How is this the same? Prog dies to board wipes and sac effects when you have no other creatures in play. Marit Lage dies to StP, any bounce effect (Jace, Karakas, etc.), can be chump blocked by lingering souls, path to exile'd, in addition to any effect that kills Prog. So clearly, the token is much more vulnerable than prog.
If they have an active wasteland theres no way to play around it, other than to play a wasteland of your own to waste their wasteland, forcing the interaction to occur.
Untrue....you can play in response to their wastelands...very dangerous play for them if they wait.
So, the combo is good if your opponent is terrible? That doesn't count as a perk of running ThesDepths. Any competent player would wait for the right opportunity to waste.
you're really trying to argue that the 1-2 extra lands that can hit the grave to pump KotR after you've created a 20/20 is a perk to running this combo? I'm not buying this one. The slight chance this narrow case ends up benefiting you is definitely outweighed by the fact that the ThesDepths combo is more fragile, slow, and narrow.
Talking about fetching the combo cards. (easy to fetch with KOTR, don't need crop rotation)
Ok, I see what you were trying to say now. its still going to require some turns after you play KotR to assemble the combo all the while exposing yourself, all the while they can see it coming from a mile away.
Now that i thought more about it, you don't even need that many pieces to run the dark depths combo. Maybe 1 loam, 2 thespian, and 1 dark depths. loam is always the 61st card. So going this route might actually give you the opportunity to run it.
I wouldn't run 61, I never want to make my deck less consistent. Thespian is not going to be good early since its a mana sink that taps for colorless in a 3 color deck.
I don't get your argument that this combo only works on bad players. You are running knights. You are able to control the land state. You should be running 4 knights regardless.
I don't understand your argument that knight makes this deck predictable. You run knights regardless in any of these decklist. It is there in the deck regardless. No one will know that you are preparing to drop the combo lands. Unless you expose yourself early on.
This combo also goes very well with scryb ranger, a card that can change the game for you a lot of times.
If you drop the combo lands while there is a waste out, that is your fault. This is the same as tapping out for NO knowing they have a daze. Combo requires tight plays and this is one of the situations.
As for loam, no one is saying to run 61 cards. People who usually can't decide on a decklist will pick loam. But the first card to cut for another card is loam, hence the name, 61st card. but with this combo, it gives you a reason to run loam in your 60 .
Overall, i still think the combo is better in maverick than it is in bant.
To clarify points where I think you're missing each other:
-The "Same" = "Same as above" meant he was answering question 4 the same way as question 3, with "ok" - Wasteland and answers to Marit Lage are both conceded difficulties with Depths.
-Loam as "61st" card doesn't mean running 61 cards, just that Loam is nearly good enough to run without Depths, so it's not including a bad option.
-Both of these are trying to do something powerful that can get you 2-for-1'd.
-Neither is fast enough to race combo or fast Aggro, but could (if assembled) beat midrange/control decks.
-Both allow them some outs - Progenitus is more often (not always) easier to race, but much harder to answer.
-Both have some amount of otherwise dead cards - NO probably has fewer, unless the Depths thing is super barebones.
-NO is a 3-4-of, 1-card combo that only requires a Green dude (and you have 4 Hierarch, 4 GSZ, 7-9 fetchlands, natural Arbor + another 6-10 guys); Depths is a 2-card combo that you will very rarely lucksack into, which only makes your deck worse when you increase the count on its pieces, and is only viable when you have an active Knight. This is almost like building a deck with 4 Tezzeret the Seeker running only 1 Foundry/1 Sword as your artifacts.
-There are some game states where this actually seems okay - drop a defensive Knight to stabilize against RUG, and start using EOT activations to go on the offensive (praying they don't have Stifle, Wasteland, or Submerge), or fly over Moat - but the "better than NO" cases seem really really narrow, and the viability of pulling it off hinges almost entirely on having an active Knight of the Reliquary.
I'm not sure there's much more than can be said about this; I think the people who are advocating Depths should try actually running it.
To clarify points where I think you're missing each other:
-The "Same" = "Same as above" meant he was answering question 4 the same way as question 3, with "ok" - Wasteland and answers to Marit Lage are both conceded difficulties with Depths.
-Loam as "61st" card doesn't mean running 61 cards, just that Loam is nearly good enough to run without Depths, so it's not including a bad option.
