Their hatred for blue cantrips still seems to be very much a thing, I wouldn't expect a Preordain unban anytime soon.
Out of all blue cards Jace, the Mind Sculptor is probably the most likely card to get unbanned, but that probably doesn't mean much.
Wow, that's insane banning those cards out all legal cards. They must really hate blue. Might also explain why we have not seen a force spike, counterspell reprint in ages.
That's just insane. Like you said demonic and tutor vampiric tutor are legal, and all the other tutors are legal...
Looks like they banned Treachery as well. 4 blue cards.... While it's not modern it does not speak well of those making the decisions for modern.
Legend said it perfectly about the balance of the urza lands.
Memory lapse made a good point too about what people think when they hear "tron" deck, I agree that I don't think of e.tron or mono U tron either even though they both use the tron lands. I played mono U for a long time and assembling tron isn't top priority,its much slower.
Would tron be so hated if it wasn't for turn 3 karn? For the most part I feel that's what the issue is, not the lands themselves. Ugin, ulamog, emmy, all these huge threats are turn four or more.
Ban Karn and the deck changes from a polarized nightmare to a perfectly fair deck.
End result of this thread = BAN KARN!
Sure if you call casting Ulamogs, Ugins, and other eldrazi essentially above curve still perfectly fair. Karn is not the reason the deck is hated.
As a Burn player, I beg you not to reprint that card. It would be absolutely glorious to play...for about a week until Burn would be hit with multiple emergency bans, followed by Price a few months later. It would be in the context of the format, way worse than a legitimate Mox.
I don't think it would be too much. I have played burn quite a bit myself. It would probably be too sudden though for the current meta. Most decks are 3 color. However, it's easy to adapt too. Just play 2 color or mono color. However, considering how many people would have to change decks up because of it. I could see quite an unhappy player base. Drastic changes generally are not good, but when I look at the card alone, and have played, and played against it in legacy. I don't see it as too much. Just a sudden meta shift, but a pretty simple shift too mostly two color.
I think the big issue is that Price of Progress was never in the format, and modern evolved without it. Price of Progress would cause the meta to shift to less greedy mana bases, but people have come to expect a 3 color deck being normal. Playing 3 colors is pretty low risk short of Blood Moon. I think that's why Price of Progress was brought up. There just is not much policing what lands people play in modern. I think Price of Progress would do a great job. If we want less greedy mana bases, and I don't see a problem with it. However, some people like playing with greedy mana bases. Greedy has been the norm so a shift to the other direction would upset some players. Also it's difficult to shift gradually in this regard. Although, a wasteland variant is certainly a step in the right direction. However, modern has evolved without Price of Progress. Consequently, peoples have the perception of greedy mana bases being normal, and something that punishes that choice is perceived abnormal.
We have people complain about Blood Moon. Their reason is general it stops me from playing the game or cuts me off a color. The fact is people perceive perfect mana as normal, and don't have to worry about color screw. If they were that worried about blood moon though they would stop playing 3 color decks. However, blood moon only sees play in a handful of decks, and mostly sits in sideboards the other times. It's also generally easy to play around with fetch-lands, and instant speed removal.
I stopped reading this wall of text after a few sentences
The fact you can even argue for a single card destroying half the decks in the format and forcing them to become 2 colors is insane and absurd, no single card should warp an entire format that much, even blood moon and burn at their piques never did that.
Every deck would pack the most burn hate centric sideboard slot that burn would be invalidated as a deck all while destroying everyones sideboard slot. The card would literally devolve modern into Eldrazi Winter proportions of bad
Only three color/tron decks would have to dedicate more seriously to burn then. However, I was going on saying that 3 color/ perfect mana has been the norm in modern. A sudden shift to less greedy mana bases would seem abnormal to what has been the norm. It's not necessarily bad, but depends on what you want out the format.
~Edit~
Also another point in that "wall of text" was the a sudden shift like that would probably lead to a lot unhappy players.
As a Burn player, I beg you not to reprint that card. It would be absolutely glorious to play...for about a week until Burn would be hit with multiple emergency bans, followed by Price a few months later. It would be in the context of the format, way worse than a legitimate Mox.
