Printable View
Eh, I was tired when I made that post. LED's ability is a mana ability indeed, meaning you can play around Daze effectively.
The "Play only any time you could play an instant" clause is designed to keep you from announcing a spell, then using LED to pay for the cost of it.
Correct.
Lion's Eye Diamond is indeed a manasource.
It acts just like a mana source, in that it does not use the stack, and can't be responded to.
However, in eratta, it was changed so that unlike ALL other mana sources, this can only be played when you can play an instant.
This is because the original purpose of the card, before 6th was that it could ONLY be used to play abilities of cards already on the table, else it would be a Black Lotus. When the new rules came, they found a loop hole to the original printing, and playing it as mana source let you play 1 spell with it. Well 1 spell (yawgs will anyone?) was sometimes all you needed, so that eratted it to play when you can play an instant.
Of course people started running all their restricted cards sideboard, and ran 4 Burning wish, to now have 4 copies of Time Walk, Yawgs Will, and other restricted sourceries, for the extra cost of 1R. Using the LED to pay for the tutored card, made you able to play 4 Yawgs will, in a deck for only 1R each. Lion's and Burning both quickly got the Restriction, but now we have the same thing here in Legacy, (look at TES)
It is, which is why the current (post-6th) wording -- "play this ability only any time you could play an instant" -- makes sense. What I don't know is how the original wording of "play this ability as a mana source" made sense under 5E rules, because I don't know what the 5E rules were. (e.g. why being a mana source wasn't already implied, and why they didn't have to specify the instant speed restriction)Quote:
Originally Posted by outsideangel
The instant speed restriction didnt have to be specified under pre-6th Edition rules because pre-6th you couldnt say "Ill announce the casting of X, and sacrifice LED to pay for it". Once 6th edition rules came out, WOTC felt they needed to preserve the original functionality of the card and issue erratum. I'm not sure why the printed version clarifies its a mana source, but probably to stress that it can (or COULD) be played anytime, and couldnt be countered or responded to.
Under 5th edition rules, you had to have the mana in your mana pool before playing a spell - you couldn't activate mana abilities during announcement. So LED worked there (though the tutor trick still worked - there were just a lot fewer tutors back then; pretty much just Demonic Tutor and Demonic Consultation).Quote:
Originally Posted by Bovinious
The default rule for activated abilities was (and still is) to be playable at instant speed unless otherwise stated, which is why the printed version lists the ability as a mana source (which was at the time supposed to be the fastest possible action - faster than interrupts, and thus uncounterable. This meant that for a brief period it was productive to play a Dark Ritual with a Nether Void out, because the Ritual, as a mana source, couldn't be countered by NV's triggered ability).
Except we don't have any Time Walks or Yawgs Will or most of the other restricted socercies to tutor for.... so Burning Wish + LED isn't anywhere near as broken as it was in vintage.Quote:
Originally Posted by dragon_demon1
Kronicler
well duh silly...Quote:
Originally Posted by Kronicler
We do have Baby Yawgs, and Draw 7's though...
I'm just saying thats what TES was inspired by, Long.dec
Went to a mox jet / bezerk tournament this saturday this was the list I was playing.
4x GGT
3x Golgari Thug
4x Stinkweed
4x Putrid imp
4x Narcomoeba
4x Bridge from Below
4x Cabal Therapy
4x LED
4x Ichorid
3x Dread Return
1x Cephalid Sage
1x FKZ
4x Breakthrough
4x Deep Analysis
4x Underground Sea
4x Gemstone Mine
4x Cephalid Coliseum
SB
4x Chain of Vapor
1x Echoing Truth
1x Blazing Archon
3x FoW
2x Pithing Needle
4x Chalice of the Void
There were 3 goblin players 3 ichorid players (counting myself) a Cret belcher, RG Stax, No-Stick w/ eratic drako, WU Fish, S Top combo, WUG Threshold, BW (sorta pikula), Burn, BU Aggro Control, and a WBG Survival.
Round 1 Goblins (2-1)
game 1 he had a god draw and owned me.
game 2 & 3 i won turn 1-2 he didnt have a chance.
Round 2 BU Aggro (2-1)
Game 1 I win turn 3 combo.
Game 2 He starts with a crypt and play - I play putrid imp t1 and follow it up with a breakthrough > discarding my ggt/thug to imp he crypts in response to discard I draw 4 and discard ichorid and some other dredgers and he crypts again next turn > I draw dead while he rips me apart.
