I really enjoy Modern as a format. This wasn’t always true, though I think that the format is moving in an increasingly positive direction over time. What I don’t care for is the fact that I can’t express my interest in Modern without somebody feeling the need to remind me why they think it’s a bad format. If they were speaking more literally they’d just say, “but I don’t like Modern,” which is completely valid, though I take issue with calling the format bad. Is it perfect? Oh my, no. But the format’s success is undeniable, and the positives vastly outweigh the negatives from my perspective.

Most of these critiques won’t be anything new to the readership at Modern Nexus. We’ve heard complaints about Modern’s non-interactivity, its supposed lack of skill, its poorly-managed banlist, its prohibitive cost. Certainly these point to some problems with the format that are worth addressing, but I think they’ve been blown out of proportion. Today I’d like to respond to Modern’s detractors and show the flaws in each of these arguments.

Modern Isn’t Interactive

The major criticism of Modern is a “lack of interaction.” There are many different angles for a Modern deck to attack you from, and a given hand won’t be good against all of them. To me, there is a silver lining here, as this means that there won’t be a dominant deck in the format that has universal interaction advantage, but I digress. The argument is that there are just a bunch of ships passing in the night.

This argument ignores the delicate combat steps of Infect versus Affinity, or how a Burn deck manages its resources against either of those decks. To say nothing of the dance between Burn and Death’s Shadow! It’s true that many games where Infect draws Blighted Agent are easy mode, though surely your position isn’t that haymakers and trumps for specific matchups and situations have no place in Magic. If it is, you’re not going to like any other format either. There are matchups where there is little or nothing that a player can do—Jund versus Tron comes to mind—though by and large I don’t buy the position that there is no interaction. Hell, even with that example you can gain significant points in the matchup with experimentation. Blood Moon Jund, anyone? There are skewed matchups and a lot of races, but ignoring blocking and removal spells as forms of interaction and citing specific cards that can make interactive pieces irrelevant isn’t taking a position that uniquely detracts from Modern.

Beyond that, I am extremely tired of hearing that Modern doesn’t have a great control deck. It does. It’s called Grixis Delver, and just because the professional community outside of myself and Kevin Jones ignore it doesn’t take away his Open trophy that he won with the deck or his undefeated run at the WMCQ this weekend. Congrats, Kevin! You might say that you don’t want to play a control deck with a win condition that is a one-mana 1/1, but stating that the win condition of the control deck isn’t shiny enough for you just means that you don’t like the control deck of the format, not that there is a void in archetype definitions.

Not to mention that Jund by most counts is yet another great control deck. And Jeskai Nahiri. And if you really need mopey nonsense to feel like you’re playing control, I see sluggish UW control decks putting up results with relatively high frequency. They don’t have what it takes to to dominate every field or necessarily enough interaction for every matchup, but again, having a deck that just has interaction advantage against everything is a recipe for dominance rather than health. Modern does not need Miracles. Legacy doesn’t even need Miracles.

One last point on the matter of interaction: putting a bunch of Stony Silences in your sideboard and complaining that you can’t interact with everybody is your own fault. There are great sideboard options with a ton of flexibility in Modern, and failing to appreciate these cards doesn’t stop them from existing. Kitchen Finks is great against aggressive creatures and removal spells alike. Fulminator Mage messes up both creature lands and Tron/Eldrazi lands. Engineered Explosives is phenomenal against opponents going wide or playing artifacts/enchantments. When I tell people that I board in Spell Pierce against Tron and how impactful hitting an Expedition Map can be they are always surprised. Modern has depth, and refusing to get your feet wet doesn’t erase that fact.

Modern is Uncompetitive

Ari Lax did a fantastic job highlighting what makes Modern so popular in his Premium article on the topic at Star City Games. The fact that there are a wealth of decks that could reasonably win a given tournament appeals to a wide audience, almost by definition. Whether I like Burn, Valakut, Affinity, Infect, or Snapcaster Mage I can play some variant of my deck on any given week and feel reasonably good about my odds of going deep into the tournament. For many players, there is a lot of value to playing the same deck for long periods of time. You develop an emotional connection that Standard simply doesn’t offer. I get to cast Delver of Secrets any old week that I want to, and unless they ban Snapcaster Mage I’ll probably feel pretty good about it.

