Does anyone think Gild is playable?
Standard forum
Posted on Jan. 27, 2014, 1:19 a.m. by JWiley129
I'm really curious to see whether Gild sees high level play in Standard. Indestructible Enchantment Creatures are really hard to deal with. And looking at MBD, I notice that it doesn't have the best answers to the gods. Similarly the cards that are the best answers to gods are Revoke Existence , Selesnya Charm , and Cyclonic Rift . I know that Gild is 4 mana, and a sorcery no less, but it does cast for a functional 3 mana. I'm considering it for a sideboard option in my B/R aggro/midrange deck, but I would like some other opinions before I do.
Probably not, it's still really slow and sorcery speed. The nail in the coffin is that to even hit any of the gods, the reason you'd consider running this over other removal, you'll have had to deal with a turn of them being active, since it can only target them once they are creatures. It's better to just keep the gods offline by killing off or forcing them to discard all their other permanents.
January 27, 2014 1:36 a.m.
@The Doctor: That wouldn't work. If you clear the field, the God is no longer a creature, and thus Devour Flesh wouldn't work. I pretty much agree with what Slycne said. I may test it out a little, but I think it's too slow.
January 27, 2014 1:39 a.m.
JakeHarlow says... #5
It seems to be a great card for dealing with gods. So far Revoke Existence and Fade into Antiquity are the best options, along with Selesnya Charm . Basically, Gild will be black's anti-deity measure. As we've seen, white and green are the best colors for this, though now that black has an option the field god defense is widening. Blue currently has counters like Annul , but bouncing a god with Disperse or Cyclonic Rift is a decent option if a god actually does hit the board. I'm not at all sure what red has these days that can shut a god down.
January 27, 2014 1:41 a.m.
Tradeylouish says... #6
Probably not, but it depends on the metagame. If black really needs targeted removal for gods, it might find a home. Sever the Bloodline saw some play when it was in Standard, and that was before the gods (though that card is made a fair bit better by its flashback and the upside of occasionally hitting multiple creatures).
January 27, 2014 1:58 a.m.
That's what I thought. I guess I'll have to stick to the plan of killing all their stuff faster than they can cast it. Thanks!
January 27, 2014 2:19 a.m.
Guild would have been absolutely fantastic if it were BB, instant, and gave the token to your opponent.
January 27, 2014 2:23 a.m.
Quite a costly and weird sorcery really. Black deals with indestructible via sacrifice and -X/-X effects, not exilation. I think it's the first time I see black removal exiling something on its own without the aid of another color, most notably white... though I am pretty sure there are some old sorceries or instants in black that do that. Hence I find this spell off-color to begin with. Plus it gives a mana acceleration token? Now that's really really weird...Flavor-wise I don't like this card and I think it definitely does not belong in black. Will it see play? Perhaps some might use it as sideboard material in MBD (MonoBlack Devotion) - especially after rotation when Devour Flesh and other forms of cheap removal from RTR are gone.
January 27, 2014 4:53 a.m.
I feel, like you guys, it is pretty terrible, I mean, I know they need some stuff to fill in rare slots, but this as an uncommon would've been okay.
January 27, 2014 5:27 a.m.
Its called flavor. King Midas, ladies and gentlemen, inflicted this card design upon us.
But I have no idea what they were thinking when they made Perplexing Chimera ...
January 27, 2014 7:10 a.m.
@cschillerThey have to have a Clone in every set, so that is a thief clone?
January 27, 2014 7:56 a.m.
@cschiller There's no flavor reason, it's just a weird stealing ability like Conjured Currency , only it's on a creature because there are enchantment creatures this block.
January 27, 2014 7:58 a.m.
CaveShinobi says... #14
I don't really like Gild . Its mana cost is too high for what it does -- if I wanted to exile a god, I'd rather splash some white for Revoke Existence , rather than play a 4-mana spell. Sure, it gives me some ramp, but that's pretty useless at that point in the game.
January 27, 2014 9:17 a.m.
ChrisHansonBiomancin says... #15
In general, I agree that Gild
is too slow, especially when compared to the plethora of other Black removal. However, MBD gets trounced by MUD because they literally have no answer for Thassa, God of the Sea
outside of Thoughtseize
and praying they don't draw into one of the other 3 in the deck (as was said above, Devour Flesh
doesn't work outside of the rare circumstance that they have Bident of Thassa
and Jace, Architect of Thought
, but somehow no other creatures despite all that draw power).