-Both of these are trying to do something powerful that can get you 2-for-1'd.
-Neither is fast enough to race combo or fast Aggro, but could (if assembled) beat midrange/control decks.
-Both allow them some outs - Progenitus is more often (not always) easier to race, but much harder to answer.
-Both have some amount of otherwise dead cards - NO probably has fewer, unless the Depths thing is super barebones.
-NO is a 3-4-of, 1-card combo that only requires a Green dude (and you have 4 Hierarch, 4 GSZ, 7-9 fetchlands, natural Arbor + another 6-10 guys); Depths is a 2-card combo that you will very rarely lucksack into, which only makes your deck worse when you increase the count on its pieces, and is only viable when you have an active Knight. This is almost like building a deck with 4 Tezzeret the Seeker running only 1 Foundry/1 Sword as your artifacts.
-There are some game states where this actually seems okay - drop a defensive Knight to stabilize against RUG, and start using EOT activations to go on the offensive (praying they don't have Stifle, Wasteland, or Submerge), or fly over Moat - but the "better than NO" cases seem really really narrow, and the viability of pulling it off hinges almost entirely on having an active Knight of the Reliquary.
I'm not sure there's much more than can be said about this; I think the people who are advocating Depths should try actually running it.
So having 2 creatures who are resistant to different answers of each other gives you more options to choose from and decide which clock is better suited in certain match ups. In any case I think it'd be fun to drop a 20/20 flying, have it StP'ed, giving you 20 life and follow up the next turn with a 10/10 protection from everything. In the end it's just a crazy thought that crossed my mind..
I crossed out things that I don't think realistically see play in Legacy. Also I think its of note that the frequency at which people run some cards vs others. Most decks playing white run 4 StP whereas things like board wipes are going to be 1-2 ofs and often relegated to the sideboard.
You need to go play a stock GSZ Bant list. You're fundamentally misunderstanding why one would play NO, how NO loses, and what Jace does for the deck.
You can't just say "If I have X in play, what could go wrong?" and then worry about Will O' The Wisp ruining your day. As rlesko noted, you're placing 4-ofs like StP next to niche sideboard cards like Perish (which, incidentally, will take out your Knight before you're done tinkering your lands). As rlesko didn't note, you're also ignoring the comparative viability of "having X in play," which is the most important difference.
Seriously, there's a reason people don't play a set of Tezzerets with a pair of tutorable 1-ofs for a combo kill: that's awful, it's super-vulnerable, it's terribly slow, and it means running terrible cards instead of good cards that do what the rest of your deck is doing.
Natural Order is a 1-card combo that makes other (usually non-blue) grindy/midrange match-ups almost un-losable when you see it. When those matches are plentiful, it's a pretty good route to take. Depths is a "1-card combo" insofar as Knight can do the whole thing. You've got more Knights than NOs, and many more counting GSZ. But you have to cast and protect the best creature in your deck for 2 turns, while hacking away 2 of your lands, spending +2 mana, and the outcome is a worse monster which the most widely-played grindy decks in the format have maindeck answers for (they incidentally all have answers for Knight).
Llawan is occasionally played as an anti-Merfolk sideboard bullet, but yeah, I don't get the Nevinyrral's Disk reference. Heck, I don't even get the Damnation reference (I only remember seeing it in the fringe Tezz Control).
Note that The Tabernacle destroys guys according to its Oracle text, so Marit Lage always gets off scot-free. (Magus of the Tabernacle forces sacrifices, just like you think it should.)
Llawan is occasionally played as an anti-Merfolk sideboard bullet, but yeah, I don't get the Nevinyrral's Disk reference. Heck, I don't even get the Damnation reference (I only remember seeing it in the fringe Tezz Control).
Note that The Tabernacle destroys guys according to its Oracle text, so Marit Lage always gets off scot-free. (Magus of the Tabernacle forces sacrifices, just like you think it should.)
Yea, I didn't clarify what cards are used instead, just felt the need to point out that the comparison was a little bit unfair. My stance is very clear though: the combo is way too hard to set up and the token is way too easy to deal with to really push this in a regular Bant shell. I just don't see how its an improvement from NO-Prog.