This undeniably contributes to the format’s popularity, and while it’s true that isn’t necessarily the same thing as quality, it is more important from a business perspective. Do you know why they banned Jace, the Mind Sculptor and Stoneforge Mystic so late into their Standard life? Tournament attendance. It’s okay for a format to have questionable quality as long as it is well-received, and for the GP and SCG Tour audience, Modern is clearly very popular.

Now, if you want to make the argument that Modern is a bad competitive format, then I’ll offer that they have already removed the Modern Pro Tour, and I agree this was the correct move. Not only is the Pro Tour about promoting the new set, but from the participant perspective it’s about “breaking it,” which flies in the face of Modern’s general purpose. That said, this does not carry down to Grand Prix and Opens. The goal of these tournaments is not the same as the Pro Tour.

Sure, Grand Prix award pro points, but consider the following. The Grand Prix cap was introduced to make it so that pro players don’t have to play literally every GP, and if you don’t like Modern then I recommend crushing the Standard and Limited GPs that you can attend rather than trying to abolish Modern GPs. The cap and the shift to 6-3s making Day 2 should have made it clear by now that Grand Prix are run in an attempt to reach the wider playerbase, and whether you think the format is a good “competitive format” doesn’t play on that level. Not to mention that there are competitive players who love Modern GPs who are able to leverage their experience with the format on the Grand Prix level. With regard to Opens, I don’t even know why you think a business like Star City Games would hold tournaments of any variety other than the one that appeals to the widest audience.

On the Modern Banlist

Part of the common criticism of Modern is that the banlist could use a significant overhaul. While I agree it’s not perfect, I think that rocking the boat in a big way all at one time would be an extremely foolish thing to do to a successful product. Major changes are not unlike creating a whole new format, which is most certainly not the end goal for Wizards. What they have shown is a willingness to unban cards so long as they do not stifle competitive diversity by the rawest definition.

I’ve seen Become Immense on the list of cards people would like banned, though the fact that there are two unique Become Immense decks and the fact that other combo decks are still viable makes me think the card is safe. Further, there is a largely unspoken element of the Modern banlist philosophy that I think is very pronounced if you’ve been paying attention. That is, decks that have to win inside of combat without tons of resilience are given more of a pass on the turn four rule. Infect is fast and resilient enough that it has some staggeringly positive matchups, though it generates very interesting games for decks that have a high density of removal. A deck like Amulet Bloom technically had to attack, though because it was so easy to set up over and over again, when opponents could only interact with the Titan, it got the axe.

The most pronounced banning on this front was Seething Song. Storm was such a medium deck at the time of this banning that it took a lot of players by surprise. If your point is that you don’t like two players playing solitaire, then Wizards agrees, though they specifically consider decks that win on the stack with busted spells outside of combat to be the definition of solitaire. Even under these parameters I agree that there are at least a few offenders in Modern very deserving of a ban. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least to see Simian Spirit Guide or Goryo’s Vengeance banned on the upcoming update, as these cards contribute almost exclusively to non-combat-based degeneracy.

You can like or dislike that the format’s philosophy gives a heavy bias to combat—though I would argue this factor absolutely contributes to the format’s popularity, as combat is among the more grokkable elements of Magic.

What Additions Could Improve Modern

Something I hear often is that Modern would benefit from Force of Will, and even more recently I’ve heard questions posted about Daze. Assuming my beliefs about the developers’ format philosophy are correct, then these free counterspells don’t make any sense.

While Splinter Twin was legal it was clearly the deck that would most heavily benefit from Force of Will due to its ability to protect a spell and win on the same turn, thus not caring about the card advantage. Currently, Infect is the deck that would most heavily benefit from Daze, as it’s just another way to win on turn two or three with counter backup, while other decks have to pay more mind to an opponent upping land counts or simply playing around Daze. If you do a good job of ensuring that the fastest decks have to win in combat, then free counters benefit the combo decks the most.

