Most people say it will be reprinted in either M14 or Theros.
But why are you so sure that it will get reprinted in the near future AT ALL?
In my opinion this speculation only started, because people HOPE it will get reprinted, because of the current price and because it was expected to be in Modern Masters but wasn't.
But is this really an argument?
The argument is purely because it wasn't printed in Modern Masters. The stated goal of that set was to increase the quantity of big-ticket and playable Modern cards in circulation, and so far it seems like it's having the intended effect. If that was their goal, the big remaining question is why some cards would have been excluded, namely stuff like Remand, Mutavault (now in M14) and Thoughtseize, the second most expensive Modern staple. Since I believe Forsythe said one of the reasons some cards weren't in MM is because they were already slated for another future expansion, people are thinking that's the only reason Thoughtseize may have been skipped.
It's not an oppressive card or a mistake, it's easy to understand, and the 2 life vs. 1 mana (compared to Despise) isn't an obvious advantage unless you're an immediate or advanced player. So it's a skill-tester, and WotC has spoken before about liking to print those types of cards in core sets.
I am slowly selling off the remainder of my spare paper collection and moving my play almost entirely to online. There isn't a big play community here, and between real life and my job it's nearly impossible for me to devote an entire evening to hanging out in a card store. And the fact that there are games firing all the time actually increases the level of competition, so you'll find yourself getting a lot better than you might otherwise.
Disclaimer: The interface is absolutely terrible, and the beta client isn't any better. I don't think anyone who plays for any amount of time likes it.
I don't think he is suggesting that a land such as this should exist. Instead he is asking:
If you could build a deck without mana base restrictions (aka, every game you would have perfect mana), would this allow new archetypes to exist, or would this only improve current archetypes?
Well then what the hell, why not just ask that instead of making it so convoluted.
Answer still the same, though; between fetches and shocks, it's already not hard to get all 5 basic land types by turn 3. Modern Tribal Zoo is basically built around that idea. I think you'd see a lot more high-colour requirements being played (i.e. Cryptic Command will find a place in UWR, which usually can't support it), but any decks that actively want to run 5 colours already are.
Immune to Wasteland? Check.
Works with basic-land fetching? Check.
Fixes all mana forever? Check.
This would be the best land ever printed and every single deck would run 4x of this in every format. But I don't think there are any decks that don't already exist that would suddenly work because of this. Between fetches and shocks it's entirely possible to run 5-colour aggro or control already, and there's nothing to build around with this card unless there's some way to utterly break it.
if a tron land like urza's tower is enchanted by something like evil presence , the others tron lands produce only one mana
This is incorrect. Evil Presence changes the land's type and abilities, but it doesn't change the name of the card, which is what the Urza lands care about. So the [card]Urza's Tower[/b] will produce B, but the other Tron lands will still produce 2 if all three are in play.
T1 and T2: Ramp
T3: Wheel of Sun and Moon
T4: Doubling Season
T5: Jace, Architect of Thought. Ultimate him, fetching your opponent's spell and another Jace, Architect of Thought. Infinite Jace loop until you have your opponent's entire deck.
I boarded Rule of Law in against so many other decks that I'd be happy to keep Ethersworn Canonist in the board if she was already there. Good against bogles, infect, and anything with Snapcaster, which is likely to be a lot now.
Agreeableness with the banning method of the format thus far: 4
Question 1: As opposed to Standard (played everywhere) and Legacy (highly varied by region due to card availability), the Modern scene seems to take hold in areas of the world that have hosted large Modern events. Toronto alone has 2-3 stores running regular events ever since the GP here in December. Is this dynamic something that you take into account when making the Grand Prix schedule? Do you think hosting large Modern events will encourage the format's growth, or are you expecting most of the drive to come from local stores that pull Modern events to them?
Question 2: Because Modern is a non-rotating format, it seems likely that as time goes on, more and more cards will be printed that enable Turn 3 or faster combos. With the stated goals of Modern, this would appear to lead to an increasingly large banlist containing combo pieces. How do you (Wizards) feel about the community perception of the banned list being not only a one-way street, but an ever-growing one?
