The silliest thing about Cruise is that its stronger than Visions, so its kinda strange that visions is banned but it isn't.
That being said, I'd have been fine with Visions coming off for a long time. There really aren't many decks that would want it, especially considering we have cruise now. If it makes an aggro deck the top deck in the format I think modern can handle it. There could have been far worse things coming from it than an aggro deck being the tops.
It's rather easily forgotten that Ancestral Visions is banned largely as a gesture of fairness in regards to how the original banlist was crafted, alongside with... well... pretty much everything that Blue had banned at the time. I mean, JTMS was probably gonna happen no matter what, but they threw AV in for arbitrary reasons. It's like Bitterblossom, all reputation and little concrete evidence.
The silliest thing about Cruise is that its stronger than Visions, so its kinda strange that visions is banned but it isn't.
That being said, I'd have been fine with Visions coming off for a long time. There really aren't many decks that would want it, especially considering we have cruise now. If it makes an aggro deck the top deck in the format I think modern can handle it. There could have been far worse things coming from it than an aggro deck being the tops.
It's rather easily forgotten that Ancestral Visions is banned largely as a gesture of fairness in regards to how the original banlist was crafted, alongside with... well... pretty much everything that Blue had banned at the time. I mean, JTMS was probably gonna happen no matter what, but they threw AV in for arbitrary reasons. It's like Bitterblossom, all reputation and little concrete evidence.
Actually, AV's reasons are even worse than Bitterblossom's. They banned AV specifically for seeing play in the Legacy Control decks that also played Jace and Mental Misstep. At least Bitterblossom was banned because of an Extended deck that only had 1 banned card and none of the extra Legacy cards like Force of Will and Brainstorm.
The silliest thing about Cruise is that its stronger than Visions, so its kinda strange that visions is banned but it isn't.
That being said, I'd have been fine with Visions coming off for a long time. There really aren't many decks that would want it, especially considering we have cruise now. If it makes an aggro deck the top deck in the format I think modern can handle it. There could have been far worse things coming from it than an aggro deck being the tops.
It's rather easily forgotten that Ancestral Visions is banned largely as a gesture of fairness in regards to how the original banlist was crafted, alongside with... well... pretty much everything that Blue had banned at the time. I mean, JTMS was probably gonna happen no matter what, but they threw AV in for arbitrary reasons. It's like Bitterblossom, all reputation and little concrete evidence.
I do think it highly amusing that, judging by their original ban list, drawing three cards on turn 5 is broken... but casting (not dropping into play, actually casting) Emrakul, the Aeons Torn on that same turn is acceptable.
They really didn't think that list through very well.
With the interpretation of how the modern format is currently, where TC and Dig are very powerful enablers. Stoneforge Mystic seems like a small thing compared to Tarmogoyf, Snapcaster, and YP for the 2 drop slot. If people are really willing to splash SFM in a twin deck, where it's already a tarmo-twin or kikki-twin, even delver-twin would not prefer to play SFM.
Banning batterskull is a necessary evil as batterskull is just obnoxious with mystic, and that would be the only card that is obnoxious with it. The swords argument doesn't work anymore, Play SFM into a counter or bolt or something. Attempt to cast swords, potentially die on t3 or t4 by twin, delver, etc.
But that is only really a hope, SFM has a powerful enabler effect. But it is not as powerful by banning batterskull and looking at how the format is turning into.
The silliest thing about Cruise is that its stronger than Visions, so its kinda strange that visions is banned but it isn't.
That being said, I'd have been fine with Visions coming off for a long time. There really aren't many decks that would want it, especially considering we have cruise now. If it makes an aggro deck the top deck in the format I think modern can handle it. There could have been far worse things coming from it than an aggro deck being the tops.
Ask your self this: What would Modern look like in a world where decks had Dig Through Time+Ancestral Visions?
The silliest thing about Cruise is that its stronger than Visions, so its kinda strange that visions is banned but it isn't.
That being said, I'd have been fine with Visions coming off for a long time. There really aren't many decks that would want it, especially considering we have cruise now. If it makes an aggro deck the top deck in the format I think modern can handle it. There could have been far worse things coming from it than an aggro deck being the tops.
Ask your self this: What would Modern look like in a world where decks had Dig Through Time+Ancestral Visions?
