"Being a mistake" is not a criteria WotC uses for bannings in Modern. Dominance, speed, timing issues, format warping, and (controversially) historic relevance in large formats are the requirements. That's how the banned list discussion should be framed.
There are plenty of "mistakes" that slipped through R&D that are a normal part of this format. Besides, Modern is supposed to be a place to play many of these "pushed" cards while avoiding Legacy's insane cost of entry. Tarmogoyf, Ravager, Delver, and Bob are all superficially very similar to SFM, AV, and BB etc. Why are we including some "overpowered" "mistakes" on the list of Historically relevant, successful decks but not others. The "Historocity" arguement seemed appropriate for PT Philly so the format wasn't just Standard's Greatest Hits rehashed, but now that we're a few years in and a sizable chunk of the player base hasn't experienced these decks, perhaps it's time to eliminate cross-format relevance as a deciding factor and leave it up to observed dominance and format warping.
That's not to suggest that it's entirely safe to unban Jace or SFM or BB etc right now but it should at least give them a fair shake instead of the standard "but it's good in Extended/Legacy and therefore Br0kenz!!" when there are very clearly other legal cards that fit the same "mistake" description in the format.
I don't understand how people can keep a straight face when they say to unban Stoneforge. It's utterly broken.
AV and Troll can deal with coming off the ban list Post Haste though. The Cantrips are too powerful when combined. That's the problem unfortunately, in a vacuum, a card might not be all that powerful (Like Stoneforge), but when combined with all the others....
SFM is not any more "utterly broken" than Snapcaster Mage, Dark Confidant, or Deathrite Shaman. Its first ability is perfectly fair for its cost and its second doesn't get around the fact that you actually have to pay the equip costs. If getting the swords out on turn 3 is so powerful, than why haven't people been been abusing them with Steelshaper's Gift? The one card that SFM is overpowered with is Batterskull, and a turn 3 Batterskull is no more broken than a turn 3 Geist of Saint Traft. Stoneforge Mystic does not break the turn 4 rule, so why must Wizards insist on keeping it banned when its only powerful use is so easily disrupted?
people people. You can't just compare SFM to steelshapers gift.. Gift is card parity, stoneforge is not. Stoneforge lets you put it out around counters, at instant speed. Gift does not. SFM provides a body to attach to, gift does not.
To put it bluntly, SFM is too good at what it does. It is a cost efficient tutor with all upside. When they were banning GSZ, WotC mentioned that they didn't like "toolbox" decks very much: a bunch of singletons that could be tutored for at a moment's notice. Stoneforge Mystic would warp deck construction as much as Green Sun's Zenith did, maybe more.
With this in mind, it is kind of surprising that Birthing Pod didn't get banned yet since it poses the same problems as these two cards do: it's a cost efficient tutor that heavily warps deck design around it.
It's hard to argue that the card hasn't exactly demonstrated it's power, especially if you take into consideration developments in the Modern metagame over the past several months.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In my dream, the world had suffered a terrible disaster. A black haze shut out the sun, and the darkness was alive with the moans and screams of wounded people. Suddenly, a small light glowed. A candle flickered into life, symbol of hope for millions. A single tiny candle, shining in the ugly dark. I laughed and blew it out.
Many thanks to HotP Studios. Special thanks to DNC for this great sig.
With this in mind, it is kind of surprising that Birthing Pod didn't get banned yet since it poses the same problems as these two cards do: it's a cost efficient tutor that heavily warps deck design around it.
It's hard to argue that the card hasn't exactly demonstrated it's power, especially if you take into consideration developments in the Modern metagame over the past several months.
Totally disagree with your phrasing of ""heavily warps deck design around it". Although Pod decks are built in a certain way, not all creature-based decks in the format are playing Pod. In the case of GSZ, if you were playing Green, you were also playing Zenith. That included Pod, 12Post, Elves, Maverick, Jund, Junk, and almost literally every deck that had green in its manabase and creatures in the maindeck. Pod, on the other hand, is just a card that one certain deck builds around. It doesn't warp deck construction any more than Splinter Twin does - If you play Twin, you are also playing Exarch, Pestermite, UR, and counterspells/draw. If you play Pod, you are playing basically all creatures, lots of singletons, and lots of toolbox answers.
That said, there is a separate argument to ban Pod: The deck is overperforming. That's an evidence-based question though, not a theoretical one. We would actually have to check Pod performance both relative to other decks and relative to its prevalence.
Totally disagree with your phrasing of ""heavily warps deck design around it". Although Pod decks are built in a certain way, not all creature-based decks in the format are playing Pod. In the case of GSZ, if you were playing Green, you were also playing Zenith. That included Pod, 12Post, Elves, Maverick, Jund, Junk, and almost literally every deck that had green in its manabase and creatures in the maindeck. Pod, on the other hand, is just a card that one certain deck builds around. It doesn't warp deck construction any more than Splinter Twin does - If you play Twin, you are also playing Exarch, Pestermite, UR, and counterspells/draw. If you play Pod, you are playing basically all creatures, lots of singletons, and lots of toolbox answers.
I agree, not every creature based deck plays Birthing Pod. Just the good ones do.
Consider this: a deck with Birthing Pod/Green Sun's Zenith normally played the full four of those and ran a bunch of singletons for tutor targets. The targets weren't always a good draw, while the tutor that could, with some minimal effort, get you any one of those cards was. The tutors were stealing the thunder of those successful cards in a way.
Without those tutors, you would probably have to devote more maindeck slots to combo pieces in order to have some degree of consistency.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In my dream, the world had suffered a terrible disaster. A black haze shut out the sun, and the darkness was alive with the moans and screams of wounded people. Suddenly, a small light glowed. A candle flickered into life, symbol of hope for millions. A single tiny candle, shining in the ugly dark. I laughed and blew it out.
Many thanks to HotP Studios. Special thanks to DNC for this great sig.
I think the biggest issue of GSZ was that it was basically a mana dork with benefits, since GSZ -> Dryad Arbor was as good as/better than Llanowar Elves. Other than that, being able to X=2 for your 1-of Gaddock was a real threat for any deck running hose-able cards. With Ooze about to hit the format, expect it to never be unbanned.
