The initial rationale for banning this card no longer holds any water: "Porting such [SFM] decks into Modern was a trivial affair, and resulted in very powerful decks. We prefer to just ban this card rather than risk yet another format dominated by Stoneforge Mystic." There are too many decks that literally don't care about SFM, only a small subset of top-tier decks that can even run this card, and too many comparable threats in other decks. Blue-based decks were at a comparable prevalence to white-based decks when Wizards unbanned JTMS, who has gone on to do all but literally nothing. There is simply no realistic Modern scenario where SFM goes on to "dominate" the format. Add in the significant public interest in this card's unban, which appears quantifiably higher than at any previous point in Modern history, and this seems like a fated unban. This is a clear "when" not "if" unban, and I double down on this being unbanned no later than Jan/Feb of 2019.
To summarize an earlier post I made on this issue, Stirrings was fine for years as a niche enabler with built-in limitations around which decks could use it. For a long time, it was just something that helped Tron and fringe Tier 2 or lower decks. This made Stirrings significantly different from Preordain, a card banned for being a blue enabler that goes in any of the many blue-based combo decks. Gradually, Stirrings has changed. These changes are pronounced in 2018. "Colorless" cards no longer represent a limitation. Rather, it's a huge species of decks much like blue-based combo is its own species. Gx Tron, Lantern Control, KCI, Amulet Titan, RG Eldrazi, and Bant Eldrazi are major format features that make up a significant portion of the metagame. In fact, there are far more Stirrings decks than both blue-based combo decks and SV decks generally! This card is no longer niche. That creates, for the first time in Modern history, a legitimate contradiction between elements of the Preordain ban and Stirrings' legality. People made this comparison before and it lacked evidence. Now, the evidence is there. I sincerely doubt Wizards unbans Preordain due to its historic fear of blue-based combo decks, which leaves them in a position where they can trim metagame shares from an entire set of decks without actually hurting those decks. This points to a Stirrings ban. We would also be remiss to ignore the significant (perhaps not majority, but still notable) public pressure Wizards has likely seen over the years to hit Stirrings decks. That's a nonzero consideration.
Scenario 3
No changes
This is the safest bet from a historical perspective, and honestly, this should probably be scenario 1. A July ban or unban with no PT proximity would be unprecedented in Modern history. It's just not very interesting to talk about, so that's probably why I have incorrectly dropped this to scenario 3. We'll see! Perhaps the most interesting thing to discuss with a "No changes" possibility is its relation to other banlist outcomes. We can argue about whether or not "No changes" is likelier than SFM/Stirring, but I think there's absolutely no argument about "No changes" being less likely than other changes. Stuff like an unban for DTT, Pod, Twin, GSZ, and even Preordain all feel far less likely than any of these three scenarios. So do bans of thread regulars like a Tron land, Cavern, Moon, SSG, Opal, etc. I'd envision a "No changes" before any of those possibilities.
Honestly, I was just trying to find a product they could push out close to any unbanning this year...and the options are limited besides another Signature Spellbook and the EDH Decks. Cause Guilds of Ravnica makes zero sense.
been playing a lot of pauper recently and now im hooked on cantrips. would like to see ponder/preordain in modern. less games of mana flood and mana screw.
I would love to see several unbans and I do think we are teetering on the edge of a SFM unban which should happen soon, but may not happen until jan 2019. I am not ready to see stirrings banned yet. There is a short list of things that could happen, and I did buy extra SFMs, but I am not certain anything will happen at THIS announcement. But here's to hoping.
To summarize an earlier post I made on this issue, Stirrings was fine for years as a niche enabler with built-in limitations around which decks could use it. For a long time, it was just something that helped Tron and fringe Tier 2 or lower decks. This made Stirrings significantly different from Preordain, a card banned for being a blue enabler that goes in any of the many blue-based combo decks. Gradually, Stirrings has changed. These changes are pronounced in 2018. "Colorless" cards no longer represent a limitation. Rather, it's a huge species of decks much like blue-based combo is its own species. Gx Tron, Lantern Control, KCI, Amulet Titan, RG Eldrazi, and Bant Eldrazi are major format features that make up a significant portion of the metagame. In fact, there are far more Stirrings decks than both blue-based combo decks and SV decks generally! This card is no longer niche. That creates, for the first time in Modern history, a legitimate contradiction between elements of the Preordain ban and Stirrings' legality. People made this comparison before and it lacked evidence. Now, the evidence is there. I sincerely doubt Wizards unbans Preordain due to its historic fear of blue-based combo decks, which leaves them in a position where they can trim metagame shares from an entire set of decks without actually hurting those decks. This points to a Stirrings ban. We would also be remiss to ignore the significant (perhaps not majority, but still notable) public pressure Wizards has likely seen over the years to hit Stirrings decks. That's a nonzero consideration.
