The next ban/unban announcement will be January 27th, the Monday before the BNG Prerelease
Read this first.
Welcome to the Modern banlist discussion! Here, you can discuss everything related to the banlist, from questioning the possibility of unbans to recent announcements of new bannings.
Please follow a few simple rules while you are here.
All MTGS forum rules apply here. If you see a user flaming, spamming, or trolling for example, please report him/her instead of responding to it.
It is okay to discuss Legacy only if it is related to Modern bans and unbans.
Discussion about dramatically increasing the size of the banlist by more than 2-3 cards is not allowed. In the past, this sort of discussion has derailed the thread into completely unconstructive debate. There is a fine line between approved ban discussion (e.g. cards that are consistently breaking the turn 4 rule in top tier decks, or cards that make oppressive top tier decks) and spammy, prohibited discussion (e.g. banning Immolating Souleater and Fling because they theoretically break the turn 4 rule). If you see someone doing this, report them instead of responding to it. If you have a question about this, feel free to get in touch with staff to ask.
Do not discuss the "death of Modern" or generally claim that it is dying.
Remember, this is a place to discuss, and have fun. Keep it civil.
Big Update for this most recent announcement:
Second Sunrise is banned.
To summarize Wizards' position, they feel they have banned cards that give decks the ability to either win or be in a controlling position by turn 3.
These cards fall in that list:
Ancient Den
Blazing Shoal
Chrome Mox
Dark Depths
Dread Return
Glimpse of Nature
Golgari Grave-Troll
Great Furnace
Hypergenesis
Seat of the Synod
Sword of the Meek
Tree of Tales
Vault of Whispers
The other main category of cards exist because they make decks too consistant/reliable and thus hamper the deck diversity of the metagame. I think these cards are the best candidates for an unbanning.
Ancestral Vision
Bitterblossom
Cloudpost
Green Sun's Zenith
Jace, the Mind Sculptor
Mental Misstep
Ponder
Preordain
Punishing Fire
Rite of Flame
Stoneforge Mystic
Umezawa's Jitte
Then there are cards which wizards currently feels were mistakes or were never really tested in eternal formats.
Skullclamp
I realize Jace/Stoneforge could possibly be here depending on your point of view.
Alright. Were starting over people, adding in legacy ban rules. Heres the deal. I will now be actively handing out cards to anyone who even in the slightest starts a flame war or trolls. This thread will only be used for discussion now. No legacy vs modern, no "Your an idiot for saying X" Again, I will be heavily moding this.
If you want to make this thread clean and not turn into the flame war it was last time. Report posts you think are derailing the thread.
Bare in mind, that I've been given the OK to hand out bans in the modern sub should anyone want to make a flame war again. So if you have nothing good to say, say nothing at all.
A great way to kickoff the old conversation is to focus on some quotes from Sam Stoddard's recent article on Modern, "Developing Modern". In the article, Stoddard touches on a number of points that are relevant to Modern ban discussion, but his section on "Keeping the Format in Check" stands out as the most pertinent. Although I made some comments about this article in a previous incarnation of the ban thread, I feel it is important to start the conversation off on the right foot by restating those points. Stoddard's article represents the most current, as of 6/23, Wizards stance on its Modern ban policy. It needs to inform our discussion before all else.
Here are some key points and quotes from the article, along with a brief interpretation:
1. TURN 3 DECKS CANNOT BE CONSISTENT AND/OR DOMINANT
Our goal with Modern is to provide a format that allows for a wide variety of decks, where no single strategy is too dominant, and where turn-three wins are not consistent.
This quote should restate a point that is already clear: Modern decks that win on turn 3 or earlier are okay as long as they are NEITHER "CONSISTENT" NOR DOMINANT. This is a point that every banning article to date has made, and a point that Stoddard again affirms for us.
2 .DEPTHS, JACE, PREORDAIN, AND PONDER ARE UNLIKELY TO EVER BE UNBANNED
Cards like Skullclamp; Dark Depths; Glimpse of Nature; or Jace, The Mind Sculptor exist at such a high power level when combined with all of the other sets in Modern that putting one of them into the format would inevitably alter the format to be all about that one card.
Other cards, like Ponder and Preordain, just provide so much cardflow to the combo decks that they become nearly impossible for "fair" decks to compete against.
If nothing else, this strongly suggests that Depths and Jace will never be around in Modern. So there isn't much point in discussing their unbanning; the Wizards stance is pretty clear.
The same goes for Ponder and Preordain, although they are in a different category than Depths/JTMS. Wizards has deemed these cantrips too powerful for the format, enough so that Stoddard has called them out in his article on bannings. In the past, posters in this thread (myself included) have called for the unbanning of at least one of these cards. By so explicitly calling the cards out as unfair, Stoddard implies that these cards are never going to get off the list; as such, we should probably avoid discussing them.
3. THE BANLIST IS A GOOD LENGTH AS IS
While I don't think the banned list is perfect, I think it is getting very close, and the diversity the format has shown over the past year, despite going through the wringer at many high-level events, is a testament to that.
This implies that there are likely to be a few more bannings (and unbannings) over the next year. It also implies that the length of the banlist, although on the long side, is basically "Right" for Wizards. So no, Wizards is not going to unban 5+ cards just to shorten it. Similarly, Wizards is not going to ban 10+ cards just to cut down on tier 1 and turn-three strategies. It means that the banlist will be tinkered with carefully and not expanded/contracted too much.
