It's gotten more discussion, but it's pretty often mentioned ever since the first time I brought it up.
Mod edit: Adding the ban announcement - cryogen
Quote from Sheldon »
We know that this will raise a great cry from some players, but as we previously noted, Gifts is simply broken (especially at the 3U cost and the fact that it's an Instant). The ability to tutor for two combo pieces and two ways to recur them generally makes this a one-card game-ender, which we feel is completely contrary to the EDH vision.
Why do you feel it should be unbanned? What aspects of the format philosophy do you feel are applicable (or not) to the card?
None of the philosophy applies to gifts.
Does it create undesirable game states? No. It can search up other cards that create undesirable game states, but that's a player decision to run those cards.
Does it warp the format strategically? No. The format has tons of tutors already, this is just one more on the pile. If you weren't tutoring up combos before, why would gifts make you do it now?
Does it produce too much mana too quickly? Of course not.
Does it create a barrier to entry? No. The card is easily available and well within standard budget limits.
There is no reason this card should have ever been banned.
I don't really think it should have ever been banned and was surprised when it was. I just like playing it as another Fact or Fiction effect. Group picking piles is kind of fun. Of course, I'd never even heard a single complaint about it at all when it got hammered.
I think this is another casualty of "the RC does what they want, screw you!"
Combo potential has not been a deciding factor of banning since Staff of Domination and Worldgorger Dragon were unbanned. I'd say as far as combo potential goes, this card matches Survival of the Fittest. One of these cards is in the wrong place and will most likely remain that way until the RC decides to create a set of consistent banning criteria.
Why do you feel it should be unbanned? What aspects of the format philosophy do you feel are applicable (or not) to the card?
I reason I feel many cards are "worthy" of being unbanned is a matter of choices. Just like with Tooth and Nail, Gifts Ungiven gives you the option to try and end the game on the spot, but it also gives you the choice to grab any number of effects to move the game in a general direction. I'd probably use it to grab 4 clone effects to make use of whatever was on board at the time. Maybe you're land light and grab 4 different lands just to put 2 more in your hand. These are mild examples, but I think the way EDH players play the game is just as important to what they play with. Some would use it to combo, others like myself would use it for grabbing removal and other forms of interaction. It's one of the cards, much like the aforementioned Tooth and Nail, that is very dependent on how people choose to use it. All of that said though, even if it's used "fairly" it still is an enormous amount of value in one card
This is another card which seems is another casualty of the RC not correcting the banned list to fit their philosophy change. The old reason given is obviously outdated at this point, so this card needs to be looked at in a new light, and I believe Carthage has done a pretty good job of that here:
Why do you feel it should be unbanned? What aspects of the format philosophy do you feel are applicable (or not) to the card?
None of the philosophy applies to gifts.
Does it create undesirable game states? No. It can search up other cards that create undesirable game states, but that's a player decision to run those cards.
Does it warp the format strategically? No. The format has tons of tutors already, this is just one more on the pile. If you weren't tutoring up combos before, why would gifts make you do it now?
Does it produce too much mana too quickly? Of course not.
Does it create a barrier to entry? No. The card is easily available and well within standard budget limits.
There is no reason this card should have ever been banned.
I agree that the card doesn't create undesirable game states. (Unless you are arguing that some people take forever to resolve it, but there are obviously worse offenders of that.)
I agree that this card does not warp the format, but I suppose you could argue that this card could become the most ubiquitous U card just because it fits in nearly every deck that can play it. Is that enough of a reason to keep it banned? (I personally don't think so as many other cards fall under this category as well.)
The point that Carthage skipped may be arguable, though, too: "Does it interact poorly with the structure of the format?" I suppose it could be argued that the "downside" of this card (the fact that you must search cards with different names) is nearly completely negated by the format structure, but that I don't believe that that is enough reason to keep it banned, either.
Simply put, I don't believe that Gifts Ungiven should be banned under the current banned list philosophy.
The downside is only there because in normal formats, you could just tutor for 4 copies of the same card, giving you 2 copies and making the choice completely pointless. The limitation just makes the card work the same in normal Magic as it would in Commander anyway.
