Let me get this straight...people think that despite them waiting until RETURN to RAVNICA to reprint shocklands, we are suddenly going to see Dominaria fetches (Onslaught) or Zendikar fetches in a new plane? Really?
Truthfully, until we see return to dominaria or return to zendikar, we won't be seeing those fetches so get it out of your head. As soon as Tarkir was spoiled, we knew fetches weren't there.
Now, as far as the duals of Tarkir are concerned, I do think that Mana confluence is a HUGE hint. They clearly wanted to "fix" City of Brass, which makes me think they will "fix" the painlands as well. That, or get a cycle of Horizon Canopies finally, for which players have been asking for a long time.
Also, as far as the Onslaught fetchlands are concerned, as silly as it is that only 5 of the fetches are legal in the format, lets not act like it would change anything. Right now, two colored decks still run 8 fetches a lot of the time for deck thinning purposes meaning they already have more than enough way to get those shocks that are almost always exclusively fetched...
EDIT: Also, I think people should really consider the fact that all signs point towards Wizards trying to replace paper legacy with paper modern due to be ing unhindered by the reserve list. If this takes place, they will not want modern to ever be a cheap/affordable format, they just will want to have the power to keep it from becoming ridiculously expensive. People complain about the prices of fetches, but you can get a playset of near mint Misty Rainforest (most expensive fetch) for the price of one damaged Underground Sea.
Here is the interesting part of discussions like this. There are 2 camps in any non-rotating format.
Camp 1: *Insert non-rotating format here* is too expensive. I don't have that much extra money laying around to invest in pieces or cardboard. Isn't this game supposed to be about fun? Magic is meant to be played, not speculated on and collected. Reprints NOW!!!
Camp 2: I got into *Insert non-rotating format here* because I wanted some stability. If I'm going to invest money in a deck, I want to know that deck will always be viable and I won't lose tons of money on my investment (Subtext: I want my cards to be expensive because that is cool). If my $2000 dollar deck tanks to $500, I'm done with Magic!!!
Now, while there are obviously people somewhere in between and just in entirely different camps altogether, I feel these are the two dominant groups. If a format is to survive, however, Camp 2 will always win out, and this is why:
-People never move from Camp 2 to Camp 1 because they have invested in their cards, and no one likes losing massive amounts of money.
-Plenty of people move from Camp 1 to Camp 2 once they get some expensive cards for similar reasons. Look at the Bob and Goyf prices from Modern Masters. People cracked one Bob or Goyf, felt like they had a foothold into expensive modern decks, and purchased more. Modern Masters made Camp 1 people convert to Camp 2. -Camp 2 are the stalwarts of a format. By definition, these people are weighed down by their expensive decks into a format, and as long as you keep them happy, they will never leave that format. If you make Camp 1 unhappy, less people join a format, but if you make Camp 2 unhappy, a format dies.
There is a way to make both camps happy, however. Make sure that decks that are super expensive don't dominate the format and decks that are cheaper are viable. By doing this, Camp 1 people are more likely to get into the format. Once they are in the format, they are more likely to shell out for expensive cards. When they do that, they are more likely to convert to Camp 2 and be modern for life.
In my opinion, THAT is the goal of the banlist of a non-rotating format in its early years. The goal is to kill the expensive decks temporarily to pull in Camp 1 people and convert them to Camp 2 without totally frustrating Camp 2 people in the process. Once a format has enough Camp 2 people, you can expect the banlist to be drastically reduced.
Ok, since I posted that, I am going to talk about DRS in relation to those premises.
Premise 1: A card does not occupy more than 1/3 of the metagame
This is clearly where DRS is the closest to being a culprit. Online, DRS is played in 29% of decks. That is dangerously close to too much, but being a 1 mana creature and having that slot be FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR less competitive could contribute to that problem. When people call DRS shaman the best 1 drop of all time, they need to realize that something being the best 1 drop is not NEARLY as significant as they are making it seem, especially in non-eternal formats. There are very few games where I would rather topdeck DRS than Goyf/Bob/Lilliana/Huntmaster/Olivia/Removal etc...is it a better topdeck than other 1 drops? Sure...But let's not forget that it is still a 1 drop.
