View Poll Results: Most bannable card in Legacy? (not that they will touch it)

Voters
192. You may not vote on this poll
  • Brainstorm

    16 8.33%
  • Force of Will

    4 2.08%
  • Lion's Eye Diamond

    35 18.23%
  • Counterbalance

    34 17.71%
  • Sensei's Divining Top

    103 53.65%
  • Tarmogoyf

    46 23.96%
  • Phyrexian Dreadnaught

    2 1.04%
  • Goblin Lackey

    4 2.08%
  • Standstill

    6 3.13%
  • Natural Order

    8 4.17%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 1134 of 1140 FirstFirst ... 134634103410841124113011311132113311341135113611371138 ... LastLast
Results 22,661 to 22,680 of 22789

Thread: All B/R update speculation.

  1. #22661

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fox View Post
    Just real quick point there, Lurrus can run and recur W&6.
    What I meant is that 1{w/b}{w/b} ang RG and U don't seem to all go together.
    Maybe there's a Lurrus + W6 deck, but is it really a Brainstorm deck too?

  2. #22662
    Member

    Join Date

    May 2015
    Location

    PDX
    Posts

    1,599

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by BirdsOfParadise View Post
    What I meant is that 1{w/b}{w/b} ang RG and U don't seem to all go together.
    Maybe there's a Lurrus + W6 deck, but is it really a Brainstorm deck too?
    Oh like 100% chance. You think Delver is really above tapping their Karakas, Wasteland target Karakas, [+1] Wrenn target Karakas, replay and tap Karakas into Lurrus? Donít even need to do all that work if DRS is legal.

    Hereís the deck:
    DRS x4
    Delver x4
    Dreadhorde x4
    Bolt x4
    FoW x4
    BS x4
    Ponder x4
    Daze x4
    Wrenn x3
    Bauble x3
    Snare x2

    Trop x1
    Usea x3
    Volc x3
    Delta x4
    Tarn x4
    Wasteland x4
    Karakas x1

    companion Lurrus and 14 others. You can put in a second white land, but itís pretty optional at that power level.

  3. #22663
    Member
    talpa's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jan 2016
    Location

    Italy
    Posts

    139

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by ESG View Post
    Spirit's best asset back then was the random game win when your opponent still drew their cards as normal. This was key to David McDarby winning SCG Portland in 2014.

    Vs. 12-Post:
    On his main phase, he used Karakas to bounce my Gaddock Teeg and then cast Repeal on my Thalia. I said "resolves," and he immediately drew a card. The only problem was that I still had a Spirit of the Labyrinth in play. We then called a judge, as we both knew what had just happened, and my opponent got a game loss during a game that we both knew I was going to lose.

    Then, later on, vs. Death & Taxes:

    I didn't think I could lose game 1. I had everything I could ask for. Except we were racing, and then Mirran Crusader hit the table. I couldn't attack into it, block it, or kill it very easily. I was barely treading water by chumping with my few white creatures when Spirit of the Labyrinth struck again: this time with a freshly drawn Horizon Canopy that my opponent immediately cracked when he played it. We both realized it right as the card got to his hand, and he immediately went to put it back. While I explained to the judge that I was positive the card that was put back was indeed the correct card, the deed had been done, and we went on to game 2.

    http://old.starcitygames.com/article...and--1st-.html
    Don't be too quick to think the joke is on blue players.
    Once, turn 1 game 1 of a big event in Italy, I vendilion clique'd my opponent on his draw step and won because he drew a card while having his Spirit in play.
    Otherwise the game was unwinnable on my side.

    I think it's a good thing the rules changed and the penalty for drawing an extra card was downgraded, even if maybe now there's more room for cheaters

  4. #22664
    The green Ancestral
    ESG's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2010
    Location

    Seattle, WA
    Posts

    1,205

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Yeah, I was happy to see that rule change, even if it generally helped me because I was good at remembering triggers and tracking board states. That rule always seemed overly harsh.

  5. #22665
    Member
    Barook's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2007
    Location

    Germany, Germering, Munich
    Posts

    6,884

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fox View Post
    Oh like 100% chance. You think Delver is really above tapping their Karakas, Wasteland target Karakas, [+1] Wrenn target Karakas, replay and tap Karakas into Lurrus? Donít even need to do all that work if DRS is legal.

