Then magic would be quite a bad game in general. Just think, whoever has the biggest dork or whoever can deal 20 the fastest with either fast creatures or evasive creatures wins. Doesn't sound that great to me. And countermagic would become even better because those would be the only 'kill' spells along with bounce spells. In short, I would never play limited or standard again. Legacy would still have swords to plowshares and co. though.
Wait a moment you included counterspells being completely removed? Then there would surely be some janky combo deck by todays standards' that would rise up due to the lack of interaction with it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Yawgmoth," Freyalise whispered as she set the bomb, "now you will pay for your treachery."
The most fundamental feature of Magic is that there is a counter-strategy to every strategy. If there is no creature removal, then the game will be solved with the optimal deck being the one that runs the most efficient creatures. Whatever this means, of course; it might mean combo (If there's no way of interacting with it, then combo becomes quite strong) or it might be some kind of aggro.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On average, Magic players are worse at new card evaluation than almost every other skill, except perhaps sideboarding.
I'm sick of all the "dies to removal" arguments used to invalidate every creature.
What would happen if wizards decided for one standard season to simply not print any creature removal spells in the standard-legal sets?
No counterspells, no doom blades, no burn spells like incinerate, no wrath effects.
Only creatures, life gain, pump spells, card draw, discard, and stuff that burns to the face.
Once you cast a creature spell you would never have to worry about it hitting the bin unless it was killed in combat.
Is this the kind of format that people would be happy with?
I've played games like that in cube before and the problem of this is that it makes games run out way to long, to the point that every match goes to time.
I'm sure it's actually possible to do it and actually be successful, but that would require taking the entire way they see magic apart. You would want to put some restriction on the number of creatures out on the board (the board would clutter very quickly), it would take away a lot of interaction and strategy from the game, it would simplify decks (not in a good way).
First you would have to talk about.. what is removal? Black: Doomblade, Dark Banishing... okay I get that Red: Incinerate... okay, take that out and replace it with sizzle? Blue: Get rid of mana leak, okay... but what about Boomerang or any similar effect, what about Mind Control or tapping creatures down? White: Get rid of pacifism? Get rid of conditional exile like with Oblivion Ring or Fiend Hunter?
The reason why green has been behind of the times is probably because green lacks removal, but now it has Prey Upon... would that be okay?
There's nothing wrong about griping about the rules, but removal has been a fundamental part of every game except perhaps Anachronism. As you can see from my examples above, the line between what is removal and what is not gets really blurred.
I would suggest playing a non-removal cards in casual games you play.. but I'll tell you from experience.. when you have equally powered creatures, it's very hard to break the standstill unless there is some interaction.. which removal does a great job at.
I think the most fun part of magic is blocking (and being blocked). It's where all the bluffing comes in, and combat tricks are awesome (in my opinion).
It always ticks me off when my critters die, because i like to set up ridiculous combos and cool interactions between my permanents. I don't want to win by playing cards that are "good by themselves". That's no fun for me. I want my cards to work together, which is very difficult when they always get removed.
A more interesting question might be "what if the quantity/quality of removal in standard was less?" One of the reasons I prefer limited is what the87th is talking about, more creature interaction and complex board states. If constructed wasn't balanced around "1/2 mana kill almost anything" and "4 mana board wipe" spells I might not have to crack new packs constantly just to enjoy creature interactions. Then again with weaker removal they would have to be much more careful with the power of "limited bombs" which can become 4-ofs in constructed.
I, like OP and several others here, also hate removal spells.
HOWEVER, after playing without them, I came to the conclusion that the game is better for having them. A friend and I designed and printed our own anime-themed set using the Magic Set Editor program a few years ago. We both disliked removal and so we included almost none at all in the set. In the first game the problem was apparent. After a few games we were so sick of not having removal that we revised the set to include some.
Why is it such an issue? Without removal, creatures pile up on both sides of the board. We would each have like 10-15 creatures. No one would attack because you were guaranteed to lose your best stuff. And it became so complex trying to figure out everything that could happen in combat with that many creatures on both sides that the game slowed to a crawl. Unless someone got out to a big lead early, the games were all painfully dull and slow. I encourage OP to try this for themselves to see what I'm talking about. Find a friend or two and play a format where all removal spells are banned.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love." --Carl Sagan
It was done in Legions (all creature cards), and I don't think people have very fond memories of playing Legions.