Premise 2: A card does not enable a turn 3 win
Clearly, DRS does not violate this or even close.
Premise 3: A card does not decrease deck diversity
This is the premise that most people will confuse. I'm not saying it keeps decks out of the format (see premise 4), but that it decreases the diversity of decks that use those colors. If there is one spot where I think DRS deserved the ban, it is here. Any deck that runs black runs DRS, most decks that run green run DRS. I could see that as an argument for banning the card as they want people to choose different cards and experiment. That being said...if they truly use this as a reason to ban a card, then Goyf, Snapcaster, Dark Confidant, and Lightning Bolt all violate this and then some. I personally feel like this is a silly reason to ban a card, but if there is a premise that DRS violates, it is this premise.
Now, at the same time, it is also true that DRS actually enable quite a bit of diversity that people are not paying attention too. DRS didn't just make JUND a deck, it make AJUNDI a deck, and the ROCK a deck. I would say enabling 3 different deck types actually means you are increasing deck diversity.
Premise 4: A card does not single-handedly prevent certain decks from being competitive
This is the most disputed of the premises in my opinion. People think that DRS enabled JUND so much and disabled graveyard strategies so much that it was keeping decks out of the format. First lets tackle the GY side of things. Most of the time when talking about this, people were referring to the green ability of DRS. Yes, black ability could sometimes be relevant, but that main case was snapcaster and that is a needed way to deal with snap and completely fair. The land ability mainly only came into play against other DRS's as you were racing to use the land. As far as the creature ability is concerned, that ability required you to use green mana. Prior to the printing of Scavenging Ooze, green didn't have a ton of ways on color to deal with graveyards. Now with scavenging ooze, the main culprit is not DRS in the slightest. Also, if a jund player is using 1 green mana and tapping their DRS to exile 1 creature from your GY, then you are slowing them down essentially by 2 mana each turn, which is quite a huge deal. This ability was very rarely used from my experience to hate GY creatures, and used far more often for the life gain.
As far as the JUND being dominate side of things, it was clearly one of the best decks. But:
San Diego GP: 1 Jund (1 JUNK)
Portland GP: 0 Jund
Kansas City GP: 0 Jund
Detroit GP: 6 Jund
Brisbane GP: 2 Jund (1 JUNK)
Antwerp GP: 1 Jund
Prague GP: 4 Jund
What you will notice, is that after the ban of BBE, Jund actually started to fall off, until its amazing performance at Detroit. You could argue that if you look at just Detroit through Prague that the deck was dominant, but if you look at the deck the entire time and exclude Junk (as that really is a different deck), that is 14/56 spots in the top 8 including Ajundi, or 25%. That is hardly oppression by a deck in my eyes, but maybe some disagree. Also, you will notice that the card that started appearing in Jund with GP Detroit was Scavenging Ooze, the same card that is the real culprit against GY's...
Premise 5: A card dose not cause serious slowdown in play
Clearly doesn't do it...
That is my reasoning for why DRS did not deserve a ban. I'm sure other will disagree as is the nature of argument, but DRS was a card that encouraged diversity amongst its colors (cutting red, white splash), did not hate other strategies or overempower JUND, and so to me, the natural conclusion is that it SHOULD NOT be banned. I am not claiming Jund will die or that I will quit playing modern, but just that I feel the ban was unjustified.
You bring up a of good points, but I guess the difference is that Wizards has come out and said they don't want combo in modern. Also, having control be tier 1 leads to no other decks being able to even play their cards, which they also do not want. To my knowledge, this is the first card that isn't combo-like or control-like that is easily dealt with that they have banned...
