In TCC's interview with Gavin Verhey today, the question came up about designing and inserting Modern cards in supplemental products bypassing Standard; apparently it's something we shouldn't expect in the near future. Nice to get a confirmation one way or the other, at least. Maybe the poll didn't go so well?
We at least know that they are warm enough to the idea to ask about it, so it's a bit disappointing to know nothing like this is coming soon. On the other hand, if we do get such a set, it's nice to know they don't want to rush it either.
The term "near future" has had an incredibly squishy meaning from WotC. They often backtrack and change their minds, or use the term to play a game of misdirection.
I'm not saying we'll get non-Standard Modern cards any time soon (or at all). But let's consider the source.
I'm quoting this now for relevancy. If you watch that TCC interview with Gavin Verhey (skip to 48:18), his phrasing regarding direct-to-Modern cards is reflective of the effort and considerations to make such a set correctly. I initially inferred from that a sense of reservation, but Gavin is a very good communicator; note earlier in the interview how effortlessly he dances around directly mentioning monetary value when addressing secondary market concerns of aggressive reprints. We know, of course, that he won't directly acknowledge the secondary market's financial value as an influence, but it's how smoothly he was able to address very real concerns while avoiding this that made me take notice on a rewatch.
Now watch the relevant section at 48:18 again, and pay attention to what he says, how he says it, and even the look on his face as he begins to answer that question. It feels more to me as if he's describing something familiar than imagined, if that makes sense. I think he did a good job of sowing just enough apprehension to give us a reason to doubt this is around the corner. Of course, my own biases are probably playing into this, so go study it and see what you think.
The point is, with Blake's hint during the Prof's Fact or Fiction for a Modern-relevant product announcement by the end of this month, as well as these posts from MaRo about how said product will "impact" Modern and how he will be floored if we don't love it...I'd be amazed if it's not the new-to-Modern supplemental set (with enemy fetchlands for good measure). If it is, well, good job Gavin for throwing us off a bit
What I'm trying to say is that trying to serve two masters risks pleasing neither
i'd agree with what you're saying, except there was a recent fairly extensive interview with Gavin Verhey (the 'architect' of many MTG products) and he specifically said that with the removal of Masters sets, they'll be ramping up Modern reprints in ancillary products as their main avenue of servicing the format.
he also noted emphatically that the recent iteration of Commander precons didn't sit well with consumers because of the lack of meaningful reprints, so he said they were going to increase the inclusion of meaningful reprints in commander products.
both these things said in the same interview, and you get a pretty clear picture. It's more likely now that we'll have some decent Modern reprints in these ancillary products than ever before. fetchlands? sure, why not.
(oh and WotC keeps reminding us that it apparently "doesn't consider the secondary market value of cards" when creating products... I guess with their recent challenger decks they have shown to us that they are actually willing to put their methods into practice by including multiple valuable cards in an affordable package. They may continue this widely appreciated attitude with upcoming Commander decks)
In the same interview you're referencing, Gavin specifically stated that fetchlands aren't a good fit for the Commander preconstructed decks. Other ancillary products, sure, because we need them and there's money to be had, but not Commander products.
Didn't Gavin specifically state that Commander precons weren't the right vehicle for fetchland reprints when asked about it by the Prof in the interview?
I'm most of the way with you on your thought processes, k0no. I too prefer five Forests main, especially since I don't feel Crucible is currently worth a slot where I am playing. A one-shot of Horizon Canopy without Crucible just doesn't seem worth the trade-off, especially with Burn looking to be more popular with Skewer in the short term.
There is enough Affinity (both HS and EF) locally for me to not like All is Dust much, but I still hang on to a pair just in case things switch up. I use a third TKS instead of the second Grafdigger's Cage, and my last two slots go to the pair of Wails until I'm sure I can handle faster decks with sorceries and cheap creatures without them.
Nothing looks particularly good from RNA for us, but that's not surprising with a deck like this. It's honestly a bit refreshing to not have a handful of new hate cards to deal with. On the other hand, if Burn ticks up, we need to be prepared.
