Narset can be degenerate but there's still enough potential to whiff, although granted you're not likely to whiff more than once a game in a hyper competitive build.
If you are consistently getting her out turn 3 or earlier, that says more about broken mana rocks than anything. Yes maybe you can get her out by turn 3 because you drew enough of your mana crypts/sol rings/etc., but those same broken mana rocks can power out, say, Zur or Arcum even earlier (since they cost less mana), and they're doing degenerate things too, and since they cost less mana you don't need as many of them in the starting hand, meaning the rest of your cards could be different things, like counterspells. In addition, in these hyper-competitive circles they can be playing cards like, say, pyroclasm and diabolic edict and such to get around the hexproof.
But let's say you argue that you can consistently get narset turn 3 even without sol ring/mana crypt. However your hand would need to be pretty specific, it would have to be basically lands and ramp cards. Then consider that if the narset gets dealt with before you attack, you're sitting there doing nothing for multiple turns, and you're even worse off if you had to use rituals/lion's eye diamond/etc. to get Narset out that quickly because that mana can't be repeatedly used to recast her.
Sometimes, say, you get a cavern of souls with the narset and get her out turn 3 and start going infinite turn 4 and nobody can answer because their only responses were counterspells and they didn't draw into any of their cheap sweepers/edicts/etc. That's part of the randomness of magic. However I do not think narset is as consistent as the most competitive builds of other degenerate generals. Feel free to disprove me, but from the way I see it, Zur/Arcum/etc. costing less mana -> they can come out earlier than Narset on average -> they don't need as specific a hand to be powered out in earlier turns -> they're still doing degenerate things.
I would rather ban the broken mana rocks first than narset. If we strip away the broken mana rocks and force the narset player to either have the god hand to get her out turn 2-3, or she's coming out turn 4-5, there's a higher chance that someone on the table will be able to find an answer, or that everyone on the table will have a creature to kill her off when she attacks (assuming this narset build doesn't pack enough instant speed removal to reliably get rid of blockers).
Narset can be degenerate but there's still enough potential to whiff, although granted you're not likely to whiff more than once a game in a hyper competitive build.
If you are consistently getting her out turn 3 or earlier, that says more about broken mana rocks than anything. Yes maybe you can get her out by turn 3 because you drew enough of your mana crypts/sol rings/etc., but those same broken mana rocks can power out, say, Zur or Arcum even earlier (since they cost less mana), and they're doing degenerate things too, and since they cost less mana you don't need as many of them in the starting hand, meaning the rest of your cards could be different things, like counterspells. In addition, in these hyper-competitive circles they can be playing cards like, say, pyroclasm and diabolic edict and such to get around the hexproof.
But let's say you argue that you can consistently get narset turn 3 even without sol ring/mana crypt. However your hand would need to be pretty specific, it would have to be basically lands and ramp cards. Then consider that if the narset gets dealt with before you attack, you're sitting there doing nothing for multiple turns, and you're even worse off if you had to use rituals/lion's eye diamond/etc. to get Narset out that quickly because that mana can't be repeatedly used to recast her.
Sometimes, say, you get a cavern of souls with the narset and get her out turn 3 and start going infinite turn 4 and nobody can answer because their only responses were counterspells and they didn't draw into any of their cheap sweepers/edicts/etc. That's part of the randomness of magic. However I do not think narset is as consistent as the most competitive builds of other degenerate generals. Feel free to disprove me, but from the way I see it, Zur/Arcum/etc. costing less mana -> they can come out earlier than Narset on average -> they don't need as specific a hand to be powered out in earlier turns -> they're still doing degenerate things.
I would rather ban the broken mana rocks first than narset. If we strip away the broken mana rocks and force the narset player to either have the god hand to get her out turn 2-3, or she's coming out turn 4-5, there's a higher chance that someone on the table will be able to find an answer, or that everyone on the table will have a creature to kill her off when she attacks (assuming this narset build doesn't pack enough instant speed removal to reliably get rid of blockers).
I agree with you, and thanks for the intelligent post! But I did want to say that the spells Narset is casting from exile aren't uncounterable. In your example Narset wins because she couldn't be countered? Those counterspells could've been sent at the time magic/extra combat spells that she's casting, not negating, but lessening the impact of Cavern of souls.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently Playing: R8whackR WUBGAtraxa Stax-Superfriends *Under Construction*WUBG
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.
Thank you for the analysis. I agree in most points but I differ in others:
Then consider that if the narset gets dealt with before you attack, you're sitting there doing nothing for multiple turns, and you're even worse off if you had to use rituals/lion's eye diamond/etc. to get Narset out that quickly because that mana can't be repeatedly used to recast her.
That's true, forcing a turn1 or turn2 Narset through rituals and especially LED it's always a gamble. If opponent got a 2 mana answer or a FoW you're most probably screwed for the rest of the game and eventually lose. But who wouldn't take this gamble if the reward means casting lot of PW, armageddons or Enter the Infinite directly? So yes, you either win or lose straight away after casting LED turn1. But the potential reward is that high that it's worth to risk if that means even drawing all your deck Turn2. Not any general can win straight away Turn2 or the same turn you attack with them. Even a Zur or Arcum casted turn1 would be slower, they need more time to build a combo able to win an entire table of opponents. The only cards I got in mind that could also wins the game turn2 in a multiplayer envinronment is Hermit Druid and in fact many EDH play ers argue if it should be banned as well. And yes, Jeleva also. But since neither Jeleva or Zur or Arcum got hexproof, are more easy to slow or disrupt. People got problem with Narset because unlike all the others combo enablers, she got also hexproof to protect her. That makes her an incredibly difficult thing to handle as a combo enabler. Unlike with the other cards, you can fill the deck with less cards to protect her and more to harm people.
I would rather ban the broken mana rocks
I higly doubt that's ever gonna happen. Just look the Sol Ring. It's in every single Pre-Con deck from 2011 until now. Neither the Wizard nor the RC are planning to change that anytime soon. That's also why people made another variant of EDH (French Duel), where all the crazy borken mana rocks are banned. Because it's the only way to do it for now.
If you get the nut hand that doesn't include sol ring/mana crypt and are able to drop narset turn 1 or 2, then grats on that low percent chance of getting that nut hand, not much I can say about that. And you'll rightfully play with fire if someone has a force of will effect.
It's probably true that T1 or 2 narset can win faster than T1 or 2 arcum/zur/etc. However it's a little less all-in because you don't need as many cards in your starting hand dedicated to making mana so those cards could be anything else, like counterspells or something.
My problem is that with sol ring/mana crypt that nut hand happens more often, and the player is able to rebuild faster if the T1 or 2 narset gets answered. That's why I would want to see the broken mana rocks gone. I know that RC will not ban them anytime soon, but they'll have to accept the consequences or what happens to the hypercompetitive scene when the broken mana rocks are allowed where really dumb stuff can happen before turn 3.
You are right in that hermit druid is dumb enough that it should be banned.
