That's true, Jitte can totally wrap the game around it and is absolutely devastating against any creature and also midrange deck. It's not that it gives you an immediate advantage but it pushes you ahead so quickly and so much that even if your opponent get his own online after you did it's basically over for him so it's not just that it wins the game on its own but it's also game deciding who can get it on the battlefield first.
Bingo. Jitte shuts down certain decks completely and overwhelms others with advantage and because it's colorless can just go anywhere it wants as long as it has a creature to sit on. NASTY brute, that.
Alright, I can see it's a strong card, still have to wonder as I never played against it.
Try it out in some testing games on cockatrice if you get a chance - or if you have any proxy legacy events near you run Death and Taxes or Merfolk and watch the thing go nuts. It also goes great in quite a few different edh decks. Jitte is ridiculously sweet and super fun to use, but like has been said, you absolutely smother your opponent with value.
Imagine it was written like this:
Umezawa's Jitte
2
Equip 2
Whenever equipped creature deals combat damage do one of the following whenever you like even if the creature dies:
- Gain 4 life
- Target creature gets -2-2
- Equipped creature gets +4+4
The only interesting element of this article was the Eye argument. I've been enjoying reading different takes on Eye vs. Temple for the April ban as I do my own testing and theorizing.
The rest was almost as unresearched and unsupported as the last article DeMars wrote on bans. The AV section has no content, the GV/SSG section doesn't make any reference to the T4 rule, and there are literally two sentences of justificaiton for BBE. Don't get me started on Jitte, which he treats as a throwaway unban without any consideration given to the dangers. Indeed, none of the unban suggestions anticipate a single counterargument. I commented as much in the article, but I really dislike these kind of unresearched pieces. They don't add anything more to the debate than do most multi-paragraph posts in this banlist thread.
These articles are just opinions backed by player experience in the game. not to mention they only can write soo many words in an article to justify there arguments.
the ugin ban makes sense obviously. But when the best strategy in modern is to be faster without much interaction. I tend to agree on arguments for a ssg ban as well as a possible hit on affinity one day. these are innovate ideas which YES do not have enough data to support them, but by god they shed some light on possible solutions to make this format more interactive. So why not flirt with the idea? what solutions would you suggest to make this format more interactive? Im sure you would be met with scrutiny aswell.
The only interesting element of this article was the Eye argument. I've been enjoying reading different takes on Eye vs. Temple for the April ban as I do my own testing and theorizing.
The rest was almost as unresearched and unsupported as the last article DeMars wrote on bans. The AV section has no content, the GV/SSG section doesn't make any reference to the T4 rule, and there are literally two sentences of justificaiton for BBE. Don't get me started on Jitte, which he treats as a throwaway unban without any consideration given to the dangers. Indeed, none of the unban suggestions anticipate a single counterargument. I commented as much in the article, but I really dislike these kind of unresearched pieces. They don't add anything more to the debate than do most multi-paragraph posts in this banlist thread.
These articles are just opinions backed by player experience in the game. not to mention they only can write soo many words in an article to justify there arguments.
the ugin ban makes sense obviously. But when the best strategy in modern is to be faster without much interaction. I tend to agree on arguments for a ssg ban as well as a possible hit on affinity one day. these are innovate ideas which YES do not have enough data to support them, but by god they shed some light on possible solutions to make this format more interactive. So why not flirt with the idea? what solutions would you suggest to make this format more interactive? Im sure you would be met with scrutiny aswell.
EDIT: I disagree with the jitte unban btw
I prefer exploring ideas to flirting with them. I'm honestly okay with most ban suggestions so long as people anticipate some counterarguments, put in some testing or at least theorize about specific matchups, and are in dialogue with the history of the card and the ban. DeMars doesn't do some of these at all, and does others poorly. Comments like "Keep in mind that the Sword cycle is certainly on a comparable power level to Jitte and is completely unplayable" are just ridiculous, and his anticipation of counterarguments is limited to "dies to removal" and "Modern has big/powerful creatures." There's no discussion of the history of the ban at all, or its abilities in formats outside of one old Standard. As a whole, this strikes me as either rushed and uncommitted (at best) or lazy (at worst), especially compared to many other authors and pros who write about Modern and bans.
