Legacy= 4 Jace format?

[Amon Amarth]

I've never really considered it, actually. More specifically, I've never wanted more than 2 Jace, the Mind Sculptors in my 60. OK, I did consider playing an additional 1 in my SB to help with the Peacekeeper plan since I only had 2 MD in Dreadstill. Why am I bringing this up now? I read some articles this week, lemme gimme you some examples.

"Is Jace that important? Hells yes! Have you ever cast that card? There's basically nothing that it doesn't do. You want to draw cards, you want to temporarily deal with big dudes, you want to eventually kill them, and Jace does it all singlehandedly. Do I really need to explain why decks that can cast Jace should play four, especially when it's a focal point of the deck?"

- Gerry Thompson

"Not every deck is actually a four-Jace deck, but I'm pretty sure that there are way more people using fewer Jaces than they should than people playing too many. When you can Misstep their turn-one play, Hymn them on two, and drop a Goyf on three, you're generally going to be able stick Jace on four (and defend it). Bouncing a creature is just brutal in Legacy, since far fewer creatures in this format have haste or "enters the battlefield" triggers than in Standard. It's a format of almost all Baneslayers. On top of this, it makes your discard even more valuable later. Additionally, there is a lot fewer burn spells and manlands that kill Jace in one hit. Besides, the combination of free counters, amazing discard, and land destruction make the advantage from Jace pretty insurmountable.
...
At this point, no one disagrees that Jace is a "10," so don't think I'm arguing that issue. I'm saying that Legacy is a four-Jace format, a position that's held by very few people at this point. "

Patrick Chapin

If I'm not reading this wrong I don't think they are advocating every Blue deck is auto 4-of Jace but that more decks should run 4 Jaces. Outside of Landstill/MUC/decks-that-like-to-draw-lots-of-games would you ever consider playing more than 1 or 2 Jaces?

[DTC]

if you're a blue-based control deck, jace is very easy to make into a win con. There really is less options against him in legacy decklists.

BUG control can run more than 2.

[Royal Ass.]

I have been running two in my Landstill deck (pre-MMS) and have been happy with that number. I don't think I would want more than two, three max. There are differences between Legacy and Standard. For one you have better draw and filtering. Specifically with landstill you have Brainstorm/Top and fetches as well as Standstills to let you see a lot more cards than a Standard deck. This means you will hit Jace more consistently as a two of. Also, we are not playing "Jace wars" where a deck needs to run 6-7 Jaces just to counteract Jaces from opposing decks.

Also consider that Legacy has a much bigger card pool so Jace is competing against a lot of other cards that need to be in the deck to deal with specific situations and get you safely to 4 mana. Standard is very incestuous with its limited card pool and Jace is just leaps and bounds better than every other card, so it's crazy not to run 4. Jace is awesome in Legacy but not to the same degree.

All that being said, I would not fault any deck for running 4 Jaces if it was tuned to do so. It's obviously an insane card. I also think that the card is not being utilized enough in Legacy. It's awesome in Standard and Vintage. For some reason it's taking people a little longer to realize this in Legacy. I don't know if it's a "4 Jace Format" but it's definitely a Jace format.

[Tacosnape]

I've been running four in Landstill since I was able to get my hands on them (It did take me running the card a couple times to fully grasp the power level of it, I admit.) And I'd never ever run another Planeswalker in it without first having four Jaces.

While at current I do agree that not every deck is a 4-Jace deck, I strongly believe it's becoming a 4-Jace format. The card is singlehandedly game-winning for control. And I think it's currently pretty close to cracking the top ten card in Legacy list.

It is, by itself, the single greatest control card ever printed, as it does almost everything a conventional control decks wants a card to do. It nets you card advantage, it disrupts your opponent, it controls the board, and it kills your opponent. There isn't much more you could possibly want out of a card. I think a lot of people still seriously underestimate it in Legacy.

[Amon Amarth]

I think the 4-Jace format is only an inevitability if the format becomes more Blue-centric, if that's possible.

[Hanni]

In blue/white control decks, Elspeth is oftentimes a better card than Jace (i.e better in some situations). Elspeth is also a better answer to an opposing Jace. I think the 2/2 split of Jace/Elspeth is much stronger than 4 Jace, especially when the deck is able to go into Superfriends mode with both.

For blue controls decks without white (like UBg Landstill), I'd agree that 4 Jace is the correct call.

For decks like Team America, or even CounterTop Bant, that primarily plan on winning with creatures, I don't think those decks need 4 Jace.

[(nameless one)]

The way I see it, Super Jace will be the FoW of that format. It's the must have blue card in a blue deck.