As Vampiric Tutor, Demonic Tutor, and Survival of the Fittest are all legal and of comparable if not higher power level and combo potential I also don't think Gifts deserves to be on the banlist any more than Staff or Worldgorger needed to.
I feel in the average playgroup TnN will end more games than Gifts simply because it seems fair. Everyone knows Gifts' power level and it will usually get run in decks that are already skirting the line of the EDH philosophy anyway.
As Vampiric Tutor, Demonic Tutor, and Survival of the Fittest are all legal and of comparable if not higher power level and combo potential I also don't think Gifts deserves to be on the banlist any more than Staff or Worldgorger needed to.
I think this is a really bad comparison. Vamp tutor gets one card, and is card disadvantage (goes to top of library, so if you need it right away you need a draw effect) AND costs 2 life. Demonic gets one card, and is a sorcery. Survival is conditional that you have a creature in your hand, and only searches for other creatures, which (without other effects) cannoy be played at instant speed. These are all powerful but either only get a single card, not an entire combo, from the deck, with a way to get what you didnt get from they grave. Survival is maybe comparable if you're tutoring over and over for something like a Kiki-Jiki or 'Lark combo chain, but it's far more volatile and restricted to only creatures, which can be a very heavy restriction. Green alone also has far less protection against combos, so it generally requires some other color support to be good.
I feel in the average playgroup TnN will end more games than Gifts simply because it seems fair. Everyone knows Gifts' power level and it will usually get run in decks that are already skirting the line of the EDH philosophy anyway.
I can't get behind this. I have a hard time believeing those except the newest players know that as soon as TnN resolves, it's very likely game over.
I think the original ban announcement still holds very true to this day. Gifts Ungiven is simply too powerful for EDH, and generally ends the game once it's played, even compared to intution. You can also use it as a double entomb for 3U, which can also be insanely powerful. It is so much easier than even intuition to make piles that are simply impossible to deal with, and later in the game it will simply win on resolution, where with Intuition at least it takes a little work and you get much less redundancy. You also cannot pick less than 3 cards with Intuition.
Additionally, it's mana cost matters much less in EDH than in something like Legacy, so 4 mana is much more doable then something like Legacy where you would likely need to play it with FoW backup, and in that case there's probably a lot of more broken things you could be doing there. I certainly wouldn't want to play in even a semi-competitive game of EDH were Gifts Ungiven is legal.
As Vampiric Tutor, Demonic Tutor, and Survival of the Fittest are all legal and of comparable if not higher power level and combo potential I also don't think Gifts deserves to be on the banlist any more than Staff or Worldgorger needed to.
I think this is a really bad comparison. Vamp tutor gets one card, and is card disadvantage (goes to top of library, so if you need it right away you need a draw effect) AND costs 2 life. Demonic gets one card, and is a sorcery. Survival is conditional that you have a creature in your hand, and only searches for other creatures, which (without other effects) cannoy be played at instant speed. These are all powerful but either only get a single card, not an entire combo, from the deck, with a way to get what you didnt get from they grave. Survival is maybe comparable if you're tutoring over and over for something like a Kiki-Jiki or 'Lark combo chain, but it's far more volatile and restricted to only creatures, which can be a very heavy restriction. Green alone also has far less protection against combos, so it generally requires some other color support to be good.
I feel in the average playgroup TnN will end more games than Gifts simply because it seems fair. Everyone knows Gifts' power level and it will usually get run in decks that are already skirting the line of the EDH philosophy anyway.
I can't get behind this. I have a hard time believeing those except the newest players know that as soon as TnN resolves, it's very likely game over.
I think the original ban announcement still holds very true to this day. Gifts Ungiven is simply too powerful for EDH, and generally ends the game once it's played, even compared to intution. You can also use it as a double entomb for 3U, which can also be insanely powerful. It is so much easier than even intuition to make piles that are simply impossible to deal with, and later in the game it will simply win on resolution, where with Intuition at least it takes a little work and you get much less redundancy. You also cannot pick less than 3 cards with Intuition.
