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

iTaLenTZ
Posts: 216
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by iTaLenTZ » 1 year ago

gkourou wrote:
1 year ago
In comparison, is Neobrand fun to play against? Lost before I even get to play a land yesterday (I am on Amulet Bloom) and after having played one land and ancient stirrings the other time. Yeah, great fun, thanks Wizards, keep Twin, GSZ or Pod banned.
Same happened to me some months ago, one of the last times I played Modern. I have said many times Allosaurus Rider should be banned. Not because the deck is too good or too consistent but because it will never be a healthy addition to the meta and whenever its critical mess does gets pushed the deck instantly becomes a problem that will be needed to address. Therefore the opportunity cost of banning it now is very low because all it does now is ruining someone's tourney and next match it folds to itself.

Aazadan
Posts: 516
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Aazadan » 1 year ago

I would put Rider in the same category as a card like Simian Spirit Guide. They're not always going to make a deck too good, but there's no decks they can go in that aren't degenerate. Rider is overcost for what it does, the only thing it can ever do is alternate cast to put a free high CMC creature into play. Just as SSG is 99% of the time, an uncounterable Lotus Petal.

SSG is more defensible I feel since it's a small amount of 1 shot mana. Rider is never going to be present in a healthy meta. I could agree that both should be banned, but I can also agree that banning them right now violates the ban philosophy used in all formats.

User avatar
LeoTzu
Posts: 30
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by LeoTzu » 1 year ago

pizzap wrote:
1 year ago
LeoTzu wrote:
1 year ago
The Fluff wrote:
1 year ago
the difference between Jace and Twin is.. Jace TMS was banned from the beginning, and then unbanned. Twin was legal for a long time and then banned. So far, I don't know of any modern card that was legal for a long time.. banned.. and then unbanned.
Depends on what you qualify as a "long time."

Wild Nacatl was legal, then banned, then unbanned. It only existed in the ban for a few months before the ban.

BBE was legal for like a year and a half before being banned, then unbanned at the same time as Jace.

It's not unprecedented for a card to make it back from the banlist.
Wild Nacatl was unbanned after the enabler GSZ was banned.
BBE was unbanned after the enabler DRS was banned.
Twin IS the enabler, so it is a totally different case. There are no examples yet that an enabler that was banned after the initial ban list has been unbanned. In other words, don't count on an unban of Twin based on BBE and Nacatl.
Fair enough. I was just making a point that there are cards that have been banned and then unbanned. It wasn't necessarily an argument for or against Twin, just more of a comment that it wouldn't be completely unprecedented for it to come off after being banned for a while.

I'm pretty neutral on Twin.

KarnDaddy
Posts: 12
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by KarnDaddy » 1 year ago

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
I guess I just don't understand people's definition of "fun" if they think Twin is totally unacceptable, but Tron, Dredge, Titan, Storm, Urza, and even stuff like Neobrand are somehow better and more fun against?

I'm just having a hard time rationalizing what it is people mean by fun, if interactive games of magic with bluffing and representation, rather than two sides vomiting their hands as fast as possible, is apparently not fun.
Fun for most of the current Modern player base, is based on on the board. Its not about hidden information, its not about bluffs, and its not about old principles like card advantage or tempo.

Its about turning Magic from a card game, into a board game, where your cards are actually just play pieces on the table.

Its been a slow decline for years and years, but thats it.

Twin has no board that matters...until it really really matters. So people hate it.

I disagree with this assessment. look at Legacy, people don't 'hate' that kind of interaction and gameplay. It's popular when it is viable in Standard, and people often enjoy Control or Midrange in any format. Intense, skill testing game where your play does take into account what the other person may be holding. The problem is that we don't have the tools. Look at Modern, look at Standard since what, RTR? the threats completely outclass the answers. if we had a free counterspell that came with the kind of drawback that made it 'for emergencies only', or Counterspell, or whatever, Twin would be fine, there would be ways to interact with it. right now in Modern, you have to be playing black to kill it at the instant speed the deck was played at, or have more mana than our games usually get to. it's a very interesting wincon and deck, but the interaction we have isn't good at interacting with it.

