Last Online
Recent Posts
posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

I could see Jeskai running one of these to smooth things out a little, but overall probably not a big impact on Vintage. Kind of insane that they made these, though.

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

alt text

I know Landstill isn't particularly in vogue at the moment, but could this be a finisher for that archetype? Or is it too narrow/slow?

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

I'm curious to see what people can come up with for this, but I think it will be difficult to make up for the loss of 4x Force of Will.

posted in Vintage Strategy read more

Just wanted to say this was a terrific watch. Really informative and insightful discussion that I found really entertaining and valuable. Would love to see more stuff like this.

posted in Vintage News read more

Another good article, Joe. I like the addition of opening hands to these, it's something that has increased relevance to Vintage games compared to other formats, and it should help generate discussion. On these hands:

Ravager Shops #1 - Agree with keep. Lead on Tomb + Emerald --> Sphere, follow up will depend on what opponent plays, but having lots of options is nice.

Ravager Shops #2 - I definitely wouldn't go down to 5 here, I think this hand is keepable. I'm really torn on whether to send back Ballista or Ravager, but I think I agree that Ravager is the right one to push to the bottom. I'd sequence this with Tomb + Lotus --> Stonecoil for 3, followed by Sphere to get both disruption and a clock on the board. Unfortunately, this line only allows for a Ballista for 1 on turn two, so maybe this isn't the right line. Curious what others would do.

Golos #1 - Agree this is a keep, should keep your opponent disrupted long enough to draw more action. Tomb --> Thorn is probably how I open with this hand, though that does leave you pretty vulnerable to Wasteland.

Golos #2 - Even on the draw, I think this is a keep. Trinisphere is still disruptive enough even if your opponent gets the first turn that I'd keep it and lead with that. Following up with back to back Golos's on the next couple turns should give you a big mana advantage to leverage for the rest of the game.

posted in Survival read more

@boogdish While I'm generally in favor of anything Tiny Robots-adjacent, I think running a Genesis Chamber/Skullclamp package is going to end up being worse than having Null Rod in your deck. Would be happy to be proven wrong, though!

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

@moorebrother1 You cannot. When you cast a spell, you remove it from its current zone and place it on the stack, so the Ancestral won't be in the graveyard to be cast again.

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

This probably holds little strategic value, but I like the possibility of bluffing by naming a counterspell that you don't have in hand, to try to keep your opponent from countering a spell.

posted in Decks read more

@jclnc007 If you plan to add Dreadnought, then it seems your deck will be kind of a weird hybrid of two old archetypes from back in 2003/2004- MaskNaught, and 7/10 Split.
An example list of 7/10 Split from around that time can be found here.
An example MaskNaught list can be found here.

While neither is particularly relevant in Vintage these days, they're still fun archetypes to play around with. My recommendation would be to pick one strategy to focus on, rather than try to mash two fairly different decks together. I think you'll have more success and more fun that way. 🙂