[Deck] Nic Fit (GBx Explorer Zenith Control)

[Tao]

Play none or play four at least.

That is a terrible argument. Not saying that he shouldn't but the argument "play 4 or 0" is always terrible (unless you have something like Accumulated Knowledge).

That's part of why I love and hate this thread: It has all the creativity to make magical pony rides happen, and then it makes you fall over drooling and moaning over the millions of brain cells and potential booty calls you just lost for reading half of it.

Agreed, 100 times.

I don't see the point of playing a 2/2 split of Deed and Decay. Decay is much more versatile and flexible. Deed is a high impact card that has to be taken full advantage of in order to be effective, and that's not what a Pod deck does. Pernicious Deed is the kind of card your opponent wants to draw against you.

Yeah, but he would blow it up for 4 or more and then it would be great against us. We can use it for 1-3 and not lose anything that we care about while the opponent loses his entire board. Deed is a key card and we should play at least 2 or 3 and I won't fault anyone who plays 4.

This deck doesn't need the 3rd Forest. Just as most Nic Fit decks out there, the 3rd Forest is superficial and mostly there not to lose value out of multiple Explorer triggers. Traditional Nic Fit also tends to play more green-heavy cards. Unlike Nic Fit, Pod cannot afford to passively ramp to inevitability, it has to get its game on fast. Quite frankly, you don't need 6 basic lands to abuse Explorer. The first trigger is the most important, and we usually can abuse 2 triggers unlike most decks we face that can only get value out of 0-1 triggers. If anything, I would play a Dryad Arbor, or another DRS if you aren't already playing a full set. Dryad is so valuable as a GSZ target or when converting a fetch land into a potential Pod chain. If I didn't play 4 GSZ, with Arbor, I would definitely play 4 DRS.

5 Basics is not enough. I am always an advocate for reducing the Basic count but 6 is the lowest number I am comfortable with.

I agree with you that Wood Elves is sub-par. It is without a doubt one of the most underwhelming cards I have played in this deck. The Oracle is much better in its stead but, if it wasn't for your blue count, the 2nd Witness is much better. Witness is one of those Pod and GSZ targets, as well as natural draws that you want more than once in a Pod deck. Traditional Nic Fit plays 2 copies and doesn't use it nearly as effectively as this.

Both give you a random body and a card to your hand. Oracle is amazing in games when you search for Pod while Witness is often underwhelming, especially in a deck with a low spell count like Pod where you can't get back Decays or additional Discard spells.

I never liked SB Jitte and Revoker in this deck. It is very difficult to side in non-combo hate cards without lowering the creature count. I find Golgari Charm to be extremely valuable as an out to RiP, board wipe against swarms and Moms, and as a mass regeneration effect against particular sweepers. RiP + Goblins or RiP + Mom are also very common combinations that makes Golgari Charm extremely versatile in certain matchups. One of the main strengths of Charm as a SB card in Pod is the fact that it comes in as a replacement for Cabal Therapy and still acts as an outlet for Explorer. Revoker is simply underwhelming and stops your Pod chain for an effect that is rarely worth it.

Agreed with both. Don't like Jitte, and I am a big fan of Charm.

Toxic Deluge is a liability and its effect is not necessary. A Virtue's Ruin, a Massacre, or a Golgari Charm generally induces similar or superior results without costing you life to do so. Finks and Thragtusk can give you life, but Pods and Creatures constantly take life points away from you as well. A sweeper is there to get you back in a losing battle, and I don't think paying life is the safest way to get it to work. Deluge is a great card without a doubt, just not in this deck, at least compared to its alternatives.

Yeah, don't like Deluge either. I can't think of a matchup in which I would board it and then pay more 2 life (and at that point you could just Infest and pay 0 life).

Overall, I think the quest to support SB FoW is a step in the wrong direction for this deck. It keeps you away from a strong synergistic core of green and black cards that benefit from only a few blue cards. I think a combination of Thoughtseize and Surgical is the way to go as a primary disruption SB plan because it is highly synergistic with your inherent game plan, and quite honestly, very reliable despite a couple Leylines here and there. Envelop and Swan Song are definitely the way to go against SnT decks IMO.

I agree with you. Force often leaves us with not enough resources to keep going and every Combo deck in the format knows how to deal with FoW. A combination of Swan Song and Thoughtseize is imo better.

[guelahpapyrus]

@Qweerios: Do you have a current list for Pod that you can post?

[Qweerios]

That is a terrible argument. Not saying that he shouldn't but the argument "play 4 or 0" is always terrible (unless you have something like Accumulated Knowledge).

False, playing 0 or 4 of the best card in Legacy which strength lies in the fact that it markedly augments consistency, digs for key cards, and breathes life into dead cards is perfectly sound. For the same reasons that if Gitaxian Probe would cost 0 mana and 0 life to cast, every deck that could play 4 would. Brainstorm will always be the best card in your deck whatever you play even when Brainstorm isn't in your deck. Arguing against 4 BS in a BUG deck with 8 fetches is like arguing against a brick wall with your head, it doesn't work out too well... I won't argue any further on this issue because I think it is straight up silly.

