Can't you Level up only as a sorcery? For a deck that plans on winning through beats I dunno if you wanna take turns off trying to pump this. I feel like a lot of gameplay is going to bring it to level 1-2 and then you'll need a few open mana to try and level it up so you can activate it again if they respond to the level up to give it instant proof. That's a lot of wasted effort when you should be developing a board and denying them an out to you're creatures.
Can't you Level up only as a sorcery? For a deck that plans on winning through beats I dunno if you wanna take turns off trying to pump this. I feel like a lot of gameplay is going to bring it to level 1-2 and then you'll need a few open mana to try and level it up so you can activate it again if they respond to the level up to give it instant proof. That's a lot of wasted effort when you should be developing a board and denying them an out to you're creatures.
You just said all I was thinking.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Decks played: Modern:
0 Affinity;
URG Delver
URGW Countercats
(Here you can find some video contents about Countercats and Temur Delver decks)
You play it as a 2/1 for one mana. Stop. You play your game, and when you’re out of cards you pump it.
Agreed. So many of our cards cost 1 mana anyway that it should be easy enough to pump a spare mana into this and still hold up Bolt or Spell Pierce or whatever.
For those of us who've cubed with Student of Warfare (or better yet, Warden of the First Tree), you see that it's not an all in one shot type of thing. You don't level up unless you have nothing better to do. But it's an eventual must-answer threat that comes down T1, starts poking, and then grows into a beast. And again, lategame against BGx or whatever, this is going to be great. It grows bigger than most Goyfs eventually, doesn't fold to grave hate, and as a top deck in a late game, attacks as a Progenitus the turn after you play it. It's susceptible to Liliana and any other edict effects, and wraths, but then so is everything else we've ever played in this slot anyway. Super pumped to play it.
EDIT - Say it takes until T4 to pump this into a 4/4. Let's also assume you've kept the ground clear for it. So by the time you're attacking for 4, you've already attacked for 2 each on turns 2 and 3. Compare to Mandrills, which comes down turn 2 if everything works out right. So turn 3 you attack for 4, which equals the damage output of an unpumped Hexdrinker until that point. But more likely, we're casting Mandrills on turn 3, which means it's 4 damage behind in the scenario I've laid out. Obviously there are deviations from this, but I think this is an example of what they call "additive subtraction."
Quote from Maro »
To explain, imagine I made a vanilla creature (this is design so creative hasn't seen it yet):
Bear on Steroids
1G
Creature – Bear
3/4
If I showed that around, I'd probably get pretty good responses. We've only done one card with the same cost and stats before (Plant Elemental from Portal) and it required you to sacrifice a Forest. Now imagine I tweak the card:
Geeky Bear on Steroids
1G
Creature – Bear
If you control at least ten artifacts, CARDNAME gains trample.
3/4
If I show this card around, I'm going to get a lot fewer positive responses. People will focus on the condition about ten artifacts, and many will come to the conclusion that there isn't really a deck for this card.
I think folks are underrating a 2/1 that comes down turn 1 in a deck that would rather cast a threat than a cantrip on turn 1. This gives us 8 creatures to play on turn 1, allowing us to hold out cantrips for later, when we have a better idea what we might need. And, unless they deal with it, we get to start smashing on turn 2.
And think about dodging grave hate. How many times have you played against Tron and got the Goyf on board or the Mandrills in your hand wrecked by a maindeck Relic of Progenitus?
I'm not saying that this card is a panacea or launches us to tier 0. But I think it's totally a real card that we ought to test with. My suspicion is that it's straight up better than Nimble Mongoose, and that the benefits over Hooting Mandrills will outweigh the drawbacks. It's going to necessitate changing the deck around, but it gets rid of Thought Scour, makes grave hate questionable at best against us, starts attacking on turn 2, and gets hard to answer, and then almost impossible in the late game.
I can't say I'm pleased to see you and must warn you I may have to do something about it.
