The reason that I don't believe that will needs to be banned is that is doesnt serve a purpose that other cards in the format don't also serve, although it does serve this purpose (in my opinion) on a more efficient level than any of those cards. I consider Vintage to be about two types of non-distinct, sometimes interchangable cards: enablers and the enabled. Enablers are cards like will, tinker, ancestral, moxen, lotus, ritual, workshop, academy, and tinker. Each of these enables other, less broken cards to become relevant and good in this format. Ancestral enables merchant scroll, tinker enables darksteel colossus, workshop enables smokestack, etc. etc. Will enables (and has enabled) burning wish, LED, gifts, and gush. The problem with will is that unlike the other cards, it hasnt enabled black lotuses, and card advantage engines. All of the enablers can produce random wins, so I consider that argument null. The problem is whether or not will is simply enabling too well. When looking at cards will has enabled, however, we see tutors, 0cc accalerants, and card advantage engines, as opposed to big creatures, limited tutors (much more so in the case of merchant scroll VS. Burning Wish) and, at worse, mindslaver. The question I ask myself, then, is this: wouldn't some other card, albeit perhaps not as efficiently, have abused gifts, or gush, or LED, since they are so obviously full of potential? Wouldn't they have, at some point, become an issue with some other interaction? I believe that they would have. As such, I can't argue for the banning of will, as even though is has clearly been an enabler, something few cards enjoy the luxury of becoming, it simply isn't the only card that could enable this sort of brokenness.