November 26 Banned & Restricted Announcement



  • @craw_advantage I played a similar deck in the Romancing the Stones 4 and 5 I think (may be fuzzy on which events I ran it). Biggest issue was counters and on color mana. Your opponent counters your draw 7, or if they don't, they get a counter in their new cards. 4 Channel would make that deck utterly nuts and you could liberally bait counters out on spells that didn't actually matter because you have 19 mana to work with.



  • Decks with unacceptably high turn 1-2 win rates often appear pretty fun...

    You really don’t even need the inconsistency of belcher. Just run the preordain engine and combo on turn 2-3 with counter back up and win with stroke of genius.

    You can also run this in fair decks. Forest, ESG, Channel, Reality Smasher, Metamorph, Sphere is fair right? It’s budget, it has to be fair.

    @Griselbrother do you have mtgo? I am more than willing to test this.

    Edit: In before someone says "Mono green Eldrazi deserves to be a deck" and another person says "Vintage needs more budget options". It's a turn 2 kill with a sphere effect with theoretically nothing but unrestricted cards... No, Vintage doesn't need that. Diversity be damned.



  • No one from my playgroup has any interest in traveling to vintage tournaments because of the state of the format, with Mental Misstep and PO being specifically cited. Misstep is tired and PO amounts to watching someone jerk off in front of you while you just sit there and beg them to hurry up and finish so you can get on with your life.



  • I am probably the one who is not bothered by playing against PO 😞

    Although, a restriction would be fine by me, simply because of meta share.



  • @messplaypc said in November 26 Banned & Restricted Announcement:

    No one from my playgroup has any interest in traveling to vintage tournaments because of the state of the format, with Mental Misstep and PO being specifically cited. Misstep is tired and PO amounts to watching someone jerk off in front of you while you just sit there and beg them to hurry up and finish so you can get on with your life.

    There was a similar problem firing Vintage in Atlanta. The TO restricted Misstep and it's fired a couple of times now. I do miss that skill intense Misstep subgame though. Turns out with 1 Misstep the 100 other counters that are good vs. outcome can actually resolve and people have room in their non-Thorn decks for them because every non combo blue deck doesn't have to start with 4 force, 4 skillstep.



  • @nedleeds how does discard like Duress, thoughtseize and therapy perform in that environment? How aboutDark Ritual?



  • @aelien Our Vintage events have fired, but still haven't been many people, let alone people actively exploring their options in a single Misstep world. I've tested the waters with Crop Rotation in Survival, and SkullclampShops.


  • TMD Supporter

    Restricting counterspells in Vintage seems like a bad idea to me. Cards that keep other cards in check are a good thing, not a bad thing.

    I don't really understand the complaints about Vintage right now.

    Vintage has everything going for it right now that has ever made Vintage great:

    • Broad color and strategic diversity (Survival has really helped) - there are like 15 viable decks, and like 4-8 decks capable of winning any tournament (Survival, PO, Dredge, Oath, BUG(r), Xerox, Shops, WEldrazi).

    • Unprecedented on-board complexity - the operational complexity of Vintage right now has never been greater from Survival to Xerox to PO to Shops, these decks are EXTREMELY complicated to manipulate on board.

    • Deep branching lines of play - virtually every deck in the format is strategic, rather than just tactical, and requires strategic insight to optimize, not just flipping cards drawn. You have really understand matchups and know your role in almost every matchup, as well as what's important.

    • Deep interactivity - with Workshop finally de-throned, players get to actually play spells, and almost every match is highly interactive.

    Take the top four decks: Shops, Xerox, PO, and Survival. That's 6 matchups (Shops v. Xerox, Shops v. PO, Shops v. Survival, Survival v. Xerox, Survival v. PO). The only match up of those six that isn't intensely interactive is Shops v. PO. The rest of the matchups are incredibly fascinating. Since Xerox can no longer just overpower it's opponents with Mentor, every Xerox matchup is super interactive as well.

    • Super Skill Intensive - where experience/knowledge matters.

