4 Card Blind

[FTW]

maxx!: Mishra's Workshop, Trinisphere, Chimeric Idol, Culling Scales

6+0+6+6+0+3+0+6+0+6 = 33

Shop seemed better than Force this round, and combo (LED, Storm, Dark Rit, etc.) all went 3-3 against Shop decks with Spheres. I wanted a threat that was faster than Tongs, and once I settled on Chimeric Idol I knew my last card had to beat Ensnaring Bridge. Culling Scales felt pretty good since my whole deck costs 3, but I did not expect so many storage land decks that can cast more expensive cards. Looks like it still worked out, especially with my threat beating Chandra all by itself.

Nice tech with Scales + Idol. I wanted to play Idol to have a faster clock than Tongs, but I was so lasered in on Ratchet Bomb, and Ratchet does not play well with Idol vs Bridge. Culling Scales solves that problem well and beats Ratchet in the mirror.

[alphastryk]

You can't cast Serenity through Sphere of Resistance if you've already used Field of Ruin, so the Field ASAP -> Serenity line does not work.

Edit 2: I'm still not seeing a way for dte to force the draw:
d t1: Tomb, Sphere
a t1: land #1 (order does not matter)
d t2: Saga to to create a threat, forcing Serenity to come down.
a t2: land #2
d t3: Use Tomb + Saga to make a Construct
a t3: Tap out for Serenity
d t4: Hold Needle to not lose it to Serenity
a t4: Serenity triggers, blowing up Sphere, Saga and Construct. Activate Field to kill Tomb. dte now has no permanents and Needle is stranded forever.

(Serenity specifically blowing up Urza's Saga because it is an enchantment was something I factored into my deck design, was important in beating my gauntlet decks with Saga).

[dte]

Edit 2: I'm still not seeing a way for dte to force the draw:
d t1: Tomb, Sphere
a t1: land #1 (order does not matter)
d t2: Saga to to create a threat, forcing Serenity to come down.
a t2: land #2
d t3: Use Tomb + Saga to make a Construct
a t3: Tap out for Serenity
d t4: Hold Needle to not lose it to Serenity
a t4: Serenity triggers, blowing up Sphere, Saga and Construct. Activate Field to kill Tomb. dte now has no permanents and Needle is stranded forever.

(Serenity specifically blowing up Urza's Saga because it is an enchantment was something I factored into my deck design, was important in beating my gauntlet decks with Saga).

That sounds right, it is 6-0 for you.

[silkster]

9. silkster: Hive of the Eye Tyrant, Dreadship Reef, Inquisition of Kozilek, Ashiok, Nightmare Muse

1. Asthereal (TO): Mishra's Workshop, Trinisphere, Ensnaring Bridge, Scalding Tongs
WW

2. dte: Urza's Saga, Pithing Needle, Ancient Tomb, Sphere of Resistance
Wow, this deck has it all. Sphere lockdown, Needle to stop charge lands and planeswalkers, and enough mana to play through Trinisphere.
LL

3. Phasmoid: Dwarven Hold, Dwarven Hold, Chandra, Awakened Inferno, Chandra, Awakened Inferno
Dwarven Hold to play around Needle? I feel like like a guy showing up to a modern tournament with a standard deck.
Kind of close, but I think it's a loss. I might look more carefully later.
LL

4. Nasst: Mishra's Workshop, Trinisphere, Ensnaring Bridge, Scalding Tongs
WW

5. RoosterCocoa: Ancient Tomb, Sphere of Resistance, Dark Depths, Thespian's Stage
Hunh, I forgot about Depths.
LL

6. GoblinSmashmaster: Lion's Eye Diamond, Lion's Eye Diamond, Lion's Eye Diamond, From Under the Floorboards
I did remember to look for cards with LED! But somehow I forgot about From Under the Floorboards, even though I've almost submitted it before (for the Epic round, I think).
LL