I think Stirrings is fine, but the fact that even aggro decks like Affinity are now playing it is a little concerning. I don't think it needs a ban, but I do agree that the rationale is there.
That said, if we look at mtgtop8's list of the most prevalent cards in the format, it's only the 32nd most played card behind such notables as Cryptic Command, Dismember, Lightning Helix, Snapcaster Mage, and Inquisition of Kozilek. Even Aether Vial and Bloodbraid Elf are close to it in prevalence and numbers and those cards don't seem broken.
It's an enabler of a lot of things, but I think the numbers are showing that the format would lose diversity if it were to be banned.
An SFM unban sounds more likely than an Ancient stirrings ban. Stirrings does increase consistency, but it isn't being abused to the level of Delve.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
abused is a pretty vague term, especially when you are comparing a card to a mechanic. i think a more apt comparison is stirrings to cards like faithless looting or street wraith.
if stirrings gets hit, it certainly would break from most, if not all, previous ban decisions. that alone makes it a suspect prediction.
i also sincerely hope stoneforge gets unbanned, but im tempering my expectations with pragmatism. wizards simply doesnt have much to gain from doing it now; and unlike bannings they arent losing much of anything by waiting.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
IMHO, the notion of a Preordain unban is not completely unreasonable anymore. It's not highly likely by any means, but if Wizards finally goes after Ancient Stirrings, Preordain would actually be a decent card to unlock for decks like Lantern that can't just replace Stirrings with Oath of Nissa.
The only relevant blue-based combo deck that remains is Storm, which wouldn't actually benefit as much from Preordain than some of the blue-based combo decks of the past. Storm is more about building up a critical mass than it is about finding a particular card. Contrast that with the As Foretold decks that were popular for a while before vanishing into nothingness. With the build-around card of the deck being a Mythic from a recent set, the success of this deck would have actually helped Wizards sell more packs.
The overall power level in Modern has increased dramatically compared to even two years ago. I recently ran a deck list I used to play all through 2016 and got royally crushed by decks like Humans and Hollow One that happen to be so much more explosive and efficient than anything I used to face with that deck. It's an arms race and Preordain should just be fine at this point. The main reason it remains on the ban list seems to be that Wizards have PTSD from previous blue-based combo decks while they somehow seem to love brown-based combo decks.
I think it's a little unfair to paint broad strokes in regards to what most players like and what most people want to watch. I'm a big fan of the complexities of creature to creature combat, but there are also a ton of people who range from bored to tears to downright hatred of that flavor of Magic, both playing and spectating. That being said, I don't watch MTG nearly as much as I play it, so I'm going to refrain from anymore speculation regarding what people want to see.
It's not painting in broad strokes if 1) it's true, 2) I'm not talking on a level as specific as intricate creature combat; simply "fair" vs. "unfair", and 3) I'm not condemning the people who don't share the majority view as bad or wrong, only pointing out that their perspective isn't a common one.
Most people like to play two-player games in which each player gets to make decisions that matter. This is my fundamental assertion, nothing more.
As far as Tron goes, Ive seen firsthand how complex a Tron player's decision tree can become, and it mostly happens when you force them to care about what you're doing. I've been playing Faeries for the better part of a year now, and played GDS before that; both of those decks do great work disrupting the opponent and presenting a clock. I've had Tron players play around counter magic, removal, and my board state instead of just trying to slam the biggest threat they can, which seems to be the assumed line of play. Is Tron as complex as KCI or Lantern? Nope. It has a low floor, but it's ceiling is respectably high.
Yes, absolutely! Linear decks are sometimes forced to adopt unorthodox, skill-testing, and creative lines of play when faced with interaction. Isn't that a point in favor of interactive decks contributing to healthy, skill-dependent, fun, and memorable gameplay?
