[Primer] UB Death's Shadow

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fallen_Empire

I'm considering brewing up a list that runs copies of hunted horror and toxic deluge main instead of delver & street wraith. Has anyone else been down this path?

---

Is this a troll? If you don't get exactly deluge then you can't kill the Centaurs so nothing can attack (Horror AND Shadows AND Anglers), nothing of yours can block or target them, so you're in a very awkward spot if your opponent wants to get aggressive, and you wouldn't even have Delver to fly over them

I played Shadow for the first time this weekend

First event

4 Delver
4 Shadow
2 Tombstalker
4 Wraith

2 Reanimate
2 Hymn
4 TS
4 BS
4 FOW
4 Ponder
4 Daze
2 Dismember
1 Push
1 Darkblast

2 Sea
4 Grave
8 Fetchlands
4 Wasteland

SB
1 Lili
2 Diabolic Edict
1 Bitterblossom
1 Winter Orb
1 TNN
2 Surgical
1 Cage
1 Null Rod
2 Marsh Casualties
1 Dread of Night
2 Ratchet Bomb

R1 Loss for turning up late (whoops)
R2 2-0 Depths
R3 0-2 Miracles
R4 1-2 Miracles

Second Event
Maindeck -1 Wasteland +1 Hymn
Sideboard -1 Marsh Casualties -1 TNN -1 Worb +1 Lili +1 Flusterstorm +1 Unmoored Ego

R1 2-0 UW Delver-Blade
R2 2-1 Miracles
R3 0-2 Miracles
R4 0-2 LED Dredge

As a long-time RUG Delver player it was very interesting to get a feel of playing this deck:

1. You don't have sticky threats (Goose) and you replace a reactive card (Stifle) with proactive cards that become much worse as the game progresses (discard spells). This means that Shadow plays much more like an aggro deck and generally wants to keep its foot on the gas starting from turn 1. Overall I would say that Shadow seems much easier to play than RUG for this reason, because your role is generally inflexible and you have fewer decisions to make in that regard. (Note that this doesn't imply at all that RUG is better than Shadow if both decks are played optimally).

2. Having access to hard-removal spells (specifically edicts) is a huge boon. Facing down a resolved TNN it's very hard to win as RUG but with Diabolic in your deck you can just untap and kill it. This means you can afford to be a bit more 'loose' both in terms of gameplay decisions and sideboarding (e.g. with these additional ways to deal with resolved permanents you can be more confident in boarding FoW out, which is something you want to do in post SB games vs fair decks anyway because you don't want to be 2-for-1ing yourself).

3. "ThOuGhTsEiZe IsN't A tEmPo CaRd" is true in the strictest sense but there are many times where e.g. you Thoughtseize their ponder and they just have to pass turn 1 after playing a land, so you functionally countered their ponder and got info on their whole hand. Not having any counters that cost mana is great because you never have to decide whether to leave up mana or tap out for a cantrip/discard. This isn't just 'training wheels', it's a significant tactical advantage

4. In RUG vs the fair/control decks you wanted to play Winter Orb because the fair decks were too resilient for you to stop them from getting to the lategame, so you needed some way to strangle your opponent's mana so your late-drawn dazes and pierces were still live. When you have black mana in your deck Hymn to Tourach can fill this role because the straight 2-for-1 is a significant resource tax that either strips their spells or hits their lands: together with the pressure that this deck can pump out (foot on the gas) it can force your opponent to play into your Dazes. RUG doesn't have any card that can 2-for-1 the opp by hitting their resources (only Loam, arguably, which isn't even that good vs Miracles anyway) so that deck doesn't have this angle. I therefore think winter orb is probably not the correct fit for Shadow because Thoughtseize and orb are applying pressure from 2 different directions. (I.e. what's the use in your opponents' lands not untapping if they don't have spells in hand to cast). I think the most effective strategy is to focus on burning all their cards away. This seems like it lines up badly vs AK but I think you can play around that with Surgical

5. Tombstalker is much better when you replace Stub with Hymn because A) It's hard to have 3 mana to pay BB for Tombstalker and leave U up for Stub B) Playing Tombstalker as your only BB spell (with Stub instead of Hymn) is awkward because you are raising your curve up for only a couple of cards which means it's hard to make in-game evaluations about how important your lands are. "I'm an efficient Delver deck which can play on 1 mana, oh no wait now I want 3 lands so I can resolve Tombstalker through a Daze." I noticed this problem with RUG a lot in the builds that played 1 or 2 TNN maindeck as the only 3 drop. When you have 2 Tombstalker and 3 Hymn you have a 'lower-variance-manacurve' and can more reliably plan on casting BB spells, and resolve your cantrips/wastelands accordingly. (Tombstalker might still not have enough upside over Angler to be correct regardless, but I think this point is worth explaining).

6. I agree with the arguments put forward by Friedman et al. that this deck doesn't want all 4 Wastelands. I think the swap I made for tournament #2 was good and would be happy playing this maindeck again.

7. Liliana is a very nice swiss army knife in the SB and I definitely think I want 2. At this point I think a confident SB would be something like
2 Surgical
2 Lili
2 Edict
2 Bomb
1 Bitterblossom
1 Cage
The rest feels more flexible and I would want to test the different matchups more to get a better idea of the kind of effects that I want.
The deck is very fun to play and I am looking forward to registering it again

Nice write up KombatKiwi. I also enjoyed testning this deck. It’s a different kind of delver deck, but i like the ’almost burn deck approach’.

Great write up, thanks. I’ve been playing a ton of leagues online in the hopes of finding a mix of disruption I like. I really like Dismember, to the point where I am now playing 4. I also have been unimpressed with Stubborn Denial, I feel like everyone expects it now that the decklists are so known, I’ve been much happier with good ol Spell Pierce. I’ve lost to two things mainly: 1) Marit Lage & 2) Swords to Plowshares (+Snap). Bitterblossom has not played well, you take too much damage that you just die when you stall.

More to come here if I can snap off some 5-0s with a solid config.

Hello, I'm playing the deck now since PT25 online and buying it in paper. I have a question about Thoughtseize vs. Force of Will when boarding: Which one of these do you want to board out normally against control decks like GControl and Miracles? I often go down to 2 FoW against fair decks but thinking about cutting them entirely since I feel like having better board cards and also that Thoughtseize does a similar job. On the other hand I often like to board out 1 Thoughtseize when I board in 2 Hymn to Tourach simply because I don't want to draw to many discard spells late game...

Against which decks do you normally leave FoW and Thoughtseize in and which one of those do you want to see more often normally?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kombatkiwi

As a long-time RUG Delver player it was very interesting to get a feel of playing this deck:

---

First off, your write-up was great. I am a former Team America player (Delver / Tarmogoyf / Tomstalker version) and I think I share a lot of your viewpoints. That said I would like to bring an open discussion, agreement, or disagreement to some of these points:

Quote:

---

1. You don't have sticky threats (Goose) and you replace a reactive card (Stifle) with proactive cards that become much worse as the game progresses (discard spells). This means that Shadow plays much more like an aggro deck and generally wants to keep its foot on the gas starting from turn 1. Overall I would say that Shadow seems much easier to play than RUG for this reason, because your role is generally inflexible and you have fewer decisions to make in that regard. (Note that this doesn't imply at all that RUG is better than Shadow if both decks are played optimally).

