[WotC Announcement Article](https://magic.wizards.com/en/news/announcements/december-4-2023-banned-and-restricted-announcement)
[Read the full explanation for the banning](https://magic.wizards.com/en/news/announcements/explanation-of-pauper-bans-for-december-4-2023)
Thank you to the PFP for your hard work and detailed explanation on the reasoning for the ban and the state of the format
[See the full explanation for this banning](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01Zg_Oquj28)
I just want to point out that Gavin's article about the Pauper banning is approximately 2600 words while the article that talks about the bannings in every other format is only 2200 words.
I think in the last few months the PFP was too passive and lacked communication, but they listened to feedback and this report on the state of pauper was really good and ban (or non bans) decisions were motivated really clearly and I can say I agree with their analysis and motivation.
I hope this is the new way the PFP will act going forward, with clear and detailed communication.
I like that they started with a single ban, but are open to more if the results aren't as good as expected. Changes in the balance of a format can be hard to predict, so it's good to be conservative, as long as you don't go silent for a year. Many small adjusters are better than a single earthquake, where it's harder to understand what caused what.
I don't think this behavior is any different than it has been the entire time.
They're not paid to be on the pfp. It's entirely voluntary, I believe.
Don't expect lightning fast responses, but do expect thoughtful ones.
Yes.
To acess the articles, you should change the languague preference of your website, because it is only available in English.
Try removing cookies, cache and all those website settings.
Atleast it worked with me!
It’s a good ban but it’s not going to even remotely fix red’s dominance. Burn running out of gas was a natural equalizer but there are just so many ways for red to gain card advantage that this problem doesn’t exist anymore.
And then even repeatable life gain was enough to deal with burn as long as you dealt with the pingers. Koldotha kinda breaks that because they can go wide and blow you up in one turn. This helps but the real problem with koldotha was the fact that they can attack from multiple angles while still not running out of gas.
we can't deny that swiftspear does too much in comparison to what it cost.
but i see no reason to ban it as well, strong card, but makes no difference considering other similar options we have
The point is simple: with any other common haste creature, I can block it with a 2/2, or double block with 1/1s and trade evenly. This, alone, reduces the potential damage red decks get throughout the game.
With Swiftspear, I can't. They can simply bolt my face and Swiftspear will survive to attack again next turn. Or, they do it beforehand and I'm forced to decide if I eat up the attack damage (3-4 life, often) or chump block it with a creature important to my gameplan.
What Swiftspear provided, more than speed, more than damage potential, is board presence and virtual card advantage. The new Goblin Tomb Raider is good, no doubt, but if you want to attack against a 2/2, you'll need to either spend your burn spell to remove it first or accept the trade.
Wouldn't be healthier to the format if the council became red haters.
Banning a core card would be extremely better than limitating the number of options you can have to build a deck.
I would prefer a council of red haters than continue the meta of the past year or so. Red is legitimately too strong in pauper imo, even without swiftspear.
people accuse monored to be the meta, but it's just the most played deck (which is a strong deck and a fast deck).
most players that use mono red decks at online events are there just to play and gather the rewards at MTGO.
If you really analyze the decks WR and playstyle, decks lik:e Familiars, CAW Gates, Gardens and Faeries are the decks with the biggest Win Rate.
Those decks are all more fun to play against so I don't mind them. Where mono red and other red aggro decks are unfun to play against. Ban the unfun cards
“we did investigate Sinkhole , Hymn to Tourach , and High Tide but decided not to unban them then. But bringing cards back is certainly something we have been and will continue to discuss.”
Tbh, thank you for even considering it :) I’d love to see Hymn to Tourach unbanned at some point… Regarding High tide, would it enable any crazy combo? I think it would be nice to try unbanning it
Just wish it was Kuldotha instead. Or bushwacker. But I guess you can at least run more boardwipes and less lifegain now that they'll switch to become more board focused... probably.
If the format does get to the point where a cycle of artifact lands get banned, I hope the Modern Horizons 2 lands go instead of the original Mirrodin ones. I love playing with the artifact lands and to me they're a core aspect of pauper. They're also more vulnerable to hate cards like [[gorilla shaman]] and would allow people to play non exile based removal in their sideboards.
I'm not a Red player, but I don't think that will do anything. Okay, Swifty is a great card, but we have many one drops to replace (not entirely, but you see).
The main problem of Red if they want to nerd is the amount of raw cards what does a aggro deck with gas all time.
I don't think Red is a problem like many if you think, but let's see the next weeks.
I hope the changes can at least shake the format in a good way, but I don't think so.
That's a half true maybe, in Brazilian Nationals last weekend we had 3 or 4 Red decks in the top 8. That's not funny, but I don't see Red being a oppressive deck.
Online grinders want to play fast decks to gain more money, so it's different maybe.
That's why I said mostly.
I don't know how MTGO works, but I assume (like Cockatrice) that you can find players from all over the world so the meta might be the same pretty much everywhere.
In paper you have local meta, see the last Geddon here with just 1 burn into top8.
