Punishing Fire also dodges Extirpate, which is a claim to fame that no other graveyard based engine can be attributed to. The only cards that "beat" Punishing Fire 100% are Leyline of the Void and Rest in Peace.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MTGO: Stillenacht288
Modern:
Footsteps Hulk
Ascendency Combo
Restore Balance
Ad Nauseam
EDH:
Ghave Lands
Narset Combo
Another thing that I don't get is why Stoneforge Mystic is banned instead of Batterskull. The good equipment usually either have costs that are around 3 mana (the sword cycle, Sword of Vengeance, Quietus Spike, Darksteel Plate, Neko-te) which makes the second ability useless, are 2 mana or cheaper (Basilisk Collar, Lightning Greaves, Swiftfoot Boots) which makes the second ability useless, or have large equip costs (Argentum Armor) which can be helped by the second ability but can't be equipped until later. So without Batterskull, because the other good living weapon cards were more powerful later in the game (Bonehoard, Lashwrithe), Stoneforge Mystic would just be a 1/2 for 2 mana with a Steelshaper's Gift as it entered the battlefield and an occasionally relevant ability. If this is the case, I think Batterskull is the much less interesting card and it should be banned instead.
SFM makes it very difficult for R&D to print good equipment. It's the Equipment version of Tinker, in that it both cheaply tutors and completely invalidates costs. Batterskull is indeed completely stupid, but SFM is an engine that would just break again (and in fact did essentially break already, via SoFaF.)
SFM makes it very difficult for R&D to print good equipment. It's the Equipment version of Tinker, in that it both cheaply tutors and completely invalidates costs. Batterskull is indeed completely stupid, but SFM is an engine that would just break again (and in fact did essentially break already, via SoFaF.)
Yes, but with the Swords, the second ability only makes them cost one less and makes you tap a creature. And other than Batterskull, which is obviously broken with SFM, how many powerful equipment have been printed that cost more than 3 mana and cost less than 4 mana to equip. The only one that comes to mind for me right now is Deathrender. Equipment have the problem that you also have to pay the equip cost, which is usually pretty big for the equipment that you would cheat into play. That is why Tinker is not a good comparison with Stoneforge Mystic.
Yes, but with the Swords, the second ability only makes them cost one less and makes your tap a creature
And makes them dodge counterspells, can be put in the field at instant speed, and don't force you to use mana on your turn to cast, letting you hava mana open for an answer like a counterspell. They can also equip it to stoneforge itself if needed.
SFM makes it very difficult for R&D to print good equipment. It's the Equipment version of Tinker, in that it both cheaply tutors and completely invalidates costs. Batterskull is indeed completely stupid, but SFM is an engine that would just break again (and in fact did essentially break already, via SoFaF.)
i maintain that this is a terrible reason. approximately 0 equipment have broken into legacy play because of stoneforge mystic since they banned it from standard. granted, they haven't printed good equipment since then, but the way they're designing equipment now, no one has to fear stoneforge breaking anything.
heck, some abilities you'd expect on equipment have recently been printed straight on to creatures. like master of cruelties. they could have easily made that an equipped ability.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I speak in sarcasm because calling people ******* ******** is not allowed.
And makes them dodge counterspells, can be put in the field at instant speed, and don't force you to use mana on your turn to cast, letting you hava mana open for an answer like a counterspell. They can also equip it to stoneforge itself if needed.
The equipping must be done at sorcery speed. Because of this, you cannot use the equipment while attacking until turn 4. Even assuming that you cheated Elbrus, the Binding Blade into play and dealt combat damage to a player with it, that would still be on turn 4, meaning that you would not win until at least turn 5. That is the biggest thing that could happen with Stoneforge Mystic, and it could be stopped by the equipped creature being blocked, counterspells on SFM, or by most kinds of removal. I would like to quote ktkenshinx's response to my saying that Grim Lavamancer is as good as Punishing Fire.
