First off just let me say i love this deck. It has changed the way i look at playing magic!

I am curious as to why you run declaration of stone though.

DogKnight156, Declaration in Stone can end swarm tactics like token spam and small agro, and it's very cheap.

Giving my opponent Clue tokens doesn't bother me because each one they use costs them two mana which they could have used to further their boardstate instead. In the early game it's often a waste of a turn, and in the middle game each token cashed reduces the spells-per-turn by one.

Also, as the description states, "there is no late game". Hehe

(... Well, the old description stated there was no end game... I forgot about that change in terms)

Are you, on these days, running this deck? I want to know how It goes with the actual meta, I want to give it a try in paper

I still run this deck but I haven't been out to a tournament since the meta shifted in favor of Red Deck Wins. It should still hold up about the same as it's a second-tier build.

I’m sure if I tried I could find an explanation but I’m curious on how you use rule 601.2e to potentially avoid a counterspell. if you couldn’t pay all the costs for the spell wouldn’t it be illegal regardless if they tried to react to it or not? Love the idea of the deck regardless

dark122, the method for casting spells in the core rules helps protect from counterspelling by virtue of the fact that you can't play a spell with targets unless there is a target the spell could affect (such as a counterspell requires a spell on the stack to target).

When you properly cast a spell you put the card on the stack first and you have to satisfy each condition before it becomes a spell. If my opponent tries to play a counterspell before I have completed casting then I stop the game and tell them they don't have a target. It is not mandatory to activate Mana abilities in order to satisfy costs and the only way for most spells to be completed is for the Mana to be in your Mana pool when you play the card (this is why activating Mana abilities is considered a special action and cannot be responded to). So after stopping an improper counterspell I simply don't activate any Mana abilities and my card has to be taken back.

This often causes stress in my opponent and I don't do it during casual games. In fact most players really don't like this but it is how spells should be cast in order to keep the game fair (definitely read the direct ruling for more information).

Do you actually do that in a tournament setting? If so, you’re not being clever - you’re cheating. Rule 4.3 of the Tournament Rules clearly deals with your proposal to manipulate out-of-order sequencing to gain information you are not entitled to. The relevant portion of the rule is reproduced below:

An out-of-order sequence must not result in a player prematurely gaining information which could reasonably affect decisions made later in that sequence.

Players may not try to use opponent's reactions to some portion of an out-of-order sequence to see if they should modify actions or try to take additional ones. Nor may players use out-of-order sequencing to try to retroactively take an action they missed at the appropriate time.

(Tagging dark122 to make sure they see this).

I do it if my opponent is impatient. I don't mete my opponent's reactions but if they try to counter a spell that doesn't exist yet then it's on them. It's simple enough (and courteous) to wait for your opponent to complete their spell before trying to counter it.

No, that’s not on them. The Tournament Rules make it clear that you are to move through the steps of a sequence promptly, without undo delay. That includes the sequence for casting a spell - if you’re purposefully doing the sequence at a speed where someone has time to declare a response before your mana is tapped, that’s just as much your fault as it is your opponent’s for jumping the gun.

Further, Rule 4.3 explicitly states that it is understood Magic is a complicated game, and it is easy to accidentally mess up some of the sequencing. In this case, you have made a decision to cast a spell, done most of the sequence, but then are intentionally trying to take advantage of an opponent making a sequencing error.

Their jumping the gun and being a tad discourteous does not change the fact that you are not allowed to gain extra information (that they have a counter and intend to use it) due to the sequencing error, and that you are not allowed to change a decision (at that point, you have made it clear your intent is to cast the spell - it’s too late to change your mind if they make an error).

I should also note that 601.2 only allows you to back out of the spell-casting process if you are “unable” to complete the spell casting process. You can’t just decide willy-nilly to cancel mid-cast

Casting the spell still requires Mana in the player's Mana pool and it is not mandatory to activate Mana abilities in order to satisfy costs. This would probably be a better discussion in the forums though.

Caerwyn, after going over the rules we quoted and considering them carefully I realize what you've said makes a lot of sense. I hadn't considered that this tactic was actually a method for cheating. I'll fix the description in a few minutes when I get home.

Have you considered to change Providence to Approach of the Second Sun ?

I haven't thought about it only because I use Providence for it's triggered ability in the opening. If it's modern legal I could see having it in my sideboard. I have one copy of it in my Zedruu commander deck.

Well, it is absolutely legal in modern, its cmc is just too expensive for modern. One copy of it in the main deck + something more could be a good substitute of Providence ,another wincon and another way to f

Another way to gain life*

It is good for all of those things. My concern for replacing Providence is that most of my tactics are ready on turn 4 and 5. While Approach of the Second Sun can't do anything before turn 7. It would be fantastic in a few specific scenarios though which is why I have room for it in my sideboard.

I read too that one of the "goals" until this deck starts to rock is that It must survive, right? What about having something like Ghostly Prison ? I have to admit that I love your deck but Providence doesn't look to me like it fits here really well..

Really the only reason I don't run Ghostly Prison is that my turn 3 is reserved for either setting Blasting Station or removing a threat with either Declaration in Stone or Oblivion Ring .

Ideally Providence will not be cast at all but can grant me the extra 6 life from the opening. Often I exile it for Gemstone Caverns directly after gaining the life. In the games where I do cast it I usually have Pariah + Stuffy Doll ready to draw the game; this would be the situation where I could play Approach of the Second Sun and I can play for this specifically if my opponent is trying very hard not to draw the game.

I'm slightly confused as to the gameplan of this deck. Please explain?

The entire strategy and associated tactics are explained in the description. Did you have a specific question?

A couple: First why snow lands? Second what is the main purpose of spike feeder? Would some more removal be recommended? By the way, love what you're going for here, just want to get the best possible version. Ya feel?

Also, that land destruction combo is absolutely disgusting. Love it

Thank you, and I'm glad to help.

The snow lands protect you from your own Scour. If you face a green or white player you don't have to hold back because your lands have a different name. Spike Feeder can buy some time when you attach Sunbond to it. I use it mainly against Agro players so they have to deal with it before they can get to my life points. It also allows you to swing with a big creature but make sure your opponent doesn't have counter-play.

Spike Feeder and Sunbond are not required if you prefer more removal.