Shouldn't ease of "discovering" the combo play a factor? Untap effects to go with TV or extra turn cards for PM aren't exactly a hidden thing, but a HD combo wasn't readily apparent until Lab Maniac was printed. Even instawin Gifts or Hulk combos are harder to spot without putting some effort into.
But in the days of the internet how hard is any combo to find?
Way back when in the 1990's, my brothers and I had a hard time figuring out Mortal Kombat character moves, but now with the internet being what it currently is we could look up 75% combos within the first week of Mortal Kombat 9 being out.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Oath of the Gatewatch; the set that caused the competitive community to freak out over Basic Lands.
I don't think ease or difficulty of assembling a combo is a current factor given that Gifts Ungiven is banned (which takes a Storm deck to truly abuse and win on the spot, but it generally just makes both ends of any two-card combo readily available). Somebody posed an interesting challenge to the thread earlier when questioning the need for Gifts to be banned; what Gifts pile available would end the game on the spot? Most people either glossed over it or tried to shoehorn in something that was ultimately more convoluted and mana intensive than casting Tooth and Nail with Entwine... most people just don't know how to do it or understand how Gifts decks work, but that doesn't mean its not banworthy.
I think that cards that can be abused the way Ad Nauseam, Hermit Druid, and to certain extent Tooth and Nail should be banned. There is nothing really creative, difficult, exciting, or otherwise fun endings to games when these cards are involved. People know how to break these cards and they have to literally go out of their way to not win outright when these cards are used. Even a "fair" use of Ad Nauseam is pretty much game over. Every deck that runs T&N has a game winning combo to go with it and you basically have to go out of your way to not make it an insta-win. And Hermit Druid used "fairly" still dumps tons of cards into your graveyard where they are infinitely more useful than in your deck. When even the "fair" usages of these cards is out of control, I think banning them makes more sense than trying to argue that people have to go out of their way to break them... because if you really think about it, they really don't.
Anyway, the best way to avoid these kinds of traps in your games is to just avoid the problematic cards, but if these kinds of cards are problematic no matter if your "meta" is casual/social or competitive/cutthroat then I say ban them and be done with it.
Tooth and Nail (and Defense of the Heart cannot win the game on the spot in a deck that does not include Black (Mikaeus) or Red (Kiki). There are quite a lot of Green decks that just use it to grab big dudes, or strong utility creatures.
Hermit Druid used to self-mill and guarantee land drops isn't broken at all. There are plenty of cards that do either of those things much better than Druid does. He is only broken in a single deck that practically nobody plays except online. Calling for him to be banned is pretty much the stupidest thing, because the number of games where that single deck is even played in is probably less than the number of games where someone wins with a turn one Helmet/Leyline combo or whatever the hell else.
Ad Nauseam I don't really give a damn about either way because it's a pretty mediocre card.
A few weeks ago someone stuck both a seedborn and prophet and proceeded to ruin the game. I mentioned how awesome it would be if someone played balance.
The entire table, even the guy vomiting cards all over us with his two untap phases on opponents turns, agreed.
Being able to soft reset games, I think, is somewhat healthy. I get the low CMC of balance being a huge issue and how ab usable it is when built around (like 344647564376547 other cards), but being able to bait out counters and still have enough to play a reset against a run away board state can be a huge plus.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The EDH stax primer When you absolutely, positively got to kill every permanent in the room, accept no substitutes.
Have you noticed that Metalworker is only at 15%? At first I thought that perhaps it is because it wasn't initially in the list, but Time Vault got added even later and is at almost 50%.
Dude, that's what I've been saying FOREVER.
Try it out. It's not quite the busted card people think it is. I've tested it in Karn (arguably the deck that stands to abuse it the most) for well over an entire year with multiple groups in the DC area - It's usually not the scariest card on the table. It's really no worse than Rofellos (or even Mycosynth Golem in my build).
EDIT: I don't even run the card anymore. I gave it plenty of time to show me how good it is - and it's a great card. But when it goes "too much too fast", there's not much you'll be able to do with it that can directly end the game other than Blightsteel or a very early combo.
Nowadays, I'm running Chaos Orb as a proxy for Perilous Vault and letting the crew decide which card they'd rather have it be when I cast it for 4. Crowd wisdom usually dictates that they prefer it be the Orb.