That comparison really isn't on point. It's like comparing Divining Witch (a card that saw zero play and still doesn't in Legacy/Vintage) to Demonic Consultation (a card that is totally broken). Lavamancer is a creature that himself is vulnerable to removal. The opponent has a full turn to answer it even after you play the guy, and basically every removal spell in the format deals with him.
SFM is easily stopped. If it is, it just becomes an overpriced Steelshaper's Gift. If not, you can play your tutored equipment for 2 mana at instant speed and it cannot be countered. An uncounterable 2 mana Sword of Feast and Famine at instant speed on turn 3 does not win the game. It gives you an advantage, but it is not broken. I'm not sure even unbanning Umezawa's Jitte as well in Modern would be broken. The only broken card with it is Batterskull, so if you banned one and unbanned the other, we would have another interesting card as opposed to another 5 mana beater that we really didn't need.
Also, Germanturkey is right, Master of Cruelties as an equipment would be pretty nice.
Keep in mind that even if your opponent bolts stoneforge, that is one bolt that is never going to be pointed at your dome, or your next creature. You've effectively put yourself up +1 card and as you've probably stalled your opponent with them wasting time on SFM you are closer to the mid-late game when the bomb equipment you have tutored is more relevant.
SFM is CA, tutor, mana cheating, and counterspell dodging in one card. It's extremely strong
First off in the entire history of Magic, Wizards has never banned a card so that they can unban a card so swapping Batterskull for SFM will not happen. Secondly SFM is way stronger than you are making it out to be, in your example trading a removal spell for SFM leaves the SFM player ahead as they still got the equipment and you traded your removal spell for basically a Squire. On the other hand if you don't have removal when SFM come down, even with just a SoFaI or SoFaF on SFM can put you so far behind that you've essentially lost the game by not being able to deal with the threat pretty much immediately as they can ride it on the back of protection for the rest of the game. And that's really the heart of the issue, its a tutor, it cheats mana, and a legitimate threat/win condition rolled into the low cost of just 1W and that's huge. It also of course brings similar issues to Survival as it puts a huge strain on development of new equipment as they could accidentally just print another Batterskull and thus the enabler is really the problem.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On Mono Black in Commander:
Quote from BlackJack68 »
But whomever your commander is, Cabal Coffers is really in charge.
First off in the entire history of Magic, Wizards has never banned a card so that they can unban a card so swapping Batterskull for SFM will not happen.
I know that Wizards has never done that, but Sam Stoddard just said that Preordain and Ponder are too powerful for Modern. Despite this, we can still discuss whether they should be or not, so I can say what I said despite how unlikely it is.
Secondly SFM is way stronger than you are making it out to be, in your example trading a removal spell for SFM leaves the SFM player ahead as they still got the equipment and you traded your removal spell for basically a Squire.
So any creature with a come into play effect that is still relevant after it comes into play is broken because of your opponent will still have gotten something if you remove the creature? That makes no sense. Also, I still fail to see how Stoneforge Mystic making the equipment cost 1 less forces you to deal with it immediately. You could, but it isn't necessary.
On the other hand if you don't have removal when SFM come down, even with just a SoFaI or SoFaF on SFM can put you so far behind that you've essentially lost the game by not being able to deal with the threat pretty much immediately as they can ride it on the back of protection for the rest of the game.
The protection is powerful. But look at this. Let's assume you cast SFM on turn 2. Your opponent doesn't counter it or remove it. Then on turn 3, you activate its ability and play a Sword. Turn 4, you equip the sword and swing. If your opponent cannot block it, he or she takes 3 damage and you get 2 powerful effects. That puts you in a strong board position, but not in a dominant one. You are allowed to get dominant board positions by turn 4 in Modern. And does that mean that you have lost the game? By that logic, being hit for 6 damage every turn with Geist of Saint Traft means that you have "lost the game".
And that's really the heart of the issue, its a tutor, it cheats mana, and a legitimate threat/win condition rolled into the low cost of just 1W and that's huge.