Tron (and other linear decks, including my own Ad Nauseam) players do indeed have to attempt to win unconventionally when facing heavy disruption. That's why I've never bashed the pilots of said decks as lacking in talent or knowledge; rather, I have merely asserted that interactive decks on average lead to healthier gameplay in the eyes of most players.
complex decision trees for both players are what most people prefer as participants and spectators. This is the gist of the argument put forth by fair deck players, and I don’t see how these statements are at all controversial.
Citation needed. I think that claim is only made by the fair deck players because duh, they like winning and like seeing their deck win.
Here's what I said earlier in the thread:
Check out the prevailing sentiments on Twitch chat during GP coverage. Head down and talk to the players at your LGS. Witness the continued popularity of fair decks regardless of meta results. Read this very thread.
I cannot present you with data, because to my knowledge there is no data to present (although I guess you could start a poll if you genuinely that a citation is needed to support the claim the most people want their decisions to matter in a game).
Consider any major sporting event. The commentators will express excitement when the game is closely contested with the lead repeatedly changing hands, and they will convey their disappointment if the game is a lop-sided blowout with one team unable to do much of anything. There may be an element of awe or respect directed at the dominating team, but ultimately the majority of neutral experts and spectators will feel let down by the lack of drama and tension in the event as a spectacle.
I do not care about seeing my decks win on the big stage; I do care about spectating interesting matches. There are some people who think that a T1 Blood Moon or a T3 combo kill against no opposing disruption is interesting, but they are firmly in the minority, and I am not one of them.
My motive is not to make my decks better or to see my decks win large events, but to help grow the game we all love and make sure it continues to thrive in the digital age!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
GB Golgari Midrange GB YouTube Channel, with deck techs, gameplay, analysis, spoiler reviews, and more!
I think PVDDR lays out the perfect case as to why Legacy won't see a ban in his opening sentence. There's a Legacy and Modern PT right around the corner, and people have trouble getting the cards in those formats (especially Legacy). A ban of something critical like DRS would potentially make many teams unable to play. On the Modern side of things, they've done shakeup bans before, but when an entire team is at stake I don't think they will.
Sounds Reasonable. Teferi Errata though that is the wrong things that needs it , the lands one is what needs fixing in general that is just a dumb interaction. I really don't know why it was not a "may ability" anyway.
Not sure I agree that no Stirrings kills Tron. I think Oath of Nissa can slot in to that roll just fine, the deck will be weaker sure. Dead unlikely.
I think PVDDR lays out the perfect case as to why Legacy won't see a ban in his opening sentence. There's a Legacy and Modern PT right around the corner, and people have trouble getting the cards in those formats (especially Legacy). A ban of something critical like DRS would potentially make many teams unable to play. On the Modern side of things, they've done shakeup bans before, but when an entire team is at stake I don't think they will.
After the last one, there will not be another Modern 'shake up' ban. It was too much bad PR.
3 UW and 1 Jeskai. That's awkward for the unban SFM crowd...
Interestingly, I think their unban/ban decisions were made before this event, so it might not affect how things shake out Monday. That will probably be "No Changes" anyway, but it's worth noting in case SFM is on the table.
As for the T8, that's a great set of decks and it is a bit awkward for that unban SFM crowd, myself included. Blue and white-based decks are increasingly viable, and it's simply indefensible anymore to talk about these decks being bad. There is just too much tournament presence.
heck ya. i totally knew there was something to those UW miracles builds i saw popping up on the 5-0 reports. they were all over the place at first, but all had the common theme of a jace/teferi split, terminus as the sweeper of choice, and no garbo cards like telling time.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
Half the top 8 is UWx control. I wonder if we are going to get the same reaction when the last top 8 was half Colorless. Probably not I imagine.
I'm actually surprised control did so well when Tron did so well last time. I figured aggro decks/storm would show up en mass to combat Tron, but it looks like people predicted that and metagamed even further. Good showing for control.
heck ya. i totally knew there was something to those UW miracles builds i saw popping up on the 5-0 reports. they were all over the place at first, but all had the common theme of a jace/teferi split, terminus as the sweeper of choice, and no garbo cards like telling time.
Should Ebony and Ivory be the official Teferi and Jace Bromance Song as they carry Control Back?
