I think the issue is the decks you're suggesting would theoretically benefit from the untap trigger, but they have better cards that provide that trigger now. Elves for example would benefit far more from Snap than they ever would from this, Snap to put Visionary in my hand and untap Cradle, play Visionary, draw a card. We should discuss decks that may actually make use of the card like Reanimator, and if this would have a major impact on them or if there would be new decks that could effectively use the card. I don't think Reanimator can use this effectively because of the 3 mana requirement, but I think it could be worth testing in that deck.
So what do you guys think about Frantic Search? Obviously it would be decent in a Solidarity or High Tide deck as well as Reanimator, but I don't see them as overbearing combo decks. What do you guys think about it's necessity to remain on the ban list? What am I missing?
I think it would be close to a zero impact card. Maybe take High Tide from tier 2 to tier 1.5, but most other decks that would run a card like this (Reanimator) would not want to spend 3 mana for this effect. You can't effectively run it in non graveyard or High Tide based decks since it creates card disadvantage if you aren't using the graveyard. I'm sure some people think it would break the format somehow though based on reactions to Mind Twist and Black Vice.
Discussing it with a few other people there are other decks that would be able to utilize this.
UB Tezzeret would be able to ramp a bit with Sol lands in addition to digging for silver bullets
Elves could splash blue in order to get some fiesty mana with a Gaea's Cradle
Enchantress would probably play this since they have some big mana lands.
I personally see it being a faitly safe unban. Sure it's another addition to the color blue, but I think it would aid decks that aren't all the T1 see-all-the-time decks and would be a welcome addition to increase variety.
I would never run this in Elves (splashing blue for this over Brainstorm!?) or UB Tezzeret (what would you replace, a card advantage spell like Thirst for Knowledge?), or Enchantress (it can't afford the card disadvantage and blue is again not worth adding to the deck). You do not want the card disadvantage in those decks and this card is always card disadvantage (-1) unless you're using the graveyard. There is no graveyard recursion, it seems really bad. The only reason High Tide would run this is for the untap trigger giving mana. It's not a very useful card in most decks.
Because it triggers on itself or any dragon entering it should be 1+4+9+16=30. I think anyway.
I like the high tide idea as running brainstorm seems important along with the protection but then again mono-red rituals might be easier.
Mono-red is by far the slowest version. You should either go with a BR version and go off turn 3-4 without protection or go High Tide and go off turn 2-4 with protection. I've tested a lot of versions and High Tide is the only version I can take to a real Legacy tournament and actually win games. It still isn't a good deck though because you're taking an okay deck (High Tide) and making it worse. You do get to play Dragonstorm and win though, and that's what it is all about.
So what do you guys think about Frantic Search? Obviously it would be decent in a Solidarity or High Tide deck as well as Reanimator, but I don't see them as overbearing combo decks. What do you guys think about it's necessity to remain on the ban list? What am I missing?
I think it would be close to a zero impact card. Maybe take High Tide from tier 2 to tier 1.5, but most other decks that would run a card like this (Reanimator) would not want to spend 3 mana for this effect. You can't effectively run it in non graveyard or High Tide based decks since it creates card disadvantage if you aren't using the graveyard. I'm sure some people think it would break the format somehow though based on reactions to Mind Twist and Black Vice.
Anyone suing a major company better have a hell of a attorney, because Hasboro sure has one. Since they HAVE reprinted certain cards on the list if you had a legal reason to sue them, you could do it right now because they have already gone back on that promise a few times. The legal reason has little to nothing to do with the reason they don't go back on the promise. The major reason they wont go back on it is, they don't want be known as a company that goes back on their promises to the players. Their integrity as a company is more important to them. Almost to a fault IMO. Their promise to players is holding them back from printing what is in the best interest of the game. I am not saying reprint the power 9 and such, but even defenders of the list have to admit, which cards are on the list is pretty arbitrary. The list has failed at what it set out to do and is now a 20 year old relic of a company that has grown and evolved where others have perished.
This is exactly the case. I think a lot of people in here have a poor understanding of the legal system based around media perception and not the reality of the situation. There just isn't any evidence for a lawsuit having legal standing. I can think of far more egregious examples of broken promises with customers that occur constantly in other industries without any legal recourse (just look at how much of this happens in the video game industry).
I know people say over and over that Wizards has said they will not ban Brainstorm, but I would really like a link to a quote.
I was just going to ask for the same thing!
And I personally don't think Black Vise can come off the list.
T1 Black Vise
T2 Sink Hole
T3 Wasteland.
Boy, that sounds like fun to play against!
T1 Island
T2 City of Traitors/Lotus Petal and Island/Ancient Tomb Show and Tell
If we get to pick the cards in our hand to demonstrate how good a card is why not pick the ones that lead to you winning the game that turn?
I'm really not a fan of demonstrating some "God hand" examples as an argument against a card. There exist many "God hands" that let you win on the first turn in Legacy, but we have cards like Force of Will and other answers. I think you need to make a more convincing argument then "you could have these three cards and it would be pretty good" to justify a card staying banned.
Well the local game shops here have stopped hosting monthly legacy due to poor turn out. A lot of people I have talked to enjoy the format but outside playing with proxies cannot even come close to affording it.
Now with the analogy comparing mtg to a cruise they simply do not compare. Its about turn around, how much does it cost to run a cruise as opposed to printing a couple cards?
