I agree with izzetmage about Bloodghast being the card I would ban from Dredge. The comment about getting multiple Amalgams on turn 2 being the most powerful thing the deck can do is in my opinion somewhat incorrect. Yes, they put a lot of power onto the board and yes that can often win them the game, but my problem with Dredge is how resilient it is even if you manage to remove all of their creatures because of the ability to play a fetchland and crack it on my second mainphase, getting back their bloodghasts and amalgams and undoing anything I've done to remove their threats.
To put it more simply: I don't have a problem with Dredge's explosiveness per se. Explosiveness is annoying and I'll lose to it, but it's something that can be dealt with. I have a problem with Dredge's resilience. The ability to play fetchlands and leave them uncracked so that if I do remove their threats they can instantly get them back is what makes the deck go from being just another combo deck to being too difficult to deal with.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Well, I can saw a woman in two, but you won't wanna look in the box when I'm through.
I agree with izzetmage about Bloodghast being the card I would ban from Dredge. The comment about getting multiple Amalgams on turn 2 being the most powerful thing the deck can do is in my opinion somewhat incorrect. Yes, they put a lot of power onto the board and yes that can often win them the game, but my problem with Dredge is how resilient it is even if you manage to remove all of their creatures because of the ability to play a fetchland and crack it on my second mainphase, getting back their bloodghasts and amalgams and undoing anything I've done to remove their threats.
To put it more simply: I don't have a problem with Dredge's explosiveness per se. Explosiveness is annoying and I'll lose to it, but it's something that can be dealt with. I have a problem with Dredge's resilience. The ability to play fetchlands and leave them uncracked so that if I do remove their threats they can instantly get them back is what makes the deck go from being just another combo deck to being too difficult to deal with.
The flaw there is that many list don't run fetches. Ghast isn't the issue, it was legal the day GGT was unban and no issue till now.
The flaw there is that many list don't run fetches. Ghast isn't the issue, it was legal the day GGT was unban and no issue till now.
Not one of the 20 lists that most recently placed in a tournament or went 5-0 in a league was without fetches. I could go back and check further if you'd like, too. Even in lists without fetches, it's the ability to use Bloodghast to recur any Amalgams in the graveyard for free with land drops that makes Dredge able to keep presenting threats which is what makes the deck more or less invulnerable to removal.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Well, I can saw a woman in two, but you won't wanna look in the box when I'm through.
Bloodghast is actually a fair card by itself. Without Dredge, it is very tame. The same goes for Amalgam, Narc, and CR. All of those are fair cards without a broken mechanic enabling them.
The problem is the Dredge mechanic. It always has been. Dredge is the engine of the deck and everyone knows how busted it is. We already have one card (Dread Return) banned specifically because it interacts with Dredge in a degenerate way. If we keep banning cards that piggyback off the Dredge engine, we are going to go back down the road of old Extended when Wizards stubbornly refused to ban Necropotence and instead banned everything that synergized with it. If Dredge needs a ban, the deck just needs to be simply killed off and put to pasture. It's not worth having to keep banning auxiliary cards just so people can still get a kick out of playing with an abusive and broken mechanic.
I agree but I also think it's fine to wait a little bit to see how things play out. We don't need new tier decks banned after 3 months while others are allowed to stay forever cough affinity infect and jund.
All of this ban Dredge talk is too aggressive. This deck does not need a banning. I haven't heard any clean arguments other than "I need to adapt as a player"
I completely understand the frustration, and I also understand how powerful Cathartic Reunion pushed the deck. It's still a graveyard based aggro deck. It wins through hate in a healthy way. If you control the board, and the graveyard, the deck is done for and it spins on its wheels like a horrible combo deck afterwards. It has good, and horrible matchups, it doesn't dominate games 1's like Affinity does.
All in all, my best hope is aggressive unbans this coming January. The only potential ban I see is Become Immense, and I am glad that I am not the only one now holding this opinion. Link
I agree with izzetmage about Bloodghast being the card I would ban from Dredge. The comment about getting multiple Amalgams on turn 2 being the most powerful thing the deck can do is in my opinion somewhat incorrect. Yes, they put a lot of power onto the board and yes that can often win them the game, but my problem with Dredge is how resilient it is even if you manage to remove all of their creatures because of the ability to play a fetchland and crack it on my second mainphase, getting back their bloodghasts and amalgams and undoing anything I've done to remove their threats.
To put it more simply: I don't have a problem with Dredge's explosiveness per se. Explosiveness is annoying and I'll lose to it, but it's something that can be dealt with. I have a problem with Dredge's resilience. The ability to play fetchlands and leave them uncracked so that if I do remove their threats they can instantly get them back is what makes the deck go from being just another combo deck to being too difficult to deal with.
To be honest, both the speed and resiliency make Dredge such a strong deck. It's like Amulet, where you had both speed in turn 2 Titans, and resiliency in Titans searching up more Titans. The speed is what eventually got it banned though.
Question: If Bloodghast was banned and the Dredge creature base became something like Narcomoeba + Prized Amalgam + Scrapheap Scrounger, would you be OK with it? I think the real problem is having a creature that comes back for 0 mana. Bloodghast is one of those, and it's relatively easy to set up the land drop with Dakmor Salvage or Life from the Loam. Things that come back for 0 mana, but piggyback off other creatures (e.g. Prized Amalgam and Vengevine) are a little more balanced since you need to pay mana for the other creatures, whether it's Scrounger, Haunted Dead or Gravecrawler.
I agree with izzetmage about Bloodghast being the card I would ban from Dredge. The comment about getting multiple Amalgams on turn 2 being the most powerful thing the deck can do is in my opinion somewhat incorrect. Yes, they put a lot of power onto the board and yes that can often win them the game, but my problem with Dredge is how resilient it is even if you manage to remove all of their creatures because of the ability to play a fetchland and crack it on my second mainphase, getting back their bloodghasts and amalgams and undoing anything I've done to remove their threats.
To put it more simply: I don't have a problem with Dredge's explosiveness per se. Explosiveness is annoying and I'll lose to it, but it's something that can be dealt with. I have a problem with Dredge's resilience. The ability to play fetchlands and leave them uncracked so that if I do remove their threats they can instantly get them back is what makes the deck go from being just another combo deck to being too difficult to deal with.
To be honest, both the speed and resiliency make Dredge such a strong deck. It's like Amulet, where you had both speed in turn 2 Titans, and resiliency in Titans searching up more Titans. The speed is what eventually got it banned though.
Question: If Bloodghast was banned and the Dredge creature base became something like Narcomoeba + Prized Amalgam + Scrapheap Scrounger, would you be OK with it? I think the real problem is having a creature that comes back for 0 mana. Bloodghast is one of those, and it's relatively easy to set up the land drop with Dakmor Salvage or Life from the Loam. Things that come back for 0 mana, but piggyback off other creatures (e.g. Prized Amalgam and Vengevine) are a little more balanced since you need to pay mana for the other creatures, whether it's Scrounger, Haunted Dead or Gravecrawler.
Actually, i think Bloodghast might be fine ban. You leave the deck playable but nerfed in a minor degree than Amulet Bloom got nerfed.
I love Bloodghast as a creature but it might be the best ban to insure a shorter banlist, and a medium-happy fanbase. I know Dredge won't be the same, but it would slow down enough to not need a GGT AND Stinkweed/Amalgam ban.
I agree but I also think it's fine to wait a little bit to see how things play out. We don't need new tier decks banned after 3 months while others are allowed to stay forever cough affinity infect and jund.
To be fair, to date Jund had the most bannings of any deck besides Storm. Infect and Affinity only do busted stuff if you don't interact with them. Both decks push the meta towards interaction, which is definately a good thing. They also help keeping Dredge and Tron in check, which is also nice.