SFM is unsalvageably overpowered. Even if you banned the Skull, you're still looking at having a tutor, a cheating ability, AND an attachable dude for 2 mana. The comparisons to tinker are rather good ones, IMO. Because SFM gives you a tutor, the mechanism to put it onto the battlefield at instant-speed and counter-proof, as well as a body to attach it to, it's far too powerful. Simply for 3 rounds of 2 mana, you get a SFM equipped with the sword of you choice. And if they interrupt the equip, you know what? They bolted a Squire, and now you're a card up. People don't realize that this card was just about as scary as JTMS in its heyday, and it's still considered a potent threat in Legacy.
GGT should be unbanned. Its banning largely had to do with the existence of DR in the format, and without DR, it's a decent dredge engine but not an overpowering win condition.
AV should probably be unbanned. The fact that it fails to impact the board until T5 means that it comes online after the critical T4. However, the fact that you can Remand your opponent's T2-T4 plays and draw into all the answers is a powerful interaction that should be considered before taking any actual action.
Kitty in my opinion should NOT be unbanned (remain banned). The reason is that Gruul Zoo is in a really good place right now, and coming out with a 3/3 for 1 that "forces" all the aggro decks to be Naya (rather than straight Gruul, Jund, or RGU Snap) only serves to limit variety.
I haven't seen enough arguments for/against, or thought about BB enough to comment about my thoughts on it.
I think the biggest issue of GSZ was that it was basically a mana dork with benefits, since GSZ -> Dryad Arbor was as good as/better than Llanowar Elves. Other than that, being able to X=2 for your 1-of Gaddock was a real threat for any deck running hose-able cards. With Ooze about to hit the format, expect it to never be unbanned.
SFM is unsalvageably overpowered. Even if you banned the Skull, you're still looking at having a tutor, a cheating ability, AND an attachable dude for 2 mana. The comparisons to tinker are rather good ones, IMO. Because SFM gives you a tutor, the mechanism to put it onto the battlefield at instant-speed and counter-proof, as well as a body to attach it to, it's far too powerful. Simply for 3 rounds of 2 mana, you get a SFM equipped with the sword of you choice. And if they interrupt the equip, you know what? They bolted a Squire, and now you're a card up. People don't realize that this card was just about as scary as JTMS in its heyday, and it's still considered a potent threat in Legacy.
GGT should be unbanned. Its banning largely had to do with the existence of DR in the format, and without DR, it's a decent dredge engine but not an overpowering win condition.
AV should probably be unbanned. The fact that it fails to impact the board until T5 means that it comes online after the critical T4. However, the fact that you can Remand your opponent's T2-T4 plays and draw into all the answers is a powerful interaction that should be considered before taking any actual action.
Kitty in my opinion should NOT be unbanned (remain banned). The reason is that Gruul Zoo is in a really good place right now, and coming out with a 3/3 for 1 that "forces" all the aggro decks to be Naya (rather than straight Gruul, Jund, or RGU Snap) only serves to limit variety.
I haven't seen enough arguments for/against, or thought about BB enough to comment about my thoughts on it.
I think the comparison of SFM to Tinker is the silliest thing i think i've read in quite awhile.
Tinker wins you the game if it resolves, plain and simple.
By that logic, Skullclamp shouldn't be banned, nor should the artifact lands or Sensei's Top.
What we are saying is that, combined with the other cards available in Modern, SFM is unredeemablly overpowered.
I agree with you for the first half of that, but Sensei's Divining Top is banned for time constraints, not power-level. However, SFM is not Tinker. Tinker is much harder to interact with and turning a Darksteel Relic into a Blightsteel Colossus is considerably more broken than a turn 3 Batterskull. Also, nobody has answered my questions yet?. How is getting a sword on turn 3 for 2 mana at instant speed that can't be countered broken? You still have to equip at sorcery speed, you still need creatures to equip it to, you still need mana to equip, and you still can't use it until turn 4, which does not break the rules for Modern. And how is getting a Batterskull on turn 3 using two cards and attacking on turn 4 more broken than playing a Geist of Saint Traft on turn 3 and attacking on turn 4? I don't think that it is, and it certainly doesn't break the turn 4 rule.
I think the comparison of SFM to Tinker is the silliest thing i think i've read in quite awhile.
Tinker wins you the game if it resolves, plain and simple.
SFM simply put, doesn't.
The issue is that you're just looking at their strict power levels, as opposed to the quintessence of what they really do. No one is arguing that SFM is nearly the power level of Tinker; rather they are arguing that they perform the same function (that is, BOTH tutoring and cheating onto the battlefield), and that function in concept is necessarily something that can and will break cards.
The issue is that you're just looking at their strict power levels, as opposed to the quintessence of what they really do. No one is arguing that SFM is nearly the power level of Tinker; rather they are arguing that they perform the same function, and that function in concept is necessarily something that can and will break cards.
They don't perform a similar function in the least. They both deal with artifacts, sure. The fact that Tinker turns into creature cheat gets rid of your 'quintessence'.
If SFM was comparable to Tinker you'd have her being played with Elbrus or some other Timmy equipment that's unfathomably huge.
They don't perform a similar function in the least. They both deal with artifacts, sure. The fact that Tinker turns into creature cheat gets rid of your 'quintessence'.
If SFM was comparable to Tinker you'd have her being played with Elbrus or some other Timmy equipment that's unfathomably huge.
Sorry for using big words, it's the only one I could think of at the time. I guess just essence could work (albeit imperfectly) in retrospect, but it's rather moot.
While this argument is steering away from strictly banlist discussion, I'd like to direct you to comments made by Brain Kibler on a comparison of the two from his perspective as a game designer.
Quote from Brian Kibler »
Stoneforge Mystic is the sort of card that would not only be on the list but would be circled and underlined and written in bold. It's Demonic Tutor plus Aether Vial—not only does it ensure that you'll get whatever Equipment card you put into your deck, but it'll let you put it directly into play at an enormous discount. It's effectively Tinker with a one-turn delay.
