All B/R update speculation.

[Morim_Brightsmoke]

On the banlist imo the only cards that are questionable to be unbanned is
Tinker
Imperial Seal
Vampiric Tutor
Timespiral

Unbanning all these cards would be monumentally stupid. I will play pitch storm combo all day with these cards. I play 4x Chrome mox 4x SDT 4x High tide 4x Fow 4x misdirection, the above cards, a ton of cantrips and Underground seas, and win an absurd amount of the time.

Also, if you just unban the black tutors, there will just be a different black storm deck that is better that doesn't run ANT, and runs the IGG loop plus 8 Chants.

Also unbanning tinker is just ludicrous any time. You do know it doesn't just fetch up big untargettable guys right. You also know this gets cast regularly on turn 2?

Actually you know what i hope they do unban tinker, I would love to finally be able to play a control slaver variant in this format, and with 4 tinker, that deck would be better than any other deck in the format.

[Rood]

Skullclamp should permanently stay on the banned list. I never want to see that thing legal in Legacy. It would basically just make decks like Goblins/Elves/Faeries/etc the ability to just go nutty and draw so many cards that it would be nearly impossible to try to punish unless you can grip or something before they can utilize it. But basically, it's one of those cards that should never be touched IMO.

[Morim_Brightsmoke]

There are a number of cards that unbanned shouldn't prove problematic:
Gush -is fairly weak w/o Fastbond and would sea play in Gro with Mox D.

Mind Twist-a buddy i play with came up with this:
X = 1: Hymn is better
X = 2: Hymn is better
X = 3: Mind Twist is better
X = 4: Mind Sludge is more or less equal

Earthcraft- could push up Elves with Nest combo.
Grim Monolith and Mask are useless

Here are a few other choices, some folks from ClassicQuarter came up with, that i am not sure of, could use some help here:
Frantic Search-would combo play this?
Time Spiral-in TES/Belcher/NLS?
Mana Drain-Isn't the #2 counter in Classic like it is in Vintage, might be due to Bazaar of Baghdad and Tutors allowing faster decks.
Worldgorger Dragon- we have it online and it seems easily disruptable and has not made a winning appearance.
Goblin Recruiter-Food Chain isn't online so i can not test this one, but recruiter alone has not made many Vial-Goblins lists as most eschew it outright.

I don't know if this would be an issue or not, but a high tide deck with frantic search and time spiral seems pretty good to me. It obviously can run Fow, and might splash a color (green?) to facilitate beating Counterbalance top. EOT Grip your counterbalance, my turn go off with four lands high tide seems pretty good.

I don't know if this is good enough to do well or not, but it would be my main concern if frantic search and timespiral came off the list.

As for Gush, I feel like a old school miracle grow deck with winter orb, would probably be pretty happy with that. I am not convinced that deck is good enough but gush feels over powered to me even without fastbond. Even with "just" exploration, Gush reads generate 2 mana draw 2 cards, which doesn't seem to bad for 0.

[Rizso]

Unbanning all these cards would be monumentally stupid. I will play pitch storm combo all day with these cards. I play 4x Chrome mox 4x SDT 4x High tide 4x Fow 4x misdirection, the above cards, a ton of cantrips and Underground seas, and win an absurd amount of the time.

Also, if you just unban the black tutors, there will just be a different black storm deck that is better that doesn't run ANT, and runs the IGG loop plus 8 Chants.

Also unbanning tinker is just ludicrous any time. You do know it doesn't just fetch up big untargettable guys right. You also know this gets cast regularly on turn 2?

Actually you know what i hope they do unban tinker, I would love to finally be able to play a control slaver variant in this format, and with 4 tinker, that deck would be better than any other deck in the format.

Tinker wouldnt go for slaver, Pretty sure it would go for belcher :P

[Zilla]

Skullclamp should permanently stay on the banned list. I never want to see that thing legal in Legacy.

It was legal in 1.5 and it was barely played at all. I'm pretty sure that with the relative power level of the format being what it is, Skullclamp wouldn't be a problem if it came off the list. It's definitely not a no-brainer though. It's absolutely one of those cards I'd love to see made legal for a single tournament to see what people come up with for it, similar to what MTG Salvation is doing with Land Tax. It's a very strong card with a lot of potential applications, but nothing jumps out in my mind as "if it gets unbanned it will definitely go in deck x and be overwhelmingly broken."

[Obfuscate Freely]

I was thinking about how much I would like to equip Tarmogoyfs and Pridemages with Skullclamp, but then my brother reminded me of Bloodghast.

Do you really want to play against that deck? A deck that can draw 2-4 cards for every land drop it makes? That sounds kind of silly to me.

Ultimately, it seems like there are so many ways to build decks around Skullclamp, I find it hard to imagine the format not being overrun with Skullclamp decks. And, as fun as it is to play with Skullclamp, it is absolutely miserable to play against it.

[Skeggi]

Name one deck that really abuses Top that does not also have Counterbalance.

