Nice article, but I think the '2-for-1' issue - which is commonly a focus of Wizards' efforts to make Auras attractive - is a red herring, and this is part of the problem: the focus on 'fixing' auras has always been in the wrong place. Bestow, Urza block recurring auras, licids (the mechanic bestow is based on) and others have fixed the '2-for-1' trade directly, while other efforts - such as Spectra Ward - have made the enchantment easier to kill than the creature, usually necessitating a card to kill the aura separately. Plenty more allow the enchanted creature to kill other cards at no loss (such as Burning Anger or Fire Whip).
Despite this, few see play. The combo issue is probably more important. Combos are not often used in competitive decks because they aren't consistent; witness the rapidity with which Jeskai Ascendancy has fallen from grace because the combo can't reliably be triggered. Fixing creatures doesn't fix this; giving specific creatures bonuses when enchanted has been tried from Legends' Rabid Wombat onwards, but that not only necessitates giving deck space to both a specific aura and one specific creature, but also getting both together. And do we want Auras to be this restrictive? An aura should be somewhat general in most cases, rather than requiring a Hermit Crab for every Fire Whip. Two for one isn't a problem: 8 deck slots for a single creature you can reliably enchant with a single aura is much more of a disincentive to play auras.
When an aura is useful on a wide range of creatures, effective enough to justify a deck slot, and doesn't 2-for-1 it will see play, but there aren't many in that category. It's called Rancor, and it's still used in all formats that can play it.
-
- Phil Bowles
- Registered User
-
Member for 17 years, 6 months, and 10 days
Last active Mon, Apr, 27 2015 09:57:02
- 0 Followers
- 971 Total Posts
- 59 Thanks
I find it hard to credit that anyone could read my point and think "ah, the Jeskai are making a fashion statement". The fact that modern Hindu culture doesn't treat the bindi as a religious observance is hardly the same as claiming the bindi is
Besides which, I didn't even make allusions to the origin of the bindi in the original post - I just drew a comparison between the physical marking in Hindu culture and an equivalent physical marking on Jeskai art. I'm not clear why this is even remotely contentious.
This has the whiff of tying yourself in a knot to backtrack the simply false comment that the third eye is "not a single thing to do with the third eye"; that was made as a blanket statement, not an expression of modern cultural practice. Initially I never even claimed it was - I just found a quote to correct this assertion.
I never claimed anywhere that the tradition wasn't found in Buddhism, I merely pointed out that it is South Asian; and recall that I was referring specifically to the bindi in this instance.
Again, I made no reference to Hinduism; the bindi is part of Buddhist tradition in South and Southeast Asia.
I'll refer you again to Exhibit A, regarding the third eye:
What would you characterise this as, if not "twisted, scanty knowledge passed off as fact"?
You're also making wholly unfounded assumptions about my own background - certainly it's limited where Chinese strains of Buddhism are concerned, but it does involve growing up around large Indian, Pakistani and Kashmiri populations, and extensive travel in Buddhist Southeast Asia. From everything you've said, I likely have a better grounding in the theological underpinnings of the religion in this area than you do. That's more than sufficient qualification for making a simple observation that a forehead marking is associated with the religion.
You may wish to look up the meaning of "pedantry". Nothing I said implied you were incorrect in associating the Jeskai with the third eye, I just pointed out that that's ultimately a reference to the same thing as the bindi. Now you've added some clarity to your line of reasoning, you're right that there is a distinction to be made in that Chinese traditions that lack the bindi do include the third eye in their theology.
This is not immediately relevant to the Jeskai, for whom the third eye appears to be a physical marking alluding to the "cunning of the dragon" rather than a religious tradition; certain;y nothing in the Wikipedia description of the third eye relates to anything in the Jeskai Khans of Tarkir guide. In any case, if your intent was to make a point about Chinese Buddhism, why do you consider your Hindu background a source of authority?
For my part, I'm tired of the trolling I've detected on the Modern Banned forum list and now here constructing straw men to knock down with an apparently targeted attempt to find something I've said to discredit rather than to engage with what I've actually said, be it making claims I never did about motives for banning Punishing Fire or claims, as here, that I'm making some sort of claim about a "Hindu-Buddhist mashup" or even impugning Hindu culture.
