The Tarmogoyf question

[3drinks]

I'm sorry I don't buy this at all. You think marginally better Kalonian Tusker is a good card in edh? You immediately listed a bunch of 4/5s (with extra upside usually) that play as though they're 5/6s tramples because of your commander. A 5/6 trample for 2 I can understand. A 3/4 with no text I very much cannot (outside of memeing).

Were you actually running Tarmogoyf in your Goreclaw, Terror of Qal Sisma deck? It'd have basically always been a 3/4 for you.

In Goreclaw specifically? Not typically because it doesn't outperform Erhnam at 2 for 4pwr (the sweet spot for the deck is cards with power 2 greater than it's mv to maximize the cost reduction, with four cost greater than six cost because it's easier and more reliable to double spell). But I do favour Goyf in decks like, say, Hans Erikkson, Korvold, Anafenza/Doran.

@3drinks How is >6-8 damage win-more in a 40 life multiplayer format? 120 isn't really a fair number, of course, since other people will probably attack and people will probably pay life for certain effects, but if I'm the aggro player I usually expect to be dealing at least 60-80 damage before I win. With 6-8 power in play that's going to take 10 turns, and more if you're disrupted by practically anything, including blockers. Most decks are not going to have a problem outracing that, even at quite low power levels.

I think we're seeing the problem here, you've got this "go big" mentality here but sometimes all you need is a base hit. If you throw everything out and inevitably get wiped, you're just sad while top decking and everyone continues on. Ideally, you put enough power out there to provide pressure, but not so much that scares people into a wipe. You drop an Avenger of Zendikar for example, and people get nervous as they believe you're representing Triumph of the Hordes. You drop a Garruk Wildspeaker and a Packleader for example, and you don't draw those same eyes even though you're still representing seven power, which is quite honestly a lot of power, even if it's not threatening lethal in one turn.

I was talking about baloths specifically in the context of goreclaw. Assuming you're playing goreclaw on 4 (and assuming he lives), you'll have the option of playing baloths or 2 vanilla-ish 4 drops on the next turn (presumably turn 4-5). So you aren't able to play a 4-drop any faster than a 6-drop in that context. In a different deck, without Goreclaw always being your 4-mana play and without his discount making a 6-drop playable on the next turn, then there'd be a more substantial difference between a 4-drop and a 6-drop (and you'd be reasonable to favor lower-mv creatures on average), but in this case if the 6-drop is better than 2 4-drops it seems like pure upside to me, unless you think someone's going to kill poor goreclaw.

I get your premise, though using Rampaging Baloths for the example is flawed because it's actually a seven drop. Literally no one is full tapping for this guy and hoping they can table it. Nor should they be allowed to table it. It's also going back to that premise of scaring people into answering your big mana threat - as they should be, baloths are terrifying! You can also read above where I talk about the four drops being superior to the sixes in the deck referenced, because of ability to double spell with them. But, you're right that Goreclaw is also very scary and people should point a kill at your friendly neighborhood bear.

You have my sympathy trying to direct answers towards the combo players. But I'm also a little confused - you say people are killing you because you're curving out with aggro threats, but you said previously that they're ignoring your threats thus allowing you to kill them.

You also previously criticized people for "sandbag [removal] for what they perceive to be the 'biggest threat'", but surely that's a reasonable thing to do if someone is threatening to combo out, rather than use it up on your vanilla beaters? I'm not sure what you think people ought to do.

