>>56069837>>56069892Lol no. As far as the "Pros" go in Legacy they generally play the blue cantrip shell because they provide consistency and are generally more forgiving for people that don't primarily play Legacy. Cost is 100% an issue in Legacy for powerful, but narrow cards; Just look at the SDT Miracles era, it was 100% correct to have a Moat in your Miracles sideboard, but few decks did due to cost issues. Speaking of the SDT Miracles era, W/R painter was a house, but very few played it due to it needing expensive and narrow cards. Did that somehow make it a bad deck because people didn't want to invest in Imperial Recruiters (A narrow, expensive card)? The argument that price doesn't matter is not a good one, there are plenty of decks (and by extension cards) that see less play than they would otherwise due to price issues.
>>56069892>Do an MTGTop8 search. Tabernacle is EVERYWHERE. And the price thing is also irrelevant when looking at MTGO data also. Still no Chains there.Yep, a decent chunk of those results are for MTGO, where you don't have to drop $1k+ for a Tabernacle. You're grossly overestimating the number of Tabernacles seeing play in paper.
>Congrats. 1 single copy. And it was over a year ago, before the top ban.Look again, that list contains 3 copies of Chainz between MB & SB. I would also note that some number of Chains is considered optimal in Jund builds.
>Then where is it? If it's so brutal why does no one play it?The current easiest/cheapest way to hate on the cantrip shell is chalice. What would you rather spend money on, ~$300 for a playset of chalices or $1500-2000 for Chainz? The fact of the matter is in this scenario, price matters a lot; The cost of getting 3-4x Chains is the price of entire legacy decks as prices currently sit. That's a pretty hard pill to swallow, even if the card does something very powerful.
