Bar the Gate
Enchantment (R)
When this enchantment enters the battlefield, exile each creature you control.
Whenever a player casts a creature spell, exile it.
When this enchantment leaves the battlefield, put all creature cards exiled with it onto the battlefield.
When this enchantment has 6 or more creature cards exiled with it, sacrifice it.

9 seems like so much for an effect that, often, will be worse than Wrath. like, it shouldn't cost 4, since it can also be used proactively, but I don't know if it's playable at 6.

I don't think the creature spell lockout effect would be printable at any mana value, no matter how many safety valves you put on it (color intensive cost, high mana value, self-sweeping, leaving the battlefield "refund" and a way for it to leave the battlefield by itself) because against aggro decks it locks them out for at least 6 turns of doing combat things once they are in top deck and after a board wipe, and control would need to have a maindeck answer for a noncreature permanent available or they won't be able to win with a creature finisher. The only way to really balance it is make it difficult to play in the first place, but at that point it just encourages "unfair" uses via cheating it into play somehow.

That said, I actually like the core concept behind that single ability, and the flavor seems pretty fitting also. It is just if it in a format with relatively efficient creature removal/sweepers, it enables a one-sided game state against a majority of archetypes.

I mean, Portcullis is a card. This is a Portcullis that wraths YOU when it comes in and eventually self-disposes

Considering Portcullis is the only card with an effect like this, has no reprints, and has been a part of players' potential collections since before Odyssey block (which is the earliest block I'm aware of that took place before the multiverse was explored past Dominaria but also after other characters like Kamahl started getting more spotlight), I don't think printability is feasible.

Portcullis is much worse, holy wow. If you are even a little ahead on board and have 4 mana while your opponent has no Shatter, it just wins the game. Which was worse than benchmarks at the time when Armageddons ran rampant.

If you cheat a 9 mana enchantment into play or ramp into it, while wrathing your board, and survive the resulting onslaught, you deserve to win with a funny stax effect I think

We are really missing a trick by not printing trolly effects at egregious costs. If it's hard enough to pull off it's more impressive than oppressive

I know what you mean; I believe the posterchild for that is Phage the Untouchable, whose safety valve is conceding in mechanical form.

Seems like Wizards has moved away from those designs over the years sadly; I actually can't think of recent designs that were designed with both Johnny and Timmy psychographic profiles in mind.

Counterpoint, Portcullis is a card that's existed for ages and is relevant in no formats. My memory of Rath Cycle's time in Type 2 is hazy, but I'm not sure it ever was. Ditto Lethal Vapors which has a lot of the same principle. Part of that is probably because you still get the ETBs of creatures that get locked up (on the first hit, and of course again on the second) but it still suggests to me that Bar is far from unprintable. True, it's been a hot minute since we've gotten this exact sort of effect but oppressive cards like Drannith Magistrate (well after Wizards began designing around Commander) and Elesh Norn, Mother of Machines or Jin-Gitaxias, Progress Tyrant are more recent. The Praetors in particular suggest to me that the big scary shutdown isn't all the dead.

I also want to gush about Disciple of Caleus Nin but she's not really the same since there's no inherent forward-screwage there.

While I agree that Lethal Vapors and Portcullis relevancy in type 2 is lost to history, any card cannot have it's type 2/standard relevancy measured based on its current relevance in Legacy/Vintage because of 25+ years of game design changes.

For example, I don't believe Psychatog sees any play currently, but it was a major threat to consider when it was first introduced. Same with Replenish during Urza's Saga block.

There is even a more reliable/more powerful hard lock in Vintage courtesy of Tezzeret the Seeker and his interaction with Time Vault.

As far as the cards you linked (with the exception of the last one not working properly), they actually have weaker effects than vapors or Portcullis, even if they only affect the opponent. Mom doesnt prevent creatures from entering, just from them entering triggering abilities. Jin 2.0 only counters one spell each turn, and only affects creature spells if they are also artifact spells. And Magistrate doesn't do anything if the opponent is casting spells from their hand.

Not that these effects aren't powerful or meta-defining because obviously they have proven themselves to be that; my point is that Portcullis/vapors are even moreso and are only held back by a combination of affecting everyone and having ways to either allow players to undo the impact they had (Portcullis leaves effect) or allow players to immediately remove it before it has an impact (Vapors really steep turn-skipping cost). One could also include Moat/Magus of the Moat to a lesser extent.

... Now that I wrote that out, I feel like I'm not articulating my argument effectively here. My point is that creatures and combat are fundamental to most archetypes win conditions and as a consequence are also often crucial for preventing loss conditions in a given meta (by that I mean if the opponent wins, you lose). By outright preventing all players from attacking with creatures, the gameplay of Magic changes at a fundamental level in that moment. The cards themselves may not be overwhelmingly powerful themselves, and may even be weak relative to a given meta, but my point was never about playability but about printability, and part of being printable is if it would lead to a positive experience for both the player using such effects and their opponents.

Judging cards on the basis of printability is like judging politicians on the basis of electability or judging safety on the basis of feeling safe.

Yeah, sure, WotC is never printing this. They're also never printing potentially untapped dual lands at uncommon, which doesn't make it a sensible decision.

I guess what I mean by printability is "does it provide a positive impact on the experience Magic: the Gathering promises?" If a card design goes contrary to that, it is less likely to be printed than one that does since, at the end of the day, WotC is an established company trying to make money by selling a product, and an effective long-term strategy in that regard is to ensure the product they are selling maintains consistent and desirable quality. At least how I would imagine a business model would work; not an economist after all.

Much like with politicians and safety policies, however, recent trends in printed card designs make me question the "consistent" part of that equation (e.g. yet another timeline reset; Universes Beyond being more prominent, etc.), so I can see your point to an extent.

idk if blue provides a positive impact on the experience mtg promises but idk if that makes it unprintable