Should Wizards specifically protect iconic cards in Legacy?

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I don't want to rehash the arguments about Brainstorm in this thread because they've been done to death and, being frank, I think on the face any argument that Brainstorm isn't ban-worthy based on performance is simply delusional.

The only really compelling argument I've heard from people is that Brainstorm is an iconic Legacy card that people have a lot of love for, and it would hurt the format's brand, in essence, to ban it.

I have a lot of sympathy for this argument and want to talk about how that would be implemented; the first implication that would have to be accepted from that is that if a deck is a problem in the format, you might only ban the second or third most powerful card in it if it means protecting an iconic card, one of the set list of classical cards that's just not legal or viable in any other format.

Some implications in list terms would seem to me to be:

- Don't ban Brainstorm; ban Delver instead.
- Unban Survival and ban Vengevine
- Unban Mystical Tutor and, if you're really that terrified of anything, ban Ad Nauseam (although again the numbers never supported a banning in this period of Legacy anyway, so really just unban M. Tutor)

And can this be retrofitted to other cards on the B&R list, and if so onto which cards (besides the obvious non-problem cards of Mind Twist, Land Tax and Black Vise.)

[KobeBryan]

That is the dumbest arguments I have ever heard...protect from banning because its an iconic card.

If the card is overpowered or wraps the format, it deserves to get banned.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

That is the dumbest arguments I have ever heard...protect from banning because its an iconic card.

If the card is overpowered or wraps the format, it deserves to get banned.

"Deserves" isn't a very useful compass. The card doesn't deserve anything, it's not like it has moral capacity. The question is; is it better for the health of the format to ban not the most problematic cards but the cards that will least be missed? I think there's a fairly compelling argument that can be made that it is.

[lordofthepit]

Yes, I think just as there are pillars of Vintage (cards like Workshop, Mana Drain, Dark Ritual, Null Rod, etc. that are significantly stronger than many restricted cards, but are unbanned nonetheless to allow for different archetypes), there should be pillars of Legacy.

In my opinion, Brainstorm is the strongest card in the format and probably better than at least half the cards on the banned list. However, I would tolerate this because it is powerful in its consistency, rather than its degenerate potential. It sees play in combo, control, and aggro-control, so it's not accurate to describe decks as being a "Brainstorm decks" the way you could describe "Mystical Tutor decks" or "Survival decks".

I am sick of the blue dominance in the metagame, but citing something like "75% of the decks at X were blue" is a bit misleading because of the multi-colored nature of the format, enabled by duals and fetches. At that same tournament, it's likely that 60% of the decks also played green.

I oppose a Brainstorm ban, although I can see why it's being discussed. I would be very disappointed if it got the axe, but I would still play Legacy (and switch back to Zoo and smash face).

[Greenpoe]

No, but Wizards should become more open to the possibility of banning creatures. Vengevine and not Survival. Snapcaster/Delver and not Brainstorm. Iona and not Mystical.

[luckme10]

I agree with a more aggressive creature banning principle. Magic has been around for 18 years and yet the playable creature base in legacy predominantly consists of cards created in the post Tarmogoyf era. Why is it that a majority of the creatures used in the game are less than 4 years old? Power creep is the issue that should be discussed here.

[thefringthing]

Some ideas for "pillars" of Legacy: Aether Vial, Lion's Eye Diamond, Tarmogoyf.

[dahcmai]

I can see where he's coming from.

Ok, this is probably a horrible example, but let's say Wizards took a serious interest into Legacy and decided that it was in everyone's better interest balance-wise to ban the dual lands. Why? Because they prohibit making any other lands printed worth playing. There will never be any other lands as good as them for color fixing so why keep them in the format when you can ban them and have room for expansion of the choices or some crap. You can just imagine some argument like that.

What would happen in that scenario is people would go into convulsions and heart failures would abound. Remember even Extended kept the duals around just for sheer love of them way past the mark where they should have rotated out. Extended flat died after they did rotate too. No one liked that format except the occasional oddball. Testing for it was miserable and let's face it, it was flat boring as sin.


The other hand has it's problems also. I personally loved Survival of the Fittest and am one of those people who didn't have a problem with that whole Vengevine thing. I never actually understood that one. That deck flopped and failed every week around here, but we have an obscene amount of grave hate also in this meta.

Survival does have a flaw with development though. They are right in saying that eventually it would get broken again with the printing of another creature that breaks it's symmetry. It would happen. Maybe not quick, but it would. It's like how Bazaar of Baghdad was borderline playable during it's time and considered serious crap for the most part, but is silly broken now.

Though I do wish they could see the problems created by newer cards and ban the culprit instead of it's older cousin who's been fine up until that point. Vengevine was my favorite one to cite for that. It's a creature that has an ability that triggers for free. Ummmm, did they forget how good free shit is? Anything for free is always worth looking at. Lion's Eye Diamond was serious crap during it's day, now it's borderline broken. Why, because it gives you free stuff. High cost, but high reward, of course it eventually would start being powerful. I personally think Vengevine will get broken again and I doubt it's all that far off. LED is probably already being watched, but it doesn't win enough SCG tournaments for anyone to care yet. Pfft.

Now Mystical Tutor is an example of a card that fits the other way. Mystical is seriously a matter of Ad Nauseum. Let's face that one. That deck was amazingly good and seriously easy to pilot and not a single person other than the people who played it, liked it. I'll give people credit for Doomsday stacks and building storm the old fashioned way, but I really hate Ant. It's a little too easy. And....Mystical took the heat for it. Pfft. reanimator argument not withstanding. Reanimator would be frigging insane with Jin Gitaxias and Mystical for the Entombs nowadays though so I guess it's a good thing it's toast. It's an example of a card that eventually did break itself. It sucks, but Jin gitaxias didn't break Reanimator. It could be argued that Entomb never should have come off, but they do like to hate on the storm decks.


To me, I would lean toward no. No iconic status for protection for bannings. Cards are printed everyday that can accidentally break older ones. They don't test for it, though I am sure they do bother to think about it a little.


Delver is pretty dumb. Nacatyl in blue, good job. Did they really think a one blue mana 3/2 flyer in blue wouldn't be good? I can hear the limited argument, but that one was coming a mile away. Once you noticed that it wasn't like the werewolves, you got it. I could live with that as a banning without the whole Brainstorm argument.

Lastly, sadly, I would ban Brainstorm if things are going to stay at status quo, that or start giving the other colors some cards worth using. Fetches did give that card a ton of power. It's definitely a matter of a card that eventually broke itself with newer cards being printed to boost it. Weird to think that once upon a time, Impulse was by far the better pick for your control deck. I'd rather see White or Black get some serious loving and have some actual competition for it instead. Split Second Duress would be nice. : ) Reactive white cards that did something besides toss damage around? Blah, blah. blah. You get the idea.

[Octopusman]

Legacy does have pillars. They just change more often.

I agree that the newer card should be banned for the most part. Losing survival because of vengevine was really sad. Just shows whoever is calling the shots doesn't care about the format's (game's?) rich history.
I don't see them caring about the format, really.

Also, choosing what is icon will get subjective pretty quickly unless you define what it is. Maybe start with, card age, card presence in top 16s and how consistently and for how long. Then pick cards people like.

Force of Will Control
Swords to Plowshares and Bolt Agro
LED combo

?

Lackey tribal, Lord of Atlantis tribal with permission.

Fun to think about. I like the mana drain's forum how it is divided bt deck type.

[sligh16]

Lastly, sadly, I would ban Brainstorm if things are going to stay at status quo, that or start giving the other colors some cards worth using. Fetches did give that card a ton of power. It's definitely a matter of a card that eventually broke itself with newer cards being printed to boost it. Weird to think that once upon a time, Impulse was by far the better pick for your control deck. I'd rather see White or Black get some serious loving and have some actual competition for it instead. Split Second Duress would be nice. : ) Reactive white cards that did something besides toss damage around? Blah, blah. blah. You get the idea.

I would like to point this part of your argument, because it reminds me of the "dogma" problem that Legacy as an eternal format has. It seems that just for being an eternal format, some people (dunno how many, I would like to know, for sure) think that it's fine and actually, they don't want to change the fact that blue is the best color. This seems, to me, like a dogmatic and selfish way to think.

It's like thinking that riches should remain riches, and poors should remain poors, because it has always been like that. I know everyone has a favorite color, but true diversity, in my opinion, should come from a power balance between them.

[Einherjer]

Ye youre right, but if Wizards tries to help, the chance that they mess up the whole thing is way bigger, so im fine with this meta... Id just love to see a lil less Tempo but thats just subjective... I think its fine.

Greetings

[Final Fortune]

I'm not certain whether or not iconic cards should have protection from bans, but creatures certainly shouldn't have it. If you look at the power creep of the post Tarmogoyf era and the number of 2cc creature choices that were just literally wiped off the face of the map because of it, I think it would've been far more prudent to ban that card in its prime to create format diversity. Delver is certainly pushing that envelope in an even more extreme direction, because what other aggressive 1 drop are u/x decks going to run after it that don't require a 4c manabase or Threshold?

[SpikeyMikey]

I would like to point this part of your argument, because it reminds me of the "dogma" problem that Legacy as an eternal format has. It seems that just for being an eternal format, some people (dunno how many, I would like to know, for sure) think that it's fine and actually, they don't want to change the fact that blue is the best color. This seems, to me, like a dogmatic and selfish way to think.

It's like thinking that riches should remain riches, and poors should remain poors, because it has always been like that. I know everyone has a favorite color, but true diversity, in my opinion, should come from a power balance between them.

You have absolutely no idea how formats work. You, and people like you, are the ones that destroyed Standard and ushered in the modern era of card design.

It has NOTHING to do with favorite colors and haves and have-nots. Frankly, your opinion sucks. You can't see beyond your own desires to see what actually creates a healthy and balanced format. Because balance doesn't come from color balance, it comes from strategy balance. You want a format where blue control isn't the best strategy? Go play Modern. The only decks running counters in Modern are the Zoo decks. And the format is stagnant and people hate it. You want another format where blue control isn't the best strategy? Play Vintage. Enjoy your Dredge vs. Workshop vs. Storm. Of course, occasionally, you'll still have to play against Landstill control, but that only makes up a small percent of the field. Be sure to tell everyone you play how nerfing blue leads to greater diversity.

Any time you have an extended card pool, broken strategies are going to come up. And it's not a linear progression, it's an exponential progression. Think of the number of different, viable, combo decks out there. I could name half a dozen without thinking about it. VIABLE combo decks. And lets say you get your foolish wish and control (aggro control, really, because true control was already hit) is hit hard enough that it drops down to 20% of the metagame. Blue occupies a perfectly fair 20% of the metagame. Those combo decks are now gods. I mean, they can go toe to toe decently with control as it is. It's not like they autolose to a single counterspell. Even Belcher can shrug off a single Force if you give them a few turns.

So you ban all the combo cards that are giving you problems. And instead of seeing High Tide and Tendrils and Hive Mind, you start seeing Dream Halls and Aluren. So you ban those. And new combos spring up in their place. And even after you've gotten rid of all the "combo" decks, 70 or 80 bannings down the road, your midrange decks are going to be even less powerful. You'll see legacy turn into the bad-tapout-control/GR-Ramp-into-inevitable-bullshit/terrible-one-drop-aggro pattern that Standard always falls into.

[TsumiBand]

You have absolutely no idea how formats work. You, and people like you, are the ones that destroyed Standard and ushered in the modern era of card design.

It has NOTHING to do with favorite colors and haves and have-nots. Frankly, your opinion sucks. You can't see beyond your own desires to see what actually creates a healthy and balanced format. Because balance doesn't come from color balance, it comes from strategy balance. You want a format where blue control isn't the best strategy? Go play Modern. The only decks running counters in Modern are the Zoo decks. And the format is stagnant and people hate it. You want another format where blue control isn't the best strategy? Play Vintage. Enjoy your Dredge vs. Workshop vs. Storm. Of course, occasionally, you'll still have to play against Landstill control, but that only makes up a small percent of the field. Be sure to tell everyone you play how nerfing blue leads to greater diversity.

Any time you have an extended card pool, broken strategies are going to come up. And it's not a linear progression, it's an exponential progression. Think of the number of different, viable, combo decks out there. I could name half a dozen without thinking about it. VIABLE combo decks. And lets say you get your foolish wish and control (aggro control, really, because true control was already hit) is hit hard enough that it drops down to 20% of the metagame. Blue occupies a perfectly fair 20% of the metagame. Those combo decks are now gods. I mean, they can go toe to toe decently with control as it is. It's not like they autolose to a single counterspell. Even Belcher can shrug off a single Force if you give them a few turns.

So you ban all the combo cards that are giving you problems. And instead of seeing High Tide and Tendrils and Hive Mind, you start seeing Dream Halls and Aluren. So you ban those. And new combos spring up in their place. And even after you've gotten rid of all the "combo" decks, 70 or 80 bannings down the road, your midrange decks are going to be even less powerful. You'll see legacy turn into the bad-tapout-control/GR-Ramp-into-inevitable-bullshit/terrible-one-drop-aggro pattern that Standard always falls into.

I see what you did there, and largely I share this view. It's way too easy for (new) players to get sucked into the "Blue > all" dogma, I for one discarded it with the inception of Legacy's split from Vintage and have never felt that was a mistake, in this format; other formats will disagree.

But I thinking you missed the forest a little bit; there is something to be said for watching the way colors implement different aspects of their strategy over the last several years. I tend to think of blocks like Onslaught and Mirrodin when I encounter this kind of argument; TGS (Mono-White Control) was an actual deck in Onslaught, and the very next block saw a metagame Mono-Green Control deck emerge, simply because artifacts were everywhere and Green's ability to hate on them could turn Affinity on its head if it didn't gain the advantage via Skullclamp.

While I don't disagree that Legacy is going to harken to certain lines of play more than others, it's not wrong to say that those lines of play tend to align themselves with certain colors.

But let's not pretend for a minute that a 3/2 flyer for U is somehow destroying fucking Legacy either. Any Blue deck that is trying to beatdown is immediately comparing itself to Merfolk, and Merfolk isn't exactly ruining the aggro matchup. Zoo is still more redundant that a deck with 16 Lords and 16 counters. The people who are trying to use Delver as an excuse for playing Counterburn are doing precisely that, and they are still playing a weaker aggro/control strategy with crappier creatures and sacrificing a PoP-proof manabase to do it.

The biggest issue with stuff like this is, people that tend to make the anti-Blue arguments also tend to have NO IDEA how Force of Will is letting them play their guys-and-burn deck in the face of good combo. The minute you figure that out you should probably start giving the hard-earned Wins to control players with a smile, knowing that they are the reason people pause before bringing RetardedCombo.dec to the tournament.

[Finn]

I'm with you, Mikey. In particluar though, wouldn't banning Brainstorm take the combo decks down a notch along with control?

[from Cairo]

Without addressing specific cards, I don't think it would be a bad policy for Wizards/DCI to consider certain cards 'pillars' to archetypes and actively avoid banning them if there are alternatives or they aren't broken.

[Tao]

You have absolutely no idea how formats work. You, and people like you, are the ones that destroyed Standard and ushered in the modern era of card design.

It has NOTHING to do with favorite colors and haves and have-nots. Frankly, your opinion sucks. You can't see beyond your own desires to see what actually creates a healthy and balanced format. Because balance doesn't come from color balance, it comes from strategy balance. You want a format where blue control isn't the best strategy? Go play Modern. The only decks running counters in Modern are the Zoo decks. And the format is stagnant and people hate it. You want another format where blue control isn't the best strategy? Play Vintage. Enjoy your Dredge vs. Workshop vs. Storm. Of course, occasionally, you'll still have to play against Landstill control, but that only makes up a small percent of the field. Be sure to tell everyone you play how nerfing blue leads to greater diversity.

Any time you have an extended card pool, broken strategies are going to come up. And it's not a linear progression, it's an exponential progression. Think of the number of different, viable, combo decks out there. I could name half a dozen without thinking about it. VIABLE combo decks. And lets say you get your foolish wish and control (aggro control, really, because true control was already hit) is hit hard enough that it drops down to 20% of the metagame. Blue occupies a perfectly fair 20% of the metagame. Those combo decks are now gods. I mean, they can go toe to toe decently with control as it is. It's not like they autolose to a single counterspell. Even Belcher can shrug off a single Force if you give them a few turns.

So you ban all the combo cards that are giving you problems. And instead of seeing High Tide and Tendrils and Hive Mind, you start seeing Dream Halls and Aluren. So you ban those. And new combos spring up in their place. And even after you've gotten rid of all the "combo" decks, 70 or 80 bannings down the road, your midrange decks are going to be even less powerful. You'll see legacy turn into the bad-tapout-control/GR-Ramp-into-inevitable-bullshit/terrible-one-drop-aggro pattern that Standard always falls into.

No your opinion sucks -_-

First of all your scenario of a format with only 20% blue is flat out stupid. I know that technically what you said was right but if we use numbers let us use those numbers that are important. Most decks are two or three colored so a perfectly balanced format would have each color included in over 40% of the decks. And that is not even what anyone wants. It would still be okay if blue was in over 50% of the decks, or 60%. One color has to be the strongest. But the current situation is that blue is in somewhere between 80% and 90% of the decks and that is not good.

Your claim that Combo would be too good once blue decks are less played is wrong too. Even in your contructed color balanced format scenario Brainstorm takes a special role. If those Combo decks that you say would run wild in such a format have no access to Brainstorm then the Combo matchup of other colors would become much stronger.
Black in particular would get much stronger against Combo because you can't hide your Combo pieces from Thoughtseize, Hymn to Tourach and Cabal Therapy anymore. But also other colors would have a much easier time because the Combo decks can't search their solutions for (Gaddock Teeg, Ethersworn Canonist, Chalice of the Void, Trinisphere, ...) so easily anymore. The Legacy pool gives all colors decent ways to combat Combo decks and as a result the Combo decks would not run wild by any means.
Of course blue would by its nature still be the best color to combat Combo but it also would still be 60% of the Metagame so there is no reason to get worried.

I also can't see the point of your references to other formats. The mutilation of the Modern format has nothing to do with Legacy. I don't know what kind of idiot decided that Blazing Shoal deserves to get banned but unlike Modern Legacy will still have Force of Will, Stifle, Daze, Wasteland, Hymn to Tourach and Cabal Therapy to keep Combo in check and make further bannings unnessecary.

[KevinTrudeau]

Subjectively speaking, yes, they should. The biggest reason I still play Magic is for nostalgic purposes, with the number two reason being the strategic aspect. If WotC were to ban a card I truly found iconic, I would be heavily disincentivized in playing. If WotC were to ban a card I found iconic that doesn't come close to belonging on the ban list, an example being Brainstorm, I would be even more disincentivized.

Objectively speaking, no, not necessarily. They should take precaution in curtailing another Vintage-esque situation from happening, but they should do what's best for the game. It's really a case-by-case basis type of deal IMO.

@IBA- I was totally planning on allowing you to join Team Jack, but because of your crusade against Brainstorm, you're not invited anymore.

[dahcmai]

I do wish they would just give the other colors something more than the usual crap.

What do we keep seeing them print?

Red gets better and better burn, but still stays subpar compared to Lightning bolt. Annoying. Luckily they finally have been getting some slightly better creatures than the old days. Goblin Guide and such.

White gets new and improved White Knights over and over again and some random damage redirection variants as usual. Thank god for planeswalkers and Elspeth or else White would still only be known for Swords. cough, Land Tax.

Black is the poor stepchild who showed everyone what Necro could do and got beaten to a pulp for it. No Necro Black! You get more Juzam variants! No Juzam, fine then, you get Negator variants.

Green has finally got it's day and got some really good critters. Still a little subpar as far as spells go, but it's gotten much better. I was really happy to see Scavenging Ooze printed. That's the best thing Green has gotten since Tarmogoyf. Goyf was almost a little overboard for it's time and it's still outclassing a ton of stuff. Ooze was something green has needed for a long time. Sorry, but Night Soil just wasn't cutting it.


Brainstorm is damned good, it just needs some competition. Do you really think these U tempo decks would be the top dogs if Necro were still around? Shit no. Necro is way overpowered, but a nice version of Greed with a cheap casting cost would sure make a difference. Personally, that's what I think needs to happen. We need a cheap cc Greed. Something as good as that would make red worth playing again too. Tip the balances back to the other colors in certain matches. I liked the Rock, Paper, Scissors, Wood, Spock game.

[conboy31]

- Unban Survival and ban Vengevine

I would love for this to happen, with or without the banning of brainstorm.

If a reasonable compromise can be made, I would rather see iconic cards protected. Though, I don't believe such a stance inherently protects brainstorm.

[dahcmai]

I forgot another point I was going to make.

It also makes for another problem of determining which cards and who is going to consider them iconic in the first place. A whole nother bag of worms you might say.

[Sloshthedark]

- Don't ban Brainstorm; Don't ban Delver
- Unban Survival, Don't ban Vengevine
- Unban Mystical Tutor

simple

protecting Iconic cards? - just think when designing new ones

to answer the question - yes, banning cards decreases variability, don't ban engines, ban problematic tools and only when its absolutely necessary

[Gheizen64]

You have absolutely no idea how formats work. You, and people like you, are the ones that destroyed Standard and ushered in the modern era of card design.

It has NOTHING to do with favorite colors and haves and have-nots. Frankly, your opinion sucks. You can't see beyond your own desires to see what actually creates a healthy and balanced format. Because balance doesn't come from color balance, it comes from strategy balance. You want a format where blue control isn't the best strategy? Go play Modern. The only decks running counters in Modern are the Zoo decks. And the format is stagnant and people hate it. You want another format where blue control isn't the best strategy? Play Vintage. Enjoy your Dredge vs. Workshop vs. Storm. Of course, occasionally, you'll still have to play against Landstill control, but that only makes up a small percent of the field. Be sure to tell everyone you play how nerfing blue leads to greater diversity.

Any time you have an extended card pool, broken strategies are going to come up. And it's not a linear progression, it's an exponential progression. Think of the number of different, viable, combo decks out there. I could name half a dozen without thinking about it. VIABLE combo decks. And lets say you get your foolish wish and control (aggro control, really, because true control was already hit) is hit hard enough that it drops down to 20% of the metagame. Blue occupies a perfectly fair 20% of the metagame. Those combo decks are now gods. I mean, they can go toe to toe decently with control as it is. It's not like they autolose to a single counterspell. Even Belcher can shrug off a single Force if you give them a few turns.