Game 3 - i win turn 3.
round 3-4 ID to top 8
top 8 -
Round 5 Black white pikula
Win game 1 going off turn 2.
Win game 2 turn 4 (could of won a turn earlier just frogot to do something ><)
Round 6 - Goblins
Game 1 - turn 1 lackey > kikijiki next turn double lackey matron into sharpshooter he removes 2 of my bridges on my first attempt to combo off I go off again next turn with 2 bridge but cant make enough zombies to get through - left him at 5.
Game 2(boarded in Blazing archon) - I destroy his hand with therapy > putrid > therapy > leaving him w/ a vial and top decking.. I play another putrid imp and try to get dredge going > he crypts and plays a shooter kills imp > I get another imp / thug off the top (i have 3 mana) and wait 2 turns trying to find a way to get threshold and he top decks SGC(plays w/ vial) and kills me..
I could of won game 2 concidering I had the mana to drop thug / and then force him to either block it or kill it which would of given putrid/cephalid thresh.. would of been GG.. (was just to tired and was thinking to hard about not letting my third imp die ><)
btw- threshold won the mox, grats Woodrow.
Alright, anyways I really like the deck but goblins seems to be a pretty hard matchup from the play testing ive done against them. Also from what Ive seen sideboarding is really hard, can anyone help me out with what to take out etc?.. and btw my actual sideboard was missing cards and had alot of filler stuff.. archon would of been wonder FoW/truth would of been leyline and -2 chalice +2 needle.
What do people think about Chrome Mox in this deck?
I continuously find myself stuck at one mana and wanting two to chain into multiple Deep Analyses (And Dakmor Salvage is very slow at solving this problem and thereby sucks), and there's always something moderately useless in my opening hand.
Is it too risky that the Mox can be countered or destroyed?
I don't think Chrome Mox is such a good idea. What cards would you want to pitch to it? I can think of one: Narcomoeba. Everything else you want sitting in your yard, not the RFG zone. Even Putrid Imp feeds Ichorid, and Cabal Therapy can be seriously abused to decimate hands and make tons of Zombies.
I think there are 3 options to sidestep the problem of playing DA, in order of viability:
a) Learn how to play without it. Don't count on Deep Analysis as a crutch but use it if it's there. Obviously don't ignore it either, it's an incredibly powerful engine. However, be able to make other plays that don't involve it. Maximize Zombie tokens made and Dread Return Cephalid Sage (multiple times), or use Cephalid Coliseum.
b) Hold back until you have 2+ lands in play. Not always the right play, but sometimes.
c) Use LED mana. I know, you don't always get LED in your opening hand, but when you do you're usually able to play 1-2 Deep Analysis, which is enough.
I'm only running 3 Deep Analysis in my list, and I view it as the weakest of the 3 draw engines in the deck, the other 2 being Breakthrough and Cephalid Coliseum.
Breakthrough is best played, as I've said before, when responded to with LED and a hand of dredgers. This is a key turn 1 play.
Cephalid Coliseum is also great in conjunction with LED, but also works with T1 Putrid Imp, T2 upkeep discard + DREDGE, Cepahlid Coliseum, dump hand, activate.
Deep Anal really only shines with LED (especially with multiple LED). It also has the downside of not discarding the cards that were just drawn. When it's good it's great, but when it's not it sucks.
First of all, how are you activating your Coliseum in the listed instance? You're assuming you have two land? Fantastic, but that doesn't solve the problem. The problem is needing the two mana.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaynel
Cephalid Coliseum is every bit as useless as Deep Analysis without a guaranteed two mana, and I don't think this deck can afford to always wait a turn. Yet, sadly, if you don't have an LED, you will go off much faster if you -do- wait a turn and drop the second land.
This is where the solution of Chrome Mox comes along.
As far as what you imprint on Chrome Mox, you're thinking too much in terms of what single cards you should imprint on it and less in the context of what's in your hand at the time. Narcomoeba's an amazing opening play imprint, but so is Dread Return, because you don't need one right off the bat and you'll probably roll another one midway through your combo. If you've got two Breakthroughs in your hand, why not imprint one? One of each of your dredgers sitting in hand? You probably won't need that Thug, even for Ichorid fodder, as the speed you'll gain from having 2 mana on turn one will compensate very well for missing one black creature in your grave as Ichorid fodder. I don't even think it's that cardinal of a sin to imprint an Ichorid itself depending on your hand, as rolling your deck at high speed should be able to compensate for the fact that you're one Ichorid short.
