[Primer] R/G Lands

[Dice_Box]

Agreed, but none of the matches it really shines is a common sight locally. I feel like in a local setting I could switch it over for another copy of Vortex and not be too unhappy with the choice.

Also I got a 3-1 record this week playing only two games. Won against BUG Delver, lost against BUG control and then got paired against an Elves player I have played each week for the last 4 weeks. He just scooped in place of playing me again. Did not want to even bother. Round four, same deal.

[Ciubulu]

Thanks for the link, it's nice to have some explanation on his choices, especially the sideborading tables!
Some thoughts:

1) I am just a bit surprised by his choice to board-out the Glacial Chasm against 4c Delver / Grixis Delver. He argues that it is because "Chasm is bad against DRS". Yeah, well, we all know that, but still, it can come very handy. And if chasm is that bad against DRS, why wouldn't Jarvis side it out against Sultaï Delver?
1.2) Personally, the more I play with Chasm, the more I think it should be a sideboard card instead of a maindeck card: right now, I feel like I'd rather have Karakas or Bojuka in the Main Deck than Chasm. What do you guys think about this?

2) Also, Jarvis apparently confirms that Trackers shines in a lot of matchs-ups post-board, so why only play 2 in the sideboard? I know, we only have 15 slots, but since the Trackers are apparently way more used than the Ancient Grudge, I am wondering why he wouldn't simply do -1 Grudge +1 Tracker. So, any thoughts?

1) chasm is there to let you win otherwise very bad matches like burn or ur and to buy you time vs many decks like elves or multiple nemesis on board. I usually side it out vs grixis because it's almost useless and a very bad topdeck. I keep it it vs sultai just because of nemesis, as a necessary evil to fight more than one nemesis into play.

2) I don't love grudge but it's a necessary evil with all the sfm decks (d&t included) and it's randomly good in many post sideboard games.

Tracker is great and the more I play the more I love it...it's simply hard to find room for it (both in the side and in the deck after game 1)...I play 3 and I'm satisfied with the number

[mechint]

You do play chasm g1 for delver , burn , ur delver and against true name deck .

[Ciubulu]

You do play chasm g1 for delver , burn , ur delver and against true name deck .

Remember that some decks simply couldn't beat a chasm shield. it is a resource against many decks: I used it more then once to win vs turbo depths, dredge and random combo decks (I.e. Belcher) and I can't count the times when a chasm bought me enough time to find an answer when I had to face multiple creatures at once or something too big to die with a couple of fires when i still didn't had a maze into play. It has many uses and it absolutely deserves a place md imho. I can compare it to tabernacle: win some games alone and it's randomly good in so many matches that I cannot imagine to leave home without it.

[Joh4n]

Remember that some decks simply couldn't beat a chasm shield. it is a resource against many decks: I used it more then once to win vs turbo depths, dredge and random combo decks (I.e. Belcher) and I can't count the times when a chasm bought me enough time to find an answer when I had to face multiple creatures at once or something too big to die with a couple of fires when i still didn't had a maze into play. It has many uses and it absolutely deserves a place md imho. I can compare it to tabernacle: win some games alone and it's randomly good in so many matches that I cannot imagine to leave home without it.

I think Turbodepths should needle Thespian's stage vs lands, and rely on hexmage for Marit.. Anyways, chasm has to stay main deck, unless you have a very very specific local meta.

[Ciubulu]

I think Turbodepths should needle Thespian's stage vs lands, and rely on hexmage for Marit..

Their first needle should always be on wasteland, otherwise the game will probably go long and we have an edge in long games vs almost any deck

[Joh4n]

Their first needle should always be on wasteland, otherwise the game will probably go long and we have an edge in long games vs almost any deck

Agreed.

[Ingo]

What's the opinion on Drop of Honey occasionally popping up in sideboards?

[Dice_Box]

It's not a terrible card, but I don't think it's effect is strong enough to warrant what the card itself costs. I personally would not seek one out.

[Crimhead]

Drop looks like a good card against Reanimator and Sneak Show. It's also probably good vs Elves and fair decks - but maybe not worth boarding cards out for. Maybe against a tougher creature deck like D&T?

I wouldn't typically run it in my local scene. I'd love to have a copy in case my meta shifts, but it's a lot of money for me right now.