In any case, let's say narset becomes very popular. I'm sure other people will try to adjust their decks to help combat fast narsets. Maybe more red decks will play pyroclasm (it does combat decks like Edric, does just enough to kill Arcum himself, etc.). Maybe people will try out meekstone. Maybe people will try out rule of law effects. Maybe someone will try stranglehold effects. Hell, lightmine field means she can't attack more than once per turn. I think that narset is just too new to immediately ban her even if she turns out to be the best general in the game. Primeval Titan and sylvan primordial were around for abit before they got banhammered. Let's see if cards that can help combat narset (while not being useless vs other decks) aren't enough to stop her.
Then let's say that these hate cards are effective in stopping the fastest narset decks. narset may be able to adjust and play more removal or protection cards. Let's say that meekstone actually becomes super effective at stopping narset. So narset decks will find ways to deal with it. But undoubtedly the more removal/answers/etc. you pack into a narset deck, the less explosive and degenerate the deck will be.
It's hard to predict exactly what will happen. That's why I think we should just let this be for a few months and see if decks can't adjust to narset, or if narset is still too good even when people adjust to her.
I agree with you, and thanks for the intelligent post! But I did want to say that the spells Narset is casting from exile aren't uncounterable. In your example Narset wins because she couldn't be countered? Those counterspells could've been sent at the time magic/extra combat spells that she's casting, not negating, but lessening the impact of Cavern of souls.
That's true, although if narset doesn't get killed after the attack, she'll be doing it next turn. The best way to beat narset is to counter herself or get her off the table.
Yeah, the problem isn't Narset. Lots of Generals do the same thing, which boils down to winning the game, no matter how it happens.
The issue is that you're not supposed to be trying to win the game in this game.
Yes, you read that right.
I know this is a tongue-in-cheek response, but my problem with the current banlist not including the broken mana rocks is that it's much easier to stop degenerate things happening on, say, Turn 5 or 6, than stopping degenerate things happening on T3 or 4.
The thing about the broken mana rocks is that where do you draw the line? Pick a random deck and it probably has Sol Ring in it. Did that fundamentally warp the deck? Now add Mana Crypt. Is it broken? Ok, let's add all the Signets. Broken yet? We'll add some Moxen and Worn Powerstone. Hmm... now we're getting somewhere.
See what I'm getting at? I won't pretend that Sol Ring and Mana Crypt are broken mana rocks, or that adding a bunch of mana rocks will make a deck more powerful. But how do you decide which mana rocks are bad or in what conjunction?
The thing about the broken mana rocks is that where do you draw the line? Pick a random deck and it probably has Sol Ring in it. Did that fundamentally warp the deck? Now add Mana Crypt. Is it broken? Ok, let's add all the Signets. Broken yet? We'll add some Moxen and Worn Powerstone. Hmm... now we're getting somewhere.
See what I'm getting at? I won't pretend that Sol Ring and Mana Crypt are broken mana rocks, or that adding a bunch of mana rocks will make a deck more powerful. But how do you decide which mana rocks are bad or in what conjunction?
I think ring and crypt are kind of in a league of their own, efficiency-wise. signets cost 2 and produce 1. powerstone costs 3 and produces 2. dynamo costs 4 and produces 3. gilded lotus costs 5 and produces 3. By comparison, sol ring and mana crypt not only produce more mana than they cost, they also have no significant downside (unlike mana vault, grim monolith, chrome mox, and mox diamond). I think there's an argument to be had about mana vault, but sol ring and mana crypt are really in a league of their own.
It's like saying, "draw is powerful, but where do you draw the line? Fact or fiction? Deep analysis? Ancestral recall?"
You draw it at ancestral recall, obviously. Just looking at the numbers alone (cost : effect) it's obvious that ancestral recall, sol ring, and mana crypt are way too efficient.
Another way to think about it is: what if people could run multiple copies of these cards? Multiple signets would be no problem. Multiple powerstones would be no problem. Multiple dynamos might be a slight problem, but only with kozilek decks or something. Multiple mana crypts would be terrifying. T1 7 drops? Yeah, no thanks.
There's no mathematical formula or algorithm I can say that will prove which mana rocks are too good. However I think a lot of people agree that sol ring and mana crypt fit the bill.
Pretty much all other ramp spells are weaker than them. Mox diamond/chrome mox 2-for-1 yourself. Mox opal needs a more specific build. Signets are about the same as something like nature's lore and nobody's complaining about nature's lore. Worn powerstone ETBs tapped. etc.
It's like saying, "draw is powerful, but where do you draw the line? Fact or fiction? Deep analysis? Ancestral recall?"
You draw it at ancestral recall, obviously. Just looking at the numbers alone (cost : effect) it's obvious that ancestral recall, sol ring, and mana crypt are way too efficient.
I agree, except that this is a bad analogy because AR is P9 and hundreds of dollars, so it fails additional categories.
Another way to think about it is: what if people could run multiple copies of these cards? Multiple signets would be no problem. Multiple powerstones would be no problem. Multiple dynamos might be a slight problem, but only with kozilek decks or something. Multiple mana crypts would be terrifying. T1 7 drops? Yeah, no thanks.
I don't get this. Why should this matter since we're playing a singleton format.
There's no mathematical formula or algorithm I can say that will prove which mana rocks are too good. However I think a lot of people agree that sol ring and mana crypt fit the bill.
Pretty much all other ramp spells are weaker than them. Mox diamond/chrome mox 2-for-1 yourself. Mox opal needs a more specific build. Signets are about the same as something like nature's lore and nobody's complaining about nature's lore. Worn powerstone ETBs tapped. etc.
That's my point. Ring/Crypt are broken mana sources, but by themselves they really don't do much other than randomly giving one player a head start. Once you start packing your deck full of redundancy in the form of mana rocks, that's when we start seeing power plays on turn 2-3 when they should have been made on turn 6+.
-----
On the official forums I dismised an argument about the T1 Narset on the premise that it dealt with sculpting your hand via the Partial Paris mulligan. I was instantly attacked because it's the "official" mulligan in Commander. In this thread we tend to go around in circle about various cards, but I would like to take a moment (if people choose to) and discuss getting rid of the PP mulligan and what the ramifications would be.
For starters, I think that in a more casual format, the Partial Paris is good because it allows people to get a playable opening hand, lessening the number of feel-bad games. However, as was brought up with Narset, more competitive players can sculpt their opening hands, and this is more detrimental to games that end too quickly. I propose that the Partial Paris mulligan is gotten rid of as the unofficial official mulligan style.
I know this is a tongue-in-cheek response, but my problem with the current banlist not including the broken mana rocks is that it's much easier to stop degenerate things happening on, say, Turn 5 or 6, than stopping degenerate things happening on T3 or 4.
I agree with you, for the record.
A long while back in this thread, I did a brief rundown about the availability of counterspells at 2 and less mana versus the ways to tutor up/lay down an irresistible win condition in a 3 turn window. The conclusion was that Control can't police Combo in this format. Both Legacy-banned tutors and Legacy-banned mana rocks are to blame for that, of course, combined with the counterspells like Force of Will that do police the eternal formats only being playable as singletons here.
Which takes me back to Cryo's point, it's not just about getting together with people whose decks are at the same level as yours. It's the fact that pitfalls exist in this cardpool where, if you fall into them, the game becomes an unplayable dice roll in comparison to engaging combo MU's everywhere else. So the game is playable as a game only for people who aren't trying to win, as I originally stated.
