All B/R update speculation.

[btm10]

Not a big deal when blue can't switch dead cards for disruption. Just take any Delver 75, Miracle 75 and Storm 75 and replace Brainstorms with Serum Visions to visualize the effect on each deck if Brainstorm is banned. I'm very sure that Storm will benefit the most, especially preboard.

I think combo probably net loses ground in this fantasyland. The other decks that lose Brainstorm get to replace it with Preordain, and I think the gap between Preordain and Visions is pretty big in this case. The tempo/midrange/control decks' disruption options are substantially interchangeable (so long as you've got a blue card for Force, or U up for Spell Pierce, or B for Thoughtseize etc.), and combo pieces really aren't, especially when we're talking about Storm.

Fortunately, as I've said before, I think a Brainstorm ban is pretty unlikely.

[Lord Seth]

I really would like to know why people think that combo decks will get hurt a lot by a Brainstorm ban. Does no one play Combo in Modern? Combo is still very consistent without Brainstorm, Preordain and Ponder (Consistent Turn 3 kills, some Turn 2 kills with Jeskai Ascendancy).

Yeah, and 4-color Jeskai Ascendancy (the version you refer to) isn't that great. Sure, it's fast, but it's very fragile. It basically has all of the weaknesses of Infect and Storm rolled up into one deck. The "good" version of 3-color Jeskai Ascendancy, which is much slower.

If you wanted to appeal to Modern, a better example would have been Storm, which (if Seething Song and Rite of Flame were unbanned) was dangerously fast at killing you, as was Blazing Shoal Infect, hence the bans on those decks while Legacy has more powerful combo decks that don't get banned. However, it's also worth remembering that a big problem with attempting to compare Modern to Legacy in this way is that Modern doesn't have Force of Will. So yes, it lacks Brainstorm, Ponder, or Preordain, but it also lacks Force of Will to begin with.

[Teveshszat]

Being instant is a huge part of Brainstorm's power.

EOT Brainstorm/Fetch before the draw? Yes please.
Brainstorm in response to Thoughtseize/Cabal Therapy/Hymn to Tourach? Yes please.
In response Brainstorm for Force of Will?

I don´t deny this. But for the evaluation if banning brainstorm will weaken the blue shell to the point were non blue strategies without splash or Top are even in the Chances to win it doesn´t matter. The reason is you are comparing the ability to increase your consistency towards a critical point.
I am not try to agrue all blue canptrips are equal to Brainstorm I try to say you can´t ban one and expect that non Blue second class decks get better in relation to blue consitency strategies. Maybe they get slightly better but they will still not beeing competetive as long as cantrips exsist and they refuse to include them.

Not a big deal when blue can't switch dead cards for disruption. Just take any Delver 75, Miracle 75 and Storm 75 and replace Brainstorms with Serum Visions to visualize the effect on each deck if Brainstorm is banned. I'm very sure that Storm will benefit the most, especially preboard.

Great joke do the same you tell us with combo. The effect will be that you have an increasment in the number of games were some 2/1 or 3/1 dude hammers you away while you try to find the last combo piece and this to a point were you just become anoyed. The reason is you have a more limited numebers of turns than control to win the game and Tempo will become faster as well.

[Tao]

Cantrips are just cantrips. There is nothing magical or special or complicated about them. If your blue deck wants additional consistency or digging for certain cards you should play them and most decks would play Ponder because it is a good card but that doesn't mean they are a unique superior playstyle.

[Teveshszat]

Tao
Cantrips are just cantrips. There is nothing magical or special or complicated about them. If your blue deck wants additional consistency or digging for certain cards you should play them and most decks would play Ponder because it is a good card but that doesn't mean they are a unique superior playstyle.

They actually are something superior because they increase consitency. In the long run the more consitent deck will win more often than the least consitent deck. This means they are better for great tournments because the deck has less bad draws than one without cantrips.
So what you do you play at least Top to migrate this if you gameplan not include a combo like elves or a blue source.

[Tao]

In the long run the overall better deck will win more, not the more consistent one. Consistency is just one of many parts that makes a deck good. The tournament size is absolutely irrelevant, all that matters is win percentage.

[Teveshszat]

Tao
In the long run the overall better deck will win more, not the more consistent one. Consistency is just one of many parts that makes a deck good. The tournament size is absolutely irrelevant, all that matters is win percentage.

The better deck is the deck with more concistency and yes it will win in the long run because it is statisticly better than that without consistency. The reason is that increased consitency means decreased variance and that says you allways get what you need to defend you.
In short math says that consitency and cardadvantage is what makes a deck superior so decks with cantrips win over decks without any sort of libary manipulation.

[wonderPreaux]

The better deck is the deck with more concistency and yes it will win in the long run because it is statisticly better than that without consistency. The reason is that increased consitency means decreased variance and that says you allways get what you need to defend you.
In short math says that consitency and cardadvantage is what makes a deck superior so decks with cantrips win over decks without any sort of libary manipulation.

