The choice of a badger for this card is a total nod to Redwall. Badgers are rare but important to the stories, typically the strongest creatures on the side of the good guys. Worth noting that the Redwall series found success in the US roughly the same time that Magic did. They're contemporary pieces of popular culture. I cant have been the only kid using Revised basics as bookmarks for Redwall stories. This already feels so much like a crossover, it seems like it would be incomplete unless the estate of Brian Jaques signs on for a Redwall Secret Lair.
Yeah, and that doesn't include reprints either (like the fetchlands don't count as Modern Horizons cards since they existed in Modern before they were reprinted in MH2/MH3).
MH sets could never have existed. It wouldn't change the fact that Wizards printed powercrept cards regardless. People seem to forget that some of the most powerful cards of the early Modern format came from way beforeKhan's. They also seem to forget that Wizards had a habit of riding a roller coaster of Standard power going up and down over the years. It just so happened that Modern had the enemy Fetches and then got the allied Fetches from Khans. They forget that Eldrazi Winter happened. They forget that cards like Dryad got printed into Standard , and boosted Amulet Titan all on its own at the time. They forget recent adds to Modern like Leyline Binding and Guildpact and how they had an impact on the format. The reality is that Wizards could have just continued to be all over the place and have Modern constantly change. Or they can focus the majority of it into MH sets.
Very much disagree with Crim. A card being in too many decks because it's just a generally good card is the EXACT reason to ban a card. Magic is a game about deck building no matter what format you're playing. With The One Ring Modern is a 56 card format. The last Standard banning banned Fable and Bankbuster for the exact reason. When building your deck with those cards in the format, you had to think of a reason to NOT include the card rather than a reason why it should be included. The same is true for The One Ring. Unless you're playing Burn, there is no reason NOT to include The One Ring in your Modern deck.
Generally correct however there are some extremely powerful decks not using the ring. also nadu runs 2. Ruby storm has 0 because it’s actually just a waste of mana for a storm deck. Jund Saga runs 0. Merfolk runs 0. Energy runs 0. It doesn’t warrant a ban but you should be only allowed to run a single copy in your deck
There's two tracks an overplayed card can go down in eternal formats, either banning it or being okay with it being a pillar of that format like Brainstorm and Force of Will in Legacy
As a legacy player there is no playing around grief, you can't counter it as that's basically grief just taking your counter and they can reanimate it to get something else, and if you let it resolve, it just gets your counter + best card or 2 best cards.
Exactly, that's why I 100% know that they deliberately choose not to ban it because MH3 sells. They, in this case, being Hasbro. Money money money, baby.
Nailed it. Grief scam is so busted because there isn't a clean answer. Tack on a combo and a good fair gameplan that also easily supports force and you get a really busted deck.
@@Amishtroll if you leyline, they just kill you with a reanimated monster. Those discard creatures aren't in the realm of playable. The just get an archon and kill you. Plus it would have to be the only non land in your hand
@@Amishtroll Leyline is a solid option mirrors the hoggak modern metagame x years ago. But grief is a turn one game ender so a seleysnya creature on turn one or turn two is often to slow.
A potential solution for errata with The One Ring might be to have the Burden counters get added to the player rather than the card itself. It'd be a flavor win and it would stop the chaining of One Rings from resetting the damage you take.
What makes the One Ring so powerful isn't the card draw. It is the chaining of One Rings together to completely kill any progression by the other player. Fogging the opponent for a turn and then activating the ring 2 to 3 times to draw into a board wipe or enough targeted removal to kill the opponents board. Then when your ring has stacked too many counters on it you play another copy of the ring and fog the opponent out for another turn.
Sounds like it is the drawing lol. The protection would be useless because there's stuff like angels grace already as well as other protection but being able to draw an extra card the turn it comes in and the 2 your next turn plus the one for turn and suddenly you're safe again
@iNCoMpeTeNtplAyS nah man, I have played against the turn multiple times and games where they chain them together. The card draw is powerful but it is the fog till their next turn that is what ultimately does me in. So many times I had lethal on board for them to drop the ring shutting down my next turn and they draw into the board wipe or get the prime time to kill me.
HOLD UP did Richard say possums aren't cute?! Look at their sweet little faces! Look at a picture with a momma possum carrying all of its babies! They're adorable! Creepy tails though lol
You only say that because its named "The One Ring". You might as well ban it at that point. The card is kind of bad if you cant hit a second one to reset the counters. I would most definitely drop the card altogether if it got restricted to that extent. Commander is the only time im okay knowing that I dont have another ring, and even then with 40 life, it can still get sketchy.
Maybe you run artifact tutors and metamorphic alterations. I think it would go from being in every deck to a bit more fringe. I think it would still show up in many strategies if they have more than one way of resetting the counters or getting rid of it.
I think the Badger is strong, I just don't like how generic it is. It's seems like a pretty pushed "good stuff" Commander, which are some of my least favorite commanders.
I also would have appreciated a discussion of Duskmourne outside of the straw man. "But what about walking dead hur dur dur" this is a REAL in universe magic set though. Whatever about lazy tropification, its about magics lack of ability to tell a real story or take itself seriously. People in fedoras, holy cow and people in cowboy hats and now we have Van High Tops in White and TVs.
I remember exactly when I quit modern. Turn 3 my Karn got countered by a free spell. The next game my wurmcoil engine got exiled by a free spell. Then my opponent cast a time warp, fetched an island that put time warp back on top of their deck. Never again.
@@Xoulrath_ there’s a ton of other counterspells that can easily stop it…are you trying to say free spells are healthy for the game? If it was legacy and I was threatening a turn 1-2 win, absolutely you need FoW. But in modern? Cmonnnn.
@@bubblehulk7647 you played a SEVEN cost, arguably BROKEN Planeswalker on turn THREE, and you're still COMPLAINING about "free" spells, which are NOT free, being a problem? Dude, have a good day and a great life. I can't take this shit seriously.
when they initially revealed that Duskmourn is coming at the end of the year, I was really excited, cause I love the creepy ass horror themes. when they showed the previews I was really disappointed, because I am indeed one of those leftover players who actually care for a *somewhat* coherent theme across sets. I disliked Thunderjunction for its campy cowboy theme that just doesn't fit into MTG imo, but they at least tried to make it fit into a more medieval-fantasy-esque multi/universe. but what I've seen from Duskmourn, they actually just use modern settings for the card arts. straight up TVs, modern glasses, etc. and I find that really lame. at first I hoped it would be alternate arts, like some special treatment or whatever, but it seems to be on the regular cards too. I would have much preferred if they stuck with art like on Overlord of the Hauntwoods (52:35) or the one version of Doomsday Excruciator (54:03). they already have Universes Beyond to bring in settings that aren't "MTG flavoured".
I feel like you're missing the point about Duskmourn. It's an in-universe set that more than ever before breaks off with MTG lore. It's up for debate whether the set's setting is welcomed or not, but you can't just brush off the complaints by comparing it to UB products. I feel like at this point WOTC has brought down the quality of the lore so much that people don't care about any kind of consistency and continuity over multiple sets.
