Menendian/Cron Podcast

[TheShop]

I have been taking a break from the vintage scene for a while and playing legacy.  I observed something and was talking about it with a friend when I heard a much better articulation of my point on the podcast.

Whenever wizards prints a card that consolidates several options into one, it is a tough break for the eternal scene.

The podcast mentions blightsteel as a great example.  I have always felt that lodestone eliminates the possibility of meaningful choice in Stax options.  Personally, I would rather have run other options than gone mono-brown.  My personal preference is irrelevant, but everyone has fewer options.

In vintage and legacy, I have noticed a similar phenomenon: a printing that eliminates the viability of cards in other decks.  I would extend their point to include this issue because such printings limit te card pool.  I am not convinced that these repercussions are known or even diligently considered by wizards.  It is easy to be bitter and paint wizards as pandering to their target younger audience who dislike control, prison, and combo.  I don't take that stance entirely either.

Sometimes options that are in the interest of a format or options that are popular with the majority of players have a huge impact on a few of us.  While I won't say that these are objectively worse for the game, it is tough to swallow sometimes when a new printing eliminates your previously viable deck.  Return to ravnica and shardless agent have made it so difficult to play grindy game in legacy.  I am also not opposed to everything that is new or "wearing my nostalgia goggles."  I just don't believe that everything new is progress either.

I don't know if these sentiments resonate with the larger community, but they have been on my mind for a while as wizards has systematically made it more and more difficult to play land destruction, control, prison, or combo in other formats.

I haven't finished the podcast, but it has been great so far.  I feel like menendian and cron touched on a giant issue for me personally.

[MTGFan]

In any Eternal format in which the card pool stretches back to the dawn of Magic, you will find an element of consolidation with every type of card or strategy.

- Brainstorm is the most efficient card filter ever printed and will supersede any other card filter in any blue deck that would want to play them.
- Dark Ritual is the most efficient non-Mox/Lotus mana acceleration ever printed and will supersede any other mana acceleration in the combo that would play such a card.
- Duress/Thoughtseize are two variations of the most efficient targeted discard ever printed and will supersede any other discard spell in the combo/aggro deck that would play discard.

And so on. Lodestone Golem is an auto-include in any Workshop deck right now. Does that mean the consolidation of some of these card strategies is a bad thing in this particular example? No more so than Dark Ritual/Brainstorm/Duress and their effects on card choice in their respective deck shells. The more recent printing of Golem simply brings it to the forefront of our consciousness. If we had been stumbling along with a variety of card filter effects and Wizards suddenly printed Brainstorm in the most recent set, what would our reaction be to the sudden consolidation of blue filter effects?

Consolidation is inevitable in a format that boasts such a vast card pool. Consolidation is not something to be feared, but to be acknowledged as the logical endpoint in the natural optimization of deck-building strategy and the inexorable growth of card efficiency.

[Smmenen]

I've written a design article (it's non-premium) that will go up on EC in the next few days, but it is definitley possible for Wizards and magic designers to make cards that increase the relevant card pool rather than consolidate it.  All pre-BSC tinker robots did this.  The trick is designing cards that are situationally better and worse than existing playables.  Thus, Flustrestorm can be printed without replacing Spell Pierce.  And so on. 

[Shax]

I've written a design article (it's non-premium) that will go up on EC in the next few days, but it is definitley possible for Wizards and magic designers to make cards that increase the relevant card pool rather than consolidate it.  All pre-BSC tinker robots did this.  The trick is designing cards that are situationally better and worse than existing playables.  Thus, Flustrestorm can be printed without replacing Spell Pierce.  And so on. 

This is also pointed out when they unrestricted Regrowth. They used the example cards as ''Yawgmoth's Will'' and ''Snapcaster Mage''.

[gkraigher]

I think it's funny that every blue player has this hatred for Lodestone Golem when the reality of the situation is that it has allowed a different archetype to become viable, thereby diversifying the field.  Sorry you don't get to gush 8 times on a single turn, because that's fair.  

By funny, I mean self-serving, bias, and hypocritical.  That's what I meant by funny.  I mean the exact same expansion set also gave us Jace, the Mindsculptor.  Do you see shop players saying, "well Jace the minsculptor consolidated 3 cards into 1 and then gave it another ultimate ability?"  No, you don't.  But when I do listen to this podcast, and I do appreciate everything these guys do for vintage, I hear a bias against workshop decks.   And while I will agree that piloting a workshop deck is easier than piloting a blue deck, it is no cake walk.  You still have to make decisions and you still have to play your cards in the right order.  

