I personally think that ritual-effects are cornerstone in Pauper, not for any nostalgic reasons, but because Pauper generally is a format of strong enablers but weak payoffs. To me, any 1-card engine runs counter to the format's identity, and I'd much rather see anything strong enough to be ritual'ed out banned, rather than the rituals themselves. Without them you lose an important Mtg archetype, density-based combo decks, which there are multiple fair of in Pauper currently, but they would be severely cut down without rituals.

As a spectator, I find that dark ritual is very defining for the format, as I have always enjoyed the weird combo side of pauper. Having strong enablers, but clunky things for them to enable is foundational.

Dark Ritual is a great card with sleek design and exciting play patterns. It's also got that special place in the mind of a player that you discuss. Dark Ritual, Bolt, Brainstorm, etc. are a big part of how special Pauper is. I would not want to see it banned.

Dark Ritual is (as you pointed out) one of the cards that make Pauper special. I vote against banning it. Initiative was a fine mechanic, that had stupidly broken creature bodies with it. I like these bans. Would’ve hoped to see maybe some unbans as well, but okay

i think dark ritual is a card that only works in certain decks plus pauper being a high power format should not be bad necessarely i dont think it warrants a ban considering it would pretty mutch remove the possibility of any storm combo decks based around it, i think it would be negative to take sutch a card from the format

I’ve been playing Pauper for a little over five years now, and although they are annoying to play against, I think having some rituals is important for the format overall. I think that it is very reasonable to ban Dark Ritual or Lotus Petal, as together they are particularly consistent, but I think the format would be less appealing if it lacked both those iconic cards.

I think dark ritual shouldn't be banned. I play for I believe five years so not a huge amount of time, but I brought a bunch of people into pauper. Many believe it's a weak format and when I say cards like dark ritual, lotus petal, brainstorm, ponder and lightning bolt are legal, their interest for the format usually spikes or at least makes them consider. I think pauper should stay the format of some of the strongest enablers and weak payoffs. It makes for fun brewing experience. You can build almost any strategy in pauper, you just need to be creative. Dark ritual enables whacky strategies like cycle storm, zubera storm, even black land destruction, fishelbrand, some reanimator stuff... If you ban it, the format loses an iconic piece, but other rituals replace it so the degenerate decks are not really hindered. Just a bit less viable.

As a casual MTG fan who knows nothing about pauper I was able to understand this video 100% you do such a fantastic job with your communication about this that it would be hard to be upset given the reasonings

I vote to keep Dark Ritual, Lotus Petal and other Ritual spells in pauper. Without the massive payoffs you see in other formats with rituals, they help to continue deck ideas to thrive in the format. Pauper is healthy with rituals and lotus petal!

I support the decision that PFP didn't ban Dark Ritual. I think Dark Ritual is necessary for some types of combo decks such as cycling storm, and these decks make pauper environment thrilling.

I would vote to keep Dark Ritual in pauper, it's a special part of Pauper that can't be replicated elsewhere.

I think part of the charm of pauper as a format is having really powerful enablers such as Dark Ritual and Lotus Petal but having underwhelming threats to deploy with them. These cards are fun when they are powering out a Gurmag Angler or enabling a crazy build like Cycle Storm, and less so when they allow for a turn 1 Entomb and Reanimate a Griselbrand. Banning those cards removes this unique space in pauper where powerful enablers can be fun and janky without being back breaking.

Dark ritual is the reason I was able to play against mono-black infect or ponza. I don't think I've ever used it, but it has allowed a lot of interesting decks to exist. Rituals should stay in the format.

Rituals are totally fine, they've only proven problematic in decks that were playing overpowered cards that subsequently required a ban (Chatterstorm, Galvanic Relay, initiative creatures). Cycle Storm is an incredibly awesome deck that's unique to pauper, and I don't think various tier 3ish LD and pinger storm decks are an issue. The issue with initiative is pretty clear in that it creates game material without ongoing cost much like a planeswalker. Monarch is strong but doesn't buy you tempo, only cards that you subsequently have to deploy, resolve and protect. If dark ritual was the issue we would have seen a turbo monarchy deck or a turbo cascader deck by now. For a lot of people pauper is a refuge from the crazy self-contained value engines you see in other formats, and I think it's proven the case that initiative (or at least the easily castable/turbo-able initiative creatures) break what the format is about.

