Sorin vs Tibalt HD remix

45 posts / 0 new
Last post

I have tested those duel decks (because I test and analyse everything). And the Sorn deck definitely has the advantage.

The amount of lifegain in Sorin is not cool against a mostly red deck. The punisher spells are a joke, you will ALWAYS take the damage. The decks aren't adjusted to improve them, they're just as innefficient as in any other deck you'd put them in, except here your opponent can pretty much always afford to say no to them.

PLanewalkers.

There' no contest here. Tibalt costs less, but he's also near useless. Where Sorin is all upsides Tibalt can, and often does actually hurt you. Throwing a land in your graveyard can hurt early, especially one of the few black mana prodcing ones. Plus, if your hand is empty, you get nothing out of his +1, while your opponent pops life-linking blockers. 

Now, the Sorin deck doesn't have spells that outright kill Tibalt, but honestly, he starts low enough ,and you have enough creatures with flying that you can get rid of him pretty much anytime you want. And he's not that much of a threat anyway. Killing Sorin is a bit more complicated. If you don't draw flame javelin or devil's play. He'll probably stick around. Unlike Tibalt, Sorin makes his own blockers.


spells

You have a single pyroclasm to try and survive the army of flying tokens coming out of efficient spells. And phantom general will make you cry.  You have THREE spells that can kill it. And I don't know WHAT they were thinking putting vampire outcasts in there. 4 toughness plus lifelink. It can seal games by itself.

Oddities. 

The sorin deck was given a silver bullet for some reason that I cannot find. decompose. The Card advantage you can get through the few flashback or unearth cards is the only thing giving you a chance as Tibalt. So losing even 2 of them makes a huge difference. Tibalt does NOT have a silver bullet card. The only thing that comes close is sulfuric vortex. Except it's double edged. And if Sorin gained some life before you played it (which it usually does) he's ahead and you're shooting yourself in the foot. Decompose has no downside. It's only a dead draw if Tibalt has nothing dangerous. In which case you don't mind. Vortex can MAKE YOU LOSE. That'S a pretty big downside.

FIX 

 
Here's how I fixed the issue. Making Sorin weaker would make the deck less fun. And I felt it was more a matter of Tialt being poorly built. So I modified the deck to balance it against Sorin

1. gang of devils OUT. charmbreaker devils IN. 

You really don't get enough out of that 6 mana with gang. Charmbreaker fits with the decks theme. And due to sulfuric vortex. I don't mind replacing a common by a rare.

2. 1 browbeat OUT , wild guess IN 

Sorin really wants to deny you extra cards, and he gains enough life not to care. I left one in the deck, but wild guess is a better fit overall. It gets one card in your graveyard and gives you two. It's even a better deal than Tibalt. 

3. Breaking point OUT flames of the firebrand IN

If you're at a point where you'd want breaking point to resolve, your opponent will take the damage unless they're at 6-7 life. The window of usefulness of this card is very narrow. You have to have gotten your (life gaining) opponent at a very low life total, but run out of threats, with breaking point probably the only card in your hand. Flames of the firebrand gives you a way to manage tokens, while still letting you remove things like phantom general or vampire nighthawk


Tibalt, the fiend-blooded OUT koth of the hammer or chandra ablaze IN.

The deck being dual colored keeps koth at an ok managable power level. Chandra the firebrand may be too good agaist Sorin. But then again the tokens have flying. Needs more testing, But there are options.



Optional. 
hellrider out, chandra's phoenix in.

Haven't drawn hellrider much. But phoenix has obvious synergy with the deck. Requires testing. If you have the decks try it and let me know.

This should make the games both more even, and make The tibalt deck more fun for the player.

I love that one of the simplest solutions for fixing a Tibalt duel deck is: Remove Tibalt.

Current decks
Comments or suggestions are always welcome

Modern
nothing at the moment

I had the same problems. Tibalt is one of the weakest cards in the deck... but I refused to take him out.

I'm going to test it later today, but I went with:
Out- shambling remains, strangling soot, bump in the night, coal stoker, corpse connoisseur

In- rakdos ickspitter, punishing fire, final revels, volcanic fallout, flametongue kavu

I'm tempted to put in pyrohemia.

3DH4LIF3

I love that one of the simplest solutions for fixing a Tibalt duel deck is: Remove Tibalt.




Yeah, it IS sad.
I had the same problems. Tibalt is one of the weakest cards in the deck... but I refused to take him out. I'm going to test it later today, but I went with: Out- shambling remains, strangling soot, bump in the night, coal stoker, corpse connoisseur In- rakdos ickspitter, punishing fire, final revels, volcanic fallout, flametongue kavu I'm tempted to put in pyrohemia.



