[Card] Extirpate

[Versus]

This is one of those cards that I look at and think, wow! For :b: I can target a card in the yard on turn one from my opponents deck at instant speed and never have to see it again the remainder of the game.

With a Ritual followed by a spell that demands countering played first (assumably FoW'd) I can now proceed to strip the other 3 FoWs clean from their deck. Goyf, Wasteland, Daze, Duress, all gone!

Then I look at all the decks here and don't see it listed anywhere. Rarely even talked about as a SB option. Here comes my question...Why?

Either it's the amateur in me that sees something that isn't there or it's what I like to refer to as a "Beer Goggle" card, looks fucking amazing until the next morning when you can see straight.

[TrialByFire]

ohhh its very very good. First Turn Dark Rit, Hymn/Duress/Therapy then Extirpate whatever you want. I play them

[Versus]

ohhh its very very good. First Turn Dark Rit, Hymn/Duress/Therapy then Extirpate whatever you want. I play them

Yeah? In Sui I assume or something else? It doesn't seem that prominent in Legacy. Standard I see it listed in Black decks more than Swamps! I just figured it was a case of having a limited card pool compared to us having full choice of range.

[Eldariel]

The card does have jobs to do, but it only fits certain decks. For example, control-decks can make good use of it by using it to eliminate recurring threats, but it's less amazing in Sui Black which often rather draws more threats or disruption. It's best when against recurring engines like Life from the Loam/manlands, Genesis or such and against single-minded combo-deck, while it's worthless against stuff like Goblins. Basically, it's a solid SB-slot if you can spare the space with lots of applications, but the decks it hit still haven't taken the format over by storm, soo...

[Versus]

but the decks it hit still haven't taken the format over by storm, soo...

Ah, that's it! Yet another reason to be well versed in the current meta. Something that won't really happen till I get out there.

Otherwise, taking the examples you've given as decks suitable for play in Legacy would this not be a solid choice in MBC or Pox SB?

[DeathwingZERO]

I would argue that the card isn't good against Goblins, as in a deck like MBC or Pox you should be killing off/discarding the 2 major threats early: Lackey and Piledriver. Once you Extirpate either of these, the deck is basically devastated by the addition of fast and efficient creatures, or E. Plague, always a solid MBC choice against Goblins. If you see Goblins and little to no combo, I say run them both.

I wouldn't say it's an auto include though, as it depends on how many immediate answers you have to early pushes via Lackey, Piledriver and Warchief. If you've got more removal/disruption than they have copies of these three, I'd say Extirpate is worth the slots. It's basically a "win more" by making sure to remove the potential of game swingers being topdecked, once you've established enough removal/discard.

It also seems very viable against the various Thresh builds, you can take the damage/wipe spells from red versions, the removal spells and denial creatures against white versions, and the creatures + removal from either. Same goes for decks like Meathooks, especially if your lucky enough to hit a Crystalline Sliver through discard or sacked early on, so you can target the rest.

VS Landstill it's really your only way to get around the manlands, because they can recur via Loam or Crucible. Making your opponent sac them hardly keeps them away, and Pox effects will miss them unless they are very tight on mana. It can also severely put a stop to their major card draw spells, forcing them to miss out on the card advantage they desperately need. Same theory goes with Survival builds, killing off the chance of recurring creatures or silver bullets.

Pretty much if you are worried about any decks with recursion or use for specific cards in the graveyard, SB it. If you go up against a ton of control/aggro-control decks, SB it. If your meta seems to look way more aggro or (non graveyard based) combo oriented, though, it's probably not too good. Only playtesting and bringing it to the tournaments is going to tell you whether or not it really shines for you.

[Nihil Credo]

Extirpate is powerful enough to singlehandedly win you the mid-to-long game against control, midrange, and engine decks. That is, in itself, pretty amazing, and I'm a big fan of the card.

However, it means you have to care about the mid-to-long game in order to want Extirpate. Control and midrange decks, IMO, should almost always play 3 in the sideboard if able. Aggro and combo probably have no need of it at all. Aggro-control? It depends on how fast they kill; Fish or Funkbrew definitely want it, but something like GAGOMY is too fast to feel its power, despite playing 8 discard spells. More discard or LD would probably win more games.

[Versus]

Thanks for clarifying all that everyone.

I guess Sui/RD kill quick enough and Ale has disruption/LD locked down so as not to need it's inclusion. I'm still building what I hope to be a good B/G Legacy Rack deck and had planned to include it in the SB, but was getting influenced by it's lack of presence in the format. That would be lack of confidence on my part. Bad habit.

[TheAardvark]

I would argue that the card isn't good against Goblins, as in a deck like MBC or Pox you should be killing off/discarding the 2 major threats early: Lackey and Piledriver.

Ringleader is a much better option to hit, as it is typically the card that will cause decks like MBC/Pox (and any other control deck) to lose moreso than a late topdecked Lackey/Piledriver. Goblin Matron is also a better target than those two in decks like that. Just saying.