EDH: UGEdric
Pauper: URDelver
Modern: UGRDelver
Draft my cube: Eric's 390 Unpowered
The fact is that a 2/1 for :G: is all but good for us. Narnam Renegade has already been used here and dismissed as not enough. And it started even above a 2/1 being a 2/3 deathtouch so it blocked and attacked very well. This can't even block an unpumped monastery swiftspear. I still see mandrills the best option.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Decks played: Modern:
0 Affinity;
URG Delver
URGW Countercats
(Here you can find some video contents about Countercats and Temur Delver decks)
Hexdrinker isn't a 2/1 for G. It's a 2/1 for G that in the midgame becomes our best threat against almost any deck. Narnam Renegade was specifically good against some archetypes and underwhelming against others. This one is, on the other hand, a well-rounded card which is very decent in the early (2/1 on turn one against Combo is definitely a fair threat) and it recycles itself as a grindy card against Control&Midrange, which Narnam WASN'T. That's the main difference.
I will probably try out a build with creature base being:
4 Delver
4 Mongoose
4 Goyf
2 Snapcaster
Drop a turn 1 creature, don't have to put extra ressources to make it grow, protect it, get within bolt-snap-bolt range. Tempo doesn't really have a backup "go long" plan. Either plan A works or we lose.
The questions I am asking myself right now, is which of the usual cards are still valid.
Blood Moon in SB?
4 Remand main?
Would Trickbind work nowadays? (Since Stifle isn't a legal option)
Play Shoal? (Trickbind is another 2cmc to pitch if need be)
Play the new Force?
17-18 lands?
Keep the deck as much at instant speed as possible? (Don't worry about Goyf, the opponent has card types in their graveyard too)
I made some calculation about the Metagame share of the last few big events. I looked for the best decks overall, and the strategies we're good (or bad) against.
One thing I dislike the most is the way people are reacting to the massive presence of UR Phoenix and Dredge in the top tier. While Surgical Extraction doesn't do much against us (sometimes can be very annoying, but certainly not a card meant against Tempo strategies), Relic of Progenitus, Nihil Spellbomb and Rest in Peace are everywhere. Maindeck. I'm kinda pissed at how good they are at handling our deck.
The fact is that a 2/1 for :G: is all but good for us. Narnam Renegade has already been used here and dismissed as not enough. And it started even above a 2/1 being a 2/3 deathtouch so it blocked and attacked very well. This can't even block an unpumped monastery swiftspear. I still see mandrills the best option.
You may well be right, but again, consider an opening hand with Mandrills and no Thought Scour versus an opener with Hexdrinker. On an open board, you deal 4 before Mandrills even comes down. And not having to devote space and mana to Thought Scour means we can Bolt / Tarfire / Forked Bolt / Roast / Dismember / Mana Leak their creatures.
Goose is fine, but having to devote spots and mana to Thought Scour to make it into anything other than a 1/1 is fine.
I'm almost viewing Hexdrinker as a Dark Confidant in that it's a cheap 2/1 that takes over the game if unanswered. It's good against the fair decks by demanding removal early. It's good against the unfair decks because it attacks starting turn 2.
You're right that Mandrills blocks Swiftspear better. But again: Mandrills doesn't come down turn 2 all the time, at least not since the Probe days. But other than Burn, which matchups is Mandrills better for?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I can't say I'm pleased to see you and must warn you I may have to do something about it.
EDH: UGEdric
Pauper: URDelver
Modern: UGRDelver
Draft my cube: Eric's 390 Unpowered
Hexdrinker isn't a 2/1 for G. It's a 2/1 for G that in the midgame becomes our best threat against almost any deck. Narnam Renegade was specifically good against some archetypes and underwhelming against others. This one is, on the other hand, a well-rounded card which is very decent in the early (2/1 on turn one against Combo is definitely a fair threat) and it recycles itself as a grindy card against Control&Midrange, which Narnam WASN'T. That's the main difference.
True about testing. The last response will be testing.