and ALL of that aside, Twin was not banned because it was not fun, tons of people loved it, Twin and Pod, the two decks that the most people probably want back. It was not banned for being too good, it was not unbanned for being unfun. it might have new toys now and be better, but it was barely the best deck, and it was banned almost exclusively to shake up the PT. talk about it in the power level discussion if you like, but Twin is not partof any proper 'banned for play experience' conversation.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Counter Point: Legacy, and its players, are not even remotely close to reflecting the majority of Magic design, development, or players.
UR Control UR

Yawgmoth
Posts: 170
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Yawgmoth » 1 year ago

DarthDrac wrote:
1 year ago
I'm still having fun in Modern, but I'm also having fun in Pioneer. In both formats at present I'm playing decks with Ilharg, the Raze-Boar and Generator Servant...
This is exactly what my point was about the need for clear format identity in addition to fun and balance.

I don't think that Modern is completely unfun but on the current trajectory I think that it will be almost indistinguishable from Pioneer before long. Because they are using the same metrics for fun and balance and an increasingly similar card pool this homogenization is inevitable.

Legacy differs from Modern substantially. I believe that Legacy players also differ from Modern players in terms of what type of gameplay they find enjoyable.
idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
Counter Point: Legacy, and its players, are not even remotely close to reflecting the majority of Magic design, development, or players.
[mention]idSurge[/mention] I think you are spot on here. I would add to that though by saying that this is what gives Legacy its identity and unique gameplay experience. On the other hand, Modern and Pioneer are very similar along the dimensions you described. This creates a problem if Modern is going to continue to exist alongside Pioneer.

Legacy offers something unique so it has a subset of players because they like that uniqueness. WotC can either merge Modern and Pioneer or they can make some design decisions that distinguish them and create another unique subtype of MtG for players to choose from.

Tomatotime
Posts: 197
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Tomatotime » 1 year ago

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
Fun for most of the current Modern player base, is based on on the board. Its not about hidden information, its not about bluffs, and its not about old principles like card advantage or tempo.

Its about turning Magic from a card game, into a board game, where your cards are actually just play pieces on the table.

Its been a slow decline for years and years, but thats it.

Twin has no board that matters...until it really really matters. So people hate it.
This seems like a bad take, as it simply does not take into account people's opinion of the entirety of the Control archetype in Modern, which does not have the disdain that Twin had. Control decks also don't typically have a lot of on board pieces until maybe the super late game when they need a threat to close things out after they stabilize. Also lets be honest here, the apex in stack interaction has already been printed, what exactly can Wotc print after FoW, Daze, or Stifle, these cards cover basically anything that can even conceivably happen regarding the stack, and they have printed a couple of cards with similar aspects to them in recent history, but short of literally reprinting these exact cards, their new versions are just not good enough. Compare Trickbind vs Stifle, compare Nimble Obstructionist vs Stifle, compare FoN vs FoW. It just so happens that Wotc printed literally the strongest possible stack interaction cards early into the games life span, do you actually think they should try to top them at this point? Or can we simply accept that those cards exist, going forward they may print new cards which inch ever closer to them, but at this point, there is simply other design space for the game to utilize that was not used 15 years ago.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Yawgmoth wrote:
1 year ago
I think you are spot on here. I would add to that though by saying that this is what gives Legacy its identity and unique gameplay experience. On the other hand, Modern and Pioneer are very similar along the dimensions you described. This creates a problem if Modern is going to continue to exist alongside Pioneer.

Legacy offers something unique so it has a subset of players because they like that uniqueness. WotC can either merge Modern and Pioneer or they can make some design decisions that distinguish them and create another unique subtype of MtG for players to choose from.
Yes, and make no mistake I dont begrudge Legacy. It is what it is though because (of several reasons) its 'type' of Magic is no longer created.

You dont get anything like Counterspell. You simply dont. You dont get Bolt. You dont get Hymn. You dont get Wasteland or anything near as good, and so on, and so on, and so on.