We might have a playable Control deck, Scapeshift would be solidly tier 1, and Twin might adopt AV. That is basically it.
Is it possible now in modern to unban stoneforge mystic?
With the fact to ban batterskull to bring it back?
short answer: no
long answer: hell no
You are dwelling on the past, as new sets come in. New cards are added to the pool, things change, and format has changed to TC and Dig decks. Stoneforge Mystic would be more of a liability by putting 5-6 other cards that dilute the deck. If you make esper blade, the deck would not do so well against delver decks.
Is it possible now in modern to unban stoneforge mystic?
With the fact to ban batterskull to bring it back?
short answer: no
long answer: hell no
You are dwelling on the past, as new sets come in. New cards are added to the pool, things change, and format has changed to TC and Dig decks. Stoneforge Mystic would be more of a liability by putting 5-6 other cards that dilute the deck. If you make esper blade, the deck would not do so well against delver decks.
the problem is that stoneforge becomes BETTER with each expansion.
the problem IS stoneforge, not batterskull
with stoneforge, you can make a UW delver stoneforge sick deck, and others, batterskull is really fine by itself.
Is it possible now in modern to unban stoneforge mystic?
With the fact to ban batterskull to bring it back?
short answer: no
long answer: hell no
You are dwelling on the past, as new sets come in. New cards are added to the pool, things change, and format has changed to TC and Dig decks. Stoneforge Mystic would be more of a liability by putting 5-6 other cards that dilute the deck. If you make esper blade, the deck would not do so well against delver decks.
the problem is that stoneforge becomes BETTER with each expansion.
the problem IS stoneforge, not batterskull
with stoneforge, you can make a UW delver stoneforge sick deck, and others, batterskull is really fine by itself.
The silliest thing about Cruise is that its stronger than Visions, so its kinda strange that visions is banned but it isn't.
That being said, I'd have been fine with Visions coming off for a long time. There really aren't many decks that would want it, especially considering we have cruise now. If it makes an aggro deck the top deck in the format I think modern can handle it. There could have been far worse things coming from it than an aggro deck being the tops.
Ask your self this: What would Modern look like in a world where decks had Dig Through Time+Ancestral Visions?
Decks have Dig and Ancestral but no Treasure cruise?
It's an interesting experiment. If Faeries can actually cast DTT I'm inclined to think it would be a t1 deck. T1 Ancestral, T2 Bitterblossom is probably one of the strongest openings you can have in modern if you aren't dead before your turn 3.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently Playing:
Modern: UWUW TronUW
Legacy: WDeath N TaxesW CEldrazi C
If you couldn't tell I hate greedy blue decks.
Is it possible now in modern to unban stoneforge mystic?
With the fact to ban batterskull to bring it back?
short answer: no
long answer: hell no
You are dwelling on the past, as new sets come in. New cards are added to the pool, things change, and format has changed to TC and Dig decks. Stoneforge Mystic would be more of a liability by putting 5-6 other cards that dilute the deck. If you make esper blade, the deck would not do so well against delver decks.
the problem is that stoneforge becomes BETTER with each expansion.
the problem IS stoneforge, not batterskull
with stoneforge, you can make a UW delver stoneforge sick deck, and others, batterskull is really fine by itself.
bottomline: they are not going to unban stoneforger, hell i see jace unbanning and def not stoneforge
Name me the new equipments that are better than the swords. The only one that I can think of is Elbrus, which I wouldn't mind in the format.
If they banned Batterskull, then SFM would probably be fine for the format but my problem with that is what's the point of unbanning a card if you just have to ban another one because of that card's impact?
Batterskull is a cool card that sees play in a lot of decks and it definitely isn't busted, banning it just so people can play with SFM (a card that forces WotC to be cautious of what kind of equipment they can print) doesn't seem worth the trade-off at all.
they haven't printed a legitimately playable equipment since swords and batterskull. godsend is meh at best (3cmc equip is high). i agree that people are living in the past when evaluating that card. yes, it is on the higher end of the power scale (and yes, someone will counter with AF's quote that SFM is a legacy card) but with how much the format has changed from this one expansion, i wouldn't be surprised if they keep pushing the envelope. in a UR heavy meta, SFM is pretty terrible. you do gain a card as advantage, but that's what good cards do. they give you card advantage.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I speak in sarcasm because calling people ******* ******** is not allowed.
