[Free Podcast] So Many Insane Plays # 23: The Vintage B&R List & More!

[Samoht]

So Library would play a role similar to that of Flusterstorm currently, which gives you a leg up in the mirror but is pretty terrible vs the rest of the field. With Library unrestricted, blue mages would have to choose between metagaming for the mirror, at the cost of extremely weakening their mana base (Stephen and Kevin discuss this well in the podcast), or metagaming for other archetypes instead. I don't see a problem with that, and I certainly don't buy that 4x Library would become an autoinclude.

No, Library is good elsewhere. It just absurdly dominates the Blue match up more than other things. Imagine a pitch counter based deck based on Library, Standstill, and other CA style cards. It just wouldn't be interesting at all. People complain about URg Landstill, imagine a list that is even more potent at leaning on CA as a crutch.

If they think that LoA is a mana base problem, then they simply are not correct. Colorless mana isn't an issue when your counters don't cost mana.

[vaughnbros]

vaughnbros, what does "[Balance] is pretty much just as good if not better than windfall" even mean? The two cards play very different roles and would be used by very different decks. I can't think of any meaningful way to directly compare them.

I thought the comparison was pretty obvious, but I'll elaborate more on my statement.  I'm not sure exactly how they play very different roles.  Both cards are brutally powerful in decks with fast mana when you win the die roll.  Windfall is essentially 1 of the 3 modes of balance.  It evens out each players hand.  It does it in a different way more conducive to a combo player, but nonetheless it is the same type of effect.  Balance has the added bonus of being able to be used as armaggdedon, in certain builds, and wrath of god, in certain situations so I feel that in the right hands its better than windfall. 

The whole its restricted and sees basically no play is a pretty bad argument for this card.  Merchant scroll is also restricted and sees basically no play.  Channel is restricted and sees basically no play.  Should we unrestrict those cards too?  There are cards on the restricted list because of how broken they are when you can meet their restrictions.  Balance is one of those cards.

Just like unrestricting draw 7's unrestricting this card promotes more die rolls, something that vintage is finally moving away from.  Why do we need to pull the format back in that direction?

There have been comparisons of balances ability to mind twist.  This should not be done.  Mind twist would cost 8 mana to twist away a whole hand, or 5 mana to even knock out a majority of it.  Balance costs 2 and only requires that you play a few cards from your hand.

So Library would play a role similar to that of Flusterstorm currently, which gives you a leg up in the mirror but is pretty terrible vs the rest of the field. With Library unrestricted, blue mages would have to choose between metagaming for the mirror, at the cost of extremely weakening their mana base (Stephen and Kevin discuss this well in the podcast), or metagaming for other archetypes instead. I don't see a problem with that, and I certainly don't buy that 4x Library would become an autoinclude.

No, Library is good elsewhere. It just absurdly dominates the Blue match up more than other things. Imagine a pitch counter based deck based on Library, Standstill, and other CA style cards. It just wouldn't be interesting at all. People complain about URg Landstill, imagine a list that is even more potent at leaning on CA as a crutch.

If they think that LoA is a mana base problem, then they simply are not correct. Colorless mana isn't an issue when your counters don't cost mana.

Yeh library is very broken even outside the blue match up.  For anyone thats played with the card extensively they should know that having library on the draw pretty much makes the hand an auto keep.

The only real problem with the card is that its difficult to keep yourself from getting too far behind on the board state while using it.  By unrestricting it, hands with 2 loa will become pretty common, over 15% of the time, and in those situations you can advance your board state.  You'd be able to force and play a land every turn while keeping 7 cards in hand to activate it.

Basically the end result I see of the card being unrestricted would be that heavy control blue lists would be the only ones to continue existing.  Or in other words the reduction of deck diversity.

[evouga]

I'm still not seeing a clear comparison here.

Windfall would be played in a storm shell. Windfall refills your hand and lets you continue comboing out. Balance on the other hand is completely useless in a storm deck.

Balance is best used in a heavy control shell as a trump against creature strategies. Windfall is completely useless in such a deck.


The "Balance on the play" scenario is a red herring. Sure, in Christmasland you can play 6x Mox Balance, and you are the heavy favorite to win. Of course, if you have 6 moxen against a helpless opponent, I'm not sure why you wouldn't want your seventh card to be EtW, or Burning Wish, or any number of other game-winning unrestricted options. More realistically, Balance on turn 1 will force your opponent to discard his worst 3 cards (note that the discard is not random, a significant disadvantage in comparison to Mind Twist). That merely makes Balance Vintage-playable, not format-warping. Hymn here would likely be stronger.