I agree that banning something from Dredge isn't neccessary yet. While I dislike Dredge a lot and would love it toned down a margin I believe a ban would be wrong at this point. Aether Revolt seems to be a promising set with many new toys for Modern and the metagame might adjust itself at some point.
All of this ban Dredge talk is too aggressive. This deck does not need a banning. I haven't heard any clean arguments other than "I need to adapt as a player"
I completely understand the frustration, and I also understand how powerful Cathartic Reunion pushed the deck. It's still a graveyard based aggro deck. It wins through hate in a healthy way. If you control the board, and the graveyard, the deck is done for and it spins on its wheels like a horrible combo deck afterwards. It has good, and horrible matchups, it doesn't dominate games 1's like Affinity does.
All in all, my best hope is aggressive unbans this coming January. The only potential ban I see is Become Immense, and I am glad that I am not the only one now holding this opinion. Link
Edit; Accidental double post above, sorry!
I agree they should open the gates. Unbanned cards. Jace shouLD be released from his shackles.
Just think how much hype would be if they opened the gates.
By unbanned a few great cards magic would just get so much more interesting.
Banning bloodghast is completely absurd. Banning anything from the deck is dumb but banning bloodghast will kill it. There is no good replacement for it and it is critical to the deck. Amalgam is by far the better choice because of its synergy with the bloodghast. The deck wasnt as resilient without amalgam.
Value is good. But Dredgevine isn't supposed to be about value. It's supposed to be about V-8; 2000 pounds of nitro boosted war vegetables. The more velocity, the better.
Modern:
DredgeVine EDH:
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight
Anima Standard:
Magic players always need something to complain about. Everyone hated abzan company, is it a shock that that too is a gy based deck g1? Remember when everyone wanted coco banned because it gave the deck such consistency? Well if dredge goes away and coco combo re enters are these people still going to go right back to complaining how resilient it is? Yes jund, infect etc has seen bans that's the point. It sees bans to keep it around but in check, so explain to me why dredge (and I've heard eldrazi on here) should just be killed? That type of thinking is a problem.
Pia's revolution, a new card that says "when an artifact you control is but into the graveyard from the battlefield you may return it to your hand unless an opponents pays three damage" is going to be banned for time reasons. And also it will be fun to watch a modern deck get infinite mana as two stubborn players refuse to stop cycling through the same two mox opals.
Pia's revolution, a new card that says "when an artifact you control is but into the graveyard from the battlefield you may return it to your hand unless an opponents pays three damage" is going to be banned for time reasons. And also it will be fun to watch a modern deck get infinite mana as two stubborn players refuse to stop cycling through the same two mox opals.
good point. It doesn't even have the "you control" but yeah I never realized how broke that is.
Value is good. But Dredgevine isn't supposed to be about value. It's supposed to be about V-8; 2000 pounds of nitro boosted war vegetables. The more velocity, the better.
Modern:
DredgeVine EDH:
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight
Anima Standard:
Pia's revolution, a new card that says "when an artifact you control is but into the graveyard from the battlefield you may return it to your hand unless an opponents pays three damage" is going to be banned for time reasons. And also it will be fun to watch a modern deck get infinite mana as two stubborn players refuse to stop cycling through the same two mox opals.
good point. It doesn't even have the "you control" but yeah I never realized how broke that is.
It's not stalling, judge, I'm gaining mana and all he had to do is take the three. He's stalling!
Saying that people are being Lazy for not adjusting their maindeck to dredge are hilarious. If you have to change up your maindeck in such a way that your putting dead cards in 90% of the matchups in modern just to have more game vs dredge, that is literally the definition of warping. In addition, you can't just change your maindeck, losing points in 90% of matchups just to gain points in one matchup that is around 10% of the meta. Hell, it's foolish to maindeck hate for a deck at 20%! It's much smarter to hope you simply dodge the matchup than dilute your gameplan g1 against a deck you simply won't run into that often
Pia's revolution, a new card that says "when an artifact you control is but into the graveyard from the battlefield you may return it to your hand unless an opponents pays three damage" is going to be banned for time reasons. And also it will be fun to watch a modern deck get infinite mana as two stubborn players refuse to stop cycling through the same two mox opals.
good point. It doesn't even have the "you control" but yeah I never realized how broke that is.
So Krark-Clan Ironworks + Pia's Revolution + any 0 mana artifact = either infinite mana or infinite damage? Fun! Not really broken or banworthy though. Someone will eventually draw Emrakul and win or something.
Pia's revolution, a new card that says "when an artifact you control is but into the graveyard from the battlefield you may return it to your hand unless an opponents pays three damage" is going to be banned for time reasons. And also it will be fun to watch a modern deck get infinite mana as two stubborn players refuse to stop cycling through the same two mox opals.
good point. It doesn't even have the "you control" but yeah I never realized how broke that is.
So Krark-Clan Ironworks + Pia's Revolution + any 0 mana artifact = either infinite mana or infinite damage? Fun! Not really broken or banworthy though. Someone will eventually draw Emrakul and win or something.
I just thought about that and wouldn't they just take the three damage resulting in your artifact going to the graveyard? Unless you have a way to return it, or mindlsaver them so they can't respond and do it on their turn.
Saying that people are being Lazy for not adjusting their maindeck to dredge are hilarious. If you have to change up your maindeck in such a way that your putting dead cards in 90% of the matchups in modern just to have more game vs dredge, that is literally the definition of warping. In addition, you can't just change your maindeck, losing points in 90% of matchups just to gain points in one matchup that is around 10% of the meta. Hell, it's foolish to maindeck hate for a deck at 20%! It's much smarter to hope you simply dodge the matchup than dilute your gameplan g1 against a deck you simply won't run into that often
Almost every single deck has maindeck removal so really you're not changing you're deck you're just adapting your removal. I'm not sure who taught you mat but you say that you are changing your deck to put in cards that are dead 90% of matchups but then later say that it's foolish to run maindeck hate for a deck at 20%. Dredge is about 10% so your first statement is correct be consistent. Going back to maindeck removal almost all decks play some sort of maindeck removal, so if you're changing the type of removal in your maindeck your not really changing your deck. The point of maindeck removal is broad answers to common threats, Lightning bolt, path, counterspells, and thoughtseize in their respective colors are examples of this. If you are changing your maindeck removal to be specific that's your own fault. Affinity has been good forever being well over 10% at many times but people don't put artifact hate as maindeck removal to counter affinity.
Value is good. But Dredgevine isn't supposed to be about value. It's supposed to be about V-8; 2000 pounds of nitro boosted war vegetables. The more velocity, the better.
Modern:
DredgeVine EDH:
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight
Anima Standard:
Pia's revolution, a new card that says "when an artifact you control is but into the graveyard from the battlefield you may return it to your hand unless an opponents pays three damage" is going to be banned for time reasons. And also it will be fun to watch a modern deck get infinite mana as two stubborn players refuse to stop cycling through the same two mox opals.
good point. It doesn't even have the "you control" but yeah I never realized how broke that is.
So Krark-Clan Ironworks + Pia's Revolution + any 0 mana artifact = either infinite mana or infinite damage? Fun! Not really broken or banworthy though. Someone will eventually draw Emrakul and win or something.
My idea of what the Banned List should be is a bit different than what I feel most think it should be. I don't think it should exist merely to "police the brokenness", or to reign in overpowered interactions, or to limit the power level of the format. Instead, I think it should exist to foster a fun, interactive, and most importantly WIDE deck building environment, where a lot of different strategies can exist. That means it shouldn't just keep all the overpowered combos out, merely the ones that are hard to interact with. It shouldn't get rid of all fast mana, merely the fast mana that directly leads to degenerate strategies.
On that note, I also feel that it should also contain cards which directly counter entire strategies in an non-interactive way. That will become clear below, in my explanations for my bans. In addition, I feel that powerful cards which may enable some degenerate strategies, but are otherwise interesting from a deckbuilding and interaction point of view, should be kept off the list if at all possible.