I wanted a high power level, non-rotating format that I can play on a regular basis, so as far as I'm concerned Wizards is knocking it out of the park. My city had a Modern GP last year so now we have at least two stores who run weekly/bi-weekly Modern events, one of which is for free! Perfect!
I'd also like the banlist to focus on actually broken/overpowered cards, instead of cards that claim to "reduce deck variability." I'm hoping that stuff like GSZ, Chrome Mox, Bitterblossom, Grave Troll, and Nacatl get unbanned once the format evolves to make them "handle-able."
Your hopes are contradictory.
A modern with stronger more dominant decks (more akin to legacy) would provide the one deck, minor refinement you seek.
a weaker modern, makes it more likely to be affected by something released in standard.
the larger gap between the power levels in standard and modern will make it less likely for standard cards to immediately imact modern. a smaller gap will make it so you do have to retool every few months. the only way yo have that larger gap is to have those dominant stronger decks.
the stability you seek will never occur in a weaker meta.
I'm not suggesting 'weakening' the Modern card pool so that new sets always impact it. If I have my deck tuned to my local metagame, then as my metagame shifts, I tweak my deck to stay competitive while everyone else does the same thing. If there is a single deck that has a strong enough matchup that it breaks that cycle, slowly everyone will drift towards playing that deck, and the metagame becomes inbred with a bunch of decks tuned to beat their own mirrors.
I think it's possible to strike a balance between allowing powerful decks to exist in the format without any single deck being so powerful that it crowds out everything else. Having a deck that's "bad against Jund" shouldn't make it a bad deck overall, but that's the state Modern has been in for a while.
A rehashing of standards greatest hits is exactly WHY we play modern.
we do it because we miss the glory years of our favorite decks from the past, and how much better they could have been if you could add this card from 2 years ago, and this card from 3 years ago.
Modern should be all the best decks of the recent past in their best form, competing for top dog.
It may be why you play Modern, but it isn't why I play Modern! I play modern to play a dynamic format with a wide variety of decks, where I don't need to be constantly rebuilding my deck every 3 months based on the new set. I like the idea of Legacy players having one deck that they are constantly refining and tweaking to the shifting metagame, and I hope Modern can reach that point.
Jund isn't dead because of this, and neither is Storm. They just have to adapt to the metagame along with the rest of us.
Add to that CAW Blade, Valakut Scapeshift, Hypergenesis, Affinity, Faeries, Sensei's Top/Counterbalance... thats 11 tier 1 decks, with many more tier 1.5, 2.0
That looks like a fairly even rounded balanced meta to me...
Maybe we need to start a new format of magic...
Well call it "Nostalgia: All the good **** banned from modern"
This already exists; it's called Legacy.
Editing for clarification: As time goes on, Legacy decks are using more and more Modern-legal cards simply because of the power creep that's been happening since the game's creation. If they unbanned BBE, JTMS, Stoneforge, Bitterblossom, artifact lands, Sensei's Top, and so on, you'd end up with barely any difference between the Modern and Legacy metagames; the only difference would be that one used duals and the other doesn't. Now you can argue that that's a good thing since the Legacy metagame clearly isn't bad, and Wizards still bans cards that are way broken (i.e. Hermit Druid), but I think part of the appeal of Modern is specifically that it isn't Legacy and it has its own nuances.
Hell, how many people would pay hundreds of dollars for duals if they could play their favourite Legacy decks in Modern nearly unchanged? Unbanning too much in Modern would kill Legacy far more effectively than banning too much.
Matt Kranstuber made an interesting point about the modern bannings (that he got from someone else), that at the outset of the format Wizards banned key cards behind all of the 'oppressive' decks from their respective Standard formats... except for Jund. Take a look:
A lot of dredge players will choose to draw if they get to, then play nothing and discard the highest dredger in their opening hand on turn 1. Say I bin an unbanned Grave Troll.
Now, turn 2, I can dredge 6 to get at least one more Dredger in the yard, hopefully cast Faithless Looting to bin even more, then discard my original dredgers. The more Narcomebas and Bridges from Below I hit, the better. If that Faithless Looting was a Dangerous Wager, I'm even better off. If I can flashback Dread Return a Flame-Kin Zealot to haste up my new zombie army, I'm practically playing Legacy dredge already.
