Will Fetchlands be used?

Standard forum

Posted on Sept. 1, 2014, 4:16 p.m. by Death_The_Kid

I love that they are reprinting Fetchlands but I have no idea how useful they are since I have never used them. I understand how they work in everyother format really but will they be good when we lose shocklands? I know they can color fix but we have the scrylands and painlands now. So how will Post Rotation decks use Fetchlands?

GoldGhost012 says... #2

They will use them. Decks running Courser of Kruphix will definitely play as many as they can afford/can spare for the life gain. Also because it'll thin your deck so you don't draw as many lands late game.

September 1, 2014 4:19 p.m.

Servo_Token says... #3

Yep. GRx midrange (assumed RUG) will definitely be a thing with both Courser of Kruphix , Chandra, Pyromaster , and getches in standard. The card selection is just too good to pass up.

September 1, 2014 4:22 p.m.

Death_The_Kid says... #4

so would a R/B still run 4x fetchlands? or maybe a few?

September 1, 2014 4:23 p.m.

ChiefBell says... #5

A fetchland doesn't actually gain you more life with courser than a normal land does. However the real catch is that courser lets you see the top card of your library and fetches let you shuffle. If you see that you're about to draw a card you don't need - pop a fetch and shuffle your library.

September 1, 2014 4:25 p.m.

GoldGhost012 says... #6

Sure. R/B would probably use 4x Bloodstained Mire and maybe a couple copies of Polluted Delta and/or Wooded Foothills .

September 1, 2014 4:26 p.m.

Servo_Token says... #7

Yeah, they're fixing. Considering that RB has a temple and a fetchland to use this coming season, you're definitely going to want to run all 8, and potentially dip into a third color just for the lands.

September 1, 2014 4:27 p.m.

Death_The_Kid says... #8

okie thanks I just was not sure how viable they would be lol

September 1, 2014 4:27 p.m.
September 1, 2014 4:32 p.m.

Gidgetimer says... #10

Without a way to interact with the top of your library running off color fetches isn't worth it. The "thinning" effect is negligible enough that it isn't worth the life payment. As fixing they are outstanding and I would run as many on-color as you can.

September 1, 2014 4:36 p.m.

During the Zendikar block, all we really had was fetchlands and a hand full of dual man lands, and the mana fixin was damn near perfect. So I'm assuming they'll see play as soon as they're printed.

September 1, 2014 5:21 p.m.

TheGamer says... #12

Definitely. Thinning out the deck is one thing, courser is another, and the fact that a lot of decks will now be 3 colors is another reason.

September 1, 2014 5:49 p.m.

sylvannos says... #13

I think the more pressing question is whether scry lands will continue to see use with pain and fetch lands both back in Standard.

September 1, 2014 5:58 p.m.

GoldGhost012 says... #14

Yes. Midrange and control will still love the scry that's included with the dual land. I'm inclined to think the enemy temples will see more play than the pain lands.

September 1, 2014 6:04 p.m.

sylvannos says... #15

@GoldGhost012: Still feels iffy if you want to play three colors. I think two color decks will stick to scry lands, but three color decks, even control and midrange, will cut down on how many they play (if they play any at all) for the advantage of having them come into play untapped.

September 1, 2014 6:12 p.m.

GoldGhost012 says... #16

Control will most likely want scry lands as much if not more than the Mystic Monastery cycle because of deck manipulation in my opinion.

September 1, 2014 6:16 p.m.

sylvannos says... #17

@GoldGhost012: Yeah, I definitely agree with you there. Mana fixing will be too good already to play crappy 3-color lands that come into play tapped with no other effect.

September 1, 2014 6:24 p.m.

Named_Tawyny says... #18

They'll definitely see play. Heck, even in mono-coloured decks, they're useful.

A mono-red burn, for example, needs to hit those first three lands, but really never needs more than five on the table. R/x fetches help with both of those issues.

September 1, 2014 6:53 p.m.

Gidgetimer says... #19

I'm sure most people have seen it, but here is an article on why it is a bad idea to run fetches in a mono-colored deck. Stifle is not in the format, but all the other points he makes are still valid.

September 1, 2014 7:26 p.m.

GoldGhost012 says... #20

I didn't even read the article and it made my head hurt.

September 1, 2014 8:04 p.m.

Gidgetimer says... #21

Synopsis is that in a deck running 20 total lands with a 8/12 split it will take on average until turn 25 to see an extra non-land card at the cost of 4.3 life. While Sligh will happily pay 4.3 life for an extra card waiting until turn 25 is a no-go.