Given the popularity of MUD these days, I think it's definitely worth consideration for a sideboard slot. The only other mono Black card that comes to mind for dealing with Thassa is Liliana of the Dark Realms , and Gild seems more reliable since it doesn't depend on your Swamp count.
January 27, 2014 9:47 a.m.
AndyReveler says... #16
hmmm....nobody seems to be mentioning that it at least attempts to pay you back by giving you an artifact that you can use for mana, not only that same turn, but whenever you want. Its a nice, maybe relevant upside to spending 4 to exile just about any creature , i think it might be worth sideboarding at least.
January 29, 2014 12:33 a.m.
For one, I think the design of this card is very good. And I think that for what it does it is fairly costed. Maro mentioned how Gild
exiles the creature so that you can't then Reanimate
that card and basically have your cake and eat it too. Which is fine with me.
Nickosis - I would not want to play BNG-THS limited if Gild
was an uncommon. That card is too powerful at uncommon, and it's not a mythic thing, so it has to be rare.
January 29, 2014 2:12 a.m.
How is "exile creature" at sorcery speed for 4 mana too powerful for uncommon? Look at something like Path to Exile . Now THAT'S too powerful for uncommon. This card is meh at best. It might find a home in limited, but it's far too slow to be useful in any constructed format. I'm with TheDevicer. Something like BB instant exile target creature, that controller gets the token would have been much better, and much more deserving of a rare slot. It seems, to me at least, that the newer sets have more and more junk rares to fill up slots that will never be played.
January 29, 2014 2:21 a.m.
kmcree - If WotC did that, then we would experience power creep and eventually (not saying it would happen any time soon) Ancestral Recall would be a "bad" card. Also I'm talking about Limited playablilty with Gild being too powerful for uncommon. This is the Standard forum, but I would love to have a discussion about why certain cards are at certain rarities in the Limited forum. I'll refer you to this if you'd like to talk more about why Gild is Rare rather than Uncommon.
And yes, Path to Exile is WAAY too powerful for uncommon and is MUCH stronger than Gild . On that we can agree :)
January 29, 2014 2:39 a.m.
I totally understand the concept, and it's one of the reasons I appreciate Wizards way more than some of the other TCG companies cough cough Yu-Gi-Oh. But this isn't an issue of power creep. There are literally dozens of cards in other formats that are significantly better than Gild . And many of them are uncommon. So in that regard, its actually a case of the opposite of power creep. And, quite frankly, with the sudden jump in indestructible cards that wizards has unleashed in this format, they needed to provide some decent form of exile. This is NOT up to par with the needs of the rest of the set, in my opinion, and for that reason, will see next to no constructed play. And in terms of limited, still not something I would even consider taking in the first 3-4 pulls of a pack, unless its a truly terrible pack.
January 29, 2014 2:55 a.m.
kmcree - Removal is removal, no matter how slow. Remember how we laughed about how overcosted Sip of Hemlock
is? It is still playable in Limited despite being 6 mana. Now, would you say that Sip of Hemlock
is stronger than Gild
? I don't think so. If the two were ever in the same pack, I'd take Gild
over Sip of Hemlock
. And there are plenty of cards that are Rare and have cards stronger than them in previous blocks even at rare. Look at Rageblood Shaman
and Boros Reckoner
. Both are rare minotaurs, but one is strictly better than the other. Is Gild
stronger than Hero's Downfall
? No. But Gild
being at uncommon would swing Limited in such a way that most people would try to play Black. Not that it already happens with Gray Merchant of Asphodel
anyways, but you know what I'm saying.
My point is that Gild is too strong for a BNG-THS Limited deck at uncommon, where someone can get multiple copies of it, than it would be at rare where you'd have to be pretty damn lucky to get 2 copies of one. Would it be too strong for DGM-GTC-RTR at rare? Maybe, but we won't really know.
January 29, 2014 3:10 a.m.
This is a standard forum, and my argument was in regards to standard. Wizards has created a bunch of indestructible creatures and given us virtually no playable way to answer them. That has the potential to warp the format, certainly much more so than Gild being common vs uncommon. If you have an answer to that argument, I'd be interested in hearing it.