Enough of that, here is my list - hopefully my meaning becomes clearer through it. I've hidden them behind Spoiler tags, because I'm afraid it went a bit long. I'm quite sure I am going to receive a lot of flack for these opinions, but thats how such things go - I actually hope to hear some of the disagreements, as I'm sure I've missed some interactions...
Artifact Lands: I know, I know, it seems crazy - but really, think about the decks that would really play them!!! I don't know how many of you remember the old Extended, prior to the advent of "Super-Standard-Extended" and well before Modern. In a lot of ways it was not too dissimilar to what Modern is now, albeit with around a decade's less worth of cards. The artifact lands were legal in it, and Affinity (which was really AFFINITY still) was a very good, albeit risky, deck in that format. That was before Vault Skirge, and Steel Overseer, and Signal Pest, so the deck was essentially still a Mirrodin Block Constructed deck with Master of Etherium thrown in. The point is that it was just about the same power level as it is now, probably weaker - the Artifact Lands aren't a problem because of Affinity!
Do you know what decks really benefitted from them? Control/midrange decks that could run Thirst for Knowledege. What is the single biggest problem with U-based control in Modern right now? No, it isn't Counterspell, or the lack thereof. It is the poor state of instant-speed card advantage and selection effects. The legalizing of Seat of the Synod would do a lot to alleviate that problem!
There is also the neat deckbuilding counterplay that the non-Darksteel Citadel Artifact Lands bring to a format - namely their weakness to spot artifact removal, notably Ancient Grudge. There is a definite drawback to having lands that can be blown up by common sideboard cards! On that note, I don't think the interaction with Mox Opal is nearly as strong as it first appears - any deck interested in running Opal already runs Citadel, and the artifact lands don't really allow for much quicker starts, merely more consistent ones. Opal's drawback is real, as well - something that brings me to the next card...
Chrome Mox: Also going back to that Extended format, does anyone recall the decks that actually played it? It wasn't the degenerate combo decks! It was mostly control/midrange decks (TFK again), All In Red (to speed in Blood Moon, a card I'll get back to in a sec), and various other decks that needed a tempo boost. The Imprint cost is real, and a big limiter to the overall power level of the card. The only "broken" deck I can think of that really jammed 4 Chrome Mox was DDT (Dark Depths / Thopter-Sword), and the only reason they did was to enable a T1 Dark Confidant! That deck was broken for reasons other than the Mox...
Basically, the card is unquestionably powerful, but in actual deckbuilding it has real drawbacks. Think about it in the current Ad Nauseum deck, for instance - it would certainly go in the deck, but it would not speed it up (run some realistic hands)! It would likely just displace the Lotus Blooms, adding a little bit of consistency while also leaving them even more vulnerable to Artifact/Enchantment removal than they already are.
What decks would really play the card? Likely the same midrange/control decks that are interested in the Artifact Lands. Faeries, for instance, would play it to power out T1 Bitterblossom - hardly a backbreaking play, and it would leave them very vulnerable to Abrupt Decay, for instance. It would make that deck much better, but with a drawback - that deck, and those like it, would be able to compete much more readily with the higher-tempo aggro decks in the format, but at the cost of both card advantage and post-board consistency. In other words, it enables more interesting strategies.
Stoneforge Mystic: I'm not going to go on about it, but T3 Batterskull seems fine to me. It has all the vulnerabilities that strategy has in Legacy, without the advantage of Force of Will to protect it. Kolaghan's Command is a card in the format, and will continue to be, after all! My only worry is that it becomes the "default U strategy", stymieing deck construction by being the most powerful midrange/tempo thing to do. That is a real concern, but it is worth unbanning just to see how it shakes out in an actual metagame.
Jace, the Mind Sculptor: The only argument I can think of for keeping this card banned is that it becomes the default U finisher. The only real interactive challenge to that is that it is a "tap-out" card, by nature, and most U decks are loath to tap out and lose their counter-war advantage. That may be enough reason to keep it on the list, but personally I'd like to see how it plays out, just like SFM, before jumping to conclusions. After all, JtMS has a lot of similarities to Bitterblossom in actual play - it is a recurring card advantage engine that requires a reactive deck to tap out to utilize. Bitterblossom isn't unsuccessful in Modern because it isn't powerful enough, but because the best strategy for it can't really afford the tempo loss of playing it - and Jace presents a similar conundrum, albeit one that is both more expensive and more powerful.
Become Immense: I just see this card becoming more and more degenerate as time goes on. I don't think that Infect is the real reason to get rid of it - the next card on the list is what I would ban out of that particular deck - but instead the various "pump to kill super-fast" strategies, most notably Death's Shadow Zoo. The card does too much for too little, and enables too many games that aren't really interactive at all. I feel it should go, just to make building such decks more interesting than currently. The various other pump spells all have their own advantages and disadvantages, and having any "auto-include" tends to dilute the impact of choosing the remaining ones. Once you also consider that it is the only card in those decks that really allows for non-magical-christmas-land T3 kills, it really should go.
Inkmoth Nexus: I don't personally feel this card is overpowered, per se, but instead that it gives certain aggressive strategies an unfair advantage over reactive ones. Both Artifact Aggro and Infect would be injured by its loss, but hardly "banned out of the format". Right now this manland acts as a "catch-all backup plan" for both decks, giving them a consistency and resiliency that undermines interactivity. If the format is to be WIDER something has to be done to knock those two down a peg, and Inkmoth is the card that they share. It is an insidious little beast, and a very interesting card that I'll be sad to see gone, but I really do believe that it is the key enabler of the two most prominent "OP" linear strategies right now. Removing it would give more opportunity to interact with those decks, and that is all that is needed to stifle their dominance.
Prized Amalgam: For all the talk about Bloodghast and the dredge mechanic cards in this thread, this is IMHO the real reason for Dredge's meteoric rise. Compare the card to Vengevine, a card that used to be the paragon of free graveyard value - in order to effectively use Vengy, you have to actually cast creature spells. In order to recur Amalgam, you have to, what, play lands? The closest comparison is to Ichorid, which is really the only other truly "free from graveyard" creature with an appreciable attack stat ever printed. I want dredge to be in the format, as I find it an interesting strategy to combat, but the UB Zombie is always going to be a problem, because it has no drawbacks!
With Prized Amalgam, Inkmoth Nexus, and Become Immense gone, the most powerful linear decks in the format would be knocked way down in power level, but importantly also all still be playable. IMHO, it is important not to just ban whole strategies out of a format - which brings me to my next set of bans, which are all on this list because they effectively do just that...
Blood Moon: Here is the big one, to me, and I'm sure a lot of people will disagree with me on it. I do not think that Blood Moon is too powerful! Quite the contrary, I think that it is a perfectly fine card in a vacuum. The thing is, a format IS NOT A VACUUM!!!
In my experience, Blood Moon (and certain other cards like it) does not act as to "police the format" as so many like to say. Wastelanddoes act like that in Legacy/Vintage, but because it is a single-use effect. You can interact with and play around Wasteland - that card leads to interesting decision trees and more interactive games, albeit ones that may be a bit more tedious than optimal (I am not a huge fan of Wasteland, either, just using it as a comparison). Blood Moon, by being a card that just says "No, you can't play the game anymore" when played to its fullest, encourages/enables NON-INTERACTIVE PLAY. If you have a typical multi-color mana base in Modern, and a Blood Moon is played against you, there is a better than even chance that you simply won't have an answer to the card. The worst part about it is that it makes all non-basics Mountains in particular, and R is the color that simply cannot remove enchantments!