[death]

More like FoW + Brainstorm + Jace = format? lol. jk

it's too early to say that it's inevitable at this moment and I would like to say no because I'm always an advocate of format diversity. BUT the printing of MM was a real push for Landstill/MUC (and Merfolk). And it's Merfolk that is more concerning for me at this point as this deck hasn't stop dominating and will continue doing so as the format gets even more blue oriented. (*cough $89.99 FOW?*)

Jace, tMS was an error on Wizard's part by printing the most broken 4cc card. The only planeswalker with 5 abilities: fateseal opponent, fateseal yourself, brainstorm, unsummon, mill — all in one card, heck right? After the P9, i'm putting him ahead of Will at 10th, except unrestricted/unbanned and dirt cheap at $80.

Of the 18 years of Magic, he's the most versatile and coolest win condition (for me, next to Stroke of Genius). Btw, he's is superb not only in blue decks but also in colorless and non-blue decks as well like Stax and Pox. If people will just stretch their imagination, any deck that is designed to create an empty board state can play 4.. Not just blue.

[emidln]

Jacle, tMS was an error on Wizard's part by printing the most broken 4cc card. This planeswalker has 5 abilities: fateseal opponent, fateseal yourself, brainstorm, unsummon, mill — all in one card, heck right? After the P9, i'm putting him ahead of Will at 10th, except unrestricted/unbanned and dirt cheap at $80.

To my knowledge, there are 3 broken cards in magic's history (I haven't seen every card, but I'm pretty sure I've seen every card with a high power leve of effectl to mana cost ratio):

(in no particular order)

Contract from Below
Black Lotus
Yawgmoth's Will

Demonic Consultation being an honorary fourth, yet still vastly below the power/cost level set by the first three. Jace isn't even close to cracking top 20.

[Hanni]

No love for Ancestral Recall, emidln?

[emidln]

Ancestral Recall is very undercosted, but why draw 3 when you can draw 7 for the same amount of mana? Making Ancestral Recall look bad is the kind of broken that the top of the list brings you.

[Hanni]

Well, I don't play for Ante, so...

[emidln]

That doesn't make the effect of drawing 7 cards for B any less broken.

And for the record, playing for Ante itself isn't nearly as good as playing for cash. The real gentleman's format is best of 5 vintage with something on the line.

[death]

It's still not playable.

For the record I said most broken 4cc=4 casting cost.

[emidln]

You're putting it ahead of Will, and there is not a card legal in Legacy that is better than Yawgmoth's Will. It might very well be the best 4cc card (arguable at least with Lodestone Golem and Gifts Ungiven assuming you're not limiting yourself to legacy cardpool), but the best 4cc spells pale in comparison to the 3s available (Will, Necro).

[Infinitium]

Will is arguably only broken due to the large amounts of cheap mana and tutors that complements it however. I certainly wouldn't put it on par with Ancestral, Lotus or CFB in a vaccuum.

Also Jace is good and is an utter bitch to deal with on an empty board, but then again that really goes for Elspeth or Garruk as well (to a lesser degree granted). It's still only an automatic 4-of in dedicated control decks.

[death]

emidln, haven't you played too much storm yet. The dark side has taken over you ;P

[emidln]

Until I can play storm perfectly, I have not played it enough.

[AriLax]

Until I can play storm perfectly, I have not played it enough.

Sig'ed.

On the topic of Jace, the card is only not a 4 of in blue decks if you are shorter on lands, in which case you might want to reconsider the rest of your deck and why you don't just play more lands to make Jace good.

[Forbiddian]

Ancestral Recall is very undercosted, but why draw 3 when you can draw 7 for the same amount of mana? Making Ancestral Recall look bad is the kind of broken that the top of the list brings you.

What makes "undercosted" different from broken? Most cards have a superior version of themselves at a higher CC.

Black Lotus is "undercosted" compared to the massively-better Gilded Lotus. Demonic Consultation is "undercosted" compared to the better Recurring Insight (or straight up Stroke of Genius).


And for the record, Demonic Consultation might not even be as strong as Ancestral Recall. You have to win 50% of your games to break even with antes, but with Demonic Consultation, you have to win 66% just to break even. Your odds are probably like 80% or so, but there are certainly cards that give more than a 14% win probability jump.

This is compounded in match-based play where you play a best of 3/5/7 for a single ante card (the way we used to roll). If you consult every game, you need to win 0.685/.758/.803 of your games to break even. If you resolve a Demonic Consultation and your opponent has an Ancestral, he can probably win a third of the games.

True, Magic changed over the years so it's about winning more than ante, but being forced to ante an additional card is very risky. The drawback of running an extra ante card is among the stiffest drawbacks in all Magic: the Gathering. When you analyze it, you're completely ignoring ante (even though it's even part of the card's print that you have to be playing for ante).