[Deck/Primer] U/r/(x) Snapcaster

[karaxu]

I'm thinking that Vexing Devil might be what we need to actually support the Stifle/Wasteland Build. Since Goblin guide clashes with that strategy so much.

[David Kaplan]

Patrick Sullivan's Creatureless UR Burn (updated with Avacyn Restored)

//Manipulation
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder

//Burn
4 Chain Lightning
4 Fireblast
4 Flame Rift
4 Lava Spike
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Price of Progress
4 Rift Bolt
2 Searing Blaze
3 Thunderous Wrath

//Land
3 Mountain
4 Volcanic Island
4 Bloodstained Mire
4 Wooded Foothills
4 Scalding Tarn

//Sideboard
Sulfuric Vortex
Smash to Smithereens
Searing Blaze
Thunderous Wrath
Pyroblast
Spell Pierce
Tormod's Crypt/Faerie Macabre
Echoing Truth

Thunderous Wrath is not playable without Brainstorm and acceleration to move it to the top or find a Brainstorm two turns ahead with Ponder makes this the ideal build for it.

The deck loses the explosiveness of Guide/Delver/Devil in exchange for removing your opponent's removal. A point was made that the two most prominent form's of creature removal do not actually become dead. StP ends up redirecting to their own guy for life and Bolt just becomes Lava Spike. Tarmogoyf/Goose/Delver/all of Maverick's guys no longer become a wall, preventing damage.

It is much more immune to countermagic than ANT/Tide/Belcher, being only set back a turn. This deck is very weak against Aegis/Leyline.

Thoughts?

[Warden]

^^It's an interesting concept, but I see Snapcaster in that list as a pure upgrade over (IMO) jank like Searing Blaze. I'd much rather reuse brainstorm and/or burn + have a potential blocker while in top-deck mode than bank on just spells.
The argument over Devil and Delver of Secrets is interesting. I am not particularly sold on either of those getting cut in favor of pure burn (rift bolt and lava spike). I see the "let's make the deck straight burn" BUT you're missing out on continuous damage via creatures.

With such a high % of spells, both Delver and Snapcaster would be upgrades over otherwise crappy spells. I'd much rather run 8 creatures + spells than a pure spell deck. Wrath is another tough call number-wise. I'd start with 2x unless I was positive my manipulation was to die for (literally). I like the gamle he's taking with Flame Rift but again, I would compliment it alongside Snaps and DoS.

EDIT: Flamebreak would be another Sb card to consider. Kills off anything but fatties in Maverick and moves in past Teeg.

[David Kaplan]

Searing Blaze is an extremely strong and underrated card in Legacy. It may be better suited for the sideboard in most metagames, but it should be included somewhere.

I am not a fan of Snapcaster. I would argue that Flames of the Blood Hand is more appropriate for the creatureless version, since to see this as a Combo deck, Snapcaster is 1UR, deal 3 damage. The body is irrelevant. In the grindier, Daze/FoW/Pierce/Ponder versions, the body is relevant.

So far, I prefer Guide/Delver/Devil over Ponder/Blaze/Wrath/Flame Rift.

//Manipulation
4 Brainstorm

//Creatures
4 Delver of Secrets
4 Goblin Guide
4 Vexing Devil

//Burn
4 Chain Lightning
4 Fireblast
4 Lava Spike
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Price of Progress
4 Rift Bolt
1 Thunderous Wrath

//Land
3 Mountain
4 Volcanic Island
4 Bloodstained Mire
4 Wooded Foothills
4 Scalding Tarn

//Sideboard
3 Smash to Smithereens
4 Submerge
2 Grim Lavamancer
3 Searing Blaze
3 Pyroblast
Sulfuric Vortex
Spell Pierce
Tormod's Crypt/Faerie Macabre

[TRAMD]

I think those recently posted lists are different enough from UR Delver to not belong in this thread. They are really burn lists splashing blue for Delver and Brainstorm. It is a good deck in its own right but it probably fits better in the Burn thread or possibly it's own.

The spectrum:

- Burn, all red
- UR Burn - splash blue for Delver and Brainstorm
- UR Tempo Burn - Burn focus with counters to slow other decks
- UR Delver - The true deck this thread is about. The deck played into multiple SCG finals. Force of Will, Snapcaster and Ponder are all main deck staples.

The last two types of decks belong here. The first two do not. The key difference is main deck interaction with counters.

Actually, I would be happy to start a new thread for UR Tempo Burn. It is what I play and I think it might be different enough to warrant its own thread. Would there be enough interest?

