I have to say, despite Grixis being the best deck, the meta in this tournament looks good, it's pretty diverse.
I do also think it's telling that Shadow is very much keeping E-Tron in check, because E-Tron has also been doing very well in tournaments, less people are complaining about it on stream, interestingly enough
I think the fact that shadow preys on E Tron is why it is best otherwise I think E Tron is at a higher power level overall considering the rest of the metagame. Some people believe E-Tron is the actually best deck in modern including myself. Even with GDS being so popular Eldrazi is still putting up good numbers.
While I would agree that E-Tron is a very powerful deck I do think that it plays second fiddle to DS simply because DS is such a prevalent match up and doesn't have any really unwinnable or at least heavily lop sided ones. It really has to have T1 Relic and T2 Chalice or the GDS player has to have kept a very weak hand for it to run over GDS. While the GDS player can very easily run over E-Tron with a wide variety of hands and the match up gets so much better post board.
I am more worried about E-Tron than Death's Shadow right now.
Shadow does not crush the fair matchups like Tron-based strategies do. If we want to incentivize control/reactive decks, we need to leave shadow decks alone and instead think about taking action against a Tier 1 ramp deck. Nearly consistent turn 3 Tron is game breaking, as lands are harder to interact with than creatures.
And yet banning either Urza's Tower or Eldrazi Temple would completely kill off Tron and Eldrazi respectively. Too many players would be upset and quit.
Considering this, would an Expedition Map ban be out of the question. It greatly reduces the consistency of enabling turn 3 tron, which is probably the most unfair thing these decks do.
Just a thought if we want to help out the control/reactive decks by weakening its, arguably, toughest matchup
I think i'm in a lonely position here but i actually think they have to Ban Street Wraith and Grapeshot, Unban Preordain, Stoneforge and if the numbers allow it, Bloodbraid Elf too.
By banning those two cards you get rid of the enabler which still feels degenerate by doing too much(Like Gitaxian Probe which i think it was rightfully banned) and the best and faster combo archetype that ever existed in Storm(which they obviosuly hate too) and keep us attached to Legacy speed. Instead you get: Midrange tools to be proactive and bold in SFM and BBE(although i have nightmares about BBE into LotV), and the filtering needed to align answers to questions. Spell based combo is still viable in Nauseam but a legal T4 speed, Shadow becomes slower but more consistent in Preordain, and Blue-based control gets another high power cantrip and a win con.
This is too much of a shake for an announcement alone, but in two it could work. However, i do feel by the look of the format and DS dominance numbers that Street Wraith is rightfully getting choped on August.
I don't know how this is a reply to me, but I don't think WotC will ban grapeshot now since they have not done so after so many ban's against Storm. They are generally okay with critical mass combo's existing as long as they are not the best thing in town.
Can we give GDS a few years to dominate and perhaps a few direct attempts to print some hate against it(like they did for Twin) before we start talking about banning a deck that isn't doing anything broken like instantly winning the game.
I am more worried about E-Tron than Death's Shadow right now.
Shadow does not crush the fair matchups like Tron-based strategies do. If we want to incentivize control/reactive decks, we need to leave shadow decks alone and instead think about taking action against a Tier 1 ramp deck. Nearly consistent turn 3 Tron is game breaking, as lands are harder to interact with than creatures.
And yet banning either Urza's Tower or Eldrazi Temple would completely kill off Tron and Eldrazi respectively. Too many players would be upset and quit.
Considering this, would an Expedition Map ban be out of the question. It greatly reduces the consistency of enabling turn 3 tron, which is probably the most unfair thing these decks do.
Just a thought if we want to help out the control/reactive decks by weakening its, arguably, toughest matchup
I think a temple ban forces players to play straight tron which is easier to police with fast decks imo.
I think if next ban announcement looked like:
Eldrazi temple banned
SFM unbanned
Non shadow Midrange would be better in this format.
While die hard counterspell players would get Thier confrollish/midrangy decks and be content.
White would be better.
And there would be less linearity and more archtype balance.
If shadow rose too dominant at this point and supplanted other urx and bgx strategies then we could look at a shadow ban.
I am more worried about E-Tron than Death's Shadow right now.