A lot of stores here have switched to proxy tournaments to get better turnout. I personally don't care. I own the cards but I just want more people to play, same reason I'm not bothered by the fakes and wouldn't be bothered by a mass reprint.
As someone mentioned earlier no lawyer on Earth could win any kind of case against Wizards reprinting. I'm not a legal expert, but I took a few business law classes when I got my BBA and I can't think of anyway Wizards would lose a case over reprints. It probably wouldn't even make it to court, because I doubt the plaintiffs would have standing.
7/8 is 87.5%, the link's been posted enough times, go look. Burn doesn't run REB because it doesn't really want to trade 1:1 with its opponents spells and/or permanents, it wants to burn the opponent out while ignoring what they're doing. Also Burn and Goblins are bad decks that you probably shouldn't be playing at all at this point.
I wouldn't call them "bad" decks. They're tier 2, but they certainly aren't bad.
I'm not a fan of banning Brainstorm because it is such an iconic card. I wish Wizards would stop printing the best creatures in blue. That makes no sense from either a balance or color flavor standpoint. Of all the best creatures in the format, the only one I think is distinctly blue is Clique. We've got Snapcaster, Delver of Secrets, True-Name Nemesis. All cards that could be other colors but Wizards made them blue. This is what is leading to blue's dominance. Not Brainstorm, but overpowered creatures in a color that isn't supposed to have them. Unfortunately it's too late to prevent all these creatures from being printed and it's really hard to justify a ban for them. So that means if the goal is to increase diversity (which I don't necessarily think it should be) you might end up having to ban the best blue cards, which means starting with Brainstorm. This is really unfortunate that Wizards has driven the format to this because MaRo can't follow his own precious color wheel flavor. They keep giving blue the best creatures because Standard isn't allowed to have good spells so what other option is there?
I'm not going to try to claim blue isn't the best color in Legacy, because I think that would be silly, but remember that we've seen decks that aren't blue succeed in the past (Elves, Death and Taxes, Maverick, etc.) and we could certainly see it swing that way again. Despite how amazing blue is though you almost always need to splash other colors because outside of Merfolk and Onmnitell it's very hard to make a mono-blue decks because blue is lacking some key components. Creature-wise blue is quickly approaching the best creature quality (which is crazy, but it is what it is), but you often need to supplement with white, black, green, or red to get the best creature base. You also need to splash another color to get real removal or you end up running suboptimal cards like Dismember. As long as Wizards doesn't print some amazing blue removal spell and doesn't keep printing more busted blue creatures I think we'll continue to see a large diversity of decks. It would be nice if non-blue decks could be just as competitive but the meta just isn't favorable for them right now because Wizards keeps giving blue amazing cards that make it extremely hard to justify not playing it.
I would never run this in Elves (splashing blue for this over Brainstorm!?) or UB Tezzeret (what would you replace, a card advantage spell like Thirst for Knowledge?), or Enchantress (it can't afford the card disadvantage and blue is again not worth adding to the deck). You do not want the card disadvantage in those decks and this card is always card disadvantage (-1) unless you're using the graveyard. There is no graveyard recursion, it seems really bad. The only reason High Tide would run this is for the untap trigger giving mana. It's not a very useful card in most decks.
Mono-red is by far the slowest version. You should either go with a BR version and go off turn 3-4 without protection or go High Tide and go off turn 2-4 with protection. I've tested a lot of versions and High Tide is the only version I can take to a real Legacy tournament and actually win games. It still isn't a good deck though because you're taking an okay deck (High Tide) and making it worse. You do get to play Dragonstorm and win though, and that's what it is all about.
I think it would be close to a zero impact card. Maybe take High Tide from tier 2 to tier 1.5, but most other decks that would run a card like this (Reanimator) would not want to spend 3 mana for this effect. You can't effectively run it in non graveyard or High Tide based decks since it creates card disadvantage if you aren't using the graveyard. I'm sure some people think it would break the format somehow though based on reactions to Mind Twist and Black Vice.
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/legacy-type-1-5/established-legacy/aggro/488613-burn
This is exactly the case. I think a lot of people in here have a poor understanding of the legal system based around media perception and not the reality of the situation. There just isn't any evidence for a lawsuit having legal standing. I can think of far more egregious examples of broken promises with customers that occur constantly in other industries without any legal recourse (just look at how much of this happens in the video game industry).
T1 Island
T2 City of Traitors/Lotus Petal and Island/Ancient Tomb Show and Tell
If we get to pick the cards in our hand to demonstrate how good a card is why not pick the ones that lead to you winning the game that turn?
I'm really not a fan of demonstrating some "God hand" examples as an argument against a card. There exist many "God hands" that let you win on the first turn in Legacy, but we have cards like Force of Will and other answers. I think you need to make a more convincing argument then "you could have these three cards and it would be pretty good" to justify a card staying banned.
A lot of people run a transitional sideboard into Belcher for this exact reason.
A lot of stores here have switched to proxy tournaments to get better turnout. I personally don't care. I own the cards but I just want more people to play, same reason I'm not bothered by the fakes and wouldn't be bothered by a mass reprint.
As someone mentioned earlier no lawyer on Earth could win any kind of case against Wizards reprinting. I'm not a legal expert, but I took a few business law classes when I got my BBA and I can't think of anyway Wizards would lose a case over reprints. It probably wouldn't even make it to court, because I doubt the plaintiffs would have standing.
I wouldn't call them "bad" decks. They're tier 2, but they certainly aren't bad.