Why use Izzet Staticaster in SnS?

Legacy forum

Posted on Dec. 17, 2015, 10:20 a.m. by GeminiSpartanX

I have 1 legacy deck-Sneak and Show. Recently I've been seeing lists that run Izzet Staticaster in the side, but I'm wondering why. The main hatebear against SnS is Containment Priest, which Staticaster can't kill. Am I missing something? I'm not an expert in the format, but my local meta consists of about a million Miracles players, with a few players on Shardless BUG, esper deathblade and reanimator. What matchup does the Staticaster shine against?

Clearing out Young Pyromancer in a field full of Grixis Delver is a big deal.

December 17, 2015 10:27 a.m.

ThisIsBullshit says... #3

Delver of Secrets  Flip, Young Pyromancer, Bob, etc

I don't know why people run it, I've found that the decks that run those cards, with exception to BUG/Grixis delver, are fairly easy to beat because they attempt to play fair,

December 17, 2015 10:29 a.m.

ThisIsBullshit says... #4

well, it also hits Phyrexian Revokers and Thalia

December 17, 2015 10:31 a.m.

GeminiSpartanX says... #5

It just seems like a strange addition when most SnS lists also run at least 2-3 Pyroclasms in the side as well which take care of all the above-mentioned cards too. Why not just run a 3rd or 4th Pyroclasm instead? I mean, staticaster can't even attack the player afterwards, so it seems pretty silly to me. The only reason I see playing it is that it's instant-speed, but I'm wondering how often that comes up. It doesn't take care of Meddling Mage either, which is a common SB cards against SnS. It just seems like Volcanic Fallout or something would be better at 3cmc.

December 17, 2015 10:50 a.m.

meecht says... #6

@GeminiSpartanX - Izzet Staticaster is repeatable.

December 17, 2015 11:25 a.m.

arcdevil says... #7

win

December 18, 2015 6:32 a.m.

sylvannos says... #8

Izzet Staticaster also pitches to Force of Will...something Pyroclasm and Toxic Deluge don't do. Sneak and Show is already light on blue cards.

December 19, 2015 2:06 p.m.

This discussion has been closed