Shadow does not crush the fair matchups like Tron-based strategies do. If we want to incentivize control/reactive decks, we need to leave shadow decks alone and instead think about taking action against a Tier 1 ramp deck. Nearly consistent turn 3 Tron is game breaking, as lands are harder to interact with than creatures.
And yet banning either Urza's Tower or Eldrazi Temple would completely kill off Tron and Eldrazi respectively. Too many players would be upset and quit.
Considering this, would an Expedition Map ban be out of the question. It greatly reduces the consistency of enabling turn 3 tron, which is probably the most unfair thing these decks do.
Just a thought if we want to help out the control/reactive decks by weakening its, arguably, toughest matchup
I guarantee you Wizards is not looking at a Tower ban. Tron decks have been fine in Modern for years, never occupying too much of a metagame share and coexisting with fair decks in Tier 1 in many metagame cycles. If anything pushed Tron it was the Eldrazi, and if anything pushed the Eldrazi it was Temple. Some Eldrazi decks don't even use Map or Tron at all (BW, Bant).
If Wizards decides to ban anything from Eldrazi, it will be Temple itself. Their rationale will be that all the Eldrazi are still useable in various shells sans Temple. The deck isn't at that metagame share yet, but it would be if any DS cards get banned. It would be the race to the bottom in action.
The idea of Wizards banning Eldrazi temple in a metagame literally polluted by Shadow decks would be comical if it wasn't so tragic.
Wizards has never, ever said "hey, this one deck is a problem, let's ban something from another fairly reasonable deck that is keeping other stuff out of the metagame."
That would be like someone seeing that Amulet Bloom was busted and reasoning that the lack of aggro decks to police it was the problem, so banning lightning bolt to make aggro decks better to fix the bloom problem.
The idea of Wizards banning Eldrazi temple in a metagame literally polluted by Shadow decks would be comical if it wasn't so tragic.
Wizards has never, ever said "hey, this one deck is a problem, let's ban something from another fairly reasonable deck that is keeping other stuff out of the metagame."
That would be like someone seeing that Amulet Bloom was busted and reasoning that the lack of aggro decks to police it was the problem, so banning lightning bolt to make aggro decks better to fix the bloom problem.
Oh, I don't think this would happen until after a DS-focused ban. Or alongside one.
We have had some pretty diverse Top 8's short of the breakout event for Grixis Shadow, which didn't surprise me at all as I was saying it was the better of the shadow decks while everyone was idiotically talking about if Misra's Bauble was perhaps to good and needing to be looked at.
We have seen various base W decks performing well with Mono-White hate bears actually looking like a solid deck in the face of spell heavy decks like Grixis Shadow and built in hate against lands matter decks like any flavor of Tron. I think as long as Grixis Shadow and E-Tron continue to be top dogs it should push that deck into the top tables more often, it is a meta-call deck for sure but it isn't as easy for GDS and E-Tron to hate as people like to think.
Blue is doing better obviously with Grixis Shadow, sure its not the deck most of us blue mages wanted but its the one we got.
Black is still king and short of WotC printing slews of powerful utility spells to compete with the discard spells that currently exist nothing is going to change that.
Red has its own deck in burn and is a consistent part timer in various other builds like GDS.
Green is probably in the least represented status it has been at for long time. Still CoCo decks are a real thing and Scapeshift is still a thing.
Colorless is the most represented overall with E-Tron and Affinity. I don't see anything changing their status, Affinity does what affinity does and any deck not running white always run the risk of simply having the robots overload your hate early. Tron decks currently are actually Eldrazi decks and don't even need to assemble Tron to deploy their threats ahead of curve so the usual hate against such strategies doesn't even do much.
Short of something new coming out of the existing card pool or something from a new set injecting a new super problematic deck into the meta-game it looks over all good.
I don't really care much about the discussion regarding "linear" decks as essentially every deck is in some way linear, you only have 75 cards to win the game with and even Reactive control has a very narrow scope of functions that the deck looks to deploy to at some point win the game. I think the major thing that people really don't like is how fast many of the decks can end the game as the game ending on T4-5 on average doesn't afford much in way of time to attempt to do whatever your deck is designed to do. Only the most pure of combo decks don't care much if at all as to what their opponent is doing and those types of decks don't currently rule the format.