Yeah, I was just thinking from the top of my head: 'What answers are there to both these cards?' So naturally, with Unsummon I meant the unsummon effect, but Jace, the Mindsculptor, Echoing Truth, Chains of Vapor etc. also do this and are played more often of course.
Yea, I see what you did there, but the problem is combo will run Chain of Vapor, controll-ish runs Jace, and some others Echoing Truth so the 20/20 is weak versus a number of different decks already. If the token was hexproof/indestructible/not able to be sac'd (Sigarda, Host of Herons on crack) I'd be all for this combo, but there are just too many ways to deal with it in peoples decks so it makes me think its not worth the effort.
Obviously if you tested it that would trump any speculation, so I encourage you to do so, but at face value it doesn't seem like its worth the inclusion.
Here is what I have come with. I went with a more control build. All advice is greatly appreciated, especially if I am missing some key aspect that makes my deck inferior. So far in testing it struggles in game one (the deck is trying to do too much at once I know), but I can transform into more control post-sideboard or bring in Mom to turn into a more maverick style deck. Also GoST is amazing in this deck, I would take out a KotR before a geist.
Yea, I see what you did there, but the problem is combo will run Chain of Vapor, controll-ish runs Jace, and some others Echoing Truth so the 20/20 is weak versus a number of different decks already. If the token was hexproof/indestructible/not able to be sac'd (Sigarda, Host of Herons on crack) I'd be all for this combo, but there are just too many ways to deal with it in peoples decks so it makes me think its not worth the effort.
Obviously if you tested it that would trump any speculation, so I encourage you to do so, but at face value it doesn't seem like its worth the inclusion.
I think your argument is moot regarding the problems you would face against combo and control decks.
First, Chain of vapors, echoing truths are not ran in main decks. This means these decks will bring it in game 2 against you.
In game 2, you would be foolish to play either the NO package, the dark depths package against a combo and control deck.
So i guess both players are really bad or trying to next level one another.
My main point was that if Progenitus dodges certain answers, and Marit Lage Token opposite answers, wouldn't it make sense to see what your opponent has and then come with the correct play?
No, it doesn't make sense. Again, go play an actual Bant deck for a few dozen matches, then try putting NO in and play some more.
Most decks have 0 answers to a resolved Progenitus, some will have a few, but they will often never see any of them in the games you actually cast it. The decks with Terminus/Verdict can answer Marit Lage much more easily anyway. If I had both combos available, for some terrible deckbuilding oversight on my part, I would still prefer NO.
For example, when I play Esper Stoneblade and I have to go up against Progenitus I board in Supreme Verdict and Perish. I actually dislike Swords to Plowshares in this match up as you cannot remove the green creature in response to Natural Order because it's part of the casting cost. And it does nothing once Progenitus resolves.
That is certainly wrong. You board out StP against a Knight of the Reliquary deck?
I like the idea of loading up the 3 slot with powerful 3 cost creatures: kotr clique and Geist. Interesting karakas can save Geist if there is a guy in the way and still connect for 4 in the air.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Never tell me the odds"
Legacy: GRB Belcher UUB Merfolk RRR Burn GWU Bant Walker RB Goblins
I'm in a meta full of Junk and Maverick so NO is the way to go. I am unsure if I'd rather keep my Stoneforges or go with a more traditional Zenith plan. I feel like if I do run into grindier decks then the Stoneforge plan is better as a complement to NO.
I'm in a meta full of Junk and Maverick so NO is the way to go. I am unsure if I'd rather keep my Stoneforges or go with a more traditional Zenith plan. I feel like if I do run into grindier decks then the Stoneforge plan is better as a complement to NO.
Junk and Maverick tend to do pretty well against stoneforge and equipment. They often run their own, have strong removal (plow, decay, etc), maze of ith, and MoM which do a good job of blanking your equipment. In those matches the hard-to-stop, over-the-top NO play supported by the consistency and selection of zenith is quite good.
I have been game planning against fair decks the last two weeks and running the following to 3-1 each time:
If you think there will be a strong combo presence then move 3 forces to the main deck. In game 1 against decks with counters, try to get a voice in play, and then when you go to NO, sac a different green creature. If they have the counter they will use it, but you will still be in a reasonable position with the new token and voice still in play. You have to play tight against deathblade. My loss last weekend was at least partially the result of two play errors on my part which allowed the deathblade back into the game with his card advantage engines. I hope this is helpful.
