B&R Results are In - No Change for Vintage

[Moxlotus]

I agree.    My point is that IF anything were to be restricted, it is crazy to restrict more cards on account of Will.    Treating the symptoms doesn't make sense if you can kill the disease. 

Is Will the disease, or is it Lotus?

What about Scryb Sprites?   

I'm not quite sure where that is coming from.   There are only two cards that are legitimately under debate for restriction: Grim Tutor and Gifts Ungiven.  Both cards are specifically used to tutor up Yawgmoth's Will as their primary strategic purpose.    That has no more to do with Lotus than Scryb Sprites. 

I would maintain that Will is not nearly as broken if Black Lotus was not in the format.  Gifting for Will gets a hell of a lot slower without Lotus.  Grimming up Will gets a lot worse without access to Black Lotus in the format.  I'm honestly not sure which is more "distorting"--Black Lotus or Will.  To some the format is Will v. Anti-will.  I'd classify it as fast mana v. anti fast mana.

I'd argue that its the So-Lo-Moxen + crypt that enable Will, Gifts, and any number of degenerate plays. They as a whole are the "Necro", everything else is just a scapegoat. They also happen to "be" Type I in many peoples minds (however silly that is), and no one will ever suggest banning them for power reasons. .: arguments like this will always crop up, will or no will, because something will abuse fast mana always. 

I agree completely.

[Smmenen]

I agree.    My point is that IF anything were to be restricted, it is crazy to restrict more cards on account of Will.    Treating the symptoms doesn't make sense if you can kill the disease. 

Is Will the disease, or is it Lotus?

What about Scryb Sprites?   

I'm not quite sure where that is coming from.   There are only two cards that are legitimately under debate for restriction: Grim Tutor and Gifts Ungiven.  Both cards are specifically used to tutor up Yawgmoth's Will as their primary strategic purpose.    That has no more to do with Lotus than Scryb Sprites. 

I would maintain that Will is not nearly as broken if Black Lotus was not in the format.  Gifting for Will gets a hell of a lot slower without Lotus.  Grimming up Will gets a lot worse without access to Black Lotus in the format. 

That's factually untrue.   MDG and Grim Long are two decks I designed and designed with the express purpose of abusing Yawgmoth's Will.   Neither deck intends to find Black Lotus before playing Yawgmoth's Will.   If Lotus shows up, great - if not, who cares?  Yawgmoth's Will will be lethal either way.   

[Moxlotus]

I agree.    My point is that IF anything were to be restricted, it is crazy to restrict more cards on account of Will.    Treating the symptoms doesn't make sense if you can kill the disease. 

Is Will the disease, or is it Lotus?

What about Scryb Sprites?   

I'm not quite sure where that is coming from.   There are only two cards that are legitimately under debate for restriction: Grim Tutor and Gifts Ungiven.  Both cards are specifically used to tutor up Yawgmoth's Will as their primary strategic purpose.    That has no more to do with Lotus than Scryb Sprites. 

I would maintain that Will is not nearly as broken if Black Lotus was not in the format.  Gifting for Will gets a hell of a lot slower without Lotus.  Grimming up Will gets a lot worse without access to Black Lotus in the format. 

That's factually untrue.   MDG and Grim Long are two decks I designed and designed with the express purpose of abusing Yawgmoth's Will.   Neither deck intends to find Black Lotus before playing Yawgmoth's Will.   If Lotus shows up, great - if not, who cares?  Yawgmoth's Will will be lethal either way.   

My memory could be incorrect, but after reading all of your Gifts articles it seems that Lotus shows up in the piles as much if not more often than Will.

Again, my memory might be wrong but haven't you written at length about how Lotus is soooooo essential to Long?  I think it was in a rebuttal to Chapin's assertion about something involving Ancestral.

Either way, Lotus would not get much worse without Will.  However, Will would be definitely worse without Black Lotus

[diopter]

To be absolutely clear:

I am agnostic as to whether Yawg Will should be banned right now.

I DO, however, believe that Yawg Will should absolutely be banned if ever Gifts or Grim Tutor would be restricted.   It is insane to restrict other cards on account of Yawgmoth's Will being a problem.   Grim Tutor is an objectively mediocre card.  Putting it on the restricted list because of its insane synergy with one card is silly.  Gifts Ungiven is not a viable engine without Will.   