    Hereís the deck:
    DRS x4
    Delver x4
    Dreadhorde x4
    Bolt x4
    FoW x4
    BS x4
    Ponder x4
    Daze x4
    Wrenn x3
    Bauble x3
    Snare x2

    Trop x1
    Usea x3
    Volc x3
    Delta x4
    Tarn x4
    Wasteland x4
    Karakas x1

    companion Lurrus and 14 others. You can put in a second white land, but itís pretty optional at that power level.
    Between DRS and Astrolabe, I see little reason why one shouldn't go full 5C clusterfuck for the hell of it.

  6. #22666
    Bald. Bearded. Moderator.
    Mr. Safety's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2010
    Location

    New Gloucester, Maine, USA
    Posts

    4,545

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fox View Post
    Oh like 100% chance. You think Delver is really above tapping their Karakas, Wasteland target Karakas, [+1] Wrenn target Karakas, replay and tap Karakas into Lurrus? Donít even need to do all that work if DRS is legal.

    Hereís the deck:
    DRS x4
    Delver x4
    Dreadhorde x4
    Bolt x4
    FoW x4
    BS x4
    Ponder x4
    Daze x4
    Wrenn x3
    Bauble x3
    Snare x2

    Trop x1
    Usea x3
    Volc x3
    Delta x4
    Tarn x4
    Wasteland x4
    Karakas x1

    companion Lurrus and 14 others. You can put in a second white land, but itís pretty optional at that power level.
    That decklist is, quite frankly, disgusting. Easily would be the best deck in the format given all those cards being legal. I think you could actually cut a couple Bolts for Force of Negation and it would be close to optimal.

    Regarding Brainstorm, for me it has always been about this question: do we want a format where we can play 4 Brainstorm or not? For me the answer will always be 'yes'. Power level is obviously too high, saturation level is too high, by all reasonable standards it should be banned. So the question isn't 'should it be banned?' because that answer will always be 'yes'. The real question is 'are we ok with a format that has access to it?' If we are, then it's a reality we need to approach accordingly. If we are not comfortable with Brainstorm in the format we can either lobby for change (good luck with that) or play a different format. Forsythe has essentially said Brainstorm is here to stay. The choice is in your hands, not theirs, whether to play Legacy or not.
    Brainstorm Realist

    I close my eyes and sink within myself, relive the gift of precious memories, in need of a fix called innocence. - Chuck Shuldiner

  7. #22667
    Member
    Barook's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2007
    Location

    Germany, Germering, Munich
    Posts

    6,884

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Safety View Post
    That decklist is, quite frankly, disgusting. Easily would be the best deck in the format given all those cards being legal. I think you could actually cut a couple Bolts for Force of Negation and it would be close to optimal.

    Regarding Brainstorm, for me it has always been about this question: do we want a format where we can play 4 Brainstorm or not? For me the answer will always be 'yes'. Power level is obviously too high, saturation level is too high, by all reasonable standards it should be banned. So the question isn't 'should it be banned?' because that answer will always be 'yes'. The real question is 'are we ok with a format that has access to it?' If we are, then it's a reality we need to approach accordingly. If we are not comfortable with Brainstorm in the format we can either lobby for change (good luck with that) or play a different format. Forsythe has essentially said Brainstorm is here to stay. The choice is in your hands, not theirs, whether to play Legacy or not.
    How good would W&6 and Arcanist be with DRS around, though?

  8. #22668
    Bald. Bearded. Moderator.
    Mr. Safety's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2010
    Location

    New Gloucester, Maine, USA
    Posts

    4,545

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Barook View Post
    How good would W&6 and Arcanist be with DRS around, though?
    I think still pretty good. DRS eats opponent's graveyards while you use your own with W&6/Arcanist. It really becomes a sub-game of 'who gets DRS resolved first' and then 'who keeps DRS around long enough to win the game'. In any sort of mirror match the priority is to counter/kill DRS and then the other card advantage tools take over. Maybe Arcanist/W&6 go down to 2 copies each, but both would still be powerful enough to include.
    Brainstorm Realist

    I close my eyes and sink within myself, relive the gift of precious memories, in need of a fix called innocence. - Chuck Shuldiner

  9. #22669
    Hymn-Slinging Mod
    H's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2008
    Location

    The U-easy-anna
    Posts

    2,904

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by non-inflammable View Post
    please explain why...
    Because the same criterion that Brainstorm is banned under, is the same circumstance that Ponder (and likely Preordain) will likely then find themselves in. Because people will always just run the "next best thing." This sort of ban-rubric is a race to the bottom.

