Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone?

True-Name Nemesis

Since we probably have been able to get an opinion on this controversial card by now, I would like to survey peoples' sentiments whether it should be banned or not from legacy. I think a survey is legitimate because there have been a lot of demands for a ban while others have downright contrary views. I'm aware that those subjects are usually discussed in the B&R thread but it's only possible to quantify the sentiments of the players by creating a single thread with a poll for this specific matter so I hope the mods don't mind.

It falls under my category of "it isn't oppressive enough to be banned, but I'd be okay with it not being in the format" together with Delver of Secrets and Show and Tell.

It's a relatively reasonable card but I think the biggest hit against it is that it is blue. Like Snapcaster Mage and Delver of Secrets, it would have been a positive card if it was non-blue. True-Name Nemesis would've been a fine white card and the 1WW cost would have created interesting deckbuilding choices (thought it may boost Death and Taxes too much). As a blue card, it just gives blue decks yet another tool that they really didn't need.

I would give up a stack of dual lands to see this card gone.

Unban black vise, sotf, earthcraft, mind twist. Thx.

I think we should give 2 months or so for the meta to adapt and then formulate opinions. Now is way too soon ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Erdvermampfa

True-Name Nemesis

Since we probably have been able to get an opinion on this controversial card by now, I would like to survey peoples' sentiments whether it should be banned or not from legacy. I think a survey is legitimate because there have been a lot of demands for a ban while others have downright contrary views. I'm aware that those subjects are usually discussed in the B&R thread but it's only possible to quantify the sentiments of the players by creating a single thread with a poll for this specific matter so I hope the mods don't mind.

---

In a meta where Emrakul can hit the field with haste on turn 2 consistently, we're worried about a pseudo-invincible 3 drop? Nah. We just need to get used to the fact that a good new card still actually gets printed every 6 months or so nowadays, lol.

Its not banworthy but its poor design. It improved midranged decks which didnt really need help

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bjholmes3

In a meta where Emrakul can hit the field with haste on turn 2 consistently, we're worried about a pseudo-invincible 3 drop? Nah. We just need to get used to the fact that a good new card still actually gets printed every 6 months or so nowadays, lol.

---

"Consistently"? Things have to line up very, very well to be able to get a hasted Emrakul on turn 2.

As for the question, I need clarification. Is it asking if I want it removed via a banning, or is it a more hypothetical "do you wish it hadn't been printed in the first place?" question. Because those are two very different questions.

Reasons for banning:
- Worst design card ever seen - really in more then 20 years this card is probably the worst ever - shame you R&D team(exclude early ante cards and some chaos warp/falling star).
- probably the most un-interactive creature ever printed - Hexproof with uncounterable and regenration(aka some Troll) wasn't so un-interactive as this one.
- R&D please don't be daltonist on blue - we already have most aggresive creature in blue - delver, we don't need the most defensive creature in blue..
- destroy all midrange creature-base decks which pop and and are good add for meta - really facing any other deck then BUG/RUG/Combo is very comfortable on tournament - it's really fun !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by apple713

Its not banworthy but its poor design. It improved midranged decks which didnt really need help

---

Agree. Since I play combo, I donnot even know if it is broken or not, but I really really dislike it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Erdvermampfa

True-Name Nemesis

Since we probably have been able to get an opinion on this controversial card by now, I would like to survey peoples' sentiments whether it should be banned or not from legacy. I think a survey is legitimate because there have been a lot of demands for a ban while others have downright contrary views. I'm aware that those subjects are usually discussed in the B&R thread but it's only possible to quantify the sentiments of the players by creating a single thread with a poll for this specific matter so I hope the mods don't mind.

---

No, there are multiple answers like Veil, its beatable and changes a meta that doesn't change often, all for it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by warai

I think we should give 2 months or so for the meta to adapt and then formulate opinions. Now is way too soon ;)

---

This 100% - I'd go so far as to say that unless WotC prints another Memory Jar or something, we should pretty much skip talking about bans for at least three months after a card becomes available, preferably more like six.

I'd be fine if they never printed True-Name Nemesis.
Protection from player is a little "unintuitive"

No, I don't think it should be banned. This is Legacy, not Modern.

The only acceptable justification in banning True-Name Nemesis is if tournament attendance is significantly declines.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fatal

- probably the most un-interactive creature ever printed - Hexproof with uncounterable and regenration(aka some Troll) wasn't so un-interactive as this one.

