What makes a card banworthy?

[iAmNateXero]

Defending sarcasm' date=' [b']shouldn't make it right[/b]... right?

 

I can argue until I'm blue in the face that Dancing Elf deserves to be banned' date=' but no matter how much I try to defend it, [b']it won't become right.[/b]

Did we just have a friendly game of shadow? o.O

[JesusofChaos™]

Give the card to JoC. JoC shall then declare where it belongs on the list. We shall then play. All hail the JoC.

 

[CrabHelmet]

Anyhow...

 

Even though each card needs to be handled individually, I find that, in general, most cards are banworthy for one (or more) of these five conditions:

 

1) The card gives too large a reward too easily for too small a cost. Most of these cards are splashable, but not all; a theme support card that lets you draw 7 cards for no real cost would be banworthy under this, despite not being splashable. Example: Raigeki.

 

2) The card enables one or more OTK's and/or FTK's to be accomplished easily. Often, these cards are used solely for the purpose of OTK's and/or FTK's. Example: Magical Explosion.

 

3) The card invalidates a basic mechanical part of the game by effectively preventing it from ever being used with any merit; a good game does not turn its back on its basic mechanics. Example: Nobleman of Crossout (invalidates Flips).

 

4) Similar to number 3, the card invalidates a certain playstyle that would otherwise contribute to the game. Example: Cyber Dragon (invalidates Stall).

 

5) The underlying idea of the card's effect is, as a matter of principle, completely unacceptable in any form. Example: Victory Dragon.

 

Condition 1 covers the vast majority of banworthy cards, with Condition 2 being the next largest. Arguably, Conditions 3-5 could probably be combined into a single condition, but there's no harm in spreading it out like this.

 

And, since I'm here, I may as well list my ideas for the conditions of Limiting:

 

A) The card cannot remain at 3 due to one or more of the banning conditions (probably Condition 1) but provides some benefit to the game at 1 that allows it to remain. Example: Mirror Force.

 

B) The card cannot remain at 3 due to an unacceptable interaction with another copy of itself; at 1, however, it cannot interact with itself, and thus can remain legal. Example: Night Assailant.

 

C) The card cannot remain at 3 for purely mechanical reasons that make multiple copies of it impossible; however, it can remain at 1, where there are no other copies with which to conflict. Example: Twin-Headed Behemoth.

 

Condition C is a good example of how each card needs to be handled individually; to my knowledge, Twin-Headed Benemoth is the only card that falls under Condition C, and it is certainly the reason that Condition C was created.

 

And, since we may as well cover Semi-Limits while we're at it:

 

X) The card cannot remain at 3 due to an unacceptable interaction with two other copies of itself; at 2, however, it cannot interact with two other copies of itself, and thus can remain Semi-Limited.

 

X is the only Semi-Limit condition that I can think of possibly happening; Condition A doesn't extend to Semi-Limiting, since it applies to cards that we want to exist but as little as possible, and I can't see Condition C extending either. I give no example of Condition X because I don't believe that any such card currently exists. If you want examples of cards that Condition X might theoretically cover, look at Thunder Dragon and Volcanic Scattershot; however, as their effects are not unacceptable, they don't need to be Semi-Limited.

[JesusofChaos™]

So CoSR fits into 1?

[CrabHelmet]

COSR partly falls into Condition 1 for the strength of its effect and partly falls into Condition 3 for removing a vital aspect - resource management - from the game by allowing reckless summoning from the graveyard.

[Exiro]

So CoSR fits into 1?

 

Yeah, it gives you too many draws too easily.

 

Also, where else?

[CrabHelmet]

So CoSR fits into 1?

 

Yeah' date=' it gives you too many draws too easily.

 

Also, where else?

[/quote']

 

COSR [...] partly falls into Condition 3 for removing a vital aspect - resource management - from the game by allowing reckless summoning from the graveyard.

[Pharaoh_Atem]

It's a matter of whether or not the Prohibition of a card can be logically defended successfully at the highest intellectual rigors that the game's players can muster.

 

tl;dr: Logic and nothing more

[Static]

Depends what kind of meta you want. Perspective is key.

[werewolfjedi]

for semi-limited, this might be one.

 

the increased chance of drawing the card creates a situation that shouldn't be allowed to commonly happen without minor setup or use of call/draw cards.

 

but it is a bit, iffy.

[CrabHelmet]

for semi-limited' date=' this might be one.

 

the increased chance of drawing the card creates a situation that shouldn't be allowed to commonly happen without minor setup or use of call/draw cards.

 

but it is a bit, iffy.

[/quote']

 

If the situation is an intolerable problem, then it cannot be allowed to remain in the game, even if its probability is reduced.

 

If the situation is not an intolerable problem, then it requires no banlist attention at all.

[swiftbirdman]

dang crab you have alot of free time on your hands...lol

[Guest PikaPerson01]

Pika uses Revive!

 

comes back to page 1.

[CrabHelmet]

Pika uses Revive!

 

comes back to page 1.

 

You need Max Revive to get it back to Page 1. Revive would only get it to Page 3 or so.

[Guest Chaos Pudding]

Pika uses Revive!

 

comes back to page 1.

 

You need Max Revive to get it back to Page 1. Revive would only get it to Page 3 or so.

 

But those Max Revives are so damn hard to get. He might not have wanted to use one on this topic.

 

And a card is banworthy if it pisses me off. Like 7 Colored Fish.