This card isn't viable in a Standard setting at all, so don't judge it by that. Instead, consider its effectiveness in EDH, where 200+ card decks aren't too far fetched.
Posted By:
Solstice_MTG
(9/17/2013 5:27:37 PM)
@Solstice_MTG, EDH is exactly 100 cards, always. Without a wish effect, there would be no way to win using this there, and you could only run one in EDH.
Posted By:
Megadog
(9/25/2013 5:39:10 PM)
Not a bad card at all. Back in the day, Jon Finkel took a Battle of Wits deck to 3-0 at the Invitational. Was a viable tournament card back when Odyssey was around.
Posted By:
Gishra
(9/28/2013 5:54:38 PM)
Other than relentless rats, is there a card that allows you to have more than four in a deck? Maybe there is a way to use thrumming stone to get at Battle of Wits? Or possibly some other kind of artifact or spell with the "Ripple" ability...
Posted By:
RAT666
(10/8/2013 2:52:01 AM)
Everyone I know with decks big enough to viably run this . . . wouldn't run this.
They "wouldn't want to win like that". :\
Posted By:
Fictionarious
(10/14/2013 7:16:26 PM)
@RAT666 - Well, there's always Shadowborn Apostle too.
Posted By:
SWFTWLF
(10/15/2013 1:30:37 AM)
The biggest challenge is to not let your opponent know what you're playing.
Posted By:
sweetgab
(12/5/2013 2:17:36 AM)
Love the ruling "In tournaments, you must be able to shuffle your entire deck within a reasonable amount of time."
One question: once you have it in play, you're going to count your entire library each turn just to make sure?
Posted By:
Kariuko
(1/21/2014 8:33:20 AM)
Couple years late on this, but I'm amazed at how many people were trashing this card.
Battle of Wits is a very strange card. Both times it was out, it was a viable card, but it requires a deck built around it (obviously), proper ability to sift through your deck for it, ect. The more tutoring you've got, the better.
There was a pretty solid Battle of Wits deck back in Kami-Rav, because there were quite a few ways of sifting through your deck.
It is a weird card and really offbeat, and will probably never dominate due to the ridiculous expense of any deck it is in (seriously, you end up running piles of good cards to up your consistency) but the idea that it is a bad card or a joke card is quite silly; the card is dangerous if you actually have sufficient tutoring available in the environment.
Are there better things to do in the older formats? Certainly. But don't knock a card that just says "you win" in a random control deck.
Posted By:
Titanium_Dragon
(3/15/2014 4:00:33 AM)
4 Battle of Wits
4 Rune-Scarred Demon
127 Shadowborn Apostle
115 Lands
Posted By:
legendary_orp
(6/4/2014 11:58:12 PM)