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

User avatar
Pistallion
Posts: 14
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Pistallion » 2 years ago

Ym1r wrote:
2 years ago
Preordain would fit straight into every blue control and every blue combo deck.
Name a blue combo deck. Storm, Ad Naus? Those decks never going to be a real threat any time soon. Neo Brand and Infect? All easily tier 2.

My problem with Preordain being on the banned list is that the reason it originally was is now outdated. Blue combo decks aren't oppressive at all, and if people here are going to argue for GSZ to be unbanned so that green toolbox can get a shot in the arm, then what about blue combo?
RGValakutGR

User avatar
tronix
Posts: 32
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by tronix » 2 years ago

FoodChainGoblins wrote:
2 years ago
But think about it - does Preordain come with more risk than Jace, the Mind Sculptor? If Modern slows down, Jace, the Mind Sculptor is KING. If Modern became a Midrange slugfest, I'd rather be on the side of going over that with Jace, the Mind Sculptor. Midrange beats Aggro, bigger Midrange beats smaller Midrange, Control beats bigger Midrange, and the controlliest Control beats Control AND Midrange. Jace is an amazing tool! He is easily the best planeswalker ever printed and honestly, most cards just don't compare. The only reason he was okay to unban is that Modern is too quick for him to matter much. That could change.

A few years ago, the 3 cards that were brought up to possibly unban were Preordain, Stoneforge Mystic, and Jace, the Mind Sculptor in that order. Yes, a lot has changed. But I honestly don't know what has changed that makes Preordain a riskier card than Jace. I really don't. You go ahead and try to Preordain to something that beats Jace because there's not much.
i cant get on board with the jace comparison as id consider it 'apples to oranges'. any risk that jace may have incurred was still bound within the scope of being a 4 cmc card that lends itself to be played in the midrange to control spectrum.

thats what i meant regarding uncertainty. preordain looks relatively tame to me, but the card could feasibly show up anywhere and everywhere given its a cheap generic selection spell. probably not a card likely to break anything since worse but serviceable cards of the same type exist in modern already, however i honestly have no idea how the card would perform or what it would do in the long term. if we are chalking up all the unknowns into the 'risk' column, then yeah there is an argument for preordain being riskier than jace.

as for your second question of 'what has changed', to put it simply blue decks dont suck as much anymore. that period however long ago where preordain looked more attractive was when people were advocating boosting blue decks pretty much across the board (which was debatable on whether it was needed). preordain, unlike jace, is just rated particularly efficiently and would see play on just that alone, much like red players are likely to be sleeving up bolts. we just arent at a point anymore where strategies incorporating blue and associated effects/cards are poorly positioned to a significant degree.

all of this ties into your initial questioning of unban timings. it has been apparent over these last few years that the format meta/ecosystem at any given point may or may not be conducive to certain unbans. for instance UWx getting better presumably became an obstacle for SFM, or how preordain would have been a comical choice in light of UR phoenix. such timing conflicts continue to prove awkward if nothing else, and i can understand if people question if things could have been sequenced better. maybe preordain could have been unbanned a good while ago, before phoenix or even storm; or maybe SFM could have been unbanned before jace. regardless its pretty clear that wizards tends to look for reasons to unban cards, or in other words they likely have some intent behind the decision beyond a simple power level assessment against what is currently going on in the format. so we see this rather frustrating ad-hoc 'make it up as we go along' system. i know some people believe this is idiotic, but there isnt exactly much room to argue that a standardized consistent unban system has the format looking either better or worse; because its all just hypotheticals and players wanting to play specific cards (and the decks they create).

edit: just to be clear i dont believe preordain should have been banned in the first place. i have said multiple times that i believe the initial bannings after the format was created were kneejerk reactions where wizards probably felt they had no choice but to overshoot the mark to get the format going in another direction. given the removal of many of the cards wasnt done systematically with appropriate time to gauge the response, as it is done currently (to an extent) i question which may have been collateral damage at the time. a time where, to be frank, perception of the format was just forming and pros/competitive players werent putting much effort into exploring it. i mean nacatl's presence in those early days, which got it banned, was likely partly due to top players jamming zoo because it was safe with a decent power floor. anywho, there is no way to tell if preordain getting locked up besides ponder was ultimately needed to curb the fastest degeneracy going on
bant iceblade
GDS

User avatar
pierreb
Posts: 276
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Up North

Post by pierreb » 2 years ago

Isn't preordain just a straight-up better version of serum visions? (Being able to select before drawing is better given the speed of the format.)

