SCD: Rhystic Study

[Mr_Webman]

I have my own rant here lol.

I personally have never had a problem with Rhystic Study. Most everybody else in my play group is also of the same mind. It's obviously a very strong card, and if you know the consequences of playing such a strong card, then by all means play it. I have 2 copies that I play in my stronger decks, but my 2 other lower power blue decks I don't play it in.

Everything is contextual. If all 4 of us are playing high power decks and 3 of us are blue, I would expect to see it in those decks. You play it, it draws ire and someone blows it up, then maybe someone plays theirs later, rinse and repeat. Such a thing will happen at higher power tables. Most of us don't search it out because it doesn't give you immediate advantage, but it does draw immediate ire. It's also middling in the late game when mana is more plentiful. That said there's a reason it draws hate; drawing 10+ cards of a 3 mana enchantment is absurd, and the stronger your deck is the better it gets. Now if you're playing with it at a table where everyone else is clearly playing barely modified precons that's a whole other issue. Communication is paramount!

That being said I do get the argument about it slowing the game down, which it absolutely does. More time spent asking "do you pay the ?" is less time we have for more games. However, in higher power tables you pretty much have to pay the whenever possible, or the game will be over pretty fast. This is the dichotomy with the card; It's just one of many powerful cards in the format, but this one in particular draws ire because it can slow the game down with potentially no benefit to the user. So I do understand the frustration.

However most everybody in my play group, myself included, view it as just one of many strong cards that will absolutely cause the table to look in your direction. The card is so prevalent that it's not worth the energy of getting frustrated all the time. Hell, most of the time it gets countered or blown up before it accrues much of any advantage.

That's just my $.02.

[Ruiner]

Generally i do my best to pay the tax unless waiting a turn would be crippling for my own gameplan.

However, if no one is paying the tax, or if multiple players have copies in play, I'll just let people get their cards unless I happen to have nothing else to do with my mana. At that point, no one else is trying to stop the flood of cards and my efforts really aren't amounting to a lot.

[Avacyn Believer]

I more or less agree with ISBPathfinder. My game plan is generally aggressive (often some version of Voltron), and so I don't usually pay the tax, as I am trying to do something every turn to deal more damage on the turn or the next. How many resources is some opponent holding only changes my target.

Good point was raised though, that Rhystic can get you ahead but if it gives you anything good is random, so it is kind of a trap to play it. I think like with some other cards we are hung up on it because in the early years of EDH it was really good. At least that is how I remember it.

2) Everyone attacks the Rhystic Study player until they are dead or it is removed.

I advocate for the same thing with anything that threatens the board, like Nevinyrral's Disk. Attack that player until the threat is removed or they pull the trigger, do not negotiate with terrorists

[TheGildedGoose]

Good point was raised though, that Rhystic can get you ahead but if it gives you anything good is random, so it is kind of a trap to play it.

Doesn't this apply to all sources of card draw? Certainly, there's more variance to Rhystic Study because your opponents can always pay the one but by and large the real world experience of FLGS play Study draws a boatload of cards, so its chances of bricking are lower than many other card draw spells.

[pokken]

Doesn't this apply to all sources of card draw?

There're a ton of card draw options that either get you specific cards or get you a bunch of cards right now, or let you look at a lot of cards. Or convert at a much higher rate. Personally I'm far more on bomb draw these days just because I'd rather draw 12 cards and kill everybody than trickle-draw 3 cards off a Rhystic Study :D YMMV whatever.

[Avacyn Believer]

Doesn't this apply to all sources of card draw?

Not wrong, I just think that with regular card draw is something you expect to see and want to have in your decks to make it play more consistently, so nobody is surprised when you play it, but Rhystic Study can be made to sound like it is so much better (and it can feel that way when you play against it and they keep drawing cards), but it can easily just sit there, draw you nothing useful but keeps making you the target.

[TheGildedGoose]

Doesn't this apply to all sources of card draw?

There're a ton of card draw options that either get you specific cards or get you a bunch of cards right now, or let you look at a lot of cards. Or convert at a much higher rate. Personally I'm far more on bomb draw these days just because I'd rather draw 12 cards and kill everybody than trickle-draw 3 cards off a Rhystic Study :D YMMV whatever.

Doesn't this apply to all sources of card draw?