[Versus]

Just double checking...You could always Wretch the targeted card being Extirpated thus saving the other 3, yes?

[Sanguine Voyeur]

I think that Extirpate is the beneficiary of savage over hype. It was heralded as the end to Ichorid of all kind, Extended and Vintage Versions. It was being maindecked all over the place in any deck with just a hint of black.


Just double checking...You could always Wretch the targeted card being Extirpated thus saving the other 3, yes?No, Split Second prevents any activated responses.

[Happy Gilmore]

Just double checking...You could always Wretch the targeted card being Extirpated thus saving the other 3, yes?
no, split second is > greater than all.

edit:
damn, beat me too it.

[Eldariel]

No, it's an activated ability and Extirpate has Split Second. But yea, Nihil hit the spot, every deck that cares about the mid- to lategame and plays black should probably pack a bunch of these somewhere. That includes decks like Landstill (and Xb variant...basically, WUb, Uwgb or UB) and indeed stuff like MBC. Decks like RecSur could also play it.

[Versus]

Oh for christs sake, I forgot about Split Second!

You guys help me not look (as) stupid when I go out and play agaisnt people other than my wife. I'll thank you in advance for that.

[Nightmare]

Oh for christs sake, I forgot about Split Second!

You guys help me not look (as) stupid when I go out and play agaisnt people other than my wife. I'll thank you in advance for that.
MTGTheSource.com

Making you look not (as) stupid since 2003.

[DeathwingZERO]

I think that Extirpate is the beneficiary of savage over hype. It was heralded as the end to Ichorid of all kind, Extended and Vintage Versions. It was being maindecked all over the place in any deck with just a hint of black.

Wasn't that mainly because Ichorid itself was the overhyped deck in both formats to begin with?

And yes, Ringleader is a savage tempo advantage if you can get one into the yard to Extirpate. You basically put them on topdeck mode for the rest of the game, and nullify it's only non-Warchief hasted options. The main reason I left it out is because it was pretty obvious a "hit if seen" thing :D

[Versus]

MTGTheSource.com

Making you look not (as) stupid since 2003.


HA! You make shirts like that, I wanna cut!

[URABAHN]

The card is incredibly narrow and really only effective against Ichorid. Don't even argue that it's good against Cephalid Breakfast, because you won't be able to play Extirpate after Abeyance. Furthermore, decks running a suite of black disruption spells already do well against Cephalid Breakfast (like Red Death).

[nitewolf9]

Furthermore, decks running a suite of black disruption spells already do well against Cephalid Breakfast (like Red Death).

I disagree with this statement. The sui matchup (ex. Red Death) against breakfast is pretty painful. They have aether vial to negate your land destruction and none of the combo pieces get hit by duress, although hymn is pretty good against them. Also worldly tutor gets around things like cabal therapy, etc. Again once they started to use tarmogoyf that deck is a beating for death. Being able to hit a combo piece (or a tarmogoyf) post board with hymn or therapy and then getting rid of it permanently has some merit. Obviously it is pretty hard to play extirpate once they abeyance you, but I don't think the card is that narrow. It also really helps in decks like landstill for the control mirror and stops a lot of random yard recursion decks. I duno, the card might be a bit narrow, but not too narrow for the board of a lot of decks that use black. People hyped it and then bashed it. The consensus is somewhere in between.

[URABAHN]

I disagree with this statement. The sui matchup (ex. Red Death) against breakfast is pretty painful. They have aether vial to negate your land destruction and none of the combo pieces get hit by duress, although hymn is pretty good against them. Also worldly tutor gets around things like cabal therapy, etc. Again once they started to use tarmogoyf that deck is a beating for death. Being able to hit a combo piece (or a tarmogoyf) post board with hymn or therapy and then getting rid of it permanently has some merit. Obviously it is pretty hard to play extirpate once they abeyance you, but I don't think the card is that narrow. It also really helps in decks like landstill for the control mirror and stops a lot of random yard recursion decks. I duno, the card might be a bit narrow, but not too narrow for the board of a lot of decks that use black. People hyped it and then bashed it. The consensus is somewhere in between.

You're right, I forgot about Tarmogoyf, I was thinking of Breakfast before Tarmo-tech. Though Obfuscate Freely and Machinus did lose to some awful black decks at GenCon Champs.

I'm beginning to think the haters are mostly correct in bashing Extirpate. I don't like it in the Landstill mirror because it doesn't advance your goals in that matchup. Maybe you get to tag a Wasteland, but you still need to win the match. Maybe you get to tag a Force of Will, but you still need to win the match. It won't stop opposing Soldier tokens, Angel tokens, Mishra's Factories in play, Nantuko Monasteries in play, or Faerie Conclaves in play. Compare it to Haunting Echoes which is absolutely better in the Landstill mirror (but may not be the perfect choice) because it damn near decks your opponent, just about turns off their Crucible of Worlds, and can remove all copies of up to a dozen key cards. Now that will do more to further your goals in the Landstill mirror than Extirpate.

