Are Fetches Even Worth Playing Anymore?
Modern forum
Posted on Oct. 23, 2018, 6:44 p.m. by APPLE01DOJ
If you're in 3 colors, obviously yes but for mono colored and dual colored decks we have so many great options between filters, fast lands, checks, manlands and shocks in addition to Assassin's Trophy, Field of Ruin, and Path to Exile all seeing play requiring more basics. Are fetches still worth playing?
Well in mono aggro decks a fetch snagging a land out of the way is pretty useful.
October 23, 2018 8:06 p.m.
The "thinning" effect is basically non existing so im gonna disagree on that.
October 23, 2018 8:29 p.m.
RoarMaster says... #6
Pretty sure the myth about mono-decks, fetches, and deck thinning was debunked years ago. I cant remember the exact math, but it was basically trading 5% of your life for like 1.6% greater chance of drawing a non-land.
Also PtE/AT dot require you to run more basics, just some.
But to answer your question, yes, in 2-3+ color decks it is worth running them.
October 23, 2018 8:30 p.m.
it might not make a difference in an individual game but over the course of multiple games it makes a difference
October 23, 2018 9:11 p.m.
Look, no. Just no. The lifeloss is a real thing. If you run fetches on your mono deck, you're just asking to get hurt. If you're 2 color or more, they're great.
October 23, 2018 9:40 p.m.
Arvail The only point of life that matters is your last point. In 90% of MU's losing 5 life will not make the difference between you winning or losing. If life loss were such a big deal, decks like Death's Shadow would be unplayable. If you can gain a ~1.5% improvement in your winrate by running fetches for your basics in a mono colored deck, you take that. 1.5% winrate is the difference between a tier 1 and tier 2 deck.
With regard to APPLE01DOJ's question: It's very worth running 4-5 basics in any deck whose mana base can support them (basically any deck that isn't land gimick based such as tron, and isn't 4+ colors such as Death's Shadow). At the point where you have 4-5 lands in play (presumably thanks to PtE/Trophy/Field/Quarter) you should be able to cast pretty much any spell in your deck. Basics ARE worth running... but if you mean to ask whether you should run 9-10 basics to play around getting all of your cards blown up, the answer is no. Your deck should not be built to play around losing. It should be built to win, with maybe a few concessions to recovery, but warping your mana base to play around getting path'd/trophy'd left right and center is not a good approach to deck building. Build your mana base to cast your spells. Once your mana base can do that, use whatever room you have left within the mana base to run basics.
October 23, 2018 10:08 p.m.
Agent_Fire says... #10
Only, run fetches in a mono-color deck if you have a reason. This reason should be based on what the cards in the deck do, such as Tireless Tracker by making an extra clue from a fetch, and Grim Lavamancer by making the ability easier to activate. Additionally, life loss is more important now than before as the format is shifting to a faster pace. In multi-color decks, fetches are still worth playing as the existence of non-basic land hate exists. For example, when you are playing against a player with Blood Moon in their deck, fetches allow you to give yourself a better chance in that matchup by giving yourself a chance to play colored spells that other duels would have not. Alongside that, if you lean too much on the filter lands decks you can't reliably use Damping Sphere. The only decks that should not run fetches are mono-color decks that have no benefit from card interactions with them or decks with a lot of scrying.
October 23, 2018 10:10 p.m.
DuTogira no you dont. Why do you think merfolk and martyr proc for example never run fetchlands? Because they are not worth it.
Deaths shadow is litetqly playable because of the lifeloss so thats the poorest example you could possibly make.
You dont increase your chance of winning by 1-2 % you increase your chance of drawing one additional spell by 1-2% which is something completely different.
The lifeloss basically doesnt matter against conrol and combo decks which is about 50% (according to mtgtop8) not 90% of the modern field
October 23, 2018 10:22 p.m.
Also, to add to the above comment, bolt snap bolt is still a very real thing in control. I wouldn't call lifeloss irrelevant vs control.
October 23, 2018 10:39 p.m.
lukas96 fair enough point that drawing 1 more spell != a win.
Death's Shadow does perfectly demonstrate my point. You, as a player, can exploit your life total as a tradeoff and gain benefits from it.
Life-loss does not matter against control or combo, you're correct. It also doesn't matter against midrange (decks like tron and jund). Midrange only cares about who is winning the board state. In the majority of games (ballparking 80%) which I've lost to aggro decks (and I've played plenty of modern), having 5 more life would not change whether I won or lost. Aggro decks routinely overkill their opponents, they don't hit for exactsies.
