Didn't SCG have record turnout yesterday for Legacy? TNN sucks, and I do think the format would be more fun if it wasn't printed, but there are decks that just don't care about TNN and those are the ones to play until something changes. I don't mean falling into the "play bad cards like Golgari Charm in your current deck" trap. I mean playing decks that just don't care about TNN at all.
But doesn't this basically point to TNN warping the format? To me it seems like to be successful you have to be on some sort of TrueBlade deck or have a plan that basically just doesn't interact with creatures on the ground. I do agree on Golgari Charm being a narrow and bad card, I don't think requiring people to play narrow cards like Charm is sustainable in the long run, new decks will appear and it will be hard to deal with them while still having hate for TNN.
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.
Twndomn make it sounds more an issue of:
1)I want to play deck X.
2)Deck X is an awful choice unless I make some changes.
3)I won't make changes
4)Therefore I will either lose games or quit.
That is a players issue, nothing more.
I think that legacy is the most player based format in competitive environment. There is no endless tide of players like in standard and Wizards can truly hurt the format if they create cards those cause people to avoid the format. I don't say that True-Name Nemesis is the problem but if people refuse to come to tournaments it will become everyone's problem. There have been lot of new game changing cards printed in last few years and some of them have created negative atmosphere among players. Of course there needs to be evolution in legacy also because who would like to play Storm, RUG Delver, UW Control format from here to eternity. Some of the cards are just so powerful that they are only tightening the format around few special decks and that is not good in my opinion.
You can't say that 'take it or leave it' argument offered by WotC is not a format's problem also because WE all together are the format. For example there wouldn't be even three rounds played if five regularly legacy playing people would skip weekly tournament in my local game shop. We must respect and care each other player as we do with the format.
(Now when I read it myself it feels like I'm world peace praying hippie... Well I am not. Hope that even some people will understand what I tried to say.)
If you have played Extended when Mind's desire and Sapphire Medallion were a thing, or Legacy ages ago, then you would have known what I am referring to.
I was under the impression that Mind's Desire has never been legal for legacy?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"An immense river of oblivion is sweeping us away into a nameless abyss." —Ernest Renan, Souvenirs d'Enfance et de Jeunesse
I think you also have to discuss the power of Desire into other engines.
I think any supposed Desire based Storm deck is going to run another engine alongside Desire to increase the odds that Desire hits something strong enough to just, with all intents and purposes, win on the spot. I see two main options for this. One being Past in Flames in a more traditional Storm deck, and the other being Time Spiral in High Tide style decks.
A Desire into Past in Flames or Time Spiral is almost as strong as Desire into Desire.
There would be a deck building hurdle to jump over when it comes to just being able to cast Desire and flash it back consistently. That's four blue mana, which almost seems impossible without drawing LED or revealing an LED off Desire. I guess you could run Manamorphos, which actually doesn't seem too bad considering the need to build up as much storm as possible before casting Desire.
As janky as it sounds I almost wonder if you would want to run something like Brain Freeze, flipping that off Desire and targeting yourself to fuel a disgustingly huge Past in Flames. That's probably too cute though.
Still, I think any supposed Desire deck needs to be running as much big business cards as possible, which is the main advantage this style of Storm build would have over existing Ad Nauseum decks. Ad Nauseum can run maybe two engine cards and a finisher because of the need to keep its overall cmc down, whereas Desire decks are free to run 6+ engines and multiple kill spells if desired. That is a good advantage, and there's also the zero lack of reliance on life total... but then you have to consider that Ad Nauseum can be built to be almost a turn faster ala TES, and even slower Ad Nauseum builds ala ANT - that would average a similar speed to Desire Storm in all likelihood - has the potential for explosive starts from double Dark Ritual hands. Desire Storm is not realistically casting turn 1 Desire, and even turn 2 Desire seems unlikely. That to me seems to be the biggest strike against Desire.
High Tide seems to be a better immediate home as being able to run both Desire and Time Spiral seems like a boost in overall power. Desire into Spiral should instantly win, as should Spiral into Desire. They both sort of fuel each other, and that adds a lot of raw power to the deck. High Tide would still be a turn 4 deck though, and to me that's been High Tide's biggest issue for a long time. They leave a lot of time for their opponent to disrupt them. Faster combo decks can sneak under hatebears that can make it all but impossible to go off without dealing with them, as well as some of the other slower disruption cards like Liliana. High Tide has to slog it through them as they don't have the luxury of being faster than them, and their countermagic can only do so much when cards like Cavern of Souls are in the format. High Tide's response to countermagic is also just "have more" whereas other Storm decks can use something like Silence or Xantid Swarm.
So while it adds raw power to High Tide it doesn't actually go to solve some of the core issues of High Tide.
