All B/R update speculation.

[Barook]

Step 1. Ban Brainstorm.
Step 2. ???
Step 3. Face-roll with Belcher!

I love how Belcher is quoted as the format's boogeyman when it comes down to "Ban Brainstorm" discussions. This argument is zero merit:

FoW is still legal. If they go for the T1 kill on the play, only the FoW in your hand will help since you have no mana to cast Brainstorm. If you're on the play, Ponder and other cantrips can dig just as deep for FoW, if not deeper in Ponder's case. Can't dig for FoW in response to Belcher going off? God forbid somebody has to think through their lines of play instead of brainstorming in response like a trained monkey while claiming "Brainstorm takes skill".

Blue doesn't go suddenly extinct without Brainstorm and every deck has the option to run Mindbreak Trap in the sideboard if it considers Belcher a problem.

[ahg113]

I love how Belcher is quoted as the format's boogeyman when it comes down to "Ban Brainstorm" discussions. This argument is zero merit:

FoW is still legal. If they go for the T1 kill on the play, only the FoW in your hand will help since you have no mana to cast Brainstorm. If you're on the play, Ponder and other cantrips can dig just as deep for FoW, if not deeper in Ponder's case. Can't dig for FoW in response to Belcher going off? God forbid somebody has to think through their lines of play instead of brainstorming in response like a trained monkey while claiming "Brainstorm takes skill".

Blue doesn't go suddenly extinct without Brainstorm and every deck has the option to run Mindbreak Trap in the sideboard if it considers Belcher a problem.

Just to clarify, you're saying a better business model is-

Step 1. Steal Underpants
Step 2. ???
Step 3. Profit!

[Barook]

Just to clarify, you're saying a better business model is-

Step 1. Steal Underpants
Step 2. ???
Step 3. Profit!

What exactly are you trying to clarify by quoting a South Park joke about stealing underpants?

[ahg113]

What exactly are you trying to clarify by quoting a South Park joke about stealing underpants?

That my Belcher comment is part of an ongoing joke to originate, the source material of which is an underpants joke from South Park.

Belcher (non-blue) winning on turn 0 is bad, but with TES or AnT (blue'ish) winning turn 0 is ok. I got nothing really. I agree with you, just wanted to smile.

I however am a fan of clarified butter, or maybe just butter in general, delicious.

[Dzra]

Blue doesn't go suddenly extinct without Brainstorm and every deck has the option to run Mindbreak Trap in the sideboard if it considers Belcher a problem.

Blue doesn't go extinct. Control and Tempo go extinct. In their place, you have a Blue-based midranged deck that looks like Junk but with True-Name Nemesi.

[Barook]

Blue doesn't go extinct. Control and Tempo go extinct. In their place, you have a Blue-based midranged deck that looks like Junk but with True-Name Nemesi.

Despite all the BS discussion, TNN is the first card to go. That goes without question.

[btm10]

Despite all the BS discussion, TNN is the first card to go. That goes without question.

I get that you think TNN is ruining the format, but it seems that you've expanded your rage to include all of the high quality blue cards. Is a "swing with my 5 creatures because control can't find enough answers" format really what you want?

[ahg113]

I get that you think TNN is ruining the format, but it seems that you've expanded your rage to include all of the high quality blue cards. Is a "swing with my 5 creatures because control can't find enough answers" format really what you want?

BELCHER! #ftw

[Dzra]

I get that you think TNN is ruining the format, but it seems that you've expanded your rage to include all of the high quality blue cards. Is a "swing with my 5 creatures because control can't find enough answers" format really what you want?

For some reason, certain people seem to be on a crusade to end Blue's dominance in Legacy. As opposed to TNN, which most can agree is a poorly designed card for multiple reasons, the argument for banning Brainstorm mostly revolves around the arbitrary idea that we should want less Blue decks in the format simply because they are Blue.

[Darkenslight]

I get that you think TNN is ruining the format, but it seems that you've expanded your rage to include all of the high quality blue cards. Is a "swing with my 5 creatures because control can't find enough answers" format really what you want?

