High Tide Banned in Pauper – What does it Means for the Format?

With the recent ban of [card]High Tide[/card] in Pauper, the format once again loses a combo archetype that proved to be a bit too strong for a metagame that has historically struggled against “solo” non-interactive decks. Pauper is a powerful format, but it has consistently shown that when a deck mostly plays its own game without interacting, the balance shifts quickly.

So let’s break down why this happened, what changes (and what doesn’t), and my personal thoughts on the update.

Table of Contents

Why High Tide Was Unbanned in the First Place

Back in March, the Pauper Format Panel decided to unban [card]High Tide[/card] as part of a controlled experiment. 

[cards]{{High Tide}}[/cards]

For context, the card’s legality used to be split between tabletop and MTGO before the formats were unified.

The logic behind the unban was pretty reasonable:

• The old enablers like [card]Cloud of Faeries[/card], [card]Peregrine Drake[/card], and [card]Frantic Search[/card] are banned.

• Without those engines, [card]High Tide[/card] might have been fair.

• The PFP wanted to test assumptions instead of relying on theory alone.

It was a bold move, and one that the community mostly welcomed — at least at first.

Seven Months Later: The Deck Was Still Too Much

After months of real gameplay data, the conclusion was clear:

[card]High Tide[/card] was still:

• Consistent

• Hard to disrupt

• Able to win without engaging the battlefield at all

Most games boiled down to one question: “Do you have specific sideboard hate at the right time?”

If the answer was no, the game often felt predetermined. That kind of dynamic isn’t healthy long-term, especially in a format where players value interaction, sequencing, and board presence.

The Comparison to One-Land Spy

The PFP also mentioned that they will continue monitoring One-Land Spy, a combo deck built around [card]Balustrade Spy[/card], because it shares some surface-level similarities with [card]High Tide[/card].

[cards]{{Balustrade Spy}}[/cards]

Both strategies can win the game while barely interacting with the opponent, often creating that familiar “solo play” experience where one player simply watches the other execute their combo without meaningful points of disruption.

However, there are important differences between the two decks that are worth recognizing.

One-Land Spy didn’t suddenly appear because of a single broken card. It slowly became viable as the card pool expanded, especially with the rise of one-mana cyclers like [card]Generous Ent[/card] and [card]Troll of Khazad-dûm[/card], along with cheap land tutors such as [card]Sagu Wildling[/card]. 

[cards]{{Generous Ent}}{{Troll of Khazad-dûm}}{{Sagu Wildling}}[/cards]

These cards allowed the deck to consistently shape its mana and its graveyard while keeping the land count extremely low. In other words, the deck emerged organically from many small printings over time.

Meanwhile, [card]High Tide[/card] is a one-card archetype. The entire deck identity snaps into place the moment that spell is legal. Its presence or absence alone determines whether the archetype exists. So when a single card is the structural keystone, any decision made about that card affects the format immediately and dramatically.

This is why the [card]High Tide[/card] ban was far more straightforward, while One-Land Spy is still under observation rather than banned outright. The two decks may feel similar to play against, but they arrived in the format in fundamentally different ways.

Does This Ban Actually Change the Meta?

In terms of overall power rankings, the ban doesn’t dramatically shift things. The top decks in Pauper are still the same ones that have defined the format for years: Burn, Blue Faeries, and Affinity. If you asked someone in 2023 what the strongest archetypes were and asked the same question today, the answer would barely change. Any deck that rises high enough to challenge those three either ends up banned or eventually proves unable to consistently keep pace.

So while removing [card]High Tide[/card] does help reduce the pressure of a non-interactive combo presence, it doesn’t fundamentally reshape the top of the format. It simply smooths out the experience for players who value interaction and board play.

My personal Opinion

To be honest, life has been hectic lately, and that has naturally slowed down the amount of Pauper content I’ve been able to create. But even during the moments when I did have time, I found myself hesitating before joining a queue. I’d stop and think, “Do I really want to play against [card]High Tide[/card] today?” And more often than not, the answer was no.

Magic has always been my space to unwind, whether online or on Arena, but when simply entering the format feels tiring, it’s a sign that something isn’t working. In that sense, I genuinely believe Pauper is healthier with [card]High Tide[/card] removed. I’m glad the Pauper Format Panel experimented with an unban and allowed real gameplay data to guide the decision. That transparency matters. And yes, even though many of us expected this outcome, the experiment was still meaningful.

With the deck gone, the format feels a bit more inviting again. Not perfect — just more playable.

What Do You Think?

Did you enjoy playing [card]High Tide[/card]?

Was this ban overdue, or unnecessary?

Does this help the format — or just maintain the same top 3 decks we always see?

Drop your thoughts — I’d love to hear how others feel.

Take care, and we will meet again in the next article!