I agree that the Stoneforge package isn't great against Junk, Maverick, etc. I find it quite useful in matches with grindy U and B decks where your NO rarely resolves or Perish is a major player. Access to Swords out of the board and Jitte also give you versatility that even Zenith can be hard pressed to match.
Which decks are you thinking about as grindy U and B? Esper, Deathblade and Shardless BUG? UB Chalice-Tezz? Something else? Bant stoneblade is my default deck when I don't have a reason to play something else, so I would be happy to give some input if you are curious about specific cards or matchups. I will say the one time I mashed stoneforge and NO together the deck was good at presenting unique threats and pressuring the opponents, but sweepers and card advantage from the opponent were, as ever, a problem. Looking back, I would only run that pairing in a very specific metagame.
A couple miracle decks, junk, maverick, and a Shardless BUG. Combo is scarce but randomly shows up so I don't want to be a dog to it. I usually play some sort of Stoneblade variant, switching between Deathblade and Bant at the moment. I felt like NO would give me an easy out to the fair decks and that Stoneforge gave me a good out to the grindy ones.
I felt like NO would give me an easy out to the fair decks and that Stoneforge gave me a good out to the grindy ones.
What are these grindy, unfair decks and these fair, nongrindy decks?
I suppose that decks with 5/6+ Goyfs might make Batterskull look bad and NO good, and really-fast-but-not-actually-unfair decks (Goblins? Burn?) might make SFM look better, though that's kinda the opposite of what you said.
I don't think they actually do a good job supplementing each other, but rather NO (often) wins matches where Stoneforge would have been good. I don't think they do well together, and makes the placement of Dryad Arbor pretty awkward.
I would posit that GSZ does a far better job aiding the NO plan (acceleration + better Dryad Arbor) and does a much better job shoring up other matches with the GSZ package (Teeg, Knight->Karakas).
That isn't really an argument for the Zenith build (could be that SFM is better enough in grindy matches by itself) or not to run NO (could be strong regardless of how they do/don't work together), but NO is much more synergistic in the GSZ builds.
Fair GSZ decks like Maverick and Junk, grindy Miracle, D&T, and BUG decks, and a splash of combo. There are no Goblin decks, RUG Delver, or Stoneblade decks in the local meta.
Fair GSZ decks like Maverick and Junk, grindy Miracle, D&T, and BUG decks, and a splash of combo. There are no Goblin decks, RUG Delver, or Stoneblade decks in the local meta.
I'm not sure that distinction gets very far.
I would def. maindeck NO in that meta - no RUG Delver (and no Jund = fewer Lily?) is a nice place to be. Board a couple Geists and Needles (for Tops and DnT) and get busy.
I can usually stick with my gameplan and that is to beat face with knights. but when the board gets stale, you gsz your dark depths and thespian and activate on their EOT. you do this with your scryb ranger.
then they have a big fatty they gotta deal with, which they usually can't.
The only cards i cut are 1 maze of ith for the dark depth 1 wasteland for thespian. and 1 life from the loam for the 61st card.
I can usually stick with my gameplan and that is to beat face with knights. but when the board gets stale, you gsz your dark depths and thespian and activate on their EOT. you do this with your scryb ranger.
Are you actively testing this, or just wrote up a list? I think everyone knows what the cards would do, and when. The two questions, in my mind, are, "What are these 'stale' board states where active Knight is letting you down?" and "Is the potential advantage really worth the downgrade of Wasteland and Maze (which can both be incredibly impactful alone) to two nearly-always-do-nothings which are only good when double-tuttored?"
I would cut Loam - as executing the combo depends so heavily on the ability to tutor up (gsz->)knight->lands, the random 1-of is not doing anything for you. If the active-Knight-can't-get-there scenario is rare enough, wasteland on the off turn is really rare, and happening upon your Loam will almost never happen.
It's a fine card, and if you wanted to play it in any Bant list that would be okay, but I think it will do ~nothing in aiding the Depths plan.
Are you actively testing this, or just wrote up a list? I think everyone knows what the cards would do, and when. The two questions, in my mind, are, "What are these 'stale' board states where active Knight is letting you down?" and "Is the potential advantage really worth the downgrade of Wasteland and Maze (which can both be incredibly impactful alone) to two nearly-always-do-nothings which are only good when double-tuttored?"