4. CARDS WILL BE UNBANNED!
As the format evolves, and we add new cards to the format, there may well be room for some of the other cards on the banned list to come off.
Cards will be unbanned! Hurray! I was most interested by the bit about "and we add new cards to the format", as if newly printed cards down the road are going to make some of the banned cards increasingly fair. I'm looking at you GGT, especially with the printing of Scavenging Ooze in M14.
5. SCAPESHIFT IS AN EXAMPLE OF AN APPROPRIATELY DOMINANT/POWERFUL DECK
That being said, we removed Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle from the banned list just about a year ago, and we have been very happy with how that change affected the format. It has also slotted into about the range we expected—powerful, but not dominant.
This was a particularly interesting quote because it gives some standard of how powerful a deck Wizards will tolerate. By this quote, the current prevalence and power of Scapeshift decks is totally fine for Wizards. This is a very interesting benchmark that we can compare other decks to. If a deck is outperforming the current, June 2013 incarnation of Scapeshift, then it might be too powerful and overly dominant. But if a deck is underperforming relative to Scapeshift, then all things equal, it's probably fine.
Overall, Stoddard's article is a strong contribution to the banning dialogue. I encourage everyone to read it and to consider his arguments, and what they might mean for the format. It is a new entry into the Wizards Banning Policy domain, and one that we all need to consider when moving ahead.
The general consensus of cards that are safest to unban in modern are Ancestral Visions, GGT, and Bitterblossom. I'm pretty sure that GGT is 100% undeserving of its spot (I'm not even sure if dredgevine would run them since they are only effective for dredging or mediocre late-game beater) and from the testing I've heard faeries would probably not be pushed over the top by bitterblossom. What about ancestral visions, though? I've heard that having it be banned unnecessarily hurts blue control decks, but would unbanning it push already strong decks like MonoU Tron and UWR tempo over the top? If ancestral visions was unbanned, which decks do you guys think it would slot into the meta, and what would that do to the format?
The general consensus of cards that are safest to unban in modern are Ancestral Visions, GGT, and Bitterblossom. I'm pretty sure that GGT is 100% undeserving of its spot (I'm not even sure if dredgevine would run them since they are only effective for dredging or mediocre late-game beater) and from the testing I've heard faeries would probably not be pushed over the top by bitterblossom. What about ancestral visions, though? I've heard that having it be banned unnecessarily hurts blue control decks, but would unbanning it push already strong decks like MonoU Tron and UWR tempo over the top? If ancestral visions was unbanned, which decks do you guys think it would slot into the meta, and what would that do to the format?
I can see why they are worried about Bitterblossom. I don't want Golgari Grave-Troll to be unbanned, but that is just because I play mill. Ancestral Vision does not belong on the banned list. Tom LaPille said that the reason that they banned it was "We chose to take our cues from Legacy" and "While not every Jace, the Mind Sculptor deck plays Ancestral Vision, a great many of them do". This does not make sense. It is banned not because it is overpowered or because it warps the format, it is because it sees play in Legacy control decks that use Jace, the Mind Sculptor and Force of Will, neither of which can be used in Modern. And Modern is not supposed to be Legacy any more that Legacy is supposed to be Vintage. Legacy used to be just everything restricted/banned in Vintage is banned in Legacy. They changed that, so why are they assuming that cards that are played in Legacy will be overpowered in Modern?
Wild Nacatl - Supposedly the reason for the ban was that it would turn every aggro deck into zoo and this card will be an automatic 4 of an by banning it we'd have other decks besides zoo. It think it's safe to say that things haven't worked out that way. We don't have more aggro decks now than we did. I'm not saying Nacatl should come off because it certainly won't help the situation but it's obvious that the purpose of the ban did not achieve its stated goal.
Ancestral Vision - As Valenarch stated, the card was banned because it saw play in Legacy. I don't feel this is a valid reason as there are plenty of Modern cards that are Legacy staples. So this is another one I don't understand. Also, with now "playable" cascade cards in Modern there is really no way to abuse this and ultimately it turns into a draw 3 on turn 5. I don't see how this s a problem and feel because of this the card is safe to come off the list.
Golgari Grave-Troll - The deck this would go into would be tier 2 at best. So while it doesn't belong on the list, taking it off would have very little impact on the format. So I don't know how I feel about this. I understand that many players simply hate the Dredge mechanic so maybe that's reason enough to keep it on as ultimately attendance and sales is WotC's top priority. As much as some players may not like this fact, card and deck unpopularity does play a role in WotC's decisions. So if this card stayed on the list permanently, I wouldn't be surprised.
So having said all that and given WotC's reasons for bans and their stance on the format, I don't see any of these cards coming off. As for the rest of the banned list, given recent WotC comments, I don't see any of them coming off anytime soon either.
Future bans? I honestly don't know. I guess Pod is a possibility if it keeps putting up big numbers like it did at PT Portland. Other than that, I have no clue. So I'll just patiently wait and see how the banned list develops. I don't think they'll be anymore bannings until Modern gets into full gear again. Does anybody know when that is because I haven't really been following?
Anyway, that's about it on my end. Time will tell if any of the above cards actually do come off the list.