I think Desire is likely safe to be totally honest.
That said, there are other cards on the banlist that are CLEARLY safe, and should come off well before we see Desire back in the format. Earthcraft will be to Enchantress as StageDepths was to Loam decks. It gives a dated strategy the means to be relevant again by giving them a combo win that naturally fits into the deck's strategy. That's really all Earthcraft will do.
Mind Twist will be played in basically decks like Tezzerator. Ancient Tomb, City of Traitors, permanent artifact mana. An early Mind Twist for 3-4 mana is likely as strong as an early Jace or Tezzeret, though certainly better against combo decks.
Black Vise will give some strength to aggro decks... aka decks that are otherwise dead. I for one would be very happy to see Zoo again. This one is a little more dangerous than Twist and Earthcraft, but not by much; whereas Twist and Earthcraft will slot themselves into existing decks with basically no other changes to the format, Black Vise will make some decks change to be more proactive if they want to minimize Vise's impact against them but I think this is fine. I don't see this as any different than the changes we had to make to our deckbuilding to adapt to TNN as fair deck players.
I think what makes these all better unbans than Desire is that they are all borderline if not downright underpowered decks that could use a boost. Storm certainly doesn't need the boost as things stand right now, and I would really have to ask WotC why they would unban a Storm card over other options that only serve to benefit archetypes that could use the boost. I do eventually see a Desire unban though, as WotC wants to trend towards a smaller banlist as much as possible. Desire would be incredibly dangerous to unrestrict in Vintage and I don't ever see that happening to be honest, but that's a format where Storm decks have the five Moxen, Black Lotus, LED, Chrome Mox, Mox Opal, etc. available to them on top of Desire being able to flip cards like Bargain and YawgWin. In Legacy it's power is greatly diminished even with the ability to run a full four should it be unbanned.
I think you also have to discuss the power of Desire into other engines.
I think any supposed Desire based Storm deck is going to run another engine alongside Desire to increase the odds that Desire hits something strong enough to just, with all intents and purposes, win on the spot. I see two main options for this. One being Past in Flames in a more traditional Storm deck, and the other being Time Spiral in High Tide style decks.
A Desire into Past in Flames or Time Spiral is almost as strong as Desire into Desire.
There would be a deck building hurdle to jump over when it comes to just being able to cast Desire and flash it back consistently. That's four blue mana, which almost seems impossible without drawing LED or revealing an LED off Desire. I guess you could run Manamorphos, which actually doesn't seem too bad considering the need to build up as much storm as possible before casting Desire.
As janky as it sounds I almost wonder if you would want to run something like Brain Freeze, flipping that off Desire and targeting yourself to fuel a disgustingly huge Past in Flames. That's probably too cute though.
Still, I think any supposed Desire deck needs to be running as much big business cards as possible, which is the main advantage this style of Storm build would have over existing Ad Nauseum decks. Ad Nauseum can run maybe two engine cards and a finisher because of the need to keep its overall cmc down, whereas Desire decks are free to run 6+ engines and multiple kill spells if desired. That is a good advantage, and there's also the zero lack of reliance on life total... but then you have to consider that Ad Nauseum can be built to be almost a turn faster ala TES, and even slower Ad Nauseum builds ala ANT - that would average a similar speed to Desire Storm in all likelihood - has the potential for explosive starts from double Dark Ritual hands. Desire Storm is not realistically casting turn 1 Desire, and even turn 2 Desire seems unlikely. That to me seems to be the biggest strike against Desire.
High Tide seems to be a better immediate home as being able to run both Desire and Time Spiral seems like a boost in overall power. Desire into Spiral should instantly win, as should Spiral into Desire. They both sort of fuel each other, and that adds a lot of raw power to the deck. High Tide would still be a turn 4 deck though, and to me that's been High Tide's biggest issue for a long time. They leave a lot of time for their opponent to disrupt them. Faster combo decks can sneak under hatebears that can make it all but impossible to go off without dealing with them, as well as some of the other slower disruption cards like Liliana. High Tide has to slog it through them as they don't have the luxury of being faster than them, and their countermagic can only do so much when cards like Cavern of Souls are in the format. High Tide's response to countermagic is also just "have more" whereas other Storm decks can use something like Silence or Xantid Swarm.
So while it adds raw power to High Tide it doesn't actually go to solve some of the core issues of High Tide.
I think Desire is likely safe to be totally honest.
That said, there are other cards on the banlist that are CLEARLY safe, and should come off well before we see Desire back in the format. Earthcraft will be to Enchantress as StageDepths was to Loam decks. It gives a dated strategy the means to be relevant again by giving them a combo win that naturally fits into the deck's strategy. That's really all Earthcraft will do.