The reason that is terrifying is I think this opens up an entirely new realms of ban possibilities. Before, the bans were directed as cards that made the format degenerate. Now, they are banning a card just because it is powerful and played in the most popular deck. I think they honestly banned it solely because of the percentage of decks that were JUND, which is just a scary thought to me, because that percentage wasn't all that high. IDK, what's next? If they are going to ban DRS, I could see the following cards all being banned simple because they are part of successful decks:
All of those cards are good early and good late and can win you the game...what makes them any more safe from the banhammer than DRS? And if those cards aren't safe, why build decks with them, because those decks sure as heck aren't cheap...
I just think the goal of Wizards should be to get as many cards OFF the banlist as possible, so at least they made a net of one card coming off, but it should have been 2...
I just would love one person to give a serious argument as to what DRS does that makes it deserving of a ban...
It doesn't pass the bolt test...
It can't do anything the turn it comes down...
All of its abilities are conditional of the correct cards being in the graveyard, and removing those cards weakens the best beater in the deck...
The "broken" DRS play is turn 1 fetch into DRS with liliana coming down on turn 2...that requires 3 cards in the hand from the get go and I can think of plenty other 3 cards in other top tier decks that can be a more "broken" combo...
Again, no one has said that DRS shaman isn't a GREAT card...but...
It doesn't enable a turn 4 win...
It doesn't win the game by itself...
It is the tiny little bonuses it gives that make is worth playing in a deck that is about tiny little advantages, whereas BBE allowed for the turn 4, almost turn 3 wins...
I am yet to see one good argument for banning Deathrite besides "it's powerful." The card is easily answered and the most broken thing it does is turn 2 liliana. It isn't BBE in Jund as that card did something broken even if removed. Deathrite is a completely fair but powerful card...In most cases it ends up serving a BoP.
O come on people...stop this EDH vs standard bickering...this card is AWFUL in standard as the god of a color combo that really needed a solid finisher to be tier 1 which is frustrating...
I have to be honest, MAYBE this would have broken her for commander, but I feel like karametra, as written (maybe with 1 or 2 less toughness/power) could have been 1GW and still not been amazing...
And if you let evolving wilds only fetch basics of two colors, then they are still no where close to fetchlands in 3 color decks...
I still though am more a fan of just reprinting fetchlands in MM2, because like I was saying earlier, they will always retain their value, so if you invest now, you won't be screwed...
And honestly, if you are complaining about the cost of cards, then you are in the wrong game...
1
Truthfully, until we see return to dominaria or return to zendikar, we won't be seeing those fetches so get it out of your head. As soon as Tarkir was spoiled, we knew fetches weren't there.
Now, as far as the duals of Tarkir are concerned, I do think that Mana confluence is a HUGE hint. They clearly wanted to "fix" City of Brass, which makes me think they will "fix" the painlands as well. That, or get a cycle of Horizon Canopies finally, for which players have been asking for a long time.
Also, as far as the Onslaught fetchlands are concerned, as silly as it is that only 5 of the fetches are legal in the format, lets not act like it would change anything. Right now, two colored decks still run 8 fetches a lot of the time for deck thinning purposes meaning they already have more than enough way to get those shocks that are almost always exclusively fetched...
EDIT: Also, I think people should really consider the fact that all signs point towards Wizards trying to replace paper legacy with paper modern due to be ing unhindered by the reserve list. If this takes place, they will not want modern to ever be a cheap/affordable format, they just will want to have the power to keep it from becoming ridiculously expensive. People complain about the prices of fetches, but you can get a playset of near mint Misty Rainforest (most expensive fetch) for the price of one damaged Underground Sea.
1
Camp 1: *Insert non-rotating format here* is too expensive. I don't have that much extra money laying around to invest in pieces or cardboard. Isn't this game supposed to be about fun? Magic is meant to be played, not speculated on and collected. Reprints NOW!!!