    If you take the position that, no, the banning of Brainstorm is a special case, you have to justify this case. Why is the Brainstorm case special? Also, since it is plausible that Brainstorm is perfectly fine without the presence of fetch lands, explain why fetch lands wouldn't be the ones banned, especially since cards like Deathrite are only, presumably, good with fetch lands as well. Now you need to articulate why fetch lands are alright and Brainstorm is not. Then, once you have done that, you go right back and look at the resultant meta. What if Tundra has a 75% meta share? Are duals bannable? Why or why not? What about Force of Will?

    The issue is, I see no way to articulate a fully spelled out manner and fashion of what "normative" Legacy is. I see no way for there to be "one rubric" of what can and should be banned. So there is no way, in my opinion, to have some cut and dry quantitative meta-threshold, or something else, to define what action should be taken in Legacy.

    Legacy just is 4x Brainstorm, by fiat. You can hate it. You can claim that is shouldn't be. But it just is the case. So, you have the option of playing it, fighting against it, or just not playing. You can say none of those are "fair" options and that might well be the case. But the fact of it is, that is the case. Now, you might think I am spuriously making a sort of Is/Ought claim, that because Legacy is the Brainstorm format, it ought to be the Brainstorm format. This is not my point, or my position. I have no idea what Legacy ought to be. The only thing I can possibly do is say what I think Legacy ought not to be. I even tried making a thread to get an idea of what people thought defined/should define Legacy years ago. I don't dwell in a place of hypothetical card-pools. There is a near infinite amount of hypothetical card-pools and I'm not interested in any of them, really.

    In our play group, we have a running joke of saying "just play your cards." It applies to a lot of things, but works here as well. Just play your cards. Is Brainstorm oppressive? Maybe. Then just play it. Or, fight it. If you say, "well, I shouldn't have to" well, I'm sorry, but if you want to play nominal Legacy, you do. But no one makes you play Legacy. If you don't like it, don't play it. If you think some other card pool is "better," make that case. Get other people on board and play that format. But the idea that "Optimal Legacy," like Shangri-La is just out there, waiting for someone to discover this utopian ideal card-pool where every card is rationally justified in it's existence, where no card could unjustly impose itself on any others, where anything and everything is viable and everyone gets a free lunch. But actual Legacy, the Legacy we have and are likely to always have to varying degrees is actually a intuitionally derived hell-hole, where the only way you stay alive is by taking life from something else, where caprice and whim define existence and every moment is a struggle to survive.

    If you want utopia Legacy, then go on and show us how it can be done. Not by some hypothetical rational exercise, but with actual empirical results. Then we might see that this hypothetical card pool really is the promised "ideal" one. Until then, no, "we" are not likely to accept the notion that "Optimal Legacy" is only a ban away.

    So, why is Lurrus ban-worthy where Brainstorm is not? I don't know. But I agree with it. Whether it is a notion of historicism, or of perception, or whatever, once again, you will never get to "Optimal Legacy" with a fully-rationalized ban-rubric. But, then again, maybe I am wrong. If so, I'd invite anyone to come up with a fully-rational, articulated, quantitative and qualitative manner to conclusively display what is "Optimal Legacy" and what is expressly not.

    In the mean time, I'll just play my cards.
    "The Ancients teach us that if we can but last, we shall prevail."
    óKaysa, Elder Druid of the Juniper Order

  10. #22670
    Member

    Join Date

    Aug 2015
    Location

    Chilltown
    Posts

    941

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by H View Post
    Because the same criterion that Brainstorm is banned under, is the same circumstance that Ponder (and likely Preordain) will likely then find themselves in. Because people will always just run the "next best thing." This sort of ban-rubric is a race to the bottom.