About hexdrinker. I fear it will die in response to the last activation before growing. We have to protect it just as any other threat (yes also mongoose: more about it later) but need to invest a lot of mana for it. I highly dislike it but we'll see.
About mongoose and or dryad. We don't need to protect it by removals, but by grave hate so the investment of resources by our side is the same but it's smaller than mandrills. That's why I prefer the latter.
EDIT: @mikepemulis. They're better in all creatures decks and tokens decks. They're very difficult to block (even a bounce can let them go through for 4 after blocks). And once entered the battlefield you just forget about them and invest resources elsewhere.
It's obvious that it WILL die from istant speed removal. But basically anything dies from it (unless we're playing Mangoose, which as you said "dies" from GH). Mandrills resists to Fatal Push, but STILL dies from Path to Exile and STILL dies from graveyard hate. I don't get this reasoning. Are we back to the "Tarmogoyf dies to removal" argument? You don't have to level it up in one go, anyway. Use your mana in the most proficient way, depending on the cards in your hand and on the lands you played.
Again, the fact that he's better than Mandrills is pure theory. Another reason to test it.
If we decide that Mandrills is still the way to go, I honestly don't see any reason not to go back to the Disrupting Shoal + Stubborn Denial lists.
It's obvious that it WILL die from istant speed removal. But basically anything dies from it (unless we're playing Mangoose, which as you said "dies" from GH). Mandrills resists to Fatal Push, but STILL dies from Path to Exile and STILL dies from graveyard hate. I don't get this reasoning. Are we back to the "Tarmogoyf dies to removal" argument? You don't have to level it up in one go, anyway. Use your mana in the most proficient way, depending on the cards in your hand and on the lands you played.
Again, the fact that he's better than Mandrills is pure theory. Another reason to test it.
If we decide that Mandrills is still the way to go, I honestly don't see any reason not to go back to the Disrupting Shoal + Stubborn Denial lists.
The problem isn't that "it dies to removal". It's that "it dies to removal after having invested resources in" (mana in this case).
Let's try to write down some numbers.
@anybody who will test hexdrinker: please take notes of the turn in which it levesls up and report.
The same for mongoose and/or dryads: the turn in which they become 3/3.
I'm still tracking what I'm shoaling and in which turn (our or opponents' since FoN can't be pitched in our turns)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Decks played: Modern:
0 Affinity;
URG Delver
URGW Countercats
(Here you can find some video contents about Countercats and Temur Delver decks)
The problem isn't that "it dies to removal". It's that "it dies to removal after having invested resources in" (mana in this case).
Let's try to write down some numbers.
@anybody who will test hexdrinker: please take notes of the turn in which it levesls up and report.
The same for mongoose and/or dryads: the turn in which they become 3/3.
I'm still tracking what I'm shoaling and in which turn (our or opponents' since FoN can't be pitched in our turns)
Yeah, I understand your concern. My points are the following:
a) You don't have to invest in it to have a playable creature. In the early game it's a very decent threat (2/1 on turn one is definitely better than Mongoose, and it doesn't require any investment like Mandrills does - playable only on turn two and only with a Scour). Putting a 2/1 into play on turn one means that we don't have to do anything else which isn't interacting with our opponent's spells. We don't have to fuel our graveyard to play a Delve spell as soon as possible (or to reach Threshold), we aren't forced to Serum Visions in a turn where we don't want just because it enables Delver flip. Deploy a 2/1 on turn one, profit. Grow style.
b) If Hexdrinker dies to removal on turn five/six in response to the leveling-up, cool, it happens. Our other creatures would die anyway, and we weren't doing anything else during that turn. Cause, otherwise, why leveling it up? Again, you just do your things and see what happens. When you're out of cards, you invest your mana into it. As simple as that.
---
I'm also on the fence about Force of Negation. I mean, if we aren't Stubborn Denialing we ARE playing it, no doubt, cause otherwise we would be a dog to Big Mana strategies (which are otherwise slightly positive).