Shouldn't ease of "discovering" the combo play a factor? Untap effects to go with TV or extra turn cards for PM aren't exactly a hidden thing, but a HD combo wasn't readily apparent until Lab Maniac was printed. Even instawin Gifts or Hulk combos are harder to spot without putting some effort into.
But in the days of the internet how hard is any combo to find?
Way back when in the 1990's, my brothers and I had a hard time figuring out Mortal Kombat character moves, but now with the internet being what it currently is we could look up 75% combos within the first week of Mortal Kombat 9 being out.
You say this because you are invested enough in the game that you not only read, but post on an internet forum daily. The majority of players do not troll forums daily, or even use Gatherer when building a deck. So while I agree with you that it may not be hard to find, that does not necessarily mean that everyone will know it. (Blackjack is another perfect example - the charts and formulas are free online and a casino won't even stop you from taking them to a table, but the minority of people who sit down at a table are ignorant of these methods.)
* I base this on a combination of what I've seen, heard from other posters, and the RC.
I don't think ease or difficulty of assembling a combo is a current factor given that Gifts Ungiven is banned (which takes a Storm deck to truly abuse and win on the spot, but it generally just makes both ends of any two-card combo readily available). Somebody posed an interesting challenge to the thread earlier when questioning the need for Gifts to be banned; what Gifts pile available would end the game on the spot? Most people either glossed over it or tried to shoehorn in something that was ultimately more convoluted and mana intensive than casting Tooth and Nail with Entwine... most people just don't know how to do it or understand how Gifts decks work, but that doesn't mean its not banworthy.
I think that cards that can be abused the way Ad Nauseam, Hermit Druid, and to certain extent Tooth and Nail should be banned. There is nothing really creative, difficult, exciting, or otherwise fun endings to games when these cards are involved. People know how to break these cards and they have to literally go out of their way to not win outright when these cards are used. Even a "fair" use of Ad Nauseam is pretty much game over. Every deck that runs T&N has a game winning combo to go with it and you basically have to go out of your way to not make it an insta-win. And Hermit Druid used "fairly" still dumps tons of cards into your graveyard where they are infinitely more useful than in your deck. When even the "fair" usages of these cards is out of control, I think banning them makes more sense than trying to argue that people have to go out of their way to break them... because if you really think about it, they really don't.
Anyway, the best way to avoid these kinds of traps in your games is to just avoid the problematic cards, but if these kinds of cards are problematic no matter if your "meta" is casual/social or competitive/cutthroat then I say ban them and be done with it.
I'm not saying that ease should be the only criteria, because then I would totally advocate for T&N, Mike&Trike, etc. There are other factors to consider: fair use, impact on the game, power level, etc.
Shouldn't ease of "discovering" the combo play a factor? Untap effects to go with TV or extra turn cards for PM aren't exactly a hidden thing, but a HD combo wasn't readily apparent until Lab Maniac was printed. Even instawin Gifts or Hulk combos are harder to spot without putting some effort into.
But in the days of the internet how hard is any combo to find?
Way back when in the 1990's, my brothers and I had a hard time figuring out Mortal Kombat character moves, but now with the internet being what it currently is we could look up 75% combos within the first week of Mortal Kombat 9 being out.
You say this because you are invested enough in the game that you not only read, but post on an internet forum daily. The majority of players do not troll forums daily, or even use Gatherer when building a deck. So while I agree with you that it may not be hard to find, that does not necessarily mean that everyone will know it. (Blackjack is another perfect example - the charts and formulas are free online and a casino won't even stop you from taking them to a table, but the minority of people who sit down at a table are ignorant of these methods.)
* I base this on a combination of what I've seen, heard from other posters, and the RC.
Point taken.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Oath of the Gatewatch; the set that caused the competitive community to freak out over Basic Lands.
Yeah, I think what gets lost in the noise is that power level and game impact are what create a situation where only a ban will work. Sure, altogether different criteria might lead to a ban. If people groan enough about Primeval Titan, go ahead and ban it, even though there are thousands of options both active and reactive to deal with it. Likewise if Tooth and Nail is not as overplayed as that, but can still be used to win games, might as well leave it unbanned because it's easily dealt with. At least one guy, run counterspells. You should be able to hit one by the time the Green player is on 9 mana, ffs. Laying down the absurd criteria of any single card that can be used to instantly win the game is just going to dilute the real issues.
