Snapcaster better than Confidant?

[SpikeyMikey]

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/legacy/23014_Building_A_Legacy_Tiago_Is_Better_Than_Bob_2nd.html

Drew Levin's latest on SCG talks about how he feels Snapcaster Mage is better than Dark Confidant in Legacy. I don't have premium, but I did find it an interesting comparison.

Personally, I disagree. I've always felt that getting a targeted card out of your graveyard is better than a random one from your library. That's why I often used to run SoLS over SoFI. But Snapcaster gets you 1 card back, whereas Confidant can get you an unlimited number. In the beginning of the article, he talks about Riptide Laboratory to reuse Snapcaster in the late game. But this means spending a lot of mana every turn whereas Bob generates that extra card every turn for free. For what Drew is looking to spend late game on Snapcaster, he could get the same kind of value out of Whispers of the Muse. The format is slow at the moment, but it's not that slow.

[Esper3k]

Yeah, I think Bob is still better. SCM really can't be played before T3 at best. A T2 Bob is still one of the scariest things to face off against. If he sticks around for a few turns, you've probably lost the game, which doesn't hold true for SCM.

[Aggro_zombies]

I don't have premium either, and even if I did I wouldn't read a Drew Levin article, but...

One nice thing about Snapcaster is his ability to increase the virtual density of certain types of cards. This is most dramatic in the case of one-for-one removal spells since many of the sweepers in Legacy are either too expensive most of the time (Wrath) or don't completely sweep (Firespout), leaving blue decks with a more control bent with few options for beating aggro but to overload on Paths and StPs. Snapcaster continues that trend, giving you basically twelve one-mana targeted removal spells, which should be enough to kill almost every problem aggro guy in the course of a game.

There's also the simple fact that Snapcaster is in a better color and gives more flexibility than Bob. I mean, yeah, Bob draws cards, but Snapcaster will almost always "draw" the exact card you want while Bob...might or might not. Snapcaster is blue and is therefore easier to use, while Bob is black. They both place similar deckbuilding restrictions on you: you don't want to be too top-heavy with Bob or you'll die, and you want a low curve with Snapcaster for mana efficiency purposes.

Overall, while I think Bob may be more powerful in a vacuum, it is very close and Snapcaster is definitely more powerful in the current Legacy environment.

[wcm8]

The cards aren't really that comparable in my opinion. Confidant is a draw engine; Snapcaster is a utility card. Utility cards fit in a bigger variety of decks, whereas draw engines typically require a deck to be built around them for maximum effect. I will say that in general Tiago is a much better topdeck, and arguably is part of better -decks- right now, but I think you're comparing apple to oranges here.

(Yes they bear some superficial resemblance by both being player-designed 2cmc 2/1 wizards, but aside from that the cards have very different applications.)

[Mr. Safety]

Wouldn't it be a fair bit of awesome to just play both, and leave the semantics out of the picture?

[Shawn]

Snapcaster plus Riptide isn't a fair comparison to Whispers of the Muse. First of all, Riptide is a land, so it doesn't take up the same type of deck space as a spell. Secondly, Whispers draws a random card, whereas reusing Snapcaster will always get you a spell. Thirdly, the mana can be broken up into several turns, you don't need 6 all at once. Lastly, Snapcaster can interact on the board and can create a series of infinite chump blocks on a Goyf or Knight if you haven't machine-gunned their board down if you've drawn multiple removal spells throughout the coarse of the game, whereas Whispers doesn't touch the board state.

My next point is slightly off topic, but I feel as though some people overvalue things such as card advantage in this format, especially since it is so tempo-based. (and this is coming from someone who loves playing with Standstills) Who cares if you have or will have a million cards, if you are far behind on board and a bunch of dorks are about to kill you?

[GGoober]

The nice thing about Snapcaster is:

If you cast it and they can't GY-hate you or have a counterspell, you will almost guaranteed to cast the card outside of your opponents countering the spell. For Bob, he runs into BOTH counters and removal. Snapcaster, like SFM, kind of ignores removal. You can remove SFM, but the equipment is already in hand (although obviously killing SFM tutoring for Batterskull is some form of answer but doesn't answer the fact that SFM has already tutored up another card). This is why during MM-era, I very often felt SFM was stronger than Bob. You can answer Bob with both counter/removal, but SFM can only really be answered with counterspells (if they tutored up the equipment, the hurt was done).

Snapcaster is pretty much similar to SFM in terms of card 'advantage'. There are some restrictions for lists playing Snapcaster. You need to pack CHEAP and WORTHWHILE instants. Snapcaster is more suited for decks going into the mid/late game because your GY starts becoming an invaluable resource. Unlike SFM/Bob, drawing that Snapcaster early game isn't great. Snapcaster starts shining in matchups where opposing dorks aren't huge e.g. Maverick/Goblins/BW etc. Your opponent can risk getting blown out with a 2/1 blocking a dude and double removal. Snapcaster is also incredible against a creature-light metagame since recycling limited removal increases the answers you can get against those creature-light decks.

It's all situational. Currently, since everyone enjoys playing threat-light and permission/removal heavy decks (look at the SCG BUG aggro-control lists), it is no wonder why the meta will be skewed towards Snapcaster mages, because that is a meta where more removal beats the threat, and sometimes that Snapcaster gets there :P

I personally see a lot more potential in Snapcaster, but it isn't a golden creature that will dominate any metagame. I do find Riptide Lab and Snapcaster extremely dirty, but in all honesty, if you can afford all that mana over 3-4 turns reusing 3 useful targets in your GY (i.e. lots of instants have to be in your GY if you want to pull off Riptide/Snapping), then that's already a pretty good board position for you lol.

I still always feel that Bob will always be the best creature ever printed, because he is the only creature in the game that screams "DEAL WITH ME", irregardless of the meta and irregardless of any opposing matchup.

[justindz]

I currently feel like Snapcaster is better than Dark Confidant. Of course, this is all relative to your deck, the meta, blah blah. I mean in a vacuum. Many of the points were covered above. Here's one additional point that I find really compelling:

Bob creates a negative restriction on deck design. It can be risky to run too many high-cost spells (e.g. Tombstalker + Forces + Jaces).