This is why Twin still has its die hard supporters. Within Modern literally absolutely NOTHING has played like it, on a remotely competitive level. NOTHING.

The reason however that it will not be unbanned, and Copy Cat was banned as well, is that todays players, modern Magic players, are used to a completely different paradigm, that revolves around the board state. You are not playing a game of cards, like Poker is a game of cards, anymore. You just are not. We are playing something closer to a board game, that unfolds based on your deck but is largely based around the gamestate as presented on the table.

The hand, hidden information, tempo, and the stack have all be devalued over time and its why many of us who are dissatisfied, have remained as such.

Its only very small windows that have allowed for deck styles, play styles, and meta games that WE enjoy, to flourish.

T3feri, is not a Control card. It has nothing of the style that many of us look for, and this is all by intent. Play to the board.
Tomatotime wrote:
1 year ago
This seems like a bad take, as it simply does not take into account people's opinion of the entirety of the Control archetype in Modern, which does not have the disdain that Twin had. Control decks also don't typically have a lot of on board pieces until maybe the super late game when they need a threat to close things out after they stabilize. Also lets be honest here, the apex in stack interaction has already been printed, what exactly can Wotc print after FoW, Daze, or Stifle, these cards cover basically anything that can even conceivably happen regarding the stack, and they have printed a couple of cards with similar aspects to them in recent history, but short of literally reprinting these exact cards, their new versions are just not good enough. Compare Trickbind vs Stifle, compare Nimble Obstructionist vs Stifle, compare FoN vs FoW. It just so happens that Wotc printed literally the strongest possible stack interaction cards early into the games life span, do you actually think they should try to top them at this point? Or can we simply accept that those cards exist, going forward they may print new cards which inch ever closer to them, but at this point, there is simply other design space for the game to utilize that was not used 15 years ago.
You could print cards like those, or close to them, into modern non-rotational formats which are not locked behind a Reserved List pay wall, so that other play styles of Magic that do not play to the board first, second, and last, could be experienced in a competitive fashion?

If the other cards are not good enough (FoN vs FoW) then...reprint the good ones. I dont care if Timmy doesnt get to have his way for a Standard rotation, frankly at all.
UR Control UR

Tomatotime
Posts: 197
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Tomatotime » 1 year ago

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
The reason however that it will not be unbanned, and Copy Cat was banned as well, is that todays players, modern Magic players, are used to a completely different paradigm, that revolves around the board state. You are not playing a game of cards, like Poker is a game of cards, anymore. You just are not. We are playing something closer to a board game, that unfolds based on your deck but is largely based around the gamestate as presented on the table.
This is simply not true, Copy Cat was banned in standard because ubiquitous answers to it did not exist within that standard environment, it is not because people didn't like the notion of a Twin combo in standard. This logic carries forward with Oko, a card that was banned because Wotc again, refused to print ubiquitous answers to a problem they created, and no one would honestly make the argument that standard players are simply "used to a completely different paradigm" that doesn't include planeswalker cards, they have been the staple standard threats for years on end.
idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
You could print cards like those, or close to them, into modern non-rotational formats which are not locked behind a Reserved List pay wall, so that other play styles of Magic that do not play to the board first, second, and last, could be experienced in a competitive fashion?
I don't think the lower powered replacements they give you will even be enough for you simply on the basis that they are not the original article which represent a select group of the strongest magic cards ever printed in the history of the game.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Tomatotime wrote:
1 year ago
This is simply not true, Copy Cat was banned in standard because ubiquitous answers to it did not exist within that standard environment, it is not because people didn't like the notion of a Twin combo in standard. This logic carries forward with Oko, a card that was banned because Wotc again, refused to print ubiquitous answers to a problem they created, and no one would honestly make the argument that standard players are simply "used to a completely different paradigm" that doesn't include planeswalker cards, they have been the staple standard threats for years on end.
It was banned out of Pioneer way too fast to be a coincidence. They dont want A + B 'instant' win combos.