I'm extremely glad to hear that this product won't ever be released, or that the likelihood of such a product is slim at best.
Whenever cards are "designed" for formats, you get garbage in Legacy like Leovold, Emissary of Trest and True-Name Nemesis.
I absolutely agree with you that TNN and Leovold were design mistakes, and Wizards seems to think so as well:
There was a time at the very beginning [of Commander] when we did make cards like Flusterstorm and Scavenging Ooze to create some Legacy shots and to make the product more appealing. [...] But what we've found is that Commander players don't usually want cards like this (Flusterstorm is an...unusual fit in most Commander decks, to say the least), and that when these cards do hit, it's often because they're incredibly powerful—which usually means they're not the most fun cards. (I'm looking at you, True-Name Nemesis.) Legacy players don't generally want cards like True-Name Nemesis that are unfun in one-on-one added to their formats, anyway. (Which is probably true of most players for most formats!)
Now, when we're designing Commander sets, we try to be very careful when thinking about cards for Eternal formats. Play Design does careful passes to try and make sure everything is safe for Legacy and Vintage. And if we do think there's any chance that a card might show up in Legacy or Vintage, we try to make it something reactive rather than proactive. Those cards have a much lower chance of being an issue; Flusterstorm answers a problem, whereas True-Name Nemesis causes one.
So it seems like they focus on not jamming proactive cards into the eternal formats now, and for the most part that's worked out alright, especially since Play Design has been involved. Two busted cards in three years from supplemental products not designed to target one single format (and prior to a team specifically established to filter such elements out, most recently three years ago) seems like such things are more the exception and not the rule.
Personally, I'd be very excited to see what these teams could come up with when Modern is the focus. I certainly don't want this hypothetical format to overhaul the format, like you, but I believe that good reactive cards and tools for new or underrepresented strategies would be very welcome. They also don't need to make hundreds of brand new cards; existing cards are relatively easier to predict, and there are always current Modern cards in dire need of reprinting. The mix of all of these things could definitely make for a very nice Modern product with time and good people working it, don't you think?
Yeah; his real focus seemed to be on how much more development and testing it would take than a typical ancillary/supplemental product. So not only would they be afraid of unbalancing the format, but the costs would be greater (something several people here pointed out as likely).
I still think the idea is on the table since they were polling about it, and I would love to see what Play Design in particular could come up with. But yeah, if this ever does happen, it will certainly be awhile.
So let's say that Wizards is warm enough to the idea to consider the possiblity, and is looking to reprint older cards into Modern. There are basically three broad categories of cards to choose from:
1. Cards that define eternal formats (Brainstorm, Hymn to Tourach, Force of Will, Daze, Price of Progress, Wasteland)
2. Cards that don't define eternal formats, but are overpowered for Standard, use obscure/obsolete keywords or mechanics, or don't fit current design or color pie philosophies (three-mana land destruction, Shroud, old-style lords or Slivers that also affect opponents' creatures, Regeneration, Astral Slide)
3. Cards that don't fit into either of the categories above, but just haven't been reprinted in a Standard-legal set (Undermine, Prohibit, Terravore)
Group 1 cards are off-limits, as they are the highest risk options to nuke the format. Some Group 3 cards would be okay, but Wizards will save a lot of these to generate excitement in Standard sets for fans of Modern. This leaves Group 2 as the most likely group to get attention for such a set. There are so many cards that fit into this section that Wizards could do sets like this for years and not exhaust the options; underrepresented decks and strategies, tribal boosts, and better answers could all be addressed in a set like this. Heck, even as a Tron player, I'd be thrilled to see cards like Pillage, Vindicate, Recoil, and/or Temporal Spring be Modern legal, and that's just one specific subset of cards.
In TCC's interview with Gavin Verhey today, the question came up about designing and inserting Modern cards in supplemental products bypassing Standard; apparently it's something we shouldn't expect in the near future. Nice to get a confirmation one way or the other, at least. Maybe the poll didn't go so well?
We at least know that they are warm enough to the idea to ask about it, so it's a bit disappointing to know nothing like this is coming soon. On the other hand, if we do get such a set, it's nice to know they don't want to rush it either.
