I hate Griselbrand

[Humphrey]

Ponder, Merchant Scroll, Burning Wish, Gifts Ungiven, Lotus Petal, Regrowth, and Trinisphere are also restricted in Vintage. This is a non-argument.

If Ponder is also banworthy, I dont know. I dont think so yet.
The tutors are restricted, because the can find the other broken restricted stuff non existant in Legacy
Trinisphere needs Workshop to make it broken
Lotus Petal has 6 Moxenfriends and the big Lotus in Vintage, if you never noticed

The argument is valid. And thank god WotC is learning. BS and Ponder were unrestricted for a long period. Almost all cantrips are banned in modern and standard is suffering with Ponder right now.

[csy]

ugh another brainstorm ban thread. /unsubscribe

seriously the results of the last umpteenth event disagrees with all of you.

[CorwinB]

If Ponder is also banworthy, I dont know. I dont think so yet.
The tutors are restricted, because the can find the other broken restricted stuff non existant in Legacy

But this is the exact same reason why Ponder and Brainstorm are restricted in Vintage : because they dig too deep for uber-broken stuff.

[Humphrey]

ugh another brainstorm ban thread. /unsubscribe

seriously the results of the last umpteenth event disagrees with all of you.

Have you checked the DTB-Section lately? 7 of 8 decks are blue and running Brainstorm. 1 thats not blue which didnt won anything lately

Guys this is discussion is easy. Just explain, why Brainstorm isnt broken, is not above legacys powerlevel, is not like an Ancestrall Recall most of the time and doesnt provide blue decks with much more consistency than any other color.

[Einherjer]

1) Play Maze of Ith
2) Play Scavenging Ooze
3) Pass the turn
4) Eat the potential fatties he drops in his graveyard once he tries to reanimate them
5) At the end of turn, flash in a Batterskull
6) Draw 3 cards
7) Play a land
8) Equip the Batterskull to a Creature
9) Pass the turn
10) Take the turn and draw 3 cards
11) Play a Land
12) Use your Stoneforge Mystic to bring in Umezawa's Jitte and equip it to the creature that has an equipped Batterskull on it.
13) Attack and force him to block, if he does you gain infinite life and he has no creature, if he doesn't, well then he is dead pretty fast
14) Stop the formalities and win

[Humphrey]

1) Play Maze of Ith
2) Play Scavenging Ooze
3) Pass the turn
4) Eat the potential fatties he drops in his graveyard once he tries to reanimate them
5) At the end of turn, flash in a Batterskull
6) Draw 3 cards
7) Play a land
8) Equip the Batterskull to a Creature
9) Pass the turn
10) Take the turn and draw 3 cards
11) Play a Land
12) Use your Stoneforge Mystic to bring in Umezawa's Jitte and equip it to the creature that has an equipped Batterskull on it.
13) Attack and force him to block, if he does you gain infinite life and he has no creature, if he doesn't, well then he is dead pretty fast
14) Stop the formalities and win

Draw 14
counter or submerge the Ooze
play land
play careful study or
discard/entomb Elesh Norn
Exhume Elesh Norn
discard/entomb angel of despair
reanimate and kill maze.

[Pippin]

In all seriousness, I agree that had it been an Emrakul it would have been worse

Not so sure I agree with that one. Emrakul doesn't draw FoWs like Griselbrand, so he can be dealt with something like Liliana, there's even enough time to play a Knight of the Reliquary and fetch up a Karakas (thanks to Maze of Ith damage prevention).

In the end, its not SNT nor Grizzle what the problem. Its Brainstorm that provides this deck with more consistency than non U decks will have to find the answers.

There's some truth in here, but I seriously think that any discussion about banning Brainstorm should be forbidden. Before Griselbrand meta was wide open, and non blue decks had almost equal chance as blue decks. Prime example was Aggro Loam which put some impressive results. With Griselbrand seeing print meta became "either you play Griselbrand or you play a counterspell.deck to combat it" (with a few exceptions of other combos having a resurgence, like Elves). That's very suppressive in my eyes. Maybe it'll be easier for me to accept this situation if Wizards unbanned Y.Bargain and Necropotence in next update, seeing how an improved Bargain that is a win condition in itself is legal... Otherwise this doesn't make any sense.

[Lord Seth]

The argument is valid.

Saying "it's even restricted in Vintage" is not a valid argument because there are quite a few cards restricted in Vintage that no one would claim are too powerful in Legacy.

But this is the exact same reason why Ponder and Brainstorm are restricted in Vintage : because they dig too deep for uber-broken stuff.

Exactly. And it's why such an appeal is invalid; Vintage has a bunch of considerations that Legacy does not, and vice versa.

[Humphrey]

Actually in my playtestings I had no problems to board answers to Grizzle and Emrakul. Humilty, Bridge, Peacekeeper, Karakas are all viable answers. So is P. Needle, Revoker, Removal, Red Blast and so on.

But most of the time, Sneakshow found its tools faster than me :(

[Lord Seth]

There's some truth in here, but I seriously think that any discussion about banning Brainstorm should be forbidden. Before Griselbrand meta was wide open, and non blue decks had almost equal chance as blue decks. Prime example was Aggro Loam which put some impressive results. With Griselbrand seeing print meta became "either you play Griselbrand or you play a counterspell.deck to combat it" (with a few exceptions of other combos having a resurgence, like Elves). That's very suppressive in my eyes.

