Recently there's been a lot of negativity flying around in the wake of a poor post-rotation Standard, the impact of sets like War of the Spark and Modern Horizons, and, of course, the brand new format Pioneer. Each of these came as a sort of a beacon of hope at first.

War of the Spark and Modern Horizons alike were both met with curiosity and excitement as we checked out the cards and tested them out in our decks. As we played with the sets, we began to see far too many powerful cards pop up across a number of formats and arguably break things along the way. Hogaak, Arisen Necropolis was banned in Modern, Arcum's Astrolabe in Pauper, and Karn, the Great Creator was restricted in Vintage. These aren't the only cards people have had concerns with either. Teferi, Time Raveler, Nissa, Who Shakes the World, Urza, Lord High Artificer, Narset, Parter of Veils, and Wrenn and Six have been wreaking havoc on a number of formats.

Even Core Set 2020 had a tremendous impact on the state of things, with Mystic Forge being restricted in Vintage - the fastest a card has ever been restricted in the format - and Field of the Dead in Standard. Now as we start playing with Throne of Eldraine, people continue to wonder if R&D isn't pushing the envelope a bit too far with cards like Gilded Goose, Questing Beast, and of course Oko, Thief of Crowns.

There's a number of cards I could also talk about here that may end up being somewhat problematic as well, such as Fires of Invention, Embercleave, Fae of Wishes, and so on. None of these have had quite the prevalence of Oko, however. As fellow author Frank Lepore wrote in his article this past week, Oko is literally in every major competitive format that isn't Pauper and is crushing in them at that. It's quickly becoming one of the worst mistakes we've seen in the game's history and has already been banned in Brawl on MTG Arena, is a near shoe-in for a Standard ban soon, and may also be up for discussion in Pioneer depending on how the format shakes out.

This leads me into my next topic: Pioneer. There's been a lot of talk about the format. Tons of excitement and hype, especially in the wake of a poor Standard environment. So much so that some tournament organizers have already been switching major Standard events over to Pioneer. There's been a lot of talk as well, however, that bans are going to happen and happen fast. Wizards has already proved this by banning our very first three cards on Monday - Felidar Guardian, Leyline of Abundance, and Oath of Nissa - with a B&R announcement for the format coming every Monday for the remainder of the year.

This brings me to what I really want to talk about: deck choice in events. With the advent of Pioneer, numerous pros and personalities claimed that if you play the format, you should be trying your hardest to break things. Sam Black was one notable voice, saying that if you're not trying to get something banned, then you're not trying hard enough in the format. We've seen this in other formats as well. In Standard it's play an Food/Ramp deck or be wrong. Modern is a bit more open but is still often play Urza or be wrong to many players. Even Pauper was play Jeskai or be wrong, though now post-banning those arguments have turned to the likes of Tron and Boros once more.

In the heat of all these arguments over the state of various formats, players have turned their ire toward any other deck that people try to break out. Want to try your luck playing Fires of Invention, Gruul Aggro, or Mardu Knights? You'll just get beaten by the Oko decks they'll say. We've seen this same kind of thing in Pauper where renowned player Martin Juza talked about Burn and was shredded by a lot of the community for promoting a "bad deck." Even the Professor recently got flack for sharing a fresh deck tech on Mono-Black Control in the format, once again stating it's poor in the format.

Modern is a bit more open so, decks like Amulet Titan, Burn, Tron, and the various Death's Shadow builds especially can stand up to the Urza decks, but those decks still stand tall. If you take something like Spirits, Storm, or Affinity like you might've a few years ago, odds are you'll be laughed at and told to play a real deck. Now we see this in Pioneer too where the mentality is starting off with the idea that you need to play the best deck the format has to offer or you're wrong. Sam isn't the only one who's talking about this either, but his statement arguably showed up the most among the player base.

I'm here to take a different approach, however: play the deck that you want to play.

I've played the best deck in different formats before and often times I found myself hating it. Playing Golgari Midrange in Guilds of Ravnica Standard last year felt boring to me, as did Abzan during Khans of Tarkir/Theros Standard, and more recently the various Delver and Jeskai decks in Pauper. I tried them all and they just didn't appeal to me. Instead I stuck with decks like Mono-White Aggro, Gruul Dragons, and Elves in those formats respectively. They were decks that I enjoyed playing, was willing to put the time in to learn how to beat the other decks that were all over the format, and did better with than the others.

With Pauper, in particular, I've become somewhat of an expert with, notably, Elves and Bogles - two decks players consider a lower tier due to being weaker to hate. Having played them far more than many players, though, I can also see lines for how to play against even the worst matchups in the format and come out on top. Many do this in Standard too, and even Legacy. Players have still put up strong results with decks like Death and Taxes or Elves in the wake of cards like Wrenn and Six and Plague Engineer ravaging the format, and it's in no small part because they know exactly how to navigate their matchups.

It's harder to do this in Modern where the metagame is often so open that becoming a dedicated expert at one specific deck can be to your detriment. Now in Pioneer, we're told that we have to break things to enjoy it, and thus should've been playing something like Mono-Green Devotion or Copycat. As it stands, though, those decks were banned quickly. Some players don't want to invest in decks like this because the warning signs are so obvious as to how they'll be nuked from the format. Eyes are on cards like Aetherworks Marvel, Dig Through Time, Treasure Cruise, and so on.

What about those who want to play Bogles, Elves, Tokens, Soulflayer-Chromanticore, Eldrazi lists, and more that haven't put up as strong a showing but are still contenders? Fun, playable decks that are probably not as likely to be banned. Players want these both because they enjoy them and to try and ensure security in their deck choice. And in the end, I think what should matter most is that you just have fun with it. If you're not having fun, be it by winning or just playing the game, then why play Magic and not something else instead?

In the end, I think we, as a community, can stand to do better by each other, and I believe that allowing people to play what they love is key to that. If someone wants to play the most powerful deck and go for the win, more power to them. If they want to play the jankiest of brews, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that either. Play what you love. If you're having fun with it, that's all that should matter about the game we all love to play.

Kendra Smith

Twitter: @TheMaverickGal

Twitch: twitch.tv/themaverickgirl

YouTube: Kendra Smith