Yeah, when they see that key answer card on top and sit back trying to play it cool, inwardly praying that you'll give it to them. That's the best time to durdle, then mill it at the last moment as an afterthought.
Printable View
Yeah, when they see that key answer card on top and sit back trying to play it cool, inwardly praying that you'll give it to them. That's the best time to durdle, then mill it at the last moment as an afterthought.
Aren't you the same guy complaining about DRS stifling diversity both here and on Reddit? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
Does anybody truly believe that DRS is on the chopping block? Playing with DRS is why I enjoy legacy! I think we can all agree that he is in contention for the best creature of all time (certainly the best 1-drop) with a planeswalker power level. Top getting banned gives me an unsettling feeling; it was another card that made legacy worth playing.
Is DRS too good?
DRS is way too good. Just like Lackey, Goyf, SFM, Delver or TNN. :smile:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Safety
Wouldn't be sad to see TNN on the chopping block.Quote:
Originally Posted by CptHaddock
Who would've thought a birds of paradise you can cast off of underground sea would be good
I was playing in a Legacy four-rounder at a GP, and during my turn while I was resolving a Brainstorm (#Legacy), my Grixis Delver opponent, apropos of nothing, says, "Deathrite Shaman is a fucked up Magic card," and me and the two matches adjacent to us could only murmur and nod in agreement, for he spake the truth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Safety
That being said, I don't think it's banworthy in Legacy. The modern ban made sense though.
Isn't that was Legacy is as a format though? A collection of all the fucked up cards that never should have been printed.Quote:
Originally Posted by taconaut
TNN is more fucked up than DRS from my point of view. Put me in a position to ban a creature out of Legacy, DRS is 4th on my list.
So TNN is what, #3? Curious what the other 2 are (Emmy and Griz?)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
I'd imagine so. If it was up to me, I'd love to ban the dumb win-in-a-can stuff you can S&T to play - we have more interesting bombs to play with, and I'd like to see if they can hold up.
Yep.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Safety
Yup, absolutely, that's why it's awesome. We weren't complaining, just noting how bonkers that duder is. :laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Blood
I mean, I play Storm and used to play Miracles before the ban, I'm all about the dumb stuff (except, like, Griselbrand. I hate me some Griselbrand).
Sure, but how do we distinguish between "S&T is the problem" and "Griselderp is the problem?"Quote:
Originally Posted by Zombie
The problem (if it is a problem) is show and tell. Not the payoffs.
S&T is in a class of its own, but we do have Sneak Attack / Through the Breach and Animate Dead / Exhume as alternative ways to cheat Grisselbrand into play.Quote:
Originally Posted by supremePINEAPPLE
I would be more inclined to think DRS is a problem if there was a single viable deck that plays 4 DRS and 0 Brainstorm besides Elves.
Stacking Vendilion Clique, Snapcaster Mage, Baleful Strix, Shardless Agent, TNN, and Leovold, as well as the refining of the cantrip/fetch engine, has removed any incentive to not play a UBGx midrange deck. I don't really see what decks are constrained by the presence of DRS like are constrained by the presence of TNN and Leovold or the insane value of Snap, Strix, Shardless or the consistency of the cantrip machine.
DRS is a 1/2 that does nothing when it comes into play and can easily be killed before its controller untaps. These other cards just give the "problem" decks (if they are really problems) such a huge lead. You can say that DRS is what makes these cards good because of the mana fixing and ramp, but if anything the decks just switch from UB base to a UG base with Noble Hierarch powering out the dumbshit.
Snap vs. Ewit
Strix vs. Bob
Shardless vs. BBE
TNN vs. Mirran Crusader/Thrun
Leovold vs.... I don't know... Spirit of the Lab?
Pretty sure the card on the left is better in mostly every situation. And these all pitch to Force.
The role of DRS' graveyard meddling in terms of stopping graveyard decks is overrated. There are still viable reanimator and dredge decks. If anything, DRS hurts cards like Past in Flames, Knight of the Reliquary, and Nimble Mongoose more than anything, but that's not the only reason all those cards are outclassed. You can bolt their DRS and play a Mongoose, but it's just stonewalled by Strix or TNN anyway.