Preordain is not broken, but I think there is a limit on how many good one-mana cantrip should be available. I personally don't think blue decks need to be made better and more consistent right now. UW control is good. Whir is good. Storm is good enough. I think storm is always just a few cards off being the top deck and adding another (better!) cantrip just adds to its consistency.

User avatar
Pistallion
Posts: 14
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Pistallion » 2 years ago

pierreb wrote:
2 years ago
Isn't preordain just a straight-up better version of serum visions? (Being able to select before drawing is better given the speed of the format.)

Preordain is not broken, but I think there is a limit on how many good one-mana cantrip should be available. I personally don't think blue decks need to be made better and more consistent right now. UW control is good. Whir is good. Storm is good enough. I think storm is always just a few cards off being the top deck and adding another (better!) cantrip just adds to its consistency.
With the printing of Damping Sphere, imo Storm is forever doomed to tier 2 or worse. While grave yard hate is probably at an all time low, other decks just have so many tools to stop what storm wants to do nowadays. With Tron being a top deck and the fact that Dampening Sphere not only hits both decks, it can slot into any deck that needs it. The fact that I can play that card in Titanshift is actually funny and makes my sideboard so much better. Storm used to be my favorite deck, but nowadays I just feel I'm fighting an uphill battle almost every single match
RGValakutGR

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 2 years ago

If we are predicting the next unban, Preordain is not the card. Remember, the last B&R specifically called out one card that they were discussing unbanning. That is a statement that I have never seen in any former B&R announcements. Due to the rarity of that statement I believe this card is head and shoulders above the nearest competition for likely hood of being unbanned.

Read this quote:

"we're choosing not to unban Bridge from Below at this time."

User avatar
tronix
Posts: 32
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by tronix » 2 years ago

metalmusic_4 wrote:
2 years ago
If we are predicting the next unban, Preordain is not the card. Remember, the last B&R specifically called out one card that they were discussing unbanning. That is a statement that I have never seen in any former B&R announcements. Due to the rarity of that statement I believe this card is head and shoulders above the nearest competition for likely hood of being unbanned.

Read this quote:

"we're choosing not to unban Bridge from Below at this time."
tbh i interpreted that bit on bridge from below as a cursory nod, acknowledging the card will remain banned for the foreseeable future. or in other words indefinitely. i mean it got one sentence at the end of a paragraph where it only kinda made sense:

'In order to ensure the metagame doesn't again revert to a Faithless Looting graveyard deck being dominant, we believe now is the correct time to make this change. For this same reason, we're choosing not to unban Bridge from Below at this time.'

sooo bridge isnt coming back to make sure the format doesnt regress back into lootings GY decks? which was banned?

call me cynical, but i wouldnt hold my breath waiting for a bridge unban. its entirely plausible wotc washes their hands of the card and doesnt give it a second glance.
bant iceblade
GDS

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 2 years ago

I can not point to another announcement where they mentioned considering unbanning a card but decided not to "at this time". I read one sentance as alot of info when we have never had anything before.

User avatar
Arkmer
Opinionated and Wrong
Posts: 325
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Minnesota

Post by Arkmer » 2 years ago

I would be surprised of Bridge from Below came off the list. Many people are very correct in saying that it is not the real offender here, but, like others have said, it also doesn't add anything to the format. It has largely gone silent in all Modern's history apart from it's sudden enabling of a very degenerate deck. I think the balance for this card is the edge of a knife as even a hair to either side is busted or worthless.

