Marshall Sutcliffe (@Marshall_LR of Limited Resources and one of the nicest people you will ever meet in the Magic podcasting community) has been asking me about… Believe it or not… Napster!
Marshall makes the reasonable point that Napster is a deck that we talk about a lot (myself, BDM, and so on)… But only really longtime readers know what the hell a Napster is. So… Here is the rundown, only eleven years after the fact. Briefly, we will go over:
The Deck
The Name
The Tournaments
The Pedigree
The Plan(s)
… and Namor
The Deck
… As Jon Finkel played it (to the 2000 US National Championships win): The Name
At the time, Napster (the “real” Napster) was the industry leader in music sharing; instead of legally downloading music via iTunes or Amazon.com, less scrupulous young people would login to Napster and download the songs they wanted that had been uploaded by different less scrupulous young people. You could pretty much get whatever you wanted without having to pay for it, therefore.
Brian Kibler came up with the deck name.
The deck that would eventually [also] be called Napster could go and get whatever it wanted thanks to playing Vampiric Tutor (we’ll get into more on how that worked in a future section).
The Tournaments
In the Spring of 2000 The Magic Dojo was pretty much a sinking ship. However they were still paying me (and a couple of other people) so we would still show up for work. We would do some work, but the onetime dreams of dotcom IPO millions were a thing of the past.
So while updating our resumes, one of the things we did was play lots and lots of Standard.
The Magic Invitational that year gave us a great set of gauntlet decks; and because I am forbidden from looking things up, I won’t… But I think our gauntlet was a Blue deck played by Zvi Mowshowitz some kind of Rebels deck played by maybe Chris Pikula or Darwin Kastle, and a StOmPy deck played by Patrick Chapin. There were also some combo decks (for example Sabre Bargain).
We played lots and lots of Standard and had quite a few good decks we could play.
At the time, BDM was innovating the tournament scene with the Grudge Match (which he resurrected just this past weekend), and we had weekly Standard at Neutral Ground, therefore. Awesome decks like Replenish were coming out at the same time, and the Grudge Match gave rise to ZevAtog the next year (for those of you who don’t know about ten year old decks these were the CawBlade and so on of the age).
I decided to play what Napster was in a Grudge Match qualifier and won it, beating Ben “Manascrew” Murray in the finals. US Regionals was soon after and I played it there, too.
In Regionals I qualified, losing a total of three games (two of them in the Top 4, and one in the Swiss). Both my losses were based on errors. In the Swiss one I had my opponent completely locked down with Agonizing Memories and no creatures in play; I made him put a land and Lin-Sivvi on top of his deck, and the turn he played her out, I ran Vampiric Tutor to get my Eradicate… Which wasn’t in the deck. I had no way to directly kill Lin-Sivvi with the amount of mana I had in play and he got a Protection from Black creature and killed me with it.
Obviously I won the next one.
Eventual Champion Sayan Bhattacharyya beat me in the Top 4 at a point when we didn’t yet have Stromgald Cabal. Stromgald Cabal (main deck) put our Replenish matchup to about 75% (it was about 45/55 in favor of Replenish at Regionals)… I messed up on an Unmask and Sayan beat me after 100 turns of do-nothing (hiding behind Circle of Protection: Black).
After qualifying at Regionals, I hooked up with Jon Finkel and the OMS brothers for US Naitonals testing, and we did exactly one session of Standard. I brought my Black deck and Jon and Chris Pikula played 3-4 different decks against me. We were a slight dog to Blue but beat every other deck by a margin of 70% or greater; as he does, Jon said it would be pointless to play any other decks and thus elected to prepare exclusively for Limited.
Jon won the Limited portion of Nationals that year, famously beating Mageta, the Lion with a “mere” Wandering Eye.
Pro Tip: If you give Jon Finkel perfect information, he will beat you, even if you have an unlimited number of Wrath of Gods.
The Pedigree
Jon used Napster to win the 2000 US National Championship, including one of the most lopsided finals matches of all time (versus Chris Benafel). Benafel was thought to have the dominant matchup with Mono-Red land destruction, but Jon beat him 3-0, after beating him badly in the Swiss as well.
Here was a typical Finkel opening draw against the Mono-Red deck:
Swamp,
Dark Ritual,
Dark Ritual,
Dark Ritual,
Persecute,
Skittering Horror
Things to keep in mind:
Red had no Lightning Bolt at the time.
Jon’s play on turn two was a Rishadan Port
This leads us reasonably-ish into…
The Plans
Napster did lots of different things well, but the main awesome sauce was its twofold dominance as a Vampiric Tutor deck and a Yawgmoth’s Will deck. Unless the opponent was playing a Morphling deck, you could pretty much just play Vampiric Tutor and win the next turn. The game might not be over, but the opponent would be more-or-less incapable of winning.
For example, you could play Vampiric Tutor for Engineered Plague against Elves. Could they win? Maybe. But not before you killed them with Thrashing Wumpus and Skittering-something.
You could get Stromgald Cabal (tap to counter a White spell), and a Replenish deck would need eight mana before it could do anything productive. Zvi, Sayan, and Don Lim eventually figured out to play Ring of Gix to tap Stromgald Cabal, but up until that point, it was a pretty firm soft lock.
