Where is Pauper Heading? | Magic: The Gathering MTG Format Panel
Vložit
- čas přidán 10. 09. 2024
- Thanks for watching Good Morning Magic! If you enjoyed the episode, it'd mean a lot to me if you subscribed: it only takes one click, and helps grow the channel.
--------------------
What have we on the PFP been talking about when it comes to Pauper changes? Let us fill you in!
Have a question? Post a comment! You can also catch me, Gavin Verhey, on the rest of the internet at:
Twitch: / gavinverhey
Twitter: / gavinverhey
Instagram: / gavinverhey
TikTok: / gavinverhey
Thumbnail background art is Great Furnace from Mirrodin by Rob Alexander.
#magicthegathering #pauper #tournament
I wish every format had this amount of communication no matter whether one agrees or not with the sentiments...
My first thought clicking this video “man I don’t like Gavin that much but at least he does a great job at communication on decisions made for pauper and his committee”
The issue with doing this in most formats is that the people who are in charge have zero consistency with what they say and what they do... Because it's purposefully not transparent otherwise card speculators would have better chances to rise our prices.
@@DemikDragonganger then reprint cards strategically to punish them
Words cannot express how desperately we need panels like this for other eternal formats. This is such an incredible success, and is having such a positive impact on Pauper. Keep up the good work!
Thanks ❤️
Thank you :)
Personally for me, the only really thing I'd like in regards to Pauper are reprints of Lotus Petal and Dust to Dust this year. I am more of a fan of adding cards, not removing them, and options like Dust to Dust for counterplay against Affinity are very helpful. Without pushing the format into just silver bullets and meta answers.
Oh yes I need 3 more lotus petals for cycle storm, but they cost as much as an entire pauper deck...^^
I need foil tinder wall
You are god in earth, dude
pls no.
Dominaria Remastered has Storm as part of limited and Lotus Petal wasn’t reprinted. Where else could it shine so much? Insane it hasn’t seen a reprint outside of the List since masterpieces. smh
I would love to see a group like this for the other non-rotating formats (pioneer, modern, legacy, vintage) it was super cool to hear what kind of things you talk about and consider beyond Ian duke's ban announcements
I would love to play this on Arena!
Love the transparency! In regards to banning to shake things up, I'm definitely against. For every player who wants a ban to hit affinity or burn just to shake things up, there will be a player who has to deal with a ban as as punishment for playing a deck they enjoy.
they can always pick another archetype to play, no? maybe not a T1 so there's no risks of bans? :)
@@Drestlin Picking another archetype to play really sucks if you just dropped $80-100 on a deck just to watch it get banned and your money is completely wasted. This is doubly true for something that is advertised as the "budget format".
I think people who want things "shaken up" in a constructed format should go play Standard, that is literally the entire point of that format. Eternal formats are supposed to be slow to change and feel more....well, eternal.
@@Drestlin I'm 9 cards away from building my first deck, which is a Boros Synthesizer. If they ban any of the artifact land cycles or monastery swiftspear, or galvanic blast, or the card that the entire deck is named after: Experimental Synthesizer, I basically lose the chance to ever play the ONE Boros deck that doesn't suck.
I'm a huge Boros fan, and pauper presented me an opportunity to be relevant at the table with my favorite color combination. Please just let me have my fun.
@@josiahleis6574 This. I might not even be able to play my Boros Synth deck before they ban Experimental Synthesizer. The very card that the archetype got its name.
What am I supposed to do then? Build another deck until they don't ban key cards from my deck?
I seriously hope I didn't just waste a ton of money for the perfect sideboard and everything, just to see the deck becoming unplayable before I can even play a single match with it.
Thank you for the communication. It really goes a long way to demonstrate that there's a lot of thought and care put into managing the format.
I feel blood fountain could be in the talk for banning, since it gives affinity a lot of recursion as well as giving you 2 artifacts for affinity really early on
Yeah blood fountain is kinda broken in affinity, could be a nice ban
Bigger fish to fry in affinity imo
@@bruhyoufarted3689 that's exactly why it's a nice ban
It wouldn't kill the deck, it would just stop the deck that runs 8~10 creatures from having virtually 20, and not allowing turn 2 metallic rebuke
This seems like an easy ban, but I think it might not be narrow enough. I don't think affinity itself is the problem.
Affinity is a good deck but is easy to beat with a deck with a good sideboard plan
I never played pauper, but seeing this level of transparency and the overwhelmingly positive comments regarding the Panel makes me seriously consider doing so. Congrats!
I highly recommend it. It's the vest format right now, as far as I am concerned.
Right?
@@liperuf 😁
It’s so cool to see such a deep insight into the thought process
I’ve loved watching Pauper evolve over the years. Hope you guys keep the format interesting and balanced as the power ceiling keeps raising
I think seeing either sinkhole or Hymn back could be positive
Especially if the artifact lands don't get hit then bringing Sinkhole back might not be quite as impactful
A Sinkhole unban would be interesting if Tron ever became more relevant. Hymn to Tourach, though? Absolutely not.
