[Official] State of Modern Thread (B&R 07/13/2020)

User avatar
The Fluff
is this so?
Posts: 1945
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted
Location: Gradius Home World
Contact:

Post by The Fluff » 1 year ago

[mention]metalmusic_4[/mention]

aether vial? Hmm, one of the best vial deck in modern is Humans. Deck is not oppressive at all. Other competitive decks are merfok and to a certain degree gobs as well. WoTC likes creature aggro decks, so I think vial is safe from any ban.
Last edited by The Fluff 1 year ago, edited 1 time in total.
Image
AnimEVO 2020 - EFZ Tournament (english commentary) // OE 2016 // POF 2018
want to play a uw control deck in modern, but don't have Jace or snapcaster? please come visit us at the Emeria thread

stubb
Posts: 20
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by stubb » 1 year ago

They've got to ban Hogaak, but I also think they have a vested interest to move slowly with bans. Imagine, after months of Hogaak summer when they already punted on a ban decision, they went through and gutted the format with the blanket bans on stuff some people are talking about. Even if that's the right move long term, now certainly isn't the time.

I also think it'd be irresponsible for them to unban Stoneforge without also announcing a reprint, as they did with Jace.

User avatar
ktkenshinx
Posts: 571
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: West Coast
Contact:

Post by ktkenshinx » 1 year ago

gkourou wrote:
1 year ago
The evidence of them being afraid is right in front of you: They dont unban the card.
If they unban it, that means they no longer think it would stifle diversity.
There are many viable arguments against the Twin unban and many ways to represent Wizards' position. This argument, however, is not one of them. It is extremely weak and basically invalidates all discussion of all unbans, and probably even bans, in a single take. By this logic, neither we nor anyone on any site should discuss any unbans because the rationale to unban a card is "true" up until the moment Wizards unbans it. That is not a defensible position. It's also factually untrue because Wizards decides unbans before they announce them, so Wizards is literally deciding their old rationale no longer applies before the unban is publicly known; yet another strike against this stance you present. It's also a bad argument because unbans can become illegitimate and no longer necessary months before Wizards even admits it. The sign that an unban is viable is not solely that Wizards unbans the card. It's the circumstances leading up to that unban which anyone is capable of reading.

The burden of proof does rest with those who want an unban. But that doesn't mean unbans are unknowable and unjustifiable up until the minute Wizards announces the unban.
metalmusic_4 wrote:
1 year ago
My prediction for tomorrow: hogaak is banned, no unbans.

I'll be very happy with any unbans(particularly twin and SFM), but I don't expect they will do it tomorrow. Hopefully they dont decide to ban 3, 4, or more cards trying to lower the overall power level.
metalmusic_4 wrote:
1 year ago
I have a fear they may try something like ban faithless looting, stirrings, SSG, grisselbrand, mox opal, aether vial and hogaak or some other list of cards to lower the power level. I don't think they would do that, but I do fear that.
Sadly, that prediction seems right to me. Hogaak is a foregone conclusion at this point and there has never (as far as I can remember in Modern) been a more certain ban on a single card. Eldrazi Winter was a certain ban, but the card was less certain. As for other bans, these also seem relatively unlikely. I understand your fear because we live in a time of Modern ban mania fearfulness, but Wizards is unlikely to do any other bans in such a warped, Hogaak-influenced era of Modern.
The Fluff wrote:
1 year ago
one of the worst possible surprises tomorrow would be Hogaak is still not banned, but they banned several other older cards instead to "weaken" Hogaak. Although it's probably almost impossible for them to do something like this.