Shard based Mid-range like Jund/Junk will continue to be bad as long as the 1-2 combo of E-Tron and DS are as good as they are. One is just a better bigger mid-range deck that goes over the shard based ones, and the other is a aggro deck that uses the same tools the mid-range decks would use to disrupt the mid-range decks for the 2-3 turns they need to win the game.
edit: while i would love for a mid-range/control Blue deck to exist I think Modern is overall to hostel to that type of strategy. 1c.c. targeted discard is by design great against those types of strategies, hurting counterspell based control decks is what Duress was designed to do and we have way better options in TS/IoK and some type of Tap out control seems like the more likely type to ever exist.
Hellfire is coming off super biased, you can't just ban temple by itself and then turn around and call Shadow an innocent bystander.
Unbans are the solution, but if I absolutely had to pick one to be banned, it'd be shadow. I do think temple would quickly be the next ban target, and its a race to the bottom.
WOTC could dual ban temple and shadow
I have so little faith in WOTC doing the right thing and unbanning instead of panic-banning the best deck(s)
Semifinals shadow vs. Shadow...great metagame, lol
These posts are baffling to me. First of all, they show a major misunderstanding of the Invitational T8, 50% of which is decided by Standard results, not Modern results. Second, the Modern portion was just 8 rounds; basically a PPTQ or an SCG IQ. Contrast this with a 15 round GP or Open. Third, I have no idea what someone who makes this kind of statement actually wants. Do they want a different fair deck mirror, like Twin vs. Twin? Or Jund vs. Jund? Is it just DS they don't like? Do they not want mirrors at all and just want four different decks in the T4, despite there being three different decks in the T4 already? Most pros really enjoy the DS mirror and the Grixis DS deck, so I don't even know if this is an expression of a widely held belief or just a personal axe to grind. The whole thing is deeply puzzling.
Honestly, I don't think many of the anti-Modern posters in this thread even know what they want. It's just fashionable to pick up certain tired narratives and repeat them with no thought to why those narratives are suspect, inaccurate, or not widely held. They know they want more fair decks, but then they bash certain fair decks because they aren't the exact type of deck they prefer. They treat the Invitational T8 as representative of the broader metagame (it isn't) and then within that false assumption ignore the fact that three of the top 4 decks are extremely interactive and fair (DS and D&T).
Don't get me wrong. There are legitimate issues with Modern that are worth complaining about. But those issues are not mentioned in posts like this. Posts like this are just the same tired Modern bashing we've seen for years. Bottom line: the hyper-vocal, hyper minority of the anti-Modern camp will always be here and will always have gripes to raise no matter what the metagame looks like.
I look at the list and see:
3 Eldrazi Tron
3 Shadow
3 BGx
4 linear/combo/aggro
I don't understand how people see lists like this and think of the words "healthy" or "diverse."
I'm not sure it's completely fair to combine aggro and linear combo decks all in one category unless it's dominating an entire meta.
Again, I do believe this is showcasing that E-Tron is not quite such an innocent deck in modern either, and definitely next on the chopping block after Shadow, if WOTC pursues that idiotic ideology and philosophy
Hah, watching this DnT game is EXACTLY the hell I experience every time. It's a deck I cannot ever wrap my head around, and it just destroys me, almost always.
Lots of people call it Lantern Combo, but its a Prison deck really.
It's similar to turns, in that it wants to assemble a lock combo to prevent the opponent from playing. It has other elements (as does turns), but it locks by assembling combo pieces and usually "winning" through opponent concession after the lock is in place. It's very much a combo deck, IMO. There is no backup plan, it's assemble the combo lock or lose.
I look at the list and see:
3 Eldrazi Tron
3 Shadow
3 BGx
4 linear/combo/aggro
I don't understand how people see lists like this and think of the words "healthy" or "diverse."
I don't understand how people see a list like that and group Affinity, Lantern Control, Living End, and RG Breach all as the same kind of deck.