Camp 2: I got into *Insert non-rotating format here* because I wanted some stability. If I'm going to invest money in a deck, I want to know that deck will always be viable and I won't lose tons of money on my investment (Subtext: I want my cards to be expensive because that is cool). If my $2000 dollar deck tanks to $500, I'm done with Magic!!!
Now, while there are obviously people somewhere in between and just in entirely different camps altogether, I feel these are the two dominant groups. If a format is to survive, however, Camp 2 will always win out, and this is why:
-People never move from Camp 2 to Camp 1 because they have invested in their cards, and no one likes losing massive amounts of money.
-Plenty of people move from Camp 1 to Camp 2 once they get some expensive cards for similar reasons. Look at the Bob and Goyf prices from Modern Masters. People cracked one Bob or Goyf, felt like they had a foothold into expensive modern decks, and purchased more. Modern Masters made Camp 1 people convert to Camp 2.
-Camp 2 are the stalwarts of a format. By definition, these people are weighed down by their expensive decks into a format, and as long as you keep them happy, they will never leave that format. If you make Camp 1 unhappy, less people join a format, but if you make Camp 2 unhappy, a format dies.
There is a way to make both camps happy, however. Make sure that decks that are super expensive don't dominate the format and decks that are cheaper are viable. By doing this, Camp 1 people are more likely to get into the format. Once they are in the format, they are more likely to shell out for expensive cards. When they do that, they are more likely to convert to Camp 2 and be modern for life.
In my opinion, THAT is the goal of the banlist of a non-rotating format in its early years. The goal is to kill the expensive decks temporarily to pull in Camp 1 people and convert them to Camp 2 without totally frustrating Camp 2 people in the process. Once a format has enough Camp 2 people, you can expect the banlist to be drastically reduced.
2
Premise 1: A card does not occupy more than 1/3 of the metagame
This is clearly where DRS is the closest to being a culprit. Online, DRS is played in 29% of decks. That is dangerously close to too much, but being a 1 mana creature and having that slot be FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR less competitive could contribute to that problem. When people call DRS shaman the best 1 drop of all time, they need to realize that something being the best 1 drop is not NEARLY as significant as they are making it seem, especially in non-eternal formats. There are very few games where I would rather topdeck DRS than Goyf/Bob/Lilliana/Huntmaster/Olivia/Removal etc...is it a better topdeck than other 1 drops? Sure...But let's not forget that it is still a 1 drop.
Premise 2: A card does not enable a turn 3 win
Clearly, DRS does not violate this or even close.
Premise 3: A card does not decrease deck diversity
This is the premise that most people will confuse. I'm not saying it keeps decks out of the format (see premise 4), but that it decreases the diversity of decks that use those colors. If there is one spot where I think DRS deserved the ban, it is here. Any deck that runs black runs DRS, most decks that run green run DRS. I could see that as an argument for banning the card as they want people to choose different cards and experiment. That being said...if they truly use this as a reason to ban a card, then Goyf, Snapcaster, Dark Confidant, and Lightning Bolt all violate this and then some. I personally feel like this is a silly reason to ban a card, but if there is a premise that DRS violates, it is this premise.
Now, at the same time, it is also true that DRS actually enable quite a bit of diversity that people are not paying attention too. DRS didn't just make JUND a deck, it make AJUNDI a deck, and the ROCK a deck. I would say enabling 3 different deck types actually means you are increasing deck diversity.
Premise 4: A card does not single-handedly prevent certain decks from being competitive
This is the most disputed of the premises in my opinion. People think that DRS enabled JUND so much and disabled graveyard strategies so much that it was keeping decks out of the format. First lets tackle the GY side of things. Most of the time when talking about this, people were referring to the green ability of DRS. Yes, black ability could sometimes be relevant, but that main case was snapcaster and that is a needed way to deal with snap and completely fair. The land ability mainly only came into play against other DRS's as you were racing to use the land. As far as the creature ability is concerned, that ability required you to use green mana. Prior to the printing of Scavenging Ooze, green didn't have a ton of ways on color to deal with graveyards. Now with scavenging ooze, the main culprit is not DRS in the slightest. Also, if a jund player is using 1 green mana and tapping their DRS to exile 1 creature from your GY, then you are slowing them down essentially by 2 mana each turn, which is quite a huge deal. This ability was very rarely used from my experience to hate GY creatures, and used far more often for the life gain.
