Hey guys, with As foretold making an entry into the format I decided to sleeve up a sample list to see how it plays just for initial testing purposes. Here is what I got so far:
So far the sample hands I have been drawing seem decent, got some interaction which allows me to potentially play a game without needing to balance ASAP like we normally would. Feedback is welcome! Still not sure exactly how many as foretolds we want to be playing though.
EDIT: Also the mana base is clearly still in tuning phase, I like it but I think I'll prolly have to do something with the bloodstained mire, maybe make it a flooded strand, tolaria west, or a basic?
As Foretold
2U
Enchantment
At the beginning of your upkeep, put a time counter on As Foretold.
Once each turn, you may pay 0 rather than pay the mana cost for a spell you cast with converted mana cost X or less, where X is the number of time counters on As Foretold.
I could see this going either direction. I guess I would say I'm hopeful, but skeptical. The card does things I like. Casting Suspend cards is huge, and free mana is always dangerous. On the other hand, it doesn't start ticking up until T3 and even at that point requires several turns before it's really going to offer up a payoff. It's like an Aether Vial for anything, but how often does a T3 Aether Vial actually pan out well? Then consider that this means tapping out on T3 without affecting the board. It seems to me like a card built for control mirrors.
While this is true, this does allow one to cast Ancestral Vision, Restore Balance, and other 0-mana cards on the turn that it is played, unlike Aether Vial.
Restore Balance seems like the strongest interaction there, or it might enable a new Living End color. I don't see Ancestral Vision being all that strong here. 3 cards for 3 mana at sorcery is about the baseline, but you're investing two here to draw 3. That's probably not going to be good enough compared to just having Painful Truths.
As someone who sleeves up restore balance from time to time I agree, in fact, this card is better then it seems, one of the worst things that can happen with the deck is getting stuck with a copy of restore balance in your hand, because actually suspending it tends to be really bad when they can see it coming. However, it should be noted, that restore balance handles card disadvantage well, in fact it actually helps the deck since it forces them to discard extra as well. I fully expect this to slot into the deck maybe even as 4 of as it offers another way to cast restore balance while also fixing a fundamental problem the deck has.
So as per the WOTC twitter, it appears that As fortold allows you to play living end, restore balance, and AV immediately which if true is huge, especially for restore balance, being able to do that on curve without needing to cascade or use simian spirit guide could make the deck WAY more consistent which is insane. Hopefully this card goes places.
I think the Twin ban suceeded in one manner, there are more bad decks that are 'viable' at a tier 3 level, due to not having to interact with the greatness that was Twin.
It didnt increase blue diversity, because blue is fundamentally flawed.
It DID increase deck diversity however, because terrible decks are more able to succeed. I know, as I play them for laughs in MTGO, and from my own experience playing Twin, I know they would all lose to Twin, hard.
I think attitudes like this are where a lot of resentment towards reactive blue mages comes from - it may be hyperbole for dramatic effect - but calling the vast majority of decks people play (Tier 1 is a minority compared to the rest of the meta) terrible, bad, garbage, jank, trash, any time they are discussed is just really off putting. People love their decks as much as you loved "the greatness that was twin" or more, and to be frank, the mass enjoyment and broad appeal of the format is far more important than preserving the elite status of reactive blue mages in the metagame.
The subtext behind what you say is that your deck was not overpowered, it was inherently superior and that was fine because decks that it suppressed did not deserve to exist at a competitive level. Can you see why this is a stance that frustrates people who do not share your viewpoint? Every once in a while someone gets sick of hearing this tireless superiority complex and goes off on a rant or leaves the forum, diva, billzag, damagecase, etc. Can we please have a discussion that doesn't involve belittling the majority of the playerbase?
Agreed, I'm kind of tired of people romantacizing twin as though it were the last guardian of the format, it was a deck that was so good, it had access to many top of the line threats, tools, and answers that it would basically carry you across the finish line itself, no effort required.