Not wrong, I just think that with regular card draw is something you expect to see and want to have in your decks to make it play more consistently, so nobody is surprised when you play it, but Rhystic Study can be made to sound like it is so much better (and it can feel that way when you play against it and they keep drawing cards), but it can easily just sit there, draw you nothing useful but keeps making you the target.

Don't get me wrong, I think that since the whole point of card draw is to find what you need to progress your gameplan, you should play either meat and potatoes simple card draw or engines easily synergistic with your commander or deck. Study does both card draw and mana denial well, but not at the same time, and not when you really need one or the other.

I was just responding to that very particular statement.

[PrimevalCommander]

Doesn't this apply to all sources of card draw?

There're a ton of card draw options that either get you specific cards or get you a bunch of cards right now, or let you look at a lot of cards. Or convert at a much higher rate. Personally I'm far more on bomb draw these days just because I'd rather draw 12 cards and kill everybody than trickle-draw 3 cards off a Rhystic Study :D YMMV whatever.

What card are you playing that can draw 12 cards for as little investment as ? Sure there are things that draw more cards, or draw cards now, but not many spells can draw more cards for as little mana as RS, even if it takes a couple turn cycles to get there. Unless I'm storming off, 12 cards now is actually LESS useful to me than 3 cards every turn cycle until my opponents kill it. Then it is a removal spell not pointed at my commander or other pieces. Few draw spells are as cheap to cast and yeild a similar return in terms or raw cards than RS, which is why it still see's so much play. If the card wasn't good, then we wouldn't be so annoyed about people playing it.

I was removing Return of the Wildspeaker from Kalamax, the Stormsire due to drawing too many cards. I couldn't hope to play them all since I'm not combo'ing or storming. I'm not playing RS there either, but the point is getting a stead stream of cards you can use as you get them may be more useful than a huge grip of cards to cast 2-3 and discard half of them to hand size.

General comment: RS does have some variance to it, and yes your opponent's can choose which mode is better for them or worse for you. But as others have mentioned, BOTH modes are actually good for you, and it is a rare time where RS doesn't pay back it's investment with an on-rate number of cards (2-3 cards). Even if it is instantly destroyed it is no different than an Elemental Bond, The Great Henge, Guardian Project, Black Market Connections, Welcoming Vampire or any number of other engine pieces eating removal. Even big draw spells are targets for Counterspell because everyone knows the "Draw 7 cards" is bad news and want to stop it. The only draw spells that don't seem to raise any eyebrows are the Night's Whisper, Fact or Fiction, and other fixed number under 4 card draw spells since drawing 2-3 random cards is likely to just get a land and maybe some action. The engine pieces that have an open ended number of cards they can draw always are the first to eat removal because the known is generally less scary than the unknown, and my opponents not knowing how many cards I will draw from this Tocasia's Welcome just seems to rub them sideways

[pokken]

I think it's fine to spend more mana depending on the deck; I just threw out 12 as a number for whatever reason but I'm more on stuff like:

- skullclamp where I'm in control and gonna draw a bajillion cards
- splendid reclamation where I'll both draw and ramp
- genesis wave where I'll end the game
- greater good protecting my board from exiling, fueling the grave
- yorion loops drawing all the cards
- thrasios with banana mana from earthcraft
- sometimes enchantresses
- open the vaults / eerie ultimatum stuff

(And of course Ephara is a trickle draw deck where I diy rhystic study that draws cards for free while I build a board state; she does basically the same idea, and study was fine in that deck. But I digress :D)


And then lower cost spells that draw cards now like whisper truths and fof.

And synergistic stuff like The Great Henge Coastal Piracy and Kindred Discovery

I think comparing henge and kindred to study is incorrect; they have a lot less exposure to sorcery speed removal and are way more explosive than study.

Other cards you have to wait to untap with, eh, fair I guess? I don't play a lot of those myself.

I think cutting Return of the Wildspeaker in Kalamax is a good call personally @PrimevalCommander - when you can Frantic Search twice for -3 mana or fof twice for 4 it doesn't make a ton of sense to expose yourself to removal for an expensive card (that doesn't anywhere compare to Dig Through Time)

YMMV again whatever but i think rhystic study is overrated and you can think whatever you want. :D

[Cyax]

Rhystic Study being at "worst" a one-sided Sphere of Resistance is still really good. Becoming archenemy is a good sign that a deck is going off, and in many cases the archenemy manages to convert their advantage into a win.

