times in a row (and surviving some how for that long).
Is this just an RNG thing, or is it a common occurrence for RUG delver players going the 17 land route?
I went through a similar phase not too long ago. I practice mostly on Xmage, and had some really bad mulligans for a few games. I even pulled up a hypergeometric calculator online to check the probability. With 17 lands, the chances of having no lands in the 7 and none in the 6 is a little below 3% if I recall correctly. Either Cockatrice RNG messed up or you had a spur of extremely bad luck, given that your other hands also lacked mana.
I've gotten into the habit of keeping most functional hands now. I mulligan if the hand doesn't work (no lands, no threats in matchups where they are needed early, etc). I've recently moved to an 18th land to smooth out a one-of Electrolyze I like to play, and the sideboard huntmasters. I mostly like that it gets me to casting two spells a turn a bit earlier, which leaves me with fewer turns of playing a threat and hoping it survives long enough for me to untap. It's probably just psychology, but since adding the 18th land, I've been more willing to mulligan decent 7s in the hope of getting great 6s.
@mnesci: I like minimum 22 blue cards to support Shoal in a grow deck, discussed here. The 1- or 2-drop split depends on what you want to counter. In a metagame full of Terminate effects, I would assume you'd want more value cards like Snapcaster or protection like Simic Charm anyway, which increases your 2-drop count. In a liner aggro metagame, countering one-drops is more important, and you want your speed, so maxing out on Thought Scour is correct. Also remember that as a mana-tight Delver deck, we can't run THAT MANY 2-drops. Our blue curve has to be mostly 1-drops just by nature of the kind of deck we're playing - Delver.
Thanks. That was very helpful. I'll stick with having the standard build for now, and add more value two-drops if I happen to come across a terminate/doom blade infested meta.
Above is Ashton's current list from page 64 for reference within my following question.
How many Blue cards do you guys run to fuel Shoal (of those of you who prefer the Shoal version)? I've been testing how many Shoals to run, and was wondering if it is really plausible to cut any given that we have so many cantrips. I'm starting with 3, but they fit so well into the deck. Delver needs a low land count, which needs a high cantrip count, which easily supports Shoal for 1.
Looking at Ashton's list shows that there are very few CMC 2 Blue cards, which suggests to me that cutting some Shoals may actually be good if we are only using it on 1-drops. He has 10 Blue cards with CMC 2 (counting the other 3 Shoals that you can pitch to the one you want to cast) vs 19 Blue cards with CMC 1. I know that the main targets are Bolt and Path, but what about Terminate and the other CMC 2 removal spells? It sucks to tap out for a threat with Shoal ready to go, and lose to a 2 CMC removal spell. Or, should I just be more conservative and rely on Spell Snare to handle the 2-drops? I really like being able to tap out on turn two though. I'm playing with Young Pyromancer, and tapping out with him is nuts with proper Shoal backup.
So, how many Blue CMC 2 cards should we run for Shoal? If more than 8 (I prefer Pyromancer to Snapcaster because he takes over games), what other 2-drops can we run to fuel Shoal?
TLDR: Why not run a basic island or forest in the basic mountain's (Jordan's most recent sideboard addition) place? It replaces Breeding Pool just as well- if not better when you want a fast Blood Moon, and enable Huntmaster of the Fells about as easily.
I have always run 18 lands in RUG delver. This probably stems from when I was running UR delver. I recently began to test 17 lands, and thus far I have been impressed by the deck's ability to run smoothly, while fitting an extra action card in the deck. Jordan's mention of the two respective land counts when he spoke of basic mountain in his most recent article (part of this was in comments0, has made me very interested in discussing the land.
I hate basic mountain in this deck. I hate it a lot. The reason is two-fold. Basic mountain is nearly useless with and against Blood Moon. Unless you land one of each basic by turn three (or have more basics in hand- a bit unlikely), your Blood Moon will cut you off of a colour. Being cut off of a colour is not fun, and I don't want to build my manabase around cutting myself off of colours. The second part is Simic Charm. UG. You will never cast a Simic Charm with two lands if one of those lands is a basic mountain. NEVER. I love Simic Charm. It is one of the best reasons to play RUG over other URX decks. We often end up on two lands. Therefore, basic mountain is bad.