I think the Twin ban suceeded in one manner, there are more bad decks that are 'viable' at a tier 3 level, due to not having to interact with the greatness that was Twin.
It didnt increase blue diversity, because blue is fundamentally flawed.
It DID increase deck diversity however, because terrible decks are more able to succeed. I know, as I play them for laughs in MTGO, and from my own experience playing Twin, I know they would all lose to Twin, hard.
Well to be fair, all blue decks in modern seem bad in comparsion to twin, considering it got to play as a tempo, combo, and control deck, enjoying all of the benefits of all of those archetypes all in one deck (mainly rug twin). I for one am happy that we no longer have to put up with it, it wasn't degenerate, but it was the deck that any idiot could just accidentally be great with because the deck had the perfect mixture of tools and fear from opponents that also helped it as well.
Sorry I'm mainly talking about experience I have personally had with eldrazi in my meta, it might very well be fundamentally different in other places, but for me, I am much more scared of BW Taxes then I am of Bant eldrazi since BW Taxes has access to selfless spirit to blank a sweeper, as well as resto angel and flikkerwisp to mess up potentially any power play you attempt to make, but well see if it gains any traction over time.
Eldrazi temple is the only card that make eldrazi really powerful. When someone plays Serum Powder to find a card, with repeated success, question must be ask about that very card. Have a look at bazaar of baghdad in vintage dredge to see the point.
I definitely agree with Wraithpk, Eldrazi are still wraping the format but it's less obvious because the decks is less consistent than before, and big ana strat still have game vs it, but that's it.
Sol lands doesn't belong to modern imho.
I'm not saying that temple is a fundamentally fair card, it isn't. But lets be real here, at this stage of the game, outside of eldrazi tron strategies, most eldrazi are coming into play via aether vial on 3 or 4 which is not a hard bridge to cross, eldrazi temple can make some lines of play a bit smoother, but fundamentally the actual effects of certain eldrazi, mainly displacer, are the bigger problems. You can get ride of temple all you want, won't stop B/W taxes much at all, they will just add a couple more painlands and be set, the deck will be marginally less powerful but the same issues it brings up will stay.
I wouldn't say Eldrazi temple is necessarily the broken part of the deck tbh, Displacer is a much more dangerous card since it makes it so that you can never actually win any combat without their permission, and if you go to kill a displacer sometimes they have flikkerwisp, selfless spirit, or even resto angel backup to save the day, as well as the possible of TKS just taking any answer you may have had pre-emptively. Just my 2 cents from my experience with B/W taxes that leans heavily on eldrazi now.
stifle would be a good blue card to help ux strategies. it wouldn't push the control end of the blue spectrum, but it'd greatly help the tempo strategies.
the only card that's on the ban list that'll help permission blue control is top. and that brings up another batch of issues that wizards probably doesn't want to deal with in modern.
The argument against most blue cards and cheap costed cards in general is "well doesn't annoying combo/hyper aggro deck just play x card also". This can been seen clearly in the current standard, fatal push goes into the decks it is best against also.
Think infect and death's shadow are annoying now, wait until they can also counter your lands.
What modern really needs is high powered blue cards that don't fix into low to the ground aggro strategies or into combo, but that are costed cheap enough that they can be effective against those strategies.
No way stifle is fitting into infect or anything like that. Infect exists in legacy as a competitive deck and it does not use cards like stifle. Infect is a linear deck that relies on redundency in pump and pfotection. The only reason that hardcore tempo cards do not exist in modern is because of how bad new players would feel to get their fetches denied and lands wastelanded while the opponent can still play all their stuff. The old school of magic did not allow big spells that some players like to be remltely viable. Stifle will only fit into delver but delver would push some players away because they feel they are not eing allosed to play.
Actually I think it fits right in with infect in modern.
Countering Liliana's -2, feeding become immense, etc. Nearly everything their current set of protection can't beat gets beat by stifle.