[nitewolf9]

You're right, I forgot about Tarmogoyf, I was thinking of Breakfast before Tarmo-tech. Though Obfuscate Freely and Machinus did lose to some awful black decks at GenCon Champs.

I'm beginning to think the haters are mostly correct in bashing Extirpate. I don't like it in the Landstill mirror because it doesn't advance your goals in that matchup. Maybe you get to tag a Wasteland, but you still need to win the match. Maybe you get to tag a Force of Will, but you still need to win the match. It won't stop opposing Soldier tokens, Angel tokens, Mishra's Factories in play, Nantuko Monasteries in play, or Faerie Conclaves in play. Compare it to Haunting Echoes which is absolutely better in the Landstill mirror (but may not be the perfect choice) because it damn near decks your opponent, just about turns off their Crucible of Worlds, and can remove all copies of up to a dozen key cards. Now that will do more to further your goals in the Landstill mirror than Extirpate.

I suppose this is quite a valid argument and you are definitely more experienced with the deck. But most of my builds of landstill do run haunting echoes, and being able to extirpate either counterspell or force of will and then echoes them when they have a crippled counter wall seems strong. This is assuming you run 2 or 3 maindeck echoes with 3 or 4 extirpate in the board (which does handle the ichorid matchup...that deck is strong and beats the shit outa landstill). I guess it really is subjective to the build, but I've always thought that landstill does well with some yard hate in the board and extirpate should be as good a choice as any. So I guess what I'm trying to say is that it can further your gameplan in the control mirror.

[Phantom]

You're right, I forgot about Tarmogoyf, I was thinking of Breakfast before Tarmo-tech. Though Obfuscate Freely and Machinus did lose to some awful black decks at GenCon Champs.

I'm beginning to think the haters are mostly correct in bashing Extirpate. I don't like it in the Landstill mirror because it doesn't advance your goals in that matchup. Maybe you get to tag a Wasteland, but you still need to win the match. Maybe you get to tag a Force of Will, but you still need to win the match. It won't stop opposing Soldier tokens, Angel tokens, Mishra's Factories in play, Nantuko Monasteries in play, or Faerie Conclaves in play. Compare it to Haunting Echoes which is absolutely better in the Landstill mirror (but may not be the perfect choice) because it damn near decks your opponent, just about turns off their Crucible of Worlds, and can remove all copies of up to a dozen key cards. Now that will do more to further your goals in the Landstill mirror than Extirpate.


I'm not 100% on where I stand with the card, but I see a lot wrong, or potentially wrong with this. If Landstill is only running cards that "win you the match" than you should change out 75% of the deck for the love of christ. Also, this makes counterspells useless. Think of Extirpate as a counter for the spells that counters fail against (Waste and Loam to name a few). It also has a significant leg up on superior cards like Echoes in that it has split fucking second. Are you really ever going to reliably resolve a Echoes against another Landstill deck?

Basically, sure, Extirpate-ing a Waste might not win you the match, but if it means you don't lose, is that really such a bad thing?

[URABAHN]

I'm not 100% on where I stand with the card, but I see a lot wrong, or potentially wrong with this. If Landstill is only running cards that "win you the match" than you should change out 75% of the deck for the love of christ. Also, this makes counterspells useless.

Just to clarify for the folks reading this, what I wrote was

"Maybe you get to tag a Wasteland, but you still need to win the match. Maybe you get to tag a Force of Will, but you still need to win the match."

I don't think that means I condone changing out 75% of the deck. I do condone leaving Extirpate at home unless your meta is rampant with Loam Control and Ichorid decks. I'd probably play Extirpate at The Lucky Frog tournaments because if 25% of the field is Loam or Ichorid, I'll probably bump into one of them sooner or later in the 3 or 4 Round tournament.


Think of Extirpate as a counter for the spells that counters fail against (Waste and Loam to name a few).

Can you name others? I can think of more than a few cards Extirpate won't counter, Haunting Echoes, Standstill, Decree of Justice, Crucible of Worlds, [manlands], Pernicious Deed, Stifle, and Wasteland. Phantom, by naming Wasteland as a spell that counters fail against, do you mean recurring Wastelands under Crucible of Worlds or Life from the Loam?


It also has a significant leg up on superior cards like Echoes in that it has split fucking second. Are you really ever going to reliably resolve a Echoes against another Landstill deck?

Yes, yes you are. When given the choice between Extirpate and Haunting Echoes in the Landstill mirror, think about which one does more. Make your decision based on a couple of assumptions (this is almost an entirely different discussion altogether, but I'll make it brief).

1. The match will go into the late game and you will have plenty of mana.
2. The match will go into the late game and you will have enough countermagic.

Between you and your opponent, there'll be enough dual lands on the table to hold a Dual Land Draft at $25 a person. When you do decide to cast Haunting Echoes, you'll have at least 1 Counterspell, probably a Force of Will, and another blue card.