I usually think Crim has pretty measured and reasonable things to say about MtG, but “Immersion is already broken, so complaining is incorrect” is a pretty hot and pretty bad take. Replace immersion with power creep. I don’t think that Crim, or the rest of the crew, would agree with the statement that “power creep is already bad so we should just go all in on it”
What a stupid comparison. One actually affects gameplay, competitive integrity, and finance. The other is a purely aesthetic aspect. If you don’t want to play immersion breaking cards, don’t play them, no one is forcing you. However, when it comes to power creep, it affects everyone regardless of what choices they make.
@@nikhilchhagan7371 I’m not equating power creep and immersion breaking. I’m saying that “Something is already bad so complaining about things that make it worse is wrong” is a tough take regardless of what the “something” is.
Modern Horizons is just Alchemy in paper, and we should just make a Traditional Modern. My locals and I have talked about trying it for a couple FNMs to see if we have fun.
@efuii I love me some Pioneer, but I don't think I'd be willing to call it Modern adjacent, personally. For me at least, a huge part of Modern's identity is that the mana is perfect and the life totals start at 14.l, and thats something that Pioneer has very specifically been engineered to not be able to replicate.
I believe they do this in Legacy and call it 'heritage' Legacy. I saw it on BoshnRoll's channel a while back. No supplemental products, only sets that have actually gone through standard. Could be a fun change up.
12:28 My favorite Redwall book growing up was about a badger, and I was so excited for this set because of the inevitable badger commander. I am heartbroken that Hugs is so boring.
Hi, I'm the guy that loves badgers and wolverines. I actually built Greensleeves just because she made badger tokens. Not sure if I'll build Hugs as a separate deck, but I do love the card.
My cousin and I have talked about this for years; playing Yu-Gi-Oh back in the day, the Restricted/Semi-Restricted list always felt nice, since it allows you to still play your favorite cards (even if they may be a bit OP)
The only reason why MtG has restricted cards at all is because back in the very earliest days cards like Moxed and Lotuses were supposed to be restricted simpl by being so rare. Thus we end up with enough jewelry to just never play lands, but they don't want to just ban them. But that is literally the only reason.
Usually, the problem is that restricting doesn't make the card weaker, it just increases the variance and reduces the skill involved in a match. The only exceptions are cards that synergize with themselves or that are easily and frequently removed and thus tend to need a reliable replacement. The One Ring is very weird even among the exceptions in how it benefits from the legend rule. It's really rare for a card to benefit so reliably from sacrificing it to the legend rule. That's the reason why if any broken card can be truly balanced by restricting the number of copies, it's The One Ring.
Crim made the same argument for Modern & Legacy of why not to ban Grief/TOR. “But ThOSe ARe ThE PoWERfUl ForMaTS.” Cards can still be too strong for a powerful format. Strength is relative. 🤦
Dude, if you ain't winnin on turn 0, is it even Magic? Yu-Gi-Oh! has left Magic in the dust. Wizards needs to hurry up and make Magic a turn 0 format across all formats, to keep up with other card games. I mean, that was their bullshit excuse with adding the Mythic rarity. This game has fallen so far. I hate that I didn't just walk away for good in the 90s.
Could you guys get in contact with daybreak and interview them about this? There might be information that we don't know about, that they actually can talk about.
I strongly disagree with Crim: I don't mind loosing, but I want to have a chance to play. Most of the +3 years cards put yourself as the underdog even against precons nowadays...
As a central european i cant help but notice the difference in perspective. For the record badgers are quite large, like roughly the size of a medium to large dog. They generally fall in the category of "dont mess with them", that said you usually dont see them that much since they spend a lot of time in rheur burrows.
The badger depicted on the magic card is a European badger, and so was the picture of the badger they looked up. North American badgers have the same basic body shape, but they look a lot meaner.
Very simple for me. It should neither be banned or restricted. Restricting it would’ve been fine if it had been specified on the card itself as part of its rules. Kind of like the opposite of relentless rats, but introducing a whole new section of a ban list into modern or legacy is just pretty outlandish. Before anyone asks, no, I don’t own any The One Rings, no I’m not a Commander player, I mainly Modern, Legacy and Pauper.
I hate the idea of restrictions, BUT, if it would apply, it should be a change in the oracle so that The One Ring text reads that you can only have one in your deck
Usually I agree with most of Crim's takes but in my opinion the One Ring should definitely be banned for no other reason than simply Reckoner Bankbuster got hit with the hammer for the reason of it being powerful colorless card draw played everywhere except the One Ring is that times like a million. It's just a horrible card to play against beyond it being simply "a powerful card." Also Seth hit the nail on the head that a one of One Ring is much, *much* better than having four of them. In Brawl and Commander I see a lot of One Rings and there the life loss actually does matter because you can't get rid of it. The main issue, I see-which Richard alluded to-was that the design of the card simply doesn't work. "Indestructible," for example, was obviously meant to be a negative in the greater design of the card so you couldn't easily remove it. In singleton formats this shines as, even though the card is busted, there you actually have to worry about the life loss and there's three other players staring the One Ring player down who can use that life loss to their advantage. Hell, even in Brawl I personally notice a massive increase in my chances at winning when most One Ring players drop a ring because the life loss just becomes so high. In constructed, though, it's horrible because as Richard said you just chain One Rings transforming the indestructible negative into all positives. It's just a poor design for 60 card formats.
metashare was the reason smugglers copter was banned in standard. if its played as much as it is, then why not ban it to see decks at their more "original" theme rather than just shoving all generic staples in. edit: i posted this at the beginning of this segment and LOVED that seth brought it up also. Its a VERY relevant topic to think about seriously
Should have never been printed. It is a flabbergastingly powerful, mechanically unique, non-Magic IP card that is a 4 of in eternal formats. The licensing issues we've already seen in stuff like WH40k are almost certainly going to plague this card as well. Its literally everything that people who have vocally been against UB have said would happen.
@@TheEvolver311they were unable to put WH40k cards in mtgo unless they were part of a precon, so certain cards that were seeing legacy play necessitated buying 4 copies of a precon. These cards only showed up on modo after over a year and a half of arguments between wotc and games workshop, and only in that weird ass form. This is like. A super obvious problem when trying to maintain fungibility between different kinds of assets and play spaces. Fucking over your mtgo players is not a quirk of the system, it is a consequence of how the rights are all split up. That kind of careless horseshit is not going to be a one off event. It is very evident that wotc cannot just reprint or Universes Beyond cards at will because of these licensing agreements. It's been said before, but depending on how some of these agreements shake out "second reserve list" is a nonzero possibility.
@al8188 they already have stated a policy on how they are going to deal with reprinted needed ip specific cards. Not surprised, MTGO is going to phase out WotC pawned it onto daybreak and will die a grizzly death. I don't particularly see that as so bad since Legacy already had paper decks that didn't exist on MTGO because WotC never released all the pre-2001 cards onto the client.
@TheEvolver311 I replied and my comment was deleted for some reason. Tl;dr: Games Workshop and WotC had a dispute which pushed back the release of WH40K cards on MTGO, delaying the release by more than a year and half. This was a problem for legacy, because some cards from the structure decks were seeing play. If you wanted them, your only recourse was $160 of starter decks for a card that is still seeing play at about 1 dollar and change.
