October 17, 2017 Banned & Restricted announcement

@brianpk80 And here I thought your list would include everything with the word discard. 🙂

@smmenen I regret that it's taken me so long to acknowledge your well-processed response. I haven't been checking in on this site very frequently in the past two months and seldom sign into Twitter.

I'm not sure if I clarified that I don't have a fervent or passionate desire to see most of the enumerated cards regulated. I simply meant that under an outrage/power-level metric, I would see those cards as reasonable restrictions. But few of them move me to begin a movement campaign. I'm not unhappy with the format right now. Despite a few rough edges, it's better now than it was last year at this time owing to the restrictions of Monastery Mentor, Thorn of Amethyst, and Gitaxian Probe. Though a member of the conspiratorial cabal of Keeper revivalists, you may recall I was the most ambivalent and least vocal about Gush, even asserting in Summer of 2016 that any action needed taken to be delayed because of how gratuitously cruel it would have been to a valued community member (you) upon the release of your book at that time.

I would note though that with each passing month, reviving the banhammer becomes more and more appealing. IIRC, both you and diophan suggested removing Treasure Cruise and Dig Through Time, both of which are reasonable. I would switch the framing of the mushy sounding "fun factor" to "misery factor" and excise Trinisphere and Monastery Mentor on that account.

Sorry for the necro, but is there any predictions for the RIX B&R announcement? I'm hoping something comes off.

@john-cox

I think anything other than 'No Changes' would be shocking. The metagame has shaken out to be largely healthy, and nobody has really pressing complaints.

Would be interesting to see some of the "why?" cards on the restricted list--Windfall comes to mind as the most likely to be non-event if it comes off the restricted list--come off, but I don't see any upside to the format for doing that.

I would not restrict anything this round based upon data I compiled. I would unrestrict Fastbond if I were the DCI.

@smmenen I'd rather see channel first over fastbond, given fastbond's much wider range for abuse. Still, I too would like to experiment with it off the list. Kudos for proposing something most would be shocked at.

Yeah Fastbond would not have been my first choice, but it's certainly an interesting one that I'd like to see! I can't see any restrictions but I can definitely hope for some cleaning up of the list.

I would have fixed some of the past mistakes by unrestricting Gitaxian Probe again.

  • 308
    Posts
  • 104099
    Views