I mostly agree with your assessment of Deep Analysis in the current build. It sucks outside of the ungodly LED draw, and for a large part, so does the entire deck. So why not fix the problem? Hitting 2 mana lends the deck a ridiculous amount of consistency it otherwise lacks, and hitting 2 mana faster is better.
Just as a sample, I goldfished ten hands in a 3-Mox-packing build and saw at least one Mox in the opening hand on four of them. Here are those four hands (None of which contained a Golgari Thug, but hey, who needs illustration of points.)
Hand 1:
Deep Analysis
Golgari Grave-Troll
Dread Return
Cephalid Sage
Chrome Mox
Chrome Mox
Putrid Imp
Hand 2:
Cephalid Coliseum
Chrome Mox
Golgari Grave-Troll
Stinkweed Imp
Ichorid
Breakthrough
Deep Analysis
Hand 3:
Narcomoeba
Breakthrough
Chrome Mox
Putrid Imp
Gemstone Mine
Deep Analysis
Stinkweed Imp
Hand 4:
Lion's Eye Diamond
City of Brass
Golgari Grave-Troll
Deep Analysis
Deep Analysis
Dread Return
Chrome Mox
Hand 1 is pretty ugly at first glance, but not terribly bad. If nothing else it's a clear example as to why the absolute max for Chrome Mox would be three if not two, because double mox kind of sucks. Double Moxen can imprint Dread Return and Cephalid Sage, cast the Putrid Imp, ditch the Analysis/Troll, and then go nuts on turn two by Dredging the Troll, then flashing the Deep Analysis. You get better options if you're on the draw as to what to imprint.
Hand 2 is pretty weird. It lacks a discard engine, so I think in a vacuum here where I was going first I'd actually open with Coliseum, Mox imprinting Deep Analysis, Breakthrough for 1. This will get you Threshold and Dredge Guys and let you trip your Coliseum for mass havoc next turn.
Hand 3 is just pretty. Mine, Mox imprinting Narcomoeba, Putrid Imp lets you get things started, then use the Breakthrough immediately after discarding the Stinkweed Imp. This will give you a fast dredge chain with the ability to flash Deep Analysis next turn, as it was in your opening hand here. This is a pretty clear example of Mox being a huge benefit to you here.
Hand 4 you pretty much just ignore the Mox and go City, LED, crack, flash both Deep Analyses. You -can- imprint Dread Return on the Mox, but with two Deep Analyses already in your hand, your chances of rolling into one diminish greatly.
Fair enough. What'd you cut in your list to make room for the Moxen. I'm still not sold on it, but I'll test it out. I just have some comments on the hands you drew.
Hand 1, those 2 Moxen could just be lands and you'd get the same result.
Hand 2, you're pitching a DA - kinda counterintuitive to the whole premise behind the addition of Chrome Mox.
Hand 3 illustrates perfectly how the Mox would work. No issues here.
Hand 4, as you said, completely ignores Mox and just goes nuts with DA and LED. It could be any card here (better if it were a dredger).
Regardless, I'm interested in trying it out.
Me and my friend basically have this whole deck built between us. What im basically asking here is if you can construct this deck on a bugdet. I have therapies but i dont have LED's.
Can you play without LED's and still be succesful?
The short answer is No.
The long answer is NNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
I SERIOUSLY doubt it.
Sadly enough, one of the viable options would be One With Nothing. Please don't play this though. Just shell out for LEDs, they're played in a bunch of combo decks.
LED isn't really that expensive anyways. If you use ebay or look for deals elsewhere, its pretty easy to get a playset for around $30-35.
@ Chrome Mox:
In the situations you desribed, how much better is Chrome Mox really than Lotus Petal? Im not advocating Petal here, but it seems like you would rarely want/need to use a Mox more than once so Petal would serve almost the same purpose, without biting you in the ass if you dont have the correct color to imprint or cannot afford to RFG that colored card.
If something goes wrong (like it sometimes does) and you fizzle, you get to untap with at least 2 mana sources and try again, I guess.
Chrome Mox is better than Lotus Petal for pretty much the same reasons that a land is better than Lotus Petal, minus the (un)counterable bit.
Of course there are some times when the permananent status of Mox will be beneficial, I was just wondering if that outweighed the drawback of the imprint, which Im not sure of.
Petal and Mox are pretty much both worse than land, so I dont see how that really supports Mox over Petal.