I would cut Loam - as executing the combo depends so heavily on the ability to tutor up (gsz->)knight->lands, the random 1-of is not doing anything for you. If the active-Knight-can't-get-there scenario is rare enough, wasteland on the off turn is really rare, and happening upon your Loam will almost never happen.
It's a fine card, and if you wanted to play it in any Bant list that would be okay, but I think it will do ~nothing in aiding the Depths plan.
I've been testing the against maverick and patriot. I also tested against Omnitel but that matchup is moot on these cards.
What I mean by stale board state is when you can't attack cuz of blockers such as mom.
Loam I know is not needed but I don't mind seeing it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Huh? This literally makes no sense.
So, the combo is good if your opponent is terrible? That doesn't count as a perk of running ThesDepths. Any competent player would wait for the right opportunity to waste.
Ok, I see what you were trying to say now. its still going to require some turns after you play KotR to assemble the combo all the while exposing yourself, all the while they can see it coming from a mile away.
I wouldn't run 61, I never want to make my deck less consistent. Thespian is not going to be good early since its a mana sink that taps for colorless in a 3 color deck.
I don't get your argument that this combo only works on bad players. You are running knights. You are able to control the land state. You should be running 4 knights regardless.
I don't understand your argument that knight makes this deck predictable. You run knights regardless in any of these decklist. It is there in the deck regardless. No one will know that you are preparing to drop the combo lands. Unless you expose yourself early on.
This combo also goes very well with scryb ranger, a card that can change the game for you a lot of times.
If you drop the combo lands while there is a waste out, that is your fault. This is the same as tapping out for NO knowing they have a daze. Combo requires tight plays and this is one of the situations.
As for loam, no one is saying to run 61 cards. People who usually can't decide on a decklist will pick loam. But the first card to cut for another card is loam, hence the name, 61st card. but with this combo, it gives you a reason to run loam in your 60 .
Overall, i still think the combo is better in maverick than it is in bant.
-The "Same" = "Same as above" meant he was answering question 4 the same way as question 3, with "ok" - Wasteland and answers to Marit Lage are both conceded difficulties with Depths.
-Loam as "61st" card doesn't mean running 61 cards, just that Loam is nearly good enough to run without Depths, so it's not including a bad option.
-Both of these are trying to do something powerful that can get you 2-for-1'd.
-Neither is fast enough to race combo or fast Aggro, but could (if assembled) beat midrange/control decks.
-Both allow them some outs - Progenitus is more often (not always) easier to race, but much harder to answer.
-Both have some amount of otherwise dead cards - NO probably has fewer, unless the Depths thing is super barebones.
-NO is a 3-4-of, 1-card combo that only requires a Green dude (and you have 4 Hierarch, 4 GSZ, 7-9 fetchlands, natural Arbor + another 6-10 guys); Depths is a 2-card combo that you will very rarely lucksack into, which only makes your deck worse when you increase the count on its pieces, and is only viable when you have an active Knight. This is almost like building a deck with 4 Tezzeret the Seeker running only 1 Foundry/1 Sword as your artifacts.
-There are some game states where this actually seems okay - drop a defensive Knight to stabilize against RUG, and start using EOT activations to go on the offensive (praying they don't have Stifle, Wasteland, or Submerge), or fly over Moat - but the "better than NO" cases seem really really narrow, and the viability of pulling it off hinges almost entirely on having an active Knight of the Reliquary.
I'm not sure there's much more than can be said about this; I think the people who are advocating Depths should try actually running it.
This combo works so much better with MOMs.
I crossed out things that I don't think realistically see play in Legacy. Also I think its of note that the frequency at which people run some cards vs others. Most decks playing white run 4 StP whereas things like board wipes are going to be 1-2 ofs and often relegated to the sideboard.
You need to go play a stock GSZ Bant list. You're fundamentally misunderstanding why one would play NO, how NO loses, and what Jace does for the deck.
You can't just say "If I have X in play, what could go wrong?" and then worry about Will O' The Wisp ruining your day. As rlesko noted, you're placing 4-ofs like StP next to niche sideboard cards like Perish (which, incidentally, will take out your Knight before you're done tinkering your lands). As rlesko didn't note, you're also ignoring the comparative viability of "having X in play," which is the most important difference.