I can see why they are worried about Bitterblossom. I don't want Golgari Grave-Troll to be unbanned, but that is just because I play mill. Ancestral Vision does not belong on the banned list. Tom LaPille said that the reason that they banned it was "We chose to take our cues from Legacy" and "While not every Jace, the Mind Sculptor deck plays Ancestral Vision, a great many of them do". This does not make sense. It is banned not because it is overpowered or because it warps the format, it is because it sees play in Legacy control decks that use Jace, the Mind Sculptor and Force of Will, neither of which can be used in Modern. And Modern is not supposed to be Legacy any more that Legacy is supposed to be Vintage. Legacy used to be just everything restricted/banned in Vintage is banned in Legacy. They changed that, so why are they assuming that cards that are played in Legacy will be overpowered in Modern?
Wait how does GGT do anything vs Mill, surgical extraction/extirpate man
I think we will see GGT before we see Dread Return unbanned (if they ever decide to unban Dread Return) all the Troll does for this format is well help Dredgevine decks with a finisher
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern:
Paper: WUR Waffle Control, RG and U Tron
MTGO: U Tron, BRG Living End, B Infect
Testing Modern on MTGO and helping to craft decks on a Budget I stream!
Wait how does GGT do anything vs Mill, surgical extraction/extirpate man
I think we will see GGT before we see Dread Return unbanned (if they ever decide to unban Dread Return) all the Troll does for this format is well help Dredgevine decks with a finisher
GGT is still pretty big after Surgical Extraction. And I hope that Dread Return will be unbanned instead of Golgari Grave-Troll. Dread Return is just more interesting and could be used in many ways while as you said, GGT is only a finisher for dredge.
Ancestral visions was banned "just to be safe". While it could have looked like a dangerous card before, it doesn't seem like it would be a problem in the format in its current state, that's why many believe it to be one of the safest unbans.
Also you could e-mail to MaRo and ask him to forward it to the proper people.
@LandBoySteve
I believe the nacatl ban did what it was supposed to do (open the doors for other aggro decks), but these decks are simply not good enough.
The big problem with nacatl is that there is no other 1 drop that can compete. This means that any other aggro deck that could appear is not as efficient as nacatl-zoo, and risks not being strong enough.
GGT is still pretty big after Surgical Extraction. And I hope that Dread Return will be unbanned instead of Golgari Grave-Troll. Dread Return is just more interesting and could be used in many ways while as you said, GGT is only a finisher for dredge.
Dread Return, while more interesting, is also much more powerful than GGT, even with Bridge banned (which seems unlikely since it was in MMA) it can still lead to some explosive plays and quick kills
That said there is also a lot of GY hate in the format as a result it may be safe to unban Dread Return soon, Scavenging Ooze is one of the best cards vs it (and GY strategies in general) and in addition to DRS it might just be to weak to make an impact despite being a very powerful card
Pros to unbanning DR:
-New interesting GY based Archetypes
Cons to unbanning DR:
-Hard to interact with
-Potential to high turn 3 consistency
The potential is in addition to Glimpse, DR decks now also have Breaking to self-mill
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern:
Paper: WUR Waffle Control, RG and U Tron
MTGO: U Tron, BRG Living End, B Infect
Testing Modern on MTGO and helping to craft decks on a Budget I stream!
E1 is the fixed version of Kitty so I dont expect Wotc to unban Kitty any time soon.
Probably on the watch list.
Cranial Plating It was not reprinted in MM. leads to explosive starts that are hard to over come by other decks. Getting rid of CP would shift Robots/Affinty to a more consistent slower build.
Voice of Resurgence Pod decks have been fringe since the inception of the format. So what card put the decks where they are now? I believe its VoR. The only thing I feel that will keep it safe is its in Standard right now.
Deathright Shaman Best 1 drop in the format right now. The card is so versatile it has pushed other 1 mana dorks out of play for the most part. Another card still in Standard, which could save it for the time being.
I am hoping for an unban of preordain, GGT, and/or seething song or rites.
I wouldn't read into Plating's absence, given that it wouldn't have played well outside of Affinity in MM draft. (Bonesplitter was essentially reprinted in that "spot.")
Has it actually been stated somewhere that E1 is the fixed Nacatl, or is that just a popular comparison?
Although I hate to see CP hit the field, it really is the biggest advantage to playing affinity, and forces extremely linear deck construction. I don't think they would neuter affinity that hard as it has a rather large fanbase, isn't dominating anything, can easily be hated out, and is one of the last aggro decks left.
VoR, while a pain in the ass in pod, isn't that much better than any persist creature in my experience but time will have to tell on that one.
I wouldn't read into Plating's absence, given that it wouldn't have played well outside of Affinity in MM draft. (Bonesplitter was essentially reprinted in that "spot.")
And could be what Wotc wants to push Robots/Affinity to. We dont know.
I dont see it being that bad in MM drafts. Actually I think it would have been pretty good addition.
Has it actually been stated somewhere that E1 is the fixed Nacatl, or is that just a popular comparison?
Although I hate to see CP hit the field, it really is the biggest advantage to playing affinity, and forces extremely linear deck construction. I don't think they would neuter affinity that hard as it has a rather large fanbase, isn't dominating anything, can easily be hated out, and is one of the last aggro decks left.
VoR, while a pain in the ass in pod, isn't that much better than any persist creature in my experience but time will have to tell on that one.