Half the top 8 is UWx control. I wonder if we are going to get the same reaction when the last top 8 was half Colorless. Probably not I imagine.
I'm actually surprised control did so well when Tron did so well last time. I figured aggro decks/storm would show up en mass to combat Tron, but it looks like people predicted that and metagamed even further. Good showing for control.
To be fair Control has nothing that WOTC could technically ban they just freed JTMS so cannot go back on that...gonna ban Teferi, he is not even better then Jace in a Vacuum and Walkers are the face of magic these days so that seems unlikely unless a Walker is super OP. They already cut blue card draw and counters to the bone. White is barely alive as is in Modern. So what is that leave hitting Snapcaster with a ban? Yeah I like to see them try that.
3 UW and 1 Jeskai. That's awkward for the unban SFM crowd...
Interestingly, I think their unban/ban decisions were made before this event, so it might not affect how things shake out Monday. That will probably be "No Changes" anyway, but it's worth noting in case SFM is on the table.
As for the T8, that's a great set of decks and it is a bit awkward for that unban SFM crowd, myself included. Blue and white-based decks are increasingly viable, and it's simply indefensible anymore to talk about these decks being bad. There is just too much tournament presence.
I may be misremembering, but I believe decisions are always finalized before taking into account any results from the weekend prior to a Monday announcement. It would be way too chaotic and last minute to make Sunday night decisions for a B&R.
3 UW and 1 Jeskai. That's awkward for the unban SFM crowd...
Interestingly, I think their unban/ban decisions were made before this event, so it might not affect how things shake out Monday. That will probably be "No Changes" anyway, but it's worth noting in case SFM is on the table.
As for the T8, that's a great set of decks and it is a bit awkward for that unban SFM crowd, myself included. Blue and white-based decks are increasingly viable, and it's simply indefensible anymore to talk about these decks being bad. There is just too much tournament presence.
I may be misremembering, but I believe decisions are always finalized before taking into account any results from the weekend prior to a Monday announcement. It would be way too chaotic and last minute to make Sunday night decisions for a B&R.
It's a little unclear. I remember a while ago someone asked (about a week before the announcement) if the decision was made, and they said yes. That said, it is possible they have everything ready to go the day before the announcement, but Aaron Forsythe or someone else has the right to pull the whole thing at the last minute should a GP result's indicate otherwise.
Anyway, the Grand Prix results demonstrate that the whole hubbub about Ancient Stirrings was just an overreaction to one event, considering only one deck playing the card actually made it to the Top 8. It further indicates that even if Ancient Stirrings is a "problem" it seems to only be so in KCI, because that seems the most consistent of the decks running it (Amulet Titan and Lantern Control are fringe at this point, and Gx Tron has always been erratic in its results). Hitting a KCI-exclusive card would make more sense than Ancient Stirrings if something needs to go, which at present I'm not convinced.
As for how it affects Stoneforge Mystic... that's a little less clear. That is a lot of UWx Control decks. On the other hand, I'm not sure Stoneforge Mystic really goes in the control decks. Stoneforge Mystic, from what I can tell, doesn't really have a history of seeing play in control decks, and is more of an aggro-control or midrange card. The problem is that it's not really that good of a control card; the Sword cards aren't very relevant for you (not enough things to equip it to), and Batterskull, while a way to stymie aggro, is not particularly efficient for a control deck because of the amount of time and mana you have to invest into making it work (while they happily are just pounding down on you), and then if Stoneforge Mystic dies you just wasted your second turn.
The kind of UWx deck it'd see play in is more something like UWR Geist, which isn't represented in the Top 8.
well id sincerely hope that a single event wouldnt change their decision to unban sfm if they were planning to. for bans? sure, because its one more data point showing if there is an urgent problem they need to address. unbans on the other hand arent necessarily meant for some pressing need because the goal is to have the card assimilate into a stable format; becoming a feature, but not dominant or oppressive.
also; since no one else linked it here is the day 2 breakdown of the SCG ATL event:
I may be misremembering, but I believe decisions are always finalized before taking into account any results from the weekend prior to a Monday announcement. It would be way too chaotic and last minute to make Sunday night decisions for a B&R.