Hoping Wizards "creates" a meta that makes Goyf and Bob redundant. Would be a dream to see it crash and burn... lol
*Back to Earth*
No way Stoneforge is being unbanned. Her being unbanned will mean many of the cards in the banned list are arguably unban-worthy. JTMS has a likelier chance to be unbanned first.
There's a lot of deck diversity in Modern at the moment: you can play blue with a splash of red (that thing that placed first in SCG Minnesota), red with a splash of blue (burn w/ Treasure Cruise), or blue/red (UR Delver). It's like American politics, which is very appropriate for election time.
Lmao, nice.
Amazing point. Personally, I think yes. Both are fair cards that aim to create value in some way but are easily dealt with. The ONLY people ive ever met in person who think the two are either ban worthy or too good for the format are those who can afford them or don't want to afford them. Its understandable. I too used to think the same thing, when MM1 came out I was like "100 dollars for a Goyf! Ha! Maybe if it comes down to 50 ill pick some up." And a few months later I was SO wrong.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active Modern Decks
U Tron GW Bogles RG Loam UR Blue Breach RBU Grixis Goryo BRU Grixis Delver GBR Jund GBW Junk
Agreed, however if I did own them I would be trying to find a way to make them useable despite the attempt being futile. Its known as one of the best card advantage engines ever but it is complete trash now.
But even if something were to come out and make Pod (my primary modern deck) as bad as Bob is currently, I would still play the deck simply because im invested and its a deck I know very well.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active Modern Decks
U Tron GW Bogles RG Loam UR Blue Breach RBU Grixis Goryo BRU Grixis Delver GBR Jund GBW Junk
Would people have a grudge against Dark Confidant and Tarmogoyf if they weren't expensive?
Speaking as a non-Goyf/Bob owner:
No. Not at all.
BUT because of their price they lock players out of decks in Modern and keep new players out of the game for as long as BGx is the 'best' deck in the format.
Further - Goyf's splashability and presence in significant numbers of decks pushes certain tier decks away from being playable by many.
My reason for not owning the cards is that I don't see the value in them - I don't think $200 is worth it for a vanilla beater so I'm happy to not have the card for now (and I own Rishadan Ports, Karakas, Wastelands, Liliana of the Veil, most fetchs and shocks etc etc - just so you realise my issue isn't purely cost).
I'm not saying they should be banned, they're not ban-worthy at all - but they should not be the entry ticket to Modern.
While I don't think SFM should be considered for un-banning (at this point in time); it is important to note that Modern is much more flush with removal than legacy is since it is a more vital form of interaction. As such SFM loses a considerable amount of power when it doesn't get to use its activated ability.
Also, while I have no proof of this, I do not think that WotC is limiting their potential equipment design space because of SFM in legacy. The problem is more-so that good equipment, by virtue of being colorless, would be nearly ubiquitous in any creature deck. Which is basically all Standard is right now. Not to mention that you would be hard-pressed to create an equipment that could compete with the existing powerhouses; while also competing with the already present hate for them in multiple decks (abrupt decay, manriki, disenchant, tin street hooligan, etc).
Basically I am saying that the argument that: "they can't unban SFM (in modern) because it would force wotc to limit equipment even further" doesn't make much sense.
Besides that I just still find it funny that some people still doubt the power of TC. It has instantly been ported to good use in both Legacy AND Vintage; in most cases a 3 or 4-of in tier 1 decks. The only point of contention is that TC's power level scales with the efficiency of the cards around it; which makes the card lose steam as the overall power of the format decreases.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
Would people have a grudge against Dark Confidant and Tarmogoyf if they weren't expensive?
Speaking as a non-Goyf/Bob owner:
No. Not at all.
BUT because of their price they lock players out of decks in Modern and keep new players out of the game for as long as BGx is the 'best' deck in the format.
Further - Goyf's splashability and presence in significant numbers of decks pushes certain tier decks away from being playable by many.
My reason for not owning the cards is that I don't see the value in them - I don't think $200 is worth it for a vanilla beater so I'm happy to not have the card for now (and I own Rishadan Ports, Karakas, Wastelands, Liliana of the Veil, most fetchs and shocks etc etc - just so you realise my issue isn't purely cost).