So you ban all the combo cards that are giving you problems. And instead of seeing High Tide and Tendrils and Hive Mind, you start seeing Dream Halls and Aluren. So you ban those. And new combos spring up in their place. And even after you've gotten rid of all the "combo" decks, 70 or 80 bannings down the road, your midrange decks are going to be even less powerful. You'll see legacy turn into the bad-tapout-control/GR-Ramp-into-inevitable-bullshit/terrible-one-drop-aggro pattern that Standard always falls into.

?
The last T8 of every vintage tournament had a lot of control. Wanna check?

Team serious open:
1-MUD
2-Landstill
3-Cobra Gush control
4-GUB tempo with Delver, Goyf, Trygon Predator, Snapcaster
8-Remora Gush control
8-Snapcaster control
8-Confidant control
8-Forgemaster MUD

LCV:
1-Snapcaster control
2-Pantera MUD
3-Snapcaster+Confidant control
4-Snapcaster+Confidant control
8-Snapcaster+Confidant control
8-MonoBLUE control (yes you're reading this right)
8-Dredge
8-Bomberman

Blue is still a large party of the meta.

Also i'm not really sure if you're sarcastic here, but no one suggested banning FoW instead of BS for a reason. BS was chosen as a target also because it'd impair combo decks as much as control ones.

[Roman Candle]

protecting Iconic cards? - just think when designing new ones

to answer the question - yes, banning cards decreases variability, don't ban engines, ban problematic tools and only when its absolutely necessary

It's very very easy to put the blame on people who design cards, but let's not forget: cards are designed for every format, not just Legacy. And with a cardpool as large as Legacy's, sometimes things are going to come out that are busted with older engine cards.

Defending engines just because they're iconic cards in Legacy is dangerously limiting to the printing of new cards. How many cards would have to be banned for being too good with x iconic engine card before the iconic engine card becomes the problem? At what point does keeping the iconic engine cause less variability than banning it and unbanning the new cards that are broken with it?

Maybe SotF shouldn't have been banned since only Vengevine was broken with it. But does that mean that Wizards can't print new interesting cards for every format that are too good with Survival so that Survival doesn't have to be banned? Or do they print them and ban them in Legacy immediately?

[nwong]

Snappy and Delver don't combine with old engine cards. In fact, it should be obvious that they'd be busted.

I don't see how someone who designs cards for a living can't just take a look at the card and realise how retardedly good it is.

[Octopusman]

Snappy and Delver don't combine with old engine cards. In fact, it should be obvious that they'd be busted.

I don't see how someone who designs cards for a living can't just take a look at the card and realise how retardedly good it is.

I totally agree with this. I think they have said many times that they don't care if their designs are reckless because they can always ban them. Like it or not, this is the ace up their sleeve.

I don't have any other hobbies or interests where I am constantly fearful that the money I spent on it will be wasted by the makers of the product. I only spent $40 on my set of Snapcasters because I pro-ordered them the same hour I found out they existed but I would be very mad if they were banned because of the financial aspect (as well as other reasons). Being a business, it's amazing that they are successful considering they regularly alienate their own customers.
If I played standard I would have been pretty mad if I had my Jaces banned. I remember when they banned Ravager and people had just spent $100 on the playset and I couldn't believe it.

If they want to keep players happy, banning the cards that make people unhappy offends the smallest amount of players usually. However, they should design fun cards that are not a problem, don't ban them, and make players happy so they don't have to live in fear of their fun cards being unplayable because those who define the rules say so.

I want there to be more Legacy players. I feel that they should abandon the reserve list. Some people would be offended. Maybe even Blizzard has to settle in court. In the long run, the amount of money they would make from reprinting reserve list cards would outweigh the damage done during the fallout after the abolishing of the list. Then they can do whatever they want and grow indefinitely.

[Zilla]

I don't see how someone who designs cards for a living can't just take a look at the card and realise how retardedly good it is.
Simple: they weren't thinking about Legacy at all when they designed those cards. They've said as much.

I think Wizards cares about Legacy and Vintage only from a retroactive standpoint. That is, they care enough to manage any potential fuckups with the B&R list, but when they're designing new cards, they're thinking almost exclusively about Limited and Standard. There are exceptions, of course. Mental Misstep was one, and look how well that turned out.

[Aggro_zombies]

Simple: they weren't thinking about Legacy at all when they designed those cards. They've said as much.

I think Wizards cares about Legacy and Vintage only from a retroactive standpoint. That is, they care enough to manage any potential fuckups with the B&R list, but when they're designing new cards, they're thinking almost exclusively about Limited and Standard. There are exceptions, of course. Mental Misstep was one, and look how well that turned out.
Mental Misstep is a bit of a bad example, though. In retrospect, it seems like it should have been very obvious that it would be used as it was, and yet it doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone at Wizards (or, indeed, some of the people on this site at the time) that it wouldn't be used for its intended purpose. I mean, why would Legacy Zoo want a counterspell, and what storm deck folds to four counters and some hatebears? How does that realistically improve the matchup at all?

I feel like Wizards should either design cards for Eternal and then test it, or never try to design anything for Eternal at all and just let the cards fall where they may. Doing it halfheartedly will just increase the number of mistakes made.

[Zilla]

Mental Misstep is a bit of a bad example, though.
Agreed. Flusterstorm is another example, and while it's pretty underwhelming, it's good at what it was designed to do.


I feel like Wizards should either design cards for Eternal and then test it, or never try to design anything for Eternal at all and just let the cards fall where they may. Doing it halfheartedly will just increase the number of mistakes made.
Agree with this wholeheartedly.

Then again, considering the almost complete lack of attention they give the format when designing new sets, I'd say things are going remarkably well. The format is diverse, skill dependent, and fun as hell to play (although I recognize that last one is entirely subjective.) Considering they've achieved that without a whole lot of trying is pretty lucky, imo.

[DrJones]

The format is diverse, skill dependent, and fun as hell to play (although I recognize that last one is entirely subjective.) Considering they've achieved that without a whole lot of trying is pretty lucky, imo.I think it could look that way if you are a player with a severe case of "blue tunnel vision", from anybody else who has seen the coverage of the legacy portion of Worlds, Legacy is the least diverse format in the story of the game, and even the person that was writing the article in the main site couldn't avoid stating the horrible fact (http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/worlds11/teammetagame). Moreso when we take into account that the two most played decks are, in fact, the same blue tempo shell splashing different colors.

I take the time to point out that the emperor is naked because you guys seem to really think he is fully dressed even when his little wiener makes an hypnotic dance in front of your eyes. Seriously, this format is canned shit, so don't be surprised if WotC does something unexpected later this month. However, if you were talking about the diversity of Legacy on Magic online, that's a whole different matter. As nobody can afford a playset of Force of Will in the digital realm, it actually is a much healthier environment with a whole lot of variety in the Top 8, and not the ruined world you all doomsayers seem to paint.

[Hof]

Surely the 4 blue duals in particular has as much to do with the strength of blue as Brainstorm has, if not more. The fact that we don't play all 16 blue duals in the same deck isn't really relevant here, because that is more a matter of deckbuilding practice (staying in 2 or 3 colors is usually best) and says nothing about the strength of each blue dual compared to other cards. This tells me that:
1) Talking about objective strength or 'penetration' of a single card is a rather pointless excercise.
2) Wizards should definitely protect iconic cards like the original duals and Brainstorm.

[Admiral_Arzar]

IBA, I think they probably should - as has been said a million times, people want to play Legacy and not some other format. I would lose interest in Legacy if I couldn't play LED or High Tide, for example.

[Gui]

SotF was banned, you can close the thread now.

Seriously, tho, if a card it too powerful, they will ban it, because this is the intention of the ban list. Being iconic is just the first good sign to determine if the card is banable, imho.

OTOH, I believe there's an argument you should also take into account: When Brainstorm is banned, there will still be a "best card of the format" and a "dominant strategy", and the banning will be worth nothing.

And finally, I wouldn't mind if they banned brainstorm, cuz I would like to see blue slightly nerfed, and still, blue would be played a lot because FoW is what really drag players to blue, for it's a remarkable solution to anything there is.

[DragoFireheart]

Brainstorm should be banned so people can clearly see what happens when you ban ironic, fun, and powerful yet relatively balanced cards from a healthy format. Thankfully we don't need to see FoW banned to understand that the format would implode and turn into a copy of Modern after everything broken was banned.

Seriously, do a temp ban on Brainstorm so we could clearly see what the results would be.

[Gui]

Seriously, do a temp ban on Brainstorm so we could clearly see what the results would be.
Really, what do you suggest? I think the format would end up being exactly the same, if not, less blue. I doubt any brokeness will come from the banning of Brainstorm. It's more likely that some brokeness will malfunction.

[snappingbowls | ಠ_ಠ]

Brainstorm should be banned so people can clearly see what happens when you ban ironic, fun, and powerful yet relatively balanced cards from a healthy format.

How about leave Brainstorm unbanned because it's fun and ironic.

I can't wait until Brainstorm doesn't get banned and everyone can keep crying about how good blue is...

[Mr. Safety]

Can someone please correct my logic if it is off here? This is what I'm thinking:

1) The longer legacy exists, the more cards are available to make unforseen and new combinations of powerful plays. It is inevitable that some combinations of cards will become more powerful than others.

2) Isn't it logical for legacy to eventually become a format where you can do one of 2 things: play a powerful combination of cards or stop an opponent from playing a powerful combination of cards? Blue has countermagic...seems fairly obvious to me that it will become Blue vs. all the other colors (in a vacuum.)

3) Or you can ban cards to keep this from happening. In a nutshell, you are propping up the less-powerful combinations of cards in the format by removing their direct competition for 'most powerful'.

Does that make sense? It seems that the more cards that get banned it becomes inevitable that it will perpetuate itself...because we are used to seeing cards banned to 'balance the format'.

(Disclaimer: I do not play Vintage and I will say absolutely nothing about it due to a lack of understanding and experience.)

Long story short (too late, I know, *sigh*): I don't want to see any more cards banned, least of all Brainstorm. It will have it's day in the sun and then we'll hopefully have a new card(s) printed that will take over. I wish that WotC could reliably do that, but lately it seems that they can't. Modern is a fucking train wreck and there aren't a lot of options to compete with the powerful combination of Brainstorm + other tempo effects. Last I heard though, those decks lose too occasionally...

[DragoFireheart]

Really, what do you suggest? I think the format would end up being exactly the same, if not, less blue. I doubt any brokeness will come from the banning of Brainstorm. It's more likely that some brokeness will malfunction.

Sometimes, reason and arguments are not enough for people. Seeing is believing.

[Gui]

Sometimes, reason and arguments are not enough for people. Seeing is believing.

Seriously, I still don't get it, what are you suggesting that the format would turn into, if brainstorm was banned?

[snappingbowls | ಠ_ಠ]

Sometimes, reason and arguments are not enough for people. Seeing is believing.

Too bad for those people. Banning something temporarily to see what the format will look like without it is hardly compelling enough to actually do that. Do you get why this is an outlandish idea that should never see practice? There are many, many reasons why stuff doesn't get "temporarily" banned just to see what it would be like.

[Pastorofmuppets]

Snappy and Delver don't combine with old engine cards. In fact, it should be obvious that they'd be busted.

I don't see how someone who designs cards for a living can't just take a look at the card and realise how retardedly good it is.

You mean a company that wants money is completely blind to the fact that if they break and take away our old toys with their good new ones, the new ones will still be good, and we'll have to buy them?
I know it's crazy. Call me a tinfoiled bastard if you'd like. I honestly believe that this is exactly what is happening.

[Mr Miagi]

Really? Yet another thread from a bunch of brainstorm haters to get it axed? This time with a more classy approach.

Mods, this is really spinning out of control. Will you allow for any good card in legacy to have it's own subset of threads and quasi discussion, where bunch of provokers and inexpirienced players make statements that this card is "just to good" and needs to be banned.. and then we'll have a whole community outraged and all of a sudden we'll have a 10+ page thread of 80% arguing against the 20% of provokers.. :eyebrow:

[snappingbowls | ಠ_ಠ]

This is the Brainstorm thread... it's only 3 pages long.

Soon to be 10+ pages long due to the situation you describe. People complain, no one likes the idea that there is a best strategy. This isn't some warm and fuzzy miracle land where every strategy can compete and all our favourite decks from 5+ years ago are still competitive.

Stop crying about Legacy having good cards and go play casual with your friends...

[Zilla]

Really? Yet another thread from a bunch of brainstorm haters to get it axed? This time with a more classy approach.

Mods, this is really spinning out of control. Will you allow for any good card in legacy to have it's own subset of threads and quasi discussion, where bunch of provokers and inexpirienced players make statements that this card is "just to good" and needs to be banned.. and then we'll have a whole community outraged and all of a sudden we'll have a 10+ page thread of 80% arguing against the 20% of provokers.. :eyebrow:
Couple things:

1. If you want to appeal to the mod staff, please do so in a PM or using the Report Post function.

2. The point of this thread is to discuss the protection of iconic cards in general, not just Brainstorm. That means dual lands, fetchlands, Force of Will, LED, etc. It is not specifically about Brainstorm. It is about whether or not it's good policy for Wizards to protect these cards from banning in order to preserve the flavor of the format.

Incidentally, I feel that they should, so long as the format is relatively diverse, skill-testing, and fun to play. None of Legacy's iconic cards are preventing that at this time, including Brainstorm.

[Zilla]

Get this shit back on track.

[Mr. Safety]

Back on track...what are the iconic cards of legacy that would need preserving other than Brainstorm? I have assembled a short list, pick it apart if you will:

1) Dual lands - allows for color combinations and power levels unattainable otherwise

2) Fetch lands - go right alongside #1

3) Force of Will - keeps the combo decks honest (for the most part) and keeps the format from degenerating into a gelatinous mass of 'wtf'

4) Library Manipulation (Brainstorm/Sensei's Divining Top/Sylvan Library) - allows you to 'get your game on' in a more consistent manner than you would otherwise, fueling all deck archetypes.

5) Aether Vial/Natural Order/Show and Tell/Sneak Attack - cards that cheat stuff into play are printed so rarely it seems that these should be icons to protect

6) All-Star Dudes (Wild Nacatl, Knight of the Reliquary, Tarmogoyf, Dark Confidant, Stoneforge Mystic, Tombstalker, etc.) - all provide a level of game play that would be significantly reduced in power level should they be removed from the format. There are a ton of them to list...I'm not sure if Snapcaster and Delver belong on this list, they are still just so damn new.

7) Mana Boosters (Lion's Eye Diamond, Rite of Flame, Dark Ritual, etc.) - these allow for explosive and unfair decks that make legacy what it is (awesome, btw) Just watching TES or Spiral Tide being played makes me grin...even if I'm losing to it. How cool is this game that you can play awesome creatures, counter any spell, or just win on the spot with an absurd combination of draw, mana acceleration, tutors, and then Tendrils for 22?

8) Tutors (Burning Wish, Green Sun's Zenith, Cunning Wish, Enlightened Tutor, etc.) - get what you need, play it, profit. These need to stay part of legacy or it will lose too much blood to recover. They fuel everything from Maverick to TES.

Those are the ones that I can rattle off the top of my head...all of them have a significant impact on what makes the format 'legacy.' I clumped them together for the sake of discussion and I listed them in the order they came to me, not in order of preference or priority.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

To be blunt, I think you're missing the point. Any card that's legal in Modern can hardly be an iconic Legacy card. If we're describing Legacy's iconic cards, the format's unique brand, we're describing a narrow and non-expanding subset of cards. It should be more like;

- Brainstorm
- Force of Will
- LED
- Wasteland


But even then the question arises of why other classic Magic cards that might be made legal if given the same consideration aren't, the prime example being the banning of Survival over Vengevine.

[Gui]

To be blunt, I think you're missing the point. Any card that's legal in Modern can hardly be an iconic Legacy card. If we're describing Legacy's iconic cards, the format's unique brand, we're describing a narrow and non-expanding subset of cards. It should be more like;

- Brainstorm
- Force of Will
- LED
- Wasteland


But even then the question arises of why other classic Magic cards that might be made legal if given the same consideration aren't, the prime example being the banning of Survival over Vengevine.

Well, FoW and Waste are both playable 4-of in vintage, so I guess the list is more like:

Brainstorm
Lion Eye's Diamond

Kidding, but anyhow, I don't think this argument should be taken into account. If any should, then the "the format will always have a best card, and something performing better than whatever else" argument is the best I know so far.

[DrJones]

Wizards shouldn't protect iconic cards, because the reason behind the creation of the legacy format was for the DCI to be able to ban problem cards in the first place, so they could finally have an eternal environment they could properly balance, and making up a list of "unbannables" completely kills that purpose.

Asking for "unbannable" cards is the most stupid idea I've ever read about Magic, and to make things clear, that list includes the people that asked for "unreprintable" cards fifteen years ago and got their wish.

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

It's not really the same. Cards like Brainstorm and Survival of the Fittest existed for years and years in the format without warping it. If they suddenly combine with new cards to create problems, sorry kids, but the new cards should be the ones to go. Even if that means they end up banning 2 or 3 cards over a period, if that keeps a card that creates a decktype alive, that actually means a larger effective pool of playable cards, which is, after all, the goal of the format.

Not to mention simple numbers. People played the format just for Survival. There are people who would stop playing because of Brainstorm being banned. Who the hell would play if duals were banned? The format being "fair" is irrelevant if no one is playing it.

[Zilla]

To be blunt, I think you're missing the point. Any card that's legal in Modern can hardly be an iconic Legacy card. If we're describing Legacy's iconic cards, the format's unique brand, we're describing a narrow and non-expanding subset of cards. It should be more like;

- Brainstorm
- Force of Will
- LED
- Wasteland
Add duals and fetchlands and I agree that's a comprehensive list.



It's not really the same. Cards like Brainstorm and Survival of the Fittest existed for years and years in the format without warping it. If they suddenly combine with new cards to create problems, sorry kids, but the new cards should be the ones to go. Even if that means they end up banning 2 or 3 cards over a period, if that keeps a card that creates a decktype alive, that actually means a larger effective pool of playable cards, which is, after all, the goal of the format.

Not to mention simple numbers. People played the format just for Survival. There are people who would stop playing because of Brainstorm being banned. Who the hell would play if duals were banned? The format being "fair" is irrelevant if no one is playing it.
I'm not gay, you're not gay, but gun to my head? Absolutely.

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

You should be able to "Like" posts.

Although re: iconic cards, not that these are necessarily in danger of banning, but there are other iconic cards, like Aether Vial, StP, Hymn, Goblin Welder, Burning Wish.

Again, to repeat the point, I think it's fair to assume that if

A) Suddenly old cards become a problem because of their interaction with new cards
B) Said old cards enable a deck type, while the new card only is playable in that deck type

The new card should be banned.

Obvious counter-example: Hulk-Flash; here, technically my argument would suggest banning Hulk, but since Flash was errata'd, it was effectively a new card as well.

[Aggro_zombies]

It's not really the same. Cards like Brainstorm and Survival of the Fittest existed for years and years in the format without warping it. If they suddenly combine with new cards to create problems, sorry kids, but the new cards should be the ones to go. Even if that means they end up banning 2 or 3 cards over a period, if that keeps a card that creates a decktype alive, that actually means a larger effective pool of playable cards, which is, after all, the goal of the format.
I'm not so sure about this. Banning Survival effectively "banned" Vengevine as well; we have yet to see that card do anything relevant despite vows from Survival apologists to prove that WotC banned the wrong thing. Banning Vengevine would simply have allowed Survival to re-offend any time there was a Vengevine-like effect, or any other creature that was good when you could tutor repeatedly off of one card. Ultimately, you would have kept a problematic enabler in the format for...what? Nostalgia purposes? I mean, yes, you keep some cards that aren't useful outside of Survival decks (like Loyal Retainers) in the format, but if Survival is crushingly dominant you also effectively "ban" other cards by making the decks that run them actively bad.

If there's a clear best deck, there's no reason not to play that deck, except for crappy ones like "personal preference." Ultimately, you increase format diversity by banning cards that have the potential to dominate the format any time a known set of conditions are filled.

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

I'm not so sure about this. Banning Survival effectively "banned" Vengevine as well; we have yet to see that card do anything relevant despite vows from Survival apologists to prove that WotC banned the wrong thing. Banning Vengevine would simply have allowed Survival to re-offend any time there was a Vengevine-like effect, or any other creature that was good when you could tutor repeatedly off of one card. Ultimately, you would have kept a problematic enabler in the format for...what? Nostalgia purposes? I mean, yes, you keep some cards that aren't useful outside of Survival decks (like Loyal Retainers) in the format, but if Survival is crushingly dominant you also effectively "ban" other cards by making the decks that run them actively bad.

If there's a clear best deck, there's no reason not to play that deck, except for crappy ones like "personal preference." Ultimately, you increase format diversity by banning cards that have the potential to dominate the format any time a known set of conditions are filled.

What you're suggesting is a sweeping ban on ALL combo cards. I can give you a hypothetical card, under your arguments, that would requite the banning of Lion's Eye Diamond, Ad Nauseum, Burning Wish, Auriok Salvagers, Entomb, Brainstorm, Tendrils of Agony, Enduring Renewal, Aluren, Argothian Enchantress, etc.

Survival wasn't this bogeyman in the format, waiting in the wings for Vengevine to come along. Vengevine was a mistake. Not one single person thought to themselves before Vengevine came out; "it's only a matter of time before Survival becomes the dominant deck". Much less "only a matter of time before Survival becomes a format-warping deck", even if assume that it was in fact format warping.

A short and non-comprehensive list of cards that were effectively banned along with Survival:

Anger
Big Game Hunter
Masticore
Genesis
Rofellos
Squee
Faerie Macabre
Wonder
Wild Mongrel
Basking Rootwalla
Gilded Drake
Vengevine

The format is weaker now for the absence of Survival. Banning Vengevine would only have banned Vengevine. Even if they print another card that could break Survival and require its banning, that's still fewer cards lost to the format.

And this, again, is without even getting into the argument of WHY people play the format, which often comes down to specific cards and deck types. Maybe those aren't the people that break top 8, but they're a significant part of the format being as popular as it is, and keeping them happy is not a non-factor.