Do not ban rituals. Avoid having planeswalkeresque cards like initiative and cards with storm. And they are fine. Also most people dislike combos, so if you just listen to "the people" there is probably a majority (especially among people who are not fully invested in the format) who would love to see them banned. This, to me would be some kind of "tyranny of the majority" and not a good way to decide the direction of the format. Thanks for your work.

Pauper has been historically a format with low power treats unlike standard or extended, so in there rituals are safe. You can ritual into a cascade creature and be not so far ahead your opponent. Also pauper is like "old legacy" where every card in hand means, so many games asking opponents how many cards in their hand to make decisions. Initiative provides free card advantage and free casting costs, it breaks the rules of pauper. This is why we hadn't seen turbo-monarch over the years. Rituals are healthy in a format without broken mechanics.

I really appreciate how clear and direct this video is. For what it’s worth I think you are spot on about rituals and I hope they end up sticking around in this great format.

I love rituals! Specifically when they have combo implications! The issue that comes up in pauper is that rituals don’t have the counterplay options seen in other formats, tax effects in particular being less common causes a serious imbalance. The payoffs of storm and high impact creatures is also a major issue. If a metagame-safe payoff could be found, and white/green had access to main/sideboard tools for these strategies that would make room for deck diversity, as it stands the payoffs printed have lacked downside or challenge in their construction, chatterstorm decks could see a comparison to dragonstorm decks, which required a balance of creatures and powerful mana to make it work. I love the exploration the pauper team is adding to the discussion! I really hope to see some restrained pushing of the formats options as time goes on! ❤️❤️❤️ A downside that requires deck building constraints or could put its caster at risk is fun for both the player and the opponent! Such drama, so much risk, and iconic magic. Dark ritual may simply not be right for the format yet, but I’d rather see it painfully grow around it like blood moon in modern than to rip it from the format in my opinion.

As a player of rituals I lile them BUT if it makes for a better format with a smaller banlist, I would be okay with seeing them go

Many magic personalities already said that the approach to communication you and your colleagues in the PFP had was outstanding. I'm here to also reinforce. Gavin... You're awesome. You do everything with care and makes me really happy to see you strike homeruns like this! Ps: do you also have time in your commute to run a podcast real quick ??

Reakky aooreciate that you are taking us so deep into the discussions. That being said, I really hope you will reevaluate the bard specifically in the future, to see what would happen if it got unbanned, but everything else stayed

I absolutely love that pauper allows me to play the most iconic commons from mtg's history. If you banned all the greatest hits like dark ritual, brainstrom, etc, I'd feel like im just playing with chaff. I'd probably stop playing pauper without being able to enjoy it as "legacy light" especially because of how accessible, yet powerful, the format is. Getting affinity chopped was a big hit for me, especially since I loved playing the iconic cards from mtg's history, now it's less so a museum of powerful old commons and just "strong stuff we have laying around" which is why I took mine apart in favor of playing delver (another amazing iconic card). I know im just a nobody ranting into the internet, but I really like pauper so I figured I'd say my piece.

I think it's notable that ritual cards are only run when there are payoffs that offset the opportunity and inherent value cost of playing those cards. The black and red rituals generally aren't run in the mono-colour variants with the respective rituals. Still, the rituals enable rogue decks, significant shenanigans and give more tools to deck builders. There will always be some form of non-game draws in a format, be it RDW, Counter-Draw or a mana cost shell like rituals or affinity. As long as the consistency of those non-games are low and manageable enough via statistics and sideboarding, rituals probably should stay.

Thanks for being so honest and open Gavin! Love pauper, it’s my favorite format, and I think keeping dark ritual, and the nostalgic powerful cards, does keep its charm alive 👏🏼👌🏼🔥

Bravo for leaving Dark Ritual/Lotus Petal in! 🙌 They enable unique and interesting decks that wouldn't be possible otherwise

My ideal pauper would have mana fixed very aggressively, meaning banning Tron lands, the best rituals, and lotus petal.

Can I just say that the PFP, their process and transparency, makes me want to play Pauper. Excellent committee, very glad you’ve set this up like this Gavin.

When I was playing at some of the CK Paupergeddeon tournaments and their weekly, I never once saw Rituals being played and it was the best time I'd had playing magic. It does suck to lose such an iconic card, but for SO MANY other cards to die for 1-3 other card's sins... that's just too much. The need of the many, out way the need of the few.