It's the cards, whether they're played once in a hundred games or once in a thousand, that you just can't beat no matter what you do that should be banned.
Another thing, maybe this poll should lay to rest the idea that you can and should get your playgroup on board with house bans. As noted, there's a strong bias toward current RC no-bans. So even if you were the one showing up with busted Turn 4 combo decks with Vintage tutors, chances are high no one would step up to discuss with you the need to ban some of these cards. Much less the guy across from you who's the one showing up with a busted deck. That guy will argue all night and not change a single card. If it's not on the list, people sensibly presume a right to hold others to have to deal with it. People trust the RC's no-ban as official word that it's not broken, when in fact unknown to them in recondite areas of the internet, they've come out and said the opposite. Like I've been saying for a while, the card by card banlist is the only RC statement 90% of EDH players ever hear. Right now, it's telling them lies.
No, it really isn't telling them lies. "Broken" doesn't mean anything in this game, because this is a game about doing broken things. Cards do not get banned for being broken, and it is blatantly stated that that is the case.
What you apparently want out of a banlist for this format is not what most other people want. Tutors do not cause problems for people that aren't playing in mostly-competitive groups.
Even a "fair" use of Ad Nauseam is pretty much game over.
This is hardly true. A fair use of Ad Nauseam is drawing like 7-10 cards, which doesn't just end the game. I have come back to win against plenty of fair Ad Nauseams.
Every deck that runs T&N has a game winning combo to go with it and you basically have to go out of your way to not make it an insta-win.
This is also definitely not true. Multiple players in my group use Tooth and Nail and don't search up infinite combos. They may often use it get win conditions, but not combos.
And Hermit Druid used "fairly" still dumps tons of cards into your graveyard where they are infinitely more useful than in your deck.
This statement is true, but that doesn't make it broken.
When even the "fair" usages of these cards is out of control, I think banning them makes more sense than trying to argue that people have to go out of their way to break them... because if you really think about it, they really don't.
Except that they do. You don't accidentally put in zero basic lands or all cards with CMC 2 or less. If you are planning to use the cards in a degenerate manner, you will be able to. If not, it won't be a problem. I remember when I first got a Tooth and Nail for my Mayael deck. I thought it was the best thing ever and I didn't even consider using it for infinite combos. I just wanted to search up two huge fatties and slam them into play.
Although I'm not advocating for its ban, in my opinion Tooth and Nail is the type of card the Rules Committee is concerned by. It is a giant splashy spell that that has a big effect. A newer player looks at it and gets excited because they can drop two fatties in play (as DTrain said). But after a while you quickly see that its pretty easy to tutor up your creature combo or even include one just because of the card.
As I said, I'm not saying it should be banned, but it reminds me of the reasoning behind the Hulk ban.
Although I'm not advocating for its ban, in my opinion Tooth and Nail is the type of card the Rules Committee is concerned by. It is a giant splashy spell that that has a big effect. A newer player looks at it and gets excited because they can drop two fatties in play (as DTrain said). But after a while you quickly see that its pretty easy to tutor up your creature combo or even include one just because of the card.
As I said, I'm not saying it should be banned, but it reminds me of the reasoning behind the Hulk ban.
I'm more of the opinion that Hulk should be unbanned, since it's at least a little bit harder to pull of combos with. You can just immediately see any two creature combo and throw it in with Hulk. You need to plan out the CMCs and probably use some kind of reanimation chain to actually get all the pieces you need. Hulk is more abusable because of all the ways to cheat creatures into play, but I also think it's less likely to "accidentally" ruin a game.
A while back, we did some local (highly unscientific) testing with a few of us regulars simply adding Protean Hulk to our green decks. The agreement was that we would not add any other cards or modify the deck in any other way--just to see what would happen if it were slipped in (and most of us play tutor-free). The results (again, highly unscientific) were unanimous: keep it banned. Whether it was that the decks were already designed to do what PH simply did more of (like decks with black and reanimation and/or with white and Karmic Guide, Reveillark, or Saffi Eriksdottir, it was clear that PH broke games by its mere presence.