E1 is the fixed version of Kitty so I dont expect Wotc to unban Kitty any time soon.
Probably on the watch list.
Cranial Plating It was not reprinted in MM. leads to explosive starts that are hard to over come by other decks. Getting rid of CP would shift Robots/Affinty to a more consistent slower build.
Voice of Resurgence Pod decks have been fringe since the inception of the format. So what card put the decks where they are now? I believe its VoR. The only thing I feel that will keep it safe is its in Standard right now.
Deathright Shaman Best 1 drop in the format right now. The card is so versatile it has pushed other 1 mana dorks out of play for the most part. Another card still in Standard, which could save it for the time being.
I am hoping for an unban of preordain, GGT, and/or seething song or rites.
I think you got a few things wrong here:
CP: I don't see affinity dominating. The important thing about affinity is, that if it dominated, it wouldn't be a problem, because people can put 6-8 cards in their SB that are good against/destroy affinity and affinity disappears, which is not something you can say about jund or pod.
VoR: This is wrong, this poor creature is very good but is not the reason the deck is overpowered. The overpowered card is obviously the reusable tutor. It's been like this ever since tutors exist with demonic tutor. Free spells and tutors have always been the most problematic things in magic. Banning VoR would be like banning vengevine instead of survival in legacy. You gotta ban the engine, not the card(s) that happen to be good with that overpowered engine.
DRS: I agree this card is too good, but it'd feel wrong banning this little mana/ping/utility creature, it's not wizard's style.
Overall with what they said in their article, it shows to me they have the same exact vision of the format as me. They just didn't mention pod is specifically in the watch list because they are waiting on the next big tournament results to do their next move.
Cranial Plating It was not reprinted in MM. leads to explosive starts that are hard to over come by other decks. Getting rid of CP would shift Robots/Affinty to a more consistent slower build.
Voice of Resurgence Pod decks have been fringe since the inception of the format. So what card put the decks where they are now? I believe its VoR. The only thing I feel that will keep it safe is its in Standard right now.
Deathright Shaman Best 1 drop in the format right now. The card is so versatile it has pushed other 1 mana dorks out of play for the most part. Another card still in Standard, which could save it for the time being.
I completely disagree about Cranial Plating.
Affinity (Or "Robots" for "those" players) has placed decently ever since modern's inception, but it hasn't WON anything significant yet, there's enough hate for it in the meta that everybody at least packs 2 pieces in their sideboard, and those pieces probably have Flashback... Or anyone packing decent creature removal will do a fine job against affinity. There's enough hate for it that it doesn't need to see another ban...
On Voice and Deathrite Shaman:
There's no way, there's absolutely NO WAY they're going to ban them especially released under the "Modern Philosophy" They're not going to basically admit to making 2 mistakes in one block...again... What's it going to look like to people who went out and paid 200$ a playset on VoR just to play it for Modern, and then it gets banned? Same with DRS, it's going to send very BAD backlash their way over the banlist regulation. The best thing they could do would be to print hoser cards in Theros, maybe something like
"Awesome Artifact Name" 2
Legendary Artifact - Rare
Creatures have no abilities.
That would definitely throw a wrench into the gears of Voice, while not every deck would want to play this because of their own creatures (because of creature creep, one would assume you'd be running your own creatures with abilities.)
Trust me, they're more willing to print a hoser card for problem cards in standard than they are about just banning them in other formats. They'd be especially protective of two popular cards from the return to one of Magic's most popular settings.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[W]FREE STONEFORGE MYSTIC and JACE THE MINDSCULPTOR[/W]
E1 is the fixed version of Kitty so I dont expect Wotc to unban Kitty any time soon.
Probably on the watch list.
Cranial Plating It was not reprinted in MM. leads to explosive starts that are hard to over come by other decks. Getting rid of CP would shift Robots/Affinty to a more consistent slower build.
Voice of Resurgence Pod decks have been fringe since the inception of the format. So what card put the decks where they are now? I believe its VoR. The only thing I feel that will keep it safe is its in Standard right now.
Deathright Shaman Best 1 drop in the format right now. The card is so versatile it has pushed other 1 mana dorks out of play for the most part. Another card still in Standard, which could save it for the time being.
I am hoping for an unban of preordain, GGT, and/or seething song or rites.
If Wizards was to ban an Affinity card, I think that Arcbound Ravager is much more powerful than Cranial Plating. I do agree with you about Deathright Shaman and possibly Golgari Grave-Troll. I hope that some of those cards that were banned because of their use in storm decks are unbanned, but that probably won't happen.
2. Punishing Fire-2 repeatable damage once per turn that gives your opponent 1 life and costs 3 mana is not broken. Grim Lavamancer does similar things in creature form. While it needs to exile cards from your graveyard and is vulnerable to removal, it is cheaper, does not give your opponent life, does not require a specific land, can be played sooner, and can be used to attack or block. Grim Lavamancer isn't broken, so how is Punishing Fire?
I don't see the reason to keep GGT on the list so I think that could safely come off. Also with all the answers to Bitterblossom in the format (Abrupt Decay stands out) it should be a safe unban as well, and would probably make Faeries a more popular deck. Apart from that I'd like to see them unban Ancestral Visions to test its power level in the Modern meta, instead of valuing it based on Legacy. And of course any ritual unbanned would be nice, though that seems unlikely.
