Two thumbs up for the layout and the well-thought out, greatly articulated points. I wish more people would take the time to make their articles aesthetically pleasing.
If you could focus more on vintage I would be ever *MORE* excited - but general theory is definitely appreciated :)
I'm not sure BUG is even the right answer in this format right now. I kind of resent the fact that results are boiled down to two categories (generally):
Mentor/Delver or Shops
I miss some of the diversity. As much as people want to act like Doomsday and Salvagers and Grixis are real options take a look at the overarching metagame right now:
That means %54.9 of the placing decks have been on those 2 categories.
I wish the metagame would diversify, but I believe two changes need to happen first, and I'm surprised no one is talking about them.
1: RESTRICT LODESTONE - been saying for years to have a lock effect and a win condition on one card is really stupid and unfair.
2: RESTRICT DIG - As much as I love it, the card has warped the metagame for blue decks. Even cards like notion thief do nothing to stop the card advantage.
Anyone out there who thinks I am wrong, I would **LOVE** for you to explain why!
Well, I haven't given up on my other decks, but I want to win, and this deck seems both consistent and powerful.
I lost the last round once, to a shops opponent who Countered his own sol ring with his chalice set on one. That was after winning game one. If you can play like that and still cash a daily, then maybe I can too.
FYI i also built a copy of your deck. But i'm as good as you yet, so i'm not ready to take it out.
Always love the content. The sad things about decks like this and the people that rely on them is they take about four (possibly five) brain cells to pilot once you realize the sequencing required.
I have *personally* been anti-shops for quite a while - as even other linear strategies like Dredge take so much more thought and competence to pilot correctly.
The saddest thing about a shop pilot's plight is the decision making is boiled down to which order will I play my lock effects in - and the less-versed pilots may think just having lock effects is enough while completely ignoring the necessary threats.
This is also the #1 reason I am a huge Wasteland enthusiast - the card is such a good tool for taking away a lot of the inherent advantage Stax decks get (like 4 Workshops)
Good article - looking forward to the next archetype!
As a huge fan of Modern, since its very beginnings, I'm a junky for Modern content. Really enjoyed this article and the videos, and looking forward to more of your work.
I'm telling you I think you're getting closer to a good 75 than most who are playing the deck, at least online. So many powerful choices. Like I said in a previous comment, the 'toolbox' approach, especially post sideboard is, in my opinion, the way to go. Which probably means it's the wrong way to go!
I think there's a decent chance for Jeskai Tokens to stay in the top 5 decks. It needs to be played and tweaked to be more of a 'toolbox' deck. To play it well, you need to ask "How do I win games without Jeskai Ascendancy in my hand?"
That can be designing ways to increase card draw to put it into your hand, or attack on a different axis. I'm a big fan of 'one of's post board. I think the token strategy can get wrecked by a few Black cards (especially Virulent Plague), so there needs to be other tricks up the sleeve. With White and Blue, there's a ton of powerful cards that still synergize well with JA, and a few that win on their own.
Also, the meta game is cyclical. Already the Esper decks are losing ground to solid value strategies. In time, it will veer back toward mid-rangey.
I think the main issue with tokens is that players can sideboard against it the same way they would against Red Aggro strategies, so there's never an 'easy match up' where the opponent has zero answers. Player always have cards for Red, which gives them half the answers for tokens. Plus enchantment hate is at a premium as well, so the Ascendancy has a high chance of being got.
The deck is also not easy to play correctly. Especially when to loot and when to not loot. I see a lot of mistakes being made there.
I think it's still a Tier 1 deck, more so than Heroic. Heroic just has a lot more favorable match ups right now. That won't last.
I'm so happy that you liked it, and that you tool the effort to pick out that quote.
Interesting that you chose that quote, as my intention was to demonstrate that that line of thought isn't always true (though as you eloquently describe, it often is).
I'm very on board with your comments concerning budget decks. It is a source of great frustration when I hear Magic described as pay-to-win. The mileage you can gain from understanding the game from a fundamental perspective if often understated with people all to quick to blame to dominance of certain money rares.
"Players were realising that correct strategy depended on the relative compositions of both decks in a given matchup, rather than either deck in isolation. There was always a beatdown. There was always a control. Winning was a simple matter of executing the right plan."
i wish more people who complain about "money decks" or card cost would understand this point. this is a pet peeve of mine because i tend to just play "piles of cards i like to collect" and cards i feel connected to via nostalgia or visual art. people will see a turn one dual land or mox, and rage out at me, not noticing or taking a few turns to realize im playing a 250 un-themed singleton deck with no specific strategy.
a deck full of commons can beat a deck full of mythics and rares - any day - given the proper matchup. yes some deck types or themes will most often always lose to other specific deck types... but that's not because of card cost... it's because of MATCHUP (inherent natural ups and downs of each color/color mix), luck of draw (shuffler)... in addition to card cost and rarity. i have plenty of decks that cost hundreds of dollars that frequently lose to decks full of any old commons: burn, elves, green agro, white weenie, and counterspells.