A while back, we did some local (highly unscientific) testing with a few of us regulars simply adding Protean Hulk to our green decks. The agreement was that we would not add any other cards or modify the deck in any other way--just to see what would happen if it were slipped in (and most of us play tutor-free). The results (again, highly unscientific) were unanimous: keep it banned. Whether it was that the decks were already designed to do what PH simply did more of (like decks with black and reanimation and/or with white and Karmic Guide, Reveillark, or Saffi Eriksdottir, it was clear that PH broke games by its mere presence.
Honest question: Are there substantive and/or common scenarios where Recurring Nightmare is markedly better than Corpse Dance or vice versa? Are they basically the same thing ~90% of the time? Is the increased cost of Dance offset by the need for a second creature for Nightmare? As I've said before I don't really use or care much about either of them ban-wise but the comparisons I've seen between them make me curious.
Another update on the current results for the poll:
Anything marked "Barely Missed" was <1% short of the next category, anything marked "Barely" was only in its category by <1%
Coalition Victory
Emrakul
Falling Star (Barely Missed)
Fastbond
Griselbrand
Karakas
Library of Alexandria
Primeval Titan
Sundering Titan (Barely)
Sway of the Stars
Sylvan Primordial
Time Vault (Barely)
Time Walk
Tinker
Tolarian Academy
Trade Secrets
Upheaval
Worldfire (Barely Missed)
I'm so concerned by some of these results that I don't have a comment on them right now.
Total side note but I like how people are discussing running this over itself.
Well, it has to be said that Kolaghan is clearly better than Kolaghan. Considering what BR decks usually want and how stiff the competition in this guild is, there is no way that I would run Kolaghan over Kolaghan! Kolaghan might make it in as the sixth guild card or so. Kolaghan on the other hand ranks several places below that.
It was so funny to me when they described this as a downgrade to the original Zurgo during the Pax East panel. I was thinking if this is a downgrade, they should really "downgrade" all legendary creatures. Haha.
My deck designing is quite concise at this point:
1. Come up with deck idea
2. Realize this idea is somehow fundamentally similar to another deck I have or that is commonly played in my group
3. Decide I don't want to disassemble one of my existing decks
4. Give up and do nothing
I don't see the point of this new shroud mechanic. It's strictly worse than Hexproof. Threshold is pretty bad too, Delirium is a much better mechanic and probably easier to activate.
Otherwise this card is a pretty neat guy. Dodges removal and grows into a Primal Huntbeast. 3/5
Honest question: Are there substantive and/or common scenarios where Recurring Nightmare is markedly better than Corpse Dance or vice versa? Are they basically the same thing ~90% of the time? Is the increased cost of Dance offset by the need for a second creature for Nightmare? As I've said before I don't really use or care much about either of them ban-wise but the comparisons I've seen between them make me curious.
Are we reading the same cards? One exiles the target EoT....
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
But that only works when you assume the player intends to win in the most optimal way possible. That's just not how the majority of players play, if this was the case, combo would be rampant and this format would basically be vintage. There are a lot of combo enablers in this format, but it's not a dominate force. Sure you have some streamlined decks out there that are vicious, but that's not that majority. The only time I see tooth and nail used as a combo enabler and piss the table off is when you have a bully combo off in a play group he's never played in. Survival of the fittest seems more ban worthy than tooth and nail by a long shot. Also, tooth and nail is my favorite card and I don't want it banned. For the record, in the last 8 months, I have only comboed twice with tooth and nail around turn 20. It was in Karador with about 50 cards in the graveyard, yes it involved lark, no I don't run saffi.
I used to have a Damia deck that was literally built around tooth and nail, turn 4 wins no problem... always with tooth and nail. I got bored, it's not fun for me.
I agree. We should all only play g/x decks because they are the most objectively fun and anyone who disagrees does not know the truth about EDH. Everyone should just play their decks because interaction beyond high fiving about how many land are in play is unfun and equivalent to casting Stasis while kicking puppies. I for one will never play with anyone who casts tutors, removal spells, blue cards, things I arbitrarily decide I don't like but will probably cast myself later.