The fact is that it's the combination of tutoring and cheating that make SFM so good. If it was JUST tutoring, it might (and probably would) not be bankable. If it was JUST cheating out equipment, it would DEFINITELY not be bannable. It's the combination of the two that make it so potent. And Tinker is the only other comparable card that does both things.
Sorry for using big words, it's the only one I could think of at the time. I guess just essence could work (albeit imperfectly) in retrospect, but it's rather moot.
While this argument is steering away from strictly banlist discussion, I'd like to direct you to comments made by Brain Kibler on a comparison of the two from his perspective as a game designer.
The fact is that it's the combination of tutoring and cheating that make SFM so good. If it was JUST tutoring, it might (and probably would) not be bankable. If it was JUST cheating out equipment, it would DEFINITELY not be bannable. It's the combination of the two that make it so potent. And Tinker is the only other comparable card that does both things.
That's powerful, sure, but as I (and a few others) have repetitively said, what she gets is not broken in the slightest. There is a reason that no one Tinkers for a Batterskull in vintage. It just isn't that back breaking, compared to much of the tier one decks. In a format with Melira Pod, Splinter Twin, Scapeshift, Open the Vaults, Goryo's Vengeance and Through the Breach, a turn 3 or 4 uncounterable 4/4 is just not back breaking. It's not card advantage that deals with threats or disrupts your opponent's game plan (unless that game plan is to punch your face in by turn 4), it's a moderate sized dumb creature, or a sword that takes several turns to connect. We're not talking about Demonic Tutor here, we're talking about Steelshaper's Gift. If there was an equipment that you could sac and destroy a creature, I'd be willing to argue that you can have a fairly powerful toolbox there, but as it stands, relying on being able to equip a 1/2 with a sword, especially if you cheat said sword into play, costing you another turn, doesn't sound appealing early game. She is a good late game threat. In a format so OBSESSED with the first 4 turns of the format, why is that bad, let alone ban worthy?
EDIT: On the topic of card advantage, the card advantage Stoneforge Mystic offers is only good as long as you have a creature. That's what makes Stoneforge Mystic so much worse than Tinker when it comes to finding things, and worse than say Kitchen Finks or Lingering Souls when it comes to pure card advantage. Her advantage requires either her or another creature to be in play (when it comes to the swords) or for her to stay in play long enough to cheat Batterskull into play (a whole 1 or 2 turns earlier than on curve).
Sorry for using big words, it's the only one I could think of at the time. I guess just essence could work (albeit imperfectly) in retrospect, but it's rather moot.
While this argument is steering away from strictly banlist discussion, I'd like to direct you to comments made by Brain Kibler on a comparison of the two from his perspective as a game designer.
The fact is that it's the combination of tutoring and cheating that make SFM so good. If it was JUST tutoring, it might (and probably would) not be bankable. If it was JUST cheating out equipment, it would DEFINITELY not be bannable. It's the combination of the two that make it so potent. And Tinker is the only other comparable card that does both things.
I'd say the fact that ones a creature and one's a spell kind of immediately breaks Kibler's argument, but moreso, it doesn't give equipment "an enormous discount"; it discounts Batterskull by 3 and The Swords by 1;
Nothing quite like Sundering Titan/Inkwell Leviathan/(insert)Steel Collosus gets put into play by Stoneforge; again the only things comparable to these cards that are equipment are things like the Kaldra-Tron or Elbrus.
She doesn't even discount Jitte (which is arguably the best thing you could tutor for with her in an unlimited cardpool)
The most 'broken' thing she does is Batterskull; she isn't the haymaker that Tinker is. She's a quick and dirty jab that might hit your chin.
The only deck in Modern (that i believe) is cold to a T3 Batterskull is Zoo; and after boarding that becomes more managable. But, Zoo is no more cold to T3 Batterskull as it is to a T3 Damnation (of a DRS, say).
Kibler is a fine player. (I honestly have no idea what games he's designed, he doesn't work at Wizards, does he? He plays competitively.) And he knows how to evaluate cards for deck building purposes. But, i think what we have in his quote is an extreme case of hyperbole. She's good and at this point in time, if legal, obviously warps white in basically the entire format. She probably doesn't deserve to be unbanned now. But, she fully deserves it once she gets more competition and a bigger cardpool to swim in.
All these pitchforks out for her blood are disconcerting. I doubt anyone has played with her beyond the Legacy or (old) Standard environment. And for those that have played her in Legacy, Modern has a pretty similar removal suite (albeit the creature removal is just as strong if thinner); Why is she fair there and not here? Modern has all the pinpoint discard, artifact hate, and just as efficient spot removal (if less of it).
It really doesnt matter what we the player base sees as over powered or broken, its what Wotc and R&D sees as broken, format warping, and bannable. We can discuss it all we want, but in the end its Wotc that decides.
And for those that have played her in Legacy, Modern has a pretty similar removal suite (albeit the creature removal is just as strong if thinner); Why is she fair there and not here? Modern has all the pinpoint discard, artifact hate, and just as efficient spot removal (if less of it).
It should be fairly obvious, she's fine in Legacy because people are doing far more powerful things in Legacy than they are in Modern. Cards like S&T, LED, Time Spiral, Reanimate aren't even available in the Modern format and thats just cards that are strictly for combo decks. Stoneforge Mystic is a good card in a sea of good cards and she sees quite a lot of play so she's probably better than merely good. But in Modern that's simply just not the case, there aren't decks like ANT or S&T that can punish you very hard for tapping out on turn two for a dude. Modern is a format that is mostly based around creature combat and card advantage, Stoneforge Mystic is CA and it helps you win creature combat with equipment and its also a body put equipment on all rolled into one package. Plus if Bloodbraid Elf, which is a far less offensive midrange value creature, is not welcome in Modern then Stoneforge Mystic certainly isn't.
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.
It really doesnt matter what we the player base sees as over powered or broken, its what Wotc and R&D sees as broken, format warping, and bannable. We can discuss it all we want, but in the end its Wotc that decides.
yes, so lets not discuss anything any more because we have no input in what wizards decides to do.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I speak in sarcasm because calling people ******* ******** is not allowed.
It really doesnt matter what we the player base sees as over powered or broken, its what Wotc and R&D sees as broken, format warping, and bannable. We can discuss it all we want, but in the end its Wotc that decides.