[Aggro_zombies]

What you're suggesting is a sweeping ban on ALL combo cards. I can give you a hypothetical card, under your arguments, that would requite the banning of Lion's Eye Diamond, Ad Nauseum, Burning Wish, Auriok Salvagers, Entomb, Brainstorm, Tendrils of Agony, Enduring Renewal, Aluren, Argothian Enchantress, etc.

Survival wasn't this bogeyman in the format, waiting in the wings for Vengevine to come along. Vengevine was a mistake. Not one single person thought to themselves before Vengevine came out; "it's only a matter of time before Survival becomes the dominant deck". Much less "only a matter of time before Survival becomes a format-warping deck", even if assume that it was in fact format warping.
I don't buy this argument for two reasons. First, the "it could be broken at any time" argument is applicable to pretty much any deck in Legacy to some degree, as well as a number of cards and interactions that don't see play in Legacy or may not even exist yet. Acting on it would necessitate the banning of vast swaths of the format for no reason other than the possibility of future domination. Second, and more importantly, Survival was a dominant deck, one whose win streak was ended by the banned list rather than new printings or metagame shifts. If a card has already shown the potential to become an unsolvable juggernaut, do you really want to leave to chance Wizards not reawakening it with a future printing? The difference between Survival and, say, Argothian Enchantress is one of track record and not raw potential.

Similarly, if we assume Vengevine is a mistake, what is stopping Wizards from printing another mistake that re-enables a known offender (Survival)? In Standard, Vengevine was only good in a few decks that never really panned out and it spent most of its time in the format in trade binders. In Limited, it was far from a bomb but still a card you took because it was decent and worth money. By those standards, it wasn't a mistake at all; it was only a mistake in the context of a format for which Wizards has stated it doesn't test. But because it was fine in the two formats that Wizards does test, what's to stop them from printing something similar in the future? Or perhaps printing some other creature that accidentally works with some creatures in Legacy to do something stupid (like Ooze)? We know that Dark Depths wasn't really on Wizards' radar when they printed Hexmage, and I'm fairly certain that no one said, "Let's make a card that combos with Trike and Phyrexian Devourer (of all things) to shoot people for lots of damage!" Again, leaving a card that is known to create broken interactions with 'mistakes' in the format in the name of diversity seems loose to me.

In short, there's no evidence to support the banning of other combo cards over Survival in a hypothetical world were Vengevine got the axe instead. They all have equal potential for being broken, but Survival actually was broken at one point and is now on peoples' radars as a card to try to break whenever a new set comes out.


The format is weaker now for the absence of Survival. Banning Vengevine would only have banned Vengevine. Even if they print another card that could break Survival and require its banning, that's still fewer cards lost to the format.
Not really, because if you were to ban Survival at a later date, your effective banned list would still be:

Anger
Big Game Hunter
Masticore
Genesis
Rofellos
Squee
Faerie Macabre
Wonder
Wild Mongrel
Basking Rootwalla
Gilded Drake

Along with any cards printed in the interim that were only good in Survival decks and Vengevine now being actually banned as opposed to soft-banned.

Again, I'm not sure why we need to keep certain cards in the format, or why we should target certain archetypes for saving over others. Rifter and Astral Slide were fun decks to play and I'm sure they had their fans, but they're effectively banned by a combination of power creep and metagame shifts. Why not argue for saving them? Because they're not iconic enough? Because there aren't (or weren't) enough people who liked them? How do you even gauge that?

More generally, is it worth basing your ban policy on the happiness of the pilots of specific decks or archetypes? Can't we invert that principle to argue that Goblin Lackey, LED, Top, Standstill, High Tide, Brainstorm, Tarmogoyf, and many other cards should now be banned because they upset people at one point in time? And if we shouldn't look at the reverse situation, then why not?

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Add duals and fetchlands and I agree that's a comprehensive list.

I would actually include a few others like StP and Hymn to Tourach, but those were the ones someone might potentially want banned but shouldn't be for, if nothing else, the reasons mentioned; they're classical and iconic cards that represent a lot of the history of the game and by association, Legacy's core brand.


For the same reason cards that fit that criteria that could come off the banned list should, even if that necessitates banning something else.

I mean if I had my druthers this would be the next update, all told;

Banned:

- Delver of Secrets
- Vengevine
- Tarmogoyf
- Emrakul, the Aeons Torn
- Forbidden Orchard
- Tendrils of Agony

Unbanned:

- Survival of the Fittest
- Oath of Druid
- Necropotence
- Black Vise
- Mind Twist
- Worldgorger Dragon
- Goblin Recruiter
- Mystical Tutor
- Earthcraft
- Land Tax
- Shahrazad

People have complained about Legacy changing too much with each new set, but taking a look at the way bannings were handled before and after, it's obvious that a lot of that is just because Legacy has gotten a lot more conservative with bannings than they used to be; in the furthest extreme, the criteria between what's too good for a new creature is far higher than what's too good for an old combo piece.

[Nonex]

Are you sure you want to unban Oath of Druids? Don't get me wrong, I love the card, but Legacy is so creature-heavy that I doubt you'd actually need Orchard.

Would Worldgorger Dragon come with a new rule saying whoever starts an unstoppable loop loses the game rather than drawing it?

Finally, what are your thoughts on Mental Misstep from those changes? I mean, you heavily shake the format, but Misstep stays banned.

[Mr. Safety]

To be blunt, I think you're missing the point. Any card that's legal in Modern can hardly be an iconic Legacy card. If we're describing Legacy's iconic cards, the format's unique brand, we're describing a narrow and non-expanding subset of cards. It should be more like;

- Brainstorm
- Force of Will
- LED
- Wasteland


But even then the question arises of why other classic Magic cards that might be made legal if given the same consideration aren't, the prime example being the banning of Survival over Vengevine.

How did I miss the point? The name of the thread is 'Should Wizards specifically protect iconic cards in Legacy?' I took a stab at defining what those iconic cards are. While Wild Nacatl is legal in modern, that doesn't mean it *isn't* an iconic legacy card. Modern is what, 6 months old? It doesn't even have a gender yet, let alone an identity...

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Oath might be very good, but it would be a lot worse without control over when it triggers and without the ability to put Emrakul into play. Actually a lot of things are just worse without Emrakul. Emrakul is the very definition of a ticking timebomb; it's far more powerful than any other creature in the game, and anything that lets you somehow circumvent mana costs (or just generate tons of mana) threatens to break him.

My attitude towards people drawing with Dragon is the same as my attitude towards people drawing with Shahrazad; who cares? I guess it sucks to go up against the guy who's playing a deck that inclines towards draws, but I don't see anyone clamoring to ban Stasis or Humility.

I would have no problem unbanning Mental Misstep either. I think it was a mistake to ban it in the first place. I just forgot about it honestly.

[nedleeds]

The SCG clones didnt even try to adapt to the emergence of SotF. The collective blue ego was hurt so badly by the possibility that a G/w deck without islands was competitive that they cried loud enough to get it banned. Go look at the lists, no effort to adapt (spell snares, pithing needle, extirpate, (gasp) maindeck disenchant spells). Pathetic, yet the ubiquitous brainstorm remains.

[Shion]

I would actually include a few others like StP and Hymn to Tourach, but those were the ones someone might potentially want banned but shouldn't be for, if nothing else, the reasons mentioned; they're classical and iconic cards that represent a lot of the history of the game and by association, Legacy's core brand.


For the same reason cards that fit that criteria that could come off the banned list should, even if that necessitates banning something else.

I mean if I had my druthers this would be the next update, all told;

Banned:

- Delver of Secrets
- Vengevine
- Tarmogoyf
- Emrakul, the Aeons Torn
- Forbidden Orchard
- Tendrils of Agony

Unbanned:

- Survival of the Fittest
- Oath of Druid
- Necropotence
- Black Vise
- Mind Twist
- Worldgorger Dragon
- Goblin Recruiter
- Mystical Tutor
- Earthcraft
- Land Tax
- Shahrazad

People have complained about Legacy changing too much with each new set, but taking a look at the way bannings were handled before and after, it's obvious that a lot of that is just because Legacy has gotten a lot more conservative with bannings than they used to be; in the furthest extreme, the criteria between what's too good for a new creature is far higher than what's too good for an old combo piece.

I'll start by saying that I agree that WOTC shoud attempt to keep Iconic cards legal in Legacy. Therefore I don't think I can agree with you about banning Tendrils of Agony because at least in my opinion Tendrils is an iconic legacy card.

Storm has had a long history in this format, and while Tendrils of Agony is not as old as some of those other cards, it is still the single most iconic card of storm combo outside of Lion's Eye Diamond. It has been the win condition in a long line of storm combo including Iggy Pop, Spanish Inquisition, TES, DDFT and ANT.

Also, I think any card can become iconic in legacy, not simply older ones. In fact Tarmogoyf may already be considered an icon of legacy, since he is the poster child of undercosted beatsticks in the format.

There's a few other things about that list I disagree with but it's rather off-topic for this thread.

[clavio]

I don't really think necropotence could possibly be unbanned even if you ban tendrils.

[Admiral_Arzar]

I don't really think necropotence could possibly be unbanned even if you ban tendrils.

This. Even if Tendrils was banned (which is NEVER should be), Necro would still break the format in half. It would be much safer IMO to unban Mind's Desire, which shows how stupid Necro actually is.* I'm iffy about Oath but am completely fine with all your other unban suggestions, IBA. I wouldn't be particular sad about any of the other bans except 'Goyf, which I believe has earned iconic status and should stay, especially as it has been power-creeped by other dudes at this point.

*Note that unbanning Mind's Desire is probably not a good idea, but it would be less dumb than Necro because at least it's only breakable in a couple of decks.

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

I don't buy this argument for two reasons. First, the "it could be broken at any time" argument is applicable to pretty much any deck in Legacy to some degree, as well as a number of cards and interactions that don't see play in Legacy or may not even exist yet. Acting on it would necessitate the banning of vast swaths of the format for no reason other than the possibility of future domination. Second, and more importantly, Survival was a dominant deck, one whose win streak was ended by the banned list rather than new printings or metagame shifts. If a card has already shown the potential to become an unsolvable juggernaut, do you really want to leave to chance Wizards not reawakening it with a future printing? The difference between Survival and, say, Argothian Enchantress is one of track record and not raw potential.

Firstly, that's exactly my point, and secondly, yes, I would rather keep Survival around and "risk" it becoming a dominant deck again, than eliminate a large variety of deck types from the format forever.

There's nothing wrong with having a dominant deck in the format; the problem comes when it becomes overly dominant for too long. If this was the case with Survival, the actual loss to the format if it happened again would still be less than losing Survival. A few months of an easily hated deck being dominant is not such a heavy blow to the format that it requires banning an iconic card.


Similarly, if we assume Vengevine is a mistake, what is stopping Wizards from printing another mistake that re-enables a known offender (Survival)? In Standard, Vengevine was only good in a few decks that never really panned out and it spent most of its time in the format in trade binders. In Limited, it was far from a bomb but still a card you took because it was decent and worth money. By those standards, it wasn't a mistake at all; it was only a mistake in the context of a format for which Wizards has stated it doesn't test. But because it was fine in the two formats that Wizards does test, what's to stop them from printing something similar in the future? Or perhaps printing some other creature that accidentally works with some creatures in Legacy to do something stupid (like Ooze)? We know that Dark Depths wasn't really on Wizards' radar when they printed Hexmage, and I'm fairly certain that no one said, "Let's make a card that combos with Trike and Phyrexian Devourer (of all things) to shoot people for lots of damage!" Again, leaving a card that is known to create broken interactions with 'mistakes' in the format in the name of diversity seems loose to me.

So you're suggesting they ban Dark Depths, or what? Broken interactions are okay. Hive Mind + Pacts is a broken interaction, but that's not curb stomping the format.


In short, there's no evidence to support the banning of other combo cards over Survival in a hypothetical world were Vengevine got the axe instead. They all have equal potential for being broken, but Survival actually was broken at one point and is now on peoples' radars as a card to try to break whenever a new set comes out.

That wasn't really the question.


Not really, because if you were to ban Survival at a later date, your effective banned list would still be:

Anger
Big Game Hunter
Masticore
Genesis
Rofellos
Squee
Faerie Macabre
Wonder
Wild Mongrel
Basking Rootwalla
Gilded Drake

Along with any cards printed in the interim that were only good in Survival decks and Vengevine now being actually banned as opposed to soft-banned.

That's...why.... you don't ban it? I'm not sure what conversation you're having right now. I'm talking about never banning Survival or Brainstorm.


Again, I'm not sure why we need to keep certain cards in the format, or why we should target certain archetypes for saving over others. Rifter and Astral Slide were fun decks to play and I'm sure they had their fans, but they're effectively banned by a combination of power creep and metagame shifts. Why not argue for saving them? Because they're not iconic enough? Because there aren't (or weren't) enough people who liked them? How do you even gauge that?

Rifter was a deck for all of a year. Survival is a card that people have built decks around for as long as it's been around.


More generally, is it worth basing your ban policy on the happiness of the pilots of specific decks or archetypes? Can't we invert that principle to argue that Goblin Lackey, LED, Top, Standstill, High Tide, Brainstorm, Tarmogoyf, and many other cards should now be banned because they upset people at one point in time? And if we shouldn't look at the reverse situation, then why not?

Because nobody refuses to play the format because of those things. If they do, they can play milder formats. Legacy inherently has certain broken interactions because of the breadth of the card pool. That's the format's main feature, card pool size. The goal should be to maximize that.

[Mr. Safety]

Legacy inherently has certain broken interactions because of the breadth of the card pool. That's the format's main feature, card pool size. The goal should be to maximize that.

Hear hear!!! That gets a cheer, my friend.

[Amon Amarth]

I would actually include a few others like StP and Hymn to Tourach, but those were the ones someone might potentially want banned but shouldn't be for, if nothing else, the reasons mentioned; they're classical and iconic cards that represent a lot of the history of the game and by association, Legacy's core brand.


For the same reason cards that fit that criteria that could come off the banned list should, even if that necessitates banning something else.

I mean if I had my druthers this would be the next update, all told;

Banned:

- Delver of Secrets
- Vengevine
- Tarmogoyf
- Emrakul, the Aeons Torn
- Forbidden Orchard
- Tendrils of Agony

Unbanned:

- Survival of the Fittest
- Oath of Druid
- Necropotence
- Black Vise
- Mind Twist
- Worldgorger Dragon
- Goblin Recruiter
- Mystical Tutor
- Earthcraft
- Land Tax
- Shahrazad

People have complained about Legacy changing too much with each new set, but taking a look at the way bannings were handled before and after, it's obvious that a lot of that is just because Legacy has gotten a lot more conservative with bannings than they used to be; in the furthest extreme, the criteria between what's too good for a new creature is far higher than what's too good for an old combo piece.

I like this list. Although I'd be hard pressed to find a reason to ban Delver, Vengevine, and Goyf when you're unbanning Recruiter and Oath. I do think banning something like Emrakul is kind of inspired, at least in this scenario.

[Meekrab]

I don't really think necropotence could possibly be unbanned even if you ban tendrils.
Yeah uh... ban Forbidden ****ing Orchard and unban Necro? I don't get it. I wouldn't mind seeing Vine and Emrakul banned and Oath and Survival unbanned, though. At least some more decks would use green for something other than GSZ shenanigans and Goyf.

[SMR0079]

Playing with those Iconic cards that are not available in other formats is one of the main draws to Legacy. I find myself in the camp that highly values nostalgia in Legacy - but not in any other format. The complex interactions of powerful cards is a facet of this appeal. That does not mean that an iconic card like Survival cannot be banned if a single strategy becomes to dominant.

The problem with Brainstorm and blue in general (I don't find it a problem personally but for those that do) is that it makes whatever strategy you are playing superior to nearly any other strategy that does not play it because it reduces variance and randomness adding consistency to what ever strategy you are implementing.

None of the other Iconic cards accomplish this, at least not in a direct way. Force keeps speed and brokenness in check, while Wasteland keeps mana bases honest. Actually, Wasteland has probably led to more blow outs then any other card in the format.

It really comes down to a question of values - which makes arriving at a consensus next to impossible, yet is also necessary as this thread illustrates.

One of Legacy's primary values is that of diversity and one can argue that Brainstorm is restricting diversity too much. With the exception of certain metagame opportunities, if you are not playing Brainstorm in this format you are doing it wrong. However, one can also argue that their is enough diversity within the decks that play Brainstorm, while still accommodating deck on the periphery that do not play the most iconic deck in the format.

I find variance and randomness to be one of the most frustrating parts of the game. We all hate the feeling of muliganing due to mana screw, or often worse, hitting that pocket of lands in the mid game that does not allow us to really implement skill at the game or attempt our deck to do it's thing.

Perhaps another question to ask, would banning Brainstorm, or any other Iconic card for that matter, net more or less interest in the format - or would it not matter either way?

[Meekrab]

The real problem with Legacy is that it tries to straddle the line between "It's an Eternal format, broken **** happens, yo" and being a Pro Tour format where you can metagame and prepare for other decks and have an advantage by outsmarting the herd rather than showing up with the 60+15 most overpowered cards; Wizards hasn't really clarified which philosophy they're following, if they've even chosen one.

[Amon Amarth]

The real problem with Legacy is that it tries to straddle the line between "It's an Eternal format, broken **** happens, yo" and being a Pro Tour format where you can metagame and prepare for other decks and have an advantage by outsmarting the herd rather than showing up with the 60+15 most overpowered cards; Wizards hasn't really clarified which philosophy they're following, if they've even chosen one.

Honestly, I'd be happier if the broken shit was spread around a bit more instead of just decks that play Dark Ritual. I'm probably in the minority though.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Yeah uh... ban Forbidden ****ing Orchard and unban Necro? I don't get it. I wouldn't mind seeing Vine and Emrakul banned and Oath and Survival unbanned, though. At least some more decks would use green for something other than GSZ shenanigans and Goyf.

It follows from the philosophy being discussed. Even with Emrakul banned, Forbidden Orchard + Oath are probably too powerful for Legacy. Oath is far the more powerful half and might even still be too powerful with Orchard gone. But it's still an iconic card from Magic's history; it makes sense, from the policy of preserving and strengthening Legacy's brand, to have it return to the format and lose the less loved card.

[Gui]

By the way, talking about protecting iconic cards, people should be also talking about Tarmogoyf. The kid alone invalidated a large amount of creatures in legacy when it came, some quite iconic by the time.

[dahcmai]

I don't really think Goyf matters much anymore. He's slowly getting dwarfed by the other creatures power creeping up on him. Notice he's barely played even in the GW decks? That's kind of scary in itself. I do totally agree on how he invalidated a ton of other creatures at the time of his printing though. I hated building decks back then because every one of them that had a splash of green required putting in Goyf and the ones that didn't made you think about the splash.

[I am the brainwasher]

I don't really think Goyf matters much anymore. He's slowly getting dwarfed by the other creatures power creeping up on him. Notice he's barely played even in the GW decks? That's kind of scary in itself. I do totally agree on how he invalidated a ton of other creatures at the time of his printing though. I hated building decks back then because every one of them that had a splash of green required putting in Goyf and the ones that didn't made you think about the splash.

Pretty much this.
I do remember all those NLU (Control-with-4-Goyfs-to-beeing-able-to-put-randomly-a-clock-on) decks and also Affinity packing those to beeing able to face a standoff.
Weird that everyone is now complaining about the exact same thing just with Brainstorm, even if it is really not that bad allover.
IMO Goyf is still the best creature in terms of its power related to its casting cost, especially in the decks its played in right now, but yes, he is pretty much outdated by the powercreep that happened in the last year(s).
I do not get the point of the problem that there logically is a top contender (or champion) of one specific "card-type" if you want to call it that way.
Brainstorm is the most nuts card when it comes down to the filtering processes, so is Goyf depending on the clock in Aggro/Control decks.
A whole different story are cards like Emrakul.

[Skeggi]

I hated building decks back then because every one of them that had a splash of green required putting in Goyf and the ones that didn't made you think about the splash.
Aren't you doing the same now for splashing blue for Brainstorm? No? You should.

[Pippin]

The real problem with Legacy is that it tries to straddle the line between "It's an Eternal format, broken **** happens, yo" and being a Pro Tour format where you can metagame and prepare for other decks and have an advantage by outsmarting the herd rather than showing up with the 60+15 most overpowered cards; Wizards hasn't really clarified which philosophy they're following, if they've even chosen one.

Actually Wizards have clarified quite clearly that Legacy is not a PT (nor PTQ) format, and will never be due to card availability issues. That's why they created Modern.
So I'd say that Legacy is in the "It's an Eternal format, broken **** happens, yo" camp of the 2 options you mentioned.

[Gui]

I don't really think Goyf matters much anymore. He's slowly getting dwarfed by the other creatures power creeping up on him. Notice he's barely played even in the GW decks? That's kind of scary in itself. I do totally agree on how he invalidated a ton of other creatures at the time of his printing though. I hated building decks back then because every one of them that had a splash of green required putting in Goyf and the ones that didn't made you think about the splash.
Exactly. I agree with all this, and this is part of why I strongly believe WotC won't move an inch to protect beloved iconic cards. The banning of SotF over Vengevine is conclusive as well. If they need to, they'll ban the most powerful card even if Legacy was the only place where it was playable.

They care more about making legacy a place for a giant pool of playable cards from all time than about this. And they want it to be a balanced format where every strategy got its chance.

Also, they want to sell cards to us, so this is why they powercreep, much.

[nedleeds]

None of the other Iconic cards accomplish this, at least not in a direct way.

SotF helped creature based decks be more consistent. Allowing you (if you managed to resolve a 2 mana enchantment, and had it stick around, and had a creature in hand) to find silver bullets for removal or aggression depending on the matchup and board state.

SotF needs to be unbanned. With Surgical Extraction around and with the game being soaked in tempo strategies packing freaking main deck Spell Snare and SCM to run it back it's just absurd that this card remains banned.

[Meekrab]

It follows from the philosophy being discussed. Even with Emrakul banned, Forbidden Orchard + Oath are probably too powerful for Legacy. Oath is far the more powerful half and might even still be too powerful with Orchard gone. But it's still an iconic card from Magic's history; it makes sense, from the policy of preserving and strengthening Legacy's brand, to have it return to the format and lose the less loved card.
I understand that angle, but Necropotence? The Skull has never been legal as a 4-of without completely breaking whatever format it was mistakenly unleashed on, what suggests to you that Legacy would be any different?