I'm not saying they should be banned, they're not ban-worthy at all - but they should not be the entry ticket to Modern.
I agree with this, despite having the cards. When Jund was dominant it was really hard for me to convince anyone to play modern with me because of the perception that the format's very expensive and not fun at all. The cost of Jund rivaled many competitive Legacy decks, a format people where much more comfortable sinking money into at the time. The cost and problematic nature of a format dominated by such a deck turned a lot of people off of Modern. It's anecdotal but many people I know initially seemed interested in playing their old standard cards/decks but were quickly turned off after a few rounds of Jund stripping away their hand while beating down with $100 roid-raging Grizzly Bears. Unfortunately for those people they couldn't do the same without investing $2,000 or so, so instead they just turned their backs on the format. Had a deck cheap deck like delver or burn been popular then it's likely some of them would have stuck around.
That said, price cannot play a factor in what gets banned/unbanned. The idea of buying into a tier one Modern deck for $150 or whatever burn costs is awesome, but the reality of a metagame that's 50% burn/delver is not. The low cost of the two decks definitely plays a role in their representation, but it's unclear how much. Jund was very well represented during the period of its dominance despite its cost, and I think it's fair to say it would have been even higher had the cost been as low as burn or delver. Even with its price serving as a huge barrier to entry however, it created a stale metagame and drove people away from the format. Although the low price of burn and delver artificially inflates the two decks' representation, it wouldn't be attracting so many people if it weren't also powerful. Ultimately power was the reason cards in Jund were banned, and power will be the reason cards in burn/delver are banned as well if the metagame cannot adapt.
Some people are going to see this as precedent for Wizards trying to keep cheap decks tier two. It is not. They are simply following the precedent they previously set for trying to maintain a balanced metagame. Sometimes that will mean cheap cards are banned, while others it may mean expensive ones are. Price should have no influence on their decisions though. If price serves as a real barrier to entry it should be handled with reprints, not the banlist. I don't care if I lose my investment on Goyf because it's reprinted into oblivion; I do care if playing Modern is no longer fun because Wizards refused to ban a 25 cent card for price reasons.
I agree - price is not a reason to ban or unban a card/deck.
But we can't take away from the fact that Delver and Burn are cheap and Tier 1 and so have an inflated meta % on that basis.
Also to be fair - mirror games can be fun and interactive. And Delver provides an opportunity for a fun interactive game of magic that isn't dependent on being first to Lili... (I'm not saying it's ideal - but I can think of worse, draw/go dependent mirror matches than Delver and so if there was going to be a dominant deck, Delver is definitely one I'd put forward). In other words, if I was going to run a tournament where only one deck was allowed - there is potential for it to be a fun tournament so long as that deck can answer itself and I believe Delver is an option for that deck.
On the flip side if Modern was a bunch of Burn mirrors, I'd probably go play Standard for a while.
With the interpretation of how the modern format is currently, where TC and Dig are very powerful enablers. Stoneforge Mystic seems like a small thing compared to Tarmogoyf, Snapcaster, and YP for the 2 drop slot. If people are really willing to splash SFM in a twin deck, where it's already a tarmo-twin or kikki-twin, even delver-twin would not prefer to play SFM.
Banning batterskull is a necessary evil as batterskull is just obnoxious with mystic, and that would be the only card that is obnoxious with it. The swords argument doesn't work anymore, Play SFM into a counter or bolt or something. Attempt to cast swords, potentially die on t3 or t4 by twin, delver, etc.
But that is only really a hope, SFM has a powerful enabler effect. But it is not as powerful by banning batterskull and looking at how the format is turning into.
Batterskull is a good countermeasure against Burn and Delver (decks that are very popular and strong right now) and it gives decks like Esper/Grixis Control the chance to have enough lifegain to outlast Aggro at least on a good draw (if the opponent doesn't have the counter/removal spell for it).
In short, you'd need to ban all of the Swords andBatterskull to make Stoneforge Mystic remotely fair (or raise the powerlevel of Modern considerably) and you'd still rob a lot of decks off of a good option against Burn/Delver (aka Batterskull). That's just a bad trade-off.
In response to your argument, Batterskull is also the reason why SFM makes it disgusting. If you wanted lifelink for delver, behemoth sledge/sword of light and shadow are very decent lifegain weapons ALL THE WHILE delver till being able to top deck something to kill you. Batterskull is a vigilance/lifelink/4/4 that delver will inevitably lose against because u can keep reusing it.
