Is it safe to unban Oath of Druids now?

[death]

Reasons:
1. Spell Snare

2. Leyline of Sanctity

3. first turn Show and Tell into Emrakul or Hive Mind + Pact is more broken than a second turn Akroma or Razia(?)

4. Grafdigger's Cage

[Rizso]

Oath of Druids should never come of the ban list, it will ruin a healthy metagame.

[Greenpoe]

Wizards won't even unban Landtax. Why would they touch Oath?

[emidln]

I don't know how relevant it would be, but just consider this sequence:

turn 1) orchard, petal, oath, go
turn 2)

a) mill my entire deck.
b) flashback memory's journey returning LED, LED, LED
c) draw LED, play LED, break LED for UUU
d) flashback deep analysis to draw LED, LED, break for RRRBBB
e) flashback past in flames

All I'm saying is that by adding 4 Oath, 4 better rainbow lands over gemstone mine, 1 deep anal, 1 memory's journey, TES now gets an alternate game ending tutor and the most abusive sideboard plan ever known to Magic (nice hatebear/cb/etc, here's a never-ending supply of hasty Emrakul).
I'll take it.

[Wirrsturm]

I think it could be part of a balanced metagame if along with it the solomoxon/bazzar/library/tinker/mandrain/workshop were also unbanned...but i suspect then the ban brainstorm whinners really would have fuel for their fire.

[(nameless one)]

Why would you unban Oath if Survival of the Fittest is still considered dangerous?

[from Cairo]

Why would you unban Oath if Survival of the Fittest is still considered dangerous?

Laughably enough there was a time in Extended where Oath was legal and Survival of the Fittest was banned.

But yea Oath of Druids is nuts and should not be unbanned.

[Michael Keller]

I don't know how relevant it would be, but just consider this sequence:

turn 1) orchard, petal, oath, go
turn 2)

a) mill my entire deck.
b) flashback memory's journey returning LED, LED, LED
c) draw LED, play LED, break LED for UUU
d) flashback deep analysis to draw LED, LED, break for RRRBBB
e) flashback past in flames

All I'm saying is that by adding 4 Oath, 4 better rainbow lands over gemstone mine, 1 deep anal, 1 memory's journey, TES now gets an alternate game ending tutor and the most abusive sideboard plan ever known to Magic (nice hatebear/cb/etc, here's a never-ending supply of hasty Emrakul).
I'll take it.

I'm pretty sure emidln that a Wasteland would do some serious damage in this sequence. I mean, Oath is still a "may" effect, and I'm not defending the prospect of it becoming legal, but there are legitimate ways to disrupt it. Of course, the card is an incredibly overpowered enabler that combos by itself effectively. And in a format dictated primarily using the attack step, the card is just far too broken to ever come off that list.

[alderon666]

Turn 1, Lotus Petal, Forbidden Orchard, Oath, go
Turn 2, get Iona + Painter's Servant

GG? =D

[emidln]

I'm pretty sure emidln that a Wasteland would do some serious damage in this sequence. I mean, Oath is still a "may" effect, and I'm not defending the prospect of it becoming legal, but there are legitimate ways to disrupt it. Of course, the card is an incredibly overpowered enabler that combos by itself effectively. And in a format dictated primarily using the attack step, the card is just far too broken to ever come off that list.

You can still actually win with that sequence with a land or petal in hand (or drawn, you just delay a turn). Further a 2nd petal or a chrome mox in hand (allowing you to save petal) also beats Wasteland.

This is ignoring where you can still just storm them normally or side in fatty fatties and smash face. The sequence I presented can be disrupted. It's also pretty low-risk to non-blue decks. Further, if you morph the deck away from Ad Naus, you can safely run Oath->Fatty plan alongside a Past in Flames storm plan. This was just a naive example with minimal changes to an existing deck. A hybrid Past in Flames/Oath deck could choose between smashing face with Emrakul or storming you out. Interestingly, lists with lots of Infernal Tutor, you can also just IT->Oath vs aggro decks. Here's an oath, better draw your Pridemage.