Not to mention that is drastically harder to kill their guy when they are up 2 mana on you every turn.
Wouldn't is be more direct to just run spell pierce so you can have more protection for your infect creatures while also having a way to stop lily from resolving in the first place?
That being said, Discard is important to combat combo and other gofish strategies. So Im not sure what to say. But its interesting to see people completely give a pass to strong discard (which is just proactive permission), and yet think counterspell is too strong.
Yeah, it's pretty hypocritical. The problem is that too many people get salty about counterspells, and WotC listened to those people and started dumbing them down, but kept making strong removal and discard, which is not really any different than permission. And now we have the mess of current Standard because people started complaining about removal and discard, so WotC dumbed those down too.
Real question here, just a thought experiment really, but if counterspell was put into modern, would any other counterspell in the format outside of cryptic even remotely make any deck list? Right now, whether we agree with it or not, the current state of counterspell balance in Modern seems fairly good, we have a lot of choices we can use, they include (but are not limited to):
These plus some other notables as well, right now we have legitimate choices, lets say in a hypothetical perfectly balanced format with equal parts aggro, midrange, control, combo, and tempo, is 4 x counterspell not simply always the best choice in a vacuum? Honest question since I have been thinking about it but I'm not 100% sure, if that is the case would that not result in massive deck building diversity lost? Is it bad if that happens? Just trying to think things through from Wotc's perspective.
@Rogue: I think we are one 'Blue Fatal Push' away from being a good competitive choice. This could be a counterspell or card advantage spell, etc. I actually think Push is making a lot of good to this format, just that it targets decks and a colour that didn't need that much help.
@gkourou: Preordain is definitely 100% a no go. Yes, it empowers blue reactive decks, but i think it targets Combo decks much more. I just think it would be plain wrong to unban this.
Splinter Twin could have never been unbanned and we would be in a good shape IMO. Now that it's ban was well over a year ago and player base had the time to think about it and put it on perspective i think all blue players would go for that. It's a fear of the deck that was artifically incepted by WOTC. When we had it, i didn't even play it, although i was about to buy into it about 3 times. I knew the deck was good but it had it weaknesses that you couldn't mitigate by being utterly-fast like Bloom and Dredge. Right now i play Grixis Delver, and i have a few friend that also play UR/x and we all agree that if unbanned, we would all jump on that ship. I think WOTC acknowledges that.
@deadmarmon: The critical difference is that Twin and Mystic are very different cards in terms of deckbuilding. One is a midrange card and the other one is part of a combo. Splinter Twin being red is purely trivial if we are talking about cards that can help 'Reactive Blue' as an archetype.
"Blue Fatal Push" is basically what blue needs at the moment. I'm not sure what form it would have to take, but I've said before that wizards doesn't want better one mana card draw cantrips than Ancestral Vision and Serum Visions, and they dislike making strong counterspells, with Aether Revolt being a unique exception. However, even Disallow is not super strong compared to Counterspell, which we will never see in standard. That means we basically are left with a stronger blue bounce spell. The two options I can see they can do with that is a one mana effect similar to Reflector Mage, or an effect that puts a permanent on top of the opponents library, forcing them to draw the same card again.
Its been said before but I think it bears repeating, I think Memory Lapse may be a very good addition to modern, its not an absolute answer like literally counterspell is which means Wotc's pseudo counterpsell balance in Modern is maintained while also giving blue access to a very real tempo answer that can mess people up a lot.
Jace is probably not too strong for Modern. However it is a midgrange(goodstuff) card by nature. If i had to bet my money on an outcome, it would be that Jace would be a reason to play Sultai Midrange. Thoughtseize it's still the best interaction spell in the format, Goyf the best efficient threat, Decay the best catch-all and Liliana of the Veil the best planeswalker. Counterspells still suck in Modern, whether they die in the late game or are just too narrow.