I would rather see how a format without TNN looks than a format without DRS. Take away the UBx decks' free wins and let's see what happens.
I'm not saying S&T is not a problem: the card is stupid. All I'm saying is that S&T for Sphinx or Prog or something seems less retarded than S&T -> Omnidrool. Hive Mind feels more like what combo in MTG is supposed to be about (IMO) than Omni or Griseltard winning the game more or less on the spot. S&T is a stupid card but S&T + stuff that puts you ahead and cares about gamestate has the potential to be interesting. I have a hard time figuring out anything sans Tin Fins where Griselbrand would feel remotely interesting because the card's effect is so binary and its overall operation so self-contained. Same reason why Storm is more fun than that, same why D&T gradually building an oppressive taxation and regulations bureau has never tilted me but T1 Chalice/Moon games routinely have a fun rating of zzzz. It's why Relic, Spellbomb, Bojuka Bog are interesting grave hate and RiP is zzz. Binary Magic is boring Magic.Quote:
Originally Posted by rufus
Is this thread really more worried about a 3/1 for 3 and not the card that enables greedy manabases and casts that dreaded 3/1 for 3?
Not me! Nothing wrong with DRS and the format is rich and diverse IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by CptHaddock
I've even defended the card, on Reddit and I believe here as well.
Edit - I have stated that I would personally prefer to see a little more synergy based decks (especially fair decks). However:
- This is a personal preference - not a criticism that the format lacks diversity.
- My lesser-than-average appreciation of "good stuff" decks has nothing to do with DRS. I don't single that card out.
That is an extremely loaded question with the way you phrased it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord_Mcdonalds
well, tnn is obnoxiously uninteractive. It's the first thing I'd like to have removed from legacy...
A bit but to suggest that TNN is more problematic than DRS simply because it's hard to kill and holds a sword incredibly well is absurd.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
You mean Brainstorm?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord_Mcdonalds
No that just gives my opponent an aneurysm and causes them to lose all motor control.
I definitely understand the confusion
I kind of look at it as whether they think the archetype itself is the problem (if so then ban the enablers) or if they think the archetype is fine but just a little overpowered (if so then ban the best payoffs or fast mana type cards).Quote:
Originally Posted by rufus
For me it's honestly not that - as far as objective powerlevel goes, both TNN and S&T+Omnibrand are manageable. Neither breaks the format. They're just distilled binaryness and boredom concentrate and rob the show floor from more nuanced and interesting boardstates and more, for the lack of a better word, "magical" ways to do broken things. I don't want prison to be lockpiece, kek im ded, but slowly succumbing to the inexorable burdens of Smokestack and Crucible or your deck gradually ceasing to operate as Revokers and Mindcensors twist the rules of the game to say "fuck you". I'd like to have Protection from everything not be a casual beater but the actual risk and investment that Natural Order requires. That GY hate didn't perma-delete everything constantly. Simple stuff like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Blood
From now on, whatever Zombie says I probably agreeQuote:
Originally Posted by Zombie
I just hate that the argument against mind Twist is that even if it's not too powerful it "adds nothing" to the format. But that's exactly how I feel about True Name and Show and Chimp
I tend to agree with you. The problem is where do you draw the line. You can say it's subjectively boring to play a game where the first two turns of the opponent is T1: Underground Sea, DRS, go. Daze your play. T2: wasteland your land, go. Same can be said for any number of things like Storm which is the kind of deck that does nothing until it goes for it or Chalice decks which are Sol Land Chalice go or Sol Land Mox Bloodmoon, "lol I win."Quote:
Originally Posted by Zombie
If you remove all of these you wind up with a shitty format like Frontier which is just a bunch of midrange value decks with a single strategy for winning.
AFAIK, that's not an actual argument used by WotC/DCI to justify the continued ban. It's just players flapping their mouths.Quote:
Originally Posted by Megadeus
Also, for what it's worth, TNN does help to keep (non-D&T) Blade decks relevant. Personally I don't care at all, but I think SFM is a card a lot of people do like to play.