Yeah, but he would blow it up for 4 or more and then it would be great against us. We can use it for 1-3 and not lose anything that we care about while the opponent loses his entire board. Deed is a key card and we should play at least 2 or 3 and I won't fault anyone who plays 4.

I would agree with you there if Deed and Decay overlapped in purpose. While they are both removal spells, one clearly occurs sooner than the other and allows us to take steam away from strategies that are at their strongest when we are at our weakest. Deed should compete with a card like Nightmare or Pod, not with a card like Decay or anything in the same branch (AKA: low cost enablers) such as GSZ, Therapy, and Brainstorm. Also, Deed is not a key card in Pod. Deed is a good card in BG(x) decks, more so in traditional Nic Fit than Pod by a significant margin.

5 Basics is not enough. I am always an advocate for reducing the Basic count but 6 is the lowest number I am comfortable with.

I don't know what you are basing this on. I gave you an explanation as to why 5 lands is enough, and you give me your personal bias. I play Control Nic Fit with 6 basics as well and I have tested Pod extensively over the last 4 tournaments and 3 weeks and concluded that 5 basics is more than enough. Mana dorks > Land drops for this deck because they convert into something else and grant the tempo we need to assert our game-plan in time. Therefore we don't need as many lands, and more creatures. Pod is not a conventional nic fit deck, it simply happens to abuse Explorer and Therapy in a similar fashion.

Both give you a random body and a card to your hand. Oracle is amazing in games when you search for Pod while Witness is often underwhelming, especially in a deck with a low spell count like Pod where you can't get back Decays or additional Discard spells.

I agree with you that they are both situational and apply to different situations. However, they are not equally relevant and Witness is much less underwhelming than Oracle. Getting back fallen bullets is often crucial and one of your only outs to a certain situation. Scrying 2 for a card will give often give you a land that you either need or do not, and witness can do that almost just as well by retrieving fetchlands. Oracle is good but you never dig for one. Witness is good but you often dig for one.

[GtF]

I didn't find Eternal Witness to always be that great. It was fine, I'd definitely play one, but I don't think it's so amazing that I'd want to play two. I agree with Tao about the reasons why.
The 3 brainstorm thing is weird, but it's also weird that you are so against playing less than four since you didn't even think it should played at all. The whole Force of Will blue count is actually an argument against having to play 4 - you are playing it to filter and up the FOW blue count, but once that count is as high as it needs to be, why add an extra one? That said, I could see playing 4, but I don't think it's as obvious as you say it is.
I haven't really played the deck enough to say whether 5 or 6 basics is better.
Like Tao said, popping Deed for 3 or less is really strong in this deck, you can usually end up with a creature above that to their nothing in the right circumstances. On the other hand, Abrupt Decay can be a lifesaver against a fast delver. I don't see why it's so wrong to run a split in a deck with tons of filtering and shuffle effects and one that is good at crafting an advantageous board state. If I had to choose, I'd choose Deed for sure.
I haven't actually tried revoker so I could see it being bad and not working well with the deck. However I have tried Jitte and found it to be really great in the right matchups. It makes those veteran explorers into real monsters.
On FOW - If you have a Pilferer or Glen Elendra going, there's no issue with "not having enough resources to keep going." The real way combo decks deal with Force of Will in the format is by preying on decks that don't have Force of Will, and think they can win with Thoughtseizes or hate bears alone. The deck's matchup G1 vs combo is bad, I see no reason not to try and commit to beating it the next two games. Also it's worth noting that if the game doesn't end immediately, hardcasting FOW becomes very possible in this deck before too long.

[Tao]

On FOW - If you have a Pilferer or Glen Elendra going, there's no issue with "not having enough resources to keep going." The real way combo decks deal with Force of Will in the format is by preying on decks that don't have Force of Will, and think they can win with Thoughtseizes or hate bears alone. The deck's matchup G1 vs combo is bad, I see no reason not to try and commit to beating it the next two games. Also it's worth noting that if the game doesn't end immediately, hardcasting FOW becomes very possible in this deck before too long.

That's a good point. My experiences were with BUG without Pod and whenever I had to pitch Jace to FoW it was really bad and I usually lost those games. But if you can pitch something like Strix it won't hurt too much. So yeah, I like that SB plan.

[Qweerios]

@GtF,

-I don't see where you get that I am somehow against playing Brainstorm entirely. I am curious to know where you got that idea from. I don't recall saying that it shouldn't be played at all, and I have been one of the few users on this thread that had to justify using Brainstorm in BUG Fit. Unless somehow promoting the Junk version makes me anti-brainstorm, I am at a loss here. I even mentioned in my last post that the first change you should make when adopting a BUG Pod deck is to up the BS count to 4...