I really like that idea. Mono Black strategies have fallen of the map entirely, and it's a shame. Mono Black Beatdown fueled by Hymn, Sinkhole, and Gary seems like it could be really legit.
sinkhole would push affinity from "pretty good" to "unbeatable;" the deck is already playing an assload of indestructible lands and land destruction spells, not to mention the fact that theyre also PLAYING BLACK. do you really want the deck that can explode to have access to the single best control spell in the history of pauper lol
I would say if anything then, Galvanic Blast is the card to hit. But like you said, the format is a lot more diverse than it has historically been a lot of the time in the fairly recent past, and I think waiting to see if Phyrexia (or even March of the Machines) can shake things up a bit is the right path to take.
Thanks for these little insights into what's going on, Gavin! I hope you can persuade some of your fellow Wizards to provide this kind of communication for other formats as well, because it is very appreciated
I love Hymn to Tourach! One of my favourites.
I'm extremely happy with the transparency of the pauper panel and want you guys to know that it is really appreciated. As for the ban talk, I know it's not an aesthetically pleasing solution, but I genuinely feel like it's worth exploring removing SOME of the MH2 bridges, it could be all of the ones with blue and/or red on them, maybe just the blue ones, maybe just the red ones, I'm not entirely sure, I just know that they're causing problems by being indestructible but it doesn't make sense to remove the ones who haven't done anything wrong like Thornglint Bridge for example.
Really been enjoying pauper. Just put together a UR Kiln Fiend and excited to play it.
Cool to see your channel here in the comments
Glad you're enjoying the format! One of my faves. 😄
There is a world outside EDH! Pioneer is a sweet format too but getting expensive.
Attended a face to face pauper tournament last night and was really happy with the variety of decks shown and the state of our format.
We were 12 players and no one played the same deck twice.
The decks:
UR Skred (my deck)
MBC
Mono white lifegain
Gruul Ponza
Kuldotha Goblins
5c Tron
UB Terror
Azorious Cawgates
Monoblue Faeries
Monogreen Infect
Rakdos Madness Reanimator
Grixis Affinity
Went 3-1 and got 4th place (only lost to Kuldotha Goblins)
Although my local meta isn't really representative of the entire state of our beloved format, I'd really like to thank and commend Gavin and the entire pauper panel for the transparency and steps they've taken so far to make pauper a more enjoyable format. Looking forward for the next video!
I feel like if y’all are going to be making a push for this format (which I love btw), providing more prize support and/or more opportunities for the wpn and other lgs’s to provide more organized play events.
I love the insight into what you guys are talking about, and on the communication front I adore how you're directing what kind of feedback you're looking for by laying out possibilities with their pros and cons. Anybody in a decision-making role would be honored to have this kind of analysis
It would be nice to have something like this for modern
They have too much of a financial interest in keeping modern terrible
@@Jessay makes zero sense but ok.
@@officerpwalker wizards needs to keep papa hasbro happy so doesn't want to provide a vision for the format and prefers to continuously warp the meta with new broken staples. This doesn't work for pauper since *by definition* the cards are easy to obtain
@@Jessay not all pauper cards are easily attainable, introducing lotus petal, but I digress. Keeping high value 'terrible' cards to help them would make sense if not every single modern player shops for singles in turn doing nothing for hasbro or wizards, especially since the set was so over opened these shops can't get rid of these so called staples and no one is firing modern tournaments, more so over not helping Hasbro or wizards financially. Make it make sense.
@@officerpwalker Demand for singles drives demand for sealed product...the cards don't just appear on the secondary market. Modern is extremely popular at every LGS I've been to. Wizards also can't create new expensive cards for pauper when they can easily do so for modern. The only expensive pauper cards are really old
Really pleasing to see that you guys are watching over Pauper and keeping us in touch with your thougts. With that much care and heart put into it, I think our format has great years coming up for it :)
Would love to see this level of format transparency for Standard or Pioneer, great video
Wizards need to do this for all formats. Appreciate transparency on pauper. I just joined format with affinity. Played affinity in modern. Hope you don’t ban anything for a bit. Many people joining format now with wallets getting thin and I honestly don’t hear too many complaints because everyone just comes with what they like to play.
This level of transparency and information about the Council's thoughts is both good for the community and provides genuine interest to me from a game design perspective. I hope that this is a common trend, and would love to see it extend to other formats. I've been very pleased by the existence of the Pauper format council so far, is there any discussion about having a similar thing for other formats?
Pauper just needs 2 things:
Reprints of Snuff Out and Dust to dust
And more sideboard Options against the popular decks
Recently I see a lot of great Sideboard cards being printed in the uncommon slot like Haywire Mite, and we don't really see unharmful cards like that around the format
haywire mite being a common in a masters set would be pretty cool
I agree with the reprints. IMO the only thing that needs to go is Koldotha rebirth. It allows the red deck to play around hate too easily.
@@caseycornett5182 yea, or galvanic blast, it gives artifact decks too much damage
Great content. Transparency and communicative. Great dialogue. Kudos to Gavin and wotz. He needs recognition
I remember listening to Gavin on a weekly podcast in 2009. . His take with the other hosts was always great. And then he got a job at wotc in 2011. Here we are 12 years later and he’s a lead designer. Crazy times. The future is never certain. Change is the only constant.