It should be fairly obvious, she's fine in Legacy because people are doing far more powerful things in Legacy than they are in Modern. Cards like S&T, LED, Time Spiral, Reanimate aren't even available in the Modern format and thats just cards that are strictly for combo decks. Stoneforge Mystic is a good card in a sea of good cards and she sees quite a lot of play so she's probably better than merely good. But in Modern that's simply just not the case, there aren't decks like ANT or S&T that can punish you very hard for tapping out on turn two for a dude. Modern is a format that is mostly based around creature combat and card advantage, Stoneforge Mystic is CA and it helps you win creature combat with equipment and its also a body put equipment on all rolled into one package. Plus if Bloodbraid Elf, which is a far less offensive midrange value creature, is not welcome in Modern then Stoneforge Mystic certainly isn't.
i think when the cardpool gets bigger, BBE could come off in the future, too.
It really doesnt matter what we the player base sees as over powered or broken, its what Wotc and R&D sees as broken, format warping, and bannable. We can discuss it all we want, but in the end its Wotc that decides.
Oh god, here we go.
/thread
Seriously, I just want to see Bitterblossom unbanned. Cause right now, there's NOWHERE I can play a good Faeries deck besides kitchen table... I'd really love to be able to play Modern Fae.
I think Modern needs to slow down a bit, Aggro is too fast and efficient at what it does. We really need a good Tempo deck to show up, and I think that could happen with AV/Ponder off the list.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[W]FREE STONEFORGE MYSTIC and JACE THE MINDSCULPTOR[/W]
Seriously, the 2 sides can only repeat the same stance so many times. Its not who says it last, thats what will happen. Look at the pages of banter about SFM, which is essentially the same points on both sides over and over. In the end its up to Wotc, not the player base.
Seriously, I just want to see Bitterblossom unbanned. Cause right now, there's NOWHERE I can play a good Faeries deck besides kitchen table... I'd really love to be able to play Modern Fae.
..and I dont, because I dont wish to play against said deck. So who is Wotc suppose to bend to?
I think Modern needs to slow down a bit, Aggro is too fast and efficient at what it does. We really need a good Tempo deck to show up, and I think that could happen with AV/Ponder off the list.
I actually agree with you here. I do think the format needs to slow down (which is why I dont understand all the talk of unbanning kitty :-/). I just dont feel the cards are there to make it happen. Even with preordain and AV unbanned.
I actually agree with you here. I do think the format needs to slow down (which is why I dont understand all the talk of unbanning kitty :-/). I just dont feel the cards are there to make it happen. Even with preordain and AV unbanned.
And another vote for slow-the-fark-down. I think the real problem with the format is that there are not enough good main-deckable answer cards in the format. The attitude is 'sideboard in the hate', but aggro doesn't have to. Take mill for example. A lot of decks have very little defense against mill. Sure, there are some great cards you can sideboard in to hose them, but you've already lost game 1 and you might lose another game because you can't find your hate in time.
But aggro doesn't have that problem. I used to play control, and now I play more aggro because aggro is a silver bullet. If you can outrace your opponent, it doesn't matter what they play. Control doesn't keep combo in check, doing 20 damage by turn 4 keeps combo in check.
Of course, unbanning AV would help, but it would only help blue (since counterspells are a silver bullet as well).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Things WotC cares about:
-making certain Standard cards can be played in Modern, therefore increasing their value and increasing WotC's profit margin
Things WotC does not care about:
-keeping the ban list as short as possible
-taking chances with an entire format for the benefit of a single card
-catering to play styles that newer players generally don't like and will lose them more players than it will gain
-keeping the meta balanced between archetypes/colors/whatever
-keeping cards on the secondary market cheap (available yes, but not cheap)
-keeping the meta diverse (as long as a single deck doesn't threaten the popularity of the format)
I have a few questions for all of the people who are shouting "Modern will die if Stoneforge Mystic is unbanned!"
If creatures with enter the battlefield abilities that are still relevant after they are played are so broken, then why does Wizards keep making them?
How is searching for Batterskull on turn 2 and getting it into play a turn later if you have no disruption comparable to using Tinker to turn a Darksteel Relic into a Blightsteel Colossus on turn 3 and swinging for 11 points of infect damage on the next turn?
How is a turn 3 Batterskull that can be stopped by counterspells, artifact removal, mass removal, creature removal, hand disruption, and search hate more broken than a turn 3 Geist of Saint Traft that can be stopped only by hand disruption, mass removal, and counterspells? Yes, Batterskull has vigilance, can be equipped after its germ dies, and has lifelink, but Traft swings for 6 damage instead of 5, has better evasion, is harder to stop, and does not need a second card, especially a creature that is vulnerable to almost everything, to work.
If the swords are so overpowered, then why aren't they dominating Modern right now? People could build decks using Steelshaper's Gift to search for them, get them out on turn 3, and swing on turn 4. Will making them cost one less and have flash suddenly turn them into cards on the level of Bob and Goyf? Or is the omnipresent threat of counterspells keeping them out of Modern, and if they had a way to get around it they would become the best cards in the format? I really don't think that is the case.
If unbanning Stoneforge Mystic would turn every deck that runs white in Modern into a "toolbox deck" like GSZ did with green, then why isn't Steelshaper's Gift doing that? Most of the good equipment in Modern costs either 2 or 3 mana and would be easy enough to play normally. You would be able to do what you can do with SFM except for the Batterskull trick, so why hasn't anybody developed a deck that would do that yet?
If SFM making the equipment immune to counterspells is so important and is powerful enough to make SFM a threat to the entire format if it was unbanned, then what would stop the opposing player from just casting a Spell Snare on SFM if they went second or casting Remand or Mana Leak on it if they went first?
How is Wizards deciding whether to unabn SFM based on how much it is played in Legacy different than deciding Legacy's ban list based on what is played in Vintage? That is what they used to do, and they stopped doing that, so maybe they should ban and unban stuff in Modern based on how well it would work in Modern.