I think all I'm saying is, and I must have been really fatigued last night to go so far off topic, is there's something to be said for efficient creatures. Yeah Silverback Elder is really good because he like Elder Gargaroth for example do a lot of things, while having such large bullseyes on them because of either what they do, or they have an ability to inhibit what someone else does, while still beating for 6/turn. Yet if you throw a Weatherseed Treefolk down, no one bats an eye despite it threatening practically the same clock. Or Blastoderm, which represents 15 damage over three turns for four mana - that's an absurd rate but it doesn't force someone to wipe the board. Yet you can't just sit there and take five every turn, that's a losing proposition at even the most casual of tables. So you do what? Try to go over the top of it which causes the next player to either do the same, or pearl clutch and wipe the board because they got scared of what might happen next. What I'm illustrating here is these vanilla/french vanilla creatures are leading to the same kind of play pattern at their worst, while at their best players are misevaluating them [because of a lack of text] despite the math showing the same clock as the new shiny cards.

That took me a long time to sus out, I hope you're following me.

[Hawk]

I do happily run Saproling Burst in Samut since it's a lot of damage with mass haste and sometimes other anthems. I also run Shivan Wurm but acknowledge it's 100% for the nostalgia - card is bad and should be something else, but I can't help myself. I don't, and wouldn't, run Blastoderm despite its iconic pedigree because it just isn't enough these days.

I do think 3drinks has a point in that #value is overrated and overstated in 2022; efficient bodies on curve can be good...

But to Dirk's point, and my own - in the year 2022, most every color has a body that's good stats AND abilities, such that a pure vanilla or even french vanilla is a tough sell. Let's just look at green:

• At 2 CMC, there's no reason beyond tribal relevance or Ruxa, Patient Professor shenanigans to run vanilla bodies, not when Scavenging Ooze, Viridian Zealot, Kraul Harpooner, Lotus Cobra, Destiny Spinner, Collector Ouphe...and that's just the start of the list.
• At 3 CMC the top of the EDHRECs charts is dominated by value monsters, but it's not like Tireless Tracker, Tireless Provisioner, Rishkar, Peema Renegade, and Evolution Sage are totally terrible at getting into the red zone while they generate that value, and there's also Wayward Swordtooth as well as scaling threats like Managorger Hydra and Champion of Lambholt. Heck, even Goreclaw, Terror of Qal Sisma doesn't need to run Alpine Grizzly (except for meme value, which is legitimate), not when Prowling Serpopard and Topiary Stomper exist alongside the aforementioned Swordtooth.
• At 4 CMC, there's precious little reason for Goreclaw to need to run old Ernie beyond nostalgia (which, again, respect - I still have that sweet foil Ernie from the Beatdown Box around). Beyond Questing Beast Green's cup runneth over with incredible 4 drops that actually do something - Temur Sabertooth, Yeva, Nature's Herald, Gemrazer, Ripjaw Raptor, Bramble Sovereign, Chameleon Colossus, Ulvenwald Oddity // Ulvenwald Behemoth, Anara, Wolvid Familiar, Nightpack Ambusher, and Wolfbriar Elemental to name just the ones on the first page of my scryfall check.

It's not so much that "we demand every creature be Questing Beast" as it is that, especially with WotC printing to Commander, it's trivial to make every creature in your aggressive deck a questing beast.

[OneAndOnly]

Eh, there's something in pulling off a win with an unwieldy creature -- Force of Natureor Lord of the Pit back in the day. Neither of those are (remotely) vanilla, though.

TBH, true vanilla creatures can be a little difficult to find these days. Quilled Slagwurm? French vanilla / trinket text creatures? Same thing, there's a one-off joy of bopping someone with a Force of Savagery (especially in a Doran deck...), but that's mostly for casual fun and laughs, and not a competitive table.

It's the interaction between cards that (for me) makes Magic fun, and vanilla creatures obviously avoid that, so it's a hard pass.

[Dunadain]

Honestly do vanilla beaters have a place ANYWHERE anymore? Tarmogoyf has been pushed out of every constructed format except, ironically, vintage (metas are weird). Delver plays Delver of Secrets // Insectile Aberration and Murktide Regent but they at least have flying, (and Dragon's Rage Channeler is just better than Delver of Secrets // Insectile Aberration). It just seems like there are so many better ways to put your opponents on a clock than a beater with no evasion,, Maddening Hex, Goblin Rabblemaster, Sheoldred, the Apocalypse, the list goes on.

