All B/R update speculation.

[dontbiteitholmes]

Griselbrand fueled combo winter is in full effect, and it seems that 2 maverick decks, elves, and goblins are in the scg open's top 8...

In before "That doesn't count because..."

[rxavage]

Griselbrand is just Lord of the Pit's bad-ass brother.

[Michael Keller]

I'm telling you! People should just play Brand in Sneak and Show and like it!

[aahz]

Griselbrand fueled combo winter is in full effect, and it seems that 2 maverick decks, elves, and goblins are in the scg open's top 8...

You forgot to mention Enchantress!

[Telperion]

Time to break out your wraths and engineered plagues. Looking forward to DCI killing 3-4 decks on Wednesday. It seems reanimator was huge in the invitational which absolutely crushes sneak attack. Control resurged and grave hate was everywhere. And then fair decks, as far as the eye can see. So people adjusted to the metagame, was it too late?

[Snap_Keep]

Thats what he's saying essentially. He cant refute my arguments about the cards power level and ubiquity. He trolls saying I'm 'mad'. He says brainstorm, a blue card, is the 'core' of legacy. Which of course doesn't actually mean anything. Then he calls me a pussy and tells me to play modern becuae he cant refute the facts about the card. Tells me that playing islands, and starting every deck with 4 copies of the same overpowered colored card is a good thing. Makes inane comparisons to lands ... which are required when building a deck and saying they are ubiquitous and thus should be banned also.

I can see you're more interested in continuing your circle jerk then discussing this any further and so this is the point where I lose interest. Good catch on that part where I called you a pussy though.

[menace13]

Thats what he's saying essentially. He cant refute my arguments about the cards power level and ubiquity. He trolls saying I'm 'mad'. He says brainstorm, a blue card, is the 'core' of legacy. Which of course doesn't actually mean anything. Then he calls me a pussy and tells me to play modern becuae he cant refute the facts about the card. Tells me that playing islands, and starting every deck with 4 copies of the same overpowered colored card is a good thing. Makes inane comparisons to lands ... which are required when building a deck and saying they are ubiquitous and thus should be banned also.

Brainstorm is as required as Duals/Fetches and Wastelands.

[ESG]

TL;DR: Show and Tell would be fine - for right now - in a format without Griselbrand. Griselbrand might be fine in a format without Show and Tell. Grave-hate is main-decked in Vintage all the time. Perhaps if Griselbrand stays legal, we might be seeing this happen to Legacy.

This happened at the invitational. Michael Hetrick was running two Relic of Progenitus in the main, along with Karakas, three Vendilion Clique and a fifth Plow effect. In his sideboard he had three Surgical Extraction, Flusterstorm, a fourth V. Clique and a Sower of Temptation.

In the deck check segment with Christian Valenti, he was running a Relic of Progenitus in the main, along with more counterspells and grave hate in the side.

Adam Boyd ran four Phantasmal Image in the main.

[lordofthepit]

Griselbrand is just Lord of the Pit's bad-ass brother.

Nope.

[Pippin]

Not sure if people were watching the SCG Invitational, but there were quite a few matches that underlined the problem quite clearly.

I think in the last round of swiss (or the round before last one) Eli Kassis (Sneak Tell) was playing against Maverick player. It was 1:1 and game 3. In game 3 Eli resolved early Show and Tell and put Griselbrand into play. His opponent had Knight of the Reliquary and Karakas at that point. Before Griselbrand being printed this would have been enough for Maverick to have a fighting chance (Show and Tell player needed a resolved Sneak Attack to win), this time Eli just drew a bunch of card when Griselbrand was bounced and then one-shot the Maverick player next turn with hasty Emrakul and Griselbrand...

Onto the Reanimator vs Maverick matchup. Before Griselbrand Maverick had a chance with STP and numerous other effects that gave them a chance against a resolved fatty. With Griselbrand being played it's not even funny anymore, as was evident in a Max Tietze (Reanimator) vs Maverick feature match. As soon as Griselbrand is resolved it's just game over.

I was using Maverick just as an example deck that had a fighting chance (with being non-blue) before Griselbrand was printed. Nowadays it's just either play Griselbrand or play anti-Griselbrand deck. That's insane.
I seriously wonder how dumb one has to be to design Griselbrand? It's like R&D haven't learned anything. Yawgmoth's Bargain? Oh, how about we reprint that, gave it flying, lifelink, huge body and enable draw step? Yawgmoth's Bargain isn't legal in format and it could be only played through ritual effects or something like show and tell. Griselbrand can be cheat into play more easier and is a win condition in itself.

For those that will call me out, feel free to check my posting history on these boards. I was a strong opponent of banning both Survival (I argued to ban Vengevine if something needed to be banned) and Mystical Tutor. This time I'm for immediate ban on Griselbrand which ruined the format IMO. Way worse than Survival + Vengevine ever did.

[Hopo]

This time I'm for immediate ban on Griselbrand which ruined the format IMO.

By the format do you mean Starcitygames tournament series or is there something more to that?