[TheWhiteDragon]

Related to this consolidation debate (and not to knock on shops specifically)...I recently just started playing legacy and modern in addition to the Vintage I knew exclusively for 16 years.  I have to say that simply by Workshop not being a card, there is an astounding array of viable strategies.  There are still grave decks, and grave hate, so bazaar/dredge would have minimal impact. Moxen lend speed, but they'd offer the same speed to every deck, so I don't see that as an advantage.  Ancestral is restricted as is yawg will (see also grave hate) and as these are more battlefield driven formats, tinker doesn't even seem so scary with the mass of removal played.  Control is still popular, so drain would be a minimal difference. This narrows down the "differences" in what decks are viable between vintage and legacy/modern to the existence of only 2 cards I believe.  Workshop, and the slew of turn 1 spheres that come with it, and oath of druids, which is the anti-aggro card to the nth degree.

To me, these two cards are the ultimate consolidation cards as their power levels to push forward their own or hinder the opponent's strategies have made the viable archetypes/decks CONSIDERABLY narrower than legacy or modern.  The fact that you don't have to face a garaunteed turn 1 sphere effect at some point in a tourney just opens the floodgates to a massive variety of decks and strategies.  Because oath does not exist, many of those strategies are aggro-based (though with the printings of cage, and abrupt decay (legacy/modern staples already), I doubt even oath would cause much problem.

So, not as a rant on workshop...but I can honestly say after seeing all 3 formats for a while now, the one card that is the ultimate consolidation of power (and as a result consolidation of the entire format) is Mishra's workshop.  The fact that it is a ritual on a stick is not so bad as the fact that it can only be used by one deck, unlike black lotus.  Spheres and unrestricted trini are available in modern and legacy- but the lack of workshop makes those decks slower and very beatable.  I'm convinced that one card has consolidated the viability of decks in vintage.

[gkraigher]

There is a diversity in legacy because they have a huge banned list and when anything gets too powerful, it's gone.  In Vintage, if a card is deemed too good, it gets restricted.  That is a huge difference.  I don't think that restricting workshop would open up anything in Vintage.  If anything, I fear it would make things worse.  

Let's say we live in a world where workshop is restricted.  There would be a couple of different variations of blue decks that would dominate top 8s.  Dredge would get hated out of the format because the blue decks wouldn't have to use precious sideboard slots for MUD decks.  It would become a Jace war, with decks switching between Oath, Delver, and Time Vault.  Tarmogoyf would get better, okay.  Deathrite shaman would find it's way into more decks, sure.  But the fish and other creature decks out there have favorable match ups to MUD, which is part of their success.  The blue decks would add firespout to the board, problem solved.  

The recent banning in modern of second sunrise was done due to time constrictions.  It had nothing to do with the fairness or unfairness of the deck.  I'd argue that workshops have sped up the format, as opposed to control deck mirror matches.  

We are currently seeing a cycle where MUD decks are very powerful, but as with all previous archetypes in Vintage, it will change and adapt with the addition of new cards.  In other words, it won't last forever.  

[wiley]

...I have to say that simply by Workshop not being a card, there is an astounding array of viable strategies...

I disagree with the vast majority of what you say.  The only point that I can agree on is that the existence of MUD and Stax does lower the diversity of the format by raising the bar of how powerful a deck must be and what types answers must be included in that deck.

However, if you think for a second that bazaar would not do the same to any other format, or even moxen/ancestral/yawg will etc even as one of's you are sorely mistaken.  They would impose the exact same types of restrictions on deck building in any format just like they do in vintage.

Vintage dredge smokes nearly every legacy deck, the only exception being the rest in peace combo decks.  I have played those games as the dredge pilot when people just wanted to play a game and I only brought vintage dredge.

Moxen do not offer the same benefits to all decks, if they did every deck in vintage would run the full amount.  And the sub par versions available to legacy and modern pale in comparison.  There are a few vintage decks that cast multiple spells with a high colorless cost, making the off color moxen far more valuable than say fish, which relies on playing far more spells that have a low cmc with mostly colored mana.

