Discussion Forum

You Sir, is awesome, and so is your deck! :D

I love it! Definately one of the more unique twists with :manau::manar: Delver that I've come across. About the only differences I would make are:

a) Snapcaster > Archaeomancer. Technically, it's more bang for your buck, but I see where the latter would be more benefical. Afterall, I'm sure there's times you don't care to completely exile your spells.

Again, love the deck man. Thumbs-freakin'-up! :cool:

[QUOTE=itsjeremyseth]I love it! Definately one of the more unique twists with :manau::manar: Delver that I've come across. About the only differences I would make are:

a) Snapcaster > Archaeomancer. Technically, it's more bang for your buck, but I see where the latter would be more benefical. Afterall, I'm sure there's times you don't care to completely exile your spells.

Again, love the deck man. Thumbs-freakin'-up! :cool:[/QUOTE]


I have definitely thought about the snapcaster idea, and it does seem to be a viable addition to the deck, but the biggest fact of the matter is, if i can i want to try and keep my cards from exile unless i do flashback from a casting cost. although putting in snapcasters, would allow flashback on everything, but the thing i see, is that with snapcaster, i have to cast it right then and there, and have to keep that much mana untapped, where with the archaeomancer, for this deck i end turn a lot of things, and can do so without neeeding to keep the mana untapped, for the possibility of something i need to snapcaster...


Don't get me wrong, snapcaster is still a possibility, and is being kept in mind!