Lodestone Golem saw play in standard Boros during Zendikar era as well as modern landfall as the top end threat that would prevent wraths or Jace. I grant you that is not a huge breadth of play but it was enough to say that card was not dead everywhere.

The reality of vintage and all magic formats in general is that one mans trash is another treasure, so while there are cards that would be broken in every format that design would see fit not to print, it is way harder to prevent the printing of a card that is not broken in ANY format.

Plus, as pointed out before, as long WOTC tried to venture into uncharted territory with things like new game zones, new wincons, etc, you are never going to have a rule in place to stop these designs in the first place.

@vaughnbros

I think there's enough evidence to support unrestricting Lodestone Golem.

You certainly cannot defend Lodestone's current placement using language, since as you said, it's a 4-cmc card. It's a Vintage playable Juggernaut. Part of the reason Shops ended up with a restricted Thorn of Amethyst and restricted Chalice is because they can use their superior mana generating lands to play multiple threats/lock pieces in a single turn. With Lodestone, that's all they're playing for their turn. So anyone has a fair opportunity to answer it by also playing just a single card.

You've got to realize that all of these restrictions are just tit-for-tat reactions to fluctuations in metagame prevalence.

"Oh blue is taking up so much metagame share, let's restrict Brainstorm and Ponder."

"Oh look, now Shops is at 30.000002% prevalence, better restrict Chalice!"

"Oh Blue is too good again with 35%, lets restrict Gush"

The trend here is a clear cut slippery slope reactionary policy that makes huge metagame changes based on small fluctuations in metagame percentages. It's bad policy because the restrictions just cancel each other out and we end up back where we started except with less powerful, less exciting, more inconsistent decks.

Also why does Workshop deserve to be a pillar of the format but Gush does not? I think it’s the most interesting matchup in all of magic. It’s the pinnacle of the game. The DCI nerfs both to a large extent, and it hasn’t really had any meaningful effect. There’s still a deck that just wants to be the Gush deck. Then there is the shop deck. Even with all these restrictions, it’s not like Naya aggro is ever going to step up to the plate. We should enjoy the premium version of this game. Not some weird highlander thing.

last edited by Guest

@desolutionist FWIW, restrict workshop, and you can unrestrict chalice, thorn, golem, and probably other things (probably not trini though).

@desolutionist

Force of Will and Mishra’s Workshop.

@vaughnbros Before, I'd have said no to FoW...but with FoN as basically a "fixed" FoW (defense, not an enabler), I'm okay with axing it.

I'd add bazaar to the list, too. Troll and other cards could come off if the busted lands just got hit.

last edited by Thewhitedragon69

@desolutionist said in Rules for Vintage B&R list:

You certainly cannot defend Lodestone's current placement using language, since as you said, it's a 4-cmc card. It's a Vintage playable Juggernaut. Part of the reason Shops ended up with a restricted Thorn of Amethyst and restricted Chalice is because they can use their superior mana generating lands to play multiple threats/lock pieces in a single turn. With Lodestone, that's all they're playing for their turn. So anyone has a fair opportunity to answer it by also playing just a single card.

A lot of the reason that Lodestone is restricted is because of the redundancy of sphere effects, which is part of the issue with the rule set as well. Even with shops I do not believe lodestone would ever have been banned if we didn't have Sphere, Thorn (now restricted), Cotv (also now restricted), and all the strip mine effects. How many blue cantrips exist vs the ones that are restricted and how do you make the determination of which ones need restriction and how many. Brainstorm might have been fine as a 4 of if there were no other blue cantrips.

@thewhitedragon69 said in Rules for Vintage B&R list:

@vaughnbros Before, I'd have said no to FoW...but with FoN as basically a "fixed" FoW (defense, not an enabler), I'm okay with axing it.
I'd add bazaar to the list, too. Troll and other cards could come off if the busted lands just got hit.