Steve, I understood from your Ban-Will article that you would favor banning Will over restricting another card because of it, because banning Will would allow you to play more cards - rather than being able to play with 1 Gifts and 1 Will, for example, you'd be able to play 4 Gifts.

However, I think that argument is flawed. As you say yourself, Grim Tutor is objectively mediocre, and Gifts Ungiven is not a viable engine without Will. If you ban Will, you effectively remove Gifts Ungiven and Grim Tutor from the realm of playability. Essentially, you go from being able to playing those 9 cards (Will, Gifts, and Grim Tutor) to getting play zero of those cards.

You are redefining the meaning of "playable" in this context from something that exists within the rules to something that is viable in competitive play.

Guilty as charged.

However, in a tournament setting, "playable within the rules" and "viable in competitive play" mean the same thing.

Consider this:

The current B/R list contains Voltaic Key, which is unanimously considered to be safe to be unrestricted. You've written that were it unrestricted, it would see four times as much play as it does now - none, that is. It would not matter if Voltaic Key was banned, restricted, unrestricted, allowed with more than 4 copies, etc. - it is not a playable card. The move to get Key of the B/R list is not to add playable cards to the Vintage card pool, but to move towards making the list an accurate representation of what is "too good" in Vintage.

OK. Coming back to banning Will. Ban Will, and you don't have to restrict Grim Tutor or Gifts Ungiven. Agreed. You can play 4 copies of these cards to your heart's content. Agreed. But, you will not have a tournament viable deck.

This is central to the discussion. B/R decisions that don't affect the playable card pool might as well not have any effect at all. If Voltaic Key were banned instead of unrestricted tomorrow, then a playable-by-the-rules card would be removed from the cardpool, but it would not matter one whit. Not one whit. You can ban all of the outright unplayables (hundreds and hundreds of cards like Tarpan, Squire, Grizzly Bears, Inspiration, etc.) as well as cards at the edge of unplayability (cards like Force Spike and Compulsive Research) and it would not matter one whit. It would not affect deck decisions at any level except at the casual level, where the very concept of a B/R list is least relevant, if at all. All that really ever matters is a change to the playable card pool. Banning Will would remove cards from that card pool, and my opinion is that not many, if any, new cards would be added to it.

Of course, you are right in that you could restrict a hundred cards in Vintage to increase the playable card pool. Dark Ritual, fetchlands, Brainstorm, Mana Drain, Workshop, Force of Will, etc. - restricting such cards would definitely add more cards to the playable pool. Hell, if you banned the artifact mana (that's 10 to 12 cards) you'd see so much more diversity in Vintage.

Realistically though, you could never do this - too many Vintage players, especially on these boards, would oppose these ideas because these cards are what make the format Vintage to them. B/R decisions regarding Vintage have to be made within the scope of this reality - that certain cards, regardless of how they warp the playable card pool, will remain available because of their importance to the core of Vintage. I beleive that within this scope, banning Yawg Will will create more harm than good.

[brianpk80]

I'm not quite sure where that is coming from.   There are only two cards that are legitimately under debate for restriction: Grim Tutor and Gifts Ungiven. 

Stephen, while I see the persuasiveness in your "fix the disease, not the symtoms" reasoning, I'm curious why you say this above.  Most arguments in favor of restricting Grim fall flat on account of the fact that it's a pretty objectively balanced card.  Also there's a secondary market factor that comes into play with Grim since it's well over $100 these days.  As for Gifts Ungiven, the last in depth discussion on that specific topic seemed to generate a strong consensus that it should not be restricted.

By contrast, there's been some healthy discussion looking beyond the two popular decks' namesake cards and honing in on the enablers they run like Merchant Scroll and Brainstorm.  There are also some recurrent though disdained suggestions here that we take a closer look at Oath of Druids, Mishra's Workshop, Dark Ritual, and a few others.  Perhaps you are using popularity as your lone metric, but I'm not sure how you arrive at dismissing these ideas as illegitimate while placing a loftier imprimatur on debating the restriction Gifts Ungiven and Grim Tutor.   