The thing about the broken mana rocks is that where do you draw the line? Pick a random deck and it probably has Sol Ring in it. Did that fundamentally warp the deck? Now add Mana Crypt. Is it broken? Ok, let's add all the Signets. Broken yet? We'll add some Moxen and Worn Powerstone. Hmm... now we're getting somewhere.
See what I'm getting at? I won't pretend that Sol Ring and Mana Crypt are broken mana rocks, or that adding a bunch of mana rocks will make a deck more powerful. But how do you decide which mana rocks are bad or in what conjunction?
It is really not hard to draw the line, at all. In fact, I don't believe anyone, RC included, sincerely believes that it is.
Signets never broke any formats, and they were only ever playable in Control decks of the formats they were legal in. But everyone to ever take a serious look at Sol Ring and Mana Crypt in any realistic context has come to the conclusion that they are unhealthy cards. Evidence being, they are banned or restricted in every WOTC supported format, the only formats with the resources and the motives to be kept healthy. And of all the volume of commentary about what cards would be safe to unban/unrestrict in Legacy/Vintage, and there is a lot, approximately 0% of all people discussing these formats think that those 2 or any of the ~2cmc tutors would be a good unban. Most of the long-time EDH'ers I know refuse to play these cards in constructed, except maybe Sol Ring because they throw them at new players via the precons. It's just not possible to take the line that these can be fair cards with any seriousness, anymore.
The pitfall is there deliberately. If you don't want to play 6cmc creature-beats, this is designed to be a terrible format for you. If you rightly think that these cards are silly and broken, EDH will be a terrible format for you. If you have anything less than full on spite for combo as an archetype, or you have respect for the skill involved in combo matchups, EDH will be a terrible format for you. Powers that be hope you will leave the format. Players do leave it in droves.
The lesson is the same, only Narset is teaching it to people who have somehow escaped it up to now. Interaction before Turn 4 can't happen efficiently in this format, and meanwhile, mounting a win before Turn 4 at oppressive levels of consistency has always been possible in this card pool. About "drawing the line", you would at least have to draw it more strictly than that, and I think most everybody knows that.
It's like saying, "draw is powerful, but where do you draw the line? Fact or fiction? Deep analysis? Ancestral recall?"
You draw it at ancestral recall, obviously. Just looking at the numbers alone (cost : effect) it's obvious that ancestral recall, sol ring, and mana crypt are way too efficient.
I agree, except that this is a bad analogy because AR is P9 and hundreds of dollars, so it fails additional categories.
Another way to think about it is: what if people could run multiple copies of these cards? Multiple signets would be no problem. Multiple powerstones would be no problem. Multiple dynamos might be a slight problem, but only with kozilek decks or something. Multiple mana crypts would be terrifying. T1 7 drops? Yeah, no thanks.
I don't get this. Why should this matter since we're playing a singleton format.
It's just an easy way to think about some things - take it to an extreme. "If every card was this good, would magic still be fun to play?" If the answer is "no", that's probably a sign that the card is problematic. It's just a way to get around the fact that any card is going to seem more innocuous in a singleton format because of the low odds of drawing it, especially cards with a much higher impact early in the game. Another good example of a card that fails this test is serra ascendant. These are cards that create significant (and, imo, unpleasant) volatility in the format - some games they do nothing significant, some games they have a massive, game-warping impact for almost no investment.
imagine wotc lost their minds and started printing many functional reprints of sol ring. Eventually the format would be a horrible broken mess. Imo that shows that sol ring is problematic, and the only thing keeping it from being insta-banned is that it doesn't come up every game.
On the official forums I dismised an argument about the T1 Narset on the premise that it dealt with sculpting your hand via the Partial Paris mulligan. I was instantly attacked because it's the "official" mulligan in Commander. In this thread we tend to go around in circle about various cards, but I would like to take a moment (if people choose to) and discuss getting rid of the PP mulligan and what the ramifications would be.
For starters, I think that in a more casual format, the Partial Paris is good because it allows people to get a playable opening hand, lessening the number of feel-bad games. However, as was brought up with Narset, more competitive players can sculpt their opening hands, and this is more detrimental to games that end too quickly. I propose that the Partial Paris mulligan is gotten rid of as the unofficial official mulligan style.
It's more difficult for competitive players to sculpt their god hand if mana crypt and sol ring were banned. For example, a competitive narset deck trying to get the T1 or 2 narset without those 2 mana rocks means their entire hand basically has to be lands and ramp. As I said earlier, not only is the probability of that "not too high", you often don't have a backup plan if your fast narset gets answered, so it's an all-in attack.
For example, if we could magically make the format such that no wins could occur "reliably" before, say, turn 5 (we alter the ban list such that this is true), I don't think partial paris becomes a problem. You can still sculpt your hand but if you don't explode quickly to do degenerate things I don't think that's an issue. However in order to reach this state where no wins can occur reliably before turn 5, we would have to ban the fast mana rocks as a start.
That's my point. Ring/Crypt are broken mana sources, but by themselves they really don't do much other than randomly giving one player a head start. Once you start packing your deck full of redundancy in the form of mana rocks, that's when we start seeing power plays on turn 2-3 when they should have been made on turn 6+.
Other people have touched on this, but the obvious argument is that sol ring can power out other stupid stuff, while the signets and such power out much less stuff on their own.
T1 sol ring gives you 2 colorless mana on T1, then gives you 4 mana on T2, 5 mana on T3
Signets/talismans/etc. can't even be played on T1 without something like sol ring, give you +1 mana on T2 (technically signets need a mana invested in them to even do that and some 2-mana rocks ETB tapped like sphere of the suns, but it applies to certain talismans/etc.), then 4 mana on T3
This is not comparable. Sol ring will be doing dumb things if we banned the signets and weaker mana rocks, while the signets are just fair.
No the reason they are not instant banned is the picture the rc is trying to paint with it's banlist is not one where players try to win the most efficient ways possible. They promote a format where they encourage you to play a turn 10+ style of play where these cards while still very swingy are not be abused to the extent they can . The rc states that you should change thier banlist to fit your needs. In one group we want to have this mindset and care about power balence we are very compeitive. In a group I just played with we used the broken cards it made the games less about skill but I still had fun with some vintage power card slinging. Now in Timmy's group down The lane they don't have issue with sol ring because their games go 15 turns not 4. The worst case is these in between groups that kill turn 6-8 where the cards are just as backbreakingly overpowered yet most here seem miss atribute the "bad card" being the combo or oppressive control card X when it was possibly not the card but the players proportions of control or simply being more efficient is why it wins. When you talk about consistent turn x whatever your talking about a mentality not relevant to how the rc looks at cards . If your mentality is not in alignment they encourage you to change it. If you are unfortunately "stuck" using the stock list with random players but your mentality is differnt it's an issue so I guess the only real debate is should the baseline favor the vision or cater to the fact that a few cards have more potential to ruin games than the joy they bring to others. In the end it looks like they took the vision and that makes sense considering random play and people "stuck" in bad situations are not thier number 1 concern when crafting the banlist. I find it hard to believe that Sheldon and co are sitting around going " sol rings ok they only get 1". Either way just talk things out fund out what cards your group does and does not like where you expect to be on power level and have some fun.