I agree with all of this. I think the pillars are a crutch and by restricting FOW, Bazaar, and shops you actually open the format up so much that you may see a large number of new deck types. I would even take it one step further and say that you should restrict fetches and true duals, as they are as much a pillar as any other enabling lands.

@protoaddict

Brainstorm and Ponder are broken in part because of Fetch lands.

I've always seen it at an extreme either way. Either restrict all non-basic lands, or unrestrict them all. If you get Bazaar and Workshop and 8 strips, let me have my 4 Academy and 4 LoA.

@vaughnbros said in Rules for Vintage B&R list:

Brainstorm and Ponder are broken in part because of Fetch lands.

And fetchlands fall into that restriction resistant zone because there is so much overlap between them and the duals and the need to run some basics that eve a restriction might see the swap of one fetch to another. At least having to run shocks over more duals provides some sort of penalty for when you naturally draw them.

For what its worth most top end 4 and 5 color edh lists do not have issue in 100 cards getting the mana they need when they need it and that is already singleton.

@protoaddict

I wonder if you could make a 4 color deck with singleton fetches?

last edited by John Cox

@john-cox said in Rules for Vintage B&R list:

I wonder if you could make a 4 color deck with singleton fetches?

Depends how distributed your color costs are. Players almost don't even pay attention to it anymore because it has been such a given for so long.

If we assume all fetches and true duals are restricted, in a 4 color deck with fairly evenly distributed color costs you can still run 6 fetches and 6 dual lands that have a relevant colors. I think the step after that is Shocks and basics, but likely what you would have is a deck that may forego an awkward colored dual or 2 in favor of more favorable shocks or basics. Thats before we even get into all the 5 color lands that exist, or another mana strategies like Snow Astrolab stuff.

Like I said, I think it would force more creativity and diversity, and would tone down a handful of problematic decks that really have abused the ease they can generate mana with. Use of off color moxen may even fall off, basics may increase as decks with fewer fetches can be punished by wastelands more, and as a side effect of needing fewer moxen and duals, easy the cost of entry for new players needing that many less reserve list cards to join in.

Like Steve was saying in the other thread, It pretty much boils down to some people wanting to play highlander and some people wanting everything (or a lot) unrestricted. We've become as polarized as the U.S. political system. Maybe there should just be two separate formats. Highlander type 1 saturday and unrestricted type 1 sunday. I would probably enjoy both formats honestly.

@john-cox said in Rules for Vintage B&R list:

@protoaddict

I wonder if you could make a 4 color deck with singleton fetches?

Why couldn't you? We already saw a spreading out of fetches when sorcerous spyglass was printed.

@protoaddict said in Rules for Vintage B&R list:

For what its worth most top end 4 and 5 color edh lists do not have issue in 100 cards getting the mana they need when they need it and that is already singleton.

EDH decks have a lot fewer wasteland effects per deck size than vintage decks are allowed, of course.
I don't dispute that fetches+duals is absurdly powerful, but probably moreso in legacy than vintage due to having 4x brainstorm and ponder. or do we blame that on the blue cards?

Fetch + Duals make mana fixing too easy. Anyone that has played another format knows the difference between a Legacy/Vintage land base and whatever random lands are available in Standard/Limited. The issue is also not just the number of colors, but the number of color combinations. Being able to cast UU, WW, and R all in the same deck with basic land access, and minimal life payment is not something that you see in other formats.

You can very easily build a manabase that can support these multiple color combinations without fetch lands. Those manabases are way more vulnerable to Wasteland though, and/or have penalties associated with them (like paying 1 life each time you tap a land). That balances the fact that you are getting access to more color combinations than you really should.

As for specific cards that are impacted, I think the most obvious card that can come off the restricted list with Fetches/Duals gone is Gush. Beyond that, you have things, like Ponder/Brainstorm, that typically want a shuffle after being used.

last edited by vaughnbros

@vaughnbros said in Rules for Vintage B&R list:

As for specific cards that are impacted, I think the most obvious card that can come off the restricted list with Fetches/Duals gone is Gush. Beyond that, you have things, like Ponder/Brainstorm, that typically want a shuffle after being used.