So, which one would you choose? Haunting Echoes or Extirpate?


Basically, sure, Extirpate-ing a Waste might not win you the match, but if it means you don't lose, is that really such a bad thing?

Bandage won't lose me the game either, but you don't see Landstill players packing that in their deck. Maybe instead of Extirpate, I could play something more useful. I'd rather play with Decree of Justice, because at least that card is more useful in the Landstill mirror than Extirpate.

[Bardo]

Extirpate is nuts and should be showing up in more decks that I see it. The first place I made for it in my decks, are all decks running Cunning Wish and Swamps, which for me is GAT/Gofy and Tog; not to mention Landstill/B. In those decks, I really recommend Extirpate which has amazing/ball-busting utility, esp as the format is shifting away from aggro and more to control and combo. Against aggro-control, it's only mediocre due to threat overall diversity. A truly great card.


So, which one would you choose? Haunting Echoes or Extirpate?

In my Tog lists, I run both.

[Bovinious]

How do you guys figure Extirpate is good against Ichorid? You would need 2 Extirpates on both Bridge From Below and Ichorid to win the game, unless of course you can somehow remove Bridges otherwise or get enough manlands to make Ichorids not a threat. If your really worried about Ichorid I think Crypt would be a better a better hate option.

[Sanguine Voyeur]

How do you guys figure Extirpate is good against Ichorid? You would need 2 Extirpates on both Bridge From Below and Ichorid to win the game, unless of course you can somehow remove Bridges otherwise or get enough manlands to make Ichorids not a threat. If your really worried about Ichorid I think Crypt would be a better a better hate option.
If you remove Bridges, they can't win out of no where. The best thing to do is to respond the triggers from Dread Return.

If you remove Ichorid, they loose the ability to go on in the long game. They are left with Narcomebas and Trolls to return.

[Bovinious]

Exactly, so basically you need to remove both, or otherwise invalidate both strats.

[Sanguine Voyeur]

If you can put on enough pressure, you can get away with removing only one though. If you have creatures that sacrifice them selfs, you don't need to worry about Bridge as much. So, AffinityWithMaindeckCryptAndExtirpate.dec would have a solid match up against Ichorid, but it could still lose to a turn one kill.

[Phantom]

Just to clarify for the folks reading this, what I wrote was

"Maybe you get to tag a Wasteland, but you still need to win the match. Maybe you get to tag a Force of Will, but you still need to win the match."

I don't think that means I condone changing out 75% of the deck. I do condone leaving Extirpate at home unless your meta is rampant with Loam Control and Ichorid decks.


I think maybe you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. Your argument was that Extirpate was bad because it you still have to win the game after casting it (right?). Here's your board for Gen Con:

4 Meddling Mage
3 Teferi’s Response
4 Engineered Plague
3 Krosan Grip
1 Engineered Explosives

Don't all these cards fall under the same category, except maybe Mage?


Can you name others? I can think of more than a few cards Extirpate won't counter, Haunting Echoes, Standstill, Decree of Justice, Crucible of Worlds, [manlands], Pernicious Deed, Stifle, and Wasteland. Phantom, by naming Wasteland as a spell that counters fail against, do you mean recurring Wastelands under Crucible of Worlds or Life from the Loam?


Counters work on all of those (except lands and Decree I guess, but Echoes is equally as shitty against Decree as Extirpate against DoJ). And yes, I was talking about reccuring Wastes. I'm assuming (and have heard) that Landstill handles itself fairly well against a Waste or two, but I have also heard that recurring Wastes are almost game over against any deck, and a key to the mirror. I could be wrong here, and maybe your list has more trouble with the regulars since you saw fit to pack Teferi’s Response in the board, but you have to admit that 'pate>Echoes against Loam and Crucible recurring Wastes, since 5 mana can often be a pipe dream then.


Yes, yes you are. When given the choice between Extirpate and Haunting Echoes in the Landstill mirror, think about which one does more. Make your decision based on a couple of assumptions (this is almost an entirely different discussion altogether, but I'll make it brief).

1. The match will go into the late game and you will have plenty of mana.
2. The match will go into the late game and you will have enough countermagic.

Between you and your opponent, there'll be enough dual lands on the table to hold a Dual Land Draft at $25 a person. When you do decide to cast Haunting Echoes, you'll have at least 1 Counterspell, probably a Force of Will, and another blue card.

So, which one would you choose? Haunting Echoes or Extirpate?


Here are the situations where I would want Extirpate:

1) Recurring Wasteland. You might not even get to 5 mana, let alone 7.
2) You are forced to cast it before you get to seven mana.
3) You are at 7 mana and he is running Daze (do any builds run Daze any more? Did they ever?)
4) You both have the hand of Counterspellx2, FoW, and Echoes. You both have seven mana (or 8). If he has Echoes, he wins. If he doesn't, yours still get countered.
5) You need/want/would really benifit from seeing something in his hand.
6) He has more counters than you.