-I think we all agree that trying to beat combo G2 and G3 is a sound plan, and probably our only reasonable alternative. However, hardcasting FoW is a moot point. Siding FoW against anything but combo is likely to be a mistake. Once you reach 5 lands vs. combo you ought to have something better to do than hardcast a FoW.

The whole Force of Will blue count is actually an argument against having to play 4 [Brainstorms]- you are playing it to filter and up the FOW blue count, but once that count is as high as it needs to be, why add an extra one?

What does this mean? "Force of Will blue count" is not an argument for anything, it is merely a requirement to be able to reasonably rely on FoW's alternate cost. When you say that "once that count is as high as it needs to be" do you imply that whatever amount of blue cards are present in your BUG Pod deck is optimal and somehow guarantees you a blue card for FoW, let along adequate leeway in what you pitch? And of all the blue cards in your deck, it appears extremely contradictory that the one card that allows you to manipulate your hand and the top of your library is the one card not being played to its fullest. This makes no sense to me whatsoever, please explain in a clear and concise fashion what this argument for playing less than 4 BS in relation with FoW's blue count is.

That's a good point. My experiences were with BUG without Pod and whenever I had to pitch Jace to FoW it was really bad and I usually lost those games. But if you can pitch something like Strix it won't hurt too much.

Let me get this right... Pitching cards to FoW makes me feel bad and makes me lose. How does pitching Strix "hurt less" than pitching a Jace? Either FoW is a bad card, either you made the wrong call by pitching Jace to FoW. It doesn't matter what blue card you pitch, you will have to pitch one and it will be the worst blue available. The more blue cards you have available, the more flexibility you have in what you pitch. Are you suggesting that we should play worst blue cards so that we feel less bad about pitching them?

@Evertbody reading this,

A good trick to anyone hitting the "Submit Reply" button is to try and think of counterarguments to what you are advancing. Be critical of what you assert and we might end up with better conclusions to successfully optimize our decks. Maybe I am alone in this enterprise but I don't believe that a good discussion revolves around you showing me what is dear to you, me showing you what is dear to me, and leaving it to that because we cannot inquire on our preferences any further. For the sake of development, let's use reason to support our choices and all will be clearer.

[Schulzchop]

It seems to me that the reason the previously proposed lists are only playing 3 Brainstorm is because there is no other card in the main that they would want to cut to add the fourth. Would it be possible to propose which card we should cut for the fourth BS and explain why it is okay to run less copies of that card, or, alternatively, can we explain why we need all of the copies of the cards in the current configuration and justify why 3 BS is OK? (AS an example, why would one want 2 Deed, 2 Decay, 3 BS over 2 Deed, 1 Decay, 4 BS).

[vilnico]

Mostly @ Qweerios:

I am getting convinced to have the 4th Brainstorm in place of the 2nd GSZ. Not because it is 4 or nothing, just to be clear.
Mainly, because of the SB plan based on FoW. Having a decent count of blue card, or just finding a FoW, justify to have 4 Brainstorm.
I think what GtF was meaning was your thinking to play 0 or 4 brainstorm was too straight forward, pointing at the authority argument that came fist.
The thing is that I do not see myself why playing 3 copies of Brainstorm could be "that bad". It does not seem so bad, after GtF results. If it is optimal, is another question I think, and I can't answer the question before playing a 3-Brainstorm list, sorry I can't bring more stones here (and probably won't happen as I will play 4 this WE).
Although I think it is as Schulzchop said, either Caleb (see the SCG article about it) and GtF wanted to cut out anything to play the 4th Brainstorm. GtF can correct if we are wrong here.

The blue card count is also the argument that will make me keep the 4th Strix over a possible Wall of Blossom. Although as you mentioned Coiling Oracle I totally forgot about, I can think to have it in place of the 4th Strix. Thx for bringing this up !!

About the 2nd Witness, I used to test this on some other Nic Fit shell, and was not very satisfied of it from what I remember. Also the Nightmare is somewhat the 2nd Witness you may need in late game. All I can say, is that my experience of playing 1 Witness even without Nightmare was sufficient.

Thx to point out my bad listing of Redcap. Have never played it actually and never realized it costs 4ccm.
I hear the worries about the lack of 3ccm creatures, I just don't know if the Finks persistance does not make it sufficient or not.
Viridian Shaman is NOT a Harmonic Sliver. Would I play W in the list, I agree it would be auto-include. And I want to have a response to Enchantment as well, which Viridian Shaman does not.
A decent G slot would be Viridian Zealot, but we have enough 2ccm creatures I think.
Elder has the advantage to be a nice body, 4/4 making it somewhat as good as the Deathtouch from the Slime in terms of defensive ability.

