I think their reasoning for not making a change is fine. They are wanting the competitive scene to have a chance to play with the new set before they make changes. Like it or not, this is why we endured Hogaak summer and Eldrazi winter. It may not be fun, but it's consistent.
When I was playing modern, I felt that Grief was the more problematic card as compared to Fury. Grief should have absolutely been banned when Fury did.
Both were a problem. Fury was stopping every Aggro deck other than burn to be dead(humans goblins etc) so it was bad for format diversity. Grief is a problem for format balance cuz it’s too strong
I kinda wish they held off on this till after the Pro Tour next weekend, just to see what the Pro Tour looked like, but it's also kinda expected they wouldn't act on Modern just yet. Pioneer, I think they could have acted on the Amalia combo and maybe Rakdos Vampires, but I also get this their reasoning to hold off till August. Standard is currently in a good spot currently in my opinion, but I dislike their once a year banning cycle for Standard. They highlighted a couple of possibly problematic cards but also talked about why they aren't currently banning them. Now if these cards become problematic then we have to wait a full year for them to rotate out, or something else becomes problematic and we have to wait hypothetically a full year before they can act. Also, I don't know about the rest of you, but Friday night/Standard Showdown haven't really recovered in my area. So I get annoyed when Wotc keeps on declaring Mission Accomplished on Standard.
@@Portrial and the inevitable outcome of a 3 year standard and tons of sets in rotation, only the best or most synergistic cards get played. I miss the smaller standard environments where things where ore things from each individual set was playable and not spread through 3 whole years of sets.
honestly the metagame is really fresh, some new decks taking center stage, some old decks that got better like merfolk and mono black. hope it stays this way
legacy is a different ballgame man, if something is broken in legacy that doesn’t mean it’s broken in modern. Good cards will stay good but the mana acceleration is a thousand times better there
Given that Wizards wants Modern to feel like Legacy-lite, Grief is an important part of the ecosystem, in that it acts as a backstop to linear combo decks. Grief also folds pretty hard to Nadu, as well as decks like Zoo and Burn where every card is similarly powerful (and Grief can't surgically cripple their opponent's game plan). Given how much support aggro decks were given in MH3, Grief isn't nearly as toxic or busted as it once was.
The community sentiment on bannings- "why dont they ban cards I dont like!?" Bans should be scarce, more bans usually means less fun beyond the short term.
Im glad we get to see bird dominate for minute, legit fun to see non determinant combos in modern for me even if it is way too strong tbh. CEdh however.... all i gotta say is rip Sheldon I miss u so much rn.
The argument of "why is this card legal in modern when it is banned in legacy" doesnt hit for me. The legacy card pool is filled with a bunch of stuff not in modern that makes modern legal cards abusable in ways they are not in modern itself. I'm blanking on examples but it's like how a lot of landfall stuff is way less broken in pioneer without fetches. Do I think Ragavan and Grief should be legal in modern? Probably not, but comparing their bans in legacy isn't the argument to make imo.
I feel ya on the play patterns not making sense on sentiments. Get rid of Grief already. Card should have been banned with Fury a while ago. Leads to so many feels bads and just frustrating matchups.
Grief and Bowmasters are going to go. The play patterns are not enjoyable. Grief strips your hand, and Bowmasters ensures you can never recover. The only reason Bowmasters is seeing less play recently is because it's not good in the Scaminator mirror. Inbred metagame. Change is needed.
Who would have thought that a card which skirts around one of the two main balancing aspects of the game (ie mana) would be problematic. I feel like I've seen this before...
Players who are frustrated at the way Legacy is right now just refuse to play a deck with 4 maindeck Leyline of the Void. Legacy is fine, grief/scam is good for the format.
I think your math on scam is off... because you're treating it as a 3 for 2. Which it isn't really. Because after you spend you're 3, you are keeping a creature in play. So you're spending 3, getting 1 back and taking 2. So it's 2 for 2 with upside of you get a body in play.