Mind Twist will be played in basically decks like Tezzerator. Ancient Tomb, City of Traitors, permanent artifact mana. An early Mind Twist for 3-4 mana is likely as strong as an early Jace or Tezzeret, though certainly better against combo decks.
Black Vise will give some strength to aggro decks... aka decks that are otherwise dead. I for one would be very happy to see Zoo again. This one is a little more dangerous than Twist and Earthcraft, but not by much; whereas Twist and Earthcraft will slot themselves into existing decks with basically no other changes to the format, Black Vise will make some decks change to be more proactive if they want to minimize Vise's impact against them but I think this is fine. I don't see this as any different than the changes we had to make to our deckbuilding to adapt to TNN as fair deck players.
I think what makes these all better unbans than Desire is that they are all borderline if not downright underpowered decks that could use a boost. Storm certainly doesn't need the boost as things stand right now, and I would really have to ask WotC why they would unban a Storm card over other options that only serve to benefit archetypes that could use the boost. I do eventually see a Desire unban though, as WotC wants to trend towards a smaller banlist as much as possible. Desire would be incredibly dangerous to unrestrict in Vintage and I don't ever see that happening to be honest, but that's a format where Storm decks have the five Moxen, Black Lotus, LED, Chrome Mox, Mox Opal, etc. available to them on top of Desire being able to flip cards like Bargain and YawgWin. In Legacy it's power is greatly diminished even with the ability to run a full four should it be unbanned.
I agree with all 3 of your unbans. Those would be the best choices IMO
Mentioning a format of specific decks also speaks to what I'm saying in the same vein as TNN. If no one will even try change how will change occur. Look at all the graveyard decks doing well right now and the lack of cards to deal with them. Magic has always been cyclical in that respect. The problem now is decks are are also trying to do so many things that getting hit by splash damage hate cards is an issue. Golgari charm was brought up as a bad card, yet all modes are relevant with game applications. Seeing it as only a hate card for TNN is just another part of a greater issue.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
------------------- Keep Abiding or Get Mangled ------------------
If you have played Extended when Mind's desire and Sapphire Medallion were a thing, or Legacy ages ago, then you would have known what I am referring to.
Mind's desire was never legal in the old type 1.5 format because the card was banned by old format rules (restricted in type 1 banned in 1.5).
I do think the only time wizards will unban this card if they were forced to ban something major, like banning show and tell... although, I would suspect they might unbanned earthcraft before mind's desire.
I think TNN is awesome... the only thing that sucks about the card it's was printed in one EDH set, and almost every magic player that knows the game had raided all the walmarts for the deck. I guess, he's going to be another 75 dollar to 150 dollar card in 6 months. (I'd wished wizards printed more of him and made him a stupid common)
Golgari charm was brought up as a bad card, yet all modes are relevant with game applications. Seeing it as only a hate card for TNN is just another part of a greater issue.
Golgari Charm is a bad card, it basically only has one mode that you're playing it for, the other modes are not super relevant as there are other cards you can be playing that are much better in those match ups. Plus it really only deals with 1 creature in their whole deck, maybe 2 if they have an unflipped Delver, but decks like Jund just have to play it because they are just cold to the card.
Yea but Punishing Fire is also a real life Magic card against Elves as well. I don't think Elves is a particularly bad matchup for Jund even pre board, because unlike most combo decks, you have disruption outside of discard. But you're right it has some marginal utility against Elves! and D&T, both of which are not doing particularly well right now so the upside is marginal.
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.
Yea but Punishing Fire is also a real life Magic card against Elves as well. I don't think Elves is a particularly bad matchup for Jund even pre board, because unlike most combo decks, you have disruption outside of discard. But you're right it has some marginal utility against Elves! and D&T, both of which are not doing particularly well right now so the upside is marginal.
So in a way those decks could be facing some splash damage from TNN. Hmm, interesting. Wish I said that in the first place.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
------------------- Keep Abiding or Get Mangled ------------------
Since when do Jund decks board in Golgari Charm just for True-Name Nemesis? Destroying an enchantment has always been relevant. Especially when those enchantments are Sneak Attack, Humility, Rest in Peace, and Counterbalance.
But doesn't this basically point to TNN warping the format? To me it seems like to be successful you have to be on some sort of TrueBlade deck or have a plan that basically just doesn't interact with creatures on the ground.
First, what are you talking about? Lands interacts with creatures (Maze & P.Fire). Imperial Painter interacts with creatures, as does D&T, as do Elves. So does Pox.
Just because a deck doesn't care about TNN doesn't mean it's non-interactive! It means the deck runs answers that work (Innocent Blood, Red Elemental Blast, etc), or the deck can keep the opponent off mana long enough for TNN to be irrelevant, or the deck swarms, evades, or tramples. If the deck stalls or races so that TNN is too late, that deck might still be running answers for other creatures.
