Ban Tarmogoyf?

[APriestOfGix]

First i want to say sorry to the mods, i know it's another goyf thread. But i think we can have some healthy discussion here.


Reasons To Ban:

It fits the DCI's qualifications to ban perfectly. Look at the worlds metagame. EVERY deck ether ran goyf, had an answer to goyf, or was combo. The DCI banned Skullclamp, when it was being run in Goblins, Affinity, and Elves, and that was only a large part of the format not the entire thing.

Goyf also falls under the under costed effect category. The reason many cards are on the banned list, is because they are eather a) broken (Will, Dragon etc.) or b) undercosted (Demonic tutor, Lotus). Goyf falls under then undercosted effect cat. He is too low a cc for the effect he brings to the game.


Reasons Not To Ban:

Goyf would be the first beater ever to see the banned list. He has no "i win" clause like many of the decks on the B7R list. He is basically a vanilla beater. He dosn't have any form of evasion, and can be answered by many cards. Chump blocking, your own goyf, deed, shackles, threads, bounce, burn (when small) mage, smother, and many others.

Although undercosted, he is not a broken combo enabler, something that the B&R list is mostly devoted to.





OK, with both sides expressed, please be civil, no flaming, and no digression. Simply state you arguments ether for or against your point, and why you think this.

Mods, if you feel this gets out of hand, feel free to moderate to keep it civil. This should encourage healthy discussion, of an issue that needs to be addressed.

Also, don't speculate if WotC will or wouln't do it. It dosn't matter, it's what YOU think!

[Bovinious]

I dont think the fact that it is run in most decks is a good arguement for banning since cards like brainstorm and FoW are almost just as played, but I do think it should be banned for the reason that games often come down to who can get a Goyf to stick first, much like the argument used to ban Skullclamp years ago.

[mikekelley]

He's good, no question. He's a vanilla beater though. Mongoose is an undercosted beater, Basking Rootwalla is undercosted, Wild Mongrel is undercosted. I'm just as afraid of Mongrel as I am of Goyf.

Goyf is not hard to take care of at all.

And plus, if they ban him, I'll lose all the free money I'm sitting on.


I dont think the fact that it is run in most decks is a good arguement for banning since cards like brainstorm and FoW are almost just as played, but I do think it should be banned for the reason that games often come down to who can get a Goyf to stick first, much like the argument used to ban Skullclamp years ago.

Whoever gets a big creature to stick wins anyway.

Pre-goyf, thresh needed a Dragon or Enforcer to stick. Just replace that with goyf, and there you go, really.

[Bovinious]

It isnt just Threshold though, its basically every deck that isnt fast combo or prison, which is another reason it may be banworthy; the number of Goyfs in the top8 worlds was more than Skullclamps in top8s during its hayday and everyone wanted that banned, I dont how this is much different really.

[Cavius The Great]

I remember reading a quote from Aaron Forsythe a few years back stating that "the only way we'll ban another creature in standard, is if it cost one mana and you can sac it for three". I think that quote is even relevent to this current age since banning a creature is something R&D seems to want to avoid. The reason being, they are so many answers to them and unless they automatically win you the game when they come into play, or can be abused in some weird combo deck, they're probably the one card type that seems to be the "least" resilient. Just my two cents, but I do agree that Tarmogoyf should be banned. Why you ask? Because when combined with Daze and FoW they're nearly unstoppable.

[APriestOfGix]

Correct. Wizards said they banned Skullclamp because it was warping the format. Every deck ether played Card X or ran main deck answers to Card X.

Goyf is the same way, It is being run main deck in every deck. MUC (MONO BLUE) was running it at worlds. Stax was running it. EVERYTHING thats wasn't Combo was running some number of Goyfs. That is warping the format in my opinion and makes it worthy of banning.

[nitewolf9]

With everything else aside, we'd have to ask ourselves whether or not legacy would be a better format without tarmogoyf. Personally I think that it would be considering that if you want to win by attacking with creatures right now and you are not playing tarmogoyf your deck is sub-optimal. As a creature that swings it simply outclasses everything else. Tarmogoyf is pretty much at its most absurd in a format like legacy where it is very likely that it will grow out of control within the first couple of turns. It is dumb. Seriously. There would be so many more playable creatures if it weren't for this fucker. I'm tired of having to put him in every deck I make. The same damn card is being played in aggro, control, AND combo decks alike. There is a problem here.

[Tao]

I agree that Goyf should be banned. Its impact on the Meta is just too big

- Decks that SHOULD NOT run vanilla beaters for 2 Mana run him:
Nongreen Fish are willing to ruin their Mana Base by adding G because it still makes the deck better.
UB control decks with heavy card draw will splash G for Tarmogoyf instead of finishing with Tog.
Another example are Landstill lists with 4 Goyfs: That's just not healthy. Don't get me wrong, it is not bad, but Landstill is a synonym for slow board control based on card advantage. And when such a deck feels the need to run 2 Mana Vanilla beaters, then something is wrong.

- It makes TOO MANY cards useless or inferior that would otherwise be good: Creatures like Hierarch, Baloth, Mongrel, Wall of Blossoms, Masticore, Doran the Siege Tower, Rumbling Slum, Iwamori, Call of the Herd and Werebear are outclassed.
Flametongue Kavu has become a joke, it doesnt even manage to trade 1/1 anymore. It SHOULD be so good in Dragon Stompy.
Silver Knight is dead.
Toughness based removal spells like Lightning Bolt are close to unplayable in the format unless you also run Goyfs.

- It makes whole Archetypes unplayble.
Red based Control decks, like UR Landstill, can't be played because of one card.
Aggro decks like Boros Deck wins would be bad when they don't splash G for Goyf. The mana base allows to and so you put Goyfs into them.

Evolution happens, for example when Ponder was printed Portent became useless. But with so many cards being made useless by one card it is not evolution but a sick mutation.

[APriestOfGix]

@Tao, i think you have explained it best.

[Kadaj]

It's difficult for me to say whether or not I feel Goyf should be banned or not. The fact that it is everywhere is irritating to me, but not because of that fact alone. It's annoying because I don't currently own a single Goyf and it would cost me 100+ dollars if I wanted to pick up a set, something I don't have nearly enough funds to allow.

I do think it's telling that when I was working on MUC and I decided I was going to try and make it a more proactive deck, the first step in doing that was to add Tarmogoyf. I have a hard time thinking of a single deck, other than certain kinds of combo, that wouldn't benefit from Tarmogoyf in some capacity. Fish and other aggro-control builds get a huge beater, Mid-Range gets another tool, and Control gets a ridiculously undercosted finisher. I remember someone saying that Psychatog would've been more fair if it was just a 5/6 for 1UB; Well guess what, they printed that at 1G.

Tarmogoyf is not broken, per se, and it isn't really all that hard to deal with. However, it is everywhere, and it is almost required in any deck playing creatures. In fact, I would go so far as to say that if you're deck plans on winning through creatures and you're not running Tarmogoyf, you misbuilt your deck.

Looking at the above points objectively, I would say that Goyf fully deserves to be banned. The card is everywhere in almost every strategy and doesn't really give the format anything innovative or exciting to work with in order to make up for its everpresent nature.

[andrew77]

Why ban it. I say just unban other broken cards. Gimme my minds desire : ) or mishra's workshops.

[JACO]

While you're whining because of your inability to solve Tarmogoyf, you should also ask for people's support in banning fetchlands and dual lands. They're in every deck, and they're like, so good.

[APriestOfGix]

Lands and Brainstorm/FoW are diffrent.

Duals do not have the smae dual in ever deck, they also are suped up basics, and will never be banned because they are treated as Eternal Basic Lands.

Fetches are the same was as Duals.

Brainstorm is a powerful effect, but not run in EVERY deck. It is a staple, kind of like how in Standard if you were playing aggro you played Jitte. Same thing with brainstorm. Nobody was going to ban Counterspell because every blue deck ran it.

Force of Will, is what keeps the format in check. Force SHOULD be banned, but it also MUST stay OFF the list, else combo takes the format, and makes every other deck grab their ankles.

Goyf is seeing play in every deck. If decks like Dragon Stompy were splashing U for Brainstorm, then we would be in the same senerio that we have of MUC splashing G for Goyf.

[Solpugid]

I hate to use the 'fun' argument, but seriously, goyf is ruining the fun of Legacy deckbuilding and playing. Fetches and duals don't do that, they ENABLE cool decks to be built.

I said this in another thread, but I'll post it here too: if he's getting the axe, it better be soon, because I want goyf to be in standard when I trade mine away.

[TeenieBopper]

Since I inadvertently started this whole thing, I want to make it clear: I wasn't proposing the banning of Tarmagoyf. Look, it packs it up to Terror. Terror. Anything the dies to Terror, that isn't itself a combo enabler (see; Hermit Druid) isn't powerful enough to be banned.

Not gonna lie, though. I wouldn't shed a tear if it was.

Edit: Oh yeah, I almost forgot:


Brain on fire..

Must... lock.. thread...

Ok. Look. I'm only going to say this once. If you have any questions or rebuttals, keep them to yourself.

Oath Sucks. Ok? It's awful. Green is an awful color. Building a control deck around it doesn't make it any better. *see "Druids, Oath of" and "Psychatog" and "Junk, PT" (ok, so junk really isn't a control deck.. well, kinda) Come to think of it, building a combo deck around that color doesn't work too well either. *see "Aluren."

Know why suicide oath was winning in extended back two seasons ago? Extended does not have the following cards: Swords to plowshares, Force of Will. Believe it or not, those cards are powerful enough to be a constant presence in any metagame with the card pool they are legal in. In fact, you may play against those very cards in the next tournament you play in. Or you may even play them yourself. I need a /sarcasm tag really badly.

If you want to play the game where I name a combo, then you name one that stops it, then I name another one.. make a different thread. However, this point counterpoint thing is fucking pointless. Benzo would be moderately playable with entomb. In fact, I would probably play it. I recieve unhealthy pleasure from reanimating fatties. However, if you check my whole existance-of-cards-that-would-slightly-affect-the-extended-metagame-if-they-were-legal arguement above, you will notice that sometimes a big ass fatty isn't that hard to deal with. Also, Tormod's crypt isn't avalable to play in extended. You know, those things you have because you didn't want to lose to Dragon (yet you did anyhow, didn't you?)

Please stop drawing conjecture from extended. It's different cardpools. Ok? We're still more like type 1 than extended. Another thing: The bannings of replenish, skullclamp, etc just because they were banned in extended. Not too bringht. They missed survival of the goddamn fittest. No worries though, it's not like anyone played those cards in old 1.5 anyhow.

This brings us full circle to Oath of Druids, and the fact that green sucks. I know an aggro deck can't handle a turn 2 fatty. Know what? That aggro deck is probably playing green. They weren't going to win anyhow.

Mind twist is a very swingy card. In the absence of good acceleration, it's not that great turn 1. However, turn 4, it empties your opponent's hand. That's pretty frickin' swingy. Of course, this depends on your matchup. I know you aren't playing mind twist in suicide. Why? Because I know you aren't playing suicide. You are a better magic player than that. So I know you didn't just compare mind twist to hymn to tourach. While hymn to tourach is actually more cost effective than a mind twist, Mind Twist happens to be infinately splashable for such a devistating effect.

Metalworker is fine. Metalworker in the current card pool is at just about the right power level for the format. After all, goblin lacky is still legal. Guess what, it's also an artifact and a creature.

I refuse to comment on the very specualtion that a "broken replenish" deck exists. I believe that to be an oxymoron. If by boken you mean "slow and disruptable" then.. nevermind.

In conclusion,

- Discussing B/R changes just make you look dumb. It makes you look like you don't know what you are talking about. I might have a thousand or more mistakes in what I have written above. I most likely do not.

- I blame people who discuss B/R changes like they are smarter than R&D for the change and seperation of the lists. You may be smarter than R&D. That's ok, so is my toaster. Just don't do it. Ok? Don't.

- Green sucks.

[APriestOfGix]

The fun argument is a HUGE factor for WotC.

It should not be dismissed.

If players feel the game is becoming un-fun because of one card, it gets banned. Hell when players felt the game was un-fun because of an entire BLOCK, WotC stepped in and helped out.

The fun aspect of the game is what makes players spend money. WotC wants to make money, and thus will try to make the game as fun as they can, short of giving cards away for free.



Blah blah blah...

- Green sucks. (except for Goyf)

Fixed...

[Solpugid]

The problem, of course, is that Legacy doesn't really make them much money, so the fun factor has less weight. Really, the only way goyf is getting banned is if enough people actually complain DIRECTLY to the company about it.

The argument that 'goyf is easily stopped' is valid, to a point, but no card can be isolated like that. The reason goyf is so good is because of the cards it can be surrounded with in a deck that easily turn it into a problem. Now if it only costed GG...

[Goaswerfraiejen]

I don't really want to get dragged into this, because I don't believe that we can have a truly constructive discussion on the topic: it's just too much of a yes-or-no issue. Personally, I feel that Legacy is much healthier now than it was six months ago, and that only the players are to blame for the format's sickly appearance: everyone is too excited that they own a playset of Tarmogoyfs, so they feel like they need to toss the card into any deck (MUC being a prime example). While Tarmogoyf is seldom detrimental (unless you're stretching your manabase), it is not always optimal. This is a huge point, because it seems to be generally accepted that Tarmogoyf improves anything--it doesn't. While it will almost always be an asset to your army, the strain on other aspects of the deck (such as the manabase if you make green a fourth colour or something) is seldom worth the tradeoff (unless you've got a forgiving metagame) when something only slightly worse is available.


While decks like Goblins appear to be on the decline, this is not because they are completely outclassed by Tarmogoyf: it's simply because so many people are too excited by their Tarmogoyfs to pick up Goblins again. In my opinion, Tarmogoyf acts as Goblin Lackey did when Goblins was omnipresent: it is a threshold that decks must be capable of passing to be competitive. For some decks, that means running four; for others, it's as simple as not keeling over to a resolved one.


Having said more than I intended, what I originally wanted to point out is a faulty premise:





EVERY deck ether ran goyf, had an answer to goyf, or was combo.


"Answer to 'Goyf" is a fake category that makes the argument seem more sound. Most any answer to a creature is an "answer to Goyf" (i.e. we're hardly talking about specific and narrow cards--we're talking about cards that are and were both useful and important to the Legacy metagame prior to Tarmogoyf) and so this premise should be eliminated from the list of criteria.


Since I've already trespassed into territory I promised not to touch, I may as well add a little more:




- It makes TOO MANY cards useless or inferior that would otherwise be good: Creatures like Hierarch, Baloth, Mongrel, Wall of Blossoms, Masticore, Doran the Siege Tower, Rumbling Slum, Iwamori, Call of the Herd and Werebear are outclassed.


These are still good, and none were stellar prior to Tarmogoyf's introduction. I agree that they're inferior beatsticks, but they almost all provide a useful ability in addition to their power and toughness, and that's why the decks that played them prior to Tarmogoyf used them. Masticore hasn't seen much Legacy play in years. So too with Wall of Blossoms--this isn't anything new. Hierarch, Baloth, Slum, Iwamori, CotH, and Werebear did see some play, but it was largely limited to a few dedicated decks. By and large, those decks still play them (minus perhaps Werebear). I simply don't think that this is a valid argument, because it fails to acknowledge that the mentioned cards (and those more tacitly implied) had already been maligned prior to Tarmogoyf's inclusion, and it assumes that all that they can do is beat down.



Flametongue Kavu has become a joke, it doesnt even manage to trade 1/1 anymore. It SHOULD be so good in Dragon Stompy.

FtK was hardly thriving prior to Tarmogoyf.



Silver Knight is dead.


Protection from Red made it conditional on red's prominence. If this is taken as a valid argument against Tarmogoyf, then River Boa, Marsh Boa, Spectral Lynx, etc. should be taken as valid arguments for its inclusion.


Toughness based removal spells like Lightning Bolt are close to unplayable in the format unless you also run Goyfs.


If we assumed for a moment that the cards mentioned above were amazing and omnipresent in Legacy prior to Tarmogoyf, we'd run into the same problem. Besides, the whole point of burn spells isn't to whack creatures--it's to provide reach and versatility. You can use burn to remove problematic creatures early on, and late in the game it becomes a useful tool for killing your opponent; burn was never meant to kill finishers in one shot.


It makes whole Archetypes unplayble.
Red based Control decks, like UR Landstill, can't be played because of one card.
Aggro decks like Boros Deck wins would be bad when they don't splash G for Goyf. The mana base allows to and so you put Goyfs into them.

First, while Tarmogoyf may or may not invalidate certain decks, it has invalidated no archetypes as such.

Second, I'm not sure that I agree with these statements either. I see no immediate reasons why UR Landstill would be unplayable simply because of Tarmogoyf. When you add Tarmogoyf to a number of other factors (including the rise of Storm-based combo), I can see why it's unattractive. But the important point here is that Tarmogoyf is not solely responsible for UR Landstill's failings; just because I run Tarmogoyf and it doesn't doesn't mean I'm more likely to win.

Likewise, I'm not convinced that BDW is particularly worse without Tarmogoyf. While it can be incorporated fairly smoothly--and certainly increases speed--I hardly think it's necessary, and I think that it's one instance where I'd rather be running something else and in my colours. Obviously, I could be wrong, but the point is that Tarmogoyf is being used as a scapegoat for trends that were already in place prior to its introduction into the format.

Besides, Tarmogoyf made TarmoTog feasible, and that's an awesome deck. It also made Breakfast much more consistent. It hasn't just taken away from Legacy; it's added a great deal.

[Tao]

While you're whining because of your inability to solve Tarmogoyf, you should also ask for people's support in banning fetchlands and dual lands. They're in every deck, and they're like, so good.


I hate to use the 'fun' argument, but seriously, goyf is ruining the fun of Legacy deckbuilding and playing. Fetches and duals don't do that, they ENABLE cool decks to be built.




Duals do not have the smae dual in ever deck, they also are suped up basics, and will never be banned because they are treated as Eternal Basic Lands.

Fun and Eternal Basic Lands can't be an argument here. The reason why Duals and Goyfs are not comparable is simple: Powerlevel gap.

There are ten Duals. they all have a high powerlevel, but if you ban them, people will play Shocklands and Fetchlands and more Basics. Ban the Fetchlands and people use Painlands. And so on. Decks will stay the same, only a bit worse.

But what is it with Goyf? What creature card would replace him in every deck? Right. Nothing remotely similar exists, no Goyf that loses 2 Life when it enters play.

[Versus]

It really doesn't matter what kind of deck you play to make him useful, that's how vanilla he truely is. Everyone gets cards into the yard, we all use fetches, Instants, Sorcery, and creatures. The other 4 card types are just a maybe, but the first four are pretty much guaranteed. Most other "broken" creatures serve their purpose in a particular deck or have a drawback be it Carnodamage, double cc costs, inabilty to be played on turn 1/2/3, ect. Nothing hinders the dropping of a Goyf, it's totally splashable, and unless you're running your own GY hate or have decks built around Moat, there's nothing negative about his inclusion.

I don't know if it should be banned or not, but it does need to be evaluated.

Take the Sui deck that placed at Worlds. Splashing G just for Goyf. No Berserk, no Deeds, just Goyf.

I'm waiting for the day an opponent cracks an LED and just lays Goyf on the table, takes a burn, and passes the turn. Why Empty the Warrens when you can fill up the Yard and beat face?

[etrigan]

On the topic of un-fun-ness, I can think of a lot of things less fun than Tarmogoyf beatdown. Dredge shenanigans being chief among them, but your mileage may vary.

[Solpugid]

@Goaswerfraiejen

I agree with many of your points, including the artificiality (is that a word?) of 'answers to goyf' as a category, and I do LOVE me some Tarmotog, but saying that goyf has helped the format seems a tad off. There seemed to be a larger number of decks with relatively even matchups until goyf hit the scene. Aggro-control (thresh) SHOULD lose to aggro (goblins) the majority of the time.

Now maybe you're right, and people are just goyf-happy. Heck, lion's-eye diamond has just as much power and isn't on the radar as ban-worthy anymore. But we still get back to the arguments of 'fun' and I personally think Legacy would be better off without tarmogoyf.

[APriestOfGix]

Tarmogoyf shouldn't be banned, it's a VANILLA creature. If you are arguing that goyf should be banned you might as well argue that the vanilla affinity artifacts should be banned too.

and that's just never gunna happen now =\

If you feel a need to become negative, then please leave. You didn't need the beginning or end of you post.

I fixed it up, so that you are being constructive.

[Solpugid]

What vanilla affinity creature is a 4/5 on turn 2 or a 5/6 on turn 3?

Edit:
Cumilative upkeep: doesn't matter you have a Tarmogoyf!).

Doesn't this sort of prove our point about goyf being too good? You basically just invaliadated your own arguments.

[Wallace]

Tarmogoyf will not be banned, he is in a lot of decks and is really good. OK, we got that, but does turn 2-3 Tarmogoyf win the game by its self, no. Brainstorm, Force of Will, Swords to Plowshares, and Jitte are all cards that are on the same power level as Goyf. I bet if you broke down the number of Goyf's compaired to the other cards I mentioned there would be close to the same amounts of each.