On the Decay/Deed split: I agree on what Qweerios points out, what Nic Fit needs is answers to early threats, to be able to value abuses on Vet.Explorer. That's how I turned a DRS into a Decay, and will probably motivate me to turn a Deed into a Decay.
I don't have experience on Jitte on such SB plan, and there seem to be more people "against" it. I see the difference between Jitte and Golgari Charm. The question here is I think, do we want a sweeper (Charm, Deed) over a permament lock (Jitte) ? As a Nic Fit player, I never felt the need to have such a thing as a Jitte, even if it may work very fine. I think my reasonning here is the same as the Decay/Deed split question: I think we need is a fast answer to threats, to clean up the board and come back. So the Jitte may turn into the 2nd Deed (assuming I go for 3/1 Decay/Deed), or a 2nd Golgari Charm...

Overall Qweerios, you argue that diluting the BG power of Nic Fit into a blue sideboard is not the way to go in a combo field (for a Nic Fit).
Although I do agree that a BGw Pod-list is stronger than a BGu Pod-list, in terms of the original mechanics, my gut feeling here (soon hopefully this will turn into experience), is that the dilution we have in this BGu is not too bad, and still permits a decent Pod mechanics. To me it is a good balance for Nic Fit to go on a combo field.

So in the end, here is the last list in date:

Lands (21)

3 Forest
1 Island
2 Swamp
2 Bayou
4 Misty Rainforest
1 Polluted Delta
3 Tropical Island
1 Underground Sea
4 Verdant Catacombs

Creatures (22)

2 Deathrite Shaman
4 Veteran Explorer

3 Baleful Strix
1 Coiling Oracle
1 Phantasmal Image
1 Scavenging Ooze

1 Eternal Witness
1 Sea Gate Oracle
1 Kitchen Finks

1 Murderous Redcap
1 Glen Elendra Archmage
1 Sower of Temptation
1 Wickerbough Elder

1 Shriekmaw
1 Thragtusk

1 Grave Titan

Spells (17)

3 Birthing Pod
1 Recurring Nightmare
1 Green Sun's Zenith

1 Pernicious Deed
3 Abrupt Decay
4 Brainstorm
4 Cabal Therapy

Sideboard

1 Glen Elendra Archmage
3 Riptide Pilferer
2 Envelop
4 Force of Will

1 Toxic Deluge / Infest
1 Golgari Charm
1 Golgari Charm / Pernicious Deed

1 Thoughtseize / Phyrexian Revoker / Venser
1 Notion Thief


To answer Schulzchop, if I were to cut something MD to play the 2nd GSZ, it might be the Sower. I might be wrong though.

[Arianrhod]

For those who are interested, here are the lists I will be running at Eternal Weekend. I'll keep you guys updated on how things are going, as usual =)

Legacy:

4 Veteran Explorer
2 Sakura-tribe Elder
2 Wood Elves
1 Eternal Witness
3 Huntmaster Of The Fells
2 Thragtusk
1 Primeval Titan

3 Pernicious Deed

3 Sensei’s Divining Top

4 Cabal Therapy
4 Green Sun’s Zenith
4 Burning Wish
2 Scapeshift
2 Slaughter Games

3 Verdant Catacombs
1 Wooded Foothills
3 Forest
2 Mountain
2 Swamp
4 Taiga
3 Badlands
2 Bayou
2 Stomping Ground
2 Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle

SB:
3 Carpet of Flowers
2 Red Elemental Blast
2 Thoughtseize
1 Rakdos's Return
1 Slaughter Games
1 Pyroclasm
1 Scapeshift
1 Reverent Silence
1 Innocent Blood
1 Toxic Deluge
1 Maelstrom Pulse

Vintage:

4 Oath of Druids
3 Rune-Scarred Demon

1 Time Walk
1 Gaea's Blessing
1 Noxious Revival
1 Yawg Will

1 Time Vault
1 Voltaic Key

1 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
1 Tezzeret the Seeker

1 Ancestral Recall
1 Brainstorm
4 Impulse
1 Gifts Ungiven
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Demonic Tutor

2 Repeal

4 Force of Will
1 Misdirection
2 Mana Drain
2 Swan Song
2 Mental Misstep

1 Black Lotus
5 Moxen
1 Mana Crypt
1 Sol Ring

1 Library of Alexandria
4 Forbidden Orchard
4 Misty Rainforest
1 Polluted Delta
2 Underground Sea
2 Tropical Island
1 Volcanic Island
1 Island

--sb
1 Lab Maniac
2 Abrupt Decay
1 Dismember
1 Ancient Grudge
2 Nature's Claim
1 Hurkyl's Recall
2 Red Elemental Blast
4 Leyline of the Void
1 Tormod's Crypt

[Qweerios]

Mostly @ Qweerios:

I am getting convinced to have the 4th Brainstorm in place of the 2nd GSZ. Not because it is 4 or nothing, just to be clear.
Mainly, because of the SB plan based on FoW. Having a decent count of blue card, or just finding a FoW, justify to have 4 Brainstorm.
I think what GtF was meaning was your thinking to play 0 or 4 brainstorm was too straight forward, pointing at the authority argument that came fist.
The thing is that I do not see myself why playing 3 copies of Brainstorm could be "that bad". It does not seem so bad, after GtF results. If it is optimal, is another question I think, and I can't answer the question before playing a 3-Brainstorm list, sorry I can't bring more stones here (and probably won't happen as I will play 4 this WE).
Although I think it is as Schulzchop said, either Caleb (see the SCG article about it) and GtF wanted to cut out anything to play the 4th Brainstorm. GtF can correct if we are wrong here.

