This is a concise response to the recent watchlist announcement (01/02/21), specifically directed to a passage that - surprisingly - so far has not been picked up on by the broader player base. Perhaps because it sounded rather unusual, but this is not supposed to be a rant. The passage that really got me excited was labelled "unbanning cards in time", and here I am quoting directly from it:
"Currently we are discussing and want to discuss with you, if this might be the right time to unban cards for half a year to test the impact on the format. Length, cards etc. will of course have to be decided at a later point, but we want to start the general discussion with you now."
First, I want to acknowledge that the tone in which the council addresses the community has noticeably changed to a more inclusive and engaging demeanor and that this organ seemingly cares more about creating a tangible understanding of their decision amongst the players. I am also seeing signs of progress regarding a clearer vision on where the format is supposed to be headed powerlevel-wise. The council shares some sentiments of the community, most urgently that we need to think thoroughly about how combo should be governed and how to direct bannings accordingly. Thus, before jumping to the actual point of the paper, let me just briefly state this: if the council feels that imbalances exist in the overall metagame, then what needs to be done is an appropriate scaling of powerlevel between deck archetypes; either by weakening the consistency of the best performing decks or by offering competitive alternatives. I am fine with both ways, but since the task is to offer an opinionated response to the council's request, I am going to make the case for three unbannings that I firmly believe would be both very beneficial to achieving greater diversity within the meta and relatively safe to release.
*A quick disclaimer: I am not going to follow the policy that cards are first placed on the unban watchlist before they are allowed to enter the format. The reason being that the unban watchlist is sadly rather short and that we haven't had an unban in years, so change is already hard to come by. That being said, I try to account for the worst possible scenarios an unban would have on the meta to keep things in the right perspective. *
Birthing Pod.
Looking into other Highlander variants, Birthing Pod decks are experiencing serious competitive success without homogenizing creature-based strategies. This observation is important to take notice of, because this seems like the most immediate downside to releasing Birthing Pod to the public. Although this is not my area of expertise, you can build around individual combos, combine some synergistic and intersecting combos, or simply play this as a value card always finding you the right piece to react and advance. This would propel strategies and cards which have fallen out of favour into competitive limelight and give players that enjoy such gameplay a reason to keep engaged with the format. Both due to reasons of power-creep as well as limitations in the card's design, I am confident that Pod would not take over the format. Apart from the recent influx of flexible removal options (Assassin's Trophy; Kolaghan's Command; Drown in the Loch; Oko; you name it), the following things are keeping the card in check: it can only be used as a sorcery; you have to have enough fodder or the correct pieces to get a chain going; it requires at least 4 mana to come down and activate, thus realistically starting from turn 3 the earliest (which is on par with if not slower than established combo decks and easier to disrupt); and people are currently flying on Opposition Agent. Additionally, although at first this might sound a bit odd, there is value in helping players reap the rewards of unusual card choices. Players seem to be longing for a card like Abrade to be a more respectable card choice. Incidental artefact removal is always something you want to load up on, but overall, there are not enough playable artefacts to rationally justify playing more versatile yet a bit underpowered removal spells. Maybe a certain degree of satisfaction might result from this as well. Of all the cards presented here, Birthing pod is by far the most sensible choice if the aim is to encourage creature-strategies or diversify the shades of combo currently available.
Umezawa's Jitte.
People should play Stoneforge Mystic more often. Considering the amount of pseudo Elvish Visionaries currently seeing play, this one is probably among the best, yet people forgo playing SFM because there are not many attractive options to tutor for. Even though Batterskull's stock in the format is rising due to Uro allowing for higher mana curves and generally longer games (plus a recurable 4/4 lifelink vigilance body being a more than roadblock for many snowballing threats of the earlygame), players avoid the cards as it seems quite clunky without its natural companion. Instead, they opt for cards with a lower ceiling that are less taxing on the mana. Umezawa's Jitte would round up a competitive Stoneforge-Mystic package and allow for a more flexible toolkit to decks that otherwise lack removal options or ways to surmount boardstalls. It is that powerful that I think a slight shift in the metagame would happen to white-x decks; at least their overall performance would improve. Thinking of what could have held the card back for such a long time, it could be that a creature-mirror with one side having Jitte is not that great of an experience, to put it mildly. However, the metagame is somewhat diverse and the format inherently variant, making it that not every game revolves around Jitte. Considering what has been printed in the last couple of years, something akin to Umezawa's Jitte is definitely in the realm of imagination.