I think that is a good point Moxnix the ban list is really only intended as a guide for new players/new groups. I and they think people will decide their own in group ban list or as is the case in my group a softer discouraged list of cards that create game states we don't like (Its the game states that are banned not the cards you have to use them well or lose them). The list is what will a new player to the format do with a card rather than people building whole decks to capitalise on a single card in their deck.
Mirror, Painter, Hulk, Titan and Primodial are just so easy to abuse causally for massive value. Druid you need to know what you are doing. Although this does bring up DEN which is easy to abuse casually as well while I feel prophet is much harder to casually do need to built in mana sinks and on board card draw what not. Narset isn't really abused casually you need to want those combat steps and work to set it up. I consider the use of clones as casual abuse you have a sweet creature I want it to and I have a sweet creature its better to have two of them.
It is almost like all of us are too familiar with the format to actually get the ban list ideas properly.
It is not a competitive environment there is no need to build the most powerful deck possible unless you cannot enjoy yourself unless you win (then you have a different problem) or if everyone else has similarly powerful decks. If your friends are sick of playing against your "overpowered" deck list there is two options you change your deck (take apart or power down) or you encourage them to improve their decks. Friends sick of seeing the millionth deck with Prophet deadeye and rift just build mono red and have them complain about purphoros instead. I think it is our responsibility of us veteran commander players to push the boundaries of interesting and exciting interactions and game states rather than pushing power level. Let the newer players have their goodstuff decks we can do better.
This of course does depend on your meta cutthroat meta's of vintage and legacy veterans go ahead, I'd say go as far as ignore the ban list at that point you know what you are doing you'll know when its a problem for your local format.
Perhaps newer groups might consider instituting a unified commander format of 4 decks that can't share cards, just to create variety and help get creativity started that will lead to a healthy meta in the future. A little extreme but variety in decks and strategies is important.
Recently my group has been looking at the french ban list as an option, I accidentally have a 1v1 legal deck (when searching for variety), perhaps we will just all make a 1v1 legal deck each. We also really think changing the mulligan rules to the normal full mull will stop games getting too samey. Atm we have just made sure to get 1 less card on the partial mull which we realised was the rule the whole time people were just getting a free mull because multiplayer.
The big problem with the whole thing is it all breaks down on the internet without personal relationships it doesn't work so well. the program I use happens to only have a small number of players so we regularly see the same players in games which does help with developing an almost store like meta there but in bigger places like Magic online and Cockatrice will have trouble with cards that can be broken and differences in deck power level and people throwing fits over certain cards and strategies.
Back to familiar territory! We're discussing the right things again.
@ cryo: Where do we draw the line for fast mana? Just Sol Ring and Mana Crypt.
You also made a point regarding the mulligan rule. Yea, I wish people would stop, sit down and think for a bit on that. Handsculpting, while unconsciously a practiced habit, is actually pretty broken. Same with Partial. "I keep Sol Ring, chuck the rest, and draw again."
I think it is our responsibility of us veteran commander players to push the boundaries of interesting and exciting interactions and game states rather than pushing power level.
While I agree with this, I still think there's no place for broken mana. Duel Commander has rid of it, I know it's competitive. But I'm starting to feel that the philosophy gap between casuals and competitive are smaller. We just need the same pool of cards. The RIGHT pool of cards.
At the end of the day, I think it boils down to Competitive vs Casual. The competitive say that casuals didn't pack enough counters to check their decks, while the casuals say competitive decks ruin the fun of the format.
No matter how the banlist looks like, the competitive people will always look among the fastest, strongest strategies to tune their decks. It has held true for the entirely of competitive Magic and will do so in Commander as well.
I understand that the Committee intended for the format to be a "casual format" but they didn't mind the "competitive groups" as long as they are having fun, but the issue rises when the two clash. There are people out there who enjoy playing with different people on different weekends and I think that the clashes mainly arise from there.
I strongly feel that there should be an official Competitive Multiplayer Banlist & a Casual Multiplayer Banlist. Yes, it is divisive, but the this division has already been shown to clearly exist even with a singular banlist. With two separate official banlists, it is a lot easier for people to declare they're "Competitive" or "Casual" Multiplayer EDH players, the same way French EDH players can easily identify themselves among the whole lot of EDH players.
It is less of an issue of the actual banlist (The specifics is which most of this entire thread is about), but rather the need of an official stand to divide the two sides.
As mentioned earlier, I understand the Committee prefers the "Casual Format", but they hold the most influence over the format and hence it is ideal that they personally do the division (The line between Competitive 1v1 was easier to differentiate), because any singular banlist can never convince one type of player to change to the other, it is better to just customize two lists for each.
On the official forums I dismised an argument about the T1 Narset on the premise that it dealt with sculpting your hand via the Partial Paris mulligan. I was instantly attacked because it's the "official" mulligan in Commander. In this thread we tend to go around in circle about various cards, but I would like to take a moment (if people choose to) and discuss getting rid of the PP mulligan and what the ramifications would be.
For starters, I think that in a more casual format, the Partial Paris is good because it allows people to get a playable opening hand, lessening the number of feel-bad games. However, as was brought up with Narset, more competitive players can sculpt their opening hands, and this is more detrimental to games that end too quickly. I propose that the Partial Paris mulligan is gotten rid of as the unofficial official mulligan style.
I wholehartedly agree. My gameshop implements a mulligan rule that is the best I've ever experienced. It is as follows:
No free mulligans of any kind. You may only qualify for one.
A hand with 0,1,6 or 7 (mana producing)lands qualifies for a free 7-card mulligan. If someone at the table qualifies, any number of may take that mulligan.
There are no partial mulligans with this method, and the method rewards players for building a lower mana curve.
It's worked beautifully for me and every shop that uses it. I highly recommend giving it a try.
I wholehartedly agree. My gameshop implements a mulligan rule that is the best I've ever experienced. It is as follows:
No free mulligans of any kind. You may only qualify for one.
A hand with 0,1,6 or 7 (mana producing)lands qualifies for a free 7-card mulligan. If someone at the table qualifies, any number of may take that mulligan.
There are no partial mulligans with this method, and the method rewards players for building a lower mana curve.
It's worked beautifully for me and every shop that uses it. I highly recommend giving it a try.
In our league, we use the "set your hand to the side and draw X new ones", where X is the standard first one free, and each additional mulligan is one less card. The key is that it's you're setting it to the side instead of shuffling and drawing each time you want to mulligan. This both saves time and forces you to think about whether your really want that combo piece that was in your opening hand. Plus, if you mulligan a hand with no lands, you have higher odds of drawing a hand containing land (since there are seven less cards in your deck). No one in our group has vocalized that they dislike this system.
As much as I know sol ring and mana crypt won't be banned.... I can safely say the format would have been better over the last 3 years. Just think of how many banlist discussions of card x involved plays that started with sol ring or mana crypt... would have been amazing!
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.
On the official forums I dismised an argument about the T1 Narset on the premise that it dealt with sculpting your hand via the Partial Paris mulligan. I was instantly attacked because it's the "official" mulligan in Commander. In this thread we tend to go around in circle about various cards, but I would like to take a moment (if people choose to) and discuss getting rid of the PP mulligan and what the ramifications would be.