To me, most legacy bans should be carried over to modern. I get the higher power argument against certain cards, but the best counterspell in modern is the third best in legacy. That counterspell can't hit creatures to deny a line like Grief, take FoN, Not Dead After All, take combo piece. Where legacy can pitch a blue card to FoW to counter the creature.
@@iankane3732 That's a bit of a nitpick. In legacy, you have better options to interact with both halves of Grief Reanimator than you get in modern, especially on turn 1. There aren't many, if any, options to hit Grief on the play and they're even worse on the draw. Plus, it's a 4/3 Menace in modern after the most common two reanimation spells in the format. That's before we get into them being solid to good even if the Grief catches removal by reanimating the Grief again.
@@blueredlover1060 grief is running rampant in legacy. It's not nearly as prevalent right now in modern. Scam is a good deck but not the best deck, rescaminator is dominating winrate and playrate in legacy.
@@blueredlover1060 they are completely different formats. It isn't binary like that, those cards are far more broken in legacy because of the broken support cards in legacy.
Not to mention rescam's current non mirror winrate is 56% and its 24% of the meta. Oko was called "the most broken card in 20 years" and its decks only had a 55% winrate. Not saying broko is fair, or even that grief is stronger, just that grief clearly needs to go. There are only 2 choices for bans and one is a pillar of the format (grief and reanimate).
I dont think its really fair to look at how cards like ragavan are broken in legacy and use that as justification to ban it in modern. Legacy being a format with very strong cards means certain cards are better in it (like ragavan or dreadhorde arcanist, which are able to give you access to stronger cards than in modern), which does not necessarily mean that those same cards are worth banning in modern.
6:40 to be fair you need to contextualise it. I've no doubt that in modern Ragavan and Grief are both incredibly toxic cards. However, in the Legacy section it mentions Grief with direct relation to Reanimator and how that has made a huge surge in pr recently. In modern it's a lot harder to do the Grief x Reanimate combo because the modern version is not "reanimate", it's a "if this creature would die return it to play" meaning that you necessarily have to have it on the turn you play it. However in Legacy it's expressly an upgrade from the old Unmask (3B thoughtseize, you can exile a plack card rather than pay its cost) As for Ragavan, I'm not *totally* sure why it's out of Legacy as I was out of the loop for a long while, but I imagine it has something to do with UR Delver having had been the blatant forerunner in the metagame for a long while (same goes for Expressive Iteration ban). Wrenn and Six was banned, I know, because of Wasteland being a thing, meaning that either you play mono basics or you play knowing that the opponent just manufactures a free sinkhole each turn for the rest of the game. This isn't me defending these cards being legal in the Modern format, this is me explaining the stimulus behind the bans. Ragavan is obviously a major FeelsBad card no matter the format, but in Legacy it was banned for another's sins. Same for why they're talking about maybe pulling the cord of Grief in Legacy right now.
@@matteosannino903yeah counter their spells for free with daze and fow, waste their land and still generate more mana via treasure and card advantage with the monkey. He was far too powerful with the interaction that delver decks have access to.
why wotc even bothers to talk about timeless when they basicly have 0 support for the format? we got ranked in arena, but they dont even offer these tournement style tournement runs what they do for every other format....
No amalia ban is absurd, saying they like the play patern is wild. Pioneer should not be a turn 3 format. And its not even like amalia is an all in combo deck, its a comfy abzan midrange shell, tha tcan combo kill you on tunr 3. Its the most aggregious deck in the format. Also Arclight phoenix is so incredibly fucked up.