True Name Nemesis.
This is more an aesthetic argument, but also exemplifies some important points regarding the development of the format. First, I do believe it is not a good testament to the format if a three mana 3/1 creature is on the ban-list while some of the cards I am going to mention in the last section are allowed to roam free. TNN is not impressive, stats-wise: it does not race particularly quickly in light of the Uro/Oko lifegain inflation and the increased loyalty of planeswalkers; against combo, it often consumes too much mana and does too little too late; and seeing how many great (green) midrange threats have entered the format, its board presence is relativized. Contrary to what people think, the creature density in blue tempo isn't actually that high, and in the context of what I just said, it fills several important roles at once. Of course, it will have its good matchups and scenarios where it seems nye unbeatable, but that has to be expected from three mana cards these days. Even if you don't have dedicated removal for Nemesis, a competitive board-centric deck should by now have several strategies of dealing with it, for instance by swarming the board, presenting bigger or long-lasting threats or just forcing the opposing nemesis out of its current offensive or defensive role. Powerlevel-wise, I think the card is less impactful now than it has ever been. If I were to decide, this card would for sure be unbanned.
As the council itself seems to notice, now is probably a good time to let some of these cards see play. Competitive stakes are low, people are enthusiastically brewing and gathering online, players report and communicate their experiences more frequently and the winds of change are blowing stronger throughout the community. I would go so far as to say that unbanning Birthing Pod and Jitte is almost a no-brainer, as they tilt the existing balance of power and allow for more creative deckbuilding, reintroduce cards to the format that have fallen off the wayside. Unbanning True Name is probably contentious, but I think that my case for it has been solid. So I hope that my article resonated with some parts of the community. Maybe together we can work towards a more balanced format.
Concludingly, I couldn't help but to mention some cards whose continued legality thwarts most well-intended efforts to create a diverse metagame and enjoyable play experience. Therefore, before responding to my article, please be reminded these are also the values that guide my contributions to the European Highlander format and that I am very much willing to exchange opinions regarding the substance matter of my proposal.
The first, and hopefully less controversial one, is Oath of Druids. Let's face it, this card belongs in a quadruple Force-of-Will format or one that can counter its combo potential turn 2 on the backswing. Oath is, in a theoretical world of Highlander, better than Thassa's Oracle or Hermit Druid and it's a major miracle that this card is not seeing more play in the format. I am not going into too much detail here, but instead opt for a broad brushstroke overview of its brokenness: it is very well positioned in the meta (the vast proportion of decks ultimately try to win via combat damage), it requires virtually no setup and has two tutors that can provide access to it on turn 1; its so cheap that it slips through most disruption and also requires very specific answers AND, most frustratingly, it basically stops you from playing your game (a reason that, on even weaker cards, has sufficed to enact a ban). So please talk more about this abomination of a Magic card. As things stand, the format is not equipped to handle it (and yes, for those who thrive on that fact, also tempo is not in most scenarios).
The second one is Demonic Tutor. DT is the best card in the format by a wide margin because it fundamentally cheats the system. Looking into other Highlander variants, it is among the highest pointed cards for good reasons. It has no deckbuilding cost, is easily splashable, grants immediate access to any card and is on top of that way too cheap, mana-wise. While I am not a member of the "ban more tutors camp", I think the format would be in a better state if Demonic was banned. The consistency boost it grants is not equally distributed between deck archetypes, as it disproportionately increases the consistency of decks that are already trying to leverage tutors to their fullest advantage. Simply put, tutors in a combo deck are there to kill you outright. Therefore, reducing the density of game winning spells (in particular one that has no limits as to what it can find and is competitively priced), would result in lower numbers of consistency and fast combo kills. In the future, it might well be that a ban of DT could prevent the constant banning of "problematic" combo-pieces which dissatisfies players that were basically playing the format for the possibility of playing exactly this or that combo. In my assessment, if you are generally badly (or positively, for that matter) positioned against combo, losing Demonic Tutor in your average "fair" deck is less severe. Of almost equal weight is the argument that it completely distorts fair matchups as well – don't tell me you never had a "feel-bad" when your opponent topdecked DT, thus immediately getting the mirrorbreaker while you would have loved for to slowly grind back into the game. I am a big fan of tutoring in decks in which it is sensible to do so and would love to see a meta which is more defined by deck-specific tutors.