As I was typing up this paragraph I just remembered Death's Shadow so I guess that's one vanilla beater that still sees constructed play.

Anyways, I was thinking about the one comment that said, if a 3/3 for one mana is "acceptable" in a 20 life, 2 player game, a 18/18 for 1 mana would be acceptable in a 40 life, 4 player game, but that overlooks the value you get from killing a player.

In a 2 player game, there is no difference to the board state between dealing 0 damage and dealing 19 damage to the opponent. In Commander, every 40 damage you deal removes a third of the opposition's board and a third of the opposition's hand. That's of corse an oversimplification, but as a general rule, there is actual value gained in killing a player even if you don't outright win.

So I think the "acceptable" 1 drop would be more than 6/6, but less than 18/18 (which is a huge range, but whatever, it's just a thought experiment).

[BaronCappuccino]

I don't think I'd play a vanilla, or rather, on a case by case basis, it'd require a very commander-centric compelling argument. A commander like Ghalta, Primal Hunger might yield said arguments, and a commander like Ruxa, Patient Professor demands them. Similar situations aside, I can't.

[TheGildedGoose]

The combat step is distasteful. #teamnevervanilla

[DirkGently]

I think we're seeing the problem here, you've got this "go big" mentality here but sometimes all you need is a base hit. If you throw everything out and inevitably get wiped, you're just sad while top decking and everyone continues on. Ideally, you put enough power out there to provide pressure, but not so much that scares people into a wipe. You drop an Avenger of Zendikar for example, and people get nervous as they believe you're representing Triumph of the Hordes. You drop a Garruk Wildspeaker and a Packleader for example, and you don't draw those same eyes even though you're still representing seven power, which is quite honestly a lot of power, even if it's not threatening lethal in one turn.

You've been talking about pressuring combo decks. A "base hit" isn't going to mean much to a deck that's planning to kill the table on turn 8 (assuming we're talking about casual-ish combo and not cEDH).

I don't know what power level your meta is playing at. But even in my very low-powered meta (which is well below "normal LGS" level), people can profitably block a 5 power creature by turn 5 most of the time. I agree that people aren't going to wipe the board over an erhnam djinn and a blastoderm, because those cards probably don't have any actual effect on the board. There's a good chance they can't even profitably attack. And in an LGS meta, by turn 5 someone's probably cast Army of the Damned off Jodah, Archmage Eternal and you'll never get a good attack against them again, assuming someone else doesn't just play Peregrine Drake into Deadeye Navigator and kill the table. Unless you've also got a lot of disruption tools to prevent these things from happening, and draw power to keep yourself stocked with them, I just don't see how you're ever going to put together enough base hits to score a run.

People get nervous about avenger of zendikar because all you need is a fetch and a ramp spell and you're swinging for 30+ damage next turn. It's a powerful standalone card, it doesn't really need support.

I get your premise, though using Rampaging Baloths for the example is flawed because it's actually a seven drop. Literally no one is full tapping for this guy and hoping they can table it. Nor should they be allowed to table it. It's also going back to that premise of scaring people into answering your big mana threat - as they should be, baloths are terrifying! You can also read above where I talk about the four drops being superior to the sixes in the deck referenced, because of ability to double spell with them. But, you're right that Goreclaw is also very scary and people should point a kill at your friendly neighborhood bear.

Fair point that it's more of a 7 than a 6, but I don't think it's nearly as scary as you think it is. There are a lot of things that can kill the table a lot faster than a baloth. If it starts swinging at me specifically then maybe I'll burn removal against it, but I definitely wouldn't fire off sorcery-speed removal unprovoked. Same for Goreclaw...I guess I'd put him at about the same threat level as baloths. Unless he's swinging at me specifically and I don't have good blocks, or unless the goreclaw player is becoming too dominant, I'm not likely to use removal against him.