-BPK

[forests failed you]

We may be severely underestimating just how good Gifts Ungiven is as a card.  Yes, it has mad synergy with Yawgmoth's Will; nobody will deny that.  However, it is an extremely powerful card all on its own.  It was the engine for the best deck during its block season, it was a critcal part in one of the best standard decks for well over a year, it was the engine of an Extended deck during this season, and it is currently banned in 5 color magic (as is Will).  In addition, I would be willing to make that claim that Gifts doesn't ONLY have synergy with Will, but rather that Gifts tends to have synergy with other extremely powerful cards.  If Gifts were to be restricted it wouldn't be just because of Yawgmoths Will... It would be at least somewhat on its own merits.  Albeit the inclusion of Yawgmoth's Will in the format may be what puts it over the edge, or makes it so frusterating for newer players to play against.

However, who is to say that Gifts wouldn't be restriction worthy even if Yawgmoth's Will were removed from the format?  It is an extremely powerful card in a format full of restricted bombs, as has already been evidenced.

[Draven]

If storm is the real culprit in magnifying the unacceptability of Yawgmoth's Will, is this a problem that can be addressed by the printing of a very focused and potent strategy hoser?  For instance:

Tormad's Crypt

It is a zero casting cost, colorless answer to Yawgs Will.

What happeend when everyone was running 4 Wastlands? Dual lands took a hit, people stopped playing 4 color, all non-basic mana bases. If people actually started playing to hate Will, I think Will would become slower due to the protection Will players need.

For the record Wizards, I do not belive Will should be banned...

[brianpk80]

If storm is the real culprit in magnifying the unacceptability of Yawgmoth's Will, is this a problem that can be addressed by the printing of a very focused and potent strategy hoser?  For instance:

Tormad's Crypt

It is a zero casting cost, colorless answer to Yawgs Will.

Hmmm, I think you misread my post.  Tormod's Crypt hoses Will itself (assuming you actually get a turn to play it) but I was focusing on the fact that it's the Storm mechanic that's unabated here.  Hence, the examples I listed were types of possible Storm hosers we could be thinking of, not ways to shut down Yawgmoth's Will.

-BPK

[yespuhyren]

We may be severely underestimating just how good Gifts Ungiven is as a card.  Yes, it has mad synergy with Yawgmoth's Will; nobody will deny that.  However, it is an extremely powerful card all on its own.  It was the engine for the best deck during its block season, it was a critcal part in one of the best standard decks for well over a year, it was the engine of an Extended deck during this season, and it is currently banned in 5 color magic (as is Will).  In addition, I would be willing to make that claim that Gifts doesn't ONLY have synergy with Will, but rather that Gifts tends to have synergy with other extremely powerful cards.  If Gifts were to be restricted it wouldn't be just because of Yawgmoths Will... It would be at least somewhat on its own merits.  Albeit the inclusion of Yawgmoth's Will in the format may be what puts it over the edge, or makes it so frusterating for newer players to play against.

However, who is to say that Gifts wouldn't be restriction worthy even if Yawgmoth's Will were removed from the format?  It is an extremely powerful card in a format full of restricted bombs, as has already been evidenced.

Gifts is insane with welder too, lets not forget, as you can tutor up Titan/Slaver or Titan/Trike or something along those lines.

[jcb193]

While I personally would like to see a Will-less format, I think it brings up an issue that nobody seems to want to discuss, and that is Vintage's "untouchables."  None of us would be upset if our $7 YWills were banned, but if it truly were an unbiased process, surely Black Lotus, Crypt, Ancestral, would have to be looked at.  I cannot imagine anyone voting for the banning of Black Lotus.  Therefore, any argument that states YWill needs to be out of the format, will be supporting a flawed system.  A system that is not prepared to deal with the bannings of $100+ cards.

Do I care about a flawed system that respects the "untouchables."  Not really, but I would have issues with anyone who said that the banning of YWill could exist in a pure, unbiased system of elimination.   

[diopter]

While I personally would like to see a Will-less format, I think it brings up an issue that nobody seems to want to discuss, and that is Vintage's "untouchables."  None of us would be upset if our $7 YWills were banned, but if it truly were an unbiased process, surely Black Lotus, Crypt, Ancestral, would have to be looked at.  I cannot imagine anyone voting for the banning of Black Lotus.  Therefore, any argument that states YWill needs to be out of the format, will be supporting a flawed system.  A system that is not prepared to deal with the bannings of $100+ cards.

Do I care about a flawed system that respects the "untouchables."  Not really, but I would have issues with anyone who said that the banning of YWill could exist in a pure, unbiased system of elimination.   