I don't even play Commander but your articles always make me want to start. It's a shame that the new client has made things so difficult. Hopefully they will sort things out eventually.
This has to be one of the best looking articles I've seen on the sight. Great job Adam.
As I've told you I really need to get into Commander some time. Getting ready for Modern Master 2015 at the moment but maybe after I've got hold of that stuff I will make an effort to give it a go.
It is important to remember that this deck was 1 match away from the top 8 of the Pro Tour in the hands of Efro. This deck has serious play to it and can shift modes from aggro to control and be good at both. As I said I would need to see your list but I pack plenty of removal/burn/counter in mine to make my deck better able to beat decks that can be a tougher match up. So let's compare lists on MTGO
@ Procrastination. You stated that "Regarding Monastery Mentor - you mention not needing another snowball card, but when discussing Ascendancy, you state that only having 4 copies hampers the deck. While Mentor is not providing the same effect as JA, isn't having multiple snowballing options still a good thing?"
Your reasoning makes sense, and I see where you are coming from. The Mentor would definitely help in a game where you could not find an Ascendancy or keep the Ascendancy on the battle. But there are several disadvantages to adding a Mentor. Firstly, it is much easier for the opponent to remove than an Ascendancy is (or than another threat is such as Secure the Wastes). Keep in mind that lands are generally the hardest permanents to remove, followed by enchantments and artifacts, followed by multiple creatures, followed by a lone creature, followed by a lone creature which is also an enchantment or artifact, which is the easiest of all to remove. Now, Mentor is a lone 2 toughness creature for 3 mana unless you have some backup to Prowess it. Your opponent could just Lightning Strike it or Savage Slash it or Hero's Downfall etc, and you have not come much closer to achieving your goal which is to explode before the opponent kills you.
What is worse, being a creature, the Mentor does not activate Ascendancy or the prowess ability of the Seeker. For example, you can be in a really super board situation with an Ascendancy out, 2 Seekers of the Way on the battlefield and maybe 2 tokens also, and only a Mentor or two in your hand. In situations like this, you cast the Mentor, then pass. The Seekers' prowess does not get activated, so they don't get bigger or lifelink, the Ascendancy abilities don't get activated, so the tokens don't get bigger, you don't get to untap your creatures, you don't get to loot, and because you were not able to loot, you may draw 2 lands in the next 2 draws and then it's GG. In scenarios like this, by trying to snowball off more, you actually did not snowball off at ALL! So in this case, it wasn't even a WIN MORE card, it was a LOSE MORE card. In such a situation you would infinitely prefer to see a Cruise or an Anticipate or a Secure the Wastes.
I am not saying that it's wrong to add Mentors because they can provide an excellent backup to Ascendancy when needed and they can snowball for wins, I am just explaining the risks and why it can actually make your deck weaker and less explosive. I find it hard to justify taking out a Secure the Wastes to add a Mentor. I could be easily convinced to splash one Mentor, because splashing one won't cause as many awkward scenarios like the one described above, and it will keep opponents off balance. For example, if your opponent sees a Mentor in the first game, they might assume that you have 4 copies, and their sideboard choices could consequently be wrong. Or they might not see it in the first game, and assume you don't have it at all, and they might board out cards accordingly and then realise that they weren't prepared for the Mentor. I am a big fan of one-of's for this reason!
@ Rerepeat, yes I like Fleece Nyx Ram as sideboard tools against Mono Red/Atarka Red, but I have never used Wall of Essence (and I don't plan to because I don't think it's strong enough).
@ Plainswalker83. I am surprised by your comment that you don't feel Ascendancy is so critical to winning. I am glad to hear your experience and I don't discount it, but it is not mine at all. For example, your opponent casts Courser of Kruphix, then the Jeskai player plays Goblin Fodder. The Courser player plays Siege Rhino, and the Jeskai player then plays Raise the Alarm or Secure the Wastes. And so on and so forth until death do us part. Without Ascendancy, our opponents will quickly run us over with higher quality cards and we will flounder. To be fair, Treasure Cruises help immensely in these types of situations to balance out the power when we lack the Ascendancy. However, the safest route to victory is to get an Ascendancy on the board in my opinion, then "go off" from there.