2. Punishing Fire-2 repeatable damage once per turn that gives your opponent 1 life and costs 3 mana is not broken. Grim Lavamancer does similar things in creature form. While it needs to exile cards from your graveyard and is vulnerable to removal, it is cheaper, does not give your opponent life, does not require a specific land, can be played sooner, and can be used to attack or block. Grim Lavamancer isn't broken, so how is Punishing Fire
That comparison really isn't on point. It's like comparing Divining Witch (a card that saw zero play and still doesn't in Legacy/Vintage) to Demonic Consultation (a card that is totally broken). Lavamancer is a creature that himself is vulnerable to removal. The opponent has a full turn to answer it even after you play the guy, and basically every removal spell in the format deals with him. Fire, as an instant, has no such limitations. You can't even use Deathrite Shaman to kill Fire because the opponent can just recur the burn spell before DRS can lose summoning sickness and exile it. Overall, Fire is just a card that limits decks and creature options, one that is much harder to answer than other options.
Goyf goes in lots of decks. Nacatl only goes in Zoo. Wizards would argue, and I would agree, that Goyf helps out a variety of different archetypes, increasing format diversity. Nacatl makes one aggro deck substantially better than others. Also, a Zoo with BOTH Experiment One and Nacatl sounds pretty redundant and scary. That said, Goyf definitely doesn't decrease card diversity. He's the best beater around at 2 CMC, and that might support an argument for his banning.
I agree with this and have been hoping that this would happen for a long time. Between all the graveyard hate you mentioned, not to mention the maindeckable Scavenging Ooze and Deathrite Shaman, Return seems increasingly safe. There are still strong arguments to be made for keeping it banned (forces players to choose whether to pack GY hate in the SB or gamble on not facing Dredge, and that's the original reason that DR got banned). But I think the benefits outweigh the risks.
Punishing Fire completely warps metagames. It requires maybe 3-4 slots out side of what a deck would normally run and completely shuts down every non-hexproof creature with less than 3 toughness. It's near impossible to answer without graveyard hate, and answers the most common graveyard hate (DRS) by itself. It almost completely pushes out certain archetypes and in return doesn't actually bring any new archetypes with it. It should not be unbanned.
Punishing Fire completely warps metagames. It requires maybe 3-4 slots out side of what a deck would normally run and completely shuts down every non-hexproof creature with less than 3 toughness. It's near impossible to answer without graveyard hate, and answers the most common graveyard hate (DRS) by itself. It almost completely pushes out certain archetypes and in return doesn't actually bring any new archetypes with it. It should not be unbanned.
At PT: Amsterdam I sat down and told Guskin they should have banned Punishing Fire. (I also asked how he designed such a bad planeswalker in Chandra Ablaze. He replied that she was development's fault. :-P) It completely warped deck decisionmaking in that 4-block environment, leading to people running Treefolk Harbinger to make sure their 1 drops didn't get nuked by it. It operates on an axes that makes it incredibly difficult to deal with efficiently. If you don't understand what makes it so problematic, I would suggest repeatedly playing against it. (Even in Legacy, the card is obnoxious when playing a deck like Esper Deathblade, since the opponent can easily play around extraction and Shaman should they choose.)
At PT: Amsterdam I sat down and told Guskin they should have banned Punishing Fire. (I also asked how he designed such a bad planeswalker in Chandra Ablaze. He replied that she was development's fault. :-P) It completely warped deck decisionmaking in that 4-block environment, leading to people running Treefolk Harbinger to make sure their 1 drops didn't get nuked by it. It operates on an axes that makes it incredibly difficult to deal with efficiently. If you don't understand what makes it so problematic, I would suggest repeatedly playing against it. (Even in Legacy, the card is obnoxious when playing a deck like Esper Deathblade, since the opponent can easily play around extraction and Shaman should they choose.)
Current DCI Modern Banned List
Big Update for this most recent announcement:
Second Sunrise is banned.
To summarize Wizards' position, they feel they have banned cards that give decks the ability to either win or be in a controlling position by turn 3.
These cards fall in that list:
Ancient Den
Blazing Shoal
Chrome Mox
Dark Depths
Dread Return
Glimpse of Nature
Golgari Grave-Troll
Great Furnace
Hypergenesis
Seat of the Synod
Sword of the Meek
Tree of Tales
Vault of Whispers
The other main category of cards exist because they make decks too consistant/reliable and thus hamper the deck diversity of the metagame. I think these cards are the best candidates for an unbanning.
Ancestral Vision
Bitterblossom
Cloudpost
Green Sun's Zenith
Jace, the Mind Sculptor
Mental Misstep
Ponder
Preordain
Punishing Fire
Rite of Flame
Stoneforge Mystic
Umezawa's Jitte
Then there are cards which wizards currently feels were mistakes or were never really tested in eternal formats.
Skullclamp
I realize Jace/Stoneforge could possibly be here depending on your point of view.
Made games last too long:
Sensei's Divining Top
Second Sunrise
Community Cup Announcement with the Initial Ban List.
1st Banned List change with explanations
2nd Banned List change with explanations
3rd Banned List change with explanations
Removal of Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle
Addition of Bloodbraid Elf and Seething Song
Addition of Second Sunrise
Old threads:
6/23/13
4/22/13
9/20/12 and 6/20/12
If you want to make this thread clean and not turn into the flame war it was last time. Report posts you think are derailing the thread.