Now I will talk about Breeding Pool. Breeding Pool is the best and worst land in the deck. How many hands have you kept with a fetch as your only land? If the other cards in the hands consisted of mostly blue and green cards, you probably went to find that one-of Breeding Pool. Let's say you mulled to six and kept fetch, delver, goyf, shoal, visions, denial. That sort of hand has justified running Breeding Pool time and time again for me. This is important for me because I initially hated Breeding Pool. We boast of our Burn matchup to Grixis players who have to fetch, shock; fetch, shock to cast their spells, but Breeding Pool does the same to us! Without that mountain (which kills Simic Charm), Breeding Pool will probably make us shock twice. It also plays quite badly with Blood Moon. I want to get a red shock, a forest, and an island when I land Blood Moon on curve. Breeding Pool makes this impossible when it shows up.
Overall, I would say that Breeding Pool has earned its slot for me due to the tight margins of mana that we run on.
Mountain has not, but I have never given it a chance. It is simply too clunky.
Then Jordan said he put a mountain in his sideboard.
I thought this was a waste of a slot. Why would you want a land that kills one of our best spells? T1 mountain also notably prevents us from playing the highly coveted T2 Hooting Mandrills with Stubborn Denial up. After more thoroughly reading the articles though, I have come to appreciate this idea.
The mountain is said to come in in two scenarios: When you want to land Blood Moon ASAP, and when missing a land drop will get you killed. I can see this being useful against Tron, GBX, decks that try to get away with five colours, and decks that can't use R. The second point applies to aggressive decks that will kill you if you miss a beat.
Now that I understand the rationale behind the basic land, I kind of like it. Having just switched to 17 lands, I can imagine needing an extra to hit early land drops reliably. I think this is most relevant when you board in Huntmaster of the Fells. Our resident four drop has given even my 18 land deck trouble sometimes, so the extra land could be helpful. I won't know until I run more games with 17 lands.
My concerns about Simic Charm being turned off are also gone as long as the Breeding Pool stays in. Adding a land doesn't worsen your mana (unless you keep bad hands because of it). Even if the Breeding Pool comes out, the interactive nature of post-board games makes hitting a third land, and turning Simic Charm back on, more likely.
The part of this that I am most interested in is the role of the mountain to land Blood Moon early. Jordan said that he often takes out Breeding Pool for this purpose. The mountain replaces Breeding Pool because you can't go Breeding Pool, island, forest, Blood Moon. Mountain enables this line. But why stop with mountain? I think that the other basic lands could do an even better job of this. As I said above, I want to get a red shock, a forest, and an island when I land Blood Moon on curve. The downside to this is that you have to shock, while mountain allows your life total to remain intact. But our life total is not that relevant in most of the matchups that call for early Blood Moon. Abzan and Jund spend most of their time not applying pressure, and dedicated control decks (Tron, Grixis, UW) don't know what pressure is. I think the two life is well worth the versatility here. Especially because you are decently likely to draw a shock in the first three lands. The extra island/forest also will tap for the right colour if drawn later.
What do you guys think of changing the basic mountain to a forest or island? Am I still missing something? Also, shout out to anyone who took the time to read that.
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
I have been doing some practice against Burn and find that early Probes make me cringe. I've had games in which not Probing could have kept me alive ling enough to close the game out.
This is only really relevant on the play because most of Burn's T1 plays are iconic. I don't really want to Probe after a Goblin Guide or suspended Rift Bolt.
My problem is that if I Probe against an unknown opponent and see a hand full of burn spells, I'm going to have a bad time.
Should I be Probing T2 on the play to be safe? Is there a threshold of Burn's meta percentage at which I should stop Probing T1 and instead Probe T2?
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
Pia and Kiran is an interesting proposition. Hitting double red can be painful (lots of shocking), but Traverse could tutor lands early to get the other colours we need, letting us shock for more red. I don't know if Pia and Kiran are better than Huntmaster, but the Thopters could be great on stalled boards. I'd say they are worth a try.
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
Against Infect I generally bring in all of my removal. I'm not sure if it is right to bring in Blood Moons to take care of Inkmoth. I'm sure others can weigh in on that. If you have enough cards to take out, maybe.