Tinker and oath would be the closest you could come to combat-able strategies in legacy and both would still lead to decks that push out a massive number of tier 1.5-2 decks simply because they can have the same turn 1 derp I win scenarios as vintage does.

It is a narrow and incorrect view to see workshop as "the ultimate consolidation of power" when the majority of the restricted list and a few certain unrestricted cards do just as much if not more than shop to raise the bar for playability in the format.

I won't contend that Legacy is a more expansive format, but ultimately there is still a tier structure in deck archetypes as the size of any given tournament grows.  Just look at the source's decks to beat section to see what the tier one strategies are.  Yes you may win local tournaments with nearly anything since metagaming is far easier when there are no absurd strategies that must be dealt with or lose, but if you go to a large tournament with a homebrew that belongs in the source's new and development decks section you have just as little chance of winning as if you went to bazaar of moxen with r/b non-goblin fish.  The massive diversity of legacy, and eventually modern too, is only a perceived one.  Most local tournaments are glorified kitchen table magic where people play their pet deck instead of what they think is truly the best in the format.  This isn't to say that I hate legacy, which I don't, but rather to say that exalting the playability of tier 2 decks in legacy and (I assume) modern is a disservice to the format as it is patently false on the large stage.

Aside from that, I view the fundamental difference between tier 1 vintage and legacy to be that vintage is a format of bombs and answers while legacy tends to be a format of all answers plus a few efficient threats.  The pillars of vintage are either all bombs, or at least the "fuse" of a bomb.  Legacy's tier 1 all play like tempo/x where x is either aggro, control or combo.  Every t1 legacy deck plays out as a tempo/attrition war against the opponent; let's see who can either sneak in a threat and protect it with a deck full of answers or who can get to a game state where the opponent's answers are temporarily exhausted and I can safely play my combo bomb.

[TheShop]

I did not intend to start a discussion on the possibility of Lodestone or workshop being OP...view avatar...

My point is that the presence of lodestone pushes out all colored variants of its own archetype just as blightsteel pushes out sphinx.

Similarly frustrating, the advent of abrupt decay and deathrite shaman in legacy significantly collapsed the design space.  BUG, Punishing X, Jund, and Even Nic Fit run the same mana dork, 1 cmc discard spells, 2 cmc discard spells, and all run decay.  Most even run the same PW. Prior to RtR, this was not the case.  Also, several other decks were viable before decay that relied on cheap permanents.  The idea that RtR single-handedly knocked multiple decks out of contention and made 3 decks run nearly 20 identical cards is bothersome.  I hope we are all playtesting our GB midrange mirrors...

[GrandpaBelcher]

My point is that the presence of lodestone pushes out all colored variants of its own archetype just as blightsteel pushes out sphinx.

Shop decks were trending towards fewer colors before Lodestone's arrival. 5C Stax gave way to Uba Stax and other mono-red builds. This happens as a result of ANY good artifact being printed. Suddenly you don't have to rely on 5C Stax's tutors, draws, and broken colored spells to supplement the power of your artifact strategy. Removing colors lets you run more two-mana lands and makes you more consistent.

Powerful colored cards that have synergy with artifacts and prison strategies (namely Welder) are still worth playing in some builds. That leaves room for future cards to become good as well. Master of Etherium might find a home yet.

[vaughnbros]

I did not intend to start a discussion on the possibility of Lodestone or workshop being OP...view avatar...

My point is that the presence of lodestone pushes out all colored variants of its own archetype just as blightsteel pushes out sphinx.

Similarly frustrating, the advent of abrupt decay and deathrite shaman in legacy significantly collapsed the design space.  BUG, Punishing X, Jund, and Even Nic Fit run the same mana dork, 1 cmc discard spells, 2 cmc discard spells, and all run decay.  Most even run the same PW. Prior to RtR, this was not the case.  Also, several other decks were viable before decay that relied on cheap permanents.  The idea that RtR single-handedly knocked multiple decks out of contention and made 3 decks run nearly 20 identical cards is bothersome.  I hope we are all playtesting our GB midrange mirrors...

This is the nature of eternal formats.  Every few once and a while you will get a card that is far and away more powerful than other options and because its eternal the card will remain there forever.  As long as the format doesn't get stale I don't think this is anything to get upset about.

