Trespassers curse, Gideon's intervention and the new viridian shaman could all be considered anti-copycat cards.
I think low Magic Online interest in the new set, which wasn't even out in stores yet, played a bigger role in the emergency ban than anything else. Prices were abysmal on Monday and Tuesday and so was prerelease attendance as far as I could see. No one was interested in the new set if standard was going to be the same old copycat deck. Also copycat has an online disadvantage because you need to click through making all the copies manually, which is the main reason I held off playing the deck. So if copycat was still doing that well even though it's more annoying to play online and there are hate cards for it, WotC finally realized how big a problem it was.
Dinrova Horror can bounce every permanent, not only creatures. That's actually (IMHO) the main selling point of the card, since its makes it useful in matchups (Bogles, Tron Mirror) where standard removal spell are generally useless.
Scapeshift accounts for four of five Scout victories at least on Gatherling (I couldn't track down the 5th). I wouldn't feel compelled to ban anything on account of Scouts since they relied solely on a banned card.
Well, I'm starting my Iconic Masters design, and the first thing that came to mind was getting all my thoughts about the set/announcement together. That ended up being the first couple of paragraphs of what will be my eventual article, and since that probably won't go up for a while (I want a full set at that point, or at least either a full top or bottom), here those paragraphs are.
So...Iconic Masters is a thing, I guess. Don’t get me wrong, there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with this set. Six booster sets (plus Commander) is standard now (and since it’s two Masters sets instead of one Masters set and Conspiracy, this should require less design work), and “Commander Masters” (more on that in a second) isn’t a bad concept in the abstract. The idea of an old-school no-spoilers Prerelease is also neat in the abstract, even if it causes some logistical problems (again, details shortly). There’s always the worry of reprint set fatigue though, especially on more-casual cards that are more likely to be constrained by supply rather than demand. The $10 MSRP is also very concerning, as it’s going to be difficult to find enough good cards to fill that in paper, while on MTGO I doubt any pack could fulfill even a $4 pack price, much less the $7 it’ll likely be.
So what is Iconic Masters going to be? Our two sources of information are the HASCON Prerelease article and the set information page, and they don’t give us much. The main elevator pitch is highlighting powerful/iconic spells from Magic’s history (name-checking the five iconic tribes of Angels, Sphinxes, Demons, Dragons, and Hydras specifically), as well as “one of the most iconic and power-packed Draft experiences yet!” This pretty clearly points to “Commander/Cube Masters”, and that sounds like a good idea, I’m worried. This concept has problems with both of the main goals of a Masters set: reprinting value and creating a good draft environment.
What is the formula for an expensive card? In general, it involves one or more of three factors: power level in a supported format, extremely low supply, and/or a place on the Reserve List. Before we started, let me make this crystal clear: This is not the set where WotC relaxes the Reserve List! Even if you think WotC can/wants to, you don’t do it in an environment where information is sketchy (our “spoilers” over HASCON weekend will be scattered, and probably full of fakes regardless). The other two reasons also aren’t that well-positioned for this set. The poster child for low supply (in paper) is Portal (mostly Portal Three Kingdoms), but they certainly aren’t “iconic” and likely won’t be in the set in large amounts (they could get sprinkled in; I could easily see a (Zodiac Dragon) at mythic for instance). As for “supported format”, that’s much more nebulous (Commander-focused cards can certainly get expensive, as can old cards mostly used in Commander these days), but the top end will always be slanted towards competitive formats, especially with the Reserve List hanging overhead and P3K moved mostly out of the range. Again, I certainly could find enough cards to make the set valuable enough in paper at least (though it’ll take a lot of digging, as I don’t have nearly as much of a sense of what Commander cards are valuable), but I don’t know how appealing it’ll be to the masses.
As for the draft format, I have two words for you: Legendary Cube. This cube format attempted to recreate the feeling of a Commander game in Cube format, and it was disliked so much that its return last year was aborted partway through and replaced with Legacy Cube. Granted, a lot it was based on problems that can be fixed (the “only Legendary Creatures” restriction was ditched during its second run, and they attempted to cut down on color fixing to create more decks than “5C Good Stuff”), but the inherent problem of “Limited format where the game doesn’t ‘start’ until Turn 5+” seems difficult to solve (and anything closer to a normal format either makes the “iconic” cards don’t matter or has their implied density ruin the balance). Of course, WotC has at least attempted to solve these problems (unless they’re pulling a really big prank on Hasbro and the playerbase—though part of me really wants this to be Un-3 now), so it’s time for me to solve them.