That's definitely true for bans, but I think unban decisions are made even further out. We know the timescale Wizards operates on when printing cards, and we've always seen them have a reprint of an unbanned card in the pipeline 1-1.5 years out. So, I think reprints are only considered when there's an upcoming product where they can reprint, but where they have enough time to pull the card from the product if they choose to not unban.
So what I'm saying is, if they decided to unban SFM, I think the decision would have been made a year ago, and the year since that decision is looked at to see if that unban decision could possibly be a bad idea and they can backtrack on it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Scenario 1
Stoneforge Mystic is unbanned
The initial rationale for banning this card no longer holds any water: "Porting such [SFM] decks into Modern was a trivial affair, and resulted in very powerful decks. We prefer to just ban this card rather than risk yet another format dominated by Stoneforge Mystic." There are too many decks that literally don't care about SFM, only a small subset of top-tier decks that can even run this card, and too many comparable threats in other decks. Blue-based decks were at a comparable prevalence to white-based decks when Wizards unbanned JTMS, who has gone on to do all but literally nothing. There is simply no realistic Modern scenario where SFM goes on to "dominate" the format. Add in the significant public interest in this card's unban, which appears quantifiably higher than at any previous point in Modern history, and this seems like a fated unban. This is a clear "when" not "if" unban, and I double down on this being unbanned no later than Jan/Feb of 2019.
Scenario 2
Ancient Stirrings is banned
To summarize an earlier post I made on this issue, Stirrings was fine for years as a niche enabler with built-in limitations around which decks could use it. For a long time, it was just something that helped Tron and fringe Tier 2 or lower decks. This made Stirrings significantly different from Preordain, a card banned for being a blue enabler that goes in any of the many blue-based combo decks. Gradually, Stirrings has changed. These changes are pronounced in 2018. "Colorless" cards no longer represent a limitation. Rather, it's a huge species of decks much like blue-based combo is its own species. Gx Tron, Lantern Control, KCI, Amulet Titan, RG Eldrazi, and Bant Eldrazi are major format features that make up a significant portion of the metagame. In fact, there are far more Stirrings decks than both blue-based combo decks and SV decks generally! This card is no longer niche. That creates, for the first time in Modern history, a legitimate contradiction between elements of the Preordain ban and Stirrings' legality. People made this comparison before and it lacked evidence. Now, the evidence is there. I sincerely doubt Wizards unbans Preordain due to its historic fear of blue-based combo decks, which leaves them in a position where they can trim metagame shares from an entire set of decks without actually hurting those decks. This points to a Stirrings ban. We would also be remiss to ignore the significant (perhaps not majority, but still notable) public pressure Wizards has likely seen over the years to hit Stirrings decks. That's a nonzero consideration.
Scenario 3
No changes
This is the safest bet from a historical perspective, and honestly, this should probably be scenario 1. A July ban or unban with no PT proximity would be unprecedented in Modern history. It's just not very interesting to talk about, so that's probably why I have incorrectly dropped this to scenario 3. We'll see! Perhaps the most interesting thing to discuss with a "No changes" possibility is its relation to other banlist outcomes. We can argue about whether or not "No changes" is likelier than SFM/Stirring, but I think there's absolutely no argument about "No changes" being less likely than other changes. Stuff like an unban for DTT, Pod, Twin, GSZ, and even Preordain all feel far less likely than any of these three scenarios. So do bans of thread regulars like a Tron land, Cavern, Moon, SSG, Opal, etc. I'd envision a "No changes" before any of those possibilities.
I would love to see several unbans and I do think we are teetering on the edge of a SFM unban which should happen soon, but may not happen until jan 2019. I am not ready to see stirrings banned yet. There is a short list of things that could happen, and I did buy extra SFMs, but I am not certain anything will happen at THIS announcement. But here's to hoping.
I think Stirrings is fine, but the fact that even aggro decks like Affinity are now playing it is a little concerning. I don't think it needs a ban, but I do agree that the rationale is there.
That said, if we look at mtgtop8's list of the most prevalent cards in the format, it's only the 32nd most played card behind such notables as Cryptic Command, Dismember, Lightning Helix, Snapcaster Mage, and Inquisition of Kozilek. Even Aether Vial and Bloodbraid Elf are close to it in prevalence and numbers and those cards don't seem broken.