Granted, when it was banned in standard it was just the best thing to be doing, but just as I have no reason to trust them on Twin, I wont trust them on Copy Cat in Pioneer.
Tomatotime wrote:
1 year ago
I don't think the lower powered replacements they give you will even be enough for you simply on the basis that they are not the original article which represent a select group of the strongest magic cards ever printed in the history of the game.
Perhaps not, but my issue is not really with those cards not being present. If they put Deprive into Pioneer for example? That would be something.

The point however remains that they play style is not supported, outside of some of the best meta periods (Dom/Guilds) in the last what, 5, 6 years?

I mean are you honestly going to tell me they dont favour the board?

Creatures, Walkers, Enchantments?
UR Control UR

Tomatotime
Posts: 197
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Tomatotime » 1 year ago

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
It was banned out of Pioneer way too fast to be a coincidence. They dont want A + B 'instant' win combos.

Granted, when it was banned in standard it was just the best thing to be doing, but just as I have no reason to trust them on Twin, I wont trust them on Copy Cat in Pioneer.
Oh my bad, I thought this whole point for copy cat was in regards to it's standard tenure, I didn't even know it was banned in pioneer since I simply don't keep up with it.

I don't know if the pioneer reasoning is all that different from standard though at it's core, I think the issue is still fundamentally that the answers aren't there, I mean lets look at when copy cat was in standard or in the general era, the answers from that point compared to all of pioneer now in terms of interacting with a combo like that aren't really all that different despite there being so many sets added, I mean in the post RTR world they simply did not print a lot of good answers, nor do they today. I think that is the more relevant issue compared to the fun aspect, though again, I am not keeping up with pioneer at all so I fully admit I could be completely wrong.
idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
Perhaps not, but my issue is not really with those cards not being present. If they put Deprive into Pioneer for example? That would be something.

The point however remains that they play style is not supported, outside of some of the best meta periods (Dom/Guilds) in the last what, 5, 6 years?

I mean are you honestly going to tell me they dont favour the board?

Creatures, Walkers, Enchantments?
I agree that as a general practice for Wotc in recent years, there is nothing they do that doesn't, on some level, favour creatures, walkers, enchantments, etc. I would simply say that magic is literally over 25 years old at this point, I get that if magic is a certain way for 6 years, that is objective a long time, but put into the greater context, this overall shift in design choice isn't THAT big of a deal to me at least, and honestly, the design shift was inevitable, again, they cannot realistically top FoW, Daze, or Stifle, they are the utter apex of stack interaction.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Right, thats the peak/apex, and I get that. It goes back to my other point when discussing answers, there is a point in which the game implodes to power creep.

However, even within the context of the last 6 years, that shift, has been documented, intentional, and unwavering. Only the brilliance of Dominaria has really allowed for shifts to other styles of play, and even then, only for a period.
UR Control UR

Tomatotime
Posts: 197
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Tomatotime » 1 year ago

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
Right, thats the peak/apex, and I get that. It goes back to my other point when discussing answers, there is a point in which the game implodes to power creep.

However, even within the context of the last 6 years, that shift, has been documented, intentional, and unwavering. Only the brilliance of Dominaria has really allowed for shifts to other styles of play, and even then, only for a period.
Well lets not completely exaggerate the scope of the issue, there have been plenty of instances of metagames within the 6 years where control has been powerful, regardless of what format your talking about, and control, even in today's watered down terms, uses the stack as an important tool. Admittedly it looks bad right now since theres not much of a point to play Control in Modern if you simply get mauled by Tron in a McDonalds alleyway, and I don't know if that is actually going to change anytime soon.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Yeah I know. You had some of Khans (a high point of Standard) and some of Dom/Guilds, which had great variety and decks.