50:45 Re: Fear of Missing Out. This seems like a giant missed opportunity. If you sold me on the idea of "fears manifested," I'd think Incarnations like Anger - where you have a guy who does something on the battlefield, and then he also has a related ability in the graveyard. Anger & it's ilk are fairly easy designs, but they could arguably be streamlined even more; Ex: Fear of Aggravated Assault 2R Legendary Enchantment Creature - Incarnation (R) Menace 3RR: Untap all creatures you control. After this phase, there is an additional combat phase followed by an additional main phase. Play this ability only any time you could play a sorcery, only once per turn, and only if ~ is on the battlefield or in your graveyard. 3/2 Instead we get power creep, complexity creep, "different for being different", and FIRE! design all rolled up into "Why the hell are you making me read this card. Maybe you want to die the graveyard ability to delirium - that sounds like fun - but honestly, the additional words of delirium and threshold can probably be cut by adding a single mana and the complexity reduction for that seems well worth it. I mean, you'll probably run FOAA in your Delirium graveyard deck anyway, so why restrict it for shaving a mana off of the cost? Maybe the problem is contemporary magic designers don't like magic. Whenever they have an opportunity to reprint a classic card, complete a tight cycle, or pay homage to a classic cycle of cards... they just say "nah, dude, I know better than magic designers. My KCI combo engine is simic and has flying, completely different degenerate playpattern. My signature demon (M) is a 6/6 flying trample with all upside for 5 mana, surely it'll see play, right? My Hexproof has "performance issues," but as the ladies say size doesn't matter and 2 mana feels like forever in bed.
I can't get too upset about the tone breaking or Fortnite-ification (or whatever you want to call it) of sets like Thunder Junction or Duskmourn compared to the normal high-fantasy tropes of MTG. Wizards themselves seem to be putting less emphasis into the narrative of the Magic IP proper, so might as well have fun with these theme park sets.
Restricted sounds good because it’s such good flavor one per deck and you can’t play a new one to avoid dying to the one ring counters building up. But whoever draws the one ring is just gonna win the vast majority of games
@13:00 badgers and wolverines are similar, both are part of the weasel family. But badgers and wolverines are OP, that is where the saying "honey badger don't care", and why literally a wolverine can take on / scare off bears and mountain lions.
I find it pretty funny that modern players are simultaneously complaining that "Modern Horizons is actually just Commander Horizons, barely any of the cards are playable" and "Modern Horizons makes up too much of the modern meta game". Not that the two complaints necessarily can't be true at the same time.
flavor restriction on One Ring is a win, and it deals with the toxic protection looping issue. even with a bunch of tutors you still gotta be careful when you trigger the protection
The errata I would like to see is : "tap, put a burden counter, draw x, loose x, x equal to the burden counters" and not the upkeep thing. Basically speeding up the life loss by one turn.
I wish they "The One Ring" had the text of Only one ring can be on the battlefield at a time, if your opponent controls "The One Ring" They sacrifice it, and your one ring gains all the burden counters on their Ring. I wonder if that could fix it or if it would be more broken. My other thought would be that "The One Ring" has the text of if you would sacrifice a Ring, the new Ring enters with same number of Burdens counters equal to the number of the counters on the Sacrificed Ring. Sadly there is nothing we can do to fix the Modern Meta but I wonder what could of fixed "The One Ring'
They should have had the burden counters get attached to the player, so playing another ring or flickering it doesn't reset how much damage it would deal you if it's on the field during your upkeep.
As someone who got back into arena last year and was looking to get into modern, it feels impossble to jump in with the one ring running rampant right now. Spending 400$ on these 4 cards and just praying they dont get banned while 90% of players have said it should be banned since the Modern PT last year, feels like im winding my fist up to punch myself in the balls. The difference between grief and the one ring is that grief is tied to a color/archtype, if its strong, you can build a deck that is good against that archetype, the one ring just goes in any deck, if you focus your deck on trying to stop it, you die to whatever the main focus of the deck is(nadu for instance). The one ring, by itself, single handedly wins games.
There's a certain video about honey badgers that you guys need to watch. They needed a vicious animal for the cutesy bloomburrow realm. Badgers fit pretty well.
Saying "Restricting the One Ring is a flavor win" is like saying "Restricting Oko is a flavor win because there's only one Oko in the Multiverse." As a big supporter of Universes Beyond, don't use the lore of J.R.R. Tolkein's literature to dictate the health of a format.
I think the play pattern is the flavor win, not that there's only a single The One Ring in the multiverse. A large part of what makes The One Ring too powerful is using the first copy to draw into a second copy to reset the burden counters with the help of the legend rule. If you only had a single copy you wouldn't be able to do this, so you might feel the burden of the power that the ring offers, which I think is how the card was supposed to work flavor-wise, but not how it works in practice.
10:56 looking super forward to hugs in Rosheen and a heavy X spell theme. We also have a bunch of support from war hammer and some new modern horizons cards. Overall he reminds me of escape to the wilds on a creature.
The funniest thing about the decision to wait m3 out before banning Grief is that it got even better. Psychic Frog took it from tier 0 and innaugurated tier -1.
31:08 Having a set be 6x more likely to be played doesn't mean it's 6x stronger, it just means it's 6x more likely to be at the top of the list. Imagine ranking all the cards in the format from strongest to weakest. If all the MH3 cards are at the top of the list, you'll see this effect, regardless of *how much* stronger they are. They could be 0.01% stronger, but if everyone agrees they're stronger, they'll still be at the top of the list. Doesn't mean the sets aren't screwing with the meta, but the answer to Seth's question is no.
They probably found some security flaw when they switched that would potentially have affected them with the previous state aswell but was exacerbated now. So they took it down entirely to fix it straight away because being aware of an issue and not fixing it right away can get you in real hot water if something happens that could cause legal liabilities.
A solution to "the one ring problem" is to create a new card rarity or keyword: "unique cards" that have a deckbuilding restriction like companion cards, so you can only have one per deck
Max flavor win for The One Ring: - If The One Ring would enter the battlefield, exile it instead if you control a card named The One Ring. - The One Ring cannot be copied.
I am on board with the idea of restricting TOR in Modern. The flavor thing is irrelevant but still a valid point and allowing one copy per deck truly lowers its power level and makes it so there is a real cost to activating it. The card will end up in SB’s of Karn decks but those decks play it regardless of its orientation within the list.
Immersion-breaking stuff aside, as someone who doesn’t really do most horror things I wouldn’t say anything I’ve seen from this set is more visually frightening than things we’ve seen in mtg before. Heck I’d say the phyrexian designs from the old Mirrodin block are more terrifying than this. For all intents and purposes the Fear of Missing Out is just a more fleshy eldrazi and Doomsday Excruciator just looks like any old mtg demon design.
Add to the LEGENDARY RULE with: You can not cast a Legendary card with the same name as one you already control on the battlefield. Problem solved!!!!!!!
What if The One Ring had an errata where the player that activates it gets an emblem that says "At the beginning of your upkeep, you lose 1 life". Now you can't reset the amount of burden counters, and even if The One Ring goes away, you're still losing life. You're forever haunted by your choice to use The One Ring, and it leaves a permanent mark on you.
Crim, the issue isn't that these new cards are powerful, it's that they're redefining what powerful is. Thus the old favorites are gone and there's no competitive justification to play anything else.