This has already been done for many years, in Legacy.

[brianpk80]

While I personally would like to see a Will-less format, I think it brings up an issue that nobody seems to want to discuss, and that is Vintage's "untouchables."  None of us would be upset if our $7 YWills were banned, but if it truly were an unbiased process, surely Black Lotus, Crypt, Ancestral, would have to be looked at.  I cannot imagine anyone voting for the banning of Black Lotus.  Therefore, any argument that states YWill needs to be out of the format, will be supporting a flawed system.  A system that is not prepared to deal with the bannings of $100+ cards.

Do I care about a flawed system that respects the "untouchables."  Not really, but I would have issues with anyone who said that the banning of YWill could exist in a pure, unbiased system of elimination.   

I think you're right on the money here but I'd defend a system that respects the "untouchables."  For well over a decade, the power nine and a few pricy out of print cards have formed the basis for what I'd call the essential "lore" of Vintage.  They are columns that define the very format not only in terms of playability but also in terms of rarity and mystique.  Ideological purity sounds like a noble goal for the forming the B&R list, but definitely not at the expense of eviscerating the holy grails of the format. 

Realistically, Moxen, Lotus, and friends should never be banned even despite the objective brokenness they bring to the format.  If we want pure evenhandedness in gaging cards for restriction/banning, respecting the "elder" and most revered cards in the format must still be a trumping factor and any measuring sticks must begin with this in mind.

We make that admittedly logically inconsistent exception for the sake of the format's lore and core identity, and then can move on to considering other cards.  While it may seem unfair in terms of raw card power, this is exactly why a $10 Urza's Saga rare is able to attract real scrutiny while Moxen etc. get an automatic free pass.  I don't find that as a bad thing.

-BPK

[diopter]

While I personally would like to see a Will-less format, I think it brings up an issue that nobody seems to want to discuss, and that is Vintage's "untouchables."  None of us would be upset if our $7 YWills were banned, but if it truly were an unbiased process, surely Black Lotus, Crypt, Ancestral, would have to be looked at.  I cannot imagine anyone voting for the banning of Black Lotus.  Therefore, any argument that states YWill needs to be out of the format, will be supporting a flawed system.  A system that is not prepared to deal with the bannings of $100+ cards.

Do I care about a flawed system that respects the "untouchables."  Not really, but I would have issues with anyone who said that the banning of YWill could exist in a pure, unbiased system of elimination.   

I think you're right on the money here but I'd defend a system that respects the "untouchables."  For well over a decade, the power nine and a few pricy out of print cards have formed the basis for what I'd call the essential "lore" of Vintage.  They are columns that define the very format not only in terms of playability but also in terms of rarity and mystique.  Ideological purity sounds like a noble goal for the forming the B&R list, but definitely not at the expense of eviscerating the holy grails of the format. 

Realistically, Moxen, Lotus, and friends should never be banned even despite the objective brokenness they bring to the format.  If we want pure evenhandedness in gaging cards for restriction/banning, respecting the "elder" and most revered cards in the format must still be a trumping factor and any measuring sticks must begin with this in mind.

We make that admittedly logically inconsistent exception for the sake of the format's lore and core identity, and then can move on to considering other cards.  While it may seem unfair in terms of raw card power, this is exactly why a $10 Urza's Saga rare is able to attract real scrutiny while Moxen etc. get an automatic free pass.  I don't find that as a bad thing.

-BPK

For you, the identity of Vintage is derived from the existence of the oldest of powerful cards, the Power 9.
For myself, the identity of Vintage is the existence of every broken tutor, bomb, fast mana, or design mistake, available for me to play - with the exception of the dexterity and ante cards, which are mechanics that the DCI have decided to stop supporting in their Eternal formats.
For others, the identity of Vintage is derived from being able to play whatever cards they want, and they would want to play with ante/dexterity cards on that principle.

You see where I am going with this - what makes Vintage special is different for everyone. Many people on this thread are against banning cards for power reasons, and many want to see a specific card (Will) banned for that reason. However, taking the position to ban Will, without taking into consideration the myriad number of other strategy-limiting or playable-card-limiting cards like the Power 9, is a logically indefensible position to me.