---

This is a REALLY good one-paragraph synopsis. In LSV's article, he explicitly says "Unless you know the opponent is on beatdown, aggressively fetch Graves. The idea is to play a turn-2 or -3 Shadow, so don’t be shy." I think it's easy to casually miss this point but it's important to keep in mind: you want to be killing the opponent. Traditional UR or RUG Delver is generally okay letting the game play out because all of your cards are good at reliably setting up 1-for-1 exchanges, usually with mana advantage, and then you're only playing 14 or 15 colored mana sources so you draw more action over X turns. Playing with discard, against good players with Stifle, or both (like I used to on BUG) significantly reduces your ability to play the long game like that. Green can offset that a bit with Sylvan Library but straight UB not so much. We really should be emphasizing the aggressive aspect of playing this deck properly.

Quote:

---

3. "ThOuGhTsEiZe IsN't A tEmPo CaRd" is true in the strictest sense but there are many times where e.g. you Thoughtseize their ponder and they just have to pass turn 1 after playing a land, so you functionally countered their ponder and got info on their whole hand. Not having any counters that cost mana is great because you never have to decide whether to leave up mana or tap out for a cantrip/discard. This isn't just 'training wheels', it's a significant tactical advantage

---

This is another great point but I would like to add to it a bit. This deck's focus on aggression over standard Delver style aggro-control means that we aren't really trying to control the game state in the same way. We still want to be using Thoughtseize and Force to be protecting our threats most of the time so that's the same, but it's more common to let things go and sandbag counters to try to kill the opponent through some things. Daze is a bit of an exception, where if you have a threat on the table it's usually good value to jam Daze just because the disruption is so much better behind a clock.

Side note, it's usually better to NOT try to mana screw the opponent with your discard spells. Like if you Hymn them and it happens, yeah sure. But you will win more games in the long term by playing tight and taking good value cards rather than flipping the coin for an easy win.

Quote:

---

I therefore think winter orb is probably not the correct fit for Shadow because Thoughtseize and orb are applying pressure from 2 different directions. (I.e. what's the use in your opponents' lands not untapping if they don't have spells in hand to cast). I think the most effective strategy is to focus on burning all their cards away. This seems like it lines up badly vs AK but I think you can play around that with Surgical

---

While they might be playing from opposite directions, I think it might be okay anyway? My current stance is that Orb slows down whatever method Miracles uses to see a ton of cards over the course of the game. A lot of the time, Miracles is just trying to get the game to a lock to find the win button and press it. Orb slows down both their ability to kill opposing tempo and their ability to find the wincon. Thoughtseize helps with this somewhat- you just take whatever cards actually get in your way (usually Swords or Force) and then kill them. I agree that there's some conflict, but it's still a reasonable plan. It's even better now that both Ponder and AK builds are increasingly common.

Quote:

---

"I'm an efficient Delver deck which can play on 1 mana, oh no wait now I want 3 lands so I can resolve Tombstalker through a Daze."

---

There's actually an even better reason (although yours are great too). A ton of our best pressure plays involve casting two spells of 0 or 1 CMC in the same turn for blow-outs on turns 2-4. So this would look like:
- Brainstorm / Ponder / Thoughtseize / Inquisition / Fatal Push / Dismember -> Angler / Shadow
- Angler / Shadow / Reanimate Wraith -> Wasteland / Force / Daze
- Dismember / Fatal Push / Thoughtseize / Inquisition -> Reanimate_Your_Card_Lulz
- Delver -> Ponder (classic)
- You get the idea. This entire deck is fucking full of these reversal plays

Hymn / Tombstalker make that REALLY hard to do turn 2-3, even if you're willing to drop an extra land. Like yeah those cards are powerful but jamming two almost-as-powerful spells in the same turn is what gives the "hee haw" hands that Delver decks are known for (especially this one). I really wanted Tombstalker to work in this deck because it's one of my favorite cards of all time, but Angler is just SO much more aggressive in the larger context of solid technical play.

Again, I loved this write-up and it was full of good information. But I also wanted to add to it to maybe start some discussion as well.

Hi, thanks for the reply

1. "Side note, it's usually better to NOT try to mana screw the opponent with your discard spells" I'm not sure if this is a direct response to my suggestion that I sometimes Thoughtseize my opponent's Ponder, but to address this, I'm not necessarily only trying to stop my opponent finding their second land. It might be the case that I look at their hand and they already have lands in hand, but I have Fatal Push for their SFM and Daze for their TNN so taking Ponder is the best play because Ponder is the most threatening card in their hand. The fact that it makes them waste mana on turn 1 is a side-benefit.

2. "While they might be playing from opposite directions, I think it might be okay anyway?" Yeah, I could see that. I assume you meant "PORTENT and ak builds" because it's not like there is any miracles deck not playing Ponder

3. "There's actually an even better reason (although yours are great too). A ton of our best pressure plays involve casting two spells of 0 or 1 CMC in the same turn for blow-outs" I think you are placing at least some unwarranted arbitrary value on casting multiple spells in the same turn. For example you list Delver -> Ponder. Of course it's good to be spending all your mana in 1 turn but if you had some hypothetical creature: "UU: 3/2 Flying, when this ETB Ponder", that would obviously be better than casting 1 Delver and 1 Ponder (assuming no counterspells). So, would "UU: 3/2 Flying, when this ETB draw a card" be better than Delver + Ponder? Probably. (Unless you place an extremely low value on card advantage). The point is that there is some power level of 2 mana spells that is sufficient to overcome the drawback of costing 1 more mana. Would "BB: Pay 4 life look at opp's hand and discard 2 nonland cards" be better than Thoughtseize + Thoughtseize? Yes. You wouldn't cut all (or any) Thoughtseize for this hypothetical 2-mana card because you do need a certain density of 1 drops for curve reasons, but obviously there are going to be points in the game where you have 2 mana available and then this BB card would be better than two 1-mana cards, and you might play it in some flex slot in the deck. Is BB: Opp discards 2 random cards better than Thoughtseize + Thoughtseize, or Thoughtseize + Ponder etc? Maybe. At some points, definitely yes. So this is the kind of discussion that needs to take place rather than just "Hurr durr all spells must cost 1 mana"

I acknowledge that Angler vs Stalker is a much bigger hurdle than Hymn vs any 1-mana spell, because paying 1 extra mana for Stalker doesn't give you an extra card worth of value, but there is some kind of benefit to Stalker over Angler and this can be factored in similarly. (At the moment I would agree that Angler is probably better and Stalker only makes sense as a meta call vs TNNs)

I updated the OP a little bit today:

• Added a link to the discord.
• Added an entry for Bitterblossom
• Added a link to Mengucci's talk on UB Shadow

Mini Report
4 Delver
4 Wraith
4 Shadow
2 Tombstalker

2 Reanimate
4 Ponder
4 Brainstorm
4 FoW
4 Daze
4 Thoughtseize
3 Hymn
2 Dismember
1 Push
1 Darkblast

3 Wasteland
4 Grave
8 Fetchlands
2 Underground Sea

3 Surgical
2 Liliana
2 Edict
2 Bomb
1 Cage
1 BB
1 Casualties
1 Dread of Night
1 Flusterstorm
1 Null Rod

1-2 Eldrazi Post
2-1 Elves
2-0 Jund

DON/Fluster/NullRod seem flexible but I think I like the rest of it.
Fluster should at least be pierce to have another anti-permanent card (Trini, Chalice, Moon, etc)

I just recently switched to this deck from UR Delver, as I really like tempo decks, from my understanding UB is better than UR, and I had all the cards for it (minus the U-seas). My question is, until I can acquire the dual lands I am running the following:
1 island
1 swamp
4 Watery Grave
4 Polluted Delta
2 blue fetches
2 black fetches
4 Wasteland

I see many lists running a Marsh Casualties in the sideboard, how often do you ever actually cast with kicker? My thought is that with my manabase, BB would likely present more of a challenge to cast this on time, then 5 mana to kick it, so I'm wondering if Shrivel would be an acceptable substitute or if I should run Toxic Deluge instead? Or just stick to Marsh Casualties?