Re: "does a card being in x amount of decks nessessetate a ban?" Im thinking about this like deathrite in legacy when that was banned. Part of the thinking was that every black or green deck was playing it, because of its flexibility of interaction, and baseline utility of being a mana dork. One difference between DRS and ring is that DRS moves green decks towards black, and black decks toward green. The ring can go in any style of deck and fill a role, but the strategy doesnt change if the ring were banned (some exceptions). I think it should be banned still, but i dont think theyd ban ring and nadu at the same time. Especially rifgt before an rcq season.
The problem with restricting The One Ring is that it doesn't solve most of the problems. The card is too good and there are just too many good ways of tutoring it for restricting to make sense. There are great tutors like Beseech The Mirror and Karn which make it too easy to find. Plus, once you have it, the card is still broken. You can even still do invincibility loops with cards like Teferi. Plus, it would exacerbate the ring vs ring problem of games where people who have a ring are more likely to win and create more non games in those ring mirror matches. In reality, it would be all the same problems just with a slightly different look.
The thing is, what makes a card being played too often ban worthy is how it warps the game around it. No one cares if basic lands are in almost every deck because they are background noise. Replacing them with other lands rarely changes the deck's strategy at all. Even cards like Llanowar Elves aren't that bothersome because they're just "generic mana dork" in our brains, but the moment that they get more complex and start to have more unique effects, their presence stops being background noise and becomes tiresome. I think that's because of the mental effort they require. It's just so much easier to our brains to think "1/1 green mana dork" than "1/2 green mana dork that makes colorless except for legendary spells and makes it so those can't be countered". Your brain can't go "ok, it's basically as if they had 1 more forest", it needs to keep track of all the possible interactions, how it affects your game plan, etc. And The One Ring is just so much worse. "Protection from everything" completely changes the game for an entire turn, the amount of draw and pain the ring gives changes every turn, you need to keep track of how likely it is for your opponent to have another ring and just reset it... It just adds extra steps to every calculation in the game. Which is not bad, I love complexity and nuanced interactions, but it becomes tiring really fast. You'd think that having to deal with the same thing over and over again would make it easier, and it does to a degree, but it also becomes psychologically harder as the novelty fades away. Our brain just begs us to do something different for a change and tries to distract us with better things, so we become more detached and sloppy. It's just bad for the game.
Fomo seems only strong with vigilance creatures. If you play it with normal creatures, you don't truly get an extra combat step, you just give one creature double strike.
36% is mind blowing. You have to consider that most lands and basic utility cards aren't from the MH sets. It's likely close to 50% of the "interesting" cards in the format. If they print a new land cycle in the next direct to modern set I would expect them to try and power creep fetchlands in some way.
Fun fact, that type of badger is from great britain I think? And they are super chill. Not like badgers here in the US who will rip you in half. so it's funny that they chose this version of a badger to be all angry
I've literally said this before, you should only be allowed to have one copy of the one ring in your deck for flavor win, and if that's not an option, make it so that the burden counters are on the player and not on the card. The one ring wasn't a burden to itself but it was to those around it
Burden counter should be attached to the player and not to the ring itself. That would be more flavour appropriate and would solve a lot of the problems with the card. This removes the incentive to chain One Rings and thereby remove the "need" for restriction.
Burden counters should have been placed onto players and have an innate "deals a damage to you on your upkeep" ability. Frodo's and Bilbo's exposure to the ring haunts him long after the rings destruction.
33:44 I actually agree with Crim here and idk what fantasy land he's living in that commander decks from 4-5 years ago don't hold up. I have commander decks from 4-5 years ago that I haven't tweaked and they're still brutal. I see people with commander decks from 8 years ago with minimal tweaks that are still insanely powerful. Commander focus isn't bad for commander, because that format isn't about a meta or competitive tournaments. Modern focus is bad when it shifts everything constantly and peoples decks become unplayable. That format isn't a casual fun format. Commander is.
I really wonder about the diversity question with the One Ring. It allows a lot of potential diversity elsewhere in the decks (playing jank) because of its card advantage and protection.
Something I was just thinking of today - what are the odds that they eventually start printing a direct-to-modern bonus sheet/supplemental product/etc. with each standard set? They already did it with EDH so it doesn't seem *impossible*...
![[ ออกกอง ] วัยหนุ่ม 2544 โลกหลังลูกกรง..ทัวร์กองถ่ายหนังใน "คุกของจริง" | JUSTดูIT.](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vB--aOkZCpw/mqdefault.jpg)
Big shoutouts to Seth pronouncing "cthonian" right this week, very proud of this character progression.
It's Chthonian.
The badger disrespect is unreal
As a Wisconsinite I am outraged
Smh my head, can't even recognize the Hufflepuff emblem and they call themselves millennials?
They deserve the disrespect.
Wisconsinites Unite!
State animal of Wisconsin!
I had already planned to go Badger Kindred. Or College mascot Kindred. Or state animal Kindred.
The choice of a badger for this card is a total nod to Redwall. Badgers are rare but important to the stories, typically the strongest creatures on the side of the good guys.
Worth noting that the Redwall series found success in the US roughly the same time that Magic did. They're contemporary pieces of popular culture. I cant have been the only kid using Revised basics as bookmarks for Redwall stories.
This already feels so much like a crossover, it seems like it would be incomplete unless the estate of Brian Jaques signs on for a Redwall Secret Lair.
Always 1 badger per book if I remember correctly, might be an exception for the book where badger was main character
Keep in mind most lands are not from Modern Horizons sets. 36% is wild
Yeah, and that doesn't include reprints either (like the fetchlands don't count as Modern Horizons cards since they existed in Modern before they were reprinted in MH2/MH3).
MH sets could never have existed. It wouldn't change the fact that Wizards printed powercrept cards regardless. People seem to forget that some of the most powerful cards of the early Modern format came from way beforeKhan's.
They also seem to forget that Wizards had a habit of riding a roller coaster of Standard power going up and down over the years. It just so happened that Modern had the enemy Fetches and then got the allied Fetches from Khans.
They forget that Eldrazi Winter happened. They forget that cards like Dryad got printed into Standard , and boosted Amulet Titan all on its own at the time. They forget recent adds to Modern like Leyline Binding and Guildpact and how they had an impact on the format.
The reality is that Wizards could have just continued to be all over the place and have Modern constantly change. Or they can focus the majority of it into MH sets.
Seth said "They play that Silly Goose" and no one giggled
Very much disagree with Crim. A card being in too many decks because it's just a generally good card is the EXACT reason to ban a card. Magic is a game about deck building no matter what format you're playing. With The One Ring Modern is a 56 card format. The last Standard banning banned Fable and Bankbuster for the exact reason. When building your deck with those cards in the format, you had to think of a reason to NOT include the card rather than a reason why it should be included. The same is true for The One Ring. Unless you're playing Burn, there is no reason NOT to include The One Ring in your Modern deck.
Generally correct however there are some extremely powerful decks not using the ring. also nadu runs 2. Ruby storm has 0 because it’s actually just a waste of mana for a storm deck. Jund Saga runs 0. Merfolk runs 0. Energy runs 0. It doesn’t warrant a ban but you should be only allowed to run a single copy in your deck
There's two tracks an overplayed card can go down in eternal formats, either banning it or being okay with it being a pillar of that format like Brainstorm and Force of Will in Legacy
Was Lurrus banned for being in too many decks or was it just more powerful than the ring?