Sure it's low-impact if it gets immediately removed or it is not followed up with anything good, but the prisoners' dilemma is an aspect that is more nuanced than "just don't pay". Firstly, a deck that consistently does not play on curve is inherently weaker and less consistent that decks that do because of a more proactive strategy. Glass-cannon decks and other decks that do not care about the draw will usually choose to not pay. Finally, assembling another strong value engine, copying your Study, seeing another player play their own Study, or playing additional stax effects are all scenarios where your opponents will be forced to either not pay or lose to a huge tempo loss.

The card is one of the strongest in the format, but it still depends on the rest of the deck to show its full potential.

[yeti1069]

I think it's fine to spend more mana depending on the deck; I just threw out 12 as a number for whatever reason but I'm more on stuff like:

- skullclamp where I'm in control and gonna draw a bajillion cards
- splendid reclamation where I'll both draw and ramp
- genesis wave where I'll end the game
- greater good protecting my board from exiling, fueling the grave
- yorion loops drawing all the cards
- thrasios with banana mana from earthcraft
- sometimes enchantresses
- open the vaults / eerie ultimatum stuff

I'm all for engine cards on-theme, but these all require multiple pieces to start "drawing cards" or a LOT of mana. Rhystic is 3 mana, and usually draws at least to rate (2-3 cards for 3 mana), and often more. There are times where burst draw of 2-3 cards for 2-3 mana is what's needed, but there are times where doing so won't be any more useful than Rhystic, whereas Rhystic is a fantastic draw piece early in the game. On curve, it out-performs nearly every other option or slows the table down while you continue playing on curve.

I get hating it for being obnoxious, or not loving it as a late game draw, but the arguments otherwise just don't hold up.

[pokken]

I get hating it for being obnoxious, or not loving it as a late game draw, but the arguments otherwise just don't hold up.

The only other argument I made is that it has a lower ceiling than synergistic draw--costing more mana doesn't mean anything if you win :D


Summing up
- it's not a great topdeck
- it's high variance (both worse in proportion to opponent skill and random timing of cards drawn)
- it has a lower ceiling than synergistic draw
- it's annoying (non-mechanical of course)
- it's much stronger in stronger metas and worse in battlecruiser environments where people play fewer spells per turn

If you can find an argument I made that "doesn't hold up" since you agree with all of them except apparently "lower ceiling than synergistic draw" (Which I feel like is obviously factual so hard to disagree with).

I think all of our disagreements are a matter of degree - like how much you should play around it, how much to value early game power, how much to value consistency, and how much to target the study player etc.


--
(Tangential high power/cedh commentary below)

Most of what I'm arguing is around correct play patterns and I think again that's hard to disagree with; I've since watched a *ton* of CEDH gameplay to hopefully update my opinions on this, and what I found is:

- At least one person at every Youtuber CEDH table is an idiot and feeds the blue draw decks and then loses. It's usally a non-blue deck.
- The best players are very selective about whose studies they feed and what spells they will cast to feed a study (usually dropping their own study effect)
- CEDH gameplay online is significantly different when an actually good player is at the table; when an actually good player is at the table, they win almost every game and it almost always revolves around people misplaying around Mystic Remora or Rhystic Study and giving them the W.

If you read tournament reports from good players, there is a whole lot more of "And everyone took a turn off and let Mystic Remora die" but you *never* see that on youtube :D

My main gameplay pattern comment is:

It is hard to know if defecting to a Rhystic Study increases your win percentage.

And I think if you watch games you'll see this is truth--it's not that defecting is always wrong, it's more that it's very hard to know if you're actually helping yourself by defecting or just falling prety to a bias toward action.

[yeti1069]

I get hating it for being obnoxious, or not loving it as a late game draw, but the arguments otherwise just don't hold up.

The only other argument I made is that it has a lower ceiling than synergistic draw--costing more mana doesn't mean anything if you win :D

Umm...

This card is not good in most scenarios.

Anyway, something to look at if you're checking cEDH for data on this, is how often does the Rhystic player win even when opponents aren't feeding it? I haven't looked looked, so it's a genuine question, but I suspect win rate is still somewhat higher than if they hadn't played it at all.

People feeding Rhystic in cEDH are idiots, pure and simple. I don't love cEDH, but I play occasionally, and nearly every time someone "goes for it" through a Rhystic, they lose...except when I play the Rhystic--I never draw anything relevant off Rhystic when I get it in cEDH.