The method used was a Monte Carlo simulation using 1,000,000 iterations, as opposed to pure mathematics.

September 1, 2014 8:27 p.m.

Femme_Fatale says... #22

September 2, 2014 10:01 p.m.

sylvannos says... #23

@Gidgetimer: I've said it before and I'll say it again. I really don't like that article. He assumes that you're playing in a vacuum where you are drawing only one card a turn. That's certainly the case with with something like RDW, especially if it doesn't have something like Grim Lavamancer .

Turn 25 seems harsh, until you start factoring in tutors and draw power and scry effects and so on.

The reality is that any deck capable of looking at multiple cards a turn (i.e. anything with Courser of Kruphix or Chandra, Pyromaster or Read the Bones ...basically every deck in Standard) benefits from deck thinning long before turn 25. With decks like Midrange or Control, it's almost a no-brainer that fetches are good enough just for the thinning. And some aggro decks will gladly pay 10 life if it means they don't get dead draws later in the game when they're trying to squeeze the last point of damage in when they're forced into topdeck mode.

September 2, 2014 10:19 p.m.

Gidgetimer says... #24

Femme_Fatale: Looked at the three decks. I'm unsure which one you were wanting me to say again but I'll assume it was this one, and gladly say it again since your deck lists didn't convince me. Without a way to interact with the top of your library running off color fetches isn't worth it. The "thinning" effect is negligible enough that it isn't worth the life payment.


sylvannos: I assume that most people are smart enough to realize that "turn 25" means "card 32" if you are removing more than 1 card from your library each turn. If not I will state right here: each card you remove from your library above the first each turn advances the turn counter by 1. He used "turn" in the article because the 2 specific decks he was discussing did not remove more than 1 card from the library each turn.

To address the specific cards you mentioned, Courser of Kruphix does more to ensure that you are not drawing lands than fetches ever would. Playing a land from the top of a deck that is not being shuffled ensures that you are 1 "gas" card ahead of where you would otherwise be. It also allows you to see the top card of your deck, allowing shuffles when they are most opportune. This is so far from using fetches only for thinning that I'm confused why this card came up in a discussion about the thinning aspects of fetches isolated from the deck manipulation aspects.

Chandra, Pyromaster either comes down turn 4 and provides: one extra card removed from the library per turn allowing for a turn 14 extra card (the 32nd card would be the exiled card on turn 14); or removes 10 extra cards providing a turn 15 extra card. I guess the dream to cycle cards with her would be plus her to 8 on turn 7, ult on turn 8, 0 for extra cards turn 9+. Which would allow the extra gas on turn 12, but I have been ignoring the fact that you might remove fetches in the ult reducing the thinning amount.

Read the Bones allows for 2 extra draws so obviously reduce the turn by 2 each time you do it. Assuming you get the whole play set this brings it down to turn 17. I am ignoring the scry since you are going to be shuffling throughout and that negates scrying lands to the bottom since we correctly randomize.

Tutors are a laughable argument since I assume you are tutoring for gas. This brings the land ratio back up. You can't say that tutoring lands out gives you a higher percentage of gas and then ignore the fact that tutoring gas out gives you a lower percentage.

September 3, 2014 5:20 p.m.

Femme_Fatale says... #25

No, you said to not play fetches in mono-coloured decks. Those three decks proves you dead wrong.

September 3, 2014 5:31 p.m.

Cobthecobbler says... #26

I really don't know why anyone questions whether or not fetches will be used. If you're asking this, then no you don't know how they work. Just because we lose shocks doesn't mean fetches become subpar to freaking pains. Let's look at it on a total life lost scale. Pain lands will ping you every time you tap them for mana. Fetches is a one time payment, plus you get to fix, PLUS you get to shuffle, and if that doesn't convince you then maybe look up deck thinning. Fetches are powerful even without breaking them. And then there are cards like the aforementioned courser that interact amazingly with them.

And yes these will be run in monocolor decks for the thinning. For example, a mono red devotion deck only needs maybe 5 lands or less on the battlefield at all times to run smoothly. Thinning is very important here because red will want to run a lot of creatures and make sure a creature(s) is hitting the board every turn. That deck doesn't have time to draw lands after turn 4, because it should be winning either the next turn or the turn after that.

September 3, 2014 5:44 p.m.

Gidgetimer says... #27

I'm sorry i didn't put the caveat on the second post I made in which I linked the article. If I could edit my comments I would add the "for thinning" caveat. Which was mentioned in the linked article but not in my comment.

Beyond that I feel that you are assuming that I will have an epiphany that I am not.

September 3, 2014 5:50 p.m.