In terms of limited, I guess we'll just have to disagree. Your comparison to Sip of Hemlock adds nothing to your argument because sip is a common. I would expect an uncommon to still be better than it. With regards to the Rageblood Shaman vs Boros Reckoner , I'm not sure you can say one is strictly better than the other. They are different cards built for different situations. In a minotaur tribal deck, which is something Wizards is currently pushing, I would argue Rageblood Shaman actually makes a stronger impact. And as far as warping drafts, there are literally dozens of uncommons out there that are total bombs in limited, and drawing any of those early in a draft can determine your color identity. That's the nature of limited. And I would argue that most people would prefer multiple copies of say Nessian Asp or Nemesis of Mortals than multiple copies of Gild . Again, I think Gild is an all-around bad card, and represents a failing on Wizards' part to accurately read the needs of the meta.
January 29, 2014 2:32 p.m.
kmcree - Whether or not Gild is a rare or uncommon has no impact on Standard at all. If Standard playability was based on rarity we would see Hythonia the Cruel decks and Enter the Infinite decks in the meta. While rares are usually stronger than nonrares, and thus make up more Standard decks, there are still commons and uncommons that see play. The rarity of a card has impact in two ways: the price of the card, and Limited play. There were other modifications that people suggested to make Gild Standard playable, and those are fine. But changing the rarity of a card could have drastic impact on Limited.
That said, I agree that there needs to be answers to the gods in Standard. Currently the main ways are in White, Blue, and Green. Red can't deal with enchantments well and Black isn't too great either. So Black has to remove the gods by "killing" them. In Black, Gild
is the only surefire way to do it, but that effect is very powerful and undercosting that card could prove disastrous. For Standard and other constructed formats. But I also know that Wizards has tested these cards extensively and have faith that they know what they're doing.
January 29, 2014 4:07 p.m.
I am completely confused, Gild only produces an Artifact token that you can sac to get one mana of your choice. How does is that removal of anything except the token you just produced?
January 30, 2014 2:11 a.m.
@JWiley129: I suppose we're sort of arguing 2 different things. I'm just disappointed in the card, and the set overall to be honest. I was looking for an exile effect to deal with the gods, and this card frankly is just terrible for that. It doesn't really make a difference to me what rarity it's printed at, although I will say that if I bought a pack of BNG (which right now I wouldn't) and drew Gild as the rare, I would be incredibly disappointed.
@lovejw2: you're joking right? Or just didn't read the card? It exiles a creature, THEN produces the artifact.
January 30, 2014 2:17 a.m.
@kmcree I'm a retard. I didn't read the card correctly. This is what happens when I read cards at 1:20 in the morning.
January 30, 2014 2:23 a.m.
kmcree - That's fair. I wish Gild was playable in Standard as well, but it just doesn't look like it. For me, while pulling a Gild won't be the worst thing in the world, I'll still buy packs of BNG and still draft the set. That said I appreciate the discussion we had hope there's no hard feelings on either side :).
And I believe that lovejw2 is just trolling us.
January 30, 2014 2:23 a.m.
and now I see lovejw2's other comment that went up the same time mine did. Sorry about that!
January 30, 2014 2:23 a.m.
Am I the only one that likes the flavor of the card? I'd personally love black seeing a bit more variety in its ability to kill things. Hero's Downfall has come down, but damn am I annoyed at having to spend $40 on a simple kill spell you need in basically every black deck in standard.
The tradeoff I suggested with a BB - same effect - token goes to opponent hardly seems too powerful given eternal has things like Go for the Throat , Dismember , and Victim of Night . Heck, even Path to Exile is a great example of a similar spell used before and that thing's uncommon. With Damnation not seeing a reprint and our premiere wraths all coming from the ravnica block, I fear we might need some nice kill spells come rotation.
January 30, 2014 3:27 a.m.
Am i the only one who saw Unravel the Aether and realised that it was insanely good in this format? In my opinion it's the best god killer. If Gild was an instant i think it'd see some decent play, but at sorcery speed it may not see so much. Also remember that this is black ramp that isn't a cluestone. Mono-black decks may see this as a way to play a midrange style of game and keep some extra mana at the ready. It's also really easily splashable, and is good for fixing mana if you're playing mana-intensive cards like Nightveil Specter , Herald of Torment or Obzedat, Ghost Council .
January 30, 2014 5 a.m.
@KingSorin I think that Fade into Antiquity is still a bit better. By the time killing a god becomes relevant, the one mana extra that you need to pay for the spell means very little, especially given that you're playing green.
The Doctor says... #2
Nope.
Black will just kill the field, then play Devour Flesh so you have to sac your god.
January 27, 2014 1:33 a.m.