If making control decks in Modern better was your goal, then you should be thinking more along the lines of Swords to Plowshares than Force of Will. One of the biggest barriers to playing a highly interactive deck in Modern is that the cheapest interactive spells all have significant drawbacks. Dismember is great against Infect, though horrid against Burn. Path to Exile is inherent card disadvantage, and if you want to combine it with the premier counters of the format in Mana Leak or Remand that mana disadvantage will matter. Not to mention that being at a mana disadvantage will often be significant simply by Modern’s efficient nature. Lightning Bolt is great on turn one and continues being great as long as reach is something you’re in the market for, but for a control deck it is far from a catchall.

Swords to Plowshares specifically might be too pushed for Modern, and it definitely isn’t the sort of card you want in Standard. But I do believe that a similar spell is what the “Modern isn’t interactive enough” players are actually pining for. Would that require cards printed specifically for Modern to make this happen? Maybe, though what’s more important here to me is that players understand the type of interaction that would actually benefit the interactive decks over the combo decks.

The other major element you could argue is missing in Modern is pushed, but reasonable, interaction with non-basic lands. Blood Moon only fits in your deck if you’re trying to cheese your opponents, Ghost Quarter has similar drawbacks to Path to Exile in addition to costing you a land drop. While Fulminator Mage is great, sometimes it comes down after you get Karned which won’t get the job done.

Finding a way to make a Standard-legal card that would be better than any of these options in Modern is dicey. Something like a creature or artifact with the text, “if a land would generate more than one mana of any type, it generates {1} instead” wouldn’t rock the boat in Standard. Or, perhaps a two-mana spell that only hits non-basics could be fine in a Standard format where monocolored decks were the focus. I wouldn’t shed a tear over an Eldrazi Temple or Urza’s Tower banning, though I don’t believe that to be the path we’re on—and I’m fine occupying the universe as it exists instead of asking for it to be tailored to me.

Realistically it seems wise to keep Tron in the format to prevent the control decks from totally taking over, given that the fast creature decks can generally brown Tron. Matchups between control decks and Tron will continue to be horrendously unfun, but at least this will prevent a control deck from completely dominating the format, which is a worse threat to format health than a perceived lack of interactivity.

On the Financial Cost of Playing Modern

And lastly, we come to the criticism that Modern as a format is too expensive. If you play a lot of Limited and/or Standard and have crunched the numbers, then you already know that Modern is a more affordable format over time. I fear this point may not resonate with everybody, though it is undeniably true. Smart trades and investing in Modern staples when they’re low will help make the format more affordable as well, though beyond that this luxury good will unfortunately not be made free to everybody.

Conspiracy: Take the Crown demonstrated that Wizards is willing to reprint Modern staples in a heavily-printed set, which means that on a long enough timeline the staple you’re looking for will get a reprint in some capacity. I don’t think it’s reasonable to ask for more, as over-printing and completely crashing the market would destroy the game completely. That’s far more concerning than the game (or just one format) being expensive.

Modern is expensive, and please don’t take this as my saying I don’t care. I’m just saying that you don’t have to buy your deck all at once. You might look at a deck that costs $1,500 and think you could never possibly own it, but there are ways around that. Investing and budgeting wisely, especially given that more reprints will be coming, makes the format far more affordable. Check out Jim Casale’s articles on this very site—there are resources available to help you get into the format for less than sticker price, and once you own a deck the cost of upkeep is very low.

All Hail Modern

Modern isn’t perfect, but it has a large following and the common arguments against the format are filthy with faulty logic. I personally love Modern, and while I can respect that not everybody does I should hope we are all mature enough to understand that no format caters to everybody. I believe the format is fine from a competitive perspective (though again, not perfect). But even if you disagree, the main avenues for the format (Grand Prix, SCG Tour) mean it doesn’t have to cater to the specific desires of the most competitive crowd. You can embrace it or you can loathe it, but understand that Modern supports a large swath of happy Magic players—and it’s not going anywhere.

Thanks for reading.

-Ryan Overturf

@RyanOverdrive on Twitter

Share this article: Facebook

Twitter

Reddit