In short, it is a "Griefer" card that only leads to un-fun, un-interactive, and un-WIDE games. The format is weaker by its inclusion, just because there are decks that may be reasonable but will never see play because the card is in it. It leads to certain proactive strategies that are immune to it being better than all others by default (Affinity including it in sideboards, for instance, or Twin's usage of it), while simultaneously suppressing entire classes of potential decks that could prey on those strategies but can't due to a weakness to the card. It also leads to "gotcha" games, where you lose to imposed mana screw - those games are about as fun as games where you get actually mana screwed, and no one enjoys that...
As I said in the intro, I think the purpose of the Banned List should be to foster a wide, fun, and interactive format. Blood Moon manages to put a dent in all three, and has no appreciable advantage I can see by its inclusion. Anyone who has lost to Tron after dropping a T2 Blood Moon can speak to that! Personally, I feel that "punishment" cards should have an "out", if they are to be fun cards - whether that be being single-use or single target (Wasteland, Ancient Grudge, Pithing Needle), being an easily-dealt-with card type (Creatures, mostly, but also Artifacts to a lesser degree), or having built-in limitations (Ensnaring Bridge, Ghostly Prison), it doesn't matter. Blood Moon doesn't fit that criteria - it disables its own interaction (R can't kill enchantments), it is the single hardest card type to remove, and its only limitation is playing basics and R. Good riddance.
Choke, Flashfires, Boil: No one really plays these, but they should go for the same reason as Blood Moon: They are uninteresting "griefer" cards, and don't add any depth or complexity to the format. They are boring and spiteful, and have no business being around.
Chalice of the Void: Same reason as Blood Moon, really, albeit in a far lesser way. The thing is, Modern is always going to be a pretty fast format, leading to the best interactive cards naturally being the cheapest ones. You're not going to play Naturalize if Nature's Claim is available! That also means that the majority of proactive decks (mostly aggressive, but also combo) are going to be riddled with one drops. Like Blood Moon, Chalice can often read "Target Opponent Can't Play The Game". After board, it disables its own removal as well! In the end, it is another "Griefer" card that leads to "Gotcha" games, which are inherently un-fun.
All that being said, of the griefer cards on this list, Chalice is the most interesting and least offensive. The only reason it rises to the level of problematic to me is my insistence on unbanning Chrome Mox, which is a sequence of plays I hope to never see on T1 ever again! I feel that if you unban the Mox, you must ban the Chalice.
Stony Silence: Another "griefer" card, Stony Silence basically acts like Blood Moon for artifacts. I have three main issues with this card. One is that it is not nearly as effective against Affinity as it could be, meaning it doesn't really suppress that linear deck effectively. Two is that it disables Artifact Lands, which would keep them from being playable in anything but combo decks as long as it is a common sideboard option. Three is that it fully suppresses any non-aggressive artifact-based deck, as they are immediately shut down by it. Taking those qualities together, all Stony Silence really does is ensure that the only viable artifact-focused decks are Affinity and Lantern, the latter only because it relies on static qualities more than activated abilities.
The card's mere existence narrows the format, and it is far from the only option to attack such strategies. Removal can be interacted with, counterspells can be played around, and creatures (Kataki, War's Wage) are far easier to deal with than enchantments. Stony Silence is a "NO, STOP PLAYING" card, and those aren't really all that healthy. I think it should go, just so that other artifact decks can exist!
Rest in Peace: First off, if this were the ONLY graveyard hate card in the format, I'd have no issue with it. It isn't. It is merely the most, shall we say, "final". Much like Stony Silence, Rest In Peace pretty much ensures that the only viable graveyard decks will be aggressive ones. By having both the trigger and the static ability, it manages to completely eliminate the use of the graveyard as a resource - which is fine, in a vacuum, but in reality what it does is punish decks that try to set things up ahead of time in the graveyard. Like Blood Moon, it isn't nearly as effective at fighting against its obvious foil - anyone who has played RiP against Dredge knows it is far from an auto-win, just as Blood Moon isn't an auto-win against Tron.
But people play RiP to fight Dredge, even though it isn't really that effective, and that has the side effect of suppressing other graveyard decks. Unlike every other option (except Leyline of the Void, which is fine due to its inherent weaknesses), it can't really be played around. You can't bait the crack like with Relic of Progenitus or Nihil Spellbomb, you can't rip it out of the hand proactively like Ravenous Trap, and you can't overload it like Scavenging Ooze or other single-target graveyard removal. It just says "NO". It is by far the least interesting grave hate in the format, mostly because of its finality. It can't be interacted with, other than by being removed, and by then it has already done its damage. Oh, and it really doesn't hurt the most linear graveyard deck!
Like Stony Silence and Blood Moon, it narrows the format without really giving anything else in return. The format would be better off without any of them, simply because it could be wider without them. They can't be interacted with effectively, they don't do their jobs very well against the most flagrant offenders, and they suppress innovation and interaction. We'd all be better off without them.
Krark-Clan Ironworks: It is possible that the combination of Chrome Mox and the Artifact Lands could push a KCI strategy into broken territory. I built a few decks with them legal, and watched/read about such lists in "NBL Modern" tournaments, and from what I could tell it isn't really an issue - the weakness to Ancient Grudge and countermagic/discard is real, and the deck is a T3.5 one at best. That being said, it is a card to watch.
Disciple of the Vault / Myr Enforcer / Cranial Plating: Disciple and Plating were both banned at various points in previous formats with the core Affinity cards, and for a good reason. There is a chance that they'd still be a problem here. I don't see it really happening - Disciple is an "all-in" card that can be played around, and Plating is really no more powerful with the Artifact Lands than it is without (we're talking about 4-6 more artifacts in the deck, at one a turn max), but they are definitely worth watching. It is possible that the "vomit Myr Enforcer" strategy (otherwise known as "All In Affinity") could become good as well, so I included it, but that seems even less likely than the other two cards. IMHO, the only reason people are really scared of these cards is residual memory of getting burned out T4 by block Affinity back in the day - and the deck that would exist in this format would look very different to that one, not to mention that it really didn't happen nearly as consistently as people remember (Atog, anyone?).
Mox Opal: The last of the "Artifact Land Dangers", I went into this a bit before, but I thought it deserved just a tad more explanation. Yes, it can allow for some truly busted acceleration, but it doesn't do it all that consistently. It does it in an interesting way, and it does it with a serious deckbuilding limitation. The legendary thing - making each Mox beyond the first into a de facto Lotus Petal - is also more of a limitation than it initially appears to be. I don't believe that many "degenerate" decks could really take advantage of the acceleration, with the one exception being KCI (covered above). Affinity is around the same speed with or without Artifact Lands, so KCI is the other big concern. What it could do is enable "big mana" artifact decks - Kuldotha Forgemaster, for instance, or Lodestone Golem, could actually see play with both Mox and the Artifact Lands around. I could also see some Thopter-Sword decks making good use of it, for instance. The thing is, all those decks are T4 decks! They are very powerful, yes, but they are also on par with what the format is otherwise capable of. They also have the same weakness to Ancient Grudge that Affinity does, albeit even more so due to the higher mana investment involved.
TLDR, I think it is worth the experiment - in all likelihood, KCI would be the card to get the axe, but Mox might be too much, as well. I think the tradeoff is worthwhile, if Mox has to go to keep the Artifact Lands, mainly to give control the TfK option I mentioned above. I'm sure more than a few will disagree, but that is my personal take!
Karn Liberated: If the format slows down a bit due to the "reigning in" of the linear decks that prey on Tron, then it is possible that the deck could become oppressive. Karn is the card that makes that deck oppressive, mostly because it fits so neatly in with completing Tron T3. Ergo, if Tron becomes dominant, take a look at banning Karn. There are other things they could be doing with their 7, anyway!
Bloodbraid Elf: This card is fine in power level, but just isn't a "healthy" card. It is too RNG-centric, for one thing, and it also has the tendency to push all GX strategies in the same direction just by being the best source of card advantage they can reliably use. Basically, it is more like Green Sun's Zenith than Deathrite Shaman - the former is kept banned because every G deck runs 4 by default, limiting strategic depth, while the latter is the one and only 1-mana planeswalker ever printed. Personally, I say keep it banned, but that isn't because it is OP!