Thoughts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coff33bit

I just recently switched to this deck from UR Delver, as I really like tempo decks, from my understanding UB is better than UR, and I had all the cards for it (minus the U-seas). My question is, until I can acquire the dual lands I am running the following:
1 island
1 swamp
4 Watery Grave
4 Polluted Delta
2 blue fetches
2 black fetches
4 Wasteland

I see many lists running a Marsh Casualties in the sideboard, how often do you ever actually cast with kicker? My thought is that with my manabase, BB would likely present more of a challenge to cast this on time, then 5 mana to kick it, so I'm wondering if Shrivel would be an acceptable substitute or if I should run Toxic Deluge instead? Or just stick to Marsh Casualties?

Thoughts?

---

Yeah you never play it with kicker
It has the downside of killing your unflipped Delvers, and all your creatures hit for one less damage in the turn that you cast it
If you have basic island in your manabase then Shrivel or Deluge would be an acceptable switch if you are finding it difficult to get double black

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kombatkiwi

Yeah you never play it with kicker
It has the downside of killing your unflipped Delvers, and all your creatures hit for one less damage in the turn that you cast it
If you have basic island in your manabase then Shrivel or Deluge would be an acceptable switch if you are finding it difficult to get double black

---

As a follow-up question, I don't foresee being able to acquire both U-Seas at the same time. So for the upgrade path what would make the most sense?
1) -1 island, +1 u-sea
2) -1 swamp, +1 u-sea
3) -1 island, -1 swamp, +1 u-sea +1 watery grave
4) other

I'm thinking 1 would make the most sense, as I can still deploy my threats under a blood moon/B2B and wastelands. I often see the discussion about 2 u-seas or no u-seas and not just a singleton.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coff33bit

As a follow-up question, I don't foresee being able to acquire both U-Seas at the same time. So for the upgrade path what would make the most sense?
1) -1 island, +1 u-sea
2) -1 swamp, +1 u-sea
3) -1 island, -1 swamp, +1 u-sea +1 watery grave
4) other

I'm thinking 1 would make the most sense, as I can still deploy my threats under a blood moon/B2B and wastelands. I often see the discussion about 2 u-seas or no u-seas and not just a singleton.

---

1. you never play marsh casualties with kicker, like NEVER EVER and you only need -1/-1 so Casualties is completely fine.
2. I play 9 fetchlands, 3 Watery Grave, 1 Island and 1 Swamp. When I get to uprade to USseas I will go for 4 Grave 1 Usea and then -1 Grave +1 USea. 9 fetch and 3/2 is strictly the better combination and 1 Usea and 4 Watery Grave feels also better than Basics imho.

Small report
Same maindeck as before (4 Grave 2 Sea 8 Fetches 3 Wasteland 2 Dismember 1 Push 1 Darkblast 2 Reanimate 3 Hymn 2 Tombstalker)
SB
2 Edict
2 Bomb
2 Liliana
2 Surgical
1 Cage
1 Pierce
1 Flusterstorm
1 Dread of Night
1 Null Rod
1 Marsh Casualties
1 Bitterblossom

0-2 Turbo Depths
1-0 Bye
1-2 UW Stoneblade
2-0 Scapeshift Nic Fit

I still like the maindeck I think
I'm considering going up to a 3rd Edict because it's a good answer for both TNN and Marit Lage, both of which seem to be fairly problematic / annoying
The Null Rod is probably unnecessary

Try a copy or two of Echoing Truth. Nice out to Marit Lage and problematic permanents that also pitches to force.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eldub

Try a copy or two of Echoing Truth. Nice out to Marit Lage and problematic permanents that also pitches to force.

---

People have suggested bounce before but I'm not convinced I want it in any other match-up except Depths, so I think extra edict might be better overall

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kombatkiwi

People have suggested bounce before but I'm not convinced I want it in any other match-up except Depths, so I think extra edict might be better overall

---

Iits actually a very flexible card. Planeswalker, Ensnaring Bridge, Dephts, some Enchantment, there are a lot of things you can bounce which can be crucial in the right moment. Because Shadow has this HUGE clock bouncing a card in the right moment can be quite powerful. I also play 1 Echoing Truth as my flex spot in my board and I bounced Dephts, 3 Arclight Phoenix and a bunch of Empty the Warrens tokens so far. The card is really good imho.

My sideboard:
3 Surgical Extraction
2 Hymn to Tourach
1 Bitterblossom
2 Liliana, the last Hope
1 Echoing Truth
2 Diabolic Edict
1 Darkblast
1 Marsh Casualties
2 Ratchet Bomb

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IamHANDSOME

Iits actually a very flexible card. Planeswalker, Ensnaring Bridge, Dephts, some Enchantment, there are a lot of things you can bounce which can be crucial in the right moment. Because Shadow has this HUGE clock bouncing a card in the right moment can be quite powerful. I also play 1 Echoing Truth as my flex spot in my board and I bounced Dephts, 3 Arclight Phoenix and a bunch of Empty the Warrens tokens so far. The card is really good imho.

My sideboard:
3 Surgical Extraction
2 Hymn to Tourach
1 Bitterblossom
2 Liliana, the last Hope
1 Echoing Truth
2 Diabolic Edict
1 Darkblast
1 Marsh Casualties
2 Ratchet Bomb

---

Also cleans up goblins, elemental and monk tokens. Lets talk about darkblast instead. Is that card actually good enough?

I wanted it to be, but I ran through 3-4 leagues and it was just too low impact to be eating my drawsteps every turn even in places like Elves where you'd want it. I've been much happier packing 2x Marsh Casualties.

Dark blast is excellent against Strix based strategies which is one of the 4 strategies that can completely shut us down. (chalice, swords and blood moon being the others). It also powers out anglers as the card reads kill a x/1 and add three mana to your mana pool when angler is in your hand. It kills most of the creatures that really hinder our strategy notably Mom, Thalia, Wirewood Symbiote, Young Pyromancer and end-step Snap Caster. It also lets us win the angler and reality smasher battles. I have played Dark blast Main for the last 3 months and it has single handedly won countless games in a G control heavy meta.

