Isn't Izzet Charm just straight up clear cut junk for legacy?
All three of its effects should cost 1 mana not 2, even if it is modular, we don't even really want a looting effect, or to hold up 2 mana for one spell.
Not really though. Chain Lightning or Lightning Bolt does it better. And only assuming the green deck didn't leave open some green mana and has no dudes to NOM. Either way, my point there was that there are plenty of spells that shock for 2 damage in legacy, but are easier to cast and can target the opponent. It may seem subtle, but those are big big differences in this format.Originally Posted by NidStyles
I'm not bashing Izzet Charm, I think it's a great card. But in general, for Legacy RUG at least, I think that0neguy is correct. With the amount of card selection we have, you're better off Brainstorming better than having to run a slightly subpar/expensive card that just provides options we already have access to in Spades (or don't want). At 2 mana, I think you'd almost be better off just running something like Counterspell instead. Less flexible, yes, but more powerful every time you actually use it.
Certainly it deserves to be tested. But I don't personally need to test it to know how it will function in my deck. If the damage hit players, or the looting effect was actually a real cantrip, that might be a whole different story. And although I won't be surprised to see it get played to some success as a 1-2 of, it's just a little underwhelming for me.
I tried the charm in the place of 2 Chain Lightnings against Omniscience and Esperblade for a couple matches. It saved me once against Esperblade when the game was in topdeck mode and I was holding 2 lands. I used the looting mode and it gave me business. Other times I mostly tried to make it work by trying to keep 2 mana in the cases I would need it. My conclusion is, it can be useful for some people (just like Thoughtscour) but for me it doesn't play well with 1cc spells and Brainstorm and I'd rather retain the smooth flow of the deck and lose out on the few times when it will save my ass.
I haven't really had the time to test much lately, but I really like the idea of Coliseum against Stoneblade, so I'll probably try Mark Sun's list with 2 Spell Pierces for the Library and Coliseum the next time I get to sit down and test. The only real part of Izzet Charm that I feel like would ever win games is the looting effect, and I think the one-of Coliseum does that better with less downside than Izzet Charm does.
Same basic thought process from myself. I like to keep the 2cc spells to a minimum in general, main reason I went down to 3 Tarmogoyf to support Sylvan Library and Fire // Ice was only in my list because it was also blue making it acceptable for FoW. Also, the colorless part of the cost for Tarmogoyf, Library, and Fire//Ice can be paid with Wasteland where this card must have two colored mana to operate. Could have easily been something else.
That said I am a fan of card quality enablers, hence the suggestion of Cephalid Coliseum, so I don't think it would be completely out of line to play Faithless Looting, especially if you don't want to go to 19 lands.
Delver enthusiast and avid practitioner of blind flipsmanship.
Follow me on Twitter: @AllSunsDawn
I tested looting for awhile and found scour to always be superior at instant speed.
13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it. Matthew 7:13-14 NIV
-Member of Clan Magic Eternal-
-Find me on MTGO (NarrowGate) -
I think I would sooner play with looting than Coliseum. Coliseum only works after you have threshold, so its not like it speeds you up, which looting does. Looting can also be milled off a thought scour to be flashed back
The problem in my eyes is that Thought Scour speeds you up just as much, and is card neutral, vs card disadvantage. In a deck that wants to 1 for 1 to victory I don't think we want either. I would rather have Thought Scour or Preordain. If I was going to play looting, I would want to play it with at least 2 thought scour as well.
If they were Draw 3 discard 2 or draw 2 Discard 1, I would be all over them, but I just don't think either is worth the card disadvantage. Brainstorm and a shuffle can fix flooding just as well.
I think most people would be all over a card that's better than Brainstorm.
I meant on the coliseum, but ya, it would be pretty stupid as an instant/sorc, I don't see that card getting printed any time soon.
I'm not sure how I feel about the Coliseum. Cantripping is better than looting in this deck, and the damage is pretty relevant. It only fuels Lavamancer and Mongoose when you are already Thresholding, so it's only really a lategame effect. It does beat Choke, but you should just spell pierce that card anyway.
I'll have to test it out, but I'm reluctant to cut the 3rd thought scour or first fire/ice for anything right now.
This thread should have been renamed into RUG Delver forever ago. It has not been called anything other than that since Delver of Secrets was printed. It's just more confusing than it needs to be.
^^ I've been calling it Thresh for years, and so have most of the people that I know that have been playing the format for more than a year or so.
Hmm I can see that, but having 6 spells of some of the functions it does doesn't sound bad IMO. At the least it's a removal spell that pitches to FOW. 2 Mana isn't really a lot for U/R Delver, they usually have more lands out from my experience.
Fire/ice is a removal spell that also pitches to force, but is easier to cast and also can kill your opponent. Also, being able to Snapcaster your spells is key in U/R. But either way, this is the RUG thread, and I don't see izzet charm squeezing I to our list too easily.
P.S., you have a point, but I can also see why people want the historic title still referenced. Renaming it like this might help newer players find it better though:
RUG Delver (Tempo/Thresh)
The Canadian reference is outdated in my opinion. We dont call WUR Delver in modern "Russian Delver", and in general using nationalities to describe decks can be offending to some folks. It doesn't describe what the deck does, just where it supposedly originated. RUG Delver is to the point, but tempo thresh are both valuable descriptors in identifying the deck's major gameplan.
Last edited by Borealis; 09-02-2012 at 10:19 PM.
Why? Because Canadian Threshold is a better tempo deck than Team America?
What sideboard options do we have against Lands.dec? There are a few in my meta and aside from my Scavenging Ooze, I feel very ill-equipped.
Try Winter Orb ;)
Stifle and Surgical Extraction (on Loam, ofc) goes the distance. Lands usually play Intuition, so Surgical is the real deal. A turn 1 Delver helps as well. Try to FoW their acceleration, like Exploration and Manabond.
Let your Dredge 6 be: Narco, Narco, Narco, Bridge, Bridge, Dread Return
No, because the Canadian version is from years ago, long before Delver existed. Team America is also a bad name in terms of identifying the actual deck and it's mechanics. The fact that you even made that statement just proves my point: deck names based on country origins or color "allegiances" provide an unnecessary source of argument. It's bad form.Why? Because Canadian Threshold is a better tempo deck than Team America?
I'm more than happy to give credit where due, but it doesn't help a new player figure out which deck to play. And that's what titles are for. History can come later, after they've picked up the deck and joined the threads.
Yeah, I could up my Extractions to three SB slots. Also, I've found Sulfuric Vortex to be a great help, and it shuts down their Zuran Orb as a bonus.
It's usually not enough though. Any other ideas, I'd love to hear them.
The deck is very very slow without Loam. Extract the Loams and Wastelands.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