Gitaxian Probe: I don't really see this card being a problem - the sorcery speed and life loss drawbacks make it a "fair" card. That being said, it does both limit deck diversity (auto-4-of in U tempo decks and Storm) and enable a problematic mechanic (Delve). If Delver strategies, UB Delve, or Storm become problems, then this should be the card to go. I wouldn't be sad to see it gone - it really is a pretty boring card...
Ensnaring Bridge: I actually have no beef with Lantern Control, and have had a lot of success with Bridge-based decks in the past. I like the card, and its drawbacks (costing 3, the hand size limitation, being a hatable card type) generally make it fine. That being said, it bears a lot of resemblence to the cards I wanted to ban for limiting the breadth of the format, and if my changes had the desired effect of slowing it down, then there's a chance that Bridge strategies could become oppressive. I don't see that really ever happening (Abrupt Decay says "Hi"), but I thought it was worth mentioning as a "watchable" card.
Simian Spirit Guide: It is possible that Chrome Mox + Spirit Guide would enable something truly horrific, albeit unlikely due to their inherent conflicts with each other. There's only so much card advantage you can reliably trade for tempo in any given game, after all! If something truly degenerate were to emerge using both, I'd rather see the Ape go, as it is a less interesting, more niche card than the Mox. In other words, you can play Chrome Mox in a control deck for a bit of a tempo boost, but you'd never do that with the mana monkey, so if one has to go, then get rid of Harambe. He only goes in degenerate decks, while the Mox goes in others as well...
Dig Through Time: This card has never really been given a fair shake in Modern. It is very, very powerful, don't get me wrong, but it isn't Treasure Cruise! The UU cost and one less card is a real drawback, which would keep it out of the linear decks for the most part. I do worry about it in linear non-aggro decks (combo/lock), but that is exactly the type of deck that Modern is sorely lacking, so it may, MAY be worth the risk. To be fair, it is the one card on this list I am least convinced would be "safe", but I think it is worth discussion and exploration.
Glimpse of Nature: Sort of the same thing as with DTT, I think that the card is undeniably powerful, but also inherently slower than it initially seems. Elves make for a good deck, but in the end they have always had a weakness to certain types of interaction, and Glimpse actually intensifies that weakness in some ways. For instance, Anger of the Gods didn't even exist in the same format as Glimpse Elves, EVER! I think there is a good chance that it is a safe card, but it may also be the type of card that makes Elves the de facto best G creature deck, limiting deck diversity. I'm not afraid of its power level as much as I am introducing another "obvious possible best deck" into the format. Worth consideration, albeit that of the careful kind.
Splinter Twin: I just had to mention this card, because I just know someone will bring it up. Personally, I'm fine with keeping it banned. Why? Not because it is too powerful, that is for sure. The real reason is that Twin the deck is by default the best tempo-combo deck in the format, simply because it requires so few cards to implement. What is the point in running any other UR combo deck when Twin is just better? There isn't one, and that isn't a good thing. The deck is fine, really, but it is too easy to fit into an obvious shell for my tastes. I'd rather see a format with 2-5 differentUX combo-control decks than one with just one, but Twin will always be that one...
So Krark-Clan Ironworks + Pia's Revolution + any 0 mana artifact = either infinite mana or infinite damage? Fun! Not really broken or banworthy though. Someone will eventually draw Emrakul and win or something.
No, there is a choice involved. This is the classic Browbeat fallacy - the combo only works if they can't make the other choice, just as Browbeat only draws 3 if they have less than 5 life. The interaction is far from broken - in my opinion, I'd say it is instead far from playable. Does anyone remember the hype around Athreos, God of Passage when it was first spoiled? This is the exact same thing, except for artifacts. How much impact did Athreos have, agian?
But it isn't getting better. Everyone isn't thinking it through. They see a new toy, and assume it will be busted, because in their minds only the "best possible situation" options present themselves. Reality is far less forgiving...
So Krark-Clan Ironworks + Pia's Revolution + any 0 mana artifact = either infinite mana or infinite damage? Fun! Not really broken or banworthy though. Someone will eventually draw Emrakul and win or something.
No, there is a choice involved. This is the classic Browbeat fallacy - the combo only works if they can't make the other choice, just as Browbeat only draws 3 if they have less than 5 life. The interaction is far from broken - in my opinion, I'd say it is instead far from playable. Does anyone remember the hype around Athreos, God of Passage when it was first spoiled? This is the exact same thing, except for artifacts. How much impact did Athreos have, agian?
But it isn't getting better. Everyone isn't thinking it through. They see a new toy, and assume it will be busted, because in their minds only the "best possible situation" options present themselves. Reality is far less forgiving...
I assume you are referring to my long post? Why is it that you "lol", and why is it that you "can't even respond"?
I was joking about eggs kinda like how people want dredge banned out of existence. Your list unbans problematic lands and bans cards that deal with them. You go on to basically ban infect as a deck too and then I stopped reading after just looking at the bans. Then your watch list has ssg and mox opal after unbanning chrome mox like huh? The linear decks will still be there you just swapped them. Ban sideboard cards like rip, stony, and bloodmoon? Really?? Why shouldn't people be able to punish others for greedy builds? Affinity currently would love these changes (EDIT: except they lose inkmoth)! Now they can get colored mana with less cost to the build and not worry about stony??? I don't know most of it even with your explaining makes no sense to me.
To put it more simply: I don't have a problem with Dredge's explosiveness per se. Explosiveness is annoying and I'll lose to it, but it's something that can be dealt with. I have a problem with Dredge's resilience. The ability to play fetchlands and leave them uncracked so that if I do remove their threats they can instantly get them back is what makes the deck go from being just another combo deck to being too difficult to deal with.
The flaw there is that many list don't run fetches. Ghast isn't the issue, it was legal the day GGT was unban and no issue till now.
Not one of the 20 lists that most recently placed in a tournament or went 5-0 in a league was without fetches. I could go back and check further if you'd like, too. Even in lists without fetches, it's the ability to use Bloodghast to recur any Amalgams in the graveyard for free with land drops that makes Dredge able to keep presenting threats which is what makes the deck more or less invulnerable to removal.
1st at the invitational and I didn't even search for 2 min.
The problem is the Dredge mechanic. It always has been. Dredge is the engine of the deck and everyone knows how busted it is. We already have one card (Dread Return) banned specifically because it interacts with Dredge in a degenerate way. If we keep banning cards that piggyback off the Dredge engine, we are going to go back down the road of old Extended when Wizards stubbornly refused to ban Necropotence and instead banned everything that synergized with it. If Dredge needs a ban, the deck just needs to be simply killed off and put to pasture. It's not worth having to keep banning auxiliary cards just so people can still get a kick out of playing with an abusive and broken mechanic.
I completely understand the frustration, and I also understand how powerful Cathartic Reunion pushed the deck. It's still a graveyard based aggro deck. It wins through hate in a healthy way. If you control the board, and the graveyard, the deck is done for and it spins on its wheels like a horrible combo deck afterwards. It has good, and horrible matchups, it doesn't dominate games 1's like Affinity does.
All in all, my best hope is aggressive unbans this coming January. The only potential ban I see is Become Immense, and I am glad that I am not the only one now holding this opinion.
Link
Edit; Accidental double post above, sorry!
Question: If Bloodghast was banned and the Dredge creature base became something like Narcomoeba + Prized Amalgam + Scrapheap Scrounger, would you be OK with it? I think the real problem is having a creature that comes back for 0 mana. Bloodghast is one of those, and it's relatively easy to set up the land drop with Dakmor Salvage or Life from the Loam. Things that come back for 0 mana, but piggyback off other creatures (e.g. Prized Amalgam and Vengevine) are a little more balanced since you need to pay mana for the other creatures, whether it's Scrounger, Haunted Dead or Gravecrawler.
| Ad Nauseam
| Infect
Big Johnny.