I'm liking Warping Wail a bit more as a sideboard choice going forward:
-With KCI banned, there's a chance TitanShift sees more play, since that bad matchup is now gone.
-With RNA bringing Skewer the Critics, we're also likely to see an up-tick in Burn, and those lists will have a higher sorcery count accordingly.
-Electrodominance will be experimented with early, and most of the suspend spells people will be abusing are sorceries (AV, Wheel of Fate, Restore Balance).
-It can go from relevant to total blowout against several popular decks, and in many matches where we're unfavored. Storm, Dredge, Infect, Living End, and most Company builds come to mind, and this is far from a comprehensive list.
The Duelists' Convocation International (DCI) announces the
elimination of the official Standard (Type II) Restricted List,
effective January 1, 1997. Henceforth, only the Banned List will
affect Standard tournament-deck construction (in addition to the
existing DCI Standard Floor Rules). Cards that currently appear on the
Standard Restricted List and that remain in the tournament environment
after the departure of Fallen Empires and Ice Age on January 1, 1997,
will be moved to the Standard (Type II) Banned List.
Therefore, on January 1, 1997, the official Banned List for sanctioned
Standard (Type II) tournaments will appear as follows:
2.3.2 The Banned List for Standard (Type II) tournaments:
?Any card not specifically permitted by rule 2.3
?Any ante card contained in any newly released card set
?Balance
?Black Vise
?Bronze Tablet
?Channel
?Ivory Tower
?Jeweled Bird
?Land Tax
?Mind Twist
?Rebirth
?Strip Mine
?Tempest Efreet
?Timmerian Fiends (HM)
The DCI realizes that this change will significantly alter deck
construction and playing strategies in the Standard tournament
environment. However, we believe there are sufficiently compelling
reasons to support this decision.
The 1995 - 96 tournament season demonstrated that restricted cards,
despite being limited to one per deck by card title, frequently
decided the outcome of duels and matches. The ability to swing a duel
or match by drawing or otherwise playing a restricted card introduces
a much higher element of chance into the tournament environment than
is appropriate for an intellectual sport. Eliminating the Restricted
List reduces the randomness factor.
Moreover, the restriction of powerful cards creates a significant
problem in ongoing card design. By way of example, consider the Tutors
in Mirage : Their effectiveness is greatly enhanced by their ability
to retrieve restricted cards from a player's library. Eliminating the
Restricted List creates fewer card design limitations.
While banning or restricting cards is never taken lightly, the absence
of a Restricted List clearly means that DCI must exercise even greater
care when making future decisions.
The DCI hopes you understand the need for this alteration to the
Standard tournament environment.
Sincerely,
Jason Carl
Director, DCI
From way back, but still relevant for the bolded portion added for emphasis above. There will never be another restricted list for competitive formats (outside of Vintage), and for good reason.
I used to be against the idea of Pernicious Deed being Modern legal despite loving the card because of the fact that it might keep fast aggro down. Really though, isn't midrange supposed to chew up aggro? Deed would be like a slightly more expensive Wrath, with the upsides of versatility and instant-speed activation. It's hard to imagine decks like Humans, Spirits, or Phoenix falling off due to GBx getting Deed. It can hit manlands, but misses planeswalkers, so all sorts of interesting and skill-testing lines could come about by having it.
Pillage and Vindicate would be nice for the format, and there's little risk in three mana one-for-one sorceries breaking anything (and I say this as someone who primarily plays Tron). Similarly, I'm all for Innocent Blood and Curfew as fun early tools with some unique applications.
Anyone advocating for multiple bans across differing archetypes to "improve the format" is delusional, and should be disregarded from any constructive discussion about format health. Seriously, this should be infraction worthy.
Back to the subject of KCI...it wins way over rate compared to everything else in the format, and all signs point to it becoming more played, not less. It manages this in the face of multiple early hate cards. Further committing to keeping the deck in check through deck and card selection is going to warp the format. It's going to take a ban soon, possibly in the next announcement. I do hope that they unban a card or two at the same time to reduce the sting, but the writing is on the wall for the deck at this point.