[Leftconsin]

Oath is just way too good to let off the ban list. It totally invalidates creature strategies for just 1G. We still have the other Eldrazi, Iona, Blighsteel, and so on. That isn't to mention what other behemoth is coming down the pipe next.

Otherwise, that major shakeup list is appealing to me. A lot of those old spells should get a shot against our new suped charged creatures. I'm betting Vise is less dominant against Delver, Nacatl, and goyf than it was against jump knights and Shivan.

[thefringthing]

I've been reasonably impressed with IBA's ability to articulate his arguments so far, but I feel that his suggestion that Shahrazad be taken off the banned list indicates he is not to be taken seriously. I'll let others address the obvious lack of foresight the rest of his proposed banned list changes betray.

[DragoFireheart]

Did someone just seriously suggest that Oath of Druids should be taken off the list?

[(nameless one)]

Has anyone tried Classic outside of MTGO?

I've always wanted to play in a Classic tournament without busting the bank for virtual cardboard.

[GGoober]

I would actually include a few others like StP and Hymn to Tourach, but those were the ones someone might potentially want banned but shouldn't be for, if nothing else, the reasons mentioned; they're classical and iconic cards that represent a lot of the history of the game and by association, Legacy's core brand.


For the same reason cards that fit that criteria that could come off the banned list should, even if that necessitates banning something else.

I mean if I had my druthers this would be the next update, all told;

Banned:

- Delver of Secrets
- Vengevine
- Tarmogoyf
- Emrakul, the Aeons Torn
- Forbidden Orchard
- Tendrils of Agony

Unbanned:

- Survival of the Fittest
- Oath of Druid
- Necropotence
- Black Vise
- Mind Twist
- Worldgorger Dragon
- Goblin Recruiter
- Mystical Tutor
- Earthcraft
- Land Tax
- Shahrazad

People have complained about Legacy changing too much with each new set, but taking a look at the way bannings were handled before and after, it's obvious that a lot of that is just because Legacy has gotten a lot more conservative with bannings than they used to be; in the furthest extreme, the criteria between what's too good for a new creature is far higher than what's too good for an old combo piece.

What are you smoking?

BANNED:
- Delver of Secrets
- Vengevine
- Tarmogoyf
- Tendrils

UNBANNED:
- Oath of Druid
- Necropotence

You do know that Delver, Vengevine, Goyf, Tendrils, any card almost becomes irrelevant when Necro and Oath are legal right? I don't see how your suggestions solve the current state of Legacy (which is in fact diverse) with your list that potentially diminishes the format into a Ritual-based format on who lands Oath/Necro firsts. Even without Orchard, Oath is still a tad too powerful for the format.
Necropotence

[TsumiBand]

In fairness, Shahrazad was only a monster in concept. I would imagine that anyone who actually played the imaginary "Subgame.dec" and won with it would have had a tournament report that would have been received much like that notorious TurboFog 5-0 report. AFAIK that deck did not exist in a meaningful incarnation.

However, banning a bunch of creatures and Brainstorm and unbanning Necro, WGD, Oath and Survival tells me that someone would rather be playing Vintage. Or that someone would rather be making less choices when it comes to what to bring to a tournament.

[snappingbowls | ಠ_ಠ]

However, banning a bunch of creatures and Brainstorm and unbanning Necro, WGD, Oath and Survival tells me that someone would rather be playing Vintage. Or that someone would rather be making less choices when it comes to what to bring to a tournament.

haha yes, this. that suggested banlist is so messed up... Necropotence?! Really.. and Worldgorger? Yeah reanimtor really is weak right now lets give this deck a strictly better win con..

why ban emrakul???

[thefringthing]

...and Worldgorger? Yeah, Reanimator really is weak right now; let's give this deck a strictly better win condition.Not to mention an easy way to force draws over and over after winning game one.

[Octopusman]

They shouldn't ban anything imo -

All of the cards that people were crying over (top, aether vial, goyf) didn't get banned and everyone eventually moved on.

Nothing to see here!

Also - How can wotc tout the reserve list to protect collectors/people who invested in the game but they'll ban cards people spent just as much money or more on? So annoying! If they ban snapcaster I will be writing them a letter. :cry:

[alderon666]

Not to mention an easy way to force draws over and over after winning game one.

How is that better than getting something like Iona/Leviathan/Jin and actually winning? People overrate the dragon. Reanimator has enough of a hard time trying to assemble a 2 card combo while fight through counters and hate. Now we gonna add a third piece to that and call it a better combo?

[snappingbowls | ಠ_ಠ]

i would compare dragon to protean hulk / pattern of rebirth whereas traditional reanimator is more akin to a more standard NO deck

dragon requires more pieces but wins instantly, as opposed to over 2-3 turns with your opponent drawing cards the whole time. Same is true with hulk into body double and carrion feeder into revielark and mogg fanatic.. way more useless peices to get stuck in your hand than if you were to play straight bant/rug NO w/ progenitus. Although prog takes 2 turns to win whereas hulk wins instantly... the difference is speed and stability

Proper capitalization and punctuation are required when posting on these boards. Use them in the future. Thanks. -zilla

[alderon666]

i would compare dragon to protean hulk / pattern of rebirth whereas traditional reanimator is more akin to a more standard NO deck

dragon requires more pieces but wins instantly, as opposed to over 2-3 turns with your opponent drawing cards the whole time. Same is true with hulk into body double and carrion feeder into revielark and mogg fanatic.. way more useless peices to get stuck in your hand than if you were to play straight bant/rug NO w/ progenitus. Although prog takes 2 turns to win whereas hulk wins instantly... the difference is speed and stability

If you've played combo decks you'd know that the difference between 2 and 3 cards is abysmall. There probably are about over fifty 3-card combos in Legacy. But few (none?) of them see play. The dragon combo dies to removal, enchantment removal, grave hate, bounce spells, Stifle... also suffers a lot from targeted discard, as discarding a non-redundant piece of the combo in your hand basically locks you until you get the right part again.

Winning on the spot is so overrated. I'll take a 2-card combo that gets blown 20% of the time after resolved than a 3 card combo with 100% win chance. And the dragon ain't even close to that as it's basically vulnerable to every other card in Magic.

Pridemage on the table? Can't go off!
Ooze on the table? Can't go off!
Echoing Truth/Swords to Plowshares/Stifle in opp's hand? Could go off, by would probably lose all my permanents.

I could go on...

[Tao]

It is futile to talk over Dragon because it is not only banned for power level. It is more like Sharazad banned for creating multiple games that not only get boring and tilting very fast but also make the clock much more relevant. Losing against Reanimator Game 1 and then havng him draw the game twice and Sideboard for minutes between each game would not make me buy more Magic Cards.

As of now I would be fine with Brainstorm in the format because people really love it if they at least ban Snapcaster.

[dahcmai]

I'm chime in on Shahrazad since I actually had a Legacy deck with 4 of them in it once.

It's a pretty worthless card actually. Any person with half a brain knows not to go into those subgames if it cripples your deck, you just concede and kept going. Darn, half your life to a white deck isn't all that big of a deal.

If it was against a deck like Sligh Red, Zoo, or some such that isn't bothered by a subgame, they always played it out and won them since you're playing with a crappy white deck that has a bunch of cards to try and synergize with Shahrazad. It doesn't work real well.

Even the tricks of removing cards from the game in a subgame to keep them gone in the main game isn't all that spectacular. It's a cute trick, but that's all. It's not worth playing the card sadly. You still have to win one game within the time limit and doing that with a deck like that isn't real fun.

Personally, I never saw why they bothered to ban the thing. It's annoying at best. Trying to abuse the clock really isn't all that worth it either. Trust me, I played with that card a ton trying to make it worth something. It's my favorite card after all, but it still sucks.

Playing Shahrazad in EDH just says "immanasshole". It's horrible. Tried it once for laughs, it wasn't real funny.

Oh and btw, Unban Necro? It would be interesting to see what people did with it nowadays, but I'm sure it would only end up being combo deck enablers. I doubt anyone would bother to play it the traditional way it used to get played back in the vintage days. Trix probably sucks anymore, but I bet Storm would love to have a bomb like that. Pay 10 or so, sculpt perfect hand, kill you next turn would probably be the amount of affect that card would have on legacy. It's too bad too, it was a fun card back in the fair times.

[TsumiBand]

I'm chime in on Shahrazad since I actually had a Legacy deck with 4 of them in it once.

It's a pretty worthless card actually. Any person with half a brain knows not to go into those subgames if it cripples your deck, you just concede and kept going. Darn, half your life to a white deck isn't all that big of a deal.

If it was against a deck like Sligh Red, Zoo, or some such that isn't bothered by a subgame, they always played it out and won them since you're playing with a crappy white deck that has a bunch of cards to try and synergize with Shahrazad. It doesn't work real well.

Even the tricks of removing cards from the game in a subgame to keep them gone in the main game isn't all that spectacular. It's a cute trick, but that's all. It's not worth playing the card sadly. You still have to win one game within the time limit and doing that with a deck like that isn't real fun.

Personally, I never saw why they bothered to ban the thing. It's annoying at best. Trying to abuse the clock really isn't all that worth it either. Trust me, I played with that card a ton trying to make it worth something. It's my favorite card after all, but it still sucks.

Playing Shahrazad in EDH just says "immanasshole". It's horrible. Tried it once for laughs, it wasn't real funny.

Oh and btw, Unban Necro? It would be interesting to see what people did with it nowadays, but I'm sure it would only end up being combo deck enablers. I doubt anyone would bother to play it the traditional way it used to get played back in the vintage days. Trix probably sucks anymore, but I bet Storm would love to have a bomb like that. Pay 10 or so, sculpt perfect hand, kill you next turn would probably be the amount of affect that card would have on legacy. It's too bad too, it was a fun card back in the fair times.

I don't think Wishes even work that way anymore, that one could putatively Wish for Shahrazad outside the current subgame and do the dreaded "functionally infinite" subgame combo. Which again, never existed in a real enough way for people to really worry about. :/

Seriously guys - is there a single meaningful account of Shahrazad even winning a tournament? The argument was that it got banned because it causes a logistical nightmare *if it goes off*. But it just fucking doesn't. Lots of things are bad after the 'if'.

I almost want them to unban Necro so that no one ever pisses and moans about Blue control again, because we'd need it around big time if they ever did such a thing. Too bad the complainers wouldn't begin to understand why they need them around, and continue to lose to both combo and (unnecessarily) control.

At any rate, to chime in my own two cents on the "Protect iconic cards in Legacy" idea; I don't necessarily believe one way or the other. I think people play older formats because there are old cards in them, and as I've said many times before, most of the oldest cards that matter most in the format would never see play with the modern concepts of color wheel and tempo and fairness that we have today. Legacy is a format based on the glaring mistakes of the last 20 years, the cards that push the envelop the most and work the best together.

So I don't think any particular card should be held up as 'unbannable' inasmuch as a card could see print in the next block that completely and totally breaks the older card. It depends on who's really doing the breaking; Animate Dead isn't broken, but with WGD it is. Survival is questionably broken with Vengevine. Seems most people agree with the banning of WGD but not with Survival; you ban the thing that's doing the breaking.

[Koby]

If Necro ever got unbanned, I wouldn't rush out to buy Necros.

I would rush out to buy Soul Spike. That one has a potential to become a $20 card.

[Tao]

Well, for Sharazad the same is true as for Worldgorger. It is not banned for power level so arguing about the low power level is futile (see my post above). It is very unpleasant to play against these decks in a tournament. Not only is it frustrating, more importantly these cards encourage stalling and clock wins.

I would love to see Emrakul banned because I hate the Show and Tell Combo with my guts because the games with and against it are stupid and boring and include zero skill.

Oath and Necropotence won't come back even if they are iconic so don't worry. They are still too strong imo though Necro gets close and Wizards won't touch them.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Were I a prissy bitch, this page would be festooned with reported posts atm. As, however, I do not give a fuck if stupid people are attempting to insult me while making their stupid arguments, let's move on.


I've been reasonably impressed with IBA's ability to articulate his arguments so far, but I feel that his suggestion that Shahrazad be taken off the banned list indicates he is not to be taken seriously. I'll let others address the obvious lack of foresight the rest of his proposed banned list changes betray.

You're choosing Shahrazad as your battleground. Really.


Did someone just seriously suggest that Oath of Druids should be taken off the list?

If you can't read the thread I honestly can't be bothered to help you.


What are you smoking?

BANNED:
- Delver of Secrets
- Vengevine
- Tarmogoyf
- Tendrils

UNBANNED:
- Oath of Druid
- Necropotence

You do know that Delver, Vengevine, Goyf, Tendrils, any card almost becomes irrelevant when Necro and Oath are legal right?

No, I don't know that. Probably because it's an inane, reactionary viewpoint and not true. When Hulk-Flash was legal, there was still room for aggro-control strategies that just used efficient beats next to disruption; I see no reason this wouldn't happen even if I hadn't taken steps to preclude either card from being too good. Even with Tendrils, Emrakul and Forbidden Orchard, neither deck could hope to be as busted as Hulk-Flash was.

Further I find this strange panic over the possibility of combo being good, from the same people that cite "Well it's Legacy, obviously Brainstorm is the best strategy just deal with it" as an argument, frankly baffling. And by baffling I mean "mind-numbingly stupid."

Combo sucks right now. Frankly, it needs a shot in the arm. What's wrong with combo being a bit better?


I don't see how your suggestions solve the current state of Legacy (which is in fact diverse) with your list that potentially diminishes the format into a Ritual-based format on who lands Oath/Necro firsts. Even without Orchard, Oath is still a tad too powerful for the format.

Diversity within one archetype, mainly. Anyway, it's hard for combo to be too dominant unless it's actually just broken in half, in which case it warrants bannings. There's only been two times in Legacy's history where combo was dominant, both of which immediately resulted in bannings.

Anyway, Legacy has multiple problems. That list was an attempt to apply the theory of protecting iconic cards to the greatest possible extent. As Tendrils has itself become an iconic card I would say that the swap of Necro for Tendrils is the most questionable choice, although Necro has I feel greater resonance with older players (my perspective may be too limited to include the viewpoint of those who started playing in the past ten years or so though.)


In fairness, Shahrazad was only a monster in concept. I would imagine that anyone who actually played the imaginary "Subgame.dec" and won with it would have had a tournament report that would have been received much like that notorious TurboFog 5-0 report. AFAIK that deck did not exist in a meaningful incarnation.

However, banning a bunch of creatures and Brainstorm and unbanning Necro, WGD, Oath and Survival tells me that someone would rather be playing Vintage. Or that someone would rather be making less choices when it comes to what to bring to a tournament.

I didn't suggest banning Brainstorm in that list. If you can't be bothered to actually read the thread before responding, I don't know why you think it's worth my time responding to you.

Oh, and you're implying that I just want to be able to pick up the agreed upon best deck and win with it. That's hilarious.


haha yes, this. that suggested banlist is so messed up... Necropotence?! Really.. and Worldgorger? Yeah reanimtor really is weak right now lets give this deck a strictly better win con..

why ban emrakul???

Worldgorger is hardly a strictly better win con, perhaps you've never played against it. You need a third card to win and you're highly vulnerable to any form of creature removal, bounce, enchantment removal, or stifle effects. If anything it makes it easier ot draw the game, to which again I say; so what? Draw effects are not particularly powerful. A two card combo that draws the game unless your opponent has an StP or Pridemage or something and just exiles all your permanents instead is hardly striking fear into the format.

Worldgorger, frankly, has no business being on the banned list as it is. Without Bazaar the deck is quite reasonable, underpowered even, and if Bazaar were unbanned I should still think Dredge far and away the more powerful deck at abusing it.


If you've played combo decks you'd know that the difference between 2 and 3 cards is abysmall. There probably are about over fifty 3-card combos in Legacy. But few (none?) of them see play. The dragon combo dies to removal, enchantment removal, grave hate, bounce spells, Stifle... also suffers a lot from targeted discard, as discarding a non-redundant piece of the combo in your hand basically locks you until you get the right part again.

Winning on the spot is so overrated. I'll take a 2-card combo that gets blown 20% of the time after resolved than a 3 card combo with 100% win chance. And the dragon ain't even close to that as it's basically vulnerable to every other card in Magic.

Pridemage on the table? Can't go off!
Ooze on the table? Can't go off!
Echoing Truth/Swords to Plowshares/Stifle in opp's hand? Could go off, by would probably lose all my permanents.

I could go on...

The post of someone who's actually got experience shines out in this thread like a goddamn lighthouse.


They shouldn't ban anything imo -

All of the cards that people were crying over (top, aether vial, goyf) didn't get banned and everyone eventually moved on.

Nothing to see here!

Also - How can wotc tout the reserve list to protect collectors/people who invested in the game but they'll ban cards people spent just as much money or more on? So annoying! If they ban snapcaster I will be writing them a letter. :cry:

Right, like Flash, Mystical Tutor, Survival and Mental Misstep.

Also I don't know anyone who's saying ban Snapcaster, they just wish (reasonably) it had been printed in red, which needs the help.


If Necro ever got unbanned, I wouldn't rush out to buy Necros.

I would rush out to buy Soul Spike. That one has a potential to become a $20 card.

Man you could trade three relevant cards for four maybe releavant spells.


Wait. You people are saying that Tendrils wouldn't be the best card to win with if Necro was unbanned? You people are fucking morons.

No, we're discussing a hypothetical scenario in which Tendrils is banned and Necro unbanned. Flames removed. I get why, but still, don't. -zilla


Also, IBA your banned list would be ridiculously stupid. Emrakul is definitely not as big of a threat as Necro is. Also you hate combo decks and you want Necro, without banning Dark Ritual or things like Grapeshot and Empty, and Oath, which completely invalidates creatures. All in all, all your post was, was further evidence to just ignore your existence.

I don't hate combo decks. I've played quite a number of combo decks in my time in Legacy. It's true that I'm not particularly a fan of storm combo, as I find it uninteresting to build or play, so that may be coloring my reasoning.

Grapeshot and Empty the Warrens are just obviously a shit load less powerful with Necro than Tendrils, since they don't enable you to keep going if you're only able to get a partial storm count. You Empty with four storm count and get ten goblins; but any deck can handle that past turn one with a handful of creatures and a removal or two, or a board clearer of some kind, and if you're building around Necro you're not building to do that turn 1. Necro doesn't let you keep a billion cards in hand so it's a lot shittier with Grapeshot than even Ad Nauseam.

I know not a lot of people played against Oath decks before Forbidden Orchard was printed, but I did and they really weren't very good. Much less so if you have to actually try to strike a balance between creatures with big effects and creatures that are hard to kill, since Emrakul is really the only card that meets both criteria and Iona coming in a distant second. Zoo can often handle an Akroma or Sphinx of the Steel Wind, you know, and the real problem with Oath is that not every deck runs a lot of creatures out there; it's a terrible kill condition against a combo deck and lots of other decks can, say, just beat you to death with manlands while you're sitting there hoping for them to play something.

Anyway, if you want to ignore my posts, I invite you to do so. There is in fact a function to that end on this board. If you want to merely post that you want to ignore my posts it makes you look like you're posing your own impotence towards what end I know not; and if you do it only half-heartedly you may end up saying stupid things that betray your own ignorance like accusing me of hating combo.


Also, why the fuck would you ever want Shahrazad unbanned? All that is doing is making Magic retarded and not fun.

There are lots of cards we could say this of, or that some people would say it of. It's not like there was a Shahrazad deck prior to that; I have never actually played against the card in a tournament in all my years of Magic. I suspect that someone in R&D or whoever manages the list did run into one online and had a fit over it, but it's much less common (though no more annoying than) Stasis, which is not banned nor should be.


Lastly, Dragon is basically unplayable without Bazaar.

This is very likely correct.

[Koby]

@ Liam Kane
You must be stoned off your ass if you think the deck wouldn't play Tendrils. Of course it does. AND Soul Spike.

@ IBA
I'm going to assume you mistyped and wrote 2 irrelevant spells (Duress, Thoughtseize, et al) for 4 life, hence allowing you to easily Necro for 16 on turn 1, and remove dead cards that would otherwise be discarded.

If it wasn't a mistype, then you've clearly not played enough storm, or remember any historical lesson involved with Trix to realize how dumb your snippy 3 second analysis was.

[Mystical_Jackass]

Brainstorm needs the ban because it's too good at what it does.

Fetchlands, Delver, Countertop, Combo decks, etc. all contain particular spells that people call broken (ie. "countertop is a broken card"), but its the interactions from cards like BS and Top that are the glue that holds these decks together. So yeah, imo if I had to choose between the power creep (Vengevine, Goyf,) vs the dig (BS, Survival,etc) I'd choose to axe the ladder.

[UnderwaterGuy]

Were I a prissy bitch...

[monstrous bitch post]


There are no more arguments to make against you. Anyone that has played a decent amount of magic can understand very easily how powerful stuff like Oath and fucking Necropotence are. Don't you think there's a reason so many people are attacking your position? It's because the position is absurd.

I don't even know. I wish I could argue against you but I cannot. If you don't think Necropotence is a card worth banning there's something completely wrong and different about the way you see this game.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

There are no more arguments to make against you.

Generally that's a sign that you're wrong.


Anyone that has played a decent amount of magic can understand very easily how powerful stuff like Oath and fucking Necropotence are. Don't you think there's a reason so many people are attacking your position? It's because the position is absurd.

Which position? I see a vague mish mash of misdirected knee jerk reactionism to various sacred cows being touched; "Oh, you can't ban x popularly played cards, stop being a whiner and just le- wait, no, what are you saying, of course we can't unban y, anyone that's played Magic knows it too..."

The reason people react to suggestions against the status quo isn't because suggesting a change to the status quo is absurd; it's because people have an enormous status quo bias.


I don't even know. I wish I could argue against you but I cannot. If you don't think Necropotence is a card worth banning there's something completely wrong and different about the way you see this game.

What do you mean "worth banning"? I suspect that you also don't know the answer to that question. Surely we're not trying to ban iconic cards for no reason.