Punishing fire is OP in that matchup. If you mulliganed to 5 every game with it in your hands, you's still win. It creates situations where the sorin player can't attack or block with a creature because it has lifelink and triggers on too many things. And you don't see it coming on the first play, so you'll get a 2 for one within a turn every single time.

But what exactly would you remove for each card?  And why Keep Tibalt? 
Rather than take Tibby out of his own deck, I would rather you added flashback, retrace, unearth, madness etc. make it so you are never afraid to use him.

~ Tim 
I am Blue/White Reached DCI Rating 1800 on 28/10/11. :D
Sig
56287226 wrote:
190106923 wrote:
Not bad. But what happens flavor wise when one kamahl kills the other one?
Zis iz a sign uf deep psychological troma, buried in zer subconscious mind. By keelink himzelf, Kamahl iz physically expressink hiz feelinks uf self-disgust ova hiz desire for hiz muzzer. [/GermanPsychologistVoice]
56957928 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
That makes no sense to me. If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed? ~ Tim
Yup, just like you can have Birds of paradise in a mono green deck but not Noble Hierarch. YAY COLOR IDENTITY
56287226 wrote:
56888618 wrote:
Is algebra really that difficult?
Survey says yes.
56883218 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
You want to make a milky drink. You squeeze a cow.
I love this description. Like the cows are sponges filled with milk. I can see it all Nick Parks claymation-style with the cow's eyes bugging out momentarily as a giant farmer squeezes it like a squeaky dog toy, and milk shoots out of it.
56287226 wrote:
56735468 wrote:
And no judge will ever give you a game loss for playing snow covered lands.
I now have a new goal in life. ;)
Rather than take Tibby out of his own deck, I would rather you added flashback, retrace, unearth, madness etc. make it so you are never afraid to use him.

~ Tim 



That would make it OP. Too much card advantage for Sorin to handle. You can't deal with your opponent playing every spell twice. Especially when most are removal. It's like letting you start with a hand of 14 cards.

Why do you think it's a bad idea to take Tibalt out of the deck? Keeping it requires turning the deck into a completely different one, removing almost every card. (and you still wouldn't need him since you'd have to add non-random discard) Then you'd have to modify Sorin as well completely, with more graveyard hate, and try to balance that. Then there isn't much point buying the decks at all.
Rather than take Tibby out of his own deck,


Why do you think it's a bad idea to take Tibalt out of the deck?


Because it is his deck.  

~ Tim 

I am Blue/White Reached DCI Rating 1800 on 28/10/11. :D
Sig
56287226 wrote:
190106923 wrote:
Not bad. But what happens flavor wise when one kamahl kills the other one?
Zis iz a sign uf deep psychological troma, buried in zer subconscious mind. By keelink himzelf, Kamahl iz physically expressink hiz feelinks uf self-disgust ova hiz desire for hiz muzzer. [/GermanPsychologistVoice]
56957928 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
That makes no sense to me. If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed? ~ Tim
Yup, just like you can have Birds of paradise in a mono green deck but not Noble Hierarch. YAY COLOR IDENTITY
56287226 wrote:
56888618 wrote:
Is algebra really that difficult?
Survey says yes.
56883218 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
You want to make a milky drink. You squeeze a cow.
I love this description. Like the cows are sponges filled with milk. I can see it all Nick Parks claymation-style with the cow's eyes bugging out momentarily as a giant farmer squeezes it like a squeaky dog toy, and milk shoots out of it.
56287226 wrote:
56735468 wrote:
And no judge will ever give you a game loss for playing snow covered lands.
I now have a new goal in life. ;)
Sorin vs Tibalt review (abridged version)

Current decks
Comments or suggestions are always welcome

Modern
nothing at the moment

The punishing fire never came up so I cant say how good it is, but rakdos ickspitter is pretty good.

EDIT:  Changed Sorin a bit as well. Out Vampire's Bite. In- Beckon Apparition. Out- Mesmiric Fiend. In- Tidehollow Sculler 

3DH4LIF3

Rather than take Tibby out of his own deck,


Why do you think it's a bad idea to take Tibalt out of the deck?


Because it is his deck.  

~ Tim 




It's the name of the deck. You can leave him for flavor reasons I guess. But you'll have to accept to lose most games.
Rather than take Tibby out of his own deck,


Why do you think it's a bad idea to take Tibalt out of the deck?


Because it is his deck.  

~ Tim 




It's the name of the deck. You can leave him for flavor reasons I guess. But you'll have to accept to lose most games.

I dunno... after a number of games I get a better sense of what he's supposed to do in the deck. He actually feels a lot better once you're top-decking and playing from your graveyard.

Also, punishing fire is soooo much fun to play around as the Sorin deck.

