All B/R update speculation.

[CptHaddock]

Angler is just a goyf with kicker, ban it!

Agreed, ban people who do even/odd rolls and Angler for the reasons listed above.

[Lord_Mcdonalds]

Ban Ponder, High Tide couldn’t survive without brainstorm.

[Crimhead]

you're saying Bug Thresh has never been a thing. Fair enough, fits the theme of your posts. I guess you also forgot to include Turbo Depths in your list of decks that don't play DRS either

I guess I should have specified RUG Delver (I've always called BUG Thresh Team America).

Regardless, I'm not saying no decks play DRS! I am refuting your assertion that every deck that can play it does. RUG Thresh is a valid counterexample. I gave you, what, half a dozen counter-examples? I only need one! Take Thresh off that list altogether and it still proves my point.

Apparently Turbo Depths does play DRS, much to my surprise.

You can keep trying to "ridicule" me for referring to DRS as a planeswalker (it clearly is not an actual planeswalker, but it certainly acts like one) and deny that you're attacking how I say things without actually adding to the argument about why DRS shouldn't be banned, but this is still the reality of the format right now.

I wasn't ridiculing the comparison, it's that you did it in the same breath as calling out a false equivalence. Kettle, pot, you know.

Regarding what you say vs how you say, the issue is you are not actually saying anything at all. Even if there were a 1cc Walker, card type and mana cost are not relevant considerations here.
EDIT - I guess you are saying that DRS is the most powerful utility creature ever printed? This is likely true, but also irrelevant.

The "most played cards" table is the only relevant thing you've posted on the topic. Still, advocating a ban on that basis is a bit hypocritical if we are not also asking to ban BS, Ponder, FoW and Wasteland.
It is generally understood that ubiquity alone is a poor criterion. That's why we look at archetypes, dominance, and overall format diversity. But we don't look at type lines and mana cost (or colourful descriptions).

[non-inflammable]

Apparently Turbo Depths does play DRS, much to my surprise.

I just played a 6 round event and had to play against "blewstew&deathrite" 5 out of the 6 rounds.
Top 4 was me and 3 grixis delver lists; lame.

I wasn't on the ban deathrite bandwagon, but make a seat for me now...

[kombatkiwi]

Fair blue decks are always going to be the best decks, but when the best fair blue deck is immune to almost everything because of 1 card, it disincentives players to bother. Goyf and Birds do not, have not and will not ever provide a deck with the same ridiculous power that DRS does. The card has been a plague for some time and is only getting worse as more and more people realise how OP the card is.

This is the crux of Steve's argument and yet none of his critics seem to have addressed this point
We have a situation where Grixis delver is pretty well established as the best deck, so people should be metagaming to beat it, and yet:
- Chalice strategies exist but aren't even overwhelmingly good vs deck full of 1 drops
- Moon strategies exist but aren't overwhelmingly good vs a deck playing 4 colors
etc
Even these matchups where you're playing some weird strategy to try and beat Grixis your deck is going to suffer from consistency issues some of the time just from playing not-brainstorm, and the Grixis deck has the tools such that no matchup is 'unwinnable': DRS is a significant one of these tools (because it makes the deck much better in general, as well as making it harder to beat the deck by attacking its mana).

If you ban DRS the blue package is still probably on top of the format, sure, but whatever version of blue deck you choose is much more beatable for not having DRS in it. Now you do actually have to make a meaningful decision as to what strategy you play, what strategy you try to beat. Now you have to "bother". Not like now where the situation is close to "I want to win? Ok, play Grixis, end of conversation"

If you want to argue against this then you need to claim that either:
a) Actually Delver/Pile aren't that dominant of a force in the metagame and SneakShow, Lands, Miracles, Eldrazi etc are all competitive, so there's no reason to ban anything. (Any arguments on this axis should refer to metagame data)
b) This is just the natural course of power creep in MTG, so even though the card greatly homogenizes the format it's still acceptable because that's just magic. (This is a subjective argument and I think the burden of proof is on the person trying to claim this is true, because when formats approach 1-deck territory the historical consensus (IMO) is that bans need to happen. What special quality of DRS means that it is safe while Misstep, Dig, Cruise need to go? If you're going to make the 'dies to removal' argument then you're also defending the 1 mana 10/10.