Jitte is busted. If you drop a jitte, and get the counters once, it becomes almost impossible to beat you fairly. Jitte will turn a 1/1 into a 4-5 turn clock, it will kill almost all relevant creatures in the format, and at absolute worst, it will gain you a bunch of life if it gets destroyed. And its any combat damage, which makes it even more busted. Swords require you to impact a player's face, swords are also unplayable, because they eat up your turn 3 and 4, while jitte eats turn 2 and 3 with a mana up, or t3 and 4 with 1 and 2 mana up.
The excitement of Jund and Zoo players in the spoiler thread for the new Arlinn planeswalker is why Wizards is going to very sparingly unban anything. The bar for excitement would be that much harder for Arlinn to leap if BBE was legal for example.
I'll admit it is always fun to try out new 4-drops in Jund and I would miss that if BBE were legal.
On the other hand though I don't think it's a good thing for Wizards to keep cards banned just to make newer cards more exciting...seems like another way of "forcing rotation" to me.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Current Modern decks BGW Junk / URB Grixis Shadow / RGB Lantern Control / WUBCBant Eldrazi
Current Legacy decks BUG Shardless BUG / UWR Predict Miracles / RUG Canadian Thresh / WRBG 4c Loam UB Reanimator
We'll see how the meta shapes out when Eldrazi is gone but if the format is still overwhelming too linear combo-aggro focused Wizards should purposely try and inject more traditional/fair aggro-midrange-control-tempo decks into the format. I mean it's great that people can point to Jund and say "see you can still play fair!" but when that's the only fair deck that can thrive in modern something is broken. The threats are too good and the answers are too weak.
I am interested in how many magic players want modern to be more interactive. That includes current modern players and non-modern players who might play it if there was less linear combo-aggro and more interaction. If the majority are happy to sit there goldfishing each other with interaction confined to "i play this and I win" sideboard cards then I guess that's that.
This is one of the reasons I REALLY enjoyed BW Eldrazi when it was coming up in December and early January pre PT OGW. It was an interactive midrange deck that could actually compete with other decks at a successful level and didn't require the GBx shell to do so. Unfortunately OGW did happen and the Aggrodrazi decks have ruined any hope of that archetype surviving. I love grindy, interactive games and so pretty much all my decks are of that vein. I'm not a huge fan of control at times because it feels less interactive back and forth and more I oppress you to the best of my abilities. If you actually resolve something relevant, I might just straight up lose.
Think about Lantern Control. It's a deck that does almost nothing BUT interact with you. It interacts with the top of your library to ensure you can never interact back. Now it's an interactive deck but it does not lead to interactive matches. I very much felt that Twin was in this same vein. It felt like they interacted with you but if you tried to interact back, you were liable to be blown out. Not running an uncounterable kill spell for Exarch? Too bad, get rekt.
Personally, I loathe combo and/or uninteractive decks and want an interactive format.
I just don't agree with many that interactive control and midrange decks aren't going to be competitive in a Twin-less, Bloom-less, Eldrazi-less (at least heavily nuetered presumably) environment.
When I read "need better answers" and "control is unplayable" it translates to my brain as "I want my Tier 0 UU deck back from the good old days".
Personally, I loathe combo and/or uninteractive decks and want an interactive format.
I just don't agree with many that interactive control and midrange decks aren't going to be competitive in a Twin-less, Bloom-less, Eldrazi-less (at least heavily nuetered presumably) environment.
When I read "need better answers" and "control is unplayable" it translates to my brain as "I want my Tier 0 UU deck back from the good old days".
Honestly, if the format goes back to Infect, Burn, and Affinity then we're going to see a HUGE surge in Jeskai control and Jund, and if Tron is neutered by an Eye of Ugin ban then it seems like the format can stabilize from that point. Jund and Ux variants have also BOTH had powerful cards spoiled from SOI so I definitely think change is on the horizon.