3DH4LIF3

There' no contest here. Tibalt costs less, but he's also near useless. Where Sorin is all upsides Tibalt can, and often does actually hurt you. Throwing a land in your graveyard can hurt early, especially one of the few black mana prodcing ones.



Not saying Tibalt isn't bad - he is - but if you're activating him while you have cards in hand that you're gonna want to play on this or the next turn, you're not playing him right at all.
I didn't want to start a whole new thread to ask this, so I'll ask it here since this is kind-of a Sorin vs. Tibalt review thread.

What about card quality? Curvature particularly. I've seen quite a few deul decks where the cards are all curved. How are these cards? 
I think both have decent curves... just tibalt had some pretty useless cards in comparison.... oh did you mean physical curvature? Mine were fine.

EDIT: I updated Sorin with two Vivid Meadows, Infest, Suffer the Past and a Sign in Blood. Took out Gatekeeper of Malakir, Decompose, and  Sorin's Thirst...

Though I'm unsure about the Suffer the past (I'm wondering if I should leave in the Decompose or play Shred Memory instead) and if Sorin's Thirst belongs for flavor reasons.

3DH4LIF3

There' no contest here. Tibalt costs less, but he's also near useless. Where Sorin is all upsides Tibalt can, and often does actually hurt you. Throwing a land in your graveyard can hurt early, especially one of the few black mana prodcing ones.



Not saying Tibalt isn't bad - he is - but if you're activating him while you have cards in hand that you're gonna want to play on this or the next turn, you're not playing him right at all.



You can't play him right. You don't have any control over what you draw. The best card in your hands could be the one you take from the top of your deck. And if you don't activate him, then he just sits there doing nothing and will probably not be there the next turn.

That pretty much defeats the whole purpose of him costing two. And if you only play him late,he won't survive long cosidering the deck has no way to block fliers and he can't protect himself. There's something to be said of a card that's good only when you have a hand full of useless cards. And even then, he's not even good. It just means you have a better chance of him not being horrible. 



There are precious little "right" ways of doing something randomly. 

What about card quality? Curvature particularly. I've seen quite a few deul decks where the cards are all curved. How are these cards? 



Are you talking about physical cards curving or mana curve? Only the PW curve because they're foil.

EDIT: I updated Sorin with two Vivid Meadows, Infest, Suffer the Past and a Sign in Blood. Took out Gatekeeper of Malakir, Decompose, and  Sorin's Thirst.
 


If you have to modify Sorin, then your changes to Tibalt are probably overkill. 

Though I'm unsure about the Suffer the past

 

An even more dangerous silver bullet that adds more lifegain against a red deck and doubles as win condition?

Can't see how that could go wrong. 


EDIT: I updated Sorin with two Vivid Meadows, Infest, Suffer the Past and a Sign in Blood. Took out Gatekeeper of Malakir, Decompose, and  Sorin's Thirst.
 



If you have to modify Sorin, then your changes to Tibalt are probably overkill.
Its as much about feel as it was playability. Sorin wasn't as fun to play as Tibalt (even thought it was the more powerful deck), so I wanted to include some things that felt like more meaningful plays, hence the Infest and the Sign in Blood. 


Though I'm unsure about the Suffer the past

 

An even more dangerous silver bullet that adds more lifegain against a red deck and doubles as win condition?

Can't see how that could go wrong. 


Its not about power level as much as it is about fun. I think the Suffer the past doesn't present enough meaningful play choices as would Shred Memory... The shred transmutes for some useful cards in the deck but also serves as protection against a powerful alpha strike from Tibalt... 

The Suffer was meant to play against/into the Punishing Fire given the lifegain, but I don't think its as interesting. I'll have to get some games in with it and see.

3DH4LIF3



EDIT: I updated Sorin with two Vivid Meadows, Infest, Suffer the Past and a Sign in Blood. Took out Gatekeeper of Malakir, Decompose, and  Sorin's Thirst.
 



If you have to modify Sorin, then your changes to Tibalt are probably overkill.

Its as much about feel as it was playability. Sorin wasn't as fun to play as Tibalt (even thought it was the more powerful deck), so I wanted to include some things that felt like more meaningful plays, hence the Infest and the Sign in Blood. 


Though I'm unsure about the Suffer the past

 

An even more dangerous silver bullet that adds more lifegain against a red deck and doubles as win condition?

Can't see how that could go wrong. 


Its not about power level as much as it is about fun. I think the Suffer the past doesn't present enough meaningful play choices as would Shred Memory... The shred transmutes for some useful cards in the deck but also serves as protection against a powerful alpha strike from Tibalt... 

The Suffer was meant to play against/into the Punishing Fire given the lifegain, but I don't think its as interesting. I'll have to get some games in with it and see.




You need to watch the power level in order for the players to have fun though.
I totally agree. But powerlevel is difficult to gauge just by looking at the lists. 