Now, I'm not saying that Echoes > 'pate in this matchup, but I do figure the reason that I don't see Echoes in boards anymore is because the number of matches it is useful against is less than the number of matchups Extirpate is useful against. We may be at a point in Legacy where 1 mana "good and uncounterable" answers are better than 5cc Sorcery bombs.

[troopatroop]

I think maybe you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. Your argument was that Extirpate was bad because it you still have to win the game after casting it (right?). Here's your board for Gen Con

No, you're misunderstanding what he's saying because he's speaking in a higher language. You have to understand, that unless you're removing something that he has another of in his hand, then Extirpate is card disadvantage. You're not removing anything other than a possibility. Granted, if you're getting rid of some sort of lategame bomb that would eventually be a huge threat, or some sort of recursive engine, it will probably be worth it. Otherwise you're just dumping a card and going -1.

[Phantom]

No, you're misunderstanding what he's saying because he's speaking in a higher language. You have to understand, that unless you're removing something that he has another of in his hand, then Extirpate is card disadvantage. You're not removing anything other than a possibility. Granted, if you're getting rid of some sort of lategame bomb that would eventually be a huge threat, or some sort of recursive engine, it will probably be worth it. Otherwise you're just dumping a card and going -1.

LOL at "higher language". He never once mentioned card advantage. People seem to have done pretty well with Crypt, and i can't help but notice that it is card disadvantage.

Also, I'm not agruing FOR the card in Landstills board, I was simply counter-pointing his arguemnet of rejection based on the premise that you still had to win the game after casting 'pate. You want to argue against the card, that's fine and I might even agree with it, but give us some solid arguments.

[TeenieBopper]

It's a one mana, uncounterable, instant speed Cranial Extraction. Why are we arguing about the stupid overpoweredness of this card?

[DeathwingZERO]

No, you're misunderstanding what he's saying because he's speaking in a higher language. You have to understand, that unless you're removing something that he has another of in his hand, then Extirpate is card disadvantage. You're not removing anything other than a possibility. Granted, if you're getting rid of some sort of lategame bomb that would eventually be a huge threat, or some sort of recursive engine, it will probably be worth it. Otherwise you're just dumping a card and going -1.

Higher language my ass. If they lose one of their manlands to a FoF split, see an early FoW or StP, an early Landstill drop, etc....it's going to make up for it in the end, regardless of how many cards are in your hand afterwards. Chances are the first player to successfully resolve a FoF or be the winner of a broken Standstill is going to have the higher card base. Otherwise, what wins is being able to be uncounterable that will swing the game in your favor. Let's take U/W/b/g Landstill as an example:

Force
StP
Deed
Wasteland (in some builds)
Loam/Crucible
DoJ
EE
Fact
Mishra's
Monastery
Counterspell/Mana Leak/Rune Snag
Stifle
Krosan Grip

The list goes on, but here's some heavy hitters. So, out of those, your going to see a minimum of 3 being played in any deck, short of Loam/Crucible, in which there is typically only 1, or Wasteland, falling under the same category. So, with your Extirpates and their inability to respond with anything, you have now effectively hit them in a 1 for 1 situation, at minimum. Chances are, it's even higher than that. Now, factor in the fact you have 4 Extirpates SB'd. You now have the ability to hit even more options, where Haunting Echoes has to beg through a counter war to resolve on the average, or wait a very, very long time (on top of the fact it's a turn 5 at it's fastest). Late game may make it better, when your both staring down 10+ lands and you can hardcast an Echoes and FoW backup, but that's nowhere near the argument that in any point of the game your Extirpate will resolve, and hit something. The only time this is not to your advantage is if it's something like a Manland, when they have already seen multiples (and are in play), or a Decree of Justice after it's already sealed them the win via tokens, etc, and your out of removal. That's a very low chance of it being flat out dead.

In my opinion, I'd say Extirpate in multiples should win hands down in the mirrors. A single Haunting Echoes may crush, but there's no guarantee it'll succeed, and if it doesn't, your down either a lot of mana, or a lot of cards. I'd much rather just nitpick at possible threats or answers, and be certain that not only does it hit, chances are it hits much more than 1 card.

[URABAHN]

It's a one mana, uncounterable, instant speed Cranial Extraction. Why are we arguing about the stupid overpoweredness of this card?

You're being sarcastic, right? I've tested the card in Train Wreck, Mono-Black Control, Red Death, and various flavors of Landstill against Rec-Sur, Goblins, Thresh, Landstill, TES, Belcher, Ichorid, and at least a couple other decks I can't remember right now. It's not like Cranial Extraction where you look at your opponent's hand and then remove all copies of that card from the game. It's okay, but it's not stupidly overpowered.