That's why we shouldn't be cheering for WOTC to unban Jace if we want the 'Reactive' spectrum to catch up with the rest of the format. I just think that if banlist is the topic, Dig Through Time is a much better card for test. There are a plenty of reasons to belive that DTT would empower blue reactive decks more than anything else, and not break the format in a haf.
Last but not least, Stoneforge Mystic doens't accomplish what we are trying to do. It fits into TWO Tier 1 strategies, and it isn't even a blue card, which leads into Mystic empowering a much shorter spectrum of blue decks as you take Sultai and Grixis out of the equation.
In conclusion, we all know blue pretty much sucks in contrast to BG/x. I would leave the banlist untouched and bring the heat with future sets, including Amonkhet.
Well if your saying that SFM wont help blue since it isn't a blue card, we can now safely put the twin debate to bed correct? I do agree with a DTT unban though, it was simply a case of being guilty until proven innocent without being given a chance to prove its innocence.
So if blue and white are weak, when are they not weak?
They're not weak when they're not weak. What exactly is difficult in understanding that?
What would it take to make them "strong" and what are we comparing them to in order to determine strength?
I'd be totally down with reprints of Counterspell and Swords to Plowshares. That would give them both a boost and also introduce cards that I think the format is in dire need of anyway.
If you took random mono-color decks in the format and threw them against each other which would come out on top? Surely your not trying to compare the power level of a mono-color set of cards to multi-color decks that enjoy a greater diversity of tools. You can try playing goyfs in a mono-green deck if you want but it will be terrible, does that mean green is weak?
I'm not sure how this relates at all to what I was saying.
Also what do we define as a color-defined deck, whether it is blue based or green based, to what extent is the deck color based and not just a multi color deck of good stuff?
Again, not sure exactly what this ruminating has to do with what I was saying. I was pointing out how, despite Blue's dominance, Legacy still has a much more healthy representation of the other colors in its top decks than Modern does.
Sorry my original quote of your post was only meant to include the final paragraph when you brought up Modern, the legacy talk wasn't my target. Perhaps I should re-word what I'm trying to say as I happen to be in a rather cosmic mood atm. Lets just say that we have a series of Modern tournaments and 1 single deck wins all of them, this hypothetical deck plays like a control deck but the only blue card in it is a playset of snapcaster mage, is blue still to be considered weak? What if the deck catches on and it becomes 15 % of the metagame share, is blue still weak if so many people play a deck with a notable blue card in it?
I suppose what I am trying to ask is at what point is a blue (or white) deck considered a blue or white deck, Is Jund a green deck? Is BW tokens a white deck? Where is the threshold for saying that white or blue are weak and where is the threshold where they are strong? Its one thing to say that perhaps Mardu as an archetype is weak compared to Jund as an archetype and perhaps SFM would fix it, but can you really break a format as complex as Modern down into just mono-color terms and apply that logic to a multi-color format?
Modern is generally hostile to purely reactive decks; this is nothing new, it has, aside from a few outlier cases, been that way from the beginning. The reason for this is simple: proactive decks look to play the threats, to "ask the questions," so to speak. Reactive decks want to have all of the answers. But modern's threat diversity is too wide to allow for a deck to be able to effectively react to the entire format. Decks like twin may have played a more reactive gameplan, but their ability to "ask the questions" when the time came, to make the opponent have the answer, is what allowed those decks to thrive. The reason blue sees less play is because it is worse at being proactive than the other colors; Snapcaster Mage and Cryptic Command, some of the most powerful blue spells in the format, are mostly reactive. If blue is to make a resurgence, either blue needs better proactive threats (merfolk being the current deck that seeks to fill that role), or modern needs to shift to allow more reactive decks, which means having a wider variety of generic answers as opposed to powerful but narrow answers.
Okay fine, but if blue based control decks in modern were all of a sudden much more proactive and threat dense, would they still be control decks by your definition? Would it not just be an aggro or midrange, or perhaps a tempo deck at that point?