Personally, I loathe combo and/or uninteractive decks and want an interactive format.
I just don't agree with many that interactive control and midrange decks aren't going to be competitive in a Twin-less, Bloom-less, Eldrazi-less (at least heavily nuetered presumably) environment.
When I read "need better answers" and "control is unplayable" it translates to my brain as "I want my Tier 0 UU deck back from the good old days".
I agree with this. My LGS was teaming with interactive matchups Post-Twin before the PT and the Eldrazi nonsense was released upon us. What people seem to want from control is the ability to interact with your opponent without them interacting back. Those kinds of decks tend to oppress the format (ala Cawblade). We shall see how things shake out after the B&R announcements.
We'll see how the meta shapes out when Eldrazi is gone but if the format is still overwhelming too linear combo-aggro focused Wizards should purposely try and inject more traditional/fair aggro-midrange-control-tempo decks into the format. I mean it's great that people can point to Jund and say "see you can still play fair!" but when that's the only fair deck that can thrive in modern something is broken. The threats are too good and the answers are too weak.
I am interested in how many magic players want modern to be more interactive. That includes current modern players and non-modern players who might play it if there was less linear combo-aggro and more interaction. If the majority are happy to sit there goldfishing each other with interaction confined to "i play this and I win" sideboard cards then I guess that's that.
This is one of the reasons I REALLY enjoyed BW Eldrazi when it was coming up in December and early January pre PT OGW. It was an interactive midrange deck that could actually compete with other decks at a successful level and didn't require the GBx shell to do so. Unfortunately OGW did happen and the Aggrodrazi decks have ruined any hope of that archetype surviving. I love grindy, interactive games and so pretty much all my decks are of that vein. I'm not a huge fan of control at times because it feels less interactive back and forth and more I oppress you to the best of my abilities. If you actually resolve something relevant, I might just straight up lose.
Think about Lantern Control. It's a deck that does almost nothing BUT interact with you. It interacts with the top of your library to ensure you can never interact back. Now it's an interactive deck but it does not lead to interactive matches. I very much felt that Twin was in this same vein. It felt like they interacted with you but if you tried to interact back, you were liable to be blown out. Not running an uncounterable kill spell for Exarch? Too bad, get rekt.
Calling BW Eldrazi an interactive deck is a pretty big stretch but you're right it would be nice if there were more viable midrange decks other than GBx. People always use the argument of "but Jund is tier 1!" to dispute midrange being weak in Modern but that's one deck. Aggro players can choose between Burn, Zoo, Infect, Affinity, and Merfolk. Combo players get their choice of Griselbrand, Ad Nauseam, Living End, Abzan CoCo, Kiki Chord, Scapeshift, etc. But if you want midrange it's Jund or Abzan and that's pretty much it unless you want to play a tier 3 Mardu deck or something. And of course if you want to play an interactive control deck there isn't a single tier 1 option.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Current Modern decks BGW Junk / URB Grixis Shadow / RGB Lantern Control / WUBCBant Eldrazi
Current Legacy decks BUG Shardless BUG / UWR Predict Miracles / RUG Canadian Thresh / WRBG 4c Loam UB Reanimator
Calling BW Eldrazi an interactive deck is a pretty big stretch but you're right it would be nice if there were more viable midrange decks other than GBx. People always use the argument of "but Jund is tier 1!" to dispute midrange being weak in Modern but that's one deck. Aggro players can choose between Burn, Zoo, Infect, Affinity, and Merfolk. Combo players get their choice of Griselbrand, Ad Nauseam, Living End, Abzan CoCo, Kiki Chord, Scapeshift, etc. But if you want midrange it's Jund or Abzan and that's pretty much it unless you want to play a tier 3 Mardu deck or something. And of course if you want to play an interactive control deck there isn't a single tier 1 option.
It's not a stretch... it ran hand disruption and a grip of removal that equated to a good percentage of the deck. It tried to out-value your removal with their creatures while dealing with your threats as efficiently as possible. It is as much of an interactive deck as Jund is. Currently there is a UW control deck that is doing very well for itself as well so while Control isn't great, it's not dead by any stretch (Lantern Control being a Prison/Control deck).