Bare in mind, that I've been given the OK to hand out bans in the modern sub should anyone want to make a flame war again. So if you have nothing good to say, say nothing at all.
Here are some key points and quotes from the article, along with a brief interpretation:
1. TURN 3 DECKS CANNOT BE CONSISTENT AND/OR DOMINANT
This quote should restate a point that is already clear: Modern decks that win on turn 3 or earlier are okay as long as they are NEITHER "CONSISTENT" NOR DOMINANT. This is a point that every banning article to date has made, and a point that Stoddard again affirms for us.
2 .DEPTHS, JACE, PREORDAIN, AND PONDER ARE UNLIKELY TO EVER BE UNBANNED
If nothing else, this strongly suggests that Depths and Jace will never be around in Modern. So there isn't much point in discussing their unbanning; the Wizards stance is pretty clear.
The same goes for Ponder and Preordain, although they are in a different category than Depths/JTMS. Wizards has deemed these cantrips too powerful for the format, enough so that Stoddard has called them out in his article on bannings. In the past, posters in this thread (myself included) have called for the unbanning of at least one of these cards. By so explicitly calling the cards out as unfair, Stoddard implies that these cards are never going to get off the list; as such, we should probably avoid discussing them.
3. THE BANLIST IS A GOOD LENGTH AS IS
This implies that there are likely to be a few more bannings (and unbannings) over the next year. It also implies that the length of the banlist, although on the long side, is basically "Right" for Wizards. So no, Wizards is not going to unban 5+ cards just to shorten it. Similarly, Wizards is not going to ban 10+ cards just to cut down on tier 1 and turn-three strategies. It means that the banlist will be tinkered with carefully and not expanded/contracted too much.
4. CARDS WILL BE UNBANNED!
Cards will be unbanned! Hurray! I was most interested by the bit about "and we add new cards to the format", as if newly printed cards down the road are going to make some of the banned cards increasingly fair. I'm looking at you GGT, especially with the printing of Scavenging Ooze in M14.
5. SCAPESHIFT IS AN EXAMPLE OF AN APPROPRIATELY DOMINANT/POWERFUL DECK
This was a particularly interesting quote because it gives some standard of how powerful a deck Wizards will tolerate. By this quote, the current prevalence and power of Scapeshift decks is totally fine for Wizards. This is a very interesting benchmark that we can compare other decks to. If a deck is outperforming the current, June 2013 incarnation of Scapeshift, then it might be too powerful and overly dominant. But if a deck is underperforming relative to Scapeshift, then all things equal, it's probably fine.
Overall, Stoddard's article is a strong contribution to the banning dialogue. I encourage everyone to read it and to consider his arguments, and what they might mean for the format. It is a new entry into the Wizards Banning Policy domain, and one that we all need to consider when moving ahead.
I can see why they are worried about Bitterblossom. I don't want Golgari Grave-Troll to be unbanned, but that is just because I play mill. Ancestral Vision does not belong on the banned list. Tom LaPille said that the reason that they banned it was "We chose to take our cues from Legacy" and "While not every Jace, the Mind Sculptor deck plays Ancestral Vision, a great many of them do". This does not make sense. It is banned not because it is overpowered or because it warps the format, it is because it sees play in Legacy control decks that use Jace, the Mind Sculptor and Force of Will, neither of which can be used in Modern. And Modern is not supposed to be Legacy any more that Legacy is supposed to be Vintage. Legacy used to be just everything restricted/banned in Vintage is banned in Legacy. They changed that, so why are they assuming that cards that are played in Legacy will be overpowered in Modern?
Also, I am going to send an email to somebody at Wizards trying to get Punishing Fire, Wild Nacatl, Ancestral Vision, and Dread Return unbanned and Bridge from Below banned. Any idea who has the most authority for deciding the banned lists?
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Wild Nacatl - Supposedly the reason for the ban was that it would turn every aggro deck into zoo and this card will be an automatic 4 of an by banning it we'd have other decks besides zoo. It think it's safe to say that things haven't worked out that way. We don't have more aggro decks now than we did. I'm not saying Nacatl should come off because it certainly won't help the situation but it's obvious that the purpose of the ban did not achieve its stated goal.
Ancestral Vision - As Valenarch stated, the card was banned because it saw play in Legacy. I don't feel this is a valid reason as there are plenty of Modern cards that are Legacy staples. So this is another one I don't understand. Also, with now "playable" cascade cards in Modern there is really no way to abuse this and ultimately it turns into a draw 3 on turn 5. I don't see how this s a problem and feel because of this the card is safe to come off the list.
Golgari Grave-Troll - The deck this would go into would be tier 2 at best. So while it doesn't belong on the list, taking it off would have very little impact on the format. So I don't know how I feel about this. I understand that many players simply hate the Dredge mechanic so maybe that's reason enough to keep it on as ultimately attendance and sales is WotC's top priority. As much as some players may not like this fact, card and deck unpopularity does play a role in WotC's decisions. So if this card stayed on the list permanently, I wouldn't be surprised.
So having said all that and given WotC's reasons for bans and their stance on the format, I don't see any of these cards coming off. As for the rest of the banned list, given recent WotC comments, I don't see any of them coming off anytime soon either.