And the there are Tempo decks - still doing very well (better than TNN decks) - playing creatures (mostly on the ground) but no TNN.
Second, there was one deck in the last SCG top eight that ran TNN. One deck! Whatever you think of the format right now, TNN is not the single driving force. It's your imagination.
T
I was on the side of ignoring TNN, but now I have doubts. TNN is hurting the Legacy tournament turnouts. Many aggro players have faced the dilemma of joining the TNN wagon or find another aggro deck that can hate it out. Either way, TNN pretty much gives the middle finger to their deck and/or their investment. I do sympathize, when they mention the possibility of quitting Legacy since they don't like either options, the matter becomes serious.
Maybe not everyone belongs in this format? People who think Lands, Painted Stone, Elves, D&T are non interactive and un-fun, shouldn't play Legacy. Poeple wh want a Modern-esq meta game wth a faster mana curve shouldn't play Legacy. People who scream when S&T decks get two spots in the top eight (but don't freak out when an aggro deck gets these results) shouldn't play Legacy. People who want cards banned which are not dominating the scene shouldn't play Legacy.
I say let them quit - WotC will be happy to have them in Modern where they belong.
I mean it's a ridiculous argument because fetches increase consistency and decrease luck, which are both positive effects for the game to try and remain legitimate as a competitive venture. Without fetchlands three-color decks lose a ton of consistency, the decision point of how to play around Wasteland/Blood Moon comes down to your opener instead of actual game choices, the skill-intensive Brainstorm/Jace/Top and fetchland interactions disappear, Loam and Crucible lost almost all of ther utility, and overall the format becomes a lot less skill intensive and a lot more luck-based. And for all this downside, the only benefits are that DRS and Goyf get slightly weaker (and they aren't close to oppressive in this format) and people have to pay tons of money to field 8-12 duals instead of 4-6 duals and fetches.
In modern the question is different, because no good card selection exists, DRS and Goyf ARE pretty close to being oppressive, there are only five fetches which favors certain color combinations, and the price barrier is more of a psychological limiter in that format. But it's still ridiculous to consider, because they tie together manabase and the decision of how and when to use your fetchlands is a valuable skill testing point in Modern.
Oh, I thought he was talking about playing a spell that is countering a spell with counters on it as it comes into play, but I see you guys were just discussing whether he was flashing a creature with flash in order to flash a flashback or just flashing a creature with flash but not needing flash in order to flashback a spell without flash.
And you disqualified yourself claiming that Golgari Charm is a bad card. All 3 modes are relevant. The fact that you have two really good other options despite mainly playing it as a sweeper is just the icing on the cake.
Yea cause the decks that are playing charm are doing so well at the moment. The other modes aren't completely irrelevant but I don't think you're necessarily boarding it in to be a harder to cast disenchant or an out to sweepers. Its OK against Sneak Attack or Pyroclasm but still not great as they can easily play around it by having enough mana to cast and activate it before you get priority. So maybe saying its a bad card is a bit harsh, but I certainly don't think its even remotely close to a good card, all of its effects are overcosted or too niche that you wouldn't play it if you didn't have to.
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.
Yea cause the decks that are playing charm are doing so well at the moment.
BUG Delver seems to have been doing well in the last few Opens, so there's that. It's fine for Golgari Charm to be narrow, since sideboard cards usually are.
We are currently talking about the fetches in the modern banned list thread and the impact if they were to be banned.
Now I bring this question around to you
Legacy players, what would happen to your format if fetches were banned?
It's doubtful that fetches are going to be banned if they were...
I think players are going to stick with mono color decks. Since Dual lands are freaking expensive and I could guess the banning of fetchland would force legacy players to play 4 duals instead of getting away with 1 or 2, therefore the dual lands might cost twice or three times more...
On the other hand, if modern bans fetches... the cost of new fetches drop since Legacy and Vintage are the only formats that could use fetches. [looking at the modern ban list and that I dont give a rat's butt about modern format... my fingers is crossed... The ban on fetches would be good for legacy and a lot of modern players are going to jump ship. Realistically speaking - wizards are not going to ban fetches in modern that would kill the modern format.]
TNN is hurting the Legacy tournament turnouts. Many aggro players have faced the dilemma of joining the TNN wagon or find another aggro deck that can hate it out. Either way, TNN pretty much gives the middle finger to their deck and/or their investment. I do sympathize, when they mention the possibility of quitting Legacy since they don't like either options, the matter becomes serious.
I'd like to further criticize this...