Even play data is tough unless you have equally matched players... I really have to get my wife motivated to play! She's actually a lot better than me, but loses because she doesn't like learning new decks and cards. I think she'd be a great testing partner.

But then, sometimes it pays to have imbalanced decks for when you have imbalanced players. My son is expressing some interest in playing EDH, and I usually give him my better decks to compensate for the fact he has no friggin' clue what he's doing.

3DH4LIF3

There are precious little "right" ways of doing something randomly.



Incorrect.

When would you want to press a button that randomly exchanges a card in your hand with another card? Not when you have a good hand, that's retarded. Know when it's not retarded? When you have a bad hand, and thus a good chance of getting something you want, or at least very little risk of losing something you want.

It's a card that helps you to not lose. You don't want to activate him unless you're losing. That's true of all his abilities. Know when you're really screwed? When your opponent has a ton of cards in hand that he can potentially kill you with, or when he has a ton of creatures for the same purpose. That is also when Tibalt's abilities are best. No, he doesn't help you when you're winning. Hence why I said that if you're losing good cards to him, you're doing something wrong.

There are right ways to do something randomly, if you control when the random action happens.
Picked this up yesterday. The wife and I played a few rounds, switched decks and played a few more.

Tibalt's deck is just a devil-themed burn deck. There's a few little combos with using Unearth creatures, and sacrificing them before their Unearth exiles them(it still gets exiled, but allows for cards like Scorched rusalka to activate again), but mostly it's just "tap red mana, do damage" with devil horns.

Sorin's deck has a lot more going for it. It has some life gain, but it has a lot more options with flyers, removal, etc. Just a leaner, meaner deck.

Also, the cards were nice and flat. Not curvy like Izzet vs. Golgari. Even the PW foils were pretty flat, also less shiny than Niv-Misset and Jarad from the aforementioned set. The cards were still that odd extra-glossy kind, feels very different from regualr booster pack Magic cards.

Hope this randomness helps.

I find signatures incredibly distracting. If you read this, then you too have found them distracting. 

There are precious little "right" ways of doing something randomly.



Incorrect.

When would you want to press a button that randomly exchanges a card in your hand with another card? Not when you have a good hand, that's retarded. Know when it's not retarded? When you have a bad hand, and thus a good chance of getting something you want, or at least very little risk of losing something you want.

It's a card that helps you to not lose. You don't want to activate him unless you're losing. That's true of all his abilities. Know when you're really screwed? When your opponent has a ton of cards in hand that he can potentially kill you with, or when he has a ton of creatures for the same purpose. That is also when Tibalt's abilities are best. No, he doesn't help you when you're winning. Hence why I said that if you're losing good cards to him, you're doing something wrong.

There are right ways to do something randomly, if you control when the random action happens.



Again, why would you want a card that only helps you (and that's a maybe) when you have a bad hand, rather than buid the deck so the odds of having a bad hand is reduced?

You can reduce the risk by waiting and waiting until you activate him (and probably until you play him, since he'll get killed if he just stands there) But you still have no control over whether you keep the new card he gave you or not.

The right way to play Tibalt is not to put him in your deck and look at his artwork while you play. 

The cards were still that odd extra-glossy kind

 

I actually like this. It makes the cards look amazing. 
Tibalt has been "good" in situations where you have board presence and are topdecking. You plus to dump a card in the yard and keep on winning.

There is hardly a situation where tibalt will turn a game around if you top deck him. He is win more if he's win at all.

I still cant believe they picked him for a duel deck.

3DH4LIF3

Again, why would you want a card that only helps you (and that's a maybe) when you have a bad hand, rather than buid the deck so the odds of having a bad hand is reduced?



Why would you play Gitaxian Probe, rather than put a useful card in its place so you won't have to pay 2 life to maybe draw a useful card?
That's a terrible comparison. Probe has synergies with other cards that lend themselves very well to winning. Tibalt does not... perhaps if the effect wasn't a random discard building a deck to use tibalt might work better.

3DH4LIF3

What I'm trying to say is that the "random" part doesn't automatically make it useless. Imagine for a second that you could use his ability as often as you'd like. This would allow you to build a perfect hand every time you wanted one, even if you were trying to avoid milling yourself. It's rather obvious with this in mind that "random" doesn't necessarily equal useless. Is it good? No, I've already said this. But it will still, theoretically, give you a small chance of turning a hand with three bad cards into something better. The question is not "Is his ability advantageous or not?" It obviously is, as long as you play it right. The question is "Does he do enough to warrant a spot in your deck and a two-mana investment?" This is the one I am unsure about. Probably not. But it does bother me when people see the word random and immediately dismiss the card. It's like very new players dismissing anything that you have to pay life for. Kinda silly.