All the decks in the format would fold to some kind of Vampiric Tutor. Frank Hernandez (Jon’s Top 8 opponent at Nationals) complained that his StOmPy deck was up against “nine Perishes” in Game One… As above, Jon had more Perish action in his sideboard.
Yawgmoth’s Will is maybe the most powerful Magic card of all time… and they let us play four. No, I don’t know why more people didn’t play it. In Napster the routes to card advantage should be pretty obvious (smash guys, re-buy creature removal), but when you start doing stuff like using your Dust Bowl so you can re-buy a land, plus popping Vampiric Tutor from the graveyard to get your next Yawgmoth’s Will… The deck was easy to win with at 25% efficiency (again, Vampiric Tutor auto-beat almost every deck)… But there was significant room for mastery.
Subtly, Unmask (a Black pitch spell) was there to help you get rid of cards like Perish when off-matchup.
… And that’s about it.
I could write about Napster, um, forever, but I’ll leave it at that. Basically a deck with potentially fast threats (turn one 5/5), more card advantage than anyone else (Yawgmoth’s Will), and the ability to beat almost any deck with one spell.
I leave you with some sketches I did of the King of Atlantis yesterday:
Scribbles:
Slicker:
LOVE
MIKE
Coming Soon:
“The Now-Famous Supermodel NipSlip Incident of 1995” (and associated shenanigans)
For those of you who don’t know what Movie Klub is, it is a klub… err… club that Lan D. Ho and Jon Finkel started a few years ago. Lan, a onetime (and one-time) Grand Prix Top 8 competitor [although a participant in the greatest Grand Prix Top 8 of all time] moved to New York City a couple of years back. Lan originally moved to NYC to make his Magic: The Gathering documentary I Came to Game, and live the real life Big Apple adventure with his friends (Magic and otherwise) along the way. He showed up without a job or anywhere to live (so a somewhat less prepared, though equally handsome Felicity), but brought with him longtime friendships and contacts, and a love of new experiences and slightly-above-average mind that landed him, eventually, a position at Susquehanna International Group.
Anyway, when Lan first moved to New York, he took up “resident gamer” status at Jon Finkel’s apartment (basically you get to live in Jon’s lavish New York luxury apartment in return for being the sixth- or eighth-man to fill out drafts when we are short)… Rough life, I know.
Lan started the once-per-week New York Movie Klub, whose original members included himself, Jon of course, Webb Allen, Dan O’Mahoney-Schwartz, Tuna Hwa, YT, and Tom Martell (plus other awesome people, obv).
Some years later, Lan has located a little south to the City of Brotherly Love, but Movie Klub continues strong, having become the social center of the week for some thirty-plus mostly awesome New Yorkers (and the occasional New Jersey-er) from various walks of life, hanging out at Jon’s every Wednesday.
This week it was my turn to show and I showed the kick-ass movie Kick-Ass.
I knew I wanted to show Kick-Ass ever since I was invited to the New York premiere by then-UGO television blogger Hillary Rothing (@tricia_tanaka), whom I had met over Twitter. The premiere feature Kick-Ass [comic book] co-creators Mark Millar and John Romita, Jr. in a Q&A afterwards, where we learned all kinds of reasons why the making of Kick-Ass may have in fact been even more interesting than the movie itself (and the movie is effin’ great).
Kick-Ass is a somehow non-satirical, often hilarious, ultra-violent movie about a kid who decides to become a real-life superhero. He has no StarkTech, no great physical or financial super resources, and no “great responsibility” borne by possession of great power. He is just a kid who likes superhero comics and buys himself a goofy green wetsuit and some surplus police batons… I know that as a teenager who grew up on a mix of Dungeons & Dragons and Marvel zombie-dom, the same kind of fantasy occurred to me more than once, but the protagonist of Kick-Ass, christening himself (ahem) “Kick-Ass” just took that vital step that separates the boys from their, you know, eventual padded rooms.
But his heart is in the right place.
Kick-Ass follows essentially three story threads, the heartwarming, uncomfortably funny, and somewhat Dexter-like birth and colossally unsuccessful early adventures of the aforementioned Kick-Ass; the backstory and development of Big Daddy and Hit-Girl, a father-daughter team of actually competent, well-funded, and well armed super vigilantes who befriend him; and the latter family’s arch-rivals, a wealthy drug cartel who eventually produce their own superhero.
Hit-Girl is among the most unique, interesting, and irreverent characters in the history of fiction, an eleven-year-old girl with the fighting prowess of a less scrupulous Drizzt Do’Urden; it is the presence of Hit-Girl that at once makes Kick-Ass such a singular piece of fiction… and simultaneously what made the movie hard to sell to studios in the development process. Not to say too much that might spoil the experience for those of you who haven’t watched it, but she is not only and eleven-year-old murderous sociopath (with a heart of gold), but the only eleven-year-old character in the history of mainstream fiction whose typical dialogue involves “giant cock” and (in the parlance of Arrested Development) the ever-popular “Seaword” [you know, if you grok].
Millar and company, in making Kick-Ass were attempting to create the Pulp Fiction of superhero movies, and I think their particular combination of emotional poignance, inappropriate hilarity, casual bloodletting, and genuinely surprising moments mean they were successful in that. It is in fact one of my favorite films.