As a legacy player there is no playing around grief, you can't counter it as that's basically grief just taking your counter and they can reanimate it to get something else, and if you let it resolve, it just gets your counter + best card or 2 best cards.
Exactly, that's why I 100% know that they deliberately choose not to ban it because MH3 sells. They, in this case, being Hasbro. Money money money, baby.
Nailed it. Grief scam is so busted because there isn't a clean answer. Tack on a combo and a good fair gameplan that also easily supports force and you get a really busted deck.
What’s wrong with leyline of sanctity or the selesnya creatures that etb instead of being discarded? Are there really no answers to grief?
@@Amishtroll if you leyline, they just kill you with a reanimated monster. Those discard creatures aren't in the realm of playable. The just get an archon and kill you. Plus it would have to be the only non land in your hand
@@Amishtroll
Leyline is a solid option mirrors the hoggak modern metagame x years ago. But grief is a turn one game ender so a seleysnya creature on turn one or turn two is often to slow.
A potential solution for errata with The One Ring might be to have the Burden counters get added to the player rather than the card itself. It'd be a flavor win and it would stop the chaining of One Rings from resetting the damage you take.
This is the way
Solid option
A promising solution, but there would be a solemnity meta overnight
@@DarthTUKbut Solemnity would also prevent the ring from drawing more cards, so it becomes like a Phyrexian Arena.
I like that idea
It should have started as a one of for flavor reasons
Definitely should have had the "You can only have one these in your deck" clause
What makes the One Ring so powerful isn't the card draw. It is the chaining of One Rings together to completely kill any progression by the other player. Fogging the opponent for a turn and then activating the ring 2 to 3 times to draw into a board wipe or enough targeted removal to kill the opponents board. Then when your ring has stacked too many counters on it you play another copy of the ring and fog the opponent out for another turn.
Sounds like the Mid-Range format so many wanted
Sounds like it is the drawing lol. The protection would be useless because there's stuff like angels grace already as well as other protection but being able to draw an extra card the turn it comes in and the 2 your next turn plus the one for turn and suddenly you're safe again
@iNCoMpeTeNtplAyS nah man, I have played against the turn multiple times and games where they chain them together. The card draw is powerful but it is the fog till their next turn that is what ultimately does me in. So many times I had lethal on board for them to drop the ring shutting down my next turn and they draw into the board wipe or get the prime time to kill me.
Yeah, if you really think about it The One Ring is pretty close to Ancestral Recall + Time Walk on a four mana colorless card, which is pretty wild.
HOLD UP did Richard say possums aren't cute?! Look at their sweet little faces! Look at a picture with a momma possum carrying all of its babies! They're adorable!
Creepy tails though lol
The perfect card to be restricted to a One of
You only say that because its named "The One Ring". You might as well ban it at that point. The card is kind of bad if you cant hit a second one to reset the counters. I would most definitely drop the card altogether if it got restricted to that extent. Commander is the only time im okay knowing that I dont have another ring, and even then with 40 life, it can still get sketchy.
Maybe you run artifact tutors and metamorphic alterations. I think it would go from being in every deck to a bit more fringe. I think it would still show up in many strategies if they have more than one way of resetting the counters or getting rid of it.
Karn the great creator will just be played as a 4 of to find it
@@vitaminstorm9429 u sir are lyuing to your selfe her
@@vitaminstorm9429stupid opinion
Why the badger hateorade?! Super happy for badger commander… 6 playable badgers in mtg history unit :)
I think the Badger is strong, I just don't like how generic it is. It's seems like a pretty pushed "good stuff" Commander, which are some of my least favorite commanders.
I also would have appreciated a discussion of Duskmourne outside of the straw man. "But what about walking dead hur dur dur" this is a REAL in universe magic set though. Whatever about lazy tropification, its about magics lack of ability to tell a real story or take itself seriously. People in fedoras, holy cow and people in cowboy hats and now we have Van High Tops in White and TVs.
I remember exactly when I quit modern.
Turn 3 my Karn got countered by a free spell.
The next game my wurmcoil engine got exiled by a free spell.
Then my opponent cast a time warp, fetched an island that put time warp back on top of their deck.
Never again.
The irony of complaining about a turn THREE Karn getting countered by a "free" spell is hysterical.
@@Xoulrath_ how is it ironic? I paid 7 mana for the Karn. My whole gameplay is around getting to turn 3 Karn, and they invalidate it for free.
@@bubblehulk7647 you paid three mana for the Karn. Stop justifying Tron and bitching about "free" counterspells that deal with shit like that.
@@Xoulrath_ there’s a ton of other counterspells that can easily stop it…are you trying to say free spells are healthy for the game? If it was legacy and I was threatening a turn 1-2 win, absolutely you need FoW. But in modern? Cmonnnn.
@@bubblehulk7647 you played a SEVEN cost, arguably BROKEN Planeswalker on turn THREE, and you're still COMPLAINING about "free" spells, which are NOT free, being a problem? Dude, have a good day and a great life. I can't take this shit seriously.
when they initially revealed that Duskmourn is coming at the end of the year, I was really excited, cause I love the creepy ass horror themes. when they showed the previews I was really disappointed, because I am indeed one of those leftover players who actually care for a *somewhat* coherent theme across sets.
I disliked Thunderjunction for its campy cowboy theme that just doesn't fit into MTG imo, but they at least tried to make it fit into a more medieval-fantasy-esque multi/universe.
but what I've seen from Duskmourn, they actually just use modern settings for the card arts. straight up TVs, modern glasses, etc. and I find that really lame. at first I hoped it would be alternate arts, like some special treatment or whatever, but it seems to be on the regular cards too. I would have much preferred if they stuck with art like on Overlord of the Hauntwoods (52:35) or the one version of Doomsday Excruciator (54:03).
they already have Universes Beyond to bring in settings that aren't "MTG flavoured".
I feel like you're missing the point about Duskmourn. It's an in-universe set that more than ever before breaks off with MTG lore.
It's up for debate whether the set's setting is welcomed or not, but you can't just brush off the complaints by comparing it to UB products.
I feel like at this point WOTC has brought down the quality of the lore so much that people don't care about any kind of consistency and continuity over multiple sets.
I usually think Crim has pretty measured and reasonable things to say about MtG, but “Immersion is already broken, so complaining is incorrect” is a pretty hot and pretty bad take. Replace immersion with power creep. I don’t think that Crim, or the rest of the crew, would agree with the statement that “power creep is already bad so we should just go all in on it”
What a stupid comparison. One actually affects gameplay, competitive integrity, and finance. The other is a purely aesthetic aspect. If you don’t want to play immersion breaking cards, don’t play them, no one is forcing you. However, when it comes to power creep, it affects everyone regardless of what choices they make.
@@nikhilchhagan7371 I’m not equating power creep and immersion breaking. I’m saying that “Something is already bad so complaining about things that make it worse is wrong” is a tough take regardless of what the “something” is.
Modern Horizons is just Alchemy in paper, and we should just make a Traditional Modern. My locals and I have talked about trying it for a couple FNMs to see if we have fun.