    Vintage is so complex right now, actually, that I think it may be beyond most players ability to actually play competently. It's actually laughable to compare, say 93/94, to contemporary Vintage. Playing 93/94 versus Vintage is like playing Checkers compared to Chess or even Go. You go land, creature go, or maybe play a spell or two. The sheer quantity of high stakes decisions every turn, combined with the number of logistical clicks or card shifts is insane. Just a single Dack activation entails 4 zone changes, which itself can require like 4-6 decisions, with branching decisions that ramify into insane complexity.

    There have been times in the past where Vintage has had greater strategic complexity - like the Gifts/Grim Long/TPS era of 2006, but vintage has never had this level of on-board complexity and deep interactivity among the best decks.

    I've been critical of many of the restrictions in recent years, but I have to say that they really did their job in promoting format diversity and making it much more interactive.



  • @smmenen
    what do blue decks have to answer with mental misstep that we need 4 MM in the format, that blue decks couldn't handle with MM restricted?

    What card must be kept in check with Mental Misstep that couldn't be kept in check before, besides A.Recall?

    If I may, Chalice was restricted because it was viewed as keeping players from playing their cards in a format where you should be able to play your cards. Misstep is almost in the same boat, but worse, every blue deck runs it.
    I'm not for restricting MM, just curious as to what your thoughts are on these points.



  • I completely agree with Menendian here. Vintage is in a great place right now, better than it has been for a long time.

    I've stated earlier why I don't want Mental Misstep restricted: It's certainly not a very powerful card but a situational one for one. In addition it slows down the format and reduces variance.

    The comparison of Mental Misstep to Chalice of the Void doesn't make much sense. Chalice isn't a one for one and it's much less situational than Misstep.

    However, I aknowledge that Misstep does hamper some strategies like Dark Ritual based decks and makes some cards, that some might want to play, much worse like Goblin Welder, Crop Rotation etc. That said, I don't mind that strategies that rely too much on a single card get punished for that.

    Edit: Also I think there's some double standard to this discussion (perhaps not by the same players though, I don't know). Some complain that Vintage is non-interactive, yet some want Misstep, which actually interacts with the opponent, restricted.



  • @smmenen said in November 26 Banned & Restricted Announcement:

    ... and like 4-8 decks capable of winning any tournament (Survival, PO, Dredge, Oath, BUG(r), Xerox, Shops, WEldrazi).

    I agree with smmenen too, alone the quoted diversity of deck types is something we didn't have for a long time, without dominance of one of them and with a broad strategic diversity.

    Maybe we can develop the meta a bit further by unrestrictions to establish additional deck types. Fastbond comes to my mind, which could boost Lands/Depth/Loam style decks, but there might be other possibilities.



  • @smmenen I also agree here. As someone who just started playing vintage again recently after a long hiatus the format seems great. I'm not sure I would have picked it back up if there were only 2 or 3 viable decks. To speak to the diversity, in 10 rounds at EW I played against 8 different decks and it was a blast!



  • @smmenen fully agree. I returned to vintage in the winter 2016 leading up to Lodestone Golem's restriction, and this if by far the best metagame during my period of playing modern vintage.



  • I was at first apprehensive as my friends had some complaints about Vintage being stale, but as a play I find the format more complex and diverse. Old School is like taking a break and it is fun but the true challenge is playing Vintage.

    I have been playing a higher level this year and I can see how complex the format is now, and I find it rewarding to play.



  • Let me start by saying Mental Misstep:

    • Is not broken
    • Does not fit the guidelines for (vintage) restriction
    • Vintage is in a pretty good place

    That said, Misstep is by far my least favorite unrestricted card. I am a brewer at heart and Misstep does impact my ability to brew a consistently competitive deck.

    While there is a good variety of viable decks, there are really only two viable castable archetypes right now - counter spell based deck or lock based decks. The other decks either don't have to cast spells to win (Bazaar decks) or only need to land a single spell (Oath decks)

    With Misstep so heavily played, any deck trying to fight outside these spaces need to give up their opportunity cost of using limited early mana to progress their board state with one drops while the Misstep deck can progress their board state without need to use that limited early mana.

    This keeps out more than just the more common known decks like welder decks, crop rotation decks, or ritual decks. It also stops yet to be proven potential decks like infect, non-prison zoo, and skull clamp decks.