You are correct about Merfolk not playing fetches because it doesn't need them. This DOES sometimes happen. Mono Green Stompy, Martyr Life, and 8-Rack all work the same way. Why? They all have ways to leverage additional mana. As a counter-point, Burn (even the mono red version) never runs less than 9 fetches, because it only ever wants 2-3 lands in play and from that point wants nothing but gas.
My point is more that you don't just cut fetches because you're mono colored. You cut fetches because your deck doesn't need color fixing AND doesn't mind drawing more lands throughout the game OR prioritizes running some other form of utility land (such as land destruction, which martyr life runs plenty of, or the mutavaults which merfolk runs).
Here's my point: Fetchlands are never cut because you can't afford to take 1 damage (or 3 for a fetch -> shock). You cut them because you have better lands to run. In the case of most of these mono colored decks, they choose to run basics over fetches because basics can't get blown out by blood moon/pithing needle/other random bs corner cases which more than half of the decks in modern somehow pack into the sideboard.
October 23, 2018 10:53 p.m.
Arvail let's remember we're debating mono colored decks here. The only mono-colored modern deck which loses a significant number of otherwise winable games to bolt-snap-bolt is 8-rack, a deck which is already prone to recursive self harm and which consequently doesn't run fetches.
Edit: To contradict my previous post because 8-Rack is a corner case, yes, 8-Rack does cut fetches because it cares about its life total and doesn't need color fixing, so it would rather avoid the self-harm. That's a corner case though based on how 8-Rack is built, not the rule.
October 23, 2018 11 p.m. Edited.
No deaths shadow doesnt prove the point because ot turns the downside of lifeloss into an upside. Its the only deck that does that. This doesnt apply to amy otjer deck which makes it not relevant for the discussion.
Id argue that tron is a control deck and that 4-5 life against midrange means one turn less when a tarmogoyf angler or what wver has to hit you so ot defwnitely matters. We shouldnt discuss about thia though because those are rather broad statements and we could discuss about this without ever coming to an end.
You absolutely cut fetchlands becaus your mono colored. How do these decks dont mind drawing additional basic lands?
Yes burn runs fetches even in mono red. Because they afe needed for landfall and for lavamancer not because of deck thinning. Its pretty much the only mono colored deck that runs fetches because its the only mono colored deck that benefits from it. Thinning is not a reason why burn runs fetches. Your wrong about that.
Fetchlands dont have anything to do with land striplands or mutavaults either. They dont influence the chance of drawing those. Utility lands cant be the reason to not play fetches your also wrong about that
October 23, 2018 11:10 p.m.
Flooremoji says... #16
The 'Thinning' of your deck is about 4 life for one card, and also hurts you when people drop the new thalia, Root Maze, or other tax effects.
October 23, 2018 11:53 p.m.
Against popular opinion... and endless articles of people presenting their alternative mathematical data disproving Deck-Thinning and using fetches doesnt work/isnt worth it....financially I agree....but as far as improving odds on your own draws (however minor) I believe deck thinning does "work". Compare the concept of Deck-thinning to MILLING you can see some simularities....think of Scalding Tarn being Jester's Cap/Surgical Extraction.
A "one-for-zero" means you are spending one of your cards to deal with zero of theirs. This is certainly not generally considered a great result. While it may look like Glimpse the Unthinkable "destroys" Ten cards, looks can be deceiving. Those cards may have been taken out of your opponent's deck but, you didn't actually diminish their available resources. Nothing has changed from what your opponent has access to in their hand or on the battlefield. Statistically those cards could have just as easily been on the bottom of your opponent's library and the result of the game would have been the same. You probably* wouldn't play a card that just put the top five cards of your opponent's library on the bottom of their library—and that's equivalently what pure milling often is. Because there normally isnt control over what is being Milled; Extirpate is an example where the exception can be made. There can be very specific times where taking cards out of your opponent's library crumbles their strategy. Although you are taking a zero-for-one to do so, removing all your opponent's combo pieces can be worth it, in the very similar way reducing the odds of topdecking a land can be helpful....
now as far as the ratio of 20 life and paying 1 life and a deck consisting of 60 cards with 53 in the library after drawing your hand... that doesn't sound like its worth it to the average bear....but theoretically...in a world where your opponent is just a decoration and doesn't attack or interact with you in any way the deck thinning will improve your draws.
October 24, 2018 11:26 a.m.
RoarMaster says... #18
Icbrgr "....but theoretically...in a world where your opponent is just a decoration and doesn't attack or interact with you in any way the deck thinning will improve your draws."