7. alphastryk: Karakas, Mishra’s Factory, Field of Ruin, Serenity
A very nice use of Field of Ruin. I love that after opponent shows their land, you can play Serenity through Trinisphere and the slowness is really important because it catches their next spell before you're able to remove their land.
LL

8. FTW: Mishra's Workshop, Trinisphere, Ratchet Bomb, Scalding Tongs
WW

10. maxx!: Mishra's Workshop, Trinisphere, Chimeric Idol, Culling Scales
I take 15 damage before stabilizing on turn 6.
WW

11. Reeplcheep: The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale, Chandra, Awakened Inferno, Leyline of Sanctity, Mercadian Bazaar
On the draw: T6 Ashiok+1 to 6; T7 +1 to 7 and a second 2/3. The only potential reason to wait on Chandra is to be able to cast her two turns in a row, but that's far too slow. So you play Chandra. I'm out of range of the -X, and +2 or -3 then she gets bounced and I can get 7 more loyalty before you can play her again.
WW


10W, 10L, straight down the middle if I made no mistakes.

Once again, I completely forgot about very well-known strategies because they're just always banned for most of the rounds I've played. It was like when we started the pauper season and everyone forgot about Burning Inquity.

5. RoosterCocoa: Ancient Tomb, Sphere of Resistance, Dark Depths, Thespian's Stage
I talked myself out of submitting this last round when it would have almost swept the field, and figured I might as well submit it while there were still unbanned lands that easily produced 2 mana.

I feel like this is the rare deck that can actually use Mana Crypt.

[GoblinSmashmaster]

ZombieSmashmaster Results for Round "Spheres"

1. Asthereal (TO): Mishra's Workshop, Trinisphere, Ensnaring Bridge, Scalding Tongs
Bridge 0-6

2. dte: Urza's saga, Pithing needle, Ancient tomb, Sphere of resistance
Zombie smash, then sphere 3-3

3. Phasmoid: Dwarven Hold, Dwarven Hold, Chandra, Awakened Inferno, Chandra, Awakened Inferno
Zombie smash! 6-0

4. Nasst: Mishra's Workshop, Trinisphere, Ensnaring Bridge, Scalding Tongs
Bridge 0-6

5. RoosterCocoa: Ancient Tomb, Sphere of Resistance, Dark Depths, Thespian's Stage
Zombie smash, then sphere 3-3

6. GoblinSmashmaster: Lion's Eye Diamond, Lion's Eye Diamond, Lion's Eye Diamond, From Under the Floorboards
That's me, playing bigger Goblins!

7. alphastryk: Karakas, Mishra’s Factory, Field of Ruin, Serenity
Zombie smash! 6-0

8. FTW: Mishra's Workshop, Trinisphere, Ratchet Bomb, Scalding Tongs
Bomb 0-6

9. silkster: Hive of the Eye Tyrant, Dreadship Reef, Inquisition of Kozilek, Ashiok, Nightmare Muse
Zombie smash! 6-0

10. maxx!: Mishra's Workshop, Trinisphere, Chimeric Idol, Culling Scales
Zombie smash, then sphere 3-3

11. Reeplcheep: The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale, Chandra, Awakened Inferno, Leyline of Sanctity, Mercadian Bazaar
Tabernacle 0-6

Total: 27 points

[dte]

I feel like this is the rare deck that can actually use Mana Crypt.

Rulewise, random effects are detrimental to the controller of an effect or the owner of the spell/permanent responsible for it?
That might change the playability of mana crypt (even if I think it is much more playable than thought of).

6. GoblinSmashmaster: Lion's Eye Diamond, Lion's Eye Diamond, Lion's Eye Diamond, From Under the Floorboards
That's me, playing bigger Goblins!


Total: 27 points

I was close to play the same deck, I thought a combo deck that beats force of negation would be crazy good. Turns out FoN was not played at all. With a tomb over the third LED it was +12 though.