For starters, I think that in a more casual format, the Partial Paris is good because it allows people to get a playable opening hand, lessening the number of feel-bad games. However, as was brought up with Narset, more competitive players can sculpt their opening hands, and this is more detrimental to games that end too quickly. I propose that the Partial Paris mulligan is gotten rid of as the unofficial official mulligan style.
It may be worthwhile to open a new thread for discussion of partial paris mulligans. It could draw in posters who don't regularly read the banlist thread and then the discussion wont be buried 10+ pages deep after a weeks.
The Highlander magic community (no generals or color identity, but still singleton) used to do Spoils mulligans, basically partial paris first one free, but changed their rules a year ago to disallow that practice. They now use the regular paris mulligans with first one free. Here is a poll discussing player reactions 6 months after the changes: http://www.magicplayer.org/forum/index.php?topic=993.0 If you read it, much of it seems like inside baseball; but many of the talking points can also be applied to EDH.
A concern is that PPMs provide too much help to decks that have a greedy multicolor manabase, want to curve out, want to run fewer lands then they should, or want to avoid 'drawing the wrong half of the deck'.
I wholehartedly agree. My gameshop implements a mulligan rule that is the best I've ever experienced. It is as follows:
No free mulligans of any kind. You may only qualify for one.
A hand with 0,1,6 or 7 (mana producing)lands qualifies for a free 7-card mulligan. If someone at the table qualifies, any number of may take that mulligan.
There are no partial mulligans with this method, and the method rewards players for building a lower mana curve.
It's worked beautifully for me and every shop that uses it. I highly recommend giving it a try.
In our league, we use the "set your hand to the side and draw X new ones", where X is the standard first one free, and each additional mulligan is one less card. The key is that it's you're setting it to the side instead of shuffling and drawing each time you want to mulligan. This both saves time and forces you to think about whether your really want that combo piece that was in your opening hand. Plus, if you mulligan a hand with no lands, you have higher odds of drawing a hand containing land (since there are seven less cards in your deck). No one in our group has vocalized that they dislike this system.
Earlier this year, I posted a thread that mentioned I was doing research on different mulligan styles and their applications. This is still true, but it is just taking a lot of time since I have to work around my job/church/family/EDH and such.
I feel like I should mention that the two systems you and burntgerbil proposed are still abusable. Yours does not allow additional sculpting around a card you have already drawn, but it has a greater likelihood of actually finding Ring/Crypt than the official PP or multiplayer mulligan rules. The one burntgerbil proposed allows me to skimp on lands a LOT, or add a lot of extra lands and be guaranteed to start with a 7-card hand that has my combo of choice.
I understand that you would probably call someone out for abusing the system in this way, but since it is still within the letter of the law you simply outsource the DB problem to another stage of the game. As long as we are looking for a new mulligan rule to solve our supposed problems, let's do it thoroughly.
Well all systems are abusable, but what I like is that if you build a combo deck you can't really mulligan for it, because if you get part of the combo but an otherwise unplayable hand, you can't get that card when you mulligan. Sol Ring is a special case because that just makes almost any opening hand better and no mulligan will prevent looking for Sol Ring.
At the end of the day, I think it boils down to Competitive vs Casual. The competitive say that casuals didn't pack enough counters to check their decks, while the casuals say competitive decks ruin the fun of the format.
No matter how the banlist looks like, the competitive people will always look among the fastest, strongest strategies to tune their decks. It has held true for the entirely of competitive Magic and will do so in Commander as well.
I understand that the Committee intended for the format to be a "casual format" but they didn't mind the "competitive groups" as long as they are having fun, but the issue rises when the two clash. There are people out there who enjoy playing with different people on different weekends and I think that the clashes mainly arise from there.
I strongly feel that there should be an official Competitive Multiplayer Banlist & a Casual Multiplayer Banlist. Yes, it is divisive, but the this division has already been shown to clearly exist even with a singular banlist. With two separate official banlists, it is a lot easier for people to declare they're "Competitive" or "Casual" Multiplayer EDH players, the same way French EDH players can easily identify themselves among the whole lot of EDH players.
It is less of an issue of the actual banlist (The specifics is which most of this entire thread is about), but rather the need of an official stand to divide the two sides.
As mentioned earlier, I understand the Committee prefers the "Casual Format", but they hold the most influence over the format and hence it is ideal that they personally do the division (The line between Competitive 1v1 was easier to differentiate), because any singular banlist can never convince one type of player to change to the other, it is better to just customize two lists for each.
It'd be better to have a single ban list that helped encourage play between strangers, since any group that doesn't have strangers can easily adjust the ban list to their liking. Strangers are stuck with whatever the official ban list is, and because that list caters only to casual players, more competitive players are screwed. Certainly, competitive multiplayer needs a better ban list; that much I agree with. Since the RC hasn't shown any interest in that however, someone else would have to manage it. There's been some discussion about that here in the past, and there is some consensus about which cards should be added/removed from the current multiplayer list to form it, but I don't think it's posted anywhere in concise terms.
@ cryo: Where do we draw the line for fast mana? Just Sol Ring and Mana Crypt.
I know I go back and forth on this, and maybe its just too influenced by the last game I played and when Sol Ringcame out, but I think these two really need to go. Making more mana than you cost with zero or minimal downside on a permanent is just too swingy early. I know its not bad on T5+, but ruining early games is still ruining games. YMMV
For the record the last game I played no Sol Rings came out, and it was 20+ turns and 4 people.
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.
It'd be better to have a single ban list that helped encourage play between strangers, since any group that doesn't have strangers can easily adjust the ban list to their liking. Strangers are stuck with whatever the official ban list is, and because that list caters only to casual players, more competitive players are screwed. Certainly, competitive multiplayer needs a better ban list; that much I agree with. Since the RC hasn't shown any interest in that however, someone else would have to manage it. There's been some discussion about that here in the past, and there is some consensus about which cards should be added/removed from the current multiplayer list to form it, but I don't think it's posted anywhere in concise terms.
Yeah, that's exactly it. Casual players within an insular group, the way the RC suggests the format should be played, do not need a ban list. But still, there is one, and it's regulated according to how one insular group prefers to play, while completely unregulated for everyone else's needs.
Take the Sylvan Primordial ban. Ok, so every casual UGx goodstuff player is sick of it. But in this hypothetical game that needs to be regulated with a ban list, the Sylvan Primordial Player is lucky not to lose to a 3-5 mana one-card combo for tapping out for 7 that late in the game. For every other game, people would be free to get sick of SP, Prime Time, etc at their own pace, and agree among themselves when the time is to stop playing it, if ever.
And what you see in practice is casual groups who don't even know a ban list exists, or who've stopped playing with Vintage staples on their own. The people who are talking about the ban list are experienced players who are sick of public games being ruined by the same old culprits.
The ban list seems to regulate this no-man's land of public casuals that doesn't actually exist. Because, god help the casual player who shows up with stompy deck to a public game, who doesn't know PT and SP are banned. You would think that's the enemy of the format, when in all likelihood, his deck is fine. And god help the experienced player in that public game who doesn't want to have to pack 15+ counterspells and spot removal cards <3 cmc just so he can play the game past Turn 5 the way he wants to do. Take out Moxes, Lotus, and all the $400+ cards that people hate, fine, that's perfectly sensible. But beyond that, who the ban list is helping, I have no idea.