Between yesterday and this morning I had 15-20 matches of Magic in order to try the new cards. It's a small sample, definitely not worth of an accurate analysis.
Collector Ouphe is a sideboard option. Null Rod on a 1G 2/2. Seems good against stuff like Whir and Lantern, if those ever rise again. Definitely going to add 2 to the RUG *****ters box.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I can't say I'm pleased to see you and must warn you I may have to do something about it.
EDH: UGEdric
Pauper: URDelver
Modern: UGRDelver
Draft my cube: Eric's 390 Unpowered
Okay, so there's a few contradictions happening in this thread right now regarding Mongoose and Hexdrinker.
What if a 3/3 Shroud isn't good enough by turn 3?
How is Hexdrinker exempt from this? It's strictly worse than mongoose until you put four mana into it. The shroud is better than the extra power every day of the week even if it's a 1/1 vs a 2/1.
Seems like the reaction when the Hexdrinker doesn't get to its second stage is basically "oh well, we tried". It seems to be that there's a general consensus that you have a more reliable way of dumping mana into something rather than filling the graveyard with proactive spells. What? In what world is this true?
Is the general consensus that removal is less present than grave hate? If so... that's just wrong.
There's really like no merit to Hexdrinker guys, C'mon. We got mongoose.
Okay, so there's a few contradictions happening in this thread right now regarding Mongoose and Hexdrinker.
What if a 3/3 Shroud isn't good enough by turn 3?
How is Hexdrinker exempt from this? It's strictly worse than mongoose until you put four mana into it. The shroud is better than the extra power every day of the week even if it's a 1/1 vs a 2/1.
Seems like the reaction when the Hexdrinker doesn't get to its second stage is basically "oh well, we tried". It seems to be that there's a general consensus that you have a more reliable way of dumping mana into something rather than filling the graveyard with proactive spells. What? In what world is this true?
Is the general consensus that removal is less present than grave hate? If so... that's just wrong.
There's really like no merit to Hexdrinker guys, C'mon. We got mongoose.
Agree with all you said (except for mongoose: for which I'd say "we got mandrills").
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Decks played: Modern:
0 Affinity;
URG Delver
URGW Countercats
(Here you can find some video contents about Countercats and Temur Delver decks)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You just said all I was thinking.
Modern:
Agreed. So many of our cards cost 1 mana anyway that it should be easy enough to pump a spare mana into this and still hold up Bolt or Spell Pierce or whatever.
For those of us who've cubed with Student of Warfare (or better yet, Warden of the First Tree), you see that it's not an all in one shot type of thing. You don't level up unless you have nothing better to do. But it's an eventual must-answer threat that comes down T1, starts poking, and then grows into a beast. And again, lategame against BGx or whatever, this is going to be great. It grows bigger than most Goyfs eventually, doesn't fold to grave hate, and as a top deck in a late game, attacks as a Progenitus the turn after you play it. It's susceptible to Liliana and any other edict effects, and wraths, but then so is everything else we've ever played in this slot anyway. Super pumped to play it.
EDIT - Say it takes until T4 to pump this into a 4/4. Let's also assume you've kept the ground clear for it. So by the time you're attacking for 4, you've already attacked for 2 each on turns 2 and 3. Compare to Mandrills, which comes down turn 2 if everything works out right. So turn 3 you attack for 4, which equals the damage output of an unpumped Hexdrinker until that point. But more likely, we're casting Mandrills on turn 3, which means it's 4 damage behind in the scenario I've laid out. Obviously there are deviations from this, but I think this is an example of what they call "additive subtraction."
I think folks are underrating a 2/1 that comes down turn 1 in a deck that would rather cast a threat than a cantrip on turn 1. This gives us 8 creatures to play on turn 1, allowing us to hold out cantrips for later, when we have a better idea what we might need. And, unless they deal with it, we get to start smashing on turn 2.