Blue players, sometimes... You have other formats to play. The most powerful card in the game is blue.
No, the most powerful card in the game is Black, and it's called Contract From Below. One mana for 3 cards is nothing compared to one mana for 7 cards.
Beyond that, who cares if Time Walk or Ancestral Recall (not sure which one you were referring to, probably Recall) is Blue? The only format you can play it in is Vintage, and as a 1-of.
Modern just happens to not be a blue format. Big deal. The format has such a wide variety of feasible decks. You should be able to find something close to your style if you're just willing to look for it.
There is a difference between not being a "blue format" and the color being as bad as it is.
People often complain about Legacy being Blue dominated. That's a fair criticism. But while Blue is clearly the king of Legacy, the other colors still get decent representation. Here are the Tier 1 decks in Legacy according to The Source:
Miracles (UWr)
BUG Midrange/Control (BUG)
Shardless BUG (BUG)
Sneak and Show (UR)
Is that a whole lot of Blue? Yes! But Green, Black, Red, and White get at least one deck they're a critical part of. And these aren't simple splashes either. Miracles doesn't work without White, the BUG decks obviously need Black and Green as it's their very namesake, and Sneak and Show for obvious reasons needs Red. No color is as left behind as Blue (and to a lesser extent White) are in Modern.
So if blue and white are weak, when are they not weak? What would it take to make them "strong" and what are we comparing them to in order to determine strength? If you took random mono-color decks in the format and threw them against each other which would come out on top? Surely your not trying to compare the power level of a mono-color set of cards to multi-color decks that enjoy a greater diversity of tools. You can try playing goyfs in a mono-green deck if you want but it will be terrible, does that mean green is weak?
Also what do we define as a color-defined deck, whether it is blue based or green based, to what extent is the deck color based and not just a multi color deck of good stuff?
1 Bloodstained Mire
1 Arid Mesa
1 Marsh Flats
1 Scalding Tarn
1 Flooded Strand
1 Blood Crypt
1 Hallowed Fountain
3 Island
1 Mountain
1 Plains
1 Swamp
4 Veinfire Borderpost
3 Mistvein Borderpost
1 Fieldmist Borderpost
4 Greater Gargadon
2 Snapcaster Mage
1 Emrakul, the Aeons Torn
4 Restore Balance
4 Serum Visions
2 Swan Song
2 Collective Brutality
3 Remand
3 Yahenni's Expertise
2 As Foretold
4 Nahiri, the Harbinger
4 Leyline of Sanctity
3 Blood Moon
1 Blessed Alliance
1 Collective Brutality
1 Fatal Push
1 Dispel
So far the sample hands I have been drawing seem decent, got some interaction which allows me to potentially play a game without needing to balance ASAP like we normally would. Feedback is welcome! Still not sure exactly how many as foretolds we want to be playing though.
EDIT: Also the mana base is clearly still in tuning phase, I like it but I think I'll prolly have to do something with the bloodstained mire, maybe make it a flooded strand, tolaria west, or a basic?
As someone who sleeves up restore balance from time to time I agree, in fact, this card is better then it seems, one of the worst things that can happen with the deck is getting stuck with a copy of restore balance in your hand, because actually suspending it tends to be really bad when they can see it coming. However, it should be noted, that restore balance handles card disadvantage well, in fact it actually helps the deck since it forces them to discard extra as well. I fully expect this to slot into the deck maybe even as 4 of as it offers another way to cast restore balance while also fixing a fundamental problem the deck has.
Agreed, I'm kind of tired of people romantacizing twin as though it were the last guardian of the format, it was a deck that was so good, it had access to many top of the line threats, tools, and answers that it would basically carry you across the finish line itself, no effort required.