Future bans? I honestly don't know. I guess Pod is a possibility if it keeps putting up big numbers like it did at PT Portland. Other than that, I have no clue. So I'll just patiently wait and see how the banned list develops. I don't think they'll be anymore bannings until Modern gets into full gear again. Does anybody know when that is because I haven't really been following?
Anyway, that's about it on my end. Time will tell if any of the above cards actually do come off the list.
Wait how does GGT do anything vs Mill, surgical extraction/extirpate man
I think we will see GGT before we see Dread Return unbanned (if they ever decide to unban Dread Return) all the Troll does for this format is well help Dredgevine decks with a finisher
Paper: WUR Waffle Control, RG and U Tron
MTGO: U Tron, BRG Living End, B Infect
Testing Modern on MTGO and helping to craft decks on a Budget
I stream!
Hermit Druid Combo:
GGT is still pretty big after Surgical Extraction. And I hope that Dread Return will be unbanned instead of Golgari Grave-Troll. Dread Return is just more interesting and could be used in many ways while as you said, GGT is only a finisher for dredge.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Ancestral visions was banned "just to be safe". While it could have looked like a dangerous card before, it doesn't seem like it would be a problem in the format in its current state, that's why many believe it to be one of the safest unbans.
Also you could e-mail to MaRo and ask him to forward it to the proper people.
@LandBoySteve
I believe the nacatl ban did what it was supposed to do (open the doors for other aggro decks), but these decks are simply not good enough.
The big problem with nacatl is that there is no other 1 drop that can compete. This means that any other aggro deck that could appear is not as efficient as nacatl-zoo, and risks not being strong enough.
Dread Return, while more interesting, is also much more powerful than GGT, even with Bridge banned (which seems unlikely since it was in MMA) it can still lead to some explosive plays and quick kills
That said there is also a lot of GY hate in the format as a result it may be safe to unban Dread Return soon, Scavenging Ooze is one of the best cards vs it (and GY strategies in general) and in addition to DRS it might just be to weak to make an impact despite being a very powerful card
Pros to unbanning DR:
-New interesting GY based Archetypes
Cons to unbanning DR:
-Hard to interact with
-Potential to high turn 3 consistency
The potential is in addition to Glimpse, DR decks now also have Breaking to self-mill
Paper: WUR Waffle Control, RG and U Tron
MTGO: U Tron, BRG Living End, B Infect
Testing Modern on MTGO and helping to craft decks on a Budget
I stream!
Hermit Druid Combo:
Probably on the watch list.
Cranial Plating It was not reprinted in MM. leads to explosive starts that are hard to over come by other decks. Getting rid of CP would shift Robots/Affinty to a more consistent slower build.
Voice of Resurgence Pod decks have been fringe since the inception of the format. So what card put the decks where they are now? I believe its VoR. The only thing I feel that will keep it safe is its in Standard right now.
Deathright Shaman Best 1 drop in the format right now. The card is so versatile it has pushed other 1 mana dorks out of play for the most part. Another card still in Standard, which could save it for the time being.
I am hoping for an unban of preordain, GGT, and/or seething song or rites.
Current post- Grand Prix KC Modern Postmortem (7/7/13)
Although I hate to see CP hit the field, it really is the biggest advantage to playing affinity, and forces extremely linear deck construction. I don't think they would neuter affinity that hard as it has a rather large fanbase, isn't dominating anything, can easily be hated out, and is one of the last aggro decks left.
VoR, while a pain in the ass in pod, isn't that much better than any persist creature in my experience but time will have to tell on that one.
And could be what Wotc wants to push Robots/Affinity to. We dont know.
I dont see it being that bad in MM drafts. Actually I think it would have been pretty good addition.
How to beat Affinity: Kill all the 2 drops!
Current post- Grand Prix KC Modern Postmortem (7/7/13)
I think you got a few things wrong here:
CP: I don't see affinity dominating. The important thing about affinity is, that if it dominated, it wouldn't be a problem, because people can put 6-8 cards in their SB that are good against/destroy affinity and affinity disappears, which is not something you can say about jund or pod.
VoR: This is wrong, this poor creature is very good but is not the reason the deck is overpowered. The overpowered card is obviously the reusable tutor. It's been like this ever since tutors exist with demonic tutor. Free spells and tutors have always been the most problematic things in magic. Banning VoR would be like banning vengevine instead of survival in legacy. You gotta ban the engine, not the card(s) that happen to be good with that overpowered engine.
DRS: I agree this card is too good, but it'd feel wrong banning this little mana/ping/utility creature, it's not wizard's style.
Overall with what they said in their article, it shows to me they have the same exact vision of the format as me. They just didn't mention pod is specifically in the watch list because they are waiting on the next big tournament results to do their next move.
I completely disagree about Cranial Plating.
Affinity (Or "Robots" for "those" players) has placed decently ever since modern's inception, but it hasn't WON anything significant yet, there's enough hate for it in the meta that everybody at least packs 2 pieces in their sideboard, and those pieces probably have Flashback... Or anyone packing decent creature removal will do a fine job against affinity. There's enough hate for it that it doesn't need to see another ban...