One of the great qualities that distinguishes Legacy above other formats is the role of meta-gaming. Competitive players follow (or better yet, predict) trends in the representation of various tier decks. They use that information to optimise card and deck selection. Not everyone meta-games. Some people always play their pet deck, some play dependent on their mood, etc. But when people chose to ignore this aspect of strategy, they generally accept that they will probably not be playing the most well positioned deck.
Are you actually saying we should use the ban-hammer to freeze the meta such that players unwilling to meta-game can always retain a tier one deck? I'm sure you don't endorse this preposterous position, so I'll ask you to rephrase or clarify.
But doesn't this basically point to TNN warping the format?
I'd like to further criticize this...
How is TNN different than any other card or stratagem? If a deck, card, combo, etc is prevalent in the format and powerful, you have to play it yourself, or play something else that either answers it or isn't threatened by it in the first place. (If it's not that prevalent, you can sometimes try to dodge it instead).
Punishing Fire? You have to either have answers (Wasteland, grave hate, etc) or else play a deck which is not soft to creature removal.
Thalia? You either need to have answers for her or else not play a deck which is hurt by taxing non-creature spells.
Wasteland/Blood Moon? Either run answers (basics for fetches, Pithing Needle, etc), or play a deck which is less soft to non-basic land hate.
Everything good in the format affects what other decks can and cannot be successfully played. By your definition, how can anything exist and be strong and not "warp" the format?
How is TNN different than any other card or stratagem? If a deck, card, combo, etc is prevalent in the format and powerful, you have to play it yourself, or play something else that either answers it or isn't threatened by it in the first place. (If it's not that prevalent, you can sometimes try to dodge it instead).
Punishing Fire? You have to either have answers (Wasteland, grave hate, etc) or else play a deck which is not soft to creature removal.
Thalia? You either need to have answers for her or else not play a deck which is hurt by taxing non-creature spells.
Wasteland/Blood Moon? Either run answers (basics for fetches, Pithing Needle, etc), or play a deck which is less soft to non-basic land hate.
Everything good in the format affects what other decks can and cannot be successfully played. By your definition, how can anything exist and be strong and not "warp" the format?
Wow, you really picked some bad cards for your argument here, part of the reason why none of these cards are nearly as bad as TNN is that there are cards that people commonly play in their main deck that are answers. TNN requires relatively narrow answers and most of the time these answers don't really do anything against the rest of the deck. Its pretty awkward to draw a bunch of Golgari Charms when your opponent has Batterskull and a Flipped Delver in play.
In addition, quite a few of these cards can be played around (Wasteland, Thalia, Blood Moon) or require you to alter the build of your deck in order to accommodate them (Thalia, Blood Moon).
Another part of the problem with TNN is the fact that it exists basically means any deck that wants to win by attacking on the ground is probably not good anymore. Just go look at the results over the last few months, decks like Jund and Maverick have plummeted, even worse is on MTGO these decks basically don't exist anymore. MTGO is really interesting since shifts happen much quicker due to less card availability issues and right now its basically Miracles vs TrueBlade vs Unfair decks, certainly a very diverse metagame!
To me it basically seems like the shift as a result of TNN has only just begun, its just much less obvious then previous problem cards. Just because there are more than 2-3 viable decks, doesn't mean that the metagame is healthy, you have to take a step back and look at broader scope of the format.
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.
In addition, quite a few of these cards can be played around (Wasteland, Thalia, Blood Moon) or require you to alter the build of your deck in order to accommodate them (Thalia, Blood Moon).
This sounds like a reason for why TNN isn't a problem.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
------------------- Keep Abiding or Get Mangled ------------------
This sounds like a reason for why TNN isn't a problem.
I don't think certain decks can play around TNN in any sort of meaningful way, Maverick and Jund have to answer it since their primary plan is to attack on the ground which TNN shuts down. Also TNN doesn't require you to really build around it in any sort of meaningful way, pretty much all the decks that are playing it did something like -2-4 GST +2-4 TNN.
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.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
But doesn't this basically point to TNN warping the format? To me it seems like to be successful you have to be on some sort of TrueBlade deck or have a plan that basically just doesn't interact with creatures on the ground. I do agree on Golgari Charm being a narrow and bad card, I don't think requiring people to play narrow cards like Charm is sustainable in the long run, new decks will appear and it will be hard to deal with them while still having hate for TNN.
I think that legacy is the most player based format in competitive environment. There is no endless tide of players like in standard and Wizards can truly hurt the format if they create cards those cause people to avoid the format. I don't say that True-Name Nemesis is the problem but if people refuse to come to tournaments it will become everyone's problem. There have been lot of new game changing cards printed in last few years and some of them have created negative atmosphere among players. Of course there needs to be evolution in legacy also because who would like to play Storm, RUG Delver, UW Control format from here to eternity. Some of the cards are just so powerful that they are only tightening the format around few special decks and that is not good in my opinion.