Seriously, there's a reason people don't play a set of Tezzerets with a pair of tutorable 1-ofs for a combo kill: that's awful, it's super-vulnerable, it's terribly slow, and it means running terrible cards instead of good cards that do what the rest of your deck is doing.
Natural Order is a 1-card combo that makes other (usually non-blue) grindy/midrange match-ups almost un-losable when you see it. When those matches are plentiful, it's a pretty good route to take. Depths is a "1-card combo" insofar as Knight can do the whole thing. You've got more Knights than NOs, and many more counting GSZ. But you have to cast and protect the best creature in your deck for 2 turns, while hacking away 2 of your lands, spending +2 mana, and the outcome is a worse monster which the most widely-played grindy decks in the format have maindeck answers for (they incidentally all have answers for Knight).
Llawan is occasionally played as an anti-Merfolk sideboard bullet, but yeah, I don't get the Nevinyrral's Disk reference. Heck, I don't even get the Damnation reference (I only remember seeing it in the fringe Tezz Control).
Note that The Tabernacle destroys guys according to its Oracle text, so Marit Lage always gets off scot-free. (Magus of the Tabernacle forces sacrifices, just like you think it should.)
Yea, I didn't clarify what cards are used instead, just felt the need to point out that the comparison was a little bit unfair. My stance is very clear though: the combo is way too hard to set up and the token is way too easy to deal with to really push this in a regular Bant shell. I just don't see how its an improvement from NO-Prog.
Yea, I see what you did there, but the problem is combo will run Chain of Vapor, controll-ish runs Jace, and some others Echoing Truth so the 20/20 is weak versus a number of different decks already. If the token was hexproof/indestructible/not able to be sac'd (Sigarda, Host of Herons on crack) I'd be all for this combo, but there are just too many ways to deal with it in peoples decks so it makes me think its not worth the effort.
Obviously if you tested it that would trump any speculation, so I encourage you to do so, but at face value it doesn't seem like its worth the inclusion.
3 Tropical Island
2 Savannah
2 Tundra
3 Flooded Strand
4 Windswept Heath
3 Misty Rainforest
2 Karakas
2 Island
1 Forest
1 Plains
Creatures: 21
4 Noble Hierarch
2 Scavenging Ooze
2 Scryb Ranger
2 Qasali Pridemage
3 Vendilion Clique
3 Geist of Saint Traft
3 Knight of the Reliquary
1 Venser, Shaper Savant
1 Gaddock Teeg
2 Force of Will
4 Swords to Plowshares
2 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
3 Brainstorm
2 Umezawa's Jitte
3 Green Sun's Zenith
2 Force of Will
3 Spell Pierce
3 Rest in Peace
3 Mother of Runes
3 Stifle
1 Flusterstorm
I think your argument is moot regarding the problems you would face against combo and control decks.
First, Chain of vapors, echoing truths are not ran in main decks. This means these decks will bring it in game 2 against you.
In game 2, you would be foolish to play either the NO package, the dark depths package against a combo and control deck.
So i guess both players are really bad or trying to next level one another.
No, it doesn't make sense. Again, go play an actual Bant deck for a few dozen matches, then try putting NO in and play some more.
Most decks have 0 answers to a resolved Progenitus, some will have a few, but they will often never see any of them in the games you actually cast it. The decks with Terminus/Verdict can answer Marit Lage much more easily anyway. If I had both combos available, for some terrible deckbuilding oversight on my part, I would still prefer NO.
That is certainly wrong. You board out StP against a Knight of the Reliquary deck?
Legacy:
GRB Belcher
UUB Merfolk
RRR Burn
GWU Bant Walker
RB Goblins
Junk and Maverick tend to do pretty well against stoneforge and equipment. They often run their own, have strong removal (plow, decay, etc), maze of ith, and MoM which do a good job of blanking your equipment. In those matches the hard-to-stop, over-the-top NO play supported by the consistency and selection of zenith is quite good.