Kick-Ass was directed by Matthew Vaughn, who also directed Movie Klub classic (also selected by YT), Stardust. The amazing thing about Stardust, adapted from the Vertigo fairy story by Neil Gaiman and Charles Vess is that it is actually better — that is, in my opinion, ends better — than the original… And Stardust has been one of my favorite stories since its late-1990s publication. Vaughn’s most recent film is X-Men: First Class… so I can only assume he likes the comics as much as I do.
General consensus among Movie Klubbers was overwhelmingly positive for Kick-Ass. During my introductory speech, hosting Jonathan Magic asked what the Rotten Tomatoes score was; I didn’t know offhand, but looked it up on ye olde iPhone 4 during the movie, and later responded with 76%.
The best possible recommendation, then, coming from Jon was:
“Then 24% of movie critics are morons.”
Kick-Ass was (among this group) least well-received by former Beckett Magic: The Gathering and Star City Games Premium author Mark Young, who keeps the general Movie Klub blog. You can read Mark’s significantly less enthusiastic review (and learn more about different movies shown) here.
My Four Perspectives Kick-Ass Review:
What was great about Kick-Ass?
So much!
The movie is beautifully filmed. The colors are alive in shot after shot. You can really tell that the people who made this movie, from Big Daddy Nic Cage to original story writer Mark Millar absolutely love the material. There are little winks, like Brian Vaughan’s Runaways being read in a local comics shop to the kinds of banter about whether or not Bruce Wayne is a bona fide superhero or just crazy rich dude that really ring true to IRL comics fans.
Cage’s performance as Big Daddy was visually evocative of Tim Burton’s Batman, but played like Adam West’s Batman. The con-fusion is something that anyone watching the movie might notice, but that longtime fans of comics-to-film and such can appreciate as a kind of micro-Easter Egg.
More than anything else, the character of Hit-Girl, so solitary in all of fiction, is something to behold. She is hilarious and tragic, and simply fun to watch. We debated after the film what Kick-Ass might have been like with a twenty-five-year-old actress in a Hit-Girl-like role… and while some Movie Klubbers might have appreciate Angelina Jolie in such a role, the general consensus is that every action movie since The Matrix has had some kind of Trinity, and it just wouldn’t have been that special.
I might be a little bit biased though… like I said, Kick-Ass is one of my favorite movies.
What about Kick-Ass gave me pause?
The biggest barrier to my potentially showing Kick-Ass was that I had already shown a Matthew Vaughn movie at a previous Movie Klub, and I didn’t want to typecast my own choices; so I suppose that “self-consciousness” would be the biggest thing that gave me pause.
This is a little bit of quibbling, but Kick-Ass takes place in New York (and there are some unmistakably “New York” shots), but it is pretty clearly not actually filmed in New York for the most part (someone at Movie Klub suggested Toronto). I mean NYC just don’t look like that.
That said, if you are one who is sensitive to harsh language — especially coming out of the pie ice cream hole of a murderous eleven-year-old girl — you probably won’t be able to distance yourself from the raw in-your-face-ness of this film to actually enjoy what is good about it.
Why would someone want to buy (or in this case, rent) Kick-Ass?
Besides the fact that it is really, really good, I am pretty sure it streams gratis on Netflix. So if you have a Netflix membership, it’s a free roll!
On Amazon streaming you can catch two of the best hours of filmdom of your life for… let’s see… $7.99:
Bloodbraid Elf
Bloodbraid Elf
Enlisted Wurm
Mountain
Plains
Reflecting Pool
Who knows what your next card is going to be?
But there is an interesting mental exercise…
What land do you play?
… So, why is this interesting again?
As you could probably tell from the screen shot, this actually came up for me last week, playing with my Mono-Cascade deck*. I was going to just run out Mountain…
Why would I run out Mountain?
When you play this kind of a deck enough–even now that we’ve layered it with four main deck Baneslayer Angels–you try to play around Anathemancer. I know it’s only turn two… But really, you start to train yourself to play Mountain in these kinds of spots as a default.
Anyway, I thought to myself, if I pull Blightning, I can play it on turn three anyway.
It was at that point that I realized my error.
There is only one right play: Reflecting Pool.
Why?
Because you have an equal chance of drawing Blightning or Esper Charm!
Your path is clear starting on turn four. If you only want to consider four mana spells, you have no issue. Any order of your next three lands will allow you to play a pair of Bloodbraid Elves. In this deck, that two-turn sequence is automatically devastating. The opponent will be under pressure and will be down four cards… That’s just how the deck is designed.
But if you draw an actual three mana spell, you can put yourself so far ahead come turn four or five that the opponent will be in topdeck mode whereas you will be playing Ultimatum Magic (that is actually part of the reason I like the Mono-Cascade deck the best… It is just ferociously more powerful than basically everything else that people seem to be playing… but more on that later).
So in this case, you can see that playing Reflecting Pool is the best turn two play. The next best play is Plains.
If you play Plains and then draw Blightning, you can play Reflecting Pool or Mountain and cast the Blightning; it is inferior to Reflecting Pool on turn two because in this case you will have to take a counter off of your Vivid Creek in order to play the Blightning. This may or may not be relevant in the particular game at hand, but this kind of haphazard play can and will have a negative effect on your long term victory prospects if you are not aware of it.
