Magic the Gathering has a long and storied history with banned and restricted cards.  In the never ending quest to create new and interesting cards, many of our favorite classics have been outlawed (and rightfully so) by the powers that be.   It has taken Wizards of the Coast the better part of a decade to get the game to a point where literally nothing is banned in the Standard format.   But still, there are many cards that have been blacklisted over the years.  For those of us who play in extended tournaments and spend most of our time playing casually, it is difficult to justify playing any of these cards in our decks.  Can counterspell be played in a casual setting?  Its been rotated out of most every format and Wizard's hasn't sought fit to reprint anything like it in years.  It seems that favorites like counterspell have been deemed "too powerful" for most (if any) format.

[caption id="attachment_2488" align="alignright" width="225" caption="For all intents and purposes the card reads like this anyway."][/caption]

It doesn't have to be like this.  In fact, Wizards has inadvertently built in their own solution to this problem.  The answer is to simply restrict the cards.  To clarify - only one copy of a card that is on the Restricted List can only be played in a deck.  While they would probably love to simply ban cards like "Time Walk", cards are left restricted so that WotC can claim that "every card is playable in some format".   But in that simple workaround they've solved their own dilemma.   I propose a new mechanic.  The "Restricted" mechanic would be simple, to the point and easily explained on the card itself.  Powerful cards that would have otherwise never been printed or reprinted could be restricted to 1, 2, or 3 cards per deck with a simple "Restricted X" mechanic.

Obviously, some players would look at this as quite a departure from the game as it plays now.  WotC rarely (if ever) attempts to interfere in the deck making process itself.  But look at the very definition of restricted as they use it.  Take a look at a card like Relentless Rats.  Its been done before and it can and should be done again.   In this article I am going to take on the issue from several angles and attempt to dismantle it myself with poignant questioning.

Rules and cards that tie player's hands aren't fun.  Why restrict deck making?

[caption id="attachment_2471" align="alignleft" width="225" caption="Welcome back, old friend. I'd rather have you in this form than not at all."][/caption]

Let's take a look at an older, "fun" card that I'm sure many would like to revisit.  There are two options for a fun and powerful card like Lightning Bolt:  1) banned in all formats or 2) "restricted".   I, for one, would prefer to see the card (or the same card with a different name) in the game with a set of restrictions then to not see it at all.  I would never propose "tying player's hands" by limiting  powerful cards like Figure of Destiny.  There are some great decks that can be built around that card that just aren't possible without playsets available in a deck.  But a card like lightning bolt hasn't avoided being reprinted because of some broken combo, it has never been reprinted because you can conceivably deal 12 damage for 4 mana.  Take it down to two in a deck?  Not so broken and it doesn't completely negate other great burn spells like Sudden Shock or Flame Javelin.  Restricted wouldn't tie player's hands so much as it would free card designers to bring back powerful classics and create new, interesting cards concepts.

So every powerful card in the future should be restricted to one or two copies in a deck?

No, not at all.  Its possible that it wouldn't even be used in every expansion!  The restricted mechanic should be used to give card designers the freedom to create options for players.  In fact, I think the mechanic should be used extremely sparingly.  It should be employed only to get powerful and fun cards into the game that would otherwise be banned or never created in the first place.  Take Ancestral Recall and Ancestral Vision.  AR is out of control re-bonk-U-loUs.  It will never be reprinted.  But it was brought back in a gimped form that is still very much playable.  Perhaps AR is a bad example (there is such a thing as a truly broken card :) ) because I wouldn't recommend it for the "restricted" mechanic, but my point is that powerful cards can be created or brought back in new forms with new mechanics.  New mechanics that don't completely mutilate the spirit of the original but offer a fun, fair and legal alternative.

Doesn't this just add an unnecessary element of "luck" to the game?

There is a very important distinction between luck and randomness.  The game of Magic is built around randomness, surprises and infinite possibilities (even within the same decks).  We attempt to tame that randomness by putting 4 copies of 10 different cards into our decks so that we can have some control over what we'll draw.  Players put 25, 26, 27 lands into their deck to try and stave off the randomness of being left without land.  My point is that a huge part of the game is about randomness and that unpredictability is part of what enhances the game.  Tempting players into playing more than 10 unique cards per 60 card deck is a step in the right direction as far as I'm concerned.  In that sense, "restricted" adds another element of skill to the game because you're forced to choose more unique mix cards.  Part of being a great Magic player is honing your ability to control the seemingly arbitrary whims of the draw.

[caption id="attachment_2485" align="alignright" width="225" caption="Tournament Garbage."][/caption]

Tournament players just aren't going to go for this.

There are many instances where top tier players will play 2 or 3 copies of a particular card.  And with cards like Counterspell (or Counterspell with a different name and "restricted) back on the table, I guarantee they'll be drooling all over each other to get them into their tournament decks.

Wizards doesn't like to add new mechanics to the game.

Nonsense.  Cascade? Persist?  Epic?  Planeswalkers?!  Need I go on?  Wizards has always, and will continue to add new mechanics to the game.  It peaks interest for older players and new players cant tell the difference between the existing cornucopia of mechanics and the addition one or two more.  Its all new to them!  New mechanics can be counted on like clockwork.

Okay, I guess I'm buying this.  But how can you, as a player, verify the number of  individual cards are in your opponent's decks?

How can you verify that an opponent is only playing four copies of any given card?  How can you be sure your opponent isn't "morphing" a land card face down  for 2 instead of an actual creature?  How can you even be sure he or she is playing with 60 cards?  The answer is, of course: you can't.  I would hope that a sense of honor would bind you but either way, there are many unverifiables in Magic the Gathering.

.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .

Obviously there are several other ways to employ the mechanic.  It would probably not be used on creatures or artifacts.  The legendary rule already works nicely there and they are much easier to get rid of.  An enchantment like Story Circle on the other hand would be a great candidate for "Restricted 2".  If I use my 2nd to last breath taking out one Story Circle in my mono colored deck I'd like to think that would be the end of that particular enchantment.  Hymn to Tourach is a devastatingly powerful card and is restricted in most every format.  But slap on with a "Restricted 1" mechanic and it becomes more reasonable.

Look, I am not asking Wizard's to make broken cards.   Modern magic is more powerful than it has ever been and that trend simply cannot continue.  I am merely asking to consider reviving older, more powerful spells or to rethink some of the cards they've inevitably thrown on the "too powerful" pile over the years.  The mock-ups you see here are just some examples of what is possible.  Obviously wizards might change the card names (as they usually do when cards are altered) or fiddle with the restricted numbers.   But surely, the flavor and power of some of our favorite cards can be harnessed and re-imagined for standard play.

I am anxious to hear the Magic community's thoughts on this matter and look forward to reading and responding to your comments or suggestions.  Take a look at the Official Banned and Restricted List over at the mother site and imagine the possibilities.

Also, keep an eye on our From the Vault: Exiled spoiler page if you're interested in other Banned/Restricted offerings.