[Protoaddict]

Workshop, and the slew of turn 1 spheres that come with it, and oath of druids, which is the anti-aggro card to the nth degree.

I don't see oath being nearly as much of a problem in the format as workshop would be. Sure it would be strong, but there are plenty of viable hate cards to deal with it in the format. Oath only starts to become a problem in this format now for basically the same reason as show and tell does, because WOTC is intent of making creatures that just win the game when they get played.

Part of why oath is good is because Oath is supported by timewalk, recall, etc. Timewalk means you cant win on the spot, no moxen means you cant theaten oath early on (no orchid, mox, oath, win).

The moxes add a big differnce to the formats as well, even though you think it evens out. Decks like affinity would become crazy strong on legacy with 5 true moxen.

[TheShop]

My point is that the presence of lodestone pushes out all colored variants of its own archetype just as blightsteel pushes out sphinx.

Shop decks were trending towards fewer colors before Lodestone's arrival. 5C Stax gave way to Uba Stax and other mono-red builds. This happens as a result of ANY good artifact being printed. Suddenly you don't have to rely on 5C Stax's tutors, draws, and broken colored spells to supplement the power of your artifact strategy. Removing colors lets you run more two-mana lands and makes you more consistent.

Powerful colored cards that have synergy with artifacts and prison strategies (namely Welder) are still worth playing in some builds. That leaves room for future cards to become good as well. Master of Etherium might find a home yet.

5 color and Uba existed simultaneously in 2005.  There was no significant workshop presence in the flash/gush meta of 2008.  After the bannings, 5 color came back first to combat Tezz.  Other builds didn't put up the results 5 color did (including the Aggro mud of that time pre-lodestone).  Then lodestone is printed, and colored spells went the way of the dodo.  There wasn't a natural progression to MUD without lodestone.

[MTGFan]

Related to this consolidation debate (and not to knock on shops specifically)...I recently just started playing legacy and modern in addition to the Vintage I knew exclusively for 16 years.  I have to say that simply by Workshop not being a card, there is an astounding array of viable strategies.  There are still grave decks, and grave hate, so bazaar/dredge would have minimal impact. Moxen lend speed, but they'd offer the same speed to every deck, so I don't see that as an advantage.  Ancestral is restricted as is yawg will (see also grave hate) and as these are more battlefield driven formats, tinker doesn't even seem so scary with the mass of removal played.  Control is still popular, so drain would be a minimal difference. This narrows down the "differences" in what decks are viable between vintage and legacy/modern to the existence of only 2 cards I believe.  Workshop, and the slew of turn 1 spheres that come with it, and oath of druids, which is the anti-aggro card to the nth degree.

The prevalance of insanely efficient artifact mana warps Vintage and would warp Legacy as well. The presence of Moxen and Lotus make things like Gorilla Shaman not only playable, but good in Vintage, whereas in Legacy it is a junk card. The same goes for stuff like Null Rod, and Karn, and Chalice (which is decent in Legacy in some shells, but is a format-defining card in Vintage).

In Legacy, the only decks that make use of artifact mana are basically the combo decks that use them as part of a combo turn. In Vintage, every deck either makes use of Moxen/Lotus/Crypt/Ring or has some kind of answer to them. If you introduced these to Legacy,it would force people to do the same thing: Play them or Answer them or Both.

The very presence of Moxen/Lotus/Crypt/Ring reduces deck size and diversity because they shrink decks down by anywhere from 5-8 cards. It's basically a ~52 card deck format.

Of course, that itself adds an interesting element to the format, and makes individual turns more nuanced, beause mana development doesn't follow the same, predictable curve as it does in Legacy. It's a matter of preference. But do not naively state that the introduction of the broken artifact mana wouldn't warp any format without them.

[MTGFan]

Aside from that, I view the fundamental difference between tier 1 vintage and legacy to be that vintage is a format of bombs and answers while legacy tends to be a format of all answers plus a few efficient threats.  The pillars of vintage are either all bombs, or at least the "fuse" of a bomb.  Legacy's tier 1 all play like tempo/x where x is either aggro, control or combo.  Every t1 legacy deck plays out as a tempo/attrition war against the opponent; let's see who can either sneak in a threat and protect it with a deck full of answers or who can get to a game state where the opponent's answers are temporarily exhausted and I can safely play my combo bomb.