Additionally, it's mana cost matters much less in EDH than in something like Legacy, so 4 mana is much more doable then something like Legacy where you would likely need to play it with FoW backup, and in that case there's probably a lot of more broken things you could be doing there. I certainly wouldn't want to play in even a semi-competitive game of EDH were Gifts Ungiven is legal.
Except power level isn't sufficient criteria to ban a card, that coming right from command central.
Yeah, total head scratcher with this one. It's cards like these on the ban list that really drove me bonkers in the original thread, like, what makes this any different than T&N? Sure, it's over twice the cost to have the best of both worlds, but it also isn't as fragile. Gifts is totally shut down with grave hate and search hate (Leonin Arbiter) and then you need to assemble the combo, which usually requires expending your resources to do so (tapping for mana, activating abilities, etc.), where T&N really only requires that it-
A.)doesn't get countered
And B.) that there isn't an instant answer all (Cyclonic Rift).
This is why I'm glad that the sub-forum was created and that we can do SCD for EDH, this is an obvious inconsistency in how the banned list was created, and regulated, and if you don't agree, you have to be utterly oblivious.
I can't get behind this. I have a hard time believeing those except the newest players know that as soon as TnN resolves, it's very likely game over.
I think the original ban announcement still holds very true to this day. Gifts Ungiven is simply too powerful for EDH, and generally ends the game once it's played, even compared to intution. You can also use it as a double entomb for 3U, which can also be insanely powerful. It is so much easier than even intuition to make piles that are simply impossible to deal with, and later in the game it will simply win on resolution, where with Intuition at least it takes a little work and you get much less redundancy. You also cannot pick less than 3 cards with Intuition.
Additionally, it's mana cost matters much less in EDH than in something like Legacy, so 4 mana is much more doable then something like Legacy where you would likely need to play it with FoW backup, and in that case there's probably a lot of more broken things you could be doing there. I certainly wouldn't want to play in even a semi-competitive game of EDH were Gifts Ungiven is legal.
As a thought experiment people on this forum tried to come up with instant win Gifts piles that cost less than Tooth and Nail (under the assumption that you EOT Gifts and untap with all your mana). I don't remember the cheapest pile, but I know that it was closer to 9 mana than 5. It also requires you to run 5 total cards dedicated to the combo, whereas T&N only requires 3.
This is why I'm glad that the sub-forum was created and that we can do SCD for EDH, this is an obvious inconsistency in how the banned list was created, and regulated, and if you don't agree, you have to be utterly oblivious.
The same could be said of anyone who doesn't agree with the reasoning for its inconsistency. Calling a group of people names doesn't help anything.
For a very long time, I agreed that Gifts should stay banned. However, since adapting my own format views to be in line with the modern philosophy of the RC, Gifts Ungiven sticks out like a sore thumb since it is very clearly a power level ban, and a relic of the days of combo-policing.
With that in mind, let me just preempt several fallacies from the old thread before they inevitably resurface here:
Gifts Ungiven is splashable at 3U.
As Cryogen said, winning with Gifts Ungiven costs more than 3U. You do not automatically end the game by casting Gifts Ungiven, and the game-ending combos that Gifts assembles are generally expensive and dedicated, not "splashable".
Unbanning Gifts Ungiven does not add anything positive to the format, so it should stay banned.
Ignoring that this logic is itself fallacious (I plan to post a thread on this topic at some point), the claim is untrue. Gifts does a lot of fair things in a lot of fair decks, and is widely considered one of the most fun cards in Magic to actually resolve.
Blue is already strong and does not need any help.
It is not the goal of the RC to balance the color pie. Given that even balancing the format for competitive play is a bad idea by the RC's admission, balancing the color pie (and using the ban list to do so) is a fool's errand.
The biggest non-"I'mma gonna combo out now" decks I see abusing Gifts are Bruna and Mimeoplasm, since both of those decks blay heavily out of the graveyard and you could easily set up a Gifts pile that includes looting cards to ensure you have the combination you want.