It's an enabler of a lot of things, but I think the numbers are showing that the format would lose diversity if it were to be banned.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
if stirrings gets hit, it certainly would break from most, if not all, previous ban decisions. that alone makes it a suspect prediction.
i also sincerely hope stoneforge gets unbanned, but im tempering my expectations with pragmatism. wizards simply doesnt have much to gain from doing it now; and unlike bannings they arent losing much of anything by waiting.
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)The only relevant blue-based combo deck that remains is Storm, which wouldn't actually benefit as much from Preordain than some of the blue-based combo decks of the past. Storm is more about building up a critical mass than it is about finding a particular card. Contrast that with the As Foretold decks that were popular for a while before vanishing into nothingness. With the build-around card of the deck being a Mythic from a recent set, the success of this deck would have actually helped Wizards sell more packs.
The overall power level in Modern has increased dramatically compared to even two years ago. I recently ran a deck list I used to play all through 2016 and got royally crushed by decks like Humans and Hollow One that happen to be so much more explosive and efficient than anything I used to face with that deck. It's an arms race and Preordain should just be fine at this point. The main reason it remains on the ban list seems to be that Wizards have PTSD from previous blue-based combo decks while they somehow seem to love brown-based combo decks.
It's not painting in broad strokes if 1) it's true, 2) I'm not talking on a level as specific as intricate creature combat; simply "fair" vs. "unfair", and 3) I'm not condemning the people who don't share the majority view as bad or wrong, only pointing out that their perspective isn't a common one.
Most people like to play two-player games in which each player gets to make decisions that matter. This is my fundamental assertion, nothing more.
Yes, absolutely! Linear decks are sometimes forced to adopt unorthodox, skill-testing, and creative lines of play when faced with interaction. Isn't that a point in favor of interactive decks contributing to healthy, skill-dependent, fun, and memorable gameplay?
Tron (and other linear decks, including my own Ad Nauseam) players do indeed have to attempt to win unconventionally when facing heavy disruption. That's why I've never bashed the pilots of said decks as lacking in talent or knowledge; rather, I have merely asserted that interactive decks on average lead to healthier gameplay in the eyes of most players.
Here's what I said earlier in the thread:
I cannot present you with data, because to my knowledge there is no data to present (although I guess you could start a poll if you genuinely that a citation is needed to support the claim the most people want their decisions to matter in a game).
Consider any major sporting event. The commentators will express excitement when the game is closely contested with the lead repeatedly changing hands, and they will convey their disappointment if the game is a lop-sided blowout with one team unable to do much of anything. There may be an element of awe or respect directed at the dominating team, but ultimately the majority of neutral experts and spectators will feel let down by the lack of drama and tension in the event as a spectacle.
I do not care about seeing my decks win on the big stage; I do care about spectating interesting matches. There are some people who think that a T1 Blood Moon or a T3 combo kill against no opposing disruption is interesting, but they are firmly in the minority, and I am not one of them.
My motive is not to make my decks better or to see my decks win large events, but to help grow the game we all love and make sure it continues to thrive in the digital age!
YouTube Channel, with deck techs, gameplay, analysis, spoiler reviews, and more!
I think PVDDR lays out the perfect case as to why Legacy won't see a ban in his opening sentence. There's a Legacy and Modern PT right around the corner, and people have trouble getting the cards in those formats (especially Legacy). A ban of something critical like DRS would potentially make many teams unable to play. On the Modern side of things, they've done shakeup bans before, but when an entire team is at stake I don't think they will.
Sounds Reasonable. Teferi Errata though that is the wrong things that needs it , the lands one is what needs fixing in general that is just a dumb interaction. I really don't know why it was not a "may ability" anyway.
Not sure I agree that no Stirrings kills Tron. I think Oath of Nissa can slot in to that roll just fine, the deck will be weaker sure. Dead unlikely.
After the last one, there will not be another Modern 'shake up' ban. It was too much bad PR.
Spirits
3 UW and 1 Jeskai. That's awkward for the unban SFM crowd...
| Ad Nauseam
| Infect
Big Johnny.
Interestingly, I think their unban/ban decisions were made before this event, so it might not affect how things shake out Monday. That will probably be "No Changes" anyway, but it's worth noting in case SFM is on the table.