Once again, does making the swords cost 2 instead of 3 matter so much that it could be the difference between having a format that has a good Stoneforge Mystic deck in it and having a format where the dominant deck is Stoneforge Mystic? And it is not rolled into the cost of 1W. If you spend 1W, it is a 1/2 creature that tutors for an equipment once. You have to spend more than that to get the 1 mana cost reduction for your swords that is supposedly so wonderful. If this was so broken, wouldn't Steelshaper's Gift+Any creature (Preferably Kor Duelist) be a broken combo? Or is the ability to pay two mana for one of the swords instead of 3 so important that it will create the dominant deck?
I highly doubt that they are going to forget the existence of SFM and print an equipment with living weapon or a similar ability that is as powerful as Batterskull.
SFM makes it very difficult for R&D to print good equipment. It's the Equipment version of Tinker, in that it both cheaply tutors and completely invalidates costs.
Woah! hardly.
Tinker can't be bolted and puts things much worse than Batterskulls into play.
Tinkering into a Blightsteel Colossus is much worse than A Stoneforge fetiching your choice of Jitte or Batterskull, followed a turn later by putting them into play
Thank you for that LordOwlington. And the thing is, I was talking about a scenario where Batterskull is banned and Umezawa's Jitte still was. The thing that everyone is so worried would be the death of Modern is people abusing the swords.:facepalm:
SFM makes it very difficult for R&D to print good equipment.
I see this argument used a fair amount, but the problem I have is that it's hard to see them as printing equipment that's better with Stoneforge Mystic than what they already have.
I see this argument used a fair amount, but the problem I have is that it's hard to see them as printing equipment that's better with Stoneforge Mystic than what they already have.
I agree. If you think about the logical conclusion of how far you can push an equipment to be abused with SFM, its hard to think of anything remotely printable that does a better job than Batterskull. The amount of design space for a printable 'better than batterskull w/ SFM' equipment is almost zero.
It comes with its own body. It can return itself to the hand to 'protect itself' before being forced back in. Its big. It gains life. It pulls double duty on offense/defense. It was designed specifically to push SFM to competitive levels (before they knew Sword of F&F was already going to do that). Its therefore pretty resaonable to suggest we'll never see a piece of equipment literally tailored to SFM as well as B'skull was. But that's not to say its unfair...in fact, it seems to perfectly fit the Turn 4 rules of Modern as a good but not insane combination in line with the power levels of other defining cards in the pool.
If we ever see living weapon again, we won't see something as pushed...instead they'll be more like Lashewrithe and Bonehoard - cards that have minimal upside in the early game.
The only other combination that I could see being remotely as breakable with SFM is equipment with a high cmc, low equip cost, a splashy effect, and protection. Think Elbrus, the Binding Blade with hexproof and Master of Cruelty's life-setting ability. I doubt that would be printable though. Plus it would give the opponent just as much opportunity to interact as the Swords of X and Y do because you have to equip. As previously mentioned, the swords are good but not insane in this format, so there's no reason to suspect the hypothetical high cmc // low equip cost card would be any better if it was printable at all.
Jitte is the only equipment I can think of that is obviously more pushed than B'skull was...and I fully expect any equipment as nutty as Jitte that ever sees print will get banned, regardless of SFM being in the format or not.
i cant believe that bocephus is claiming for unbannings, but i agree, i think that more rituals, card advantage and library manipulation are needed in the format
i cant believe that bocephus is claiming for unbannings, but i agree, i think that more rituals, card advantage and library manipulation are needed in the format
Selective reading.
I have said from the time of the P&P bannings they went over board and one should be unbanned. Said the same about seething song and ritual when they banned song.
My only issue with unbanning SFM is that most midrange/control decks are just going to jam in 4 SFM, Batterskull, and a sword.
Junk-Absolutely.
Jund-Probably not. Doesn't really need it, to be honest.
Naya/Big Zoo would probably add it
Wafo-Tapa Control-No room.
UW Resto or Sun Titan Control- Maybe? Some people will try it, sure, but I honestly don't think it'd become a mainstay.