Turns out the next Masters set might have leaked out from a WPN email (probably because of the delay in Announcement Day). All we have right now is the name "Iconic Masters" and a release date of November 17th. I'm going to save anything meaningful until we get official word (which might happen tomorrow, based on previous reaction to some unintentional official leaks), mainly because we have no idea what this is: Eternal Masters 2, Commander Masters, a bigger FTV (what this is partially replacing), a gold-bordered cube product, or anything else. I might start sketching out a "Commander Masters" set (just because I like doing them; it can get thrown on the pile with my mostly-complete MM4 and EM2 designs), but don't expect an article until we get a better picture of what this is (not that it'll help with my predictions on a set with no meaningful range restrictions)
Edit: Well, it's real, and while it'll release in November (in both Paper and MTGO), it's getting a old-school prerelease at HasCon where no one knows the cards. We don't know much about the set itself (other than a mention of the iconic tribes and the facts page saying it'll be "one of the most ... power-packed draft experiences yet". Assuming they aren't being literal with "power-packed" (which would be one of the dumbest moves ever, breaking the reserve list with no verification possible), this sure sounds like Commander Masters to me. Expect a list soon, and it'll probably be nothing like the actual list :/
I agree with you that some players might decide to hedge, splitting between the Eidolons and the Harsh Mentors (for example 2 of each in the deck). However, I think it IS a choice between either Eidolon or Mentor if you want to use a full playset of at least one of the cards (and most players will probably choose this route rather than hedging). The 2CMC is a precious slot in that deck, and a slot which can clunk if there are too many creatures in that slot.
Eidolons and Harsh Mentors play similar roles, both of which become significantly worse the longer the game goes on. You don't want to be casting an Eidolon on Turn 2 and a Mentor on Turn 3. Because by Turn 3 your opponent has already probably activated his/her most relevant fetch lands and other low cost cards requiring activation costs. A similar problem occurs if you cast the Mentor on Turn 2 and the Eidolon on Turn 3.
Mark my words - I predict that if you go to MTG Goldfish website 6 months from now, you will not see the Tier 1 burn or RDW decks using both Eidolons and Harsh Mentors. I could be wrong of course, but that is my prediction and I stand by it.
(There might be rogue players who play both, and if that's what you mean then I would agree with you, but I assumed that we are talking here about Tier 1 decks).
You may be right about Soul-Scar Mage. In making a Top 8 I generally try and look for cards that might be main deck playable rather than sideboard cards. I could see a deck going all-in on Prowess with Swiftspear, Soul-Scar Mage and Bedlam Reveller. That may not be a deck but it has potential. To me Harsh Mentor is a sideboard card as I don't think it is good enough main but I may very well be proven wrong about that.
You can run Eidolon and Harsh Mentor together but that is more 2-drop creatures than the average Burn deck plays. I also think Burn lists are generally pretty tight. I think the main deck playability of Harsh Mentor comes down to how often you get a trigger off your opponent cracking fetches. Without playing the card I don't really know the answer to that. However my assessment is that against the average deck in Modern it' too easy to play around and not punishing enough.
But that framing is somewhat faulty--you seemingly imply that the choice is to play Eidolon OR Mentor. I think 4/1 is probably going to be a decent choice in Burn.
I also have a difficult time seeing Soul Scar Mage as more impactful than Mentor.
It does indeed but those aren't hugely prevalent card types in Modern, except in Affinity - hence why Mentor is good in that matchup. The other manlands that see play are usually saved for the late game, by which time you could probably clear Mentor from the board.
I think comparing Mentor to one-drops is off as it is a two-drop. Grim Lavamancer has applications as removal as well as going to the dome. Wild Nacatl is an excellent one-drop that is very difficult to compare to Mentor.
I think Eidolon is the best comparator as it is 2-mana and does something very similar. You aren't guaranteed value out of Eidolon but Modern is a format heavily based on <3 CMC spells making it very difficult to avoid. Also the vast majority of removal for Eidolon triggers its ability so you at least get 2 damage even it your opponent immediately kills your Eidolon. A lot of decks can remove Mentor without taking a single point of damage and I think there are a good number of decks that aren't heavily taxed by its effect, other than maybe cracking fetches. It's not a bad card and a fine sideboard card but I think you might be overrating it.
Wizards announced a new concurrent user number on Monday, so this is not the case.
https://twitter.com/mtg_lee/status/857343957872762882
They also changed the combat shortcut this week.
there was a vague tweet about it that it would be going out next week (that was sent during this week)
I do recall seeing that.
Seems like a reasonable surmise.
Trespassers curse, Gideon's intervention and the new viridian shaman could all be considered anti-copycat cards.