As someone who plays both Vintage and Legacy on a competitive level, I believe that Legacy does lend itself to a more diverse range of competitive strategies, primarily because of what you stated - it is a format full of answers. There is nothing truly broken in Legacy. Everything can be answered efficiently and succinctly with main-deck answers or a few sideboard cards.

In Vintage, you have to be playing either a Mana Drain deck, an Oath deck, a Workshop deck, a Null Rod deck, a Bazaar deck, or a Ritual deck, or some combination of them, or you are literally not competitive. There are no real "pillars" in Legacy that force the deck builder to conform to their strictures. Some cards are more efficient than others in that format, but none of them are format-defining or format-warping as the Artifact mana platter (Lotus/Moxen/Crypt/Ring) or the major Pillars of Drain/Oath/Shop/Bazaar/Rod. All of the aforementioned cards are truly sterling examples of consolidation of power.

Nothing consolidates power nearly to that level in Legacy. The closest Legacy has to this is maybe Brainstorm, which is the most efficient card filter in the game, or Tarmogoyf, which is the most efficient creature in the format. And even in those cases, you can justify not playing those cards in decks that make use of their respective colors: I can play Merfolk without Brainstorm, and I can play a GW Maverick deck without Tarmogoyf because I want guys with more utility like Knight of the Reliquary. If I play a deck without Artifact mana or Drain/Oath/Shop/Bazaar/Rod in Vintage, I am a fool.

[Phoenix888]

With all the "Wizards doesn't care about vintage/eternal" type comments that get thrown around I would have thought that Lodestone Golem would have been praised, not vilified.

All this talk about restricting Golem smacks of blue control player bias that shows up every time a new card comes around that makes life slightly tougher for blue control decks.

[Protoaddict]

I play dredge and white trash lately and I hate lodestone golem too.

If anything I would argue that he is actually just too good for his CMC. and should have been 5 mana, legendary (like Thalia), or had less power/toughness. I mean if Juggernaut was balanced and played then taking away his negative ability and giving him an absurd positive one seems like it should cost more right?

As far as consolidation goes, I think people don't want to admit that workshops is probably a card that should be restricted. Besides the fact that, as in the above arguments, it consolidated the field, restricting it also just lowers the power of the deck, but it does not kill it. If you lose 3 workshops, you can now decide to run Ancient tomb or Man lands or City of traitors, or mana vault if you don't already. Not as good but hardly game over for the list. Honestly I am a dredge player and I would probably say the same thing of bazaar (not before shop though), in that if you ban bazaar dredge would still be insanely powerful with self mill cards like faithless looting, much like the legacy version of it, but would still roll over to grave hate.

Oath is another story all together because if you restrict oath you kinda break the deck. They would probably turn into show and tell lists at that point but considering how much oath hate there is now I don't see oath as a problem anymore.

[vaughnbros]

Whenever wizards prints a card that consolidates several options into one, it is a tough break for the eternal scene.

The podcast mentions blightsteel as a great example.  I have always felt that lodestone eliminates the possibility of meaningful choice in Stax options.  Personally, I would rather have run other options than gone mono-brown.  My personal preference is irrelevant, but everyone has fewer options.

In vintage and legacy, I have noticed a similar phenomenon: a printing that eliminates the viability of cards in other decks.  I would extend their point to include this issue because such printings limit te card pool.  I am not convinced that these repercussions are known or even diligently considered by wizards.  It is easy to be bitter and paint wizards as pandering to their target younger audience who dislike control, prison, and combo.  I don't take that stance entirely either.

This is the nature of eternal formats there is nothing wizards can really do about it other than extend the banned/restricted lists.  What you are viewing as a consoladation of power is just the printing of an eternal bomb.  Would you rather they never print another bomb ever again?  No more cards of the power level of Jace, Lodestone, Bob, Griselbrand?  I personally don't think this would be good thing at all.

[Phoenix888]

This is the nature of eternal formats there is nothing wizards can really do about it other than extend the banned/restricted lists.  What you are viewing as a consoladation of power is just the printing of an eternal bomb.  Would you rather they never print another bomb ever again?  No more cards of the power level of Jace, Lodestone, Bob, Griselbrand?  I personally don't think this would be good thing at all.

They're damned if they do, damned if they don't.