Higher language my ass. If they lose one of their manlands to a FoF split, see an early FoW or StP, an early Landstill drop, etc....it's going to make up for it in the end, regardless of how many cards are in your hand afterwards. Chances are the first player to successfully resolve a FoF or be the winner of a broken Standstill is going to have the higher card base. Otherwise, what wins is being able to be uncounterable that will swing the game in your favor.

I don't think you realize you're almost speaking my language, DeathwingZERO. Let me edit your post to more closely reflect how I feel about Extirpate.


If they lose one of their manlands to a FoF split, see an early FoW or StP, an early Landstill drop, etc....the player will make up for it in the end, regardless of how many cards are in your hand afterwards. Chances are the first player to successfully resolve a FoF or be the winner of a broken Standstill is going to have the higher card base. Otherwise, what wins is being able to be uncounterable that will swing the game in your favor.

See what I did there? It's subtle, but what it essentially means is losing a card that I didn't have in the first place isn't going to make much difference in the end. Just because you took a FoW doesn't mean you've suddenly shifted the match in your favor. Just because you took Swords to Plowshares doesn't mean you've suddenly shifted the match in your favor. Your opponent can still have (as an example) more manlands and a Standstill on the board and even though you stole all the FoWs and all the StPs you've got your back up against a wall.


Chances are the first player to successfully resolve a FoF or be the winner of a broken Standstill is going to have the higher card base.

I couldn't agree more! You talk about shifting games into your favor, well drawing lots of relevant cards will do that for you.


Otherwise, what wins is being able to be uncounterable that will swing the game in your favor.

How can one Landstill player be more uncounterable than another player? By playing Extirpate? You really think so? Decree of Justice would be a better place to look for an uncounterable "swingy" card.

One last thing


So, with your Extirpates and their inability to respond with anything, you have now effectively hit them in a 1 for 1 situation, at minimum.

That's simply not correct. As pointed out in the original Extirpate thread, unless you take a card out of your opponent's hand, it's not card advantage, it's not even card parity (1-for-1).

[DeathwingZERO]

I would agree it's not the same power level that a Cranial effect would have, but I still think people are really dodging the aspect if it's real power, and that's in a black based/splash control build, where it becomes better than any counterspell.

[Nihil Credo]

It's not like Cranial Extraction where you look at your opponent's hand and then remove all copies of that card from the game.
You may want to read CE again.

[URABAHN]

You may want to read CE again.

No, I'm right, but I'll clarify. Extirpate is not like Cranial Extraction where you look at your opponent's hand, choose a card, and then remove all copies of that card from the game.

[HdH_Cthulhu]

Yesterday i played with my ***** deck against a Type 2 (dralnu U B control) and lost to it:cry:

I FoW his Persecute and then he casts a Extirpate on it and removes the other 3 FoW from My HAND

I think this card is good beacause it could do very strong things compared to its casting cost!

[Versus]

Ouch! You had all four in your hand!?

[DragoFireheart]

Yesterday i played with my ***** deck against a Type 2 (dralnu U B control) and lost to it:cry:

I FoW his Persecute and then he casts a Extirpate on it and removes the other 3 FoW from My HAND

I think this card is good beacause it could do very strong things compared to its casting cost!

LOL!

This goes to show you that even decks that seem weaker can still win.

[Tacosnape]

It also goes to show that Threshold hates Black Control.

That's ridiculous, though.

[Nihil Credo]

No, I'm right, but I'll clarify. Extirpate is not like Cranial Extraction where you look at your opponent's hand, choose a card, and then remove all copies of that card from the game.
No, you're still wrong. You're thinking of Lobotomy. With Cranial Extraction, the very first thing you do during resolution is to name a card; only afterwards you discover whether you hit or missed.

[URABAHN]

No, you're still wrong. You're thinking of Lobotomy. With Cranial Extraction, the very first thing you do during resolution is to name a card; only afterwards you discover whether you hit or missed.

Yup, you're right!

[Shriekmaw]

Yesterday i played with my ***** deck against a Type 2 (dralnu U B control) and lost to it:cry:

I FoW his Persecute and then he casts a Extirpate on it and removes the other 3 FoW from My HAND

I think this card is good beacause it could do very strong things compared to its casting cost!


I knew that Extirpate was going to be awesome when I saw it first printed. This coming from someone that focuses on type 2 or standard for the most part. I'm glad to see the Legacy community picking up on how powerful the card is.

Its just becoming a lot more difficult of not only combo decks of doing well, but control decks also when this card is all over the place is.

I guess its coming down to splashing black and just playing it yourself. :)

[Versus]

nick, maybe you would know this then? I was playing some guy with a Seismic Assault/Life from the Loam type deck that had Goyf. Ohran Viper, Lightning Helix's, and what not. He said to me after the match "Please tell me you SB'd in Extirpates or I'm gonna feel really dumb for bringing in ______."

I don't remeber what he said and now it's bugging the shit out of me what card that possibly could have been??

[GreenOne]

nick, maybe you would know this then? I was playing some guy with a Seismic Assault/Life from the Loam type deck that had Goyf. Ohran Viper, Lightning Helix's, and what not. He said to me after the match "Please tell me you SB'd in Extirpates or I'm gonna feel really dumb for bringing in ______."