Pod doesn't want or need it.
Teachings doesn't need it.
Might make Pikula Dead Guy Ale viable as well as Death and Taxes tier 1.
To be honest, the package seems less appealing overall without Jitte. Batterskull fills a beater roll, Swords fill the "guarenteed to connect" roll, but you don't have the "I win combat for the rest of the game" edge from Jitte.
Without Batterskull, Stoneforge stops being one of those things where every White deck wants is, and becomes this awesome niche card, where the Caw-blade like tempo decks and midrangey Junk decks want it, and it creates interesting deck contruction ideas and cool sideboards and equipment packages
I could see a Stoneforge Mystic unban is Batterskull was banned at the same time, sure. Stoneforge without Batterskull would be a fair card that could be used to sneak Swords into play past counters. The Swords would cost "4" instead of "5", since it would take 2 mana to put them in and 2 to equip.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You can't always win, and just because you lose doesn't mean you played badly.
Even if you lose, it is important to remain confident in your ability to make good plays and decisions. Lose that and you are truly lost.
Testing is great, and the better the testing is, the better off you'll be.
It is impossible to tilt and play well.
It is possible to make no mistakes and still lose.
Stoneforge Mystic's biggest problem is that it puts severe restrictions on what equipment R&D can make in future sets. Every future equipment printed will have to answer the "Does this break Stoneforge Mystic?" test. Eventually they'll have one of those equipments slip through the cracks. Then what? Do you ban that equipment just so people can still play Stoneforge Mystic? Of course not; you ban the enabler.
Stoneforge Mystic's biggest problem is that it puts severe restrictions on what equipment R&D can make in future sets. Every future equipment printed will have to answer the "Does this break Stoneforge Mystic?" test. Eventually they'll have one of those equipments slip through the cracks. Then what? Do you ban that equipment just so people can still play Stoneforge Mystic? Of course not; you ban the enabler.
did you miss the last page of posts? they're not exactly pushing the limits of equipment. i doubt they'll print stuff, even at higher cmc and equip cost, that will rival what batterskull and swords (and jitte) do.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I speak in sarcasm because calling people ******* ******** is not allowed.
did you miss the last page of posts? they're not exactly pushing the limits of equipment. i doubt they'll print stuff, even at higher cmc and equip cost, that will rival what batterskull and swords (and jitte) do.
I think this is true. I believe we've seen the last days of "good" equipment because in the early days WotC didn't know how powerful they would be. Now they know and are going to be very careful about what they create. Still, with Batterskull legal it is doubtful SFM will ever come off the list.
Stoneforge Mystic's biggest problem is that it puts severe restrictions on what equipment R&D can make in future sets. Every future equipment printed will have to answer the "Does this break Stoneforge Mystic?" test. Eventually they'll have one of those equipments slip through the cracks. Then what? Do you ban that equipment just so people can still play Stoneforge Mystic? Of course not; you ban the enabler.
To break Stoneforge Mystic, R&D would have to either print equipment as broken as the Jitte, which I'm pretty sure they learned not to do, or they will have to bring back living weapon and make the equipment with it as immediately powerful as Batterskull. Living Weapon is a 6 on the Storm Scale. It is probably not coming back.
I think this is true. I believe we've seen the last days of "good" equipment because in the early days WotC didn't know how powerful they would be. Now they know and are going to be very careful about what they create. Still, with Batterskull legal it is doubtful SFM will ever come off the list.
I think the same thing happens with lots of new card types that the game has introduced. I have seen WOTC make more design "mistakes" when printing new card types or with new machanics.
Ex: Plainswalkers. The first ones were balanced, but a couple were underpowered. No one knew how to react to them yet, or how to balance them, so we got Jace TMS. Oops!
Another ex: "Phyrexian" mana. Most of those cards worked out quite fairly, a few are tournament playable today (Surgical Extraction, Dismember) and one broke Legacy in half (Mental Misstep.) Its arguable whether Misstep would have done a similar deal to Modern, but it looks like that card is staying put for a long time.