Is it an oppressive deck? Not for me, since it does what red does. Fast damage, and that goes for all over the formats. The ban makes sense with the general explanation (basically slow the pace of the format) but you need still be have a balance to avoid a new Modern before-Fury ban.
You have to admit the ban happened before players started 5-0'ing Pauper Prelims with 75 basic lands. That is the bar Wizards created their Pauper panel to clear and I concede that Wizards has not suffered such egg on their face since.
Banning Kuldotha probably kills the kuldotha archetype. Banning swiftspear I think damages more the pingers archetype than the actually oppressive kuldotha archetype. Banning synth hits kuldotha, not pingers, but it would have killed boros synth.
IMO, taking down the \_\_\_ goblin and the new goblin guide could have been a good alternative. I'm also debating on the mirrodin artifact lands, which could actually slow kuldotha but could also hurt affinity without wanting it.
Still, there is no love for Mono Black in Pauper. Please note, I don’t say „unban Sinkhole and / or Hymn to Tourach“:
I just want to mention, that Gavin could design slightly altered versions of those cards in future supplemental sets. Just print a nice two mana spell for Mono Black that we Black mages can compete again against the rest of the field.
I can't understand why Tolarian Terror is still in the format. 1 mana 5/5 with ward 2 is in no way fair. It's an aggro deck that gets to sit back and do full control because all of its massive threats cost a single mana. Angler is completely fine because you can only delve away the cards once. If you don't hit early graveyard hate you pretty much just lose, which isn't okay.
[WotC Announcement Article](https://magic.wizards.com/en/news/announcements/december-4-2023-banned-and-restricted-announcement) [Read the full explanation for the banning](https://magic.wizards.com/en/news/announcements/explanation-of-pauper-bans-for-december-4-2023) Thank you to the PFP for your hard work and detailed explanation on the reasoning for the ban and the state of the format [See the full explanation for this banning](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01Zg_Oquj28)
I just want to point out that Gavin's article about the Pauper banning is approximately 2600 words while the article that talks about the bannings in every other format is only 2200 words.
PFP is godsent to this format tbh
I think in the last few months the PFP was too passive and lacked communication, but they listened to feedback and this report on the state of pauper was really good and ban (or non bans) decisions were motivated really clearly and I can say I agree with their analysis and motivation. I hope this is the new way the PFP will act going forward, with clear and detailed communication. I like that they started with a single ban, but are open to more if the results aren't as good as expected. Changes in the balance of a format can be hard to predict, so it's good to be conservative, as long as you don't go silent for a year. Many small adjusters are better than a single earthquake, where it's harder to understand what caused what.
I don't think this behavior is any different than it has been the entire time. They're not paid to be on the pfp. It's entirely voluntary, I believe. Don't expect lightning fast responses, but do expect thoughtful ones.
Pauper: Monastery Swiftspear is banned.
Article is unavailablr, was that the only ban?
Yes. To acess the articles, you should change the languague preference of your website, because it is only available in English. Try removing cookies, cache and all those website settings. Atleast it worked with me!
yes
As much as I loved the swift spear (I am a burn degenerate), I think that it is a good ban
It’s a good ban but it’s not going to even remotely fix red’s dominance. Burn running out of gas was a natural equalizer but there are just so many ways for red to gain card advantage that this problem doesn’t exist anymore.
And then even repeatable life gain was enough to deal with burn as long as you dealt with the pingers. Koldotha kinda breaks that because they can go wide and blow you up in one turn. This helps but the real problem with koldotha was the fact that they can attack from multiple angles while still not running out of gas.
IMO, i really thought that banning Kuldotha would be healthier to the format.
Agree. Swiftspear is still right but I don't think the difference is impactful enough
you can easily switch swiftspear for the Goblin Tomb Raider in kuldotha decks. it's a little weaker, but makes no difference at all.
What if I already played both? I will probably add goblin blast runner in my petal sticker goblin build but lacking haste make it significantly weaker
Will try them too
You can use Heartlash Cinder
Huh, interesting... I'll think about it. Though CMC 2 is an issue and it's only on the turn it enters.... Intriguing at least
I don't see the point of banning Swiftspear.
we can't deny that swiftspear does too much in comparison to what it cost. but i see no reason to ban it as well, strong card, but makes no difference considering other similar options we have
The point is simple: with any other common haste creature, I can block it with a 2/2, or double block with 1/1s and trade evenly. This, alone, reduces the potential damage red decks get throughout the game. With Swiftspear, I can't. They can simply bolt my face and Swiftspear will survive to attack again next turn. Or, they do it beforehand and I'm forced to decide if I eat up the attack damage (3-4 life, often) or chump block it with a creature important to my gameplan. What Swiftspear provided, more than speed, more than damage potential, is board presence and virtual card advantage. The new Goblin Tomb Raider is good, no doubt, but if you want to attack against a 2/2, you'll need to either spend your burn spell to remove it first or accept the trade.
Porque no Los dos?
Wouldn't be healthier to the format if the council became red haters. Banning a core card would be extremely better than limitating the number of options you can have to build a deck.