Snapcaster loosens a restriction on deck design. You can build more loosely around bullet effects and rely on using them multiple times.

Viewed that way, I think it's fair to say that you must build around both cards but one card forces concessions whereas the other one opens up more options. Subtle, but important.

Also, Bob doesn't pitch to Force. <-- TROLL!

[Tammit67]

Bob is good, but it is hard to get value out of him in legacy, as often he eats a bolt as the goyf rushes past.

In the design space of magic, Bob is wayyyy better, but in legacy, I can see where Drew is coming from.

[Esper3k]

I disagree on Snapcaster loosening up deckbuilding restrictions - I think it also makes it restrictive.

See, with Snapcaster, you have to play a certain number of instants / sorceries to be able to use it, probably around 12 or so to be safe. On top of that, those spells can't be expensive ones (anything more than 2 CMC is pretty much useless), so things like FoW don't really work for counting spells for SCM.

[Gheizen64]

Bob is good, but it is hard to get value out of him in legacy, as often he eats a bolt as the goyf rushes past.

In the design space of magic, Bob is wayyyy better, but in legacy, I can see where Drew is coming from.

Yeah pretty much. Bob is fantastic but in legacy i've almost never satisfied with him, he get removed by everything and life total matter more often than you'd think when everyone play 4/5 for 1G and 7/7 for 1WG.
Snapcaster dodge the removal issue and is blue, hence better. If Tiago were red, it would be another story, but as a blue card i feel it's usually the better card in this format. And it's still overhyped imho.

[DragoFireheart]

Bob is over hyped. If he were as amazing as the theory craft suggested he'd get played more, but the fact that your life total DOES matter and how he dies to every creature removal (short of crap like Snuff Out) makes him very fragile and hard to protect.

Snappy is blue, has flash, and removal doesn't prevent his flashback effect. He's good at what he does: giving you more card advantage in the mid-to-late game areas.

[MDB]

Apples and oranges...

Goyfy, Darky, Snappy, Misty, about time to get a Firey!

That red super twodrop is soo overdue...

Anyways, I agree with Mr. Safety, Bob & Tiago seem pretty nifty together.
But I can see how they can compete for the same spot in a UB-list, despite the aforementioned differences.

[caiomarcos]

Snappy is blue

Nuff said. Put it on green and it would be 10% of what he is now. So no, Snapcaster is no better than Bob. Blue is better then Black.

[Tammit67]

Nuff said. Put it on green and it would be 10% of what he is now. So no, Snapcaster is no better than Bob. Blue is better then Black.

If he was green he would be easily splashable. The only deck that would have to change its manabase that currently runs him would be stoneblade which admittedly is an issue, but everything else doesn't care. He'd get nearly as much attention.

InFact, I'd go out on a limb to say he'd see MORE attention in green/red than he does now, since decks like zoo or maverick would like to utilize card advantage and a body. Blue gets a lot of options when it comes to card advantage, other decks have to work at it.

[nayon]

What's with the hate towards Drew Levin in this place?

[Koby]

If he was green he would be easily splashable. The only deck that would have to change its manabase that currently runs him would be stoneblade which admittedly is an issue, but everything else doesn't care. He'd get nearly as much attention.

InFact, I'd go out on a limb to say he'd see MORE attention in green/red than he does now, since decks like zoo or maverick would like to utilize card advantage and a body. Blue gets a lot of options when it comes to card advantage, other decks have to work at it.

Which probably explains why he seems to be best utilized in RUG decks. Recycling StP is nice, but recycling Lightning Bolt is better (when it comes to going aggro, and more versatile).

[metamet]

What's with the hate towards Drew Levin in this place?

... it's Drew Levin?

All kidding aside, I'll relay what I've heard on a few occasions: Drew isn't necessarily known for his play skill or his placing. To many, the SCG circuit feels like a glorified FNM with Legacy, so there isn't a ton of reverence for someone who grinds out a top 8 once in a while.

/the views of this post do not necessarily reflect those of the poster. I personally have no issue with, well, anyone.

[GGoober]

I never met Drew, some say he's nice IRL, some say he's arrogant, some say he's a bad player. I just don't like his article. They're always in the tone of "This deck is amazing (his series of stompy articles in a period of 2 weeks)" or "This article is going to be about Legacy except I'm going to talk about myself".

It wasn't a loss when his articles went premium while we keep the better ones free (Mon Goblin Chief, Hatfields, Brian deMars etc). This isn't meant to downball Drew, but it's just criticism from a reader.

[nayon]

I never met Drew, some say he's nice IRL, some say he's arrogant, some say he's a bad player. I just don't like his article. They're always in the tone of "This deck is amazing (his series of stompy articles in a period of 2 weeks)" or "This article is going to be about Legacy except I'm going to talk about myself".

It wasn't a loss when his articles went premium while we keep the better ones free (Mon Goblin Chief, Hatfields, Brian deMars etc). This isn't meant to downball Drew, but it's just criticism from a reader.

I've met him several times, and he's a really nice guy. As for his articles, I kinda see your point in that regard, but then again almost every single Magic writer sells their decks as the hottest thing since sliced bread.

[joemauer]

Remember when mental misstep was banned and everyone said snapcaster mages were going to be worthless.......I guess he isn't so bad after all.

[baghdadbob]

They are both good cards in there respected places. They are also great in combination with each other. As for which is better I would say Snap Caster for a few reasons.

-Pitches to Force (Trolololol)...but seriously.
-Essentially gives you 8 plus/minus copys of all removal and counterspells in your deck.
-FLASH! This is such a huge factor and in my opinion gives it an overwhelming edge over Bob. If Bob had flash this debate would be over.
-Magic is a game of math and lets face it guys Tiago Chan is Asian and Bob is a white dood, who do you want on your side? :tongue:

[Koby]

True story - I've lost to Snapcaster Mage flashing back nothing, attacking for 2. Bear with Flash is way underestimated.

[baghdadbob]

True story - I've lost to Snapcaster Mage flashing back nothing, attacking for 2. Bear with Flash is way underestimated.