I don't think it would be too much. I have played burn quite a bit myself. It would probably be too sudden though for the current meta. Most decks are 3 color. However, it's easy to adapt too. Just play 2 color or mono color. However, considering how many people would have to change decks up because of it. I could see quite an unhappy player base. Drastic changes generally are not good, but when I look at the card alone, and have played, and played against it in legacy. I don't see it as too much. Just a sudden meta shift, but a pretty simple shift too mostly two color.
I think the big issue is that Price of Progress was never in the format, and modern evolved without it. Price of Progress would cause the meta to shift to less greedy mana bases, but people have come to expect a 3 color deck being normal. Playing 3 colors is pretty low risk short of Blood Moon. I think that's why Price of Progress was brought up. There just is not much policing what lands people play in modern. I think Price of Progress would do a great job. If we want less greedy mana bases, and I don't see a problem with it. However, some people like playing with greedy mana bases. Greedy has been the norm so a shift to the other direction would upset some players. Also it's difficult to shift gradually in this regard. Although, a wasteland variant is certainly a step in the right direction. However, modern has evolved without Price of Progress. Consequently, peoples have the perception of greedy mana bases being normal, and something that punishes that choice is perceived abnormal.
We have people complain about Blood Moon. Their reason is general it stops me from playing the game or cuts me off a color. The fact is people perceive perfect mana as normal, and don't have to worry about color screw. If they were that worried about blood moon though they would stop playing 3 color decks. However, blood moon only sees play in a handful of decks, and mostly sits in sideboards the other times. It's also generally easy to play around with fetch-lands, and instant speed removal.
While a lot of you think Price of Progress is too much. It's something the meta would quickly adapt too. A two color deck generally only needs to fetch one non-basic. Price of Progress becomes a shock for 2 mana in a mostly 2 color meta. It makes three color decks a risky proposal. I am fine with that. However, I could see the case that would cause too sudden of a meta shift. That doesn't mean it's necessarily broken, but a lot decks in modern are 3 color.
Considering when they said that the threat pendulum had swung too far. I am not sure they have had time to react yet. Curious to see the ixalan uncommons and commons. Even then I think it would be the set after Ixalan or the next. If we don't see anything by then, the answer is a definite no.
It's baffling. If they put cycling on it would have made more sense. However, the fact it has a single word for the card name. Makes worry if it will be the new norm instead of Overrun. Cards with a single word for a name are cards wizards tends to reprint.
Yea, I do. So the person was not entirely lying. Their source was not completely accurate though lol. Makes me wonder if it was something that leaked before the design was finalized. I could see the switch to red.
I likeHollow one against decks like burn where we need to race. We can get some power on the board to attack or block. Just was play testing with against burn. However against most decks, this deck is still pretty quick.
It might also be useful against blue decks since it forces them to spend mana to answer it.
However, the card does absolutely nothing against Living End. So that means you'd need additional GY hate against living end, and then you'd have too much GY hate in your SB. If you run Cage as your only GY hate, then you'd have a hard time with Living End. What's the solution?
I don't see that as problem. While cage is good, I normal would rather run other graveyard hosers. I like cage against collected company, but if you have a lot graveyard based decks in your meta. I feel there are better cards mainly since Grafdigger's Cage does not exile the graveyard. While it's a bit more multi-purpose, but nothing beats just exiling the problem cards. Grafdigger's is vulnerable also to any artifact hate so I like enchantments more. Beast within can deal with a lot of hate cards so they may still sidestep your board cards.
Considering 90% of this thread is some kind of legal discussion, has there been any post with better pictures of the cards?
You won't get one, most likely. WotC's leak has run its course.
Instead of looking at what the leak spoiled, look at what it didn't spoil. That will tell you clearly that WotC was behind it.
'WOTC's leak'?!? Why would wizards do this? They would never do something like during the spoilers seasons of an other set, and even if it was not spoiler season I see no reason they would do this. This affects wizards 3rd party partners which they share spoilers with during spoiler season, ect...