Whatever the powers that be claim to be the purpose of their ban list, the purpose of a ban list isn't something you get to decide. Ban lists, software patches, and any ongoing changes to a game are made with the purpose of fixing exploits. They're not made to "share a vision" of the format, and what not. The only people who need them are those who continuously run into existing exploits, and so deliberately leaving them unfixed as a trap for those who use exploits makes absolutely no sense.
If you are consistently getting her out turn 3 or earlier, that says more about broken mana rocks than anything. Yes maybe you can get her out by turn 3 because you drew enough of your mana crypts/sol rings/etc., but those same broken mana rocks can power out, say, Zur or Arcum even earlier (since they cost less mana), and they're doing degenerate things too, and since they cost less mana you don't need as many of them in the starting hand, meaning the rest of your cards could be different things, like counterspells. In addition, in these hyper-competitive circles they can be playing cards like, say, pyroclasm and diabolic edict and such to get around the hexproof.
But let's say you argue that you can consistently get narset turn 3 even without sol ring/mana crypt. However your hand would need to be pretty specific, it would have to be basically lands and ramp cards. Then consider that if the narset gets dealt with before you attack, you're sitting there doing nothing for multiple turns, and you're even worse off if you had to use rituals/lion's eye diamond/etc. to get Narset out that quickly because that mana can't be repeatedly used to recast her.
Sometimes, say, you get a cavern of souls with the narset and get her out turn 3 and start going infinite turn 4 and nobody can answer because their only responses were counterspells and they didn't draw into any of their cheap sweepers/edicts/etc. That's part of the randomness of magic. However I do not think narset is as consistent as the most competitive builds of other degenerate generals. Feel free to disprove me, but from the way I see it, Zur/Arcum/etc. costing less mana -> they can come out earlier than Narset on average -> they don't need as specific a hand to be powered out in earlier turns -> they're still doing degenerate things.
I would rather ban the broken mana rocks first than narset. If we strip away the broken mana rocks and force the narset player to either have the god hand to get her out turn 2-3, or she's coming out turn 4-5, there's a higher chance that someone on the table will be able to find an answer, or that everyone on the table will have a creature to kill her off when she attacks (assuming this narset build doesn't pack enough instant speed removal to reliably get rid of blockers).
WUBRGProgenitus
URGMaelstrom Wanderer
WUBOloro, Ageless Ascetic
WURZedruu, the Greathearted
BRGProssh, Skyraider of Kher ($100)
GWUDerevi, Empyrial Tactician ($100)
UGKruphix, God of Horizons ($100)(retired)UTalrand, Sky Summoner (French 1v1, $100)
I agree with you, and thanks for the intelligent post! But I did want to say that the spells Narset is casting from exile aren't uncounterable. In your example Narset wins because she couldn't be countered? Those counterspells could've been sent at the time magic/extra combat spells that she's casting, not negating, but lessening the impact of Cavern of souls.
R8whackR
WUBGAtraxa Stax-Superfriends *Under Construction*WUBG
It is also nothing like Narset in any form or function, so why you keep bringing it up is unknown to me.
The issue is that you're not supposed to be trying to win the game in this game.
Yes, you read that right.
If you get the nut hand that doesn't include sol ring/mana crypt and are able to drop narset turn 1 or 2, then grats on that low percent chance of getting that nut hand, not much I can say about that. And you'll rightfully play with fire if someone has a force of will effect.
It's probably true that T1 or 2 narset can win faster than T1 or 2 arcum/zur/etc. However it's a little less all-in because you don't need as many cards in your starting hand dedicated to making mana so those cards could be anything else, like counterspells or something.
My problem is that with sol ring/mana crypt that nut hand happens more often, and the player is able to rebuild faster if the T1 or 2 narset gets answered. That's why I would want to see the broken mana rocks gone. I know that RC will not ban them anytime soon, but they'll have to accept the consequences or what happens to the hypercompetitive scene when the broken mana rocks are allowed where really dumb stuff can happen before turn 3.
You are right in that hermit druid is dumb enough that it should be banned.
In any case, let's say narset becomes very popular. I'm sure other people will try to adjust their decks to help combat fast narsets. Maybe more red decks will play pyroclasm (it does combat decks like Edric, does just enough to kill Arcum himself, etc.). Maybe people will try out meekstone. Maybe people will try out rule of law effects. Maybe someone will try stranglehold effects. Hell, lightmine field means she can't attack more than once per turn. I think that narset is just too new to immediately ban her even if she turns out to be the best general in the game. Primeval Titan and sylvan primordial were around for abit before they got banhammered. Let's see if cards that can help combat narset (while not being useless vs other decks) aren't enough to stop her.
Then let's say that these hate cards are effective in stopping the fastest narset decks. narset may be able to adjust and play more removal or protection cards. Let's say that meekstone actually becomes super effective at stopping narset. So narset decks will find ways to deal with it. But undoubtedly the more removal/answers/etc. you pack into a narset deck, the less explosive and degenerate the deck will be.
It's hard to predict exactly what will happen. That's why I think we should just let this be for a few months and see if decks can't adjust to narset, or if narset is still too good even when people adjust to her.
That's true, although if narset doesn't get killed after the attack, she'll be doing it next turn. The best way to beat narset is to counter herself or get her off the table.
I know this is a tongue-in-cheek response, but my problem with the current banlist not including the broken mana rocks is that it's much easier to stop degenerate things happening on, say, Turn 5 or 6, than stopping degenerate things happening on T3 or 4.
WUBRGProgenitus
URGMaelstrom Wanderer
WUBOloro, Ageless Ascetic
WURZedruu, the Greathearted
BRGProssh, Skyraider of Kher ($100)
GWUDerevi, Empyrial Tactician ($100)
UGKruphix, God of Horizons ($100)(retired)UTalrand, Sky Summoner (French 1v1, $100)
See what I'm getting at? I won't pretend that Sol Ring and Mana Crypt are broken mana rocks, or that adding a bunch of mana rocks will make a deck more powerful. But how do you decide which mana rocks are bad or in what conjunction?
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
It's like saying, "draw is powerful, but where do you draw the line? Fact or fiction? Deep analysis? Ancestral recall?"
You draw it at ancestral recall, obviously. Just looking at the numbers alone (cost : effect) it's obvious that ancestral recall, sol ring, and mana crypt are way too efficient.
Another way to think about it is: what if people could run multiple copies of these cards? Multiple signets would be no problem. Multiple powerstones would be no problem. Multiple dynamos might be a slight problem, but only with kozilek decks or something. Multiple mana crypts would be terrifying. T1 7 drops? Yeah, no thanks.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
Pretty much all other ramp spells are weaker than them. Mox diamond/chrome mox 2-for-1 yourself. Mox opal needs a more specific build. Signets are about the same as something like nature's lore and nobody's complaining about nature's lore. Worn powerstone ETBs tapped. etc.