If the discard wasn't random, he'd be overpowered at 2, according to MaRo. Would probably be fine at 1RR, but he was always meant to be a gimmick, so that obviously wasn't gonna happen. What I'd have liked to see was for the discard to happen before the draw, but... I guess that's too good as well. 
Again, why would you want a card that only helps you (and that's a maybe) when you have a bad hand, rather than buid the deck so the odds of having a bad hand is reduced?



Why would you play Gitaxian Probe, rather than put a useful card in its place so you won't have to pay 2 life to maybe draw a useful card?



Wha? What's the point of this comparison? I don't even......
What I'm trying to say is that the "random" part doesn't automatically make it useless. Imagine for a second that you could use his ability as often as you'd like. This would allow you to build a perfect hand every time you wanted one, even if you were trying to avoid milling yourself. It's rather obvious with this in mind that "random" doesn't necessarily equal useless. Is it good? No, I've already said this. But it will still, theoretically, give you a small chance of turning a hand with three bad cards into something better. The question is not "Is his ability advantageous or not?" It obviously is, as long as you play it right. The question is "Does he do enough to warrant a spot in your deck and a two-mana investment?" This is the one I am unsure about. Probably not. But it does bother me when people see the word random and immediately dismiss the card. It's like very new players dismissing anything that you have to pay life for. Kinda silly.

If the discard wasn't random, he'd be overpowered at 2, according to MaRo. Would probably be fine at 1RR, but he was always meant to be a gimmick, so that obviously wasn't gonna happen. What I'd have liked to see was for the discard to happen before the draw, but... I guess that's too good as well. 



The word "random" itself does not make him useless.  However at RR he is pretty much strictly worse than other cards that perform the same functions as him.

There is never a case where you say "Tibalt is the best card for this job!".  Not even in his own Standard enviornment.  Not even in his own block!

If he only cost just R he might (emphasis might) be playable.  Claiming that he would have been undercosted at RR without the "random" clause added on is just silly.  No wonder they seem to have so much trouble getting red planeswalkers right.

His other abilities arent very good, they rely on things your opponent does and give your opponent multiple turns to prepare.  I think its pretty fair to make a comparison between them and punisher cards.

Current decks
Comments or suggestions are always welcome

Modern
nothing at the moment

What I'm trying to say is that the "random" part doesn't automatically make it useless. Imagine for a second that you could use his ability as often as you'd like. This would allow you to build a perfect hand every time you wanted one, even if you were trying to avoid milling yourself. It's rather obvious with this in mind that "random" doesn't necessarily equal useless. Is it good? No, I've already said this. But it will still, theoretically, give you a small chance of turning a hand with three bad cards into something better. The question is not "Is his ability advantageous or not?" It obviously is, as long as you play it right. The question is "Does he do enough to warrant a spot in your deck and a two-mana investment?" This is the one I am unsure about. Probably not. But it does bother me when people see the word random and immediately dismiss the card. It's like very new players dismissing anything that you have to pay life for. Kinda silly.

If the discard wasn't random, he'd be overpowered at 2, according to MaRo. Would probably be fine at 1RR, but he was always meant to be a gimmick, so that obviously wasn't gonna happen. What I'd have liked to see was for the discard to happen before the draw, but... I guess that's too good as well. 



The word "random" itself does not make him useless.  However at RR he is pretty much strictly worse than other cards that perform the same functions as him.

There is never a case where you say "Tibalt is the best card for this job!".  Not even in his own Standard enviornment.  Not even in his own block!

If he only cost just R he might (emphasis might) be playable.  Claiming that he would have been undercosted at RR without the "random" clause added on is just silly.  No wonder they seem to have so much trouble getting red planeswalkers right.

His other abilities arent very good, they rely on things your opponent does and give your opponent multiple turns to prepare.  I think its pretty fair to make a comparison between them and punisher cards.



When designing PW cards. You need to take the "better safe than sorry" approach. They're problematic to deal with, so it's understandable. However. I can't see why they'd think Tibalt was a dcent mythic OR Planewalker. No deck wants him. There's not even any synergy between his abilities.
Wha? What's the point of this comparison? I don't even......



To point out that thinning your deck is good, and that incremental advantage tends to be worth something like that.

The word "random" itself does not make him useless.  However at RR he is pretty much strictly worse than other cards that perform the same functions as him.

There is never a case where you say "Tibalt is the best card for this job!".  Not even in his own Standard enviornment.  Not even in his own block!

If he only cost just R he might (emphasis might) be playable.  Claiming that he would have been undercosted at RR without the "random" clause added on is just silly.  No wonder they seem to have so much trouble getting red planeswalkers right.