This and even in Legions there was some form of removal in the form of creatures that would force combat/blocking in provoke and various other abilities.
The emphasis/removal of certain parts of the game are nice occasionally as a gimmick but for the continued health of the game there needs to be a balance.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag and start slitting throats.
- H.L Mencken
I Became insane with long Intervals of horrible Sanity
All Religion, my friend is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
- Edgar Allan Poe
I'm actually wondering what would happen if we didn't ask hypothetical questions that could never happen?
In all seriousness, this is a non issue. It won't happen.
But okay, I'll play the game. I'll tell you what would happen.
Magic would go out of business. The games would become so long and boring that people would stop playing it.
I have a Vintage Goblin deck that has no removal outside of 4 Goblin Grenades which I don't play as removal but as burn to the face.
I play it against my friend's legacy Goblin deck which is about the same except he has no Recruiters in it.
The games are a joke. The board state becomes a nightmare to keep track of between the Lackeys, Instigators, Chieftains, Piledrivers, Siege-Gangs and what have you. I essentially have to wait for my Goblin Charbelcher and Recruiter to stack the deck and finish him off, if I'm lucky.
In the meantime, the game is a drag.
The worst, and I do mean the absolute WORST thing that could EVER happen to this game would be if the got rid of removal.
But thankfully, as with most hypothetical questions like these, it won't happen.
Which is why I don't understand why we get threads like these as they are ultimately pointless.
Is this the kind of format that people would be happy with?
Nope, but I think one of the things about growing as a player is learning not to take things personally about pet cards. Dies to removal IS an annoying arguement, and half the cards people play now die to removal... but what's important to note is that if you are playing X card... and it "dies to removal," you better be dang well ready to protect it. The bigger the threat, the bigger the target. So when another creature comes along, like the Tians... removal doesn't matter, because they've done something as they've come into play. If they get removed, you still made the best from the mana investment. So when something cool in concept... like Psychosis Crawler comes along... you have to either be able to protect it, be able to abuse it in response to removal, or be able to justify it's cost.
So when people are saying "dies to removal" it means: "I am paying how much for this card, for what value?"
OP horribly misunderstands the "dies to removal" argument.
Take the Drogskol Reaver - it costs 5WU, is a 3/5, has doublestrike, lifelink, and whenever you gain life, draw a card. If it lives, it's a house. If it dies, your consolation prize for hardcasting something that costs 1 more than a titan and 2 less than a Tooth and nailin a color combo with limited ramp, that relies upon having formidable responses to formidable threats, is the saltiness of your tears.
Simply put, Wurmcoil Engine is unbelievably better since when it dies, you get 2 3/3's, which is awesome. It's also not vulnerable to the removal that every deck can run, which is a valid argument when your threat is 7CMC and is not Dismember proof.
Fundamentally, you can't run a huge CMC spell without getting some value out of it. If you do, you just flat out lose when somebody ices your dude. That's why the Eldrazi titans were of really good design on one aspect - their casting triggers. That's why the m10 titans, for all the criticisms, are good because of their triggers for constructed play. You need to get some value out of big spells or - if all the titans triggers were 'attack only', Primeval Titan would be sitting in the dollar rare bin gathering dust right now. Nothing sucks worse than going "tap for 9, Tooth and Nail entwined" when your opponent goes "trolololol mana leak". Answers, simply put, are WAY too strong when they can out tempo you by 6 mana in the Drogskol Reaver/Dismember example and 7 for Tooth and nail vs. two CMC countermagic.
Comparatively, Tarmogoyf and Dark Confidant are relevant at all stages of the game - unlike your enormous threats - which makes them exponentially more useful than a 7+ CMC bomb - and if they die, big whoop, they cost 2 mana. Cast Terror on a Goyf? Fine, tempo parity. Bolt a Bob? -1, but it's not a big loss.