Hanni has tried to make the argument 'B', but I don't think there is a clear case for why DRS is acceptable and other banned cards are 'rightfully' not allowed :

My argument for why DRS is okay, and the 10/10 isn't, isn't because it dies to spot removal. My argument in favor of DRS is that even if you don't have an immediate answer for DRS, you don't just lose on the spot. A 10/10 ends the game in two swings if you don't have an answer.

I think many people would argue that if you don't answer DRS immediately then the DRS player only has to back it up with not-much and then you are already in 'lose on the spot' territory. I'll concede that the 1-mana 10/10 would still be more offensive than DRS, but when your argument starts to look like 'DRS is acceptable because it can't kill me on turn 3 if my opp mulligans to 2' I think maybe you are failing to see the wood for the trees a little bit (or your standard for banning cards is skewed; misstep never made anybody lose on the spot, so it's fine?)

Fair blue decks are immune to almost everything explicitly because of DRS? That's a bold statement.

Is it?

I still don't mind DRS enabling an arguably tier-zero Brainstorm deck (if the metagame data even supports this conclusion, I haven't bothered to properly check), because I believe that situation gives a lot of scope for people to outplay each other. That is a big reason for why I like MTG. (Also why I wouldn't mind Probe getting axed)
But if somebody has other priorities for their children's card game (variety in viable deck selection etc) then I think there are valid reasons for that person to dislike the current legacy, which appears to be approaching (or is at) a Dig/Top situation.
Please stop with the "uhhhhh DRS is actually not a planeswalker, can't you READ!?!?!?"

[Gheizen64]

Can't wait until we ban everything but brainstorm to address the blue cantrip shell power level.

[Erdvermampfa]

Can't wait until we ban everything but brainstorm to address the blue cantrip shell power level.

It's indeed ridiculous how DRS has been discussed as the primary ban candidate recently while cards that are much more banworthy like Gitaxian Probe aren't even problematized by the majority. I would argue that a ban of Probe would be much more reasonable right now because in my view it is what puts the UBR Delver deck over the top. Removing Probe would bring it back to legacy adequate levels of absurdness. Probe is a inherently broken card anyways and is a residual of a design mistake (Phyrexian mana) that has been unadressed for a way too long time.

[Hanni]

It's indeed ridiculous how DRS has been discussed as the primary ban candidate recently while cards that are much more banworthy like Gitaxian Probe aren't even problematized by the majority. I would argue that a ban of Probe would be much more reasonable right now because in my view it is what puts the UBR Delver deck over the top. Removing Probe would bring it back to legacy adequate levels of absurdness. Probe is a inherently broken card anyways and is a residual of a design mistake (Phyrexian mana) that has been unadressed for a way too long time.

Do you believe Gitaxian Probe is more powerful or banworthy than either Brainstorm or Ponder?

[Lemnear]

It's indeed ridiculous how DRS has been discussed as the primary ban candidate recently while cards that are much more banworthy like Gitaxian Probe aren't even problematized by the majority. I would argue that a ban of Probe would be much more reasonable right now because in my view it is what puts the UBR Delver deck over the top. Removing Probe would bring it back to legacy adequate levels of absurdness. Probe is a inherently broken card anyways and is a residual of a design mistake (Phyrexian mana) that has been unadressed for a way too long time.

I don't think that pointing at DRS with it's history of invalidating the natural weaknesses of 1cc.dec and 4c piles is "ridiculous" by any means. No one is denying that Probe is a strong card, but banning it wouldn't really shake up the format in a way people seem to desire.

[Dice_Box]

The format would be lessened by the loss of DRS, it's Graveyard interaction is a boon for Legacy.

[Hanni]

Hanni has tried to make the argument 'B', but I don't think there is a clear case for why DRS is acceptable and other banned cards are 'rightfully' not allowed :

I think many people would argue that if you don't answer DRS immediately then the DRS player only has to back it up with not-much and then you are already in 'lose on the spot' territory. I'll concede that the 1-mana 10/10 would still be more offensive than DRS, but when your argument starts to look like 'DRS is acceptable because it can't kill me on turn 3 if my opp mulligans to 2' I think maybe you are failing to see the wood for the trees a little bit (or your standard for banning cards is skewed; misstep never made anybody lose on the spot, so it's fine?)