Sinkhole and Hymn could be added in a moment when Control decks or decks that want to play the long game need a check. In this moment, they would push out slow decks and in turn the metagame will shift to favor aggressive strategies, which you already stated are the strongest at the moment. So it doesn’t make sense to unban those now, without also unbanning tools to help Storm and Tron. That’s too much of a shake up.
They are too powerfull cards for pauper, it would probably go in favor of affinity due to the card advantage it can generate since very early on the game and due to the indestructible lands. A tron deck would be no match against a monoblack with sinkhole and hym to tourach, and this aplies to gw bogles or caw gates
I believe the point about being unwilling to unban any combo cards is odd considering how poorly performing the entire archtype is. I'm not advocating for a specific card one way or another, but discussing the balance of the format when there aren't viable combo strategies is a little wild.
The problem with most combo in pauper imo is that the best combos in pauper have always required playing blue to disrupt them. Combos of this archetype (like the old Galvanic Relay storm deck) have a strong effect of warping the format around them even if their win rates only put them in tier 1 rather than 0 when they're good.
Hasbro's probably trying to turn all MTG players into Paupers by end of 2023... 😂😢
Great to see that you guys have on table all this topics, and i agree with them all. I'm the type that like to play with different decks, and in my experience, momo red and affinity need attention but not more than this. Caw gates and terror are decks that need practice and knowledge to play, they have the tools to overtake affinity and red.
I think the format lacks combo decks like moggwarts, but competitive fast combo are in my opinion not enjoyable to play against! Special thanks to weber for representing Brazil!
I don't have much to add except that I appreciate the video with the updates and the excellent editing. Thanks Gavin 😊
Love this kind of openness. A swiftspear ban would make me pretty sad. But I'm just a red player that's pretty new to the format, so take that as you will.
I highly doubt swiftspear will be banned it would probably be galvanic blast and maybe the artifact land cycle.
Fellow red player here
Love the transparency of this video!
I love playing mono black in pauper. In my opinion, sinkhole wouldn’t punish affinity or mono red much, since affinity has bridges and mono red is good at operating on so few lands. Hymn to Tourach, on the other hand, is a great early game 2 for 1 that requires a bit of luck to be as good as possible. Affinity and mono red can stumble if they lose their threat density in the early game, so I think that Hymn would be a great addition.
As a mono black player myself, hell no, lol. Hymn is a messed up card, and sinkhole is even worse. You should play some games AGAINST those cards and see how you like getting stuck on one land and forced to discard away half your hand.
In terms of power level, Galv Blast and Deadly dispute stick out to me as the most above the curve cards in pauper atm. Galv Blast might be "just a burn spell" but it's just so much better than every other option with good artifacts everywhere. Honorable mention for is Blood Fountain. Making 2 artifacts for 1 mana might just be a little too good.
Unbanning Hymn sounds a little scary, but also a little exciting. Sinkhole, pretty much the same, but maybe a little less so. It sure makes being on the play really good for Mono B decks, which I could see as a little unfun, but i could also see it could see mono B as a fun "fair" deck that could keep the really degenerate stuff in line.
I think Dispute would have too much splash damage without actually achieving the goal. Affinity can easily replace it and every black focused deck would go from tier 3 to unplayable. Removing it would actually make the format less diverse.
Please talk wizards into doing things like this for other formats
Hi, i really appreciate the transparency of this video! I play pauper and i think in affinity should be banned Blood Fountain, because without It affinity lose the recursion from cemetery of his trouble creatures, and about mono red burn you should ban monastero swiftspear, She gives too much pressure and damage in the early stage of games...thanks for listening!!
Oh and i forget to Say that i really like the idea to unban Sinkhole and Hymn ti tourach!! Waiting for new creature cards for monoblack... 🙏🙏
Great work here guys!
Absolutely love the format, even though in my LGS it’s not super popular
Wish we could get pauper in Arena as well
Gavin thank you so much for being so transparent about this also thank you for putting in, what i assume is voluntary extra workload to not abandon this format it means a lot to us players.
As for my opinions:
I think for affinity to be on a level playing field with the rest of the format the bridges need to get banned. when trying to beat any of the top decks you can usually go after one of their ressources e.g. gain life vs burn, play edicts vs terror, remove the land or have pingers vs gates. with affiinty there is no angle of attack right now. The bridges not only fix the previously bad mana but also enable affinity and act as fodder for both munitions and disputes. Heck i have won a game vs gates after drawing 17 lands just be repeatedly saccing them to ping their creatures.
the deck needs to be attackable once again and banning the bridges is the way to just that ( unless you want the dispute effects out of the format entirely then that could also be a reasonable angle i think).
As for Burn i am not as passionate about bans. I do agree with many of the people i talked to that a deck shouldnt be able to kill as reliably early while being able to grind as well as the deck currently does. Also of course the fact of the matter is that the games usually boils down to finding the sideboard hate/lifegain or getting run over which of course isnt a good feeling so there is that. SO yeah that lack of agency simply doesnt lead to fun games making burn as a top deck questionable from an enjoyment perspective ( as you rightly pointed out).
Whatever happens i am just stoked about your transperency on this.
cheers
Thank you so much to you and the PFP!