Big cards need consolation prizes is the point of the "Dies to Removal" argument. If your giant spell sucks removal of some kind, you need to get SOME value out of it or it's not worth playing, since playing a large spell is integral to your game plan. In magical christmas land, yes, Drogskol Reaver is good, because your opponent has no removal whatsoever and isn't playing Inkmoth Nexus, Garruk Wildspeaker, or Kessig Wolf Run, all of which easily wipe out the Reaver or its player.
OP horribly misunderstands the "dies to removal" argument.
Take the Drogskol Reaver - it costs 5WU, is a 3/5, has doublestrike, lifelink, and whenever you gain life, draw a card. If it lives, it's a house. If it dies, your consolation prize for hardcasting something that costs 1 more than a titan and 2 less than a Tooth and nailin a color combo with limited ramp, that relies upon having formidable responses to formidable threats, is the saltiness of your tears.
Simply put, Wurmcoil Engine is unbelievably better since when it dies, you get 2 3/3's, which is awesome. It's also not vulnerable to the removal that every deck can run, which is a valid argument when your threat is 7CMC and is not Dismember proof.
Fundamentally, you can't run a huge CMC spell without getting some value out of it. If you do, you just flat out lose when somebody ices your dude. That's why the Eldrazi titans were of really good design on one aspect - their casting triggers. That's why the m10 titans, for all the criticisms, are good because of their triggers for constructed play. You need to get some value out of big spells or - if all the titans triggers were 'attack only', Primeval Titan would be sitting in the dollar rare bin gathering dust right now. Nothing sucks worse than going "tap for 9, Tooth and Nail entwined" when your opponent goes "trolololol mana leak". Answers, simply put, are WAY too strong when they can out tempo you by 6 mana in the Drogskol Reaver/Dismember example and 7 for Tooth and nail vs. two CMC countermagic.
Comparatively, Tarmogoyf and Dark Confidant are relevant at all stages of the game - unlike your enormous threats - which makes them exponentially more useful than a 7+ CMC bomb - and if they die, big whoop, they cost 2 mana. Cast Terror on a Goyf? Fine, tempo parity. Bolt a Bob? -1, but it's not a big loss.
Big cards need consolation prizes is the point of the "Dies to Removal" argument. If your giant spell sucks removal of some kind, you need to get SOME value out of it or it's not worth playing, since playing a large spell is integral to your game plan. In magical christmas land, yes, Drogskol Reaver is good, because your opponent has no removal whatsoever and isn't playing Inkmoth Nexus, Garruk Wildspeaker, or Kessig Wolf Run, all of which easily wipe out the Reaver or its player.
Excellently explained. ^^^ This should be required reading for every new player to Magic so that they understand why certain cards, with all their glitz, are just not that good.
The Eldrazi's are a perfect example.
Ulamog? Exile it? No problem. I just took out your biggest baddest card on the playing field upon casting. Plus, exiling is about the only way to get rid of it outside of -1/-1 counters.
Some cards are just too risky to play because if they get toasted upon casting, you're out a ton.
This has to be one of the worst ideas ever. Plus, they already tried it and it didn't work, so it would be catastrophically idiotic.
The Eldrazi's are a perfect example.
Ulamog? Exile it? No problem. I just took out your biggest baddest card on the playing field upon casting. Plus, exiling is about the only way to get rid of it outside of -1/-1 counters.
Some cards are just too risky to play because if they get toasted upon casting, you're out a ton
That's one of the reasons I love this game though. I have an eldrazi deck that is really fun, but doesn't have a win percentage I'd be happy with for my other decks, but man its fun. But the beauty is that yeah, I may have a 9/9 out with anihilator 3 that will generally f stuff up if left alone. The coolest part though, is that there are literally thousands of ways to deal with it for my opponent, or me if I'm playing against it.
What would happen if wizards decided for one standard season to simply not print any creature removal spells in the standard-legal sets?
No counterspells, no doom blades, no burn spells like incinerate, no wrath effects.
Only creatures, life gain, pump spells, card draw, discard, and stuff that burns to the face.
Once you cast a creature spell you would never have to worry about it hitting the bin unless it was killed in combat.
Is this the kind of format that people would be happy with?
"If wizards folded $100 bills in packs, people would still complain."
Lovely, lovely quote.
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
I opened 20 packs and didn't get a single foil $100 bill.
F this.