Hogaak for sure will join the ranks of banned modern cards.
As I noted above, and you said yourself, it's possible but extremely unlikely. The optics on anything other than a Hogaak ban are just untenable for Wizards. Modern has a publicity problem right now due to this terrible summer and the already negative, toxic Twitter/Reddit/article commentary around the format. These vocal minorities typically don't matter for format health, but they will matter coming off this summer where any new or old player has a very negative Modern experience fresh in mind. The climate makes it impossible to assess claims about format health but very likely people will make those claims without data. It isn't a great time to be a Modern player right now, although I am confident the format can eventually recover if managed correctly.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

metalmusic_4 wrote:
1 year ago
I have a fear they may try something like ban faithless looting, stirrings, SSG, grisselbrand, mox opal, aether vial and hogaak or some other list of cards to lower the power level. I don't think they would do that, but I do fear that.
Outside a Twin/SFM unban, this would be my ideal.
UR Control UR

User avatar
drmarkb
Posts: 553
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by drmarkb » 1 year ago

Hoogy will go. The one good thing is the deck is so busted that it has not been as prevalent at the LGS as it has online and in bigger, high prize events. Those following the finance know the ban has been factored in to the card's price.

Twin will not be making an appearance in a Modern event near you my friends, and those whose tumescent desires are for infinite combos will be left frustrated unless they want to invest in Copycat or some devoted Druids. Pod too- not unless we really do see invasion of the body snatchers at Wizards. I would love to see mh2 bring Stasis to the format, but it just won't ever happen no matter how safe. Twin is one of those I suspect.

I think we may never see unbans of SFM vatiety except when they need to do something unpleasant, so it is possible.

Looting is the big one- I know huge vociferous swathes of people who want it gone, and few the other way.

I made a lot of money off Twin, and then off its banning- some saw it coming to an extent- as with all Mtg bans, when they happen there are those who are caught out, and those not. I rarely get caught out, but Looting has me completely paralysed by indescision, although I sold out if looting decks and staples for them a year ago just in case. I think it may go at some point. I just do not know.

Whatever happens Modern will always be two ships passing in the night, one if them in fire.
Last edited by drmarkb 1 year ago, edited 2 times in total.

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 1 year ago

The Fluff wrote:
1 year ago
metalmusic_4

aether vial? Hmm, one of the best vial deck in modern is Humans. Deck is not oppressive at all. Other competitive decks are merfok and to a certain degree gobs as well. WoTC likes creature aggro decks, so I think vial is safe from any ban.
Ya I'm not advocating for any other bans, I just named a bunch of powerful cards for that list I wrote up there. I'm just saying, like we have discussed many times, as much as we think we know what they are going to do, really we dont, they could decide to do any number of things.

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

drmarkb wrote:
1 year ago
and those whose tumescent desires are for infinite combos will be left frustrated
If I really wanted to, I would currently invest into Urza. Problem there is 3 fold.

1 I'm not a Prison fan.
2 Mox is on the list of 'ya this could get banned some time'.
3 Wizard's does not like Infinite Combo, and if it becomes a true force post-Hogaak, it could easily attract their attention.
UR Control UR

User avatar
ktkenshinx
Posts: 571
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: West Coast
Contact:

Post by ktkenshinx » 1 year ago

gkourou wrote:
1 year ago
Seems like you misread my take. It is not a real argument. It is just a fact. Wizards is not unbanning twin, because they are afraid of something. That's probably twin stifling diversity(whether this is among blue decks or overall diversity) and no, it seems weird saying we should apply this to everything.
I am not misreading anything. Your quote was very clear:
The evidence of them being afraid is right in front of you: They dont unban the card.
If they unban it, that means they no longer think it would stifle diversity.
The lack of an unban is not evidence of them being afraid for reasons I have already explained. 1) Wizards decides to unban cards before we know about it. This fact alone invalidates the entire argument. Wizards may decide to unban a card on a Tuesday that falls 6 days before an unban. Wizards has now decided to unban the card but we don't know about it yet. But the lack of an unban would give a false positive as to the evidence that it is "unsafe." 2) Conditions may exist that justify an unban even if Wizards has not yet acted on it. For instance, if someone argued that JTMS/BBE were safe unbans in the 3-4 months before the unban, those people would have accurately predicted (and maybe even influenced, depending on their platform) Wizards' unban decision. By your argument, we would have to say those people were wrong because Wizards hadn't yet unbanned the card... even though they accurately predicted the conditions of an unban a few months later.

