[M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master



  • @vaughnbros I get your point and when I play the Seeker, I often evaluate the board state to see if doing a plus and then attacking the next turn will win me the game. My point about the style of play is important. If the board is clear or I feel that it is controlled and tap down 5 to cast this card then I am going to pump out 2 or 3 thopters to put pressure on my opponent then net the gain of card draw.

    When I have played JTMS, it is normal to brainstorm for a few turns then start to fate seal once you have enough control in your hand. Terferi plays similar to JTMS except slightly better because you draw one and keep mana open then you can pump into his ultimate.

    All of these are slow.

    You are looking at taking 8 turns to win with JTMS, Teferi does not "win" the game but makes it impossible for your opponent to win. While Tezzeret creates a 8 turn clock assuming your opponent is at 18 and you make 3 thopters, you can shorten the clock by making more thopters and you can play Moat. This was the point I was trying to make. I am assuming that the deck you are playing is not artifact heavy so the Seeker would not add as much value.



  • I really think saying that you cannot compare walkers is wrong. You cannot compare all walkers, but Tezz vs other Tezz is at least in the same ball park, and tezz vs Jace is still a lot closer than Tezz vs Lightning bolt or something. It's like saying you cannot compare mox ruby to mox pearl because red uses artifacts better and needs more mana. All cards are contextual and all decks are built on synergies, but even saying that on the surface these 2 cards have a lot in common.

    Both are mono blue
    Both cost the same amount
    Both are above bolt range for loyalty
    Both want to be in a deck with artifacts, specifically ramp artifacts since they help play this card earlier.
    Both can provide some form of card advantage

    It is rare with a walker that you build a deck around it or that it's just strong enough to be plopped into a deck because of power alone. There needs to be some level of synergy and power on both ends for it to merit inclusion into your 75. I think we will likely find that both these tezzes end up in decks that have a lot more in common than not. Ill go out on a limb here and say that every deck running either of these cards is going to have

    Ancestral
    Timewalk
    4x Force of will
    Xx Mental Misstep
    Black lotus
    5+ x Moxen
    Sol ring
    Tinkerer
    Yadda yadda yadda

    The difference I really see in this is original tezz does lend itself more to combo kill with a backup of control features, where as this tezz lends itself to control with a possible combo at the end.

    I do not think they are light years apart, and the heuristics make sense in the context of this card getting played.



  • @chubbyrain said in [M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master:

    @evouga said in [M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master:

    Amusing, though as you well know, comparing new printings to superior existing options is a sound evaluation strategy regardless of whether it was incorrectly applied in the case of Teferi.

    I disagree. I think it is a very poor method of card evaluation and has a horrible track record. I almost never use it and would encourage anyone looking to get better at Magic to refrain from using it.

    I suspect that assessment is Von Restorff bias, and doesn't hold up to statistical scrutiny.

    Dramatic misevaluation (JtMS, e.g.) are remembered, but for every such case, there are many more cards like Broken Bond, Mastermind's Acquisition, Silent Gravestone, Zacama, Primal Calamity, etc. that were rightly dismissed for being outclasses in their roles by existing printings, and then forgotten.



  • Not sure I understand the allure of this card if you aren't artifact heavy. Its best ability is by far its 0 when you have metalcraft. While reliably only drawing 1, you are now in the Jace, Teferi, Dack, ect. zone as its draw is inferior to all those walkers and its secondary ability of a 1/1 flier is worse than those of Jace/Dack/Teferi/ect. His ultimate also seems much worse than Jace/Teferi to me. So he's worse on basically every ability unless you have metalcraft.

    Being in the artifact heavy scope, all the Tezz's are a fair comparison. He is the artifact walker (along with Daretti). Tezz 1.0 is the best, but lets not forget Tezz 2.0 saw significant play and was great in more controlling lists. The other two Tezz's dont seem good to me as one has no CA engine and the other is 6 mana. Perhaps there is a list that wants ALL the Tezz's (and maybe some Daretti's). But to me, he seems like 3rd best in the Tezz rankings with his ultimate / secondary ability being so much worse than 1.0 and 2.0.



  • Edited because some apparently found my post offensive or demeaning which certainly wasn't my intention. My apologies.



  • @griselbrother As was noted by evouga, there is serious recall bias on negative evals. We can find numerous cards that were passed over or called sideboard cards that only ever became that.



  • @evouga I mean, if your argument is that the majority of new cards won't see play, I would agree with that. However, you hardly need to refer to other cards to prove that. Mastermind's Acquisition is not unplayable because Demonic Tutor exists. Silent Gravestone is not unplayable because Grafdigger's Cage exists. Those cards are simply not good enough for Vintage - they don't do enough, or the right thing, for the mana cost.