Yet if you throw a Weatherseed Treefolk down, no one bats an eye despite it threatening practically the same clock.

Well yes, because they're probably planning to kill you way before a 5-power beater attacks them unblocked 8 times - but destroying their permanents, or drawing into your own threats and answers, has the potential to derail their plans a lot more than a glacially-slow combat clock.

Or Blastoderm, which represents 15 damage over three turns for four mana - that's an absurd rate but it doesn't force someone to wipe the board. Yet you can't just sit there and take five every turn, that's a losing proposition at even the most casual of tables.

I would say it's a losing proposition ONLY at the most casual of tables. At a "normal LGS" power table, in my experience, someone can easily take 5 a turn, and just kill you long before it adds up to lethal. Or they can just chump block. Or have a bigger creature.

I've been playing Soul of Windgrace as my set-commander deck for the season, and he's got similar stats to blastoderm (plus a lot more value ofc). It's pretty common for me to get brick-walled by blockers a turn or two after I play him. Or gets blown up by a board wipe. If I get 2-3 good attacks in, without needing supporting spells, that's pretty good. And that's at a very low-powered table where people aren't threatening to combo out. Plus he's dealing commander damage, so he's (debatably) twice as effective as blastoderm. So I don't buy the situation where blastoderm gets to just attack unopposed for 3 consecutive turns. Sure, it could happen occasionally, but I'd expect the average is attacking once unblocked, once chumped, and the third time can't attack at all.

So you do what? Try to go over the top of it which causes the next player to either do the same,

Regardless of who goes "over the top" first and/or hardest it seems like you lose in that scenario.

or pearl clutch and wipe the board because they got scared of what might happen next.

Weird choice of words. It doesn't seem like you're winning in this scenario either though, you're just forcing a reset (without having accrued value).

What I'm illustrating here is these vanilla/french vanilla creatures are leading to the same kind of play pattern at their worst, while at their best players are misevaluating them [because of a lack of text] despite the math showing the same clock as the new shiny cards.

It seems like at their BEST they have the same result as "new shiny cards" - i.e. someone board wipes. At their worst, someone else plays something bigger and scarier, nobody has an answer for it, and you lose. Based on your own evaluation.

The reason people don't evaluate vanilla-ish beaters higher isn't because of the number of words on them. Its because the other players are planning to do something powerful which invalidates moderate combat hits by comboing a win or building a massive board or drawing dozens of cards. Silverback Elder blowing up their important pieces is likely to create a much bigger hindrance to their ability to achieve that plan than a creature with the same power but without that ability. Avenger of Zendikar will get their attention on combat alone because it presents a much larger, faster threat, and thus a realistic hindrance to their ability to achieve their plan. Erhnam djinn does not. Most decks can happily take 4-5 damage for a few turns while they build.

When I build an aggro deck, I want something that can put out at least 10 points of damage (after blockers) a turn as quickly as possible, is durable against disruption (especially wipes), and which has at least a little interaction to disrupt enemy combos, or permanents that might shut me down. Dealing 7 points a turn pre-blockers, especially without disruption, sounds way too slow to have an appreciable impact in a game outside of a very, very low-powered meta.

[Yatsufusa]

The closest thing I'm running to a vanilla beatstick is Daemogoth Titan in Karador (where I turn its downside to a marginal upside). I used to run Lord of Extinction in the same deck, but it technically failed the beatstick part because it actually garners attention for outright removal that it never gets to beat, while the Titan actually gets to at least act as removal when blocked (this coming from a situation when I was sacrificing stuff like Viridian Emissary with the Commander around to bring it back).

Going by that logic I think 14 power is the benchmark where a true Vanilla will get my attention. It represents 3 hits (Elder Dragon terms) to kill an opponent from full and is technically "inconspicuous" enough at that number, since I suspect being below a "(easier-to-)divisible" number like 15 can potentially throw people off. 20 definitely gets attention because Double Strike exists and as I said I think there's something about 15 that people will automatically math to 3 hits and consider it a threat. 13 obviously falls short by 1.