Thanks for reading the piece. I hope the style of argument presented here as well as the undertone were in accordance with the community guidelines. Stay healthy and safe!
"Currently we are discussing and want to discuss with you, if this might be the right time to unban cards for half a year to test the impact on the format. Length, cards etc. will of course have to be decided at a later point, but we want to start the general discussion with you now."
First, I want to acknowledge that the tone in which the council addresses the community has noticeably changed to a more inclusive and engaging demeanor and that this organ seemingly cares more about creating a tangible understanding of their decision amongst the players. I am also seeing signs of progress regarding a clearer vision on where the format is supposed to be headed powerlevel-wise. The council shares some sentiments of the community, most urgently that we need to think thoroughly about how combo should be governed and how to direct bannings accordingly. Thus, before jumping to the actual point of the paper, let me just briefly state this: if the council feels that imbalances exist in the overall metagame, then what needs to be done is an appropriate scaling of powerlevel between deck archetypes; either by weakening the consistency of the best performing decks or by offering competitive alternatives. I am fine with both ways, but since the task is to offer an opinionated response to the council's request, I am going to make the case for three unbannings that I firmly believe would be both very beneficial to achieving greater diversity within the meta and relatively safe to release.
*A quick disclaimer: I am not going to follow the policy that cards are first placed on the unban watchlist before they are allowed to enter the format. The reason being that the unban watchlist is sadly rather short and that we haven't had an unban in years, so change is already hard to come by. That being said, I try to account for the worst possible scenarios an unban would have on the meta to keep things in the right perspective. *
Birthing Pod.
Looking into other Highlander variants, Birthing Pod decks are experiencing serious competitive success without homogenizing creature-based strategies. This observation is important to take notice of, because this seems like the most immediate downside to releasing Birthing Pod to the public. Although this is not my area of expertise, you can build around individual combos, combine some synergistic and intersecting combos, or simply play this as a value card always finding you the right piece to react and advance. This would propel strategies and cards which have fallen out of favour into competitive limelight and give players that enjoy such gameplay a reason to keep engaged with the format. Both due to reasons of power-creep as well as limitations in the card's design, I am confident that Pod would not take over the format. Apart from the recent influx of flexible removal options (Assassin's Trophy; Kolaghan's Command; Drown in the Loch; Oko; you name it), the following things are keeping the card in check: it can only be used as a sorcery; you have to have enough fodder or the correct pieces to get a chain going; it requires at least 4 mana to come down and activate, thus realistically starting from turn 3 the earliest (which is on par with if not slower than established combo decks and easier to disrupt); and people are currently flying on Opposition Agent. Additionally, although at first this might sound a bit odd, there is value in helping players reap the rewards of unusual card choices. Players seem to be longing for a card like Abrade to be a more respectable card choice. Incidental artefact removal is always something you want to load up on, but overall, there are not enough playable artefacts to rationally justify playing more versatile yet a bit underpowered removal spells. Maybe a certain degree of satisfaction might result from this as well. Of all the cards presented here, Birthing pod is by far the most sensible choice if the aim is to encourage creature-strategies or diversify the shades of combo currently available.
Umezawa's Jitte.
People should play Stoneforge Mystic more often. Considering the amount of pseudo Elvish Visionaries currently seeing play, this one is probably among the best, yet people forgo playing SFM because there are not many attractive options to tutor for. Even though Batterskull's stock in the format is rising due to Uro allowing for higher mana curves and generally longer games (plus a recurable 4/4 lifelink vigilance body being a more than roadblock for many snowballing threats of the earlygame), players avoid the cards as it seems quite clunky without its natural companion. Instead, they opt for cards with a lower ceiling that are less taxing on the mana. Umezawa's Jitte would round up a competitive Stoneforge-Mystic package and allow for a more flexible toolkit to decks that otherwise lack removal options or ways to surmount boardstalls. It is that powerful that I think a slight shift in the metagame would happen to white-x decks; at least their overall performance would improve. Thinking of what could have held the card back for such a long time, it could be that a creature-mirror with one side having Jitte is not that great of an experience, to put it mildly. However, the metagame is somewhat diverse and the format inherently variant, making it that not every game revolves around Jitte. Considering what has been printed in the last couple of years, something akin to Umezawa's Jitte is definitely in the realm of imagination.
True Name Nemesis.