Taking a turn off vs Mystic Remora is entirely different than doing so vs Rhystic. The RS player spends 3 mana, and then continues with their game whether opponents defect or not, whereas the MR player has to decide whether they want to spend an increasing amount of mana to keep their draw/stax piece around. Taking a turn off will often either lead to the MR player also functionally taking a turn off, or letting the fish die, and then the draw engine is gone. That said, even that game play can be beneficial to the MR player. I've kept a bad hand with fish after mulliganing down to 4 and not wanting to go lower, played fish, and everyone took a turn off. I paid for fish, and everyone took another turn off. That meant that I got a couple of extra draws to find something to get my game going otherwise, while everyone else was twiddling their thumbs--I won that game, 1000% because MR bought me 2 turns to draw into a game plan, without anyone feeding it...for 1 mana.

In casual magic, you say Rhystic is bad because players are dropping fewer cards per turn, but I contend that it's just not as insane as it is in cEDH. Casual players are often less wary of Rhystic, but they also take a much bigger hit by "taking a turn off" when they're at 1 spell/turn if they don't have an alternative spell that comes in under Rhystic. Again, feeding Rhystic in a weaker (than cEDH) deck, or one that can less take advantage of the copious resources isn't necessarily as bad as it is otherwise. I run it in Captain N'ghathrod because it's exactly what I want there--something that comes down before all the big stuff and passively either draws cards or slows everyone else down for my grindy long game. That's the key--more resources are always good, but decks that run kind of slowly also just benefit from slowing everyone else down. In Captain I'm almost always happy with whichever decision players make.

Now, vs synergistic draw, the ceiling for Rhystic may be lower, but the floor is also higher, and again, you're comparing it to multiple card combinations that amount to 2x, 3x, 4x as much mana (or more). If Phyrexian Arena drew 2 cards instead of 1, I'm pretty sure nearly everyone would play it. I know I would.

[pokken]

"not good in most scenarios" isn't an argument it's a value judgment :D

--

The floor is way lower a- it's one sided sphere of resistance that makes you the target :D

[yeti1069]

"not good in most scenarios" isn't an argument it's a value judgment :D

--

The floor is way lower a- it's one sided sphere of resistance that makes you the target :D

The floor of Skullclamp is you have an artifact and no creatures, or no creatures with low enough toughness to die on equip and no sac outlet.
The floor of Splendid Reclamation is you have no lands in your yard and are holding a 4-mana sorcery.
The floor of Genesis Wave is you don't have a ton of mana to spend or you cast it for a smallish amount and hit (virtually) nothing.
The floor of Greater Good is you have no creatures to sacrifice, or you do, but will end up going down cards...and you become the target, because this is a very powerful card.
The floor of Yorion loops is you haven't got anything to loop, and just have a 4/5 flyer for 5 (not bad, but hardly comparable).
The floor of Thrasios is you spend 4 mana a turn to Opt.
The floor of an enchantress is you have a 0/1, 0/2, 2/2, or 1/3 with no enchantments in your hand.
The floor of Open the Vaults is you have nothing to recur, and your opponent(s) have bombs in their yards.
The floor of Eerie Ultimatum is you have a 7-mana sorcery in hand that you can't cast due to its prohibitive colors, or you have nothing in your yard.

Now, of course, the ceilings on these cards are very high, but they're (mostly) not existing in the same territory as Rhystic, they're engine pieces or finishers. All of them require board states, a lot of mana, full(ish) hands or graveyards to do their respective thing.

[pokken]

The floor of Skullclamp is you have an artifact and no creatures, or no creatures with low enough toughness to die on equip and no sac outlet.
The floor of Splendid Reclamation is you have no lands in your yard and are holding a 4-mana sorcery.
The floor of Genesis Wave is you don't have a ton of mana to spend or you cast it for a smallish amount and hit (virtually) nothing.
The floor of Greater Good is you have no creatures to sacrifice, or you do, but will end up going down cards...and you become the target, because this is a very powerful card.
The floor of Yorion loops is you haven't got anything to loop, and just have a 4/5 flyer for 5 (not bad, but hardly comparable).
The floor of Thrasios is you spend 4 mana a turn to Opt.
The floor of an enchantress is you have a 0/1, 0/2, 2/2, or 1/3 with no enchantments in your hand.
The floor of Open the Vaults is you have nothing to recur, and your opponent(s) have bombs in their yards.
The floor of Eerie Ultimatum is you have a 7-mana sorcery in hand that you can't cast due to its prohibitive colors, or you have nothing in your yard.