I apologise if I disappoint people with my tendency to make accurate, specific, appropriately qualified statements rather than wild generalisations they can fly into a rage over, but if people are going to invent those wild generalisations on my behalf to use against me, I'm fully entitled to defend my position however much manufactured outrage you want to throw my way.
And this different perspective is something you need to bear in mind when interpreting what other people say. Those of us on the outside are, indeed, more likely to look at your religion from an anthropological rather than a practitioner's perspective. So it makes no sense to counter a point made in one context - such as understanding the bindi in terms of its religious origins - with a point about the way it's currently practised. Certainly you can bring up the latter, but it's absurd to say "the former isn't valid, because the latter is". They're two very different points, and not mutually exclusive.
Strangely, I missed the part of 'format diversity' that involved 'no change whatsoever'. If it's really just a case of "would you like a random effects generator defining the dominant deck or a dumb 4/5 Lightning Helix", that's not something that's going to have an objective answer either way - those of us who prefer consistency would opt for the status quo, those who favour more variance would go for Yahtzee Elf.
No, the DRS Jund decks weren't "so powerful" because they could splash White. The DRS Jund decks were powerful because they had Deathrite Shaman.[/quote]
That seems to be splitting hairs. What was it about Deathrite that made it so powerful? Was it the 2 life or the drain for 2? No, from what's been said and implied here (such comments as 'Deathrite would be fine if not for fetches') it was the mana.
Ok, but I'm not sure this really alters the conclusion. If white beats Jund, it just seems more likely that Abzan with its new tools will simply keep Jund suppressed. So in that case the status quo doesn't change not because - as I'd interpreted the comments to indicate - white decks are superior to the rest of the metagame, but because they're superior to Jund. Again, if we're treating the tools Abzan now has that it lacked in the BBE era - such as Siege Rhino, and you mention Lingering Souls - to be essentially equivalent in power to the Jund versions, it seems Jund doesn't offer a great deal.
Or it could simply be a case like the aforementioned RUG/UR Twin, where some people go into White for Siege Rhino and Lingering Souls, and some people go into Red for Bloodbraid Elf and Lightning Bolt. Each version of the deck would have its own strengths and weaknesses versus other decks. You're dismissing this middle ground without much of a reason outside of your claim that going into White was what made Jund great, but that's actually a complete inversion of what happened.[/quote]
As above, whatever the order of cause and effect, the end result is basically the same. Was the Jund era characterised by Jund decks with a healthy supporting cast of Junk decks? If not, why do you suppose the situation would be any different in reverse, in a situation where one or other deck commands a substantial proportion of the metagame?
And where is Zoo in the metagame these days? Where, in a format defined by police cards in B and BG, is a green deck without black likely to remain in the metagame however many elves you unban? I'm sure I could pick any number of random assemblages of cards the thing might be good in, but a deck doesn't warrant consideration just because it was once good or relevant enough to be given its own name; otherwise we might as well argue bans and unbans based on their relevance to Prosbloom.
If you mean 4-colour zoo, why would a deck relying on cards like Become Immense and Tasigur in their modern incarnations want Bloodbraid Elf? Dropping a free Steppe Lynx is cute, but it's hardly a game-changer. If anything, it's a more random element there than it is in Jund - anything it grabs in Jund is likely to be solid at most game stages, while in zoo it's as likely to grab that lynx or an unkicked Vines of Vastwood as Tarmogoyf or Temur Battle Rage.
You are however neglecting the key point in the quoted passage, which is the rest of that sentence - as well as the unquoted following sentences in the same paragraph. Unbans have been made to benefit singular deck types (such as Valakut in Scapeshift), but those have been decks that genuinely added diversity to the metagame rather than switching out Rhino and Lingering Souls for two similar cards.
Dig Through Time was certainly a ridiculous ban, but the Nacatl ban seems well-justified from the comment at the time:
It's not clear how relevant the Punishing Fire ban is now given the justification given for banning it in the same article. From looking at stats the only decks that seem to be reliant on 2-toughness or less screatures are, with the exception of infect, pretty much nonexistent anyway. Nevertheless keeping it banned is probably a good precautionary measure; if new tools are printed those decks could conceivably come back, or new weenie archetypes could rise, but Punishing Fire plus Burnwillows makes that a practical impossibility.