Exemplars has been very good in testing thus far. I bring it in when I side in Anger and my other control package. I have not tried out Ram or Wall because the Aggro match up does not worry me so much as does the deck with a ton of sweepers.
We will have to catch up online sometime because I am not experiencing the negatives you are mentioning. I have won many games without ascendancy even out and especially after board. The 3 Disdainful Stroke help a lot as well. As I said I will be putting up videos but also I play the deck in paper and win FNM or place 2nd more often than not. I also use Tokens to top bigger tournaments. I will admit it is now harder but this deck rewards those who really have experience with the deck and it pays off in that way. As for Atarka Red and Esper Dragons, I mentioned Esper can be winnable depending on our build of Tokens and the board. Atarka Red I feel is a very good match up. Our Tokens kill pretty much all of their creatures and the life gain from seeker is valuable. After board we get sweepers and Negate to thwart their offense and then can take over the game. I added you and look forward to comparing lists.
That sounds like a rough experience. Still being able to top 8 a GP is still extremely promising. Maybe if you had stuck with it you might have been able to do well at the next PT you qualified for. All variance tends to correct itself in the end.
The information and the aspect were just wonderful. I think that your viewpoint is deep, it's just well thought out and truly incredible to see someone who knows how to put these thoughts so well. Good job!
I agree. Ultimately its why I never pursued MTG with an 'all-in' perspective and finally decided to just get a job and earn my money in the workforce. Not as fun, but pays much better. It was pretty heart-breaking to Q for PT Portland 2014 off a GP Montreal top 8, spend weeks and weeks practicing, then go 0-3 in my M15 draft pod because I didn't open a planeswalker and 2/3 of my opponents did. The last guy just watched me mulligan to 4 in the third game. Variance at its finest.
Due to generous donations over time, many Standard-legal cards are available.
Two thumbs up for the layout and the well-thought out, greatly articulated points. I wish more people would take the time to make their articles aesthetically pleasing.
If you could focus more on vintage I would be ever *MORE* excited - but general theory is definitely appreciated :)
Thanks for the article,
Zach
I'm not sure BUG is even the right answer in this format right now. I kind of resent the fact that results are boiled down to two categories (generally):
Mentor/Delver or Shops
I miss some of the diversity. As much as people want to act like Doomsday and Salvagers and Grixis are real options take a look at the overarching metagame right now:
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/metagame/vintage#online
That means %54.9 of the placing decks have been on those 2 categories.
I wish the metagame would diversify, but I believe two changes need to happen first, and I'm surprised no one is talking about them.
1: RESTRICT LODESTONE - been saying for years to have a lock effect and a win condition on one card is really stupid and unfair.
2: RESTRICT DIG - As much as I love it, the card has warped the metagame for blue decks. Even cards like notion thief do nothing to stop the card advantage.
Anyone out there who thinks I am wrong, I would **LOVE** for you to explain why!
A quick note on your Hammybot blurb: Erik died five, not three, years ago.
Well, I haven't given up on my other decks, but I want to win, and this deck seems both consistent and powerful.
I lost the last round once, to a shops opponent who Countered his own sol ring with his chalice set on one. That was after winning game one. If you can play like that and still cash a daily, then maybe I can too.
FYI i also built a copy of your deck. But i'm as good as you yet, so i'm not ready to take it out.
Hey Joe -
Always love the content. The sad things about decks like this and the people that rely on them is they take about four (possibly five) brain cells to pilot once you realize the sequencing required.
I have *personally* been anti-shops for quite a while - as even other linear strategies like Dredge take so much more thought and competence to pilot correctly.
The saddest thing about a shop pilot's plight is the decision making is boiled down to which order will I play my lock effects in - and the less-versed pilots may think just having lock effects is enough while completely ignoring the necessary threats.
This is also the #1 reason I am a huge Wasteland enthusiast - the card is such a good tool for taking away a lot of the inherent advantage Stax decks get (like 4 Workshops)
Good article - looking forward to the next archetype!
Zach
As a huge fan of Modern, since its very beginnings, I'm a junky for Modern content. Really enjoyed this article and the videos, and looking forward to more of your work.
Really appreciate it, look forward to one of our "Late night" testing sessions
I'm telling you I think you're getting closer to a good 75 than most who are playing the deck, at least online. So many powerful choices. Like I said in a previous comment, the 'toolbox' approach, especially post sideboard is, in my opinion, the way to go. Which probably means it's the wrong way to go!
Great stuff as usual. See you at the shuffle hut.