Lol
Never going to work
We have traditional modern now, and it's called Pioneer. For how long tho, idk.
@efuii I love me some Pioneer, but I don't think I'd be willing to call it Modern adjacent, personally. For me at least, a huge part of Modern's identity is that the mana is perfect and the life totals start at 14.l, and thats something that Pioneer has very specifically been engineered to not be able to replicate.
@Tyke-Myson they already balanced it for digital and it actually was effective
I believe they do this in Legacy and call it 'heritage' Legacy. I saw it on BoshnRoll's channel a while back. No supplemental products, only sets that have actually gone through standard. Could be a fun change up.
Badgers are great! Much love. They live in cetts (burrows) that they sometimes share with other critters!
12:28 My favorite Redwall book growing up was about a badger, and I was so excited for this set because of the inevitable badger commander. I am heartbroken that Hugs is so boring.
I think WoTC is afraid of player backlash from banning millions of dollars from decks.
Hi, I'm the guy that loves badgers and wolverines. I actually built Greensleeves just because she made badger tokens. Not sure if I'll build Hugs as a separate deck, but I do love the card.
So much badger slander 😢
Imagine being so chronically online you don’t know what a badger is
UW Madison students are crying rn. Not knowing what a badger is is a personal attack lol
My cousin and I have talked about this for years; playing Yu-Gi-Oh back in the day, the Restricted/Semi-Restricted list always felt nice, since it allows you to still play your favorite cards (even if they may be a bit OP)
Semi always felt pointless for anything but Malicious imo, lol
@@baconsir1159 I like how they use it now as a testing ground for potential unbans/unrestricts
The only reason why MtG has restricted cards at all is because back in the very earliest days cards like Moxed and Lotuses were supposed to be restricted simpl by being so rare. Thus we end up with enough jewelry to just never play lands, but they don't want to just ban them. But that is literally the only reason.
Usually, the problem is that restricting doesn't make the card weaker, it just increases the variance and reduces the skill involved in a match.
The only exceptions are cards that synergize with themselves or that are easily and frequently removed and thus tend to need a reliable replacement. The One Ring is very weird even among the exceptions in how it benefits from the legend rule. It's really rare for a card to benefit so reliably from sacrificing it to the legend rule. That's the reason why if any broken card can be truly balanced by restricting the number of copies, it's The One Ring.
Crim made the same argument for Modern & Legacy of why not to ban Grief/TOR. “But ThOSe ARe ThE PoWERfUl ForMaTS.”
Cards can still be too strong for a powerful format. Strength is relative. 🤦
Dude, if you ain't winnin on turn 0, is it even Magic? Yu-Gi-Oh! has left Magic in the dust. Wizards needs to hurry up and make Magic a turn 0 format across all formats, to keep up with other card games. I mean, that was their bullshit excuse with adding the Mythic rarity. This game has fallen so far. I hate that I didn't just walk away for good in the 90s.
I couldn't quite read Richard's t-shirt, and didn't know what chaturanga was. So I was sat there thinking "T-Rex hates Chaturbate"?
Could you guys get in contact with daybreak and interview them about this? There might be information that we don't know about, that they actually can talk about.
Should be errataed to give the player the counters like experience counters.
Fits more thematically also.
I strongly disagree with Crim: I don't mind loosing, but I want to have a chance to play. Most of the +3 years cards put yourself as the underdog even against precons nowadays...
As a central european i cant help but notice the difference in perspective. For the record badgers are quite large, like roughly the size of a medium to large dog. They generally fall in the category of "dont mess with them", that said you usually dont see them that much since they spend a lot of time in rheur burrows.
The badger depicted on the magic card is a European badger, and so was the picture of the badger they looked up. North American badgers have the same basic body shape, but they look a lot meaner.
Very simple for me. It should neither be banned or restricted. Restricting it would’ve been fine if it had been specified on the card itself as part of its rules. Kind of like the opposite of relentless rats, but introducing a whole new section of a ban list into modern or legacy is just pretty outlandish. Before anyone asks, no, I don’t own any The One Rings, no I’m not a Commander player, I mainly Modern, Legacy and Pauper.
I hate the idea of restrictions, BUT, if it would apply, it should be a change in the oracle so that The One Ring text reads that you can only have one in your deck
Im sorry, did we miss the whole 'body horror' axis of ALL OF PHYREXIA?
I feel releasing previews for Duskmourne this early is what the set needed because I'm way more interested in it now that I was before.
Not knowing what a badger is wild to me.
Usually I agree with most of Crim's takes but in my opinion the One Ring should definitely be banned for no other reason than simply Reckoner Bankbuster got hit with the hammer for the reason of it being powerful colorless card draw played everywhere except the One Ring is that times like a million. It's just a horrible card to play against beyond it being simply "a powerful card." Also Seth hit the nail on the head that a one of One Ring is much, *much* better than having four of them. In Brawl and Commander I see a lot of One Rings and there the life loss actually does matter because you can't get rid of it. The main issue, I see-which Richard alluded to-was that the design of the card simply doesn't work. "Indestructible," for example, was obviously meant to be a negative in the greater design of the card so you couldn't easily remove it. In singleton formats this shines as, even though the card is busted, there you actually have to worry about the life loss and there's three other players staring the One Ring player down who can use that life loss to their advantage. Hell, even in Brawl I personally notice a massive increase in my chances at winning when most One Ring players drop a ring because the life loss just becomes so high. In constructed, though, it's horrible because as Richard said you just chain One Rings transforming the indestructible negative into all positives. It's just a poor design for 60 card formats.
I don't think you can compare Standard bannings to Modern that cleanly.
We can’t ban The One Ring because it needs to be reprinted in Duskmourn with a TV screen with a circle on it...
metashare was the reason smugglers copter was banned in standard. if its played as much as it is, then why not ban it to see decks at their more "original" theme rather than just shoving all generic staples in.
edit: i posted this at the beginning of this segment and LOVED that seth brought it up also. Its a VERY relevant topic to think about seriously
Should have never been printed. It is a flabbergastingly powerful, mechanically unique, non-Magic IP card that is a 4 of in eternal formats. The licensing issues we've already seen in stuff like WH40k are almost certainly going to plague this card as well. Its literally everything that people who have vocally been against UB have said would happen.
What issue with WH40k?
@@TheEvolver311they were unable to put WH40k cards in mtgo unless they were part of a precon, so certain cards that were seeing legacy play necessitated buying 4 copies of a precon. These cards only showed up on modo after over a year and a half of arguments between wotc and games workshop, and only in that weird ass form.
This is like. A super obvious problem when trying to maintain fungibility between different kinds of assets and play spaces. Fucking over your mtgo players is not a quirk of the system, it is a consequence of how the rights are all split up. That kind of careless horseshit is not going to be a one off event.
It is very evident that wotc cannot just reprint or Universes Beyond cards at will because of these licensing agreements. It's been said before, but depending on how some of these agreements shake out "second reserve list" is a nonzero possibility.
@al8188 they already have stated a policy on how they are going to deal with reprinted needed ip specific cards.
Not surprised, MTGO is going to phase out WotC pawned it onto daybreak and will die a grizzly death. I don't particularly see that as so bad since Legacy already had paper decks that didn't exist on MTGO because WotC never released all the pre-2001 cards onto the client.