Why?
… For the exact same reason that playing Reflecting Pool is better than playing Mountain on turn two.
We sometimes talk about the general rules in Magic.
Zvi calls this one “Finkel’s Law” (it was made popular by myself and Justin Polin during our short term at Brainburst Premium): Focus Only On What Matters.
Some people who listen to the Top 8 Magic Podcast know that Finkel actually has more than one law. This is a second one: Magic is a game of options. Generally the better play is the one that preserves the most options.
So in this case, playing a Reflecting Pool on the second turn is better than a Mountain because it helps leave open your options… You will be able to play Esper Charm or Blightning on turn three, regardless of which (if either) you draw.
By the same token, playing Plains is better than playing Mountain on turn two, but worse than playing Reflecting Pool because it shines a similar light (or lack thereof) on your options. You will theoretically be able to play either three mana spell, but if you draw Blightning, you will have to spend a counter on your Vivid Creek that you would not have to spend if you instead played Reflecting Pool first. That Vivid counter might end up mattering.
So what really happened?
I actually just pulled another land (either Plains or Exotic Orchard, I don’t remember). He was playing a U/W deck of some sort and got annihilated by discard into more discard into sixth turn Enlisted Ultimatum… Just like they all do! 🙂
* Yes, yes, yes dear readers, I know this whole hypothetical is based on an imaginary, now-outdated mana base. And yes, I made a new one. Check back tomorrow-ish 🙂
Just a quickie on Alara Reborn common, Jund Hackblade.
Aesthetics:
Jund Hackblade is a hard working little fellow, and one of the more interesting cards that has been spoiled so far.
On its lonesome, Jund Hackblade is relatively uninteresting, a 2/1 for either BR or GR (and speaking of aesthetics, did anyone else notice the relative size difference of the Golgari v. Red mana symbols?)… But if you play a multicolored permanent on the first turn and follow up with this guy, you have a nice 3/2 haste for either BR or GR. Saucy.
The question is, what are you going to use to set him up?
My personal opionion is that Tattermunge Maniac is probably the best option; you can play it for either G or R on turn one, and you actually need G on the second turn even in a primarily Red deck (assuming you are the G side of course), so that makes things smoother.
Brian David-Marshall told me he really likes Figure of Destiny but I think that might be a little bit awkward due to the (I assume) forced Black mana on turn two… But that is probably resolvable by dual land in Blightning Beatdown. Figure of Destiny being a card you might actually want to play, of course.
There is also the possibility of just playing Jund Hackblade on the bonus… That is you don’t optimize to play him out of the gates on turn two… You just run him over (or alongside, actually) Goblin Deathraiders and he becomes a much better mid-game topdeck in a Blightning build with Boggart Ram-Gang and Ashenmoor Gouger.
Where Can I See This Fitting In? This is a really cool card. It is obviously at its maximum when you can follow up a first turn Figure of Destiny or some such, rocking a Ram-Gang essentially, but I think that was the trap I fell into when initially evaluating it: Thinking only in terms of how good it can be on turn two. Remember that it can be regular on turn two and then you can just play a Ram-Gang the next turn and come in for six anyway; or you can play a Deathraiders on turn two and this plus Tarfire to get in the following turn for six anyway.
Basically you are going to want to play this in a beatdown deck that can support multicolored spells; you don’t just through it into a straight Red version and cross your fingers on the mana; that requires some amount of deck customization, but I don’t think it will be overly difficult. Green with Maniacs, but more likely some evolved take on Blightning.Â
Snap Judgment Rating:If there were such a thing as a “defining” Role-Player, this would be it. Not a staple, but also not played “interchangeably” as many and most Role Players.
For a much more extensive discussion of Jund Hackblade and the cards you might want to play alongside it to set up, you might want to check out Brian David-Marshall’s take on Top8Magic.com.
While you’re over there, mise well be a pal and pick up a copy of Deckade, amiright?
Deckade – For those of you who have always dreamed of waking up next to my smiling (or in this case grumpy) face… You can buy one and plop it down onto the nightstand (Jon Finkel does this).
In the spirit of Taunting Jon Becker, we bring you Alara Reborn common, Pale Recluse.
Aesthetics:
To really understand Pale Recluse, I have to reference a similar (and I use the word “similar” loosely) card, Traumatic Visions. Traumatic Visions is a Conflux common. For five mana it can Counter target spell, and has Basic landcycling for 1U.
Jon Finkel has said that this card lets him do basically “everything he could ever want to do” … Counter spells, draw cards, and ultimately play lands. Brian David-Marshall actually argued that this is a poential in Legacy (on top of your deck it can counter Force of Will with Counterbalance).
Let’s dial it back to Alara Reborn.
You see Pale Recluse can do everything Jon Becker wants to do.
Here is a card that can block flying creatures without itself having flying OR dig up for a Forest or Plains. Five mana would be too much for a 4/5 Reach, but we think Becker would certainly play with it on six in forties if not sixties (sixty-ones).
I was recently inspired by Brian Kibler’s Pro Tour Honolulu qualification with his “Cabal Interrogator” deck.
When Brian told me he qualified, that is what he told me he qualified with. I think it took me a few days to discover that he had actually just played a templated Loam deck, and that the Cabal Interrogators were in his sideboard. Details.