Unless a lot of other cards become unbanned, I think it’s probably best to keep with the trajectory of not banning ritual effects.

I do think that the rituals are going to keep causing problems, but not at an absolutely unacceptable rate like they end up doing in other formats that have better higher end threats. Being able to play Dark Ritual alongside what usually amounts to draft chaff is absolutely a charm to the format that can't be discounted

What made the Venture mechanic fun to play with is that you had to constantly be taking game actions in order to advance your dungeon progress and ramping up towards those big rewards. Initiative ruined that by having an incredibly overpowered dungeon and also allowing for automatic progress.

Great respect for al of the hard work put into this. I would love to see other formats like modern get similar treatment.

I think that keeping rituals is good for pauper. Pauper combo decks have the nice texture of "Great enablers, terrible clunky payoffs", e.g. fishelbrand, something that you just can't really find in any other format. You get lotus petal, you get cabal and dark ritual, you get rite of flame and seething song, great. Now put together some unholy abomination. Meanwhile in other formats you just get some deterministic win you can barely interact with. Pauper is still playing with power, and if you got rid of rituals and fast mana it'd go from "playing with cheap power" to "playing limited++".

0-1 cost fast mana I think is where it gets problematic in pauper. unlike older formats such as legacy turn 0 interaction doesn't exist so there's literally nothing you can do to stop a ritual chain since most interaction (counterspell castdown) unlocks turn 2 and even snuffout requires at least 1 mainphase. Of course it is a big part of the format and I think all the fancy pseudo-storm combo decks are cool, but having spiritguide, petal, rite, and dark ritual is a lot of redundancy so some of those pieces might need to go.

For my little experience with pauper I think there's a huge difference between paper and online pauper. Online people tend to build decks that just win games the most (net decks if you will), while in paper you usually have a huge variety of builds because paper players "just feel plays different" and make changes according to the metagame of their zone. Hearing that the online dictates what gets banned or not makes me chuckle a bit because in paper people would have found different ways to deal with it for sure

Powerful mana and janky payoffs are fun to watch and to play. >:)

I like that powerful cards like Dark Ritual and Lotus Petal are legal in Pauper

I love how legacy and vintage do bans and restrictions, one format says straight up no, the other one lets you keep a single copy. Is there a way down the road for pauper to have some split like that?

Sure, everyone loves dark ritual, lotus petal and etc, but if in the next year or so we have to ban another batch of a new mechanic to justify keeping dark ritual and lotus petal legal, i think we should re-evaluate this decision. As of right now, keep them legal.

One of the big things I love about pauper is that fast mana gets to stay, and, sure, it means most of the storm (and now initiative) cards get the boot, but this creates a unique format with unique and interesting ways to use that mana beyond building a lethal grapeshot or empty the warrens or Initiative boi. I also think removing Black fast mana won't abolish fast mana decks, they'll just switch to RG shells and use elves, Rite of Flame and Manamorphose to get there. Is that a bit slower? Sure. But I don't think it's a meaningful change in power level and is definitely at the expense of interesting play/build space that is unique to pauper.

I think ritual is fine. I dont think online game play should solely decide bannings. I believe if people are spending several cards to get one creature out then they should get that creature. Just because something is popular doesn't mean its broken. People want to play whats new. Therefore that is also not a reason to ban cards.

Great job for such a fast ban! Also to answer your question, yes, keep Ritual legal in Pauper. That makes it different from other formats, which are full of powerful threads but lack fast mana. Ritual wasn't even any popular in Pauper before Initiative, it is played only in a few non-T1 decks, so it is not the problem.

The thing with Dark Ritual that makes it fair is you 2 for 1 yourself for a quick mana boost (or 3 for 1, if you chain two of them). You burn two, bring out your 5/3 and then...POW! Lightning Bolt. And it's a dead draw late in the game, when you need to top deck something.

I don't have an issue with rituals although part of that is nostalgia. When I started. Playing the classic Dark Ritual into Hypnotic Spectre was a brutal first turn and we loved it. As for Affinity, half my sideboard is there to deal with one deck. Game one is rough if I didn't know what I was playing against.

thank you for the accurate changes pfp have been doing! your actions doesnt come from a superficial view, you guys really see the big picture and make pauper the best format

I was actually nervous for this B&R announcement since I was worried the rituals (+ Petal) would be banned instead of the Initiative cards. I agree with your reasoning that these cards are important to have in Pauper (for some people), even though they are risky and might necessitate bans of other cards. Being able to play these cards is a huge appeal for the format in my opinion and gets people excited about it. Thank you for taking this into consideration!