---

Progenitus would like to have a word with you...

Norin the Wary is pretty difficult to interact with as well.

just give us mystical tutor back. :trollface:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fatal

Reasons for banning:
- Worst design card ever seen - really in more then 20 years this card is probably the worst ever - shame you R&D team(exclude early ante cards and some chaos warp/falling star).
- probably the most un-interactive creature ever printed - Hexproof with uncounterable and regenration(aka some Troll) wasn't so un-interactive as this one.
- R&D please don't be daltonist on blue - we already have most aggresive creature in blue - delver, we don't need the most defensive creature in blue..
- destroy all midrange creature-base decks which pop and and are good add for meta - really facing any other deck then BUG/RUG/Combo is very comfortable on tournament - it's really fun !

---

Worst design ever? Find the thread dedicated to Great Wall, then.
Btw, I'd really love to see a bit more Chaos Warp-like and Falling Star-like cards. You know, kind of a cards that are funny or interesting. I know that a bulk of red part of pie must be " Deal 2 dmg" and "destroy target target" and "when ~ etb, deal some dmg", etc. There are 3828 red cards that our lgs sells and out of them I count some ten cards interesting and different enough that one may send them as an SSS gift.
So we're discussing banning of Troll Ascetic? Fine. Sadly I can't comment on TNN as I never met one IRL. It is legal for... three weeks? And people already want it to be banned? Strange.
Not that the design isn't idiotic (similarly to that of Griselbrand and emrakul, when speaking of creatures, and of course Delver plus Goyf), but is it really necessary to ban it?
As Esper3k wrote: Norin the Wary is pretty difficult to interact with as well.

Fun is far too subjective for it to be a valid reason for banning a card; in my opinion, cards should only ever be banned if they are having a detrimental effect on the balance of the game. TNN is a stupid card, but answers exist. I don't see how it's any more or less ridiculous than being wasteland locked, unable to cast your cards due to chalice or blood moon, or being grinded out by punishing fire or jitte. It exists, and we all need to play around it for the time being. If it's a problem, it'll get banned, but it should be given the chance to prove itself problematic first. This isn't modern, and cards in legacy should only ever be banned based on good reason.

Sent from my RM-825_apac_australia_new_zealand_259 using Tapatalk

I voted yes. Not because I think it's warping or incredibly broken, but because it's just awful to sit across from it. Emrakul too, FWIW.



Also, I loathe the thought of having to abandon NOPro and run it instead. Shudder.

True Name Nemesis is one of those cards people will cry for a ban.. like Show and Tell/whatever you lost to at your last tournament. It is a good card, and sometimes good cards win the game alone.

It comes down to the one thing nobody wants to hear: IF you have a bad matchup against Bant/Esper/decks with Nemesis (they're not nemesis.dec), consider switching:
- cards in your maindeck (Death& Taxes: i switched Sword of fire and ice in for sword of light and shadow and added back some flyers)
- cards in your sideboard( Esperblade: i now play Zealous Persecution)
- decks ( Im already playing storm)

I don't like the card, but i like Mystical Tutor and Survival. Liking a card is not the Reason to ban it (except Modern with Seething Song, it seems).

So, it should stay, but a more flexible card would`ve been better.

About the Hasty Emrakul thing on Turn 2, With Sneak Attack you have to get quite lucky, and with Tinfins Emrakul seems like a bad choice unless he is holding hands with a lifelink demon while attacking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Squirrel

True Name Nemesis is one of those cards people will cry for a ban.. like Show and Tell/whatever you lost to at your last tournament. It is a good card, and sometimes good cards win the game alone.

It comes down to the one thing nobody wants to hear: IF you have a bad matchup against Bant/Esper/decks with Nemesis (they're not nemesis.dec), consider switching:
- cards in your maindeck (Death& Taxes: i switched Sword of fire and ice in for sword of light and shadow and added back some flyers)
- cards in your sideboard( Esperblade: i now play Zealous Persecution)
- decks ( Im already playing storm)

I don't like the card, but i like Mystical Tutor and Survival. Liking a card is not the Reason to ban it (except Modern with Seething Song, it seems).

So, it should stay, but a more flexible card would`ve been better.

About the Hasty Emrakul thing on Turn 2, With Sneak Attack you have to get quite lucky, and with Tinfins Emrakul seems like a bad choice unless he is holding hands with a lifelink demon while attacking.