When I suggested unbanning SFM, I also suggested banning Batterskull. Are the swords really broken enough with SFM that even without Umezawa's Jitte and Batterskull it would still warp the format? Unlike Batterskull, they do nothing when put onto the battlefield at instant speed, so its second ability would only help them dodge counterspells (which, as I said above, would have been used on SFM if your opponent had any) and reduce the mana cost by one, which is not powerful enough to be worth a ban.
If creatures with enter the battlefield abilities that are still relevant after they are played are so broken, then why does Wizards keep making them?
They aren't broken in general, only really few of them.
How is a turn 3 Batterskull that can be stopped by counterspells, artifact removal, mass removal, creature removal, hand disruption, and search hate more broken than a turn 3 Geist of Saint Traft that can be stopped only by hand disruption, mass removal, and counterspells and sacrifice effects, and a reasonable blocker (keeping in mind that it is harder to have something that trades with batterskull turn 3)? Yes, Batterskull has vigilance, can be equipped after its germ dies, and has lifelink, but Traft swings for 6 damage instead of 5, has better evasion, is harder to stop, and does not need a second card, It does, you need to use your other cards to keep the field clear for geist to attack freely especially a creature that is vulnerable to almost everything, to work.
Bold
If the swords are so overpowered, then why aren't they dominating Modern right now? People could build decks using Steelshaper's Gift to search for them, get them out on turn 3, and swing on turn 4. Will making them cost one less and have flash suddenly turn them into cards on the level of Bob and Goyf? Or is the omnipresent threat of counterspells keeping them out of Modern, and if they had a way to get around it they would become the best cards in the format? I really don't think that is the case.
It is too slow like that. As an example, you have to:
1) Use gift (lets say on first turn)
2) Cast some sort of creature to attach the equipment to, maybe something with protection (like a creature with hexproof) or evasion.
3) Cast the sword.
4) Then you can equip and swing if it is reasonable. Note that you problably spent your first three turns tapped out (meaning, almost defenseless against many things).
This same scenario with mystic is:
1) Cast a relevant 1-mana card. Depending on the deck, it could be something like thoughseize, serum visions, Deathrite Shaman, or maybe some important sideboard card like relic of progenitus or pithing needle. Or hold removal like bolt, path, disfigure, or a counterspell like spell snare (which would be fairly relevant in the mirror).
2) Cast mystic. This lets you search for the equipment and it counts as the creature to be equipped if it needs to.
3) Do nothing on your turn. This lets you hold up a counterspell or removal or some protection. Put the equipment on the field if possible on the end of the oponent's turn.
4) If the equipment was successfully put on the field on the previous turn, equip then attack if it is reasonable to do so.
Comparing both scenarios, the mystic scenario is:
More consistent (because the mystic is the tutor and the creature - you don't risk not having one or the other);
Resistant (you have some way to protect yourself);
More flexible (you don't drop the equipment if you don't need/can't, you have more options on turns 1 and 3);
More abuseable (Situation: Don't equip turn 4, then resto angel in response to removal/attacks/end of turn, blink mystic and get another equipment, simultaneously giving you more card advantage, protection and another evasive creature to equip).
If SFM making the equipment immune to counterspells is so important and is powerful enough to make SFM a threat to the entire format if it was unbanned, then what would stop the opposing player from just casting a Spell Snare on SFM if they went second or casting Remand or Mana Leak on it if they went first?
Not all decks play blue for that.
How is Wizards deciding whether to unabn SFM based on how much it is played in Legacy different than deciding Legacy's ban list based on what is played in Vintage? That is what they used to do, and they stopped doing that, so maybe they should ban and unban stuff in Modern based on how well it would work in Modern.
Thye didn't have modern data when they banned it, and they had to start the banlist based on something, which was mostly Legacy/Extended (the two formats that share much of their cardpool with modern).
When I suggested unbanning SFM, I also suggested banning Batterskull. Are the swords really broken enough with SFM that even without Umezawa's Jitte and Batterskull it would still warp the format? Unlike Batterskull, they do nothing when put onto the battlefield at instant speed, so its second ability would only help them dodge counterspells (which, as I said above, would have been used on SFM if your opponent had any) and reduce the mana cost by one, which is not powerful enough to be worth a ban.
The problem is not that specific play or another, which is what you seem to be focusing on. The problem is the (quite possible) deck that would be built around that play and others. Wizards did not want to risk a similar deck to cawblade (from standard) or Whatever-Blade (from Legacy) possibly dominating modern so early (and I would guess they still don't want that deck now).
I'm not sure how this topic got steered to Stoneforge. Of all the cards that could be unbanned, I think it is low on the list. I think it could be unbanned some day but the modern format is just not really strong enough to handle it right now. I think just about every non-combo deck would at least consider adding 4 stoneforge, 1 batterskull, and 2-3 swords. Every deck playing white would immediately put the package in, I think. Then just about every deck would need to maindeck hate for it. That's the very definition of format warping. If say, every card card except skullclamp was legal, then Stoneforge wouldn't really even be that good, but right now, it would just be the go-to strategy for too many decks.
My top 5 cards for unbanning consideration in order are this;
1. GGT
2. Preordain (I was really annoyed at the Sam Stoddard article where he said this was too good. I just can't imagine how it would be with storm now neutered.)
3. Bitterblossom (Faeries is doing nothing right now)
4. Ancestral Vision (Control and tempo could use a boost and would keep control more in check)
5. Wild Nacatl (Zoo is not doing any thing right now. Gruul is just seems way better right now. Only thing I hope wouldn't happen though is if both Gruul and zoo players would all just switch over to Naya. This would decrease diversity and not really be any better for the format.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
There are plenty of "mistakes" that slipped through R&D that are a normal part of this format. Besides, Modern is supposed to be a place to play many of these "pushed" cards while avoiding Legacy's insane cost of entry. Tarmogoyf, Ravager, Delver, and Bob are all superficially very similar to SFM, AV, and BB etc. Why are we including some "overpowered" "mistakes" on the list of Historically relevant, successful decks but not others. The "Historocity" arguement seemed appropriate for PT Philly so the format wasn't just Standard's Greatest Hits rehashed, but now that we're a few years in and a sizable chunk of the player base hasn't experienced these decks, perhaps it's time to eliminate cross-format relevance as a deciding factor and leave it up to observed dominance and format warping.
