...like a prairie dog ready to strike fear into people's hearts again.
This is just too good.
Anyway, my thoughts: I'm suprised that no one has mentioned Lazav, Dimir Mastermind or Necrotic Ooze. Seems to me they get at least as much benefit as Kraj. And they pair nicely with the aforementioned Hedonist's Trove. I smell a U/B control/mill "I'll play what you're playing" deck...
Hmm, those are nice picks. I mean rue 4 was not a huge deal for most people. It did restrict people and people whined, but it was never a big deal.
Now Chromatic Lantern is gonna spike in price. Personally, I don't like the rule change; it's part of the challenge of deckbuilding and I feel goes against the philosophy of only using the commander's colors. Thief and clone decks had their limitations but not anymore. Now we'll see more Sen Triplets and the like - as if it wasn't annoying enough as it is...
You still can only use your commander's colors, just you are not restricted to only producing that mana. If I steal a Deathrite Shaman in a U/R deck, If i have ways of producing any color, I can use her abilities. But that does not mean I could run her normally.
Yeah, you can't add other card colors to the decks - I get that. A monoU deck won't be able to add red spells and what-not. But a Sen Triplets deck with Chromatic Lantern, lands that produce mana of any color, etc. will be able to play any card from an opponent's hand - regardless if the card weren't WUB. Now Sen Triplets has no drawback.
My YouTube Channel: The Commander Tavern - a channel I just started where I'll post deck techs and gameplays. Please support by checking it out. Maybe you'll like its content and subscribe! Thanks!
Now Chromatic Lantern is gonna spike in price. Personally, I don't like the rule change; it's part of the challenge of deckbuilding and I feel goes against the philosophy of only using the commander's colors. Thief and clone decks had their limitations but not anymore. Now we'll see more Sen Triplets and the like - as if it wasn't annoying enough as it is...
You still can only use your commander's colors, just you are not restricted to only producing that mana. If I steal a Deathrite Shaman in a U/R deck, If i have ways of producing any color, I can use her abilities. But that does not mean I could run her normally.
Yeah, you can't add other card colors to the decks - I get that. A monoU deck won't be able to add red spells and what-not. But a Sen Triplets deck with Chromatic Lantern, lands that produce mana of any color, etc. will be able to play any card from an opponent's hand - regardless if the card weren't WUB. Now Sen Triplets has no drawback.
which is most likely going to make them come back.
Well, I have Lazav, Dimir Mastermind deck, so rule 4 not there anymore is quite good news for all the clones, reanimation and mill the deck contains.
Also, I wanted to make Sen Triplets deck, but never did it because the fact you cannot play agaisnt G or R players. Now, that rule 4 is gone, nothing is hindering me fro, creating this deck. I am actually quite happy that the RC abolished this rule.
Now Chromatic Lantern is gonna spike in price. Personally, I don't like the rule change; it's part of the challenge of deckbuilding and I feel goes against the philosophy of only using the commander's colors. Thief and clone decks had their limitations but not anymore. Now we'll see more Sen Triplets and the like - as if it wasn't annoying enough as it is...
You still can only use your commander's colors, just you are not restricted to only producing that mana. If I steal a Deathrite Shaman in a U/R deck, If i have ways of producing any color, I can use her abilities. But that does not mean I could run her normally.
Yeah, you can't add other card colors to the decks - I get that. A monoU deck won't be able to add red spells and what-not. But a Sen Triplets deck with Chromatic Lantern, lands that produce mana of any color, etc. will be able to play any card from an opponent's hand - regardless if the card weren't WUB. Now Sen Triplets has no drawback.
But why should they have a drawback? The card was not created for Commander. It doesn't say you can't play cards outside of your commander's color identity. Rule 4 was an artificial flavor barrier. It's a Magic card that's meant to be played in a game of Magic - which Commander is a format of.
I say all this as a proponent of Rule 4. It was excellent flavor; I loved the restriction, even if it was forced, and I will mourn the loss of it.
However, it's a net gain for the format by making cards like the Triplets playable and reducing extra rules to explain to new players.
Just like the removal of tuck, the legend rule change and the removal of sideboards from the official rules these are all positive changes.