Well to be fair, all blue decks in modern seem bad in comparsion to twin, considering it got to play as a tempo, combo, and control deck, enjoying all of the benefits of all of those archetypes all in one deck (mainly rug twin). I for one am happy that we no longer have to put up with it, it wasn't degenerate, but it was the deck that any idiot could just accidentally be great with because the deck had the perfect mixture of tools and fear from opponents that also helped it as well.
I'm not saying that temple is a fundamentally fair card, it isn't. But lets be real here, at this stage of the game, outside of eldrazi tron strategies, most eldrazi are coming into play via aether vial on 3 or 4 which is not a hard bridge to cross, eldrazi temple can make some lines of play a bit smoother, but fundamentally the actual effects of certain eldrazi, mainly displacer, are the bigger problems. You can get ride of temple all you want, won't stop B/W taxes much at all, they will just add a couple more painlands and be set, the deck will be marginally less powerful but the same issues it brings up will stay.
Wouldn't is be more direct to just run spell pierce so you can have more protection for your infect creatures while also having a way to stop lily from resolving in the first place?
Real question here, just a thought experiment really, but if counterspell was put into modern, would any other counterspell in the format outside of cryptic even remotely make any deck list? Right now, whether we agree with it or not, the current state of counterspell balance in Modern seems fairly good, we have a lot of choices we can use, they include (but are not limited to):
Mana Leak,
Cryptic Command,
Spell Pierce,
Dispel,
Remand,
Countersquall,
Deprive,
Spell Snare,
Disallow?
These plus some other notables as well, right now we have legitimate choices, lets say in a hypothetical perfectly balanced format with equal parts aggro, midrange, control, combo, and tempo, is 4 x counterspell not simply always the best choice in a vacuum? Honest question since I have been thinking about it but I'm not 100% sure, if that is the case would that not result in massive deck building diversity lost? Is it bad if that happens? Just trying to think things through from Wotc's perspective.
Its been said before but I think it bears repeating, I think Memory Lapse may be a very good addition to modern, its not an absolute answer like literally counterspell is which means Wotc's pseudo counterpsell balance in Modern is maintained while also giving blue access to a very real tempo answer that can mess people up a lot.
Well if your saying that SFM wont help blue since it isn't a blue card, we can now safely put the twin debate to bed correct? I do agree with a DTT unban though, it was simply a case of being guilty until proven innocent without being given a chance to prove its innocence.
Sorry my original quote of your post was only meant to include the final paragraph when you brought up Modern, the legacy talk wasn't my target. Perhaps I should re-word what I'm trying to say as I happen to be in a rather cosmic mood atm. Lets just say that we have a series of Modern tournaments and 1 single deck wins all of them, this hypothetical deck plays like a control deck but the only blue card in it is a playset of snapcaster mage, is blue still to be considered weak? What if the deck catches on and it becomes 15 % of the metagame share, is blue still weak if so many people play a deck with a notable blue card in it?
I suppose what I am trying to ask is at what point is a blue (or white) deck considered a blue or white deck, Is Jund a green deck? Is BW tokens a white deck? Where is the threshold for saying that white or blue are weak and where is the threshold where they are strong? Its one thing to say that perhaps Mardu as an archetype is weak compared to Jund as an archetype and perhaps SFM would fix it, but can you really break a format as complex as Modern down into just mono-color terms and apply that logic to a multi-color format?
Okay fine, but if blue based control decks in modern were all of a sudden much more proactive and threat dense, would they still be control decks by your definition? Would it not just be an aggro or midrange, or perhaps a tempo deck at that point?
So if blue and white are weak, when are they not weak? What would it take to make them "strong" and what are we comparing them to in order to determine strength? If you took random mono-color decks in the format and threw them against each other which would come out on top? Surely your not trying to compare the power level of a mono-color set of cards to multi-color decks that enjoy a greater diversity of tools. You can try playing goyfs in a mono-green deck if you want but it will be terrible, does that mean green is weak?
Also what do we define as a color-defined deck, whether it is blue based or green based, to what extent is the deck color based and not just a multi color deck of good stuff?