Short report
R1 2-0 RB Reanimator
R2 2-1 RB Reanimator
R3 0-2 Mono Red Sneak
R4 2-1 Grixis Control
R5 ID
Top8 2-1 Rw Goblins
Top4 2-1 Grixis Delver
Finals 0-2 Esper Stoneblade

Won a scrubland

4 Delver
4 Shadow
4 Wraith
2 Tombstalker

4 Ponder
4 Brainstorm
4 Force
4 Daze
2 Dismember
1 Push
1 Darkblast
3 Hymn
2 Reanimate

4 Grave
2 Sea
3 Waste
8 Fetchland

3 Edict
3 Surgical
2 Lili
2 Bomb
1 Blossom
1 Pierce
1 Fluster
1 Cage
1 Casualties

3 Edict seemed good

Tried a list with JVP after I read Ben Friedman's thoughts on the deck
The argument about how early pressure / chip shots makes little sense in a deck with no burn and 5/5 and 10/10 finishers is quite convincing

2 Tombstalker
2 Jace, Vryn's Prodigy
4 Street Wraith
4 Death's Shadow

4 Ponder
4 Brainstorm
2 Preordain
4 Thoughtseize
4 Daze
4 Force of Will
3 Hymn to Tourach
2 Reanimate
2 Dismember
1 Fatal Push
1 Darkblast

4 Watery Grave
2 Underground Sea
8 Fetchlands
3 Wasteland

SB
2 Liliana, the Last Hope
2 Ratchet Bomb
3 Diabolic Edict
3 Surgical Extraction
1 Infernal Contract
1 Spell Pierce
1 Flusterstorm
1 Marsh Casualties
1 Dread of Night

First Event (literally never cast a JVP before in my life I don't think)
2-1 UW Stoneblade
2-1 UR Delver
0-2 Chalice Post
2-0 Elves
Top 4 Concession (we split prizes already so my opponent went home)
Finals 0-2 Chalice Post (same guy) [I played really badly in the finals but it seems like a horrible matchup]

Second event
2-0 MonoB Reanimator (no depths)
2-1 Miracles
2-0 Enchantress (non-Wish build)

Maybe the dread of night can be the third bomb. The Flusterstorm is the other flex slot

Infernal contract seems nuts. I mis-sequenced against miracles and cast it on 3 which put me to 1 and disabled my FoW, but it would have still been way better than Bitterblossom in that spot. I also cast it against enchantress and it gave me enough fuel for FoW to stop Solitary Confinement from resolving.

So far this is looking like my #1 candidate for GP Niagara Falls

Positive experience taking out delvers for JVP etc

Having 3 edicts helps a lot against several matchups.

After feeling a bit threat-light and noticing darkblast being a brick in a couple of games I'm going to swap the maindeck Darkblast with one of the SB Lilianas
I still think 3 Liliana in the 75 is too many and am going to keep the 1-1 split of Liliana and Contract in the sideboard

It looks like we'll get a few upgrades in War of the Spark

Liliana's Triumph should replace Diabolic Edict. Contentious Plans might be a good sideboard card against Chalice, similar to Throne of Geth but replaces itself, flips Delver, and pitches to Force.

Speaking of anti-Chalice tech, I have been trying Vampire Hexmage. I like that it lines up well against Baleful Strix and can also sink a Planeswalker against UBx control.

Hi all, I've been messing around a bit with UB Shadow online now that the London mull is legal. Agree with the Ben Friedman article about JVP being better than Delver in this kind of deck.

Current list:


4 Bloodstained Mire
4 Polluted Delta
1 Verdant Catacombs
4 Watery Grave
2 Underground Sea
1 Swamp
1 Dark Ritual

4 Ponder
4 Brainstorm
2 Preordain

4 Death's Shadow
2 Jace, Vryn's Prodigy
2 Liliana, the Last Hope
2 Gurmag Angler
1 Tombstalker

4 Force of Will
4 Thoughtseize
4 Hymn to Tourach
3 Daze
2 Spell Pierce

2 Fatal Push
1 Recoil
1 Dismember
1 Marsh Casualties

SB:
3 Surgical Extraction
2 Diabolic Edict
2 Echoing Truth
2 Flusterstorm
1 Dread of Night
1 Null Rod
1 Tsabo's Web
1 Marsh Casualties
1 Gloom
1 Infernal Contract


Some of the choices are a bit unconventional, but there's honestly some method behind the madness!:

- No Street Wraith. I've found the card underwhelming. Sure there's a floor on how bad a 2 life cycler can be, but it's so bad late-game when your life total is too low to reasonably cycle. The body is a bit underwhelming and the Reanimate 'combo' is unexciting unless you can follow it up with multiple Shadows. It also takes up a chunk of non-blue slots in the deck and I believe it's possible to prove mathematically that it never cycles into a land when you need it to, while always cycling into a land when you need gas.

- Four Hymn to Tourach. I was sick of not drawing Hymns vs Miracles and combo. The fine people of MtGO deserve to receive Tourach's blessing multiple times in a game of Magic IMHO.

- 16 black-producing lands to combo with Hymn to Tourach. Extra lands also help to offset the loss of 'free' life-loss from Street Wraith.

- Zero Wasteland since it does not cast Hymn to Tourach. Also, people are playing a lot of basic lands online at the moment.

- Main-deck Lilianas have been great -- a threat against control, removal spell vs creature decks, acceleration for delve fatties, digging for spells for JVP to cast.

- A fun-of Dark Ritual. I added this to an earlier build that only ran 15 lands figuring that it might be marginally better than the 16th land, but it's been pretty entertaining so I've kept it even after upping the land count. Turn one Lilly is obviously great vs a lot of decks, but even accelerating out a delve fatty can be good a lot of the time.

- Recoil is a bit of a pet card, but I think it's useful to have a main-deck answer to problematic permanents. Without Wasteland, stuff like Maze of Ith is a real pain. This list is also super-weak to Turbo Depths so it's handy to have a way to answer Marit Lage.

- I'm not 100% sure about the removal config. Main-deck Marsh Casualities feels excellent against a lot of decks. I've been going back and forth on 2 Push / 1 Dismember and 1 Push / 2 Dismember.

- Sideboard Tsabo's Web for Maze of Ith.

- Sideboard Echoing Truth for Leylines, Marit Lage, Chalices. EoT bounce their stuff, main-phase Hymn to Tourach never gets old.

- SB Infernal Contract probably came from kombatkiwi's post. It's been amazing for me. I love the Mirage version's flavour text. I love drawing cards. You know it's a good card when it has three skulls in the casting cost.

Anyway, I've been really enjoying this list so thought I'd share.

I went 10-5 at GP Niagara Falls and came 94th (IIRC)

Chalice Post 2-1
Bant Foodchain 2-0
Grixis Delver 2-0
UR Delver 2-0
UW Blade 2-1
UW Blade 2-0
Grixis Control 0-2
Infect 0-2
UW Blade 2-0
Eldrazi Stompy 1-2
Enchantress 0-2
URb Delver 2-0
Chalice Post 2-1
Architect Merfolk 2-1
URb Delver 1-2

('URb Delver' seems mostly UR just with bitterblossom SB)

The match I lost vs Grixis Control I think I was playing a bit loose and the match vs Infect was just a punt. The final round I also could have maybe played a bit better but the Enchantress matchup was totally unwinnable and the 1-2 vs Eldrazi was close but I don't think there was anything I clearly should have done differently

List:

4 Death's Shadow
4 Street Wrath
2 Tombstalker
2 Jace, Vryn's Prodigy

4 Force of Will
4 Daze
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
4 Thoughtseize
3 Hymn to Tourach
2 Preordain
2 Reanimate
2 Dismember
1 Fatal Push
1 Liliana the Last Hope

4 Watery Grave
2 Underground Sea
3 Wasteland
2 Polluted Delta
1 Scalding Tarn
1 Flooded Strand
1 Misty Rainforest
1 Verdant Catacombs
1 Marsh Flats
1 Bloodstained Mire