I'm sure if we kept seeing Phyrexian mana cards for a few more sets that WOTC would have learned from its mistake and we would have seen more balanced spells of this type, just like we see balanced, if a bit weaker, Planeswalkers these days.
I feel like we see cards that try to test the boundaries of a card type's power level. Batterskull and a lot of the recent 5-drop creatures feel that way. Most of the time these cards are tournament powerhouses, but not in need of any action. Once in a while, however, we see that a card pushes things a bit too far, and that's where the trouble happens.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You can't always win, and just because you lose doesn't mean you played badly.
Even if you lose, it is important to remain confident in your ability to make good plays and decisions. Lose that and you are truly lost.
Testing is great, and the better the testing is, the better off you'll be.
It is impossible to tilt and play well.
It is possible to make no mistakes and still lose.
I don't recall this happening outside of Block formats. Care to offer an example?
Looking over the list of bans in MTG history, I couldn't find a single example of an engine piece banning that needed to be followed up with another banning in order to kill a deck. The closest example is in Modern, with Preordain/Ponder getting banned and then Seething Song getting banned down the road to fully "kill" storm. Skullclamp is another (bad) example, with the card seeing play in Affinity, getting banned, and then with Affinity eating more bans later. But that's not a good comparison at all, because Clamp got banned for its omnipresence, not its use in just Affinity. The historical example just doesn't exist.
First off in the entire history of Magic, Wizards has never banned a card so that they can unban a card so swapping Batterskull for SFM will not happen.
This is the most important point when considering an SFM unban. There is zero historical precedent for unbanning a card and swapping it with a newly banned card. In all the simultaneous bans/unbans in MTG history, this has never happened with two related cards. At least going on this precedent, it is extremely unlikely that Wizards will ban Batterskull and unban SFM in one move. Although Wizards is not a slave to its own history of bannings and unbannings, its policy and pattern of bans has been fairly consistent since late 2004.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Footsteps Hulk
Ascendency Combo
Restore Balance
Ad Nauseam
EDH:
Ghave Lands
Narset Combo
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Current post- Grand Prix KC Modern Postmortem (7/7/13)
Yes, but with the Swords, the second ability only makes them cost one less and makes you tap a creature. And other than Batterskull, which is obviously broken with SFM, how many powerful equipment have been printed that cost more than 3 mana and cost less than 4 mana to equip. The only one that comes to mind for me right now is Deathrender. Equipment have the problem that you also have to pay the equip cost, which is usually pretty big for the equipment that you would cheat into play. That is why Tinker is not a good comparison with Stoneforge Mystic.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
And makes them dodge counterspells, can be put in the field at instant speed, and don't force you to use mana on your turn to cast, letting you hava mana open for an answer like a counterspell. They can also equip it to stoneforge itself if needed.
i maintain that this is a terrible reason. approximately 0 equipment have broken into legacy play because of stoneforge mystic since they banned it from standard. granted, they haven't printed good equipment since then, but the way they're designing equipment now, no one has to fear stoneforge breaking anything.
heck, some abilities you'd expect on equipment have recently been printed straight on to creatures. like master of cruelties. they could have easily made that an equipped ability.
The equipping must be done at sorcery speed. Because of this, you cannot use the equipment while attacking until turn 4. Even assuming that you cheated Elbrus, the Binding Blade into play and dealt combat damage to a player with it, that would still be on turn 4, meaning that you would not win until at least turn 5. That is the biggest thing that could happen with Stoneforge Mystic, and it could be stopped by the equipped creature being blocked, counterspells on SFM, or by most kinds of removal. I would like to quote ktkenshinx's response to my saying that Grim Lavamancer is as good as Punishing Fire.
SFM is easily stopped. If it is, it just becomes an overpriced Steelshaper's Gift. If not, you can play your tutored equipment for 2 mana at instant speed and it cannot be countered. An uncounterable 2 mana Sword of Feast and Famine at instant speed on turn 3 does not win the game. It gives you an advantage, but it is not broken. I'm not sure even unbanning Umezawa's Jitte as well in Modern would be broken. The only broken card with it is Batterskull, so if you banned one and unbanned the other, we would have another interesting card as opposed to another 5 mana beater that we really didn't need.