I think there's a decent chance for Jeskai Tokens to stay in the top 5 decks. It needs to be played and tweaked to be more of a 'toolbox' deck. To play it well, you need to ask "How do I win games without Jeskai Ascendancy in my hand?"
That can be designing ways to increase card draw to put it into your hand, or attack on a different axis. I'm a big fan of 'one of's post board. I think the token strategy can get wrecked by a few Black cards (especially Virulent Plague), so there needs to be other tricks up the sleeve. With White and Blue, there's a ton of powerful cards that still synergize well with JA, and a few that win on their own.
Also, the meta game is cyclical. Already the Esper decks are losing ground to solid value strategies. In time, it will veer back toward mid-rangey.
I think the main issue with tokens is that players can sideboard against it the same way they would against Red Aggro strategies, so there's never an 'easy match up' where the opponent has zero answers. Player always have cards for Red, which gives them half the answers for tokens. Plus enchantment hate is at a premium as well, so the Ascendancy has a high chance of being got.
The deck is also not easy to play correctly. Especially when to loot and when to not loot. I see a lot of mistakes being made there.
I think it's still a Tier 1 deck, more so than Heroic. Heroic just has a lot more favorable match ups right now. That won't last.
Thanks Fred for the correction. Sadly I can't make that change myself.
There always seem to be one or two things that fall between the cracks despite my best efforts to check and double check.
The correct name is "Sligh" not "sleigh." The deck was designed by Jay Schneider and played by Paul Sligh.
I'm so happy that you liked it, and that you tool the effort to pick out that quote.
Interesting that you chose that quote, as my intention was to demonstrate that that line of thought isn't always true (though as you eloquently describe, it often is).
I'm very on board with your comments concerning budget decks. It is a source of great frustration when I hear Magic described as pay-to-win. The mileage you can gain from understanding the game from a fundamental perspective if often understated with people all to quick to blame to dominance of certain money rares.
Frankie
great article! this was my favorite quote:
"Players were realising that correct strategy depended on the relative compositions of both decks in a given matchup, rather than either deck in isolation. There was always a beatdown. There was always a control. Winning was a simple matter of executing the right plan."
i wish more people who complain about "money decks" or card cost would understand this point. this is a pet peeve of mine because i tend to just play "piles of cards i like to collect" and cards i feel connected to via nostalgia or visual art. people will see a turn one dual land or mox, and rage out at me, not noticing or taking a few turns to realize im playing a 250 un-themed singleton deck with no specific strategy.
a deck full of commons can beat a deck full of mythics and rares - any day - given the proper matchup. yes some deck types or themes will most often always lose to other specific deck types... but that's not because of card cost... it's because of MATCHUP (inherent natural ups and downs of each color/color mix), luck of draw (shuffler)... in addition to card cost and rarity. i have plenty of decks that cost hundreds of dollars that frequently lose to decks full of any old commons: burn, elves, green agro, white weenie, and counterspells.
decks and games do not exist in a vacuum.
Zoo's Company, Three's a Crowd
I actually recently nabbed the joke twitter handle "@FrankieTenToys" so it looks like we think alike haha.
Look forward to chatting when our paths cross.
Great stuff. I definitely miss your articles.
I don't even play Commander but your articles always make me want to start. It's a shame that the new client has made things so difficult. Hopefully they will sort things out eventually.
This has to be one of the best looking articles I've seen on the sight. Great job Adam.
As I've told you I really need to get into Commander some time. Getting ready for Modern Master 2015 at the moment but maybe after I've got hold of that stuff I will make an effort to give it a go.
It is important to remember that this deck was 1 match away from the top 8 of the Pro Tour in the hands of Efro. This deck has serious play to it and can shift modes from aggro to control and be good at both. As I said I would need to see your list but I pack plenty of removal/burn/counter in mine to make my deck better able to beat decks that can be a tougher match up. So let's compare lists on MTGO
@ Procrastination. You stated that "Regarding Monastery Mentor - you mention not needing another snowball card, but when discussing Ascendancy, you state that only having 4 copies hampers the deck. While Mentor is not providing the same effect as JA, isn't having multiple snowballing options still a good thing?"
Your reasoning makes sense, and I see where you are coming from. The Mentor would definitely help in a game where you could not find an Ascendancy or keep the Ascendancy on the battle. But there are several disadvantages to adding a Mentor. Firstly, it is much easier for the opponent to remove than an Ascendancy is (or than another threat is such as Secure the Wastes). Keep in mind that lands are generally the hardest permanents to remove, followed by enchantments and artifacts, followed by multiple creatures, followed by a lone creature, followed by a lone creature which is also an enchantment or artifact, which is the easiest of all to remove. Now, Mentor is a lone 2 toughness creature for 3 mana unless you have some backup to Prowess it. Your opponent could just Lightning Strike it or Savage Slash it or Hero's Downfall etc, and you have not come much closer to achieving your goal which is to explode before the opponent kills you.