Calling BW Eldrazi an interactive deck is a pretty big stretch but you're right it would be nice if there were more viable midrange decks other than GBx. People always use the argument of "but Jund is tier 1!" to dispute midrange being weak in Modern but that's one deck. Aggro players can choose between Burn, Zoo, Infect, Affinity, and Merfolk. Combo players get their choice of Griselbrand, Ad Nauseam, Living End, Abzan CoCo, Kiki Chord, Scapeshift, etc. But if you want midrange it's Jund or Abzan and that's pretty much it unless you want to play a tier 3 Mardu deck or something. And of course if you want to play an interactive control deck there isn't a single tier 1 option.
It is as much of an interactive deck as Jund is.
I get the point you're trying to make, but that's just ridiculous. The deck lies somewhere between Tron and Jund in terms of interactivity. Yes it played some discard and removal, but not nearly as much interaction as Jund plays.
As for UW control, it's doing decently now because of its good Eldrazi matchup, but after Eldrazi are banned I wouldn't expect UW control to be tier 1 not by a long shot.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Current Modern decks BGW Junk / URB Grixis Shadow / RGB Lantern Control / WUBCBant Eldrazi
Current Legacy decks BUG Shardless BUG / UWR Predict Miracles / RUG Canadian Thresh / WRBG 4c Loam UB Reanimator
Calling BW Eldrazi an interactive deck is a pretty big stretch but you're right it would be nice if there were more viable midrange decks other than GBx. People always use the argument of "but Jund is tier 1!" to dispute midrange being weak in Modern but that's one deck. Aggro players can choose between Burn, Zoo, Infect, Affinity, and Merfolk. Combo players get their choice of Griselbrand, Ad Nauseam, Living End, Abzan CoCo, Kiki Chord, Scapeshift, etc. But if you want midrange it's Jund or Abzan and that's pretty much it unless you want to play a tier 3 Mardu deck or something. And of course if you want to play an interactive control deck there isn't a single tier 1 option.
It's not a stretch... it ran hand disruption and a grip of removal that equated to a good percentage of the deck. It tried to out-value your removal with their creatures while dealing with your threats as efficiently as possible. It is as much of an interactive deck as Jund is. Currently there is a UW control deck that is doing very well for itself as well so while Control isn't great, it's not dead by any stretch (Lantern Control being a Prison/Control deck).
I'll second this - my Bx Eldrazi list ran: 3x Dismember, 1x Go For the Throat, 2x Languish, 2x Surgical Extraction, 4x Relic, 4x Ghost Quarter, 4x Inquisition, 2x Thoughtseize, and TKSs/Stranglers all in the main. That's a HEFTY amount of interaction that only increased post board.
I'll second this - my Bx Eldrazi list ran: 3x Dismember, 1x Go For the Throat, 2x Languish, 2x Surgical Extraction, 4x Relic, 4x Ghost Quarter, 4x Inquisition, 2x Thoughtseize, and TKSs/Stranglers all in the main. That's a HEFTY amount of interaction that only increased post board.
Too bad those cheaky little c****....reatures made their way in.
It would be a nice midrange deck. And yes it was interactive.
I agree. I wish we could just ban mimic and reality smasher and move on with our lives but I know they're not going to do this.
It would be great if they banned the creatures but they won't do that because they always ban the enablers.
And it makes sense to normally. If they ever print lower cmc eldrazi again (a highly likely scenario) we'd have to go through this thing all over again.
It would be great if they banned the creatures but they won't do that because they always ban the enablers.
And it makes sense to normally. If they ever print lower cmc eldrazi again (a highly likely scenario) we'd have to go through this thing all over again.
Yup I think it's doomed at this point and already sold out of it. I was disappointed that my new fun and interactive deck had such a short life span (and not because it couldn't quite cut it in modern but because of new cards being degenerate with the engine. I blame mimic more than Reality Smasher because it was still fair in my shell, just very strong.)
It would be great if they banned the creatures but they won't do that because they always ban the enablers.