I'm not against banning Necro; if it proves too powerful. Right now I'm willing to accept that it would be inherently too powerful with Tendrils in the format; that might be true without Tendrils but I'm more skeptical of that claim. Tendrils is itself a bit of an iconic card, but less so I think than the Skull, which has had an enormous influence on the history of the game in numerous formats. If there's a way to make it Legacy legal without the format devolving, I think it should certainly be pursued; and it follows quite naturally from the philosophy that people were quite happy to spout in protecting Brainstorm when that also meant protecting the status quo; when we apply it the same way to cards that have already been banned we see the actual reasoning of many of these posters for what it is; raw status quo bias, and nothing more or less.

[clavio]

The thing is Necro does so much more than fuel a lethal tendrils. There's a vintage deck called "Dark Times" which does not run Tendrils of Agony but still tends to win the turn after resolving Necropotence (and not because of Will or other broken shit we're not allowed to have over here). I don't think it would be too hard to port such a deck in this hypothetical legacy, especially in a situation where you get to run four Necropotence (Necropotences?) rather than just the one. I'm also sure that porting Times to Legacy wouldn't even be the most broken thing you could do with four Necros.

But yeah. There would still be less Necros in that format than there are Brainstorms right now.

Dragon would be garbage. It would certainly lose to all the Necro decks :)

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Just looked it up. It looks like a very cool deck and I would have no problem with something similar existing in Legacy at all. In fact it's exactly the sort of deck we tend to want Necro to be played in if it's legal. Not sure if it would survive the lack of cheap tutors though, but it's possible.

[Mystical_Jackass]

No offense, but then I could see so many decks running some dark ritual into Necro play. Then once again everyone will be chanting that rituals "too good at what it does".

Nostalgia can stay in EDH imo.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

So what? Dark Ritual isn't getting played at all outside of Storm decks right now, why shouldn't it be allowed to be good? Black is maybe the weakest color right now, why shouldn't it be better? I mean yes, Dark Ritual into Necro sounds degenerate; but you can only pull that off maybe 1 in 4 games. Lots of decks have degenerate openings that happen maybe 1 in 4 games. Hell, 1 in 4 games Affinity is a good deck, that doesn't make it viable.

[Mon,Goblin Chief]

No, I don't know that. Probably because it's an inane, reactionary viewpoint and not true. When Hulk-Flash was legal, there was still room for aggro-control strategies that just used efficient beats next to disruption; I see no reason this wouldn't happen even if I hadn't taken steps to preclude either card from being too good. Even with Tendrils, Emrakul and Forbidden Orchard, neither deck could hope to be as busted as Hulk-Flash was.

You're right, Necro isn't as busted as Hulk-Flash was. It's much much better.

While I'd love to get to play with Necro again, I just have to ask: have you ever played a four Necro format in which the card had actually been figured out (as in "playing this allows me to set up any combo while filling my hand with protection" and not "sweet, I can now draw cards in my monoB aggro/control deck")?

The only reason Necro isn't considered to be better than Time Walk, Yawgmoth's Will or pretty much any other Magic card ever printed is the fact that it costs BBB and is therefore hard to splash. The power level of the effect is significantly higher than that of Will or Tinker. Making Necro and Ritual (an even more iconic card and therefore unlikely to get banned with that philosophy) legal at the same time will result in a meta of nothing but Necro and Necro-hate decks, Tendrils or no. If you resolve turn one Necro you can literally win with any combo-kill of your choice and have a deck that'll dominate any matchup but the mirror or 40 hate cards 20 land (and you probably beat that anyway).

Look at it this way: Ritual + Necro (honestly, if you can't win the game after turn 1-2 Necro, you built your deck wrong) is essentially the same thing as Flash + Protean Hulk (with the dead cards incurred by running an actual wincon in the necro-deck mirroring the dead combo-pieces in Flash). If it resolves, they die. Sure with Necro it takes another turn, the combo also only costs B, though, and fills your hand with free countermagic to survive that turn.

As to the once in four games thing:
a) Tutors exist (ETutor finds both Necro or the Petal to drop it on turn 2 consistently for example)
b) Affinity might be a good deck once every four games. Necro would win more than one in eight games straight up (you're ~16 percent to draw both Ritual and Necro naturally) and a ton more would effectively end turn 2. The deck would be NOT ridiculous in maybe one out of ten games, not the other way around.

As for Oath, I have to agree with Metalworker here that banning the creatures (other than Vengevine) is redundant if Oath is unbanned, though I'd be all for trying out this one and see if the effect would actually be as immense as I suspect (that and I loved playing Oath until they printed Orchard :p). The correct way to build an aggro-control deck at that point is to play a Progenitus (or something else big and hard to kill), a Gaea's Blessing so you don't deck and use Oath as your two-drop "creature." The only way to avoid that would be to actually make sure the most ridiculous cheap drops (like Goyf and Delver) are around to provide at least a minor incentive to actually play decks that contain creatures and don't just sub in Oath.
This is particularly damning because Oath kind of self-regulates. If people don't play creatures, Oath doesn't trigger and you're better of playing real creatures. The problem? You suddenly lose to the people that are still on Oath, meaning you're better of playing Oath and preparing some other way to win if the opponent refuses to play guys.

Finally, a note: Banning Tendrils would probably be bad for the format for a similar reason banning Brainstorm would be bad for it - there is a significant number of players invested into archetypes based around the card already and taking their favorite toy away even to bring back something as awesome as Necro is unlikely to help the format. Same reason I'd have much preferred a ban on Vengevine to hitting Survival, btw. If stuff needs to be banned, it's always better to ban those things that don't have a significant number of fans (if possible).

[Meekrab]

Man you could trade three relevant cards for four maybe releavant spells.
I think the point was that Soul Spike brings your opponent's life total towards zero for free during your end step, and all you have to do is exile cards you were going to discard anyway. It seems pretty janky, though, and I'm sure there's an easy way to win after Necroing for 15.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

No, I haven't.

I would point out that there are significant differences between Hulk-Flash and Ritual-Necropotence, namely the latter gives your opponent a turn, which is entirely relevant, and is only good if you have life left and room to breath. At six life against a board full of aggro creatures, Hulk-Flash wins and Necro is probably going to do nothing if you don't hit a lot of Soul Spikes and Contagions.

But maybe it's too powerful. Okay. So let's try it out for a few months and see. And then we can ban it or Oath again if they're actually impossible to unban.

What I don't understand is the inconsistency of people who will bend over backwards to justify Brainstorm remaining Legacy legal, despite its absurd power level and dominance, and who will then still say that we can't even try to unban iconic old cards.

I take your point on Tendrils, and it's probably a better argument than potential bustedness to not unban Necro (as certainly I don't think the two can co-exist without basically banning all fast mana). Of course Necro also has its fans but obviously not ones currently invested.

[Mon,Goblin Chief]

No, I haven't.

I would point out that there are significant differences between Hulk-Flash and Ritual-Necropotence, namely the latter gives your opponent a turn, which is entirely relevant, and is only good if you have life left and room to breath. At six life against a board full of aggro creatures, Hulk-Flash wins and Necro is probably going to do nothing if you don't hit a lot of Soul Spikes and Contagions.

But maybe it's too powerful. Okay. So let's try it out for a few months and see. And then we can ban it or Oath again if they're actually impossible to unban.

What I don't understand is the inconsistency of people who will bend over backwards to justify Brainstorm remaining Legacy legal, despite its absurd power level and dominance, and who will then still say that we can't even try to unban iconic old cards.

I take your point on Tendrils, and it's probably a better argument than potential bustedness to not unban Necro (as certainly I don't think the two can co-exist without basically banning all fast mana). Of course Necro also has its fans but obviously not ones currently invested.

Oh, I would definitely bend over backwards to keep Brainstorm legal. At the same time, I wouldn't have a problem with trial runs on everything you suggested other than Necro and would even enjoy if that was tried out (if only so that I get to play with Necro again for three months *g* I guarantee unbanned Necro would lead to disaster as far as format diversity is concerned, though).

Obviously just posting this to show you not all of us that want to keep Brainstorm only hold that opinion because of status quo bias. Maybe that restores some of your faith in mankind ;)

Finally, because I enjoy this kind of theoretical comparison:
Sure, Flash Hulk wins against a board of aggro-creatures at six life and Necro doesn't. How likely is that situation to come up when the tools exist to make turn two Necro incredibly easy and you get to run FoW, Daze, MisD and Firestorm (over-Necro to fuel it) to keep that from happening? (edit: Soul Spike and Contagion shouldn't be anywhere near your Necro deck, btw.)

/edit edit: Damn you, now I can't stop thinking about Necro-lists again. Useless waste of Magic creativity as I'm not ever going to be able to play with it but soooo fun to imagine. I kinda wish they'll do that now.
As I'm thinking about it, banning Tendrils is probably unnecessary if you plan to unban Necro as it's a relatively clunky wincon for the deck. It isn't blue (you want to be able to pitch extra winconditions to FoW), you're rarely able to actually Tendrils for lethal after a single turn without an additional engine (which Will provides in Vintage but not in Legacy - actually, Past in Flames is probably sufficient, darn it) because Necro leaves you with only seven cards and you definitely want to keep one to two active pitchcounters of off your first Necro.

/and another edit: I'd actually hate to see Black Vise tried out. Turn one Vise on the play is very powerful in a format without Moxen and leads to really unfun games. And yes, I've also played in four Vise formats before (other than modern Vintage where speed makes Black Vise irrelevant I mean). A ton of games come down to who wins the die-roll.

[Gheizen64]

/and another edit: I'd actually hate to see Black Vise tried out. Turn one Vise on the play is very powerful in a format without Moxen and leads to really unfun games. And yes, I've also played in four Vise formats before (other than modern Vintage where speed makes Black Vise irrelevant I mean). A ton of games come down to who wins the die-roll.

Because legacy isn't fast enough? Vise sucks. I'd be ready to bet it wouldn't see the light of any T8 an year after its eventual unban.

[soltakar]

@Oath - Beast Within allows the trigger to resolve a lot more than I would like it to, especially with the power creep for fatties over the past few years. I used to love to play Oath and necro (and brainstorm) before they were 'discovered' and broken. But I just don't like the idea of even more ways to cheat fatties into play super easy and super early in the game. Turn 2 Blightsteel is possible with Oath, and that will just force more people to have to play blue.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Oh, I would definitely bend over backwards to keep Brainstorm legal. At the same time, I wouldn't have a problem with trial runs on everything you suggested other than Necro and would even enjoy if that was tried out (if only so that I get to play with Necro again for three months *g* I guarantee unbanned Necro would lead to disaster as far as format diversity is concerned, though).

Obviously just posting this to show you not all of us that want to keep Brainstorm only hold that opinion because of status quo bias. Maybe that restores some of your faith in mankind ;)

All this is fair enough.


Finally, because I enjoy this kind of theoretical comparison:
Sure, Flash Hulk wins against a board of aggro-creatures at six life and Necro doesn't. How likely is that situation to come up when the tools exist to make turn two Necro incredibly easy and you get to run FoW, Daze, MisD and Firestorm (over-Necro to fuel it) to keep that from happening? (edit: Soul Spike and Contagion shouldn't be anywhere near your Necro deck, btw.)

Except for Firestorm, Hulk-Flash could and did run all of those cards; and I know I ended up running Deed in my build of the deck at GP Columbus (which was a bit better before the judges clarified that copy tokens have the converted mana cost of the creature they're copying.)


/edit edit: Damn you, now I can't stop thinking about Necro-lists again. Useless waste of Magic creativity as I'm not ever going to be able to play with it but soooo fun to imagine. I kinda wish they'll do that now.
As I'm thinking about it, banning Tendrils is probably unnecessary if you plan to unban Necro as it's a relatively clunky wincon for the deck. It isn't blue (you want to be able to pitch extra winconditions to FoW), you're rarely able to actually Tendrils for lethal after a single turn without an additional engine (which Will provides in Vintage but not in Legacy - actually, Past in Flames is probably sufficient, darn it) because Necro leaves you with only seven cards and you definitely want to keep one to two active pitchcounters of off your first Necro.

/and another edit: I'd actually hate to see Black Vise tried out. Turn one Vise on the play is very powerful in a format without Moxen and leads to really unfun games. And yes, I've also played in four Vise formats before (other than modern Vintage where speed makes Black Vise irrelevant I mean). A ton of games come down to who wins the die-roll.

I can't speak too much to the best build of Necropotence decks, but I'd be happy to see Black Vise serve as a restriction on them at least.

[GGoober]

Don't let the illusion of Necro winning the next turn make it seem that it's a huge cost compared to winning on the turn itself. Most people forget that necroin'g for a full grip often involves finding a protection spell at the very least that can protect your win next turn. Once necro resolves, if Pithing Needle is not in play, you are going to fight a very uphill battle to win, sure you won't win instantly but the uphill battle is incredibly difficult to win in the majority of games.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Sure. I have no doubt that the majority of games that Necro lands, the Necro player wins. But that's also true of Sneak Attack, or Doomsday. I'm just saying that this doesn't seem sufficient reason to ban it outright without even attempting to see if it actually deserves it. By no means am I trying to argue that Necropotence isn't a good card; but lots of good cards are legal in Legacy.

[snappingbowls | ಠ_ಠ]

Sure. I have no doubt that the majority of games that Necro lands, the Necro player wins. But that's also true of Sneak Attack, or Doomsday. I'm just saying that this doesn't seem sufficient reason to ban it outright without even attempting to see if it actually deserves it. By no means am I trying to argue that Necropotence isn't a good card; but lots of good cards are legal in Legacy.

Sneak Attack requires a threat in hand to be game winning whereas a Necropotence put's 11-15 cards in your hand, with Force of Wills and probably Dazes to protect your win condition, which you also drew. Doomsday is way more rickety and easy to disrupt than Necro, which is only really stopped by bounce and Pithing Needle. If you go for Shelldock with Doomsday you can get Wasted, Stifled or Edicted. Necropotence isn't just another good card in Legacy, it's one of the best, most broken magic cards ever. There will be times when you don't draw as aggressively with it, maybe 2-3 cards a turn, but even then you're probably winning because of it. Seriously, and I can't say this enough, Necropotence is about as broken as cards get. ( I put it up there with Yawgmoth's Will, Balance and even Academy)

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

It certainly was very powerful back in the day. But I don't believe- someone can correct me on this- that it's dominating Vintage at all. And it's never been legal in Legacy so we really don't know. I'm sure it will be doing broken and unfair things if you can stick it early on with life to spare, but the fact that it gets materially worse in a rapid way against aggro decks seems in my mind like a natural limitation on how good it can be; you simply can't have a strategy of mulling until you hit on land-dark ritual-necro and hope to win with that.

[edgarps22]

I for one would be more than open to a test season with certain cards, like Oath and Necro, unbanned just to see what happened, ala Gush in Vintage. I see some problems with Necro because it can be that powerful, even without Tendrils, I see Past In Flames working pretty well with it and potentially ending the game on the spot, or the following turn with protection. You do make a fun point though IBA in that aggro decks, Zoo especially, might have an edge at times due to just being able to bolt you out if you go too far into the game. Oath is crazy good, but at the same time, with no Forbidden Orchard you would need tricks like Beast Within to go off. I see it fitting real well in TurboLand again making it actually viable. Honestly though, I could see it with Forbidden Orchard, we do have cards like Wasteland, Stifle, Innocent Blood, Swords to Plowshares, Path to Exile, Diabolic Edict on the play, etc. lots of early outs. I am not saying it wouldn't be strong, but answerable for sure. Then again it could blow up the world and make Legacy very unfun and degenerate. Either way I would enjoy the experiment, if only to play with fun powerful cards again.

[Koby]

Don't let the illusion of Necro winning the next turn make it seem that it's a huge cost compared to winning on the turn itself. Most people forget that necroin'g for a full grip often involves finding a protection spell at the very least that can protect your win next turn. Once necro resolves, if Pithing Needle is not in play, you are going to fight a very uphill battle to win, sure you won't win instantly but the uphill battle is incredibly difficult to win in the majority of games.

Necro for maximum possible, pitching 2 random black spells to Soul Spike (4) discard down to FoW, Brainstorm, Ritual, Ritual, Ritual, Petal, Tendrils; either counter a spell, or storm for 6+. Repeat.

EDIT: Do we really need to rehash this argument over again to prove Necro is not worth unbanning? (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?19901-Most-degenerate-historical-decks-in-legacy-(and-other-formats)&p=519745&viewfull=1#post519745)

[Meekrab]

It certainly was very powerful back in the day. But I don't believe- someone can correct me on this- that it's dominating Vintage at all.
Depends what you mean by 'dominating'. Every deck that can cast it, which means every deck with 4 Dark Rituals, plays it, so in a certain sense, it has 100% domination. On the other hand, pure Tendrils decks are on the outs lately, since WotC has been busy making creatures and planeswalkers as broken as possible, and Vintage players are perhaps more adaptable than any other format's devotees and have given up their 2006 era decks.

Several years ago, before 6/7 creatures for 2 mana and Jace 2.0, the Vintage landscape was very much Tendrils (Necropotence) vs. Mana Drain (which sometimes won with Tendrils and sometimes used Necro as fuel) vs. Workshops (which couldn't cast Necro) vs. Bazaars (which didn't want Necro, because it needs to draw cards to dredge).

Nothing suggests the Skull wouldn't break Legacy in half. We already have Tendrils decks that consistently goldfish turn 3 or 4, I don't want their turn 2 percentage going up because they can sculpt a perfect hand even more easily.

[Gui]

Necro for maximum possible, pitching 2 random black spells to Soul Spike (4) discard down to FoW, Brainstorm, Ritual, Ritual, Ritual, Petal, Tendrils; either counter a spell, or storm for 6+. Repeat.

EDIT: Do we really need to rehash this argument over again to prove Necro is not worth unbanning? (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?19901-Most-degenerate-historical-decks-in-legacy-(and-other-formats)&p=519745&viewfull=1#post519745)

Btw, TIBA suggested its unban together with the ban of Tendrils. I dunno if this would be enough, but I think one of the best kills when using Necro is Tendrils.

[Mon,Goblin Chief]

It certainly was very powerful back in the day. But I don't believe- someone can correct me on this- that it's dominating Vintage at all. And it's never been legal in Legacy so we really don't know. I'm sure it will be doing broken and unfair things if you can stick it early on with life to spare, but the fact that it gets materially worse in a rapid way against aggro decks seems in my mind like a natural limitation on how good it can be; you simply can't have a strategy of mulling until you hit on land-dark ritual-necro and hope to win with that.

It doesn't dominate Vintage right now because you can play only a single Necro and therefore not build your deck around it. Like Gifts Ungiven (again in Vintage) Necro is a card that gets an order of magnitude more powerful if you can run four of them and build your deck around the plan of consistently casting it early.
And while it might not be dominating in the sense of an archetype dominating, it utterly dominates games. I can count the number of games I lost after resolving Necropotence during my ~10 years of playing Vintage on one hand. Drawing 10 to 15 cards for three mana does that. To understand how ridiculous the card actually is, just think of it as an Infernal Contract that draws 10+ instead of 4.

@Gheizen: No, actually, Legacy isn't all that fast as far as Black Vise is concerned (not counting combo-decks, obviously) or compared to Vintage combo/Workshop/Dredge. If you're on the draw in a format without Moxen while the opponent has Black Vise and you don't have a 1-drop that actually reduces handsize, you're generally not coming back from it (assuming they have anything else). And god forbid you ever miss a land drop early on.
There is no doubt in my mind Vise would be very very strong. Not to the point of being dominant but to the point of making a lot of matches come down to the die-roll and luck of the draw as well as being generally horrible to play out. On the play, against anything not running artifact acceleration Black Vise generally represents at least 6 damage and that isn't counting multiple Black Vises or Wastelands. If you don't see how six to the dome (with potential for more) for :1: is a problem I'm not sure what format you're playing. And that doesn't even take into account that Black Vise also turns the game into an annoying race in which it is more important to get cards out of your hand than to play well.
Again, I don't claim the card would be dominant, just that it would make the format a lot less fun to play in - and I don't think that should be the goal of any unbanning. Black Vise functions similar to say Show and Tell Emrakul in how stupid it makes games but doesn't need you to really build your deck around it (other than it either being aggressive or capable of stranding cards in the opponents hand).

[Gheizen64]

@Gheizen: No, actually, Legacy isn't all that fast as far as Black Vise is concerned (not counting combo-decks, obviously) or compared to Vintage combo/Workshop/Dredge. If you're on the draw in a format without Moxen while the opponent has Black Vise and you don't have a 1-drop that actually reduces handsize, you're generally not coming back from it (assuming they have anything else). And god forbid you ever miss a land drop early on.
There is no doubt in my mind Vise would be very very strong. Not to the point of being dominant but to the point of making a lot of matches come down to the die-roll and luck of the draw as well as being generally horrible to play out. On the play, against anything not running artifact acceleration Black Vise generally represents at least 6 damage and that isn't counting multiple Black Vises or Wastelands. If you don't see how six to the dome (with potential for more) for :1: is a problem I'm not sure what format you're playing. And that doesn't even take into account that Black Vise also turns the game into an annoying race in which it is more important to get cards out of your hand than to play well.
Again, I don't claim the card would be dominant, just that it would make the format a lot less fun to play in - and I don't think that should be the goal of any unbanning. Black Vise functions similar to say Show and Tell Emrakul in how stupid it makes games but doesn't need you to really build your deck around it (other than it either being aggressive or capable of stranding cards in the opponents hand).


Too bad in reality no deck would profictably run it because it's a dead draw beyond T1 that can't even attack or block on an empty board, it's just dead. Burn wouldn't run it. Prison doesn't exist in this format (Stasis can't win 2 games under 1 hour). Affinity? Affinity still get hated easily and would still be inconsistent. Fabled opening like ritual into triple vise are worse than triple ritual into Tendril. At least triple ritual into tendril don't get owned by a single fow. Or even better, ritual into entomb-exhume, it's even one card less. I'd rather play a CotV for 1 on the play than playing 2 vise off a tomb. And still no-one of those opening are seen, because as devastating they may be, they require you to add cards that are simply bad if you can't get them online asap.
I repeat, there's no single deck in legacy that would run Vise unless the format degenerated in caw-blade mirrors.