From everything I've seen from the discussion and from evaluating it, Bloodbraid Elf seems unlikely to do anything for format diversity if unbanned. If it proves not to be safe, it would just lead to a Jund resurgence replacing Abzan. If, as others have argued, it's more or less equivalent to Siege Rhino in its power, and the DRS Jund decks were so powerful because they could splash a white component, it's not clear why it would provide any incentive to play Jund. Without DRS to add mana consistency, going the white route is a better option because it has better answers to the threats that stop Jund, and if Junk now has a card that fills the BBE role, what would be the point of adding red to the deck? It looks like a case where there's little likelihood of middle ground: it's either unplayable or it's an auto-play.
Simply as a general principle, unbanning a card used in exactly one deck type, and that a deck not dissimilar to existing decks in the format, seems to do little to add diversity - the very argument that BBE is very similar to Rhino is an argument against it. The unbanned cards have consistently been cards that do things the format can't currently do; nothing works as well with Scapeshift as Valakut, nothing fills Grave-Troll's role as a dredge-enabling finisher (except much less efficiently), there are no one-drops available to green aggro decks comparable to Wild Nacatl, there's nothing resembling Bitterblossom in the game at all. Faeries and graveyard decks are much more distinct archetypes than 'good stuff aggro', and Scapeshift is a unique combo deck.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bindi_%28decoration%29
So, that would be the third eye the bindi traditionally represents? Not sure where you're trying to go with excessive pedantry; certainly the context is welcome, but the point you make is fundamentally the same - it's a South Asian Hindu tradition being mashed up with the otherwise Chinese style of the Jeskai. Whether you identify it with the actual marking used or the theological concept that inspired that marking is irrelevant to the point.
Not to mention that the eye on the forehead is an obvious allusion to the bindi, which is South and Southeast Asian (though predominantly associated with India). It is true that Jeskai humans more closely resemble Chinese (not Tibetan) in appearance and dress, however.
I haven't seen any non-Abzan control decks that aren't part-blue; I've faced him in UB control and seen him in Sultai control decklists. Abzan obviously doesn't run him because that's a creature-based control deck. And Sultai control has so many directions to go for its win condition that the chances of being able to profitably steal Ugin aren't high at the best of times, and likely go down after game one because the deck can side Ugin out and creature-based threats in, given that Ugin isn't generally a strong win condition against control.
Green has five ramp spells between this and Fate Reforged: Whisperer of the Wilds (Reforged, common), Frontier Siege (Reforged, rare), Explosive Vegetation (Dragons, uncommon), Sheltered Aerie (Dragons, common) and Shaman of Forgotten Ways (Dragons, mythic).
EDIT: And the other Reforged cards mentioned above. Ainok Guide is less playable now the outlast lords have left the format, especially now that green has viable 2-drops, but it and Map the Wastes may both be playable.
You can't really bank on a mythic, as even if you happen to pull it it won't show up every game. Having said that LSV rates Atarka the single best Limited card in the set, and I agree - giving your creatures haste is only good with other creatures, specifically creatures you're playing after Kolaghan has come down and that don't have haste to begin with. In BR in this set this is at least somewhat conditional (what are you holding onto past turn 6? If you have Kolaghan and everything you played before turn 6, do you actually need it?). Atarka is an independently powerful bomb.
Boltwing Marauder is stupidly good, though.
This accords pretty well with my view of things, but goes into a lot more detail than I'd considered (and despite having already settled on Atarka I'm pretty tempted to go Silumgar because that play style seems a lot of fun and the idea of trying UB aggro is appealing. Plus the reward of pulling Atarka or the command as the promo rare may not be worth the risk of pulling Foe-Razer Regent or Crater Elemental).
Nice in principle, but I suspect somewhat best-case-scenario thinking. Decks running Ugin are mostly control decks, so can hold Ugin until they have a way of countering Silumgar (as they likely would in case of removal, so I doubt he'll be more of a consideration than a random 'kill Ugin' spell), and he's an easy side out against control decks where he's deemed not to be worth the risk - in any case a control deck that has Ugin in play has little need to draw into its finisher with his ultimate, since he is the finisher (and for much the same reason, if you're a control deck in a position to steal him, he's pretty much a win-more).