What is worse, being a creature, the Mentor does not activate Ascendancy or the prowess ability of the Seeker. For example, you can be in a really super board situation with an Ascendancy out, 2 Seekers of the Way on the battlefield and maybe 2 tokens also, and only a Mentor or two in your hand. In situations like this, you cast the Mentor, then pass. The Seekers' prowess does not get activated, so they don't get bigger or lifelink, the Ascendancy abilities don't get activated, so the tokens don't get bigger, you don't get to untap your creatures, you don't get to loot, and because you were not able to loot, you may draw 2 lands in the next 2 draws and then it's GG. In scenarios like this, by trying to snowball off more, you actually did not snowball off at ALL! So in this case, it wasn't even a WIN MORE card, it was a LOSE MORE card. In such a situation you would infinitely prefer to see a Cruise or an Anticipate or a Secure the Wastes.
I am not saying that it's wrong to add Mentors because they can provide an excellent backup to Ascendancy when needed and they can snowball for wins, I am just explaining the risks and why it can actually make your deck weaker and less explosive. I find it hard to justify taking out a Secure the Wastes to add a Mentor. I could be easily convinced to splash one Mentor, because splashing one won't cause as many awkward scenarios like the one described above, and it will keep opponents off balance. For example, if your opponent sees a Mentor in the first game, they might assume that you have 4 copies, and their sideboard choices could consequently be wrong. Or they might not see it in the first game, and assume you don't have it at all, and they might board out cards accordingly and then realise that they weren't prepared for the Mentor. I am a big fan of one-of's for this reason!
@ Rerepeat, yes I like Fleece Nyx Ram as sideboard tools against Mono Red/Atarka Red, but I have never used Wall of Essence (and I don't plan to because I don't think it's strong enough).
@ Plainswalker83. I am surprised by your comment that you don't feel Ascendancy is so critical to winning. I am glad to hear your experience and I don't discount it, but it is not mine at all. For example, your opponent casts Courser of Kruphix, then the Jeskai player plays Goblin Fodder. The Courser player plays Siege Rhino, and the Jeskai player then plays Raise the Alarm or Secure the Wastes. And so on and so forth until death do us part. Without Ascendancy, our opponents will quickly run us over with higher quality cards and we will flounder. To be fair, Treasure Cruises help immensely in these types of situations to balance out the power when we lack the Ascendancy. However, the safest route to victory is to get an Ascendancy on the board in my opinion, then "go off" from there.
Exemplars has been very good in testing thus far. I bring it in when I side in Anger and my other control package. I have not tried out Ram or Wall because the Aggro match up does not worry me so much as does the deck with a ton of sweepers.
We will have to catch up online sometime because I am not experiencing the negatives you are mentioning. I have won many games without ascendancy even out and especially after board. The 3 Disdainful Stroke help a lot as well. As I said I will be putting up videos but also I play the deck in paper and win FNM or place 2nd more often than not. I also use Tokens to top bigger tournaments. I will admit it is now harder but this deck rewards those who really have experience with the deck and it pays off in that way. As for Atarka Red and Esper Dragons, I mentioned Esper can be winnable depending on our build of Tokens and the board. Atarka Red I feel is a very good match up. Our Tokens kill pretty much all of their creatures and the life gain from seeker is valuable. After board we get sweepers and Negate to thwart their offense and then can take over the game. I added you and look forward to comparing lists.
That sounds like a rough experience. Still being able to top 8 a GP is still extremely promising. Maybe if you had stuck with it you might have been able to do well at the next PT you qualified for. All variance tends to correct itself in the end.
The information and the aspect were just wonderful. I think that your viewpoint is deep, it's just well thought out and truly incredible to see someone who knows how to put these thoughts so well. Good job!
check this out~~~
how to buy followers on instagram
I agree. Ultimately its why I never pursued MTG with an 'all-in' perspective and finally decided to just get a job and earn my money in the workforce. Not as fun, but pays much better. It was pretty heart-breaking to Q for PT Portland 2014 off a GP Montreal top 8, spend weeks and weeks practicing, then go 0-3 in my M15 draft pod because I didn't open a planeswalker and 2/3 of my opponents did. The last guy just watched me mulligan to 4 in the third game. Variance at its finest.