[snappingbowls | ಠ_ಠ]

Did anyone here actually play Magic in 1995? I'm guessing not seeing as Gheizan thinks Black Vise would suck (...) and Bear Ass thinks Necro is just another good legacy card. Yeah, a deck with wastes and stifles would be good with Vise.

You guys need to play with these here cards and then get an opinion.

[Mon,Goblin Chief]

Did anyone here actually play Magic in 1995? I'm guessing not seeing as Gheizan thinks Black Vise would suck (...) and Bear Ass thinks Necro is just another good legacy card. Yeah, a deck with wastes and stifles would be good with Vise.

You guys need to play with these here cards and then get an opinion.

This. I did in fact play in 1995 hence my opinions on Vise. As to Necro, that was fine in 1995 (though still dominant) because people hadn't figured out yet you should run it in combo-decks.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Did anyone here actually play Magic in 1995? I'm guessing not seeing as Gheizan thinks Black Vise would suck (...) and Bear Ass thinks Necro is just another good legacy card. Yeah, a deck with wastes and stifles would be good with Vise.

You guys need to play with these here cards and then get an opinion.

No, I didn't play competitive Magic in 1995.

I can imagine you making this argument in the raw about Zuran Orb and Serendib Efreet though.

Also decide whether you want to play rough or not, because this thing you do of trying to be an internet tough guy up until I start taking off the gloves is getting old. If you want me to explicate on how dumb your various opinions are I can do it, but I want your sayso that this time you're not going to complain that I'm being mean to the mods.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

This. I did in fact play in 1995 hence my opinions on Vise. As to Necro, that was fine in 1995 (though still dominant) because people hadn't figured out yet you should run it in combo-decks.

I'm fairly certain there was more to the dynamic involved there than Necro being legal or not. Creatures have gotten a metric fuckton better in the meanwhile. Again, back in the early days of Legacy you had a lot of people, mostly Vintage veterans, running around squawking that everyone playing Werebears and Dazes were wasting their time and that we were fooling ourselves to think Legacy wouldn't just be another combo dominated format.

That's not to say, by any means, that Necro might not come off only to need to go back on the banned list in three or six months. But I don't feel confident saying so at all. And while Black Vise might be playable- I doubt it outside of making Stasis perhaps viable, frankly- I see no possibility at all that Black Vise would need to be rebanned.

[Admiral_Arzar]

Did anyone here actually play Magic in 1995? I'm guessing not seeing as Gheizan thinks Black Vise would suck (...) and Bear Ass thinks Necro is just another good legacy card. Yeah, a deck with wastes and stifles would be good with Vise.

You guys need to play with these here cards and then get an opinion.

It seems to escape people that Black Vise does nothing as soon as your opponent casts FOW, and the decks that DON'T play FOW are either going to blow it up and/or just kill you. The only decks that actually have to worry about Vise are slow control decks (which while I love you Mon, seems to be the main reason you are against a Vise unban as slow control is your preference) or slow combo decks that maintain a lot of cards in hand for a few turns (Spiral Tide).

EDIT: Also, snappingbowls, I agree with IBA here. I haven't really seen a post of yours lately that has actually added to the discussion without making my skull ache. Stop spouting knee-jerk opinions about things that you seem to know absolutely nothing about. And no, I don't care if you "played with these cards in 1995" - that experience means precisely shit considering the huge differences in today's format.

[Gheizen64]

Did anyone here actually play Magic in 1995? I'm guessing not seeing as Gheizan thinks Black Vise would suck (...) and Bear Ass thinks Necro is just another good legacy card. Yeah, a deck with wastes and stifles would be good with Vise.

You guys need to play with these here cards and then get an opinion.

Not only you spell my name wrong, you also make inordinated assumptions about when i started playing and whatsnot. FYI, i started playing as soon as magic came out here (and sold all my collection once in 2001, so i've got 0 duals now when i had two playset of each black bordered that i sold for ~8 euros each fucking fail lol), with black border revised, and i played with and against vise my fair share of times. Back then when no one knew what T1-T2-Extended were and when i was banned from a tournament for playing Kird Ape (extended was just born and i basically always played T1 without knowing it thinking it was the only format existing), i remember a mate of mine always playing a land equilibrium deck/stasis deck that killed by vise while i always played RG beat deck with sol ring and i thought shivan dragon was the best card of my deck (green was for Kird apes, llanowar elves and giant growth, red was dragon whelp, bolt, dwarven warrior to combo with giant growth and whelp before pump lol). I remember the tempest era and a mate of mine winning a beta Mox Pearl with an Aggro 5-color sliver deck that i still admire to this day since no one in the tournament was prepared for it or even thought it was actually good. I went thru the Urza extended era with an unshakeable faith in my wildfire deck that had a bad matchup even against fluctuator decks with song of the damned. I basically stopped playing constructed the moment duals were banned from extended and i play only limited still to this day.
Vise sucks and if you stopped blabbering about "obvious" things that people that started playing in 1995 know by divine gift and started to actually argument with some lists or reports how certain cards would be ridiculous you'd see that too. Try writing down a list of two with vise and playtest it. No, screw that, there are already some in the unbanned decklist challenge topic so you don't even have to think for a list. There are like one million iterations of Stasis/Prison Vise and Vise Sligh.

[snappingbowls | ಠ_ಠ]

No, I didn't play competitive Magic in 1995.

I can imagine you making this argument in the raw about Zuran Orb and Serendib Efreet though.

Also decide whether you want to play rough or not, because this thing you do of trying to be an internet tough guy up until I start taking off the gloves is getting old. If you want me to explicate on how dumb your various opinions are I can do it, but I want your sayso that this time you're not going to complain that I'm being mean to the mods.

Heh, you got mad. Sorry you're wrong about something to do with magic? Hardly a big deal, don't get upset... and I don't want to play rough, that sounds intimidating to me! I just think you have dumb ideas but you always talk so loudly about them it's fun to see you react so vehemently. Also, you literally did just call Necro another good legacy card, this speaks volumes as to how little you know about the card and its power level. Seriously, and Oath? Man, it's almost like you've never played with these cards, and I'm not trolling, I just can't wrap my head around the idea that you think these two cards could ever belong in legacy. You are clearly ban happy and are just mad that the evil blue decks are so popular right now that you want to unban the most absolute nut cards not in blue. I guess you don't realize that in unbanning Oath and Necro, everyone would basically have to play Forces.



It seems to escape people that Black Vise does nothing as soon as your opponent casts FOW, and the decks that DON'T play FOW are either going to blow it up and/or just kill you. The only decks that actually have to worry about Vise are slow control decks (which while I love you Mon, seems to be the main reason you are against a Vise unban as slow control is your preference) or slow combo decks that maintain a lot of cards in hand for a few turns (Spiral Tide).

EDIT: Also, snappingbowls, I agree with IBA here. I haven't really seen a post of yours lately that has actually added to the discussion without making my skull ache. Stop spouting knee-jerk opinions about things that you seem to know absolutely nothing about. And no, I don't care if you "played with these cards in 1995" - that experience means precisely shit considering the huge differences in today's format.

Because I make your head hurt I know nothing? I think that would mean the opposite... By the way, that hurting sensation is probably just you thinking. Reading the suggestions for ban/unban in this thread I would say I do know what I'm talking about compared to some others... I think the root of the issue here is that I accidentally stumbled upon a very passionate circle jerk wherein the elder forum dwellers are always gonna be the most logical, Vulkan beings of supreme knowledge.


This. I did in fact play in 1995 hence my opinions on Vise. As to Necro, that was fine in 1995 (though still dominant) because people hadn't figured out yet you should run it in combo-decks.

Problem is, today people do know how to break it. We wouldn't be facing down tons of jump knights and hymns, we would just bounce it in response to the draws or lose.

Whatever though, I'm going to proxy up some Vise lists as Gheizan64 suggests and you guys should fuck with some Necro combo lists, and see if it isn't as good as me and Mon,Goblin Chief say it is.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I in fact did not call Necropotence just another good Legacy card; I said that it would certainly be, at the very least, good, but Legacy has lots of good cards. I also said more times than I'm going to bother to count that I fully recognize that the consequence of unbanning Necropotence might simply be needing ot ban it again in a few months. I'm okay with that. Let's try the format without Tendrils and with Necro- which gives very fast aggro decks two direct boosts, I believe- and if it can't stand, it can't stand.

Of course taken apart from that the rest of the list suggestions stand.

As for Oath, I have in fact played in a format with Oath. Oath was fully legal in 1.5. No one played it. Without Forbidden Orchard it's pretty bad because there are a lot of decks it will just lose to while unable to put together a kill condition. Now I suppose this is probably less true now since it could run Jace as a secondary kill condition, but you're talking now about a fairly slow control deck. And a lot of combo decks are actually going to roll right over that.

And even creature decks can handle most of the kill conditions you would run once Emrakul is removed. Iona? Never been very good against Zoo, and any deck with Knight can get Karakas to bounce her; of course Knight is answerable but if it isn't you're in a pretty poor situation now. Progenitus? Very good at turning sideways, and a decent blocker, but unlike Emrakul he can't do offense and defense at the same time. Empyrial Archangel is a fog against a board of double Tarmogoyfs; if you had a lot more board control elemnts than the old lists I suppose it might work though.

Now Oath is probably better now than before it had Beast Within at least, and now that it has better kill conditions than Akroma to choose from (remember when 6/6 was considered huge?), but again, in a format where Oath was legal, it saw basically no play at all because the people that played it soon ceased to do so after losing a lot.

So I'm perfectly willing to see what these cards would be like now.

[clavio]

I've been really thinking about it the past few days....I don't think that Necro in Legacy without tendrils would be much stronger than say ANT/TES is right now. It would be good, real good, but hardly a world beater. I'd like to see a list that proves otherwise.

[Gheizen64]

I in fact did not call Necropotence just another good Legacy card; I said that it would certainly be, at the very least, good, but Legacy has lots of good cards. I also said more times than I'm going to bother to count that I fully recognize that the consequence of unbanning Necropotence might simply be needing ot ban it again in a few months. I'm okay with that. Let's try the format without Tendrils and with Necro- which gives very fast aggro decks two direct boosts, I believe- and if it can't stand, it can't stand.

Of course taken apart from that the rest of the list suggestions stand.

As for Oath, I have in fact played in a format with Oath. Oath was fully legal in 1.5. No one played it. Without Forbidden Orchard it's pretty bad because there are a lot of decks it will just lose to while unable to put together a kill condition. Now I suppose this is probably less true now since it could run Jace as a secondary kill condition, but you're talking now about a fairly slow control deck. And a lot of combo decks are actually going to roll right over that.

And even creature decks can handle most of the kill conditions you would run once Emrakul is removed. Iona? Never been very good against Zoo, and any deck with Knight can get Karakas to bounce her; of course Knight is answerable but if it isn't you're in a pretty poor situation now. Progenitus? Very good at turning sideways, and a decent blocker, but unlike Emrakul he can't do offense and defense at the same time. Empyrial Archangel is a fog against a board of double Tarmogoyfs; if you had a lot more board control elemnts than the old lists I suppose it might work though.

Now Oath is probably better now than before it had Beast Within at least, and now that it has better kill conditions than Akroma to choose from (remember when 6/6 was considered huge?), but again, in a format where Oath was legal, it saw basically no play at all because the people that played it soon ceased to do so after losing a lot.

So I'm perfectly willing to see what these cards would be like now.

I believe modern oath goes for the tutoring demon and then win the same turn via some sort of combo.

[troopatroop]

I played Oath the last week before it got banned. Got paired against Scepter-Chant.


Deck wasn't that good...

[boneclub24]

I play a lot of vintage. Oath right now isn't being played much, but even when it was it wasn't a hard deck to stop.

Of course, you do need to remember Oath is a one card combo.

[edgarps22]

It may be a one card combo, but it usually does not end the game immediately, and there are many ways to deal with one big fatty on the opposing board. Edict effects for the shroud types, flat out swords to plowshares if it doesn't have shroud. And unlike Vintage, we actually run Swords to Plowshares a LOT. Heck even Unsummon can do a lot, truly I do not see many creatures that would be extremely abusive. Progenitus is something we can already deal with early, Emrakul as well (Oath would put these in play approximately on the same turn as Show and Tell/Natural Order), the one thing it doesn't require is them coming in 4 of's. This means they can be more controlling, or more combo oriented, but certainly not aggro oriented. This would open another control archetype, or combo archetype depending on what you can do with it, but I honestly believe we could find ways to react and deal with it, with Forbidden Orchard as well. It would simply mean that Greater Gargadon would see more play, as well as more black edict effects, maybe even Jesters Cap effects because it can completely neutralize them.

I truly wonder how degenerate it would be, but would welcome a chance to test it out. We do not exactly have Black Lotus and the Moxen to make it a consistent turn 1 play, we do have Lotus Petal and Chrome Mox, and Mox Diamond, but those come at a cost that would make the turn 1 play very vulnerable to any control. For instance Mox Diamond and Chrome Mox both require 2 cards in hand, the mox and something to imprint or discard, then u have to have oath, and Forbidden Orchard for it to truly work. That leaves you with 3 cards to defend it, you may have Force of Will, but what happens when you have to Force the opposing force, are left with one card and they simply edict you on turn 2, or Swords your guy on their turn 1. I see this deck being capable of strong plays, very very powerful indeed, but not broken yet. I would love to see what would happen to the metagame, as it would certainly adjust and we do have the tools to adjust.

[Koby]

It may be a one card combo, but it usually does not end the game immediately . . .

I don't think you've ever been a victim of Turn 1 Oath + Orchard, FoW backup; Untap Blightsteel Colossas with Dragon Breath.

[Zilla]

I'm pretty sure that Oath would just further reinforce the necessity for decks to run blue, which is already a big complaint that certain players have with the format. If anything, don't we want nonblue creature decks to be stronger in this format? Seems like unbanning Oath would be a big step in the wrong direction.

[lordofthepit]

I mean if I had my druthers this would be the next update, all told;

Banned:

- Delver of Secrets
- Vengevine
- Tarmogoyf
- Emrakul, the Aeons Torn
- Forbidden Orchard
- Tendrils of Agony

Unbanned:

- Survival of the Fittest
- Oath of Druid
- Necropotence
- Black Vise
- Mind Twist
- Worldgorger Dragon
- Goblin Recruiter
- Mystical Tutor
- Earthcraft
- Land Tax
- Shahrazad

People have complained about Legacy changing too much with each new set, but taking a look at the way bannings were handled before and after, it's obvious that a lot of that is just because Legacy has gotten a lot more conservative with bannings than they used to be; in the furthest extreme, the criteria between what's too good for a new creature is far higher than what's too good for an old combo piece.



Survival of the Fittest: This is a card that 100% had to leave the meta a year ago. Even though it was slower, it put up more dominant results than Hulk Flash did back in the day. I do wonder if the existence of Surgical Extraction (as a commonly played graveyard hate card that owns Vengevine) and Scavenging Ooze (as a piece of graveyard hate that can be easily tutored and is not absolutely embarrassing to run) can make this relatively safe for the metagame again.
Oath of Druids: In my opinion, the least unbannable card in the format. Someone compared the card to Black Vise, which is great against control decks. However, Black Vise usually "only" deals 6-10 damage, even if drawn on the play against a very slow control deck, which maybe makes up 1% of the meta. Oath of Druids absolutely invalidates any archetype that relies primarily on creatures to win (not only aggro and aggro control, but even decks like Stoneblade and Enchantress), which probably make up at least 80% of the meta. Even if this didn't totally dominate the format, it would devolve into something like Storm vs. Oath vs. Lands vs. Jacestill or something else that no one wants to play.
Necropotence: This is already an overpowered card when you build it around a "fair" shell, like with pump Knights and Drain Life back during Black Summer. Rest assured the Necro pilots have no intention of breaking it in a "safe shell". Expect this to spawn dangerous combo decks. Sure, there are instances in which this card is terrible (i.e. Pithing Needle/Phyrexian Revoker on Necro, low on life against a burn deck), but it is good in almost every other situation, and when it is good, it absolutely buries the opponent in card advantage. On another note...

Yawgmoth's Bargain (since I've seen this suggested in a previous thread): See Necropotence, with a more powerful effect and a more expensive casting cost. However, the higher casting cost just means players are not deluded into using Bargain "fairly" with a traditional aggro deck; it simply means they run it into a more dedicated combo deck that can generate mana morefairly and will likely go off the turn you cast Bargain. Compare this card to Ad Nauseam, but now consider that you no longer have to constrain your deck to running cards with low mana costs. This means you can not only run Force of Will for protection and possibly Show and Tell/Academy Rector for acceleration, but you don't need to rely as much on Infernal Tutor for "virtual copies". Consequently, the deck is less prone to getting blown out by a counterspell or Vendilion Clique as you're trying to get hellbent.
Demonic Consultation: There is a relatively small (but not insignificant) chance you will kill yourself with this card, or mill your library to a state where you cannot possibly win before decking. If players choose to run this, it is an indication that there is something so broken in the deck as to justify this risk. Otherwise, this card would see no play. Either way, there's no reason to unban this.
Time Spiral: I would similarly argue that there is no fair and fun use for this card if it were still on the banned list. The only deck that it would possibly fit in would be a combo deck, and one that takes 30-50 minutes to goldfish at that, while introducing all kinds of logistical issues such as "What's the storm?", "How much mana is floating?", and "How many times have you cast Meditate?" I have no idea why this card was unbanned. (In case someone accuses me of being biased, I have a playset of Time Spiral, plus all the other cards in the deck except for Candelabra in thos decks that run it.)

Black Vise: this is very safe for unbanning, except the possibility of some terrible Prison deck suddenly rising to Tier 3 status. It's an absolute beating against the slowest control decks, which maybe make up 1% of the metagame; and it's only a beating if drawn in the opening hand, since it's one of the worst cards in the format when drawn in the late game. I can't think of a single deck that considers Black Vise more threatening than Aether Vial (besides possibly a Necropotence deck, if that card were ever unbanned). A Vial deck constrains you to running a lot of creatures with a low mana curve for maximum utility; Black Vise requires you to run either a super-aggressive deck (with lots of burn and fast creatures) or a dedicated prison deck (and forces an archetype already heavily dependent on its opening hand to become even more so); in other words, it only fits in decks that run bad cards.
Mind Twist: Worse than Hymn to Tourach in aggressive decks that have a heavy black commitment. Usually too slow against aggressive decks, unless fit into a dedicated ramp/prison strategy. An absolute blowout in control mirrors, without relying on a heavy commitment. The card would certainly see play in some decks if unbanned, but I don't think it would be too bad.
Worldgorger Dragon: I'm okay with unbanning only if the rules are changed so that an infinite loop causes the active player to lose the game.
Goblin Recruiter: I'm not too familiar with Food Chain Goblins, so I'll just assume it won't overrun the format and speak of the impact of this card on the traditional Goblins deck. On one hand, I think that deck needs a boost, but this might be too strong. In the very early game, this is not that great, but in the late game, any control, midrange, and perhaps even aggro deck will need to be able to counter every Recruiter that gets cast (or even late game Aether VIals that can threaten to cheat Recruiter into play) since being able to stack your deck is a tremendously powerful effect. Moreover, the triggered ability takes forever to resolve. Perhaps not in a deck like Food Chain Goblins where you're going off against a goldfish, but with a more complicated board state (say, against Stoneblade or Zoo), you will need to carefully consider your position, your resources, possible cards in the opponent's hand, etc. before deciding how to stack your deck.
Mystical Tutor: I thought this banning was totally unnecessary when it happened, especially since most Storm and Reanimator pilots weren't putting up great results. However, with the new tools at the disposal of these combo decks (Past in Flames, Jin-Gitaxias/Elesh Norn) and the decline of Counterbalance strategies, this might simply be too dangerous in the current metagame. (Note this is the exact opposite of my reaction to Survival of the Fittest, where I thought the banning was well-deserved at the time, but that the metagame is perhaps better equipped to deal with it now as a result of new cards.)
Earthcraft: I wouldn't object, but Elves might become a Tier 1 deck. This is a more versatile Heritage Druid (since you don't have to tap 3 creatures at a time) that is much harder to remove. Not as worried about Squirrel Nest shenanigans.
Land Tax: This card requires you to constrain your deck way too much to break. First, you have to be able to operate with very little basic land, which means you'll probably have to run Chrome Mox, Mox Diamond, and possibly Opal (or use a bad card like Zuran Orb to sacrifice your lands). Next, you have to be able to do something with those lands (such as Seismic Assault, Brainstorm, or Scroll Rack). The first two cards require you to use dual lands and fetchlands, while still requiring enough basic lands to make Land Tax profitable. Scroll Rack is a bad card that not only requires Land Tax to be useful, but also requires that your opponent obliges by playing fewer lands than you without presenting a threat like a Wild Nacatl or Aether Vial. Land Tax is not powerful enough of an effect to try to break a deck around (especially one that is so conditional), but it's a card that fits in any existing deck either besides Quinn.
Shahrazad: What the fuck...

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

[LIST]
Survival of the Fittest: This is a card that 100% had to leave the meta a year ago. Even though it was slower, it put up more dominant results than Hulk Flash did back in the day. I do wonder if the existence of Surgical Extraction (as a commonly played graveyard hate card that owns Vengevine) and Scavenging Ooze (as a piece of graveyard hate that can be easily tutored and is not absolutely embarrassing to run) can make this relatively safe for the metagame again.

You should probably read the entirety of things you post in response to. The suggestion was to unban Survival but ban Vengevine.


Oath of Druids: In my opinion, the least unbannable card in the format.

The Hell? No. Just no. The banned list includes;

Ancestral Recall
Black Lotus
The Moxen
Sol Ring
Mana Crypt
Mana Vault
Tolarian Academy
Time Walk
Library of Alexandria
Mishra's Workshop
Tinker
Time Vault
Demonic Consultation
Flash
Memory Jar
Yawgmoth's Bargain
Yawgmoth's Will
Skullclamp

Please tell me which of those is more unbannable than Oath of Druids.


Someone compared the card to Black Vise, which is great against control decks. However, Black Vise usually "only" deals 6-10 damage, even if drawn on the play against a very slow control deck, which maybe makes up 1% of the meta. Oath of Druids absolutely invalidates any archetype that relies primarily on creatures to win (not only aggro and aggro control, but even decks like Stoneblade and Enchantress), which probably make up at least 80% of the meta. Even if this didn't totally dominate the format, it would devolve into something like Storm vs. Oath vs. Lands vs. Jacestill or something else that no one wants to play.