As far as the JUND being dominate side of things, it was clearly one of the best decks. But:
San Diego GP: 1 Jund (1 JUNK)
Portland GP: 0 Jund
Kansas City GP: 0 Jund
Detroit GP: 6 Jund
Brisbane GP: 2 Jund (1 JUNK)
Antwerp GP: 1 Jund
Prague GP: 4 Jund
What you will notice, is that after the ban of BBE, Jund actually started to fall off, until its amazing performance at Detroit. You could argue that if you look at just Detroit through Prague that the deck was dominant, but if you look at the deck the entire time and exclude Junk (as that really is a different deck), that is 14/56 spots in the top 8 including Ajundi, or 25%. That is hardly oppression by a deck in my eyes, but maybe some disagree. Also, you will notice that the card that started appearing in Jund with GP Detroit was Scavenging Ooze, the same card that is the real culprit against GY's...
Premise 5: A card dose not cause serious slowdown in play
Clearly doesn't do it...
That is my reasoning for why DRS did not deserve a ban. I'm sure other will disagree as is the nature of argument, but DRS was a card that encouraged diversity amongst its colors (cutting red, white splash), did not hate other strategies or overempower JUND, and so to me, the natural conclusion is that it SHOULD NOT be banned. I am not claiming Jund will die or that I will quit playing modern, but just that I feel the ban was unjustified.
1
http://www.starcitygames.com/article/25602_On-The-Modern-Banned-List.html
1
The reason that is terrifying is I think this opens up an entirely new realms of ban possibilities. Before, the bans were directed as cards that made the format degenerate. Now, they are banning a card just because it is powerful and played in the most popular deck. I think they honestly banned it solely because of the percentage of decks that were JUND, which is just a scary thought to me, because that percentage wasn't all that high. IDK, what's next? If they are going to ban DRS, I could see the following cards all being banned simple because they are part of successful decks:
Snapcaster Mage
Delver of Secrets
Tarmogoyf
Dark Confidant
Splinter Twin
Birthing Pod
Cranial Plating
All of those cards are good early and good late and can win you the game...what makes them any more safe from the banhammer than DRS? And if those cards aren't safe, why build decks with them, because those decks sure as heck aren't cheap...
I just think the goal of Wizards should be to get as many cards OFF the banlist as possible, so at least they made a net of one card coming off, but it should have been 2...
1
Deathrite Shaman is the hero modern deserves...but not the one it needs right now...
1
It doesn't pass the bolt test...
It can't do anything the turn it comes down...
All of its abilities are conditional of the correct cards being in the graveyard, and removing those cards weakens the best beater in the deck...
The "broken" DRS play is turn 1 fetch into DRS with liliana coming down on turn 2...that requires 3 cards in the hand from the get go and I can think of plenty other 3 cards in other top tier decks that can be a more "broken" combo...
Again, no one has said that DRS shaman isn't a GREAT card...but...
It doesn't enable a turn 4 win...
It doesn't win the game by itself...
It is the tiny little bonuses it gives that make is worth playing in a deck that is about tiny little advantages, whereas BBE allowed for the turn 4, almost turn 3 wins...
2
1
I have to be honest, MAYBE this would have broken her for commander, but I feel like karametra, as written (maybe with 1 or 2 less toughness/power) could have been 1GW and still not been amazing...
1
I still though am more a fan of just reprinting fetchlands in MM2, because like I was saying earlier, they will always retain their value, so if you invest now, you won't be screwed...
And honestly, if you are complaining about the cost of cards, then you are in the wrong game...