Also, Germanturkey is right, Master of Cruelties as an equipment would be pretty nice.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
SFM is CA, tutor, mana cheating, and counterspell dodging in one card. It's extremely strong
I know that Wizards has never done that, but Sam Stoddard just said that Preordain and Ponder are too powerful for Modern. Despite this, we can still discuss whether they should be or not, so I can say what I said despite how unlikely it is.
So any creature with a come into play effect that is still relevant after it comes into play is broken because of your opponent will still have gotten something if you remove the creature? That makes no sense. Also, I still fail to see how Stoneforge Mystic making the equipment cost 1 less forces you to deal with it immediately. You could, but it isn't necessary.
The protection is powerful. But look at this. Let's assume you cast SFM on turn 2. Your opponent doesn't counter it or remove it. Then on turn 3, you activate its ability and play a Sword. Turn 4, you equip the sword and swing. If your opponent cannot block it, he or she takes 3 damage and you get 2 powerful effects. That puts you in a strong board position, but not in a dominant one. You are allowed to get dominant board positions by turn 4 in Modern. And does that mean that you have lost the game? By that logic, being hit for 6 damage every turn with Geist of Saint Traft means that you have "lost the game".
Once again, does making the swords cost 2 instead of 3 matter so much that it could be the difference between having a format that has a good Stoneforge Mystic deck in it and having a format where the dominant deck is Stoneforge Mystic? And it is not rolled into the cost of 1W. If you spend 1W, it is a 1/2 creature that tutors for an equipment once. You have to spend more than that to get the 1 mana cost reduction for your swords that is supposedly so wonderful. If this was so broken, wouldn't Steelshaper's Gift+Any creature (Preferably Kor Duelist) be a broken combo? Or is the ability to pay two mana for one of the swords instead of 3 so important that it will create the dominant deck?
It also of course brings similar issues to Survival as it puts a huge strain on development of new equipment as they could accidentally just print another Batterskull and thus the enabler is really the problem.
I highly doubt that they are going to forget the existence of SFM and print an equipment with living weapon or a similar ability that is as powerful as Batterskull.
Thank you for that LordOwlington. And the thing is, I was talking about a scenario where Batterskull is banned and Umezawa's Jitte still was. The thing that everyone is so worried would be the death of Modern is people abusing the swords.:facepalm:
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
I see this argument used a fair amount, but the problem I have is that it's hard to see them as printing equipment that's better with Stoneforge Mystic than what they already have.
I agree. If you think about the logical conclusion of how far you can push an equipment to be abused with SFM, its hard to think of anything remotely printable that does a better job than Batterskull. The amount of design space for a printable 'better than batterskull w/ SFM' equipment is almost zero.
It comes with its own body. It can return itself to the hand to 'protect itself' before being forced back in. Its big. It gains life. It pulls double duty on offense/defense. It was designed specifically to push SFM to competitive levels (before they knew Sword of F&F was already going to do that). Its therefore pretty resaonable to suggest we'll never see a piece of equipment literally tailored to SFM as well as B'skull was. But that's not to say its unfair...in fact, it seems to perfectly fit the Turn 4 rules of Modern as a good but not insane combination in line with the power levels of other defining cards in the pool.
If we ever see living weapon again, we won't see something as pushed...instead they'll be more like Lashewrithe and Bonehoard - cards that have minimal upside in the early game.
The only other combination that I could see being remotely as breakable with SFM is equipment with a high cmc, low equip cost, a splashy effect, and protection. Think Elbrus, the Binding Blade with hexproof and Master of Cruelty's life-setting ability. I doubt that would be printable though. Plus it would give the opponent just as much opportunity to interact as the Swords of X and Y do because you have to equip. As previously mentioned, the swords are good but not insane in this format, so there's no reason to suspect the hypothetical high cmc // low equip cost card would be any better if it was printable at all.