[DMel]

Oh my god, can you imagine the fit the Burn players would throw if you started talking about Burn with a blue splash in their thread? "THERE'S A THREAD FOR THAT!" the cries would wail out. They'd be talking about this thread. And they'd be right. Every thread has different versions of your deck and they may not be of interest to you, but when they share the color identity and 75% of the cards, you gotta deal with it.

Regarding that creatureless build above, I would agree that Snapcaster is an upgrade to the deck, even though it gives them a target for their removal. But for different reasons.

If you want to play Thunderous Wrath - and lets face it, you do! - you need all the Brainstorms you can get. Four probably isn't enough, and Ponder just doesn't cut it (though it's still a necessary piece). Snapping back a Brainstorm to dig for relevant Burn and bury your Thunderous Wrath when it's the last card in your hand is vitally important. Otherwise they will sit in your hand more often than you'd like, I fear.

Plus, the other points about Tiago are also quite relevant. Having a chump-blocking body means you don't have to aim Burn spells at the creature that's about to kill you. That means you can use those Burn spells to kill your opponent the next turn instead. 1UR for 3 damage and a 2/1 is probably not good enough to be played on its own, but it's close. But combine that with the ability to also sometimes be a 2/1 that Brainstorms for 1UR and it's probably one of the best cards in the deck, especially if you're playing conditional cards like Wrath, PoP, or the like.

[Warden]

Originally Posted by DMel

Oh my god, can you imagine the fit the Burn players would throw if you started talking about Burn with a blue splash in their thread? "THERE'S A THREAD FOR THAT!" the cries would wail out. They'd be talking about this thread. And they'd be right. Every thread has different versions of your deck and they may not be of interest to you, but when they share the color identity and 75% of the cards, you gotta deal with it.

Thank you on so many levels. I'm glad I don't have to use mod-text to confirm this notion. This is the line of thought I have. Color identity and near-identical card-pool = the main reasons I'd keep discussion of potential UR "burn" decks here.

Regarding that creatureless build above, I would agree that Snapcaster is an upgrade to the deck, even though it gives them a target for their removal. But for different reasons.

If you want to play Thunderous Wrath - and lets face it, you do! - you need all the Brainstorms you can get. Four probably isn't enough, and Ponder just doesn't cut it (though it's still a necessary piece). Snapping back a Brainstorm to dig for relevant Burn and bury your Thunderous Wrath when it's the last card in your hand is vitally important. Otherwise they will sit in your hand more often than you'd like, I fear.

Plus, the other points about Tiago are also quite relevant. Having a chump-blocking body means you don't have to aim Burn spells at the creature that's about to kill you. That means you can use those Burn spells to kill your opponent the next turn instead. 1UR for 3 damage and a 2/1 is probably not good enough to be played on its own, but it's close. But combine that with the ability to also sometimes be a 2/1 that Brainstorms for 1UR and it's probably one of the best cards in the deck, especially if you're playing conditional cards like Wrath, PoP, or the like.

I agree with this in-full. These are some of the points I was trying to articulate. I'm in agreement (look at my post above) that you have to be certain your card/library manipulation is amazing to consider running Wraths. They are a very high gamble, as only brainstorm can put them from your hand --> make them a miracle again.

@David Kaplan: I respectfully disagree. The body of snapcaster is entirely relevant. At worst he's going to recycle a spell + be a 2/1 flash. You lose too many lines of play keeping him out of the deck. DMel goes a very good job highlighting this point.

EDIT: Moved to aggro after forum restructuring.
-Warden

[TRAMD]

I guess I feel the addition of MD counters is a bigger difference than adding Delver and Brainstorm but I have no problem with discussion about a blue splash burn build going on here. I love more discussion in the thread about my favorite deck. It just seems like the focus of the deck is a little closer to Burn than UR Delver and input from that thread might be more helpful. I am an active poster in the Burn thread and there is plenty of accepted talk about blue, white and black splashes. It is certainly not an issue that I "gotta deal with" because it never bothered me and I wasn't trying to "kick" anyone out (nor was I under the impression that I could). If you enjoy finding things to get upset about then by all means, continue your rants. It did entertain me, especially the mod pseudo-threat.

I initially thought that the point about Snapcaster being Brainstorm 5-8 for getting miracles out of your hand was brilliant but really it will rarely matter. You only need to deal with Thunderous Wrath in your opening hand. Unless you have 3+ in that hand the Brainstorm in your graveyard already did everything you need it to and further Brainstorms will rarely matter for Thunderous Wrath (unless miracle makes Brainstorm a spell to counter).

As far as Snappy otherwise...I am testing well without him but he is far from bad in this deck.

[DMel]

The issue, though, is that you also need Brainstorms to shuffle away lands, and it's hard to both set up your Wraths and otherwise fix your hand with one single Brainstorm. I do see your point though, that as a predominately Burn style deck, we're only really concerned with getting rid of Wraths in our starting hand. Otherwise we'll just play them when we draw them. But regardless, I think the versatility of Snappy, plus his particular synergy with the deck, makes him the right call.