If you're going to group combo, control, and aggro as 1 category why not throw in midrange and ramp and say it's just 14 combo/control/aggro/midrange/ramp decks! There's no diversity!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern
JundBGR
RW Blood MoonRW
Pauper
Delver U
Elves G
Control B
Commander
Edgar Markov BRW
Captain Sisay GW
Niv-Mizzet, Parun UR
Tymna and Ravos WB
I don't understand why Shadow and E-Tron need to be hit at the same time.
Shadow has been great overall for the format, beating up the non-interactive decks and encouraging interaction
E-Tron does not encourage interaction quite nearly as much. With its multiple sol lands, it just goes over everything that tries to interact.
Weakening E-Tron would encourage more interactive strategies to emerge which in turn will help combat Death's Shadow, not make shadow better.
Agreed. People who think that if A>B and you weaken B it will make A better don't understand how metagames work. Of course, just because Shadow preys on Eldrazi Tron doesn't mean it's actually the better deck. I think E-Tron is currently the best deck in the format, and it's evidenced by the fact that it continually puts up strong results despite a poor matchup against another highly prevalent deck.
Lots of people call it Lantern Combo, but its a Prison deck really.
It's similar to turns, in that it wants to assemble a lock combo to prevent the opponent from playing. It has other elements (as does turns), but it locks by assembling combo pieces and usually "winning" through opponent concession after the lock is in place. It's very much a combo deck, IMO. There is no backup plan, it's assemble the combo lock or lose.
That's ridiculous. The deck wins via mill. That's like calling a blue draw go deck combo because the deck uses the combo of drawing cards and counterspell to lock the opponent out of the game. Legacy control decks used sensei's diving top and counterbalance to lock the opponent out of the game and that didn't make them combo decks. Eternal Command can lock the opponent out but it's not a combo deck.
Lantern Control wins by interacting with the opponent. It's a control deck. Labeling it as the same category as aggro when it plays 0 creatures and every card interacts with the opponent is ridiculous.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern
JundBGR
RW Blood MoonRW
Pauper
Delver U
Elves G
Control B
Commander
Edgar Markov BRW
Captain Sisay GW
Niv-Mizzet, Parun UR
Tymna and Ravos WB
Twin could come off if they left Jace and SFM on the list.
decks playing:
none
While I would agree that E-Tron is a very powerful deck I do think that it plays second fiddle to DS simply because DS is such a prevalent match up and doesn't have any really unwinnable or at least heavily lop sided ones. It really has to have T1 Relic and T2 Chalice or the GDS player has to have kept a very weak hand for it to run over GDS. While the GDS player can very easily run over E-Tron with a wide variety of hands and the match up gets so much better post board.
Shadow does not crush the fair matchups like Tron-based strategies do. If we want to incentivize control/reactive decks, we need to leave shadow decks alone and instead think about taking action against a Tier 1 ramp deck. Nearly consistent turn 3 Tron is game breaking, as lands are harder to interact with than creatures.
And yet banning either Urza's Tower or Eldrazi Temple would completely kill off Tron and Eldrazi respectively. Too many players would be upset and quit.
Considering this, would an Expedition Map ban be out of the question. It greatly reduces the consistency of enabling turn 3 tron, which is probably the most unfair thing these decks do.
Just a thought if we want to help out the control/reactive decks by weakening its, arguably, toughest matchup
I don't know how this is a reply to me, but I don't think WotC will ban grapeshot now since they have not done so after so many ban's against Storm. They are generally okay with critical mass combo's existing as long as they are not the best thing in town.
Can we give GDS a few years to dominate and perhaps a few direct attempts to print some hate against it(like they did for Twin) before we start talking about banning a deck that isn't doing anything broken like instantly winning the game.
I think if next ban announcement looked like:
Eldrazi temple banned
SFM unbanned
Non shadow Midrange would be better in this format.
While die hard counterspell players would get Thier confrollish/midrangy decks and be content.
White would be better.
And there would be less linearity and more archtype balance.
If shadow rose too dominant at this point and supplanted other urx and bgx strategies then we could look at a shadow ban.
decks playing:
none
I guarantee you Wizards is not looking at a Tower ban. Tron decks have been fine in Modern for years, never occupying too much of a metagame share and coexisting with fair decks in Tier 1 in many metagame cycles. If anything pushed Tron it was the Eldrazi, and if anything pushed the Eldrazi it was Temple. Some Eldrazi decks don't even use Map or Tron at all (BW, Bant).