Yes, Balance is sometimes a Wrath, sometimes a Mind Twist, sometimes Armageddon. But it's almost never what you want it to be, and the quaint days of spending several turns sculpting the perfect Balance blowout unmolested are long behind us.

[Smmenen]

Our library discussion in the podcast is fairly nuanced, and not well represented here.   I've played with Library consistently from 2001 to roughly 2006.   I think some of my Gifts decks ran it.  I don't think Library would dominate Vintage or create a dominant deck. 

[MaximumCDawg]

Finally got through the whole podcast.  My thoughts, as usual, come from someone who only has a few pieces of power and is drawn to non-top tier decks because I play sanctioned only.  From that perspective...

I think much of your Podcast is colored by your focus on Shops as the boogeyman of the format.  This is explicit when you're talking about restricting Lodestone Golem or Chalice of the Void, but I think also lurks behind why you consider Library a safe unrestrict.  I take issue with both (though I agree with much of the rest of your analysis).

SHOPS - GOLEM / CHALICE

Shops, as you point out, is not statistically dominant.  You therefore do not have objective data justifying a restriction like you would have for, say, Thirst.  As Kevin points out, Golem has simply filled the hole that Trinisphere could have filled.  It makes Shops into a very real thing.  

I like this for three reasons:

(1) Shops keeps sideboards honest.

Shops, like Dredge, demands very specific hate if you want a chance to beat it. Now, like I said, I tend to play off-the-wall decks or aggro/control -- the most "competitive" I get is probably Oath -- and this is exactly what I want in my format.  Having two decks that demand specific answers prevent the generic blue control / combo decks from having enough sideboard space to dedicate to beating unusual strategies, and so they have a chance.  Humans, for example, becomes much less viable if your opponents all have sideboard space for a playset of Pyroclasm and friends.

(2) It minimizes the impression of the format as one of "turn 1 kills" or "coin flips"

Here I completely disagree with you guys.  You characterize shops as doing the opposite.  The reason I don't agree is that Shops does a very good job of suppressing combo, particularly storm, but also things like Doomsday.  When these decks win on turn 1 or 2, they finish the job.  It's big, its' splashy, and it's a heck of alot more what people think of when they think of Vintage.  It's also much harder for non-blue control decks to deal with than Shops is, which brings me too:

(3) Non-blue decks, which benefit from Shops keeping boards honest, can also compete with Shops on par with the blue decks.

It wouldn't mean much to say that Shops keeps boards honest and combo down if it also preyed on the aggro and second-tier strategies just as hard.  But, I don't think it does.  Against shops, these decks are in potentially just as solid a position as the fully powered blue decks are.  Shops hate is not expensive.  Wasteland, Force, and Confidant are sort of pricey, but beyond that, Steel Sabotage, Hurkyl's Recall, Shattering Spree, Ancient Grudge, Trygon Predator, Relicwarder, Pridemage, etc, are all very cheap and affordable cards that a non-powered deck can use just as well as a powered deck.  You lose moxen, fine, but you probably run Spirit Guides instead, which is not necessarily worse against shops.  You lose the recurring nature of the mana, but you can cast them through Chalice at 0.

I note specifically that Guli has been doing wonderful things with Mayor of Avabruk in specifically this context.  It slips in through shops and then provides you with a stream of 3/3s to kill off Golems.  That's an innovation that I'm waiting to spread, but it's an example of how non-powered decks can do well.

My conclusion, therefore, is that Steve doesn't like shops because you today typically play fully-powered decks, usually blue control or combo, and shops is a big roadblock for those decks.  This is leading to an inflated sense of how "oppressive" it actually is, since it statistically is not dominating.  I think it's opening the door for the rogue decks to actually exist.

LIBRARY OF ALEXANDRIA

On the flip side, I think you very much underestimate the impact of unrestricting Library because you over-estimate how much a turn 1 Library stunts your development.  A turn 1 library feeds on itself very quickly.  Your development is "stunted" in the sense that you can't vomit out a bunch of moxen, or have one blue open turn 1.  So what?  You're protecting yourself with free countermagic turn 1, then regular counters on turn 2.  In return, you're generating 3 to 5 cards or so; you sit back and sculpt your hand until you can win.

Now, losing your first turn is bad against Shops.  But against everyone else, I think the tradeoff is more than reasonable.  No one wants landstill to lead with a library every game!

[Smmenen]

No one wants landstill to lead with a library every game!

I'm fine with that actually.  Landstill being good is healthy for the format.  Would definitely combat steroetypes about it.  Plus, I don't think it's possible for Landstill to dominate Vintage as % of Top 8s for a long period of time, even with 4 LoA.  Nor would people stop playing Bob/Snapcaster decks, so it wouldn't reduce the diversity of blue decks by that much more either, I believe.  

