Ban Lists!!

[Zeppeli Gyro Supreme]

Returning a monster in either player's Graveyard is not the same as destroying a face-up monster with the highest DEF on the field at all. Think, would you rather have Brain Control, Smashing Ground, or Monster Reborn when you have an empty field and nothing else to play?

[Psycho Shocker Android]

Lets say your opponent just nuked your field with dad removing all of his monster what do you want?

[Zeppeli Gyro Supreme]

Lets say your opponent just nuked your field with dad removing all of his monster what do you want?

If you had a non-DARK deck, Brain Control is more than likely a worthless draw.

 

And you still have your own Grave. Also, Smashing Ground is pointless in this situation. And as I said, it's a situation. Even if Brain Control was the best choice in THIS situation, that doesn't mean that Monster Reborn isn't better. Snipe Hunter, Tuners, Galdiator Beasts, and many effect monsters beg to differ than Brain Control is as useful as Monster Reborn.

[Psycho Shocker Android]

Lets say your opponent just nuked your field with dad removing all of his monster what do you want?

If you had a non-DARK deck' date=' Brain Control is worthless.

 

And you still have your own Grave. Also, Smashing Ground is pointless in this situation.

[/quote']

 

Even non dark decks runs dark monsters like breaker, sangan, spirit reaper and dd crow (necro gardna for lightsworn). Chances are Brain control is your best bet (you might even be able to swarm a little with what you have and then just steal dad for game).

 

Monster reborn will usually just block damage for a turn while smashing ground will eliminate a threat (O.o I'm speaking MTG there LOL).

[GenzoTheHarpist]

Honestly we can dream up scenarios where one is better than the other all day long. Both have their uses. I think that either one will generally help you in such a situation. There are many factors to consider.

[Psycho Shocker Android]

Honestly we can dream up scenarios where one is better than the other all day long. Both have their uses. I think that either one will generally help you in such a situation. There are many factors to consider.

 

Exactly what I've been trying to prove. A scenario alone can't prove something unless it's something that can be performed nearly everygame and that generates some kind of OTK or insane advantage just like premature burial and rescue cat in the OCG.

[Zeppeli Gyro Supreme]

Also, Monster Reborn will help you the most for when you are in the lead. And Brain Control can only target face-up monsters, anyway. While Monster Reborn can give you a defender, a monster who can use its effect, or an attacker, which will stay on the field until your opponent can think of a way to kill it. It basically IS a Brain Control, except better.

[CrabHelmet]

I saw something likening Smashing Ground to Monster Reborn on the grounds that they were both +0, and became unable to read the rest of the topic because my palm was obscuring my vision.

[Zeppeli Gyro Supreme]

Exactly my point. Not only is Smashing Ground a limited card in its abilities, but it also does not function nearly the same way as Monster Reborn.

[Psycho Shocker Android]

Your only saying that monster reborn gives you any monster from the grave you can't even prove that this makes it banworhty.

 

You know why because it's not.

[GenzoTheHarpist]

Brain control not only gives a monster (tribute/synchro) but also in this case kills one of your opponents, making it a +1.

[Zeppeli Gyro Supreme]

Brain control not only gives a monster (tribute/synchro) but also in this case kills one of your opponents' date=' making it a +1.

[/quote']

In a technicality, this is true. But it's also technically not true.

 

Also, Psycho, ignoring text is not an argument. So try actually proving that Monster Reborn is not highly abusable.

[GenzoTheHarpist]

So try actually proving that Monster Reborn is not highly abusable.

 

You don't have to try and prove a negative.

[Zeppeli Gyro Supreme]

So try actually proving that Monster Reborn is not highly abusable.

 

You don't have to try and prove a negative.

You have no idea what you just said o.O

 

I'm trying to get him to prove that Monster Reborn is not abusable. It's as it sounds.

[CrabHelmet]

I'm starting to think that Pojo might be better at banlist construction than this site, and Pojo has people who want Imperial Order, Witch of the Black Forest, and Thousand-Eyes Restrict legalized.

[GenzoTheHarpist]

So try actually proving that Monster Reborn is not highly abusable.

 

You don't have to try and prove a negative.

You have no idea what you just said o.O

 

I'm trying to get him to prove that Monster Reborn is not abusable. It's as it sounds.

Exactly. The rules of debate say that people don't have to prove that something isn't true... the onus is on the person who claims a positive statement.

[Zeppeli Gyro Supreme]

So try actually proving that Monster Reborn is not highly abusable.

 

You don't have to try and prove a negative.

You have no idea what you just said o.O

 

I'm trying to get him to prove that Monster Reborn is not abusable. It's as it sounds.

Exactly. The rules of debate say that people don't have to prove that something isn't true... the onus is on the person who claims a positive statement.

So, what you're saying is that you don't have to prove anything if they say something isn't true? Makes a lot of sense :/

 

Learn your logic.

[CrabHelmet]

Genzo is actually correct in this regard; burden of proof lies on the person in favour of banning.

