whitedragon never did anything banworthy either, just slowly, consistently, annoys people away from the site
@ten-ten Comments like this aren't going to lead to more Vintage content, especially since this was probably not a cost-effective use of Justin's time, and more something he did for the community. If you weren't a particular fan, constructive criticism is going to get you more of the content you're interested in while still being respectful to the time and effort Justin invested in the coverage.
I for one find it funny that people spend their time and energy complaining about this awesome article by @IamActuallyLvL1 but, as a community, say almost nothing about Andreas Petersen being DQ'ed for Bribery.
What is there to say?
This was one of the least controversial DQs of all time and it's good that Andreas and the other person were held accountable. There's no real question of sleight of hand or sloppy play or marked cards. Literal video evidence, plus the damning tweet. It was disconcerting that some people thought that because this happens "all the time" it's ok, but I think most people were just waiting to see what would happen and were happy to see justice and the 2nd place person get the painting.
If there is one topic worth discussing, it's that MTGO used to pair like in paper during the final round with the 1 seed playing the 2 seed, the 3 seed playing the 4 seed, and so on, unless they already played. They scrapped this when they went to daily events, which awarded prizes based on record and didn't care about seeding (so it was unfair to make top seeds play - you were actually penalizing people for having good tiebreakers by making them play other people with good tiebreakers for the same prizes as people with lower tiebreakers). In top X events, tiebreakers are relevant but if you have random pairings in the end, you get an unequal incentive to play in the last round where one player might be playing for top 8 and one player playing for play points. Returning to power pairings makes for more similar incentives and decreases the likelihood of this happening.
To be clear, MTGO's flaws doesn't excuse bad behavior from players but fixing the system can certainly make bad behavior less likely.
@serracollector The issue is those effects are optional. Your opponent can decline to search. Field of Ruin is mandatory (I remember using it to disrupt topdeck tutors when I was fooling around with it in Vintage) but those are the type of effects you want to include.
The rules allowing you to look at a player's sideboard while controlling their turn where changed in 2016 because of Emrakul, the Promised End. You are no longer able to do so and you cannot choose cards from outside the game with things like wishes or Karn's -2.
Source: Gatherer entry on Mindslaver
@thewhitedragon69 I've been using Sevinne's Reclamation to either Breach kill, bring back a couple walkers, or trigger the 3rd ability to clean up planeswalkers.
Does the deck evaluate the strengths of Omnath or the strength of Oath of Druid in a format that has a lot of BUG/Bazaar decks?
Does the deck evaluate the strengths of Omnath or the pretty heavy permission suite with a ton of Blue cards and disruption to make the Forces work (without as much inconsistently as Oath typically has when you have a Griselbrand in your hand)?
Does the deck evaluate the strength of Omnath or the power of the cantrip-Delve card engine letting you win the late game with whatever you want, provided you can consistently get there?
The goal of any deck should be to have cards that work together and I think trying to pull out parts and look at them in isolation loses sight of the bigger picture.
To that end, I don't know how to really answer your question any more than I did before by playing it in a Lutri shell. Omnath is just doing the same things he was doing before more frequently in this shell.
Record now is 7-1 for what it's worth but again, that's not what I'm trying to do here. My main goal is to convey the general strategies I'm pursuing with this card and the results.
Since we are also putting a Sanctuary into play and will almost certainly have the requisite 4 islands
note that if you don't have 3 other islands in play before Splendid Reclamation, Mystic Sanctuary will enter tapped and you will get no trigger.
Since Splendid Reclamation returns lands to the battlefield tapped, it will never be able to trigger Mystic Sanctuary, regardless of the number of Islands its controller controls or when they control them.
Yes, I think this is the right assessment. I'm not sure how this thread got so heated---it's clear that (1) Omnath is good, (2) Omnath is not Vintage-warping good, (3) establishing that a miser's copy of any card is significantly better than the next-best choice (in a quantitatively-sound way, beyond isolated anecdotes) is always very difficult, and that is no different for Omnath. Run him if you like him, or don't. shrug
I agree, when you only know the record, it is very difficult to infer the effect of a single card on game states an contributions to those records. But I really tried hard to describe the actual games in which Omnath was involved. This isn't a black box - you have the pilot's insights into the games played. In that way, it is more testing rather than observational data derived just from decklists and result. Except it has the added benefit of competitive play against random opponents.
It was compared to a singleton Peek and I won a Vintage Challenge with Peek. Where is the single card discussion I made on Peek? It doesn't exist. If you would have asked me why I included it, I was in the process of testing out several cantrips and included Peek for the Instant speed play around Narset/Leo and to help engineer the Breech combo around things like Surgical Extraction. Not the biggest endorsement of the card but I designed the deck, I played the games, and I won with the deck. That is certainly more insight than you had just glancing at the winning Breach list and going from there. It was also funny - another streamer picked up the deck played games with it, was like "Why am I playing Peek in my Vintage deck?" and cut the card for Lavinia. When you put their experiences with mine, it certainly builds more of a narrative regarding Peek as not the end-all-be-all card for Vintage.
Now, I included my reasons for including Omnath and then followed with my experiences with the card. Of this information, people have picked and chosen whatever snippets they find most convenient, whether it's of the record or things like pitching to either Force being a primary mode of play (it's not, but a card is the sum of its parts and pitching to Forces is a component of its versatility). That is really frustrating when you take the effort to include much more in your posts.
I will add additional information in that the MTGO leagues have been insanely Bazaar heavy, with 10 of my 19 matches against various Bazaar decks. In those matches, I am 9-1 (17-3 overall) with Omnath fulfilling a critical part when he makes an appearance. The gaining 7 life a turn nullifies Hogaak or multiple Vines + Hollow Ones and the 4/4 body blocks the smaller creatures. The card isn't enough by itself but you are generally able to remove a portion of the clock with graveyard hate, removal, or Tabernacle, and the Omnath effectively closes the door with either the life or by fueling a broken turn with 9 mana (and Lutri to copy a Time Walk or Ancestral or something).
I would also ask @LieNielsen, which of those matchups is Omnath bad against? It's really just Xerox (which hasn't been very popular). Omnath is actually better than Mentor against PO and Doomsday because of the ability to pitch to Force and the cantrip, so it's rarely a dead card as opposed to Mentor, and I've found it to be circumstantially better than Mentor against the various Hogaak decks since your tokens can't always deal with the Trample. In any case, you aren't choosing between Mentor and this but having a card that has a comparable role to Mentor is certainly a boon for control decks in this metagame.