Exactly at worst snapcaster mage is a 2/1 blocker OUT OF NO WHERE!

[bowvamp]

Snapcaster is too mana intensive for today's meta. He's hard to compare to Bob for that reason. His advantage is that you don't "have" to play him till later. But if you wait till later with Bob, you'll still get Bob. It might even be a good idea to wait till later if you're banking on Bob being your game winner, so that he's more protected. I think Riptide Laboratory is too mana intensive as well.

Also, what's with everyone making cute nicknames all of a sudden? I don't think that it would make me seem like a better player if I called my Tombstalker Tomby or my Mishra's Factory Mishra-y (although I do call it Factory some times).

[JJ_JKidd]

SCM gets you the cards you "need." Generally, however, Bob is better for obvious reasons like it does not need any cost when it activates, etc. You know all these so-called PROS trying to super hype up new cards so that their prices will skyrocket. Speculating bitches!

[baghdadbob]

SCM gets you the cards you "need." Generally, however, Bob is better for obvious reasons like it does not need any cost when it activates, etc. You know all these so-called PROS trying to super hype up new cards so that their prices will skyrocket. Speculating bitches!

Or the card is just that good and you can't afford any so you are undervaluing it to make up for your lack of legal tender. This is what people in the field of psychology call cognitive dissonance.

[UnsungHero]

Its always great when a new card like Mega Man is released and people say how mediocre it is or compares it to a card that does something totally different. Seems like people still haven't learned anything from Jace. Test the card out for yourself and see what you think. Mega Man is good. Bob is good. Its a really silly comparison because they do totally different things.

[Rizso]

While I like bob more then Megaman. Megaman does do at least 2 for 1 unless it gets countered.

[xDITx Force of Will]

No dissenting opinion here; both are exceptional two drops.

I feel like Dark Confidant is more of an urgent threat, whereas Snapcaster is an excellent one time play. Everyone has already spoken about the virtual card advantage Snapcaster creates and how well it works in many control decks. I feel that Dark Confidant, unanswered for any amount of time is worse to be up against than a flashed back Brainstorm, Edict or Bolt.

I play decks with both :)

[Mr. Safety]

True story - I've lost to Snapcaster Mage flashing back nothing, attacking for 2. Bear with Flash is way underestimated.

Time for some trolling: I've been testing Ambush Viper over Dismember maindeck in a RUG tempo homebrew. Bear with flash and deathtouch is way underestimated.

[RJM]

Time for some trolling: I've been testing Ambush Viper over Dismember maindeck in a RUG tempo homebrew. Bear with flash and deathtouch is way underestimated.

For the fact alone that it gets hit by Spell Snare, which is presently everywhere, I'd say I prefer having Dismember.

[Piceli89]

For the fact alone that it gets hit by Spell Snare and every removal of the format, which is presently everywhere, I'd say I prefer having Dismember.

[baghdadbob]

No dissenting opinion here; both are exceptional two drops.

I feel like Dark Confidant is more of an urgent threat, whereas Snapcaster is an excellent one time play. Everyone has already spoken about the virtual card advantage Snapcaster creates and how well it works in many control decks. I feel that Dark Confidant, unanswered for any amount of time is worse to be up against than a flashed back Brainstorm, Edict or Bolt.

I play decks with both :)

Exactly, very well said.

[kiblast]

For the fact alone that it gets hit by Spell Snare and every removal of the format, which is presently everywhere, I'd say I prefer having Dismember.

This is called baiting the removal, in all honestly.K, just joking.

Back in topic: the main difference between Bob and Tiago is that Bob is way easier to answer (as already many of you said), while Tiago (it has flash, so it's a bit more difficult to answer) is easily subject to Stifle. And with the renewed wave of tempo decks, Stifle is a present problem.
But, if opponent for some reason doesn't answer your Bob and you are playing it in a blue deck, you just won.

To me Bob is still more broken.
But I like Tiago because lets me stay Ux mana open, and pitches.
Eh, I guess I'll have to play both :D

[Mr. Safety]

For the fact alone that it gets hit by Spell Snare and every removal of the format, which is presently everywhere, I'd say I prefer having Dismember.


If they waste removal on my Ambush Viper, so much the better. It means my Delver and Grim Lavamancers are avoiding removal. If they play Spell Snare on my Ambush Viper, in response: Spell Pierce, Force of Will, Daze, or Brainstorm into Force/Daze (hopefully.) I find the argument of 'Spell Snare is being played' to be rather weak...does that make Hymn to Tourach, Smother, Go for the Throat, Dark Confidant, Tarmogoyf, Snapcaster Mage, and Qasali Pridemage unplayable now? Removal is removal, it's always around. If removal was the end-all-be-all of a deck's/cards's potential success, Thrun the Last Troll and Troll Ascetic would be the best creatures in the format.

I would just like to reiterate this very important word:


testing

On topic, I have been seeing some pretty hawt setups with Bob, Tiago, tied in with a Stifle-Naught package. I feel that this is an insanely powerful strategy right now. Playing 8 Stifles with Dreadnaughts is good, along with more than 4 of any of the other powerful cards in that setup (Spell Snare, Spell Pierce, Brainstorm, Ghastly Demise, Hymn to Tourach, etc.)

[Offler]

Well the Stifle-Dreadnaught-Snapcaster seems to me really powerful...

But does differ much from stifle-dreadnaught-torpor orb? depends much on rest of the deck... Snapcaster is more versatile...

[SpikeyMikey]

If removal was the end-all-be-all of a deck's/cards's potential success, Thrun the Last Troll and Troll Ascetic would be the best creatures in the format.


On an interesting side note, my roomate and I were playing the other day and for shits and grins, he busted out the old San Diego Zoo listing, circa 2004. 4 Nimble Mongoose and 3 Troll Ascetic was a HUGE problem for my BUGstill, even with Liliana. I'm currently working on a Bant deck with Nim, Troll and Geist. It's an amalgam of the Hexproof/Shroud creature concept and New Horizons. Calling it "Hammer Pants" (because of Can't Touch This. Lame, I know). I'm not saying it's going to be the next big thing, but it has potential. People have forgotten how difficult multiple shroud creatures are to deal with.