@@Portrial also acceptable- the deck doesn’t have to be ban out of existence (maybe) but something needs to get hit- hitting cruise keeps the deck alive but not nearly as good which is probably fine. Or they can also just gut the whole thing and hit Phoenix which I’m also fine with
@@yoyoguy1st sad thing is it doesnt have a clear way to weaken the deck by banning a card. Any worthwhile bans will either completely gut the deck by banning a combo piece, or will only slightly weaken the deck by banning a support piece like 1 mana lifegainers. Posible angle is to ban collexted company for the t4 xonsistency but thats a bad angle a s it also gut the rest of tribal creativity like elves, angels, or merfolks, and to a small degree, spirits
@@Aaron-l3l6g commander does have an official ban list. You can just rule zero. But if you were playing in a wizards event at say a commandfest, there is an official banlist
Toxic play pattern. It punishes players for trying to get back into a game from behind. It's the best answer to itself. It's easily splashable. It didn't stop blue decks whatsoever, it just pushed out creature decks.
No changes? Didn't realize WOTC was doing stand-up comedy these days
I think their reasoning for not making a change is fine. They are wanting the competitive scene to have a chance to play with the new set before they make changes. Like it or not, this is why we endured Hogaak summer and Eldrazi winter. It may not be fun, but it's consistent.
When I was playing modern, I felt that Grief was the more problematic card as compared to Fury. Grief should have absolutely been banned when Fury did.
Both were a problem. Fury was stopping every Aggro deck other than burn to be dead(humans goblins etc) so it was bad for format diversity. Grief is a problem for format balance cuz it’s too strong
I kinda wish they held off on this till after the Pro Tour next weekend, just to see what the Pro Tour looked like, but it's also kinda expected they wouldn't act on Modern just yet.
Pioneer, I think they could have acted on the Amalia combo and maybe Rakdos Vampires, but I also get this their reasoning to hold off till August.
Standard is currently in a good spot currently in my opinion, but I dislike their once a year banning cycle for Standard. They highlighted a couple of possibly problematic cards but also talked about why they aren't currently banning them. Now if these cards become problematic then we have to wait a full year for them to rotate out, or something else becomes problematic and we have to wait hypothetically a full year before they can act.
Also, I don't know about the rest of you, but Friday night/Standard Showdown haven't really recovered in my area. So I get annoyed when Wotc keeps on declaring Mission Accomplished on Standard.
Standard being too stale and the same few cards keeps on getting played despite the 3 year cycle is annoyingly depresing.
@@Portrial and the inevitable outcome of a 3 year standard and tons of sets in rotation, only the best or most synergistic cards get played. I miss the smaller standard environments where things where ore things from each individual set was playable and not spread through 3 whole years of sets.
honestly the metagame is really fresh, some new decks taking center stage, some old decks that got better like merfolk and mono black. hope it stays this way
Kek, ban bowmasters first, so that every x/1 that isn't ragavan can see play again.
Absolutely agree
Bowmasters is fair
legacy is a different ballgame man, if something is broken in legacy that doesn’t mean it’s broken in modern. Good cards will stay good but the mana acceleration is a thousand times better there
We need slivers and other tribes up there too. Only merfolk? Really? 😒
Given that Wizards wants Modern to feel like Legacy-lite, Grief is an important part of the ecosystem, in that it acts as a backstop to linear combo decks. Grief also folds pretty hard to Nadu, as well as decks like Zoo and Burn where every card is similarly powerful (and Grief can't surgically cripple their opponent's game plan). Given how much support aggro decks were given in MH3, Grief isn't nearly as toxic or busted as it once was.
Atleast no play boosters being added
thats my kind of humor XD
The community sentiment on bannings- "why dont they ban cards I dont like!?"
Bans should be scarce, more bans usually means less fun beyond the short term.
Im glad we get to see bird dominate for minute, legit fun to see non determinant combos in modern for me even if it is way too strong tbh. CEdh however.... all i gotta say is rip Sheldon I miss u so much rn.
The argument of "why is this card legal in modern when it is banned in legacy" doesnt hit for me. The legacy card pool is filled with a bunch of stuff not in modern that makes modern legal cards abusable in ways they are not in modern itself. I'm blanking on examples but it's like how a lot of landfall stuff is way less broken in pioneer without fetches.
Do I think Ragavan and Grief should be legal in modern? Probably not, but comparing their bans in legacy isn't the argument to make imo.