The lack of an unban is NEVER evidence that Wizards is afraid of an unban. Just like the lack of a ban is NEVER evidence that a card is healthy. In both cases, unban and ban proponents must build cases that may or may not influence/predict Wizards' decisions. There may be other reasons an unban is safe, but those are either specific to the card itself, the metagame, the decks that would use the card, etc. Lack of action is not evidence of anything other than lack of action.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

User avatar
drmarkb
Posts: 553
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by drmarkb » 1 year ago

@ idsuge, you have encapsulated my feelings on Mox Opal decks, and Urza in particular - regarding long term holdd- there is a small risk of a ban at some point. I do think Urza will be a safe choice right now, and would be safe for your money. If someone or somthing broke it then I suspect they would not go after Opal unless many decks were abusing it, at which case the writing would be on the wall.
If you do not like Prison then I would say Urza is a bit more than prison, more a hybrid deck., but enjoyment is only going to be something that you will get after you play it. I know a few players say there are some v bad matches, it would probably be safe to buy into, esp with many pieces being EDH able.

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1109
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

drmarkb wrote:
1 year ago
I made a lot of money off Twin, and then off its banning- some saw it coming to an extent- as with all Mtg bans, when they happen there are those who are caught out, and those not. I rarely get caught out,
Forgive me, but I have an extremely difficult time believing this. Pretty much no one predicted Twin would go. Additionally, most of the big names in analysis at the time celebrated the deck as an excellent and healthy pillar of the Modern format. And that Twin was a big part of what kept Modern from devolving into the linear rat races that have defined the format ever since its removal.

It very well may have been the case that your prediction was right, but it certainly went against everything everyone knew publicly at the time, and may have been more of a lucky hunch than the product of careful and precise prediction.

User avatar
drmarkb
Posts: 553
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by drmarkb » 1 year ago

If you are referring to the ban, yeah there is always the lucky hunch element. I am ultra conservative at Mtg finance, however, and can sniff a ban a mile away, at least against a deck if not the card. I often wargame financial scenarios. I did pay a lot of attention to what people said on the ground rather than the online banlist discussions, and the event schedules etc. Event schedules had a big ban list impact, still do to an extent. I don't crunch numbers besides prices, my gut felt a ban in the offing. I do get things wrong - fifty swan songs is testament to that, but my hunch was a ban to hurt the deck big time, I figured Twin or, more likely, Exarch.
The ban was a surprise ban, but not enough of one to catch me. Sometimes you get lucky.

Ban list discussions play out arguments in full glare, but they often have people who think they have proved something, often in direct contradiction to what another person thinks they have proved the opposite. Witness the views on Twin. Those people rarely make bans.

Before the ban I invested in the glue commons, UR fetches, Spellskites, and Torpor Orbs. Fetches to be fair I targeted since the format started.
People would always take their random deck, add four Orbs or whatever and think 'job done' . Never was, of course, and soon those same players would be changing decks. Back then gormats and outlets were fewer.
Twin players think about removal, but many players like to hose with permanents, which is why Force of Negation is rekevant- counter the Orb or Ghostly Prison or whatever, flash in and win next turn. Those Torpor Orbs never were very good but people bought them anyway, I got left with a few but the profit was made. It never turned into Stony Silence levels or RIP levels of profit, but people always buy hosers, even poor narrow ones. Selling out of the stock I had from the deck felt good, but I always remember the losses....
Last edited by drmarkb 1 year ago, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

There was an element calling for a ban on Twin. The vocal side online dismissed it as it did not fall in the parameters we felt existed at the time.

It's neither here nor there though anymore.