That's not to suggest that it's entirely safe to unban Jace or SFM or BB etc right now but it should at least give them a fair shake instead of the standard "but it's good in Extended/Legacy and therefore Br0kenz!!" when there are very clearly other legal cards that fit the same "mistake" description in the format.
Speculate less. Test more.
SFM is not any more "utterly broken" than Snapcaster Mage, Dark Confidant, or Deathrite Shaman. Its first ability is perfectly fair for its cost and its second doesn't get around the fact that you actually have to pay the equip costs. If getting the swords out on turn 3 is so powerful, than why haven't people been been abusing them with Steelshaper's Gift? The one card that SFM is overpowered with is Batterskull, and a turn 3 Batterskull is no more broken than a turn 3 Geist of Saint Traft. Stoneforge Mystic does not break the turn 4 rule, so why must Wizards insist on keeping it banned when its only powerful use is so easily disrupted?
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
With this in mind, it is kind of surprising that Birthing Pod didn't get banned yet since it poses the same problems as these two cards do: it's a cost efficient tutor that heavily warps deck design around it.
It's hard to argue that the card hasn't exactly demonstrated it's power, especially if you take into consideration developments in the Modern metagame over the past several months.
Many thanks to HotP Studios. Special thanks to DNC for this great sig.
Totally disagree with your phrasing of ""heavily warps deck design around it". Although Pod decks are built in a certain way, not all creature-based decks in the format are playing Pod. In the case of GSZ, if you were playing Green, you were also playing Zenith. That included Pod, 12Post, Elves, Maverick, Jund, Junk, and almost literally every deck that had green in its manabase and creatures in the maindeck. Pod, on the other hand, is just a card that one certain deck builds around. It doesn't warp deck construction any more than Splinter Twin does - If you play Twin, you are also playing Exarch, Pestermite, UR, and counterspells/draw. If you play Pod, you are playing basically all creatures, lots of singletons, and lots of toolbox answers.
That said, there is a separate argument to ban Pod: The deck is overperforming. That's an evidence-based question though, not a theoretical one. We would actually have to check Pod performance both relative to other decks and relative to its prevalence.
I agree, not every creature based deck plays Birthing Pod. Just the good ones do.
Consider this: a deck with Birthing Pod/Green Sun's Zenith normally played the full four of those and ran a bunch of singletons for tutor targets. The targets weren't always a good draw, while the tutor that could, with some minimal effort, get you any one of those cards was. The tutors were stealing the thunder of those successful cards in a way.
Without those tutors, you would probably have to devote more maindeck slots to combo pieces in order to have some degree of consistency.
Many thanks to HotP Studios. Special thanks to DNC for this great sig.
SFM is unsalvageably overpowered. Even if you banned the Skull, you're still looking at having a tutor, a cheating ability, AND an attachable dude for 2 mana. The comparisons to tinker are rather good ones, IMO. Because SFM gives you a tutor, the mechanism to put it onto the battlefield at instant-speed and counter-proof, as well as a body to attach it to, it's far too powerful. Simply for 3 rounds of 2 mana, you get a SFM equipped with the sword of you choice. And if they interrupt the equip, you know what? They bolted a Squire, and now you're a card up. People don't realize that this card was just about as scary as JTMS in its heyday, and it's still considered a potent threat in Legacy.
GGT should be unbanned. Its banning largely had to do with the existence of DR in the format, and without DR, it's a decent dredge engine but not an overpowering win condition.
AV should probably be unbanned. The fact that it fails to impact the board until T5 means that it comes online after the critical T4. However, the fact that you can Remand your opponent's T2-T4 plays and draw into all the answers is a powerful interaction that should be considered before taking any actual action.
Kitty in my opinion should NOT be unbanned (remain banned). The reason is that Gruul Zoo is in a really good place right now, and coming out with a 3/3 for 1 that "forces" all the aggro decks to be Naya (rather than straight Gruul, Jund, or RGU Snap) only serves to limit variety.
I haven't seen enough arguments for/against, or thought about BB enough to comment about my thoughts on it.
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
I think the comparison of SFM to Tinker is the silliest thing i think i've read in quite awhile.
Tinker wins you the game if it resolves, plain and simple.
SFM simply put, doesn't.
Sig courtesy of DOLZero
[82/360] Custom Cube
Blog about the Custom Cube
I agree with you for the first half of that, but Sensei's Divining Top is banned for time constraints, not power-level. However, SFM is not Tinker. Tinker is much harder to interact with and turning a Darksteel Relic into a Blightsteel Colossus is considerably more broken than a turn 3 Batterskull. Also, nobody has answered my questions yet?. How is getting a sword on turn 3 for 2 mana at instant speed that can't be countered broken? You still have to equip at sorcery speed, you still need creatures to equip it to, you still need mana to equip, and you still can't use it until turn 4, which does not break the rules for Modern. And how is getting a Batterskull on turn 3 using two cards and attacking on turn 4 more broken than playing a Geist of Saint Traft on turn 3 and attacking on turn 4? I don't think that it is, and it certainly doesn't break the turn 4 rule.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
The issue is that you're just looking at their strict power levels, as opposed to the quintessence of what they really do. No one is arguing that SFM is nearly the power level of Tinker; rather they are arguing that they perform the same function (that is, BOTH tutoring and cheating onto the battlefield), and that function in concept is necessarily something that can and will break cards.
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
I wasn't extending that to a ban/unban argument...
It's simply silly to compare Tinker wit SFM. They're alike in no way shape or form aside from the fact they deal with artifacts.
They don't perform a similar function in the least. They both deal with artifacts, sure. The fact that Tinker turns into creature cheat gets rid of your 'quintessence'.
If SFM was comparable to Tinker you'd have her being played with Elbrus or some other Timmy equipment that's unfathomably huge.
Sig courtesy of DOLZero
[82/360] Custom Cube
Blog about the Custom Cube
Sorry for using big words, it's the only one I could think of at the time. I guess just essence could work (albeit imperfectly) in retrospect, but it's rather moot.
