|
Post by RockBass on Sept 21, 2012 12:00:44 GMT -5
Do you think that they could take the approach with our format of that of Vintage? So instead of BANNING a card we get a RESTRICTION? Maybe restricting Cranial Plating, Glimmerpost, and Glistener Elf/Invigorate to a 1 of? Or is this thought just a complete hogwash? It's an interesting idea, but I think a restriction in those cases would kill the decks just as much as a ban would. Plus, Pauper inherently has a restriction built in to it by the rarity we are allowed to use.
|
|
|
Post by yugular on Sept 21, 2012 16:29:57 GMT -5
Restriction will never be the right solution. Vintage is a special case and I am 99% sure we will never see restricted cards in any other format.
|
|
|
Post by Fan of History on Sept 25, 2012 1:02:55 GMT -5
Restricted lists is an artifact of the dark past, do not spread them. Ban or allow.
|
|
|
Post by Fan of History on Sept 25, 2012 1:04:24 GMT -5
And I still think that the cards that are banned in modern should be banned in Classic Pauper. Getting rid of Cloudpost and Rite of Flame would solve many problems. The artifact lands don't need to be banned, but if that is the price for consistency, so be it
|
|
Mr. Kris
Is Super Cool
Sexay Ma-chine
Posts: 198
|
Post by Mr. Kris on Sept 26, 2012 12:51:33 GMT -5
Would banning the artifact lands kill the Affinity deck too much though? It that was to happen I could see Affinity going more the "Metalcraft" route and less dump your hand and try to crush route.
I do agree with making the ban list a bit more robust though. How about if 1 piece of the top decks all got the crush?
Glistener Elf (I mean c'mon its like a Wild Nactl) Glimmerpost Ponder (or) Preordain (both?) Rite of Flame Daze (NO FREE COUNTERSPELLS!) COP: Black
|
|