Workshop is a pillar of vintage -Aaron Forsythe



  • https://mobile.twitter.com/mtgaaron/status/985674571188588544

    I guess shops is here for good. Interesting how he admits it now.



  • Coincidentally, my front doormat has, "transgressive stuff needs a place to live" printed right on it.



  • Okay. Fine. Can I get an official list of cards that are "pillars" for all formats so I can stop being disappointed when they don't get the bullet?


  • TMD Supporter

    CHOO CHOO ALL ABOARD THE ROBOT TRAIN


  • TMD Supporter

    @thecravenone said in Workshop is a pillar of vintage -Aaron Forsythe:

    Okay. Fine. Can I get an official list of cards that are "pillars" for all formats so I can stop being disappointed when they don't get the bullet?

    Given the lack of action after the recent B&R, consider all the best decks in any given format to be the pillars.



  • @hierarchnoble said in Workshop is a pillar of vintage -Aaron Forsythe:

    @thecravenone said in Workshop is a pillar of vintage -Aaron Forsythe:

    Okay. Fine. Can I get an official list of cards that are "pillars" for all formats so I can stop being disappointed when they don't get the bullet?

    Given the lack of action after the recent B&R, consider all the best decks in any given format to be the pillars.

    Standard rotation is canceled to avoid having pillars leave the format!



  • I've hated the term "Pillars of the Format" since I first heard it over a decade ago. As a concept, it makes people worse players, worse deckbuilders, worse policymakers.

    It doesn't mean anything, it gives people misleading ideas about what decks are in the metagame, it discourages good strategies an encourages bad ones. I have seen an uncountable number of sideboards ruined by the idea that "Pillars" are a thing worth thinking about. Most damning, in a format with a thousand cards printed each year, it's completely nonsensical. What people call "A Pillar" has changed a dozen times since I started playing (Dredge wasn't always a mechanic, for instance) so the idea of "Pillars" as some eternal concept set apart from "the metagame" is misinformed at best.

    The concept of Pillars is (and was, from day one) maladaptive. Regardless of the outcome in this particular case, it's a shame that the idea has spread so far.

    ... and thus ends my rant that probably has nothing to do with what Aaron was talking about :)



  • I wonder if they did a temporary restriction would be a nice way to approach it. Like "Workshop is restricted but will be unrestricted again 1 year from now".
    Would give a lot of time to see what really happens to the format without it.


  • TMD Supporter

    @naixin said in Workshop is a pillar of vintage -Aaron Forsythe:

    https://mobile.twitter.com/mtgaaron/status/985674571188588544

    I guess shops is here for good. Interesting how he admits it now.

    My tweeted response:

    "Factoring community preferences in B&R list management is understandable. But categorical exemptions for 'pillar' status is slippery business. It's hard to see how Gush was less of a pillar than Shop in statistical, 'format uniqueness' or community terms."

    Evan Erwin pointed out that the difference between Gush and Shops is $$. I responded:

    1. That's even more dangerous business than determining what is a pillar. Factoring in the secondary market value of cards has an obvious entrenched-card effect, and using it as a factor or tiebreaker has a predictable bias towards status quo.

    2. But even on it's face, restricting Workshop - which I am not convinced needs to happen to rebalance the format - wouldn't cause their value to fall to 0. Dealers I talked to last year projected a 20%ish drop in short run. It's still played in Old School & coveted by collectors.

    In short, I largely agree with what Brassman said.

    Think about this rationale. Something becomes a pillar through being a prominent part of the format. The idea of exempting "pillars" can too easily become a post hoc justification for dominance, if 'pillar status' is determined by prevalence and tradition. That's very problematic.



  • @brass-man Wow... I am a little awed to hear Brass Man light it up with that kind of fury! Well done sir.

    I agree that, "pillars" is a pretty vacuous concept. It's especially vacuous in terms of deck building. I am with you there. I do think building with "pillars" in mind is... pretty much silly most of the time.