[EDH] It's built to be a casual format and to a specific vision, and if you don't like the vision, there's nothing wrong with that, but it's not going to change to accommodate everyone. Big tent is not a goal.
Now Chromatic Lantern is gonna spike in price. Personally, I don't like the rule change; it's part of the challenge of deckbuilding and I feel goes against the philosophy of only using the commander's colors. Thief and clone decks had their limitations but not anymore. Now we'll see more Sen Triplets and the like - as if it wasn't annoying enough as it is...
You still can only use your commander's colors, just you are not restricted to only producing that mana. If I steal a Deathrite Shaman in a U/R deck, If i have ways of producing any color, I can use her abilities. But that does not mean I could run her normally.
Yeah, you can't add other card colors to the decks - I get that. A monoU deck won't be able to add red spells and what-not. But a Sen Triplets deck with Chromatic Lantern, lands that produce mana of any color, etc. will be able to play any card from an opponent's hand - regardless if the card weren't WUB. Now Sen Triplets has no drawback.
But why should they have a drawback? The card was not created for Commander. It doesn't say you can't play cards outside of your commander's color identity. Rule 4 was an artificial flavor barrier. It's a Magic card that's meant to be played in a game of Magic - which Commander is a format of.
I say all this as a proponent of Rule 4. It was excellent flavor; I loved the restriction, even if it was forced, and I will mourn the loss of it.
However, it's a net gain for the format by making cards like the Triplets playable and reducing extra rules to explain to new players.
Just like the removal of tuck, the legend rule change and the removal of sideboards from the official rules these are all positive changes.
Also makes things like the storage lands viable. I mean we have mono colored storage lands but the dual color storage lands were much better.
Wait is rule 4 what proibted players form using card like Boartusk Liege and Vexing Shusher form being played in mono-red decks?
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.
Now Chromatic Lantern is gonna spike in price. Personally, I don't like the rule change; it's part of the challenge of deckbuilding and I feel goes against the philosophy of only using the commander's colors. Thief and clone decks had their limitations but not anymore. Now we'll see more Sen Triplets and the like - as if it wasn't annoying enough as it is...
You still can only use your commander's colors, just you are not restricted to only producing that mana. If I steal a Deathrite Shaman in a U/R deck, If i have ways of producing any color, I can use her abilities. But that does not mean I could run her normally.
Yeah, you can't add other card colors to the decks - I get that. A monoU deck won't be able to add red spells and what-not. But a Sen Triplets deck with Chromatic Lantern, lands that produce mana of any color, etc. will be able to play any card from an opponent's hand - regardless if the card weren't WUB. Now Sen Triplets has no drawback.
But why should they have a drawback? The card was not created for Commander. It doesn't say you can't play cards outside of your commander's color identity. Rule 4 was an artificial flavor barrier. It's a Magic card that's meant to be played in a game of Magic - which Commander is a format of.
I say all this as a proponent of Rule 4. It was excellent flavor; I loved the restriction, even if it was forced, and I will mourn the loss of it.
However, it's a net gain for the format by making cards like the Triplets playable and reducing extra rules to explain to new players.
Just like the removal of tuck, the legend rule change and the removal of sideboards from the official rules these are all positive changes.
Can you please elaborate? What change in the sideboards?
My YouTube Channel: The Commander Tavern - a channel I just started where I'll post deck techs and gameplays. Please support by checking it out. Maybe you'll like its content and subscribe! Thanks!
Just like ... the removal of sideboards from the official rules these are all positive changes.
YMMV. It's fine to get rid of the sideboards, but the way they handled it was pretty shoddy. All the wishes are still legal to run, but they just stopped functioning all of a sudden. It could have been handled better.
I'll probably run all vivid lands in my grixis deck, as someone else already mentioned - allows praetor's grasp to do more than just remove combo pieces.
Exotic Orchard gets better. Now any five-color land in any opposing deck gives the full five colors.
I'm fairly sure that exotic orchard always worked that way, but I suppose I could be wrong. It gives access to all colors if the enemy has a vivid crag on the battlefield, even without any counters.
I remember trying to get them to remove this rule many years ago, when I first started playing. I figured it'd happen eventually. It just doesn't matter enough to justify its existence.
Exotic Orchard gets better. Now any five-color land in any opposing deck gives the full five colors.
