Weird, for some reason I didn't see the command's. I guess I can't read lol

I guess I didn't realize the charm's potential. Nice, I just might try them in some of my sideboards

Did you know that Dromokas Command is currently unplayable? So is Leyline of the Void.

Not necessarily.

I've seen a few lists with 1 Dromoka's Command in the sideboard including chief's deck.

Leyline of the Void is an experiment. I've found it amazing in the opening hand, but later it's just too little too late, so I am going to pull it for another moon and stone rain.

In matchups where you would bring either in, Molten Rain is probably better than Stone Rain.

Dromoka's Command is rather poor. It's good on occasion, but most of the time you probably want more targeted hate or more power.

What about Ravenous Trap for instant speed graveyard removal?

Do you guys mean to say Kolaghan's Command? Dromoka's Command is Selesnya colors

His description discusses Dromokas Command, which is pretty poor. Kolaghan's Command is sick.

Right. I didn't realize until I read the hidden text, my bad.

I meant opposing Dromoka's Commands in abzan decks. I've seen them on occasion. I know it isn't very good, but it is literally the only card they have that can kill Keranos, God of Storms once it hits the field because Keranos is never a creature. I think they're run for such occasions because abzan players know that indestructible noncreatures are unkillable for them, and so Gods can pose a threat if left unanswered. I know that not many people play Gods in modern, but there are a few decks (like this one and other delver decks) that do for the purpose of beating abzan.

Stone rain is better because of mana cost. For the same reason with splash decks don't run Countersquall, I try to avoid cards in this deck, which is splash .

Rakdos Charm is much better graveyard hate than Ravenous Trap because the charm has other uses as well. Imo you need permanent graveyard removal like Rest in Peace to hurt abzan. I usually don't use the charm for graveyard hate. It's mainly meant as insurance for twin and affinity.

You said you were looking for a new name, so how about "Delving Towards Death". You have tasi and angler, so delve plays a part here, and it sounds grixis.

I'm not sure what to suggest, looks solid.

Hmmm. Not a bad idea! Definitely better then 'the-new-delver'. That was just the name I slapped on top so I knew which deck it was. Thanks!

Wow this deck is fantastic! It plays so efficiently! +1

Thanks! I wouldn't call it fantastic, but I still like it a lot. Now I just have to build and test it.

I'm still tweaking the sideboard a lot and am considering Darkness. Anyone have thoughts? It is a great stall while I set up against Abzan, can be passable if timed correctly against burn (don't fall for skullckrack or atarka's command), can buy me a turn to find a removal spell against twin, and can buy me a turn against Affinity.

The only question is if it is more effective than some other card in the sideboard. I'm not sure. I also don't know if it would bring the abzan matchup above 50% win, because that's about where I am at right now. If I hit a moon before their rhino, then I win. If they can resolve and protect a rhino and a goyf or taz before the moon, then I lose. I win if I haven't lost by turn 10, they win if they can win by turn 10. It's annoying.

It's an expensive counterspell, but since this is a modern deck it probably doesn't matter, everything is expensive. What about Cryptic Command?

Hmmm.

It's expensive in mana and money.

And it's really slow.

But it could work. Perhaps not against burn or affinity, but against twin and most importantly abzan, it'd be amazing. Tap all their creatures when both of our boards are looking large? Yes please. It'd be a great mirror-breaker when the boards are very full, but I think I have too many other mana-intensive spells. A main goal of this deck was to have a very efficient mana base of mostly basics to keep my health high, so because I am trying to support some cards I don't think a would be possible.

I'll have to test it and see if I can ever cast it and how effective it is. Thanks for the suggestion! I'll definitely try it out and see if it works.

You sound like you've never seen a Cryptic Command before. :) I don't think it's a good fit here, as it's not fast enough for your aggro-tempo plan.

Tasigur should be in your deck. At least 2 (probably 3) of him before any Fish.

Very true, I have never seen a Cryptic Command played before. I'm very familiar with the card and what it does, but not with how / when it's used.

I've actually decided not to play Tasigur because 4/5 just isn't good enough. I'd rather pay the extra mana or delve the extra card for an Angler because it beats abzan creatures. Tasigur is an abzan creature - a 4/5 - so it will only waste a turn to cast it in that matchup. AS for the other matchups, the Angler isn't much more of an investment and plays about the same. I never have gotten value off of a Tasigur effect activation.