Sorry, you're right - I missed a line, and hadn't made the connection between the +2s and triggering the ultimate. Since I've yet to see Ugin pull off his ultimate, this is a rather unlikely trick play and not one I'd want to risk not having in hand ready for when Ugin pops.
I think buy up any Dragons cards you want to play with and ditch the rest - it seems nothing in this set is worth anything financially. Even the playable mythics are going for $6-7 except the planeswalkers.
I think Kolaghan's Command will do fairly well in Modern if there's a deck for it, but isn't BR generally considered a bad combination in Eternal formats? I wouldn't be surprised if that's keeping prices down, since seems less attractive than other commands in Standard.
I don't know where we're at in terms of the consensus list for DtK cards that will make much impact on Modern, and I know that includes a few commons and uncommons. The only Modern-relevant cards I can really think of at rare are Collected Company, Atarka's Command, Myth Realized, Anafenza, Kolaghan's Command, the Avatar and Ire Shaman in Shamans/stompy (in the former case), Dragonlord Atarka in reanimator, and Living Lore if someone breaks it. Of these maybe only Collected Company, Myth Realized and perhaps Atarka and her Command will see Legacy play. Despite being an early Narset fan, I'm not too sure she even has a home in Legacy, and I think both PWs are cards that will probably lose rather than accrue value over time (though they may get a brief price hike during their time in Standard).
You're right that that effect shouldn't be dismissed, but you're also right it shouldn't be considered too highly either. A decent portion of these are creatures that don't need to attack to be useful, several others pair with Sorin, Stormbreath can turn monstrous pretty much as soon as Silumgar comes down, and while it's more efficient that way no one ever forced you to have 4 power on the board to cast Crater's Claws.
And, given articles like the recent Channel Fireball one on 'top 9 cards Silvestri is excited to play in Standard', I don't think Silumgar's a sleeper - it seems a few people expect him to do well, for all my own doubts about his viability (and hey, I was wrong about Valorous Stance).
Thanks for adding the context, but it has no bearing on anything I said - I merely took the point from the article that Jund was making top 8s prior to the ban (which I took, apparently incorrectly, as a surrogate indication that the deck was tier 1 at the time), and continued to do so afterwards. I made no claim about the reasons for banning Punishing Fire. What your piece does indicate, as I reported, was that cutting PF had no appreciable effect on the deck's performance, something you explicitly refer to.
Regarding Rhino vs. BBE, given the way Wizards makes banning decisions based on representation in the metagame you can't really make those kinds of arguments for consistency as far as banning decisions are concerned - however similar the two cards may seem, if Rhino Abzan isn't putting up the metagame percentages Elf Junk did, there's no basis for either banning it or unbanning Elf (whether or not Elf itself was directly responsible for those percentages).
No, I covered the possibility of grabbing an Ugin who has the loyalty to kill himself:
After all, you keep no board presence after doing that because killing Ugin with his ultimate also exiles Silumgar. You're gaining no value from the exile effect because an opponent with an Ugin in play isn't putting down any other permanents (any other PWs he has he'll just hold in hand). Ugin isn't even much of a threat to UB since you too don't have permanents and can use an Ugin of your own as a win condition (or, if BUG, Garruk). Finishers like PLA laugh him off.
This is the flaw with stealing PWs - most of them are played in decks tailored to their needs, and they aren't themselves running good targets. You're not dropping permanents if Ugin is in your deck. You're not using big creatures if you're playing Elspeth. With a few Sultai exceptions you aren't running creatures and Ashiok in the same deck. And with Sorin you need to be a creature deck to gain value. Few PWs are generally useful in the way a stolen creature is, and not having flash and being overpriced for its body makes Silumgar a far cry from Sower of Temptation where stealing creatures is concerned - sure he's got higher toughness, but only red and green decks care about toughness where their removal is concerned.
Silumgar seems 'win more' to me - if you're losing to resolved creatures and PWs, he'll do practically nothing. If the opponent hasn't resolved anything you don't need him, and letting something resolve just to steal it is risky and unnecessary. I've had games where I've beaten down UB control with Coursers or Wayfinders - sure, it's a dream scenario to steal a Stormbreath, but how often is anyone dropping Stormbreaths on you when they know you play sweepers and a Rabblemaster will pressure you at least as well? I just don't see Silumgar as a good fit for control decks, and he's too slow anywhere else.