Is it worth having that kind of a card in the format? Always on the brink of breaking something but otherwise not used in anything. I don't really see how it benefits the format. You could easily say that the ban list should be as slim as possible and that's a fine opinion to have, I just don't think I would put it so strightforwardly.

As for Preordain, I really think it's fairly innocuous. It's biggest nays in my mind are about hitting a critical mass of 1cmc cantrips, and maybe it pairing reasonably with Jace as a way to clear the top of the library (then draw); other than that it's just a minor upgrade over SV*. For the critical mass argument, I would gladly give up SV for Preordain, but what would that look like on the banned list? That's just as silly as many of the other examples given for "if this, then why that?"

*At one point, over on Salvation, someone did a quick comparison of SV vs Preordain and of the 5(?) scenarios, Preordain gave the better options in 2 of them. I don't remember how it was put together though.

User avatar
Wraithpk
Posts: 181
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Connecticut, USA

Post by Wraithpk » 2 years ago

pierreb wrote:
2 years ago
Isn't preordain just a straight-up better version of serum visions? (Being able to select before drawing is better given the speed of the format.)

Preordain is not broken, but I think there is a limit on how many good one-mana cantrip should be available. I personally don't think blue decks need to be made better and more consistent right now. UW control is good. Whir is good. Storm is good enough. I think storm is always just a few cards off being the top deck and adding another (better!) cantrip just adds to its consistency.
No, it's not strictly better than SV because SV always sees 3 cards, whereas Preordain only sees two cards if you want one of them on top. Here's a comparison of the two cards in every possible case:
You want none of the top 3 cards: The same. Both draw you a card you don't want and bottom two others you don't want. Both dig 3 deep towards the card you're looking for.
You want the top card, but not the next two: Serum Visions is better. You have to draw the third card next turn with Preordain, but SV bottoms it.
You want the second card, but not the top or third: Preordain is better. Both draw you a card you don't want and bottom another, but Preordain gets you the card you want this turn, whereas SV gets it next turn.
You want the third card, but not the top two: Preordain is better. You get to bottom both top cards and get the card you want, while SV has to draw one you don't want and get the card you want next turn.
You want the top two cards, but not the third: Serum Visions is better. You get to bottom the third card, while Preordain won't see it, so you'll draw it two turns later. Preordain does let you pick the order you draw the top 2 in, so it could be a little better for sequencing, but SV is better card selection.
You want the top and third card, but not the second: Roughly the same. Both draw you the top card this turn and bottom the second card. However, you do have the added information from seeing the third card with SV, so it's very slightly better.
You don't want the top card, but do want the second and third: Preordain is better. Lets you bottom the top card you don't want, while SV has to draw it.
You want all three cards: Roughly the same. SV lets you pick the order you draw the second and third cards in, while Preordain lets you pick the order you draw the first and second in. Also as above, you do get the added info of seeing the third card with SV.
So Preordain is better in 3 cases, SV is better in 2 cases, and they're roughly the same in 3 cases, but SV does get you more info in two of those cases. So if you're playing Preordain over SV, it takes an average of 8 casts before you're +1 on better cases with the card. You're probably not casting more than 3 or 4 of these cantrips in even a long game, so you're maybe seeing an average of a little over 1 extra case where Preordain is better than SV in a three game match. That's really not a huge difference.

As for your point on Storm, I don't think Preordain would do all that much for the deck. It's an improvement over Sleight of Hand for sure, but Storm's problem isn't really its consistency, so Preordain doesn't really fix any problem the deck has.
Modern
ubr Grixis Shadow ubr
uwg Bant Stoneblade uwg
gbr Jund gbr

Pioneer
urIzzet Phoenixur
rMono-Red Aggror
uwAzorius Controluw

Commander
bg Meren of Clan Nel Toth bg

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 2 years ago

People undersell SV, when its REALLY not that bad in comparison.