I think Grave-Troll can be unbanned, but keeping Dread Return banned forces a potential Dredge player to get a bit more creative about their win condition, which is probably a good thing.
You can do the math and it will show you that ritual storm is dead, but that would not suit your arguments, so you won't do it right?
I'm also still wating for the various persons claiming that storm regulary won on T3 to back up their claims, with something.
I did the opposite in the old thread and i can dig it up if there is need for it, i'm just curious to see someone argue the opposite with some valid reasons.
What math, exactly? I used to play Storm and have played against Storm often online, and I have personally witnessed it go off on turn 3 numerous times, even with mediocre hands. If you see a person dump all their spells, flash them all back, then brick, that's not a fault of the deck. That's the person being a bad Storm player. It requires the same kind of head for statistics and probability as Eggs, except with slightly less bookkeeping.
I'd love to see a mathematical argument for "Ritual Storm is dead" only two days after the bans were announced, and 2 days before the bannings even take place. All that will happen is that Storm will become a little bit slower and probably a little bit more resilient.
U jelly?
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=517045
The argument is purely because it wasn't printed in Modern Masters. The stated goal of that set was to increase the quantity of big-ticket and playable Modern cards in circulation, and so far it seems like it's having the intended effect. If that was their goal, the big remaining question is why some cards would have been excluded, namely stuff like Remand, Mutavault (now in M14) and Thoughtseize, the second most expensive Modern staple. Since I believe Forsythe said one of the reasons some cards weren't in MM is because they were already slated for another future expansion, people are thinking that's the only reason Thoughtseize may have been skipped.
It's not an oppressive card or a mistake, it's easy to understand, and the 2 life vs. 1 mana (compared to Despise) isn't an obvious advantage unless you're an immediate or advanced player. So it's a skill-tester, and WotC has spoken before about liking to print those types of cards in core sets.
Disclaimer: The interface is absolutely terrible, and the beta client isn't any better. I don't think anyone who plays for any amount of time likes it.
Well then what the hell, why not just ask that instead of making it so convoluted.
Answer still the same, though; between fetches and shocks, it's already not hard to get all 5 basic land types by turn 3. Modern Tribal Zoo is basically built around that idea. I think you'd see a lot more high-colour requirements being played (i.e. Cryptic Command will find a place in UWR, which usually can't support it), but any decks that actively want to run 5 colours already are.
Works with basic-land fetching? Check.
Fixes all mana forever? Check.
This would be the best land ever printed and every single deck would run 4x of this in every format. But I don't think there are any decks that don't already exist that would suddenly work because of this. Between fetches and shocks it's entirely possible to run 5-colour aggro or control already, and there's nothing to build around with this card unless there's some way to utterly break it.
This is incorrect. Evil Presence changes the land's type and abilities, but it doesn't change the name of the card, which is what the Urza lands care about. So the [card]Urza's Tower[/b] will produce B, but the other Tron lands will still produce 2 if all three are in play.
T3: Wheel of Sun and Moon
T4: Doubling Season
T5: Jace, Architect of Thought. Ultimate him, fetching your opponent's spell and another Jace, Architect of Thought. Infinite Jace loop until you have your opponent's entire deck.
I WANT TO BELIEVE
Agreeableness with the banning method of the format thus far: 4
Question 1: As opposed to Standard (played everywhere) and Legacy (highly varied by region due to card availability), the Modern scene seems to take hold in areas of the world that have hosted large Modern events. Toronto alone has 2-3 stores running regular events ever since the GP here in December. Is this dynamic something that you take into account when making the Grand Prix schedule? Do you think hosting large Modern events will encourage the format's growth, or are you expecting most of the drive to come from local stores that pull Modern events to them?
Question 2: Because Modern is a non-rotating format, it seems likely that as time goes on, more and more cards will be printed that enable Turn 3 or faster combos. With the stated goals of Modern, this would appear to lead to an increasingly large banlist containing combo pieces. How do you (Wizards) feel about the community perception of the banned list being not only a one-way street, but an ever-growing one?