Right, but people dont play in a vacuum. And to build a deck, theorycraft, or expect your opponent to not attack or interact with you is silly. Thats like saying Force of Will sucks, because in a vacuum, where your opponent doesnt do anything, it is useless.
Does running fetches 'thin' your deck slightly? Yes. Does it do so at an efficient or effective cost though? No.
October 24, 2018 3:32 p.m.
RoarMaster true any Counterspell/Fog would be a dead draw in a vacuum...
as far as efficient/effectiveness is concerned it hinges on the deck... There are plenty of mono colored decks with low mana curves having little to no interaction with an opponent (looking at you combo players).
October 24, 2018 4:32 p.m.
Whoch mono colored decks play fetchlands at all. Lets look at some examples to see that you are wrong.
Burn is literally the only mono colored modern deck that does so (for reasons that where alreqdy elaborated)
October 24, 2018 5:48 p.m.
APPLE01DOJ says... #21
Any decks with Bloodghast or Fatal Push has a valid reason for fetches.
Same with Gurmag Angler.
October 24, 2018 7:39 p.m.
Alright, because this conversation is getting ludicrous, let’s blow this all out of the water. How many mono colored decks are modern playable? Five, generously speaking.
That means there’s a pretty good chance you’re in 2+ colors. That means fetchlands are likely worth running in your deck purely for color fixing. Forget draw %, forget “is the life loss really worth it”. For almost every single modern deck in existence, fetch lands help you play the game. Paying 5 life to be able to consistently play magic is worth it. Period.
Yes there are some exceptions. They usually make themselves GLARINGLY obvious. No, despite recent statistics, you don’t just stop playing fetchlands. They help you play the game if you play more than one color.
October 25, 2018 1:30 a.m.
Soul sisters doesnt play fetchlands.
If there arereasons to play them like push or angler you play fetchlands. Nobody denied that. The point is that thinning alone isnt worth it and that there is no deck that plays them for that.
I dont see how this gets ludicrously to be honest. There can absolutely be more than 5 playable mono colored decks. Im not sure why you bring that up its not reqlly relevant. Depends on how you define playanle though. More colored decks are obviously better in a format which amazing mana fixing such as modern. So i absolutely agree with your last paragraph
October 25, 2018 4:22 a.m.
lukas96 find me a competitive, 2+ color deck which has won a modern tournament in the last three months that doesn’t play fetches AND isn’t a tron variant or ad nauseam (which prefers scry lands for draw filtering because the combo is clunky and somewhat expensive).
If you can, then we’ll resume talking about whether or not fetches are still worth playing.
October 25, 2018 6:15 p.m. Edited.
Storm lol...
I never argued that fetches are not worth it I said that they shouldnt be played in one color decks
October 25, 2018 6:49 p.m.
1) Storm plays fetches...
2) I didn’t realize your point was that mono-colored shouldn’t play fetches. My understanding was that you were arguing that fetches were becoming objectively bad in modern because they hurt.
3) mono colored decks can still make use of fetches (as burn demonstrates), but you are correct that -without their color fixing utility- many mono colored decks find that the marginal draw % improvements which fetches offer aren’t worth the 1 damage, especially if those decks don’t make use of any mechanics which fetchlands help exploit.
October 25, 2018 7:34 p.m.
SeekerofSecrets says... #28
I think that the mana base is extremely dependent on the strategy of the build..... 90% of mono color decks do not need fetches, while 90% of two color builds do need fetches. The only exceptions that I can think of is tron, death and taxes and yes gift storm is indeed fetchless. (and I'm sure there are more).
The lack of fetches in storm makes it much more consistant and actually increases its speed, the draw back being that you cant play blood moon in the side.
October 25, 2018 7:43 p.m.
https://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=20334&d=333057&f=MO
Are we sure gift Storm doesn’t play fetches?
October 25, 2018 7:51 p.m.
There are 143 storm deck from this year at mtg top 8. 8 of them play flooded strand 29 of them scalding tarn 22 polluted delta and 10 of them mosty rain forest.
So yes i feel pretty confident to say that.
2)yep that was a mis understanding
3)absolitely and i didnt mention that
October 25, 2018 8 p.m.
SeekerofSecrets says... #31
According to mtg gold fish only 31% play tarn....
lukas96 says... #2
Mono colored decks should only play fetches if they have some how synnwrgy with what fetches do any ways. Thats nothing new and basically known for as long as fetches exist.
We get new dual lands every few sets. I think they are part of why striplands and also cards like path and trophy can be good in multiples. You opponent is likely to run out of basics because of them.
Thats not really a reason to play less fetchlands though. Its a reason to olay more basics
October 23, 2018 7:13 p.m.