WUBRGProgenitus
URGMaelstrom Wanderer
WUBOloro, Ageless Ascetic
WURZedruu, the Greathearted
BRGProssh, Skyraider of Kher ($100)
GWUDerevi, Empyrial Tactician ($100)
UGKruphix, God of Horizons ($100)(retired)UTalrand, Sky Summoner (French 1v1, $100)
I agree, except that this is a bad analogy because AR is P9 and hundreds of dollars, so it fails additional categories.
I don't get this. Why should this matter since we're playing a singleton format.
That's my point. Ring/Crypt are broken mana sources, but by themselves they really don't do much other than randomly giving one player a head start. Once you start packing your deck full of redundancy in the form of mana rocks, that's when we start seeing power plays on turn 2-3 when they should have been made on turn 6+.
-----
On the official forums I dismised an argument about the T1 Narset on the premise that it dealt with sculpting your hand via the Partial Paris mulligan. I was instantly attacked because it's the "official" mulligan in Commander. In this thread we tend to go around in circle about various cards, but I would like to take a moment (if people choose to) and discuss getting rid of the PP mulligan and what the ramifications would be.
For starters, I think that in a more casual format, the Partial Paris is good because it allows people to get a playable opening hand, lessening the number of feel-bad games. However, as was brought up with Narset, more competitive players can sculpt their opening hands, and this is more detrimental to games that end too quickly. I propose that the Partial Paris mulligan is gotten rid of as the unofficial official mulligan style.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
I agree with you, for the record.
A long while back in this thread, I did a brief rundown about the availability of counterspells at 2 and less mana versus the ways to tutor up/lay down an irresistible win condition in a 3 turn window. The conclusion was that Control can't police Combo in this format. Both Legacy-banned tutors and Legacy-banned mana rocks are to blame for that, of course, combined with the counterspells like Force of Will that do police the eternal formats only being playable as singletons here.
Which takes me back to Cryo's point, it's not just about getting together with people whose decks are at the same level as yours. It's the fact that pitfalls exist in this cardpool where, if you fall into them, the game becomes an unplayable dice roll in comparison to engaging combo MU's everywhere else. So the game is playable as a game only for people who aren't trying to win, as I originally stated.
It is really not hard to draw the line, at all. In fact, I don't believe anyone, RC included, sincerely believes that it is.
Signets never broke any formats, and they were only ever playable in Control decks of the formats they were legal in. But everyone to ever take a serious look at Sol Ring and Mana Crypt in any realistic context has come to the conclusion that they are unhealthy cards. Evidence being, they are banned or restricted in every WOTC supported format, the only formats with the resources and the motives to be kept healthy. And of all the volume of commentary about what cards would be safe to unban/unrestrict in Legacy/Vintage, and there is a lot, approximately 0% of all people discussing these formats think that those 2 or any of the ~2cmc tutors would be a good unban. Most of the long-time EDH'ers I know refuse to play these cards in constructed, except maybe Sol Ring because they throw them at new players via the precons. It's just not possible to take the line that these can be fair cards with any seriousness, anymore.
The pitfall is there deliberately. If you don't want to play 6cmc creature-beats, this is designed to be a terrible format for you. If you rightly think that these cards are silly and broken, EDH will be a terrible format for you. If you have anything less than full on spite for combo as an archetype, or you have respect for the skill involved in combo matchups, EDH will be a terrible format for you. Powers that be hope you will leave the format. Players do leave it in droves.
The lesson is the same, only Narset is teaching it to people who have somehow escaped it up to now. Interaction before Turn 4 can't happen efficiently in this format, and meanwhile, mounting a win before Turn 4 at oppressive levels of consistency has always been possible in this card pool. About "drawing the line", you would at least have to draw it more strictly than that, and I think most everybody knows that.
imagine wotc lost their minds and started printing many functional reprints of sol ring. Eventually the format would be a horrible broken mess. Imo that shows that sol ring is problematic, and the only thing keeping it from being insta-banned is that it doesn't come up every game.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
It's more difficult for competitive players to sculpt their god hand if mana crypt and sol ring were banned. For example, a competitive narset deck trying to get the T1 or 2 narset without those 2 mana rocks means their entire hand basically has to be lands and ramp. As I said earlier, not only is the probability of that "not too high", you often don't have a backup plan if your fast narset gets answered, so it's an all-in attack.
For example, if we could magically make the format such that no wins could occur "reliably" before, say, turn 5 (we alter the ban list such that this is true), I don't think partial paris becomes a problem. You can still sculpt your hand but if you don't explode quickly to do degenerate things I don't think that's an issue. However in order to reach this state where no wins can occur reliably before turn 5, we would have to ban the fast mana rocks as a start.
Other people have touched on this, but the obvious argument is that sol ring can power out other stupid stuff, while the signets and such power out much less stuff on their own.
T1 sol ring gives you 2 colorless mana on T1, then gives you 4 mana on T2, 5 mana on T3
Signets/talismans/etc. can't even be played on T1 without something like sol ring, give you +1 mana on T2 (technically signets need a mana invested in them to even do that and some 2-mana rocks ETB tapped like sphere of the suns, but it applies to certain talismans/etc.), then 4 mana on T3
This is not comparable. Sol ring will be doing dumb things if we banned the signets and weaker mana rocks, while the signets are just fair.
WUBRGProgenitus
URGMaelstrom Wanderer
WUBOloro, Ageless Ascetic
WURZedruu, the Greathearted
BRGProssh, Skyraider of Kher ($100)
GWUDerevi, Empyrial Tactician ($100)
UGKruphix, God of Horizons ($100)(retired)UTalrand, Sky Summoner (French 1v1, $100)
Damia http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=410191
DDFT Legacyhttp://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=505247
Domain Zoo http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=10212429#post10212429
Mirror, Painter, Hulk, Titan and Primodial are just so easy to abuse causally for massive value. Druid you need to know what you are doing. Although this does bring up DEN which is easy to abuse casually as well while I feel prophet is much harder to casually do need to built in mana sinks and on board card draw what not. Narset isn't really abused casually you need to want those combat steps and work to set it up. I consider the use of clones as casual abuse you have a sweet creature I want it to and I have a sweet creature its better to have two of them.
It is almost like all of us are too familiar with the format to actually get the ban list ideas properly.
It is not a competitive environment there is no need to build the most powerful deck possible unless you cannot enjoy yourself unless you win (then you have a different problem) or if everyone else has similarly powerful decks. If your friends are sick of playing against your "overpowered" deck list there is two options you change your deck (take apart or power down) or you encourage them to improve their decks. Friends sick of seeing the millionth deck with Prophet deadeye and rift just build mono red and have them complain about purphoros instead. I think it is our responsibility of us veteran commander players to push the boundaries of interesting and exciting interactions and game states rather than pushing power level. Let the newer players have their goodstuff decks we can do better.
This of course does depend on your meta cutthroat meta's of vintage and legacy veterans go ahead, I'd say go as far as ignore the ban list at that point you know what you are doing you'll know when its a problem for your local format.
Perhaps newer groups might consider instituting a unified commander format of 4 decks that can't share cards, just to create variety and help get creativity started that will lead to a healthy meta in the future. A little extreme but variety in decks and strategies is important.