His other abilities arent very good, they rely on things your opponent does and give your opponent multiple turns to prepare.  I think its pretty fair to make a comparison between them and punisher cards.



I agree completely with all of this.

Too bad neither of us work at Wizards, then. I really want a good red planeswalker. Koth is the closest we have, but he's sadly just a win-more card. Only good when you already have board advantage. 
Wha? What's the point of this comparison? I don't even......



To point out that thinning your deck is good, and that incremental advantage tends to be worth something like that.


Then why use a card that costs nothing to run for comparison? Last I checked Tibalt didn't cost ..

The problem with Tibalt is, like I have said before, that it does nothing.

Imagine a mono red deck, with all the cheap madness/flashback/unearth/etc spells under the sun, Fiery Temper and Violent Eruption and  all the other usual supscets, then think if you would play Tibalt in that deck over Wild Guess. If your answer is yes, then you haven't played with Tibalt.


IMAGE(http://i1.minus.com/jbcBXM4z66fMtK.jpg)

192884403 wrote:
surely one can't say complex conditional passive language is bad grammar ?
Then why use a card that costs nothing to run for comparison? Last I checked Tibalt didn't cost ..



To make the point that his ability isn't worthless, just overcosted. Obviously, since Tibalt's ability is free after the first two-mana investment, it will eventually pay for itself eventually. But I doubt that happens fast enough for anyone to care. Tibalt doesn't cost 0 mana, but his ability does.

The problem with Tibalt is, like I have said before, that it does nothing.



The same could be said of a card that, for a very small cost, merely replaces itself and gives a tiny effect. Yet Gitaxian Probe is a good card, is it not?

Imagine a mono red deck, with all the cheap madness/flashback/unearth/etc spells under the sun, Fiery Temper and Violent Eruption and  all the other usual supscets, then think if you would play Tibalt in that deck over Wild Guess. If your answer is yes, then you haven't played with Tibalt.



Would you ever play Chain Lightning over Lightning Bolt, though? So why is it that they're almost equally popular in any burn deck that can run both?

But I don't think I ever said that you should run Tibalt. In fact, I said repeatedly that he is bad. What I am saying is that people are acting as if the random discard is some sort of cardinal sin. The problem is that he doesn't do enough, not that he does nothing.
Imagine a mono red deck, with all the cheap madness/flashback/unearth/etc spells under the sun, Fiery Temper and Violent Eruption and  all the other usual supscets, then think if you would play Tibalt in that deck over Wild Guess. If your answer is yes, then you haven't played with Tibalt.



Would you ever play Chain Lightning over Lightning Bolt, though? So why is it that they're almost equally popular in any burn deck that can run both?


Chain Lighting is basically Lightning Bolt 5-8. Much as Shard Volley is 9-12. and Rift Bolt is 13-16. If there wasn't the 4 card limit, no deck would ever play Chain Lighting or the other cards, they'd play as many bolts they need. The thing is, you can make a deck which is basically a bunch of Lightning Bolt effects and be able to win. Which is why Lava Spike sees any play at all, as well as other "bad" cards like Flame Rift and Fireblast.

Tibalt's role though, you never need that many cards for. You hardly need a playset of the effect in a deck that wants the effect. Which is why, Tibalt is unplayable unless you particularly want to play with Tibalt (maybe you like the art?).

What I am saying is that people are acting as if the random discard is some sort of cardinal sin.


This is quite true indeed.

The problem is that he doesn't do enough, not that he does nothing.


I insist that he does nothing.

It is a planeswalker, which means it builds up to help you win. Even if we assume his + ability nets you a small gain, the fact remains that both of his other abilities are not worth the trouble. Even Nissa Revane and Chandra Ablaze, two of the worst planeswalkers, will help you win if they manage to do their thing. An Insurrection that your opponent knew about since turn 2 and could stop from happening hardly does. The same applies to a Sudden Impact with "Suspend 2 for .

IMAGE(http://i1.minus.com/jbcBXM4z66fMtK.jpg)

192884403 wrote:
surely one can't say complex conditional passive language is bad grammar ?
What I'm trying to say is that the "random" part doesn't automatically make it useless. Imagine for a second that you could use his ability as often as you'd like. This would allow you to build a perfect hand every time you wanted one,  



I don,t think there's any point to this since you oviously can't use the ability more than once. But just to humor you.

No, you couldn't build a perfect hand that way. You'd build a random hand. You could have a great hand, or have an almost perfect one and eventually lose it, or go through a playset of a card that you really need and make your perfect hand impossible. You have no control over what you keep.


But it will still, theoretically, give you a small chance of turning a hand with three bad cards into something better.



Except there's nothing good about this.

1. Your hand needs to be bad.
2. There's no telling if you'll draw a better card or not.
3. If it is a decent card, there's no telling whether you get to keep it or not.
4. You also could draw something worse than what you have, and keep it.