Actually, i think Bloodghast might be fine ban. You leave the deck playable but nerfed in a minor degree than Amulet Bloom got nerfed.
I love Bloodghast as a creature but it might be the best ban to insure a shorter banlist, and a medium-happy fanbase. I know Dredge won't be the same, but it would slow down enough to not need a GGT AND Stinkweed/Amalgam ban.
To be fair, to date Jund had the most bannings of any deck besides Storm. Infect and Affinity only do busted stuff if you don't interact with them. Both decks push the meta towards interaction, which is definately a good thing. They also help keeping Dredge and Tron in check, which is also nice.
I agree that banning something from Dredge isn't neccessary yet. While I dislike Dredge a lot and would love it toned down a margin I believe a ban would be wrong at this point. Aether Revolt seems to be a promising set with many new toys for Modern and the metagame might adjust itself at some point.
My Modern Decks:
BGWAbzan MidrangeWGB
UWRJeskai NahiriRWU
BRUGrixis ControlURB
I agree they should open the gates. Unbanned cards. Jace shouLD be released from his shackles.
Just think how much hype would be if they opened the gates.
By unbanned a few great cards magic would just get so much more interesting.
Modern:
DredgeVine
EDH:
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight
Anima
Standard:
Modern:
DredgeVine
EDH:
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight
Anima
Standard:
It's not stalling, judge, I'm gaining mana and all he had to do is take the three. He's stalling!
UWRjeskai nahiri UWR
UBRgrixis titi UBR
UBRgrixis delverUBR
UR ur kikimite UR
EDH
RUG Riku of Two Reflections RUG
UBR Marchesa, the Black Rose UBR
UBRGYidris, Maelstrom Wielder UBRG
UBRJeleva, Nephalia's ScourgeUBR
So Krark-Clan Ironworks + Pia's Revolution + any 0 mana artifact = either infinite mana or infinite damage? Fun! Not really broken or banworthy though. Someone will eventually draw Emrakul and win or something.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Almost every single deck has maindeck removal so really you're not changing you're deck you're just adapting your removal. I'm not sure who taught you mat but you say that you are changing your deck to put in cards that are dead 90% of matchups but then later say that it's foolish to run maindeck hate for a deck at 20%. Dredge is about 10% so your first statement is correct be consistent. Going back to maindeck removal almost all decks play some sort of maindeck removal, so if you're changing the type of removal in your maindeck your not really changing your deck. The point of maindeck removal is broad answers to common threats, Lightning bolt, path, counterspells, and thoughtseize in their respective colors are examples of this. If you are changing your maindeck removal to be specific that's your own fault. Affinity has been good forever being well over 10% at many times but people don't put artifact hate as maindeck removal to counter affinity.
Modern:
DredgeVine
EDH:
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight
Anima
Standard:
Eggs is getting better. Ban it out of existence!
On that note, I also feel that it should also contain cards which directly counter entire strategies in an non-interactive way. That will become clear below, in my explanations for my bans. In addition, I feel that powerful cards which may enable some degenerate strategies, but are otherwise interesting from a deckbuilding and interaction point of view, should be kept off the list if at all possible.
Enough of that, here is my list - hopefully my meaning becomes clearer through it. I've hidden them behind Spoiler tags, because I'm afraid it went a bit long. I'm quite sure I am going to receive a lot of flack for these opinions, but thats how such things go - I actually hope to hear some of the disagreements, as I'm sure I've missed some interactions...
Artifact Lands: I know, I know, it seems crazy - but really, think about the decks that would really play them!!! I don't know how many of you remember the old Extended, prior to the advent of "Super-Standard-Extended" and well before Modern. In a lot of ways it was not too dissimilar to what Modern is now, albeit with around a decade's less worth of cards. The artifact lands were legal in it, and Affinity (which was really AFFINITY still) was a very good, albeit risky, deck in that format. That was before Vault Skirge, and Steel Overseer, and Signal Pest, so the deck was essentially still a Mirrodin Block Constructed deck with Master of Etherium thrown in. The point is that it was just about the same power level as it is now, probably weaker - the Artifact Lands aren't a problem because of Affinity!
Do you know what decks really benefitted from them? Control/midrange decks that could run Thirst for Knowledege. What is the single biggest problem with U-based control in Modern right now? No, it isn't Counterspell, or the lack thereof. It is the poor state of instant-speed card advantage and selection effects. The legalizing of Seat of the Synod would do a lot to alleviate that problem!
There is also the neat deckbuilding counterplay that the non-Darksteel Citadel Artifact Lands bring to a format - namely their weakness to spot artifact removal, notably Ancient Grudge. There is a definite drawback to having lands that can be blown up by common sideboard cards! On that note, I don't think the interaction with Mox Opal is nearly as strong as it first appears - any deck interested in running Opal already runs Citadel, and the artifact lands don't really allow for much quicker starts, merely more consistent ones. Opal's drawback is real, as well - something that brings me to the next card...
Chrome Mox: Also going back to that Extended format, does anyone recall the decks that actually played it? It wasn't the degenerate combo decks! It was mostly control/midrange decks (TFK again), All In Red (to speed in Blood Moon, a card I'll get back to in a sec), and various other decks that needed a tempo boost. The Imprint cost is real, and a big limiter to the overall power level of the card. The only "broken" deck I can think of that really jammed 4 Chrome Mox was DDT (Dark Depths / Thopter-Sword), and the only reason they did was to enable a T1 Dark Confidant! That deck was broken for reasons other than the Mox...
Basically, the card is unquestionably powerful, but in actual deckbuilding it has real drawbacks. Think about it in the current Ad Nauseum deck, for instance - it would certainly go in the deck, but it would not speed it up (run some realistic hands)! It would likely just displace the Lotus Blooms, adding a little bit of consistency while also leaving them even more vulnerable to Artifact/Enchantment removal than they already are.
What decks would really play the card? Likely the same midrange/control decks that are interested in the Artifact Lands. Faeries, for instance, would play it to power out T1 Bitterblossom - hardly a backbreaking play, and it would leave them very vulnerable to Abrupt Decay, for instance. It would make that deck much better, but with a drawback - that deck, and those like it, would be able to compete much more readily with the higher-tempo aggro decks in the format, but at the cost of both card advantage and post-board consistency. In other words, it enables more interesting strategies.
Stoneforge Mystic: I'm not going to go on about it, but T3 Batterskull seems fine to me. It has all the vulnerabilities that strategy has in Legacy, without the advantage of Force of Will to protect it. Kolaghan's Command is a card in the format, and will continue to be, after all! My only worry is that it becomes the "default U strategy", stymieing deck construction by being the most powerful midrange/tempo thing to do. That is a real concern, but it is worth unbanning just to see how it shakes out in an actual metagame.
Jace, the Mind Sculptor: The only argument I can think of for keeping this card banned is that it becomes the default U finisher. The only real interactive challenge to that is that it is a "tap-out" card, by nature, and most U decks are loath to tap out and lose their counter-war advantage. That may be enough reason to keep it on the list, but personally I'd like to see how it plays out, just like SFM, before jumping to conclusions. After all, JtMS has a lot of similarities to Bitterblossom in actual play - it is a recurring card advantage engine that requires a reactive deck to tap out to utilize. Bitterblossom isn't unsuccessful in Modern because it isn't powerful enough, but because the best strategy for it can't really afford the tempo loss of playing it - and Jace presents a similar conundrum, albeit one that is both more expensive and more powerful.
