Maybe you have perfect, flawless, can read anything vision. Good for you!
That's not even remotely close to all people, or most people. Some people struggle to read the cards when they're printed in normal size. Which is why we have reminder text. Text that can be reduced, or removed, on cards that have other text. So suggesting a fairly sizeable portion of the new cards here have text boxes made harder to read for zero in-set value. Terrible plan, never do that.
Also Animate Dead is a terrible example because, as an effect today, they'd never print that. Except that, you know, they have to because that's the only way the effect text works now. And Effect text, unlike reminder text, has to be printed as it is. Because it isn't reminder text, which can be removed or truncated as needed. Unless you believe Convoke's reminder text is accurate to how Convoke works. (It isn't.)
Except... that isn’t saying they did that to avoid referencing Commander. The bold is just saying they would be doing it differently.
I read this on the article:
We wouldn't be putting the play-as-commander rules on the cards
I read this on Rowan and Will: "...can be your commander" which is a "play as commander" rule...on the cards.
You see the problem?
I also don't believe on the "there's not enough space" thing. There is space if you are willing to make it. Eternal Masters Animated Dead is 10 lines card. They can simply make slightly smaller characters to make fit just everything (of course there's no infinite space in card, but there's no evidence that Pir didn't get the clause "you can play both Pir and Toothy as Commanders" for space reasons).
And... the merit in that plan is... what exactly? Why do they need to spell that out when it's not relevant for the set? For the Planeswalkers they can't be used as Commanders normally, so that's an entirely different thing.
Aside from the their synergies, will seems decent by himself. The -2 is awesome in EDH and the +2 shuts down generals for a turn cycle.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Avatar by Disappointing Signet Inc
EDH Decks UWB Oloro, Ageless Ascetic's spring of life RUG Animar, Soul of the Elements and friends... lots of them WBG Karador king of two worlds (value and attrition) WRKalemne's Angels BRUG Yidris's Wild Party UWBR Breya's Terrifying Tinker Toys UBRThe Pretender
Or... they could put them here, in the set that is focused on partners and teamwork. They fit the theme. Daretti, aside from being from Fiora, doesn't have anything really to do with the Conspiracy themes. The PW commanders actually fit here, because you're hyper fixating on "These guys can be Commanders" and ignoring the fact that they fit very well with the teamwork and synergy focus of the set. That's the focus. The "can be Commander" bit is just an addition so they actually can be Commanders, something that they can't do without that. Given that they wanted to let the Partners be Commanders this is kind of a necessity. The other Partners don't have that same issue.
So, synergy, utility, parallel? Sounds about right for a set themed around twos.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Card advantage is not the same thing as card draw. Something for 2B cannot be strictly worse than something for BBB or 3BB. If you're taking out Swords to Plowshares for Plummet, you're a fool. Stop doing these things!
Except that they still would have done Partner the way they did. If they wanted to avoid Partner they'd just have made up a new term for it. But they wanted it to work for Commander, they just didn't need to reference it in the text.
And if your playgroup has issues with the Partner Planeswalkers not explaining how they work that's on the playgroup, not on WotC.
As far as my point on Daretti, I was saying that Daretti doesn't fit Conspiracy, so saying he should be offloaded to there doesn't really make sense. He is not an equivalent to the Planeswalker twins, because the twins are mechanically connected to Battlebond, not necessarily the plane (if they even are from here, which they may not be).
Do we know if these two are fraternal twins, or a married couple, or what? I feel like they're the former, but that raises some questions about planeswalker sparks.
Maybe they share the same soul, and so they share the same spark. Whenever one planeswalks, the other gets dragged along unwillingly. Sibling infighting ensues.
Are people really upset that the word "commander" isn't in the reminder text on Partner With creatures?
Reminder text that forgets to remind you of major functionality is pretty bad reminder text. "Partner" meant something before Battlebond, and they've muddied the waters by now making it sometimes mean that but also mean something different but only putting reminder text for part of it.
...it would had not confuse players with Partner working so wildly differently in this set (there's too much rules baggage...Partners that can be both commanders, partners that can't be commanders, partners that have a totally different meaning yet still tied with the original Partner ability, Partners cards on Planeswalkers Commanders without even explaining the whole "target player search library" on card text, etc.)
If they wanted to avoid to reference commander on Partner only to "not confuse players" they already failed hard at that before the set is even out.