[Admiral Nobeard]

Even given the cost of Drop, I'd still consider it since it's a consistent threat to any deck with creatures. You play it early enough and it stops DRS for some amount of time and can slowly chip away at D&T, BUG decks, or any deck that wants to have a consistent board threat. Yes it's expensive, and yes it's slow, but three points to take away:

• When you're facing creatures constantly, you need a consistent answer
• It's the same CMC at Vortex, but can also deal with much larger threats more efficiently
• We're playing a deck with Tabernacle. Whether you traded into it or bought a Tabernacle, getting a Drop through either means should be easier. (the hard part for trading into it would be finding one)

[Crimhead]

Yes it's expensive, and yes it's slow, but three points to take away:

• When you're facing creatures constantly, you need a consistent answer
• It's the same CMC at Vortex, but can also deal with much larger threats more efficiently
• We're playing a deck with Tabernacle. Whether you traded into it or bought a Tabernacle, getting a Drop through either means should be easier. (the hard part for trading into it would be finding one)

1 - Against most fair creature decks, I wouldn't board this in anyway. I have consistent answers already.
2 - But Vortex is a win-condition and an out against Moon.
3 - Personally I had more wealth when I bought my $200 English Tabernacle. Owning a Tabernacle does not trivialise the price of cheaper but expensive cards.

If I was sure I wanted to run it, I might make an effort to acquire a copy. Right now it would go in my large box of optional cards and gather dust.

[Ingo]

I like that it deals with big utility creatures like KOTR or untargettable threats like TNN, as it's an effect we don't have.

But what would really convince me if would be an adequate card versus S&T or Reanimator. And I kinda doubt that, mainly because Grisel still draws 14, and Sneakattack doesn't care. Nonetheless I'll proxy one and play some local games with it.

[Dice_Box]

Tabernacle was always a cost/benefit analysis. Yes, getting Tabernacle was worth it. Now, it's a little different.

I am in a different place from where I was when I spent money week after week on magic. I just can't justify doing that anymore while having the amount of money in cards that I do set aside. So I am unwilling to spend. When tax comes in I may get a pair, trading away a Chains or something. I more or less exclusively play Lands and Stax these days away.

That said, being able to buy a Tabernacle at some point is not the same as spending 100 au on Drop.

[Claymore]

Splash a Savannah or two for Poryphory Nodes or whatever?

[Crimhead]

Splash a Savannah or two for Poryphory Nodes or whatever?

Even if you were already splashing white, Drop > Nodes. Even then, is this card so good as to justify running a sub-par alternative?

[Claymore]

Is there something different between the two other than needing to get White? Which I can see that being sometimes difficult but not severely so.
They look identical to me and you can't drop Honey/Nodes turn 1 on a blank board, you need to wait until a creature has been played out anyway. More of a turn 2/3 card.

[rlesko]

Even if you were already splashing white, Drop > Nodes. Even then, is this card so good as to justify running a sub-par alternative?

How so? http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Ca...verseid=124470 "This is the timeshifted version of Drop of Honey."

I would consider it if I had like 2-3 slots where I could play this thing, and meta was infested with creatures. I generally don't like nonland cards that I can't play multiples of in my SB.

[kravkenov]

What I don't like about Drop of Honey (or its white Timeshifted version) is that if you want to prevent opponent to overwhelm you with creatures, you should play it relatively fast. But if you do so, opponent can just wait a turn with no creature in play and the enchantment get self-destroyed. If you wait few turns before playing it to get some value back, first there is some chance to dredge it away, and second it might be a bit slow to manage the actual creatures you want to get ride at turn 4-5-6 because of the smallest one that was played turns 1-2-3.

[rlesko]

What I don't like about Drop of Honey (or its white Timeshifted version) is that if you want to prevent opponent to overwhelm you with creatures, you should play it relatively fast. But if you do so, opponent can just wait a turn with no creature in play and the enchantment get self-destroyed. If you wait few turns before playing it to get some value back, first there is some chance to dredge it away, and second it might be a bit slow to manage the actual creatures you want to get ride at turn 4-5-6 because of the smallest one that was played turns 1-2-3.

I think you're thinking about the card wrong. You can't dream of 4 for 1'ing your opponent with it. Imagine being on the draw and your opponent played a turn 1 deathrite. On turn 2 he may even cast a true name or something, at which point you are very far behind. Well, if you play the card on turn 1, your opponent now will probably let his shaman die to get rid of the drop of honey. Its only a 1 for 1, but you bought yourself a TON of tempo. Same scenario can apply to elves or taxes.