Love this update. Despite no changes being made, it's still invaluable to hear what the panel has been considering, their concerns, their rationale and meta statistics.
It would be great to have similar updates on a quarterly basis.
As a paper pauper player I'd like to say a big thank you to the PFP for the hard work you do. Really value that there's a dedicated group trying to keep the format healthy. Overall got to say you're doing a great job and I appreciate it's a very tough role.
Thank you to you and the panel for all that you do and for how beautifully you articulate the care given to the Pauper format :)
Suggestion:
To your point about including sinkhole and hymn for mono black… Maybe a ‘more balanced’ alternative would be to down shift Smallpox and Dakmor Salvage?
This might offer a new archetype option that mono black players might really enjoy :)
as an 8+ year pauper fanatic i would love to see a rule change as to what cards are legal in the format, namely to not allow cards from supplemental sets like Modern Horizons and commander legends to enter the format, and then see what to ban/unban. If you look at the current pauper banlist there are 11 cards from supplemental sets out of 30 total banned cards, this is a ridiculous level of overrepresentation considering how many more standard legal sets there have been over supplemental sets during 30 years of magic. Also i would add that bans like atog and disciple of the vault where a result of horrible interactions between those cards and cards from newer supplemental sets. In my opinion, when cards that have been perfectly fine in pauper since it's inception all of the sudden become problematic, almost every single time it's because of the addition of newer, non standard legal cards.
Lastly, and as more of a side note, i really don't like the logic given behind the reasons of certain bans. For instance: when prophetic prism was banned, a card that again, was perfectly fine for 10+ years, in that same announcement you've mentioned that you chose to ban it over the new artifact lands because of how much brewing potential the new lands had. Well i could say the exact same thing about the prism, and i think it woudl be much more logical given it's 10 year track record. If there ever was a card that was an auto include in 3 color brews, it was the prism. I know that abuse potential from decks like tron was also listed as one of the reasons, but in that case why not ban ghostly flicker? that was the real enabler of the deck alongside cards like mnemonic wall and ephemerate.
This is so cool! I had no idea there was a panel, that seems super healthy for the format
Thank's for letting us in on yours and the rest and the panel's thoughts; it is very much appreciated. Also I'd love to see especially a Legacy format panel :) Considering Pauper please don't ban anything just for the sake of its popularity. There may be an argument if we headed to a situation similar to where Splinter Twin was in Modern in 2010? I'd love to see the meta develop and adapt further. Most eternal formats have a boogey man and I love trying to beat them as long as they're reasonably overtuned. Affinity honestly might be a special case, since the artifact lands definitely make it tick and they're absolutely busted.
Thanks this is a great example of how to communicate to players. I've enjoyed playing pauper online although I haven't played many tournaments yet. I don't find Burn or Affinity oppressive or in need for banning. Having said that I play Affinity as well as mono-Black and Dimir terror.
Very good analysis. Personnaly, I share your point of view and I don't think the format requires additionnal bans ; I am currently enjoying playing with this meta. About bridges, these cards improved the diversity of decks so I think it should not be a good target of ban. Finally, I would like to thank you for your involvement and your regular communication.
I like how recently there were some addition of the functional reprints. The Vilalge Rites and Corrupted Conviction could form something cool but they need some fuel cards for their engine. I see people are tinkering around with Rekless Impulse and Wrenns resolve. I`m lookin forward to see some more functional reprints in pauper.
Things I would like :
- Unban Invigorate 8) (okay I play infect it's the only reason)
- Pauper Masters set (one can dream !)
Thanks for this video, I'm glad we have the PFP and the transparency! I believe in you guys' work and will continue to enjoy the format. If you can sneak nice reprints like chain lightning and chainers edict in sets I will be very happy :p
Great video! Straight to the point, just what it needs. I've played a fair bit of Hymn and Sinkhole in Peasant back in the days (a format similar to Pauper where you're allowed up to 5 uncommons per deck), you're absolutely right, it's not a lot of fun to play against them. Still, they are a part of Magic history and worth talking about. There's arguments for both of them but I'd unban Sinkhole first. It leads to less non-games compared to Hymn since it's way easier to draw out of. It doesn't only feel way less random, it is ;-).
Please don't ban anything just to "shake things up". That sounds like the beginning of the end for an eternal format.
personally i am against bannings "just to shake things up" it's as you laid out a s slippery slope.
unbanning "hymn to tourach" and "sinkhole" on the other and hand could be worth a try.
thank you very much for your communication and transparancy
I also think Galv Blast wouldn't be a terrible ban, Red needs a hit desperately IMO and Swiftspear is played in a lot of fair decks that eats removal or can be blocked.
Unfortunately Hymn and Sink despite being cards I love are too impactful in a format without something like FoW that can mitigate them like Legacy
Mono black need some better tools. I’m not sure that these two are not possiblilities. They are bad late game top decks which seems safer in such a Grindy and slow format.
My ten (somewhat disjointed) thoughts:
1. Love that you've made this video & hopefully we keep seeing regular videos like this in the future. Kudos to Gavin (and the rest of the PFP).