[Samoht]

No one wants landstill to lead with a library every game!

I'm fine with that actually.  Landstill being good is healthy for the format.  Would definitely combat steroetypes about it.  Plus, I don't think it's possible for Landstill to dominate Vintage as % of Top 8s for a long period of time, even with 4 LoA.  Nor would people stop playing Bob/Snapcaster decks, so it wouldn't reduce the diversity of blue decks by that much more either, I believe.  

Why would you not play Snapcaster in a deck with Library? He's free Card Advantage. You shouldn't be fine with a control deck that can lead/stack LoA. That would actually be oppressive and statistically dominant.

[Smmenen]

Oh, they definitely would play LoA & Snapcaste togther.  There would be LoA/Bob decks, just as you can even play Gush/LoA decks.  I was talking specifically about being fine with Landstill having a turn one LoA 40% of the time.  I think there is an equilibrium where, for most blue decks, the optimal number of LoAs maindeck is less than 4.  LoA is not the card it was ten years ago. The format is much faster today. 

[brianpk80]

Oh, they definitely would play LoA & Snapcaste togther.  There would be LoA/Bob decks, just as you can even play Gush/LoA decks.  I was talking specifically about being fine with Landstill having a turn one LoA 40% of the time.  I think there is an equilibrium where, for most blue decks, the optimal number of LoAs maindeck is less than 4.  LoA is not the card it was ten years ago. The format is much faster today.  

There's no point in unrestricting it, since there is no strong demand for doing so and the genie can't as easily go back into the bottle if it ends up being a catastrophe, due to its small print run and likely price explosion.  No one in favor of unrestricting it seems to care that much either way but several people are very opposed to it.  The burden outweighs the benefit.  It's also very "unfun" to play against, a criterion that seems to animate your opposition to Workshop.  

The point I made earlier about context v. the card itself was simply that both should be considered when making changes to the B&R list.  Pretending that there is only context and that there is no such thing as an individual card's power level is too clever by half.  

If you're soliciting community input on the topic to aggregate, my vote would be:

Unrestrict Gifts Ungiven
Unrestrict Regrowth
Unrestrict Ponder
Restrict Lodestone Golem
Ban Tinker

[MaximumCDawg]

There's no point in unrestricting it, since there is no strong demand for doing so and the genie can't as easily go back into the bottle if it ends up being a catastrophe, due to its small print run and likely price explosion.  No one in favor of unrestricting it seems to care that much either way but several people are very opposed to it.  The burden outweighs the benefit.  It's also very "unfun" to play against, a criterion that seems to animate your opposition to Workshop.  

I don't know about "unfun" exactly.  If your blue control opponent lands a first turn Library, and you don't have a Wasteland ready, you're just going to watch them draw 3+ cards and counter everything you do while you assemble a counter-attack.  Speaking as someone who runs fishy decks, mind you.  It's uncounterable card advantage, which is HUGE in that match up.  It's not exactly unfun, but by the time they draw their 4th extra card, you know how this game is going.  It's like someone resolving an early Ancestral, only you cannot counter it.  It's just really, retardedly powerful against any deck that isn't going to lock it up turn 1 (i.e. anything except Shops and Dredge).

If you're soliciting community input on the topic to aggregate, my vote would be:

Unrestrict Gifts Ungiven
Unrestrict Regrowth
Unrestrict Ponder
Restrict Lodestone Golem
Ban Tinker

Stop pickin' on Lodestone, man.  He's cool.

"Ban" tinker? We don't ban things around these parts, hoss.

[brianpk80]

"Ban" tinker? We don't ban things around these parts, hoss.

The banhammer has always been an option--Channel, Mind Twist, and Time Vault itself have all been banned for power level reasons.  Tinker, Yawgmoth's Will, and Time Vault have come up for ban discussion multiple times in the last decade but there's never been a resolution.  There was broad support for banning Vault/Tinker and a few voices on the other side saying "then go play Legacy" but nothing final ever came of it.  The levels of support might be different now with the remaining players since many people quit after 2008, the summer restrictions and Vault being the chief reasons cited.  One would think undoing most of that year would be a primary goal.  Time Vault is still a turn-off to people who might be otherwise interested in the format which dampens the sales pitch to get more people involved.  But it's become part of the P9 more or less and it would be unfair to people who own it to ban it now.  Tinker on the other hand doesn't have that barrier.       

[Smmenen]

That (Erik Lauer specifically, is my gues) is why it took so long to get Land Tax unbanned in Legacy. 