Again, the swords arugment doesn't work, we are at the point of the format where if u attempt to SFM for a swords and get countered. You can potentially get blown out into an OTK from your opponent for diluting your deck of 6-7 cards. Where it's 4 SFM and 2 equipment, if anything only basilisk collar + staticaster seems decent and that doesn't seem to be enough board presence. 1 mana removal IS EVERYWHERE, in the form of bolt, path to exile, etc. Players are looking for FASTER games, SFM is a tedious set up over time. Even twin and pod are losing out of favor due to a faster metagame caused by the new khan's cards. I have yet to see any new equipment in khans to cause SFM to be anything problematic. The only problematic thing right now is the interaction of SFM and Batterskull, where you have to either keep one of them banned. I would rather have batterskull banned where it is just an inevitability bomb for ALL forms of decks. Batterskull is outside range of almost EVERY form of removal currently in modern, albeit the artifact interaction spells, while swords are still in contention of not being as powerful thanks to RtR card pool.
Batterskull is not overpowered whatsoever unless paired with SFM, so saying you want banning Batterskull and not SFM isnt valid. Its like saying Death rite was OP because of fetch lands, and since we have to much 1 mana creature removal, we better ban fetch lands. (its an exaggeration but you get my point).
Question, will anything like ponder, preordain, or rite of flame be unbanned (or similarly be printed)? Mainly because i feel pure combo is far and few between in Modern.
Pretty sure dig through time is there to help combo, I don't think those are going to be unbanned to serve as yet another tool for blue. Combo doesn't seem few and far between to me.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
Do you guys think that Thragtusk could be good enough in Modern Pod or any green deck in general? It seems awesome against Delver and Burn, since it gainst a bunch of life AND can't really be Vapor Snagged.
If I recall correctly, it was designed to fight Standard Delver decks.
I know it costs 5 mana rather than 4, but against the current metagame it looks better than Obstinate Baloth, since Thrag always gives you at least a 2 for 1 and gains more life. Also, he is better at attacking.
Unless, of course, you are going to face 8-rack and Jund...
I have to agree that the meta is getting kinda terrible. Unless things change in the next months, I'm afraid Wizards will have to use their Banhammer again.
I've been thinking about this recently. People play Thragtusk in Legacy Nic Fit (sometimes with Pod, sometimes with just GSZ) and it generally matches up well against delver. The hard part is podding into it before you die though.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It's rather easily forgotten that Ancestral Visions is banned largely as a gesture of fairness in regards to how the original banlist was crafted, alongside with... well... pretty much everything that Blue had banned at the time. I mean, JTMS was probably gonna happen no matter what, but they threw AV in for arbitrary reasons. It's like Bitterblossom, all reputation and little concrete evidence.
Actually, AV's reasons are even worse than Bitterblossom's. They banned AV specifically for seeing play in the Legacy Control decks that also played Jace and Mental Misstep. At least Bitterblossom was banned because of an Extended deck that only had 1 banned card and none of the extra Legacy cards like Force of Will and Brainstorm.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
They really didn't think that list through very well.
Banning batterskull is a necessary evil as batterskull is just obnoxious with mystic, and that would be the only card that is obnoxious with it. The swords argument doesn't work anymore, Play SFM into a counter or bolt or something. Attempt to cast swords, potentially die on t3 or t4 by twin, delver, etc.
But that is only really a hope, SFM has a powerful enabler effect. But it is not as powerful by banning batterskull and looking at how the format is turning into.
short answer: no
long answer: hell no
Ask your self this: What would Modern look like in a world where decks had Dig Through Time+Ancestral Visions?
We might have a playable Control deck, Scapeshift would be solidly tier 1, and Twin might adopt AV. That is basically it.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Why not? If the best equipment it can search up is Sword of Fire and Ice, how can it be any more broken than the rest of the format?