Yeah, we've got non-legendary partners now that can't be your commander but can search each other out, plus legendary ones that remind you they can search each other out but forget to say they can be partnered in the command zone, not to mention planeswalkers that are randomly allowed to be commanders and also have partner. This may be the messiest keyword I've seen, as it doesn't have the same definition in all instances and has deviated from its original meaning by a fair amount. If they had only applied "Partner with" to legendary creatures and planeswalkers, it would have been okay, as it would have retained the original definition and expanded upon it. But putting it on non-legendaries actually eliminates the original definition, causing the expansion to become a replacement, except only in some cases.
So they did Partner CPWs, in a form. Does this mean C18 could very likely have CPWs with straight-up Partner? That would be sweet.
If Chandra and Gideon appear in a Western setting, maybe they could get "Partners with Chandra/Gideon"? A Western setting could be the basis for a future Battlebond-esque set, as the 2HG format goes hand-in-hand with the idea of Western duos like "Sheriff and Deputy" or "Bonnie and Clyde".
MTGS Wikia Article about "New World Order"
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
PSA to everyone who keeps forgetting about the Reserved List:
You're on a website dedicated to talking about MtG. You're only a few keystrokes away from finding out what cards are on the Reserved List. You're also only a few keystrokes away from finding out why some cards on the Reserved List got foil printings in FtV, as Judge promos, or whatnot, as well as why that won't happen again. Stop doing this.
1. Except that they didn't say they were excluding Commander purposely. The decision to use Partner in particular seems to indicate the opposite, they were keeping Commander in mind when designing these cards, because it allows them to be used as Commanders as a pair. All they said is they wouldn't include it on the cards, that's it. Unless there is something else you're referencing, what you're linking doesn't include any reasoning on why they did that, just that they chose not to do it.
2. They aren't confusing at all though. And if Battlebond lives or dies based on the inclusion of two Legendary Planeswalker Partners then there are a lot more issues going on than Will/Rowan.
3. Given that Daretti was designed as a card prior to being a Planeswalker you're getting cause and effect mixed up as well. They said that for the Planeswalkers for Commander they designed the cards first, and then looked for Planeswalkers that could fit that theme. They didn't choose Daretti and then build him in. Which is why he wasn't in Conspiracy.
4. You keep missing the point I'm making. The Planeswalkers fit Battlebond. They do not fit in Commander, at least not to the extent they fit in Battlebond. Being Planeswalker Commanders does not trump the synergy/teamwork theme, at least not to me, and presumably WotC.
There's a lot to unpack here, so let's just go through it one by one. You see, you're counting lines, not words, not characters. There is a very large difference between several quick to parse out lines of text and a giant block of continuous text without line spacing under it to help separate out the words. I know this is complicated, but stick with me. In silver boarder the joke is a part of the card, so ignoring rules, procedures, and important details to add to the joke is more than acceptable. Thus the high word density in Bureaucracy, Rules Lawyer, and Calcutron. In normal cards, with normal effects, it's different. Which is why the number of characters, and number of words, matters much more than number of lines. To wit, Odric, Lunarch Marchall is a little more difficult to read than Collective Defiance even if the latter has more words, characters, and lines. Just to put this all into perspective between your cards listed, and the cards I added to help illustrate the point. We have Temur Charm at a lowly 42 words, 231 characters, hardly a good example for a wordy card. Odric, Lunarch Marshall is a full textbox at normal print text with 43 words, 279 characters. Collective Effort (46 words, 270 characters), Mardu Charm (50 words, 277 characters), and Collective Defiance (52 words, 293 characters) seem full but really none of that is stretching the textbox or readability with all the dead space between lines. About the only reason any charms are readable is they aren't a solid block of text. Pir, Imaginative Rascal sits at 55 words, 323 characters for comparison (remember that). Collective Brutality (61 words, 326 characters) starts getting a bit wordy due to how its extra effects are paid for. Pir, Imaginative Rascal moves up 66 words, 387 characters if we add the Commander rules to its reminder text, which is stretching readability. But if you think Animate Dead is just fine with its 68 words, 444 characters, you have a weird sense of what's acceptable to get someone to read at a table, with every competitive, and casual, game mode carrying a time limit, for what is an acceptable block of text for someone to read cold. Now for your nonsensical examples of Uncards, The Grand Calcutron is pretty even with Animate dead at 81 words, 462 characters, but as there are more linebreaks it reads easier. Rules Lawyer (110 words, 645 characters) and Bureaucracy (127 words, 760 characters) are specifically over the top complicated due to what they do and how they do them. This is why they can make Planeswalkers fairly readable, due to the design of them already separating out effects. Which means four effect Chandra (66 words, 353 characters) and Jace (70 words, 375 characters) still don't feel as hard to read as Animate Dead. Although, if you really wanted to get me, you could have pointed at Will for having more characters and words than Animate Dead. It probably didn't feel that way because they increased the text box on Will and Rowan though (like Chandra and Jace before). To end, none of that matters as reminder text needs to be immediately functional more than it needs to be accurate, they try to keep reminder text the same (barring fill in the blank cardnames, card types, or card subtypes) among all cards in the set with that version of the text, such as Obelisk of Urd including creatures tapping for color mana. And there are non-legendary Partner with creatures who can't be your commander. So the text can't appear on those creatures. But if you're playing Commander you already have a strong understanding of how complicated the games rules can get, so this sort of interaction shouldn't be that hard.