[Versus]

People are playing Threads of Disloyalty over Control Magic. Previous Smother bashers have left their Edicts in their binders. At this rate Deathmark will be viable removal in Legacy. That should say something.

[So Annoying My Account Is Banned]

Doesn't this sort of prove our point about goyf being too good? You basically just invaliadated your own arguments.

ok, you are getting a powerful creature from your opponents side of the board onto your side of the board, think it's called card advantage or something like that. I wouldn't consider this to disprove my situation, because if you cast Mind Harness on a fledgling dragon you would still be in the same state of the game (who cares! you have a fledgling dragon and he (or possibly she, but very doubtful) doesn't!).

As for the affinity example, I am going to have to say that was indeed my bad, affinity is a horrible deck and should never be used for an example for anything. I was trying to make a connection with the whole 'undercosted fattie thing' and a cranial plating in affinity does make all of their creatures significantly larger, but it was quite a stretch so...I'm sorry :u::u:

[Pinder]

Reasons To Ban:

It's a good card that gets played in all the good decks.

Reasons Not To Ban:
He dosn't have any form of evasion, and can be answered by many cards. Chump blocking, your own goyf, deed, shackles, threads, bounce, burn (when small) mage, smother, and many others.


I don't really think that having to have answers to a turn 2 Tarmogoyf is really too much different from needing to have answers to a turn one Lackey. I suppose there a fewer adequate answers, though. And Lackey was really only in one deck, whereas Goyf is in every deck that uses the attack step.

I don't really think it needs to be banned, because I think that the format can deal with him, but I wouldn't really be outraged or confused if Wizards did. He's a lot more broken in Legacy, which makes great use of graveyards as a resource and has many ways to get cards there, than he is in Extended or Standard (Although Extended still has Fetchlands). And he's not that great in Vintage because there are just more broken things to do (like a 1st turn 11/11 indestructable. Take that, Goyf). I think that Legacy has the unique situation of being just powerful enough to make Goyf absurd, but not powerful enough to balance it out.

[So Annoying My Account Is Banned]

People are playing Threads of Disloyalty over Control Magic. Previous Smother bashers have left their Edicts in their binders. At this rate Deathmark will be viable removal in Legacy. That should say something.

Smother isn't quite as narrow as deathmark, Smother is still good against goblins. And threads isn't an awful card, it nabs at a lot of other good creatures too (Dark confidant comes to mind).

=\

For a format that has been so fast for such a long time, that has seen first turn belcher kills TES and iggy pop combo, and has had Goblins be the tier 1 deck for amazingly long, it's so odd that people do not like creatures that are nearly as efficient and powerful as the spells have been.

[Solpugid]

@former-known-as-homarid

My post was a tad biting, so I apologize for that. And no problem with the affinity example (although I don't think the deck is that bad).

The thing is, goyf is majorly warping the format. Much more so than Goblins did. With goyf around, mind harness is better than control magic. Counterbalance then gets better because the format's average CC got lower. This may cause a rise in prison decks, complete with their chalices, yet those decks still can't overcome goyf (seriously, I've seen it).

[AngryTroll]

I agree that Goyf is amazingly good, but I don't think it needs banning. As everyone has said, it's a vanilla beater.

Every color already has a plethora of answers to this card. Many or most of the answers were played before Goyf hit the scene. If you splash green in MUC for 4 Goyf, you are simply making your opponent's removal relevant instead of a blank card. After that first tier of removal, that was being run anyways, there are more removal spells that are viable options (like Deathmark, which kills Goyf, Exalted Angel, Doran, Gaddok Teeg, Meddling Mage, Eternal Dragon (once), almost everything in Survival, and a ton of other random creatures).

White: Swords to Plowshares, Wrath, Humility, Moat, Spectral Lynx, Swords clones
Black: Smother, Damnation, Terror
Green: Goyf, River Boa (etc)
Red: Burn + creature
Blue: Threads of Disloyalty, Mind Harness, Force, Counterbalance
All colors: Engineered Explosives
Green and Black: Pernicious Deed

If you go back a page and replace "Tarmogoyf" with "Goblin Lackey", we have an argument very similar to the Lackey arguments we have all heard before. However, instead of Lackey being a baseline that every deck had to be able to beat, Goyf is a baseline that every deck has to be able to beat or include. I think the fact that decks can run their own copy of Goyfs to combat other Goyfs makes it more fair than Lackey ever was.

[Phantom]

I'm not certain where I stand on this subject, but I hate some of the arguments people use:

"It's a vanilla beater!"

Then you won't mind if I use my 0cc 20/20 proxy?

"There are so many answers!"

Name me a card that doesn't have answers. Also, see above. Answers don't make a card fair. Answers have to be drawn, they have to be cast, they have to resolve, blah blah blah. Answers suck. Hell, wasn't this the argument AGAINST banning Flash. Fuck that.

"It's like Lackey!"

This is the most important point in my opinion. Lackey stifled innovation because it required you to answer it. That was annoying, but sometimes interesting. Tarmogoyf stifles innovation by requiring you to RUN it (unless you are running non Breakfast combo). I never thought I'd see the day when Landstill and Truffle Shuffle and god knows what other decks with NO plans for early beatings are running a 2 drop creature simply because he's better than anything else in the meta. Hell, the day goblins started discussing splashing him should have been a giant red flag to everyone.

That said, man do I like him.

[C.P.]

As dominant as Goyf is in the format, it still is a creature that wins by using attack step fair and square. It is very unlikely that WotC will take a action to that.

As for the Goyf problem, I think it will go away by itself as other problems in the format(with exception of flash) did. Survival, Lackey, EtW, and many other cards were apparently problematic and banworthy, but the format managed without banning. Same will happen to Goyf, probably with most unexpected way. Who would have thought that 5/6 for 1G is what solves Goblin problem? Perhaps something like that will happen and no one will complain about Goyf, as people did to lackey.

[Tacosnape]

Banning Tarmogoyf is a retarded idea. It capitulates to the hundreds of creature removal spells people already play.

Also, as for Lackey comparisons? Let's make this short and sweet. If Tarmogoyf hits you, you lose some life and have a few turns to remove him still. If Lackey hits you, you probably lose.

[Wallace]

Goyf is getting out of hand, I mean I was just looking around Ebay and found this. (http://cgi.ebay.com/4x-FOIL-Tarmogoyf-MTG-Future-Sight-MINT_W0QQitemZ310004655762QQihZ021QQcategoryZ19115QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem) Almost $100 each for foil goyf, come on...

[lolosoon]

Tarmy makes me happy. As a Legacy player, I'd rather face a huge 2cc beater turn 2 than an army of goblins turn 3.

Still, Wotc's R&D fucked things up hard with this card. Waaaayy too undercosted for its body. Like Tao said, there is no beater that could match with the Goyf that early. Even late game !!

But as sad it might sound for some players, Unfair it is for sure, but Tarmogoyf is not banworthy imho.

For the same cc, Hermit Druid is, Goblin Recruiter is, Tarmogoyf is not.

[C.P.]

Goyf is getting out of hand, I mean I was just looking around Ebay and found this. (http://cgi.ebay.com/4x-FOIL-Tarmogoyf-MTG-Future-Sight-MINT_W0QQitemZ310004655762QQihZ021QQcategoryZ19115QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem) Almost $100 each for foil goyf, come on...

The high card price does not mean that they are banworthy.

[Wallace]

The high card price does not mean that they are banworthy.

Never said that, if you read back a few posts I aqgree that Goyf does not and will not be banned. Was just pointing out that Goyf is getting out of hand.

[Slag]

I'll have to admit, I would like to see goyf banned, but this is only so I wouldn't have to acquire any. I felt the same way about Force of Will, until I got some. Now I think Force of Will is just peachy.
That being said, I don't feel goyf should be banned for warping the format. I think it has warped the format, by raising the standard for powerful creatures. It's disequilibrating to have the format suddenly change, but I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing. We can't always have the same cards be the best, or legacy would always have the same cards be awesome, which would probably lead to stagnation.
I also don't think goyf should be banned because all decks that have green have to play it, even though I love playing green and now can't. Like force, I think it's ok to have a best card in a color for the format. This does create problems for the format, though, because it requires budget players to immediately abandon certain colors. However, it's generally accepted that legacy is a format with a high entry price, and we can't ban things based on that, lest we open up the duals for banning as well.

[kicks_422]

See my custom title.

So what if Goyf is in all the decks that win? Banning him is like banning Island.

[freakish777]

Banning Tarmogoyf is a retarded idea. It capitulates to the hundreds of creature removal spells people already play.

Also, as for Lackey comparisons? Let's make this short and sweet. If Tarmogoyf hits you, you lose some life and have a few turns to remove him still. If Lackey hits you, you probably lose.

QFMFT

There are even more relevant answers to Goyf than Lackey because he costs 1 more (yes you lose Bolt/Chain Lightning/Shock as a potential answer, you pick up removal spells that cost 2, Smother, Terror, Terminate, a million other black spells, and green specific spells, Perish/Death Mark/Slay).

Oh noes, Silver Knight is crappy now! And Spectral Lynx got better, what's your point?

Price below $50 shouldn't matter for Legacy. Sea Drake costs $30+. Moat (granted it's a 1 of) costs $40+. The Abyss (again, likely a 1 of) costs $40+. If Goyf cost $100, sure I'd consider the "It's too expensive!" argument, but seriously, it costs $120 a set, the same as Underground Seas. You should all be happy that Wizards is capable of printing cards that affect our format. I'm happy with the job Wizards is doing.

There are plenty of decks that don't run Tarmogoyf and can do well, and even run green (Enchantress, Welder Survival, Aluren), and there's plenty that don't run green and do well (TES, Belcher, UWb Fish, Goblins, Dragon Stompy, etc).

I don't know where anyone is getting the idea that Tarmogoyf creates any unfair advantages.

He's a creature. Kill him.

If he had power and toughness equal to the number of cards in all graveyards, I would consider him ban worthy. He only cares about types of cards. Get over it.

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

Can anyone provide an argument against banning goyf that isn't also an argument for unbanning Oath/Dragon?

People describe him as a "vanilla beater" in an effort to portray the argument that "aggro isn't unfair". But the problem isn't aggro. The problem is that he's such a ludicrously efficient kill condition that he makes control and combo too powerful; the aggro plan is pointless when a low-commitment creature exists as both trump to opposing aggro strategies and kill condition.

And price alone doesn't matter; but high prices for a card you're essentially forced to run in order to remain competitive do matter.

[Nightmare]

Can anyone provide an argument against banning goyf that isn't also an argument for unbanning Oath/Dragon?

I'd love to see Oath unbanned.

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

That doesn't create a very healthy meta-game, unfortunately. Invalidating aggro-based strategies isn't something that we should strive for.

[Nightmare]

That doesn't create a very healthy meta-game, unfortunately. Invalidating aggro-based strategies isn't something that we should strive for.I didn't say it would be healthy, I just said I'd like it.

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

I'd like Argothian Enchantress to cost 1 less and have Threshold - +20/+19 but it ain't in the cards.

[T is for TOOL]

This thread is starting to suck, badly. We are at lock-alert level red, or the ketchup as I like to call it. Commiserating about Goyfs effect on Legacy is fine, but knock off the sarcastic and snarky comments so I can drop the lock-alert to mustard, or even pickle.

[Happy Gilmore]

As long as strategies exist in legacy that totally trump a beatdown plan via goyfs I see no reason to ban the card. The cards power is a direct result of the mana requirements. 1G is attainable by any deck, including belcher/ichorid and every deck that isn't white stax...but then again it could splash for Goyf too. Banning gofy would upset a huge number of people. Availability has put this little creature into practically everyones hands $40 price tag or not. And more than this, because it is playable in 3 major formats once you complete your set your good to go. Your going to have to convince Wizards to ban it in Standard before you can get it banned in legacy. There is no other way. Goyf is good because of the powerful cards that can support it. CB alone makes it almost impossible to kill, but is it the fault of Tarmogoyf? If he was banned and everyone went back to Bear, the playing field would still be even, and CB would still give players the ability to protect a beater that is incredibly undercosted. Why is he so good? Simple, */*+1 they cannot kill each other in combat.

[freakish777]

Can anyone provide an argument against banning goyf that isn't also an argument for unbanning Oath/Dragon?

People describe him as a "vanilla beater" in an effort to portray the argument that "aggro isn't unfair". But the problem isn't aggro. The problem is that he's such a ludicrously efficient kill condition that he makes control and combo too powerful; the aggro plan is pointless when a low-commitment creature exists as both trump to opposing aggro strategies and kill condition.



Was this supposed to be an argument against NOT banning goyf that isn't also an argument for unbanning Oath/Dragon? If not I think I'm misreading something in your second paragraph, or missing something in your argument.

[Tacosnape]

All threads regarding banning or unbanning of cards should probably just be auto-locked, because they all degenerate into "Well why shouldn't we ban/unban ___ then", which further degenerates into everyone telling you exactly what is and isn't okay in the format. Meh. Ketchup indeed.

[Volt]

I'd like to call a moratorium on the "It's just a vanilla beater" argument. Imagine this creature:

Reductio Ad Absurdum Goyf
G
20/20

It's just a vanilla beater, right? It can be Swordsed or countered, right? It's completely, wildly, ridiculously unfair, right?

That said, I'm not completely sure Tarmogoyf should be banned. I guess I'm kinda leaning towards the "Ban it!" camp, but I'm not going to go out and picket the DCI about it or anything.

[Cabal-kun]

Stop complaining about an extremely efficient creature. Heck, why don't you just axe every efficient creature there is while you're at it?

The second reason to stop: save your ammo for later. When we get a bombshell dropped and you whine about it, people will point and laugh, saying 'Say the people who wanted to ban Goyf.' So, pick your battles carefully.

[Media314r8]

While I don't think that goyf should be banned in legacy, I DO think that he's overpowered/undercosted for standard. (and in the same color as Garruk, but thats a thread for another day)

@ 'just kill him' argument:
This argument is terrible, as it assumes that all decks are packing removal for creatures with 4+ toughness, and that is unrealistic. Comparing goyf to FoW, Lackey, and Jitte is also a terrible analogy, as EVERY deck can include green duals and fetch for a way to play goyf. Decks must have a sufficient creature count to run jitte, have enough blue spells to run FoW, and have enough goblins (or changlings... barf) to run lackey.

A decent analogy for goyf is StP, the most undercosted, instant speed removal ever printed. (in the least likely color) Not all decks should have to worry about their white Akroma biting it to a 1 mana removal spell, but swords makes play healthy. Goyf is similarly undercosted for the best vanilla creature ever printed, but he is also fair: in a format where lands can serve as 3/3 blockers for 1 colorless mana, a 4/5 for 1G is acceptable. In standard, when CiP tapped lands can turn into 3/3 blockers for 1G, goyf is way to friggin overpowered.

Most importantly, unless a card in legacy warps a highly sponsored and organized event, (read GP: flash) Wizards is perfectly happy selling boxes of futuresight to people who want to crack goyfs, and really doesn't care enough about the health of the eternal formats to ban a vanilla creature just because it's seeing play.

EDIT: Ketchup... CATsup... ketchup, CATsup.....

"are you here to help me with my CAPsup problem?"

[Volt]

Stop complaining about an extremely efficient creature. Heck, why don't you just axe every efficient creature there is while you're at it?

The second reason to stop: save your ammo for later. When we get a bombshell dropped and you whine about it, people will point and laugh, saying 'Say the people who wanted to ban Goyf.' So, pick your battles carefully.

Blah blah tough guy talk.

To call Tarmogoyf an efficient creature and lump it in with "every efficient creature" is an injustice to Tarmogoyf. Tarmogoyf is to the rest of creaturedom what the New England Patriots are to the rest of the NFL. At what point does efficiency become brokenness? Is Ancestral Recall simply an efficient draw spell? Is Black Lotus simply an efficient fast mana card? Is Demonic Tutor simply an efficient tutor?

Again, I'm not completely sure Tarmogoyf should be banned. However, I think people should avoid the trap of calling it "just a vanilla beater." It is possible for a vanilla beater to be broken, and I think Tarmogoyf comes pretty darn close to the threshold.

[Lothian]

Ok, so lets talk about a few facts regarding worlds.

Here are some interesting stats on the 53 decks posted on Wizards (all deck 4-1 and above)

Including sideboards, here is the order of the most played cards in the field which occurred in 10 decks or more minimum:

28 Tormod's Crypt
27 Wasteland
26 Polluted Delta
25 Brainstorm
25 Tarmogoyf
24 Flooded Strand
24 Tropical Island
23 Thoughtseize
22 Force of Will
20 Engineered Explosives
19 Swords to Plowshares
19 Tundra
18 Pithing Needle
16 Underground Sea
15 Cabal Therapy
15 Krosan Grip
15 Leyline of the Void
15 Ponder
14 Bayou
14 Daze
14 Island
14 Stifle
13 Counterbalance
13 Dark Confidant
13 Sensei's Divining Top
13 Wooded Foothills
12 Bloodstained Mire
12 Nimble Mongoose
12 Plains
11 Engineered Plague
11 Mishra's Factory
10 Aether Vial
10 Chalice of the Void
10 Taiga
10 Threads of Disloyalty
10 Umezawa's Jitte

So yes, Tarmo is present in 47%, but just as much as brainstorm, with toughtseize, fow, stp and EE very close.

Tarmo is by far the best beater, but he's not in EVERY deck.
Banning Tarmo = banning brainstorm = banning fow = banning stp

Just no-sense at all..........

[Lothian]

Plains? Like, basic Plains? Shouldn't this invalidate the results? =\

As far statistics go my friend, plains is a card, played in some decks, so part of the classification. The first basic is Island at 14 out of 53 decks.

Very few basics were played in the end, prompting a big call for dragon stompy to appear, although it posted disappointing result in the end (only 1 in top 53)

[Kronicler]

Volt: Your point about the 20/20 vanilla beater is a strong one, but I think that all it really establishes is that there is a line that can be crossed where a vanilla beater is unfair / unfun / ban worthy. The thing is though, that unlike your 20/20 and Lackey, Goyf doesn't win you the game if he hits your opponent a single time. That means they have a ton more time to find an answer to him, whether it be one of the bazillion of the removal spells in the format, a way to reduce his size, gain control of him, or just put something bigger in his way.

Kronicler

[Jander78]

Banning Tarmo = banning brainstorm = banning fow = banning stp
This is a horrible statement. While I'm not sure I agree that Tarmogoyf deserves banning, comparing a creature to 3 instants is like apples to oranges. Tarmogoyf is a win condition. Most decks are splashing green just to support this win condition and the rest of the cards are usually in the deck to find Goyf, answer Goyf, or stop Goyf from coming into play (and possibly the lesser favored "steal Goyf"). This is where the possible problem lies.

Brainstorm, FoW, and STP do not function as win conditions. They don't swing the game strongly in someones favor. Brainstorm is card filter. It doesn't gain any card advantage, just quality at the mercy of a shuffle effect. FoW is card disadvantage and is used as protection, stoping degenerate first turns, or forcing something into play. STP is 1 for 1 removal. None of these cards have a parenthetical clause of "if this isn't answered, you will probably lose", and without most of them, we would have a format at the mercy of combo. Also, decks do not splash for the sole purpose of supporting any one of these cards.

Comparing Goyf to Lackey / Tog is the only argument that really is justifiable.

[Phantom]

So yes, Tarmo is present in 47%, but just as much as brainstorm, with toughtseize, fow, stp and EE very close.


Ummmm, NO. Comparing Goyf to cards that in no way win you the game and are a completely different type of card is completely unfair and pointless. Every archetype can run a card like Brainstorm and every deck can run Explosives in the board regardless of colors played.

A comparison with teeth would be to compare to other colored beaters. It was in nearly TWICE as many decks as the next best beater (which is also sort of a draw spell) Dark Confidant. I find that amazing. Mongoose is less than half and then there isn't even another colored creature on there.

[Lothian]

I agree in a sense, but in the end, without Tarmo there, you end-up with very few beaters.

I think that's part of the trick from Wizards.

They try to get us some descent beaters for years. Or else it ends-up combo-control all the way...

5 goblins in top53 = 5 lackey

Lackey was where tarmo is now

Maybe we have to accept a beater defining the format to some extent.

I wouldn't be surprise we will find an answer to Tarmo in next expansions

what about a symetrical tormod's?

[Volt]

Volt: Your point about the 20/20 vanilla beater is a strong one, but I think that all it really establishes is that there is a line that can be crossed where a vanilla beater is unfair / unfun / ban worthy.

Exactly. Where is that line? 10/10 for G? 5/5 for G? 5/6 for 1G? I don't know, but I think Tarmogoyf is very close to that line, and maybe even slightly past it.

[Bovinious]

The high card price does not mean that they are banworthy.

Really? Ask Mana Drain and Illusionary Mask...not to say Goyf is near those in price.

But yeah I basically agree with what everyone else said about how Goyf distorts and should be banned, dont see a reason to beat a dead horse.

[TrialByFire]

I thought Mana Drain was banned on power level? Tabernacle costs more than Mana Drain, so does Grim Tutor, moneywise
And Illusionary Mask sucks in this format

[Happy Gilmore]

Sigh, why are we even entertaining this thread? No one gives a crap what this site thinks, if they did we would have seen Flash banned before Columbus and we wrote letters to the effect. The only purpose this thread serves is to get people frustrated and make us look like complainers to the rest of the communtiy. Lets give this it rest. If you don't like playing with Tarmogoyf find a better strategy. I can say with certainty that there are others around.

I request this thread be closed, its not going to end well.

[C.P.]

Really? Ask Mana Drain and Illusionary Mask...not to say Goyf is near those in price.

But yeah I basically agree with what everyone else said about how Goyf distorts and should be banned, dont see a reason to beat a dead horse.

Mask, I buy your argument, but Drain?

[Phantom]

Exactly. Where is that line?

Tough to say exactly, but basically your goal as a card designer should be to make very good cards that still leave room for choices by the deck designer. This was always my problem with vintage. Every deck starts with X amount of cards as almost auto includes because they are too amazing not to run.

I really think that green beaters were a perfect example of good design before Goyf was printed. It had a ton of great beaters (Goose, Werebear, Mongrel, Troll, Iwamori, etc) that were never auto includes. Different strategies called for different choices; thresh took goose and bear, madness and loam liked Mongrel, control liked Troll, and midrange aggro like Iwamori. Goyf has made all of these choices and moot or at least secondary. Hell, I would probably put him in a deck that never put any cards into the graveyard.

[Bovinious]

I thought Mana Drain was banned on power level? Tabernacle costs more than Mana Drain, so does Grim Tutor, moneywise
And Illusionary Mask sucks in this format

Im pretty sure Mana Drain is just banned for the price tag, think about it. The only deck that would run it would be maybe Landstill, and it would need to run more cards to sink mana to abuse it and to avoid mana burn. It wouldnt be played over FoW/Daze is any Gro/NQG decks, so I dont see a reason other then pricetag.

WOTC has been pretty inconsistent with this policy too, like said before, they didnt ban Grim Tutor or Tabernacle for this reason, but I think that is because when Legacy was created those cards didnt cost that much and they dont want to follow up on their stupid price-banning policy. Also Imperial Seal being banned perplexes me, not sure if its banned for price or b/c WOTC thinks its broken...

Anyways didnt mean to derail the thread, back to how broken Goyf is :tongue:

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

I agree in a sense, but in the end, without Tarmo there, you end-up with very few beaters.

I think that's part of the trick from Wizards.

They try to get us some descent beaters for years. Or else it ends-up combo-control all the way...

5 goblins in top53 = 5 lackey

Lackey was where tarmo is now

Maybe we have to accept a beater defining the format to some extent.

What?

The problem isn't that Goyf makes aggro too strong, the problem is he makes control/combo too strong.


That means they have a ton more time to find an answer to him, whether it be one of the bazillion of the removal spells in the format,

Hyperbole for the win? And if you DO have a removal spell that isn't narrow, and the opponent DOESN'T have an answer, what then? The best case scenario is card parity. That's an amazing proposition for 1G.


a way to reduce his size,

Um?


gain control of him,

With what? What playable MD cards will take control of him?


or just put something bigger in his way.

Like what? Akroma? Yeah. I'm sure I'll have plenty of time to get Akroma out with 1 or more Goyfs staring me down.

[Nihil Credo]

Tarmogoyf is omnipresent enough to severely annoy, but other than push Lightning Bolt and Werebear into a corner of the metagame it doesn't truly pose the same level problem the way, say, Lackey did. There's a huge difference between requiring an answer in one turn and requiring it in four... hell, if Dark Confidant or Shadowmage Infiltrator lives four turns, you've probably lost too.

To correct the omnipresence problem, if I were WotC, I think a far better option than banning would be to make it so running Tarmogoyf isn't by default the best option. How? By printing good cards, tournament worthy on their own, that also happen to hose Tarmogoyf and/or can't be played along with Tarmogoyf, and that aren't strictly worse than just playing Goyfs of your own. A walking Meekstone/Marble Titan, or a powerful pro-green dude that costs :u::b: or :r::w:, or a cheap mass Radiant's Judgment. An idea I've fancied was "creatures with power less than their toughness can't block", which would be great especially because it's clearly red - the colour which has the most problems with Goyf.

Granted, designing and printing some new cards ad hoc would take at least several months (second set of Shadowmoor, at the earliest), but let's face it, no-one's leaving the game because of Tarmogoyf - as I said, it's an annoyance, not a problem.

[TheAardvark]

What?
With what? What playable MD cards will take control of him?


Shackles and Threads are the only two, unless you're a Euro and have the awesomeness to play Mind Harness MD.

[Lothian]

What?

The problem isn't that Goyf makes aggro too strong, the problem is he makes control/combo too strong.


Goyf in Combo? It gives some aggro plan B to some combo maybe (Cephalid), but it is not helping your combo engine, so it's pretty silly most of the time (Ichorid, TES, Belcher etc...)

Goyf in aggro-control obviously. In control if you run green already, why not. Or splash for it, but you undermine your manabase.

Tarmo is in fashion, and over-played on my opinion.

But it helps some under-par decks (black sui?) to come back on the map, so why not?

[APriestOfGix]

This thread is becoming bad. Mods please help fix it up, or just lock it...


Goyf forces you to have an answer. However not just any answer, a very specific one. Toughness removal dosn't do it 90% of the time, forcing red decks to splash another color to answer it.

Goyf forces green to have another creature with regeneration, or another goyf.

Goyf forces white to run StP.



Goyf dosn't stop Blue and Black the most powerful colors in magic.
Goyf is basically un-red-able.
Goyf forces green to run itself.
Goyf forces white to run 4 of 1 card, and be able to find a resolve them, else lose.

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

Shackles and Threads are the only two, unless you're a Euro and have the awesomeness to play Mind Harness MD.

Shackles can't easily race Goyf's power. You need some back up plan to stall it out. Threads seems like an obvious warning flag, kind of like Leyline in the days of Flash. If it gets to the point where people are regularly MDing Threads, things will have come to a head.

[C.P.]

This thread is becoming bad. Mods please help fix it up, or just lock it...

Like you're the one to talk.


Goyf forces you to have an answer. However not just any answer, a very specific one. Toughness removal dosn't do it 90% of the time, forcing red decks to splash another color to answer it.

Any creature with 4 toughness has this problem. Half of the removal that is being played in the format is not burn, anyway.


Goyf forces white to run StP.

This was the case long before the Goyf.




Goyf dosn't stop Blue and Black the most powerful colors in magic.
Goyf is basically un-red-able.
Goyf forces green to run itself.
Goyf forces white to run 4 of 1 card, and be able to find a resolve them, else lose.

What is this supposed to imply?

[caiomarcos]

Ok, so lets talk about a few facts regarding worlds.

Here are some interesting stats on the 53 decks posted on Wizards (all deck 4-1 and above)

Including sideboards, here is the order of the most played cards in the field which occurred in 10 decks or more minimum:

28 Tormod's Crypt
27 Wasteland
26 Polluted Delta
25 Brainstorm
25 Tarmogoyf
24 Flooded Strand
24 Tropical Island
23 Thoughtseize
22 Force of Will
20 Engineered Explosives
19 Swords to Plowshares
19 Tundra
18 Pithing Needle
16 Underground Sea
15 Cabal Therapy
15 Krosan Grip
15 Leyline of the Void
15 Ponder
14 Bayou
14 Daze
14 Island
14 Stifle
13 Counterbalance
13 Dark Confidant
13 Sensei's Divining Top
13 Wooded Foothills
12 Bloodstained Mire
12 Nimble Mongoose
12 Plains
11 Engineered Plague
11 Mishra's Factory
10 Aether Vial
10 Chalice of the Void
10 Taiga
10 Threads of Disloyalty
10 Umezawa's Jitte

So yes, Tarmo is present in 47%, but just as much as brainstorm, with toughtseize, fow, stp and EE very close.

Tarmo is by far the best beater, but he's not in EVERY deck.
Banning Tarmo = banning brainstorm = banning fow = banning stp

Just no-sense at all..........


The thing to look here is not Goyf's percentage against all the rest of the field, but against the rest of the beaters/win con. It's pretty damn close to be the ONLY beater in the whole list, Mishra's Factory and Mongoose being the other ones, (or Dark Confidant, but personally I consider it more drawing than beating) way behind.

Tarmogoyf made almost all other forms of winning useless. If you cost mana and have to attack, Goyf took your place.

No Jotun Grunts, no Serra Avengers, no Piledrivers, no Exalteds, no Negators etc - an amazing lack of creatures, but still Swords to Plowshares and Thoughtsize are omnipresent. Even Threads of Disloyalty is one of the most played cards.

Wizard's push to make Magic as a whole more combat oriented (a policy they've been clearly implementing in the last 8 years) went too far. Tarmogoyf crossed the line of a broken beater, a thing we've never seen before, but it actually happened now.

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

I transferred this from the less active thread.

Say:

You've dug for your Wrath of God, and fought through his counterwall. The 5/6 beater finally died after dealing 10 to you. And next turn he combos off because he was playing Breakfast, and you had to waste your resources dealing with Goyf.

Or you deal with a 4/5 Goyf after a swing with StP. That's an 8 point life differential with card parity. And what if he plays another one next turn? Or finishes setting up Balance-Top?

Goyf isn't insane in the sense that Long.dec or Academy were insane. He's insane because it's four deck slots that require immediate response, and don't have to directly tie into the rest of the deck's strategy. That's stupid. There's almost no reason NOT to run Goyf.

Also, ditto what the guy above me said.

Also, just looking at t8, 27 out of a potential 32 Goyfs were present. That's pretty suspicious.

[C.P.]

Tarmogoyf made almost all other forms of winning useless. If you cost mana and have to attack, Goyf took your place.

No Jotun Grunts, no Serra Avengers, no Piledrivers, no Exalteds, no Negators etc - an amazing lack of creatures, but still Swords to Plowshares and Thoughtsize are omnipresent. Even Threads of Disloyalty is one of the most played cards.


This is probably the single most persuasive argument in the banning of goyf. I'm in non-banning camp, but I have to admit that goyf decreased diversity in creatures.

[scrumdogg]

On the topic of un-fun-ness, I can think of a lot of things less fun than Tarmogoyf beatdown. Dredge shenanigans being chief among them, but your mileage may vary.

QFT, no matter how big Goyf gets (and it has a built in organic limit, to get beyond that require you to play other cards) it will not kill you in one shot, one turn, one attack on it's own. Combo, almost all combo, is significantly less 'fun' to play against & requires a lot more & more esoteric hate than a creature which dies to a wide range of playable creature kill. STP, any Terror variant including Smother & Shriekmaw, EE, Deed, Wrath/Damnation...the list is extensive. Control decks have a wide variety of options as well ranging from the expensive ($$ wise anyway) like Moat to all the board sweeping to recursive blocking to the ability to steal Goyf to the under-utilized (given the amount of critters currently running around) Ensnaring Bridge. Combo just snickers when it sees a Goyf & wins anyway.


Although undercosted, he is not a broken combo enabler, something that the B&R list is mostly devoted to.

From the original parameters of the discussion...until this changes in some way (and it won't) it is silly to discuss bannings. Oh, and spellcheck is your friend if you don't wish to look like a drooling incompetent. People might take you more seriously if you souped up this component of your scenarios....:rolleyes:

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

QFT, no matter how big Goyf gets (and it has a built in organic limit, to get beyond that require you to play other cards) it will not kill you in one shot, one turn, one attack on it's own. Combo, almost all combo, is significantly less 'fun' to play against & requires a lot more & more esoteric hate than a creature which dies to a wide range of playable creature kill. STP, any Terror variant including Smother & Shriekmaw, EE, Deed, Wrath/Damnation...the list is extensive. Control decks have a wide variety of options as well ranging from the expensive ($$ wise anyway) like Moat to all the board sweeping to recursive blocking to the ability to steal Goyf to the under-utilized (given the amount of critters currently running around) Ensnaring Bridge. Combo just snickers when it sees a Goyf & wins anyway.


Oh. Thank GOD. I didn't realize they had changed the rules so you could only play 56 forest and 4 Goyfs.

MEIN BAD.

Those answers are all slow and easily countered by Thoughtseize, Daze, Stifle, Force of Will, Counter-Top, Burning Wish, or secondary win conditions.

And those combos almost universally lost to Threshold when Thresh didn't have Goyf. Why would their chances have improved now?

[Phantom]

Combo just snickers when it sees a Goyf & wins anyway.

I'm fairly certain that combo players hate Goyf (or they should). I can't even imagine what percentage of their game losses come at the hands of this guy, and how pissed they must be that Aggro control players (the control here being either blue counters or black discard) can drop a 4 or 5 turn clock so early and still easily have mana to cast discard or counters (at least with Werebear it was almost always a 1/1 for a while).

Ask a combo player if they'd rather play vs. Thresh, or something slower but with more counters like MUC, and I bet you most of them will take the slow deck that let's them refill their hand after a failed combo or bait counters steadily. God knows I would.

[Happy Gilmore]

Ok Matt, I give. What do you want us to do about it? What exactly solves this problem? Or is the goal simply to rant? Do you want me to boycot goyf? Send letters to Wizards? Start being constructive, because nothing we say here will ever do more than stir up a hornets nest in a community that is only recently comming together to build a format that wizards has done little to help besides an occasional GP. I know damn well how hard it can be to deal with a goyf, I know he is the holy Grail of beaters, why do you thing I play 4 in every deck I test and play? My goal is to play the best deck possible, if Flash was legal I would play that, but its not. When and if Goyf is banned I will play the next best thing. Nothing will change for me.

You still play enchantress right? Doesn't that deck have absolutely no trouble with stoping him? No it doesn't, it does however have issues with FoW, Daze, Thoughseize and various disruption spells. Have you ever seen a deck whose soul purpose was to abuse the hell out of goyf? In other words, had very little disruption and focused simply on beating you upside the head with as much damage as possible? No, the closest thing to that is Goyf Sligh. Its not the fault of goyf, its the powerful spells that support him. Don't think for a second that banning goyf will change anything. CB, Thoughseize, burn, Discard, FoW, Daze, pump spells will be around long after goyf has been obsoleted.

Think about Goyf and Ravager. Its all about the shell you put them in. The difference is, gofy fits into hundreds of shells, but ravager only one. Would you be willing to ban him because of this? Does a beater deserve to be banned because it is the most playable creature in Magic? It certainly doesn't on the basis of being the most broken. As of yet I don't think Wizards has printed a completely broken creature. Ravager in my mind was the closest because it obsoleted all answers that were thown at it. Creature removal became irrelevant. Thats unfair, thats broken, and thats why he was banned. On its own Tarmogoyf does none of these things. Its all about the shell, and Goyf fits in them all.

Every deck needs a different strategy to combat, but no matter what every deck has to combat goyf at the same time. On these grounds wizards has to decide if Tarmogoyf is too good for magic. We require a new definition broken if the decision is made to ban him. And if he is it will be a clean sweep, you can't ask them to ban goyf in legacy without having them do it in Standard and Extended. He is even better in those formats. They have the just as many ways of abusing him and fewer ways of stopping him.

[JACO]

This thread is becoming bad. Mods please help fix it up, or just lock it...Goyf forces you to have an answer. However not just any answer, a very specific one. Toughness removal dosn't do it 90% of the time, forcing red decks to splash another color to answer it.

Goyf forces green to have another creature with regeneration, or another goyf.

Goyf forces white to run StP.

Goyf dosn't stop Blue and Black the most powerful colors in magic.
Goyf is basically un-red-able.
Goyf forces green to run itself.
Goyf forces white to run 4 of 1 card, and be able to find a resolve them, else lose.You are the one who started this thread, but I'm glad you'll agree that it's bad. There are so many irrelevant posts and comparisons.

To address what you wrote above, Swords to Plowshares should be the MAIN reason that any deck should even play white. It is the best white card available in Legacy. That argument flat out sucks. Any threat, if left unchecked, is going to win the game if the opponent can't race it. You'd be better off sticking to a power level argument, and frankly I don't think you'll get anywhere with that.

Goblin Lackey is arguably as big of a threat as Tarmogoyf. Dark Confidant is arguably as big of a threat as Tarmogoyf. So are other creatures like Terravore, Quirion Dryad, etc. The point is, Legacy is a format where 'undercosted' cards are the only thing that should be playable, by virtue of the allowed card pool. The best cards push the weakest cards out of the rotation naturally.

Somewhere along the line, a few people got the idea they could just play shitty cards and decks that don't interact with the opponent, and that they wouldn't be forced to deal with what their opponent does, because they want to build their deck however they want and not have to combat what the opponent is doing. Guess what? You have to deal with it. That's the game of Magic.

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

Ok Matt, I give. What do you want us to do about it? What exactly solves this problem? Or is the goal simply to rant?

This is unconstructive and hypocritical. If my goal is simply to rant, your's can't possibly be higher, although it can be lower.


Do you want me to boycot goyf? Send letters to Wizards? Start being constructive, because nothing we say here will ever do more than stir up a hornets nest in a community that is only recently comming together to build a format that wizards has done little to help besides an occasional GP. I know damn well how hard it can be to deal with a goyf, I know he is the holy Grail of beaters, why do you thing I play 4 in every deck I test and play? My goal is to play the best deck possible, if Flash was legal I would play that, but its not. When and if Goyf is banned I will play the next best thing. Nothing will change for me.

That's poor reasoning. Your presume that there will always be an obvious "best" choice.


You still play enchantress right? Doesn't that deck have absolutely no trouble with stoping him? No it doesn't, it does however have issues with FoW, Daze, Thoughseize and various disruption spells. Have you ever seen a deck whose soul purpose was to abuse the hell out of goyf? In other words, had very little disruption and focused simply on beating you upside the head with as much damage as possible? No, the closest thing to that is Goyf Sligh. Its not the fault of goyf, its the powerful spells that support him. Don't think for a second that banning goyf will change anything. CB, Thoughseize, burn, Discard, FoW, Daze, pump spells will be around long after goyf has been obsoleted.

Anti-banning people need to stop looking at cards in a vacuum.

So Flash was banned. But it wasn't Flash that won; it was Hulk. So playing the next best cost cheater will produce the same results, under your line of reasoning.

Support cards are part of an overall strategy; the more powerful the kill condition that strategy can support, the more powerful the overall strategy is. Goyf is completely comparable to Oath of Druids in this regard.


Think about Goyf and Ravager. Its all about the shell you put them in. The difference is, gofy fits into hundreds of shells, but ravager only one. Would you be willing to ban him because of this? Does a beater deserve to be banned because it is the most playable creature in Magic?

If its playability directly invalidates the vast majority of previously played threats, then yes.


It certainly doesn't on the basis of being the most broken.

How not?


As of yet I don't think Wizards has printed a completely broken creature. Ravager in my mind was the closest because it obsoleted all answers that were thown at it. Creature removal became irrelevant. Thats unfair, thats broken, and thats why he was banned. On its own Tarmogoyf does none of these things. Its all about the shell, and Goyf fits in them all.

That's exactly the problem. There were answers to Ravager. There were answers to Skullclamp too. Skullclamp wasn't broken because of the decks specifically built around it, it was broken because of how easily it fit into the majority of strategies.


Every deck needs a different strategy to combat, but no matter what every deck has to combat goyf at the same time.

Dominic, what does this mean?


Guess what? You have to deal with it. That's the game of Magic.

You could extrapolate that into anything. Why even have a banned list? What is its function?


The thing is, I'm not 100% sold either way. But the people against banning aren't making any convincing arguments.

[freakish777]

How exactly is it a "Bad Thing" for the format for people to be playing Threads of Disloyalty main deck?

When Landstill was the default control deck right after the split, most lists packed 4 Swords to Plowshares and 4 four cost sorceries, enchantments or artifacts that attemtped to get card advantage (Wrath, Humility/Moat, Disk) to deal with creatures specifically (because creatures and combat are supposed to be the cornerstone of the game). Isn't playing with a 3cc enchantment that attempts to gain card advantage specifically against creatures simply an evolution in deck building? If said "evolution" is being prodded along by Tarmogoyf I don't see the harm in that.

Personally I think Threads is an extremely underrated card. Let's look at it pre-Future Sight and the creatures it was likely to steal and be good against:

Dark Confidant
Werebear
Nantuko Shade
Jotun Grunt
Wild Mongrel/Aquamoeba
Quirion Dryad
Serra Avenger
Silver Knight
Birds of Paradise
Rofellos (if he get's raw-dogged)

cards it was less good against but still relevant:

Meddling Mage (force your opponent to not attack unless they want to turn your spells back on)
Arcbound Ravager (if you were on the play it traded 1 for 1 with Ravager)
Grim Lavamancer (if you have Red mana, they'll likely make it kill itself, if you don't they get their last shock in at your dome).

Yes, it's against Goblins, that doesn't mean it's a bad card (I certainly wouldn't have told people that SBing was terrible).

Post Future-sight it hits random Breakfast combo creatures as well.

I really don't think Threads of Disloyalty being played in the main deck means that Legacy is unhealthy. The game is supposed to revolve around creatures, why would an enchantment that provides +1 card advantage (usually what you ask of Wrath anyways) and is relevant with creatures seeing play be the same as Leyline of the Void seeing play (which is only relevant with graveyards, which is supposed to be less focused on, and the fact that it's a replacement specifically to hose Hulk's leaves play ability)?

[Happy Gilmore]

Quote:
Every deck needs a different strategy to combat, but no matter what every deck has to combat goyf at the same time.
"Dominic, what does this mean?"

what I was trying to say is this:

Magic is won by by the player who can successfully overcome the strategies of their opponent, either by disrupting theirs or establishing their own. Yes, this is vague. However it helps me explain a little better what I meant.

You play against Goblins right, and you have answers you know are good against them such as pyroclasm. But what happens when they play Tarmogoyf which is not affected by these answers? Wort does the same thing. Now, lets say your answers were Deed instead of Clasm. That answers both strategies at once.

The difficulty is addapting to this new threat and still being competitive vs. the opponents main strategy. Your Cephalid Breakfast example hits it right on the head.

What if I argued that Goyf should not be banned because it is a 4 slot commitment that increases the potency of the main strategy of many decks, therefore makes more decks viable in Legacy. Goyf protects and strengthens a strategy because it requires an opponent to use his answers in another manner, rather than disrupting the main strategy. Why is this bad? I would argue it is not only good but neccessary in developing the format. Decks have had to evole because of this. Combo decks needed to become faster, leaner. Control decks had to give up higher cc win conditions. Agro decks had to both incorporate Goyfs and answer them. I would say that goyf has done more to establish a Legacy gauntlet than any one card in magic. Now competitive decks have to deal with multiple potent strategies, all of which can win. For these reasons I feel that Gofy has forced legacy to evolve in a positive manner. If the worlds results show us anything it is that goyf has made pre-existing strategies better rather than obsolete them.

Goyf can't do it on its own, thats why the whole system works.

[Bardo]

In one of Smmenen's articles he was writing about at which point an x/x for :1: becomes broken. He answered, and I agree, that it was roughly a 4/4 for :1: in Vintage. That is pretty much a breaking point.

In Legacy, we basically have essentially a 5/6 for 1G--which simply amazing. For now, I don't think anything should be done. It's sort of like the argument Machinus used when everyone was calling for Lackey's banning. If anything, Tarmogoyf is a format-defining card, which isn't bad in and of itself. It will force decks to evolve or perish, which isn't necessarily bad either.

[Phantom]

How exactly is it a "Bad Thing" for the format for people to be playing Threads of Disloyalty main deck?


Your missing the point. No one is saying Threads is a bad card, just that Control Magic is 1 more freaking mana, but Threads is seeing more play because there is only one creature you will be grabbing. Basically, when people are running narrow, specific answers as opposed to broad quality answers, thanks to a creature dominating a format, that's usually a bad thing. Threads is bad enough (maybe not terribly bad but at least a warning sign), but Mind Harness mainboard is insane.

@Spat: I'm completely with you. I can't say I'm for or against banning at this point, but the arguments for banning seem fairly strong, and I haven't seen a decent one against banning (someone please list all the answers again...).

I think the best argument against banning, at least in my mind, is that it doesn't FEEL horribly broken. Lackey is a 1/1 for 1 that was easy as hell to remove, but when it hit you, you felt it. It felt broken. They were cheating. This isn't fair. Get WotC on the line.

Goyf just sits there. Being big. Breaking no major laws of the game except the Power to cc ratio. I'm not sure I'm saying that right, but I get the feeling that not wanting to ban Goyf is more of a gut feeling since there so much hard evidence pointing the other way.

[Bardo]

Interesting point, but to be fair, Lackey was printed nearly a decade ago (1998) and has the advantage of being a myth over a far larger period of time that something like six months. So when you killed one, it had a lot more psychological resonance than bumping off a powerful dude one set removed.

[Timmy, Power Gamer]

Regarding the cost argument, yes, he is expensive. However, it is foolish to believe that an *in print* card will be banned because it's cost was driven too high due to its popularity.

[Happy Gilmore]

I think the best argument against banning, at least in my mind, is that it doesn't FEEL horribly broken. Lackey is a 1/1 for 1 that was easy as hell to remove, but when it hit you, you felt it. It felt broken. They were cheating. This isn't fair. Get WotC on the line.



I'm curious what you think about my anti-banning argument. Is my assertion alteast correct? Has goyf made pre-existing strategies better? Does it prevent format evolution or create innovation?

[Bardo]

Regarding the cost argument, yes, he is expensive. However, it is foolish to believe that an *in print* card will be banned because it's cost was driven too high due to its popularity.

Well, nothing in Legacy is banned just because it's expensive. True, some expensive cards are banned, but also because they're powerful too (Bazaar, Drain, Workshop, etc.). So, something would have to be suitably powerful, not just expensive, to get the axe.

(For cheap + banned, consider Gush.)

[Kadaj]

I'm curious what you think about my anti-banning argument. Is my assertion alteast correct? Has goyf made pre-existing strategies better? Does it prevent format evolution or create innovation?

I think that it is indeed true that Goyf has made several pre-existing strategies better, such as Threshold and Breakfast, which can be seen as both a good thing and a bad thing.

However, the problem with stating that Goyf has cultivated innovation in Legacy is that it's the same kind of innovation that Skullclamp created. Yes, it's true that Skullclamp allowed several strategies to function at a very high level when it was still legal (BG Cemetary springs to mind) that simply wouldn't have been possible without it, but it was also absolutely everywhere and fit into almost everything with almost no cost. The thing was either being run or actively targeted by a ton of decks, and that's a problem, creation of new viable decks be damned.

Yes, Goyf does allow things like Fish and other non-Thresh aggro-control builds to be more competitive than they previously were, but Goyf also goes into just about anything with creatures (the sole exception I can think of is the Tomb Aggro decks) and, in a sort of perverse way, stifles creativity because almost every new deck created these days should probably be running Goyf, on top of all of the various pre-existing decks that incorporate him.

I don't really know whether Goyf should be banned. It's not shattering the environment, and its presense is probably not at a Skullclamp level just yet, but it is getting there, and if it ever gets to that point there will be issues abound.

[Bovinious]

Well, nothing in Legacy is banned just because it's expensive. True, some expensive cards are banned, but also because they're powerful too (Bazaar, Drain, Workshop, etc.). So, something would have to be suitably powerful, not just expensive, to get the axe.

(For cheap + banned, consider Gush.)

Untrue, WotC even said when they created Legacy that they would ban cards for cost concerns only. Cards like Illusionary Mask, Mana Drain, Imperial Seal, and Library of Alexandria are pretty much banned just because they cost hundreds of dollars each. Bazaar and Shop are probably too powerful, and are banned for power reasons as well as cost.

[MattH]

Well, nothing in Legacy is banned just because it's expensive. True, some expensive cards are banned, but also because they're powerful too (Bazaar, Drain, Workshop, etc.). So, something would have to be suitably powerful, not just expensive, to get the axe.

(For cheap + banned, consider Gush.)

I would say that while Illusionary Mask was originally banned for a combination of suspected-power reasons (and at the time, everything was suspect because it was a new format) and price reasons, it remains banned only because of its price.

Back on topic: I would be fine with Goyf being banned, and also fine with it not being banned. I basically am in agreement with Spatula on this one, believe it or not. Worlds was a unique tournament, so it's not clear how much weight to give the 27/32 number. But if Goyf maintains a top-eight ratio of 24/32 or better throughout much of the next six months, hen I think banning could be justified.

[Bardo]

Untrue, WotC even said when they created Legacy that they would ban cards for cost concerns only. Cards like Illusionary Mask, Mana Drain, Imperial Seal, and Library of Alexandria are pretty much banned just because they cost hundreds of dollars each. Bazaar and Shop are probably too powerful, and are banned for power reasons as well as cost.

You're mistaken. Show me anywhere (reputable source, not some random dude), that WotC banned any Legacy cards due solely to their price. If there was a dollar threshold. Then explain to me why Tabernacle is legal? (Every cards you mentioned is also off the power curve of Legacy.)

Edit. Re: Mask. That's speculation and opinion. Maybe you're right, but it can't be confirmed. It's expensive, powerful and a rules nightmare (compare the oracle text with the printed card, for instance).

[Bovinious]

You're mistaken. Show me anywhere (reputable source, not some random dude), that WotC banned any Legacy cards due solely to their price. If there was a dollar threshold, Tabernacle would be banned, no?

Edit. Re: Mask. That's speculation and opinion. Maybe you're right, but it can't be confirmed. It's expensive, powerful and a rules nightmare (compare the oracle text with the printed card, for instance).

You know, I could have sworn when they laid out Legacy they stated some cards were banned for cost reasons, but all I found was this "Note, too, that the power level of many of these cards, combined with their scarcity, presented a major barrier to entry to the format for many players" under the header Dominant cards that have been considered for restriction in Vintage in the article here: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/af30 , which implies scarcity was a concern but not the sole reason. I always thought WotC partially created Legacy to be affordable to people who couldnt play vintage and therefore banned shit like Mask and Drain, but havnt kept up with it by banning Tabernacle and the like because someone realized it was dumbass reason to ban cards, but I guess that isnt a stated goal of the format unless its in another article, my bad.

I guess this just means WOTC has even MORE cleaning up of our banned list to do...

[Happy Gilmore]

Even if Goyf was in 100% of the t8 deck I don't think they will ban it in legacy unless it is also banned in Std and Ext. As I said, there are more outlets for abuse and fewer ways of dealing with him. Hell, when was the last time you saw a Plainswalker or Tribal card in legacy?

[badjuju]

A lot of you guys are spamming really irrelevant arguments. Cost of the card? Please.

Although I say this with slight hesitation, I am for banning Tarmogoyf. My reason? Because it's in virtually any and every deck whose mana base can support it. Most of you may argue that this makes goyf an extremely good card because it is viable in every deck, but that is a clear misconception. Control and combo decks aren't running it because they want to, but because they can't afford not to (oops double negative). Decks can always pack removal, but why pack removal when you can just pack the ultimate answer: itself. Ontop of that, it helps you win the game! Who needs to cycle decree? Who needs to pitch cards to Tog? Who needs to sacrifice a board to Ravager? Let's just play a 2cc creature that straight out trumps every other creature in the format, making one on one creature-creature combat nearly irrelevant and damage based removal obsolete. We can come up with tons of theory craft situations: oh goyf is so easily answered, oh if you ban goyf ban stp, etc etc. The problem with goyf is that it is largely undercosted for what it does. Other may argue that a card isn't worthy of a ban unless it has broken interactions or ends the game in its own right. What goyf does is subtlely slide under both those radars. There are no direct broken interactions - just cantrips that fill up the graveyard quickly. He does not end the game when you play him - but he will relatively quickly, faster than any other creature at its mana cost (without any further investment, like Nantuko Shade).

In a nutshell -

reasons to ban: undercosted, run in every deck because you'd be handicapped without it.

Note how I'm not attacking the un-fun factor, I'm just stating that the card is in too many places at once, more than any one single creature should ever be anyways.

[thefreakaccident]

I remember the same arguements to ban goblin lackey and ringleader a long time ago... this seems to be no different.

[Obfuscate Freely]

I thought about it, and I realized that this is actually a fairly important issue for me. I really enjoy the format the way it is right now, and I am especially fond of Tarmogoyf - it was a shock for me to see so many people upset about it.

I hope this sentiment isn't a result of 'goyf's cost, even if I agree that $40 for a Standard rare is absurd.

Well, I went through this thread, and tried to respond to as many of the points raised as I could. This is going to be a long one.


I dont think the fact that it is run in most decks is a good arguement for banning since cards like brainstorm and FoW are almost just as played, but I do think it should be banned for the reason that games often come down to who can get a Goyf to stick first, much like the argument used to ban Skullclamp years ago.
Games rarely come down to "who can get Goyf to stick first." The card takes 4-5 turns to kill an opponent, and is stopped cold by a copy of itself. In the Thresh mirror, for example, if one player is busy setting up Counterbalance + Sensei's Divining Top while the other is playing a Tarmogoyf, the player with Counterbalance will probably win handily.

It isnt just Threshold though, its basically every deck that isnt fast combo or prison, which is another reason it may be banworthy; the number of Goyfs in the top8 worlds was more than Skullclamps in top8s during its hayday and everyone wanted that banned, I dont how this is much different really.
Skullclamp is different because it is considerably more powerful than Tarmogoyf. It actually wins games much quicker than a Tarmogoyf can, because drawing 4-6 cards is often enough to seal a game in one player's favor. On top of that, Skullclamp continues to bury the opponent deeper as the game goes on. This is why it is true that the first player to resolve a Skullclamp usually wins.

With everything else aside, we'd have to ask ourselves whether or not legacy would be a better format without tarmogoyf. Personally I think that it would be considering that if you want to win by attacking with creatures right now and you are not playing tarmogoyf your deck is sub-optimal. As a creature that swings it simply outclasses everything else. Tarmogoyf is pretty much at its most absurd in a format like legacy where it is very likely that it will grow out of control within the first couple of turns. It is dumb. Seriously. There would be so many more playable creatures if it weren't for this fucker. I'm tired of having to put him in every deck I make. The same damn card is being played in aggro, control, AND combo decks alike. There is a problem here.
I don't think the fact that Tarmogoyf is clearly the most efficient body in the format makes it ban-worthy. We have Brainstorm, which is clearly the best draw/manipulation spell, Swords to Plowshares, which is clearly the best removal spell, and Force of Will, which is clearly the best counterspell. We even have a clear best discard spell in Thoughtseize. Any deck with cards that fill these roles will inevitably play these spells first, because they are the best.

This is fundamental to Legacy deckbuilding, and probably will remain so for as long as we have access to fetches and duals.

I agree that Goyf should be banned. Its impact on the Meta is just too big

- Decks that SHOULD NOT run vanilla beaters for 2 Mana run him:
Nongreen Fish are willing to ruin their Mana Base by adding G because it still makes the deck better.
UB control decks with heavy card draw will splash G for Tarmogoyf instead of finishing with Tog.
Another example are Landstill lists with 4 Goyfs: That's just not healthy. Don't get me wrong, it is not bad, but Landstill is a synonym for slow board control based on card advantage. And when such a deck feels the need to run 2 Mana Vanilla beaters, then something is wrong.
Saying something "should not" be without any reasoning is nonsensical. I fail to see a problem with control decks playing Tarmogoyf, especially if there isn't a problem with control decks playing Psychatog. Nothing is unfair about hybrid strategies.

- It makes TOO MANY cards useless or inferior that would otherwise be good: Creatures like Hierarch, Baloth, Mongrel, Wall of Blossoms, Masticore, Doran the Siege Tower, Rumbling Slum, Iwamori, Call of the Herd and Werebear are outclassed.
Flametongue Kavu has become a joke, it doesnt even manage to trade 1/1 anymore. It SHOULD be so good in Dragon Stompy.
Silver Knight is dead.
Toughness based removal spells like Lightning Bolt are close to unplayable in the format unless you also run Goyfs.
Again, just claiming that there is a problem because things "should" be different is not a compelling argument. I don't find the format any less enjoyable because I can't play Silver Knight.

Besides that, most of those cards (Silver Knight included) were questionable before Tarmogoyf was printed, anyway. There have always been (and will always be) tons of almost-playable cards in Legacy.

- It makes whole Archetypes unplayble.
Red based Control decks, like UR Landstill, can't be played because of one card.
Aggro decks like Boros Deck wins would be bad when they don't splash G for Goyf. The mana base allows to and so you put Goyfs into them.

Evolution happens, for example when Ponder was printed Portent became useless. But with so many cards being made useless by one card it is not evolution but a sick mutation.
Changes in the metagame, like those brought on by new cards entering the format, can influence (and even be included in) existing decks without needing to be banned. Assuming that UR control decks were actually viable before Tarmogoyf, there is nothing wrong with different kinds of control decks rising to take their place. Does that really mean that whole archetypes have been rendered unplayable? If so, is that really a bad thing?

I think Ponder is a fine analogy to Tarmogoyf. Ponder one-upped Portent, and Tarmogoyf one-upped Werebear. Tarmogoyf is neat in that it doesn't ask your deck to do anything special for it (like reach threshold), but it really doesn't replace all that many creatures that weren't smaller than Werebear, anyway.

Tarmogoyf is not broken, per se, and it isn't really all that hard to deal with. However, it is everywhere, and it is almost required in any deck playing creatures. In fact, I would go so far as to say that if you're deck plans on winning through creatures and you're not running Tarmogoyf, you misbuilt your deck.
Tarmogoyf is the staple combat-oriented creature in the format, just as Brainstorm is the staple draw spell and Swords to Plowshares is the staple removal spell. If you're looking for a combat-oriented creature, 'goyf is the best there is, but I don't see how that makes it ban-worthy.

Brainstorm is a powerful effect, but not run in EVERY deck. It is a staple, kind of like how in Standard if you were playing aggro you played Jitte. Same thing with brainstorm. Nobody was going to ban Counterspell because every blue deck ran it.
I don't understand why Tarmogoyf isn't comparable. It is the best of a class of cards, and a format staple.

Force of Will, is what keeps the format in check. Force SHOULD be banned, but it also MUST stay OFF the list, else combo takes the format, and makes every other deck grab their ankles.
This is a little off-topic, but Force of Will is another example of a format staple, and the best of a class of cards. I don't see any compelling reason it could ever be ban-worthy, combo or not. What do you suppose the purpose of banning cards is?

Goyf is seeing play in every deck. If decks like Dragon Stompy were splashing U for Brainstorm, then we would be in the same senerio that we have of MUC splashing G for Goyf.
Not every deck can actually afford to invest mana in fixing their draws, and Dragon Stompy is a prime example of this. However, every deck that can afford to play Brainstorm absolutely should do so.

I hate to use the 'fun' argument, but seriously, goyf is ruining the fun of Legacy deckbuilding and playing. Fetches and duals don't do that, they ENABLE cool decks to be built.
This is an important point. However, I disagree with you strongly. As I said before, I love Tarmogoyf. I love playing it, I love playing against it, and I love designing decks with it. I think that, from Legacy's perspective, Tarmogoyf is an absolute triumph of card design.

See, playing with Tarmogoyf gives a deck the ability to switch from control, to beatdown, and back again very easily. I enjoy this dynamic very much, and have found it very rewarding to develop my skill at taking advantage of it.

Tarmogoyf also operates as a great "Plan B" in some decks (Cephalid Breakfast and Landstill come to mind). This is also something I enjoy, as it leads to games playing out in a greater variety of ways, and to fewer games being miserable blow-outs for either side.

People are playing Threads of Disloyalty over Control Magic. Previous Smother bashers have left their Edicts in their binders. At this rate Deathmark will be viable removal in Legacy. That should say something.

@former-known-as-homarid

My post was a tad biting, so I apologize for that. And no problem with the affinity example (although I don't think the deck is that bad).

The thing is, goyf is majorly warping the format. Much more so than Goblins did. With goyf around, mind harness is better than control magic. Counterbalance then gets better because the format's average CC got lower. This may cause a rise in prison decks, complete with their chalices, yet those decks still can't overcome goyf (seriously, I've seen it).
Tarmogoyf has now become the scapegoat for every format change that people don't understand.

Control Magic answers Tarmogoyf as well as Threads of Disloyalty does, so I don't see your point here. Edict has worse problems than Tarmogoyf. Mind Harness is not better than Control Magic. Counterbalance would be insane whether Tarmogoyf had been printed or not. Prison decks don't care whether the opponent has a Tarmogoyf or a Werebear.

Can anyone provide an argument against banning goyf that isn't also an argument for unbanning Oath/Dragon?
I don't know about Dragon (would you pair it with Survival, or Buried Alive, or what?), but Oath is simply far more powerful than Tarmogoyf.

For the same :1::g:, you get a six-power flyer with trample and first strike, every turn. This kills in two swings a lot of the time, and it's an enchantment, which makes it harder to answer.

Oath also has the ability to magically transform into absurdly powerful utility creatures after boarding. In the appropriate matchups, :1::g: for a Thunder Dragon or a Platinum Angel is far more unfair than Tarmogoyf could ever be.

And price alone doesn't matter; but high prices for a card you're essentially forced to run in order to remain competitive do matter.
I don't agree that price matters at all, but as others have said, a set of 'goyfs is no more expensive than a set of Underground Seas, anyway.

Brainstorm, FoW, and STP do not function as win conditions. They don't swing the game strongly in someones favor. Brainstorm is card filter. It doesn't gain any card advantage, just quality at the mercy of a shuffle effect. FoW is card disadvantage and is used as protection, stoping degenerate first turns, or forcing something into play. STP is 1 for 1 removal. None of these cards have a parenthetical clause of "if this isn't answered, you will probably lose", and without most of them, we would have a format at the mercy of combo. Also, decks do not splash for the sole purpose of supporting any one of these cards.
I've seen Brainstorm swing games heavily into people's favor plenty of times. Also, Tarmogoyf does its share of keeping combo at bay, if that's a real argument for the merit of a card.

Decks do splash for Brainstorm and Force, but since they are both blue, and Force requires a heavier commitment, most of those decks end up with a base-blue manabase. See: Threshold (which also splashes for Swords to Plowshares.)

Tough to say exactly, but basically your goal as a card designer should be to make very good cards that still leave room for choices by the deck designer. This was always my problem with vintage. Every deck starts with X amount of cards as almost auto includes because they are too amazing not to run.

I really think that green beaters were a perfect example of good design before Goyf was printed. It had a ton of great beaters (Goose, Werebear, Mongrel, Troll, Iwamori, etc) that were never auto includes. Different strategies called for different choices; thresh took goose and bear, madness and loam liked Mongrel, control liked Troll, and midrange aggro like Iwamori. Goyf has made all of these choices and moot or at least secondary. Hell, I would probably put him in a deck that never put any cards into the graveyard.
Wild Mongrel, Troll Ascetic, and Iwamori of the LIVE THE DREAM were all pretty poor in Legacy before Tarmogoyf, because they were already worse than Werebear and Nimble Mongoose. Tarmogoyf may outclass them more sharply, but the point is that there is always a best choice among similar cards.

It almost seems like you want cards to be closer in power level, so you can be more free to get away with suboptimal card choices. I do not think this is a reason to ban a card.

The problem isn't that Goyf makes aggro too strong, the problem is he makes control/combo too strong.

People describe him as a "vanilla beater" in an effort to portray the argument that "aggro isn't unfair". But the problem isn't aggro. The problem is that he's such a ludicrously efficient kill condition that he makes control and combo too powerful; the aggro plan is pointless when a low-commitment creature exists as both trump to opposing aggro strategies and kill condition.
Goyf Sligh, an aggro deck in the DTB Forum, is basically viable only because of Tarmogoyf. I'm not sure I understand your point.

Hyperbole for the win? And if you DO have a removal spell that isn't narrow, and the opponent DOESN'T have an answer, what then? The best case scenario is card parity. That's an amazing proposition for 1G.
This could apply to Grizzly Bears. Is that card an "amazing proposition?"

Like what? Akroma? Yeah. I'm sure I'll have plenty of time to get Akroma out with 1 or more Goyfs staring me down.
Nantuko Shade comes to mind as a card not on the list of The Most Expensive Things I Can Think Of. So does Arc Slogger.

I transferred this from the less active thread.

Say:

You've dug for your Wrath of God, and fought through his counterwall. The 5/6 beater finally died after dealing 10 to you. And next turn he combos off because he was playing Breakfast, and you had to waste your resources dealing with Goyf.

Or you deal with a 4/5 Goyf after a swing with StP. That's an 8 point life differential with card parity. And what if he plays another one next turn? Or finishes setting up Balance-Top?

Yeah, Tarmogoyf is a really good card. These imaginary scenarios are pretty weak, though, In the first example, you lost because your poorly-designed deck had to allocate too many resources to dealing with a single threat. Wrath of God? A four-mana 1:1 trade? Breakfast would have won that game, regardless (it isn't like the 10 damage was relevant).

In the second example, you came out ahead in mana investment, but you're complaining that your opponent might keep playing Magic against you? Tarmogoyf looks perfectly acceptable there.

Goyf isn't insane in the sense that Long.dec or Academy were insane. He's insane because it's four deck slots that require immediate response, and don't have to directly tie into the rest of the deck's strategy. That's stupid. There's almost no reason NOT to run Goyf.
Both of those examples actually demonstrate why Tarmogoyf does not require an immediate response. You still have a significant life buffer, even after getting hit multiple times by an average-sized 'goyf. Compare this to things like Goblin Lackey, Dark Confidant, or even Sword of Fire and Ice.

Legacy games are often fast and brutal. Tarmogoyf is far from the scariest thing to see on the other side of the table.

Oh. Thank GOD. I didn't realize they had changed the rules so you could only play 56 forest and 4 Goyfs.

MEIN BAD.

Those answers are all slow and easily countered by Thoughtseize, Daze, Stifle, Force of Will, Counter-Top, Burning Wish, or secondary win conditions.
Didn't you already refute this as an argument in favor of Tarmogoyf earlier in the thread? If not, here I'll throw you a nice, slow lob:

Tarmogoyf isn't a problem because it is easily answered by Thoughtseize, Daze, Force of Will, Counterbalance, Burning Wish, Swords to Plowshares, Smother, and other copies of itself.

Yes, Goyf does allow things like Fish and other non-Thresh aggro-control builds to be more competitive than they previously were, but Goyf also goes into just about anything with creatures (the sole exception I can think of is the Tomb Aggro decks) and, in a sort of perverse way, stifles creativity because almost every new deck created these days should probably be running Goyf, on top of all of the various pre-existing decks that incorporate him.
Tarmogoyf does not stifle creativity any more than any other powerful card at the top of its class. In fact, since it doesn't require any specific type of deck design to be good (Tarmogoyf will even always block an opposing 'goyf, regardless of whether one deck can "power" it better than the other), Tarmogoyf probably encourages creativity.

I mean, before Tarmogoyf, Nimble Mongoose and Werebear were the benchmark creatures, and going toe-to-toe with them usually meant either playing much more expensive threats, or incorporating the threshold mechanic into your deck's design. How is Tarmogoyf more stifling than that?

Control and combo decks aren't running it because they want to, but because they can't afford not to (oops double negative).
You had better have a way of explaining this better, because it seems like a pretty silly statement to me.

[Volt]

I remember the same arguements to ban goblin lackey and ringleader a long time ago... this seems to be no different.

Of course. Any call for the banning of any creature is going to seem " to be no different," no matter how meritous the arguments for banning. For the record, I was never for the banning of Lackey or Ringleader. Those creatures only go in one deck, and I was fine with Goblins being the best deck. I think the main issue with Tarmogoyf is that it makes virtually every other creature in Magic irrelevant.

[badjuju]

You had better have a way of explaining this better, because it seems like a pretty silly statement to me.

Tarmogoyf was obviously designed with a mindset for aggro decks. Doesn't it seem even slightly wrong that pure control and pure combo decks are starting to adopt this card as a viable man-plan? Not even man-plan - win condition.

Beyond that, if you don't have an answer right then and there at the time Tarmogoyf hits the table, you will be taking near-lethal amounts of damage. He's not like Lackey. Lackey needs other goblins to compliment him. Granted that's a sideways argument, Tarmogoyf doesn't need the support of other creatures because he wins games on his own. His cost also makes him extremely splash-able.

As for a more literal interpretation of what I said earlier: not having Tarmogoyf handicaps your deck. This becomes a more of: why not run Tarmogoyf? He trumps all other win conditions AND blocks opposing Tarmogoyfs. And thus he was included in virtually every deck that can support green. That to me is format warping, however subtle it is and regardless of whether or not the card is overpowered.

EDIT: That's the problem - most banned cards are banned because they are overpowered and trigger a reaction. Tarmogoyf doesn't seem overpowered because it can be dealt with by common cards, the same ones we've been using forever, which I believe skews our perspectives and covers the fact that goyf is truly undercosted for his punch. Respective creatures of equal power (ie. Tog, Welder, Confidant) aren't considered banworthy because they cannot be played in every deck. Tarmogoyf can.

[Happy Gilmore]

Of course. Any call for the banning of any creature is going to seem " to be no different," no matter how meritous the arguments for banning. For the record, I was never for the banning of Lackey or Ringleader. Those creatures only go in one deck, and I was fine with Goblins being the best deck. I think the main issue with Tarmogoyf is that it makes virtually every other creature in Magic irrelevant.

Really? So Cards like Shriekmaw, Big Game Hunter, and Bone Shreader are irrelevant?

[Volt]

@Obfuscate: Basically, you like Tarmogoyf because it simplifies deck-building decisions for you. I dislike it because it drastically (yes, drastically) reduces creature diversity in Legacy. Tarmogoyf is the first creature that gets included in every deck that contains forests. And if your deck doesn't include forests, it probably should.

[Volt]

Really? So Cards like Shriekmaw, Big Game Hunter, and Bone Shreader are irrelevant?

Funny that you would mention only creatures that happen to kill Tarmogoyf.

EDIT: Btw, those creatures mostly get run in Survival decks... which also run Tarmogoyf.

[Anusien]

There is always going to be best cards in certain categories. I think the complain is that everyone knows it now, and it's affecting the metagame in obvious ways. The best of anything is always a convenient scapegoat.

I tend to like Tarmogoyf because it's quite the equalizer. The fact that your Goyfs are as big as theirs means that many matchups are less random. Tarmogoyf is much more easily answered than, say, Werebear because he's always equal.

The anti-Tarmogoyf arguments fall into a few camps:
Price) Who cares? Seriously, we play with $300 manabases.
Obsoleting an Archetype) This happens all the time. In order to win that obsoleting an archetype requires a ban to fix, you need to win that having that archetype around is better for Magic than the cost a ban. I feel like Tarmogoyf makes more decks viable than it obsoletes.
It's Too Good) It's clearly not. It doesn't Trample or Evade, and it kicks it to any removal spell that also could have killed a Werebear. Anyway, winning that it's too good is nearly impossible, since there's no criteria for how good is too good.

[Volt]

It's Too Good) It's clearly not. It doesn't Trample or Evade, and it kicks it to any removal spell that also could have killed a Werebear. Anyway, winning that it's too good is nearly impossible, since there's no criteria for how good is too good.

Oh good, another permutation of the "It's just a vanilla beater" (http://mtgthesource.com/forums/showpost.php?p=186576&postcount=53) argument.

Again, my main problem with Tarmogoyf is that it reduces creature diversity (http://mtgthesource.com/forums/showpost.php?p=186583&postcount=57) in the format.

[TeenieBopper]

I tend to like Tarmogoyf because it's quite the equalizer. The fact that your Goyfs are as big as theirs means that many matchups are less random.

And if you don't run Tarmagoyf? What then? You pretty much pack it in. That's the point the banning scene is making, and it's not necessarily one I disagree with. For basically every deck in the format, it's play 'goyf or go home.

Look at the link Volt posted. (http://mtgthesource.com/forums/showpost.php?p=186583&postcount=57) Tarmagoyf is seen almost 100% more than the next actual win condition on the list.

Before someone busts out the "But Brainstorm is seen just as much as Tarmagoyf" argument again, think about this. Decks that play blue are going to play Brainstorm. Decks are playing green just for Tarmagoyf.

[frogboy]

I find it pretty hilarious how Extended is okay with a random 5/6 for two running around but SHIT NO we can't have that in Legacy.

[Phantom]

Wild Mongrel, Troll Ascetic, and Iwamori of the LIVE THE DREAM were all pretty poor in Legacy before Tarmogoyf, because they were already worse than Werebear and Nimble Mongoose. Tarmogoyf may outclass them more sharply, but the point is that there is always a best choice among similar cards.


This is flat out not true. A deck that won the Legacy champs last year (UG Madness) ran Wild Mongrel. That's my whole point. While there will always be cards that are better in a vacuum, decks are not created in a vacuum. Some decks fill their hand better than they fill the yard. They ran Mongrel (or if they could abuse the discard). Some decks got to 2GG quicker than they got the Threshold. They ran Iwamori (or Baloth, or whatever). Some decks blew the board up with Deed or Disk. They ran Troll. Other decks were constantly sweeping the board and not wanting to break their own Standstill. They ran Factories. Now they ALL run Tarmogoyf!


Anyway, winning that it's too good is nearly impossible, since there's no criteria for how good is too good.

Nice Freudian slip of a misspell. And just because there is no official criteria doesn't mean we can't use our brains. Otherwise, if there is no criteria than nothing is too good, get me 4 Lotus and let's have some "fun".

I want to say more on this later, because I really do find it interesting, but I have two exams tomorrow. Gah.

[TeenieBopper]

Extended is a completely different format. You simply can't compare the two. There are decks that are good in that format that aren't good here and vice versa. That completely changes the dynamic of the format. Also, the card pool in Extended is much, much smaller than Legacy, so I'd be willing to bet that many of the popular decks in Extended would be popular anyways, with or without Tarmagoyf. With such a large cardpool, there are many decks that could otherwise be played in Legacy, but can't because of Tarmagoyf. I suppose "stifling innovation" would be too strong a term, but it's somewhat valid. I mean, you don't have to play Tarmagoyf. But honestly, why wouldn't you?

[CynicalSquirrel]

I think one of the most disturbing aspects of Tarmogoyf is that the best or at least most common answer to it is your own Tarmogoyfs. It's almost created a chain reaction where one deck runs Goyf and then another runs it to try to cancel out the other Goyfs. I've seen a lot of games that basically just came down to who drew how many Tarmogoyfs, which I think is one of the clear signs of a really really overpowered card.

That being said, I'm still not sure if it should be banned. The question to me is if Tarmogoyf is a broken card, or simply a format defining card the way Goblin Lackey was a defining card earlier. To be entirely honest, I'm not really sure what the answer is to that question.

[Goaswerfraiejen]

This is flat out not true. A deck that won the Legacy champs last year (UG Madness) ran Wild Mongrel. That's my whole point. While there will always be cards that are better in a vacuum, decks are not created in a vacuum. Some decks fill their hand better than they fill the yard. They ran Mongrel (or if they could abuse the discard). Some decks got to 2GG quicker than they got the Threshold. They ran Iwamori (or Baloth, or whatever). Some decks blew the board up with Deed or Disk. They ran Troll. Other decks were constantly sweeping the board and not wanting to break their own Standstill. They ran Factories. Now they ALL run Tarmogoyf!


I think you're missing the point (actually, I don't think that you specifically are, but I'm worried that others might), which is (was) that the argument saying that these cards are now useles and invalidated is patently untrue; just as those cards proved useful alongside something else in given decks, so too do they prove just as useful now (but often alongside Tarmogoyf). Their conditionality was both their great strength and their great weakness; Tarmogoyf's great strength is its unconditionality, which is essentially what's at stake in this whole banning issue. Tarmogoyf is an excellent complement to or finisher for most decks; that much is obvious. Whether or not it's the best use of that slot is another question. While it will probably never be a bad inclusion, it will not always be the best inclusion. It's up to players to discern the difference, however, and we're not doing that all too well, I think.

Nevertheless, the point that cards should not be compared in a vacuum is an important one--hence why we can't really submit a list of "outclassed" cretures as evidence of the need to ban Tarmogoyf. I also agree that its omnipresence and price tag are a little depressing


TeenieBopper: I think that the argument that we need to "play 'goyf or go home" is patently untrue. Any deck equipped to deal with creatures will make mince meat of Tarmogoyf--Lands.dec and Belcher, for example, neither run it, need it, or fear it. The question that needs to be asked is whether or not Tarmogoyf is the best possible win condition for a given deck--and in many cases, that's going to be a yes. Similarly, when building a blue draw engine, you have to ask yourself whether or not Brainstorm and Ponder will make for the best core. Most often, Brainstorm will garner a "yes", and Ponder also has a strong chance. Winning without and against Tarmogoyf is not particularly difficult--note the "vanilla creature" argument--what's problematic from the opponent's standpoint is winning through such a huge wall (and this is where removal comes in, obviously). Tarmogoyf is not replacing creatures (indeed, if your only win condition is four Tarmogoyfs, I doubt you'll be getting all that far); rather, it's replacing finishers, thus lowering curves and increasing speed. And even then, other finishers are still important.


Extended is a completely different format. You simply can't compare the two. There are decks that are good in that format that aren't good here and vice versa.


With all due respect, I don't think that that's relevant: it would seem that Legacy's larger cardpool would mean a greater adaptability against any single threat.


Also, the card pool in Extended is much, much smaller than Legacy, so I'd be willing to bet that many of the popular decks in Extended would be popular anyways, with or without Tarmagoyf.


I fail to see the connection to the argument at hand. Are you implying that Tarmogoyf's presence means that certain decks are unplayable in Legacy? That these decks just disappeared once Tarmogoyf came onto the scene rather than adapt (often to include it)? I'm sorry, but if that's the case, you're going to have to point out some distinct decks that have disappeared. As far as I can tell, the only deck that really gained in popularity thanks to Tarmogoyf was Threshold--and it was far from unpopular to begin with.



With such a large cardpool, there are many decks that could otherwise be played in Legacy, but can't because of Tarmagoyf. I suppose "stifling innovation" would be too strong a term, but it's somewhat valid. I mean, you don't have to play Tarmagoyf. But honestly, why wouldn't you?


Again, what decks (as a whole--"Tarmogoyf-less Threshold" is just bad argumentation) are being kept down by Tarmogoyf alone? This is a real question: I just don't see it.


That's not to say that I don't see some legitimate concerns about Tarmogoyf:

-The price tag is ridiculous.
-Its unconditionality is leading to an overemphasis on the card, which in turn leads to its omnipresence--a fact that is both disturbing and, to a certain extent, un-fun (a lot of you are making this point, and I don't disagree with it; what I disagree with is the justification that goes with it, which says that "Tarmogoyf invalidates this or that"--it does no such thing).


While these are legitimate concerns, I really don't think they're enough for a ban. Perhaps some sort of solution is necessary (such as symmetrical graveyard hate), but I really don't feel that a ban will work to our advantage. At that point, what would we do? Revert to the metagame as it stood 6 months ago? I dunno about you, but I remember us all complaining vociferously at the time.

Personally, I like the fact that Tarmogoyf has placed the emphasis back on creature combat. Of course, that's just my own quirky nature. But perhaps its a harbinger of metagame shakeups to come.

[Phantom]

I'm curious what you think about my anti-banning argument. Is my assertion alteast correct? Has goyf made pre-existing strategies better? Does it prevent format evolution or create innovation?

Sorry for the slow response, but you took the time to answer my post, so here goes:

I think your assertion is correct, but your conclusions are wrong. Goyf has made pre-existing strategies stronger, but so would Demonic Tutor, Black Lotus, Mana Drain, Oath of Druids, and on and on.

I think it does stifle innovation and evolution because it takes out any deck design choice. If I told you I was making a white deck, and had to choose between Grunt, Silver Knight, and Exalted Angel, which would you recommend to me? You would say "what is the deck like" and give me Grunt in fish, Knight in WW, and Angel in Stax/AStompy, right? Now if I'm building a green deck and ask for a call between Werebear, Tarmogoyf, and Iwamori (or green fattie of choice) do you even have to look? Is there any conceivable Legacy deck where Goyf isn't the right choice?


I think you're missing the point (actually, I don't think that you specifically are, but I'm worried that others might), which is (was) that the argument saying that these cards are now useles and invalidated is patently untrue; just as those cards proved useful alongside something else in given decks, so too do they prove just as useful now (but often alongside Tarmogoyf). Their conditionality was both their great strength and their great weakness; Tarmogoyf's great strength is its unconditionality, which is essentially what's at stake in this whole banning issue. Tarmogoyf is an excellent complement to or finisher for most decks; that much is obvious. Whether or not it's the best use of that slot is another question. While it will probably never be a bad inclusion, it will not always be the best inclusion. It's up to players to discern the difference, however, and we're not doing that all too well, I think.


Thanks for the response. I think my point is that it's ALWAYS the best use for the spot. I mean, have we ever seen a creature that is run in Combo, Aggro, Control and all the hybrids in between. I don't think it's an accident that the Combo decks with Goyf outperformed Belcher and TES at Worlds (off topic, nvm).

This is a non recursive 2cc creature that has found his way into a slow as molasses deck (4c Landstill) that constantly sweeps the board, doesn't want to cast summon spells, and has no plans on winning anytime soon. Read that again! They are literally playing this creature in decks where it has NO BUSINESS simply because it is so overpowered that they can't not.

This seems to me the very definition of stifled innovation. That is not the same as HALTING innovation, but when we are all nearly forced to run a 4-of no matter what our gameplan, I find my innovation stifled.



TeenieBopper: I think that the argument that we need to "play 'goyf or go home" is patently untrue. Any deck equipped to deal with creatures will make mince meat of Tarmogoyf--Lands.dec and Belcher, for example, neither run it, need it, or fear it.


The problem with this argument is the same could be said about a 15/15 3cc creature. In fact, similar things were said about Flash. The problem with the argument is that answers to Goyf aren't enough. You need a strategy that is equal to or superior to a Goyf strategy in order to make that deck a good choice for a tourney. You could play UBW Fish and load up on answers to Goyf (Thoughtseize, StP, Slaughter Pact, Grunt, Terror, etc) but is your deck just as good against a random deck as a deck that includes Goyf? And what about the other 56 cards in that Goyf deck? You still have to deal with them, and what if your answers don't do anything against those cards? I mean, if Goyf is so easy to answer than why are Goyfs splattered all over the T8s?

You brought up Belcher for example. It is a combo strategy. I personally think that Breakfast is a superior deck because it runs a combo strategy, but with a Goyf backup. I might be wrong, but I think more and more results will bear me out. (This might be an oversimplification and I really shouldn't be talking about combo with authority)

[TeenieBopper]

I think that the argument that we need to "play 'goyf or go home" is patently untrue. Any deck equipped to deal with creatures will make mince meat of Tarmogoyf--Lands.dec and Belcher, for example, neither run it, need it, or fear it.

Was it an exaggeration? Maybe (though not much of one). Patently untrue? I think not. Tarmagoyf is so powerful that it's being used where it doesn't enhance the natural synergy of the deck, or is in direct conflict with the aims of the deck (Goblins and 4c Landstill, respectively). Many decks (in fact, I'd say all except for the two that you mentioned) are made better by Tarmagoyf.


The question that needs to be asked is whether or not Tarmogoyf is the best possible win condition for a given deck--and in many cases, that's going to be a yes.

That's exactly my point. Tarmagoyf is head and shoulders above any other creature in the format. Unless you're running Belcher/TES or 43lands, you should be running Tarmagoyf.

Stifling innovation doesn't necessarily mean that decks are being held down. It can also mean that any given deck will be made better by running Tarmagoyf. If you're not running Tarmagoyf, you're running an inferior version of the deck. Hence "play Tarmagoyf or go home."

Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing the metagame of six months ago. Thresh, Goblins, Landstill, Belcher/TES were all on pretty much a level playing field. Now, X/g aggro control is just better than everything else in the format.

Just to reiterate, I'm not necessarily in favor of banning the card (Seriously. Terror), but I seriously hate the omnipresence of the card. It's worse than Goblin Lackey ever was.

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

With all due respect, I don't think that that's relevant: it would seem that Legacy's larger cardpool would mean a greater adaptability against any single threat.

I'm not sure that's how it pans out in reality. A stronger supply of answers and card manipulation means that a low-commitment kill condition like Goyf is stronger, not weaker.



Other replies later.

[Happy Gilmore]

........

I think you said it better than I ever could. I echo your sentiment.

[Tao]

Besides that, most of those cards (Silver Knight included) were questionable before Tarmogoyf was printed, anyway. There have always been (and will always be) tons of almost-playable cards in Legacy.

I agree that I have given some cards that were not playe d a lot. But Ravenous Baloth and / or Loxodon Hierarch were a staple in Survival decks and Rock decks. Flametongue Kavu was a staple in Survival and in Dragon Stompy, Silver Knight was good in Angel Sompy, Boros and similar decks.



I think Ponder is a fine analogy to Tarmogoyf. Ponder one-upped Portent, and Tarmogoyf one-upped Werebear. Tarmogoyf is neat in that it doesn't ask your deck to do anything special for it (like reach threshold), but it really doesn't replace all that many creatures that weren't smaller than Werebear, anyway.

That's the main mistake in your statement.
Tarmogoyf is not only an upgraded Werebear. It is also an upgraded Ravenous Baloth, Psychatog, Decree of Justice, Wild Mongrel and Silver Knight.
But Ponder is an upgraded Portent, and nothing else.
It is not also an upgrade to Brainstorm, Accumulated Knowledge, Thirst for Knowledge and Fact or Fiction.

If Tarmogoyf was a Drawspell, it would be "1U - Draw 3 cards" >>> note that Goyf is of course not as powerful as that spell would be. But the gap between Goyf and the next best creature would be as big as the gap between that draw spell and the next best draw spell.
Brainstorm would still be run as a good card like Mongoose, Predict would be outclassed like Werebear, AK like Mongrel, Thirst like Psychatog and Fact like Hierarch.




Saying something "should not" be without any reasoning is nonsensical.

The reason why Landstill should not play a Vanilla creature is because it contradicts the deck's game plan. Of course there is always a critical point in Magic from where raw power beats synergy:

Just as an example: "1W - gain 20 life" would be played in Threshold even if the deck shouldn't play life gain.

And Goyf has just hit that critical point of raw power that makes a Vanilla Beater playable in Landstill despite the total lack of synergy.


I fail to see a problem with control decks playing Tarmogoyf, especially if there isn't a problem with control decks playing Psychatog. Nothing is unfair about hybrid strategies.

The problem is that Psychatog is not also used in every other deck.

Tog is playable when you play a ton of card draw, Wild Mongrel when you have an aggressive strategy, Werebear when you play quick draw spells in an aggressive deck, Decree of Justice when you control the boad and have many lands out, Krosan Cloudscraper when you mill your library to pump a Sutured Ghoul.

Goyf is all these decks just like Clamp was in most Standard decks when it was allowed.


I remember the same arguements to ban goblin lackey and ringleader a long time ago... this seems to be no different.

The difference is that Vial Goblins was very close to get the ban hammer in some way, Vial, Lackey or Ringleader. This time I don't believe that WotC are even considering to ban Goyf.


If I told you I was making a white deck, and had to choose between Grunt, Silver Knight, and Exalted Angel, which would you recommend to me? You would say "what is the deck like" and give me Grunt in fish, Knight in WW, and Angel in Stax/AStompy, right? Now if I'm building a green deck and ask for a call between Werebear, Tarmogoyf, and Iwamori (or green fattie of choice) do you even have to look? Is there any conceivable Legacy deck where Goyf isn't the right choice?


It is even worse. I'd recommend for your WW to splash Savannah for Goyf and in your Fish to splash Tropical for Goyf.

[andrew77]

You guys have to realize goyf isn't nearly powerful enough to be banworthy. Sure it has caused a huge impact on the format, but other cards do too. I mean look at what narcomoeba has done. It pretty much forces everyone to play graveyard hate, but wizards won't be banning it anytime soon.

Sure goyf makes threshold pretty ridiculous and has upset the format in terms of what decks are out there, it doesn't mean it will be banned.

In all honesty though, the biggest problem I have with goyf is the clock he can provide. Some of you are saying its 4-5 turns, but for a single creature that is fast. Especially when threshold took a hell of a long time to kill. I mean I remember the days where I played TES v white thresh and even if they stopped my first attempt to combo I had at least 7/8 turns to try again. Now if my combo turn is stopped the ***** player will probably have like a 3 turn clock on me. Doubling the goldfish speed of threshold decks is pretty damn powerful and that is my problem with goyf.

Nonetheless I don't think it should be banned. I wouldn't mind a ban, but it isn't necessary

[GreenOne]

Why isn't a poll attached to that thread? Can someone add it?

However, Goyf is just unfunny.

It stifles creativity: in the "decks to beat forum" atm the only decks not playing it are some of the Life from the loam Variants, Burn and Aluren. It gets played even by combo decks and it affects the combo matchups too (it's a FAST clock, much faster than werebear/quirion driad/mongrel)

Legacy use to be a really diverse format, now it's up to goyfvariants.format

Looking at my signature... now we have Vial Goyflins, Goyfstill, Goyf Stax and Monogreen Goyf-Stompy. So we're probably closer to an end.

[Goaswerfraiejen]

Phantom and TeenieBopper: Thanks for clarifying your positions. I’m not wholly in disagreement with what you’re saying, just some of the arguments that those points get attached to (like holding decks or cards down).




The problem with this argument is the same could be said about a 15/15 3cc creature. In fact, similar things were said about Flash.


Yes and no. The difference is that while Flash had a very limited set of answers (they were basically black and blue) and required decks to reconfigure their strategies to make room for those answers, the answers to Tarmogoyf were present in almost every deck prior to Tarmogoyf’s introduction into the format. Goblins is largely to blame for that, but there it stands. I don’t disagree that the investment-return ratio is ridiculously skewed when it comes to Tarmogoyf, but I do think that I like the format a lot more as it is than how it was six months ago. Like I said, I too have some concerns about Tarmogoyf’s omnipresence, but those aren’t enough to convince me that the format would be better without it. I don’t want to try to convince you that I’m right or anything, because I know that won’t work, and there isn’t much middle ground between our opinions.

Part of the trouble with Tarmogoyf in Magic as it stands now is that Tarmogoyf draws its power from a symmetrical effect, and Magic just isn’t equipped to deal with that aspect of a card yet. It’s sort of like if we had Bridge from Below but could only get rid of our own graveyard. The “symmetrical zone” is sort of like a new zone in Magic that is a little under-represented at the moment.



The problem with the argument is that answers to Goyf aren't enough. You need a strategy that is equal to or superior to a Goyf strategy in order to make that deck a good choice for a tourney. You could play UBW Fish and load up on answers to Goyf (Thoughtseize, StP, Slaughter Pact, Grunt, Terror, etc) but is your deck just as good against a random deck as a deck that includes Goyf? And what about the other 56 cards in that Goyf deck? You still have to deal with them, and what if your answers don't do anything against those cards? I mean, if Goyf is so easy to answer than why are Goyfs splattered all over the T8s?


But what is a “’goyf strategy?” By and large, Tarmogoyf just capitalizes on pre-existing strategic trends, meaning that if you can deal with the deck in question, Tarmogoyf’s presence will just be a minor headache. I’m not saying that the difficulty of dealing with decks doesn’t change with Tarmogoyf’s inclusion in a deck--since clearly the aggressive boost it provides changes things up a bit--but rather that the format was and is equipped to deal with it without jumping through hoops. The only “problem” that needs resolving is, as you rightly point out, Tarmogoyf’s inclusion in decks where its inclusion does not seem to be the best choice. I recognize that your concern extends to decks in which it’s the best choice anyway, but our own common ground lies more with those decks in which Tarmogoyf’s presence is an oddity and an aberration.



I agree that I have given some cards that were not played a lot. But Ravenous Baloth and / or Loxodon Hierarch were a staple in Survival decks and Rock decks. Flametongue Kavu was a staple in Survival and in Dragon Stompy, Silver Knight was good in Angel Sompy, Boros and similar decks.

Hierarch is still a staple in those kinds of decks, and FtK was quickly losing ground prior to Tarmogoyf. And as I said earlier, Silver Knight was only good as long as red creatures dominated the format, another trend that was quickly passing. The problem that I have with these sorts of examples is that you’re bringing in either highly conditional creatures or utility creatures that saw only a limited amount of play in decks designed to abuse their abilities--and these sorts of decks still use them, because what was interesting was the fat coupled with the ability. Hierarch isn’t bad all of a sudden; he still gains life and swings for four, and any deck planning on sliding him in and out is still going to do so. Naming cards that aren’t as effective in the metagame just doesn’t constitute a great argument against Tarmogoyf unless, like Flash, it makes anything but a select few cards absolutely irrelevant--which, being a pure beatstick, itjust can’t do. All it can do is replace other beatsticks. For example, while Silver Knight is no longer a great choice, Spectral Lynx is--when we’re talking about such highly conditional cards, the arguments just don’t tread water.

Again, I’m not trying to convince you that I’m right and you’re wrong, but this kind of argument just can’t be accepted as valid; it’s exceedingly easy to list narrow cards that are no longer stellar choices, just as it’s exceedingly easy to list a new set of narrow cards that’s now a whole lot more stellar.

[Slay]

The problem with Tarmogoyf is that once it hits play, the game revolves around protecting it or answering it. It's easy to do both, but to claim it doesn't fundamentally affect the focus of the game is very very wrong. There's only a few other cards in Legacy that have the ability to do that, specifically(but not entirely) Lackey, Counterbalance, Dark Confidant, Vial and maaaaybe Ruins. Of all these, two are easily killable, while two requires a deck built to abuse it, and Vial requires an aggro strategy, which has been basically obsoleted by Tarmogoyf.

No, it's not easy to answer Tarmogoyf. To do so you have to play non-damage related creaturekill spells, or have a army of critters for Tarmogoyf to swing into. One-on-one he beats nearly every creature in the game at the early, middle, and lategame points, so you can't make him chump out. So, you either have to find your Explosives, Deed, or Swords(Smother?), or another Goyf, or you have to counter it. I would say that it has the most resilience for as powerful an effect it has.

And I remind you, that when you play Tarmogoyf it doesn't require any extra mana commitment. Your opponent has to answer it then, or he faces death. You, however, can keep swinging with it every turn, and continue developing your board position. A tarmogoyf, on average, is at least a time walk, sometimes much more than that. It's fundamentally a game-warping play.

While I personally don't feel it's ready to get banned, it's getting mighty close to the plateau of other banned, broken cards in terms of format warping.
-Slay

[Zuriya]

Perhaps Morningtide will include cards that make Tarmogoyf really unattractive.
Cards that would punish players for playing Tarmogoyf. The tough thing is i can't find any elegant examples. Perhaps a land that you can reveal while searching your library that kills Tarmogoyf a la Panglacial Wurm.
I guess i have to conclude that a ban of Tarmogoyf is the best clean answer. I hope they unban something green at the same time.

[Bardo]

Cards that would punish players for playing Tarmogoyf.

Planar Void?

[Nihil Credo]

As I said in an earlier post, the key is actually to have cards that 1) can't be run along with Tarmogoyf and 2) aren't strictly worse than just playing Goyfs of your own.

The problem isn't answering Tarmogoyf. We already can. The problem is that there aren't enough alternatives to Tarmogoyf, which is why people feel there is a problem.

[freakish777]

Again, my main problem with Tarmogoyf is that it reduces creature diversity (http://mtgthesource.com/forums/showpost.php?p=186583&postcount=57) in the format.

What creatures does Goyf "kick out the format" that Lackey doesn't?



Sorry Slay, couldn't resist...


The problem with Werebear is that once it hits play, the game revolves around protecting it or answering it. It's easy to do both, but to claim it doesn't fundamentally affect the focus of the game is very very wrong. There's only a few other cards in Legacy that have the ability to do that, specifically(but not entirely) Lackey, Counterbalance, Dark Confidant, Vial and maaaaybe Ruins. Of all these, two are easily killable, while two requires a deck built to abuse it, and Vial requires an aggro strategy, which has been basically obsoleted (besides Goblins) by Werebear.

No, it's not easy to answer Werebear. To do so you have to play non-damage related creaturekill spells (besides FlameTongue Kavu), or have a army of critters for Tarmogoyf to swing into. One-on-one he beats nearly every creature in the game at the early, middle, and lategame points (besides other Threshold creatures), so you can't make him chump out. So, you either have to find your Explosives, Deed, or Swords(Smother?), or another Werebear, or you have to counter it. I would say that it has the most resilience for as powerful an effect it has.

And I remind you, that when you play Werebear it doesn't require any extra mana commitment. Your opponent has to answer it then, or he faces death. You, however, can keep swinging with it every turn, and continue developing your board position. A Werebear, on average, is at least a time walk, sometimes much more than that. It's fundamentally a game-warping play.

While I personally don't feel it's ready to get banned, it's getting mighty close to the plateau of other banned, broken cards in terms of format warping.
-Slay

@Bardo. You know what sucks? Having to respond to your opponent's turn 1 Planar Void by cracking a fetchland and Brainstorming, just so that your Goyfs are atleast 2/3's later in the game...

[Phantom]

What creatures does Goyf "kick out the format" that Lackey doesn't?


1) FtK

Actually, Lackey didn't hurt creature diversity AT ALL. The one deck could run it, did, and the rest of the decks went about their business. Lackey really only affected the ANSWERS you would run (and occasionally your overall speed goals). All it really did to the creatures was put a premium on low CC and pro:red.

Goyf on the other hand kicks out the worst 4 creatures (mostly) IN EVERY DECK (for example Thresh ditching werebear). So, to answer your question, a shit load.

@Planar Void: I think he meant good cards.

[Zuriya]

Well. Planar Void looks fine. But I was thinking of hate like Tormod's Crypt against Dredge or Energy Flux against Affinity. For a card like Tarmogoyf there is no such card (i think) unless you make unelegant cards.
And Wizards won't continue printing new candidates for "best creature ever" at that pace.

[Volt]

What creatures does Goyf "kick out the format" that Lackey doesn't?

Practically all of them. I mean, just click on that little linky thing I provided. That says it all.

[Cold_air]

I want him in because I just spent 160 dollars on a Chinese set. : (

[Windux]

I want him in because I just spent 160 dollars on a Chinese set. : (

I spend 8$ for my set and bought 15 sets :)

I like goyf.
It's a creature in a format, where every deck can easily handle creatures or even ignore creatures (combo).

[Slay]

Sorry Slay, couldn't resist...

Well you should have resisted, because the Werebear/Tarmogoyf analogy is dumb as hell. Werebear doesn't actually become a threat until the midgame, and is terrible in the early game. In the late game it's also worse, and in a lot of decks it's worthless because of both of those facts. The fact that almost anytime you lay down a 'goyf the focus of the game immediately shifts around it is one that does not apply to Werebear, for extremely obvious reasons.
-Slay

[Lothian]

It's a creature in a format, where every deck can easily handle creatures or even ignore creatures (combo).

Couldn't say better

Tarmo does perfect what he's supposed to do: beat down, and that's about it

People who can't handle Tarmo in Legacy, just go back to Standard.

What tarmo does, it clocks you down a bit quicker than werebear, and that's it!

if you play combo, you wouldn't care less...

If you play control (like me in monoU), then any beater is a threat and is handled accordingly.

what the difference between Tarmo and werebear?

except Tarmo doesn't produre mana?

The only annoyed people are monoR.

And sorry lads, but I'm not going to cry for them...

[Bardo]

@Bardo. You know what sucks? Having to respond to your opponent's turn 1 Planar Void by cracking a fetchland and Brainstorming, just so that your Goyfs are atleast 2/3's later in the game...

Sure, 2/3s for 1G--not much better than Elvish Warrior. :smile:

[Bovinious]

Because having to play terrible narrow cards like Planar Void MD (or even SB) is a sign of unhealthy distortion at all...

[etrigan]

Because having to play terrible narrow cards like Planar Void MD (or even SB) is a sign of unhealthy distortion at all...

Who's playing Planar Void?

[zulander]

It stifles creativity: in the "decks to beat forum" atm the only decks not playing it are some of the Life from the loam Variants, Burn and Aluren. It gets played even by combo decks and it affects the combo matchups too (it's a FAST clock, much faster than werebear/quirion driad/mongrel)


Just because it's more efficient than it's counterparts doesn't mean it should be banned. And for the record.. I've seen many a 6/6+ dryads turn 3/4, so please stop saying goyf is much faster then them.

[Bovinious]

Who's playing Planar Void?

Bardo was proposing it as an incredicbly stupid and narrow answer to Goyf or something, a sure sign of unhealthy format distortion.

[Volt]

Bardo was proposing it as an incredicbly stupid and narrow answer to Goyf or something, a sure sign of unhealthy format distortion.

Incredibly stupid and narrow? Planar Void is perhaps the best anti-graveyard card in the game. I would never play it maindeck (that would surely be a sign of the apocalypse), but it's a great sideboard card.

[Atwa]

Incredibly stupid and narrow? Planar Void is perhaps the best anti-graveyard card in the game. I would never play it maindeck (that would surely be a sign of the apocalypse), but it's a great sideboard card.

QFT.

If not taken care of, it hoses Loam decks, Goyf deck, Threshold, Dredge, Iggy, Breakfast and Reaminate. It also hurts decks like 42Lands.dec, Tog, Landstill and Staxs.

The only decks it really sucks against are MUC and aggro decks.

[Zach Tartell]

Who's playing Planar Void?

I tested one in my GWrb enchantress for a while. It was mediocre, so I switched to a couple of MD'd Leylines, then moved the playset to my board, then dropped black.

Goyf is good. I really don't want to make an asshat out of myself by making a statement I can't back up. You folk are crazy.

[Wallace]

QFT.

If not taken care of, it hoses Loam decks, Goyf deck, Threshold, Dredge, Iggy, Breakfast and Reaminate. It also hurts decks like 42Lands.dec, Tog, Landstill and Staxs.

The only decks it really sucks against are MUC and aggro decks.


Is there really a goyf deck, I mean a deck that just runs Goyf and ways to make goyf bigger? Goyf Slight would be the only deck I can think of that even comes close and that's really just a burn deck with some big, low cc creatures. So I don't really think we can say there is a goyf deck, just a whole bunch of decks that threw Goyf into the mix.

[C.P.]

Why are people still talking about this, I mean there are valid points for Banning Goyf and Points to not ban him. It's now come down to a matter opinion now, Goyf is one of the biggest creatures ever, as compaired to it's cc, Goyf exploded onto the every format. When I first read Goyf I thought ehhh, he will replace Werebear in most decks and see some standard play, I sold 11 of them for $2.00 each at GP Colombus, like 2 weeks later I was being offered $10 each for the 4 I had left and luckly I held on to them. So, stop whining about banning or not banning Goyf, he IS NOT going to be banned any time soon. If you were lucky enough to have a set before the price went through the roof, good for you, if not, to bad open some packs of future sight.

I traded my last copy of flash(perchased $3 each, and sold for 12$ each) for a playset of these. :)

I agree that he is not going to get axed. and while goyf decreased aggro diversity, it increased control + combo diversity, in a way, at least. I think it is fair tradeoff, seeing how everyone complained about goboos killing control before goyf.

[So Annoying My Account Is Banned]

From what I see here the best course of action would not be to ban tarmogoyf. There have already been too many people who spent too much money on the goyf that there would be a lot of protest to it, perhaps too much. A much better course of action I think for wizards to take would be to print something that nerfs goyf, not makes it tottally useless but nerfs it a lot.

problem is, I cannot think of a card that would do that, perhaps a 'act like cards that are in graveyards aren't there' kind of effect would seem pretty sweet.

oh, have you noticed how Tarmogoyf and Britney Spears are so much a like as well? They both started off somewhat slim and not a total nuisance, and then a little bit later they are fat as hell and practically everyone but their devout fans are yelling at them to gtfo. it's so uncanny!!

[Atwa]

Is there really a goyf deck, I mean a deck that just runs Goyf and ways to make goyf bigger? Goyf Slight would be the only deck I can think of that even comes close and that's really just a burn deck with some big, low cc creatures. So I don't really think we can say there is a goyf deck, just a whole bunch of decks that threw Goyf into the mix.

I've actually designed a pure Goyf deck when Future Sight was release (and everybody else was still arguing about Flash). I've played it in the last Source Tourney to a 3/4th place, out of over 50 people.

I still play it and the deck is still pretty strong. I had never thought at the moment every deck would start playing it, but there sure are other goyf decks around other than Goyf Slight.

I have no problem with Goyf. Everyone complaints every deck plays it, but I rather have every deck play a certain creature and a very diverse field, than a bomb only fitting in one deck, where the meta starts becomming deck A and hate A.deck.

We still have the diversity we had a year ago. To be more accurate, I think even more decks are competive then a year ago. I see nothing to complain about.

[Bovinious]

Incredibly stupid and narrow? Planar Void is perhaps the best anti-graveyard card in the game. I would never play it maindeck (that would surely be a sign of the apocalypse), but it's a great sideboard card.

I dont think its so great, particularly because Leyline of the Void and Tormod's Crypt exist, and Planar Void also nerfs your own Goyfs which you are playing unless youre playing Dredge or TES, in which case Planar Void is bad to run as well.

[freakish777]

Incredibly stupid and narrow? Planar Void is perhaps the best anti-graveyard card in the game. I would never play it maindeck (that would surely be a sign of the apocalypse), but it's a great sideboard card.

I agree that its a great SB card. Obviously you'd run it in say a BW deck or something along those lines, but for B you beat up on:

Ichorid
Goyfs
Decks with LftL
Breakfast
TES (occassionally, its probably better than a removal spell if you have a lot of dead cards).

[Bovinious]

Or you can pay 0 (Leyline, Crypt) to nueter those same decks, and not nerf the Goyfs which you are certainly running as well.

[The Rack]

I really think that Wizards has a plan for Goyf. They unleash a beast already with the intent of killing it. I doubt it will be top of the food chain for long due to some auto goyf hoser. And to all those that have very short memories.

Do you remember these same threads about banning ringleader? no no, not lackey but ringleader. Yeah, Goblin Ringleader affected the metagame much more than goyf has right? not really... I guess some people will always complain about somethings but this seems to be more than a few anticonformists talking.

Goblins forced everyone to play Blue or 1st turn drops to kill Lackey. So does Goyf. Goblins can play through hate and amange to win without attacking. Goyf cannot. Goblins forced more Goblins/Antigoblins decks than Goyf did/has. Goblins altered the metagame enough to give combo another tool (rite of flame) and clearly antigoblin cards (Tivadar guy that kills goblins). Has goyf? no. Will it? perhaps. But I don't think Goyf has had as much of an impact as Goblins entirely but moreso than specific goblin cards.

[Bardo]

Bardo was proposing it as an incredicbly stupid and narrow answer to Goyf or something, a sure sign of unhealthy format distortion.

Just in my own defense here, I was being serious. I actually had it as a 3-of in my Landstill sideboard a couple of weeks ago (as an answer to Ichorid, Breakfast and some of the other graveyard-based decks I was expecting). And then I added Tarmogoyfs of my own to the maindeck, so out went that plan.

Otherwise, yeah, Planar Void is a powerful little 1-mana card.

[Happy Gilmore]

The problem with Tarmogoyf is that once it hits play, the game revolves around protecting it or answering it. It's easy to do both, but to claim it doesn't fundamentally affect the focus of the game is very very wrong. There's only a few other cards in Legacy that have the ability to do that, specifically(but not entirely) Lackey, Counterbalance, Dark Confidant, Vial and maaaaybe Ruins. Of all these, two are easily killable, while two requires a deck built to abuse it, and Vial requires an aggro strategy, which has been basically obsoleted by Tarmogoyf.

-Slay

How about Survival of the Fittest? Shackles? CoTV? Trinisphere? Humility? Exhalted Angel? Moat? And all the other cards that have to be answered imediately? Your Argument doesn't hold water, there are many cards in legacy that have just as much if not more of an imediate impact on the game. Depending on the matchup each one of these card could be ten times worse than Tarmogoyf.

Edit:
Have you guys been following the leaks for the new up comming set? There have been reports of cards that remove graveyards and such, a sign that wizards is taking steps to solve the issue.

Remember Odyssey Onslaught std? They printed Both Goblin Piledriver (pro Blue) and Smother specifically to answer the two best creatures in the format. Tog and Wild Mongrel, just wait and see, your answer will come.

[Clark Kant]

It seems like there is almost universal agreement that the format would be better and healthier with Tarmogoyf banned.

So many different creatures went from being good to nigh unplayable because of Goyf and the card is freaking EVERYWHERE.

The only thing people can't agree on is whether there is something inherently wrong with banning a vanilla beater, no matter how undercosted.

I'll join the ban goyf gang and support that with this question.





Can anyone name one single deck other than pure combo or a deck that simply can't in any conceivable way splash green, where a green splash to play Tarmogoyf isn't worth considering?

[Phantom]

Just in my own defense here, I was being serious. I actually had it as a 3-of in my Landstill sideboard a couple of weeks ago (as an answer to Ichorid, Breakfast and some of the other graveyard-based decks I was expecting). And then I added Tarmogoyfs of my own to the maindeck, so out went that plan.


Could you even type that that without laughing at how fucking INSANE that is? You are lierally playing a deck that has NO business running anything remotely like Goyf. Landstill plays like 1000 answers to Goyf, not to mention your gem in the board, and you STILL found it more beneficial to just play the card rather than try to beat it, despite the overwhelming anti-synergy between it and the rest of the deck.

I know you weren't trying to make an argument for or against Goyf, but i'm pretty sure you convinced me that Goyf is just way too overpowered.

[Bovinious]

Can anyone name one single deck other than pure combo or a deck that simply can't in any conceivable way splash green, where a green splash to play Tarmogoyf isn't worth considering?

I dont think one exists, for example look at the top like 16-32 decks for worlds and youll see every deck that isnt God-awful ran Goyf except Dredge, TES, and Belcher. Even goblins has had moderate success running Goyf, GOBLINS FFS...

EDIT:


Could you even type that that without laughing at how fucking INSANE that is? You are lierally playing a deck that has NO business running anything remotely like Goyf. Landstill plays like 1000 answers to Goyf, not to mention your gem in the board, and you STILL found it more beneficial to just play the card rather than try to beat it, despite the overwhelming anti-synergy between it and the rest of the deck.

I know you weren't trying to make an argument for or against Goyf, but i'm pretty sure you convinced me that Goyf is just way too overpowered.

No hes right, Goyf is the sickness in Landstill, as it is in any deck that isnt fast combo...the point remains that he was running Planar Void rather than something better like Jailer or Extirpate, but thats moot now i guess.

[SuckerPunch]

I just want to say...

Goyf is legacy's power 9. Virtually every single deck should be playing (with very few exceptions as there are with the power 9 (Ichorid and Fish etc)).


I actually think Wizards should reprint the card as an uncommon.

The main problem to me it seems isn't that Goyf is too hard to deal with, it's that Goyf costs so much and yet you need to run four copies of it in every deck you build. And that seems anti to Legacy's budget status.

The older goyfs with the special future shifted borders would still hold collectors value. Especially if Goyf when Goyf is standard legal.

[edgewalker]

I really don't want to get pulled into this BS, but you're silly if you think Goyf should be banned. Go look at the world decks that had a record of 4-1 or better. Sure the majority of them played Goyf, but they where all different decks. I'd much rather see a metagame where one card is scene in 8-12 competitive decks than see the "Big 3" from a few years ago. As someone mentioned above I'd also hate to one best deck and then decks that are just designed to stop him. With Goyf, we've seen decks become competitive that would normally never see play, hell sligh is decent again, I can't remember the last time sligh was decent.

Removed insults

[Zuriya]

I dont think its so great, particularly because Leyline of the Void and Tormod's Crypt exist, and Planar Void also nerfs your own Goyfs which you are playing unless youre playing Dredge or TES, in which case Planar Void is bad to run as well.

If I read that correctly, you have to read Tarmogoyf again. (Sorry if I am wrong). Yes, your Tarmogoyfs just got even better.

[frogboy]

Could you even type that that without laughing at how fucking INSANE that is? You are lierally playing a deck that has NO business running anything remotely like Goyf. Landstill plays like 1000 answers to Goyf, not to mention your gem in the board, and you STILL found it more beneficial to just play the card rather than try to beat it, despite the overwhelming anti-synergy between it and the rest of the deck.

I know you weren't trying to make an argument for or against Goyf, but i'm pretty sure you convinced me that Goyf is just way too overpowered.

People played Silver Knight in Astral Slide because Goblins was basically kold to turn two Knight assuming the Slide deck drew like two other spells before turn five. This is more or less the same thing. It's not a new concept at all. People played Anurid Brushhopper in Wake, for God's sake.

[Clark Kant]

II'd much rather see a metagame where one card is scene in 8-12 competitive decks than see the "Big 3" from a few years ago. As someone mentioned above I'd also hate to one best deck and then decks that are just designed to stop him.

Actually that's an EXCELLENT point.

The problem I have is, I think the format became so massively diverse because Goblins fell out of the top tier, and that could have been done without printing Goyf, by printing some very effective very splashable goblin hate instead.

When goblin left, that was when slower controllish disruptive decks became viable.

Threshold doesn't inhibit controllish decks, it encourages them.

Combo is very vulnerable to disruption.

It was goblins that played like a combo deck, but was nigh invulnerable to disruption, that was making slower controllish decks unviable and thus holding the format back.

When it left, decks like Dragon Stompy, Landstill, Stax and a million others suddenly became viable.

We can only in the most indirect sense credit Goyf with that.

There's a dozen other ways Wizards could have brought goblins down a notch without printing Goyf.

[C.P.]

The main problem to me it seems isn't that Goyf is too hard to deal with, it's that Goyf costs so much and yet you need to run four copies of it in every deck you build. And that seems anti to Legacy's budget status.

I call BS.

Ok, it is 40 dollar card tha is obtainable by opening packs/ask guy in your local store. You know what staple card is more expensive/hard to get? Dual lands. You can't really crack a pack to get it, either. Legacy is an expensive format, and you'll have to face that fact. It's not like Standard or Extended player can get away from having to own a Goyf.

Your argument seems no better than 'I don't own the card so it is bad' to me.

[Cait_Sith]

Dual lands all cost less than Tarmogoyf, on a 1-1 basis.

Also, once in Legacy, it tends to cost less than Standard since a lot of the cards are good and stay good for an extensive period.

[C.P.]

Dual lands all cost less than Tarmogoyf, on a 1-1 basis.

Not underground sea, if I remember correctly.

Would goyf's price go down once it rotates out of the T2? When it gets played in every other format? Probably yes, but not much.

I'll give you that my evidences were not very convincing. however, I still think any price related comment here is irrelevant.

[ForceofWill]

I bet tarmogoyf will be a 10 dollar card when he rotates out of extended.

[Media314r8]

Not underground sea, if I remember correctly.


I agree that price is irrelavent, but Goyf IS more than any single dual, as I recently pciked up a set of gem-mint seas for $120 total, and sets of goyf are hard-to-find on ebay for $120, you're more likely to spend about $140 on a set of goyfs.

[thefreakaccident]

I bet tarmogoyf will be a 10 dollar card when he rotates out of extended.

This is true, as vintage will never tough him and we will be the only ones interested in the card... who cares about legacy?!

[Media314r8]

From what I see here the best course of action would not be to ban tarmogoyf. There have already been too many people who spent too much money on the goyf that there would be a lot of protest to it, perhaps too much. A much better course of action I think for wizards to take would be to print something that nerfs goyf, not makes it tottally useless but nerfs it a lot.

problem is, I cannot think of a card that would do that, perhaps a 'act like cards that are in graveyards aren't there' kind of effect would seem pretty sweet.

oh, have you noticed how Tarmogoyf and Britney Spears are so much a like as well? They both started off somewhat slim and not a total nuisance, and then a little bit later they are fat as hell and practically everyone but their devout fans are yelling at them to gtfo. it's so uncanny!!

A card that nerfs a overpowered creature that has been compared to psychatog??? There might be some precedence for this... oh yeah! Psychatog!

Goblin Piledriver was wizard's gift to red, as it was the only answer they had to Dr. Teeth. I'm not suggesting they reprint driver with pro-gren, but I had thought this card might surface in Morningtide.

Bizzaro-Piledriver (goblin clothesline-er)
1B
protection from green
Whenever Golbin Clothesline-er blocks, it gets +0/+2 for each attacking creature.
2/1

Kind of a mirror driver that isn't as obscenely broken, but could chill on blocking duty all day, and most likely survive whenever a horde attacks, while possibly killing the attacker with it's natural 2 power. Blocks green fat all day too. Not terrible when on attacking duty, as 2/1 for 1B and pro-something is fine for a goblin without drawbacks, and it would solve the goyf dilemma. I love the flavor too. Illustration could be a pair of goblins hiding in the brush holding a taught barb-wire between them while a horde of elves charge in.

Just the kinds of things that run through my head.

[Volt]

This is true, as vintage will never touch him...

Actually, GAT plays Tarmogoyf now.

[Whit3 Ghost]

Actually, GAT plays Tarmogoyf now.
And RG GoyfBeats just won a SCG P9.

[MattH]

The problem with Tarmogoyf is that nearly every way of winning the game is worse than Attacking With Tarmogoyf.

Does that mean it should be banned? I don't think so...but maybe.

[TheAardvark]

I bet tarmogoyf will be a 10 dollar card when he rotates out of extended.

Which is in, you know, 6 years. Just thought I'd mention that.

And as far as Tarmogoyf in Vintage, even Smennen called 'Goyf the best creature in Vintage.

Just saying.

[Goaswerfraiejen]

So many different creatures went from being good to nigh unplayable because of Goyf and the card is freaking EVERYWHERE.

For the third time, saying that some cards have been outclassed is simply not a valid argument in this case due to the number of others that have been made good (like Spectral Lynx and Smother, for example). Besides, there's nothing wrong with cards getting outclassed--that happens all the time. What's bad is when a ton of cards becomes obsolete (à la Flash), and that's just not the case here. All Tarmogoyf outclasses is other beatsticks. That's it. Its popularity is another matter, but I think that it makes us lose sight of the facts.





Can anyone name one single deck other than pure combo or a deck that simply can't in any conceivable way splash green, where a green splash to play Tarmogoyf isn't worth considering?

Lands. Hell, I'll add another for good measure: Reanimator.





The problem I have is, I think the format became so massively diverse because Goblins fell out of the top tier, and that could have been done without printing Goyf, by printing some very effective very splashable goblin hate instead.



Don't forget that Goblins was losing popularity prior to Tarmogoyf's inclusion in the format. In large part, this was due to the rise of fast storm-based combo decks like TES and Belcher. Then Flash came and everyone's attention was elsewhere for a while, and not long after things settled, Tarmogoyf came to give Threshold the punch to deal the final blow. Tarmogoyf came at the end of the trend, and Goblins is still quite strong. It didn't single-handedly do anything.



When goblin left, that was when slower controllish disruptive decks became viable.

Threshold doesn't inhibit controllish decks, it encourages them.

Combo is very vulnerable to disruption.

It was goblins that played like a combo deck, but was nigh invulnerable to disruption, that was making slower controllish decks unviable and thus holding the format back.

When it left, decks like Dragon Stompy, Landstill, Stax and a million others suddenly became viable.

We can only in the most indirect sense credit Goyf with that.

There's a dozen other ways Wizards could have brought goblins down a notch without printing Goyf.


Don't take this as an attack or anything, but earlier you said you'd join the banning bandwagon, yet now you seem to be praising Tarmogoyf's positive contributions to the format. Have you had a change of heart?

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

Not underground sea, if I remember correctly.

Would goyf's price go down once it rotates out of the T2? When it gets played in every other format? Probably yes, but not much.

I'll give you that my evidences were not very convincing. however, I still think any price related comment here is irrelevant.

If it's relevant to the health of the format, it's not irrelevant to the discussion.

Goyf in a vacuum isn't worse than the duals. This argument is deceptive, however, because it implies that there's a dichotomy when really it's an addition. It's not like you had to spend 120-160 on a set of duals before, but now you have to spend 100-120 on a set of goyfs. It's an additional 100+ to the majority of competitive decks you would consider getting.

This isn't always a speed bump for people coming in from other Goyf-dominated formats, but it is for every casual player or retired player trying to get into the format.

[Jak]

I guess the only thing I hate about Goyf is that he pushed Thresh over the top. It is kind of wierd saying this, but a 5/6 for :1: :g: is slowing the format down. I liked fast combo like Belcher and TES being a large part of the meta, but with all the Thresh, those decks hardly see play (belcher more so). I think it is considered format warping when every deck is playing Goyf and it pushes one of the best decks into outright first place. Thresh is everywhere.

[freakish777]

It seems like there is almost universal agreement that the format would be better and healthier with Tarmogoyf banned.

Where are you getting almost universal from? The fact that this thread is 9 pages and not 2 of everyone saying "Yep Ban him" should be enough to show you that that statement isn't accurate.


To oppose the 20/20 for G argument (and attempt to prove that Goyf is just a beater). Goyf actually does rely on there being spells in graveyards, but for the sake of argument, let's say this 20/20 for G requires a single card in any graveyard otherwise it's an 0/1 until there are cards in the graveyard.

With that in mind, we end up with a deck that doesn't look too different from Threshold currently, just we're going to go ahead and run Worldly Tutor, and maybe even otherwise bad cards like Foil/Misdirection (hey, you don't want to lose to Chalice@1 or Trinisphere on the draw, and you want to protect against your opponent's StP).

The number of decks (currently viable) this card would push out of the format would be greater then the number of cards that Tarmogoyf made unviable before it saw print. Lackey, Swords to Plowshares, Force of Will, Innocent Blood, etc had already obsoleted so many of the creatures that I'm appalled that people are complaining about creature diversity. Volt's link to Lothian's post about card break-down of the 4-1 and better Legacy decks is, well 100% worthless. One, that list only took into account cards played in 10 or more decks. That list would look much different if it didn't have this needless limitation (Ichorid & Goblins in particular give you a large number of other creatures). Next the list of 4-1 and better lists from Worlds I don't think tells us a whole lot, seeing as how a certain number of Pros are going to just be drawing one or more of the last 2 rounds, where as if this had been a 6 round Swiss tournament with a cut to top 8, a look at all the 4-X and above lists would be much more useful for gauging the metagame.

Silver Knight is decidedly worse in the meta.
Spectral Lynx is decidely better.
Werebear is decidedly worse in this metagame as it's been replaced.
Burn spells are decidely better in this metagame (Goyf Sligh?!) because they still go at the opponent's dome even if, gasp, they can't take down a Goyf with less than 2 spells (guess what you couldn't do to Bear either?).
Flametongue Kavu is decidedly worse.
Magus of the Moon is decidely better.
Wrath of God is decidely worse (this was being pushed out anyways).
Threads of Disloyalty (a good card that provides +1 CA) is decidedly better.

A sorcery speed terror sees play (mainly because it comes back every turn in your upkeep and is tutorable) and hoses Goyf.

The metagame is not being destroyed. Only changed.

Here's a very small list of cards that are still good despite Tarmogoyf being printed, I'm sure there's about 200 more:

Sea Drake
Life from the Loam
Burning Wish
Dark Confidant
Spell Snare
Counterbalance
Swords to Plowshares
Stifle
Force of Will
Crucible of Worlds
Moat

In short the total number of good/relevant cards hasn't particularly changed.

A 20/20 for G on the other hand would in fact destroy the metagame. One would need to be playing that deck, playing a deck that runs 12+ removal spells, plus FoW, MisD, etc.

The line of absurdity for me, really is when decks start playing Foil or Misdirection to resolve a spell. Vintage is patently absurd. We don't see Foil there (Thank God) because it's a generally awful spell, but we do see Misdirection. However, even in the most broken of formats, about 1/3 of the time you play MisD it isn't to resolve your own spell, but to try and hi-jack your opponent's Ancestral (and it's Vintage, we expect broken). Packing 2 MisD's in Legacy to ensure you resolve your spell (or have your StP hit your blocker)? That's when we have a problem with "just a beater."

Here's a list for your magical 20/20 for G:

3 Tundra
3 Underground Sea
4 Tropical Island
7 Fetches
4 Worldly Tutor
4 Barbara Walters
4 Ponder
4 Brainstorm
4 Force of Will
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Thoughtseize
4 Daze
4 Street Wraith
3 Misdirection
4 Foil

Tell me you can put together a deck that isn't this deck what's currently available in Legacy that can beat this...

Again, more decks would get pushed out of the format the then total number of cards that Goyf currently makes bad.




The Fun argument:

Multiple choice, which do you find losing to the least fun:

A) turn 1 Trinisphere followed by Geddon a couple turns later.
B) Tendrils for 20/EtW for 12/Goblin Charbelcher on turn 1~2.
C) A 20+ power trampling haste dude on turn 3.
D) 10 3/3 Haste guys on turn 3.
E) a 5/6 on turn 6.
F) Stasis.