I don't remeber what he said and now it's bugging the shit out of me what card that possibly could have been??

maybe a glittering wish? :tongue:

[Cait_Sith]

Yesterday i played with my ***** deck against a Type 2 (dralnu U B control) and lost to it:cry:

I FoW his Persecute and then he casts a Extirpate on it and removes the other 3 FoW from My HAND

I think this card is good beacause it could do very strong things compared to its casting cost!

Hilarious timez! The day before this was posted, Persecute was NOT legal in T2. It had not been legal for over a month by then.

[Versus]

maybe a glittering wish? :tongue:

HAHA, maybe! I guess it's kinda a vague question. Probably best to ask him or wait and find out the hard way.

[Goaswerfraiejen]

I've only just started properly appreciating Extirpate. I currently have 4 in the sideboard for TarmoTog, and I'm really loving it at the moment. Most of the time, I find that dealing with the first huge threat/annoyance/whatever isn't so hard; I just don't want more to follow, because the more resources you expend, the harder it is to deal with things. Extirpate has the very real advantage of being a largely pro-active card, meaning that it saves counterspells, creature removal, etc. Lately, I've been going up against a number of decks with Loam engines (Terrageddon, Lands, etc.), and hitting LFTL has proven invaluable. So too versus Jotun Grunt.

In any case, I just wanted to add that I'm starting to come over to Extirpate's side; it's not for every situation, but it's often quite powerful, and really--really--handy.

[DeathwingZERO]

nick, maybe you would know this then? I was playing some guy with a Seismic Assault/Life from the Loam type deck that had Goyf. Ohran Viper, Lightning Helix's, and what not. He said to me after the match "Please tell me you SB'd in Extirpates or I'm gonna feel really dumb for bringing in ______."

I don't remeber what he said and now it's bugging the shit out of me what card that possibly could have been??

Perhaps something like Ground Seal? The only thing I can think of that gets around Extirpate in a deck pumping Goyf would be something keeping the graveyard safe. I'd think it's a safe bet he'd feel stupid for it considering that if you didn't side in Extirpate, he would have just shut off his Loam engine for no reason, seeing as it targets the 3 lands.

[Phantom]

nick, maybe you would know this then? I was playing some guy with a Seismic Assault/Life from the Loam type deck that had Goyf. Ohran Viper, Lightning Helix's, and what not. He said to me after the match "Please tell me you SB'd in Extirpates or I'm gonna feel really dumb for bringing in ______."

Chalice. I win.

[georgjorge]

I don't know why nobody mentioned it so far in this thread, but the best use of Extirpate for me is land destruction. With many decks running only four Duals and eight Fetches to support a color, Extirpating the Duals will cut them off for the rest of the game. And it can be done second turn with Wasteland + Extirpate, and is uncounterable ! I don't think building a deck around it is viable, but it sure makes me think very hard if that Crypt or Leyline or something shouldn't be an Extirpate when I'm running a deck with four Wastes.

[Nihil Credo]

I've seen lots of people maindeck Extirpate specifically for that reason. The problem I have with that choice is how unlikely it is to pay off: the 'Extirpate a dual' play only works against decks with bad mana-bases, only if they didn't pack 1-2 basics, and only if you draw the Extirpate early enough that they didn't play a second dual. When I was testing the UGB Thresh mirror with another player, who was running Stifle/Waste/2 Extirpate, while I wasn't, I never lost a game because of Extirpate.

Moreover, let's take a look at the metagame decks:

Sui Black: Horrible
Burn: Horrible
Thresh: Mediocre to good, depending on how the deck is built (8 creatures or more? Basic lands?)
Landstill: Decent
Goblins: Horrible
The Rock: Mediocre (Genesis is the only real target)
Survival: Golden
Loam: Golden
Aluren: Great in combination with discard; useless otherwise

[Maveric78f]

Is it your rating of the decks ? Almost mine ^^

It's better to look at the worlds lists, to have a good idea of the metagame. According to me extirpate is good against any deck with tarmogoyfs, because they are often their lonely kill. Destroy/discard one, get 10 turns to settle.

A lot of people play very bad their extirpate too. Extirpate is one of the most control cards ever made and some people are extirpating FoW as soon as they see one (cf report). But FoW is so bad against control. It's card disadvantage. Hit counterspells, Facts, kills or whatever (even cantrips), but not such a useless card in the MU.

Sui Black: Horrible => extirpate creatures, starting with shade
Burn: Horrible => try to extirpate what they have in hand
Thresh: quite good => hit tropical if you can, or hit creatures starting with tarmogoyf
Landstill: Decent => depends a lot on your deck. The best is often to take care of draw spells and on recursions
Goblins: Horrible => CA first
The Rock: Mediocre (Genesis is the only real target) => depends a lot on the build too. Witness (CA) and tarmogoyf (kill) first, then only Genesis
Survival: Golden => not that much golden. Skwi at first (or survival if you can hit it). If it has a combo included, hit a piece of it.
Loam: Golden => CA : loam
Aluren: Great in combination with discard; useless otherwise => hit a piece of the combo or manadeny them.