And it makes sense to normally. If they ever print lower cmc eldrazi again (a highly likely scenario) we'd have to go through this thing all over again.
Yup I think it's doomed at this point and already sold out of it. I was disappointed that my new fun and interactive deck had such a short life span (and not because it couldn't quite cut it in modern but because of new cards being degenerate with the engine. I blame mimic more than Reality Smasher because it was still fair in my shell, just very strong.)
Some things just aren't meant to be but it was fun while it lasted.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Death to false Value.
GW
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Bingo. Jitte shuts down certain decks completely and overwhelms others with advantage and because it's colorless can just go anywhere it wants as long as it has a creature to sit on. NASTY brute, that.
Oh man a pro asking for bans on a combo deck and buffs to jund?! This is practically unheard of!!!
Spirits
Try it out in some testing games on cockatrice if you get a chance - or if you have any proxy legacy events near you run Death and Taxes or Merfolk and watch the thing go nuts. It also goes great in quite a few different edh decks. Jitte is ridiculously sweet and super fun to use, but like has been said, you absolutely smother your opponent with value.
Imagine it was written like this:
Umezawa's Jitte
2
Equip 2
Whenever equipped creature deals combat damage do one of the following whenever you like even if the creature dies:
- Gain 4 life
- Target creature gets -2-2
- Equipped creature gets +4+4
Valuetown.
Auto metalcraft + actual affinity creatures (frogmite etc.) + ravager + disciple of the vault. The artifact lands are insane in the right deck.
the ugin ban makes sense obviously. But when the best strategy in modern is to be faster without much interaction. I tend to agree on arguments for a ssg ban as well as a possible hit on affinity one day. these are innovate ideas which YES do not have enough data to support them, but by god they shed some light on possible solutions to make this format more interactive. So why not flirt with the idea? what solutions would you suggest to make this format more interactive? Im sure you would be met with scrutiny aswell.
EDIT: I disagree with the jitte unban btw
decks playing:
none
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
I prefer exploring ideas to flirting with them. I'm honestly okay with most ban suggestions so long as people anticipate some counterarguments, put in some testing or at least theorize about specific matchups, and are in dialogue with the history of the card and the ban. DeMars doesn't do some of these at all, and does others poorly. Comments like "Keep in mind that the Sword cycle is certainly on a comparable power level to Jitte and is completely unplayable" are just ridiculous, and his anticipation of counterarguments is limited to "dies to removal" and "Modern has big/powerful creatures." There's no discussion of the history of the ban at all, or its abilities in formats outside of one old Standard. As a whole, this strikes me as either rushed and uncommitted (at best) or lazy (at worst), especially compared to many other authors and pros who write about Modern and bans.
Death and Taxes
Pauper
UB Teachings
Tortured Existence
Murasa Tron
Modern
Pod (RIP)
Bloom(RIP)
Merfolk
On the other hand though I don't think it's a good thing for Wizards to keep cards banned just to make newer cards more exciting...seems like another way of "forcing rotation" to me.
BGW Junk / URB Grixis Shadow / RGB Lantern Control / WUBCBant Eldrazi
Current Legacy decks
BUG Shardless BUG / UWR Predict Miracles / RUG Canadian Thresh / WRBG 4c Loam
UB Reanimator
This is one of the reasons I REALLY enjoyed BW Eldrazi when it was coming up in December and early January pre PT OGW. It was an interactive midrange deck that could actually compete with other decks at a successful level and didn't require the GBx shell to do so. Unfortunately OGW did happen and the Aggrodrazi decks have ruined any hope of that archetype surviving. I love grindy, interactive games and so pretty much all my decks are of that vein. I'm not a huge fan of control at times because it feels less interactive back and forth and more I oppress you to the best of my abilities. If you actually resolve something relevant, I might just straight up lose.
Think about Lantern Control. It's a deck that does almost nothing BUT interact with you. It interacts with the top of your library to ensure you can never interact back. Now it's an interactive deck but it does not lead to interactive matches. I very much felt that Twin was in this same vein. It felt like they interacted with you but if you tried to interact back, you were liable to be blown out. Not running an uncounterable kill spell for Exarch? Too bad, get rekt.