SB
3 Ratchet Bomb
3 Diabolic Edict
3 Surgical Extraction
1 Liliana, the Last Hope
1 Infernal Contract
1 Dread of Night
1 Toxic Deluge
1 Darkblast
1 Spell Pierce

Basically what I think about the JVP version compared to Delver is that:
- It's better against fair blue decks because it grinds better. This includes Stoneblade and Miracles, but probably also those random decks like Food Chain. I think overall it's also slightly better against Delver decks, but because you don't have your own cheap turn1 threats there are a slightly increased frequency of games where you get Delver/Daze/Wasted out
- It's much worse against every deck that is trying to prey on fair blue decks, because the easiest way to beat these decks is by aggroing them out with Delver/Daze/Waste before they can lock your mana or reach a lategame that goes over the top of Hymn/Jace. If your opponent has Thalia or Eye of Ugin or Blood Moon in their deck then Delver is much better than JVP
- The Delver version is probably slightly better against combo but this is negligible-ish because Jace can also be quite strong vs combo

It might be possible to play a hybrid Wrapter/Friedman Hymn + Delver version, which I have had some success with in the past, which gives you some of the benefits of both setups

The only card from the GP 75 I might change (assuming I still want to play JVP) is the 2nd reanimate in the maindeck (possibly to the 4th Hymn or 4th waste depending on what meta you are expecting, but I'm not sure what I would change this to or if I even want to change it at all) and the Toxic Deluge in the SB (to a cheaper removal spell like Marsh Casualties, 2nd Darkblast, Push etc to improve the matchup against Delver and DNT). [edit: and of course Diabolic Edict becomes Liliana's Triumph]

Is this deck dead? Is this thread dead? Is the Source dead? No.

Is took Death’s Shadow to a local 3K. Trying Snuff Out over Dismember since there are more non-black creatures I want to remove lately. In the sideboard, trying out Plague Engineer as well as Force of Negation in the slots I would normally dedicate to answers to Chalice of the Void.

4 Death’s Shadow
4 Delver of Secrets
4 Street Wraith
2 Gurmag Angler
2 Reanimate
3 Ponder
1 Preordain
4 Brainstorm
4 Daze
4 Force of Will
2 Stubborn Denial
4 Thoughtseize
2 Fatal Push
2 Snuff Out
4 Wasteland
3 Watery Grave
2 Underground Sea
9 Fetchlands

2 Force of Negation
1 Diabolic Edict
2 Dread of Night
2 Hymn to Tourach
2 Liliana, the Last Hope
1 Plague Engineer
3 Surgical Extraction
1 Engineered Explosives
1 Nihil Spellbomb

Round 1 v. Wrenn Pile
I am able to take advantage of opponent’s clunkiness with some good aggro draws involving reanimated Street Wraiths. 2-0.

Round 2 v. Miracles
Despite opponent receiving a game loss for showing up late, we can’t finish 2 games. I am way ahead game 3, but my Delvers just don’t flip and can’t close it out in time.
1-1.

Round 3 v. Slow Depths
I find the right interaction at the right times with help from Thoughtseize and cantrips, so Wasteland and Force of Will prevent opponent from doing much. 2-0.

Round 4 v. Snow Wrenn Pile
With a creature-heavy hand, I push lethal through two Baleful Strixes game 1. Game 2, opponent gets stuck on two mana long enough for me to close it out. 2-0.

Round 5 v. Bomberman
I lose game 1 to turn-one Chalice. Game 2 plays out normally and I ride disruption, a good Hymn, and creatures to victory. Game 3 is quite interesting. Opponent goes all in on a turn-one Mystic Forge. I cycle Street Wraith into Force of Negation to counter it, but I don’t have a threat for a while and opponent resolves Chalice on 1. I already spent my Engineered Explosives to clear a Ballista and Mox, so it is there for good, but I resolve a Plague Engineer on Monk with Wasteland and Forces to control the game. Plague Engineer does all 20. 2-1.

Round 6 v. Maverick
Both games, opponent aggressively Wastelands me. Both games, I find the lands to recover and Wasteland back. Opponent does not recover in time. 2-0.

Round 7 ID into top 8

Quarters opponent does not show up.

Semis v. 4c “Loam”
This match was streamed. You can watch CFB Game Center’s VOD on twitch. Game 1 I win through early Chalice on 1 with reanimated Street Wraith, Gurmag Angler, and Snuff Out. Game 2, I am ahead, but go too low, forgetting about Punishing Fire. Oops. Game 3, I keep in the hopes that I can Thoughtseize away his Chalice. Unfortunately, it wasn’t in hand but on the top of the deck. From there, opponent runs away with the game with Wrenn and Liliana of the Veil. I didn’t really have a sideboard plan for this match, and in retrospect, wish I kept more of my main deck intact.

Overall, I think Snuff Out performed well. I cut it versus Strix decks anyway and good against Knights even though can’t get Dark Confident versus Loam. Plague Engineer was also great as a proactive answer to 1/1s. Force of Negation was alright, but since 3 out of 4 of my game losses were to Chalice, I think I might go back to a stronger anti-Chalice card like Contentious Plan.

How have you been liking contentious plans? I have been really curious as to how that card is working for people.

I am actually thinking of making this deck in legacy and turning my legacy goblins deck into a modern deck. How has the deck been performing as a whole for you? Haven't seen many people playing this deck recently.

The cool thing about shadow decks is that you can really make any color combo you want and they all play very differently. Could splash green for sylvan library, berserk, and traverse the ulvenwald, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joaquin

How have you been liking contentious plans? I have been really curious as to how that card is working for people.

I am actually thinking of making this deck in legacy and turning my legacy goblins deck into a modern deck. How has the deck been performing as a whole for you? Haven't seen many people playing this deck recently.

---

I have enjoyed Contentious Plan as a focused answer to Chalice. I usually feel so happy when I have it to tick a Chalice to 2 that I don't even think about the extra card, then I look at my hand with a new card and think, "oh yeah, I get that too." It just depends on how much you want for Chalice alone as it really doesn't have other utility.

I think the deck takes a hit because the spell-based combo decks are less popular while game-winning permanents that UB has a though time answering are abundant (Teferi, Bridge, Chalice, Wrenn + Wasteland, Karn, etc.). You just have to hope to get under these. When URx delver decks were gaining in popularity recently, I thought the deck felt quite good, as our mana-base and creatures are just better than theirs.

EDIT: One more thing on Contentious Plan. I've had one other use for it that has actually been nice: tick Blast Zone to 2 to save my creatures.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aedrew

I have enjoyed Contentious Plan as a focused answer to Chalice. I usually feel so happy when I have it to tick a Chalice to 2 that I don't even think about the extra card, then I look at my hand with a new card and think, "oh yeah, I get that too." It just depends on how much you want for Chalice alone as it really doesn't have other utility.

I think the deck takes a hit because the spell-based combo decks are less popular while game-winning permanents that UB has a though time answering are abundant (Teferi, Bridge, Chalice, Wrenn + Wasteland, Karn, etc.). You just have to hope to get under these. When URx delver decks were gaining in popularity recently, I thought the deck felt quite good, as our mana-base and creatures are just better than theirs.

EDIT: One more thing on Contentious Plan. I've had one other use for it that has actually been nice: tick Blast Zone to 2 to save my creatures.