Brainstorm is probably the most egregious card for a particular format ever seen in the history of Magic. And that includes the Summer of Skullclamp. IT is, without a doubt, the single most powerful card in Legacy. There is literally nothing that comes close to the filtering that BS can do. TNN gets some splash hate, and Delver is probably the stupidest mistake that Wizards made, color-wise. This is my fundamanetal issue with the meta; that decks without BS must rely on having a ton of redundancy, whereas Blue decks can just shove BS, FoW and almost anything else and call it a day.

I feel like there's almost no risk when playing Blue in Legacy, be it combo, control or aggro (with the only exception being Merfolk, who have other means of gaining card advantage), whereas there's considerable risk when you don't play Blue.

[davelin]

For some reason, certain people seem to be on a crusade to end Blue's dominance in Legacy. As opposed to TNN, which most can agree is a poorly designed card for multiple reasons, the argument for banning Brainstorm mostly revolves around the arbitrary idea that we should want less Blue decks in the format simply because they are Blue.

I don't think it's arbitrary to consider a healthy metagame one that doesn't involve 90% of decks requiring one specific color. If the culprit was one of the other four colors, the argument would be the same.

[btm10]

Brainstorm is probably the most egregious card for a particular format ever seen in the history of Magic. And that includes the Summer of Skullclamp. IT is, without a doubt, the single most powerful card in Legacy. There is literally nothing that comes close to the filtering that BS can do. TNN gets some splash hate, and Delver is probably the stupidest mistake that Wizards made, color-wise. This is my fundamanetal issue with the meta; that decks without BS must rely on having a ton of redundancy, whereas Blue decks can just shove BS, FoW and almost anything else and call it a day.

I feel like there's almost no risk when playing Blue in Legacy, be it combo, control or aggro (with the only exception being Merfolk, who have other means of gaining card advantage), whereas there's considerable risk when you don't play Blue.

I think you forgot about Necropotence. And unlike Necro and Skullclamp, Brainstorm isn't an engine card, it's a cantrip. An excellent cantrip, but it's still just that. Blue has had this ability forever, and banning Brainstorm is just going to lead people to run Opt, Portent, Serum Visions, Preordain, or Impulse in those slots. It will not fundamentally change the dominance of Blue as a color, because the third and worse string cantrips are still worth running when there isn't better manipulation available. I ask again - why do you want to make Legacy a format dominated by a bunch of mediocre creature-based strategies?

[Gheizen64]

I think you forgot about Necropotence. And unlike Necro and Skullclamp, Brainstorm isn't an engine card, it's a cantrip. An excellent cantrip, but it's still just that. Blue has had this ability forever, and banning Brainstorm is just going to lead people to run Opt, Portent, Serum Visions, Preordain, or Impulse in those slots. It will not fundamentally change the dominance of Blue as a color, because the third and worse string cantrips are still worth running when there isn't better manipulation available. I ask again - why do you want to make Legacy a format dominated by a bunch of mediocre creature-based strategies?

BS is a cantrip in the same way ancestral recall isn't cantrip: it isn't. BS WOULD be a cantrip if didn't actually draw you 3 and just peeked 3.

[Infinitium]

This is my fundamanetal issue with the meta; that decks without BS must rely on having a ton of redundancy, whereas Blue decks can just shove BS, FoW and almost anything else and call it a day.

So we have succesfully concluded that reducing variance in what most often amounts game of luck is a good thing in order to produce consistent results. Whilst I don't agree with the assesment that cutting brainstorm would "kill control" or whatever the rallying cry of the week amounts to, having the third option of decks with situationally useful cards held together by card selection makes for a more interesting game than one that only amounts to various implementations of goodstuff and non-interactive decks. At least the crowd harping for the ban of Force of Will had the actually valid argument of it being disproportionatly good in combo decks to fall back on after the usual tiresome tirade against ubiquity.