While this argument is steering away from strictly banlist discussion, I'd like to direct you to comments made by Brain Kibler on a comparison of the two from his perspective as a game designer.
http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/extended/21994
The fact is that it's the combination of tutoring and cheating that make SFM so good. If it was JUST tutoring, it might (and probably would) not be bankable. If it was JUST cheating out equipment, it would DEFINITELY not be bannable. It's the combination of the two that make it so potent. And Tinker is the only other comparable card that does both things.
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
That's powerful, sure, but as I (and a few others) have repetitively said, what she gets is not broken in the slightest. There is a reason that no one Tinkers for a Batterskull in vintage. It just isn't that back breaking, compared to much of the tier one decks. In a format with Melira Pod, Splinter Twin, Scapeshift, Open the Vaults, Goryo's Vengeance and Through the Breach, a turn 3 or 4 uncounterable 4/4 is just not back breaking. It's not card advantage that deals with threats or disrupts your opponent's game plan (unless that game plan is to punch your face in by turn 4), it's a moderate sized dumb creature, or a sword that takes several turns to connect. We're not talking about Demonic Tutor here, we're talking about Steelshaper's Gift. If there was an equipment that you could sac and destroy a creature, I'd be willing to argue that you can have a fairly powerful toolbox there, but as it stands, relying on being able to equip a 1/2 with a sword, especially if you cheat said sword into play, costing you another turn, doesn't sound appealing early game. She is a good late game threat. In a format so OBSESSED with the first 4 turns of the format, why is that bad, let alone ban worthy?
EDIT: On the topic of card advantage, the card advantage Stoneforge Mystic offers is only good as long as you have a creature. That's what makes Stoneforge Mystic so much worse than Tinker when it comes to finding things, and worse than say Kitchen Finks or Lingering Souls when it comes to pure card advantage. Her advantage requires either her or another creature to be in play (when it comes to the swords) or for her to stay in play long enough to cheat Batterskull into play (a whole 1 or 2 turns earlier than on curve).
Footsteps Hulk
Ascendency Combo
Restore Balance
Ad Nauseam
EDH:
Ghave Lands
Narset Combo
I'd say the fact that ones a creature and one's a spell kind of immediately breaks Kibler's argument, but moreso, it doesn't give equipment "an enormous discount"; it discounts Batterskull by 3 and The Swords by 1;
Nothing quite like Sundering Titan/Inkwell Leviathan/(insert)Steel Collosus gets put into play by Stoneforge; again the only things comparable to these cards that are equipment are things like the Kaldra-Tron or Elbrus.
She doesn't even discount Jitte (which is arguably the best thing you could tutor for with her in an unlimited cardpool)
The most 'broken' thing she does is Batterskull; she isn't the haymaker that Tinker is. She's a quick and dirty jab that might hit your chin.
The only deck in Modern (that i believe) is cold to a T3 Batterskull is Zoo; and after boarding that becomes more managable. But, Zoo is no more cold to T3 Batterskull as it is to a T3 Damnation (of a DRS, say).
Kibler is a fine player. (I honestly have no idea what games he's designed, he doesn't work at Wizards, does he? He plays competitively.) And he knows how to evaluate cards for deck building purposes. But, i think what we have in his quote is an extreme case of hyperbole. She's good and at this point in time, if legal, obviously warps white in basically the entire format. She probably doesn't deserve to be unbanned now. But, she fully deserves it once she gets more competition and a bigger cardpool to swim in.
All these pitchforks out for her blood are disconcerting. I doubt anyone has played with her beyond the Legacy or (old) Standard environment. And for those that have played her in Legacy, Modern has a pretty similar removal suite (albeit the creature removal is just as strong if thinner); Why is she fair there and not here? Modern has all the pinpoint discard, artifact hate, and just as efficient spot removal (if less of it).
Sig courtesy of DOLZero
[82/360] Custom Cube
Blog about the Custom Cube
It should be fairly obvious, she's fine in Legacy because people are doing far more powerful things in Legacy than they are in Modern. Cards like S&T, LED, Time Spiral, Reanimate aren't even available in the Modern format and thats just cards that are strictly for combo decks. Stoneforge Mystic is a good card in a sea of good cards and she sees quite a lot of play so she's probably better than merely good. But in Modern that's simply just not the case, there aren't decks like ANT or S&T that can punish you very hard for tapping out on turn two for a dude. Modern is a format that is mostly based around creature combat and card advantage, Stoneforge Mystic is CA and it helps you win creature combat with equipment and its also a body put equipment on all rolled into one package. Plus if Bloodbraid Elf, which is a far less offensive midrange value creature, is not welcome in Modern then Stoneforge Mystic certainly isn't.
yes, so lets not discuss anything any more because we have no input in what wizards decides to do.
That's the entire point of this thread...
i think when the cardpool gets bigger, BBE could come off in the future, too.
Sig courtesy of DOLZero
[82/360] Custom Cube
Blog about the Custom Cube
Oh god, here we go.
/thread
Seriously, I just want to see Bitterblossom unbanned. Cause right now, there's NOWHERE I can play a good Faeries deck besides kitchen table... I'd really love to be able to play Modern Fae.
I think Modern needs to slow down a bit, Aggro is too fast and efficient at what it does. We really need a good Tempo deck to show up, and I think that could happen with AV/Ponder off the list.
[W]FREE STONEFORGE MYSTIC and JACE THE MINDSCULPTOR[/W]
Please Visit my Alterations Page!
My Alters Sales Thread
Want a FREE Playset of Foil Baneslayer Angels?!?:
Seriously, the 2 sides can only repeat the same stance so many times. Its not who says it last, thats what will happen. Look at the pages of banter about SFM, which is essentially the same points on both sides over and over. In the end its up to Wotc, not the player base.
..and I dont, because I dont wish to play against said deck. So who is Wotc suppose to bend to?
I actually agree with you here. I do think the format needs to slow down (which is why I dont understand all the talk of unbanning kitty :-/). I just dont feel the cards are there to make it happen. Even with preordain and AV unbanned.
And another vote for slow-the-fark-down. I think the real problem with the format is that there are not enough good main-deckable answer cards in the format. The attitude is 'sideboard in the hate', but aggro doesn't have to. Take mill for example. A lot of decks have very little defense against mill. Sure, there are some great cards you can sideboard in to hose them, but you've already lost game 1 and you might lose another game because you can't find your hate in time.