Become Immense: I just see this card becoming more and more degenerate as time goes on. I don't think that Infect is the real reason to get rid of it - the next card on the list is what I would ban out of that particular deck - but instead the various "pump to kill super-fast" strategies, most notably Death's Shadow Zoo. The card does too much for too little, and enables too many games that aren't really interactive at all. I feel it should go, just to make building such decks more interesting than currently. The various other pump spells all have their own advantages and disadvantages, and having any "auto-include" tends to dilute the impact of choosing the remaining ones. Once you also consider that it is the only card in those decks that really allows for non-magical-christmas-land T3 kills, it really should go.
Inkmoth Nexus: I don't personally feel this card is overpowered, per se, but instead that it gives certain aggressive strategies an unfair advantage over reactive ones. Both Artifact Aggro and Infect would be injured by its loss, but hardly "banned out of the format". Right now this manland acts as a "catch-all backup plan" for both decks, giving them a consistency and resiliency that undermines interactivity. If the format is to be WIDER something has to be done to knock those two down a peg, and Inkmoth is the card that they share. It is an insidious little beast, and a very interesting card that I'll be sad to see gone, but I really do believe that it is the key enabler of the two most prominent "OP" linear strategies right now. Removing it would give more opportunity to interact with those decks, and that is all that is needed to stifle their dominance.
Prized Amalgam: For all the talk about Bloodghast and the dredge mechanic cards in this thread, this is IMHO the real reason for Dredge's meteoric rise. Compare the card to Vengevine, a card that used to be the paragon of free graveyard value - in order to effectively use Vengy, you have to actually cast creature spells. In order to recur Amalgam, you have to, what, play lands? The closest comparison is to Ichorid, which is really the only other truly "free from graveyard" creature with an appreciable attack stat ever printed. I want dredge to be in the format, as I find it an interesting strategy to combat, but the UB Zombie is always going to be a problem, because it has no drawbacks!
With Prized Amalgam, Inkmoth Nexus, and Become Immense gone, the most powerful linear decks in the format would be knocked way down in power level, but importantly also all still be playable. IMHO, it is important not to just ban whole strategies out of a format - which brings me to my next set of bans, which are all on this list because they effectively do just that...
Blood Moon: Here is the big one, to me, and I'm sure a lot of people will disagree with me on it. I do not think that Blood Moon is too powerful! Quite the contrary, I think that it is a perfectly fine card in a vacuum. The thing is, a format IS NOT A VACUUM!!!
In my experience, Blood Moon (and certain other cards like it) does not act as to "police the format" as so many like to say. Wasteland does act like that in Legacy/Vintage, but because it is a single-use effect. You can interact with and play around Wasteland - that card leads to interesting decision trees and more interactive games, albeit ones that may be a bit more tedious than optimal (I am not a huge fan of Wasteland, either, just using it as a comparison). Blood Moon, by being a card that just says "No, you can't play the game anymore" when played to its fullest, encourages/enables NON-INTERACTIVE PLAY. If you have a typical multi-color mana base in Modern, and a Blood Moon is played against you, there is a better than even chance that you simply won't have an answer to the card. The worst part about it is that it makes all non-basics Mountains in particular, and R is the color that simply cannot remove enchantments!
In short, it is a "Griefer" card that only leads to un-fun, un-interactive, and un-WIDE games. The format is weaker by its inclusion, just because there are decks that may be reasonable but will never see play because the card is in it. It leads to certain proactive strategies that are immune to it being better than all others by default (Affinity including it in sideboards, for instance, or Twin's usage of it), while simultaneously suppressing entire classes of potential decks that could prey on those strategies but can't due to a weakness to the card. It also leads to "gotcha" games, where you lose to imposed mana screw - those games are about as fun as games where you get actually mana screwed, and no one enjoys that...
As I said in the intro, I think the purpose of the Banned List should be to foster a wide, fun, and interactive format. Blood Moon manages to put a dent in all three, and has no appreciable advantage I can see by its inclusion. Anyone who has lost to Tron after dropping a T2 Blood Moon can speak to that! Personally, I feel that "punishment" cards should have an "out", if they are to be fun cards - whether that be being single-use or single target (Wasteland, Ancient Grudge, Pithing Needle), being an easily-dealt-with card type (Creatures, mostly, but also Artifacts to a lesser degree), or having built-in limitations (Ensnaring Bridge, Ghostly Prison), it doesn't matter. Blood Moon doesn't fit that criteria - it disables its own interaction (R can't kill enchantments), it is the single hardest card type to remove, and its only limitation is playing basics and R. Good riddance.
Choke, Flashfires, Boil: No one really plays these, but they should go for the same reason as Blood Moon: They are uninteresting "griefer" cards, and don't add any depth or complexity to the format. They are boring and spiteful, and have no business being around.
Chalice of the Void: Same reason as Blood Moon, really, albeit in a far lesser way. The thing is, Modern is always going to be a pretty fast format, leading to the best interactive cards naturally being the cheapest ones. You're not going to play Naturalize if Nature's Claim is available! That also means that the majority of proactive decks (mostly aggressive, but also combo) are going to be riddled with one drops. Like Blood Moon, Chalice can often read "Target Opponent Can't Play The Game". After board, it disables its own removal as well! In the end, it is another "Griefer" card that leads to "Gotcha" games, which are inherently un-fun.
All that being said, of the griefer cards on this list, Chalice is the most interesting and least offensive. The only reason it rises to the level of problematic to me is my insistence on unbanning Chrome Mox, which is a sequence of plays I hope to never see on T1 ever again! I feel that if you unban the Mox, you must ban the Chalice.
Stony Silence: Another "griefer" card, Stony Silence basically acts like Blood Moon for artifacts. I have three main issues with this card. One is that it is not nearly as effective against Affinity as it could be, meaning it doesn't really suppress that linear deck effectively. Two is that it disables Artifact Lands, which would keep them from being playable in anything but combo decks as long as it is a common sideboard option. Three is that it fully suppresses any non-aggressive artifact-based deck, as they are immediately shut down by it. Taking those qualities together, all Stony Silence really does is ensure that the only viable artifact-focused decks are Affinity and Lantern, the latter only because it relies on static qualities more than activated abilities.
The card's mere existence narrows the format, and it is far from the only option to attack such strategies. Removal can be interacted with, counterspells can be played around, and creatures (Kataki, War's Wage) are far easier to deal with than enchantments. Stony Silence is a "NO, STOP PLAYING" card, and those aren't really all that healthy. I think it should go, just so that other artifact decks can exist!
Rest in Peace: First off, if this were the ONLY graveyard hate card in the format, I'd have no issue with it. It isn't. It is merely the most, shall we say, "final". Much like Stony Silence, Rest In Peace pretty much ensures that the only viable graveyard decks will be aggressive ones. By having both the trigger and the static ability, it manages to completely eliminate the use of the graveyard as a resource - which is fine, in a vacuum, but in reality what it does is punish decks that try to set things up ahead of time in the graveyard. Like Blood Moon, it isn't nearly as effective at fighting against its obvious foil - anyone who has played RiP against Dredge knows it is far from an auto-win, just as Blood Moon isn't an auto-win against Tron.
But people play RiP to fight Dredge, even though it isn't really that effective, and that has the side effect of suppressing other graveyard decks. Unlike every other option (except Leyline of the Void, which is fine due to its inherent weaknesses), it can't really be played around. You can't bait the crack like with Relic of Progenitus or Nihil Spellbomb, you can't rip it out of the hand proactively like Ravenous Trap, and you can't overload it like Scavenging Ooze or other single-target graveyard removal. It just says "NO". It is by far the least interesting grave hate in the format, mostly because of its finality. It can't be interacted with, other than by being removed, and by then it has already done its damage. Oh, and it really doesn't hurt the most linear graveyard deck!
Like Stony Silence and Blood Moon, it narrows the format without really giving anything else in return. The format would be better off without any of them, simply because it could be wider without them. They can't be interacted with effectively, they don't do their jobs very well against the most flagrant offenders, and they suppress innovation and interaction. We'd all be better off without them.