Yeah. I cringe whenever I see players advocating the banning of an (admittedly not oppressive) card or deck on the grounds that they don't personally enjoy it. :frown:Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Blood
We've all seen the results of WotC's fun policing in other formats.
I would hate to dig through years of Rosewater's blogs, but I mentioned in "Current State of Magic" that the answer I got from Rosewater himself when I queried on Mind Twist (because even years ago we all said "yeah, like.. just put it back in already") was simply "Lol cuz it's broken", possibly spelled differently.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
WotC's main spot-light guy thinks it's too bonkers; can't say much for the other people there but I'd imagine anything ever deemed broken in the past is deemed broken now by default.
I don't think TNN is really on the power level of ban-worthy. If there's a good reason to ban it, I would point to its intended use of naming an opponent in a game with 2-3 total opponents. There's plenty of poorly designed uninteractive cards, but we're generally not going to see ban + here's the fixed version (like Earthcraft and Cryptolith Rite). I'm not really sure what the point of talking about fix vs ban is, but these would be changes that would make legacy better for some uninteractive cards:
-TNN: in a game with >1 opponent, choose 1. Alternatively, choose a player or a PW and TNN gains protection from that player's spells or that PW's abilities.
-Cavern of Souls: mana generated can only be used to cast named tribe (like Mishra's Workshop). Additionally change wording to say mana can be used to cast noncreature spells of named tribe, just without uncounterability clause. As far as Eldrazi are concerned, Cavern's colorless mana gains tribal uncounterable wording.
-Aether Vial: forced to add a counter each turn. Alternatively, when activated and creature is put into play (or attempted in the case of say Priest on board), remove all counters.
-Counterbalance: symmetrical and pay 2 life to counter a spell. Adding Cumulative Upkeep on top of those fixes is overkill, but definitely not without precedent (see Tidal Control).
In the interim, you can at least take solace in the fact that decks that run a card like TNN are generally unable to deal with it and will continue to suffer losses to Thoughtseize, Reanimate that. As long as the "strategy" is turn 1 mana dork #1 of 8 in an attempt to turn 2 TNN, they won't have mana up to hide their own loss-con with Brainstorm.
Edit: thinking more about Aether Vial, it could have also been pretty much the same card but just made into a land so it could just be Blood Moon'd, Wastelanded, etc while further compromising a deck's mana base to loss by color-screw.
http://i.imgur.com/B2rHfcQ.pngQuote:
Originally Posted by tescrin
>anything ever deemed broken in the past is deemed broken now by default
And conversely, if it wasn't broken 10 years ago it ain't broken now: Show and Tell/Griselbrand etc.
Edit: Can we unban Nedleeds already? This thread blows without him.
I agree. This thread without him is as bad as Legacy without Top and BS still in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevestamopz
LolQuote:
Originally Posted by Stevestamopz
Turn 1:Swamp, Dark Ritual, Entomb, Exhume, Sire of Insanity
Yeah, Mind Twist sure is BROKEN IN HALF
Naw, Sire is totally fine b/c it's Mind Twist'y on a creature - that's how you know it's healthy for magic.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeckBird
Well, I just put your pet deck back into the DTB, so I am going to go and call this IOU null and void.Quote:
Originally Posted by CutthroatCasual
oh Dice... what happened to your scruples?!Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
If you put his pet deck in the DTB you have to everyone's decks into DTB.
I know this is an old post, but the recent 5-0 list changes make it relevant again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Megadeus
I was a strong proponent of using League results to inform (un)banning decisions because they represent such a large dataset, but even apart from the reduced utility of a nonrandom sample under WotC's new standard for releasing 5-0 decklists, there's another problem with using League results to inform yourself about the paper Legacy metagame: the low cost and high liquidity of MODO decks means that there's a lot more metagame churn online than there is in paper, which could lead to false conclusions about how healthy the metagame is.
The hell? Why was he banned?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gheizen64