I think low Magic Online interest in the new set, which wasn't even out in stores yet, played a bigger role in the emergency ban than anything else. Prices were abysmal on Monday and Tuesday and so was prerelease attendance as far as I could see. No one was interested in the new set if standard was going to be the same old copycat deck. Also copycat has an online disadvantage because you need to click through making all the copies manually, which is the main reason I held off playing the deck. So if copycat was still doing that well even though it's more annoying to play online and there are hate cards for it, WotC finally realized how big a problem it was.
Where did you get the info that 1v1 commander will be clarified on May 1? I haven't been able to find that.
As for the not letting infinite combos by Aaron Forscythe, I'm positive he was referring to Standard only.
haha if I am not misnaming something it isn't me. :p Thanks for listening and the subtle correction. :D
Thanks for this podcast, I enjoyed.
Nice to see the green Kamigawa Dragon Jugan become a member of the Joraga tribe. :) The elves will be delighted!
Dinrova Horror can bounce every permanent, not only creatures. That's actually (IMHO) the main selling point of the card, since its makes it useful in matchups (Bogles, Tron Mirror) where standard removal spell are generally useless.
You can get it for under 20 tix in other versions. However, it is still a lot.
Gorilla shaman on the good stuff list is unreasonable.
Fixed it. Singleton is April 29.
Scapeshift accounts for four of five Scout victories at least on Gatherling (I couldn't track down the 5th). I wouldn't feel compelled to ban anything on account of Scouts since they relied solely on a banned card.
Gathering says Apr 22 is singleton
Haven't see a common in the Good Stuff list since the Old Daze
Well, I'm starting my Iconic Masters design, and the first thing that came to mind was getting all my thoughts about the set/announcement together. That ended up being the first couple of paragraphs of what will be my eventual article, and since that probably won't go up for a while (I want a full set at that point, or at least either a full top or bottom), here those paragraphs are.
So...Iconic Masters is a thing, I guess. Don’t get me wrong, there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with this set. Six booster sets (plus Commander) is standard now (and since it’s two Masters sets instead of one Masters set and Conspiracy, this should require less design work), and “Commander Masters” (more on that in a second) isn’t a bad concept in the abstract. The idea of an old-school no-spoilers Prerelease is also neat in the abstract, even if it causes some logistical problems (again, details shortly). There’s always the worry of reprint set fatigue though, especially on more-casual cards that are more likely to be constrained by supply rather than demand. The $10 MSRP is also very concerning, as it’s going to be difficult to find enough good cards to fill that in paper, while on MTGO I doubt any pack could fulfill even a $4 pack price, much less the $7 it’ll likely be.
So what is Iconic Masters going to be? Our two sources of information are the HASCON Prerelease article and the set information page, and they don’t give us much. The main elevator pitch is highlighting powerful/iconic spells from Magic’s history (name-checking the five iconic tribes of Angels, Sphinxes, Demons, Dragons, and Hydras specifically), as well as “one of the most iconic and power-packed Draft experiences yet!” This pretty clearly points to “Commander/Cube Masters”, and that sounds like a good idea, I’m worried. This concept has problems with both of the main goals of a Masters set: reprinting value and creating a good draft environment.
What is the formula for an expensive card? In general, it involves one or more of three factors: power level in a supported format, extremely low supply, and/or a place on the Reserve List. Before we started, let me make this crystal clear: This is not the set where WotC relaxes the Reserve List! Even if you think WotC can/wants to, you don’t do it in an environment where information is sketchy (our “spoilers” over HASCON weekend will be scattered, and probably full of fakes regardless). The other two reasons also aren’t that well-positioned for this set. The poster child for low supply (in paper) is Portal (mostly Portal Three Kingdoms), but they certainly aren’t “iconic” and likely won’t be in the set in large amounts (they could get sprinkled in; I could easily see a (Zodiac Dragon) at mythic for instance). As for “supported format”, that’s much more nebulous (Commander-focused cards can certainly get expensive, as can old cards mostly used in Commander these days), but the top end will always be slanted towards competitive formats, especially with the Reserve List hanging overhead and P3K moved mostly out of the range. Again, I certainly could find enough cards to make the set valuable enough in paper at least (though it’ll take a lot of digging, as I don’t have nearly as much of a sense of what Commander cards are valuable), but I don’t know how appealing it’ll be to the masses.
As for the draft format, I have two words for you: Legendary Cube. This cube format attempted to recreate the feeling of a Commander game in Cube format, and it was disliked so much that its return last year was aborted partway through and replaced with Legacy Cube. Granted, a lot it was based on problems that can be fixed (the “only Legendary Creatures” restriction was ditched during its second run, and they attempted to cut down on color fixing to create more decks than “5C Good Stuff”), but the inherent problem of “Limited format where the game doesn’t ‘start’ until Turn 5+” seems difficult to solve (and anything closer to a normal format either makes the “iconic” cards don’t matter or has their implied density ruin the balance). Of course, WotC has at least attempted to solve these problems (unless they’re pulling a really big prank on Hasbro and the playerbase—though part of me really wants this to be Un-3 now), so it’s time for me to solve them.