As for the T8, that's a great set of decks and it is a bit awkward for that unban SFM crowd, myself included. Blue and white-based decks are increasingly viable, and it's simply indefensible anymore to talk about these decks being bad. There is just too much tournament presence.
Praise be Jace and Teferi, Control's Finest bonus points if you get the reference.
I really don't think SFM changes much for UWx but I could be wrong.
Between obvious and admitted bias and just general misunderstanding, that modern portion was difficult to get through.
Theoretically yes, in practice no. No one would be interested in watching an eternal format that doesn't even exist anymore after the PT.
If they were going to do this, they would use the mid season post PT ban period to do it.
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)I'm actually surprised control did so well when Tron did so well last time. I figured aggro decks/storm would show up en mass to combat Tron, but it looks like people predicted that and metagamed even further. Good showing for control.
Should Ebony and Ivory be the official Teferi and Jace Bromance Song as they carry Control Back?
To be fair Control has nothing that WOTC could technically ban they just freed JTMS so cannot go back on that...gonna ban Teferi, he is not even better then Jace in a Vacuum and Walkers are the face of magic these days so that seems unlikely unless a Walker is super OP. They already cut blue card draw and counters to the bone. White is barely alive as is in Modern. So what is that leave hitting Snapcaster with a ban? Yeah I like to see them try that.
I may be misremembering, but I believe decisions are always finalized before taking into account any results from the weekend prior to a Monday announcement. It would be way too chaotic and last minute to make Sunday night decisions for a B&R.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Anyway, the Grand Prix results demonstrate that the whole hubbub about Ancient Stirrings was just an overreaction to one event, considering only one deck playing the card actually made it to the Top 8. It further indicates that even if Ancient Stirrings is a "problem" it seems to only be so in KCI, because that seems the most consistent of the decks running it (Amulet Titan and Lantern Control are fringe at this point, and Gx Tron has always been erratic in its results). Hitting a KCI-exclusive card would make more sense than Ancient Stirrings if something needs to go, which at present I'm not convinced.
As for how it affects Stoneforge Mystic... that's a little less clear. That is a lot of UWx Control decks. On the other hand, I'm not sure Stoneforge Mystic really goes in the control decks. Stoneforge Mystic, from what I can tell, doesn't really have a history of seeing play in control decks, and is more of an aggro-control or midrange card. The problem is that it's not really that good of a control card; the Sword cards aren't very relevant for you (not enough things to equip it to), and Batterskull, while a way to stymie aggro, is not particularly efficient for a control deck because of the amount of time and mana you have to invest into making it work (while they happily are just pounding down on you), and then if Stoneforge Mystic dies you just wasted your second turn.
The kind of UWx deck it'd see play in is more something like UWR Geist, which isn't represented in the Top 8.
also; since no one else linked it here is the day 2 breakdown of the SCG ATL event:
Humans – 4
Jeskai Control – 4
Affinity – 4
Mono-Green Tron – 4
Infect – 4
Ironworks Combo – 3
Grixis Death’s Shadow – 3
Burn – 3
U/R Gifts Storm – 3
U/W Control – 3
Eldrazi Tron – 2
B/R Hollow+One – 2
G/W Company – 2
Jund – 2
Blue Moon – 2
Elves – 2
Mardu Pyromancer – 2
Counters Company – 2
U/R Prison – 1
Dredge – 1
Faeries – 1
G/R Land Destruction – 1
Living+End – 1
Goryo’s Vengeance – 1
Mono-Blue Tron – 1
Colorless Eldrazi – 1
Bant Spirits – 1
B/G Midrange – 1
Temur Moon – 1
R/G Eldrazi – 1
G/W Hexproof – 1
Amulet Titan – 1
Titan Shift – 1
B/W Smallpox – 1
Abzan – 1
Bant Company – 1
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)That's definitely true for bans, but I think unban decisions are made even further out. We know the timescale Wizards operates on when printing cards, and we've always seen them have a reprint of an unbanned card in the pipeline 1-1.5 years out. So, I think reprints are only considered when there's an upcoming product where they can reprint, but where they have enough time to pull the card from the product if they choose to not unban.
So what I'm saying is, if they decided to unban SFM, I think the decision would have been made a year ago, and the year since that decision is looked at to see if that unban decision could possibly be a bad idea and they can backtrack on it.