Until we are talking Ponder, I really couldnt care less about Preordain.
UR Control UR

User avatar
tronix
Posts: 32
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by tronix » 2 years ago

yeah preordain has been analyzed a good amount. its no ponder or brainstorm. the worry over hitting a critical mass of cantrips only holds so much weight since spell slinger decks doing the xerox thing already leverage the currently legal suite and cant exactly just add 4 more; meaning it would be a swap upgrade measured in how much better preordain is compared to the next best option (usually cited as SV, but opt has its place as well). id imagine there'd be some amount of decks possibly trimming lands maybe using 6-8 cantrips where they previously used 4. the really noticeable influence would involve decks splashing blue or could splash blue that werent playing SV/opt, but then use preordain to good effect.

an understated difference in the use cases as wraithpk outlined is the boost in efficacy and likelihood of impacting the outcome of the game when immediate selection is of particular importance. for example if you need to find something right away SV is of minimal to no help while preordain...helps more. not very probable to happen often, but if ever deciding a game or a match the performance of the card will stand out more.

a weaker argument against preordain is that such a selection spell is naturally inclined to help the 'unfair' and 'linear' rabble everyone loves to hate; more than the opposition. the assumption being that strategies looking to employ certain sequences or combinations benefit more from dig and selection than when used moreso as a means to adapt to shifting game states. i could see this being true to an extent, but am dubious on such a difference noticeably shifting the format or meta cycles.

anywho this future unban talk is optimistic to the point of bordering on delusional. nothing is going to be unbanned any time soon (maybe sans reverting bridge). jace/bbe being unbanned at a time many thought the format was decent to good is one thing, SFM finally getting released after years and only when wotc screwed the pooch with hogaak is...something else lol
bant iceblade
GDS

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 2 years ago

I've mentioned this often enough, but without a critical mass of 1 or 0 costing spells, that better 'I need this one card' dig from Preordain is of less importance.

Its just not as good as people want to think.
UR Control UR

User avatar
pierreb
Posts: 276
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Up North

Post by pierreb » 2 years ago

Wraithpk wrote:
2 years ago
Here's a comparison of the two cards in every possible case:
I think your analysis is misleading for the following reasons:
  • Most of the time, you're looking for one card, not two. At the very least, you usually need one card now and the other can wait at least a turn.
  • Modern is a fast format where early turns count, so drawing the best-of-two is better than drawing random and setting up your next draw.
  • Setting up your future draws is messed up by fetches.
With this in mind, preordain is always better than SV. (SV is only very slightly better when you want the 1st and 3rd because you have the knowledge that your next draw will be the card you want. Preordain will give you the card in teh same schedule, but you won't know you're about to get it.)

If you're only digging for one card and chain multiple copies, preordain is *much* better because you get to choose between two cards first, then dumping them if they're not the right ones and draw the mystery card. This usually results in you needing to cast fewer cantrips in one turn: if it's the top card, they are equal. If it's the 2nd or 3rd card, preordain is better as you will draw the 2nd or 3rd.
Last edited by pierreb 2 years ago, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Pistallion
Posts: 14
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Pistallion » 2 years ago

The play patterns Preordain creates makes it a lot better than SV in a deck like Storm
RGValakutGR

User avatar
Wraithpk
Posts: 181
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Connecticut, USA

Post by Wraithpk » 2 years ago

tronix wrote:
2 years ago

an understated difference in the use cases as wraithpk outlined is the boost in efficacy and likelihood of impacting the outcome of the game when immediate selection is of particular importance. for example if you need to find something right away SV is of minimal to no help while preordain...helps more. not very probable to happen often, but if ever deciding a game or a match the performance of the card will stand out more.

anywho this future unban talk is optimistic to the point of bordering on delusional. nothing is going to be unbanned any time soon
So, in the case where you're looking for a one-outter, if the card is on top of your deck SV is better. Both draw the card this turn and find your one-outter, but SV gives you additional filtering for upcoming turns. Preordain is better if the card is second or third from the top, since you can find it this turn, whereas SV won't get it until next turn, but that's only going to be true if you also have the mana to cast the card this turn. If you don't, they're equal, as SV will draw it next turn and cast it at the same time as Preordain. If it's further down than that, both cards are equal, as they'll both dig three deep towards it.

