Banned & Restricted Announcement is out

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.misc,rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules,rec.games.trading-cards.magic.strategy (More info?)

Here it is, hot off the presses. I'm a little surprised by some of the
changes (did they have to ban seven cards to take out one deck?) and
especially like the announcement at the bottom, which is something that
should have happened years ago.

March 2005 DCI Banned and Restricted List Announcement -- Magic: the
Gathering

Announcement Date: March 1, 2005
Effective Date: March 20, 2005
Magic Online Effective Date: March 24, 2005 (after the regularly
scheduled Thursday downtime)

Standard

Arcbound Ravager is banned
Disciple of the Vault is banned
Artifact lands are banned (Ancient Den, Great Furnace, Seat of the
Synod, Tree of Tales, Vault of Whispers, Darksteel Citadel)

Kamigawa Block Constructed

No changes

Extended

No changes

Legacy

No changes

Vintage

Trinisphere is restricted

Magic Online Formats:

Classic

No changes

Open

No changes

Prismatic

No changes

Singleton

Skullclamp is banned

Tribal Wars

No changes

Special Announcement Regarding Starter-Level Card Sets:

On October 20, 2005 cards from all starter-level card sets -- Portal,
Portal Second Age, Portal Three Kingdoms, and Starter (1999 and 2000) --
will become legal for sanctioned play in the Vintage and Legacy formats.
This change makes all black-bordered and white-bordered Magic sets legal
for play in the Vintage and Legacy formats. Please refer to the Oracle
card reference for the official updated wordings, including card type
and creature type, for all these cards.

The following changes are expected to be in the October 1, 2005 update
to the Banned and Restricted Lists:

Legacy

Imperial Seal is banned

Vintage

Personal Tutor is restricted
Imperial Seal is restricted

For an explanation of the changes from Magic R&D, tune in to Aaron
Forsythe's "Latest Developments" column on magicthegathering.com on
Friday, March 4, 2005.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.misc,rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules,rec.games.trading-cards.magic.strategy (More info?)

Well it's official Affinity is dead. predictions for the meta-game anyone?

1. T&N
2. RDW
3. G/B Control
4. MBC
5. MUC
6. WW(?)
7. R/G Beats

oh the meta is wide open now i think, what does everyone else think? Oh yeah
hope you got your Chrome Moxes already because they just skyrocketed in
price.

 

[Jax]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.misc,rec.games.trading-cards.magic.strategy (More info?)

(Note: .rules has been taken out, as there are currently no rules
questions about the list)

Darkwvlf sez:

<<
> Well it's official Affinity is dead. predictions for the meta-game
anyone?
>
> 1. T&N
> 2. RDW
> 3. G/B Control
> 4. MBC
> 5. MUC
> 6. WW(?)
> 7. R/G Beats
>
> oh the meta is wide open now i think, what does everyone else think?
Oh yeah
> hope you got your Chrome Moxes already because they just skyrocketed
in
> price.
>>

I see a game that's not too much slower, because they decided to leave
AEther Vial in...

....and I'd be curious to know why they restricted Trinisphere, a
slow-down card, in Vintage, the fastest format of all...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.misc,rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules,rec.games.trading-cards.magic.strategy (More info?)

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 05:05:16 GMT, Jeff Heikkinen <no.way@jose.org> wrote:
>Here it is, hot off the presses. I'm a little surprised by some of the
>changes (did they have to ban seven cards to take out one deck?) and
>especially like the announcement at the bottom, which is something that
>should have happened years ago.

Just to confirm, yes, this is the official announcement; Jeff managed to get
it before I did (thank you for posting it promptly!).

>Standard
>
>Arcbound Ravager is banned
>Disciple of the Vault is banned
>Artifact lands are banned (Ancient Den, Great Furnace, Seat of the
>Synod, Tree of Tales, Vault of Whispers, Darksteel Citadel)
>
>Vintage
>
>Trinisphere is restricted
>
>Magic Online Formats:
>
>Singleton
>
>Skullclamp is banned
>
>Special Announcement Regarding Starter-Level Card Sets:
>
>On October 20, 2005 cards from all starter-level card sets -- Portal,
>Portal Second Age, Portal Three Kingdoms, and Starter (1999 and 2000) --
>will become legal for sanctioned play in the Vintage and Legacy formats.
>This change makes all black-bordered and white-bordered Magic sets legal
>for play in the Vintage and Legacy formats. Please refer to the Oracle
>card reference for the official updated wordings, including card type
>and creature type, for all these cards.

