Buffet- so much variety, but all kind of the same
I know, I know, Lutri runs perpendicular to all MTG dogma.
The First Catechism of Magic the Gathering: run as many copies of a card as you can
This, of course, allows you to use better cards, have more consistency, have more control of constructional principles and adherence to strategy and tactics. I don't disagree with this theory whatsoever. I just want to see if there's a way to justify playing Lutri, a card clearly made for commander that is obviously too strong for commander and was banned before it hit shelves. But shockingly, I actually think there is a possibility here. Hear me out.
I've got three primary arguments:
1- Siding against this deck is madness, bordering on impossibility.
Beyond the general knowledge of 'this will run instants and sorceries and is either blue, red, or blue and red', there's nothing to go on but the cards you see game one. Besides, what deck doesn't run instants, sorceries, or has blue or red? They exist certainly, but they're in the minority of decktypes.
2- Power creep saturation
What is the difference between Opt and Preordain?
They are 80% the exact same card with different 20% in either direction of value. Blue one-drop cantrips that Scry. Opt is faster, Preordain gets an extra Scry. This is literally +1/-1 tempo converted in either direction. So really, what's the difference beyond preference?
What I'm getting at here is that MTG as a game has been running for 30 years, and has gone through enough power creep that there are four different playable blue one-drop cantrips that are 80% the same and use the remaining 20% for different advantage. The same is true for many other staples of deck construction. Removal, control magic, discard, grave hate, grave love, win conditions. Thus, being limited to one copy of each card isn't the drawback it used to be. I'm still not going to endorse it in any other context, but I do believe it's worth note that four cards that do 80% of the same thing and don't have a bad remaining 20% isn't all that bad. If formatted correctly, you can run a deck that's almost identical as a traditional 'use four copies of the same card' that does almost the exact same thing with minor differences in tactical preference.
3- Attrition breaker
Magic runs on matchup percentages. There will always be good and bad matchups that swing high and low, but there are also plenty of interactions that basically split down the middle. In theory, two competent players using two competent decks playing ten straight games should break 6-4 or 5-5 barring unfortunate matchups. Within said games, a portion of the games will reach attrition once both players run out of cards saying 'no' to whatever the other player is trying to do. Thus, at that point, the player who topdecks the first paradigm breaker takes the initiative and it's both players topdecking until someone draws an out or the clock hits 0. Companions help break this attrition, as they are available in every game, ostensibly allowing the player a +1 in material once both sides run out of juice. On top of that, Lutri copies a spell and has Flash, meaning that in all likelihood, Lutri will be a +2 with tempo. So, what I'm getting at here is that a build that has a built in +2 material is going to tend to win games of attrition more rather than less. In a build like this, with 25 cards clocking in at two-drops or lower, Lutri will hit the board with a copy spell for four or five mana, which is perfect for the point when both players run out of juice.
On top of these advantages, I'm comboing the idea with another doctrine I've been experimenting with. We all know MTG is a stats game, and that decks work on percentages rather than guarantees. The best constant a player can achieve is not catching mulligans. Being on the play with a mulligan means playing at -2 for +1 tempo, ostensibly with two of the six cards in hand as lands, meaning you're looking at four probable cards to get something going, protect it, and saying no to opponent's plan. Those ain't great odds, as we all know. Thus, avoiding mulligans is paramount.
To achieve this, I've been toying around with the cycling lands and higher land counts than is strictly traditional. This build is running 24 lands with five being mono-colored one-drop cycles and one three-drop (which will primarily be fetched to color fix, which is a pretty popular tactic). Thus, besides running more lands, creating fewer mandatory mulligans, this build has fewer dead draws, as five of the lands become 'pay 1: draw 1 card' instants. Combine that with the fetch lands, three-drop cycle land, and pain draw land (fiery islet), and the build is suddenly orders of magnitude better at topdecking than traditional builds.
There is, of course, a tradeoff. The cycle lands hit tapped and the one-drops are mono-colored. Thus, you'll experience some games with a loss of tempo due to suffering through turns 1, 2, or 3 with a dropped tapped land. However, this is mitigated by a low curve (quarter of the deck is one-drops), higher land count in general, which ups the chances of not having to drop the tapped land until you can play one-drops and two-drops, and all the color fixing glory that's available in modern lands that essentially doesn't care about a few mono-colored lands when it can fetch whatever it needs or field lands that trade life for colors and tempo.
Is this theory perfect? Nah, this is an imperfect game. I do, however, think it's worth pursuing as an alternative paradigm to help fix losing games to mulligans and bad topdecking.
The great thing for this build is that, when combined with the land strategy, you're playing a deck that's less likely to mulligan, less likely to flounder on dead draws, and comes with a built in +2 material, probably with tempo. In exchange, you have to run Consider, Opt, Preordain, and Peek instead of four copies of Consider. Hopefully I've articulated an argument as to how that tradeoff is at least possibly tenable.
The build itself works off the 'good stuff' model a bit, and has lots of use for a full grave but doesn't actually rely on it. If opponent sides in grave hate, they will cripple your one copy of Murktide and handicap your Hearth Elemental, Snap, Kroxa, and Kess. Notably, all those are still playable to varying degrees regardless. So, if opponent overcorrects to hate against the grave, thank him and keep going. Other than a few full grave mechanics, the build either says 'no' directly or indirectly, grinds out slow advantage as only control can do, and runs win conditions that either justify their inclusion all by themselves, such as Murktide, or double as delayed material or tactical control. I'm absolutely in love with the adventure cards these days, as they are storable material that essentially has no drawback. I particularly enjoy Hearth Elemental in this build, as its about as good a topdeck as you can get in builds such as these. If your hand's empty, two mana draws you two cards. If you're topdecking, you're almost certainly got a grave full of instants and sorceries to some degree, so he's not going to be expensive to cast as a critter. In fact, its quite possible that three mana will get you +2 cards and a 4/5 that's completely immune from half the standard removal run in modern (bolt, fatal push, prismatic ending, etc), and requires either a hard kill like terminate or a juiced unholy heat to deal with. Fun stuff.
Feedback appreciated.