My issue is that those are mostly accidental I feel. The drive of the game is not in a direction I desire, if that makes sense, and again I get it. Legacy is what I desire, but I'm not buying Duals. :p
UR Control UR

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Of course it is, it plays to the board, fun for everyone!
UR Control UR

User avatar
Ed06288
Posts: 160
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Ed06288 » 1 year ago

Is it possible to have a balance between committing to the board and only stack based interaction? Like a metagame where half the decks commit stuff to the board and the other half are like control? I'm guessing wizards doesn't want that

That guy in the ox of agonas video is super annoying

User avatar
robertleva
Posts: 484
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by robertleva » 1 year ago

dredge is back hooray! Im not playing modern right now, but I can promise you that a dredge meta will keep me away.
Robert Leva
Creator of Modern's 8Rack Deck
Image

User avatar
Ed06288
Posts: 160
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Ed06288 » 1 year ago

i remember reading arguments on "the source" about how brainstorm was bad but cards like dark confidant and sylvan library were good designs. i wonder if wizards is doing the right thing by moving away from stack interaction.

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

Ed06288 wrote:
1 year ago
That guy in the ox of agonas video is super annoying
I found the hillarious sarcasm a perfect example of why I hate the deck. The vibe I was getting is "This is stupid how good this is," and to that, I very much agree.

It is the posterchild of "I want to make non-games" in Modern. Either it overwhelmingly wins, or it gets shut out of existence, or it answers the hate, and then overwhelmingly wins anyway, unless multiple additional hate pieces come through.

I guess this is what people consider "fun"? At that point, why not just flip cards in a deck back and forth and see who reveals the largest number? AKA War. Because that's the kind of feeling this style of gameplay gives me. Same goes for Tron, same goes for Titan, same goes for Storm, same goes for....

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Ed06288 wrote:
1 year ago
Is it possible to have a balance between committing to the board and only stack based interaction? Like a metagame where half the decks commit stuff to the board and the other half are like control? I'm guessing wizards doesn't want that
Yes of course. And we had it.
Ed06288 wrote:
1 year ago
i remember reading arguments on "the source" about how brainstorm was bad but cards like dark confidant and sylvan library were good designs. i wonder if wizards is doing the right thing by moving away from stack interaction.
Sounds like some idiotic bias to me. The stack is what makes Magic.
UR Control UR

User avatar
Ed06288
Posts: 160
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Ed06288 » 1 year ago

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
Sounds like some idiotic bias to me. The stack is what makes Magic.
well it seemed like half the posters liked brainstorm and the other half hated it. and for many different reasons too. people like that sylvan library can at least be abrupt decay'ed whereas brainstorm demands another blue card like a spell pierce. i kinda agree that card engines should be easy to interact with. it was probably more a discussion on brainstorm than the stack so maybe im taking it out of context.

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

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
Ed06288 wrote:
1 year ago
i remember reading arguments on "the source" about how brainstorm was bad but cards like dark confidant and sylvan library were good designs. i wonder if wizards is doing the right thing by moving away from stack interaction.
Sounds like some idiotic bias to me. The stack is what makes Magic.
Being able to make conscious, meaningful game actions with opponent and their plays, on their turn, or in response to their actions is what makes Magic interesting. It's what sets it apart from regular board games and almost every other card game. It adds a real-time element to a turn-based structure, and vastly increases decision trees, and what makes me really love this game. Most of the "here's my stuff, deal with it" of Battlecruiser Magic is done a lot better by a number of board games, and frankly bores me in Magic.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Ed06288 wrote:
1 year ago
idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
Sounds like some idiotic bias to me. The stack is what makes Magic.
well it seemed like half the posters liked brainstorm and the other half hated it. and for many different reasons too. people like that sylvan library can at least be abrupt decay'ed whereas brainstorm demands another blue card like a spell pierce. i kinda agree that card engines should be easy to interact with. it was probably more a discussion on brainstorm than the stack so maybe im taking it out of context.
Brainstorm, is not an engine.
UR Control UR

User avatar
Ed06288
Posts: 160
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Ed06288 » 1 year ago

Well I play magic because I like playing with and against different strategies. Not everything has to be interactive or stack based. Although the pendulum may have shifted too far in one direction, I agree.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Nobody wants it to be all of one thing. There is an undeniable bias however to the board right now. Thats a flaw.
UR Control UR

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Modern”