[silkster]

Rulewise, random effects are detrimental to the controller of an effect or the owner of the spell/permanent responsible for it?
That might change the playability of mana crypt (even if I think it is much more playable than thought of).

Exactly! So Mana Crypt is mostly really bad because you only get 6 more turns after you play it, and Stage+Depths is one of very few ways to win that fast.

[Phasmoid]

9. silkster: ​ ​ ​ Hive of the Eye Tyrant ​ , ​ Dreadship Reef ​ , ​ Inquisition of Kozilek ​ , ​ Ashiok, Nightmare Muse
​ ​ ​ ​ vs
​ ​ ​ ​ me: ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Dwarven Hold ​ , ​ Dwarven Hold ​ , ​ Chandra, Awakened Inferno ​ , ​ Chandra, Awakened Inferno

is the one of my matches that I had not worked out before this post. ​ Inquisition is dead against me and I had
a quite long analysis here, which missed the relevance of the Legendary type, pointed out by Asthereal below.

[Asthereal]

​

9. silkster: ​ ​ ​ Hive of the Eye Tyrant ​ , ​ Dreadship Reef ​ , ​ Inquisition of Kozilek ​ , ​ Ashiok, Nightmare Muse
​ ​ ​ ​ vs
​ ​ ​ ​ me: ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Dwarven Hold ​ , ​ Dwarven Hold ​ , ​ Chandra, Awakened Inferno ​ , ​ Chandra, Awakened Inferno

is the one of my matches that I had not worked out before this post. ​ Inquisition is dead
against me and I claim I win both, so suppose I am OTD. ​ I play my lands on T1 and T2,
and will not cast either Chandra before T9 unless silkster has already cast Ashiok.

if we reach my T9 without silkster having cast Ashiok:

I cast both Chandras on T9, and +2 both of them _unless_ you cast Ashiok the previous turn.
As my T9 ends, they have 8 loyalty and silkster has 2 fire emblems, so silkster
loses no later than silkster's T19 upkeep if silkster doesn't win before then.
Hive's attacks are no sooner than ​ T7,T12,T17,T22 , ​ which is too slow,
so silkster would need to cast Ashiok and make something stick as a result.
Ashiok's +1 won't do that when when my Chandras have loyalties at least ​ 3,6 ,
and Ashiok's -3 won't do that when my Chandras both have loyalty at least 2.
Thus Hive would need to attack one or both of my Chandras
to stop their loyalties from being at least ​ 3,6 .
However, one attack doesn't do that, and my Chandras each
get more than two +2s for each of Hive's subsequent attacks.​

I fear Chandra is legendary by definition, so you can't have two of her at the same time and keep both in play. You'll have to sacrifice one.

[Phasmoid]

I fear Chandra is legendary by definition, so you can't have two of her at the same time and keep both in play. You'll have to sacrifice one.

Ah, I completely missed that. ​ I'll have to check my other results too, although I _think_ none of the others involved me having both at the same time.

[Asthereal]

Ah, I completely missed that. ​ I'll have to check my other results too, although I _think_ none of the others involved me having both at the same time.

Yeah, it's a bit confusing, as usually the Legendary thing is literally mentioned on the card, but in the case of planeswalkers, it's the character that's Legendary, not the card itself.
So you can't have both a Jace Beleren and a Jace, the Mind Sculptor in play at the same time. As the second enters the battlefield, you'll have to choose one and sac it.
And as you can see from the text on both, the old Jace doesn't even have the word Legendary in its type line, but Jace TMS does.

[alphastryk]

Yeah, it's a bit confusing, as usually the Legendary thing is literally mentioned on the card, but in the case of planeswalkers, it's the character that's Legendary, not the card itself.
So you can't have both a Jace Beleren and a Jace, the Mind Sculptor in play at the same time. As the second enters the battlefield, you'll have to choose one and sac it.
And as you can see from the text on both, the old Jace doesn't even have the word Legendary in its type line, but Jace TMS does.