Now, of course, the ceilings on these cards are very high, but they're (mostly) not existing in the same territory as Rhystic, they're engine pieces or finishers. All of them require board states, a lot of mana, full(ish) hands or graveyards to do their respective thing.

Yeah and the floor of Rhystic Study is being archenemy for 3 mana. So lower floor. Having a card you don't want to cast yet is significantly better than playing a card that you can't defend and dying because of it :D

Remember Luminarch Ascension? The floor of that card is worse than -1 card for nothing, it's getting hated off the table instantly.

Lower floor, lower ceiling. Significantly more efficient and better average outcome.

[yeti1069]

Yeah and the floor of Rhystic Study is being archenemy for 3 mana. So lower floor. Having a card you don't want to cast yet is significantly better than playing a card that you can't defend and dying because of it :D

I've found that to rarely be the case (auto-archenemy for the rest of the game/until it's gone), and even when it was...it's still a draw engine/stax piece, either feeding me cards or slowing everyone down. Both of which make it harder for opponents to kill me. There was the assertion above that taking a turn off rather than feeding Rhystic is the right play, but if everyone does that, what does it matter if you're archenemy or not? No one is killing you.

[TheGildedGoose]

I've found that to rarely be the case (auto-archenemy for the rest of the game/until it's gone), and even when it was...it's still a draw engine/stax piece, either feeding me cards or slowing everyone down. Both of which make it harder for opponents to kill me. There was the assertion above that taking a turn off rather than feeding Rhystic is the right play, but if everyone does that, what does it matter if you're archenemy or not? No one is killing you.

This is my experience, and I think the thrust of this thread is that it's a miserable prisoner's dilemma for everyone else involved. It does not spark joy.

[pokken]

The whole point is that it's thought of as a prisoners dilemma but it isn't really. In a true dilemma you have a reasonable idea of the outcome and it doesn't get progressively worse when each person defects. And it doesn't necessarily get better for you to defect.

another important difference is you aren't prevented from communicating or locked in to continuing to defect.

And most importantly you don't really know how much better it's getting for you to defect.

Side note I would love to hear about your metas and whether there is someone who actively %$#% the bed against study. My experience is there's basically always someone who does it completely wrong.

[yeti1069]

The whole point is that it's thought of as a prisoners dilemma but it isn't really. In a true dilemma you have a reasonable idea of the outcome and it doesn't get progressively worse when each person defects. And it doesn't necessarily get better for you to defect.

another important difference is you aren't prevented from communicating or locked in to continuing to defect.

And most importantly you don't really know how much better it's getting for you to defect.

Side note I would love to hear about your metas and whether there is someone who actively %$#% the bed against study. My experience is there's basically always someone who does it completely wrong.

I don't have a meta these days. Mostly just playing randos on Spelltable. I'd say in a portion of games there is definitely some jackass who boldly proclaims "I don't pay taxes!" or a (seeming) idiot who doesn't pay...and then has mana left over at EOT that they never spend. Conceivably, they could have some interaction in hand that they're holding up, but I've had whole games go by without seeing that mysterious 1-mana interaction spell, so...doubtful (this was at an ostensibly cEDH table). I also have had plenty of games where players try to play around it, only not paying occasionally, and it is a decent card there without being super obnoxious as either a reminder nor as an overwhelming card advantage machine. In the first set, those games also typically feature a general lack of interaction and/or understanding of Magic rules.

[TheGildedGoose]

The whole point is that it's thought of as a prisoners dilemma but it isn't really. In a true dilemma you have a reasonable idea of the outcome and it doesn't get progressively worse when each person defects. And it doesn't necessarily get better for you to defect.

I'm not sure why you think a "true dilemma" requires any of that. You can still act in self-interest without having a firm grasp on the outcomes. Faulty input doesn't change motivation.

Side note I would love to hear about your metas and whether there is someone who actively %$#% the bed against study. My experience is there's basically always someone who does it completely wrong.

Some combination of various types of online play and FLGSs, leaning towards the latter. A turn 3 Rhystic Study usually allows that person to run away with the game, often because someone at the table is bad at Magic.

[pokken]

I'm not sure why you think a "true dilemma" requires any of that. You can still act in self-interest without having a firm grasp on the outcomes. Faulty input doesn't change motivation.