[APriestOfGix]

It's better to look at the worlds lists, to have a good idea of the metagame.

That would be like only interviewing homeless crackheads about what stocks to invest in.

You can't use the Worlds results for ANYTHING! Just pretend they never happened.

[Atwa]

Thresh: quite good => hit tropical if you can

Note that Extirpate reads: non-land.

Still, Taking FoW or Goyf is a nice play against Threshold.

[Cabal-kun]

Note that Extirpate reads: non-land.

Note that Extirpate reads: other than a basic land.

[OffTheWall]

I love hitting their wastelands with it (in response to them hitting your land). I will lose one land if they are losing 4 that seems fair.

[nitewolf9]

I love hitting their wastelands with it (in response to them hitting your land). I will lose one land if they are losing 4 that seems fair.

Against what deck and playing with what deck would this be a good play? If they aren't holding any wastelands in their hand you are 2 for 1ing yourself. Their wasteland still did its job and you are down one card. I don't think this seems fair.

[Media314r8]

I've been running Extirpate as a three-of in my board for almost a year now, and I don't side it in vs thresh, as it's all well and good to nuke 1/3 of their threats, ( I might be more tempted to bring it in against a straight UG thresh list with only werebear and goyf) most thresh decks have more threats and reach (red splash) to justify brining in three almost dead cards.

I usually only bring in the 'pate against decks like landstill, ichorid, and loam (ichorid only because my shadowmages, slaughter pacts, and thoughtseizes are mostly dead, and stopping the 'goyf plan' or 'ating an moeba in response to the trigger is a fine too.)

'pate is a narrow card, but when it hits a deck, it usually hits HARD. I would never recommend them MB, unless you were playing them (illegaly) in the flash era with about 12 turnn one discard spells to ensure a turn two 'pated flash. Unless you've thoughoughly tested it, I would recomend olaying something 'safer' in your SB, like crypts or E plagues. For players with tried and tested SBs with a few flexible slots, it can turnt he matchups against loam and landstill decks more in your favor, but beware of the allure of it's efect, as save for once in a blue moon, its allways teo-for one'ing yourself.

[OffTheWall]

Against what deck and playing with what deck would this be a good play? If they aren't holding any wastelands in their hand you are 2 for 1ing yourself. Their wasteland still did its job and you are down one card. I don't think this seems fair.

It depends on the number of non-basics you are running. If you are heavy in them wastelands are tough to deal with. Also a majority of people playing wasteland are running methods of recursion of them ie: loam/COW. Unless you are running stifle, wastelands are tough to deal with.

[AngryTroll]

When facing Extirpate with Survival, hitting Squee early is super annoying. In the late game, it is much less effective. Hitting a Survival, BWish, or a Goyf if you manage to counter one early is a lot better than hitting the single Squee, because it prevents Survival from Topdecking the Win. Extirpate is absolutely good against Survival, but it will not single handedly win the match for you.

Extirpate is crazy good against Loam, however. Nailing Loam cuts off the main engine of that deck. Unlike Survival, nailing Life from the Loam might just win you the game on the spot.

Ichorid is another great example of a deck that really really hates to see Extirpate. If you can deal with the Bridges from Below, then Extirpate can handle the other main threat of the deck.

Nailing duals is annoying, but if your deck is running enough basics, it isn't the end of the world. For example, I had Taigas and Bayous Extirpated last time I played against Mono Black. It did slow me down, but at that point I was playing around Wasteland anyways, so I was fetching basics anyways. Against Thresh, with a manabase including 8 Duals and only 3-4 basics, Extirpate seems much more effective. Again, though, Sinkhole and Wasteland will probably make more of a difference.

In conclusion, I like Extirpate as a sideboard card, but I am not sure that hitting land is the right play. Someone mentioned 2-for-1ing yourself with the card...you are always going to be 1-for-0ing or 2-for-1ing yourself. Against a deck like Ichorid or LftL, you may 1-for-1, or 1-for-2/3/4, and disable the main engine in the deck, and against Survival you pay 1 to slow the deck's early game. However, against a deck like Thresh, unless you have the control elements to try to deal with the rest of the deck, Extirpate seems sub-par. If you can apply pressure while taking away your opponent's options for winning the game, Extirpate is solid. Nailing Goyfs, Mongeese, or Enforcers is strong if you are applying enough pressure to end the game quickly. On the other hand, if you blow up a land, they may not be able to play the threats anyways.

I am undecided about Extirpate main. It seems solid whenever I run into it, but I that is due to me playing Thresh and RGBSA, where there are only 10 creatures of 3 different kinds, and Squee, Survival, and Wish, respectively.