@TheEvolver311 I replied and my comment was deleted for some reason.
Tl;dr: Games Workshop and WotC had a dispute which pushed back the release of WH40K cards on MTGO, delaying the release by more than a year and half. This was a problem for legacy, because some cards from the structure decks were seeing play. If you wanted them, your only recourse was $160 of starter decks for a card that is still seeing play at about 1 dollar and change.
50:45 Re: Fear of Missing Out. This seems like a giant missed opportunity. If you sold me on the idea of "fears manifested," I'd think Incarnations like Anger - where you have a guy who does something on the battlefield, and then he also has a related ability in the graveyard. Anger & it's ilk are fairly easy designs, but they could arguably be streamlined even more; Ex:
Fear of Aggravated Assault 2R Legendary Enchantment Creature - Incarnation (R) Menace 3RR: Untap all creatures you control. After this phase, there is an additional combat phase followed by an additional main phase. Play this ability only any time you could play a sorcery, only once per turn, and only if ~ is on the battlefield or in your graveyard. 3/2
Instead we get power creep, complexity creep, "different for being different", and FIRE! design all rolled up into "Why the hell are you making me read this card.
Maybe you want to die the graveyard ability to delirium - that sounds like fun - but honestly, the additional words of delirium and threshold can probably be cut by adding a single mana and the complexity reduction for that seems well worth it. I mean, you'll probably run FOAA in your Delirium graveyard deck anyway, so why restrict it for shaving a mana off of the cost?
Maybe the problem is contemporary magic designers don't like magic. Whenever they have an opportunity to reprint a classic card, complete a tight cycle, or pay homage to a classic cycle of cards... they just say "nah, dude, I know better than magic designers. My KCI combo engine is simic and has flying, completely different degenerate playpattern. My signature demon (M) is a 6/6 flying trample with all upside for 5 mana, surely it'll see play, right? My Hexproof has "performance issues," but as the ladies say size doesn't matter and 2 mana feels like forever in bed.
Crim look so good in this angle!!
Yeah, to a frog!
His normal high angle gives him big goblin vibes, I'm realizing
He's so hot id let him put a baby in me
at first i was like, who tf is that? lmao that guy looks intense
Oh shit your right crim hot?
Goldfish Crew - Badgers are low tier.
Redwall fans - Badgers are GOATed
DOINK!!
Cactar: 1/1 haste, deals 1,000 damage to a creature that blocks it. Shroud (so you can't give it lifelink)
I can't get too upset about the tone breaking or Fortnite-ification (or whatever you want to call it) of sets like Thunder Junction or Duskmourn compared to the normal high-fantasy tropes of MTG. Wizards themselves seem to be putting less emphasis into the narrative of the Magic IP proper, so might as well have fun with these theme park sets.
Restricted sounds good because it’s such good flavor one per deck and you can’t play a new one to avoid dying to the one ring counters building up. But whoever draws the one ring is just gonna win the vast majority of games
Ban Nadu
Ban Ring
Ban Grief
@13:00 badgers and wolverines are similar, both are part of the weasel family. But badgers and wolverines are OP, that is where the saying "honey badger don't care", and why literally a wolverine can take on / scare off bears and mountain lions.
Listening to this on my commute in Wyoming and seeing two roadkill badgers.
I find it pretty funny that modern players are simultaneously complaining that "Modern Horizons is actually just Commander Horizons, barely any of the cards are playable" and "Modern Horizons makes up too much of the modern meta game". Not that the two complaints necessarily can't be true at the same time.
flavor restriction on One Ring is a win, and it deals with the toxic protection looping issue. even with a bunch of tutors you still gotta be careful when you trigger the protection
You should be allowed to play 8 of them
Now THATS what I'm talkin about
The errata I would like to see is : "tap, put a burden counter, draw x, loose x, x equal to the burden counters" and not the upkeep thing. Basically speeding up the life loss by one turn.
I wish they "The One Ring" had the text of Only one ring can be on the battlefield at a time, if your opponent controls "The One Ring" They sacrifice it, and your one ring gains all the burden counters on their Ring. I wonder if that could fix it or if it would be more broken. My other thought would be that "The One Ring" has the text of if you would sacrifice a Ring, the new Ring enters with same number of Burdens counters equal to the number of the counters on the Sacrificed Ring. Sadly there is nothing we can do to fix the Modern Meta but I wonder what could of fixed "The One Ring'
They should have had the burden counters get attached to the player, so playing another ring or flickering it doesn't reset how much damage it would deal you if it's on the field during your upkeep.
As someone who got back into arena last year and was looking to get into modern, it feels impossble to jump in with the one ring running rampant right now. Spending 400$ on these 4 cards and just praying they dont get banned while 90% of players have said it should be banned since the Modern PT last year, feels like im winding my fist up to punch myself in the balls.
The difference between grief and the one ring is that grief is tied to a color/archtype, if its strong, you can build a deck that is good against that archetype, the one ring just goes in any deck, if you focus your deck on trying to stop it, you die to whatever the main focus of the deck is(nadu for instance). The one ring, by itself, single handedly wins games.
There's a certain video about honey badgers that you guys need to watch. They needed a vicious animal for the cutesy bloomburrow realm. Badgers fit pretty well.
Saying "Restricting the One Ring is a flavor win" is like saying "Restricting Oko is a flavor win because there's only one Oko in the Multiverse." As a big supporter of Universes Beyond, don't use the lore of J.R.R. Tolkein's literature to dictate the health of a format.
I think the play pattern is the flavor win, not that there's only a single The One Ring in the multiverse. A large part of what makes The One Ring too powerful is using the first copy to draw into a second copy to reset the burden counters with the help of the legend rule. If you only had a single copy you wouldn't be able to do this, so you might feel the burden of the power that the ring offers, which I think is how the card was supposed to work flavor-wise, but not how it works in practice.
10:56 looking super forward to hugs in Rosheen and a heavy X spell theme. We also have a bunch of support from war hammer and some new modern horizons cards.
Overall he reminds me of escape to the wilds on a creature.
The funniest thing about the decision to wait m3 out before banning Grief is that it got even better. Psychic Frog took it from tier 0 and innaugurated tier -1.
31:08 Having a set be 6x more likely to be played doesn't mean it's 6x stronger, it just means it's 6x more likely to be at the top of the list. Imagine ranking all the cards in the format from strongest to weakest. If all the MH3 cards are at the top of the list, you'll see this effect, regardless of *how much* stronger they are. They could be 0.01% stronger, but if everyone agrees they're stronger, they'll still be at the top of the list.
Doesn't mean the sets aren't screwing with the meta, but the answer to Seth's question is no.
Errata-ing the protection effect is too awkward, the easiest errata would be to put the burden counters on the player.
Badgers are incredible, powerful, and shy. Had a den in the back of my property for years and have never caught a glimpse
They probably found some security flaw when they switched that would potentially have affected them with the previous state aswell but was exacerbated now. So they took it down entirely to fix it straight away because being aware of an issue and not fixing it right away can get you in real hot water if something happens that could cause legal liabilities.