Actually, you now can have two different planeswalkers with the same type - they changed them all to be Legendary instead to make the rules for different permanent types more consistent. In this case however, two Legendaries with the same name can't be in play at the same time for the same player.

[Phasmoid]

​

hopefully-correct-this-time analysis for

9. silkster: ​ ​ ​ Hive of the Eye Tyrant ​ , ​ Dreadship Reef ​ , ​ Inquisition of Kozilek ​ , ​ Ashiok, Nightmare Muse
​ ​ ​ ​ vs
​ ​ ​ ​ me: ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Dwarven Hold ​ , ​ Dwarven Hold ​ , ​ Chandra, Awakened Inferno ​ , ​ Chandra, Awakened Inferno

, ​ which is the one of my matches that I had not worked out corrctly before this post.
Inquisition is dead against me and I claim I win both, so suppose I am OTD. ​ I play my lands on
T1 and T2, and will not cast either Chandra before T9 unless silkster has already cast Ashiok.




if we reach my T8 without silkster having cast Ashiok:

I cast one Chandra on my T8, and +2 it that turn. ​ As my T8 ends, it has 8 loyalty and silkster has a
fire emblem, so silkster loses no later than silkster's T28 upkeep if silkster doesn't win before then.
Hive's attacks are no sooner than ​ T6,T11,T16,T21,T26,T31 , ​ which is too slow,
so silkster would need to cast Ashiok and make something stick as a result.
Until silkster casts Ashiok, I keep 1 Chandra in hand.
Ashiok's -7 can't be activated the turn it's cast, and wouldn't help at that point even if it could.
Ashiok's +1 also won't make something stick, since I -6 my alread-on-the-battlefield
Chandra to kill Ashiok, cast my other Chandra, put my old Chandra into my
graveyard due to the legend rule, and -3 my new Chandra to kill the Nightmare.


Thus, assume that silkster casts Ashiok before my T8.



Dreadship Reef can't have gotten to 9 stored, so silkster
can't animate Hive the same turn as silkster casts Ashiok.
If silkster uses the -3 on Ashiok, then there was no point in casting Ashiok.
The -3 has no other targets, so silkster uses the +1. ​ To cast Ashiok, Dreadship Reef
needed to have uptapped with at least 4 stored, which doesn't happen before T6.
Thus on the next turn, my lands untap with at least 3,4 stored, so I cast a Chandra.
I -6 that Chandra, trading it with Ashiok. ​ I spent 6 mana and missed 2 storings
(on the same turn), so I cast my other Chandra on T10, and +2 her that turn.
Casting Ashiok spent at least 4 storage and skipped a storing, so Dreadship Reef
goes to 4 stored on silkster's T10, which means Hive can't attack before my T10.
The Nightmare attacks at most 4 times before my T10, so I will have at least
12 life when I get an 8-loyalty Chandra and silkster gets a fire emblem.


if silkster double-attacks Chandra on T11:
Reef goes to 0 stored, Chandra goes to 3 loyalty, and I will still have at least 12 life.
I +2 Chandra on my T11, bringing her to 5 loyalty and giving silkster another fire emblem.
Hive can't attack again on T12, so I -3 Chandra on my T12.
That kills the Nightmare, so I take at most 2 more damage from it.
Hive's subsequent attacks are no sooner than T16 and T21, dealing at most
6 damage to me, and I don't even take that much damage, since silkster
loses no later than silkster's T21 upkeep to the at least 2 fire emblems.
Thus I win with more than 4 life remaining.

if on silkster's T11, the Nightmare attacks Chandra and Hive does not animate:
I will still have at least 12 life, and Chandra goes to 6 loyalty.
I +2 her on my T11, bringing her back to 8 loyalty and giving silkster another fire emblem.
I -3 Chandra on my T12, killing the Nightmare, so I take at most 2 more damage from it.
Hive's attacks are no sooner than ​ T12,T16,T21 , ​ dealing at most 9
damage to me, and I don't even take that much damage, since silkster
loses no later than silkster's T21 upkeep to the at least 2 fire emblems.
Thus I win with more than 1 life remaining.