Krark-Clan Ironworks: It is possible that the combination of Chrome Mox and the Artifact Lands could push a KCI strategy into broken territory. I built a few decks with them legal, and watched/read about such lists in "NBL Modern" tournaments, and from what I could tell it isn't really an issue - the weakness to Ancient Grudge and countermagic/discard is real, and the deck is a T3.5 one at best. That being said, it is a card to watch.
Disciple of the Vault / Myr Enforcer / Cranial Plating: Disciple and Plating were both banned at various points in previous formats with the core Affinity cards, and for a good reason. There is a chance that they'd still be a problem here. I don't see it really happening - Disciple is an "all-in" card that can be played around, and Plating is really no more powerful with the Artifact Lands than it is without (we're talking about 4-6 more artifacts in the deck, at one a turn max), but they are definitely worth watching. It is possible that the "vomit Myr Enforcer" strategy (otherwise known as "All In Affinity") could become good as well, so I included it, but that seems even less likely than the other two cards. IMHO, the only reason people are really scared of these cards is residual memory of getting burned out T4 by block Affinity back in the day - and the deck that would exist in this format would look very different to that one, not to mention that it really didn't happen nearly as consistently as people remember (Atog, anyone?).
Mox Opal: The last of the "Artifact Land Dangers", I went into this a bit before, but I thought it deserved just a tad more explanation. Yes, it can allow for some truly busted acceleration, but it doesn't do it all that consistently. It does it in an interesting way, and it does it with a serious deckbuilding limitation. The legendary thing - making each Mox beyond the first into a de facto Lotus Petal - is also more of a limitation than it initially appears to be. I don't believe that many "degenerate" decks could really take advantage of the acceleration, with the one exception being KCI (covered above). Affinity is around the same speed with or without Artifact Lands, so KCI is the other big concern. What it could do is enable "big mana" artifact decks - Kuldotha Forgemaster, for instance, or Lodestone Golem, could actually see play with both Mox and the Artifact Lands around. I could also see some Thopter-Sword decks making good use of it, for instance. The thing is, all those decks are T4 decks! They are very powerful, yes, but they are also on par with what the format is otherwise capable of. They also have the same weakness to Ancient Grudge that Affinity does, albeit even more so due to the higher mana investment involved.
TLDR, I think it is worth the experiment - in all likelihood, KCI would be the card to get the axe, but Mox might be too much, as well. I think the tradeoff is worthwhile, if Mox has to go to keep the Artifact Lands, mainly to give control the TfK option I mentioned above. I'm sure more than a few will disagree, but that is my personal take!
Karn Liberated: If the format slows down a bit due to the "reigning in" of the linear decks that prey on Tron, then it is possible that the deck could become oppressive. Karn is the card that makes that deck oppressive, mostly because it fits so neatly in with completing Tron T3. Ergo, if Tron becomes dominant, take a look at banning Karn. There are other things they could be doing with their 7, anyway!
Bloodbraid Elf: This card is fine in power level, but just isn't a "healthy" card. It is too RNG-centric, for one thing, and it also has the tendency to push all GX strategies in the same direction just by being the best source of card advantage they can reliably use. Basically, it is more like Green Sun's Zenith than Deathrite Shaman - the former is kept banned because every G deck runs 4 by default, limiting strategic depth, while the latter is the one and only 1-mana planeswalker ever printed. Personally, I say keep it banned, but that isn't because it is OP!
Gitaxian Probe: I don't really see this card being a problem - the sorcery speed and life loss drawbacks make it a "fair" card. That being said, it does both limit deck diversity (auto-4-of in U tempo decks and Storm) and enable a problematic mechanic (Delve). If Delver strategies, UB Delve, or Storm become problems, then this should be the card to go. I wouldn't be sad to see it gone - it really is a pretty boring card...
Ensnaring Bridge: I actually have no beef with Lantern Control, and have had a lot of success with Bridge-based decks in the past. I like the card, and its drawbacks (costing 3, the hand size limitation, being a hatable card type) generally make it fine. That being said, it bears a lot of resemblence to the cards I wanted to ban for limiting the breadth of the format, and if my changes had the desired effect of slowing it down, then there's a chance that Bridge strategies could become oppressive. I don't see that really ever happening (Abrupt Decay says "Hi"), but I thought it was worth mentioning as a "watchable" card.
Simian Spirit Guide: It is possible that Chrome Mox + Spirit Guide would enable something truly horrific, albeit unlikely due to their inherent conflicts with each other. There's only so much card advantage you can reliably trade for tempo in any given game, after all! If something truly degenerate were to emerge using both, I'd rather see the Ape go, as it is a less interesting, more niche card than the Mox. In other words, you can play Chrome Mox in a control deck for a bit of a tempo boost, but you'd never do that with the mana monkey, so if one has to go, then get rid of Harambe. He only goes in degenerate decks, while the Mox goes in others as well...
Dig Through Time: This card has never really been given a fair shake in Modern. It is very, very powerful, don't get me wrong, but it isn't Treasure Cruise! The UU cost and one less card is a real drawback, which would keep it out of the linear decks for the most part. I do worry about it in linear non-aggro decks (combo/lock), but that is exactly the type of deck that Modern is sorely lacking, so it may, MAY be worth the risk. To be fair, it is the one card on this list I am least convinced would be "safe", but I think it is worth discussion and exploration.
Glimpse of Nature: Sort of the same thing as with DTT, I think that the card is undeniably powerful, but also inherently slower than it initially seems. Elves make for a good deck, but in the end they have always had a weakness to certain types of interaction, and Glimpse actually intensifies that weakness in some ways. For instance, Anger of the Gods didn't even exist in the same format as Glimpse Elves, EVER! I think there is a good chance that it is a safe card, but it may also be the type of card that makes Elves the de facto best G creature deck, limiting deck diversity. I'm not afraid of its power level as much as I am introducing another "obvious possible best deck" into the format. Worth consideration, albeit that of the careful kind.
Splinter Twin: I just had to mention this card, because I just know someone will bring it up. Personally, I'm fine with keeping it banned. Why? Not because it is too powerful, that is for sure. The real reason is that Twin the deck is by default the best tempo-combo deck in the format, simply because it requires so few cards to implement. What is the point in running any other UR combo deck when Twin is just better? There isn't one, and that isn't a good thing. The deck is fine, really, but it is too easy to fit into an obvious shell for my tastes. I'd rather see a format with 2-5 different UX combo-control decks than one with just one, but Twin will always be that one...
No, there is a choice involved. This is the classic Browbeat fallacy - the combo only works if they can't make the other choice, just as Browbeat only draws 3 if they have less than 5 life. The interaction is far from broken - in my opinion, I'd say it is instead far from playable. Does anyone remember the hype around Athreos, God of Passage when it was first spoiled? This is the exact same thing, except for artifacts. How much impact did Athreos have, agian?
But it isn't getting better. Everyone isn't thinking it through. They see a new toy, and assume it will be busted, because in their minds only the "best possible situation" options present themselves. Reality is far less forgiving...
I assume you are referring to my long post? Why is it that you "lol", and why is it that you "can't even respond"?
I was joking about eggs kinda like how people want dredge banned out of existence. Your list unbans problematic lands and bans cards that deal with them. You go on to basically ban infect as a deck too and then I stopped reading after just looking at the bans. Then your watch list has ssg and mox opal after unbanning chrome mox like huh? The linear decks will still be there you just swapped them. Ban sideboard cards like rip, stony, and bloodmoon? Really?? Why shouldn't people be able to punish others for greedy builds? Affinity currently would love these changes (EDIT: except they lose inkmoth)! Now they can get colored mana with less cost to the build and not worry about stony??? I don't know most of it even with your explaining makes no sense to me.