Quinn has been mentioned, various versions of The Rock and Landstill also run Top. The problem with Top is not that it itself is extremely overpowerd: it's very good, but not overpowered like LED. The problem with Top is that the abusive use is very high. Top takes ALOT of time and it's hard for judges to tell whether a player is just stalling or actually thinking about a hard decision. It's pretty common that a Landstill player or a Rock player wins game 1 and can go to time in game 2. This way, the opponent never stood a chance, all because of Top. Therefor it's one of the most unfair cards in the game.

[FoolofaTook]

Quinn has been mentioned, various versions of The Rock and Landstill also run Top. The problem with Top is not that it itself is extremely overpowerd: it's very good, but not overpowered like LED. The problem with Top is that the abusive use is very high. Top takes ALOT of time and it's hard for judges to tell whether a player is just stalling or actually thinking about a hard decision. It's pretty common that a Landstill player or a Rock player wins game 1 and can go to time in game 2. This way, the opponent never stood a chance, all because of Top. Therefor it's one of the most unfair cards in the game.

None of those decks abuse Top for the win the way the CounterTop decks do. I agree there are issues with intentionally drawing games out with Top that can be problematic, however the DCI has explicit penalties for intentional slow play. All you have to do is call a judge over when you have become fairly sure the opponent is deliberately stalling. Most people speed up remarkably when a match penalty is potentially in the offing.

You cannot stop people from attempting to cheat, you can only notify the authorities and make the cheating attempts much less feasible and much more uncomfortable for the person involved.

[Skeggi]

All you have to do is call a judge over when you have become fairly sure the opponent is deliberately stalling. Most people speed up remarkably when a match penalty is potentially in the offing.

The problem here is that you're either too late, or you're acting premature. Should you pre-emptively call a judge every time you see your opponent resolve a Top?

[(nameless one)]

What about Iona?

Does it deserve the banhammer? It does make mono-color decks useless.

Nothing says banhammer like 'you cannot play Magic'.

It essentially follows the same reason why Oath of Druids is not legal in Legacy.

[FoolofaTook]

The problem here is that you're either too late, or you're acting premature. Should you pre-emptively call a judge every time you see your opponent resolve a Top?

I'd call a judge the third time he took minutes to decide what to do with his top 3 in the second game. You have 50 minutes give or take to play the 3 games and if somebody is repeatedly stalling after winning game 1 it's pretty clear what they're doing. This doesn't mean that I'd get relief from the judge but the guy goes on the watch list at that point and if I had to call the judge over again it probably gets resolved.

I have never, BTW, actually had to call a judge over on stalling issues but I've had it happen around me and generally the issue gets resolved.

What about Iona?

Does it deserve the banhammer? It does make mono-color decks useless.

Nothing says banhammer like 'you cannot play Magic'.

It essentially follows the same reason why Oath of Druids is not legal in Legacy.

Iona gets the banhammer only if Reanimator turns into a killer deck that is slaying the format. It was a mistake to print the card, because it hates out mono-color decks so efficiently, however that effect isn't going to be big in Standard and I doubt that WotC worries a lot about other than dominant effects of their prints on Eternal formats.

[DrJones]

Iona gets the banhammer only if Reanimator turns into a killer deck that is slaying the format. It was a mistake to print the card, because it hates out mono-color decks so efficiently, however that effect isn't going to be big in Standard and I doubt that WotC worries a lot about other than dominant effects of their prints on Eternal formats.

LandTax disagrees with you. Cards also get banned if they move the game towards the wrong direction.

[majikal]

What about Iona?

Does it deserve the banhammer? It does make mono-color decks useless.

Nothing says banhammer like 'you cannot play Magic'.

It essentially follows the same reason why Oath of Druids is not legal in Legacy.

I think it's more likely they that if they ban anything (and they probably won't), they will ban the most egregious enabler of Iona, which is Entomb. The mere presence of Entomb places serious constraints on the kind of creatures R&D can design. Iona was designed while Entomb was still banned, and I don't think they tested that interaction very much/at all before deciding to unban it. Quite frankly, using any other method to cheat her into play is pretty much on par with NO/Progenitus, but getting her into play on turn 1 or 2 with Entomb is the same kind of broken as Oath of Druids.

[FoolofaTook]

LandTax disagrees with you. Cards also get banned if they move the game towards the wrong direction.

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazin...com/daily/af30

"Cards that are/were banned in Extended: Not every card that has ever been banned in Extended is banned in this new format, but we felt the most powerful ones had no place here. These include Earthcraft, Goblin Recruiter, Hermit Druid, Land Tax, Oath of Druids, Replenish, and newly exiled Skullclamp and Metalworker. With “1.5” now a little less like Vintage and a little more like Extended, it makes sense that the banned list is a compromise between the two. Most of these cards are very cheap combo enablers that are hard to defend against."

According to Aaron Forsythe Land Tax was a power level ban.

[Nightmare]

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazin...com/daily/af30

"Cards that are/were banned in Extended: Not every card that has ever been banned in Extended is banned in this new format, but we felt the most powerful ones had no place here. These include Earthcraft, Goblin Recruiter, Hermit Druid, Land Tax, Oath of Druids, Replenish, and newly exiled Skullclamp and Metalworker. With “1.5” now a little less like Vintage and a little more like Extended, it makes sense that the banned list is a compromise between the two. Most of these cards are very cheap combo enablers that are hard to defend against."