    The vast majority of cards are not functional equivalents of other cards. Comparisons are really only useful when the cards being compared are incredibly similar in functionality, i.e. Broken Bond to Nature's Claim. They are not useful when cards are functionally dissimilar. Comparing this card to either previous Tezzeret ignores the function and focuses on superficial characteristics. It is intellectually lazy and misses the mark, regardless of whether this Tezzeret sees play or not.

    If you look at the previous comparisons people have made with Jace, the Mind Sculpter vs Brainstorm; Teferi vs Tezzeret, Saheeli Rai vs Dack; Jace, Vryn's Prodigy vs...Merfolk Looter; etc, you see a pattern of dissimilarity between the cards' functionalty. JtMS is not a cantrip like Brainstorm, it is an incredibly potent card advantage engine, a decent win condition, and a poor removal spell. Teferi is a powerful removal spell, a good card advantage engine, and a very slow win condition by itself - Tezzeret the Seeker is almost purely a win condition. Saheeli Rai is a combo piece (aka the Blue Bridge Below). Dack is a card selection (advantage with Gush/Delve spells) engine and potent artifact removal.

    My point and frustration with comparisons is that people are too ready to leap to comparisons without actually evaluating the functional role of the card being discussed. I find this leads to a lot of bad comparisons and bad comparisons derail threads, as now we end up talking about why "Tezzeret 3.0 =/= Tezzeret 1.0", not "How can Tezzeret 3.0 be used and is that good enough for a Vintage deck?". So, yes, there is some role for comparisons in card evaluation. However, most people are terrible at these comparisons, make poor comparisons, and lead threads on tangents. I would prefer people make arguments either without comparisons, or arguments based on functionality with comparisons augmenting the conclusions rather than serving as a shortcut for actually evaluating cards. That way, even if the arguments are wrong or illogical or whatever, the discussion is still centered on the topic of the thread.

    Does that make sense?



  • Here a few cards that were thought of very highly at spoiler season and became next to nothing:

    Bojuka Bog:
    http://www.archive.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=39691.0

    Past in Flames:
    http://www.archive.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=42905.0

    Ensoul Artifact:
    http://www.archive.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=46533.0

    Praetor's Grip:
    http://www.archive.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=42096.0

    Beast Within:
    http://www.archive.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=42149.0

    We could also theoretically add in the numerous cards that have been unrestricted in the past 10 years or so including:
    Thirst for Knowledge
    Burning Wish
    Gifts Ungiven



  • @griselbrother Please take the time to post these quotes in context.

    Rich actually said:

    This card is actually worth considering. First, it triggers more easily than Pyromancer -- such as off Moxen. Second, the Tokens this generates themselves have Prowess. This means that you can very easily win the game with a handful of these tokens. In a way, the damage output multiples your spells from one turn with your spells for the next turn. Now, there is a huge cost when you move from 2 to 3 mana. This card might be unplayable. But it's actually a card that might be awesome.

    Rich is decidedly more optimistic on this card than you conveyed. I didn't bother checking other quotes - I was curious what my first impression was and Rich happened to be the first response in that thread. But now I'm pissed at the lack of journalistic integrity.



  • @chubbyrain said in [M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master:

    Comparing this card to either previous Tezzeret ignores the function and focuses on superficial characteristics.

    On the contrary, I've already argued that, in my opinion, Artifice Master serves
    (1) very similar roles
    (2) in the same shells
    (3) poorly
    as The Seeker. It has since been pointed out to me that Artifice Master might be a key ingredient in a Null Rod-based blue control deck. I acknowledge the possibility, remain quite skeptical, and will be the first to eat crow if I'm wrong.



  • @vaughnbros said in [M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master:

    Here a few cards that were thought of very highly at spoiler season and became next to nothing:

    Past in Flames:
    http://www.archive.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=42905.0

    Past in Flames is an interesting case in that I don't think it's fair to call previous evaluations of the card wrong: Past in Flames is a very potent combo engine offering a nearly unique effect, in search of a critical mass of enablers. Each printing along the lines of Cathartic Reunion makes Past in Flames stronger, and it's not out of the question in my mind that we will eventually see the right environment for a Past in Flames deck to shine.



  • @evouga said in [M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master:

    @vaughnbros said in [M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master:

    Here a few cards that were thought of very highly at spoiler season and became next to nothing:

    Past in Flames:
    http://www.archive.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=42905.0

    Past in Flames is an interesting case in that I don't think it's fair to call previous evaluations of the card wrong

    You highlight an interesting point here that most card evaluations are based on the current metagame or even more specifically an individuals viewpoint of the current metagame via whatever decks they are currently playing.

    This is why cards that were previously so powerful that they needed to be restricted can then be unrestricted and have 0 effect on the metagame.

