LIke I said, we must play at a different power level, because whenever I play, there will 100% be creatures on the board within the firt 3 turns.
I do agree that it is miles better then Bringer of the Black Down.
I would define a pet card as a card that you know isn't good enough to be in that specific deck, has little synergy with the rest of the deck, but you play annyway. I think most people would agree with me when saying Jace isn't good enough to be played in MOST commander decks, and certainly not in this one.
Actually Jace is not played in Cedh, non of the top-decks are running him.
Ofcourse he's better when you have creatures laying around to block, but we're arguing over playing him in Lands.dec, in which he doesn't belong, because we're not a typical control deck that runs 6-10 Creature-wrath's, or a Stax deck that locks everything down, or an extra turns deck, or a superfriends deck,... For sure he will be better in any of those decks, can we at least agree on that?
To me it seems to boil down to our differences in playgroups. Jace would'nt make it around 1 Cycle where I play, except for after a COA wrath. Can we agree that 2UU for 1 Brainstorm (sometimes 2) is just bad? Because if so, Jace would be bad in my meta.
I don't think we play at different power-levels, just different metas. I also said that Jace TMS is bad in cEDH, kinda like how Jace TMS is hard to tap-out for in Modern.
Jace is never just 2UU for only one Brainstorm when I play. Yes, I agree with you that 2UU for Brainstorm is poor. But since I always get more than that, I will continue to play Jace. Brainstorm synergizes extremely well in my shuffle and tutor heavy deck. It's better than getting a land back each turn.
However, if you can't ever get more value than one Brainstorm, I can see why you wouldn't play it. If Jace TMS can't make one round in your group, why bother with Wrenn other than just to try new cards?
The thing is it is debatable wether Brainstorm is better then getting a land back, espcially accounting for the difference in mana. I'm not saying Wrenn is definitely better, I'm unsure, I just think Jace is not good enough, not for me to play at least.
Even 2UU for 2 Brainstorms is not good enough I believe, however, you play what you play, I can see that in a slower meta, Jace could be better, not in mine though. I'm going to try Wrenn out if I get one, unsure about the power lvl.
So this guy got spoiled. From now on, Golos will probably be the go-to-guy for new Lands.dec players. But those in the know, understand how gamebreaking a Planar Cleansing is in the command zone.
You'll will probably get laughed at for sticking with Child of Alara instead. Heck, when I tell people I'm running a Lands.dec, they always ask how come I'm not using Windgrace or Omnath.
Golos does seem like a great add for the 99. I might even build an entirely separate 99 with Golos at the helm. It would be a completely different build and I would get to actually get to play Sol Ring and Mana Crypt.
This is also another interesting card. It's kinda like a Valakut that you wouldn't need Prismatic Omen. And if you have Prismatic Omen, you could even Scapeshift for this and Valakut. It's always nice to have a back-up plan for when a gate gets exiled. I know people suggest Riftsweeper, but that has always been a non-starter for me.
About back-up plans, Avenger of Zendikar has been a monster for me lately.
On turn 7, I played an Avenger for 8 plants. Opponent on my immediate left senses trouble and steals Avenger with a Dragonlord Silumgar.
On turn 8, I played Jace, the Mind Sculptor and bounced Silumgar. Then resolve a Splendid Reclamation for 3 fetchlands and a cycle land. My plants had 8x +1/+1 counters and it was game.
Jace TMS + Avenger = Best buddies from Worldwake.
I completely agree with you on Golos. The reason why COA Lands.dec is so good, lies with the fact that people can't (or seldomly) interact with lands, but we can, so we can keep on blowing up the board almost no downside, while demolishing opponents' resources, turn after turn.
Not a big fan of Field of the Dead, best case scenario you get like, I don't know, 15 2/2's? Which sounds underwhelming to me, and doesn't seem worth it.
But let me know how it runs, if you choose to try it out
While I agree that Avenger is a very good card, a very good finisher, and I run him in a lot of my green decks. I don't like playing popular game-finishers. Everyone has lost to Avenger at one point or another. I find it much more satisfying to win with Maze's end, Inkmoth Nexus, Valakut or Marit Lage.
To each their own ofcourse, everyone enjoys different things, I've just seen one too many Avengers in my day ^^
I don't have a defined meta. I just show up to 1 of 3 different LGS to play depending on the day I have available. Lately, my opponents have mostly been unable to recover from just the first Child trigger. It's just the luck of how the pods assemble. I can see how an even more recurrable Child would shut people out.