Even in a world where you restrict fetches and true duals, a typical 3 color deck is probably still going to have enough fetches and island to make Gush and cantrip shuffles work. Like lets just say your playing some BUG Variant, you still likely start your build with:

1 Verdant Catacombs
1 Polluted delta
1 Misty rainforest
1 Bayou
1 Tropical Island
1 Underground sea
1 Island

Then you can probably run at least one off color fetch just because it gets most of what you need, and maybe even a shock land or 2

1 Scalding Tarn
1 Breeding pool
1 Watery Grave

Now is this starting configuration as strong as it used to be? Absolutely not. Maybe if this this list is Oath and are are already starting with 4 rainbow lands the mana base is equivalent, most other decks are forced to think about what they run and what utility lands they can afford. However, this base is still very strong at enabling a 3 color deck, or even a 3 color + splash list. If the worst case scenario is that we put a little more pressure on life totals like we see in most every other format of magic the change would already have gone a long way to even out the playing field and give cards like lightning bolt and delver more of a chance and depowering some of the other problem cards in the the format like the cantrips and Deathrite Shaman. Decks with easier mana requirements like Fish decks might even see a come back, or dare I say it, aggro.

@protoaddict

Here is the manabase from one of Stephen's Pyromancer Gush decks (VSL Season 5):

1 Flooded Strand
1 Island
1 Misty Rainforest
1 Polluted Delta
4 Scalding Tarn
2 Tropical Island
3 Underground Sea
2 Volcanic Island

This is already running 1 of each blue fetch. You'd be restricted to playing off-color fetches that can only find your duals (and not basic island). It also runs 2 Trop, 3 sea, and 2 Volc. You'd have to play 4 shock lands in places of duals to get that same mix. So that is a significant downgrade in terms of mana base to support Gush in the same fashion.

Taking repeated lightning bolts, and shocks in your Gush deck may seem fine in some matchups, but against Shops, Delver, or any other aggressive strategy that damage will add up and it would hurt the deck's overall win %. Reduced ability to fetch basic island as your first land is also a pretty big limiter in matchups against Wasteland.

EDIT: Woops should have gone back further, original example was post restriction.

last edited by vaughnbros

if duals and fetches are restricted, which they might as well be given the DCI’s track record, then you can just play 5c lands like in old school. It kills Gush but we’re not allowed to have that regardless so what’s the difference?

And you know old school has 4 Strips and no fetches? 5c Keeper is still the best.

No matter what happens we’re all just going to be playing worse versions of the same decks.

last edited by Guest

@desolutionist said in Rules for Vintage B&R list:

No matter what happens we’re all just going to be playing worse versions of the same decks.

I'm not sure that a worse version of the same deck is actually the same deck. What is a shops deck with 3 fewer shops? Is it starting to border on being Affinity? Is Trinisphere even worth maindecking in this case, or do stax decks become colorless eldrazi / Null rod style builds.

Dredge without 4 bazaar may very well decide to forego the serum powders as well, and maybe that deck becomes a Crop rotation build that now can run utility lands, or a Burning inquiry list with Hollow ones and the like.

How many Deathrites do you run in a list with only 5-6 fetches? Is Goyf good if you cannot ensure land in the yard like you used to? What about DDT and Treasure Cruise?

Does blood moon come back into prominence to punish greedy mana bases or would Force of Vigor still hold it at bay? Do decks running lightning bolt start to consider running more burn because of more vulnerable life totals?

@protoaddict

Agree with this. Manabases are the most important component of a deck in Magic because you simply can't do anything without one that functions properly. Change the overall options for a manabase, and you change the overall options for decks entirely.

Look in the opposite direction, what if we unrestricted Lotus, and Moxen? The format would be homogenized super fast due to all of the best mana sources being available as 4-ofs instead of singletons.

  • 60
    Posts
  • 5337
    Views