Combos Browse all Suggest
Legality
| Format | Legality |
| Archenemy | Legal |
| Casual | Legal |
| Commander: Rule 0 | Legal |
| Custom | Legal |
| Duel Commander | Legal |
| Highlander | Legal |
| Leviathan | Legal |
| Limited | Legal |
| Oathbreaker | Legal |
| Oldschool 93/94 | Legal |
| Planechase | Legal |
| Quest Magic | Legal |
| Vanguard | Legal |
griffstick on darkest hour ideas
1 year ago
Sproet on
Legacy Banlist
1 year ago
You forgot Crusade, Jihad, Invoke Prejudice, Pradesh Gypsies, Cleanse, Stone-Throwing Devils, and Imprison
Icbrgr on Censorship
2 years ago
Times are just different now... even in the history of magic cards/art there are now forbidden Crusade, Invoke Prejudice, Jihad, Cleanse, Stone-Throwing Devils, Imprison ect ect...
This hasnt happened to me personally no....but iv'e seen wild threads in the blind eternities that went on that had less to do with magic/the game than Oof_Magic's original/copied posts.
If someone where to make a post saying that they were upset with the author of the war of the sparks decision to undo Nissa and Chandras relationship/sexual preferences that would be allowed to let the conversation develop..... I cant say the same would be allowed/tolerated if it went the other direction. If someone were to make a post/thread about Niko Aris and their opinions surrounding the planswalkers lore and creation I could also only assume the conversation would be allowed to go one way as well.
DemonDragonJ on Will we see less cards …
3 years ago
enpc, Dromar39, I agree with those statements, and I am almost afraid to address a sensitive subject, but should that not have meant that cards such as Imprison , Cleanse , and Crusade should not have been deemed taboo, since they are in no way related to real world events?
dbpunk on None
3 years ago
Ok so Im just gonna say this about the setting precedent arguments (slippery slope) and the "bit of a stretch" arguments.
A lot of you are claiming this is a slippery slope and that theres evidence theyll ban more cards for the same reason. And tbh there isnt any evidence of that. They havent said anything about other cards potentially banned for it and there is no precedent for them banning other things with this reason. Unless say, the card depicted something racist in the art.
Weve explained why these cards arent good and pointed out like realistic reasons why people will get offended. Even Cleanse, which a number of people have explained nonstop (once again, its a combination of a number of things but the fact that racial cleansing is an idea combined with the effect and flavor text). The first comment on this thread literally addressed this issue from a member of the MTG community who is a POC. None of these are the huge stretches you think they are. Literally like Ive said on here myself why Jihad and Crusade are problems as a Muslim (note: before anyone says Islam is a religion, its also one that is heavily associated with Middle Eastern people and is mostly POC in terms of people).
Also like... did any of you even use these cards? Or cards like them? Like also its a card game, it shouldnt even be depicting cards directly referencing racist ideals.
And before anyone says "Stone-Throwing Devils is a stretch" the name of that one is a literal slur used against Muslims. Like even if you havent heard it used, that shouldnt be the name of a card.
DemonDragonJ on None
3 years ago
TheRealSpecialK, in the case of Jihad, I can understand your words, and there is also the fact that a fantasy world using real world terminology does not make sense. For that reason, I shall also accept the banning of Pradesh Gypsies, since the Roma people do not exist in a fictional world.
However, I shall stand by my assertion that Cleanse should not be banned, because the word "black" refers to philosophical alignment, not ethnicity.
Also, when people today use the word "crusade," they are more often than not using it as a general term for a zealous movement to achieve a certain goal, not in reference to the specific crusades that occurred during the 1000's to the 1200's, so I shall maintain that the card Crusade is not problematic, especially when Cathars' Crusade has not been banned.
derekross305 on None
3 years ago
I can understand the Invoke Prejudice one. I guess you could make the case for it representing medieval executioners but I'm not going to get into that. If Cleanse is going to be considered racist than Virtue's Ruin should be too. Personally though, I think that's a slippery slope and kind of ridiculous to say Black/White creatures in the game are like Black/White people in real life. This game has always had the 5 colors and they are not about race. Crusade and Jihad seem more focused on religion than race and the artwork on those aren't bad at all. I don't see how Predash Gypsies is racist and I personally have never heard the word Gypsy used as a racial slur. Are gypsies even a race? Even if they were, that card says nothing bad about them. As far as Imprison and Stone-Throwing Devils go, it seems like they're just creating racism where it isn't. You'd basically have to be racist yourself to see some of these as racist. I don't see why we have to have politics/race seep into every aspect of our lives anyway. Just let us play our card games.
Deadpoo111 on None
3 years ago
Wow, this was a really interesting move by WotC I honestly didn't see it coming, but I think I'm glad it did.
To start, I don't think this banning affects gameplay at all, the last time I saw any of these cards in a commander deck or other deck was never. Sure Crusade may be okay for white decks, but there are other, better, cards.
Onto each card:
-
Invoke Prejudice: I think everyone can agree that this card has no place in our game. When I learned it existed like 2 years ago, I was surprised it was ever printed (which is also what Wizard's said in their article)
-
Cleanse: a lot of people think this shouldn't be banned. The tone seems like exactly what Wizards said in the article.
-
Stone-Throwing Devils: I honestly didn't know this card existed. I can certainly see why it's banned now, again, I don't think this banning actually hurts anyone.
-
Pradesh Gypsies: The term is a slur, I'm almost uncomfortable putting the card name here. This card shouldn't have been created in the first place. I saw an argument from someone that said they felt this excluded people who identified as (and these are their words) "a gypsie" and that they felt the banning of this card took away their ability to relate to the game. The only question is if the person knew this card existed. It's really freakin' obscure.
-
Jihad: very straight forward card. I agree with the decision to ban it. Also, I've never seen ANYONE play this card in my 4+ years of constant commander and no I never will sooo
-
Imprison: Again, very surprised this card existed. I'll make a point about old magic cards soon but like...damn, WotC was messed up in the early days. The art is a clear depiction of what others have said above, I don't think there should be any argument about this cards banning.
-
Crusade: This might be the most debated card aside from cleanse. While I've never played against or seen it, I do know people that run this card in mono white decks. The card legitimately references the actual crusades, especially with the OG art and while a lot of people use: "it's time for another crusade" ironically, the historical event is a terrifying glimpse of how bad humanity actually is, I agree with this banning, though it may affect a few players within the community (EDH speaking.
For one, I don't disagree with the bannings, Wizards essentially removing cards that depict or reference real-world (yes it's important to distinguish between real world and reality)intolerance is a good thing as it will promote a healthier game. Overall, the bans don't affect anyone other than Crusade for which there is a functional reprint.
I've got two last points to make. The first is that these cards are from the beginning of Magic's history. These old sets simply weren't regulated like they are today. The company didn't put a ton of care into it's public image like they do today.
Finally, I do think this is Wizard's hopping on a corporate bandwagon. While I do agree these cards should've been banned a long time ago (Tbh they shouldn't have been made at all), I think Wizards could've banned them at any time, but now that people are taking a closer look into companies in light of the recent events in america, Wizards felt some pressure to erase past mistakes (which is still a good thing). At least those cards are finally out of here, they didn't have a good use anyway.