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
You are dwelling on the past, as new sets come in. New cards are added to the pool, things change, and format has changed to TC and Dig decks. Stoneforge Mystic would be more of a liability by putting 5-6 other cards that dilute the deck. If you make esper blade, the deck would not do so well against delver decks.
the problem is that stoneforge becomes BETTER with each expansion.
the problem IS stoneforge, not batterskull
with stoneforge, you can make a UW delver stoneforge sick deck, and others, batterskull is really fine by itself.
http://www.starcitygames.com/article/28145_The-Modern-Banned-List.html
bottomline: they are not going to unban stoneforger, hell i see jace unbanning and def not stoneforge
Name me the new equipments that are better than the swords. The only one that I can think of is Elbrus, which I wouldn't mind in the format.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Decks have Dig and Ancestral but no Treasure cruise?
It's an interesting experiment. If Faeries can actually cast DTT I'm inclined to think it would be a t1 deck. T1 Ancestral, T2 Bitterblossom is probably one of the strongest openings you can have in modern if you aren't dead before your turn 3.
Modern:
UWUW TronUW
Legacy:
WDeath N TaxesW
CEldrazi C
If you couldn't tell I hate greedy blue decks.
Vintage
WWhite Trash
If they banned Batterskull, then SFM would probably be fine for the format but my problem with that is what's the point of unbanning a card if you just have to ban another one because of that card's impact?
Batterskull is a cool card that sees play in a lot of decks and it definitely isn't busted, banning it just so people can play with SFM (a card that forces WotC to be cautious of what kind of equipment they can print) doesn't seem worth the trade-off at all.
GB Midrange HomebrewBG
Modern
Affinity X
EDH
Jarad, Golgari Lich LordBG
*Back to Earth*
No way Stoneforge is being unbanned. Her being unbanned will mean many of the cards in the banned list are arguably unban-worthy. JTMS has a likelier chance to be unbanned first.
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
Amazing point. Personally, I think yes. Both are fair cards that aim to create value in some way but are easily dealt with. The ONLY people ive ever met in person who think the two are either ban worthy or too good for the format are those who can afford them or don't want to afford them. Its understandable. I too used to think the same thing, when MM1 came out I was like "100 dollars for a Goyf! Ha! Maybe if it comes down to 50 ill pick some up." And a few months later I was SO wrong.
U Tron
GW Bogles
RG Loam
UR Blue Breach
RBU Grixis Goryo
BRU Grixis Delver
GBR Jund
GBW Junk
Active Legacy Decks
BR Reanimator
But even if something were to come out and make Pod (my primary modern deck) as bad as Bob is currently, I would still play the deck simply because im invested and its a deck I know very well.
U Tron
GW Bogles
RG Loam
UR Blue Breach
RBU Grixis Goryo
BRU Grixis Delver
GBR Jund
GBW Junk
Active Legacy Decks
BR Reanimator
Speaking as a non-Goyf/Bob owner:
No. Not at all.
BUT because of their price they lock players out of decks in Modern and keep new players out of the game for as long as BGx is the 'best' deck in the format.
Further - Goyf's splashability and presence in significant numbers of decks pushes certain tier decks away from being playable by many.
My reason for not owning the cards is that I don't see the value in them - I don't think $200 is worth it for a vanilla beater so I'm happy to not have the card for now (and I own Rishadan Ports, Karakas, Wastelands, Liliana of the Veil, most fetchs and shocks etc etc - just so you realise my issue isn't purely cost).
I'm not saying they should be banned, they're not ban-worthy at all - but they should not be the entry ticket to Modern.
Also, while I have no proof of this, I do not think that WotC is limiting their potential equipment design space because of SFM in legacy. The problem is more-so that good equipment, by virtue of being colorless, would be nearly ubiquitous in any creature deck. Which is basically all Standard is right now. Not to mention that you would be hard-pressed to create an equipment that could compete with the existing powerhouses; while also competing with the already present hate for them in multiple decks (abrupt decay, manriki, disenchant, tin street hooligan, etc).
Basically I am saying that the argument that: "they can't unban SFM (in modern) because it would force wotc to limit equipment even further" doesn't make much sense.
Besides that I just still find it funny that some people still doubt the power of TC. It has instantly been ported to good use in both Legacy AND Vintage; in most cases a 3 or 4-of in tier 1 decks. The only point of contention is that TC's power level scales with the efficiency of the cards around it; which makes the card lose steam as the overall power of the format decreases.