If Wizards decides to ban anything from Eldrazi, it will be Temple itself. Their rationale will be that all the Eldrazi are still useable in various shells sans Temple. The deck isn't at that metagame share yet, but it would be if any DS cards get banned. It would be the race to the bottom in action.
Wizards has never, ever said "hey, this one deck is a problem, let's ban something from another fairly reasonable deck that is keeping other stuff out of the metagame."
That would be like someone seeing that Amulet Bloom was busted and reasoning that the lack of aggro decks to police it was the problem, so banning lightning bolt to make aggro decks better to fix the bloom problem.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
Oh, I don't think this would happen until after a DS-focused ban. Or alongside one.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
Spirits
no ban's
no unbans
We have had some pretty diverse Top 8's short of the breakout event for Grixis Shadow, which didn't surprise me at all as I was saying it was the better of the shadow decks while everyone was idiotically talking about if Misra's Bauble was perhaps to good and needing to be looked at.
We have seen various base W decks performing well with Mono-White hate bears actually looking like a solid deck in the face of spell heavy decks like Grixis Shadow and built in hate against lands matter decks like any flavor of Tron. I think as long as Grixis Shadow and E-Tron continue to be top dogs it should push that deck into the top tables more often, it is a meta-call deck for sure but it isn't as easy for GDS and E-Tron to hate as people like to think.
Blue is doing better obviously with Grixis Shadow, sure its not the deck most of us blue mages wanted but its the one we got.
Black is still king and short of WotC printing slews of powerful utility spells to compete with the discard spells that currently exist nothing is going to change that.
Red has its own deck in burn and is a consistent part timer in various other builds like GDS.
Green is probably in the least represented status it has been at for long time. Still CoCo decks are a real thing and Scapeshift is still a thing.
Colorless is the most represented overall with E-Tron and Affinity. I don't see anything changing their status, Affinity does what affinity does and any deck not running white always run the risk of simply having the robots overload your hate early. Tron decks currently are actually Eldrazi decks and don't even need to assemble Tron to deploy their threats ahead of curve so the usual hate against such strategies doesn't even do much.
Short of something new coming out of the existing card pool or something from a new set injecting a new super problematic deck into the meta-game it looks over all good.
I don't really care much about the discussion regarding "linear" decks as essentially every deck is in some way linear, you only have 75 cards to win the game with and even Reactive control has a very narrow scope of functions that the deck looks to deploy to at some point win the game. I think the major thing that people really don't like is how fast many of the decks can end the game as the game ending on T4-5 on average doesn't afford much in way of time to attempt to do whatever your deck is designed to do. Only the most pure of combo decks don't care much if at all as to what their opponent is doing and those types of decks don't currently rule the format.
Shard based Mid-range like Jund/Junk will continue to be bad as long as the 1-2 combo of E-Tron and DS are as good as they are. One is just a better bigger mid-range deck that goes over the shard based ones, and the other is a aggro deck that uses the same tools the mid-range decks would use to disrupt the mid-range decks for the 2-3 turns they need to win the game.
edit: while i would love for a mid-range/control Blue deck to exist I think Modern is overall to hostel to that type of strategy. 1c.c. targeted discard is by design great against those types of strategies, hurting counterspell based control decks is what Duress was designed to do and we have way better options in TS/IoK and some type of Tap out control seems like the more likely type to ever exist.
Hellfire is coming off super biased, you can't just ban temple by itself and then turn around and call Shadow an innocent bystander.
Unbans are the solution, but if I absolutely had to pick one to be banned, it'd be shadow. I do think temple would quickly be the next ban target, and its a race to the bottom.
WOTC could dual ban temple and shadow
I have so little faith in WOTC doing the right thing and unbanning instead of panic-banning the best deck(s)
I look at the list and see:
3 Eldrazi Tron
3 Shadow
3 BGx
4 linear/combo/aggro
I don't understand how people see lists like this and think of the words "healthy" or "diverse."
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
I've heard Lantern Conrol described a lot of ways, but linear, combo, or aggro is not one of them.