I wasn't implying that a 1 drop necessarily has to be 'if you cannot immediately answer this you lose' in order to be banworthy, I was simply explaining why a 1 mana 10/10 would be far more oppressive than DRS.

I've won plenty of games where my opponent resolves DRS and I don't deal with it right away. That's not to say that there aren't situations where that happens, but I feel like people are dramatically exaggerating the power of DRS. It's certainly the best one drop in the format right now, but people are blowing it out of proportion. That's why I introduced the idea of a 1 mana 10/10 into the discussion, as contrast.

DRS definitely gives resiliency to mana denial, yes, that's what a mana dork does. But the reason Grixis Delver is the best deck right now is the sum of all of its parts. For example, DRS isn't why the deck can sometimes beat Chalice... free countermagic (and artifact removal postboard) is. The entire deck is stacked with the most powerful and efficient spells in the format. Without DRS, Delver is still the best deck in the format.

The fact that DRS enables a ton of interesting archetypes like Food Chain feels like he does more for the format than the negatives. DRS enables non-blue decks too. And while Deadguy, The Rock, Maverick, Jund, and other decks aren't as good as the blue stew, that's an entirely different issue that has no correlation to DRS.

At any rate, you are correct that my standard for banning cards is skewed. I did not believe that Mystical Tutor, Survival of the Fittest, nor Sensei's Divining Top needed to be banned, and I don't think anything currently needs to be banned either. I did feel that Flash, TC, Dig, and Misstep were too powerful and needed to be banned... so it's not like I'm completely against banning things, I just believe that cards need to be oppressive and format warping (i.e you either play said card/deck, or you play a deck that beats said card/deck). I don't believe that any cards are oppressive or format warping right now.

[Mr. Safety]

I wasn't implying that a 1 drop necessarily has to be 'if you cannot immediately answer this you lose' in order to be banworthy, I was simply explaining why a 1 mana 10/10 would be far more oppressive than DRS.

I've won plenty of games where my opponent resolves DRS and I don't deal with it right away. That's not to say that there aren't situations where that happens, but I feel like people are dramatically exaggerating the power of DRS. It's certainly the best one drop in the format right now, but people are blowing it out of proportion. That's why I introduced the idea of a 1 mana 10/10 into the discussion, as contrast.

DRS definitely gives resiliency to mana denial, yes, that's what a mana dork does. But the reason Grixis Delver is the best deck right now is the sum of all of its parts. For example, DRS isn't why the deck can sometimes beat Chalice... free countermagic (and artifact removal postboard) is. The entire deck is stacked with the most powerful and efficient spells in the format. Without DRS, Delver is still the best deck in the format.

The fact that DRS enables a ton of interesting archetypes like Food Chain feels like he does more for the format than the negatives. DRS enables non-blue decks too. And while Deadguy, The Rock, Maverick, Jund, and other decks aren't as good as the blue stew, that's an entirely different issue that has no correlation to DRS.

At any rate, you are correct that my standard for banning cards is skewed. I did not believe that Mystical Tutor, Survival of the Fittest, nor Sensei's Divining Top needed to be banned, and I don't think anything currently needs to be banned either. I did feel that Flash, TC, Dig, and Misstep were too powerful and needed to be banned... so it's not like I'm completely against banning things, I just believe that cards need to be oppressive and format warping (i.e you either play said card/deck, or you play a deck that beats said card/deck). I don't believe that any cards are oppressive or format warping right now.

I like a bunch of this post, the one exception being the point about Mystical Tutor, Survival, and SDT (which I felt all needed a ban.) I do however think your approach to how bannings happen is more productive than most.