The reason is that as deck designers, we are very interested in whatever clever thing we can point at to show how, you know, clever and / or different we are. Really! I know it is difficult to believe. Some of us play with four Umezawa’s Jittes instead of three and call ourselves geniuses (and / or are voted geniuses into the Magic Invitational), for example.
The problem with these cards is that for every unique and shining gem, you usually have four or five stinkers, ergo the fine line between tech and jank.
In this spirit Five with Flores brings you five cards that have made me feel clever:
Card: Meddle Deck:Flying Beatdown Story: Meddle was a medium-inflexible if obviously trish-advantageous two-for-one, and I have always been a sucker for a two-for-one. Ergo, Meddle, sticking out like a sore thumb. In the first appearance of the wildly popular Penn Flying Beatdown, altran defeated Jon Finkel at a Gray Matter $1,000 tournament in probably no part due to pointing a Meddle at a “bolt” (Incinerate?) Jon had intended for Albert’s Man-o’-War at Finkel’s Jackal Pup. In a commensurate display of maturity, I danced around the tournament area yelling “Finkel lost to the Flores card!”
In a wild turn of events (for any of you who followed that deck list link)… There isn’t even a Meddle in the Decks to Beat published version of Flying Beatdown! I guess by then I had mentally relegated it to Jank, in favor of Honorable Passage.
Card: Unforge Deck:Kuroda-Style Red Story: You probably know from the more famous version of Kuroda-style Red that we eventually cut Unforge; however Regionals-era I was stuck with them. And by “stuck” I mean I played them. Like four. You see I got spooked into thinking due to the renaissance of Jamie Wakefield (“Joshie Green”) at the time that any and all would be packing Troll Ascetics and equipment at Regionals, and Jamie kept telling me that my deck couldn’t beat his deck. Well I’ll show him, I thought, and figured out how to win. And by “figured out” I mean I was dealt Unforge tech by Brian David-Marshall and / or Seth Burn. In actuality the real gold of this deck was the Culling Scales technology that proved unbeatable at Nationals for especially the then-popular White Weenie deck. However I soldiered into Regionals with Unforges; they came up once. Yes I killed a Troll Ascetic (the big selling point was that the opponent would typically tap out to equip an Ascetic). Lost anyway, game and match.
Card: Gnarled Mass Deck:Critical Mass Story: It’s been like four years so now I am comfortable coming out with the truth. We’re all friends here. The Masses weren’t that Critical. Certainly the idea of Gnarled Mass was groundbreaking. Sadin especially latched onto them like they were Blake Lively’s boobies. They were good and helped out in the Black and White matchups but Steve for some reason kept siding them in and siding Keiga out in like every matchup “for tempo” (you got me — kid won a Grand Prix). But right before the PTQ I cut the one I had main deck for the Enlightened Bushi when Josh pointed out that one kills North Tree and the other one doesn’t; by the Grand Prix Gerard was up to two Isaos main deck! But we still had four “critical” Gnarled Masses in the sideboard up to the morning of the PTQ… half of which were culled before opening bell for Consuming Vortex. I maintained at the time that the cards were indistinguishable because they were both “good against beatdown” when in fact I won my match against Tim Gillam for the slot purely by top decking Consuming Vortex when I would have just died to his 5/5 flying the next turn had it been a 3/3 Spirit.
Card: Annex Deck:URzaTron Story: Let’s dial it back to the last Pro Tour Honolulu. Osyp’s URzaTron deck… I get a lot of credit for this deck (most of it self-propelled) but the real process was me making a bunch of bad decks and Osyp and Josh testing everything… Turns out the ‘Tron was actually pretty good. The most defining card in the sideboard (which was arguably the best part of the deck, and mostly Osyp’s) was Giant Solifuge, which was borrowed from a Red Deck I was high on at the end of testing, to superb effect. However the one card I insisted would be great was Annex. You see I had this theory that we could steal other people’s ‘Tron parts. It would be bonzer! The Annexes mostly worked out for Osyp. He looked great all tournament of course. Josh missed Day Two by taking a Mountain (right play I believe) when his opponent’s kill card was Maga (could have ended it right there by swiping Swamp, which was also on board). Eugene Harvey, who also played the deck but not to Osyp’s success, told me he thought that the Annexes were flat out bad, unplayable on the draw, and that he never wanted more than two in his deck.
Oh well.
Did I mention I single-handedly designed this awesome URzaTron deck that was the only undefeated Day One deck of the last Pro Tour Honolulu? It was really great and I made it all by myself. If I had been qualified I probably would have done even better than Osyp, but he did okay I guess.
Card: Muse Vessel Deck:Charleston AngelFire Story: To this day I maintain I was very happy with my Muse Vessels. I won almost every match I sided them in. That said, blame Brian Weissman. Brian told me he really liked them in his update to The Deck (Standard) and I mean COME ON, it’s Brian Weissman! So when we were working on Block (where Muse Vessel was legal) I decided that we should play all four because I had the inside track Weissman tech, and most teams would probably be stupid and not play any Muse Vessels at all, let alone all four (and for a while I insisted we play all four main because they were obviously so good). By the way not even my teammates or intimate playtest partners from that summer knew the true origin of Muse Vessel — but now you do.