---

If you're playing the no-2-drop delver version of the deck then Contentious Plan seems good.
If you're playing the more controlling version of the deck with hymn/JVP then it obviously won't work though (unless you can somehow find a SB map for chalice decks where you board them all out)

Agree with the above. Contentious Plans is a very good focused answer to Chalice, but obviously a much worse card overall that doesn't have any other applications really. I've been liking a split between the two, like 1-2 or 2-1. That is all for the Delver list, not the JVP list.

Speaking of which, I'd been following the Delver vs JVP discussion a little back then and in my opinion you can't say one is better than the other. They're fundamentally different decks. The former is in the first place a Delver deck that differentiates itself from other Delver deck by sticking to only two colors and playing the Shadow/Wraith/Reanimate package alongside Anglers as its creatures number 5-12. That gives it a niche in the metagame for having a slightly more stable mana base, having arguably the best matchup against spell-based combo out of all the Delver decks and having the edge in the Delver mirror because its creatures are bigger, while being worse against most control strategies, especially those that play Plows.

The JVP list definitely plays the more powerful cards, but that can be said about any midrange or control deck in Legacy when compared with any Delver deck. My fear is that, quite frankly, JVP is not a particularly good card in Legacy and any deck that plays it as its two-drop of choice should ask itself if that's because it's actually good or just because they don't have access to other options due to color restrictions. I haven't seen any deck with access to red, green or even white play JVP in a very long time. I admit I haven't tested the JVP Shadow list too much and when I played it it was good, but those 2 JVPs never stood out as particularly strong. Was it a viable deck? Yes. Would it be an even better deck with a third color and other two-drops over JVP? Quite possibly.

JVP is the Snapcaster of Daze/Wasteland + lower land count strategies, allowing the trip to 3-4 mana with an untap step. It's rather harmonious alongside Delver, because there would be no way to really capitalize on the early game advantages of Daze/WL without Delver.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

JVP is the Snapcaster of Daze/Wasteland + lower land count strategies, allowing the trip to 3-4 mana with an untap step. It's rather harmonious alongside Delver, because there would be no way to really capitalize on the early game advantages of Daze/WL without Delver.

---

Well the argument is that the extra card advantage from JVP allows you to play more of an attrition game with Hymn/Thoughtseize flashbacks, and then you can ride to victory on the back of 1 Shadow/Angler rather than needing extra threats in the form of Delver to aggro people out. I think it's hard to construct a list with Delver AND JVP where the ratios of threats/cantrips/disruption/mana make sense

Quote:

---

Agree with the above. Contentious Plans is a very good focused answer to Chalice, but obviously a much worse card overall that doesn't have any other applications really. I've been liking a split between the two, like 1-2 or 2-1. That is all for the Delver list, not the JVP list.

Speaking of which, I'd been following the Delver vs JVP discussion a little back then and in my opinion you can't say one is better than the other. They're fundamentally different decks. The former is in the first place a Delver deck that differentiates itself from other Delver deck by sticking to only two colors and playing the Shadow/Wraith/Reanimate package alongside Anglers as its creatures number 5-12. That gives it a niche in the metagame for having a slightly more stable mana base, having arguably the best matchup against spell-based combo out of all the Delver decks and having the edge in the Delver mirror because its creatures are bigger, while being worse against most control strategies, especially those that play Plows.

The JVP list definitely plays the more powerful cards, but that can be said about any midrange or control deck in Legacy when compared with any Delver deck. My fear is that, quite frankly, JVP is not a particularly good card in Legacy and any deck that plays it as its two-drop of choice should ask itself if that's because it's actually good or just because they don't have access to other options due to color restrictions. I haven't seen any deck with access to red, green or even white play JVP in a very long time. I admit I haven't tested the JVP Shadow list too much and when I played it it was good, but those 2 JVPs never stood out as particularly strong. Was it a viable deck? Yes. Would it be an even better deck with a third color and other two-drops over JVP? Quite possibly.

---

Just because they're different decks doesn't mean you can't say one is better than the other, you can say Sneak and Show is better than Spanish Inquisition just by looking at winrates, you don't need to assess how similar the decks are.

JVP is a lot like Dreadhorde Arcanist, the fundamental difference is that Dreadhorde Arcanist doesn't work with Hymn to Tourach. (Both because Hymn costs 2 so Arcanist can't target it and because Arcanist cost R so you would be a Grixis deck that needs at least URBB). You want to have Hymn in Shadow rather than e.g. Bolts because Hymn is more impactful as disruption and your threats are such heavy-hitters you don't need help to win matches by racing.

Or to put it another way, JVP shadow seems to have the exact combination of
a) Wanting to play the card Hymn to Tourach
b) Not wanting to have more than 2 lands
c) Space in the deck for a value 2drop

If you cut JVP then either
- You keep Hymn but you spend the value slot on another card in another colour (or Snapcasters) because nothing else exists in UB: to keep the manabase stable basics are needed and the curve skews higher so you end up with Grixis Control or some kind of Thief of Sanity deck
- You cut JVP for Dreadhorde Arcanist but now Hymn is awkward, so because you're playing Red now you replace them with Bolts and this cascade probably means that you end up with Grixis Delver
- You decide that you don't need a value 2drop and just go back to playing Delver Shadow, either you keep the Hymns or replace them with other disruption like Stubborn Denials

In terms of the actual play pattern of the card ("this is really good if you untap with it but otherwise costs 2 mana and dies easily") it's really not much different to Dreadhorde Arcanist at all. It can't flashback every single turn but it interacts better with other spells the deck wants to be playing anyway (Hymn, Dismember), the Loot is okay, pitches to FoW, etc. UR Delver doesn't want to play JVP because UR is a much more aggressive deck than Shadow and JVP is a much less aggressive card than Arcanist, also even if you argue Arcanist is abstractly a better card than JVP that deck is already in the right colour, so we accept this "worse" 2drop under the assumption that being able to play TS/Hymn is worth it

The primary difference is Arcanist is generating mana. With JVP you still have to pay the cost. Flashing back a cantrip with Arcanist so you can make your third land drop and basically have 4 mana worth of spells cast in a turn is what makes it such a great tempo boost.

JVP is reasonable in shadow but not nearly as powerful as Arcanist honestly.

I don't think the comparison is fair either, Arcanist is a significantly better card than JVP because it 1) virtually generates mana, 2) it works every turn unlike JVP who only flashbacks something once before needing to recharge and 3) actually wins the game on its own.

A zero mana Thoughtseize is likely to be the better turn 3 play than a 2 mana Hymn, so whenever you feel like pairing Arcanist with discard effects you can easily do that and play Grixis, maybe even with an Inquisition or two. Sure, Hymn is technically CA while flashing back a TS isn't, though the turn after you'll flashback another spell with Arcanist while JVP sits there shrinking a creature, so over time Arcanist actually generates more CA than Jace. There's exactly that one turn frame where Jace is technically up on CA, though as I said it's significantly behind on mana at the same time. Arcanist will also hit for 4 every turn in a UR(x) shell, so it will actually win the game instead of sitting around.

If the goal was to go bigger than Delver but stay under Grixis Control then sure, Delverless Shadow is a good deck. All I'm saying is that the Delver vs JVP as cards debate shouldn't be a thing. Delver is the backbone of traditional UB Shadow while JVP is more of a concession to the lack of a third color that would offer better two-drops in the new variant. The only other options are Snapcaster and Strix, and at that point you're probably close to just a worse Grixis Control.