The bolded area highlights an exceedingly good point that I like: Deadguy, Rock, Maverick, Jund all would suffer incredibly without DRS, and I believe that the main reason they are playable at tier 2 at all is because of the card. Yes, they are not as good as Blue-based mid-range decks, but they aren't as far off as they would be without DRS. I also agree that the problems they have in the metagame aren't related to DRS at all, mostly consistency issues. We all know the best consistency enablers come from blue-based filtering, or in the 'old days' SDT, and while us BGx players would like Sylvan Library/Mirri's Guile to be as good as Brainstorm they simply aren't, not when it's such a small part of the overall plan.

[Ace/Homebrew]

That's why I introduced the idea of a 1 mana 10/10 into the discussion.

For the sake of this discussion, a hypothetical 1 mana 17/4 doesn't change anything right? It kills in the same amount of time (while allowing the opponent to probe or fetch on their turn), and it dies to the same stuff...

[Hanni]

For the sake of this discussion, a hypothetical 1 mana 17/4 doesn't change anything right? It kills in the same amount of time (while allowing the opponent to probe or fetch on their turn), and it dies to the same stuff...

That actually seems way more oppressive than a 10/10, because connecting a single time puts the opponent in single Lightning Bolt range. Regardless, the original point I was making was in response to Steve a page or two back about vanilla creatures.

[Ace/Homebrew]

That actually seems way more oppressive than a 10/10, because connecting a single time puts the opponent in single Lightning Bolt range. Regardless, the original point I was making was in response to Steve a page or two back about vanilla creatures.

You're right, I hadn't considered bolt.

So 15 or 16 power is probably the highest it can go without changing the conversation.

If we shoot for a 1-mana vanilla that is a minimum 3 swings before lethal, while keeping bolt in mind... that would be 7 or 8 power. Is that creature more oppressive than DRS?

I'm not of the opinion that DRS needs to be banned, but I kinda like the thought experiment of 'where is the line for 1-mana vanilla creatures before it is better than DRS?'

[Hanni]

You're right, I hadn't considered bolt.

So 15 or 16 power is probably the highest it can go without changing the conversation.

If we shoot for a 1-mana vanilla that is a minimum 3 swings before lethal, while keeping bolt in mind... that would be 7 or 8 power. Is that creature more oppressive than DRS?

I'm not of the opinion that DRS needs to be banned, but I kinda like the thought experiment of 'where is the line for 1-mana vanilla creatures before it is better than DRS?'

I mean, it's definitely deck specific, but I think I'd rather have a vanilla 4/4 for 1 mana with no drawbacks over DRS in a Delver deck. In something midrange and less aggressive, I'd much rather have the best mana dork in the format. However, where the line is for when a vanilla one drop would become more ubiquitous than DRS would probably be at around the 7 power range? I don't really know.

[Ace/Homebrew]

I don't really know.

That's fair, it's all theory anyway. I just think it is sort of a neat way to quantize the strength of a creature for power-creep comparisons.

For instance, Goyf is pretty reliably a 4/5 for and even that isn't 'the best' anymore. The printing of a 5/5 for has arguably crept past the formerly ubiquitous Tarmogoyf.

[Watersaw]

The fact that DRS enables a ton of interesting archetypes like Food Chain feels like he does more for the format than the negatives. DRS enables non-blue decks too. And while Deadguy, The Rock, Maverick, Jund, and other decks aren't as good as the blue stew, that's an entirely different issue that has no correlation to DRS.

Sure DRS can go in tier 2 decks but why should that be an argument that the card is safe? Throwing a broken card into a bad deck doesn't mean the card should be legal, and it doesn't make the good decks that run it any less good.

[Kap'n Cook]

The fact that Top enables a ton of interesting archetypes like Doomsday feels like it does more for the format than the negatives. Top enables non-blue decks too. And while Nic Fit, Painter, 12 Post and other decks aren't as good as the blue stew, that's an entirely different issue that has no correlation to Top.

[Hanni]

Cool. I also think Top was fine, so I don’t see your point. You could replace the card of discussion in there with Mental Misstep, and it still doesn't have any bearing on the original point. Any card that can see play in multiple decks could be plugged into my sentence, but it doesn't mean that putting words into my mouth changes the value of the original sentence. Black Lotus could fit in every deck too... you definitely should have went all the way for a more dramatic effect.