Edit: I just remembered that we have revelry and grudge. Don't bring in moon. Also, they could Nature's Claim the moon, and you'll be sad.
Thoughtscour can come out because you don't need to be fast here. Against Infect you are definitely not the beatdown. Counters are pretty good if they start to stumble and you can hold up mana (Shoal is a plus in that regard).
Never try to kill their guys pre or mid combat! Following this rule can improve your Infect matchup (assuming you do this, I think it's a fairly common pitfall) considerably. Always go to damage if they attack and you'll only take one or two. Infect plays way more pump spells than we do removal. You won't win that fight. Their pump will resolve, bolt will damage a 4/4, and you'll take extra poison.
Essentially, don't be aggressive. Stay safe and eventually establish a clock. Bolt their creatures on their end step. Using instant speed removal on your own turn is also totally acceptable.
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
Also if so, what did you remove/what is your current sideboard?
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
My least favourite part of the card is the land tutor. I see how you might want to tutor a land in a pinch, but Serum Visions does draw fixing fairly well for us. Mulliganing also somewhat takes care of getting lands.
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
I don't like fancy nonbasics in this deck. I run 18 lands (one more than most) and I still had nightmares of drawing my one-of Kessig Wolf Run out of the sideboard too early when I played it. Colourless doesn't cast my spells. Land light hands are common enough that I consider such lands a serious liability to my manabase.
Toolboxing creatures could be interesting though. You could put one or two Traverse in the board and cut a couple grindy threats from it. The main benefit to the tutor would be to get extra slots out of it. The following sideboard essentially has 4 Huntmasters, 3 Thragtusks, and 3 Scavenging Oozes for consistency purposes. Just don't let your one-of die. Then you're out of luck.
2 Traverse
2 Huntmaster
1 Thragtusk
1 Scavenging Ooze
1 Any other grindy creature not off the top of my head
3 Blood Moon
2 Pyriclasm
2 Destructive Revelry
1 Ancient Grudge
I don't like those ETB destroy target artifact/enchantment creatures. Tutoring for them could really hurt your tempo. I'd stick with Grudge and Revelry.
I think Prowess could make betteruse of Traverse. Pump your creatures and get a threat to seal the game. Getting in for an extra 2 or 3 damage while putting a [whatever one-of curve topper Prowess uses] in your hand could be a real play.
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
I imagine its primary purpose would be to draw cards in a grindy game. For this to generate Clues, we need one or more creatures to deal combat damage to a player. The Clues are a mana sink that I don't think we can afford.
This is essentially what needs to happen to draw with this:
Land and untap with a threat
Resolve Ongoing Investigation
Connect with the threat
Have mana open later to sacrifice the Clue
While it could theoretically produce enough card advantage to win you the game, it seems unlikely that it will produce two or even three Clues. Not to mention the fact that you need to sacrifice them too. While you are trying to draw cards, your opponent will be killing the threat you just connected with. As a tempo deck, I think it is more important for us to maintain the board and turn it into damage. This seems like going through too many hoops. As Ashton suggested, Snapcaster Mage does a really clean and concise job of "drawing" cards. For example, flashback a counter to protect another threat. Now you have two threats! Or use Huntmaster. You need a lot of mana for Ongoing Investigation anyways, and you bring them in during matchups in which you'll be hitting a lot of land drops.
I think the best comparison is to Curiosity. Curiosity does have the potential to 2-for-1 you, but this essentially does too. If you cast this but never have a chance to use it, you are effectively down a card. Curiosity is at its best when you have counters up, your opponent is tapped out, or you've probed to confirm that the way is clear. This is safer in that you don't need to be as careful with it, but I think it is too conservative.
On to the secondary purpose. You pay two mana and exile a creature from your graveyard to gain two life. This isn't really relevant in the grindy matchups. Jund and Junk don't care about your life total- they care about theirs. Your life total doesn't really matter against them (please correct me if I am playing this matchup totally wrong). Moreover, Scavenging Ooze does this WAY better. He is an extra threat, grinds nicely, shrinks enemy goyfs, and gains as much life per mana.
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
Against combo, I can see the appeal of being able to consistently go for a quick Mandrills to clock them or to be able to hold up counters in case an important spell hits the stack and just Thoughtscour if it doesn't, but I'm not sure how good it is against aggro decks.