I'd also like the banlist to focus on actually broken/overpowered cards, instead of cards that claim to "reduce deck variability." I'm hoping that stuff like GSZ, Chrome Mox, Bitterblossom, Grave Troll, and Nacatl get unbanned once the format evolves to make them "handle-able."
I'm not suggesting 'weakening' the Modern card pool so that new sets always impact it. If I have my deck tuned to my local metagame, then as my metagame shifts, I tweak my deck to stay competitive while everyone else does the same thing. If there is a single deck that has a strong enough matchup that it breaks that cycle, slowly everyone will drift towards playing that deck, and the metagame becomes inbred with a bunch of decks tuned to beat their own mirrors.
I think it's possible to strike a balance between allowing powerful decks to exist in the format without any single deck being so powerful that it crowds out everything else. Having a deck that's "bad against Jund" shouldn't make it a bad deck overall, but that's the state Modern has been in for a while.
It may be why you play Modern, but it isn't why I play Modern! I play modern to play a dynamic format with a wide variety of decks, where I don't need to be constantly rebuilding my deck every 3 months based on the new set. I like the idea of Legacy players having one deck that they are constantly refining and tweaking to the shifting metagame, and I hope Modern can reach that point.
Jund isn't dead because of this, and neither is Storm. They just have to adapt to the metagame along with the rest of us.
This already exists; it's called Legacy.
Editing for clarification: As time goes on, Legacy decks are using more and more Modern-legal cards simply because of the power creep that's been happening since the game's creation. If they unbanned BBE, JTMS, Stoneforge, Bitterblossom, artifact lands, Sensei's Top, and so on, you'd end up with barely any difference between the Modern and Legacy metagames; the only difference would be that one used duals and the other doesn't. Now you can argue that that's a good thing since the Legacy metagame clearly isn't bad, and Wizards still bans cards that are way broken (i.e. Hermit Druid), but I think part of the appeal of Modern is specifically that it isn't Legacy and it has its own nuances.
Hell, how many people would pay hundreds of dollars for duals if they could play their favourite Legacy decks in Modern nearly unchanged? Unbanning too much in Modern would kill Legacy far more effectively than banning too much.
Matt Kranstuber made an interesting point about the modern bannings (that he got from someone else), that at the outset of the format Wizards banned key cards behind all of the 'oppressive' decks from their respective Standard formats... except for Jund. Take a look:
Mirrodin & Kamigawa: Artifact Lands banned
Kamigawa & Ravnica: Jitte banned
Lorwyn & Alara: Faeries: Bitterblossom banned
Alara & Zendikar: Jund, nothing banned
Zendikar & Scars: Caw-blade, Jace and Stoneforge banned
Scars & Innistrad: Delver, Ponder & Preordain banned
If anything, banning BBE brings the list more inline with what Wizards said they didn't want (a re-hashing of Standard's greatest hits).
Now, turn 2, I can dredge 6 to get at least one more Dredger in the yard, hopefully cast Faithless Looting to bin even more, then discard my original dredgers. The more Narcomebas and Bridges from Below I hit, the better. If that Faithless Looting was a Dangerous Wager, I'm even better off. If I can flashback Dread Return a Flame-Kin Zealot to haste up my new zombie army, I'm practically playing Legacy dredge already.
I think Grave-Troll can be unbanned, but keeping Dread Return banned forces a potential Dredge player to get a bit more creative about their win condition, which is probably a good thing.
What math, exactly? I used to play Storm and have played against Storm often online, and I have personally witnessed it go off on turn 3 numerous times, even with mediocre hands. If you see a person dump all their spells, flash them all back, then brick, that's not a fault of the deck. That's the person being a bad Storm player. It requires the same kind of head for statistics and probability as Eggs, except with slightly less bookkeeping.
I'd love to see a mathematical argument for "Ritual Storm is dead" only two days after the bans were announced, and 2 days before the bannings even take place. All that will happen is that Storm will become a little bit slower and probably a little bit more resilient.