On Voice and Deathrite Shaman:
There's no way, there's absolutely NO WAY they're going to ban them especially released under the "Modern Philosophy" They're not going to basically admit to making 2 mistakes in one block...again... What's it going to look like to people who went out and paid 200$ a playset on VoR just to play it for Modern, and then it gets banned? Same with DRS, it's going to send very BAD backlash their way over the banlist regulation. The best thing they could do would be to print hoser cards in Theros, maybe something like
"Awesome Artifact Name" 2
Legendary Artifact - Rare
Creatures have no abilities.
That would definitely throw a wrench into the gears of Voice, while not every deck would want to play this because of their own creatures (because of creature creep, one would assume you'd be running your own creatures with abilities.)
Trust me, they're more willing to print a hoser card for problem cards in standard than they are about just banning them in other formats. They'd be especially protective of two popular cards from the return to one of Magic's most popular settings.
[W]FREE STONEFORGE MYSTIC and JACE THE MINDSCULPTOR[/W]
Please Visit my Alterations Page!
My Alters Sales Thread
Want a FREE Playset of Foil Baneslayer Angels?!?:
If Wizards was to ban an Affinity card, I think that Arcbound Ravager is much more powerful than Cranial Plating. I do agree with you about Deathright Shaman and possibly Golgari Grave-Troll. I hope that some of those cards that were banned because of their use in storm decks are unbanned, but that probably won't happen.
The cards that I think should be unbanned are
1. Ancestral Vision-As I've said before, it was banned because Jace, the Mind Sculptor decks used it in Legacy. Jace, the Mind Sculptor is banned, so Ancestral Vision shouldn't be. I also don't think that it could be abused the same way as Restore Balance, Hypergenesis, or Living End could with cascade because nobody has broken Wheel of Fate or Lotus Bloom with cascade yet, and I don't think they'll be able to break Ancestral Vision either.
2. Punishing Fire-2 repeatable damage once per turn that gives your opponent 1 life and costs 3 mana is not broken. Grim Lavamancer does similar things in creature form. While it needs to exile cards from your graveyard and is vulnerable to removal, it is cheaper, does not give your opponent life, does not require a specific land, can be played sooner, and can be used to attack or block. Grim Lavamancer isn't broken, so how is Punishing Fire?
3. Wild Nacatl-It is no more broken than Tarmogoyf. Wizards will never ban Goyf, so Wild Nacatl shouldn't be banned either.
4. Dread Return-Wizards hates dredge too much. There has been a lot of graveyard hate printed such as Grafdigger's Cage, Leyline of the Void, and Rest in Peace. Unbanning Dread Return would probably have a similar effect as that of unbanning Valakut. People would make new decks that would be powerful, but not broken.
I hope that someday Seething Song, Preordain, and Ponder are taken off the ban list, but that seems like wishful thinking. GGT deserves to come off too, but if I had to choose between it and Dread Return, Dread Return is far better and more interesting than Golgari Grave-Troll.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
I think I remember them being worried about Bitterblossom being abused with Scion of Oona.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
And Spell Snare
I am interested in seeing Bitterblossom in a UB control shell as well as Fae, not sure how good it is until you test all the angles
Paper: WUR Waffle Control, RG and U Tron
MTGO: U Tron, BRG Living End, B Infect
Testing Modern on MTGO and helping to craft decks on a Budget
I stream!
Hermit Druid Combo:
That comparison really isn't on point. It's like comparing Divining Witch (a card that saw zero play and still doesn't in Legacy/Vintage) to Demonic Consultation (a card that is totally broken). Lavamancer is a creature that himself is vulnerable to removal. The opponent has a full turn to answer it even after you play the guy, and basically every removal spell in the format deals with him. Fire, as an instant, has no such limitations. You can't even use Deathrite Shaman to kill Fire because the opponent can just recur the burn spell before DRS can lose summoning sickness and exile it. Overall, Fire is just a card that limits decks and creature options, one that is much harder to answer than other options.
Goyf goes in lots of decks. Nacatl only goes in Zoo. Wizards would argue, and I would agree, that Goyf helps out a variety of different archetypes, increasing format diversity. Nacatl makes one aggro deck substantially better than others. Also, a Zoo with BOTH Experiment One and Nacatl sounds pretty redundant and scary. That said, Goyf definitely doesn't decrease card diversity. He's the best beater around at 2 CMC, and that might support an argument for his banning.
I agree with this and have been hoping that this would happen for a long time. Between all the graveyard hate you mentioned, not to mention the maindeckable Scavenging Ooze and Deathrite Shaman, Return seems increasingly safe. There are still strong arguments to be made for keeping it banned (forces players to choose whether to pack GY hate in the SB or gamble on not facing Dredge, and that's the original reason that DR got banned). But I think the benefits outweigh the risks.
At PT: Amsterdam I sat down and told Guskin they should have banned Punishing Fire. (I also asked how he designed such a bad planeswalker in Chandra Ablaze. He replied that she was development's fault. :-P) It completely warped deck decisionmaking in that 4-block environment, leading to people running Treefolk Harbinger to make sure their 1 drops didn't get nuked by it. It operates on an axes that makes it incredibly difficult to deal with efficiently. If you don't understand what makes it so problematic, I would suggest repeatedly playing against it. (Even in Legacy, the card is obnoxious when playing a deck like Esper Deathblade, since the opponent can easily play around extraction and Shaman should they choose.)
Current post- Grand Prix KC Modern Postmortem (7/7/13)
I guess I can see your point.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.