otherwise:
I -3 Chandra on my T11, killing the Nightmare.
Hive can't animate more than once before T16, so Chandra can't die before then,
since either Hive didn't attack her or Hive animated but didn't attack her.
I +2 Chandra on each of my turns after T11. ​ That happens more than twice
before T16, and more than twice for each of Hive's subsequent attacks.
Thus Chandra does not die, so there is no point in attacking her, and silkster will lose to
accumulating fire emblems on the upkeep of silkster's T17 if silkster doesn't win before then.
That means the Nightmare attacks me on T11, and Hive attacks me as often as it can.
Hive 3 damage on T11 and another 3 on T16, but its next attack would be T21, which is too late.
Thus I win with at least 4 life remaining.

​

[Phasmoid]

3. Phasmoid: Dwarven Hold, Dwarven Hold, Chandra, Awakened Inferno, Chandra, Awakened Inferno
Dwarven Hold to play around Needle? I feel like like a guy showing up to a modern tournament with a standard deck.
Kind of close, but I think it's a loss. I might look more carefully later.
LL

Well, that was why I picked Dwarven Hold, but between submitting my deck and the deadline, I realized that doesn't help my deck,
since although Needle doesn't affect my lands, it does shut down my Chandras. ​ (I decided, whatever, and stuck with my deck anyway.)

(Also, my previous post has a full analysis.)

[Asthereal]

Actually, you now can have two different planeswalkers with the same type - they changed them all to be Legendary instead to make the rules for different permanent types more consistent. In this case however, two Legendaries with the same name can't be in play at the same time for the same player.

WTF I just looked it up!
Apparently not in the right place...

[Phasmoid]

Rulewise, random effects are detrimental to the controller of an effect or the owner of the spell/permanent responsible for it?

My understanding is that it's the latter: ​ detrimental to the player responsible for its existence, even if the other player controls it

(I would prefer an epsilon exception -
if for all positive epsilon, you have a strategy which would give you at least a certain
result with probability greater than 1-epsilon, then you get at least that result
- but I believe we have some precedent from an Eldrazi shuffler that this thread doesn't even have a probability-zero exception.)

[Asthereal]

My understanding is that it's the latter: ​ detrimental to the player responsible for its existence, even if the other player controls it

Why would that be true?

The rule right now says "random effects are always in favor of the opponent".
And that opponent is the one who is opponent to the controller of the card or effect, right?

If we're discussing whether Donateing a Mana Crypt should be a way to win, I'd say it should be.

[Phasmoid]

Why would that be true?

The rule right now says "random effects are always in favor of the opponent".
And that opponent is the one who is opponent to the controller of the card or effect, right?

If we're discussing whether Donateing a Mana Crypt should be a way to win, I'd say it should be.

Well - whether-or-not it's actually true - it would be true to
slightly-more discourage the use of cards that create random effects.


Also, the quote from the OP is actually
"Random effects always have the effect that is most favorable to the opponent." ​ .
(The difference matters when using search to find that part of your post.)
When the effect has a controller, I agree with your interpretation of
that quote, since that corresponds to when MtG text uses ​ ​ ​ "an opponent" ​ .


When there is no controller ​ - ​ such as a
"would be put into a graveyard from anywhere, ... shuffle it into its owners library instead."
card moving from a zone that's neither the battlefield or the stack,
while there was already 1 or more cards in that player's library ​ -
I imagine you would say the owner of the card, and I am not aware of any current
cases in which that would differ from, player responsible for the effect's existence.
(A hypothetical permanent card with
"All cards in hands have [the replace-with-shuffle ability I referred to above]."
would cause those to sometimes differ.)


For Donateing a Mana Crypt, I'm giving 3 example decks
- ​ albeit not ones which would be legal this season ​ -
in case my explanation would otherwise be unclear.