Another thing not to forget is that he enables what I believe is the best graveyard-hosing strategy realistically available, which is 4 Surgical Extraction and 4 Snapcaster Mage. Without Snappy, Surgical just doesn't do enough against Dredge. Without Tiago I'd probably run Relic of Progenitus, but I'd rather strip the opposing deck of win-cons repeatedly.

[TRAMD]

That does bring up something that I noticed in testing Thunderous Wrath...I would Brainstorm to put one on top but I also frequently wanted to fetch out a land to cast a Delver or a Guide or whatever and then felt like I had to wait so that I could cast the miracle spell. It seemed like it was usually worth it but it could be frustrating at times.

[Warden]

Originally Posted by TRAMD

That does bring up something that I noticed in testing Thunderous Wrath...I would Brainstorm to put one on top but I also frequently wanted to fetch out a land to cast a Delver or a Guide or whatever and then felt like I had to wait so that I could cast the miracle spell. It seemed like it was usually worth it but it could be frustrating at times.

I have been looking at 2-for-1 functionality within cards (not to be confused with an actual 2-for-1 card) to compensate for this. At the moment I am still 'iffy' on Wrath for reasons you bring up. The upside is monstrous...but the frustrations and handcuffing is problematic enough to question lines of play. Of considerations, I have looked to Magma Jet > Ponder. It's by NO MEANS something I am advocating for -- but something I'm looking into. If I can deal damage AND scry, that's a tremendous synergy for the deck. Despite the 2cc cost, it serves the same "filter stuff" role of ponder while potentially killing off the opponent. Ponder is also a sorcery, so speed isn't an issue at all.

In terms of actual 2-for-1 cards to run, I found some suggestions. Seeing my friend Greg (playing well with UR delver and RUG delver) this weekend was great. He advocates for forked bolt in the current environment. His argument was strong (a lot of the format is x/2 and x/1) but I'm not sure.
Discussion with others also had us debating over stifle coming back to the deck. I prefer burn over tempo (with the argument burn is never dead to draw into).
I was also able to hear Kenny Adam's argument against running Vexing Devil in the deck (told through Greg). The main issue is devil not sticking on the table. I believe devil is a pure upgrade over guide but Kenny would rather keep guide (haste, forces removal upon it, etc).

[TRAMD]

Originally Posted by Warden

I have been looking at 2-for-1 functionality within cards (not to be confused with an actual 2-for-1 card) to compensate for this. At the moment I am still 'iffy' on Wrath for reasons you bring up. The upside is monstrous...but the frustrations and handcuffing is problematic enough to question lines of play. Of considerations, I have looked to Magma Jet > Ponder. It's by NO MEANS something I am advocating for -- but something I'm looking into. If I can deal damage AND scry, that's a tremendous synergy for the deck. Despite the 2cc cost, it serves the same "filter stuff" role of ponder while potentially killing off the opponent. Ponder is also a sorcery, so speed isn't an issue at all.

In terms of actual 2-for-1 cards to run, I found some suggestions. Seeing my friend Greg (playing well with UR delver and RUG delver) this weekend was great. He advocates for forked bolt in the current environment. His argument was strong (a lot of the format is x/2 and x/1) but I'm not sure.
Discussion with others also had us debating over stifle coming back to the deck. I prefer burn over tempo (with the argument burn is never dead to draw into).
I was also able to hear Kenny Adam's argument against running Vexing Devil in the deck (told through Greg). The main issue is devil not sticking on the table. I believe devil is a pure upgrade over guide but Kenny would rather keep guide (haste, forces removal upon it, etc).

I love Forked Bolt! I ran it as a 4-of in my standard deck the entire time it was legal and I run it as a 4-of in my Modern Sligh deck. The problem is that our deck is a bit more burn than sligh. The difference being that we will usually want to put burn to the skull. I am not saying that Forked Bolt is unplayable in this deck but maybe there are better options. It could definitely have some utility clearing a couple token blockers or even burning a MOM. I think it does warrant testing in any deck that would consider Lava Spike.

I love Stifle. I consider going to 4 on a daily basis (I currently run 3). Getting an early fetchland is backbreaking. I also love stifling an equip or Jitte/Sword effect to keep someone from gaining life.

I would never remove Guide but I think it and the devil can work well together. Guide turn 1 and devil turn 2 is a great play.

EDIT: Warden, LOOVE the new avatar.