Like I said, Preordain is definitely the better card overall, but it's not better in every situation. People relate Preordain to Ponder all the time because they're both banned in Modern and see play in Legacy, but Preordain is much MUCH closer in power to SV than it is to Ponder. Brainstorm and Ponder are the truly broken blue cantrips. I don't think Preordain is broken, it's just good. It probably wouldn't have any real impact on Modern.

That said, it'll probably never be unbanned, because I think the banning of Faithless Looting shows that WotC wants to remove the strong 1 mana cantrips. I think it's more likely that we eventually see Ancient Stirrings get banned than us ever seeing Preordain released. Besides, there aren't going to be any more unbannings for at least a year. I still think it's fun to talk about what cards could be unbanned, as long as we all recognize that nothing else is coming off any time soon.
pierreb wrote:
2 years ago
I think your analysis is misleading for the following reasons:
  • Most of the time, you're looking for one card, not two. At the very least, you usually need one card now and the other can wait at least a turn.
  • Modern is a fast format where early turns count, so drawing the best-of-two is better than drawing random and setting up your next draw.
  • Setting up your future draws is messed up by fetches.
With this in mind, preordain is always better than SV.
Ok, I'll address each of your points in turn:

1. That's not true at all. How many times do you cast a SV and want to top both cards? Plenty of times. Especially in the early turns of the game, you're not often looking for one thing in particular. Your argument is basically that it's much more common to only want the second or third card down and not the other two than it is to want two of the top three cards, and you need to provide some data to back up that conjecture, or else you're just using your "feeling" and stating it as fact.

2. Except that SV is better in the early turns of the game than Preordain, because if you don't have the mana available to cast the thing you find, the advantage of Preordain drawing the card this turn means nothing since you can't cast it until the next turn anyway, while seeing an additional card deeper means that SV also gets to cast the card next turn, but also potentially gets to bottom an unwanted card that Preordain doesn't see. What you're missing here is that both cards are going to draw you a random card. SV draws you a random card this turn and filters the next two, while Preordain filters the top two and draws one of those if you want, but the third card down will be a random card you'll draw at some point.

3. Only if you play poorly. It's really not hard to fetch before playing SV. I don't think it's a valid criticism that a card is worse if you make bad plays.

So with that in mind, Preordain is not always better than SV. Here's an easy example: on turn 1 SV is always better or equal to Preordain. Preordain choosing what you draw this turn means nothing if you can't cast it, which takes away its advantage where you get a card you want this turn where SV wouldn't get it until next turn. SV, on the other hand, will see more cards on average, since it always sees 3 cards, while Preordain only sees 3 if you double bottom.
If you're only digging for one card and chain multiple copies, preordain is *much* better because you get to choose between two cards first, then dumping them if they're not the right ones and draw the mystery card. This usually results in you needing to cast fewer cantrips in one turn: if it's the top card, they are equal. If it's the 2nd or 3rd card, preordain is better as you will draw the 2nd or 3rd.
No, if it's the top card SV is better because both cantrips will get the card for you this turn, but SV sees the third card down, whereas Preordain does not. If it's the 2nd or 3rd card down, Preordain is better IFF you also have the available mana to cast it this turn. If not, SV is better if it's the second card, since it sees the 3rd card and lets you bottom/top it, and they're equal if it's the 3rd card, since both will draw the card and a random card by the next turn.
Modern
ubr Grixis Shadow ubr
uwg Bant Stoneblade uwg
gbr Jund gbr

Pioneer
urIzzet Phoenixur
rMono-Red Aggror
uwAzorius Controluw

Commander
bg Meren of Clan Nel Toth bg

User avatar
Ym1r
Posts: 153
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Ym1r » 2 years ago

Pistallion wrote:
2 years ago
Ym1r wrote:
2 years ago
Preordain would fit straight into every blue control and every blue combo deck.
Name a blue combo deck. Storm, Ad Naus? Those decks never going to be a real threat any time soon. Neo Brand and Infect? All easily tier 2.