Honest question: Are there substantive and/or common scenarios where Recurring Nightmare is markedly better than Corpse Dance or vice versa? Are they basically the same thing ~90% of the time? Is the increased cost of Dance offset by the need for a second creature for Nightmare? As I've said before I don't really use or care much about either of them ban-wise but the comparisons I've seen between them make me curious.
Are we reading the same cards? One exiles the target EoT....
Sac outlets are good. Or they can even die during combat. The exile on CD is so irrelevant except when you're using it to change the top card of your graveyard.
A while back, we did some local (highly unscientific) testing with a few of us regulars simply adding Protean Hulk to our green decks. The agreement was that we would not add any other cards or modify the deck in any other way--just to see what would happen if it were slipped in (and most of us play tutor-free). The results (again, highly unscientific) were unanimous: keep it banned. Whether it was that the decks were already designed to do what PH simply did more of (like decks with black and reanimation and/or with white and Karmic Guide, Reveillark, or Saffi Eriksdottir, it was clear that PH broke games by its mere presence.
Is "we" your local group or is it each local group for the RC?
Honest question: Are there substantive and/or common scenarios where Recurring Nightmare is markedly better than Corpse Dance or vice versa? Are they basically the same thing ~90% of the time? Is the increased cost of Dance offset by the need for a second creature for Nightmare? As I've said before I don't really use or care much about either of them ban-wise but the comparisons I've seen between them make me curious.
If your deck wants creatures to ETB and die, Recurring Nightmare alone lets you do one of each for 3 at a time as long as you have one of each to do (which you will unless someone kills your last creature or exiles your last creature card in a graveyard).
Corpse Dance will let you do just one at a time, for five, if it is the top creature card in your graveyard, if you have a sac outlet.
They're similar, but Nightmare is a much better effect.
No, it really isn't telling them lies. "Broken" doesn't mean anything in this game, because this is a game about doing broken things. Cards do not get banned for being broken, and it is blatantly stated that that is the case.
What you apparently want out of a banlist for this format is not what most other people want. Tutors do not cause problems for people that aren't playing in mostly-competitive groups.
Except cards are banned when they are broken, regardless of what the RC says about it. The RC didn't create the idea of a ban list. The committee for the first TCG ban list ever, whatever it was, created it to get broken cards out of the game. That's what banlists do. It's a tautology. A card being broken literally means that there is no reliable or healthy way to deal with it in game, so a body of rules that ban cards exists outside the game to regulate them. That's what every player understands as the chief purpose of a ban list, regardless if they've read a single word from the RC on how they're attempting to use that list. The RC doesn't get to decide what a ban list is or what it is for, regardless of mission statements to that effect. Ban lists are lists of cards unplayable in the game. The RC only gets to decide which cards are on it.
It's not just what I or any other player wants out of the format, either. It's the format as it exists. Everyone plays it. If you play Chess against people who don't know how Knights move, you are still playing Chess, and you have to deal at some point with the fact that they can leap over other pieces. In EDH, you will have to deal with the fact that tutors are more efficient than counterspells in this format, unlike every other format of Magic including Vintage, I might add. That is the game you are playing because those are the rules.
Leaving certain cards off a ban list, given the purpose of a ban list as stated by the RC or otherwise, is sending the message that that the cards not on it are fair and each player can and should be expected to deal with them. In the case of certain cards, that message is simply a lie. Players in fact can not use in-game methods to deal with the fact that tutors and mana rocks outpace countermagic.
No, it really isn't telling them lies. "Broken" doesn't mean anything in this game, because this is a game about doing broken things. Cards do not get banned for being broken, and it is blatantly stated that that is the case.
What you apparently want out of a banlist for this format is not what most other people want. Tutors do not cause problems for people that aren't playing in mostly-competitive groups.
Except cards are banned when they are broken, regardless of what the RC says about it. The RC didn't create the idea of a ban list. The committee for the first TCG ban list ever, whatever it was, created it to get broken cards out of the game. That's what banlists do. It's a tautology. A card being broken literally means that there is no reliable or healthy way to deal with it in game, so a body of rules that ban cards exists outside the game to regulate them. That's what every player understands as the chief purpose of a ban list, regardless if they've read a single word from the RC on how they're attempting to use that list. The RC doesn't get to decide what a ban list is or what it is for, regardless of mission statements to that effect. Ban lists are lists of cards unplayable in the game. The RC only gets to decide which cards are on it.