[brianpk80]

For you, the identity of Vintage is derived from the existence of the oldest of powerful cards, the Power 9.
For myself, the identity of Vintage is the existence of every broken tutor, bomb, fast mana, or design mistake, available for me to play - with the exception of the dexterity and ante cards, which are mechanics that the DCI have decided to stop supporting in their Eternal formats.
For others, the identity of Vintage is derived from being able to play whatever cards they want, and they would want to play with ante/dexterity cards on that principle.

Much as you're correct that the identity of Vintage is in the eye of the beholder, I think it would be a mistake to assign the same deference towards ante cards or $5 rares as we do to the Power Nine and similarly revered expensive cards like Mana Drain, Workshop, LoA, and Bazaar.  The secondary market and "lore" factor of Vintage isn't something that can be summarily cast aside in the name of achieving an ideological purity and evenhandedness in the B&R list.  While the game may play out in a more objectively balanced manner were we to ban Black Lotus and Ancestral Recall, that end wouldn't be justified by the means which for most of us would equate to ripping the heart and soul out of this format.  Relating that to the dissatisfaction one might theoretically feel with the prohibition on ante cards is an unfair comparison that shouldn't require elaborating.   

You see where I am going with this - what makes Vintage special is different for everyone. Many people on this thread are against banning cards for power reasons, and many want to see a specific card (Will) banned for that reason. However, taking the position to ban Will, without taking into consideration the myriad number of other strategy-limiting or playable-card-limiting cards like the Power 9, is a logically indefensible position to me.

It is logically inconsistent, yes, I already acknowledged that.  It's an allowance made for the overall essence of Vintage Magic.  I did not defend its logic, rather I defended the fact that having a system with a few unabashedly illogical allowances is an acceptable system to maintain both the game balance and intrigue of the format.  Reality and ideological purity isn't exactly a match made in heaven. 

FWIW, I'm not 100% sold on the idea of banning anything right now.  I find the idea of printing focused strategy hosers to be the most utilitarian solution to the grievances rasied here.  On one hand, we could achieve the goal of deterring good players from gravitating towards solitaire non-interactive decks that will ultimately pollute the format (and have already in many estimations) while still maintaining the B&R list without the stress of controversial changes. 

-BPK

[petergrifindor]

Hello to everybody from Spain and sorry for my english.

To me the  discussion of banning yawgmoth´s will, is a sintoma of another problem that the Vintage community will have to face someday. This problem is that the card poll is growing with each collection that enter (Grim Tutor, Imperial Seal, Gifts Ungiven, Trinisphere...), and the decks are becoming more and more powerfull ( Which I love  ).


I think it may happen that one day the restricted list won´t be enough to keep the power of some decks in check. Then Vintage would be a monster that can eat itself. If that happen we would be forced to change things.

I think  banning cards is not the solution the format needs. To ban Yawgmoth´s Will will leave the things almost in the same situation that we have now ( almost every deck playing more than  6 mana artifacts, a lot of tutors, and 2 or 3 bombs that leave the game sealed by turn 3).

If you really want to shake the format why not to intruduce a limit in the restricted cards per deck you can play. Now the tier 1 decks runs about 15-20 restricted cards, which  are pretty much the same in every deck. This is what limits the tactics or the strategy in Vintage: In order to win you have to play with this cards.

If you could play with only 9 restricted cards which will they be? The tutors? The aceleration? The Bombs? Ancestral and Time Walk?

[Brainstorm]

Now that is an interesting suggestion that allows all cards to be played but curbs the increasingly degenerative nature of the format. If one were to compile some metrics on the number of restricted cards per deck that could be revealing.

[Imzakhor]

Sounds an awful lot like my suggestion of a mox restriction/tutor restriction, though depending on the actual number of restricted cards usable, would be either more or less restrictive. (Probably more).

I would LOVE a cap on the number of restricted cards available to each deck. Talk about diversity then... The floodgates would open. Power creep would matter a whole lot less.

A number like 15 sounds about right, as a start. All the mana, if you want, and nothing more, or drop a few bombs, at the expense of faster mana.

I LIKE IT!

[zeus-online]

I hate that idea, i'd much rather ban a couple of cards - Although i just don't see anything other then Will being good enough to warrant a banning.

/Zeus

[diopter]

I hate that idea, i'd much rather ban a couple of cards - Although i just don't see anything other then Will being good enough to warrant a banning.

/Zeus

I agree with you - except I don't see Will being good enough, or rather, bad enough (for the format) to ban.