I also didn't quite understand the point where Friedman said he and Firer were on the same basic strategies with his deck and that he liked his take on UW Delver. Firer played Delvers alongside midrange cards like SFM and he liked it because Delvers can eat the removals for SFM. Well didn't we have just exactly that same element in Delver Shadow and didn't he just decide against that concept himself?

Quote:

---

Just because they're different decks doesn't mean you can't say one is better than the other, you can say Sneak and Show is better than Spanish Inquisition just by looking at winrates, you don't need to assess how similar the decks are.

---

Are there any results that back up the fact that JVP lists are objectively better? If you compare them to Sneak and Show vs Spanish Inquisition I'd expect to see JVPs in every major tournament top8/16.

Quote:

---

If the goal was to go bigger than Delver but stay under Grixis Control then sure, Delverless Shadow is a good deck... The only other options are Snapcaster and Strix, and at that point you're probably close to just a worse Grixis Control.

---

This is almost exactly what I said except "Delver is the backbone of traditional UB Shadow" is not a statement that has any value. "JVP is a concession to the lack of a third colour" yes this is essentially what I said, but this doesn't provide any info as to whether the Delver version or the JVP version is better.

Quote:

---

I also didn't quite understand the point where Friedman said he and Firer were on the same basic strategies with his deck and that he liked his take on UW Delver. Firer played Delvers alongside midrange cards like SFM and he liked it because Delvers can eat the removals for SFM. Well didn't we have just exactly that same element in Delver Shadow and didn't he just decide against that concept himself?

---

I don't know this story and the way that you tell it is confusing (so many he-him it's difficult to figure out who thought what) but I dislike UW Delver for basically the same reason I don't like Delver in UB Shadow.

Quote:

---

Are there any results that back up the fact that JVP lists are objectively better? If you compare them to Sneak and Show vs Spanish Inquisition I'd expect to see JVPs in every major tournament top8/16.

---

I wasn't trying to imply no-Delver is better than Delver to the same extent that SNS is better than Spanish Inquisition, just that the idea of "you can't say deck A is better than deck B if they are different strategies" is a bad way of approaching deck building/selection.

There's a lot of things being mashed up. The main issue with this deck is that Delver has been stranded by itself as a 1cmc (turn 1) threat b/c DRS got banned, and there are precisely zero 1cmc black creatures to fill that void (because this deck isn't called Zombardment - the one exception to this black 1cmc vacuum). JVP/Arcanist/Gurmag won't ever fix this structural instability.

The set slots are 4x Delver + 4x DRS analogue [does not exist] + 4x Shadow [i.e. UB's Goyf]. Being a Delver deck caps you at 15-16 creatures, and you're putting basically all those remaining slots into Gurmag [the TNN-payoff slot]. You can't inject [not-flash] 2-drops into the DRS slot to fix this problem - particularly when Street Wraith can't flip Delver, nor can it tell you how to play anything but predictably linear lines (it's a highly suspect Probe replacement).

There are three ways to change:
-drop Delver and play a worse version of UWx Blade/Shardless/Czech/Grixis "control"/4c Wrenn (these are all the same deck). The key to being successful with the black-using value deck, is that you have SCM with Hymn
-stop trying to make Shadow fit in the DRS slot with Wraith's linear life loss, and use those slots to do something more specialized at the 2cmc mark granting novel play patterns towards a Shadow plan (like Confidant*/Bitterblossom/Orzhov Charm-types or just basic land killers like Sinkhole/Trophy).
-change nothing except cut down to 2 Gurmag and fill the slots with JVP/Arcanist/Last Hope/etc. such that you end up with ~18x lands +16x things [at most] that won't flip a Delver
*Not the best idea with FoW & Gurmag

In terms of individual cards:
-JVP is mainly a Reanimator card; that said Shadow still has Swamp in it, so Massacre/Snuff Out can at least benefit from Yawg. Will wording. The real key to JVP outside Reanimator is a plan of mana denial into "I have a game plan which involves recasting said mana denial in such a way that I don't just lose to Basic supertype."
-Arcanist is like Dark Confidant, except he's opposed to how Shadow has to win games [creature damage]. An opponent is pretty free to ignore him as the Shadow player has either sabotaged Delver (too many non-flippers, thus unable to pressure adequately before the Snapcaster + PW phase of the game) or diluted their deck with red cards to the point that it's now "legacy cards I own, without Snapcaster" (in which case you kill Arcanist). Arcanist also ramps up just how badly Shadow loses to Chalice.

There is precious little evidence support Shadow as having enough play to stand alone without Delver, because stepping back from the early game means we have to directly compare Shadow to Snapcaster. It's not JVP vs Delver, it's "do I have a plan to play JVP alongside Delver with cuts to Gurmag [and/or Wraith] slots?" If the answer to cutting back on Gurmag is 'yes,' you weigh land destruction/JVP builds vs yard-independent Last Hope (or other 3cmc walker).

Edit: all opponents really need to do against Delver decks is kill ~12 dudes (in a very long game) to not die. It is unlikely that anything will change how bad this deck is vs StP, but investigating the viability of Hogaak-casting strategies are likely the highest yield area of improvement for this deck at this time. This strategy would favor Bitterblossom, but would likely require :b::g: cards to handle Wrenn/Plague Engineer.

The strategy of dumping threat numbers, such that opponents only need to kill ~8 non-evasive dudes total, is a losing strategy against not-combo.

Quote:

---

Edit: all opponents really need to do against Delver decks is kill ~12 dudes (in a very long game) to not die.

---

This has been true for the majority of Delver decks over the years, but still Uxy Tempo has always been a tier 1 strategy for the last 20 years or so. And it has never been as easy as it seems to kill those 12 dudes and win the game that easily. That's why Tempo decks play their Dazes, Wastelands and Forces and they do a pretty good job at making sure your 12 creatures go the distance.

I still prefer UB Shadow as a variation of that Tempo shell that has always worked in Legacy. 6 Duals, 8 Fetches, 4 wastelands, 12 creatures, 4 Force/Brainstorm/Daze/Ponder, 4 creature removal spells and a bunch of extra interaction to fill the last 10. That's what the original Shadow list was and is. Everything else is, as I said, a different deck with a different gameplan. And that different deck is one I personally don't like as much, because I think that 3/4-colored strategies with higher-powered cards are better at playing the non-pure-tempo fair game in Legacy.

Miracles is likely the deck's worst matchup and other Plow matchups are also hard, though UW Stoneblade and UW Delver are still perfectly winnable because of how much better Daze and removal spells are against them than against Miracles. Not overextending your Shadows when they could have Plows should be a no-brainer anyway (never having 2 in play and never having one in play alongside something that would get you above 13 when Plowed whenever possible).

Quote:

---

There's a lot of things being mashed up. The main issue with this deck is that Delver has been stranded by itself as a 1cmc (turn 1) threat b/c DRS got banned, and there are precisely zero 1cmc black creatures to fill that void (because this deck isn't called Zombardment - the one exception to this black 1cmc vacuum). JVP/Arcanist/Gurmag won't ever fix this structural instability.