It's not just what I or any other player wants out of the format, either. It's the format as it exists. Everyone plays it. If you play Chess against people who don't know how Knights move, you are still playing Chess, and you have to deal at some point with the fact that they can leap over other pieces. In EDH, you will have to deal with the fact that tutors are more efficient than counterspells in this format, unlike every other format of Magic including Vintage, I might add. That is the game you are playing because those are the rules.
Leaving certain cards off a ban list, given the purpose of a ban list as stated by the RC or otherwise, is sending the message that that the cards not on it are fair and each player can and should be expected to deal with them. In the case of certain cards, that message is simply a lie. Players in fact can not use in-game methods to deal with the fact that tutors and mana rocks outpace countermagic.
I like your argument that "not banned = legal" as the only binding "law" for the format but I'm a bit hazy on how you transition to tutors > counterspells.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I think EDH would be more fun for the majority of participants if players just showed eachother their decks rather than actually playing games out."
No, it really isn't telling them lies. "Broken" doesn't mean anything in this game, because this is a game about doing broken things. Cards do not get banned for being broken, and it is blatantly stated that that is the case.
What you apparently want out of a banlist for this format is not what most other people want. Tutors do not cause problems for people that aren't playing in mostly-competitive groups.
Except cards are banned when they are broken, regardless of what the RC says about it. The RC didn't create the idea of a ban list. The committee for the first TCG ban list ever, whatever it was, created it to get broken cards out of the game. That's what banlists do. It's a tautology. A card being broken literally means that there is no reliable or healthy way to deal with it in game, so a body of rules that ban cards exists outside the game to regulate them. That's what every player understands as the chief purpose of a ban list, regardless if they've read a single word from the RC on how they're attempting to use that list. The RC doesn't get to decide what a ban list is or what it is for, regardless of mission statements to that effect. Ban lists are lists of cards unplayable in the game. The RC only gets to decide which cards are on it.
It's not just what I or any other player wants out of the format, either. It's the format as it exists. Everyone plays it. If you play Chess against people who don't know how Knights move, you are still playing Chess, and you have to deal at some point with the fact that they can leap over other pieces. In EDH, you will have to deal with the fact that tutors are more efficient than counterspells in this format, unlike every other format of Magic including Vintage, I might add. That is the game you are playing because those are the rules.
Leaving certain cards off a ban list, given the purpose of a ban list as stated by the RC or otherwise, is sending the message that that the cards not on it are fair and each player can and should be expected to deal with them. In the case of certain cards, that message is simply a lie. Players in fact can not use in-game methods to deal with the fact that tutors and mana rocks outpace countermagic.
I like your argument that "not banned = legal" as the only binding "law" for the format but I'm a bit hazy on how you transition to tutors > counterspells.
He's just pointing out that the nature of EDH as a format makes tutors stronger than counterspells.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Rest in RIP My Signature, I guess. 2015-2016, we hardly knew ye.
Total side note but I like how people are discussing running this over itself.
Well, it has to be said that Kolaghan is clearly better than Kolaghan. Considering what BR decks usually want and how stiff the competition in this guild is, there is no way that I would run Kolaghan over Kolaghan! Kolaghan might make it in as the sixth guild card or so. Kolaghan on the other hand ranks several places below that.
It was so funny to me when they described this as a downgrade to the original Zurgo during the Pax East panel. I was thinking if this is a downgrade, they should really "downgrade" all legendary creatures. Haha.
My deck designing is quite concise at this point:
1. Come up with deck idea
2. Realize this idea is somehow fundamentally similar to another deck I have or that is commonly played in my group
3. Decide I don't want to disassemble one of my existing decks
4. Give up and do nothing
I don't see the point of this new shroud mechanic. It's strictly worse than Hexproof. Threshold is pretty bad too, Delirium is a much better mechanic and probably easier to activate.
Otherwise this card is a pretty neat guy. Dodges removal and grows into a Primal Huntbeast. 3/5
But in the days of the internet how hard is any combo to find?