2. I wish other formats (especially Standard) had a similar format panel with non-WotC representation & such good communication. I've seen firsthand the positive impact it's having on Pauper gameplay locally to me & players confidence in the format. Honestly the PFP seems like a rare positive note from WotC since I got back into MtG 3 years ago.
3. On unbans - I think bans should be permanent. There are so many thousands of legal cards that players can brew with, with more being added all the time. Why waste time on cards that have been proven to be problematic. Hymn to Tourach shouldn't even be near the conversation. Just keep moving forward.
4. On bans - The prevalence of Tron and Affinity has kept me away from the format in the past, and is largely keeping me away from the format at the moment. Burn feels as though it is easier to prepare for and sideboard against. I would love to see both Tron and Affinity each reduced to
Affinity and burn have evolved over the life of pauper. Both started as very linear decks and have evolved to more interesting and skill testing decks. I don't think anything from them should be banned. There's also alot of answers that are good for both decks. I don't think anything needs to be banned.
I agree here, especially if they print some better answers/weapons against those decks.
Thanks for sharing the panel's thoughts! I think conversations like this are definitely good for the format we love!
1) really appreciate the transparency. Not that popper is a super expensive format but in general the idea of knowing what cards could possibly be on the chopping block help save players from buying into a deck.
2) for affinity I would almost say getting rid of deadly dispute or the original artifact lands slows down the deck but doesn't completely kill it.
3) as for burn there's a part of me that was really excited that Swift's beer was getting a downgrade but also when legacy burn and pauper burn looks super similar now is that really okay for pauper
Honestly just getting a heads up is fantastic, glad the pauper league has played out like this, keep it up!
Being new to exploring pauper as a format, I came into it surprised how much of a meta % Rdw is. Not surprised the grixis affinity decks do as well as they do. Being a big Rdw fan, I know how much my opponents hate playing vrs it. What you said about how affinity/Rdw feel to face over n over n over, spot on. It's not something I'd recommend for a formats growth. I'd like a shift just for the format feel. Only because I know how Rdw heavy formats feel.
With how much this format has changed in just one year. New cards having a big effect on the format. Things can happen by itself too. I'm not for changing just to change. Just yet
IMO there's no need for drastic measures. Banning the artifact lands or Monastery Swiftspear will only lower Pauper's overall power level and not in a good way. Not to mention, it could actually create issues in the long run and lead to even more bans to rebalance everything else. If Affinity and Mono Red are just slightly "overtuned" compared to other decks, I'd rather nerf them with selective bans. From my experience, the real culprits are Blood Fountain and Experimental Synthesizer. They are the glue that holds those 2 decks together and allows them to do too many things at once. Blood Fountain accelerates the "Affinity count" by 2 for only 1 mana, and makes removal essentially meaningless against the deck. They will just sac Fountain, recur their best 2 threats and deploy them immediately. The issue with Synthesizer is plain obvious, it practically negates the main weakness of a Mono Red Deck (running out of cards).
Also, for goodness' sake, please don't unban Sinkhole and Hymn. If the lack of player agency against Affinity and Mono Red is an issue, imagine losing on turn 1 to Dark Ritual into Sinkhole/Hymn. Sinkhole alone is pretty atrocious to play against, but Hymn straight up turns all games into a coin flip. "GG I literally can't play because I discarded my only lands in hand".
I'd rather have Daze unbanned if need be. It's quite possibly the least offensive card on the banlist, especially when compared to Sinkhole and Hymn, and it would actually bring back some much needed agency to the format.
Just my two cents, sorry for the wall of text! Thank you for keeping us updated and being so receptive to our feedback!
As a guiding principle, I believe that bans should be used to remove problematic/unfair cards, not to simply "shake things up". Eternal formats are deep enough that there will tend to be a natural ebb and flow of dominant strategies, even if you do nothing. There will always be top decks, and those decks will be popular because they're good, and people like to play good decks.
New printings throughout the year always have the chance to make an impact, especially supplemental sets. I don't think you need to force "freshness" on what is otherwise a relatively self-correcting ecosystem.
Pauper seems pretty balanced right now. This is the format that I have most fun playing for sure.
Just hoping it doesn't go down the same path as modern, with the recent power creep increase and the deck prices scalling up to absurd amounts.
Keep up the good work! And thank you for caring about the format!
Hello PFP!! Congrats for the great job!
That's my thoughts and considerations:
Unban:
Gush
Bans:
Ponder
Preordain
Serum Visions (preventive)
Bridges
Since the unification, pauper has been going throught a lot and we know it. Lots of new releases are adding great cards with a reasonable power level. The argument of banning here and there so we can lower pauper's general power level doesn't work anymore, because is just too much going on. With many releases, many new thing to explore, looks like the future is to have more powerful stuff so players can have good options to choose. In that sense, more options would feel nice, and I think that is possible, and Gush is the best example. But first...
I don't think the bridges are healthy at all. Afinity always worked just great being a fast and explosive deck, and as all explosive decks it can also be vulnerable and inconsistent. Not only sideboard was pretty effective against the deck, but mana fixing was also a question. Maybe even unban atog would be possible after banning bridges, because the combo aspect of the deck was kinda fun, even if I've never been a afinity player. But I think ban bridges is pretty much correct anyway.