Also there's enough emphasis on the power I'd even give the leeway to 3MV. It could cost Woolly Thoctar mana (in my case, it would need to be Abzan) and I'd be tempted to try it out at the very least. If purely at 1G I could see a Power of 10 as reasonable (4 hits instead of 3 and being 2-digits brings the attention it probably should be bringing at 2MV), but that's the "objective view" while subjectively it will be far cry from a 3MV 14-power in terms of tempting me to try it out. because I'd rather pay 4 for my Daemogoth Titan and its synergies at that point. Heck I'd suspect 2MV might bring too much attention to other things (like my graveyard or my own life total) instead.

[DirkGently]

I for one am glad we finally had some people vote 6/7 so there's a more normal curve and not a weird gap between 5/6 and 7/8.

Whee 7th grade stats:
mean: 6.33/7.33 (wouldn't play vanilla ignored)
median: 6/7 (wouldn't play vanilla included)
mode: 5/6

[TheAmericanSpirit]

I for one am glad we finally had some people vote 6/7 so there's a more normal curve and not a weird gap between 5/6 and 7/8.

NGL, I find it super amusing you're about as pleased by overall shape of the curve as you are with said curve's ability to prove a point. 🤣

[TheGildedGoose]

This thread is ridiculous. Tarmogoyf can be a 5/6 trivially and none of you play it.

[3drinks]

This thread is ridiculous. Tarmogoyf can be a 5/6 trivially and none of you play it.

Finally, I'm not alone.

[materpillar]

This thread is ridiculous. Tarmogoyf can be a 5/6 trivially and none of you play it.

Finally, I'm not alone.

That's the point of this thread? I said wouldn't play Tarmogoyf unless it was always a 7/8. I obviously won't play it as usually a 5/6.

[edit]: Hadn't checked the graph. Looks like there's a bunch of liars in the graph.

[Dunadain]

This thread is ridiculous. Tarmogoyf can be a 5/6 trivially and none of you play it.

Nonsense, I had a selvala heart of the wild deck that ran tarmo for a while, and he got cut because in early game he's not consistently any meaningful size.

One of the best creatures in that deck was Lupine Prototype, if tarmo was actually consistently a 5/6 he would have been great.

[Guardman]

I actually had a great example of this a few days ago as I was putting together my Armix, Filigree Thrasher & Rebbec, Architect of Ascension Artifact Creature deck. I was looking at Patchwork Automaton and I was like I am running so many artifacts this is just a good value creature. But the more I thought about it, the more I realized while he might eventually be a 6/6 for two with ward, that just isn't good enough compared to all the other artifact creatures with some sort of value outside of just power and toughness.

[Legend]

This thread is ridiculous. Tarmogoyf can be a 5/6 trivially and none of you play it.

Nonsense, I had a selvala heart of the wild deck that ran tarmo for a while, and he got cut because in early game he's not consistently any meaningful size.

One of the best creatures in that deck was Lupine Prototype, if tarmo was actually consistently a 5/6 he would have been great.

Right, but notwithstanding Selvala, as Dirk already said

Selvala, Heart of the Wilds says 'hi'

Yeah, that was why I didn't want to get too specific since obviously some commanders do specifically get a significant benefit from a high power/toughness creature and I didn't want them to skew the results.

If one or two sevala players votes based on that, np, but I don't want everyone basing their vote on that niche case.

[onering]

He clearly brought up his Selvala to provide a counter example to the assertion that goyf is "trivially a 5/6". For him, it was not that consistently enough to be worth it, but a consistent 5/6 for 2 would have been

[illakunsaa]

If there was a 2 mana consistent 5/6 vanilla creature I would consider it in niche decks. That would be my floor. A relevant creature type would improve the creature a lot. Something like elf or dragon and I think it would be a staple in those decks.