There's a lot to unpack here, so let's just go through it one by one.
You see, you're counting lines, not words, not characters. There is a very large difference between several quick to parse out lines of text and a giant block of continuous text without line spacing under it to help separate out the words. I know this is complicated, but stick with me. In silver boarder the joke is a part of the card, so ignoring rules, procedures, and important details to add to the joke is more than acceptable. Thus the high word density in Bureaucracy, Rules Lawyer, and Calcutron. In normal cards, with normal effects, it's different. Which is why the number of characters, and number of words, matters much more than number of lines.
To wit, Odric, Lunarch Marchall is a little more difficult to read than Collective Defiance even if the latter has more words, characters, and lines. Just to put this all into perspective between your cards listed, and the cards I added to help illustrate the point. We have:
Temur Charm at a lowly 42 words, 231 characters, hardly a good example for a wordy card.
Odric, Lunarch Marshall is a full textbox at normal print text with 43 words, 279 characters.
Collective Effort (46 words, 270 characters), Mardu Charm (50 words, 277 characters), and Collective Defiance (52 words, 293 characters) seem full but really none of that is stretching the textbox or readability with all the dead space between lines. About the only reason any charms are readable is they aren't a solid block of text.
Pir, Imaginative Rascal sits at 55 words, 323 characters for comparison (remember that).
Collective Brutality (61 words, 326 characters) starts getting a bit wordy due to how its extra effects are paid for.
Pir, Imaginative Rascal moves up 66 words, 387 characters if we add the Commander rules to its reminder text, which is stretching readability.
But if you think Animate Dead is just fine with its 68 words, 444 characters, you have a weird sense of what's acceptable to get someone to read at a table, with every competitive, and casual, game mode carrying a time limit, for what is an acceptable block of text for someone to read cold.
Now for your nonsensical examples of Uncards, The Grand Calcutron is pretty even with Animate dead at 81 words, 462 characters, but as there are more linebreaks it reads easier. Rules Lawyer (110 words, 645 characters) and Bureaucracy (127 words, 760 characters) are specifically over the top complicated due to what they do and how they do them. This is why they can make Planeswalkers fairly readable, due to the design of them already separating out effects. Which means four effect Chandra (66 words, 353 characters) and Jace (70 words, 375 characters) still don't feel as hard to read as Animate Dead. Although, if you really wanted to get me, you could have pointed at Will for having more characters and words than Animate Dead. It probably didn't feel that way because they increased the text box on Will and Rowan though (like Chandra and Jace before).
To end, none of that matters as reminder text needs to be immediately functional more than it needs to be accurate, they try to keep reminder text the same (barring fill in the blank cardnames, card types, or card subtypes) among all cards in the set with that version of the text, such as Obelisk of Urd including creatures tapping for color mana.
And there are non-legendary Partner with creatures who can't be your commander. So the text can't appear on those creatures. But if you're playing Commander you already have a strong understanding of how complicated the games rules can get, so this sort of interaction shouldn't be that hard.
(Wasn't this version easier to read than the one outside the spoiler.)
I just want to remind people of a couple Key differences in the "Partner with...." mechanic
(1) There is NO searching of the library. The card is put in hand from the library. No searching.
(2) Target Player may put card from library to hand Not just You. Could be your teammate, enemy (if you wanted) or political ally in a multiplayer game.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Been a member here for over a dozen years. Playing since '95 just got lost in the twitch shuffle.
I just want to remind people of a couple Key differences in the "Partner with...." mechanic
(1) There is NO searching of the library. The card is put in hand from the library. No searching.