You can't say that 'take it or leave it' argument offered by WotC is not a format's problem also because WE all together are the format. For example there wouldn't be even three rounds played if five regularly legacy playing people would skip weekly tournament in my local game shop. We must respect and care each other player as we do with the format.
(Now when I read it myself it feels like I'm world peace praying hippie... Well I am not. Hope that even some people will understand what I tried to say.)
Modern
WUBRG
But Toxic Deluge seems like a good answer to it
I was under the impression that Mind's Desire has never been legal for legacy?
I think any supposed Desire based Storm deck is going to run another engine alongside Desire to increase the odds that Desire hits something strong enough to just, with all intents and purposes, win on the spot. I see two main options for this. One being Past in Flames in a more traditional Storm deck, and the other being Time Spiral in High Tide style decks.
A Desire into Past in Flames or Time Spiral is almost as strong as Desire into Desire.
There would be a deck building hurdle to jump over when it comes to just being able to cast Desire and flash it back consistently. That's four blue mana, which almost seems impossible without drawing LED or revealing an LED off Desire. I guess you could run Manamorphos, which actually doesn't seem too bad considering the need to build up as much storm as possible before casting Desire.
As janky as it sounds I almost wonder if you would want to run something like Brain Freeze, flipping that off Desire and targeting yourself to fuel a disgustingly huge Past in Flames. That's probably too cute though.
Still, I think any supposed Desire deck needs to be running as much big business cards as possible, which is the main advantage this style of Storm build would have over existing Ad Nauseum decks. Ad Nauseum can run maybe two engine cards and a finisher because of the need to keep its overall cmc down, whereas Desire decks are free to run 6+ engines and multiple kill spells if desired. That is a good advantage, and there's also the zero lack of reliance on life total... but then you have to consider that Ad Nauseum can be built to be almost a turn faster ala TES, and even slower Ad Nauseum builds ala ANT - that would average a similar speed to Desire Storm in all likelihood - has the potential for explosive starts from double Dark Ritual hands. Desire Storm is not realistically casting turn 1 Desire, and even turn 2 Desire seems unlikely. That to me seems to be the biggest strike against Desire.
High Tide seems to be a better immediate home as being able to run both Desire and Time Spiral seems like a boost in overall power. Desire into Spiral should instantly win, as should Spiral into Desire. They both sort of fuel each other, and that adds a lot of raw power to the deck. High Tide would still be a turn 4 deck though, and to me that's been High Tide's biggest issue for a long time. They leave a lot of time for their opponent to disrupt them. Faster combo decks can sneak under hatebears that can make it all but impossible to go off without dealing with them, as well as some of the other slower disruption cards like Liliana. High Tide has to slog it through them as they don't have the luxury of being faster than them, and their countermagic can only do so much when cards like Cavern of Souls are in the format. High Tide's response to countermagic is also just "have more" whereas other Storm decks can use something like Silence or Xantid Swarm.
So while it adds raw power to High Tide it doesn't actually go to solve some of the core issues of High Tide.
I think Desire is likely safe to be totally honest.
That said, there are other cards on the banlist that are CLEARLY safe, and should come off well before we see Desire back in the format. Earthcraft will be to Enchantress as StageDepths was to Loam decks. It gives a dated strategy the means to be relevant again by giving them a combo win that naturally fits into the deck's strategy. That's really all Earthcraft will do.
Mind Twist will be played in basically decks like Tezzerator. Ancient Tomb, City of Traitors, permanent artifact mana. An early Mind Twist for 3-4 mana is likely as strong as an early Jace or Tezzeret, though certainly better against combo decks.
Black Vise will give some strength to aggro decks... aka decks that are otherwise dead. I for one would be very happy to see Zoo again. This one is a little more dangerous than Twist and Earthcraft, but not by much; whereas Twist and Earthcraft will slot themselves into existing decks with basically no other changes to the format, Black Vise will make some decks change to be more proactive if they want to minimize Vise's impact against them but I think this is fine. I don't see this as any different than the changes we had to make to our deckbuilding to adapt to TNN as fair deck players.
I think what makes these all better unbans than Desire is that they are all borderline if not downright underpowered decks that could use a boost. Storm certainly doesn't need the boost as things stand right now, and I would really have to ask WotC why they would unban a Storm card over other options that only serve to benefit archetypes that could use the boost. I do eventually see a Desire unban though, as WotC wants to trend towards a smaller banlist as much as possible. Desire would be incredibly dangerous to unrestrict in Vintage and I don't ever see that happening to be honest, but that's a format where Storm decks have the five Moxen, Black Lotus, LED, Chrome Mox, Mox Opal, etc. available to them on top of Desire being able to flip cards like Bargain and YawgWin. In Legacy it's power is greatly diminished even with the ability to run a full four should it be unbanned.