(Essentially, it seems they waited to make sure they wouldn't have cards
that were legal in Type I/1.5 and simultaneously available but not legal in
Extended; Urza block is rotating out of Extended in the not-too-distant future,
and P1/P2/P3/Starter were all from that time period or before.)

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from dbd@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.strategy (More info?)

On 2005-03-01, Darkwvlf <darkwvlf@isp.com> wrote:
> Well it's official Affinity is dead. predictions for the meta-game anyone?

I kinda wish they would restrict cards in Standard instead of outright banning
them. Broodstar Affinity is dead now, too, and I liked him. If a deck could
have one each of the arti-lands, would that have been so bad? maybe, but the
Broodstar is so much easier to remove (terror, rend flesh, horobi's
whisper...) that I'm kinda sad to see it go. Could have been an interesting
deck for some people to play.

> 1. T&N
> 2. RDW
> 3. G/B Control
> 4. MBC
> 5. MUC
> 6. WW(?)
> 7. R/G Beats

Is this in any particular order? It might be in the order of what you will
see in the Standard metagame. I guess we'll have to wait for Saviors to
really see what comes about, but I pretty much agree with this list.

RDW? Is this viable right now? I just put together a Ponza-style deck that
might work, using a couple of the new cards from Betrayers. Might go easier
on the Sowing Salts now, though, since I don't have Darksteel Citadel to pick
on. Still need 'em for T&N.
As far as RDW, I'll have to put one back together. Won't need Shatters &
Hearth Kamis anymore, I don't think. Or granulate.


MUC is my fave, and I like my current build. When I saw the banning last
night, I went ahead and moved the 4 Relic Barriers out and have temporarily
replaced them with some Merchant Scrolls and Mind Bends. This may not be
optimal, but in my metagame, ppl like to play choke and boil such. I could
counter, sure, but it's much more fun to change the text to their land base
and watch the stunned look on their face. I also put in an additional Keiga,
since I think I'll see more T&N, and that's better than the relic barrier
vs. the Colossus.

WW
I keep trying to make this work and keep failing. My bonesplitters (well,
jittes, now, I suppose) might last a bit longer. Plus, ppl will likely have
naturalize only now, so they'll need to make the decision between knocking off
my jitte/bonesplitter 2nd turn, or waiting to see if I drop a Glorious Anthem
the next.

MBC? I think this could be viable. I haven't tried it yet, as I don't have
all the cards I need (one more extraction, please!) but it's another type I'm
fond of, and i think it got better w/ Betrayers.

> oh the meta is wide open now i think, what does everyone else think? Oh yeah
> hope you got your Chrome Moxes already because they just skyrocketed in
> price.

they will, but has that happened yet? I got two the other day, and I'm pretty
happy about that. Could still use a couple more...

K

--
In vino veritas
http://openwine.net

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.misc,rec.games.trading-cards.magic.strategy (More info?)

> I see a game that's not too much slower, because they decided to leave
> AEther Vial in...

I humbly disagree. First, non-vial affinity builds were only slightly slower
than Vial ones. Vial only became a common feature of the deck after affinity
mirror matches became the norm.

Second, Vial has not yet been proven viable in a T2 deck other than
Affinity. If It was was, I think we would have seen it already. I don't
expect it to reappear in any new tier 1 decks.

The new standard for speed is not a Vial deck at all, but good old Mono Red.

> ...and I'd be curious to know why they restricted Trinisphere, a
> slow-down card, in Vintage, the fastest format of all...

Simply because it was appearing in a lot of decks, along with Crucible of
the Worlds and Mishra's Workshop (someone called them the Unholy Trinity...
does anyone recall who?) and they think that by restricting one of the three
cards, they can reduce the number of the others that will appear in winning
decks. I personally would have picked Mishra's Workshop for restriction, as
fast mana has been shown time and again to be the biggest gamebreaker in
Magic. Now they're just going to going to have to restrict any good 3cc
artifact that gets printed. Anyone have any other ideas on this?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.strategy (More info?)

>> ...and I'd be curious to know why they restricted Trinisphere, a
>> slow-down card, in Vintage, the fastest format of all...
>
>Simply because it was appearing in a lot of decks, along with Crucible of
>the Worlds and Mishra's Workshop (someone called them the Unholy Trinity...
>does anyone recall who?) and they think that by restricting one of the three
>cards, they can reduce the number of the others that will appear in winning
>decks. I personally would have picked Mishra's Workshop for restriction, as
>fast mana has been shown time and again to be the biggest gamebreaker in
>Magic. Now they're just going to going to have to restrict any good 3cc
>artifact that gets printed. Anyone have any other ideas on this?
>

I would have prefered them to restrict workshop as well as it does
realy seam to be the unfair part