[DMel]

Originally Posted by Warden

I have been looking at 2-for-1 functionality within cards (not to be confused with an actual 2-for-1 card) to compensate for this. At the moment I am still 'iffy' on Wrath for reasons you bring up. The upside is monstrous...but the frustrations and handcuffing is problematic enough to question lines of play. Of considerations, I have looked to Magma Jet > Ponder. It's by NO MEANS something I am advocating for -- but something I'm looking into. If I can deal damage AND scry, that's a tremendous synergy for the deck. Despite the 2cc cost, it serves the same "filter stuff" role of ponder while potentially killing off the opponent. Ponder is also a sorcery, so speed isn't an issue at all.

In terms of actual 2-for-1 cards to run, I found some suggestions. Seeing my friend Greg (playing well with UR delver and RUG delver) this weekend was great. He advocates for forked bolt in the current environment. His argument was strong (a lot of the format is x/2 and x/1) but I'm not sure.
Discussion with others also had us debating over stifle coming back to the deck. I prefer burn over tempo (with the argument burn is never dead to draw into).
I was also able to hear Kenny Adam's argument against running Vexing Devil in the deck (told through Greg). The main issue is devil not sticking on the table. I believe devil is a pure upgrade over guide but Kenny would rather keep guide (haste, forces removal upon it, etc).

TRAMD's problem is exactly what I'm talking about with the necessity of Snapcaster, who also happens to be one of the best 2-for-1 cards (in both senses you use it) available.

I don't like Magma Jet because it is significantly worse at flipping a Delver, which let's remember is probably the main reason to add Blue to the deck in the first place.

But, just because we play Delver doesn't make us a Tempo deck. Which is why I'm not a huge fan of things like Forked Bolt in this deck. My response to a resolved Lingering Souls isn't to Forked Bolt both tokens and attack in... I'll lose this fight because they'll flashback Souls, and they play 4 Souls and I'd never play 4 Forked Bolt, as it's a Shock against many decks. My response with U/R Delver is to go over the top with Burn. That's why I want Bolt, Chain and Wrath as the burn spells.

As for Delver, I think it's definitely something to test in the deck, probably in the Guide spot. The problem with playing both is that they each fill the same function (R=4 damage early), and if you have too many creatures Delver itself gets worse. You want to have a decent chance at blind-flipping Delver when need be. So, I'd test it, and see which card is giving you R=4 damage or more reliably.

Finally, as to Stifle/Wasteland, I think Devil and Wrath give us the opportunity to try this, by replacing Price and Guide which don't work with the strategy. I'm looking forward to playing it because each card on its own (Stifle and Wasteland, that is) can steal a game all by itself. Sure, mana denial isn't exactly in line with a Burn strategy so much as a Tempo strategy, but at the same time, mana denial adversely affects almost every deck in Legacy. It also is easily supported by the mana base, and makes Daze that much better (of which I almost always play a full set despite whatever others are doing).

[rstevens416]

Im going to SCG prov this weekend and going to run u/r delver. Not becuase it won the other week, I have acually been playing this deck for a cuple of months now.

I am going with more of the tempo base. I would like to put some vexing devils in besides guides, or maybe another creautre. but for now this is the deck i have worked out. Im expecting some odd decks that "take adavantage" of mircle ability. I am also expecting lots of maveric, blade decks, RUG, (of course) and goblins or fish. i feel with the new land you will end up seeing lots of trible decks.

creatures (14)
4 goblin guide
3 snap caster
4 delvers
3 grim lavamancer

spells (26)
4 Brainstorm
2 Ponder
3 Spell peirce
3 Stifle
2 daze
4 Chain Lightning
2 Fireblast
4 Lightning Bolt
2 Price of Progress

Land (20)
2 Mountain
1 island
4 Volcanic Island
4 wasteland
2 Bloodstained Mire
2 Wooded Foothills
4 Scalding Tarn

sideboard

3 sergical extractions
2 Sulfuric Vortex
3 Smash to Smithereens
3 force of will
1 price of progress
2 fire//ice
1 pyroblast

one thing i would like advice on is the spell peirce/stifle and daze. i have 10 spells that counter/break tempo and it seems like it is too much.

ill take suggestions.

[Tormod]

You probably know, goblin guide has synergy with price of progress.

Wasteland, stifle do not have synergy with goblin guide and price of progress.
Depending on the deck your opponent is playing as soon as he finds out your playing wasteland and price, he will basics to play around your strategy.

I think you run stifle and wasteland, you drop POP and GG.
If your run GG and POP you drop stifle and wasteland.

I can see running up to 2 wastelands to eliminate troublesome utility lands. But burn is the win con in this deck, and fitting in tempo cards seems too cute.

If you want an alternative to GG and POP there isn't much. You could run cosi trickster. In place of POP, searing blaze is fine as a 2 of.