[ReinVos]

Of course it's safe to unban Oath.

First of all, a dedicated Oath deck really needs an Oath in the opening hand. Even with four in the deck, you'll have less than 50% chance of finding one in your openener. By building a deck around one card you'll open yourself up to disruption like pointed discard. Not only that, Spell Snare is a major weapon in Legacy so resolving one will be quite difficult. If the opponent deals with the Oath you'll find yourself with bad cards in your hand and deck, simply because Oath of Druids is the only reason those bad cards are there in the first place.

Also, there are no real moxen in Legacy, which means you'll get one or two turns before Oath hits the table. If it does hit the table, you'll have another turn of trying to get rid of it. If you fail at doing either of those things, your deck isn't going to be good enough to compete anyway.

What makes Oath so scary that it's still banned while enablers of the same power level like LED and Entomb are legal? Remember it needs other cards to work, not to mention the symmetrical nature of Oath which will bite you in the ass occasionally.

Oh, before you're going to respond to this, yeah, I'm trollin'

[GGoober]

Even if Oath's power level is fair, it would still be banned for simple reasons: Legacy at the moment has a healthy presence of aggro, Oath would skew the presence of aggro and discourage decks to play creatures (since every creature you play is making Oath combo more consistent).

This is the main reason even if Oath is fair it would not be unbanned. It applies heavily in the principle of the health of the format.

[snappingbowls | ಠ_ಠ]

Q: Is it safe to unban Oath of Druids now?

A: It is entirely unsafe and unwise to unban Oath of Druids in Legacy.

[Mr. Safety]

Necropotence then?

[Gheizen64]

Necropotence then?

I'm honestly torn on what would be worse for the format. Bargain is a much safer bet.

But it's useless to debate such things when tax twist and vise are still on that list. And earthcraft. Honestly.

[phonics]

Laughably enough there was a time in Extended where Oath was legal and Survival of the Fittest was banned.

But yea Oath of Druids is nuts and should not be unbanned.

I dont know when that was but fatties weren't as strong back then than now. Oath has the benefit of recent sets having creatures that are more powerful than ever.

[Leftconsin]

There are about 60 cards on the banned list I'd rather have come off before Oath.

[Meekrab]

I dont know when that was but fatties weren't as strong back then than now. Oath has the benefit of recent sets having creatures that are more powerful than ever.

Orchard hadn't been printed yet, IIRC. There were plenty of big monsters to Oath up, but it wasn't a self-enabling combo at the time.

[phonics]

Orchard hadn't been printed yet, IIRC. There were plenty of big monsters to Oath up, but it wasn't a self-enabling combo at the time.

That is true also. Although Verdant Force doesnt have the same umph as Emrakul, Terastodon, Blightsteel to name a few.

[death]

I wanted to start a healthy discussion but it didn't work out. Oath is worse than Land Tax, Survival, Necro and Bargain because the card needs a deck that is warped around it. Usuallly a one-trick pony, you shut down Oath and you shut down the player. Based on my experience in building Vintage decks, the Oath strategy is weak sauce compared to TPS and dredge.

If there are LED-based decks that exists now and win on turns 1-2, how come Oath is still scary? Survival is a different story because there are several variations of the deck that can be built, making each deck that runs the card more robust and virtually unstoppable. Same case with Necro/Bargain, as if Storm isn't broken as it is. Land Tax offers insane card advantage, 3 cards a turn will be too much against tempo which is currently rampant.

The example emidln gave is easily disruptible and I imagine a deck like that has to run a ton of crap cards which are ineffective by themselves without Oath in play. And with a shitload of removal available in legacy I couldn't imagine Oathed fatties being more dangerous than turn 1 entomb turn 2 Jin, Draw 7 ok?