I find that against aggro decks, I'd rather use some removal/counters on the first couple of turns and sort of Midrange my way into a one-mana-Mandrills with backup than go for an early Thoughtscour trying to land my Mandrills on turn two. I don't think aiming for Mandrills to block early is as viable as simply preventing them from getting a board in the first place. Being able to delve the removal and counters makes Mandrills the same tempo play, but without risking my opponent getting an advantage.
Am I evaluating this properly? I have gone down to two Thoughtscours to make room for more removal.
We can't know exactly what the post-Eldrazi meta will look like (so this last bit may be entirely moot), but I've read a lot of people say it will be linear aggro. The recent uptick in Company and Chord decks make me really like more removal (Forked Bolt is so nice) over the one or two cantrips I dropped. Especially because letting those decks build up a board can make for a nasty stall.
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
You have many counterspells, and very little removal. I imagine you just want to be able to take out small creatures before you turn the corner. You don't run any dismembers or roasts in the 75, so large creatures seem hard for you to push past. Has vapour snag helped with pushing damage through after larger creatures come down?
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
It looks like she would be best as a curve topper for a more creature heavy deck. Slam down threats and on turn four drop her for a big push.
I like that she is versitile. If your opponent is playing red, +1 her to get her out of bolt range. If not, make a wolf and have some fun. The problem is that the +1 doesn't help us if we don't have a creature already.
I think she could be really effective in a build with more creatures and around 18 or 19 lands. I'm not sure how low delver will let us put the instant and sorcery count though.
I'm currently running 18 lands for a one-of huntmaster in the main. I like him as a curve topper because he is a sort of nail in the coffin. If my opponent got past all the other threats, they probably don't have the gas to stop huntmaster. I think Arlinn might be able to fill a similar role if more creatures are around. I think she could be effective if you can keep something on board long enough for her to matter.
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
I went through a similar phase not too long ago. I practice mostly on Xmage, and had some really bad mulligans for a few games. I even pulled up a hypergeometric calculator online to check the probability. With 17 lands, the chances of having no lands in the 7 and none in the 6 is a little below 3% if I recall correctly. Either Cockatrice RNG messed up or you had a spur of extremely bad luck, given that your other hands also lacked mana.
I've gotten into the habit of keeping most functional hands now. I mulligan if the hand doesn't work (no lands, no threats in matchups where they are needed early, etc). I've recently moved to an 18th land to smooth out a one-of Electrolyze I like to play, and the sideboard huntmasters. I mostly like that it gets me to casting two spells a turn a bit earlier, which leaves me with fewer turns of playing a threat and hoping it survives long enough for me to untap. It's probably just psychology, but since adding the 18th land, I've been more willing to mulligan decent 7s in the hope of getting great 6s.
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
Thanks. That was very helpful. I'll stick with having the standard build for now, and add more value two-drops if I happen to come across a terminate/doom blade infested meta.
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
Above is Ashton's current list from page 64 for reference within my following question.
How many Blue cards do you guys run to fuel Shoal (of those of you who prefer the Shoal version)? I've been testing how many Shoals to run, and was wondering if it is really plausible to cut any given that we have so many cantrips. I'm starting with 3, but they fit so well into the deck. Delver needs a low land count, which needs a high cantrip count, which easily supports Shoal for 1.
Looking at Ashton's list shows that there are very few CMC 2 Blue cards, which suggests to me that cutting some Shoals may actually be good if we are only using it on 1-drops. He has 10 Blue cards with CMC 2 (counting the other 3 Shoals that you can pitch to the one you want to cast) vs 19 Blue cards with CMC 1. I know that the main targets are Bolt and Path, but what about Terminate and the other CMC 2 removal spells? It sucks to tap out for a threat with Shoal ready to go, and lose to a 2 CMC removal spell. Or, should I just be more conservative and rely on Spell Snare to handle the 2-drops? I really like being able to tap out on turn two though. I'm playing with Young Pyromancer, and tapping out with him is nuts with proper Shoal backup.
So, how many Blue CMC 2 cards should we run for Shoal? If more than 8 (I prefer Pyromancer to Snapcaster because he takes over games), what other 2-drops can we run to fuel Shoal?
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg