Is Grishoalbrand safe?
Modern forum
Posted on March 19, 2016, 2:09 p.m. by Jay
I saw some discussion of possibly banning shoal or goryo's, and I have a full deck I'm not using right now. I'd like to hold onto it if it's safe, but if there's a reasonable chance of bans I'll dump the big value in it now. Thoughts?
aeonstoremyliver says... #3
It's Modern, where nothing is safe from the ban hammer.
In all seriousness, Grishoalbranned can win turn two. WoTC doesn't like that. I suppose if the deck puts up results in a big way, something will get banned. However as noted, Eldrazi have a bullseye on them currently.
March 19, 2016 3:26 p.m.
BloodoftheBloodMoon says... #4
The deck has the possibility to win on turn 2. It's not consistent whatsoever, but it can. the deck did get better with the color shift from jund to grixis, so it did get more consistent and resilient in the form of Izzet Charm. The deck is hella fun to play too, so if you want to, go for it. I don't think it'll be banned.
March 19, 2016 3:34 p.m.
lemmingllama says... #5
I do think that it is more degenerate than many other decks in the format, since the number of turn 3 kills is fairly high. However, since the combo is fairly fragile, I doubt that it will be able to consistently put up good results. Once Grishoalbrand is a known quantity that is expected, people can pack additional graveyard hate and kill off the deck. So I think it falls into the same space as Living End decks, good but not bannable due to how fragile they are.
That being said, Goryo's Vengeance is still super broken. If any other legendary that can also abuse it is printed, then it could be banned. In that case, you'd want to swap your deck over to a Protean Hulk build.
March 19, 2016 3:58 p.m.
Goryo's vengeance is not broken in the slightest...the legendary clause makes it about as fair as you can get. You have to devote your deck to doing something extremely fragile to be able to "abuse" it like glass cannon Griselbrand. Other decks, like mine, use it for some really fun and neat things that are just value, not degenerate in any way. It won't be banned.
March 19, 2016 4:46 p.m.
It can turn 2 or turn 3 win. No matter how inconsistent it is, it breaks the turn 4 rule. Bloom titan was not a consistent deck and died hard to a variety of counters / removal spells but it doesnt matter. If it breaks the turn 4 rule, it breaks the turn 4 rule. End of story.
March 19, 2016 5 p.m.
There are plenty of other cards to get rid of that will fix the turn 3 issue... There is no need to completely eliminate the entire deck
March 19, 2016 5:37 p.m.
lemmingllama says... #9
@ChiefBell The turn 4 rule says the deck "consistently kills before turn 4" if I remember correctly.
Amulet Bloom is different from Grishoalbrand because it was also just capable of playing a game of fair magic and winning that way. Grishoalbrand can extremely rarely just hardcast a Griselbrand and go off, whereas Primeval Titan was much easier on the Bloom deck.
March 19, 2016 5:39 p.m.
Right but when it comes to the turn 4 rule it still breaks it. It's irrelevant how fair or unfair the deck is. Whether it's a linear deck or not. Whether it has multiple wincons. Doesn't matter.
If they ban Bloom given that it produces wins before turn 4 (inconsistently) then they need to ban ALL decks that product turn 4 wins (inconsistently).
This is basic stuff.
I don't think they should have got rid of Bloom and I don't think they need to do anything about Grishoalbrand - but if they put guidelines in place then they need to follow them.
March 19, 2016 5:47 p.m.
By that measure green infect should get the hammer, too. Wizards needs to step up and make better decisions or at least have more solid reasoning behind them.
March 19, 2016 6:49 p.m.
So, sounds like there's no solid consensus... Would you say I should offload them then? It feels bad because I put so much time into acquiring them, but it's a lot of value to potentially lose. That said, if they stay legal they could also go up... What would you do?
March 19, 2016 6:56 p.m.
I think wizards are hypocritical enough to ignore it. It hasnt done much recently. If it starts top 8ing - get rid of it fast.
March 19, 2016 7:23 p.m.
FAMOUSWATERMELON says... #15
With all this talk about the Turn 4 rule, didn't that rule exist because of Twin? And now Twin is dead.
March 19, 2016 7:27 p.m.
Twin was pretty much the epitome of what the format was about for many of us older players, yeah. It defined a lot of the rules.
Edit: not in a bad way, in a "this is the best example of the power level we are aiming for".
March 19, 2016 7:31 p.m. Edited.
FAMOUSWATERMELON says... #17
But my point is, what says that the rule still exists? At least in Wizard's mind?
March 19, 2016 7:51 p.m.
Well I think in a wider sense it's just an arbitrary indication of what decks should be doing. As far as I'm aware it's their rule, not ours. We didn't define it - they did.
As far as I'm aware.
March 19, 2016 7:58 p.m.
JexInfinite says... #19
If I was in charge of B&R, I'd ban SSG to heavily nerf the deck. It's degenerate Magic and something you usually want to steer clear of. It's very reminiscent of Flash Hulk which was an evil, evil deck. Yes, consistency is an issue, but it's still a stupid broken deck. In the interests of preserving Ad Nauseam, banning Goryo's Vengeance would be the better move since that will always result in broken combo, but neither of these decks are currently popular and so it's probably not too big of a deal.
Is it as stupid as Amulet Bloom? Absolutely, but it's inconsistent which is why people don't think it should be banned. I disagree with this reasoning because once you begin to go off, you almost always end up winning.
March 19, 2016 8:26 p.m.
JexInfinite says... #20
If you're planning to offload, it's probably a good idea, even if it doesn't get banned.
March 19, 2016 8:28 p.m.
Sceadugenga says... #21
The above reasoning for bannings isn't really accurate, or to say the least, it isn't complete. Take a look at the article "What's With Eldrazi" by David Erenwein on modern nexus for the most complete analysis I've yet seen.
March 19, 2016 9:06 p.m.
vampirelazarus says... #22
I think Chief hit the nail on the head.
WotC has this kind of hypocritical banning policy the last couple of years. It feels like literally nothing is safe anymore. Hell, elves probably isn't safe, because it can win on turn three, albeit very, very inconsistently.
March 19, 2016 9:23 p.m. Edited.
Thanks for the input all. I pulled the trigger; it's all going out on Puca as we speak. I wasn't using them anyway, I'll take the $300 for less than 20 core cards.
March 19, 2016 10:37 p.m.
if grishoalbrand got something that made it a consistant t2 win like old infect, it would get banned, but right now a relic of progenitus can put it off for a while, or even terminate. its not consistant enough to kill off the format but if something was printed it could be banned(like a modern entomb)
March 20, 2016 1:10 p.m.
If they ban Goryo's Vengeance I will cry.
Wizards hates combo players. I was already mentally preparing for building Living Twin before they banned Splinter Twin - and I can hardly rationalize spending over $1000 on a deck. Now I'm rationalizing building up to a $1400 Niv-Mizzet combo deck with Goryo's Vengeance.
I will freaking cry. Tears. Intense tears. Probably quit playing Modern for a long while too. I'll gladly go back to the restricted realm of Standard.
March 21, 2016 5:23 p.m.
aeonstoremyliver says... #26
@TMBRLZ Play Legacy. Bit bigger of a buy in but shit gets banned hardly ever, with the exception of Treasure Cruise and Dig Through Time as of late.
March 22, 2016 12:45 a.m.
Fleetwood-Mat says... #27
Guys, almost every good modern aggro deck can win before turn 4 (inconsistently). I've seen Burn do it, I've seen Infect do it, I've seen Affinity do it and I've even seen Bogles do it. If they were serious about being more strict about the "turn 4 rule" they'd be banning Cranial Plating, Mutagenic Growth, Lightning Bolt and Spirit Mantle. They're not worried about turn 3 kills, especially when it doesn't happen every game. Summer Bloom got banned because Bloom Titan was unstoppable and simply unfair, Splinter Twin got banned because it was holding down a whole lot of other archetypes (and in my opinion a really degenerate combo at best). Having one deck come to mind first when building a sideboard usually indicates that deck is a little too meta-warping. Now instead of thinking about ways to get around twin, I can use up those slots to add sideboards against cards that my deck is ACTUALLY weak against, and not just because unlimited tokens outnumber my blockers.
March 22, 2016 6:28 p.m.
My manager at my card shop suggested they need to ban all the mana acceleration like Mox Opal and Simian Spirit Guide.
March 22, 2016 8:24 p.m.
Fleetwood-Mat says... #29
TMBRLZ, I don't agree with that. Those two cards only have the profile they have because of Lightning Bolt. No one would bat an eye about those cards if turn 1 Birds of Paradise was considered a good play in modern. Path to Exile doesn't answer BoP very well, Thoughtseize requires you to pay 2 life to get the BoP, and it is NOT worth a Dismember to remove. Lightning Bolt is the card most in need of banning in Modern. No other 1 mana removal spell is so versatile and overbearing as Lightning Bolt is... think about it; NO downside, instant speed, 1 cmc, creature OR player, it's an automatic 4 of in any modern deck playing red and it has NO equal (every functional reprint is strictly worse). Banning it would open up a world of cards that are just not legitimate because of the existence of bolt in Modern. Obviously Birds of Paradise still die to a Shock, but at least the alternative is no longer 3 to the face, but 2 instead (a lot less punishing). I doubt they will ever actually ban Lightning Bolt, which means that they would be incredibly prejudice if they banned the few good replacements for BoP that exist in the format.
March 22, 2016 9:15 p.m.
FAMOUSWATERMELON says... #30
A) Lightning Bolt will not get banned.
B) Those cards are good because they basically act as playing two lands a turn. Land into BoP T1 does nothing because Birds don't have haste and you have to pay for it. Land into SSG or Opal means you just played another land. They're nowhere near comparable.
March 22, 2016 9:30 p.m. Edited.
Well defended FAMOUSWATERMELON
I wouldn't mind seeing Mox get axed. While it isn't indomitable, Affinity has been ruling the format for a while. I don't know if that would kill Affinity, but I'm not an Affinity player. As much as I've watched the deck, its not a deck you really know until you play it.
I'm not saying Affinity is busted or overwhelming and needs removed from the format, but removing Mox Opal would definitely slow it down, to the same degree banning Summer Bloom and Eye of Ugin did/will drastically slow, but not completely immobilize Bloom Titan and Eldrazi respectively.
My point is - not to derail this post too much - is that banning the mana accelerators wouldn't be a bad idea. Banning Simian Spirit Guide would screw over Ad Naus though...
8vomit says... #2
I dont see it getting the ban hammer any time soon. If it were consuming the modern meta, or was just OP, they WotC would ban something, but it is not. Thats Eldrazi Aggro
That being said, no one really expected twin or summer bloom to get banned. so who knows. I thinks its turning into a marketing scheme honestly..
March 19, 2016 2:19 p.m.