A solution to "the one ring problem" is to create a new card rarity or keyword: "unique cards" that have a deckbuilding restriction like companion cards, so you can only have one per deck
For the Redwall fans, Hans seems to be either a Cregga or Brocktree stand in, and those are two of the most popular characters in the series.
Max flavor win for The One Ring:
- If The One Ring would enter the battlefield, exile it instead if you control a card named The One Ring.
- The One Ring cannot be copied.
I am on board with the idea of restricting TOR in Modern. The flavor thing is irrelevant but still a valid point and allowing one copy per deck truly lowers its power level and makes it so there is a real cost to activating it. The card will end up in SB’s of Karn decks but those decks play it regardless of its orientation within the list.
Immersion-breaking stuff aside, as someone who doesn’t really do most horror things I wouldn’t say anything I’ve seen from this set is more visually frightening than things we’ve seen in mtg before. Heck I’d say the phyrexian designs from the old Mirrodin block are more terrifying than this. For all intents and purposes the Fear of Missing Out is just a more fleshy eldrazi and Doomsday Excruciator just looks like any old mtg demon design.
Restriction just means you end up playing a couple copies of Phyrexian Metamorph and ways to Karn Wish or search up your 1 copy.
Add to the LEGENDARY RULE with: You can not cast a Legendary card with the same name as one you already control on the battlefield. Problem solved!!!!!!!
What if The One Ring had an errata where the player that activates it gets an emblem that says "At the beginning of your upkeep, you lose 1 life".
Now you can't reset the amount of burden counters, and even if The One Ring goes away, you're still losing life. You're forever haunted by your choice to use The One Ring, and it leaves a permanent mark on you.
I would never expect Richard to be scared of horror movies! I love horror movies, and anything scary. To me, scary things are cute!
No mention about Duskmorne being a tricolor set? I want to know what kind of new triome we will get
Crim, the issue isn't that these new cards are powerful, it's that they're redefining what powerful is. Thus the old favorites are gone and there's no competitive justification to play anything else.
We need Sir David Attenborough to narrate this episode while the crew talks about badgers.
Re: "does a card being in x amount of decks nessessetate a ban?"
Im thinking about this like deathrite in legacy when that was banned. Part of the thinking was that every black or green deck was playing it, because of its flexibility of interaction, and baseline utility of being a mana dork.
One difference between DRS and ring is that DRS moves green decks towards black, and black decks toward green. The ring can go in any style of deck and fill a role, but the strategy doesnt change if the ring were banned (some exceptions).
I think it should be banned still, but i dont think theyd ban ring and nadu at the same time. Especially rifgt before an rcq season.
The problem with restricting The One Ring is that it doesn't solve most of the problems. The card is too good and there are just too many good ways of tutoring it for restricting to make sense. There are great tutors like Beseech The Mirror and Karn which make it too easy to find. Plus, once you have it, the card is still broken. You can even still do invincibility loops with cards like Teferi. Plus, it would exacerbate the ring vs ring problem of games where people who have a ring are more likely to win and create more non games in those ring mirror matches. In reality, it would be all the same problems just with a slightly different look.
Bring back the OG Legend rule specifically for the one ring only.
The ring changes hands as suits it's own goals, lore wise.
Should be errata'd to add the line "A deck may only contain one copy of the one ring."
The thing is, what makes a card being played too often ban worthy is how it warps the game around it. No one cares if basic lands are in almost every deck because they are background noise. Replacing them with other lands rarely changes the deck's strategy at all.
Even cards like Llanowar Elves aren't that bothersome because they're just "generic mana dork" in our brains, but the moment that they get more complex and start to have more unique effects, their presence stops being background noise and becomes tiresome.
I think that's because of the mental effort they require. It's just so much easier to our brains to think "1/1 green mana dork" than "1/2 green mana dork that makes colorless except for legendary spells and makes it so those can't be countered". Your brain can't go "ok, it's basically as if they had 1 more forest", it needs to keep track of all the possible interactions, how it affects your game plan, etc. And The One Ring is just so much worse.
"Protection from everything" completely changes the game for an entire turn, the amount of draw and pain the ring gives changes every turn, you need to keep track of how likely it is for your opponent to have another ring and just reset it... It just adds extra steps to every calculation in the game. Which is not bad, I love complexity and nuanced interactions, but it becomes tiring really fast.
You'd think that having to deal with the same thing over and over again would make it easier, and it does to a degree, but it also becomes psychologically harder as the novelty fades away. Our brain just begs us to do something different for a change and tries to distract us with better things, so we become more detached and sloppy. It's just bad for the game.
Fomo seems only strong with vigilance creatures. If you play it with normal creatures, you don't truly get an extra combat step, you just give one creature double strike.
36% is mind blowing. You have to consider that most lands and basic utility cards aren't from the MH sets. It's likely close to 50% of the "interesting" cards in the format. If they print a new land cycle in the next direct to modern set I would expect them to try and power creep fetchlands in some way.
Fun fact, that type of badger is from great britain I think? And they are super chill. Not like badgers here in the US who will rip you in half. so it's funny that they chose this version of a badger to be all angry
I love the crew, but podcasts with Crim just taste better. Welcome back Crim. Sorry about your bike.
What if the one ring put the burden countrers on the player similarly to an experience counter, that way a new one ring won't reset your damage
I've literally said this before, you should only be allowed to have one copy of the one ring in your deck for flavor win, and if that's not an option, make it so that the burden counters are on the player and not on the card. The one ring wasn't a burden to itself but it was to those around it
100% agree with this. Excellent take. It makes it so that chaining rings becomes a nonissue.
Hugs, Grisly Guardian is playable in Gruul Omnath for sure.
Seth doesn't realize that if Ring was restricted, Phyrexian Metamorph would become the next big expensive magic card :)
It should either be a ONE of or banned. They banned Smugglers Copter for less.
Burden counter should be attached to the player and not to the ring itself. That would be more flavour appropriate and would solve a lot of the problems with the card. This removes the incentive to chain One Rings and thereby remove the "need" for restriction.
Burden counters should have been placed onto players and have an innate "deals a damage to you on your upkeep" ability. Frodo's and Bilbo's exposure to the ring haunts him long after the rings destruction.
33:44 I actually agree with Crim here and idk what fantasy land he's living in that commander decks from 4-5 years ago don't hold up. I have commander decks from 4-5 years ago that I haven't tweaked and they're still brutal. I see people with commander decks from 8 years ago with minimal tweaks that are still insanely powerful.
Commander focus isn't bad for commander, because that format isn't about a meta or competitive tournaments.
Modern focus is bad when it shifts everything constantly and peoples decks become unplayable. That format isn't a casual fun format. Commander is.
Huggs is going to be a super cool card in the 99 in gruul x-ramp.
Crying about grief but advocating for the one ring is wild
I have a feeling if the one ring is restricted and karn is not (or banned), you'd just see 4x karn lists with ring + blood clock or whatever
I really wonder about the diversity question with the One Ring. It allows a lot of potential diversity elsewhere in the decks (playing jank) because of its card advantage and protection.
Something I was just thinking of today - what are the odds that they eventually start printing a direct-to-modern bonus sheet/supplemental product/etc. with each standard set? They already did it with EDH so it doesn't seem *impossible*...
Crim! It’s definitely Luigi’s Mansion! I said exactly the same as you in this to some friends 😂