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)I agree with this, despite having the cards. When Jund was dominant it was really hard for me to convince anyone to play modern with me because of the perception that the format's very expensive and not fun at all. The cost of Jund rivaled many competitive Legacy decks, a format people where much more comfortable sinking money into at the time. The cost and problematic nature of a format dominated by such a deck turned a lot of people off of Modern. It's anecdotal but many people I know initially seemed interested in playing their old standard cards/decks but were quickly turned off after a few rounds of Jund stripping away their hand while beating down with $100 roid-raging Grizzly Bears. Unfortunately for those people they couldn't do the same without investing $2,000 or so, so instead they just turned their backs on the format. Had a deck cheap deck like delver or burn been popular then it's likely some of them would have stuck around.
That said, price cannot play a factor in what gets banned/unbanned. The idea of buying into a tier one Modern deck for $150 or whatever burn costs is awesome, but the reality of a metagame that's 50% burn/delver is not. The low cost of the two decks definitely plays a role in their representation, but it's unclear how much. Jund was very well represented during the period of its dominance despite its cost, and I think it's fair to say it would have been even higher had the cost been as low as burn or delver. Even with its price serving as a huge barrier to entry however, it created a stale metagame and drove people away from the format. Although the low price of burn and delver artificially inflates the two decks' representation, it wouldn't be attracting so many people if it weren't also powerful. Ultimately power was the reason cards in Jund were banned, and power will be the reason cards in burn/delver are banned as well if the metagame cannot adapt.
Some people are going to see this as precedent for Wizards trying to keep cheap decks tier two. It is not. They are simply following the precedent they previously set for trying to maintain a balanced metagame. Sometimes that will mean cheap cards are banned, while others it may mean expensive ones are. Price should have no influence on their decisions though. If price serves as a real barrier to entry it should be handled with reprints, not the banlist. I don't care if I lose my investment on Goyf because it's reprinted into oblivion; I do care if playing Modern is no longer fun because Wizards refused to ban a 25 cent card for price reasons.
'78 CB750F, '09 CBR600RR
But we can't take away from the fact that Delver and Burn are cheap and Tier 1 and so have an inflated meta % on that basis.
Also to be fair - mirror games can be fun and interactive. And Delver provides an opportunity for a fun interactive game of magic that isn't dependent on being first to Lili... (I'm not saying it's ideal - but I can think of worse, draw/go dependent mirror matches than Delver and so if there was going to be a dominant deck, Delver is definitely one I'd put forward). In other words, if I was going to run a tournament where only one deck was allowed - there is potential for it to be a fun tournament so long as that deck can answer itself and I believe Delver is an option for that deck.
On the flip side if Modern was a bunch of Burn mirrors, I'd probably go play Standard for a while.
In response to your argument, Batterskull is also the reason why SFM makes it disgusting. If you wanted lifelink for delver, behemoth sledge/sword of light and shadow are very decent lifegain weapons ALL THE WHILE delver till being able to top deck something to kill you. Batterskull is a vigilance/lifelink/4/4 that delver will inevitably lose against because u can keep reusing it.
Again, the swords arugment doesn't work, we are at the point of the format where if u attempt to SFM for a swords and get countered. You can potentially get blown out into an OTK from your opponent for diluting your deck of 6-7 cards. Where it's 4 SFM and 2 equipment, if anything only basilisk collar + staticaster seems decent and that doesn't seem to be enough board presence. 1 mana removal IS EVERYWHERE, in the form of bolt, path to exile, etc. Players are looking for FASTER games, SFM is a tedious set up over time. Even twin and pod are losing out of favor due to a faster metagame caused by the new khan's cards. I have yet to see any new equipment in khans to cause SFM to be anything problematic. The only problematic thing right now is the interaction of SFM and Batterskull, where you have to either keep one of them banned. I would rather have batterskull banned where it is just an inevitability bomb for ALL forms of decks. Batterskull is outside range of almost EVERY form of removal currently in modern, albeit the artifact interaction spells, while swords are still in contention of not being as powerful thanks to RtR card pool.
Question, will anything like ponder, preordain, or rite of flame be unbanned (or similarly be printed)? Mainly because i feel pure combo is far and few between in Modern.
URStormRU
GRTitanshift[mana]RG/mana]
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
I've been thinking about this recently. People play Thragtusk in Legacy Nic Fit (sometimes with Pod, sometimes with just GSZ) and it generally matches up well against delver. The hard part is podding into it before you die though.