I agree with all 3 of your unbans. Those would be the best choices IMO
Mentioning a format of specific decks also speaks to what I'm saying in the same vein as TNN. If no one will even try change how will change occur. Look at all the graveyard decks doing well right now and the lack of cards to deal with them. Magic has always been cyclical in that respect. The problem now is decks are are also trying to do so many things that getting hit by splash damage hate cards is an issue. Golgari charm was brought up as a bad card, yet all modes are relevant with game applications. Seeing it as only a hate card for TNN is just another part of a greater issue.
-----The Legacy Flowchart-----
Tiny Leaders Overlord
Mind's desire was never legal in the old type 1.5 format because the card was banned by old format rules (restricted in type 1 banned in 1.5).
I do think the only time wizards will unban this card if they were forced to ban something major, like banning show and tell... although, I would suspect they might unbanned earthcraft before mind's desire.
I think TNN is awesome... the only thing that sucks about the card it's was printed in one EDH set, and almost every magic player that knows the game had raided all the walmarts for the deck. I guess, he's going to be another 75 dollar to 150 dollar card in 6 months. (I'd wished wizards printed more of him and made him a stupid common)
In his Second 100 days - Yawgmoth's Bargain is unrestricted in Vintage.
What is going to happen in the Next 100 days!!!
Golgari Charm is a bad card, it basically only has one mode that you're playing it for, the other modes are not super relevant as there are other cards you can be playing that are much better in those match ups. Plus it really only deals with 1 creature in their whole deck, maybe 2 if they have an unflipped Delver, but decks like Jund just have to play it because they are just cold to the card.
-----The Legacy Flowchart-----
Tiny Leaders Overlord
Yea but Punishing Fire is also a real life Magic card against Elves as well. I don't think Elves is a particularly bad matchup for Jund even pre board, because unlike most combo decks, you have disruption outside of discard. But you're right it has some marginal utility against Elves! and D&T, both of which are not doing particularly well right now so the upside is marginal.
Sush, I like my Pet intact...
(TNN hate could really really hurt elves, if a suitable deck comes along.)
Current decks of choice:
Vintage: Shops.
Legacy: Lands.
Modern: Lantern.
So in a way those decks could be facing some splash damage from TNN. Hmm, interesting. Wish I said that in the first place.
-----The Legacy Flowchart-----
Tiny Leaders Overlord
My Trade Thread
Current Decks:
Legacy:
GWR Punishing Maverick
UW Miracles
UR Sneak and Show
GWB Enchantress
First, what are you talking about? Lands interacts with creatures (Maze & P.Fire). Imperial Painter interacts with creatures, as does D&T, as do Elves. So does Pox.
Just because a deck doesn't care about TNN doesn't mean it's non-interactive! It means the deck runs answers that work (Innocent Blood, Red Elemental Blast, etc), or the deck can keep the opponent off mana long enough for TNN to be irrelevant, or the deck swarms, evades, or tramples. If the deck stalls or races so that TNN is too late, that deck might still be running answers for other creatures.
And the there are Tempo decks - still doing very well (better than TNN decks) - playing creatures (mostly on the ground) but no TNN.
Second, there was one deck in the last SCG top eight that ran TNN. One deck! Whatever you think of the format right now, TNN is not the single driving force. It's your imagination.
Maybe not everyone belongs in this format? People who think Lands, Painted Stone, Elves, D&T are non interactive and un-fun, shouldn't play Legacy. Poeple wh want a Modern-esq meta game wth a faster mana curve shouldn't play Legacy. People who scream when S&T decks get two spots in the top eight (but don't freak out when an aggro deck gets these results) shouldn't play Legacy. People who want cards banned which are not dominating the scene shouldn't play Legacy.
I say let them quit - WotC will be happy to have them in Modern where they belong.
https://fieldmarshalshandbook.wordpress.com/
RUGLegacy Lands.dec
RUGBLegacy Lands.dec
RGLegacy Lands.dec
WUBRG EDH Lands.dec
UBR EDH Artificer Prodigy
B EDH Relentless Rats
Trust me. We don't want 'em either.
I'd actually love to play Legacy, it's just I can't justify the expense when nobody around here plays it.
Now I bring this question around to you
Legacy players, what would happen to your format if fetches were banned?
In modern the question is different, because no good card selection exists, DRS and Goyf ARE pretty close to being oppressive, there are only five fetches which favors certain color combinations, and the price barrier is more of a psychological limiter in that format. But it's still ridiculous to consider, because they tie together manabase and the decision of how and when to use your fetchlands is a valuable skill testing point in Modern.