If you can't tell, I really dislike the norms of established decks and tend to go against them all. I don't really try to stick to the aggro-tempo plan unless I'm facing Twin or other control lists because they don't like aggro-tempo. Otherwise I prefer midrange because it's more fun.

I'm not sure you are delving properly, or know how good drawing cards is. Sometimes the norms exist for a reason.

Very true, the norms do exist for a reason, and because of the norms Delver has an awful burn and abzan matchup. Yes, I have sacrificed some of my affinity and twin matchups with this deck, but they aren't super common in my meta. I think I know how to delve. I know I can only delve as many cards as there are in my graveyard, but because I never try to make a turn 2 Tasigur / Angler, the extra cost is nothing. I usually have extra cards to delve, which is preferred.

I also know how valuable card advantage is. That's why I have Outpost Siege in my sideboard. It absolutely wrecks Abzan because of the card advantage I gain. I can cast twice as many spells as them and that leads to a victory. But Tasigur draws you the cards you don't want. Whenever I use Tasigur's ability my graveyard usually has 10+ cards in it so I get the card my opponent doesn't care about which is fine if they have Liliana of the Veil, but I try make sure Lili isn't on the field for long. Long story short I just don't like Tasigur in delver decks. Call it soft innovating because I am not playing an unheard of deck, but no one else is foolish enough to outright ignore the construction of the successful decks.

When you're playing stuff like Vampire Nighthawk, Dimir Charm and Countersquall, you can be assured Tasigur won't get you good stuff. Angler just eats a removal spell. Tasigur gets you a card before dying, and very frequently a reasonable one at that. You just need the right assortment of powerful spells, which you don't currently have.

I'll point out that Nighthawk is just as bad against Abzan as YP is. It does to the same set of removal, doesn't leave anything behind and can't take over a game on its own and punish stumbles. Deathtouch is marginal, because YP can still trade for a Goyf and is better against literally everything else. I'm also not convinced Nighthawk is actually strong against Burn. It comes down a turn later, and gaining two life is not worth your turn, especially when it could potentially eat a Skullcracks effect or any burn spell.

I still stand on my decision for Angler but I see both sides. I won't change it because I've seen it work but tasigur has not worked for me for the same reasons you said - I don't have the powerful spell set to make it work. What removal spells can the Angler eat? Not AD. Only Path to Exile which is why I have counters and Spellskite.

The biggest difference between Nighthawk and YP in abzan is Lingering Souls. Nighthawk eats them all day long but YP can't touch them. Otherwise, yeah they're equally bad. I have found Nighthawk to make the difference against burn but understand why most people don't think it would work. I've done hundreds of playtests against burn and by chance discovered its power. The key is countering until they topdeck, then land a nighthawk because it won't die to Searing Blaze (need 2 cards for a landfall trigger). At worst, Nighthawk buys me a turn. At best he wins the game, which isn't uncommon.

Unconventionality is the name of my game and so far I haven't necessarily lost. I haven't won by any means, but I haven't lost.

I meant that when Angler dies, it's just dead. Tasigur draws a card, which is the name of the game.

YP isn't particularly bad against Souls. The tokens can still attack into Spirits.

If you're trying to focus all your efforts to beat Abzan and Burn, you might just be losing to everything else.

Abzan and burn are 2 of the most played decks. I don't think it's unreasonable to sideboard for them specifically. I also don't run Dragon's Claw because it's burn-specific. It doesn't help anywhere else. That doesn't exactly hold true for Outpost Siege though. That's abzan-specific but is still helpful to some degree against other midrange or control lists because of the card advantage. True, my deck is weak to most tier 2 decks, but not hopelessly so. My sideboard, although mostly abzan-specific, can still handle most decks because the themes in Abazn are not unique - the tools to beat it can help against a lot of decks. Between Monastery Siege, Rakdos Charm, and Spellskite I have the tools to beat most decks, and with the option of aggro-tempo, I can have a good enough matchup against almost all decks, which is the best a magic player can ask for.

I'm not much into Modern but this looks pretty decent to me. Also the fact that you have a sideboard to counter different type of decks I say that you're pretty dang prepared

Thanks! Yeah, I hope it's getting there. It does well right now, but I know it can do better. The sideboard is a big deal to me because I'm stubborn and want to play delver in an anti-delver meta, so my sideboard needs to be perfect. Thanks for the comment!