Gush just creates many other decks. I was a very active player when gush was around, and I know UW inside out tribe, UR blitz and Ux faeries (pre and post Foil happens) were very unique decks. Uniqueness is the word here, something no other card could replace. Gush is unique, powerful and it can be even explosive, or just card advantage played along with brainstorm or something, but the fact is that it create instantly many other decks. We never had Gush without Daze and Probe, so I think is worth trying and one more reason to think that is not going to be the same as it was.
The powerful cantrips are polemic. I think the keyword here to discuss the presence of the powerful cantrips is xerox. Xerox is the word we use to describe the effect cantrips have over deck structure. Basically they allow you play less lands then you would, and the strong selection create this effect where you can play consistenly lands and playables. And we know that beyond that, cantrips do much more, like they make you come back from insane situations where you have nothing and then you just have the game on the palm of your hand.
Well, I know it is a very complex topic, but I just wanted to give a small contribution to the cantrips subject. Preordain is just vintage level for me, and that does not change even when people say "but in pauper is not like that".
And even if we have a reason to think so, my last argument is: Gush is just much better than the cantrips. Better I mean: Gush create new decks, and cantrips reduce variance ("variância" in portuguese). So if we could choose, as a community, I really think after feeling the environment, the pauper community would choose Gush over the cantrips.
See ya
This is so excellent. Helps me buy-in to the pauper decision making. Please do consider unbanning mono-black control pieces like Sinkhole, Hymnn, or BOTH!! 😊
This kind of communication was amazing, great job to everybody involved!
A note on freshness. Pauper is a format where most players can have several decks. Events that we play in my neck of the woods almost never see the same player playing the same deck for multiple events in a row. That helps it stay fresh. Getting bored with Ninja Fae, try Tron. Tired of Artifacts, try Caw Gates, etc. Helps keep it fresh even if bannings aren't happening.
Pleeeease do this for other Formats, Like legacy. Such Information and Engagement could revitalize beloved Formats, that really struggle.
you can't revitalize a format where a deck costs thousands of dollars. Modern is already expensive AF. Pauper is great because the cost of a top deck is nothing, you can build and own several ones without going bankrupt, which means it's way easier for people to get into it, more people = organized play = more people = pfp.
I'd love to play Pauper on Arena... any chance it would ever become a format option? Cheers!
Me too
Something I would like to bring up is a tool that is unique to pauper amongst magic formats: targeted downshifts.
If the PFP can have a "downshift list" as a kind of opposite of the ban list, it would have a tool to inject new cards into the format for the sake of freshness and balance. If one deck is too strong, consider downshifting an answer. If the meta is too settled, look to some uncommons that would give brewers more to play with.
I don't really think that's something that the PFP could or would do. Downshifting cards is something that Wizards is going to control, and Gavin has said that he keeps an eye out for potential cards to be downshifted to common for Pauper purposes (see things like Experiment One or Monastery Swiftspear, for recent examples). And due to the timeline of how Wizards prints cards, it can take a year to get something printed. For example, if they decided that Damping Sphere needed a reprint at common for Pauper, they couldn't just shoehorn that into the next standard set in three months - that set is already done (and the next set or two after that are nearing completion as well).
Also, Wizards has done the "make cards legal in a format where they wouldn't normally be legal" before. Back when Extended was a format, the first rotation of the format kept the original dual lands legal, even though the sets they were in rotated out (they did rotate out a few years later when the next Extended rotation happened).
Does Magic have plans to include Pauper in Arena or to expand access of MTGO to other devices?
Just wanted to say these videos and the panel is appreciated and you are doing some great work with your communication to the format.
While I agree mostly about format diversity, I don't think bridges going is too much of a problem, Affinity will not be able to be 3+ colours and keep greedy mana bases, levelling the playing field in the wake of gorilla shaman.
I actually think deadly dispute should be up for discussion on the bannings, similar to Astrolable, it makes deck building too easy, allows greedy keeps and under to top tier focused Decks it's so easy to play because of artifact land synergy with so much out there. The treasure effectively making it cost 1 mana in a fast format is too advantageous IMO.
Lastly I echo some others re: reprints,though Dom Rem has a ton (bravo) ,Dust to Dust, Pyroblast, Hydroblast, Lotus Petal etc could do with having more in circulation though.
Keep up the good work and have a great day!
I like to thank you for the videos.
It has been wonderful to get a better view into how all formats are handled and I have begun to enjoy commander more knowing the history of the precon decks.
However actions WotC are taking are affecting my enjoyment of the game. Specifically the recent bit with the D&D OGL has made a far more stressful experience as I worry for my friends and those I support in the industry.
I'm hopeful Wizard can correct their path. If they can't though, I don't think I could support any of Hasbro's products both D&D and all forms of Magic. It would irrevocably injure these games and works that I do enjoy.
Thank you again.
Honestly, I’m glad there are no bans. The format seems pretty healthy at the moment, and I think encouraging new archetypes is the way to go rather than banning cards to weaken current ones that are slightly better than the other options at the moment.