Thread | Draft
Standard would be broken and unplayable? It would ruin magic?
Only green would be viable? Games would end due to decking because of the permanent standoff?
Wait a moment you included counterspells being completely removed? Then there would surely be some janky combo deck by todays standards' that would rise up due to the lack of interaction with it.
Currently Playing:
Retired
The most fundamental feature of Magic is that there is a counter-strategy to every strategy. If there is no creature removal, then the game will be solved with the optimal deck being the one that runs the most efficient creatures. Whatever this means, of course; it might mean combo (If there's no way of interacting with it, then combo becomes quite strong) or it might be some kind of aggro.
I actually heard a better one once "If wizards put $50 bills in pack, players would complain about the way they were folded."
I've played games like that in cube before and the problem of this is that it makes games run out way to long, to the point that every match goes to time.
First you would have to talk about.. what is removal?
Black: Doomblade, Dark Banishing... okay I get that
Red: Incinerate... okay, take that out and replace it with sizzle?
Blue: Get rid of mana leak, okay... but what about Boomerang or any similar effect, what about Mind Control or tapping creatures down?
White: Get rid of pacifism? Get rid of conditional exile like with Oblivion Ring or Fiend Hunter?
The reason why green has been behind of the times is probably because green lacks removal, but now it has Prey Upon... would that be okay?
There's nothing wrong about griping about the rules, but removal has been a fundamental part of every game except perhaps Anachronism. As you can see from my examples above, the line between what is removal and what is not gets really blurred.
I would suggest playing a non-removal cards in casual games you play.. but I'll tell you from experience.. when you have equally powered creatures, it's very hard to break the standstill unless there is some interaction.. which removal does a great job at.
BEtched Champion/InfectB
WSoilders/knightsW
WUVenser SplicerWU
RRDWR
GFeed the Pack comboG
WUPool of ExhaustionWU
EDH
GEzuri, Elf OverrunG
BGeth, GraverobberB
UThada Adel, ThiefU
RUrabrask, Big RedR
WElesh Norn, CrusadeW
WUGAngus Makenzie, Bant ControlWUG
Extended
WGElvesWG
Legacy
RGoblinsR
UBGFariesUBG
UBGRaffinityUBG
You can find me on MTGO. My username is gereffi.
I think the most fun part of magic is blocking (and being blocked). It's where all the bluffing comes in, and combat tricks are awesome (in my opinion).
It always ticks me off when my critters die, because i like to set up ridiculous combos and cool interactions between my permanents. I don't want to win by playing cards that are "good by themselves". That's no fun for me. I want my cards to work together, which is very difficult when they always get removed.
HOWEVER, after playing without them, I came to the conclusion that the game is better for having them. A friend and I designed and printed our own anime-themed set using the Magic Set Editor program a few years ago. We both disliked removal and so we included almost none at all in the set. In the first game the problem was apparent. After a few games we were so sick of not having removal that we revised the set to include some.
Why is it such an issue? Without removal, creatures pile up on both sides of the board. We would each have like 10-15 creatures. No one would attack because you were guaranteed to lose your best stuff. And it became so complex trying to figure out everything that could happen in combat with that many creatures on both sides that the game slowed to a crawl. Unless someone got out to a big lead early, the games were all painfully dull and slow. I encourage OP to try this for themselves to see what I'm talking about. Find a friend or two and play a format where all removal spells are banned.
This and even in Legions there was some form of removal in the form of creatures that would force combat/blocking in provoke and various other abilities.
The emphasis/removal of certain parts of the game are nice occasionally as a gimmick but for the continued health of the game there needs to be a balance.
- H.L Mencken
I Became insane with long Intervals of horrible Sanity
All Religion, my friend is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
- Edgar Allan Poe
The Crafters' Rules Guru
In all seriousness, this is a non issue. It won't happen.
But okay, I'll play the game. I'll tell you what would happen.
Magic would go out of business. The games would become so long and boring that people would stop playing it.
I have a Vintage Goblin deck that has no removal outside of 4 Goblin Grenades which I don't play as removal but as burn to the face.
I play it against my friend's legacy Goblin deck which is about the same except he has no Recruiters in it.