    The one favorable thing I will say for Aaron's statement is this: it is nice to have reassurance about BR policies, whatever that may be. Stability is a good thing in general, and a very good thing in vintage, especially with regards to card value. I don't own a single Workshop. I kinda doubt I ever will. But this statement makes me at least think about it. Or ,I'll say it this way, I would never buy into Workshops if I thought they could be restricted, so now that I think they won't the idea is intriguing.

    SO... in as far as this statement provides reassurance to the "Vintage Community" (another vague category), by implying that there is at least an elevated standard that has to be met to restrict "Pillars"... I'm ok with it. The reassurance is nice, even if the nomenclature lacks sharpness. Not to drive the conversation into BR land, (dioses, please let's not) but I think the reassurance is nice. And, I would personally be super-sad if those stalwart vintage diehard shops players out there, who are so much a part of this format, were to lose out on the card value and opportunity to play their beloved. (Although, they clearly are the enemy, and I do despise them and openly question their humanity.)

    In other news, I'm definitely getting "Transgressive stuff needs a place to live" tattooed on the small of my back. I may or may not already have "Risk" tattooed on one butt cheek, and "Reward" tattooed on the other.



  • @fsecco said in Workshop is a pillar of vintage -Aaron Forsythe:

    I wonder if they did a temporary restriction would be a nice way to approach it. Like "Workshop is restricted but will be unrestricted again 1 year from now".
    Would give a lot of time to see what really happens to the format without it.

    What happens when people find the temporary format vastly superior? Not saying that I believe that to be the case or not, but I would believe a temporary restriction to be practically speaking impossible.



  • @enderfall they could listen to the community and decide to keep it that way. Idk, there are a lot of ways to do a temporary thing.



  • Pillars are nonsense. But Aaron’s point is pretty easy to see with just a bit of common sense. Workshop is a big reason to play Vintage for a lot of folks and they don’t feel like messing around with that.

    Is that for the best? Dunno.

    When Brainstorm was restricted, Vintage improved immensely. I’m led to believe people quit though. Maybe they’re trying not to do that again.

    I kinda prefer the trajectory of Yawgmoth’s Will anyway. Once so problematic that Smmenen advocated for a ban, it’s now back at healthy levels due to the strategy of durdle-to-one-big-turn (oh sorry - “masterfully managing resources”) becoming marginalized in the evolving metagame. It’s possible Shops can go this way as the number of ways to deploy opposing curve-efficient fatties increases.



  • While I don't particularly care one way or the other about the pillar argument, I do find the statement "Transgressive stuff needs a place to live" as a point of insight to the way Wizards is looking at the b/r list on the whole.

    Certainly, it is easy to read too much into it. But to my knowledge it is the first time a "let people play with their busted cards" criteria has ever been articulated from that side of the fence.

    I know several of us look at Vintage as the format populated by the overpowered cards of years gone by, but this is the first time I know of that it is described as a desirable goal of the format.


  • TMD Supporter

    I don’t understand how Brainstorm is seen as a pillar of Legacy but it wasn’t for Vintage. It’s ironic since Legacy is all 4-ofs, Brainstorm is kind of whatever. But In Vintage, a format of singletons, it was essential to smoothing out draws so that each deck could actually just deploy their strategy and not get beaten by random numbers. Just bring back Brainstorm please. That’s all I want from the DCI. I want to enjoy Vintage the way it’s supposed to be.

    @ribby

    Yah, most of the best Vintage players quit when Brainstorm was restricted. I don’t remember a single person who found enjoyment post Brainstorm. I think everyone just dealt with it until it was forgotten. Can you find a single post from that time in the archives from someone, who wasn’t a Shops player, saying the format is greatly improved without Brainstorm? I remember testing then; the Brainstorm restriction blatantly made every blue deck worse.

    The only time anyone ever suggested restricting Brainstorm was in bizarre hypothetical scenarios while imagining how to shake up the format. (It didn’t work). The only beneficiary was Workshops.