Recently my group has been looking at the french ban list as an option, I accidentally have a 1v1 legal deck (when searching for variety), perhaps we will just all make a 1v1 legal deck each. We also really think changing the mulligan rules to the normal full mull will stop games getting too samey. Atm we have just made sure to get 1 less card on the partial mull which we realised was the rule the whole time people were just getting a free mull because multiplayer.
The big problem with the whole thing is it all breaks down on the internet without personal relationships it doesn't work so well. the program I use happens to only have a small number of players so we regularly see the same players in games which does help with developing an almost store like meta there but in bigger places like Magic online and Cockatrice will have trouble with cards that can be broken and differences in deck power level and people throwing fits over certain cards and strategies.
Pioneer:UR Pheonix
Modern:U Mono U Tron
EDH
GB Glissa, the traitor: Army of Cans
UW Dragonlord Ojutai: Dragonlord NOjutai
UWGDerevi, Empyrial Tactician "you cannot fight the storm"
R Zirilan of the claw. The solution to every problem is dragons
UB Etrata, the Silencer Cloning assassination
Peasant cube: Cards I own
Back to familiar territory! We're discussing the right things again.
@ cryo: Where do we draw the line for fast mana? Just Sol Ring and Mana Crypt.
You also made a point regarding the mulligan rule. Yea, I wish people would stop, sit down and think for a bit on that. Handsculpting, while unconsciously a practiced habit, is actually pretty broken. Same with Partial. "I keep Sol Ring, chuck the rest, and draw again."
While I agree with this, I still think there's no place for broken mana. Duel Commander has rid of it, I know it's competitive. But I'm starting to feel that the philosophy gap between casuals and competitive are smaller. We just need the same pool of cards. The RIGHT pool of cards.
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
No matter how the banlist looks like, the competitive people will always look among the fastest, strongest strategies to tune their decks. It has held true for the entirely of competitive Magic and will do so in Commander as well.
I understand that the Committee intended for the format to be a "casual format" but they didn't mind the "competitive groups" as long as they are having fun, but the issue rises when the two clash. There are people out there who enjoy playing with different people on different weekends and I think that the clashes mainly arise from there.
I strongly feel that there should be an official Competitive Multiplayer Banlist & a Casual Multiplayer Banlist. Yes, it is divisive, but the this division has already been shown to clearly exist even with a singular banlist. With two separate official banlists, it is a lot easier for people to declare they're "Competitive" or "Casual" Multiplayer EDH players, the same way French EDH players can easily identify themselves among the whole lot of EDH players.
It is less of an issue of the actual banlist (The specifics is which most of this entire thread is about), but rather the need of an official stand to divide the two sides.
As mentioned earlier, I understand the Committee prefers the "Casual Format", but they hold the most influence over the format and hence it is ideal that they personally do the division (The line between Competitive 1v1 was easier to differentiate), because any singular banlist can never convince one type of player to change to the other, it is better to just customize two lists for each.
I wholehartedly agree. My gameshop implements a mulligan rule that is the best I've ever experienced. It is as follows:
No free mulligans of any kind. You may only qualify for one.
A hand with 0,1,6 or 7 (mana producing)lands qualifies for a free 7-card mulligan. If someone at the table qualifies, any number of may take that mulligan.
There are no partial mulligans with this method, and the method rewards players for building a lower mana curve.
It's worked beautifully for me and every shop that uses it. I highly recommend giving it a try.
In our league, we use the "set your hand to the side and draw X new ones", where X is the standard first one free, and each additional mulligan is one less card. The key is that it's you're setting it to the side instead of shuffling and drawing each time you want to mulligan. This both saves time and forces you to think about whether your really want that combo piece that was in your opening hand. Plus, if you mulligan a hand with no lands, you have higher odds of drawing a hand containing land (since there are seven less cards in your deck). No one in our group has vocalized that they dislike this system.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
It may be worthwhile to open a new thread for discussion of partial paris mulligans. It could draw in posters who don't regularly read the banlist thread and then the discussion wont be buried 10+ pages deep after a weeks.
The Highlander magic community (no generals or color identity, but still singleton) used to do Spoils mulligans, basically partial paris first one free, but changed their rules a year ago to disallow that practice. They now use the regular paris mulligans with first one free. Here is a poll discussing player reactions 6 months after the changes: http://www.magicplayer.org/forum/index.php?topic=993.0 If you read it, much of it seems like inside baseball; but many of the talking points can also be applied to EDH.
A concern is that PPMs provide too much help to decks that have a greedy multicolor manabase, want to curve out, want to run fewer lands then they should, or want to avoid 'drawing the wrong half of the deck'.
Earlier this year, I posted a thread that mentioned I was doing research on different mulligan styles and their applications. This is still true, but it is just taking a lot of time since I have to work around my job/church/family/EDH and such.
I feel like I should mention that the two systems you and burntgerbil proposed are still abusable. Yours does not allow additional sculpting around a card you have already drawn, but it has a greater likelihood of actually finding Ring/Crypt than the official PP or multiplayer mulligan rules. The one burntgerbil proposed allows me to skimp on lands a LOT, or add a lot of extra lands and be guaranteed to start with a 7-card hand that has my combo of choice.
I understand that you would probably call someone out for abusing the system in this way, but since it is still within the letter of the law you simply outsource the DB problem to another stage of the game. As long as we are looking for a new mulligan rule to solve our supposed problems, let's do it thoroughly.
Draft my Mono-Blue Cube!
lichess.org | chess.com
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
For the record the last game I played no Sol Rings came out, and it was 20+ turns and 4 people.
Yeah, that's exactly it. Casual players within an insular group, the way the RC suggests the format should be played, do not need a ban list. But still, there is one, and it's regulated according to how one insular group prefers to play, while completely unregulated for everyone else's needs.
Take the Sylvan Primordial ban. Ok, so every casual UGx goodstuff player is sick of it. But in this hypothetical game that needs to be regulated with a ban list, the Sylvan Primordial Player is lucky not to lose to a 3-5 mana one-card combo for tapping out for 7 that late in the game. For every other game, people would be free to get sick of SP, Prime Time, etc at their own pace, and agree among themselves when the time is to stop playing it, if ever.
And what you see in practice is casual groups who don't even know a ban list exists, or who've stopped playing with Vintage staples on their own. The people who are talking about the ban list are experienced players who are sick of public games being ruined by the same old culprits.
The ban list seems to regulate this no-man's land of public casuals that doesn't actually exist. Because, god help the casual player who shows up with stompy deck to a public game, who doesn't know PT and SP are banned. You would think that's the enemy of the format, when in all likelihood, his deck is fine. And god help the experienced player in that public game who doesn't want to have to pack 15+ counterspells and spot removal cards <3 cmc just so he can play the game past Turn 5 the way he wants to do. Take out Moxes, Lotus, and all the $400+ cards that people hate, fine, that's perfectly sensible. But beyond that, who the ban list is helping, I have no idea.
Whatever the powers that be claim to be the purpose of their ban list, the purpose of a ban list isn't something you get to decide. Ban lists, software patches, and any ongoing changes to a game are made with the purpose of fixing exploits. They're not made to "share a vision" of the format, and what not. The only people who need them are those who continuously run into existing exploits, and so deliberately leaving them unfixed as a trap for those who use exploits makes absolutely no sense.