[Mr. Safety]

On an interesting side note, my roomate and I were playing the other day and for shits and grins, he busted out the old San Diego Zoo listing, circa 2004. 4 Nimble Mongoose and 3 Troll Ascetic was a HUGE problem for my BUGstill, even with Liliana. I'm currently working on a Bant deck with Nim, Troll and Geist. It's an amalgam of the Hexproof/Shroud creature concept and New Horizons. Calling it "Hammer Pants" (because of Can't Touch This. Lame, I know). I'm not saying it's going to be the next big thing, but it has potential. People have forgotten how difficult multiple shroud creatures are to deal with.

I agree...but are you doing it because Spell Snare is ruining your chances of resolving any 2-mana threats? I didn't think so...

[SpikeyMikey]

I agree...but are you doing it because Spell Snare is ruining your chances of resolving any 2-mana threats? I didn't think so...

No. But blanking Spell Snare was a nice side benefit of my previous deck. Daze was the only 2 drop until it was replaced with MM.

It comes into play. I mean, a spell that blanks a commonly played counter like Snare or Pierce, that's a plus in the favor of that spell. Not paying 4 life is a plus also. You have to weigh these things. Saying "it's not good because of Spell Snare" is silly. There's no single criterion that determines the viability of a card in Legacy. No Jace Test. No Liliana Test. Not even a Morphling Test. There's just careful evaluation of the card in relation to the rest of the deck and what you're trying to do. Dismember is Snappable, Ambush Viper isn't. But Ambush Viper is an acceptable draw in a topdeck war, Dismember is not. Which would be superior would depend on the deck it's going in.

[Mr. Safety]

We are agreeing, just saying it differently, lol.

This is the list I was thinking of using Ambush Viper in:

4x Delver of Secrets
4x Nimble Mongoose
3x Grim Lavamancer
2x Ambush Viper
2x Snapcaster Mage

3x Force of Will
3x Daze
4x Brainstorm
3x Spell Snare
2x Spell Pierce
4x Lightning Bolt
3x Fire/Ice
2x Ponder
1x Sylvan Library

4x Wasteland
4x Misty Rainforest
4x Scalding Tarn
2x Volcanic Island
2x Tropical Island
1x Taiga
1x Mountain
1x Island
1x Forest


Dismember may indeed be the way to go...but I'm fighting against my urge to play less than 20 lands (even with 6 cantrips and a Sylvan Library) I like the fact that there is 15 creatures in there, but it may be too many for Delver and Snapcaster to work together well. I like that Ambush Viper can be an answer to a fat Knight of the Reliquary attacking me (and Knights were well represented in the top 8 at PT-Amsterdam)

[kiblast]

I find the argument of 'Spell Snare is being played' to be rather weak...does that make Hymn to Tourach, Smother, Go for the Throat, Dark Confidant, Tarmogoyf, Snapcaster Mage, and Qasali Pridemage unplayable now?


No, obviously. But 60 cards are so few that I'd never waste a slot for Ambush Viper anyway. The fact that Spell Snare both hits Time Walk and Ambush Viper doesn't make Ambush Viper better.


If removal was the end-all-be-all of a deck's/cards's potential success, Thrun the Last Troll and Troll Ascetic would be the best creatures in the format.

In my opinion Troll Ascetic is the most underrated beater in the format.
Edit: Just think of him in the old Green Chalice Aggro build with 4 GSZ and 3 Jitte maindeck.

[Offler]

Hm. I just realized one thing. Snapcaster is not wanted only in Type 2. Legacy and many formats are interested in the card.

Remember the Mental Misstep? It made boom in legacy and vintage, and after some time no one remembered...

Snapcaster is different. If it affects both type 2 and legacy and maybe all formats in the way, and it really shows why that card is going to be so much expensive...

[Mr. Safety]

No, obviously. But 60 cards are so few that I'd never waste a slot for Ambush Viper anyway. The fact that Spell Snare both hits Time Walk and Ambush Viper doesn't make Ambush Viper better.

I'm a little lost on the Time Walk reference...



In my opinion Troll Ascetic is the most underrated beater in the format.
Edit: Just think of him in the old Green Chalice Aggro build with 4 GSZ and 3 Jitte maindeck.

Sure thing, very underrated. He shows up in rogue decks (tier 2) but not generally in tier 1-1.5.

[Zilla]

I'm a little lost on the Time Walk reference...
Confused me too, but I think he's saying Ambush Viper is a bad card regardless of Spell Snare.

[Mr. Safety]

I'm fairly sure that's what he means, too.

It's funny...if Ambush Viper were printed in alpha, he would have been awesome. Now, he's just 'meh, whatever.'

[SpikeyMikey]

I'm fairly sure that's what he means, too.

It's funny...if Ambush Viper were printed in alpha, he would have been awesome. Now, he's just 'meh, whatever.'

That applies to 90% of the cards printed these days. If Delver of Secrets was in Alpha, Scott John's Zoo would've been a dominating force at least until storm combo appeared and RGW aggro would have another name entirely.

[caiomarcos]

That applies to 90% of the CREATURE cards printed these days. If Delver of Secrets was in Alpha, Scott John's Zoo would've been a dominating force at least until storm combo appeared and RGW aggro would have another name entirely.

Now that's correct.

[SpikeyMikey]

Mostly the creatures. But there are some non-creature cards that would make people turn their heads in 1994/95. Doom Blade is Dark Banishing at Terror's cost. Dismember would be pretty hot too, probably better than Oubliette or Paralyze. Oblivion Ring, Moorland Haunt, Batterskull (oh man, imagine Batterskull in an era where Sengir and Serra were the best creatures in the game), any of the planeswalkers... Draw is a little sketchy when compared to Ancestral, but Blue Sun's Zenith matches up favorably with Braingeyser and things like Ponder or Preordain would have been good back then too. Far better than Brainstorm in that era(assuming Vintage restricted list). Mimic Vat would've been pretty nuts.