Decreased variance does NOT mean you always get what you need, you dont understand math at all. Decreased variance just means that what you get, whatever it is, comes from a smaller range of possibilities, because it VARIES less. Also, decks with cantrips pay an opportunity cost of tempo and board presence, it's not as though cantrips are zero mana spells, thats why Burn kept cropping up over the summer as the durdley miracles decks that were so popular actually had a tougher time of dealing with straight speed than most people realized

Edit: Also, this is yet another anti-cantrip argument made with a completely fallacious and/or ignorant approach to mathematics/statistics, I only note this because Im pretty sure I mentioned such a thing a few pages back. If i felt like being the type of guy with a passive aggressive sig quote, like many who argue against cantrips, its hard to beat:

increased consitency means decreased variance and that says you allways get what you need to defend you.

[Zombie]

He's not in the anti-cantrip camp. He's a pure competitive soul who cares only for competition and skill testing and hates variance yet plays Legacy for some reason and not Chess or something.

[Ellomdian]

From Tom Lapille's actual article regarding homogeneity in Vintage being the reason for restricting Brainstorm (emphasis mine) -

"There were two problems that needed to be solved. The first was that Force of Will decks were much, much stronger than decks built around Mishra's Workshop, Bazaar of Baghdad, and Dark Ritual. The second issue was that Brainstorm and Ponder had a homogenizing effect on Vintage blue decks. Once you put four Force of Will, four Brainstorm, four Ponder, a bunch of restricted cards, and some mana sources in your deck, there simply isn't much room to put in anything else. This meant that the differences between different Force of Will decks were usually very small, and that hurt the format's variety."

I don't really feel that we have the same issues in Legacy today, TBH. FoW (despite constant argument to the contrary) is the glue that holds this madhouse together, and has been since it's inception. It serves more as a Fun-Police card than an overly oppressive strategy on it's own merit. But, more notably, Legacy does not have a list of 10-15 cards that are effectively auto-includes because of their inherent power level. As much as people have presented the idea of a 'Blue-shell,' we are not seeing lists that approach anything close to the homogeneity of 2008-era Vintage, and the decks that use Brainstorm actually have radically different play patterns. Executing ANT combo, playing a UR Tempo list, and piloting Miracles are 3 very different exercises.

So, if we shouldn't argue for banning Brainstorm based on homogeneity, then we can argue based on majority blue appearance, right? Here's the quote from Erik Lauer's article detailing the Mental Misstep ban:

Unfortunately, it turned out poorly. Looking at high-level tournaments, instead of results having blue and nonblue decks playing Mental Misstep, there are more blue decks than ever. The DCI is banning Mental Misstep, with the hopes of restoring the more diverse metagame that existed prior to the printing of Mental Misstep.

This point is oft misquoted - MM was not banned because it turned up in every deck (which it was, in fact, designed to do) - it was banned because it made Blue decks (specifically) considerably stronger, and as a result, Blue decks dominated the Meta. That's important for 2 reasons; one, it demonstrates that someone, somewhere, is paying attention to Legacy from an organizational perspective, and two, they are willing to guide a format based on goals of diversity (not just on the power level of individual cards.)

So, what can we conclude? I believe the following:

1. Legacy is not currently experiencing the statistical homogeneity of card choice and play selection that drove them to restrict cards in the Vintage Blue shells circa 2008, and as such, that should not qualify as grounds for considering BnR action.
2. There is a cap for single cards driving the power level of specific types of decks (including Color) that can draw BnR action. If no action is taken, it can be assumed that OP is fine with the state of high-level and store-level play, and further complaint about it is so much pissing in the wind.

I understand why Mods want to keep this thread open to corral all of this discussion into a single place, but TBH, there hasn't been much actual discussion for a long time. Between the Pet Deck arguments, the 'Blue Hate' discussion, and general idiocy, at this point, it's probably worth it for another sticky'd thread titled "I just want to Complain on the Internet" so that we don't even have to keep it tangentially related to Magic.

[Barook]

This point is oft misquoted - MM was not banned because it turned up in every deck (which it was, in fact, designed to do) - it was banned because it made Blue decks (specifically) considerably stronger, and as a result, Blue decks dominated the Meta.

Actually, MM being in "every deck" was part of the reason it was banned, aside from blue dominance, as stated in the official announcement. IIRC, it was on Maro's blog, but good luck digging that one out.

So it wasn't actually misquoted, but just on another, harder to find source.

[Teveshszat]

Decreased variance does NOT mean you always get what you need, you dont understand math at all. Decreased variance just means that what you get, whatever it is, comes from a smaller range of possibilities, because it VARIES less. Also, decks with cantrips pay an opportunity cost of tempo and board presence, it's not as though cantrips are zero mana spells, thats why Burn kept cropping up over the summer as the durdley miracles decks that were so popular actually had a tougher time of dealing with straight speed than most people realized

Wow just wow. You thinking I am not able to understand math and but draw all the wrong conlcusions. You are right that what I get varies less because it comes from a smaller range of possibilities. This also means the chance will increase that I draw 1 of my four copies of STP against a Gofy when I play a cantrip and draw addtional cards with it.
This means each cantrip increases the chance that I find the card I need. You see the chance to draw a STP out of your 53 cards increases when drawing 3 more cards with brainstorm and actually doubles the chances getting one STP. You also could see it deceases the range of dead draws.
So nope I understand Math and nope you are not right with this.