Jitte is the only equipment I can think of that is obviously more pushed than B'skull was...and I fully expect any equipment as nutty as Jitte that ever sees print will get banned, regardless of SFM being in the format or not.
Speculate less. Test more.
Selective reading.
I have said from the time of the P&P bannings they went over board and one should be unbanned. Said the same about seething song and ritual when they banned song.
Junk-Absolutely.
Jund-Probably not. Doesn't really need it, to be honest.
Naya/Big Zoo would probably add it
Wafo-Tapa Control-No room.
UW Resto or Sun Titan Control- Maybe? Some people will try it, sure, but I honestly don't think it'd become a mainstay.
Pod doesn't want or need it.
Teachings doesn't need it.
Might make Pikula Dead Guy Ale viable as well as Death and Taxes tier 1.
To be honest, the package seems less appealing overall without Jitte. Batterskull fills a beater roll, Swords fill the "guarenteed to connect" roll, but you don't have the "I win combat for the rest of the game" edge from Jitte.
Footsteps Hulk
Ascendency Combo
Restore Balance
Ad Nauseam
EDH:
Ghave Lands
Narset Combo
~ Brian DeMars
did you miss the last page of posts? they're not exactly pushing the limits of equipment. i doubt they'll print stuff, even at higher cmc and equip cost, that will rival what batterskull and swords (and jitte) do.
I think this is true. I believe we've seen the last days of "good" equipment because in the early days WotC didn't know how powerful they would be. Now they know and are going to be very careful about what they create. Still, with Batterskull legal it is doubtful SFM will ever come off the list.
To break Stoneforge Mystic, R&D would have to either print equipment as broken as the Jitte, which I'm pretty sure they learned not to do, or they will have to bring back living weapon and make the equipment with it as immediately powerful as Batterskull. Living Weapon is a 6 on the Storm Scale. It is probably not coming back.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
I think the same thing happens with lots of new card types that the game has introduced. I have seen WOTC make more design "mistakes" when printing new card types or with new machanics.
Ex: Plainswalkers. The first ones were balanced, but a couple were underpowered. No one knew how to react to them yet, or how to balance them, so we got Jace TMS. Oops!
Another ex: "Phyrexian" mana. Most of those cards worked out quite fairly, a few are tournament playable today (Surgical Extraction, Dismember) and one broke Legacy in half (Mental Misstep.) Its arguable whether Misstep would have done a similar deal to Modern, but it looks like that card is staying put for a long time.
I'm sure if we kept seeing Phyrexian mana cards for a few more sets that WOTC would have learned from its mistake and we would have seen more balanced spells of this type, just like we see balanced, if a bit weaker, Planeswalkers these days.
I feel like we see cards that try to test the boundaries of a card type's power level. Batterskull and a lot of the recent 5-drop creatures feel that way. Most of the time these cards are tournament powerhouses, but not in need of any action. Once in a while, however, we see that a card pushes things a bit too far, and that's where the trouble happens.
~ Brian DeMars
Looking over the list of bans in MTG history, I couldn't find a single example of an engine piece banning that needed to be followed up with another banning in order to kill a deck. The closest example is in Modern, with Preordain/Ponder getting banned and then Seething Song getting banned down the road to fully "kill" storm. Skullclamp is another (bad) example, with the card seeing play in Affinity, getting banned, and then with Affinity eating more bans later. But that's not a good comparison at all, because Clamp got banned for its omnipresence, not its use in just Affinity. The historical example just doesn't exist.
This is the most important point when considering an SFM unban. There is zero historical precedent for unbanning a card and swapping it with a newly banned card. In all the simultaneous bans/unbans in MTG history, this has never happened with two related cards. At least going on this precedent, it is extremely unlikely that Wizards will ban Batterskull and unban SFM in one move. Although Wizards is not a slave to its own history of bannings and unbannings, its policy and pattern of bans has been fairly consistent since late 2004.