GoldGhost012 says... #28

Your math has no power here.

September 3, 2014 5:52 p.m.

Gidgetimer says... #29

The only reason I'm not being dogmatic about it is that it is a Monte Carlo at a million iterations instead of pure mathematics.

Here is a follow up article by the same guy using more pure mathematics but he still resorts to simulation.

September 3, 2014 6:16 p.m.

sylvannos says... #30

@Gidgetimer: That's the problem I have with the article, though...he doesn't factor in things like extra cards being drawn and comes to the immediate conclusion that fetch lands shouldn't be used in mono-colored decks. He then says things like the life loss isn't worth the percentage, which is an arbitrary opinion. It may be the correct opinion, but shows he's ignoring decks like combo, which can just win the turn they crack their fetches, meaning the life loss is completely irrelevant when they need the extra percentage boost.

I think he'd be much more correct if the percent was something like 0.05%, but it's not. It's more like 4% or higher. Even drawing just two extra cards increases the odds of drawing a non-land spell by 2%.

September 3, 2014 7:26 p.m.

Gidgetimer says... #31

I would encourage you to read the second article I linked and see if he adequately addresses your concerns. If not I would be interested in seeing an article (using simulation or mathematics) that draws the conclusion that fetch lands being used as pure thinning are a good idea.

I realize that there are problems with the conclusions drawn by the article, but given the raw data presented I agree with the conclusion that thinning is not an adequate reason to play fetches.

September 3, 2014 9:55 p.m.

Femme_Fatale says... #32

We all came to this conclusion in another thread. A fetch for just thinning isn't a good method for your deck. It's also a waste of money. I'm pretty sure saving $200 trumps the minuscule amount of thinning that presents itself for your deck.

I also want to point out that the life loss is an issue. I've come across multiple instances where I can't get the land I need to effectively play a spell because all I've got is a fetch and only 1 life.

You also can't forget the deck searching and nonbasic land hate. Those will also make your fetches a lot more worthless than they already are.

September 3, 2014 10:03 p.m.

sylvannos says... #33

@Gidgetimer: I looked at the second article, which is where I pulled the percentages from. He's completely right that a mono-color aggro deck with no library manipulation or card draw doesn't benefit from adding fetches for the sake of thinning.

Again, where I think he's wrong is assuming the life loss isn't worth the thinning in other decks. It's the same reason decks play Gitaxian Probe or 60 cards instead of 62.

September 3, 2014 10:25 p.m.

Femme_Fatale says... #34

Gitaxian Probe is used mainly in storm and tempo builds. It procs things like Young Pyromancer and Delver of Secrets  Flip . And the fact that you can see their hand is MUCH more important than any deck thinning. Decks do not use Gitaxian Probe as a deck thinner. They use it because it synergizes with the rest of the deck.

September 3, 2014 10:41 p.m.

Cobthecobbler says... #35

It's not rocket science: you crack a fetch and you remove a land from your deck, that's one less land to draw. Thinning. Boom.

September 4, 2014 4:09 a.m.

Named_Tawyny says... #36

Okay, so I just did some back-of-envelope (literally) calculations on this. I generally know my maths (took probability theory in college, play poker and blackjack reasonably well for money (counting cards is easier than it looks)). OTOH, it's early in the morning.

A couple of assumptions. 60 card, mono-red deck. 20 mountains, vs 12 mountains, 8 fetches. On the draw. 5 land drops by T6. No extra card drawing. We're drawing fetches at a rate of 2 fetches for every 5 total land we draw. We're taking this from T7.

Scenario 1 - 20 mountains.

By the end of T6, we've seen 13 cards (7 initial hand, plus six draws). and played 5 lands. This leaves us with 47 cards in our library, of which 15 are lands (and 32 are non-lands)

15 out of 47 works out to 31.91% land. .: our T7 draw has about a 32% chance of drawing into land, and a 68% chance of drawing into gas.

Scenario2 - 12 mountains, 8 fetches

By the end of T6, we've seen 15 cards (7 initial hand, six draws, plus two additional fetched land) and played 7 lands (3 normal land, and 2 fetches, both which tutored up an extra mountain) This leaves us with 25 cards in our library, of which 13 are land (and 32 are nonlands)

13 out of 45 works out to 28.90% land .: our T7 draw has about a 29% chance of drawing into a land, and a 71% chance of drawing into gas.

71% vs 68% chance of drawing into gas for the cost of 2 life. These percentages diverge further as each turn (or draw) happens.

Is 3% worth two life? Maybe. It really depends on the deck you're playing.

September 4, 2014 7:37 a.m.

This discussion has been closed