Now going into the last week of testing we had a problem that our U/R/W deck was losing to our B/W deck at about a 7-3 clip in favor of B/W in Game One despite being ahead for most of the games (this carried into the Pro Tour where I — armed with B/W — bashed basically every Angel opponent). I didn’t understand this at all because the U/R/W seemed to be so much better equipped in terms of card advantage in every way. I concluded at the end of about 30 games that I played against myself on Apprentice that U/R/W didn’t have enough “stuff” and that the card advantage and Angel-centric card advantage were going nowhere because the deck was just drawing and drawing into more draw and B/W was winning close corner games with well-placed Mortifies all all that kind of stuff. So I concluded that U/R/w needed more “stuff” … Why not the other guy’s stuff?
The inclusion of Muse Vessel turned around the matchup to between a 6-4 and a 7-3 in favor of U/R/W, which made me happy.
It did not however make Steve happy, and he always sided out Muse Vessel.
Here are two points of potential embarassment: 1) Because we played two Muse Vessels main, we didn’t have room for cards like the fourth Demonfire, which probably would have pushed us from no money to the Top 4, and 2) We fundamentally misunderstood the U/R/W deck’s positioning in the control “mirrors” … It wasn’t until after the Pro Tour that we realized Steve was always winning as the beatdown and that all our Muse Vessel and Train of Thought into Swift Silence and Mimeofacture (jank I accidentally picked up from MTGO one night) was actually a colossal waste of strategy when we were winning against control with Lightning Helix to the face, mostly. The problem was that we assumed Steve would be playing against the fast deck, when he kept playing against the slowest deck. Would that we could have swapped Steve and Paul in that Pro Tour…
Did I mention “blame Brian Weissman” yet?
I’d say “I hope you enjoyed this” … But I already know you did.
LOVE
MIKE
P.S. Speaking of enjoying reading something awesome that I wrote, there is this pretty historic Magic book name o’ Deckade that is back in print over at Top 8 Magic. If you like what you read here, the Podcasts you listen to over there, or you just want to look back at ten years of my fabulous, Magical, life – signed copies are once again available.
So based on a couple of reader requests (I’m looking at you, CMH2003 and thewachman), plus an absolutely glowing testimonial from Rich Hagon “the best thing that happened to Magic writing in the last year was Zac falling off the train and going to Malaysia” I went back and looked at Interaction Advantage (or Card Advantage Is Wrong, Kinda) and Applied Interaction Advantage, its sequel from this week.
My general impression is that there isn’t really anything wrong with Zac’s theory… only that it isn’t new.
A lot of you probably didn’t have Brainburst Premium when I was writing for that site (which was around the heyday of Who’s the Beatdown II: Multitasking and some other fine articles from Zvi), but to me, this is fairly settled stuff.
Hill attempts in his Interaction Advantage to “reconcile the competing existing concepts of Card Advantage and Card Quality with one another in a coherent fashion, while incorporating the reality that certain effects have an impact on the board that far exceeds the expected interaction value of your average ‘card,’ but aren’t easily measured by the other ‘cards’ they destroy, negate, or generate.” This is in large part a reaction to Stephen Menendian’s claim that “In fact, within the game of Magic, there are only interactions. There is no such thing as a ‘Magic card’. This is a difficult ontological reality for many Magic players to accept.â€
I suppose in order to properly address Zac’s article I will have to get Stephen’s statement out of the way first.
It’s asinine.
Okay, that’s probably a little harsh.
There are obviouslycards. In fact, the cards say “cards” all over them (look at any “discard” card). There have to be cards. It’s silly to pretend that there aren’t cards, because even if you agree with Stephen’s ultimate claim, the physical cards themselves have tremendous value “within [a] game of Magic.” If nothing else, cards give you something to bluff with. They give you something to look at when assessing if your opponent “has it” or not. They give you something to draw extra of if you are a cheater, or to watch that your opponent isn’t drawing extra of if you suspect him of being a cheater. They give you something to draw extra of if you are not a cheater but don’t know what else to do with the five Blue mana staring at you. The physicality, the reality, of the cards is essential to interactive Magic and to pretend that they don’t exist is to remove from the game that single solitary thing that differentiates the very good players from the absolute masters of the game. I can tell you that Jon Finkel walked by a playtest session once and ordered us to stop. We were playing poker deck with a Survival of the Fittest list. Jon insisted that what we were doing was actually hurtingus, and that there was no reason to test a Survival deck with proxies. “You just don’t have the right feel for the cards, and never will.”
Jon at the time had numerous Grand Prix wins and Pro Tour Top 8s on the back of his unparalleled skill with Survival of the Fittest, and to this day claims the absolute mastery of Survival of the Fittest among his proudest capabilities as the game’s greatest technician. If there was any one person’s opinion that absolutely mattered on this topic, it was his, irrevocably.
And he believed in cards.
But that probably wasn’t what Stephen was about in his statement.
He was really just being over dramatic about card counting, and I suppose that is forgivable insofar as what he was “getting at” (I assume) is essentially true from a pure counting perspective. It was true the last time I said it, and when edt told it to me, too. Just not new. I stress that this is accurate only from a counting perspective, that is, the recording of exchanges, and not true in any other sense.