As for decks tending to look alike, that is probably more due to inertia than anything else. Between the large cardpool to build decks from, the unknown factor that is the opponents deck and virtually infinite amount of gamestates that can result between the two it's pretty much impossible to deduce what an optimal iteration of a magic deck looks like so people tend to go with what seem to have worked previously. Same reason why most pillar cards of the format generally needs a few months to pick up speed. Same reason why even Merfolk decks already running fetchlands still don't tend to include brainstorm. Same reason why "objective power level" (sic) of a card is a downright useless metric to gauge whether it should be included in a game or not.

[testing32]

For some reason, certain people seem to be on a crusade to end Blue's dominance in Legacy. As opposed to TNN, which most can agree is a poorly designed card for multiple reasons, the argument for banning Brainstorm mostly revolves around the arbitrary idea that we should want less Blue decks in the format simply because they are Blue.

I would consider a healthy metagame one that doesn't have 56 card decks.

[PirateKing]

I would consider a healthy metagame one that doesn't have 56 card decks.

That's like complaining that a healthy metagame shouldn't be primarily decks with 20 land and 40 nonland cards. Or 60 in general. Why must all decks be 60 cards? Ban them!

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

It's not at all like that. Wizards has for the 20+ years they've been running this game posited the stance that decks should vary from each other in their entirety. It is an entirely new thing to argue that decks should all start with 4x of the same card. When formats have come remotely close to being as dominated by one card as Legacy is by Brainstorm, bannings have ensued.

And Brainstorm involves a lot less skill in its execution than Ponder or Portent. What it does do is undo much of the penalty of previous bad decisions.

Brainstorm does reduce the amount that your current hand is determined by luck, but reducing luck is not the same as rewarding skill.

Blue doesn't go extinct. Control and Tempo go extinct. In their place, you have a Blue-based midranged deck that looks like Junk but with True-Name Nemesi.

Is that... not what we have? In what way would these theoretical decks be more Junk-ish than, say, Esper Blade?

Anyway, no, control and tempo do not need Brainstorm.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

For some reason, certain people seem to be on a crusade to end Blue's dominance in Legacy. As opposed to TNN, which most can agree is a poorly designed card for multiple reasons, the argument for banning Brainstorm mostly revolves around the arbitrary idea that we should want less Blue decks in the format simply because they are Blue.

It is not arbitrary, it is precedent. There is an established precedent that the color wheel should be somewhat balanced within a metagame, that this is desirable.

IBA's data shows that Brainstorm is heavily used. What it does not show is whether this has a negative impact on the format.

"Heavily used" is a cute way of saying, "As close to absolute dominance as is realistically possible."

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

IBA: You would find your posts are more productive in getting your point across if you were not so abrasive.

No, that has nothing to do with getting my point across, I get my point across with data and rhetorical reasoning. This is just something people say when they're feeling raw about how I'm talking to them in particular.

Right now, you give the impression that your a tool with a superiority complex. If you toned it down you would find yourself a respected member of this community

Oh golly gee I would thanks for the advice mister Dice_Box, join date March 2013.

I think you forgot about Necropotence. And unlike Necro and Skullclamp, Brainstorm isn't an engine card, it's a cantrip. An excellent cantrip, but it's still just that. Blue has had this ability forever, and banning Brainstorm is just going to lead people to run Opt, Portent, Serum Visions, Preordain, or Impulse in those slots. It will not fundamentally change the dominance of Blue as a color, because the third and worse string cantrips are still worth running when there isn't better manipulation available. I ask again - why do you want to make Legacy a format dominated by a bunch of mediocre creature-based strategies?

Necro never achieved 90% that I'm aware.

banning Brainstorm is just going to lead people to run Opt, Portent, Serum Visions, Preordain, or Impulse in those slots.

Those cards are laughably worse than Brainstorm, this is an invalidating argument.

[testing32]

GP Paris - No Brainstorm top 8

3rd - Painter
16th - Elves
21st - Painter
25th - Death and Taxes
29th - Dredge
34th - Elves
35th - Merfolk
39th - Elves

Maybe we can start doing what vintage champs does where you win a better prize if you aren't running power except we do it with brainstorm.