At this point all we can know is Hogaak rides off to die at 9ish AM Pacific tomorrow.
UR Control UR

True-Name Nemesis
Posts: 156
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by True-Name Nemesis » 1 year ago

That's a cute assumption.

You seem to be under the impression that there can only be a singular reason (fear) why the card remains banned. Naive. All it means is WoTC has reason(s) why it's there. Fear could very well be one of them, could very well be not.

But you know, taking their claims at face value when they're not exactly great examples of truth and transparency behind their decisions. Naive.

But if that's all you have to cling on to then you do you.

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1109
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

gkourou wrote:
1 year ago
The day they stop being afraid of twin, they will unban it, or soon enough.
Based on many of their words and actions over many years, it has nothing to do with fear. It has to do with a combination of fundamental misunderstandings guided by spreadsheets of data (instead of deep experience and knowledge playing Modern) and a complete unwillingness to admit wrongdoing unless absolutely forced to. They've really done nothing to demonstrate otherwise, especially with regards to Twin, specifically.

Add into that the multiple fires they had to put out in Standard over the past years with the relative "leave Modern alone" attitude, and it very cleanly explains their lazy and misguided management style when it comes to the banned list.
drmarkb wrote:
1 year ago
:poop: If you are referring to the ban, yeah there is always the lucky hunch element. I am ultra conservative at Mtg finance, however, and can sniff a ban a mile away, at least against a deck if not the card. I often wargame financial scenarios. I did pay a lot of attention to what people said on the ground rather than the online banlist discussions, and the event schedules etc. Event schedules had a big ban list impact, still do to an extent. I don't crunch numbers besides prices, my gut felt a ban in the offing. I do get things wrong - fifty swan songs is testament to that, but my hunch was a ban to hurt the deck big time, I figured Twin or, more likely, Exarch.
The ban was a surprise ban, but not enough of one to catch me. Sometimes you get lucky.
I mean, in 2015 the only people saying Twin should be banned were kooks and people without a leg to stand on. Everyone in all of Magic knew that Summer Bloom would be gone, and most people predicted that with its removal, Twin's presence would actually subside (since Twin was pretty much the only deck with a positive Bloom matchup). But rather than let that play out, WOTC pulled the rug out and banned Twin too.

For perspective, this would be like predicting today, right now, that Mox Opal will be banned, selling them off, and then watching it get banned alongside Hogaak tomorrow. Sure, that means the prediction turned out right, but it doesn't make it any less "randomly out of left field" than Twin was. A broken clock is right twice a day; doesn't mean it's a good way to tell time. And in 2015, the only ones clamoring for a Twin ban were the same broken clocks that call for bans on all sorts of random things in the format.

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 1 year ago

The way I remember the lead up to the twin ban was all about the previous protour. Amulet titan vs twin in the finals. People were screaming loudly about amulet titan and everyone expected a ban from that deck, but if you remember twin won that event. That was the second pro tour twin had won in modern, and if they were banning summer bloom, which came in 2nd, it wasn't hard to imagine they would ban something from twin too. I expected the ban to be snapcaster mage so I sold them and my tarns to rebuy later, but I and many others were VERY surprised that the ban was actually splinter twin itself. That is the way I remember it and I was a twin player at the time.

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1109
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

metalmusic_4 wrote:
1 year ago
The way I remember the lead up to the twin ban was all about the previous protour. Amulet titan vs twin in the finals. People were screaming loudly about amulet titan and everyone expected a ban from that deck, but if you remember twin won that event. That was the second pro tour twin had won in modern, and if they were banning summer bloom, which came in 2nd, it wasn't hard to imagine they would ban something from twin too. I expected the ban to be snapcaster mage so I sold them and my tarns to rebuy later, but I and many others were VERY surprised that the ban was actually splinter twin itself. That is the way I remember it and I was a twin player at the time.
But that PT was a year before the ban. And that summer saw Twin falling dramatically in popularity as Jund, Abzan, and Grixis Control all grew in popularity. What many of us guess happened is that WOTC saw the triple Top 8 placement in Pittsburgh and, without understanding the context of WHY it happened (and with the ulterior motive of wanting their new Oath Eldrazi to make a splash at the PT lulz), they panicked and banned it. Then made up a bunch of nonsense malarkey to justify it.