You don't insert a problematic deck to (try and) fix a problem in a format.
That assumes that the deck a) was actually problematic when it was banned; a point of controversy that has been discussed for three years, and b) would still be problematic today, in a considerably faster and more powerful format, in which it got no meaningful upgrades.
Both of those are very strong assumptions to make.
It's not a strong assumption that Wizards thought it was problematic, according to the Splinter Twin ban announcement:
We also look for decks that hold a large enough percentage of the competitive field to reduce the diversity of the format.
Antonio Del Moral León won Pro Tour Fate Reforged playing Splinter Twin, and Jelger Wiegersma finished third; Splinter Twin has won two of the four Modern Pro Tours. Splinter Twin reached the Top 8 of the last six Modern Grand Prix. The last Modern Grand Prix in Pittsburgh had three Splinter Twin decks in the Top 8, including Alex Bianchi's winning deck.
Decks that are this strong can hurt diversity by pushing the decks that it defeats out of competition. They can also reduce diversity by supplanting similar decks. For instance, Shaun McLaren won Pro Tour Born of the Gods playing this Jeskai control deck. Alex Bianchi won our most recent Modern Grand Prix playing a similar deck but adding the Splinter Twin combination. Similarly, Temur Tempo used to see play at high-level events but has been supplanted by Temur Twin.
We considered what one would do with the cards from a Splinter Twin deck with Splinter Twin banned. In the case of some Jeskai or Temur, there are very similar decks to build. In other cases, there is Kiki-Jiki as a replacement.
In the interest of competitive diversity, Splinter Twin is banned from Modern.
So however we feel about it now, it checked enough boxes for Wizards to ban it, and the main point in bold above was that it was powerful enough to stymie format diversity.
As far as being more powerful today? I highly doubt it, honestly, though I don't feel it's as safe as some of the other options we have, especially SFM (which would barely put a dent in the format at this point). Opt is a definite pick-up, and a horde of maybes are available depending on the splash, but it's hard to imagine Twin dominating the format when decks like Izzet Phoenix, GDS, and Azorius Control are doing well.
As a Gx Tron player, I would be very excited for Twin to return. Some of my most memorable matches over the years were against Twin decks, and it would help keep a lot of the decks that give mine issues in check. That bias aside, however, I recognize that Twin decks run the risk of cannibalizing most other combo decks, especially if KCI gets a piece banned. Because of this, I'm skeptical Wizards would feel that they would get more out of letting Twin be legal in the format again. Most of the cards that comprise the deck already have good equity save for the namesake card itself, and you'd be risking value of card in decks like Ad Nauseam, Storm, and all sorts of other decks in the exchange.
I'm still of the opinion that says Ancient Stirrings should go, not KCI.
It would be sad to see an entire archetype disappear when it can be reigned in instead by reducing its consistency.
If the deck presents logistical issues, and only if, then I would advocate KCI itself as the correct target.
But if this is not the case, and it is just too consistent at assembling the combo, then I would suggest Stirrings instead, which eliminates no entire archetypes but reduces the consistency of various hated archetypes such as Lantern, Tron, Amulet, and KCI simultaneously. Just as Ponder and Preordain went away to reduce the consistency of a large swath of blue/red combo decks, I think this would be the correct option.
KCI won on camera several times without even casting Stirrings to go off this weekend, and it did so quickly and through multiple hate cards. Banning something that isn't pushing anything else over the curve is not a good idea, as you risk not hitting KCI hard enough, while punishing other decks that, while potent, aren't dominating the format. This directly risks equity in all of the affected decks (and no; Gx Tron wouldn't be competitively viable with Oath of Nissa instead) as well as a much broader hit to format confidence. If something from KCI is going to get banned (which looks increasingly probable), it needs to be something that targets KCI specifically.