I have been game planning against fair decks the last two weeks and running the following to 3-1 each time:
4x Noble Hierarch
1x Gaddock Teeg
3x Knight of the Reliquary
2x Qasali Pridemage
1x Scavenging Ooze
3x Vendilion Clique
2x Voice of Resurgence
1x Tarmogoyf
1x Rhox War Monk
1x Progenitus
Instants [8]
4x Brainstorm
4x Swords to Plowshares
Sorceries [7]
4x Green Sun's Zenith
3x Natural Order
1x Sensei's Divining Top
Planeswalkers [3]
3x Jace, the Mind Sculptor
1x Karakas
1x Maze of Ith
1x Forest
1x island
1x plains
2x Savannah
2x Tropical Island
2x Tundra
2x Wasteland
4x Misty Rainforest
4x Windswept Heath
1x Dryad Arbor
1x Divert
1x Garruk Relentless
1x Empyrial Archangel
1x Surgical Extraction
3x Force of Will
1x Flusterstorm
2x Leyline of Sanctity
1x Ethersworn Canonist
1x Enlightened Tutor
1x Bojuka Bog
1x Detention Sphere
1x Tormod's Crypt
If you think there will be a strong combo presence then move 3 forces to the main deck. In game 1 against decks with counters, try to get a voice in play, and then when you go to NO, sac a different green creature. If they have the counter they will use it, but you will still be in a reasonable position with the new token and voice still in play. You have to play tight against deathblade. My loss last weekend was at least partially the result of two play errors on my part which allowed the deathblade back into the game with his card advantage engines. I hope this is helpful.
What are these grindy, unfair decks and these fair, nongrindy decks?
I suppose that decks with 5/6+ Goyfs might make Batterskull look bad and NO good, and really-fast-but-not-actually-unfair decks (Goblins? Burn?) might make SFM look better, though that's kinda the opposite of what you said.
I don't think they actually do a good job supplementing each other, but rather NO (often) wins matches where Stoneforge would have been good. I don't think they do well together, and makes the placement of Dryad Arbor pretty awkward.
I would posit that GSZ does a far better job aiding the NO plan (acceleration + better Dryad Arbor) and does a much better job shoring up other matches with the GSZ package (Teeg, Knight->Karakas).
That isn't really an argument for the Zenith build (could be that SFM is better enough in grindy matches by itself) or not to run NO (could be strong regardless of how they do/don't work together), but NO is much more synergistic in the GSZ builds.
I'm not sure that distinction gets very far.
I would def. maindeck NO in that meta - no RUG Delver (and no Jund = fewer Lily?) is a nice place to be. Board a couple Geists and Needles (for Tops and DnT) and get busy.
4 knights of the reliquary
3 vendillion clique
2 qasali pridemage
4 noble hierarch
1 scavenging ooze
1 scryb ranger
lands
1 dark depths
1 thespian stage
1 flooded strand
3 windswept heath
3 tropical island
2 wasteland
1 plains
1 island
1 forest
2 tundra
1 savannah
4 misty rainforest
1 karakas
4 brainstorm
4 swords to plowshares
4 force of will
3 spell pierce
other
1 ponder
3 jace the mind sculptor
1 life from the loam
4 green sun's zenith
I can usually stick with my gameplan and that is to beat face with knights. but when the board gets stale, you gsz your dark depths and thespian and activate on their EOT. you do this with your scryb ranger.
then they have a big fatty they gotta deal with, which they usually can't.
The only cards i cut are 1 maze of ith for the dark depth 1 wasteland for thespian. and 1 life from the loam for the 61st card.
Are you actively testing this, or just wrote up a list? I think everyone knows what the cards would do, and when. The two questions, in my mind, are, "What are these 'stale' board states where active Knight is letting you down?" and "Is the potential advantage really worth the downgrade of Wasteland and Maze (which can both be incredibly impactful alone) to two nearly-always-do-nothings which are only good when double-tuttored?"
I would cut Loam - as executing the combo depends so heavily on the ability to tutor up (gsz->)knight->lands, the random 1-of is not doing anything for you. If the active-Knight-can't-get-there scenario is rare enough, wasteland on the off turn is really rare, and happening upon your Loam will almost never happen.
It's a fine card, and if you wanted to play it in any Bant list that would be okay, but I think it will do ~nothing in aiding the Depths plan.
I've been testing the against maverick and patriot. I also tested against Omnitel but that matchup is moot on these cards.
What I mean by stale board state is when you can't attack cuz of blockers such as mom.
Loam I know is not needed but I don't mind seeing it.