I think that it would be irresponsible to totally dismiss the potential of Gifts to be a strong card, but I would love to see the RC do some fresh informal testing of the card.
The biggest non-"I'mma gonna combo out now" decks I see abusing Gifts are Bruna and Mimeoplasm, since both of those decks blay heavily out of the graveyard and you could easily set up a Gifts pile that includes looting cards to ensure you have the combination you want.
I think that it would be irresponsible to totally dismiss the potential of Gifts to be a strong card, but I would love to see the RC do some fresh informal testing of the card.
Agreed!
Also, you can achieve the "double-Entomb" effect without the Looters; just choose to find two cards instead of four. In these applications, Gifts is more flexible but generally no stronger than Intuition or Buried Alive.
Why does Bruna need things in the grave? Doesn't it pull from hand too? For Mimeoplasm, you're just making Gifts into a bad Entomb, Buried Alive or Jarad's Orders. Yeah, you might play Gifts anyway, but so what? It is a really fun card, though, so I can see playing it even if it isn't the most powerful thing ever. It's really, really popular in my meta where you run fof effects in blue decks and serveral times a game, sometimes, even a turn cycle, we group debate piles.
Why does Bruna need things in the grave? Doesn't it pull from hand too?
Because in a Bruna deck, it tutors for four enchantments that you will enchant on Bruna, similar to what she currently gets from Intuition. For the most part, it won't matter where your opponent chooses to put the cards, you'll likely get all of them. There aren't many (any?) ways to straight tutor for four cards cards of your choice.
For Mimeoplasm, you're just making Gifts into a bad Entomb, Buried Alive or Jarad's Orders. Yeah, you might play Gifts anyway, but so what? It is a really fun card, though, so I can see playing it even if it isn't the most powerful thing ever. It's really, really popular in my meta where you run fof effects in blue decks and several times a game, sometimes, even a turn cycle, we group debate piles.
Gifts is an incredibly powerful card in the right decks. I don't think it should be banned, given that cards like TNN are legal, but it is absolutely not a weak card.
Note that I wasn't saying that Gifts should stay banned because of a couple of very strong interactions. Merely pointing out that there are inherent strengths to it which shouldn't be dismissed.
Yeah, total head scratcher with this one. It's cards like these on the ban list that really drove me bonkers in the original thread, like, what makes this any different than T&N? Sure, it's over twice the cost to have the best of both worlds, but it also isn't as fragile. Gifts is totally shut down with grave hate and search hate (Leonin Arbiter) and then you need to assemble the combo, which usually requires expending your resources to do so (tapping for mana, activating abilities, etc.), where T&N really only requires that it-
A.)doesn't get countered
And B.) that there isn't an instant answer all (Cyclonic Rift).
Thats not at all accurate. Single piece removal stops T+N, as does search hate. And ignoring that it costs 9 to cast a T+N can't just be hand waved. Look I think both are fine off the ban list, but terrible reasoning like this does not help our case.
This is why I'm glad that the sub-forum was created and that we can do SCD for EDH, this is an obvious inconsistency in how the banned list was created, and regulated, and if you don't agree, you have to be utterly oblivious.
Its been a great tool to drill down on some cards, but to pretend any ban list is objectively consistent is silly. They all have 'consistency issues' because there are thousands of cards that all interact with a fairly small set of rules and game objects. No matter the format or the reason for the list or the size of the list, you will always be able to say 'Card X should be banned if card Y is'.
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
Yeah, total head scratcher with this one. It's cards like these on the ban list that really drove me bonkers in the original thread, like, what makes this any different than T&N? Sure, it's over twice the cost to have the best of both worlds, but it also isn't as fragile. Gifts is totally shut down with grave hate and search hate (Leonin Arbiter) and then you need to assemble the combo, which usually requires expending your resources to do so (tapping for mana, activating abilities, etc.), where T&N really only requires that it-
A.)doesn't get countered
And B.) that there isn't an instant answer all (Cyclonic Rift).
Thats not at all accurate. Single piece removal stops T+N, as does search hate. And ignoring that it costs 9 to cast a T+N can't just be hand waved. Look I think both are fine off the ban list, but terrible reasoning like this does not help our case.