    Its also why some of these viewpoints of initially spoiled cards can look bad years later. For instance, if we look at my quoted comments on Dack Fayden:

    On Dack:

    vaughnbros: "I'm not sure how playable he is main deck as his second ability and ult are rather >narrow while his +1 isn't back breaking."
    vaughnbros: "You mean like how hes an overpriced Careful study against any creature heavy >deck like BUG fish or Merfolk?"

    BUG fish and Merfolk aren't even decks anymore. Cards that paired well with Dack Fayden: Young Pyromancer and Delve draw spells had yet to be printed. The card made a meteoric rise thanks to a lot of shifts in the metagame.



  • Another thing to consider when looking at past evaluations is the context in which they were evaluated. It would be easy to find plenty of cards that are unplayable in today's metagame that might have been evaluated highly. However, it might not have been the case in the Vintage environment it was originally printed in. People tend to be slow at adapting to change and trying new cards. While I'm not claiming any of the above cards were evaluated correctly, it is still incorrect to look at them with today's metagame in mind.

    Hypothetically, let's say a card X was evaluated highly, but was never actually played. In the following set, a major B&R change occurred that caused a major shift in Vintage, or perhaps a newer printing was spoiled (such as Thought-Knot Seer) which had major ramifications for Vintage. Of course card X was never played, but perhaps there was a time when it was worth consideration.



  • @evouga said in [M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master:

    @chubbyrain said in [M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master:

    Comparing this card to either previous Tezzeret ignores the function and focuses on superficial characteristics.

    On the contrary, I've already argued that, in my opinion, Artifice Master serves
    (1) very similar roles
    (2) in the same shells
    (3) poorly
    as The Seeker. It has since been pointed out to me that Artifice Master might be a key ingredient in a Null Rod-based blue control deck. I acknowledge the possibility, remain quite skeptical, and will be the first to eat crow if I'm wrong.

    I couldn't disagree more. This card is a pure card advantage engine - you never want to use any other mode than the 0 unless in desperation. While that might translate into winning the game in some other way, it's not a primary win condition like Tezz.



  • @hrishi

    I thought every one of the 5 cards I mentioned would have at least some impact on Vintage and there are litany of cards that I was even higher on that have also had no impact. The reality and main point here is that most cards that are printed are bad for Vintage, and even those that pass our initial sniff test end up being bad. Its a cynical point of view, but learning from those mistakes can help you save a lot of time going down a rabbit hole of playing a card that isn't worth the time.

    Due to all the metagame shifts, I find you are just as well off, if not better, looking at decks from other more popular formats for inspirational cards or punching in random search parameters on gatherer than chasing marginal spoilers, like this one.



  • @chubbyrain said in [M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master:

    @griselbrother Please take the time to post these quotes in context.

    Rich actually said:

    This card is actually worth considering. First, it triggers more easily than Pyromancer -- such as off Moxen. Second, the Tokens this generates themselves have Prowess. This means that you can very easily win the game with a handful of these tokens. In a way, the damage output multiples your spells from one turn with your spells for the next turn. Now, there is a huge cost when you move from 2 to 3 mana. This card might be unplayable. But it's actually a card that might be awesome.

    Rich is decidedly more optimistic on this card than you conveyed. I didn't bother checking other quotes - I was curious what my first impression was and Rich happened to be the first response in that thread. But now I'm pissed at the lack of journalistic integrity.

    Haha relax. Yes of course it's taken out of context, but the quote is still as funny as it would have been if I had quoted the whole post he made. Saying the card might be unplayable shows how wrong the evaluation was no matter what else was said.

    And honestly, I don't really think it makes his evaluation that much better that he said that it might be awesome when it should have been obvious to everyone and their dog that Mentor was gonna be completely bananas.

    If someone says that the earth might be flat, it doesn't really matter if that same person also says that the earth might be round.

    My post was never meant to be demeaning to anyone, and so I apologize if you feel offended because Rich Shay is your friend or idol or something like that, but I do think that Rich himself would just find his post hilarious.



  • @griselbrother

    1. Misrepresenting a person's words is irresponsible, regardless of intent.

    2. If your actual purpose was humor, you could have easily omitted names.

    3. It is common to mention the opposing view. If I lead with "the earth might be flat" then spend the rest of the paper talking about the support for a spherical earth, the primary message of my paper is not "the earth is flat". It's why context matters...



  • @griselbrother said in [M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master:

    If someone says that the earth might be flat, it doesn't really matter

    It does too matter. What if that person is a high school science teacher?



  • @hierarchnoble said in [M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master:

    @griselbrother said in [M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master:

    If someone says that the earth might be flat, it doesn't really matter

    It does too matter. What if that person is a high school

    Sorry, this doesn't make any sense.



  • @griselbrother said in [M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master:

    @hierarchnoble said in [M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master:

    @griselbrother said in [M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master:

    If someone says that the earth might be flat, it doesn't really matter

    It does too matter. What if that person is a high school

    Sorry

    You'd better be.


 

WAF/WHF