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 1 year ago

Ok, that POV is fine, but i expected a ban for the deck and many others did too. We can agrue about shake up bans (which is what I believe, even if it was a real good deck) or the merits, but it is true that some people did expect to see something happen. And they killed birthing pod the year before, they were taking action against top decks annually at that time and most of us knew it. The fact that they banned splinter twin itself killed the deck and was very surprising, but I did expect action to be taken. I didn't agree with taking action against the twin deck, but I could see the writing on the wall.

User avatar
ktkenshinx
Posts: 571
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: West Coast
Contact:

Post by ktkenshinx » 1 year ago

gkourou wrote:
1 year ago
@ktk you may want to re-read my post. You got it Completely wrong, again.
A card being on the banlist is a clear evidence wizards is afraid of something.
In the case of twin, we have two members of wizards (blake Rasmussen and another one- can link the twitch url later) saying various stuff about twin, mainly that modern was better at the day that was unbanned between other stuff and thats a kind of a proof but the bottomline is that they are afraid to unban it, because of the reason they banned it, diversity. I can not believe that you are arguing that, but i guess you do.

The day they stop being afraid of twin, they will unban it, or soon enough.
I do not believe I am being unclear so I don't understand why you simply keep repeating your position as if it is correct without acknowledging my stance. Are you seriously saying that Wizards was afraid of BBE and JTMS in the week before we knew they were unbanned, even though they had literally made the decision without us knowing about it? That makes absolutely no sense. This is one of many reasons why this argument is incredibly weak and wrong. Moreover, the argument of "lack of action = fear" leaves us in a place where we can't predict or discuss any unbans ever, even if Wizards has just unbanned a card.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

SaltySips
Posts: 2
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by SaltySips » 1 year ago

For the past 2 months I have been hesitant to even write this and it might be due to unfortunate timing, but whenever I look in here, I feel it sounds the same.

New forum, almost 60 pages in, and it's still the same people nagging and „twin twin twin twin twin".

I hoped we could leave that over at mtgsalvation.

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Agreed, especially when the argument has boiled down to the equivalent of 'Cuz Wizards said so!'

There is no debate.
There are no new facts.
There is no testing that would EVER be accepted.

Just why even bother?

It's either unbanned tomorrow or it's not. Same with SFM. That's even less of a risk, but yet here we are, it's still banned, ergo, it MUST be too good, 'because Wizards says so!'

As long as people continue to entertain that they may understand the format, and defend Wizards in the face of actual logic and arguments?

We get nowhere.

'Jace has a grave in Modern' isn't that how it went?
UR Control UR

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 1 year ago

They only change the ban list, what roughly quarterly? And people can keep their POV for a long time, so these arguements can last about as long as the game does.
Twin was a very controversial ban among the community, I think we can all agree on that. The community was certainly divided on the twin issue. This twin arguement will likely go for YEARS to come. Even if it were unbanned there would be at least occasional complaints that they ever unbanned it because somebody got combo-ed turn 4 two games in a row, so the arguement would just be reversed.
Hogaak is a easy and almost unanimous agreement ban, but twin was not. And just like any divided community people will argue over any decision made on a narrow margin.

PS: UNBAN TWIN!

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1109
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

metalmusic_4 wrote:
1 year ago
Even if it were unbanned there would be at least occasional complaints that they ever unbanned it because somebody got combo-ed turn 4 two games in a row, so the arguement would just be reversed.
The likelihood of that happening is less than 5% (given a ~20% turn 4 combo probability). So sure, people could complain, but let's be honest, it's about the least obnoxious way to lose in Modern. Would you rather be locked out of taking game actions instead? Forced into submission until you concede? Killed reliably faster than turn 4? Killed by a non-deterministic loop that leaves a fleeting sliver of hope?