Way back when in the 1990's, my brothers and I had a hard time figuring out Mortal Kombat character moves, but now with the internet being what it currently is we could look up 75% combos within the first week of Mortal Kombat 9 being out.
I think that cards that can be abused the way Ad Nauseam, Hermit Druid, and to certain extent Tooth and Nail should be banned. There is nothing really creative, difficult, exciting, or otherwise fun endings to games when these cards are involved. People know how to break these cards and they have to literally go out of their way to not win outright when these cards are used. Even a "fair" use of Ad Nauseam is pretty much game over. Every deck that runs T&N has a game winning combo to go with it and you basically have to go out of your way to not make it an insta-win. And Hermit Druid used "fairly" still dumps tons of cards into your graveyard where they are infinitely more useful than in your deck. When even the "fair" usages of these cards is out of control, I think banning them makes more sense than trying to argue that people have to go out of their way to break them... because if you really think about it, they really don't.
Anyway, the best way to avoid these kinds of traps in your games is to just avoid the problematic cards, but if these kinds of cards are problematic no matter if your "meta" is casual/social or competitive/cutthroat then I say ban them and be done with it.
Hermit Druid used to self-mill and guarantee land drops isn't broken at all. There are plenty of cards that do either of those things much better than Druid does. He is only broken in a single deck that practically nobody plays except online. Calling for him to be banned is pretty much the stupidest thing, because the number of games where that single deck is even played in is probably less than the number of games where someone wins with a turn one Helmet/Leyline combo or whatever the hell else.
Ad Nauseam I don't really give a damn about either way because it's a pretty mediocre card.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Clan RepresentativeA few weeks ago someone stuck both a seedborn and prophet and proceeded to ruin the game. I mentioned how awesome it would be if someone played balance.
The entire table, even the guy vomiting cards all over us with his two untap phases on opponents turns, agreed.
Being able to soft reset games, I think, is somewhat healthy. I get the low CMC of balance being a huge issue and how ab usable it is when built around (like 344647564376547 other cards), but being able to bait out counters and still have enough to play a reset against a run away board state can be a huge plus.
The EDH stax primer
When you absolutely, positively got to kill every permanent in the room, accept no substitutes.
Dude, that's what I've been saying FOREVER.
Try it out. It's not quite the busted card people think it is. I've tested it in Karn (arguably the deck that stands to abuse it the most) for well over an entire year with multiple groups in the DC area - It's usually not the scariest card on the table. It's really no worse than Rofellos (or even Mycosynth Golem in my build).
EDIT: I don't even run the card anymore. I gave it plenty of time to show me how good it is - and it's a great card. But when it goes "too much too fast", there's not much you'll be able to do with it that can directly end the game other than Blightsteel or a very early combo.
Nowadays, I'm running Chaos Orb as a proxy for Perilous Vault and letting the crew decide which card they'd rather have it be when I cast it for 4. Crowd wisdom usually dictates that they prefer it be the Orb.
You say this because you are invested enough in the game that you not only read, but post on an internet forum daily. The majority of players do not troll forums daily, or even use Gatherer when building a deck. So while I agree with you that it may not be hard to find, that does not necessarily mean that everyone will know it. (Blackjack is another perfect example - the charts and formulas are free online and a casino won't even stop you from taking them to a table, but the minority of people who sit down at a table are ignorant of these methods.)
* I base this on a combination of what I've seen, heard from other posters, and the RC.
I'm not saying that ease should be the only criteria, because then I would totally advocate for T&N, Mike&Trike, etc. There are other factors to consider: fair use, impact on the game, power level, etc.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Point taken.
It's the cards, whether they're played once in a hundred games or once in a thousand, that you just can't beat no matter what you do that should be banned.
Another thing, maybe this poll should lay to rest the idea that you can and should get your playgroup on board with house bans. As noted, there's a strong bias toward current RC no-bans. So even if you were the one showing up with busted Turn 4 combo decks with Vintage tutors, chances are high no one would step up to discuss with you the need to ban some of these cards. Much less the guy across from you who's the one showing up with a busted deck. That guy will argue all night and not change a single card. If it's not on the list, people sensibly presume a right to hold others to have to deal with it. People trust the RC's no-ban as official word that it's not broken, when in fact unknown to them in recondite areas of the internet, they've come out and said the opposite. Like I've been saying for a while, the card by card banlist is the only RC statement 90% of EDH players ever hear. Right now, it's telling them lies.