I'm fairly sure that exotic orchard always worked that way, but I suppose I could be wrong. It gives access to all colors if the enemy has a vivid crag on the battlefield, even without any counters.
While it's true that an opponent's Vivid Crag will let you tap Exotic Orchard for any color, prior to the removal of Rule 4, attempting to tap Exotic Orchard for a color outside your commander's Color Identity would produce colorless mana as a replacement effect.
I remember long arguments about whether you could tap Exotic Orchard for R if an opponent had a rainbow land but a nonred commander. Maybe they did resolve in favor of tapping for any color, but I don't remember ever playing that way. At the least, it's simpler now.
I remember long arguments about whether you could tap Exotic Orchard for R if an opponent had a rainbow land but a nonred commander. Maybe they did resolve in favor of tapping for any color, but I don't remember ever playing that way. At the least, it's simpler now.
Exotic Orchard doesn't care about restrictions or replacements effects around the lands that it's looking at. If your opponent has a Vivid land with no counters on it, Orchard can tap for anything. If an opponent's only land is a Reflecting Pool, Orchard can tap for anything. Prior to this week, that was still true regardless of your opponent's color identity (although Orchard still had to respect your own color identity).
I may try Shared Fate in my Zedru deck, not that I ran celestial dawn but I know from experience that not being allowed to play from your own deck can be really aggravating.
I might try Shared Fate myself because now it might not be super frustrating. With rule 4 around, it felt less like playing each other's decks and more like a soft lock.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Zedruu: "This deck is not only able to go crazy - it also needs to do so."
Now Chromatic Lantern is gonna spike in price. Personally, I don't like the rule change; it's part of the challenge of deckbuilding and I feel goes against the philosophy of only using the commander's colors. Thief and clone decks had their limitations but not anymore. Now we'll see more Sen Triplets and the like - as if it wasn't annoying enough as it is...
You still can only use your commander's colors, just you are not restricted to only producing that mana. If I steal a Deathrite Shaman in a U/R deck, If i have ways of producing any color, I can use her abilities. But that does not mean I could run her normally.
Yeah, you can't add other card colors to the decks - I get that. A monoU deck won't be able to add red spells and what-not. But a Sen Triplets deck with Chromatic Lantern, lands that produce mana of any color, etc. will be able to play any card from an opponent's hand - regardless if the card weren't WUB. Now Sen Triplets has no drawback.
Except it still requires an over-commitment to an unfavorable board state. It is only a problem if triplets is on the board, and they have open mana on your turn. A single mass removal spell of artifacts ruins their day, which is in almost every deck anyways. In all honesty, the tuck rule has caused more problems than this ever will.
Exotic Orchard gets better. Now any five-color land in any opposing deck gives the full five colors.
I'm fairly sure that exotic orchard always worked that way, but I suppose I could be wrong. It gives access to all colors if the enemy has a vivid crag on the battlefield, even without any counters.
While it's true that an opponent's Vivid Crag will let you tap Exotic Orchard for any color, prior to the removal of Rule 4, attempting to tap Exotic Orchard for a color outside your commander's Color Identity would produce colorless mana as a replacement effect.
It's a moot point now, but wouldn't it have produced generic mana and not colorless? I'm pretty sure this is the exact reason for the change, and again, it doesn't mean anything now, but it would be nice to know how it would have worked.
Exotic Orchard gets better. Now any five-color land in any opposing deck gives the full five colors.
I'm fairly sure that exotic orchard always worked that way, but I suppose I could be wrong. It gives access to all colors if the enemy has a vivid crag on the battlefield, even without any counters.
While it's true that an opponent's Vivid Crag will let you tap Exotic Orchard for any color, prior to the removal of Rule 4, attempting to tap Exotic Orchard for a color outside your commander's Color Identity would produce colorless mana as a replacement effect.
It's a moot point now, but wouldn't it have produced generic mana and not colorless? I'm pretty sure this is the exact reason for the change, and again, it doesn't mean anything now, but it would be nice to know how it would have worked.
It is not now, nor has it ever been, possible to add generic mana to your mana pool, in any format. Generic mana only exists on costs. Rule 4 created a replacement effect in Commander games that would turn off-color mana into colorless mana.