The games are a joke. The board state becomes a nightmare to keep track of between the Lackeys, Instigators, Chieftains, Piledrivers, Siege-Gangs and what have you. I essentially have to wait for my Goblin Charbelcher and Recruiter to stack the deck and finish him off, if I'm lucky.
In the meantime, the game is a drag.
The worst, and I do mean the absolute WORST thing that could EVER happen to this game would be if the got rid of removal.
But thankfully, as with most hypothetical questions like these, it won't happen.
Which is why I don't understand why we get threads like these as they are ultimately pointless.
Nope, but I think one of the things about growing as a player is learning not to take things personally about pet cards. Dies to removal IS an annoying arguement, and half the cards people play now die to removal... but what's important to note is that if you are playing X card... and it "dies to removal," you better be dang well ready to protect it. The bigger the threat, the bigger the target. So when another creature comes along, like the Tians... removal doesn't matter, because they've done something as they've come into play. If they get removed, you still made the best from the mana investment. So when something cool in concept... like Psychosis Crawler comes along... you have to either be able to protect it, be able to abuse it in response to removal, or be able to justify it's cost.
So when people are saying "dies to removal" it means: "I am paying how much for this card, for what value?"
Take the Drogskol Reaver - it costs 5WU, is a 3/5, has doublestrike, lifelink, and whenever you gain life, draw a card. If it lives, it's a house. If it dies, your consolation prize for hardcasting something that costs 1 more than a titan and 2 less than a Tooth and nailin a color combo with limited ramp, that relies upon having formidable responses to formidable threats, is the saltiness of your tears.
Simply put, Wurmcoil Engine is unbelievably better since when it dies, you get 2 3/3's, which is awesome. It's also not vulnerable to the removal that every deck can run, which is a valid argument when your threat is 7CMC and is not Dismember proof.
Fundamentally, you can't run a huge CMC spell without getting some value out of it. If you do, you just flat out lose when somebody ices your dude. That's why the Eldrazi titans were of really good design on one aspect - their casting triggers. That's why the m10 titans, for all the criticisms, are good because of their triggers for constructed play. You need to get some value out of big spells or - if all the titans triggers were 'attack only', Primeval Titan would be sitting in the dollar rare bin gathering dust right now. Nothing sucks worse than going "tap for 9, Tooth and Nail entwined" when your opponent goes "trolololol mana leak". Answers, simply put, are WAY too strong when they can out tempo you by 6 mana in the Drogskol Reaver/Dismember example and 7 for Tooth and nail vs. two CMC countermagic.
Comparatively, Tarmogoyf and Dark Confidant are relevant at all stages of the game - unlike your enormous threats - which makes them exponentially more useful than a 7+ CMC bomb - and if they die, big whoop, they cost 2 mana. Cast Terror on a Goyf? Fine, tempo parity. Bolt a Bob? -1, but it's not a big loss.
Big cards need consolation prizes is the point of the "Dies to Removal" argument. If your giant spell sucks removal of some kind, you need to get SOME value out of it or it's not worth playing, since playing a large spell is integral to your game plan. In magical christmas land, yes, Drogskol Reaver is good, because your opponent has no removal whatsoever and isn't playing Inkmoth Nexus, Garruk Wildspeaker, or Kessig Wolf Run, all of which easily wipe out the Reaver or its player.
Excellently explained. ^^^ This should be required reading for every new player to Magic so that they understand why certain cards, with all their glitz, are just not that good.
The Eldrazi's are a perfect example.
Ulamog? Exile it? No problem. I just took out your biggest baddest card on the playing field upon casting. Plus, exiling is about the only way to get rid of it outside of -1/-1 counters.
Some cards are just too risky to play because if they get toasted upon casting, you're out a ton.
WUBRGCommander Decklists - PaperWUBRG
CCCCCommander Decklists - TheorycraftCCCC
Sig Credit: Pegasus Bishop
That's one of the reasons I love this game though. I have an eldrazi deck that is really fun, but doesn't have a win percentage I'd be happy with for my other decks, but man its fun. But the beauty is that yeah, I may have a 9/9 out with anihilator 3 that will generally f stuff up if left alone. The coolest part though, is that there are literally thousands of ways to deal with it for my opponent, or me if I'm playing against it.