This is why I'm glad that the sub-forum was created and that we can do SCD for EDH, this is an obvious inconsistency in how the banned list was created, and regulated, and if you don't agree, you have to be utterly oblivious.
Its been a great tool to drill down on some cards, but to pretend any ban list is objectively consistent is silly. They all have 'consistency issues' because there are thousands of cards that all interact with a fairly small set of rules and game objects. No matter the format or the reason for the list or the size of the list, you will always be able to say 'Card X should be banned if card Y is'.
What you search for with gifts will put you over 9. I didn't dismiss it, but 9 cmc isn't a prohibitive cost in green, either. Secondly, it's 9 to entwine, 7 to tutor or put into play, which is always forgotten when talking about T&N.
Spot removal only works if what you search for is affected by it, and you still have a threat on the board.
If my reasoning is terrible, why not provide some of your own? "Dies to removal" is a terrible argument. You also place quite the restrictions on those "other" answers. Have to have untapped mana, and not just removal, but the right removal, something that doesn't get answered by the player who cast, etc. Maybe Rift wasn't the best choice as a reference, but the most effective answer to a resolved T&N is going to be Evacuation effects, at instant speed. T&N's answers aren't as broad as Gifts.
If the reasoning for unbanning Koko is because grave hate has become a near staple, then the same can be applied to gifts.
Why does Bruna need things in the grave? Doesn't it pull from hand too?
Because in a Bruna deck, it tutors for four enchantments that you will enchant on Bruna, similar to what she currently gets from Intuition. For the most part, it won't matter where your opponent chooses to put the cards, you'll likely get all of them. There aren't many (any?) ways to straight tutor for four cards cards of your choice.
For Mimeoplasm, you're just making Gifts into a bad Entomb, Buried Alive or Jarad's Orders. Yeah, you might play Gifts anyway, but so what? It is a really fun card, though, so I can see playing it even if it isn't the most powerful thing ever. It's really, really popular in my meta where you run fof effects in blue decks and several times a game, sometimes, even a turn cycle, we group debate piles.
Gifts is an incredibly powerful card in the right decks. I don't think it should be banned, given that cards like TNN are legal, but it is absolutely not a weak card.
I didn't say Gifts was weak. I was specifically referring to tutoring looting effects with it. So, what about Bruna, though? Intuition and Three Dreams already get you 3 auras. Tutoring for 4 auras for 4 mana is perfectly fair. It's certainly not garbage like Diabolic Tutor, but for fair uses, it doesn't look any stronger than already legal tutors. Tutoring a pair of counterspells to hand is fine for 4. Tutoring a pair of draw spells to hand for 4 is fine. Tutoring a pair of ramp spells to hand for 4 is kind of bad. Tutoring a pair of Vindicate spells to hand for 4 is fine. Double Jarad's Orders where your opponent chooses the stacks is fine. A pair of token/mana doublers to hand for 4 is fine. Just like I said about Hulk, exactly what non-combo things are you getting that makes the card insanely powerful?
Just like I said about Hulk, exactly what non-combo things are you getting that makes the card insanely powerful?
^--This.
With the change in the RC's banning philosophy, this card currently hits almost no points of criteria for being banned. It seems to me to be a strictly "power-ban" due to the intentional, combo-centric uses of this card. Why then is it still banned?
It's gotten more discussion, but it's pretty often mentioned ever since the first time I brought it up.
Mod edit: Adding the ban announcement - cryogen
We have way stronger tutors that are currently legal.
Demonic Tutor is fine but we can't have gifts?
Survival is fine but we can't have gifts?
Tooth and Nail is fine but we can't have gifts?
Very silly to me.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
None of the philosophy applies to gifts.
Does it create undesirable game states? No. It can search up other cards that create undesirable game states, but that's a player decision to run those cards.
Does it warp the format strategically? No. The format has tons of tutors already, this is just one more on the pile. If you weren't tutoring up combos before, why would gifts make you do it now?