---

Ok

Quote:

---

The set slots are 4x Delver + 4x DRS analogue [does not exist] + 4x Shadow [i.e. UB's Goyf]. Being a Delver deck caps you at 15-16 creatures, and you're putting basically all those remaining slots into Gurmag [the TNN-payoff slot]. You can't inject [not-flash] 2-drops into the DRS slot to fix this problem - particularly when Street Wraith can't flip Delver, nor can it tell you how to play anything but predictably linear lines (it's a highly suspect Probe replacement).

---

Ok, although I think you are putting slightly too much emphasis on this anti-wraith idea

Quote:

---

There are three ways to change:
-drop Delver and play a worse version of UWx Blade/Shardless/Czech/Grixis "control"/4c Wrenn (these are all the same deck). The key to being successful with the black-using value deck, is that you have SCM with Hymn
-stop trying to make Shadow fit in the DRS slot with Wraith's linear life loss, and use those slots to do something more specialized at the 2cmc mark granting novel play patterns towards a Shadow plan (like Confidant*/Bitterblossom/Orzhov Charm-types or just basic land killers like Sinkhole/Trophy).
-change nothing except cut down to 2 Gurmag and fill the slots with JVP/Arcanist/Last Hope/etc. such that you end up with ~18x lands +16x things [at most] that won't flip a Delver
*Not the best idea with FoW & Gurmag

---

- You need an argument for why cutting delver from UB leads to a "worse" midrange deck. Why must the key to being successful not be JVP+Hymn
- Again you have this weird thought that Wraith is bad because it only does 1 thing. Wraith is either good or bad based on the metagame dictating how much damage you want to be doing to yourself. Arguing that it's bad because it's not "specialised" is nonsense when the card has no function except to instantly replace itself.
- Yeah I don't think it makes sense to play Delver + Shadow + Angler + extra creatures which is what you seem to also be saying in this third point

Quote:

---

In terms of individual cards:
-JVP is mainly a Reanimator card; that said Shadow still has Swamp in it, so Massacre/Snuff Out can at least benefit from Yawg. Will wording. The real key to JVP outside Reanimator is a plan of mana denial into "I have a game plan which involves recasting said mana denial in such a way that I don't just lose to Basic supertype."
-Arcanist is like Dark Confidant, except he's opposed to how Shadow has to win games [creature damage]. An opponent is pretty free to ignore him as the Shadow player has either sabotaged Delver (too many non-flippers, thus unable to pressure adequately before the Snapcaster + PW phase of the game) or diluted their deck with red cards to the point that it's now "legacy cards I own, without Snapcaster" (in which case you kill Arcanist). Arcanist also ramps up just how badly Shadow loses to Chalice.

---

- Yes, agreed with first point. Hymn to Tourach plays this role because starving your opponent out of resources (cards in hand) is functional manadenial, invariant to whether the opponent is playing basics or not
- I don't think an opponent would ever realistically ignore an Arcanist and this second point doesn't make much sense to me (except the chalice thing, which is valid but marginal)

Quote:

---

There is precious little evidence support Shadow as having enough play to stand alone without Delver, because stepping back from the early game means we have to directly compare Shadow to Snapcaster. It's not JVP vs Delver, it's "do I have a plan to play JVP alongside Delver with cuts to Gurmag [and/or Wraith] slots?" If the answer to cutting back on Gurmag is 'yes,' you weigh land destruction/JVP builds vs yard-independent Last Hope (or other 3cmc walker).

---

This is wrong, again you assert that playing Shadow without Delver is bad with no argument

Quote:

---

Edit: all opponents really need to do against Delver decks is kill ~12 dudes (in a very long game) to not die. It is unlikely that anything will change how bad this deck is vs StP, but investigating the viability of Hogaak-casting strategies are likely the highest yield area of improvement for this deck at this time. This strategy would favor Bitterblossom, but would likely require :b::g: cards to handle Wrenn/Plague Engineer.

The strategy of dumping threat numbers, such that opponents only need to kill ~8 non-evasive dudes total, is a losing strategy against not-combo.

---

Izor already explained why this is mostly baloney.
The idea of playing Hogaak in a xerox deck is amusing and I don't want to write it off immediately but you would need such a huge overhaul of the deck to reliably enable convoke I don't think it's likely you would end up with something that's better than either the Depths build or the full-graveyard dredge/altar versions.

Quote:

---

Miracles is likely the deck's worst matchup and other Plow matchups are also hard, though UW Stoneblade and UW Delver are still perfectly winnable because of how much better Daze and removal spells are against them than against Miracles. Not overextending your Shadows when they could have Plows should be a no-brainer anyway (never having 2 in play and never having one in play alongside something that would get you above 13 when Plowed whenever possible).

---

With the JVP version I feel favoured vs Miracles and Blade.
The worst matchups are DNT, Lands, and Stompy/Prison decks
Basically the anti-delver decks become much better against you but the fair blue matchups become more favoured for Shadow, and the combo matchup is roughly the same.
I have no idea whether the deck is still good or not (haven't tried it much post-WAR) because not being able to play Wrenn seems like such a huge drawback and there are some other tools that decks have got (e.g. Arcanist, Veil of Summer).
The deck can take advantage of Force of Negation and Plague Engineer though, which is something

@kombatkiwi
Every time you reach for Hymn, you reach for Snapcaster, meaning you play Czech Pile/Grixis Control/4c Wrenn b/c these decks just win more games. Solo-Hymn has never been an effective strategy with staying power - so even if you run JVP, you shouldn't be doing it. Here's the no-SCM Hymn peer group: Pox, Jund, BUG Delver. Shardless & occasional Aluren/Food Chain are too high on the mana curve for a comparison, and furthermore [non-Aluren] Shardless Agent is an obsolete Snapcaster (the only thing that ever made Shardless BUG playable was how SDT/CB warped the format in its favor, making cascade towards Decay a reasonable play).

Solo-Hymn doesn't work, and cutting Delvers for JVP (or SCM) + Hymn turns you into a less-winning Grixis Control deck. The problem of Shadow/Angler getting trounced by kill spell + SCM (especially bad if StP) has always been the problem. While it's not exactly effective to use Delver to duress StP from hand, it's better than sitting around in an aggressive deck with zero reach trying to Hymn those spells from hand while they develop ever more unassailable mana (thanks to cards like Vista/Astrolabe/Wrenn) towards PWs taking over the game. Daze and Wasteland are getting worse in real time, and playing solo-Hymn just makes those two cards worse...You cut the Delvers [the only aggressive opener this deck has left] on top of this and it's over, you're in build-order loss territory b/c you've butchered any chance of Daze ever helping you.

WotC made 3-4 color mana bases trivial, so to have a shot with a Daze deck you really need to have a focused gameplan. Stranding Delver by itself and looking for answers at 2cmc (which are opposed to creating a low-to-the-ground pro-Delver gamestate) means that the moment you consider it you're generally making a "cards I own" pile. These piles not only win less than value pile vs the field, they also lose badly to value pile. The days of pretending you've got a good matchup vs greedy value piles and Tundra decks are over - Wasteland stealing the game was the only way that ever worked out, and this just won't happen anymore.

In any 2c/3c shell a not-combo deck needs cards playing off each-other. Random 2-for-1's that don't do anything to synergize & advance a gameplan and fail to deal with on-board problems aren't effective, b/c everyone else is playing that same style with SCM on top of it all. You don't even need to look at how bad Shadow is vs real Delver decks (Delver + Bolt) to realize that Hymn is the wrong card.