[Discussion] Melting Pot For Thoughts On Extirpate

[Whit3 Ghost]

It's not about situations I described, just picture any situation you like and answer those two questions. Yes you will find some where Extirpate IS better than a discard, those situations do exist. But they are less frequent than the situations where a discard trumphs Extirpate.

This is the exact reason why the FT list emidln posted runs 4 Duress maindeck and one sideboarded Extirpate.

[The Legacy Weapon]

Why does there have to be a fight over what's better between Extirpate or whatever else? (Duress, Therapy, etc...) There are obvious pros and cons to running Extirpate just like there are for any other cards you might run in it's place. I say if you prefer Extirpate, run it. If we all just ran the same old crap as everyone else, the game would be lame. I'm all for discussion but damn it seems like everyone is so damn pushy with their own opinions that we never really get anywhere.

[Tosh]

Why does there have to be a fight over what's better between Extirpate or whatever else? (Duress, Therapy, etc...) There are obvious pros and cons to running Extirpate just like there are for any other cards you might run in it's place. I say if you prefer Extirpate, run it. If we all just ran the same old crap as everyone else, the game would be lame. I'm all for discussion but damn it seems like everyone is so damn pushy with their own opinions that we never really get anywhere.

This isn't really helping. Sure, you could run Grizzly Bears over Tarmogoyf in <insert deck with Tarmogoyf in it> but it is in no way optimal. The obvious choice is Tarmogoyf. Now, between Extirpate vs other disruption the choice isn't so obvious. What people are trying to do is to logically support their hypothesis and give some data to back it up.

The whole "play what you prefer" is implied since no one is going to force you to play one card over another. I would assert that in this thread opinion is often confused with hypothesis since it is theoretically possible to prove one school of thought right.

[emidln]

As you can see, he clearly states: Chant in response to their chant, meaning he is Chanting during his own turn. Else it would be bad to respond with your own chant on theirs during your turn, it's not like you can combo anyway this turn.

No, you still have it backwards. Chant in response to chant is a play assuming that he is responding to a chant they're playing on his turn. Chant in response to chant on his own turn makes no sense unless you fear them end stepping a Mystical Tutor. His chant in response to chant is for an opponent playing chant on the opponent's main phase in an attempt to combo out. He responds with chant nullifying their turn. On his upkeep, he gets priority first and Extirpates chants disallowing them the opportunity to chant him on his turn. He would then be free to combo out without the worry of chant.

The only possible time that an Extirpate is better than a discard spell is when the feared card is floating in the top3 cards and the opponent has a SDT.

Wrong. Discard spells are pretty universally (at least the good ones) sorcery speed. Extirpate being an instant figures very much into what you want to do with it. Breaking Standstill on your own turn is horrible. Spending extra mana on your turn is bothersome. Getting your Duress/Therapy/Thoughtseize flat out countered because they're holding a second is awful. I've outlined all of these before in my posts.

[citanul]

No, you still have it backwards. Chant in response to chant is a play assuming that he is responding to a chant they're playing on his turn. Chant in response to chant on his own turn makes no sense unless you fear them end stepping a Mystical Tutor. His chant in response to chant is for an opponent playing chant on the opponent's main phase in an attempt to combo out. He responds with chant nullifying their turn. On his upkeep, he gets priority first and Extirpates chants disallowing them the opportunity to chant him on his turn. He would then be free to combo out without the worry of chant.

That's actually what I ment, just worded it wrong I guess. Anyway, if your opponent had the same hand as you except that the Extirpate is a discard he wins, no matter how. Since he will play Duress, where you would have Extirpate, instead of that Chant during his turn. You Chant in response so he can't go off or steal the chant. If you don't chant he'll take it anyway. So during your own turn then, he chants on your upkeep. Then turn gets passed to him and he wins. When comparing two cards you shouldn't forge situations so that it's unequal.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I actually have no problem with Extirpate as a tutorable 1-of post board. That's exactly the narrow situation where I'll allow it, since it's not going to clutter up his hand early on and he doesn't have it in games where it's useless.

[Raider Bob]

Extirpate is the nutz against any deck that runs 3 win conditions.
Decks that have more than three win conditions like any creature based deck in legacy as of late Extirpate is not so good.

[Maveric78f]

The list where I play extirpate for reference: here.

Extirpate is good in conjunction with Jotun Grunt: does not affect its ability to remain into play and still gets rid, at instant/split second speed of any graveyard threat or general threat of a deck that hit the yard. The goal of Extirpate is obviously not to make card advantage but to break mechanisms of a deck.

As Raider Bob said, extirpate is good at dealing with kills and I always enter them against Aggro Loam, mainly to deal with their annoying kills which are usually only 3-of among tarmo, terravore, crusher and seismic assault.