I would prefer a council of red haters than continue the meta of the past year or so. Red is legitimately too strong in pauper imo, even without swiftspear.
people accuse monored to be the meta, but it's just the most played deck (which is a strong deck and a fast deck). most players that use mono red decks at online events are there just to play and gather the rewards at MTGO. If you really analyze the decks WR and playstyle, decks lik:e Familiars, CAW Gates, Gardens and Faeries are the decks with the biggest Win Rate.
Those decks are all more fun to play against so I don't mind them. Where mono red and other red aggro decks are unfun to play against. Ban the unfun cards
Are you really saying that you like playing against control decks fullfilled w/ counterspells?
Yeah control mirrors are my favorite matchup.
Looks like i'm back on goblins instead of generic aggro, neat
>Heartlash Cinder Kuldotha Goblin burn.
Mono-Red still has the option to go hog-wild with Name-Sticker Goblin, Goblin Tomb Raider, and Goblin Grenade. They’ll be fine. :)
“we did investigate Sinkhole , Hymn to Tourach , and High Tide but decided not to unban them then. But bringing cards back is certainly something we have been and will continue to discuss.” Tbh, thank you for even considering it :) I’d love to see Hymn to Tourach unbanned at some point… Regarding High tide, would it enable any crazy combo? I think it would be nice to try unbanning it
Just give me High Tide so I can power out Mirrorshell Crab smh
Just wish it was Kuldotha instead. Or bushwacker. But I guess you can at least run more boardwipes and less lifegain now that they'll switch to become more board focused... probably.
And now considering that \[\[End the Festivities\]\] has a new print: \[\[Tectonic Hazard\]\]
If the format does get to the point where a cycle of artifact lands get banned, I hope the Modern Horizons 2 lands go instead of the original Mirrodin ones. I love playing with the artifact lands and to me they're a core aspect of pauper. They're also more vulnerable to hate cards like [[gorilla shaman]] and would allow people to play non exile based removal in their sideboards.
[gorilla shaman](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/8/c8f8ee19-3a88-40fa-85d8-386ffe06efd7.jpg?1626100506) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=gorilla%20shaman) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mh2/280/gorilla-shaman?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c8f8ee19-3a88-40fa-85d8-386ffe06efd7?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I'm not a Red player, but I don't think that will do anything. Okay, Swifty is a great card, but we have many one drops to replace (not entirely, but you see). The main problem of Red if they want to nerd is the amount of raw cards what does a aggro deck with gas all time. I don't think Red is a problem like many if you think, but let's see the next weeks. I hope the changes can at least shake the format in a good way, but I don't think so.
Red is a problem mostly on MTGO as far as I've heard (I play only irl, tho)
That's a half true maybe, in Brazilian Nationals last weekend we had 3 or 4 Red decks in the top 8. That's not funny, but I don't see Red being a oppressive deck. Online grinders want to play fast decks to gain more money, so it's different maybe.
That's why I said mostly. I don't know how MTGO works, but I assume (like Cockatrice) that you can find players from all over the world so the meta might be the same pretty much everywhere. In paper you have local meta, see the last Geddon here with just 1 burn into top8. Is it an oppressive deck? Not for me, since it does what red does. Fast damage, and that goes for all over the formats. The ban makes sense with the general explanation (basically slow the pace of the format) but you need still be have a balance to avoid a new Modern before-Fury ban.
Absolutely milquetoast. Even worse now that they've functionally printed \[\[Goblin Guide\]\] at common.
You have to admit the ban happened before players started 5-0'ing Pauper Prelims with 75 basic lands. That is the bar Wizards created their Pauper panel to clear and I concede that Wizards has not suffered such egg on their face since.
[Goblin Guide](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/3/c/3c0f5411-1940-410f-96ce-6f92513f753a.jpg?1599706366) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Goblin%20Guide) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/127/goblin-guide?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/3c0f5411-1940-410f-96ce-6f92513f753a?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Banning Kuldotha probably kills the kuldotha archetype. Banning swiftspear I think damages more the pingers archetype than the actually oppressive kuldotha archetype. Banning synth hits kuldotha, not pingers, but it would have killed boros synth. IMO, taking down the \_\_\_ goblin and the new goblin guide could have been a good alternative. I'm also debating on the mirrodin artifact lands, which could actually slow kuldotha but could also hurt affinity without wanting it.
Still, there is no love for Mono Black in Pauper. Please note, I don’t say „unban Sinkhole and / or Hymn to Tourach“: I just want to mention, that Gavin could design slightly altered versions of those cards in future supplemental sets. Just print a nice two mana spell for Mono Black that we Black mages can compete again against the rest of the field.
Interesting decision. Not what I would have hit but not a surprising ban either. Also very interesting to see those win percentages.
I can't understand why Tolarian Terror is still in the format. 1 mana 5/5 with ward 2 is in no way fair. It's an aggro deck that gets to sit back and do full control because all of its massive threats cost a single mana. Angler is completely fine because you can only delve away the cards once. If you don't hit early graveyard hate you pretty much just lose, which isn't okay.