Squee's Embrace I have always loved this card. The art is done by Rebecca Guay and its one of the few cards with art of an actual hug/embrace. It buffs your creature and gives them squee's ability in a way making it harder too get 2 for oned by your opponent. Oh did I also mention it references Squee?
Wow, that's insane banning those cards out all legal cards. They must really hate blue. Might also explain why we have not seen a force spike, counterspell reprint in ages.
That's just insane. Like you said demonic and tutor vampiric tutor are legal, and all the other tutors are legal...
Looks like they banned Treachery as well. 4 blue cards.... While it's not modern it does not speak well of those making the decisions for modern.
Sure if you call casting Ulamogs, Ugins, and other eldrazi essentially above curve still perfectly fair. Karn is not the reason the deck is hated.
Only three color/tron decks would have to dedicate more seriously to burn then. However, I was going on saying that 3 color/ perfect mana has been the norm in modern. A sudden shift to less greedy mana bases would seem abnormal to what has been the norm. It's not necessarily bad, but depends on what you want out the format.
~Edit~
Also another point in that "wall of text" was the a sudden shift like that would probably lead to a lot unhappy players.
I don't think it would be too much. I have played burn quite a bit myself. It would probably be too sudden though for the current meta. Most decks are 3 color. However, it's easy to adapt too. Just play 2 color or mono color. However, considering how many people would have to change decks up because of it. I could see quite an unhappy player base. Drastic changes generally are not good, but when I look at the card alone, and have played, and played against it in legacy. I don't see it as too much. Just a sudden meta shift, but a pretty simple shift too mostly two color.
I think the big issue is that Price of Progress was never in the format, and modern evolved without it. Price of Progress would cause the meta to shift to less greedy mana bases, but people have come to expect a 3 color deck being normal. Playing 3 colors is pretty low risk short of Blood Moon. I think that's why Price of Progress was brought up. There just is not much policing what lands people play in modern. I think Price of Progress would do a great job. If we want less greedy mana bases, and I don't see a problem with it. However, some people like playing with greedy mana bases. Greedy has been the norm so a shift to the other direction would upset some players. Also it's difficult to shift gradually in this regard. Although, a wasteland variant is certainly a step in the right direction. However, modern has evolved without Price of Progress. Consequently, peoples have the perception of greedy mana bases being normal, and something that punishes that choice is perceived abnormal.
We have people complain about Blood Moon. Their reason is general it stops me from playing the game or cuts me off a color. The fact is people perceive perfect mana as normal, and don't have to worry about color screw. If they were that worried about blood moon though they would stop playing 3 color decks. However, blood moon only sees play in a handful of decks, and mostly sits in sideboards the other times. It's also generally easy to play around with fetch-lands, and instant speed removal.
It's a cool picture. I think it would have been better to have put that picture on Ravenous Rats or Chittering Rats. It's sadly an underwhelming card.
I would agree as well. If you are referring to the word gatewatch.
Yea, I do. So the person was not entirely lying. Their source was not completely accurate though lol. Makes me wonder if it was something that leaked before the design was finalized. I could see the switch to red.
It might also be useful against blue decks since it forces them to spend mana to answer it.
It's also quite fun to drop two Hollow Ones on turn two.
One game I cycled Street Wraith and Horror of the Broken Lands. Then cast one and exiled simian spirit guide to cast an other. That was also after mulling to 6.
I don't see that as problem. While cage is good, I normal would rather run other graveyard hosers. I like cage against collected company, but if you have a lot graveyard based decks in your meta. I feel there are better cards mainly since Grafdigger's Cage does not exile the graveyard. While it's a bit more multi-purpose, but nothing beats just exiling the problem cards. Grafdigger's is vulnerable also to any artifact hate so I like enchantments more. Beast within can deal with a lot of hate cards so they may still sidestep your board cards.
Also cards like these cards slow the deck down.
'WOTC's leak'?!? Why would wizards do this? They would never do something like during the spoilers seasons of an other set, and even if it was not spoiler season I see no reason they would do this. This affects wizards 3rd party partners which they share spoilers with during spoiler season, ect...