[wonderPreaux]

Wow just wow. You thinking I am not able to understand math and but draw all the wrong conlcusions. You are right that what I get varies less because it comes from a smaller range of possibilities. This also means the chance will increase that I draw 1 of my four copies of STP against a Gofy when I play a cantrip and draw addtional cards with it.
This means each cantrip increases the chance that I find the card I need. You see the chance to draw a STP out of your 53 cards increases when drawing 3 more cards with brainstorm and actually doubles the chances getting one STP. You also could see it deceases the range of dead draws.
So nope I understand Math and nope you are not right with this.

You are entirely incorrect. So long as you have cards in deck that aren't STP you don't ALWAYS draw STP. Increasing your odds doesn't mean your odds become 100% and saying so as an argument is misleading and ignorant. Cantrips DO NOT give you what you need all the time, they are an investment in redraws at getting the card, they CAN and DO fail to find what you need.

[Finn]

Reduction in variance is the only thing that determines the strength of a deck?
Brainstorm being an instant is unimportant in gauging its strength as a card?

Tveshszat, you may very well know maths. What you clearly are ignorant of is Magic.

EDIT: On a related note, I have met a few players who have acquired some pretty poor ideas about the game because they think they can successfully describe it as function of equations only. I wonder if that is occurring here.

[Ellomdian]

You are entirely incorrect.

This argument (and others in the same vein) are tedious and miss the point.

The primary complaint of cantrips should not be that they serve to decrease variance, it should be that the opportunity cost in terms of deck construction AND play decisions to do so is extremely low.

As an added bonus, it's not a relative argument, it's a statement of fact.

[Aggro_zombies]

Friendly mod reminder: Contentious issues are not an invitation to be an asshole. Keep it civil or keep it to yourself.

[Tao]

This argument (and others in the same vein) are tedious and miss the point.

The primary complaint of cantrips should not be that they serve to decrease variance, it should be that the opportunity cost in terms of deck construction AND play decisions to do so is extremely low.

As an added bonus, it's not a relative argument, it's a statement of fact.

Cantrips are just a concept among many, you gain card quality for a mana investment. There is nothing inherently OP with that. If Hymn to Tourach would discard 4 cards, that would be OP, but it would not make the entire concept of Discard inherently OP. In the end it is all about the power level of a card compared to the rest of the format and it is the same with Brainstorm. Cantrips are not OP, Brainstorm and maybe Ponder are. Preordain would (imo) make a fair and good cantrip for Legacy and Serum Visions seems underpowered to me.

[wonderPreaux]

This argument (and others in the same vein) are tedious and miss the point.

The primary complaint of cantrips should not be that they serve to decrease variance, it should be that the opportunity cost in terms of deck construction AND play decisions to do so is extremely low.

As an added bonus, it's not a relative argument, it's a statement of fact.

My main issue with people who misrepresent the math of the situation is that, in doing so, they are concealing or misrepresenting the opportunity cost and that is blatantly deceptive. The opportunity cost may indeed be low if we are to examine it, but acting like the opportunity cost doesnt exist, which is what some of these statements imply, is not a correct examination.

For example, a common argument is that cantrip decks will find cards more easily than those decks without cantrips and that confers an advantage overall. However, most decks with cantrips are still 60 cards, that means something had to be cut FOR those cantrips. Thus the odds of finding a card aren't a straight upgrade, theres the reduction in chance caused by having less of a card and the increase that comes from having the cantrips in your deck. some cantrip decks might even be WORSE at finding a subset of cards on a particular turn than a noncantrip deck, on average.

There's also the idea that cantrips let you keep more hands, the classic "Brainstorm = un-mulligan" for instance. While a Brainstorm might fix a hand, you also accept a certain amount of variance when you keep a hand based on a cantrip, especially when the cantrip(s) have to find a certain combo of cards. Example:

Midrange Non-Cantrip Deck: 4 Dudes, 2 Lands, 1 Removal - It's pretty obvious where this hand is going, but you might fall behind if you draw 2+ lands in succession

Non-Combo Cantrip Deck: 2 Dudes, 1 Land, 4 Cantrips - This hand has a decent start, but if you don't find another land, you might seriously fall behind

With the first hand, you know exactly what you're dealing, with the other its a mystery, so your variance reducers might force you to accept more variance overall.

These are the sort of nuances people ignore when they say "cantrips always give you what you need" if you want to argue about how powerful a card is, you need to equitably represent its positives and negatives in context

[rufus]

I'm tired of this. Anyone want to crusade against the 'restart the game' effect on Karn Liberated instead?

[Lejay]

I'm tired of this. Anyone want to crusade against the 'restart the game' effect on Karn Liberated instead?

Probably no one, especially considering it's a clue on the future of the storyline. Karn will probably return back in time and save Mirrodin from the dark tide of Phyrexia.