Once you establish basics like the laws of gravity, you start speaking of certain phenomenons as being commonly understood based on the acceptance of such a universal law. There are principles in Magic that stipulate that the best decks are always the most consistent ones. This has been proven throughout the ages in every format when the best deck is always the one taking the most broken interaction and replicating it with the most consistency. If your deck plays fetchlands or a significant amount of free shuffle effects, Brainstorm is the best card in the format, period. Brainstorm is your best attempt at consistency if you can support it. Stating that Brainstorm is a 0 or 4 card is pragmatic and shouldn't be subject to debate if you take half a second to think about why it is so instead of dwelling on the semantics of such an argument. Just like the laws of gravity, you can argue against it as much as you want but it won't get you anywhere unless you advance groundbreaking observations against it. If you intend on reaching UB in a green-centric deck by T2-3, 4 copies of BS is a no-brainer. Hell, 4 BS would increase your consistency even if they were your 61st-64th cards!

Looking at 3 copies of BS and thinking that it isn't bad because someone had success with 3 copies is akin to thinking that punching a kid is not bad because you know kids get murdered around the world. You can look at all the alternatives you want to justify your lack of 4 BS but the fact remain that it is not the optimal choice. If you look at GtF's results (which could have been affected by a myriad of elements), meticulously count the amount of blue cards, and factor in the timmy in you that wants to play these never-seen-before cards, then 3 brainstorms appears not bad. If you want to make your deck optimal, 3 brainstorm is bad, 4 brainstorm is good.

GSZ is merely a BS#5-8 for this deck except that it is limited to green creatures. They are both measures of consistency with their own specializations and flexibility. If it came down to it, I would cut a 1drop or a 2drop that I have multiple copies of in a hearbeat for another copy of GSZ. This is a green-centric silver-bullet type creature deck we are talking about. 4 GSZ and 4 BS should be the first thing you put in your list and see where it leads you from there. The moment you start running out of relevant targets is the moment you should consider increasing your creature density and lowering your GSZ count.

As you will soon discover, Batterskull and Jitte cannot go unchecked. Wickerbough is fine, and so is Viridian Shaman. Harmonic handles artifacts more than anything else. Most enchantments you will encounter can be dealt with Decay, while the most relevant Artifact against you cannot be. Any PW protected by a Bskull will outvalue your Pod engine, and thats even more true for BUG variants as their Pod chains are significantly weaker.

Also, Finks is rarely what you want to Pod into at 3. Getting a Terror out of Shredder, a card back from Witness, a cantrip from Oracle, or artifact removal from Viridian Shaman/Sliver is almost always what you want out of your Pod chain to maximize its value. Finks is the Pod target I search for the least at 3, and by far. I like him against Pox, Burn, Mongoose, Geist, when under pressure, or when I intend on getting a 2nd 4drop. I don't like him when I am trying to get the most value out of my Pod chain (AKA: most of the time). I think you are more likely to feel the drawbacks of running out of 3drops than to feel the advantages of that additional 4drop.

On to constructive criticism:

I have been thinking about replacing Recurring Nightmare for Havengul Lich. Without Rector, I think that if Lich proves to grant similar value to Nightmare, the fact that it is Pod-able and consists of a creature might be worth it. I have enjoyed taking over games with Lich by looping Bone Shredders every turn and stealing the Goyfs I would blow up. It also has some nice synergy with cards like Viridian Zealot. It is reasonably sized as well with a 4/4 Decay/Bolt-proof body.

[Tao]

That's an argument for 4 Brainstorm. I don't necessarily disagree with it but that is not what you said. You said "either 4 Brainstorm or 0 Brainstorm" and that still doesn't make sense.

[pfiremc13]

I think his argument is that with cards like brainstorm you either always want it, or never want it because you think it's bad. Since brainstorm just depends on the cards on top of your library, I would agree. (Though I do think it's a weird argument to make)

[Qweerios]

You said "either 4 Brainstorm or 0 Brainstorm" and that still doesn't make sense.

It is quite staight-foward once you get down to it. Let me explain in intricate details.

You should play 0 Brainstorms if you cannot support them.
You should play 4 Brainstorms if you can support them.

I define "supporting them" as having reliable access to blue mana and sufficient amount of shuffle effects.

Reliable access to blue mana includes, but is not limited to: the availability of blue mana producing lands.

Blue mana producing lands are most popular in the form of basic Islands, and non-basic Islands commonly known as blue dual lands.

Said lands are made readily available by fetch lands which incidentally consist of shuffle effects.