And think about dodging grave hate. How many times have you played against Tron and got the Goyf on board or the Mandrills in your hand wrecked by a maindeck Relic of Progenitus?
I'm not saying that this card is a panacea or launches us to tier 0. But I think it's totally a real card that we ought to test with. My suspicion is that it's straight up better than Nimble Mongoose, and that the benefits over Hooting Mandrills will outweigh the drawbacks. It's going to necessitate changing the deck around, but it gets rid of Thought Scour, makes grave hate questionable at best against us, starts attacking on turn 2, and gets hard to answer, and then almost impossible in the late game.
EDH: UGEdric
Pauper: UR Delver
Modern: UGR Delver
Draft my cube: Eric's 390 Unpowered
Modern:
Hexdrinker isn't a 2/1 for G. It's a 2/1 for G that in the midgame becomes our best threat against almost any deck. Narnam Renegade was specifically good against some archetypes and underwhelming against others. This one is, on the other hand, a well-rounded card which is very decent in the early (2/1 on turn one against Combo is definitely a fair threat) and it recycles itself as a grindy card against Control&Midrange, which Narnam WASN'T. That's the main difference.
4 Delver
4 Mongoose
4 Goyf
2 Snapcaster
Drop a turn 1 creature, don't have to put extra ressources to make it grow, protect it, get within bolt-snap-bolt range. Tempo doesn't really have a backup "go long" plan. Either plan A works or we lose.
The questions I am asking myself right now, is which of the usual cards are still valid.
Blood Moon in SB?
4 Remand main?
Would Trickbind work nowadays? (Since Stifle isn't a legal option)
Play Shoal? (Trickbind is another 2cmc to pitch if need be)
Play the new Force?
17-18 lands?
Keep the deck as much at instant speed as possible? (Don't worry about Goyf, the opponent has card types in their graveyard too)
I made some calculation about the Metagame share of the last few big events. I looked for the best decks overall, and the strategies we're good (or bad) against.
One thing I dislike the most is the way people are reacting to the massive presence of UR Phoenix and Dredge in the top tier. While Surgical Extraction doesn't do much against us (sometimes can be very annoying, but certainly not a card meant against Tempo strategies), Relic of Progenitus, Nihil Spellbomb and Rest in Peace are everywhere. Maindeck. I'm kinda pissed at how good they are at handling our deck.
Nimble Mongoose doesn't seem that appealing in a wide metagame. One between Tarmogoyf and Hooting Mandrills also seems too heavy.
That's my take, for the time being. Starting from tomorrow, I'll try this list (with some minor tweaks in case it will be necessary to do so).
4x Misty Rainforest
4x Polluted Delta
2x Wooded Foothills
1x Stomping Ground
2x Island
1x Forest
2x Steam Vents
2x Breeding Pool
Creatures (14)
4x Delver of Secrets
4x Hexdrinker
4x Tarmogoyf
2x Vendilion Clique
3x Opt
4x Serum Visions
4x Lightning Bolt
3x Vapor Snag
3x Tarfire
4x Force of Negation
4x Spell Snare
3x Deprive
1x Dismember
3x Surgical Extraction
2x Abrade
2x Entrancing Melody
3x Ceremonious Rejection
2x Negate
1x Engineered Explosives
1x Vendilion Clique
You may well be right, but again, consider an opening hand with Mandrills and no Thought Scour versus an opener with Hexdrinker. On an open board, you deal 4 before Mandrills even comes down. And not having to devote space and mana to Thought Scour means we can Bolt / Tarfire / Forked Bolt / Roast / Dismember / Mana Leak their creatures.
Goose is fine, but having to devote spots and mana to Thought Scour to make it into anything other than a 1/1 is fine.
I'm almost viewing Hexdrinker as a Dark Confidant in that it's a cheap 2/1 that takes over the game if unanswered. It's good against the fair decks by demanding removal early. It's good against the unfair decks because it attacks starting turn 2.