---

I get the sense that most people just think that it shouldn't exist because of its terrible design, not how good it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phonics

I get the sense that most people just think that it shouldn't exist because of its terrible design, not how good it is.

---

i know, but in my opinion, terrible Design is not a reason to get a card banned. Also, it is a quite new( and in some way innovative) Designs. Yes, it limits interaction, but isn't that a big part of legacy (any hard and softlock, Combo, manadenial etc. )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Squirrel

i know, but in my opinion, terrible Design is not a reason to get a card banned. Also, it is a quite new( and in some way innovative) Designs. Yes, it limits interaction, but isn't that a big part of legacy (any hard and softlock, Combo, manadenial etc. )

---

The problem lies in decreased interaction during combat. It turns the format into Combo, TNN aggro, and anti-TNN aggro. It makes the game less rich, less diverse, and less interesting.

There is very little that TNN actually adds to the format. It just makes existing tier 1 decks like Stoneblade and Delver even harder to deal with unless you're playing combo. Not everyone wants to play TNN.dec OR Combo.

And again, it's just *insanely* bad design. The kind of design that would be laughed out of R&D even 10 years ago. There's a reason stuff like this was traditionally put in green and/or only given hexproof (and not the whole pro:player unockability).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MGB

The problem lies in decreased interaction during combat. It turns the format into Combo, TNN aggro, and anti-TNN aggro. It makes the game less rich, less diverse, and less interesting.

There is very little that TNN actually adds to the format. It just makes existing tier 1 decks like Stoneblade and Delver even harder to deal with unless you're playing combo. Not everyone wants to play TNN.dec OR Combo.

And again, it's just *insanely* bad design. The kind of design that would be laughed out of R&D even 10 years ago. There's a reason stuff like this was traditionally put in green and/or only given hexproof (and not the whole pro:player unockability).

---

Glad to see that TNN invalidated Control :rolleyes:

Aside from Death and Taxes, what creature based decks that can't roll over it or deal with it (albeit with some minor changes). With the exception of red, there are answers in every color, most of which are commonly played already. You can fight it on the stack AND when it has resolved.

If you can't deal with Turn 3 TNN, how in fuck's name are you dealing with Turn 3 Hasty Emrakul?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mini1337s

Glad to see that TNN invalidated Control :rolleyes:

Aside from Death and Taxes, what creature based decks that can't roll over it or deal with it (albeit with some minor changes). With the exception of red, there are answers in every color, most of which are commonly played already. You can fight it on the stack AND when it has resolved.

If you can't deal with Turn 3 TNN, how in fuck's name are you dealing with Turn 3 Hasty Emrakul?

---

Turn emrakul is only possible through a combo. It means only a certain type of deck can do this and exposes itself to everything that is good vs combo,and has all the downfalls of combo as well. AND there are ways to target Emrakul with non-instants like Karakas, ORing, Jace etc.

Any blue deck can play TNN for 1uu without difficulty and have an unstoppable wincon vs opposing fair aggro decks.

I think that, if the comments are true, he was made for Commander. Let him stay there where he has answers. His design limits answers in a duel and thus I feel he should be played where he was "designed" to be.

I would like to see it banned so I wouldn't have to change my sideboard....

/sarcasm

"Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone" and "Should True-Name Nemesis be banned" are two different questions, to which the answers are "yes" and "no" respectively.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zilla

"Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone" and "Should True-Name Nemesis be banned" are two different questions, to which the answers are "yes" and "no" respectively.

---

Agreed. I didn't notice the question on the poll was different than the thread's title until I had already voted.

Please stop being so pedantic and don't pretend that you wouldn't get the question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zilla

"Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone" and "Should True-Name Nemesis be banned" are two different questions, to which the answers are "yes" and "no" respectively.

---

This.

I wouldn't care about him if I could lock him under Stasis and kill his owner with a Black Vise. True Name would seem downright neighborly.

He's dumb, annoying, and uninteractive, but not broken.

It's weird and dumb that Legacy players pretend that, "Should this card not exist" and "Should this card be banned" are significantly different questions.

If a card actively makes the format worse for existing, why wouldn't you ban it?

Because worse is really subjective. I don't think Black Vise makes the format worse, I don't think Survival makes the format worse. Others probably do. I'd rather unban cards than ban more cards. Unbanning cards that require building decks around them like Black Vise, Earthcraft, Survival and maybe Dragon is interesting. Mental Mistep is not interesting, you simply play 4 unless you are playing Chalice on 1. TNN isn't particularly interesting but it isn't any more powerful than some other creatures like Stoneforge, Delver, Clique and Tarmogoyf.