    If you take the position that, no, the banning of Brainstorm is a special case, you have to justify this case. Why is the Brainstorm case special? Also, since it is plausible that Brainstorm is perfectly fine without the presence of fetch lands, explain why fetch lands wouldn't be the ones banned, especially since cards like Deathrite are only, presumably, good with fetch lands as well. Now you need to articulate why fetch lands are alright and Brainstorm is not. Then, once you have done that, you go right back and look at the resultant meta. What if Tundra has a 75% meta share? Are duals bannable? Why or why not? What about Force of Will?

    The issue is, I see no way to articulate a fully spelled out manner and fashion of what "normative" Legacy is. I see no way for there to be "one rubric" of what can and should be banned. So there is no way, in my opinion, to have some cut and dry quantitative meta-threshold, or something else, to define what action should be taken in Legacy.

    Legacy just is 4x Brainstorm, by fiat. You can hate it. You can claim that is shouldn't be. But it just is the case. So, you have the option of playing it, fighting against it, or just not playing. You can say none of those are "fair" options and that might well be the case. But the fact of it is, that is the case. Now, you might think I am spuriously making a sort of Is/Ought claim, that because Legacy is the Brainstorm format, it ought to be the Brainstorm format. This is not my point, or my position. I have no idea what Legacy ought to be. The only thing I can possibly do is say what I think Legacy ought not to be. I even tried making a thread to get an idea of what people thought defined/should define Legacy years ago. I don't dwell in a place of hypothetical card-pools. There is a near infinite amount of hypothetical card-pools and I'm not interested in any of them, really.

    In our play group, we have a running joke of saying "just play your cards." It applies to a lot of things, but works here as well. Just play your cards. Is Brainstorm oppressive? Maybe. Then just play it. Or, fight it. If you say, "well, I shouldn't have to" well, I'm sorry, but if you want to play nominal Legacy, you do. But no one makes you play Legacy. If you don't like it, don't play it. If you think some other card pool is "better," make that case. Get other people on board and play that format. But the idea that "Optimal Legacy," like Shangri-La is just out there, waiting for someone to discover this utopian ideal card-pool where every card is rationally justified in it's existence, where no card could unjustly impose itself on any others, where anything and everything is viable and everyone gets a free lunch. But actual Legacy, the Legacy we have and are likely to always have to varying degrees is actually a intuitionally derived hell-hole, where the only way you stay alive is by taking life from something else, where caprice and whim define existence and every moment is a struggle to survive.

    If you want utopia Legacy, then go on and show us how it can be done. Not by some hypothetical rational exercise, but with actual empirical results. Then we might see that this hypothetical card pool really is the promised "ideal" one. Until then, no, "we" are not likely to accept the notion that "Optimal Legacy" is only a ban away.

    So, why is Lurrus ban-worthy where Brainstorm is not? I don't know. But I agree with it. Whether it is a notion of historicism, or of perception, or whatever, once again, you will never get to "Optimal Legacy" with a fully-rationalized ban-rubric. But, then again, maybe I am wrong. If so, I'd invite anyone to come up with a fully-rational, articulated, quantitative and qualitative manner to conclusively display what is "Optimal Legacy" and what is expressly not.

    In the mean time, I'll just play my cards.
    Can someone sticky this?
    Quote Originally Posted by non-inflammable View Post
    If you diversified your cantrips, a chalice wouldn't be a liability.
    Quote Originally Posted by chunderbucket View Post
    You want interesting, nonbinary games? Don't make your deck so reliant on cantrips, like pretty much every above deck.
    Quote Originally Posted by iatee View Post
    I am tired of malicious top 8s and it is time to put an end to the practice.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevestamopz View Post
    Almost everyone plays decks that are strictly worse 75s than the top decks - which most people could sleeve up if they wanted to, they just elected not to.

  11. #22671

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Barook View Post
    It would help if we had card draw hate in the same abundance and quality of GY hate. Card draw is one of the strongest actions in the game, yet it basically goes unpunished
    please!?!


    Quote Originally Posted by H View Post
    In the mean time, I'll just play my cards.
    here on some of my cards that i was able to find in less than 5 minutes, can i play these cards?


    i get your well-written but laissez-faire post; SDT, DTT, DRS, Breach, W&6, TC and Probe were sacrificed on the altar of BS.

    would banning BS be a bigger blow to legacy than banning fetchlands?
    how about unbanning these cards: SDT, DTT, DRS, Breach, W&6, TC , Probe, MindTwist and ManaDrain

    There isn't a problem wth any other card draw in legacy. it's just BS.