Turns out the next Masters set might have leaked out from a WPN email (probably because of the delay in Announcement Day). All we have right now is the name "Iconic Masters" and a release date of November 17th. I'm going to save anything meaningful until we get official word (which might happen tomorrow, based on previous reaction to some unintentional official leaks), mainly because we have no idea what this is: Eternal Masters 2, Commander Masters, a bigger FTV (what this is partially replacing), a gold-bordered cube product, or anything else. I might start sketching out a "Commander Masters" set (just because I like doing them; it can get thrown on the pile with my mostly-complete MM4 and EM2 designs), but don't expect an article until we get a better picture of what this is (not that it'll help with my predictions on a set with no meaningful range restrictions)
Edit: Well, it's real, and while it'll release in November (in both Paper and MTGO), it's getting a old-school prerelease at HasCon where no one knows the cards. We don't know much about the set itself (other than a mention of the iconic tribes and the facts page saying it'll be "one of the most ... power-packed draft experiences yet". Assuming they aren't being literal with "power-packed" (which would be one of the dumbest moves ever, breaking the reserve list with no verification possible), this sure sounds like Commander Masters to me. Expect a list soon, and it'll probably be nothing like the actual list :/
Hi xger,
I agree with you that some players might decide to hedge, splitting between the Eidolons and the Harsh Mentors (for example 2 of each in the deck). However, I think it IS a choice between either Eidolon or Mentor if you want to use a full playset of at least one of the cards (and most players will probably choose this route rather than hedging). The 2CMC is a precious slot in that deck, and a slot which can clunk if there are too many creatures in that slot.
Eidolons and Harsh Mentors play similar roles, both of which become significantly worse the longer the game goes on. You don't want to be casting an Eidolon on Turn 2 and a Mentor on Turn 3. Because by Turn 3 your opponent has already probably activated his/her most relevant fetch lands and other low cost cards requiring activation costs. A similar problem occurs if you cast the Mentor on Turn 2 and the Eidolon on Turn 3.
Mark my words - I predict that if you go to MTG Goldfish website 6 months from now, you will not see the Tier 1 burn or RDW decks using both Eidolons and Harsh Mentors. I could be wrong of course, but that is my prediction and I stand by it.
(There might be rogue players who play both, and if that's what you mean then I would agree with you, but I assumed that we are talking here about Tier 1 decks).
You may be right about Soul-Scar Mage. In making a Top 8 I generally try and look for cards that might be main deck playable rather than sideboard cards. I could see a deck going all-in on Prowess with Swiftspear, Soul-Scar Mage and Bedlam Reveller. That may not be a deck but it has potential. To me Harsh Mentor is a sideboard card as I don't think it is good enough main but I may very well be proven wrong about that.
You can run Eidolon and Harsh Mentor together but that is more 2-drop creatures than the average Burn deck plays. I also think Burn lists are generally pretty tight. I think the main deck playability of Harsh Mentor comes down to how often you get a trigger off your opponent cracking fetches. Without playing the card I don't really know the answer to that. However my assessment is that against the average deck in Modern it' too easy to play around and not punishing enough.
But that framing is somewhat faulty--you seemingly imply that the choice is to play Eidolon OR Mentor. I think 4/1 is probably going to be a decent choice in Burn.
I also have a difficult time seeing Soul Scar Mage as more impactful than Mentor.
It does indeed but those aren't hugely prevalent card types in Modern, except in Affinity - hence why Mentor is good in that matchup. The other manlands that see play are usually saved for the late game, by which time you could probably clear Mentor from the board.
Mentor also triggers on man-lands and equipment
I see Nissa in an amulet-bloom type of deck
My Modern deck definitely fears the Eidolon more than it fears the Harsh Mentor.
I think comparing Mentor to one-drops is off as it is a two-drop. Grim Lavamancer has applications as removal as well as going to the dome. Wild Nacatl is an excellent one-drop that is very difficult to compare to Mentor.
I think Eidolon is the best comparator as it is 2-mana and does something very similar. You aren't guaranteed value out of Eidolon but Modern is a format heavily based on <3 CMC spells making it very difficult to avoid. Also the vast majority of removal for Eidolon triggers its ability so you at least get 2 damage even it your opponent immediately kills your Eidolon. A lot of decks can remove Mentor without taking a single point of damage and I think there are a good number of decks that aren't heavily taxed by its effect, other than maybe cracking fetches. It's not a bad card and a fine sideboard card but I think you might be overrating it.