But aggro doesn't have that problem. I used to play control, and now I play more aggro because aggro is a silver bullet. If you can outrace your opponent, it doesn't matter what they play. Control doesn't keep combo in check, doing 20 damage by turn 4 keeps combo in check.
Of course, unbanning AV would help, but it would only help blue (since counterspells are a silver bullet as well).
-making certain Standard cards can be played in Modern, therefore increasing their value and increasing WotC's profit margin
Things WotC does not care about:
-keeping the ban list as short as possible
-taking chances with an entire format for the benefit of a single card
-catering to play styles that newer players generally don't like and will lose them more players than it will gain
-keeping the meta balanced between archetypes/colors/whatever
-keeping cards on the secondary market cheap (available yes, but not cheap)
-keeping the meta diverse (as long as a single deck doesn't threaten the popularity of the format)
If creatures with enter the battlefield abilities that are still relevant after they are played are so broken, then why does Wizards keep making them?
How is searching for Batterskull on turn 2 and getting it into play a turn later if you have no disruption comparable to using Tinker to turn a Darksteel Relic into a Blightsteel Colossus on turn 3 and swinging for 11 points of infect damage on the next turn?
How is a turn 3 Batterskull that can be stopped by counterspells, artifact removal, mass removal, creature removal, hand disruption, and search hate more broken than a turn 3 Geist of Saint Traft that can be stopped only by hand disruption, mass removal, and counterspells? Yes, Batterskull has vigilance, can be equipped after its germ dies, and has lifelink, but Traft swings for 6 damage instead of 5, has better evasion, is harder to stop, and does not need a second card, especially a creature that is vulnerable to almost everything, to work.
If the swords are so overpowered, then why aren't they dominating Modern right now? People could build decks using Steelshaper's Gift to search for them, get them out on turn 3, and swing on turn 4. Will making them cost one less and have flash suddenly turn them into cards on the level of Bob and Goyf? Or is the omnipresent threat of counterspells keeping them out of Modern, and if they had a way to get around it they would become the best cards in the format? I really don't think that is the case.
If unbanning Stoneforge Mystic would turn every deck that runs white in Modern into a "toolbox deck" like GSZ did with green, then why isn't Steelshaper's Gift doing that? Most of the good equipment in Modern costs either 2 or 3 mana and would be easy enough to play normally. You would be able to do what you can do with SFM except for the Batterskull trick, so why hasn't anybody developed a deck that would do that yet?
If SFM making the equipment immune to counterspells is so important and is powerful enough to make SFM a threat to the entire format if it was unbanned, then what would stop the opposing player from just casting a Spell Snare on SFM if they went second or casting Remand or Mana Leak on it if they went first?
How is Wizards deciding whether to unabn SFM based on how much it is played in Legacy different than deciding Legacy's ban list based on what is played in Vintage? That is what they used to do, and they stopped doing that, so maybe they should ban and unban stuff in Modern based on how well it would work in Modern.
When I suggested unbanning SFM, I also suggested banning Batterskull. Are the swords really broken enough with SFM that even without Umezawa's Jitte and Batterskull it would still warp the format? Unlike Batterskull, they do nothing when put onto the battlefield at instant speed, so its second ability would only help them dodge counterspells (which, as I said above, would have been used on SFM if your opponent had any) and reduce the mana cost by one, which is not powerful enough to be worth a ban.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
the people who give legitimate reasons for why it should be unbanned rather than people who make arguments using personal feelings.
They aren't broken in general, only really few of them.
Bold
It is too slow like that. As an example, you have to:
1) Use gift (lets say on first turn)
2) Cast some sort of creature to attach the equipment to, maybe something with protection (like a creature with hexproof) or evasion.
3) Cast the sword.
4) Then you can equip and swing if it is reasonable. Note that you problably spent your first three turns tapped out (meaning, almost defenseless against many things).
This same scenario with mystic is:
1) Cast a relevant 1-mana card. Depending on the deck, it could be something like thoughseize, serum visions, Deathrite Shaman, or maybe some important sideboard card like relic of progenitus or pithing needle. Or hold removal like bolt, path, disfigure, or a counterspell like spell snare (which would be fairly relevant in the mirror).
2) Cast mystic. This lets you search for the equipment and it counts as the creature to be equipped if it needs to.
3) Do nothing on your turn. This lets you hold up a counterspell or removal or some protection. Put the equipment on the field if possible on the end of the oponent's turn.
4) If the equipment was successfully put on the field on the previous turn, equip then attack if it is reasonable to do so.
Comparing both scenarios, the mystic scenario is:
More consistent (because the mystic is the tutor and the creature - you don't risk not having one or the other);
Resistant (you have some way to protect yourself);
More flexible (you don't drop the equipment if you don't need/can't, you have more options on turns 1 and 3);
More abuseable (Situation: Don't equip turn 4, then resto angel in response to removal/attacks/end of turn, blink mystic and get another equipment, simultaneously giving you more card advantage, protection and another evasive creature to equip).
Not all decks play blue for that.
Thye didn't have modern data when they banned it, and they had to start the banlist based on something, which was mostly Legacy/Extended (the two formats that share much of their cardpool with modern).
The problem is not that specific play or another, which is what you seem to be focusing on. The problem is the (quite possible) deck that would be built around that play and others. Wizards did not want to risk a similar deck to cawblade (from standard) or Whatever-Blade (from Legacy) possibly dominating modern so early (and I would guess they still don't want that deck now).
My top 5 cards for unbanning consideration in order are this;
1. GGT
2. Preordain (I was really annoyed at the Sam Stoddard article where he said this was too good. I just can't imagine how it would be with storm now neutered.)
3. Bitterblossom (Faeries is doing nothing right now)
4. Ancestral Vision (Control and tempo could use a boost and would keep control more in check)
5. Wild Nacatl (Zoo is not doing any thing right now. Gruul is just seems way better right now. Only thing I hope wouldn't happen though is if both Gruul and zoo players would all just switch over to Naya. This would decrease diversity and not really be any better for the format.)