  12. #22672
    Hymn-Slinging Mod
    H's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2008
    Location

    The U-easy-anna
    Posts

    2,904

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by non-inflammable View Post
    here on some of my cards that i was able to find in less than 5 minutes, can i play these cards?


    i get your laissez-faire post but i'll just add this: SDT, DTT, DRS, Breach, W&6, TC and Probe were sacrificed on the altar of BS.

    would banning BS be a bigger blow to legacy than banning fetchlands?
    how about unbanning these cards: SDT, DTT, DRS, Breach, W&6, TC , Probe, MindTwist and ManaDrain
    Can I play my Time Walk or Ancestral Recall?

    Once again, you make the claim that Brainstorm is what got SDT and the rest banned, but as multiple people have pointed out, that really was more likely fetchlands.

    That being said, SDT is an idiotic card, in my opinion. But that is neither here nor there. The issue with your Brainstorm vitriol is that, if we were to ban Brainstorm and unban all those other things, what makes you think that is a better format?

    Once again, your hypothetical card-pool, with Mana Drain, for example, legal, is A-OK because there wouldn't be Brainstorm. Even if I give you the benefit of the doubt and say that we are banning Fetchlands and Brainstorm, really, Mana Drain? Under what auspices am I to take this suggestion seriously? Mana Drain would fundamentally punish any deck that attempts to resolve a spell with a CMC over 1 when the opponent has UU open. If you think the format is Blue heavy now, just wait until you can't even think of trying to resolve a spell without costing yourself a huge amount of tempo in the process, by losing your threat and giving your opponent mana to play theirs.

    I could go on, but your proposed unban list looks nearly like a gish gallop to me and I do have a job for the moment, and that job isn't to disprove the health and viability of any list you hypothetically throw together. You already expose your position when you ask, "is banning Brainstorm a bigger blow to Legacy than fetchlands" though, because you do realize that Legacy, as such, is literally predicated on them. That is, whatever does define Legacy is at least in part, Brainstorm and fetchlands. You want a differential Legacy card-pool? Make that case. The burden of proof is on you, not me. I already have a Legacy card pool at hand that I feel is worth playing/exploring and that is the current existent, legal card pool. And so does my local play-group.

    Again, I am not asking you to like it. I am not telling you to accept it. But the fact of the matter is, that is Legacy and until someone actually demonstrates that Legacy minus or plus some cards is demonstrably better, I will continue to be overtly skeptical and stake out my position, time and time again.
    "The Ancients teach us that if we can but last, we shall prevail."
    óKaysa, Elder Druid of the Juniper Order

  13. #22673
    It's not easy being green

    Join Date

    Jul 2010
    Posts

    1,635

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Safety View Post
    Regarding Brainstorm, for me it has always been about this question: do we want a format where we can play 4 Brainstorm or not? For me the answer will always be 'yes'. Power level is obviously too high, saturation level is too high, by all reasonable standards it should be banned. So the question isn't 'should it be banned?' because that answer will always be 'yes'. The real question is 'are we ok with a format that has access to it?' If we are, then it's a reality we need to approach accordingly. If we are not comfortable with Brainstorm in the format we can either lobby for change (good luck with that) or play a different format. Forsythe has essentially said Brainstorm is here to stay. The choice is in your hands, not theirs, whether to play Legacy or not.
    I was about to say that Pauper exists, Brainstorm is legal and playable in tier 1 decks but you have to build around it to justify its inclusion. Took a look at goldfish, and LSV just went and top8'd with this:

    UR Faeries
    4 Augur of Bolas
    4 Ninja of the Deep Hours
    4 Spellstutter Sprite

    4 Brainstorm
    4 Preordain
    4 Accumulated Knowledge
    1 Tragic Lesson

    3 Counterspell
    1 Deprive
    3 Force Spike

    4 Skred
    2 Lightning Bolt
    1 Fire // Ice

    3 Ash Barrens
    4 Evolving Wilds
    3 Mystic Sanctuary
    9 Snow-Covered Island
    2 Snow-Covered Mountain

    //Sideboard:
    1 Curfew
    1 Echoing Truth
    1 Electrickery
    2 Gorilla Shaman
    3 Hydroblast
    3 Red Elemental Blast
    2 Relic of Progenitus
    2 Swirling Sandstorm


    If you don't ban Xerox, Xerox will come for you.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lemnear
    (On Innistrad)
    Yeah, an insanely powerful block which put the "derp!" factor in Legacy completely over the top.