Pauper is often referred to as legacy light. If it's legal in legacy I say keep it. However that said legacy is currently having terrible problems with these powerful enablers that "are the cornerstone of the format". At some point you have to ask are these cards getting banned for the sins of others. Would these cards be able to stay without rituals. MtgO does things like "no ban-list" modern. Could they do something like "no ritual pauper"? You got enough data from two weeks to pull the trigger. You are also asking for our opinion, why not test it?

I've been playing Pauper for well over a decade and this is by far the most clear and concise banning explanation over a contentious decision I've seen 👌 I am however erring on the side of banning some of the ritual effects. I appreciate the iconic nature of cards such as Dark Rit, however rituals are also major players in other formats. Initiative is a unique, intricate and challenging mechanic which is unique to Pauper and it seems a waste of creative energy that a mechanic such of this is at risk of being edged out by the engine of rituals behind them.

I liked the aproach and actions the pauper team come with. I don't like the fact that in all releases we get fucking weird value engines in pauper and absolutely nothing straight aggro and relevant to fight it.

Nice after fixing Pauper would you start fixing Modern thanks!

I enjoy having powerful cards like dark ritual in this format, as it incentivizes new players to give it a real chance. Without it and cards like it, pauper would not be the same exciting game that it is today

I think dark ritual is one of those cards that is a litmus test for a format is. If the best DR deck is a glass cannon, spin the wheel type (1land spy) or similar, the format is good. If it shows up in a consistent T1 or T2 deck, then there's a combo problem.

I got into Pauper because I could play Brainstorm, Daze, and Gush. I’ve stayed with it because there are other fun decks using iconic powerful cards. Pauper decks should be incredible to watch. The notion of playing with just commons sounds like the decks would be trash. Pauper is so fun because it thoroughly defies that expectation. Dark Ritual is a format defining card. Lotus Petal being our common version of Black Lotus (even a parallel price tag) is beautiful. I believe we should be willing to ban new cards rather than cards that players have loved for decades.

it's clear Dark Ritual enables some very unfair things, but I agree it's too iconic to Pauper, especially for players who consider it some sort of "Legacy Lite" format. I see Pauper as the format where I can play old stuff that don't see play anywhere else, and even though I don't play Dark Ritual, I think it's part of the format's charm

Not related to banning but just a look into all decks having life gain. There is no card that stops this at any point. Any chance of looking into having a card that prevents life gain be printed as a common? Thanks.

Weren't all of the Initiative cards overcosted to prevent this from happening (warp formats)? So... this means we will be getting better costed initiative cards for the future... or that we wont se the mechanic ever again?

I think storm is a little annoying to play against because I don’t like the hate cards I have against it. Can we get smothering rug at common?

Dark Ritual into a Drain Life with Pulse of Llanowar on the table was what made me fall in love with Magic.

My gut says not to ban dark ritual but I would be understanding if it had to go, same with lotus petal

Hey Gavin! Thank you so much for the extensive video! You care so much about pauper, which made me return to pauper after years :) Venture into the dungeon is my favourite recent mechanic, so by extension initiative is also my favourite. I'm happy that some of it stayed. My only concern is that dark ritual effects would smother future design space of mechanics and/or commons with that mechanics.

The issue is that if the card is worth cheating in that much to where it makes the card problematic, it wouldn’t matter if ritual was in the format or not. The problem is that commons as of recent have been printed with insane mechanics that out power all other commons that are in the field. Like you stated in the video, the 7 cards you talked about banning were simply because of a mechanic introduced into the format. We aren’t banning 4 mana 0/4 defenders because of their stats. I love the constant push of new ideas and designs in the game, but designers need to be cautious of what is being put into the format. The PFP is a double-edged sword for me. It both strives to protect our format and ensure that everything is fun and enjoyable, but it also means that wizards acknowledges the format more and will create more cards for it. That can be good for cards like weather the storm as a great sideboard card we needed in the format, but bad because of the massive amount of bannings that we’ve had in the last few years. There have been more pauper bans in the last 4 years than the rest of pauper’s history. That’s not a coincidence. I want to point out that I know there are more sets per year than ever and that means less time to play test cards and understand impact of mechanics and strategies, but there has to be a fine line between game breaking mechanics and another vanilla 2/2. Thanks for reading and I hope you have a great day!

Banning Ritual effect is 100% no for me. Without them, format loses a lot: possible combo decks. Combo decks can certainly go over the top if not looked carefully, but they make format healthy. If you take Ritual effects away, you effectively remove one part of Rock,Paper,Sciccors game. And that is not good for overall health of format. Atm aggro decks are still most played and thriving part of format, so I wouldnt remove Rituals from format. To keep things interesting.

I don't play pauper. However, I quit modern because it was a format controlled by bans not cards or meta game. Which it ideally should be - this goes for any formats but more so for non-rotating formats than for limited formats since this have a much smaller window to be play in. I believe the reason this problem is occurring again (although in another format) is because RnD seems to be more focus on making new and better treats and don't make enough good answers. For instance had Endurance been printed along with Hogaak it might not have lead to the same amount of problems (you can talk about how healthy it is several cards are format warping especially when it is a luxury limited products, but that is another discussion). I can see why it is more interesting to design better and stronger treats but from design perspective and the business side. Many players want to play with cards which push the gameplay forward talking action either by having enablers which will make it possible to cast a big payoff in the end or just simply attacking and being the active in a sense you become the focus point of the game and a protagonist. It is less interesting in stoping this or playing this game especially for new players. However, it is important this tools are available to have a healthy meta game. This means when you are designing cards for old formats (which a set like commander legends are design for at least partly since the cards are not played in standard) it is important to see what impact the treats will have on the old format. If there is not enough designed answers to new treats in a new product, the players will be on put on their back foot not by the player they are facing but by the design team. I understand it can be hard to design for older formats especially when there is more than 20k number of cards. However, i firmly believe it is much better if there are design the necessary answers rather relying on bans. The metagame should be created by the players not B&R announcements - no my point is not to have zero bans or legalising every banned card, but it should be a design goal to try designing (a) solution(s) rather than banning the problematic cards.

10:40 I just kept thinking about this and Hypnotic Specter while watching this.

I have a very hard time making up my mind on nonsense (ritual effects, infinite combos, free spells or effects, extra turns, broken cards like Uro and Oko, etc.). I know myself to be a timmy, so I'm 100 % committed to having the meta consist of fair strategies. I can have my cool big turns if my opponents are trying to stop me, race me, or kill me on turn four, but not if they're comboing off on turn three or win because their cards are inherently better than anything my deck can do. I don't want the johnnies and spikes to have less fun, but nonsense prevents me from having it. I'm really torn. My gut tells me nonsense shouldn't exist in any format, but I'm interested to see other argumentations.

I mainly play Pauper for the nostalgic thrill of casting the old broken cards. I would rather see every new non-Standard common banned preemptively than see Dark Ritual go, honestly.

I look at cards like Ritual and Petal the same way I always looked at Twin,Pod and looting in Modern. They were absolute pillars and players grew super attached to them but it was just clear over and over that an infinitely growing pile of cards were going to have to be banned to pay for their sins which is just a ridiculous situation. They will have to eat the ban hammer eventually, so at the minimum test banning them is probably going to be worth just getting over with.

So cards like Dark Ritual are a big part of pauper but I would rather ban I than 5ish other cards so if it comes up again then it would prefer ritual be banned

Maybe it is worth the try to ban black rituals and leaving the red ones to try to unban some storm cards. Chatterstorm and galvanic relay were powerful cards due to fast mana access, but as a storm player in every format, i don't think it would be extremely powerful using only red rituals, deploylands and petal. Also, red rituals and agro decks have a common enemy: blue blasts. To sum up, unban galvanic relay (and chatterstorm) and ban black rituals and let combo players work.

the fact that this video was intelligible to a literal non-mtg player (myself) is astounding, and exemplifies perfectly the kind of communication i wish we had in yugioh

From the outside looking in, the PFP has looked like a rousing success! I wish there was a Legacy Format Panel that could take a look at Delver and then blog about their thought process. Or a Modern Format Panel that could take a look at 4c Omnath and it's effect on tournament length (it feels like every round in the Face to Face Opens I've attended went to time). Also its overall power level.