A sufficient amount of shuffle effects includes, but is not limited to: the commonly agreed upon critical amount of fetch lands which is 7+

Therefore, 7+ Fetch lands along with blue mana producing lands constitutes a supporting core for the card known as Brainstorm.

Brainstorm in a Brainstorm-able deck is the best card to consistently achieve a strategy involving the combination of different cards.

The combination of different cards such as Lands, Creature, Instant, Sorcery, Enchantment, and Artifact spells for instance are crucial in the deployment of any strategy of the trading card game known as Magic: the Gathering.

In the MtG format known as Legacy, the minimum amount of cards a deck can contain is 60, and the maximum amount of copies of a single card is restricted to 4 (with the exception of basic lands).

The most consistent deck given 1 card drawn per turn must contain at least 15 different cards (with the exception of basic lands).

Since different cards are bound to be forced to coexist in the same deck, sequence and succession is bound to have an impact on the outcome of your strategy and game plan.

Cards like Brainstorm augments the rate of consistency and correct sequencing of cards of any given strategy falling under the previous conditions.

Assuming that consistency and sequencing is paramount to optimization, you should play the maximum amount of Brainstorms available.

Therefore any Legacy deck should play either 0 or 4 Brainstorms.

Unbeknownst to me, this never gets old. I have been explaining the virtues of Brainstorm to this thread for years now, and the only logical conclusion I derive is that I must be retarded in some odd way...

[GtF]

It is quite staight-foward once you get down to it. Let me explain in intricate details.

You should play 0 Brainstorms if you cannot support them.
You should play 4 Brainstorms if you can support them.

I define "supporting them" as having reliable access to blue mana and sufficient amount of shuffle effects.

Reliable access to blue mana includes, but is not limited to: the availability of blue mana producing lands.

Blue mana producing lands are most popular in the form of basic Islands, and non-basic Islands commonly known as blue dual lands.

Said lands are made readily available by fetch lands which incidentally consist of shuffle effects.

A sufficient amount of shuffle effects includes, but is not limited to: the commonly agreed upon critical amount of fetch lands which is 7+

Therefore, 7+ Fetch lands along with blue mana producing lands constitutes a supporting core for the card known as Brainstorm.

Brainstorm in a Brainstorm-able deck is the best card to consistently achieve a strategy involving the combination of different cards.

The combination of different cards such as Lands, Creature, Instant, Sorcery, Enchantment, and Artifact spells for instance are crucial in the deployment of any strategy of the trading card game known as Magic: the Gathering.

In the MtG format known as Legacy, the minimum amount of cards a deck can contain is 60, and the maximum amount of copies of a single card is restricted to 4 (with the exception of basic lands).

The most consistent deck given 1 card drawn per turn must contain at least 15 different cards (with the exception of basic lands).

Since different cards are bound to be forced to coexist in the same deck, sequence and succession is bound to have an impact on the outcome of your strategy and game plan.

Cards like Brainstorm augments the rate of consistency and correct sequencing of cards of any given strategy falling under the previous conditions.

Assuming that consistency and sequencing is paramount to optimization, you should play the maximum amount of Brainstorms available.

Therefore any Legacy deck should play either 0 or 4 Brainstorms.

Unbeknownst to me, this never gets old. I have been explaining the virtues of Brainstorm to this thread for years now, and the only logical conclusion I derive is that I must be retarded in some odd way...

You aren't retarded, but your style of argumentation is pretty arrogant. Comparing 4 brainstorms to the laws of gravity is an interesting technique. Talking down to people as if no one but you could possibly have a logical reason for an opinion is another. None of these are good ways to win arguments, in my experience. That's kind of a broader point about style, take it or leave it.

First, here's the reason I assumed you were anti-brainstorm in the first place:

2) Cutting GSZ, Pods, and Decays for Brainstorm unnecessarily stretches you thin on colors. Compare it to splashing blue in Maverick for Brainstorm. Maverick is entirely capable of splashing another color, and Brainstorm is a good card. However, the costs of splashing into blue for a card you probably want to use on T2 are too great and including Brainstorm forces you to dilute the core of the deck. 4 Moms, and 4 GSZ is much more consistent than 3 Moms, 1 GSZ, and 4 Brainstorm will ever be. When I compare playing BUG to Junk Pod, it feels like Brainstorm is there because I play Strix > Blossoms, and because I find myself digging for colors more often than I should if I didn't have Brainstorm and Strix in the first place. The notion that you need Brainstorm to reshuffle Pod targets is negligible in practice because it is often easier to cast non-green creatures than it is to brainstorm them away to Pod into them;

I assumed this meant that you thought brainstorm was unnecessary ("it unnecessarily stretches you thin on colors") and that GSZ, pods and decays were all better to play. I think this is a reasonable interpretation of what you wrote. But if that's not what you meant, and apparently you meant the exact opposite ("always play 4 brainstorm") then fine, so be it. So to address that point:

Brainstorm is a great card that helps with card selection and consistently executing a game plan. But it is still a magic card that takes up space in a deck, costs a mana to play, and in some sense "hides" information about the cards it will eventually turn into. The card is so powerful that the benefits almost always outweigh these costs assuming the requisite shuffle effects. But it is important to remember that these costs still exist. Brainstorm is not free, Black Lotus is not free, no card in magic is free. Every card has the opportunity cost of not being some other card.
This becomes relevant in a pod deck because you need to have:
A) Whatever pod targets you think are important for how the game will be likely to play out.
B) A minimum threshold of creatures around so that when you get a pod into play, you will have something to do with it.