Problem: Oath was legal in 1.5 and this never happened. Without Forbidden Orchard the deck is going to pretty much just lose to anything that doesn't need to drop creatures; and it's not guaranteed an autowin against the decks that do as a lot of them run either discard of enchantment removal or burn or counter and can various counter, destroy or make you discard Oath; or just wait to rush the board when Progenitus is too little to matter.


Necropotence: This is already an overpowered card when you build it around a "fair" shell, like with pump Knights and Drain Life back during Black Summer. Rest assured the Necro pilots have no intention of breaking it in a "safe shell". Expect this to spawn dangerous combo decks.

Combo sucks right now. I would be fine with more combo decks, especially ones that had trouble dealing with very aggro strategies.


Yawgmoth's Bargain (since I've seen this suggested in a previous thread): See Necropotence, with a more powerful effect and a more expensive casting cost. However, the higher casting cost just means players are not deluded into using Bargain "fairly" with a traditional aggro deck; it simply means they run it into a more dedicated combo deck that can generate mana morefairly and will likely go off the turn you cast Bargain. Compare this card to Ad Nauseam, but now consider that you no longer have to constrain your deck to running cards with low mana costs. This means you can not only run Force of Will for protection and possibly Show and Tell/Academy Rector for acceleration, but you don't need to rely as much on Infernal Tutor for "virtual copies". Consequently, the deck is less prone to getting blown out by a counterspell or Vendilion Clique as you're trying to get hellbent.
Demonic Consultation: There is a relatively small (but not insignificant) chance you will kill yourself with this card, or mill your library to a state where you cannot possibly win before decking. If players choose to run this, it is an indication that there is something so broken in the deck as to justify this risk. Otherwise, this card would see no play. Either way, there's no reason to unban this.

I see no reason you mentioned these and suspect it was to taint my argument by implication that I must also want to unban Demonic Consultation, which I assuredly do not.

Also I would describe the cases of killing yourself with Demonic Consultation going after a four of or even a three of as quite insignificant.


Black Vise: this is very safe for unbanning, except the possibility of some terrible Prison deck suddenly rising to Tier 3 status. It's an absolute beating against the slowest control decks, which maybe make up 1% of the metagame; and it's only a beating if drawn in the opening hand, since it's one of the worst cards in the format when drawn in the late game. I can't think of a single deck that considers Black Vise more threatening than Aether Vial (besides possibly a Necropotence deck, if that card were ever unbanned). A Vial deck constrains you to running a lot of creatures with a low mana curve for maximum utility; Black Vise requires you to run either a super-aggressive deck (with lots of burn and fast creatures) or a dedicated prison deck (and forces an archetype already heavily dependent on its opening hand to become even more so); in other words, it only fits in decks that run bad cards.

Except for the complete dismissal of those strategies at the end as being somehow inherently bad, I'm glad we agree on something.


Worldgorger Dragon: I'm okay with unbanning only if the rules are changed so that an infinite loop causes the active player to lose the game.

They can Necro on your turn. I'm not sure you want to do this. I'm not sure why you would even want to.


Earthcraft: I wouldn't object, but Elves might become a Tier 1 deck. This is a more versatile Heritage Druid (since you don't have to tap 3 creatures at a time) that is much harder to remove. Not as worried about Squirrel Nest shenanigans.

It's also neither a creature nor an elf. I'm pretty sure it would only get played in Enchantress.


Land Tax: ... Scroll Rack is a bad card

Get the fuck out of my thread.


Shahrazad: What the fuck...


I'm not sure if this is in reaction to it somehow being an unreasonable card to unban, or to a realization that it was ever banned to start with.

[lordofthepit]

The Hell? No. Just no. The banned list includes;

Ancestral Recall
Black Lotus
The Moxen
Sol Ring
Mana Crypt
Mana Vault
Tolarian Academy
Time Walk
Library of Alexandria
Mishra's Workshop
Tinker
Time Vault
Demonic Consultation
Flash
Memory Jar
Yawgmoth's Bargain
Yawgmoth's Will
Skullclamp

Sorry, I thought I had edited it to say "least unbannable card on the list, and one of the least unbannable in the format, as I had meant to say".

I do believe that the following cards are weaker (i.e. either more difficult to build around or to resolve, or less impactful on board state, etc.) than Oath of Druids though:
Library of Alexandria - Drawing cards when it's in your opening hand is broken; Oathing out an Iona (only because Emrakul would be banned under your list) is even worse.
Demonic Consultation - What legal four-of card would you search for that's worth paying B for and incurring the drawbacks of this card? I certainly wouldn't run it in Ad Nauseam combo or in High Tide, but I might in Show and Tell combo.
Yawgmoth's Bargain - Win the game for 1G > win the game for 4BB, even if the former is slightly more conditional.
Skullclamp - I know how broken this is. Oath is better since you don't have to stuff your deck with a bunch of small creatures and you can win for 1G instead of just generating massive card advantage for a zillion mana.
Memory Jar - Drawing 7 cards for 5 (even with Welder recursion or whatever else) isn't as broken as winning for 1G.
Time Vault - Two card combo for a minimum of 4 mana is weaker than one card combo for 1G; yes, you don't win right away with an Oath, and it's conditional on your opponent having a creature, but this still holds.

The only reason that Oath isn't as dominant in Vintage and in the old Type 1.5 is because those formats are not creature-oriented formats. It's wonderful if you miss that type of Magic, but I think most people like playing creatures in Legacy (even if just an Enchantress).

I'm not addressing the other issues, but I do acknowledge you are correct that Earthcraft would likely also see play in Enchantress.

[Admiral_Arzar]

Sorry, I thought I had edited it to say "least unbannable card on the list, and one of the least unbannable in the format, as I had meant to say".


Demonic Consultation - What legal four-of card would you search for that's worth paying B for and incurring the drawbacks of this card? I certainly wouldn't run it in Ad Nauseam combo or in High Tide, but I might in Show and Tell combo.
Yawgmoth's Bargain - Win the game for 1G > win the game for 4BB, even if the former is slightly more conditional.


PLEASE give storm combo players Demonic Consultation. It would be amazing, until they decided to ban LED instead to fix the format. I'm not sure why an instant-speed Demonic Tutor for B is considered anything less than broken in half. It's like the time somebody said Gush wouldn't be broken in Legacy...

Bargain is busted but probably not as bad as a lot of things on the list. It would be very nasty with Show and Tell still in the format though - hard-casting it is quite a bit more difficult.

[edgarps22]

I don't think you've ever been a victim of Turn 1 Oath + Orchard, FoW backup; Untap Blightsteel Colossas with Dragon Breath.

I have in fact had to deal with that situation. The trick is in Legacy, not Vintage, that would take Orchard, Oath, Chrome/Diamond, Land/Card to pitch to Chrome, Dragons Breath, and then 2 other cards, and if they are not Force + blue card, Force beats you, so does any 1 drop removal, nature's claim, and Greater Gargoadon makes it funny. So in the end you need an absolute stone cold nutter hand for this to work, basically a 5 card combo without real tutors/moxen etc to power it out. I mean sometimes you get paired against Maverick and they don't have the Swords, but maybe they do and you are sunk.

I see it as very powerful, but TES is very powerful, a lot of deck ideas are very powerful in Legacy. I think this is one we could at least give a shot to, if it blows up the world, then it blew up the world for a few months and it goes back on the banlist. I would rather see what happens.

In the end I jut believe we have more redundancy of answers in this format to deal with it than you see in Vintage, where most answers are 1-2 of's, sometimes 3 of's, rarely 4 of's. Here we have Qasali Pridemage, Natures Claim, Swords To Plowshares, Path to Exile, and plenty of other options that can legitimately be run as 4 of's and not juse get blown out. I think it is worth a shot.

[Koby]

I'll grant you that Legacy has more (relevant) removal for Oath decks than Vintage, and worse tutoring. However, the relevant tutors are still legal (E-tutor, Crop Rotation). Lotus Petal also allows Oath to be cast on the first turn, so that reduces the level of dependence of having the right card to pitch to (Mox). The point is, if it were legal, it's still a huge headache for the format to deal with. It also completely nullifies a wide swath of Legacy archetypes; which is the main reason for it to remain banned.

[edgarps22]

See I believe it would definitely cause a metagame shakeup, but is that necessarily bad? I am not sure which archetypes would truly suffer, I know Eva Green and Suicide Black could potentially get a lot stronger with Sadistic Sacrament out of the board, or in the main if the deck is a large part of the metagame due to popularity. It would at least open its own archetype again, make TurboLand potentially relevant, Suicide Black would probably see more play, Team America and other Stifle/Wasteland tempo decks would still do well, Maverick for sure can handle it with access to white removal, Goblins sides in Gargadons and starts maindecking Stingscourger (not sure why they aren't doing that now actually). I honestly think we could handle it. Heck you could Duress turn 1, remove oath and legitimately Surgical Extract them out of the game knowing if they have a way to stop it. I see a lot of holes in the deck that we already have the tools available to exploit. I say it would be worth the risk, and this is all saying that Orchard is unbanned at the same time, without it, it becomes much weaker.

[lordofthepit]

PLEASE give storm combo players Demonic Consultation. It would be amazing, until they decided to ban LED instead to fix the format. I'm not sure why an instant-speed Demonic Tutor for B is considered anything less than broken in half. It's like the time somebody said Gush wouldn't be broken in Legacy...

Bargain is busted but probably not as bad as a lot of things on the list. It would be very nasty with Show and Tell still in the format though - hard-casting it is quite a bit more difficult.

Demonic Consultation and Bargain are broken, and I said as much earlier. They would make storm much stronger against the field (although you'd have to revamp your win conditions to accommodate Demonic Consultation). But that's only a narrow portion of the metagame, and it still has bad matchups.

Oath of Druids would give any deck that has access to 1G an almost "I win" trump over any deck running creatures... which is roughly 80-90% of the format. Those other cards pale in comparison.

[dahcmai]

Oath being unbanned would be stupid. It would just say 1G, play a creature and prepare to deal with Emrakul next turn. With Orchard, it's just as nasty. When Natural Order is dangerous enough at 4 mana, two mana to do the same thing seems silly.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Full warning for this. - Bardo

[edgarps22]

IBA they were more responding to my comments saying that Oath might be okay even with Orchard, so that was in response to my post. Emrakul would certainly be a problem, but I have a feeling the go to guy would be Blightsteel, not Emrakul, either way my argument is I truly believe we can handle it, we have the same tools but far more prevalent than in Vintage.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

An Oath deck in Legacy built around Blightsteel would be terrible, there are far too many StPs, PtEs, Maze of Iths and decks that just don't need to drop creatures.

The problem with Oath under the suggested changes I made is that there's just not a lot of big guys that combine board-breaking effects with a difficulty in killing them. Emrakul is far and away the heads in this category, with Iona a very distant second that only breaks a few narrow decks. And maybe Empyrial Archangel, which might work with a deck running enough StPs and other removal to take down Goyfs and Knights reliably, but that doesn't sound like an inherently unfair deck.

[edgarps22]

I agree. It would certainly give rise to more decks splashing black for edict effects and is more than manageable, providing no Orchard. Without Orchard, its at the same speed as Show and Tell but more fragile as it is exposed to more than just countermagic.

[DragoFireheart]

Seriously, people want Oath?

How about someone makes an Oath Legacy deck and sees how many people they could crush with it. 4 Oaths, a couple big creatures, then the rest of the deck would be counters and dig (along with some mana accel so you can drop it turn one). Enlightened tutor could nab it, and a Ugw mana base won't be too hard to have with Orchards. You could even run Show n Tell with it! Ridiculous deck,and I don't want to see it.

[Fossil4182]

Regardless of whether or not it should be unbanned, if WotC banned Survival of the Fittest, there is zero risk Oath of Druids comes off the list. Green, two mana enchantments that tutor obscenely powerful creatures are too powerful for Legacy. I do not think Survival of the Fittest should of been banned, but Oath is more powerful in that universally accessible cards to counteract it do not exist. Specifically, Survival is more vulnerable because one can use Graveyard hate (in the form of artifacts) and Needle effects to stop activations without requiring one to be in a specific color to have a viable sideboard strategy. Oath is immune to this because once it is in play, there isn't a universally accessible way to hate it out. For the same reason, it wouldn't surprise me if Show and Tell was banned at some point in the future. The primary reason i don't think it will be banned is because one has to have Show and Tell plus a creature in hand in order to resolve the combo.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Seriously, people want Oath?

How about someone makes an Oath Legacy deck and sees how many people they could crush with it. 4 Oaths, a couple big creatures, then the rest of the deck would be counters and dig (along with some mana accel so you can drop it turn one). Enlightened tutor could nab it, and a Ugw mana base won't be too hard to have with Orchards. You could even run Show n Tell with it! Ridiculous deck,and I don't want to see it.

You should consider reading a thread before you reply to it some time, you might find the experience edifying.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Regardless of whether or not it should be unbanned, if WotC banned Survival of the Fittest, there is zero risk Oath of Druids comes off the list. Green, two mana enchantments that tutor obscenely powerful creatures are too powerful for Legacy. I do not think Survival of the Fittest should of been banned, but Oath is more powerful in that universally accessible cards to counteract it do not exist. Specifically, Survival is more vulnerable because one can use Graveyard hate (in the form of artifacts) and Needle effects to stop activations without requiring one to be in a specific color to have a viable sideboard strategy. Oath is immune to this because once it is in play, there isn't a universally accessible way to hate it out. For the same reason, it wouldn't surprise me if Show and Tell was banned at some point in the future. The primary reason i don't think it will be banned is because one has to have Show and Tell plus a creature in hand in order to resolve the combo.

Well clearly this would mark a shift in their current banning practices. However, it seems to be one in line with what a lot of people seem to want from Legacy, or at least claim to when they're explaining why Brainstorm should never be banned despite its absurd power level and dominance over the format.

[DragoFireheart]

You should consider reading a thread before you reply to it some time, you might find the experience edifying.

AKA: I don't have a good comeback so instead I'm going to troll you instead.

You're getting really bad at this. My post wasn't aimed at anyone. I saw people discussing Oath. I disagreed that even considering it would be a good idea. You then lash at me. Aren't the mods getting sick of you instigating fights? If I missed some important detail then feel free to correct my ignorance, but don't post an empty response if you have nothing constructive to add. And yes, I read your post about 1.5 having Oath legal and I still disagree with you on that entire post. When a single card can lock-out the majority of aggro decks by turn 3 or so WITH counter backup, it's questionable if such a card should be unbanned.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I don't have a good comeback so instead I'm going to troll you instead.

I appreciate the warning, but I think everyone expects it at this point.


You're getting really bad at this. My post wasn't aimed at anyone. I saw people discussing Oath. I disagreed that even considering it would be a good idea. You then lash at me. Aren't the mods getting sick of you instigating fights? If I missed some important detail then feel free to correct my ignorance, but don't post an empty response if you have nothing constructive to add. And yes, I read your post about 1.5 having Oath legal and I still disagree with you on that entire post. When a single card can lock-out the majority of aggro decks by turn 3 or so WITH counter backup, it's questionable if such a card should be unbanned.

I mean you could take being told to read the thread as a personal affront, or you could read the thread to understand what you missed.

You clearly didn't read my post or you wouldn't have been talking about how good Oath with Forbidden Orchards would be to address the suggestion that Orchard be banned (along with Emrakul) in order to make room to unban Oath. Nor are you addressing the argument in the context of the thread, which can be discerned by simply reading the title.

[Nonex]

I find Land Tax curious. I don't know when or why it got banned, but most people don't believe it's broken anymore (if it has ever been), yet it remains banned because WotC doesn't want a move as natural as playing lands to become a liability. I can understand that reasoning, but it's been some time since we started claiming for its comeback, which leads me to this question: what should you do with a card you keep out of the format because it goes against your principles for the game when a large part of the community wants it unbanned?

[dsck]

I find Land Tax curious. I don't know when or why it got banned, but most people don't believe it's broken anymore (if it has ever been), yet it remains banned because WotC doesn't want a move as natural as playing lands to become a liability. I can understand that reasoning, but it's been some time since we started claiming for its comeback, which leads me to this question: what should you do with a card you keep out of the format because it goes against your principles for the game when a large part of the community wants it unbanned?

The only people I know who want it unbanned are couple people here, locally we had some talk about it and it was concluded shortly being stupid card nobody wants to see unbanned.

On top of potentially drawing you 3 cards/turn it also takes time shuffling repeatedly during game.

[DragoFireheart]

I guess Land Tax being banned makes sense for the same reason SDT being banned in old extended, though it's curious that SDT is legal in Legacy when Land Tax is not...

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

The only people I know who want it unbanned are couple people here, locally we had some talk about it and it was concluded shortly being stupid card nobody wants to see unbanned.

On top of potentially drawing you 3 cards/turn it also takes time shuffling repeatedly during game.

Life from the Loam gives you three cards a turn, only it's not controllable by your opponent and it doesn't require you to miss land drops, so you can get more mana, the exact thing one supposes you would be running Land Tax to do.

I get it, people used to play Land Tax-Scroll Rack in control. They also used to play Jayemdae Tome. Land Tax is significantly less powerful than its also erstwhile banned list friend Thawing Glaciers, which hasn't seen any serious play in Legacy since the format was named and a good while before.

[IsThisACatInAHat?]

Life from the Loam gives you three cards a turn, only it's not controllable by your opponent and it doesn't require you to miss land drops, so you can get more mana, the exact thing one supposes you would be running Land Tax to do.

I get it, people used to play Land Tax-Scroll Rack in control. They also used to play Jayemdae Tome. Land Tax is significantly less powerful than its also erstwhile banned list friend Thawing Glaciers, which hasn't seen any serious play in Legacy since the format was named and a good while before.
Does anyone actually believe this garbage? Do you? Just because Scroll Rack was the last-best card to use with Land Tax doesn't mean it's not ridiculously broken right now with cards already in the format. Personally I'd be more than happy to goldfish all of the new Parfait players for 3 months with Stoneblade Tax before it was rebanned. At least then all of the blue haters will really have something to whine about when it comes to Brainstorm as a broken enabler.

[TsumiBand]

If they unban Land Tax then I will only play one deck.


4 Land Tax

4 Soldier of Fortune
4 Squadron Hawk
4 Welkin Hawk
4 Llanowar Sentinel
4 Daru Cavalier
4 Avarax

4 Sensei's Divining Top
4 Oblation
4 Chaos Warp

4 Windswept Heath
4 Arid Mesa

1 Plateau
1 Sacred Foundry
1 Savannah
1 Temple Garden
4 Ghost Quarter
4 Plains


I call it "The Funcooker"

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Does anyone actually believe this garbage? Do you?

Why wouldn't I? I've actually played with the fucking card in a control deck, unlike all the people throwing up pretenses. It's dreck. It's not just not broken, it's not good. I can say with certainty that no control deck would ever try to run Land Tax (or not past the first week of testing). The best you might get is some silly ass aggro deck running Empyrial Plate, but it's still just better to run Weathered Wayfarer if anything since he's easier to get active and can grab actual useful cards.


Just because Scroll Rack was the last-best card to use with Land Tax doesn't mean it's not ridiculously broken right now with cards already in the format. Personally I'd be more than happy to goldfish all of the new Parfait players for 3 months with Stoneblade Tax before it was rebanned. At least then all of the blue haters will really have something to whine about when it comes to Brainstorm as a broken enabler.

Yeah, Land Tax is pretty good in a vacuum where you can pretend your opponent will always let you activate it. In other news, Hunted Horror is amazing when you're playing against generous goldfish that choose to never attack or block.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

If they unban Land Tax then I will only play one deck.

4 Avarax

<3

[emidln]

Demonic Consultation - What legal four-of card would you search for that's worth paying B for and incurring the drawbacks of this card? I certainly wouldn't run it in Ad Nauseam combo or in High Tide, but I might in Show and Tell combo.


Hymn, STP, Jace, Vindicate, Ad Nauseam, Goblin Recruiter, Burning Wish, Glimpse of Nature, Back to Basics, Vedalken Shackles, Spore Flower, Knight of the Reliquary, Time Spiral, Path to Exile, Qasali Pridemage.

The only decks that basically don't get better by running 4 Consult require very specific combinations of cards that suck so bad they can only afford to run 1-2 copies. Decks like Breakfast, Oath, maybe some Survival combo deck (and Oath would just run more creatures anyway just to play 4). ANT as it's currently built wouldn't run consult, but TES would play 4 and pilots would instantly switch to playing either 4 Wish or 3-4 Tendrils with 3-4 Ad Naus. Unlike Vintage, we have don't have a restricted Time Vault or Yawgmoth's Will to accidentally remove and kill our strategy. Consult is B, find whatever you need (whether trying to win fairly or not).

Consult is the best tutor ever printed. If you don't play it when it is legal in a format without restricted bombs, your deck is significantly worse than every other deck in the field.

[dontbiteitholmes]

The only people I know who want it unbanned are couple people here, locally we had some talk about it and it was concluded shortly being stupid card nobody wants to see unbanned.

On top of potentially drawing you 3 cards/turn it also takes time shuffling repeatedly during game.

You've got to be kidding me. The only reason no one "wants" Land Tax unbanned is because no one gives a shit. If your local group of players thinks Land Tax would break the format they need to stop serving school lunches on lead plates in your area.

Land Tax should not be banned due to time concerns. Any time Land Tax would waste shuffling it will make up for in losing the game as quickly as possible. The only way Land Tax becomes playable is if your whole deck is set up to "abuse" it. If you consider playing a deck that abuses Land Tax, red flag, you are a horrible Magic player.

[TsumiBand]

I genuinely don't feel that Land Tax is any broken.

People keep making the "it draws you three fucking cards" argument, but it's three fucking basic lands. As people are fond of reminding when it comes to any given draw spell, it's only as good as the cards you put in your deck.

Even if there is a flaw in that logic, then consider that it is a really really stupid Standstill. It might be recursive, but only inasmuch as the opponent allows it to be. And several decks in the format would be fine to just operate on artifact mana while you just durdled away your turn one hoping to draw three land, maybe.