Does it produce too much mana too quickly? Of course not.
Does it create a barrier to entry? No. The card is easily available and well within standard budget limits.
There is no reason this card should have ever been banned.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Combo potential has not been a deciding factor of banning since Staff of Domination and Worldgorger Dragon were unbanned. I'd say as far as combo potential goes, this card matches Survival of the Fittest. One of these cards is in the wrong place and will most likely remain that way until the RC decides to create a set of consistent banning criteria.
I reason I feel many cards are "worthy" of being unbanned is a matter of choices. Just like with Tooth and Nail, Gifts Ungiven gives you the option to try and end the game on the spot, but it also gives you the choice to grab any number of effects to move the game in a general direction. I'd probably use it to grab 4 clone effects to make use of whatever was on board at the time. Maybe you're land light and grab 4 different lands just to put 2 more in your hand. These are mild examples, but I think the way EDH players play the game is just as important to what they play with. Some would use it to combo, others like myself would use it for grabbing removal and other forms of interaction. It's one of the cards, much like the aforementioned Tooth and Nail, that is very dependent on how people choose to use it. All of that said though, even if it's used "fairly" it still is an enormous amount of value in one card
U Azami, Lady of Scrolls - Knowledge is Power U [Primer]
R Heartless Hidetsugu - The Art of Ending Games R
GB Ishkanah, Grafwidow - The Cluster HungersBG
I agree that the card doesn't create undesirable game states. (Unless you are arguing that some people take forever to resolve it, but there are obviously worse offenders of that.)
I agree that this card does not warp the format, but I suppose you could argue that this card could become the most ubiquitous U card just because it fits in nearly every deck that can play it. Is that enough of a reason to keep it banned? (I personally don't think so as many other cards fall under this category as well.)
The point that Carthage skipped may be arguable, though, too: "Does it interact poorly with the structure of the format?" I suppose it could be argued that the "downside" of this card (the fact that you must search cards with different names) is nearly completely negated by the format structure, but that I don't believe that that is enough reason to keep it banned, either.
Simply put, I don't believe that Gifts Ungiven should be banned under the current banned list philosophy.
I feel in the average playgroup TnN will end more games than Gifts simply because it seems fair. Everyone knows Gifts' power level and it will usually get run in decks that are already skirting the line of the EDH philosophy anyway.
I think this is a really bad comparison. Vamp tutor gets one card, and is card disadvantage (goes to top of library, so if you need it right away you need a draw effect) AND costs 2 life. Demonic gets one card, and is a sorcery. Survival is conditional that you have a creature in your hand, and only searches for other creatures, which (without other effects) cannoy be played at instant speed. These are all powerful but either only get a single card, not an entire combo, from the deck, with a way to get what you didnt get from they grave. Survival is maybe comparable if you're tutoring over and over for something like a Kiki-Jiki or 'Lark combo chain, but it's far more volatile and restricted to only creatures, which can be a very heavy restriction. Green alone also has far less protection against combos, so it generally requires some other color support to be good.
I can't get behind this. I have a hard time believeing those except the newest players know that as soon as TnN resolves, it's very likely game over.
I think the original ban announcement still holds very true to this day. Gifts Ungiven is simply too powerful for EDH, and generally ends the game once it's played, even compared to intution. You can also use it as a double entomb for 3U, which can also be insanely powerful. It is so much easier than even intuition to make piles that are simply impossible to deal with, and later in the game it will simply win on resolution, where with Intuition at least it takes a little work and you get much less redundancy. You also cannot pick less than 3 cards with Intuition.
Additionally, it's mana cost matters much less in EDH than in something like Legacy, so 4 mana is much more doable then something like Legacy where you would likely need to play it with FoW backup, and in that case there's probably a lot of more broken things you could be doing there. I certainly wouldn't want to play in even a semi-competitive game of EDH were Gifts Ungiven is legal.
Except power level isn't sufficient criteria to ban a card, that coming right from command central.