Add to this the relative importance of having some miscellaneous answers that no creature provides (Decay and Deed), a good number of lands, a late game inevitability engine (Recurring Nightmare), disruption and built-in sac outlet (Cabal Therapy) and the aformentioned creatures and the space becomes pretty tight. If you cut one of those other cards completely, then you can brainstorm to your hearts content when the time comes, and it will not help you because the card you are looking for will not be in the deck (because you cut it for the 4th brainstorm). You could go above sixty, but this affects the mana ratio and again, I'm not sure it would actually help more than it hurts, if, on the critical turn (which could be as early as turn 2 or 3), you dig with brainstorm only to find more brainstorms. Normally decks have no problem finding room because they have a very focused gameplan and there are only a certain number of cards that accomplish it. In fact, they usually have to strain and play some number of cards they'd rather not. You can see, I hope, how this situation is exactly the opposite for a Pod deck - People have to resist the urge to add creatures that aren't strictly necessary and keep it economical. The impulse to reach UB on turn 2-3-4 is a great one, but we have to keep in mind that there are already veteran explorers, deathrites, a GSZ, and fetchlands to help with that. You might say, more ways couldn't hurt, but it clearly could hurt if those ways replace cards that are important for later on. One more example I could provide is legacy merfolk, which does not play brainstorm (plus fetchlands) even though it easily could. It has a good reason for this, though it is not the same reason as the pod deck. It's just an example to show that there can be a reason not to play 4 of the best card in legacy.

All that said, I can see 4 brainstorm being correct in this deck. I'm just not sure that it is, and I think it's an empirical question based on how the deck plays out with 3 vs. 4, and not an immutable law of nature like you seem to think.

What I meant about Force of Will was simply this: Once you have the requisite blue count for Force of Will, whatever you determine that to be, you don't need to start adding cards "just because they are blue." Brainstorm is blue, but the requisite blue count has been achieved (in my opinion) without a 4th. Therefore you don't have to add a 4th for that reason.
Also, while having the mana to cast Force of Will later on is a secondary benefit, I don't think it is a "moot point." If you have 2 FOWs and another blue card, being able to hardcast one and alternate cast the other is quite relevant, as you now have two counters instead of one. This comes up a decent amount.

As for the actual decklist:
I strongly recommend against cutting the 4th Baleful Strix for Coiling Oracle. If anything I'd play Wall of Blossoms because it blocks better, but really I would just stick with Strix as it is superior in every way except being tutorable (with only 1 GSZ I do not think this is very relevant). Hell you can even GSZ for Scavenging Ooze and pod it away if it comes to that. Though usually when you GSZ for Ooze, it just wins the game on the spot.
Because of Baleful Strix I'd think twice about Viridian Shaman. The trigger is not optional. I expected to hate Slime because of how much it costs, but in practice it was fine. You still have Decay, Therapy, and Deed to deal with early problems.
Decay vs. Deed: From playing the deck I've found deed to be absolutely amazing. Decay has been just ok. Deed has gotten me out of situations no other card could and completely swung games around, Abrupt Decay could have been many other cards and still worked fine (sometimes better). The deck works pretty well with Deed overall despite what people have said: We have tons of lands, creatures that cost a lot of mana that won't get Deeded away, and creatures that persist after activating. It might not be as good as in a BUG landstill deck with Jace as the only permanent, but it's still very good. I'd stick with 2 Deed main and 1 SB.
Sower is basically a better Bone Shredder and was awesome for me, I'd recommend keeping that card. As for running out of 3s, it seems possible, but hasn't been an issue for me in 20 rounds so far with the deck. Even if it had been, I think you are better off risking it than playing a suboptimal card at 3.
I still think a surgical or two in the board would be pretty good.

I should mention in case it wasn't apparent that when boarding in the FOW and anti-combo package, a lot of the pod package and creatures come out. The gameplan is vastly different, though I do like to leave in a few pods so I can climb the chain up to Glen Elendra, at which point things should be pretty well locked up.