Not correct. Color identity hasn't changed, you still can only have color symbols corresponding to your general on cards in your deck. However, if you somehow acquired a Flamekin Village during a game where you're playing a Bant deck and happen to have a City of Brass out, you can now tap the City for a Red mana to use the Village's secondary effect. Before, rule 4 would have instead caused the City to generate colorless mana instead.
edit: Nath'd
To add to the topic itself, I think the cards I'm most excited for are the cards that have yet to be printed, and hopefully SoI brings us some new toys exactly in this vein.
I don't think dedicated thief/clone decks are the real problem in EDH right now. This (tiny) boost in their power won't change that.
Hmm, those are nice picks. I mean rue 4 was not a huge deal for most people. It did restrict people and people whined, but it was never a big deal.
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
Yeah, you can't add other card colors to the decks - I get that. A monoU deck won't be able to add red spells and what-not. But a Sen Triplets deck with Chromatic Lantern, lands that produce mana of any color, etc. will be able to play any card from an opponent's hand - regardless if the card weren't WUB. Now Sen Triplets has no drawback.
BGU [Primer] Sidisi, Brood Tyrant BGU | BG [Primer] Mazirek, Kraul Death Priest BG | G [Primer] Polukranos, World Eater G
My YouTube Channel:
The Commander Tavern - a channel I just started where I'll post deck techs and gameplays. Please support by checking it out. Maybe you'll like its content and subscribe! Thanks!
which is most likely going to make them come back.
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
Also, I wanted to make Sen Triplets deck, but never did it because the fact you cannot play agaisnt G or R players. Now, that rule 4 is gone, nothing is hindering me fro, creating this deck. I am actually quite happy that the RC abolished this rule.
But why should they have a drawback? The card was not created for Commander. It doesn't say you can't play cards outside of your commander's color identity. Rule 4 was an artificial flavor barrier. It's a Magic card that's meant to be played in a game of Magic - which Commander is a format of.
I say all this as a proponent of Rule 4. It was excellent flavor; I loved the restriction, even if it was forced, and I will mourn the loss of it.
However, it's a net gain for the format by making cards like the Triplets playable and reducing extra rules to explain to new players.
Just like the removal of tuck, the legend rule change and the removal of sideboards from the official rules these are all positive changes.
Also makes things like the storage lands viable. I mean we have mono colored storage lands but the dual color storage lands were much better.
Wait is rule 4 what proibted players form using card like Boartusk Liege and Vexing Shusher form being played in mono-red decks?
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
Can you please elaborate? What change in the sideboards?
BGU [Primer] Sidisi, Brood Tyrant BGU | BG [Primer] Mazirek, Kraul Death Priest BG | G [Primer] Polukranos, World Eater G
My YouTube Channel:
The Commander Tavern - a channel I just started where I'll post deck techs and gameplays. Please support by checking it out. Maybe you'll like its content and subscribe! Thanks!
YMMV. It's fine to get rid of the sideboards, but the way they handled it was pretty shoddy. All the wishes are still legal to run, but they just stopped functioning all of a sudden. It could have been handled better.
My G Yisan, the Bard of Death G deck.
My BUGWR Hermit druid BUGWR deck.
I remember trying to get them to remove this rule many years ago, when I first started playing. I figured it'd happen eventually. It just doesn't matter enough to justify its existence.
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
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Except it still requires an over-commitment to an unfavorable board state. It is only a problem if triplets is on the board, and they have open mana on your turn. A single mass removal spell of artifacts ruins their day, which is in almost every deck anyways. In all honesty, the tuck rule has caused more problems than this ever will.
It's a moot point now, but wouldn't it have produced generic mana and not colorless? I'm pretty sure this is the exact reason for the change, and again, it doesn't mean anything now, but it would be nice to know how it would have worked.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Not correct. Color identity hasn't changed, you still can only have color symbols corresponding to your general on cards in your deck. However, if you somehow acquired a Flamekin Village during a game where you're playing a Bant deck and happen to have a City of Brass out, you can now tap the City for a Red mana to use the Village's secondary effect. Before, rule 4 would have instead caused the City to generate colorless mana instead.
edit: Nath'd
To add to the topic itself, I think the cards I'm most excited for are the cards that have yet to be printed, and hopefully SoI brings us some new toys exactly in this vein.