Proposing bans on Ancient Stirrings or Faithless Looting at this point in time makes absolutely no sense because the equity and confidence risks are far too great. And, once again, it is disingenuous to group entirely different archetypes together for the purpose of ban assessment of a card they happen to share. If you can't accept the fact that decks like Tron, Lantern, and Hardened Scales are reasonable format inclusions, that's your problem, not everyone else's. Driving the false narrative that Ponder and Preordain being banned necessitates Stirrings or Looting to be banned for being better versions isn't productive, and Wizards isn't going to act on it, so you need to get used to it.
That is truly horrible. Time for a KCI or Trawler ban. I may try to put a blog post together this week condensing all the reasons, but it boils down to GP prevalence, MWP, potential (buy unproven) logistical issues, and negative play patterns that are widely disliked.
It's clear from the results of recent Grands Prix that the KCI deck is the problem, not just anything with Stirrings in it. Anyone advocating for a Stirrings or Looting ban at this point is just clueless.
Now watch the relevant section at 48:18 again, and pay attention to what he says, how he says it, and even the look on his face as he begins to answer that question. It feels more to me as if he's describing something familiar than imagined, if that makes sense. I think he did a good job of sowing just enough apprehension to give us a reason to doubt this is around the corner. Of course, my own biases are probably playing into this, so go study it and see what you think.
The point is, with Blake's hint during the Prof's Fact or Fiction for a Modern-relevant product announcement by the end of this month, as well as these posts from MaRo about how said product will "impact" Modern and how he will be floored if we don't love it...I'd be amazed if it's not the new-to-Modern supplemental set (with enemy fetchlands for good measure). If it is, well, good job Gavin for throwing us off a bit
There is enough Affinity (both HS and EF) locally for me to not like All is Dust much, but I still hang on to a pair just in case things switch up. I use a third TKS instead of the second Grafdigger's Cage, and my last two slots go to the pair of Wails until I'm sure I can handle faster decks with sorceries and cheap creatures without them.
Nothing looks particularly good from RNA for us, but that's not surprising with a deck like this. It's honestly a bit refreshing to not have a handful of new hate cards to deal with. On the other hand, if Burn ticks up, we need to be prepared.
So it seems like they focus on not jamming proactive cards into the eternal formats now, and for the most part that's worked out alright, especially since Play Design has been involved. Two busted cards in three years from supplemental products not designed to target one single format (and prior to a team specifically established to filter such elements out, most recently three years ago) seems like such things are more the exception and not the rule.
Personally, I'd be very excited to see what these teams could come up with when Modern is the focus. I certainly don't want this hypothetical format to overhaul the format, like you, but I believe that good reactive cards and tools for new or underrepresented strategies would be very welcome. They also don't need to make hundreds of brand new cards; existing cards are relatively easier to predict, and there are always current Modern cards in dire need of reprinting. The mix of all of these things could definitely make for a very nice Modern product with time and good people working it, don't you think?
I still think the idea is on the table since they were polling about it, and I would love to see what Play Design in particular could come up with. But yeah, if this ever does happen, it will certainly be awhile.
So let's say that Wizards is warm enough to the idea to consider the possiblity, and is looking to reprint older cards into Modern. There are basically three broad categories of cards to choose from:
1. Cards that define eternal formats (Brainstorm, Hymn to Tourach, Force of Will, Daze, Price of Progress, Wasteland)
2. Cards that don't define eternal formats, but are overpowered for Standard, use obscure/obsolete keywords or mechanics, or don't fit current design or color pie philosophies (three-mana land destruction, Shroud, old-style lords or Slivers that also affect opponents' creatures, Regeneration, Astral Slide)
3. Cards that don't fit into either of the categories above, but just haven't been reprinted in a Standard-legal set (Undermine, Prohibit, Terravore)
Group 1 cards are off-limits, as they are the highest risk options to nuke the format. Some Group 3 cards would be okay, but Wizards will save a lot of these to generate excitement in Standard sets for fans of Modern. This leaves Group 2 as the most likely group to get attention for such a set. There are so many cards that fit into this section that Wizards could do sets like this for years and not exhaust the options; underrepresented decks and strategies, tribal boosts, and better answers could all be addressed in a set like this. Heck, even as a Tron player, I'd be thrilled to see cards like Pillage, Vindicate, Recoil, and/or Temporal Spring be Modern legal, and that's just one specific subset of cards.