I owe Erik an apology! Erik actually got it unbanned. I will avoid speculation like that in the future. 

[MaximumCDawg]

Whoa doggy!

Steve, did you just get Regrowth unrestricted?

[Guli]

Oh, they definitely would play LoA & Snapcaste togther.  There would be LoA/Bob decks, just as you can even play Gush/LoA decks.  I was talking specifically about being fine with Landstill having a turn one LoA 40% of the time.  I think there is an equilibrium where, for most blue decks, the optimal number of LoAs maindeck is less than 4.  LoA is not the card it was ten years ago. The format is much faster today.  

There's no point in unrestricting it, since there is no strong demand for doing so and the genie can't as easily go back into the bottle if it ends up being a catastrophe, due to its small print run and likely price explosion.  No one in favor of unrestricting it seems to care that much either way but several people are very opposed to it.  The burden outweighs the benefit.  It's also very "unfun" to play against, a criterion that seems to animate your opposition to Workshop.  

The point I made earlier about context v. the card itself was simply that both should be considered when making changes to the B&R list.  Pretending that there is only context and that there is no such thing as an individual card's power level is too clever by half.  

If you're soliciting community input on the topic to aggregate, my vote would be:

Unrestrict Gifts Ungiven
Unrestrict Regrowth
Unrestrict Ponder
Restrict Lodestone Golem
Ban Tinker

I would not restrict Golem, just make it a legend.

About Tinker, I think it is fair if you indeed give blue Gifts and Ponder. Regrowth is unrestricted anyway now.

[psyburat]

Whoa doggy!

Steve, did you just get Regrowth unrestricted?

Nope, Brian did. 

[nedleeds]

Context defines the 'power level' of a card (or any game piece really, if we want to talk game theory) and in magic especially context is so deeply embedded in the connections and countless heuristics in a game as complex as magic. We have countless examples of this, and we only need to look at the history of the banned and restricted list for proof, Icy Manipulator, Mirror Universe, Gauntlet of Might and Ali From Cairo were all restricted in Type I at one time or another and some rightfully so. They were oppressive given the context around them. Conversely other cards weren't restricted and didn't need to be restricted because the number of powerful interactions with the context around them were limited. Block provides more examples of a card being too powerful given the context (Thawing Glaciers, Lin Sivvi, etc.).

As for actual BnR ... as somebody who wants to win with small and medium sized men who aren't Golems I can't condone Balance being unrestricted. It's the all time greatest anti-creature spell. It may even trump Oath so far as crushing man strategies. Decks that don't interact on the stack are at it's mercy, against sweepers (of which very few are played in vintage currently) you typically want to not over extend. Balance punishes you either way, if you over extend you get your men swept, if you sandbag and play 'smart' your opponent may sweep your smaller battlefield and mind rot the men out of your hand. I understand that maybe narrow answers would emerge (Loxodon Smiter, Meddling Mage, Gloom ???) but Balance is a real 'oops I win' card and thus should be a 1 of.

To give some perspective on regrowth ... it went on the Restricted list when Orcish Oriflamme came off. With all the blue recursion and red recursion I think it's safe to give it a go.

I'm not a fan of on the play if you don't have stack interaction you lose cards that are fairly linear. A storm deck performing a number of actions into a lethal storm count is one thing. Having Flash and Hulk in hand and following the script you read off the internet is irritating and not good for anyone.

I think the proliferation of blue cantrips makes Ponder something worth looking at. I mean you are cutting into your business when you start a blue deck with 4 x ponder, 4 x preordain, 1 x brainstorm, X x restricteds.

[Smmenen]

So Library would play a role similar to that of Flusterstorm currently, which gives you a leg up in the mirror but is pretty terrible vs the rest of the field. With Library unrestricted, blue mages would have to choose between metagaming for the mirror, at the cost of extremely weakening their mana base (Stephen and Kevin discuss this well in the podcast), or metagaming for other archetypes instead. I don't see a problem with that, and I certainly don't buy that 4x Library would become an autoinclude.

No, Library is good elsewhere. It just absurdly dominates the Blue match up more than other things. Imagine a pitch counter based deck based on Library, Standstill, and other CA style cards. It just wouldn't be interesting at all. People complain about URg Landstill, imagine a list that is even more potent at leaning on CA as a crutch.

If they think that LoA is a mana base problem, then they simply are not correct. Colorless mana isn't an issue when your counters don't cost mana.

This was a very interesting exchange.  So much so that I read these quotes and we discussed them in the listener feedback section of our latest podcast: www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=45256.msg624490