[PrimevalCommander]

Tarmagoyf was routinely played in decks without any synergy whatsoever. When I think of "The Tarmagoyf Question" I'm thinking of a creature big enough to overcome the need to synergize with the deck and break into decks that have no real need for large vanilla creature, but it is SO BIG as to be difficult to ignore in deckbuilding. Hence why my vote was quite high on the power level compared to others. I think I voted 8/9, because 5 drops are getting 6+ power now, so I want a creature I can run out early for some pressure and not be invalidated past turn 5 with all the larger creatures running around. If my no-synergy 2 drop was only a 5/6, then it would loose most of it's effectiveness by turn 6 and that is only about 1/2 way through the game I play. I'd want it to at LEAST block 6/6's and win, since that seems to be the de-facto P/T for mid-game creatures right now.

[ISBPathfinder]

It is possible that "in the right deck" I would consider it as soon as 4/5 range but more broadly I think its going to need to beat titans in combat being 6+ power. The other issue is that it lacks any evasion so its easily chumped which is another issue for the card in this format if you are looking to beat in. In most cases most decks are going to want something like Scavenging Ooze far before this card even if it starts smaller the growth, disruption, and lifegain of scooze just makes it way more relevant than potentially being more stat efficient.

Once you get into the higher range though it does become interesting from a Greater Good sort of effect though but it still lacks in the ability to connect realm meaning you likely need to pair it with some evasion still.

[pokken]

Tarmagoyf was routinely played in decks without any synergy whatsoever. .

NIT:

There was never a routinely non-synergistic tarmogoyf deck because all tarmogoyf decks started with fetchlands and usually both instants and sorceries because that's what it took to survive in modern. Part of what made Goyf so great in modern is the very specific sequence of:

* inquisition, fetchland, goyf. Ok, you bolt goyf and he's a 3/4 and survives.

Similar kinda stuff in legacy, but Goyf was a lot worse in legacy.

Bottom line is that without fetchlands Goyf is pretty medium:P

[PrimevalCommander]

Tarmagoyf was routinely played in decks without any synergy whatsoever. .

NIT:

There was never a routinely non-synergistic tarmogoyf deck because all tarmogoyf decks started with fetchlands and usually both instants and sorceries because that's what it took to survive in modern. Part of what made Goyf so great in modern is the very specific sequence of:

* inquisition, fetchland, goyf. Ok, you bolt goyf and he's a 3/4 and survives.

Similar kinda stuff in legacy, but Goyf was a lot worse in legacy.

Bottom line is that without fetchlands Goyf is pretty medium:P

True, I was simplifying maybe too much. Playing instants and sorceries doesn't scream "synergy" though when Goyf calls out card types I guess technically it is. My main point is that control decks were splashing green just for that one card. If goyf didn't exist, many of the decks wouldn't play green at all. We see this regularly with certain pushed cards in constructed since fetch lands make fixing so easy, but to my understanding Goyf made this phenomenon the most prominent from that point. Fetches, Ponder, Path to Exile, Lightning Bolt, Thoughtseize, all staples that bumped up card types in the early turns that made Goyf a powerhouse for 2 mana in early Modern format and even in Extended. Modern was more fun with Goblin Guide was the best red 1 drop in the format and it actually gave your opponent card advantage, not you.

I had a lot of fun with a 5 color Domain Zoo deck with Goyf, Wild Nacatl, Dark Confidant, Tribal Flames, and Lightning Helix. I think I had a blue card in sideboard but forgot what it was.

If "COMMANDERGOYF" said it gets power/toughness equal to Double the number of card types in all graveyards, would that be playable in multiplayer. That makes having a 4/5 and 6/7 goyf by turn 3 actually achievable, and still scales to HUGE in the late game. I'd probably play that. Easier way to think about it. If Goyf was twice as good, even with the variable P/T ability, would we play it.