 

I could explain why instant non-situational non-themed generic costless revival of any monster in either graveyard in either position with no strings attached does nothing other than to reduce the impact of skill on the game by giving an incredible advantage to whichever player is lucky enough to topdeck it. I could explain that we already have recursion that is balanced in a variety of ways - ATK limit (Limit Reverse), Level limit (Graceful Revival), monster category restriction (Swing of Memories, Re-Fusion), Type limit (Book of Life), must be a member of a certain name group (Rite of Spirit), or requires significant setup (Symbols of Heritage, Black Garden). I could explain that Smashing Ground does not have the capacity to cause additional advantage to be gained after its use, and that Brain Control does not provide access to a vast toolbox limited only by the cards that both players have used.

 

I could do all that if I really wanted to waste my time talking to a brick wall. Instead, however, I'm going to pose a question: Why not put Monster Reborn at 3?

[Psycho Shocker Android]

Ok tell me if I miss a some points in the definition of "abusable".

 

1. Is it searchable

Yes with gold sarcophagus but what card isn't searchable with that.

 

2. Is it reusable

A feather of the phoenix can put this back on top of your deck...

 

3. Is what you get with it too strong

Situational, what you need has to be in the grave or else you won't acheive anything good with it and you can't get back stuff like DAD/JD. Just like some other versatile cards, given the proper scenario this card can do good things. If you really get something broken it's because that monster should be banned.

 

4. Is it bad for the game

Very vague. It helps some decks that don't have anything to play with their graveyard. It's good in most decks (exept macro or royal oppression). Does it kills specific decks, no. Do you almost automaticly win when you play this, certainly not. So i guess it's not that bad.

 

5. It's costless

Meaning you can play it when you have it and you could play this multiple time but you don't play this more than once per duel. It surely would have been less powerful if it had a cost but now it hasn't. Is it bad? I don't think so since you only get 1 monster.

 

I think it's fine where it is. It's a good card that's why it's limited but it isn't broken.

 

*Edit why not put monster reborn at 3

for the same reason you don't have 3 mirror force/heavy storm/brain control... like those cards monster reborn is strong but not enough to be ban

 

*Edit no2

after rereading what crab said no you don't get incredible advantage by playing monster reborn you usually get a 0 or a +1 (just like breaker and brain control) and you can even get -1 if you don't have anything good to revive. Try giving me 1 good monster you can revive who can give you an incredible advantage?

[CrabHelmet]

Ok tell me if I miss a some points in the definition of "abusable".

 

1. Is it searchable

Yes with gold sarcophagus but what card isn't searchable with that.

 

2. Is it reusable

A feather of the phoenix can put this back on top of your deck...

 

At this point' date=' I can't tell whether you're discussing Monster Reborn, Pot of Greed, The Wicked Dreadroot, The Cheerful Coffin, or Chaos Emperor Dragon - Envoy of the End. None of them are especially searchable or reusable.

 

3. Is what you get with it too strong

Situational, what you need has to be in the grave or else you won't acheive anything good with it and you can't get back stuff like DAD/JD. Just like some other versatile cards, given the proper scenario this card can do good things. If you really get something broken it's because that monster should be banned.

 

The problem is not the monster you get back. The problem is that anyone who draws the card can instantly get back any monster of their choice.

 

4. Is it bad for the game

Very vague. It helps some decks that don't have anything to play with their graveyard. It's good in most decks (exept macro or royal oppression). Does it kills specific decks' date=' no. Do you almost automaticly win when you play this, certainly not. So i guess it's not that bad.

[/quote']

 

In addition to helping the decks that don't have anything to play with their graveyard, it helps the decks that can play with their graveyard even more. When was the last time you saw Zombies that didn't run Monster Reborn? Macro and Oppression (and HOTU-Exodia) are just about the only decks that won't run it.

 

Although activating Monster Reborn is not equivalent to declaring victory, whoever does activate it immediately gets a sizable advantage as a reward for skillfully...being the player lucky enough to draw Monster Reborn. The fact that it moves the emphasis of the game from skillful plays to lucky draws is why it damages the game and needs to go.

 

5. It's costless

Meaning you can play it when you have it and you could play this multiple time but you don't play this more than once per duel. It surely would have been less powerful if it had a cost but now it hasn't. Is it bad? I don't think so since you only get 1 monster.

 

The same could be said of Last Will.

 

Let's put Last Will at 3.

 

I think it's fine where it is. It's a good card that's why it's limited but it isn't broken.

 

Anyone with half a brain doesn't limit cards for the crime of being good.

 

*Edit why not put monster reborn at 3

for the same reason you don't have 3 mirror force/heavy storm/brain control... like those cards monster reborn is strong but not enough to be ban

 

You don't limit cards on the grounds that they're good. Only a mindless Konami-parrot would do something so retarded.

 

Mirror Force and Heavy Storm provide benefit to the game at 1 by punishing overextension' date=' but at 3 would murder aggro and non-chainables respectively. Brain Control is only at 1 because of the moronic Konami policy that you espouse.

 

So, I ask again: how does Monster Reborn become an unacceptable broken menace at 3 but transform into something perfectly fine at 1?