My problem with Preordain being on the banned list is that the reason it originally was is now outdated. Blue combo decks aren't oppressive at all, and if people here are going to argue for GSZ to be unbanned so that green toolbox can get a shot in the arm, then what about blue combo?
Because, and you would know that if you would had read the post and the quoted quote more closely, Preordain, much like Looting and Probe, don't enable 1 deck, but they enable a series of strategies making them considerably more powerful than the rest of the field, turning the format into a "GY format", or an "all in" format.

If GSZ has a chance, and if you ask me, it shouldn't, is because it supposedly enables a specific deck. IMHO, this is not exactly the case, and I don't thing we need such a strong tutors for a number of reasons, but that's besides the point here. The point is that Preordain would work for a wide range of the field, possibly pushing a number of decks over the top, not just one. As such, there is not reason to run the risk of unbanning in. As I said, Stirrings is in the watchlist exactly for that reason, and probably on borrowed time, until another green colorless deck breaks the format.
Counter, draw a card.

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1177
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 2 years ago

The one nice thing about this most recent B&R is that it fairly firmly solidifies the connection and correlation of timing between unbans and huge predictable bans.

User avatar
kddncn
Posts: 12
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Contact:

Post by kddncn » 2 years ago

I think preordain is unlikely to come off next simply because WotC has continually referenced the success of UWx strategies over the past few years as a reason why they were unlikely to unban SFM. Particularly while the impacts of this ban are still broadly settling, I imagine barring another bonkers card being printed, we're unlikely to see further shake ups with either bannings or unbannings.

I haven't had much time to play on modo recently, but was wondering if the average number of SFM decks have started to drop.
Tundra Lover: uw/x all formats

Father of son with Hydrocephalus

User avatar
pierreb
Posts: 276
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Up North

Post by pierreb » 2 years ago

Wraithpk wrote:
2 years ago
1. That's not true at all. (...)
2. Except that SV is better in the early turns of the game than Preordain, because (...)
3. Only if you play poorly. (...)
Meh. If you're going to be that aggressive and one sided, why do you think I'd care about what you say?

It's not "not true at all". Many times there are multiple laternate lines of play *and* I specifically said that you usually need one card now and other cards will only be relevant on other turns. For example, which also addresses you point #2, in early turn you often want to draw a land to fix your mana. And that land, addressing your point #3, will often be a fetch that you will play immediately.

So, I addressed all your three points with a single, straight-forward argument that makes sense and happens often in games. And I didn't even need to call you a poor player.

User avatar
Wraithpk
Posts: 181
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Connecticut, USA

Post by Wraithpk » 2 years ago

pierreb wrote:
2 years ago

Meh. If you're going to be that aggressive and one sided, why do you think I'd care about what you say?

It's not "not true at all". Many times there are multiple laternate lines of play *and* I specifically said that you usually need one card now and other cards will only be relevant on other turns. For example, which also addresses you point #2, in early turn you often want to draw a land to fix your mana. And that land, addressing your point #3, will often be a fetch that you will play immediately.

So, I addressed all your three points with a single, straight-forward argument that makes sense and happens often in games. And I didn't even need to call you a poor player.
I don't think I was being aggressive, but sorry if you thought I was. I don't agree that it's most commonly the case where you want a specific card immediately and other cards are less important. That certainly does happen, and Preordain tends to be better in those situations, but that's not the majority of times you're casting one of these cantrips. I believe you that there are times where Preordain is better, so you don't really need to provide examples. In fact, I would say that Preordain is better in more situations than SV is better in, which is why I have said it's the better card overall. What I'm disagreeing with is the notion that it's always better, because that's demonstrably untrue, and I disagree with the opinion that it's overall better than SV by a large margin. As I've said, Preordain is much closer to SV in power than it is to Ponder.
Modern
ubr Grixis Shadow ubr
uwg Bant Stoneblade uwg
gbr Jund gbr

Pioneer
urIzzet Phoenixur
rMono-Red Aggror
uwAzorius Controluw

Commander
bg Meren of Clan Nel Toth bg

User avatar
Arkmer
Opinionated and Wrong
Posts: 325
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Minnesota

Post by Arkmer » 2 years ago

So if the thoughts on SV vs Preordain are pretty clear, how blurry can we make them?