[pokken]

True, I was simplifying maybe too much. Playing instants and sorceries doesn't scream "synergy" though when Goyf calls out card types I guess technically it is. My main point is that control decks were splashing green just for that one card. If goyf didn't exist, many of the decks wouldn't play green at all. We see this regularly with certain pushed cards in constructed since fetch lands make fixing so easy, but to my understanding Goyf made this phenomenon the most prominent from that point. Fetches, Ponder, Path to Exile, Lightning Bolt, Thoughtseize, all staples that bumped up card types in the early turns that made Goyf a powerhouse for 2 mana in early Modern format and even in Extended. Modern was more fun with Goblin Guide was the best red 1 drop in the format and it actually gave your opponent card advantage, not you.

I had a lot of fun with a 5 color Domain Zoo deck with Goyf, Wild Nacatl, Dark Confidant, Tribal Flames, and Lightning Helix. I think I had a blue card in sideboard but forgot what it was.

If "COMMANDERGOYF" said it gets power/toughness equal to Double the number of card types in all graveyards, would that be playable in multiplayer. That makes having a 4/5 and 6/7 goyf by turn 3 actually achievable, and still scales to HUGE in the late game. I'd probably play that. Easier way to think about it. If Goyf was twice as good, even with the variable P/T ability, would we play it.

Yeah I agree. That's pretty close.

I know Serra Ascendant is kinda my benchmark for beef in the format, and it's almost always good enough. I'd play a 2 mana 7/8 in Breena for sure. I play a 5 mana 20/20 in the form of Sunscorch Regent and it's usually pretty good :p

Right around 4-5 power for 1 mana is right. A 1 mana 4/4 I would play in a lot of situations.

[ISBPathfinder]

I know Serra Ascendant is kinda my benchmark for beef in the format, and it's almost always good enough. I'd play a 2 mana 7/8 in Breena for sure. I play a 5 mana 20/20 in the form of Sunscorch Regent and it's usually pretty good :p

Right around 4-5 power for 1 mana is right. A 1 mana 4/4 I would play in a lot of situations.

Ascendant also has lifelink and flying though. Goyf lacking evasion and lifelink is still rough and even with all this I wouldn't say that Ascendant goes in every white deck optimally. Even if you were to buff up its stats at the increased mana cost that lack of anything else to the card and lack of evasion as well is a hard sell for me. I would say that if you are comparing it against Ascendant that mark is probably closer to 10 power if you aren't giving it something additional and keeping it at two mana.

It is in green though and picking up trample isn't that hard but I think assuming you can just pick up extra things for goyf is still something I would hold against it rather than assume it will happen easily.

[pokken]

Ascendant also has lifelink and flying though. Goyf lacking evasion and lifelink is still rough and even with all this I wouldn't say that Ascendant goes in every white deck optimally. Even if you were to buff up its stats at the increased mana cost that lack of anything else to the card and lack of evasion as well is a hard sell for me. I would say that if you are comparing it against Ascendant that mark is probably closer to 10 power if you aren't giving it something additional and keeping it at two mana.

It is in green though and picking up trample isn't that hard but I think assuming you can just pick up extra things for goyf is still something I would hold against it rather than assume it will happen easily.

So the interesting part of being a big beef slab is that people are far less likely to have chump blockers early in the game. So a 1 mana 5/5 for example, would apply a tremendous amount of pressure. Evasion is far less relevant on turn 1 or 2.

The lifelink is what really makes ascendant have universal appeal; it can be W: Gain 12 life, or it can be W: pressure the leader's life total significantly. It's good in both defensive and offensive decks.

I think 4-5 points of power per mana comes close to "in every deck that wants to pressure life totals early" but that's a much smaller subset than ascendant as you say. Interestingly, I am *way* more interested in a 1 mana 4/5 than a 2 mana 8/9 for general use, but I'd strongly consider both.