From the most recent SCG Open:
1. Lands (no counterspells)
2. Elves (no counterspells)
3. Elves (no counterspells)
4. RUG Delver (counterspells)
5. Maverick (no counterspells)
6. ?????? (anyone know why there's nothing listed for #6?)
7. Affinity (counterspells in sideboard)
8. Dredge (no counterspells)

So, out of the top 8, one deck had counterspells maindeck, one had counterspells in the sideboard, and one I have no idea but let's assume it had counterspells (seriously, what's with that? Why isn't it there?). The other non-counterspell decks were obviously able to keep up with Griselbrand. Unless Elves, Maverick, Affinity, and Dredge all count as "a few exceptions of other combos having a resurgence"? (don't forget Goblins, which took first place the week beforehand)

[damionblackgear]

From the most recent SCG Open:
1. Lands (no counterspells)
2. Elves (no counterspells)
3. Elves (no counterspells)
4. RUG Delver (counterspells)
5. Maverick (no counterspells)
6. ?????? (anyone know why there's nothing listed for #6?)
7. Affinity (counterspells in sideboard)
8. Dredge (no counterspells)

So, out of the top 8, one deck had counterspells maindeck, one had counterspells in the sideboard, and one I have no idea but let's assume it had counterspells (seriously, what's with that? Why isn't it there?). The other non-counterspell decks were obviously able to keep up with Griselbrand. Unless Elves, Maverick, Affinity, and Dredge all count as "a few exceptions of other combos having a resurgence"? (don't forget Goblins, which took first place the week beforehand)

The 6th place person was DQ'd (had counters). The 9th place (no counters) person was moved up but did officially participate in top 8 (breakers).

[Pippin]

From the most recent SCG Open:
1. Lands (no counterspells)
2. Elves (no counterspells)
3. Elves (no counterspells)
4. RUG Delver (counterspells)
5. Maverick (no counterspells)
6. ?????? (anyone know why there's nothing listed for #6?)
7. Affinity (counterspells in sideboard)
8. Dredge (no counterspells)

So, out of the top 8, one deck had counterspells maindeck, one had counterspells in the sideboard, and one I have no idea but let's assume it had counterspells (seriously, what's with that? Why isn't it there?). The other non-counterspell decks were obviously able to keep up with Griselbrand. Unless Elves, Maverick, Affinity, and Dredge all count as "a few exceptions of other combos having a resurgence"? (don't forget Goblins, which took first place the week beforehand)

It was stated in coverage of latest SCG Open that there was a surprising low amount of Griselbrand decks in the field. That may give you an answer to why top 8 looked like that.
For those players that actually played S&T decks I surely hope they didn't knock themselves out like this one did: http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...l=1#post653972

edit. another testament of unusual metagame - according to the winner of last SCG (Lands player), he didn't play against a single Griselbrand deck in the 11 rounds he played.

[Humphrey]

It was stated in coverage of latest SCG Open that there was a surprising low amount of Griselbrand decks in the field. That may give you an answer to why top 8 looked like that.
For those players that actually played S&T decks I surely hope they didn't knock themselves out like this one did: http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...l=1#post653972

One tournament out of hundreds says nothing about the metagame.
Check http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/met...?format=Legacy


Also it seems to me the SCG´s are frequently played by casuals.

[dontbiteitholmes]

One tournament out of hundreds says nothing about the metagame.
Check http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/met...?format=Legacy


Also it seems to me the SCG´s are frequently played by casuals.

Until the top 8 supports your argument, then it is extremely relevant. I know this because I read these threads and that is 100% how it works. If the last SCG top 8 was 6 blue decks or 3 Griselbrand decks it would be judged a compelling argument that whatever card the haters currently hate is ruining to format. Also for May your link says Maverick was the #1 deck.

Anyways we'll see what happens at the GP, should be interesting and there are sure to be plenty of GBrand decks. Too bad the new Merfolk lord won't be out yet, I'll be interested to see what that does to the format (if anything). The only thing I can say for sure is there won't be a 4x Land Tax deck in the top 8 (maybe it will show up as a 1x if anything).

[Julian23]

Godwin's law:

• - Nazis
• + Brainstorm

[DragoFireheart]

In the end, its not SNT nor Grizzle what the problem. Its Brainstorm that provides this deck with more consistency than non U decks will have to find the answers.

I made a lot of playtesting against SneakShow with a lot of different decks and answers. In the end, I lost. To Brainstorm.

How cant anybody see, that this cards powerlevel is way above legacys level. Its even restricted in vintage.

Ban it.

In the end, its not Brainstorm what the problem. Its Island that provides this deck with more consistency than non U decks will have to find the answers.

I made a lot of playtesting against Blue with a lot of different decks and answers. In the end, I lost. To Island.

How cant anybody see, that this cards powerlevel is way above legacys level. Its even restricted in vintage.

Ban it.

[Tao]

a few corrections:

- the game state is not won as people in this thread say. It will all depend on if the Reanimator guy can find a Force of Will in Griselbrands seven for the Ooze which is not unlikely. If he can, then he can just drop Elesh Norn the next turn and end the game.

- tournament results (still) show an absurd dominance of Brainstorm.dec

http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/mostplayedcards.php

[DragoFireheart]

- tournament results (still) show an absurd dominance of Brainstorm.dec

http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/mostplayedcards.php

- What's your point?

[Tao]

- What's your point?

people said "last oomphteen events show Brainstorm isn't dominating" and "top8s are disagreeing with you". I used statistic evidence to prove them wrong. It is very effective.

[rxavage]

people said "last oomphteen events show Brainstorm isn't dominating" and "top8s are disagreeing with you". I used statistic evidence to prove them wrong. It is very effective.

Funny thing about statistics is that you can use them to "prove" whatever you want.