Yeah, total head scratcher with this one. It's cards like these on the ban list that really drove me bonkers in the original thread, like, what makes this any different than T&N? Sure, it's over twice the cost to have the best of both worlds, but it also isn't as fragile. Gifts is totally shut down with grave hate and search hate (Leonin Arbiter) and then you need to assemble the combo, which usually requires expending your resources to do so (tapping for mana, activating abilities, etc.), where T&N really only requires that it-
A.)doesn't get countered
And B.) that there isn't an instant answer all (Cyclonic Rift).
This is why I'm glad that the sub-forum was created and that we can do SCD for EDH, this is an obvious inconsistency in how the banned list was created, and regulated, and if you don't agree, you have to be utterly oblivious.
As a thought experiment people on this forum tried to come up with instant win Gifts piles that cost less than Tooth and Nail (under the assumption that you EOT Gifts and untap with all your mana). I don't remember the cheapest pile, but I know that it was closer to 9 mana than 5. It also requires you to run 5 total cards dedicated to the combo, whereas T&N only requires 3.
The same could be said of anyone who doesn't agree with the reasoning for its inconsistency. Calling a group of people names doesn't help anything.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
With that in mind, let me just preempt several fallacies from the old thread before they inevitably resurface here:
Gifts Ungiven is splashable at 3U.
As Cryogen said, winning with Gifts Ungiven costs more than 3U. You do not automatically end the game by casting Gifts Ungiven, and the game-ending combos that Gifts assembles are generally expensive and dedicated, not "splashable".
Unbanning Gifts Ungiven does not add anything positive to the format, so it should stay banned.
Ignoring that this logic is itself fallacious (I plan to post a thread on this topic at some point), the claim is untrue. Gifts does a lot of fair things in a lot of fair decks, and is widely considered one of the most fun cards in Magic to actually resolve.
Blue is already strong and does not need any help.
It is not the goal of the RC to balance the color pie. Given that even balancing the format for competitive play is a bad idea by the RC's admission, balancing the color pie (and using the ban list to do so) is a fool's errand.
Draft my Mono-Blue Cube!
lichess.org | chess.com
I think that it would be irresponsible to totally dismiss the potential of Gifts to be a strong card, but I would love to see the RC do some fresh informal testing of the card.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Also, you can achieve the "double-Entomb" effect without the Looters; just choose to find two cards instead of four. In these applications, Gifts is more flexible but generally no stronger than Intuition or Buried Alive.
Draft my Mono-Blue Cube!
lichess.org | chess.com
Gifts is an incredibly powerful card in the right decks. I don't think it should be banned, given that cards like TNN are legal, but it is absolutely not a weak card.
My Helpdesk
[Pr] Marath | [Pr] Lovisa | Jodah | Saskia | Najeela | Yisan | Lord Windgrace | Atraxa | Meren | Gisa and Geralf
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Its been a great tool to drill down on some cards, but to pretend any ban list is objectively consistent is silly. They all have 'consistency issues' because there are thousands of cards that all interact with a fairly small set of rules and game objects. No matter the format or the reason for the list or the size of the list, you will always be able to say 'Card X should be banned if card Y is'.
What you search for with gifts will put you over 9. I didn't dismiss it, but 9 cmc isn't a prohibitive cost in green, either. Secondly, it's 9 to entwine, 7 to tutor or put into play, which is always forgotten when talking about T&N.
Spot removal only works if what you search for is affected by it, and you still have a threat on the board.
If my reasoning is terrible, why not provide some of your own? "Dies to removal" is a terrible argument. You also place quite the restrictions on those "other" answers. Have to have untapped mana, and not just removal, but the right removal, something that doesn't get answered by the player who cast, etc. Maybe Rift wasn't the best choice as a reference, but the most effective answer to a resolved T&N is going to be Evacuation effects, at instant speed. T&N's answers aren't as broad as Gifts.
If the reasoning for unbanning Koko is because grave hate has become a near staple, then the same can be applied to gifts.
^--This.
With the change in the RC's banning philosophy, this card currently hits almost no points of criteria for being banned. It seems to me to be a strictly "power-ban" due to the intentional, combo-centric uses of this card. Why then is it still banned?