The concept of a prisoner's dilemma requires those things at least, er, classically. It can be a lower case d dilemma but it's not exactly a prisoner's dilemma. I'm at the point now where the word dilemma is starting to look weird :D

Like I think people mentally shorthand the idea of Rhystic Study is a prisoner's dilemma where it's best for you if you defect but everyone else cooperates (e.g. prisoner's dilemma) - but that's inaccurate (for the reasons I previously enumerated).

[TheGildedGoose]

I'm not sure why you think a "true dilemma" requires any of that. You can still act in self-interest without having a firm grasp on the outcomes. Faulty input doesn't change motivation.

The concept of a prisoner's dilemma requires those things at least, er, classically. It can be a lower case d dilemma but it's not exactly a prisoner's dilemma. I'm at the point now where the word dilemma is starting to look weird :D

Like I think people mentally shorthand the idea of Rhystic Study is a prisoner's dilemma where it's best for you if you defect but everyone else cooperates (e.g. prisoner's dilemma) - but that's inaccurate (for the reasons I previously enumerated).

Maybe it's a semantic quibble over "reasonable." The problem as you present it here - that it's difficult to determine if a specific in-game action increases or decreases your chances of winning - applies to virtually all forms of interaction and card draw, though. It's true, moreso than other cards it's difficult to perceive whether defecting or cooperating with regards to Rhystic Study helps you or not in the long run, but you can't be sure it's the right call to use your removal spell on that Guardian Project, either. When you attempt to factor in things like your own deck construction, your own playskill, the deckbuilding and playskill of that opponent, the deckbuilding and playskill of the other opponent(s), the possibility for tabletalk, the psychological instability of some nerds... it's a melange of madness.

Making suboptimal choices is part of the game. It's a feature, not a bug, especially in EDH. That's what makes it exciting.

[capitacommunist]

Summing up
- it's not a great topdeck
- it's high variance (both worse in proportion to opponent skill and random timing of cards drawn)
- it has a lower ceiling than synergistic draw
- it's annoying (non-mechanical of course)
- it's much stronger in stronger metas and worse in battlecruiser environments where people play fewer spells per turn

Describing Rhystic Study in this way does not feel like an fair reflection of how it plays in practice (and what a powerful card it is). In my experience Rhystic Study always overperforms as players should (mostly) pay the tax, but realistically that just doesn't happen in a commander game for the many reasons already mentioned by you and in this thread (especially bad player skill and frequency that paying the tax would stop you from making a play to advance your game). Evaluating it should be on that typical impact it has on the game rather than ceiling/floor, and unless it's removed within a turn cycle that is generally far above other 3 MV spells (a bunch of cards drawn and a lot of mana tied up/plays delayed), and delivers a far better cards/mana rate than other draw spells.

That it makes you the archenemy at the table I also do not see as a reason not to play it (nor as a floor) - this applies to a couple of dozen high profile cards in the format and Rhystic Study is generally not the only one on the table at any given time. For that reason I don't actually see the Study player becoming the archenemy that frequently.

However, when I consider whether to play it in decks, I do consider whether I would be happy with a one-sided Sphere of Resistance as a card. As player skill increases, Rhystic Study should tend in that direction, so if you would not play that card, Rhystic Study becomes more of a question mark versus other possible blue draw spells. From this perspective, Rhystic Study isn't the best fit in every deck, as its potential is much better in decks that already have other taxing/slowing down pieces for example, or have a proactive gameplay where slowing your opponents is extra valuable (akin to something like Tangle-Wire).

[pokken]

@capitacommunist I was listing the negatives so of course it seems one sided :D

I disagree that you only should evaluate the typical scenario. Especially with the typical scenario being confounded by people being dumb. I'd suggest evaluating it based on floor, ceiling, typical play in your meta and then typical experience under optimal play.

There are a lot of reasons to minimize variance by playing higher floor things and also to allow for explosive wins by playing higher ceiling cards. So you evaluate all the angles.

I can't argue that study is a great card against dummies, and in formats where lots of fast mana is played. But I maintain it's a lot worse than people think in casual games annnnnd it *should* be even worse if people played around right.

And it's annoying. :D

Arguments like "it's good with Tangle Wire do not help the "but you shouldn't always be archenemy" argument. The cards that make study good should make you the archenemy almost always.

I get that sometimes it's a choice of remove Consecrated Sphinx and don't pay the tax or remove study and die to sphinx. Those are the exceptions and you can make the right play.

I said almost always not always :D