I think banning dark ritual is a bit of a slippery slope

As much as I love me some Dark Ritual, it does stand out from the rest of it's kind in a big enough way that it might merit a ban. I think its largest problem is how low the activation requirement is: just one mana. It doesn't have any other restriction. Cabal ritual needs threshold, rite of flame needs another copy of itself in the graveyard before it becomes comparable (and even then, it is still a sorcery), and songs of the damned requires a high creature count. To put into context, you could probably print a card with the exact same text as Dark Ritual, only requiring Spell Mastery for the full effect, and it would STILL see a tonne of play. (And notably "fix" the issue of exploiting it in fast openers). I understand the nostalgia and attachment to the card, but it might just not be right for the future of the format - with it, there is likely to be more high-costed, high-payout mechanics or cards that won't fit into the format. Like c'mon guys, we banned one of the 5 mana initiative creatures and it somehow made sense.

rituals are fine. i'm was going to build cycle storm and it's going to be such a medium deck but it'll be a blast to play. now i can't since i have to worry about the deck being banned out of existence while affinity is fine since everyone is required to play hate pieces in board.

I'm strongly in favor of keeping dark ritual and lotus petal. They're part of what make pauper interesting. Decks like cycle storm are are awesome but not format warping. Echoing what a lot of others have said, this format does strong enablers, but weak threats. I'm a lot more dubious of decently powerful mechanics intended for multiplayer like Monarch and the Initiative than I am of powerful rituals. I don't hate that the multiplayer mechanics see play or anything; I think the monarch acts kind of like having a paired down planeswalker that actually works really well for this format. But if one of these mechanics intended for multiplayer + ritual/petal is a problem, I'd much rather you prioritize removing the multiplayer card causing problems in the 1v1 format rather than going after the enablers.

Listening to this video on a format I've never played (but admittedly have some interest in) was one hell of a positive experience. Coming from playing really only Commander and Yugioh having a ban list so clearly explained and as in depth as this was actually really solidifies my desire to engage with the format. Even if I disagree at least I know what I'm disagreeing with. I think the literal only way that this could be improved is knowing through what means the team at WOTC communicates with players to determine community sentiment and how that gets used. Currently the only complains I've seen is that this was a quick ban that didn't give the community much chance to try to keep it in check. Great presentation, well written, excellent way to incentivize me to play Pauper.

In the past couple years, cards like dark ritual, lotus petal, cabal ritual and others acted as a landmine for the format. It only needed the final push to break it. It was it with chatterstorm, galvanic relay and, recently, with the initiative mechanic. The mechanic may be strong, but those rituals are steroids.

As an avid storm player, rituals are one of my favorite spell types, but quite frankly they can truly warp formats. Most of the red ones are more conditonal in some way and as such if any ritual should be banned it should absolutely be Dark Ritual

I like the idea of Pauper being a more accessible version of Legacy, so I think it would be good if cards like Dark Ritual remained in the format.

I'd really love to see a similar panel for the Vintage format

My experience with rituals in pauper is they are typically glass cannon. Good starts are kept in check by bad starting hands and or mulligans. If more rituals we're present in the format it might require a ban but for now I think rituals have an in game check. Also generally counter spells and removal can keep rituals in check as often the ritual player gets 2 for 1'd

You need to leave rituals, it's part of what makes pauper what it is. Insane enablers are a cornerstone of the format just like you said. The Storm decks in the format right now are healthy and it's very nice having that genre of deck as an option for people. Makes way more sense to get rid of mechanics developed for multiplayer. The depth of removal in the format smooths over any threats that can be turboed out, unless they bring with them mechanics that cannot be interacted with in enough ways. I love the initiative and monarch in EDH, but they shouldn't be a priority to make fit in pauper.

It is fun having these cards in the format currently but frustrating knowing their time is likely limited. Powerful 3-4 drops are going to be printed year after year, and we are going to see those banned regularly for the sake of rituals just like the absurd amount of artifacts banned in vintage because of workshop not being restricted. I think you have two unpopular options but taking action now might be the healthier in the long term

I do kinda wish underdark explorer stayed as an alternative to monarch for the UB fairies decks. Turn 2 initiative off an exhaustion land and dark ritual would still be kinda nuts though

do you think modern will see soon ban?

My mtgo account was hacked, literally in the middle of a game, and my cards stolen over two weeks ago. I was looking forward to trying out initiative but never got to. No one has replied to my support requests and I'm just sitting here waiting for anything to happen. My account is restricted and I can't trade. Some one please help.

Keep rituals. Encourage paper pauper. Don't create more waste with draft chaff.