In the early to mid 2000s I was obsessed with counting and argued that all card advantage is ultimately virtual. From the perspective of instantaneous utility there is no difference between playing Keiga, the Tide Star scaring off three attackers and playing Wrath of God to kill three attackers. You might be shaking your head at this because in one case there are still potential attackers on the board and in the latter case there aren’t. It is ultimately futile to argue the point because I can just pretend they will never attack and therefore never have utility (what if I play Windborn Muse and the opponent chooses never to attack with them due to mana constraints?) … Or what if the opponent plays Living Death and gets them all back? We can really only look at things at a given instant because the idea of long-term card counting really comes down to where you stick the words THE END … It’s the difference between comedy and tragedy and all the difference in a game of Magic.
Have you ever played ninety-nine one hundredths of a perfect game of Magic? Your back to the wall the whole time, mana flooded, desperately chump blocking, holding on until you weasel into a topdeck, then still have to juke it perfectly for three turns, pray he doesn’t realize you’re bluffing (there are those cards again) until you pull again… Only to mis-click on the last turn (real-life mis-click counts too)? Congratulations. Ninety-nine out of one hundred. Wasn’t good enough.
Okay, back to Zac…
Not a bad set of articles. I’m sure many readers benefitted from reading these, and that is all we can ask of ourselves as writers. Not bad; simply not new.
In my mind Card Advantage and this nebulous idea of “Card Quality” don’t have to be reconciled.
Correctly counted, all card advantage is virtual, cardboard or no.
The easiest way to describe it is this:
Turn one of a Standard game, summer of 1999.
Your opponent plays Swamp, Blood Pet. The table popped up before he even played his Swamp, and he can’t possibly contain his excitement or disguise his grin.
Okay, you think.
Seven cards, not one of them a Mogg Fanatic. For the sake of this example, you have four Mogg Fanatics in your deck, but anything else, you’re dead.
You have 53 cards in the stack in front of you, or put more simply, a 75% chance of losing on the spot.
You pull “a card” … that is, a piece of cardboard (it exists). It is not, however, a Mogg Fanatic.
For sake of counting — real honest to goodness counting — you pulled nothing. You pulled a blank. It’s as if you didn’t draw at all.
If your are reading my blog, I am fairly sure you understand this example. Now I am going to make you a better Magic player. For reals.
EVERY SINGLE PULL YOU MAKE OPERATES THE EXACT SAME WAY.
All the counting in Magic is instantaneous. There is no difference between being too scared to set off a Veiled Serpent and simply not having any hand at all from being Mind Sludged beyond the option of someday NOT being too scared of setting off a Veiled Serpent and manning up (or bluffing that you might someday similarly man up). Player behavior dictates everything. It always has.
Here is the important reiteration: EVERY SINGLE PULL YOU MAKE OPERATES THE EXACT SAME WAY.
You understood the summer of 1999 example because of the virtual boner the opponent showed you, your knowledge of your four Mogg Fanatic deck (probably Counter-Phoenix), and the fact that you realized that you were staring at a textbook Hatred kill. Now even with these parameters filled, it would have been up to player behavior. Maybe you could bluff a Shock or a Force Spike. Maybe the opponent doesn’t know that you have no out there. But you, the guy reading this blog, understood from the example that the in-game utility you got from a non-Mogg Fanatic pull was zero.
The difference between you before you read this post and you after reading the next paragraph is that you will understand that the lesson of Bob Maher is that you should always assess your cards as if you are under the exact same kind of pressure.
The value of card drawing is tied directly to probability. More cards give you more chances at relevant pulls. Playing “as if you are under pressure” leads to crafting a strategy that will necessarily conform to the threats and interactions that your opponent can present within the appropriate time frame. This is actually quite simple if you think about it.
We often go back to the timeless Finkel message “Focus only on what matters.” Certain pundits have complained on occasion that they don’t know what matters. It may be simpler to think of the relevant interactions. You all understood the relevance of the Mogg Fanatic versus Blood Pet scenario. Every Magic interaction making up every Magic game can be broken down into similar buckets of relevance and probability, which in turn fit into larger buckets that make up the Stage superstructure that describes every Magic game.
For example take MWC v. Zoo in Extended:
MWC will win essentially every game that is allowed to go to Stage Three. How MWC wins is more-or-less irrelevant because there is almost no play that is bad enough that Zoo would be able to come back and win if it gets that far (I like making the opponent die to his stupid Dark Confidant, personally).
MWC has a suprising Stage One. Not good, but surprising (you are surprised when you lose to Mana Tithe, and also surprised when you lose to Lightning Helix).
Zoo crosses Stage One superbly, and acheives Stage Two within two turns most games. Zoo has to try to win in Stage Two. This statement is the entire framework of the strategy that guides both decks.
When players say they don’t know what is relevant — at least if they were playing one of the two decks described here — it is possible they are failing in the basic identification of strategy.
Zoo can only win one way: Kill the opponent before he acheives Stage Three, likely with a combination of beatdown and burn spells. One of my favorite things when I was actively playing the MWC deck was when my Zoo opponent would play Umezawa’s Jitte, typically in an attempt to not play into a big old Wrath of God. I liked this because I never lost a game when the opponent went Jitte. He would cede time by not killing me. I would react with Lightning Helix or Unmake (or sometimes Condemn) and buy a precious turn that brought me closer to Stage Three.