[Zilla]

Honestly Ambush Viper isn't that bad, specifically in RUG. It provides outs to KotR, which are sorely lacking in those colors, unless you count Gilded Drake or Submerge. It would be a hell of a lot better if it were a flying 1/1 for 1G so it could answer Tombstalker, though. Or even just a 1/1 for G would be better for tempo. Still, it's not awful as is.

[Mr. Safety]

Honestly Ambush Viper isn't that bad, specifically in RUG. It provides outs to KotR, which are sorely lacking in those colors, unless you count Gilded Drake or Submerge. It would be a hell of a lot better if it were a flying 1/1 for 1G so it could answer Tombstalker, though. Or even just a 1/1 for G would be better for tempo. Still, it's not awful as is.

You summed up my whole reasoning for testing the little sucker: Knight of the Reliquary. Looking at PT-Amsterdam, there was a big showing of Knight of the Reliquary. Honestly, Goyf can be problematic for RUG colors as well. Fire/Ice can deal with it temporarily, but not permanently. Your other option is to counter it, but if you have removal why waste a counterspell? Just my thought process is all...again, testing. It's not like I'm staking anything on this snake.

[Dark Ritual]

Eh, I'd rather play gilded drake than ambush viper. Stealing knight is nice and gilded drake is sweetness against reanimator; cast drake when they have jin in play is priceless.

So many cards that are printed now would have been the stones if they were printed in alpha/beta but alas they weren't. So many of the creatures they print now just trump the older creatures in terms of power level. Delver of secrets? Bonkers. Olivia Voldaren? Sooo broken. Even phyrexian vatmother would be just sick. And all those dragons and angels they print nowadays are just plain better than the older options like serra angel and shivan dragon.

[kiblast]

Mostly the creatures. But there are some non-creature cards that would make people turn their heads in 1994/95. Doom Blade is Dark Banishing at Terror's cost. Dismember would be pretty hot too, probably better than Oubliette or Paralyze. Oblivion Ring, Moorland Haunt, Batterskull (oh man, imagine Batterskull in an era where Sengir and Serra were the best creatures in the game), any of the planeswalkers... Draw is a little sketchy when compared to Ancestral, but Blue Sun's Zenith matches up favorably with Braingeyser and things like Ponder or Preordain would have been good back then too. Far better than Brainstorm in that era(assuming Vintage restricted list). Mimic Vat would've been pretty nuts.

Yeah, but is also a matter of the other cards in the deck that make certain cards shine today through particular build/synergies (like Brainstorm before-after introduction of lots of shuffle effects in decks through fetchlands). But I'm 100% sure that Mimic as you say, or Batterskull,or Jitte would have been incredibly overpowered/ very good.
And, just think of the obvious power creep of 4-5cc creatures. Beta Baneslayer? lol.

[dahcmai]

Heh, it took me forever to agree with people that Brainstorm was decent. You have to consider I played back then and Brainstorm was serious trash during Ice Age. That was common knowledge. Fetches were the only thing that changed my mind on that. I still liked Impulse over it for the longest time.

Impulse, now that was serious searching power. Lim Dul's Vault was awesome, though getting the card was still a big deal.

It seriously cracks me up to hear about Brainstorm being the best card in Legacy. It's even funnier to hear how everyone talks about strategy on when to cast it. Too funny.



Sorry of subject a lot, but that always kills me.

Anyway, I really have to agree that Snapcaster is better than Confidant. Unearth has convinced me alone. It makes the thing broken as hell. if I have Blue in my deck I'm using Snapcasters. That's all there is to it. It's too good to make people play around counters and removal at the same time all the time. He makes all play decisions suck with three open mana and something in the yard. That's worth a ton. What do I have in my yard? well, you have to play around those too now. That's annoying as hell and awesome to be on the other end.

Yeah, he's gold.

[Admiral_Arzar]

Anyway, I really have to agree that Snapcaster is better than Confidant. Unearth has convinced me alone. It makes the thing broken as hell. if I have Blue in my deck I'm using Snapcasters. That's all there is to it. It's too good to make people play around counters and removal at the same time all the time. He makes all play decisions suck with three open mana and something in the yard. That's worth a ton. What do I have in my yard? well, you have to play around those too now. That's annoying as hell and awesome to be on the other end.

Yeah, he's gold.

I was standing pretty staunchly by Bob in this debate because I hadn't played against Snapcaster yet. I got to play against RUG tempo with Snapcasters using Spiral Tide this weekend - it turned the matchup from favored to highly unfavored for me (Tide usually beats Canadian thresh unless they get the nuts both pre and postboard). "Snapcaster targeting REB" is pretty backbreaking, as was "Snapcaster targeting the Surgical Extraction on Time Spiral that you just forced." So yeah, Snapcaster is absolutely beyond stupid, and I honestly don't understand how WOTC could rationalize printing it in blue.

[metamet]

It seriously cracks me up to hear about Brainstorm being the best card in Legacy. It's even funnier to hear how everyone talks about strategy on when to cast it. Too funny.


Are you being serious here? Because... well, I've seen many people go turn 1, play a fetch, pass; eot, crack the fetch, brainstorm.

To recognize that that is a terrible play is, well, strategy.

/side :)

[sir]

They're just displaying confidence to throw you off and lull you into a dangerously carefree attitude and a false sense of security. "I'm already sure I won't want to shuffle this." Mind games, my friend, mind games. :cool:

[ddt15]

I was standing pretty staunchly by Bob in this debate because I hadn't played against Snapcaster yet. I got to play against RUG tempo with Snapcasters using Spiral Tide this weekend - it turned the matchup from favored to highly unfavored for me (Tide usually beats Canadian thresh unless they get the nuts both pre and postboard). "Snapcaster targeting REB" is pretty backbreaking, as was "Snapcaster targeting the Surgical Extraction on Time Spiral that you just forced." So yeah, Snapcaster is absolutely beyond stupid, and I honestly don't understand how WOTC could rationalize printing it in blue.
²nd that. I don't know why wizards bans misstep because "it forces people to play blue" then print stuff like snapcaster. It would have been totally insane if MM weren't banned. But its pretty good too with all the other 1-mana counterspells, or plow, or hymn, or REB, or bolt, or brainstorm. Blue does not need more answer-all cards. TBH, if they printed it in another color, it would just get splashed in anyway unless maybe it required double color cost.