I had my doubts about how the PFP was handling the situation, but i had to admit that the response was swift and surgical; leaving the window open for another readjustment in 2 weeks if the bans prove insufficient. Clearly the PFP seems to be one the best things that happened to the format in the last few years.

I really wish every format had this level of transparency, it creates trust in the format and we feel secure to invest more into it

Why ban Aakroka if it cant be played out of dark ritual and there’s no blue ritual like the red one if that’s the problem with the 4 mana cost

When is their a legacy group?

I think banning "All cards mentioning the Initiative mechanic" would be a better ban. Four out of the seven are already banned and you want the fifth out as well, it would make a shorter and more coherent ban list. Also on the Wizards ban list website, as of right now, SInkhole is listed twice. Edit: Just a small anecdote; my LGS(s) all of them consist of games fighting over Monarch and Initiative, none play Dark Ritual. Like I said small sample size of 4 stores consisting of 12-25 players each but I think it shows where the problem truly lies. I actually thought DR was banned because I've never seen it played and two of my friends play mono-black.

This is a well reasoned and healthy approach to banning issues. The other formats could learn from this. That written, it's insane that you guys keep letting Lotus Petal dodge the ban.

Very well spoken! Thanks for the thorough update and the important work you and the panel have done!

Keep ritual effects and lotus petal in pauper.

I think its just as you said. Some amount of these iconic & powerful effects are good and are a keystone of Pauper's identity. "ideas" like Rituals, storm and affinity are iconic and need to be represented in Pauper, less important are they payoffs IMO. Ban payoffs, leave enablers.

If you don't ban the fast mana, you won't be able to print aggressive 3 or 4 drops in the future, which means every couple of years, you will need to ban another card. Just ban the fast mana, and be done with it. I would rather play with new, powerful toys.

As always I appreciate the video and input on the discussion you had with the PFP. Regarding the Rituals discussion - I think may have had an opportunity to be fun & unique part of Pauper, but I feelt hat time has passed and that they need to go. It's not like Pauper is a new format - we have tons of historical data that shows that when Dark Ritual is showing up in a competent deck, it's often something that is not okay and immediately needs addressing. I feel looking at the format hopeful of what it could do vs what it has & continues to do is just setting up the format for more problems. Pauper is filled with a lot of cards that are rarely if ever going to be okay in fair decks, but always end up supporting the unfair decks in ways that make those unfair strategies broken from day 1. I think cards like Lotus Petal, along whit Manamorphose and Chromatic Star & Sphere, do too much to enable these decks any time we get a powerful enough payoff. Additionlly they allow non-red or non-black combos to still take advantage of the rituals too easily. They ask very little of you in deck building. And history has shown that, when these cards are popping up in combo decks, it's usually a sign that the format is in trouble. I think that hitting these types of cards will greatly reduce the potential problems that arise when a new combo payoff does come out to help those decks potentially be a healthier part of the metagame. (Also, banning Sphere and Star can help weaken Affinity and the Deadly Dispute) Another card I think should go is Snuff Out (and potentially Skred/Unholy Heat). The ability for blue tempo decks to remove key threats for zero mana is absurd, and does a great deal at pushing out any type of midrange deck that might try to challenge them on the battlefield. The difference between something like that & Cast Down at 2 mana is night & day. I do not see how the types of midrange strategies you hope to promote in this video can come to fruition while Blue decks can play this card so easily unless every creature generates so much advantage that it's insurmountable for any reasonable non-combo deck (like the problem Initiative & Monarch create). Please consider this card more and what it has done & will continue to do to the format.

I asked a friend of mine who is much smarter and much more familiar with the pauper meta-game/history of pauper than I and he had this to say: "I don't want pauper to lose it's identity of good spells bad payoffs. Otherwise if we take out the good old stuff and keep the new goodstuff it'll just feel like weaker pioneer, filled with midrange value decks that isn't anything special because all the cards would then be legal in other-non-rotating formats. For example I wish they banned foil instead of daze, gush, probe which weren't a problem until the foil downshift. Pauper used to be so unique that you could even play gush and probe. Now it's lost part of it's identity." That was also kind of my gut reaction though I'm more of a simpleton so for me I just like playing cool old cards that I don't get to play in any other 60 card constructed formats (excluding vintage and legacy because they're prohibitively expensive)

Keep the rituals. Pauper is a format where card advantage actually matters and there aren't insane one card wincons (well until initiative), so there is an actual cost to dark rituals.