    The good news is that with the benefit of the rise of Survival Salad, Misstep has even fewer good targets. If the meta shifts enough that Misstep is dead more often, the number of copies will shrink. It looks as if this is already happening.

    The one thing I think we can agree on is that we won't all agree. I will forever desire for shifting metas. Others like as little change as possible. Neither is absolutely right. Unless WOTC decided to start banning Vintage the same way they do Modern, I'll have to settle with playing decks that I am less excited about. At the end of the day, these are still pretty fun games - even if I feel the deck is stale.



  • And legacy has basically been portrayed as Brainstorm vs Chalice of the Void.

    Restricting Mental Misstep is not going to make Blue decks less counterspells dependent or other decks less "lock based" (though ravager shops is pretty damn fast for a lock-based deck).

    It will allow combo decks to more effectively combo and provide for less interactive games of magic.

    And I'm sorry, if your deck folds to Mental Misstep, it's probably not a very good deck to begin with.



  • @ChubbyRain to say "And I'm sorry, if your deck folds to Mental Misstep, it's probably not a very good deck to begin with." is a bit unfair. Single hate cards can foil otherwise good decks.

    For example if you followed legacy around the time Mental Misstep was banned in legacy, the High Tide deck started being a real player for quite a bit of time. It would not be fair to call that deck bad - it just struggled to fight through one specific heavily played hate card.

    I like constant reevaluation of meta games. We could swing the whole process the other way. Many of the great 1-drop cards on the restricted list were put there before the printing of Misstep. Maybe since this car exists, they unrestrict fastbond, mystical tutor, imperial seal, or demonic consultation.

    Having the conversation is, in my opinion, healthy...


  • TMD Supporter

    @ten-ten said in November 26 Banned & Restricted Announcement:

    @smmenen
    what do blue decks have to answer with mental misstep that we need 4 MM in the format, that blue decks couldn't handle with MM restricted?

    I'm not for restricting MM, just curious as to what your thoughts are on these points.

    No card in particular makes Misstep important to the format, but I do think the format is healthier when players don't get to do everything they want to do, and Misstep serves that purpose.

    I am sometimes sad that it's so weakened Duress effects and Dark Rituals, but then I like the fact that Misstep probably reduces the possibility of speed combo kills in the format overall. It keeps "Oops, No Lands," and Belcher type decks or just Storm 10 from winning on turn 1 alot of the time.

    I also like the fact that Misstep counters pests like Deathrite Shaman, which would be so much more insanely powerful if Misstep were restricted. Same with Top, which is uber-time wasting and just an annoying card.



  • @trius The point I'm making is that people seem to think Mental Misstep is going to bring back decks like Control Slaver. It's not. The card, Goblin Welder, just isn't a good card in Vintage any more. Neither is Mana Drain. Imagine if Mental Misstep was legal in Legacy right now and you had a ton of people on the internet yelling "Unrestrict Mental Misstep so High Tide can be played again". It would be a bullcrap argument because we know that High Tide isn't good in the current Legacy with Mental Misstep banned.

    As for unrestricting Fastbond, Mystical Tutor, Imperial Seal, Demonic Consultation, etc. Why? Would you unban them in Legacy? No, they would be degenerate cards that would lead to a miserable play experience. Legitimately the only reason to unrestrict them in Vintage is if you think they would see very little play, which, granted, is pretty likely with probably Imperial Seal. Still, it's hardly a pressing need and kind of misses a key point of the B&R list which is producing a format people want to play.

    This point literally came up on the SCGTour in reference to Modern when I was watching it this past weekend:
    "Not ever card on the banned list needs a defense attorney."


  • TMD Supporter

    @chubbyrain said in November 26 Banned & Restricted Announcement:

    This point literally came up on the SCGTour in reference to Modern when I was watching it this past weekend:
    "Not ever card on the banned list needs a defense attorney."

    As an attorney, I love this idea. Well, the opposite.

    Every card deserves the strongest, most vigorous advocacy. That’s the only way we know it really deserve to be restricted.


 

WAF/WHF