(2) Target Player may put card from library to hand Not just You. Could be your teammate, enemy (if you wanted) or political ally in a multiplayer game.
From the official mechanics article:
Specifically, when one of them enters the battlefield, target player may search their library for the other, reveal it, put it into their hand, and shuffle their library. (Note that the reminder text summarizes this for brevity, but it is a standard search and shuffle.)
Arkham, the 1920's. Investigators battle horrors from beyond time and space, risking life and sanity while conspiracies of cultists and malign servitors seek gateways for their outer gods to return...
Soon, the stars will be right! Great Cthulhu shall rise!
In b4 old Vorthos saying that the chance of sibling being walkers is basically 0...
Honestly I’m more annoyed, that they are humans again, we have a new creature type Azra (they look a bit like tieflings to be honest) which we may never see again, like the Khenras from Amonkhet. Wizards always fails to give those special species a planeswalker card when we visit their world, honestly Samut and Djeru as Khenras would have been so much better.
Still I like those two, at least Will looks a bit like a cryomancer with the sword.
Perhaps we'll see an Azra show up on a different Plane, like Tamiyo. In WotC's defense I counted 18 different species of planeswalkers on Gatherer (19 if you count Ugin as a Spirit).
I just want to remind people of a couple Key differences in the "Partner with...." mechanic
(1) There is NO searching of the library. The card is put in hand from the library. No searching.
This is wrong
Quote from WotC »
Each of them has the new ability partner with [the other]. That ability means two things. First, they'll come to each other's aid. Specifically, when one of them enters the battlefield, target player may search their library for the other, reveal it, put it into their hand, and shuffle their library. (Note that the reminder text summarizes this for brevity, but it is a standard search and shuffle.)
Edit: SUPER NINJA'D guess that's what I get for citing sources
I just want to remind people of a couple Key differences in the "Partner with...." mechanic
(1) There is NO searching of the library. The card is put in hand from the library. No searching.
(2) Target Player may put card from library to hand Not just You. Could be your teammate, enemy (if you wanted) or political ally in a multiplayer game.
From the official mechanics article:
Specifically, when one of them enters the battlefield, target player may search their library for the other, reveal it, put it into their hand, and shuffle their library. (Note that the reminder text summarizes this for brevity, but it is a standard search and shuffle.)
Each of them has the new ability partner with [the other]. That ability means two things. First, they'll come to each other's aid. Specifically, when one of them enters the battlefield, target player may search their library for the other, reveal it, put it into their hand, and shuffle their library. (Note that the reminder text summarizes this for brevity, but it is a standard search and shuffle.)
Edit: SUPER NINJA'D guess that's what I get for citing sources[/quote]
Well there yougo WOTC, just make things more confusing. Brevity is a stupid reason to omit the word SEARCH. I mean c'mon. This is a cluster****
How dare WOTC hit two birds with one stone to make more people happy, and make these cards viable in an eternal format. How dare they apply a heavily requested and popular mechanic we've been clamoring to see again and requesting to have outside of Commander products. How dare they oblige all these requests.
1. Because it's not an iron clad rule. Boom, done. Now explain why it has to be an iron clad rule when it's a self-created one.
2. Yes, and that matters with regards to the end result because... why exactly? They started in one area and ended up in another. Presumably to make it better for Commander, as otherwise there doesn't seem to be much reason for it.
3. Except... they aren't. People being confused by something is not the same thing as something being confusing. There are any number of things that people can find confusing, that doesn't mean that the subject broadly is confusing. I've seen limited complaints on this, mostly from you and a couple others. Most don't seem to have much confusion on the matter.
4. And... they changed their mind on that. Maybe now the rule is supplemental products. I expect someone will ask Maro and he will clarify on it. Or maybe Battlebond counts for the purposes of a Commander product even if Commander isn't in the title.
5. You cut an important qualifier of my text, which was "as much as they do in Battlebond". Commander is not a game about teamwork. It has politics, but not teams of people working together for the entire match. You want to know what set focuses on teams of people? Battlebond. You want to know what the Planeswalkers are doing? Working together.
6. See 1. The premise is not an ironclad rule, plain and simple, and you haven't given any reason why it should be except that it upsets you for ill-defined reasons. Your personal feelings on the matter do not mean that the cards should not exist here.