TNN is only the next Tarmogoyf to make a lot of other previous viable options obsolete. Maybe it does the same to Tarmogoyf what Goofy did to werebear and psychatog

Quote:

---

The Gentleman's Agreement

When we saw the Grand Prix–Madrid finals decks, a few of us got worried, jumped onto Magic Online, and started playing some Legacy with them. We were terrified by what we found. Although we were playing in the tournament practice room, which is hardly the same thing as a real tournament environment, we weren't losing very many matches with either Reanimator or Ad Nauseam. In my case, I don't recall losing any matches with either deck outside of a misclick while I was still learning the Ad Nauseam deck. The decks were just so strong that opponents not set up in their maindecks or that didn't sideboard heavily against us couldn't compete.

Our research took another turn, however, when we investigated how Legacy is played in the real world. We discovered something rather interesting, and that is that Mystical Tutor decks were quite rare at Legacy tournaments that did not have tons of money on the line. At Grand Prix and other cash tournaments, people were happy to bust out their Mystical Tutorss. However, in the comfort of their home stores they seemed to prefer doing other things that were more fun, if perhaps less powerful. This struck me as being a sort of gentleman's agreement; everyone knew what sick decks were out there, but they chose not to play them.

Having played with the Mystical Tutor decks, we knew what the alternative was. In order to stop a Mystical Tutor deck, people needed to either play decks full of things like Stifle, Daze, and Force of Will, or sideboard heavily into graveyard hate and cards like Mindbreak Trap. For Reanimator, that wasn't even a big deal sometimes, as it could sideboard Pithing Needles; and Ad Nauseam Tendrils could go through Mindbreak Trap and Force of Will fairly easily with a few well-placed Duresses or Thoughtseizes. After sideboarding, the games were all about the hate cards, which struck us as being a little unhealthy. Worse, Mystical Tutor often allowed these decks to heap resiliency on the hate at very little cost by adding only a single card like Show and Tell or Wipe Away—and they could Mystical Tutor for them.

The fascinating thing about the aforementioned agreement is that it seemed that the people who were part of the gentleman's agreement were having more fun than the people who weren't. Whether or not they were aware that there was anything special going on, they were experiencing a better variety of decks and a higher quantity of recognizable baseline Magic gameplay—even though they were still playing with nearly every Magic card that has been printed. We saw the world they had made, and we liked it. We liked it so much more than the competitive world that had Mystical Tutor decks that we decided to give that happier world to everyone.

---

I know how ridiculous people called the Gentleman's Agreement, yet here we are, screaming for the same thing which has been laughed at before.

The baseline is:

- TNN forces the format into a) Combo b) TNN decks and c) Anti-TNN decks that require either counters, discard or very narrow answers.
- TNN sucks the fun out of the format and we'd be all better off without it in the format.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin

It's weird and dumb that Legacy players pretend that, "Should this card not exist" and "Should this card be banned" are significantly different questions.

If a card actively makes the format worse for existing, why wouldn't you ban it?

---

Because there are negative consequences associated with banning cards with respect to consumer confidence in the format and in Magic products.

Yeah, I really dislike the card and wish it had never been conceived (or at least that they had made it an ETB trigger that targets the player or something that could be interacted with on at least a few points). However... it's here now in all of its uninteractive glory, so let's just see what happens. I'd say that by the time GP Paris is done, we should have a better idea of how the format adjusts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lordofthepit

Because there are negative consequences associated with banning cards with respect to consumer confidence in the format and in Magic products.

---

Yeah, that's bullshit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nedleeds

Because worse is really subjective.

---

Life is hard.

Quote:

---

I don't think Black Vise makes the format worse, I don't think Survival makes the format worse. Others probably do. I'd rather unban cards than ban more cards. Unbanning cards that require building decks around them like Black Vise, Earthcraft, Survival and maybe Dragon is interesting. Mental Mistep is not interesting, you simply play 4 unless you are playing Chalice on 1. TNN isn't particularly interesting but it isn't any more powerful than some other creatures like Stoneforge, Delver, Clique and Tarmogoyf.

---

This isn't a banning philosophy, it is a pastiche of unrelated opinions.