@chubbyrain1 LOL. I think this is why I pick with you. You clearly get riled up and hold grudges from post to post. Makes it too easy. You feed my troll.
But I think I'll call a truce and stop sniping you. Not sure why I singled you out in the first place (other than you make it so easy!) Let the Omnath thing go - I release you. Peace be with you .
As to the OP, I made my points on Greed vs other cards like IC/CB. Happy testing.
To be fair, I wouldn't shit on the deck if he 5-0 with Greed as a 1-of if he could explain why every time he drew it, it was THE card he wanted to draw, or why it was better than other options. I don't have issues with people posting good records and showing how the card was critical to the result. If the OP ran a ritual storm list with a greed, went 5-0, and could explain the scenarios where it won him games, was better than other options, or was at least as good as any other card when he drew it in multiple stages of the game....that's perfectly fine reasoning.
What I DO dislike is when people play a 1-of and 5-0 a league (and maybe went 3-2, 1-4, whatever the other 90x they played it) with a solid 59 card deck with a 1-of that was irrelevant or inferior in those 5 wins and holds up that record as proof that "card X is good." When someone runs a tuned Workshop list with a singleton Burning Wish (with no red mana), 5-0s, and then says "see, I 5-0d; Workshop Wish is baller," that's where I take issue.
Yes, that post from BrassMan was about me. The only one who I can see that I annoy (probably consistently) is Chubbyrain. I've actually had a lot of good discussions on TMD, but for some reason I tend to get snarky/snippy with Chubbyrain.
@lienielsen You are free to brew with anything you want. Let us know how successful you are.
I don't know how valid the "gets around restricted Narset" argument is. That's pretty niche nowadays and won't come up in most blue matchups as a 1-of (and blue will be only half your matches anyway).
In OS, Greed is sweet...but OS is such a slower format than Vintage. I don't even think Greed is fast enough for MODERN. IC/CB is all black, but I thought we were staying in black. If blue is an option to run with counters, then there are lots of superior blue draw spells (standstill for example only dies to REB on the stack - can't be flustered, decayed, vigored, or REBed in play). If we're staying in black...IC is probably the best 3-mana draw-4 I can find. In a deck where you run rituals, BBB is light years faster than 3B - especially when they can remove Greed before you ever draw 1 card with Vigor (and oath/vengevine would eat Greed for lunch with their ability to win faster or take your life toward 0 in a hurry).
You mention Mirror Universe, so I know you are an OS player . MU has no prayer of ever being a viable win in Vintage nowadays. Death's Shadow is more Modern. I know some have tried a turbo-DS list, but infect is honestly just faster/better (invigorate + berserk anyone?).
Play any card you want. But if you are "just throwing the idea out there" without ample testing/success to back it up, people will point out the flaws/reasons why it likely won't work.
@botvinik I have my moments. I usually am selective with my snark - typically when someone dismisses good criticisms in favor of a pet...or when someone 5-0s an online league and tries to justify a 1-of they crammed in their 60 by holding that 5-0 record as proof.
In general, I like good discussion on cards. Hard for me to not poke the bear when people get chippy though. Can't contain my online troll sometimes.
OP is just short for Original Poster.
It's not that Greed is horrible - it's darn good in OS and slower formats. But it is too slow for Vintage. Sure, cards like bargain and FoF aren't comparable because they are more expensive or blue (even if they are more game breaking than Greed when resolved). You can dismiss them in that context.
But then when we mention cards like Night's Whisper, Dark Confidant, or Infernal Contract...they ARE black and cheaper.
DC maybe you can dismiss since it has to survive a turn to even draw 1, and can easily smack you for 5+ life on 1 card. But it does chip away at your opponent's life and comes down on turn 1 sans ritual - so there's that.
Night's Whisper/Read the Bones - don't draw you more than 2 cards ever...so though they are cheaper and set up your win faster, they may not be as good long game (if a long game even matters for a storm or ritual-based deck).
But I think you'll have a hard time explaining away Infernal Contract. For BBB you get 4 cards NOW at the cost of 10 or less life, and usually it's like 6 or less life most games. Greed is 3B + BBBB + minimum 8 life, usually over 2 turns (or trading rituals for cards which is not great CA). The ONLY situation where Greed is better is if you are locked under an opponent's restricted Narset/Leovold/Spirit of Labyrinth and can draw only 1 card a turn on their turn. When a card is only better than another card in a niche situation that rarely occurs - the lesser card is the worse option. In this case, IC > Greed...and IC is unplayed (though I don't think unplayable). So I have a hard time thinking Greed is a Vintage gem when a better card already doesn't make the cut.
@revengeanceful It's okay. The OP found what they think is a gem. We all think it's a dud and explained why. They clearly don't want discussion or critique, only praise for finding an unheralded diamond in the rough. Let him run greed in his list and wish it was just about any other bomb or cheap draw spell...he'll come around.
Actually, he'll likely resolve greed in games where he's already got the win in the bag and then be like "See, Greed is awesome!"
A good tester would examine each time he drew greed and wished it were anything else (or if it was an irrelevant draw because he's already won), or if Greed were the one card he needed to win in that situation. But people don't do that with pet cards. They win with "Keeper-running-sedge-troll" and claim the troll won the match, when in reality the other 59 cards won and the troll was irrelevant.
@protoaddict You can surely do any of those options listed. Playing Vintage doesn't stop you from doing other formats. I play Vintage, Modern, Pioneer, OS, Standard, Historic, and Brawl myself (the last 3 strictly because of MTGArena). Vintage is a really fun format, though. It allows the broken and the vast majority of all cards and is never "solved." I like Vintage probably better than any other format - but I also play with good proxies in Austin/San Antonio tourneys (when we had them pre-pandemic). That crowd/age of people is more my kind of folks than the standard/modern kids too, being 40 myself.
But, to wrap it up and reiterate, Vintage can thrive with unsanctioned quality-proxy tourneys. No need to involve WotC other than the B&R list - and that can vary locally if agreed upon prior, but then you have to be sure to communicate that change to people that may just "show up" whom you may have trouble informing about the changes. Standardized B&R for the format is fine, but sticking to strictly the 2-3 sanctioned tourneys per year with the rich-player exclusivity is a death knell to the format. Bypass that crap.
@moorebrother1 I think a lot of players tend to be Spikes. They want to win, and they are deck players more than deck builders. I like to consider myself a builder first. Netdecking is the default for most Spikes.
That said, allowing proxies but not sharpied-lands solves the problem. If people are going to drop $50 on P9 and duals and other cards as quality proxies, they're going to actually invest time in mastering the deck first. It also upholds the aesthetic in-game experience and avoids illegible card text/ambiguous cards. Sharpie is fine for table-top playtesting, but I like good-quality proxy as a standard in local tourneys.