These posts are baffling to me. First of all, they show a major misunderstanding of the Invitational T8, 50% of which is decided by Standard results, not Modern results. Second, the Modern portion was just 8 rounds; basically a PPTQ or an SCG IQ. Contrast this with a 15 round GP or Open. Third, I have no idea what someone who makes this kind of statement actually wants. Do they want a different fair deck mirror, like Twin vs. Twin? Or Jund vs. Jund? Is it just DS they don't like? Do they not want mirrors at all and just want four different decks in the T4, despite there being three different decks in the T4 already? Most pros really enjoy the DS mirror and the Grixis DS deck, so I don't even know if this is an expression of a widely held belief or just a personal axe to grind. The whole thing is deeply puzzling.
Honestly, I don't think many of the anti-Modern posters in this thread even know what they want. It's just fashionable to pick up certain tired narratives and repeat them with no thought to why those narratives are suspect, inaccurate, or not widely held. They know they want more fair decks, but then they bash certain fair decks because they aren't the exact type of deck they prefer. They treat the Invitational T8 as representative of the broader metagame (it isn't) and then within that false assumption ignore the fact that three of the top 4 decks are extremely interactive and fair (DS and D&T).
Don't get me wrong. There are legitimate issues with Modern that are worth complaining about. But those issues are not mentioned in posts like this. Posts like this are just the same tired Modern bashing we've seen for years. Bottom line: the hyper-vocal, hyper minority of the anti-Modern camp will always be here and will always have gripes to raise no matter what the metagame looks like.
I'm not sure it's completely fair to combine aggro and linear combo decks all in one category unless it's dominating an entire meta.
Again, I do believe this is showcasing that E-Tron is not quite such an innocent deck in modern either, and definitely next on the chopping block after Shadow, if WOTC pursues that idiotic ideology and philosophy
Spirits
Well played to the pilot.
Spirits
It's similar to turns, in that it wants to assemble a lock combo to prevent the opponent from playing. It has other elements (as does turns), but it locks by assembling combo pieces and usually "winning" through opponent concession after the lock is in place. It's very much a combo deck, IMO. There is no backup plan, it's assemble the combo lock or lose.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Spirits
Shadow has been great overall for the format, beating up the non-interactive decks and encouraging interaction
E-Tron does not encourage interaction quite nearly as much. With its multiple sol lands, it just goes over everything that tries to interact.
Weakening E-Tron would encourage more interactive strategies to emerge which in turn will help combat Death's Shadow, not make shadow better.
I don't understand how people see a list like that and group Affinity, Lantern Control, Living End, and RG Breach all as the same kind of deck.
If you're going to group combo, control, and aggro as 1 category why not throw in midrange and ramp and say it's just 14 combo/control/aggro/midrange/ramp decks! There's no diversity!
JundBGR
RW Blood MoonRW
Pauper
Delver U
Elves G
Control B
Commander
Edgar Markov BRW
Captain Sisay GW
Niv-Mizzet, Parun UR
Tymna and Ravos WB
Standard: lol no
Modern: BG/x, UR/x, Burn, Merfolk, Zoo, Storm
Legacy: Shardless BUG, Delver (BUG, RUG, Grixis), Landstill, Depths Combo, Merfolk
Vintage: Dark Times, BUG Fish, Merfolk
EDH: Teysa, Orzhov Scion / Krenko, Mob Boss / Stonebrow, Krosan Hero
That's ridiculous. The deck wins via mill. That's like calling a blue draw go deck combo because the deck uses the combo of drawing cards and counterspell to lock the opponent out of the game. Legacy control decks used sensei's diving top and counterbalance to lock the opponent out of the game and that didn't make them combo decks. Eternal Command can lock the opponent out but it's not a combo deck.
Lantern Control wins by interacting with the opponent. It's a control deck. Labeling it as the same category as aggro when it plays 0 creatures and every card interacts with the opponent is ridiculous.
JundBGR
RW Blood MoonRW
Pauper
Delver U
Elves G
Control B
Commander
Edgar Markov BRW
Captain Sisay GW
Niv-Mizzet, Parun UR
Tymna and Ravos WB
Spirits