Basically? You're making a big fuss about something that really, really doesn't matter, for the sake of... nothing. There is zero merit, zero gain in pushing them off to take up slots in the Planeswalker decks in Commander. Those slots are actually important because they also give the chance to visit old Planeswalkers that don't exist. If they took out Serra and replaced her with the twins you know people would gripe. Or other Planeswalker concepts that work better in Commander. Here? They fit perfectly for Battlebond. If the new gimmick was 2HG Commander you'd have a better argument.
Well there yougo WOTC, just make things more confusing. Brevity is a stupid reason to omit the word SEARCH. I mean c'mon. This is a cluster****
Yep - inaccurate reminder text is bad reminder text. I find the whole execution of "Partner with" to be sadly lacking. It reneges on the original meaning of Partner by putting it on non-legends, it forgets to mention vital functionality on legends, and it fails to use "Search" (a mechanically- and rules-relevant word) when performing a search, all things that will lead to confusion. All of which is a shame, because I actually like the ability.
It's not inaccurate, its unspecific. Do remember that reminder text is plane English (or whatever language it is being printed in) so the concept of putting the card in your hand from your library is actually what is happening.
Lots of abilities in Magic have reminder text that is incomplete for brevity or written out casually instead of in Magic rules text ("Your creatures may help you cast this spell" for example). The difference between the partners-with creatures and the partners-with planeswalkers is that the partners-with creatures have a keyword with reminder text, while the planeswalkers have rules text that's needed for the card to function as intended in Commander. The reminder text doesn't mention commander because Commander isn't relevant in the context where reminder text is most important (ie, to players drafting the set encountering Partner for the first time). Once again, heavily invested EDH players are mad that they weren't catered to in even the smallest details of a card even as a bunch of Commander stuff is being printed.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On average, Magic players are worse at new card evaluation than almost every other skill, except perhaps sideboarding.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
That's not even remotely close to all people, or most people. Some people struggle to read the cards when they're printed in normal size. Which is why we have reminder text. Text that can be reduced, or removed, on cards that have other text. So suggesting a fairly sizeable portion of the new cards here have text boxes made harder to read for zero in-set value. Terrible plan, never do that.
Also Animate Dead is a terrible example because, as an effect today, they'd never print that. Except that, you know, they have to because that's the only way the effect text works now. And Effect text, unlike reminder text, has to be printed as it is. Because it isn't reminder text, which can be removed or truncated as needed. Unless you believe Convoke's reminder text is accurate to how Convoke works. (It isn't.)
And... the merit in that plan is... what exactly? Why do they need to spell that out when it's not relevant for the set? For the Planeswalkers they can't be used as Commanders normally, so that's an entirely different thing.
EDH Decks
UWB Oloro, Ageless Ascetic's spring of life
RUG Animar, Soul of the Elements and friends... lots of them
WBG Karador king of two worlds (value and attrition)
WRKalemne's Angels
BRUG Yidris's Wild Party
UWBR Breya's Terrifying Tinker Toys
UBR The Pretender
On phasing:
And if your playgroup has issues with the Partner Planeswalkers not explaining how they work that's on the playgroup, not on WotC.
As far as my point on Daretti, I was saying that Daretti doesn't fit Conspiracy, so saying he should be offloaded to there doesn't really make sense. He is not an equivalent to the Planeswalker twins, because the twins are mechanically connected to Battlebond, not necessarily the plane (if they even are from here, which they may not be).
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
2023 Average Peasant Cube|and Discussion
Because I have more decks than fit in a signature
Useful Resources:
MTGSalvation tags
EDHREC
ManabaseCrafter
If Chandra and Gideon appear in a Western setting, maybe they could get "Partners with Chandra/Gideon"? A Western setting could be the basis for a future Battlebond-esque set, as the 2HG format goes hand-in-hand with the idea of Western duos like "Sheriff and Deputy" or "Bonnie and Clyde".
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
2. They aren't confusing at all though. And if Battlebond lives or dies based on the inclusion of two Legendary Planeswalker Partners then there are a lot more issues going on than Will/Rowan.
3. Given that Daretti was designed as a card prior to being a Planeswalker you're getting cause and effect mixed up as well. They said that for the Planeswalkers for Commander they designed the cards first, and then looked for Planeswalkers that could fit that theme. They didn't choose Daretti and then build him in. Which is why he wasn't in Conspiracy.
4. You keep missing the point I'm making. The Planeswalkers fit Battlebond. They do not fit in Commander, at least not to the extent they fit in Battlebond. Being Planeswalker Commanders does not trump the synergy/teamwork theme, at least not to me, and presumably WotC.