You're right that Mandrills blocks Swiftspear better. But again: Mandrills doesn't come down turn 2 all the time, at least not since the Probe days. But other than Burn, which matchups is Mandrills better for?
EDH: UGEdric
Pauper: UR Delver
Modern: UGR Delver
Draft my cube: Eric's 390 Unpowered
True about testing. The last response will be testing.
About hexdrinker. I fear it will die in response to the last activation before growing. We have to protect it just as any other threat (yes also mongoose: more about it later) but need to invest a lot of mana for it. I highly dislike it but we'll see.
About mongoose and or dryad. We don't need to protect it by removals, but by grave hate so the investment of resources by our side is the same but it's smaller than mandrills. That's why I prefer the latter.
EDIT: @mikepemulis. They're better in all creatures decks and tokens decks. They're very difficult to block (even a bounce can let them go through for 4 after blocks). And once entered the battlefield you just forget about them and invest resources elsewhere.
Modern:
Again, the fact that he's better than Mandrills is pure theory. Another reason to test it.
If we decide that Mandrills is still the way to go, I honestly don't see any reason not to go back to the Disrupting Shoal + Stubborn Denial lists.
The problem isn't that "it dies to removal". It's that "it dies to removal after having invested resources in" (mana in this case).
Let's try to write down some numbers.
Modern:
Yeah, I understand your concern. My points are the following:
a) You don't have to invest in it to have a playable creature. In the early game it's a very decent threat (2/1 on turn one is definitely better than Mongoose, and it doesn't require any investment like Mandrills does - playable only on turn two and only with a Scour). Putting a 2/1 into play on turn one means that we don't have to do anything else which isn't interacting with our opponent's spells. We don't have to fuel our graveyard to play a Delve spell as soon as possible (or to reach Threshold), we aren't forced to Serum Visions in a turn where we don't want just because it enables Delver flip. Deploy a 2/1 on turn one, profit. Grow style.
b) If Hexdrinker dies to removal on turn five/six in response to the leveling-up, cool, it happens. Our other creatures would die anyway, and we weren't doing anything else during that turn. Cause, otherwise, why leveling it up? Again, you just do your things and see what happens. When you're out of cards, you invest your mana into it. As simple as that.
---
I'm also on the fence about Force of Negation. I mean, if we aren't Stubborn Denialing we ARE playing it, no doubt, cause otherwise we would be a dog to Big Mana strategies (which are otherwise slightly positive).
There are two alternatives, IMHO:
4x Hexdrinker
4x Tarmogoyf
2x Vendilion Clique // Snapcaster Mage
4x Force of Negation
3x Deprive // Mana Leak // Remand
4x Spell Snare
3x Hexdrinker
4x Tarmogoyf
3x Hooting Mandrills
4x Stubborn Denial
3x Deprive // Mana Leak // Remand
4x Spell Snare // Disrupting Shoal
My current confinguration post Horizons is
4 Tarmogoyf
4 Hooting Mandrills
2 Stubborn Denial
2 Force of Negation
3 Mana Leak
3 Disrupting Shoal
Modern:
Modern: MONKEY GROW & Amulet Titan
Legacy: RG Lands
EDH: Merieke Ri Berit Esper Good stuff
Between yesterday and this morning I had 15-20 matches of Magic in order to try the new cards. It's a small sample, definitely not worth of an accurate analysis.
Still, I'm already in love with Hexdrinker and I'm not fully convinced about Force of Negation -> Disrupting Shoal swap.
EDH: UGEdric
Pauper: UR Delver
Modern: UGR Delver
Draft my cube: Eric's 390 Unpowered
What if a 3/3 Shroud isn't good enough by turn 3?
There's really like no merit to Hexdrinker guys, C'mon. We got mongoose.
FoN doesn't compete with shoal but with stubborn denial. Hitting creatures is too important. That said you can't play 8 pitch spell. Hence my split.
Agree with all you said (except for mongoose: for which I'd say "we got mandrills").
Modern: