All B/R update speculation.

I want Griselbrand and friends gone due to sheer derp. I mean, just look at:
Protean Hulk, Regal Force, Craterhoof Behemoth, Progenitus, Darksteel Colossi, Sphinx of the Steel Wind, Blazing Archon, Inkewell Leviathan, Terastodon and stuff
and
Griselbrand, Emrakul, Omniscience, Jin-Gitaxias...

The former are brutally strong but awkward in their own way. Some require setup, others solve specific problems. The latter are just so overpowered and universally applicable they become boring and unexciting. They just win, basically no questions asked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zombie

I want Griselbrand and friends gone due to sheer derp. I mean, just look at:
Protean Hulk, Regal Force, Craterhoof Behemoth, Progenitus, Darksteel Colossi, Sphinx of the Steel Wind, Blazing Archon, Inkewell Leviathan, Terastodon and stuff
and
Griselbrand, Emrakul, Omniscience, Jin-Gitaxias...

The former are brutally strong but awkward in their own way. Some require setup, others solve specific problems. The latter are just so overpowered and universally applicable they become boring and unexciting. They just win, basically no questions asked.

---

Word. I don't have a problem with Show and Tell or reanimator based strategies, but at least make them choose which ridiculous critters they want to have, or make them board guys in and out depending on match-up. Right now it is Griselbrand and Emrakul > all others.

So anyone still thinks either Griselbrand or S&T could get the ban hammer this May?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bilb_o

So anyone still thinks either Griselbrand or S&T could get the ban hammer this May?

---

As stupid as both of those cards are, neither are dominating. I believe either/or will be banned one day; however one or two more ridiculous card(s) need to be printed first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zombie

I want Griselbrand and friends gone due to sheer derp. I mean, just look at:
Protean Hulk, Regal Force, Craterhoof Behemoth, Progenitus, Darksteel Colossi, Sphinx of the Steel Wind, Blazing Archon, Inkewell Leviathan, Terastodon and stuff
and
Griselbrand, Emrakul, Omniscience, Jin-Gitaxias...

The former are brutally strong but awkward in their own way. Some require setup, others solve specific problems. The latter are just so overpowered and universally applicable they become boring and unexciting. They just win, basically no questions asked.

---

The fattie very rarely will get the Axe. if anything is going to get the axe it would be SNT. Not saying it needs the Axe. What got the Axe though, Survival or Vengevine? Its always the enablers.

If we are going to ban some cards, just because they are derpy and un fun to some people and not because they are actually dominating the format we might as well just be Modern :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bilb_o

So anyone still thinks either Griselbrand or S&T could get the ban hammer this May?

---

Dunno ... atm the Grizz-Bear's invading Modern in Company of G. Vengeance and Through the Breach. Maybe WotC becomes more aware of him here than via Vintage & Legacy. Still I don't see a Problem with him

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bilb_o

So anyone still thinks either Griselbrand or S&T could get the ban hammer this May?

---

Unless something happens between now and May, not really. Neither Show and Tell nor Tin Fins are particularly dominant.

But if they were to ban one...a while ago I would've said that Show and Tell would be the banned one, but with Tin Fins around I'm wondering if they might pick Griselbrand instead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Megadeus

The fattie very rarely will get the Axe. if anything is going to get the axe it would be SNT. Not saying it needs the Axe. What got the Axe though, Survival or Vengevine? Its always the enablers.

---

That ban the enablers mantra is a bit strange. In a two-card combo combopieces are equivalent, how can you say that one is enabler and other is not?

Can anyone give a reasonable definition of "enabler", so that I can't say "Vengevine is a powerful enabler, which makes self-discard broken, ban the enabler please" or "Griselbrand is powerful enabler that makes cheat-fatty effects broken"?

The only possible definition I've found is "enabler is a combo-piece which fits in more possible combos" (e.g. cheat-fatty effects are enablers because there are less of them than fatties), but then the whole "ban the enablers" idea is hogwash: Why on the hell you will want to ban something which fits in a lot of different decks those hurting a lot of stuff while you can ban non-"enabler" to hurt less of them and keep everything helthy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by salvor

That ban the enablers mantra is a bit strange. In a two-card combo combopieces are equivalent, how can you say that one is enabler and other is not?

Can anyone give a reasonable definition of "enabler", so that I can't say "Vengevine is a powerful enabler, which makes self-discard broken, ban the enabler please" or "Griselbrand is powerful enabler that makes cheat-fatty effects broken"?

The only possible definition I've found is "enabler is a combo-piece which fits in more possible combos" (e.g. cheat-fatty effects are enablers because there are less of them than fatties), but then the whole "ban the enablers" idea is hogwash: Why on the hell you will want to ban something which fits in a lot of different decks those hurting a lot of stuff while you can ban non-"enabler" to hurt less of them and keep everything helthy.

---

"enablers" are card's which Open up ways to cheat on manacosts or make a certain strategy significantly easier to execute. Entomb enables reanimation-strategies as Survival did, Show&Tell, Sneak attack, Omniscience, Flash, etc. reduce mana costs, mystical gave Combo Decks of all Kind redundancy.

They ban enablers because that is WotC's policy. Survival was banned because of being a repeatable tutor which harms WotC's Freedom to print dumb creatures which would Push SotF over the Top like Vengevine may did. They printed "fixed" versions in Fauna Shaman, gren Sun's Zenith and summiner's pact though.

The bolded Part is a Problem: Grizz is the ultimate Target for a wide range of decks like sneak Attack, S&T and reanimator. There is no other option but Grizz & Emrakul ... period. So IF the DCI wants to harm those Decks they have to choose the Card in Common (Grizz & Emrakul) or will at least ban entomb + show&tell (+ X) instead. Survival gave evidence which Option they would prefer.

Show and Tell, Sneak Attack, Entomb, etc. are all enablers, but in the case of Griselbrand, the creature is itself an enabler (like Hermit Druid). Unlikely previous enablers like Necropotence or Yawgmoth's Bargain to which it bears some resemblence, however, Griselbrand is also a win condition.

It's not dominating the format, and I am enough of a hypocrite that I will occasionally play Griselbrand.dec when the time is right, but that card unequivocally should have never been printed. However, I think the threshold for "banning" is higher than what I would have for "this shouldn't have been printed", so it may be enough to keep off the chopping block for now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lordofthepit

It's not dominating the format...

---

I sure don't have to mention Mystical Tutor here, have I?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

I sure don't have to mention Mystical Tutor here, have I?

---

I never understood that banning. Maybe it was preemptive because the DCI knew about Miracles as well as the new toys that Storm/Reanimator would receive (Mystical Tutor + Probe is just way too efficient, and I don't need to get into Past in Flames, Griselbrand, Jin-Gitaxias, etc.).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lordofthepit

I never understood that banning. Maybe it was preemptive because the DCI knew about Miracles as well as the new toys that Storm/Reanimator would receive (Mystical Tutor + Probe is just way too efficient, and I don't need to get into Past in Flames, Griselbrand, Jin-Gitaxias, etc.).

---

Ah, there it is! They banned mystical so they can continue to print dumb shit ... same as with Survival and likely the same with every other enabler in the Future once they hit a certain threshold of powerhouses which abuse the engine

That's all I was trying to Point out

So the question becomes do they think S&T reached that threshold

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bilb_o

So the question becomes do they think S&T reached that threshold

---

Exactly. You may want to add Entomb as another top-enabler which was discussed in several threads before. Now that Griselbrand + Emrakul found their way into Modern with G. Vengeance and Through the Breach I expect the DCI to take a closer look to Grizz+enablers overall

If SnT and Grislebrand are seen as too powerful OR that in combination with a new creature pushes it over the top, SnT would get banned before Grislebrand.

I suspect S&T will get axed before Griselbrand, but both are a bad sign for the format in the long-term. S&T is only really on the chopping block so long as R&D continue to disregard the fact that a card's casting cost has zero relevance to its degeneracy in Eternal formats. Even in Modern you can cheat creature costs very easily and somewhat reliably, so simply saying "we test it at 7 mana and it was too broken, but 8 mana is OK" is laughable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koby

I suspect S&T will get axed before Griselbrand, but both are a bad sign for the format in the long-term. S&T is only really on the chopping block so long as R&D continue to disregard the fact that a card's casting cost has zero relevance to its degeneracy in Eternal formats. Even in Modern you can cheat creature costs very easily and somewhat reliably, so simply saying "we test it at 7 mana and it was too broken, but 8 mana is OK" is laughable.

---

Especially with decks like 12-post that can inevitably ramp into a daemon or tentacle monster despite disruption.


On a unrelated note, I wish Mental Misstep was made legal again just so I can try a Blade Control deck with SFM, Jace, Snapcaster, and MMS for a few months to see how degenerate it would be. Makes me sad that we never got to see how bad MMS would have gotten if it was still legal when Snappy got printed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

"enablers" are card's which Open up ways to cheat on manacosts or make a certain strategy significantly easier to execute.

---

The second clause of "enabler" makes your definition awful. Under this defintion, Ad Nauseam should have been banned. Honestly, Griselbrand is just as much a means as it is an ends. It's not like Iona or Emrakul where it just wins by itself as a creature. Griselbrand is an enabler because he refills your hand. With the other insane creatures, if you deal with them, you're in good shape (relatively). With Griselbrand, if you deal with the creature, it's not important because your opponent still drew 7-14 cards.

The second clause made me realize the difference between Enablers and Engines

Examples for Engines:
Survival of the Fittest, Ad Nauseam, Ill-Gotten Gains, Past in Flames, Argothian Enchantress etc.

Examples for Enablers:
Tinker, Show and Tell, Loyal Retainers, Natural Order, Kuldotha Forgemaster, Aluren etc.

Forgemaster is repeatable. Probably more of an engine card?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Julian23

The second clause made me realize the difference between Enablers and Engines

Examples for Engines:
Survival of the Fittest, Ad Nauseam, Ill-Gotten Gains, Past in Flames, Argothian Enchantress etc.

Examples for Enablers:
Tinker, Show and Tell, Loyal Retainers, Natural Order, Kuldotha Forgemaster, Aluren etc.

---

I support this POV. To break it down: Engines need follow-up plays; enablers end the game

i think you meant to say

To break it down: Legacy players are by FAR (and i mean FAR FAR away any others) those who complain/whine the most just for the sake of it and they tend to do it repeatedly so it can goes on over and over again on the same sterile, counterproductive,fallaciously prophetic, and pointless battles of arguments.

and i can give counstless of threads/posts about that.

the legacy meta have never been so diverse. Changing strategy/sideboard/main deck/deck should be a better waste of time.

Gush seems safe. It would be playable, but not broken.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clavio

Gush seems safe. It would be playable, but not broken.

---

Uhhh, troll detected? Have you ever played Gush in Vintage? It's gotten restricted twice!

I would play the shit out of gush if it were UN banned

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clavio

Gush seems safe. It would be playable, but not broken.

---

Yes, Legacy Tempo don't need only free Counters but free carddraw + mana acceleration too.

We had this already twice in this thread. Go home

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clavio

Gush seems safe. It would be playable, but not broken.

---

RUG Threshold would dominate the meta with this card.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phazonmuant

Uhhh, troll detected? Have you ever played Gush in Vintage? It's gotten restricted twice!

---

Yes. Gush wouldn't work in Legacy like it does in Vintage, Vintage is a totally different format. Vintage can't even handle thirst for knowledge. Also, Gush got unrestricted twice.

Quote:

---

RUG Threshold would dominate the meta with this card.

---

Probably

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clavio

Yes. Gush wouldn't work in Legacy like it does in Vintage, Vintage is a totally different format. Vintage can't even handle thirst for knowledge. Also, Gush got unrestricted twice.



Probably

---

Or just give Doomsday decks a free Ideas Unbound. Also, Tre sh would no longer worry about running out of 1 for 1 trades. People like to think the card is weak without Fastbond. It also adds nothing to the format. It goes in Blue tempo decks, and Doomsday- what I can think of off the top of my head. It's also not fun to play against when your opp just goes from 2 cards to 5. Yes, he did take back land drops, but his deck functions on 1 or 2 anyway. And Brainstorm takes those lands back and trades them in.

The difference is that Legacy has no Fastbond but Tempo is an archetype unlike in Vintage because of the Moxen. Therefore the effect being free in addition to the "mana acceleration" (no landdrop possible in your turn? Gush, Return 2 Islands, replay one, have 3 mana available) is even stronger than in Vintage and would wreck complete havoc if legal.

Edit: flood mana, gush, Brainstorm, put 2 Lands back, Play and crack fetchland is disgusting ... Even or my taste


T4K's Restriction wasn't because of it's own strength but being simply a playset among FoW in the Time-Key-Control Decks of it's time, filtering for Time Vault + Voltaic Key while Get'n rid of your Tinkerbot. The effect wasn't broken but the Deck was undoubtful strong. The only actions the DCI can take for Vintage are restrictions so they took the only Card played as a 3/4-off besides FoW and restricted it. This was even in the official announcement.

Gush was restricted twice because the DCI was too stupid to realize the card which dominated the format since Meandeck Gifts wasn't Gifts, Gush or Flash but Merchant Scroll. Instead of simply restricting Scroll and let the format breathe they restricted Ponder, Brainstorm, Scroll, Gush, Flash and Gifts instead. This ended in T4K being the last playable Engine aside Intuition/AK (mana intense, slow, vulnerable to graveyard hate) which got T4K chopped too

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

Edit: flood mana, gush, Brainstorm, put 2 Lands back, Play and crack fetchland is disgusting ... Even or my taste

---

Imagine a RUG deck stifling your first land, dropping a Goose, wasting your second land on their 2nd turn, and then casting Gush on their 4th turn and shuffling away the excess lands with brainstorm all while having FoW/Daze waiting for you.

Stupid.

In many combo decks that go off around turn 3 and use islands, Gush does double duty as card draw and acceleration, and can protect your lands.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rufus

In many combo decks that go off around turn 3 and use islands, Gush does double duty as card draw and acceleration, and can protect your lands.

---

Oh yeah, High Tide players would LOVE Gush. They would gush about it if they thought the card would be made legal.

Stupid. Why are we discussing unbanning Gush?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

Edit: flood mana, gush, Brainstorm, put 2 Lands back, Play and crack fetchland is disgusting ... Even or my taste

---

Ok, it's too good in tempo decks. I just really want to play it again, I loved it in old extended. Damn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DragoFireheart

Oh yeah, High Tide players would LOVE Gush. They would gush about it if they thought the card would be made legal.

---

Returning 2 Islands to your hands is not what high tide is looking to do. Even if it was a reliable setup spell, it would be terrible once you were going off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clavio

Gush seems safe. It would be playable, but not broken.

---

There are a few people who believe Brainstorm should be banned in Legacy, but you think blue needs more card drawing in Legacy? Interesting.

Speaking of Brainstorm being banned...

I would argue that Brainstorm might be better than Ancestral Recall.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DragoFireheart

Speaking of Brainstorm being banned...

I would argue that Brainstorm might be better than Ancestral Recall.

---

Why in gods name are we back to Brainstorm and in addition, paired with such nonsene? The only moment I can come up with that being true is having your Oath Target or Tinkerbot in hand ... ups ... both are banned in Legacy anyways

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

Why in gods name are we back to Brainstorm and in addition, paired with such nonsene? The only moment I can come up with that being true is having your Oath Target or Tinkerbot in hand ... ups ... both are banned in Legacy anyways

---

1. Brainstorm, along with fetchlands, can imitate the same card quality you would get with recall. You get to choose the best of same card pool Recall would give you minus the two worst cards you put back. You end up with less cards with Brainstorm but will have nearly the same card quality as Recall.

2. You can protect critical cards from discard spells. Recall can not do this.

3. Like you said, you can put back Oath/Tinker targets back into the library. While it is not played as much as it used to, this can help make Natural Order better.

4. Brainstorm enables Miracles and can help get them out of your hand. Recall can not do this. Brainstorm also enables other cards that depend on the top card of the library, such as Delver of Secrets and Counterbalance.


There's a reason Brainstorm is restricted in Vintage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DragoFireheart

There's a reason Brainstorm is restricted in Vintage.

---

because of the same reason they restricted Ponder and banned Ponder and Preordain in Modern: They can grab Combo pieces