I feel ya on the play patterns not making sense on sentiments. Get rid of Grief already. Card should have been banned with Fury a while ago. Leads to so many feels bads and just frustrating matchups.
Grief and Bowmasters are going to go. The play patterns are not enjoyable. Grief strips your hand, and Bowmasters ensures you can never recover. The only reason Bowmasters is seeing less play recently is because it's not good in the Scaminator mirror. Inbred metagame. Change is needed.
I’m tired of hearing people whine about grief when it’s the only thing holding the format in check (this is in the context of modern)
Don’t you mean force of will?
Grief doesn't hold anything in check. Force of Will and Wasteland do.
@@JohnFromAccounting both of which aren’t in the modern format my guy
@@yoyoguy1st I’m talking about modern homies
@@jstrozza9411 i think we’ve seen from the pro tour that grief is doing jack all for keeping the format in check.
Who would have thought that a card which skirts around one of the two main balancing aspects of the game (ie mana) would be problematic.
I feel like I've seen this before...
Players who are frustrated at the way Legacy is right now just refuse to play a deck with 4 maindeck Leyline of the Void. Legacy is fine, grief/scam is good for the format.
PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD WIZARDS BAN GRIEF IN MODERN AND LEGACY. THANK YOU!
I think your math on scam is off... because you're treating it as a 3 for 2. Which it isn't really. Because after you spend you're 3, you are keeping a creature in play. So you're spending 3, getting 1 back and taking 2. So it's 2 for 2 with upside of you get a body in play.
No restrictions on The One Ring is what I cannot wrap my head around.
To me, most legacy bans should be carried over to modern. I get the higher power argument against certain cards, but the best counterspell in modern is the third best in legacy. That counterspell can't hit creatures to deny a line like Grief, take FoN, Not Dead After All, take combo piece. Where legacy can pitch a blue card to FoW to counter the creature.
Lol in legacy you fow the grief, they just reanimate it. They still took 3 cards from your hand and have a 3/2 menace.
@@iankane3732 That's a bit of a nitpick. In legacy, you have better options to interact with both halves of Grief Reanimator than you get in modern, especially on turn 1. There aren't many, if any, options to hit Grief on the play and they're even worse on the draw. Plus, it's a 4/3 Menace in modern after the most common two reanimation spells in the format. That's before we get into them being solid to good even if the Grief catches removal by reanimating the Grief again.
@@blueredlover1060 grief is running rampant in legacy. It's not nearly as prevalent right now in modern. Scam is a good deck but not the best deck, rescaminator is dominating winrate and playrate in legacy.
@@iankane3732 I'm sure it is. However, cards that are powerful enough to warp legacy shouldn't be in modern.
@@blueredlover1060 they are completely different formats. It isn't binary like that, those cards are far more broken in legacy because of the broken support cards in legacy.
Not to mention rescam's current non mirror winrate is 56% and its 24% of the meta. Oko was called "the most broken card in 20 years" and its decks only had a 55% winrate. Not saying broko is fair, or even that grief is stronger, just that grief clearly needs to go. There are only 2 choices for bans and one is a pillar of the format (grief and reanimate).
I dont think its really fair to look at how cards like ragavan are broken in legacy and use that as justification to ban it in modern. Legacy being a format with very strong cards means certain cards are better in it (like ragavan or dreadhorde arcanist, which are able to give you access to stronger cards than in modern), which does not necessarily mean that those same cards are worth banning in modern.
Would be funny to see greif getting banned in legacy but still be a menace in Modern Kappa
I mean, there are several cards that are banned in legacy but legal in modern. Ragavan, wrenn and six, dreadhorde arcanist, underworld breach.
Shuko 12.68 tix loool
6:40 to be fair you need to contextualise it. I've no doubt that in modern Ragavan and Grief are both incredibly toxic cards.