Is "Scry 1, draw 1, scry 1" too good? Literally the halfway between them both.

Zorakkiller
Posts: 57
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Zorakkiller » 2 years ago

I have a hard time seeing any upside for unbaning preordain. what's the incentive? it won't enable more decks, and makes already good or problematic decks more consistent. it just doesn't make any sense to unban preordain before cards that can actually create a more diverse meta such as gsz.

User avatar
Wraithpk
Posts: 181
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Connecticut, USA

Post by Wraithpk » 2 years ago

gkourou wrote:
2 years ago
Seeing a random card usually sucks, especially late game. Being able to mitigate that is huge. I think preordain would end up being problematic and wotc knows this.
Generally speaking, one of the most silly things one could do is unban a card with cmc <=1. This includes cards like preordain, looting, but also probe and bridge from below.

As a blue mage, i want preordain to be forever banned and realistically speaking it should not happen and it won't.

There are minimal to zero cards that would be fine if unbanned now from the banlist. Having your opinion is fine, but i trust wizards to doing whats best. ;)
Both cards potentially draw you a random card. If you double bottom with Preordain, you draw the third card down, which will be a random card you haven't seen. If you want one of the top two then it doesn't, but that also means it only sees 2 cards, versus SV always seeing 3.

I agree with your conclusion, though. This is all just some theory discussion on the difference between the two cards, but I also don't think they ever unban it because they're moving towards removing good 1 mana cantrips, not adding them to the format. So it's kind of a moot point, it's most likely never getting unbanned even if it was a safe card.
Modern
ubr Grixis Shadow ubr
uwg Bant Stoneblade uwg
gbr Jund gbr

Pioneer
urIzzet Phoenixur
rMono-Red Aggror
uwAzorius Controluw

Commander
bg Meren of Clan Nel Toth bg

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1177
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 2 years ago

As safe as Preordain is (and let's be honest, it's incredibly safe), there's no real driving reason in WOTC's eyes to unban it. I would much rather see some sort of new 1cmc blue cantrip that deals with Surveil instead.

But even then, I've said it plenty of times before, a mediocre cantrip just doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things, and unbanning it would have virtually no meaningful impact on Modern. It's just another silly thing sitting on a list that it doesn't deserve to remain on, but WOTC has no drive or desire to do anything about.

User avatar
Wraithpk
Posts: 181
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Connecticut, USA

Post by Wraithpk » 2 years ago

Arkmer wrote:
2 years ago
So if the thoughts on SV vs Preordain are pretty clear, how blurry can we make them?

Is "Scry 1, draw 1, scry 1" too good? Literally the halfway between them both.
If it's sorcery speed, probably not. I mean, I really don't think even Preordain would be too good, I just don't think they're going to unban it.

I think a more interesting question would be how do you construct a fixed Brainstorm? We know that 1 mana instant draw 3 top 2 is too powerful. On the other end of the spectrum, we have a 4 mana sorcery draw 3 top 2 and get a 2/2 body in the form of Riverwise Auger, and that sees no play. A 2/2 body in Modern is worth about 1 mana, so that tells me that 3 mana sorcery draw 3 top 2 wouldn't be good enough either. At 3 mana and instant speed we have draw 2s with upside in Esper Charm and Archmage's Charm, so I don't think a 3 mana instant Brainstorm would be good enough either.

So then we come to 2 mana sorcery Brainstorm. Is that too good for Modern? Is it not good enough? What about 2 mana instant draw 2 top 1? Interested in what you all think.
Modern
ubr Grixis Shadow ubr
uwg Bant Stoneblade uwg
gbr Jund gbr

Pioneer
urIzzet Phoenixur
rMono-Red Aggror
uwAzorius Controluw

Commander
bg Meren of Clan Nel Toth bg

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Modern”