I just don't agree with many that interactive control and midrange decks aren't going to be competitive in a Twin-less, Bloom-less, Eldrazi-less (at least heavily nuetered presumably) environment.
When I read "need better answers" and "control is unplayable" it translates to my brain as "I want my Tier 0 UU deck back from the good old days".
Honestly, if the format goes back to Infect, Burn, and Affinity then we're going to see a HUGE surge in Jeskai control and Jund, and if Tron is neutered by an Eye of Ugin ban then it seems like the format can stabilize from that point. Jund and Ux variants have also BOTH had powerful cards spoiled from SOI so I definitely think change is on the horizon.
I agree with this. My LGS was teaming with interactive matchups Post-Twin before the PT and the Eldrazi nonsense was released upon us. What people seem to want from control is the ability to interact with your opponent without them interacting back. Those kinds of decks tend to oppress the format (ala Cawblade). We shall see how things shake out after the B&R announcements.
Calling BW Eldrazi an interactive deck is a pretty big stretch but you're right it would be nice if there were more viable midrange decks other than GBx. People always use the argument of "but Jund is tier 1!" to dispute midrange being weak in Modern but that's one deck. Aggro players can choose between Burn, Zoo, Infect, Affinity, and Merfolk. Combo players get their choice of Griselbrand, Ad Nauseam, Living End, Abzan CoCo, Kiki Chord, Scapeshift, etc. But if you want midrange it's Jund or Abzan and that's pretty much it unless you want to play a tier 3 Mardu deck or something. And of course if you want to play an interactive control deck there isn't a single tier 1 option.
BGW Junk / URB Grixis Shadow / RGB Lantern Control / WUBCBant Eldrazi
Current Legacy decks
BUG Shardless BUG / UWR Predict Miracles / RUG Canadian Thresh / WRBG 4c Loam
UB Reanimator
It's not a stretch... it ran hand disruption and a grip of removal that equated to a good percentage of the deck. It tried to out-value your removal with their creatures while dealing with your threats as efficiently as possible. It is as much of an interactive deck as Jund is. Currently there is a UW control deck that is doing very well for itself as well so while Control isn't great, it's not dead by any stretch (Lantern Control being a Prison/Control deck).
I get the point you're trying to make, but that's just ridiculous. The deck lies somewhere between Tron and Jund in terms of interactivity. Yes it played some discard and removal, but not nearly as much interaction as Jund plays.
As for UW control, it's doing decently now because of its good Eldrazi matchup, but after Eldrazi are banned I wouldn't expect UW control to be tier 1 not by a long shot.
BGW Junk / URB Grixis Shadow / RGB Lantern Control / WUBCBant Eldrazi
Current Legacy decks
BUG Shardless BUG / UWR Predict Miracles / RUG Canadian Thresh / WRBG 4c Loam
UB Reanimator
I'll second this - my Bx Eldrazi list ran: 3x Dismember, 1x Go For the Throat, 2x Languish, 2x Surgical Extraction, 4x Relic, 4x Ghost Quarter, 4x Inquisition, 2x Thoughtseize, and TKSs/Stranglers all in the main. That's a HEFTY amount of interaction that only increased post board.
I agree. I wish we could just ban mimic and reality smasher and move on with our lives but I know they're not going to do this.
RGTron
UGInfect
URStorm
WUBRAd Nauseam
BRGrishoalbrand
URGScapeshift
WBGAbzan Company
WUBRGAmulet Titan
BRGLiving End
WGBogles
And it makes sense to normally. If they ever print lower cmc eldrazi again (a highly likely scenario) we'd have to go through this thing all over again.
Yup I think it's doomed at this point and already sold out of it. I was disappointed that my new fun and interactive deck had such a short life span (and not because it couldn't quite cut it in modern but because of new cards being degenerate with the engine. I blame mimic more than Reality Smasher because it was still fair in my shell, just very strong.)
Some things just aren't meant to be but it was fun while it lasted.