T1: Goblin Guide. Attack for 2 DMG. Opponent 18 life.
T2: Keldon Marauders. 1 DMG to opponent. Attack for 2 DMG. Opponent 15 life.
T3: Insult. Attack for 10 DMG. Opponent 5 life.
T4: Keldon Marauders dies. 1 DMG to opponent. Attack for 2 DMG. Injury for 2 DMG to opponent. Opponent 0 life.
3 cards 20 dmg.
T1: Goblin Guide. Attack for 2 DMG. Opponent 18 life.
T2: Spike Jester. Attack for 5 DMG. Opponent 13 life.
T3: Insult. Attack for 10 DMG. Opponent 3 life.
Also noteworthy that paying the energy isn't a "may" ability - if you have it, you pay it.
Wait, seriously? I MUST pay for it if I can? Can I get a Judge ruling on this?
I read this as G: You get an energy counter, a creature enters the battlefield effect and a creature leaves the battlefield effect. Play this only a sorcery.
Quick question for a judge: If my opponent controls a Leonin Arbiter and casts a Path to Exile on my creature or uses Ghost Quarter's ability on my land do I still get the option to shuffle my library? Assuming I don't pay the Arbiters extra cost.
Its good that bloodbraid elf doesn't combo with eldritch evolution immediately so if it does get unbanned hitting an evolution on top wont mean bloodbraid into primeval titan or inferno titan.
They won't ban lightning bolt. Ever. This is on par with 'ban tarmogoyf because it's expensive' arguments.
If tarmogoyf starts showing up in almost half of the competitive decks I bet you they would ban it.
And no, this isn't on par with saying 'ban tarmogoyf because it is too expensive'. Its ban a card because its too oppressive.
The way in which I believe it is warping the format is makes other decks worse. A LOT of decks. In fact it makes a lot of decks completely unplayable competitively. What if in a world without Lightning Bolt there was 10 or 11 tier 1 decks? Therefore adding more diversity to the format. Wouldn't that make a better format? I think it would.
I personally don't care if anything gets unbanned. However I REALLY think (and I may be the only one) that Lightning Bolt should be banned. My reasoning for this is that it is warping the format. Statistics show that it is in 44% of all the top placing decks. The next closest most played non land card is Path to Exile at 24%. Of the seven tier 1 decks three will always play it as a 4-of (Burn, Jund, Jeskai control) and now Tron decks (also a tier 1) are running 4 bolts over sweepers like pyroclasm or firespout.
I believe that banning lightning bolt will reduce thoses decks dominance with out completely destroying them and will allow the emergence of newer architypes and a more diverse tier 1.
Thoughts?
#banlightningbolt
Banning bolt would only make linear aggressive decks like Affinity and Infect better. What decks besides those would benefit from the lack of efficient removal/reach?
This may or may not be the case. Without testing an environment there is no way to be certain. When linear aggressive decks are dominant the format changes to adapt to those strategies. I would love to see a few meta game tests in a modern where the cards banned are the current banned list + lightning bolt, (similar to the no-banned modern competitions run recently), to give validity to either my standing point that it is warping the format or to prove your standing point of it would make the other tier 1 decks too powerful and therefore dominant.
I would love to see Wizards come out and say we are banning lightning bolt to explore a modern without it, if this proves to be too much and a deck that lightning bolt was keeping in check becomes the alpha dog we will be happy to unban it at the next unbanning. I personally would love to see wizards try new things, whether successful or not, to keep the format from becoming stagnant. As long as they are upfront with the reasoning for doing so.
I personally don't care if anything gets unbanned. However I REALLY think (and I may be the only one) that Lightning Bolt should be banned. My reasoning for this is that it is warping the format. Statistics show that it is in 44% of all the top placing decks. The next closest most played non land card is Path to Exile at 24%. Of the seven tier 1 decks three will always play it as a 4-of (Burn, Jund, Jeskai control) and now Tron decks (also a tier 1) are running 4 bolts over sweepers like pyroclasm or firespout.
I believe that banning lightning bolt will reduce thoses decks dominance with out completely destroying them and will allow the emergence of newer architypes and a more diverse tier 1.
T2: Keldon Marauders. 1 DMG to opponent. Attack for 2 DMG. Opponent 15 life.
T3: Insult. Attack for 10 DMG. Opponent 5 life.
T4: Keldon Marauders dies. 1 DMG to opponent. Attack for 2 DMG. Injury for 2 DMG to opponent. Opponent 0 life.
3 cards 20 dmg.
T1: Goblin Guide. Attack for 2 DMG. Opponent 18 life.
T2: Spike Jester. Attack for 5 DMG. Opponent 13 life.
T3: Insult. Attack for 10 DMG. Opponent 3 life.
Sometimes 17 DMG is enough.
Wait, seriously? I MUST pay for it if I can? Can I get a Judge ruling on this?
I read this as
G: You get an energy counter, a creature enters the battlefield effect and a creature leaves the battlefield effect. Play this only a sorcery.
If tarmogoyf starts showing up in almost half of the competitive decks I bet you they would ban it.
And no, this isn't on par with saying 'ban tarmogoyf because it is too expensive'. Its ban a card because its too oppressive.
This may or may not be the case. Without testing an environment there is no way to be certain. When linear aggressive decks are dominant the format changes to adapt to those strategies. I would love to see a few meta game tests in a modern where the cards banned are the current banned list + lightning bolt, (similar to the no-banned modern competitions run recently), to give validity to either my standing point that it is warping the format or to prove your standing point of it would make the other tier 1 decks too powerful and therefore dominant.
I would love to see Wizards come out and say we are banning lightning bolt to explore a modern without it, if this proves to be too much and a deck that lightning bolt was keeping in check becomes the alpha dog we will be happy to unban it at the next unbanning. I personally would love to see wizards try new things, whether successful or not, to keep the format from becoming stagnant. As long as they are upfront with the reasoning for doing so.
I believe that banning lightning bolt will reduce thoses decks dominance with out completely destroying them and will allow the emergence of newer architypes and a more diverse tier 1.
Thoughts?
#banlightningbolt
T2 Double striker: Kor Duelist OR Boros Swiftblade OR Fencing Ace OR Viashino Slaughtermaster OR Warren Instigator.
T3 Sword of Feast and Famine, attack, untap, flash in another sword or aura.
Opponent has discarded two cards and you have a pro black pro green plus more double striker. GG.
Also turns swords into counterspells. Noice.
4 Kindle the Carnage
4 Blasphemous Act
4 Ragged Veins
4 Boros Reckoner
4 Hornet Nest
4 Beast Within
4 Avatar of Might
4 Lightning Bolt
20 Other lands