  • @desolutionist said in Workshop is a pillar of vintage -Aaron Forsythe:

    I don’t understand how Brainstorm is seen as a pillar of Legacy but it wasn’t for Vintage. It’s ironic since Legacy is all 4-ofs, Brainstorm is kind of whatever. But In Vintage, a format of singletons, it was essential to smoothing out draws so that each deck could actually just deploy their strategy and not get beaten by random numbers. Just bring back Brainstorm please. That’s all I want from the DCI. I want to enjoy Vintage the way it’s supposed to be.

    @ribby

    Yah, most of the best Vintage players quit when Brainstorm was restricted. I don’t remember a single person who found enjoyment post Brainstorm. I think everyone just dealt with it until it was forgotten. Can you find a single post from that time in the archives from someone, who wasn’t a Shops player, saying the format is greatly improved without Brainstorm? I remember testing then; the Brainstorm restriction blatantly made every blue deck worse.

    The only time anyone ever suggested restricting Brainstorm was in bizarre hypothetical scenarios while imagining how to shake up the format. (It didn’t work). The only beneficiary was Workshops.

    I had this conversation with Poxeverything just last night. Brainstorm needs to come back. Most xerox decks woudld probably probably cut 4 preordains, add 3 brainstorms and 1 other spell. Gives us the flexibility of turn 1 land, pass. BS at end of your turn. I honestly think this is needed in the format.


  • TMD Supporter

    @khahan said in Workshop is a pillar of vintage -Aaron Forsythe:

    Brainstorm needs to come back. Most xerox decks woudld probably probably cut 4 preordains, add 3 brainstorms and 1 other spell. Gives us the flexibility of turn 1 land, pass. BS at end of your turn. I honestly think this is needed in the format.

    I am not going to say that Vintage wouldn't be better with the unrestriction of Brainstorm. I'm not going to say Vintage couldn't handle the unrestriction of Brainstorm. Mostly because this isn't the B/R thread. All I'm going to say is that card is a devastating weapon for any deck that runs the color blue, as demonstrated by the entire Legacy format.

    As for the original tweet, it's nice to get some affirmation of what many Vintage aficionados have suspected for a long time but the uncertainty of which has inspired a lot of trepidation. At least I know I'll rest easier brewing and planning for events knowing that the core of my Vintage identity is safe for another few B/R cycles, at least. And, for what it's worth, I agree that Gush should probably have had similar treatment. Mentor was clearly the Lodestone Golem to Gush's MWS.


  • TMD Supporter

    @cutlex said in Workshop is a pillar of vintage -Aaron Forsythe:

    As for the original tweet, it's nice to get some affirmation of what many Vintage aficionados have suspected for a long time but the uncertainty of which has inspired a lot of trepidation. At least I know I'll rest easier brewing and planning for events knowing that the core of my Vintage identity is safe for another few B/R cycles, at least. And, for what it's worth, I agree that Gush should probably have had similar treatment. Mentor was clearly the Lodestone Golem to Gush's MWS.

    MWS?



  • @mdkubiak Mishra's WorkShop.



  • Let the bigs dog off the leash. I.E gush,scroll,brainstorm,flash and let’s see how fast Mishra workshop drops from being a “pillar” of the format and the majority start crying to get chalice and thorn back instead of axing MWS.

    At this point it’s a bunch of mish mosh. To be able to use empirical data based on meta game %’s to justify restrictions then just simply ignore them the next time around is utterly ridiculous.
    The problem is that the artifacts they keep printing just keeping pushing the power creep further and further without hitting the acceleration. It’s not even like they try new mechanics with the artifacts like they do with the “blue” based cards which quickly get restricted the cards are just that silly.
    I would rather play in a 4 trinisphere vs burning long vs u/r standstill era then this crap we’ve been force fed for the past 4-5 years.


Locked
 

WAF/WHF