This is more an aesthetic argument, but also exemplifies some important points regarding the development of the format. First, I do believe it is not a good testament to the format if a three mana 3/1 creature is on the ban-list while some of the cards I am going to mention in the last section are allowed to roam free. TNN is not impressive, stats-wise: it does not race particularly quickly in light of the Uro/Oko lifegain inflation and the increased loyalty of planeswalkers; against combo, it often consumes too much mana and does too little too late; and seeing how many great (green) midrange threats have entered the format, its board presence is relativized. Contrary to what people think, the creature density in blue tempo isn't actually that high, and in the context of what I just said, it fills several important roles at once. Of course, it will have its good matchups and scenarios where it seems nye unbeatable, but that has to be expected from three mana cards these days. Even if you don't have dedicated removal for Nemesis, a competitive board-centric deck should by now have several strategies of dealing with it, for instance by swarming the board, presenting bigger or long-lasting threats or just forcing the opposing nemesis out of its current offensive or defensive role. Powerlevel-wise, I think the card is less impactful now than it has ever been. If I were to decide, this card would for sure be unbanned.
As the council itself seems to notice, now is probably a good time to let some of these cards see play. Competitive stakes are low, people are enthusiastically brewing and gathering online, players report and communicate their experiences more frequently and the winds of change are blowing stronger throughout the community. I would go so far as to say that unbanning Birthing Pod and Jitte is almost a no-brainer, as they tilt the existing balance of power and allow for more creative deckbuilding, reintroduce cards to the format that have fallen off the wayside. Unbanning True Name is probably contentious, but I think that my case for it has been solid. So I hope that my article resonated with some parts of the community. Maybe together we can work towards a more balanced format.
Concludingly, I couldn't help but to mention some cards whose continued legality thwarts most well-intended efforts to create a diverse metagame and enjoyable play experience. Therefore, before responding to my article, please be reminded these are also the values that guide my contributions to the European Highlander format and that I am very much willing to exchange opinions regarding the substance matter of my proposal.
The first, and hopefully less controversial one, is Oath of Druids. Let's face it, this card belongs in a quadruple Force-of-Will format or one that can counter its combo potential turn 2 on the backswing. Oath is, in a theoretical world of Highlander, better than Thassa's Oracle or Hermit Druid and it's a major miracle that this card is not seeing more play in the format. I am not going into too much detail here, but instead opt for a broad brushstroke overview of its brokenness: it is very well positioned in the meta (the vast proportion of decks ultimately try to win via combat damage), it requires virtually no setup and has two tutors that can provide access to it on turn 1; its so cheap that it slips through most disruption and also requires very specific answers AND, most frustratingly, it basically stops you from playing your game (a reason that, on even weaker cards, has sufficed to enact a ban). So please talk more about this abomination of a Magic card. As things stand, the format is not equipped to handle it (and yes, for those who thrive on that fact, also tempo is not in most scenarios).
The second one is Demonic Tutor. DT is the best card in the format by a wide margin because it fundamentally cheats the system. Looking into other Highlander variants, it is among the highest pointed cards for good reasons. It has no deckbuilding cost, is easily splashable, grants immediate access to any card and is on top of that way too cheap, mana-wise. While I am not a member of the "ban more tutors camp", I think the format would be in a better state if Demonic was banned. The consistency boost it grants is not equally distributed between deck archetypes, as it disproportionately increases the consistency of decks that are already trying to leverage tutors to their fullest advantage. Simply put, tutors in a combo deck are there to kill you outright. Therefore, reducing the density of game winning spells (in particular one that has no limits as to what it can find and is competitively priced), would result in lower numbers of consistency and fast combo kills. In the future, it might well be that a ban of DT could prevent the constant banning of "problematic" combo-pieces which dissatisfies players that were basically playing the format for the possibility of playing exactly this or that combo. In my assessment, if you are generally badly (or positively, for that matter) positioned against combo, losing Demonic Tutor in your average "fair" deck is less severe. Of almost equal weight is the argument that it completely distorts fair matchups as well – don't tell me you never had a "feel-bad" when your opponent topdecked DT, thus immediately getting the mirrorbreaker while you would have loved for to slowly grind back into the game. I am a big fan of tutoring in decks in which it is sensible to do so and would love to see a meta which is more defined by deck-specific tutors.
Thanks for reading the piece. I hope the style of argument presented here as well as the undertone were in accordance with the community guidelines. Stay healthy and safe!