[UseLess]

It's been a while since I posted here. Mainly I kept working on my BUGfit list that is nowadays my main deck. I've put up some decent results with the deck, going top 4/8 and winning a few local tournaments in a row. However, there are a few slots I would like some input on from you guys. So here's the list:


4 Veteran Explorer
1 Huntmaster of the Fells
1 Thrun, the last troll
1 Sigarda, Host of Herons
1 Consecrated Sphinx
1 Open slot (Notion Thief/True-Name Nemesis)

4 Cabal Therapy
4 Abrupt Decay
4 Brainstorm
4 Negate
3 Green Sun's Zenith
2 Counterspell
1 Maelstrom Pulse
1 Far/Away

2 Jace, The Mind Sculptor
1 Karn Liberated

3 Pernicious Deed

3 Island
2 Forest
2 Swamp
1 Mountain
4 Misty Rainforest
3 Verdant Catacombs
2 Bayou
2 Tropical Island
1 Underground sea
2 Phyrexian Tower

Sideboard:
4 Force of Will
3 Daze
2 Innocent blood
2 Hydroblast
2 Extirpate
2 Open slots

So a short explanation of some choices. I play a very controllish type of BUGfit, basically keeping the board of the opponent clear up to a point where I can put a finisher in play. I used to play only sigarda and huntmaster, along with 2 notion thiefs but those proved to be not good enough. I've put back in a Thrun which I didn't like in previous builds, but here he is pretty good with providing a decent clock that is answered by only very few cards. This leaves me with a single notion thief that is rather underwhelming in testing. With the new True-Name Nemesis I'm thinking of using this card, which also meets the requirements for a hard-to-kill finisher. The thing is that I want my blue count to be reasonable due to the FoWs in the SB and therefore preferably have a blue creature. As I'm writing this I figure that a second thrun or second consecrated sphinx might also be an option for the creature slot. Apart from the two creature slots the main is pretty much perfect for me. The best would be some UG creature that keeps the blue count and is GSZable, but unfortunately proper ones have still to be printed...

I've also tested: Eternal Witness, Thragtusk, Wolfir Silverheart, all of which didn't make the cut as they simply can't finish the game, which is what I want when resolving a GSZ. Kodama of the North Tree is under consideration, but I think Thrun is just better. I know many of you value Thragtusk very highly, but I have never been able to fit him within my style of playing and I don't really like the card. Huntmaster provides a bit of life, an additional blocker right away and can function as removel. It is just so much more versatile that I prefer it over Thragtusk. Sigarda is simply the best creature one can GSZ. It sucks to have in an opener or draw it, but BS and Jace can take care of that.

What I'm also tinkering about is the SB. I have two open slots now -used to be a daze and surgical extraction- but due to the lack of graveyard decks the surgical was never used and I mostly sided in 3 Dazes, so I cut the forth. A friend of mine plays a very die-hard control BUG deck with a lot of counters, Jace, Lily, Standstill, pernicious deed etc. I have a lot of trouble winning from that and would like to have some extra SB cards for such control decks. A second Thrun might be an option here. I'm pretty confident against aggro and combo decks. Only merfolk with their Island walk is troubling. You really need deed to win this.
About the FoWs, which I just noticed a discussion has started about: I really like them. Against combo they are simply good, against more controlish decks they give me a back up when going all in for GSZ. My blue count MD is now 14, excluding the open slot. Usually I take out Abrupt Decays and such for FoWs, so with +4 FoW, -1 blue card I would get to 17 which has been doable so far. However, a blue card in the open MB slot would be nice. I can also easily hard cast it in a later stage of the game, so using it is hardly a problem. Looking forward to your input!

[lavafrogg]

The qwerrios brainstorm post should be saved as a part of historical source definitions. Along with other great theorems such as "why is my life gain deck bad" and "why should I stick this fork in the light socket". All of which should be manditory reading for aspiring magic slingers.

[Arianrhod]

Lost a vry very close set to esper in round one. Stalled with a top g1, wrecked g2, died to a jace in turns with five mou tains in play and two valakuts....vet on top of my deck. Haven't used games yet, carpet got pierced, no other changes entered in. Mana felt fine....four fetches werr nice game one but still didn't get me there.

400isuh people here. Lots of miracles and blade, some delver and combo.

[Arianrhod]

1-1. Beat red mud.....somehow

[Tao]

Go Arian! Beating MUD is tough.

First of all please note that I don't say 4 Brainstorm is wrong and I would probably run 4. Remember that it was I who convinced Caleb to run 4 Brainstorm in the first place. That said most Pod lists are very tight on deck space. 21-22 lands, 4 Therapy, 22-24 creatures, 3-4 Pods are already ~52 fix slots that you can't touch. So for the last 8-9 cards, I can certainly see good reasons to not run 4 Brainstorm if you want something like additional discard, removal, GSZ or a Recurring Nightmare.

For BUG lists in general, I am still unconvinced that Pod with all its deck building restrictions is better than just playing Jace as your engine.

[Tao]

It's been a while since I posted here. Mainly I kept working on my BUGfit list that is nowadays my main deck. I've put up some decent results with the deck, going top 4/8 and winning a few local tournaments in a row. However, there are a few slots I would like some input on from you guys. So here's the list:

Huntmaster is good but he alone is not worth splashing a 4th color. He is literally the only red card in your list. Cutting him and the mountain for a better land and an alternative beater seems like a good idea.