  14. #22674
    Land Destruction Enthusiast
    Megadeus's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jul 2012
    Location

    Kennesaw, GA
    Posts

    5,578

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by FourDogsinaHorseSuit View Post
    You guys are working really hard to just not ban brainstorm.
    I came here to say this but I'm glad someone else beat me to it
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Cheese View Post
    I've been taking shitty brews and tier 2 decks to tournaments and losing with them for years now. Welcome to the club. We meet for cocktails after round 6.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevestamopz View Post
    Top quality german restraint there.

    If I'm at the point where I'm rage quitting, you can bet your kransky that I'm calling everyone involved a cunt.

  15. #22675
    Hymn-Slinging Mod
    H's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2008
    Location

    The U-easy-anna
    Posts

    2,904

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    I'm not working hard at all. In fact, I do exactly zero work to keep it Brainstorm legal. Wizards does it for me.

    All I actually do is play the cards that are legal in the format. Seems like people are doing much more to figure out ways to interpret Legacy as something that ought to be without Brainstorm (or fetch lands, or whatever). But, you can interpret things as it serves your interest, of course.
    "The Ancients teach us that if we can but last, we shall prevail."
    óKaysa, Elder Druid of the Juniper Order

  16. #22676

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by H View Post
    I'm not working hard at all. In fact, I do exactly zero work to keep it Brainstorm legal. Wizards does it for me.

    All I actually do is play the cards that are legal in the format. Seems like people are doing much more to figure out ways to interpret Legacy as something that ought to be without Brainstorm (or fetch lands, or whatever). But, you can interpret things as it serves your interest, of course.
    I think there is a general misunderstanding of the 'debate' that dominates this thread. The discussion is mostly between a group of realists that see that brainstorm is untouchable and idealists that want brainstorm gone. There isnt any meaningful discussion because both sides aren't even approaching the issue in the same context.

  17. #22677
    Sushi or Meat and Eggs
    Cire's Avatar
    Join Date

    Apr 2007
    Posts

    2,069

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by phonics View Post
    I think there is a general misunderstanding of the 'debate' that dominates this thread. The discussion is mostly between a group of realists that see that brainstorm is untouchable and idealists that want brainstorm gone. There isnt any meaningful discussion because both sides aren't even approaching the issue in the same context.
    Great Summation
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Safety View Post
    You sir are a ninja of fine quality.

  18. #22678
    Site Contributor

    Join Date

    Apr 2014
    Posts

    947

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by phonics View Post
    I think there is a general misunderstanding of the 'debate' that dominates this thread. The discussion is mostly between a group of realists that see that brainstorm is untouchable and idealists that want brainstorm gone. There isnt any meaningful discussion because both sides aren't even approaching the issue in the same context.
    Brainstorm and the fetches are just like workshops and bazaar in vintage. They should have been banned a long time ago (when the formats started) but it's far too late and they've been so ingrained in the formats to do anything about them. They're never going to axed, period.
    Quote Originally Posted by ThatDeleuzeGuy View Post
    I want to play as close to possible a 100% reactive deck that also approached 0% variance in how it played. I want to play magic with as little variance as possible. Also had a foiled out miracles deck that was an investment of about 6 grand that is now nearly worthless.
    Quote Originally Posted by Secretly.A.Bee View Post
    My original post did that.

    I'd love to have a battle of wits with you but I see you lack the necessary equipment.

    Good day.