There are two cards that are sometimes played in Zoo that could complicate issues for MWC. Both Tidehollow Sculler and Gaddock Teeg could remove MWC’s ability to interact in Stage Two (typically pre-empting or removing Wrath of God); without such ability to interact, MWC would die before Stage Three (obviously losing in the process).
Naya Burn and the Lightning Bolt Deck have different ways of interacting with MWC than Zoo.
Naya Burn can play Molten Rain — especially on a Mistveil Plains or Temple of the False God — which restricts MWC in Stage Two (or even shanks MWC back to a manascrewed Stage One in some cases); either deck can play Sulfurous Vortex, which can not only kill MWC when MWC should be trumping in Stage Three (and certainly Stage Two), but can undermine the active dictation of Stage Three (whereas Zoo would always lose in Stage Three).
You will notice that the evaluation statement that describes both decks’ strategies differs when MWC is playing against Naya Burn (which looks like Zoo). If the MWC player assumes “[this deck] has to try to win in Stage Two” MWC may fail. MWC may in fact inevitably fail. In fact, this may be tantamount to a mis-assignment of role! What does it mean if Naya Burn can violate Stage Three airspace? We are in a very different world than “MWC will win essentially every game that is allowed to go to Stage Three,” aren’t we? It sounds almost like racing (God forbid) could be a relevant if not necessary option in our bundle of sticks, an arrow in our quiver we just might have to string up.
Think about what is necessary to identify the necessity of racing in the MWC v. Naya Burn fight. At the micro level, you have to figure out which if any of your cards is appropriate for racing and how and when to play them. At a slightly wider level you have to identify how to either find cards to race or how to prevent Naya Burn from racing you (or perhaps if you are very spoiled) how to make the game no longer about racing. But at an even wider level, you have to have correctly assessed that the paradigm of the game is a little bit different than playing against Zoo. When you are very good, the appearance of a Sulfurous Vortex will begin a domino cascade in your mind that will inform your next five turns’ of tactics. A lesser player will simply lose and not realize how he lost, having drawn all his best cards “against Zoo.”
Those of you who followed me on MTGO when I was actively playing MWC know that I was sideboarding as many as four copies of Kataki, War’s Wage, not for Affinity, but primarily for the Lightning Bolt Deck. Kataki did several things in the Lightning Bolt matchup, over and over, even when it didn’t seem to make a lot of sense. Kataki was always a lightning rod. Or when he wasn’t, the opponent didn’t realize what was going on. Often, he would buy Shrapnel Blast! You see, the Lightning Bolt deck is full of Darksteel Citadels and Great Furnaces and really doesn’t have enough operating mana to let you run all over them with Kataki forever. Secondly, Kataki almost guaranteed that Mana Tithe was good. Especially once I had removed Oblivion Ring from my deck (Unmake was basically always better), I actually had to gamble on Mana Tithe being able to stop Sulfuric Vortex. Finally, Kataki gave me a little racing game. You’d be surprised! He’d get in for six or eight. He never killed the other guy, but the other guy was often so cavalier about his life total he didn’t realize he was in a race. Therefore he would have fewer turns than expected to draw his 20th point of burn and I could shave a turn or two off of my normally glacial Decree kill.
Last thing. This is super important!
Zac — we have to get back to Zac, Zac inspired this post — says in the second of his two referenced articles that he is not trying to describe a kind of “option advantage” with his theory. That is fine; what he is describing is his to describe. However remember that good Magic play is about the preservation of options. When you are presented with two similar plays, typically the one that leaves you more options is superior. This is the root of our theories on mana efficient play, card advantage, life total preservation… everything we think of as “clean” technical play is actually about generating and preserving our options.
And because bluffing is an option… You already knew there was such a thing as a card so I won’t bother repeating that.
LOVE
MIKE
P.S. I realize there are infinite difficult concepts in this post, and I will be happy to follow up more specifically on any topic any of you want me to in the comments.
This is actually Game Two of the previous post’s brawl between Zoo and the Lightning Bolt Deck.
… But this time, we are examining the game from the perspective of the enemy!
Why is Spark Elemental worth playing in a world full of Mind’s Desires and Death Clouds? Why would the greatest player of all time have chosen this deck, let alone posted a top finish with it at the World Champsionships?
Check out the SWOT on the Lightning Bolt Deck to find out!
LOVE
MIKE
P.S. Here is Jon Finkel’s Lightning Bolt Deck from the 2008 World Championships:
3 Flames of the Blood Hand
4 Incinerate
4 Keldon Marauders
4 Lava Spike
4 Magma Jet
4 Mogg Fanatic
4 Rift Bolt
4 Shrapnel Blast
4 Spark Elemental
4 Sulfuric Vortex
I have been calling this deck the Lightning Bolt Deck largely for want of a better name.
Basically the deck has every “bad” Lightning Bolt reprint from Spark Elemental and Lava Spike on one (Lightning Bolts that can’t kill Hypnotic Specters) to Incinerate on two (Lightning Bolt for twice the cost).
In all seriousness, the critical mass of burn in the Lightning Bolt Deck can help win the game very quickly (as in the video itself). This deck is definitely on my short list.
(5/29/2009)
All Alara Reborn