ManaCrypt: ​ ​ ​ Island ​ , ​ Mana Crypt ​ , ​ Glacial Wall ​ , ​ Donate
MonoGreen: ​ ​ ​ Forest ​ , ​ Forest ​ , ​ Forest ​ , ​ Leatherback Baloth
BackBuild: ​ ​ ​ Veldt ​ , ​ Helix Pinnacle ​ , ​ Traproot Kami ​ , ​ Green Scarab

I agree with you that the result of the current rule is, MC beats both MG and BB.
For MC vs MG, I also agree that that is what the result should be, though for me,
that's because if a coin keeps getting flipped, the probability of never losing 7 flips is zero.
For MC vs BB, I think MC should lose, even though the current rule has it win.

​

[alphastryk]

Why would that be true?

The rule right now says "random effects are always in favor of the opponent".
And that opponent is the one who is opponent to the controller of the card or effect, right?

If we're discussing whether Donateing a Mana Crypt should be a way to win, I'd say it should be.

I'm all for a Donated Mana Crypt being a win condition, which aligns with my understanding of the rules

[dte]

Well - whether-or-not it's actually true - it would be true to
slightly-more discourage the use of cards that create random effects.


Also, the quote from the OP is actually
"Random effects always have the effect that is most favorable to the opponent." ​ .
(The difference matters when using search to find that part of your post.)
When the effect has a controller, I agree with your interpretation of
that quote, since that corresponds to when MtG text uses ​ ​ ​ "an opponent" ​ .


When there is no controller ​ - ​ such as a
"would be put into a graveyard from anywhere, ... shuffle it into its owners library instead."
card moving from a zone that's neither the battlefield or the stack,
while there was already 1 or more cards in that player's library ​ -
I imagine you would say the owner of the card, and I am not aware of any current
cases in which that would differ from, player responsible for the effect's existence.
(A hypothetical permanent card with
"All cards in hands have [the replace-with-shuffle ability I referred to above]."
would cause those to sometimes differ.)


For Donateing a Mana Crypt, I'm giving 3 example decks
- ​ albeit not ones which would be legal this season ​ -
in case my explanation would otherwise be unclear.

ManaCrypt: ​ ​ ​ Island ​ , ​ Mana Crypt ​ , ​ Glacial Wall ​ , ​ Donate
MonoGreen: ​ ​ ​ Forest ​ , ​ Forest ​ , ​ Forest ​ , ​ Leatherback Baloth
BackBuild: ​ ​ ​ Veldt ​ , ​ Helix Pinnacle ​ , ​ Traproot Kami ​ , ​ Green Scarab

I agree with you that the result of the current rule is, MC beats both MG and BB.
For MC vs MG, I also agree that that is what the result should be, though for me,
that's because if a coin keeps getting flipped, the probability of never losing 7 flips is zero.
For MC vs BB, I think MC should lose, even though the current rule has it win.
​

The owner of the Emrakul's card is actually the controller of the shuffle effect.

Otherwise I think the last interpretation would be weird, as it leaves a lot of interpretation. Currently if you submitted infinite life, recursion and mana clash and I mindslave you, I win the game, even if you went for a billion life two turns ago. With your interpretation, infinite life and recursion + mana clash would win vs any deck that do not interact with it.

If we're discussing whether Donateing a Mana Crypt should be a way to win, I'd say it should be.

I'm all for a Donated Mana Crypt being a win condition, which aligns with my understanding of the rules

Crypt/donate is indeed what I was referring too.
So for all purposes, mana crypt reads, at your upkeep, take three if that's bad for you.
It makes more sense to me that it works. It is actually a very strong wincon (throw in any discard opponent's hand for 3 on T1, there is a bunch of them). That's why I asked for everyone to be aware of the rules, as it always feel shitty (cheaty?) to lose because of a rule misunderstanding (either submitting crypt/donate to discover you backbuilded yourself, or getting rolled over by a crypt/donate you thought would not work).
As long as we all agree, everything is good :)