  19. #22679
    Hymn-Slinging Mod
    H's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2008
    Location

    The U-easy-anna
    Posts

    2,904

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by phonics View Post
    I think there is a general misunderstanding of the 'debate' that dominates this thread. The discussion is mostly between a group of realists that see that brainstorm is untouchable and idealists that want brainstorm gone. There isnt any meaningful discussion because both sides aren't even approaching the issue in the same context.
    Fundamentally correct analysis, I think. Funny part, for me personally, being that I am much more of an idealist and not a realist in many (most?) ways. In fact, if we looked back far enough, I was actually well in the "Ban Brainstorm" camp years ago. Then I realized the position just was not tennible, or rational, to me, in many ways I came to recognize.
    "The Ancients teach us that if we can but last, we shall prevail."
    óKaysa, Elder Druid of the Juniper Order

  20. #22680
    Bald. Bearded. Moderator.
    Mr. Safety's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2010
    Location

    New Gloucester, Maine, USA
    Posts

    4,545

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by H View Post
    Because the same criterion that Brainstorm is banned under, is the same circumstance that Ponder (and likely Preordain) will likely then find themselves in. Because people will always just run the "next best thing." This sort of ban-rubric is a race to the bottom.

    If you take the position that, no, the banning of Brainstorm is a special case, you have to justify this case. Why is the Brainstorm case special? Also, since it is plausible that Brainstorm is perfectly fine without the presence of fetch lands, explain why fetch lands wouldn't be the ones banned, especially since cards like Deathrite are only, presumably, good with fetch lands as well. Now you need to articulate why fetch lands are alright and Brainstorm is not. Then, once you have done that, you go right back and look at the resultant meta. What if Tundra has a 75% meta share? Are duals bannable? Why or why not? What about Force of Will?

    The issue is, I see no way to articulate a fully spelled out manner and fashion of what "normative" Legacy is. I see no way for there to be "one rubric" of what can and should be banned. So there is no way, in my opinion, to have some cut and dry quantitative meta-threshold, or something else, to define what action should be taken in Legacy.

    Legacy just is 4x Brainstorm, by fiat. You can hate it. You can claim that is shouldn't be. But it just is the case. So, you have the option of playing it, fighting against it, or just not playing. You can say none of those are "fair" options and that might well be the case. But the fact of it is, that is the case. Now, you might think I am spuriously making a sort of Is/Ought claim, that because Legacy is the Brainstorm format, it ought to be the Brainstorm format. This is not my point, or my position. I have no idea what Legacy ought to be. The only thing I can possibly do is say what I think Legacy ought not to be. I even tried making a thread to get an idea of what people thought defined/should define Legacy years ago. I don't dwell in a place of hypothetical card-pools. There is a near infinite amount of hypothetical card-pools and I'm not interested in any of them, really.

    In our play group, we have a running joke of saying "just play your cards." It applies to a lot of things, but works here as well. Just play your cards. Is Brainstorm oppressive? Maybe. Then just play it. Or, fight it. If you say, "well, I shouldn't have to" well, I'm sorry, but if you want to play nominal Legacy, you do. But no one makes you play Legacy. If you don't like it, don't play it. If you think some other card pool is "better," make that case. Get other people on board and play that format. But the idea that "Optimal Legacy," like Shangri-La is just out there, waiting for someone to discover this utopian ideal card-pool where every card is rationally justified in it's existence, where no card could unjustly impose itself on any others, where anything and everything is viable and everyone gets a free lunch. But actual Legacy, the Legacy we have and are likely to always have to varying degrees is actually a intuitionally derived hell-hole, where the only way you stay alive is by taking life from something else, where caprice and whim define existence and every moment is a struggle to survive.

    If you want utopia Legacy, then go on and show us how it can be done. Not by some hypothetical rational exercise, but with actual empirical results. Then we might see that this hypothetical card pool really is the promised "ideal" one. Until then, no, "we" are not likely to accept the notion that "Optimal Legacy" is only a ban away.

    So, why is Lurrus ban-worthy where Brainstorm is not? I don't know. But I agree with it. Whether it is a notion of historicism, or of perception, or whatever, once again, you will never get to "Optimal Legacy" with a fully-rationalized ban-rubric. But, then again, maybe I am wrong. If so, I'd invite anyone to come up with a fully-rational, articulated, quantitative and qualitative manner to conclusively display what is "Optimal Legacy" and what is expressly not.

    In the mean time, I'll just play my cards.
    Just piping in, I love this post. Outlining the is/ought argument was awesome.
    Brainstorm Realist

    I close my eyes and sink within myself, relive the gift of precious memories, in need of a fix called innocence. - Chuck Shuldiner

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)