The question is not "Is his ability advantageous or not?" It obviously is, as long as you play it right.

 

You DON'T KNOW if it will be or not. Playing a card right implies that you can garantee yourself some advantage out of it. You can't do that with Tibalt.

The same could be said of a card that, for a very small cost, merely replaces itself and gives a tiny effect. Yet 
Gitaxian Probe is a good card, is it not?
 

No, the same can't be said at all. Probe's effect is ALWAYS the same, And you know what it will do before you use it . And it's free.  You can add to your storm count for free. It won't cost you  mana and it won't cost you a card. AND you get information out of it. That's a world away from Tibalt (So much for planeswalking, I pity da fool)

Also, Tibalt's ability never pays for itself. No matter how many times you use it, the CA is always 0.

To point out that thinning your deck is good, and that incremental advantage tends to be worth something like that.
 


If you're going to thin your deck, you'll do it with a beneficial effect. Something that you can use anytime you want rather than when you have a bad hand. And preferably more than 1 card at a time.

Also, if you use Tibalt, you have NO idea what you're thinning your deck of. Thinning implies improving the odds of drawing, or not drawing, a particular card or card type.  Or at the very least, drawing less of it.

So yeah, Random is bad.

To point out that thinning your deck is good, and that incremental advantage tends to be worth something like that.



The problem with Tibalt is, like I have said before, that it does nothing.


The same could be said of a card that, for a very small cost, merely replaces itself and gives a tiny effect. Yet Gitaxian Probe is a good card, is it not?




This is a really really horrible example and just makes it look as though you dont understand the reason Gitaxian Probe is used.

The thinning effect alone is minor (basically trivial actually) compared to the fact that it lets you look at your opponent's hand for free while replacing itself.  Knowing hidden information is huge, and its even bigger in eternal formats where hidden information can end up playing a much larger role than the cards already on the table.

Current decks
Comments or suggestions are always welcome

Modern
nothing at the moment

Chain Lighting is basically Lightning Bolt 5-8. Much as Shard Volley is 9-12. and Rift Bolt is 13-16. If there wasn't the 4 card limit, no deck would ever play Chain Lighting or the other cards, they'd play as many bolts they need. The thing is, you can make a deck which is basically a bunch of Lightning Bolt effects and be able to win. Which is why Lava Spike sees any play at all, as well as other "bad" cards like Flame Rift and Fireblast.



It was a rhetorical question. I know all of this - the point was to get you to think about it.

Tibalt's role though, you never need that many cards for. You hardly need a playset of the effect in a deck that wants the effect. Which is why, Tibalt is unplayable unless you particularly want to play with Tibalt (maybe you like the art?).



This, however, is correct and I entirely agree. I mostly wanted to point out that not being the best at something doesn't make a card unplayable, it just means that you'll only play it if you want 4+ of the effect. You are, however, correct that no deck really wants it that much.

I insist that he does nothing.

It is a planeswalker, which means it builds up to help you win. Even if we assume his + ability nets you a small gain, the fact remains that both of his other abilities are not worth the trouble. Even Nissa Revane and Chandra Ablaze, two of the worst planeswalkers, will help you win if they manage to do their thing. An Insurrection that your opponent knew about since turn 2 and could stop from happening hardly does. The same applies to a Sudden Impact with "Suspend 2 for .



One could argue that if you can get your opponent to have to play around it, that's good. But if it really does become an issue, he or she will just kill Tibbles, so once again you are right that he doesn't really help there.

No, you couldn't build a perfect hand that way. You'd build a random hand. You could have a great hand, or have an almost perfect one and eventually lose it, or go through a playset of a card that you really need and make your perfect hand impossible. You have no control over what you keep.



But you do. You can stop at any time. When you're happy, stop. When you have a hand that you want, don't use Tibalt. Unless the effect happened at random times, saying that you have no control over it is very wrong.

Except there's nothing good about this.

1. Your hand needs to be bad.
2. There's no telling if you'll draw a better card or not.
3. If it is a decent card, there's no telling whether you get to keep it or not.
4. You also could draw something worse than what you have, and keep it.



And what, then, would you have lost? Absolutely nothing. The worse your hand is, the better an ability like his is. Again, I am not claiming that he isn't bad, I'm just saying that the theory behind "Draw, then discard randomly" isn't necessarily bad.

You DON'T KNOW if it will be or not. Playing a card right implies that you can garantee yourself some advantage out of it. You can't do that with Tibalt.



Again, the effect isn't random. You choose when to activate it.

No, the same can't be said at all. Probe's effect is ALWAYS the same, And you know what it will do before you use it . And it's free.