You see, you're counting lines, not words, not characters. There is a very large difference between several quick to parse out lines of text and a giant block of continuous text without line spacing under it to help separate out the words. I know this is complicated, but stick with me. In silver boarder the joke is a part of the card, so ignoring rules, procedures, and important details to add to the joke is more than acceptable. Thus the high word density in Bureaucracy, Rules Lawyer, and Calcutron. In normal cards, with normal effects, it's different. Which is why the number of characters, and number of words, matters much more than number of lines.
To wit, Odric, Lunarch Marchall is a little more difficult to read than Collective Defiance even if the latter has more words, characters, and lines. Just to put this all into perspective between your cards listed, and the cards I added to help illustrate the point. We have:
To end, none of that matters as reminder text needs to be immediately functional more than it needs to be accurate, they try to keep reminder text the same (barring fill in the blank cardnames, card types, or card subtypes) among all cards in the set with that version of the text, such as Obelisk of Urd including creatures tapping for color mana.
And there are non-legendary Partner with creatures who can't be your commander. So the text can't appear on those creatures. But if you're playing Commander you already have a strong understanding of how complicated the games rules can get, so this sort of interaction shouldn't be that hard.
(Wasn't this version easier to read than the one outside the spoiler.)
(1) There is NO searching of the library. The card is put in hand from the library. No searching.
(2) Target Player may put card from library to hand Not just You. Could be your teammate, enemy (if you wanted) or political ally in a multiplayer game.
2023 Average Peasant Cube|and Discussion
Because I have more decks than fit in a signature
Useful Resources:
MTGSalvation tags
EDHREC
ManabaseCrafter
https://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/magic-fundamentals/the-rumor-mill/792943-battlebond-packaging
• Call of Cthulhu CCG Servitor for the Netherlands!
Arkham, the 1920's. Investigators battle horrors from beyond time and space, risking life and sanity while conspiracies of cultists and malign servitors seek gateways for their outer gods to return...
Soon, the stars will be right! Great Cthulhu shall rise!
It is searching, according to the rules article. The fact that the keyword skips the word "search" for brevity is part of the point of the complains.
This is wrong
Edit: SUPER NINJA'D guess that's what I get for citing sources
This is wrong
Edit: SUPER NINJA'D guess that's what I get for citing sources[/quote]
Well there yougo WOTC, just make things more confusing. Brevity is a stupid reason to omit the word SEARCH. I mean c'mon. This is a cluster****
|| UW Jace, Vyn's Prodigy UW || UG Kenessos, Priest of Thassa (feat. Arixmethes) UG ||
Cards I still want to see created:
|| Olantin, Lost City || Pavios and Thanasis || Choryu ||
2. Yes, and that matters with regards to the end result because... why exactly? They started in one area and ended up in another. Presumably to make it better for Commander, as otherwise there doesn't seem to be much reason for it.
3. Except... they aren't. People being confused by something is not the same thing as something being confusing. There are any number of things that people can find confusing, that doesn't mean that the subject broadly is confusing. I've seen limited complaints on this, mostly from you and a couple others. Most don't seem to have much confusion on the matter.
4. And... they changed their mind on that. Maybe now the rule is supplemental products. I expect someone will ask Maro and he will clarify on it. Or maybe Battlebond counts for the purposes of a Commander product even if Commander isn't in the title.
5. You cut an important qualifier of my text, which was "as much as they do in Battlebond". Commander is not a game about teamwork. It has politics, but not teams of people working together for the entire match. You want to know what set focuses on teams of people? Battlebond. You want to know what the Planeswalkers are doing? Working together.
6. See 1. The premise is not an ironclad rule, plain and simple, and you haven't given any reason why it should be except that it upsets you for ill-defined reasons. Your personal feelings on the matter do not mean that the cards should not exist here.
Basically? You're making a big fuss about something that really, really doesn't matter, for the sake of... nothing. There is zero merit, zero gain in pushing them off to take up slots in the Planeswalker decks in Commander. Those slots are actually important because they also give the chance to visit old Planeswalkers that don't exist. If they took out Serra and replaced her with the twins you know people would gripe. Or other Planeswalker concepts that work better in Commander. Here? They fit perfectly for Battlebond. If the new gimmick was 2HG Commander you'd have a better argument.
2023 Average Peasant Cube|and Discussion
Because I have more decks than fit in a signature
Useful Resources:
MTGSalvation tags
EDHREC
ManabaseCrafter