At any rate, if the shuffling aspect is what keeps it banned, then I think that's spiting the wrong aspect of the game and there are numerous other ways of building a shuffle-happy deck. Rebels, tutors, fetchlands, Squadron Hawk, Divining Top, blah blah blah. Everyone plays as many tutor effects as they can already, that's a given, welcome to Eternal.

[lordofthepit]

Hymn, STP, Jace, Vindicate, Ad Nauseam, Goblin Recruiter, Burning Wish, Glimpse of Nature, Back to Basics, Vedalken Shackles, Spore Flower, Knight of the Reliquary, Time Spiral, Path to Exile, Qasali Pridemage.

Please keep in mind the context of my quote. I know it's a sick tutor (the best in the game if you're playing non-restricted cards), and I played it with 4 Necropotences in Suicide Necro and Trix decks. This was in comparison to Oath of Druids, which is a far more broken card in this format (maybe not to you, since you primarily play decks without creatures).

I stand corrected on Tendrils decks not wanting Demonic Consultation, since they can be adapted to use them (although even TES as it currently stands wouldn't need 4 IT, 4 BW, and 4 DC).

Consultation for Knight or Qasali is pretty good; do you know what's better? Green Sun's Zenith, since it doesn't take away your one-of lands for Knight, doesn't get rid of other toolbox creatures, doesn't require you to run 4 Qasali Pridemages, serves as a 1 mana rampant growth, color fixes (instead of requiring you to splash black), doesn't reveal unknown information to your opponent, and doesn't occasionally deck you out (which is a small probability, but not insignificant from my experience with Necro/Trix). I mean, being able to tutor for creatures at will is nice, but GSZ does it much better (and Oath of Druids, the broken card which was what I was comparing to, does it even better still).

Not sure about Glimpse of Nature either. The first Glimpse for GB is definitely strong, but then you're eating into a lot of your deck in a deck that frequently draws most of its library anyway, possibly binning your Emrakul/Regal Force and other GSZ targets. Moreover, you're certain to draw into more Demonic Consultations, and at that point, you run into diminishing returns. Everything you would want to Tutor for is either a land (unlikely at that point), a Glimpse, or a creature (which the other spells in the deck--GSZ and Pact do better).

Goblin Recruiter is currently banned, so I assume you mean given IBA's new format. Swords, Path, Jace, Vindicate, etc. are hardly impressive when you need to add an extra B to the casting cost and reveal valuable information about your deck, although I will grant that the flexibility of tutoring for the right card depending on situation makes them more useful.

I do agree that there are decks that can break Demonic Consultation and instantly become Tier 1 decks. That is nothing in comparison to Oath of Druids, which would become a Tier 0 deck and crush 80% of the existing metagame, forcing the rest of the format to become Oath vs. non-creature decks. Oath is one of the most broken cards on the banned list and arguably the most oppressive, if you judge oppression with respect to how many decks instantly become obsolete in its presence (i.e. Yawgmoth's Will is more broken, but not as oppressive since existing decks can still change to adapt, albeit to very limited success).

[IsThisACatInAHat?]

Why wouldn't I? I've actually played with the fucking card in a control deck, unlike all the people throwing up pretenses. It's dreck. It's not just not broken, it's not good. I can say with certainty that no control deck would ever try to run Land Tax (or not past the first week of testing). The best you might get is some silly ass aggro deck running Empyrial Plate, but it's still just better to run Weathered Wayfarer if anything since he's easier to get active and can grab actual useful cards.



Yeah, Land Tax is pretty good in a vacuum where you can pretend your opponent will always let you activate it. In other news, Hunted Horror is amazing when you're playing against generous goldfish that choose to never attack or block.
"Let you activate it" is a trivial non-issue. UW can easily afford to drop all of its crappy utility lands to exchange for fetches, after which you can actually just decide however often to you want to activate Land Tax. There's absolutely no way to play around Tundra, Land Tax, any number of fetches. Either they don't play more than one land and you're several turns ahead on mana, or they do play more land and you EOT fail to find for however many you need until you can activate it. Throw in a Brainstorm or Jace and you've just Recalled. Stone Rained yourself? Good thing you just fetched 3 basics! I'm sure there are even more broken interactions than just fetchlands and Brainstorm, but the fact that Land Tax is one of the most broken cards on the banned list just from it's obvious interactions seems lost on someone who can only see blue cards as overpowered.

[dontbiteitholmes]

"Let you activate it" is a trivial non-issue. UW can easily afford to drop all of its crappy utility lands to exchange for fetches, after which you can actually just decide however often to you want to activate Land Tax. There's absolutely no way to play around Tundra, Land Tax, any number of fetches. Either they don't play more than one land and you're several turns ahead on mana, or they do play more land and you EOT fail to find for however many you need until you can activate it. Throw in a Brainstorm or Jace and you've just Recalled. Stone Rained yourself? Good thing you just fetched 3 basics! I'm sure there are even more broken interactions than just fetchlands and Brainstorm, but the fact that Land Tax is one of the most broken cards on the banned list just from it's obvious interactions seems lost on someone who can only see blue cards as overpowered.

Yeah purposely missing land drops and running Land Tax in a control deck to potentially make one of the best cards in Legacy slightly better is baller. That has got to be the sickest combo in the format, soooo broken. Anyone who fails to see how broken the 3 card combo that puts you behind on lands and turns Brainstorm into Recall is must be pretty stupid. I mean a 3 card combo that basically draws you three cards... This isn't vintage guys, get real. Land Tax needs to stay banned forever.

Don't even worry if your opponent drops a first turn Delver and doesn't play a second land. You can always Waste yourself and go broken turn 3. Then the game is practically over, you will have sick card advantage with all those basic lands and cards you couldn't play since you missed all those land drops. Fool proof plan!

[emidln]

Please keep in mind the context of my quote. I know it's a sick tutor (the best in the game if you're playing non-restricted cards), and I played it with 4 Necropotences in Suicide Necro and Trix decks. This was in comparison to Oath of Druids, which is a far more broken card in this format (maybe not to you, since you primarily play decks without creatures).

I stand corrected on Tendrils decks not wanting Demonic Consultation, since they can be adapted to use them (although even TES as it currently stands wouldn't need 4 IT, 4 BW, and 4 DC).

Consultation for Knight or Qasali is pretty good; do you know what's better? Green Sun's Zenith, since it doesn't take away your one-of lands for Knight, doesn't get rid of other toolbox creatures, doesn't require you to run 4 Qasali Pridemages, serves as a 1 mana rampant growth, color fixes (instead of requiring you to splash black), doesn't reveal unknown information to your opponent, and doesn't occasionally deck you out (which is a small probability, but not insignificant from my experience with Necro/Trix). I mean, being able to tutor for creatures at will is nice, but GSZ does it much better (and Oath of Druids, the broken card which was what I was comparing to, does it even better still).

Not sure about Glimpse of Nature either. The first Glimpse for GB is definitely strong, but then you're eating into a lot of your deck in a deck that frequently draws most of its library anyway, possibly binning your Emrakul/Regal Force and other GSZ targets. Moreover, you're certain to draw into more Demonic Consultations, and at that point, you run into diminishing returns. Everything you would want to Tutor for is either a land (unlikely at that point), a Glimpse, or a creature (which the other spells in the deck--GSZ and Pact do better).

Goblin Recruiter is currently banned, so I assume you mean given IBA's new format. Swords, Path, Jace, Vindicate, etc. are hardly impressive when you need to add an extra B to the casting cost and reveal valuable information about your deck, although I will grant that the flexibility of tutoring for the right card depending on situation makes them more useful.

I do agree that there are decks that can break Demonic Consultation and instantly become Tier 1 decks. That is nothing in comparison to Oath of Druids, which would become a Tier 0 deck and crush 80% of the existing metagame, forcing the rest of the format to become Oath vs. non-creature decks. Oath is one of the most broken cards on the banned list and arguably the most oppressive, if you judge oppression with respect to how many decks instantly become obsolete in its presence (i.e. Yawgmoth's Will is more broken, but not as oppressive since existing decks can still change to adapt, albeit to very limited success).

Re: Elves: Really, are you that telling me that *only* drawing 20-30 card isn't going to win you the game?

You're looking at this the wrong way. It's not a matter of DC for broken stuff. Given. Hypothetically, we ban the other broken stuff.

Still with me? Now you have every deck that plays fair wanting to just DC into whatever in their deck is best right now. Will Hymn bury them? Does Vindicate on Jace just win the game? If you have a creature to kill, get STP or Vindicate (depending on what you have the most of). Do you need a threat? Grab a goyf. Who cares if you rfg 20 redundant cards?

With Zoo, it's not about the ability to find Pridemage or Knight. It's about doing that and finding Path, Krosan Grip, Choke, Mindbreak Trap, etc.

Look at it another way: a deck full of 1-ofs. If you're in a situation where finding a 1-of wins you the game but you lose without it, losing a fraction of the time isn't an issue. Even if you're not against the ropes, if casting a card for B wins you the game immediately at a high percentage whereas the rest of the time you lose, you now have a solvable math problem. Past work in this area leads me to believe that you're still better off with 4 Consult in your deck than 0.

B to find anything (it has no tangible drawback because you lose such a small percentage of games (that you probably weren't winning anyway) in exchange for utterly crushing the rest of the time you draw it) at instant speed is that fucking good. Give me Demonic Consultation over everything on the banned list minus Lotus, Will, Bazaar, Workshop, and Time Vault.

Interesting Note: Oath decks in the current vintage metagame are actually weak to the Fish strategies. Qasali Pridemage is that fucking good, particularly when paired with a counter suite equal to that of the Oath decks. Further, the best ways to really abuse Oath to make it into more than just a grindy anti-aggro tools (oath into Iona into the blue krec into lotus, will, petal/crypt and flashback deep anal or RSD chaining Time Walk) don't exist here. It's still likely way too good, but Vintage has controlled their Oath problem with proper application of UBW decks, G/W decks, and slightly more broken spells + blue countermagic.

[menace13]

Oath is one of the most broken cards on the banned list and arguably the most oppressive, if you judge oppression with respect to how many decks instantly become obsolete in its presence (i.e. Yawgmoth's Will is more broken, but not as oppressive since existing decks can still change to adapt, albeit to very limited success).
YWill is more opressive than any other card on the list. Would you rather play against 4 Oaths or 4 YWin?

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

"Let you activate it" is a trivial non-issue. UW can easily afford to drop all of its crappy utility lands to exchange for fetches, after which you can actually just decide however often to you want to activate Land Tax. There's absolutely no way to play around Tundra, Land Tax, any number of fetches. Either they don't play more than one land and you're several turns ahead on mana, or they do play more land and you EOT fail to find for however many you need until you can activate it. Throw in a Brainstorm or Jace and you've just Recalled. Stone Rained yourself? Good thing you just fetched 3 basics! I'm sure there are even more broken interactions than just fetchlands and Brainstorm, but the fact that Land Tax is one of the most broken cards on the banned list just from it's obvious interactions seems lost on someone who can only see blue cards as overpowered.

Land Tax doesn't interact with fetchlands.

I mean even if it did, it would hardly be one of "the most broken cards on the banned list," but if it did it might be playable. However, no, Land Tax will not interact with fetchlands, or Wastelands, or anything like that, no. If you don't actually start your upkeep, before you have the chance to do anything, even play mana abilities, with less lands than opponent, nothing will happen, the trigger won't even go onto the stack. This is why I said that it's just functionally much worse than Weathered Wayfarer.

[IsThisACatInAHat?]

Fetchlands can be activated at instant speed, hence
EOT fail to find Unless your opponent is doing something to stop you in their end step, you're untapping with fewer lands as often as you like. It's not a worse Wayfarer, it's a ridiculously broken card drawing engine that needs to remain banned. If you want to unban a card drawing engine, unban Library of Alexandria. It's only good in control decks against other control decks, where it's absurd. Rather that than only good in control decks against every other deck, where it's a Recall.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

So in order to be up total cards (and still behind a land drop!) over just Tithing with the fetchland on the stack, you have to then miss your next land drop.

That's not a "ridiculous broken draw engine."

That's skipping multiple land drops in order to get basic lands.

This plan is awful. You'd be better off running Krosan Tusker. Blowing up your own lands for no reason and then skipping land drops is an enormous hidden mana cost that makes Land Tax far too slow and expensive to be profitable.

If you're looking at cards that are good at breaking Brainstorm we could just go for the Standard interaction and play Squadron Hawk, which is a kill condition, can carry a sword and doesn't require you to kill your own mana base so you actually can cast Jace. But cards that are only good with already good cards like Brainstorm generally aren't the breadwinners in Legacy.

Land Tax isn't technically strictly worse than LftL, but that's about all it is, a technicality. Life from the Loam is also pretty busted with Jace, it's just not shit without and actually helps you cast Jace instead of getting in the way. It even works when you want it to.

[Rizso]

Unbanning Oath of Druids would cause everyone to play Leyline of Sanctity in their boards / main :P

Would like to see Mind Twist Get unbanned.

Wouldnt Land Tax just be a spell that cast late game to thin out the deck from basics. Wich has to be in higher number to ever able to abuse it.

[UnderwaterGuy]

Land Tax doesn't interact with fetchlands.

I mean even if it did, it would hardly be one of "the most broken cards on the banned list," but if it did it might be playable. However, no, Land Tax will not interact with fetchlands, or Wastelands, or anything like that, no. If you don't actually start your upkeep, before you have the chance to do anything, even play mana abilities, with less lands than opponent, nothing will happen, the trigger won't even go onto the stack. This is why I said that it's just functionally much worse than Weathered Wayfarer.

You didn't even read his post :laugh:

I mean, it was a pretty dumb post and you could have easily degraded him for it (DBIHolmes did a good job of that). But you didn't. You couldn't even read and understand why he was dumb so you just had to assume he was dumb for some other reason.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

You didn't even read his post :laugh:

I mean, it was a pretty dumb post and you could have easily degraded him for it (DBIHolmes did a good job of that). But you didn't. You couldn't even read and understand why he was dumb so you just had to assume he was dumb for some other reason.

I mean I clearly read his post and assumed he meant the interaction between fetchlands and Land Tax that exists with, say, its progeny Tithe and Weathered Wayfarer, that would be intuitive and make the card actually quite decent, but just happens not to exist in this case.

I mean you could argue that it was more reasonable to assume that no, he actually meant just intentionally destroying your own lands to get Land Tax active, but I'd prefer to credit him with a mistake and common sense than the inverse of that.

Regardless, you've spent like half of your time on this board trying to prove me wrong about various things in an effort to gain some kind of imagined face. There are worse hobbies I suppose but I don't think this is a very rich avenue for you to explore towards that end.

[lordofthepit]

Re: Elves: Really, are you that telling me that *only* drawing 20-30 card isn't going to win you the game?

You're looking at this the wrong way. It's not a matter of DC for broken stuff. Given. Hypothetically, we ban the other broken stuff.

Still with me? Now you have every deck that plays fair wanting to just DC into whatever in their deck is best right now. Will Hymn bury them? Does Vindicate on Jace just win the game? If you have a creature to kill, get STP or Vindicate (depending on what you have the most of). Do you need a threat? Grab a goyf. Who cares if you rfg 20 redundant cards?

With Zoo, it's not about the ability to find Pridemage or Knight. It's about doing that and finding Path, Krosan Grip, Choke, Mindbreak Trap, etc.

Look at it another way: a deck full of 1-ofs. If you're in a situation where finding a 1-of wins you the game but you lose without it, losing a fraction of the time isn't an issue. Even if you're not against the ropes, if casting a card for B wins you the game immediately at a high percentage whereas the rest of the time you lose, you now have a solvable math problem. Past work in this area leads me to believe that you're still better off with 4 Consult in your deck than 0.

B to find anything (it has no tangible drawback because you lose such a small percentage of games (that you probably weren't winning anyway) in exchange for utterly crushing the rest of the time you draw it) at instant speed is that fucking good. Give me Demonic Consultation over everything on the banned list minus Lotus, Will, Bazaar, Workshop, and Time Vault.

Interesting Note: Oath decks in the current vintage metagame are actually weak to the Fish strategies. Qasali Pridemage is that fucking good, particularly when paired with a counter suite equal to that of the Oath decks. Further, the best ways to really abuse Oath to make it into more than just a grindy anti-aggro tools (oath into Iona into the blue krec into lotus, will, petal/crypt and flashback deep anal or RSD chaining Time Walk) don't exist here. It's still likely way too good, but Vintage has controlled their Oath problem with proper application of UBW decks, G/W decks, and slightly more broken spells + blue countermagic.

I know how sick Demonic Consultation was in the old Extended format. For just one mana, at instant speed, you could tutor up any card in your library while maintaining card parity. It could give you the most powerful cards in the format (Necropotence), but was also unmatched in its flexibility for getting you whatever might be necessary in a given situation (Donate, Force of Will, etc.). There was a small chance that you could mill away your entire library, but that probability is typically very small (and I am extremely comfortable with statistics, so rest assured I know how to do this). Even in the case of diminished returns (i.e., you have two win conditions left in your library), the probability that you mill yourself out is smaller than the expected value gained from being able to Consult for the right card. As long as you don't mill away your win conditions, you can typically treat those removed cards as though they were on the bottom of your library, since Demonic Consultation is statistically netural. You explained all that beautifully, and yes, Demonic Consultation is an absolutely sick card. I'm still going to have to disagree with how powerful it ranks on the Legacy banned list though.

My contention is that in modern Legacy is much more tutor oriented than the old Extended (although not quite Vintage), with cards like fetchlands, Green Sun's Zenith, Knight of the Reliquary, and Stoneforge Mystic--in addition to the obvious Infernal Tutors, Doomsdays, and such; therefore, the downside to Demonic Consultation is more significant than it used to be. With so much tutoring power and one- or two-ofs in deck construction, you will often remove with Consultation a card you might otherwise have tutored for later in the game. Whereas the chance of milling away your entire library (or even just your win conditions) is relatively small, the cumulative effect of milling away other desirable cards is much higher. Splashing black to support Consultation is a very real cost. So is adding B to the casting cost of any of your cards. Unlike in combo decks (let's say a redundantly constructed one to maximize the benefits of Consultation), where your expected win percentage can change drastically based on your ability to resolve a single card by turn 2 or 3, the case is different in "attrition-based" aggro/control decks like Zoo, Rock, or Landstill.

Let's consider a deck that naturally has access to black mana (Rock), so we don't have to weaken the manabase by splashing for another. Consider how often you might win the game if your Demonic Consultation were instead the next best card (say, Knight of the Reliquary for the sake of argument). Then consider the opportunity cost associated with having to wait a turn, or otherwise tap your mana in a more resourceful manner, so you could tutor Knight of the Reliquary up. Consider how often you're milling away your Umezawa's Jitte, your Scavenging Ooze, or your Karakas in a matchup where those cards are critical. Or even milling 2 Wastelands when you relied on using Knight to Waste them four times to lock them out. Consider how often the best way to make use of your mana is to cast an early Demonic Consultation against an unknown opponent, thereby providing him very valuable information about the construction of your deck. And finally, compare that with the (granted, relatively negligible) chance of decking yourself. Perhaps not on your first Consultation, but on your second or third ones in a longer, more drawn out game (since none of your Consultations are for gamebreaking cards that will win the game quickly). At some point, your Consultations are guided not so much by "what do I need right now", but rather "what can I reasonably get?"; and finally, in the very late game, those Consultations may even become a liability. Of course, compare that with the opporunity gained from the flexibility of being able to tutor for a slower Swords to Plowshares, or a slower Hymn to Tourach, or a slower Vindicate, or another sideboard card (which you'll hopefully have several copies of).

My argument is that while Demonic Consultation is still a good card, you're not drastically increasing your expected win percentage unless it's in a combo deck that can be constructed to take advantage of it (so not Reanimator, most Doomsday and ANT decks as currently constructed, etc.). So I hesitate to call it one of the most broken cards on the banned list, although I can certainly appreciate the case in its favor. I'm sure you're a great deckbuilder that has a lot of experience with this card, and you may very well be correct on your position. I just want to submit that I'm not entirely new to Demonic Consultation either and that I see it as being less absurd in modern Legacy than it was in old Extended.

[lordofthepit]

YWill is more opressive than any other card on the list. Would you rather play against 4 Oaths or 4 YWin?

You're misunderstanding me.

Oath of Druids is more oppressive because it essentially requires any deck that relies on creatures to stop running creatures, or cease being competitive. (Of course, maybe creature decks can maindeck 4 Qasali Pridemages, 4 Nature's Claim, 4 Leyline of Sanctity and manage an occasional match win against Oath.)

Yawgmoth's Win is a more broken card because it is fundamentally more powerful in the context of Vintage/Legacy/etc. But it is not as oppressive because it does not require that a wide swath of decks in the current metagame be entirely abandoned. Rather, many existing decks can adapt by running their own Yawgmoth's Wills, along with small changes to their maindecks; other decks will have to be entirely abandoned, but not nearly as many as would be rendered obsolete by Oath.dec.

[UnderwaterGuy]

Just because Demonic Consultation wouldn't directly fit into the current combo lists doesn't mean much about its power. Similar to Mind's Desire, they might not be simple additions but they could be powerful enough to deserve changes or significantly new lists.

[menace13]

You're misunderstanding me.

Oath of Druids is more oppressive because it essentially requires any deck that relies on creatures to stop running creatures, or cease being competitive. (Of course, maybe creature decks can maindeck 4 Qasali Pridemages, 4 Nature's Claim, 4 Leyline of Sanctity and manage an occasional match win against Oath.)

Yawgmoth's Win is a more broken card because it is fundamentally more powerful in the context of Vintage/Legacy/etc. But it is not as oppressive because it does not require that a wide swath of decks in the current metagame be entirely abandoned. Rather, many existing decks can adapt by running their own Yawgmoth's Wills, along with small changes to their maindecks; other decks will have to be entirely abandoned, but not nearly as many as would be rendered obsolete by Oath.dec.
I don't agree.

Oath can be kept in check with UGW, GW, GWB fish decks with hatebears- very similar to Legacy decks like Bant, BUG, Maverick and Rock-. Those same decks have a better Oath MU than a MU vs 4 Wills. You can take many of the creature decks and adapt them to beat Oath, it is not so easy with YWill. YWill as a 4 of beats a wider swath of decks than Oath ever could in Legacy- petals, LEDS and every cantrip all playsets-. Do you even know how good YWill is with LEDS?