According to Aaron Forsythe Land Tax was a power level ban.

I know how much you love quoting things, but there are more recent articles on that site that say the reason Land Tax is banned has much more to do with the fact that it creates uninteresting, long stalemates where no one wants to play land for fear of the opponent gaining a huge advantage.

I'd find the quote but I'm at work, and WotC's site is blocked. Anyone who can find that article, it would be appreciated.

[Aggro_zombies]

Look, I can quote official WotC statements too!

"Furthermore, the Top encourages players to maximize the number of shuffle effects they play in a deck and the constant shuffling, cutting, presenting to an opponent to repeat the process, and then continuation of a turn exacerbated the situation. In the past the DCI has banned such cards on those grounds alone (Shahrazad is a good example of this, with Land Tax and Thawing Glaciers also having been banned for similar reasons) but in conjunction with the Top’s popularity during the last Extended PTQ season, the decision was to ban the card from the format it was harming."

Emphasis mine.

[FoolofaTook]

I know how much you love quoting things, but there are more recent articles on that site that say the reason Land Tax is banned has much more to do with the fact that it creates uninteresting, long stalemates where no one wants to play land for fear of the opponent gaining a huge advantage.

I'd find the quote but I'm at work, and WotC's site is blocked. Anyone who can find that article, it would be appreciated.

The article I quoted was from the period immediately following the banning of Land Tax in Legacy. You guys can quote an article following the banning of Sensei's Divining Top 3 years later in a different format, at a time when WotC was defending the banning of SDT and I find that somewhat informative - however, it's nowhere near as informative to me as the statement that a WotC representative detailed to explain the banning in the appropriate context and timeframe chose to make immediately after the banning.

[(nameless one)]

Look, I can quote official WotC statements too!

"Furthermore, the Top encourages players to maximize the number of shuffle effects they play in a deck and the constant shuffling, cutting, presenting to an opponent to repeat the process, and then continuation of a turn exacerbated the situation. In the past the DCI has banned such cards on those grounds alone (Shahrazad is a good example of this, with Land Tax and Thawing Glaciers also having been banned for similar reasons) but in conjunction with the Top’s popularity during the last Extended PTQ season, the decision was to ban the card from the format it was harming."

Emphasis mine.

I am guessing that this rule does not really apply on Legacy because Top and Glaciers are both legal in the format.

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazin...com/daily/af30

"Cards that are/were banned in Extended: Not every card that has ever been banned in Extended is banned in this new format, but we felt the most powerful ones had no place here. These include Earthcraft, Goblin Recruiter, Hermit Druid, Land Tax, Oath of Druids, Replenish, and newly exiled Skullclamp and Metalworker. With “1.5” now a little less like Vintage and a little more like Extended, it makes sense that the banned list is a compromise between the two. Most of these cards are very cheap combo enablers that are hard to defend against."

According to Aaron Forsythe Land Tax was a power level ban.

I think this is the real reason why Land Tax is banned in Legacy, which is now irrelevant since it is deemed as a jank card by some folks in this forum.

[Nightmare]

The article I quoted was from the period immediately following the banning of Land Tax in Legacy. You guys can quote an article following the banning of Sensei's Divining Top 3 years later in a different format, at a time when WotC was defending the banning of SDT and I find that somewhat informative - however, it's nowhere near as informative to me as the statement that a WotC representative detailed to explain the banning in the appropriate context and timeframe chose to make immediately after the banning.

Actually, the quote to which I was referring has nothing to do with Top. It was in the article where AF addressed why Land Tax didn't come off the list a few cycles ago. Again, as I can't go through the archives to find the article right now, you'll either need to take my word for it - which is completely out of character for you - or go look it up yourself.

Edit - before someone finds the quote and I get a million people jumping down my throat, it may mention Top. However, it isn't the article posted above.

[FoolofaTook]

Actually, the quote to which I was referring has nothing to do with Top. It was in the article where AF addressed why Land Tax didn't come off the list a few cycles ago. Again, as I can't go through the archives to find the article right now, you'll either need to take my word for it - which is completely out of character for you - or go look it up yourself.

Edit - before someone finds the quote and I get a million people jumping down my throat, it may mention Top. However, it isn't the article posted above.

I don't need to look it up, and I apologize for responding to you based on the post I read below yours which was actually Aggro_zombies post. I'm usually better at parsing, it's just I was responding to two critical posts in a row and I mixed and matched.

Here's the response I should have given to your post:

If WotC won't take Land Tax off the banned list because they're afraid that it will lead to situations in which nobody plays land because of fear of giving the opponent a huge advantage then that suggests to me that they think that Land Tax is too powerful for the format because of the extreme impact it would have on play styles and choices. This would match their feeling of 2004 when Aaron Forsythe said... blah blah blah.

Again, apologies for responding to you as if you had written the Aggro_zombies post. I'll try to be more careful about responding to multiple posts in the future.