Delver is pretty stupid too, but at least its somewhat limited to threshold.

[Mr. Safety]

²nd that. I don't know why wizards bans misstep because "it forces people to play blue" then print stuff like snapcaster. It would have been totally insane if MM weren't banned. But its pretty good too with all the other 1-mana counterspells, or plow, or hymn, or REB, or bolt, or brainstorm. Blue does not need more answer-all cards. TBH, if they printed it in another color, it would just get splashed in anyway unless maybe it required double color cost.

Delver is pretty stupid too, but at least its somewhat limited to threshold.

Agree here, except for Delver. Delver is great. We have another Wild Nacatl, I don't see this as a big deal. *shrug*

[Koby]

I don't understand how people are still surprised when WotC prints good Blue cards. They've been doing this for years and obviously don't care that they're propping Blue up at the expense of other colors (namely Red).

[TooCloseToTheSun]

I don't understand how people are still surprised when WotC prints good Blue cards. They've been doing this for years and obviously don't care that they're propping Blue up at the expense of other colors (namely Red).

Yeah why is no one playing red? /sarcasm

[Koby]

Yeah why is no one playing red? /sarcasm

Sadly, Red only serves one purpose: Direct Damage. Everything else is a wash.

[TooCloseToTheSun]

Sadly, Red only serves one purpose: Direct Damage. Everything else is a wash.

This is just false.

Blood Moon
Magus of the Moon
Red Elemental Blast
Pyroblast
Imperial Recruiter

to name a few.

[Admiral_Arzar]

I don't understand how people are still surprised when WotC prints good Blue cards. They've been doing this for years and obviously don't care that they're propping Blue up at the expense of other colors (namely Red).

Sometimes I like to think that they've learned their lesson, but it's never true.

[Octopusman]

Maybe I'm wrong, but I've been playing since the early 90's and I definitely remember periods where I felt like Blue was nerfed into the ground for long durations. I thought they had learned their lesson. I remember thinking how "blue has to suffer now because of what was printed in the past". Seriously, go back and look at prophecy through apocalypse. Nemesis at least gave blue AK and rising waters. Odyssey changed things with tog and we got a decent UB pro card.
Onslaught - Scrourge was pretty embarassing for blue as well imo except for Stifle (and mind's desire?), which will always be a card that comes and goes as far as a meta call.
Even Mirrodin block was pretty weak except for that moment when Broodstar laid the beat down prior to ravager being printed. Although, thoughtcast was pretty heavily played even thought they banned pretty much the whole deck except for that card.

Then they printed Gifts Ungiven and it has seen some good stuff since then.

I think we all know that Wotc does not really design with eternal in mind. Perhaps they used to and that's why I remember blue being oppressed. So when something good is printed in blue, we notice it more, imo. Then you end up with Jace 2.0, Mental Misstep, Snapcaster in standard.
Personally, I don't think that U needs to be nerfed. I just wish they would buff red (and I don't mean better burn or more broken goblins).

As long as they pretend there's a color pie, blue just has some dangerous characteristics. They need to invent more interesting characteristics for the other colors or do some shifting.
We have all been crying about how we want red to do something other than be some berserked goblin or direct damage spell.
They gave up/pulled the plug on land destruction and didn't replace it with anything. Also, they took Fork and made it blue.

I want to see more land punishment or mana using punishment but this is a dangerous design space so I understand why these tend to usually be too terrible to be playable unless they turn out to be super good (power surge vs. magus of the moon - yes, hard to compare).
I really want to see a 1R 2/2 hatebear in red that is Manabarbs.

Good discussion.
And no, I don't think that Snapcaster is better than Confidant in a vaccuum. Outside of the vaccuum, I do believe he's better than Confidant.

Here's the thing. Snapcaster has tighter design constraints when building a deck than Confidant. With Confidant, you are usually wondering if it's worth the small percentage chance that you're going to blind flip a 5cmc or similar. With Snapcaster, he is quickly dismissed if the other cards in the deck do not warrant his inclusion. Also, it's more mana intensive.

I think that confidant is one of the scariest control cards ever printed. I think that Snapcaster is one of the scariest tempo cards ever printed.

Consider how many good players will stack their library so they take 0 from a land if they didn't need to set it up to draw an additional answer they needed. You might not see the gains from this until another turn or two when the card advantage starts to accumulate. With Snapcaster, you are never snapping back a land drop. When it's used correctly, it's going to get an answer that you have almost always already used. That's at minimum a 2 for 1 in that situation and it may be a 3 for 1 if they get desperate and spend a card removing the snapcaster.
When you're snapping back swords and similar, it's not an unlikely scenario that a U player is going to have a clear board to be swinging in the red zone for 2 each turn.

Maybe Path is better since it'll take a ton of turns for the Snapcaster to make up for all of the plow healing...

[Fossil4182]

I believe Snapcaster Mage will be better than Dark Confidant in Legacy.

The primary reason is that Snapcaster gains you immediate value if they do not counter it. For example, if you cast Confidant and your opponent removes it before your next upkeep, you haven't really gained a lot of value except trading a creature for a removal spell. If Snapcaster isn't countered, you immediately gain some degree of value since you can potentially recur a spell from your graveyard. Dark Confidant shines in Vintage because it is a removal light format which means the you're much more likely to generate card advantage with it. Overall, Legacy is a removal heavy format which makes protecting a Confidant much more difficult. I'm not disputing the ability of Confidant to take over a game with card advantage, but the probably of that occurring on a regular basis is much more difficult given the landscape of Legacy.

As an aside, I think looking at the two is a somewhat awkward comparison. Dark Confidant is a card advantage engine. Snapcaster can do an impersonation of this by recurring Brainstorm etc. However, Snapcaster is more of a jack of all trades in terms of its application and is limited by what spells are in the graveyard. I think the best way I can articulate why I have a problem with this comparison is that these two cards don't compete for the same slots. Decks will be constructed very differently to take full advantage of either so a vacuum comparison of the cards seem difficult.

[Julian23]

This is just false.