However, in the Legacy section it mentions Grief with direct relation to Reanimator and how that has made a huge surge in pr recently. In modern it's a lot harder to do the Grief x Reanimate combo because the modern version is not "reanimate", it's a "if this creature would die return it to play" meaning that you necessarily have to have it on the turn you play it. However in Legacy it's expressly an upgrade from the old Unmask (3B thoughtseize, you can exile a plack card rather than pay its cost)
As for Ragavan, I'm not *totally* sure why it's out of Legacy as I was out of the loop for a long while, but I imagine it has something to do with UR Delver having had been the blatant forerunner in the metagame for a long while (same goes for Expressive Iteration ban).
Wrenn and Six was banned, I know, because of Wasteland being a thing, meaning that either you play mono basics or you play knowing that the opponent just manufactures a free sinkhole each turn for the rest of the game.
This isn't me defending these cards being legal in the Modern format, this is me explaining the stimulus behind the bans. Ragavan is obviously a major FeelsBad card no matter the format, but in Legacy it was banned for another's sins. Same for why they're talking about maybe pulling the cord of Grief in Legacy right now.
I think the issue with Ragavan in Legacy is the lower mana curve of most decks which means you're essentially never going to whiff
@@williamdrum9899the issue was the combination with Daze and Wasteland
@@matteosannino903yeah counter their spells for free with daze and fow, waste their land and still generate more mana via treasure and card advantage with the monkey. He was far too powerful with the interaction that delver decks have access to.
Unmask is a fair card that nobody has even complained about. You 2-for-1 yourself to strip a card. Grief + Reanimate + black card is a 3-for-3.
@@JohnFromAccounting 3 for 2*
Commenting only like 1 minute in BUT I hope they refrain from banning anything MH3 until we see a bit of tournament play
why wotc even bothers to talk about timeless when they basicly have 0 support for the format? we got ranked in arena, but they dont even offer these tournement style tournement runs what they do for every other format....
Timeless is still too new, give it a couple more sets so theres more than like four viable decks.
No amalia ban is absurd, saying they like the play patern is wild. Pioneer should not be a turn 3 format. And its not even like amalia is an all in combo deck, its a comfy abzan midrange shell, tha tcan combo kill you on tunr 3. Its the most aggregious deck in the format. Also Arclight phoenix is so incredibly fucked up.
Phoenix deck power will get slower if they dont have access to delve.
@@Portrial also acceptable- the deck doesn’t have to be ban out of existence (maybe) but something needs to get hit- hitting cruise keeps the deck alive but not nearly as good which is probably fine. Or they can also just gut the whole thing and hit Phoenix which I’m also fine with
I despise amalia combo. I hate how it can win turn 3 and I hate how resilient it is and how it has killed so many decks in the format.
@@yoyoguy1st sad thing is it doesnt have a clear way to weaken the deck by banning a card. Any worthwhile bans will either completely gut the deck by banning a combo piece, or will only slightly weaken the deck by banning a support piece like 1 mana lifegainers.
Posible angle is to ban collexted company for the t4 xonsistency but thats a bad angle a s it also gut the rest of tribal creativity like elves, angels, or merfolks, and to a small degree, spirits
@@Portrial just ban Amalia- easy. Wild growth walker is a cool card, Amalia is either useless or broken
Nadu no ban in commander??? OMG guys
It Will not be banner in commander the comitee Will just Say that players Will police it themselves and stuff.
@@lorpuz4664and that’s how it should be with nadu.
@@nicholasjohnston7350 i know but still a commander ban is very rare and nadu is not the top of the list for that
Commander doesn't have a ban list. It's more a list of suggestions then anything.
@@Aaron-l3l6g commander does have an official ban list. You can just rule zero. But if you were playing in a wizards event at say a commandfest, there is an official banlist
Bow master is not that bad
🤣🤣🤣
Toxic play pattern. It punishes players for trying to get back into a game from behind. It's the best answer to itself. It's easily splashable. It didn't stop blue decks whatsoever, it just pushed out creature decks.