If nothing else, Twin said: if you don't have the answer (which, lol, is about a thousand different possible things), the game is over and we move on.

True-Name Nemesis
Posts: 156
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by True-Name Nemesis » 1 year ago

gkourou wrote:
1 year ago
Sure, there might he another reason, but there is some reason that it is there and not unbanned. That's probably the reason they banned i, meaning diversity. If you think thats a hypothesis and you think that twin may still be on the banlist for another reason, maybe, but saying that it's still in there not because of diversity reasons, but for some other shady reason, at the same time that it can not be turn 4 rule violation or logistic reasons, is super weird.

I prefer to look at the obvious one, that its still there for the reason that is banned.

Also, that hostility towards anyone that dares not to say "twin is totally fine" is also worrying for me, but also a little bit peculiar :p :p

I prefer interactive discussion and opinion exchange, but when you are hostile towards me and say "what a joke", you are way off. Thanks for the discussion!
True-Name Nemesis wrote:
1 year ago
gkourou wrote:
1 year ago
We dont have any need of saying it would or would not be fine. We just dont care. Its banned and we don't either care about discussing about it. If you ask me, i wouldnt mind it coming out that much, but whatever.
Don't start getting involved in twin talk if you don't care to discuss it then. What a joke.
Let's make this clear, I was very obviously referring to your hypocrisy in saying you don't care to to discuss Twin when YOU first made the choice to engage with my Twin-related post, not your argument.

But tbh it might as well be considering your definition of an interactive discussion and opinion exchange seems to be "because WoTC said so". Yes thank you for the wonderful insight you have provided.

Also, I like how you're going on about hostility towards you when in the past 24 hours you have made 2 accusations against me of misrepresenting your points, yet have been unable to provide any evidence when asked to clarify where.

Playing the victim again.

User avatar
The Fluff
is this so?
Posts: 1945
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted
Location: Gradius Home World
Contact:

Post by The Fluff » 1 year ago

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
drmarkb wrote:
1 year ago
and those whose tumescent desires are for infinite combos will be left frustrated
If I really wanted to, I would currently invest into Urza. Problem there is 3 fold.

1 I'm not a Prison fan.
2 Mox is on the list of 'ya this could get banned some time'.
3 Wizard's does not like Infinite Combo, and if it becomes a true force post-Hogaak, it could easily attract their attention.
mox is a crazy expensive card that could suddenly become banned when something breaks it. Not worth investing imo.

Have cashed in on it a few years ago with no regrets. :)
Image
AnimEVO 2020 - EFZ Tournament (english commentary) // OE 2016 // POF 2018
want to play a uw control deck in modern, but don't have Jace or snapcaster? please come visit us at the Emeria thread

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1109
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

The Fluff wrote:
1 year ago
idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
drmarkb wrote:
1 year ago
and those whose tumescent desires are for infinite combos will be left frustrated
If I really wanted to, I would currently invest into Urza. Problem there is 3 fold.

1 I'm not a Prison fan.
2 Mox is on the list of 'ya this could get banned some time'.
3 Wizard's does not like Infinite Combo, and if it becomes a true force post-Hogaak, it could easily attract their attention.
mox is a crazy expensive card that could suddenly become banned when something breaks it. Not worth investing imo.

Have cashed in on it a few years ago with no regrets. :)
This is one of the main reasons I have never strayed from the URx/UWx archetypes for the past several years. I already own pretty much everything, and nothing would feel worse than buying into some other deck, then have it hit with a ban that it may or may not deserve. Dredge has been at the top of that list for a while (especially with Creeping Chill) and I would love to be playing Urza right now, but am not for the same reasons. The massively expensive, unique pieces, along with the ever-present fear of ban just makes it less and less enticing to want to shell out the cash.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Modern”