I'm with you on this one. Banning cards as a go-to solution is just wrong - it's punishing good decks for winning, while rewarding bad decks for not winning, and creates this backward dynamic of players with good decks not tanting those decks to do well, for rear of being targeted for bans, while players with bad decks are asking for bans to weaken the stronger decks, instead of improving their own.
I'd much rather see new cards printed, or downshifted to help decks at the lower end. It happened when burning tree emissary was downshifted, giving a boost to mono G stompy that was suddenly good against mono U delver, so people went with UR delver/faeries to gain access to fire/ice, and skred, but that weakened the deck against tron, etc.
Honestly, there will always be the best deck, and having 4 at the top isn't bad. Especially that the rogue decks are still winning regularly. People just play burn, and affinity a lot, because they're fast, and easy to play. Used to be that way with boros bully - a very resiliant deck. And then jeskai ephemerate, and people cried about ephemerate to no end (though it was astrolabe that eventually got the axe).
Really glad to hear this and the thoughts behind it! I actually wanted to build affinity but was afraid to due to all the talk of bans. Thanks for giving me the push to build it!
You mentioned sinkhole and hymn but you didn't mention high tide. I am kinda wondering why it wasn't on the table. Without the major untappers or brain freeze or blue sun zenith, it would be really hard to combo off with it. Is the worry that it could make familiars too strong?
Thank you so much for this! I knew people were crying too much jeez! the format is fine for now! good to know the panel is alive and active and taking good care of the best magic format ever! TY!
Sooo... people don't like to play against agressive decks / artifact decks because they encouter them "too often". Can you imagine what will happen when the top decks they encounter are cawgate and dimir terror, decks that actually run 4 copies of counterspell and potentially more counterspell-like effects? If I learned one thing while playing magic it is that if players hate something more than loosing to burn it is playing (even when winning) against counterspells.
I think "banning something because its popular" is a dangerous road to go, especially since it would put an eternal format to a forced rotation, and thereby taking away a lot of appeal from the enternal format (aka: Not having to buy new cards each standard rotation) - imagine if banning the top decks out of existing every 6 months (since this is the rate we are talking about, its not like this is a years old meta, bans started about 12 months ago and now we are talking about bans because of "too popular[but not too good] decks"). I'd imagine backlash for the refugees that came to this format because of wizards/hasbros predatory strategy on where to lead mtg (counting me as one of them). So, I'd be strongly against "ban it because players have fun playing it". Its something else if the winrates warrant it ofc, but from what I see atm they are not problematic.
Going on what to bann - I'd be in favor of that what has the least impact on other decks. So if something HAS to be banned, my list would be:
1) Galv Blast: Is played in some other decks that run artifacts, but that can be downshifted to a lightning bolt, so that wouldn't be a huge issue. I could see this, since 4 galv blasts for 16 can lead to a feelsbad moment and happen from time to time.
2) Untapped artifact lands: I'd ban those over the bridges, since they hit both top decks (Kuldotha Red & Affinity), they provide more tempo AND most importantly: If you ban brigdes it has some impactfull splashdamage on other decks (Wildfire, Tutor bridges up with trinket mage, Indestructible 3/3 flyers with artificer and so on). While untapped artifact lands have some splash damage (5/5 i.e. storm likes them for deadly dispute) most of that splashdamage would be negated by a banned galv blast. Worst tho: If you bann the bridges rather than these lands a g2/g3 gorilla shaman will just be "hey I blew up all your lands, have fun not playing magic". With the bridges still beeing in a single gorilla shaman won't just be a full land wipe, which I think is healthy.
I wouldn't bann deadly dispute - there are SO many decks utilizing it, and its a great draw engine and color fixing that some decks just rely upon.
But TL;DR: Don't ban anything on popularity alone if winrates don't support the decision. I predict a lot more whining if 2 blue decks with counterspells are the most encountered.
That beeing said, the communication on what is done and why is great :)
I love this transparency so much! Based on this overview, banning the original artifact lands sounds like a good call (knocks down Affinity and has some splash damage to Burn), but it makes sense to wait and see. For fans of eternal formats, having a stable metagame is a feature, I agree.
Do love the work that’s being done on pauper! I will say as a mono black enjoyer that hymn maaaay be a bit too much but sinkhole might be worth considering, not a pauper expert but mono black could use the help :)
as long as there are multiple different ways of play (aggro, midrange, etc.) i am not a fan of shaking the format up through bans.
In my opinion, if the format can handle brainstorm it can handle hymn. I think it would be a cool include.
Double black is a high cost as black isn't doing great and pauper manabases aren't great. So it would only push decks that are struggling.
Thanks for this Gavin, it's great to know what's going on an why!
Great video. More communication is always welcome.
I wish the entire WotC company was as transparent as this is. I've been a fan of your work since 2012, Gavin. Have a late "happy new year"!
Just wanted to say I appreciate y'all having these discussions and putting them out for people to discuss. Pauper is a great format.
Why discus only banning? More interesting is what type of effects could be added to enhance other strategies but not mono red or affinity?