We at least know that they are warm enough to the idea to ask about it, so it's a bit disappointing to know nothing like this is coming soon. On the other hand, if we do get such a set, it's nice to know they don't want to rush it either.
-With KCI banned, there's a chance TitanShift sees more play, since that bad matchup is now gone.
-With RNA bringing Skewer the Critics, we're also likely to see an up-tick in Burn, and those lists will have a higher sorcery count accordingly.
-Electrodominance will be experimented with early, and most of the suspend spells people will be abusing are sorceries (AV, Wheel of Fate, Restore Balance).
-It can go from relevant to total blowout against several popular decks, and in many matches where we're unfavored. Storm, Dredge, Infect, Living End, and most Company builds come to mind, and this is far from a comprehensive list.
From way back, but still relevant for the bolded portion added for emphasis above. There will never be another restricted list for competitive formats (outside of Vintage), and for good reason.
Pillage and Vindicate would be nice for the format, and there's little risk in three mana one-for-one sorceries breaking anything (and I say this as someone who primarily plays Tron). Similarly, I'm all for Innocent Blood and Curfew as fun early tools with some unique applications.
What sounds bad? Force of Will, Daze, Stifle, Misdirection, Wasteland, Dust Bowl, Price of Progress, Hymn to Tourach, and any old school Ritual effects (especially from artifact sources). All of these cards are very high risk, and push all sorts of existing archetypes out of competitive viability.
Back to the subject of KCI...it wins way over rate compared to everything else in the format, and all signs point to it becoming more played, not less. It manages this in the face of multiple early hate cards. Further committing to keeping the deck in check through deck and card selection is going to warp the format. It's going to take a ban soon, possibly in the next announcement. I do hope that they unban a card or two at the same time to reduce the sting, but the writing is on the wall for the deck at this point.
So however we feel about it now, it checked enough boxes for Wizards to ban it, and the main point in bold above was that it was powerful enough to stymie format diversity.
As far as being more powerful today? I highly doubt it, honestly, though I don't feel it's as safe as some of the other options we have, especially SFM (which would barely put a dent in the format at this point). Opt is a definite pick-up, and a horde of maybes are available depending on the splash, but it's hard to imagine Twin dominating the format when decks like Izzet Phoenix, GDS, and Azorius Control are doing well.
As a Gx Tron player, I would be very excited for Twin to return. Some of my most memorable matches over the years were against Twin decks, and it would help keep a lot of the decks that give mine issues in check. That bias aside, however, I recognize that Twin decks run the risk of cannibalizing most other combo decks, especially if KCI gets a piece banned. Because of this, I'm skeptical Wizards would feel that they would get more out of letting Twin be legal in the format again. Most of the cards that comprise the deck already have good equity save for the namesake card itself, and you'd be risking value of card in decks like Ad Nauseam, Storm, and all sorts of other decks in the exchange.
KCI won on camera several times without even casting Stirrings to go off this weekend, and it did so quickly and through multiple hate cards. Banning something that isn't pushing anything else over the curve is not a good idea, as you risk not hitting KCI hard enough, while punishing other decks that, while potent, aren't dominating the format. This directly risks equity in all of the affected decks (and no; Gx Tron wouldn't be competitively viable with Oath of Nissa instead) as well as a much broader hit to format confidence. If something from KCI is going to get banned (which looks increasingly probable), it needs to be something that targets KCI specifically.
Proposing bans on Ancient Stirrings or Faithless Looting at this point in time makes absolutely no sense because the equity and confidence risks are far too great. And, once again, it is disingenuous to group entirely different archetypes together for the purpose of ban assessment of a card they happen to share. If you can't accept the fact that decks like Tron, Lantern, and Hardened Scales are reasonable format inclusions, that's your problem, not everyone else's. Driving the false narrative that Ponder and Preordain being banned necessitates Stirrings or Looting to be banned for being better versions isn't productive, and Wizards isn't going to act on it, so you need to get used to it.