 

Oh, and by the way, "I think it's strong so let's put it at 1" isn't "proof".

 

*Edit no2

after rereading what crab said no you don't get incredible advantage by playing monster reborn you usually get a 0 or a +1 (just like breaker and brain control) and you can even get -1 if you don't have anything good to revive. Try giving me 1 good monster you can revive who can give you an incredible advantage?

 

Advantage in a duel isn't measured purely in terms of +'s and -'s. Graceful Charity is a +0. If you cannot understand this, then you are bad at this game.

[GenzoTheHarpist]

About it being at three, I believe it falls under condition A of your limiting criteria, Crab. That's just my point of view though.

 

"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."

[Psycho Shocker Android]

"The problem is not the monster you get back. The problem is that anyone who draws the card can instantly get back any monster of their choice."

 

You could apply this logic to any card limited to 1 "anyone who draws _______ get _______".

 

"Although activating Monster Reborn is not equivalent to declaring victory, whoever does activate it immediately gets a sizable advantage as a reward for skillfully...being the player lucky enough to draw Monster Reborn. The fact that it moves the emphasis of the game from skillful plays to lucky draws is why it damages the game and needs to go."

 

I can say that's a good argument but it doesn't automatically give you a sizable advantage. I agree this can be a lucky draw but again it can be dead early in the game. It's also not 100% skill-less. I saw a lot of bad duelist reborn for nothing or reborn crap when they could have done way better with it.

 

"The same could be said of Last Will.

 

Let's put Last Will at 3."

 

Ummm no we don't have access to 3 monster reborn. We could test this limited but i don't think it would be a good idea, since it would clearly advantage decks that uses syncro. Plus 6 months is a long period (let's face it 6 months of snatch steal was bad) we'd only need a couple weeks to see the bad things last will can do...

 

"Anyone with half a brain doesn't limit cards for the crime of being good."

 

I know it was just to sum up everything that had been said.

 

"Mirror Force and Heavy Storm provide benefit to the game at 1 by punishing overextension, but at 3 would murder aggro and non-chainables respectively. Brain Control is only at 1 because of the moronic Konami policy that you espouse."

 

Monster Reborn can punish mindlessy sending a monster to the grave. Brain control is another debate we already have enough with reborn i think.

 

"So, I ask again: how does Monster Reborn become an unacceptable broken menace at 3 but transform into something perfectly fine at 1?"

 

Having multiple copies of this card at the same time can easily give you "sizable advantage" to use your words. It lets you special summon enough beatsticks to give you a large LP advantage or could let you combo multiple monsters to aquire advantage over your opponent that 1 monster reborn alone couldn't do (It's not like double raiza but it's the only thing i can think of for the moment).

 

"Advantage in a duel isn't measured purely in terms of +'s and -'s. Graceful Charity is a +0. If you cannot understand this, then you are bad at this game."

 

Bad example see darkwolds...

But i get the point lol. I meant tangible advantage unlike thunder dragon.

 

 

 

I played the game when it was ban and I didn't care. Now that it's back I haven't felt that it should be banned like snatch steal or ring of destruction. I think it really is a bordeline card just like you said it can be topdecked but the required cards need to be in the grave. In terms of advantage what this card can do is situational.

[Corporal]

Monster Reborn while free has some good for this game. Your opponent now has to think on what he puts in his grave. When monster reborn was ban you could just dump any monster in your graveyard safely (like green baboon and DMoC).

 

Don't be ridiculous. A year ago' date=' anyone who suggested legalizing Monster Reborn would have been laughed off of any half-intelligent forum. Monster Reborn's text hasn't changed since then.

[/quote']

 

After playing it for more than six months I think it's perfect where it is. Some cards needs to be tested in the advanced format to see if it would really affect this game or not. They've done it before with Snatch Steal and we all saw that it was wrong. They fixed it on the following ban list. This time I think Monster Reborn passed the test.

 

Just because Konami is too bloody stupid to re-ban it doesn't mean that Monster Reborn has passed some sort of invisible test and is somehow balanced. The game has never had a need for entirely costless generic revival, and Monster Reborn is as costless and generic as revival gets. It was banworthy from the start and nothing has changed to make it acceptable. Konami just kept it legal because people like you think that you have a right to plop a piece of costless generic recursion into every deck you make, and they know that people like you would complain if they felt that this right had been violated.

Well I pretty much agree with you, the meta has sort of gone past the point where just having some over-powered card will help you. With all the new cards that have come out, there are so many ways to negate Monster Reborn.

 

Also, they really did need a generic revival card(IDK why, ask Konami), and all the others had ways to be abused and constantly reused.

[asbalih]

I hate all of the ban lists!! Instead of making ban lists, DON'T MAKE THE STINKING OVERPOWERED CARDS IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!

[Corporal]

I hate all of the ban lists!! Instead of making ban lists' date=' DON'T MAKE THE STINKING OVERPOWERED CARDS IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!

[/quote']

 

That's not how it always works....Some cards might not be useful until they can be used with other cards. Butterfly Dagger Elma, for example.