I really do like the idea of, if banning, banning galvanic blast and great furnace. Given the format’s in a relatively healthy place, I’d even be happy to only hit one, and then see if another deck nudges out #1! Don’t think one would be enough, but you know ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
BTW if you see this Gavin, this is Alex, that wacky hologram guy that you met at the GT convention. Hope you’re doing well, man! Incredible to see you taking so much time for the community, but also pls maybe take one weekend for yourself this year 😅
If you have to ban one of the sets of lands please don’t ban the Mirrodin lands. My friends and I use them in so many of our decks. They enable a lot of fun things. I can see banning the indestructible Artifact lands but even then those enable fun and interesting things too.
Thanks for the update!
I think sinkhole should be unbanned. Thinking about burn, which can run off a low land count, and affinity, whose lands can be indestructible. If mono black climbs in the rankings, and the top tier decks have to take out a few threats for lands to hedge against it, I think that helps the format overall.
And, please please please put together a panel like this for legacy!
Nobody around me plays Pauper and I don't play online, but I do REALLY like this breakdown and would love to see more in the future for other formats like Modern.
Super happy to see open conversations about format. I wouldn't ban anything yet. If i had to pick it would be probably deadly dispute and maby monastery swift spear. And when it comes to unbans i would love to see sojourners companion.
In affinity I feel Blood Fountain is the issue. You can fight through affinity then they draw 2 Myr Enforcers and it's over
I don't see how adding either Sinkhole or Hymn to Tourach to the format provides a positive experience, and aside from Mono-Black, you would just see an UB Faeries/UB Terror tempo deck pick up either/both and likely become the best thing in the format. I can see the novelty, but I don't think the argument stands up either - we wouldn't be discussing if unbanning Ancestral Recall was on the cards if that had been a common. It's simply too strong and format-warping and I believe the same applies to Sinkhole and Hymn to Tourach.
I think Galvanic Blast is first and foremost a good ban. I personally don't think that Affinity would play Lightning Bolt instead and it could certainly stand to lose some reach/removal, and the "redundancy" that gets mentioned for Burn just doesn't apply to Galvanic Blast because the difference between that and Chain Lightning or a "redundant" card like Skewer the Critics is much, much larger than the difference between Chain Lightning and Skewer the Critics. Burn decks currently have a way too easy time "turning on" Galvanic Blast because of amazing auto-includes like Experimental Synthesizer and other decks having a hard time punishing including Great Furnace over Mountain. The extra point of damage simply isn't easily replaced, and Galvanic Blast is not "redundant" in the Burn deck in my opinion.
I also do not think that Swiftspear provides good gameplay or does any good for the format, and Burn getting to open with it on the play is simply too strong for a large portion of the field to really handle consistently. I think one factor that should also be discussed when talking about strong decks with a large meta game share is if the mirror is enjoyable. I personally think that the Affinity mirror can be engaging to some extent, but the Burn mirror on the other hand just is not very interesting, and it is hard to leverage good play into a win in the mirror. I also think it's pretty telling that good Burn pilots at this point basically do not sideboard for the mirror, possibly because there are no good sideboard options. This also makes Burn stronger against the field. Compare it to when Burn was at its peak in Modern, where Burn decks had to include both Kor Firewalker (because it was incredibly strong in the mirror) and Path to Exile (partially to counter your opponents Kor Firewalker) in their sideboards, making them less strong against the field because they had to spend sideboard slots on the mirror - something we simply don't see in Pauper, and won't see, unless a good anti-Burn card that Burn can play in the sideboard somehow emerges.
Unban Hymn. Give black and green the tools to exile artifacts: Splinter, Dispossess, Tear Asunder, and Dreams of Steel and Oil would make great downshifts. This might help black and green to have a bigger meta share.... or you could just unban all the banned cards, and see what happens when the dust settles.
While I'd prefer bridges go I'd take the removal of galvanic, I know the stats say bolt is still more played but damn it doesn't feel that way online, because of bridges tons of decks can more easily get metalcraft.
Ban the bridges
i love pauper and /-/ow its is now, ty for everyt/-/ing
I agree that bans just to shake things up are a bad idea. I like the safety of pauper being an eternal format, yet I've had to disassemble multiple "rogue" lists due to bans that were meant to target other decks.
I'd love to keep my mono green initiative tron for a while :D
This kind of transparency with every format would be amazing.
To give more tools to mono black, there's a lot of options.
I love Devotion based decks, so enchantments is a good way to go.
Maybe either giving some old cards a new, more devotion friendly mana value for spells such as "Stab Wound" would be nice, or a new line for spells such as "Contaminated Ground" or "Corrupted Roots" in order to "force" the enchanted land's owner to tap it to lose X life whenever he casts a non-creature spell or is unable to untap it on the his next untap step ?
After all, land destruction is not fun, and duress/divest will be the best discard spell for a long time. I don't see that form of "mana burn" being an issue, while in black. Red would have to play fast as it always does, blue has enchantment hate in forms of counterspells/bouncing, white can gain life, is creature based and has a lot of ways to destroy enchantments, green too + weather the storm.
What if you just ban all the payoffs for affinity? If the deck has no affinity creatures, is it affinity at all?
I think rathet than banning specific things to nudge down burn or affinity there should be discussion on what in the form of reducing the rarity of a card or pronting something new could bring to other decks to creep their power higher to make them better keep up with burn or affinity