I certainly don't find losing to a 5/6 on turn 6 less fun than losing to the first 4 options. If it were simply a matter of unfun, Stasis would be banned. I'm certainly not going to say that it's better than Tarmogoyf, it isn't. What I will say though is that the 1st 4 options actually are good (good enough to see Legacy play), and I find them less fun than losing to Tarmogoyf by a longshot. I always feel there's something I could have done (or not done, ie ignore him and combo out) about Tarmogoyf, if I don't feel that way at the end of a game, then I have either brought a terrible deck (ie, not a deck that would have been capable of winning even if Tarmogoyf had been Werebear instead) to begin with, or have come to the conclusion that I don't understand the format.



The Diversity Argument:

Go back to the Barbara Walters rant. Give me an estimate of the number of cards that the current Legacy environment supports as playable cards, and give me an estimate of the number of cards that were playable pre-Goyf (ignoring Flash, ie, when Goblins was #1). Goyf pushes some cards out, and allows for other cards to become good. If you haven't seen that yet, then you need to quit Magic. There will never be any format (so long as Wizards of the Coast is in business) that will "Stay the Same forever and ever Amen!" Nor do I want to play in a format that never changes. I don't want to play in a format that changes every 3~6 months, but I don't want to play in a format that consists of Goblins, Threshold, High Tide for the rest of existance. I want to see new decks/ideas, I want to see problems solved by ingenuity (and not bannings), I want to decks become obsoleted by something better, I want to see those same decks come back and surprise the metagame when its completely unexpected and ripe for the raping.

[Illissius]

If we have a situation where a clearly overpowered and possibly bannable* card is making the format more fun**, that's pretty interesting. Forces the DCI to really articulate what the hell their B&R policy actually is. They've banned or restricted cards (or refused to unban them) before when they weren't too overpowered but made the game unfun; does that mean they get to stay legal in the opposite case?

* I'm not sure if it is, but this thread and its length show that it's not outside the realm of possibility. The question is whether Tarmogoyf is like Brainstorm, Force of Will, and Swords to Plowshares, or like, say, Rishadan Port in Masques Block.

** And yeah, I think the current Legacy environment is the awesomest we've ever had (with the possible exception of when the format was first created). So infinitely than being squeezed between the deathlock of Goblins and Solidarity.

[Volt]

An argument for banning Tarmogoyf is not an argument for keeping the format locked into some eternal Goblins vs. Thresh vs. Solidarity deathgrip. As Goas pointed out in one of his earlier posts, that metagame was already on its way out before Tgoyf came along.

Also, there is nothing necessarily wrong with any particular creature being the most efficient in the game, as long as it's within arm's reach of the field. That's how I see it, anyway. Tgoyf isn't just 10 or 20 percent more efficient than the next best dude. It's more like 50% or 100% or even 200%. Hell, I'm not even sure who the next best dude is.

[matelml]

Hell, I'm not even sure who the next best dude is.

Dark Confidant, definitely.

[Volt]

Dark Confidant, definitely.

I suppose. Thing is, Dark Confidant is barely a dude. He might as well be an artifact or an echantment. How often does Dark Confidant swing FTW? I'm sure it has happened in the history of Magic, but come on.

[Phantom]

If we have a situation where a clearly overpowered and possibly bannable* card is making the format more fun**, that's pretty interesting. Forces the DCI to really articulate what the hell their B&R policy actually is. They've banned or restricted cards (or refused to unban them) before when they weren't too overpowered but made the game unfun; does that mean they get to stay legal in the opposite case?

* I'm not sure if it is, but this thread and its length show that it's not outside the realm of possibility. The question is whether Tarmogoyf is like Brainstorm, Force of Will, and Swords to Plowshares, or like, say, Rishadan Port in Masques Block.

** And yeah, I think the current Legacy environment is the awesomest we've ever had (with the possible exception of when the format was first created). So infinitely than being squeezed between the deathlock of Goblins and Solidarity.

This is actually a pretty interesting argument. I do agree with Volt however that banning Goyf won't revert the format to the GP:Philly meta or anything, although I would be more worried about what Goblins they bring out in the next two sets.

While Goyf might make the format more fun, I am more of a deckbuilder than competitive player, and I think it makes deckbuilding less interesting. It's just so insanely powerful that you want (or maybe need) to run it. That limits a lot of my options right off the bat.

The other three creatures on that list of most played in the worlds are perfect examples of how to design an overpowered creature. Dark Confidant, Nimble Mongoose, and Mishra's Factories are broken. They are not however, so broken that I feel the need to run them in any deck that wins by attacking, no matter what colors I originally decided to run. Hell, I don't even feel the need to run them in a deck that's running that color. Look at Red Death and Sui Black not running Confidant. Look at Dryad Sligh and Loam decks passing over Mongoose. Look at all the Zoo decks running Waste, or 3 colors instead of Factory.

Maybe what I'm saying is this, I LIKE the fact that creatures and creature strategies are getting more powerful, I just don't like one being so far above the others that I'm forced to run it. Print 15 more Goyf level creatures across all colors and I think I'll get on board. The only problem with this is that it invalidates most of the creatures we currently run, but I guess they've done that before since I see very few Serra Angels or Shivan Dragons or Killer Bees (I forgot how much I loved this art) running around.


Edit: @Frogboy: I can't really comment too much since I wasn't around for Wake or Slide. I will just say I'd imagine it's little different when a control deck runs a defensive card like Silver Knight (I'm assuming it ran it as protection against Goblins?) as opposed to a defensive and incredibly offensive creature like Goyf. Also, I would imagine (but not be sure without seeing a list) that Knight fit better into Slide's shell than Goyf does into Landstill since Slide, even if it ran as many sweepers as Landstill, could always save Knight with a phase out. I mean, I have no problems with Landstill running early stall creatures to help them get to the late game (they don't seem to need to, so whatever) or big, often recursive fatties to finish me off (Eternal Dragon, Gigapede, Angel, etc) but running Goyf really makes no sense to them, except for the fact that it's just too overpowered not to run. I mean, Deed and Goyf alone have the synergy of a fart in church.

Maybe I'm wrong about this and if you show me a successful list of a Legacy control deck that runs an insanely out of place creature due to power level (and not meta concerns) I will say so.

[Illissius]

While Goyf might make the format more fun, I am more of a deckbuilder than competitive player, and I think it makes deckbuilding less interesting. It's just so insanely powerful that you want (or maybe need) to run it. That limits a lot of my options right off the bat.


I am more of a deckbuilder than a player to the point where I have something like a hundred or so lists and sketches in my Notes side panel in Opera (not counting the other hundred or so archived because they're outdated), but almost literally never actually play any games. The metagame is just so much more diverse and wide open when it's defined by Tarmogoyf, than when it's defined by Goblins and Storm, or at least it feels that way to me. The metagame was changing anyways, this is certainly true, but was taking way too long for my taste and mostly just replacing one breed of Storm combo with another, slightly less onerous, one. Tarmogoyf transformed the environment faster and more thoroughly than anything else could have. (For perspective, Goblins and Storm combo are two of, if not the two, decks I most despise in modern Magic. Like most, they're much, much more tolerable when they're just another viable deck, and not the defining decks of the format.)

[Bovinious]

LOOK WHAT TARMOGOYF DID TO THAT INNOCENT GIRL, IF THIS DOESNT JUSTIFY ITS BANNING IDK WHAT DOES!!!

But really its pretty much agreed everyone wants it banned, and it probably should be banned, but WOTC is really negligent with the B&R lists so nothings going to happen :(

[T is for TOOL]

But really its pretty much agreed everyone wants it banned
Then no one will object if I finally lock this thread?

[Bovinious]

I have no objections to these things but others may...

[Phantom]

Well that's the thing, I'm not even sure I want it banned, or that it's banning would be a good thing. The logical side of me sees the insanity of the card. The other side of me really likes what it has done to the meta, and really enjoys designing decks that include him. Maybe I just like him because 99% of the decks I design are aggro or aggro control, and those seem to be the best shell for him.

It really is sort of a unique situation since past bannings have come from a card making a particular deck or strategy overpowered. Goyf might do that, but it almost makes the entire meta more powerful. I really don't know what to think here.

[kirdape3]

Tarmogoyf was in the maindeck of 24 of 53 Worlds decks that went 4-1 or better. That's not dominance, even on the scale of Umezawa's Jitte in Block.

Let me put it this way. If Wizards won't ban Gifts Ungiven in its block format, when it was the most powerful card in that format by a mile (yes, including Jitte), then I would seriously doubt that they'll ban Tarmogoyf.

[Goaswerfraiejen]

But really its pretty much agreed everyone wants it banned

Hardly. There's only universal assent if you ignore everyone who disagrees. But I think it's safe to say that we won't get much further on the subject--nor could we, even if we wanted to.

[caiomarcos]

...

The Fun argument:

Multiple choice, which do you find losing to the least fun:

A) turn 1 Trinisphere followed by Geddon a couple turns later.
B) Tendrils for 20/EtW for 12/Goblin Charbelcher on turn 1~2.
C) A 20+ power trampling haste dude on turn 3.
D) 10 3/3 Haste guys on turn 3.
E) a 5/6 on turn 6.
F) Stasis.

I certainly don't find losing to a 5/6 on turn 6 less fun than losing to the first 4 options. If it were simply a matter of unfun, Stasis would be banned. I'm certainly not going to say that it's better than Tarmogoyf, it isn't. What I will say though is that the 1st 4 options actually are good (good enough to see Legacy play), and I find them less fun than losing to Tarmogoyf by a longshot. I always feel there's something I could have done (or not done, ie ignore him and combo out) about Tarmogoyf, if I don't feel that way at the end of a game, then I have either brought a terrible deck (ie, not a deck that would have been capable of winning even if Tarmogoyf had been Werebear instead) to begin with, or have come to the conclusion that I don't understand the format.



Fun factor is really a personal thing, but how each way of unfun-winning does its job is not. All the other four options that you consider less fun are specific builds that try to capitalize on that winning conditions.
Whole decks are designed around those kills. You need very specific cards in you hand to achieve those kills and you're open for a ton of disruption that might as well lose you the game if you attempt Tendrils for 20/EtW for 12/Goblin Charbelcher on turn 1~2. Even so, all those things are less efficient than 4 Goyfs + 36 filler.

Like someone said, Goyf is for Legacy what Power 9 is for Vintage. Every deck has to have it, and there lies the problem: Legacy is not supposed to have P9-like cards. You shouldn't have to splash green in every deck you build to accommodate a Goyf, just like every deck in Vintage splashes blue to play with Ancestral Recall.

[kirdape3]

Except I thought I just disproved that... 24/53 is what, 45%? Those are the decks that did well at Worlds. Sure, it's nice to have, but not even all the attack decks that could've had him in there didn't (look specifically to Mori's deck for an example).

The inclusion of Tarmogoyf is not the sine qua non of success in Legacy. It certainly doesn't hurt, but you don't HAVE TO HAVE it.

[Volt]

I know it sounded like I was calling for Tarmogoyf to be banned in my last several posts, but really I'm on the fence like a lot of other people. I certainly don't feel anywhere nearly as strongly about it as I did about Flash (which absolutely flat out had to go, and yet there were still some people who said otherwise -- but let's not go there). I think it's a little silly that we have one creature that is head, shoulders and chest above all other creatures in the format, but I don't think the format is in a bad state because of it... yet.

[kcp1221]

A couple months ago, in game 2 of a match my opponent goes first and mizes:

turn 1 : land, thopter, thopter, thopter, frogmite, thoughtcast
(Jokingly Apologizes for the mize )

my turn 1 : fetch

turn 2: land, arcbound ravager (I mana tithe), he attacks for 2.

my turn 2 : land, goyf (5/6). next turn drop serenity following turn attack with a 6/7 while opponents board contains 1 glimmervoid

(I apologize for my mize after he concedes).

[Bovinious]

Ok so apparently there is not a concensus (yet). I say we should have some sort of simple yes or no poll added to this thread, and have everyone choose a side, no abstaining or on the fence stuff in the poll. The Bible did it best, the angels who didnt takes sides went to Hell also. So yeah...can we possibly add a Y/N poll?

[GreenOne]

Ok so apparently there is not a concensus (yet). I say we should have some sort of simple yes or no poll added to this thread, and have everyone choose a side, no abstaining or on the fence stuff in the poll. The Bible did it best, the angels who didnt takes sides went to Hell also. So yeah...can we possibly add a Y/N poll?

Yeah, I said the same thing some pages back, but nobody listened to me. One voice is a noob. Two voices are a mob.

[Bovinious]

Yeah, I said the same thing some pages back, but nobody listened to me. One voice is a noob. Two voices are a mob.

Ok then, ill make one myself :)

[kicks_422]

Like someone said, Goyf is for Legacy what Power 9 is for Vintage. Every deck has to have it, and there lies the problem: Legacy is not supposed to have P9-like cards. You shouldn't have to splash green in every deck you build to accommodate a Goyf, just like every deck in Vintage splashes blue to play with Ancestral Recall.

I disagree with that. I've been regularly trumping powered decks using an unpowered deck, so no, P9 isn't required to win in Vintage as mostly everyone thinks. The P9 are powerful, sure... But not having them makes you a better player and a better deckbuilder in the sense that you have to fight through them, methinks.

Same goes with Goyf. If you use him, smash face. If you don't, then stop Goyf from doing so. That simple.

I think Goyf is being hated a lot because of Thresh, or UGx aggro-control in general. If say, Goyf isn't allowed to be run in Thresh, but is allowed in everything else (e.g. Breakfast, Sligh, SuiBlack, Affinity, etc.), I don't think it would be much of a problem. It's Thresh's awesomeness of finding Goyf, casting him, protecting him, and clearing the way for him that everyone's complaining about.

[Nihil Credo]

I say we should have some sort of simple yes or no poll added to this thread, and have everyone choose a side, no abstaining or on the fence stuff in the poll. The Bible did it best, the angels who didnt takes sides went to Hell also.
Avoid wording things this way - it's only going to start a fight. - Zilla

Whether Tarmogoyf should be banned or not is not a choice that falls on us; it falls on the DCI.

Our role, if indeed we have any, is that of the advisor: we examine the state of the format and distill information, collecting pros and cons. An Aye vs. Nay binary choice is useless to that end... especially when so many people are split on the issue (for example, there are some who feel that Tarmogoyf fits the criteria for banning, and yet banning it would worsen the format).

If the DCI is even going to bother to take a look at the Source for opinions, it is certainly going to ignore a simple vote of the unwashed masses who wished Giant Solifuge was a 4/3. It might not ignore a well-reasoned explanation of the issue as perceived by Legacy regulars.

[Bovinious]

Vaguely disrespectful sentence removed. - Zilla

Whether Tarmogoyf should be banned or not is not a choice that falls on us; it falls on the DCI.

Our role, if indeed we have any, is that of the advisor: we examine the state of the format and distill information, collecting pros and cons. An Aye vs. Nay binary choice is useless to that end.

If the DCI is even going to bother to take a look at the Source for opinions, it is certainly going to ignore a simple vote of the unwashed masses who wished Giant Solifuge was a 4/3. It might not ignore a well-reasoned explanation of the issue as perceived by Legacy regulars.

WOW umm idiotic?...its a poll to see what the opinions of people are quickly rather than having to read through many pages of E-peen stroking...it was pretty clear above that I was unclear what the concensus was if there even was one. Do you have some sort of personal vendetta towards me or something?

[kicks_422]

its a poll to see what the opinions of people are quickly rather than having to read through many pages of E-peen stroking...

Where's the fun in that?

[The Rack]

Tarmogoyf shouldn't be banned. It is not an I WIN CARD. It does not literally prevent your opponent from doing anything (stasis and slaver although not banned really really annoying). It does not kill the turn it comes into play (tendrils). It does have to be built around to an extent. It is strictly vanilla. It is green. All the removal we were using on goblins, most is still usable against goyf. It's not that damn good!!!

[thefreakaccident]

I don't know about you guys, but when I am playing control I fear a resolved mongoose much more than a resolved tarmogoyf...

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

Except I thought I just disproved that... 24/53 is what, 45%? Those are the decks that did well at Worlds. Sure, it's nice to have, but not even all the attack decks that could've had him in there didn't (look specifically to Mori's deck for an example).

27/32, on the other hand, is app. 82%.

[frogboy]

Spat: Elaborate?

[kirdape3]

If that's 27/32 of the Top 8 decklists...

Huber - 7 points
Nakano - 8 points
Nassif - 11 points
Chapin - 10 points
Mori - 12 points
Peleg - 10 points
van Heeswijk - 13 points
Ootsuka - 9 points.

Of those, only Mori and van Heeswijk showed up on the list of players who went 4-1 or better in Legacy, and Mori didn't even have Tarmogoyf in his list.

[frogboy]

oh.

Public service announcement: Folks who confuse the Legacy decks the people in the top eight were playing with the decks that actually had the highest performance in Legacy should educate themselves.

[freakish777]

A couple months ago, in game 2 of a match my opponent goes first and mizes:

turn 1 : land, thopter, thopter, thopter, frogmite, thoughtcast
(Jokingly Apologizes for the mize )

my turn 1 : fetch

turn 2: land, arcbound ravager (I mana tithe), he attacks for 2.

my turn 2 : land, goyf (5/6). next turn drop serenity following turn attack with a 6/7 while opponents board contains 1 glimmervoid

(I apologize for my mize after he concedes).


Yes, because Tarmagoyf was 100% the reason you won there. NOT the ludricous hate card in Serenity that Wrath of Armageddon'd your opponents side of the board only...

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

If that's 27/32 of the Top 8 decklists...


Top 8 of the Legacy lists, by Legacy performance specifically. 27 of a possible 32 Goyfs. Unless I counted wrong.

[Van Phanel]

I guess you did count wrong, it actually was 28/32 possible Goyfs in the 5-0-Decks. Only Stuart Wright didn't play them, the other seven all had the full set of 4.

I also can't see much of a reason to run between 0 and 4 Goyfs, either they don't fit the deck or you want 4 which is another indication for it being quite efficient. /understatement

[Ewokslayer]

Is there a particular reason to not include all the 4-1 or better decks (53 decks) and just look at the 5-0 decks?
What about the 2 4-0-1 decks?
For those that are interested the 5-0 were Komuro, Wright, Camargo, Lybaert, OMahaney, Petric, Yasooka, and Wu (not the top 8 decks in the listing for whatever reason) There were 28/32 possible goyfs.
including the 2 4-0-1 (Van Hee, Cardenal) we have 32/40 goyfs
including the 43 4-1 players we have 94/212 goyfs.

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

Which indicates that of good players with good decks, the Goyf-players were much more likely to beat their non-goyf playing brethren. It's hardly conclusive, but it indicates a trend that bears watching.

Which is really the only certainty at this point. The card bears watching.

[frogboy]

Is there a particular reason to not include all the 4-1 or better decks (53 decks) and just look at the 5-0 decks?

The main difference between 4-1 and 5-0 is getting lucky pairings.

[Ewokslayer]

Which indicates that of good players with good decks, the Goyf-players were much more likely to beat their non-goyf playing brethren. It's hardly conclusive, but it indicates a trend that bears watching.

Which is really the only certainty at this point. The card bears watching.

There is no indication at all of that. If there were 43 players that were 4-1 it is save to assume that their loses were not all to the 8 5-0 players.

We do have the pairings, results, and decklists of those 43 players so one could look up to what deck each of those 43 players lost to.


The main difference between 4-1 and 5-0 is getting lucky pairings.
That and you don't care what your record is but your opponent can level up by winning.

[freakish777]

Yeah, keep in mind that the 5-0 players could have played against decks that finished 2-1-2 due to the fact that the overall tournament determines pairings, not the sub-sections of the tournament.

[Ewokslayer]

Does anyone know why there are 53 decklists but the standings indicate 55 players with 12 points or more?

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

There is no indication at all of that. If there were 43 players that were 4-1 it is save to assume that their loses were not all to the 8 5-0 players.

Edit: Crap. Stupid Worlds.

I started trying to track this, but it looks like an insane amount of effort for a relatively vague indicator.

[MattH]

WOW umm idiotic?...its a poll to see what the opinions of people are quickly rather than having to read through many pages of E-peen stroking...it was pretty clear above that I was unclear what the concensus was if there even was one. Do you have some sort of personal vendetta towards me or something?
Yes, it IS counterintuitive to try and force an issue on which there are numerous well-thought-out positions into a black-and-white, yes-or-no vote.

[Bovinious]

Yes, it IS idiotic to try and force an issue on which there are numerous well-thought-out positions into a black-and-white, yes-or-no vote.

No.

Im sorry so many people are indecisive and cant just choose a side, its really not my fault and not an irrational request either...

We're not starting a poll for this topic, so let's end it at that. - Zilla

[andreotti16]

My suggestion if any from just looking at all these posts is if tarmogoyf should be banned at all, it should only be banned in legacy. Standard and extended can't boost tarmogoyf that much (4 months tarmogoyf rotates anyway.) and vintage has much crueler ways to win then tarmogoyf. Legacy has pitch spells, and legacy has fetchloands, two easy ways to pump tarmogoyf fast. (by the way, i know it was a sad day when a monday night legacy had someone go 4-0 with an affinity build splashing green for tarmogoyf. That is just want i want to say.

[Jujuhawk]

Epic bump there, slugger.

[T is for TOOL]

No!