Just for the sake of anecdotes, yesterday my opponent had Griselbrand enter the play twice to do it's thing and he wasn't even close to winning that. If you want hyperbole, it works both ways, you know.

[Michael Keller]

By the format do you mean Starcitygames tournament series or is there something more to that?

Just for the sake of anecdotes, yesterday my opponent had Griselbrand enter the play twice to do it's thing and he wasn't even close to winning that. If you want hyperbole, it works both ways, you know.

I'm quite certain your corner-case scenario isn't true for most competitive Legacy decks exploiting Griselbrand for all its worth. You could theoretically beat an active Griselbrand in play, but it's not likely.

In almost every circumstance, drawing seven to fourteen cards lopsidedly is game over. And for as much as people do not like referencing the Open Series as a measuring stick for the format's current prevalent decks, it is in fact the largest tournament series in the United States - so I'd say it bears some weight on the vast, general stage.

That doesn't mean the level of skill in the Opens is always ridiculously high, which in many cases it's simply relatively average.

[Hopo]

I'm quite certain your corner-case scenario isn't true for most competitive Legacy decks exploiting Griselbrand for all its worth .

Hence I labelled it as an anecdote and kind of hoped that people just let it be. It's not too motivating to discuss the matter when people are talking about turn 1 draw 14's like the deck always had that, with double counter backup. And they most likely have never even faced that situation. It's nice to discuss about the potential brokenness and all but to neglect probabilities is just dumb.

And for as much as people do not like referencing the Open Series as a measuring stick for the format's current prevalent decks, it is in fact the largest tournament series in the United States - so I'd say it bears some weight on the vast, general stage.

From Europe this looks to be the problem, since I'm willing to say that all this banning nonsense revolves mainly around SCG Open results. And it is difficult to justify measures that affect the other half of the world where Griselbrand doesn't seem to be much of an problem. It definitely is a card and a good one, but by no means oppressive.

If you only look at SCG, you might have a somewhat crooked perspective on things, and that is totally understandable. Just remember that there's something else to that as well. Legacy is not SCG, of course unless you only play in SCG series. But that should be stated in a disclaimer anyway.

[Pippin]

Just for the sake of anecdotes, yesterday my opponent had Griselbrand enter the play twice to do it's thing and he wasn't even close to winning that. If you want hyperbole, it works both ways, you know.

Really? How awesome, please do share more.
On a more serious note, did you film the match so that we can watch it? I'm asking because my examples were recorded and can be watched online right now.

Also, I'm not from USA - infact I'm from Europe and SCG aside still see Griselbrand as a huge problem.

[Hopo]

Really? How awesome, please do share more.
On a more serious note, did you film the match so that we can watch it? I'm asking because my examples were recorded and can be watched online right now.

Also, I'm not from USA - infact I'm from Europe and SCG aside still see Griselbrand as a huge problem.

Honestly, I don't carry a video camera with me in GPT's. So no videos here, sorry. I'm a little surprised by this question and it makes me think if people are playing this game nowadays in MWS only?

[Awaclus]

On a more serious note, did you film the match so that we can watch it? I'm asking because my examples were recorded and can be watched online right now.

This argument is ridiculous. How does filming matches make any difference to the power level of the cards the winning player uses?

[Gheizen64]

The point is that everyone that played magic should know how hard is to win against a resolved bargain. I played against the card a fair bit, and the only correct way to fight it is to prevent it entering into play, not trying to win after it land, because, you know, card is ridiculous. And it was even in T2 where u played it alongside Skirge Familiar and Drain life, imagine in a format with FoW, Brainstorm and the likes.

But i guess someone somewhere played a match with someone else and didn't lose after griselbrand entered into play so it's all ok.

[Pippin]

This argument is ridiculous. How does filming matches make any difference to the power level of the cards the winning player uses?

It was an argument on the same level that Hopo presented his opinion at first.
My original points were argumented by specific scenarios and matches while response to that was thin air scenarios.
Hollywood sumed it nicely.

[Hopo]

It was an argument on the same level that Hopo presented his opinion at first.
My original points were argumented by specific scenarios and matches while response to that was thin air scenarios.

I'm sorry but did I promise something else than an anecdote and some hyperbole? Please, read again, this time with your eyes open:

Just for the sake of anecdotes, yesterday my opponent had Griselbrand enter the play twice to do it's thing and he wasn't even close to winning that. If you want hyperbole, it works both ways, you know.

If you think a game or even some games you witnessed proves anything, you are not fit to have the discussion regarding if a card is banworthy or not.

What does a Stifle do against a Bargain? Right, absolutely nothing. Now think a moment about Griselbrand. Correct, Stifle deals 14 to the dome.

[SaberTooth]

SnT was a deck before gizzi... but it was normal, beatable... now, it's like griselbrand it's an enabler by itself, and obviously a 7/7 lifelink with flying. Actually never played against griselbrand, because no one is playing it on my meta (a really small one, but with the old sneak and tell deck), but reading and watching... maybe the banning will be fine