What you apparently want out of a banlist for this format is not what most other people want. Tutors do not cause problems for people that aren't playing in mostly-competitive groups.
GUB [Retired Primer] The Mimeoplasm BUG
Modern: UR Storm RU
Cube: WUBRG Pauper Cube GRBUW
Credit for the banner goes to DarkNightCavalier at Heroes of the Plane Studios
As I said, I'm not saying it should be banned, but it reminds me of the reasoning behind the Hulk ban.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
GUB [Retired Primer] The Mimeoplasm BUG
Modern: UR Storm RU
Cube: WUBRG Pauper Cube GRBUW
Credit for the banner goes to DarkNightCavalier at Heroes of the Plane Studios
Has any similar testing been done with regards to Recurring Nightmare, comparing it to Corpse Dance?
Anything marked "Barely Missed" was <1% short of the next category, anything marked "Barely" was only in its category by <1%
Ancestral Recall
Balance
Biorhythm
Braids (General Only)
Channel
Chaos Orb
Emrakul (General Only)
Erayo (General Only)
Griselbrand (General Only)
Limited Resources
Moxen
Rofellos
Yawgmoth's Bargain
Coalition Victory
Emrakul
Falling Star (Barely Missed)
Fastbond
Griselbrand
Karakas
Library of Alexandria
Primeval Titan
Sundering Titan (Barely)
Sway of the Stars
Sylvan Primordial
Time Vault (Barely)
Time Walk
Tinker
Tolarian Academy
Trade Secrets
Upheaval
Worldfire (Barely Missed)
I'm so concerned by some of these results that I don't have a comment on them right now.
I used to have a Damia deck that was literally built around tooth and nail, turn 4 wins no problem... always with tooth and nail. I got bored, it's not fun for me.
Sac outlets are good. Or they can even die during combat. The exile on CD is so irrelevant except when you're using it to change the top card of your graveyard.
Is "we" your local group or is it each local group for the RC?
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
If your deck wants creatures to ETB and die, Recurring Nightmare alone lets you do one of each for 3 at a time as long as you have one of each to do (which you will unless someone kills your last creature or exiles your last creature card in a graveyard).
Corpse Dance will let you do just one at a time, for five, if it is the top creature card in your graveyard, if you have a sac outlet.
They're similar, but Nightmare is a much better effect.
Except cards are banned when they are broken, regardless of what the RC says about it. The RC didn't create the idea of a ban list. The committee for the first TCG ban list ever, whatever it was, created it to get broken cards out of the game. That's what banlists do. It's a tautology. A card being broken literally means that there is no reliable or healthy way to deal with it in game, so a body of rules that ban cards exists outside the game to regulate them. That's what every player understands as the chief purpose of a ban list, regardless if they've read a single word from the RC on how they're attempting to use that list. The RC doesn't get to decide what a ban list is or what it is for, regardless of mission statements to that effect. Ban lists are lists of cards unplayable in the game. The RC only gets to decide which cards are on it.
It's not just what I or any other player wants out of the format, either. It's the format as it exists. Everyone plays it. If you play Chess against people who don't know how Knights move, you are still playing Chess, and you have to deal at some point with the fact that they can leap over other pieces. In EDH, you will have to deal with the fact that tutors are more efficient than counterspells in this format, unlike every other format of Magic including Vintage, I might add. That is the game you are playing because those are the rules.
Leaving certain cards off a ban list, given the purpose of a ban list as stated by the RC or otherwise, is sending the message that that the cards not on it are fair and each player can and should be expected to deal with them. In the case of certain cards, that message is simply a lie. Players in fact can not use in-game methods to deal with the fact that tutors and mana rocks outpace countermagic.
I like your argument that "not banned = legal" as the only binding "law" for the format but I'm a bit hazy on how you transition to tutors > counterspells.
He's just pointing out that the nature of EDH as a format makes tutors stronger than counterspells.