Blood Moon
Magus of the Moon
Red Elemental Blast
Pyroblast
Imperial Recruiter

to name a few.

While not disagreeing with your general statement, the fact that you basically included 2 cards that are almost exact reprints of two cards already on your list is so ironic when discussing red's impact on the format.

On topic: Dark Confidant is just way more powerful than any other 2-drop. However, Legacy just isn't all about power. As people have pointed out, creature removal is abundant; therefor, a card that provides immediate CA is very likely to provide higher EV than a card like Bob, that needs to survive for a whole turn.

[caiomarcos]

However, Snapcaster is more of a jack of all trades

I'd say that Bob is much more versatile and could give you advantages in many more builds than snapcaster. So no, personally I think that bob is of more trades than snapcaster. It is worth playing from Aggro Loam to Storm Combo with no extra deck tweaking.


Maybe I'm wrong, but I've been playing since the early 90's and I definitely remember periods where I felt like Blue was nerfed into the ground for long durations. I thought they had learned their lesson. I remember thinking how "blue has to suffer now because of what was printed in the past". Seriously, go back and look at prophecy through apocalypse. Nemesis at least gave blue AK and rising waters. Odyssey changed things with tog and we got a decent UB pro card.
Onslaught - Scrourge was pretty embarassing for blue as well imo except for Stifle (and mind's desire?), which will always be a card that comes and goes as far as a meta call.
Even Mirrodin block was pretty weak except for that moment when Broodstar laid the beat down prior to ravager being printed. Although, thoughtcast was pretty heavily played even thought they banned pretty much the whole deck except for that card.

Then they printed Gifts Ungiven and it has seen some good stuff since then.

I think we all know that Wotc does not really design with eternal in mind. Perhaps they used to and that's why I remember blue being oppressed. So when something good is printed in blue, we notice it more, imo. Then you end up with Jace 2.0, Mental Misstep, Snapcaster in standard.
Personally, I don't think that U needs to be nerfed. I just wish they would buff red (and I don't mean better burn or more broken goblins).

As long as they pretend there's a color pie, blue just has some dangerous characteristics. They need to invent more interesting characteristics for the other colors or do some shifting.
We have all been crying about how we want red to do something other than be some berserked goblin or direct damage spell.
They gave up/pulled the plug on land destruction and didn't replace it with anything. Also, they took Fork and made it blue.

I want to see more land punishment or mana using punishment but this is a dangerous design space so I understand why these tend to usually be too terrible to be playable unless they turn out to be super good (power surge vs. magus of the moon - yes, hard to compare).
I really want to see a 1R 2/2 hatebear in red that is Manabarbs.

Good discussion.
And no, I don't think that Snapcaster is better than Confidant in a vaccuum. Outside of the vaccuum, I do believe he's better than Confidant.

Here's the thing. Snapcaster has tighter design constraints when building a deck than Confidant. With Confidant, you are usually wondering if it's worth the small percentage chance that you're going to blind flip a 5cmc or similar. With Snapcaster, he is quickly dismissed if the other cards in the deck do not warrant his inclusion. Also, it's more mana intensive.

I think that confidant is one of the scariest control cards ever printed. I think that Snapcaster is one of the scariest tempo cards ever printed.

Consider how many good players will stack their library so they take 0 from a land if they didn't need to set it up to draw an additional answer they needed. You might not see the gains from this until another turn or two when the card advantage starts to accumulate. With Snapcaster, you are never snapping back a land drop. When it's used correctly, it's going to get an answer that you have almost always already used. That's at minimum a 2 for 1 in that situation and it may be a 3 for 1 if they get desperate and spend a card removing the snapcaster.
When you're snapping back swords and similar, it's not an unlikely scenario that a U player is going to have a clear board to be swinging in the red zone for 2 each turn.

Maybe Path is better since it'll take a ton of turns for the Snapcaster to make up for all of the plow healing...

Maybe, and probably, one of the posts with the most truth content I've ever seen. So many things are right on spot and more importantly, so many things are so much relevant to the discussion, that I can add no more to what has already been said. QFMFT

[Tammit67]

I'd say that Bob is much more versatile and could give you advantages in many more builds than snapcaster. So no, personally I think that bob is of more trades than snapcaster. It is worth playing from Aggro Loam to Storm Combo with no extra deck tweaking.

Well, the reason why Bob works in Storm combo/aggro loam is because the decks are already constructed in such a way to abuse other engines that keep the average mana cost fairly low. Aggro loam averages about 1 CMC a card, thanks to many lands, diamond and chalice, while storm is storm, ranging between .8 with TES to a little higher with AnT. I wouldn't say at all that confidant does not restrict your deck requirements, because it absolutely does. As do all the cards that see play in this format.

[caiomarcos]

Well, the reason why Bob works in Storm combo/aggro loam is because the decks are already constructed in such a way to abuse other engines that keep the average mana cost fairly low. Aggro loam averages about 1 CMC a card, thanks to many lands, diamond and chalice, while storm is storm, ranging between .8 with TES to a little higher with AnT. I wouldn't say at all that confidant does not restrict your deck requirements, because it absolutely does. As do all the cards that see play in this format.

What's the average CMC of the entire format? If it was only for CMC reasons, Bob would go in many more decks than now.

Look at Team America decks, with Jaces and FoWs, has average CMC only slightly over 2, so Confidant is more than OK. The only restriction that Confidant would impose in a Legacy deck is already a format restriction.

[SpikeyMikey]

I think that confidant is one of the scariest control cards ever printed. I think that Snapcaster is one of the scariest tempo cards ever printed.

Consider how many good players will stack their library so they take 0 from a land if they didn't need to set it up to draw an additional answer they needed. You might not see the gains from this until another turn or two when the card advantage starts to accumulate. With Snapcaster, you are never snapping back a land drop. When it's used correctly, it's going to get an answer that you have almost always already used. That's at minimum a 2 for 1 in that situation and it may be a 3 for 1 if they get desperate and spend a card removing the snapcaster.
When you're snapping back swords and similar, it's not an unlikely scenario that a U player is going to have a clear board to be swinging in the red zone for 2 each turn.