All this can be said of Tibbles' ability too. It always does the same. You can claim that you don't know if he'll replace a card in your hand with a good or a bad card, or do anything at all. But you also don't know if Probe will replace itself with a good card, a basic land or another Probe. It's obviously better because the outcomes are better, but it's still no more guaranteed than Tibalt.

Also, Tibalt's ability never pays for itself. No matter how many times you use it, the CA is always 0.



Same for Probe.

So yeah, Random is bad.



Only if you're a bad player. If the advantage is big enough, it's worth the risk. It's not in this case, but then again, I have stated repeatedly that it's not the dismissal of Tibalt that bothers me, it's the idea that "Random is always bad". It strikes me as very similar to "Why would I want to pay life for an effect? Then I'll lose faster!"

This is a really really horrible example and just makes it look as though you dont understand the reason Gitaxian Probe is used.

The thinning effect alone is minor (basically trivial actually) compared to the fact that it lets you look at your opponent's hand for free while replacing itself.  Knowing hidden information is huge, and its even bigger in eternal formats where hidden information can end up playing a much larger role than the cards already on the table.



Yes, perhaps a better example would have been Street Wraith. Card draw for the most part, can occasionally be played as a creature. Tibbles is +1 for the most part, occasionally something else. If he lives that long. Which we already established that he won't. But in theory.

Just as a sidenote, I won't respond anymore in this thread. I feel like the topic has been discussed through by now, and these long-ish posts are really tiring to write. Sorry.
But you do. You can stop at any time. When you're happy, stop. When you have a hand that you want, don't use Tibalt. Unless the effect happened at random times, saying that you have no control over it is very wrong.



How can you know you'll have a hand that you're happy with at some point?

And what, then, would you have lost? Absolutely nothing. The worse your hand is, the better an ability like his is. Again, I am not claiming that he isn't bad, I'm just saying that the theory behind "Draw, then discard randomly" isn't necessarily bad.



You're making my point.  A useful ability is about gaining something, not not losing something.

 
Same for Probe.



No one here ever said that probe generated CA.


the idea that "Random is always bad". It strikes me as very similar to "Why would I want to pay life for an effect? Then I'll lose faster!"



Tibbles is +1 for the most part,


I think you are misunderstanding the concept of CA. 

You have 5 cards, you activate Tibalt's first ability. You draw, then discard. Once the ability resolves, you have 5 cards. This is +0 CA, no matter how many times you use it. Unless you meant something else.

It's very different. But you know what? There's a very easy way to settle this.

If it's not always bad. Name a situation where you would prefer "draw a card then discard a card at random" to "Draw a card, then discard a card".

If the effect isn't bad, then there would exist at least a few cases where you'd wish for it over the other.


It's very different. But you know what? There's a very easy way to settle this.

If it's not always bad. Name a situation where you would prefer "draw a card then discard a card at random" to "Draw a card, then discard a card".


If the effect isn't bad, then there would exist at least a few cases where you'd wish for it over the other.


I would have to disagree on this. Abilities can't really be judged as "bad" or "not bad" just by simple comparison to similar abilities. There's really no reason you would want shroud over hexproof, but that doesn't mean shroud isn't good or even that it isn't good enough.

Choosing the card is obviously better than losing a card at random but Tibalt has already been printed with random discard and that says nothing about wether the ability is useful or not. You have to judge Tibalt on what Tibalt can do, what other cards do or do not do is of little consequence to evaluating this particular card.


I might agree that Tibalt isn't particularly good but dreaming about what other cards do or how he could be worded better isn't doing much for him. It could persuade your card choices but says little for his quality.

Tibalt sucks.  Period.  That is all.
It's very different. But you know what? There's a very easy way to settle this.

If it's not always bad. Name a situation where you would prefer "draw a card then discard a card at random" to "Draw a card, then discard a card".


If the effect isn't bad, then there would exist at least a few cases where you'd wish for it over the other.


I would have to disagree on this. Abilities can't really be judged as "bad" or "not bad" just by simple comparison to similar abilities. There's really no reason you would want shroud over hexproof, but that doesn't mean shroud isn't good or even that it isn't good enough.

Choosing the card is obviously better than losing a card at random but Tibalt has already been printed with random discard and that says nothing about wether the ability is useful or not. You have to judge Tibalt on what Tibalt can do, what other cards do or do not do is of little consequence to evaluating this particular card.


I might agree that Tibalt isn't particularly good but dreaming about what other cards do or how he could be worded better isn't doing much for him. It could persuade your card choices but says little for his quality.




How would you know how good a card is if you don't compare it to other cards?

 
Never mind how crappy tibalt is... I occurred to me that dash hopes might be a fun fit. I mean, the punisher cards are some of the most fun in tibalt's deck. Having more of them can only mean more fun! Right?

3DH4LIF3