-regarding Snapcaster Mage.
Yea cause the decks that are playing charm are doing so well at the moment. The other modes aren't completely irrelevant but I don't think you're necessarily boarding it in to be a harder to cast disenchant or an out to sweepers. Its OK against Sneak Attack or Pyroclasm but still not great as they can easily play around it by having enough mana to cast and activate it before you get priority. So maybe saying its a bad card is a bit harsh, but I certainly don't think its even remotely close to a good card, all of its effects are overcosted or too niche that you wouldn't play it if you didn't have to.
BUG Delver seems to have been doing well in the last few Opens, so there's that. It's fine for Golgari Charm to be narrow, since sideboard cards usually are.
It's doubtful that fetches are going to be banned if they were...
I think players are going to stick with mono color decks. Since Dual lands are freaking expensive and I could guess the banning of fetchland would force legacy players to play 4 duals instead of getting away with 1 or 2, therefore the dual lands might cost twice or three times more...
On the other hand, if modern bans fetches... the cost of new fetches drop since Legacy and Vintage are the only formats that could use fetches. [looking at the modern ban list and that I dont give a rat's butt about modern format... my fingers is crossed... The ban on fetches would be good for legacy and a lot of modern players are going to jump ship. Realistically speaking - wizards are not going to ban fetches in modern that would kill the modern format.]
In his Second 100 days - Yawgmoth's Bargain is unrestricted in Vintage.
What is going to happen in the Next 100 days!!!
I'd like to further criticize this...
One of the great qualities that distinguishes Legacy above other formats is the role of meta-gaming. Competitive players follow (or better yet, predict) trends in the representation of various tier decks. They use that information to optimise card and deck selection. Not everyone meta-games. Some people always play their pet deck, some play dependent on their mood, etc. But when people chose to ignore this aspect of strategy, they generally accept that they will probably not be playing the most well positioned deck.
Are you actually saying we should use the ban-hammer to freeze the meta such that players unwilling to meta-game can always retain a tier one deck? I'm sure you don't endorse this preposterous position, so I'll ask you to rephrase or clarify.
I'd like to further criticize this...
How is TNN different than any other card or stratagem? If a deck, card, combo, etc is prevalent in the format and powerful, you have to play it yourself, or play something else that either answers it or isn't threatened by it in the first place. (If it's not that prevalent, you can sometimes try to dodge it instead).
Punishing Fire? You have to either have answers (Wasteland, grave hate, etc) or else play a deck which is not soft to creature removal.
Thalia? You either need to have answers for her or else not play a deck which is hurt by taxing non-creature spells.
Wasteland/Blood Moon? Either run answers (basics for fetches, Pithing Needle, etc), or play a deck which is less soft to non-basic land hate.
Everything good in the format affects what other decks can and cannot be successfully played. By your definition, how can anything exist and be strong and not "warp" the format?
https://fieldmarshalshandbook.wordpress.com/
RUGLegacy Lands.dec
RUGBLegacy Lands.dec
RGLegacy Lands.dec
WUBRG EDH Lands.dec
UBR EDH Artificer Prodigy
B EDH Relentless Rats
Wow, you really picked some bad cards for your argument here, part of the reason why none of these cards are nearly as bad as TNN is that there are cards that people commonly play in their main deck that are answers. TNN requires relatively narrow answers and most of the time these answers don't really do anything against the rest of the deck. Its pretty awkward to draw a bunch of Golgari Charms when your opponent has Batterskull and a Flipped Delver in play.
In addition, quite a few of these cards can be played around (Wasteland, Thalia, Blood Moon) or require you to alter the build of your deck in order to accommodate them (Thalia, Blood Moon).
Another part of the problem with TNN is the fact that it exists basically means any deck that wants to win by attacking on the ground is probably not good anymore. Just go look at the results over the last few months, decks like Jund and Maverick have plummeted, even worse is on MTGO these decks basically don't exist anymore. MTGO is really interesting since shifts happen much quicker due to less card availability issues and right now its basically Miracles vs TrueBlade vs Unfair decks, certainly a very diverse metagame!
To me it basically seems like the shift as a result of TNN has only just begun, its just much less obvious then previous problem cards. Just because there are more than 2-3 viable decks, doesn't mean that the metagame is healthy, you have to take a step back and look at broader scope of the format.
This sounds like a reason for why TNN isn't a problem.
-----The Legacy Flowchart-----
Tiny Leaders Overlord
I don't think certain decks can play around TNN in any sort of meaningful way, Maverick and Jund have to answer it since their primary plan is to attack on the ground which TNN shuts down. Also TNN doesn't require you to really build around it in any sort of meaningful way, pretty much all the decks that are playing it did something like -2-4 GST +2-4 TNN.