Maybe Path is better since it'll take a ton of turns for the Snapcaster to make up for all of the plow healing...

Here's why I don't like Snapcaster though. Like you said, he's a tempo creature. He's not really that great in out-and-out control and he's not that good in aggro. But he's expensive. He's 3+ mana, really. It would be like if Vindicate only fit well into a tempo shell. He's a late game card in decks that don't ever want to see the late game.

[TooCloseToTheSun]

While not disagreeing with your general statement, the fact that you basically included 2 cards that are almost exact reprints of two cards already on your list is so ironic when discussing red's impact on the format.


Yeah, I have been working on a UR Tempo list and those cards were at the forefront of my mind. It does give you a general idea though, red does more than direct damage.

On Topic: I really didn't think that much of snapcaster at first, I just thought if people wanted more removal than run more removal. After a few games though, he is pretty ridiculous. He just seems to smooth games out, if he resolves he impacts the game right away. Confidant on the other hand needs to stick around, but if he does it almost always locks things up. These two seem to be in different roles, so it is kind of hard to compare them.

[Octopusman]

Here's why I don't like Snapcaster though. Like you said, he's a tempo creature. He's not really that great in out-and-out control and he's not that good in aggro. But he's expensive. He's 3+ mana, really. It would be like if Vindicate only fit well into a tempo shell. He's a late game card in decks that don't ever want to see the late game.

Hey SpikeyMikey. I respect that but doesn't tempo want to get into the late game by putting a vice grip on early plays? Their clock is usually weak and they grind out a win later on.
I view Snapcaster as the gas that tempo needs to stay relevant once you have progressed past the first few turns.

Thoughts? I'm tired.

[Octopusman]

Yeah, I have been working on a UR Tempo list and those cards were at the forefront of my mind. It does give you a general idea though, red does more than direct damage.

On Topic: I really didn't think that much of snapcaster at first, I just thought if people wanted more removal than run more removal. After a few games though, he is pretty ridiculous. He just seems to smooth games out, if he resolves he impacts the game right away. Confidant on the other hand needs to stick around, but if he does it almost always locks things up. These two seem to be in different roles, so it is kind of hard to compare them.

Snapping back pyroblast is ridiculous. I plan on doing a lot of this soon.

[SpikeyMikey]

Hey SpikeyMikey. I respect that but doesn't tempo want to get into the late game by putting a vice grip on early plays? Their clock is usually weak and they grind out a win later on.
I view Snapcaster as the gas that tempo needs to stay relevant once you have progressed past the first few turns.

Thoughts? I'm tired.

That's how the tempo decks use him. They use Snapcaster to replay whatever disruption seems most relevant at the time, or, if there is no relevant disruption to flash back, they Brainstorm. He provides decks with a lot of flexibility. But the flexibility comes at the cost of speed and redundancy. Snapcaster *can* be Hymn through Tourach 5-8. Or it can be Brainstorm 5-8. But it's very similar to Eternal Witness. Yes, Snapcaster has flash and costs 2 instead of 3. And it pitches to Force, which is not unimportant. But the actual effect is actually much weaker than Eternal Witness also. You can only get instants and sorceries and you have to use them the same turn.

Now the flash is huge. It increases the flexibility a great deal. I think that Snapcaster, because of it's casting cost and because of the improvement of flash, is better than Eternal Witness, the same as Spell Snare or Spell Pierce is better than Counterspell. But much as I don't believe that Spell Snare belongs in every control listing, I don't believe that most tempo listings get as much mileage out of him as they think they do.

The thing with recursion effects is that the space to fit them is always made by removing the effects you want to recur. You're trading the flexibility to decide which disruption effect to use with the redundancy of disruption effects. So if you draw the proper disruption effects to begin with, Snapcaster can let you reuse them. But you'd often get the same effect out of running more of your most important disruption and it would cost you less mana. You lose that flexibility in the mid game, but you strengthen your early game because you have usable disruption in your hand instead of a Snapcaster you can't get any value out of.

[DragoFireheart]

This is just false.

Blood Moon
Magus of the Moon
Red Elemental Blast
Pyroblast
Imperial Recruiter

to name a few.

Ironically, the better blue gets the better red gets as well due to some of those cards.

[Octopusman]

That's how the tempo decks use him. They use Snapcaster to replay whatever disruption seems most relevant at the time, or, if there is no relevant disruption to flash back, they Brainstorm. He provides decks with a lot of flexibility. But the flexibility comes at the cost of speed and redundancy. Snapcaster *can* be Hymn through Tourach 5-8. Or it can be Brainstorm 5-8. But it's very similar to Eternal Witness. Yes, Snapcaster has flash and costs 2 instead of 3. And it pitches to Force, which is not unimportant. But the actual effect is actually much weaker than Eternal Witness also. You can only get instants and sorceries and you have to use them the same turn.

Now the flash is huge. It increases the flexibility a great deal. I think that Snapcaster, because of it's casting cost and because of the improvement of flash, is better than Eternal Witness, the same as Spell Snare or Spell Pierce is better than Counterspell. But much as I don't believe that Spell Snare belongs in every control listing, I don't believe that most tempo listings get as much mileage out of him as they think they do.

The thing with recursion effects is that the space to fit them is always made by removing the effects you want to recur. You're trading the flexibility to decide which disruption effect to use with the redundancy of disruption effects. So if you draw the proper disruption effects to begin with, Snapcaster can let you reuse them. But you'd often get the same effect out of running more of your most important disruption and it would cost you less mana. You lose that flexibility in the mid game, but you strengthen your early game because you have usable disruption in your hand instead of a Snapcaster you can't get any value out of.

Totally agree with what you're saying. Which is why I'm really having a hard time justifying Snapcaster as a 4 of. There is snapcaster fever, but I fear that too many copies leads to less useful early game/starting hands.

I feel that for unearth type abuse he can be justified as a 4, though.
I never liked the "pitches to force" argument but if I go above 2 copies I feel that I will be doing that quite a bit.


For Snapcaster, it truly is an opportunity cost argument (like any other card in magic) in regards to early game sacrifices vs late game flexibility.